May 27, 2017

SHOCK: NR House Committee Discovers “Post-Normal” Science in ESA

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Monday, December 15, 2014

Committee Report Uncovers Lack of Independence & Accountability of Peer Review Process for ESA Listing Decisions

WASHINGTON, D.C. – House Natural Resources Committee majority staff released a report today that questions the independence and accountability of the peer review process in recent Endangered Species Act (ESA) listing decisions. The report entitled, “Under the Microscope: An examination of the questionable science and lack of independent peer review in Endangered Species Act listing decisions” studies the federal government’s peer review process for 13 different ESA listing decisions made by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) since July 2013. The report found numerous examples of potential bias and conflicts of interests with the peer reviewers and a lack of transparency and consistency in the peer
review process.

“The decision of whether or not to list a species under the Endangered Species Act has significant implications for the economy and livelihoods of impacted communities and private landowners. As such, these important decisions must be based on sound science that has undergone an independent peer review. This report raises troubling concerns about the lack of independence of the peer review process and whether many current, upcoming or recently finalized listing decisions, such as the White Bluffs Bladderpod in my Central Washington district, are scientifically sound,” said House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Doc Hastings (WA-04). “With hundreds of ESA listings driven by this Administration’s closed-door settlements with litigious groups, discovery of any potential bias about how ESA data and science are reviewed casts serious doubt on the credibility of these decisions, and provides more evidence that the ESA needs continued oversight and updating.”

Specific findings of the report include:

* The FWS does not have clear or consistent policies and procedures in place across all Regions to ensure that peer reviewers with potential conflicts of interest are identified and screened;

* The FWS generally seeks peer review of its proposed listing decisions at the same time they are made available for public comment, rather than earlier in the process when the peer reviewers may have more meaningful input;

* The FWS regularly recruits the same scientists on whose work a listing decision is based to serve as peer reviewers, including those who have known policy positions or affiliations with advocacy groups that support the listing decision, rather than truly independent scientists;

* The FWS uses scientists as peer reviewers who have received grants or other financial assistance from the Department of the Interior and its bureaus and other agencies; and

* The FWS routinely withholds from the public the identities of peer reviewers, qualifications of peer reviewers, and details about their comments.

Share
  • Chandie Bartell

    That is why over-sight is needed for everything now as there is no trust.

    • Alfalfa1

      I want truth and justice NOT the hyperbole you’re spewing.

      “Furthermore, the damage has been do egregious, effecting not only individuals, families, communities, by destroying certain industries in the job sector, but the lawlessness is very well recorded and has become more public as people are made aware of the psychological monkey wrenching tactics”
      What about the poor wildlife you cry about suffering predation and disease?

      • Chandie Bartell

        That is the last attack you’re going to inappropriately make to me. I’m not going to allow you to manipulate me into patiently answering all your questions, as you refuse to process the data. You’re afraid of it. It makes you angry and you’re now crossing the line and getting vicious with your answers. Check your emotions and anger.

        I’ve provided you with information, data, latest findings on research I was given permission to share, provided with contact names and phone numbers.

        Not once have you or any of your associates that follow me onto threads and attack everything I post have got a hold of Dr. Rod Evans or Tim Kemery.

        So until you get a hold of those sources, you can’t claim the information I am sharing isn’t credible. In order to check my information for credibility you need to contact the sources, and you REFUSE to do that. YOU REFUSE TO CALL DR. ROD EVANS.

        That is why you spend days and countless hours FOCUSING ON ME.

        You have an agenda, and you fear the data and you’re more afraid of speaking to the sources. That is what Tim Kemery told me last night, that you won’t dare to call him or Dr. Evans as you are afraid too.

        YOU ARE AFRAID OF THE TRUTH.

        • Alfalfa1

          “Call someone else” even though you’re the one spewing misinformation ad nauseum.
          Again – let’s see. Who should I trust – A respected parasitologist and researcher OR a trapper and a local veterinarian?

          • Chandie Bartell

            Everybody already predicted you were afraid to call the sources I gave you. I wouldn’t call Dr. Lora R. Ballwebber’s study fringe. Keep trying.

          • Alfalfa1

            It appears that all Ballwebber’s lab doing is doing is genotyping the samples being sent to her.

          • Chandie Bartell

            Yes and I posted the results that Dr. Rod Evans got from her. That is what’s making you so mad.

          • wolf moderate

            You just posted his cell number in an open forum? Poor guy is gonna have to change his number now…lol

          • Chandie Bartell

            I just spoke to him, and he told me to post his cell number for Geoff Pritchard, Alfalfa1, Guest, Bob Ferris, and Barb Rupers. He wants them to call him, instead of play these games.

