A 'body blow' for climate research: Trump pauses NOAA collaboration with 'foreign nationals'
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3b98b/3b98b27002a886e3c22ef7575c610b9bca5c9dac" alt=""
Some employees at the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration have been told to temporarily stop all international collaborations and communications, with dramatic impacts on vital climate, weather and fisheries monitoring. Photo by NOAA/NASA GOES Project/Flickr
Canadian climate and fisheries experts are reeling after the Trump administration ordered researchers with the U.S. government agency in charge of weather forecasting, climate research and fisheries to temporarily stop communicating with "foreign nationals."
The move, which was first reported Wednesday by WIRED, could devastate weather and oceanic forecasting, climate change research, and Canada's ability to manage and study key fish stocks like Pacific salmon and halibut, experts and advocates say.
"This is not a small blow for climate research – it is a body blow," said Tzeporah Berman, a long-time Canadian climate advocate and expert. If implemented permanently, the move would hamstring some of the world's most important climate monitoring data and modelling, making it hard to assess the scale of the crisis and craft effective responses.
"Neither Trump nor Musk have the power to secure the US’s borders against climate change,” Berman said. “The fires and floods know no borders and it is absolutely critical that the world share data and solutions on shared global threats. Trump and Musk constraining NOAA from collaborating threatens us all, including us citizens. It's a dangerous, closed minded, knee jerk ideological policy that could literally cost lives."
An internal email shared with WIRED shows that employees at the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) were told to "PAUSE ALL INTERNATIONAL ENGAGEMENT" (sic), including international commissions and emails with "foreign national colleagues."
The ban extends to the National Environmental Satellite, Data and Information Service (NESDIS), which works extensively with international partners to collect climate and weather data that is vital to protect air, shipping and railways from extreme weather, in addition to its value for climate research. Both organizations are contained within the U.S.'s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
The move could hide measurements from the Mauna Loa Observatory carbon dioxide monitoring program, widely considered the world's benchmark measures. It could also eliminate a key global temperature record used by climate researchers worldwide, global monitoring for rising sea levels and ocean temperatures and lead to weaker climate modeling and forecasting. The move will also disrupt countries' ability to meet their global climate commitments; and limit developing nations' ability to prepare for climate disasters, Berman said.
While other organizations in Europe, Japan and the U.K. could help fill the hole, the loss of NOAA data would be a "major setback" for global climate science, Berman warned.
"Those data sets are not only of the U.S.," said Tianjia (Tina) Liu, a University of British Columbia geography professor who specializes in wildfire. "Having them is really beneficial for the entire region, and really helpful for managing natural disasters."
In a statement, Environment and Climate Change Canada confirmed it has a "longstanding relationship" with NOAA in weather, climate, satellite and water monitoring. It has "not officially been informed of any changes to its collaboration with NOAA."
Villy Christensen, a professor at the University of British Columbia and founder of a decades-long approach to managing fisheries that focuses on ecosystem health long used by the NMFS emphasized that blocking collaborative efforts will harm research and management decisions in the U.S., Canada and other countries.
American isolationism could curtail some of the decades-old committees that manage key species in both Canada and the U.S. Take Pacific salmon and Pacific Halibut: the fish species migrate between both countries, and sustain important fisheries on either side of the border. For years, they've been managed through a collaborative U.S.-Canada process that relies heavily on U.S. data.
"These are really important joint efforts between the U.S. and Canada to manage, assess and manage and allocate fish stocks or catches," said John Driscoll, a fisheries scientist and policy analyst with the David Suzuki Foundation. Even if the temporary pause is lifted, the disruption could have "disproportionate effects" on both countries' ability to manage the fish.
Still, Christensen said that ultimately, if necessary Canada and global researchers can make do without the U.S. Last year, the country joined most of Horizon Europe, the world's largest research and innovation funding scheme, which allows Canadian researchers to access funding and collaborate more closely with Europe.
But he was clear that's not the goal of science.
"[Scientists] depend on collaboration," Christensen said. " We stand on the shoulders of giants, they walk with us – and cooperation is absolutely a requirement."
Comments
What a small-minded, selfish, cold-hearted, puny little anatomical part that president is. How can anyone hate their children and grandchildren — and all children — that much?! ("How dare they think they have a right to a future. Only I get a future.")
Here's hoping some of those scientists still have landline phones.
One good ideological revolution deserves another. Frame the narrative around national sovereignty and the fact that Canada owns it's high latitude land. Push back against outrage as America (in the form of the Republican party) shows its hand that its strategy for the coming climate catastrophe is intimidation and encroachment.
Certainly, cutting scientific collaboration channels is detrimental to progress for all parties. Thank God, way back in the 70's, Canada invested in its own weather, oceanographic and climat prediction capabilities. Some of the most advanced mathematical modelling capabilities that are now used universally were developed by Canadian scientists working in our own Canadian laboratories. There was debate, at the time, whether Canada should make this investment or simply let the US Weather Service do it, since their models covered the Canadian territory and our effort appeared as a duplication.
Similarly, Canada developed its own very successful monitoring satellites, such as Radarsat. The Europeans, Japan and other countries also developed independent and somewhat duplicate capabilities. Free sharing of data and scientific development is a well established principle in the weather and climate field, facilitated by the World Meteorological Organisation: unlike other fields, there are no patents. The USA may be very powerful in this field, but they do not have exclusive capability. We all rely on others, even on very small countries.
It is very sad, but not catastrophic, that a group of unqualified politicians are making decisions that will hurt every one without even gaining any financial gain, their main objective.
Living in hurricane country, I rely a lot on NOAA forecasting to monitor storms that could drive me away from my coastal home for safety. Learning from this article is devastating but thank you Richard for your encouraging report.
I also monitor Canadian and European models, and they will hopefully be enough.
Why is this not huge news in the CBC? I expect nothing from postmedia but this is fundamental information.
Also, if any of those planners from the 70s are still alive, thank you for your care and conscientiousness. What you did has lasted and protects us even today.
Hi CNO,
I tried to share this great article online today but even with a subscription the link is behind a paywall when shared. Bill C18 already makes it nearly impossible for Canadians to access valid, factual information, particularly news, it's sad you are making it harder not easier. Not everyone has heard of CNO and paywalls aren't broadening public awareness either.
I agree. I very much like CNO articles but have no way to share them with colleagues even though I have a subscription.
I wonder what Trump's response will be when he eventually hears about the Columbia River Treaty.