Improving recovery planning for threatened and endangered species: Comparative analysis of recovery plans can contribute to more effective recovery planning

BioScience

Volumn 48, Issue 3, 1998, Pages 177-184

  Foin, Theodore C ^a   Riley, Seth P D ^a   Pawley, Anitra L ^a   Ayres, Debra R ^b   Carlsen, Tina M ^c   Hodum, Peter J ^a   Switzer, Paul V ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS   (United States)

^c LAWRENCE LIVERMORE NATIONAL LABORATORY   (United States)

^d EASTERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0031885353     PISSN: 00063568     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/1313263     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Britten HB, Brussard PF, Murphy DD. 1994. The pending extinction of the uncompahgre fritillary butterfly. Conservation Biology 8: 86-94.
2. Carroll C, Auspurger C, Dobson A, Franklin J, Orians G, Reid W, Tracy R, Wilcove D, Wilson J, Lubchenco J. 1996. Strengthening the use of science in achieving the goals of the Endangered Species Act. Ecological Applications 6: 1-11.
3. Christensen NL, et al. 1996. Comments on the scientific basis for ecosystem management. Ecological Applications 6: 665-691.
4. Cook RE, Dixon PM. 1987. A review of recovery plans for threatened and endangered plant species. Washington (DC): World Wildlife Fund.
5. Culbert R, Blair RB. 1989. Recovery planning and endangered species. Endangered Species Update 5(10): 2-8.
6. Dixon PM, Cook RE. 1989. Science, planning, and the recovery of endangered plants. Endangered Species Update 6(10): 9-14.
7. Dobson AP, Rodriguez JP, Roberts WM, Wilcove DS. 1997. Geographic distribution of endangered species. Science 275: 550-553.
8. Easter-Pilcher A. 1996. Implementing the Endangered Species Act. BioScience 46: 355-363.
9. Flather CH, Joyce LA, Bloomgarden CA. 1994. Species endangerment patterns in the United States. Washington (DC): USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experimental Station. General Technical Report no. RM-241.
10. Gunderson LH, Holling CS, Light SS, eds. 1995. Barriers and bridges to the renewal of ecosystems and institutions. New York: Columbia University Press.
11. Holling CS. 1978. Adaptive environmental management. New York: Academic Press.
12. Mattson DJ, Craighead JJ. 1994. The Yellow-stone grizzly bear recovery program: Uncertain information, uncertain policy. Pages 101-129 in Clark TW, Reading RP, Clarke AL, eds. Endangered Species Recovery. Washington (DC): Island Press.
13. McMillan M, Wilcove D. 1994. Gone but not forgotten: Why have species protected by the Endangered Species Act become extinct? Endangered Species Update 11: 5-6.
14. Mueller TL. 1994. Guide to the federal and California endangered species laws. Sacramento (CA): Planning and Conservation League Foundation.
15. [NRC] National Research Council. 1995. Committee on Scientific Issues in the Endangered Species Act. Science and the Endangered Species Act. Washington (DC): National Academy Press.
16. Norton BR. 1988. Avoiding the triage question. Endangered Species Update 5(8/9): 1-4.
17. Reffalt WC. 1988. United States listing for endangered species: Chronicles of extinction? Endangered Species Update 5(10): 10-13.
18. Ringold PL, Algeria J, Czaplewski RL, Mulder BS, Tolle T, Burnett K. 1996. Adaptive monitoring design for ecosystem management. Ecological Applications 6: 745-747.
19. Rohlf DJ. 1989. The Endangered Species Act: A Guide to Its Protections and Implementation. Stanford (CA): Stanford Environmental Law Society.
20. Sarewitz D, Barber M, Huyler J Jr., DeMorgan P. 1996. Interdisciplinary scientific opportunities at the new consolidated US Geological Survey and National Biological Service. GSA Today, October 1996: 10-11.
21. Schemske DW, Hubbard BC, Ruckelshaus MH, Goodwillie C, Parker IM, Bishop JG. 1994. Evaluating approaches to the conservation of rare and endangered plants. Ecology 75: 584-606.
22. Schwalbe R. 1993. The Endangered Species Act at twenty: An analytical survey of Federal endangered species protection. Natural Resources Journal 33: 1027-1075.
23. Tear TH, Scott JM, Hayward PH, Griffith B. 1993. Status and prospects for success of the Endangered Species Act: A look at recovery plans. Science 262: 976-977.
24. _. 1994. Recovery plans and the Endangered Species Act: Are criticisms supported by the data? Conservation Biology 9: 182-195.
25. Walters CJ. 1986. Adaptive management of renewable resources. New York: MacMillan.
26. Weinstein MP, Balletto JH, Teal JM, Ludwig DF. 1997. Success criteria and adaptive management for a large-scale wetland restoration project. Wetlands Ecology and Management 4: 111-127.