[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 81 (Wednesday, April 27, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 23650-23683]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-9836]



[[Page 23649]]

Vol. 76

Wednesday,

No. 81

April 27, 2011

Part II





Department of the Interior





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



Fish and Wildlife Service



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



50 CFR Part 17



Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Finding on a 
Petition and Proposed Rule To Remove the Morelet's Crocodile From the 
Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife; Proposed Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 76 , No. 81 / Wednesday, April 27, 2011 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 23650]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

[Docket No. FWS-R9-ES-2010-0030; 92210-1113-0000-C6]
RIN 1018-AV22


Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Finding 
on a Petition and Proposed Rule To Remove the Morelet's Crocodile From 
the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: Under the authority of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 
amended (Act), we, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), 
announce a 12-month finding on a petition and a proposed rule to remove 
the Morelet's crocodile (Crocodylus moreletii) throughout its range 
from the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife due to 
recovery. This action is based on a thorough review of the best 
available scientific and commercial data, including new information 
that became available after we received the petition, which indicates 
that the species' status had improved to the point that the Morelet's 
crocodile is not likely to become threatened within the foreseeable 
future throughout all or a significant portion of its range. If this 
proposed rule is finalized, the Morelet's crocodile will remain 
protected under the provisions of the Convention on International Trade 
in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. We are seeking 
information, data, and comments from the public on this proposed rule.

DATES: To ensure that we are able to consider your comments on this 
proposed rule, they must be received or postmarked on or before June 
27, 2011. We must receive requests for public hearings, in writing, at 
the address shown in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section below 
by June 13, 2011.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Search for docket number FWS-R9-ES-2010-0030 and then follow the 
instructions for submitting comments.
     U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public Comments Processing, 
Attn: FWS-R9-ES-2010-0030; Division of Policy and Directives 
Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, 
Suite 222; Arlington, VA 22203.
    We will not accept comments by e-mail or fax. We will post all 
comments on http://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we 
will post any personal information you provide us (see the Public 
Comments section below for more information).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Janine Van Norman, Chief, Branch of 
Foreign Species, Endangered Species Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Room 420, Arlington, VA 22203, 
U.S.A.; telephone 703-358-2171; facsimile 703-358-1735. Individuals who 
are hearing-impaired or speech-impaired may call the Federal 
Information Relay Service at 800-877-8339 for TTY assistance 24 hours a 
day, 7 days a week.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Public Comments

    Any final action resulting from this proposed rule will be based on 
the best scientific and commercial data available and be as accurate 
and effective as possible. Therefore, we request comments or 
information from other concerned government agencies, the scientific 
community, industry, or other interested parties concerning this 
proposed rule. The comments that will be most useful and likely to 
influence our decisions are those supported by data or peer-reviewed 
studies and those that include citations to, and analyses of, 
applicable laws and regulations. Please make your comments as specific 
as possible and explain the basis for them. In addition, please include 
sufficient information with your comments to allow us to authenticate 
any scientific or commercial data you reference or provide. In 
particular, we seek comments concerning the following:
    (1) New biological, trade, or other relevant information and data 
concerning any threat (or lack thereof) to the Morelet's crocodile.
    (2) New information and data on whether or not climate change is a 
threat to the Morelet's crocodile, what regional climate change models 
are available, and whether they are reliable and credible to use as 
step-down models for assessing the effect of climate change on the 
species and its habitat.
    (3) The location of any additional populations of Morelet's 
crocodile.
    (4) New information and data concerning the range, distribution, 
and population size and population trends of the Morelet's crocodile.
    (5) New information and data on the current or planned activities 
within the geographic range of the Morelet's crocodile that may affect 
or benefit the species.
    (6) New information and data concerning captive breeding operations 
in Mexico, Belize, and Guatemala.
    (7) New information and data on the Morelet's crocodile in 
Guatemala that would enhance our analysis of whether this population 
qualifies as a Distinct Population Segment under the Act (16 U.S.C. 
1531 et seq.), and whether this population warrants continued 
protection under the Act.
    (8) Information and data concerning the status and results of 
monitoring actions for the Morelet's crocodile, including those 
implemented under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered 
Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), the Belize-Guatemala-Mexico 
Tri-national Strategy for the Conservation and Sustainable Use of 
Morelet's Crocodile, and the Belizean monitoring plan that are 
discussed under the Post-Delisting Monitoring section below.
    (9) Information pertaining to Belize's efforts to fully enact 
national legislation and/or their efforts to ensure Belize's compliance 
with CITES.
    Please note that submissions merely stating support for or 
opposition to the action under consideration without providing 
supporting information, although noted, will not be considered in 
making a determination, as section 4(b)(1)(A) of the Endangered Species 
Act of 1973, as amended (Act; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) directs that a 
determination as to whether any species is an endangered or threatened 
species must be made ``solely on the basis of the best scientific and 
commercial data available.''
    Prior to issuing a final rule on this proposed action, we will take 
into consideration all comments and any additional information we 
receive. Such information may lead to a final rule that differs from 
this proposal. All comments and recommendations, including names and 
addresses, will become part of the administrative record.
    You may submit your comments and materials concerning this proposed 
rule by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. We will not 
consider comments sent by e-mail or fax or to an address not listed in 
the ADDRESSES section. If you submit a comment via http://www.regulations.gov, your entire comment--including any personal 
identifying information--will be posted on the Web site. Please note 
that comments posted to this Web site are not immediately viewable. 
When you submit a comment, the system receives

[[Page 23651]]

it immediately. However, the comment will not be publicly viewable 
until we post it, which might not occur until several days after 
submission.
    If you mail or hand-deliver a hardcopy comment that includes 
personal identifying information, you may request at the top of your 
document that we withhold this information from public review. However, 
we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. To ensure that the 
electronic docket for this rulemaking is complete and all comments we 
receive are publicly available, we will post all hardcopy submissions 
on http://www.regulations.gov.
    In addition, comments and materials we receive, as well as 
supporting documentation used in preparing this proposed rule, will be 
available for public inspection in two ways:
    (1) You can view them on http://www.regulations.gov. In the Enter 
Keyword or ID box, enter FWS-R9-ES-2010-0030, which is the docket 
number for this rulemaking.
    (2) You can make an appointment, during normal business hours, to 
view the comments and materials in person at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service's Endangered Species Program located in our Headquarters office 
(see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

Public Availability of Comments

    Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or 
other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be 
aware that your entire comment--including your personal identifying 
information--might be made publicly available at any time. While you 
can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying 
information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be 
able to do so.

Public Hearing

    Section 4(b)(5)(E) of the Act provides for one or more public 
hearings on this proposed rule, if requested. We must receive requests 
for public hearings, in writing, at the address shown in the FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by the date shown in the DATES 
section of this document. We will schedule public hearings on this 
proposal, if any are requested, and announce the dates, times, and 
places of those hearings, as well as how to obtain reasonable 
accommodations, in the Federal Register at least 15 days before the 
first hearing.

Background

    Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires the Service to make an 
initial finding as to whether a petition to list, delist, or reclassify 
a species has presented substantial information indicating that the 
requested action may be warranted. To the maximum extent practicable, 
the finding shall be made within 90 days following receipt of the 
petition and published promptly in the Federal Register. If the 90-day 
finding is positive--that is, the petition has presented substantial 
information indicating that the requested action may be warranted--
section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires the Service to commence a status 
review of the species if one has not already been initiated under the 
Service's internal candidate assessment process. In addition, section 
4(b)(3)(B) of the Act requires the Service to make a finding within 12 
months following receipt of the petition on whether the requested 
action is warranted, not warranted, or warranted but precluded by 
higher-priority listing actions. That finding is referred to as the 
``12-month finding.''

Previous Federal Actions

    The Morelet's crocodile was listed as endangered throughout its 
entire range under the predecessor of the Act via a rule published in 
the Federal Register on June 2, 1970 (35 FR 8491). Import into, export 
from, or re-export from the United States, as well as other 
prohibitions, including movement in the course of a commercial activity 
and sale in interstate or foreign commerce, of endangered species and 
their parts and products, are prohibited under the Act unless otherwise 
authorized. Authorizations for endangered species can only be made for 
scientific purposes or to enhance the propagation or survival of the 
species. On July 1, 1975, the Morelet's crocodile was listed in 
Appendix I of CITES. These protections were put in place because the 
species had suffered substantial population declines throughout its 
range due to habitat destruction and overexploitation through the 
commercial crocodilian skin trade. CITES Appendix I includes species 
that are ``threatened with extinction which are or may be affected by 
trade.''
    On May 26, 2005, the Service received a petition from the 
Government of Mexico's Comisi[oacute]n Nacional para el Conocimiento y 
Uso de la Biodiversidad (CONABIO 2005) to remove the Morelet's 
crocodile from the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife at 50 CFR 
17.11.
    Based on the information provided, the Service's 90-day finding on 
the petition, which was published in the Federal Register on June 28, 
2006 (71 FR 36743), stated that the petition provided substantial 
information to indicate that the requested action may be warranted. In 
that finding, we announced that we had initiated a status review of the 
species as required under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act, and that we 
were seeking comments on the petition, as well as information on the 
status of the species, particularly in Belize and Guatemala. The 
Service also solicited comments or additional information from 
counterparts in Mexico, Belize and Guatemala.
    This proposed rule to delist the Morelet's crocodile throughout its 
range also constitutes our 12-month finding that the petitioned action 
is warranted.

Species Information

    Three species of crocodilians occur in Mexico and Central America. 
The Morelet's crocodile and the American crocodile (Crocodylus acutus) 
co-occur in Mexico, Belize, and Guatemala (Schmidt 1924, pp. 79 and 85; 
Stuart 1948, p. 45). While their ranges overlap, the American crocodile 
has a much larger range than the Morelet's crocodile, and is found in 
the United States in the State of Florida, as well as in the Caribbean, 
on Pacific and Atlantic coasts of Central America and northern South 
America in Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador, and northern Peru. A third 
species, the common or spectacled caiman (Caiman crocodilus) occurs in 
Mexico and Guatemala, but is absent from Belize. The distribution of 
the common caiman also extends into northern South America (Ross 1998, 
pp. 14-17; Thorbjarnarson 1992, pp. 82-85). The Morelet's crocodile was 
named after a French naturalist, P.M.A. Morelet (1809-1892), who 
discovered this species in Mexico in 1850 (Britton 2008, p. 1). The 
type locality of the species was later restricted to ``Guatemala, El 
Peten, Laguna de Peten'' when the species was scientifically described. 
In Mexico, the Morelet's crocodile is known as ``lagarto'' or ``swamp 
crocodile'' (Rodriguez-Quivedo et al, 2008).
    The Morelet's crocodile is a ``relatively small species'' that 
usually attains a maximum length of approximately 9.8-11.5 ft (3-3.5 m 
(S[aacute]nchez (2005, p. 4); Britton (2008, p. 1)), with most wild 
adults ranging in length 6.6-8.2 ft (2-2.5 m). Hurley (2005, p. 2), 
however, reported specimens attaining 15.4 ft (4.7 m). Platt and 
Rainwater (2005, p. 25) stated that size estimates where shorter 
lengths were documented were probably based on populations that had 
been heavily impacted by hunting and which now contained few large 
adults. The Morelet's crocodile is distinguished

[[Page 23652]]

from other crocodiles, particularly the partially sympatric (having the 
same or overlapping distribution) and somewhat larger American 
crocodile, by the number of dorsal scales in each transverse row on its 
back, the number and arrangement of nuchal scales (located at the nape 
of the neck), and irregular scales on the ventrolateral (lower side) 
surface of the tail (Meerman 1994, p. 110; Navarro Serment 2004, pp. 
55-56; Platt and Rainwater 2005, p. 27; Hern[aacute]ndez Hurtado et al. 
2006, p. 376; Platt et al. 2008b, p. 294). The Morelet's crocodile has 
six nuchal scales of similar size compared to other crocodile species, 
which have either four nuchal scales or four large nuchal scales and 
two small ones (CITES 2010a, p.11). Unlike most other species of 
crocodilians, the Morelet's crocodile lacks bony plates beneath the 
skin (osteoderms), making their skin more valuable as leather (Hurley 
2005, p. 9). Adults have a yellowish-olive black skin, usually showing 
big black spots at the tail and at the back area, which in some adults 
can be entirely black. The ventral (underside) area is light in color, 
with a creamy yellowish tone. A thick and soft skin has made the 
Morelet's crocodile desirable for commercialization (CITES 2010a, p. 
3).
    Opportunistic carnivores, juvenile Morelet's crocodiles feed on 
small invertebrates, especially insects and arachnids, while subadults 
eat a more diverse diet including mollusks, crustaceans, fish, 
amphibians, and small reptiles. Adult crocodiles consume reptiles, 
birds, and mammals (Platt et al. 2002, p. 82; S[aacute]nchez 2005, p. 
7; Platt et al. 2006, pp. 283-285; CITES 2008, p. 9, CITES 2010a, p. 
3). This species is also known to exhibit necrophagy (consumption of 
dead animal carcasses over an extended period (several days)) and 
interspecific kleptoparasitism (stealing of food from an individual by 
another individual) (Platt et al. 2007, p. 310).
    Morelet's crocodiles attain sexual maturity at about 4.9 ft (1.5 m) 
in length, at approximately 7-8 years of age. A growth rate of 0.63 
inches (in) per month (1.6 centimeters (cm) per month) was observed in 
Morelet's crocodiles during the first 3 years of life under protected 
conditions in Mexico, while a rate of 0.94-1.18 in per month (2.4-3.0 
cm per month) was achieved under farming conditions (P[eacute]rez-
Higareda et al. 1995, p. 173). Adult females build nests and lay 20-40 
eggs per clutch (Hurley 2005, p. 3; S[aacute]nchez 2005, p. 6), with an 
average of 35 eggs per clutch (CITES 2008, p. 9, CITES 2010a, p. 3). 
Nests, usually constructed of leaf mounds at the beginning of the wet 
season (April-June), are located on the shores of freshwater wetlands, 
as well as in coastal lagoons and mangrove patches (Platt et al. 2008a, 
pp. 179-182).
    An analysis based on DNA microsatellite data from hatchlings 
collected at 10 Morelet's crocodile nests in Belize showed that progeny 
from five of the 10 nests were sired by at least two males (McVay et 
al. 2008, p. 643). These data suggested that multiple paternity was a 
mating strategy for the Morelet's crocodile and was not an isolated 
event. In addition, this information may be useful in the application 
of conservation and management techniques for the species.
    The eggs of Morelet's crocodiles hatch in September-October, 65-90 
days after they are laid. Females attend the nest during incubation, 
and can assist the newborns to leave the nest. Both parents protect 
juveniles against predators and other adult crocodiles (CITES 2010a, p. 
3). Nest failures due to flooding and predation, both avian and 
mammalian, are common (Platt et al. 2008a, p. 184). Expected lifespan 
in the wild is 50-65 years (Hurley 2005, p. 4.) The Morelet's crocodile 
exhibits and shares with other crocodilians many acoustic and visual 
signals that convey reproductive, territorial, and other types of 
information (Senter 2008, p. 354).
    The Morelet's crocodile occurs primarily in freshwater environments 
such as lakes, swamps, and slow-moving rivers, but can temporarily 
inhabit intermittent freshwater bodies, such as flooded savannahs, and 
occasionally observed in brackish coastal lagoons (Villegas 2006, p. 
8). Floating and emergent vegetation provide cover to protect young 
crocodiles from predators, including cannibalism by adult crocodiles 
(S[aacute]nchez 2005, p. 7). In contrast to the Morelet's crocodile, 
the American crocodile feeds mainly on fish and occurs primarily in 
coastal or brackish environments, such as coastal mangrove swamps, 
brackish and salt water bays, lagoons, marshes, tidal rivers, and 
brackish creeks. American crocodiles can also be found in abandoned 
coastal canals and borrow pits and may range inland into freshwater 
environments preferred by the Morelet's crocodile such as lakes and 
lower reaches of large rivers. American and Morelet's crocodiles have 
been known to lay eggs within the same nest mound as conspecifics, 
suggesting a more gregarious and tolerant demeanor (Brien et al. 2007, 
pp. 17-18).
    The historical distribution of the Morelet's crocodile comprised 
the eastern coastal plain of Mexico, most of the Yucatan Peninsula, 
Belize, and northern Guatemala (Hurley 2005, p. 1), with an estimated 
historical distribution covering 173,746 mi\2\ (450,000 km\2\) (Sigler 
and Dom[iacute]nguez Laso 2008, pp. 11-12). Based on the analyses 
conducted for the petition, approximately 51 percent of the original 
geographic distribution in Mexico remains undisturbed, while 
approximately 49 percent is disturbed or altered. In linear terms, the 
amount of undisturbed shoreline habitat available in Mexico to the 
Morelet's crocodile is about 15,534 mi (25,000 km) of shoreline, which 
is approximately 72 percent of the total undisturbed shoreline habitat 
available throughout the species' range. According to CONABIO, the 
amount of undisturbed shoreline habitat available to the Morelet's 
crocodile in Belize and Guatemala is estimated to be 2,050 mi (3,300 
km) and 4,163 mi (6,700 km), respectively, or 9 and 19 percent of the 
total undisturbed shoreline habitat available throughout the species' 
range (CONABIO 2005, pp. 16-19).
    Historical estimates of total population sizes in the three range 
countries are unavailable or imprecise, and we were not able to find 
any additional data on historical, range-wide population estimates for 
the species. While not quantifiable or documented by field surveys, Lee 
(1996, p. 134) characterized the historical distribution and abundance 
of the Morelet's crocodile in the Yucatan Peninsula of Mexico as 
follows: ``Throughout its range, nearly every local aguada (flood) has 
(or had) its lagarto, which generally proves to be C. moreletii.'' The 
same probably could be said about Belize and Guatemala.
    It has been widely reported, however, that by the middle of the 
20th Century, populations of Morelet's crocodiles were widely depleted 
due primarily to overharvest for commercial purposes during the 1940s-
1950s. In ``Crocodiles: An action plan for their conservation,'' 
Thorbjarnarson (1992, p. 68 and the references cited therein) 
characterized the Mexican populations of Morelet's crocodiles in the 
early 1990s as very depleted in the Mexican States of Tamaulipas and 
Veracruz, recovering to some degree and viable in northeastern Mexico, 
and severely threatened in Tabasco State and Campeche State. However, 
populations of Morelet's crocodiles were not depleted in southern 
Chiapas State and eastern Quintana Roo State (Sian Ka'an Biosphere 
Reserve).
    Few historical estimates for the Morelet's crocodile in Belize are 
available, but based on surveys during 1978 and 1979, Abercrombie et 
al.

[[Page 23653]]

(1980, p. 103) reported that very few adults were observed in areas 
where they had previously been relatively abundant. This condition was 
attributed to overexploitation (i.e., commercial trade in hides). 
Thorbjarnarson (1992, p. 55) characterized the Morelet's crocodile 
populations in the early 1990s as generally depleted in the northern 
part of Belize, but relatively abundant in several other areas. 
Abercrombie et al. estimated the total population of Morelet's 
crocodiles older than 9 months of age in Belize at 2,200-2,500 
individuals (Abercrombie et al. 1982, p. 16). Nothing was known in the 
scientific literature at that time about populations in the southern 
part of Belize. The only available countrywide estimates for the 
Morelet's crocodile in Belize suggested a total population size of 
25,000-30,000 individuals that was declining in number in 1945, was 
near depletion between 1970 and 1980, and, in response to several 
protective measures, had undergone a slow recovery by 2000 to about 
20,000 individuals (Finger et al. 2002, p. 199).
    Thorbjarnarson (1992, p. 64) characterized the Guatemalan 
populations in the early 1990s as depleted, but capable of recovery. He 
indicated that 75 individuals had been reported at three lakes in the 
Pet[eacute]n Region, in the northern portion of the country, and that 
Morelet's crocodiles were known to be common in other parts of that 
region.
    By the late 1990s, little had changed with regard to our knowledge 
of the distribution and abundance of the Morelet's crocodile. In 
``Crocodiles: Status survey and conservation action plan (second 
edition),'' Ross (1998, pp. 46-47) characterized several populations of 
Morelet's crocodiles in all three countries as depleted. In some areas, 
however, including the Lacand[oacute]n Forest (Chiapas State, Mexico) 
and the Sian Ka'an Biosphere Reserve (Quintana Roo State, Mexico), 
healthy populations of the Morelet's crocodile existed. These findings 
were based on anecdotal reports and incidental records; numerical data 
were not readily available.
    Based on extrapolations of habitat relationships (e.g., vegetation 
type, size of wetland/riverine feature, and disturbance factors; 
described in more detail in CONABIO 2005, pp. 16-19) and frequency of 
encounter rates (derived from country-specific field research), the 
potential global population of free-ranging Morelet's crocodiles in 
2004 was estimated to be 102,432 individuals (all age classes; 79,718 
individuals in Mexico, 8,803 in Belize, and 13,911 in Guatemala), 
including approximately 19,400 adults (CONABIO 2005, pp. 17-19).

Summary of Factors Affecting the Species

    Section 4 of the Act and its implementing regulations, 50 CFR part 
424, set forth the procedures for listing, reclassifying, or removing 
species from the Federal Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 
and Plants. ``Species'' is defined by the Act as including any species 
or subspecies of fish or wildlife or plants, and any distinct 
vertebrate population segment of fish or wildlife that interbreeds when 
mature (16 U.S.C. 1532(16)). Once the ``species'' is determined, we 
then evaluate whether that species may be endangered or threatened 
because of one or more of the five factors described in section 4(a)(1) 
of the Act. We must consider these same five factors in reclassifying 
or delisting a species. For species that are already listed as 
endangered or threatened, the analysis of threats must include an 
evaluation of both the threats currently facing the species, and the 
threats that are reasonably likely to affect the species in the 
foreseeable future following the delisting or downlisting and the 
removal or reduction of the Act's protections. We may delist a species 
according to 50 CFR 424.11(d) if the best available scientific and 
commercial data indicate that the species is neither endangered nor 
threatened for the following reasons: (1) The species is extinct; (2) 
the species has recovered and is no longer endangered or threatened; 
and/or (3) the original scientific data used at the time the species 
was classified were in error.

Factor A. Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or 
Curtailment of the Species' Habitat or Range

    The overharvest for commercial purposes, rather than habitat 
destruction or modification, was the primary reason for the Morelet's 
crocodile being listed under the Act and its inclusion in CITES. 
However, the Five Factor Analysis under the Act requires an analysis of 
current and future potential impacts to the species based on 
modification or destruction of habitat.
    The petition (CONABIO 2005) highlights habitat degradation as a 
potential threat, especially if it involves lack of prey and eventual 
contamination of water bodies. Currently, the extent of habitat 
degradation is estimated to be moderate in Mexico and Belize, and 
slightly higher in northern Pet[eacute]n, Guatemala (CONABIO 2005, 
Annex 1, p. 10). However, as stated previously, historical estimates of 
range-wide habitat destruction for the Morelet's crocodile are 
unavailable or imprecise. We found that the data on habitat destruction 
was primarily presented separately for each individual country. 
Therefore, the following analysis of the potential threats to the 
species from habitat destruction or modification first presents the 
specific information available for the Morelet's crocodile in each 
country, and then presents the general information that was available 
for the species as a whole.

Mexico

    The Morelet's crocodile is known historically from 10 states in 
Mexico (from east to west): Quintana Roo, Yucat[aacute]n, Campeche, 
Chiapas, Tabasco, Veracruz, Oaxaca, Hidalgo, San Luis Potos[iacute], 
and Tamaulipas ([Aacute]guilar 2005, p. 2). Based on available 
information and interviews during a 1995 site visit to Mexico by the 
IUCN Crocodile Specialist Group, Ross (1998, p. 13) suggested ``with 
some confidence'' that the Morelet's crocodile was widely distributed 
throughout most of its original range. At the request of the 
petitioner, these states were resurveyed to assess current Morelet's 
crocodile populations in those areas.
    Surveys conducted between 2000 and 2004 documented the widespread 
distribution and relative abundance of wild populations of the 
Morelet's crocodile in Mexico (Dom[iacute]nguez-Laso et al. 2005, pp. 
21-30; also summarized in S[aacute]nchez Herrera 2000, pp. 17-19; 
CONABIO 2005, pp. 11-13 and Annex 5; S[aacute]nchez Herrera and 
[Aacute]lvarez-Romero 2008, page 415; Garc[iacute]a et al. 2007, pp. 
31-32; Sigler and Dom[iacute]nguez Laso 2008, pp. 11-13). Surveys found 
Morelet's crocodiles at 63 sites across all 10 Mexican states 
comprising the species' entire historic range in Mexico (CONABIO 2005, 
p. 12). Habitat evaluations based on five environmental components 
rated habitat quality as excellent at 10 sites (24 percent), or as 
favorable or suitable at 24 sites (57 percent). Furthermore, evidence 
of the presence of the Morelet's crocodile was found in cultivated 
areas and at sites with ``intermediate'' quality habitats (CONABIO 
2005, p. 13). This suggested that the Morelet's crocodile does not 
require undisturbed habitat in order to occupy a site. Habitat mapping 
resulted in an estimated minimum of 15,675 mi (25,227 km) of shoreline 
as suitable Morelet's crocodile habitat in Mexico, which is 72 percent 
of the estimated suitable shoreline habitat available throughout the 
species range (CONABIO 2005, pp. 14-16).

