From its inception, the Endangered Species Act has been controversial, because the law carries significant ramifications for economic activity that is deemed a threat to recovery. The very process of listing and delisting species is the subject of considerable scrutiny and interest-group pressure.

That’s why the best course is to follow the science, rather than political considerations.

In 2000, some Washington state biologists submitted fake samples during a national lynx study. They said they did so to test whether a Montana lab was on the ball, but they acted without getting their supervisors’ approval.

When caught, it looked like they were trying to influence the results of the study, and critics of the Endangered Species Act pounced.

As a result, the U.S. Interior Department developed a new code to protect the sanctity of studies. But what the department couldn’t anticipate was a political appointee altering scientific reports to minimize the impact of endangered species.

The inspector general for the U.S. Interior Department has found that Julie MacDonald, deputy assistant secretary for fish and wildlife and parks, often softened studies to help landowners, according to the Washington Post.

MacDonald is a civil engineer with no background in the natural sciences, but she didn’t hesitate to challenge the experts and browbeat them to change conclusions.

For instance, when biologists concluded that the endangered Kootenai River white sturgeon required a river flow of 2.3 to 5.9 cubic feet per second for spawning, she urged that only the higher number be used, because that would be more helpful to dam operators.

The survival of the white sturgeon, the largest freshwater fish in the country, has been a running battle in North Idaho and Montana ever since the Libby Dam was built 33 years ago.

It was only when a U.S. Fish and Wildlife official demanded that she put the request in writing that she backed off.

In another incident, she wanted the nesting range of the endangered southwest willow flycatcher to be changed from 2.1 miles to 1.8 miles, apparently because the correct number might have posed problems for a California ranch run by her husband.

The agency’s inspector general also said MacDonald abused her position by sending confidential documents to friends and allies at the Pacific Legal Foundation and the California Farm Bureau, both critics of the Endangered Species Act. She acknowledged that she would have denied public records requests for the same information.

The Interior Department has refused comment thus far, calling it a “personnel matter.”

It’s a lot more than that, but if MacDonald were delisted from the department, that would go a long way toward restoring its credibility as a trusted source of scientific information … once again.