Uncovering Environmental Problems Could Get You a Year in a Wyoming Jail
16th May 2015
Citizen scientists are playing an increasingly important role in experiments, but there may be a place where certain experiments are less than welcome: Wyoming.
The term ‘citizen scientists’ is, of course, a euphemism for ‘busybody enviro-Nazis who suspect you are doing something with your own property that they don’t like’.
A new law passed earlier this year criminalizes the collection of data on “open land” if the collector doesn’t receive permission in advance and eventually shares that data with the government.
If the enviro-Nazis don’t choose to pester you, the taxpayer-funded enviro-Nazis want to make sure they get their turn at the piñata.
As Slate points out, the move sounds like a modest proposal until almost any of those terms — “collection,” “data,” or “open land” — are defined. And although other states have passed similar laws, Wyoming’s seems especially broad: photographs are specifically covered by the law, while the land could mean any place outside of a town or city.
Privacy? What’s that?
One example: under the law, collection of data could mean taking soil samples to demonstrate an environmental problem in a state park — an act that could be seen as a violation of the law if shared with the government, and ultimately inadmissible in a lawsuit.
Oh, I’m sure somebody’s worried about ‘an environmental problem in a state park’ rather than some rancher or natural resources extraction company.
Why would the Wyoming government want that? At Slate, Justin Pidot, citing a recent case where citizen scientists found high levels of E. coli in streams, argues that it’s a way for the government to crack down on environmental dissent. You can either keep that information to yourself, or risk a year in jail.
Oh, I’m sure the worry is about ‘a way for the government to crack down on environmental dissent’, which it’s never shown any inclination to do.
If you believe that one, they’ll tell you another one.
May 16th, 2015 at 22:30
A subject I work with every day – and so few people understand how frustrating it is.
A lawyer gave a talk on environmental crime a few years back and in it she pointed out that the average murderer serves 3.5 years while the average person convicted of an environmental crime serves 5.5 years – and it’s easier to be convicted of an environmental crime than a murder.