Federally threatened and endangered plant species have typically been reduced to one or several small populations, and recovery plans for these species often call for the creation or augmentation of populations in new or historical locations (“re-introduction”) before the species can be considered for down- or de-listing. In California, re-introduction is a required action in the recovery plans of 42 listed plant species and a potential action for another 45 species, and several recovery-oriented reintroductions have already been performed. However, we know of no work to date that has examined the outcomes of these projects, or perhaps more importantly, the perspectives of those who have worked to re-introduce these species. Our research aimed to understand how individuals leading and advising re-introductions defined recovery and project success, and how they approached their work. We conducted semi-structured interviews with practitioners and scientific advisors in California on their efforts (re)introducing a variety of listed plant species. Questions focused on practitioners’ definitions of recovery, thoughts on species de-listing and project success, resources desired to improve project outcomes, and lessons they had learned in their efforts.
Results/Conclusions
Practitioners of recovery-oriented re-introduction efforts highlighted the importance of developing a deep understanding of their species’ ecology prior to project implementation. Re-introduction practitioners commonly defined a recovery as the formation of multiple long-term, stable populations that are self-replicating, a definition that is consistent with ecological concepts. Project outcomes ranged from those where the re-introduced population was quickly extirpated to those that appear promising (i.e., the re-introduced population persists, though it is too soon to be considered successful). Regardless of project outcomes, most practitioners felt that de- or down-listing was unlikely in the near-term for their species. Practitioners described their projects as part of long-term management strategies to prevent species extinction, instead of using language that suggested re-introduction projects were interventions that would directly lead to species recovery. Practitioners highlighted several key lessons learned in their work. First, the importance of spending significant time in the field learning about the species ecology prior to project implementation. Second, being respected as an expert by permitting agencies is key to achieving a cooperative and productive relationship for the benefit of the species. Finally, projects benefit from multi-year, multi-technique efforts, and experimental tests of re-introduction techniques.