Federal Officials Tried to Fake Lynx Data

An ongoing point of controversy in the western part of the United States is the protection of lynx habitat. Environmentalists claim that lynx habitat is endangered and want new restrictions on private and public lands, while developers and others argue that lynx habitat is not endangered and new regulations are not needed. In the midst of this controversy comes word that federal employees of the U.S. Forest Service and The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service apparently tried to plant evidence indicating lynx were present in a federal forest that is currently part of a three-year study of the species.

The research in question was a three-year study authorized by the Clinton administration to study the habitat of the lynx population in and around the Gifford Pinchot National Forest and the Wenatchee National Forest in Washington state. The study used rubbing posts in the forests which were then examined for the presence of lynx hair.

But at least seven government officials were disciplined for planting at least three samples of lynx hair on the posts. When the DNA of the lynx hair was analyzed, two of the samples matched a lynx living in an animal preserve, and the third sample match that of a lynx that had been held by the government until its owner reclaimed it. The government officials had taken hair from those animals, and affixed it to the rubbing posts to make it appear as if lynx had been in the area.

Had the ruse succeeded, this could have led to restrictions on human activity within the two parks.

When caught, the three Forest Service employees, two U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service officials, and two Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife employees claimed they were simply trying to “test” the lab’s DNA expertise. Those who participated in the scheme have been banned from any further participation in the survey, although the government will not release their names citing privacy issues.

Source:

Rare lynx hairs found in forests exposed as hoax. Audrey Hudson, The Washington Times, December 17, 2001.