CESA recovery plans are non-regulatory public documents that establish long-term planning and prioritization of actions that support the recovery of species designated as threatened or endangered. Recovery plans provide a roadmap of specific, measurable milestones that would scientifically support delisting a species listed under CESA. These plans can be used as a resource to develop and justify funding for recovery projects. Absent a federal recovery plan, a state recovery plan may serve as the only guidance document for the recovery of a species.
(Recovery Guidelines page 1)
There are many similarities between CESA and ESA recovery planning, but there are also nuanced differences.
Similarities:
- Recovery planning follows a three-part framework that includes a scientific assessment, recovery plan, and implementation strategy.
- Recovery plans are required to include recovery criteria, recovery actions, and time and cost estimates.
- Recovery plans are nonregulatory.
Differences:
- CESA is a California law, separate from the laws and regulations of the federal ESA. Therefore, recovery planning under CESA is led by CDFW and conducted independently of federal recovery planning efforts led by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or the National Marine Fisheries Service.
- CESA recovery plans are written for species listed under CESA, which may or may not be listed under the federal ESA.
- The scope of a CESA recovery plan only encompasses a species’ range within California. The scope of an ESA recovery plan encompasses the species’ range within the United States, which for some species may include areas outside of California.
- ESA recovery plans must be developed and implemented, so long as recovery planning would benefit the species (ESA, Section 4(f)(1)), whereas CESA recovery plans may be developed and implemented as funding is available or as funding is appropriated by the California Legislature (Fish & G. Code, Section 2079.1(a)).
- CESA recovery planning is flexible as to what kind of document may be used as a scientific assessment, whereas ESA recovery plans typically use Species Status Assessments, which follow a specific format.
CESA recovery planning requires at least one public meeting in the recovery planning area; ESA recovery planning does not have this requirement.
As CESA recovery plans pertain only to California, the status of a species in an adjacent state will not affect whether a CESA recovery plan is developed. When a species is listed under CESA, the listing designation is based solely on the species’ status within California. Likewise, the recovery actions and criteria established under CESA will focus exclusively on the species’ status within California. This ensures that recovery plans are tailored specifically to the conservation needs of the species in California. However, recovery planning may consider the species’ status and conservation efforts in adjacent states as they relate to California populations.
(Recovery Guidelines pages 9-10)
CDFW is actively developing a list of high priority species for recovery planning. As required by Fish and Game Code section 2079.1(b), CDFW will prioritize the species that are most likely to benefit from a recovery plan, especially those with populations that may be significantly affected by changes in land use, climate, and/or aquatic conditions. CDFW ranks species based on biological considerations including population size and trend, range size and distribution, and vulnerability to threats and climate change. Other considerations may include the availability of relevant species information, tribal and cultural significance/importance, the existence of a federal recovery plan, staff capacity, and the level of involvement or commitment from California Native American tribes and other governmental or non-governmental partners and interested parties.
If there is a CESA-listed species that you believe would benefit from a recovery plan or if you would like to provide input on species prioritization, please share your knowledge and opinions with CDFW by emailing the CESA Recovery Coordinators at CESArecovery@wildlife.ca.gov.
(Recovery Guidelines page 8)
CESA recovery plans will not be developed for candidate species or species that are not listed under CESA. However, other recovery, conservation, or management plans of either listed or non-listed species may be developed through processes separate from CESA (e.g., Red Abalone Recovery Plan, Western Joshua Tree Conservation Plan).
For the purposes of recovery planning, a species is considered recovered once its recovery criteria have been met, threats to the species are managed or sufficiently minimized, and the status of the species has improved to the point at which the protections provided by CESA are no longer needed.
(Recovery Guidelines page 4)
Species that are biologically recovered (i.e., if recovery criteria in a recovery plan are met) are not automatically delisted. Delisting a species protected under CESA follows the same regulatory process as listing a species under CESA. An interested party or CDFW must petition the California Fish and Game Commission (Commission) to delist the species. If, based on the petition, the Commission determines delisting may be warranted, CDFW will complete a status review that includes a recommendation to the Commission on whether to delist the species. Following a public engagement process, the Commission may vote to delist the species based on CDFW’s recommendation and consideration of factors raised during the public comment period and public meeting.
(Recovery Guidelines pages 11-12)
At this time, there is no state funding allocated specifically for the implementation of CESA recovery plans. However, recovery plans identify funding needs and can be used to prioritize funding for conservation projects. Recovery actions identified in recovery plans will often be more competitive for receiving funding.
CDFW will seek diverse representation on recovery teams that is tailored to the focal species and its recovery needs. CDFW will invite participation from those who have knowledge of, or interest in, the focal species; possess relevant expertise or resources important for species recovery; and/or represent an entity that will have an integral role in the recovery of the species. This can include, but is not limited to, tribal governments, tribal staff, academic researchers, natural resource specialists, landowners and land managers, local governments, non-governmental organizations, and persons with specialized experience. CDFW staff will be responsible for leading each recovery team, providing oversight, and guiding the plan through the approval process.
(Recovery Guidelines page 9)
Because local involvement is critical to the development and implementation of recovery plans, CDFW will coordinate with local communities and governments, including tribal governments, through a variety of inclusive and collaborative approaches.
This coordination will include hosting tribal listening sessions to engage and incorporate the perspectives of indigenous communities, consistent with CDFW’s Tribal Communication and Consultation Policy, which emphasizes respectful government-to-government consultation and meaningful tribal involvement.
In addition, CDFW will hold at least one local public meeting to facilitate community input and foster open dialogue with local stakeholders, including government agencies. These meetings provide opportunities for sharing information and discussing recovery goals tailored to specific regions.
Draft recovery plans will be circulated for a public comment period and review, facilitating transparency and broad community feedback before plans are finalized. Moreover, recovery teams may include local specialists and resource managers who bring valuable expertise and local knowledge, helping to align recovery efforts with regional conservation priorities and resources.
Through these collaborative efforts, CDFW strives to build strong partnerships with local governments and communities to enhance the effectiveness of species recovery planning efforts.
(Recovery Guidelines pages 8-9)
Recovery plans under CESA are guidance tools rather than enforceable documents with requirements, enforcement, or penalties. According to the Fish and Game Code §2079.1, “the department may develop and implement nonregulatory recovery plans for the conservation and survival of species listed as an endangered species or as a threatened species, unless the department finds that the recovery plan will not promote the conservation of the species.” Recovery plans are voluntary, advisory documents designed to support conservation efforts, and do not impose binding legal requirements.
CDFW retains flexibility to recommend conservation actions tailored to each species’ needs, while allowing tribes, landowners, stakeholders, and agencies to collaborate on recovery efforts without being subject to regulatory mandates. This approach aims to encourage cooperation and adaptive management rather than relying solely on enforcement.