[[Page 23654]]

    Population characteristics of the Morelet's crocodiles in Mexico 
were also determined during the 2000-2004 field surveys. All age 
classes were well represented (34 percent juveniles; 47 percent 
subadults; and 19 percent adults), indicating good recruitment 
(Dom[iacute]nguez-Laso et al. 2005, p. 31). A higher proportion of 
males to females (1.55 to 1 overall versus about 1 male per female) was 
observed in all age classes, except older subadults (Dom[iacute]nguez-
Laso et al. 2005, pp. 33-34). Mean frequency of encounter, based on 62 
localities surveyed--excluding one outlier site with an atypically 
large crocodile population--was 5.76 individuals per 0.62 mi (= 1 
kilometer (km)) of shoreline (mode = 3.16 individuals per km); 
Dom[iacute]nguez-Laso et al. 2005, pp. 30, 40). These frequency of 
encounter rates were similar to those reported for other sites, for 
example: (1) Sigler et al. (2002, p. 222) reported rates of 8.33-18.5 
individuals per km at various sites throughout Mexico and commented 
that these were the highest rates ever reported for that country; (2) 
Cede[ntilde]o-V[aacute]zquez (2002, p. 353) reported rates of 1-2 
individuals per km, when present (22 of 40 surveys; 711 individuals 
counted; all age classes represented; hatchlings in September), at 
Bahia de Chetumal and R[iacute]o Hondo, Mexico (n = 17 sites) and 
commented on the recovery of the species; (3) Cede[ntilde]o-
V[aacute]zquez et al. (2006, p. 15) reported rates of 7.6 and 5.3 
individuals per km at La Arrigue[ntilde]a, Campeche State, and 
commented that this suggested a healthy population. A population 
estimate--based on (a) extrapolations of 3.16 individuals per km, (b) 
19 percent adults, and (c) a cautious estimate of occupied habitat 
(15,675 mi (25,227 km) of river habitat)--produced a result of 
approximately 79,718 wild individuals (all ages) in Mexico comprising 
78 percent of the total wild population, including approximately 15,146 
adults in Mexico (Dom[iacute]nguez-Laso 2005, p. 40).
    New information now available to the Service documents updates in 
the geographic distribution of the Morelet's crocodile in Mexico. 
Because of several unauthorized introductions or escapes from captive-
breeding facilities in areas outside of the reported range of the 
species, the Morelet's crocodile has become established in the wild at 
three sites: Chacahua, Oaxaca State; Villa Flores, Chiapas State; and 
Laguna de Alcuzahue, Colima State ([Aacute]lvarez Romero et al. 2008, 
p. 415). Several captive-breeding facilities along the Pacific coast in 
western Mexico contain Morelet's crocodiles. These facilities are 
located in areas outside of the reported range of the species, but 
potentially with appropriate habitat for this species. Concerns have 
been raised about these introductions and the potential negative 
impacts of this ``exotic'' or ``invasive'' species on the local biota 
([Aacute]lvarez Romero et al. 2008, pp. 415 and 417). The Government of 
Mexico is making efforts to diagnose potential threats to the native 
American crocodile caused by hybridization with the introduced 
Morelet's crocodile on the Pacific coast of Mexico. The goal of these 
efforts is to generate morphological and molecular identification 
materials and study the population dynamics of the American crocodile. 
It will include monitoring and harvest of Morelet's crocodiles and 
hybrids for scientific research (CITES 2010a, p. 6).
    According to the information presented in CONABIO 2005, the 
Morelet's crocodile in Mexico occupies at least 12 protected areas 
(CONABIO 2005, p. 30 and Annex 6). Part of the Sistema Nacional de 
[Aacute]reas Naturales Protegidas (SINANP or National System of 
Protected Natural Areas, described more fully in the Factor D section, 
Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms), encompasses 13 percent 
of the species' range and include the following areas: Los Tuxtlas 
Biosphere Reserve, Pantanos de Centla Biosphere Reserve, Laguna de 
T[eacute]rminos Biosphere Reserve, Hampolol Wildlife Conservation and 
Research Center, El Palmar State Preserve, R[iacute]a Lagartos 
Biosphere Reserve, Yum Balam Biosphere Reserve, Laguna Nichupte, Sian 
Ka'an Biosphere Reserve, Bahia Chetumal (Bay) and R[iacute]o Hondo 
(River).
    The Government of Mexico's 2010 CITES proposal to transfer the 
Morelet's crocodile from CITES Appendix I to CITES Appendix II provided 
updated information on the number of protected areas for the Morelet's 
crocodile in Mexico. About 77 Federal and certified protected areas in 
Mexico provide shelter and legal protection to the Morelet's crocodile 
in its potential range. Of these, 11 have records of the species 
covering 7,763,147 acres (ac) (3,141,634 hectares (ha)) (CITES 2010a, 
pp. 11, 17-20). The Government of Mexico designated eight of the eleven 
protected areas containing Morelet's crocodiles as Biosphere Reserves, 
and the three remaining protected areas containing Morelet's crocodiles 
as Flora and Fauna Protection Areas. As stated above, these protected 
areas are part of SINANP (described more fully in the Factor D section, 
Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms).
    The Government of Mexico's 2010 CITES proposal used both a 
narrative description (CITES 2010a, p. 11) and a list (CITES 2010a, pp. 
17-20) to indicate that there are 11 federally protected areas in 
Mexico containing Morelet's crocodile. CONABIO 2005 used a narrative 
description (CONABIO 2005, p. 30) to indicate that there are at least 
12 federally protected areas in Mexico containing Morelet's crocodile 
(CONABIO 2005, p. 30), but did not include a list of the federally 
protected areas. Based on the information available to the Service, we 
were unable to find any additional data to explain the difference 
between in the numbers of federally protected areas cited in these two 
documents. The Government of Mexico's 2010 CITES proposal is the more 
recent document, and we consider it to contain the best available 
scientific and commercial data on the number of federally protected 
areas in Mexico.
    The Convention on Wetlands of International Importance especially 
as Waterfowl Habitat (also known as the Ramsar Convention) is an 
intergovernmental treaty that provides a framework for international 
cooperation for the conservation of wetland habitats. CONABIO 2005 did 
not provide information on whether the Ramsar Convention protects any 
Morelet's crocodile habitat in Mexico. However, this information was 
included in the Government of Mexico's 2010 CITES proposal. According 
to their 2010 CITES proposal, there are 41 Ramsar sites in the 
potential range of the Morelet's crocodile in Mexico, 13 of which have 
records of the species covering 6,779,875 ac (2,743,718 ha) (CITES 
2010a, pp. 11, 17-20).
    According to the information presented in CONABIO 2005, one of the 
main potential threats to the Morelet's crocodile is habitat 
destruction and fragmentation due to residential and infrastructure 
development, such as dams, roads, residential areas, and irrigated 
fields (CONABIO 2005, Annex 2, pp. 4-5). The information presented in 
CONABIO 2005 indicated that land reform and the ensuing colonization of 
undeveloped areas is a potential threat to the Morelet's crocodile, but 
the Government of Mexico has no such actions planned at this time 
(CONABIO 2005, p. 33). This threat of habitat degradation is 
ameliorated in Mexico by the Ley General de Equilibrio Ecol[oacute]gico 
y Protecci[oacute]n al Ambiente (LGEEPA; General Ecological Equilibrium 
and Environmental Protection Law). This 1988 law has strict 
restrictions against land use changes in Mexico, especially for 
undisturbed habitat such as those areas used by the Morelet's crocodile 
(CONABIO 2005, p. 25). This law is supported by several others in 
Mexico

[[Page 23655]]

that ensure the conservation of native flora and fauna in Mexico (see 
discussion in the Factor D section, Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory 
Mechanisms; also see CONABIO 2005, Annex 3).
    According to the information presented by CONABIO, even in the 
historic context of prolonged habitat alteration, wild populations of 
Morelet's crocodiles remained abundant; so much so that large, 
commercial exploitation of the species was occurring up until Federal 
and international protections were put in place 40 years ago. 
Alteration of Morelet's crocodile habitat occurring since then may have 
produced some additional reductions in local populations, but these 
reductions are not comparable to those of the past. In addition, even 
in areas where changes to the original environment are not reversible, 
evidence points to a certain degree of tolerance by Morelet's 
crocodiles, especially when the habitat alterations are a result of 
agriculture or low technology livestock production (CONABIO 2005, p. 
25).
    Based on surveys, it appears that the Morelet's crocodile in Mexico 
occurs in all 10 states from where it traditionally has been reported 
(CONABIO 2005, pp. 11-19). Although approximately 49 percent of the 
original range in Mexico has been altered, much of the altered habitat 
is still occupied by the Morelet's crocodile. Approximately 77,220 
mi\2\ (200,000 km\2\) of undisturbed habitat remains in Mexico, which 
is equivalent to approximately 15,534 mi (25,000 km) of shoreline. The 
Government of Mexico protects habitat occupied by the Morelet's 
crocodile in 11 areas designated by the Government of Mexico as either 
Biosphere Reserves or Flora and Fauna Protection Areas covering a total 
of 7,763,147 ac (3,141,634 ha). In addition, the Ramsar Convention 
protects Morelet's crocodile habitat at 13 sites in Mexico covering 
6,779,875 ac (2,743,718 ha). We do not have any information or data on 
the amount of geographic overlap, if any, between the areas of habitat 
protected by the Government of Mexico versus that protected by the 
Ramsar Convention. Therefore, we considered these two protection 
mechanisms as providing separate, but complimentary, habitat protection 
as part of our analysis of habitat protection under this proposed rule.
    We find that the information presented in the petition, as well as 
the additional information available to the Service, represents the 
best available scientific and commercial data on habitat destruction or 
modification for Morelet's crocodiles in Mexico. Although moderate 
habitat destruction or modification is currently affecting local 
populations of Morelet's crocodiles in Mexico, and this is likely to 
continue in the foreseeable future, these activities would not have a 
significant impact on the species because they would be subject to 
conservation measures under the Government of Mexico's regulatory 
framework. This framework will continue to provide adequate protection 
to the Morelet's crocodile and its habitat in the foreseeable future. 
Surveys conducted found Morelet's crocodiles at 63 sites across all 10 
Mexican states comprising the species' entire historic range in Mexico 
(CONABIO 2005, p. 12). Given that Mexico contains more than 85 percent 
of the species' natural range, an estimated 78 percent of all wild 
individuals, that 7,763,147 ac (3,141,634 ha) of habitat are protected 
by the Government of Mexico, and that 6,779,875 ac (2,743,718 ha) of 
habitat are protected by the Ramsar Convention, we conclude that 
habitat destruction or modification is neither a threat, nor is it 
anticipated to significantly impact the Morelet's crocodile in Mexico 
in the foreseeable future.

Belize

    The Morelet's crocodile was historically known from all six states 
in Belize (from north to south): Corozal, Orange Walk, Belize, Cayo, 
Stann Creek, and Toledo (Anonymous 1998). According to information 
provided by CONABIO, virtually all of the country contained suitable 
habitat for the species. The style of economic development in Belize 
has not required massive alteration of the natural environment. Thus, 
in general, no extensive and drastic alteration of Morelet's crocodile 
habitat has occurred in Belize (CONABIO 2005, p. 26). The current 
amount of altered versus unaltered current habitat for the Morelet's 
crocodile in Belize is unknown, but the petitioners estimated the 
current amount of potentially suitable habitat to be approximately 
2,050 mi (3,300 km) of shoreline (CONABIO 2005, pp.14-19).
    While the species is widespread in the northern portion of the 
country, it is naturally limited to a narrow region of lowlands along 
the coast in the southern part of Belize, which is otherwise 
mountainous (Schmidt 1924, p. 80; Abercrombie et al. 1982, pp. 12-16; 
Platt et al. 1999, p. 395; Platt and Thorbjarnarson 2000a, pp. 25-26). 
Although the Government of Belize was not a party to the petition, 
teams not associated with the Mexican effort to delist the species 
recently surveyed these states, in part, to assess Morelet's crocodile 
populations in those areas. Based on recent surveys, all six districts 
historically known to contain Morelet's crocodiles were surveyed in a 
general characterization of the biodiversity of Belize (Boles 2005, p. 
4; Belize Forest Department 2006, p. 22; Biological-Diversity.info 
website 2009). At Spanish Creek Wildlife Sanctuary, in the north-
central part of the country, Meerman et al. (2004, pp. 23-24 and 30-32) 
determined that the Morelet's crocodile was fairly common at the site 
(frequency of encounter rate = 1.4-2.4 individuals per km). At 
Mayflower Bocawina National Park, near the coast in the southeastern 
part of the country, Meerman et al. (2003b, p. 30) unexpectedly located 
the Morelet's crocodile at fast-flowing streams such as Silk Grass 
Creek. While this specimen could have been introduced at the site, its 
occurrence could also be natural. Along the Macal River, in west-
central Belize, Stafford et al. (2003, pp. 18 and 20) located a 
breeding population of the Morelet's crocodile (frequency of encounter 
rate = 1.48 individuals per km) (2001) and 1.25 individuals per km 
(2002) at a mountainous site at 1,476 ft (450 m) elevation (higher than 
expected). A total population size at the Macal River site was 
calculated to be, at minimum, about 94 individuals (Stafford et al. 
2003, p. 19).
    Earlier comparisons between spotlight surveys conducted in northern 
Belize in 1979-1980 and 1992-1997 also showed that Morelet's crocodiles 
were widely distributed and relatively abundant across several habitat 
types and levels of human accessibility (Platt and Thorbjarnarson 
2000b, p. 23). In addition to an extensive system of nature reserves 
including significant areas of crocodile habitat, these researchers 
noted relatively high Morelet's crocodile encounter rates in wetlands 
surrounding sugarcane fields in this area. Morelet's crocodiles were 
observed in canals and ditches within the municipal limits of Belize 
City and Orange Walk, as well as in wetlands easily accessible from 
many villages (Platt and Thorbjarnarson 2000b, p. 23).
    Population characteristics of Morelet's crocodiles in Belize were 
also determined during these surveys. Size class distribution--25.4 
percent adults in the 1990s, compared with 5-10 percent in an earlier 
study--was consistent with population recovery from past 
overexploitation (Platt and Thorbjarnarson 2000b, p. 24). Platt and 
Thorbjarnarson (2000b, pp. 23, 26) reported an overall frequency of 
encounter of 1.56 individuals per km; encounter rates were much higher 
in

[[Page 23656]]

nonalluvial (8.20 individuals per km) and alluvial (6.11 individuals 
per km) lagoons than in rivers and creeks (0.95 individuals per km) or 
in mangrove habitats (0.24 individuals per km). While a significant, 
male-biased sex ratio (5.3 males per 1 female versus about 1 male per 
female) was identified, the reasons were unclear (Platt and 
Thorbjarnarson 2000a, pp. 23, 27). Based on extrapolations of habitat 
relationships in Mexico (which results in an estimated 2,080 mi (3,347 
km) of potential habitat in Belize) and an average frequency of 
encounter of 2.63 individuals per km, CONABIO stated that these results 
suggested a total Belize population estimate for the Morelet's 
crocodile of about 8,803 individuals in the wild (all age classes), 
comprising 9 percent of the total wild population, including about 
1,673 adults (CONABIO 2005, p. 18). Although this is not a typically 
constructed population estimate, this estimate constitutes the best 
available scientific and commercial data for the nationwide abundance 
of Morelet's crocodiles in Belize. Although Platt suggested that these 
overall values for Belize may be somewhat inflated because habitat in 
southern Belize is less suitable for Morelet's crocodiles than areas in 
the north (Platt 2008, pers. comm.), frequency of encounter values for 
Morelet's crocodile populations and total population sizes in Belize 
may have further increased due to continued protection for over a 
decade since these surveys in the 1990s. Boles (2005, p. 4) and Belize 
Forest Department (2006, p. 22), based on countrywide analyses, both 
suggested that the Morelet's crocodile had ``recovered'' in Belize and 
could be categorized as ``healthy.''
    CONABIO did not present information about the distribution and 
abundance of the Morelet's crocodile in protected areas in Belize. 
Other information obtained by the Service, however, suggests that the 
species is present in many protected areas in Belize, including: 
Sarstoon Temash National Park (Meerman et al. 2003a, p. 45), Mayflower 
Bocawina National Park (Meerman, et al. 2003b, p. 30), and Spanish 
Creek Wildlife Sanctuary (Meerman et al. 2004, pp. 30-31). Overall, 
about 18-26 percent of the national territory of Belize is under some 
form of protection (BERDS 2005b, p. 1; Young 2008, p. 29). In several 
of these protected areas, natural resource extraction is permitted from 
the site, thus potentially limiting their contribution to the 
conservation status of the Morelet's crocodile. However, we have no 
evidence that resource extraction in these Belizean protected areas is 
currently or anticipated to affect significantly the Morelet's 
crocodile.
    We find that the data presented by CONABIO, and additional data 
available to the Service, represents the best available scientific and 
commercial data on habitat destruction or modification for Morelet's 
crocodiles in Belize. Although habitat destruction or modification is 
currently affecting some local populations of Morelet's crocodiles in 
Belize, and this is likely to continue in the foreseeable future, we do 
not have any evidence that habitat destruction or modification is 
currently or anticipated to be a threat to the Morelet's crocodile in 
Belize.

Guatemala

    The Morelet's crocodile was historically known from the northern 
portion of Guatemala (States of Pet[eacute]n and Alta Verapaz; Schmidt 
1924, pp. 79-84). According to information provided by CONABIO, the 
Pet[eacute]n region of Guatemala was scarcely populated by humans 
before 1960 (an estimated 15,000 to 21,000 inhabitants in approximately 
12,960 square miles (33,566 km[sup2]) or about one third of Guatemala's 
area) (CONABIO 2005). In 1961, the Government of Guatemala started an 
official program to foster colonization in the region, and this caused 
environmental alteration, as well as increased human conflicts with 
crocodiles. Slightly more than 50 percent of the potential habitat for 
the Morelet's crocodile has been altered in Guatemala (CONABIO 2005, p. 
26). While the current amount of altered versus unaltered habitat for 
the Morelet's crocodile in Guatemala is unknown, the petitioners 
estimated the current amount of potentially suitable habitat to be 
approximately 4,163 mi (6,700 km) of shoreline (CONABIO 2005, pp.14-
19). According to information provided by CONABIO, studies on the 
status of Morelet's crocodile habitat and population in Guatemala are 
underway, and the potential threats to the species are under assessment 
(CONABIO 2005, p. 26).
    Recent nationwide survey results are not available for Guatemala, 
but populations appear to remain in their historical range in the 
northern part of the country, especially the central portion of the 
State of Pet[eacute]n, Laguna del Tigre National Park (northwestern 
portion of the State of Pet[eacute]n) (Casta[ntilde]eda Moya et al. 
2000, p.63) and the El Mirador-R[iacute]o Azul National Park 
(ParksWatch, 2002, page 3). The Laguna del Tigre National Park, the 
largest national park in Guatemala and the largest protected wetland in 
Central America, is home to the largest numbers of Morelet's crocodiles 
in Guatemala (ParksWatch 2003, p. 1).
    While information regarding the distribution and abundance of 
Morelet's crocodile in Guatemala is sparse, investigations conducted in 
Laguna del Tigre National Park (date unspecified, reported in 1998) 
estimated 4.35 individuals per km in the Sacluc River and 2.1 
individuals per km in the San Pedro River, with a population structure 
typical of stable populations (Casta[ntilde]eda Moya 1998a, p. 13). 
Casta[ntilde]eda Moya (1997, p. 1; 1998a, p. 521) characterized 
Morelet's crocodile distribution in the northern State of Pet[eacute]n, 
Guatemala, as fragmented, with the healthiest populations in the 
northern region of Pet[eacute]n, where human impact was lower. In a 
follow-up study at Laguna del Tigre National Park Casta[ntilde]eda Moya 
et al. (2000, pp. 62-63) reported a mean frequency of encounter rate 
for the entire park of 4.3 individuals per km, with maximum values of 
12.28 individuals per km at Flor de Luna and 11.00 individuals per km 
at Laguna La Pista. The Morelet's crocodile was more frequently 
encountered in closed aquatic systems than in open aquatic systems. 
Juveniles were more frequently observed than were adults.
    Based on extrapolations of habitat relationships in Mexico (which 
resulted in an estimated 4,159.8 mi (6,694.5 km) of potential habitat 
in Guatemala) and an average frequency of encounter of 2.078 
individuals per km, CONABIO stated that there is an estimated total 
Guatemalan population of Morelet's crocodile of about 13,911 
individuals in the wild (all age classes) comprising 13 percent of the 
total wild population, including about 2,643 adults (CONABIO 2005, p. 
18). Although this is not a typically constructed population estimate, 
this population estimate constitutes the best available scientific and 
commercial data for the nationwide abundance of Morelet's crocodiles in 
Guatemala.
    While Guatemala has regulatory mechanisms in place to protect these 
habitats, it appears that the Government of Guatemala, until recently, 
was not able to enforce them adequately. Resource extraction, drug 
trade, a lack of enforcement, and financial issues limited protected 
areas' potential contribution to the conservation status of the 
Morelet's crocodile (IARNA URL IIA 2006, pp. 88-92). For example, the 
Laguna del Tigre National Park, together with the Laguna del Tigre 
Protected Biotope, was considered critically threatened by drug trade, 
land grabs, the presence of human settlements, expanding agriculture 
and cattle

[[Page 23657]]

ranching, poaching, forest fires, the oil industry, and the almost 
complete lack of institutional control over the area (ParksWatch 2003, 
p. 11.) ParksWatch also deemed this national park, and its surrounding 
area, would not meet its biological diversity objectives in the 
immediate future unless urgent steps were taken (ParksWatch 2003, p. 
11.) However, the following year ParksWatch noted major improvements at 
Laguna del Tigre since their 2003 report. We have obtained information 
on the specific protections recently provided to Morelet's crocodiles 
in the conservation areas of Guatemala, and events that reveal a 
commitment by the Guatemalan government to curtail illegal activities 
harmful to Laguna del Tigre National Park. We will go into detail in 
the Factor D section, Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms.
    Casta[ntilde]eda Moya et al. (2000, p. 61), based on historical 
references, cited increased destruction of habitat due to human 
encroachment as having an adverse affect on the species. Based on the 
research at Laguna del Tigre National Park, Casta[ntilde]eda Moya et 
al. (2000, pp. 61 and 65) indicated that sibal (sawgrass) (Cladium 
jamaicense) was extensively burned each year. This burning constituted 
a major impact to the Morelet's crocodile habitat, as sibal habitat 
offered suitable insulation, food availability, nesting cover, and 
protection from predators. Furthermore, the fires facilitated the 
expansion of savannahs consisting almost exclusively of jimbal (Bambusa 
longifolia). Studies on the Morelet's crocodile in Pet[eacute]n suggest 
fires in jimbal groves prevent Morelet's crocodiles from reproducing 
since fire affects nesting sites (ParksWatch 2003, p. 13). In a more 
general sense, USAID (2002, pp. 19-23) and Ruiz Ordo[ntilde]ez (2005, 
pp. 2-8) indicated several conservation threats at the national level 
in Guatemala, including habitat loss, habitat degradation, habitat 
fragmentation, overutilization of resources, environmental 
contamination, and degradation, and the introduction of exotic species.
    For the past ten years, USAID and WCS having been working with 
other NGOs and the Guatemalan government to combat these issues. In 
their ``Maya Biosphere Landscape Conservation Area, Guatemala, 
Implementation Plan FY 2008'' (WCS 2009, page 3) the WCS highlighted 
their central goals for ensuring the conservation of wide-ranging 
target species, including the Morelet's crocodile, was to contain the 
advance of the Laguna del Tigre agro-pastoral frontier and maintain the 
comparatively intact eastern bloc of the Maya Biosphere Reserve (MBR) 
forest. Strategies to reduce impacts to wildlife in the MBR landscape 
include involving people in local communities, forest concessions, 
governments, and NGOs in local conservation efforts; developing 
adaptive management strategies to address tactically threats across the 
landscape; and educating local communities on best management practices 
across the MBR and beyond. Since 2003, however, efforts by the Wildlife 
Conservation Society (WCS) have reduced areas burned in the MBR in 
Guatemala. Through educating locals on best management practices, 
conducting aerial flights, utilizing remote sensing to monitor changes 
in forest cover and fire, and establishing and patrolling a 47-
kilometer fire break, along with regularly reporting to the Guatemalan 
and provincial governments and national media, WCS's efforts have 
resulted in a 90% reduction in areas burned in the Laguna del Tigre 
portion of the MBR (WCS 2009).
    In addition, the president of Guatemala recently deployed 250 
specially trained soldiers to recover fully all the protected zones of 
El Peten in Laguna del Tigre National Park. The contingent, called the 
``green battalion'' will work jointly with the Guatemalan Attorney 
General's Office. This effort is aimed at combating drug trafficking 
and removal or destruction of natural and archeological resources in 
Laguna del Tigre, El Peten region of the MBR (Latin American Herald 
Tribune, 2010).
    El Mirador-R[iacute]o Azul National Park in northeastern Guatemala 
is located in the department of Pet[eacute]n maintains a population of 
Morelet's crocodiles (ParksWatch 2002, page 3). The park is composed of 
two sections, which are divided by the Dos Lagunas Biotope. The western 
section is known as El Mirador and the eastern part is known as 
R[iacute]o Azul. This area is considered by World Resources Institute 
to be the last pristine Guatemalan rainforest. It is also one of the 
few protected areas that have experienced little deforestation over the 
years. No permanent human residents live within the park borders or in 
its immediate surrounding areas. El Mirador-R[iacute]o Azul National 
Park is considered vulnerable, by ParksWatch, meaning that immediate 
conservation measures are not needed at this time, but monitoring is 
necessary to ensure the protection and maintenance of its biological 
diversity in the near future (ParksWatch, 2002, page 3). NGO's such as 
Asociaci[oacute]n Balam, WCS-Guatemala, the Asociati[oacute]n of Forest 
Communities of Pet[eacute]n (ACOFOP), the Guatemalan National Park 
Service (CONAP), the Guatemalan Archeological Institute (IDAEH), and 
the office of the Executive Secretary of the President of Guatemala 
formed an alliance called the ``Mesa Multisectorial para el Area 
Natural y Cultural de Mirador-Rio Azule''. This alliance was formed to 
develop consensus among its team members regarding the long-term 
protection of the park and provide sustained economic contribution to 
the people of the MBR and of Guatemala.
    While CONABIO estimated that slightly more than 50 percent of the 
potential habitat for the Morelet's crocodile has been altered in 
Guatemala, they gave no information indicating to what extent (CONABIO 
2005, p. 26). Very little information has been collected about the 
consequences of forest fires, hunting, and habitat fragmentation to the 
Morelet's crocodile. However, Mexico saw the presence of the Morelet's 
crocodile in cultivated areas and at sites with ``intermediate'' 
quality habitats (CONABIO 2005, p. 13) and Belize noted relatively high 
Morelet's crocodile encounter rates in wetlands surrounding sugarcane 
fields, canals and ditches within the municipal limits of Belize (Platt 
and Thorbjarnarson 2000b, p. 23). This information suggests that the 
Morelet's crocodile does not require undisturbed habitat in order to 
occupy a site. The current amount of altered versus unaltered habitat 
for the Morelet's crocodile in Guatemala is unknown, but the 
petitioners estimated the current amount of potentially suitable 
habitat to be approximately 4,163 mi (6,700 km) of shoreline (CONABIO 
2005, pp.14-19).

Other Threats to the Species' Habitat

Recreational and Educational Activities

    Nonconsumptive recreational or educational uses in the form of 
ecotourism are ongoing and may grow in magnitude in the future. While 
CONABIO did not present precise information about the number of 
companies or sites visited by tourists, an informal Internet search 
suggested that large numbers of ecotourism companies and nature sites 
in all three range countries were involved in this activity. At Tikal 
National Park in Guatemala, for example, the number of visitors has 
increased from 14,594 visitors in 1981 to 141,899 visitors in 2002 
(IARNA URL IIA 2006, p. 103). Many of these visitors potentially 
visited Morelet's crocodile areas in the Pet[eacute]n Region that are 
in the immediate vicinity of the park as part of their ecotourism 
experience.
    While we cannot completely rule out the potential for adverse 
effects to the Morelet's crocodile due to disturbance

[[Page 23658]]

from ecotourism activity in Tikal National Park, we have found no 
evidence of such effects. Furthermore, we do not have any information 
to indicate that ecotourism is likely to become a serious problem in 
the future. Successful ecotourism, by its very nature, relies on the 
continued conservation and protection of the natural resources it uses. 
Although the number of visitors to protected areas is increasing and 
the demand for ecotourism may grow in the future, the ecotourism 
industry has a significant incentive to ensure that their activities do 
not become a serious problem to the Morelet's crocodile and its habitat 
in the future.
    Mazzotti et al. (2005, p. 984), however, did identify the following 
negative impacts associated with tourism development at Sian Ka'an 
Biosphere Reserve (Mexico):
    (1) Habitat loss;
    (2) Alteration of surface and underground water flow;
    (3) Ground water pollution;
    (4) Extraction of resources;
    (5) Erosion and sedimentation;
    (6) Decrease in biodiversity; and
    (7) Reduced traditional and recreational use for local communities.
    Visual pollution, including trash, as well as ``jeep safaris'' 
(caravans of small convertible sports utility vehicles being driven 
through the reserve) and boat traffic, is also increasing at Sian Ka'an 
Biosphere Reserve (Mazzotti et al. 2005, p. 992). While none of these 
factors was specifically linked to the Morelet's crocodile, all could 
apply were the situation to deteriorate. However, we do not have any 
information to indicate that the situation will deteriorate in the 
future. Biosphere Reserves in Mexico are part of the United Nations 
Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization's (UNESCO) ``Man and 
the Biosphere'' program and are legally protected under Mexican federal 
laws. Key features of biosphere reserves are core zones of complete 
protection of key resources surrounded by mixed-use buffer zones. These 
buffer zones are particularly important given the pressures on the Sian 
Ka'an Biosphere Reserve from tourism, and its culturally and 
archeologically significant areas (Mazzotti et al. 2005, p. 982). 
Recognizing these potential negative factors, geographically dispersed 
ecotourism involving limited numbers of visitors under controlled 
conditions to observe and photograph specimens from canoes, 
photographic blinds, or hiking trails can provide relatively benign 
opportunities to local residents for economic benefits that can serve 
as an alternative or disincentive to harvest the Morelet's crocodile 
(CONABIO 2005, p. 28).
    There is also evidence that ecotourism, as well as scientific 
research and wildlife conservation, are compatible activities with 
respect to the Morelet's crocodile. In Mexico, for example, ecotourists 
accompany biologists associated with the Amigos de Sian Ka'an group as 
they conduct surveys of the Morelet's crocodile at Sian Ka'an Biosphere 
Reserve, along the eastern coast of the Yucatan Peninsula, Quintana Roo 
State (EcoColors Tours 2010, pp. 1). At another site, the La Ventanilla 
Eco-tourism Project in Oaxaca State, Mexico, international volunteers 
assist local residents and biologists to conserve the Morelet's 
crocodile, turtles, iguanas, and other species of wildlife (Volunteers 
for International Partnership--Mexico 2010, 1-4). In Belize, tourists, 
as well as wildlife researchers from the United States and their 
Belizean counterparts, are implementing an ecological field study of 
the Morelet's crocodile at Lamanai Outpost Lodge and Research Station 
that eventually will lead to the development of a national management 
plan for the species (The Croc Docs 2010, pp. 1-6). If the biological 
data, in part collected by the ecotourists, support harvest, and 
effective enforcement regulations can be developed and implemented, 
this plan may include commercial exploitation of the Morelet's 
crocodile. In Guatemala, scientists and ecotourists are working 
cooperatively with the ProPet[eacute]n group to undertake conservation 
work at the Scarlet Macaw Biological Station in the Maya Biosphere 
Reserve (ProPeten 2009, p. 1). While these activities differ with 
regard to specific details, in general they provide positive 
conservation benefits to the Morelet's crocodile and demonstrate that 
ecotourism, as well as scientific research and wildlife conservation, 
can be compatible with respect to the species.

Agriculture, Grazing, and Infrastructure Development

    Agriculture, grazing, and infrastructure development (such as dams, 
roads, residential areas, and irrigated fields) generally are indirect 
impacts in that the purpose of the action is not focused on the 
crocodile. These activities can be either consumptive (for example, 
destruction of nests and eggs by machinery) or nonconsumptive (for 
example, loss of access to traditional nesting or feeding sites), and 
are generally manifested through habitat loss or fragmentation. 
Depending on the nature and extent of these activities, they may have a 
substantial negative impact on local Morelet's crocodile populations. 
Although agriculture, grazing, and infrastructure development are 
currently affecting local populations of Morelet's crocodiles, and this 
is likely to continue in the foreseeable future, we do not have any 
evidence that these activities are currently or anticipated to be a 
range-wide threat to the Morelet's crocodile.

Summary of Factor A

    Although some habitat degradation has occurred in Mexico, this 
threat is ameliorated by the LGEEPA. This law has strict restrictions 
against land use changes in Mexico, especially for undisturbed habitat 
such as those areas used by the Morelet's crocodile (CONABIO 2005, p. 
25). The Sistema Nacional de [Aacute]reas Naturales Protegidas (SINANP) 
also provides significant habitat protection in Mexico. The SINANP 
created designated protected areas because these areas contain key or 
representative ecosystems or species, or ecosystems or species that are 
at risk and require strict control. In Mexico, at least 11 protected 
areas contain populations of the Morelet's crocodile (CITES 2010a, pp. 
17-20). In Belize, at least three protected areas contain Morelet's 
crocodile populations (Meerman et al. 2003a, p. 45; Meerman et al. 
2003b, p. 30; and Meerman et al. 2004, pp. 30-31). Mexico and Belize 
contain the majority of all wild Morelet's crocodiles (87 percent) and 
the majority of the potentially suitable habitat throughout the 
species' range (81 percent). We find that, although habitat destruction 
and modification is affecting individual crocodiles locally, the 
overall level of habitat protection in Mexico and Belize is currently 
adequate and we anticipate that it will remain so.
    Based on current information, Guatemala contains the remaining 13 
percent of the wild Morelet's crocodiles and the remaining 19 percent 
of the potentially suitable habitat throughout the species' range. 
Although the Morelet's crocodile occupies at least two protected areas 
in Guatemala (Casta[ntilde]eda Moya et al. 2000, p. 63), one, the El 
Mirador-R[iacute]o Azul National Park has no permanent human presence 
either in or surrounding the park and contains the last pristine 
rainforest in Guatemala which has experienced very little 
deforestation. The NGO community has partnered with the President of 
Guatemala to establish a coalition to ensure long-term protection of 
this important national park, while providing for sustainable economic 
incentives to the people of the MBR and of Guatemala. The second 
protected

[[Page 23659]]

area, Laguna del Tigre National Park, has been affected by past human 
encroachment, fire, deforestation, grazing, and infrastructure 
development. Although these factors may have affected local populations 
of Morelet's crocodiles, we have no evidence that it has affected the 
species range-wide. The government of Guatemala and the local and 
international NGO community have again partnered to address these 
issues through direct interventions; including local and international 
community in conservation efforts; and educating people on the use of 
best management practices. These efforts have resulted in a 90% 
reduction in fires in Laguna del Tigre National Park, and the 
successful interdiction of individuals conducting unlawful activities.
    Despite the localized impacts in all three countries, the current 
range-wide distribution of Morelet's crocodile now closely resembles 
historical range-wide distribution. The species has existing available 
high quality habitat, healthy population distribution, is abundant at 
known sites and it is expanding into new sites. Even in the face of 
habitat alteration, this species has been shown to occupy disturbed 
habitat. There have been observed increases in the relative abundance 
of the species, and a total population size of approximately 19,400 
adults in the three range countries. Species experts now widely 
characterize Morelet's crocodile populations as healthy. Although some 
local factors continue to affect the habitat for Morelet's crocodile, 
we have no information to indicate that these local factors are of 
sufficient magnitude to have a range-wide impact on the species to the 
point that would cause the Morelet's crocodile to meet the definition 
of either an endangered or a threatened species. Therefore, we find 
that the present or threatened destruction, modification, or 
curtailment of its habitat or range is not likely to threaten or 
endanger the Morelet's crocodile in the foreseeable future.

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

Commercial Harvest (Legal and Illegal Trade)
    The Morelet's crocodile was included in Appendix I of CITES on July 
1, 1975. Species included in Appendix I are species threatened with 
extinction that are or may be affected by trade. CITES prohibits 
international trade in specimens of these species unless the trade is 
found to be not detrimental to the survival of the species, the 
specimens in trade were legally acquired, and the purpose of the import 
is not for primarily commercial purposes or the specimen meets one of 
the exemptions established under the CITES Treaty. A more thorough 
explanation of CITES is found in the ``Convention on International 
Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora'' discussion under 
the section Factor D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms.
    Overexploitation for commercial purposes prior to 1970 is widely 
accepted as the primary cause of a drastic, range-wide population 
decline of Morelet's crocodile (Platt and Thorbjarnarson 2000b, p. 21; 
CONABIO 2005, p. 27). Historically, commercial overexploitation, 
through the harvest of adult animals from the wild, was a much greater 
threat to the Morelet's crocodile than habitat loss. During the first 
half of the 20th century, hundreds of thousands of skins per year were 
marketed (CITES 2008, pp. 17, 20). The precise magnitude of the trade 
is unclear however, because trade data for the Morelet's crocodile was 
recorded at a higher taxonomic level incorporating other crocodilians. 
See, for example, Loa Loza 1998a, pp. 134-135; Arroyo-Quiroz et al. 
2007, p. 933. It is reported that prior to 1975, hide dealers in Belize 
purchased up to 12,000 skins annually, and an unknown number of skins 
were exported illegally in contravention to Mexican law (Plat and 
Thorbjarnarson 2000b, p. 21). Precise estimates of historical trade 
from Mexico or Guatemala were unavailable. Even now, the commercial 
market for designer fashion items made from high quality crocodile 
skins, such as leather belts, footwear, wallets, and handbags, is 
highly lucrative. For example, a single pair of shoes may retail for 
hundreds of dollars, a handbag for several thousand dollars, and a tote 
bag for tens of thousands of dollars.

Legal Trade

    In 1997, the Government of Mexico established a system for 
registering, supervising, and enforcing Unidad de Manejo y 
Administraci[oacute]n (UMAs; Conservation Management and Administrative 
Units) for intensive reproduction of economically valuable natural 
resources, including the captive breeding of Morelet's crocodiles 
(CONABIO 2005, Annex 3, pp. 3-5). Commercial use of Morelet's 
crocodiles in Mexico for domestic trade was strictly limited to animals 
raised in closed-cycle, captive-breeding operations regulated by the 
Government of Mexico under the UMA system. For international trade, 
commercial trade was restricted to animals raised in these closed-
cycle, captive-breeding operations registered with the CITES 
Secretariat. In order for these closed-cycle, captive-breeding 
operations to be successful, great care was given to satisfying the 
biological requirements of the species (Cremieux et al. 2005, p. 417; 
Brien et al. 2007, pp. 1-26). According to Le[oacute]n Vel[aacute]zquez 
(2004, p. 52), there were approximately 30,000 Morelet's crocodiles in 
captive-breeding facilities in Mexico in 2004. There were 38,449 
Morelet's crocodiles housed in 19 Mexican closed-cycle captive-breeding 
operations in 2008 (CITES 2010a, p. 24). Currently, the annual 
production of Morelet's crocodiles in Mexican closed-cycle captive-
breeding operations does not exceed 40,000 individuals (CITES 2010a, p. 
8).
    Under Mexican law, closed-cycle captive-breeding operations wishing 
to make their Morelet's crocodiles available for commercial use must 
demonstrate that they are able to go beyond the F2 generation of 
reproducing individuals. This requirement supports the use of Morelet's 
crocodiles that is compatible with conservation of the species by 
offsetting the demand for crocodiles taken from the wild. Such 
facilities produced a variety of items including skins/hides, meat, 
live individuals as pets, stuffed figurines, and leather products 
(fashion accessories) for both domestic and international trade.
    Based on CITES annual reports for the period 1996-2005, Caldwell 
(2007, pp. 6-7) noted relatively low levels of international legal 
trade in products from Mexican captive-breeding operations during 1996-
1999 (fewer than 200 skins/year), but higher levels during 2000-2005 
(2,430 skins in 2001; 1,591 skins in 2002; and below 1,000 skins per 
year during the rest of the period). Japan has been the main importer 
of products from Mexican captive-breeding operations, with lesser 
quantities going to France, Italy, the Republic of Korea, and Spain 
(Caldwell 2007, p. 6).
    The United Nations Environment Programme--World Conservation 
Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC) manages a trade database on behalf of the 
CITES Secretariat. Each Party to CITES is responsible for compiling 
annual reports to the CITES Secretariat regarding their country's trade 
in species protected under CITES. UNEP-WCMC enters the data from these 
annual reports into a trade database, which is used to analyze trade in 
CITES specimens. Due to the time needed to compile the data, the most 
recent year

[[Page 23660]]

for which comprehensive trade statistics are available is normally two 
years prior to the current year.
    In general, prior to 2010, international legal trade consisted of 
small quantities of unfinished hides/skins or finished leather 
products, exported primarily from Mexico to Japan and European 
countries, as well as biological specimens destined for research. These 
countries process the unfinished hides/skins into leather products such 
as belts, footwear, wallets, and handbags that in turn are sold within 
their own country or re-exported for sale to other countries. Due to 
the listing status of the species under the Act, the United States 
cannot be a commercial destination for Morelet's crocodile skins and 
products. It is currently illegal to import Morelet's crocodile skins 
and products into the United States, unless the import is for 
scientific or enhancement purposes.
    In 2010, the Government of Mexico submitted a proposal to the 15th 
Meeting of the CITES Conference of the Parties (CoP15) to transfer the 
Morelet's crocodile throughout its range to Appendix II of CITES with a 
zero quota for trade in wild specimens because the Government of Mexico 
concluded that the Morelet's crocodile no longer met the criteria for 
inclusion in Appendix I (CITES 2010a, p. 1). Consistent with a request 
from Guatemala (CITES 2010a, Annex 4, page 25), the Government of 
Mexico amended their proposal by adding the words ``for commercial 
purposes'' after ``with a zero quota for trade in wild specimens''. In 
addition, the Government of Guatemala opposed the initial CITES 
proposal to downlist the species throughout its range based on the lack 
of knowledge of the population and population trends in Guatemala, 
threats to the species from deforestation and pollution in Guatemala, 
and the possibility of illegal, cross-border trade taking place from 
Guatemala. Because of Guatemala's concerns, Mexico requested that the 
vote be split, with the Mexico and Belize populations considered 
separately from the Guatemala's population. The proposal to downlist 
the Mexico and Belize populations to CITES Appendix II with a zero 
quota for wild specimens for commercial purposes was adopted by 
consensus. Mexico then withdrew its proposal to downlist the Guatemala 
population, leaving that population in CITES Appendix I. As a result, 
only Morelet's crocodiles in Mexico and Belize were transferred to 
CITES Appendix II. Morelet's crocodiles in Guatemala remain in CITES 
Appendix I (CITES 2010b, p. 1). The new CITES designations became 
effective on June 23, 2010. Please see the discussion in the Factor D 
section, Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms, for additional 
information on the change in CITES designation for the Morelet's 
crocodile.
    According to the 2010 CITES proposal to transfer the Morelet's 
crocodile to Appendix II, the UNEP-WCMC CITES Trade Database showed 
that, until 2007, the parts and derivatives of the Morelet's crocodile 
most commonly found in trade were skins, skin pieces and leather 
products, although other products include live specimens, eggs, bodies, 
scales, skulls and shoes were also traded. The largest exporter between 
2001 and 2007 was Mexico (8,498 skins, 750 skin pieces and 1,193 
leather products), followed by Belize with 116 bodies, 766 eggs and 
3,124 specimens for scientific purposes (exported to the United 
States). The major importing countries were Japan (6,170 skins), United 
States (3,124 specimens for scientific purposes), Italy (1,219 skins), 
the Republic of Korea (560 skins), France (375 skins) and Spain (162 
skins) (CITES 2010a, p. 8).
    According to the CITES (CITES 2010a) proposal to transfer the 
Morelet's crocodile to Appendix II, the national harvest of animals 
from closed-cycle operations authorized in Mexico amounts to fewer than 
2,000 skins per year since the year 2000. In the period between 2000 
and 2009, 119 CITES export permits were issued in Mexico for a total of 
12,276 Morelet's crocodile skins. However, the total potential 
production from closed-cycle captive-breeding operations was about 
16,500 individuals and approximately 10,000 skins per year (CITES 
2010a, p. 7).
    We examined the information on Mexico's closed-cycle, captive 
breeding operations in Annex 3 of the 2010 CITES proposal. According to 
the information provided in the Annex, there were 19 closed-cycle 
captive-breeding operations registered as UMAs for the Morelet's 
crocodile in Mexico. Only four of the 19 UMAs had a captive population 
sufficient to support commercial trade, and only two of these four 
could support international commercial trade--both of which were 
registered with CITES. As of 2008, the captive population in these four 
UMAs ranged from 1,237 to 28,673 individuals. The two UMAs that were 
not registered with CITES had the potential to produce 1,100 skins per 
year for local commercial trade (CITES 2010a, Annex 3, p. 24). The 
population levels for the remaining 15 UMAs were relatively low by 
comparison, ranging from six to 576 individuals. Rather than supporting 
commercial trade, four of the remaining 15 UMAs supported exhibition, 
seven had no commercial production, three contributed to the economic 
support of the local community, and one was used for research.
    Three of these 19 Mexican captive-breeding operations were also 
registered with CITES, and could therefore commercially trade Morelet's 
crocodile products internationally, as well as domestically while the 
species was listed under Appendix I. However, one of these CITES-
registered captive breeding operations contains only six individuals, 
and is used for exhibition purposes. Only two of the three CITES-
registered captive breeding operations commercially produce enough 
Morelet's crocodile skins with the annual production potential for 
international trade. These two captive breeding operations have the 
potential to produce an estimated 2,500 skins annually for 
international trade (CITES 2010a, pp. 7 and 24, Annex 3). Please see 
the discussion in the Factor D section, Inadequacy of Existing 
Regulatory Mechanisms, for additional information on the three CITES-
registered captive breeding operations.
    There are no captive-breeding facilities in Belize or Guatemala 
that are providing specimens or skins for trade, either domestically or 
internationally under the CITES captive-breeding exception (CITES 
2010c). In Belize, Morelet's crocodiles are officially protected from 
commercial harvest. Platt and Thorbjarnarson (2000b) found no evidence 
of commercial poaching of Morelet's crocodiles for skins or meat in 
Belize (Platt and Thorbjarnarson 2000b, p. 27). Reportedly, the species 
is not subject to commercial activities in Guatemala given that 
Guatemala's Comisi[oacute]n Nacional de [Aacute]reas Protegidas (CONAP; 
National Commission on Protected Areas, also known as the Guatemalan 
National Park Service) prohibits the export and trade in wild specimens 
of endangered species (CITES 2010a, p. 7).

Illegal Trade

    According to the 2010 CITES proposal to transfer the Morelet's 
crocodile to Appendix II, the UNEP-WCMC CITES Trade Database showed few 
illegal movements of parts and derivatives of the Morelet's crocodile 
between 1975 and 2007 from Mexico, Guatemala, and Belize, with the 
United States as the only destination. This suggests that there is a 
very low level of illegal trade and that it is only with the United 
States; however, enforcement actions are not a required field for CITES 
Annual Reports. Unlike the United States, most countries do not specify 
the

[[Page 23661]]

action taken on imports. Thus, the fact that illegal trade to the 
United States is documented in the WCMC database does not mean that 
this is the only illegal trade in the species. That said, between 1982 
and 2005, items found to have been ``illegally'' imported to the United 
States from Mexico were mainly leather products (308) and shoes (419 
pairs). It is quite possible that these U.S. imports derived from legal 
operations in Mexico, but were precluded from import into the U.S. 
because of the Morelet's crocodile's endangered status under the 
Endangered Species Act.
    Considering the same caveats pertaining to WCMC data, there were 
eight records illegal trade occurring from Guatemala (between 1989 and 
1997), mainly involving pairs of shoes (27), and one case in Belize, 
which involved the export of 31 eggs in 1995. Regarding Guatemala, 
Casta[ntilde]eda-Moya (1998) stated that illegal capture of the species 
continued in the Pet[eacute]n region in that year. However, he admitted 
that the volume of such activity had decreased compared to the 
situation 25 years before (CITES 2010a, p. 8).
    Recent data available on illegal trade in the Morelet's crocodile 
between 1975 and 2007 showed that the United States reported illegal 
imports (UNEP-WCMC CITES Trade Database 2010a). The data on illegal 
imports are based on the numbers of items that were seized and 
confiscated by law enforcement personnel in both the United States and 
in other countries. This information is not included in CITES annual 
reports for each country; the United States is the exception. The 
majority of the illegal Morelet's crocodile parts and derivatives 
confiscated upon arrival into the United States between 1975 and 2007 
came from Mexico (20 skins, 28 handbags, 243 leather items, 419 pairs 
of shoes, 3 watch straps, 9 bodies, 10 garments, 2 live animals, and 65 
small leather products). Again, these items could have come from legal 
operations in Mexico, but were a violation at the time under the Act 
due to the Morelet's crocodile's endangered status. A significantly 
smaller number of illegal items originated from Guatemala (1 skin, 2 
handbags, 1 leather item, 27 pairs of shoes, and 1 body) and Belize (31 
eggs). The majority of the illegal trade reportedly began in 1985, but 
began to decline steadily starting in 2000. Between 2005 and 2007, 
there were only several reported illegal imports of Morelet's crocodile 
into the United States, and these were small leather products from 
Mexico (UNEP-WCMC CITES Trade Database 2010b).
    The Government of Mexico's Federal Prosecutor for Environmental 
Protection (PROFEPA) has investigated illegal trade in live animals, 
presumably for the pet trade. A potential illegal market in live 
animals is under analysis, and would be expected to involve the Mexican 
cities of Guadalajara, Monterrey, and Mexico City (Mexico 2006, p. 41). 
Illegal harvest or killing of individuals perceived as threats to 
humans or livestock cannot be completely precluded, but enforcement of 
controls on domestic and international trade severely limit any 
commercial incentives. PROFEPA performs inspections to prevent 
laundering of wild Morelet's crocodile specimens and other illegal 
activities. There was a declining trend in seizures of illegal 
specimens and products during 1998-2007. According to Mexico (Mexico 
2006, pp. 39-42), 85 specimens were confiscated in 2003, two in 2004, 
80 in 2005, and 14 in 2006 (partial results). In addition and according 
to Paola Mosig, Program officer for the TRAFFIC World Wildlife Fund in 
Mexico, 20 seizures with a total of 48 live specimens, as well as 25 
belts and two wallets were confiscated in 2007 (Mosig 2008, pers. 
comm.) According to TRAFFIC, the Wildlife Trade Monitoring Network, 
these seizures are indicative of a strong enforcement program that 
deters illegal trade (Mosig 2008, pers. comm.).

Current Trade

    In accordance with Article II, paragraph 2(a) of CITES, and CITES 
Resolution Conf. 9.24 (Rev CoP14) Annex 1, the Government of Mexico 
submitted a proposal (CoP15 Prop.8) to the CoP15 to transfer the 
Morelet's crocodile throughout its range to Appendix II of CITES with 
an annotation requiring a zero quota for wild specimens that was 
further amended by adding the phrase, ``for commercial purposes'' 
(CITES 2010a, p. 1). The Government of Guatemala opposed Mexico's CITES 
proposal as it pertains to the species in Guatemala, based on the 
limited knowledge of the population and population trends in Guatemala; 
the threats to the species from deforestation and pollution in 
Guatemala; and the possibilities of illegal, cross-border trade taking 
place from Guatemala to Mexico. As a result, the parties to CITES 
agreed that Morelet's crocodiles in Mexico and Belize should be 
transferred to CITES Appendix II but that Morelet's crocodiles in 
Guatemala remain in CITES Appendix I. (CITES 2010b, p. 2). The change 
in CITES status for Morelet's crocodiles in Mexico and Belize became 
effective on June 23, 2010. Because of the zero quota annotation, 
transferring the Morelet's crocodile to CITES Appendix II precludes the 
trade of wild specimens for commercial purposes and therefore should 
not create additional pressure on wild populations in any of the range 
states, as long as enforcement remains effective. As such, 
international commercial trade in Morelet's crocodiles under CITES is 
currently limited to individuals from captive-breeding operations only. 
However, once the Appendix-II status went into effect for Morelet's 
crocodiles in Mexico and Belize, international trade of Morelet's 
crocodiles in Mexico and Belize under CITES was no longer limited to 
facilities that are registered with the CITES Secretariat pursuant to 
the resolution on registration of operations that breed Appendix-I 
animal species for commercial purposes (Resolution Conf. 12.10 (Rev. 
CoP15)).
    According to the Government of Mexico's 2010 CITES proposal, the 
current level of international trade in the Morelet's crocodile is 
around 8,600 individuals in 10 years (an average of 860 individuals per 
year). The Morelet's crocodile represents only a small fraction of the 
global trade in crocodilians, far behind the market leaders: brown 
spectacled caiman (Caiman crocodilus fuscus), American alligator 
(Alligator mississippiensis), and Nile crocodile (Crocodilus 
niloticus). Current trends in international trade do not indicate a 
threat to the Morelet's crocodile in the wild (CITES 2010a, p. 8). In 
addition, the Government of Mexico's proposal to move the Morelet's 
crocodile to CITES Appendix II allows only individuals from sources 
other than wild populations to be exported and this provision remains 
in effect with the zero quota for wild specimens traded for commercial 
purposes. The risk of laundering of wild specimens through farms is 
very low, because the quality of skins produced in captivity is much 
higher than wild-caught skins, and demand in international trade 
focuses on high quality skins (CITES 2010a, pp. 8, 23). It should be 
noted that there are a number of CITES-recognized production methods 
that are not ``wild'' and not ``bred in captivity.'' Mexico or any 
other country is free to propose a change to the annotation at the next 
CoP removing this limitation. However, there is no indication at this 
time that a change is imminent.
    To see if our results would be comparable to Mexico's assessment, 
we queried the UNEP-WCMC CITES Trade Database for the number of 
Morelet's crocodile skins legally exported between 1998 and 2008 and 
found

[[Page 23662]]

similar results for the current level of legal trade cited above by the 
Government of Mexico. According to the UNEP-WCMC CITES Trade Database, 
Mexico exported 8,780 skins between 1998 and 2008, an average of 878 
skins per year (UNEP-WCMC CITES Trade Database 2010b). Two of the 
previously CITES-registered captive breeding operations in Mexico have 
the potential to produce 2,500 skins per year for international trade 
(CITES 2010a, Annex 3, p. 24), which is more than adequate to meet the 
current demand for legal trade of less than 900 skins per year. If this 
proposed rule is finalized, then Morelet's crocodile products would be 
able to be imported into the United States and the demand for 
international trade may increase. However, we do not believe this 
potential increase in international trade is likely to threaten or 
endanger wild Morelet's crocodiles due to the adequate supply of 
captive-bred individuals in Mexico available for legal international 
commercial trade under CITES.
    Besides CITES and the Act, no other international measures control 
the cross-border movement of the Morelet's crocodile (CITES 2010a, p. 
10). If this proposed rule is finalized and the prohibitions of the Act 
are removed, then Morelet's crocodile parts and products could be 
imported into the United States for commercial purposes, provided they 
do not originate in Guatemala. However, cross-border movement of the 
Morelet's crocodile throughout its range would still be regulated 
through CITES (Appendix II for Mexico and Belize; Appendix I in 
Guatemala).

Subsistence Harvest

    The overharvest for commercial purposes, rather than subsistence 
harvest, was the primary reason for the Morelet's crocodile listing 
under the Act and under CITES. Although subsistence harvest has 
historically had an impact on some local populations of Morelet's 
crocodiles, these impacts have diminished over time and do not 
currently have a significant impact on the species as a whole.
    Indigenous cultures in Mexico, Belize, and Guatemala have a long 
history of using the Morelet's crocodile for subsistence and cultural 
purposes (Maimone Celorio et al. 2006, pp. 40-43; Zamudio 2006, pp. 5-
8; M[eacute]ndez-Cabrera and Montiel 2007, p. 132). Historically, the 
Maya Indians in Mexico consumed small quantities of the eggs and meat 
of the Morelet's crocodile (Maimone Celorio et al. 2006, pp. 40-43; 
Zamudio 2006, pp. 5-8; M[eacute]ndez-Cabrera and Montiel 2007, p. 132). 
Hunting and harvest techniques were based on traditional knowledge by 
these people of the behavior and ecology of the Morelet's crocodile 
(Cede[ntilde]o-V[aacute]zquez and Zamudio Acedo 2005, pp. 8-9). More 
recently (1965-1980), and in response to a demand by outside buyers/
businessmen, Maya hunters harvested large quantities of hides for 
commercial purposes, but that activity now has largely been 
discontinued (Zamudio et al. 2004, p. 344).
    Indigenous and nonindigenous people in Belize, generally poor 
farmers, also engaged in large-scale, commercial harvest of hides 
during the previous century, but that practice was primarily based on 
economic instead of cultural reasons (Hope and Abercrombie 1986, p. 
146). Abercrombie et al. (1982, p. 19) made a distinction between 
master hunters in Belize, generally older men who made extensive forays 
into the forest in search of specific game species, and part-time 
hunters, generally younger men who made short-term, opportunistic 
outings and often harvested Morelet's crocodiles. Among other uses, the 
Morelet's crocodile also has important roles in indigenous art, 
medicine, and religion (Stocker and Armsey, 1980, p. 740; Cupul-
Maga[ntilde]a 2003, pp. 45-48), and is used locally for handicrafts, 
jewelry, decorations, and curios (BERDS 2005a, p. 1).
    Meerman et al. (2003a, p. 49) noted a relative scarcity of fish and 
fish predators such as crocodiles in the Sarstoon Temash National Park 
in Belize. They suspected that fish populations are depressed, and that 
over-fishing by humans must play a role. People engaged in fishing 
along the Upper Temash River also annually collect Morelet's crocodile 
eggs from nests located along water channels for human consumption. In 
some years, one or more nests escape discovery so the eggs are not 
collected. As a result, baby crocodiles are subsequently seen that 
year. Heavy fishing also reduces the potential prey base for the 
Morelet's crocodile. The heavy predation on eggs together with the 
depletion of the Morelet's crocodile's prey base may be responsible for 
the low crocodile count along the river (Meerman et al. 2003a, pp. 42, 
45).
    Casta[ntilde]eda Moya (1998a, p. 521; 1998b, p. 13) listed illegal 
hunting as a threat to Morelet's crocodile in the Pet[eacute]n region 
of Guatemala, but did not provide a numerical estimate of the take. 
ARCAS, an animal welfare group in Guatemala, reported the rescue or 
recovery of 49 live individuals (about 8 per year), most likely from 
pet dealers or private individuals, during the period 2002-2007 (ARCAS 
2002, p. 3; 2003, p. 2; 2004, p. 2; 2005, p. 2; 2006, p. 3; 2007, p. 
3). We do not have any information describing the effect of these 
threats on the status of wild populations in Guatemala.
    Although subsistence harvest continues to affect negatively some 
local populations of the Morelet's crocodile, the impacts appear to be 
very small. We have no evidence that subsistence harvest is currently 
or anticipated to affect significantly the Morelet's crocodile 
throughout its range. The current range-wide distribution of the 
Morelet's crocodile closely mirrors the historical range-wide 
distribution, with a total population size of approximately 19,400 
adults in the three range countries.

Scientific Research

    Scientific research in and of itself also constitutes a use of the 
Morelet's crocodile. Research in the three range countries has mainly 
focused on field surveys for the occurrence of the species, relative to 
abundance and habitat quality, which do not require removal of 
specimens. Research protocols followed so far have been those accepted 
worldwide and do not involve significant alteration of habitat or 
behavior (CITES 2010a, p. 7). Several scientific research projects on 
the Morelet's crocodile have focused on field surveys that involve 
capture, handling, or invasive techniques to identify, for example, the 
species, sex, or size class of the specimen, as well as to collect 
biological specimens or to attach an identification tag. If conducted 
according to standard protocols, these physical activities pose little 
risk of injury or disturbance to the subject crocodiles. Several 
studies have also entailed, for example, night surveys using bright 
spotlights (Casta[ntilde]eda Moya et al. 2000, p. 62), stomach flushing 
(Platt et al. 2006, p. 282), collection of small blood samples (Dever 
et al. 2002, p. 1079), or the gathering of nonviable eggs from nests 
for contaminants analyses (Rainwater et al. 2002a, p. 320). None of 
these studies has cited any negative effects due to handling or 
observation on the Morelet's crocodile populations.
    All three range countries regulate scientific research and 
collection. According to the UNEP-WCMC CITES Trade Database, 3,124 
specimens were exported for scientific purposes from Mexico to the 
United States. From an administrative standpoint, a permit at the state 
or Federal level regulates the collection of biological samples for 
scientific purposes in Mexico. In Mexico, the Mexican Endangered

[[Page 23663]]

Species List (NOM-126-SEMARNAT-2000) regulates the collection of 
biological samples from wild species for scientific use. In addition, 
the Governments of Belize and Guatemala regulate scientific collection 
and research. In Belize, this type of export is subject to strict 
protocols and provisions of the Wildlife Protection Act (CITES 2010a, 
p. 7).
    With the Appendix-II designation for Morelet's crocodiles in Mexico 
and Belize, individuals or institutions wishing to import scientific 
samples originating from those countries will no longer be required to 
obtain a CITES import permit. However, the CITES import permit 
requirement would still be in effect for Guatemala and CITES export 
permits or re-export certificates, regardless of the country of origin, 
would be required. The elimination of import permits, while continuing 
the CITES requirement for export permits and re-export certificates, 
may result in additional scientific collecting and research to benefit 
the species while ensuring that adequate protections for the species 
remain in place (see the Factor D section, Inadequacy of Existing 
Regulatory Mechanisms, below).
    In conclusion, we are not aware of any evidence that utilization of 
the Morelet's crocodile for scientific research purposes poses anything 
more than a low risk to the subject individuals; furthermore, risks at 
the population level are probably negligible. To the contrary, these 
studies (surveys and sampling) provide useful information essential to 
monitoring the status and continued health of individuals as well as 
populations. These studies also allow ecotourists in these countries to 
work with the scientific community in the collection of Morelet's 
crocodile data (Volunteers for International Partnership 2009, pp. 1-
4.) This provides ecotourists with an opportunity to observe the 
Morelet's crocodile in its native habitat and to gain firsthand 
knowledge about the conservation threats that the species is facing.

Ranching

    Although the Belize-Guatemala-Mexico Tri-national Strategy for the 
Conservation and Sustainable Use of Morelet's Crocodile (see the Post-
Delisting Monitoring section, below) includes long-term plans for 
ranching, none of the range countries have given any indication they 
plan to ranch Morelet's crocodiles within the foreseeable future.

Summary of Factor B

    Thus, while uncontrolled commercial harvests nearly extirpated the 
Morelet's crocodile, the species has largely recovered because of being 
protected under CITES and the Act in the early 1970s, as well as the 
implementation of CITES trade controls by all three range countries. 
All of the range countries currently continue to prohibit harvest of 
wild Morelet's crocodiles.
    Illegal international and domestic trade still occurs, but levels 
remain low. Any incidence of illegal killing that may have occurred has 
not prevented the observed population increase of the species. The 
potential remains for illegal cross-border trade, as well as the 
laundering of wild specimens through existing captive-breeding 
operations in Mexico, but enforcement in Mexico is relatively strict. 
Given the increased effectiveness of law enforcement personnel with 
regard to the implementation of CITES, the increased supply of captive-
bred Morelet's crocodiles in Mexico that are now available for 
commercial trade as a result of the Morelet's crocodile's transfer to 
CITES Appendix II, and the increasing awareness of these regulations by 
the public, we anticipate that illegal trade in wild Morelet's 
crocodiles will decrease in the majority of the species' range in the 
foreseeable future.
    The Government of Mexico's Federal Prosecutor for Environmental 
Protection (PROFEPA) performs inspections to prevent laundering of wild 
Morelet's crocodile specimens and other illegal activities. In Belize, 
the importation and exportation of wildlife requires a permit and is 
subject to strict protocols and provisions of the Wildlife Protection 
Act, Hunting of Scheduled species for scientific or educational 
purposes in Belize also requires a permit. There was a declining trend 
in seizures of illegal specimens and products from 1998-2007. According 
to TRAFFIC, these seizures are indicative of a strong enforcement 
program that deters illegal trade (Mosig 2008, pers. comm.).
    Other uses such as scientific research are either benign or involve 
relatively small numbers of Morelet's crocodiles. In addition and given 
the steps that the Government of Mexico is taking internally to promote 
the sustainable commercial use of Morelet's crocodiles, we anticipate 
that commercial uses will increase in the foreseeable future, 
especially in Mexico, but that captive-bred specimens will be used 
instead of wild individuals.
    In conclusion, we find that the overutilization for commercial, 
recreational, scientific, or educational purposes is not a significant 
factor affecting the Morelet's crocodile throughout its range, both now 
and for the foreseeable future.

Factor C. Disease or Predation

    Inter-specific interactions, namely disease and predation, can have 
significant impacts on the conservation status of a species. At the 
time the petition was submitted, disease was not considered a 
significant conservation threat to the Morelet's crocodile. However, 
the West Nile Virus (WNV) has been detected in several Mexican 
populations of the Morelet's crocodile. According to Farf[aacute]n-Ale 
et al. (2006, pp. 910-911), six specimens tested negative to the WNV at 
the M[eacute]rida Zoo, Yucatan State, Mexico, during 2003-2004, while 
six of seven specimens tested positive to the WNV at Ciudad del Carmen, 
Campeche State, Mexico, in 2004. All crocodiles, including those not 
sampled, showed no signs of illness at the time of the testing or 
during the 3 months that followed (Farf[aacute]n-Ale et al. (2006, p. 
911).
    In a separate survey conducted during May-October 2005, Hidalgo-
Mart[iacute]nez et al. (2008, p. 80) detected the WNV in six of seven 
Morelet's crocodiles at Zool[oacute]gico La Venta, Villahermosa, 
Tabasco State, Mexico. All animals were healthy at the time of serum 
collection, and none had a history of WNV-like illness. The presence of 
WNV antibodies in animals from those zoos demonstrated the presence of 
WNV in those regions and indicated a potential risk of infection in 
animals. The magnitude of that potential risk, however, has not been 
determined. West Nile Virus was responsible for a significant number of 
deaths of farmed American alligators in the U.S. State of Georgia 
during separate outbreaks in 2001 and 2002 (Farf[aacute]n-Ale et al. 
2006, p. 908). However, we do not have any information to indicate that 
WNV causes illness in the Morelet's crocodile. The sample sizes in the 
above studies on Morelet's crocodile were small, so much larger studies 
are needed. However, the best available information does not suggest 
that WNV is a threat or likely to become a threat.
    Predation on Morelet's crocodile eggs and juveniles is a common 
natural phenomenon, posing no risk to healthy populations. They are 
preyed upon more frequently at the juvenile stage by many birds and 
medium-sized mammals (CITES 2010a, p. 4). Larger juveniles and 
subadults are less susceptible than small juveniles are to predation, 
and only large carnivores such as jaguars (Panthera onca)

[[Page 23664]]

(Navarro Serment 2004, p. 57) pose a risk to adult crocodiles. Larger 
Morelet's crocodiles may prey upon the juveniles of their species. 
However, this tends to act as an early factor promoting population 
regulation and adult spacing. Aggressive interactions among adults seem 
to be reduced by this mechanism, especially in populations with too 
many adults. In populations with a steady state of age distribution, 
cannibalism usually remains at a minimum (CONABIO 2005, p. 29). We are 
unaware of any unnatural rates of predation affecting any age class of 
Morelet's crocodile, and we have no indication that predation will 
exacerbate other threats to the species in the future.
    Other interspecific interactions can also affect the conservation 
status of a species. The Morelet's crocodile and the American crocodile 
co-occur and may compete with each other for resources along the 
freshwater-saltwater interface in coastal Mexico and Belize. Platt and 
Thorbjarnarson (2000a, p. 16; 2000b, pp. 24-26) reported relatively 
higher frequency of encounter rates for the Morelet's crocodile at 
alluvial and nonalluvial lagoons, mangrove forest, and rivers and 
creeks, collectively characterized as inland sites, while the American 
crocodile was relatively more abundant in offshore cays and the 
Turneffe Atoll. These differences were attributed to the smaller body 
size of the Morelet's crocodile, as well as past exploitation patterns 
by hunters and subsequent niche expansion by this species (Platt and 
Thorbjarnarson 2000b, p. 26). There was no indication, however, that 
interspecific competition between the Morelet's and the American 
crocodiles was a serious conservation problem.
    Parasites have been also reported for the Morelet's crocodile, but 
have not been identified as a conservation threat. In Mexico, 
trematodes (parasitic flatworms commonly called flukes) and nematodes 
(unsegmented worms commonly called roundworms) have been reported 
(Moravec and Vargas-V[aacute]zquez 1998, p. 499; Moravec 2001, p. 47) 
from the Yucatan Peninsula, but health problems with the crocodile 
hosts were not noted. Rainwater et al. (2001a, p. 836) reported ticks 
(Amblyomma dissimile and Amblyomma sp.), but noted that parasitism by 
ticks on the Morelet's crocodile was rare in Belize and elsewhere.
    Padilla Paz (2008, p. vi) characterized hematology, body index, and 
external injuries for 103 Morelet's crocodiles from the northern 
wetlands of Campeche State, Mexico. These variables were used to 
characterize the health of the animals. Captive Morelet's crocodiles 
evaluated for that study presented significantly more injuries than did 
wild individuals. Parasitism with nematodes (Paratrichosoma recurvum) 
was greater in wild crocodiles than in captive individuals. No serious 
health issues were identified in individuals in either group (Padilla 
Paz 2008, pp. 67-68).
    Individual Morelet's crocodiles can also have physical issues that 
can affect their well-being. Rainwater et al. (2001b, pp. 125-127) 
reported two individuals among 642 Morelet's crocodiles captured in 
Belize with a missing forelimb. Known in the technical literature as 
ectromelia, this condition was probably the result of congenital 
defects and not due to an injury. Both individuals otherwise appeared 
to be in good condition.

Summary of Factor C

    While the full impact of the WNV on the Morelet's crocodile has yet 
to be determined, there is no indication at present that WNV poses a 
threat to the species, and other interspecific interactions do not 
appear to be adversely affecting the Morelet's crocodile. In 
conclusion, we find that disease or predation is not a significant 
factor affecting the Morelet's crocodile throughout its range, both now 
and for the foreseeable future.

Factor D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms

Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna 
and Flora
    The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild 
Fauna and Flora (CITES, the Convention, or Treaty) is an international 
agreement between member governments to ensure that the international 
trade in plants and wildlife does not threaten the species' survival. 
It provides varying degrees of protection to more than 30,000 species 
of animals and plants, whether they are traded as live specimens, parts 
or products. Countries that have agreed to be bound by the Convention 
(that have ``joined'' CITES) are known as Parties. Although CITES is 
legally binding on the Parties, it does not take the place of national 
laws. Rather, it provides a framework to be respected by each Party, 
which has to adopt its own domestic legislation to ensure that CITES is 
implemented at the national level. For many years, CITES has been among 
the international conservation agreements with the largest membership, 
with now 175 Parties (http://www.CITES.org).
    CITES works by subjecting international trade in specimens of 
selected species to certain controls. Trade includes any movement into 
or out of a country and is not limited to commercial movement. All 
import, export, re-export, and ``introduction from the sea'' of species 
covered by the Convention have to be authorized through a permitting 
system. The species covered by CITES are listed in three Appendices, 
according to the degree of protection they need (CITES 2009c).
    Appendix I include species threatened with extinction that are or 
may be affected by trade. Trade in specimens of these species is 
permitted only in exceptional circumstances. Appendix II includes 
species not necessarily threatened with extinction, but in which trade 
must be controlled in order to avoid utilization incompatible with 
their survival. Appendix III includes species that have been 
unilaterally listed by a Party to assist in the implementation of the 
listing Party's national legislation to conserve and monitor trade in 
the listed species. The Conference of the Parties (CoP), which is the 
decision-making body of the Convention and comprises all its member 
countries, has agreed on a set of biological and trade criteria to help 
determine whether a species should be included in Appendices I or II 
(Since Appendix-III listings are a unilateral decision, Parties do not 
need to abide by the same biological and trade criteria adopted by the 
Parties.). At each regular meeting of the CoP, Parties submit proposals 
based on those criteria to amend these two Appendices to add, remove, 
or reclassify species (such as the Government of Mexico's 2010 proposal 
to transfer the Morelet's crocodile from Appendix I to Appendix II). 
Parties discuss these amendment proposals during the CoP, and then they 
are submitted for adoption by the Parties (http://www.cites.org).
    A specimen of a CITES-listed species may be imported into or 
exported (or re-exported) from a Party only if the appropriate permit 
or certificate has been obtained prior to the international trade and 
presented for clearance at the port of entry or exit.

Regulation of Trade in Appendix-I Specimens

    Both an export permit or re-export certificate must be issued by 
the country of export and an import permit from the country of import 
must be obtained prior to international trade for Appendix-I species. 
An export permit

[[Page 23665]]

may only be issued if the country of export determines that the export 
will not be detrimental to the survival of the species, the specimen 
was legally obtained according to the animal and plant protection laws 
in the country of export, live animals or plants are prepared and 
shipped for export to minimize any risk of injury, damage to health, or 
cruel treatment, and an import permit has been granted by the importing 
country. Likewise, the requirements for a re-export certificate are 
that the country of re-export determines that the specimen was imported 
into their country in accordance with CITES, that live animals or 
plants are prepared and shipped for re-export to minimize any risk of 
injury, damage to health, or cruel treatment, and an import permit has 
been granted.
    Issuance of import permits for Appendix-I species will also need a 
determination from the country of import that the import will not be 
for purposes that are detrimental to the survival of the species, the 
proposed recipient of live animals or plants is suitably equipped to 
house and care for them, and the purpose of the import is not for 
primarily commercial purposes. Thus, with few exceptions, Appendix-I 
species cannot be traded for commercial purposes.

Regulation of Trade in Appendix-II Specimens

    In contrast to the trade requirements for an Appendix-I species, 
CITES does not require an import permit from the destination country as 
a condition for the export and re-export of an Appendix-II species, 
unless it is required by the destination country's national law. 
However, an export permit or re-export certificate is required from the 
exporting country prior to the international trade taking place. An 
export permit may only be issued for Appendix-II species if the country 
of export determines that: (1) The export will not be detrimental to 
the survival of the species; (2) the specimen was legally obtained 
according to the animal and plant protection laws in the country of 
export; and (3) live animals or plants are prepared and shipped for 
export to minimize any risk of injury, damage to health, or cruel 
treatment.
    A re-export certificate may only be issued for Appendix-II species 
if the country of re-export determines that: (1) The specimen was 
imported into their country in accordance with CITES and (2) live 
animals or plants are prepared and shipped for re-export to minimize 
any risk of injury, damage to health, or cruel treatment.
    Parties to CITES are required to monitor both the export permits 
granted and the actual exports for Appendix II species. If a Party 
determines that the export of an Appendix-II species should be limited 
in order to maintain that species throughout its range at a level 
consistent with its role in the ecosystems in which it occurs and well 
above the level at which the species might become eligible for 
inclusion as an Appendix-I species, then that Party must take suitable 
measures to limit the number of export permits granted for that species 
(CITES article IV, paragraph 3).

CITES Registered Captive-Breeding Operations

    Prior to the Morelet's crocodile in Mexico and Belize being 
downlisted to Appendix II, it could be treated as an Appendix II 
species and internationally traded commercially only if the specimen 
originated from a captive-breeding operation registered with the CITES 
Secretariat in accordance with CITES Resolution Conf. 12.10 (Rev. 
CoP15) ``Guidelines for a procedure to register and monitor operations 
that breed Appendix-I animal species for commercial purposes.'' These 
captive-breeding operations may only be registered if specimens 
produced by that operation qualify as `bred in captivity' according to 
the provisions of Resolution Conf. 10.16 (Rev.). To qualify as bred in 
captivity, specimens must be born in a controlled environment where the 
parents mated. In addition, breeding stock must be established in 
accordance with the provisions of CITES and relevant national laws and 
in a manner not detrimental to the survival of the species in the wild. 
Breeding stock must also be maintained without the introduction of 
specimens from the wild, except for the occasional addition of animals, 
eggs or gametes meeting certain requirements. The breeding stock must 
have produced offspring of second generation (F2) in a controlled 
environment or be able to demonstrate that it is capable of reliably 
producing second-generation offspring in a controlled environment. 
Resolution Conf. 12.10 (Rev. CoP15) defines the term ``bred in 
captivity for commercial purposes'' as ``any specimen of an animal bred 
to obtain economic benefit, including profit, whether in cash or kind 
where the purpose is directed toward sale, exchange, or provision of a 
service or any other form of economic use or benefit''. Countries 
operating CITES-registered operations must ensure that the operation 
``will make a continuing meaningful contribution according to the 
conservation needs of the species'' (CITES 2007b, pp. 1-2). Under the 
exception in the Treaty and Resolution Conf. 12.10 (Rev. CoP15), 
specimens of Appendix-I species originating from CITES-registered 
captive-breeding operations can be traded for commercial purposes, and 
shipments only need to be accompanied by an export permit issued by the 
exporting country. The importer is not required to obtain an import 
permit because these specimens are treated as CITES Appendix II. 
Countries that are Parties to CITES should restrict their imports of 
Appendix-I captive-bred specimens to those coming only from CITES-
registered operations. Additional information on CITES-registered 
operations can be found on the CITES Web site at http://www.cites.org/eng/resources/registers.shtml.
    Prior to the downlisting of the species in Mexico and Belize, three 
CITES-registered operations for Morelet's crocodiles were located in 
Mexico. These facilities, while no longer registered with the CITES 
Secretariat, are still in operation (CITES 2010a, p. 24, Annex 3). The 
names of these operations are:
    (1) Cocodrilos Mexicanos (established in 1989; (former) 
registration number A-MX-501) in Culiacan, Sinaloa State. In 2008, this 
operation contained 28,673 captive Morelet's crocodiles for commercial 
production (CITES 2010a, p. 24, Annex 3).
    (2) Industrias Moreletii (established in 1993; (former) 
registration number A-MX-502) in Villahermosa, Tabasco State. In 2008, 
this operation contained 1,237 captive Morelet's crocodiles for 
commercial production (CITES 2010a, p. 24, Annex 3).
    (3) Cocodrilos de Chiapas (established in 1989; (former) 
registration number A-MX-503) in Tapachula, Chiapas State. In 2008, 
this operation contained six captive Morelet's crocodiles for 
exhibition purposes (CITES 2010a, p. 24, Annex 3).
    When the CITES Appendix-II designation became effective on June 23, 
2010, for Morelet's crocodiles in Mexico and Belize, commercial 
international trade in captive Morelet's crocodiles was no longer 
limited to crocodiles originating from the three operations that were 
registered with the CITES Secretariat. However, with the annotated 
listing, no export of wild-caught specimens for commercial purposes is 
allowed. Thus, any commercial export will continue to come from sources 
other than wild populations. There are currently 19 closed-cycle 
captive-breeding operations registered with the Government of Mexico as 
UMAs for the

[[Page 23666]]

production of Morelet's crocodile in Mexico. Under Mexican law, UMAs 
registered with the Government of Mexico must be closed-cycle and prove 
that they can produce individuals beyond the F2 generation (UMAs are 
described more fully below). Only four of the 19 UMAs have a captive 
population sufficiently large to support commercial trade, and only two 
of these four UMAs currently support international commercial trade--
(Cocodrilos Mexicanos and Industrias Moreletii) (CITES 2010a, Annex 3, 
p. 24). Importing Morelet's crocodiles from Mexican captive-breeding 
operations no longer requires a CITES import permit because a CITES 
import permit is not required for Appendix II species. However, a CITES 
export permit or re-export certificate is still required. Although the 
two remaining UMAs capable of supporting trade (Cacahuatal in Veracruz 
State and Punta del Este in Campeche State) currently do not contain 
enough Morelet's crocodiles to support international commercial trade, 
they do have enough potential annual production to produce enough skins 
to support local commercial trade (CITES 2010a, Annex 3, p. 24).
    Since the Morelet's crocodile in Guatemala is listed as an 
Appendix-I species under CITES, the only way that Morelet's crocodiles 
and their parts and products from Guatemala could legally be traded 
commercially in international trade is if a captive-breeding operation 
were to be registered with the CITES Secretariat. However, since 
Guatemala does not currently have any captive breeding operations that 
are registered with the CITES Secretariat, the commercial international 
trade in Morelet's crocodile products from Guatemala remains 
restricted.
    However, under the current listing of the species under the Act, it 
remains illegal to import Morelet's crocodiles or their parts or 
products into the United States, regardless of the source, unless the 
purpose of the import is for scientific research or enhancement of 
propagation or survival of the species. If this proposed rule is 
finalized and the prohibitions of the Act are removed, Morelet's 
crocodile parts and products originating from sources other than wild 
populations from Mexico and Belize could be imported into the United 
States for commercial purposes, as long as the required CITES export 
permit or re-export certificate has been granted. As discussed earlier, 
however, an export permit will not be granted unless the exporting 
country finds that the export will not be detrimental to the species 
and the specimen was lawfully acquired.

Mexico's Proposal To Transfer the Morelet's Crocodile to CITES Appendix 
II

    At the 2008 CITES Animals Committee meeting, the Government of 
Mexico submitted for comment and review a draft proposal to transfer 
Mexico's population of Morelet's crocodile from Appendix I to Appendix 
II based on Mexico's belief that the Morelet's crocodile no longer met 
the criteria for inclusion in Appendix I (CITES 2008a, pp. 1-28; CITES 
2008a, p. 32). Committee members were generally favorable of the 
proposal, but had several technical questions and suggestions. The 
Government of Mexico subsequently revised their 2008 proposal and 
formally submitted a 2010 CITES proposal for consideration at CoP15, 
held in March 2010 in Doha, Qatar (Government of Mexico 2010). The 2010 
proposal was to transfer the Morelet's crocodile throughout its range 
to Appendix II (CoP15 Prop. 8). The CITES Secretariat reviewed the 
proposal and agreed that the Morelet's crocodile no longer met the 
biological criteria for an Appendix-I species and recommended that the 
proposal be adopted.
    The Government of Mexico's 2010 CITES proposal recommended 
transferring the Morelet's crocodile from Appendix I to Appendix II 
because the species no longer met the criteria for inclusion in 
Appendix I. Under the 2010 proposal, the transfer to Appendix II 
applied to all three range countries. The 2010 proposal included an 
annotation establishing a zero quota for wild specimens. The zero quota 
would prohibit any international trade in wild specimens within the 
context of CITES, thereby limiting the trade to Morelet's crocodile and 
its products to those originating from sources other than wild 
specimens. Although the Belize-Guatemala-Mexico Tri-national Strategy 
for the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Morelet's Crocodile (see 
the Post-Delisting Monitoring section, below) includes long-term plans 
for ranching, none of the range countries have indicated they plan to 
ranch Morelet's crocodiles within the foreseeable future.
    The Government of Mexico consulted with the Governments of Belize 
and Guatemala on their 2010 CITES proposal. The Government of Belize 
supported the proposal, but did not provide documents to the CITES 
Secretariat to indicate their official support. According to the 
Government of Mexico's 2010 CITES proposal, the Government of Guatemala 
supported the proposal in part, but recommended transferring only the 
Mexican population of Morelet's crocodile in captive-breeding 
operations to Appendix II, with a zero quota for wild specimens traded 
for commercial purposes. In a letter from Guatemala's Consejo Nacional 
de Areas Protegidas to the Ambassador of Mexico dated 5 June 2009 
(CITES 2010a, Annex 4, p. 25), the Government of Guatemala indicated 
that it did not support the Government of Mexico's 2010 CITES proposal 
as written. They recommended verifying that moving captive Morelet's 
crocodiles in Mexico to Appendix II would not put wild Morelet's 
crocodiles in Mexico at risk. They supported Mexico's transfer of 
captive-bred populations of Morelet's crocodiles from Appendix I to 
Appendix II provided the parties ensure the following:
     They verify that wild populations of Morelet's crocodiles 
in Mexico will not be at risk as they are moved from Appendix I to II;
     If Mexico's proposal at CoP15 is approved, then measures 
should be put in place for strict monitoring and enforcement on the 
Mexico-Guatemala border;
     That the marking of live animals be done by methods that 
cannot be falsified and that skins be tagged in accordance with CITES 
to maintain chain of custody;
     That the tagging methods for Mexican populations of 
Morelet's crocodile be widely circulated to range countries and those 
countries importing parts and products as well as live specimens.
    Under Guatemala's recommended scenario, Morelet's crocodiles in 
Mexico, and Belize would be in Appendix II, with a zero quota for wild 
specimens traded for commercial purposes and all Morelet's crocodiles 
in Guatemala would remain on Appendix I (CITES 2010a, pp. 12, 25-26). 
The Appendix-II designation became effective on June 23, 2010. As a 
result, Morelet's crocodiles and their products from Mexico and Belize 
from sources other than wild populations are now allowed to enter 
international trade for commercial purposes under CITES. They are, 
however, not currently able to enter the United States market because 
the Act's prohibitions remain in effect. The international commercial 
trade in all wild Morelet's crocodiles remains restricted.
    At this time, the Government of Mexico intends to export products 
derived from Morelet's crocodiles raised in its captive-breeding 
operations that are registered with the Government of Mexico as UMAs, 
and that have a proven track record of producing

[[Page 23667]]

offspring beyond the F2 generation (CITES 2008, p. 23; CITES 2010a, p. 
9).
    Now that the Morelet's crocodile in Mexico and Belize is 
transferred to CITES Appendix II with an annotation providing a zero 
quota for wild specimens traded for commercial purposes, if this 
proposed delisting rule under the Act is finalized, then products 
originating from any captive-breeding operations in Mexico (and Belize, 
if any) could be imported into the United States. In addition, if this 
proposed delisting rule under the Act is finalized, then Morelet's 
crocodile products manufactured in other countries could also be re-
exported into the United States if those skins originated in Mexico or 
Belize and were not derived from wild populations. Live Morelet's 
crocodiles and parts or products originating from Guatemala will remain 
in CITES Appendix I, with its associated trade restrictions remaining 
in place.
    Through Resolution Conf. 8.4 (Rev. CoP15) the Parties to CITES have 
adopted a process, the National Legislation Project, to evaluate 
whether Parties have adequate domestic legislation to successfully 
implement the Treaty. In reviewing a country's national legislation, 
the Secretariat considers whether a Party's domestic laws designate the 
responsible Scientific and Management authorities, prohibit trade in 
violation of the Convention, have penalty provisions in place for 
illegal trade, and provide for seizure of specimens that were illegally 
traded or possessed.
    While both Guatemala and Mexico's legislation have been determined 
to be sufficient to properly implement the Treaty, Belize's national 
legislation was considered lacking. As part of the National Legislative 
Project, Belize has submitted a plan to revise their legislation to the 
Secretariat in March 2010, but as of this proposed rule, have not 
officially enacted any revised legislation (CITES 2010e). Although a 
trade suspension was put in place for Belize for one orchid species, 
Myrmecophila tibicinis, the suspension was in relation to the Review of 
Significant Trade in Specimens of Appendix II species (CITES 2010d) and 
not due to Belize's current legislation implementing CITES. If this 
proposed rule is finalized, CITES will continue to protect the 
Morelet's crocodile throughout its range by regulating international 
trade. However, as part of this proposed rule, we are requesting any 
information on Belize's efforts to enact national legislation and/or 
their efforts to ensure their compliance with CITES. We will continue 
to monitor Belize's progress between the proposed and final rules.
    All three countries also have protected-species and protected-areas 
legislation under the jurisdiction of specific ministries or 
departments. The three range countries have an extensive regulatory 
framework to control activities with respect to the Morelet's crocodile 
and its habitat. Mexico is unique among the three range countries in 
that the Government of Mexico also has legislation regulating captive-
breeding operations.
Mexico
    The Government of Mexico has a strict and comprehensive legal 
framework to regulate the conservation and sustainable use of the 
Morelet's crocodile in Mexico:
    (1) Ley General de Equilibrio Ecol[oacute]gico y Protecci[oacute]n 
al Ambiente (LGEEPA; General Ecological Equilibrium and Environmental 
Protection Law)--This is the primary Mexican law for environmental 
matters and is the principal legal instrument that regulates the 
Morelet's crocodile in Mexico (CONABIO 2005, Annex 3, p. 1). Passed in 
1988, this law applies to and integrates the three levels of government 
within the context of natural resources: Federal, state, and municipal. 
With regard to trade in wildlife species, including the Morelet's 
crocodile, the LGEEPA contains the basis to regulate all activities, 
including importation, exportation, seizures, sustainable use, 
violations, fines, animal welfare, and legal possession. While forty-
five articles within the Mexican LGEEPA deal with environmental 
contamination (CONABIO 2005, Annex 3, p. 1), we are not aware of any 
specific provisions and their relevance to Morelet's crocodile.
    (2) Ley General de Vida Silvestre (LGVS: General Wildlife Law)--
Passed in 2000, this law regulates the use, conservation, and 
management of domestic wild fauna and flora and their habitat (CONABIO 
2005, Annex 3, pp. 1-2). This law is based on the principle of 
sustainable use. Any activity with regard to wild fauna and flora must 
comply with certain requirements: The activity must be supported by an 
approved management plan; the quantity to be harvested must be less 
than natural recruitment (replacement); and the harvest must not have 
negative impacts on the wild populations, their habitat, or biological 
activities. With regard to the Morelet's crocodile, harvest of wild 
populations is not permitted, and harvest under this law would only be 
permitted for specimens obtained through closed-cycle, captive-breeding 
operations which have programs that contribute to the development of 
wild populations (CITES 2010a, p. 9).
    According to the LGVS, alien specimens or populations are those 
occurring outside their natural range (such as the Morelet's crocodiles 
found on the Pacific coast of Mexico), including hybrids. Such 
specimens or populations can only be managed in captivity, and with 
prior approval. A management plan must be in place with established 
security and contingency measures to avoid any negative effects on the 
conservation of wild native specimens and populations or their habitat. 
LGVS establishes management, control, and remediation measures for 
individuals or populations considered harmful. Measures may consist of 
capture/collection for the development of recovery, restocking and 
reintroduction projects; for research or environmental education 
activities; for relocation of specimens (subject to prior evaluation of 
the destination habitat and condition of the individuals); for 
elimination or eradication of individuals/populations; or of actions or 
devices to keep the individuals away, disperse them, make access 
difficult or reduce the damage they cause (CITES 2010a, p. 9).
    (3) Programa de Conservaci[oacute]n de la Vida Silvestre y 
Diversificaci[oacute]n Productiva en el Sector Rural (Program for 
Wildlife Conservation and Productive Diversification of the Rural 
Sector)--Launched in 2000, this program defines the conceptual, 
strategic, legal and administrative framework that governs any 
initiative for the conservation and use of wild species (CITES 2010a, 
p. 8). The goal of this program is to establish incentives for private 
and public initiatives that favor natural resources conservation, as 
well as provide economic opportunities for private entities for the 
sustainable use of these resources (CONABIO 2005, Annex 3, pp. 2-3). 
Based on a biological evaluation of the species, this program promotes 
the use and conservation of priority species of plants and animals, 
including the establishment of wildlife production units and technical 
advisory committees such as the COMACROM (Subcomit[eacute] 
T[eacute]cnico Consultivo para la Conservaci[oacute]n, Manejo y 
Aprovechamiento Sustentable de los Crocodylia en M[eacute]xico; 
Technical Advisory Subcommittee for the Conservation, Management and 
Sustainable Use of the Crocodilians in Mexico) in the case of the 
Morelet's crocodile. Created by the Government of Mexico in 1999, 
COMACROM includes scientists, technicians, NGOs, producers, authorities 
and other

[[Page 23668]]

stakeholders. It participates in meetings of the IUCN Crocodile 
Specialist Group (CSG) and contributes publications to the CSG (CITES 
2010a, p. 8).
    (4) Norma Oficial Mexicana NOM-059-SEMARNAT-2001--Passed in 2001, 
this regulation provides legal protection to domestic endangered 
species of fauna and flora and provides a mechanism to evaluate 
extinction risks (CONABIO 2005, Annex 3, p. 3). The M[eacute]todo de 
Evaluaci[oacute]n de Riesgo de Extinci[oacute]n de Especies Silvestres 
de M[eacute]xico (MER; Method to Evaluate Wildlife Extinction Risks in 
Mexico), one of the parts of this regulation, has four categories of 
risk: Probably extinct in the wild, in peril, threatened, and subject 
to special protection. The Morelet's crocodile is included in the 
category ``subject to special protection.'' This regulation defines the 
category ``subject to special protection'' as ``those species or 
populations that might find themselves threatened by factors that 
adversely affect their viability, thus determining the need to promote 
conservation or recovery and the recovery and conservation of 
associated species populations. (This category may include lower risk 
categories of the IUCN classification).''
    Although the Government of Mexico no longer classifies the 
Morelet's crocodile as ``Endangered'' or ``Threatened,'' classification 
as ``subject to special protection'' under Mexican Official Law NOM-
059-SEMARNAT-2001 allows legal protection at the national level (CITES 
2010a, p. 9). Including the Morelet's crocodile in this category allows 
the Government of Mexico to make sure it still meets the conservation 
needs of important species from both a biologically and socio-economic 
standpoint before the species can be considered as threatened or 
endangered. The petitioners recommended keeping the Morelet's crocodile 
in this category of ``subject to special protection'' to maintain 
existing measures of conservation, technical supervision, monitoring 
and enforcement in order to avoid the species' having a higher risk 
category in the future (CONABIO 2005, p. 4 and Annex 2, p. 5).
    (5) Norma Oficial Mexicana NOM-126-SEMARNAT-2000--Passed in 2000, 
this regulation oversees scientific research and collection by 
individual domestic and foreign researchers, as well as by institutions 
(CONABIO 2005, Annex 3, p. 3). If a species is also regulated under 
CITES, the appropriate permit or certificate must be obtained under 
this regulation. Scientific research or collections involving the 
Morelet's crocodile are regulated under these provisions.
    (6) Sistema de Unidades de Manejo para la Conservaci[oacute]n de la 
Vida Silvestre (SUMA; Wildlife Conservation Management and 
Administration Unit System)--In 1997, the Government of Mexico 
established a system for registering, supervising, and enforcing UMAs 
(Unidad de Manejo y Administraci[oacute]n; Conservation Management and 
Administrative Units) for intensive reproduction of economically 
valuable natural resources, including captive farming of Morelet's 
crocodiles (CONABIO 2005, Annex 3, pp. 3-5). The goal of this 
regulation was to ensure that biodiversity conservation be considered 
within the context of the production and socioeconomic needs of the 
country. This system combined a broad range of entities or facilities 
(``units'') under a single administrative program, including zoological 
and botanical gardens, greenhouses, and animal breeding centers. 
Through these units, the Government of Mexico promotes natural 
resources uses that are responsible and planned. Extensive and 
intensive captive-breeding units for the Morelet's crocodile are 
covered under this system. In exchange for the right to harvest the 
Morelet's crocodile under controlled conditions, closed-cycle captive-
breeding unit operators are required to develop and implement an 
approved management plan for the site, as well as to conserve the 
species' habitat and other species that use that habitat. Strict animal 
husbandry practices and welfare considerations are required under these 
plans.
    Legal registration of approved UMAs requires proof of captive 
production beyond the F2 generation (CITES 2010a, p. 9). For intensive 
UMAs, such as captive-breeding operations in Mexico, the Government of 
Mexico requires the UMAs to submit regular reports that must include 
information on births and deaths, number and identification of traded 
specimens, and management activities (CITES 2010a, p. 10).
    The Government of Mexico uses three methods to mark live Morelet's 
crocodiles registered with the Wildlife Division through the 
corresponding inventories of UMAs. The first method is interdigital 
staples on the feet. The second method is the traditional method of 
cutting notches in the tail scales and is only used by some operations 
(CITES 2010a, p. 10). These marks are registered with the Government of 
Mexico. The third method is the Universal Tagging System required by 
CITES for the export of skins (Resolution Conf. 11.12 (Rev. CoP15), 
which consists of a plastic security tag with the UMA registration 
number, the species code, a serial number, and the year of production 
or harvest. Any application for a CITES export permit must include the 
number of the authorized specimen based on the interdigital tag and the 
skin's plastic security tag and is used to track skins and other 
products (CITES 2010a, p. 10).
    Approximately 50 UMAs have been registered for rearing Morelet's 
crocodiles in Mexico since the 1980s, primarily for domestic commerce. 
Nineteen of them are still actively managing the species and three were 
registered with the CITES Secretariat when the species in Mexico was 
included in Appendix I (CITES 2010a, p. 11). Only five of the nineteen 
UMAs have the potential for annual commercial production of products 
made from Morelet's crocodile (CITES 2010a, p. 24).
    (7) Sistema Nacional de [Aacute]reas Naturales Protegidas (SINANP; 
National System of Protected Natural Areas)--Passed in 2000, this 
system is made up of parcels identified as Protected Natural Areas 
(CONABIO 2005, Annex 3, p. 5). These Protected Natural Areas are 
created by Presidential decree and the activities on them are regulated 
under the LGEEPA, which requires that the Protected Natural Areas 
receive special protection for conservation, restoration and 
development activities. The National Commission of Natural Protected 
Areas (CONANP), a decentralized organ of the Government of Mexico's 
Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources (SEMARNAT), currently 
administers 173 federal natural areas representing more than 62,396,392 
ac (25,250,963 ha). These natural areas are categorized as: Biosphere 
Reserves, National Parks, Natural Monuments, Areas of Natural Resource 
Protection, Areas of Protection of Flora and Fauna, and Sanctuaries.
    These areas are protected under Mexican law because they contain 
key or representative ecosystems or species, or ecosystems or species 
that are at risk and require strict control. Many ecosystems or 
species, including the Morelet's crocodile, are protected under this 
system. According to the Government of Mexico, SINANP includes at least 
12 protected areas occupied by Morelet's crocodile, covering an 
estimated 13 percent of the species' geographic range (CONABIO 2005, p. 
30).
    (8) C[oacute]digo Penal Federal (Federal Penal Code)--The code 
contains a special section for environmental crimes (CONABIO 2005, 
Annex 3, pp. 5-6). These penalties apply to those who commit crimes 
against plants or

[[Page 23669]]

animals, as well as to individuals who illegally use or commercialize 
regulated species without authorization. These penalties apply to 
crimes involving the Morelet's crocodiles.
    In order to implement and enforce the laws and regulations 
mentioned above, SEMARNAT created the office of the Procuradur[iacute]a 
Federal de Protecci[oacute]n al Ambiente (PROFEPA; Federal Prosecutor 
for Environmental Protection) and the Programa para la 
Inspecci[oacute]n y Vigilancia en Puertos, Aeropuertos y Fronteras 
(Ports, Airports, and Borders Inspection and Enforcement Program) 
(CONABIO 2005, Annex 3, p. 6). Under this program, imports and exports 
for key products regulated by SEMARNAT are inspected at 65 points of 
entry and exit to prevent laundering. Morelet's crocodile products are 
regulated under this program. PROFEPA implements the Environmental 
Inspection Program at ports, airports, and borders, and the Wildlife 
Inspection Program, monitoring all stages of the use of wild species 
and ensuring their protection. Inspection and enforcement programs make 
these Mexican laws and regulations more effective, especially at 
airports and border ports of entry and exit. Specific actions include 
the verification of cross-border movements in compliance with CITES and 
other international agreements in coordination with customs 
authorities; inspection of areas of wildlife harvest, stockpiling, 
distribution, and sale; surveillance of areas of wildlife distribution 
and harvest; and special operations in areas of wildlife harvest, 
stockpiling, distribution and sale, in coordination with public law 
enforcement and judicial authorities (Govt. of Mexico 2010, p. 11). 
Mexico has implemented several programs to prevent and combat illegal 
harvest, including the System of Wildlife Management Units (SUMA) which 
is based on six key elements: (1) Registration with the Wildlife 
Division (DGVS Direcci[oacute]n General de Vida Silvestre- SEMARNAT, 
CITES Management Authority); (2) proper habitat management; (3) 
monitoring of wild populations of the species harvested; (4) controlled 
harvest (including periodic reports and inventories on each UMA); (5) 
management plan approved and registered with the Wildlife Division; and 
(6) certificate of production and market/tagging methods. SEMARNAT 
conducts random inspections of UMAs and, if any issues are detected in 
the management plan, carries out population studies, including sampling 
activities and species inventories and produces periodic reports on 
these findings (CITES 2010a, p. 10).
    We do not have any information on whether the Mexican legal 
framework specifically authorizes subsistence hunting or cultural use 
of the Morelet's crocodile, or on the current level of enforcement, or 
whether the enforcement is considered adequate.
Belize
    The Government of Belize also has a legal framework that regulates 
the conservation and sustainable use of the Morelet's crocodile, along 
with other species of birds, mammals, and reptiles (collectively known 
as Scheduled species). In general terms, the Wildlife Protection Act 
prohibits illegal harvest and export in Belize (Government of Belize 
2000 p. 7-9). The Forestry Department, within the Ministry of Natural 
Resources and the Environment, is the relevant government agency with 
respect to the Morelet's crocodile. Under this legislation, the Game 
Warden controls hunting of these species. Certain activities are 
prohibited and a license is required. For example, hunting of the 
Morelet's crocodile is prohibited. Importation and exportation of 
wildlife is subject to strict protocols and provisions of the Wildlife 
Protection Act and requires a permit. Hunting of certain species for 
scientific or educational purposes also requires a permit. The 
legislation also identifies offenses and penalties.
    In addition to the Wildlife Protection Act, the Government of 
Belize is in the process of developing and implementing a National List 
of Critical Species (Meerman 2005a, pp. 1-8; Meerman 2005b, p. 38). 
This list is based, in part, on the procedures used by IUCN Red List of 
Threatened Animals (see IUCN 2001, version 3.1, 35 pp.). Within the 
context of the Belize Protected Areas Policy and System Plan, this list 
will serve as a basis for the Belize Red Data List. According to the 
2005 list (Meerman 2005a, p. 8), the Morelet's crocodile is categorized 
as ``CD'' (Conservation Dependant) in Belize due to the following 
factors: small range, hunted, economic importance, charismatic species 
drawing national and international attention, and persecuted as 
perceived pest. Under the 2005 list, Conservation Dependent species are 
taxa that are the focus of a continuing taxon-specific or habitat-
specific conservation program for the taxon in question, the cessation 
of which would result in the taxon qualifying for one of the threatened 
categories on the list within five years (Meerman 2005a, p. 3).
    These laws and regulations provide legal protection to the 
Morelet's crocodile in Belize. We have no information on whether the 
Wildlife Protection Act is sufficiently enforced. The CITES Legislation 
Project (CITES 2010e) concluded that Belize's national legislation does 
not meet any of the requirements for implementing CITES. However, 
Belize has submitted a plan and draft legislation to CITES as of March 
2010, but has not officially enacted the legislation. In spite of this 
assessment by CITES, trade data seem to indicate the threat of 
unregulated trade from Belize is minimal. However, as part of this 
rule, we are requesting from the public any information pertaining to 
Belize's efforts to fully enact legislation and ensure their compliance 
with CITES.
Guatemala
    The Government of Guatemala also has a legal framework that 
regulates the conservation and sustainable use of natural resources, 
including the Morelet's crocodile (IIA URL FCAA IARNA 2003, pp. 67-69; 
IARNA URL IIA 2006, pp. 104-107; Rep[uacute]blica de Guatemala 2007, 
pp. 3-4 and 31). In general terms, and based on our review of other 
materials, natural resources management is under the jurisdiction of 
the Ministerio de Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (Ministry of the 
Environment and Natural Resources; USAID 2002, pp. 44-45; 
Rep[uacute]blica de Guatemala 2007, pp. 3-4 and 9). The main 
legislation in this regard is Decreto N[uacute]mero 4-89 (Ley de 
[Aacute]reas Protegidas, Gobierno de Guatemala 1989, pp. 1-24; Birner 
et al. 2005, p. 290; Law of Protected Areas and Amendments/Revisions). 
This decree established the Comisi[oacute]n Nacional de [Aacute]reas 
Protegidas (CONAP; National Commission on Protected Areas). CONAP has 
been tasked to run the Sistema Nacional de [Aacute]reas Protegidas 
(SIGAP; National System of Protected Areas; IARNA URL IIA 2006, pp. 
104-107). In Guatemala, the Morelet's crocodile is included in the 
Endangered Species List (Resolution No. ALC/032-99 of CONAP) in 
Category 2, ``Seriously Endangered,'' which includes species that are 
endangered because of habitat loss, trade, the very small size of their 
populations and/or endemism with limited distribution (CITES 2010a, p. 
9).
    In the past, threats to the Morelet's crocodile and its habitat in 
Guatemala, compounded with the lack of funding and personnel, made it 
difficult for the Government of Guatemala to adequately enforce these 
laws and regulations. Ongoing conservation actions were often 
overwhelmed by slow economic

[[Page 23670]]

development, high levels of poverty, unequal land distribution, a 
highly segmented society, and the effects of more than three decades of 
civil war (Birner et al. 2005, pp. 285, 292). In 2003, Laguna del Tigre 
National Park was considered by ParkWatch as critically threatened due 
to land grabs, the presence of human settlements, expanding agriculture 
and cattle ranching, poaching, forest fires, the oil industry, and an 
almost complete lack of institutional control over the area (ParksWatch 
2003, pp. 1, 11). However, in 2004 ParksWatch stated that the staff at 
Laguna del Tigre had doubled in size since their 2003 report 
(ParksWatch 2004, p, 30.) Seventy-three park rangers, 10 archeological 
site guards and 96 Army personnel were hired to staff the park and 
since the increase in staffing, both the park and the biotope are 
``constantly patrolled.'' In addition, the Wildlife Conservation 
Society and U.S. AID continued its ``Biodiversity Conservation at a 
Landscape Scale'' program and has provided a comprehensive plan with 
specific goals to preserve and protect wildlife in the MBR in Guatemala 
through conserving wildlife species and their habitat, while 
maintaining the economic productivity of renewable natural resources. 
They are fulfilling these goals by establishing specific parameters. 
Namely, ``to develop adaptive and participatory strategy to reduce 
threats to wildlife in the MBR; to develop, implement and monitor 
sustainable mechanisms to reduce threats to wildlife and ecosystems 
across the MBR landscape; to learn and teach best management practices 
for the conservation of the MBR and beyond; and to guide, design and 
test wildlife-focused planning'' (WCS 2008, page 3). For the past nine 
years the WCS has been conducting overflights of Laguna del Tigre Park 
with the Guatemalan National Park Service and LightHawk (a volunteer-
based environmental aviation organization) and has used that 
information to identify illegal colonization, resulting in successfully 
removing illegal squatters (80+ families) from the area. In addition, 
overflights revealed marijuana clearings on the eastern-most port of 
Mirador-R[iacute]o Azule National Park in 2007. WCS overflights helped 
to monitor fires, locate illegal settlements and notify the national 
and provincial government as well as the national media of illegal 
activities. As a result, the presence of fires in Laguna del Tigre 
National Park has been reduced by 90%. In addition, WCS has taken an 
active role in educating locals and concessionaires on best management 
practices for sustainable use of forest products. (WCS 10 year report, 
no date given, page 6).
    In August 2010, the president of Guatemala announced that he is 
deploying 250 soldiers to recover fully all the protected zones of El 
Pet[eacute]n in the Laguna del Tigre section of the MBR. This ``Green 
Battalion'' is being deployed specifically to protect the Laguna del 
Tigre National Park and work jointly with the National Civil Police and 
the Attorney General's Office to combat drug trafficking and the 
illegal harvest of natural resources and archaeological sites of that 
region of the MBR (Latin American Herald Tribune, December 6, 2010).
    The Government of Guatemala is also participating in the Tri-
national Strategy (see the Post-Delisting Monitoring section below) for 
Morelet's crocodile, wherein specific actions directed toward the 
Morelet's crocodile are defined. Conservation actions in Guatemala are 
being developed and implemented within the context of the Convention on 
Biological Diversity and the National Biodiversity Strategy and Action 
Plan (Birner et al. 2005, p. 285). Many outstanding accomplishments 
have been achieved in Guatemala in terms of biodiversity conservation 
(IARNA URL IIA 2006, p. 22) and the Guatemalan government seems 
committed to ensuring that environmental management and enforcement 
efforts continue.

