(T)he Recovery Team failed to make use of the best available science and, in fact, appears to have selectively cited from the available science to justify a reduction in habitat protection. . . the primary issue threatening the continued persistence of the owl remains the original loss of habitat through logging that prompted the original listing.

The SCB-AOU review also found that "far too much emphasis is placed on the adverse effects of barred owl range expansion" as a cause of the owl's continued decline. And there's more:

The proposed options are not supported by any reasonable interpretation of the best available scientific information.

And that's just a pared-down greatest-hits version of the criticisms. The spotted-owl reviews are just part of a larger lookback at many decisions made under Macdonald. As U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service spokeswoman Valerie Fellows told The Missoulian recently:

The problem is Julie changed the science that went into making those decisions.

However, as we pointed out recently, the Bush administration has not announced plans to revisit or revise the spotted-owl recovery plan produced under those circumstances because it was not finalized while Macdonald still worked for the agency.

*This post originally said this review was by The Wilderness Society, an environmental advocacy group. Wrong. It was the professional science group The Wildlife Society that undertook the review. We also see now that we should mention that the other review, released today by the ornithologists' and conservation biologists' professional science societies, was requested by the Interior Department. The Wildlife Society launched its own review indepenently.