No description available.

In recent years, critical habitat has been subject to a great deal of controversy and numerous lawsuits. Critical habitat is an integral part of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) that serves not only to protect the species and its habitat but may also help the recovery of the species. Critical habitat has been the subject of a large number of recent lawsuits. These lawsuits arise from conservation groups, forcing the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to designate critical habitat and from developmental groups, claiming that the economic analyses used by the FWS during the designation of critical habitat are faulty. The economic analyses that are currently being done by the FWS are quantifying the costs of critical habitat to the extent possible while virtually making no effort to quantify the benefits of critical habitat. This potentially biased economic analysis can skew public opinion by presenting an unbalanced result from the analysis. Therefore, this thesis presents a methodology for comprehensively identifying and quantifying, where possible, the costs and benefits of critical habitat.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Oregon State University, 2001. / Includes bibliographical references.

published_or_final_version / Environmental Management / Master / Master of Science in Environmental Management

Thesis (M.S.)--Oregon State University, 2008. / Printout. Includes bibliographical references. Also available on the World Wide Web.

Univ., Diss.--Göttingen, 2005. / Literaturverz. S. 372 - 395.

Thesis (M.S.)--University of Tennessee, Knoxville, 2004. / Title from title page screen (viewed Feb. 2, 2005). Thesis advisor: Randall L. Small. Document formatted into pages (viii, 73 p. : ill. (some col.), maps). Vita. Includes bibliographical references (p. 39-44).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Oregon State University, 2010. / Printout. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 101-115). Also available on the World Wide Web.

abstract: Since its inception in 1973, the Endangered Species Act has been met with both praise and criticism. More than 40 years later, the Act is still polarizing, with proponents applauding its power to protect species and critics arguing against its perceived ineffectiveness and potential mismanagement. Recovery plans, which were required by the 1988 amendments to the Act, play an important role in organizing efforts to protect and recover species under the Act. In 1999, in an effort to evaluate the process, the Society for Conservation Biology commissioned an independent review of endangered species recovery planning. From these findings, the SCB made key recommendations for how management agencies could improve the recovery planning process, after which the 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. Here, I seek to determine the extent to which SCB recommendations were incorporated into these new guidelines, and if, in turn, the recommendations regarding threats manifested in recovery plans written under the new guidelines. I found that the guidelines successfully incorporated most SCB recommendations, except those that addressed monitoring. As a result, recent recovery plans have improved in their treatment of threats, but still fail to adequately incorporate threat monitoring. This failure suggests that developing clear guidelines for monitoring should be an important priority in future ESA recovery planning. / Dissertation/Thesis / M.S. Biology 2014

The U.S. Endangered Species Act (U.S. ESA) is one of the oldest pieces of legislation to protect endangered species. The bodies responsible for administering the U.S. ESA have published species Biennial Recovery Statuses (BRSs) in Reports to Congress on the Status of Endangered and Threatened Species. We found that expert assessments of species recovery trends match BRSs reasonably well; however, there appears to be a weak relationship between the BRSs and available data tracking species abundance and range trends. We aimed to establish whether the recovery trends of species examined were detectably associated with their threats, the general U.S. ESA tools, or recovery actions. We found positive associations between species recovery and two U.S. ESA tools – mean annual funding and peer-reviewed scientific information. However, correlations with other variables differ greatly depending on how recovery is defined. Species threats and recovery actions are also moderately related to their abundance and range trends.