Charges of meddling at FWS lead to expanded lynx habitat – NYTimes.com

Critical habitat expanded from 1,841 square miles to 39,000.

Julie MacDonald was involved in limiting lynx critical habitat to areas they already existed.

Charges of meddling at FWS lead to expanded lynx habitat
New York Times

Thanks to Virginia for pointing this story out.

10 Responses to “Charges of meddling at FWS lead to expanded lynx habitat – NYTimes.com”

  1. Layton Says:

    Now don’t get all upset, but wasn’t this Lynx thing the study where they caught some biologists making their own results by planting hair samples in multiple places where they didn’t exist??

    I seem to recall that it happened up in Washington??

  2. Save bears Says:

    If I remember correctly Layton, it was people who had been hired to help out with the studies….and had infiltrated to show a picture that actually didn’t exist…

  3. Save bears Says:

    The whole process on both sides of the coin concerning lynx was prostituted from the beginning…

  4. Ken Cole Says:

    As I recall, the biologists were getting results that they questioned so they submitted samples for quality control and Butch Otter tried to make hay of it. Their intention was not to change the results found but to determine whether the results that they were getting back were correct. They wanted control samples which are common in scientific research.

    I think we’ve had a go around about this before Layton. Go back and look through the links I provided and you can find out more.

  5. SAP Says:

    Ken is correct, Layton. I have a whole fat file on that “scandal.” The genetics lab was a little grumpy about the field guys doubting their competence, so they didn’t really help douse the flames of controversy once the “test” went public.

    The idea was simple: the field guys were not confident that the lab was correctly classifying the hair samples they were submitting, so they wanted to send in some samples that they KNEW were lynx hairs and see what result the lab got. So they got samples from — I believe — taxidermy-ed (sp?) specimens and sent them in.

    The spin, however, was that the field guys had an “agenda” and were trying to fabricate lynx occurrences in places where they otherwise had no evidence of occurrences. Not true.

  6. Layton Says:

    Ken,

    I’m sorry — which links??

  7. Ken Cole Says:

    From our last go around.

  8. Layton Says:

    Thanks for the help Ken — How does one get to “our last go around”??

    If it isn’t to much trouble that is.

  9. Ken Cole Says:

    I’m busy. Figure it out.

  10. Layton Says:

    Did you have a bad day at the computer there Bunky??

    Not busy enough that you can’t leave a shitty reply tho’.


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: