Farewell from a (muzzled) climate scientist

Monday, August 5, 2013

After more than 15 years of writing for Better Farming and its predecessor, this veteran climatologist is calling it a day. Cutbacks on science-related government programs and clampdowns by Ottawa's information control gurus have made the task just too problematic

by HENRY HENGEVELD

In the fall of 1997, I was surprised by a telephone call from Richard Charteris, editor of the now-defunct farm magazine Farm & Country. Would I be willing, he asked, to write bi-weekly contributions on weather and climate for his journal?  

The offer sounded interesting. With background training in meteorology and almost 30 years of experience with the Canadian weather service under my belt – more than half of that spent on communicating climate sciences to policy makers and the Canadian public – I was ready to try such a venture.    

However, before a Government of Canada employee can become a freelance writer for a journal, he or she must first jump through some protocol hoops. I first checked with my bosses, who gave their nod of approval. Then I contacted colleagues in the Ontario regional climate centre to make sure I wouldn't step on the toes of others who might be interested in pursuing such an opportunity. No takers there!

I finally contacted staff in Environment Canada's conflict of interest office to get their blessing.  "Well," the junior officer that responded replied. "We see risks, but can agree to your doing so provided you do not identify yourself as an Environment Canada employee and don't badmouth the Government of Canada in your articles." He withdrew the first condition once I reminded him that, in all other contact with media, we were always given the opposite advice.  

Thus I accepted Richard's offer, although scaling back contributions to a less-challenging monthly basis, rather than bi-weekly. That agreement ended in the spring of 1999 with the demise of Farm & Country's publishing company. However, editors of the sequel, Better Farming, asked me to come back again a few months later.   

I look back over the subsequent 15 or so years of contributions with pleasure – and gratitude to the editors involved for their trust and encouragement. Readers have also been gracious, with mostly positive feedback (although there are a few climate change doubters). Now, some 100 or so articles later, I think it's time to say adieu.

There are several reasons for doing so. First, I am now a senior citizen. That in itself is not an excuse, as many other seniors might be quick to point out. However, I am also active as a volunteer in other organizations and a devotee of 10 wonderful grandchildren spread across Canada. Sorry, but visiting and spending time with grandchildren take precedence over writing articles!

Secondly, the challenge of writing informative articles for Better Farming has significantly increased. While with the weather service, I constantly came across weather and climate-related information and scientific articles that were worth writing about. Hence, resource material was never an issue. Although I officially retired in 2004, Environment Canada asked whether I would stay on in an emeritus role. That, simply put, meant I would be a part-time "pseudo-employee" but without salary! A few small contracts thrown in for projects I would pursue helped me justify this to my better half, so I accepted. This also continued my easy access to sound information for Better Farming articles.

Then, about four years ago, the working environment with the weather service began to change dramatically.  Edicts from information control gurus in Ottawa declared that all employee contact with media must first be approved by Ottawa bureaucrats whose sole task seemed to be to make their political masters (that is, the Prime Minister and his ministers) look good and keep them out of trouble.

Furthermore, all scientific reports prepared for public information must first be pre-screened and approved for release by these same bureaucrats, few, if any, having relevant scientific backgrounds. Most reports would come back with proposed changes that would alter or remove bits of information that might embarrass the government. No inconvenient truths, please! Failure to agree to such changes meant failure to get approval for release of the information to the Canadian public.  

My final project as an emeritus science advisor was a synthesis of three years of recent, peer-reviewed climate-change-related research papers published in international scientific journals (more than 1,000 papers in total). This report, needless to say, took much effort and due diligence to prepare, and was similar to ones I had regularly produced in previous years.

Once completed in early 2010, the synthesis was first reviewed by other experts to check for accuracy (the normal peer review process). It was then forwarded to "Ottawa" for approval to print and release to the public. Unfortunately, the information gurus there came back with a long list of changes required to make it acceptable. I found most of these would distort the quality of the report, and were therefore unethical. Attempts to find compromises failed. Since I wanted no part in a less-than-honest report, it was never published. That spring, I resigned from my emeritus position.

That resignation, as well as other changes occurring within Environment Canada, has significantly impacted my writings for Better Farming. First, my access to information was now restricted to web searches and direct contact with former colleagues. I no longer had direct access to the abundant scientific literature available through Environment Canada. Secondly, the scientific assessment group that I had worked with for many years was dissolved shortly after I resigned, and staff within the group assigned to other activities. Made sense, since there is no need for science advisors if they are not allowed to advise!

Other Environment Canada cutbacks on science-related programs also resulted in the cessation of seasonal analysis of weather behaviour across Canada. As a result, writing informative articles for Better Farming became an ever-increasing challenge. Despite a compassionate concession from the editors to cut the number of articles to bi-monthly frequency, I have struggled with the articles. Not surprisingly, the fun is gone. Hence this article will be my last.

I am, by nature, an optimist. I also trust in our political system. Thus I believe that Canadians will, in due course, demand changes in Ottawa that will restore the quality of science pursued by dedicated researchers within the various Canadian government departments – whether Fisheries and Oceans, Agriculture Canada, Environment Canada, the National Research Council (all hit by recent cutbacks) or elsewhere. I also assume that, eventually, the muzzles will come off those scientists still remaining, so that the people of Canada that they are to serve, can be served.
However, my shift is over. God bless! BF

Henry Hengeveld is a retired climatologist.