More Proof Bush is Destroying the Environment

[Nickdfresh]

February 10, 2005


U.S. Scientists Say They Are Told to Alter Findings
# More than 200 Fish and Wildlife researchers cite cases where conclusions were reversed to weaken protections and favor business, a survey finds.


By Julie Cart, Times Staff Writer

More than 200 scientists employed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service say they have been directed to alter official findings to lessen protections for plants and animals, a survey released Wednesday says.

The survey of the agency's scientific staff of 1,400 had a 30% response rate and was conducted jointly by the Union of Concerned Scientists and Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility.

A division of the Department of the Interior, the Fish and Wildlife Service is charged with determining which animals and plants should be placed on the endangered species list and designating areas where such species need to be protected.

More than half of the biologists and other researchers who responded to the survey said they knew of cases in which commercial interests, including timber, grazing, development and energy companies, had applied political pressure to reverse scientific conclusions deemed harmful to their business.

Bush administration officials, including Craig Manson, an assistant secretary of the Interior who oversees the Fish and Wildlife Service, have been critical of the 1973 Endangered Species Act, contending that its implementation has imposed hardships on developers and others while failing to restore healthy populations of wildlife.

Along with Republican leaders in Congress, the administration is pushing to revamp the act. The president's proposed budget calls for a $3-million reduction in funding of Fish and Wildlife's endangered species programs.

"The pressure to alter scientific reports for political reasons has become pervasive at Fish and Wildlife offices around the country," said Lexi Shultz of the Union of Concerned Scientists.

Mitch Snow, a spokesman for the Fish and Wildlife Service, said the agency had no comment on the survey, except to say "some of the basic premises just aren't so."

The two groups that circulated the survey also made available memos from Fish and Wildlife officials that instructed employees not to respond to the survey, even if they did so on their own time. Snow said that agency employees could not use work time to respond to outside surveys.

Fish and Wildlife scientists in 90 national offices were asked 42 questions and given space to respond in essay form in the mail-in survey sent in November.

One scientist working in the Pacific region, which includes California, wrote: "I have been through the reversal of two listing decisions due to political pressure. Science was ignored — and worse, manipulated, to build a bogus rationale for reversal of these listing decisions."

More than 20% of survey responders reported they had been "directed to inappropriately exclude or alter technical information."

However, 69% said they had never been given such a directive. And, although more than half of the respondents said they had been ordered to alter findings to lessen protection of species, nearly 40% said they had never been required to do so.

Sally Stefferud, a biologist who retired in 2002 after 20 years with the agency, said Wednesday she was not surprised by the survey results, saying she had been ordered to change a finding on a biological opinion.

"Political pressures influence the outcome of almost all the cases," she said. "As a scientist, I would probably say you really can't trust the science coming out of the agency."

A biologist in Alaska wrote in response to the survey: "It is one thing for the department to dismiss our recommendations, it is quite another to be forced (under veiled threat of removal) to say something that is counter to our best professional judgment."

Don Lindburg, head of the office of giant panda conservation at the Zoological Society of San Diego, said it was unrealistic to expect federal scientists to be exempt from politics or pressure.

"I've not stood in the shoes of any of those scientists," he said. "But it is not difficult for me to believe that there are pressures from those who are not happy with conservation objectives, and here I am referring to development interest and others.

"But when it comes to altering data, that is a serious matter. I am really sorry to hear that scientists working for the service feel they have to do that. Changing facts to fit the politics — that is a very unhealthy thing. If I were a scientist in that position I would just refuse to do it."

The Union of Concerned Scientists and the public employee group provided copies of the survey and excerpts from essay-style responses.

One biologist based in California, who responded to the survey, said in an interview with The Times that the Fish and Wildlife Service was not interested in adding any species to the endangered species list.

"For biologists who do endangered species analysis, my experience is that the majority of them are ordered to reverse their conclusions [if they favor listing]. There are other biologists who will do it if you won't," said the biologist, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

LA TImes (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-scientists10feb10,0,4954654.story?coll=la-home-nation)

[Angel]

I heard yesterday that now he wants to drill oil in a protected Arctic area. Of course, he has no fucking clue just how vital the Arctic is, nor how important it is to the environment.

