Asking
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Scientists on alert after some NOAA staff ordered to stop talking to people overseas

Feb. 6, 2025 at 6:46 pm
By Scott Dance
The Washington Post

Staff members at a division of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration have been told this week to stop all contact with foreign nationals, including on international treaties and seafood catch limits, stoking confusion and fear among government scientists as the Trump administration begins to shape its vision for their work.

The orders came from leaders of the National Marine Fisheries Service in all-staff meetings this week, according to multiple staff members, who spoke with The Washington Post on the condition of anonymity for fear of retribution from the new administration. And the change has put some agency work — including efforts to set annual quotas on seafood harvests — on hold for the foreseeable future.

At other branches of NOAA, international contact is facing heavy scrutiny, staff members said, raising questions about how easily they could carry out everyday efforts to monitor weather and atmospheric conditions — such as working with other countries to track tsunami risks across the Pacific Ocean, key to ensuring safety along the West Coast. NOAA produces government weather forecasts, conducts long-term climate monitoring and research, and manages the nation’s fisheries and marine mammals.

“People have asked, ‘What if I have a postdoc [researcher] and they’re not a U.S. citizen?’” one fisheries employee said. “Nobody has an answer for those types of questions.”

The new instructions come as representatives of Elon Musk’s U.S. DOGE (Department of Government Efficiency) Service have meanwhile taken over internal NOAA websites, employees said, removing pages devoted to diversity-focused employee affinity groups. DOGE officials have also begun gathering information on what research or grants might conflict with President Donald Trump’s executive order rooting diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives out of government, they added.

NOAA did not immediately respond to request for comment on the new policy.

Separately, NOAA on Wednesday canceled a National Academies study that was exploring how quotas and permits affect the fisheries industry, including whether there were barriers preventing new entrants from participating in the industry.

Some details about the new orders to NOAA staff were first reported by WIRED on Wednesday, including that the ban on foreign communication also applied to an agency branch that oversees satellite-collected environmental data.

The turmoil has created an atmosphere of fear and confusion across the agency of 13,000 employees. At all-hands meetings convened in NOAA offices across the country this week, staffers raised questions about whether the integrity of NOAA science is at risk.

There have been few clear answers.

Democrats in Congress have prepared to fight any actions to weaken or dismantle NOAA, which they said the president could not legally do without their input.

In an interview, Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Maryland) said that given Musk’s action to dismantle agencies including the U.S. Agency for International Development and the U.S. Department of Education, fears that NOAA could be next are legitimate.

“We need to be on full alert,” he said.

In field offices across the country, some staff were “being left completely clueless,” said Andrew Rosenberg, a former NOAA official and a senior fellow at the University of New Hampshire’s Carsey School of Public Policy. Across the agency, staff members have received emails with repeated requests for volunteers who want to resign from their posts — part of a sweeping effort to shrink the federal workforce. On Thursday, a federal judge paused the deadline for the administration’s buyout offer.

“What are they supposed to do? What are they not supposed to do?” Rosenberg said. For many, it was not clear, he said.

Fears stem from examples of scientists being sidelined or muted during Trump’s first term, and signs that the president is taking more brazen steps to derail their work in his second administration. That includes recent steps to shutter government offices devoted to the disproportionate harms of pollution on poor and minority communities and to scrutinize research of all kinds focused on minorities, women and LGBTQ+ people.

In perhaps the most notable incident touching on the integrity of weather and climate science during Trump’s first term, the president referred to an official National Hurricane Center forecast cone for Hurricane Dorian that had been doctored with a Sharpie marker. Trump on Monday nominated a key player from that episode to lead NOAA: Neil Jacobs, an atmospheric scientist who was serving as acting NOAA administrator at the time and was later found to have violated agency policies that guard against political interference in science.

Scientists, congressional staffers and former NOAA officials who spoke with The Post credited Jacobs for his strong support for improvements in weather and climate forecasting.

Some also pointed to assurances by commerce secretary nominee Howard Lutnick during his confirmation hearings that he would not dismantle NOAA, as had been suggested in Project 2025, the Republican playbook for a second Trump administration. NOAA sits within the Commerce Department in part because of the importance of weather forecasting to fisheries and other industries, but Republicans have proposed making it an independent agency.

California Reps. Jared Huffman and Zoe Lofgren, the ranking Democrats on the House’s natural resources and science committees, respectively, said in a joint statement that they feared DOGE was “wreaking havoc on the scientific and regulatory systems that protect American families’ safety and jobs.”

“Americans rely on NOAA’s services, day in and day out,” they said.

Democratic members of Maryland’s congressional delegation — including Van Hollen, Sen. Angela Alsobrooks and Rep. Jamie Raskin, whose district includes NOAA’s Silver Spring headquarters — requested that Lutnick meet with them to “reaffirm … unwavering support for this crucial agency.” The nomination of Lutnick, CEO of financial services firm Cantor Fitzgerald, got the approval of a Senate committee on Wednesday.

“America needs to understand precisely the Administration’s plans for NOAA’s future,” the Maryland lawmakers wrote in a letter Thursday.

After the administration took down many government websites devoted to LGBTQ+ health, gender and HIV care last week, concern heightened Wednesday that content focused on climate was next: A NOAA website hosting data on greenhouse gas monitoring had disappeared.

But staff confirmed to The Post that the brief disruption was related to “scheduled maintenance,” tied to work on electrical systems at a NOAA facility in Boulder, Colorado. That website was operating normally Thursday.
Top | New | Old
ArishMell · 70-79, M
Whatever happens within the USA is of course Americans' business, but the country needs seriously consider its reputation internationally.

