61700 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 190 / Wednesday, September 30, 2020 / Proposed Rules

unlawful for any person subject to the DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, jurisdiction of the United States to enter FWS–R4–ES–2019–0069, which is commit, to attempt to commit, to solicit Fish and Wildlife Service the docket number for this rulemaking. another to commit, or cause to be Then, click on the Search button. On the committed, any of the following acts in 50 CFR Part 17 resulting page, in the Search panel on regard to this species: [Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2019–0069; the left side of the screen, under the Document Type heading, click on the (i) Import or export, as set forth at FXES11130900000–189–FF0932000] Proposed Rule box to locate this § 17.61(b). RIN 1018–BE14 document. You may submit a comment (ii) Remove and reduce to possession Endangered and Threatened Wildlife by clicking on ‘‘Comment Now!’’ from areas under Federal jurisdiction, as and Plants; Reclassifying the Virgin (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail set forth at § 17.61(c)(1). Islands Tree Boa From Endangered to to: Public Comments Processing, Attn: (iii) Maliciously damage or destroy Threatened With a Section 4(d) Rule FWS–R4–ES–2019–0069; U.S. Fish and the species on any areas under Federal Wildlife Service, MS: JAO/1N, 5275 jurisdiction, or remove, cut, dig up, or AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041– damage or destroy the species on any Interior. 3803. other area in knowing violation of any ACTION: Proposed rule. We request that you send comments only by the methods described above. State law or regulation or in the course SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and of any violation of a State criminal We will post all comments on http:// Wildlife Service (Service), propose to www.regulations.gov. This generally trespass law, as set forth at section reclassify the Virgin Islands tree boa 9(a)(2)(B) of the Act. means that we will post any personal (Virgin Islands boa; Chilabothrus (= information you provide us (see (iv) Interstate or foreign commerce in Epicrates) granti) from an endangered Information Requested, below, for more the course of commercial activity, as set species to a threatened species with a information). rule issued under section 4(d) of the forth at § 17.61(d). Document availability: The proposed Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Act), (v) Sell or offer for sale, as set forth rule and supporting documents as amended. If we finalize this rule as at § 17.61(e). (including the species status assessment proposed, it would reclassify the Virgin (SSA) report and references cited) are (2) Exceptions from prohibitions. The Islands boa from endangered to available at http://www.regulations.gov following exceptions from prohibitions threatened on the List of Endangered under Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2019– apply to beach layia: and Threatened Wildlife (List). This 0069. (i) The prohibitions described in proposal is based on a thorough review paragraph (b)(1) of this section do not of the best available scientific data, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: apply to activities conducted as which indicate that the species’ status Edwin E. Mun˜ iz, Field Supervisor, U.S. authorized by a permit issued in has improved such that it is not Fish and Wildlife Service, Caribbean accordance with the provisions set forth currently in danger of extinction Ecological Services Field Office, Road ´ at § 17.72. throughout all or a significant portion of 301 Km 5.1, Corozo Ward, Boqueron, its range. We are also proposing a rule Puerto Rico 00622; or P.O. Box 491, (ii) Any employee or agent of the under the authority of section 4(d) of the Boquero´n, Puerto Rico 00622; telephone Service or of a State conservation Act that provides measures that are 787–851–7297. Persons who use a agency that is operating a conservation necessary and advisable to provide for telecommunications device for the deaf program pursuant to the terms of a the conservation of the Virgin Islands (TDD) may call the Federal Relay cooperative agreement with the Service boa. Further, we are correcting the List Service at 800–877–8339. in accordance with section 6(c) of the to change the scientific name of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Act, who is designated by that agency Virgin Islands boa in the List from for such purposes, may, when acting in Epicrates monensis granti to Executive Summary the course of official duties, remove and Chilabothrus granti to reflect the Why we need to publish a rule. Under reduce to possession from areas under currently accepted taxonomy. Virgin the Act, a species may warrant Federal jurisdiction members of beach Islands boa is a distinct species, not a reclassification from endangered to layia that are covered by an approved subspecies, and Epicrates is no longer threatened if it no longer meets the cooperative agreement to carry out the scientifically accepted genus for this definition of endangered (in danger of conservation programs. species. extinction). The Virgin Islands boa is (iii) You may engage in any act DATES: We will accept comments listed as endangered, and we are prohibited under paragraph (b)(1) of this received or postmarked on or before proposing to reclassify it as threatened November 30, 2020. Comments section with seeds of cultivated because we have determined it is no submitted electronically using the specimens, provided that a statement longer in danger of extinction. Federal eRulemaking Portal (see that the seeds are of ‘‘cultivated origin’’ Reclassifications can only be made by ADDRESSES, below) must be received by issuing a rule. Furthermore, extending accompanies the seeds or their 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the closing the ‘‘take’’ prohibitions in section 9 of container. date. We must receive requests for a the Act to threatened species, such as Aurelia Skipwith, public hearing, in writing, at the address those we are proposing for this species Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. shown in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION under a section 4(d) rule, can only be CONTACT by November 16, 2020. [FR Doc. 2020–19026 Filed 9–29–20; 8:45 am] made by issuing a rule. Finally, the ADDRESSES: Written comments: You may change of the scientific name of the BILLING CODE 4333–15–P submit comments on this proposed rule Virgin Islands boa in the List from by one of the following methods: Epicrates monensis granti to (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal Chilabothrus granti, can only be made eRulemaking Portal: http:// effective by issuing a rule.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:31 Sep 29, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30SEP1.SGM 30SEP1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 190 / Wednesday, September 30, 2020 / Proposed Rules 61701

What this rule does. We propose to under the Act, we sought the expert prohibition or exception within U.S. reclassify the Virgin Islands tree boa opinions of six appropriate specialists territory that would contribute to the from an endangered species to a regarding the species status assessment conservation of the species. In threatened species with a rule issued report (SSA). We received responses particular, we are seeking input from under section 4(d) of the Act to provide from five specialists on the SSA report, experts regarding species restoration measures that are necessary and which informed this proposed rule. The and captive propagation practices and advisable to provide for the purpose of peer review is to ensure that related activities, or whether take conservation of this species. We also our listing determinations, critical associated with any other activities change the scientific name in the List to habitat designations, and 4(d) rules are should be considered excepted from the reflect the currently accepted taxonomy. based on scientifically sound data, prohibitions in the 4(d) rule. The basis for our action. Under the assumptions, and analyses. The peer (5) Current or planned activities Act, we may determine that a species is reviewers have expertise in the biology, within the geographic range of the an endangered or threatened species habitat, and threats to the species. Virgin Islands boa that may either because of any of five factors: (A) The Because we will consider all negatively impact or benefit the species. present or threatened destruction, comments and information we receive Please include sufficient information modification, or curtailment of its during the comment period, our final with your submission (such as scientific habitat or range; (B) overutilization for determination may differ from this journal articles or other publications) to commercial, recreational, scientific, or proposal. Based on the new information allow us to verify any scientific or educational purposes; (C) disease or we receive (and any comments on that commercial information you include. predation; (D) the inadequacy of new information), we may conclude that Please note that submissions merely existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E) the species is endangered instead of stating support for, or opposition to, the other natural or manmade factors threatened, or we may conclude that the action under consideration without affecting its continued existence. We species does not warrant listing as either providing supporting information, have determined that the Virgin Islands an endangered species or a threatened although noted, will not be considered boa is not currently in danger of species. Such final decisions would be in making a determination, as section extinction and, therefore, does not meet a logical outgrowth of this proposal, as 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that the definition of an endangered species, long as we: (1) Base the decisions on the determinations as to whether any but is still affected by the following best scientific and commercial data species is an endangered or a threatened current and ongoing stressors to the available, after considering all of the species must be made ‘‘solely on the extent that the species meets the relevant factors; (2) do not rely on basis of the best scientific and definition of a threatened species under factors Congress has not intended us to commercial data available.’’ the Act: consider; and (3) articulate a rational You may submit your comments and • Habitat loss and fragmentation from connection between the facts found and materials concerning this proposed rule human development (Factor A). the conclusions made, including why by one of the methods listed in • Direct and indirect predation/ we changed our conclusion. ADDRESSES. We request that you send competition by exotic mammals such as comments only by the methods rats, cats, and possibly, to a lesser Information Requested described in ADDRESSES. extent, mongoose (Factor C). We intend that any final action If you submit information via http:// • Stochastic events such as resulting from this proposed rule will be www.regulations.gov, your entire hurricanes and sea level rise, based on the best scientific and submission—including any personal exacerbated by the cumulative effects of commercial data available and be as identifying information—will be posted climate change (Factor E). accurate and as effective as possible. on the website. If your submission is • Intentional harm due to fear of Therefore, we request comments and made via a hardcopy that includes snakes (Factor E). information from other concerned personal identifying information, you We are also proposing a section 4(d) governmental agencies, Native may request at the top of your document rule. When we list a species as American tribes, the scientific that we withhold this information from threatened, section 4(d) of the Act community, industry, or any other public review. However, we cannot allows us to issue regulations that are interested party concerning this guarantee that we will be able to do so. necessary and advisable to provide for proposed rule. We will post all hardcopy submissions the conservation of the species. We particularly seek comments on: on http://www.regulations.gov. Accordingly, we are proposing a 4(d) (1) Information concerning the Comments and materials we receive, rule for the Virgin Islands boa that biology and ecology of the Virgin as well as supporting documentation we would, among other things, prohibit Islands boa. used in preparing this proposed rule, take associated with capturing, (2) Relevant data concerning any will be available for public inspection handling, trapping, collecting, or other stressors (or lack thereof) to the Virgin on http://www.regulations.gov, or by activities, including intentional or Islands boa, particularly any data on the appointment, during normal business incidental introduction of exotic possible effects of climate change as it hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife species, such as cats or rats that relates to habitat, and the extent of Service, Caribbean Ecological Services compete with, prey upon, or destroy the Territorial protection and management Field Office (see FOR FURTHER habitat of the Virgin Islands boa. The that would be provided to this boa as a INFORMATION CONTACT). proposed 4(d) rule would also except threatened species. from these prohibitions take associated (3) Reasons why we should or should Public Hearing with certain conservation efforts. not reclassify the Virgin Islands boa Section 4(b)(5) of the Act provides for Peer review. In accordance with our from an endangered species to a a public hearing on this proposal, if joint policy on peer review published in threatened species under the Act. requested. Requests must be received by the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 (4) Information concerning activities the date specified in DATES. Such FR 34270), and our August 22, 2016, that should be considered under a rule requests must be sent to the address memorandum updating and clarifying issued in accordance with section 4(d) shown in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION the role of peer review of listing actions of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) as a CONTACT. We will schedule a public

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:31 Sep 29, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30SEP1.SGM 30SEP1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS 61702 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 190 / Wednesday, September 30, 2020 / Proposed Rules

hearing on this proposal, if requested, I. Proposed Reclassification The Virgin Islands boa occurs in and announce the date, time, and place Determination subtropical dry forest and subtropical of the hearing, as well as how to obtain Background moist forest (Service 2009, p. 11). reasonable accommodations, in the Subtropical dry forest covers Federal Register at least 15 days before A thorough review of the taxonomy, approximately 14 percent (128,420 the hearing. For the immediate future, life history, ecology, and overall hectares (ha); 317,332 acres (ac)) of we will provide these public hearings viability of the Virgin Islands boa is Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands using webinars that will be announced presented in the SSA report (Service (USVI), typically receives less than 750 on the Service’s website, in addition to 2018, entire; available at https:// mm (29 in) rainfall annually (Ewel and the Federal Register. The use of these www.fws.gov/southeast/ and at http:// Whitmore 1973, pp. 9–20), and is characterized by small (less than 5 virtual public hearings is consistent www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2019–0069). A summary meter (m; 16 feet (ft)) deciduous trees with our regulation at 50 CFR of this information follows: with high densities of interlocking 424.16(c)(3). The Virgin Islands boa is endemic to branches and vines connecting adjacent Previous Federal Actions Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands (U.S. tree canopies (Ewel and Whitmore 1973, and British). Originally, the Virgin p. 10). Subtropical moist forest covers The Virgin Islands boa was originally Islands boa was considered a subspecies approximately 58 percent (538,130 ha; listed as an endangered subspecies of the Puerto Rican boa (Epicrates 1,329,750 acres) of Puerto Rico and (Epicrates inornatus granti) of the inornatus; Stull 1933, pp. 1–2), but was USVI and typically receives more than Puerto Rican boa (Epicrates inornatus at later found to be more closely related to 1,100 mm (43 in) of annual rainfall. It time of listing, now Chilabothrus the Mona Island boa, and the is dominated by semi-evergreen and inornatus) on October 13, 1970 (35 FR nomenclature for the two snakes was evergreen deciduous trees up to 20 m 16047), under the Endangered Species altered to reflect two subspecies, (66 ft) tall with rounded crowns. The Conservation Act of 1969, and remained Epicrates monensis monensis (Mona Virgin Islands boa has also been listed with the passage of the Act in Island boa) and E. m. granti (Virgin reported to occur in mangrove forest, 1973. In 1979, we published a technical Islands boa) (Sheplan and Schwartz thicket/scrub, disturbed lower correction (44 FR 70677, December 7, 1974, pp. 94–104). More recently, vegetation, and artificial structures (Harvey and Platenberg 2009, p. 114; 1979) revising the scientific name of the molecular phylogeny work indicates that the genus Epicrates is paraphyletic Tolson 2003, entire). Virgin Islands boa from Epicrates Habitat needs for Virgin Islands boa inornatus granti to Epicrates monensis (a group composed of a collection of organisms, including the most recent can be divided into those for foraging granti. A recovery plan for this species and those for resting. Factors common ancestor of all those was completed in 1986 (Service 1986, contributing to foraging habitat quality organisms), and the West Indian clade entire) and updated in September 2019. are tree density and connectivity, (as opposed to the mainland clade) was The most recent 5-year review, presence of arboreal and ground-level designated as Chilabothrus (Reynolds et completed in 2009, recommended refugia, prey density, and rat presence/ al. 2013, entire). As a result, the Virgin reclassifying the Virgin Islands boa to a density (Tolson 1988, pp. 234–235). Islands boa is now considered its own threatened species due to the Tree density is more important than tree species. We accept the change of the population stabilizing (Service 2009, species or diversity; Virgin Islands boas Virgin Islands boa’s classification from do not appear to prefer a particular tree entire). Based on this recommendation, the subspecies Epicrates monensis we initiated a species status assessment species after accounting for availability granti to the species Chilabothrus granti and structure (Platenberg 2018, pers. (SSA) and completed an SSA report in and are amending the scientific name to 2018 (Service 2018, entire). comm.). The highest densities of Virgin match the currently accepted Islands boas are found where there are Supporting Documents nomenclature. few or no exotic predators and high The Virgin Islands boa is a medium- densities of lizard prey (Tolson 1988, p. A species status assessment (SSA) length, slender, nonvenomous snake. 233; Tolson 1996b, p. 410). Resting team prepared an SSA report for the The largest snout-vent lengths (SVL) habitat includes refugia for inactive boas Virgin Islands boa. The SSA team was recorded for the species were 1,066 to use during the day. Refugia can be the composed of Service biologists, in millimeters (mm; 42 inches (in)) for axils (angles between trunk and consultation with other species experts. females and 1,112 mm (44 in) for males branches) of Cocos or Sabal species, tree The SSA report represents a (total body lengths 1,203 mm (47 in) and holes, termite nests, or under rocks and compilation of the best scientific and 1,349 mm (53 in), respectively; Tolson debris (Tolson 1988, p. 233). commercial data available concerning 2005, entire), although most specimens The Virgin Islands boa forages at night the status of the species, including the range between 600 and 800 mm (24–31 by gliding slowly along small branches impacts of past, present, and future in) SVL, with an average mass of 165 in search of sleeping lizards (Service factors (both negative and beneficial) grams (6 ounces) (USVI Division of 1986, p. 6). The primary prey for the affecting the species. The Service sent Wildlife, unpub. data). Adults are gray- Virgin Islands boa is the Puerto Rican the SSA report to six independent peer brown with dark-brown blotches that crested anole (Anolis cristatellus), and reviewers and received five responses. are partially edged with black, and the greatest concentrations of Virgin The Service also sent the SSA report to feature a blue-purple iridescence on Islands boa are found where Anolis their dorsal surface; the ventral surface 2 state partners, including scientists with densities exceed 60 individuals/100 m is creamy white or yellowish white. (1,076 ft2; Tolson 1988, p. 233). Other expertise in Virgin Islands boa habitat, Newborns, on the other hand, have an prey species include ground lizard for review. We received review from almost grayish-white body color with (Ameiva exsul), house mouse (Mus two experts from the Puerto Rico black blotches and weigh 2.0–7.2 grams musculus), small birds, iguana (Iguana Department of Natural and (0.07–0.25 ounces) with SVLs of 200– iguana) hatchlings, and likely other Environmental Resources. 350 mm (approx. 8–14 inches) (Tolson small animals encountered (Maclean 1992, pers. comm.). 1982, pp. 30–31, 37; Tolson 1989, p.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:31 Sep 29, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30SEP1.SGM 30SEP1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 190 / Wednesday, September 30, 2020 / Proposed Rules 61703

165; Tolson 2005, p. 9; Platenberg 2018, recent survey did not find Virgin Islands (B) Overutilization for commercial, pers. comm.). The Virgin Islands boa boas on Cayo Ratones in 2018 (Island recreational, scientific, or educational may also compete for prey and other Conservation 2018, pp. 5, 17). However, purposes; niche components with the Puerto because Virgin Islands boas are difficult (C) Disease or predation; Rican racer (Borikenophis to find, and the 2018 surveys were not (D) The inadequacy of existing portoricensis), a snake native to Puerto extensive (e.g., did not survey the whole regulatory mechanisms; or Rico, the U.S. and British Virgin Islands, island), there is currently not enough (E) Other natural or manmade factors and surrounding cays. evidence to conclude the Cayo Ratones affecting its continued existence. These factors represent broad Much of what is known about Virgin population has been extirpated. Lastly, Islands boa life history comes from categories of natural or human-caused there is also one report from 2004 that actions or conditions that could have an studies in captivity. Lifespans in the species occurs on Greater St. James captivity often exceed 20 years, and effect on a species’ continued existence. Island in St. Thomas, but nothing is In evaluating these actions and sometimes exceed 30 years (7% of known about that potential population captive Virgin Islands boas exceeded 30 conditions, we look for those that may (Dempsey 2019, pers. comm.). In 2009, have a negative effect on individuals of years of age; Smith 2018, pers. comm.), based on all known populations in but typical lifespans in the wild are not the species, as well as other actions or Puerto Rico and the USVI, an estimated known. Sexual maturity is reached at 2– conditions that may ameliorate any 1,300–1,500 Virgin Islands boas were 3 years of age (Tolson 1989, Tolson and negative effects or may have positive thought to occur (Service 2009, p. 8), Pin˜ ero 1985), and boas are still effects. although many population sizes used reproductive at >20 years of age (Tolson We use the term ‘‘threat’’ to refer in for this estimate are highly speculative. 2018, pers. comm.). Females breed general to actions or conditions that are biennially, but studies have suggested Based on the 2018 SSA (Service 2018, known to or are reasonably likely to that annual breeding may occur in some entire), current population trend negatively affect individuals of a conditions (Tolson and Pin˜ ero 1985). estimates for Puerto Rico and USVI are species. The term ‘‘threat’’ includes Courtship behaviors and copulation either declining, potentially declining, actions or conditions that have a direct occur from February through May, and considered rare, or unknown and most impact on individuals (direct impacts), interaction with conspecifics of the populations are small or considered rare as well as those that affect individuals opposite sex appears to be necessary for (Service 2018, p. 30). through alteration of their habitat or reproductive cycling (Tolson 1989). The The population in Tortola Island, BVI, required resources (stressors). The term gestation period, observed from a single was confirmed in 2018, but there are no ‘‘threat’’ may encompass—either known copulation between two specific data regarding the status of that together or separately—the source of the individuals, is about 132 days (Tolson population (McGowan 2018, pers. action or condition or the action or 1989). Virgin Islands boas give birth to comm.). In addition, according to condition itself. live young from late August through anecdotal reports, the species is thought However, the mere identification of any threat(s) does not necessarily mean October to litters of 2–10 young, and to occur on Jost Van Dyke, Guana that the species meets the statutory litter size increases with female body Island, Necker Cay, Great Camanoe, and definition of an ‘‘endangered species’’ or size (Tolson 1992, pers. comm.). Virgin Gorda of the BVI (Mayer and a ‘‘threatened species.’’ In determining The exact historical distribution of the Lazell 1988, entire), but data and whether a species meets either Virgin Islands boa is unknown, but its confirmed observations are limited. definition, we must evaluate all present disjointed distribution suggests There is not enough information to identified threats by considering the that it was once more widely distributed reliably assess the status of Virgin expected response by the species, and across small islands within its range. In Islands boa populations on those the effects of the threats—in light of the 1970s, when the Virgin Islands boa islands. was originally listed, its range was those actions and conditions that will identified as three islands: Puerto Rico Regulatory and Analytical Framework ameliorate the threats—on an (no specific site), St. Thomas, USVI individual, population, and species (from a single record), and Tortola in the Regulatory Framework level. We evaluate each threat and its British Virgin Islands (BVI) (from one Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) expected effects on the species, then report) (44 FR 70677, December 7, and its implementing regulations (50 analyze the cumulative effect of all of 1979). When the recovery plan was CFR part 424) set forth the procedures the threats on the species as a whole. written (1986), 71 individuals were for determining whether a species is an We also consider the cumulative effect of the threats in light of those actions reported in two populations: one on the ‘‘endangered species’’ or a ‘‘threatened and conditions that will have positive eastern side of St. Thomas in the USVI, species.’’ The Act defines an effects on the species—such as any and one at Cayo Diablo, an offshore islet endangered species as a species that is existing regulatory mechanisms or in Puerto Rico (Service 2009). ‘‘in danger of extinction throughout all Currently, the Virgin Islands boa conservation efforts. The Secretary or a significant portion of its range,’’ and occurs on six islands between Puerto determines whether the species meets a threatened species as a species that is Rico, USVI, and BVI: the eastern Puerto the definition of an ‘‘endangered ‘‘likely to become an endangered Rican islands of Cayo Diablo and species’’ or a ‘‘threatened species’’ only species within the foreseeable future Culebra; Rı´o Grande on the Puerto Rican after conducting this cumulative throughout all or a significant portion of main island; eastern St. Thomas and an analysis and describing the expected its range.’’ The Act requires that we offshore cay in USVI (USVI Cay; an effect on the species now and in the introduced population); and Tortola. A determine whether any species is an foreseeable future. seventh population (also introduced) on ‘‘endangered species’’ or a ‘‘threatened The Act does not define the term the Puerto Rican island of Cayo Ratones species’’ because of any of the following ‘‘foreseeable future,’’ which appears in may still remain, although after the factors: the statutory definition of ‘‘threatened reestablishment of rats on this island (A) The present or threatened species.’’ Our implementing regulations after 2004, the status of this population destruction, modification, or at 50 CFR 424.11(d) set forth a is uncertain (Service 2018, p. 24). A curtailment of its habitat or range; framework for evaluating the foreseeable

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:31 Sep 29, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30SEP1.SGM 30SEP1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS 61704 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 190 / Wednesday, September 30, 2020 / Proposed Rules

future on a case-by-case basis. The term redundant a species is and the more residences and can persist within foreseeable future extends only so far representation it has, the more likely it developed areas if habitat patches are into the future as the Services can is to sustain populations over time, even available, but only if no cats or rats are reasonably determine that both the under changing environmental around (Platenberg and Harvey 2010, p. future threats and the species’ responses conditions. Using these principles, we 552; Platenberg 2018, pers. comm.). to those threats are likely. In other identified the species’ ecological Where boas coexist with urban words, the foreseeable future is the requirements for survival and development, development continues to period of time in which we can make reproduction at the individual, threaten populations via habitat reliable predictions. ‘‘Reliable’’ does not population, and species levels, and destruction, especially in St. Thomas, mean ‘‘certain’’; it means sufficient to described the beneficial and risk factors Rı´o Grande (Puerto Rico), and Culebra provide a reasonable degree of influencing the species’ viability. Island where habitat has declined confidence in the prediction. Thus, a The SSA process can be categorized throughout decades. In St. Thomas, prediction is reliable if it is reasonable into three sequential stages. During the available habitat has declined due to to depend on it when making decisions. first stage, we evaluated the individual development for resorts, condos, and It is not always possible or necessary species’ life-history needs. The next related infrastructure, and has become to define foreseeable future as a stage involved an assessment of the more constricted and isolated particular number of years. Analysis of historical and current condition of the (Platenberg and Harvey 2010, p. 552). In the foreseeable future uses the best species’ demographics and habitat Puerto Rico, human populations are scientific and commercial data available characteristics, including an decreasing, but residential development and should consider the timeframes explanation of how the species arrived continues to increase island-wide, applicable to the relevant threats and to at its current condition. The final stage including around protected areas the species’ likely responses to those of the SSA involved making predictions (Castro-Prieto et al. 2017, entire). threats in view of its life-history about the species’ responses to positive Consequences of human development characteristics. Data that are typically and negative environmental and on the boa and its habitat not only relevant to assessing the species’ anthropogenic influences. This process include habitat loss and fragmentation biological response include species- used the best available information to due to deforestation, but also mortality specific factors such as lifespan, characterize viability as the ability of a from vehicular strikes, an increase in reproductive rates or productivity, species to sustain populations in the predators such as cats and rats, and an certain behaviors, and other wild over time. We use this information increase in human–boa conflicts that demographic factors. to inform our regulatory decision. results in snakes being killed because of Analytical Framework Summary of Biological Status and fear of snakes (Service 2018, pp. 13–14). Both Puerto Rico and the USVI have Threats The SSA report documents the results regulatory mechanisms established to of our comprehensive biological status In this discussion, we review the protect the species and its habitat review for the species, including an biological condition of the species and throughout consultation processes for assessment of the potential threats to the its resources, and the threats that the authorization of development species. The SSA report does not influence the species’ current and future projects. Presently, the Virgin Islands represent a decision by the Service on condition, in order to assess the species’ boa is legally protected under Puerto whether the species should be proposed overall viability and the risks to that Rico’s Commonwealth Law No. 241– for listing as an endangered or viability. In the SSA report (Service 1999 (12 L.P.R.A. Sec.107), known as threatened species under the Act. It 2018, pp. 12–18), we reviewed all the New Wildlife Law of Puerto Rico. does, however, provide the scientific factors (i.e., threats, stressors) that could This law has provisions to protect basis that informs our regulatory be affecting the Virgin Islands boa now habitat for all wildlife species, including decisions, which involve the further or in the future. However, in this plants and animals. In addition, the application of standards within the Act proposed rule, we will focus our species is protected by Puerto Rico and its implementing regulations and discussion only on those factors that Department of Natural and policies. The following is a summary of could meaningfully impact the status of Environmental Resources (PRDNER)’s the key results and conclusions from the the species. The risk factors affecting the Regulation 6766, which under Article SSA report; the full SSA report can be status of the Virgin Islands boa vary 2.06 prohibits collecting, cutting, and found at Docket FWS–R4–ES–2019– from location to location, but generally removing, among other activities, listed 0069 on http://www.regulations.gov and include habitat loss and degradation plant and animal individuals within the at https://www.fws.gov/southeast/. from development, introduced jurisdiction of Puerto Rico (DRNA To assess the Virgin Islands boa’s predators, sea level rise (SLR) and a 2004). In USVI, Act No. 5665, known as viability, we used the three conservation changing climate, and public attitudes the Virgin Islands’ Indigenous and biology principles of resiliency, towards snakes. Where habitat is Endangered Species Act, which is redundancy, and representation (Shaffer available but the species is not present enforced by the U.S. Virgin Islands and Stein 2000, pp. 306–310). Briefly, (i.e., most of the small islands in the Department of Planning and Natural resiliency supports the ability of the eastern Puerto Rico bank and USVI), it Resources (VIDPNR), protects the species to withstand environmental and is believed that absences are due to local species. demographic stochasticity (for example, extirpation resulting from habitat Despite these regulations being in wet or dry, warm or cold years), degradation and colonization of exotic place, including the requirement for redundancy supports the ability of the species (Service 2009, p. 11). We developers to conduct environmental species to withstand catastrophic events discuss each of the risk factors below. assessments and mitigate damage to the (for example, droughts, large pollution species and habitat, the regulations have events), and representation supports the Development proved difficult to enforce, they are ability of the species to adapt over time Virgin Islands boas occur on both often ignored by developers, and they to long-term changes in the environment privately and publicly owned land. do not cover all development activities (for example, climate changes). In Virgin Islands boas have been observed in all Virgin Islands boa habitat general, the more resilient and living in developed areas around (Platenberg 2011, pers. comm.). For

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:31 Sep 29, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30SEP1.SGM 30SEP1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 190 / Wednesday, September 30, 2020 / Proposed Rules 61705

example, in St. Thomas, major permit developed islands is challenging, but is low-lying islands and parts of larger applications submitted for projects in feasible on smaller cays. Prior to islands (Bellard et al. 2014, pp. 203– the coastal zone require an reintroduction of the boas, rats were 204). The low-lying islands of Cayo environmental impact assessment that eliminated from Cayo Ratones and the Diablo and the USVI Cay, which addresses endangered species and USVI Cay using anticoagulant poison support Virgin Islands boa populations, protected habitat, but these (Tolson 1996b, p. 410), although Cayo and the island of Cayo Ratones, which requirements do not apply to smaller Ratones was recolonized by rats may still support a population, are all projects or those outside of the coastal sometime after August 2004, vulnerable to SLR and storm surges in zone. Furthermore, as noted in one highlighting the importance of ongoing the future. Boa populations on Rı´o study, even though a protocol was monitoring for rat presence after a Grande, Culebra, and St. Thomas are not developed and applied to delineate removal project. Cayo Ratones was considered at risk from SLR; however, habitat on protected sites and identify thought to harbor one of the most robust the three cays (Cayo Diablo, Cayo mitigation strategies, the absence of a Virgin Islands boa populations, but Ratones, and USVI Cay) could see 10– legal mechanism to enforce mitigation during the recent 2018 survey, no boas 23 percent loss due to SLR over the next has led to varying success as developers were found (Island Conservation 2018, 30 years (Service 2018, pp. 38–46). Past are slow to accept, and often ignore, the p. 20). There are no Virgin Islands boas and current observations suggest that mitigation process (Platenberg and present on islands with established rat the species can survive major hurricane Harvey 2010, pp. 551–552). populations and no rat predators (such events, although lasting impacts to Most offshore cays within the species’ as cats). range are part of the Territorial habitat, particularly die-off of vegetation Government or protected as wildlife Effects of Climate Change, Including inundated by storm surges, have been refuges, thus formally protecting Virgin Sea Level Rise observed (Platenberg 2018, pers. comm.; Islands boa habitat for three of the six Climate change will continue to Smith 2018, unpaginated; Tolson 1991, populations (i.e., Cayo Diablo, Cayo influence Virgin Islands boa persistence pp. 12, 16; Yrigoyen 2018, pers. comm.). Ratones, and USVI Cay). Cayo Ratones into the future. Species that are Loss of habitat due to storm surge and Cayo Diablo are included in La dependent on specialized habitat types impacts is similar to loss of habitat due Cordillera Natural Reserve managed by or limited in distribution (including the to development; loss of low-lying forest the PRDNER, and the offshore cay in Virgin Islands boa) are most susceptible habitat could result in decreased habitat USVI is managed and protected by the to the impacts of climate change (Byers availability for the Virgin Islands boas VIDPNR. Furthermore, even though and Norris 2011, p. 22). and their prey. Virgin Islands boa habitat on privately The climate in the southeastern Persecution by Residents owned land on Culebra Island is United States and Caribbean has currently under pressure from urban warmed about two degrees Fahrenheit Intentional killing of the more and tourism development and from a cool period in the 1960s and common and larger sized Puerto Rican deforestation, more than 1,000 acres of 1970s, and temperatures are expected to boa (Chilabothrus inornatus) due to fear continue to rise (Carter et al. 2014, pp. suitable habitat on the island are or superstitious beliefs has been well 398–399). Projections for future protected within the Service’s Culebra documented in the literature (Bird-Pico´ precipitation trends in this area are less National Wildlife Refuge. 1994, p. 35; Puente-Rolo´n and Bird-Pico´ certain than those for temperature, but 2004, p. 343; Joglar 2005, p. 146). Thus, Predation and Competition suggest that overall annual precipitation Virgin Islands boas in proximity to One of the primary threats to Virgin will decrease, and that tropical storms Islands boa populations is predation by will occur less frequently but with more developed areas where people fear exotic mammalian predators, mainly force (i.e., more category 4 and 5 snakes are susceptible to intentional cats and rats, and possibly, to a lesser hurricanes) than historical averages killings. Public encounters with Virgin degree, mongoose. Mongoose are not (Carter et al. 2014, pp. 398–399; Islands boas in the more populated Rı´o likely a major predator of Virgin Islands Knutson et al. 2010, pp. 161–162). With Grande and Culebra locations are boa because mongoose are terrestrial increasing temperatures and decreasing considered questionable because of the and active during the day, while Virgin precipitation, drought could negatively rarity of boas in those populations, and Islands boas are arboreal and active influence Virgin Islands boa there are only a couple of anecdotal primarily at night, although not populations. After a severe drought in records of intentional killings between exclusively (Service 2018, p. 14). Feral eastern Puerto Rico, Anolis populations those areas (Service 2009, pp. 15–16). In cats are known to prey upon boas crashed on Cayo Diablo and body the highly developed east side of St. (Tolson 1996b, p. 409), and cat condition indices of the boas Thomas, about 10 percent of the Virgin populations around human plummeted (Tolson 2018, pers. comm.). Islands boa records in St. Thomas are development are further bolstered by cat Sea levels are expected to rise from dead boas killed by humans on feeding stations set up by residents. globally, potentially exceeding 1 m (3 private property (Platenberg 2006, There has not been direct evidence of feet) of SLR by 2100 (Reynolds et al. unpub. data). We have no further rats preying upon Virgin Islands boas, 2012, p. 3). Local SLR impacts will information to assess the magnitude of but boas are not present on islands with depend not only on how much the this threat, but it is likely that high densities of rats (Tolson 1986, ocean level itself rises, but also on land intentional killings of Virgin Islands unpaginated; Tolson 1988, p. 235). Rats subsidence or changes in offshore boas still occur, are not being likely negatively impact Virgin Islands currents (Carter et al. 2014, p. 400). documented, and would be particularly boas by competing for prey, or by Impacts on terrestrial ecosystems can be detrimental to rare populations such as inducing behavioral changes in Anolis temporary, via submergence of habitat in Rı´o Grande. The Service is not aware prey that make them less likely to be during storm surges, or permanent, via of a law enforcement case related to the encountered by boas (Tolson 1988, p. salt water intrusion into the water table, boa in Puerto Rico or the USVI. 235). However, rats may also predate on inundation of habitat, and erosion. SLR Populations that occur within protected neonate boas (Service 1986, p. 12). and hurricane storm surges in the areas are not expected to be exposed to Complete predator removal on large Caribbean are predicted to inundate this threat.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:31 Sep 29, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30SEP1.SGM 30SEP1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS 61706 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 190 / Wednesday, September 30, 2020 / Proposed Rules

