The federal proposal to remove endangered species protections for all gray wolves in the lower 48 states came under fire Friday from a scientific peer review panel that unanimously found that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's decision does not reflect the best available science regarding wolves.
The panel's analysis was released Friday and is the latest in a series of setbacks to the plan, announced last year. When it announced its plan last June, Fish and Wildlife Service Director Daniel Ashe called the recovery of wolves — which were hunted and poisoned to the brink extinction — "one of the most successful recoveries in the history of wildlife conservation."
In addition, the new rule would recognize the small population of Mexican wolves in New Mexico and Arizona as a unique subspecies and list the animal as endangered. Since that announcement, the process of obtaining peer review of the delisting decision has been fraught with charges of compromised scientific integrity and political manipulation.
This is the second panel convened by the federal agency.
An earlier incarnation was disbanded after it surfaced that the wildlife service sought to remove scientists who signed on to a letter expressing concerns about the delisting proposal.
The process was restarted and the new document arrives at many of the same conclusions reached by previous analysis, including the assertion that the delisting rule is based on analysis not universally accepted among scientists and not reflecting the latest data.
In light of the panel's findings, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on Friday announced that it would extend public comment on the matter another 45 days.