At a time when the world’s oceans face the very real prospect of an apocalyptic collapse, this development is an unalloyed good for worldwide efforts to bring us back from the brink. The scientific research which will be able to take place in these protected ecosystems may produce the data and solutions we need to keep burgeoning world populations in a more sustainable balance with the oceans’ roles in climate, food supply, and biodiversity. And, as Roosevelt knew and Bush seems to have remembered, there’s an intrinsic value to protecting vast areas of wilderness even if most people never encounter them.

So, kudos, President Bush, truly.

Of course, there’s more to say:

As good as creating these protected areas is, it’s also a dodge, and an “easy” way to burnish that which is tarnished. It’s great that Presidents can do these sorts of things, and it’s a great and welcome surprise that this one has.

But just as one doesn’t win a traditional war by pulling down a statute, landing on an aircraft carrier, and proclaiming “Mission Accomplished,” one doesn’t win the war for healthy oceans via a single gesture-however grand.

Lisa Jackson, if you’re listening, good words to live by.

Related:
RB: Bush Interior Department Official to Endangered Species: $#% You!
RB: The Rape of the EPA: Bush Appointee Steven Johnson Called to Task
RB: It’s Not Over Yet: Bush Sneaks In Harmful Pollution Laws

January 20 can’t come soon enough, but first let the crimes of the Bush administration be released and judged. Today’s chopping block head is Julie MacDonald, a former high-ranking official in the Interior Department’s Fish and Wildlife Service. According to a newly-released report from Interior Inspector General Earl Devaney, MacDonald successfully “tainted nearly every decision made on the protection of endangered species over five years” and even exceeded expectations by “exert[ing] improper political interference on many more rulings than previously thought.”

MacDonald’s priority, according to the report, was not so much the well-being of hurting species, but rather a particular political agenda (hmm, perhaps we see a pattern?) that led her to push through a host of rulings axing greater protection for endangered species. Seven of them were (thankfully) reversed by the department, but Devaney’s report found an additional 13 decisions that MacDonald skewed to fit her agenda, and two more that she “indirectly affected.”

MacDonald, a civil engineer with a master’s degree in management, resigned from her post in May of 2007 amid accusations that she’d “violated the Endangered Species Act, censored science and mistreated staff of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.”

Things had gotten so bad that a House congressional oversight committee was about to hold a hearing—and they only knew the half of it, according to Devaney, who stated in his report that:

“MacDonald’s zeal to advance her agenda has caused considerable harm to the integrity of the ESA program and to the morale and reputation” of the Fish and Wildlife Service, as well as potential harm to animals under the Endangered Species Act [and] “[h]er heavy-handedness has cast doubt on nearly every ESA decision issued during her tenure.”

Then again, in her defense, have any ESA decisions in the past eight years been any less dubious?

Related:
RB: The Rape of the EPA: Bush Appointee Steven Johnson Called to Task
RB: Fights Over Space! NASA Head Disses Obama’s Transition Team
RB: It’s Not Over Yet: Bush Sneaks In Harmful Pollution Laws

Mashing scientific evidence into a pulpy soup of agenda-laden misinformation seems to be a common theme for the modern GOP. The latest (and arguably most egregious) example is outgoing EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson, whose reign has been dominated by a poverty of factual information, with hard science routinely twisted to suit political designs.

In a scathing profile in the Philadelphia Enquirer (via ThinkProgress), writers John Shiffman and John Sullivan delve into the cult of mediocrity that dominated Johnson’s time at the agency. The piece is filled with forehead-slappers like the following:

Perhaps one of the best insights into Johnson’s vision for EPA can be found in written testimony he submitted to a Senate committee this year. In the document, Johnson laid out his top 11 goals.

No. 1 was clean energy, particularly approving drilling for “thousands of new oil and gas wells” on tribal and federal lands. No. 2 was homeland security.

Environmental enforcement and sound science ranked ninth and 10th.