          • wolf moderate

            Who cares? He’s been indoctrinated by the Moscow crowd. He’s too far gone to save. Sometimes you just gotta say enough is enough.

          • Chandie Bartell

            I do. I want him to talk to Tim Kemery person to person, instead of behind his back.

          • TRemington

            Alfalfa1/Geoff Pritchard – Out of courtesy please use only one user name. Most people don’t know that some people use several usernames, mostly out of dishonesty.

          • Alfalfa1

            “Someone” violated the Disqus Basic terms and posted a person’s contact information without their approval resulting in harassment. Thanks.

          • Chandie Bartell

            Sounds like you’re making up excuses.

          • Chandie Bartell

            Well since you won’t call people with your questions about a results of a study you’re trying to discredit when given their contact information and cell phone number, won’t answer your phone ( I believe I called twice), to set up a conference call for you to speak to Tim Kemery and Dr. Rod Evans, and you apparently don’t e-mail your colleagues, and prefer to question their work on these forums I guess this is where I will post answers to your questions from your colleagues.

            Guest Chandie Bartell

            V. Geist in his part of the article insinuates that these tapeworm eggs are transmitted through aerosol exposure

            ” It will usually be dry and will then liberate clouds of tape worm eggs and this cloud of eggs will settle on your clothing, your exposed skin, in your sinuses.”

            And then Dovel refers to Geist’s comment:

            “As each pile of fresh wolf feces begins to dry, the eggs, like weed seeds, are released and transported by wind, water and assorted mammals, birds and especially insects over what is often a considerable distance from the original site.”
            Yet Bill Foreyt,, a parasitologist and trapper, refutes this, as the eggs do not survive desiccation. But we should accept the opinion of Valerius Geist who’s historical work centers around cervid behavior.

            Reply from Dr. Val Geist to Geoff Pritchard’s question:

            Here is his answer: My information about Echinococcus granulosus came from the late professor J. R. Adams at the University of British Columbia who had an ongoing research program into Echinococcus granulosus, and who taught the wildlife students at UBC about his research. He was quite emphatic about the dangers from handling dry wolf feces. That’s the message carried away by all graduates in wildlife from UBC, as we did have wolves in Canada and you did not, at least in the West. He was honored in 1978 by the Canadian Society of Zoologists with the Wardle Award for his research. Did Bill Foreyt test eggs from dry wolf scat for infectivity? Sincerely, Val Geist

          • Chandie Bartell

            This is why Scientists names need to be listed on peer review. This person claims to be a wildlife biologist.

          • Alfalfa1

            Trained as a researcher and wildlife biologist. You seem to distrust anyone who doesn’t wear a foil hat.

          • GoldDust

            Nobody here fits that description; Although it could be said people with little or no real world knowledge beyond their training claiming others with advanced knowledge beyond their own knowledge level accusing them of being a foil hatter might be a foil hatter themselves since their mind has for various reasons been blocked from discovering the reality of this worlds system we live in. Maybe you’re paranoid that the world isn’t what you’ve been deceived into believing it is. Maybe you should think about yourself and look in the mirror. I get a giggle out of people like you. Science by imperfect humans is your god or theology. Peer review is highly questionable and has been for years. You’re preaching a scientific dictatorship and are apparently to stupid to recognize it. That being said, why would anyone here take you serious, you’re just another one of Chandie’s trolls she has dragged in here to bore us all with.. I”d post the history and controversy of peer review discussed by various scientists but I think it would be a waste of time, because narrow minded people like you are a waste of time.

            “A tin foil hat is a hat made from one or more sheets of aluminium foil, or a piece of conventional headgear lined with foil, worn in the belief it shields the brain from threats such aselectromagnetic fields, mind control, and mind reading.”

            “The notion of wearing homemade headgear for protection has become a popular stereotype and byword for paranoia, persecutory delusions, and belief in pseudo science and conspiracy theories. Tin foil hats have appeared in movies such as Signs and Futurama: Into the Wild Green Yonder.”

          • Alfalfa1

            I’ll use a line from T. Remington’s recent article as it applies to you specifically – “I think it was humorist/comedian Tim Sample who got a laugh when he said that some people not only don’t have a clue, they don’t even suspect.”

            Watch out for those contrails and the Vatican. The black helicopters are just over the horizon.

            Ms Bartell says ridiculous things in public forums (like The Capital Press) and then deems anyone who disagrees as challenges her nonsense as a troll attacking her. As I said before she’s a parrot trying to be relevant .

