The Microscope and the Kaleidoscope: Independent Science in the Columbia River Basin

In 1996, against a background of apparent failure to halt the decline of fish and wildlife populations in the Columbia River Basin despite increased investments in recovery, the Independent Scientific Advisory Board (ISAB) and Independent Scientific Review Panel (ISRP) were created. The ISAB examines the kaleidoscope of underlying, and sometimes conflicting, scientific information used to guide restoration of fish and wildlife in a highly altered ecosystem. ISAB reviews inform the fish and wildlife programs of the Northwest Power and Conservation Council, Columbia River Indian Tribes, and NOAA Fisheries. The ISRP, created by Congress, provides independent technical review of individual fish and wildlife projects funded by the Bonneville Power Administration, including several hundred projects covering habitat restoration, wildlife mitigation, hatchery production, fish passage, and research, monitoring and evaluation. The groups’ effectiveness hinges not only on the quality of the scientific findings but on how the findings are used to inform policy. The groups’ founding charges proved to be well designed to ensure that the science informs policy. The groups’ multi-disciplinary approach, independence, and a direct tie to decision-making are critical.

ISAB and ISRP membership includes scientists with expertise in Columbia River fisheries, statistics, wildlife, marine sciences, geomorphology, and social sciences. This multi-disciplinary representation is useful in the ISRP's coverage of a wide array of projects and the ISAB's exploration of emerging scientific issues. The groups' independence is defined in a conflicts of interest policy, a National Academy of Sciences aided appointments process, anonymous peer reviews, self-determined review procedures, and (for the ISAB) the ability to propose reviews. This independence is tempered by specific procedures on how the groups operate and how their advice is considered. ISRP reviews are fully incorporated in the project selection and review process for the Council's Fish and Wildlife Program, and the Council must explain in writing if it diverges from the ISRP's recommendations. ISAB assignments are designed to directly inform the analysis used by the decision makers to develop recovery and mitigation plans. In addition, ISAB membership includes non-voting representatives from the Council, NOAA Fisheries, and the Tribes, who provide context on their respective programs so that the ISAB provides relevant advice. Both groups reach findings by consensus. The impact of ISAB and ISRP reviews are evident in the adoption of an ecosystem-based restoration framework and assurance that the projects implementing that framework are based on sound science.