John Pendergrass presents on the science of environmental policy in the Animal Science/Agricultural Engineering Building on Wednesday, Feb. 12.

He began by showing photographs of some of humanity’s major environmental mistakes. Love Canal in New York. Valley of the Drums in Kentucky. Buffalo Creek dam in West Virginia. The Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska. 

“Our legislation of environmental law has unfortunately frequently been the result of disasters or crises,” John Pendergrass said. “We deal with them problem by problem.” 

Pendergrass is the Climate and Energy Program director and senior attorney for the Environmental Law Institute in Washington, and he leads ELI’s Judicial Education Program to help educate judges worldwide about environmental law. He spoke about science’s influence on environmental policy and fielded questions from about 50 audience members Wednesday night in the Animal Science/Agricultural Engineering Building as a part of the environmental science and technology department’s seminar series.

“He talked about how you have to have a catastrophe to force things to happen … which I think is a big issue with environmental law,” said Glade Dlott, a graduate research assistant studying soil microbial ecology and a member of the seminar committee. “The fact that it’s so reactionary and not proactive, it seems to be not as useful when whatever has happened has already happened.”

Dlott invited Pendergrass to speak at the university, hoping to remind scientists about the effect their work can have on the world. 

“Environmental legislation definitely makes use of science and technology, but the nature of the legislative process doesn’t lend itself to a sophisticated use of science; it tends to be basics,” Pendergrass said.

Pendergrass also discussed some of the difficulties with regulating legislation once it is passed.

“By and large, the details are not in the environmental statute; they are left to agencies to come up with regulations,” Pendergrass said. “I think regulations are better suited to the incorporations of science and technology.” 

Public participation can play a huge role in the regulatory process, he said, because the public can comment on proposed regulation and the agency carrying out the regulatory process must take these comments into consideration.  

Science and technology also become important in the courts, depending on the case, Pendergrass said, but facts have different meanings in that setting.

“In science, how do you think of facts? Something you can measure, demonstrate,” he said. “What is a fact in a courtroom? A fact is what the jury decides.”

Through his travels, Pendergrass said, he’s learned that science has been a prime motivator and basis for a number of treaties in international law.

These include the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, which works to prevent animal and plant extinction, and the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, which focuses on protecting the ozone layer.  

“This treaty [the Montreal Protocol] is now considered the most successful international environmental treaty,” Pendergrass said. “It was scientists that brought the problem to the notice of the international community and worked with them, coming up with rules.” 

Sophomore Elisheva Mittelman went to the seminar to learn more about her major, environmental science and policy. 

“I don’t have a big background in environmental laws, so hearing his take on different laws and the most important issues of today was interesting to hear,” Mittelman said.

Alexandra St. Pé, a doctorate student at University of Maryland, Baltimore County in the geography and environmental systems department, said she was surprised to hear about the impact public opinion can have on regulation and the lack of science in legislation.

“It highlighted the need to have more scientists involved in congressional positions,” St. Pé said. “I think that law and regulations can benefit from having that perspective.”