[ODShowtime]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
February 10, 2005


"The pressure to alter scientific reports for political reasons has become pervasive at Fish and Wildlife offices around the country," said Lexi Shultz of the Union of Concerned Scientists.

"Political pressures influence the outcome of almost all the cases," she said. "As a scientist, I would probably say you really can't trust the science coming out of the agency."

A biologist in Alaska wrote in response to the survey: "It is one thing for the department to dismiss our recommendations, it is quite another to be forced (under veiled threat of removal) to say something that is counter to our best professional judgment."

What makes you guys think the administration isn't ignoring all kinds of other experts?

[BigBadBrian]

That reminds me, it's almost fishing season:

http://www.sopotnickscabbagepatch.com/Humor/Humor3/a_fishing.gif

[ELVIS]

Originally posted by Angel
I heard yesterday that now he wants to drill oil in a protected Arctic area. Of course, he has no fucking clue just how vital the Arctic is, nor how important it is to the environment.


Drilling for oil does not destroy the surrounding enviroment...

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by ELVIS
Drilling for oil does not destroy the surrounding enviroment...

Yes it does nimrod, but since you can't SPELL environment, I won't expect you to know the ramifications either.:rolleyes:

[ELVIS]

I'm typing in complete darkness...

Explain to us how it destroys the ENVIRONMENT !!

[Warham]

I wonder if Clinton was helping to destroy the environment when he was president too. Or perhaps Carter, Johnson and Kennedy.

I guess the environment wasn't partially destroyed from '60-'68, '76-'80, and '92-'00. It only started back up when Bush was elected.

[academic punk]

Originally posted by Warham
I wonder if Clinton was helping to destroy the environment when he was president too. Or perhaps Carter, Johnson and Kennedy.

I guess the environment wasn't partially destroyed from '60-'68, '76-'80, and '92-'00. It only started back up when Bush was elected.


Clinton did have his share of fuck-ups but part of the reason that states like Utah hate him so was b/c he declared significant portions of the state "forever wild", thus immune from de-forestation, drilling, and building.

Two books worth a read: Robert Kennedy's Crime Against Nature, and just when you think he's just some democrat nut, maybe pick up Christine Whitman's It's My party Too. Remmeber her? She was appointed by Bush as the head of the EPA. She also resigned from the administration in frustration for Bush breaking campaign promises regarding his commitments to a healthy environment.

Wanna accuse her of being some democrat wing nut? Didn't think so. Which is why you haven't heard a word about the book on FOX News.

Bottom line: according to Bush's "Clean Air Act", carbon dioxide is not listed as a pollutant. Again, CARBON dioxide...not a pollutant.

[Warham]

My personal beliefs, and this doesn't mean anything to you all, is that mankind cannot destroy itself or the Earth by it's own volition.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Warham
My personal beliefs, and this doesn't mean anything to you all, is that mankind cannot destroy itself or the Earth by it's own volition.

I guess the WWII fire bombings and the nuclear strikes on Hiroshima and Nagasaki show that we definitely can't kill 100,000's at a crack. :rolleyes:

[academic punk]

that's a convenient philosophy, warham.

[Warham]

I didn't say mankind couldn't kill each other, Nick. I said that I didn't think the Earth could be totally annihilated.

Two different things.

Also, PUNK, that doesn't mean that I adhere to this 'what the hell, just throw your big mac wrapper out the car window because it doesn't matter in the long run' philosophy. That's just my greater belief. It doesn't give an excuse to trash the planet, it's just my belief that we ultimately cannot destroy it.

[academic punk]

we can destroy the planet as easily as it can destroy us.

[Little_Skittles]

yep. It's kinda got a domino effect too.

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by ELVIS
I'm typing in complete darkness...



:rolleyes:


Get the hell out of the basement then......


Complete darkness, yet that's the ONLY word you've screwed up all day? hmmmm

My point is, why can't you right wing neocon bible thumpers EVER just admit a mistake?

ever?

[Warham]

I've made lots of mistakes.

One of them was accepting a Bill Clinton/Al Gore bumper sticker in '92. I don't know what the hell I was thinking. I think I put it on one of my baseball card binders I had at the time.

[Warham]

...

[Little_Skittles]

lol a mistkae isn't a mistake until you refuse to correct it. :rolleyes: :D

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by Warham
...

