National Academies Press: OpenBook

Review of the Lake Ontario-St. Lawrence River Studies (2006)

Chapter: Appendix D Water Science and Technology Board

« Previous: Appendix C Acronyms
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D Water Science and Technology Board." National Research Council. 2006. Review of the Lake Ontario-St. Lawrence River Studies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11481.
×

Appendix D
Water Science and Technology Board

R. RHODES TRUSSELL, Chair, Trussell Technologies, Inc., Pasadena, California

MARY JO BAEDECKER, U.S. Geological Survey (Retired), Vienna, Virginia

JOAN G. EHRENFELD, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey

DARA ENTEKHABI, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts

GERALD E. GALLOWAY, Titan Corporation, Reston, Virginia

PETER GLEICK, Pacific Institute for Studies in Development, Environment, and Security, Oakland, California

CHARLES N. HAAS, Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

KAI N. LEE, Williams College, Williamstown, Massachusetts

JAMES K. MITCHELL, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg

CHRISTINE L. MOE, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia

ROBERT PERCIASEPE, National Audubon Society, New York, New York

LEONARD SHABMAN, Resources for the Future, Washington, DC

KARL K. TUREKIAN, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut

HAME M. WATT, Independent Consultant, Washington, DC

CLAIRE WELTY, University of Maryland, Baltimore County

JAMES L. WESCOAT, JR., University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

GARRET P. WESTERHOFF, Malcolm Pirnie, Inc., White Plains, New York

Staff

STEPHEN D. PARKER, Director

LAUREN E. ALEXANDER, Senior Staff Officer

LAURA J. EHLERS, Senior Staff Officer

JEFFREY W. JACOBS, Senior Staff Officer

STEPHANIE E. JOHNSON, Senior Staff Officer

WILLIAM S. LOGAN, Senior Staff Officer

M. JEANNE AQUILINO, Financial and Administrative Associate

ANITA A. HALL, Administrative Assistant

ELLEN A. DE GUZMAN, Senior Program Associate/Research Associate

DOROTHY K. WEIR, Research Associate

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D Water Science and Technology Board." National Research Council. 2006. Review of the Lake Ontario-St. Lawrence River Studies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11481.
×
Page 143
Next: Appendix E Biographical Information »
Review of the Lake Ontario-St. Lawrence River Studies Get This Book
×
 Review of the Lake Ontario-St. Lawrence River Studies
Buy Paperback | $52.00 Buy Ebook | $41.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Since the 1950s,the International Joint Commission (IJC) of Canada and the United States has issued water regulation and management plans for Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River. Changes in recreational, environmental, navigational and other uses of the water system have prompted the IJC to consider replacing the current water regulation plan in operation for more than 40 years. IJC’s goals for a replacement plan include sound scientific foundations, public participation, transparency in plan development and evaluation, and inclusion of environmental considerations. To help develop and select the new plan, the IJC supported a 5-year, $20 million Lake Ontario-St. Lawrence River Study (LOSLR Study). The LOSLR Study uses models to compile and integrate data gathered from a series of commissioned studies of wetlands, species at risk, recreational boating, fisheries, coastal erosion and flooding, commercial navigation, hydropower, industrial, municipal and domestic water intakes, public information and education, and hydrologic modeling.

This report reviews a portion of the study that focused on wetlands and species at risk and three of the models that were used. The report finds that the overall breadth of the LOSLR study is impressive, and commends the scale and inclusiveness of the studies and models. In terms of informing decision making, however, the reviewed studies and models show deficiencies when evaluated against ten evaluation criteria, including treatment of uncertainty, quality control/quality assurance, thorough documentation, and empirical foundations. Among the report’s recommendations is a need for more thorough documentation of study methods and findings, stronger and more consistent quality control, and more attention to how uncertainty should be addressed to better inform decision making. This NRC study was conducted in collaboration with the Royal Society of Canada.

READ FREE ONLINE

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!