LYNX REVIEW

Now that federal wildlife officials are reviewing a decision about protecting lynx habitat in Maine, state biologists and timberland owners have an obligation to show regulators that a cooperative approach is better than more government oversight. Building on the effort, while ensuring that federal requirements for protecting lynx habitat are met, is a promising approach.

To comply with a federal court order, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 2005 designated proposed critical habitat for the Canada lynx, a threatened species. In Maine, the only state on the East Coast that is home to the wild cats, the service identified more than 10,600 square miles of northern Maine as critical habitat, which is land that must be protected to ensure lynx have a place to live and breed. Landowners that seek federal permits, such as permission to build in wetlands, would face a separate review for effects on critical habitat.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service proposed the designation although it and the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife said it was unnecessary because large private landowners have already worked with state and federal officials to develop a plan to protect lynx and their habitat.

After the 6 million acres of critical habitat was proposed in Maine, timber companies asked that their land be exempted, which would have made the designation meaningless because they owned most of the habitat land. The Maine land was excluded from a final rule on lynx critical habitat, published in November.

Now the federal wildlife service is reviewing that decision and seven others because it says a Department of Interior official improperly influenced them.

The eight decisions involve former Deputy Assistant Secretary Julie MacDonald, who in some instances pressured scientists to change their findings about endangered species and leaked information to industry officials, according to the department’s inspector general.

Last summer, Ms. MacDonald met in Washington with landowners from Maine, including a representative of Plum Creek Timber Co., the largest landowner affected by the proposal.

According to a June 21 memo to H. Dale Hall, the director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the director of the Mountain-Prairie regional office Mitch King said, anticipating what Ms. MacDonald would want, the Washington office directed that critical habitat would not be designated on Plum Creek properties. Staff then determined that all private commercial forestlands should be excluded from the designation.

Mr. Hall last week said he wouldn’t have ordered the reviews if he didn’t suspect the results could be different.

One challenge for the service is to separate Ms. MacDonald’s misdeeds from the scientific recommendations of the biologists who initially considered the need for critical habitat and came to the same conclusion as Ms. MacDonald.

A second challenge will be convincing the federal judge that the voluntary approach will protect the cats as well as another layer of government review.

If the cooperative approach provides the level of protection required by federal law, the review should find it is sufficient.