12 ILLINOIS AUDUBON BULLETIN 
Species already being ade- 
quately protected in refuges, such 
as the Key deer in Florida, or lim- 
ited to a small geographic area 
where only habitat protection is 
required, are not included. States 
may develop their own recovery 
teams and plans for intrastate spe- 
cies, provided they meet certain 
conditions of the 1973 Endangered 
Species Act. (Texas has underway a 
plan for the Attwater’s greater 
prairie chicken and Utah has 
elected to do the same for the Utah 
prairie dog.) 
Formation of Recovery Teams 
The recovery teams generally are 
composed of three to seven 
members, all on-the-ground pro- 
fessionals drawn from agencies 
and organizations with the greatest 
responsibility for and expertise in 
each species. Teams thus consist 
mainly of Federal and State agency 
employees. They also may include 
university researchers and repre- 
sentatives of private conservation 
groups. The members are all nom- 
inated by Fish and Wildlife Service 
regional directors in consultation 
with the States, other agencies and 
organizations, and Endangered 
Species Program officials. The re- 
gional directors are responsible for 
overseeing the operation of their 
teams and recovery plans subject 
to final approval by the Endan- 
gered Species Program manager. 
The recovery team concept 
arose, in part, from the fact that 
prior to the 1973 Act, a number of 
agencies such as the Bureau of 
Land Management, Forest Service, 
Soil Conservation Service, Depart- 
ment of Defense, State conserva- 
tion agencies, private organiza- 
tions, and foreign governments 
were conducting independent pro- 
grams for various endangered and 
threatened species. Many of these 
programs were not adequately co- 
ordinated and were needlessly du- 
plicative. 
Accordingly, one main purpose 
of recovery teams is to be the 
means for combining varied efforts 
into a single effective program 
aimed at improving the status of 
the species in question. In devel- 
oping plans, the ultimate goal is to 
bring about the removal of species 
from the endangered and threat- 
ened lists. There may be an imme- 
diate goal in some instances, such 
as the California condor, to prevent 
the imminent extinction of a spe- 
cies. 
Biological Emphasis 
Recovery plans are constructed 
around a ‘‘prime objective’ relat- 
ing to the biological status of each 
species. The accomplishment of 
this objective may be broken down 
into several subgoals covering the 
maintenance of habitat, food sup- 
ply, natality, mortality, etc. The 
plan then gives a step-by-step out- 
line for achieving these goals and, 
eventually, the prime objective. 
All of the factors affecting the 
biological status of a species, and 
the problems to be overcome, are 
identified in the plans. They are 
updated as needed to incorporate 