Conservation Measures That Affect the presence and amount of suitable habitat where predators have become Species (e.g., appropriate forest structure, reestablished. adequate prey base, available refugia), Positive influences on Virgin Islands Summary of Current Condition boa viability have been habitat protection status or threat of protection, predator control, and captive development, the presence/absence/ For the Virgin Islands boa to maintain breeding and reintroduction. Two eradication of exotic predators, and viability, its populations, or some populations of Virgin Islands boa were geomorphology that provides protection portion thereof, must be resilient. For reintroduced to protected cays after from SLR and hurricane storm surges the SSA, our classification of resiliency predators had been removed, one on that are likely to affect the persistence relied heavily on habitat characteristics Cayo Ratones (Puerto Rico) in 1993, and of low-lying habitat. Potential sites for in the absence of highly certain new introductions have been suggested another on USVI Cay in 2002. Founders population size or trend estimates. The (Reynolds et al. 2015, p. 499) and need for these reintroductions came largely habitat characteristics we assessed were: to be further assessed, although one new from a cooperative captive-breeding Degree of habitat protection (or, effort is in the early stages of program initiated in 1985 between the conversely, development risk), presence implementation. Some areas may Service, DNER, VIDPNR, and the Toledo of introduced predators, and require that predators be removed before Zoological Garden. Cayo Diablo vulnerability to storm surges (Service boas are moved and future monitoring is provided the founding individuals for 2018, p. 31). ensured to prevent recolonization. In the captive population that was Representation can be measured by addition to reintroductions to new sites, reintroduced to Cayo Ratones (6 the breadth of genetic or environmental augmentation of existing populations kilometers (3.5 miles) away from Cayo diversity within and among populations may prove beneficial or necessary for and gauges the probability that a species Diablo), and St. Thomas provided the the persistence of existing populations, founding individuals for the captive is capable of adapting to environmental particularly on developed islands and changes. A range-wide genetic analysis population that was reintroduced to the cays where predators have become USVI Cay (4 kilometers (2.5 miles) away of the Virgin Islands boa showed there reestablished. was little genetic variation; however, the from St. Thomas). In conclusion, the Virgin Islands boa The Cayo Ratones population same study found that each sampled still faces the threat of development on locality had unique mtDNA haplotypes, originated from 41 captive-born boas St. Thomas, Rı´o Grande, and Culebra (offspring of Cayo Diablo boas) released indicating a lack of gene flow between Island, and regulatory mechanisms islands (Rodrı´guez-Robles et al. 2015, between 1993 and 1995. Post-release addressing this threat are difficult to entire). Therefore, in the SSA we used survival was high: 82.6 percent of enforce or do not cover all development genetics to delineate representative individuals and 89 percent of neonates actions affecting the species. Human units. survived at least 1 year (Tolson 1996a, development results in habitat loss from unpaginated). By 2004, the population deforestation and fragmentation, The species also needs to exhibit had grown to an estimated 500 boas mortality from vehicular strikes, and some degree of redundancy in order to (Tolson et al. 2008, p. 68). increased predation by cats and rats. In maintain viability. Catastrophic events Unfortunately, since 2004, Cayo Ratones addition, impacts from changes in that could affect both single and has been recolonized by rats, and no climate could affect habitat. Drought multiple populations of the Virgin boas were found during surveys in 2018 could negatively influence Virgin Islands boa include drought, hurricanes, (Island Conservation 2018, pp. 5, 20). Islands boa populations through loss of and colonization or recolonization of However, because Virgin Islands boas prey. SLR and storm surges are expected exotic predators. This species occurs in are difficult to find, and this survey was to inundate low-lying islands, such as geographically isolated groups and does not exhaustive, we believe it is Cayo Diablo, Cayo Ratones, and the not disperse from island to island to premature to conclude the population USVI Cay, which currently support interact and interbreed; therefore, for has been extirpated. Intensive follow-up Virgin Islands boa populations. Finally, purposes of analyzing redundancy, all surveys are needed to confirm whether persecution of boas by citizens, due to boas within each island were a population still persists or is fear or superstition, can affect considered to be individual extirpated, but it is clear that the individual boas, although there has populations. population has declined. never been a systematic study of the Resiliency The USVI Cay reintroduction was impact of these events on the overall initiated with the release of 42 Virgin population. Because resiliency is a population- Islands boas in 2002 and 2003, 11 from When considering conservation level attribute, the key to assessing it is captivity and 31 from St. Thomas. actions and how they influence the the ability to delineate populations. As Follow-up surveys in 2003–2004 viability of Virgin Islands boa, about discussed above, we considered all boas provided an estimate of 168 boas (202 half of known localities where Virgin within each island to be single boas/ha), which researchers suspected Islands boas occur are on small offshore populations. On small offshore cays, was near carrying capacity for the island islets managed for conservation. In what we define as a population might (Tolson 2005, p. 9). More recent surveys addition, predator removal has been consist of a single interbreeding deme in 2018 detected 20 boas over 2 nights, successful at smaller cays, such as USVI (or subdivision) of Virgin Islands boas. resulting in an estimate of 26–33 boas Cay, although the reestablishment of On larger islands, what we define as a across the island (Island Conservation rats on Cayo Ratones illustrates the need population functions more as a 2018, pp. 20–30). Differences in survey for continued monitoring and removal metapopulation, with multiple and analysis methodologies complicate efforts. Lastly, successful interbreeding groups in isolated habitat direct comparisons of population size reintroductions of Virgin Islands boas patches that may interact weakly via between these time points. Recent occurred on these islands after the dispersal and recolonization of surveys also indicate that there are no eradication of predators; however, extirpated patches. Alternately, multiple rats on the island. additional predator removal and occupied patches on large islands may Factors for consideration for future augmentation of reintroduced boa be completely isolated from one another reintroduction sites include the populations may be needed on cays (Service 2018, p. 20).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:31 Sep 29, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30SEP1.SGM 30SEP1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 190 / Wednesday, September 30, 2020 / Proposed Rules 61707

Six island populations were make them difficult to find, and we and species experts. Monitoring data are considered: Cayo Diablo, Cayo Ratones, could not confirm any to be extant at the scarce. The Virgin Islands boa recovery Culebra Island, Rı´o Grande (Puerto time we completed our analysis. plan (Service 1986, pp. 16–19) called for Rico), St. Thomas, and USVI Cay Resiliency scores for each population periodic monitoring to estimate (USVI). We acknowledge the were generated by combining scores for population sizes and trends, but surveys uncertainty about the persistence of three habitat metrics (Protection/ since then have been few and far Virgin Islands boas on Cayo Ratones due Development Risk, Exotic Mammals, between. Survey methodology and to the recolonization of the island by and Storm Surge Risk) and one reporting have varied from population population metric (Population Size and/ rats; however, because of reasons to population, with survey results given or Trend, dependent on availability). described previously, we included this as estimated abundances, estimated Each metric was weighted equally, with island in our analysis. Further, one or the overall effect that habitat (three densities, or encounter rates per person- more populations exist in the BVI, but metrics) was weighted three times hour of searching. The above-described data are severely limited, and for the higher than population size/trend (one factors in combination contribute to SSA, we lacked sufficient data from metric). For each metric, populations high levels of uncertainty in current and these islands to incorporate them into were assigned a score of ¥1, 0, or 1, as past population sizes, and how they our viability analysis. In addition, other described below in table 1. have changed over time. Accordingly, populations may occur on islands in The scores were based on the best resiliency classifications relied more Puerto Rico and USVI, but Virgin available information for each heavily on habitat conditions than Islands boa habitat and activity patterns population, gathered from the literature population size and trend estimates.

TABLE 1—DESCRIPTION OF HABITAT AND POPULATION FACTOR SCORES TO DETERMINE VIRGIN ISLANDS BOA POPULATION RESILIENCY

Habitat metrics Population metric Score Habitat protection/ Population development risk Exotic mammals Storm surge risk size/trend *

–1 ...... Habitat not protected, at risk Exotic mammals present ...... Topography and elevation Relatively low population size of being developed. leaves population vulner- and/or declining trend. able to storm surges. 0 ...... Some habitat protected, some NA ...... NA ...... Relatively moderate popu- at risk of being developed. lation size and stable trend, OR High degree of uncer- tainty in population size/ trends. 1 ...... Habitat protected in identified Exotic mammals absent ...... Protected by topography and Relatively high population protected area. elevation. size and/or growth. * Population size/trend scores are relative and were based on the best available information for each population, gathered from the literature and species experts.

The scores for each population across boas/ha) to the entire island, the model separate survey efforts in 2018, all metrics were summed, and final provides an estimate of 20 boas on the researchers found a total of 64 boas population resiliency categories were island (95% confidence interval 13–39), (Smith 2018ab, entire). assigned as follows: which is much lower than earlier Three of the populations (Rı´o Grande, Low Resiliency: –4 to –2 unpublished survey results, however Culebra, and St. Thomas) with low or Moderately Low Resiliency: –1 comparisons cannot be made between moderately low resiliency occur on Moderate Resiliency: 0 the surveys because of different survey larger and higher elevation islands, Moderately High Resiliency: 1 and analytical methodologies (Service which provide more protection from High Resiliency: 2 to 4 2018, p.23). Primarily because of the storm surges, but have more human-boa Applying these resiliency categories protected and exotic-mammal-free state interactions, habitat loss and to the six populations of Virgin Islands of the habitat, this population is fragmentation from development, and boa, we determined that one population considered to have moderately high exotic cats and rats. Recent surveys in has moderately high resiliency (Cayo resiliency to demographic and 2018 on Rı´o Grande found three boas Diablo), one has moderate resiliency environmental stochastic events and (three survey nights) (Island (USVI Cay), one has moderately low disturbances (e.g., fluctuations in Conservation 2018, p. 20). For Culebra, resiliency (Culebra), and three have low demographic rates, variation in climatic surveys in 2018 found no boas (Island resiliency (Cayo Ratones, Rı´o Grande, conditions, illegal human activities). Conservation 2018, p. 20); however, two and St. Thomas). The USVI Cay population, also on a individuals were documented in The population classified as having protected offshore island with no exotic February 2019 within the Culebra moderately high resiliency (Cayo mammals, was determined to have National Wildlife Refuge (Puente-Rolo´n Diablo) occurs on a small offshore moderate resiliency. Recent surveys and Vega-Castillo 2019, p. 18). On island that is free of exotic rats and cats have revealed a potential decline in October 2019, another individual was and is protected for conservation. In abundance and the loss of two prey confirmed in an area outside of the addition, Cayo Diablo was surveyed in species (Smith 2018a, pp. 7–8), possibly Refuge (Roma´n 2019, pers. comm.). For 2018 with 10 boas being found (Island as a result of density dependence as the St. Thomas, there have been no recent Conservation 2018). Extrapolating the population approached carrying systematic surveys for the species as density within the transect area (2.9 capacity after reintroduction. Over two much of eastern St. Thomas is

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:31 Sep 29, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30SEP1.SGM 30SEP1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS 61708 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 190 / Wednesday, September 30, 2020 / Proposed Rules

inaccessible due to private ownership or sourced from Cayo Diablo and St. USVI Cay population was sourced from impenetrable habitat; however, Thomas separately (Tolson 1996b, p. St. Thomas, so there are two opportunistic observations have 412). To minimize the chances of populations with St. Thomas averaged about 10 observations of Virgin introducing individuals poorly suited to representation, with neither considered Islands boa per year since 2000. The their new environment, the captive to have high resiliency. The other two remaining low-resiliency population population sourced from Cayo Diablo natural populations, Culebra and Rı´o (Cayo Ratones) is classified as such as founded the reintroduced population on Grande, both characterized as having a result of the recolonization of rats on nearby Cayo Ratones, and the captive St. moderately low or low resiliency, have the island and resulting declining Thomas population founded the not been used for captive breeding and trend—or possible extirpation—of boas, reintroduced population on the nearby reintroduction, so have no additional as no boas were detected during recent USVI Cay (Tolson 1996b, p. 412). populations on other islands with the survey efforts (Island Conservation In addition to genetic differences, the 2018). six populations also have noticeable same genetic characteristics. Overall, phenotypic differences. These are not three of four representative units have at Representation just limited to coloration differences least one moderate resilient population. A range-wide genetic analysis of between USVI and Puerto Rican While currently we could consider Virgin Islands boa showed that there populations (Tolson 1996b, p. 412); the USVI Cay and Cayo Ratones was little genetic variation within the Cayo Diablo reportedly has lighter reintroduced populations (currently species (Rodrı´guez-Robles et al. 2015, p. coloration than the Rı´o Grande and with moderate and low resiliency, 150), supporting the idea that there is Culebra populations (Tolson 2018, pers. respectively) to be redundant only one representative unit of Virgin comm.). The Rı´o Grande population also populations sharing the same genetic Islands boa. However, each sampled occurs in a different habitat type signature and adaptive potential as their island, and each sampled locality (subtropical moist forest) than the others source populations, all of the islands within the same island, had unique (subtropical dry or littoral forest; Tolson occupied by Virgin Islands boa are mtDNA haplotypes, indicating a lack of 1996b, p. 410). gene flow between islands/populations In light of this information, we isolated from each other. Without (Rodrı´guez-Robles et al. 2015, p. 150). considered each of the four natural human-mediated movement of boas These results suggest that each populations in Puerto Rico and USVI as between islands, the reintroduced population has a different genetic a representative unit (table 2). The Cayo populations are expected to diverge signature, perhaps as a result of genetic Diablo population is considered to have genetically from their source adaptations to their local environment, moderately high resiliency. As this was populations over time, and may at some or genetic drift with increasing isolation the source for the low-resiliency Cayo point in the future (decades to centuries; of small populations. The Ratones population, there are two Reynolds et al. 2015, entire) be different reintroduction program took this view, populations representing the Cayo enough to be considered its own unique and managed captive populations Diablo genetic signature. Similarly, the representative unit.