And that’s not even the worst of it:

Johnson approved pesticide testing on human subjects, lowered the monetary value of a human life by $1 million, reduced air pollution reporting requirements for corporate farms, and altered a chemical risk-assessment program that has slowed analysis to a crawl.

To top it all off, Johnson is described as using the following reasoning against his critics:

He believes in the Bush agenda and, like his boss, said his resolve is fueled by his deep Christian beliefs.

It is a faith he developed early in life. Johnson’s strongest association outside the EPA is his relationship with his alma mater, Taylor University, one of the nation’s oldest evangelical colleges…

Johnson majored in biology. At Taylor, that includes discussion of creationism.

When asked to articulate his view on the creationism/science debate, Johnson responded with the following:

It’s not a clean-cut division. If you have studied at all creationism vs. evolution, there’s theistic or God-controlled evolution and there’s variations on all those themes.

Sure, there are variations. Unfortunately, none of them are grounded in actual fact. But then, neither are Johnson’s policies.

Related:
RB: Is Bobby Kennedy Really the “Anti-Science” Choice for EPA Head?
RB: Global Warming Denial in the Senate: The Latest Chapter
RB: Rant of the Day: Hitchens Slams Palin on Science

One of the more fascinating—and troubling—undercurrents of the conservation movement is that it has a clear, unalterable lid: We want to conserve species and their habitats, but not at the expense of our own well-being. In other words, when it’s them v. us, the furry critters will get it every time (a phenomenon handily illustrated by just about every creature movie).

Now, as Michael Wall reports in ScienceNOW Daily News, this man-beast conflict is coming to a dramatic head in Nepal, where villagers have undergone an extensive campaign to rebuild degraded forests in an effort to restore the dwindling tiger population. The giant cats—or what remains of them—have been shoved for years into smaller and smaller spaces in between villages, fields, and roads.

To keep the species from perishing entirely, for over a decade the Nepalese government has been working to expand the tiger reserves. Local communities have also joined in, managing the recovering forests and learning to allocate now-smaller resources like firewood and livestock grounds. In fact, the program has been a near-model of conservation in action, with the tiger parks giving back portions of their revenues to the sacrificing communities.

The only party that isn’t complacent in this whole affair, unfortunately, is the tigers. With their numbers on the rise—and the number of humans surrounding them not decreasing—they’re attacking people in record numbers.

According to the latest research:

[K]illings soared once the buffer-zone forests bounced back, from an average of 1.2 people per year in the first 2 decades to 7.2 thereafter. The killing rate jumped nearly threefold inside the park and more than ninefold inside the buffer zone, the team reports in this month’s issue of Biological Conservation.

All of which leaves conservationists and academics declaring an uneasy victory—the tigers are successfully breeding in their new habitats!—while the villagers who’ve been scrimping and sacrificing to help the beasts are now worried about being mauled. There’s your kicker: No one ever said that gratitude was a prerequisite in the animal kingdom.

Meanwhile, in poetically ironic timing, the Bush administration is overturning a 25-year-old ban on carrying concealed firearms in national parks and wildlife refuges. So we can be sure to blow the head off any ungrateful bears or moose that fail to recognize our tax dollars are paying for their stomping ground.

Related:
RB: Bush Tries to Do Good for the Environment; Cheney Smacks Him Down
RB: Save the Ugly Animals!
RB: Are Conservationists Favoring Cuddly Animals?

Image: iStockPhoto

None too soon, the experts have begun weighing in on what President-Elect Obama should do regarding climate and energy policy. Even better, Obama’s transition team has put together a list of around 200 Bush policies to be kicked to the curb ASAP. They include gems like reversing the limit on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, and ditching a rule that stops U.S. aid-receiving family planning groups from informing women about the availability of abortion.

