[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 147 (Tuesday, July 31, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 36755-36773]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-16359]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-2016-0076; 4500030115]
RIN 1018-BC82
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Endangered Species
Status for Five Poecilotheria Tarantula Species From Sri Lanka
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), determine
endangered species status under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended, for the following five tarantula species from Sri Lanka:
Poecilotheria fasciata, P. ornata, P. smithi, P. subfusca, and P.
vittata. The effect of this regulation will be to add these species to
the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife.
DATES: This rule becomes effective August 30, 2018.
ADDRESSES: This final rule is available on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov at docket number FWS-HQ-ES-2016-0076. Comments and
materials we received, as well as supporting documentation we used in
preparing this rule, are available for public inspection at http://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Don Morgan, Chief, Branch of Delisting
and Foreign Species, Ecological Services, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, MS: ES, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803;
telephone, 703-358-2171. Persons who use a telecommunications device
for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Relay Service at 800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Summary
Why we need to publish a rule. Under the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (Act; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), a species may be
protected through listing as an endangered species or threatened
species if it meets the definition of an ``endangered species'' or
``threatened species'' under the Act. Listing a species as an
endangered or threatened species can only be completed by issuing a
rule.
What this document does. This rule will add the following five
tarantula species to the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife in
title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations (50 CFR 17.11(h)) as
endangered species: Poecilotheria fasciata, P. ornata, P. smithi, P.
subfusca, and P. vittata.
The basis for our action. Under the Act, we use the best available
scientific and commercial data to determine whether a species meets the
definition of a ``threatened species'' or an ``endangered species''
because of any one or more of the following five factors or the
cumulative effects thereof: (A) The present or threatened destruction,
modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range; (B)
Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes; (C) Disease or predation; (D) The inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E) Other natural or manmade factors
affecting its continued existence. We have determined on the basis of
the best available scientific and commercial data that P. fasciata, P.
ornata, P. smithi, P. subfusca, and P. vittata are in danger of
extinction because of ongoing habitat loss and degradation and the
cumulative effects of this and other threat factors. One species, P.
smithi, is also in danger of extinction because of the effects of
stochastic (random) processes.
Peer review and public comment. We sought comments from independent
peer reviewers to ensure that our designation is based on
scientifically sound data and analyses. We invited these peer reviewers
to comment on our listing proposal. We also considered all comments and
information received from the public during the comment period.
Previous Federal Action
We received a petition, dated October 29, 2010, from WildEarth
Guardians requesting that the following 11 tarantula species in the
genus Poecilotheria be listed under the Act as endangered or
threatened: Poecilotheria fasciata, P. formosa, P. hanumavilasumica, P.
metallica, P. miranda, P. ornata, P. pederseni, P. rufilata, P. smithi,
P. striata, and P. subfusca. The petition identified itself as such and
included the information as required by 50 CFR 424.14(a). We published
a 90-day finding on December 3, 2013 (78 FR 72622), indicating that the
petition presents substantial scientific and commercial information
indicating that listing these 11 species may be warranted. At that time
we also (1) notified the public that we were initiating a review of the
status of these species to determine if listing them is warranted, (2)
requested from the public scientific and commercial data and other
information regarding the species, and (3) notified the public that at
the conclusion of our review of the status of these species, we would
issue a 12-month finding on the petition, as provided in section
4(b)(3)(B) of the Act. We published a 12-month finding and proposed
rule for listing the five Poecilotheria species that are endemic to Sri
Lanka (Poecilotheria fasciata, P. ornata, P. pederseni, P. smithi, and
P. subfusca) on December 14, 2016 (81 FR 90297). In our 12-month
finding and proposed rule we determined that these five species were in
danger of extinction throughout their ranges and proposed listing them
as endangered under the Act. We requested input from the public, range
country, other interested parties, and peer reviewers during a 60-day
public comment period that ended February 13, 2017.
Summary of Changes From the Proposed Rule
In preparing this final rule, we reviewed and fully considered
comments from the public and peer reviewers on the proposed rule. This
final rule incorporates minor changes to our proposed listing based on
the comments we received (See: Summary of Comments and
Recommendations).
Background
Taxonomy and Species Descriptions
Poecilotheria is a genus of arboreal spiders endemic to Sri Lanka
and India. The genus belongs to the family Theraphosidae, often
referred to as tarantulas, within the infraorder Mygalomorphae. As with
most theraphosid genera, Poecilotheria is a poorly understood genus.
The taxonomy has never been studied using modern DNA technology;
therefore, species descriptions are based solely on morphological
characteristics. Consequently, there have been several revisions,
additions, and subtractions to the list of Poecilotheria species over
the last 20 years (Nanayakkara 2014a, pp. 71-72; Gabriel et al. 2013,
entire).
The World Spider Catalog (2017, unpaginated; 2016, unpaginated)
currently recognizes 14 species of Poecilotheria. The Integrated
Taxonomic Information System currently identifies 16 species in the
genus, based on the 2011 version of the same catalog. Because the World
Spider Catalog is the widely accepted authority on spider taxonomy, we
consider the Poecilotheria species recognized by the most recent (2017)
version of this catalog to be valid. Based on the World
[[Page 36756]]
Spider Catalog, all five of the species addressed in this rule are
considered valid taxon, although P. pederseni is now considered a
junior synonym to the currently accepted name P. vittata. Therefore, in
the remainder of this document we refer to this species as P. vittata.
Further, all five of these species have multiple common names (see
WildEarth Guardians 2010, p. 4); thus, we refer to them by their
scientific names throughout this document.
Poecilotheria species are among the largest spiders in the world,
with body lengths of 4 to 9 centimeters (1.5 to 3.5 inches) and maximum
adult leg spans varying from 15 to 25 centimeters (6 to 10 inches)
(Nanayakkara 2014a, pp. 94-129; Molur et al. 2006, p. 23). They are
known for their fast movements and potent venom that, in humans,
typically causes extended muscle cramps and severe pain (Fuchs 2014, p.
75; Nanayakkara and Adikaram 2013, p. 53). They are hairy spiders and
have striking coloration, with dorsal color patterns of gray, black,
brown, and in one case, a metallic blue. Ventral coloration of either
sex is typically more of the same with the exception of the first pair
of legs, which in some species bear bright yellow to orange aposematic
(warning) markings that are visible when the spider presents a
defensive display. Mature spiders exhibit some sexual dimorphism with
mature males having a more drab coloration and being significantly
smaller than the adult females (Siliwal 2017, unpaginated; Nanayakkara
2014a, entire; Pocock 1899, pp. 84-86).
The primary characteristics used to distinguish Poecilotheria
species are ventral leg markings (Gabriel 2010 p. 13, citing several
authors). Some authors indicate that identification via leg markings is
straightforward for most Poecilotheria species (Nanayakkara 2014a, pp.
74-75; Gabriel 2011a, p. 25). However, the apparent consistent leg
patterns observed in adults of a species could also be a function of
specimens being collected from a limited number of locations (Morra
2013, p. 129). During surveys, researchers found more variation than
suggested by published species descriptions and indicated that
identifying Poecilotheria species is not as straightforward as
suggested by current descriptions (Molur et al. 2003, unpaginated).
Immature spiders (juveniles) lack the variation in coloring found in
adults. As a result, they are difficult to differentiate visually;
genetic analysis may be the only way to reliably identify juveniles to
species (Longhorn 2014a, unpaginated).
Captive Poecilotheria
Most captive individuals of Poecilotheria species are in the pet
trade; few specimens of the species addressed in this rule are held in
zoos (Species360 2017, unpaginated). Poecilotheria species are commonly
bred in captivity by amateur hobbyists as well as vendors, and are
available as captive-bred young in the pet trade in the United States,
Europe, and elsewhere (see Trade). However, while rearing and keeping
of captive individuals by hobbyists and vendors has provided
information on life history of these species, we are not aware of any
existing conservation programs for these species, including any in
which specimens held or sold as pets contribute to the viability of
these species within their native ranges in the wild.
Individuals of these species that are held or sold as pets hold
limited conservation value to the species in the wild because they are
not genetically managed for conservation purposes. Individuals in the
pet trade descend from wild individuals from unknown locations, have
undocumented lineages, come from limited stock (e.g., see Gabriel 2012,
p. 18), and are bred without knowledge or consideration of their
genetics. They also likely include an unknown number of hybrid
individuals resulting from intentional crosses, or unintentional
crosses resulting from confusion and difficulty in species taxonomy and
identification (Gabriel 2011a, pp. 25-26; Gabriel et al. 2005, p. 4;
Gabriel 2003, pp. 89-90). Further, many are likely several generations
removed from wild ancestors and thus may be adversely affected by
inbreeding or maladapted to conditions in the wild. In short, captive
individuals held or sold as pets do not adhere to the IUCN guidelines
for reintroductions and other conservation translocations (IUCN 2013,
entire). Further, we are not aware of any captive-breeding programs for
Poecilotheria that adhere to IUCN guidelines.
Because (1) the purpose of our status assessments is to determine
the status of the species in the wild, (2) we are not aware of any
information indicating that captive individuals are contributing to the
conservation of these species in the wild, and (3) captive individuals
held or sold as pets have limited value for conservation programs or
for reintroduction purposes, we place little weight on the status of
captive individuals in our assessment of the status of the five
Poecilotheria species addressed in this rule.
Tarantula General Biology
Tarantulas possess life-history traits markedly different from most
spiders and other arthropods (Bond et al. 2006, p. 145). They are long-
lived, have delayed sexual maturity, and most are habitat specialists
that are extremely sedentary. They also have poor dispersal ability
because their mode of travel is limited to walking, and they typically
do not move far from the area in which they are born. As a result, the
distribution of individuals tends to be highly clumped in suitable
microhabitats (a smaller habitat within a larger habitat), populations
are extremely genetically structured (genetically subdivided; gene
frequencies differ across the population), and the group shows a high
level of endemism (species restricted to a particular geographical
location) (Ferreti et al. 2014, p. 2; Hedin et al. 2013, p. 509, citing
several sources; Bond et al. 2006, pp. 145-146, citing several
sources).
Tarantulas are primarily nocturnal and typically lead a hidden
life, spending much of their time concealed inside burrows or crevices
(retreats) that provide protection from predators and the elements
(Foelix 2011, p. 14; Molur et al. 2003, unpaginated; Gallon 2000,
unpaginated). They are very sensitive to vibrations and climatic
conditions, and usually do not come out of their retreats in conditions
like rains, wind, or excessive light, or when they detect movement
outside their retreat (Molur et al. 2003, unpaginated). Tarantulas are
generalist predators that sit and wait for passing prey near the
entrance of their retreats (Gallon 2000, unpaginated). With the
exception of reproductive males that wander in search of females during
the breeding season, they leave their retreat only briefly for
capturing prey, and quickly return to it at the slightest vibration or
disturbance (Foelix 2011, p. 14; Stotley and Shillington 2009, pp.
1210-1211; Molur et al. 2003, unpaginated). Tarantulas generally
inhabit a suitable retreat for extended periods and may use the same
retreat for years (Stotley and Shilling 2009, pp. 1210-1211; Stradling
1994, p. 87). Most tarantulas are solitary, with one spider occupying a
retreat (Gallon 2000, unpaginated).
The lifestyle of adult male tarantulas differs from that of adult
females and juveniles. Females and juveniles are sedentary, spending
most of their time in or near their retreat. Adult females are long-
lived and continue to grow, molt, and reproduce for several years after
reaching maturity (Ferreti et al. 2014, p. 2, citing several sources;
Costa
[[Page 36757]]
and Perez-Miles 2002, p. 585, citing several sources; Gallon 2000,
unpaginated). They are capable of producing one brood per year,
although they do not always do so (Ferreti et al. 2014, p. 2; Stradling
1994, pp. 92-96). Males have shorter lifespans than females and, after
reaching maturity, no longer molt and usually only live one or two
breeding seasons (Costa and Perez-Miles 2002, p. 585, Gallon 2000,
unpaginated). Further, on reaching maturity, males leave their retreats
to wander in search of receptive females with which to mate (Stotley
and Shillington 2009, pp. 1210-1211). Males appear to search the
landscape for females randomly and, at short range, may be able to
detect females through contact sex-pheromones on silk deposited by the
female at the entrance of her retreat (Ferreti et al. 2013, pp. 88, 90;
Janowski-Bell and Horner 1999, pp. 506, 509; Yanez et al. 1999, pp.
165-167; Stradling 1994, p. 96). Males may cover relatively large areas
when searching for females. Males of a ground-dwelling temperate
species (Aphonopelma anax) are reported covering search areas up to 29
ha (72 acres), though the mean size of areas searched is much smaller
(1.1 0.5 ha one year and 8.8 2.5 ha another
year) (Stotley and Shillington 2009, p. 1216).
When a male locates a receptive female, the two will mate in or
near the entrance to the female's retreat. After mating, the female
returns to her retreat where she eventually lays eggs within an egg-sac
and tends the eggs until they hatch. Spiderlings reach maturity in one
or more years (Gallon 2000, unpaginated).
Poecilotheria Biology
Limited information is available on Poecilotheria species in the
wild. While they appear to be typical tarantulas in many respects, they
differ from most tarantulas in that they are somewhat social (discussed
below) and reside in trees rather than ground burrows (see
Microhabitat).
Poecilotheria species are patchily distributed (Siliwal et al.
2008, p. 8) and prey on a variety of insects, including winged
termites, beetles, grasshoppers, and moths, and occasionally small
vertebrates (Das et al. 2012, entire; Molur et al. 2006, p. 31; Smith
et al. 2001, p. 57).
We are not aware of any information regarding the reproductive
success of wild Poecilotheria species. However, reproduction may be
greatly reduced during droughts (Smith et al. 2001, pp. 46, 49).
Additionally, given the apparently random searching for females by male
tarantulas, successful mating of females likely depends on the density
of males in the vicinity. In a study conducted on an arboreal tropical
tarantula (Avicularia avicularia in Trinidad), less than half of adult
females produced eggs in the same year despite the fact that they were
in close proximity to each other and exhibited the same weight gain,
possibly due to a failure to mate (Stradling 1994, p. 96).
Time to maturity in Poecilotheria species varies and is influenced
by the temperature at which the young are raised and amount of food
provided (Gabriel 2006, entire). Based on observations of captive
Poecilotheria, males mature from spiderlings to adults in 11 to16
months (Gabriel 2011b, p. 101; Gabriel 2005, entire). Females mature in
14 to 48 months and generally live an additional 60 to 85 months after
maturing (Cowper 2017, unpaginated; Weaver 2017, unpaginated; Gabriel
2012, p. 19; Government of Sri Lanka and Government of the United
States 2000, p. 3), although they have been reported living up to 14
years (Gallon 2012, p. 69). Females lay about 50 to 100 eggs, 5 to 6
months after mating (Nanayakarra 2014a, p. 79; Gabriel 2011b, entire;
Gabriel 2005, p. 101). In captivity, generation time appears to be
roughly 2-3 years (see Gabriel 2011b, entire; Gabriel 2006, p. 96;
Gabriel 2005, entire). While captive individuals provide some
indication of potential growth, longevity, and reproductive capacity of
wild individuals, these variables are likely to vary with conditions in
the wild. Poecilotheria are ectotherms and, as such, their
physiological and developmental processes including growth and
reproduction are strongly influenced by body temperature and it is
likely that captive-rearing of these species is primarily done under
ideal environmental conditions for reproduction and growth.
Unlike most tarantulas, which are solitary, most Poecilotheria
species display a degree of sociality. Adult females often share their
retreat with their spiderlings. Eventually as the young mature, they
disperse to find denning areas of their own. Occasionally young remain
on their natal tree to breed, or three to four adult females will share
the same retreat (Nanayakkara 2014a, pp. 74, 80). These semi-social
behaviors are believed to be a response to a lack of availability of
suitable habitat (trees) in which individuals can reside (Nanayakkara
2014a, pp. 74, 80; Gallon 2000, unpaginated).
Poecilotheria Habitat
Microhabitat
Poecilotheria occupy preexisting holes or crevices in trees or
behind loose tree bark (Molur et al. 2006, p. 31; Samarawckrama et al.
2005; Molur et al. 2003 unpaginated; Kirk 1996, pp. 22-23). Individuals
of some species are also occasionally found in grooves or crevices in
or on other substrates such as rocks or buildings that are close to
wooded areas (Samarawckrama et al. 2005, pp. 76, 83; Molur et al. 2003,
unpaginated). In a survey in Sri Lanka, 89 percent (31) of
Poecilotheria spiders were found in or on trees, while 11 percent (4)
were found in or on buildings (Samarawckrama et al. 2005, p. 76).
Poecilotheria species are said to have a preference for residing in
old, established trees with naturally occurring burrows (Nanayakkara
2014a, p. 86). Some species also appear to prefer particular tree
species (Nanayakkara 2014a, p. 84; Samarawckrama et al. 2005, p. 76).
Macrohabitat
Most Poecilotheria species occur in forested areas, although some
occasionally occur in other treed habitats such as plantations
(Nanayakkara 2014a, p. 86; Molur et al. 2006, p. 10; Molur et al 2003,
entire; Smith et al. 2001, entire). Poecilotheria are less abundant in
degraded forest (Molur et al. 2004, p. 1665). Less complex, degraded
forests may contain fewer trees that provide adequate retreats for
these species and less cover for protection from predators and the
elements. Trees with broad, dense canopy cover likely provide
Poecilotheria in hotter, dryer habitats protection from heat and
desiccation (Siliwal 2008, pp. 12, 15). We provide additional, species-
specific information on habitat below.
Sri Lanka
Sri Lanka is an island nation about 65,610 square kilometers (km
\2\) (25,332 square miles (mi \2\)) in area (Weerakoon 2012, p. xvii),
or about the size of West Virginia (Fig. 1). The variation in
topography, soils, and rainfall on the island has resulted in a
diversity of ecosystems with high levels of species endemism
(Government of Sri Lanka (GOSL) 2014, pp. xiv-xv). Sri Lanka, together
with the Western Ghats of India, is identified as a global biodiversity
hotspot, and is among the eight ``hottest hotspots,'' (Myers et al.
2000, entire).
Sri Lanka consists of a mountainous region (central highlands),
reaching 2,500 meters (8,202 feet) in elevation, in
[[Page 36758]]
the south-central part of the island surrounded by broad lowland plains
(GOSL 2012, p. 2a-3-141) (Fig. 2). The country has a tropical climate
characterized by two major monsoon periods: the southwest monsoon from
May to September and the northeast monsoon from December to February
(GOSL 2012, pp. 7-8).
Sri Lanka's central highlands create a rain shadow effect that
gives rise to two pronounced climate zones--the wet zone and dry zone--
and a less extensive intermediate zone between the two (Ministry of
Environment-Sri Lanka (MOE) 2010, pp. 21-22) (Fig. 2). Small arid zones
also occur on the northwestern and southeastern ends of the country
(Nanayakkara 2014a, p. 22). Annual rainfall ranges from less than 1,000
millimeters (mm) (39.4 inches (in)) in the arid zone to over 5,000 mm
(197 in) in the wet zone of the central highlands (Jayatillake et al.
2005, pp. 66-67). Mean annual temperature ranges from 27 degrees
Celsius ([deg]C) (80.6 degrees Fahrenheit ([deg]F)) in the lowlands to
15 [deg]C (59 ;[deg]F) in the highlands (Eriyagama et al. 2010, p. 2).
The wet zone is located in the southwestern quarter of the island,
where high annual rainfall is maintained throughout the year by rain
received during both monsoons and during inter-monsoonal periods (MOE
2010, pp. 21-22) (Fig. 2). The wet zone is divided into low, mid, and
montane regions based on altitude. The dry zone, in which most of the
land area of Sri Lanka occurs, is spread over much of the lowland
plains and is subjected to several months of drought (MOE 2010, pp. 21-
22) (Fig. 2). Most of the rain in this zone comes from the northeast
monsoon and inter-monsoonal rains (MOE 2010, pp. 21-22; Malgrem 2003,
p. 1236). Characteristic forest types occur within each of the
different climate zones.
Species-Specific Information
Each of the five species addressed in this finding is endemic to
Sri Lanka and has a range restricted to a particular region and one or
two of Sri Lanka's climate zones (Nanayakkara 2014a, pp. 84-85) (Fig.
1, Fig. 2). Due to their secretive and nocturnal habits, sensitivity to
vibrations, and their occurrence in structurally complex habitat
(forest), Poecilotheria species are difficult to detect (Molur et al.
2003, unpaginated). Therefore, reported ranges are possibly smaller
than the actual ranges of these species. However, surveys for these
species were conducted at many locations throughout the country during
2009-2012 by Nanayakkara et al. (2012, entire), and we consider the
locations reported in Nanayakkara (2014a, entire) to reflect the best
available information concerning the ranges of these species.
Historical ranges for the five species addressed in this rule are
unknown. Further, information on species abundance or population
dynamics is not available on any of the five species; therefore,
population trends are unknown. However, based upon the multitude of
threats acting on these species, especially extensive and ongoing
habitat loss and degradation, experts believe populations are
declining, and that these species are very likely to go extinct within
the next two or three decades (Nanayakkara and Adikaram 2013, p. 54).
We are not aware of any existing conservation programs for these
species. All five species are categorized on the National Red List of
Sri Lanka as Endangered or Critically Endangered based on their area of
occupancy (Critically Endangered: less than 10 km \2\; Endangered: less
than 500 km \2\) and distribution (Critically Endangered: severely
fragmented or known to exist at only a single location; Endangered:
severely fragmented or known to exist at no more than five locations),
and the status (continuing decline, observed, inferred or projected, in
the area, extent, or quality, or any combination of the three) of their
habitat (MOE 2012, p. 55; IUCN 2001, entire).
For locations discussed in species-specific information below, see
Fig. 1. For locations of the ranges of the different species, see Fig.
2.
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P
[[Page 36759]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR31JY18.001
[[Page 36760]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR31JY18.002
BILLING CODE 4333-15-C
P. fasciata
Poecilotheria fasciata occurs in forests below 200-m elevation in
Sri Lanka's dry and intermediate zones north of Colombo and is also
sometimes found in coconut plantations in this region (Nanayakkara
2014a, p. 96; Nanayakkara 2014b, unpublished data; Smith et al. 2001,
entire). The species has a broad but patchy distribution and is
estimated to occupy less than 500 km\2\ (193 mi\2\) of its range (MOE
2012, p. 55; Smith et al. 2001, p. 48). The area, extent, or quality
(or a combination thereof) of P. fasciata's habitat is in continuing
decline, and the species is categorized on the National Red List of Sri
Lanka as Endangered (MOE 2012, p. 55).
The only detailed record of the species' occurrence is provided by
Smith et al. (2001, entire), where Poecilotheria fasciata colonized a
coconut plantation following a prolonged drought. While P. fasciata in
dry and intermediate zone forests, including those surrounding the
coconut plantation, were found to be emaciated and without spiderlings,
those in the irrigated plantation were found to have spiderlings in
their retreats and wider abdomens. Smith et al. argue that P. fasciata
was able to colonize the plantation due to the occurrence of P.
fasciata in the adjacent remnant forest, the presence of coconut trees
that were infested with weevils and subsequently fed on by woodpeckers
that created holes suitable for P. fasciata retreats, and plantation
irrigation that resulted in an abundant prey base for the species. The
P. fasciata population in the plantation was apparently established in
the 1980s and persisted until at least 2000 (Smith et al. 2001, pp. 49,
52).
During recent surveys, P. fasciata were detected at nine
locations--two in coconut plantations and seven in forest locations.
Greater than 20 adults and 100 juveniles were found in coconut
plantations, and greater than 30 adults and no juveniles were found in
forest locations (Nanayakkara 2014b, unpublished data). Although no
[[Page 36761]]
juveniles were detected in forest habitats during these surveys, recent
observations of P. fasciata juveniles in forest habitat have been
reported (Nanayakkara 2014a, p. 96; Kumarasinghe et al. 2013, p. 10).
Therefore, based on the observations of Smith et al. described above,
it is possible that the lack of juveniles detected in forests during
recent surveys was due to drought conditions during the survey period.
As indicated above, island-wide surveys for Poecilotheria were
conducted during 2009-2012, and droughts occurred in 2010 and 2012 in
the region in which P. fasciata occurs (Integrated Regional Information
Network 2012, unpaginated; Disaster Management Center, Sri Lanka 2010,
p. 12). However, while juveniles were detected only in coconut
plantations during these surveys, numbers found in coconut and forest
habitat cannot be directly compared because surveys were designed for
determining distribution rather than species abundance or density. For
instance, juveniles may be more difficult to detect in forest habitat
than in coconut plantations, or a greater area of coconut plantations
may have been searched compared to forest habitat.
