[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 81 (Wednesday, April 27, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 23650-23683]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-9836]
[[Page 23649]]
Vol. 76
Wednesday,
No. 81
April 27, 2011
Part II
Department of the Interior
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fish and Wildlife Service
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Finding on a
Petition and Proposed Rule To Remove the Morelet's Crocodile From the
Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife; Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 76 , No. 81 / Wednesday, April 27, 2011 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 23650]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R9-ES-2010-0030; 92210-1113-0000-C6]
RIN 1018-AV22
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Finding
on a Petition and Proposed Rule To Remove the Morelet's Crocodile From
the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Under the authority of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act), we, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service),
announce a 12-month finding on a petition and a proposed rule to remove
the Morelet's crocodile (Crocodylus moreletii) throughout its range
from the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife due to
recovery. This action is based on a thorough review of the best
available scientific and commercial data, including new information
that became available after we received the petition, which indicates
that the species' status had improved to the point that the Morelet's
crocodile is not likely to become threatened within the foreseeable
future throughout all or a significant portion of its range. If this
proposed rule is finalized, the Morelet's crocodile will remain
protected under the provisions of the Convention on International Trade
in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. We are seeking
information, data, and comments from the public on this proposed rule.
DATES: To ensure that we are able to consider your comments on this
proposed rule, they must be received or postmarked on or before June
27, 2011. We must receive requests for public hearings, in writing, at
the address shown in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section below
by June 13, 2011.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by one of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Search for docket number FWS-R9-ES-2010-0030 and then follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public Comments Processing,
Attn: FWS-R9-ES-2010-0030; Division of Policy and Directives
Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive,
Suite 222; Arlington, VA 22203.
We will not accept comments by e-mail or fax. We will post all
comments on http://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we
will post any personal information you provide us (see the Public
Comments section below for more information).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Janine Van Norman, Chief, Branch of
Foreign Species, Endangered Species Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Room 420, Arlington, VA 22203,
U.S.A.; telephone 703-358-2171; facsimile 703-358-1735. Individuals who
are hearing-impaired or speech-impaired may call the Federal
Information Relay Service at 800-877-8339 for TTY assistance 24 hours a
day, 7 days a week.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Comments
Any final action resulting from this proposed rule will be based on
the best scientific and commercial data available and be as accurate
and effective as possible. Therefore, we request comments or
information from other concerned government agencies, the scientific
community, industry, or other interested parties concerning this
proposed rule. The comments that will be most useful and likely to
influence our decisions are those supported by data or peer-reviewed
studies and those that include citations to, and analyses of,
applicable laws and regulations. Please make your comments as specific
as possible and explain the basis for them. In addition, please include
sufficient information with your comments to allow us to authenticate
any scientific or commercial data you reference or provide. In
particular, we seek comments concerning the following:
(1) New biological, trade, or other relevant information and data
concerning any threat (or lack thereof) to the Morelet's crocodile.
(2) New information and data on whether or not climate change is a
threat to the Morelet's crocodile, what regional climate change models
are available, and whether they are reliable and credible to use as
step-down models for assessing the effect of climate change on the
species and its habitat.
(3) The location of any additional populations of Morelet's
crocodile.
(4) New information and data concerning the range, distribution,
and population size and population trends of the Morelet's crocodile.
(5) New information and data on the current or planned activities
within the geographic range of the Morelet's crocodile that may affect
or benefit the species.
(6) New information and data concerning captive breeding operations
in Mexico, Belize, and Guatemala.
(7) New information and data on the Morelet's crocodile in
Guatemala that would enhance our analysis of whether this population
qualifies as a Distinct Population Segment under the Act (16 U.S.C.
1531 et seq.), and whether this population warrants continued
protection under the Act.
(8) Information and data concerning the status and results of
monitoring actions for the Morelet's crocodile, including those
implemented under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered
Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), the Belize-Guatemala-Mexico
Tri-national Strategy for the Conservation and Sustainable Use of
Morelet's Crocodile, and the Belizean monitoring plan that are
discussed under the Post-Delisting Monitoring section below.
(9) Information pertaining to Belize's efforts to fully enact
national legislation and/or their efforts to ensure Belize's compliance
with CITES.
Please note that submissions merely stating support for or
opposition to the action under consideration without providing
supporting information, although noted, will not be considered in
making a determination, as section 4(b)(1)(A) of the Endangered Species
Act of 1973, as amended (Act; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) directs that a
determination as to whether any species is an endangered or threatened
species must be made ``solely on the basis of the best scientific and
commercial data available.''
Prior to issuing a final rule on this proposed action, we will take
into consideration all comments and any additional information we
receive. Such information may lead to a final rule that differs from
this proposal. All comments and recommendations, including names and
addresses, will become part of the administrative record.
You may submit your comments and materials concerning this proposed
rule by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. We will not
consider comments sent by e-mail or fax or to an address not listed in
the ADDRESSES section. If you submit a comment via http://www.regulations.gov, your entire comment--including any personal
identifying information--will be posted on the Web site. Please note
that comments posted to this Web site are not immediately viewable.
When you submit a comment, the system receives
[[Page 23651]]
it immediately. However, the comment will not be publicly viewable
until we post it, which might not occur until several days after
submission.
If you mail or hand-deliver a hardcopy comment that includes
personal identifying information, you may request at the top of your
document that we withhold this information from public review. However,
we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. To ensure that the
electronic docket for this rulemaking is complete and all comments we
receive are publicly available, we will post all hardcopy submissions
on http://www.regulations.gov.
In addition, comments and materials we receive, as well as
supporting documentation used in preparing this proposed rule, will be
available for public inspection in two ways:
(1) You can view them on http://www.regulations.gov. In the Enter
Keyword or ID box, enter FWS-R9-ES-2010-0030, which is the docket
number for this rulemaking.
(2) You can make an appointment, during normal business hours, to
view the comments and materials in person at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service's Endangered Species Program located in our Headquarters office
(see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Public Availability of Comments
Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or
other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be
aware that your entire comment--including your personal identifying
information--might be made publicly available at any time. While you
can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be
able to do so.
Public Hearing
Section 4(b)(5)(E) of the Act provides for one or more public
hearings on this proposed rule, if requested. We must receive requests
for public hearings, in writing, at the address shown in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by the date shown in the DATES
section of this document. We will schedule public hearings on this
proposal, if any are requested, and announce the dates, times, and
places of those hearings, as well as how to obtain reasonable
accommodations, in the Federal Register at least 15 days before the
first hearing.
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires the Service to make an
initial finding as to whether a petition to list, delist, or reclassify
a species has presented substantial information indicating that the
requested action may be warranted. To the maximum extent practicable,
the finding shall be made within 90 days following receipt of the
petition and published promptly in the Federal Register. If the 90-day
finding is positive--that is, the petition has presented substantial
information indicating that the requested action may be warranted--
section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires the Service to commence a status
review of the species if one has not already been initiated under the
Service's internal candidate assessment process. In addition, section
4(b)(3)(B) of the Act requires the Service to make a finding within 12
months following receipt of the petition on whether the requested
action is warranted, not warranted, or warranted but precluded by
higher-priority listing actions. That finding is referred to as the
``12-month finding.''
Previous Federal Actions
The Morelet's crocodile was listed as endangered throughout its
entire range under the predecessor of the Act via a rule published in
the Federal Register on June 2, 1970 (35 FR 8491). Import into, export
from, or re-export from the United States, as well as other
prohibitions, including movement in the course of a commercial activity
and sale in interstate or foreign commerce, of endangered species and
their parts and products, are prohibited under the Act unless otherwise
authorized. Authorizations for endangered species can only be made for
scientific purposes or to enhance the propagation or survival of the
species. On July 1, 1975, the Morelet's crocodile was listed in
Appendix I of CITES. These protections were put in place because the
species had suffered substantial population declines throughout its
range due to habitat destruction and overexploitation through the
commercial crocodilian skin trade. CITES Appendix I includes species
that are ``threatened with extinction which are or may be affected by
trade.''
On May 26, 2005, the Service received a petition from the
Government of Mexico's Comisi[oacute]n Nacional para el Conocimiento y
Uso de la Biodiversidad (CONABIO 2005) to remove the Morelet's
crocodile from the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife at 50 CFR
17.11.
Based on the information provided, the Service's 90-day finding on
the petition, which was published in the Federal Register on June 28,
2006 (71 FR 36743), stated that the petition provided substantial
information to indicate that the requested action may be warranted. In
that finding, we announced that we had initiated a status review of the
species as required under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act, and that we
were seeking comments on the petition, as well as information on the
status of the species, particularly in Belize and Guatemala. The
Service also solicited comments or additional information from
counterparts in Mexico, Belize and Guatemala.
This proposed rule to delist the Morelet's crocodile throughout its
range also constitutes our 12-month finding that the petitioned action
is warranted.
Species Information
Three species of crocodilians occur in Mexico and Central America.
The Morelet's crocodile and the American crocodile (Crocodylus acutus)
co-occur in Mexico, Belize, and Guatemala (Schmidt 1924, pp. 79 and 85;
Stuart 1948, p. 45). While their ranges overlap, the American crocodile
has a much larger range than the Morelet's crocodile, and is found in
the United States in the State of Florida, as well as in the Caribbean,
on Pacific and Atlantic coasts of Central America and northern South
America in Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador, and northern Peru. A third
species, the common or spectacled caiman (Caiman crocodilus) occurs in
Mexico and Guatemala, but is absent from Belize. The distribution of
the common caiman also extends into northern South America (Ross 1998,
pp. 14-17; Thorbjarnarson 1992, pp. 82-85). The Morelet's crocodile was
named after a French naturalist, P.M.A. Morelet (1809-1892), who
discovered this species in Mexico in 1850 (Britton 2008, p. 1). The
type locality of the species was later restricted to ``Guatemala, El
Peten, Laguna de Peten'' when the species was scientifically described.
In Mexico, the Morelet's crocodile is known as ``lagarto'' or ``swamp
crocodile'' (Rodriguez-Quivedo et al, 2008).
The Morelet's crocodile is a ``relatively small species'' that
usually attains a maximum length of approximately 9.8-11.5 ft (3-3.5 m
(S[aacute]nchez (2005, p. 4); Britton (2008, p. 1)), with most wild
adults ranging in length 6.6-8.2 ft (2-2.5 m). Hurley (2005, p. 2),
however, reported specimens attaining 15.4 ft (4.7 m). Platt and
Rainwater (2005, p. 25) stated that size estimates where shorter
lengths were documented were probably based on populations that had
been heavily impacted by hunting and which now contained few large
adults. The Morelet's crocodile is distinguished
[[Page 23652]]
from other crocodiles, particularly the partially sympatric (having the
same or overlapping distribution) and somewhat larger American
crocodile, by the number of dorsal scales in each transverse row on its
back, the number and arrangement of nuchal scales (located at the nape
of the neck), and irregular scales on the ventrolateral (lower side)
surface of the tail (Meerman 1994, p. 110; Navarro Serment 2004, pp.
55-56; Platt and Rainwater 2005, p. 27; Hern[aacute]ndez Hurtado et al.
2006, p. 376; Platt et al. 2008b, p. 294). The Morelet's crocodile has
six nuchal scales of similar size compared to other crocodile species,
which have either four nuchal scales or four large nuchal scales and
two small ones (CITES 2010a, p.11). Unlike most other species of
crocodilians, the Morelet's crocodile lacks bony plates beneath the
skin (osteoderms), making their skin more valuable as leather (Hurley
2005, p. 9). Adults have a yellowish-olive black skin, usually showing
big black spots at the tail and at the back area, which in some adults
can be entirely black. The ventral (underside) area is light in color,
with a creamy yellowish tone. A thick and soft skin has made the
Morelet's crocodile desirable for commercialization (CITES 2010a, p.
3).
Opportunistic carnivores, juvenile Morelet's crocodiles feed on
small invertebrates, especially insects and arachnids, while subadults
eat a more diverse diet including mollusks, crustaceans, fish,
amphibians, and small reptiles. Adult crocodiles consume reptiles,
birds, and mammals (Platt et al. 2002, p. 82; S[aacute]nchez 2005, p.
7; Platt et al. 2006, pp. 283-285; CITES 2008, p. 9, CITES 2010a, p.
3). This species is also known to exhibit necrophagy (consumption of
dead animal carcasses over an extended period (several days)) and
interspecific kleptoparasitism (stealing of food from an individual by
another individual) (Platt et al. 2007, p. 310).
Morelet's crocodiles attain sexual maturity at about 4.9 ft (1.5 m)
in length, at approximately 7-8 years of age. A growth rate of 0.63
inches (in) per month (1.6 centimeters (cm) per month) was observed in
Morelet's crocodiles during the first 3 years of life under protected
conditions in Mexico, while a rate of 0.94-1.18 in per month (2.4-3.0
cm per month) was achieved under farming conditions (P[eacute]rez-
Higareda et al. 1995, p. 173). Adult females build nests and lay 20-40
eggs per clutch (Hurley 2005, p. 3; S[aacute]nchez 2005, p. 6), with an
average of 35 eggs per clutch (CITES 2008, p. 9, CITES 2010a, p. 3).
Nests, usually constructed of leaf mounds at the beginning of the wet
season (April-June), are located on the shores of freshwater wetlands,
as well as in coastal lagoons and mangrove patches (Platt et al. 2008a,
pp. 179-182).
An analysis based on DNA microsatellite data from hatchlings
collected at 10 Morelet's crocodile nests in Belize showed that progeny
from five of the 10 nests were sired by at least two males (McVay et
al. 2008, p. 643). These data suggested that multiple paternity was a
mating strategy for the Morelet's crocodile and was not an isolated
event. In addition, this information may be useful in the application
of conservation and management techniques for the species.
The eggs of Morelet's crocodiles hatch in September-October, 65-90
days after they are laid. Females attend the nest during incubation,
and can assist the newborns to leave the nest. Both parents protect
juveniles against predators and other adult crocodiles (CITES 2010a, p.
3). Nest failures due to flooding and predation, both avian and
mammalian, are common (Platt et al. 2008a, p. 184). Expected lifespan
in the wild is 50-65 years (Hurley 2005, p. 4.) The Morelet's crocodile
exhibits and shares with other crocodilians many acoustic and visual
signals that convey reproductive, territorial, and other types of
information (Senter 2008, p. 354).
The Morelet's crocodile occurs primarily in freshwater environments
such as lakes, swamps, and slow-moving rivers, but can temporarily
inhabit intermittent freshwater bodies, such as flooded savannahs, and
occasionally observed in brackish coastal lagoons (Villegas 2006, p.
8). Floating and emergent vegetation provide cover to protect young
crocodiles from predators, including cannibalism by adult crocodiles
(S[aacute]nchez 2005, p. 7). In contrast to the Morelet's crocodile,
the American crocodile feeds mainly on fish and occurs primarily in
coastal or brackish environments, such as coastal mangrove swamps,
brackish and salt water bays, lagoons, marshes, tidal rivers, and
brackish creeks. American crocodiles can also be found in abandoned
coastal canals and borrow pits and may range inland into freshwater
environments preferred by the Morelet's crocodile such as lakes and
lower reaches of large rivers. American and Morelet's crocodiles have
been known to lay eggs within the same nest mound as conspecifics,
suggesting a more gregarious and tolerant demeanor (Brien et al. 2007,
pp. 17-18).
The historical distribution of the Morelet's crocodile comprised
the eastern coastal plain of Mexico, most of the Yucatan Peninsula,
Belize, and northern Guatemala (Hurley 2005, p. 1), with an estimated
historical distribution covering 173,746 mi\2\ (450,000 km\2\) (Sigler
and Dom[iacute]nguez Laso 2008, pp. 11-12). Based on the analyses
conducted for the petition, approximately 51 percent of the original
geographic distribution in Mexico remains undisturbed, while
approximately 49 percent is disturbed or altered. In linear terms, the
amount of undisturbed shoreline habitat available in Mexico to the
Morelet's crocodile is about 15,534 mi (25,000 km) of shoreline, which
is approximately 72 percent of the total undisturbed shoreline habitat
available throughout the species' range. According to CONABIO, the
amount of undisturbed shoreline habitat available to the Morelet's
crocodile in Belize and Guatemala is estimated to be 2,050 mi (3,300
km) and 4,163 mi (6,700 km), respectively, or 9 and 19 percent of the
total undisturbed shoreline habitat available throughout the species'
range (CONABIO 2005, pp. 16-19).
Historical estimates of total population sizes in the three range
countries are unavailable or imprecise, and we were not able to find
any additional data on historical, range-wide population estimates for
the species. While not quantifiable or documented by field surveys, Lee
(1996, p. 134) characterized the historical distribution and abundance
of the Morelet's crocodile in the Yucatan Peninsula of Mexico as
follows: ``Throughout its range, nearly every local aguada (flood) has
(or had) its lagarto, which generally proves to be C. moreletii.'' The
same probably could be said about Belize and Guatemala.
It has been widely reported, however, that by the middle of the
20th Century, populations of Morelet's crocodiles were widely depleted
due primarily to overharvest for commercial purposes during the 1940s-
1950s. In ``Crocodiles: An action plan for their conservation,''
Thorbjarnarson (1992, p. 68 and the references cited therein)
characterized the Mexican populations of Morelet's crocodiles in the
early 1990s as very depleted in the Mexican States of Tamaulipas and
Veracruz, recovering to some degree and viable in northeastern Mexico,
and severely threatened in Tabasco State and Campeche State. However,
populations of Morelet's crocodiles were not depleted in southern
Chiapas State and eastern Quintana Roo State (Sian Ka'an Biosphere
Reserve).
Few historical estimates for the Morelet's crocodile in Belize are
available, but based on surveys during 1978 and 1979, Abercrombie et
al.
[[Page 23653]]
(1980, p. 103) reported that very few adults were observed in areas
where they had previously been relatively abundant. This condition was
attributed to overexploitation (i.e., commercial trade in hides).
Thorbjarnarson (1992, p. 55) characterized the Morelet's crocodile
populations in the early 1990s as generally depleted in the northern
part of Belize, but relatively abundant in several other areas.
Abercrombie et al. estimated the total population of Morelet's
crocodiles older than 9 months of age in Belize at 2,200-2,500
individuals (Abercrombie et al. 1982, p. 16). Nothing was known in the
scientific literature at that time about populations in the southern
part of Belize. The only available countrywide estimates for the
Morelet's crocodile in Belize suggested a total population size of
25,000-30,000 individuals that was declining in number in 1945, was
near depletion between 1970 and 1980, and, in response to several
protective measures, had undergone a slow recovery by 2000 to about
20,000 individuals (Finger et al. 2002, p. 199).
Thorbjarnarson (1992, p. 64) characterized the Guatemalan
populations in the early 1990s as depleted, but capable of recovery. He
indicated that 75 individuals had been reported at three lakes in the
Pet[eacute]n Region, in the northern portion of the country, and that
Morelet's crocodiles were known to be common in other parts of that
region.
By the late 1990s, little had changed with regard to our knowledge
of the distribution and abundance of the Morelet's crocodile. In
``Crocodiles: Status survey and conservation action plan (second
edition),'' Ross (1998, pp. 46-47) characterized several populations of
Morelet's crocodiles in all three countries as depleted. In some areas,
however, including the Lacand[oacute]n Forest (Chiapas State, Mexico)
and the Sian Ka'an Biosphere Reserve (Quintana Roo State, Mexico),
healthy populations of the Morelet's crocodile existed. These findings
were based on anecdotal reports and incidental records; numerical data
were not readily available.
Based on extrapolations of habitat relationships (e.g., vegetation
type, size of wetland/riverine feature, and disturbance factors;
described in more detail in CONABIO 2005, pp. 16-19) and frequency of
encounter rates (derived from country-specific field research), the
potential global population of free-ranging Morelet's crocodiles in
2004 was estimated to be 102,432 individuals (all age classes; 79,718
individuals in Mexico, 8,803 in Belize, and 13,911 in Guatemala),
including approximately 19,400 adults (CONABIO 2005, pp. 17-19).
Summary of Factors Affecting the Species
Section 4 of the Act and its implementing regulations, 50 CFR part
424, set forth the procedures for listing, reclassifying, or removing
species from the Federal Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants. ``Species'' is defined by the Act as including any species
or subspecies of fish or wildlife or plants, and any distinct
vertebrate population segment of fish or wildlife that interbreeds when
mature (16 U.S.C. 1532(16)). Once the ``species'' is determined, we
then evaluate whether that species may be endangered or threatened
because of one or more of the five factors described in section 4(a)(1)
of the Act. We must consider these same five factors in reclassifying
or delisting a species. For species that are already listed as
endangered or threatened, the analysis of threats must include an
evaluation of both the threats currently facing the species, and the
threats that are reasonably likely to affect the species in the
foreseeable future following the delisting or downlisting and the
removal or reduction of the Act's protections. We may delist a species
according to 50 CFR 424.11(d) if the best available scientific and
commercial data indicate that the species is neither endangered nor
threatened for the following reasons: (1) The species is extinct; (2)
the species has recovered and is no longer endangered or threatened;
and/or (3) the original scientific data used at the time the species
was classified were in error.
Factor A. Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or
Curtailment of the Species' Habitat or Range
The overharvest for commercial purposes, rather than habitat
destruction or modification, was the primary reason for the Morelet's
crocodile being listed under the Act and its inclusion in CITES.
However, the Five Factor Analysis under the Act requires an analysis of
current and future potential impacts to the species based on
modification or destruction of habitat.
The petition (CONABIO 2005) highlights habitat degradation as a
potential threat, especially if it involves lack of prey and eventual
contamination of water bodies. Currently, the extent of habitat
degradation is estimated to be moderate in Mexico and Belize, and
slightly higher in northern Pet[eacute]n, Guatemala (CONABIO 2005,
Annex 1, p. 10). However, as stated previously, historical estimates of
range-wide habitat destruction for the Morelet's crocodile are
unavailable or imprecise. We found that the data on habitat destruction
was primarily presented separately for each individual country.
Therefore, the following analysis of the potential threats to the
species from habitat destruction or modification first presents the
specific information available for the Morelet's crocodile in each
country, and then presents the general information that was available
for the species as a whole.
Mexico
The Morelet's crocodile is known historically from 10 states in
Mexico (from east to west): Quintana Roo, Yucat[aacute]n, Campeche,
Chiapas, Tabasco, Veracruz, Oaxaca, Hidalgo, San Luis Potos[iacute],
and Tamaulipas ([Aacute]guilar 2005, p. 2). Based on available
information and interviews during a 1995 site visit to Mexico by the
IUCN Crocodile Specialist Group, Ross (1998, p. 13) suggested ``with
some confidence'' that the Morelet's crocodile was widely distributed
throughout most of its original range. At the request of the
petitioner, these states were resurveyed to assess current Morelet's
crocodile populations in those areas.
Surveys conducted between 2000 and 2004 documented the widespread
distribution and relative abundance of wild populations of the
Morelet's crocodile in Mexico (Dom[iacute]nguez-Laso et al. 2005, pp.
21-30; also summarized in S[aacute]nchez Herrera 2000, pp. 17-19;
CONABIO 2005, pp. 11-13 and Annex 5; S[aacute]nchez Herrera and
[Aacute]lvarez-Romero 2008, page 415; Garc[iacute]a et al. 2007, pp.
31-32; Sigler and Dom[iacute]nguez Laso 2008, pp. 11-13). Surveys found
Morelet's crocodiles at 63 sites across all 10 Mexican states
comprising the species' entire historic range in Mexico (CONABIO 2005,
p. 12). Habitat evaluations based on five environmental components
rated habitat quality as excellent at 10 sites (24 percent), or as
favorable or suitable at 24 sites (57 percent). Furthermore, evidence
of the presence of the Morelet's crocodile was found in cultivated
areas and at sites with ``intermediate'' quality habitats (CONABIO
2005, p. 13). This suggested that the Morelet's crocodile does not
require undisturbed habitat in order to occupy a site. Habitat mapping
resulted in an estimated minimum of 15,675 mi (25,227 km) of shoreline
as suitable Morelet's crocodile habitat in Mexico, which is 72 percent
of the estimated suitable shoreline habitat available throughout the
species range (CONABIO 2005, pp. 14-16).
[[Page 23654]]
Population characteristics of the Morelet's crocodiles in Mexico
were also determined during the 2000-2004 field surveys. All age
classes were well represented (34 percent juveniles; 47 percent
subadults; and 19 percent adults), indicating good recruitment
(Dom[iacute]nguez-Laso et al. 2005, p. 31). A higher proportion of
males to females (1.55 to 1 overall versus about 1 male per female) was
observed in all age classes, except older subadults (Dom[iacute]nguez-
Laso et al. 2005, pp. 33-34). Mean frequency of encounter, based on 62
localities surveyed--excluding one outlier site with an atypically
large crocodile population--was 5.76 individuals per 0.62 mi (= 1
kilometer (km)) of shoreline (mode = 3.16 individuals per km);
Dom[iacute]nguez-Laso et al. 2005, pp. 30, 40). These frequency of
encounter rates were similar to those reported for other sites, for
example: (1) Sigler et al. (2002, p. 222) reported rates of 8.33-18.5
individuals per km at various sites throughout Mexico and commented
that these were the highest rates ever reported for that country; (2)
Cede[ntilde]o-V[aacute]zquez (2002, p. 353) reported rates of 1-2
individuals per km, when present (22 of 40 surveys; 711 individuals
counted; all age classes represented; hatchlings in September), at
Bahia de Chetumal and R[iacute]o Hondo, Mexico (n = 17 sites) and
commented on the recovery of the species; (3) Cede[ntilde]o-
V[aacute]zquez et al. (2006, p. 15) reported rates of 7.6 and 5.3
individuals per km at La Arrigue[ntilde]a, Campeche State, and
commented that this suggested a healthy population. A population
estimate--based on (a) extrapolations of 3.16 individuals per km, (b)
19 percent adults, and (c) a cautious estimate of occupied habitat
(15,675 mi (25,227 km) of river habitat)--produced a result of
approximately 79,718 wild individuals (all ages) in Mexico comprising
78 percent of the total wild population, including approximately 15,146
adults in Mexico (Dom[iacute]nguez-Laso 2005, p. 40).
New information now available to the Service documents updates in
the geographic distribution of the Morelet's crocodile in Mexico.
Because of several unauthorized introductions or escapes from captive-
breeding facilities in areas outside of the reported range of the
species, the Morelet's crocodile has become established in the wild at
three sites: Chacahua, Oaxaca State; Villa Flores, Chiapas State; and
Laguna de Alcuzahue, Colima State ([Aacute]lvarez Romero et al. 2008,
p. 415). Several captive-breeding facilities along the Pacific coast in
western Mexico contain Morelet's crocodiles. These facilities are
located in areas outside of the reported range of the species, but
potentially with appropriate habitat for this species. Concerns have
been raised about these introductions and the potential negative
impacts of this ``exotic'' or ``invasive'' species on the local biota
([Aacute]lvarez Romero et al. 2008, pp. 415 and 417). The Government of
Mexico is making efforts to diagnose potential threats to the native
American crocodile caused by hybridization with the introduced
Morelet's crocodile on the Pacific coast of Mexico. The goal of these
efforts is to generate morphological and molecular identification
materials and study the population dynamics of the American crocodile.
It will include monitoring and harvest of Morelet's crocodiles and
hybrids for scientific research (CITES 2010a, p. 6).
According to the information presented in CONABIO 2005, the
Morelet's crocodile in Mexico occupies at least 12 protected areas
(CONABIO 2005, p. 30 and Annex 6). Part of the Sistema Nacional de
[Aacute]reas Naturales Protegidas (SINANP or National System of
Protected Natural Areas, described more fully in the Factor D section,
Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms), encompasses 13 percent
of the species' range and include the following areas: Los Tuxtlas
Biosphere Reserve, Pantanos de Centla Biosphere Reserve, Laguna de
T[eacute]rminos Biosphere Reserve, Hampolol Wildlife Conservation and
Research Center, El Palmar State Preserve, R[iacute]a Lagartos
Biosphere Reserve, Yum Balam Biosphere Reserve, Laguna Nichupte, Sian
Ka'an Biosphere Reserve, Bahia Chetumal (Bay) and R[iacute]o Hondo
(River).
The Government of Mexico's 2010 CITES proposal to transfer the
Morelet's crocodile from CITES Appendix I to CITES Appendix II provided
updated information on the number of protected areas for the Morelet's
crocodile in Mexico. About 77 Federal and certified protected areas in
Mexico provide shelter and legal protection to the Morelet's crocodile
in its potential range. Of these, 11 have records of the species
covering 7,763,147 acres (ac) (3,141,634 hectares (ha)) (CITES 2010a,
pp. 11, 17-20). The Government of Mexico designated eight of the eleven
protected areas containing Morelet's crocodiles as Biosphere Reserves,
and the three remaining protected areas containing Morelet's crocodiles
as Flora and Fauna Protection Areas. As stated above, these protected
areas are part of SINANP (described more fully in the Factor D section,
Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms).
The Government of Mexico's 2010 CITES proposal used both a
narrative description (CITES 2010a, p. 11) and a list (CITES 2010a, pp.
17-20) to indicate that there are 11 federally protected areas in
Mexico containing Morelet's crocodile. CONABIO 2005 used a narrative
description (CONABIO 2005, p. 30) to indicate that there are at least
12 federally protected areas in Mexico containing Morelet's crocodile
(CONABIO 2005, p. 30), but did not include a list of the federally
protected areas. Based on the information available to the Service, we
were unable to find any additional data to explain the difference
between in the numbers of federally protected areas cited in these two
documents. The Government of Mexico's 2010 CITES proposal is the more
recent document, and we consider it to contain the best available
scientific and commercial data on the number of federally protected
areas in Mexico.
The Convention on Wetlands of International Importance especially
as Waterfowl Habitat (also known as the Ramsar Convention) is an
intergovernmental treaty that provides a framework for international
cooperation for the conservation of wetland habitats. CONABIO 2005 did
not provide information on whether the Ramsar Convention protects any
Morelet's crocodile habitat in Mexico. However, this information was
included in the Government of Mexico's 2010 CITES proposal. According
to their 2010 CITES proposal, there are 41 Ramsar sites in the
potential range of the Morelet's crocodile in Mexico, 13 of which have
records of the species covering 6,779,875 ac (2,743,718 ha) (CITES
2010a, pp. 11, 17-20).
According to the information presented in CONABIO 2005, one of the
main potential threats to the Morelet's crocodile is habitat
destruction and fragmentation due to residential and infrastructure
development, such as dams, roads, residential areas, and irrigated
fields (CONABIO 2005, Annex 2, pp. 4-5). The information presented in
CONABIO 2005 indicated that land reform and the ensuing colonization of
undeveloped areas is a potential threat to the Morelet's crocodile, but
the Government of Mexico has no such actions planned at this time
(CONABIO 2005, p. 33). This threat of habitat degradation is
ameliorated in Mexico by the Ley General de Equilibrio Ecol[oacute]gico
y Protecci[oacute]n al Ambiente (LGEEPA; General Ecological Equilibrium
and Environmental Protection Law). This 1988 law has strict
restrictions against land use changes in Mexico, especially for
undisturbed habitat such as those areas used by the Morelet's crocodile
(CONABIO 2005, p. 25). This law is supported by several others in
Mexico
[[Page 23655]]
that ensure the conservation of native flora and fauna in Mexico (see
discussion in the Factor D section, Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory
Mechanisms; also see CONABIO 2005, Annex 3).
According to the information presented by CONABIO, even in the
historic context of prolonged habitat alteration, wild populations of
Morelet's crocodiles remained abundant; so much so that large,
commercial exploitation of the species was occurring up until Federal
and international protections were put in place 40 years ago.
Alteration of Morelet's crocodile habitat occurring since then may have
produced some additional reductions in local populations, but these
reductions are not comparable to those of the past. In addition, even
in areas where changes to the original environment are not reversible,
evidence points to a certain degree of tolerance by Morelet's
crocodiles, especially when the habitat alterations are a result of
agriculture or low technology livestock production (CONABIO 2005, p.
25).
Based on surveys, it appears that the Morelet's crocodile in Mexico
occurs in all 10 states from where it traditionally has been reported
(CONABIO 2005, pp. 11-19). Although approximately 49 percent of the
original range in Mexico has been altered, much of the altered habitat
is still occupied by the Morelet's crocodile. Approximately 77,220
mi\2\ (200,000 km\2\) of undisturbed habitat remains in Mexico, which
is equivalent to approximately 15,534 mi (25,000 km) of shoreline. The
Government of Mexico protects habitat occupied by the Morelet's
crocodile in 11 areas designated by the Government of Mexico as either
Biosphere Reserves or Flora and Fauna Protection Areas covering a total
of 7,763,147 ac (3,141,634 ha). In addition, the Ramsar Convention
protects Morelet's crocodile habitat at 13 sites in Mexico covering
6,779,875 ac (2,743,718 ha). We do not have any information or data on
the amount of geographic overlap, if any, between the areas of habitat
protected by the Government of Mexico versus that protected by the
Ramsar Convention. Therefore, we considered these two protection
mechanisms as providing separate, but complimentary, habitat protection
as part of our analysis of habitat protection under this proposed rule.
We find that the information presented in the petition, as well as
the additional information available to the Service, represents the
best available scientific and commercial data on habitat destruction or
modification for Morelet's crocodiles in Mexico. Although moderate
habitat destruction or modification is currently affecting local
populations of Morelet's crocodiles in Mexico, and this is likely to
continue in the foreseeable future, these activities would not have a
significant impact on the species because they would be subject to
conservation measures under the Government of Mexico's regulatory
framework. This framework will continue to provide adequate protection
to the Morelet's crocodile and its habitat in the foreseeable future.
Surveys conducted found Morelet's crocodiles at 63 sites across all 10
Mexican states comprising the species' entire historic range in Mexico
(CONABIO 2005, p. 12). Given that Mexico contains more than 85 percent
of the species' natural range, an estimated 78 percent of all wild
individuals, that 7,763,147 ac (3,141,634 ha) of habitat are protected
by the Government of Mexico, and that 6,779,875 ac (2,743,718 ha) of
habitat are protected by the Ramsar Convention, we conclude that
habitat destruction or modification is neither a threat, nor is it
anticipated to significantly impact the Morelet's crocodile in Mexico
in the foreseeable future.
Belize
The Morelet's crocodile was historically known from all six states
in Belize (from north to south): Corozal, Orange Walk, Belize, Cayo,
Stann Creek, and Toledo (Anonymous 1998). According to information
provided by CONABIO, virtually all of the country contained suitable
habitat for the species. The style of economic development in Belize
has not required massive alteration of the natural environment. Thus,
in general, no extensive and drastic alteration of Morelet's crocodile
habitat has occurred in Belize (CONABIO 2005, p. 26). The current
amount of altered versus unaltered current habitat for the Morelet's
crocodile in Belize is unknown, but the petitioners estimated the
current amount of potentially suitable habitat to be approximately
2,050 mi (3,300 km) of shoreline (CONABIO 2005, pp.14-19).
While the species is widespread in the northern portion of the
country, it is naturally limited to a narrow region of lowlands along
the coast in the southern part of Belize, which is otherwise
mountainous (Schmidt 1924, p. 80; Abercrombie et al. 1982, pp. 12-16;
Platt et al. 1999, p. 395; Platt and Thorbjarnarson 2000a, pp. 25-26).
Although the Government of Belize was not a party to the petition,
teams not associated with the Mexican effort to delist the species
recently surveyed these states, in part, to assess Morelet's crocodile
populations in those areas. Based on recent surveys, all six districts
historically known to contain Morelet's crocodiles were surveyed in a
general characterization of the biodiversity of Belize (Boles 2005, p.
4; Belize Forest Department 2006, p. 22; Biological-Diversity.info
website 2009). At Spanish Creek Wildlife Sanctuary, in the north-
central part of the country, Meerman et al. (2004, pp. 23-24 and 30-32)
determined that the Morelet's crocodile was fairly common at the site
(frequency of encounter rate = 1.4-2.4 individuals per km). At
Mayflower Bocawina National Park, near the coast in the southeastern
part of the country, Meerman et al. (2003b, p. 30) unexpectedly located
the Morelet's crocodile at fast-flowing streams such as Silk Grass
Creek. While this specimen could have been introduced at the site, its
occurrence could also be natural. Along the Macal River, in west-
central Belize, Stafford et al. (2003, pp. 18 and 20) located a
breeding population of the Morelet's crocodile (frequency of encounter
rate = 1.48 individuals per km) (2001) and 1.25 individuals per km
(2002) at a mountainous site at 1,476 ft (450 m) elevation (higher than
expected). A total population size at the Macal River site was
calculated to be, at minimum, about 94 individuals (Stafford et al.
2003, p. 19).
Earlier comparisons between spotlight surveys conducted in northern
Belize in 1979-1980 and 1992-1997 also showed that Morelet's crocodiles
were widely distributed and relatively abundant across several habitat
types and levels of human accessibility (Platt and Thorbjarnarson
2000b, p. 23). In addition to an extensive system of nature reserves
including significant areas of crocodile habitat, these researchers
noted relatively high Morelet's crocodile encounter rates in wetlands
surrounding sugarcane fields in this area. Morelet's crocodiles were
observed in canals and ditches within the municipal limits of Belize
City and Orange Walk, as well as in wetlands easily accessible from
many villages (Platt and Thorbjarnarson 2000b, p. 23).
Population characteristics of Morelet's crocodiles in Belize were
also determined during these surveys. Size class distribution--25.4
percent adults in the 1990s, compared with 5-10 percent in an earlier
study--was consistent with population recovery from past
overexploitation (Platt and Thorbjarnarson 2000b, p. 24). Platt and
Thorbjarnarson (2000b, pp. 23, 26) reported an overall frequency of
encounter of 1.56 individuals per km; encounter rates were much higher
in
[[Page 23656]]
nonalluvial (8.20 individuals per km) and alluvial (6.11 individuals
per km) lagoons than in rivers and creeks (0.95 individuals per km) or
in mangrove habitats (0.24 individuals per km). While a significant,
male-biased sex ratio (5.3 males per 1 female versus about 1 male per
female) was identified, the reasons were unclear (Platt and
Thorbjarnarson 2000a, pp. 23, 27). Based on extrapolations of habitat
relationships in Mexico (which results in an estimated 2,080 mi (3,347
km) of potential habitat in Belize) and an average frequency of
encounter of 2.63 individuals per km, CONABIO stated that these results
suggested a total Belize population estimate for the Morelet's
crocodile of about 8,803 individuals in the wild (all age classes),
comprising 9 percent of the total wild population, including about
1,673 adults (CONABIO 2005, p. 18). Although this is not a typically
constructed population estimate, this estimate constitutes the best
available scientific and commercial data for the nationwide abundance
of Morelet's crocodiles in Belize. Although Platt suggested that these
overall values for Belize may be somewhat inflated because habitat in
southern Belize is less suitable for Morelet's crocodiles than areas in
the north (Platt 2008, pers. comm.), frequency of encounter values for
Morelet's crocodile populations and total population sizes in Belize
may have further increased due to continued protection for over a
decade since these surveys in the 1990s. Boles (2005, p. 4) and Belize
Forest Department (2006, p. 22), based on countrywide analyses, both
suggested that the Morelet's crocodile had ``recovered'' in Belize and
could be categorized as ``healthy.''
CONABIO did not present information about the distribution and
abundance of the Morelet's crocodile in protected areas in Belize.
Other information obtained by the Service, however, suggests that the
species is present in many protected areas in Belize, including:
Sarstoon Temash National Park (Meerman et al. 2003a, p. 45), Mayflower
Bocawina National Park (Meerman, et al. 2003b, p. 30), and Spanish
Creek Wildlife Sanctuary (Meerman et al. 2004, pp. 30-31). Overall,
about 18-26 percent of the national territory of Belize is under some
form of protection (BERDS 2005b, p. 1; Young 2008, p. 29). In several
of these protected areas, natural resource extraction is permitted from
the site, thus potentially limiting their contribution to the
conservation status of the Morelet's crocodile. However, we have no
evidence that resource extraction in these Belizean protected areas is
currently or anticipated to affect significantly the Morelet's
crocodile.
We find that the data presented by CONABIO, and additional data
available to the Service, represents the best available scientific and
commercial data on habitat destruction or modification for Morelet's
crocodiles in Belize. Although habitat destruction or modification is
currently affecting some local populations of Morelet's crocodiles in
Belize, and this is likely to continue in the foreseeable future, we do
not have any evidence that habitat destruction or modification is
currently or anticipated to be a threat to the Morelet's crocodile in
Belize.
Guatemala
The Morelet's crocodile was historically known from the northern
portion of Guatemala (States of Pet[eacute]n and Alta Verapaz; Schmidt
1924, pp. 79-84). According to information provided by CONABIO, the
Pet[eacute]n region of Guatemala was scarcely populated by humans
before 1960 (an estimated 15,000 to 21,000 inhabitants in approximately
12,960 square miles (33,566 km[sup2]) or about one third of Guatemala's
area) (CONABIO 2005). In 1961, the Government of Guatemala started an
official program to foster colonization in the region, and this caused
environmental alteration, as well as increased human conflicts with
crocodiles. Slightly more than 50 percent of the potential habitat for
the Morelet's crocodile has been altered in Guatemala (CONABIO 2005, p.
26). While the current amount of altered versus unaltered habitat for
the Morelet's crocodile in Guatemala is unknown, the petitioners
estimated the current amount of potentially suitable habitat to be
approximately 4,163 mi (6,700 km) of shoreline (CONABIO 2005, pp.14-
19). According to information provided by CONABIO, studies on the
status of Morelet's crocodile habitat and population in Guatemala are
underway, and the potential threats to the species are under assessment
(CONABIO 2005, p. 26).
Recent nationwide survey results are not available for Guatemala,
but populations appear to remain in their historical range in the
northern part of the country, especially the central portion of the
State of Pet[eacute]n, Laguna del Tigre National Park (northwestern
portion of the State of Pet[eacute]n) (Casta[ntilde]eda Moya et al.
2000, p.63) and the El Mirador-R[iacute]o Azul National Park
(ParksWatch, 2002, page 3). The Laguna del Tigre National Park, the
largest national park in Guatemala and the largest protected wetland in
Central America, is home to the largest numbers of Morelet's crocodiles
in Guatemala (ParksWatch 2003, p. 1).
While information regarding the distribution and abundance of
Morelet's crocodile in Guatemala is sparse, investigations conducted in
Laguna del Tigre National Park (date unspecified, reported in 1998)
estimated 4.35 individuals per km in the Sacluc River and 2.1
individuals per km in the San Pedro River, with a population structure
typical of stable populations (Casta[ntilde]eda Moya 1998a, p. 13).
Casta[ntilde]eda Moya (1997, p. 1; 1998a, p. 521) characterized
Morelet's crocodile distribution in the northern State of Pet[eacute]n,
Guatemala, as fragmented, with the healthiest populations in the
northern region of Pet[eacute]n, where human impact was lower. In a
follow-up study at Laguna del Tigre National Park Casta[ntilde]eda Moya
et al. (2000, pp. 62-63) reported a mean frequency of encounter rate
for the entire park of 4.3 individuals per km, with maximum values of
12.28 individuals per km at Flor de Luna and 11.00 individuals per km
at Laguna La Pista. The Morelet's crocodile was more frequently
encountered in closed aquatic systems than in open aquatic systems.
Juveniles were more frequently observed than were adults.
Based on extrapolations of habitat relationships in Mexico (which
resulted in an estimated 4,159.8 mi (6,694.5 km) of potential habitat
in Guatemala) and an average frequency of encounter of 2.078
individuals per km, CONABIO stated that there is an estimated total
Guatemalan population of Morelet's crocodile of about 13,911
individuals in the wild (all age classes) comprising 13 percent of the
total wild population, including about 2,643 adults (CONABIO 2005, p.
18). Although this is not a typically constructed population estimate,
this population estimate constitutes the best available scientific and
commercial data for the nationwide abundance of Morelet's crocodiles in
Guatemala.
While Guatemala has regulatory mechanisms in place to protect these
habitats, it appears that the Government of Guatemala, until recently,
was not able to enforce them adequately. Resource extraction, drug
trade, a lack of enforcement, and financial issues limited protected
areas' potential contribution to the conservation status of the
Morelet's crocodile (IARNA URL IIA 2006, pp. 88-92). For example, the
Laguna del Tigre National Park, together with the Laguna del Tigre
Protected Biotope, was considered critically threatened by drug trade,
land grabs, the presence of human settlements, expanding agriculture
and cattle
[[Page 23657]]
ranching, poaching, forest fires, the oil industry, and the almost
complete lack of institutional control over the area (ParksWatch 2003,
p. 11.) ParksWatch also deemed this national park, and its surrounding
area, would not meet its biological diversity objectives in the
immediate future unless urgent steps were taken (ParksWatch 2003, p.
11.) However, the following year ParksWatch noted major improvements at
Laguna del Tigre since their 2003 report. We have obtained information
on the specific protections recently provided to Morelet's crocodiles
in the conservation areas of Guatemala, and events that reveal a
commitment by the Guatemalan government to curtail illegal activities
harmful to Laguna del Tigre National Park. We will go into detail in
the Factor D section, Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms.
Casta[ntilde]eda Moya et al. (2000, p. 61), based on historical
references, cited increased destruction of habitat due to human
encroachment as having an adverse affect on the species. Based on the
research at Laguna del Tigre National Park, Casta[ntilde]eda Moya et
al. (2000, pp. 61 and 65) indicated that sibal (sawgrass) (Cladium
jamaicense) was extensively burned each year. This burning constituted
a major impact to the Morelet's crocodile habitat, as sibal habitat
offered suitable insulation, food availability, nesting cover, and
protection from predators. Furthermore, the fires facilitated the
expansion of savannahs consisting almost exclusively of jimbal (Bambusa
longifolia). Studies on the Morelet's crocodile in Pet[eacute]n suggest
fires in jimbal groves prevent Morelet's crocodiles from reproducing
since fire affects nesting sites (ParksWatch 2003, p. 13). In a more
general sense, USAID (2002, pp. 19-23) and Ruiz Ordo[ntilde]ez (2005,
pp. 2-8) indicated several conservation threats at the national level
in Guatemala, including habitat loss, habitat degradation, habitat
fragmentation, overutilization of resources, environmental
contamination, and degradation, and the introduction of exotic species.
For the past ten years, USAID and WCS having been working with
other NGOs and the Guatemalan government to combat these issues. In
their ``Maya Biosphere Landscape Conservation Area, Guatemala,
Implementation Plan FY 2008'' (WCS 2009, page 3) the WCS highlighted
their central goals for ensuring the conservation of wide-ranging
target species, including the Morelet's crocodile, was to contain the
advance of the Laguna del Tigre agro-pastoral frontier and maintain the
comparatively intact eastern bloc of the Maya Biosphere Reserve (MBR)
forest. Strategies to reduce impacts to wildlife in the MBR landscape
include involving people in local communities, forest concessions,
governments, and NGOs in local conservation efforts; developing
adaptive management strategies to address tactically threats across the
landscape; and educating local communities on best management practices
across the MBR and beyond. Since 2003, however, efforts by the Wildlife
Conservation Society (WCS) have reduced areas burned in the MBR in
Guatemala. Through educating locals on best management practices,
conducting aerial flights, utilizing remote sensing to monitor changes
in forest cover and fire, and establishing and patrolling a 47-
kilometer fire break, along with regularly reporting to the Guatemalan
and provincial governments and national media, WCS's efforts have
resulted in a 90% reduction in areas burned in the Laguna del Tigre
portion of the MBR (WCS 2009).
In addition, the president of Guatemala recently deployed 250
specially trained soldiers to recover fully all the protected zones of
El Peten in Laguna del Tigre National Park. The contingent, called the
``green battalion'' will work jointly with the Guatemalan Attorney
General's Office. This effort is aimed at combating drug trafficking
and removal or destruction of natural and archeological resources in
Laguna del Tigre, El Peten region of the MBR (Latin American Herald
Tribune, 2010).
El Mirador-R[iacute]o Azul National Park in northeastern Guatemala
is located in the department of Pet[eacute]n maintains a population of
Morelet's crocodiles (ParksWatch 2002, page 3). The park is composed of
two sections, which are divided by the Dos Lagunas Biotope. The western
section is known as El Mirador and the eastern part is known as
R[iacute]o Azul. This area is considered by World Resources Institute
to be the last pristine Guatemalan rainforest. It is also one of the
few protected areas that have experienced little deforestation over the
years. No permanent human residents live within the park borders or in
its immediate surrounding areas. El Mirador-R[iacute]o Azul National
Park is considered vulnerable, by ParksWatch, meaning that immediate
conservation measures are not needed at this time, but monitoring is
necessary to ensure the protection and maintenance of its biological
diversity in the near future (ParksWatch, 2002, page 3). NGO's such as
Asociaci[oacute]n Balam, WCS-Guatemala, the Asociati[oacute]n of Forest
Communities of Pet[eacute]n (ACOFOP), the Guatemalan National Park
Service (CONAP), the Guatemalan Archeological Institute (IDAEH), and
the office of the Executive Secretary of the President of Guatemala
formed an alliance called the ``Mesa Multisectorial para el Area
Natural y Cultural de Mirador-Rio Azule''. This alliance was formed to
develop consensus among its team members regarding the long-term
protection of the park and provide sustained economic contribution to
the people of the MBR and of Guatemala.
While CONABIO estimated that slightly more than 50 percent of the
potential habitat for the Morelet's crocodile has been altered in
Guatemala, they gave no information indicating to what extent (CONABIO
2005, p. 26). Very little information has been collected about the
consequences of forest fires, hunting, and habitat fragmentation to the
Morelet's crocodile. However, Mexico saw the presence of the Morelet's
crocodile in cultivated areas and at sites with ``intermediate''
quality habitats (CONABIO 2005, p. 13) and Belize noted relatively high
Morelet's crocodile encounter rates in wetlands surrounding sugarcane
fields, canals and ditches within the municipal limits of Belize (Platt
and Thorbjarnarson 2000b, p. 23). This information suggests that the
Morelet's crocodile does not require undisturbed habitat in order to
occupy a site. The current amount of altered versus unaltered habitat
for the Morelet's crocodile in Guatemala is unknown, but the
petitioners estimated the current amount of potentially suitable
habitat to be approximately 4,163 mi (6,700 km) of shoreline (CONABIO
2005, pp.14-19).
Other Threats to the Species' Habitat
Recreational and Educational Activities
Nonconsumptive recreational or educational uses in the form of
ecotourism are ongoing and may grow in magnitude in the future. While
CONABIO did not present precise information about the number of
companies or sites visited by tourists, an informal Internet search
suggested that large numbers of ecotourism companies and nature sites
in all three range countries were involved in this activity. At Tikal
National Park in Guatemala, for example, the number of visitors has
increased from 14,594 visitors in 1981 to 141,899 visitors in 2002
(IARNA URL IIA 2006, p. 103). Many of these visitors potentially
visited Morelet's crocodile areas in the Pet[eacute]n Region that are
in the immediate vicinity of the park as part of their ecotourism
experience.
While we cannot completely rule out the potential for adverse
effects to the Morelet's crocodile due to disturbance
[[Page 23658]]
from ecotourism activity in Tikal National Park, we have found no
evidence of such effects. Furthermore, we do not have any information
to indicate that ecotourism is likely to become a serious problem in
the future. Successful ecotourism, by its very nature, relies on the
continued conservation and protection of the natural resources it uses.
Although the number of visitors to protected areas is increasing and
the demand for ecotourism may grow in the future, the ecotourism
industry has a significant incentive to ensure that their activities do
not become a serious problem to the Morelet's crocodile and its habitat
in the future.
Mazzotti et al. (2005, p. 984), however, did identify the following
negative impacts associated with tourism development at Sian Ka'an
Biosphere Reserve (Mexico):
(1) Habitat loss;
(2) Alteration of surface and underground water flow;
(3) Ground water pollution;
(4) Extraction of resources;
(5) Erosion and sedimentation;
(6) Decrease in biodiversity; and
(7) Reduced traditional and recreational use for local communities.
Visual pollution, including trash, as well as ``jeep safaris''
(caravans of small convertible sports utility vehicles being driven
through the reserve) and boat traffic, is also increasing at Sian Ka'an
Biosphere Reserve (Mazzotti et al. 2005, p. 992). While none of these
factors was specifically linked to the Morelet's crocodile, all could
apply were the situation to deteriorate. However, we do not have any
information to indicate that the situation will deteriorate in the
future. Biosphere Reserves in Mexico are part of the United Nations
Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization's (UNESCO) ``Man and
the Biosphere'' program and are legally protected under Mexican federal
laws. Key features of biosphere reserves are core zones of complete
protection of key resources surrounded by mixed-use buffer zones. These
buffer zones are particularly important given the pressures on the Sian
Ka'an Biosphere Reserve from tourism, and its culturally and
archeologically significant areas (Mazzotti et al. 2005, p. 982).
Recognizing these potential negative factors, geographically dispersed
ecotourism involving limited numbers of visitors under controlled
conditions to observe and photograph specimens from canoes,
photographic blinds, or hiking trails can provide relatively benign
opportunities to local residents for economic benefits that can serve
as an alternative or disincentive to harvest the Morelet's crocodile
(CONABIO 2005, p. 28).
There is also evidence that ecotourism, as well as scientific
research and wildlife conservation, are compatible activities with
respect to the Morelet's crocodile. In Mexico, for example, ecotourists
accompany biologists associated with the Amigos de Sian Ka'an group as
they conduct surveys of the Morelet's crocodile at Sian Ka'an Biosphere
Reserve, along the eastern coast of the Yucatan Peninsula, Quintana Roo
State (EcoColors Tours 2010, pp. 1). At another site, the La Ventanilla
Eco-tourism Project in Oaxaca State, Mexico, international volunteers
assist local residents and biologists to conserve the Morelet's
crocodile, turtles, iguanas, and other species of wildlife (Volunteers
for International Partnership--Mexico 2010, 1-4). In Belize, tourists,
as well as wildlife researchers from the United States and their
Belizean counterparts, are implementing an ecological field study of
the Morelet's crocodile at Lamanai Outpost Lodge and Research Station
that eventually will lead to the development of a national management
plan for the species (The Croc Docs 2010, pp. 1-6). If the biological
data, in part collected by the ecotourists, support harvest, and
effective enforcement regulations can be developed and implemented,
this plan may include commercial exploitation of the Morelet's
crocodile. In Guatemala, scientists and ecotourists are working
cooperatively with the ProPet[eacute]n group to undertake conservation
work at the Scarlet Macaw Biological Station in the Maya Biosphere
Reserve (ProPeten 2009, p. 1). While these activities differ with
regard to specific details, in general they provide positive
conservation benefits to the Morelet's crocodile and demonstrate that
ecotourism, as well as scientific research and wildlife conservation,
can be compatible with respect to the species.
Agriculture, Grazing, and Infrastructure Development
Agriculture, grazing, and infrastructure development (such as dams,
roads, residential areas, and irrigated fields) generally are indirect
impacts in that the purpose of the action is not focused on the
crocodile. These activities can be either consumptive (for example,
destruction of nests and eggs by machinery) or nonconsumptive (for
example, loss of access to traditional nesting or feeding sites), and
are generally manifested through habitat loss or fragmentation.
Depending on the nature and extent of these activities, they may have a
substantial negative impact on local Morelet's crocodile populations.
Although agriculture, grazing, and infrastructure development are
currently affecting local populations of Morelet's crocodiles, and this
is likely to continue in the foreseeable future, we do not have any
evidence that these activities are currently or anticipated to be a
range-wide threat to the Morelet's crocodile.
Summary of Factor A
Although some habitat degradation has occurred in Mexico, this
threat is ameliorated by the LGEEPA. This law has strict restrictions
against land use changes in Mexico, especially for undisturbed habitat
such as those areas used by the Morelet's crocodile (CONABIO 2005, p.
25). The Sistema Nacional de [Aacute]reas Naturales Protegidas (SINANP)
also provides significant habitat protection in Mexico. The SINANP
created designated protected areas because these areas contain key or
representative ecosystems or species, or ecosystems or species that are
at risk and require strict control. In Mexico, at least 11 protected
areas contain populations of the Morelet's crocodile (CITES 2010a, pp.
17-20). In Belize, at least three protected areas contain Morelet's
crocodile populations (Meerman et al. 2003a, p. 45; Meerman et al.
2003b, p. 30; and Meerman et al. 2004, pp. 30-31). Mexico and Belize
contain the majority of all wild Morelet's crocodiles (87 percent) and
the majority of the potentially suitable habitat throughout the
species' range (81 percent). We find that, although habitat destruction
and modification is affecting individual crocodiles locally, the
overall level of habitat protection in Mexico and Belize is currently
adequate and we anticipate that it will remain so.
Based on current information, Guatemala contains the remaining 13
percent of the wild Morelet's crocodiles and the remaining 19 percent
of the potentially suitable habitat throughout the species' range.
Although the Morelet's crocodile occupies at least two protected areas
in Guatemala (Casta[ntilde]eda Moya et al. 2000, p. 63), one, the El
Mirador-R[iacute]o Azul National Park has no permanent human presence
either in or surrounding the park and contains the last pristine
rainforest in Guatemala which has experienced very little
deforestation. The NGO community has partnered with the President of
Guatemala to establish a coalition to ensure long-term protection of
this important national park, while providing for sustainable economic
incentives to the people of the MBR and of Guatemala. The second
protected
[[Page 23659]]
area, Laguna del Tigre National Park, has been affected by past human
encroachment, fire, deforestation, grazing, and infrastructure
development. Although these factors may have affected local populations
of Morelet's crocodiles, we have no evidence that it has affected the
species range-wide. The government of Guatemala and the local and
international NGO community have again partnered to address these
issues through direct interventions; including local and international
community in conservation efforts; and educating people on the use of
best management practices. These efforts have resulted in a 90%
reduction in fires in Laguna del Tigre National Park, and the
successful interdiction of individuals conducting unlawful activities.
Despite the localized impacts in all three countries, the current
range-wide distribution of Morelet's crocodile now closely resembles
historical range-wide distribution. The species has existing available
high quality habitat, healthy population distribution, is abundant at
known sites and it is expanding into new sites. Even in the face of
habitat alteration, this species has been shown to occupy disturbed
habitat. There have been observed increases in the relative abundance
of the species, and a total population size of approximately 19,400
adults in the three range countries. Species experts now widely
characterize Morelet's crocodile populations as healthy. Although some
local factors continue to affect the habitat for Morelet's crocodile,
we have no information to indicate that these local factors are of
sufficient magnitude to have a range-wide impact on the species to the
point that would cause the Morelet's crocodile to meet the definition
of either an endangered or a threatened species. Therefore, we find
that the present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range is not likely to threaten or
endanger the Morelet's crocodile in the foreseeable future.
Factor B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
Commercial Harvest (Legal and Illegal Trade)
The Morelet's crocodile was included in Appendix I of CITES on July
1, 1975. Species included in Appendix I are species threatened with
extinction that are or may be affected by trade. CITES prohibits
international trade in specimens of these species unless the trade is
found to be not detrimental to the survival of the species, the
specimens in trade were legally acquired, and the purpose of the import
is not for primarily commercial purposes or the specimen meets one of
the exemptions established under the CITES Treaty. A more thorough
explanation of CITES is found in the ``Convention on International
Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora'' discussion under
the section Factor D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms.
Overexploitation for commercial purposes prior to 1970 is widely
accepted as the primary cause of a drastic, range-wide population
decline of Morelet's crocodile (Platt and Thorbjarnarson 2000b, p. 21;
CONABIO 2005, p. 27). Historically, commercial overexploitation,
through the harvest of adult animals from the wild, was a much greater
threat to the Morelet's crocodile than habitat loss. During the first
half of the 20th century, hundreds of thousands of skins per year were
marketed (CITES 2008, pp. 17, 20). The precise magnitude of the trade
is unclear however, because trade data for the Morelet's crocodile was
recorded at a higher taxonomic level incorporating other crocodilians.
See, for example, Loa Loza 1998a, pp. 134-135; Arroyo-Quiroz et al.
2007, p. 933. It is reported that prior to 1975, hide dealers in Belize
purchased up to 12,000 skins annually, and an unknown number of skins
were exported illegally in contravention to Mexican law (Plat and
Thorbjarnarson 2000b, p. 21). Precise estimates of historical trade
from Mexico or Guatemala were unavailable. Even now, the commercial
market for designer fashion items made from high quality crocodile
skins, such as leather belts, footwear, wallets, and handbags, is
highly lucrative. For example, a single pair of shoes may retail for
hundreds of dollars, a handbag for several thousand dollars, and a tote
bag for tens of thousands of dollars.
Legal Trade
In 1997, the Government of Mexico established a system for
registering, supervising, and enforcing Unidad de Manejo y
Administraci[oacute]n (UMAs; Conservation Management and Administrative
Units) for intensive reproduction of economically valuable natural
resources, including the captive breeding of Morelet's crocodiles
(CONABIO 2005, Annex 3, pp. 3-5). Commercial use of Morelet's
crocodiles in Mexico for domestic trade was strictly limited to animals
raised in closed-cycle, captive-breeding operations regulated by the
Government of Mexico under the UMA system. For international trade,
commercial trade was restricted to animals raised in these closed-
cycle, captive-breeding operations registered with the CITES
Secretariat. In order for these closed-cycle, captive-breeding
operations to be successful, great care was given to satisfying the
biological requirements of the species (Cremieux et al. 2005, p. 417;
Brien et al. 2007, pp. 1-26). According to Le[oacute]n Vel[aacute]zquez
(2004, p. 52), there were approximately 30,000 Morelet's crocodiles in
captive-breeding facilities in Mexico in 2004. There were 38,449
Morelet's crocodiles housed in 19 Mexican closed-cycle captive-breeding
operations in 2008 (CITES 2010a, p. 24). Currently, the annual
production of Morelet's crocodiles in Mexican closed-cycle captive-
breeding operations does not exceed 40,000 individuals (CITES 2010a, p.
8).
Under Mexican law, closed-cycle captive-breeding operations wishing
to make their Morelet's crocodiles available for commercial use must
demonstrate that they are able to go beyond the F2 generation of
reproducing individuals. This requirement supports the use of Morelet's
crocodiles that is compatible with conservation of the species by
offsetting the demand for crocodiles taken from the wild. Such
facilities produced a variety of items including skins/hides, meat,
live individuals as pets, stuffed figurines, and leather products
(fashion accessories) for both domestic and international trade.
Based on CITES annual reports for the period 1996-2005, Caldwell
(2007, pp. 6-7) noted relatively low levels of international legal
trade in products from Mexican captive-breeding operations during 1996-
1999 (fewer than 200 skins/year), but higher levels during 2000-2005
(2,430 skins in 2001; 1,591 skins in 2002; and below 1,000 skins per
year during the rest of the period). Japan has been the main importer
of products from Mexican captive-breeding operations, with lesser
quantities going to France, Italy, the Republic of Korea, and Spain
(Caldwell 2007, p. 6).
The United Nations Environment Programme--World Conservation
Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC) manages a trade database on behalf of the
CITES Secretariat. Each Party to CITES is responsible for compiling
annual reports to the CITES Secretariat regarding their country's trade
in species protected under CITES. UNEP-WCMC enters the data from these
annual reports into a trade database, which is used to analyze trade in
CITES specimens. Due to the time needed to compile the data, the most
recent year
[[Page 23660]]
for which comprehensive trade statistics are available is normally two
years prior to the current year.
In general, prior to 2010, international legal trade consisted of
small quantities of unfinished hides/skins or finished leather
products, exported primarily from Mexico to Japan and European
countries, as well as biological specimens destined for research. These
countries process the unfinished hides/skins into leather products such
as belts, footwear, wallets, and handbags that in turn are sold within
their own country or re-exported for sale to other countries. Due to
the listing status of the species under the Act, the United States
cannot be a commercial destination for Morelet's crocodile skins and
products. It is currently illegal to import Morelet's crocodile skins
and products into the United States, unless the import is for
scientific or enhancement purposes.
In 2010, the Government of Mexico submitted a proposal to the 15th
Meeting of the CITES Conference of the Parties (CoP15) to transfer the
Morelet's crocodile throughout its range to Appendix II of CITES with a
zero quota for trade in wild specimens because the Government of Mexico
concluded that the Morelet's crocodile no longer met the criteria for
inclusion in Appendix I (CITES 2010a, p. 1). Consistent with a request
from Guatemala (CITES 2010a, Annex 4, page 25), the Government of
Mexico amended their proposal by adding the words ``for commercial
purposes'' after ``with a zero quota for trade in wild specimens''. In
addition, the Government of Guatemala opposed the initial CITES
proposal to downlist the species throughout its range based on the lack
of knowledge of the population and population trends in Guatemala,
threats to the species from deforestation and pollution in Guatemala,
and the possibility of illegal, cross-border trade taking place from
Guatemala. Because of Guatemala's concerns, Mexico requested that the
vote be split, with the Mexico and Belize populations considered
separately from the Guatemala's population. The proposal to downlist
the Mexico and Belize populations to CITES Appendix II with a zero
quota for wild specimens for commercial purposes was adopted by
consensus. Mexico then withdrew its proposal to downlist the Guatemala
population, leaving that population in CITES Appendix I. As a result,
only Morelet's crocodiles in Mexico and Belize were transferred to
CITES Appendix II. Morelet's crocodiles in Guatemala remain in CITES
Appendix I (CITES 2010b, p. 1). The new CITES designations became
effective on June 23, 2010. Please see the discussion in the Factor D
section, Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms, for additional
information on the change in CITES designation for the Morelet's
crocodile.
According to the 2010 CITES proposal to transfer the Morelet's
crocodile to Appendix II, the UNEP-WCMC CITES Trade Database showed
that, until 2007, the parts and derivatives of the Morelet's crocodile
most commonly found in trade were skins, skin pieces and leather
products, although other products include live specimens, eggs, bodies,
scales, skulls and shoes were also traded. The largest exporter between
2001 and 2007 was Mexico (8,498 skins, 750 skin pieces and 1,193
leather products), followed by Belize with 116 bodies, 766 eggs and
3,124 specimens for scientific purposes (exported to the United
States). The major importing countries were Japan (6,170 skins), United
States (3,124 specimens for scientific purposes), Italy (1,219 skins),
the Republic of Korea (560 skins), France (375 skins) and Spain (162
skins) (CITES 2010a, p. 8).
According to the CITES (CITES 2010a) proposal to transfer the
Morelet's crocodile to Appendix II, the national harvest of animals
from closed-cycle operations authorized in Mexico amounts to fewer than
2,000 skins per year since the year 2000. In the period between 2000
and 2009, 119 CITES export permits were issued in Mexico for a total of
12,276 Morelet's crocodile skins. However, the total potential
production from closed-cycle captive-breeding operations was about
16,500 individuals and approximately 10,000 skins per year (CITES
2010a, p. 7).
We examined the information on Mexico's closed-cycle, captive
breeding operations in Annex 3 of the 2010 CITES proposal. According to
the information provided in the Annex, there were 19 closed-cycle
captive-breeding operations registered as UMAs for the Morelet's
crocodile in Mexico. Only four of the 19 UMAs had a captive population
sufficient to support commercial trade, and only two of these four
could support international commercial trade--both of which were
registered with CITES. As of 2008, the captive population in these four
UMAs ranged from 1,237 to 28,673 individuals. The two UMAs that were
not registered with CITES had the potential to produce 1,100 skins per
year for local commercial trade (CITES 2010a, Annex 3, p. 24). The
population levels for the remaining 15 UMAs were relatively low by
comparison, ranging from six to 576 individuals. Rather than supporting
commercial trade, four of the remaining 15 UMAs supported exhibition,
seven had no commercial production, three contributed to the economic
support of the local community, and one was used for research.
Three of these 19 Mexican captive-breeding operations were also
registered with CITES, and could therefore commercially trade Morelet's
crocodile products internationally, as well as domestically while the
species was listed under Appendix I. However, one of these CITES-
registered captive breeding operations contains only six individuals,
and is used for exhibition purposes. Only two of the three CITES-
registered captive breeding operations commercially produce enough
Morelet's crocodile skins with the annual production potential for
international trade. These two captive breeding operations have the
potential to produce an estimated 2,500 skins annually for
international trade (CITES 2010a, pp. 7 and 24, Annex 3). Please see
the discussion in the Factor D section, Inadequacy of Existing
Regulatory Mechanisms, for additional information on the three CITES-
registered captive breeding operations.
There are no captive-breeding facilities in Belize or Guatemala
that are providing specimens or skins for trade, either domestically or
internationally under the CITES captive-breeding exception (CITES
2010c). In Belize, Morelet's crocodiles are officially protected from
commercial harvest. Platt and Thorbjarnarson (2000b) found no evidence
of commercial poaching of Morelet's crocodiles for skins or meat in
Belize (Platt and Thorbjarnarson 2000b, p. 27). Reportedly, the species
is not subject to commercial activities in Guatemala given that
Guatemala's Comisi[oacute]n Nacional de [Aacute]reas Protegidas (CONAP;
National Commission on Protected Areas, also known as the Guatemalan
National Park Service) prohibits the export and trade in wild specimens
of endangered species (CITES 2010a, p. 7).
Illegal Trade
According to the 2010 CITES proposal to transfer the Morelet's
crocodile to Appendix II, the UNEP-WCMC CITES Trade Database showed few
illegal movements of parts and derivatives of the Morelet's crocodile
between 1975 and 2007 from Mexico, Guatemala, and Belize, with the
United States as the only destination. This suggests that there is a
very low level of illegal trade and that it is only with the United
States; however, enforcement actions are not a required field for CITES
Annual Reports. Unlike the United States, most countries do not specify
the
[[Page 23661]]
action taken on imports. Thus, the fact that illegal trade to the
United States is documented in the WCMC database does not mean that
this is the only illegal trade in the species. That said, between 1982
and 2005, items found to have been ``illegally'' imported to the United
States from Mexico were mainly leather products (308) and shoes (419
pairs). It is quite possible that these U.S. imports derived from legal
operations in Mexico, but were precluded from import into the U.S.
because of the Morelet's crocodile's endangered status under the
Endangered Species Act.
Considering the same caveats pertaining to WCMC data, there were
eight records illegal trade occurring from Guatemala (between 1989 and
1997), mainly involving pairs of shoes (27), and one case in Belize,
which involved the export of 31 eggs in 1995. Regarding Guatemala,
Casta[ntilde]eda-Moya (1998) stated that illegal capture of the species
continued in the Pet[eacute]n region in that year. However, he admitted
that the volume of such activity had decreased compared to the
situation 25 years before (CITES 2010a, p. 8).
Recent data available on illegal trade in the Morelet's crocodile
between 1975 and 2007 showed that the United States reported illegal
imports (UNEP-WCMC CITES Trade Database 2010a). The data on illegal
imports are based on the numbers of items that were seized and
confiscated by law enforcement personnel in both the United States and
in other countries. This information is not included in CITES annual
reports for each country; the United States is the exception. The
majority of the illegal Morelet's crocodile parts and derivatives
confiscated upon arrival into the United States between 1975 and 2007
came from Mexico (20 skins, 28 handbags, 243 leather items, 419 pairs
of shoes, 3 watch straps, 9 bodies, 10 garments, 2 live animals, and 65
small leather products). Again, these items could have come from legal
operations in Mexico, but were a violation at the time under the Act
due to the Morelet's crocodile's endangered status. A significantly
smaller number of illegal items originated from Guatemala (1 skin, 2
handbags, 1 leather item, 27 pairs of shoes, and 1 body) and Belize (31
eggs). The majority of the illegal trade reportedly began in 1985, but
began to decline steadily starting in 2000. Between 2005 and 2007,
there were only several reported illegal imports of Morelet's crocodile
into the United States, and these were small leather products from
Mexico (UNEP-WCMC CITES Trade Database 2010b).
The Government of Mexico's Federal Prosecutor for Environmental
Protection (PROFEPA) has investigated illegal trade in live animals,
presumably for the pet trade. A potential illegal market in live
animals is under analysis, and would be expected to involve the Mexican
cities of Guadalajara, Monterrey, and Mexico City (Mexico 2006, p. 41).
Illegal harvest or killing of individuals perceived as threats to
humans or livestock cannot be completely precluded, but enforcement of
controls on domestic and international trade severely limit any
commercial incentives. PROFEPA performs inspections to prevent
laundering of wild Morelet's crocodile specimens and other illegal
activities. There was a declining trend in seizures of illegal
specimens and products during 1998-2007. According to Mexico (Mexico
2006, pp. 39-42), 85 specimens were confiscated in 2003, two in 2004,
80 in 2005, and 14 in 2006 (partial results). In addition and according
to Paola Mosig, Program officer for the TRAFFIC World Wildlife Fund in
Mexico, 20 seizures with a total of 48 live specimens, as well as 25
belts and two wallets were confiscated in 2007 (Mosig 2008, pers.
comm.) According to TRAFFIC, the Wildlife Trade Monitoring Network,
these seizures are indicative of a strong enforcement program that
deters illegal trade (Mosig 2008, pers. comm.).
Current Trade
In accordance with Article II, paragraph 2(a) of CITES, and CITES
Resolution Conf. 9.24 (Rev CoP14) Annex 1, the Government of Mexico
submitted a proposal (CoP15 Prop.8) to the CoP15 to transfer the
Morelet's crocodile throughout its range to Appendix II of CITES with
an annotation requiring a zero quota for wild specimens that was
further amended by adding the phrase, ``for commercial purposes''
(CITES 2010a, p. 1). The Government of Guatemala opposed Mexico's CITES
proposal as it pertains to the species in Guatemala, based on the
limited knowledge of the population and population trends in Guatemala;
the threats to the species from deforestation and pollution in
Guatemala; and the possibilities of illegal, cross-border trade taking
place from Guatemala to Mexico. As a result, the parties to CITES
agreed that Morelet's crocodiles in Mexico and Belize should be
transferred to CITES Appendix II but that Morelet's crocodiles in
Guatemala remain in CITES Appendix I. (CITES 2010b, p. 2). The change
in CITES status for Morelet's crocodiles in Mexico and Belize became
effective on June 23, 2010. Because of the zero quota annotation,
transferring the Morelet's crocodile to CITES Appendix II precludes the
trade of wild specimens for commercial purposes and therefore should
not create additional pressure on wild populations in any of the range
states, as long as enforcement remains effective. As such,
international commercial trade in Morelet's crocodiles under CITES is
currently limited to individuals from captive-breeding operations only.
However, once the Appendix-II status went into effect for Morelet's
crocodiles in Mexico and Belize, international trade of Morelet's
crocodiles in Mexico and Belize under CITES was no longer limited to
facilities that are registered with the CITES Secretariat pursuant to
the resolution on registration of operations that breed Appendix-I
animal species for commercial purposes (Resolution Conf. 12.10 (Rev.
CoP15)).
According to the Government of Mexico's 2010 CITES proposal, the
current level of international trade in the Morelet's crocodile is
around 8,600 individuals in 10 years (an average of 860 individuals per
year). The Morelet's crocodile represents only a small fraction of the
global trade in crocodilians, far behind the market leaders: brown
spectacled caiman (Caiman crocodilus fuscus), American alligator
(Alligator mississippiensis), and Nile crocodile (Crocodilus
niloticus). Current trends in international trade do not indicate a
threat to the Morelet's crocodile in the wild (CITES 2010a, p. 8). In
addition, the Government of Mexico's proposal to move the Morelet's
crocodile to CITES Appendix II allows only individuals from sources
other than wild populations to be exported and this provision remains
in effect with the zero quota for wild specimens traded for commercial
purposes. The risk of laundering of wild specimens through farms is
very low, because the quality of skins produced in captivity is much
higher than wild-caught skins, and demand in international trade
focuses on high quality skins (CITES 2010a, pp. 8, 23). It should be
noted that there are a number of CITES-recognized production methods
that are not ``wild'' and not ``bred in captivity.'' Mexico or any
other country is free to propose a change to the annotation at the next
CoP removing this limitation. However, there is no indication at this
time that a change is imminent.
To see if our results would be comparable to Mexico's assessment,
we queried the UNEP-WCMC CITES Trade Database for the number of
Morelet's crocodile skins legally exported between 1998 and 2008 and
found
[[Page 23662]]
similar results for the current level of legal trade cited above by the
Government of Mexico. According to the UNEP-WCMC CITES Trade Database,
Mexico exported 8,780 skins between 1998 and 2008, an average of 878
skins per year (UNEP-WCMC CITES Trade Database 2010b). Two of the
previously CITES-registered captive breeding operations in Mexico have
the potential to produce 2,500 skins per year for international trade
(CITES 2010a, Annex 3, p. 24), which is more than adequate to meet the
current demand for legal trade of less than 900 skins per year. If this
proposed rule is finalized, then Morelet's crocodile products would be
able to be imported into the United States and the demand for
international trade may increase. However, we do not believe this
potential increase in international trade is likely to threaten or
endanger wild Morelet's crocodiles due to the adequate supply of
captive-bred individuals in Mexico available for legal international
commercial trade under CITES.
Besides CITES and the Act, no other international measures control
the cross-border movement of the Morelet's crocodile (CITES 2010a, p.
10). If this proposed rule is finalized and the prohibitions of the Act
are removed, then Morelet's crocodile parts and products could be
imported into the United States for commercial purposes, provided they
do not originate in Guatemala. However, cross-border movement of the
Morelet's crocodile throughout its range would still be regulated
through CITES (Appendix II for Mexico and Belize; Appendix I in
Guatemala).
Subsistence Harvest
The overharvest for commercial purposes, rather than subsistence
harvest, was the primary reason for the Morelet's crocodile listing
under the Act and under CITES. Although subsistence harvest has
historically had an impact on some local populations of Morelet's
crocodiles, these impacts have diminished over time and do not
currently have a significant impact on the species as a whole.
Indigenous cultures in Mexico, Belize, and Guatemala have a long
history of using the Morelet's crocodile for subsistence and cultural
purposes (Maimone Celorio et al. 2006, pp. 40-43; Zamudio 2006, pp. 5-
8; M[eacute]ndez-Cabrera and Montiel 2007, p. 132). Historically, the
Maya Indians in Mexico consumed small quantities of the eggs and meat
of the Morelet's crocodile (Maimone Celorio et al. 2006, pp. 40-43;
Zamudio 2006, pp. 5-8; M[eacute]ndez-Cabrera and Montiel 2007, p. 132).
Hunting and harvest techniques were based on traditional knowledge by
these people of the behavior and ecology of the Morelet's crocodile
(Cede[ntilde]o-V[aacute]zquez and Zamudio Acedo 2005, pp. 8-9). More
recently (1965-1980), and in response to a demand by outside buyers/
businessmen, Maya hunters harvested large quantities of hides for
commercial purposes, but that activity now has largely been
discontinued (Zamudio et al. 2004, p. 344).
Indigenous and nonindigenous people in Belize, generally poor
farmers, also engaged in large-scale, commercial harvest of hides
during the previous century, but that practice was primarily based on
economic instead of cultural reasons (Hope and Abercrombie 1986, p.
146). Abercrombie et al. (1982, p. 19) made a distinction between
master hunters in Belize, generally older men who made extensive forays
into the forest in search of specific game species, and part-time
hunters, generally younger men who made short-term, opportunistic
outings and often harvested Morelet's crocodiles. Among other uses, the
Morelet's crocodile also has important roles in indigenous art,
medicine, and religion (Stocker and Armsey, 1980, p. 740; Cupul-
Maga[ntilde]a 2003, pp. 45-48), and is used locally for handicrafts,
jewelry, decorations, and curios (BERDS 2005a, p. 1).
Meerman et al. (2003a, p. 49) noted a relative scarcity of fish and
fish predators such as crocodiles in the Sarstoon Temash National Park
in Belize. They suspected that fish populations are depressed, and that
over-fishing by humans must play a role. People engaged in fishing
along the Upper Temash River also annually collect Morelet's crocodile
eggs from nests located along water channels for human consumption. In
some years, one or more nests escape discovery so the eggs are not
collected. As a result, baby crocodiles are subsequently seen that
year. Heavy fishing also reduces the potential prey base for the
Morelet's crocodile. The heavy predation on eggs together with the
depletion of the Morelet's crocodile's prey base may be responsible for
the low crocodile count along the river (Meerman et al. 2003a, pp. 42,
45).
Casta[ntilde]eda Moya (1998a, p. 521; 1998b, p. 13) listed illegal
hunting as a threat to Morelet's crocodile in the Pet[eacute]n region
of Guatemala, but did not provide a numerical estimate of the take.
ARCAS, an animal welfare group in Guatemala, reported the rescue or
recovery of 49 live individuals (about 8 per year), most likely from
pet dealers or private individuals, during the period 2002-2007 (ARCAS
2002, p. 3; 2003, p. 2; 2004, p. 2; 2005, p. 2; 2006, p. 3; 2007, p.
3). We do not have any information describing the effect of these
threats on the status of wild populations in Guatemala.
Although subsistence harvest continues to affect negatively some
local populations of the Morelet's crocodile, the impacts appear to be
very small. We have no evidence that subsistence harvest is currently
or anticipated to affect significantly the Morelet's crocodile
throughout its range. The current range-wide distribution of the
Morelet's crocodile closely mirrors the historical range-wide
distribution, with a total population size of approximately 19,400
adults in the three range countries.
Scientific Research
Scientific research in and of itself also constitutes a use of the
Morelet's crocodile. Research in the three range countries has mainly
focused on field surveys for the occurrence of the species, relative to
abundance and habitat quality, which do not require removal of
specimens. Research protocols followed so far have been those accepted
worldwide and do not involve significant alteration of habitat or
behavior (CITES 2010a, p. 7). Several scientific research projects on
the Morelet's crocodile have focused on field surveys that involve
capture, handling, or invasive techniques to identify, for example, the
species, sex, or size class of the specimen, as well as to collect
biological specimens or to attach an identification tag. If conducted
according to standard protocols, these physical activities pose little
risk of injury or disturbance to the subject crocodiles. Several
studies have also entailed, for example, night surveys using bright
spotlights (Casta[ntilde]eda Moya et al. 2000, p. 62), stomach flushing
(Platt et al. 2006, p. 282), collection of small blood samples (Dever
et al. 2002, p. 1079), or the gathering of nonviable eggs from nests
for contaminants analyses (Rainwater et al. 2002a, p. 320). None of
these studies has cited any negative effects due to handling or
observation on the Morelet's crocodile populations.
All three range countries regulate scientific research and
collection. According to the UNEP-WCMC CITES Trade Database, 3,124
specimens were exported for scientific purposes from Mexico to the
United States. From an administrative standpoint, a permit at the state
or Federal level regulates the collection of biological samples for
scientific purposes in Mexico. In Mexico, the Mexican Endangered
[[Page 23663]]
Species List (NOM-126-SEMARNAT-2000) regulates the collection of
biological samples from wild species for scientific use. In addition,
the Governments of Belize and Guatemala regulate scientific collection
and research. In Belize, this type of export is subject to strict
protocols and provisions of the Wildlife Protection Act (CITES 2010a,
p. 7).
With the Appendix-II designation for Morelet's crocodiles in Mexico
and Belize, individuals or institutions wishing to import scientific
samples originating from those countries will no longer be required to
obtain a CITES import permit. However, the CITES import permit
requirement would still be in effect for Guatemala and CITES export
permits or re-export certificates, regardless of the country of origin,
would be required. The elimination of import permits, while continuing
the CITES requirement for export permits and re-export certificates,
may result in additional scientific collecting and research to benefit
the species while ensuring that adequate protections for the species
remain in place (see the Factor D section, Inadequacy of Existing
Regulatory Mechanisms, below).
In conclusion, we are not aware of any evidence that utilization of
the Morelet's crocodile for scientific research purposes poses anything
more than a low risk to the subject individuals; furthermore, risks at
the population level are probably negligible. To the contrary, these
studies (surveys and sampling) provide useful information essential to
monitoring the status and continued health of individuals as well as
populations. These studies also allow ecotourists in these countries to
work with the scientific community in the collection of Morelet's
crocodile data (Volunteers for International Partnership 2009, pp. 1-
4.) This provides ecotourists with an opportunity to observe the
Morelet's crocodile in its native habitat and to gain firsthand
knowledge about the conservation threats that the species is facing.
Ranching
Although the Belize-Guatemala-Mexico Tri-national Strategy for the
Conservation and Sustainable Use of Morelet's Crocodile (see the Post-
Delisting Monitoring section, below) includes long-term plans for
ranching, none of the range countries have given any indication they
plan to ranch Morelet's crocodiles within the foreseeable future.
Summary of Factor B
Thus, while uncontrolled commercial harvests nearly extirpated the
Morelet's crocodile, the species has largely recovered because of being
protected under CITES and the Act in the early 1970s, as well as the
implementation of CITES trade controls by all three range countries.
All of the range countries currently continue to prohibit harvest of
wild Morelet's crocodiles.
Illegal international and domestic trade still occurs, but levels
remain low. Any incidence of illegal killing that may have occurred has
not prevented the observed population increase of the species. The
potential remains for illegal cross-border trade, as well as the
laundering of wild specimens through existing captive-breeding
operations in Mexico, but enforcement in Mexico is relatively strict.
Given the increased effectiveness of law enforcement personnel with
regard to the implementation of CITES, the increased supply of captive-
bred Morelet's crocodiles in Mexico that are now available for
commercial trade as a result of the Morelet's crocodile's transfer to
CITES Appendix II, and the increasing awareness of these regulations by
the public, we anticipate that illegal trade in wild Morelet's
crocodiles will decrease in the majority of the species' range in the
foreseeable future.
The Government of Mexico's Federal Prosecutor for Environmental
Protection (PROFEPA) performs inspections to prevent laundering of wild
Morelet's crocodile specimens and other illegal activities. In Belize,
the importation and exportation of wildlife requires a permit and is
subject to strict protocols and provisions of the Wildlife Protection
Act, Hunting of Scheduled species for scientific or educational
purposes in Belize also requires a permit. There was a declining trend
in seizures of illegal specimens and products from 1998-2007. According
to TRAFFIC, these seizures are indicative of a strong enforcement
program that deters illegal trade (Mosig 2008, pers. comm.).
Other uses such as scientific research are either benign or involve
relatively small numbers of Morelet's crocodiles. In addition and given
the steps that the Government of Mexico is taking internally to promote
the sustainable commercial use of Morelet's crocodiles, we anticipate
that commercial uses will increase in the foreseeable future,
especially in Mexico, but that captive-bred specimens will be used
instead of wild individuals.
In conclusion, we find that the overutilization for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational purposes is not a significant
factor affecting the Morelet's crocodile throughout its range, both now
and for the foreseeable future.
Factor C. Disease or Predation
Inter-specific interactions, namely disease and predation, can have
significant impacts on the conservation status of a species. At the
time the petition was submitted, disease was not considered a
significant conservation threat to the Morelet's crocodile. However,
the West Nile Virus (WNV) has been detected in several Mexican
populations of the Morelet's crocodile. According to Farf[aacute]n-Ale
et al. (2006, pp. 910-911), six specimens tested negative to the WNV at
the M[eacute]rida Zoo, Yucatan State, Mexico, during 2003-2004, while
six of seven specimens tested positive to the WNV at Ciudad del Carmen,
Campeche State, Mexico, in 2004. All crocodiles, including those not
sampled, showed no signs of illness at the time of the testing or
during the 3 months that followed (Farf[aacute]n-Ale et al. (2006, p.
911).
In a separate survey conducted during May-October 2005, Hidalgo-
Mart[iacute]nez et al. (2008, p. 80) detected the WNV in six of seven
Morelet's crocodiles at Zool[oacute]gico La Venta, Villahermosa,
Tabasco State, Mexico. All animals were healthy at the time of serum
collection, and none had a history of WNV-like illness. The presence of
WNV antibodies in animals from those zoos demonstrated the presence of
WNV in those regions and indicated a potential risk of infection in
animals. The magnitude of that potential risk, however, has not been
determined. West Nile Virus was responsible for a significant number of
deaths of farmed American alligators in the U.S. State of Georgia
during separate outbreaks in 2001 and 2002 (Farf[aacute]n-Ale et al.
2006, p. 908). However, we do not have any information to indicate that
WNV causes illness in the Morelet's crocodile. The sample sizes in the
above studies on Morelet's crocodile were small, so much larger studies
are needed. However, the best available information does not suggest
that WNV is a threat or likely to become a threat.
Predation on Morelet's crocodile eggs and juveniles is a common
natural phenomenon, posing no risk to healthy populations. They are
preyed upon more frequently at the juvenile stage by many birds and
medium-sized mammals (CITES 2010a, p. 4). Larger juveniles and
subadults are less susceptible than small juveniles are to predation,
and only large carnivores such as jaguars (Panthera onca)
[[Page 23664]]
(Navarro Serment 2004, p. 57) pose a risk to adult crocodiles. Larger
Morelet's crocodiles may prey upon the juveniles of their species.
However, this tends to act as an early factor promoting population
regulation and adult spacing. Aggressive interactions among adults seem
to be reduced by this mechanism, especially in populations with too
many adults. In populations with a steady state of age distribution,
cannibalism usually remains at a minimum (CONABIO 2005, p. 29). We are
unaware of any unnatural rates of predation affecting any age class of
Morelet's crocodile, and we have no indication that predation will
exacerbate other threats to the species in the future.
Other interspecific interactions can also affect the conservation
status of a species. The Morelet's crocodile and the American crocodile
co-occur and may compete with each other for resources along the
freshwater-saltwater interface in coastal Mexico and Belize. Platt and
Thorbjarnarson (2000a, p. 16; 2000b, pp. 24-26) reported relatively
higher frequency of encounter rates for the Morelet's crocodile at
alluvial and nonalluvial lagoons, mangrove forest, and rivers and
creeks, collectively characterized as inland sites, while the American
crocodile was relatively more abundant in offshore cays and the
Turneffe Atoll. These differences were attributed to the smaller body
size of the Morelet's crocodile, as well as past exploitation patterns
by hunters and subsequent niche expansion by this species (Platt and
Thorbjarnarson 2000b, p. 26). There was no indication, however, that
interspecific competition between the Morelet's and the American
crocodiles was a serious conservation problem.
Parasites have been also reported for the Morelet's crocodile, but
have not been identified as a conservation threat. In Mexico,
trematodes (parasitic flatworms commonly called flukes) and nematodes
(unsegmented worms commonly called roundworms) have been reported
(Moravec and Vargas-V[aacute]zquez 1998, p. 499; Moravec 2001, p. 47)
from the Yucatan Peninsula, but health problems with the crocodile
hosts were not noted. Rainwater et al. (2001a, p. 836) reported ticks
(Amblyomma dissimile and Amblyomma sp.), but noted that parasitism by
ticks on the Morelet's crocodile was rare in Belize and elsewhere.
Padilla Paz (2008, p. vi) characterized hematology, body index, and
external injuries for 103 Morelet's crocodiles from the northern
wetlands of Campeche State, Mexico. These variables were used to
characterize the health of the animals. Captive Morelet's crocodiles
evaluated for that study presented significantly more injuries than did
wild individuals. Parasitism with nematodes (Paratrichosoma recurvum)
was greater in wild crocodiles than in captive individuals. No serious
health issues were identified in individuals in either group (Padilla
Paz 2008, pp. 67-68).
Individual Morelet's crocodiles can also have physical issues that
can affect their well-being. Rainwater et al. (2001b, pp. 125-127)
reported two individuals among 642 Morelet's crocodiles captured in
Belize with a missing forelimb. Known in the technical literature as
ectromelia, this condition was probably the result of congenital
defects and not due to an injury. Both individuals otherwise appeared
to be in good condition.
Summary of Factor C
While the full impact of the WNV on the Morelet's crocodile has yet
to be determined, there is no indication at present that WNV poses a
threat to the species, and other interspecific interactions do not
appear to be adversely affecting the Morelet's crocodile. In
conclusion, we find that disease or predation is not a significant
factor affecting the Morelet's crocodile throughout its range, both now
and for the foreseeable future.
Factor D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna
and Flora
The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild
Fauna and Flora (CITES, the Convention, or Treaty) is an international
agreement between member governments to ensure that the international
trade in plants and wildlife does not threaten the species' survival.
It provides varying degrees of protection to more than 30,000 species
of animals and plants, whether they are traded as live specimens, parts
or products. Countries that have agreed to be bound by the Convention
(that have ``joined'' CITES) are known as Parties. Although CITES is
legally binding on the Parties, it does not take the place of national
laws. Rather, it provides a framework to be respected by each Party,
which has to adopt its own domestic legislation to ensure that CITES is
implemented at the national level. For many years, CITES has been among
the international conservation agreements with the largest membership,
with now 175 Parties (http://www.CITES.org).
CITES works by subjecting international trade in specimens of
selected species to certain controls. Trade includes any movement into
or out of a country and is not limited to commercial movement. All
import, export, re-export, and ``introduction from the sea'' of species
covered by the Convention have to be authorized through a permitting
system. The species covered by CITES are listed in three Appendices,
according to the degree of protection they need (CITES 2009c).
Appendix I include species threatened with extinction that are or
may be affected by trade. Trade in specimens of these species is
permitted only in exceptional circumstances. Appendix II includes
species not necessarily threatened with extinction, but in which trade
must be controlled in order to avoid utilization incompatible with
their survival. Appendix III includes species that have been
unilaterally listed by a Party to assist in the implementation of the
listing Party's national legislation to conserve and monitor trade in
the listed species. The Conference of the Parties (CoP), which is the
decision-making body of the Convention and comprises all its member
countries, has agreed on a set of biological and trade criteria to help
determine whether a species should be included in Appendices I or II
(Since Appendix-III listings are a unilateral decision, Parties do not
need to abide by the same biological and trade criteria adopted by the
Parties.). At each regular meeting of the CoP, Parties submit proposals
based on those criteria to amend these two Appendices to add, remove,
or reclassify species (such as the Government of Mexico's 2010 proposal
to transfer the Morelet's crocodile from Appendix I to Appendix II).
Parties discuss these amendment proposals during the CoP, and then they
are submitted for adoption by the Parties (http://www.cites.org).
A specimen of a CITES-listed species may be imported into or
exported (or re-exported) from a Party only if the appropriate permit
or certificate has been obtained prior to the international trade and
presented for clearance at the port of entry or exit.
Regulation of Trade in Appendix-I Specimens
Both an export permit or re-export certificate must be issued by
the country of export and an import permit from the country of import
must be obtained prior to international trade for Appendix-I species.
An export permit
[[Page 23665]]
may only be issued if the country of export determines that the export
will not be detrimental to the survival of the species, the specimen
was legally obtained according to the animal and plant protection laws
in the country of export, live animals or plants are prepared and
shipped for export to minimize any risk of injury, damage to health, or
cruel treatment, and an import permit has been granted by the importing
country. Likewise, the requirements for a re-export certificate are
that the country of re-export determines that the specimen was imported
into their country in accordance with CITES, that live animals or
plants are prepared and shipped for re-export to minimize any risk of
injury, damage to health, or cruel treatment, and an import permit has
been granted.
Issuance of import permits for Appendix-I species will also need a
determination from the country of import that the import will not be
for purposes that are detrimental to the survival of the species, the
proposed recipient of live animals or plants is suitably equipped to
house and care for them, and the purpose of the import is not for
primarily commercial purposes. Thus, with few exceptions, Appendix-I
species cannot be traded for commercial purposes.
Regulation of Trade in Appendix-II Specimens
In contrast to the trade requirements for an Appendix-I species,
CITES does not require an import permit from the destination country as
a condition for the export and re-export of an Appendix-II species,
unless it is required by the destination country's national law.
However, an export permit or re-export certificate is required from the
exporting country prior to the international trade taking place. An
export permit may only be issued for Appendix-II species if the country
of export determines that: (1) The export will not be detrimental to
the survival of the species; (2) the specimen was legally obtained
according to the animal and plant protection laws in the country of
export; and (3) live animals or plants are prepared and shipped for
export to minimize any risk of injury, damage to health, or cruel
treatment.
A re-export certificate may only be issued for Appendix-II species
if the country of re-export determines that: (1) The specimen was
imported into their country in accordance with CITES and (2) live
animals or plants are prepared and shipped for re-export to minimize
any risk of injury, damage to health, or cruel treatment.
Parties to CITES are required to monitor both the export permits
granted and the actual exports for Appendix II species. If a Party
determines that the export of an Appendix-II species should be limited
in order to maintain that species throughout its range at a level
consistent with its role in the ecosystems in which it occurs and well
above the level at which the species might become eligible for
inclusion as an Appendix-I species, then that Party must take suitable
measures to limit the number of export permits granted for that species
(CITES article IV, paragraph 3).
CITES Registered Captive-Breeding Operations
Prior to the Morelet's crocodile in Mexico and Belize being
downlisted to Appendix II, it could be treated as an Appendix II
species and internationally traded commercially only if the specimen
originated from a captive-breeding operation registered with the CITES
Secretariat in accordance with CITES Resolution Conf. 12.10 (Rev.
CoP15) ``Guidelines for a procedure to register and monitor operations
that breed Appendix-I animal species for commercial purposes.'' These
captive-breeding operations may only be registered if specimens
produced by that operation qualify as `bred in captivity' according to
the provisions of Resolution Conf. 10.16 (Rev.). To qualify as bred in
captivity, specimens must be born in a controlled environment where the
parents mated. In addition, breeding stock must be established in
accordance with the provisions of CITES and relevant national laws and
in a manner not detrimental to the survival of the species in the wild.
Breeding stock must also be maintained without the introduction of
specimens from the wild, except for the occasional addition of animals,
eggs or gametes meeting certain requirements. The breeding stock must
have produced offspring of second generation (F2) in a controlled
environment or be able to demonstrate that it is capable of reliably
producing second-generation offspring in a controlled environment.
Resolution Conf. 12.10 (Rev. CoP15) defines the term ``bred in
captivity for commercial purposes'' as ``any specimen of an animal bred
to obtain economic benefit, including profit, whether in cash or kind
where the purpose is directed toward sale, exchange, or provision of a
service or any other form of economic use or benefit''. Countries
operating CITES-registered operations must ensure that the operation
``will make a continuing meaningful contribution according to the
conservation needs of the species'' (CITES 2007b, pp. 1-2). Under the
exception in the Treaty and Resolution Conf. 12.10 (Rev. CoP15),
specimens of Appendix-I species originating from CITES-registered
captive-breeding operations can be traded for commercial purposes, and
shipments only need to be accompanied by an export permit issued by the
exporting country. The importer is not required to obtain an import
permit because these specimens are treated as CITES Appendix II.
Countries that are Parties to CITES should restrict their imports of
Appendix-I captive-bred specimens to those coming only from CITES-
registered operations. Additional information on CITES-registered
operations can be found on the CITES Web site at http://www.cites.org/eng/resources/registers.shtml.
Prior to the downlisting of the species in Mexico and Belize, three
CITES-registered operations for Morelet's crocodiles were located in
Mexico. These facilities, while no longer registered with the CITES
Secretariat, are still in operation (CITES 2010a, p. 24, Annex 3). The
names of these operations are:
(1) Cocodrilos Mexicanos (established in 1989; (former)
registration number A-MX-501) in Culiacan, Sinaloa State. In 2008, this
operation contained 28,673 captive Morelet's crocodiles for commercial
production (CITES 2010a, p. 24, Annex 3).
(2) Industrias Moreletii (established in 1993; (former)
registration number A-MX-502) in Villahermosa, Tabasco State. In 2008,
this operation contained 1,237 captive Morelet's crocodiles for
commercial production (CITES 2010a, p. 24, Annex 3).
(3) Cocodrilos de Chiapas (established in 1989; (former)
registration number A-MX-503) in Tapachula, Chiapas State. In 2008,
this operation contained six captive Morelet's crocodiles for
exhibition purposes (CITES 2010a, p. 24, Annex 3).
When the CITES Appendix-II designation became effective on June 23,
2010, for Morelet's crocodiles in Mexico and Belize, commercial
international trade in captive Morelet's crocodiles was no longer
limited to crocodiles originating from the three operations that were
registered with the CITES Secretariat. However, with the annotated
listing, no export of wild-caught specimens for commercial purposes is
allowed. Thus, any commercial export will continue to come from sources
other than wild populations. There are currently 19 closed-cycle
captive-breeding operations registered with the Government of Mexico as
UMAs for the
[[Page 23666]]
production of Morelet's crocodile in Mexico. Under Mexican law, UMAs
registered with the Government of Mexico must be closed-cycle and prove
that they can produce individuals beyond the F2 generation (UMAs are
described more fully below). Only four of the 19 UMAs have a captive
population sufficiently large to support commercial trade, and only two
of these four UMAs currently support international commercial trade--
(Cocodrilos Mexicanos and Industrias Moreletii) (CITES 2010a, Annex 3,
p. 24). Importing Morelet's crocodiles from Mexican captive-breeding
operations no longer requires a CITES import permit because a CITES
import permit is not required for Appendix II species. However, a CITES
export permit or re-export certificate is still required. Although the
two remaining UMAs capable of supporting trade (Cacahuatal in Veracruz
State and Punta del Este in Campeche State) currently do not contain
enough Morelet's crocodiles to support international commercial trade,
they do have enough potential annual production to produce enough skins
to support local commercial trade (CITES 2010a, Annex 3, p. 24).
Since the Morelet's crocodile in Guatemala is listed as an
Appendix-I species under CITES, the only way that Morelet's crocodiles
and their parts and products from Guatemala could legally be traded
commercially in international trade is if a captive-breeding operation
were to be registered with the CITES Secretariat. However, since
Guatemala does not currently have any captive breeding operations that
are registered with the CITES Secretariat, the commercial international
trade in Morelet's crocodile products from Guatemala remains
restricted.
However, under the current listing of the species under the Act, it
remains illegal to import Morelet's crocodiles or their parts or
products into the United States, regardless of the source, unless the
purpose of the import is for scientific research or enhancement of
propagation or survival of the species. If this proposed rule is
finalized and the prohibitions of the Act are removed, Morelet's
crocodile parts and products originating from sources other than wild
populations from Mexico and Belize could be imported into the United
States for commercial purposes, as long as the required CITES export
permit or re-export certificate has been granted. As discussed earlier,
however, an export permit will not be granted unless the exporting
country finds that the export will not be detrimental to the species
and the specimen was lawfully acquired.
Mexico's Proposal To Transfer the Morelet's Crocodile to CITES Appendix
II
At the 2008 CITES Animals Committee meeting, the Government of
Mexico submitted for comment and review a draft proposal to transfer
Mexico's population of Morelet's crocodile from Appendix I to Appendix
II based on Mexico's belief that the Morelet's crocodile no longer met
the criteria for inclusion in Appendix I (CITES 2008a, pp. 1-28; CITES
2008a, p. 32). Committee members were generally favorable of the
proposal, but had several technical questions and suggestions. The
Government of Mexico subsequently revised their 2008 proposal and
formally submitted a 2010 CITES proposal for consideration at CoP15,
held in March 2010 in Doha, Qatar (Government of Mexico 2010). The 2010
proposal was to transfer the Morelet's crocodile throughout its range
to Appendix II (CoP15 Prop. 8). The CITES Secretariat reviewed the
proposal and agreed that the Morelet's crocodile no longer met the
biological criteria for an Appendix-I species and recommended that the
proposal be adopted.
The Government of Mexico's 2010 CITES proposal recommended
transferring the Morelet's crocodile from Appendix I to Appendix II
because the species no longer met the criteria for inclusion in
Appendix I. Under the 2010 proposal, the transfer to Appendix II
applied to all three range countries. The 2010 proposal included an
annotation establishing a zero quota for wild specimens. The zero quota
would prohibit any international trade in wild specimens within the
context of CITES, thereby limiting the trade to Morelet's crocodile and
its products to those originating from sources other than wild
specimens. Although the Belize-Guatemala-Mexico Tri-national Strategy
for the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Morelet's Crocodile (see
the Post-Delisting Monitoring section, below) includes long-term plans
for ranching, none of the range countries have indicated they plan to
ranch Morelet's crocodiles within the foreseeable future.
The Government of Mexico consulted with the Governments of Belize
and Guatemala on their 2010 CITES proposal. The Government of Belize
supported the proposal, but did not provide documents to the CITES
Secretariat to indicate their official support. According to the
Government of Mexico's 2010 CITES proposal, the Government of Guatemala
supported the proposal in part, but recommended transferring only the
Mexican population of Morelet's crocodile in captive-breeding
operations to Appendix II, with a zero quota for wild specimens traded
for commercial purposes. In a letter from Guatemala's Consejo Nacional
de Areas Protegidas to the Ambassador of Mexico dated 5 June 2009
(CITES 2010a, Annex 4, p. 25), the Government of Guatemala indicated
that it did not support the Government of Mexico's 2010 CITES proposal
as written. They recommended verifying that moving captive Morelet's
crocodiles in Mexico to Appendix II would not put wild Morelet's
crocodiles in Mexico at risk. They supported Mexico's transfer of
captive-bred populations of Morelet's crocodiles from Appendix I to
Appendix II provided the parties ensure the following:
They verify that wild populations of Morelet's crocodiles
in Mexico will not be at risk as they are moved from Appendix I to II;
If Mexico's proposal at CoP15 is approved, then measures
should be put in place for strict monitoring and enforcement on the
Mexico-Guatemala border;
That the marking of live animals be done by methods that
cannot be falsified and that skins be tagged in accordance with CITES
to maintain chain of custody;
That the tagging methods for Mexican populations of
Morelet's crocodile be widely circulated to range countries and those
countries importing parts and products as well as live specimens.
Under Guatemala's recommended scenario, Morelet's crocodiles in
Mexico, and Belize would be in Appendix II, with a zero quota for wild
specimens traded for commercial purposes and all Morelet's crocodiles
in Guatemala would remain on Appendix I (CITES 2010a, pp. 12, 25-26).
The Appendix-II designation became effective on June 23, 2010. As a
result, Morelet's crocodiles and their products from Mexico and Belize
from sources other than wild populations are now allowed to enter
international trade for commercial purposes under CITES. They are,
however, not currently able to enter the United States market because
the Act's prohibitions remain in effect. The international commercial
trade in all wild Morelet's crocodiles remains restricted.
At this time, the Government of Mexico intends to export products
derived from Morelet's crocodiles raised in its captive-breeding
operations that are registered with the Government of Mexico as UMAs,
and that have a proven track record of producing
[[Page 23667]]
offspring beyond the F2 generation (CITES 2008, p. 23; CITES 2010a, p.
9).
Now that the Morelet's crocodile in Mexico and Belize is
transferred to CITES Appendix II with an annotation providing a zero
quota for wild specimens traded for commercial purposes, if this
proposed delisting rule under the Act is finalized, then products
originating from any captive-breeding operations in Mexico (and Belize,
if any) could be imported into the United States. In addition, if this
proposed delisting rule under the Act is finalized, then Morelet's
crocodile products manufactured in other countries could also be re-
exported into the United States if those skins originated in Mexico or
Belize and were not derived from wild populations. Live Morelet's
crocodiles and parts or products originating from Guatemala will remain
in CITES Appendix I, with its associated trade restrictions remaining
in place.
Through Resolution Conf. 8.4 (Rev. CoP15) the Parties to CITES have
adopted a process, the National Legislation Project, to evaluate
whether Parties have adequate domestic legislation to successfully
implement the Treaty. In reviewing a country's national legislation,
the Secretariat considers whether a Party's domestic laws designate the
responsible Scientific and Management authorities, prohibit trade in
violation of the Convention, have penalty provisions in place for
illegal trade, and provide for seizure of specimens that were illegally
traded or possessed.
While both Guatemala and Mexico's legislation have been determined
to be sufficient to properly implement the Treaty, Belize's national
legislation was considered lacking. As part of the National Legislative
Project, Belize has submitted a plan to revise their legislation to the
Secretariat in March 2010, but as of this proposed rule, have not
officially enacted any revised legislation (CITES 2010e). Although a
trade suspension was put in place for Belize for one orchid species,
Myrmecophila tibicinis, the suspension was in relation to the Review of
Significant Trade in Specimens of Appendix II species (CITES 2010d) and
not due to Belize's current legislation implementing CITES. If this
proposed rule is finalized, CITES will continue to protect the
Morelet's crocodile throughout its range by regulating international
trade. However, as part of this proposed rule, we are requesting any
information on Belize's efforts to enact national legislation and/or
their efforts to ensure their compliance with CITES. We will continue
to monitor Belize's progress between the proposed and final rules.
All three countries also have protected-species and protected-areas
legislation under the jurisdiction of specific ministries or
departments. The three range countries have an extensive regulatory
framework to control activities with respect to the Morelet's crocodile
and its habitat. Mexico is unique among the three range countries in
that the Government of Mexico also has legislation regulating captive-
breeding operations.
Mexico
The Government of Mexico has a strict and comprehensive legal
framework to regulate the conservation and sustainable use of the
Morelet's crocodile in Mexico:
(1) Ley General de Equilibrio Ecol[oacute]gico y Protecci[oacute]n
al Ambiente (LGEEPA; General Ecological Equilibrium and Environmental
Protection Law)--This is the primary Mexican law for environmental
matters and is the principal legal instrument that regulates the
Morelet's crocodile in Mexico (CONABIO 2005, Annex 3, p. 1). Passed in
1988, this law applies to and integrates the three levels of government
within the context of natural resources: Federal, state, and municipal.
With regard to trade in wildlife species, including the Morelet's
crocodile, the LGEEPA contains the basis to regulate all activities,
including importation, exportation, seizures, sustainable use,
violations, fines, animal welfare, and legal possession. While forty-
five articles within the Mexican LGEEPA deal with environmental
contamination (CONABIO 2005, Annex 3, p. 1), we are not aware of any
specific provisions and their relevance to Morelet's crocodile.
(2) Ley General de Vida Silvestre (LGVS: General Wildlife Law)--
Passed in 2000, this law regulates the use, conservation, and
management of domestic wild fauna and flora and their habitat (CONABIO
2005, Annex 3, pp. 1-2). This law is based on the principle of
sustainable use. Any activity with regard to wild fauna and flora must
comply with certain requirements: The activity must be supported by an
approved management plan; the quantity to be harvested must be less
than natural recruitment (replacement); and the harvest must not have
negative impacts on the wild populations, their habitat, or biological
activities. With regard to the Morelet's crocodile, harvest of wild
populations is not permitted, and harvest under this law would only be
permitted for specimens obtained through closed-cycle, captive-breeding
operations which have programs that contribute to the development of
wild populations (CITES 2010a, p. 9).
According to the LGVS, alien specimens or populations are those
occurring outside their natural range (such as the Morelet's crocodiles
found on the Pacific coast of Mexico), including hybrids. Such
specimens or populations can only be managed in captivity, and with
prior approval. A management plan must be in place with established
security and contingency measures to avoid any negative effects on the
conservation of wild native specimens and populations or their habitat.
LGVS establishes management, control, and remediation measures for
individuals or populations considered harmful. Measures may consist of
capture/collection for the development of recovery, restocking and
reintroduction projects; for research or environmental education
activities; for relocation of specimens (subject to prior evaluation of
the destination habitat and condition of the individuals); for
elimination or eradication of individuals/populations; or of actions or
devices to keep the individuals away, disperse them, make access
difficult or reduce the damage they cause (CITES 2010a, p. 9).
(3) Programa de Conservaci[oacute]n de la Vida Silvestre y
Diversificaci[oacute]n Productiva en el Sector Rural (Program for
Wildlife Conservation and Productive Diversification of the Rural
Sector)--Launched in 2000, this program defines the conceptual,
strategic, legal and administrative framework that governs any
initiative for the conservation and use of wild species (CITES 2010a,
p. 8). The goal of this program is to establish incentives for private
and public initiatives that favor natural resources conservation, as
well as provide economic opportunities for private entities for the
sustainable use of these resources (CONABIO 2005, Annex 3, pp. 2-3).
Based on a biological evaluation of the species, this program promotes
the use and conservation of priority species of plants and animals,
including the establishment of wildlife production units and technical
advisory committees such as the COMACROM (Subcomit[eacute]
T[eacute]cnico Consultivo para la Conservaci[oacute]n, Manejo y
Aprovechamiento Sustentable de los Crocodylia en M[eacute]xico;
Technical Advisory Subcommittee for the Conservation, Management and
Sustainable Use of the Crocodilians in Mexico) in the case of the
Morelet's crocodile. Created by the Government of Mexico in 1999,
COMACROM includes scientists, technicians, NGOs, producers, authorities
and other
[[Page 23668]]
stakeholders. It participates in meetings of the IUCN Crocodile
Specialist Group (CSG) and contributes publications to the CSG (CITES
2010a, p. 8).
(4) Norma Oficial Mexicana NOM-059-SEMARNAT-2001--Passed in 2001,
this regulation provides legal protection to domestic endangered
species of fauna and flora and provides a mechanism to evaluate
extinction risks (CONABIO 2005, Annex 3, p. 3). The M[eacute]todo de
Evaluaci[oacute]n de Riesgo de Extinci[oacute]n de Especies Silvestres
de M[eacute]xico (MER; Method to Evaluate Wildlife Extinction Risks in
Mexico), one of the parts of this regulation, has four categories of
risk: Probably extinct in the wild, in peril, threatened, and subject
to special protection. The Morelet's crocodile is included in the
category ``subject to special protection.'' This regulation defines the
category ``subject to special protection'' as ``those species or
populations that might find themselves threatened by factors that
adversely affect their viability, thus determining the need to promote
conservation or recovery and the recovery and conservation of
associated species populations. (This category may include lower risk
categories of the IUCN classification).''
Although the Government of Mexico no longer classifies the
Morelet's crocodile as ``Endangered'' or ``Threatened,'' classification
as ``subject to special protection'' under Mexican Official Law NOM-
059-SEMARNAT-2001 allows legal protection at the national level (CITES
2010a, p. 9). Including the Morelet's crocodile in this category allows
the Government of Mexico to make sure it still meets the conservation
needs of important species from both a biologically and socio-economic
standpoint before the species can be considered as threatened or
endangered. The petitioners recommended keeping the Morelet's crocodile
in this category of ``subject to special protection'' to maintain
existing measures of conservation, technical supervision, monitoring
and enforcement in order to avoid the species' having a higher risk
category in the future (CONABIO 2005, p. 4 and Annex 2, p. 5).
(5) Norma Oficial Mexicana NOM-126-SEMARNAT-2000--Passed in 2000,
this regulation oversees scientific research and collection by
individual domestic and foreign researchers, as well as by institutions
(CONABIO 2005, Annex 3, p. 3). If a species is also regulated under
CITES, the appropriate permit or certificate must be obtained under
this regulation. Scientific research or collections involving the
Morelet's crocodile are regulated under these provisions.
(6) Sistema de Unidades de Manejo para la Conservaci[oacute]n de la
Vida Silvestre (SUMA; Wildlife Conservation Management and
Administration Unit System)--In 1997, the Government of Mexico
established a system for registering, supervising, and enforcing UMAs
(Unidad de Manejo y Administraci[oacute]n; Conservation Management and
Administrative Units) for intensive reproduction of economically
valuable natural resources, including captive farming of Morelet's
crocodiles (CONABIO 2005, Annex 3, pp. 3-5). The goal of this
regulation was to ensure that biodiversity conservation be considered
within the context of the production and socioeconomic needs of the
country. This system combined a broad range of entities or facilities
(``units'') under a single administrative program, including zoological
and botanical gardens, greenhouses, and animal breeding centers.
Through these units, the Government of Mexico promotes natural
resources uses that are responsible and planned. Extensive and
intensive captive-breeding units for the Morelet's crocodile are
covered under this system. In exchange for the right to harvest the
Morelet's crocodile under controlled conditions, closed-cycle captive-
breeding unit operators are required to develop and implement an
approved management plan for the site, as well as to conserve the
species' habitat and other species that use that habitat. Strict animal
husbandry practices and welfare considerations are required under these
plans.
Legal registration of approved UMAs requires proof of captive
production beyond the F2 generation (CITES 2010a, p. 9). For intensive
UMAs, such as captive-breeding operations in Mexico, the Government of
Mexico requires the UMAs to submit regular reports that must include
information on births and deaths, number and identification of traded
specimens, and management activities (CITES 2010a, p. 10).
The Government of Mexico uses three methods to mark live Morelet's
crocodiles registered with the Wildlife Division through the
corresponding inventories of UMAs. The first method is interdigital
staples on the feet. The second method is the traditional method of
cutting notches in the tail scales and is only used by some operations
(CITES 2010a, p. 10). These marks are registered with the Government of
Mexico. The third method is the Universal Tagging System required by
CITES for the export of skins (Resolution Conf. 11.12 (Rev. CoP15),
which consists of a plastic security tag with the UMA registration
number, the species code, a serial number, and the year of production
or harvest. Any application for a CITES export permit must include the
number of the authorized specimen based on the interdigital tag and the
skin's plastic security tag and is used to track skins and other
products (CITES 2010a, p. 10).
Approximately 50 UMAs have been registered for rearing Morelet's
crocodiles in Mexico since the 1980s, primarily for domestic commerce.
Nineteen of them are still actively managing the species and three were
registered with the CITES Secretariat when the species in Mexico was
included in Appendix I (CITES 2010a, p. 11). Only five of the nineteen
UMAs have the potential for annual commercial production of products
made from Morelet's crocodile (CITES 2010a, p. 24).
(7) Sistema Nacional de [Aacute]reas Naturales Protegidas (SINANP;
National System of Protected Natural Areas)--Passed in 2000, this
system is made up of parcels identified as Protected Natural Areas
(CONABIO 2005, Annex 3, p. 5). These Protected Natural Areas are
created by Presidential decree and the activities on them are regulated
under the LGEEPA, which requires that the Protected Natural Areas
receive special protection for conservation, restoration and
development activities. The National Commission of Natural Protected
Areas (CONANP), a decentralized organ of the Government of Mexico's
Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources (SEMARNAT), currently
administers 173 federal natural areas representing more than 62,396,392
ac (25,250,963 ha). These natural areas are categorized as: Biosphere
Reserves, National Parks, Natural Monuments, Areas of Natural Resource
Protection, Areas of Protection of Flora and Fauna, and Sanctuaries.
These areas are protected under Mexican law because they contain
key or representative ecosystems or species, or ecosystems or species
that are at risk and require strict control. Many ecosystems or
species, including the Morelet's crocodile, are protected under this
system. According to the Government of Mexico, SINANP includes at least
12 protected areas occupied by Morelet's crocodile, covering an
estimated 13 percent of the species' geographic range (CONABIO 2005, p.
30).
(8) C[oacute]digo Penal Federal (Federal Penal Code)--The code
contains a special section for environmental crimes (CONABIO 2005,
Annex 3, pp. 5-6). These penalties apply to those who commit crimes
against plants or
[[Page 23669]]
animals, as well as to individuals who illegally use or commercialize
regulated species without authorization. These penalties apply to
crimes involving the Morelet's crocodiles.
In order to implement and enforce the laws and regulations
mentioned above, SEMARNAT created the office of the Procuradur[iacute]a
Federal de Protecci[oacute]n al Ambiente (PROFEPA; Federal Prosecutor
for Environmental Protection) and the Programa para la
Inspecci[oacute]n y Vigilancia en Puertos, Aeropuertos y Fronteras
(Ports, Airports, and Borders Inspection and Enforcement Program)
(CONABIO 2005, Annex 3, p. 6). Under this program, imports and exports
for key products regulated by SEMARNAT are inspected at 65 points of
entry and exit to prevent laundering. Morelet's crocodile products are
regulated under this program. PROFEPA implements the Environmental
Inspection Program at ports, airports, and borders, and the Wildlife
Inspection Program, monitoring all stages of the use of wild species
and ensuring their protection. Inspection and enforcement programs make
these Mexican laws and regulations more effective, especially at
airports and border ports of entry and exit. Specific actions include
the verification of cross-border movements in compliance with CITES and
other international agreements in coordination with customs
authorities; inspection of areas of wildlife harvest, stockpiling,
distribution, and sale; surveillance of areas of wildlife distribution
and harvest; and special operations in areas of wildlife harvest,
stockpiling, distribution and sale, in coordination with public law
enforcement and judicial authorities (Govt. of Mexico 2010, p. 11).
Mexico has implemented several programs to prevent and combat illegal
harvest, including the System of Wildlife Management Units (SUMA) which
is based on six key elements: (1) Registration with the Wildlife
Division (DGVS Direcci[oacute]n General de Vida Silvestre- SEMARNAT,
CITES Management Authority); (2) proper habitat management; (3)
monitoring of wild populations of the species harvested; (4) controlled
harvest (including periodic reports and inventories on each UMA); (5)
management plan approved and registered with the Wildlife Division; and
(6) certificate of production and market/tagging methods. SEMARNAT
conducts random inspections of UMAs and, if any issues are detected in
the management plan, carries out population studies, including sampling
activities and species inventories and produces periodic reports on
these findings (CITES 2010a, p. 10).
We do not have any information on whether the Mexican legal
framework specifically authorizes subsistence hunting or cultural use
of the Morelet's crocodile, or on the current level of enforcement, or
whether the enforcement is considered adequate.
Belize
The Government of Belize also has a legal framework that regulates
the conservation and sustainable use of the Morelet's crocodile, along
with other species of birds, mammals, and reptiles (collectively known
as Scheduled species). In general terms, the Wildlife Protection Act
prohibits illegal harvest and export in Belize (Government of Belize
2000 p. 7-9). The Forestry Department, within the Ministry of Natural
Resources and the Environment, is the relevant government agency with
respect to the Morelet's crocodile. Under this legislation, the Game
Warden controls hunting of these species. Certain activities are
prohibited and a license is required. For example, hunting of the
Morelet's crocodile is prohibited. Importation and exportation of
wildlife is subject to strict protocols and provisions of the Wildlife
Protection Act and requires a permit. Hunting of certain species for
scientific or educational purposes also requires a permit. The
legislation also identifies offenses and penalties.
In addition to the Wildlife Protection Act, the Government of
Belize is in the process of developing and implementing a National List
of Critical Species (Meerman 2005a, pp. 1-8; Meerman 2005b, p. 38).
This list is based, in part, on the procedures used by IUCN Red List of
Threatened Animals (see IUCN 2001, version 3.1, 35 pp.). Within the
context of the Belize Protected Areas Policy and System Plan, this list
will serve as a basis for the Belize Red Data List. According to the
2005 list (Meerman 2005a, p. 8), the Morelet's crocodile is categorized
as ``CD'' (Conservation Dependant) in Belize due to the following
factors: small range, hunted, economic importance, charismatic species
drawing national and international attention, and persecuted as
perceived pest. Under the 2005 list, Conservation Dependent species are
taxa that are the focus of a continuing taxon-specific or habitat-
specific conservation program for the taxon in question, the cessation
of which would result in the taxon qualifying for one of the threatened
categories on the list within five years (Meerman 2005a, p. 3).
These laws and regulations provide legal protection to the
Morelet's crocodile in Belize. We have no information on whether the
Wildlife Protection Act is sufficiently enforced. The CITES Legislation
Project (CITES 2010e) concluded that Belize's national legislation does
not meet any of the requirements for implementing CITES. However,
Belize has submitted a plan and draft legislation to CITES as of March
2010, but has not officially enacted the legislation. In spite of this
assessment by CITES, trade data seem to indicate the threat of
unregulated trade from Belize is minimal. However, as part of this
rule, we are requesting from the public any information pertaining to
Belize's efforts to fully enact legislation and ensure their compliance
with CITES.
Guatemala
The Government of Guatemala also has a legal framework that
regulates the conservation and sustainable use of natural resources,
including the Morelet's crocodile (IIA URL FCAA IARNA 2003, pp. 67-69;
IARNA URL IIA 2006, pp. 104-107; Rep[uacute]blica de Guatemala 2007,
pp. 3-4 and 31). In general terms, and based on our review of other
materials, natural resources management is under the jurisdiction of
the Ministerio de Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (Ministry of the
Environment and Natural Resources; USAID 2002, pp. 44-45;
Rep[uacute]blica de Guatemala 2007, pp. 3-4 and 9). The main
legislation in this regard is Decreto N[uacute]mero 4-89 (Ley de
[Aacute]reas Protegidas, Gobierno de Guatemala 1989, pp. 1-24; Birner
et al. 2005, p. 290; Law of Protected Areas and Amendments/Revisions).
This decree established the Comisi[oacute]n Nacional de [Aacute]reas
Protegidas (CONAP; National Commission on Protected Areas). CONAP has
been tasked to run the Sistema Nacional de [Aacute]reas Protegidas
(SIGAP; National System of Protected Areas; IARNA URL IIA 2006, pp.
104-107). In Guatemala, the Morelet's crocodile is included in the
Endangered Species List (Resolution No. ALC/032-99 of CONAP) in
Category 2, ``Seriously Endangered,'' which includes species that are
endangered because of habitat loss, trade, the very small size of their
populations and/or endemism with limited distribution (CITES 2010a, p.
9).
In the past, threats to the Morelet's crocodile and its habitat in
Guatemala, compounded with the lack of funding and personnel, made it
difficult for the Government of Guatemala to adequately enforce these
laws and regulations. Ongoing conservation actions were often
overwhelmed by slow economic
[[Page 23670]]
development, high levels of poverty, unequal land distribution, a
highly segmented society, and the effects of more than three decades of
civil war (Birner et al. 2005, pp. 285, 292). In 2003, Laguna del Tigre
National Park was considered by ParkWatch as critically threatened due
to land grabs, the presence of human settlements, expanding agriculture
and cattle ranching, poaching, forest fires, the oil industry, and an
almost complete lack of institutional control over the area (ParksWatch
2003, pp. 1, 11). However, in 2004 ParksWatch stated that the staff at
Laguna del Tigre had doubled in size since their 2003 report
(ParksWatch 2004, p, 30.) Seventy-three park rangers, 10 archeological
site guards and 96 Army personnel were hired to staff the park and
since the increase in staffing, both the park and the biotope are
``constantly patrolled.'' In addition, the Wildlife Conservation
Society and U.S. AID continued its ``Biodiversity Conservation at a
Landscape Scale'' program and has provided a comprehensive plan with
specific goals to preserve and protect wildlife in the MBR in Guatemala
through conserving wildlife species and their habitat, while
maintaining the economic productivity of renewable natural resources.
They are fulfilling these goals by establishing specific parameters.
Namely, ``to develop adaptive and participatory strategy to reduce
threats to wildlife in the MBR; to develop, implement and monitor
sustainable mechanisms to reduce threats to wildlife and ecosystems
across the MBR landscape; to learn and teach best management practices
for the conservation of the MBR and beyond; and to guide, design and
test wildlife-focused planning'' (WCS 2008, page 3). For the past nine
years the WCS has been conducting overflights of Laguna del Tigre Park
with the Guatemalan National Park Service and LightHawk (a volunteer-
based environmental aviation organization) and has used that
information to identify illegal colonization, resulting in successfully
removing illegal squatters (80+ families) from the area. In addition,
overflights revealed marijuana clearings on the eastern-most port of
Mirador-R[iacute]o Azule National Park in 2007. WCS overflights helped
to monitor fires, locate illegal settlements and notify the national
and provincial government as well as the national media of illegal
activities. As a result, the presence of fires in Laguna del Tigre
National Park has been reduced by 90%. In addition, WCS has taken an
active role in educating locals and concessionaires on best management
practices for sustainable use of forest products. (WCS 10 year report,
no date given, page 6).
In August 2010, the president of Guatemala announced that he is
deploying 250 soldiers to recover fully all the protected zones of El
Pet[eacute]n in the Laguna del Tigre section of the MBR. This ``Green
Battalion'' is being deployed specifically to protect the Laguna del
Tigre National Park and work jointly with the National Civil Police and
the Attorney General's Office to combat drug trafficking and the
illegal harvest of natural resources and archaeological sites of that
region of the MBR (Latin American Herald Tribune, December 6, 2010).
The Government of Guatemala is also participating in the Tri-
national Strategy (see the Post-Delisting Monitoring section below) for
Morelet's crocodile, wherein specific actions directed toward the
Morelet's crocodile are defined. Conservation actions in Guatemala are
being developed and implemented within the context of the Convention on
Biological Diversity and the National Biodiversity Strategy and Action
Plan (Birner et al. 2005, p. 285). Many outstanding accomplishments
have been achieved in Guatemala in terms of biodiversity conservation
(IARNA URL IIA 2006, p. 22) and the Guatemalan government seems
committed to ensuring that environmental management and enforcement
efforts continue.
Summary of Factor D
Based on all three range countries being Parties to CITES, as well
as having protected-species and protected-areas legislation, and
implementing this legislation, and enforcing relevant laws, the current
regulatory mechanisms appear to be adequate to conserve the Morelet's
crocodile in the majority of the species' range. As per the CITES
National Legislation Project (CITES 2010e), both Guatemala and Mexico's
legislation meet all the requirements for implementing CITES. Belize's
national legislation was considered not to meet any of the requirements
for implementing CITES. However, Belize has submitted a plan and draft
legislation to CITES as of March 2010, but has not officially enacted
the legislation. Per decisions made during CoP15, the CITES protections
for Morelet's crocodiles in Guatemala will remain unchanged. They will
remain protected as an Appendix-I species, with those CITES trade
restrictions remaining in place.
Together, Mexico and Belize contain the majority of wild
individuals (87 percent) and the estimated potentially suitable habitat
(81 percent) throughout the species' range. We anticipate that these
conditions will remain essentially the same, both domestically and
internationally in the sense of more-effective regulatory mechanisms,
in the foreseeable future (e.g., CITES). However, we did not solely
rely on these future measures in finding the species is no longer
threatened or endangered.
Existing regulatory mechanisms, including CITES and domestic
prohibitions on harvest of wild Morelet's crocodiles, have played a
vital role in resurgence of Morelet's crocodiles over the last 40
years. While some trade restrictions could be lifted in the future,
particularly to allow increased trade in captive-bred specimens now
that Morelet's crocodiles in Mexico and Belize have been moved to CITES
Appendix II with a zero export quota for wild specimens traded for
commercial purposes, we believe such lifting of restrictions would pose
little risk to the species. All three range countries restrict the use
of wild specimens and the Government of Mexico has institutions with
proven track records to administer and enforce controls on captive-
breeding operations and laundering of illegal specimens. Should the
zero export quota for wild specimens traded for commercial purposes be
lifted, it may create greater enforcement challenges in all three range
countries in the foreseeable future because the taking of wild
Morelet's crocodiles could be authorized. If it does, the requirements
of CITES Appendix II will apply. The exporting country will be required
to determine that the export is not detrimental to the survival of the
species in the wild and specimens are legally acquired prior to issuing
a permit authorizing the export. However, a change to the annotation
would require approval of two-thirds of the Parties voting at a CoP and
cannot be done unilaterally by any of the range countries. Therefore,
we do not have any indication that CITES and the regulatory mechanisms
of the range countries will be inadequate to continue to protect the
species in the wild if this proposed delisting rule under the Act is
finalized, or if ranching is authorized in the future.
The reproduction and survival rates of wild Morelet's crocodiles
are currently robust. Populations remain stable throughout most of
their range, and have expanded their range in some areas. In
conclusion, we find that, taken together, the currently existing
protections described above are adequate, and they will remain adequate
to protect the Morelet's crocodile and its
[[Page 23671]]
habitat in the majority of its range now and within the foreseeable
future.
Factor E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting the Continued
Existence of the Species
Human-Crocodile Conflicts
The Morelet's crocodile is known to attack humans. While data about
these conflicts are limited, anecdotal reports suggest that these
conflicts are widespread and ongoing. In a well-documented attack in
Belize in August 2001, a Morelet's crocodile attacked a 13-year-old
male and caused him to drown in the Belama area of Belize City (Finger
et al. 2002, p. 198).
More often, human-crocodile conflicts involving the Morelet's
crocodile are more benign. In Mexico, for example, the Crocodile Museum
(Chiapas State; about 80 cases per year) assists local officials
through the capture, rescue, and relocation of local crocodilians (all
three species, including the Morelet's crocodile) that are considered
potentially dangerous or, because of their location (close proximity to
human activities), they might be killed by local inhabitants
(Dom[iacute]nguez-Laso 2008, p. 5). Abercrombie et al. (1982, p. 19)
reported that the Morelet's crocodile was generally feared in Belize.
Finger et al. (2002, p. 199) indicated that development related to
human occupation (such as residential areas and infrastructure) in
Morelet's crocodile habitat around Belize City was generating
increasing numbers of human-crocodile conflicts. Windsor et al. (2002,
p. 418) also noted that the practice of feeding the Morelet's crocodile
by residents and tourists was becoming more common and was also
generating increasing numbers of human-crocodile conflicts in Belize.
According to Platt and Thorbjarnarson (2000a, p. 27), large Morelet's
crocodiles, despite legal protections, are still perceived as threats
to humans and livestock, and are occasionally killed near residential
areas in Belize. While educational programs are needed for local
residents and visitors to deter this activity, it may also be necessary
to develop a problem crocodile removal program to resolve these
conflicts (Windsor et al. 2002, p. 418). No information was available
about human-crocodile conflicts in Guatemala. Although human-crocodile
conflicts are affecting local populations of Morelet's crocodiles, and
this is likely to continue in the foreseeable future, we do not have
any evidence that it is currently or anticipated to be a threat to the
species as a whole.
Environmental Contaminants
Environmental contaminants are known to have negative impacts on
terrestrial vertebrates (Smith et al. 2007, p. 41), including
crocodilians (Ross 1998, p. 3). The primary routes through which
terrestrial reptiles, including the Morelet's crocodile, are exposed to
environmental pollutants are ingestion of contaminated prey, dermal
contact, maternal transfer, and accumulation of chemicals into eggs
from contaminated nesting media (Smith et al. 2007, p. 48). With regard
to the Morelet's crocodile, organochlorine contaminants have been
detected in the scutes (external scales) (DeBusk 2001, pp. viii-ix) and
the chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) of hatched Morelet's crocodile eggs
(Pepper et al. 2004, pp. 493 and 495), as well as in whole contents
analysis of nonviable crocodile eggs (Wu et al. 2000a, p. 6,416; 2000b,
p. 671; Wu et al. 2006, 151).
The most common organochlorine found in studies of Morelet's
crocodile in Belize was DDE (dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene),
detected in 100 percent of eggs collected by Wu et al. (2000b, p. 673)
and 69 percent of CAMs sampled by Pepper et al. (2004, p. 495).
Organochlorines have also been detected at additional sites throughout
coastal Belize and the interior highlands (Meerman 2006a, p. 26; Wu et
al. 2006, p. 153). Although exposure to organochlorines has been linked
to adverse effects on population health of the American alligator in
Florida (several studies cited by Wu et al. 2000b, p. 676), no
population-level effects were detected in Belize (McMurry and Anderson
2000, pp. 1 and 4; Wu et al. 2000b, p. 676). Rainwater (2003, pp. xii
and 38), however, later suggested that some of the sites that had been
chosen for comparative purposes in fact had similar contaminant
profiles and that some study results suggesting no significant
differences between sites may be equivocal.
Vitellogenin induction (development of the egg yolk) in the
Morelet's crocodile, suggesting endocrine disruption due to
environmental contamination when exhibited by males, recently has
become a research topic in Belize. Reproductive impairment due to
endocrine-disrupting contaminants has been demonstrated elsewhere in
crocodilians and is suspected to occur in Belize due to known
contaminant levels (Selcer et al. 2006, p. 50; Rainwater et al. 2008,
p. 101). Initial results have not documented contaminant-induced
vitellogenin in blood plasma in the Morelet's crocodile, but this
condition may occur in the wild in Belize; studies are ongoing (Selcer
et al. 2006, p. 50; Rainwater et al. 2008, pp. 101 and 106-107).
Mercury was detected in nonviable Morelet's crocodile eggs
collected from eight nests across three localities in northern Belize
in 1995 (Rainwater et al. 2002a, p. 320; Rainwater et al. 2002b, p.
190). While mercury was detected in all eggs sampled, the mean
concentration per egg was among the lowest reported values for any
crocodile species. No overt signs of mercury toxicity or evidence of a
population decline was noted for Morelet's crocodiles at the site
(Rainwater et al. 2002a, pp. 321-322).
All samples for studies of organochlorine and mercury contaminants
cited above came from Belize, and we are not aware of any similar
investigations elsewhere in the Morelet's crocodile range (Mexico or
Guatemala). Since reproduction and survival rates of Morelet's
crocodiles are currently robust, we do not have any reason to believe
that environmental contaminants are currently likely to cause the
Morelet's crocodile to become in danger of extinction within the
foreseeable future.
Populations currently remain stable throughout most of the species
range, and have even expanded their range in some areas. This provides
empirical evidence of the species' intrinsic resilience and
adaptability. There is no evidence that environmental contaminants
currently pose a threat to the species. Although environmental
contaminants may represent a potential threat, especially given the
potential for long-term bioaccumulation of contaminants during the
species' long reproductive life, given this species' resiliency we do
not have any data to indicate that it is likely to become a threat in
the foreseeable future.
Manmade factors that could affect the continued existence of the
Morelet's crocodile, according to CONABIO (CONABIO 2005, p. 32), were
the construction and operation of oil extraction infrastructure and
thermoelectric plants. The operation of chemical and manufacturing
industries could also become a threat if potentially toxic residual
materials are disposed of improperly. These activities, however, are
highly regulated by the Ley General de Equilibrio Ecol[oacute]gico y
Protecci[oacute]n al Ambiente (LGEEPA); General Ecological Equilibrium
and Environmental Protection Law) and the Attorney General for the
Protection of the Environment (PROFEPA). Under LGEEPA, every new
project has to fulfill strict protocols for the assessment of
[[Page 23672]]
environmental impacts before it can be approved.
As discussed above in the Factor D., Inadequacy of Existing
Regulatory Mechanisms, section, the Government of Guatemala opposed the
Government of Mexico's 2010 CITES proposal based, in part, on threats
to the species from pollution in Guatemala (CITES 2010a, p. 6).
However, we do not have any information or data on the extent of the
impact, if any, that pollution may have on the Morelet's crocodile in
Guatemala.
Genetic Diversity and Integrity
At least three factors have been identified as potential threats
with respect to the Morelet's crocodile: (1) Genetic heterogeneity; (2)
hybridization; and (3) male-biased sex ratios.
Genetic Heterogeneity
Evaluation of nine microsatellite loci, highly repetitive DNA
sequences, from Morelet's crocodiles in Belize suggested a high degree
of genetic heterogeneity within local populations, relatively high
levels of migration among populations, and no evidence of a major
genetic bottleneck due to population depletion in the mid-1900s (Dever
and Densmore 2001, pp. 543-544; Dever et al. 2002, p. 1084). Population
bottlenecks are a period when a species population drops to such a low
level that many genetic lineages become extinct and genetic variation
is reduced to a few individuals, resulting in genetic homogeneity. If
severe, it can lead to inbreeding. Endangered species that do not
become extinct might expand their populations, but with limited genetic
diversity, they may not be able to adapt to changing environmental
conditions. The high degree of genetic heterogeneity found in Morelet's
crocodiles was attributed to frequent migration by individuals among
the several adjacent Morelet's crocodile populations. Ray et al. (2004,
pp. 455-457) found low levels of genetic diversity in the mitochondrial
control region of Morelet's crocodiles at 10 sites in northern Belize
and at one site each in northern Guatemala and Mexico, but these
results were inconsistent with a population bottleneck and may be
typical of crocodilian populations. Other studies of the repetitive
sequences in the mitochondrial control are ongoing in the Morelet's
crocodile and may be a useful tool for researchers investigating
population dynamics of this species (Ray and Densmore 2003, p. 1012).
Hybridization
Data suggest that some hybridization between Morelet's crocodiles
and American crocodiles has always periodically occurred in the wild in
areas where both species are sympatric, and that the hybridization is
more frequent than previously believed (Cede[ntilde]o-V[aacute]zquez et
al., 2008, p. 666-667; Rodr[iacute]guez et al., 2008, p. 678). While
the first hybrids were identified in coastal areas of eastern Belize,
later studies also located hybrids in Mexico along the eastern and
northern coasts of the Yucatan Peninsula (Ray et al. 2004, p. 449;
Cede[ntilde]o-V[aacute]zquez et al. 2008, p. 661; Rodr[iacute]guez et
al. 2008, p. 674).
Hybridization involves several key issues. First, hybridization
appears to be bidirectional (males of one species with females of the
other species, and vice versa). In addition, hybrids (confirmed by
laboratory tests) do not always exhibit physical characteristics (such
as body size, shape, or coloration) that are a mixture of both species,
and they are not always readily identifiable as such in the hand.
Furthermore, F2 hybrids and backcrosses of hybrids to nonhybrids have
been reported. These circumstances hinder the field identification of
potential hybrids.
Ray et al. (2004, p. 459) stated that further assessment of genetic
contact between these two species should precede reclassification of
Morelet's under CITES, presumably because of uncertainty regarding
numbers of genetically pure individuals in Belize. While populations of
both the Morelet's crocodile and the American crocodile suffered from
the hunting pressures of the 1950s and 1960s, the American crocodile
has been slower to recover. Indeed, Ray et al. (2004, p. 459) noted
that hybridization likely represents a greater danger to the genetic
integrity of the larger but rarer American crocodile than to the
Morelet's crocodile in Belize. The Service believes this concern bears
additional investigation, but is not sufficient to warrant continued
endangered or threatened status under the Act for the Morelet's
crocodile.
One hypothetical concern about hybridization is that
supplementation of wild Morelet's crocodile populations in Mexico with
captive-bred crocodiles might affect the genetic integrity of wild
populations. While analyses of captive-bred populations have not been
published, differences in the nature and extent of genetic variation of
these populations compared with wild populations might be expected. It
is not clear if these differences, if they occur, would be significant
or important from a conservation standpoint. Furthermore, this issue
may be a moot point. Although agreements between captive-breeding
operations and the Government of Mexico require breeders to make
available up to 10 percent of their offspring for reintroduction to the
wild, or as breeding stock for other crocodile farms in the country, no
releases of captive-bred stock have occurred (Mexico 2006, p. 28). No
releases have occurred because the current total population sizes of
wild populations in Mexico, according to Mexican officials, are
sufficiently large to render releases unnecessary (CITES 2008, p. 23).
However, accidental escapes and deliberate releases of the Morelet's
crocodile from captive rearing-units outside of the species' natural
range have occurred in wetland habitats along the Pacific coast of
Mexico. These wetland habitats are already occupied by the naturally
occurring American crocodile, and interactions between the two
crocodile species are likely (Ross 1995, p. 14). These escapes and
releases of Morelet's crocodiles may pose risks to the genetic
integrity of naturally occurring American crocodiles, but probably not
to Morelet's crocodiles. The Government of Mexico is making efforts to
diagnose potential threats to the native American crocodile caused by
hybridization with the introduced Morelet's crocodile on the Pacific
coast of Mexico. The goal of these efforts is to generate morphological
and molecular identification materials and study the population
dynamics of the American crocodile. It will include monitoring and
harvest of Morelet's crocodiles and hybrids for scientific research
(CITES 2010a, p. 6).
Although hybridization between American and Morelet's crocodiles
continues to affect negatively some local populations of the Morelet's
crocodile, the impacts appear to be very small. We have no evidence
that hybridization is currently or anticipated to affect significantly
the Morelet's crocodile throughout its range.
Male-biased Sex Ratios
Another potential risk from supplementation of wild populations
with captive-bred Morelet's crocodiles is that of skewed sex ratios
(greater proportion of males in captive populations). Incubation
temperature affects the sex ratio of crocodilian species differently
(Escobedo-Galv[aacute]n 2006, p. 131). Like many crocodilian species,
the Morelet's crocodile exhibits temperature-dependent sex
determination. Incubation temperatures greater than about 93 [deg]F (34
[deg]C) or less than 90 [deg]F (32 [deg]C) produce females, while
temperatures between 90-93 [deg]F (32-34 [deg]C) generally produce
males (Escobedo-Galv[aacute]n 2006, p. 133; Escobedo-Galv[aacute]n et
al. 2008, p. 2). Some wild populations of the Morelet's
[[Page 23673]]
crocodile in Belize also have greater proportions of males than females
(5.3 males per 1 female), but seem to be healthy (Platt and
Thorbjarnarson 2000a, p. 23). We do not have any evidence that skewed
sex ratios currently pose a threat to the species. Although skewed sex
ratios may represent a potential threat, especially given the potential
for skewed sex ratios as a result of climate change, this information
is not sufficient to be able to judge the timing of this potential,
i.e., that it will manifest within the foreseeable future. Therefore,
we do not have any information to indicate that it is likely to become
a threat in the foreseeable future.
Natural Weather Events
Natural weather can affect the Morelet's crocodile. Hurricanes or
heavy seasonal rains, for example, may pose risks to Morelet's
crocodile eggs located in nests along water channels. Flooding
associated with hurricanes or rains, however, may also provide
conservation benefits to the Morelet's crocodile by facilitating
movements of individuals across the landscape, thereby promoting gene
flow (CITES 2010a, p. 6). Furthermore, extended dry periods can result
in the temporary disappearance of ephemeral water bodies, with
concomitant increases in Morelet's crocodile densities and
intraspecific interactions at nearby sites that still have water. There
is no evidence, however, that natural weather conditions have been a
problem for the Morelet's crocodile, which has adapted to these weather
conditions. Therefore, we have no reason to believe that natural
weather events are currently likely to cause the Morelet's crocodile to
become in danger of extinction within the foreseeable future throughout
all or any significant portion of its range.
Climate Change
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concluded that
warming of the climate system is unequivocal (IPCC 2007a, p. 30) and
sea levels are expected to rise well into the foreseeable future (Bates
et al. 2008, pp. 20 and 28-29). Numerous long-term changes have been
observed including changes in arctic temperatures and ice, widespread
changes in precipitation amounts, ocean salinity, wind patterns, and
aspects of extreme weather including droughts, heavy precipitation,
heat waves, and the intensity of tropical cyclones (IPCC 2007b, p. 7).
Based on scenarios that do not assume explicit climate policies to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions, global average temperature is
projected to rise by 2-11.5 [deg]F by the end of this century (relative
to the 1980-1999 time period) (USGCRP 2011, p. 9). Species that are
dependent on specialized habitat types, limited in distribution, or
occurring already at the extreme periphery of their range will be most
susceptible to the impacts of climate change. While continued change is
certain, the magnitude and rate of change is unknown in many cases.
The information currently available on the effects of climate
change and the available climate change models do not make sufficiently
accurate estimates of location and magnitude of effects at a scale
small enough to apply to the range of the Morelet's crocodile. We do
not have any information on the projected impacts to the Morelet's
crocodile because of climate change, particularly the potential impacts
of shifting global temperatures on sex ratios. The study by Escobedo-
Galv[aacute]n et al. 2008 regarding climate change's projected impacts
to the American crocodile illustrates the possible impacts to the
Morelet's crocodile. This study, entitled ``Potential effects of
climate change on the sex ratio of crocodiles'' (Escobedo-Galv[aacute]n
et al. 2008), was presented at the February 2008 International Science
Symposium: Climate Change and Diversity in the Americas. The study
selected several areas in Florida and western Mexico that contain
American crocodiles, and used the current environmental information for
these areas to predict how increased temperatures would affect the
potential geographical distribution and sex ratios of the species in
Florida, the Caribbean, and Central America.
Based on a preliminary analysis (focusing on the geographic
distribution and sex ratios of American crocodiles in the present,
2020, and 2050), Escobedo-Galv[aacute]n et al. (2008) postulated that
the geographic distribution and sex ratios of American crocodile
populations in different parts of the range would change in response to
temperature and sea level parameters. Crocodiles are ectothermic,
relying on external sources of heat to regulate their body temperature.
They control their body temperature by basking in the sun, or moving to
areas with warmer or cooler air or water temperatures. Optimal growth
in crocodilians has been found to occur around 88 [deg]F (31 [deg]C),
with appetites and effective digestion diminishing below 84 [deg]F (29
[deg]C) (Brien et al. 2007, p. 15). As the global temperatures
increase, areas that are currently too cool to support American and
Morelet's crocodiles may become warm enough to support them in the
future. According to Escobedo-Galv[aacute]n et al. 2008, increased
global temperatures and sea level would benefit the American crocodile
by significantly increasing its potential habitat and distribution.
Their study predicted that the current potential distribution for the
American crocodile would expand 69 percent in 2020 and 207 percent in
2050. This is an 81 percent increase in potential distribution from
2020 to 2050 (Escobedo-Galv[aacute]n et al. 2008, presentation, pp. 9-
10).
The study also predicted that increased global temperatures would
have a significantly negative impact on the sex ratios of the American
crocodile. Like many other crocodilian species, both the American and
the Morelet's crocodile exhibit temperature-dependent sex
determination. The macroclimate (global climate) affects the
mesoclimate (the temperature outside of a crocodile's nest), which in
turn affects the microclimate (the temperature inside of a crocodile's
nest), which in turn determines the proportion of males to females
produced in the nest (Escobedo-Galv[aacute]n et al. 2008, presentation
p. 4). Incubation temperatures greater than about 93 [deg]F (34 [deg]C)
or less than 90 [deg]F (32 [deg]C) produce females while temperatures
between 90-93 [deg]F (32-34 [deg]C) generally produce males (Escobedo-
Galv[aacute]n 2006, p. 133; Escobedo-Galv[aacute]n et al. 2008, p. 2).
Thus, the production of males is entirely dependent upon a sustained
incubation temperature range of only three degrees. Incubation
temperatures greater than 97 [deg]F (36 [deg]C) are at the upper end of
the tolerance range for reptile eggs and result in death of embryos and
stress to the surviving hatchlings (Escobedo-Galv[aacute]n et al. 2008,
presentation, p. 2).
According to Escobedo-Galv[aacute]n et al. 2008, the current sex
ratio of the American crocodile favors females (based on potential
species distribution): 75 percent of the potential species distribution
has fewer males than females, 15 percent has an equal number of males
and females, and 10 percent has more males than females. The study
predicted that by 2020, the sex ratio is expected to shift in favor of
males due to increases in nest temperature as a result of climate
change: 24 percent of the potential species distribution will have
fewer males than females, 16 percent will have an equal number of males
and females, and 60 percent will have more males than females
(Escobedo-Galv[aacute]n et al. 2008, presentation, pp. 11-12). Under
this scenario, the number of females produced will be reduced
significantly by 2020, which in turn will reduce the overall total eggs
laid in each
[[Page 23674]]
breeding season. Of the eggs laid, more are likely to become males,
which in turn would further reduce the number of breeding females
produced over time. Escobedo-Galv[aacute]n et al. 2008 predicted that
by 2050, American crocodiles would become extinct in Florida, the
Caribbean, or Central America (Escobedo-Galv[aacute]n et al. 2008,
presentation p. 13).
Although American crocodiles are found primarily in saline and
brackish environments, they can also be found in abandoned coastal
canals and borrow pits and may range inland into freshwater
environments preferred by Morelet's crocodiles such as lakes and lower
reaches of large rivers. American crocodiles are extremely adaptable in
their nesting strategy, and while they mainly nest in holes,
individuals will readily build mound nests if suitable materials are
available. American and Morelet's crocodiles have been known to lay
eggs within the same nest mound as conspecifics, suggesting a more
gregarious and tolerant demeanor (Brien et al. 2007, pp. 17-18). Sea
level rise would significantly expand the amount of inland saline and
brackish coastal habitat available to the American crocodile, and
correspondingly decrease the amount of inland freshwater habitat
available to the Morelet's crocodile. The area of available land would
also be reduced as a result of sea level rise, further increasing
competition between the two species for terrestrial activities such as
nesting and basking on the shoreline.
The study by Escobedo-Galv[aacute]n et al. 2008 did not provide any
information or data on the effects of climate change on the Morelet's
crocodile. Although the American crocodile and Morelet's crocodile have
overlapping ranges, similar life-history requirements, and may lay eggs
in the same nest, we do not have any evidence that climate change
currently poses a threat to the Morelet's crocodile. Although climate
change may represent a potential threat to the Morelet's crocodile,
especially given the crocodilian requirement for temperature dependent
sex determination, we do not have any data to indicate that it is
likely to become a threat in the foreseeable future. We are seeking
information and data on the effects of climate change on the Morelet's
crocodile as part of this proposed rule.
Other Potential Concerns
Other information obtained by the Service, however, suggests that
the construction and operation of dams to generate electricity could be
a conservation threat to the Morelet's crocodile (for example, the
Chalillo hydroelectric dam in Belize on the Macal River, an area
inhabited by the Morelet's crocodile (Environment News Service 2004, p.
1; Hogan 2008, p. 2). At the national level, six main environmental
issues affecting natural resources have been identified for Belize: (1)
High deforestation rate; (2) solid and liquid waste management issues;
(3) rising poverty rates; (4) rapid coastal development; (5)
ineffective institution and legal frameworks; and (6) oil discovery
(Young 2008, p. 18).
We do not have any information to indicate the extent of the
impact, if any, that these environmental issues may have on the
Morelet's crocodile in Belize. There is no evidence that these
environmental issues in Belize currently pose a threat to the species.
Although they may represent a potential threat, we do not have any data
to indicate that it is likely to become a threat in the foreseeable
future
There has been some information indicating that fishing nets (for
fish and turtles) and death by drowning as threats to the Morelet's
crocodile in Guatemala, but we do not have information regarding
specific rates of injury or mortality (CITES 2008a, page). CONABIO
(2005, p. 27) suggested that the number of crocodiles accidentally
captured in nets in Guatemala was low, but the basis for this claim was
unclear. Platt and Thorbjarnarson (2000b, p. 27) noted that ``a limited
number of crocodiles'' drown in fish and turtle nets in northern Belize
each year. There is no evidence that fishing currently poses a threat
to the species. Although it may represent a potential threat, we do not
have any data to indicate that it is likely to become a threat in the
foreseeable future.
Summary of Factor E
Few, if any, natural or manmade factors are anticipated to affect
the continued existence of the Morelet's crocodile. While natural
factors such as hurricanes and extended dry seasons (CONABIO 2005, p.
32) may affect the species, we believe that the species has evolved
with these kinds of events and they do not pose a threat to the
species.
Several phenomena are categorized here as other natural or manmade
factors that were considered as potentially affecting the conservation
status of the Morelet's crocodile in the foreseeable future. Our
knowledge about these factors is incomplete and uneven among the three
range countries. Environmental contaminants, especially DDE and
mercury, have been widely reported for Belize. To date, however, there
is no evidence of negative effects to the Morelet's crocodile due to
exposure to organochlorines even though these contaminants have been
linked to documented adverse effects on population health in a similar
species, the American alligator.
Vitellogenin induction in males, suggesting endocrine disruption
due to environmental contamination, is predicted in Belize, but has not
been documented. These factors do not appear to pose a conservation
threat to the Morelet's crocodile in Belize at this time. Information
about environmental contaminants in Mexico and Guatemala with regard to
the Morelet's crocodile is limited. Potential environmental contaminant
issues with respect to the Morelet's crocodile probably are the least
well known in Mexico, but that country has an extensive legal framework
to resolve any problems that may develop, especially if contaminants
also become a public health issue. We do not have any information to
indicate that environmental contaminants pose a danger to the species
throughout its range. Although environmental contaminants may represent
a potential threat, especially given the potential for bioaccumulation
of contaminants during the species' long reproductive life, we do not
have any data to indicate that it is likely to become a threat to the
species in the foreseeable future.
Bycatch in fishing nets has been mentioned as a potential problem
in Guatemala. In Belize, a ``limited number of crocodiles'' may die or
be injured in nets (Platt and Thorbjarnarson 2000b, p. 27), while
information about the potential negative effects of fishing nets on the
Morelet's crocodile in Mexico is limited. Overall, these local impacts
do not appear to have any significant impact on Morelet's crocodiles.
Although it may represent a potential threat, we do not have any data
to indicate that it is likely to become a threat in the foreseeable
future.
Genetic diversity and integrity is a relatively complicated subject
with respect to the Morelet's crocodile, and our knowledge across the
three range countries is uneven. Studies in Belize suggest that wild
populations in that country have a high degree of genetic diversity
(Dever and Densmore 2001, pp. 543-544; Dever et al. 2002, p. 1084).
Hybridization between the Morelet's crocodile and the American
crocodile has been documented for eastern Belize and the eastern and
northern coasts of the Yucatan Peninsula in Mexico (Ray et al. 2004, p.
440; Cede[ntilde]o-V[aacute]zquez et al. 2008, p. 661; Rodriguez et al.
2008, p. 674). The nature and extent of genetic variation of captive-
bred populations with respect to wild populations, as well as male-
biased sex ratios, are also
[[Page 23675]]
poorly understood issues, but potentially important in Mexico where
captive-bred individuals may eventually be released into the wild.
There is no indication, however, that the Morelet's crocodile suffers
from any genetic limitations throughout its range.
Natural weather events do not appear to have any population level
impacts to the Morelet's crocodile, which has evolved to thrive in this
climate. We do not have any evidence that climate change poses a threat
to the species. Although climate change may represent a potential
threat, especially given the crocodilian requirement for temperature
dependent sex determination, we do not have any data to indicate that
it is likely to become a threat in the foreseeable future.
Although some local factors continue to affect the Morelet's
crocodile, we do not have any information to indicate that these
factors are of sufficient magnitude to affect any population of the
Morelet's crocodile. In conclusion, we find that other natural and
manmade factors are not a significant factor affecting the Morelet's
crocodile throughout its range, both now and for the foreseeable
future.
Conclusion of the 5-Factor Analysis
We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial data
available and have determined that the Morelet's crocodile is no longer
endangered or threatened throughout all of its range. When considering
the listing status of the species, the first step in the analysis is to
determine whether the species is in danger of extinction or likely to
become endangered throughout all of its range. For instance, if the
threats on a species are acting only on a portion of its range, but the
effects of the threats are such that they do not place the entire
species in danger of extinction or likely to become endangered, we
would not retain the entire species on the list.
In developing this proposed rule, we have carefully assessed the
best scientific and commercial data available regarding the threats
facing this species, as well as the ongoing conservation efforts by the
three range countries. This information indicates that numbers of
Morelet's crocodiles have significantly increased over the past four
decades since being categorized as depleted by species experts in the
1970s. In Mexico and Belize, the species is broadly distributed
geographically, essentially occupying the entire historical range, and
age classes reflect healthy reproduction and recruitment into a wild
breeding population of about 10,000-20,000 adults (Ross 2000, p. 3;
CONABIO 2005, p. 19).
We have identified a number of potential threats to the Morelet's
crocodile. Some of these potential threats may directly or indirectly
affect individual Morelet's crocodiles, while others may affect
Morelet's crocodile habitat. The contributions of these potential
threats, identified in the Summary of Factors Affecting the Species
sections above are discussed in approximate descending magnitude of
impact in the foreseeable future:
(1) A continuation of wild harvest for ranching may pose a threat
to the species if the countries decide to change course. However, if
conducted in compliance with CITES, the ranching would have to be non-
detrimental for the specimens to enter international trade. Our
assessment of the risk associated with this potential threat is based
primarily on the demonstrated adverse effects of past overharvest on
populations. Additional monitoring programs and adequate regulatory
mechanisms would need to be established prior to legalizing ranching.
Such mechanisms would be important to prevent the laundering of
illegally harvested Morelet's crocodiles. We find that, taken together,
the currently existing protections (described above in the Factor D
section, Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms) are adequate,
and they will remain adequate to protect the Morelet's crocodile and
its habitat in the majority of its range now and within the foreseeable
future if this proposed rule is finalized and the protections of the
Act are removed.
(2) The detection of organic and inorganic environmental
contaminants in Morelet's crocodile eggs in Belize indicates that
impacts from concentrations of environmental contaminants may represent
a potential threat because Morelet's crocodiles have a long lifespan
and remain reproductively active once they attain sexual maturity.
However, there is no evidence that environmental contaminants are
currently affecting populations (numbers and reproduction appear to be
robust). In order to determine that environmental contaminants may be a
threat to the Morelet's crocodile in the future, their presence in the
environment must be occurring at a level that affects the long-term
population levels over at least a significant portion of the range of
the species. We know of no ongoing monitoring of environmental
contaminants anywhere in the species' range. Although 45 articles
within the Mexican LGEEPA deal with environmental contamination
(CONABIO 2005, Annex 3, p. 1), we have not received a detailed analysis
of the specific provisions and their relevance to Morelet's crocodile.
We are unaware of regulatory mechanisms governing activities that
discharge environmental contaminants that potentially affect Morelet's
crocodile in Belize. However, we do not have any data to indicate that
environmental contaminants are likely to become a threat in the
foreseeable future.
(3) Although habitat loss and degradation continues to negatively
affect the habitat for some local populations of the Morelet's
crocodile, we do not have any information to indicate that it is of
sufficient magnitude to have a range-wide impact on the species to the
point that would cause the Morelet's crocodile to meet the definition
of either an endangered or a threatened species. The species'
relatively wide distribution throughout its historical range and
apparent tolerance for habitats in proximity to agriculture, grazing,
and human habitation are substantial factors mitigating these impacts
to Morelet's crocodiles over the next several decades. We anticipate
that these conditions will remain essentially the same in the
foreseeable future due to the adequate regulatory mechanisms in place
to protect suitable habitat for the Morelet's crocodile in the majority
of its range (see discussion above under the Factor D., Inadequacy of
Existing Regulatory Mechanisms, section).
The Morelet's crocodile continues to be affected by a variety of
potential residual threats. It is likely that development, hurricanes
and other storm events, random human disturbance, fishery activities,
oil spills, and infestation by parasites will continue to impact
individual crocodiles into the future. Although these impacts are
generally expected to continue intermittently at low levels into the
foreseeable future, we do not expect these impacts to affect
significantly the Morelet's crocodile to the point that it would result
in declines in the range-wide status of the species.
Although some potential threats to the Morelet's crocodile remain
throughout its range, as discussed above, they are at a low enough
level such that they are not having a significant population level or
demographic effect on Morelet's crocodile populations in Mexico and
Belize, in fact, most populations are stable and/or increasing and
still occur in their historic range. Any low level threats occurring in
Guatemala are currently being addressed by the Guatemalan national and
provincial governments with the help of the local and international NGO
community. We do not believe, based on the best
[[Page 23676]]
available information, that the extent of potential threats to the
species in Guatemala, even if they increase will cause the Morelet's
crocodile to become threatened or endangered in the future. The
government of Guatemala recognizes the importance of this and other
landscape species in the Guatemalan Maya Biosphere and are implementing
regulatory and enforcement controls to combat human encroachment, land
clearing, fires and other illegal activities that may pose a threat to
these species. In addition, Guatemala's request to keep Guatemala's
populations of Morelet's crocodile in Appendix I attests to their
commitment to ensure trade does not affect Guatemala's wild Morelet's
crocodile populations.
Having determined that the Morelet's crocodile is no longer
endangered or threatened throughout its range, we must next determine
if the threats to the Morelet's crocodile are non-uniformly distributed
such that populations in one portion of its range experience higher
level of threats that populations in other portions of its range.
Significant Portion of the Range
Section 4(c)(1) of the Act requires the Service to determine
whether a portion of a species' range, if not all, meets the definition
of endangered or threatened. A portion of a species' range is
significant if it is part of the current range of the species and it
contributes substantially to the representation, resiliency, or
redundancy of the species. The contribution must be at a level such
that its loss would result in a decrease in the ability to conserve the
species. In other words, in considering significance, the Service asks
whether the loss of this portion likely would eventually move the
species towards extinction, but not to the point where the species
should be listed as threatened or endangered throughout all of its
range.
We evaluated the Morelet's crocodile's range in the context of
whether any potential threats are concentrated in a portion of its
range such that if there were concentrated impacts, that crocodile
population might be in danger of extinction. We further evaluated
whether any such population or complex might constitute a significant
portion of the species range.
Guatemala's Contribution to Representation, Resiliency, or Redundancy
of the Species
As part of the SPR analysis, we look to see, in terms of species or
habitat, if Guatemala contributes substantially to the representation,
resiliency, or redundancy of the Morelet's crocodile species.
Resiliency of a species allows the species to recover from periodic
disturbance. A species will likely be more resilient if large
populations exist in high-quality habitat distributed throughout the
range of the species in such a way as to capture the environmental
variability found within the range of the species. It is likely that
the larger size of a population will help contribute to the viability
of the species overall. Thus, a portion of a range of a species may
make a meaningful contribution to the resiliency of the species if the
area is relatively large and contains particularly high-quality habitat
or if its location or characteristics make it less susceptible to
certain threats than other portions of the range. When evaluating
whether or how a portion of the range contributes to the resiliency of
the species, it may help to evaluate the historical value of the
portion of the range and how frequently the portion is used by the
species. In addition, the range may contribute to the resiliency for
other reasons--for instance, it may contain an important concentration
of certain types of habitat that are necessary for the species to carry
out its life history functions, such as breeding, feeding, migration,
dispersal or wintering.
Guatemala comprises a small portion of the overall range of the
Morelet's crocodile. The estimated number of Morelet's crocodiles in
Guatemala is 13% of the potential global population estimate. The
extent of undisturbed habitat in Guatemala is estimated to be 19% of
the total range estimate (CONABIO 2005, pp. 16-19). Past resource
extraction, drug trade, a lack of enforcement, and financial issues
limited Guatemala's protected areas' potential contribution to the
conservation status of the species (IARNA URL IIA 2006, pp. 88-92),
causing habitat loss, habitat degradation, habitat fragmentation,
overutilization of resources, environmental contamination, and the
introduction of exotic species. These past threats may have lowered the
quality of habitat available to Morelet's crocodile. In addition,
Morelet's crocodile habitat consists of flooded savannahs and marshes
that are typical of the species habitat throughout its range, but are
not representative of the environmental variability found within the
total range of the species. The species' range, specifically Laguna del
Tigre National Park, was in the past more susceptible to certain
threats. The small size of the Guatemalan portion of the Morelet's
crocodile's range; the small population size of the species in
Guatemala; and the past threats that affected the quality of the
habitat limits Guatemala's contribution to resiliency. Therefore, we
find that the population of the Morelet's crocodile in Guatemala does
not significantly contribute to the resiliency of the species.
Redundancy of populations may be needed to provide a margin of
safety for the species to withstand catastrophic events. This does not
mean that any portion that provides redundancy is a significant portion
of the range of the species. The idea is to conserve enough areas of
the range such that random perturbations in the system act on only a
few populations. Therefore, each area must be examined based on whether
that area provides an increment of redundancy that is important to the
conservation of the species.
Morelet's crocodile distribution in the northern State of
Pet[eacute]n, Guatemala has been described as fragmented, with the
healthiest populations in the northern region of Pet[eacute]n, where
human impact was lower (Casta[ntilde]eda Moya 1997, p. 1; 1998a, p.
521). While Guatemala has regulatory mechanisms in place to protect
their national parks, it appears that the Government of Guatemala,
until recently, was not able to enforce them adequately. Although
Guatemala has conserved several areas of the Morelet's crocodile's
range, past threats limited their potential contribution to the
conservation of the species (IARNA URL IIA 2006, pp. 88-92). The idea
is to conserve enough areas of the range such that random perturbations
in the system act on only a few populations, however, Guatemala has
been unable in the past to adequately conserve Morelet's habitat. Thus
we conclude that the population of the Morelet's crocodile in Guatemala
does not significantly contribute to the redundancy of the species.
Representation ensures that the species' adaptive capabilities are
conserved. Specifically, the portion should be evaluated to see how it
contributes to the genetic, morphological, physiological, behavioral,
or ecological diversity of the species. A substantial contribution to
the representation includes populations or portions of the range that
are markedly genetically divergent, occur in a unique or unusual
ecological setting, or have unique morphological, physiological, or
behavioral characteristics. The loss of genetically based diversity or
unique adaptations may substantially reduce the ability of the species
to respond and adapt to future environmental changes. For
[[Page 23677]]
example, a peripheral population may contribute meaningfully to
representation if there is evidence that it provides genetic diversity
due to its location on the margin of the species habitat requirements.
Morphological, physiological, and behavioral diversity across the range
of the species may also indicate adaptations to environmental variation
or genetically based differences, and therefore should be considered
when evaluating a portion's contribution to representation.
We could not find any data or information that the Morelet's
crocodile in Guatemala is ecologically unusual, unique, or otherwise
significant to the species as a whole in any way (for example, in terms
of species or habitat). Morelet's crocodile habitat consists of flooded
savannahs and marshes that are typical of the species habitat
throughout its range. In addition, we have no information indicating
that the Guatemala population is genetically different from the
remainder of the range. We therefore conclude that the range of the
Morelet's crocodile in Guatemala does not significantly contribute to
the representation of the species.
Because the Morelet's crocodile's range in Guatemala does not
contribute significantly towards the resiliency, redundancy or
representation of the species, we do not consider Guatemala to be a
significant portion of the range of the species.
Finding
The PVA conducted by Sanchez (S[aacute]nchez 2005) suggests the
long-term prognosis for the survival and genetic diversity of the
Morelet's crocodile throughout its range is very good, estimating that
the average time to reach the quasi-extinction threshold of 500
individuals being 483 years (S[aacute]nchez 2005, pp. 43-51). Under the
PVA, the probability of survival of a population of 30,000 individuals,
subject to high-stress conditions is approximately 86 percent, and
maintaining their genetic diversity is approximately 99 percent.
A species is ``endangered'' for purposes of the Act if it is in
danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its
range and is ``threatened'' if it is likely to become endangered within
the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its
range. The word ``range'' is used here to refer to the range in which
the species currently exists, and the word ``significant'' refers to
the value of that portion of the range being considered to the
conservation of the species.
The Act does not define the term ``foreseeable future.'' However,
in a January 16, 2009, memorandum addressed to the Acting Director of
the Service from the Office of the Solicitor, Department of the
Interior, concluded, ``* * * as used in the [Act], Congress intended
the term `foreseeable future' to describe the extent to which the
Secretary can reasonably rely on predictions about the future in making
determinations about the future conservation status of the species''
(U.S. Department of the Interior 2009, page 1). ``Foreseeable future''
is determined by the Service on a case-by-case basis, taking into
consideration a variety of species-specific factors such as lifespan,
genetics, mating systems, demography, threat projection timeframes, and
environmental variability.
In considering the foreseeable future as it relates to the status
of the Morelet's crocodile, we defined the ``foreseeable future'' to be
the extent to which, given the amount and substance of available data,
events or effects can and should be anticipated, or the threats
reasonably extrapolated. We considered the historical data to identify
any relevant threats acting on the species, ongoing conservation
efforts, data on species abundance and persistence at individual sites
since the time of listing, and identifiable informational gaps and
uncertainties regarding residual and emerging threats to the species,
as well as population status and trends. We then looked to see if
reliable predictions about the status of the species in response to
those factors could be drawn. We considered the historical data to
identify any relevant existing trends that might allow for reliable
prediction of the future, in the form of extrapolating the trends. We
also considered whether we could reliably predict any future events,
not yet acting on the species and, therefore, not yet manifested in a
trend, that might affect the status of the species, recognizing that
our ability to make reliable predictions into the future is limited by
the variable quantity and quality of available data. Following a range-
wide threats analysis, we evaluated whether the Morelet's crocodile is
endangered or threatened in any significant portion(s) of its range.
As required by the Act, we considered the five factors in assessing
whether the Morelet's crocodile is threatened or endangered throughout
all or a significant portion of its range. We reviewed the petition,
information available in our files, comments and information received
after the publication of our 90-day finding (71 FR 36743), and other
available published and unpublished information, and consulted with
recognized experts. We have carefully assessed the best available
scientific and commercial data regarding the past, present, and future
threats faced by the Morelet's crocodile. This status review found that
although some localized impacts to individual Morelet's crocodiles
still occur, such as habitat loss from agricultural development, they
have been reduced enough so as to not impact the species on a
population level. In addition to the five-factor analysis, we also
considered the progress made by the range countries towards addressing
previous threats to Morelet's crocodiles. We took into consideration
the conservation actions that have occurred, are ongoing, and are
planned. Since listing, the species' status has improved because of the
following:
National and international laws and treaties have
minimized the impacts of hunting and trade in wild-caught specimens.
Morelet's crocodile populations are stable or increasing.
Total population size is approximately 19,400 adults in
the three range countries.
Species experts now widely characterize Morelet's
crocodile populations as healthy.
The current range-wide distribution of Morelet's crocodile
now closely resembles historical range-wide distribution
Range countries have improved efforts to protect and
manage Morelet's crocodile habitat.
The long-term prognosis for the survival and genetic
diversity of the Morelet's crocodile throughout its range is very good
In sum, the ongoing development and updating of management plans,
the active management of habitat, the ongoing research, and the
protections provided by laws and protected lands provide compelling
evidence that recovery actions are successful.
The primary factor that led to the listing of the Morelet's
crocodile was trade. However, the trend today is towards increasing
population sizes, with trade restricted to captive-bred specimens only.
We find that the localized impacts identified in the three range
countries, when combined with the increase in population sizes, ongoing
active research and management, and protections provided by range
countries, those impacts are not of sufficient imminence, intensity, or
magnitude to indicate that the Morelet's crocodile is threatened with
extinction now or in the foreseeable future. Consequently, we have
determined that Morelet's crocodile should be removed from the list of
[[Page 23678]]
endangered and threatened wildlife and plants.
Distinct Vertebrate Population Segments
Section 3(15) of the Act defines ``species'' to include ``any
species or subspecies of fish and wildlife or plants, and any distinct
population segment of any species of vertebrate fish or wildlife which
interbreeds when mature (16 U.S.C. 1532(16)). After assessing whether
or not the Morelet's crocodile is endangered or threatened throughout
its range, we next consider whether a distinct vertebrate population
segment (DPS) of the Morelet's crocodile meets the definition of
endangered or is likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future
(threatened).
To interpret and implement the DPS provisions of the Act and
congressional guidance, the Service and the National Marine Fisheries
Service (now the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration--
Fisheries Service), published the Policy Regarding the Recognition of
Distinct Vertebrate Population Segments (DPS Policy) in the Federal
Register on February 7, 1996 (61 FR 4722). Under the DPS Policy, we
evaluate a set of elements in a three-step process in order to make our
decision concerning the establishment and classification of a possible
DPS. These elements are applied similarly for additions to or removals
from the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants.
These elements include: (1) The discreteness of a population in
relation to the remainder of the taxon to which it belongs; (2) the
significance of the population segment to the taxon to which it
belongs; and (3) the population segment's conservation status in
relation to the Act's standards for listing (addition to the list),
delisting (removal from the list), or reclassification (i.e., is the
population segment endangered or threatened).
First, the Policy requires the Service to determine that a
vertebrate population is discrete in relation to the remainder of the
taxon to which it belongs. Discreteness refers to the ability to
delineate a population segment from other members of a taxon based on
either (1) Physical, physiological, ecological, or behavioral factors,
or (2) international governmental boundaries that result in significant
differences in control of exploitation, management, or habitat
conservation status, or regulatory mechanisms that are significant in
light of section 4(a)(1)(D) of the Act--the inadequacy of existing
regulatory mechanisms.
Second, if we determine that the population is discrete under one
or more of the discreteness conditions, then a determination is made as
to whether the population is significant to the larger taxon to which
it belongs in light of Congressional guidance (see Senate Report 151,
96th Congress, 1st Session) that the authority to list DPSs be used
``sparingly and only when the biological evidence indicates that such
action is warranted.'' In carrying out this examination, we consider
available scientific evidence of the population's importance to the
taxon to which it belongs. This consideration may include, but is not
limited to the following: (1) The persistence of the population segment
in an ecological setting that is unique or unusual for the taxon; (2)
evidence that loss of the population segment would result in a
significant gap in the range of the taxon; (3) evidence that the
population segment represents the only surviving natural occurrence of
a taxon that may be more abundant elsewhere as an introduced population
outside of its historic range; and (4) evidence that the discrete
population segment differs markedly from other populations of the
species in its genetic characteristics from other populations of the
species. A population segment needs to satisfy only one of these
conditions to be considered significant.
Lastly, if we determine that the population is both discrete and
significant, then the Policy requires an analysis of the population
segment's conservation status in relation to the Act's standards for
listing (addition to the list), delisting (removal from the list), or
reclassification (i.e., is the population segment endangered or
threatened).
Discreteness
The first step in our DPS analysis for the Morelet's crocodile was
to determine whether there were any populations of the Morelet's
crocodile that were discrete in relation to the remainder of the taxon
to which it belongs. Under the DPS Policy, a population segment of a
vertebrate taxon may be considered discrete if it satisfies either one
of the following conditions: (1) It is markedly separated from other
populations of the same taxon because of physical, physiological,
ecological, or behavioral factors. Quantitative measures of genetic or
morphological discontinuity may provide evidence of this separation; or
(2) it is delimited by international governmental boundaries within
which differences in control of exploitation, management of habitat,
conservation status, or regulatory mechanisms exist that are
significant in light of section 4(a)(1)(D) of the Act--the inadequacy
of existing regulatory mechanisms. Recognition of international
boundaries when they coincide with differences in the management,
status, or exploitation of the species under the Act is consistent with
CITES, which recognizes international boundaries for these same
reasons. CITES is implemented in the United States by the Act.
Physical, Physiological, Ecological, or Behavioral Factors
We do not have any data or information to indicate that there are
any physical, physiological, ecological, or behavioral facts that
separate any populations of the Morelet's crocodile. The historical
distribution of the Morelet's crocodile comprised the eastern coastal
plain of Mexico, most of the Yucatan Peninsula, Belize, and northern
Guatemala (Hurley 2005, p. 1), with an estimated historical
distribution covering 173,746 mi\2\ (450,000 km\2\) (Sigler and
Dom[iacute]nguez Laso 2008, pp. 11-12). The Morelet's crocodile is a
wide-ranging species that occurs primarily in freshwater environments
such as lakes, swamps, and slow-moving rivers. This species of
crocodile can temporarily inhabit intermittent freshwater bodies such
as flooded savannahs and is occasionally observed in brackish coastal
lagoons (Villegas 2006, p. 8).
We do not have any data or information to indicate that any
populations of the Morelet's crocodile exhibit genetic or morphological
discontinuity that may indicate that they are a separate population.
Although we do not have any data or information on the dispersal
strategies for the Morelet's crocodile that would indicate a population
may be discrete, we have no evidence to suggest that there are barriers
that would prevent the Morelet's crocodile from dispersing within its
known range. The current range-wide distribution of the Morelet's
crocodile closely mirrors the historical range-wide distribution, and
there are large amount of high quality of habitat available. Therefore,
we have no evidence suggesting that the Morelet's crocodile is isolated
in any part of its range.
International Differences in Species' Conservation Status
As discussed above in the Factor D section, Inadequacy of Existing
Regulatory Mechanisms, all three range
[[Page 23679]]
countries are Parties to CITES. In addition, data and information
available to the Service indicates that all three range countries have
Federally protected-species and protected-areas legislation under the
jurisdiction of specific ministries or departments that control
activities that affect the Morelet's crocodile and its habitat.
Mexico's Federal legal framework is particularly robust. The CITES
National Legislation Project (http://www.CITES.org) deemed both Mexico
and Guatemala's national legislation as Category 1, meeting all the
requirements to implement CITES, with Belize in Category 3 (not meeting
the requirements for implementing CITES), but having submitted a
national legislation plan and draft of legislation that has not yet
been adopted.
Based on current data and information available to the Service, the
Governments of Mexico, Guatemala, and Belize appear to be adequately
enforcing their respective legal frameworks, both at the Federal level
and under CITES. Mexico and Belize contain the majority of wild
Morelet's crocodiles (87 percent) and the majority of the potentially
suitable habitat (81 percent) throughout the species' range. Because of
this adequate enforcement, the majority of the threats to the species
and its habitat have been eliminated in Mexico and Belize. Although
some residual threats remain, these threats have been reduced to a low
enough level that they are not having significant population level or
demographic effects.
In contrast, based on data and information available to the
Service, it appears that in the past, the Government of Guatemala was
not able to enforce adequately their legal framework to protect the
Morelet's crocodile and its habitat in Guatemala. The lack of funding
and personnel made enforcement of Guatemala's legal framework
especially challenging. Conservation actions were often overwhelmed by
slow economic development, high levels of poverty, unequal land
distribution, a highly segmented society, and the effects of more than
three decades of civil war (Birner et al. 2005, pp. 285, 292).
For example, per ParkWatch (2003) noted that a designation as a
national park or important wetland conservation area in Guatemala does
not necessarily afford protection to the Morelet's crocodile or its
habitat. The Laguna del Tigre National Park, located in Pet[eacute]n
region of Guatemala, is home to the largest population of Morelet's
crocodiles in Guatemala. The park was considered by ParkWatch as
critically threatened due to land grabs, the presence of human
settlements, expanding agriculture and cattle ranching, poaching,
forest fires, the oil industry, and almost complete lack of
institutional control over the area (ParksWatch 2003, pp. 1, 11).
However, by 2004, ParksWatch stated that the staff at Laguna del Tigre
had doubled in size since their 2003 report. Seventy-three park
rangers, 10 archeological site guards and 96 Army personnel were hired
to staff the park and since the increase in staffing, both the park and
the biotope are ``constantly patrolled.'' In addition, the WCS
continued its ``Biodiversity Conservation at a Landscape Scale''
program (with USAID) for Guatemala and has provided a comprehensive
plan with specific goals to preserve and protect wildlife in the Maya
Biosphere Reserve in Guatemala through conserving wildlife species and
their habitat, while maintaining the economic productivity of renewable
natural resources. They are fulfilling these goals by establishing
specific parameters. Namely, ``to develop adaptive and participatory
strategy to reduce threats to wildlife in the MBR; to develop,
implement and monitor sustainable mechanisms to reduce threats to
wildlife and ecosystems across the MBR landscape; to learn and teach
best management practices for the conservation of the MBR and beyond;
and to guide, design and test wildlife-focused planning'' (WCS 2008,
page 3). These efforts were endorsed by the president of Guatemala
through his office's attendance at the Mesa Multisectorial roundtable
discussion held in Guatemala in 2009.
Many outstanding accomplishments have been achieved in Guatemala in
terms of biodiversity conservation (IARNA URL IIA 2006, p. 22), and
efforts to achieve desired levels of environmental management are
ongoing. In August 2010, the president of Guatemala announced that he
is deploying 250 soldiers to recover fully all the protected zones of
El Peten in the Laguna del Tigre section of the MBR. This ``Green
Battalion'' is being deployed specifically protect the Laguna del Tigre
National Park and work jointly with the National Civil Police and the
Attorney General's Office to combat drug trafficking and the illegal
harvest of natural resources and archaeological sites of that region of
the MBR (Latin American Herald Tribune, December 6, 2010). Additional
help from WCS and USAID includes establishing over flights to monitor
fires, locating illegal settlements and notifying the national and
provincial government of illegal activities, as well as the national
media. These efforts have resulted in additional personnel added to
parks, removal of settlements, consistent patrols and cessation of
illegal activities, and educating locals and concessionaires on best
management practices for sustainable use of forest products. In
addition, the CITES National Legislation Project (http://www.CITES.org)
deemed both Mexico and Guatemala's national legislation as Category 1,
meeting all the requirements to implement CITES, with Belize in
Category 3 (not meeting the requirements for implementing CITES), but
having submitted a national legislation plan and draft of legislation
that has not yet been adopted.
Casta[ntilde]eda Moya (1998a, p. 521; 1998b, p. 13) listed illegal
hunting as a threat to Morelet's crocodile in the Pet[eacute]n region
of Guatemala (CITES 2010a), but did not provide a numerical estimate of
the take. ARCAS, an animal welfare group in Guatemala, reported the
rescue or recovery of 49 live individuals (about 8 per year), most
likely from pet dealers or private individuals, during the period 2002-
2007 (ARCAS 2002, p. 3; 2003, p. 2; 2004, p. 2; 2005, p. 2; 2006, p. 3;
2007, p. 3).
The Government of Guatemala acknowledged these issues when it
opposed Mexico's 2010 CITES proposal to transfer the Morelet's
crocodile from Appendix I to Appendix II throughout its range.
Specifically, the Government of Guatemala opposed transferring
Morelet's crocodiles in Guatemala to Appendix II based on the lack of
knowledge of the population and population trends in Guatemala, the
potential threats to the species from deforestation and pollution in
Guatemala, and the likelihood of illegal, cross-border trade taking
place in Guatemala. Morelet's crocodiles in Guatemala remain in CITES
Appendix I (CITES 2010a, p. 2). As a result of the Government of
Guatemala's past inability to adequately enforce their legal framework,
the Morelet's crocodile in Guatemala may be still subject to some
illegal hunting and some destruction of habitat due to previous human
encroachment. This constitutes a difference in control of exploitation,
management of habitat, conservation status, or regulatory mechanisms
that is significant in light of section 4(a)(1)(D) of the Act.
Conclusion on Discreteness
We have determined, based on the best available data and
information that the population of Morelet's crocodiles in Guatemala is
discrete due to the significant difference in the control of
exploitation, management of habitat,
[[Page 23680]]
conservation status, or regulatory mechanisms between international
boundaries. Therefore, we have determined that the Guatemala population
of the Morelet's crocodile meets the requirements of our DPS Policy for
discreteness. We will next conduct an analysis of the Guatemala
population of the Morelet's crocodile under the significance element of
the DPS Policy.
Significance
Having determined that the population of Morelet's crocodiles in
Guatemala is discrete under one or more of the discreteness conditions
described in the DPS Policy, we must then determine whether the
population in Guatemala is significant. We evaluate its biological and
ecological significance based on ``the available scientific evidence of
the discrete population segment's importance to the taxon to which it
belongs'' (61 FR 4725). We make this evaluation in light of
congressional guidance that the Service's authority to list DPSs be
used ``sparingly.'' Since precise circumstances are likely to vary
considerably from case to case, the DPS Policy does not describe all
the classes of information that might be used in determining the
biological and ecological importance of a discrete population. However,
the DPS Policy describes four possible classes of information that
provide evidence of a population segment's biological and ecological
importance to the taxon to which it belongs. As specified in the DPS
Policy (61 FR 4722), consideration of the population segment's
significance may include, but is not limited to the following: (1)
Persistence of the population segment in an ecological setting that is
unusual or unique for the taxon; (2) evidence that loss of the
population segment would result in a significant gap in the range of
the taxon; (3) evidence that the population segment represents the only
surviving natural occurrence of a taxon that may be more abundant
elsewhere as an introduced population outside of its historic range;
and (4) evidence that the discrete population segment differs markedly
from other populations of the species in its genetic characteristics. A
population segment needs to satisfy only one of these conditions to be
considered significant.
Persistence in a Unique Ecological Setting
As stated in the DPS Policy, the Service believes that occurrence
in an unusual ecological setting may be an indication that a population
segment represents a significant resource warranting conservation under
the Act (61 FR 4724). In considering whether the population occupies an
ecological setting that is unusual or unique for the taxon, we evaluate
whether the habitat includes unique features not used by the taxon
elsewhere and whether the habitat shares many features common to the
habitats of other populations. As stated above, the Morelet's crocodile
is a wide-ranging species that occurs primarily in freshwater
environments such as lakes, swamps, and slow-moving rivers. This
species of crocodile can temporarily inhabit intermittent freshwater
bodies such as flooded savannahs and is occasionally observed in
brackish coastal lagoons (Villegas 2006, p. 8). We do not have any
evidence to indicate that the Guatemala population of the Morelet's
crocodile occurs in habitat that includes unique features not used by
the taxon elsewhere in its range. Morelet's crocodile habitat in the
Laguna del Tigre National Park consists of flooded savannahs and
marshes that are typical of the species habitat throughout its range.
Therefore, we conclude that the discrete population of Morelet's
crocodiles in Guatemala is not ``significant'' because of persistence
in a unique or unusual ecological setting.
Significant Gap in the Taxon's Range
As stated in the DPS Policy, the Service believes that evidence
that loss of the discrete population segment would result in a
significant gap in the range of a taxon, is potentially an indication
that a population segment represents a significant resource warranting
conservation under the Act (61 FR 4724). As the Ninth Circuit has
stated, ``[t]he plain language of the second significance factor does
not limit how a gap could be important,'' National Ass'n of Home
Builders v. Norton, 340 F.3d 835, 846 (9th Cir. 2003). Thus, we
considered a variety of ways in which the loss of the Guatemala
population of the Morelet's crocodile might result in a significant gap
in the range of species. Namely, we considered whether Guatemala
contributed to the resiliency, redundancy, or representation of the
taxon's range. As stated previously in the Significant Portion of the
Range analysis, the Service felt that due to the small size of the
Guatemalan portion of the Morelet's crocodile's range and the small
population size of the species in Guatemala, its overall contribution
to the species was limited. While Guatemala has regulatory mechanisms
in place to protect their national parks, it appears that until
recently, the government was unable to enforce them adequately.
Although Guatemala has conserved several areas of the Morelet's
crocodile's range, past threats limited this population's contribution
to the species (IARNA URL IIA 2006, pp. 88-92). Morelet's crocodile
habitat consists of flooded savannahs and marshes that are typical of
the species habitat throughout its range, but are not ecologically
unusual, unique, or otherwise significant to the species as a whole in
any way. In addition, we found no information indicating that the
Guatemala population is genetically different from the remainder of the
range.
Conclusion of Significant Gap in the Taxon's Range
The Morelet's crocodile in Guatemala does not significantly
contribute to the resiliency, redundancy or the representation of the
species or its range, including but not limited to, the size of the
range, habitat quality, habitat variability, or genetic uniqueness. The
majority of the species range occurs in Mexico and Belize, which
contain the majority of all wild Morelet's crocodiles (87 percent) and
the majority of the potentially suitable habitat throughout the
species' range (81 percent). Should a discrete population segment of
Morelet's crocodiles in Guatemala decrease for any reason (which we
have concluded is unlikely), then it is likely that Morelet's
crocodiles in Mexico and Belize would expand their range and re-
colonize any potential habitat in Guatemala. Thus, we feel the loss of
a discrete population segment in Guatemala would not create a
significant gap in the range of the species, nor does it represent a
significant resource warranting conservation under the Act.
Natural Occurrence of a Taxon Abundant Elsewhere as an Introduced
Population
As stated in the DPS Policy, the Service believes that evidence
that the population segment represents the only surviving natural
occurrence of a taxon that may be more abundant elsewhere as an
introduced population outside of its historic range may be an
indication that a population segment represents a significant resource
warranting conservation under the Act (61 FR 4724). This element does
not apply to the Morelet's crocodile in Guatemala. The Guatemala
population of the Morelet's crocodile does not represent the only
surviving natural occurrence of the Morelet's crocodile throughout the
range of the taxon. After the protections of the Act and CITES were put
in place in the 1970s, populations of Morelet's crocodiles increased
and expanded their
[[Page 23681]]
range naturally over time to the point that they have recovered and are
now found in all areas of their historic range.
Marked Differences in Genetic Characteristics
As stated in the DPS Policy, the Service believes that evidence
that a discrete population segment differs markedly from other
populations of the species in its genetic characteristics may be an
indication that a population segment represents a significant resource
warranting conservation under the Act (61 FR 4724).
Genetic diversity and integrity is a relatively complicated subject
with respect to the Morelet's crocodile, and our knowledge across the
three range countries is uneven. The genetic data we do have are with
respect to hybridization between Morelet's crocodiles and American
crocodiles. Thus, we have no information indicating that the Guatemala
population is markedly different from the remainder of the range.
Conclusion on Significance
First, we do not have any data or information to indicate that the
Guatemala population of the Morelet's crocodile occurs in habitat that
includes unique features not used by the taxon elsewhere in its range.
Morelet's crocodile habitat in the Laguna del Tigre National Park
consists of flooded savannahs and marshes that are typical of the
species habitat throughout its range. Second we conclude that loss of
Morelet's crocodiles in 13 percent of their range would not constitute
a significant gap in the range of the species due to the loss of a
population that is ecologically unusual, unique, or otherwise
significant to the species as a whole in any way (for example, in terms
of species or habitat) or that contributes substantially to the
representation, resiliency, or redundancy of the species. Third, the
Guatemala population of the Morelet's crocodile does not represent the
only surviving natural occurrence of the Morelet's crocodile throughout
the range of the taxon. Finally, the Guatemala population of the
Morelet's crocodile does not have any genetic characteristics that are
markedly different from Morelet's crocodiles elsewhere in the range of
the taxon. Therefore, based on the information available to the
Service, we conclude that the discrete population of Morelet's
crocodiles in Guatemala does not meet the requirements under our DPS
Policy for significance.
Conclusion of DPS Analysis
Based on the best available data and information, we conclude that
the Guatemala population of the Morelet's crocodile meets the
requirements of our DPS Policy for discreteness, but does not meet the
requirements of our DPS policy for significance in relation to the
remainder of the taxon (i.e., Morelet's crocodiles in Mexico and
Belize). The population of Morelet's crocodiles in Guatemala is
discrete due to the significant difference in the control of
exploitation, management of habitat, conservation status, or regulatory
mechanisms between international boundaries. This difference is
evidenced by the fact that Morelet's crocodiles in Guatemala remain
listed under Appendix I of CITES, while those in Mexico and Belize were
downgraded to Appendix II. The discrete population of Morelet's
crocodiles in Guatemala does not meet the requirements of our DPS
policy for significance because it: (1) Does not occur in habitat that
includes unique features not used by the taxon elsewhere in its range;
(2) would not constitute a significant gap in the range of the species
due to the loss of a population that contributes substantially to the
representation, resiliency, or redundancy of the species; (3) does not
represent the only surviving natural occurrence of the Morelet's
crocodile throughout the range of the taxon; and (4) does not have any
genetic characteristics that are markedly different from Morelet's
crocodiles elsewhere in the range of the taxon. Therefore, we conclude
that the population of the Morelet's crocodile in Guatemala is not a
DPS pursuant to our DPS Policy, and, therefore, is not a listable
entity under section 3(15) of the Act.
Effects of This Proposed Rule
This proposed rule, if made final, would revise our regulations at
50 CFR 17.11(h) by removing the Morelet's crocodile throughout its
range from the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. Our
regulations do not authorize designating critical habitat in areas
outside of the United States. Specifically, our regulations at 50 CFR
424.12(h) specify that critical habitat shall not be designated within
foreign countries or in other areas outside of U.S. jurisdiction.
Because no critical habitat was ever designated for this species, this
rule would not affect 50 CFR 17.95.
The prohibitions and conservation measures provided by the Act,
particularly through section 9, would no longer apply. This rulemaking,
however, does not affect the protection given to the Morelet's
crocodile under CITES. Delisting under the Act would allow import, re-
export, and commercial activity in Morelet's crocodiles and their parts
and products originating from any country, including the three range
countries, provided that the requirements of CITES are met.
Post-delisting Monitoring
Section 4(g)(1) of the Act requires the Secretary of Interior,
through the Service, to implement a system in cooperation with the
States to monitor for not less than 5 years the status of all species
that are removed from the lists of endangered and threatened wildlife
and plants (50 CFR 17.11, 17.12) due to recovery. This monitoring
requirement is to ensure prevention of significant risk to the well-
being of recovered species.
Species monitoring is also called for under CITES. CITES Resolution
Conf. 9.24 (Rev. CoP 15), provides criteria for including species under
CITES Appendices I and II. Through the resolution, the parties have
resolved that the status of species included in Appendices I and II
should be regularly reviewed by the range countries and proponents, in
collaboration with the CITES Animals Committee or Plants Committee, in
order to monitor the effectiveness of CITES protections, subject to the
availability of funds (CITES 2007a, p. 3).
At the international level, perhaps the most important ongoing
conservation effort for the Morelet's crocodile is the agreement by the
three range countries to develop and implement the Belize-Guatemala-
Mexico Tri-national Strategy for the Conservation and Sustainable
Management of Morelet's Crocodile (Crocodylus moreletii) (Estrategia
Tri-nacional Belice-Guatemala-M[eacute]xico para la Conservaci[oacute]n
y el Manejo Sostenible del Cocodrilo de Morelet (Crocodylus moreletii)
(Tri-national Strategy) (S[aacute]nchez 2006).
This initiative began in June 2001 at Laguna del Tigre National
Park, Pet[eacute]n, Guatemala, when representatives of the three
countries met to discuss matters of mutual interest. A follow up
meeting attended by about 25 species experts and government officials
from all three range countries took place in April 2006 (Mexico City,
Mexico). Two working groups were formed: (1) Technical and Scientific
Matters; and (2) Administration, Management, and Uses. Group members
discussed technical issues for two days, and generated a series of
products, commitments, and agreements. The first group produced or
agreed to compile a series of documents,
[[Page 23682]]
including distribution maps, survey techniques, scientific literature,
and databases (e.g., geographic information system). The second group
agreed to work toward a regional assessment of the conservation status
of the Morelet's crocodile, as well as development and implementation
of regional actions to improve the conservation status of the species
(institutional capacity building, project development and
implementation, and development of a regional captive-breeding
program). The final product of the workshop was the development of
``Estrategia Regional para el Manejo y la Conservaci[oacute]n del
Cocodrilo de Morelet (Crocodylus moreletii) (Regional Strategy for the
Management and Conservation of the Morelet's Crocodile) (Regional
Strategy), found on pp. 43-53 of the Tri-national Strategy document
(Sanchez 2006). This Regional Strategy outlines a series of objectives,
products, and working protocols to accomplish the goals of the Tri-
national Strategy. As these tasks are completed, they will
significantly enhance the conservation status of the Morelet's
crocodile.
According to S[aacute]nchez Herrera and [Aacute]lvarez-Romero
(2006), as result of this initiative, the three range countries have
agreed to implement the Regional Strategy, which also includes
monitoring the species. The three range countries plan to implement the
Regional Strategy by:
(1) Conducting population surveys in defined priority areas using
systematic and coordinated monitoring, with standardized fieldwork
methods and techniques.
(2) Developing a shared biological and geographical information
system.
(3) Identifying priority areas and routes for conservation and
surveillance, along with those for future potential for ranching.
(4) Supporting and developing educational programs and outreach
materials.
(5) Promoting personnel training and experience exchange, including
field techniques and surveillance.
(6) Promoting species-friendly production projects such as close-
cycle farms (and eventually future ranching), along with the
development of a legal regional market and a certification strategy for
Morelet's crocodile products.
(7) Raising funds in support of the activities and tasks outlined
in the Strategy (S[aacute]nchez Herrera and [Aacute]lvarez-Romero 2006,
p. 263).
The Government of Mexico is making efforts to design and implement
a countrywide monitoring program for the populations and habitat of the
Morelet's crocodile, including the possibility of involving Belize and
Guatemala. The aim is to build on the experiences and results of the
COPAN Project and the suggestions made at the 23rd meeting of the CITES
Animals Committee (Geneva, April 2008, see the Animals Committee
summary record labeled as document AC23) to obtain better information
about the status and trends of relevant populations of the species and
their habitat. The program will be developed in the framework of the
Tri-national Strategy (CITES 2010a, p. 9). The Government of Mexico has
established contacts with the Governments of Belize and Guatemala as
part of the Tri-National Strategy (CITES 2008, p. 32).
Stage 1 of the project is currently under way. It aims to develop a
preliminary design of the program, considering relevant areas in the
range of the species. Ideally, areas could be selected in the three
countries, based on the COPAN Project and subsequent studies. The
design will be reviewed and assessed in a 2010 workshop involving
species experts and authorities, who will agree upon on the most
appropriate methods and define time intervals, routes/localities and
variables to take into account for crocodiles and their habitat.
Manuals will be developed to ensure the effectiveness of fieldwork and
training of staff. This stage will also include the design of a
database where information will be organized and centralized (CITES
2010a, p. 9).
To date, the preliminary design proposes a monitoring effort with
biannual sampling throughout the range of the species, with
observations made in at least three routes per defined region (e.g. 12
regions in Mexico) using nighttime counts. In addition, one of the
three routes per region will be selected for capture-mark-recapture of
individuals and standard data/sample collection, as well as nest
location and monitoring. Information obtained will make it possible to
estimate relative abundance indices to detect variations in the
population in time, determine the sex and age ratio and the general
status and activity of individuals, and obtain data on the reproductive
effort and success of the species, and on habitat critical for breeding
(CITES 2010a, pp. 9-10).
Stage 2 will be implemented once the monitoring program has been
published. It will consist of implementing the actions decided,
including setting up and training the field teams, signing the relevant
cooperation agreements, carrying out field work, and developing the
database. Information stored in the database will be periodically
analyzed to produce estimates of the population and its trends in the
short, medium, and long term (CITES 2010a, pp. 9-10) (CITES 2010a, p.
10). We do not have any information on implementation progress for the
Tri-National Strategy, and are seeking this information as part of this
proposed rule.
In Belize, Dr. Frank Mazzotti (University of Florida) is
collaborating with the Belize Forestry Department to develop a national
crocodile management program (The Croc Docs 2009, pp. 1-8). This
project seeks to develop, in collaboration with the Lamanai Field
Research Center, a monitoring program for these species. Along with the
monitoring program, the project will develop a training program for
government and nongovernment personnel in Belize so that the monitoring
program can be maintained. This long-term program has great potential
to provide ongoing conservation benefits to the Morelet's crocodile in
Belize. We do not have any information on implementation progress for
this monitoring program in Belize, and are seeking this information as
part of this proposed rule.
The Act requires the Service to monitor the status of the species
in cooperation with the States. The Act defines the term ``State'' as
``any of the several States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth
of Puerto Rico, American Samoa, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and the Trust
Territory of the Pacific Islands.'' For species found entirely outside
of the United States and therefore outside the areas defined as a
``State'' under the Act, we must cooperate with the species' range
countries to meet the post-delisting monitoring requirements of the Act
to ensure that the species will maintain its recovered status
throughout its range after the protections of Act are removed. As the
species experts, the range countries are best qualified to develop and
implement a range-wide post-delisting monitoring plan for their
species. If this proposed rule is finalized and the Morelet's crocodile
is delisted under the Act, we will work with the range countries to
monitor the status of the species throughout its range via their
implementation of the existing monitoring requirements under CITES, the
Tri-national Strategy, the Belizean monitoring program discussed above,
and any additional monitoring plans that may be developed in the
future.
Peer Review
In accordance with our joint peer review policy with the National
Marine Fisheries Service, ``Notice of Interagency Cooperative Policy
for Peer Review in
[[Page 23683]]
Endangered Species Act Activities,'' that was published in the Federal
Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), and the Office of Management
and Budget's Final Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review, dated
December 16, 2004, we will seek the expert opinions of at least three
appropriate independent specialists regarding the science in this
proposed rule. The purpose of peer review is to ensure that listing,
reclassification, and delisting decisions are based on scientifically
sound data, assumptions, and analyses. We will send copies of this
proposed rule to the peer reviewers immediately following publication
in the Federal Register. We will invite these peer reviewers to
comment, during the public comment period, on the specific assumptions
and conclusions in this proposed delisting of the Morelet's crocodile.
We will summarize the opinions of these reviewers in the final decision
document, and we will consider their input and any additional
information we received as part of our process of making a final
decision on this proposal. Such communication may lead to a final
decision that differs from this proposal.
Required Determinations
Clarity of the Rule
We are required by Executive Orders 12866 and 12988 and by the
Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain
language. This means that each rule we publish must:
(1) Be logically organized;
(2) Use the active voice to address readers directly;
(3) Use clear language rather than jargon;
(4) Be divided into short sections and sentences; and
(5) Use lists and tables wherever possible.
If you feel that we have not met these requirements, send us
comments by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. To
better help us revise the rule, your comments should be as specific as
possible. For example, you should tell us the numbers of the sections
or paragraphs that are unclearly written, which sections or sentences
are too long, the sections where you feel lists or tables would be
useful, etc.
National Environmental Policy Act
We have determined that an environmental assessments or an
environmental impact statement, as defined under the authority of the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.),
need not be prepared in connection with regulations adopted under
section 4(a) of the Act. A notice outlining our reasons for this
determination was published in the Federal Register on October 25, 1983
(48 FR 49244).
References Cited
A complete list of the references used to develop this proposed
rule is available upon request from the Endangered Species Program in
our Headquarters office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section).
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.
Proposed Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, we hereby propose to amend part 17, subchapter B of
chapter I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth
below:
PART 17--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 16 U.S.C. 1531-1544; 16 U.S.C.
4201-4245; Public Law 99-625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise
noted.
Sec. 17.11 [Amended]
2. Amend Sec. 17.11(h) by removing the entry for ``Crocodile,
Morelet's'' under ``REPTILES'' from the List of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife.
Dated: April 11, 2011.
Daniel M. Ashe,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2011-9836 Filed 4-26-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P