1. Table 1. Ranking system adopted in 1983 and currently used by the US Fish and Wildlife Service to recover threatened and endangered species
From: Funding Extinction? Biological Needs and Political Realities in the Allocation of Resources to Endangered Species RecoveryAn existing priority system, which should guide the Fish and Wildlife Service in endangered species recovery, is ineffective, and current spending patterns decrease long-term viability of island species
BioScience. 2002;52(2): doi: / (2002)052[0169:FEBNAP]2.0.CO;2
BioScience | © 2002 American Institute of Biological Sciences

2. Table 2. Species that received the least (underfunded) and most (overfunded) funding relative to their priority rank
From: Funding Extinction? Biological Needs and Political Realities in the Allocation of Resources to Endangered Species RecoveryAn existing priority system, which should guide the Fish and Wildlife Service in endangered species recovery, is ineffective, and current spending patterns decrease long-term viability of island species
BioScience. 2002;52(2): doi: / (2002)052[0169:FEBNAP]2.0.CO;2
BioScience | © 2002 American Institute of Biological Sciences

3. Figure 1. Important relationships among the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), Congress, the states, nongovernment organizations (NGOs), and the public influence allocation of expenditures for recovery of threatened and endangered species
From: Funding Extinction? Biological Needs and Political Realities in the Allocation of Resources to Endangered Species RecoveryAn existing priority system, which should guide the Fish and Wildlife Service in endangered species recovery, is ineffective, and current spending patterns decrease long-term viability of island species
BioScience. 2002;52(2): doi: / (2002)052[0169:FEBNAP]2.0.CO;2
BioScience | © 2002 American Institute of Biological Sciences

4. Figure 2. Relationship between expenditures and priority rank of threatened and endangered species. Little variation (r² = 0.04, that is, less than 4%) in spending was explained by priority rank and sample size (n = 179 species), which produced statistical significance (p = 0.021). Relationships did not improve after recovery spending by states and other federal agencies was removed (for USFWS only: r² = 0.05, p = 0.004)
From: Funding Extinction? Biological Needs and Political Realities in the Allocation of Resources to Endangered Species RecoveryAn existing priority system, which should guide the Fish and Wildlife Service in endangered species recovery, is ineffective, and current spending patterns decrease long-term viability of island species
BioScience. 2002;52(2): doi: / (2002)052[0169:FEBNAP]2.0.CO;2
BioScience | © 2002 American Institute of Biological Sciences

5. Figure 3. Relationship between spending and hierarchical components of the priority ranking system. Means (±1 standard error [SE]) from three-way ANOVA (F = 2.05, df = 12, 165, p = 0.023). Analyses for taxonomic groups: Mammals: F = 1.34, df = 7, 42, p = Birds: F = 2.18, df = 12, 72, p = (recovery potential F = p = 0.001). Herptiles: F = 1.60, df = 8, 34, p = 0.16
From: Funding Extinction? Biological Needs and Political Realities in the Allocation of Resources to Endangered Species RecoveryAn existing priority system, which should guide the Fish and Wildlife Service in endangered species recovery, is ineffective, and current spending patterns decrease long-term viability of island species
BioScience. 2002;52(2): doi: / (2002)052[0169:FEBNAP]2.0.CO;2
BioScience | © 2002 American Institute of Biological Sciences

6. Figure 4. Comparisons (Mean [SE]) of annual expenditures between category C species and all species within the next highest priority rank. No category C species rank lower than 9C. Small sample sizes precluded statistical tests. Species whose recovery will involve economic conflict receive a C designation in addition to their numerical rank and have priority over other species of similar rank
From: Funding Extinction? Biological Needs and Political Realities in the Allocation of Resources to Endangered Species RecoveryAn existing priority system, which should guide the Fish and Wildlife Service in endangered species recovery, is ineffective, and current spending patterns decrease long-term viability of island species
BioScience. 2002;52(2): doi: / (2002)052[0169:FEBNAP]2.0.CO;2
BioScience | © 2002 American Institute of Biological Sciences

7. Figure 5. Relationship (Mean [SE]) between expenditures and population trend of threatened and endangered species. Letters indicate significant differences among means within a year (one-way ANOVA; F = 6.32, df = 2, 139, p = 0.002; Tukey's posthoc test). Species with uncertain population trends (n = 35) were not analyzed
From: Funding Extinction? Biological Needs and Political Realities in the Allocation of Resources to Endangered Species RecoveryAn existing priority system, which should guide the Fish and Wildlife Service in endangered species recovery, is ineffective, and current spending patterns decrease long-term viability of island species
BioScience. 2002;52(2): doi: / (2002)052[0169:FEBNAP]2.0.CO;2
BioScience | © 2002 American Institute of Biological Sciences

8. Figure 6. Spearman's rank correlation between standardized residuals of mean expenditures by priority rank and range size of threatened and endangered species (r = 0.42, p < 0.001). No relationship existed between range size and priority rank (r = 0.12, p = 0.11) or population trend (F = 2.22, df = 2, 137, p = 0.11). Analyses for taxonomic groups: mammals: r = 0.26, p = 0.07; birds: r = 0.42, p < 0.001; herptiles: r = 0.46, p = 0.003
From: Funding Extinction? Biological Needs and Political Realities in the Allocation of Resources to Endangered Species RecoveryAn existing priority system, which should guide the Fish and Wildlife Service in endangered species recovery, is ineffective, and current spending patterns decrease long-term viability of island species
BioScience. 2002;52(2): doi: / (2002)052[0169:FEBNAP]2.0.CO;2
BioScience | © 2002 American Institute of Biological Sciences

9. Island species are especially vulnerable to extinction because their limited range and small population sizes make them susceptible to stochastic events such as the introduction of the nonnative brown tree snake, held here by researcher Tom Fritts on Guam. Photograph by Bruce Rideout
From: Funding Extinction? Biological Needs and Political Realities in the Allocation of Resources to Endangered Species RecoveryAn existing priority system, which should guide the Fish and Wildlife Service in endangered species recovery, is ineffective, and current spending patterns decrease long-term viability of island species
BioScience. 2002;52(2): doi: / (2002)052[0169:FEBNAP]2.0.CO;2
BioScience | © 2002 American Institute of Biological Sciences

10. One of the world's rarest birds, the Hawaiian crow (Corvus hawaiiensis, current population 36) is a high-priority species that has received moderate financial resources. Lawsuits have directed funding toward this species, but at a rate substantially lower than funding levels for less-imperiled mainland species. Photograph by John Marzluff
From: Funding Extinction? Biological Needs and Political Realities in the Allocation of Resources to Endangered Species RecoveryAn existing priority system, which should guide the Fish and Wildlife Service in endangered species recovery, is ineffective, and current spending patterns decrease long-term viability of island species
BioScience. 2002;52(2): doi: / (2002)052[0169:FEBNAP]2.0.CO;2
BioScience | © 2002 American Institute of Biological Sciences

11. The island of Rota, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, is home to healthy populations of several endangered species. However, development is occurring (center of photo), the threat of invasion by nonnative species is high, and political representation in Congress is lacking. These factors combine to increase the risk of native species' extinction on this island paradise. Photograph by Bruce Rideout
From: Funding Extinction? Biological Needs and Political Realities in the Allocation of Resources to Endangered Species RecoveryAn existing priority system, which should guide the Fish and Wildlife Service in endangered species recovery, is ineffective, and current spending patterns decrease long-term viability of island species
BioScience. 2002;52(2): doi: / (2002)052[0169:FEBNAP]2.0.CO;2
BioScience | © 2002 American Institute of Biological Sciences

12. Two island species staring into the extinction vortex, the Hawaiian crow and the Mariana crow (Corvus kubaryi). These species are recognized as high priorities for recovery, but funding is currently not sufficient to remove important limiting factors and increase their population sizes. As a result, we may soon know them only in this form—specimens in a museum drawer. Photograph by John Marzluff
From: Funding Extinction? Biological Needs and Political Realities in the Allocation of Resources to Endangered Species RecoveryAn existing priority system, which should guide the Fish and Wildlife Service in endangered species recovery, is ineffective, and current spending patterns decrease long-term viability of island species
BioScience. 2002;52(2): doi: / (2002)052[0169:FEBNAP]2.0.CO;2
BioScience | © 2002 American Institute of Biological Sciences

13. The bald eagle is a wide-ranging species with broad public appeal
The bald eagle is a wide-ranging species with broad public appeal. State and federal agencies devote significant proportions of their endangered species budgets to its management and recovery despite its very low priority rank (14C). The photograph above was taken by Beth Madden; the photograph on the right was taken by Marco Restani
From: Funding Extinction? Biological Needs and Political Realities in the Allocation of Resources to Endangered Species RecoveryAn existing priority system, which should guide the Fish and Wildlife Service in endangered species recovery, is ineffective, and current spending patterns decrease long-term viability of island species
BioScience. 2002;52(2): doi: / (2002)052[0169:FEBNAP]2.0.CO;2
BioScience | © 2002 American Institute of Biological Sciences

14. From: Funding Extinction
From: Funding Extinction? Biological Needs and Political Realities in the Allocation of Resources to Endangered Species RecoveryAn existing priority system, which should guide the Fish and Wildlife Service in endangered species recovery, is ineffective, and current spending patterns decrease long-term viability of island species
BioScience. 2002;52(2): doi: / (2002)052[0169:FEBNAP]2.0.CO;2
BioScience | © 2002 American Institute of Biological Sciences

15. For decades, expensive captive-breeding programs were directed at American peregrine falcons, a wide-ranging subspecies whose primary cause of endangerment was organochlorine pesticides. Peregrines have a low-priority rank (9), and critically imperiled island species also in need of captive breeding may have suffered from this trade-off in expenditure allocations. Photograph by Marco Restani
From: Funding Extinction? Biological Needs and Political Realities in the Allocation of Resources to Endangered Species RecoveryAn existing priority system, which should guide the Fish and Wildlife Service in endangered species recovery, is ineffective, and current spending patterns decrease long-term viability of island species
BioScience. 2002;52(2): doi: / (2002)052[0169:FEBNAP]2.0.CO;2
BioScience | © 2002 American Institute of Biological Sciences