Leading the Way in Scientific Misconduct
The Department of the Interior recently proclaimed in a blog that the agency is “Leading the Way in Scientific Integrity.”
“The Department of the Interior (DOI) has a unique role as one of the United States Government’s leading creators and consumers of scientific data and research. Ensuring the integrity of scientific research and data relied upon by the Department is critical. Policymakers rely on this science to inform policy decisions. The public counts on DOI for trustworthy scientific data, research, and analysis related to everything from earthquakes and endangered species to the environmental impacts of human activities.”
Despite the spin from the Deputy Secretary of the Interior David Hayes, the DOI’s record shows that it values politics more than scientific integrity. In our report, “Keeping Entrepreneurship at Bay”, we explain how multiple offices within DOI “significantly lack oversight, accountability, and transparency, and as a result have gone unchecked in their manipulation of scientific data.”
The use of bad science informed the decision of former Secretary Salazar to shut down Drakes Bay Oyster Company, a small, family-run, environmentally sustainable farm located inside the Point Reyes National Seashore.
How has the DOI distorted science to fit their political agenda and try to shut down a sustainable small business? Let us count the ways:
Distort Data
- In the draft environmental impact statement (DEIS), the National Parks Service (NPS) used data from a 1995 study on the sound impact of a 70 horsepower (HP) jet ski at the distance of two feet to make conclusions on the noise level of 20 and 40 HP oyster skiffs at fifty feet.
- In the same DEIS, NPS used data from a 400 HP cement mixer truck that can be heard for 2.4 miles to misrepresent a ¼ HP oyster tumbler than can be heard for only 150 feet.
- The DOI Office of Inspector General found no misconduct and declared that the data was “reasonable and justified based on mechanical similarities.”
Cover Up
- DOI Field Solicitor Gavin Frost wrote a report that found NPS scientists violated the NPS Code of Scientific and Scholarly Conduct by “blurring the line between exploration and advocacy through research.”
- Specifically the report found that NPS employees “mishandled” data and “refus[ed] . . . to modify their intuitive, but statistically and scientifically unproven, belief that DBOC mariculture activities” disturbed harbor seals in Drakes Estero.
- The Frost Report concluded that NPS scientists showed “bias,” “advocacy,” a “troubling mind-set,” and a “willingness to allow subjective beliefs … to guide scientific conclusions.”
- Frost excused the employees by labeling these actions as “administrative misconduct” instead of scientific misconduct.
Change: From “No Evidence” to “Directly Connected”
- Even after independent analysis by Dr. Brent Stewart, an independent harbor seal behavior specialist at Hubbs SeaWorld Research Institute contracted by NPS, concluded there was “no evidence of disturbance” of harbor seals by the oyster skiffs in Drakes Bay, the U.S. Geological Survey issued a public report stating that the oyster skiffs could be directly connected, or at least associated with a flushing level of disturbance” in some seals, and the NPS in their Final EIS misrepresented Dr. Stewart’s report to conclude cause-and-effect.
Politics over Integrity
Despite the attempted victory lap by DOI on its website, the evidence shows that the only thing they are leading in is the Orwellian doublespeak they use to cover up their scientific misconduct.
As of May 24, 2013, Cause of Action no longer represents Drakes Bay Oyster Company, the Lunny family, or Dr. Corey Goodman and will be withdrawing as counsel from the litigation.
Senator Unveils “Victims of Government”
Senator Ron Johnson has released “Victims of Government”; a project dedicated to exposing the unintended consequences of federal regulations.
The Small Business Administration Office of Advocacy estimates that it costs Americans $1.75 trillion to comply with federal regulations each year. To put $1.75 trillion into perspective, that amount is larger than all but eight economies in the world. It also means that over 10% of the U.S. economy is spent on trying to satisfy rules issued by Washington bureaucrats. That doesn’t even include federal, state, and local taxes.
This heavy regulatory burden diverts resources from innovation to compliance, discourages business investment, and chills job creation. It is no accident that as Washington adds new regulations, more and more Americans are unemployed and underemployed.
Elected leaders need to carefully consider the costs and negative unintended consequences of unnecessary federal regulations. They need to remember that real people must comply with these regulations and that making them overly burdensome stifles American growth. This blog features just some of the victims of government.
