Joshua Tree National Park Superintendent allegedly reprimanded by Interior Secretary Zinke for, uh,
Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke sulks over the pubic use of science in tweets posted by Joshua Tree National Park.
We've just about had it with Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke and the Trump administration. Between their ongoing roll-back of environmental and public health protections, their gross ignorance of climate change, and their recent mangling of our national monuments so those areas in Utah can be more easily exploited for uranium mining, coal strip-mining, as well as oil and natural gas drilling and fracking, all the while spouting some absurd rhetoric about how the people of Utah should decide what happens to lands that belong to all of us, we're absolutely done with giving the folks from the Department of the Ulterior (Motives) the benefit of the doubt.
Today, we learn from The Hill that Joshua Tree National Park Superintendent David Smith was summoned to Zinke's office last month to reprimand Smith for tweets from the park's Twitter account that very rationally describe the consequences of climate change. Yes, that's right - the superintendent of a national park was sent to "the woodshed," as described by one source in The Hill, for sharing science with the public.
We've had our differences with National Park Service staff in the past, and some have engaged in some rather unethical, and possibly illegal conduct, with respect to this publication. While Smith has been in the superintendent's position, we've only had one incident of possible over-reaction to a mundane feature story we ran, and while we can disagree to some extent how he handled that scenario (or how our requests for information were virtually ignored by staff working for the park), overall, Smith has been a pretty solid leader for the park during what may be its most challenging times yet.
While we don't expect to agree with everything the NPS says or does, and they can be officious bureaucrats sometimes, we absolutely want them to succeed at their mission of protecting and preserving these national treasures for future generations of Americans - something Zinke doesn't appear to value. Even at their most officious, NPS personnel always seem to truly care for the lands they manage. The people who visit them? Not so much.
The November tweets from Joshua Tree National Park (@JoshuaTreeNPS), are rampant with evidently controversial statements, such as, "New generations of young Joshua trees are not surviving in the southern part of their current range. As older trees die, there are fewer young ones to replace them." Or this hysteria-inducing speculation: "Average overnight low temperatures are increasing at a faster rate than daytime highs. Rarer freezing temperatures are pushing habitable ranges for some species to higher elevations and latitudes."
All of this is verifiable fact, and those of us who live near the park know there have been changes to our weather. For example, during our 17 years living 15 minutes away from the park, we've never needed an air conditioner. Now we do. We didn't change, but our summers certainly have. We now see 100 degree temperatures more frequently, and for longer stretches, beginning earlier in the summer, than before. No longer can we count on evening breezes from the nearby San Bernardino Mountains to cool us down overnight. And let's not forget that it's 70 degrees as I write this - in mid-December.
None of the park's tweets are anything other than factual scientific information about the environment of the national park. It's not news that within 100 years, Joshua Tree National Park may not have many Joshua trees, the same way Glacier National Park may no longer sport any glaciers. If anything, Zinke should have summoned Smith to his office to commend him for helping educate the public about the threats to these national treasures, not to scold him.
Zinke, who appears to neither know, nor care, about science, other than the science of ignoring environmental, tribal, and public input while catering to special interests, is in no moral position to be hectoring our superintendent over educating the public. This is absolutely unacceptable. Not that the secretary cares. He does not work for us, after all, and should be considered a trespasser whenever spotted on public lands.
For now, however, the park's tweets are still posted, and the National Park Service's page on climate change in Joshua Tree, remains online. Check them out for yourself - while you have the chance.
Update:
We have reached out to Joshua Tree National Park staff for comment and additional information, but have not heard back. This is not unusual. The park does not have a dedicated public information contact and often shies away from controversial or unpopular information requests, hoping they will go away and leave them alone. Should we receive a response, we will include it here.
After posting this story to a Facebook group, Explorers of the Mojave Desert, we have seen quite a few comments that this is either "fake" news, or completely political. It is political in that our political representatives are attempting to suppress the science of climate change and have tried to suppress free speech in the process. We are merely noting this process. Use of confidential sources is not a sign of fake news, it is a journalistic practice that frequently occurs when said sources have a legitimate fear of reprisal. The use of the term "alleged," is a regular professional practice in journalism. Should we receive confirmation directly from reliable sources ourselves, we will be happy to remove the "allegedly," from our headline.
Some commenters, such as one Facebook user who lives in Yucca Valley, according to his social media profile, claims climate change is inevitable, isn't related to human activity, and notes that scientists are wrong about Joshua trees dying due to climate change because he has Joshua trees in his backyard.
"it’s a cycle folks! Stop hyping it up for the political agenda!! So You have this park called “Joshua Tree” made famous by a music group that I happen to like! The park sees millions of visitors now. They come to see the Joshua trees, take pictures, jump on the Joshua trees, burn the Joshua trees and paint on the Joshua trees. Of course the Joshua trees in “the park” are going to die!! But go out to Mojave National Preserve or any “public Land” less traveled and the trees are healthy!! "
We'd have to agree with him about how some of our visitors harm the trees, but to think that they run tree to tree in the park destroying them, seems a bit of a stretch. We'd agree that the trees in the preserve, at higher elevations, which is what we're talking about when it comes to Joshua trees and climate change - that they are being pushed out of lower elevations - do look pretty good. However, we'll stick with the science, not the politicians.
It is interesting to note how many people say mentioning climate change is too political, when in fact, climate change is science that politicians try to ignore or stifle because of its science, not its politics.
"Seems every time someone posts from the 'Sunrunner' it is really hateful," said Robbie Baumann, from Mohave Valley, Arizona, whose Facebook page literally has this pasted across the top:
In addition to finding our publication's posts about the desert "hateful," it is encouraging to find he also doesn't like the NFL much either...
One of the more enlightened commenters, however, is Terry Lane, who noted:
"You global warming hoax pushers make me sick, the temperature has not risen more than .6 of 1 degree in over 500 years!! Put on yur big boy pants and quit crying!! Climate change only happens in the 4 seasons and that’s it!! Unless a volcano erupts in yur back yard!! Quit spewing all these lies!!"
We assure Terry, who allegedly was a former science teacher at Kings Canyon Unified School District, and who claims to have studied agriculture at UC Davis (no indication of whether he graduated, however), we have our big boy pants on and have no need to dry our tears at present. Terry hates them "libs," it would appear, but we'd have to agree with him to a point that better forestry management could help with preventing wildfires. We don't quite have the same faith in controlled burns he exhibits on his page, but that comes from direct experience with some of them becoming uncontrolled burns. He has a point though.
Other members of the group deny that natural resource extraction could play a role in the reduction of national monument sizes in Utah, despite much evidence to the contrary, but we'll have more on that topic soon.