Methinks; low slinks the fink that winks for the lynx!
Posted on 12/31/2001 5:03:05 PM PST by expose
Planted Lynx Fur In Habitat Survey Upsets Legislators Associated Press
Monday, December 31, 2001 Lawmakers want an investigation into whether government wildlife biologists planted lynx fur in two national forests to make it appear that the animals were present so that people would be kept out.
The Forest Service and Fish and Wildlife Service are tracking the rare Canadian lynx to determine how many there are and where they live. Data from the four-year survey will be used to determine how best to protect the lynx, which is classified as "threatened."
During the 2000 sampling session, biologists planted three samples of lynx fur on rubbing posts in parts of the Wenatchee and Gifford Pinchot national forests in Washington state, areas not usually home to the lynx. Fur taken from such posts is used to indicate if lynx are in the area.
The seven biologists -- three from the Forest Service, two from the Fish and Wildlife Service and two from the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife -- admitted they planted the samples and said they wanted to test whether the lab could identify lynx fur.
The cats, 3 1/2 feet long and 40 pounds at their largest, prey on snowshoe hares. Efforts to protect lynx habitat are underway in 57 forests in 16 states.
None of the seven biologists remains in the lynx survey program. Six were reassigned, and one retired.
House Resources Committee Chairman James V. Hansen (R-Utah) and Rep. Scott McInnis (R-Colo.), chairman of the House forests subcommittee, called that "grossly inadequate punishment given the magnitude of this offense."
They said if it is found that the intent was to skew the study, the biologists should be fired.
"These offenses minimally amount to professional malfeasance of the highest order," the congressman wrote Dec. 18 in a letter to Agriculture Secretary Ann M. Veneman and Interior Secretary Gale A. Norton, whose agencies administer the lynx program.
Some proposed changes to protect the lynx include limiting the thinning of forests to improve habitat for the snowshoe hare and to restrict snowmobiling and some other winter activities. But Hansen and McInnis want a review of all data collected through the program before any land management decisions are made.
Without additional scrutiny of the data, no assurances can be made that the "lynx recovery effort is grounded in science, rather than in the fraudulent behavior of unscrupulous field officers," Hansen and McInnis wrote.
Forest Service Chief Dale N. Bosworth said the fur fiasco is embarrassing but did not threaten the closure of any habitat to the public.
Fish and Wildlife Service spokesman Chris Tollefson said the agency is confident the lynx count has not been tainted.
"We don't believe that there was an intent to submit these results to skew the results of the survey, but it could have compromised the entire survey and forced us to do it all over again," he said.
Hansen and McInnis have asked the General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress, to look into the matter and will convene hearings early next year.
I have a major problem with this statement.
It didn't seem logical? What about collecting the data, performing an appropriate statistically based analysis, and forming a conclusion based on pre-determined standards that include all the data collected?
Methinks; low slinks the fink that winks for the lynx!
And for the 1000 pound manatees, well, we close all the waters under two feet deep so they won't get hit by a boat. Figure that one out if you can.
tarpon
I don't get it. A previous study says there are "lynx up & down the Cascades", the scientists are skeptical of this claim - in exactly the same way that many people here are - so this time they send in control samples to test whether the lab really knows what they're doing! Friends, that's good scientific procedure! The only thing they did "wrong" was not getting permission from their superiors. Then word gets out to the press - garbled, it turns out - and the story mutates into "SCIENTISTS FAKE LYNX DATA TO TRY AND SHUT DOWN THE FORESTS!" Incredible."I didn't trust the results of the lab, so I wasn't going to tell them I was sending in a blind sample. A 1998 study came out with the results of lynx up and down the Cascades, and that didn't seem logical. Most of us doubted it. How could there be so many lynx?"
I got this off of the linked article. Does anyone else have a problem with this statement? The earlier study was wrong because it came back with too many lynx? Wasn't the study supposed to determin how many there were? The lab came back with results we didn't like so we sent in false samples to test the lab????
The BS excuse that they were "testing" the labs won't fly as they could have sent samples from Lynx and other similar non-Lynx cats in a single blind test. It wasn't necessary to go into the field to test the lab. Ironic that the lab was so good that the lab nailed the samples as from a ringer animal already in the custody of these "biologists".
I think that you get it, they got caught and made up a cute little story. - There's no such thing as an honest environmentalist.
We all know how honest you are though jenny; like you would never come down on the side of a fellow psuedo-sci-groupie, would you?
That one has retired is a significant departure from earlier stories. The earlier stories implied that all 7 were low level employees but if one is of, or close to, retirement age, that would imply an advanced position in the orginization.
Congress give the Terrorists the 503C status that how
you don't hear no one Talking about that do you!!!
Congress can be so easily led by these reports
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.