Wednesday, October 25, 2017

‘Let us do our job’: Anger erupts over EPA’s apparent muzzling of scientists (WaPo)

Scientists must be free to practice the scientific method without fear or favor. Trump's political apparatchik's give scientists orders not to speak at conferences, and veto grants.   I was honored to represent EPA employees in environmental whistleblower cases, and to advise Fish & Wildlife scientists in California's San Joaquin Valley Drainage cleanup.  I've never seen an administration so hostile to scientific free speech.  Polluter mouthpieces are in charge of EPA now.  This stinks.

People in St. Augustine know that climate change is real.  Censoring science is immoral.


‘Let us do our job’: Anger erupts over EPA’s apparent muzzling of scientists
By Brady Dennis and Juliet Eilperin
October 23, 2017
Washington Post


Protesters gather Monday outside a meeting where a report on the Narragansett Bay, which included a focus on climate change, was to be released in Providence, R.I. The Environmental Protection Agency prohibited three scientists from speaking at the event. (Michelle R. Smith/AP)

The Trump administration’s decision to prevent government scientists from presenting climate change-related research at a conference in Rhode Island on Monday gave the event a suddenly high profile, with protesters outside, media inside and angry lawmakers and academics criticizing the move.

“This type of political interference, or scientific censorship — whatever you want to call it — is ill-advised and does a real disservice to the American public and public health,” Sen. Jack Reed (D), Rhode Island’s senior senator, said at an opening news conference for the State of Narragansett Bay and Its Watershed event in Providence. “We can debate the issues. We can have different viewpoints. But we should all be able to objectively examine the data and look at the evidence.”

Reed was joined Monday by the rest of the state’s congressional delegation, all of them Democrats, who took turns chastising the Environmental Protection Agency for instructing two of its scientists and one contractor not to speak at the conference Monday.

“The elephant in the room is, it’s almost impossible to imagine this sequence of events,” Rep. David N. Cicilline said at Monday’s event, calling the scientists involved deeply respected and the report itself thoroughly vetted. “The idea that we would deny the American people information — good, reliable facts and evidence to develop good public policy — is not only disappointing, it’s dangerous.”

Rep. Jim Langevin echoed that sentiment. “We have got to get beyond this point of stifling science, of muzzling good science, and speak to the facts as they are,” he said. “This shouldn’t be about a Democratic or Republican issue. It’s about protecting the planet.”

Outside, a small group of protesters gathered, wearing tape over their mouths and holding handmade signs. “Denial is not a policy,” read one. “Un-gag science,” read another.

[EPA now requires political aide’s sign-off for agency grants, awards]

The EPA has offered little explanation for the decision to prevent the scientists from participating, other than to say in a statement that they were allowed to attend the event but not present because “it is not an EPA conference.”

Monday’s conference marked the culmination of a three-year report on the status of Narragansett Bay, New England’s largest estuary, and the challenges it faces. Climate change features as a significant factor in the 500-page report, which evaluates 24 aspects of the bay and its larger watershed. But organizers said the broader point of Monday’s official release of the report was to highlight the improved water quality of the bay in recent decades — a success story they say is due in large part to the state’s partnership with the EPA and its scientists.

For about six years, the EPA has provided about $600,000 annually for each of more than two dozen national estuaries, including the Narragansett Bay Estuary Program, the conference’s host.

The program’s director, Tom Borden, said that the head of the EPA’s National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory Atlantic Ecology Division informed him Friday that the keynote speaker, division research ecologist Autumn Oczkowski, and another colleague in the lab, Rose Martin, would not be able to make presentations at the event.

“I was not given a clear reason why,” Borden said in an interview Sunday, adding that his team had worked closely with several of the agency’s scientists on protecting and restoring the bay. “It’s a terrific partnership to have EPA working with us.”

An EPA contractor who had contributed to two chapters of the report, Emily Shumchenia, also was told not to speak at the event. She and Martin were slated to take part in a panel titled “The Present and Future Biological Implications of Climate Change.”

The estuary report, which was subject to extensive peer review and public comment, charts how Narragansett Bay is becoming cleaner but also faces such challenges as nutrient runoff and climate change.

The public complaints Monday came not only from lawmakers, but also from those involved in the report and from veterans of the work of improving the quality of Narragansett Bay.

“The irony is an effort to squelch the participation from EPA, I think, just highlights the importance of science as the basis for our work and commits us even more vigorously to promoting science,” said Janet Coit, director of the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management.

John King, a University of Rhode Island oceanography professor who chairs the science advisory committee of the Narragansett Bay Estuary Program, said the EPA’s decision had unwisely politicized the science underlying Monday’s report, and that it would have been “completely irresponsible” not to examine the potential effects that climate change will have on the bay.

“What I’d say to [EPA] Administrator [Scott] Pruitt is our job is to inform policy. Hopefully, it becomes good policy,” King told the assembled crowd. “Let us do our job, without fear of losing our jobs. I hope in that spirit, we can move forward from what has occurred.”

