The National Canada Lynx Survey

Based on these concerns, many USFS large predator biologists questioned Weaver's results and called for independent verification. In March 2000, Lynx Canadensis was listed as Threatened under the ESA (USFWS, 2000; Federal Register, Vol. 65, No. 58). The Weaver study was cited in this report, but as preliminary data only, and it played no significant role in the Threatened listing. Later that year, Weaver was compelled to provide hair samples from his survey. These were independently analyzed and found to be from bobcats and coyotes. The General Accounting Office (GAO) investigated Weaver's survey in July/August, 2000 and found no evidence of tampering. It was concluded that his spurious samples were the result of contamination (GAO, 2000). An extensive check of the Internet by me revealed no further references to the study by environmental groups or anyone else dated later than early 2000 (at which time the survey results had not been falsified).

In 1999 under the auspices of the USFS Rocky Mountain Research Station, the NCLS was launched to resolve gaps in knowledge of lynx populations and to resolve the issues raised by the Weaver study. The NCLS was based on a two pronged Detection -> Follow-Up Confirmation approach and designed to use very specific protocols regarding data gathering and processing that drew heavily from lessons learned previously. Due to the large historical range of Lynx Canadensis and the difficulties in detecting and tracking it, the USFS did not have the manpower to dedicate the number of field scientists necessary for a thorough study. Therefore, the Detection phase was to make use of a significantly improved version of the Weaver hair snagging technique (particularly regarding the attractants and protocols for placement of pads, sample gathering and record keeping) designed specifically for implementation by non-technical field personnel. The hair snagging protocol was subjected to formal peer review (McDaniel et al., 2000) and was designed to be simple enough for these non-technical field workers to follow in a straightforward manner without special skills. Detailed directions were provided to all field technicians, a precise plan for location of the data gathering stations was set up and records were kept of where all samples were gathered and under what circumstances, and a special kit was provided containing all necessary supplies and directions. Once gathered, hair samples are sent to the USFS/U. of Montana Carnivore Conservation Genetics Laboratory (CCGL) in Missoula, MT. There, mitochondrial DNA is extracted from the samples, amplified using polymerase chain reaction (PCR) techniques and analyzed using a protocol developed specifically for this purpose. This mtDNA analysis protocol was also peer-reviewed and extensively blind tested at the USFWS Forensics Lab in Ashland, OR against known felid DNA samples and found to be 100% reliable (Mills et al., 2000). Results are also compared with Genbank (a large international database of genetic information on a wide range of species). These analyses allow for both positive identification of felid predators and verification of the genetic diversity within subpopulations against known data (isolated breeding populations should show certain types and degrees of allele variation that will also be more or less range specific). Among other things in conjunction with the Follow-Up Confirmation surveys, this allows for false samples, domestic specimens and fur farm escapees to be identified as such. Where positive results are obtained, the Follow-Up Confirmation surveys are implemented using an intensive winter snow tracking protocol and possibly trapping and radio tracking of some specimens. No conservation policies are to be proposed until this process is completed. As of this writing, the NCLS has gathered and analyzed over 1200 positively verified hair samples. Of these, only 4 came from areas where the lynx was not previously thought to be present (the Boise and Shoshone National Forests). In both cases, the Follow-Up Confirmation studies are being fully implemented prior to any policy proposals (McKelvey, 2002).

The “Lynxgate” Incident

In September of 1999 and again in September 2000, several field technicians working on the NCLS for the Washington Dept. of Fish & Wildlife in the Wenatchee and Gifford Pinchot National Forests in Washington State (areas where Lynx Canadensis is not known to have present in recent history) submitted hair samples from a stuffed bobcat (owned by one of the technicians) and a captive lynx as part of the survey for this region. The samples were submitted with made up Site Numbers so as to prevent them from being included in the actual NCLS survey data, the techs in question kept personal records of their activity at their offices (WDFW, 2001), and in both cases immediately notified their supervisors of their activities (WDFW, 2002) (this is HARDLY the behavior one would expect from someone involved in a conspiracy to deceptively slant a study for political reasons!). In the spring of 2001, the USFS hired independent consultants to investigate the incident. When questioned, the techs claimed to have had reservations about the reliability of the CCGL's protocols and wished to test them with a "control". It should be noted that, despite peer-review and blind testing of the CCGL protocols, not everyone was happy with the rejection of the Weaver study. It is possible, though not certain, that these folks intended to "prove" that the CCGL had fallaciously rejected Weaver's results. At least one of the individuals in question has since publicly identified himself in an interview with Outside magazine and said he was "only after the truth" (Outside, 2002). Nevertheless, this behavior, well intentioned or not, was a severe and highly unprofessional break from NCLS procedures. After the USFS internal investigation was concluded, the techs in question were cleared of all charges of intent to skew the survey, but were taken off of the NCLS team and were banned from participating in other such studies (in my opinion, rightly so). In any event, regardless of their motives, the samples did not survive analysis at the CCGL and were removed from the survey over 5 months BEFORE the story went public last December (Seattle Times, Dec. 18, 2001)—a classic example of the self-correcting nature of proper scientific method. Thus, there is currently no evidence to suggest that the incident was an attempt to falsely represent the range of Lynx Canadensis and the false samples have had virtually no impact on the survey's results.

Despite this history however, in the fall of 2001 a "whistle blower" at the USFS (whose identity has to my knowledge, never been revealed) contacted the Washington Times (WT) about the incident, and they subsequently ran a story accusing the USFS and environmental groups of deliberately perpetrating a massive and deliberate "hoax", the purpose of which was to "skew" the survey results for "so-called higher purposes". The nature of these alleged "higher purposes" was never clarified in the article (Washington Times, Dec. 17, 2001). The controversy has since spread like wildfire in public forums and Congressional circles and become a rallying point for Property Rights and Resource Use advocates and others who oppose many environmental policies like the ESA.

In light of the history of this incident and the interest groups involved, it is revealing to compare the facts given above with their renditions in popular anti-environmental forums. The WT article cited above (and numerous other articles since) made the following claims,

• "Fake" hair samples were planted on rubbing pads in the Wenatchee and Gifford Pinchot National Forests by USFS biologists.
• The perpetrators were "rogue biologists trying to influence natural-resources policy". Their specific intentions were to advance an undisclosed political agenda by trying to deceptively skew the survey data so as to indicate the presence of the Canada Lynx where it does not exist.
• If the false samples had not been detected, entire National Forest regions would have been closed permanently to most recreational and economic uses, the result of which would have been the destruction of entire rural communities and the "wrecking of some people's way of life".
• This incident is the latest in a string of interrelated plots by "rabid environmentalists" to bring about the destruction of rural America, including the 1998 bombing of a $12 million ski resort project in Vail, CO by the Earth Liberation Front.