Dr. Robert T. Lackey, Department of Fisheries, Wildlife, and  Conservation Sciences at Oregon State University, discusses how effectively resolving the typical ecological or natural resource policy issue requires providing an array of scientific information to decision-makers.  In my experience, the ability of scientists (and scientific information) to constructively inform policy deliberations is diminished when what is offered as “science” is inculcated with policy preferences.  As with all human activity, the scientific enterprise is not free of values, nor is it objectively independent.  Still, values reflected in subtle form as policy preferences should not be permitted to prejudice scientific information.  Scientific information becomes “normative” when it contains tacit policy preferences and thus, by extension, promotes particular policy options.  There are many examples of normative science corrupting the development of sound ecological policy by operating under the guise of policy-neutral science.  In fact, with its tacitly derived value and preference character, normative science provides little substantive help in reconciling the most divisive elements of policy.  In my opinion, scientists should play the important role of “informing” ecological policy discussions with unbiased, understandable scientific information, assessments, and forecasts.  For developing sound ecological policy, science is important, helpful, even essential, but involvement with policy issues by a naive scientist can lead to loss of credibility and perceived independence unless the proper roles of both science and policy are understood and followed.