          • GoldDust

            Yes well one wonders why you’d bother arguing with a parrot. As well Geo-engineering aerosols spraying as taught in various Universities has nothing to do with contrails. The Vatican claims power over all men and nations. The black helicopters might be just over some horizon as the u.s. military uses those.

          • TRemington

            Alfalfa1 – This comment directed at Chandie is too personal, inappropriate and not relevant to the post.

          • Ernie Meyer

            i agree …personal attacks are out of line

          • Chandie Bartell

            Be careful who you make fun of. You’re not out of the woods for coming on here and being so rude. I’m sending everyone of your questions to your colleagues that you had questions for. Answers will be provided as they come in. I’ve already posted Dr. Val Geist’s response to one of your questions. I’m getting Dr. Clay Dethlesen’s e-mail next. All of us take Hydatid Disease very seriously, you should too.

          • GoldDust

            I’ve been trained as a Mechanical engineer, plumber, journeyman and master plumber, radiant heating technician. Hydro plant engineering and design. I’ve roughly 200,000 hours of experience in those fields. I’ve met several people with those licenses with no field experience. I’ve met several architects and engineers with years of practice drawing buildings on paper and they act just like Phd snobs in wildlife biology do, they will not listen to people they feel are not as “educated” as they are when it comes to building design. Unfortunately for many of those arrogant pricks the lawsuits against their faulty designs have forced them to listen in the courts where I’ve experience as an expert witness against them and their design flaws. Other fields of science are no different. Especially wildlife biology. Wildlife biologists themselves are in disagreement over multiple issues concerning wildlife, and management. One huge mistake they make is in thinking a backwoodsman hunter trapper with years of experience in the field practicing those activities are not credible people, which is simply a scientific error on their parts, their own selfishness and arrogance, human imperfection on display. The ultimate in selfishness is thinking you cannot learn from myself, or a Tim Kemery. Two people who most likely have years of backcountry experience under their belts that you yourself don’t have. Selfishness, arrogance, ignorance, are human weaknesses and you’ve displayed those here.

          • Alfalfa1

            Wow- expert witness testimony? I’d suggest you keep your profile unknown as some of your followings would diminish the reliability of your opinions.
            If wildlife biologists had such disdain for “trappers”, why would they hire them (Kemery for example) to trap wolverines? Bogus.
            And if they are the arrogant narrow-winded pricks you claim, why would they “be in disagreement of multiple issues concerning wildlife and management?

          • Chandie Bartell

            Those are good questions. Why would they? Your’e the only one on here that claims they are a Wildlife biologist, and questioned Tim Kemery’s credentials, and have tried to minimize his experience. You’re also one of several that have tried that before, but when put on the spot to contact him lose credibility because you don’t follow through. I’ve also had people contact him that have apologized after they have met the man in person, realizing they were in error.

          • Ernie Meyer

            even working ten hours a day thats 20000 days of work? thers only 220 work days in a year…how old are you?

          • wolf moderate

            220 work days for school teachers, professors, and government workers maybe lol.

          • Chandie Bartell

            When I was a teacher the pay ended at 4:00 PM, however I never left the classroom until usually 6-8 PM, and sometimes later on the average doing lesson plans, and preparing for the assignments so they would all run smoothly for 25 children all who were either 6 to 7 years old.

            Then I went home after that and corrected papers with comments for another hour or more. Many times getting more projects prepared from my home.

            I would go on weekend Saturday or Sunday to get ready for the next week.

            All extra projects like my Farm unit, incubators, chicks ordered, extra stickers, art projects, creative writing where materials weren’t available in the class room, including units I taught I purchased out of my own pocket.

            On vacation days, I would go in and spend two days or more cleaning my classroom, getting things ready, changing bulletin board paper, calendars, decorations, restocking materials, lesson planning, etc. so when the students came back things were in order.

            There were several teachers in the building that stayed late at night getting things ready. I easily put in 5-6 hours more a day without pay.

            Teachers work very hard, and people think it’s an 8-3:00 job. That’s not the truth.

          • GoldDust

            Not old enough to have done that, I apparently misused my calculator here. As an employee roughly working forty hours per week 56,000 hours, not including over time which there was. As a business owner 48,000 hours working 80 hours per week. Which is why I got out of that line of work completely for the last seven years. I have a close friend operating his own HVAC business doing 4 to 5 thousand hours annually and I worry he is going to drop dead from it.

