WATCHFrOGGING POLITICAL CORRUPTION

In the decades since its founding, the Center has made it a constant priority to keep close tabs on the government agencies administering lands and programs that most affect endangered species — in particular the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which implements the Endangered Species Act, as well as public-lands agencies such as the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management.

Recently our focus has been on politically motivated, often illegal bureaucratic interference in decision-making that should be based strictly on science. At the Fish and Wildlife Service, undermining and manipulation of scientific data for the benefit of private interests reached a new height under the Bush administration. The Center has led the way in exposing bad actions at the Service to the media and policymakers and leading the drive toward reform.

In part as a result of our work, in July 2007 the Fish and Wildlife Service agreed to review eight Endangered Species Act decisions tainted by Julie MacDonald, a Bush-appointed deputy assistant secretary for Fish, Wildlife and Parks. MacDonald had resigned in May 2007 after an inspector general investigation — prompted largely by a Washington Post exposé of MacDonald’s corruption informed by Center research — found she had bullied agency biologists, manipulated their work, and colluded with industry lobbyists. The inspector general’s report called her the Interior Department’s “attack dog” when it came to quashing any proposals to list new species or protect their habitat.

After a five-month review, the Service announced it would revise seven decisions “inappropriately influenced” by MacDonald. The announcement amounted to damage control — an end-run around public outcry that might force a broader examination of wrongdoing at the agency. In fact, MacDonald had been involved in hundreds of decisions over the course of her six-year tenure, and subterfuge and squelching of protections for species was in no way limited to her. Similar interventions and reversals had come down from former Assistant Secretary Craig Manson, Special Assistant Randall Bowman, Ruth Solomon at the Office of Management and Budget, and other political appointees. Not included in the Service’s planned review, for instance, were the Sacramento splittail or the greater sage grouse — just two examples of clearcut interference. MacDonald was heavily involved in the final decision to delist the splittail while owning a farm containing its habitat. And the Service has already been ordered by a judge to redo its decision not to list the sage grouse, also due to MacDonald’s influence.

Two lawmakers have called for a full accounting of political interference over endangered species decisions, and both the Inspector General’s Office and the Government Accountability Office are conducting their own investigations into political tampering at the Fish and Wildlife Service. In May 2008, the Government Accountability Office released a report showing that political interference in endangered species decisions was not limited to MacDonald.

Within just days of Fish and Wildlife’s announcement that it would revise seven decisions, the Center had compiled a list of 55 species that lost protections through political interventions from above. We’re working at a rapid pace to take legal and other actions to come to the rescue of these animals and plants.

LITIGATING POLITICAL CORRUPTION

On August 28, 2007, the Center filed a notice of intent to sue the Department of the Interior for political interference resulting in decisions limiting or denying protection to 55 endangered species. Since then, our list of species wronged has grown to include 59. To date we’ve filed suit to protect 26 species, and we’re in the process of preparing suits for more. Thanks to our work, the administration has already agreed to redo 15 critical habitat designations and to reconsider listing for the Mexican garter snake.

Learn more about our Litigating Political Corruption Campaign.