It’s been over a month since the Deepwater Horizon exploded and sank in the Gulf of Mexico, killing 11 people and sending thousands of gallons of crude oil pouring into the deep sea. Despite efforts to cap and siphon the spill, the oil slick continues to spread.

Two weeks ago, TENTHMIL decided to look past the horrifying statistics about the size and impact of the spill (which have now been shown to be grossly underestimated), to engage government officials and academic experts in a productive discussion about the road to restoration.

Although simple, this goal was easier said than done.

TENTHMIL was one of the first to point out what seemed like thinly veiled attempts to keep media outlets in the dark about what was actually going on down in the Gulf. The story, “Behind The Oil Curtain: How Bureaucratic Gag Orders are Hurting Restoration,” drew significant criticism from those who felt we wrongly insinuated that the government was in cahoots with BP to limit information about the clean-up efforts and prevent a PR mess that would reflect badly when it time to settle the bill in court.

While this might have seemed farfetched at the time, it seems our suspicions were pretty accurate.

When the first of 30 sea turtles washed up dead on beaches along the Gulf Coast, federal officials told marine biologists performing necropsies that the turtles were evidence in an ongoing investigation, and to follow a chain-of-evidence protocol and not comment to the media. (For those still in doubt, this is a textbook example of a bureaucratic gag order).

Just days ago, several major media outlets, including Huffington Post, Mother Jones, and CBS, reported that BP contractors and the Coast Guard were taped chasing news cameras away from an oil-slicked beach, supposedly at the behest of BP. Although the location was a public beach, a man on the boat can be heard saying, “These are BP’s rules…These are not our rules.”

Karl Burkhart of Mother Nature News reported that his contacts in Louisiana have given “numerous, unconfirmed reports of cameras and cell phones being confiscated, scientists with monitoring equipment being turned away, and local reporters blocked from access to public lands impacted by the oil spill.”

The Blue Seals, a rapid-response team of marine conservation experts determined to document this environmental catastrophe on behalf of the wildlife, offered to aid with clean-up efforts but were quickly turned away by BP and governmental officials who, under the pretext of safety concerns, are limiting access to the areas affected by the spill. 
“Our services were rejected as expected,” said Brown in a press release. “It is obvious that BP does not want pictures of dead animals. BP has been very successful so far in controlling the story. Government officials and the bird group do their best to talk privately, and when they return at night, it is all very secretive.”

McClatchy Newspapers reported that BP is still withholding the “results of tests on the extent of workers’ exposure to evaporating oil or from the burning of crude over the gulf, even though researchers say that data is crucial in determining whether the conditions are safe.”

The article went on to state that it took repeated pressure from the Senate for BP to release videos of the spill site that could give scientists a clue to the amount of the oil in gulf, raising questions about why the government is allowing the company to keep such data from reaching the public.

Even OSHA, the agency in charge of monitoring compliance with worker safety, is still waiting politely for BP to release air sampling data that it desperately needs. “It is not ours to publish,” said Dean Wingo, OSHA’s assistant regional administrator who oversees Louisiana. “We are working with (BP) and encouraging them to post the data so that it is publicly available.”

This flies in the face of BP’s claim that it is sharing the data with “legitimate interested parties,” which include government agencies and the private companies responsible for clean-up. When asked whether the information can be released publicly, Toby Odone, a BP spokesman responded, “Why would one do it? Any parties with a legitimate interest can have access to it.”

Well for one thing, Mr. Odone, we have a right to know. We actually care about what’s happening to our coastline, countless species of marine wildlife, and the seafood populations that feed our families.

Although it would be nice to assume that this is a tragic and isolated incident of obstruction, the facts prove that this is common practice among government agencies, especially when environmental issues are involved.

Contrary to the Obama administration’s vows of transparency, Public Employees for Environmental Transparency (PEER) recently discovered that the U.S. Forest Service has barred its law enforcement personnel from responding to media inquiries without headquarters approval, a mandate that prevents the timely release of crime, fire and accident reports.

Embarrassed by 2009 media coverage of Mexican drug operations inside national forests, Forest Service Chief Thomas Tidwell issued an agency-wide directive that any press inquiries on a “national issue” had to be vetted through Washington. David Ferrell, Director of Law Enforcement and Investigations (LEI) for the Forest Service, took the media policy one step further and forbade all unapproved interviews, replies, presentations, briefings, speeches or releases.

All this worry and secrecy about getting their stories straight before talking to the public (whom they are supposed to be serving) and there wasn’t even a major multinational petroleum company involved!

One can only assume that something similar is motivating the obvious lack of dialogue between BP, the government, and terrified American citizens that are now watching balls of toxic tar wash up on their beaches.