Minnesota scientist Deborah Swackhamer merits her state's thanks for fighting back when Trump administration bureaucrats pressured her to spin, rather than tell the truth, in recent congressional testimony.

Swackhamer, a retired University of Minnesota environmental health sciences professor, serves as an influential adviser to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). She chairs the agency's Board of Scientific Counselors, a panel that typically has consisted of around 70 eminent scientists. Their mission: to review the scientific research conducted by the agency and provide an independent assessment of its quality and integrity.

There are growing concerns nationally — shared by this Editorial Board — that a Trump administration EPA will rely only on industry to shape policy, pushing aside the traditional foundation of scientific research. Information in Swackhamer's May 23 testimony lent credence to this, by pointing out that the agency under new EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt has not renewed the advisory roles of numerous scientists serving in this capacity. Pruitt has long been a climate-change skeptic and opponent of environmental protections.

That is likely what resulted in the interference from Pruitt's chief of staff. In e-mails obtained by the New York Times, he urged Swackhamer to soften the language about the departing scientists, saying decisions hadn't been made yet. At the same time, the newspaper noted, the agency continued to send out nonrenewal letters.

Pruitt's staff wildly miscalculated in thinking they could push around Swackhamer. She has long been one of Minnesota's best-known experts on water-quality policy. Her commitment to science never faltered. She didn't back down in her May 23 testimony. And when the Times reported on the e-mails and followed up with her, Swackhamer fearlessly pushed back against the administration. She told the newspaper that she felt "bullied" and provided more details, saying her advisory panel is down to 11 people from 70.

The EPA is entrusted with protecting vital natural resources: among them, clean air and drinkable water. The Trump administration, which campaigned successfully on rolling back environmental protections, should be honest about the changes it is making. If it is not, Swackhamer has admirably signaled that the scientific community is on guard against the agency's new leadership acting in the dark.