Recovery Plan for the Northern Spotted Owl - DRAFT

Second, the analysis in this appendix focuses primarily on the costs of owlconservation measures because they are central to the development of a costeffectiverecovery plan. It does not assess the benefits of recovery because theRecovery Team did not pursue options that would fail to achieve recovery. TheEndangered Species Act required the Recovery Team to focus on the questionof how to achieve recovery, not whether efforts to recover the spotted owl arejustified by the benefits of preserving the species and its habitat. The otherbenefits of various owl conservation measures, such as protection of otherspecies and increased recreation value, were considered only when they wouldaffect the design of the plan. They would be relevant, of course, in making finaldecisions about implementation of the plan.In addition, the economic analysis used in the formulation of the draft recoveryplan was not intended to provide a highly precise and comprehensive enumerationof all of the economic effects of owl conservation measures. The approachused was to be selective and "economical" in the conduct of economic analysis.Analysis was limited to key indicators of the costs of owl conservation thatwould be understandable and helpful to the Recovery Team's biologists in theirefforts to find ways to reduce the costs of achieving recovery.D. Summary of Features to Reduce CostsPart of the process of formulating a cost-effective recovery plan is to consider awide variety of ways to reduce costs without undercutting the effectiveness ofthe plan. This appendix outlines economic principles and information suggestingmany ways of reducing costs that the Recovery Team considered. Somewere rejected for biological reasons, others for lack of demonstrated applicationand lack of the data needed to implement them in designing a recovery plan.Several features, however, were included in the recovery plan as a result ofefforts to reduce the costs of achieving recovery. These include the following:1. The designated conservation areas (DCAs) were designed to make use ofareas that have relatively high quality owl habitat and, where possible, to avoidthe use of forest with high potential for timber harvest.2. To promote greater efficiency, the DCA boundaries will be refined prior toapproval of the final recovery plan based on the site-specific data available tothe federal forest management agencies.3. The DCA management guidelines allow silvicultural treatment of areas notsuitable for owl habitat to promote more rapid development of suitable conditionsand provide timber as well.4. The management guidelines for federal land outside of DCAs were tailoredto local conditions so that the resulting timber harvest restrictions will betterassure the habitat conditions in each area that are needed for recovery withoutincurring unnecessary cost.5. Suggestions were developed for management of nonfederal lands that willincrease the efficiency of their contribution to recovery by integrating stateauthorities and existing programs into a coordinated strategy.6. To provide a basis for improving the cost-effectiveness of the recovery plan,a research and monitoring program is proposed to provide information on thehabitat conditions that are most productive for owls and the forest managementpractices that are most compatible with production and maintenance ofowl habitat conditions.533