TABLE 2—REPRESENTATION: NUMBER OF VIRGIN ISLANDS BOA POPULATIONS OF EACH RESILIENCY CLASS IN EACH REP- RESENTATIVE UNIT, CORRESPONDING TO NATURAL (NOT INTRODUCED) POPULATIONS, WHICH THEMSELVES COR- RESPOND TO UNIQUE GENETIC SIGNATURES

Moderately Moderate Moderately Natural population high resiliency resiliency low resiliency Low resiliency (genetic signature) populations populations populations populations

Cayo Diablo ...... 1 0 0 1 Culebra ...... 0 0 1 0 Rı´o Grande ...... 0 0 0 1 St. Thomas ...... 0 1 0 1

Redundancy their range, which have been subject to moderate resiliency, and the Culebra Redundancy describes the ability of a local extirpations from habitat population has moderately low species to withstand catastrophic degradation, invasive species, and resiliency. The other three assessed events. Measured by the number of historical climate and sea level changes. populations currently have low populations, their resiliency (ability of a However, for current redundancy, we resiliency. Redundancy for the species species to withstand environmental and identified the six populations in Puerto includes populations on six islands in demographic stochasticity (e.g., wet or Rico and USVI (and one or more Puerto Rico and USVI, and possibly dry years)) and their distribution (and populations in the BVI of unknown more in the BVI, although not part of connectivity), redundancy gauges the status). As discussed above, three of this assessment. Representation consists probability that the species has a margin these populations are considered to of four representative units, two of of safety to withstand or return from have resiliency; therefore, the species is which have two populations catastrophic events (such as a rare moderately buffered against the effects representing its genetic signature, and destructive natural event or episode of catastrophic events. three of the four units have populations with some level of resiliency. involving many populations). Summary The exact historical distribution of the The Virgin Islands boa has Virgin Islands boa is unknown, but their Of the six assessed populations, the demonstrated some ability to adapt to present disjointed distribution suggests Cayo Diablo population is the only one changing environmental conditions over that they were once more widely that currently has moderately high time from both anthropogenic threats distributed across small islands within resiliency, the USVI Cay population has (e.g., habitat disturbance due to

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:31 Sep 29, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30SEP1.SGM 30SEP1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 190 / Wednesday, September 30, 2020 / Proposed Rules 61709

development) and natural disturbances (other than SLR and hurricane storm struggling populations on developed (e.g., predation and hurricanes). surges) on the boas and their habitat. islands are augmented. Compared to historical distribution at Species that are dependent on Under a pessimistic scenario: Under the time of listing that included three specialized habitat types and limited in the Pessimistic scenario, no locations (Puerto Rico, St. Thomas, and distribution and migration ability, such reintroductions occur, presumably due Tortola), the species currently has six as the Virgin Islands boa, are susceptible to reduced funds or changes in populations (potentially more if the to the impacts of climate change (Byers governmental or conservation priorities. species persists in the BVI and others and Norris 2011, p. 22), but the No additional habitat is protected, and are eventually confirmed). Three of the direction, magnitude, and timeframe of development continues to impact six current populations exhibit varying these impacts on the species are populations on human-inhabited levels of resiliency from moderately uncertain. islands. Exotic mammals remain a threat high to moderately low, whereas three Below we present three plausible where already present. Rats colonize exhibit low resiliency. Since the species future scenarios for the Virgin Islands Cayo Diablo and recolonize the USVI was listed as an endangered species in boa over the next 30 years (to 2048): Cay. 1970, it has demonstrated some degree Status Quo, Conservation, and Given current resources, priorities, of resiliency despite threats. Pessimistic. Impacts of climate change and conservation momentum, the Status and SLR are treated the same across all Quo scenario is the most likely scenario Future Conditions three scenarios, as the trajectory of for the future. The Status Quo scenario To assess the future resiliency, climate change will proceed regardless includes the implementation of a new redundancy, and representation for the of different levels of local conservation reintroduction, which is planned but Virgin Islands boa, we considered for Virgin Islands boa. For all three contingent on continued funding (not impacts of human development, habitat scenarios, SLR is considered to occur at yet secured) and a long-term protection and restoration, a rate of 0.30 meters (1 foot) by 2048, commitment to manage and propagate a reintroductions, public outreach and and 0.61–0.91 meters (2–3 feet) by 2100 captive population, select a suitable site education, and SLR. We predicted (Church et al. 2013; Service 2018, pp. (which may involve rat eradication), resiliency at two future time points, 30 38–41). Multiple major hurricanes are reintroduce boas, and conduct post- years and ∼80 years in the future (2048 expected to strike within the Virgin release monitoring. The likelihoods of and 2100). Predictions made at the 80- Islands boa’s range. the Conservation and Pessimistic year time point are based only on SLR Under a status quo scenario: scenarios are contingent upon the and hurricane storm surges as Development continues at the current decisions, resources, and priorities of predictions about the other factors are pace, and development and exotic management and conservation too uncertain to allow for a meaningful mammals continue to negatively impact organizations, which are difficult to analysis. As discussed in Determination Virgin Islands boa populations. Boa predict. The Pessimistic scenario is of Status below, all of the impacts were population sizes in these developed likely if funds and effort are not directed considered at the 30-year time step. areas decline, as they are suspected to to captive breeding and reintroduction, With input from species’ experts, we currently be in decline by species community outreach and education, chose the 30-year time step in order to experts (but hard data are lacking to habitat protection and restoration, and encompass multiple generations of confirm trends). No new habitat is ongoing monitoring of Virgin Islands Virgin Islands boa (which can live past protected. Under this scenario, one new boas, their habitat, and exotic species. 20 years and reproduce at 2–3 years of reintroduction that has already been The Conservation scenario is likely if age; Tolson 1989, p. 166; Tolson and initiated with the 2018 capture of abundant funds and effort are directed Pin˜ ero 1985, unpaginated). In addition, snakes to reinvigorate captive breeding towards these initiatives. we considered the time required to plan takes place. Resiliency and execute a reintroduction (about 10 Under a conservation scenario: While years; Tolson 2018, pers. comm.) and development continues on human- Under all three future scenarios, the how a 30-year time step would allow us occupied islands, under this scenario three populations on developed islands to see results of reintroduction efforts. new Virgin Islands boa habitat is are predicted to remain at low resiliency Lastly, we considered the time required protected from development on the or become extirpated by 2048 (table 3). for habitat restoration to be realized (10 Puerto Rico main island, and additional Even with conservation efforts to years or less; Platenberg 2018, pers. habitat is protected on Culebra and St. prevent extirpation, none of the comm). The 30-year time step coincides Thomas (where some habitat is already populations are expected to improve with the foreseeable future for this protected), to preserve and restore their resiliency because of the analysis (i.e., the period of time in habitat and habitat connectivity. magnitude of the threats facing them. which we can make reliable Because of the size of the islands and Cayo Diablo, the population with the predictions). For information on human populations there, exotic cats highest resiliency, is expected to predictions made at the 80-year time and rats remain problematic, but this continue to have high resiliency unless step, see the SSA report (Service 2018, risk would be reduced by conservation the island is colonized by rats, which pp. 38–46). efforts including predator control and could drive the population to We did not explicitly consider the effective community outreach and extirpation. Cayo Ratones, which role that genetics may play in the future. education about the effect of free- presently has a robust rat population, Although the absence of natural roaming cats on native wildlife. will remain at low resiliency and migration of boas between islands Regulations and enforcement improve potential extirpation unless rats are isolates these populations and makes on protected lands. Rats are eradicated eradicated; supplemental translocations them vulnerable to inbreeding and (and eradication efforts are monitored) may also be necessary, but more surveys genetic drift, no genetic abnormalities or from Cayo Ratones and, if necessary, are necessary to determine the needs of evidence of inbreeding depression have more boas are translocated there. the population. Given that the threats been observed in the boa (Tolson 1996b, Reintroductions occur at a rate of one facing populations on developed islands p. 412). We also did not explicitly site per decade, including the one will be very difficult to surmount, the consider the impacts of climate change reintroduction already planned, and most effective way to increase the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:31 Sep 29, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30SEP1.SGM 30SEP1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS 61710 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 190 / Wednesday, September 30, 2020 / Proposed Rules

overall resiliency of populations range- in quality protected habitat, prevent and have continual predator eradication wide is to reintroduce new populations future colonization by exotic predators, monitoring.

TABLE 3—SUMMARY TABLE OF FUTURE RESILIENCY FOR VIRGIN ISLANDS BOA POPULATIONS IN 2048 UNDER THREE SCENARIOS

Future—status quo Future—conservation Future—pessimistic Population Current resiliency (2048) (2048) (2048)

Cayo Diablo ...... Moderately High ...... Moderately High ...... High ...... Low/Extirpated. Cayo Ratones ...... Low ...... Low/Extirpated ...... High ...... Low/Extirpated. Culebra ...... Moderately Low ...... Low/Extirpated ...... Moderately Low ...... Low/Extirpated. Rı´o Grande ...... Low ...... Low/Extirpated ...... Low ...... Low/Extirpated. St. Thomas ...... Low ...... Low/Extirpated ...... Low ...... Low/Extirpated. USVI Cay ...... Moderate ...... Moderate ...... High ...... Low/Extirpated. New (introduced) popu- None ...... 1 High ...... 3 High ...... None. lations (pops). Summary (# pops) ...... 6 pops ...... 3–7 pops ...... 9 pops ...... 0–6 pops. Low: 3 ...... Low/Extirpated: 4 ...... Low: 2 ...... Low/Extirpated: 6. Mod Low: 1 ...... Moderate: 1 ...... Mod Low:1 ...... High: 0. Moderate: 1 ...... Mod High:1 ...... High: 6 ...... Mod High: 1 ...... High: 1 ......

Redundancy scenario includes two additional via continuous eradication efforts and The total number of populations reintroductions, which could be sourced public outreach. Six high-resiliency under the Status Quo scenario is three from any population. Sourcing new populations are predicted to exist after to seven depending on whether four reintroductions from Culebra or Rı´o 30 years. Under this scenario, three populations become extirpated or Grande would improve redundancy populations are expected to have remain at a low resiliency. Under the within representative units, but other moderately low or low resiliency, but Pessimistic scenario, all populations are factors such as geographic proximity to are protected from complete extirpation predicted to be extirpated or remain at the reintroduction site and availability by active conservation measures. Under low resiliency. The Conservation of source boas also factor into the the Pessimistic scenario, development scenario improves redundancy by decision of where to source continues to impact populations on introducing three new populations that reintroductions. The Pessimistic developed islands, no reintroductions are expected to have high resiliency, scenario does not include any new occur, and rats colonize/recolonize the improving the resiliency of the Cayo reintroduced populations. islands where they are not currently present. No highly resilient populations Ratones population by eradicating rats Summary and providing translocations if needed, are predicted to remain after 30 years, and preventing low-resiliency Conservation of existing populations and all six current populations are at populations from becoming extirpated, of Virgin Islands boas and their habitat risk of extirpation. for a total of nine populations. As time on developed islands, via population Redundancy increases under the goes on after the horizon of our 30-year augmentation and habitat restoration (in Status Quo and Conservation scenarios; scenarios, SLR becomes more important occupied areas and to establish however, under the Pessimistic to consider, as current populations with migration corridors), is important to scenario, no high-resiliency populations the highest resiliency potential are the contribute to resiliency and redundancy remain. Representation remains the same populations that will be most at within representative areas for the same four units under the Status Quo risk from SLR. species. The future condition of the scenario. Under the Conservation Virgin Islands boa was assessed under scenario, redundancy may improve Representation three scenarios 30 years into the future. within representative units with the In the Current Condition section Under the Status Quo scenario, addition of two more reintroduced above, we identified each natural (not development continues to impact the populations, depending on where those introduced) Virgin Islands boa populations on developed islands, no populations are sourced. Based on our population as a representative unit. new habitat is protected, and one new analysis, we consider the Status Quo Under this concept, a reintroduced reintroduction takes place. Two scenario to be the most likely scenario, population is of the same representative moderately high or high-resiliency and therefore expect the Virgin Islands unit as the source population used for populations are predicted to remain boa will have three resilient populations the reintroduction, and future after 30 years (Cayo Diablo and a new at our 30-year timeframe, with representation for the species depends reintroduced population), while USVI continued redundancy and highly on how reintroductions are Cay remains in moderate resiliency, and representation. carried out (table 11 in Service 2018, p. the remaining four populations are We also assessed the risk from SLR 59). predicted to have low resiliency or and hurricanes at 30 years into the The Status Quo scenario includes one potentially be extirpated. future. In 30 years, SLR alone is reintroduction sourced from the USVI Under the Conservation scenario, unlikely to significantly impact Virgin Cay population, which was originally some habitat on the three developed Islands boa populations, with sourced from the St. Thomas islands is protected for conservation/ approximately 4–5 percent of land population. Therefore, the new restoration, reintroductions occur at a predicted to be inundated (Service 2018, reintroduced population would be rate of one per decade, and presence of p. 43). Habitat on low-lying cays (Cayo considered part of the St. Thomas exotic mammals are monitored and Diablo, Cayo Ratones, and USVI Cay) representative unit. The Conservation controlled (though likely not eradicated) has proven to be resilient to hurricanes