According to the study commissioned by the Small Business Administration Office of Advocacy, “had every U.S. household paid an equal share of the federal regulatory burden, each would have owed $15,586 in 2008.”
Cause of Action is well aware of how the federal government can clamp down on economic opportunity. We represent Drakes Bay Oyster Company; a small, family-run, sustainable oyster farm located in Point Reyes National Seashore in a lawsuit against the Department of the Interior (DOI). DOI is using bad science to make false claims about the oyster company’s impact on the environment. If Interior succeeds, 30 jobs would be destroyed, and 40 percent of California’s oyster market would disappear. Most recently, Drakes Bay Oyster Company has been granted an emergency Injunction pending appeal keeping the farm open until the 9th circuit rules on DBOC’s injunction appeal.
Cause of Action Commends House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform on Oversight Agenda
Cause of Action Commends House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform on Oversight Agenda
WASHINGTON – On April 2, Gibson Dunn released their assessment of the submitted oversight agendas of the 113th Congress. Gibson Dunn outlined key areas of oversight that they considered noteworthy in these submissions, including the Department of Energy.
Cause of Action has repeatedly drawn into question the accountability at the Department of Energy, particularly with the Loan Guarantee Program which has awarded more than $9 billion in grants.
Dan Epstein, executive director:
“Under the Department of Energy, millions of taxpayer dollars have been wasted on grants and loans to companies that failed to produce the promised results, were not innovative in technology, and in some cases ultimately declared bankruptcy. We believe that the DOE engaged in arbitrary and capricious methods when awarding loan guarantees through the Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing program and that certain qualified candidates—like XP Vehicles—were not evaluated on their merits, and were essentially overlooked for less qualified and politically-connected candidates. As Cause of Action continues our investigation into how these loans were awarded, we look to OGR to continue their oversight of the DOE Loan Guarantee Program, and look forward to helping them fulfill their mission to work, ‘in partnership with citizen-watchdogs, to deliver the facts to the American people and bring genuine reform to the federal bureaucracy.’”
To learn more about Cause of Action, and their lawsuit against the Department of Energy, click here.
Bipartisan Amendment to Save Drakes Bay Oyster Co Filed in Senate Budget Proposal
Bipartisan Amendment to Save Drakes Bay Oyster Co Filed in Senate Budget Proposal
WASHINGTON – Today, Senators David Vitter (R-LA) and Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) co-sponsored an amendment to the Senate Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Year 2014, which, if passed, would allow Drakes Bay Oyster Company to remain open at least 10 more years. The amendment would “establish a deficit-neutral reserve fund to reinstate the reservation of use and occupancy and special use permits to conduct certain commercial operations.”
Dan Epstein, Cause of Action’s executive director commented on the proposal:
“Government accountability is not a partisan issue—neither is saving jobs. This amendment would save 30 jobs at Drakes Bay Oyster Company and 40 percent of California’s oyster market. It would also send the message to the Department of Interior that transparency and scientific integrity cannot be casually dismissed for political purposes.”
Cause of Action, Briscoe Ivester & Bazel LLP, Stoel Rives LLP, and SSL Law Firm represent Drakes Bay Oyster Company in their current federal lawsuit against the Department of the Interior, National Park Service and Secretary Ken Salazar.
Cause of Action Statement on the Energy and Natural Resources Committee Nomination of Sally Jewell
Cause of Action on the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Nomination of Sally Jewell
WASHINGTON – Today, the U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources voted to move the nomination of Sally Jewell for Secretary of the Interior forward to a full Senate vote.
Dan Epstein, Cause of Action’s executive director expressed concerns with Mrs. Jewell’s past alliances:
“As a former board member of the National Parks Conservation Association, we have serious concerns about Mrs. Jewell’s plans for the Department of the Interior. We saw Secretary Salazar’s overreach and abuse of power concerning Drakes Bay Oyster Company and we want the Senate to find out what Mrs. Jewell’s plans are for the future of this sustainable farm. The culture of corruption, and disregard for scientific integrity at the Department of the Interior needs to end. Will the Senate hold Mrs. Jewell accountable for her political connections and how they may impact her decisions as Secretary?
For more information on Drakes Bay Oyster Company and their lawsuit against Secretary Salazar, the National Parks Service, and the Department of the interior, click here.
