7619 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Service Guidance and Endangered Species Act Implementation Recovery Priority System The Service outlined "Endangered and Threatened Species Listing and Recovery Priority Guidelines" (Guidelines) in the Federal Register dated September 21, 1983. The Guidelines set recovery plan develop- ment and' implementation priorities by combining immediacy of threats to a species' survival with the species' "recovery potential." The priority systems are based on an anal- ysis of such factors as degree and im- mediacy of threat faced by species, needs for further information, and species' recovery potentials. The Species Recovery Priority System uses the criteria of (1) degree of threat, (2) recoverability, and (3) taxonomy [level of genetic diversity]. By applying these criteria, all listed species are assigned a species priority number of 1 through 18. A fourth fac- tor, conflict, is a supplementary ele- ment in determining what actions are to be implemented for the recovery of a species. In addition, the fourth fac- tor gives priority, within each cate- gory, in the preparation of recovery plans to those species that are, or may be, in conflict with construction or other development projects. Thus, the species retains its numerical rank and acquires the letter designation of "C," indicating conflict (1C-18C). The Service's Recovery Priority System is outlined in Table 1. In addition to the species priority numbers, consideration is given to the importance of each recovery task. Priorities (1-3) are assigned to recov- ery tasks based on the following cri- teria: Priority 1 task-necessary to prevent species extinction Priority 2 task-necessary to maintain species status Priority 3 task-necessary to achieve species recovery 8 Combination of the two systems re- sults in a two-tiered priority system (species recovery number-task prior- ity number) which serves as a guide to distribute the program resources equitably for all listed species. Funds are allocated for recovery tasks ac- cording to species and task priorities. Implementation of this priority sys- tem ensures that limited resources can be focused on areas of greatest needs. In concept, resources should be allo- cated first to accomplishing priority-1 recovery tasks for species with a re- covery priority number of 1 and last to priority-3 tasks for a species with recovery priority of 18 (lowest prior- ity delineated in the current system). Actual funding allocations, however, may not follow this formula strictly in all cases. Some otherwise low prior- ity species that need only one or two low priority tasks to complete recov- ery might receive resources to expe- dite their downlisting or delisting. In practice, Congress sometimes mandates that funds be spent on species or tasks that would otherwise not yet be funded by a strict applica- tion of the two priority systems. Also, the Service must often be flexible enough to take advantage of special opportunities provided by shifting social, political, or economic circum- stances. Therefore, the two formal priority systems, used in tandem, serve as a guide rather than a mold to which all actions must conform. The Service must be allowed to exercise management discretion in order to achieve the greatest conservation benefits for resources expended. Other agencies, groups, and individu- als can and do become involved in the coordinated recovery effort. Table 1. Recovery Priority Syste m* Degree of Threat Recovery Potential Taxonomy Priority Conflict High Monotypic genus 1 1C 1 High Species 2 22 High Subspecies 3 3C High Low Monotypic genus 4 3 4C Low Species 5 55 Low Subspecies 6 6C 6 High Monotypic genus 7 7C 7 High Species 8 8C 8 High Subspecies 9 9C Moderate Low Monotypic genus 10 9 10C 10 Low Species 11 11C 11 Low Subspecies 12 12C 12 High Monotypic genus 13 13C 13 High Species 14 14C 14 High Subspecies 15 15C Low 15 Low Monotypic genus 16 16C 16 Low Species 17 17C 17 Low Subspecies 18 18C 18 As Published Sept. 21, 1983 (43 FR 430981