P. ornata
Poecilotheria ornata is found in the plains and hills of the
lowland wet zone in southwestern Sri Lanka (Nanayakkara 2014a, pp. 112-
113; Smith et al. 2002, p. 90). It is one of the few solitary species
in the genus (Nanayakkara 2014a, p. 112). In recent surveys, 23 adults
and no juveniles were detected at 4 locations (Nanayakkara 2014b,
unpublished data). Poecilotheria ornata is estimated to occupy less
than 500 km\2\ (193 mi\2\) of its range (MOE 2012, p. 55), and the
area, extent, or quality (or a combination thereof) of the species'
habitat is in continuing decline. Poecilotheria ornata is categorized
on the National Red List of Sri Lanka as Endangered (MOE 2012, p. 55).
P. smithi
Poecilotherai smithi is found in the central highlands, in Kandy
and Matale districts (Nanayakkara et al. 2013, pp. 73-74). It was
originally found in the wet zone at mid elevations (Kirk 1996, p. 23),
although it is described as a montane species (Jacobi 2005, entire;
Smith et al. 2002, p. 92). Poecilotheria smithi appears to be very rare
(Nanayakkara et al. 2013, p. 73; Gabriel et al. 2005, p. 4) and is
considered ``highly threatened'' (Nanayakkara et al. 2013, p. 73). The
species was described in 1996, and, despite several efforts to locate
the species during the past 20 years, few individuals have been found
(Nanayakkara et al. 2013, pp. 73-74; Gabriel et al. 2005, pp. 6-7). In
2005, three adult females and four spiderlings were reported in the
Haragama, Kandy district, an area described as severely impacted by
several anthropogenic factors (Nanayakkara et al. 2013, p. 74; Gabriel
et al. 2005, pp. 6-7). During surveys conducted in several areas of the
country during 2003-2005, no P. smithi were found (Samarawckrama et al.
2005, entire). Finally, during recent surveys, the species was found at
two locations with seven adults and nine juveniles detected
(Nanayakkara 2014b, unpublished data). Prior to these recent surveys,
the species was known only from the Haragama, Kandy district. However,
the species was recently found about 31 km (19.3 mi) away from
Haragama, in three trees within a 5-km\2\ (1.9-mi\2\) area of highly
disturbed habitat (Nanayakkara et al. 2013, p. 74).
Poecilotheria smithi was estimated to occupy less than 10 km\2\
(3.9 mi\2\) of its range (MOE 2012, p. 55) but a recently reported
location in Matale district increases the known area of occupancy by 5
km\2\ (1.9 mi\2\). The area, extent, or quality (or a combination
thereof) of the species' habitat is considered to be in continuing
decline, and the species is categorized on the National Red List of Sri
Lanka as Critically Endangered (MOE 2012, p. 55).
P. subfusca
Poecilotheria subfusca occurs in the wet zone of the central
highlands of Sri Lanka, in two disjunct regions: the montane region
above 1,500-m elevation in Nuwara Eliya and Badulla districts; and at
500 to 600 m (1,640 to 1,968 ft) elevation in Kegalla, Kandy, and
Matale districts (Nanayakkara 2014a, pp. 101-102, 116; Smith et al.
2002, entire).
During recent surveys, P. subfusca was found at 10 locations, and a
total of 25 adult and 56 juvenile P. subfusca were detected
(Nanayakkara 2014b, unpublished data). The area of the range occupied
by P. subfusca is less than 500 km\2\ (193 mi\2\) (MOE 2012, p. 55).
Further, the area, extent, or quality (or a combination thereof) of P.
subfusca's habitat is in continuing decline throughout its range, and
the species is categorized on the National Red List of Sri Lanka as
Endangered (MOE 2012, p. 55).
P. vittata
Poecilotheria vittata occurs in the arid, dry, and intermediate
zones of Hambantota and Monaragala districts in southeastern Sri Lanka
(Kekulandala and Goonatilake 2015, unpaginated; Nanayakkara 2014a, pp.
106-107). The species' preferred habitat is Manilkara hexandra (Palu)
trees (Nanayakkara 2014a, p. 106), a dominant canopy tree species in
Sri Lanka's dry forest (Gunarathne and Perera 2014, p. 15). In recent
surveys, the species was found at 4 locations, and 15 adults and 7
juveniles of P. vittata were detected (Nanayakkara 2014b, unpublished
data). Poecilotheria vittata is estimated to occupy less than 500 km\2\
(193 mi\2\) of its range (MOE 2012, p. 55), and the area, extent, or
quality (or a combination thereof) of the species' habitat is
considered to be in continuing decline. Poecilotheria vittata is
categorized on the National Red List of Sri Lanka as Endangered (MOE
2012, p. 55).
Summary of Biological Status and Threats
The Act directs us to determine whether any species is an
endangered species or a threatened species because of any one or more
of five factors or the cumulative effects thereof: (A) The present or
threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or
range; (B) Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes; (C) Disease or predation; (D) The inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E) Other natural or manmade factors
affecting its continued existence. In this section, we summarize the
biological condition of the species and its resources, and the
influences on these to assess the species' overall viability and the
risks to that viability.
Habitat Loss and Degradation
Habitat loss and degradation are considered primary factors
negatively affecting Poecilotheria species (Nanayakkara and Adikaram
2013, pp. 53-54; MOE 2012, p. 55; Molur et al. 2008, pp. 1-2). Forest
loss and degradation are likely to negatively impact the five species
addressed in this rule in several ways. First, forest loss and
degradation directly eliminate or reduce the availability of trees
required by Poecilotheria species for reproduction, foraging, and
protection (Samarawckrama et al. 2005, p. 76; Smith et al. 2002,
entire). Second, due to the limited ability of Poecilotheria species to
travel, as well as their sedentary habits, forest loss and degradation
are also likely to result in direct mortality of individuals or
populations, via physical trauma caused by the activities that result
in forest loss and degradation, or the intentional killing of these
spiders when they are encountered by humans during these activities
(see Intentional Killing). Such mortality affects these species'
[[Page 36762]]
abundances and distributions, and also their genetic diversity.
Tarantulas have highly structured populations (See Tarantula General
Biology) and, consequently, the loss of a local population of a
species--due to habitat loss or any other factor--equates to a loss of
unique genetic diversity (Bond et al. 2006, p. 154, citing several
sources). Finally, the loss of forest also often results in fragmented
habitat. Due to the limited dispersal ability of these species, forest
fragmentation is likely to isolate Poecilotheria populations, which
increases their vulnerability to stochastic processes (see Stochastic
Processes), and may also expose wandering males and dispersing
juveniles to increased mortality from intentional killing or predation
when they attempt to cross between forest fragments (Bond et al. 2006,
p. 155) (see Intentional Killing).
Deforestation
Forests covered almost the entire island of Sri Lanka a few
centuries ago (Mattsson et al. 2012, p. 31). However, extensive
deforestation occurred during the British colonial period (1815-1948)
as a result of forest-clearing for establishment of plantation crops
such as tea and coffee, and also exploitation for timber, slash-and-
burn agriculture (a method of agriculture in which natural vegetation
is cut down and burned to clear the land for planting), and land
settlement. In 1884, about midway through the British colonial period,
closed-canopy (dense) forest covered 84 percent of the country and was
reduced to 44 percent by 1956 (GOSL 2012, p. 2a-3-145; Nanayakkara
1996, in Mattson et al. 2012, p. 31). Deforestation continued after
independence as the result of timber extraction, slash-and-burn
agriculture, human settlements, national development projects, and
encroachment (GOSL 2012, pp. 2a-3-144-145; Perera et al. 2012, p. 165).
As a result, dense forest cover (canopy density greater than 70
percent) declined by half in about 50 years, to 22 percent in 2010
(GOSL 2012, pp. 51, 2a-3-145; Nanayakkara 1996, in Mattson et al. 2012,
p. 31). Open-canopy forest (canopy density less than 70 percent)
covered an additional 6.8 percent of the country in 2010 for an overall
forest cover of 28.6 percent (GOSL 2012, p. 51).
The extent of deforestation differed in the three climate zones of
the country. The impacts of anthropogenic factors on forests in the
wetter regions of the island have been more extensive due to the higher
density of the human population in these regions. The human population
density in the wet zone is 650 people per km\2\ (1,684 per mi\2\)
compared to 170 people per km\2\ (440 per km\2\) in the dry zone and
329 per km\2\ (852 per mi\2\) nationally (GOSL 2012, p. 8). Currently
about 13 percent of the wet zone, 15 percent of the intermediate zone,
and 29 percent of the dry zone are densely forested (Table 1).
Recent information on forest cover in the different climate zones
is provided in three reports (GOSL 2015, GOSL 2012, and FAO 2015a), all
of which provide information from the Forest Department of Sri Lanka.
One report (GOSL 2015) provides a map of the change in forest cover
between 1992 and 2010 and a qualitative assessment of these changes.
The others (GOSL 2012 and FAO 2015a) provide quantitative information
on the area of forest cover by forest type for 1992, 1999, and 2010.
These latter two reports differ slightly in their presentation of
information but contain identical data on natural forest cover.
However, the Forest Department of Sri Lanka used different rainfall
criteria to separate dry and intermediate zone forests, and different
altitude criteria to separate montane and submontane forests, in
different years (see climate zone and forest definitions in FAO 2015a,
p. 6; GOSL 2012, p. 51; FAO 2005, p. 7; FAO 2001, pp. 16, 53).
Therefore, we combined the information on intermediate and dry zone
forests, and the information on montane and submontane forests (see 81
FR 90307, Table 4). We discuss the information on forest cover from the
various sources by climate zone below.
Wet Zone Forest
Wet zone forests in Sri Lanka are categorized as montane,
submontane, or lowland forest, based on elevation. Very little wet zone
forest remains in Sri Lanka. Currently, montane and submontane forests
combined covers only about 733 km\2\ (283 mi\2\) and is severely
fragmented (GOSL 2012, pp. 51, 2a-3-142). The area remained relatively
stable from 1992 to 2010 (81 FR 90307; GOSL 2012, p. 51). More recent
evidence indicates these forests are currently declining: firewood
collection, cutting of trees for other domestic purposes, and gem
mining are ongoing in these forests, and large areas were recently
illegally cleared for vegetable cultivation (Wijesundara 2012, p. 182).
While these forests are protected in Sri Lanka, administering agencies
do not have sufficient resources to prevent these activities
(Wijesundara 2012, p. 182).
The area of lowland wet zone forests (lowland rainforest) declined
from 1992 to 2010. Remaining lowland rainforests are severely
fragmented, exist primarily as small, isolated patches, and declined by
13% (183 km\2\)(71 mi\2\)) during the 18-year period, though the rate
of loss slowed considerably during the latter half of this period (81
FR 90307, Table 4; GOSL 2012, p. 2a-3-142; Lindstrom et al. 2012, p.
681). Changes in forest cover show low levels of deforestation
throughout the lowland rainforest region from 1992 to 2010, and a
deforestation ``hotspot'' on the border of Kalutara and Ratnapura
districts, which is within the range of P. ornata (Fig. 1, Fig. 2)
(GOSL 2015, unpaginated).
Dry and Intermediate Zone Forests
Dry and intermediate zone forests, which include most open-canopy
forest (Mattsson et al. 2012, p. 30), declined by 8% (1,372 km\2\ (530
mi\2\)) between 1992 and 2010 (81 FR 90307, Table 4). The rate of
deforestation nationwide during this period was highest in Anuradhapura
and Moneragala districts, in which large portions of the ranges of P.
fasciata and P. vittata occur (see Fig. 1, Fig. 2) (GOSL 2015,
unpaginated). Further, deforestation hotspots have been found in other
districts where these species occur, including Puttalam and Hambantota
(GOSL 2015, unpaginated). Natural regeneration of dry forest species is
poor, and dry zone forests are heavily degraded as a result of
activities such as frequent shifting cultivation and timber logging
(Perera 2012, p. 165, citing several sources).
[[Page 36763]]
Table 1--The Total Area of Sri Lanka's Climate Zones, and the Coverage of Dense Forest (Canopy Cover Greater
Than 70 Percent) Within Each Zone in 2010, Based on Information Provided in 81 FR 90302, Table 2 and GOSL 2012,
p. 51
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Area covered with
dense (canopy
cover greater Proportion
Climate zones of Sri Lanka Area \1\ (km\2\) than 70 percent) (percent) with
closed-canopy dense forest \2\
forest in 2010
(km\2\)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wet Zone............................................... 15,090 1,966 13
Intermediate Zone...................................... 7,873 1,179 15
Dry Zone............................................... 39,366 \3\ 11,238 29
Arid Zone.............................................. 3,281 ................. .................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Calculated based on proportion of land area in each climate zone as provided in 81 FR 90302, Table 2, and a
total land area of 65,610 km\2\.
\2\ Original extent of forest cover is unknown. However, each zone was likely close to 100% forested because
dense forest covered 84% of the island in 1884, following several decades of deforestation.
\3\ Figure is for dry monsoon forest and riverine forest. It does not include mangrove forests.
Forest Conservation Measures
Sri Lanka has taken steps in recent decades to conserve its
forests, and these efforts have contributed to the slowing of
deforestation in the country (GOSL 2012, pp. 54-55). In 1990, the
country imposed a moratorium on logging in all natural forests, marked
most reserve boundaries to stem encroachments, and implemented
management plans for forest and wildlife reserves, which became legal
requirements under the Forest Ordinance Amendment Act No. 65 of 2009
and the Fauna and Flora Ordinance Amendment Act No. 22 of 2009 (GOSL
2014, p. 26). The government also encourages community participation in
forest and protected area management, has implemented programs to
engage residents in community forestry to reduce encroachment of cash
crops and tea in the wet zone and slash-and-burn agriculture in the dry
zone, and encourages use of non-forest lands and private woodlots for
meeting the demands for wood and wood products (GOSL 2014, p. 26). In
addition to these efforts, between 12 percent (GOSL 2015, unpaginated)
and 28 percent (GOSL 2014, pp. xvi, 23) of the country's land area is
reported to be under protected area status.
Although considerable efforts have been undertaken in Sri Lanka in
recent years to stop deforestation and forest degradation, these
processes are ongoing (see Current and Future Forest Trends). The
assessment of the status of natural forests during the Species Red List
assessments in 2012 indicate that, despite advances in forest
conservation in the country, many existing threats continue to impact
forest habitats (GOSL 2014, p. 26). While laws and regulations are in
place to address deforestation, several factors inhibit their
implementation (GOSL 2012, pp. 55, 2a-3-148-150). For instance, lack of
financial assistance for protected area management, increasing demand
for land, and unplanned, after-the-fact legalization of land
encroachments, result in further loss of the forest habitat of the five
species addressed in this finding (GOSL 2014, p. 22; GOSL 2011,
unpaginated). Also, government agencies have poor coordination with
respect to forest conservation--conservation agencies are not always
adequately consulted on initiatives to develop forested land (GOSL
2014, p. 22; MOE 2010, p. 31). Finally, many protected areas within the
wet zone are small, degraded, and isolated (GOSL 2014, p. 31).
Current and Future Forest Trends
The current drivers of deforestation and forest degradation in Sri
Lanka include a variety of factors such as small-scale encroachments,
illicit timber harvesting, forest fires, destructive mining practices,
and clearing of forest for developments, settlements, and agriculture
(GOSL 2012, p. 12). These stressors are exacerbated by a large, dense
human population that is projected to increase from 20.7 million in
2015 to 21.5 million in 2030 (United Nations 2015, p. 22). While the
majority of remaining forested areas are protected, further population
growth is likely to result in reduction of forested areas because (1)
Sri Lanka already has a very high human density (329 people per km\2\
(852 per mi\2\)), (2) increases in the population will elevate an
already high demand for land, and (3) little non-forested land is
available for expansion of housing, development, cash crops, or
subsistence agriculture (GOSL 2012, pp. 8, 14, 58). Most (72%) of the
population of Sri Lanka is rural, dependence on agriculture for
subsistence is widespread, and the rate of population growth is higher
in rural areas. This results in an increasing demand in the country for
land for subsistence (Lindstrom et al. 2012, p. 680; GOSL 2011,
unpaginated).
The current drivers of deforestation and forest degradation are
exacerbated by high economic returns from illicit land conversions,
lack of alternative livelihood opportunities for those practicing
slash-and-burn agriculture and, in the dry zone, poverty and the weak
implementation of land-use policy (GOSL 2012, pp. 14-15). Further, in
the 30 years prior to 2009, Sri Lanka was engaged in a civil war, which
was fought primarily in the dry zone of the northern and eastern
regions of the country, many areas of which were inaccessible. The war,
along with a reduced rate of development in the country as a whole
during this period, may have helped limit deforestation rates (GOSL
2012, pp. 48, 56-57).
Overall, deforestation and forest degradation in Sri Lanka are
ongoing, although recent rates of deforestation are much lower than
during the mid- to late-20th century--the rate of deforestation during
1992-2010 was 71 km\2\ (27.4 mi\2\) per year, compared to 400 km\2\
(154 mi\2\) per year during 1956-1992 (GOSL 2015, unpaginated).
However, since the end of Sri Lanka's civil war in 2009, the government
has been implementing an extensive 10-year development plan with the
goal of transforming the country into a global economic and industrial
hub (Buthpitiya 2013, p. ii; Central Bank of Sri Lanka 2012, p. 67;
Ministry of Finance and Planning-Sri Lanka (MOFP) 2010, entire). The
plan includes large infrastructure projects throughout the country
(MOFP 2010, entire). Projects include, among other things, development
of seaports, airports, expressways, railways, industrial parks, power
plants, and water management systems that will allow for planned
[[Page 36764]]
expansion of agriculture, and many of these projects have already
started (Buthpitiya 2013, pp. 5-6; Central Bank of Sri Lanka 2012, p.
67; MOFP 2010, entire). They also include projects located within the
ranges of all five species addressed in this finding, although the plan
does not provide the amount of area that will be impacted by these
projects (Fig. 2 and MOFP 2010, pp. 63, 93, 101, 202-298). For example,
a new dam project within the range of P. smithi will submerge one of
the two sites at which the species is found (Nanayakkara 2017,
unpaginated). The rate of loss of natural forest (primary forest and
other naturally regenerated forest) increased from 60 km\2\ (23 mi\2\)
per year during 2000-2010 to 86 km\2\ (33 mi\2\) per year during 2010-
2015 (FAO 2015b, pp. 44, 50). As post-war reconstruction and
development continues in Sri Lanka, deforestation and forest
degradation can be expected to rise (GOSL 2012, p. 2a-3-146).
Coconut Plantations
Coconut is grown throughout Sri Lanka. Most (57 percent) of the
area under coconut cultivation is in the intermediate and wet zones
north of Colombo (MOE 2011, p. 14), which overlaps with the southern
portion of the range of P. fasciata. As indicated above, P. fasciata
are sometimes found in coconut plantations in Sri Lanka, although the
extent to which coconut plantations contribute to sustaining viable
populations of these species is unknown. The ability of coconut
plantations to contribute to conservation of P. fasciata is limited
because: (1) Tarantulas are poor dispersers (see Tarantula General
Biology); (2) colonization of coconut plantations by the species
appears to depend on the occurrence of occupied natural forest in
relatively close proximity to coconut plantations (Smith et al. 2001,
entire); and (3) very little natural forest remains in the coconut-
growing region in which P. fasciata occurs (Fig. 2 and GOSL 2015,
unpaginated; MOE 2014, p. 94).
