|
[Federal Register: September 20, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 183)]
[Notices]
[Page 56916-56922]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr20se00-92]
=============================================================
----------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
RIN 1018-AG25
Policy Regarding
Controlled Propagation of Species Listed Under
the Endangered Species Act
AGENCIES: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior; National Marine
Fisheries Service, Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of policy.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This policy, published jointly by the Fish and Wildlife
Service (FWS) and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), jointly
referred to as the Services, addresses the role of controlled propagation in the conservation and recovery of species listed as
endangered or threatened under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (as
amended) (Act). The policy provides guidance and establishes
consistency for use of controlled propagation as a component of a
listed species recovery strategy. This policy will help to ensure
smooth transitions between various phases of conservation efforts such
as propagation, reintroduction and monitoring, and foster efficient use
of available funds. The policy supports the controlled propagation of
listed species when recommended in an approved recovery plan or when
necessary to prevent extinction of a species. Appropriate uses of controlled propagation include supporting recovery related research,
maintaining refugia populations, providing plants or animals for
reintroduction or augmentation of existing populations, and conserving
species or populations at risk of imminent extinction or extirpation.
DATES: The final policy on controlled propagation is effective October
20, 2000.
ADDRESSES: You may view comments and materials received during the
public comment period for the draft policy document by appointment
during normal business hours in Room 420, 4401 North Fairfax Drive,
Arlington, Virginia 22203.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Harrelson, Division of
Endangered Species, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service at the above address
(703/358-2171) or by e-mail at David_Harrelson@fws.gov; or Marta
Nammack, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service (301/713-1401) or by e-mail at Marta.Nammack@noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Endangered Species Act specifically
charges us with the responsibility for identification, protection,
management, and recovery of species of plants and animals in danger of
extinction. Fulfilling this responsibility requires the protection and
conservation of not only individual organisms and populations, but also
the genetic and ecological resources that listed species represent.
Long-term viability depends on maintaining genetic adaptability within
each species. Species, as defined in section 3(15) of the Act, includes
``any subspecies of fish or wildlife or plants, and any distinct
population segment of any species of vertebrate fish or wildlife which
interbreeds when mature.'' Though the Act emphasizes the restoration of
listed species in their
[[Page 56917]]
natural habitats, section 3(3) of the Act recognizes propagation as a
tool available to us to achieve this end. The controlled propagation of
animals and plants in certain situations is an essential tool for the
conservation and recovery of listed species. In the past, we have used controlled propagation to reverse population declines and to
successfully return listed species to suitable habitat in the wild. To
support the goal of restoring endangered and threatened animals and
plants, we are obligated to develop sound policies based on the best
available scientific and commercial information.
Summary of Comments and Recommendations
A draft policy on this subject was published on February 7, 1996
(61 FR 4716), and invited public comment. We received 47 comments.
Twenty-four were from zoos, aquariums, botanical gardens, and
conservation organizations, 3 from academic institutions, 6 from
private individuals and business organizations, 2 from government
organizations, and 12 from State natural resource agencies. Nearly all
comments received were supportive of the policy and its goals. Comments
that expressed concerns or criticisms were limited, though quite
specific. We reviewed all comments received, and suggestions or
clarifications have been incorporated into the final policy text. The
following describes the major issues identified and our responses.
Issue: The draft policy, as published, would have a significant
impact in terms of increased workload on the Services, zoological parks
and aquariums, private organizations, and individual citizens.
Response: We acknowledge this concern and have modified the policy
to reduce impacts to the zoo and aquarium community, botanical
facilities, Federal fish hatcheries, and others who may be involved in propagation of listed species. As amended, this final policy is not
expected to have a significant impact on organizations or individuals
involved in propagation of listed species. The majority of zoological
parks and aquaria that are involved in programs assisting the recovery
of endangered and threatened animal species native to the United States
are members of the American Zoo and Aquarium Association (AZA). The AZA
has developed numerous strategies, protocols, and standards that
address concerns associated with captive animal populations involved in
conservation-based breeding programs. This final policy encourages the
Services, and others, to follow as may be practical, the protocols and
standards of the AZA, and other appropriate organizations, for the controlled propagation of animal species. The Center for Plant
Conservation (CPC) is similar to the AZA in that this organization
consists of member botanical gardens and arboreta that are involved in
preventing the extinction of native plants, including those federally
listed as endangered or threatened. When practical, the Services and
others are encouraged to use the protocols and standards of the CPC,
and other appropriate organizations, when propagating listed plant
species.