Summary of Factor D

    Based on all three range countries being Parties to CITES, as well 
as having protected-species and protected-areas legislation, and 
implementing this legislation, and enforcing relevant laws, the current 
regulatory mechanisms appear to be adequate to conserve the Morelet's 
crocodile in the majority of the species' range. As per the CITES 
National Legislation Project (CITES 2010e), both Guatemala and Mexico's 
legislation meet all the requirements for implementing CITES. Belize's 
national legislation was considered not to meet any of the requirements 
for implementing CITES. However, Belize has submitted a plan and draft 
legislation to CITES as of March 2010, but has not officially enacted 
the legislation. Per decisions made during CoP15, the CITES protections 
for Morelet's crocodiles in Guatemala will remain unchanged. They will 
remain protected as an Appendix-I species, with those CITES trade 
restrictions remaining in place.
    Together, Mexico and Belize contain the majority of wild 
individuals (87 percent) and the estimated potentially suitable habitat 
(81 percent) throughout the species' range. We anticipate that these 
conditions will remain essentially the same, both domestically and 
internationally in the sense of more-effective regulatory mechanisms, 
in the foreseeable future (e.g., CITES). However, we did not solely 
rely on these future measures in finding the species is no longer 
threatened or endangered.
    Existing regulatory mechanisms, including CITES and domestic 
prohibitions on harvest of wild Morelet's crocodiles, have played a 
vital role in resurgence of Morelet's crocodiles over the last 40 
years. While some trade restrictions could be lifted in the future, 
particularly to allow increased trade in captive-bred specimens now 
that Morelet's crocodiles in Mexico and Belize have been moved to CITES 
Appendix II with a zero export quota for wild specimens traded for 
commercial purposes, we believe such lifting of restrictions would pose 
little risk to the species. All three range countries restrict the use 
of wild specimens and the Government of Mexico has institutions with 
proven track records to administer and enforce controls on captive-
breeding operations and laundering of illegal specimens. Should the 
zero export quota for wild specimens traded for commercial purposes be 
lifted, it may create greater enforcement challenges in all three range 
countries in the foreseeable future because the taking of wild 
Morelet's crocodiles could be authorized. If it does, the requirements 
of CITES Appendix II will apply. The exporting country will be required 
to determine that the export is not detrimental to the survival of the 
species in the wild and specimens are legally acquired prior to issuing 
a permit authorizing the export. However, a change to the annotation 
would require approval of two-thirds of the Parties voting at a CoP and 
cannot be done unilaterally by any of the range countries. Therefore, 
we do not have any indication that CITES and the regulatory mechanisms 
of the range countries will be inadequate to continue to protect the 
species in the wild if this proposed delisting rule under the Act is 
finalized, or if ranching is authorized in the future.
    The reproduction and survival rates of wild Morelet's crocodiles 
are currently robust. Populations remain stable throughout most of 
their range, and have expanded their range in some areas. In 
conclusion, we find that, taken together, the currently existing 
protections described above are adequate, and they will remain adequate 
to protect the Morelet's crocodile and its

[[Page 23671]]

habitat in the majority of its range now and within the foreseeable 
future.

Factor E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting the Continued 
Existence of the Species

Human-Crocodile Conflicts
    The Morelet's crocodile is known to attack humans. While data about 
these conflicts are limited, anecdotal reports suggest that these 
conflicts are widespread and ongoing. In a well-documented attack in 
Belize in August 2001, a Morelet's crocodile attacked a 13-year-old 
male and caused him to drown in the Belama area of Belize City (Finger 
et al. 2002, p. 198).
    More often, human-crocodile conflicts involving the Morelet's 
crocodile are more benign. In Mexico, for example, the Crocodile Museum 
(Chiapas State; about 80 cases per year) assists local officials 
through the capture, rescue, and relocation of local crocodilians (all 
three species, including the Morelet's crocodile) that are considered 
potentially dangerous or, because of their location (close proximity to 
human activities), they might be killed by local inhabitants 
(Dom[iacute]nguez-Laso 2008, p. 5). Abercrombie et al. (1982, p. 19) 
reported that the Morelet's crocodile was generally feared in Belize. 
Finger et al. (2002, p. 199) indicated that development related to 
human occupation (such as residential areas and infrastructure) in 
Morelet's crocodile habitat around Belize City was generating 
increasing numbers of human-crocodile conflicts. Windsor et al. (2002, 
p. 418) also noted that the practice of feeding the Morelet's crocodile 
by residents and tourists was becoming more common and was also 
generating increasing numbers of human-crocodile conflicts in Belize. 
According to Platt and Thorbjarnarson (2000a, p. 27), large Morelet's 
crocodiles, despite legal protections, are still perceived as threats 
to humans and livestock, and are occasionally killed near residential 
areas in Belize. While educational programs are needed for local 
residents and visitors to deter this activity, it may also be necessary 
to develop a problem crocodile removal program to resolve these 
conflicts (Windsor et al. 2002, p. 418). No information was available 
about human-crocodile conflicts in Guatemala. Although human-crocodile 
conflicts are affecting local populations of Morelet's crocodiles, and 
this is likely to continue in the foreseeable future, we do not have 
any evidence that it is currently or anticipated to be a threat to the 
species as a whole.
Environmental Contaminants
    Environmental contaminants are known to have negative impacts on 
terrestrial vertebrates (Smith et al. 2007, p. 41), including 
crocodilians (Ross 1998, p. 3). The primary routes through which 
terrestrial reptiles, including the Morelet's crocodile, are exposed to 
environmental pollutants are ingestion of contaminated prey, dermal 
contact, maternal transfer, and accumulation of chemicals into eggs 
from contaminated nesting media (Smith et al. 2007, p. 48). With regard 
to the Morelet's crocodile, organochlorine contaminants have been 
detected in the scutes (external scales) (DeBusk 2001, pp. viii-ix) and 
the chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) of hatched Morelet's crocodile eggs 
(Pepper et al. 2004, pp. 493 and 495), as well as in whole contents 
analysis of nonviable crocodile eggs (Wu et al. 2000a, p. 6,416; 2000b, 
p. 671; Wu et al. 2006, 151).
    The most common organochlorine found in studies of Morelet's 
crocodile in Belize was DDE (dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene), 
detected in 100 percent of eggs collected by Wu et al. (2000b, p. 673) 
and 69 percent of CAMs sampled by Pepper et al. (2004, p. 495). 
Organochlorines have also been detected at additional sites throughout 
coastal Belize and the interior highlands (Meerman 2006a, p. 26; Wu et 
al. 2006, p. 153). Although exposure to organochlorines has been linked 
to adverse effects on population health of the American alligator in 
Florida (several studies cited by Wu et al. 2000b, p. 676), no 
population-level effects were detected in Belize (McMurry and Anderson 
2000, pp. 1 and 4; Wu et al. 2000b, p. 676). Rainwater (2003, pp. xii 
and 38), however, later suggested that some of the sites that had been 
chosen for comparative purposes in fact had similar contaminant 
profiles and that some study results suggesting no significant 
differences between sites may be equivocal.
    Vitellogenin induction (development of the egg yolk) in the 
Morelet's crocodile, suggesting endocrine disruption due to 
environmental contamination when exhibited by males, recently has 
become a research topic in Belize. Reproductive impairment due to 
endocrine-disrupting contaminants has been demonstrated elsewhere in 
crocodilians and is suspected to occur in Belize due to known 
contaminant levels (Selcer et al. 2006, p. 50; Rainwater et al. 2008, 
p. 101). Initial results have not documented contaminant-induced 
vitellogenin in blood plasma in the Morelet's crocodile, but this 
condition may occur in the wild in Belize; studies are ongoing (Selcer 
et al. 2006, p. 50; Rainwater et al. 2008, pp. 101 and 106-107).
    Mercury was detected in nonviable Morelet's crocodile eggs 
collected from eight nests across three localities in northern Belize 
in 1995 (Rainwater et al. 2002a, p. 320; Rainwater et al. 2002b, p. 
190). While mercury was detected in all eggs sampled, the mean 
concentration per egg was among the lowest reported values for any 
crocodile species. No overt signs of mercury toxicity or evidence of a 
population decline was noted for Morelet's crocodiles at the site 
(Rainwater et al. 2002a, pp. 321-322).
    All samples for studies of organochlorine and mercury contaminants 
cited above came from Belize, and we are not aware of any similar 
investigations elsewhere in the Morelet's crocodile range (Mexico or 
Guatemala). Since reproduction and survival rates of Morelet's 
crocodiles are currently robust, we do not have any reason to believe 
that environmental contaminants are currently likely to cause the 
Morelet's crocodile to become in danger of extinction within the 
foreseeable future.
    Populations currently remain stable throughout most of the species 
range, and have even expanded their range in some areas. This provides 
empirical evidence of the species' intrinsic resilience and 
adaptability. There is no evidence that environmental contaminants 
currently pose a threat to the species. Although environmental 
contaminants may represent a potential threat, especially given the 
potential for long-term bioaccumulation of contaminants during the 
species' long reproductive life, given this species' resiliency we do 
not have any data to indicate that it is likely to become a threat in 
the foreseeable future.
    Manmade factors that could affect the continued existence of the 
Morelet's crocodile, according to CONABIO (CONABIO 2005, p. 32), were 
the construction and operation of oil extraction infrastructure and 
thermoelectric plants. The operation of chemical and manufacturing 
industries could also become a threat if potentially toxic residual 
materials are disposed of improperly. These activities, however, are 
highly regulated by the Ley General de Equilibrio Ecol[oacute]gico y 
Protecci[oacute]n al Ambiente (LGEEPA); General Ecological Equilibrium 
and Environmental Protection Law) and the Attorney General for the 
Protection of the Environment (PROFEPA). Under LGEEPA, every new 
project has to fulfill strict protocols for the assessment of

[[Page 23672]]

environmental impacts before it can be approved.
    As discussed above in the Factor D., Inadequacy of Existing 
Regulatory Mechanisms, section, the Government of Guatemala opposed the 
Government of Mexico's 2010 CITES proposal based, in part, on threats 
to the species from pollution in Guatemala (CITES 2010a, p. 6). 
However, we do not have any information or data on the extent of the 
impact, if any, that pollution may have on the Morelet's crocodile in 
Guatemala.
Genetic Diversity and Integrity
    At least three factors have been identified as potential threats 
with respect to the Morelet's crocodile: (1) Genetic heterogeneity; (2) 
hybridization; and (3) male-biased sex ratios.

Genetic Heterogeneity

    Evaluation of nine microsatellite loci, highly repetitive DNA 
sequences, from Morelet's crocodiles in Belize suggested a high degree 
of genetic heterogeneity within local populations, relatively high 
levels of migration among populations, and no evidence of a major 
genetic bottleneck due to population depletion in the mid-1900s (Dever 
and Densmore 2001, pp. 543-544; Dever et al. 2002, p. 1084). Population 
bottlenecks are a period when a species population drops to such a low 
level that many genetic lineages become extinct and genetic variation 
is reduced to a few individuals, resulting in genetic homogeneity. If 
severe, it can lead to inbreeding. Endangered species that do not 
become extinct might expand their populations, but with limited genetic 
diversity, they may not be able to adapt to changing environmental 
conditions. The high degree of genetic heterogeneity found in Morelet's 
crocodiles was attributed to frequent migration by individuals among 
the several adjacent Morelet's crocodile populations. Ray et al. (2004, 
pp. 455-457) found low levels of genetic diversity in the mitochondrial 
control region of Morelet's crocodiles at 10 sites in northern Belize 
and at one site each in northern Guatemala and Mexico, but these 
results were inconsistent with a population bottleneck and may be 
typical of crocodilian populations. Other studies of the repetitive 
sequences in the mitochondrial control are ongoing in the Morelet's 
crocodile and may be a useful tool for researchers investigating 
population dynamics of this species (Ray and Densmore 2003, p. 1012).

Hybridization

    Data suggest that some hybridization between Morelet's crocodiles 
and American crocodiles has always periodically occurred in the wild in 
areas where both species are sympatric, and that the hybridization is 
more frequent than previously believed (Cede[ntilde]o-V[aacute]zquez et 
al., 2008, p. 666-667; Rodr[iacute]guez et al., 2008, p. 678). While 
the first hybrids were identified in coastal areas of eastern Belize, 
later studies also located hybrids in Mexico along the eastern and 
northern coasts of the Yucatan Peninsula (Ray et al. 2004, p. 449; 
Cede[ntilde]o-V[aacute]zquez et al. 2008, p. 661; Rodr[iacute]guez et 
al. 2008, p. 674).
    Hybridization involves several key issues. First, hybridization 
appears to be bidirectional (males of one species with females of the 
other species, and vice versa). In addition, hybrids (confirmed by 
laboratory tests) do not always exhibit physical characteristics (such 
as body size, shape, or coloration) that are a mixture of both species, 
and they are not always readily identifiable as such in the hand. 
Furthermore, F2 hybrids and backcrosses of hybrids to nonhybrids have 
been reported. These circumstances hinder the field identification of 
potential hybrids.
    Ray et al. (2004, p. 459) stated that further assessment of genetic 
contact between these two species should precede reclassification of 
Morelet's under CITES, presumably because of uncertainty regarding 
numbers of genetically pure individuals in Belize. While populations of 
both the Morelet's crocodile and the American crocodile suffered from 
the hunting pressures of the 1950s and 1960s, the American crocodile 
has been slower to recover. Indeed, Ray et al. (2004, p. 459) noted 
that hybridization likely represents a greater danger to the genetic 
integrity of the larger but rarer American crocodile than to the 
Morelet's crocodile in Belize. The Service believes this concern bears 
additional investigation, but is not sufficient to warrant continued 
endangered or threatened status under the Act for the Morelet's 
crocodile.
    One hypothetical concern about hybridization is that 
supplementation of wild Morelet's crocodile populations in Mexico with 
captive-bred crocodiles might affect the genetic integrity of wild 
populations. While analyses of captive-bred populations have not been 
published, differences in the nature and extent of genetic variation of 
these populations compared with wild populations might be expected. It 
is not clear if these differences, if they occur, would be significant 
or important from a conservation standpoint. Furthermore, this issue 
may be a moot point. Although agreements between captive-breeding 
operations and the Government of Mexico require breeders to make 
available up to 10 percent of their offspring for reintroduction to the 
wild, or as breeding stock for other crocodile farms in the country, no 
releases of captive-bred stock have occurred (Mexico 2006, p. 28). No 
releases have occurred because the current total population sizes of 
wild populations in Mexico, according to Mexican officials, are 
sufficiently large to render releases unnecessary (CITES 2008, p. 23). 
However, accidental escapes and deliberate releases of the Morelet's 
crocodile from captive rearing-units outside of the species' natural 
range have occurred in wetland habitats along the Pacific coast of 
Mexico. These wetland habitats are already occupied by the naturally 
occurring American crocodile, and interactions between the two 
crocodile species are likely (Ross 1995, p. 14). These escapes and 
releases of Morelet's crocodiles may pose risks to the genetic 
integrity of naturally occurring American crocodiles, but probably not 
to Morelet's crocodiles. The Government of Mexico is making efforts to 
diagnose potential threats to the native American crocodile caused by 
hybridization with the introduced Morelet's crocodile on the Pacific 
coast of Mexico. The goal of these efforts is to generate morphological 
and molecular identification materials and study the population 
dynamics of the American crocodile. It will include monitoring and 
harvest of Morelet's crocodiles and hybrids for scientific research 
(CITES 2010a, p. 6).
    Although hybridization between American and Morelet's crocodiles 
continues to affect negatively some local populations of the Morelet's 
crocodile, the impacts appear to be very small. We have no evidence 
that hybridization is currently or anticipated to affect significantly 
the Morelet's crocodile throughout its range.

Male-biased Sex Ratios

    Another potential risk from supplementation of wild populations 
with captive-bred Morelet's crocodiles is that of skewed sex ratios 
(greater proportion of males in captive populations). Incubation 
temperature affects the sex ratio of crocodilian species differently 
(Escobedo-Galv[aacute]n 2006, p. 131). Like many crocodilian species, 
the Morelet's crocodile exhibits temperature-dependent sex 
determination. Incubation temperatures greater than about 93 [deg]F (34 
[deg]C) or less than 90 [deg]F (32 [deg]C) produce females, while 
temperatures between 90-93 [deg]F (32-34 [deg]C) generally produce 
males (Escobedo-Galv[aacute]n 2006, p. 133; Escobedo-Galv[aacute]n et 
al. 2008, p. 2). Some wild populations of the Morelet's

[[Page 23673]]

crocodile in Belize also have greater proportions of males than females 
(5.3 males per 1 female), but seem to be healthy (Platt and 
Thorbjarnarson 2000a, p. 23). We do not have any evidence that skewed 
sex ratios currently pose a threat to the species. Although skewed sex 
ratios may represent a potential threat, especially given the potential 
for skewed sex ratios as a result of climate change, this information 
is not sufficient to be able to judge the timing of this potential, 
i.e., that it will manifest within the foreseeable future. Therefore, 
we do not have any information to indicate that it is likely to become 
a threat in the foreseeable future.
Natural Weather Events
    Natural weather can affect the Morelet's crocodile. Hurricanes or 
heavy seasonal rains, for example, may pose risks to Morelet's 
crocodile eggs located in nests along water channels. Flooding 
associated with hurricanes or rains, however, may also provide 
conservation benefits to the Morelet's crocodile by facilitating 
movements of individuals across the landscape, thereby promoting gene 
flow (CITES 2010a, p. 6). Furthermore, extended dry periods can result 
in the temporary disappearance of ephemeral water bodies, with 
concomitant increases in Morelet's crocodile densities and 
intraspecific interactions at nearby sites that still have water. There 
is no evidence, however, that natural weather conditions have been a 
problem for the Morelet's crocodile, which has adapted to these weather 
conditions. Therefore, we have no reason to believe that natural 
weather events are currently likely to cause the Morelet's crocodile to 
become in danger of extinction within the foreseeable future throughout 
all or any significant portion of its range.
Climate Change
    The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concluded that 
warming of the climate system is unequivocal (IPCC 2007a, p. 30) and 
sea levels are expected to rise well into the foreseeable future (Bates 
et al. 2008, pp. 20 and 28-29). Numerous long-term changes have been 
observed including changes in arctic temperatures and ice, widespread 
changes in precipitation amounts, ocean salinity, wind patterns, and 
aspects of extreme weather including droughts, heavy precipitation, 
heat waves, and the intensity of tropical cyclones (IPCC 2007b, p. 7). 
Based on scenarios that do not assume explicit climate policies to 
reduce greenhouse gas emissions, global average temperature is 
projected to rise by 2-11.5 [deg]F by the end of this century (relative 
to the 1980-1999 time period) (USGCRP 2011, p. 9). Species that are 
dependent on specialized habitat types, limited in distribution, or 
occurring already at the extreme periphery of their range will be most 
susceptible to the impacts of climate change. While continued change is 
certain, the magnitude and rate of change is unknown in many cases.
    The information currently available on the effects of climate 
change and the available climate change models do not make sufficiently 
accurate estimates of location and magnitude of effects at a scale 
small enough to apply to the range of the Morelet's crocodile. We do 
not have any information on the projected impacts to the Morelet's 
crocodile because of climate change, particularly the potential impacts 
of shifting global temperatures on sex ratios. The study by Escobedo-
Galv[aacute]n et al. 2008 regarding climate change's projected impacts 
to the American crocodile illustrates the possible impacts to the 
Morelet's crocodile. This study, entitled ``Potential effects of 
climate change on the sex ratio of crocodiles'' (Escobedo-Galv[aacute]n 
et al. 2008), was presented at the February 2008 International Science 
Symposium: Climate Change and Diversity in the Americas. The study 
selected several areas in Florida and western Mexico that contain 
American crocodiles, and used the current environmental information for 
these areas to predict how increased temperatures would affect the 
potential geographical distribution and sex ratios of the species in 
Florida, the Caribbean, and Central America.
    Based on a preliminary analysis (focusing on the geographic 
distribution and sex ratios of American crocodiles in the present, 
2020, and 2050), Escobedo-Galv[aacute]n et al. (2008) postulated that 
the geographic distribution and sex ratios of American crocodile 
populations in different parts of the range would change in response to 
temperature and sea level parameters. Crocodiles are ectothermic, 
relying on external sources of heat to regulate their body temperature. 
They control their body temperature by basking in the sun, or moving to 
areas with warmer or cooler air or water temperatures. Optimal growth 
in crocodilians has been found to occur around 88 [deg]F (31 [deg]C), 
with appetites and effective digestion diminishing below 84 [deg]F (29 
[deg]C) (Brien et al. 2007, p. 15). As the global temperatures 
increase, areas that are currently too cool to support American and 
Morelet's crocodiles may become warm enough to support them in the 
future. According to Escobedo-Galv[aacute]n et al. 2008, increased 
global temperatures and sea level would benefit the American crocodile 
by significantly increasing its potential habitat and distribution. 
Their study predicted that the current potential distribution for the 
American crocodile would expand 69 percent in 2020 and 207 percent in 
2050. This is an 81 percent increase in potential distribution from 
2020 to 2050 (Escobedo-Galv[aacute]n et al. 2008, presentation, pp. 9-
10).
    The study also predicted that increased global temperatures would 
have a significantly negative impact on the sex ratios of the American 
crocodile. Like many other crocodilian species, both the American and 
the Morelet's crocodile exhibit temperature-dependent sex 
determination. The macroclimate (global climate) affects the 
mesoclimate (the temperature outside of a crocodile's nest), which in 
turn affects the microclimate (the temperature inside of a crocodile's 
nest), which in turn determines the proportion of males to females 
produced in the nest (Escobedo-Galv[aacute]n et al. 2008, presentation 
p. 4). Incubation temperatures greater than about 93 [deg]F (34 [deg]C) 
or less than 90 [deg]F (32 [deg]C) produce females while temperatures 
between 90-93 [deg]F (32-34 [deg]C) generally produce males (Escobedo-
Galv[aacute]n 2006, p. 133; Escobedo-Galv[aacute]n et al. 2008, p. 2). 
Thus, the production of males is entirely dependent upon a sustained 
incubation temperature range of only three degrees. Incubation 
temperatures greater than 97 [deg]F (36 [deg]C) are at the upper end of 
the tolerance range for reptile eggs and result in death of embryos and 
stress to the surviving hatchlings (Escobedo-Galv[aacute]n et al. 2008, 
presentation, p. 2).
    According to Escobedo-Galv[aacute]n et al. 2008, the current sex 
ratio of the American crocodile favors females (based on potential 
species distribution): 75 percent of the potential species distribution 
has fewer males than females, 15 percent has an equal number of males 
and females, and 10 percent has more males than females. The study 
predicted that by 2020, the sex ratio is expected to shift in favor of 
males due to increases in nest temperature as a result of climate 
change: 24 percent of the potential species distribution will have 
fewer males than females, 16 percent will have an equal number of males 
and females, and 60 percent will have more males than females 
(Escobedo-Galv[aacute]n et al. 2008, presentation, pp. 11-12). Under 
this scenario, the number of females produced will be reduced 
significantly by 2020, which in turn will reduce the overall total eggs 
laid in each

[[Page 23674]]

breeding season. Of the eggs laid, more are likely to become males, 
which in turn would further reduce the number of breeding females 
produced over time. Escobedo-Galv[aacute]n et al. 2008 predicted that 
by 2050, American crocodiles would become extinct in Florida, the 
Caribbean, or Central America (Escobedo-Galv[aacute]n et al. 2008, 
presentation p. 13).
    Although American crocodiles are found primarily in saline and 
brackish environments, they can also be found in abandoned coastal 
canals and borrow pits and may range inland into freshwater 
environments preferred by Morelet's crocodiles such as lakes and lower 
reaches of large rivers. American crocodiles are extremely adaptable in 
their nesting strategy, and while they mainly nest in holes, 
individuals will readily build mound nests if suitable materials are 
available. American and Morelet's crocodiles have been known to lay 
eggs within the same nest mound as conspecifics, suggesting a more 
gregarious and tolerant demeanor (Brien et al. 2007, pp. 17-18). Sea 
level rise would significantly expand the amount of inland saline and 
brackish coastal habitat available to the American crocodile, and 
correspondingly decrease the amount of inland freshwater habitat 
available to the Morelet's crocodile. The area of available land would 
also be reduced as a result of sea level rise, further increasing 
competition between the two species for terrestrial activities such as 
nesting and basking on the shoreline.
    The study by Escobedo-Galv[aacute]n et al. 2008 did not provide any 
information or data on the effects of climate change on the Morelet's 
crocodile. Although the American crocodile and Morelet's crocodile have 
overlapping ranges, similar life-history requirements, and may lay eggs 
in the same nest, we do not have any evidence that climate change 
currently poses a threat to the Morelet's crocodile. Although climate 
change may represent a potential threat to the Morelet's crocodile, 
especially given the crocodilian requirement for temperature dependent 
sex determination, we do not have any data to indicate that it is 
likely to become a threat in the foreseeable future. We are seeking 
information and data on the effects of climate change on the Morelet's 
crocodile as part of this proposed rule.
Other Potential Concerns
    Other information obtained by the Service, however, suggests that 
the construction and operation of dams to generate electricity could be 
a conservation threat to the Morelet's crocodile (for example, the 
Chalillo hydroelectric dam in Belize on the Macal River, an area 
inhabited by the Morelet's crocodile (Environment News Service 2004, p. 
1; Hogan 2008, p. 2). At the national level, six main environmental 
issues affecting natural resources have been identified for Belize: (1) 
High deforestation rate; (2) solid and liquid waste management issues; 
(3) rising poverty rates; (4) rapid coastal development; (5) 
ineffective institution and legal frameworks; and (6) oil discovery 
(Young 2008, p. 18).
    We do not have any information to indicate the extent of the 
impact, if any, that these environmental issues may have on the 
Morelet's crocodile in Belize. There is no evidence that these 
environmental issues in Belize currently pose a threat to the species. 
Although they may represent a potential threat, we do not have any data 
to indicate that it is likely to become a threat in the foreseeable 
future
    There has been some information indicating that fishing nets (for 
fish and turtles) and death by drowning as threats to the Morelet's 
crocodile in Guatemala, but we do not have information regarding 
specific rates of injury or mortality (CITES 2008a, page). CONABIO 
(2005, p. 27) suggested that the number of crocodiles accidentally 
captured in nets in Guatemala was low, but the basis for this claim was 
unclear. Platt and Thorbjarnarson (2000b, p. 27) noted that ``a limited 
number of crocodiles'' drown in fish and turtle nets in northern Belize 
each year. There is no evidence that fishing currently poses a threat 
to the species. Although it may represent a potential threat, we do not 
have any data to indicate that it is likely to become a threat in the 
foreseeable future.

Summary of Factor E

    Few, if any, natural or manmade factors are anticipated to affect 
the continued existence of the Morelet's crocodile. While natural 
factors such as hurricanes and extended dry seasons (CONABIO 2005, p. 
32) may affect the species, we believe that the species has evolved 
with these kinds of events and they do not pose a threat to the 
species.
    Several phenomena are categorized here as other natural or manmade 
factors that were considered as potentially affecting the conservation 
status of the Morelet's crocodile in the foreseeable future. Our 
knowledge about these factors is incomplete and uneven among the three 
range countries. Environmental contaminants, especially DDE and 
mercury, have been widely reported for Belize. To date, however, there 
is no evidence of negative effects to the Morelet's crocodile due to 
exposure to organochlorines even though these contaminants have been 
linked to documented adverse effects on population health in a similar 
species, the American alligator.
    Vitellogenin induction in males, suggesting endocrine disruption 
due to environmental contamination, is predicted in Belize, but has not 
been documented. These factors do not appear to pose a conservation 
threat to the Morelet's crocodile in Belize at this time. Information 
about environmental contaminants in Mexico and Guatemala with regard to 
the Morelet's crocodile is limited. Potential environmental contaminant 
issues with respect to the Morelet's crocodile probably are the least 
well known in Mexico, but that country has an extensive legal framework 
to resolve any problems that may develop, especially if contaminants 
also become a public health issue. We do not have any information to 
indicate that environmental contaminants pose a danger to the species 
throughout its range. Although environmental contaminants may represent 
a potential threat, especially given the potential for bioaccumulation 
of contaminants during the species' long reproductive life, we do not 
have any data to indicate that it is likely to become a threat to the 
species in the foreseeable future.
    Bycatch in fishing nets has been mentioned as a potential problem 
in Guatemala. In Belize, a ``limited number of crocodiles'' may die or 
be injured in nets (Platt and Thorbjarnarson 2000b, p. 27), while 
information about the potential negative effects of fishing nets on the 
Morelet's crocodile in Mexico is limited. Overall, these local impacts 
do not appear to have any significant impact on Morelet's crocodiles. 
Although it may represent a potential threat, we do not have any data 
to indicate that it is likely to become a threat in the foreseeable 
future.
    Genetic diversity and integrity is a relatively complicated subject 
with respect to the Morelet's crocodile, and our knowledge across the 
three range countries is uneven. Studies in Belize suggest that wild 
populations in that country have a high degree of genetic diversity 
(Dever and Densmore 2001, pp. 543-544; Dever et al. 2002, p. 1084). 
Hybridization between the Morelet's crocodile and the American 
crocodile has been documented for eastern Belize and the eastern and 
northern coasts of the Yucatan Peninsula in Mexico (Ray et al. 2004, p. 
440; Cede[ntilde]o-V[aacute]zquez et al. 2008, p. 661; Rodriguez et al. 
2008, p. 674). The nature and extent of genetic variation of captive-
bred populations with respect to wild populations, as well as male-
biased sex ratios, are also

[[Page 23675]]

poorly understood issues, but potentially important in Mexico where 
captive-bred individuals may eventually be released into the wild. 
There is no indication, however, that the Morelet's crocodile suffers 
from any genetic limitations throughout its range.
    Natural weather events do not appear to have any population level 
impacts to the Morelet's crocodile, which has evolved to thrive in this 
climate. We do not have any evidence that climate change poses a threat 
to the species. Although climate change may represent a potential 
threat, especially given the crocodilian requirement for temperature 
dependent sex determination, we do not have any data to indicate that 
it is likely to become a threat in the foreseeable future.
    Although some local factors continue to affect the Morelet's 
crocodile, we do not have any information to indicate that these 
factors are of sufficient magnitude to affect any population of the 
Morelet's crocodile. In conclusion, we find that other natural and 
manmade factors are not a significant factor affecting the Morelet's 
crocodile throughout its range, both now and for the foreseeable 
future.

Conclusion of the 5-Factor Analysis

    We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial data 
available and have determined that the Morelet's crocodile is no longer 
endangered or threatened throughout all of its range. When considering 
the listing status of the species, the first step in the analysis is to 
determine whether the species is in danger of extinction or likely to 
become endangered throughout all of its range. For instance, if the 
threats on a species are acting only on a portion of its range, but the 
effects of the threats are such that they do not place the entire 
species in danger of extinction or likely to become endangered, we 
would not retain the entire species on the list.
    In developing this proposed rule, we have carefully assessed the 
best scientific and commercial data available regarding the threats 
facing this species, as well as the ongoing conservation efforts by the 
three range countries. This information indicates that numbers of 
Morelet's crocodiles have significantly increased over the past four 
decades since being categorized as depleted by species experts in the 
1970s. In Mexico and Belize, the species is broadly distributed 
geographically, essentially occupying the entire historical range, and 
age classes reflect healthy reproduction and recruitment into a wild 
breeding population of about 10,000-20,000 adults (Ross 2000, p. 3; 
CONABIO 2005, p. 19).
    We have identified a number of potential threats to the Morelet's 
crocodile. Some of these potential threats may directly or indirectly 
affect individual Morelet's crocodiles, while others may affect 
Morelet's crocodile habitat. The contributions of these potential 
threats, identified in the Summary of Factors Affecting the Species 
sections above are discussed in approximate descending magnitude of 
impact in the foreseeable future:
    (1) A continuation of wild harvest for ranching may pose a threat 
to the species if the countries decide to change course. However, if 
conducted in compliance with CITES, the ranching would have to be non-
detrimental for the specimens to enter international trade. Our 
assessment of the risk associated with this potential threat is based 
primarily on the demonstrated adverse effects of past overharvest on 
populations. Additional monitoring programs and adequate regulatory 
mechanisms would need to be established prior to legalizing ranching. 
Such mechanisms would be important to prevent the laundering of 
illegally harvested Morelet's crocodiles. We find that, taken together, 
the currently existing protections (described above in the Factor D 
section, Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms) are adequate, 
and they will remain adequate to protect the Morelet's crocodile and 
its habitat in the majority of its range now and within the foreseeable 
future if this proposed rule is finalized and the protections of the 
Act are removed.
    (2) The detection of organic and inorganic environmental 
contaminants in Morelet's crocodile eggs in Belize indicates that 
impacts from concentrations of environmental contaminants may represent 
a potential threat because Morelet's crocodiles have a long lifespan 
and remain reproductively active once they attain sexual maturity. 
However, there is no evidence that environmental contaminants are 
currently affecting populations (numbers and reproduction appear to be 
robust). In order to determine that environmental contaminants may be a 
threat to the Morelet's crocodile in the future, their presence in the 
environment must be occurring at a level that affects the long-term 
population levels over at least a significant portion of the range of 
the species. We know of no ongoing monitoring of environmental 
contaminants anywhere in the species' range. Although 45 articles 
within the Mexican LGEEPA deal with environmental contamination 
(CONABIO 2005, Annex 3, p. 1), we have not received a detailed analysis 
of the specific provisions and their relevance to Morelet's crocodile. 
We are unaware of regulatory mechanisms governing activities that 
discharge environmental contaminants that potentially affect Morelet's 
crocodile in Belize. However, we do not have any data to indicate that 
environmental contaminants are likely to become a threat in the 
foreseeable future.
    (3) Although habitat loss and degradation continues to negatively 
affect the habitat for some local populations of the Morelet's 
crocodile, we do not have any information to indicate that it is of 
sufficient magnitude to have a range-wide impact on the species to the 
point that would cause the Morelet's crocodile to meet the definition 
of either an endangered or a threatened species. The species' 
relatively wide distribution throughout its historical range and 
apparent tolerance for habitats in proximity to agriculture, grazing, 
and human habitation are substantial factors mitigating these impacts 
to Morelet's crocodiles over the next several decades. We anticipate 
that these conditions will remain essentially the same in the 
foreseeable future due to the adequate regulatory mechanisms in place 
to protect suitable habitat for the Morelet's crocodile in the majority 
of its range (see discussion above under the Factor D., Inadequacy of 
Existing Regulatory Mechanisms, section).
    The Morelet's crocodile continues to be affected by a variety of 
potential residual threats. It is likely that development, hurricanes 
and other storm events, random human disturbance, fishery activities, 
oil spills, and infestation by parasites will continue to impact 
individual crocodiles into the future. Although these impacts are 
generally expected to continue intermittently at low levels into the 
foreseeable future, we do not expect these impacts to affect 
significantly the Morelet's crocodile to the point that it would result 
in declines in the range-wide status of the species.
    Although some potential threats to the Morelet's crocodile remain 
throughout its range, as discussed above, they are at a low enough 
level such that they are not having a significant population level or 
demographic effect on Morelet's crocodile populations in Mexico and 
Belize, in fact, most populations are stable and/or increasing and 
still occur in their historic range. Any low level threats occurring in 
Guatemala are currently being addressed by the Guatemalan national and 
provincial governments with the help of the local and international NGO 
community. We do not believe, based on the best

[[Page 23676]]

available information, that the extent of potential threats to the 
species in Guatemala, even if they increase will cause the Morelet's 
crocodile to become threatened or endangered in the future. The 
government of Guatemala recognizes the importance of this and other 
landscape species in the Guatemalan Maya Biosphere and are implementing 
regulatory and enforcement controls to combat human encroachment, land 
clearing, fires and other illegal activities that may pose a threat to 
these species. In addition, Guatemala's request to keep Guatemala's 
populations of Morelet's crocodile in Appendix I attests to their 
commitment to ensure trade does not affect Guatemala's wild Morelet's 
crocodile populations.
    Having determined that the Morelet's crocodile is no longer 
endangered or threatened throughout its range, we must next determine 
if the threats to the Morelet's crocodile are non-uniformly distributed 
such that populations in one portion of its range experience higher 
level of threats that populations in other portions of its range.

Significant Portion of the Range

    Section 4(c)(1) of the Act requires the Service to determine 
whether a portion of a species' range, if not all, meets the definition 
of endangered or threatened. A portion of a species' range is 
significant if it is part of the current range of the species and it 
contributes substantially to the representation, resiliency, or 
redundancy of the species. The contribution must be at a level such 
that its loss would result in a decrease in the ability to conserve the 
species. In other words, in considering significance, the Service asks 
whether the loss of this portion likely would eventually move the 
species towards extinction, but not to the point where the species 
should be listed as threatened or endangered throughout all of its 
range.
    We evaluated the Morelet's crocodile's range in the context of 
whether any potential threats are concentrated in a portion of its 
range such that if there were concentrated impacts, that crocodile 
population might be in danger of extinction. We further evaluated 
whether any such population or complex might constitute a significant 
portion of the species range.

Guatemala's Contribution to Representation, Resiliency, or Redundancy 
of the Species

    As part of the SPR analysis, we look to see, in terms of species or 
habitat, if Guatemala contributes substantially to the representation, 
resiliency, or redundancy of the Morelet's crocodile species.
    Resiliency of a species allows the species to recover from periodic 
disturbance. A species will likely be more resilient if large 
populations exist in high-quality habitat distributed throughout the 
range of the species in such a way as to capture the environmental 
variability found within the range of the species. It is likely that 
the larger size of a population will help contribute to the viability 
of the species overall. Thus, a portion of a range of a species may 
make a meaningful contribution to the resiliency of the species if the 
area is relatively large and contains particularly high-quality habitat 
or if its location or characteristics make it less susceptible to 
certain threats than other portions of the range. When evaluating 
whether or how a portion of the range contributes to the resiliency of 
the species, it may help to evaluate the historical value of the 
portion of the range and how frequently the portion is used by the 
species. In addition, the range may contribute to the resiliency for 
other reasons--for instance, it may contain an important concentration 
of certain types of habitat that are necessary for the species to carry 
out its life history functions, such as breeding, feeding, migration, 
dispersal or wintering.
    Guatemala comprises a small portion of the overall range of the 
Morelet's crocodile. The estimated number of Morelet's crocodiles in 
Guatemala is 13% of the potential global population estimate. The 
extent of undisturbed habitat in Guatemala is estimated to be 19% of 
the total range estimate (CONABIO 2005, pp. 16-19). Past resource 
extraction, drug trade, a lack of enforcement, and financial issues 
limited Guatemala's protected areas' potential contribution to the 
conservation status of the species (IARNA URL IIA 2006, pp. 88-92), 
causing habitat loss, habitat degradation, habitat fragmentation, 
overutilization of resources, environmental contamination, and the 
introduction of exotic species. These past threats may have lowered the 
quality of habitat available to Morelet's crocodile. In addition, 
Morelet's crocodile habitat consists of flooded savannahs and marshes 
that are typical of the species habitat throughout its range, but are 
not representative of the environmental variability found within the 
total range of the species. The species' range, specifically Laguna del 
Tigre National Park, was in the past more susceptible to certain 
threats. The small size of the Guatemalan portion of the Morelet's 
crocodile's range; the small population size of the species in 
Guatemala; and the past threats that affected the quality of the 
habitat limits Guatemala's contribution to resiliency. Therefore, we 
find that the population of the Morelet's crocodile in Guatemala does 
not significantly contribute to the resiliency of the species.
    Redundancy of populations may be needed to provide a margin of 
safety for the species to withstand catastrophic events. This does not 
mean that any portion that provides redundancy is a significant portion 
of the range of the species. The idea is to conserve enough areas of 
the range such that random perturbations in the system act on only a 
few populations. Therefore, each area must be examined based on whether 
that area provides an increment of redundancy that is important to the 
conservation of the species.
    Morelet's crocodile distribution in the northern State of 
Pet[eacute]n, Guatemala has been described as fragmented, with the 
healthiest populations in the northern region of Pet[eacute]n, where 
human impact was lower (Casta[ntilde]eda Moya 1997, p. 1; 1998a, p. 
521). While Guatemala has regulatory mechanisms in place to protect 
their national parks, it appears that the Government of Guatemala, 
until recently, was not able to enforce them adequately. Although 
Guatemala has conserved several areas of the Morelet's crocodile's 
range, past threats limited their potential contribution to the 
conservation of the species (IARNA URL IIA 2006, pp. 88-92). The idea 
is to conserve enough areas of the range such that random perturbations 
in the system act on only a few populations, however, Guatemala has 
been unable in the past to adequately conserve Morelet's habitat. Thus 
we conclude that the population of the Morelet's crocodile in Guatemala 
does not significantly contribute to the redundancy of the species.
    Representation ensures that the species' adaptive capabilities are 
conserved. Specifically, the portion should be evaluated to see how it 
contributes to the genetic, morphological, physiological, behavioral, 
or ecological diversity of the species. A substantial contribution to 
the representation includes populations or portions of the range that 
are markedly genetically divergent, occur in a unique or unusual 
ecological setting, or have unique morphological, physiological, or 
behavioral characteristics. The loss of genetically based diversity or 
unique adaptations may substantially reduce the ability of the species 
to respond and adapt to future environmental changes. For

[[Page 23677]]

example, a peripheral population may contribute meaningfully to 
representation if there is evidence that it provides genetic diversity 
due to its location on the margin of the species habitat requirements. 
Morphological, physiological, and behavioral diversity across the range 
of the species may also indicate adaptations to environmental variation 
or genetically based differences, and therefore should be considered 
when evaluating a portion's contribution to representation.
    We could not find any data or information that the Morelet's 
crocodile in Guatemala is ecologically unusual, unique, or otherwise 
significant to the species as a whole in any way (for example, in terms 
of species or habitat). Morelet's crocodile habitat consists of flooded 
savannahs and marshes that are typical of the species habitat 
throughout its range. In addition, we have no information indicating 
that the Guatemala population is genetically different from the 
remainder of the range. We therefore conclude that the range of the 
Morelet's crocodile in Guatemala does not significantly contribute to 
the representation of the species.
    Because the Morelet's crocodile's range in Guatemala does not 
contribute significantly towards the resiliency, redundancy or 
representation of the species, we do not consider Guatemala to be a 
significant portion of the range of the species.

Finding

    The PVA conducted by Sanchez (S[aacute]nchez 2005) suggests the 
long-term prognosis for the survival and genetic diversity of the 
Morelet's crocodile throughout its range is very good, estimating that 
the average time to reach the quasi-extinction threshold of 500 
individuals being 483 years (S[aacute]nchez 2005, pp. 43-51). Under the 
PVA, the probability of survival of a population of 30,000 individuals, 
subject to high-stress conditions is approximately 86 percent, and 
maintaining their genetic diversity is approximately 99 percent.
    A species is ``endangered'' for purposes of the Act if it is in 
danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its 
range and is ``threatened'' if it is likely to become endangered within 
the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its 
range. The word ``range'' is used here to refer to the range in which 
the species currently exists, and the word ``significant'' refers to 
the value of that portion of the range being considered to the 
conservation of the species.
    The Act does not define the term ``foreseeable future.'' However, 
in a January 16, 2009, memorandum addressed to the Acting Director of 
the Service from the Office of the Solicitor, Department of the 
Interior, concluded, ``* * * as used in the [Act], Congress intended 
the term `foreseeable future' to describe the extent to which the 
Secretary can reasonably rely on predictions about the future in making 
determinations about the future conservation status of the species'' 
(U.S. Department of the Interior 2009, page 1). ``Foreseeable future'' 
is determined by the Service on a case-by-case basis, taking into 
consideration a variety of species-specific factors such as lifespan, 
genetics, mating systems, demography, threat projection timeframes, and 
environmental variability.
    In considering the foreseeable future as it relates to the status 
of the Morelet's crocodile, we defined the ``foreseeable future'' to be 
the extent to which, given the amount and substance of available data, 
events or effects can and should be anticipated, or the threats 
reasonably extrapolated. We considered the historical data to identify 
any relevant threats acting on the species, ongoing conservation 
efforts, data on species abundance and persistence at individual sites 
since the time of listing, and identifiable informational gaps and 
uncertainties regarding residual and emerging threats to the species, 
as well as population status and trends. We then looked to see if 
reliable predictions about the status of the species in response to 
those factors could be drawn. We considered the historical data to 
identify any relevant existing trends that might allow for reliable 
prediction of the future, in the form of extrapolating the trends. We 
also considered whether we could reliably predict any future events, 
not yet acting on the species and, therefore, not yet manifested in a 
trend, that might affect the status of the species, recognizing that 
our ability to make reliable predictions into the future is limited by 
the variable quantity and quality of available data. Following a range-
wide threats analysis, we evaluated whether the Morelet's crocodile is 
endangered or threatened in any significant portion(s) of its range.
    As required by the Act, we considered the five factors in assessing 
whether the Morelet's crocodile is threatened or endangered throughout 
all or a significant portion of its range. We reviewed the petition, 
information available in our files, comments and information received 
after the publication of our 90-day finding (71 FR 36743), and other 
available published and unpublished information, and consulted with 
recognized experts. We have carefully assessed the best available 
scientific and commercial data regarding the past, present, and future 
threats faced by the Morelet's crocodile. This status review found that 
although some localized impacts to individual Morelet's crocodiles 
still occur, such as habitat loss from agricultural development, they 
have been reduced enough so as to not impact the species on a 
population level. In addition to the five-factor analysis, we also 
considered the progress made by the range countries towards addressing 
previous threats to Morelet's crocodiles. We took into consideration 
the conservation actions that have occurred, are ongoing, and are 
planned. Since listing, the species' status has improved because of the 
following:
     National and international laws and treaties have 
minimized the impacts of hunting and trade in wild-caught specimens.
     Morelet's crocodile populations are stable or increasing.
     Total population size is approximately 19,400 adults in 
the three range countries.
     Species experts now widely characterize Morelet's 
crocodile populations as healthy.
     The current range-wide distribution of Morelet's crocodile 
now closely resembles historical range-wide distribution
     Range countries have improved efforts to protect and 
manage Morelet's crocodile habitat.
     The long-term prognosis for the survival and genetic 
diversity of the Morelet's crocodile throughout its range is very good
    In sum, the ongoing development and updating of management plans, 
the active management of habitat, the ongoing research, and the 
protections provided by laws and protected lands provide compelling 
evidence that recovery actions are successful.
    The primary factor that led to the listing of the Morelet's 
crocodile was trade. However, the trend today is towards increasing 
population sizes, with trade restricted to captive-bred specimens only. 
We find that the localized impacts identified in the three range 
countries, when combined with the increase in population sizes, ongoing 
active research and management, and protections provided by range 
countries, those impacts are not of sufficient imminence, intensity, or 
magnitude to indicate that the Morelet's crocodile is threatened with 
extinction now or in the foreseeable future. Consequently, we have 
determined that Morelet's crocodile should be removed from the list of

[[Page 23678]]

endangered and threatened wildlife and plants.

Distinct Vertebrate Population Segments

    Section 3(15) of the Act defines ``species'' to include ``any 
species or subspecies of fish and wildlife or plants, and any distinct 
population segment of any species of vertebrate fish or wildlife which 
interbreeds when mature (16 U.S.C. 1532(16)). After assessing whether 
or not the Morelet's crocodile is endangered or threatened throughout 
its range, we next consider whether a distinct vertebrate population 
segment (DPS) of the Morelet's crocodile meets the definition of 
endangered or is likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future 
(threatened).
    To interpret and implement the DPS provisions of the Act and 
congressional guidance, the Service and the National Marine Fisheries 
Service (now the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration--
Fisheries Service), published the Policy Regarding the Recognition of 
Distinct Vertebrate Population Segments (DPS Policy) in the Federal 
Register on February 7, 1996 (61 FR 4722). Under the DPS Policy, we 
evaluate a set of elements in a three-step process in order to make our 
decision concerning the establishment and classification of a possible 
DPS. These elements are applied similarly for additions to or removals 
from the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants.
    These elements include: (1) The discreteness of a population in 
relation to the remainder of the taxon to which it belongs; (2) the 
significance of the population segment to the taxon to which it 
belongs; and (3) the population segment's conservation status in 
relation to the Act's standards for listing (addition to the list), 
delisting (removal from the list), or reclassification (i.e., is the 
population segment endangered or threatened).
    First, the Policy requires the Service to determine that a 
vertebrate population is discrete in relation to the remainder of the 
taxon to which it belongs. Discreteness refers to the ability to 
delineate a population segment from other members of a taxon based on 
either (1) Physical, physiological, ecological, or behavioral factors, 
or (2) international governmental boundaries that result in significant 
differences in control of exploitation, management, or habitat 
conservation status, or regulatory mechanisms that are significant in 
light of section 4(a)(1)(D) of the Act--the inadequacy of existing 
regulatory mechanisms.
    Second, if we determine that the population is discrete under one 
or more of the discreteness conditions, then a determination is made as 
to whether the population is significant to the larger taxon to which 
it belongs in light of Congressional guidance (see Senate Report 151, 
96th Congress, 1st Session) that the authority to list DPSs be used 
``sparingly and only when the biological evidence indicates that such 
action is warranted.'' In carrying out this examination, we consider 
available scientific evidence of the population's importance to the 
taxon to which it belongs. This consideration may include, but is not 
limited to the following: (1) The persistence of the population segment 
in an ecological setting that is unique or unusual for the taxon; (2) 
evidence that loss of the population segment would result in a 
significant gap in the range of the taxon; (3) evidence that the 
population segment represents the only surviving natural occurrence of 
a taxon that may be more abundant elsewhere as an introduced population 
outside of its historic range; and (4) evidence that the discrete 
population segment differs markedly from other populations of the 
species in its genetic characteristics from other populations of the 
species. A population segment needs to satisfy only one of these 
conditions to be considered significant.
    Lastly, if we determine that the population is both discrete and 
significant, then the Policy requires an analysis of the population 
segment's conservation status in relation to the Act's standards for 
listing (addition to the list), delisting (removal from the list), or 
reclassification (i.e., is the population segment endangered or 
threatened).

Discreteness

    The first step in our DPS analysis for the Morelet's crocodile was 
to determine whether there were any populations of the Morelet's 
crocodile that were discrete in relation to the remainder of the taxon 
to which it belongs. Under the DPS Policy, a population segment of a 
vertebrate taxon may be considered discrete if it satisfies either one 
of the following conditions: (1) It is markedly separated from other 
populations of the same taxon because of physical, physiological, 
ecological, or behavioral factors. Quantitative measures of genetic or 
morphological discontinuity may provide evidence of this separation; or 
(2) it is delimited by international governmental boundaries within 
which differences in control of exploitation, management of habitat, 
conservation status, or regulatory mechanisms exist that are 
significant in light of section 4(a)(1)(D) of the Act--the inadequacy 
of existing regulatory mechanisms. Recognition of international 
boundaries when they coincide with differences in the management, 
status, or exploitation of the species under the Act is consistent with 
CITES, which recognizes international boundaries for these same 
reasons. CITES is implemented in the United States by the Act.

Physical, Physiological, Ecological, or Behavioral Factors

    We do not have any data or information to indicate that there are 
any physical, physiological, ecological, or behavioral facts that 
separate any populations of the Morelet's crocodile. The historical 
distribution of the Morelet's crocodile comprised the eastern coastal 
plain of Mexico, most of the Yucatan Peninsula, Belize, and northern 
Guatemala (Hurley 2005, p. 1), with an estimated historical 
distribution covering 173,746 mi\2\ (450,000 km\2\) (Sigler and 
Dom[iacute]nguez Laso 2008, pp. 11-12). The Morelet's crocodile is a 
wide-ranging species that occurs primarily in freshwater environments 
such as lakes, swamps, and slow-moving rivers. This species of 
crocodile can temporarily inhabit intermittent freshwater bodies such 
as flooded savannahs and is occasionally observed in brackish coastal 
lagoons (Villegas 2006, p. 8).
    We do not have any data or information to indicate that any 
populations of the Morelet's crocodile exhibit genetic or morphological 
discontinuity that may indicate that they are a separate population. 
Although we do not have any data or information on the dispersal 
strategies for the Morelet's crocodile that would indicate a population 
may be discrete, we have no evidence to suggest that there are barriers 
that would prevent the Morelet's crocodile from dispersing within its 
known range. The current range-wide distribution of the Morelet's 
crocodile closely mirrors the historical range-wide distribution, and 
there are large amount of high quality of habitat available. Therefore, 
we have no evidence suggesting that the Morelet's crocodile is isolated 
in any part of its range.