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:31 Sep 29, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30SEP1.SGM 30SEP1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 190 / Wednesday, September 30, 2020 / Proposed Rules 61711

in the past, and likely will remain so minimized sufficiently and the species structures are unknown. Cayo Ratones with 0.30 meters (1 foot) of SLR is robust enough to delist. In other had a thriving population, with 41 expected over the next 30 years, cases, recovery opportunities may be introduced boas in 1993–1995 having although the exact impacts of any discovered that were not known when high survival and wild reproduction particular future storm are impossible to the recovery plan was finalized. These and were able to increase numbers to predict. Overall, USVI Cay is most at opportunities may be used instead of nearly 500 boas by 2005 (Tolson et al. risk from SLR and storm impacts, while methods identified in the recovery plan. 2008, p. 68; Service 2018, p. 24). there is a moderate risk of SLR impacts Likewise, information on the species However, recent surveys in 2018 did not to Virgin Islands boas and habitat on may be learned that was not known at detect any boas, but did uncover a Cayo Diablo and Cayo Ratones, and low the time the recovery plan was robust rat population (Island risk at Culebra, Rı´o Grande, and St. finalized. The new information may Conservation 2018, entire; Service 2018, Thomas. change the extent to which existing p. 24). Because Virgin Islands boas are We note that, by using the SSA criteria are appropriate for recognizing hard to find and habitat conditions framework to guide our analysis of the recovery of the species. Recovery of a remain in good condition post scientific information documented in species is a dynamic process requiring hurricanes, there is not enough evidence the SSA report, we have not only adaptive management that may, or may to indicate boa extirpation, although the analyzed individual effects on the not, follow all of the guidance provided reestablishment of rats is likely causing species, but we have also analyzed their in a recovery plan. decline in this population. For Culebra, potential cumulative effects. We The Virgin Islands Tree Boa Recovery surveys in 2018 found no boas (Island incorporate the cumulative effects into Plan, issued by the Service on March 27, Conservation 2018, p. 20); however, two our SSA analysis when we characterize 1986, did not contain measurable individuals were documented in the current and future condition of the criteria. An amendment to the recovery February 2019 within the Culebra species. Our assessment of the current plan was issued in September 2019 to National Wildlife Refuge (Puente-Rolo´n and future conditions encompasses and include quantitative delisting criteria. and Vega-Castillo 2019, p. 18). On incorporates the threats individually The amended recovery plan suggests October 2019, another individual was and cumulatively. Our current and that recovery be defined in the confirmed in an area outside of the future condition assessment is iterative following terms: • Refuge (Roma´n 2019, pers. comm.). The because it accumulates and evaluates Delisting Criterion 1. Existing two Puerto Rican Rı´o Grande population has the effects of all the factors that may be (2) Virgin Islands boa populations with consistent but very low encounter rates influencing the species, including the highest resiliency (Cayo Diablo and for Virgin Islands boas, with three threats and conservation efforts. USVI Cay) exhibit a stable or increasing observed during recent 2018 surveys. Because the SSA framework considers trend, evidenced by natural recruitment These two populations were determined and multiple age classes. This criterion not just the presence of the factors, but to have low (Rı´o Grande) and has been partially met. Ensuring the to what degree they collectively moderately low (Culebra) resiliency. conservation of resilient populations is influence risk to the entire species, our Similarly, the species has been sighted important for the recovery of the Virgin assessment integrates the cumulative on St. Thomas (Platenberg and Harvey Islands boa as it will help those effects of the factors and replaces a 2010, entire), and earlier estimates populations to further withstand standalone cumulative effects analysis. assessed the population to be about 400 catastrophic and stochastic events. The individuals (Tolson 1991, p. 11). Recovery and Recovery Plan populations of the Virgin Islands boa at Despite lack of recent surveys on St. Implementation Cayo Diablo and USVI Cay are Thomas (primarily due to inaccessibility Section 4(f) of the Act directs us to considered potentially declining develop and implement recovery plans (Tolson 2004, p. 11; Tolson et al. 2008, of habitat), opportunistic reports for the conservation and survival of p. 68), and currently have moderately indicate approximately 10 Virgin endangered and threatened species high and moderate resiliency, Islands boa observations per year since unless we determine that such a plan respectively (Service 2018, pp. 23, 28). 2000 (Service 2018, p. 27). The SSA will not promote the conservation of the Both Cayo Diablo and USVI cay are free classifies this population as having low species. Recovery plans are not of exotic predators/competitors and are resiliency. Virgin Islands boas are regulatory documents and are instead protected as part of natural reserves. known to occur on Tortola (and likely intended to establish goals for long-term Habitat conditions are recovering several other British Virgin islands); conservation of a listed species; define following hurricanes, and Virgin Islands however, no data are available about the criteria that are designed to indicate boas continue to persist, with upwards size or status of those populations when the threats facing a species have of 20 boas estimated on Cayo Diablo, (Service 2018, p. 29). been removed or reduced to such an and boas appear to be at carrying • Delisting Criterion 2. Establish three extent that the species may no longer capacity on USVI Cay (Service 2018, pp. (3) additional populations that show a need the protections of the Act; and 23, 28). In addition, these resilient stable or increasing trend, evidenced by provide guidance to our Federal, State, populations may serve as sources to natural recruitment and multiple age and other governmental and establish the new populations outlined classes. This criterion has not been met. nongovernmental partners on methods in Criterion 2, if maintained at their Increasing the number of resilient to minimize threats to listed species. current level. Virgin Islands boas have populations will improve the species’ There are many paths to already been collected from the USVI viability. In order to expand the species’ accomplishing recovery of a species, Cay population to establish a captive- distribution, these new populations will and recovery may be achieved without breeding program in order to implement be established on protected suitable all of the criteria in a recovery plan Criterion 2. habitat where threats from invasive being fully met. For example, one or Five islands (Culebra, Rı´o Grande mammals are not present and SLR will more criteria may be exceeded while (Puerto Rico), St. Thomas, Cayo have minimal impact on the habitat. In other criteria may not yet be Ratones, and Tortola) currently have addition, increasing the number of accomplished. In that instance, we may Virgin Islands boas present, although populations and broadening the species’ determine that the threats are population numbers and age class distribution will enhance their ability to

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:31 Sep 29, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30SEP1.SGM 30SEP1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS 61712 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 190 / Wednesday, September 30, 2020 / Proposed Rules

withstand catastrophic and stochastic populations exhibit a stable or conservation by the territorial events. For this species, it is believed increasing trend, evidenced by natural governments of Puerto Rico and USVI, that three additional populations recruitment and multiple age classes; and the Culebra Island population exhibiting these traits is necessary to three additional populations show a occurs both within private and ensure sufficient redundancy such that stable or increasing trend, evidenced by protected areas (i.e., Culebra National the species will no longer require natural recruitment and multiple age Wildlife Refuge). protection under the Act. classes; and threats are reduced or Predation by exotic mammals, namely • Delisting Criterion 3. Threats are eliminated to the degree that the species cats and rats, remains a threat to the reduced or eliminated to the degree that is viable for the foreseeable future. Virgin Islands boa (Factor C). While the species is viable for the foreseeable Based on the information gathered and there is no evidence of rats preying future. This criterion has been partially analyzed, two of these criteria have been directly on the Virgin Islands boa, met. The primary threats to Virgin partially met. Virgin Islands boas are generally not Islands boa are development, predation/ present on islands with high densities of competition from exotic mammals, Determination of Virgin Islands Boa Status rats. This is likely due to competition climate change, and persecution from for prey rather than predation. the public. Virgin Islands boa Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533), Reintroductions of Virgin Islands boas populations have coexisted with urban and its implementing regulations at 50 have been successful on islands where development on Culebra, Rı´o Grande, CFR part 424, set forth the procedures rat populations have been exterminated. St. Thomas, and several British Virgin for determining whether a species meets Feral cats are known to prey on boas islands, although impacts from the the definition of endangered species or and are an ongoing threat to the species. threatened species. The Act defines an development appear to cause a decline The fear of snakes, as well as ‘‘endangered species’’ as a species ‘‘in in these populations. Consequences of superstitious beliefs and even confusion danger of extinction throughout all or a human development on the boa and its with other snakes, may contribute to the significant portion of its range,’’ and habitat include habitat loss and intentional killing of Virgin Islands boas ‘‘threatened species’’ as a species ‘‘likely fragmentation due to deforestation, (Factor E), although there has not yet to become an endangered species within mortality from vehicular strikes, and an been a systematic study done to the foreseeable future throughout all or increase in predators/competitors, such determine if these individual deaths are a significant portion of its range.’’ The as cats and rats. Three islands (Cayo having a species-wide effect. Diablo, Cayo Ratones, and USVI Cay) Act requires that we determine whether Due to the limited distribution of are protected from development a species meets the definition of Virgin Islands boas, climate change and impacts. The threat of predation/ ‘‘endangered species’’ or ‘‘threatened SLR (Factor E) may also have an impact. competition by exotic mammals can be species’’ because of any of the following Low-lying islands and parts of larger reduced/eliminated, but requires factors: (A) The present or threatened islands, where Virgin Islands boa continual monitoring and eradication destruction, modification, or efforts. In 1985, a successful rat control curtailment of its habitat or range; (B) populations are supported, are program was started, and Cayo Ratones Overutilization for commercial, vulnerable to SLR and storm surge. The and USVI Cay were identified as recreational, scientific, or educational species has persisted despite major potentially suitable for the purposes; (C) Disease or predation; (D) hurricane events, although there may be reintroduction of the species. At one The inadequacy of existing regulatory impacts to habitat (e.g., die-off of time, rats had been eliminated on Cayo mechanisms; or (E) Other natural or vegetation) due to storm surge. Ratones, but they have since returned manmade factors affecting its continued The Virgin Islands boa has and are in robust numbers. Rats on existence. demonstrated some ability to adapt to changing environmental conditions over USVI Cay have been eliminated, and Status Throughout All of Its Range Virgin Islands boas are established time (representation) from both there. In areas where urban After evaluating threats to the species anthropogenic threats (e.g., habitat development is prevalent, it is unlikely and assessing the cumulative effects of disturbance due to development) and that feral cats and rats will be fully the threats under the section 4(a)(1) natural disturbances (e.g., predation and eradicated. Storm surge and SLR are the factors, we find that, while the present hurricanes). Since the species was listed effects of climate change that are or threatened destruction, modification, as an endangered species in 1970, it has projected to impact Virgin Islands boa or curtailment of its habitat (Factor A) demonstrated resiliency despite threats. populations; however, the species has remains a threat for at least three of the Since the writing of the recovery plan thus far proven to be resilient to severe populations, three of the six populations (Service 1986, entire), two new storms (and associated storm surge) and fully occur in protected areas, and we populations have been reintroduced SLR is not expected to significantly expect the species’ population (Cayo Ratones and USVI Cay) and two impact the species in the foreseeable resiliency to ameliorate the threat in the previously unknown populations have future (see Future Conditions, above). future. The Virgin Islands boa’s habitat been discovered (Culebra and Rı´o Finally, intentional killing of Virgin is found on both private and publicly Grande), although the continued Islands boas, whether due to fear of owned lands. Past, current and persistence of the Cayo Ratones snakes or confusion with other snakes, expanding urban development will population is uncertain. There are has been identified as a threat; however, continue to impact the Virgin Islands currently at least six populations (not the extent of the effect of persecution on boa on the main islands (i.e., St. including those potentially on the BVI) Virgin Islands boa populations is Thomas, Rı´o Grande (Puerto Rico), and with varying levels of resiliency; one unknown. Culebra), which are under development population has moderately high pressure related to urban expansion and resiliency, one has moderate resiliency, Summary tourism; however, not all areas of the one has moderately low resiliency, and The amended Virgin Islands boa species’ range occur near population three have low resiliency. Based on the recovery plan (Service 2019) contains centers. Half of the currently known biology of the species and the three recovery criteria for delisting the populations are found on islands and documented responses to the species: Two Virgin Islands boa small islets that are managed for development and reintroductions since