The biggest slashes, so far anyway, have been saved for Bush’s environmental policies. As the Washington Post reports, Obama has announced his intention to “quickly reverse the Bush administration’s decision last December to deny California the authority to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from automobiles.” There’s also the undoing of the executive order that opens public lands to oil drilling, as well as social/economic moves like closing Guantanamo and tossing a life preserver to GM (though whether that’s a good idea remains to be seen).

Related:
RB: Obama & McCain Answer DISCOVER’s Questions on the Environment
RB: What Must the Next President Do to Save Science? DISCOVER’s Science Policy Project 2008

Yesterday we noted that dear old (and still around) President Bush was working overtime to pass environmental regulations—many of which would harm, not help, said environment—before he’s shown the proverbial boot. But to be fair, not every rule he’s looking to enact is bad: The Washington Post reports that one in particular may even be crucial in conserving some our most vital underwater ecosystems. The plan is to restrict or ban fishing and mineral exploitation in two huge areas of the Pacific.

No surprise, his attempts to do some good are being met with resistance, to the point where the scope of the original plan, which included the preservation of four potential “marine monuments” has already been whittled down. And leading the anti-conservation charge is none other than friend-to-corporations-everywhere Dick Cheney, who argues that the restrictions will hurt the economies of nearby regions like the Northern Mariana Islands.

The ocean areas in question, called “treasure troves” of biodiversity, are described by the Post as follows:

Kingman Reef and other islands in the central Pacific area teem with sharks and other top predators; the Mariana Trench and its nearby islands are home to several species of rare beaked whales and the Micronesian megapode — an endangered bird that uses the heat from volcanic vents to incubate its eggs — as well as to mud volcanoes, pools of boiling sulfur and the greatest microbial diversity on Earth.

Still, sayeth Cheney, if there’s mining and fishing to be done, to heck with the megapodes—though apparently he’s less worried about what will happen to fishing long-term if we don’t create preserves where fish can replenish their dwindling populations.

In a rousing (and unfortunately somewhat uncommon) display of spine-growing, the current First Lady is taking up the ocean’s cause, arguing that “preserving the region’s natural attributes would attract tourism and burnish the president’s record for history.” This may be the first/last time we’ll say this, but here it is: We couldn’t agree with Laura more.

Related:
RB: It’s Not Over Yet: Bush Sneaks In Harmful Pollution Laws
RB: Whales Battle U.S. Military…and (Probably) Lose

Nothing puts a damper on an historic world-mobilizing event like a steaming heap of pollution. As 80Beats reports, the nation’s current and least favorite—no, really, we’re not just saying that—president is using his last days in office to enact a virtual bonanza of legislation aimed at letting industries like coal-mining and commercial fishing wreak (even more) havoc on the environment.

Via the the Natural Resources Defense Council, here’s a description of one of the proposed rules, which exempts factory farms from requiring permits that limit water pollution:

Creates a loophole allowing facility operators to avoid permits by claiming they won’t have a discharge.

Adopts a scheme that allows facilities to avoid certain environmental enforcement. For instance, if an operator certifies that the facility won’t have a discharge, environmental authorities will ignore enforcement action, even if the facility discharges to the nation’s waters.

Rejects improvements in technology that would reduce harmful bacteria and other pathogens contained in animal waste, missing an opportunity to prevent water pollution and threats to public health.

Well, guess he figures he’ll drink only bottled water after leaving the White House. (Good luck with that one.)

If you can’t laugh about the federal government’s repeated attempts to muzzle scientists whose findings don’t jibe with the administration’s political agenda…well, what can you laugh about?

The Union of Concerned Scientists decided to fight hubris with humor by launching the Scientific Integrity Editorial Cartoon Contest this spring. The voting is open, and this is the last week to pick your favorite—all voting ends on Friday. The final 12 entries are pretty good—we have our favorites here at DISCOVER, but we don’t want to sway the polling.

“Science Idol,” as the contest has been nicknamed, may not attract the national attention of its television namesake. But perhaps dealing with government interference with humor will open a few more eyes—or at least we’ll get a good laugh out of it.

Image: iStockphoto