Brady Dennis is a national reporter for The Washington Post, focusing on the environment and public health issues. Follow @brady_dennis
Juliet Eilperin is The Washington Post's senior national affairs correspondent, covering how the new administration is transforming a range of U.S. policies and the federal government itself. She is the author of two books—one on sharks, and another on Congress, not to be confused with each other—and has worked for the Post since 1998. Follow @eilperin

-------------------


E.P.A. Cancels Talk on Climate Change by Agency Scientists
By LISA FRIEDMAN
OCT. 22, 2017
The New York Times



The Narragansett Bay Estuary Program is funded through the E.P.A.’s approximately $26 million National Estuary Program. Credit Erik Jacobs for The New York Times

WASHINGTON — The Environmental Protection Agency has canceled the speaking appearance of three agency scientists who were scheduled to discuss climate change at a conference on Monday in Rhode Island, according to the agency and several people involved.

John Konkus, an E.P.A. spokesman and a former Trump campaign operative in Florida, confirmed that agency scientists would not speak at the State of the Narragansett Bay and Watershed program in Providence. He provided no further explanation.

Scientists involved in the program said that much of the discussion at the event centers on climate change. Many said they were surprised by the E.P.A.’s last-minute cancellation, particularly since the agency helps to fund the Narragansett Bay Estuary Program, which is hosting the conference. The scientists who have been barred from speaking contributed substantial material to a 400-page report to be issued on Monday.

The move highlights widespread concern that the E.P.A. will silence government scientists from speaking publicly or conducting work on climate change. Scott Pruitt, the agency administrator, has said that he does not believe human-caused greenhouse gas emissions are primarily responsible for the warming of the planet.

“It’s definitely a blatant example of the scientific censorship we all suspected was going to start being enforced at E.P.A.,” said John King, a professor of oceanography at the University of Rhode Island who chairs the science advisory committee of the Narragansett Bay Estuary Program. “They don’t believe in climate change, so I think what they’re trying to do is stifle discussions of the impacts of climate change.”

Monday’s conference is designed to draw attention to the health of Narragansett Bay, the largest estuary in New England and a key to the region’s tourism and fishing industries. Rhode Island’s entire congressional delegation, all Democrats, will attend a morning news conference. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, an outspoken critic of Mr. Pruitt, will be among the speakers.

Scientists there will unveil the report on the state of the bay, which E.P.A. scientists helped research and write. Among the findings will be that climate change is affecting air and water temperatures, precipitation, sea level and fish in and around the estuary.

Autumn Oczkowski, a research ecologist at the E.P.A.’s National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory Atlantic Ecology Division in Rhode Island, was scheduled to give the keynote address. Colleagues familiar with her speech said she intended to address climate change and other factors affecting the health of the estuary.

Climate Change Is Complex. We’ve Got Answers to Your Questions.
We know. Global warming is daunting. So here’s a place to start: 17 often-asked questions with some straightforward answers.

Rose Martin, a postdoctoral fellow at the same E.P.A. laboratory and Emily Shumchenia, an E.P.A. consultant, were scheduled to speak on an afternoon panel entitled “The Present and Future Biological Implications of Climate Change.”

“The report is about trends. It’s kind of hard not to talk about climate change when you’re talking about the future of the Narragansett Bay,” Mr. King said.

The agenda and speaker lineup was emailed to attendees on October 4. Tom Borden, the program director of the Narragansett Bay Estuary Program, said he received a call on Friday from Wayne Munns, director of the Atlantic ecology division of the E.P.A.’s Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, telling him the three scientists would not be allowed to speak.

“I was not really provided with a clear explanation,” Mr. Borden said. “He advised me that it was the decision of the E.P.A. Office of Public Affairs.”

GRAPHIC
A ‘500-Year Flood’ Could Happen Again Sooner Than You Think. Here’s Why.
Terms like “500-year flood” and “100-year flood” are used as shorthand by government officials and actuaries, but they can confuse the public.

Several Rhode Island scientists who work closely with the regional lab said political officials from E.P.A. headquarters in Washington spent two days last week in the Rhode Island office reviewing the lab’s work.

Mr. Munns confirmed that E.P.A. officials would not be participating in the meeting but did not explain why. Mr. Konkus, the agency spokesman, did not respond to questions about whether the conference’s focus on climate change was a factor in canceling the appearances.

He said in an email that E.P.A. scientists may attend the program, but not the morning news conference. He later clarified saying, “E.P.A. staff will not be formally presenting at either.”

Since August, all E.P.A. grant solicitations have gone through Mr. Konkus’s office for review, according to a directive first obtained by E & E News. Mr. Konkus served on President Trump’s campaign before he was appointed deputy associate administrator in E.P.A.’s Office of Public Affairs. At the time, agency officials said they were ensuring agency funding is in line with Mr. Pruitt’s priorities.

The Narragansett Bay Estuary Program is funded through the E.P.A.’s approximately $26 million National Estuary Program. It funds 28 state-based estuary programs and delivers about $600,000 annually to the Narragansett Bay program. Mr. Pruitt’s proposed budget for 2018 would eliminate the national program.

Under Mr. Pruitt’s leadership the E.P.A. also has removed most mentions of the words “climate change” from its website. He has declined to link carbon dioxide emissions to global warming, and in an interview with Time magazine last week said he intended to assemble a team of independent experts to challenge established climate science because, Mr. Pruitt asserted, it has not yet been subject to “a robust, meaningful debate.”

Follow @NYTClimate on Twitter

A version of this article appears in print on October 23, 2017, on Page A16 of the New York edition with the headline: E.P.A. Bars 3 of Its Scientists From a Conference to Discuss Climate Change. Order Reprints| Today's Paper|Subscribe

No comments: