Assessing the impact of the U.S. Endangered Species Act recovery planning guidelines on managing threats for listed species

Caitlin M. Troyer, Leah Gerber

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The Endangered Species Act (ESA) of the United States was enacted in 1973 to prevent the extinction of species. Recovery plans, required by 1988 amendments to the ESA, play an important role in organizing these efforts to protect and recover species. To improve the use of science in the recovery planning process, the Society for Conservation Biology (SCB) commissioned an independent review of endangered species recovery planning in 1999. From these findings, the SCB made key recommendations for how management agencies could improve the recovery planning process, after which the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service redrafted their recovery planning guidelines. One important recommendation called for recovery plans to make threats a primary focus, including organizing and prioritizing recovery tasks for threat abatement. We sought to determine the extent to which results from the SCB study were incorporated into these new guidelines and whether the SCB recommendations regarding threats manifested in recovery plans written under the new guidelines. Recovery planning guidelines generally incorporated the SCB recommendations, including those for managing threats. However, although recent recovery plans have improved in their treatment of threats, many fail to adequately incorporate threat monitoring. This failure suggests that developing clear guidelines for monitoring should be an important priority in improving ESA recovery planning.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1423-1433
Number of pages11
JournalConservation Biology
Volume29
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1 2015

Fingerprint

Endangered Species Act
endangered species
planning
recovery plan
Biological Sciences
planning process
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
marine fisheries
monitoring
extinction
recommendation
fish

Keywords

  • Extinction
  • Monitoring
  • Recovery plan guidelines
  • Threats
  • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ecology
  • Nature and Landscape Conservation
  • Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

Cite this

Assessing the impact of the U.S. Endangered Species Act recovery planning guidelines on managing threats for listed species. / Troyer, Caitlin M.; Gerber, Leah.

In: Conservation Biology, Vol. 29, No. 5, 01.10.2015, p. 1423-1433.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{7cc239f1f5a849608a45514fbed2d45b,
title = "Assessing the impact of the U.S. Endangered Species Act recovery planning guidelines on managing threats for listed species",
abstract = "The Endangered Species Act (ESA) of the United States was enacted in 1973 to prevent the extinction of species. Recovery plans, required by 1988 amendments to the ESA, play an important role in organizing these efforts to protect and recover species. To improve the use of science in the recovery planning process, the Society for Conservation Biology (SCB) commissioned an independent review of endangered species recovery planning in 1999. From these findings, the SCB made key recommendations for how management agencies could improve the recovery planning process, after which the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service redrafted their recovery planning guidelines. One important recommendation called for recovery plans to make threats a primary focus, including organizing and prioritizing recovery tasks for threat abatement. We sought to determine the extent to which results from the SCB study were incorporated into these new guidelines and whether the SCB recommendations regarding threats manifested in recovery plans written under the new guidelines. Recovery planning guidelines generally incorporated the SCB recommendations, including those for managing threats. However, although recent recovery plans have improved in their treatment of threats, many fail to adequately incorporate threat monitoring. This failure suggests that developing clear guidelines for monitoring should be an important priority in improving ESA recovery planning.",
keywords = "Extinction, Monitoring, Recovery plan guidelines, Threats, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service",
author = "Troyer, {Caitlin M.} and Leah Gerber",
year = "2015",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/cobi.12552",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "29",
pages = "1423--1433",
journal = "Conservation Biology",
issn = "0888-8892",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Assessing the impact of the U.S. Endangered Species Act recovery planning guidelines on managing threats for listed species

AU - Troyer, Caitlin M.

AU - Gerber, Leah

PY - 2015/10/1

Y1 - 2015/10/1

N2 - The Endangered Species Act (ESA) of the United States was enacted in 1973 to prevent the extinction of species. Recovery plans, required by 1988 amendments to the ESA, play an important role in organizing these efforts to protect and recover species. To improve the use of science in the recovery planning process, the Society for Conservation Biology (SCB) commissioned an independent review of endangered species recovery planning in 1999. From these findings, the SCB made key recommendations for how management agencies could improve the recovery planning process, after which the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service redrafted their recovery planning guidelines. One important recommendation called for recovery plans to make threats a primary focus, including organizing and prioritizing recovery tasks for threat abatement. We sought to determine the extent to which results from the SCB study were incorporated into these new guidelines and whether the SCB recommendations regarding threats manifested in recovery plans written under the new guidelines. Recovery planning guidelines generally incorporated the SCB recommendations, including those for managing threats. However, although recent recovery plans have improved in their treatment of threats, many fail to adequately incorporate threat monitoring. This failure suggests that developing clear guidelines for monitoring should be an important priority in improving ESA recovery planning.

AB - The Endangered Species Act (ESA) of the United States was enacted in 1973 to prevent the extinction of species. Recovery plans, required by 1988 amendments to the ESA, play an important role in organizing these efforts to protect and recover species. To improve the use of science in the recovery planning process, the Society for Conservation Biology (SCB) commissioned an independent review of endangered species recovery planning in 1999. From these findings, the SCB made key recommendations for how management agencies could improve the recovery planning process, after which the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service redrafted their recovery planning guidelines. One important recommendation called for recovery plans to make threats a primary focus, including organizing and prioritizing recovery tasks for threat abatement. We sought to determine the extent to which results from the SCB study were incorporated into these new guidelines and whether the SCB recommendations regarding threats manifested in recovery plans written under the new guidelines. Recovery planning guidelines generally incorporated the SCB recommendations, including those for managing threats. However, although recent recovery plans have improved in their treatment of threats, many fail to adequately incorporate threat monitoring. This failure suggests that developing clear guidelines for monitoring should be an important priority in improving ESA recovery planning.

KW - Extinction

KW - Monitoring

KW - Recovery plan guidelines

KW - Threats

KW - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84941876640&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84941876640&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/cobi.12552

DO - 10.1111/cobi.12552

M3 - Article

C2 - 26108948

AN - SCOPUS:84941876640

VL - 29

SP - 1423

EP - 1433

JO - Conservation Biology

JF - Conservation Biology

SN - 0888-8892

IS - 5

ER -