Ag Alert: Why the Drakes Bay Oyster case matters
The following is from the California Farm Bureau Federation:
Why the Drakes Bay Oyster case matters
By Paul Wenger, President, California Farm Bureau Federation
Last week, the California Farm Bureau Federation, the Marin County Farm Bureau and the Sonoma County Farm Bureau joined in a petition to a federal appeals court, urging the court to give the Drakes Bay Oyster Co. a new hearing—and a new chance to continue its sustainable aquaculture operation.
The company and its owners, Kevin and Nancy Lunny, carry on a decades-long tradition of mariculture in Drakes Estero. The oyster farming operation has been there since the 1930s—so long that few people remember the estero before the farm existed. It was there long before the Point Reyes National Seashore was established in 1960.
Despite a record as excellent stewards of the land and of the estero, the Lunnys and their farm face eviction.
The National Park Service determined that the oyster farm had to go and pulled out all the stops in its efforts to evict the farm, even though its presence adds to the overall character of the area. The Lunnys, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Farm Bureau and other advocates have pointed out a long history of shoddy, slanted pseudo-science used by the Park Service in an effort to justify removing the oyster farm.
Despite protests from the West Marin community, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar decided last November that the farm would have to leave when its lease expired. Only a last-minute stay from a federal court last month allowed the Lunnys to remain in business, while the court considers their appeal.
If you’ve been following the case like I have, you know that Drakes Bay Oyster Co. is a prime example of the local, sustainable agriculture that many Bay Area residents prize. If you haven’t been following the case, you might be surprised by the range of individuals, groups and organizations that joined together in the petition last week on behalf of the Lunnys.
Along with CFBF and the two county Farm Bureaus, the petitioners included famed Berkeley chef Alice Waters; the Hayes Street Grill, a fish restaurant in San Francisco; the Tomales Bay Oyster Co.; the Marin County agricultural commissioner; Food Democracy Now; Marin Organic; and the Alliance for Local Sustainable Agriculture.
These folks may all come at this issue from different angles, but we end up at the same place: What’s happening to the Drakes Bay Oyster Co. is wrong.
The petition was written by Judith Teichman, a San Francisco attorney who assembled the coalition favoring the farm’s continued operation. It notes that closing down Drakes Estero as a source of fresh, sustainably raised shellfish would wreak havoc with the world-famous local, sustainable food and agriculture of the Bay Area. It would also disrupt shellfish cultivation on Tomales Bay. It would put 31 people out of work, some of whom have worked for the oyster farm for 30 years.
Closing the oyster company would also be a serious setback for modern environmental thinking, the petition says. Leading voices in the environmental movement have called for 21st century conservationists to embrace a more people-friendly ethic that supports working landscapes—just the sort of operation that Drakes Bay Oyster Co. represents.
Old-fashioned environmental activists want to force people off the land, to return it to some sort of pre-human condition. That thinking leads to confrontation instead of collaboration, and to situations where progressive, thoughtful farmers and ranchers like the Lunnys get pushed aside because of someone’s interpretation of the purity of nature.
For Farm Bureau, the case has implications beyond Drakes Estero.
Half of the land in California is owned by the federal or state government. Rural communities, where many Farm Bureau members live and work, depend on multiple use of these lands. National parks and wilderness areas operate under land-management rules that allow for human presence and use, even when the primary mandate is for preservation and environmental protection.
To ban an operation such as Drakes Bay Oyster Co. on the ideological belief that it should not exist in a national park or wilderness area—despite evidence that the farm provides important economic, cultural and social benefits—sets an awful precedent for everyone who believes that humans and nature can and must co-exist sustainably.
That’s why Farm Bureau supports the Lunnys and Drakes Bay Oyster Co. If the bureaucrats and the kick-the-humans-out branch of environmentalism can run the Lunnys out, you can bet they’ll keep trying to throttle more wise uses of taxpayer-owned lands.
That narrow, preservationist vision never worked and doesn’t now. The appeals court will hear the oyster farm’s case in May, and we hope it will restore common sense to the management of the Point Reyes National Seashore.
As of May 24, 2013, Cause of Action no longer represents Drakes Bay Oyster Company, the Lunny family, or Dr. Corey Goodman and will be withdrawing as counsel from the litigation.