Recovery Plan for Endangered Animals

Picture of Koala Bear : Until less than a thousand years ago there were millions of koala's in Australia. Now only thousands remain. In the year's between 1887-89 and again the years of 1900-1903 there was much killing of the koala bear for sport. Many people would shoot the koala bear because the small animal is an easy target and some people receive pleasure from seeing an innocent animal in pain. Another reason for the sharp decline of the koala bear was because of the demand for their fur, which was sold around the country. In 1908, 58,000 koala skins were sold in Sydney Australia alone. Between the years of 1920-1921, in Sydney Australia, a total of 205,679 skins were sold, and in 1924 over two million koala skins were sold.

What is a recovery plan?

Recovery plans, as part of the Fish and Wildlife Service’s Reovery Program, are designed to reverse the decline of a threatened or endangered species and eventually bring the population to a self-sustaining level. Each plan should include:

1. a description of the species’ current situation, including any relevant scientific data;
2. a recovery objective (for example, a target population number), and a list of criteria for indicating when the objective has been achieved;
3. an implementation schedule, including priorities of tasks and cost estimates;
4. an appendix identifying appropriate external reviews of the plan, and any additional pertinent information.

A recovery plan may include a myriad of different options including reintroduction, habitat acquisition, captive propagation, habitat restoration and protection, population assessments, research and technical assistance for landowners, and public education. Unfortunately, implementation of a recovery plan is not mandatory, so once it is finalized, the plan may just collect dust on a shelf.


How is a recovery plan drafted?

There is no deadline for finalizing a recovery plan. In addition, FWS may decide not to draft a recovery plan if it determines that "such plans would not contribute to [the species'] conservation."

The drafting process begins after FWS Regional Directors decide whether a plan would, indeed, benefit the species in question. The Regional Directors then appoint a recovery team, whose members are selected based on their expertise with the species and with relevant scientific disciplines. The team is supposed to include representatives from interested constituencies--for example, state, federal, or tribal agencies, academic institutions, non-governmental organizations, and commercial enterprises.

The actual process of preparing the recovery plan varies from circumstance to circumstance. FWS can provide some guidance for plan development by setting priorities or arbitrating disputes between individual team members.

During and after the drafting process, independent peer review of the plan may be solicited. In addition, there is a public comment period before the plan is finalized and implemented.


Does recovery planning work?

Critics of recovery planning often say that the process either doesn’t work, costs too much, or both.

The Endangered Species Act as a whole has been quite successful in its mission of halting the decline of endangered and threatened species. about 64% of mammal species and 68% of bird species listed in 1973 were classified as "improving and stable" by 1994. Recovery planning has clearly played a role in this success. But very few species have actually been recovered and delisted. Recovery takes a long time because it must reverse a decline that has occurred over the past two centuries. The recovery period may depend on the status of the species population, the gestation rate of a species, or other biological factors. However, the length of recovery time also depends largely on how quickly an effective recovery plan is developed and implemented. This is largely affected by budget constraints, political pressure, and limited scientific data.

Meanwhile, FWS and National Marine Fisheries Service expenditures on recovery planning are quite limited and should be increased. In FY 1999 only 30% of the total endangered species budget went to recovery planning. Moreover, recovery planning helps limit costs to individuals and states by taking proactive steps to protect species before privately-funded mitigation is necessary.


How can recovery planning be improved?

The National Academy of Sciences recommended that all recovery planning should include an element of "recovery plan guidance," which details how the ESA should be implemented to recover the species. NAS also recommended that a rational, scientific evaluation of survial and recovery goals is needed. These changes would help make recovery plans quantifiable and based on principles of conservation biology. The resulting meaningful recovery plans will make the ESA much more effective and lead to better recovery (and hence more rapid delisting) of species. In addition, if recovery plans identify the types of activities that are likely to violate the ESA, predictability will be increased and controversy will diminish when specific projects are evaluated concerning their impact on listed species and their habitat.

Currently, there is no explicit requirement in the law for federal action agencies to implement recovery plans, nor are plans typically detailed enough to clearly establish whether they are being followed. Involved states and federal agencies evade implementation of recovery plans, thus increasing the burden on FWS, NMFS and private citizens to take actions to recover listed species. For example, the Mexican spotted owl was listed as threatened in 1993 due to high logging rates on U.S. Forest Service lands. The Recovery Plan established specific guidelines for protecting known Mexican spotted owls and their habitat. The U.S. Forest Service has violated the guidelines of the Recovery Plan by logging protected habitat and spotted owl nest areas (called Protected Activity Centers).

The Endangered Species Coalition believes that requiring the government to develop and implement recovery plans according to set deadlines, and with improved scientific standards, would greatly increase the rate of recovery and delisting.