Those individuals or organizations that currently have permits to
keep listed species are exempt from this policy for the duration of the
permit unless the Regional Director (FWS) or Assistant Administrator
(NMFS) determines otherwise. For example, a permit holder implementing
activities recommended in an approved recovery plan is exempt and would
not need to reapply for a new permit. We have made substantial efforts
to avoid adverse impacts, economic or otherwise, in order that
cooperative recovery partnership opportunities may be maintained or
increased with qualified organizations and individuals.
Issue: The policy would apply to research activities identified in
recovery plans in which controlled propagation or unintentional propagation may occur.
Response: Research identified in recovery plans, including research
that may lead to development of a controlled propagation capacity, is
not covered by this policy because the intent of such research is not
the production of individuals for introduction into the wild. Should
offspring that are the product of research efforts be proposed for
introduction into the wild, such offspring and any proposed
reintroductions will be subject to this policy.
Should circumstances arise in the course of implementing recovery
activities, including research, in which application of this policy is
deemed necessary for the benefit of the listed species, the decision to
apply the policy will rest with the Regional Director or Assistant
Administrator.
Research on species with short lifespans (e.g., 1 to 2 years) that
requires maintenance of a captive population not intended for release
to the wild is exempt from this policy. However, all activities
involving reproduction of a listed U.S. species must meet the
requirements of the Act, as well as any other legal and administrative
obligations. All persons or institutions conducting approved activities
involving controlled propagation of listed species for purposes other
than release in the wild will still be required to develop appropriate
measures to address concerns identified under section E. 5. of this
policy.
Issue: The policy would apply to foreign species being maintained
and propagated in U.S. zoological and aquarium facilities or by private
individuals.
Response: This policy only applies to species indigenous to the
United States and its territories for which we have, or intend to
prepare, recovery plans. We have exempted foreign species that are
listed under the Act and being propagated or maintained in the United
States for conservation purposes.
Issue: Requirements to develop genetics and reintroduction guidance
documents for species being propagated for augmentation of existing
populations or for the establishment of new populations in the wild are
not practical.
Response: We recognize this concern and have modified the policy
accordingly. In many instances there is insufficient biological
knowledge of the listed species to develop detailed genetic management
documents, and the requirement for these documents may unnecessarily
burden conservation and recovery efforts. However, we strongly
recommend development of these documents if adequate information is
available. Furthermore, we reemphasize the recommendation in the draft
policy that controlled propagation activities follow accepted
standards, which include appropriate genetics management.
Issue: There are too many reporting requirements.
Response: We have reduced reporting requirements. However, we need
to identify those listed species involved in controlled propagation programs, the level of production in these programs, and efforts to
secure appropriate habitat for population augmentation, reintroduction,
and recovery.
Issue: The requirement that controlled propagation be permitted
only if indicated in an approved final recovery plan would place an
unnecessary burden on Federal programs to revise existing recovery
plans to meet this requirement.
Response: We do not agree. The recovery plans for most species for
which controlled propagation is occurring have identified this action
as a specific recovery task. Where controlled propagation is not
identified as a task in the recovery plan, but has been subsequently
determined to be necessary to the recovery of the species,
[[Page 56918]]
the plan would need to be amended or revised.
Required Determinations
1. Regulatory Planning and Review
In accordance with Executive Order 12866, this policy was submitted
for review by the Office of Management and Budget. In accordance with
the criteria set forth in Executive Order 12866, this policy is not a
significant regulatory action. Under current and anticipated levels of
activity, this policy will not result in an annual economic effect of
$100 million or more. Moreover, this policy will not adversely affect
an economic sector, productivity, jobs, the environment, or other units
of government. The controlled propagation policy does not pertain to
commercial products or activities or anything traded in the
marketplace.
2. Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)
We certify that this policy will not have a significant economic
effect on a substantial number of small entities. This policy does not
apply to all species listed under the Act but only to those species
native to the United States and its territories for which recovery
plans exist or are expected to be developed. Furthermore, controlled propagation is restricted to those species for which such propagation is specifically recommended in an approved final recovery plan.