          • Chandie Bartell

            Wrong, What I mean is a researcher and wildlife biologist is no different than anybody else. If it’s about Science and the truth, that “researcher” wouldn’t be putting people down and treating them like they’re his subjects.

            When Scientists become dictators than that is when things go wrong.

          • Alfalfa1

            “Scientists names need to be listed on peer review”
            So you can call them late at night too?

          • Chandie Bartell

            I don’t know of Scientists right now that are “trolling” me on to sites, asking me the same questions trying to throw one red-herring after another to force me to quit sharing information.

            Can you think of anybody else, but yourself. And yes I did give Tim Kemery your number, he gets in late at night. That shouldn’t bother you, as you are on the computer day and night attacking his credibility, or attempting to discredit Rod Evans, George Dovels, Lynn Stuter, Tom Remington, myself, and it’s not appropriate.

          • GoldDust

            Yeah it’s bullshit and well past time to walk away.

          • Chandie Bartell

            “Again – let’s see. Who should I trust – A respected parasitologist and researcher OR a trapper and a local veterinarian?”

            “Hmm – advocating for using science (it’s a small S) and that’s wrong?”

            _________________________________________
            ANSWER- Then why do you keep spending days and hour after hour asking me QUESTIONS? I’m not on the sampling team.

            Why not contact the people in direct contact with the Sampling Team? For example, we’ve always had wolves on the landcape in Idaho, but we DID not have Echinococcus granulosus. How did we know that?

            Because there wasn’t Hydatid Disease in the Intermediate Host. You have to have a diseased primary host to have a diseased Intermediate Host.

            We never had it before because it wasn’t here. Now we have a heavy egg load in our ecosystem. Wolves are the only disease vector.

            Aerosoling is what is very dangerous. How did our elk, moose, and deer get so infected????

          • Chandie Bartell

            You’re not being responsible. Make sure you share this with your respected parasitologist friend and ask him if he conducted the following tests.

            Reply from Dr. Val Geist to Geoff Pritchard’s question:

            Here is his answer: My information about Echinococcus granulosus came from the late professor J. R. Adams at the University of British Columbia who had an ongoing research program into Echinococcus granulosus, and who taught the wildlife students at UBC about his research. He was quite emphatic about the dangers from handling dry wolf feces. That’s the message carried away by all graduates in wildlife from UBC, as we did have wolves in Canada and you did not, at least in the West. He was honored in 1978 by the Canadian Society of Zoologists with the Wardle Award for his research. Did Bill Foreyt test eggs from dry wolf scat for infectivity? Sincerely, Val Geist

  • Alfalfa1

    * The FWS regularly recruits the same scientists on whose work a listing decision is based to serve as peer reviewers, including those who have known policy positions or affiliations with advocacy groups that support the listing decision, rather than truly independent scientists;
    READ – not Republicans

    * The FWS uses scientists as peer reviewers who have received grants or other financial assistance from the Department of the Interior and its bureaus and other agencies; and
    Why is that an issue? Those would most likely be the scientists with the most experience regarding the topic.

    * The FWS routinely withholds from the public the identities of peer reviewers, qualifications of peer reviewers, and details about their comments.
    The names of the reviewers are confidential so that they won’t be pressured to lean one way or another and can give an honest review. The potential for harassment and bad blood is too high – right Chandie? That’s how peer review works – those being reviewed don’t know who the reviewers are either.

    • Chandie Bartell

      You are in error. Peer Review doesn’t equal Peer evaluated.

      • Alfalfa1

        You don’t know what peer review is so don’t pretend to.

        • Chandie Bartell

          Peers would be other carnivore biologists for example reviewing the same research. The problem is when the reviewing isn’t honest.

  • wolf moderate

    I looked you up too but didn’t call. I used to live in Tensed…on the reservation. Helluva good times for white and red guys alike lol.

    • Alfalfa1

      It’s pretty obvious who did it.

      • Chandie Bartell

        When they call pick up your phone so you can talk to them. If you want to slander people and their work on the internet, you better be able to be able to back it up in person when you’re contacted.

  • Chandie Bartell

    Oh, man up and grow up. I’ve had to deal with you stalkers for years. Pretty pathetic when you have people that claim to be living in Idaho, or nearby but are too afraid to meet you in person. Everyone knows where I live, if you look me up I’m not going to play the victim. If you want to trail me so bad come to Potlatch, Idaho. I’m at the Grange all the time. I’m the last house on Crane Creek road, white farm house. So instead of following me all around on threads meet me in person. I’ll even buy you a cup of coffee, then you can’t quit harassing me on the internet.