I think warham started to post an S.O.S.


Hope he's okay:D

[academic punk]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine
I think warham started to post an S.O.S.


Hope he's okay:D

I don't.



(KIDDING!!!)

[Angel]

Originally posted by ELVIS
Drilling for oil does not destroy the surrounding enviroment...

Oh please... for starters. The area being discussed is a wildlife sanctuary, I believe the caribou winter nesting area. Come up here to Alberta and I'll show you just what drilling for oil does to the environment. I'll even take you to some of the areas that my Grandfather helped to destroy. He was an Alberta oil pioneer.

[Little_Skittles]

every action has reaction. whether the action is good or bad guys try and remember. the best laid plans of mice and men often go astray. What may be right for some isn't right for others.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Warham
I've made lots of mistakes.

One of them was accepting a Bill Clinton/Al Gore bumper sticker in '92. I don't know what the hell I was thinking. I think I put it on one of my baseball card binders I had at the time.

Careful Warham, they'll throw you out of the John J. Birch Society for admitting egregious sins like that.

[BigBadBrian]

Originally posted by academic punk

Wanna accuse her of being some democrat wing nut? Didn't think so. Which is why you haven't heard a word about the book on FOX News.



Not true. She has been interviewed on Fox and Friends in the morning, by Brit Hume, profiled by Shepard Smith, interviewed by Sean Hannity for her book tour, and interviewed by Bill O'Reilly.

Next argument. Do try to do better. :rolleyes:

[BigBadBrian]

Originally posted by Warham
I didn't say mankind couldn't kill each other, Nick. I said that I didn't think the Earth could be totally annihilated.

Two different things.

Also, PUNK, that doesn't mean that I adhere to this 'what the hell, just throw your big mac wrapper out the car window because it doesn't matter in the long run' philosophy. That's just my greater belief. It doesn't give an excuse to trash the planet, it's just my belief that we ultimately cannot destroy it.

I wanna fucking tax the hell out of cigarette smokers. Those fuckers piss me the fuck off. Using MY WORLD as their ashtray...what the fuck? Those bastards need to be rounded up once a month in those little sheriff ponchos you see prisoners wearing and made to go around and pick up cigarette butts. :mad:

[academic punk]

Originally posted by BigBadBrian
Not true. She has been interviewed on Fox and Friends in the morning, by Brit Hume, profiled by Shepard Smith, interviewed by Sean Hannity for her book tour, and interviewed by Bill O'Reilly.

Next argument. Do try to do better. :rolleyes:

I stand corrected. I actually did check foxnews.com for listings, and found a big fat gooseegg.

care to impart what she had to say? what was the o'reilly interview like?

[ELVIS]

Originally posted by BigBadBrian
I wanna fucking tax the hell out of cigarette smokers. Those fuckers piss me the fuck off. Using MY WORLD as their ashtray...what the fuck? Those bastards need to be rounded up once a month in those little sheriff ponchos you see prisoners wearing and made to go around and pick up cigarette butts. :mad:

I'm for that...

[FORD]

Originally posted by BigBadBrian
I wanna fucking tax the hell out of cigarette smokers. Those fuckers piss me the fuck off. Using MY WORLD as their ashtray...what the fuck? Those bastards need to be rounded up once a month in those little sheriff ponchos you see prisoners wearing and made to go around and pick up cigarette butts. :mad:

Got my vote. And while we're at it, smoke free bars, damn it!

[mwsully]

It's good to see that there are people here who give a damn about environmental concerns. I don't know if this has been said, but it has been public knowledge that George W. has done the least for the environment out of all the Republican presidents of the past. Historically, Republicans have set aside many wild areas as national parks, monuments and such.

I'm not into bashing anyone's political leanings here -- I, myself, am an independent who tends to vote Green; and I agree that humans will have a tough time killing off all visible life. The earth has survived and flourished after every large scalle natural disasters, climate change, etc. in the past. However, the rate of change had been very slow -- thousands of years, allowing gradual adjustments/adaptations to those global changes.

Now, unfortunately, we have accelerated those changes to the point where, to most people, it's unbelievable -- literally. No matter how much evidence continues to be gathered regarding the state of our planet, many folks are not too concerned about it. Sure, an increase of a few degrees in temperature does not seem too serious, but on a global scale, you're talking about big, and sadly, negative changes.