Programs involving the controlled propagation of federally listed
species are typically restricted to institutions such as the FWS's
National Fish Hatcheries and Fish Technology Centers. Nongovernmental
entities that may be involved in the controlled propagation of listed
species are typically organizations with a high level of technical
skill in the captive maintenance and breeding of plants and animals,
such as zoos, aquaria, and botanical gardens. Rarely are academic
institutions and even more infrequently, private individuals, involved
in the controlled propagation of listed species for conservation and
recovery purposes.
3. Small Business Regulatory Fairness Act (5 U.S.C. 804(2))
This is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This policy will
not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more,
produce increases in costs or prices for consumers, individual
industries or Federal, State or local government agencies, affect
economic competitiveness, or economically impact geographic regions in
the United States or its territories.
4. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.)
This policy does not impose an unfunded mandate on any State,
Tribal, or local government or the private sector of $100 million or
more per year.
5. Takings
In accordance with Executive Order 12630, this policy does not pose
significant takings implications, and a takings implication assessment
is not required. Implementation of this policy will not result in
``take'' of private property and will not alter the value of private
property. Many reintroductions of propagated species occur exclusively
on FWS, other Federal, or State lands, but reintroductions on private
lands are not unknown. In such cases, the private entities work with
the Services as willing partners to ensure the success of the
reintroduction effort.
6. Federalism
In accordance with Executive Order 13132, this policy does not have
sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a
federalism assessment. It does not affect the structure or role of
States, and will not have direct, substantial, or significant effects
on States. Releases of propagated species typically occur on Federal or
State lands. The States work with the Services as willing partners to
ensure the success of reintroduction efforts.
7. Civil Justice Reform
In accordance with Executive Order 12988, the Department of the
Interior's Office of the Solicitor has determined that this policy does
not unduly burden the judicial system. The final policy provides clear
standards, simplifies procedures, reduces burden, and is clearly
written such that litigation risk is minimized.
8. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)
This policy does not contain any new information collection
requirements for which Office of Management and Budget approval under
the Paperwork Reduction Act is required. The OMB control number for the
FWS is 1018-0094 and for NMFS is 0648-0230 and 0648-0402.
9. National Environmental Policy Act
We have analyzed this policy under the criteria of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 as amended, and have determined that
the issuance of this policy is categorically excluded by the Department
of the Interior in 516 DM 2, Appendix 1.10. The NMFS concurs with the
Department of the Interior's determination that the issuance of this
policy qualifies for a categorical exclusion and satisfies the
categorical exclusion criteria in the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration 216-6 Administrative Order, Environmental Review
Procedure. No further NEPA documentation is required.
10. Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes
Though no reintroductions of captively propagated federally
endangered or threatened species have been undertaken, in accordance
with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994, ``Government-to-
Government Relations with Native American Tribal Governments'' (59 FR
22951) and 512 DM 2, we recognize the potential for such actions in the
future and the obligation to relate to federally recognized Tribes on a
government-to-government basis.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited in this final policy is
available on request from the Washington Office of the Division of
Endangered Species (see ADDRESSES section).
Authors. The primary authors of this policy are David Harrelson of
the Fish and Wildlife Service's Division of Endangered Species, Mail
Stop 420 ARLSQ, 1849 C Street, NW, Washington, DC 20240 (703/358-2171),
and Marta Nammack of the National Marine Fisheries Service's Protected
Species Management Division, 1335 East-West Highway, Silver Spring,
Maryland 20910 (301/713-1401).
Policy Statement
A. What is the purpose of this policy? This policy provides
guidance and establishes consistency with respect to Fish and Wildlife
Service (FWS) and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), jointly
called the Services, activities in which the controlled propagation of
a listed species, as the term ``species'' is defined in section 3(15)
of the Act, is implemented as a component of the recovery strategy for
a listed species. It supports and promotes coordination between various
phases of controlled propagation efforts such as propagation technology
development, propagation for release, population augmentation,
reintroduction, and monitoring. This policy will also contribute to the
efficient use of funding resources.
