Wednesday, January 16, 2008

Part III

Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Rule To List Six Foreign as Endangered; Final Rule

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:38 Jan 15, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\16JAR3.SGM 16JAR3 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES3 3146 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR following receipt of the petition and January 9, 1986 (51 FR 996), we found published promptly in the Federal that listing 54 from the 1980 Fish and Wildlife Service Register. If we find that the petition has petition, including the black and presented substantial information the long-legged thicketbird, continued 50 CFR Part 17 indicating that the requested action may to be warranted but precluded, whereas [FWS–R1–JA–2008–007; 96100–1671–000; be warranted (a positive finding), new information caused us to find that 1018–AT62] section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires us listing four other species in the 1980 to commence a status review of the petition was no longer warranted. We Endangered and Threatened Wildlife species if one has not already been published additional annual notices on and Plants; Final Rule To List Six initiated under our internal candidate the species included in the 1980 Foreign Birds as Endangered assessment process. In addition, section petition on July 7, 1988 (53 FR 25511); 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act requires us to make December 29, 1988 (53 FR 52746); April AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, a finding within 12 months following 25, 1990 (55 FR 17475); and November Interior. receipt of the petition on whether the 21, 1991 (56 FR 58664), in which we ACTION: Final rule. requested action is warranted, not indicated that the and the warranted, or warranted but precluded long-legged thicketbird continued to be SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and by higher-priority listing actions (this warranted but precluded. Wildlife Service (Service), determine finding is referred to as the ‘‘12-month endangered status for six avian On May 6, 1991 (1991 petition), we finding’’). Section 4(b)(3)(C) of the Act species—black stilt (Himantopus received a petition from Alison requires that a finding of warranted but novaezelandiae), caerulean paradise- Stattersfield, of ICBP, to list 53 precluded for petitioned species should flycatcher (Eutrichomyias rowleyi), giant additional foreign birds under the Act. be treated as having been resubmitted ibis (Pseudibis gigantea), Gurney’s pitta The caerulean paradise-flycatcher, giant on the date of the warranted but (Pitta gurneyi), long-legged thicketbird ibis, Gurney’s pitta, and Socorro precluded finding, and is therefore (Trichocichla rufa), and Socorro were included in the 1991 subject to a new finding within 1 year mockingbird ( graysoni)—under petition. On December 16, 1991, we and subsequently thereafter until we the Act of 1973, as published a positive 90-day finding and take action on a proposal to list or amended (Act). This rule implements announced the initiation of a status withdraw our original finding. The the protection of the Act for these six review of the 53 foreign birds listed in Service publishes an annual notice of species. the 1991 petition (56 FR 65207). The resubmitted petition findings (annual 1991 petition included the giant ibis, EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule is notice) for all foreign species for which Gurney’s pitta, Socorro mockingbird, effective February 15, 2008. listings were previously found to be and caerulean paradise-flycatcher ADDRESSES: The supporting file for this warranted but precluded. among the 53 foreign birds that the rule is available for public inspection, On November 24, 1980, we received petitioner requested be listed under the by appointment, during normal business a petition (1980 petition) from Dr. Act. On March 28, 1994 (59 FR 14496), hours, Monday through Friday, in Suite Warren B. King, Chairman, United we published a proposed rule to list 30 110, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Arlington, States Section of the International African species from both the 1980 Virginia 22203. Council for Bird Preservation (ICBP), to and 1991 petitions. In the same Federal FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. add 79 bird species (19 native and 60 Register document, we included a Patricia De Angelis, at the above foreign) to the List of Endangered and notice of findings in which we address; by fax to 703–358–2276; by Threatened Wildlife (50 CFR 17.11(h)), announced our determination that e-mail to [email protected]; including the black stilt and the long- listing the 38 remaining species from or by telephone, 703–358–1708. legged thicket bird (or, long-legged the 1991 petition was warranted but SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: warbler, which was the common name precluded; this group included the giant used in the petition). In response to the ibis, Gurney’s pitta, Socorro Background 1980 petition, we published a positive mockingbird, and caerulean paradise- In this final rule, we determine 90-day finding on May 12, 1981 (46 FR flycatcher. On May 21, 2004 (69 FR endangered status for six foreign bird 26464), for 77 of the species (19 29354), we published an annual notice species under the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et domestic and 58 foreign), noting that 2 of findings on resubmitted petitions for seq.): Black stilt (Himantopus of the foreign species identified in the foreign species and annual description novaezelandiae), caerulean paradise- petition were already listed under the of progress on listing actions (2004 flycatcher (Eutrichomyias rowleyi), giant Act, and initiated a status review. On annual notice) within which we ranked ibis (Pseudibis gigantea), Gurney’s pitta January 20, 1984, we published an species for listing by assigning them a (Pitta gurneyi), long-legged thicketbird annual review on pending petitions and Listing Priority Number per the (Trichocichla rufa), and Socorro description of progress on all petition Service’s listing priority guidelines, mockingbird (Mimus graysoni). findings addressed therein (49 FR 2485). published on September 21, 1983 (48 FR In that notice, we found that listing all 43098). Based on this ranking and Previous Federal Action 58 foreign bird species from the 1980 priorities, we determined that listing Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires petition, including the black stilt and five of the previously petitioned us to make a finding (known as a ‘‘90- the long-legged thicketbird, was species—the black stilt, caerulean day finding’’) on whether a petition to warranted but precluded by higher- paradise-flycatcher, giant ibis, Gurney’s add, remove, or reclassify a species from priority listing actions. On May 10, pitta, and Socorro mockingbird—was the list of endangered or threatened 1985, we published the first annual warranted. In the same 2004 annual species has presented substantial notice (50 FR 19761) in which we notice, we determined that the long- information indicating that the continued to find that listing all 58 legged thicketbird and 16 other species requested action may be warranted. To foreign bird species from the 1980 no longer warranted listing on the basis the maximum extent practicable, the petition was warranted but precluded. that those species were likely extinct. In finding shall be made within 90 days In our next annual notice, published on response to the 2004 annual notice, we

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:38 Jan 15, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR3.SGM 16JAR3 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 3147

received information indicating that the efforts and additional actions to be species which is in danger of extinction long-legged thicketbird had been undertaken by the Mexican government, throughout all or a significant portion of rediscovered, in small numbers, in including scientific investigations, in its range. A threatened species is 2002. The magnitude of the threat to the order to protect the species. defined as a species which is likely to species was perceived as high and the Our Response: While general support become an endangered species within immediacy of threat imminent. of a listing is not, in itself, a substantive the foreseeable future throughout all or Therefore, we assigned this species a comment that we take into a significant portion of its range. listing priority ranking of 1, which consideration as part of our five-factor Therefore, we evaluated the best ranking is reserved specifically for a analysis, we appreciate the support of available scientific and commercial monospecific , and determined these range countries. Cooperation is information on each species under the that listing the species was warranted at important to the conservation of foreign five listing factors to determine whether that time. species. they met the definition of endangered or On November 22, 2006 (71 FR 67530), Comment 2: One researcher opposed threatened. we published a Federal Register notice the listing of the long-legged thicketbird Following is a species-by-species to list black stilt, caerulean paradise- on the basis that the species is not analysis of these five factors. The flycatcher, giant ibis, Gurney’s pitta, endangered, but merely elusive to the species are considered in alphabetical long-legged thicketbird, and Socorro inexperienced or to those with an order: Black stilt, caerulean paradise- mockingbird as endangered. We uneducated eye. flycatcher, giant ibis, Gurney’s pitta, implemented the Service’s peer review Our Response: We have taken into long-legged thicketbird, and Socorro process and opened a 60-day comment account in our review of the long-legged mockingbird. period to solicit scientific and thicketbird the bird’s elusive behavior. commercial information on the species However, we believe that we have used I. Black stilt (Himantopus from all interested parties following the best available scientific information novaezelandiae) publication of the proposed rule. in our status review and have accurately Species Description determined the appropriate threat status Summary of Comments and for this species. The black stilt is a wading bird in the Recommendations Comment 3: One commenter family . It is native to In the proposed rule of November 22, recommended that the term kakı¨ be and is locally known there 2006 (71 FR 67530), we requested that used to refer to the black stilt by its Maori name ‘‘kaki.’’ Adults are all interested parties submit information throughout the rule, as it is the preferred characterized by long red legs, a slender that might contribute to development of name in New Zealand. bill and black plumage (BirdLife a final rule. We received five comments: Our Response: We have added this International (BLI) 2007a; New Zealand two from members of the public and one common name in the species Conservation Management Group (NZ each from the governments of description for the black stilt, but have CMaG 2007). Adult males and females , Fiji, and Mexico. In chosen to use the common name ‘‘black are generally regarded as having accordance with our policy, ‘‘Notice of stilt’’ throughout the rule and in the list identical plumage (BLI 2007e); however, Interagency Cooperative Policy for Peer because the federal listing will be Elkington and Maloney (2000) Review in Endangered Species Act categorized under the species grouping determined that white flecking around Activities,’’ published on July 1, 1994 ‘‘stilt.’’ their eyes and crown is generally (59 FR 34270), we also sought the expert Several commenters provided indicative of older males. Juveniles have opinion of at least three appropriate additional information on the species. a white-plumed breast, neck, and head independent specialists regarding the This information has been considered (BLI 2007e). Black and pied stilt proposed rule. and incorporated into the rulemaking as (Himantopus himantopus) hybridize Comment 1: Four commenters appropriate (as indicated in the citations (see , below), and hybrids are supported the proposed listings, by ‘‘in litt.’’). more varied in color, with varying including the governments of Cambodia, gradations of white and black plumage, Fiji, and Mexico. The government of Species Information and Factors and varying body characteristics, such Cambodia ‘‘strongly endorsed[d] the Affecting the Species as shorter legs and longer bills (BLI proposal of giant ibis to be listed in [the] Under section 4(a) of the Act (16 2007e; Department of Conservation U.S. Endangered Species Act. The Fijian U.S.C. 1533(a)(1)) and regulations (DOC) 2007a; Maloney & Murray 2002; government noted that the benefits of promulgated to implement the listing Reed et al. 2007). listing the long-legged thicketbird under provisions of the Act (50 CFR part The species can reach 16 inches (in) the Act are ‘‘perhaps marginal’’ but that 424.11), we may list a species as (40 centimeters (cm)) (BLI 2007e) in a listing could help where species, such threatened and endangered on the basis height, with a wingspan of 23 in (58 as the thicketbird, are not listed in the of five threat factors: (A) Present or cm). The average age of birds in the Appendices of the Convention on threatened destruction, modification, or current population is 6 years (BLI International Trade in Endangered curtailment of its or range; (B) 2007e; Maloney & Murray 2002). The Species of Wild Fauna and Flora overutilization for commercial, potential lifespan of the species is (CITES) because trade in the wild bird recreational, scientific, or educational unknown, but the oldest recorded is not a concern at this time. The purposes; (C) disease or ; (D) specimen, a banded female relocated in potential funding and technical support inadequacy of existing regulatory 1983, was estimated to be at least 12 (see Available Conservation Measures) mechanisms; or (E) other natural or years old (Pierce 1986b). for the development of management manmade factors affecting its continued Taxonomy programs for the conservation of species existence. Listing may be warranted in foreign countries could be beneficial based on any of the above threat factors, The black stilt was first taxonomically to the thicketbird in Fiji. Similarly, the either singly or in combination. described by Gould in 1841 and placed government of Mexico commented that Under the Act, we may determine a in the family Recurvirostridae. It is one listing the Socorro mockingbird under species to be endangered or threatened. of two stilt species in New Zealand, the the Act would support its ongoing An endangered species is defined as a other being the pied stilt (Pierce 1984a;

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:38 Jan 15, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR3.SGM 16JAR3 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES3 3148 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations

Reed et al. 1993a). Where their ranges Canterbury on South Island or Northern (nesting success plus fledging success) overlap, the black stilt may interbreed Island coastal areas in the winter, from for the same period was 0.9 percent. with its close relative, the pied stilt February to June, before returning to the Recruitment, defined by Maloney and (Reed et al. 1993a). It is generally UWB to breed in July and August (BLI Murray (2002) as the number of chicks accepted that hybridization between 2007e; Maloney & Murray 2002: NZ attaining 2 years of age, is only about 4 these two species has been occurring CMaG 2007; Pierce 1984a; Pierce 1996; percent. only in the last two centuries, as the Reed et al. 1993a). Reed et al. (1993a) Reproductive potential does not pied stilt expanded its range from believe that this migratory behavior has appear to be the primary limiting factor to New Zealand in the early resulted from hybridization with the to the black stilt’s breeding success and 19th century (Greene 1999; Pierce pied stilt (which migrates to coastal recruitment rates. The black stilt has 1984a; Reed et al. 1993a). During the waters in the winter) (Dowding & Moore high reproductive capability, first late 19th century, the frequency of 2006). In the absence of a suitable mate reproducing at age 2 and continuing to hybrid sightings increased (Pierce of the same species, black will produce multiple clutches in captivity 1984b) but observers of the time did not mate and produce hybrid offspring with to at least age 13 plus (Maloney & realize that the two species were the pied stilt (BLI 2007e; DOC 2007a; Murray 2002; Reed 1998). The species hybridizing, and the taxonomy of Maloney & Murray 2002; Reed et al. has high fecundity, producing clutches Himantopus species of New Zealand 1993a). Mixed pairs (a black stilt paired of one to four every breeding was the subject of much debate (Buller with a pied stilt) and their offspring are season, and will re-nest if clutches are 1874; Potts 1872; Travers 1871). In 1984, more likely to participate in migratory lost early in the season (BLI 2007e; Reed Pierce (1984b) concluded on the basis of behavior (Dowding & Moore 2006; Reed et al. 1993a; Maloney & Murray 2002). morphological, ecological, and et al. 1993a). Hybridization is discussed Moreover, a review of captive breeding behavioral differences that the two further under Factor E. records from two breeding seasons species remained distinct. Genetic Black stilts reach adulthood around (1981 to 1982 and 2001 to 2002) found analysis in the 20th century confirmed 18 months of age, attaining sexual that the survival rate of captive-bred that the two species were undergoing maturity between 2 and 3 years of age. stilts reintroduced to the wild at 2 introgressive hybridization, wherein They mate for life, nest in solitary pairs months and 10 months increased to 88 viable offspring produced from the (often miles (kilometers) from another percent and 82 percent, respectively successful mating of two distinct pair), and exhibit high nesting fidelity (Van Heezik et al. 2005). (returning to the same location to nest species were subsequently capable of Historical Range and Distribution mating with parental species (Greene each year) (BLI 2007e; DOC 2007a; 1999). From these studies, despite the Maloney & Murray 2002; Pierce 1984a; When it was described in 1841, the genetic similarity between the two Reed et al. 1993a). The breeding season species’ range included both the North species, Greene (1999) concluded that begins in July or August and -laying and South Islands of New Zealand the species remain distinct. occurs from September to December (Pierce 1984a). Its range has contracted (BLI 2007e; Maloney & Murray 2002; NZ twice in the 20th century: Once in the Habitat and Life History CMaG 2007). Ground-nesting birds, 1940s, when the breeding range became Black stilt habitat includes riverbanks, black stilts prefer open nesting sites, restricted to the South Island, and again lakeshores, swamps, and shallow ponds such as dry, stable riverbanks (Maloney in the 1960s, when the UWB became (Maloney & Murray 2002; Pierce 1982; & Murray 2002; Pierce 1982; Pierce their only breeding area (Maloney & Potts 1872; Reed et al. 1993a). The 1986b; Reed et al. 1993a). They lay a Murray 2002; Pierce 1984a; Reed et al. species’ habitat preferences shift slightly typical clutch size of four eggs and have 1993a). depending on the seasons, which are: a lengthy fledging period of 40 to 55 As the black stilt’s range contracted, Breeding (braided rivers, side streams, days (the amount of time it takes birds researchers noticed that the pied stilt’s and swamps), post-breeding (riverbeds to hatch and leave the nest) (Maloney & range had increased (Pierce 1984a). In and shallow tarns), and wintering Murray 2002). Both sexes share the the last quarter of the 19th century, both (inland waters or river deltas) (Maloney nesting responsibility (Maloney & black and pied stilts were considered & Murray 2002). However, these Murray 2002; Pierce 1986b; Pierce 1996; common across South Island (Buller are often located within the same Sanders & Maloney 2002). Eggs are 1874, 1878; Travers 1871). By the 1980– watershed, and the species is incubated by both sexes for 25 days, and 1981 breeding season, the estimated considered a primarily sedentary, pairs will often re-nest if the first clutch number of pied stilts in the UWB was nonmigrating species (Maloney & is lost early in the season (BLI 2007e; between 1,500 and 2,000 (Pierce 1984a). Murray 2002; Pierce 1986b). About 90 Reed et al. 1993a; Maloney & Murray At the same time, only 23 black stilt percent of the black stilt population 2002; NZ CMaG 2007). Chicks are adults were known in the wild overwinters in the Upper Waitaki Basin precocial (the young are relatively (Maloney & Murray 2002; Van Heezik et (UWB; in the central region of the South mature and mobile from the moment of al. 2005). Experts considered whether Island) by moving to inland areas to hatching) and capable of feeding the black stilts were being competitively continue feeding on aquatic insects, themselves within hours of hatching excluded by the pied stilt and found including larvae of mayfly (Deleatidium (DOC 2007a; Reed et al. 1993a). After that this was not the case. Black stilts sp.) and caddisfly (Olinga sp.), and, to fledging, chicks stay with parents until and pied stilts prefer slightly different a lesser extent, on mollusks and fish the beginning of the following breeding feeding areas (black stilts forage in (DOC 2007a; Reed et al. 1993a). season (Maloney & Murray 2002). riffles and pied stilts at pools) (Pierce Researchers believe that the black stilt’s The black stilt’s breeding success in 1986a); black stilts are better foragers long legs allow them to wade out into the wild is very low. For example, than pied stilts (employing a greater the deeper, unfrozen sections of rivers according to Maloney and Murray variety of foraging techniques that allow where they can continue foraging (2002), from 1977 to 1979, of 33 chicks them to obtain more food) (DOC 2007a; throughout the winter (DOC 2007a; that hatched in unmanaged nests, only Pierce 1986a; Reed et al. 1993a); also, Reed et al. 1993a). 2 individuals (or 6.1 percent) survived black stilts are territorially dominant A small percentage (about 10 percent) to fledge (i.e., lived long enough to leave over pied stilts when breeding areas of the population migrates to coastal the nest). Overall breeding success overlap (Maloney & Murray 2002). From

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:38 Jan 15, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR3.SGM 16JAR3 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 3149

this work, researchers concluded that Conservation Conservancy Districts, 1981, only 23 adults remained in the the decreasing range and numbers of occurring only in 2 districts (Canterbury wild (Maloney & Murray 2002; Van black stilts in the face of the increasing and Otaga) on the South Island and 2 Heezik et al. 2005). In August 2000, pied stilt population reflected the black (Waikata and Bay of Plenty) on the there were 48 adults in the wild, of stilt’s inability to adapt as readily to North Island (Hitchmough 2002). The which 15 to 18 were females. As of man-induced changes, namely, the majority of the population remains in February 2007, the wild adult introduction of predators and habitat the UWB, on the South Island, year population consisted of 87 adults, modification (Pierce 1986a, 1986b; round (BLI 2007e; Maloney & Murray including 17 productive pairs and a Maloney & Murray 2002: Reed et al. 2002: Pierce 1984a; Reed et al. 1993a; total of 41 females (DOC 2007b). 1993a). Historical declines were NZ CMaG 2007), and their breeding Captive-held population numbers: attributed primarily to predation by range is now entirely confined to the Throughout the 1980s, an average of 15 mammals introduced in the 19th wetlands and rivers of the UWB birds was managed in captivity (Reed et century and secondarily to habitat loss (Maloney & Murray 2002; Pierce 1984a). al. 1993a). In 1998, the number of and hybridization with the pied stilt Population Estimates managed birds reached 48 individuals. (Pierce 1984b; Reed et al. 1993a, 1993b). At that time, it was decided that the For a primarily sedentary species, the The wild black stilt population has captive-held population should be black stilt requires a fairly large area for undergone severe reductions in maintained at approximately 6 breeding feeding and nesting. In counts numbers concomitant with the pairs. It was further determined that, in conducted between 1991 and 1994, reduction in range area. In the 1950s, order to maintain a genetic diversity Maloney (1999) found less than one the total population was estimated at among the breeding stock, a base black stilt for every 3 mi (5 km) of river 500 to 1,000 birds; however, within one population of at least 18 breeding adults surveyed. The species’ tendency to decade the population decreased to and juveniles would be maintained as overwinter inland requires sufficiently between 50 to 100 birds (Pierce 1996). replacement stock and, barring a large areas of river habitat to allow for Since 1981, the New Zealand catastrophic loss of the wild population, continuous year-round feeding (DOC Department of Conservation has only first-generation captive stock 2007a; Reed et al. 1993a). Life history intensively managed the wild black stilt would be used for breeding (Reed 1998). population, including the establishment traits, such as lifelong pair-bonding As of 2007, the captive breeding of a captive population (Maloney & combined with high nesting fidelity program consisted of 15 adults, Murray 2002; Reed 1998; Reed et al. (returning to the same location to nest including 6 productive pairs (DOC 1993a, 1993b). The captive breeding each year) and solitary nesting 2007b). program entails the transfer of ‘‘eggs, combined with their preference for open The black stilt is considered to be one chicks, juveniles and sub-adults from nesting sites (often miles from another of the rarest wading birds in the world one part of the range to any other part pair), contribute to the highly dispersed (BLI 2007e; Caruso 2006; Reed et al. of the range’’ (R. Maloney in litt. nature of the population and their 1993a). Since 1994, the species has been October 2007). For further discussion on resultant large habitat requirement categorized by the World Conservation the captive breeding program, see (Maloney & Murray 2002; Pierce 1982, Union (IUCN) as ‘‘Critically 1986b; Reed et al. 1993a). ‘‘Management Plans,’’ under Factor D. Since the establishment of the captive Endangered’’ (BLI 2007a). The species’ Current Range and Distribution breeding program, the Department of continued existence in the wild today is The current range of the black stilt is Conservation has managed the global considered a direct result of the captive estimated to be an 821 square mile (mi2) population of black stilts, including breeding program (Maloney & Murray (2,830 square kilometer (km2)) area in captive-held and wild birds, as a single 2002; Reed et al. 1993a; Van Heezik et the ‘‘braided-river’’ habitat of the UWB breeding population (R. Maloney in litt. al. 2005). According to the priority (BLI 2007e). Located on the eastern side November 2007). Wild and reintroduced management ranking system devised by of the Southern Alps, in central South birds are free to move across the full Molloy and Davis (1992) for the New Island, New Zealand, the following geographical range of the species. Thus, Zealand Department of Conservation, rivers and lakes comprise the braided the number of adults in the wild should the species was ranked as a Category river habitat: Tasman, Godley, Hopkins, be considered in conjunction with the ‘‘A’’ species, which includes the Ahuriri, Tekapo, Cass, Dobson, number of breeding pairs held in ‘‘highest priority threatened species’’ Macaulay, Lower Ohau, Pukaki and captivity. According to Dr. Maloney (in (Hitchmough et al. 2005; Reed et al. Upper Ohau, as well as Lakes Ohau and litt. October 2007), a total wild 1993a). Under New Zealand Department Pukaki (Maloney et al. 1997). The UWB population number, including immature of Conservation’s management system population is sometimes referred to in individuals, ‘‘is not informative’’ devised in 2002, the black stilt is the literature as the Mackenzie Basin because the total wild population is classified as ‘‘Nationally Critical’’ population (for example, in Reed et al. dependent on how many young the (Hitchmough et al. 2005). In the 2004 to 1993a). According to Dr. Richard breeding program produces and releases 2005 breeding season, 7 pairs of captive- Maloney of the Department of each year. The number of breeding pairs held black stilt and 12 pairs in the wild Conservation, Twizel, New Zealand (in is more informative as an indicator of produced ‘‘up to 100 birds per year for litt. November 2007), although the two the status of the population (R. Maloney release into the wild’’ (NZ CMaG 2007). areas represent slightly different in litt. November 2007). The number of Summary of Factors Affecting the Black geographical boundaries, the black stilt available females is particularly Stilt population being referred to is the same important because of the species’ A. The Present or Threatened in either instance. Because habitat tendency to hybridize with pied stilt Destruction, Modification, or quality in the species’ present range is when male black stilts are unable to find Curtailment of the Black Stilt’s Habitat considered to be higher than in other suitable mates (see Factor E) (Maloney or Range former localities, the species is managed & Murray 2002). in situ (Maloney & Murray 2002). Wild population estimates: From 1975 Today, it is estimated that only 10 The black stilt is considered locally to 1979, there were an estimated 50 to percent of New Zealand’s wetlands extinct in 9 of the 13 Department of 60 adults in the wild (Pierce 1984a); by remain intact (Caruso 2006). The

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:38 Jan 15, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR3.SGM 16JAR3 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES3 3150 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations

braided river habitat of UWB is a fishing and camping activities are population, including salmonellosis, globally rare ecosystem. With an disruptive to black stilts (Maloney & yersiniosis, campylobacteriosis, estimated area of 3,664 mi2 (9,490 km2), Murray 2002). Recreational use of pasteurellosis (fowl cholera), the UWB may account for 50 to 60 riverbed sites disturbs nesting birds and capillariasis, cestodiasis, trematodiasis, percent of the remaining suitable prevents successful rearing of offspring avian malaria, and coccidiosis. The braided river habitat in New Zealand (BLI 2007e). assessment found no reported major die- (Caruso 2006; Maloney et al. 1997). The Additional impacts on black stilt offs of wild black stilts resulting from UWB is the only breeding ground for the habitat include drainage for fields or infectious diseases carried by birds black stilt and most of the population irrigation, overgrazing of wetlands, and translocated from captivity to the wild. remains in the UWB year-round water extraction for agricultural Most of the illnesses and deaths that (Maloney & Murray 2002; Pierce 1984a; irrigation (Caruso 2006; Collar et al. occurred among captive-reared birds Reed et al. 1993a). 1994a; Maloney & Murray 2002). Since were related to husbandry and could be Several factors affect the quality of 1850, 40 percent of UWB wetlands have controlled with improved husbandry black stilt breeding and nesting grounds. been drained for farming (Caruso 2006). methods, such as improved diet and Among the most significant impacts to Proliferation of introduced weeds is a parasite screening. Finally, the the UWB has been the diversion of problem (Maloney & Murray 2002). assessment suggested the establishment rivers for hydroelectric power (HEP) Invasive plants, especially the crack of a surveillance program to determine development (Caruso 2006; Collar et al. willow (Salix fragilis), introduced by the prevalence of significant disease 1994a; Maloney 1999). Since 1935, eight settlers as windbreaks, degrade black outbreaks in wild black stilts and HEP plants have been built on rivers, stilt habitat by contributing to an facilitate development of pre-release floodplains, and wetlands associated overgrowth in formerly open areas quarantine and health-screening with the UWB (Caruso 2006). The (Caruso 2006; Collar et al. 1994a; protocols regarding captive-reared birds damming of rivers for HEP and flood Maloney & Murray 2002: Pierce 1996; (Jakob-Hoff 2001). A screening program control projects has reduced river flows Reed et al. 1993). for potential pathogens and improved and interrupted the natural flooding husbandry methods specific to the black Summary of Factor A cycles vital to the creation and stilt captive population were outlined in maintenance of the open gravel braided The black stilt’s primary habitat and the 1998 management plan for captive river system of the UWB. It is estimated only known nesting ground within the black stilts (Reed 1998). In 2005, a that floodplains have been reduced by UWB is a globally rare ecosystem that is review of the records since 1995 for 17 percent in the 11 major rivers of the being altered by water diversion, captive-held birds showed that UWB (Caruso 2006; Maloney & Murray wetland conversion, invasive species, infection, along with trauma, was a 2002). and recreation. Lack of suitable habitat major cause of death among all age Disturbance by recreational users of for feeding and nesting increases the classes in captivity, especially chicks riverbeds and riversides also affects species’ risk of extinction. The species within the first two weeks after hatching black stilt habitat within the UWB does not tolerate human disturbance, (Van Heezik et al. 2005). Van Heezik et (Maloney & Murray 2002). The riverine and recreational activities within the al. (2005) reported that protocols that habitat where black stilts live and nest species’ riverside nesting grounds has monitor birds, intervene at the first is a prime outdoor recreation area. the potential to disrupt the species’ signs of illness, and minimize the According to the New Zealand Ministry breeding success. Reduction in habitat introduction of pathogens into the for the environment (NZ MFE 2007), quality is likely to increase the breeding unit were strictly adhered to. recreational activities include water vulnerability of black stilt to predation This has prevented the spread of these sport fishing, mountain biking, four- (see Factor C). We find that the black wheel driving, and jet skiing. Central infectious diseases among captive-held stilt population is at significant risk South Island Fish and Game New birds or transmission into the wild throughout all of its range by the present Zealand manages the Waitaki populations (Van Heezik et al. 2005). or threatened destruction, modification, Catchment (which includes rivers of the Predation by introduced mammalian or curtailment of its habitat. UWB and associated wetlands) and predators and by unnaturally high considers the Catchment to be B. Overutilization for Commercial, numbers of avian predators is a primary ‘‘outstanding publicly accessible game Recreational, Scientific, or Educational threat to the black stilt (R. Maloney in bird hunting and waterfowl habitat’’ Purposes litt. February 2007). Non-native (NZ MFE 2007). According to the New the species from use for commercial, predators introduced since the late 19th Zealand Ministry for the Environment recreational, scientific, or educational century include (Felis catus), (NZ MFE 2007), recreational use and purposes. The species has not been ferrets (Mustela furo), stoats (M. impacts on the areas of the Waitaki formally considered for listing in the erminea), hedgehogs (Erinaceus Catchment are predicted to increase. Appendices of CITES (http:// europaeus), and brown rats (Rattus The New Zealand Ministry for the www.cites.org). norvegicus) (Maloney & Murray 2002; R. Environment (2007) does not address Maloney in litt. February 2007; Pierce C. Disease or Predation the effect that increased recreational 1996; Sanders & Maloney 2002). In activities will have on the black stilt or There are currently no known addition, population numbers of avian other native species (See also Factor D). diseases affecting the black stilt in the predators, such as the non-native Maloney and Murray (2002) indicate wild. Jakob-Hoff (2001) of the Auckland Australian harrier (Circus approximans) that the species does not tolerate human Zoo Wildlife Health and Research and the native kelp gull (Larus disturbance. Recreational activities that Centre, New Zealand, conducted a risk dominicanus), are unnaturally high are disruptive to the black stilt’s life assessment for disease transmission because of human-induced changes, cycle are considered to be a potentially caused by the translocation of captive such as the introduction of rabbits, serious threat to the species (R. Maloney black stilt to the wild population. The agricultural development, and the in litt. February 2007). Indiscriminate assessment considered a number of presence of rubbish dumps (Dowding & use of off-road vehicles and jet-boats, ‘‘diseases of concern’’ that may Murphy 2001; Maloney & Murray 2002). disturbance by hikers and dogs, and potentially threaten the wild New Zealand is home to only one native

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:38 Jan 15, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR3.SGM 16JAR3 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 3151

mammal, a species of , and 2007), and, of all these deaths, only 11 efforts have been limited and introduced mammalian predators pose a were known conclusively (5 of which inconsistent. We consider predation to great risk to native bird species of New were directly observed predation be a significant contributory factor Zealand, including the black stilt, events). currently threatening this species and because these species evolved in the In an unpublished report by Saunders one that is projected to continue in the absence of these predators (Caruso et al. (1996, as cited in Dowding & future. 2006). Murphy 2001), predation may have Several aspects of the black stilt’s life accounted for nearly 77 percent of black D. The Inadequacy of Existing history and nesting behavior contribute stilt chick losses between 1982 and Regulatory Mechanisms to heavy predation losses (Dowding & 1995. Using video cameras, Sanders and Four aspects are considered under Murphy 2001). Solitary ground-nesting Maloney (2002) studied the causes of this factor: National protection, habitat birds, the black stilt’s preference for mortality on ground-nesting birds in the protection, the black stilt’s status as a open nesting sites and feeding areas, UWB. The study monitored 23 black culturally significant species, and the such as dry, stable riverbanks, may stilt nests and recorded 5 lethal events species’ management plans. increase their susceptibility to predation attributed primarily to cats and harriers. National protection: The black stilt is by mammalian predators, such as feral Cats were observed eating eggs, killing an ‘‘absolutely protected’’ species under cats and ferrets, which use the banks as an adult nesting bird, and stalking nests. the New Zealand’s Wildlife Act of 1953 pathways (Maloney & Murray 2002; One black stilt nest containing ceramic (1953 Act No. 31 1953). Under this Act, Pierce 1982; Pierce 1986b; Reed et al. eggs was visited by cats nine times over it is illegal to (a) hunt or kill; (b) buy, 1993a). Nesting as early as August, a 32-day period. A harrier ate a chick sell, or otherwise dispose of, or have when other prey sources are less and a hatching egg in another nest. possession of any absolutely protected available, adds to the black stilts’ Unlike other bird species being wildlife or any skin, feathers, or other vulnerability (Reed et al. 1993a). Both observed in the same study, black stilts portion, or any egg of any absolutely sexes share nesting responsibility continued to nest upon dummy eggs protected wildlife; or (c) rob, disturb, or during the lengthy fledging period and even after being visited by cats, destroy, or have possession of the nest are equally vulnerable to predation revealing that the use of dummy eggs of any absolutely protected species (Part during the breeding season (Maloney & increased their risk of mortality and 5, 63(1)). Violations of this law by Murray 2002; Pierce 1986b; Pierce 1996; further confirming that the species is ill- individuals can result in imprisonment Sanders & Maloney 2002). Black stilts adapted to this predation pressure for a term not exceeding 6 months; or exhibit ineffective anti-predator (Sanders & Maloney 2002). a fine not exceeding $100,000 plus a behavior, contributing to significant Despite 20 years of predator trapping further fine not exceeding $5,000 for mortality of nestlings and fledglings undertaken by the New Zealand each head of wildlife and egg of wildlife (Maloney & Murray 2002). For instance, Department of Conservation to protect in respect of which the offence is black stilts do not perform distraction black stilt nesting and fledging attempts, committed (Part 5, 67(A)(1)(a)). displays until late in incubation (Reed predator control efforts have met with Violations by corporations can result in et al. 1993a). They will also re-nest in mixed success. Fledging success (the a fine not exceeding $200,000 plus a the same site if a clutch is lost to number of chicks fledged versus the further fine not exceeding $10,000 for predation (Pierce 1986b; Sanders & number of chicks hatched) was each head of wildlife and egg of wildlife Maloney 2002). increased in some but not all years in respect of which the offence is To test the effects of predation on the (Keedwell et al. 2002). In a review of committed (Part 5, 67(A)(1)(a)). Given black stilt, Pierce (1986a) undertook a predator trapping activities conducted that take by humans is not a threat to predator control study in a portion of between 1981 and 2000, Keedwell et al. the black stilt, this law does not reduce the species’ range during three breeding (2002) found that efforts were any threats to the species. seasons, from 1977 to 1979, monitoring inconsistent, resulting in highly variable Habitat protection: New Zealand a total of 50 nests. Traps were placed results each season. For instance, protects more than 30 percent of its total around 23 randomly selected nests; predator control was sometimes land area as reserve land (Craig et al. these nests were ‘‘protected.’’ These and undertaken for the entire breeding 2000; Green & Clarkson 2006). However, the remaining 27 nests, designated as season but other times began well after except for a few small and scattered ‘‘unprotected,’’ were monitored. Pierce the start of the breeding season. wetland reserves, most black stilt (1986a) determined that 64 percent of Keedwell et al. (2002) calculated that habitat is unprotected by the black stilt breeding failures were over the 20-year management period, government (Maloney & Murray 2002). attributed to predation and found that the effort expended in predator control Habitat modification, including success in fledging and breeding was equivalent to roughly 9.8 ‘‘person diversion or use of water for electrical increased at protected nests to 32.5 years.’’ According to Dr. Maloney (in generation, agriculture, and recreational percent and 10.8 percent, respectively litt. March 2007), the intensity and scale activities (as discussed under Factor A), (R. Maloney in litt. February 2007). of control need to be significantly is a primary threat to this species. Most predation was caused by brown expanded to be effective in increasing The Waitaki Catchment Water rats (14 nests), ferrets (13 nests), and fledgling survival and recruitment. Allocation Plan addresses water cats (11 nests). allocation for activities that involve the In a review of 499 eggs placed in the Summary of Factor C take, use, damming, and diversion of wild from 1979 to 1999, mortality was For the reasons outlined above, we water in relation to the Waitaki attributed to predation (45 percent); believe that disease is not currently a Catchment. The most recent plan was unknown causes (43 percent); flooding contributory threat factor for the black approved in 2004 by the New Zealand (10 percent); and human disturbance, stilt. Predation by introduced Ministry for the Environment, in disease, cold weather, poor parenting, mammalian and avian predators causes accordance with the Resource and starvation (2 percent) (Maloney and black stilt mortality at all life stages. Management Act of 1991 and the Murray 2002). However, direct Despite evidence that predator control Resource Management (Waitaki observation of predation events is significantly increased the species’ Catchment) Amendment Act of 2004 difficult (R. Maloney in litt. February breeding success, predator control (NZ MFE 2005). The objectives of the

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:38 Jan 15, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR3.SGM 16JAR3 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES3 3152 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations

Waitaki Catchment Regional Plan were government (NZ MFE 2001). New before releasing them back to the wild. to balance electrical generation with Zealand’s Resource Management Act of This technique has been used for most conservation and other human uses of 1991 is based on sustainably managing eggs since 1998, and has resulted in the Catchment, including an evaluation resources, while encouraging approximately 30 percent recruitment of minimum lake levels required to community and individual involvement rate (Van Heezik et al. 2005). achieve these objectives. The evaluation in the planning for conservation (NZ A second concurrent phase seeks to gave specific consideration to the effect MFE 1991). We believe that local increase black stilt breeding success and of water flow changes on the feeding, involvement is important for resource adult survival in the wild by continuing roosting, and breeding habitat of the conservation and may help to reduce research on the primary causes of black stilt (and other wetland birds), threats to the species by increasing mortality and developing mitigation and it was determined that the awareness of the conservation risks. measures to prevent excess mortality. established water levels were suitable Management plans: According to the Attempts to monitor all forms of for these wetland species (NZ MFE New Zealand Ministry of Environment, mortality via direct observation began in 2005). However, the Waitaki Catchment high priority is afforded to the black stilt 1998 and are ongoing. Goals under this Regional Plan provided exemptions for recovery plan (NZ MFE 1997). phase include obtaining a better other activities that also adversely affect Beginning in 1981, the New Zealand understanding of the causes of chick black stilt and its habitat, including Department of Conservation undertook and adult mortality, developing multi- certain agricultural uses and management of the wild black stilt species predator control methods, and recreational activities (See Factor A). population to increase fledging success understanding mate choice decisions at Policy 35 of the Waitaki Catchment and recruitment of juveniles in the different population densities. As an Water Allocation Plan exempts certain declining populations in Mackenzie example, because monitoring birds activities from allocation limits, basin (R. Maloney in litt. March 2007; between post-flight to adulthood is including ‘‘tourism and recreational Reed et al. 1993b). Since 1993, black difficult, researchers are monitoring facilities from the lakes [Tekapo, Pukaki stilt management has been guided by adults using transmitters (Maloney & and Ohau] and from the canals leading two consecutive recovery plans, the first Murray 2002). In September 2007, from them’’ (NZ MFE 2004). Rule 2(2) published in 1993 (Reed et al. 1993a) researchers released 38 adult black stilts of the Waitaki Catchment Water and a second, updated plan approved in fitted with transmitters (Timaru Herald Allocation Plan exempts ‘‘stock 2002 (Maloney & Murray 2002), that 2007). These transmitters help drinking-water * * * and processing covers the period 2001–2011. researchers locate wild birds that have and storage of perishable produce’’ from The goals of the current recovery plan died (Maloney & Murray 2002). consideration under the allocation (effective from 2001 to 2011) are to The management of the captive black increase the black stilt population stilt population is addressed in both limits (NZ MFE 2005). Thus, while the within the next 10 years to more than recovery plans (Reed et al. 1993; Waitaki Catchment Water Allocation 250 breeding individuals, with a mean Maloney & Murray 2002), and also in a Plan addresses regulation on water annual recruitment rate that exceeds the separate Department of Conservation levels associated with hydroelectric mean annual adult mortality rate management plan published in 1998 power generation, it did not address or (Maloney & Murray 2002). There are two (Reed 1998). According to Reed (1998), reduce threats to black stilt habitat from overlapping phases. Phase 1 of the the goals of the captive management water diversion for certain agricultural program involves a series of objectives plan are to provide young birds for and recreational activities, which is aimed at increasing the number of black release into the wild and develop a self- adversely affecting the black stilt (Factor stilts in the wild by maximizing sustaining captive population. Five A). recruitment rate both in the wild (for objectives were established to achieve Status as a culturally significant instance, by ensuring that all female these goals: (1) Establish a captive species: The UWB is considered a black stilts are mated with a male each population capable of being self- ‘‘taonga,’’ and the black stilt a ‘‘taonga’’ season) and by captive-rearing black sustaining, (2) provide juveniles for species for the Ngai tahu¯ , the native stilts and releasing large numbers of release and eggs for fostering to the tribal population inhabiting most of the captive-born young to the wild. A wild, (3) undertake research to increase South Island, New Zealand (Schedule review of captive breeding records from productivity and survival, (4) establish 97 1998; NZ MFE 2005). ‘‘Taonga’’ is a two breeding seasons (1981 to 1982 and health monitoring of the captive Maori word for any item, object or thing 2001 to 2002) found that the survival population, and (5) advocate that has special significance to the rate of captive-bred stilts that were conservation of black stilts to the culture, including birds and plants reintroduced to the wild was 88 percent general public. This management plan (Auckland Museum 1997). Under the at 2 months and 82 percent at 10 outlines the expansion of the captive Ngai tahu¯ Claims Settlement Act of months (Van Heezik et al. 2005). breeding program and formalizes the 1998, the New Zealand Department of Between 1992 and 1999, researchers protocols for captive release, health Conservation must consult with, and determined that the recruitment rate of screening, and monitoring. have particular regard to, the views of chicks that had been artificially Experts consider that, despite only the Ngai tahu¯ when making incubated in captivity and then hatched incremental success in increasing wild management decisions concerning and raised in the wild was only 4 population numbers, the captive- ‘‘taonga’’ species (1998 Act No. 97. percent, with only 8 of the 189 chicks breeding program, along with predator 1998; Maloney & Murray 2002). An Ngai surviving to 2 years of age. However, control, have prevented the species from tahu¯ representative is a member of the birds that were hatched and raised in going (BLI 2007e; Kakı¨ Recovery Group (Maloney in litt. captivity and then released into the wild Maloney & Murray 2002: Reed et al. February 2007), which implements the achieved a minimum recruitment rate of 1993; Van Heezik et al. 2005). The management plan for the black stilt 22 percent (Maloney & Murray 2002). management plans are addressing (Maloney & Murray 2002). Including the Thus, wild losses of eggs, chicks, and several aspects to facilitate the species’ tribes in resource decision-making is an fledglings are largely avoided by recovery, including research into important conservation strategy artificially incubating and captive- survival, production of offspring for undertaken by the New Zealand rearing young to 3 or 9 months of age release into the wild, and continued

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:38 Jan 15, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR3.SGM 16JAR3 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 3153

research into the causes of mortality in gene flow is approximately 15 percent with the pied stilt population rather the wild, including predation. However, (Maloney & Murray 2002). However, the than remain in their natal range, as pure the relative success of the captive relatedness of the entire black stilt black stilts would. As a result, cross- breeding program is hindered by the population has not been determined, fostering of black stilt eggs with pied inadequacy of regulatory mechanisms, and inbreeding depression is a possible stilt parents was discontinued. More combined with limited or inconsistent threat (Maloney & Murray 2002). importantly, this research revealed that efforts to control predators (Factor C) A general approximation of minimum hybridization was detrimental to the and conserve and provide suitable viable population size is the 50 / 500 long-term survival of the black stilt, as habitat for the species (Factor A). rule (Soule´ 1980; Hunter 1996). This mixed pairs were effectively ‘‘lost’’ from rule states that an effective population the population (Reed et al. 1993b). Summary of Factor D (Ne) of 50 individuals is the minimum Hybrid management (such as breaking Regulatory mechanisms exist to size required to avoid imminent risks up mixed-pair bonds prior to mating) is protect the black stilt from take. from inbreeding. Ne represents the part of the conservation strategy However, take is not a primary threat to number of in a population that identified in the black stilt recovery the species. Government-sponsored actually contribute to reproduction, and plan, and researchers believe black stilts measures are in place to facilitate the is often much smaller than the census, possess several inherent qualities that species’ recovery (as discussed under or total number of individuals in the reduce gene flow, such as the black this factor), including mitigating threats population (N). Furthermore, the rule stilt’s strong positive assortative mating from predation (as discussed under states that the long-term fitness of a (selecting black stilt over pied stilt when Factor C). However, the inadequacy of population requires an Ne of at least 500 given the choice) and the low fitness of regulatory mechanisms to protect or individuals, so that it will not lose its hybrid offspring (Maloney & Murray curb in the species’ genetic diversity over time and will 2002). However, black stilts live in only known breeding ground (Factor A), maintain an enhanced capacity to adapt relative isolation from each other, and combined with inconsistent predator to changing conditions. nesting pairs are often located miles control (Factor C), results in failure to The available information for 2007 (kilometers) apart (BLI 2007e; DOC reduce or remove threats from the indicates that the breeding population 2007a; Pierce 1984a; Reed et al. 1993a). species’ habitat. As such, we believe of the black stilt (based on the number Sex ratios are an important indicator of that the inadequacy of regulatory of wild and captive-held breeding pairs) the species’ tendency to pair with pied mechanisms is a contributory risk factor is 46 individuals (DOC 2007b); 46 is just stilts (Maloney & Murray 2002), and currently and in the future for this below the minimum effective experts note that black stilts pair with species. population size required to avoid risks the pied stilt when ‘‘suitable’’ mates from inbreeding (N = 50 individuals). E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors e within the species are not available Moreover, the upper limit of the Affecting the Continued Existence of the (DOC 2007a; Greene 1999; NZ CMaG population is 102 adults (DOC 2007b). Species 2007; Reed et al. 1993a). Given the This represents the maximum potential species’ dispersed nature, the likelihood Three additional factors are number of reproducing members in the for hybridization with the growing considered herein: Genetic risks wild black stilt population and is less population of pied stilts increases as associated with small population sizes, than one-fifth of the upper threshold (Ne black stilt population numbers decrease hybridization, and threats from = 500 individuals) required for long- and black stilt males are less able to find stochastic events (random natural term fitness of a population that will not females (Greene 1999; Pierce 1996). occurrences). lose its genetic diversity over time and Threats from stochastic events: With Genetic risks associated with small will maintain an enhanced capacity to a wild adult population of 87 adults population sizes: The small size of the adapt to changing conditions. As such, (DOC 2007b), experts consider the risk black stilt population, estimated in 2007 we currently consider the species to be of a single catastrophic event to be a as 87 adults consisting of 17 breeding at risk due to lack of near- and long-term serious threat that could destroy most of pairs (DOC 2007b), makes this species viability. the population (Maloney & Murray vulnerable to any of several risks, Hybridization: Black stilt males and 2002). New Zealand’s South Island is including inbreeding depression, loss of pied stilt females can produce fertile subject to tsunamis and earthquakes. genetic variation, and accumulation of offspring (BLI 2007e; DOC 2007a; According to the New Zealand Institute new . Inbreeding can have Maloney & Murray 2002; Reed et al. of Geological and Nuclear Sciences (NZ individual or population-level 1993a). However, hybrid offspring GNS) (2007), since 1840, when tsunami consequences either by increasing the exhibit distinct differences in survival recordkeeping began, 10 tsunamis phenotypic expression (the outward rate and behavior that may be measuring 16.4 ft (5 m) or higher have appearance or observable structure, deleterious to the species’ long-term hit New Zealand. New Zealand is function or behavior of a living survival (Reed et al. 1993a). Hybrid vulnerable to tsunamis because of the organism) of recessive, deleterious survival to adulthood is about 50 high amount of seismic activity in the alleles or by reducing the overall fitness percent that of the offspring of pure region. Approximately 10,000 to 15,000 of individuals in the population black stilt pairs. In addition, researchers earthquakes occur in New Zealand (Charlesworth & Charlesworth 1987; noted changes in behavioral patterns in annually, most of low magnitude Shaffer 1981). Small, isolated chicks fostered to pied stilt parents (Quake Trackers 2007). New Zealand is populations of wildlife species are also between 1981 and 1987. Due to the expected to experience earthquakes of susceptible to demographic problems limited number of wild black stilt magnitude of 7 on the Richter scale only (Shaffer 1981), which may include breeding pairs, part of the species’ about once a decade (Walsh 2003). reduced reproductive success of management plan at that time was to However, since 2003, the southern individuals and chance disequilibrium cross-foster black stilt eggs to pied stilt region of the South Island has been of sex ratios. Research has shown that parents. Cross-fostered black stilts were rocked by at least three earthquakes near the long-term survival of the black stilt half as likely to be re-sighted in the or above that magnitude. Centered in or as a species requires gene flow to be at UWB and mixed pairs were more likely near Fiordland, 266 mi (429 km) south least 5 percent, and that the present to participate in migratory behavior of the heart of black stilt territory (The

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:38 Jan 15, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR3.SGM 16JAR3 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES3 3154 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations

New Zealand (NZ) Herald 2004, 2007; throughout all of its known range Hypothermis, but insufficient Walsh 2003), the years and magnitudes primarily due to ongoing threats to its information impedes a conclusive of each of these high-magnitude habitat (Factor A); predation (Factor C); decision. Therefore, we accept the earthquakes were: 2003, 7.2 magnitude; and genetic dilution from hybridization, species as Eutrichomyias rowleyi, which 2004: 7.2 magnitude; 2007: 6.7 lack of near- and long-term genetic follows the Integrated Taxonomic magnitude (NZ Herald 2004, 2007; viability, and susceptibility to stochastic Information System (ITIS 2007). Walsh 2003). The 2003 earthquake was events due to risks associated small Habitat and Life History the first on-land earthquake of this population sizes (Factor E). magnitude since 1968 (Walsh 2003). Furthermore, we have determined that The caerulean paradise-flycatcher was The main quake triggered a small the inadequacy of existing regulatory known only from its type specimen tsunami that brought flooding as far mechanisms is a contributory risk factor until 1998. Current knowledge of its north as Haast (Jackson Bay), less than that endangers the species’ continued and behavior are based on 33 100 mi (161 km) from the UWB, where existence (Factor D). Therefore, we are sightings between 1998 and 1999 (Riley the majority of the black stilt population determining endangered status for the & Wardill 2001; Whitten et al. 1987). lives year-round and the only known black stilt under the Act. Because we Riley and Wardill (2001) point out that breeding ground for the species find that the black stilt is endangered the basic lack of ecological information (McGinty & Hancox 2004; Walsh 2003). throughout all of its range, there is no on this species impedes its At least 5,000 aftershocks were recorded reason to consider its status in any conservation. Information about the from the 2003 earthquake, one significant portion of its range. species’ range, behavior, reproduction, registering 6.1 on the Richter scale and population size is quite limited. (McGinty & Hancox 2004; NZ Herald II. Caerulean Paradise-Flycatcher 2007). More than 400 landslides were (Eutrichomyias Rowleyi) The species has been observed mostly triggered, the largest of which sent Species Description in the steep-sloped, closed canopies of 262,000 cubic yards (yd3) (200,000 low-elevation broadleaf primary forest, cubic meters (m3)) of soil crashing down The caerulean paradise-flycatcher is a between 1,394 and 2,133 ft (425 and 650 the fiord at Charles Sound, triggering a member of the Monarchidiae family, m). A few birds were observed foraging 3 to 6 ft (1 to 2 m) high tsunami that locally known as ‘‘burung niu’’ (Whitten on a scrub forest ridge top or in inundated surrounding vegetation 13 to 2006). It is native to , and secondary forest, but only when those 16 ft (4 to 5 m) above sea level (McGinty adults are about 5 in (18 cm) in height, areas were bordered by primary forest. & Hancox 2004). According to Maloney with a long tail and long rictal bristles The caerulean paradise-flycatcher and Murray (2002), flooding was the (stiff hairs around the base of the bill) prefers primary forest habitat, but can second leading cause of egg mortality in (Riley & Wardill 2001; Whitten et al. forage in secondary scrub that is a study conducted between 1977 and 1987). There is scant biometric data for bordered by primary forest; however, 1979. Stochastic events, such as this species, because, other than the the species is absent from disturbed earthquakes and tsunamis, could result type specimen, only one additional habitat away from primary forest in extensive mortalities from which the specimen was captured, measured, and (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001a, 2007d; Riley population may be unable to recover, released in 1998 (Riley & Wardill 2001). & Wardill 2001). The species is described as a bright leading to extinction (Caughley 1994; The species is often observed foraging cerulean blue (which can be likened to Charlesworth & Charlesworth 1987; in association with other bird species a deep blue sky) with gray undertones Maloney & Murray 2002). and a particular squirrel species, on the belly, legs, upper wing coverts believed to be the Celebes dwarf squirrel Summary of Factor E (feathers) and down the sides of the (Prosciurillus murinius) (Riley & Wardill The black stilt is subject to genetic neck to the breast (BLI 2007d; Riley & 2001). Adept at catching flies in the air, dilution, including changes in survival Wardill 2001; Whitten et al. 1987). The this insectivore feeds primarily in the and behavior, due to demographic type specimen, which was described as canopy and sub-canopy, but is known to problems and hybridization with the a male, is slightly larger and duskier in descend to the understory (http:// pied stilt, and is also susceptible to appearance than the specimen measured www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001a, 2007d; Riley other genetic risks, such as inbreeding, in 1998, leading researchers to believe & Wardill 2001). due to its small population size. The that the former specimen was a juvenile species is vulnerable due to stochastic and the latter, a female (Riley & Wardill Experts believe that the species is event, such as a tsunamis or 2001). sedentary, as individuals do not appear to move between the valleys in which earthquakes, which are known to occur Taxonomy in the region. We consider the species’ they are observed (www.rdb.or.id; BLI extremely small population size, along The first specimen of caerulean 2001a, 2007d; Riley & Wardill 2001). with the associated risks of genetic paradise-flycatcher was collected by The largest recorded flock size has been dilution, demographic shifts, and Meyer in 1873. The species has always five birds (Riley & Wardill 2001). Based vulnerability to stochastic events, to be been placed in the Monarchidiae family, on two sightings of young, in October significant risks factors throughout the but within three different genera. When and in December, researchers presume black stilt’s range currently and in the described in 1878, Meyer placed the that nesting and fledging occur in that future. species in the genus Zeocephus; later it time period (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001a; was placed in the genus Hypothymis Riley & Wardill 2001). Researchers Conclusion and Determination for the (Riley & Wardill 2001; Whitten et al. believe the bird builds nests of palm Black Stilt 1987). In 1939, it was placed into the leaves (likely Arenga spp.) in the We have carefully assessed the best monotypic genus Eutrichomyias, also of branches of understory trees (including available scientific and commercial the Monarchidae family, and Szygium spp.) from 7 to 8 ft (2 to 2.5 m) information regarding the past, present, distinguished from Hypothymis by its off the ground (www.rdb.or.id; BLI and potential future threats faced by the abundant rictal bristles (Riley & Wardill 2001a; Riley & Wardill 2001). Both sexes black stilt. We have determined that the 2001). Riley and Wardill (2001) suggest appear to care for the young (Riley & species is in danger of extinction that the species may be more related to Wardill 2001).

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:38 Jan 15, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR3.SGM 16JAR3 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 3155

Historical Range and Distribution actually the name of a mountain peak) been no significant forest losses on The only known range of the (http://www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001a) and Sangihe Island (Whitten 2006) because caerulean paradise-flycatcher is on Pegunungan Sahendaruman (BLI the Sangihe Island economy is not Sangihe Island, north of Sulawesi, 2004b). Mt. Sahendaruman supports the driven by timber harvest as in other Indonesia (Riley & Wardill 2001; only extensive remaining primary forest parts of Indonesia. The inaccessibility of Whitten et al. 1987). Sangihe Island, on the island (http://www.rdb.or.id; BLI Mt. Sahendaruman forest made timber also known as Great Sangihe, Great 2001a, 2007d; Riley & Wardill 2001) and extraction uneconomical (Vidaeus Sangir, or Sangir Besar Island, is part of is home to three critically-threatened 2001). However, Riley & Wardill (2001) species of birds, including the caerulean noted that the caerulean paradise- the Sangihe-Talaud archipelago paradise-flycatcher; no other area in flycatcher likely only existed on Mt. (Whitten et al. 1987) in the waters Indonesia supports more than one Sahendaruman because of the steep, between Sulawesi (northern Indonesia) critically threatened bird species (BLI fairly inaccessible terrain. and the (Brodjonegoro et al. 2001a). Most threats to the caerulean 2004). The archipelago consists of two Mt. Sahendaruman extends to an paradise-flycatcher habitat have been island groups, the Sangihe group and altitude of approximately 3,382 ft (1,031 locally derived (Vidaeus 2001), caused the Talaud group, and until 2002, the m) (Riley 2002). The entire forest covers by smaller scale activities on the lower entire island group was administered as an area of less than 3 mi2 (8 km2). fringes of the primary forest on Mt. one unit. Thus, most available However, because of the species’ Sahendaruman (Riley & Wardill 2001), information on the archipelago concerns preference for riverine habitat at including within the boundaries of the both island groups. elevations from 1,394 to 2,133 ft (425 to Mt. Sahendaruman Protection Forest The Sangihe-Talaud archipelago 650 m), the actual range available to the (see Factor D). Forest clearing by includes 77 islands; 56 are inhabited, flycatcher is estimated to be an area of farmers is generally small scale, including Sangihe (Brodjonegoro et al. 0.8 mi2 (2 km2) on the lower valleys between 53,820 to 161,459 square ft (ft2) 2004). The total land mass of the near the fringe of the forest (5,000 to 15,000 m2), and occurs along 2 Sangihe-Talaud archipelago is 314 mi (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001a, 2007d; Riley the fringes of the primary forest, which 2 (813 km ) (Mous & DeVantier 2001), of & Wardill 2001). Moreover, because the is adjacent to the species’ preferred 2 which Sangihe Island includes 270 mi species is rarely seen at higher habitat. BirdLife International (2006c) 2 (700 km ) (Riley 2002), making it the elevations, experts believe that this reported that shifting cultivation has largest island in the archipelago. The species has reached its upper caused the gradual erosion of the lower Island became part of the Dutch East elevational limit (Riley & Wardill 2001). fringes of the primary forest on Mt. Company in the 17th century, and Sahendaruman. Encroachment for forest Population Estimates remained primarily under Dutch control product extraction on the fringes of the for the next 300 years (Simkin and The population is estimated to be forest also disrupts the flycatcher’s Siebert 1994). In some of the earliest between 19 and 135 individuals. This habitat (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001a, accounts, Sangihe Island was already estimate is based on inferences made 2007d Kirby 2003a; Riley & Wardill known for its coconut and nutmeg from 33 sightings between 1998 and 2001). Forest is also cleared for wood, plantations (New York Times Archives 1999 (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001a, 2007d; paper production, conversion to cash 1892). Most of Sangihe Island was Riley & Wardill 2001). The basis for this crops, shifting cultivation, and deforested by 1920, having been logged estimate is well explained by Riley and settlements (Riley & Wardill 2001; for timber and paper production or Wardill (2001, p. 49), who note the Whitten et al. 1987). Researchers believe converted to cash crop plantations possibility that the total population may that the species has reached its upper (Riley 2002; Riley & Wardill 2001; consist of only those 19 observed birds. elevational limit and that human Whitten et al. 1987). More recent census data is not available. pressures on the lower fringes of its The extent of the caerulean paradise- habitat have boxed the species into its flycatcher’s historic distribution is not current range (www.rdb.or.id; BLI well known because there have been so The caerulean paradise-flycatcher is a 2001a; Riley & Wardill 2001). few sightings of this species. Following protected species in Indonesia (J.C. the initial discovery of the species in Wardill in litt. 1999, as cited in BLI Summary of Factor A 1873, there were only two reported 2001a). The IUCN considers this species The caerulean paradise-flycatcher is sightings; both unconfirmed (Riley & to be ‘‘’’ due to its currently limited to an area of suitable Wardill 2001). By the 1980s, with no low estimated population size and habitat that may be as small as 0.8 m2 confirmed sightings of live caerulean restricted range (BLI 2004a). (2 km2) on Mt. Sahendaruman. paradise-flycatchers for over 100 years, Summary of Factors Affecting the Preferring lower elevations, the species the species was presumed extinct due to Caerulean Paradise-Flycatcher appears to have reached its upper loss of habitat (Riley & Wardill 2001; elevational limit for suitable habitat. Thompson 1996; Whitten et al. 1987). A. The Present or Threatened Encroachment on the fringes at the base Destruction, Modification, or of the mountain threatens the species to Current Range and Distribution Curtailment of the Caerulean Paradise- the lower extent of its range. Given the The caerulean paradise-flycatcher was flycatcher’s Habitat or Range caerulean paradise-flycatcher’s limited rediscovered in 1998 (Riley & Wardill Today, much of Sangihe Island is range and preference for closed-canopy 2001), occupying the forested valleys covered by plantations or secondary primary forest, habitat modification around the base of Mount forests and the caerulean paradise- even at a small scale can have a Sahendaruman, on the southern part of flycatcher’s habitat on Mt. profound effect on the species. Based on Sangihe Island (www.rdb.or.id; BLI Sahendaruman provides the only the above information, we believe that 2001a; BLI 2005; Riley & Wardill 2001). remaining extensive primary forest on the present and future threatened An extinct volcano, Mt. Sahendaruman the island (Riley & Wardill 2001; destruction, modification, or is variously referred to as: Gunungan Whitten et al. 1987). Land use patterns curtailment of the caerulean paradise- Sahendaruman and Gunungan on Sangihe Island have been fairly flycatcher’s habitat or range threatens Sahengbalira (the latter of which is stable (Vidaeus 2001), and there have the species throughout its range.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:38 Jan 15, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR3.SGM 16JAR3 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES3 3156 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations

B. Overutilization for Commercial, Summary of Factor B prohibited (Whitten 2006). Thus, the Recreational, Scientific, or Educational Indiscriminate bird hunting and species is not adequately protected from Purposes hunting-related disturbances are hunting due to its presence within the While there is no documented widespread within the species’ range Mt. Sahendaruman Protection Forest. Plans that began in 2001 to have the evidence that the species is a specific (Mt. Sahendaruman forest). The species Mt. Sahendaruman Protection Forest target of hunting, researchers familiar has an extremely small population size designated a wildlife preserve, with core with the area and the species consider and is adverse to human disturbance. areas as a strict nature reserve indiscriminate hunting to be a risk We consider incidental hunting and (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001a, 2007d; Riley factor for this species (Riley & Wardill hunting disturbances to be factors that & Wardill 2001), have not been 2001; www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001a). threaten this species throughout its implemented (Whitten 2006). However, Sangihe Island locals are known for range. such a designation might not benefit the hunting birds indiscriminately with air C. Disease or Predation species. According to experts, rifles as a hobby in and around the designating this habitat as a nature There is no available evidence forests of Mt. Sahendaruman (BLI reserve would shift management of the indicating that disease or predation 2001a; Riley & Wardill 2001). BirdLife area from the local government to the have led to decline in caerulean International (2006c) describes hunting central government. This centralization paradise-flycatcher populations or pressures on small , to which of enforcement and administration contribute to the species’ risk of group of birds the caerulean paradise- might be unresponsive or ineffective in flycatcher belongs, as ‘‘intensive.’’ Riley extinction. protecting the species and may not and Wardill (2001) noted that while D. The Inadequacy of Existing produce the most viable options for conducting fieldwork in Mt. Regulatory Mechanisms long-term conservation of the species Sahendaruman forest in 1998, a group of (Vidaeus 2001; Whitten 2006). Because The caerulean paradise-flycatcher was three hunters were observed carrying 20 this designation has not been enacted, declared a protected species by the to 30 birds of all sizes that had been we are unable to evaluate whether this Indonesian government in January 1999 shot. regulatory mechanism might effectively (J. C. Wardill in litt. 1999 as cited in BLI Indiscriminate hunting has resulted in address the issues of habitat destruction 2001a). Protected species are regulated declines of more accessible bird species (Factor A) and hunting (Factor B). on the island (www.rdb.or.id; BLI under the Act of the Republic of The species’ habitat is also 2001a) and locals have identified Indonesia No. 5 of 1990 Concerning inadequately protected (BLI 2003a, hunting as a key cause for the decline Conservation of Living Resources and 2004b; Conservation International 2003; in bird species in the Mt. Their Ecosystems (Act No. 5 1990). Whitten 2006). There are no strictly Sahendaruman area (BLI 2001a). The Under this Act, hunting, capturing, protected areas on the island (Riley & practice is so pervasive that BirdLife killing, possession, or trade in protected Wardill 2001; Whitten 2006). The Mt. International—Indonesia Programme species or their parts is prohibited, Sahendaruman Protection Forest is (Vidaeus 2001) has focused on creating except as permitted for research, managed for its watershed value (Riley educational materials aimed at school science, or conservation purposes 2002; Riley & Wardill 2001). Although children to encourage them to find (Article 21–22). Despite this law, an the Mt. Sahendaruman Protection Forest alternative hobbies to hunting. Given analysis conducted by the IUCN (World contains the only remaining primary the species’ extremely small population Conservation Union) in 2003 found that forest on the island that is suitable for size, between 19 and 135 individuals, this species remained insufficiently the caerulean paradise-flycatcher (Riley indiscriminate hunting of even a few protected (Conservation International & Wardill 2001), small-scale forest individuals would have a detrimental 2003). Lee et al. (2005) noted that conversion for agricultural purposes and effect on the population (See Factor E). Indonesia has over ‘‘150 existing non-timber forest product extraction Riley (2002) conducted research on national laws and regulations to protect occurs on the fringes of the forest (see mammal hunting on Sangihe Island, its wildlife species and area * * * Factor A). Local rights to manage finding that, after habitat loss, hunting however, Indonesia lacks an integrated cultivation and settlement areas within pressure was the biggest threat on the system of law enforcement’’ (p. 478). the Protection Forest are among the key island. In interviews with local farmers, Problems include lack of awareness of disputes between locals and the forestry 77 percent of the farmers admitted to wildlife laws and inadequate department (BLI 2001a). Thus, the hunting mammals variously using air monitoring capability among law habitat’s status as a Protection Forest rifles, snares and mist nets. enforcement officials (Lee et al. 2005). does not protect the species from threats Furthermore, hunting pressure was Evidence of continued indiscriminate of habitat modification. particularly high for the bear cuscus hunting within the species’ habitat The caerulean paradise-flycatcher has (Ailurops ursinus melanotis), a small indicates that the caerulean paradise- been included in a biodiversity project, marsupial found only in the primary flycatcher’s listing as protected in 1999 Action Sampiri. Members of the Action forests of Mt. Sahendaruman, the same has not reduced the threat of hunting Sampiri research team, Riley and habitat as the caerulean paradise- (Factor B). Wardill, rediscovered this species in flycatcher. Riley and Wardill (2001) The caerulean paradise-flycatcher’s 1998 (Riley & Wardill 2001; Whitten characterize the flycatcher as adverse to habitat lies within an approximately 2006). Present-day members of Action human disturbance, and hunting 16 mi 2 (43 km 2) area centered on Mt. Sampiri (now known as Yayasan pressures in the same habitat as the Sahendaruman that has been designated Sampiri) were contracted to develop a flycatcher contribute to disturbance as Protection Forest since 1994, under public awareness program on the merits activities that are disruptive to the the jurisdiction of the Department of of enhancing forest protection as part of species (as described under Factor A). Forestry (Riley & Wardill 2001). a comprehensive conservation project The species is not known to be in However, Whitten (2006) noted that for the Sangihe-Talaud islands being international trade and has not been protection forests do not confer specific implemented by BirdLife International formally considered for listing under protections on the wildlife found and the World Bank, with funding from CITES (www.cites.org). therein; for example, hunting is not the Global Environment Facility

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:38 Jan 15, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR3.SGM 16JAR3 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 3157

(Whitten 2006). Conservation efforts population of the caerulean paradise- III. Giant Ibis (Pseudibis Gigantea) that focus on people’s awareness of the flycatcher may be as small as 19 birds Species Description forest and its value, including potential (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001a, 2007d; Riley for ecotourism with the prospect for & Wardill 2001); this is clearly below The giant ibis is a waterbird in the local employment opportunities, are the minimum effective population size family Threskiornithidae. It is native to considered important to the species’ (N = 50 individuals) required to avoid Cambodia, Lao People’s Democratic e Republic (hereafter, Lao PDR), and long-term conservation (BLI Indonesia risks from inbreeding. Moreover the Vietnam. Adults stand approximately 3 Program 2001; Riley & Wardill 2001; upper limit of the population estimate Whitten 2006). For instance, the ft (1 m) tall, and have dark grey-brown of no more than 135 birds plumage, with a dark hindcrown and caerulean paradise-flycatcher is among (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001a, 2007d; Riley the endemic birds designated as island nape. Wing-coverts are pale gray, with & Wardill 2001) is a quarter of the upper mascots, which has promoted greater darker tips. They have light red legs, a awareness of the species among locals threshold (Ne = 500) required for long- long downward curving bill, and red and has led to a general reduction in term fitness of a population that will not eyes. Juveniles have short, black indiscriminate hunting (www.rdb.or.id; lose its genetic diversity over time and feathers on their hindcrown and BLI 2001a). will maintain an enhanced capacity to hindneck, a shorter bill, and brown eyes adapt to changing conditions. As such, (BLI 2007h). Summary of Factor D we currently consider the species to be Taxonomy Based on the above information, at significant risk of potential existing regulatory mechanisms are not demographic shifts and lack of near- The species was first taxonomically adequate to reduce or remove threats and long-term viability. described by Oustalet in 1877 and from habitat destruction (Factor A) and named Pseudibis gigantea, in the hunting (Factor B). Encroachment and Summary of Factor E Threskiornithidae family. That same destruction along the fringes of the year, Elliot placed the species in its own Demographic shifts and lack of near- species’ habitat are significant current monotypic genus Thaumatibis, in the and long-term viability associated with and future threats for this species, yet same family, on the basis that the giant the species’ habitat is insufficiently the extant population’s small size are ibis is much larger and less colorful protected. Further, the lack of major risks to the caerulean paradise- than all other ibises (BLI 2007h). We enforcement of protections against take flycatcher. Therefore, we consider the accept the species as Pseudibis gigantea, and inadequate protection within its species’ extremely small population size which follows the Integrated Taxonomic habitat does not adequately reduce or and the risks associated with loss of Information System (ITIS 2007). genetic diversity and demographic shifts remove the threat of hunting. We Habitat and Life History believe that the inadequacy of to be significant factors that threaten the regulatory mechanisms and their caerulean paradise-flycatcher The giant ibis requires large areas of enforcement are contributory risk throughout its range currently and in undisturbed habitat in deciduous factors that threaten the species now the future. dipterocarp forest and associated and in the future. wetlands (Tom Clements, Wildlife Conclusion and Determination for the Conservation Society—Cambodia E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Caerulean Paradise-Flycatcher Program, Phnom Penh, Cambodia, in Affecting the Continued Existence of the litt. December 2007). It is found in open Species We have carefully assessed the best habitats (open wooded plains, humid The caerulean paradise-flycatcher’s available scientific and commercial clearings) and deciduous forested small estimated population size, information regarding the past, present, wetlands (pools in deep forest, lakes, between 19 and 135 individuals (BLI and potential future threats faced by the swamps, seasonally flooded marshes, 2007d; Riley & Wardill 2001), makes caerulean paradise-flycatcher. We have paddy fields) (BLI 2007h; Collar et al. this species vulnerable to any of several determined that the species is in danger 1994b; Matheu & del Hoyo 1992). The risks, including inbreeding depression, of extinction throughout all of its known mix of dry forest and freshwater swamp loss of genetic variation, and range primarily due to disturbance and ecosystems is found only in this region accumulation of new mutations. encroachment of its habitat (Factor A), (WWF 2001, 2005). Freshwater swamp Inbreeding can have individual or threats from hunting and hunting- habitat is flooded at least 6 months of population-level consequences by either related disturbances (Factor B), and lack the year and consists of shrubland increasing the phenotypic expression of of near- and long-term genetic viability (dominated by a nearly continuous recessive, deleterious alleles or by associated with the species’ small canopy of deciduous species, including reducing the overall fitness of population size (Factor E). Furthermore, spurges (Euphorbiaceae family) and individuals in the population we have determined that the inadequacy legumes (Fabaceae family)) and of (Charlesworth & Charlesworth 1987). of existing regulatory mechanisms to forestland (dominated by mangroves Small, isolated populations of wildlife reduce or remove these threats is a (Rhizophoraceae family) and melaleucas species are also susceptible to contributory factor to the risks that (Melaleuca spp.)). The freshwater demographic problems (Shaffer 1981), endanger this species’ continued swamp ecosystem is found only in which may include reduced existence (Factor D). Therefore, we are Cambodia and Vietnam (WWF 2001). reproductive success of individuals and determining endangered status for the Lower Mekong dry forests, found only chance disequilibrium of sex ratios. In in Cambodia, Lao PDR, and Vietnam, caerulean paradise-flycatcher under the the absence of more species-specific life also provide habitat to the giant ibis. Act. Because we find that the caerulean history data, a general approximation of These forests are characterized by minimum viable population sizes is paradise-flycatcher is endangered deciduous tropical hardwoods referred to as the 50/500 rule (Soule´ throughout all of its range, there is no (Dipterocarpaceae family) and semi- 1980; Hunter 1996), as described under reason to consider its status in any evergreen forest (containing a mix of Factor E of the black stilt. The available significant portion of its range. deciduous and evergreen trees) information indicates that the interspersed with meadows, ponds, and

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:38 Jan 15, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR3.SGM 16JAR3 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES3 3158 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations

other wetlands. Semi-evergreen forests by BirdLife International (2001b) paints are two factors attributed to the species’ are unique to mainland Southeast an erratic picture of the ‘‘appearance’’ decline (Wildlife Conservation Society (WWF 2006b). and ‘‘disappearance’’ of the giant ibis in (WCS) 2007a, 2007b, 2007c). Although considered nonmigratory, each range country during the 20th Lao PDR: The giant ibis was not the giant ibis will travel to seek out century. The species has been suspected reported from Lao PDR until 1926. permanent pools of water during the dry or considered extinct in each of its range Thereafter, it was observed only once season (Bird et al. 2006; Matheu & del countries at least once since it was first each decade in the 1930s and the 1940s. Hoyo 1992). The giant ibis may forage described in 1877. In the early part of Based on the paucity of sightings, it was alone, in pairs or in small groups (BLI the century, the species was observed never believed to be common in Lao 2007h). Preferring mudflats, they use most often in . In the mid- PDR (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001b). By their bills to probe in the mud for a 1920s, the species was seen only in Lao 1992, the species was no longer variety of seeds and small animals, PDR, Cambodia, and Vietnam considered extant in Lao PDR including , small (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001b). By 1992, (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001b; Matheu & amphibians, and (Clements et the species was considered extant only del Hoyo 1992), although the species al. 2007; Davidson et al. 2002). in Vietnam and possibly in Cambodia was observed again the next year (see Although considered a wetland species, (Matheu & del Hoyo 1992). By the end Current range, below). Historical the giant ibis will also forage in dry of the 20th century, the species was declines are attributed to hunting and areas; it is believed that this is an considered extinct in Vietnam and wetland draining or other human to the lengthy dry season Thailand, and extant primarily in disturbances (www.rdb.or.id; BLI within its range (www.rdb.or.id; BLI Cambodia and in Lao PDR to a lesser 2001b). 2001b, 2007h; Davidson et al. 2002). extent (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001b, Thailand: This species was observed Until recently, little was known about 2007h). Today, the species is considered in Thailand several times between 1896 giant ibis breeding biology, except that extinct only in Thailand and 1913, at a time when it was not the species was believed to nest in trees (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001b; Matheu & being reported in any of the other range as other ibises do (BLI 2007h). A nesting del Hoyo 1992). countries, except for one sighting in survey was conducted in Preah Vihear Experts have noted several factors Cambodia. All sightings were made in Protected Forest (PVPF) and Kulen unrelated to the species’ actual status the southern regions of Thailand and Promtep Wildlife Sanctuary (KPWS) that have contributed to this erratic there have been no confirmed sightings between 2004 and 2007 (Clements et al. record: (1) The records may not be of this species in Thailand since 1913 2007). The majority of giant ibises bred complete because sightings may go (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001b). From the in remote areas, sing wetlands that have unreported or unconfirmed for several scant sightings of this species, a minimal human presence (T. Clements years (BLI 2001b; Matheu & del Hoyo researchers are uncertain whether the in litt. December 2007). The number of 1992) (e.g., in Vietnam, there were nests remained fairly stable over the several unconfirmed sightings in the giant ibis was ever resident to Thailand, four years of the surveys, although their 1980s); (2) nearly continuous war in the or just a visitor (www.rdb.or.id; BLI locations changed. Researchers found an last half of the 20th century in one or 2001b). Since 1992, the species has been average of 19 nests in the 534-mi2 all of the range countries may have considered extinct in Thailand, (1,383-km2) area surveyed in PVPF and impeded expeditions to locate the primarily due to loss of habitat from 7 nests in the 726-mi2 (1,881-km2) species (Matheu & del Hoyo 1992) (e.g., wetland draining (www.rdb.or.id; BLI KPWS. Fledging success was estimated Cambodia experienced a nearly 50-year 2001b; Matheu & del Hoyo 1992). at around 50 percent, suggesting that the period of war, during which time there Vietnam: The species was observed population was not increasing. were only four sightings of the species); once late in the 19th century and not Researchers determined that weather and, (3) the habitat may be remote or the seen again until the mid-1920s, when it and predation were the primary limiting terrain difficult to access, which might was observed several times until 1931. factors (Clements et al. 2007). See Factor also impede opportunities to observe By the turn of the 21st century, the giant C. the species (Duckworth et al. 1998). For ibis was believed extirpated from The giant ibis is characterized as these reasons, recorded sightings (or the Vietnam, with no confirmed sightings highly sensitive to human disturbance lack thereof) cannot be used as a basis between 1931 and 2003 (www.rdb.or.id; (Bird et al. 2006; www.rdb.or.id; BLI for concluding extinction (Butchart et BLI 2001b; Eames et al. 2004). The 2001b, 2007h; T. Clements in litt. al. 2006). species was rediscovered in 2003. December 2007; Clements et al. 2007; Specific information for each range Hunting is considered the primary cause Dudley 2007; Eames et al. 2004). country follows. of the historical decline, and land Clements (in litt. December 2007) Cambodia: The first specimen of giant conversion to agriculture is a secondary postulated that the species’ sensitivity ibis was obtained in Cambodia in 1876, cause (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001b). but no additional sightings were to human populations is due to Current Range and Distribution disturbance (e.g., at feeding ponds) and reported until 1918. Historically, the incidental persecution through hunting species’ range spanned from the north The giant ibis’ current range is the and poisoning of water sources (see through central region and into the mix of dry forest and freshwater swamp Factors A and B). eastern portions of the country. The forest ecosystems of Cambodia, Lao giant ibis was observed several times in PDR, and Vietnam; it is considered Historical Range and Distribution the 1920s and 1930s, but only four times extirpated from Thailand (BLI 2000a, The giant ibis’s historical range between 1939 and 1989 (www.rdb.or.id; 2001b; www.rdb.or.id; BirdLife extended from central and peninsular BLI 2001b). In 1992, experts believed International—Indochina Programme Thailand; through northern, central, and the species might be extant in (BLI–IP) & Vietnam’s Ministry of coastal regions of Cambodia; southern Cambodia, but indicated that the recent Agriculture and Rural Development and central Lao PDR; and southern reports had been unconfirmed (Matheu (MARD) 2004; Eames et al. 2004; World Vietnam (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001b). & del Hoyo 1992). The species was Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) 2001, A comparison of recorded observed again in 2000 (see Current 2005). Each range country is discussed observations of this species maintained Range, below). Disturbance and hunting below.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:38 Jan 15, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR3.SGM 16JAR3 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 3159

Cambodia: Between 1992 and 2002, 1998, no giant ibises were found in giant ibis population today is located in there were no confirmed giant ibis central Lao PDR (Duckworth et al. Cambodia, with a small number in sightings in Cambodia. However, since 1998), indicating that the giant ibis may southern Lao PDR, even fewer in 2002, the species has been observed at no longer be present in central Lao PDR, Vietnam, and no known individuals in several sites throughout Cambodia. as it was historically (www.rdb.or.id; Thailand (BLI 2000a, 2001b; Observations in 2002 and 2003 suggest BLI 2001b). Previously suspected to be www.rdb.or.id; Clements et al. 2007). that the species continues to inhabit its nonresident (www.rdb.or.id; BLI The population has been conservatively historic range in the north, central, and 2001b), however in 2007 it is being estimated at a minimum of 100 pairs, eastern provinces. In the Northern reported as a resident (BLI 2007b). with no more than 250 total individuals Plains, the giant ibis has been observed The giant ibis has been found in the (Clements et al. 2007). in Stung Treng and Preah Vihar open deciduous forest of two areas in Cambodia: Population surveys have Provinces (bordering Lao PDR), and extreme southern Lao PDR: Xe Pian been conducted in several areas since Kratie Province (Bird et al. 2006; National Biodiversity Conservation Area the giant ibis’ rediscovery in Cambodia www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001b; Clements et (NBCA) (Champasak and Attapeu in 2000. Aerial surveys between 2000 al. 2007). The Northern Plains are Provinces) and Dong Khanthung and 2001 indicated that between 50 considered the largest remaining proposed NBCA (Champasak Province) birds and 90 were located in the contiguous tract of seasonally inundated (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001b, 2007b; Northern Plains (BLI–IP & MARD 2004). meadows and permanent pools within a Clements et al. 2007; Poole 2002) and Based on the nest surveys conducted deciduous dipterocarp forest (Davidson giant ibis may only be a frequent visitor between 2004 and 2007 in Preah Vihear et al. 2002). In central Cambodia, the to Lao PDR there from Cambodia. The Protected Forest (PVPF) and Kulen species has been observed in the Tonle Xe Pain NBCA is 927 mi2 (2,400 km2) Promtep Wildlife Sanctuary (KPWS), Sap floodplains (Kompong Thom and (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001c). The Dong also in the Northern Plains, there was Siem Reap) (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001b; Khanthung proposed NBCA has not yet evidence of 28 nesting pairs of birds Clements et al. 2007). The Tonle Sap been defined or approved (BLI 2007b). (Clements et al. 2007). Extrapolating to floodplain and associated rivers is Thailand: The species has not been the available suitable habitat within the considered one of the few remaining observed in Thailand since 1913 Northern Plains (including the Tonle remnants of freshwater swamp forest (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001b). Sap Lake), researchers estimated the type in the region. Approximately 2,120 Vietnam: At the turn of the 21st population in the Northern Plains at 30 mi2 (5,490 km2) of the freshwater century, giant ibis was believed to 40 pairs. In the Eastern Plains swamp forest ecoregion is protected in extirpated from Vietnam, with no (including the Siema Biodiversity Cambodia. Of this amount, the Tonle confirmed sightings since 1931 Conservation Area (SBCA) and the Sap Great Lake Protected Area (which (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001b; Eames et al. Lomphat Wildlife Sanctuary), the includes the Tonle Sap floodplain) 2004). However, in 2003, several giant population has been estimated at no makes up 2,092 mi2 (5,420 km2) of that ibises were observed during surveys in more than 10 to 20 pairs. In protected habitat (WWF 2001). In Yok Don National Park (BLI–IP & MARD northeastern Cambodia, Siem Pang eastern Cambodia, the species has been 2004; Eames et al. 2004; World Wide (Stung Treng Province) surveys suggest located in the Lomphat Wildlife Fund for Nature (WWF) 2005). Located that an excess of 14 pairs may exist. The Sanctuary (Mondulkiri and Rattanakiri in Dok Lok Province in central Vietnam, total giant ibis population in Cambodia, Provinces) (Bird et al. 2006; the Park shares a western border with based on available suitable habitat, is 82 www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001b; Clements et Cambodia. There is some speculation to 100 pairs (Clements et al. 2007). al. 2007; Davidson et al. 2002). The that the birds flew over the border from Lao PDR: The giant ibis Laotian Lomphat Wildlife Sanctuary spans a 965 Cambodia (Mondulkiri Province) (WWF population is estimated to include no mi2 (2,500 km2) area in northeastern 2005), but this has not been confirmed more than 5 to 10 pairs of birds Cambodia (in Mondulkiri and or refuted. (Clements et al. 2007). Vietnam: In 2003 and 2004, several Rattanakiri Provinces) near the Vietnam Population Estimates border (WildAid 2003, 2005). The giant ibises were observed during Lomphat Sanctuary is considered to be Population estimates are provided for surveys in Yok Don National Park (Don one of the most important areas for the global population of giant ibis as Lok Province), the only known location wildlife in Cambodia (WildAid 2005). well as for each range country. The within Vietnam (BLI–IP & MARD 2004; More recent sightings suggest that the range country estimates should not be Eames et al. 2004; World Wide Fund for giant ibis’ range may extend further considered distinct subpopulations. Nature (WWF) 2005). Yok Don National south and east than previously Very little is known about the species’ Park, which occupies a 446-mi2 (1,155- understood (Bird et al. 2006). The ecology and dispersal, and all known km2) area, became a protected area in species has been observed in Kampot areas where giant ibis have been 1986 and a national park in 1991. The Province (the southernmost Province in observed are contiguous. There may be forest has three use areas: A 312-mi2 Cambodia) (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001b) some interchange between populations (809-km2) strict protection area, a 117- and in the buffer zone of Seima and researchers have been unable to mi2 (3,043-km2) forest rehabilitation Biodiversity Conservation Area (SBCA) identify discrete subpopulations of this area, and a 16-mi2 (42-km2) (Kratie and Mondulkiri Provinces, species (T. Clements in litt. December administration and services area. In eastern Cambodia) (Bird et al. 2006; 2007). addition, a 517-mi2 (1,339-km2) buffer Clements et al. 2007). The SBCA was Global population estimates: The zone has been defined (Eames et al. designated in 2002 and encompasses a giant ibis is characterized as uncommon 2004). However, these protections are 540 mi2 (1,400 km2) area (WCS 2007b). and local throughout its range (Matheu ineffective at reducing or removing Lao PDR: The giant ibis was believed & del Hoyo 1992; BLI 2000a). It occurs threats directed at the species (see extinct in Lao PDR in 1992 (Matheu & at relatively low densities and requires Factor D). del Hoyo 1992). The following year, an large areas of undisturbed habitat Eames et al. (2004) postulated that the observation was confirmed and it has (deciduous dipterocarp forest and species is either very rare or a visitor in since been observed in Lao PDR several associated wetlands) (T. Clements in Vietnam. The Yok Don area is times. Based on surveys conducted in litt. December 2007). The majority of the contiguous with sites in Cambodia (such

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:38 Jan 15, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR3.SGM 16JAR3 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES3 3160 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations

as Eastern Mondulkiri) that are known Vietnam: In Vietnam, the species is The Tonle Sap floodplain, currently the to support resident breeding birds of listed as endangered (Eames et al. 2004). southernmost extreme of the giant ibis’ giant ibises (T. Clements in litt. However, this regulatory mechanism is range in Cambodia, and freshwater December 2007). During the re- ineffective at reducing or removing swamp forest ecosystem rely on the evaluation of the species’ status, experts threats directed at the species (see Mekong River as part of its seasonal concluded that Yok Don National Park Factor D). cycle of flooding (WWF 2001). A study of the impact of this dam on is unlikely to support any breeding pairs Summary of Factors Affecting the Giant downstream communities in 2001 found (Clements et al. 2007). They considered Ibis that the birds observed within the Park that the effect of the dam on humans were likely to be foraging or dispersing Where applicable in the sections (including resettlement, drowning in birds and that it was unlikely that the below, factors affecting the survival of unexpected floods, and livelihood Park ‘‘supported resident breeding birds the giant ibises are discussed in two changes especially for fishermen) would due to the high level of disturbance and parts: (1) Regional factors (affecting or be ‘‘significant but manageable,’’ by hunting’’ (T. Clements in litt. December including two or more range countries), relocating communities inland, for 2007). and (2) Factors within individual range instance. The report also noted no countries. anticipated impacts on waterbirds Conservation Status A. The Present or Threatened (CRES 2001). However, the study did Global conservation status: Using the Destruction, Modification, or not look beyond Vietnam and the effects IUCN categories, the global population Curtailment of the Species Habitat or of water flow disruption further of giant ibis falls within the range of 50 Range downstream, including Tonle Sap to 250 individuals (BLI 2007h). The floodplain in Cambodia. Within the first Giant ibis is affected throughout its recent rediscovery of giant ibis in year of the dam’s completion, massive range by (1) habitat modification from devastating floods were reported Vietnam and additional populations in dam construction, (2) deforestation Cambodia prompted BirdLife to re- downstream (CRES 2001). caused by war, (3) illegal logging and Dam construction along the Srepok evaluate the species’ status in 2007 (Jez wood fuel collection, (4), and continued Bird, Global Species Programme River, which flows through giant ibis human encroachment (Bird et al. 2006; habitat in Vietnam and Cambodia, has Assistant, BirdLife International, in litt. BLI 2007h; T. Clements in litt. November 2007; BirdLife Globally also altered the species’ habitat. December 2007; Clements et al. 2007; Construction of the Buon Koup Dam Threatened Species Forum 2007). They Poole 2002; WWF 2001, 2005). concluded that, despite recent new began in 2003 (San et al. 2007), altering (1) Habitat modification from dam the natural water and vegetation sightings of giant ibis in Vietnam and construction: Dam construction along Cambodia, there was insufficient patterns along the Srepok River, the Mekong River Basin (MRB) has affecting Yok Don National Park (Eames evidence to confirm that the giant ibis altered giant ibis habitat throughout its population exceeds 250 individuals et al. 2004). A draft environmental range. The MRB begins as a system of impact analysis (EIA) identified several (Clements et al. 2007; J. Bird in litt. tributaries and streams originating in November 2007). impacts to people living along the the Tibetan Plateau and flowing Cambodian side of the river, including The giant ibis has been categorized by eventually into the Mekong River Delta, daily irregular water fluctuations, the IUCN as a ‘‘Critically Endangered’’ 2,000 mi (4,800 km) from start to finish. erosion of riverbanks, and water since 1994 (BLI 2004c). BirdLife Including parts of China, and pollution, as well as impacts on paddy International, which serves as the IUCN Vietnam, nearly one-third the land area production, fish migration, fishing Red List authority for birds, re-evaluated of Thailand, and most of Cambodia and livelihoods, and species diversity (San the status of the species in 2007 and Lao PDR, the MRB encompasses a et al. 2007). In response to decided to retain its critically 307,000 mi2 (795,000 km2) area. The unpredictable water levels and flash endangered status for the 2008 Red List Lower Mekong River Basin (LMRB) flooding caused by dams, people began (J. Bird in litt. November 2007; Clements includes Cambodia, Lao PDR, Thailand, moving inland (ADB 2005). et al. 2007). and Vietnam (Mekong River Dam construction along the MRB has Cambodia: In 2005, the giant ibis was Commission (MRC) 2007). According to diverted water from critical ecosystems declared the national symbolic bird in the Asian Development Bank (ADB and has altered or threatens to alter the Cambodia (Chheang Dany, Deputy 2005), 13 dams are built, being built, or natural water and vegetation along Director, Wildlife Protection Office, proposed to be built along the Mekong waterways within the Mekong River Phnom Penh, Cambodia, in litt. January River Subregion. This important Delta, a vital water source throughout 2007) and, as of 2007, the species had regional resource has a profound the species’ range. Impacts include been proposed as endangered in the influence on each of the diverse drastic water level fluctuations, frequent draft wildlife list in Cambodia, the ecosystems through which it flows, flooding, and reduced water levels highest protected species category by including giant ibis habitat. Two during the dry season, as well as the the Forestry Law of 2002. However, this examples are discussed. potential for riverbank erosion and regulatory mechanism is ineffective at Construction of Yali Falls increased water pollution. As reducing or removing threats directed at hydroelectric dam began in Vietnam in populations move further inland to the species (see Factor D). 1993 and was completed in 1999. The escape the unpredictable changes Lao PDR: In Lao PDR, the giant ibis 226-ft (69-m) high dam was constructed caused by dam construction, they is legally protected and receives some at Yali Falls, on a tributary of the Sesan encroach upon inland forested areas, habitat protection in the Xe Pian River. Part of the LMRB, the Sesan River including freshwater swamp ecosystems National Biodiversity Conservation Area originates in Vietnam and flows through and semi-evergreen forests, which serve (NBCA) (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001b). Cambodia, where it meets the Mekong as giant ibis habitat (See (4) Continued However, these regulatory mechanisms River. The Mekong River, in turn, flows human encroachment, below). The giant are ineffective at reducing or removing into the Tonle Sap floodplain (Center ibis is adverse to human disturbance threats directed at the species (see for Natural Resources and (Bird et al., 2006; www.rdb.or.id; BLI Factor D). Environmental Studies (CRES) 2001). 2001b, 2007h; Dudley 2007; Eames et

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:38 Jan 15, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR3.SGM 16JAR3 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 3161

al., 2004), and increased human the giant ibis was observed in 2003 (WWF 2001, p. 1). Extensive cultivation disturbance exacerbates the impact of (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001b), and in the during the dry season and the impacts habitat modification caused by dam SBCA, where the species was observed from fishing communities along the construction. See also (4) Continued in 2006 (Bird et al., 2006). delta, disrupt the natural water cycle, human encroachment, below. Lao PDR: Logging has been reported resulting in drastic water level (2) Deforestation from war: The entire in the Xe Pian National Biodiversity fluctuations within the Mekong River range of the giant ibis was severely Conservation Area (NBCA), where the Delta, with frequent flooding and lower affected by deforestation resulting from giant ibis has been observed, perhaps as water levels during the dry season the Vietnam War (1959 to 1975). a seasonal visitor (Robichaud et al., (WWF 2001). Bombing, herbicide spraying, and land- 2001). The buffer zone of Cambodia’s Seima clearing activities were undertaken In Vietnam: Deforestation in Vietnam Biodiversity Conservation Area (SBCA) during the War. According to Westing has been significant throughout the 20th (Kratie and Mondulkiri Province), (2002), 13.8 million U.S. tons (14 century. In 1943, approximately 43 where giant ibis was observed in 2006 million metric tons) of high-explosive percent of the total land area in Vietnam (Bird et al. 2006), is threatened by a munitions were dropped by the United was covered by natural forest. This variety of human activities, including States throughout the region, including corresponded to 54,054 mi2 (140,000 road building, increased subsistence 5 percent in Cambodia, 16 percent in km2). By 1945, 22,007 mi2 (57,000 km2) activities, and collection of non-timber Lao PDR, 8 percent in northern of natural forest had been cleared forest products (Bird et al. 2006; WCS Vietnam, and 71 percent in southern (Brown et al., 2001). By 1990, the total 2007b). Resin tapping is common Vietnam, targeting primarily rural areas. forested area had been reduced to 27 throughout the SBCA, and the Between 18 to 19 million gallons (gal) percent, nearly half the amount of 1943 concomitant increase in the number of (68 to 72 million liters (l)) of herbicides (Boi 2002). people entering the SBCA to undertake (including Agent Orange contaminated Logging bans in Vietnam became this and other extractive activities poses with dioxin (see Factor E)) were sprayed progressively more pervasive in the an additional threat to the giant ibis on the region (Schechter et al., 2001; 1990s. In 1992, logging in watershed (Bird et al. 2006), which is highly Westing 2002). Of this amount, less than and special-use forests was banned. In sensitive to human disturbance (Bird et 0.1 percent was sprayed in Cambodia, 2 1999, all commercial logging in natural al. 2006; www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001b, percent in Lao PDR, negligible amounts forests in the northern highlands and 2007h; T. Clements in litt. December in northern Vietnam, and over 98 midlands, the southeast, and in the 2007; Clements et al. 2007; Dudley percent in southern Vietnam. Finally, 3 Mekong River and Red River Delta 2007; Eames et al. 2004). percent (1,255 mi2 (3,250 km2)) of the Provinces was banned. As of 2001, 58 Lao PDR: Robichaud et al. (2001) total forested area in South Vietnam was percent of Vietnam’s natural forests identified the following ongoing plowed over with tractors (Westing were covered by the ban (Brown et al., internal and external threats to giant ibis 2002). Inland forested areas, including 2001). (See Factor D.) habitat in the Xe Pian National freshwater swamp ecosystems and semi- The government planned to obtain its Biodiversity Conservation Area (NBCA): evergreen forests, which serve as giant wood needs from plantation forests (1) Subsistence agriculture, (2) ibis habitat, were especially affected by (Brown et al., 2001). In 1999, the total subsistence hunting, (3) trade hunting, herbicide applications during the war, forested area had increased to 33 (4) subsistence fishing, (5) trade fishing, where up to 77 percent of the total percent, corresponding to 36,464 mi2 (6) free-ranging livestock, (7) road spraying occurred (Boi 2002). The most (94,440 km2). This figure included 5,680 construction, and (8) infrastructure affected areas of bombing, spraying, and mi2 (14,710 km2) of plantation forest, development. bulldozing correspond with the historic only 1 percent of which represented Vietnam: Giant ibis habitat in range of the giant ibis, where the species deciduous forest (Boi 2002). The Vietnam’s Yok Don National Park is went unobserved until 1993, and the increase in plantations forests led to threatened by road building, road figures for southern Vietnam are changes in species composition. improvements, and artificial waterhole particularly informative, where the Changes in species composition led to creation on sites of natural ‘‘trapeangs’’ species remains unobserved to this day changes in the amount of forest cover. (seasonal and permanent waterholes). (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001c). Following the Food and Agriculture Giant mimosa (Mimosa pigra) has (3) Illegal logging and wood fuel Organization’s (FAO) classifications for spread rapidly along the Srepok River collection: The open and deciduous forest cover, Cuong (1999) determined since the 1980s (Eames et al. 2004). forested wetland habitats preferred by from remote sensing data that, between Giant mimosa is an aggressively the giant ibis species have diminished 1943 and 1995, forest cover in Vietnam invasive plant that forms dense thickets, over much of Indochina, and only transformed from 43 percent cover closing formerly open habitats and Cambodia retains significant portions of (which considered to be medium forest outcompeting native species (WWF this habitat (WWF 2005). Deforestation cover by FAO), to 28 percent (which 2001). from illegal logging and wood fuel FAO considers to be open forest). The giant ibis requires large areas of collection has reduced the number of (4) Continued human encroachment: undisturbed habitat and is known to be nesting sites available to the species Habitat alteration from dam highly sensitive to human disturbance (BLI 2007h; Poole 2002). In addition, it construction and destruction caused by (Bird et al. 2006; www.rdb.or.id; BLI led to increased habitat disturbance (see war are compounded by human 2001b, 2007h; T. Clements in litt. (4), Continued human encroachment). encroachment throughout the species’ December 2007; Clements et al. 2007; Cambodia: Poole (2002) reported that range (see also (2), Factors within Dudley 2007; Eames et al. 2004). In the large nesting trees around Cambodia’s individual range countries, below). nesting surveys conducted between Tonle Sap floodplain, particularly Cambodia: In Cambodia’s Tonle Sap 2004 and 2007, researchers found that crucial to ibises for nesting, are under floodplain, the effects of dam the most nests were located more than increasing pressure by felling for construction are exacerbated by 3 mi (5 km) from villages (Clements et firewood and building material. Illegal agricultural conversion (Eames et al. al. 2007). Bird et al. (2006) studied the logging has been reported in Trapeang 2004). Tonle Sap floodplain is effect of habitat disturbance on several Boeung (Global Witness 2007), where considered ‘‘prime rice-growing habitat’’ large waterbirds, including the giant

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:38 Jan 15, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR3.SGM 16JAR3 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES3 3162 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations

ibis. They found that the giant ibis was caused by hunting other species waterholes, using commonly available significantly less likely to visit watering throughout its range (Bird et al. 2006; herbicides, fertilizers, or insecticides, to holes that were frequented by humans. www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001b, 2007h; T. hunt fish and sometimes to poison large The majority of the species breeds in Clements in litt. December 2007; Desai waterbirds for consumption (T. remote areas and uses wetlands that & Luthy 1996; Eames et al. 2004; Poole Clements in litt. December 2007). have minimal human presence (T. 2002; WCS 2007a, 2007b, 2007c). There Poole (2002) noted that bird species in Clements in litt. December 2007). have been reports of severe hunting Cambodia are generally susceptible to Habitat fragmentation caused by loss pressures on large mammals and indiscriminate hunting and egg of habitat is compounded by human waterbirds, including giant the ibis, collection. A 1996 wildlife survey of disturbance and is likely to have a throughout the species’ range (ADB three sites within Mondulkiri and disproportionate effect on the remaining 2005; T. Clements in litt. December Rattanakiri Provinces, where Lomphat individuals (Clements et al. 2007). 2007; Desai & Luthy 1996; Poole 2002; Wildlife Sanctuary is located and According to Clements (in litt. United Nations Environment wherein the giant ibises have been December 2007), continuing expansion Programme-Strategic Environment observed, revealed that hunting was of human settlements and wetland Framework (UNEP–SEF) 2005; WCS extensive and intense (Desai & Vuthy manipulation are likely to cause strong 2007a, 2007b, 2007c). In 2005, the 1996). The Wildlife Conservation declines over time, even if deforestation United Nations Environment Society reported hunting as the single rates are low. Programme-Strategic Environment largest threat to wildlife in the Northern Plains (WCS 2007a). Subsistence and Summary of Factor A Framework (UNEP–SEF 2005) reviewed major threats to biodiversity, including commercial hunting of a variety of Giant ibis habitat has been destroyed giant ibis, within the Greater Mekong animals has been reported in within the and degraded throughout the core of its Sub-region (including Cambodia, Lao SBCA as recently as February 2006 (Bird range, and habitat reduction or PDR, Myanmar, Thailand, and et al. 2006; WCS 2007b), and collection modification continues to be a Vietnam). They found that, after habitat of eggs and chicks from nests threaten significant factor endangering the loss, the second greatest threat to large waterbirds in the Tonle Sap species. The giant ibis is a waterbird endangered wildlife in the region was floodplain (Clements et al. 2007; WCS that seeks out permanent sources of hunting and gathering. Giant ibises are 2007a, 2007b, 2007c). See also Factor D. water, and the impacts from habitat particularly vulnerable to hunting Lao PDR: BirdLife International destruction and alteration are during the dry season, when they seek (2006a) reports that hunting in Lao PDR exacerbated by its aversion to human out permanent water sources and are has severely impacted most large disturbance. Dam construction has more likely to encounter people seeking waterbirds. While we have no contributed to habitat alteration on a out these same water resources (BLI information that the giant ibis is regional scale along waterways within 2007h). specifically targeted, this practice would the Mekong River Delta (a vital water Given the species’ small estimated severely threaten the species in Lao source throughout the species’ core global population size (a minimum of PDR, where the giant ibis population is range) and contributes to unpredictable 100 pairs, but no more than 250 total unlikely to exceed 5 to 10 pairs water fluctuations and changes in individuals (Clements et al. 2007)), any (Clements et al. 2007). human activity along the waterways. hunting would be detrimental to the Vietnam: Large mammals and The effects of flooding are exacerbated species’ continued existence. Highly waterbirds are particularly vulnerable to by extensive cultivation during the dry sensitive to human disturbance, giant hunting within Yok Don National Park, season and the impacts from fishing ibises are negatively affected by the only location within Vietnam where communities along the delta. Habitat disturbance from hunting-related giant ibis has been observed (Eames et loss through wetland drainage for activities, even when they are not al. 2004), and wildlife hunting agricultural purposes has reduced directly targeted (T. Clements in litt. continued to be a problem within the foraging and roosting areas. Logging has December 2007). Yok Don National Park in 2005 (Eames been reported in giant ibis territory in (2) Overutilization within individual et al. 2005) (see also Factor D). The U.S. each range country, and deforestation range countries: Department of State (DOS) reported that reduces the number of trees available to Cambodia: Cambodia is the core of Vietnam’s wildlife, including the species as nesting sites. Expansion the species’ range, where the total endangered birds, is threatened by of human settlements and conversion of Cambodian giant ibis population is illegal export to China (DOS Cable wetland areas to agriculture continue estimated to be 82 to 100 pairs 2007). However, we have no specific throughout the species’ known range. (Clements et al. 2007). Subsistence information that the giant ibis is part of The encroachment of nesting sites and hunting is a challenge to wildlife such trade. The species is not known to foraging areas is compounded by human protection in Cambodia, where the be in international trade and has not disturbance and may disproportionately average annual income is US$268 and been formally considered for listing promote fragmentation of remaining ‘‘95 percent of the country lives from under CITES (www.cites.org). individuals. Based on the above tree cutting and wildlife hunting’’ Summary of Factor B information, we find that the present or (WildAid 2002, p. 1). According to threatened destruction, modification, or Clements (in litt. December 2007), in Indiscriminate hunting threatens giant curtailment of the giant ibis’ habitat or surveys conducted over the past eight ibis throughout its range. Giant ibises range is a significant on-going and years, there have been occasional are especially accessible and more future risk to the species. reports of giant ibis being hunted for vulnerable to hunting at the height of personal or commercial use in the dry season when they are B. Overutilization for Commercial, Cambodia, but ‘‘it [giant ibis] appears to concentrated around available Recreational, Scientific, or Educational have little value wildlife trade.’’ In the waterholes. The species’ aversion to Purposes past 5 years, Clements (in litt. December human disturbance makes it more (1) Overutilization within the region: 2007) is aware of two instances of giant vulnerable to disruption from hunting- The giant ibis is susceptible to hunting ibis hunting, both for personal related activities. Given their small for consumption and disturbance consumption. In addition, locals poison population numbers (estimated to be

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:38 Jan 15, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR3.SGM 16JAR3 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 3163

100 pairs at minimum, but no more than major contributor to the species’ low be built along the Mekong River 250 individuals) and the apparent fledging success (Clements et al. 2007). Subregion (ADB 2005). The continued inadequacies in enforcement (Factor D), Given the species’ small global modification of giant ibis habitat has we consider incidental killing from population size and that the Northern been identified as a primary threat to hunting and hunting disturbances to be Plains species may represent up to one- this species (Factor A), and this regional factors that threaten this species fourth of the known giant ibis regulatory mechanism is not effective at throughout its range. population, we consider this level of reducing that threat. predation to be a significant factor that (2) Regulatory mechanisms within C. Disease or Predation threatens the species’ continued individual range countries: According to the Deputy Director of existence. Cambodia: Several laws exist in the Wildlife Protection Office in Cambodia to protect the giant ibis from Cambodia (C. Dany in litt. January Summary of Factor C two of the primary threats to the 2007), highly pathogenic avian While the avian flu may be a threat to species, habitat destruction (Factor A) influenza (HPAI) H5N1 continues to be giant ibises, there is no evidence that and hunting (Factor B). However, they a serious problem. This strain of avian known populations are currently are ineffective at reducing those threats. influenza first appeared in Asia in 1996 infected. Potential for disease outbreaks In Cambodia, Declaration No. 359, and spread from country to country warrants monitoring (see Factor D) and issued by the Ministry of Agriculture, with rapid succession (Peterson et al. may become a more significant threat Forestry and Fisheries in 1994, 2007). By 2006, the virus was detected factor in the future. However, we find prohibited the hunting of giant ibis. across most of Europe and in several that disease is not a risk to the giant ibis However, reports of severe hunting African countries. Influenza A viruses, at this time. pressure within the giant ibis’ habitat to which group strain H5N1 belongs, Predation by crows, macaques, hawks, and illegal poaching of wildlife in infect domestic animals and humans, civets, and martins threatens the largest Cambodia continue (Bird et al. 2006; but wildfowl and shorebirds are known concentration of giant ibises and Desai & Luthy 1996; FFI 2000; Poole considered the primary source of this contributes to the species’ low fledging 2002; UNEP–SEF 2005; WCS 2007a, virus in nature (Olsen et al. 2006), success (estimated to be only 50 2007b, 2007c). particularly wild birds of wetland and percent). Given the risks associated with Joint Declaration No. 1563, On the aquatic environments (Peterson et al. small population sizes, further Suppression of Wildlife Destruction in 2007). Although the Wildlife Protection reductions in population numbers the Kingdom of Cambodia, was issued Office noted that the U.S. Department of jeopardizes the species’ viability and by the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry Agriculture and Plant Health resiliency to adapt to changing and Fisheries in 1996. However, JICA Inspection Service were helping train conditions (see Factor E). We consider (1999) reported that this regulatory field staff on surveillance techniques, predation to be a factor that endangers measure was ineffectively enforced. In Cambodia lacks an avian influenza wild the species. 2000, survey work conducted by Fauna bird surveillance program (C. Dany in and Flora International in collaboration D. The Inadequacy of Existing litt. January 2007). According to Dany with the Government of Cambodia, Regulatory Mechanisms (in litt. January, November 2007), Ministry of Environment and Wildlife scientists are not sure how many wild (1) Regional regulatory mechanisms: Protection Office, found evidence of bird species carry or are infected by AI, The Mekong River Commission (MRC) illegal hunting of a variety of animals and it is possible that giant ibis may be was formed between the governments of and noted a flagrant disregard for the a carrier. However, a comprehensive Cambodia, Lao PDR, Thailand, and illegality of this activity: ‘‘Hunters and study has not yet been undertaken. Lack Vietnam in 1995 as part of The dealers freely displayed the illegal of an avian influenza wild bird Agreement on the Cooperation for the materials and readily provided any surveillance program in Cambodia will Sustainable Development of the Mekong details requested,’’ indicating a lack of make it difficult to resolve whether River Basin. The signatories agreed to wildlife laws awareness or inadequate giant ibis is a carrier. jointly manage their shared water law enforcement (FFI 2000). Until recently, there was no resources and economic development of The Forestry Law of 2002 strictly information on predation affecting the the river (MRC 2007). In 2003, the prohibited hunting, harming, or giant ibis, and there is still very little governments of Cambodia, China, Lao harassing wildlife (Article 49) (Law on known about giant ibis breeding ecology PDR, Myanmar, Thailand, and Vietnam Forestry 2003). This law further and dispersal (T. Clements in litt. committed to cooperate on developing a prohibited the possession, trapping, December 2007). However, recent regional power grid (via hydroelectric transport, or trade in rare and research suggests that predation impacts dams), among other things, under the endangered wildlife (Article 49). As of the largest known concentration of giant Asian Development Bank’s Greater 2007, Dany (in litt. January 2007) noted ibises in Cambodia’s Northern Plains Mekong Subregion Program that the species had been proposed as (estimated to be 30 to 40 pairs of birds), (International Rivers Network. 2004). endangered in the draft wildlife list in representing between one-third to one- However, according to the International Cambodia, the highest protected species fourth of the total known population Rivers Network (2004), the master plan category by Forestry Law 2002 (Law on (Clements et al. 2007). Nesting surveys to create the regional power grid did not Forestry 2003). However, to our were conducted between 2004 and thoroughly assess the impacts to knowledge, Cambodia has not yet 2007, and the giant ibis’ fledging communities, fisheries, Forests or published a list of endangered or rare success was estimated at 50 percent. nature reserves. The cooperative efforts species. Thus, this law is not currently Researchers determined that predation have had little impact on the dams effective at protecting the giant ibis from had negatively impacted the giant ibis’ being built in the Mekong River Region threats by hunting (Factor B). fledging success. Predation by crows or on broader decision-making The Creation and Designation of (Corvus macrorhynchos), macaques processes within the Region (CRES Protected Areas regulation (November (Macaca sp.), hawks (species unknown), 2001). According to the Asian 1993) established a national system of civets (Cynogale sp), and martins Development Bank, 13 dams have been protected areas. In 1994, through (species unknown) was identified as a built, are being built, or are proposed to Declaration No. 1033 on the Protection

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:38 Jan 15, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR3.SGM 16JAR3 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES3 3164 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations

of Natural Areas, the following activities 2006a). The above measures have demonstrated a keen interest in offering were banned in all protected areas: (1) focused attention on the conservation information to protect their resources Construction of saw mills, charcoal situation at Tonle Sap and have begun and assist the rangers. Extensive public ovens, brick kilns, tile kilns, limestone to improve the conservation situation outreach has improved conservation ovens, tobacco ovens; (2) hunting or there, but several management awareness throughout the Sanctuary placement of traps for tusks, bones, challenges remain, including and around its borders (WildAid 2005). feathers, horns, leather, or blood; (3) overexploitation of flooded forests and Project leaders for the Lomphat deforestation; (4) mining minerals or use fisheries; negative impacts from Conservation Project indicated that great of explosives; (5) use of domestic invasive species; lack of monitoring and strides have been made in training animals, such as dogs; (6) dumping of enforcement; low level of public rangers and combating poaching, pollutants; (7) the use of machines or awareness of biodiversity values; and although community outreach required heavy cars which may cause smoke uncoordinated research, monitoring, more effort (WildAid 2005). In 2005, the pollution; (8) noise pollution; and (9) and evaluation of species’ populations giant ibis was declared the national unpermitted research and experiments. (Matsui et al. 2006; Tonle Sap Biosphere symbolic bird in Cambodia (C. Dany in In addition, the Law on Environmental Reserve Secretariat 2007). litt. January 2007), which may help to Protection and Natural Resource The Seima Biodiversity Conservation raise public awareness as to the need to Management of 1996 (Law on Area was established through conserve the species and its habitat. Environmental Protection and Natural Declaration 260.12–08–2002 (On the Giant ibis habitat within Cambodian Resource Management 1996) sets forth Establishment of Seima Biodiversity protected areas faces several challenges. general provisions for environmental Conservation Area in Samling Forest The legal framework governing protection. Under Article 8 of this law, Concession in Mondul Kiri and Kratie wetlands management is institutionally Cambodia declares that its natural Provinces). However, threats at this site complex, resting upon legislation vested resources (including wildlife) shall be remain. Lack of clear land and resource in government agencies responsible for conserved, developed, and managed and tenure within the buffer zone of Seima resource use (Fishery Law 1987), land used in a rational and sustainable Biodiversity Conservation Area (SBCA) use planning (Land Law 2001), and manner. Several protected areas have (Kratie and Mondulkiri Province), environmental conservation been established within the range of the where giant ibises were observed in (Environmental Law 1996, Royal Decree giant ibis, including the Tonle Sap Great 2006 (Bird et al. 2006), has resulted in on the Designation and Creation of Lake Protected Area, Seima Biodiversity influxes of squatters interested in National Protected Areas System 1993) Conservation Area, and Lomphat claiming, cutting, or clearing the land (Bonheur et al. 2005). Furthermore, the Wildlife Sanctuary. (WCS 2007b). In early 2006, during country’s wildlife protection office lacks surveys of the Seima Biodiversity the staff, technical ability and monetary The Tonle Sap Great Lake protected Conservation Area (SBCA), where giant support to conduct systematic surveys area was designated a Multiple Use ibis is located, researchers encountered on the giant ibis (C. Dany in litt. January Management Area in 1993 through the hunters ‘‘with no law enforcement in 2007). This, in turn, leads to ineffective Creation and Designation of Protected operation’’ (Bird et al. 2006, p. v). monitoring and enforcement, and, Areas Decree (Creation and Designation The Lomphat Wildlife Sanctuary, consequently, resource use goes largely of Protected Areas 1993). Under this where the giant ibis is also found, was unregulated (Bonheur et al. 2005). Thus, decree, Multiple Use Management Areas established in 1993 through the Creation the protected areas system in Cambodia are those areas which provide for the and Designation of Protected Areas is ineffective in removing or reducing sustainable use of water resources, Decree (Creation and Designation of the threats of habitat modification timber, wildlife, fish, pasture and Protected Areas 1993) and is considered (Factor A) and hunting (Factor B) faced recreation with the conservation of to be one of the most important areas for by the giant ibis. nature primarily oriented to support wildlife in Cambodia (WildAid 2005). Lao PDR: Giant ibis is legally these economic activities. In 1997, the Under this decree wildlife sanctuaries protected in Lao PDR (Eames et al. Tonle Sap region was designated a are considered natural areas where 2004). In Lao PDR, the giant ibis is UNESCO ‘‘Man and Biosphere’’ site. To nationally significant species of flora found in one protected area, the Xe Pian echo the United Nations designation, and fauna, natural communities, or National Biodiversity Conservation the Cambodian government developed a physical features require specific Areas (NBCA). Regulation No. 0524/ National Environmental Action Plan intervention for their perpetuation MAF.2001, on NBCAs and wildlife (NEAP) in 1997, supporting the (Creation and Designation of Protected management, was issued by the UNESCO site goals. Among the priority Areas 1993). In 2003 and 2004, the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry on areas of intervention are fisheries and Service’s Rhino and Tiger Conservation June 7, 2001 (Robichaud et al. 2001). floodplain agriculture at Tonle Sap Fund supported the Lomphat This regulation is a comprehensive code Lake, biodiversity and protected areas, Conservation Project (LCP), which has a of wildlife protection. Penalties for and environmental education. NEAP long-term goal of assisting rangers and violation of the existing decrees and was followed by the adoption of the field staff in the conservation of the instructions are outlined in the Penal Strategy and Action Plan for the Sanctuary’s living resources, including Code of the Lao PDR (October 23, 1989) Protection of Tonle Sap (SAPPTS) in giant ibis. Six teams of rangers were and refined in the Instructions for the February 1998, and the issuance of a trained during the duration of the LCP, Implementation of Decree No. 118 and Royal Decree officially making Tonle and the Sanctuary began instituting in the Forestry Law of 1996. Sap Lake a Biosphere Reserve on April patrols on at least 15 days per month. Xe Pian NBCA was established in 10, 2001 (Tonle Sap Biosphere Reserve The rangers have been extremely 1993 as part of the system of National Secretariat 2007). In 2006, the efficient in locating poachers, illegal Protected Areas. Long-term biodiversity Cambodian government created loggers, and entire camps set aside for conservation is the primary objective of Integrated Farming and Biodiversity poachers. Educational materials were NBCAs, according to PM Decree 164 Areas (IFBA), including 115 mi2 (300 developed and tailored to the villagers’ and the 1996 Forestry Law. While the km2) near Tonle Sap Lake, to protect the patterns of use of the local resources establishment of this protected area distinctive flora in that region (WWF (WildAid 2003), and villagers have represents a positive step toward

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:38 Jan 15, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR3.SGM 16JAR3 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 3165

conserving habitat in Xe Pian, the service of recreation and tourism. The individuals and chance disequilibrium protection afforded giant ibis in the Xe Law on Forest Protection and of sex ratios. Pian NBCA is marginal to ineffective Development prohibits, among other We are unaware of any genetic studies due to confusion over management things: (1) Unpermitted logging; (2) for the giant ibis. However, threats to authority and lack of enforcement unpermitted hunting, shooting, capture, near- and long-term genetic viability can (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001c, 2001d; caging, or slaughter of forest animals; (3) be estimated. In the absence of more Rauchibauld et al. 2001). Furthermore, illegally destroying forest resources or species-specific life history data, the 50/ the existence of an NBCA does not rule ecosystems; (4) violating regulation on 500 rule (as explained under Factor E out construction of hydroelectric dams, forest fire prevention; (5) violating for the black stilt) (Soule´ 1980; Hunter or commercial activities such as logging regulations on prevention and 1996) may be used to approximate (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001d), identified elimination of organisms harmful to minimum viable population sizes, as as threats to this species (Factor A). forests; (6) illegal encroachment; (7) described under Factor E for the black Thailand: The species is currently illegal possession, transport, or trade in stilt. The available information indicates considered extirpated from Thailand. forest plants and animals; (8) illegally that the largest concentration of giant However, giant ibis is protected by the grazing cattle in strictly-protected zones ibis consists of 30 to 40 pairs (Clements Wildlife Animal Reservation and of special use forests; (9) illegally et al. 2007). This would equate to 60 to Protection Act (WARPA) (B.E. 2535 exerting adverse impacts on wildlife; 80 individuals, which just meets the 1992; Eames et al. 2004). Under and (10) illegally bringing toxic minimum effective population size (Ne WARPA, hunting is prohibited (section chemicals or explosives into forests = 50 individuals) required to avoid risks 16), as is possession of carcasses (Article 12). However, the Yok Don from inbreeding. The current maximum (section 19), trade (section 20), and National Park apparently lacks specific estimate of no more than 250 collection, harm or possession of nests regulations governing activities within individuals for the entire population (section 21). Violations of sections 16, the Park (Eames et al. 2004), and it is (Clements et al. 2007) is only half of the 19, or 20 of WARPS may result in unclear what tangible protections, if upper threshold (Ne = 500) required for imprisonment not exceeding four years any, are afforded the species in this long-term fitness of a population that or fines nor exceeding 40,000 baht (Thai area. Furthermore, there are continued will not lose its genetic diversity over dollars), or both. Violations of section external threats to the biological time and that will maintain an 21 of WARPA may result in resources in the park (e.g., the proposed enhanced capacity to adapt to changing imprisonment not exceeding one year or Ea Tung dam) (ICEM 2003) (Factor A) conditions. As such, we currently fines not exceeding 6,000 baht. This and hunting (Factor B). Eames et al. consider the species to be at risk of long- protection may help to remove the (2005) reported that hunting was a term genetic viability and associated threat of hunting, which affect the problem for wildlife within the Yok Don demographic problems. Environmental toxins: Environmental species throughout its existing current National Park. Thus, the measures in toxins likely pose a threat to the giant range (Factor B), but does nothing to place are ineffective at reducing the ibis, given its foraging habit and diet. remove or reduce the threat to habitat threats to this species. reduction (Factor A), which was Agent Orange was one of the primary attributed as the primary cause for the Summary of Factor D defoliants sprayed during the Vietnam species’ extinction in Thailand War (Westing 2002). One of the Existing regulatory mechanisms (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001b; Matheu & formulations (2,3,7,8- throughout the giant ibis’ range are del Hoyo 1992). tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD)) Vietnam: Decree No. 32/2006/ND–CP ineffective at reducing or removing released dioxin as a byproduct as it of March 30, 2006, on Management of threats directed at the species, including broke down. Dioxin is a known human Endangered, Precious, and Rare Forest habitat modification (Factor A) and carcinogen. Studies conducted Plants and Animals, establishes a list of hunting (Factor B). We believe that the following the war through the mid- endangered species and protections inadequacy of regulatory mechanisms, 1990s found that residents of southern afforded to those species (Decree No. 32 especially with regard to lack of law Vietnam contained extremely high 2006). However, the giant ibis is not on enforcement and habitat protection, is a levels of dioxin found in fluid or tissue that list (Official Dispatch No. 3399 contributory risk factor for the giant ibis. samples, including mother’s milk and 2002) and therefore is not afforded any E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors food fish. Sediment studies in the 1980s legal protection under this Decree. Affecting the Continued Existence of the indicated that dioxin can move through Vietnam banned hunting without a Species soil into lakes or rivers, where it permit in 1975 (Zeller 2006). However, attaches to organic material in the the Department of State (DOS Cable Other factors which affect the giant sediment. In 1995, tissue sample studies 2007) reports that Vietnam’s wildlife, ibis’ continued existence are: its small revealed that even residents in areas including birds, continues to be population size and environmental that were not sprayed by Agent Orange susceptible to domestic consumption. toxins. (in northern Vietnam) contained low Yok Don National Park was Small population size: Small, isolated levels of TCDD contamination. In 2001, established by Decree in 2002 populations of wildlife species are high levels of dioxin were still being (International Centre for Environmental susceptible to demographic shifts and detected in residents in southern Management (ICEM) 2003). Under genetic problems (Shaffer 1981). These Vietnam 30 years after TCDD was Vietnam’s Law on Forest Protection and threat factors, which may act in concert, sprayed. Residents born subsequent to Development of 2004 (No. 25 2004), include natural variation in survival and spraying and newly arrived residents National Parks are considered special reproductive success of individuals, had similarly high levels of dioxin in use forests, which are used mainly for chance disequilibrium of sex ratios, their systems. The authors concluded conservation of nature, preservation of changes in gene frequencies due to that it is highly probable that current national forest ecosystems, and , and diminished genetic dioxin contamination detected in biological gene resources; scientific diversity and associated effects due to humans is the result of past and current research; protection of historical and inbreeding. Demographic problems may exposure to dioxin that has moved from cultural relics as well as landscapes; in include reduced reproductive success of the soil into river sediments, into fish,

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:38 Jan 15, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR3.SGM 16JAR3 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES3 3166 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations

and subsequently into people from fish and associated lack of genetic viability brown on the upper side, and black and consumption (Schechter et al. 2001). and threats of demographic shifts to be yellow bands along the sides of the The giant ibis forages in mud flats, significant risks to the giant ibis underbelly. The female has a brown probing the mud with their bills. With throughout its range. crown and paler light-brown and buff evidence that dioxin contamination in Dioxin contamination likely poses a (or black and yellow) banding on the soils persists more than 30 years after threat to the giant ibis, given its foraging underparts. The juvenile is draped in the Vietnam War, it is likely that the habits of eating along mud flats and brown plumage on the crown, nape, and giant ibis is being exposed to this probing the mud with its bill and the breast, with pale streaks on the upper contaminant. fact that dioxin contamination remains belly and white speckles on the wings According to Gatehouse (2004), when in the soil more than 30 years later. Diet (BLI 2007g; Gould 1969; Thailand fish, birds, or mammals are exposed may also expose giant ibises to dioxin Scientific Authority 1990). from conception through postnatal or accumulated in the tissue of prey Taxonomy post hatching stages, dioxins may species. Although we believe that disrupt development of several major dioxin contamination could be a factor Gurney’s pitta, in the family Pittidae, organ systems (including the endocrine, contributing to the decline of the giant was described by Hume as Pitta gurneyi reproductive, immune and nervous ibis, there has been no direct research in 1875 (BLI 2005) from a specimen systems). Dioxins are potent into the effects of dioxin on giant ibis. obtained in Myanmar. developmental toxicants even at low As such, insufficient information Habitat and Life History concentrations, and effects of dioxin precludes our ability to determine This species’ habitat requirements of poisoning in birds include poor whether dioxin contamination this species were poorly understood breeding success, embryo lethality, and endangers the species. developmental deformities (Gatehouse until surveys were conducted in the 2004). Although we are unaware of any Conclusion and Determination for the 1980s (see Population Estimates, below). studies of the effect of environmental Giant ibis Gurney’s pitta inhabits lowland, semi- contaminants on the giant ibis, this may We have carefully assessed the best evergreen secondary rainforest, at be a factor in the species’ low fledging available scientific and commercial elevations from 260 to 460 ft (80 to 140 success (estimated to be 50 percent information regarding the past, present, m). They are especially found at (Clements et al. 2007)). and potential future threats faced by the elevations less than 328 ft (100 m), in areas with little to no undergrowth (BLI Birds may be exposed to dioxins in giant ibis. We have determined that the 2000b, 2001c; Gould 1969). Access to their food or by foraging in species is in danger of extinction permanent sources of water is a central contaminated soil (Gatehouse 2004). throughout all of its known range feature of Gurney’s pitta habitat, such Animals vary in their sensitivity to primarily due to ongoing threats to its that populations are often located near dioxin (Karchner et al. 2006) and levels habitat (Factor A), unregulated hunting gully systems where moist conditions of contamination vary relative to their (Factor B), and genetic and demographic remain year-round (BLI 2000b, 2001c). trophic level (position in the food chain) risks associated with the species’ small (Gatehouse 2004). Giant ibis consumes Gurney’s pitta has been described as population size and habitat a ‘‘relatively silent species’’ (Rose 2003, primarily invertebrates, small reptiles, fragmentation (Factor E). Predation and amphibians (www.rdb.or.id; BLI p. 142); although more audible during threatens the largest known mating season, and the species occurs 2001b, 2007h; Davidson et al. 2002). concentration of giant ibis in the According to Gatehouse (2004), other more often in the mornings and Northern Plains of Cambodia (Factor C). evenings (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001c; bird species at this mid-trophic level Furthermore, we have determined that accumulate dioxin contamination at a Gould 1969). The species rarely the inadequacy of regulatory ventures into open areas low to midrange (where birds of prey mechanisms to reduce or remove these have the highest levels of (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001c) and does threats is a contributory factor to the not live in groups (Thai Society for the contamination). Dioxin poisoning is risks that endanger this species’ known to affect reptiles, resulting in Conservation of Wild Animals (TSCWA) continued existence (Factor D). no date (n.d.)). A terrestrial bird, development abnormalities (Shirose et Therefore, we are determining al. 1995). Residual contamination in the Gurney’s pitta hops around the forest endangered status for the giant ibis floor on its strong hind legs to forage on tissues of prey species may remain long under the Act. Because we find that the after contaminant concentrations are insects, snails, and especially giant ibis is endangered throughout all earthworms (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001c; reduced (Gatehouse 2004). Given that of its range, there is no reason to giant ibis is a mid-trophic level species, Kekule 2005; TSCWA n.d.). consider its status in any significant Apparently monogamous which are known to accumulate dioxin portion of its range. at low-to mid-range levels, and that (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001c), the species reptiles, a food source for giant ibis, are IV. Gurney’s pitta (Pitta gurneyi) breeds during the monsoon season from April to October (www.rdb.or.id; BLI known to retain residual dioxin within Species Description their tissues, it is likely that the giant 2001c, 2007g). Dome-shaped nests with ibis is being exposed to dioxin through The Gurney’s pitta is a member of the a single opening are built approximately its prey species as well. Pittidae family and is native to 3.3 to 8.2 ft (1 to 2.5 m) off the ground Myanmar and Thailand. The species is in spiny understory palms, including Summary of Factor E also known commonly as the black- rakum (Salacca rumphii or Salacca The giant ibis’ small population, breasted pitta (www.rdb.or.id; BLI wallichiana), rattan (Daemonorops or estimated to be at least 100 pairs, but no 2001c) and the jewel-thrush (BLI-IP & Calamu longisetus), and licuala palms more than 250 total individuals, poses Biodiversity and Nature Conservation (Licuala spp.) (BLI 2001c, 2003b; Kekule a risk to the species throughout its range Association (BANCA) Darwin Project 2005; Rose 2003; TSCWA n.d.). Eggs are with regard to lack of near-term long- Office 2004). Adults are between 7 and cream-colored with brown flecks, the term genetic viability and to potential 8 in (18 and 20 cm) tall. The male has typical clutch size is 3 to 4, and eggs are demographic shifts. We consider the a blue crown and a turquoise-tinged tail. incubated by both males and females for species’ extremely small population size Black plumage covers the breast, with as few as 10 and up to 20 days

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:38 Jan 15, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR3.SGM 16JAR3 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 3167

(www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001c; Rose 2003; war within the region (Kekule 2005) (for Provinces. Although two territories may TSCWA n.d.). In captivity, pairs nested instance, Thailand was involved in or still exist in Trang Province (in an area twice in 1 year (www.rdb.or.id; BLI affected by war from 1965–1988); (3) the called Tambon Aw Tong) (Rose 2003), 2001c). Gurney’s pitta apparently has a inaccessible habitat and danger from the only remaining viable population low rate of breeding success, with an landmines (in Myanmar, for example occupies a 2-mi2 (5.2-km2) area in Krabi average production of one (Lambert (Kekule 2005)); and (4) government Province, near Mount Khao Nur Chuchi 1996 as cited in BLI 2001c), two, or, at regulations restricting access to (BLI 2007g; Round & Gretton 1989). Its most, three chicks (Kekule 2005) fledged researchers (Kekule 2005, regarding range is described as extremely small per clutch. In the only nest monitoring Myanmar). For these reasons, experts and declining (Rose 2003). study, three giant ibis nests achieved an caution against claims of extinction The Mt. Khao Nur Chuchi area may be overall fledging rate of 27.3 percent until thorough surveys have been referred to by any of several names, (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001c; Rose 2003). completed (Butchart et al., 2006). including Khao Nur Chuchi Reserve, Thus, the species has low fledging The distribution of Gurney’s pitta Khlong Pra-Bang Khram Non-Hunting success. appears to have steadily contracted in a Area, Khlong Pra-Bang Khram Wildlife southerly direction (BLI 2001c). Prior to Sanctuary (Rose 2003, Kekule 2005), Historical Range and Distribution 1950, the species was observed in and Kao Phra Bang Khram Forest Gurney’s pitta is native to Myanmar several locations within Myanmar’s Reserve, which describes an area and Thailand, and the species was Tanintharyi Division (referred to adjacent to the wildlife sanctuary historically observed throughout the historically as ‘‘Tenasserim’’) and in the (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001c; TSCWA Thai-Malay peninsula (peninsular central (Prachuap Khiri Khan) and n.d.). Following the rediscovery of Thailand and adjacent southern southern (Chumphon, Ranong, Gurney’s pitta near Mt. Khao Nor Myanmar) (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001c, Nakhonsrithammarat, Phuket, Chuchi in 1986, a non-hunting area was 2007g). The species has been Phatthatumg, and Trang) Provinces of established in 1987. This area was characterized as formerly common Thailand. Between 1950 and 1979, the upgraded to a wildlife sanctuary in across much of this range (BLI 2000b; species was only observed once, in the 1993; however, crucial areas of pitta Kekule 2005). However, BirdLife southernmost Province of Thailand’s habitat were not included in the International (2001c) pointed out that central region, Prachuap Khiri Khan. sanctuary (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001c; the Gurney’s pitta will not be found in Between 1980 and 2000, the species was Round 1999). Rather, the remaining absence of its preferred habitat and observed only in southern peninsular territories remain part of the Kao Phra characterized the species as locally Thailand (in Phangnga, Krabi, and Bang Khram Forest Reserve (see Factors abundant within its preferred habitat Suratthani Provinces) (www.rdb.or.id; A and D). Hereafter, this population will (lowland, semi-evergreen secondary BLI 2001c). Until its rediscovery in be referred to as the Khao Nur Chuchi rainforest in areas with little-to-no Myanmar in 2003, the species was population. undergrowth) (BLI 2000b, 2001c; Gould believed to have a range limited to a 20 Myanmar: In Myanmar, Gurney’s pitta 1969). mi2 (50 km2) area in Thailand (BLI was rediscovered in 2003 at four sites in A comparison of the confirmed 2000b). Experts believe that steady the Ngawun Reserve Forest, within its observations of Gurney’s pitta habitat loss since the 1920s has been a historic range of Tanintharyi Division, maintained by BirdLife International main driver in the species’ historical in southern Myanmar. All sightings (2001c) since the species was first decline (BLI 2000b, 2001c; Rose 2003). were within 1.2 mi (2 km) of the trans- described reveals that there have often Tanintharyi highway and within the 193 been large gaps in observations in the Current Range and Distribution mi2 (500 km2) Ngawun Forest Reserve past. In Myanmar, the species was not BirdLife International (2000b) (BLI–IP & BANCA Darwin Project Office observed for the nearly 30-year period estimated the range of Gurney’s pitta to 2004). The species also apparently between 1877 and 1904, and went be 942 mi2 (2,440 km2 ). However, range occurs in neighboring Lenya forest, site unobserved again in Myanmar between estimates are based on the ‘‘Extent of of the proposed Lenya National Park, 1914 and 2003. In Thailand, the species Occurrence’’ for the species, which is also in Tanintharyi Division (BLI–IP & was historically observed with greater defined by the authors as ‘‘the area BANCA Darwin Project Office 2006). frequency (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001c). contained within the shortest Researchers believe that Myanmar has However, there were long periods continuous imaginary boundary which the largest remaining suitable habitat for during which the species was not can be drawn to encompass all the the species (BLI–IP & BANCA Darwin observed in Thailand, including a 50- known, inferred, or projected sites of Project Office 2004; Eames et al. 2005). year period, from 1936 to 1986, during present occurrence of a species, In 2004, using satellite imagery, the which there was only one confirmed excluding cases of vagrancy’’ (BLI remaining habitat available to the pitta observation of the species in 1952. 2000b, p. 22). Therefore, this estimate was estimated to be 1,349 mi2 (3,496 Gould noted in 1969 that the species likely includes areas that are unsuitable km2). Most of this habitat is fragmented, ‘‘moves about quite a lot’’ (Gould 1969, for the pitta, such that its range is but the five largest patches total an area p. 154), which may be a reference to the probably smaller than this estimate. of 553 mi2 (1,431 km2) and range in size species’ ‘‘disappearance’’ and Today, the Gurney’s pitta is found in from 53 to 180 mi2 (137 to 467 km2) ‘‘reappearance’’ across its range (see also two areas, one within each range (BLI–IP & BANCA Darwin Project Office Population Estimates, below). country. Details for each range country 2004), significantly larger than the These occurrence records are likely will be discussed below, starting with entire estimated range of the Gurney’s incomplete for several reasons other Thailand, because much of what we pitta (of 20 mi2 (50 km2)) prior to its than the species’ rarity, including: (1) know about the Gurney’s pitta is based rediscovery in Myanmar (Eames et al. The relative silence of the species, on this population. 2005). As of 2005, experts also believed making it difficult to detect when Thailand: In Thailand, Gurney’s pitta that suitable habitat existed in a surveying suitable habitat (for instance, was rediscovered in 1986 in at least five neighboring Lenya forest to support Rose (2003) noted that during a 39-hour localities within its historical range, Gurney’s pitta (BLI–IP & BANCA period observing one nest, only nine including Prachuap Khiri Khan, Darwin Project Office 2006; Eames et al. calls were heard); (2) long periods of Suratthani, Phangnga, Krabi, and Trang 2005).

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:38 Jan 15, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR3.SGM 16JAR3 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES3 3168 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations

Population Estimates as assumed by these researchers, and (2) Thailand in 1989, illegal logging and Population estimates are provided for the extrapolation does not take into forest conversion for agriculture the global population of Gurney’s pitta, account human-induced threats, such as continued. trapping. Therefore, until the as well as for each range country. (2) Factors Within Individual Range Thailand is discussed before Myanmar, predictions have been ground-truthed, Countries we are unable to consider the 8,000 pair as most information on Gurney’s pitta is Thailand: Thailand has lost an based on the population in Thailand, estimate as a reliable reflection of the current population size. We consider average of 1,274 mi2 (3,300 km2) of which was the only known population natural forest since 1960, with of Gurney’s pitta until 2003 when it was the 150 pitta sightings made in 2004 to be the most accurate current estimate of deforestation rates in the last three rediscovered in Myanmar. decades often exceeding 3 percent per Global population estimate: The the Gurney’s pitta population size in Myanmar. year (Brown et al. 2001). By 1987, only relative silence of this species has made 20 to 50 km2 of forest below 328 ft (100 it difficult to census (David Olson, Conservation Status m) (habitat preferred by Gurney’s pitta) Irvine Ranch Land Reserve Trust, in litt. remained in peninsular Thailand (BLI February 2007; Rose 2003). Until the The conservation status of the Gurney’s pitta is provided both on a 2000b, 2001c). A portion of the last recent rediscovery of Gurney’s pitta in remaining viable population of Gurney’s Myanmar in 2003 (BLI 2003b), the global level and according to individual range countries. Thailand is again pitta, the Khao Nur Chuchi population, global population estimate for Gurney’s was included within the Khlong Pra- pitta was based solely on the Thai discussed before Myanmar. Global population status: The Bang Khram Wildlife Sanctuary in 1993. population, which stood between 24 However, encroachment for settlements and 30 individuals (www.rdb.or.id; BLI Gurney’s pitta has been classified as ‘‘Critically Endangered’’ by the IUCN and clearing for crops were continuous 2001c; Rose 2003). With the discovery problems through the 1990s, as of the Myanmar population, the global since 1994 (BLI 2005). Thailand: Gurney’s pitta is protected summarized by BirdLife International population may be between 175 to 185 (2001c). The other, more extensive, individuals. The IUCN has not by the Wildlife Animal Reservation and Protection Act (WARPA) in Thailand portion of the population was included undertaken a formal re-evaluation of the in the Kao Phra Bang Khram Forest global population of Gurney’s pitta (B.E. 2535 1992; Eames et al. 2005). However, this regulatory mechanism is Reserve (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001c). since its rediscovery in Myanmar. There has been a substantial Thailand: The Khao Nur Chuchi ineffective at reducing or removing threats directed at the species (see conservation effort to foster sustainable population is considered the last agricultural practices around the Khao remaining viable population in Factor D). Myanmar: The species is protected in Nor Chuchi protected area. In 1990, the Thailand (Round & Gretton 1989). Khao Nor Chuchi Lowland Forest Myanmar by the Wildlife Act of 1994 Censuses undertaken following its Project was established to engage the (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001c). However, rediscovery in the late 1980s aimed to local community in management, this regulatory mechanism is ineffective identify additional localities and the education programs, and ecotourism, to at reducing or removing threats directed number of individuals extant within the reduce pressure on the remaining forest at the species (see Factor D). area. The species reportedly declined habitat. This project met with only from 44 to 45 pairs in 1986 (BLI 2000b) Summary of Factors Affecting the limited success (BLI 2007g), and illegal to 17 pairs in 1987 (Rose 2003) and to Gurney’s pitta forest clearance has persisted into the 9 pairs in 1997 (BLI 2000b) and then Where applicable in the sections 21st century (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001c; increased to 11 breeding pairs in 2000 below, factors affecting the survival of Rose 2003). Moreover, the more recent (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001c). As of 2003, practice of planting oil palms, which are Gurney’s pitta are discussed in two the population stood between 24 and 30 more profitable than rubber plantations, parts: (1) Regional factors (affecting or individuals (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001c; on illegally cleared forest patches, including both range countries), and (2) Rose 2003). removes the natural ground cover used Factors within individual range Myanmar: BirdLife International— for foraging and concealment by the countries. Indochina Program has been conducting ground-dwelling pitta (Rose 2003). site surveys on the rediscovered A. The Present or Threatened Myanmar: Gurney’s pitta is found populations within the Ngawun Forest Destruction, Modification, or within the 193 mi 2 (500 km 2 ) Ngawun Reserve (BLI 2003b). In 2003, at least 10 Curtailment of the Gurney’s Pitta’s Reserve Forest, described as the largest to 12 pairs were observed (BLI 2003b; Habitat or Range remaining contiguous lowland forest in Eames et al. 2005). In 2004, researchers southern Myanmar (BLI 2003b, 2005), determined that the Myanmar (1) Regional factors and also within neighboring Lenya population was sizable, having made Experts believe that steady habitat forest, site of a proposed National Park approximately 150 pitta sightings (BLI– loss since the 1920s contributed to the (BLI–IP & BANCA Darwin Project Office IP & BANCA Darwin Project Office species’ historical decline (BLI 2000b, 2006), located within Tanintharyi 2004). 2001c; Rose 2003). Large-scale Division. Recent surveys indicated that Extrapolating on the availability of conversion of habitat for agriculture Myanmar’s Tanintharyi Division suitable habitat, researchers estimated (such as rice planting) in Southeast contains substantial suitable habitat for that the Myanmar population might Asia, including Thailand and Myanmar, pittas (estimated to be 1,349 mi 2 (3494 include up to 8,000 pairs (Eames et al. began in the 1800s. This was followed km 2 ), but much of it was fragmented 2005; Grimmitt 2006). However, we by forest clearing for cash crops, such as (BLI 2005) and deforestation for oil believe that this population estimate, rubber (Hevea brasiliensis) and oil palm palm plantations was ongoing (Eames et based on the availability of suitable (Elaeis guineensis). The 1950s saw the al. 2005). Between 1990 and 1995, habitat, may be an overestimate for this advent of a commercial logging industry Myanmar lost 1,494 mi 2 (3,870 km 2 ) of species for two reasons: (1) The to satisfy an increasing demand for forest per year, averaging a 1.4 percent Myanmar population may not be Asian timber (Sodhi et al. 2004). Despite reduction in forests per year (FAO randomly distributed in suitable habitat a complete logging ban implemented in 1999). In southern Tanintharyi Division,

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:38 Jan 15, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR3.SGM 16JAR3 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 3169

logging reduced one large patch of surrounding an abandoned pitta nest possession of carcasses (section 19), lowland forest from 163 mi 2 (423 km 2 ) within the Khao Nur Chuchi population trade (section 20), and collection, harm, in 1990 to 102 mi 2 (265 km 2 ) in 2000 in Thailand; the nets were placed there or possession of nests (section 21). (Eames et al. 2005). by villagers to capture the birds (see also Violations of sections 16, 19, or 20 may Factor D). result in imprisonment not exceeding Summary of Factor A We are not aware of any specific four years or fines not exceeding 40,000 Although the known range of the information regarding trapping or illegal baht, or both. Violations of section 21 Gurney’s pitta has expanded trade in Myanmar, and there is no may result in imprisonment not considerably with the rediscovery of the specific information indicating that exceeding 1 year or fines not exceeding species in Myanmar, habitat conversion, scientific or educational uses of the 6,000 baht. However, while Thai law destruction, and encroachment species are a threat. does not allow capture or sale of the continues to be a significant factor Gurney’s pitta, the law does allow for Summary of Factor B throughout the species’ range. Illegal possession of the species and bird-nets logging and conversion for cash crops Trapping has impacted the species in have recently been found near empty continue throughout the species’ range. the past and may be ongoing. Given the Gurney’s pitta nests within the range of Based on the above information, we find species’ small population size in Thailand’s only remaining viable that the Gurney’s pitta is at significant Thailand, estimated at 24 to 30 population of the species (the Khao Nur risk throughout its range due to the individuals, reports of ongoing trapping Chuchi population) (Kekule 2005). This present or threatened destruction, and hunting activities within the suggests that this regulation is modification, or curtailment of its species’ only known range in Thailand inadequate to protect the few remaining habitat or range. is a significant concern. As such, we individuals of this species from hunting B. Overutilization for Commercial, consider the trapping or hunting to be (Factor B). Recreational, Scientific, or Educational factors that threaten the species in Protection of the species’ habitat has Purposes Thailand. not been effective in addressing forest clearance and poaching (Factor A). Gurney’s pitta was popular in the pet C. Disease or Predation When the Khlong Pra-Bang Khram trade in the 1980s and was overutilized There is no information about Wildlife Sanctuary was established in for this purpose by local snare-trappers diseases affecting Gurney’s pitta. 1993, it provided incomplete protection (BLI 2007g; Rose 2003; Thailand Regarding predation, dog-tooth for pitta territories, as only 5 of the 21 Scientific Authority 1990). Illegal trade ( cynodon) is a natural known pitta territories were in the species was occurring even when predator of the Gurney’s pitta. The dog- encompassed within the Sanctuary. The experts were not reporting sightings of tooth cat snake is a member of the night most important and extensive areas of the species. For instance, the species tree adder family that can reach lengths pitta habitat and territories were not was reportedly on the price list of an up to 9 ft (2.75 m). A tree dweller, this included, including a crucial 12 mi2 (30 illicit Thai-based animal dealer in 1985, snake is native to several southeast km2) area considered to be core to the one year before the population was Asian countries. In Thailand, the snake pitta habitat (Round 1999; BLI 2001c). rediscovered in Thailand (Thailand has been found in Prachuap Khiri Khan Sanctuaries are reportedly rarely Scientific Authority 1990). Ironically, (the location of the largest known pitta patrolled by staff (WorldTwitch the rediscovery of the pitta in Thailand population in Thailand) and it shares Thailand 2000) and a survey in 2001 can be credited to a wildlife smuggler in many similarities with Gurney’s pitta, confirmed that protection and law Bangkok, who helped rediscover the including living mainly in lowland rain enforcement at Khao Nor Chuchi was species. After the smuggler was found forests, rarely entering cultivated areas essentially nonexistent (Rose 2003). with a bird in his possession, he led or human settlements, and principally While the Sanctuary receives funds for researchers to a small forest patch in feeding on birds and their eggs (Thiesen its management from the central southern Thailand, where the species n.d). Gretton (1988) reported that a dog- government, authority to address was subsequently observed (Round & tooth cat snake killed near a Gurney’s problems within the Reserve is given to Gretton 1989). The species was listed in pitta nest contained a chick that it had the provincial officials. This provides Appendix III of CITES by Thailand in apparently taken from the nest the neither the authority nor the 1987 (UNEP–WCMC 2007a), requiring previous day. Given the small remaining responsibility for Reserve staff to focus that a certificate of origin or export population size in Thailand (estimated on problems within the reserve (BLI permit from Thailand accompany to be 11 breeding pairs in 2000 (BLI 2001c). As habitat destruction is international exports of the species. In 2000b)), predation by the dog-tooth cat ongoing within giant ibis habitat (BLI 1990, Gurney’s pitta was uplisted to snake would present a threat to the 2001c; Kekule 2005; Rose 2003), this CITES Appendix I, which prohibited pitta, but no further information on this regulatory mechanism is ineffective at international trade for commercial threat is available to us. addressing the threat of habitat purposes. According to the WCMC destruction (Factor A). database, there has been no CITES- Summary of Factor C Myanmar: This species is considered reported trade in this species since its Predation may affect Gurney’s pittas, a ‘‘completely protected’’ species of listing in 1987 (UNEP–WCMC 2007b). but there is insufficient information for wildlife under section 15(a) of Trapping for the caged-bird trade us to consider this a significant factor Myanmar’s Protection of Wildlife and continued to threaten the species currently impacting the Gurney’s pitta. Wild Plants and Conservation of Natural through the late 20th into the early 21st Areas Law of 1994 (Forest Department century (www.rdb.or.id; BLI 2001c; D. The Inadequacy of Existing Notification No. 583/94; Protection of Rose 2003), including evidence of non- Regulatory Mechanisms Wild Life and Wild Plants and specific poaching at Khao Nur Chuchi Thailand: Gurney’s pitta is protected Conservation of Natural Areas Law Non-Hunting Area (WorldTwitch by the Wildlife Animal Reservation and 1994). This law made it is illegal to kill, Thailand 2000). Although Rose (2003) Protection Act (WARPA) (B.E. 2535 hunt, wound, possess, sell, transport, or believed that trapping had ceased, 1992; Eames et al. 2005). Under this act, transfer a completely protected species Kekule (2005) found bird-nets hunting is prohibited (section 16), as is without permission (section 37).

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:38 Jan 15, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR3.SGM 16JAR3 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES3 3170 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations

Violators of this law are subject to Therefore, we believe the inadequacy which the pitta nests and which ripens imprisonment for up to 7 years or a fine and ineffective implementation of coincident with the Gurney’s pitta’s up to kyats 50,000, or both (section 37). regulatory mechanisms are contributory breeding season. However, no specific We have no information that the species risk factors that endanger the Gurney’s data exist to indicate that disturbance is being trapped, hunted, or sold in pitta. from fruit collection may be an actual Myanmar. Therefore, this regulation is E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors threat. Therefore, we do not consider not currently removing or reducing the Affecting the Continued Existence of the fruit collection to be a factor impacting primary threat to this species within Species the Gurney’s pitta at this time. Myanmar, habitat destruction (Factor Collection of forest products may The small population size of the A). Gurney’s pitta, estimated at 24 to 30 in There are currently no protected areas constitute a disturbance to Gurney’s Thailand and 150 in Myanmar, poses a in the peninsular region where the pitta in Thailand during their breeding risk to this species throughout its range Gurney’s pitta is found (Hirschfeld season. The edible fruits of the rakum with regard to lack of near-term long- 2008). Within the Ngawun Forest palm, one of the palms in which the term genetic viability and to potential Reserve, the habitat of the Gurney’s pitta Gurney’s pitta nests, are sought after in demographic shifts. Therefore, we is protected under the provisions of the Thailand (BLI 2007g). Peak harvest consider the species’ extremely small Burma Forest Act of 1902, as amended occurs in June and July (World population size and associated genetic (Conservation Monitoring Centre 1992). Agroforestry Center (WAC) n.d.), and demographic risks to be significant Prohibited activities in reserved forests coinciding with the Gurney’s pitta include trespassing, pasturing, breeding season (www.rdb.or.id; BLI factors that endanger the Gurney’s pitta damaging trees, setting fires, mining, 2001c, 2007g). However, forest-collected throughout its range. cultivation, poisoning or dynamiting, fruit is considered inferior to the Conclusion and Determination for the hunting, shooting, fishing, or setting cultivated variety, harvest has never Gurney’s Pitta traps or snares. According to BirdLife been tracked (WAC n.d.), and we are International—Indochina Program (BLI– unaware of any research concerning this We have carefully assessed the best IP & BANCA Darwin Project Office type of disturbance in relation to the available scientific and commercial 2005), the Ngawun Forest Reserve is the Gurney’s pitta. Thus, we are unable to information regarding the past, present, largest block of lowland forest in conclude that this activity threatens the and potential future threats faced by the southern Myanmar, but it remains species’ survival, due to insufficient Gurney’s pitta. We have determined that inadequately protected due to information. the species is in danger of extinction ineffective enforcement. Therefore, this Small, isolated populations of wildlife throughout all of its known range regulation is not removing or reducing species are susceptible to demographic primarily due to habitat loss (Factor A), the primary threat to this species within and genetic problems (Shaffer 1981). trapping, or hunting in Thailand (Factor Myanmar, habitat destruction (Factor These threat factors, which may act in B), and genetic and demographic risks A). concert, include natural variation in associated with the species’ small The species is also apparently extant survival and reproductive success of population size (Factor E). Furthermore, in neighboring Lenya forest, site of the individuals, chance disequilibrium of we have determined that the inadequacy proposed Lenya National Park (BLI–IP & sex ratios, changes in gene frequencies of existing regulatory mechanisms to BANCA Darwin Project Office 2006). due to genetic drift, and diminished reduce or remove these threats is a However, it appears that the Park has genetic diversity and associated effects contributory factor to the risks that yet to be established and, as currently due to inbreeding. Demographic endanger this species’ continued drawn, its boundaries would not problems may include reduced existence (Factor D). Therefore, we are encompass critical pitta territories reproductive success of individuals and determining endangered status for the within the Lenya Forest or the Ngawun chance disequilibrium of sex ratios species under the Act. Because we find Forest Reserve (BLI–IP & BANCA (Charlesworth & Charlesworth 1987; that the Gurney’s pitta is endangered Darwin Project Office 2006; Grimmitt Shaffer 1981). Using the 50 / 500 rule throughout all of its range, there is no 2006). Therefore, because that (as described under Factor E for the reason to consider its status in any establishment of the Park as currently black stilt) (Soule´ 1980; Hunter 1996) significant portion of its range. drawn would exclude pitta territory, and given the two population estimates this mechanism would not likely (24 to 30 in Thailand (www.rdb.or.id; V. Long-Legged Thicketbird remove or reduce the primary threat to BLI 2001c; Rose 2003), and 150 in (Trichocichla rufa) this species within Myanmar, habitat Myanmar (BLI–IP & BANCA Darwin Species Description destruction (Factor A). Project Office 2005)), the population in Thailand has likely undergone The long-legged thicketbird is an Old Summary of Factor D inbreeding. In addition, both the Thai World warbler belonging to the Sylvidae Although regulatory mechanisms are and the Myanmar populations exist at family, and native to the Fiji Islands. in place that could reduce or remove numbers well below the minimum (of at The species is also commonly known as threats to the species, implementation of least 500 individuals in order to prevent the long-legged warbler (BLI 2007i). these mechanisms appears to be slow the loss of genetic diversity over time Local residents named the secretive (such as the delay in establishing the and maintain an enhanced capacity to thicketbird ‘‘Manu Kalou,’’ or ‘‘Spirit proposed National Park), ineffective adapt to changing conditions. As such, Bird,’’ during the 19th century because (such as the inability to quell poaching we currently consider the species to be of its ethereal voice (BLI 2000c; Dutson threats to the species), or inadequate. at significant risk due to lack of near- & Masibalavu 2004). Adults stand 6 in For instance, in Thailand, there is and long-term genetic viability. (17 cm) tall, with long blue legs, a short evidence of trapping within Gurney’s black bill, and a long tail. Upperparts of pitta territory. Despite indications that Summary of Factor E the body are warm brown with a long poaching is ongoing, the law allows for The Gurney’s pitta may be adversely supercilium (head plumage). The throat possession of the species, although it affected by collection of the rakum fruit is white and the flanks are a pale, rufous does not allow capture or sale. in Thailand, which grows in a tree in color (BLI 2007i).

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:38 Jan 15, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR3.SGM 16JAR3 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 3171

Taxonomy Current Range and Distribution endangered, where it was previously The long-legged thicketbird was The long-legged thicketbird was classified as data deficient (BLI 2006b, described by Reichenow as Trichocichla rediscovered in 2002, although 2007i; H. Pippard in litt. February rufa in 1890, and placed in the Sylvidae confirmation of the sighting took nearly 2007). family as a monospecific genus. Two a year (BLI 2003c; Kirby 2003b). It was Summary of Factors Affecting the Long- specimens discovered on the island of located at several sites on Viti Levu, Legged Thicketbird Vanua Levu in 1974 were described as found only in dense undergrowth of the A. The Present or Threatened a distinct subspecies (Trichocichla rufa Fijian mountains (BLI 2003c; Kirby Destruction, Modification, or clunei) (BLI 2003c; Kirby 2003b; Helen 2003b; H. Pippard in litt. February Curtailment of the Long-Legged Pippard, Director of Environment, Suva, 2007). However, a researcher who spent Thicketbird’s Habitat or Range Fiji, in litt. February 2007). However, 5 years working in Fiji on conservation ITIS and BirdLife recognize the long- projects indicated that the species is Habitat destruction from logging, legged thicketbird only to the species ‘‘commonly found if you know where to conversion to agriculture, and invasive level, and we accept this taxonomy. look for it in mid-elevation rocky species threatens the long-legged Habitat and Life History streams with dense overstories’’ (D. thicketbird habitat. The most recent Olson in litt. February 2007). The largest estimates of forest cover on the islands The long-legged thicketbird requires known concentration of the long-legged of Vanua Levu and Viti Levu are from intact mid- to high-elevation forest thicketbird is found within the 1995. In 1995, the total forested area, associated with riverine habitat and approximately 2 mi2 (5 km2) area including mangrove forest, pine dense vegetation (H. Pippard in litt. known as the Wabu National Forest plantation, hardwood plantation, February 2007). Its habitat is dominated Reserve (BLI 2007i). Little is known scattered natural forest, medium dense by old-growth montane forest (BLI about the species’ current range, natural forest, and dense natural forest, 2007i), and the species is found at necessitating additional surveys in on the Fiji Islands was 3,293 mi2 (9933 altitudes ranging from 2,625 to 3,281 ft suitable habitat (BLI 2007i). km2) (Lal & Touvou 2003). This equated (800 to 1000 m) (Dutson & Masibalavu to just under half of Fiji’s total land area 2004). Population Estimates and included an excess of 490 mi2 Because this species was known only There is insufficient information to (1,270 km2) of the dense forest, from four voucher specimens until determine the historic population levels preferred by the long-legged thicketbird 2002, very little is known about its life of this species (BLI 2007i). Today, (on Viti Levu, and 463 mi2 (1,200 km2) history (BLI 2007i). It is characterized as researchers believe that the species is on Vanua Levu) (Chand 2002). Although a secretive ground-warbler that is easily locally common in ideal habitat there is more forested area on Vanua overlooked unless it is singing (BLI (unlogged forest at elevations between Levu than on Viti Levu, Fiji considers 2007i). Its call is distinctive, and 2,625 and 3,281 ft (800 and 1000 m)), that the degree of habitat degradation on recognizing its song is considered key to but that it is patchy in distribution and Vanua Levu has resulted in the species’ identifying it in the wild (Dutson & extirpation from that island (H. Pippard Masibalavu 2004). absent from most forest (BLI 2003c, 2007i; D. Olson in litt. February 2007; in litt. February 2007). Historical Range and Distribution Kirby 2003b). The current population is Logging: According to the Fijian The long-legged thicketbird is estimated to be between 50 to 249 government, logging of virgin forests is endemic to the Fijian Islands. The Fijian individuals. However, this estimation is the primary threat to this species, which Archipelago comprises over 320 islands, a categorical one, used by BirdLife prefers intact forest habitat (H. Pippard over an area approximating 502,000 mi2 International to conform to the IUCN in litt. February 2007). Eighty-three (1.3 million km2) (Chand 2002). criteria. The actual number of percent of the total land area, including Historically the species was found on individuals may be much smaller (or most of the natural forest cover, is two Fijian islands: Viti Levu and Vanua larger) than this range suggests. In privately owned (McKenzie et al. 2005). Levu. Viti Levu, meaning ‘‘Big Fiji,’’ is surveys conducted from 2002 to 2005, The forestry sector contributes 2.5 the largest island, with an area of 4,011 12 pairs were discovered in Wabu (BLI percent to Fiji’s gross domestic product mi2 (10,390 km2). Vanua Levu, meaning 2003c, 2007i; Kirby 2003b). Nine pairs (GDP) and about F$50 million (US$27.6 ‘‘Big Land,’’ is little more than half as were found along a 1.24-mi (2-km) million) in foreign exchange export large at 2,135 mi2 (5,530 km2) (Chand length of stream in dense undergrowth earnings annually (McKenzie et al. 2002). thickets; two of these pairs were 2005). The long-legged thicketbird was long accompanied by recently fledged The Fijian government began large- considered extinct, with no confirmed juveniles. Using the data from the 2005 scale planting of pine and hardwoods in observations since 1894 (BLI 2003c; field surveys, only 30 individuals were the 1960s, such that today 13 percent of Kirby 2003b) and several unconfirmed observed during field surveys in 2005 Fiji’s forests are planted. In 2003, there sightings in 1967, 1973, and 1991 (BLI (BLI 2003c; Kirby 2003b). were approximately 204 mi2 (529 km2) 2000c). The first confirmed sighting in of hardwood plantations, mainly big- Conservation Status recent time was that of two individuals leaf mahogany (Swietenia macrophylla), in 1974, found on the island of Vanua The Fiji Department of Environment and 179 mi2 (463 km2) of pine (Pinus Levu (BLI 2003c; Kirby 2003b). There considers the extant long-legged caribea) plantations (ITTO 2005). was no evidence of its continued thicketbird on Viti Levu to be Habitat conversion for timber existence until 2002, when it was vulnerable to further decline or plantations, including pine and big-leaf rediscovered on Viti Levu (BLI 2003c). extinction. Conservation priorities for mahogany, in long-legged thicketbird The Fijian government considers the this species include: protection of forest habitat renders the habitat unsuitable species to be extinct on Vanua Levu, and research on the species’ habitat for the bird (BLI 2003c), as it prefers where forests are less intact and there requirements and impacts of invasive intact forest (Pippard in litt. February have been greater impacts from forest species on the species (H. Pippard in 2007). See also Factor D. loss, including invasive species (H. litt. February 2007). As of 2007, the Conversion to agriculture: The Pippard in litt. February 2007). species was classified by the IUCN as economy is dominated by the sugar

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:38 Jan 15, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR3.SGM 16JAR3 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES3 3172 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations

industry and food crops, including taro, (USGS 2006). Thus, in the face of thicketbird. However, there is cassava, sweet potatoes or kumala, and increasing habitat disturbance, invasive insufficient information to determine a wide variety of fruits and vegetables. plants could pose a threat to the long- that predation is ongoing or has the An estimated 67 percent of the labor legged thicketbird, which prefers intact potential to negatively affect this force is employed in agriculture, and primary forest (H. Pippard in litt. species. this sector of the economy accounts for February 2007). However, we are Summary of Factor C almost 21 percent of Fiji’s GDP (Chand unaware of specific information 2002). In 2007, Fiji released census data regarding the effect of invasive plants on More information is needed in order that estimated the population on the the long-legged thicketbird or its habitat. to determine the role of predation, if islands to be 827,900 inhabitants. This As, such we are unable to make a any, in this species’ decline. Currently, represents an increase of 53,000 people determination as to the threat this factor there is insufficient information to since the 1996 census (Fiji Government might cause, if any, to the species. determine that threats from predation Online 2007). Most of these people are contributing to the species’ risk of Summary of Factor A inhabit the two main islands of Viti extinction. Habitat destruction from logging and Levu and Vanua Levu (Dutson & D. The Inadequacy of Existing habitat conversion to agricultural Masibalavu 2004). As the population Regulatory Mechanisms increases, the production area of these purposes produce unsuitable conditions and other major food crops continues to for the long-legged thicketbird, which The long-legged thicketbird is a increase each year. In Fiji, all preferred prefers intact forest with dense threatened species under Schedule 1, arable lands are fully utilized or vegetation. We consider habitat Section 3 of Fiji’s Endangered and unavailable for land tenure reasons. destruction to be a significant threat to Protected Species Act of 2002 (No. 29 of Thus, agriculture has expanded onto the long-legged thicketbird that 2002). This law and its implementing steeper marginal land to the interior of endangers the species throughout its regulations (Endangered and Protected the island (Chand 2002). Agricultural range. Species Regulations (Act No. 29 2002; Legal Notice No. 64) prohibit trade in conversion produces unsuitable B. Overutilization for Commercial, conditions for the long-legged the thicketbird, unless permitted. As Recreational, Scientific, or Educational trade is not known to be a threat to the thicketbird, which prefers intact forests Purposes with dense vegetation, and the thicketbird, this law and its continuing expansion of agriculture into According to the Fijian government, implementing regulations do not steeper lands to the interior jeopardizes there is no trade, collection, or captive address the conservation needs of the the long-legged thicketbird, which breeding of the long-legged thicketbird species. prefers mid- to high-elevation forest (H. at this time, nor is any likely in the The thicketbird is also a ‘‘protected Pippard in litt. February 2007). future (H. Pippard in litt. February bird’’ under Fiji’s Birds and Game Invasive species: Although BirdLife 2007). There is no known threat to the Protection Act of 1923 (Rev. 1985), as International (2007i) noted that the species from use for commercial, amended. Under this Act it is illegal to influx of invasive species has not been recreational, scientific, or educational willfully kill, wound, or take any shown to have deleterious effects on the purposes. The species has not been protected bird, or attempt to sell, suitability of the habitat for the long- formally considered for listing in the possess, or export a protected bird, or legged thicketbird, it is unclear what Appendices of CITES (www.cites.org). their parts, nests or eggs (Part II, § 3). The penalty for violating this Act is a factors were considered to arrive at this C. Disease or Predation determination, including whether they fine not to exceed $50, or, if this amount referred to invasive animals or plants. We have no information to indicate cannot be paid, imprisonment for up to The long-legged thicketbird prefers that the long-legged thicketbird is 3 months (Part IV, § 15) (Birds and intact forest, and the Fijian government threatened by disease. Game Protection Act 1985). As hunting considers invasive species to be a factor Predation by invasive animals, and trapping are not known to be threats that contributed to the species’ namely rats (Rattus spp.) and to the thicketbird, this law and its extirpation from Vanua Levu (H. mongooses (Rallus phillopensis), is regulations do not address the Pippard in litt. February 2007). Invasive considered by Fiji to be a highly conservation needs of the species. plants and animals are problematic on significant threat to the species (H. Some of the forest habitat of the long- Viti Levu (See Factor C for further Pippard in litt. February 2007). legged thicketbird is within the Wabu discussion on invasive animals). African Mongooses were introduced in 1883 to National Forest Reserve and is protected tulip tree (Spathodea campanulata) is Fiji to kill rats, but both these species under Fijian law (BLI 2007i). However, invasive in forests and open areas of Viti could potentially be serious predatory the protections within the reserve are Levu (McKenzie et al. 2005). threats to the long-legged thicketbird not absolute and the Forestry Act has a No longer facing the natural enemies (BLI 2000c). According to BirdLife number of serious weaknesses. For or competition from other species that International (2007i), however, the long- example, legal loopholes permit they faced in their place of origin, legged thicketbird has been found clearcutting of forests over which the invasive plants are capable of spreading successfully nesting alongside these Forestry Department has no control, and and outcompeting native species. predators in Wabu, indicating that all protected areas established under the Invasive plants can spread and mongooses may not be predators after provisions of the Forestry Act are reproduce prolifically, causing all. The first sighting of this species in subject to dereservation at the significant changes to ecosystems and 2002 was of a long-legged thicketbird ministerial level; and reserve forests upsetting their ecological balance. warding off a mongoose from its nearby have frequently been dereserved (World Human disturbance, such as logging nest, which would indicate that the Conservation Monitoring Centre 1992). activities and agricultural conversion, is species exhibits anti-predatory behavior In addition, forest reserves are managed considered a major vector for (Dutson & Masibalavu 2004). Given the as long-term production forests, with introducing invasive plants. Once an species’ small population size, between extraction being allowed by permit invasive plant is introduced to an area, 50 to 249 individuals, predation could (Forest Decree 1992, Part III). In 2003, it has the potential to invade larger areas pose a significant risk to the long-legged experts considered that insufficient

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:38 Jan 15, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR3.SGM 16JAR3 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 3173

protection of long-legged thicketbird legged thicketbird teeters on the edge of that endanger the long-legged habitat would lead to a high probability the minimum number of individuals thicketbird throughout its range. of habitat conversion or destruction (BLI required to avoid imminent risks from Conclusion and Determination for the 2003c; Kirby 2003b). According to inbreeding (N = 50). The current e Long-Legged Thicketbird Dutson and Masibalavu (2004), BirdLife maximum estimate of 249 individuals Fiji is working with the Department of for the entire population (BLI 2007i) is We have carefully assessed the best Forestry to focus on long-term only half of the upper threshold (Ne = available scientific and commercial protection within the Wabu and with 500) required to maintain genetic information regarding the past, present, local communities to focus on forest diversity over time and to maintain an and potential future threats faced by the conservation and alternatives to forest enhanced capacity to adapt to changing long-legged thicketbird, above. We have destruction, such as ecotourism, which conditions. As such, we currently determined that the species is in danger may help to moderate habitat consider the species to be at risk due to of extinction throughout all of its known destruction. However, we consider this its lack of near- and long-term genetic range primarily due to ongoing threats regulatory mechanism to be inadequate viability. to its habitat (Factor A), lack of near- in removing or reducing the primary Threats from stochastic events: Small and long-term genetic and associated threat to this species, habitat populations of wildlife species also demographic shifts, and susceptibility destruction. susceptible to stochastic environmental to stochastic events due to risks Summary of Factor D events (for example, severe storms, associated small population sizes prolonged drought, extreme cold spells, (Factor E). Furthermore, we have While some of the forest habitat of the wildfire). Stochastic events could result determined that the inadequacy of long-legged thicketbird is within the 2- in extensive mortalities from which the existing regulatory mechanisms (Factor mi2 (5-km2) Wabu Forest Reserve population may be unable to recover, D) is a contributory risk factor that (Wabu) and is protected under Fijian leading to extinction (Caughley 1994; endangers the species. Therefore, we are law, the regulatory mechanisms in place determining endangered status for the to protect the species do not adequately Charlesworth & Charlesworth 1987). Fiji is susceptible to damage from tropical long-legged thicketbird under the Act. reduce or remove the primary manmade Because we find that the long-legged threat to this species, habitat destruction storms and cyclones. Tropical storms, which can sustain winds up to 130 thicketbird is endangered throughout all (Factor A). We conclude that the of its range, there is no reason to inadequacy of existing regulatory miles per hour (mph) (209 kilometers per hour (kph)), are common in the consider its status in any significant mechanisms is a contributory risk factor portion of its range. that endangers the long-legged South Pacific from November to April thicketbird. (Ligaiula 2007). Cyclones, also known as VI. Socorro Mockingbird (Mimus typhoons, are storms that typically form graysoni) E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors at sea and move inland, generating high Affecting the Continued Existence of the winds exceeding 130 mph (209 kph) up Species Description Species to 200 mph (322 kph). Thirteen tropical The Socorro mockingbird is a member Two additional factors are considered storms have hit Fiji in the past 10 years of the Mimidae family, and endemic to herein, genetic risks associated with (Associated Press 2007). In December , Mexico. This species is small population sizes and threats from 2007, Cyclone Daman made landfall on also referred to as Socorro , stochastic events. Viti Levu, with winds up to 155 mph especially in older literature (e.g., Effect of small population sizes: (250 kph). Trees were destroyed, and Brattstrom & Howell 1956). Adults stand Small, isolated populations of wildlife heavy rains caused landslides and about 10 in (25 cm) tall and are mostly species are susceptible to demographic flooding in low-lying areas (Ligaiula brown, with whitish underparts, darker and genetic problems (Shaffer 1981). 2007). The extant long-legged wings (except for two narrow bands of These threat factors, which may act in thicketbird population is extremely white), a dark tail, reddish iris, and dark concert, include natural variation in small and highly localized (BLI 2003c, gape (the soft tissue at the corner of the survival and reproductive success of 2007i; Kirby 2003b). Therefore, any mouth) (BLI 2007f; Martı´nez-Go´mez & individuals, chance disequilibrium of additional stress to the population due Curry 1998). Male and female Socorro sex ratios, changes in gene frequencies to stochastic events, such as cyclones, have similar plumage, but due to genetic drift, and diminished represents a risk to the species and males are larger than females. A juvenile genetic diversity and associated effects could lead to a further decline in the (first-year bird) can be distinguished due to inbreeding, loss of genetic species’ abundance or the extent of its from an adult by its plumage, spotted variation, and accumulation of new occupied range. breast, grayish iris, and yellowish gape mutations. Inbreeding can have Summary of Factor E (Martı´nez-Go´mez & Curry 1998). individual and population consequences by either increasing the In addition to ongoing threats to the Taxonomy phenotypic expression of recessive, species’ habitat (see Factor A), a major The Socorro mockingbird was first deleterious alleles or by reducing the risk to the long-legged thicketbird is taxonomically described as Mimodes overall fitness of individuals in the lack of near- and long-term genetic graysoni (Mimidae family), by Lawrence population (Charlesworth & viability associated with the extant in 1871. Ornithologists recognized that Charlesworth 1987; Shaffer 1981). In the population’s extremely small size. In the species’ behavioral characteristics absence of more species-specific life addition, the long-legged thicketbird is were reminiscent of the mockingbird history data, a general approximation of vulnerable to reductions in numbers or genus, Mimus, of the same family minimum viable population size is extinction from stochastic events, such (Barber et al. 2004). Genetic analysis referred to as the 50/500 rule (Soule´ as cyclones. We consider the species’ conducted by Barber et al. (2004) 1980; Hunter 1996), described under extremely small population size, the demonstrated that the species is most Factor E for the black stilt. The available associated genetic risks and closely related to Mimus spp. In our information indicates that, with an Ne of demographic shifts, and vulnerability to proposed rule, we referred to this approximately 50 (BLI 2007i), the long- stochastic events to be significant risks species as Mimodes. However, we find

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:38 Jan 15, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR3.SGM 16JAR3 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES3 3174 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations

the appropriate taxonomy for the prior to 1958 (Martı´nez-Go´mez 2002). 1990; (2) it is not an ‘‘estimate’’ of the species is Mimus graysoni, which Brattstrom and Howell (1956) observed Socorro mockingbird population, but follows the Integrated Taxonomic the species in coastal locations in the rather the ‘‘category’’ to which BirdLife Information System (ITIS 2007). southwest part of the Island, inland at International assigned the species, in higher elevations, and in canyons on the accordance with the IUCN listing Habitat and Life History northern part of the Island. Socorro criteria. Based on the most recent The geography of Socorro Island rises mockingbird may have inhabited the surveys, carried out between 1993 and from sea level on the coast to a height southwest portions of the island only 1994, the estimated population total was of nearly 3,445 ft (4,000 m) elevation on seasonally (R. Curry in litt. February 353 individuals, with a calculated the peak of Mount Evermann, in the 2007). By the 1980s, the species was uncertainty of 66 (Martı´nez-Go´mez & center of the island (Comisio´n Nacional restricted to undegraded fig groves Curry 1996). Taking the calculated ´ de Areas Naturales Protegidas (Ficus cotinifolia), habitat which was uncertainty of this estimate into (CONANP) n.d.). Socorro mockingbirds becoming rare (Jehl & Parkes 1982). account, the estimated total population are found in greatest abundance at Habitat reduction is considered the ranged between 287 and 419 (R. Curry elevations above 1,969 ft (600 m) primary cause of population and range in litt. February 2007). This estimate (Martı´nez-Go´mez & Curry 1996). They declines of the Socorro mockingbird was reconfirmed in the summer 2006, prefer undisturbed montane areas and (BLI 2000d). when Dr. Juan Martı´nez-Go´mez (Island primary forests that have a variety of Current Range and Distribution Endemics Foundation, Mexico, in litt. fruit-bearing plants and a high density via CONABIO February 2007) inspected of tree species. Dominant plant species The current range of the Socorro previous banding areas on the Island. in the Socorro’s preferred habitat mockingbird is limited to an estimated He encountered a population similar to 2 2 include holly (Ilex socorrensis), 6 mi (15 km ) area. The species is that studied by Martı´nez-Go´mez and Guettarda insularis (no common name), found in forests above 1,640 ft (500 m) Curry (1996), above, with an estimated ´ and lion’s paw (Oreopanax xalapensis), (Martı´nez-Gomez 2002) and is most population size between 298 and 408 along with the understory Triumfetta abundant at elevations above 1,969 ft individuals. While Dr. Martı´nez-Go´mez socorrensis and Eupatorium pacificum (600 m) around Mt. Evermann cautions against extrapolating these ´ ´ ´ ´ (Martınez-Gomez et al. 2001). Socorro (CONANP n.d.; Martınez-Gomez & estimates beyond the banding areas mockingbirds forage on fruits, Curry 1996; Wehtje et al. 1993). studied, he indicated a likelihood that In our proposed rule (71 FR 67530), invertebrates, and small arthropods additional Socorro mockingbirds are on (Martı´nez-Go´mez et al. 2001). They have we noted, ‘‘the species is less common the island (J. Martı´nez-Go´mez in litt. via been observed feeding on blowfly larvae in taller forest patches and fig groves at CONABIO February 2007). on sheep carcasses (Brattstrom & Howell low and mid elevations.’’ Martı´nez- 1956). Go´mez (in litt. via CONABIO February In our proposed rule, we wrote, ‘‘of Little is known about the Socorro 2007) pointed out that this may be 215 birds ringed in 1993–1994, 55 mockingbird’s life history; breeding misleading. The field study conducted percent were subadults.’’ However, information is based largely on studies by Martı´nez-Go´mez et al. (2001) Martı´nez-Go´mez (in litt. via CONABIO conducted by Martı´nez-Go´mez and indicated that the absence of the February 2007) noted this estimate was Curry (1995) during 1993 and 1994. Socorro mockingbird in the low- erroneously based on the pooled data They found four nests in 1994, which elevation fig grove was due to habitat from the 1993–1994 banding study were located about 12 ft (3.7 m) off the degradation. This is discussed further conducted by Martı´nez-Go´mez and ground, each in a different species of under Factor A. Curry (1996), which biased our estimate. tree: Holly, Bumelia socorrensis (no In our proposed rule, we noted that The banding for the 2-year study took common name), Guettarda insularis (no the species ‘‘is absent from areas of place at different times of the year: The common name), and Meliosma nesites [croton] Croton masonii scrub near sea- banding in 1993 took place after the (no common name). Researchers level (Martı´nez-Go´mez & Curry 1996).’’ breeding season, and the 1994 banding inferred that nesting likely occurs Curry (in litt. February 2007) clarified took place during the entire breeding between November and July, with a that it is uncertain whether Socorro season. Thus, in analyzing the 1994 clutch size of three. Eggs were incubated mockingbird ever inhabited the croton data, which would be more by females only (Martı´nez-Go´mez & scrub habitat, except as visitors during representative of actual age ratios, it was Curry 1998) for no more than 15 days the nonbreeding season. apparent that sex ratios were not (Martı´nez-Go´mez & Curry 1995). A large disproportionate and that the Population Estimates number of subadults recorded during population had produced many young. 1994 suggested high breeding success The Socorro mockingbird was once Thus, the 1994 data suggest that the for the species (J. Martı´nez-Go´mez in considered the most abundant landbird species has a high breeding success and litt. via Comisio´n Nacional Para el on Socorro Island (Brattstrom & Howell that the population may be successful in Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad 1956). The population declined through recolonizing the area once habitat (CONABIO) February 2007). the 1960s and 1970s, and by 1978 it was quality improves (J. Martı´nez-Go´mez in feared to be on the verge of extinction litt. February 2007). Historical Range and Distribution (Jehl & Parkes 1982). In our proposed Conservation Status The Socorro mockingbird is endemic rule, we wrote that ‘‘current estimates of to Socorro Island, Mexico, in the population size for the species range The IUCN has listed the Socorro Revillagigedo archipelago of Mexico. from 50 to 249 individuals (BLI 2000).’’ mockingbird as ‘‘Critically Endangered’’ Socorro Island is the largest of four According to Dr. Robert Curry since 2000, due to loss of habitat and , with an (Associate Professor, Villanova the small remaining number of mature approximate land area of 54 mi2 (140 University, Villanova, Pennsylvania, in adults (BLI 2007c). The species is km2) (Walter 1990). The island is 210 mi litt. February 2007), there are two categorized as ‘‘Peligro’’ in Mexico, (338 km) southwest of Baja California, problems with this figure: (1) It does not meaning it is in danger of extinction Mexico. The Socorro mockingbird was reflect the most recent field data, but (Hesiquio Benı´tez Dı´az, Director de widespread and common on the island reflects data collected between 1988 and Enlace y Asuntos Internacionales,

