Murphy DEP Using “Junk Science” and Junk Ethics To Manage NJ Forests
Revolving Door & Billionaire Funds Politicize Science & Create Gross Conflicts of Interest
[Update below]
This is a quick follow-up to the Daily Beast’s killer story that exposed the “junk science” behind the Murphy DEP’s forest management policies:
“John Terborgh, one of the world’s premier conservation biologists, observes that there’s “no conservation reason for creating more early successional habitat.” Cutting trees to expand such habitat, he told me, “is a bogus argument, ginned up as an excuse for more logging. But the argument could work with a gullible public.”
In other words, logging-for-wildlife is based on junk science.”
The Daily Beast story merely scratches the surface of both junk science and junk ethics at DEP.
Although I’ve seen a lot in my 35+ year career with DEP and as a DEP critic, I’ve not seen a combination of things quite this corrupt.
I provide the details in this letter I just wrote to DEP Commissioner LaTourette – read it, the facts are remarkable:
Dear Commissioner LaTourette:
I write to bring 3 important and related concerns to your attention and request your corrective action:
1. A world leading scientist was quoted in a national publication harshly criticizing the scientific basis of the DEP’s “Young Forests” management approach to NJ forests:
“John Terborgh, one of the world’s premier conservation biologists, observes that there’s “no conservation reason for creating more early successional habitat.” Cutting trees to expand such habitat, he told me, “is a bogus argument, ginned up as an excuse for more logging. But the argument could work with a gullible public.”
In other words, logging-for-wildlife is based on junk science.”
(link to full article:
As you may know, Assistant Commissioner Cecil recently briefed Senator Smith’s Forestry Task Force on DEP’s application of the “Young Forest” management approach, which is credibly denounced as “junk science”.
I urge your reconsideration of this science and this form of “active forestry” management and to reverse course at the Forestry Task Force.
(Mr. Cecil has also criticized the public, and on completely false grounds, e.g. see this whopper:
“According to John Cecil, NJ Audubon’s vice president of stewardship, “The public tends to have a knee-jerk reaction to burning trees and plants, even at the benefit of the habitat. It’s an interesting catch-22. The public doesn’t have a lot of exposure to positive habitat manipulation.” For example, air quality degraded by vehicle emissions gets tangled in the public’s mind with smoke from burning, which leads to a negative perception of prescribed fire.”
2. NJ Audubon Society, also harshly criticized in the national story linked above, recently distributed a social media video in which DEP staffer Sharon Petzinger makes a presentation.
The presentation was to Senator Smith during a NJ Audubon organized “tour” of Sparta Mountain Wildlife Management Area, where the DEP has conducted controversial logging and forestry management projects. See Part 2:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_CeHuaqOvc
Ms. Petzinger appears in part 3:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvXib5Wi0ic
Given Senator Smith’s presence, the Sparta Mt. “tour” represents lobbying, as defined by ELEC as an “attempt to influence government policy”.
The NJ Audubon videos must be considered “public relations” or more accurately, propaganda.
It is not appropriate for DEP staffers to be making presentations to private, by invitation only, lobbying tours (sponsored by regulated entities) with legislators on pending legislative initiatives (and matters before the DEP).
During the Florio administration, I served in the DEP Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs and there were very tight restrictions on such activities (ask former Commissioner Scott Weiner). The “tour” raises additional “appearance” issues that undermine the Department’s credibility and independence and erode the public’s trust and confidence in the Department’s management of public resources.
It also inappropriately politicizes the science and impairs the objectivity of the Department (in part one of the video, a NJ Audubon presenter speaks of “the opposition” (Don Donnelly, at time 1:25) – a revealing adversarial and political term, not a scientific or valid public policy term).
As you know, Assistant Commissioner Cecil formerly served as head of NJ Audubon’s Forest stewardship program and was directly involved in the DEP approved Sparta Mountain logging project that was the subject of the “tour”.
As you also know, the current head of NJ Audubon’s Government Affairs Office is Eileen Murphy, who previously was the Director of the DEP’s Division of Science and Research.
Ms. Murphy scheduled the “tour”. Ms. Murphy was selected by Senator Smith as a Co-Chair of Smith’s legislative Forestry Task Force which is currently deliberating. Assistant Commissioner Cecil recently made a presentation to that Task Force.
This kind of blatant “revolving door” practice and the “reasonable appearance” of conflicts and bias is not a good look.
It suggests “regulatory capture” as well.
I trust that Assistant Commissioner Cecil has filed conflict of interest and recusal documents during his ethics review prior to assuming his DEP position.
3. The following fact pattern is deeply disturbing.
- The Forest Stewardship Plan for Sparta Mountain was prepared by NJ Audubon and approved by the Department.
- The NJ Audubon was provided a $330,000 grant to prepare that Plan from Hudson Farm Foundation, owned by Wall Street billionaire Peter Kellogg.
- Mr. Kellogg also funded several DEP managers and staffers involved in forestry to attend a weekly “NJ conservation leadership program” conference (“tuition” was $4,850 per head) – I document and discuss that here:
- Assistant Commissioner Cecil was involved in preparing the Kellogg funded Sparta Mt. DEP approved forestry Plan.
- Mr Cecil also prepared a private forestry plan for Mr. Kellogg’s Hudson Farm private property when he worked with NJ Audubon. (link to that plan taken down, but this Hudson Farm Ruffed Grouse Report documents it: Report Prepared by
- John Cecil
- Vice President Stewardship
- John Parke
- Stewardship Project Director – North Region
And this from NJA themselves!
“In recent years, NJ Audubon has led several restoration and research projects at Hudson Farm that directly provide state/regional/community benefits including enhanced biodiversity, improved surface water infiltration, increased habitat, reduced soil erosion, and improved forest resiliency and functionality.”
- The Department’s recent presentation to the Smith Forestry Task Force stated that the Department was developing Carbon credit and trading policies with RGGI carbon “sequestration” funding. The NJ RGGI implementing statute allocates millions of dollars to carbon sequestration from forestry.
- Mr. Kellogg’s Hudson Farm property currently has a forestry plan to quantify carbon credits and is involved in a private carbon storage and sequestration credit scheme. (link to that plan has been user password blocked, but this site quantified the carbon credits).
- It is reasonable to assume that Kellogg would participate in and benefit from the DEP carbon credit trading scheme announced by and currently being developed by the Department.
The conflicts here are egregious and must be resolved.
I urge your immediate attention to these matters and request that the Department make some form of public statement to clarify and resolve the above concerns about science, policy, and ethics. I look forward to your timely and favorable reply.
Respectfully,
We filed OPRA request for DEP Assistant Commissioner Cecil’s ethics disclosure and recusal documents and will keep you posted.
[Update: oops!, I forgot to mention this: Mr. Kellogg was issued an award for Hudson Farm by his fellow Wall Street colleague:
[End Note: Here is my OPRA records request:
I request the following public records:
1. The ethics disclosure documents submitted by Assistant Commissioner John Cecil upon his joining DEP.
2. The DEP ethics officer review and guidance documents provided to Assistant Commissioner Cecil.
3. The recusal documents for Assistant Commissioner Cecil.