Guidance is provided regarding the use of controlled propagation for:
Preventing the extinction of listed species, subspecies,
or populations;
[[Page 56919]]
Recovery-oriented scientific research, including, but not
restricted to, developing propagation methods and technology, and other
actions that are expected to result in a net benefit to the listed
taxon. Use of surrogates, while applicable to the recovery of listed
species, is exempt from the requirements of this policy;
Maintaining genetic vigor and demographic diversity of
listed species, subspecies, or populations;
Maintaining refugia populations for nearly extinct animals
or plants on a temporary basis until threats to a listed species'
habitat are alleviated, or necessary habitat modifications are
completed, or when potentially catastrophic events occur (e.g.,
chemical spills, severe storms, fires, flooding);
Providing individuals for establishing new, self-
sustaining populations necessary for recovery of the listed species;
and
Supplementing or enhancing extant populations to
facilitate recovery of the listed species.
B. What is the scope of this policy? This policy applies to all
pertinent organizational elements of both Services, notwithstanding
those differences in administrative procedures and policies as noted.
Exceptions to this policy appear in section F. This policy pertains to
all efforts requiring permits under 50 CFR 17 subparts C and D, funded,
authorized, or carried out by us that are conducted to propagate
threatened or endangered species by:
Establishing or maintaining refugia populations;
Producing individuals for research and technology
development needs;
Producing individuals for supplementing extant
populations; and
Producing individuals for reintroduction to suitable
habitat within the species' historic range.
C. Why is this policy necessary? The controlled propagation of
animals and plants in certain situations is an essential tool for the
conservation and recovery of listed species. In the past, we have used controlled propagation to reverse population declines and to
successfully return listed species to suitable habitat in the wild.
Though controlled propagation has a supportive role in the recovery
of some listed species, the intent of the Act is ``to provide a means
whereby the ecosystems upon which endangered species and threatened
species depend may be conserved.'' Controlled propagation is not a
substitute for addressing factors responsible for an endangered or
threatened species' decline. Therefore, our first priority is to
recover wild populations in their natural habitat wherever possible,
without resorting to the use of controlled propagation. This position
is fully consistent with the Act.
We recognize that genetic and ecological risks may be associated
with introducing to the wild, animals and plants bred and reared in a controlled environment. When considering controlled propagation as a
recovery option, the potential benefits and risks must be assessed and
alternatives requiring less intervention objectively evaluated. If controlled propagation is identified as an appropriate strategy for the
recovery of a listed species, it must be conducted in a manner that
will, to the maximum extent possible, preserve the genetic and
ecological distinctiveness of the listed species and minimize risks to
existing wild populations.
We recognize that for many species, information available for
detailed genetics conservation management or assessment of risks
associated with reintroduction may be insufficient. Therefore, this
policy does not specifically require written genetic management plans
and ecological risk assessments to initiate or support controlled propagation programs. Additionally, acute conservation needs may
legitimately outweigh delays that would be incurred by such a
requirement. However, where sufficient biological and environmental
information exists, and where conservation activities would not be
unduly constrained, a formal assessment of ecological and genetic risks
is strongly encouraged. Risks that must be evaluated in the planning of controlled propagation programs include the following specific
examples:
Removal of natural parental stock that may result in an
increased risk of extinction by reducing the abundance of wild
individuals and reducing genetic variability within naturally occurring
populations;
Equipment failures, human error, disease, and other
potential catastrophic events that may cause the loss of some or all of
the population being held or maintained in captivity or cultivation;
The potential for an increased level of inbreeding or
other adverse genetic effects within populations that may result from
the enhancement of only a portion of the gene pool;
Potential erosion of genetic differences between
populations as a result of mixed stock transfers or supplementation;
Exposure to novel selection regimes in controlled environments that may diminish a listed species' natural capacity to
survive and reproduce in the wild;
Genetic introgression, which may diminish local
adaptations of the naturally occurring population;
Increased predation, competition for food, space, mates,
or other factors that may displace naturally occurring individuals, or
interfere with foraging, migratory, reproductive, or other essential
behaviors; and
Disease transmission. Controlled propagation programs must be undertaken in a manner that
minimizes potentially adverse impacts to existing wild populations of
listed species, and we must conduct controlled propagation programs in
a manner that avoids additional listing actions.
D. What are the definitions for terms used in this policy? The
following definitions apply: Controlled environment--A controlled environment is one manipulated
for the purpose of producing or rearing progeny of the species in
question, and of a design intended to prevent unplanned escape or entry
of plants, animals, or gametes, embryos, seeds, propagules, or other
potential reproductive products. Controlled propagation--Among animals, it includes natural or
artificial matings, fertilization of sex cells, transfer of embryos,
development of offspring, and grow-out of individuals of a species when
the species is intentionally confined or the mating is directly
intended by human intervention.