Reducing government funding on purely economic grounds - i.e. genuinely too expensive - is regrettable but understandable. However, very seriously cutting or ending participation in international organisations, treaties and projects for nakedly-political reasons, apparently with little or no scrutiny and oversight, risks losing not only technical work and credibility but also trust abroad.

This would be even worse if the government compromises its own security. Allegedly, Elon Musk now has access to highly confidential material, and in turn has passed that access down the DOGE chain. Has he, or his staff, been cleared to see such material and use it responsibly?

Now, I cannot verify that, but it came on top of Musk calling the foreign-aid civil-servants "criminals". I doubt anyone outside of the USA takes Musk's insults seriously, despite, or because, he is so ambitious, ruthless and callous. Unfortunately even a suspicion of low confidentiality could harm international co-operation between very experienced, honest professionals who normally work very well together. It may please the leaders of certain other, normally anti-USA, countries, though.

It is also worth considering that if the USA wants to export anything, or has companies working abroad, many of its foriegn customers or hosts are now very supportive of employee rights, including that of being employed without racial, sexual, disability and religious prejudice. Rights that took much fighting for, but now seen as right and normal. So might be reluctant to trade with suppliers who do not respect them. They might still buy but be very unhappy about the risk to their own reputation. Obviously any foreign company still has to abide by its host country's national laws, anyway.

Similarly, many countries expect their suppliers of goods to meet minimum standards of product safety and production-environmental protection. I do not know the USA's intentions for its internal commerce, but its exports must still meet their customers' national standards, usually now based on international ones - including any set by the ISO or other bodies of which the USA is a member.


This seems a case of being careful for what you wish....
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@Northwest Good way to put it! I think if was an American living in the USA I'd worry more about Elon Musk than Donald Trump, whichever Party I voted for.
@ArishMell Musk is to 47 what Sloppy Steve Bannon was to 45.
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@KunsanVeteran Sorry - you've lost me there.
@BrandNewMan You said
those who supported open breaking of US immigration laws
The thing is, considering peoples' cases for asylum is NOT breaking US immigration laws. Not at all. The thing is, allowing asylum seekers to have their cases considered is FOLLOWING the law! The thing is, our immigration laws and policies were laid down in the 1960s and 1970s haven't been overhauled since Reagan in the 1980s.

Here is US law on asylum:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1158
Any alien who is physically present ... may apply for asylum in accordance with this section or, ...
The LAW says that showing up at the border and applying for asylum is LEGAL. I agree, the law needs to be changed. But until it's changed, showing up at the border and applying for asylum is LEGAL

This Reagan era law creates a giant loophole for asylum seekers. It's a holdover from the '60s & '70s US immigration law and policy was designed to spit in the eye of Fidel Castro by treating everyone who set foot on Florida as an asylum seeker. This helped earn votes from a swing demographic in a swing state. I agree, we need immigration reform.

And the Senate Bipartisan border bill would have closed that loophole and others. It was the first immigration overhaul since Reagan gave amnesty in 1986.

And of course you know what happened to he Senate Bipartisan border bill. Trump leaned on his flunkies to kill it. Trump wanted a mess on the border to run against. Trump DAMAGED America for campaign purposes.
Matt85 · 36-40, M
do you think you could sum that up in a few honest sentences
Northwest · M
@Matt85
do you think you could sum that up in a few honest sentences

Do you have a reading disability?
JustNik · 51-55, F
More of the same we’ve been seeing, just with NOAA now. Flouting the law in pursuit of their usual policy of plugging ears and shutting eyes and saying if we can’t see or hear it, it’s not a problem. @Matt85
Tastyfrzz · 61-69, M
Reminds me of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix.
Carla · 61-69, F
In 1895, no one needed no lousy noaa. That's when america was great, donchaknow
FreddieUK · 70-79, M
stoking confusion and fear among government scientists

This is the plan. Frighten everyone into submission. Methodology of all autocracies.
All this concern for following the law from those who supported open breaking of US immigration laws .. forgiving student loans outside presidential authority .. not enforcing laws on theft, propety damage, assault during BLM riots and attacks on police stations and govt offices, etc. ..

The hypocrisy is beyond the pale.
@Northwest Lol .. I don't agree with everything Trump does .. but more so than Biden/Harris or clearly what was coming under Harris /Walz. That is the nature of the beast .. you can't always get what you want and never without a side or two of stuff you don't.
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
@BrandNewMan says
Trump was not in power then.
Uhm .. The President doesn't make the laws. The President takes an oath to faithfully uphold and execute the laws.

Here is US law on asylum:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1158
Any alien who is physically present ... may apply for asylum in accordance with this section or, ...
The LAW says that showing up at the border and applying for asylum is LEGAL. I agree, the law needs to be changed. But until it's changed, showing up at the border and applying for asylum is LEGAL.

This Reagan era law creates a giant loophole for asylum seekers. It's a holdover from the '60s & '70s US immigration law and policy was designed to spit in the eye of Fidel Castro by treating everyone who set foot on Florida as an asylum seeker. This helped earn votes from a swing demographic in a swing state.

I agree, we need immigration reform. But it's a lie to say Biden broke any laws when he allowed people to request asylum. BTW, Reagan was probably the biggest immigration fan of the last 10 or 15 presidents. BTW, the immigration laws reflect REAGAN'S agenda. Not Biden's, but REAGAN'S.

I'll end with a paraphrase of Reagan:
The trouble with our conservative friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so!
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
This comment is hidden. Show Comment

 
Post Comment