case for exploration in therefuge... Norton also added data that were erroneous, stating that caribou calving hasbeen concentrated outside the proposed drilling area in 11 of the last 18 years, when theopposite is true. Environmentalists say that this is directly conflicting to what USFWS has stated in those reports. Quoting from the actual survey, the Lycos Environmental NewsService states, "there have been PCH [Porcupine caribou herd] calving concentrationswithin the 1002 Area in 27 of the last 30 years. The Interior Department changed thosenumbers to say Concentrated calving occurred primarily outside of the 1002 Area in 11of the last 18 years.The USFWS also provided the Interior Secretary with figures on which monthscaribou calving areas were most sensitive. These statistics were drawn together in regard toanother of the Senates questions, concerning the caribous historic calving range. Butnoticeably, Nortons reported statistics were different from those provided. LycosEnvironmental News Service again pointed this out: The USFWS also emphasized thatthe calving and early summer seasons (late May to early July) are the periods ofgreatest sensitivity of caribou. The agency provided figures to Norton showingconcentrations of caribou in the 1002 Area. Norton did not pass these figures on toCongress, instead offering a different figure showing only figures for a time period inwhich the caribou used less of the 1002 Area. Reaction to this was shown in theWashington Post article. ...some Fish and Wildlife officials said that they were careful tosend Norton a complete and balanced portrait of the science, regardless of personalbiases, and that she cherry-picked the data that suited her. Many environmentalistgroups equate this action almost like catching the lobbyists with their pants down. Theybelieve Nortons conduct is clear indication that the whole project is concerned more withgreed than conserving the refuge, adding fuel to an ever g...
