The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) initiated a review of the status of Rice’s whales on Thursday. 

The whales have been a cudgel activists have used to impede oil and gas development in the Gulf of America ever since they were identified as a distinct species in 2021, and the NMFS review could remove the animal from the endangered species listing. 

The debate about the whale’s listing has been going on for some time. The news of the review comes one day after Protect the People’s Trust (PPT), a government watchdog group, wrote to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, arguing that the science by which the whale was determined to be a distinct species — an important aspect of the species’ listing — lacked the quality standards that the federal government is required to uphold. 

Michael Chamberlain, director of PPT, told Just the News that the issue isn’t just a quibble over a species of whale in the Gulf of America. The policies that came from the decisions on the Rice’s whales have had far-reaching impacts on the cost of energy in America. 

The case, he said, highlights why government decisions should be based on “gold standard scientific inputs,” that are free from conflicts of interest and chain of custody questions. 

“With our country at war, and energy independence a genuine national security concern now more than ever, the threshold for decisions with such profound impacts should be extremely high. To put all of this in jeopardy in response to sloppy or agenda-driven science is unconscionable,” Chamberlain said. 

Determining classification of Rice's whales may need closer look

The Rice’s whales have only been found in the Gulf of America, which makes them an ideal species for activists hoping to stop oil and gas production in the area. It’s believed that less than 100 of the whales remain, and if they are a distinct species, they would be among the most endangered in the world. 

However, if the Rice’s whale isn’t a distinct species, then they’re a variation of the Bryde’s whale, which are generally not considered endangered. 

According to PPT, the research concluding they are a distinct species deserves a closer look. It was largely based on two studies, and Dr. Patricia Rosel was the lead author on both. At the time the second study was published, she was an employee of NMFS. That study, which was a leading factor in the decision to list the whales as endangered, was based upon examination of a single sample with a questionable chain of custody, PPT explains in their letter. 

Based on the 2021 study’s conclusions, environmental groups petitioned for speed limits on vessels, as well as other restrictions on activities in the Gulf, which impacted the oil and gas industry. Since then, the environmental impacts of oil and gas drilling in the Gulf of America, including its alleged impacts on the Rice’s whales, have been the subject of multiple lawsuits and federal agency opinions that have held up oil and gas leasing. 

PPT raises questions of bias, conflict of interest

Rosel was involved at every level of the process regarding her work, PPT explained. While authoring the two papers, she was a lead NOAA federal scientist. She served on the Status Review Team that evaluated and adopted her work as a primary foundation of evidence, and she was also the deputy editor of the journal that published the papers. Additionally, she was the chair of the SMM Committee on Taxonomy that formally evaluated and accepted the conclusions in her paper, which the NMFS cited as the basis for reclassifying the Rice’s whale as a full species. 

The Information Quality Act of 2000 put forth standards that are meant to ensure the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of information, which includes research, that federal agencies utilize and share. Among the requirements are standards of objectivity so that the process by which scientific information is produced and validated is truly independent. 

“A process that does not structurally separate those functions does not satisfy that requirement regardless of the quality of the underlying science,” Chamberlain said. 

Recent study disputes classification

A more recent study by Dr. R. W. Davis of Texas A&M in Galveston questions whether the Rice’s whales are a distinct species. The study notes that the genetic evidence underlying the whales’ species determination shows extremely low genetic diversity. The study suggests that the limited range of the whales represents a surviving population that was historically more widespread before commercial whaling, as opposed to a distinct species. 

During a budget hearing of the Senate Appropriations Committee last month, Sen. Katie Britt, R-Ala., questioned Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick about the species determination of the Rice’s whale and appeared to reference Davis’ study questioning that determination. 

“I can’t emphasize enough the implications of misclassifying these whales as endangered. The listing created a substantial national security risk,” Britt said. 

Lutnick is on the Endangered Species Committee, which voted in March to make oil and gas drilling exempt from the Endangered Species Act. The six-member panel, made up of several Trump administration officials and is chaired by Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, voted unanimously, arguing that the exemption is necessary to prevent environmental groups from using litigation to restrict oil production in the Gulf of America, which the panel argued is becoming a threat to national security.  

“The potential impact on the vital industries in the Gulf of America was so devastating that the Endangered Species Committee felt it necessary to intervene and exempt oil and gas drilling in the Gulf,” PPT's Chamberlain said. 

Britt asked Lutnick if he’d consider delisting the Rice’s whale based on this new research. Lutnick agreed that it’s important that the science be reviewed to determine if it's a distinct species. 

“If it is not, we need to stop the nonsense of treating something as if it’s endangered when it’s plentiful,” Lutnick said. 

Degrading quality of information, scientific "findings"

Opponents have accused anti-fossil fuel groups of weaponizing the Endangered Species Act to stop oil and gas development. PPT previously obtained emails through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request that show two special interest groups pushed the Biden administration’s Department of Interior to make progressive climate change a key factor in the implementation of the Endangered Species Act.  

As much as the environmental groups couch their opposition to oil and gas development as a concern for endangered species, they’ve shown no comparable concern for potential impacts of the offshore wind industry on whales and other marine mammals. Often, they’ve championed the industry despite those concerns.

PPT has been reviewing the scientific processes behind a number of policies passed during the Biden administration. This includes John Kerry asserting, without evidence, that climate change kills 15 million people every year, Assistant Secretary for Health Levine asserting with scant evidence that gender transition treatments for minors were safe, effective, and necessary, and Dr. Anthony Fauci and his colleagues burying a study that showed natural immunity from prior COVID-19 infection was superior to immunity from the vaccines even though they privately admitted that study was "impressive." 

“From its earliest days when the CDC allowed the teachers' unions to write portions of the school reopening guidance, the Biden administration consistently subjugated science to their political and policy objectives on hot-button issues. We at PPT documented several of those instances,” Chamberlain said. 

Even though the Endangered Species Committee exempted oil and gas operations from the ESA, Chamberlain said a thorough review of the quality of information that formed the basis for the listing of the Rice’s whale is important. As with many decisions the Trump administration has taken, they can be undone by a subsequent administration. 

“We are certainly hopeful the Trump administration will be responsive to our concerns and investigate the issues we raised. These steps are important because, just as a legislative action is more durable and sustainable than an executive order, action that addresses the flaws, shortcomings, and conflicts associated with the science supporting a listing can achieve a more durable result,” Chamberlain said.