[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 18 (Thursday, January 27, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-1613]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: January 27, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
50 CFR Part 23
Species Being Considered for Changes to the Appendices to the
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna
and Flora
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Request for information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of
Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES or Convention) regulates international
trade in certain animal and plant species, which are listed in the
appendices of this treaty. The United States, as a Party to CITES, may
propose amendments to the appendices for consideration by the other
Parties.
This notice invites comments and information from the public on
species that have been identified as candidates for U.S. proposals to
amend Appendix I or II at the next biennial meeting of Party countries.
DATES: The Service will consider all comments received by March 14,
1994, on proposals described in this notice.
The ninth meeting of the Conference of the Parties to CITES (COP9)
is scheduled for November 7-18, 1994, in Fort Lauderdale, Florida.
ADDRESSES: Please send correspondence concerning this notice to Chief,
Office of Scientific Authority; room 725, Arlington Square Building;
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Washington, DC 20240. Fax number (703)
358-2276. Express and messenger-delivered mail should be addressed to
the Office of Scientific Authority; room 750, 4401 North Fairfax Drive;
Arlington, Virginia 22203. Comments and other information received will
be available for public inspection by appointment, from 8 a.m. to 4
p.m. Monday through Friday, at the Arlington, Virginia address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dr. Charles W. Dane, Chief, Office of Scientific Authority, at the
above address, telephone (703) 358-1708.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In its previous notice on this subject (58
FR 38112; July 15, 1993), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service)
requested information on plant and animal species that might lead the
Service to prepare proposals to amend the CITES appendices for
consideration at the upcoming ninth meeting of the Conference of the
Parties. That notice described the provisions of CITES for listing
species in the appendices and set forth information requirements for
proposals. The present notice announces the proposals received,
explains why the Service does not intend to consider certain proposals,
and describes those proposals that will receive further consideration
prior to a decision as to whether to submit any of these proposals to
the CITES Secretariat by the June 10, 1994, deadline.
The Service received proposals from the Environmental Investigation
Agency (EIA), the Fauna and Flora Preservation Society (FFPS), ICCAT
Watch (a coalition consisting of the Center for Marine Conservation,
the National Audubon Society, and World Wildlife Fund-US), the Natural
Resources Defense Council, and the Oregon Natural Resources Council, by
September 28, 1993. These organizations proposed adding or transferring
nine different taxa, and in addition, EIA proposed transferring all
bird species listed in Appendix III to Appendix II. In addition, the
Service is considering the development of certain other proposals.
The Service continues to consider submitting proposals to amend the
appendices for the following species: Narwhal (for possible transfer
from Appendix II to Appendix I); musk deer (for possible listing of
species or populations in Appendix I); saiga antelope (for listing in
Appendix I or II); box turtles (add to Appendix II); copperbelly water
snake (add to Appendix II); bluefin tuna (add to Appendix II); whale
shark (add to Appendix II); requiem and hammer-head sharks (add to
Appendix II); tarantulas (add to Appendix II); Port-Orford-Cedar (add
to Appendix II with its logs, sawn wood, and veneer only); bigleaf
mahogany (add to Appendix II with exclusion of secondary and finished
products); and two genera of African mahoganies with their logs, sawn
wood, and veneer only (for possible listing in Appendix II). The
Service will continue to consider a listing of freshwater pearly
mussels that will provide protection to the most endangered while
excluding those easily identifiable species that are used in the pearl
bead industry and that are not believed to be threatened by trade. The
Service is also considering a proposal to remove the non-African
populations of aloes from the appendices. In addition, the Service at
the suggestion of the CITES Nomenclature Committee will consider
developing a proposal to clarify the present listing of the urial, Ovis
vignei.
Proposals That the Service Does Not Plan To Submit
EIA submitted a recommendation with no accompanying information to
transfer all birds listed in Appendix III to Appendix II. The Service
first notes that the basis for a country adding a species to Appendix
III is different from the criteria for including a species in Appendix
II. Moreover, while trade ultimately may became detrimental to the
survival of any Appendix III species if not carefully regulated,
insufficient information was presented by EIA to justify proposals for
individual species at this time.
ICCAT Watch submitted a proposal to list the western Atlantic
population of the bluefin tuna, Thunnus thynnus, in Appendix I. In a
subsequent letter, after the November 1993 meeting of the Parties to
the International Convention for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas
(ICCAT), ICCAT Watch withdrew their request for the Service to consider
proposing this bluefin tuna population in Appendix I. Based on the
actions taken by ICCAT (as presented later in this notice under the
consideration of an Appendix II listing for bluefin tuna), the Service
does not believe that listing the western population of bluefin tuna in
Appendix I is appropriate.
The blue shark, Prionace glauca, was proposed for possible listing
in Appendix II or III, by the National Audubon Society in 1991. The
Service has reconsidered the recommendation in preparation for COP9.
The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Fishery Management Plan
for Sharks of the Atlantic Oceans placed these sharks in the pelagic
species group. In the preparation for development of the management
plan, a peer review effort by NMFS and non-NMFS experts evaluated the
available information and determined that there was no evidence
available to indicate that the pelagic species group of sharks was
overfished in the Northwest Atlantic. In comparison with other sharks,
blue sharks have a relatively high reproductive rate and rapid growth
rate, and are widely distributed. Hence, they may be more resilient and
more robust with respect to fishing pressure than many other shark
species. Therefore, the Service does not intend to propose this species
for listing in Appendix II, or to list it unilaterally in Appendix III.
Proposals That the Service May Submit
The following proposals are being considered for submission as
proposed amendments to the CITES appendices. The Service seeks
additional comments and information to assist it in making decisions
whether to submit these proposed amendments.
1. Narwhal (Monodon monoceros)
EIA proposed that the narwhal be transferred from Appendix II to
Appendix I. The Small Cetacean Subcommittee of the Scientific Committee
of the International Whaling Commission has had difficulty in carrying
out stock assessments for this species due to the amount of available
data, and has expressed concern about catch levels and loss rates for
some narwhal populations. The degree to which trade, as opposed to
hunting for food, determines the level of narwhal catches is unclear.
Therefore, the Service seeks information about population levels, stock
structure, catches, and trade of this species, but without additional
information on the threat to the species, the Service is unlikely to
propose the transfer of this species to Appendix I.
2. Musk Deer (Moschus spp.)
The Service received a draft proposal from EIA to transfer the
Appendix II populations of musk deer (Moschus spp.) to Appendix I of
CITES. The musk deer, represented by at least four valid species, have
a wide distribution in eastern Russia, Mongolia, Korea, China
(including the Tibet Autonomous Region), the Himalayas (from northern
Afghanistan eastwards to Nepal and Bhutan), and marginally into
northern Vietnam. They range from comparatively low elevations
(coniferous forests) to the highest growth of dwarf rhododendron and
willow thickets (about 12,500 feet or 3,800 meters).
Musk deer are the most primitive of all living deer. Antlers are
lacking in both sexes, and males have long upper canine teeth that
extend far below the upper lip. A musk gland in the abdomen of the male
secretes a brownish wax-like substance, which is used extensively in
the manufacture of perfumes and soaps. About 28 to 30 grams (a little
over an ounce) of the secretion can be obtained from a single male. Due
to their secretive nature and inaccessible habitat, little is known
about the population numbers of musk deer.
At the Fourth Meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP4) to
CITES held in Botswana in 1983, the Parties voted to transfer the
Himalayan populations (Afghanistan, Bhutan, Burma, India, Nepal, and
Pakistan) from Appendix II to Appendix I. Although there are widespread
reports of rampant poaching, the trade in musk is poorly documented.
The CITES Animals Committee working on significantly traded species,
has identified this taxon as one for which possible problems exist and
has recommended: (1) That China and Russia suspend exports of specimens
of musk deer, excluding derivatives; and (2) that all Parties increase
their enforcement efforts to ensure that all specimens of Moschus spp.
in international trade, including derivatives, have been legally
exported. Therefore, the Service is considering proposing the transfer
of the Appendix II populations of musk deer to Appendix I. However,
trade in musk from captive stock is reported, and the CITES Animals
Committee has requested a report on production from captive stocks and
information on the source of musk used for medicine manufacture and
details of measures taken to control trade in manufactured products.
The Service seeks information on the effect of trade on these species,
especially any data on the volume of musk entering trade.
3. Saiga Antelope (Saiga tatarica)
EIA submitted a draft proposal to the Service to include the saiga
antelope in Appendix I of CITES. There are two recognized subspecies:
The Russian saiga (Saiga tatarica tatarica) and the Mongolian saiga
(Saiga tatarica mongolica). Historically the saiga antelope ranged from
the Ukraine to western Mongolia. Today, the species remains only in the
area stretching from the steppe east of the lower Volga River across
Kazakhstan through the Dzungarian Basin of northwest China to Mongolia.
Presently, its distribution within Russia is not continuous, but is
divided into disjunct populations. Saiga antelopes inhabit steppes and
semideserts, from sea level to 5,000 feet. This antelope lives in large
herds, and the early maturation and fecundity of this species allow for
rapid population increases, reaching 60 to 80 percent annually.
In the 1960s the saiga antelope was the most widespread wild
ungulate in the U.S.S.R., and it was estimated that approximately 2
million animals inhabited Asia. However, the population in Mongolia is
listed as endangered under the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA). Other
than humans, wolves are the main predator of the species. Lack of
fodder in winter is the most important natural calamity causing mass
mortality of saiga antelopes. This species is harvested for its meat,
hides, fat, as well as the horns, which are exported to China. Since
the 1960s, little scientific information is available on population
size and trade in parts. The Service solicits additional information on
international trade and population status, in order to make its final
decision on whether to propose the entire species for listing in
Appendix II, and if so, whether to propose any populations for Appendix
I.
4. Urial (Ovis vignei)
At the Plenipotentiary meeting of the CITES Parties in 1973, Ovis
vignei was included in Appendix I, as proposed by India, and was also
referred to as urial and shapo. However, because there was no
supporting documentation submitted at the time of the proposed listing,
and because different references available in early 1973 attributed
different subspecies and populations to Ovis vignei, it is not
completely clear what population(s) the Parties intended to protect.
Ellerman and Morrison-Scott's Checklist of Palaearctic and Indian
Mammals (1966, British Museum) considered O. vignei to be restricted
to those populations in Kashmir and Ladak. Ovis orientalis vignei had
been described by Blyth in 1841 from specimens collected in Ladak,
India.
Also at the Plenipotentiary meeting, Afghanistan proposed including
Ovis orientalis in Appendix III (Afghanistan proposed subspecies
listings for five other mammals but not for Ovis orientalis). However,
it never did list this species; whether this is because it considered
their populations to be covered by the Ovis vignei listing or whether
the desire of the government to include them in Appendix III had
changed by the time that Afghanistan acceded to CITES on January 28,
1986, is unknown.
At the time of the Second Meeting of the Conference of the Parties
(COP2) in 1979, the Parties apparently considered Ovis vignei to
include populations of urial in Iran. This interpretation is based on
the absence of any debate on the coverage of the Appendix I listing
when Iran proposed to delete Ovis vignei arkal from Appendix I. (Iran
later withdrew the proposal.) While one might have expected several
Plenipotentiary meeting participants to also have participated in COP2
and to have commented on any inconsistency between the original listing
and the proposal presented at COP2, it is not known with certainty what
was the original intent of the Parties.
In the CITES-adopted checklist for mammals, Mammal Species of the
World by Honacki, Kinman, and Koeppl (1982), Ovis vignei is considered
to represent those populations from eastern Iran to Ladak, and Ovis
orientalis (also known as Ovis aries) is considered to represent those
populations from western Iran to Turkey.
Adoption of a new nomenclatural reference by the Parties cannot
change the entity originally listed, and, as previously noted, that
listing seems unclear. A new reference, Mammals Species of the World,
2nd edition, by Wilson and Reeder (1993), retains the distribution
assigned to Ovis vignei and Ovis aries (=orientalis) in the earlier
1982 checklist, but further highlights the issue by including synonyms
(usually subspecies or species) that are associated with Ovis vignei
and Ovis aries (=orientalis). For Ovis vignei these synonyms include
some names that some individuals have associated with Ovis orientalis,
e.g., arabica, arkal, blanfordi, bochariensis, cycloceros, dolgopolovi,
punjabiensis, severtzovi, varentsowi.
Note: The entity referred to above as severtzovi is located
between population centers of Ovis vignei and Ovis ammon, and the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has previously included this entity
as Ovis ammon in the listing of this species as endangered pursuant
to the U.S. Endangered Species Act.
The CITES Nomenclature Committee has not considered the listing
issue to be clear enough to make a nomenclatural interpretation, and
therefore, since the Parties should make this decision, the Service is
considering submitting a proposal to clarify what populations are
included in Appendix I as a result of the 1973 listing of Ovis vignei.
The Service seeks information on the status of and trade in the
various populations/subspecies of the urial distributed from northwest
India, through Pakistan (except for the extreme northern portion),
Afghanistan (except for the extreme northeast portion), western
Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan, to northern and eastern Iran. The Service
may propose listing any or all of these populations in Appendix I or
Appendix II.
5. Box Turtles (Terrapene spp.)
Prior to the Eighth Meeting of the Conference of the Parties in
1992 (COP8), the New York Zoological Society submitted a proposal to
the Service for its consideration, to add the genus Terrapene (box
turtles) to Appendix II, while retaining T. coahuila (Aquatic box
turtle, or Coahuilan box turtle) in Appendix I. The Service initially
considered submitting this proposal for consideration at COP8, but
decided not to due to a lack of trade data. The Service is now
considering submitting this proposal, based on both biological
information and trade information from the Service's Law Enforcement
Management Information System (LEMIS). While a separate code for data
entry of information on trade in specimens of this genus was provided
after COP8, the Service's records of exports and imports in LEMIS for
species not listed in the CITES appendices are to be considered as a
minimum for the numbers of specimens in trade.
The genus Terrapene is comprised of four species (T. carolina, T.
coahuila, T. nelsoni, and T. ornata), with 11 recognized subspecies; T.
coahuila is already listed in Appendix I.
Terrapene nelsoni has a very small and fragmented range on the west
coast of Mexico. Terrapene ornata ranges over large sections of the
midwestern United States and the Great Plains, from Texas north to
southern South Dakota, and eastward to Indiana. Terrapene carolina is
the most widely distributed species of box turtle, and is found from
Canada to Mexico; its range is from Maine southward to Florida, and
westward through southern Canada to Michigan, Illinois, Kansas,
Oklahoma, and Texas. Although widespread, the species is reported to be
rare or extinct in parts of its range in Maine, New Hampshire,
Michigan, and Ontario, and declining elsewhere in its range.
Box turtles are long-lived and slow-growing, with low annual
reproductive output and late onset of sexual maturity (10-20 years).
They also have high site fidelity, and loss of adults from a population
can have a significant detrimental effect on the status of the
population. Box turtles are important components of many terrestrial
ecosystems. Development activities have increasingly fragmented their
habitats. The sale of T. carolina and T ornata is restricted in several
States, while allowed in others.
Based on Service LEMIS data, 26,817 box turtles were exported from
the United States in 1992, and 18,134 were exported in 1993. However,
1993 data are not yet fully entered into the computer system, and are
thereby incomplete. These figures represent the number of box turtles
reported to the Service as being exported; it is not possible to
ascertain how many were removed from the wild. Whether or not this
level of international trade in these species is detrimental to
populations must take into account the numbers removed from the wild
for international trade along with the numbers removed from the wild
for other purposes, including but not limited to interstate and
intrastate commerce, habitat loss, habitat degradation, disease, and
predation.
The Service solicits additional information on population trends,
levels of trade, and the affect of trade on population status for
review in deciding whether to submit a proposal to include the genus
Terrapene in Appendix II, while retaining T. coahuila in Appendix I.
6. Copperbelly Water Snake (Nerodia erythrogaster)
The northern subspecies. Nerodia erythrogaster neglecta, of this
water snake is considered to be threatened. The current distribution of
this subspecies is restricted to the lower Ohio River Valley and the
lower Wabash River Valley in extreme southwestern Indiana and adjacent
Illinois and Kentucky, and in southern Michigan northeastern Indiana,
and northwestern Ohio. Due to significant population declines,
especially in Michigan, Ohio, and northern Indiana, the subspecies now
persists only in scattered, isolated pockets where suitable habitat
exists. The total population is estimated approximately 1,530 adults
rangewide, with 368 breeding pairs.
A proposed rule to list the northern copperbelly water snake as
threatened under the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA) was signed by
the Service's Director on July 26, 1993. Recently there appear to be
indications that this taxon is intercrossing with another subspecies in
areas of overlap of the ranges of these two taxa.
Habitat loss and fragmentation are the primary factors threatening
the continued existence of the subspecies, but amateur collectors
reportedly continue to take snakes from the wild. It is sought because
of its rarity, its large size, its unique coloration, and its value in
the pet trade. It is reported that an international commercial dealer
offered $260 for a breeding pair of northern copperbelly water snakes.
The Service is seeking information on the extent and significance
of trade in the species, and would consider proposing the entire
species for Appendix II if there is sufficient concern about similarity
of appearance.
7. Bluefin Tuna (Thunnus thynnus)
The Service received a draft proposal from ICCAT Watch, a coalition
consisting of the National Audubon Society, the Center for Marine
Conservation, and World Wildlife Fund-US, to list bluefin tuna
throughout the Atlantic in Appendix II.
Previously, a notice was published in the Federal Register (56 FR
33894, July 24, 1991) seeking comments on a proposal from the National
Audubon Society to list the western Atlantic stock of bluefin tuna in
Appendix I. The NMFS initially recommended that public comment be
received on the merits of proposing the species for listing in Appendix
II. After review of all comments and available information, the Service
decided not to propose listing of the species in either appendix.
Management of the Atlantic bluefin tuna falls under the
responsibility of parties to the ICCAT. Provisions of Article XIV of
CITES relieve ICCAT member countries from CITES obligations with
respect to trade in specimens of marine species included in Appendix
II, if such trade is in accordance with the provisions of ICCAT and if
a certificate stipulating to this condition is given by the CITES
Management Authority of the country of introduction.
For western Atlantic bluefin tuna, the current stock assessment
(1993) by the ICCAT Standing Committee on Research and Statistics
(SCRS) estimated stock trajectories showing a significant decline from
1970 to 1992 but with a small increase in 1993. The 1993 median
estimate of abundance for 8-year-old and older tuna is 10.9 percent of
the 1970 median, 20 percent of the 1977 median, 43 percent of the 1982
median, and 78 percent of the 1988 median. In terms of spawning
biomass, current abundance is estimated at between 6 percent and 12
percent of that which could produce maximum sustainable yield.
Projections by the SCRS stock abundance, based on the assumption that
the current relationship between spawning biomass and recruitment will
prevail in the future, suggest that there is about a 50 percent chance
of preventing further decline in mature stock size if catches between
1994 and 2001 were limited to 1,200 metric tons per year (mt/yr). Lower
catches result in higher odds of preventing further reductions in
spawning stock. The allowable catch in 1994 is, 1,995 mt. The allowable
catch in 1995 is 1,200 mt, subject to scientific review of the most
recent assessment results.
In addition, there is an uncertainty about the proper north-south
dividing line between the western and eastern populations. In recent
years, Japanese vessels have harvested a substantial tonnage of bluefin
tuna just east of the original N-S line. At least a portion of this
take may have included tuna from the western population.
For eastern Atlantic bluefin tuna, the 1992 assessment shows great
variability in the abundance of the youngest age groups (ages 1-4) over
the period 1970-91). Estimates of abundance of fish 5 years old or
older, which includes most of the spawning stock, have shown a
consistent downward trend, the average abundance of fish 5 years old or
older for 1990-92 being about one half the average estimate for 1970-
72. Abundance estimates for the oldest fish of this stock (ages 10 and
older) have shown an even greater downward trend since 1970. The
average estimated abundance of fish in this age group for the period
1990-92 was about one third of the average estimate for the 1970-72
period.
Recent (1991) estimated fishing mortality rates for eastern
Atlantic bluefin are between 2 and 7 times the common fishing mortality
rate reference levels which are thought to result in long-term average
yields near maximum sustainable yield and provide adequate safeguards
against recruitment failure. Over the long term, fishing mortality
rates as high as those estimated are likely to result in increased
risks of stock collapse.
At COP8, Sweden proposed the listing of the western Atlantic
population of bluefin tuna in Appendix I and the eastern Atlantic
population in Appendix II. The proposal was withdrawn by Sweden at the
meeting based on a set of conditions which primarily included the
requirement that ``ICCAT continue its initiatives, with particular
emphasis on quota reductions, to restore and maintain Atlantic bluefin
tuna populations * * *.''
At the 1993 Regular Meeting of ICCAT, the quota for take of the
species in the western Atlantic was reduced from the 1991 level by 25
percent of 1994 and by another 30 percent for 1995, for a 55 percent
total reduction since Sweden submitted its resolution to COP8. In
addition, the quota for Japanese fishing vessels, in the central
Atlantic, whose harvest had been 450 mt annually from the western
Atlantic and about 1,000 mt annually from the eastern Atlantic, was
capped at 1,300 mt for the 2-year period 1994-95.
Progress was made on other conservation measures, including the
development of a Bluefin Statistical Document (similar to a CITES
certificate of origin), which would be required by all ICCAT countries
for the importation of bluefin tuna. This document is already required
for frozen bluefin tuna imports. It will be partially implemented for
fresh tuna by June 1994, and full implementation is scheduled for
December 1994, when the document must be validated by the appropriate
government official. An intersessional meeting is scheduled for spring
1994 to discuss, among other things, the use of trade measures as an
enforcement tool. Thus, a proposal to list this species in Appendix II
may not be warranted at this time based on the progress at the last two
ICCAT meetings.
However, ICCAT has not yet fully implemented the quota reductions
or the Bluefin Statistical Document Program, and other measures may be
necessary for ICCAT to take with respect to non-ICCAT countries in
order to supplement the existing conservation regime. Therefore, the
Service requests comments on the merits for an Appendix II listing of
the entire Atlantic population, particularly with respect to collecting
trade date concerning non-ICCAT countries.
8. Whale Shark (Rhincodon typus)
EIA proposed that the whale shark be considered for CITES
protection, and subsequently provided a draft proposal to include this
species in Appendix II. Whale sharks are large filter feeders and exist
in the temperate seas throughout the world. Whale sharks are vulnerable
to commercial harpoon gear and collisions with vessels. Whale sharks
have supported small to medium commercial fisheries in India, Pakistan,
China, the Philippines, and Senegal, where catches may be increasing.
The flesh is eaten fresh or after being slated and dried.
The whale shark is slow growing and may produce few young, and
consequently, may be easily overexploited. The NMFS Fishery Management
Plan for Sharks of the Atlantic Oceans placed whale sharks in the large
coastal species group, and this group of sharks is considered to be
overfished in the Northwest Atlantic and to have declined off southern
California. However, this species does not appear to be an important
fisheries species.
Because of the recent increases in worldwide catches of sharks for
the meat and fins, and for medicinal purposes, the Service is
requesting information this species, but without more specific
information indicating population declines or increases in trade, the
Service may not have sufficient information to warrant submission of a
proposal for this species.
9. Requiem Sharks (Carcharhinidae spp.) and Hammerhead Sharks
(Sphyrnidae spp.)
These species were proposed for review for inclusion in Appendix II
or III, by the National Audubon Society in 1991. At that time, the
Service did not believe that sufficient information was available to
propose these species for consideration at COP8. However, the Service
is re-examining this recommendation in preparation for COP9.
These species are normally targeted by commercial shark longline
and gillnet fisheries and are also subject to take in recreational
fisheries. The NMFS Fishery Management Plan for Sharks of the Atlantic
Oceans placed these sharks in the large coastal species group, but many
individuals of these species make extensive migrations. In the
preparation for development of the management plan, a peer review of
effort by NMFS and non-NMFS experts evaluated the available information
and determined that the large coastal species group of sharks was
overfished in the Northwest Atlantic. As a consequence, catch quotas
imposed for the large coastal shark species were set at levels
representing a 30 percent drop pattern. These sharks are vulnerable to
overexploitation.
Because of the recent increases in worldwide catches of sharks for
the meat and fins, and for medicinal purposes, the Service is
requesting information on these species. However, without more specific
information indicating specific population declines or increases in
trade, the Service may not have sufficient information to warrant
submission of any proposal for these species.
10. Freshwater or Pearly Mussels (Family Unionidae)
The bivalve mollusc family Unionidae (pearly mussels or naiads) is
one of the most diverse mollusc families in North America. Their
geographic distribution is widespread; naiads are found in most of the
major river drainages in the Southeast and Midwest, including the Upper
Mississippi drainage system, and as far west as Oklahoma and Texas.
Members of this family also occur in Europe
At the Sixth Meeting of the Conference of the Parties in 1987, the
Ten-Year Review Committee Chairman withdrew a proposal to remove the
six unionid species listed in Appendix II (with the other 26 species
remaining in Appendix I) with the understanding that the United States
would review the need for the listings.
Most of the species included in Appendix I are listed as endangered
pursuant to the U.S. Endangered Species Act, and two of the species
included in Appendix II are now listed as endangered. However, seven of
the Appendix I species and the remaining four Appendix II species are
not listed as endangered or threatened under ESA. A few species of
pearly mussels are valued as a source of beads for the cultured pearl
industry, and shells of these species as well as the pearls made from
such shells are heavily traded. The Service's concern is how to provide
the appropriate protection to the endangered pearly mussels without
unnecessarily regulating the trade in the few commercially valuable,
non-threatened mussels.
Mussel shells used in the manufacture of cultured pearls are
identifiable by their heavier, all white shells, and they occur in
larger rivers and reservoirs with few species of endangered mussels.
Furthermore, State regulations usually prohibit the collection of
shells from those sections of rivers with significant populations of
the endangered mussels. Even with these and other State restrictions,
some endangered mussels may be harvested by the divers; however, it is
believed that the buyers exclude shells not valuable for the making of
pearl beads, and the exporters further screen all shells to sort them
into species and size categories to fill specific orders from foreign
buyers. Therefore, the likelihood of endangered mussels being exported
for the pearl industry is extremely low.
Rather, the potential trade threat to the endangered species may be
from shell collectors and the use of shells in the jewelry industry. It
is probably only the most endangered species that would be affected by
trade for collections, and the Service is endeavoring to determine
whether there is any threat to endangered species from the trade in
mussels for jewelry.
There are about 58 endangered freshwater mussels and another 53
that may be endangered but for which definitive status information is
not yet available. If the most endangered of these species may be
affected by trade, having the species listed under CITES would provide
additional protection for the species. Therefore, the Service is
considering preparing a proposal to list in Appendix I only the most
endangered of the species (thus, downlisting some of the present
Appendix I species) and proposing the remainder of the native species
for inclusion in Appendix II, except those clearly identifiable species
exported for the pearl industry. The basis for this proposal would be
either because of status of the species or for reasons of similarity of
appearance. The species that the Service is considering excluding are:
Actinonaias ligamentina (=A. carinata), Amblema plicata, Cyclonaias
tuberculata, Elliptio crassidens, Elliparia lineolata, Fusconaia ebena,
Fusconaia flava, Ligumia recta, Megalonaias nervosa, Obliquaria
reflexa, Pleurobema cordatum, Quadrula apiculata, Quadrula metanevra,
Quadrula nodulata, Quadrula pustulosa, Quadrula quadrula, and
Tritogonia verrucosa. This approach provides the shortest list (unless
the entire unionid taxon were listed, which would add an unnecessary
permit burden), and the shorter list would assist enforcement officers
in focusing their efforts. This approach would also involve downlisting
some species presently listed in Appendix I. An alternative may be
that, for those species where there is not a sufficient probability of
trade to warrant any CITES listing, the Service might propose the
deletion of present Appendix I and II freshwater mussel species.
The Service would especially appreciate comments as to whether
information already available sufficiently identifies the most
endangered species so that further identification of these species by
listing them in Appendix I does not increase the threat from
collection. Additional information on the trade in shells for the
jewelry industry would be appreciated, as well as comments on the above
recommendations for species to be excluded from any proposal that the
Service may submit.
11. Tarantulas (Brachypelma spp.)
The Service has been considering listing additional Brachypelma
species to address look-alike concerns. As a result of the Service's
discussions, a proposal was received from Dr. Robert Wolff of Trinity
Christian College, Palos Heights, Illinois, to list all members of the
tarantula genus Brachypelma (also known as Euathlus and Brachypelmides)
in Appendix II of CITES. Most species of this genus have very limited
distributions within the general area of Central America from northern
Mexico south into Colombia, and are known only from a very limited
geographic region within a single country. The very limited
distributions of these species places each in greater danger of
possible extinction.
Brachypelma tarantulas are ground-dwelling, burrowing spiders
occurring from semi-desert regions, through tropical dry deciduous
forests, to tropical moist forests. The red-haired Brachypelma
tarantulas are very popular as pets. They are long-lived spiders; the
females frequently live up to 20 years, with as many as 12 possible
years for breeding. The males are only mature for a single breeding
season and are heavily preyed upon during their wanderings. Whereas up
to 400 individual eggs may be produced in each egg sac, the number of
hatchlings surviving to adulthood is extremely small (about 1 percent).
Therefore, the loss of mature individuals from a population is a major
threat to the species; larger individuals are preferred by the pet
trade. Several species in the genus are poorly described or virtually
unknown, and no thorough population studies have been conducted on any
of the species.
Very little is known about the trade in Brachypelma tarantulas and
most specimens are probably coming out of Mexico without proper
documentation. Mexico prevents the hunting and export of tarantulas
without a permit. At the Fifth Meeting of the Conference of the Parties
(Buenos Aires, 1985), the United States proposed the inclusion of
Brachypelma smithi (the red-kneed tarantula) in Appendix II because of
widespread documented trade. The listing of all Brachypelma tarantulas
would eliminate the present confusion over identification of which
species are entering trade. Most species within the genus are easily
recognized by the red or reddish hairs on the legs or abdomen. The
Service is, therefore, considering the listing of all members of the
genus Brachypelma in Appendix II and seeks information on the effects
of trade on these tarantulas, especially any data on the volume of
specimens entering trade.
12. Port-Orford-Cedar (Chamaecyparis lawsoniana)
In response to the July 15, 1993, notice (58 FR 38112) which
initiated listing preparation for COP9, the Oregon Natural Resources
Council provided a thorough draft proposal to include the Lawson-
cypress or Port-Orford-cedar (Chamaecyparis lawsoniana) in Appendix II.
This species is native to southwestern Oregon and northwestern
California within a general coastal area of less than 200 by 100 miles,
mostly from about Coos Bay, Oregon south to Arcata, California. It is
also in cultivation (and has a number of horticultural varieties). The
species has been reduced both in range and by over 85 percent in
natural standing volume, and is now logged almost entirely for export
(primarily to Japan). An introduced pathogen (Phytophthora lateralis)
has been spreading particularly along waterways and as a side effect of
soil transport by vehicles and logging equipment. The main stimulus for
the logging of Port-Orford cedar is high export prices, and one
important stimulus for the construction of many logging roads is the
export of raw logs. This fungus has spread through the northern and
western portions of the tree species' range, and it has infected
perhaps 20 percent of the remaining coastal stands. The root disease is
virulent, and the infected trees cannot be cured. By the mid-1980s, an
estimated 60 percent of the trees of this species in southwestern
Oregon's young-growth forests had been killed by this introduced
disease.
The Service is considering submission of a proposal to list the
U.S. population of this species and its logs, sawn wood, and veneer in
Appendix II. Information is desired particularly on populations that
are functioning naturally and are effectively safe from habitat loss,
exploitation, and infection; and in addition, information is requested
on the location of U.S. non-natural silvicultural plantations and the
extent of such exports from them.
13. Bigleaf Mahogany (Swietenia macrophylla)
American mahogany, the genus Swietenia, is native to the neotropics
(56 FR 33898-33899, July 24, 1991). Two of the three species in this
genus are listed in CITES Appendix II: Swietenia humilis (Pacific Coast
mahogany) including its parts and derivatives, which occurs in Mexico
and Central America; and Swietenia mahagoni (Caribbean mahogany)
including only its logs, sawn wood, and veneer, which occurs on some
Caribbean islands and extends to southern Florida. The unlisted
species, Swietenia macrophylla (bigleaf mahogany), occurs from South
America to Mexico; it apparently forms hybrids naturally with S.
humilis in Costa Rica. In the Carribean, S. mahagoni seems to have
crossed spontaneously with introduced S. macrophylla to form hybrids
that have been called S. aubrevilleana. Swietenia species and hybrids
also are in cultivation (and may be locally naturalized); some are
grown ornamentally and/or silviculturally. Swietenia macrophylla and S.
mahagoni are grown with limited success in plantations in the tropics
of the New and Old Worlds.
At COP8, Costa Rica and the United States proposed to include
Swietenia macrophylla and its natural hybrid in Appendix II; the U.S.
proposal excluded the Old World populations and secondary and final
products (e.g., finished products and derivatives). In a preliminary
meeting during COP8, all the range States except three (Bolivia, Peru
and Honduras) tentatively supported the listing. Costa Rica decided to
support the U.S. proposal. However, because of lack of sufficient
consensus, the United States withdrew its proposal (cf. 57 FR 20443,
May 13, 1992).
In response to the July 15, 1993, notice (58 FR 38112) that
initiated listing preparations for COP9, the Natural Resources Defense
Council provided a new extensive draft proposal to include the
neotropical populations of Swietenia macrophylla and its natural hybrid
in Appendix II, including only the timber and wood processed to the
first stage of transformation (i.e., primary products), such as logs,
wood in the rough, sawn wood, veneer sheets, and plywood. The September
1993 meeting of the CITES Plants Committee favored submission of a
proposal for this species.
The Service regards the available information and data sufficient
to support reproposing this species and its natural hybrid, and
believes that there is increasing understanding of the consequences and
value of its regulation under CITES Appendix II. The United States has
become the main importer of this species, and the Service plans to
provide a draft proposal to the range States for their comments.
Information is desired particularly on populations that are functioning
naturally and are effectively safe from habitat loss and exploitation.
14. African Mahoganies
The Fauna and Flora Preservation Society provided draft proposals
to list the African mahoganies in Appendix II. African mahoganies
include the genera Entandrophragma (about 11 species) and Khaya (about
6 species), which are native to the tropics of Africa, with Khaya
extending to the Comoros Islands and Madagascar. Some of the 17 species
are in cultivation, including some silvicultural plantations. The
majority of the species have some legal protection in one or more
countries, generally with respect to their export. All of the species
have been declining due to habitat conversion and selectively varied
commercial exploitation, and nearly all of them have been reported to
be threatened in various countries and significant portions of their
ranges.
The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization has recognized
the need to conserve most Khaya and some Entandrophragma species, being
concerned with their genetic erosion. The September 1993 meeting of the
CITES Plants Committee reviewed draft proposals for these genera, and
favored the circulation of these drafts for their possible submission.
In November 1993, Germany circulated them to the range States for their
views. The Service may join with Germany's initiative, or provide draft
proposals to the range States by April 1994 for their comments.
Information is desired particularly on populations of each species that
are functioning naturally and are effectively safe from habitat loss
and exploitation.
15. Non-native aloes (Aloe spp.)
All species of Aloe are included in the CITES appendices, with
nearly all in Appendix II, including the plants called Aloe vera
(synonym Aloe barbadensis). The genus is essentially African in range,
extending to Madagascar and the Arabian Peninsula, and perhaps
naturally to the Canary Islands. Plants regarded as Aloe vera have been
used for millennia and the yellow-flowered species may be extinct in
its native range in the wild; it may have been native to the Canary
Islands, or perhaps the southern Arabian Peninsula or northeastern
Africa (e.g., Ethiopia), where similar species occur.
The whole plants commonly in trade as aloe vera are of artificially
propagated (or also naturalized) origin. Their regulation has become an
enforcement burden. To deal with this situation, the Service is
considering submission of a proposal by June 1994 to remove the non-
native populations of Aloe that are geographically unrelated to the
general African area. Thus, all species of Aloe where they may be
native, including all of Africa considered broadly (e.g., including
neighboring islands such as the Canary Islands and Socotra) and the
Arabian Peninsula, would continue to be regulated by CITES. The
September 1993 meeting of the CITES Plants Committee favored submission
of some such proposal on this problem, and the conservation committee
of the International Organization for Succulent Plant Study offered to
assist in its preparation. Information is requested on whether
exclusion of plants from this non-native population of Aloe would
significantly increase risk to the survival in its native range of any
Aloe (i.e., species, subspecies, botanical variety, or significant
population).
Future Actions
The Service will consider all available information in deciding
which proposals warrant consideration by the Parties. The U.S.
proposals must be submitted to the CITES Secretariat by June 10, 1994,
for consideration at the November 1994 meeting of the Conference of the
Parties in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. After the June date, the Service
will publish a further Federal Register notice to announce its
decisions on the potential proposals discussed above. Persons having
current biological or trade information about the species being
considered are invited to contact the Service's Office of Scientific
Authority at the above address.
The primary author of this notice is Dr. Charles W. Dane, Chief,
Office of Scientific Authority, under the authority of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 23
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Treaties.
Dated: January 3, 1994.
Mollie H. Beattie,
Director.
[FR Doc. 94-1613 Filed 1-26-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-M