International Differences in Species' Conservation Status

    As discussed above in the Factor D section, Inadequacy of Existing 
Regulatory Mechanisms, all three range

[[Page 23679]]

countries are Parties to CITES. In addition, data and information 
available to the Service indicates that all three range countries have 
Federally protected-species and protected-areas legislation under the 
jurisdiction of specific ministries or departments that control 
activities that affect the Morelet's crocodile and its habitat. 
Mexico's Federal legal framework is particularly robust. The CITES 
National Legislation Project (http://www.CITES.org) deemed both Mexico 
and Guatemala's national legislation as Category 1, meeting all the 
requirements to implement CITES, with Belize in Category 3 (not meeting 
the requirements for implementing CITES), but having submitted a 
national legislation plan and draft of legislation that has not yet 
been adopted.
    Based on current data and information available to the Service, the 
Governments of Mexico, Guatemala, and Belize appear to be adequately 
enforcing their respective legal frameworks, both at the Federal level 
and under CITES. Mexico and Belize contain the majority of wild 
Morelet's crocodiles (87 percent) and the majority of the potentially 
suitable habitat (81 percent) throughout the species' range. Because of 
this adequate enforcement, the majority of the threats to the species 
and its habitat have been eliminated in Mexico and Belize. Although 
some residual threats remain, these threats have been reduced to a low 
enough level that they are not having significant population level or 
demographic effects.
    In contrast, based on data and information available to the 
Service, it appears that in the past, the Government of Guatemala was 
not able to enforce adequately their legal framework to protect the 
Morelet's crocodile and its habitat in Guatemala. The lack of funding 
and personnel made enforcement of Guatemala's legal framework 
especially challenging. Conservation actions were often overwhelmed by 
slow economic development, high levels of poverty, unequal land 
distribution, a highly segmented society, and the effects of more than 
three decades of civil war (Birner et al. 2005, pp. 285, 292).
    For example, per ParkWatch (2003) noted that a designation as a 
national park or important wetland conservation area in Guatemala does 
not necessarily afford protection to the Morelet's crocodile or its 
habitat. The Laguna del Tigre National Park, located in Pet[eacute]n 
region of Guatemala, is home to the largest population of Morelet's 
crocodiles in Guatemala. The park was considered by ParkWatch as 
critically threatened due to land grabs, the presence of human 
settlements, expanding agriculture and cattle ranching, poaching, 
forest fires, the oil industry, and almost complete lack of 
institutional control over the area (ParksWatch 2003, pp. 1, 11). 
However, by 2004, ParksWatch stated that the staff at Laguna del Tigre 
had doubled in size since their 2003 report. Seventy-three park 
rangers, 10 archeological site guards and 96 Army personnel were hired 
to staff the park and since the increase in staffing, both the park and 
the biotope are ``constantly patrolled.'' In addition, the WCS 
continued its ``Biodiversity Conservation at a Landscape Scale'' 
program (with USAID) for Guatemala and has provided a comprehensive 
plan with specific goals to preserve and protect wildlife in the Maya 
Biosphere Reserve in Guatemala through conserving wildlife species and 
their habitat, while maintaining the economic productivity of renewable 
natural resources. They are fulfilling these goals by establishing 
specific parameters. Namely, ``to develop adaptive and participatory 
strategy to reduce threats to wildlife in the MBR; to develop, 
implement and monitor sustainable mechanisms to reduce threats to 
wildlife and ecosystems across the MBR landscape; to learn and teach 
best management practices for the conservation of the MBR and beyond; 
and to guide, design and test wildlife-focused planning'' (WCS 2008, 
page 3). These efforts were endorsed by the president of Guatemala 
through his office's attendance at the Mesa Multisectorial roundtable 
discussion held in Guatemala in 2009.
    Many outstanding accomplishments have been achieved in Guatemala in 
terms of biodiversity conservation (IARNA URL IIA 2006, p. 22), and 
efforts to achieve desired levels of environmental management are 
ongoing. In August 2010, the president of Guatemala announced that he 
is deploying 250 soldiers to recover fully all the protected zones of 
El Peten in the Laguna del Tigre section of the MBR. This ``Green 
Battalion'' is being deployed specifically protect the Laguna del Tigre 
National Park and work jointly with the National Civil Police and the 
Attorney General's Office to combat drug trafficking and the illegal 
harvest of natural resources and archaeological sites of that region of 
the MBR (Latin American Herald Tribune, December 6, 2010). Additional 
help from WCS and USAID includes establishing over flights to monitor 
fires, locating illegal settlements and notifying the national and 
provincial government of illegal activities, as well as the national 
media. These efforts have resulted in additional personnel added to 
parks, removal of settlements, consistent patrols and cessation of 
illegal activities, and educating locals and concessionaires on best 
management practices for sustainable use of forest products. In 
addition, the CITES National Legislation Project (http://www.CITES.org) 
deemed both Mexico and Guatemala's national legislation as Category 1, 
meeting all the requirements to implement CITES, with Belize in 
Category 3 (not meeting the requirements for implementing CITES), but 
having submitted a national legislation plan and draft of legislation 
that has not yet been adopted.
    Casta[ntilde]eda Moya (1998a, p. 521; 1998b, p. 13) listed illegal 
hunting as a threat to Morelet's crocodile in the Pet[eacute]n region 
of Guatemala (CITES 2010a), but did not provide a numerical estimate of 
the take. ARCAS, an animal welfare group in Guatemala, reported the 
rescue or recovery of 49 live individuals (about 8 per year), most 
likely from pet dealers or private individuals, during the period 2002-
2007 (ARCAS 2002, p. 3; 2003, p. 2; 2004, p. 2; 2005, p. 2; 2006, p. 3; 
2007, p. 3).
    The Government of Guatemala acknowledged these issues when it 
opposed Mexico's 2010 CITES proposal to transfer the Morelet's 
crocodile from Appendix I to Appendix II throughout its range. 
Specifically, the Government of Guatemala opposed transferring 
Morelet's crocodiles in Guatemala to Appendix II based on the lack of 
knowledge of the population and population trends in Guatemala, the 
potential threats to the species from deforestation and pollution in 
Guatemala, and the likelihood of illegal, cross-border trade taking 
place in Guatemala. Morelet's crocodiles in Guatemala remain in CITES 
Appendix I (CITES 2010a, p. 2). As a result of the Government of 
Guatemala's past inability to adequately enforce their legal framework, 
the Morelet's crocodile in Guatemala may be still subject to some 
illegal hunting and some destruction of habitat due to previous human 
encroachment. This constitutes a difference in control of exploitation, 
management of habitat, conservation status, or regulatory mechanisms 
that is significant in light of section 4(a)(1)(D) of the Act.

Conclusion on Discreteness

    We have determined, based on the best available data and 
information that the population of Morelet's crocodiles in Guatemala is 
discrete due to the significant difference in the control of 
exploitation, management of habitat,

[[Page 23680]]

conservation status, or regulatory mechanisms between international 
boundaries. Therefore, we have determined that the Guatemala population 
of the Morelet's crocodile meets the requirements of our DPS Policy for 
discreteness. We will next conduct an analysis of the Guatemala 
population of the Morelet's crocodile under the significance element of 
the DPS Policy.

Significance

    Having determined that the population of Morelet's crocodiles in 
Guatemala is discrete under one or more of the discreteness conditions 
described in the DPS Policy, we must then determine whether the 
population in Guatemala is significant. We evaluate its biological and 
ecological significance based on ``the available scientific evidence of 
the discrete population segment's importance to the taxon to which it 
belongs'' (61 FR 4725). We make this evaluation in light of 
congressional guidance that the Service's authority to list DPSs be 
used ``sparingly.'' Since precise circumstances are likely to vary 
considerably from case to case, the DPS Policy does not describe all 
the classes of information that might be used in determining the 
biological and ecological importance of a discrete population. However, 
the DPS Policy describes four possible classes of information that 
provide evidence of a population segment's biological and ecological 
importance to the taxon to which it belongs. As specified in the DPS 
Policy (61 FR 4722), consideration of the population segment's 
significance may include, but is not limited to the following: (1) 
Persistence of the population segment in an ecological setting that is 
unusual or unique for the taxon; (2) evidence that loss of the 
population segment would result in a significant gap in the range of 
the taxon; (3) evidence that the population segment represents the only 
surviving natural occurrence of a taxon that may be more abundant 
elsewhere as an introduced population outside of its historic range; 
and (4) evidence that the discrete population segment differs markedly 
from other populations of the species in its genetic characteristics. A 
population segment needs to satisfy only one of these conditions to be 
considered significant.

Persistence in a Unique Ecological Setting

    As stated in the DPS Policy, the Service believes that occurrence 
in an unusual ecological setting may be an indication that a population 
segment represents a significant resource warranting conservation under 
the Act (61 FR 4724). In considering whether the population occupies an 
ecological setting that is unusual or unique for the taxon, we evaluate 
whether the habitat includes unique features not used by the taxon 
elsewhere and whether the habitat shares many features common to the 
habitats of other populations. As stated above, the Morelet's crocodile 
is a wide-ranging species that occurs primarily in freshwater 
environments such as lakes, swamps, and slow-moving rivers. This 
species of crocodile can temporarily inhabit intermittent freshwater 
bodies such as flooded savannahs and is occasionally observed in 
brackish coastal lagoons (Villegas 2006, p. 8). We do not have any 
evidence to indicate that the Guatemala population of the Morelet's 
crocodile occurs in habitat that includes unique features not used by 
the taxon elsewhere in its range. Morelet's crocodile habitat in the 
Laguna del Tigre National Park consists of flooded savannahs and 
marshes that are typical of the species habitat throughout its range. 
Therefore, we conclude that the discrete population of Morelet's 
crocodiles in Guatemala is not ``significant'' because of persistence 
in a unique or unusual ecological setting.

Significant Gap in the Taxon's Range

    As stated in the DPS Policy, the Service believes that evidence 
that loss of the discrete population segment would result in a 
significant gap in the range of a taxon, is potentially an indication 
that a population segment represents a significant resource warranting 
conservation under the Act (61 FR 4724). As the Ninth Circuit has 
stated, ``[t]he plain language of the second significance factor does 
not limit how a gap could be important,'' National Ass'n of Home 
Builders v. Norton, 340 F.3d 835, 846 (9th Cir. 2003). Thus, we 
considered a variety of ways in which the loss of the Guatemala 
population of the Morelet's crocodile might result in a significant gap 
in the range of species. Namely, we considered whether Guatemala 
contributed to the resiliency, redundancy, or representation of the 
taxon's range. As stated previously in the Significant Portion of the 
Range analysis, the Service felt that due to the small size of the 
Guatemalan portion of the Morelet's crocodile's range and the small 
population size of the species in Guatemala, its overall contribution 
to the species was limited. While Guatemala has regulatory mechanisms 
in place to protect their national parks, it appears that until 
recently, the government was unable to enforce them adequately. 
Although Guatemala has conserved several areas of the Morelet's 
crocodile's range, past threats limited this population's contribution 
to the species (IARNA URL IIA 2006, pp. 88-92). Morelet's crocodile 
habitat consists of flooded savannahs and marshes that are typical of 
the species habitat throughout its range, but are not ecologically 
unusual, unique, or otherwise significant to the species as a whole in 
any way. In addition, we found no information indicating that the 
Guatemala population is genetically different from the remainder of the 
range.

Conclusion of Significant Gap in the Taxon's Range

    The Morelet's crocodile in Guatemala does not significantly 
contribute to the resiliency, redundancy or the representation of the 
species or its range, including but not limited to, the size of the 
range, habitat quality, habitat variability, or genetic uniqueness. The 
majority of the species range occurs in Mexico and Belize, which 
contain the majority of all wild Morelet's crocodiles (87 percent) and 
the majority of the potentially suitable habitat throughout the 
species' range (81 percent). Should a discrete population segment of 
Morelet's crocodiles in Guatemala decrease for any reason (which we 
have concluded is unlikely), then it is likely that Morelet's 
crocodiles in Mexico and Belize would expand their range and re-
colonize any potential habitat in Guatemala. Thus, we feel the loss of 
a discrete population segment in Guatemala would not create a 
significant gap in the range of the species, nor does it represent a 
significant resource warranting conservation under the Act.

Natural Occurrence of a Taxon Abundant Elsewhere as an Introduced 
Population

    As stated in the DPS Policy, the Service believes that evidence 
that the population segment represents the only surviving natural 
occurrence of a taxon that may be more abundant elsewhere as an 
introduced population outside of its historic range may be an 
indication that a population segment represents a significant resource 
warranting conservation under the Act (61 FR 4724). This element does 
not apply to the Morelet's crocodile in Guatemala. The Guatemala 
population of the Morelet's crocodile does not represent the only 
surviving natural occurrence of the Morelet's crocodile throughout the 
range of the taxon. After the protections of the Act and CITES were put 
in place in the 1970s, populations of Morelet's crocodiles increased 
and expanded their

[[Page 23681]]

range naturally over time to the point that they have recovered and are 
now found in all areas of their historic range.

Marked Differences in Genetic Characteristics

    As stated in the DPS Policy, the Service believes that evidence 
that a discrete population segment differs markedly from other 
populations of the species in its genetic characteristics may be an 
indication that a population segment represents a significant resource 
warranting conservation under the Act (61 FR 4724).
    Genetic diversity and integrity is a relatively complicated subject 
with respect to the Morelet's crocodile, and our knowledge across the 
three range countries is uneven. The genetic data we do have are with 
respect to hybridization between Morelet's crocodiles and American 
crocodiles. Thus, we have no information indicating that the Guatemala 
population is markedly different from the remainder of the range.

Conclusion on Significance

    First, we do not have any data or information to indicate that the 
Guatemala population of the Morelet's crocodile occurs in habitat that 
includes unique features not used by the taxon elsewhere in its range. 
Morelet's crocodile habitat in the Laguna del Tigre National Park 
consists of flooded savannahs and marshes that are typical of the 
species habitat throughout its range. Second we conclude that loss of 
Morelet's crocodiles in 13 percent of their range would not constitute 
a significant gap in the range of the species due to the loss of a 
population that is ecologically unusual, unique, or otherwise 
significant to the species as a whole in any way (for example, in terms 
of species or habitat) or that contributes substantially to the 
representation, resiliency, or redundancy of the species. Third, the 
Guatemala population of the Morelet's crocodile does not represent the 
only surviving natural occurrence of the Morelet's crocodile throughout 
the range of the taxon. Finally, the Guatemala population of the 
Morelet's crocodile does not have any genetic characteristics that are 
markedly different from Morelet's crocodiles elsewhere in the range of 
the taxon. Therefore, based on the information available to the 
Service, we conclude that the discrete population of Morelet's 
crocodiles in Guatemala does not meet the requirements under our DPS 
Policy for significance.

Conclusion of DPS Analysis

    Based on the best available data and information, we conclude that 
the Guatemala population of the Morelet's crocodile meets the 
requirements of our DPS Policy for discreteness, but does not meet the 
requirements of our DPS policy for significance in relation to the 
remainder of the taxon (i.e., Morelet's crocodiles in Mexico and 
Belize). The population of Morelet's crocodiles in Guatemala is 
discrete due to the significant difference in the control of 
exploitation, management of habitat, conservation status, or regulatory 
mechanisms between international boundaries. This difference is 
evidenced by the fact that Morelet's crocodiles in Guatemala remain 
listed under Appendix I of CITES, while those in Mexico and Belize were 
downgraded to Appendix II. The discrete population of Morelet's 
crocodiles in Guatemala does not meet the requirements of our DPS 
policy for significance because it: (1) Does not occur in habitat that 
includes unique features not used by the taxon elsewhere in its range; 
(2) would not constitute a significant gap in the range of the species 
due to the loss of a population that contributes substantially to the 
representation, resiliency, or redundancy of the species; (3) does not 
represent the only surviving natural occurrence of the Morelet's 
crocodile throughout the range of the taxon; and (4) does not have any 
genetic characteristics that are markedly different from Morelet's 
crocodiles elsewhere in the range of the taxon. Therefore, we conclude 
that the population of the Morelet's crocodile in Guatemala is not a 
DPS pursuant to our DPS Policy, and, therefore, is not a listable 
entity under section 3(15) of the Act.

Effects of This Proposed Rule

    This proposed rule, if made final, would revise our regulations at 
50 CFR 17.11(h) by removing the Morelet's crocodile throughout its 
range from the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. Our 
regulations do not authorize designating critical habitat in areas 
outside of the United States. Specifically, our regulations at 50 CFR 
424.12(h) specify that critical habitat shall not be designated within 
foreign countries or in other areas outside of U.S. jurisdiction. 
Because no critical habitat was ever designated for this species, this 
rule would not affect 50 CFR 17.95.
    The prohibitions and conservation measures provided by the Act, 
particularly through section 9, would no longer apply. This rulemaking, 
however, does not affect the protection given to the Morelet's 
crocodile under CITES. Delisting under the Act would allow import, re-
export, and commercial activity in Morelet's crocodiles and their parts 
and products originating from any country, including the three range 
countries, provided that the requirements of CITES are met.

Post-delisting Monitoring

    Section 4(g)(1) of the Act requires the Secretary of Interior, 
through the Service, to implement a system in cooperation with the 
States to monitor for not less than 5 years the status of all species 
that are removed from the lists of endangered and threatened wildlife 
and plants (50 CFR 17.11, 17.12) due to recovery. This monitoring 
requirement is to ensure prevention of significant risk to the well-
being of recovered species.
    Species monitoring is also called for under CITES. CITES Resolution 
Conf. 9.24 (Rev. CoP 15), provides criteria for including species under 
CITES Appendices I and II. Through the resolution, the parties have 
resolved that the status of species included in Appendices I and II 
should be regularly reviewed by the range countries and proponents, in 
collaboration with the CITES Animals Committee or Plants Committee, in 
order to monitor the effectiveness of CITES protections, subject to the 
availability of funds (CITES 2007a, p. 3).
    At the international level, perhaps the most important ongoing 
conservation effort for the Morelet's crocodile is the agreement by the 
three range countries to develop and implement the Belize-Guatemala-
Mexico Tri-national Strategy for the Conservation and Sustainable 
Management of Morelet's Crocodile (Crocodylus moreletii) (Estrategia 
Tri-nacional Belice-Guatemala-M[eacute]xico para la Conservaci[oacute]n 
y el Manejo Sostenible del Cocodrilo de Morelet (Crocodylus moreletii) 
(Tri-national Strategy) (S[aacute]nchez 2006).
    This initiative began in June 2001 at Laguna del Tigre National 
Park, Pet[eacute]n, Guatemala, when representatives of the three 
countries met to discuss matters of mutual interest. A follow up 
meeting attended by about 25 species experts and government officials 
from all three range countries took place in April 2006 (Mexico City, 
Mexico). Two working groups were formed: (1) Technical and Scientific 
Matters; and (2) Administration, Management, and Uses. Group members 
discussed technical issues for two days, and generated a series of 
products, commitments, and agreements. The first group produced or 
agreed to compile a series of documents,

[[Page 23682]]

including distribution maps, survey techniques, scientific literature, 
and databases (e.g., geographic information system). The second group 
agreed to work toward a regional assessment of the conservation status 
of the Morelet's crocodile, as well as development and implementation 
of regional actions to improve the conservation status of the species 
(institutional capacity building, project development and 
implementation, and development of a regional captive-breeding 
program). The final product of the workshop was the development of 
``Estrategia Regional para el Manejo y la Conservaci[oacute]n del 
Cocodrilo de Morelet (Crocodylus moreletii) (Regional Strategy for the 
Management and Conservation of the Morelet's Crocodile) (Regional 
Strategy), found on pp. 43-53 of the Tri-national Strategy document 
(Sanchez 2006). This Regional Strategy outlines a series of objectives, 
products, and working protocols to accomplish the goals of the Tri-
national Strategy. As these tasks are completed, they will 
significantly enhance the conservation status of the Morelet's 
crocodile.
    According to S[aacute]nchez Herrera and [Aacute]lvarez-Romero 
(2006), as result of this initiative, the three range countries have 
agreed to implement the Regional Strategy, which also includes 
monitoring the species. The three range countries plan to implement the 
Regional Strategy by:
    (1) Conducting population surveys in defined priority areas using 
systematic and coordinated monitoring, with standardized fieldwork 
methods and techniques.
    (2) Developing a shared biological and geographical information 
system.
    (3) Identifying priority areas and routes for conservation and 
surveillance, along with those for future potential for ranching.
    (4) Supporting and developing educational programs and outreach 
materials.
    (5) Promoting personnel training and experience exchange, including 
field techniques and surveillance.
    (6) Promoting species-friendly production projects such as close-
cycle farms (and eventually future ranching), along with the 
development of a legal regional market and a certification strategy for 
Morelet's crocodile products.
    (7) Raising funds in support of the activities and tasks outlined 
in the Strategy (S[aacute]nchez Herrera and [Aacute]lvarez-Romero 2006, 
p. 263).
    The Government of Mexico is making efforts to design and implement 
a countrywide monitoring program for the populations and habitat of the 
Morelet's crocodile, including the possibility of involving Belize and 
Guatemala. The aim is to build on the experiences and results of the 
COPAN Project and the suggestions made at the 23rd meeting of the CITES 
Animals Committee (Geneva, April 2008, see the Animals Committee 
summary record labeled as document AC23) to obtain better information 
about the status and trends of relevant populations of the species and 
their habitat. The program will be developed in the framework of the 
Tri-national Strategy (CITES 2010a, p. 9). The Government of Mexico has 
established contacts with the Governments of Belize and Guatemala as 
part of the Tri-National Strategy (CITES 2008, p. 32).
    Stage 1 of the project is currently under way. It aims to develop a 
preliminary design of the program, considering relevant areas in the 
range of the species. Ideally, areas could be selected in the three 
countries, based on the COPAN Project and subsequent studies. The 
design will be reviewed and assessed in a 2010 workshop involving 
species experts and authorities, who will agree upon on the most 
appropriate methods and define time intervals, routes/localities and 
variables to take into account for crocodiles and their habitat. 
Manuals will be developed to ensure the effectiveness of fieldwork and 
training of staff. This stage will also include the design of a 
database where information will be organized and centralized (CITES 
2010a, p. 9).
    To date, the preliminary design proposes a monitoring effort with 
biannual sampling throughout the range of the species, with 
observations made in at least three routes per defined region (e.g. 12 
regions in Mexico) using nighttime counts. In addition, one of the 
three routes per region will be selected for capture-mark-recapture of 
individuals and standard data/sample collection, as well as nest 
location and monitoring. Information obtained will make it possible to 
estimate relative abundance indices to detect variations in the 
population in time, determine the sex and age ratio and the general 
status and activity of individuals, and obtain data on the reproductive 
effort and success of the species, and on habitat critical for breeding 
(CITES 2010a, pp. 9-10).
    Stage 2 will be implemented once the monitoring program has been 
published. It will consist of implementing the actions decided, 
including setting up and training the field teams, signing the relevant 
cooperation agreements, carrying out field work, and developing the 
database. Information stored in the database will be periodically 
analyzed to produce estimates of the population and its trends in the 
short, medium, and long term (CITES 2010a, pp. 9-10) (CITES 2010a, p. 
10). We do not have any information on implementation progress for the 
Tri-National Strategy, and are seeking this information as part of this 
proposed rule.
    In Belize, Dr. Frank Mazzotti (University of Florida) is 
collaborating with the Belize Forestry Department to develop a national 
crocodile management program (The Croc Docs 2009, pp. 1-8). This 
project seeks to develop, in collaboration with the Lamanai Field 
Research Center, a monitoring program for these species. Along with the 
monitoring program, the project will develop a training program for 
government and nongovernment personnel in Belize so that the monitoring 
program can be maintained. This long-term program has great potential 
to provide ongoing conservation benefits to the Morelet's crocodile in 
Belize. We do not have any information on implementation progress for 
this monitoring program in Belize, and are seeking this information as 
part of this proposed rule.
    The Act requires the Service to monitor the status of the species 
in cooperation with the States. The Act defines the term ``State'' as 
``any of the several States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth 
of Puerto Rico, American Samoa, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and the Trust 
Territory of the Pacific Islands.'' For species found entirely outside 
of the United States and therefore outside the areas defined as a 
``State'' under the Act, we must cooperate with the species' range 
countries to meet the post-delisting monitoring requirements of the Act 
to ensure that the species will maintain its recovered status 
throughout its range after the protections of Act are removed. As the 
species experts, the range countries are best qualified to develop and 
implement a range-wide post-delisting monitoring plan for their 
species. If this proposed rule is finalized and the Morelet's crocodile 
is delisted under the Act, we will work with the range countries to 
monitor the status of the species throughout its range via their 
implementation of the existing monitoring requirements under CITES, the 
Tri-national Strategy, the Belizean monitoring program discussed above, 
and any additional monitoring plans that may be developed in the 
future.

Peer Review

    In accordance with our joint peer review policy with the National 
Marine Fisheries Service, ``Notice of Interagency Cooperative Policy 
for Peer Review in

[[Page 23683]]

Endangered Species Act Activities,'' that was published in the Federal 
Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), and the Office of Management 
and Budget's Final Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review, dated 
December 16, 2004, we will seek the expert opinions of at least three 
appropriate independent specialists regarding the science in this 
proposed rule. The purpose of peer review is to ensure that listing, 
reclassification, and delisting decisions are based on scientifically 
sound data, assumptions, and analyses. We will send copies of this 
proposed rule to the peer reviewers immediately following publication 
in the Federal Register. We will invite these peer reviewers to 
comment, during the public comment period, on the specific assumptions 
and conclusions in this proposed delisting of the Morelet's crocodile. 
We will summarize the opinions of these reviewers in the final decision 
document, and we will consider their input and any additional 
information we received as part of our process of making a final 
decision on this proposal. Such communication may lead to a final 
decision that differs from this proposal.

Required Determinations

Clarity of the Rule

    We are required by Executive Orders 12866 and 12988 and by the 
Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain 
language. This means that each rule we publish must:
    (1) Be logically organized;
    (2) Use the active voice to address readers directly;
    (3) Use clear language rather than jargon;
    (4) Be divided into short sections and sentences; and
    (5) Use lists and tables wherever possible.
    If you feel that we have not met these requirements, send us 
comments by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. To 
better help us revise the rule, your comments should be as specific as 
possible. For example, you should tell us the numbers of the sections 
or paragraphs that are unclearly written, which sections or sentences 
are too long, the sections where you feel lists or tables would be 
useful, etc.

National Environmental Policy Act

    We have determined that an environmental assessments or an 
environmental impact statement, as defined under the authority of the 
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), 
need not be prepared in connection with regulations adopted under 
section 4(a) of the Act. A notice outlining our reasons for this 
determination was published in the Federal Register on October 25, 1983 
(48 FR 49244).

References Cited

    A complete list of the references used to develop this proposed 
rule is available upon request from the Endangered Species Program in 
our Headquarters office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section).

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17

    Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.

Proposed Regulation Promulgation

    Accordingly, we hereby propose to amend part 17, subchapter B of 
chapter I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, 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.


Sec.  17.11  [Amended]

    2. Amend Sec.  17.11(h) by removing the entry for ``Crocodile, 
Morelet's'' under ``REPTILES'' from the List of Endangered and 
Threatened Wildlife.

    Dated: April 11, 2011.
Daniel M. Ashe,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2011-9836 Filed 4-26-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P