Recovery Plan for the Northern Spotted Owl - DRAFT

Economic patterns show the efficiency of specialized organizations. In the caseof owl conservation, specialization may facilitate increases in owl productivity.It may be possible to create specialized elements within existing organizationsfor the express purpose of managing owl habitat. In some cases, changes inland ownership may be needed. Because protection of the owl population is apublic good, not a market good, it would be reasonable to rely more on publicthan private institutions for the provision of owl habitat.Management systems that allow trading of resources among managers ofcompeting uses have proven to be more effective at allocating resources amongthose competing uses in a cost minimizing way. This principle has gainedwider recognition in environmental policy in recent years. For example,applications of trading processes are being developed for air emission reductionas well as wetlands preservation and restoration. Similar trading mechanismsmay be able to contribute to reducing the costs of allocating forestland to owlrecovery. For example, government agencies might be allowed to trade forestlandoutside of areas designated for owl habitat for areas within designatedareas if they can show that there will be gains in the support of owls andtimber harvests.F. Equity and Distributional PrinciplesIn its efforts to gather information on the costs of owl conservation measuresthe Recovery Team learned of the strong concerns in timber dependent communitiesabout the unfairness of the burden they may be forced bear so thatthe owl can be preserved to the benefit of all. As a result, the Recovery Teamdeveloped a number of principles dealing with equity and distributional issues.It may be possible to reduce the social costs of achieving owl recovery byslowing the rate of decline in timber harvests near the most isolated, timberdependent communities. The job losses that result from restricting timberharvests cause more severe wage losses and other social costs in isolated,timber dependent communities. If ways can be found to lessen the reductionin timber harvests near such communities, especially in the near term, thesocial costs of owl recovery may be lower. It also may be more equitable tocompensate individuals who bear the cost of owl conservation measures byshifting more of the cost to the general public. Compensation has the addedadvantage of reducing the social costs by offsetting income losses that oftencause socially damaging behavior without causing similar costs among thebroader population from which the compensation is drawn.G. Dealing with Uncertainty and RiskBoth policy uncertainties and scientific uncertainties affect the costs of owlconservation measures. Policy uncertainty increases costs by encouragingharvesting of timber before it has reached the age at which it would yieldgreatest profit. Policy uncertainty also is likely to dampen investments inincreased forestland productivity. Scientific uncertainty about owl ecologyand the effects of various forest management practices increases costs byrequiring habitat protection measures in the short term that may be morerestrictive than are needed in light of subsequent research. However, pastexperience shows that it also can be costly when research shows that greaterprotection is needed because past forest management practices did not provideadequately for the owl.540