Lefties Panic as USDA Curbs Use of 'Climate Change' Language

Public domain image via Pixabay https://pixabay.com/en/earth-globe-water-wave-sea-lake-216834/

The Guardian is crying “censorship” about U.S. Department of Agriculture emails they have obtained indicating that employees are being asked to avoid using “climate change” language in favor of language that is probably more accurate.


A series of emails obtained by the Guardian between staff at the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), a USDA unit that oversees farmers’ land conservation, show that the incoming Trump administration has had a stark impact on the language used by some federal employees around climate change.

The unit who issued this guidance is focused on soil health.

A missive from Bianca Moebius-Clune, director of soil health, lists terms that should be avoided by staff and those that should replace them. “Climate change” is in the “avoid” category, to be replaced by “weather extremes”. Instead of “climate change adaption”, staff are asked to use “resilience to weather extremes”.

The primary cause of human-driven climate change is also targeted, with the term “reduce greenhouse gases” blacklisted in favor of “build soil organic matter, increase nutrient use efficiency”. Meanwhile, “sequester carbon” is ruled out and replaced by “build soil organic matter”.

To me this looks like employees are being asked to stop using lazy buzzwords and use language that actually describes the results they are supposedly trying to produce.

In her email to staff, dated 16 February this year, Moebius-Clune said the new language was given to her staff and suggests it be passed on. She writes that “we won’t change the modeling, just how we talk about it – there are a lot of benefits to putting carbon back in the sail [sic], climate mitigation is just one of them”, and that a colleague from USDA’s public affairs team gave advice to “tamp down on discretionary messaging right now”.

In contrast to these newly contentious climate terms, Moebius-Clune wrote that references to economic growth, emerging business opportunities in the rural US, agro-tourism and “improved aesthetics” should be “tolerated if not appreciated by all.”


You would think that such things would be tolerated or appreciated by all, but the Chicken Little’s on the far left but this is basically an affront to their religion. Kudos to the USDA for toning down the hysteria.


Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Trending on RedState Videos