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:31 Sep 29, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30SEP1.SGM 30SEP1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 190 / Wednesday, September 30, 2020 / Proposed Rules 61713

listing, we expect the species to respond Taking into account the impacts of the likely to become so within the the same way in the foreseeable future. factors based on the Status Quo foreseeable future throughout all or a Our implementing regulations at 50 scenario, and because the Virgin Islands significant portion of its range. The CFR 424.11(d) set forth a framework boa contains three relatively resilient court in Center for Biological Diversity within which we evaluate the populations now (i.e., having v. Everson, 2020 WL 437289 (D.D.C. Jan. foreseeable future on a case-by-case moderately high to moderately low 28, 2020) (Center for Biological basis. The term foreseeable future resiliency), and two of those Diversity), vacated the aspect of the extends only so far into the future as the populations are predicted to maintain 2014 Significant Portion of its Range Services can reasonably determine that their moderate to moderately high Policy that provided that the Services both the future threats and the species’ resiliency in the future, especially in do not undertake an analysis of responses to those threats are likely. In populations where exotic mammals are significant portions of a species’ range if other words, the foreseeable future is not present, we expect the species to the species warrants listing as the period of time in which we can maintain populations on two of the six threatened throughout all of its range. make reliable predictions. ‘‘Reliable’’ islands within the foreseeable future. Therefore, we proceed to evaluating does not mean ‘‘certain’’; it means However, continuation of the current whether the species is endangered in a sufficient to provide a reasonable degree population trends for these two significant portion of its range—that is, of confidence in the prediction. Thus, a populations into the future is dependent whether there is any portion of the prediction is reliable if it is reasonable on management (e.g., habitat species’ range for which both (1) the to depend on it when making decisions. conservation/preservation and predator portion is significant; and, (2) the It is not always possible or necessary control/eradication). Under the Status species is in danger of extinction in that to define foreseeable future as a Quo scenario, the three populations on portion. Depending on the case, it might particular number of years. Analysis of developed islands are predicted to be more efficient for us to address the the foreseeable future uses the best possibly become extirpated by 2048. ‘‘significance’’ question or the ‘‘status’’ scientific and commercial data available Under the Conservation Scenario, up to question first. We can choose to address and should consider the timeframes six populations are predicted to become either question first. Regardless of applicable to the relevant threats and to highly resilient within the foreseeable which question we address first, if we the species’ likely responses to those future. While threat intensity and reach a negative answer with respect to threats in view of its life-history management needs vary somewhat the first question that we address, we do characteristics. Data that are typically across the range of the species (e.g., not need to evaluate the other question relevant to assessing the species’ urban population areas versus non- for that portion of the species’ range. biological response include species- populated conserved areas), Virgin Following the court’s holding in specific factors such as lifespan, Islands boa populations on islands Center for Biological Diversity, we now reproductive rates or productivity, throughout the range of the species consider whether there are any certain behaviors, and other continue to be reliant on active significant portions of the species’ range demographic factors. conservation management and require where the species is in danger of The foreseeable future described here adequate implementation of regulatory extinction now (i.e., endangered). In uses the best available data and mechanisms, and all remain vulnerable undertaking this analysis for Virgin considers the species’ life-history to threats that could cause substantial Islands boa, we choose to address the characteristics, threat projection population declines in the foreseeable status question first—we consider timeframes, and environmental future (e.g., feral cat predation). information pertaining to the geographic variability, which may affect the Despite the existing regulatory distribution of both the species and the reliability of projections. We also mechanisms and conservation efforts, threats that the species faces to identify considered the timeframes applicable to the factors identified above continue to any portions of the range where the the relevant threats and to the species’ affect the Virgin Islands boa. However, species is endangered. likely responses to those threats in view the species has persisted with varying For Virgin Islands boa, we considered of its life-history characteristics. We degrees of resiliency since it was listed whether the threats are geographically determined the foreseeable future to be in 1970. Once known from three concentrated in any portion of the 30 years from present. As discussed locations, now known from at least six species’ range at a biologically above, the SSA’s future scenarios locations, the species was successfully meaningful scale. We examined the considered impacts from development, introduced to two new locations (one following threats: Habitat loss and habitat restoration and protection, possibly extirpated by uncontrolled degradation from development, reintroductions of the Virgin Islands exotic mammals) and discovered at two introduced predators, SLR and a boa, and SLR. Based on the modeling new locations, and could be at changing climate, and public attitudes and scenarios evaluated for Virgin additional locations in the unsurveyed towards snakes, including cumulative Islands boa, we considered our ability to BVI and other areas in St. Thomas; thus, effects. For detailed descriptions of each make reliable predictions in the future the known distribution has expanded threat, see Summary of Biological Status and the uncertainty with regard to how since listing. Thus, after assessing the and Threats, above. and to what degree the species would best available information, we Impacts from habitat loss and respond to factors within this determine that the Virgin Islands boa is degradation are prevalent throughout timeframe. In addition, the timing and not currently in danger of extinction, the range of the Virgin Islands boa. The response of habitat to restoration efforts but is likely to become in danger of boas occur on both privately and (presumably multiple efforts needed, extinction within the foreseeable future, publicly owned land. Habitat loss and and spaced out over time as funding and throughout all of its range. fragmentation from deforestation resources permit) and the species’ happens with the development of response to those improved habitat Status Throughout a Significant Portion privately owned land, and even occurs conditions, as well as the lifespan of the of Its Range around protected areas. Habitat loss also species (which can exceed 20 years in Under the Act and our implementing happens from SLR. Loss of habitat due captivity) also informed our foreseeable regulations, a species may warrant to SLR and storm surge impacts is future timeframe. listing if it is in danger of extinction or similar to loss of habitat due to

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:31 Sep 29, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30SEP1.SGM 30SEP1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS 61714 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 190 / Wednesday, September 30, 2020 / Proposed Rules

development where the loss of low- small population numbers across the specific conservation needs of the lying forest habitat could result in range of the species are not considered threatened species. The second sentence decreased habitat availability for the to contribute to a concentration of grants particularly broad discretion to Virgin Islands boas and their prey. All threats. the Service when adopting the known islands and cays that are We found no concentration of threats prohibitions under section 9. occupied by Virgin Islands boas are in any portion of the Virgin Islands The courts have recognized the extent threatened with habitat loss and boa’s range at a biologically meaningful of the Secretary’s discretion under this fragmentation. scale. Thus, there are no portions of the standard to develop rules that are Similarly, the threat of introduced species’ range where the species has a appropriate for the conservation of a predators is of concern range-wide for different status from its rangewide species. For example, courts have the Virgin Islands boa. Feral cats are status. Therefore, no portion of the upheld rules developed under section known to prey upon boas, and rats may species’ range provides a basis for 4(d) as a valid exercise of agency predate on neonate boas or compete determining that the species is in danger authority where they prohibited take of with boas for prey. Cats and rats are of extinction in a significant portion of threatened wildlife, or include a limited easily introduced to islands, usually via its range, and we determine that the taking prohibition (see Alsea Valley boat. Efforts to eliminate exotic species is likely to become in danger of Alliance v. Lautenbacher, 2007 U.S. mammalian predators has been extinction within the foreseeable future Dist. Lexis 60203 (D. Or. 2007); successful on some of the smaller cays, throughout all of its range. This is Washington Environmental Council v. but requires continual removal and consistent with the courts’ holdings in National Marine Fisheries Service, 2002 monitoring on the larger developed Desert Survivors v. Department of the U.S. Dist. Lexis 5432 (W.D. Wash. islands. Interior, No. 16–cv–01165–JCS, 2018 2002)). Courts have also upheld 4(d) Climate change is expected to WL 4053447 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 24, 2018), rules that do not address all of the influence Virgin Islands boa persistence and Center for Biological Diversity v. threats a species faces (see State of throughout its range into the future. Jewell, 248 F. Supp. 3d, 946, 959 (D. Louisiana v. Verity, 853 F.2d 322 (5th Species that are limited in distribution, Ariz. 2017). Cir. 1988)). As noted in the legislative such as the Virgin Islands boa, are history when the Act was initially susceptible to the impacts of climate Determination of Status enacted, ‘‘once an animal is on the change. Temperatures throughout the Our review of the best available threatened list, the Secretary has an Caribbean are expected to rise, scientific and commercial information almost infinite number of options precipitation is likely to decrease indicates that the Virgin Islands boa available to him with regard to the (resulting in drought), and tropical meets the definition of a threatened permitted activities for those species. He storms may occur less frequently but species. Therefore, we propose to may, for example, permit taking, but not with more force. Every island and cay reclassify the Virgin Islands boa as a importation of such species, or he may within the range of the Virgin Island boa threatened species in accordance with choose to forbid both taking and is susceptible to these impacts from a sections 3(20) and 4(a)(1) of the Act. importation but allow the transportation changing climate. of such species’’ (H.R. Rep. No. 412, The intentional killing of Virgin II. Proposed Rule Issued Under Section 93rd Cong., 1st Sess. 1973). Islands boas is a threat to the species 4(d) of the Act Exercising our authority under section regardless of where it occurs. While Background 4(d), we have developed a species- those boas that live in proximity to specific proposed rule that is designed developed areas are more susceptible to Section 4(d) of the Act contains two to address the Virgin Islands boa’s intentional killings, public fear towards sentences. The first sentence states that specific threats and conservation needs. snakes is a threat that can impact the the ‘‘Secretary shall issue such Although the statute does not require boas throughout their range. regulations as he deems necessary and the Service to make a ‘‘necessary and Low population numbers can be advisable to provide for the advisable’’ finding with respect to the considered a threat such that the other conservation’’ of species listed as adoption of specific prohibitions under threats acting on the species can result threatened. The U.S. Supreme Court has section 9, we find that this rule taken as in a concentration of threats to noted that statutory language like a whole satisfies the requirement in extremely small populations. Data ‘‘necessary and advisable’’ demonstrates section 4(d) of the Act to issue presented in the SSA indicate that a large degree of deference to the agency regulations deemed necessary and current population trend estimates for (see Webster v. Doe, 486 U.S. 592 advisable to provide for the Virgin Island boas in Puerto Rico and (1988)). Conservation is defined in the conservation of the Virgin Islands boa. USVI are uncertain, indicating that they Act to mean ‘‘the use of all methods and As discussed above under Summary of are either declining, potentially procedures which are necessary to bring Biological Status and Threats, the declining, considered rare, or unknown, any endangered species or threatened Service has concluded that the Virgin but most populations are small or species to the point at which the Islands boa is likely to become in danger considered rare. Rarity does not measures provided pursuant to [the Act] of extinction within the foreseeable necessarily equate to dangerously small are no longer necessary.’’ Additionally, future primarily due to development- population sizes, and because the the second sentence of section 4(d) of associated impacts (i.e., habitat survey methodologies and reporting has the Act states that the Secretary ‘‘may by fragmentation and loss, vehicular varied from population to population regulation prohibit with respect to any strikes), predation/competition by and over time, population size and threatened species any act prohibited exotic species, climate change, and trend estimates were not exclusively under section 9(a)(1), in the case of fish persecution by the public. In addition, relied on to determine resiliency. or wildlife, or section 9(a)(2), in the case the species is management reliant in Despite the rarity of Virgin Island boas of plants.’’ Thus, the combination of the that it depends on maintaining current on most islands, the species has two sentences of section 4(d) provides levels of management and establishing demonstrated resiliency for decades, the Secretary with wide latitude of new populations into suitable habitat. and is predicted to continue to maintain discretion to select and promulgate Therefore, the provisions of this resiliency, despite threats. Therefore appropriate regulations tailored to the proposed 4(d) rule would promote

