National Resources Defense Council: Obama’s Reorganization Plan Could Erode NOAA’s Capabilities

[Better Believe It]

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
January 13, 2012
CONTACT: Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC)

Obama’s Reorganization Plan Could Erode NOAA’s Capabilities
NRDC is ‘’Extremely Troubled’’ by Proposal to Move Agency to Interior

WASHINGTON - January 13 - The following is a statement from Frances Beinecke, president of the Natural Resources Defense Council, on the government reorganization plan announced by President Obama.

“Streamlining government to better serve the American people is a worthy undertaking. But we are extremely troubled by the proposal to relocate the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) within the Department of Interior.

“This is not merely some technical, bureaucratic shift. The move could erode the capabilities and mute the voice of the government’s primary agency for protecting our oceans and the ecosystems and economies that depend on them.

“We understand the president’s interest in creating a more nimble, coherent entity for economic policy; but that can be done without sacrificing the scientific and environmental strengths of NOAA, and the independent perspectives it brings to critical issues.”
.
###

The Natural Resources Defense Council is a national, nonprofit organization of scientists, lawyers and environmental specialists dedicated to protecting public health and the environment. Founded in 1970, NRDC has 1.2 million members and online activists, served from offices in New York, Washington, Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Beijing.

[ProSense]

1. Not

"Obama’s Reorganization Plan Could Erode NOAA’s Capabilities"

...sure how moving the NOAA from Commerce to Interior would erode it. NRDC:

President Obama has announced a plan to move the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration out of the Commerce Department and into the Department of the Interior. While streamlining government to better serve the American people is a worthy undertaking, this decision could significantly undermine efforts to safeguard our oceans and marine life.

http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/fbeinecke/obamas_call_to_move_noaa_could.html

Still, this comes on the heels of this President's new oceans policy:

NRDC: Obama Administration Maps the Way toward Better Oceans Management
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511111

[Enrique]

2. they say the Interior Department is too focused on drilling

according to your first link.

[ProSense]

3. Yes

"they say the Interior Department is too focused on drilling"

...the Interior is also focused on conservation. Being buried in Commerce is likely the reason most people have no idea what the NOAA does, that it even exists and why the administration's policy is the first.

Here's a good comment from the link:

While I appreciate Beinecke's concern for issues with mining and government oversight of mining, her argument fails to persuade. Painting the Interior Department as a mining and exploration operation overlooks a much larger palette of science- and natural resource management-driven agencies within. Interior has a lot of agencies and scientists that protect our environment in addition to their legal requirements to let others destroy it. In fact a quick look at the Commerce agency line-up quickly shows NOAA as the odd duck, as the rest of the Department's bureaus are business, statistics, standards of people resources; not natural resources. Also, I have to trust an Interior Secretary over a Commerce Secretary any day just on sheer vocabulary, as a jobs and economics will be the primary bottom line for a Commerce Secretary, not ocean health.

The biggest benefit of this move will be the Endangered Species Act (ESA) which is enforced by US Fish and Wildlife Service (Interior) for terrestrial species and NOAA (Commerce) for ocean/ocean-going species (i.e. salmon). Now we can have scientists under one Secretary, with options open to possible move ESA-roles to one agency or at least standardize management.

That said, I agree mining and exploration laws do need overhauled. Agencies still need tireless scientists and adequate budgets to enforce their regulations. But what concerns me the most are those laws that tie NOAA to Commerce which will need to be overhauled as a result of this move. Will those legal updates weaken, strengthen or remove the governmental responsibilities that protect natural resources? I haven't heard anything about that but welcome investigation.

I totally agree with that. The NRDC's concerns need to be addressed, which is that the NOAA retain its independence and stature.

[Dov Henis]

4. Some relevant recently updated science comprehensions...

It's WHAT, not WHERETO, move that matters...

20-21st Century Science, Challenge And Prospects

No hope for American-International Science Dominated By
An American Religious Political Trade-Union...

http://universe-life.com/2011/12/17/enlightenment/

http://universe-life.com/2011/12/13/21st-century-science-whence-and-whither/

Dov Henis (comments from 22nd century)
http://universe-life.com/