The Rhetoric and Politics of Science in the Case of the Missouri River System

<jats:p> Two versions of a biological opinion written by different teams in the U.S. Fish and Wild-life Service illuminate how different rhetorical strategies reflect different values. The historical narrative in the earlier biological opinion, which is used to argue for vigorous action to protect endangered species along the Missouri River, is largely erased in the later opinion that privileges human uses of the river system. This analysis emphasizes the problematic nature of authorship when the concept is applied to a document produced in an organization or agency. Moreover, examining how authors control information reveals the power technical writers have to influence meaning making. </jats:p>