The term also includes the human-induced propagation of plants from
seeds, spores, callus tissue, divisions, cuttings, or other plant
tissue, or through pollination in a controlled environment.
Defined in the context of this policy, controlled propagation refers to the production of individuals, generally within a
managed environment, for the purpose of supplementing or augmenting a
wild population(s), or reintroduction to the wild to establish new
populations.
Intercross--Any instance of interbreeding or genetic exchange
between individuals of different species, subspecies, or distinct
population segments of a vertebrate species.
Phenotype--The expression of the genetic makeup of an organism
through physical characteristics that make up its appearance.
Recovery priority system--The system used for assigning recovery
priorities to listed species and to recovery tasks. Recovery priority
is based on the degree of threat, recovery potential, taxonomic
[[Page 56920]]
distinctness, and presence of an actual or imminent conflict between
the species' conservation, adverse human activities, and other threats.
Rescue and salvage--These terms refer to extreme conditions wherein
a species or population segment at risk of extinction is brought into a controlled environment (i.e., refugia) on a temporary or permanent
basis.
Taxon--A formal group of organisms of any rank or formal scientific
classification.
E. What is our Policy? This policy is intended to address
candidate, proposed, and listed species indigenous to the United States
and its territories for which the Services, have, or intend to prepare,
recovery plans. This policy focuses primarily on those activities
involving gamete transfer and subsequent development and grow-out of
offspring in a laboratory, botanical facility, zoo, hatchery, aquarium,
or similarly controlled environment. This policy also addresses
activities related to or preceding controlled propagation activities
such as:
Obtaining and rearing offspring for research;
Procuring broodstock for future controlled propagation and
augmentation efforts; or
Holding offspring for a substantial portion of their
development or through a life-stage that experiences poor survival in
the wild.
The goals of this policy include coordinating recovery actions
specific to controlled propagation activities; maximizing benefits to
the listed species from controlled propagation efforts; assuring that
appropriate recovery measures other than controlled propagation and
that other existing recovery priorities are considered in making controlled propagation decisions; and ensuring prudent use of funds.
Our policy is that the controlled propagation of threatened and
endangered species will be:
1. Used as a recovery strategy only when other measures employed to
maintain or improve a listed species' status in the wild have failed,
are determined to be likely to fail, are shown to be ineffective in
overcoming extant factors limiting recovery, or would be insufficient
to achieve full recovery. All reasonable effort should be made to
accomplish conservation measures that enable a listed species to
recover in the wild, with or without intervention (e.g., artificial
cavity provisioning), prior to implementing controlled propagation for
reintroduction or supplementation.
2. Coordinated with conservation actions and other recovery
measures, as appropriate or specified in recovery plans, that will
contribute to, or otherwise support, the provision of secure and
suitable habitat. Controlled propagation programs intended for
reintroduction or augmentation must be coordinated with habitat
management, restoration, and other species' recovery efforts.
3. Based on the specific recommendations of recovery strategies
identified in approved recovery plans or supplements to approved
recovery plans whenever practical. The recovery plan, in addressing controlled propagation, should clearly identify the necessity and role
of this activity as a recovery strategy.
4. Based on specific consideration of the potential ecological and
genetic effects of the removal of individuals for controlled propagation purposes on wild populations and the potential effects of
introductions of artificially bred animals or plants on the receiving
population and other resident species. Assessments of potential risks
and benefits will be addressed, as required, through sections 7 and 10
of the Act and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA, 42 U.S.C.
4332) for proposed controlled propagation actions.
5. Based on sound scientific principles to conserve genetic
variation and species integrity. Intercrossing will not be considered
for use in controlled propagation programs unless recommended in an
approved recovery plan; supported in an approved genetic management
plan (if information is available to develop such a plan, and which may
or may not be part of an approved recovery plan); implemented in a
scientifically controlled and approved manner; and undertaken to
compensate for a loss of genetic viability in listed taxa that have
been genetically isolated in the wild as a result of human activity.
Use of intercross individuals for species conservation will require the
approval of the FWS Director or that of the NMFS Assistant
Administrator, in accordance with all applicable policies.