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:38 Jan 15, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR3.SGM 16JAR3 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 3175

CONABIO, Tlalpan, Mexico, in litt. 1993). The Socorro mockingbird prefers Less degraded habitat provides less February 2007). undisturbed montane areas and forests favorable conditions for the locusts and with a dense understory. In the southern the swarms are less intense. Because Summary of Factors Affecting the fig forests, hop bush (Dodonaea viscosa) birds eat locusts, they are better able to Socorro Mockingbird has replaced the original understory, moderate the effects of the swarm, A. The Present or Threatened and these areas are too degraded for the which also drives down the locust Destruction, Modification, or Socorro to inhabit (Martı´nez-Go´mez et population in the north, where birds are Curtailment of Socorro Mockingbird’s al. 2001). found at higher densities. In the south, Habitat or Range Habitat degradation caused by sheep locusts swarms are more intense, and Socorro mockingbird habitat in the drastically altered habitat on Socorro habitat destruction combined with southern portions of the island has been Island (BLI 2000d; R. Curry in litt. predation has reduced the number of February 2007; Martı´nez-Go´mez 2002), severely degraded by construction of a birds inhabiting the southern portion of especially low- to mid-elevation fig naval base and sheep overgrazing for the the island. The low bird density in the forests (ranging in altitude from 0 to past 50 years. In addition, locust south is insufficient to moderate the 1,640 ft (to 500 m)) in the southern swarms (Schistocerca piceifrons) have effects of the swarms being produced portion of the island (Martı´nez-Go´mez invaded that island since the mid-1990s. there. Locust swarms have also reduced in litt. February 2007). By 1990, they These threats to Socorro mockingbird available food sources, by denuding the had overgrazed the southern third of the habitat are discussed in turn. fruit trees of bark which serve as part of island (Martı´nez-Go´mez & Curry 1996), Naval base: The Mexican Navy built the Socorro mockingbird diet. Martı´nez- where the Socorro mockingbird was a base on Socorro Island in the late Go´mez (2005) attributed the greater and once plentiful (Brattstrom & Howell), 1950s (Martı´nez-Go´mez et al. 2001). continued intensity of swarms in the although perhaps only seasonally (R. Built on the southernmost tip, at Bahia south to the combination of habitat Curry in litt. February 2007). In the Vargas Lozano, the base supports more degradation (which created unsuitable northern regions of Socorro Island, low- habitat for the birds) and predation by than 200 personnel and family (Wehtje to mid-elevation fig forests are largely et al. 1993). The Socorro mockingbird cats (which reduced the number of undegraded and serve as important birds). We consider sheep overgrazing to prefers undisturbed montane areas, and habitat for the Socorro mockingbird may have occupied the area seasonally be a factor contributing to the (Martı´nez-Go´mez & Curry 1996; endangerment of this species. before the base was built (R. Curry in Martı´nez-Go´mez et al. 2001). Sheep litt. February 2007). During overgrazing extirpated the species from Summary of Factor A construction, native vegetation was one-third of its former range (BLI The current range of the Socorro removed from around the base and 2000d). mockingbird is limited to an estimated replaced with non-native grasses Locust swarms: Another factor 6-mi2 (15-km2) area. Habitat has been ´ ´ (Martınez-Gomez et al. 2001). Habitat causing the degradation of Socorro altered by construction of the Naval destruction caused by construction of mockingbird habitat was brought to our base, sheep overgrazing and locust the naval base contributed to the attention by Martı´nez-Go´mez (in litt. swarms, compounded by predation species’ extirpation from the southern February 2007). According to Martı´nez- (Factor C). Locust swarms have reduced third of the island (BLI 2000d), although Go´mez (2005), permanent locust available food sources by denuding the not to the same extent as sheep (Schistocerca piceifrons) swarms have fruit trees of bark. Preferring overgrazing. invaded the island since 1994. The undisturbed montane habitat and Sheep overgrazing: The greatest locusts swarm twice yearly and are primary forest, these factors have impact on the habitat of Socorro Island capable of reaching all points on the created unsuitable conditions for the has been severe degradation due to island. The swarms have defoliated species. Overgrazing and locust swarms intensive grazing by introduced trees and shrubs in several regions of continue to threaten the Socorro mammals (BLI 2000d; Curry in litt. the island, which decreases the mockingbird. We believe that the February 2007; Martı´nez-Go´mez in litt. availability of food from fruit trees and Socorro mockingbird is at significant February 2007; Martı´nez-Go´mez & Curry modifies the primary forest habitat risk throughout its range due to the 1995, 1996; Martı´nez-Go´mez et al. which the species prefers. Locusts are present and ongoing destruction and 2001). Socorro Island has no native especially pronounced in the southern modification of its habitat. mammals (Jehl & Parkes 1982). In our portion of the Island. A larger number proposed rule, we noted that Cody of young locusts and locusts in non- B. Overutilization for Commercial, (2005) reported that Socorro swarming stages are found in the Recreational, Scientific, or Educational mockingbird habitat is threatened by degraded habitats in the south Purposes destruction from introduced rabbits and (Martı´nez-Go´mez 2005). Martı´nez- There is no information indicating pigs. However, Curry (in litt. February Go´mez (2005) concluded that the higher that the Socorro mockingbird is being 2007) pointed out that, while rabbits intensity of outbreaks in the southern utilized for commercial, recreational, and pigs are problematic on the nearby portion of the island was an indirect scientific, or educational purposes. The island of Clario´n, these two exotic result of sheep overgrazing and species is not known to be in mammals were never introduced on predation caused by introduced international trade and has not been Socorro. mammals, namely sheep and cats (see formally considered for listing under Sheep were brought to Socorro Island Factor C). Sheep overgrazing has created CITES (www.cites.org). near the end of the 19th century and, by open conditions, providing suitable 1956, there were an estimated 2,000 habitat for locust reproduction, as C. Disease or Predation sheep living in the southern portions of evidenced by the high number of young We are not aware of any disease the island (Brattstrom & Howell 1956). and non-swarming stages of locust concerns that may have led to the Left feral, the sheep overgrazed, creating found primarily in those areas decline of the Socorro mockingbird extensive open areas (2005) and leaving (Martı´nez-Go´mez 2005). In the northern species. the soil vulnerable to erosion (R. Curry portions of the island habitat is less Predation by native red-tailed hawks in litt. February 2007; Wehtje et al. degraded and bird densities are higher. (Buteo jamaicensis soccoroensis) and

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:38 Jan 15, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR3.SGM 16JAR3 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES3 3176 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations

introduced feral cats is a factor in the with others to review the documented habitats for endemic, threatened, or species’ decline. The red-tailed hawk is cases of feral cat eradications on islands endangered species must be done in a one of two native raptors on the island; and found only 48 examples (Nogales et manner that does not alter the the other is the elf owl (Micrathene al. 2003). Socorro Island has an area of conditions necessary for their survival, whitneyi graysoni), a small insectivore. 54 mi2 (140 km2) (Walter 1990) and development, and (Article On the mainland, red-tailed hawks eat there are few examples of eradications 83); (4) prohibit the unpermitted use of primarily mammals; however, on on larger islands. Of the 48 examples threatened and endangered species Socorro Island their prey consists reviewed by Nogales et al. (2003), most (Article 87); and (5) stipulate penalties primarily of birds, land crabs, and were conducted on islands smaller than for violation, including fines equivalent (Jehl & Parkes 1983; Wehtje et al. 2 mi2 (5 km2) and only a few on islands to 20 to 20,000 days of the general 1993). In addition, hawks have been larger than 6 mi2 (15 km2). One minimum wage effective in the Federal known to prey on adults of other species successful eradication program on a District at the time the sanction is on the island (Martı´nez-Go´mex & Curry larger island (Marion Island, Republic of imposed, confiscation of instruments 1995). Martı´nez-Go´mez and Curry South Africa; area: 112 mi2 (290 km2)) related to violations, suspension or (1995) concluded that nesting birds and took place over a 15-year period. The revocation of permits, and adult Socorro mockingbirds were removal process becomes more administrative arrest for up to 36 hours vulnerable to predation by red-tailed complicated when humans occupy the (Article 171). While this overarching hawks. island, because preventing environmental law aims to protect Cats: During their banding study in reintroduction of invasive species also threatened and endangered species, 1994, Martı´nez-Go´mez and Curry (1995) becomes a factor (Nogales et al. 2003). there are no specific provisions in the reported that hawks and feral cats were Other predators: Feral house mice law that address the threats to the likely predators of this species. Cats (Mus musculus), on the other hand, Socorro mockingbird (i.e., habitat were introduced to the island in 1972 already present on the island, pose no degradation from introduced mammals, (Martı´nez-Go´mez 2002; Martı´nez-Go´mez known threat to the species (R. Curry in habitat destruction (Factor A), and et al. 2001). Cat predation is considered litt. February 2007). Curry (in litt. predation (Factor C)). the major factor responsible for February 2007) considers the potential According to the national legislation extirpation of the accidental introduction of feral black NOM–059-ECOL–2001, the species is (Zenaida graysoni) (Jehl & Parkes 1983). rats (Rattus rattus) by Naval transport to categorized as ‘‘Peligro,’’ meaning it is Examinations of cat stomach contents be a grave potential threat to the Socorro in danger of extinction (H. Benı´tez Dı´az and scats found no substantive evidence mockingbird, considering this risk as in litt. February 2007). Under Mexico’s of Socorro mockingbird remains. potentially devastating as the threat of Wildlife Law (Ley General De Vida However, Curry (in litt. February 2007) genetic erosion. Such an introduction Silvestre 2002), it is illegal to kill, and Martı´nez-Go´mez (2002, 2005) has not yet occurred and, as such, we possess, transport, or trade in species in consider that, while feral cats are not do not consider predation by rats to be danger of extinction without a permit the primary reason for the Socorro a factor endangering the species. (Article 122). As overutilization is not a mockingbird’s decline, in combination threat to the viability of the species, this Summary of Factor C with habitat degradation caused by regulation is of little consequence to the sheep, predation by cats is contributing Predation by native hawks and feral viability of the Socorro mockingbird. to its decline. Socorro mockingbird cats does not appear to be the primary On June 4, 1994, the Mexican fledglings, which are unable to fly for factor causing this species’ decline at government established the several days after leaving the nest, and this time. However, in combination with Revillagigedo Archipelago Biosphere ground-foraging adults are vulnerable to the threat from habitat degradation Reserve and declared it to be a Protected predation by feral cats (Martı´nez-Go´mez (Factor A) and the species’ small Natural Area (Revillagigedo Archipelago & Curry 1995, 1996). population size (Factor E), predation is Decree 1994). This reserve included the According to the Center for Tropical contributing to the endangerment of the entire island of Socorro and established Research in Ecology, Agriculture, and species. the following protections: (1) Development (CenTREAD) (2007), Formulation of a management plan that D. The Inadequacy of Existing eradication of feral cats from Socorro sets specific objectives for the reserve Regulatory Mechanisms Island is listed as a primary goal in the (Articles 2 and 3), (2) ban on draft management plan for the The General Law of Ecological construction inside core areas of the Biosphere Reserve (CenTREAD 2007). In Equilibrium and Environmental reserve (which includes the entire 2001, Grupo de Ecologı´a y Conservacio´n Protection was enacted on March 1, island of Socorro) (Article 4), (3) de Islas, A.C. (GECI), received a North 1988, and was amended by Decree requirement of an environmental impact American Wetlands Conservation Act published December 13, 1996, and statement for construction in the buffer grant to initiate the eradication of another Decree published January 7, zones of the reserve, (4) ban on the introduced mammals (including rabbits, 2000 (General Law of Ecological establishment of new human pigs and sheep) from neighboring Equilibrium and Environmental settlements within the reserve (Article Clario´n Island and to initiate the Protection 2000). This law and its 7), (5) establishment of a ‘‘closed eradication of cats and sheep from amendments: (1) Established the season’’ on all plants and animals in the Socorro Island (Sa´nchez and Tershy authority to designate protected natural reserve (Article 9), (6) prohibition on the 2001). The work on Clario´n Island was areas to safeguard the genetic diversity dumping or discharge of contaminants completed (CenTREAD 2007). However, of wild species and to preserve species (Article 11), and (7) limit on recreational the work on Socorro Island may prove that are in danger of extinction, are activities to those identified in the to be lengthy and daunting. Dr. Bernie threatened endemics, or are rare, and management plan for the reserve Tershy of the Institute for Marine those that need special protection (Article 15). According to the Comisio´n Sciences (University of California, Santa (Article 45); (2) prohibit hunting or Nacional de A´ reas Naturales Protegidas Cruz, California), a primary researcher exploitation of species within core areas (n.d.), a management plan has been involved in the eradication programs on of biosphere reserves (Article 70); (3) drafted and is in the process of being Clario´n and Socorro Islands, worked specify that use of natural resources in published. Management

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:38 Jan 15, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR3.SGM 16JAR3 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 3177

recommendations include: Eradicate required to avoid risks from inbreeding Threats from stochastic events: cats and sheep from the island; restore (Ne = 50). However, the upper limit of Socorro Island is situated in a zone with the soil and vegetation; and establish a the population estimate of no more than a high probability of being in the research monitoring station, especially 408 birds (J. Martı´nez-Go´mez in litt. via trajectory of cyclones from the Pacific to monitor the population before and CONABIO February 2007) is near the northeast, which form during the after eradications (BLI 2007f). If this upper threshold for Ne = 500). Martı´nez- months of May to October. Since 1958, management plan is finalized and Go´mez (2002) notes that the species 77 hurricanes and eight tropical storms enacted, this regulatory mechanism has currently exhibits a positive have hit the Island chain (Comisio´n the potential to reduce or remove threats reproductive rate, but that demographic Nacional de A´ reas Naturales Protegidas to habitat and from predation and could problems will ensue for this species (CONANP) n.d.). In 1997, Hurricane ultimately result in the recovery of the within the next 20 to 30 years, should Linda came within 46 mi (74 km; 40 species. However, based on the best habitat degradation continue. We nautical miles (nm)) of the island, where available information at this time, we conclude that, combined with the it reportedly ‘‘wreaked havoc’’ (Wirth have no assurances that the threats from habitat destruction (Factor 1998). At 160 knots, it was the strongest management plan will be completed, A) and predation (Factor C), this hurricane recorded in the Pacific since implemented, and effective. Therefore, population is vulnerable to genetic risks recordkeeping began in 1949 (Lawrence this regulatory mechanism is inadequate associated with small population sizes 1999). in reducing the threats to this species. that negatively impact the species’ long- Socorro Island is a volcanic island. The most recent eruption of Mt. Summary of Factor D term viability. Hybridization: In addition, the Evermann occurred in 1993, from an Regulatory mechanisms are potential for the Socorro mockingbird to underwater vent off the southwest coast. inadequate to reduce the threats to the hybridize with the northern Regular volcanic activity continues species, habitat destruction (Factor A) mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos) was throughout the Island from fumaroles and predation (Factor C). As such, we brought to our attention by Dr. Curry (in and hydrothermal vents (Bulletin of the believe that the inadequacy of litt. February 2007). The northern Global Volcanism Network 1993). The regulatory mechanisms is a contributory mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos) last major volcanic eruption on Socorro risk factor that endangers the species. arrived on the Island in 1978, either Island occurred in 1948 (CONANP n.d.) E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors naturally or transported by Naval and, according to Trombley (2007), the Affecting the Continued Existence of the personnel (Curry in litt. February 2007), next is expected in 2014. An eruption in Species and its population has steadily 1952 on San Benedicto decimated the increased (Jehl & Parkes 1983). Jehl and native flora and fauna on that island Three additional factors are ´ ´ Parkes (1983) showed that the northern (Martınez-Gomez 2002). considered herein, genetic risks Stochastic events, such as hurricanes mockingbird’s habitat requirements are associated with small population sizes, and volcanic eruptions, could result in different from those of the Socorro hybridization, and threats from extensive mortalities from which the mockingbird and the northern stochastic events. population may be unable to recover, mockingbird, concluding that the Genetic risks associated with small leading to extinction. Increased is not population sizes: The small estimated population fragmentation in competitively excluding the Socorro size of the population, between 298 and combination with these factors increases ´ mockingbird. They found that the 408 individuals (Martı´nez-Gomez & the likelihood of extinction of the northern mockingbird’s success on the Curry 1996) exposes this species to any species through a single stochastic event island was due to its ability to adapt to of several risks, including inbreeding (Caughley 1994; Charlesworth & the island’s degraded habitat. However, depression, loss of genetic variation, Charlesworth 1987). and accumulation of new mutations. it was recently determined that the Inbreeding can have individual or northern mockingbird is genetically Summary of Factor E population-level consequences either by most closely related to the Socorro Combined with the population increasing the phenotypic expression of mockingbird (Arbogast et al. 2006; pressures caused by habitat loss (Factor recessive, deleterious alleles or by Barber et al. 2004), which increases the A) and predation (Factor C), the Socorro reducing the overall fitness of possibility that the two species are mockingbird is subject to long-term individuals in the population capable of hybridizing (R. Curry in litt. genetic risks associated with its small (Charlesworth & Charlesworth 1987). February 2007). In addition, Baptista population and compounded by the risk Small, isolated populations of wildlife and Martı´nez-Go´mez (2002) noted that of stochastic events, such as cyclones or species are also susceptible to song development in Socorro eruptions, severely reducing population demographic problems (Shaffer 1981), mockingbird may be being influenced numbers such that the species is unable which may include reduced by contact with northern mockingbirds. to recover. We consider the species’ reproductive success of individuals and Interspecific mimicry could facilitate small population size and threats from chance disequilibrium of sex ratios. In hybridization through sexual stochastic events threats that contribute the absence of more species-specific life misimprinting (R. Curry in litt. February to the endangerment of the species. history data, a general approximation of 2007). minimum viable population sizes is We recognize that hybridization can Conclusion and Determination for the referred to as the 50 / 500 rule (Soule´ lead to genetic dilution and other Socorro Mockingbird 1980; Hunter 1996), as described under genetic risks that undermine the genetic We have carefully assessed the best Factor E for the black stilt. The available integrity of a species. There is currently available scientific and commercial information indicates that the no evidence that hybridization has information regarding the past, present, population of the Socorro mockingbird occurred between the Socorro and potential future threats faced by the may be as small as 298 birds (J. mockingbird and the northern black stilt, above. We have determined Martı´nez-Go´mez in litt. via CONABIO mockingbird. As such, we do not that the species is in danger of February 2007); this is above the consider this a current factor extinction throughout all of its known minimum effective population size endangering the species. range primarily due to ongoing threats

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:38 Jan 15, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR3.SGM 16JAR3 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES3 3178 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations

to its habitats (Factor A) and predation endangered species and to provide National Environmental Policy Act (Factor C), compounded by genetic risks assistance for such programs in the form to the species’ long-term genetic of personnel and the training of We have determined that viability and susceptibility to stochastic personnel. environmental assessments and events due to risks associated small The Act and its implementing environmental impact statements, as population sizes (Factor E). regulations set forth a series of general defined under the authority of the Furthermore, we have determined that prohibitions and exceptions that apply National Environmental Policy Act of the inadequacy of existing regulatory to all endangered wildlife. As such, 1969, need not be prepared in mechanisms is a contributory risk factor these prohibitions would be applicable connection with regulations adopted that endangers the species’ continued to the black stilt, caerulean paradise- pursuant to section 4(a) of the Act. A existence (Factor D). Therefore, we are flycatcher, giant ibis, Gurney’s pitta, notice outlining our reasons for this determining endangered status for the Long-legged thicketbird, and Socorro determination was published in the Socorro mockingbird under the Act. mockingbird. These prohibitions, Federal Register on October 25, 1983 Because we find that the Socorro pursuant to 50 CFR 17.21, in part, make (48 FR 49244). mockingbird is endangered throughout it illegal for any person subject to U.S. References Cited all of its range, there is no reason to jurisdiction to ‘‘take’’ (includes harass, consider its status in any significant harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, A list of the references used to portion of its range. trap, capture, or to attempt any of these) develop this final rule is available upon request (see ADDRESSES section). Required Determinations within the United States or upon the high seas; import or export; deliver, Author Available Conservation Measures receive, carry, transport, or ship in Conservation measures provided to interstate or foreign commerce in the The primary author of this notice is species listed as endangered or course of commercial activity; or sell or the staff of the Division of Scientific threatened under the Act include offer for sale in interstate or foreign Authority, U.S. Fish and Wildlife recognition, recovery actions, commerce any endangered wildlife Service (see ADDRESSES section). requirements for Federal protection, and species. It also is illegal to possess, sell, List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 prohibitions against certain practices. deliver, carry, transport, or ship any Recognition through listing results in such wildlife that has been taken in Endangered and threatened species, public awareness and encourages and violation of the Act. Certain exceptions Exports, Imports, Reporting and results in conservation actions by apply to agents of the Service and State recordkeeping requirements, Federal governments, private agencies conservation agencies. Transportation. Permits may be issued to carry out and groups, and individuals. Regulation Promulgation Section 7(a) of the Act, as amended, otherwise prohibited activities and as implemented by regulations at 50 involving endangered wildlife species I Accordingly, we amend part 17, CFR part 402, requires Federal agencies under certain circumstances. subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the to evaluate their actions within the Regulations governing permits are Code of Federal Regulations, as follows: United States or on the high seas with codified at 50 CFR 17.22. With regard to respect to any species that is proposed endangered wildlife, a permit may be PART 17—[AMENDED] or listed as endangered or threatened, issued for the following purposes: for and with respect to its critical habitat, scientific purposes, to enhance the I 1. The authority citation for part 17 if any is being designated. However, propagation or survival of the species, continues to read as follows: given that the black stilt, caerulean and for incidental take in connection Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 16 U.S.C. paradise-flycatcher, giant ibis, Gurney’s with otherwise lawful activities. 1531–1544; 16 U.S.C. 4201–4245; Pub. L. 99– pitta, Long-legged thicketbird, and Paperwork Reduction Act 625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted. Socorro mockingbird are not native to the United States, no critical habitat is This final rule does not contain any I 2. Amend 17.11(h) by adding new being proposed for designation with this new collections of information that entries for ‘‘Ibis, giant,’’ ‘‘Mockingbird, rule. require approval by the Office of Socorro,’’ ‘‘Paradise-flycatcher, Section 8(a) of the Act authorizes the Management and Budget (OMB) under caerulean,’’ ‘‘Pitta, Gurney’s,’’ ‘‘Stilt, provision of limited financial assistance 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. The regulation black,’’ and ‘‘Thicketbird, long-legged’’ for the development and management of will not impose new recordkeeping or in alphabetical order under Birds, to the programs that the Secretary of the reporting requirements on State or local List of Endangered and Threatened Interior determines to be necessary or governments, individuals, businesses, or Wildlife as follows: useful for the conservation of organizations. We may not conduct or endangered species in foreign countries. sponsor and you are not required to § 17.11 Endangered and threatened Sections 8(b) and 8(c) of the Act respond to a collection of information wildlife. authorize the Secretary to encourage unless it displays a currently valid OMB * * * * * conservation programs for foreign control number. (h) * * *

Species Vertebrate popu- lation where en- Critical Special Historic range dangered or Status When listed habitat rules Common name Scientific name threatened

******* BIRDS

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:38 Jan 15, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR3.SGM 16JAR3 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 3179

Species Vertebrate popu- lation where en- Critical Special Historic range dangered or Status When listed habitat rules Common name Scientific name threatened

******* Ibis, giant ...... Pseudibis gigantea ... Cambodia, Lao PDR, Entire ...... E 760 NA NA Thailand, Vietnam.

******* Mockingbird, Socorro Mimus Graysoni ...... Mexico ...... Entire ...... E 760 NA NA

******* Paradise-flycatcher, Eutrichomyias rowleyi Indonesia ...... Entire ...... E 760 NA NA caerulean.

******* Pitta, Gurney’s ...... Pitta gurneyi ...... Myanmar, Thailand .. Entire ...... E 760 NA NA

******* Stilt, black ...... Himantopus New Zealand ...... Entire ...... E 760 NA NA novaezelandiae.

******* Thicketbird, long- Trichocichla rufa ...... Fiji ...... Entire ...... E 760 NA NA legged.

*******

Dated: January 7, 2008. Kenneth Stansell, Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. [FR Doc. E8–492 Filed 1–15–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:38 Jan 15, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR3.SGM 16JAR3 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES3