The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) will revise seven of eight decisions made under the Endangered Species Act program after reviewing them for improper political interference. The four-month review came as a result of a Department of Interior inspector general's investigation of allegations that former Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Julie A. MacDonald, intimidated staff and changed the scientific information agency scientists developed for decisions about listing or delisting threatened or endangered species.

MacDonald resigned her position April 30 after the investigation concluded her actions, though not illegal, violated the Code of Federal Regulations regarding disclosure of nonpublic information and the appearance of preferential treatment. MacDonald disclosed information to the California Farm Bureau Federation and the Pacific Legal Foundation, a property rights group that often challenges endangered species decisions.

FWS Acting Director Kenneth Stansell sent a letter Nov. 23 to House Natural Resources Committee Chair Nick Rahall (D-WV) detailing the outcome of the eight decisions reviewed. Stansell wrote, "The Service believes that revising the seven identified decisions is supported by scientific evidence and the proper legal standards. As resources allow, these revisions will be completed as expeditiously as possible."

Rahall led the charge to investigate political interference in FWS. The Natural Resources Committee held a hearing May 9, shortly after the inspector general's investigation and MacDonald's resignation. On the committee's website, Rahall's reaction to the letter from Stansell implies the problem may go much deeper than these seven decisions. He is quoted as saying, "Julie MacDonald, who was a civil engineer by training, should never have been allowed near the endangered species program. This announcement is the latest illustration of the depth of incompetence at the highest levels of management within the Interior Department and breadth of this Administration's penchant for torpedoing science. Today we hear that seven out of eight decisions she made need to be scrapped, causing us once again to question the integrity of the entire program under her watch."

Stansell's letter did not imply a sense of urgency to revise the decisions, however. In the case of the white-tailed prairie dog, for example, his letter indicates that "the Service will complete a 12-month finding in Fiscal Year 2009, if funding is available." The FWS is under court direction to complete a new proposed rule for the Canadian lynx critical habitat by August 2008 and must supply status reports to the court starting Feb. 1, 2008. Other species covered by the review include 12 species of Hawaiian picture-wing flies, the Arroyo toad, the California red-legged frog, and the Preble's meadow jumping mouse. The letter consistently promises to revise the decisions "as funding is made available."

According to a Nov. 28 Washington Post story, some environmentalists are suspicious of FWS's review and have sued the agency over the status of the white-tailed prairie dog. The Forest Guardians and the Center for Native Ecosystems joined with other groups to initiate the suit. A spokesperson for the Forest Guardians is quoted as saying the group believes there are other decisions that need to be reviewed because of MacDonald's action. In addition, they want FWS to review other decisions made by political appointees.