Federal Register, Volume 59 Issue 235 (Thursday, December 8, 1994)

[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 235 (Thursday, December 8, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-30132]

[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: December 8, 1994]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

RIN 1018-AB66

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Threatened Status
for the Goliath Frog

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Service determines threatened status for the goliath frog
of Central Africa. This huge amphibian is narrowly distributed and is
vulnerable to commercial collection for export and to other problems.
This rule implements the protection of the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended, for this species. Permits will be available for
scientific purposes, to enhance propagation or survival, and for
zoological exhibition.

EFFECTIVE DATE: January 9, 1995.

ADDRESSES: The complete file for this rule is available for public
inspection, by appointment, from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday through
Friday, in Room 750, 4401 Fairfax Drive, Arlington, Virginia 22203.
Express and messenger-delivered mail should be sent to the Office of
Scientific Authority at this same address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Charles W. Dane, Chief, Office of
Scientific Authority; Mail Stop: Arlington Square, Room 725; U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service; Washington, D.C. 20240 (phone 703-358-1708; FAX
703-358-2276).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Recent investigations have suggested an alarming worldwide decline
in populations of frogs and other amphibians (Johnson 1994; Rabb 1990).
Because of their generally complex life cycles, with aquatic larval and
terrestrial adult stages, their low and high status in community food
chains, and their permeable skin, amphibians constitute a group
particularly sensitive to environmental disturbances. The precise
causes of the decline are not well understood, but indicated factors in
various cases include forest destruction, habitat fragmentation,
overhunting, acid rain, metallic pollution, pesticides, and soil
drying. Problems with frogs and other amphibians have been observed in
such diverse places as Western Canada, South Carolina, Guatemala,
Ecuador, Puerto Rico, Borneo, and Australia.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has received
information that the largest frog in the world is among those in
jeopardy. This species, the goliath frog (Conraua goliath) of Central
Africa, reaches a recorded weight of up to 7.2 pounds (3.3 kilograms),
a head and body length of 12.6 inches (320 millimeters), and a total
length, including the hind leg and foot, of about 32 inches (813
millimeters); there have been reports of even larger individuals (Klass
1990; Sabater Pi 1985; Zahl 1967). This giant amphibian has a
relatively small range. It occurs along major rivers in dense
rainforest within an area of about 10,000 square miles (26,000 square
kilometers) in Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, and southwestern Cameroon. In
contrast, the common bullfrog (Rana catesbiana), which is about half
the size, occurs all across eastern North America from Quebec to Mexico
(Frost 1985; Sabater Pi 1985; Zahl 1967).

Previous Federal Action

In a petition dated April 9, 1991, the Service was requested to add
the goliath frog to the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. The
petition was from Dr. Christina M. Richards (Biology Department, Wayne
State University, Detroit, Michigan 48202) and Dr. Victor H. Hutchison
(Department of Zoology, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma
73069). It was accompanied by extensive data on the biology of the
goliath frog, and pointed out such problems as slow maturation, rarity,
restricted distribution, habitat destruction, local hunting,
international trade, high prices for living specimens, and poor
adaptation to captivity.
Section 4(b)(3) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended
in 1982 (Act), requires two findings with respect to a petition to
list, delist, or reclassify a species. Within 90 days of receipt, a
finding must be made on whether the petition presents substantial
information indicating that the requested action may be warranted, and,
within 12 months of receipt, a finding must be made as to whether the
action is warranted, not warranted, or warranted but precluded by other
listing activity.
The Service examined the data submitted by the petitioners and
consulted other authorities. It also learned that the goliath frog is
classified as vulnerable by the World Conservation Union (IUCN). This
review led the Service to make the findings that the petition did
present substantial information and that the requested action was
warranted. These findings were incorporated in a proposal to list the
goliath frog as a threatened species, published in the Federal Register
of September 12, 1991 (56 FR 46397-46400). The comment period on the
proposal was reopened by notices in the Federal Registers of July 19,
1994 (59 FR 36737-36738), and October 25, 1994 (59 FR 53628-53629).

Summary of Comments and Recommendations

In the proposed rule of September 12, 1991, and associated
notifications, all interested parties were requested to submit
information that might contribute to development of a final rule.
Cables were sent to United States embassies in countries within the
range of the subject species, requesting new data and the comments of
the governments of those counties. Of the 12 responses received on the
original proposal, 7 indicated support for classification of the
goliath frog as threatened, 2 indicated opposition, and 3 did not
clearly express an opinion in that regard. Several of the respondents
provided new information, some of which has been incorporated into this
document. Specific substantive points made in opposition to listing, or
to other aspects of the proposal, are discussed below.
Point 1.--Listing will bring about unnecessary restrictions and
paperwork, thereby interfering with legitimate importation and
research, and thus preventing efforts to propagate and maintain the
goliath frog in captivity. Service response.--The Act requires the
Service to list species that may be endangered or threatened, based on
the best scientific and commercial data available, regardless of any
inconvenience that may be caused by such listing. The Act provides for
the issuance of permits to conduct otherwise prohibited activities for
the purposes of scientific research, enhancement of propagation and
survival of the species, and zoological exhibition. The Service will
make every effort to expedite the processing of permit applications.
Point 2.--The distribution of the goliath frog is poorly known and
may extend over a considerably larger area than given in the proposal.
Service response.--Based on the species' habitat requirements, it is
possible that the range of the frog is larger than now known, but
reports to this effect have so far been anecdotal. The original
petitioners have indicated that the species does occur in a small part
of Gabon.
Point 3.--The habitat of the goliath frog is not so restricted as
indicated in the proposal, the species not being limited, for example,
to areas of cascades and rapids. Service response.--Information from
several respondents, with varying views on listing, suggests that this
is a valid point. The following statement by Dr. Peter Brazaitis (New
York Zoological Society, personal communication) may help resolve the
issue: ``I agree they are not restricted to waterfalls and rapids but
are found in small cul-de-sacs and broad deep rivers most of which
descend over waterfalls and rapids at some point and probably are well
oxygenated.''
Point 4.--The goliath frog is not rare, is easily located and
caught, and probably numbers in the hundreds of thousands, and also is
not a major food source for the native people. Service response.--The
preponderance of evidence does suggest that the species can still be
collected in small numbers by knowledgeable persons who are willing to
go out into rivers, well away from settled areas, at night, thereby
taking some risks because of the currents and other hazards. It is
utilized for food whenever practical, though there are conflicting
views on the resulting impact on over-all populations. Reports of large
numbers may in part be based on observations of other species of the
genus Conraua that occur in the same area and that may reach the size
of immature C. goliath. In any case, absolute numbers may have little
bearing on degree of threat. As noted below in the ``Summary of Factors
Affecting the Species,'' the government of Cameroon now classifies the
goliath frog as ``rare or on the way to extinction.''
Point 5.--Extensive habitat destruction has not been observed.
Service response.--While several respondents indicated this to be the
case, other authorities with experience in the involved areas, as cited
below in the ``Summary of Factors Affecting the Species.'' do consider
deforestation and various other forms of environmental disruption to be
a threat to the goliath frog.
Point 6.--There is little demand for commercial or exhibitional
purposes and few, if any, frogs are now being exported. Service
response.--Information from Dr. Brazaitis (as cited above) and
Professor Jean-Luc Amiet of the University of Yaounde (as conveyed by
the petitioners and in a telegram from the United States embassy in
Yaounde), suggests that commercial interest was stimulated following
initial collection activity and display in the 1980s. There is much
potential demand for this spectacular amphibian, for such purposes as
the pet trade, exhibition, and food production. The exact number of
individuals exported from the range states is unknown but most reports
suggest a figure in the hundreds during the 1980s. Statistics compiled
by Professor Amiet show a total of 433 licensed exports from Cameroon
from 1985 to 1990, with about 80 percent going to the United States and
the vast majority being for commercial purposes. A 1991 ban on
exportation from Cameroon reportedly has not been fully successful.
Service records indicate that at least 72 individuals were exported
from Equatorial Guinea and Cameroon to the United States in 1992; 5
more arrived in February 1993. The extremely high prices that have been
advertised may be evidence both of demand and difficulty in obtaining
specimens.
Point 7.--The goliath frog is not necessarily difficult to
transport or maintain in captivity, and there is no reliable evidence
showing that it is slow to reach maturity. Service response.--A
consensus among respondents is that it is possible to successfully
transport and maintain the goliath frog, and that some individuals have
survived for months or years in captivity, but this involves
considerable effort and diligence, many frogs have been lost, and much
more must be learned before intensive utilization would be safe. All
individuals kept by zoos in the United States have now died. Little is
known about the biology of this species, the suggested slow maturation
being only a judgment based on the great size of full grown
individuals.
In the notices of July 19 and October 25, 1994, reopening the
comment period, the Service observed that the above concerns had been
raised and solicited additional information on these matters and other
aspects of the status and biology of the goliath frog. Cables again
were sent to United States embassies in appropriate countries and other
requests were made for new data and comments. Of the 6 new responses
received, 3 expressed support for the original proposal and 3 indicated
that no new information had been obtained. Considering these responses
and all previously collected material, the Service now is proceeding
with a final rule to determine threatened status for the goliath frog.

Summary of Factors Affecting the Species

After a thorough review and consideration of all information
available, the Service has determined that the goliath frog should be
classified as threatened. Section 4(a)(1) of the Endangered Species Act
(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and regulations (50 CFR part 424) promulgated
to implement the listing provisions of the Act were followed. A species
may be determined to be endangered or threatened due to one or more of
the five factors described in section 4(a)(1). These factors and their
application to the goliath frog (Conraua goliath) are as follows:

A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment
of Its Habitat or Range

The goliath frog has a narrowly restricted range and has been
reported to be rare therein. Despite its spectacular size it was not
formally described until 1906. Subsequent investigators have commented
repeatedly on how difficult the species is to locate, approach, and
capture (Gewalt 1977; Perret 1957; Perret and Mertens 1957). Data
compiled by the petitioners show that only 91 specimens were reported
collected through 1967. The rate of collection later increased in
response to growing scientific and commercial interest. Letters
solicited by the petitioners from authorities in Cameroon pointed out
that logging, deforestation, and dams are affecting the limited habitat
of the goliath frog. For example, Roger C. Fotso of the Laboratory of
Zoology, University of Yaounde, wrote: ``It is clear that the giant
frog suffers from habitat loss, due to intensive deforestation in the
whole region. The region in which this frog occurs corresponds to one
of the most populated parts of the country * * * urgent measures need
to be taken to protect the giant frog in Cameroon where it is not just
lucky enough to occur in a national park or reserve.'' Professor Amiet
(as cited by the United States embassy in Yaounde) noted that the
recent establishment of reserves in Cameroon appears to have slowed or
stabilized the decline of the species. With respect to the situation in
neighboring Equatorial Guinea, Sabater-Pi (1985) reported that the
habitat of the goliath frog ``has been altered mainly by human
activities, such as deforestation for agricultural purposes, forest
exploitation and establishment of new villages. All these factors
drastically have altered the ecosystem inhabited by the species.''

B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes

The goliath frog is hunted by the native peoples within its range,
some of whom consider its meat a delicacy. Information presented by
Zahl (1967) suggests that this species is so difficult to approach, its
capture is a cause for celebration. Sabater-Pi (1985) warned that it
was threatened by native hunting and that effective protective measures
were needed at the national level.
A new problem, and one causing much of the immediate concern for
the species, is capture and export of live animals. Because of its
size, the goliath frog has much potential for public and private
exhibition. Advertisements submitted by the petitioners show that the
asking price in early 1990 was $599.00 for ``small'' specimens and
$2,500.00 for individuals weighing 6-9 pounds. In July 1992, a zoo
purchased six frogs from an importer at $1,200.00 each. An individual
exported from the United States to Japan in October 1993 had a declared
value of $1,400.00. One U.S. dealer is reported to have imported many
individuals and to have attempted to enter some in the well-known Frog
Jump Jubilee in Calaveras County, California. Further information and
statistics on commercial trade are given above in ``point 6'' of the
``Summary of Comments and Recommendations.''
In a letter to the petitioners, Bob Johnson, Curator of Amphibians
and Reptiles at the Toronto Metropolitan Zoo, expressed concern that
current levels of commercial exploitation might be excessive in
relation to sustainability of wild populations of Conraua goliath. He
noted also that survival rates in previous importations have not been
high, primarily because of shipping stress and the time required to
acclimate the species to captive conditions.

C. Disease or Predation

While not now known to be general problems, disease and natural
predation are to be expected and may become of serious conservation
concern for populations that already have been severely reduced or
fragmented through human disturbance.

D. The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms

Although the goliath frog currently is classified as vulnerable by
the IUCN (Groombridge 1994), it is not covered by the Convention on
International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora
(CITES). Preliminary to the Eighth Meeting of the Conference of Parties
to CITES, held in Kyoto in March 1992, the Service submitted a proposal
to include the goliath frog in Appendix II of CITES. However, at the
meeting the Service withdrew this proposal, based mainly on an analysis
developed by the IUCN Species Survival Commission Trade Specialist
Group (Brautigam 1992). A subsequent review of that analysis suggests
that it is not complete; all three of the substantive listed references
are actually negative responses (two of them from the same parties) to
the Service's proposals to list the goliath frog as threatened or to
include it in Appendix II of CITES. The analysis does not utilize
information from the proposals themselves, the various positive
responses thereto, or the listing petition.
As noted above, exportation of the goliath frog from Africa
continued at least to 1993, and effectiveness of local regulation is
not well understood. However, in a letter of May 11, 1994, the Ministry
of Environment and Forests of Cameroon notified the Service that the
goliath frog is now classified as a species that is ``rare or on the
way to extinction.'' It is under complete legal protection in Cameroon
and cannot be taken without special authorization from the Ministry.

E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting its Continued Existence

Although Conraua goliath is by far the world's largest frog, its
eggs, tadpoles, and young are hardly larger than those of other frogs
(Sabater-Pi 1985; Zahl 1967). The petitioners therefore state that C.
goliath undoubtedly takes a longer time than do most frogs to become
sexually mature, and a mature animal removed from a population will not
be replaced quickly. They note also that mortality in captivity is
extremely high and zoos have been unable to keep specimens for long
term display. As pointed out in the above ``Summary of Comments and
Recommendations,'' some individuals have been successfully maintained
for lengthy periods in captivity, but only through much effort and
expense. Attempts to establish colonies at Lincoln Park Zoo, Chicago,
and Washington Park Zoo, Portland, were unsuccessful. All frogs there
now have died and the Service is not aware of any other zoos that are
maintaining the species.
The decision to determine threatened status for the goliath frog
was based on an assessment of the best available scientific
information, and of past, present, and probable future threats to the
species. This giant frog is narrowly distributed, and is vulnerable to
human exploitation and environmental disruption. In the proposed rule
the Service noted that further review might lead to a final rule
classifying the goliath frog as endangered, rather than threatened.
Information obtained during the comment period, however, supports
recognition of the species as threatened. Although there are questions
about population status and biological factors, there is general
concern regarding long-term habitat trends and potential commercial
demand. If conservation measures are not implemented, further declines
are likely to occur, increasing the danger of extinction for the
goliath frog. Critical habitat is not being determined, as its
designation is not applicable to foreign species.

Available Conservation Measures

Conservation measures provided to species listed as endangered or
threatened pursuant to the Act include recognition, requirements for
Federal protection, and prohibitions against certain practices.
Recognition through listing encourages conservation measures by
Federal, international, and private agencies, groups, and individuals.
Section 7(a) of the Act, as amended, and as implemented by
regulations at 50 CFR part 402, requires Federal agencies to evaluate
their actions that are to be conducted within the United States or on
the high seas, with respect to any species that is proposed or listed
as endangered or threatened and with respect to its proposed or
designated critical habitat (if any). Section 7(a)(2) requires Federal
agencies to ensure that activities they authorize, fund, or carry out
are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed
species or to destroy or adversely modify its critical habitat. If a
proposed Federal action may affect a listed species, the responsible
Federal agency must enter into formal consultation with the Service. No
such actions within U.S. jurisdiction are currently known with respect
to the species covered by this proposal.
Section 8(a) of the Act authorizes the provision of limited
financial assistance for the development and management of programs
that the Secretary of the Interior determines to be necessary or useful
for the conservation of endangered species in foreign countries.
Sections 8(b) and 8(c) of the Act authorize the Secretary to encourage
conservation programs for foreign endangered species, and to provide
assistance for such programs, in the form of personnel and the training
of personnel.
Section 9 of the Act, and implementing regulations found at 50 CFR
17.21 and 17.31 set forth a series of general prohibitions and
exceptions that apply to all threatened wildlife. These prohibitions,
in part, make it illegal for any person subject to the jurisdiction of
the United States to take, import or export, ship in interstate
commerce in the course of commercial activity, or sell or offer for
sale in interstate or foreign commerce any threatened wildlife. It also
is illegal to possess, sell, deliver, transport, or ship any such
wildlife that has been taken in violation of the Act. Certain
exceptions apply to agents of the Service and State conservation
agencies.
Permits may be issued to carry out otherwise prohibited activities
involving endangered and threatened wildlife under certain
circumstances. Regulations governing permits are codified at 50 CFR
17.22, 17.23, and 17.32. Such permits are available for scientific
purposes, to enhance propagation or survival, or for incidental take in
connection with other such lawful activities. For threatened species,
there are also permits for zoological exhibition, educational purposes,
or special purposes consistent with the purposes of the Act.

National Environmental Policy Act

The Service has determined that an Environmental Assessment, as
defined under the authority of the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969, need not be prepared in connection with regulations adopted
pursuant to section 4(a) of the Endangered Species Act, as amended. A
notice outlining the Service's reasons for this determination was
published in the Federal Register of October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244).

Literature Cited

Brautigam, A. 1992. Analyses of proposals to amend the CITES
Appendices. Submitted to the Eighth Meeting of the Conference of the
Parties, Kyoto, Japan. World Conservation Union Species Survival
Commission Trade Specialist Group.
Frost, D.R., ed. 1985. Amphibian species of the world. A taxonomic
and geographical reference. Allen Press and Association of
Systematic Collections, Lawrence, Kansas, v + 732 pp.
Gewalt, W. 1977. Einige Bemerkungen uber Fang, Transport und Haltung
des Goliathfrosches (Conraua goliath, Boulenger). Zool. Garten
47:161-192.
Groombridge, B., ed. 1994. 1994 IUCN red list of threatened animals.
World Conservation Union, Gland, Switzerland, lv + 286 pp.
Johnson, B. 1994. Declining amphibian populations task force.
Species, no. 21-22, pp. 118-119.
Klass, T. 1990. Monster frogs have leg up on other jumpers. Ann
Arbor News, January 9.
Perret, J.L. 1957. Observations sur Rana goliath Blgr. Bull. Soc.
Neuchateloise Sci. Nat. 80:195-202.
Perret, J.L., and R. Mertens. 1957. Etude d'une collection
herpetologique faite au Cameroun de 1952 a 1955. Bull. de I.F.A.N.
19:548-601.
Rabb, G.B. 1990. Declining amphibian populations. Species, no. 13-
14, pp. 33-34.
Sabater-Pi, J. 1985. Contribution to the biology of the giant frog
(Conraua goliath, Boulenger). Amphibia-Reptilia 6:143-153.
Zahl, P.A. 1967. In quest of the world's largest frog. Natl. Geogr.
134:446-452.

Author

The primary author of this rule is Ronald M. Nowak, Office of
Scientific Authority, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C.
20240 (703-358-1708).

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17

Endangered and threatened wildlife, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation, and Wildlife.

Regulation Promulgation

Accordingly, part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the
Code of Federal Regulations, is hereby amended as set forth below.

PART 17--[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for Part 17 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 16 U.S.C. 1531-1544; 16 U.S.C.
4201-4245; Public Law 99-625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise
noted.

2. Section 17.11(h) is amended by adding the following, in
alphabetical order under AMPHIBIANS, to the List of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife:

Sec. 17.11 Endangered and threatened wildlife.

* * * * *
(h) * * *

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species Vertebrate population
--------------------------------------------------- Historic range where endangered or Status When listed Critical Special
Common name Scientific name threatened habitat rules
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amphibians

* * * * * * *
Frog, goliath........... Conraua goliath......... Cameroon, Equatorial Entire................. T 566 NA NA
Guinea, Gabon.
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: November 30, 1994.
Mollie H. Beattie,
Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 94-30132 Filed 12-5-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-M