BANGOR – When a National Academy of Sciences panel comes to town next week, a lot of people – including Gov. Angus King – are hoping its members can be persuaded the federal government erred in listing wild Atlantic salmon in eight Maine rivers as an endangered species.

The academy’s study of the salmon issue in the state, which will begin with a day and a half of meetings in Bangor, was solicited by Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins. They believe the government was wrong to claim there are genetically unique wild fish in the eight rivers.

Instead, the senators and King contend that more than a century of stocking several different types of salmon into those rivers has resulted in mongrel fish, rather than a remnant population of wild Atlantic salmon.

Shortly before the listing was announced last fall, King wrote to the two U.S. Cabinet officials who were in charge of deciding if the fish qualified for protection under the federal Endangered Species Act. He asked them to consider the consequences of an endangered listing on the state’s economy, and he questioned the science that would form the basis of such a listing.

While the ESA listing went forward, an undersecretary in the Department of Commerce promised King that if the NAS study finds the fish are not genetically unique, they will be removed from the list.

Shortly thereafter, the senators secured $500,000 in federal funding for the study and said it would focus on the genetics issue. NAS and congressional officials, however, agree there was no written charge from Congress spelling out what exactly the academy was to study.

Congress sent the $500,000 and a letter saying it was for studying salmon, said David Policansky, the academy staff member who will direct the evaluation. “That’s it,” he said Thursday.

Some requests for studies come with very detailed written instructions from members of Congress but this one did not, Policansky said from his Washington, D.C., office.

NAS staff did talk with congressional staff members about the salmon study, a discussion that touched on genetics, blueberries, logging, dams and other aspects of the issue, he said.

The NAS is making no promises about what it may find in this case.

Policansky said the panel does not aim to second-guess the listing and that the scope of the group’s study is much broader than genetics.

It also includes causes of the decline in salmon population, interaction between farmed-raised and wild fish, environmental factors affecting salmon and the impact of recreational, commercial and subsistence fishing in the rivers and ocean in and around Maine.

The job of the NAS panel, which includes two Maine scientists, is to evaluate the scientific information that was the basis of the endangered species listing, as well as any other scientific information that the body deems necessary.

The panel may decide that the science is not good enough, but it will not make recommendations as to what types of regulations are needed to restore salmon stocks, he said.

“They could say the data is not good enough … to make such and such a decision,” Policansky said.

The panel could call for more research or it could pinpoint specific causes for the decline in salmon and suggest that those causes be addressed.

The 14-member panel will issue an interim report by the end of the year addressing the genetic issues.

The panel includes professors from across the United States, Canada and Sweden, including Bruce Wiersma, dean of the College of Natural Sciences, Forestry and Agriculture at the University of Maine, and Lewis Incze, a research scientist and past director of the Bigelow Laboratory in Boothbay Harbor.

Whatever its scope, state government officials eagerly await the review.

“Our hope is that the science underlying the listing will be borne out by the NAS, but it is not certain that that is the case,” said Dave Lackey, a spokesman for Snowe.

He said the scientific review could bolster public support for protecting salmon.

“We happen to believe the best way to shore up the salmon population is through … the state plan,” Lackey said. “That’s different from what the feds believe.”

Federal fisheries officials said there were deficiencies in the state plan that did not make it adequate to protect wild salmon stocks, which have dwindled to fewer than 30 fish by a federal count.

Lackey also said the federal proposal to list “came out rapidly and without notice,” which could indicate that it was a reaction to lawsuits filed by conservation groups.

“The administration has made it clear that the purpose of the study is to obtain an objective scientific review of the issue,” said John Ripley, a spokesman for the governor. “We are confident this will be accomplished by the National Academy.”

Ripley said the governor has long called for an objective view of the science, but that the federal government has not always been forthright with the data it used to decide the salmon should be listed as endangered. In fact, the state is still in the midst of a lawsuit with the federal fisheries agencies over the genetics data.

Maine filed a Freedom of Information request to obtain the data, and was sent compact disks that were not readable, so it went to court. Earlier this year, a federal court judge ruled that the federal government had to turn over most of the 300 documents sought by the state. The federal government appealed that ruling to the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston. A ruling from that court is pending.

In the meantime, the scientific review will go on.

In an all-day public session next Tuesday at the Four Points Sheraton hotel in Bangor, the academy panel will hear from federal and state officials, university professors and representatives of salmon conservation groups.

King has asked to address the panel and members of the staffs of the state’s congressional delegation may do the same, although no U.S. senators or representatives are expected to attend. A public comment period is scheduled for one hour beginning at 5:15 p.m.

If needed, more public testimony will be taken beginning at 8:30 the following morning when the panel will reconvene to discuss possible future field trips and meetings.