The Earth is a homeostatic system and any sudden change disrupts it, no matter how much it tries to counteract it.

And sadly, we will never unite globally unless the change affects all of us, which at that point -- whenever that is, if ever -- may be too late.

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by FORD
Got my vote. And while we're at it, smoke free bars, damn it!

Didnt a judge just overturn Pierce County's ban?

[The Scatologist]

Count me in on the cigarette tax too dammit! I know non smokers who have died from cancer from second hand smoke. PISSES ME FUCKING OFF!

[Little_Skittles]

no i think we should outlaw cigarettes and then make marijauna legal and tax it.

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by Little_Skittles
no i think we should outlaw cigarettes and then make marijauna legal and tax it.

Both should be legal, and heavily taxed.:cool:

The hypocrisy with regards to these laws have never ceased to amaze me.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by FORD
Got my vote. And while we're at it, smoke free bars, damn it!

We have them in New York State, I love it even though I haven't been out much lately. Some bar owners have bitched up a storm about the ban and claimed it's "destroying their business, but the smokers are coming back and can still smoke OUTSIDE!

Erie County, where I live was also the first in the nation to sue the tobacco companies. The revenue was supposed to save us, yet somehow we're still bankrupt and have a "Red Budget!":(

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine
Both should be legal, and heavily taxed.:cool:

The hypocrisy with regards to these laws have never ceased to amaze me.

Yup!!'

[academic punk]

Originally posted by BigBadBrian
I wanna fucking tax the hell out of cigarette smokers. Those fuckers piss me the fuck off. Using MY WORLD as their ashtray...what the fuck? Those bastards need to be rounded up once a month in those little sheriff ponchos you see prisoners wearing and made to go around and pick up cigarette butts. :mad:


Good point, Bri. BUt here's the thing: cigarettes don't contribute nearly as much to the air pollutants as smokestack and factory emissions.

Don't you want to see that stuff have deep regulations set upon them?

[ODShowtime]

Originally posted by Warham
My personal beliefs, and this doesn't mean anything to you all, is that mankind cannot destroy itself or the Earth by it's own volition.

first of all, you have no basis for that beleif, second, sure we probably can't rend the earth in two, but we could end up like 12 Monkeys hiding underground. Is that any conselation?

[ODShowtime]

Originally posted by Little_Skittles
no i think we should outlaw cigarettes and then make marijauna legal and tax it.


she is wise for her age:D


just stop selling cigarettes god damn it. I don't need the temptation when I'm out a-boozin!

[academic punk]

Oh, and by the way, that whole concept of heavy taxes on cigarette smokers and emoting them to virtual second-class citizen status?

That's something that the Canadians already have in place. (non-smokers are given priiority fro surgery and medical care over smokers).

So, Bri, you turning socialist over there or what?

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by academic punk

So, Bri, you turning socialist over there or what?

:D

[DLR7884]

FUCK ALL OF YOU NON-SMOKERS WHO GIVE US SMOKERS SHIT.

This God damn country was built on tobacco.

Don't ever forget that.

DLR7884
Assholes.

[BigBadBrian]

Originally posted by academic punk
Oh, and by the way, that whole concept of heavy taxes on cigarette smokers and emoting them to virtual second-class citizen status?

That's something that the Canadians already have in place. (non-smokers are given priiority fro surgery and medical care over smokers).

So, Bri, you turning socialist over there or what?

You'd be amazed at what my beliefs are on a variety of issues when we only debate a scant two or three on a daily basis on this board. :gulp:

[ODShowtime]

Originally posted by BigBadBrian
You'd be amazed at what my beliefs are on a variety of issues when I only debate a scant two or three on a daily basis and just throw in stupid bullshit when I don't understand the rest.

:D

[Angel]

Originally posted by academic punk
Oh, and by the way, that whole concept of heavy taxes on cigarette smokers and emoting them to virtual second-class citizen status?

That's something that the Canadians already have in place. (non-smokers are given priiority fro surgery and medical care over smokers).

BULLSHIT! I have heard of one Cardiologist in Manitoba who refused to do surgery on a patient until they quit smoking, and one doctor who will no longer see smokers who are not willing to quit.

Priority for surgery is based on need.

