Accidental Contamination of Samples Used in Canadian Lynx Study  
Rendered the Study's Preliminary Conclusion Invalid (14-AUG-01,  
GAO-01-1018R).							 
								 
This report discusses the validity of the results of a 1998 study
of the Canadian lynx. The Forest Service contracted with Dr. John
Weaver of the Wildlife Conservation Society in New York City to  
help survey the Canadian lynx in the Cascade Mountains	of	 
Washington and Oregon. In a March 1999 interim report, Dr. Weaver
concluded that the Canadian lynx lives in some forests in	 
Washington and Oregon. In March 2000, the Fish and Wildlife	 
Service placed the lynx on its list of threatened species in the 
forested portions of 13 states, including Washington and Oregon. 
Issues have since been raised about whether the study's results  
have been falsified. GAO found no evidence that the study was	 
deliberately falsified. 					 
-------------------------Indexing Terms------------------------- 
REPORTNUM:   GAO-01-1018R					        
    ACCNO:   A01605						        
  TITLE:     Accidental Contamination of Samples Used in Canadian Lynx
             Study Rendered the Study's Preliminary Conclusion Invalid        
     DATE:   08/14/2001 
  SUBJECT:   Endangered species 				 
	     Wildlife conservation				 
	     Oregon						 
	     Washington 					 

******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO Testimony.                                               **
**                                                              **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
******************************************************************
GAO-01-1018R
     
GAO- 01- 1018R Canadian Lynx Study United States General Accounting Office

Washington, DC 20548

August 14, 2001 The Honorable James Hansen Chairman Committee on Resources
House of Representatives

Subject: Accidental Contamination of Samples Used in Canadian Lynx Study
Rendered the Study?s Preliminary Conclusion Invalid

Dear Mr. Chairman: This letter responds to your request that we investigate
the results of a 1998 study concerning the Canadian lynx. The Forest Service
contracted with Dr. John Weaver of the Wildlife Conservation Society in New
York City to help conduct surveys for the Canadian lynx in the Cascade
Mountain range of Washington and Oregon. In a March 1999 interim report, Dr.
Weaver concluded that the Canadian lynx resides in certain forested portions
of the states of Washington and Oregon. The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service
cited the 1999 interim report?s preliminary data in the final rule it
published in the Federal Register on the status of the Canadian lynx. 1 In
March 2000, the Fish and Wildlife Service placed the lynx on its list of
threatened species, pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973, 2 in the
forested portions of 13 states, including Washington and Oregon.

Dr. Weaver based his preliminary conclusion on the results of a
deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) analysis of hair samples recovered in the
Cascade Mountain range of Washington and Oregon. That analysis was conducted
by the Science Resource Center of the Wildlife Conservation Society.
Additional DNA analysis was performed on the same hair samples by the
Wildlife Genetics International Laboratory in Canada, which questioned
whether the samples had been contaminated. You asked us to (1) determine
whether allegations that the study was deliberately falsified are accurate
and (2) confirm that two laboratories reached different conclusions based on
an analysis of the same samples.

We conducted our investigation between August 2000 and July 2001 in
accordance with investigative standards established by the President?s
Council on Integrity and Efficiency. We interviewed Dr. John Weaver; Dr.
George Amato, the Director of the

1 65 Federal Register16052. 2 16 U. S. C. sect. 1531 et. seq.

GAO- 01- 1018R Canadian Lynx Study 2 Science Resource Center for the
Wildlife Conservation Society 3 ; and Dr. David

Paetkau, the Senior Geneticist at the Wildlife Genetics International
Laboratory. We also interviewed Fish and Wildlife Service field and
headquarters personnel and Forest Service field officials. Furthermore, we
reviewed relevant Fish and Wildlife Service and Forest Service
documentation. The scope and validity of the data relied on by the Fish and
Wildlife Service in reaching its decision to list the lynx as threatened in
the states of Washington and Oregon under the Endangered Species Act are
beyond the scope of this investigation.

In summary, we found no evidence that the study conducted by Dr. Weaver was
deliberately falsified. In fact, the preliminary conclusion reported in the
March 1999 interim report was based on hair samples that had been
accidentally contaminated. In September 2000, Dr. Weaver had the original
hair samples submitted to the Wildlife Genetics International Laboratory for
additional analysis. That analysis questioned whether the samples used in
the study had been accidentally contaminated, which raised questions about
the conclusion in the interim report. Dr. Weaver notified the Forest Service
of the results of the second analysis, and in a letter to cognizant Forest
Service supervisors and biologists characterized the Canadian lynx locations
reported in the March 1999 interim report- the states of Washington and
Oregon- as unverified. During our investigation, Dr. Weaver issued a final
report in June 2001, which concluded that samples relied upon in the March
1999 interim report were contaminated. In a June 2001 letter to us, the Fish
and Wildlife Service said that the interim report had no bearing on its
final decision to list the Canadian lynx as a threatened species in
Washington and Oregon.

A Second Laboratory?s Analysis Determined that Samples Used in the Canadian
Lynx Study Were Accidentally Contaminated

In 1998, the Forest Service contracted with Dr. Weaver to assist in the
design, implementation, and analysis of a Canadian lynx survey in the
Cascade Mountain range of Washington and Oregon. The surveys were an attempt
to obtain information about the lynx populations in those states. Forest
Service biologists and technicians collected hair samples from sites in
Washington and Oregon and sent the samples to Dr. Weaver. Dr. Weaver then
sent the samples to the Wildlife Conservation Society?s Science Resource
Center for DNA analysis. The laboratory?s DNA analysis identified hair
samples from nine collection sites in Washington and five sites in Oregon as
being from the Canadian lynx. Dr. Weaver told both the Fish and Wildlife
Service and the Forest Service of his preliminary findings, which were based
on the laboratory analysis. He provided a written interim report, titled
Lynx Surveys in the Cascade Range: Washington and Oregon, with those same
results to the Forest Service in March 1999. The interim report named Dr.
Weaver and Dr. Amato, the Director of the Science Resource Center, as co-
authors.

On March 24, 2000, the Fish and Wildlife Service published its final rule- a
determination that the existence of the Canadian lynx is threatened in 13
states, including Washington and Oregon- in the Federal Register. The final
rule includes available data on the Canadian lynx, including its habitat and
historical residence in

3 Dr. Amato, who was identified as a co- author of both the interim and
final reports, said he was not aware that his name had been associated with
the interim report.

GAO- 01- 1018R Canadian Lynx Study 3 various states and regions of the
United States over the last 100 years or more and

refers to Dr. Weaver?s interim report as ?preliminary? data presented for
the states of Washington and Oregon.

Dr. Weaver told us that after he provided his interim report to the Forest
Service in March 1999, a Forest Service colleague told him that some doubt
had arisen within the agency about the existence of the Canadian lynx in
Oregon. As a result, Dr. Weaver asked the Science Resource Center to send
its samples to the Wildlife Genetics International Laboratory in Edmonton,
Alberta. The laboratory?s Senior Geneticist, Dr. Paetkau, said the
laboratory received Dr. Weaver?s samples on September 2, 2000, and provided
the results to him by telephone on September 19, 2000. The Canadian
laboratory?s DNA analysis of the hair samples identified all of them as
being hair from the Canadian lynx. However, the Canadian laboratory noted
that the DNA ?signal? was stronger than would normally be expected from hair
samples and raised questions about whether the samples had been
contaminated. In response, Dr. Weaver sent the portions of the original
samples he had retained to the Canadian laboratory, without informing the
laboratory of the samples? origin. The laboratory?s DNA analysis identified
the samples as cougar and bobcat, rather than lynx. Dr. Weaver concluded
that the samples that were initially sent to the Science Resource Center
must have become accidentally contaminated at that laboratory. The Center?s
director, Dr. Amato, disagreed that contamination actually occurred at his
laboratory, but he acknowledged that it could have happened.

Dr. Weaver told us that he notified the Forest Service and the Fish and
Wildlife Service of the different DNA results in approximately September
2000. Based on that notification, the Forest Service issued a letter to its
Forest Supervisors and Wildlife Biologists in the Pacific Northwest. The
letter said that the Forest Service considered the Canadian lynx locations
reported in the March 1999 interim report- the states of Washington and
Oregon- to be unverified. The letter also stated that a survey was currently
being conducted for Canadian lynx in Washington and Oregon and that so far,
lynx had only been detected in several locations in Washington. A Forest
Service official told us that the agency would not use Dr. Weaver?s 1998
study data in any management documents. In a June 1, 2001, letter to us, the
Fish and Wildlife Service said Dr. Weaver?s study had no bearing on its
decision to list the Canadian lynx as threatened.

On June 26, 2001, Dr. Weaver told us that Dr. Paetkau of the Canadian
laboratory performed additional DNA analyses of the hair samples it received
from the Science Resource Center. Dr. Paetkau said the laboratory performed
the analysis on May 16, 2001, and provided the results to Dr. Weaver the
following day. He said the results showed that all but one of the samples
came from the same lynx, which in Dr. Weaver?s opinion provided further
evidence that the samples had become contaminated. Dr. Weaver said that the
Canadian laboratory had also analyzed hair samples from a lynx he had kept
captive until approximately 1997 and that its DNA was different from the DNA
samples received from the Science Resource Center. The June 2001 final
report to the Forest Service concluded that the hair samples on which the
March 1999 interim findings were based were contaminated.

GAO- 01- 1018R Canadian Lynx Study 4 Concerning the DNA analysis, Dr. Amato
said he had received numerous hair samples

from Dr. Weaver for DNA analysis and that each sample was routinely
identified when the laboratory received them. Dr. Amato said that had he
known that Dr. Weaver intended to present the results of the analysis to the
Forest Service as evidence of the presence of Canadian lynx, he would have
used different protocols. Dr. Paetkau told us that in general, (1)
laboratories that perform the same type of analysis in a very rigorous
manner, such as Canada?s Wildlife Genetics International Laboratory, are
concerned about following certain protocols and (2) academic laboratories,
such as the Science Resource Center laboratory, focus on using information
in a new way and are less concerned about certain protocols.

Agency Comments

The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Forest Service provided comments
on a draft of this letter, in which they concurred with the letter and its
findings.

- - - - As arranged with your office, unless you announce its contents
earlier, we plan no further distribution of this letter until 30 days after
the date of the letter. At that time, we will send copies to interested
congressional committees and the Secretaries of Agriculture and the
Interior. We will also make copies available to others on request. The
letter will also be available at www. gao. gov. If you have any questions
about this investigation, please call me at (202) 512- 7455 or Assistant
Director Patrick Sullivan at (202) 512- 6722. Senior Special Agent Woodrow
Hunt, Senior Analyst Shelia James, and Senior Attorney Barry Shillito made
significant contributions to this investigation and letter.

Sincerely yours, Robert H. Hast Managing Director Office of Special
Investigations

(600820)
*** End of document. ***