Mercury Strategy for the Bay-Delta Ecosystem - CALFED Bay-Delta ...

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
step in development, needed to ensure that the monitoring program is designed at the onset to
address the information needs of management entities, regulatory agencies, and other end users.
Informal peer review of refined goals and objectives is strongly encouraged at this stage.
(3) Develop robust sampling strategies – Statistical expertise in sampling design and statistics
should be applied to develop robust sampling strategies capable of meeting defined objectives.
Statistical analyses of recent, reliable fish-mercury data should be used in crafting an efficient
sampling design.
(4) Develop detailed procedures for program tasks – Protocols should be developed for each of
the following: sampling of fish, handling and analyses of samples, quality assurance and quality
control, archiving of samples (if warranted), management of data, statistical analysis of data,
synthesis and reporting of information, public outreach, and periodic peer review of all aspects of
this core component by an expert panel.
(5) Subject the sampling frame, methods, and detailed procedures to external peer review and
incorporate appropriate revisions.
(6) Issue contracts to accomplish program tasks – This work should be contracted to a scientific
team that is experienced in the sampling and analysis of fish for mercury, with proven
capabilities in the management, statistical analysis, and rigorous interpretation of large data sets
and a track record of timely reporting of findings from large multidisciplinary projects on
mercury. Moreover, the team members should have the institutional support needed for a
sustained commitment to at least a 4-year monitoring program. Contracts should be issued with
minimal delay to allocate funds for initiating and accomplishing program tasks.
Fiscal support for steps 1-5 above should be provided by CALFED. The provision of in-kind
support from involved state and federal agencies in all aspects of development and execution is
encouraged throughout the monitoring program.
The monitoring program should be adaptive, with the flexibility to evolve in response to new
knowledge and the changing needs of management and regulatory entities. In this regard, the
steering committee is encouraged to consider the operational structure and process used in
managing the Regional Monitoring Program for the Bay, an adaptive program with annual
funding of about $3 million, as a model for managing this new monitoring program. After initial
program development, the steering committee’s role could include (1) the facilitation of
communication between managers and scientists, (2) consideration of proposed modifications to
increase program efficiency and to ensure responsiveness to the evolving needs of information
users, and (3) the coordination of peer reviews.
Communication, Management and Sharing of Data, and Integration of Findings
An implemented mercury program will produce large amounts of data, and open communication
of data and results among participating scientists, agencies, stakeholders, and the public are vital
for successful adaptive management and for sustaining political support for the program
(Johnson 1999b). The transfer and sharing of information from ongoing investigations should be
actively facilitated, given the importance of rigorous interdisciplinary interpretation and the need
to provide timely information for adaptive management. The typical lag times from generation
of scientific data until final reporting and publication are long, relative to the anticipated rapid
29