I'm a smoker, and I have never had to wait for any medical care due to my smoking. Although, maybe if they refused to replace my pacemaker until I quit, it might give me that extra push. ;)

[DLR7884]

Although, maybe if they refused to replace my pacemaker until I quit, it might give me that extra push.

:rofl: :rolleyes:

DLR7884
I am planning on quitting before I "need" to.

[Angel]

My kid did really well on the new nicorette inhalers, I'm going to do the combo Zyban, inhaler thing. Haven't picked a start time yet though. :D

[DLR7884]

I used the nicitrol inhaler and stopped smoking for over a month.

DLR7884
I'll be using that when I quit again.

[ODShowtime]

Originally posted by DLR7884
I used the nicitrol inhaler and stopped smoking for over a month.

DLR7884
I'll be using that when I quit again.

I quit using nothing more than a week at home alone and a nice bag of dope.

[DLR7884]

Originally posted by ODShowtime
I quit using nothing more than a week at home alone and a nice bag of dope.

Nice.

DLR7884
:)

[ODShowtime]

I'm tellin' ya it works. a year and a month for me

[academic punk]

Originally posted by BigBadBrian
You'd be amazed at what my beliefs are on a variety of issues when we only debate a scant two or three on a daily basis on this board. :gulp:


Okay...As Ross Perot said, I'm all ears...

(for those who wish to continue the smoking discussion, start a new thread)

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by academic punk
Oh, and by the way, that whole concept of heavy taxes on cigarette smokers and emoting them to virtual second-class citizen status?

That's something that the Canadians already have in place. (non-smokers are given priiority fro surgery and medical care over smokers).

So, Bri, you turning socialist over there or what?

Have you noticed how out-of-control our Medicaid costs are in the fair Empire State? How much of that is due to tobacco related diseases? I'll tell you what, you smokers pay out of pocket for your smoking related illnesses that costs me, and you can keep your tax money, 'till then, the TAXES STAY!

[academic punk]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine
Didnt a judge just overturn Pierce County's ban?


Regarding smoking bans, Cuba as of today (2-13) is now smoke-free in public places. that's right...the country famous for thier cigars 9and probably is 40% of their revenue) is now a big, fat no-smoking zone.

[BigBadBrian]

Originally posted by Angel
BULLSHIT! I have heard of one Cardiologist in Manitoba who refused to do surgery on a patient until they quit smoking, and one doctor who will no longer see smokers who are not willing to quit.

Priority for surgery is based on need.

I'm a smoker, and I have never had to wait for any medical care due to my smoking. Although, maybe if they refused to replace my pacemaker until I quit, it might give me that extra push. ;)

Maybe so, but I think it's just a matter of time here in the States, and maybe in Canada, that smoking will affect the care a person receives.

Hell, it's already legal to fire a person from a job here in the States if they smoke.

[academic punk]

Originally posted by BigBadBrian
Maybe so, but I think it's just a matter of time here in the States, and maybe in Canada, that smoking will affect the care a person receives.

Hell, it's already legal to fire a person from a job here in the States if they smoke.


is it? what job?

not lap dancers, certainly. becuase at the bachelor party I was at the other night, the stripper took a cigarette and "smoked" it through her..

you know the rest.

[Anonymous]

Does anybody really need proof that Bush is destroying the envronment? I mean, it's so fucking obvious that trying to prove is... stating the obvious!

Cheers! :bottle:

[Seshmeister]

Originally posted by FORD
Got my vote. And while we're at it, smoke free bars, damn it!

Yeah quickly followed by beer free bars since that's bad for you too.

Bunch of whining pussies...:)

[BigBadBrian]

Originally posted by Seshmeister
Yeah quickly followed by beer free bars since that's bad for you too.

Bunch of whining pussies...:)

Still chain-smoking, huh? ;)

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Seshmeister
Yeah quickly followed by beer free bars since that's bad for you too.

Bunch of whining pussies...:)

Uh, I'm not breathing your beer Sesh, I only breath in my own beer.

[Seshmeister]

And I don't charge you for the free nicotine...

[Seshmeister]

Originally posted by The Scatologist
Count me in on the cigarette tax too dammit! I know non smokers who have died from cancer from second hand smoke. PISSES ME FUCKING OFF!

Fucking myth.