EPA thwarts scientists’ conference speeches
Researcher directs fire at agency head Pruitt
PROVIDENCE, R.I. — The Environmental Protection Agency kept three scientists from speaking at a Monday event, a move condemned by researchers and Democratic members of Congress as an attempt by the agency to silence a discussion of climate change.
The scientists were scheduled to discuss a report on the health of Narragansett Bay, New England’s largest estuary. Among the findings in the 500-page report is that climate change is affecting air and water temperatures, precipitation, sea level and fish.
The EPA didn’t explain why the scientists were told not to speak but said in a statement that the agency supports the program that published the document, the Narragansett Bay Estuary Program, with a $600,000 annual grant. The EPA is the sole funder of the program.
Several people involved in the report and members of the state’s congressional delegation likened it to scientific censorship. They cited EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, who has rejected the scientific consensus on climate change.
John King, a professor of oceanography at the University of Rhode Island and the chair of the science advisory committee for the estuary program, compared the decision to the opening move of a chess game.
“It’s the opening gambit. Can we censor science and get away with it? I would say I hope not,” King said.
Thomas Borden, program director of the estuary program, said Wayne Munns, director of the EPA’S Atlantic Ecology Division, had called him Friday afternoon to say two staffers who work out of its research lab in the town of Narragansett had been advised that they could not attend. Munns did not give him an explanation, but Borden said he understood that the decision had come from EPA headquarters in Washington.
One of the staffers, Autumn Oczkowski, was scheduled to give the keynote at an afternoon workshop session. Another, Rose Martin, was scheduled to speak on a panel.
After Munns’ call, Borden said he checked with an EPA consultant, Emily Shumchenia, who King said was detailed to the estuary program and who wrote significant portions of the report. She was told she should not participate, Borden said.
King said he knew when they were organizing the speaking program that there might be an issue with the EPA, given the direction under Pruitt’s leadership. But he said all three are excellent young scientists, and they were asked to participate so their work could be highlighted.
Scientists from a variety of agencies and institutions had been working for years on the technical document, the purpose of which is to examine the condition of the bay and the trends with data on 24 different environmental indicators.
“It’s a comprehensive scientific update of the status of the bay,” Borden said. “It’s not a policy document.”