6. Preceded, when practical, by the development of a genetics
management plan based on accepted scientific principles and procedures. Controlled propagation protocols will follow accepted standards such as
those employed by the American Zoo and Aquarium Association (AZA), the
Center for Plant Conservation (CPC), and Federal agency protocols such
as fish management guidelines to the extent practical. All efforts will
be made by us and our cooperators to ensure that the genetic makeup of
propagated individuals is representative of that in free-ranging
populations and that propagated individuals are behaviorally and
physiologically suitable for introduction. Determination of biological
``suitability'' may include, but should not necessarily be limited to,
analysis of geomorphological similarities of habitat, genetic
similarity, phenotypic characteristics, stock histories, habitat use,
and other ecological, biological, and behavioral indicators. All controlled propagation programs will address the issue of disposition
of individuals found to be:
(a) Unfit for introduction to the wild;
(b) Unfit to serve as broodstock;
(c) Surplus to program needs; or
(d) Surplus to the recovery needs for the species (e.g., to
preclude genetic and ecological swamping). Controlled propagation activities should not be initiated without
including consideration of these issues and obtaining required permits
and other authorizations as necessary. Disposition of individuals
surplus to program needs may include use for research or other
appropriate purposes.
Programs involving the controlled propagation of listed species for
research purposes identified in final recovery plans and in which
progeny will not be reintroduced to the wild are exempt from this
policy. Examples of exempt actions include research involving the
determination of germination rates in plants and spawning success rates
in fish. This exemption does not extend to the need for these
activities to comply with any other applicable Federal or State
permitting or regulatory requirements.
7. Conducted in a manner that takes all known precautions to
prohibit the potential introduction or spread of diseases and parasites
into controlled environments or suitable habitat.
8. Conducted in a manner that will prevent the escape or accidental
introduction of individuals outside their historic range.
9. Conducted, when feasible, at more than one location in order to
reduce the potential for catastrophic loss at a single facility when a
substantial fraction of a species or important population segment is
brought into captivity.
10. Coordinated, as appropriate, with organizations and qualified
individuals both within and outside our agencies. We will cooperate
with other Federal agencies and State, Tribal, and local governments.
11. Conducted in a manner that will meet our information needs and
that will be in accordance with accepted protocols and standards. In
the case of listed species for which traditional
[[Page 56921]]
studbooks or registrations are not practical, records of eggs, larvae,
or other life-stages will be maintained.
12. With limited exceptions, implemented only after a commitment to
funding is secured.
13. Prior to releases of propagated individuals, tied to
development of a reintroduction plan, unless this information is
already contained in an approved recovery plan, species survival plan,
or equivalent document that has received the approval of the
appropriate Service. Controlled propagation and reintroduction plans
will identify measurable objectives and milestones for the proposed propagation and reintroduction effort. The controlled propagation and
reintroduction plan should be based on strategies identified in the
approved recovery plan. It should include protocols for health
management, disease screening and disease-free certification,
monitoring and evaluation of genetic, demographic, life-history,
phenotypic, and behavioral characteristics, data collection,
recordkeeping, and reporting as appropriate. On implementation,
periodic evaluations must be made to assess project progress and
consider new scientific information and the status of habitat
conservation efforts.
14. Conducted in accordance with the regulations implementing the
Endangered Species Act, Marine Mammal Protection Act, Animal Welfare
Act, Lacey Act, Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956, and the Services'
procedures relative to NEPA.
F. Does this policy allow any exceptions? Except as identified in
this section, any exceptions to the above policy guidelines will
require specific approval from the FWS Director or the NMFS Assistant
Administrator on a case by case basis. The following circumstances have
been anticipated and are exempted from this policy.
1. Pacific salmon are exempted from this policy. NMFS, as the lead
Service for the recovery of listed Pacific salmon, has developed and
will continue to use the interim policy (April 5, 1993, 58 FR 17573)
addressing controlled propagation of these species. The NMFS interim
artificial propagation policy more specifically addresses the
biological needs of these species.
2. Cases where a listed species has an ephemeral reproductive stage
or short (1-2 year) lifespan that necessitates controlled propagation to sustain the listed species in refugia, or to maintain a research
population where there is no intent to release captive-bred individuals
from that population into the wild, are exempt.
3. In the absence of an approved recovery plan, recommendations
contained in recovery outlines, draft recovery plans, or made in
writing by a recovery team may be used to justify controlled propagation as a necessary recovery measure for listed species in
danger of imminent extinction or extirpation of critical populations.
However, under such circumstances initiation of controlled propagation activities will require the Regional Director's or Assistant
Administrator's approval.
4. Candidate and proposed species held in refugia, used in
research, or used for the development of propagation technology that
are subsequently listed as endangered or threatened are exempted from
this policy. Any propagation program initiated with candidate or
proposed species with the intent to produce individuals for release to
the wild are not exempted and must comply with this policy.
5. Captive breeding of listed species that are not native to the
United States or its territories or possessions, and producing
individuals not addressed in an approved recovery plan and not intended
for release within the United States or its territories or possessions,
is exempt from this policy. However, such activities must comply with
any other Federal and State laws, permit needs, or other requirements.
6. The temporary removal and holding of listed individuals, unless
such actions intentionally involve reproduction other than for purposes
of recovery-related research or as needed to maintain a refugia
population is exempted.
7. The short-term holding or captive-rearing of wild-bred
individuals obtained for later reintroduction, augmentation, or
translocation efforts when controlled propagation does not take place
or is not intended during the period of captive maintenance.
8. Actions involving cryopreservation or other methods of
conserving biological materials, if not intended for near-term use in controlled propagation or the reintroduction into the wild of listed
species, are exempt from this policy. When and if reintroduction to the
wild requires the use of these materials, such activities would come
under the scope of this policy.
9. Additional exceptions to this policy may be made on a case-by-
case basis with the approval of the FWS Director or NMFS Assistant
Administrator, as warranted.
Where conflicts may arise between this policy and programs carried
out in furtherance of restoration goals or required by treaty, trust
resources obligations, or other legal mandate, we will, to the extent
practical, make every effort to achieve solutions that are consistent
with the requirements of the Act and this policy.
G. Who are our potential partners? We recognize the need for
partnerships with other Federal agencies, States, Tribes, local
governments, and private entities in the recovery of listed species. We
will seek to develop partnerships with qualified cooperators for the
purpose of propagating listed, proposed, and candidate species (as
authorized under sections 6 and 2(a)(5) of the Act). Guidance for this
activity is as follows:
1. The FWS Regional Directors or the NMFS Regional Administrators
may explore opportunities for accomplishing controlled propagation and
any associated research tasks with other Federal cooperators, FWS/NMFS
facilities, State agencies, Tribes, zoological parks, aquaria,
botanical gardens, academia, and other qualified parties at their
discretion. We will select cooperators on the basis of scientific
merits; technical capability; willingness to adhere to our policies,
guidance, and protocols; and cost-effectiveness.
2. Regional Directors or Regional Administrators, depending on
which agency has lead for the species, will be responsible for ensuring
appropriate staff oversight of programs conducted by all cooperators to
ensure adherence to necessary protocols, guidance, and permit
conditions, and to coordinate reporting requirements.
H. What are the Federal agency responsibilities under this policy?
This policy shall be implemented in accordance with the following
guidelines:
1. The Regional Directors and Regional Administrators will ensure
compliance with this policy for those species for which they have
responsibility.
2. Regional Directors and Regional Administrators are responsible
for recovery of listed species under their jurisdiction. Recovery
actions for which Regional Directors and Regional Administrators have
authority include establishment of refugia, initiation of necessary
research or technology development, implementation of controlled propagation programs, and propagation research for listed species. When
determining species' priority for inclusion in controlled propagation programs, we will consider the following:
(a) Whether or not a listed species' recovery plan outline, draft
recovery plan, or final recovery plan identifies controlled propagation as an appropriate recovery strategy and what
[[Page 56922]]
priority this task is assigned within the overall recovery strategy.
(b) The availability and willingness of cooperators to contribute
to recovery activities, including cost sharing.
3. In the event that the current recovery plan fails to identify
the establishment of refugia, initiation of propagation research, or controlled propagation as recovery tasks as necessary to the recovery
of the species, the recovery plan will be updated, amended, or revised
as appropriate. Recovery plans not yet finalized will be amended to
reflect the changed recovery requirements of the listed species and
provide justifications as necessary.
4. Within 6 months of the effective date of this policy, FWS
Regional Directors will identify all listed species for which they have
the lead recovery responsibility that are (1) being held in refugia;
(2) involved in pre-propagation research; and (3) are involved in controlled propagation programs. For species involved in controlled propagation programs, the level of production and the recovery purpose
(e.g., augmentation of extant populations, establishment of new
populations) will be identified. This information will be reported to
the Assistant Director, Endangered Species, in the FWS Washington D.C.
Office.
5. Continuation of those programs not in conformity with this
policy 12 months following implementation of this policy will require
the FWS Director's or NMFS Assistant Administrator's concurrence. The
Regional Director and Regional Administrator will provide his or her
recommendation to the Director or Assistant Administrator.
I. Does the policy include annual reporting requirements? For the
FWS, annual reports based on fiscal years will be prepared by the
responsible regional authority and submitted to the Director, through
the Assistant Director, Endangered Species, not later than October 31st
of each year. Reports will contain the following information for each
species being maintained in refugia, in pre-propagation research, or
under propagation:
Recovery priority number;
Policy criteria that are not met (if any);
A brief description of the controlled propagation program,
including objectives and status;
List of cooperators, if any;
Expenditures for the past fiscal year;
Prospects for, or obstacles to, achieving research, controlled propagation, or reintroduction objectives, and,
A brief description of the status of wild populations, if
any.
J. What authorities support this policy? The Endangered Species Act
of 1973, as amended; Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended;
Animal Welfare Act; Lacey Act; Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956; and
National Environmental Policy Act.
K. What are the information collection requirements? The permit
application required for participation in the controlled propagation of
species listed under the Act is FWS form #3-200-55 Interstate Commerce
and Recovery and form #3-200-56 for incidental take. Applicants for
NMFS research/enhancement permits or incidental take permits must meet
certain criteria in their applications but there are no specific forms.
We use these forms or applications to permit recovery actions that may
be undertaken for scientific purposes, enhancement of propagation or
survival, or for incidental taking. Whenever we ask the public to
submit information, we must have authorization from the Office of
Management and Budget. As part of the permitting process, we often ask
the public to provide information such as filling out permit
applications or submitting reports.
Information collection requirements under this policy are included
under the Office of Management and Budget collection approval number
1018-0094 (FWS) and 0648-0230 (NMFS), which includes information
collection for permits granted for interstate commerce and recovery and
incidental take. The expiration date of this approval is February 28,
2001(FWS), and October 31, 2001 (NMFS). The purpose of information
collection is to identify performance of permitted tasks and make
decisions, according to criteria established in various Federal
wildlife and plant conservation statutes and described in 50 CFR
17.22(a)(1) and (3) and 17.32(a)(1) and (3) (FWS) and 50 CFR 222
(NMFS).
We have estimated that the time required by an applicant to
complete FWS form 3-200-55 is 2 hours. Applications to NMFS for these
permits are estimated to require 80 hours for completion. The
information required is already known to the applicant and need only be
entered on the application form. Summary information for endangered
species permit applications will be published in the Federal Register
as required by regulation. This notice is provided pursuant to section
10(c) of the Act and NEPA regulations (40 CFR 1506.6). The total burden
hours for completing reporting requirements is also estimated at 2
hours for the FWS and 80 hours for NMFS. No costs to applicants beyond
the cost of hour burden described above are anticipated. Annual reports
are generally required for permits for scientific research.
For organizations, businesses, or individuals operating as a
business (i.e., permittee not covered by the Privacy Act), we request
that such entities identify any information that should be considered
privileged and confidential business information to allow us to meet
our responsibilities under the Freedom of Information Act. Confidential
business information must be clearly marked ``Business Confidential''
at the top of the first page and each succeeding page, and must be
accompanied by a nonconfidential summary of the confidential
information. Documents may be made available to the public under
Department of the Interior Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
regulations in 43 CFR 2.13(c)(4), 43 CFR 2.15(d)(1)(I) and Department
of Commerce 15 CFR 4. Documents and other information submitted with
these applications are made available for public review, subject to the
requirements of the Privacy Act and FOIA, by any party who submits a
written request for a copy of such documents to the appropriate Service
within 30 days of the date of publication of the notice.
Signed: August 4, 2000.
Jamie Rappaport Clark,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior.
Dated: August 18, 2000.
Penelope D. Dalton,
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 00-23957 Filed 9-19-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
|