[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 189 (Wednesday, September 30, 1998)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 52226-52231]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-25987]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 23

RIN 1018-AF23


Export of River Otters Taken in Missouri in the 1998-1999 and 
Subsequent Seasons

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of 
Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) is a treaty that regulates international 
trade in certain species of animals and plants. Exports of specimens 
(live, dead, or parts and products thereof) of animals and plants 
listed in Appendix II of CITES require an export permit from the 
country of origin. Export permits for specimens of species listed in 
CITES Appendix II are issued by a country's CITES Management Authority 
after two conditions are met: the country's CITES Scientific Authority 
must determine that the exports will not be detrimental to the survival 
of the species. This is known as a ``non-detriment finding''; the CITES 
Management Authority must determine that the specimens were not 
obtained in violation of laws for their protection. Live animals or 
plants require additional findings. For exports from the United States, 
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Office of Management Authority and 
Office of Scientific Authority make these findings.
    The purpose of this proposed rule is to announce proposed findings 
by the CITES Scientific and Management Authorities of the United States 
on the export of river otters taken in the State of Missouri, and to 
propose the addition of Missouri to the list of States and Indian 
Nations approved for export of river otter skins. This approval is on a 
multi-year basis. The Service proposes to apply these findings to river 
otters taken in Missouri during the 1998-1999 season and subsequent 
seasons, subject to the conditions applying to other approved States. 
We appreciate your comments on this proposed rule.

DATES: The Service will consider comments received on or before October 
30, 1998 in making its final determination on this proposed rule.

ADDRESSES: Please send your correspondence concerning this proposed 
rule to: Office of Scientific Authority; U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service; Mail Stop ARLSQ 750; 1849 C Street, NW; Washington, DC 20240; 
or via E-mail to: [email protected]. Comments and materials received 
will be available for public inspection, by appointment, from 8:00 am 
to 4:00 pm, Monday through Friday, at the same address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scientific Authority finding: Dr. 
Susan Lieberman, Chief, Office of Scientific Authority; phone: 703-358-
1708; fax: 703-358-2276; E-mail: [email protected]. Management 
Authority finding: Ms. Teiko Saito, Chief, Office of Management 
Authority; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Mail Stop ARLSQ 700; 1849 C 
Street, NW, Washington, DC 20240; phone: 703-358-2095; fax: 703-358-
2280.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On January 5, 1984 (49 FR 590), we published 
a rule granting approval for the export of pelts of North American 
river otters (Lontra canadensis) and certain other CITES-listed 
Appendix-II species of furbearing mammals from specified States and 
Indian Nations, Tribes, and Reservations (hereafter referred to as 
Indian Nations). That rule covered the 1983-1984 season as well as 
subsequent seasons. In succeeding years, we have approved the export of 
pelts of one or more species of furbearing mammals listed in CITES 
Appendix II from other States and Indian Nations, through the rule-
making process. These approvals were and continue to be subject to 
certain population monitoring and export requirements. The purposes of 
this proposed rule are to: (1) Announce proposed findings by the 
Scientific and Management Authorities of the United

[[Page 52227]]

States for the export of river otter pelts (Lontra canadensis) taken in 
the State of Missouri; and (2) to add Missouri to the list of States 
and Indian Nations approved for the export of river otter skins. We 
propose these findings for the export of the pelts of river otters 
taken in the State of Missouri during the 1998-1999 and subsequent 
seasons, subject to the conditions applying to other approved States 
and Tribes.
    CITES regulates the import, export, re-export, and introduction 
from the sea of animal and plant species listed in the three CITES 
Appendices for the purpose of controlling trade in those species. 
According to CITES (and the Endangered Species Act, which implements 
CITES in the United States):
    1. Appendix I includes species threatened with extinction that are 
or may be affected by trade.
    2. Appendix II includes species that, although not necessarily 
threatened with extinction now, may become so unless their trade is 
strictly controlled. Appendix II also includes species that must be 
subject to regulation in order that trade in other currently or 
potentially threatened species (those in Appendix I or II) may be 
brought under effective control (e.g., because of difficulty in 
distinguishing specimens of threatened species from those of other non-
threatened species).
    3. Appendix III includes species that any Party country identifies 
as being subject to regulation within its jurisdiction for purposes of 
preventing or restricting exploitation, and for which it needs the 
cooperation of other Party countries to control trade.
    CITES Appendix II includes the American river otter pursuant to 
CITES Article II, paragraph 2(b). You may obtain a copy of the CITES 
Treaty from the Office of Scientific Authority at the above address or 
from the Service's web page at http://www.fws.gov. CITES Article II, 
paragraph 2 states: ``Appendix II shall include: (a) all species which 
although not necessarily now threatened with extinction may become so 
unless trade in specimens of such species is subject to strict 
regulation in order to avoid utilization incompatible with their 
survival; and (b) other species which must be subject to regulation in 
order that trade in specimens of certain species referred to in sub-
paragraph (a) of this paragraph may be brought under effective 
control.'' In the January 5, 1984 Federal Register (49 FR 590), we 
announced the results of a review of the species listed at the fourth 
meeting of the CITES Conference of the Parties (COP4, held in 1983 in 
Botswana) regarding U.S. species of furbearing mammals, including the 
river otter. Specifically, we determined that the river otter is 
included in Appendix II of CITES because of the similarity in 
appearance of its pelts (and of products manufactured from those pelts) 
to other species listed in Appendix I or II. The Service determined at 
that time that the American river otter did not qualify for CITES 
Appendix II based on its own conservation status, but rather due to its 
similarity to other listed species. The January 5, 1985, Notice in the 
Federal Register described how our Office of Scientific Authority 
planned to monitor, on an annual basis, the population and trade status 
of the native furbearer species listed pursuant to CITES Article 
II.2(b). We stated then that we could institute restrictive export 
controls for a given species, for one or more States or Indian Nations, 
if export levels appeared to be contributing to long-term population 
declines. In that document we also described how our Office of 
Management Authority would require States and Indian Nations to assure 
the legal acquisition of specimens entering international trade, as 
evidenced by marking with approved, serially unique tags.

Scientific Authority Findings

    Article IV (paragraph 2) of CITES requires that, before the 
Management Authority issues a permit to export a specimen of a species 
included in Appendix II, the Scientific Authority must advise ``that 
such export will not be detrimental to the survival of that species.'' 
Our Office of Scientific Authority must develop such advice (known as a 
``non-detriment finding'') for the export of Appendix-II animals, in 
accordance with Section 8A(c)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, 
as amended. For native U.S. species such as the river otter, the Act 
requires the Secretary of the Interior to base export determinations 
and advice ``upon the best available biological information derived 
from professionally accepted wildlife management practices; but is not 
required to make, or require any State to make, estimates of population 
size in making such determinations or giving such advice.''
    The wildlife agencies of individual States and Indian Nations 
manage the river otter. We identified in the January 5, 1984, Federal 
Register, and listed in 50 CFR Sec. 23.53 most of States and Indian 
Nations approved for the export of river otters. We granted 
administrative approval to the State of Tennessee for the 1994-1995 
season and multi-year approval through a rule-making for 1995-1996 and 
subsequent seasons (61 FR 2454, January 26, 1996). We granted 
administrative approval to the State of Missouri for the 1996-1997 and 
1997-1998 seasons. Each State or Indian Nation approved by the Service 
for the export of river otters has a program to regulate the trapping 
and take of the species.
    The Service's Office of Scientific Authority therefore has two 
primary obligations regarding exports of river otters taken in the 
United States:
    (1) We must find that any U.S. exports of river otter pelts are not 
detrimental to the population status in the wild of any other similar 
furbearer species listed in Appendix I or II.
    (2) We must determine that the status of river otters in the United 
States (based on information provided by the States and based on our 
own monitoring of trade) does not decline to the point where the 
species itself could qualify for inclusion in CITES Appendix II in its 
own right, pursuant to Article II.2(a). The CITES Parties adopted new, 
improved criteria for inclusion of species in Appendix II, pursuant to 
Article II.2(a), at the ninth meeting of the Conference of the Parties, 
held in the United States in November 1994 (Resolution Conf. 9.24).
    Since listing of the river otter in Appendix II was due to its 
similarity of appearance to other listed species in need of trade 
controls, an important component of our non-detriment finding is 
consideration of the impact of river otter trade on the status of these 
other species. The Office of Scientific Authority has determined that 
the CITES requirement of issuing export permits naming the species 
being traded, coupled with the marking of pelts with tags bearing the 
name of the species, State of origin, year of take, and a unique serial 
number, is sufficient to eliminate potential problems of confusion 
with, and therefore risk to, other listed species. The requirement to 
tag all river otter pelts with unique, tamper-proof tags is a U.S. 
requirement that goes beyond any CITES requirement (see Management 
Authority Findings, below, for tag specifications).
    In addition to considering the effect of trade on species or 
populations other than those being exported from the United States, we 
will regularly examine information on river otters in the State of 
Missouri to determine if there is a population decline that might 
warrant more restrictive export controls. The Service also will 
continue to work closely with the State of Missouri, which has primary 
management responsibility for river otters. The monitoring and 
assessment for Missouri will follow the same approach used for other 
States and Indian Nations. As part of this monitoring, we annually 
request

[[Page 52228]]

that the States and Indian Nations already approved for export of river 
otters certify to the Service that the best available biological 
information derived from professionally accepted wildlife management 
practices indicates that take of river otters during the forthcoming 
season will not be detrimental to the survival of the species.
    Whenever available information from the States or other sources 
indicates a possible problem in a particular State, the Scientific 
Authority will conduct a comprehensive review of accumulated 
information to determine whether conclusions about the treatment of 
these species as listed for similarity of appearance (Article II.2.b) 
continue to be true for the particular State.
    Originally a common resident of the State of Missouri, river otters 
were nearly extirpated from the State between 1860 and 1910. An 
estimated 70 animals survived in the southeastern part of the State by 
the mid-1930s. Because most significant habitat changes occurred more 
recently, this early population decline is believed to be a consequence 
of unregulated trapping and other killing of the species. Legal 
protection for the species occurred in 1936, but the species did not 
begin to recover until the State initiated a restoration and 
reintroduction program. The Missouri Department of Conservation (MDC) 
initiated a river otter reintroduction program in 1982, whereby it 
released 845 river otters at 43 locations in the State. The MDC 
considers that restoration program to have been completed in 1992; 
during those 10 years it studied the status and distribution of river 
otters in the State. Based on information provided by the State of 
Missouri and other States, the Service believes that the status of 
river otters in the Midwest of the United States has improved, and 
populations in virtually all States where the species is native are 
either stable or increasing. We published a discussion of this release 
program and our previous findings on river otters in Missouri in the 
Federal Register on April 2, 1996 (61 FR 14543) and October 7, 1996 (61 
FR 52403).
    According to the MDC, Missouri has in place several different 
methods to monitor and assess the status of river otters in the State: 
(1) A three-year study began in 1996, in cooperation with the 
University of Missouri, to develop population monitoring methods, 
including a stream survey for otter sign, a capture-per-unit-effort 
index based on trappers' records, and a refined population model based 
on age-specific reproduction data and age-distribution data from a 
sample of Missouri river otters; (2) the State uses aerial surveys of 
winter tracks to monitor populations, along with Archer's Index to 
Furbearer Populations, as an index of population trends; and (3) the 
State has in place a mandatory pelt registration and tagging program 
during annual trapping seasons, in order to provide a harvest 
accounting system.
    In 1995, the Missouri Conservation Commission approved an otter 
trapping season for the 1996-1997 season. After further deliberation we 
approved export authorization for pelts of Missouri river otters taken 
during the 1996-1997 season. Subsequently, in July 1997, the MDC 
requested export authority for the 1997-1998 season and subsequent 
trapping seasons. We granted export authorization for the 1997-1998 
season only, based on our evaluation of information provided by 
Missouri. On June 22, 1998, our Office of Scientific Authority received 
a detailed request from the State of Missouri for approval of exports 
of river otter pelts for 1998-1999 and subsequent seasons. The June 22, 
1998, request from the State of Missouri Department of Conservation 
contained detailed analyses of data from the 1997-1998 season as well 
as previous seasons. This information is available on request from the 
Office of Scientific Authority.
    According to the State of Missouri, trappers took 1,146 otters in 
the 1997-1998 trapping season. The State believes that trapping 
pressure and the number of otters taken per licensed trapper (an index 
of population status) remained basically the same from previous years. 
Of those otters taken, the State tagged 1,128 with CITES tags provided 
by the Service. The State also analyzed and necropsied 260 river otters 
taken in the State as an important component of its assessment of river 
otter populations. The submission of June 22, 1998, from the State 
elaborates on these assessments. Using a number of indices and 
measurements, the State of Missouri has determined that reproductive 
rates are higher than previously predicted for river otters and that a 
healthy proportion of the river otter population in the State consists 
of juveniles and yearlings (both males and females), which reinforces 
the State's assertion that the population is increasing. The State also 
used population demographic data from otter necropsies and survival 
data from radio-telemetry studies to model otter population growth. The 
MDC has concluded that there is a pre-season estimated population of 
6,736 river otters in the State of Missouri, and that this population 
continues to increase.
    Ongoing river otter population surveys in Missouri have taken place 
both prior to and after the trapping season. Preliminary results 
indicate a stable or increasing population. The State also calculates 
indices of capture-per-unit-effort based on trapper diaries, but 
analysis of these data for the 1997-1998 season is not yet completed. 
The MDC has also used Archer's Index to Furbearer Populations to detect 
changes in furbearer populations; those results are consistent with an 
increase in river otter populations.
    The State of Missouri believes that its data support a conclusion 
that river otter populations are widely distributed and secure in 
Missouri. The Service notes that whether or not export approval is 
granted under CITES, the State of Missouri has primary responsibility 
for managing its river otter populations and will continue its trapping 
program. The State of Missouri is committed to continue its surveys, 
population monitoring, and population modeling. Based on: (1) The 
biological and other information provided by the Missouri Department of 
Conservation; (2) the existence of a management infrastructure in the 
State for managing and enforcing trapping regulations; and (3) the 
determination that permitting and tagging requirements will virtually 
eliminate the possibility that exporters will misrepresent other 
similar-appearing CITES-listed species in trade as river otters, the 
Service's Office of Scientific Authority proposes to issue advice to 
the Office of Management Authority that exports of river otter pelts of 
animals legally taken in the State of Missouri will not be detrimental 
to the population of other similar furbearer species listed in CITES 
Appendix I or II. Furthermore, the Office of Scientific Authority also 
believes that river otters in the United States do not qualify for 
inclusion in CITES Appendix II pursuant to Article II.2(a). Therefore, 
the Service proposes to add the State of Missouri to the list of States 
and Indian Nations approved for export of river otters.

Management Authority Findings

    Exports of Appendix-II species are allowed under CITES only if the 
Management Authority is satisfied that the specimens were not obtained 
in violation of laws for their protection. Therefore, to allow an 
export, we must be satisfied that applicants wishing to export river 
otter pelts, hides, or products obtained them in compliance with State, 
Indian, and Federal law. State or Tribal tagging programs provide 
evidence of legal take for the following native U.S. species: Alaskan 
gray wolf,

[[Page 52229]]

Alaska brown or grizzly bear, American alligator, bobcat, lynx, and 
river otter. The States and Tribes have responsibility for management 
of these species, and we assure ourselves that pelts are taken in 
accordance with State and Tribal law through a tagging program. The 
Service annually contracts for the manufacture and delivery of specific 
CITES animal-hide tags for States and Indian Nations that qualify. We 
note that, although the United States instituted this tagging 
requirement independently of CITES, the CITES Parties adopted it for 
all crocodilian species. The Office of Management Authority is 
responsible for ordering the tags for all approved States and Indian 
Nations and provides them at no charge. We have adopted the following 
export requirements for the 1983-1984 and subsequent seasons:
    (1) Current State or Indian Nation, Tribe, or Reservation hunting, 
trapping, and tagging regulations and sample tags must be on file with 
our Office of Management Authority;
    (2) The tags must be durable and permanently locking, and must show 
the U.S.-CITES logo, the name of the State or Indian Nation, Tribe, or 
Reservation of origin, the year of take, the species, and a unique 
serial number;
    (3) Trappers or other persons taking otters must attach tags to all 
pelts taken within a minimum time after take, as specified by the State 
or Indian regulation, and must do so as soon as possible to minimize 
movement of untagged pelts (even pelts not intended for export must be 
tagged);
    (4) Trappers or other persons taking otters must attach tags 
permanently as authorized and prescribed by the State or Indian 
regulation;
    (5) Takers/trappers/dealers who are licensed or registered by the 
State or Indian Nation must account for all tags received and must 
return unused tags to the State or Indian Nation within a specified 
time after the season closes; and
    (6) We will allow the export of fully manufactured fur or hide 
products from the United States only when the CITES export tags removed 
from the hides prior to manufacture are surrendered to us prior to 
export.

Proposed Export Decision

    We propose approval of exports of Missouri river otters taken 
during the 1998-1999 and subsequent seasons on the grounds that such 
exports meet the criteria for both the Scientific Authority and 
Management Authority under CITES.

Comments Solicited

    We invite your comments on these proposed findings and the proposed 
rule-making to add Missouri to the list of States approved for export 
of river otters. We particularly welcome any biological or other 
scientific information you may have or any analysis of the information 
provided by the State of Missouri Department of Conservation. In our 
final decision on this proposed rule, we will consider all comments 
received, as well as any additional information we may receive. Such 
consideration could lead to findings different from those presented in 
this proposal.
    Executive Order 12866 requires each agency to write regulations 
that are easy to understand. We invite your comments on how to make 
this notice easier to understand, including answers to questions such 
as the following: (1) Are the requirements in the proposed rule clearly 
stated? (2) Does the proposed rule contain technical language or jargon 
that interferes with its clarity? (3) Does the format of the proposed 
rule (grouping and order of sections, use of headings, paragraphing, 
etc.) aid or reduce its clarity? (4) Would the proposed rule be easier 
to understand if it were divided into more (but shorter) sections? (5) 
Is the description of the proposed rule in the SUPPLEMENTARY 
INFORMATION section of the preamble helpful in understanding the 
proposed rule? What else could we do to make the proposed rule easier 
to understand?
    Send a copy of any comments that concern how we could make this 
notice easier to understand to: Office of Regulatory Affairs, 
Department of the Interior, room 7229, 1849 C Street, NW, Washington, 
DC 20240. You may also e-mail the comments to this address: 
E[email protected].

Effects of the Rule and Required Determinations

    As a preface to this portion of the notice, we note that the 
issuance of Management Authority and Scientific Authority findings 
under CITES does not constitute rulemaking under the Administrative 
Procedures Act (APA). Nevertheless, we have used the rulemaking 
procedure to enhance involvement by the states and the public.
    The Department of the Interior previously determined (48 FR 37494, 
August 18, 1983) that the export of river otters from various States 
and Indian Tribes or Nations, taken in the 1983-1984 and subsequent 
seasons, is not a major Federal action that would significantly affect 
the quality of the human environment under the National Environmental 
Policy Act (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4347). Before a final decision is 
made on this proposed rule, the Fish and Wildlife Service will 
determine whether a finding of no significant impact is appropriate 
under regulations implementing NEPA.
    This proposed rule was not subject to Office of Management and 
Budget review under Executive Order 12866 and would not pose 
significant economic effects to a substantial number of small entities 
as outlined under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et 
seq.). Because the existing rule treats exports on a State-by-State and 
Indian Nation-by-Indian Nation basis and proposes to approve export in 
accordance with an already existing State or Indian Nation management 
program, the proposed rule would have little effect on small entities 
in and of itself. The proposed rule would allow continued international 
trade in river otters from the United States in according with CITES 
and does not contain any Federalism impacts as described in Executive 
Order 12612. This action is not expected to have significant taking 
implications for U.S. citizens, as per Executive Order No. 12630.

Information Collection Requirements

    We have examined this proposed regulation under the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995 and found it to contain no new information 
collection requirements for which Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
approval is required. Persons exporting river otter skins from the 
United States may obtain permits which are already authorized under 50 
CFR part 23 as approved by OMB and assigned clearance number 1018-0093. 
No new information collection or permit requirements are contained in 
this proposed regulation. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a 
person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless 
it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
    This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small 
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This rule does not have 
an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more; will not cause 
a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual 
industries, Federal, State, or local government agencies, or geographic 
regions; and does not have significant adverse effects on competition, 
employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability

[[Page 52230]]

of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises.
    In accordance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501, 
et seq.), this rule will not significantly or uniquely affect small 
governments, nor will it produce a Federal mandate of $100 million or 
greater in any year (i.e., it is not a significant regulatory action 
under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act).
    In accordance with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994, 
``Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal 
Governments'' (59 FR 22951) and 512 DM 2, we have evaluated possible 
effects on Federally recognized Indian tribes and have determined that 
there are no effects. Individual tribal members are subject to the same 
regulatory requirements as other individuals who export American river 
otters.
    In accordance with Executive Order 12988, the Office of the 
Solicitor has determined that the rule does not unduly burden the 
judicial system and meets the requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) 
of the Order. Specifically, this rule has been reviewed to eliminate 
errors and ambiguity, has been written to minimize litigation, provides 
a clear legal standard for affected conduct, and specifies in clear 
language the effect on existing Federal law or regulation.
    This proposed rule is issued under the authority of the Endangered 
Species Act of 1973 as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 23

    Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Treaties.

PART 23--ENDANGERED SPECIES CONVENTION

    Accordingly, the Service proposes to amend Part 23 of Title 50, 
Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth below:
    1. The authority citation for Part 23 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: Convention on International Trade in Endangered 
Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, 27 U.S.T. 1087; and Endangered 
Species Act of 1973, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.

    2. In Subpart F--Export of Certain Species, revise Sec. 23.53 to 
read as follows:


Sec. 23.53  River otter (Lontra canadensis).

    States for which we permit the export of the indicated season's 
take under Sec. 23.15 of this part:
    (a) States and Seasons Approved for Export of River Otter From the 
United States:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                        1983-84     1995-96     1998-99
                                              1977-78\1\  1978-79\2\  1979-80\3\    1980-81     1981-82     1982-83   and future  and future  and future
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama.....................................          Q           +           +           +           +           +           +           +           +
Alaska......................................          +           +           +           +           +           +           +           +           +
Arkansas....................................          Q           +           +           +           +           +           +           +           +
Connecticut.................................          Q           +           +           +           +           +           +           +           +
Delaware....................................          Q           +           +           +           +           +           +           +           +
Florida.....................................          Q           +           +           +           +           +           +           +           +
Georgia.....................................          Q           +           +           +           +           +           +           +           +
Louisiana...................................          Q           +           +           +           +           +           +           +           +
Maine.......................................          Q           +           +           +           +           +           +           +           +
Maryland....................................          Q           +           +           +           +           +           +           +           +
Massachusetts...............................          Q           +           +           +           +           +           +           +           +
Michigan....................................          Q           +           +           +           +           +           +           +           +
Minnesota...................................          Q           +           +           +           +           +           +           +           +
Mississippi.................................          Q           +           +           +           +           +           +           +           +
Missouri....................................          -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -        +\5\
Montana.....................................          Q           +           +           +           +           +           +           +           +
New Hampshire...............................          Q           +           +           +           +           +           +           +           +
New Jersey..................................          -           -           -           -           -           +           +           +           +
New York....................................          Q           +           +           +           +           +           +           +           +
North Carolina..............................          Q           +           +           +           +           +           +           +           +
Oregon......................................          Q           +           +           +           +           +           +           +           +
Penobscot Nation............................          -           -           -           -           -           -           +           +           +
Rhode Island................................          Q           +           -           -           -           -           -           -           -
South Carolina..............................          Q           +           +           +           +           +           +           +           +
Tennessee...................................          -           -           -           -           -           -           -        +\4\           +
Vermont.....................................          Q           +           +           +           +           +           +           +           +
Virginia....................................          Q           +           +           +           +           +           +           +           +
Washington..................................          Q           +           +           +           +           +           +           +           +
Wisconsin...................................          Q           +           +           +           +           +           +           +           +
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For further information, see 42 FR 43729, Aug. 30, 1977; 43 FR 11081, Mar. 16, 1978; and 43 FR 29469, July 7, 1978.
\2\ For further information, see 43 FR 11096, Mar. 16, 1978; 43 FR 13913, Apr. 3, 1978; 43 FR 15097, Apr. 10, 1978; 43 FR 29469, July 7, 1978; 43 FR
  35013, Aug. 7, 1978; 43 FR 36293, Aug. 16, 1978; and 43 FR 39305, Sept. 1, 1978.
\3\ For further information, see 44 FR 25383, Apr. 30, 1979; 44 FR 31583, May 31, 1979; 44 FR 40842, July 12, 1979; 44 FR 52289, Sept. 7, 1979; and 44
  FR 55540, Sept. 26, 1979.
\4\ Export for 1994-95 approved administratively (for Tennessee).
\5\ Export for 1996-97 and 1997-98 approved administratively (for Missouri).
Q: Export approved with quota.
+: Export approved.
-: Export not approved.

    (b) Condition on export: Exporters must clearly identify each pelt 
as to species, State, or Indian Nation of origin, and season of taking, 
by permanently attaching a serially numbered tag of a type approved by 
the Service and attached under conditions established by the Service. 
Exception to the tagging requirement: We will allow

[[Page 52231]]

the export of fully manufactured fur or hide products from the United 
States only when the CITES export tags removed from the hides prior to 
manufacture are surrendered to us prior to export. Such tags must be 
removed by cutting the tag straps on the side next to the locking 
socket of the tag, so that the locking socket and locking tip remain 
joined.

    Dated: September 22, 1998.
Stephen C. Saunders,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 98-25987 Filed 9-29-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P