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:31 Sep 29, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30SEP1.SGM 30SEP1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 190 / Wednesday, September 30, 2020 / Proposed Rules 61715

conservation of the Virgin Islands boa likewise help preserve the species’ Even for activities prohibited by the by encouraging species restoration populations and also decrease negative 4(d) rule, including those described efforts. The provisions of this proposed effects from other stressors impeding above, we may issue permits to carry rule are one of many tools that the recovery of the species. The species’ out those activities involving threatened Service would use to promote the continuance may be dependent upon wildlife under certain circumstances. conservation of the Virgin Islands boa. active management occurring on the Regulations governing permits are The proposed 4(d) rule would apply islands and cays, especially as it codified at 50 CFR 17.32. With regard to only if and when the Service makes concerns exotic predator control and threatened wildlife, a permit may be final the reclassification of the Virgin human development. Most offshore issued for the following purposes: for Islands boa as a threatened species. islands and cays where the Virgin scientific purposes, to enhance Islands boa is found are protected by propagation or survival, for economic Provisions of the Proposed 4(d) Rule municipal, territorial, and Federal hardship, for zoological exhibition, for The proposed 4(d) rule would provide agencies. However, existing land educational purposes, for incidental for the conservation of the Virgin protections provided by those agencies taking, or for special purposes Islands boa by prohibiting the following are not comprehensive for the Virgin consistent with the purposes of the Act. activities, except as otherwise Islands boa and are often not enforced. There are also certain statutory authorized or permitted: Import or We determined that one of the exemptions from the prohibitions, export; take; possession and other acts primary threats to the Virgin Islands boa which are found in sections 9 and 10 of with unlawfully taken specimens; is the presence of exotic mammals, the Act. delivery, receipt, transport, or shipment which, when present in high densities, The Service recognizes the special in interstate or foreign commerce in the is indicative of a lack of boa and unique relationship with our State, course of commercial activity; or sale or populations. Therefore, any Commonwealth, and Territory natural offering for sale in interstate or foreign introduction of exotic species, such as resource agency partners in contributing commerce. We also propose several cats or rats, that compete with, prey to conservation of listed species. State, exceptions to these prohibitions, which upon, or destroy the habitat of the Commonwealth, and Territory agencies along with the prohibitions are set forth Virgin Islands boa would further impact often possess scientific data and under Proposed Regulation the species and its habitat and therefore valuable expertise on the status and Promulgation, below. will also be prohibited by the proposed distribution of endangered, threatened, Under the Act, ‘‘take’’ means to 4(d) rule. and candidate species of wildlife and harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, Maintaining and expanding existing plants. These agencies, because of their wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or populations, and creating new authorities and their close working to attempt to engage in any such populations, is also vital to the relationships with local governments conduct. Some of these provisions have conservation of the Virgin Islands boa. and landowners, are in a unique been further defined in regulation at 50 Therefore, the proposed 4(d) rule would position to assist the Service in CFR 17.3. Take can result knowingly or provide for the conservation of the implementing all aspects of the Act. In otherwise, by direct and indirect species by excepting from the take this regard, section 6 of the Act provides impacts, intentionally or incidentally. prohibitions conservation efforts by that the Service shall cooperate to the Regulating incidental and intentional Federal, Commonwealth, Territory, and maximum extent practicable with the take would help preserve the species’ municipal wildlife agencies to benefit States, Commonwealths, and Territories remaining populations, enable the Virgin Islands boa, including control in carrying out programs authorized by beneficial management actions to occur, and eradication of exotic mammals, the Act. Therefore, any qualified and decrease synergistic, negative habitat restoration, and collection of employee or agent of a Commonwealth effects from other stressors. broodstock, tissue collection for genetic or Territory conservation agency that is Protecting the Virgin Islands boa from analysis, captive propagation, and a party to a cooperative agreement with direct and indirect forms of take, such reintroduction into currently occupied the Service in accordance with section as physical injury or killing, whether and unoccupied areas within the 6(c) of the Act, who is designated by his incidental or intentional, will help historical range of the species. Efforts by or her agency for such purposes, would preserve and recover the remaining these wildlife agency entities to monitor be able to conduct activities designed to populations of the species. Therefore, and survey Virgin Islands boa conserve the Virgin Islands boa that may we propose to prohibit intentional and populations and habitat that require result in otherwise prohibited take incidental take of Virgin Islands boa, handling, temporary holding, pit without additional authorization. including, but not limited to, capturing, tagging, tissue sampling, and release Nothing in this proposed 4(d) rule handling, trapping, collecting, would also be excepted from the take would change in any way the recovery destruction and modification of its prohibitions under this proposed 4(d) planning provisions of section 4(f) of the habitat, or any other activities that rule. Act, the consultation requirements would result in take of the species. The fear of snakes, as well as under section 7 of the Act, or the ability As discussed above under Summary superstitious beliefs, may contribute to of the Service to enter into partnerships of Biological Status and Threats, a range the intentional killing of boas. Although for the management and protection of of activities have the potential to impact we cannot address fear or beliefs in a the Virgin Islands boa. However, the species, including development, 4(d) rule, we can except from the interagency cooperation may be further intentional killing of boas by private prohibitions take associated with streamlined through planned citizens, and introduction of exotic removing boas from houses and other programmatic consultations for the predators/competitors (e.g., cats, rats). structures to provide alternatives to species between Federal agencies and Regulating these activities will help killing individual boas. Therefore, the the Service. We ask the public, preserve the remaining populations and proposed 4(d) rule would except from particularly Commonwealth and protect individual boas. the prohibitions take associated with Territorial agencies and other interested Protecting the Virgin Islands boa from nonlethal removal of Virgin Islands boas stakeholders that may be affected by the incidental take, such as harm that from human structures, and returning proposed 4(d) rule, to provide results from habitat degradation, will them to natural habitat. comments and suggestions regarding

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:31 Sep 29, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30SEP1.SGM 30SEP1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS 61716 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 190 / Wednesday, September 30, 2020 / Proposed Rules

additional guidance and methods that us the numbers of the sections or to make information available to tribes. the Service could provide or use, paragraphs that are unclearly written, There are no tribal lands associated with respectively, to streamline the which sections or sentences are too this proposed rule. implementation of this proposed 4(d) long, the sections where you feel lists or References Cited rule (see Information Requested, above). tables would be useful, etc. Effects of This Proposed Rule National Environmental Policy Act (42 A complete list of references cited is U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) available on the internet at http:// This proposal, if made final, would www.regulations.gov under Docket No. revise 50 CFR 17.11 to reclassify the It is our position that, outside the FWS–R4–ES–2019–0069 and upon Virgin Islands boa from endangered to jurisdiction of the U.S. Court of Appeals request from the Field Supervisor, threatened on the List of Endangered for the Tenth Circuit, we do not need to Caribbean Ecological Services Field and Threatened Wildlife. Additionally, prepare environmental analyses Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION if the proposed 4(d) rule is adopted in pursuant to the National Environmental CONTACT, above). a final rule, the Service will detail Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et prohibitions set forth at 50 CFR 17.21 seq.) in connection with designating Authors and 17.32, except for incidental take critical habitat under the Act. We The primary authors of this proposed associated with conservation efforts by published a notice outlining our reasons rule are staff members of the Service’s Federal, Commonwealth, Territory, or for this determination in the Federal Species Assessment Team and the municipal wildlife agencies; nonlethal Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR Caribbean Ecological Services Field removal from human structures; and 49244). This position was upheld by the Office. monitoring and survey efforts of Virgin U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Islands boa. In addition, we will revise Circuit (Douglas County v. Babbitt, 48 List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 the List of Endangered and Threatened F.3d 1495 (9th Cir. 1995), cert. denied Endangered and threatened species, Wildlife to change the species’ scientific 516 U.S. 1042 (1996)). Exports, Imports, Reporting and name to Chilabothrus granti. Government-to-Government recordkeeping requirements, Required Determinations Relationship With Tribes Transportation. Clarity of the Proposed Rule In accordance with the President’s Proposed Regulation Promulgation memorandum of April 29, 1994, We are required by Executive Orders Accordingly, we propose to amend ‘‘Government-to-Government Relations 12866 and 12988 and by the part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title with Native American Tribal Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Governments’’ (59 FR 22951), Executive 1998, to write all rules in plain as set forth below: Order 13175, and the Department of the language. This means that each rule we Interior’s manual at 512 DM 2, we publish must: PART 17—ENDANGERED AND (a) Be logically organized; readily acknowledge our responsibility THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS (b) Use the active voice to address to communicate meaningfully with readers directly; recognized Federal Tribes on a ■ 1. The authority citation for part 17 (c) Use clear language rather than government-to-government basis. In continues to read as follows: jargon; accordance with Secretarial Order 3206 Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 1531– (d) Be divided into short sections and of June 5, 1997 (American Indian Tribal 1544; and 4201–4245, unless otherwise sentences; and Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust noted. (e) Use lists and tables wherever Responsibilities, and the Endangered possible. Species Act), we readily acknowledge § 17.11 Endangered and threatened If you feel that we have not met these our responsibilities to work directly wildlife. requirements, send us comments by one with tribes in developing programs for ■ 2. Amend § 17.11 in paragraph (h) by of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. To healthy ecosystems, to acknowledge that revising the entry for ‘‘Boa, Virgin better help us revise the rule, your tribal lands are not subject to the same Islands tree’’ under REPTILES in the comments should be as specific as controls as Federal public lands, to List of Endangered and Threatened possible. For example, you should tell remain sensitive to Indian culture, and Wildlife to read as follows:

Listing citations and Common name Scientific name Where listed Status applicable rules

******* Reptiles

******* Boa, Virgin Islands tree .. Chilabothrus granti ...... Wherever found ...... T 35 FR 16047, 10/13/1970; 44 FR 70677, 12/7/ 1979; [Federal Register citation of the final rule]. 50 CFR 17.42(j).4d

*******

■ 3. Amend § 17.42 by adding paragraph (j) Virgin Islands tree boa Islands tree boa. Except as provided (j) to read as set forth below: (Chilabothrus granti)—(1) Prohibitions. under paragraph (j)(2) of this section The following prohibitions that apply to and §§ 17.4 and 17.5, it is unlawful for § 17.42 Special rules—reptiles. endangered wildlife also apply to Virgin any person subject to the jurisdiction of * * * * *

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:31 Sep 29, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30SEP1.SGM 30SEP1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 190 / Wednesday, September 30, 2020 / Proposed Rules 61717

the United States to commit, to attempt upon, or destroy the habitat of the collection for genetic analysis, captive to commit, to solicit another to commit, Virgin Islands boa is also prohibited. propagation, and reintroduction into or cause to be committed, any of the (2) Exceptions from prohibitions. In currently occupied or unoccupied areas following activities in regard to this regard to this species, you may: within the historical range of the Virgin species: (i) Conduct activities as authorized by Islands tree boa. (i) Import or export, as set forth at a permit under § 17.32. (B) Nonlethal removal (and return to § 17.21(b); (ii) Take, as set forth at § 17.21(c)(2) natural habitat) of Virgin Islands tree (ii) Take, as set forth at § 17.21(c)(1); through (c)(4) for endangered wildlife. boa from human structures, defense of (iii) Take, as set forth at § 17.31(b). (iii) Possession and other acts with human life, and authorized capture and (iv) Possess and engage in other acts unlawfully taken specimens, as set forth handling of Virgin Islands tree boas. with unlawfully taken endangered at § 17.21(d)(1); (C) Efforts to monitor and survey wildlife, as set forth at § 17.21(d)(2). Virgin Islands tree boa populations and (iv) Interstate or foreign commerce in (v) Incidental take of Virgin Islands habitat that may include handling, the course of commercial activity, as set tree boa resulting from: temporary holding, pit tagging, tissue forth at § 17.21(e); and (A) Conservation efforts by Federal, sampling, and release. (v) Sale or offer for sale, as set forth Commonwealth, Territory, or municipal at § 17.21(f). wildlife agencies, including, but not Aurelia Skipwith, (vi) The intentional or incidental limited to, control and eradication of Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. introduction of exotic species, such as exotic mammals and habitat restoration, [FR Doc. 2020–19027 Filed 9–29–20; 8:45 am] cats or rats, that compete with, prey and collection of broodstock, tissue BILLING CODE 4333–15–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:31 Sep 29, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\30SEP1.SGM 30SEP1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS