[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