The aerial extent of coconut cultivation in Sri Lanka has varied
between about 3,630 and 4,200 km\2\ (1,402 and 1,622 mi\2\) since 2005
(Central Bank of Sri Lanka 2014, Statistical Appendix, Table 13), with
no clear directional trend. However, due to the rising human population
and resulting escalating demand for land in Sri Lanka, plantations have
become increasingly fragmented due to conversion of these lands to
housing (GOSL 2014, pp. 26-27). As indicated above, due to their
limited dispersal ability, forest fragmentation is likely to isolate
Poecilotheria populations, which increases their vulnerability to
stochastic processes (see Stochastic Processes), and may also expose
wandering males and dispersing juveniles to increased mortality from
intentional killing or predation when they attempt to cross between
forest fragments (Bond et al. 2006, p. 155) (see Intentional Killing).
Thus, even though P. fasciata uses coconut plantations to some extent,
fragmentation of this habitat is likely to isolate populations and
increase their vulnerability to stochastic processes, intentional
killing, and predation.
Summary
Sri Lanka has lost most of its forest cover due to a variety of
factors over the past several decades. Very little (1,966 km\2\ (759
mi\2\)) wet zone forest--in which the ranges of P. ornata, P. smithi,
and P. subfusca occur--remains in the country. The remainder is highly
fragmented and continues to be deforested. Only about 35 percent
(16,872 km\2\ (6,514 mi\2\)) of dense and open canopy dry and
intermediate zone forests--in which the ranges of P. fasciata and P.
vittata occur--remain, deforestation in these forests is ongoing, and
recent rates of deforestation in the country have been highest in
regions constituting large portions of the ranges of these two species.
Forest cover continues to decline at a rate of 86 km\2\ (33 mi\2\) per
year, and the rate of loss is higher in the dry zone than the wet zone.
While the current rate of forest loss is much lower than in the
previous century, the rate of loss of natural forest is increasing and
is anticipated to increase in the future with the country's emphasis on
development and the projected population increase of 800,000 people.
While coconut plantations provide additional habitat for one species
(P. fasciata) in some areas, these plantations are becoming
increasingly fragmented due to demand for housing.
Tarantulas have sedentary habits, limited dispersal ability, and
highly structured populations. Therefore, loss of habitat has likely
resulted in direct loss of individuals or populations and,
consequently, a reduction in the distribution and genetic diversity of
these species. The distribution of these species is already limited--
each currently occupies less than 500 km\2\ (193 mi\2\) or, for P.
smithi, less than 10 to 15 km\2\ (3.9 to 5.8 mi\2\) of its range--and
deforestation continues within the ranges of all five species discussed
in this finding. Further, the limited distribution of these species is
likely continuing to decline with ongoing loss of habitat. We conclude
that habitat loss is likely currently having significant negative
impacts on the viability of these species because: (1) These species
have very small distributions; (2) little forest remains in Sri Lanka;
(3) remaining habitat is fragmented; and (4) deforestation is ongoing
within these species' ranges.
Pesticides
Pesticides are identified as a threat to Poecilotheria species in
Sri Lanka (Nanayakkara 2014b, unpublished data; Gabriel 2014,
unpaginated). The five species addressed in this finding could
potentially be exposed to pesticides via pesticide drift into forests
that are adjacent to crop-growing areas; by traveling over pesticide-
treated land when dispersing between forest patches; or by consuming
prey that have been exposed to pesticides. Populations of these species
could potentially be directly affected by pesticides through increased
mortality or through sublethal effects such as reduced fecundity,
fertility, and offspring viability, and changes in sex ratio, behavior,
and dispersal (Nash et al. 2010, p. 1694, citing several sources).
Poecilotheria species may also be indirectly affected by pesticides if
pesticides reduce or deplete available prey species.
Over 100 pesticide (herbicide, fungicide, and insecticide) active
ingredients are registered for use in Sri Lanka. Among the most
commonly used insecticides are carbofuran, diazinon, and chloropyrifos
(Padmajani et al. 2014, pp. 11-12). These are broad-spectrum,
neurotoxic insecticides, which tend to have very negative effects on
nontarget organisms (Pekar 2013, p. 415). Further, sit-and-wait
predators appear to be more sensitive to insecticide applications than
web-making spiders (Pekar 1999, p. 1077).
The use of pesticides in Sri Lanka has been increasing steadily
since the 1950s (Selvarajah and Thiruchelvam 2007, p. 381). Pesticide
imports into Sri Lanka increased by 50 percent in 2011 compared to 2006
(Padmajani et al. 2014, p. 11). The level of misuse and overuse of
pesticides in Sri Lanka is high. Depending on region and crop species,
33 to 60 percent of Sri Lankan farmers use greater amounts, higher
concentrations, or more frequent applications of pesticides (or a
combination of these) than is recommended (Padmajani et al. 2014, pp.
13, 31, citing several sources).
The susceptibility of spiders to the direct effects of different
pesticides varies with pesticide type and formulation, spider species,
development stage, sex, and abiotic and biotic conditions at the time
of pesticide
[[Page 36765]]
application (Pekar 2013, pp. 416-417). Further, different classes of
pesticides can cause different sublethal effects. For instance,
activities such as movement, prey capture, reproduction, development,
and defense are particularly disrupted by neurotoxic formulations
because they are governed by complex neural interactions. However,
spiders can potentially recover from sublethal effects over several
days (Pekar 2013, p. 417), although the effects are complicated by the
potential for cumulative effects of multiple applications across a
season (Nash et al. 2010, p. 1694).
We are not aware of any information on the population-level effects
of pesticides on Poecilotheria species. However, given the large
proportion of Sri Lanka's human population that is reliant on farming,
the high level of misuse and overuse of pesticides in the country, and
the broad-spectrum and high level of toxicity of the insecticides
commonly used in the country, it is likely that the species addressed
in this finding are directly or indirectly negatively affected by
pesticides to some extent. Therefore, while the population-level
effects of pesticides on the five species addressed in this finding are
uncertain, the effects of pesticides likely exacerbate the effects of
other threats acting on these species.
Climate Change
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concluded that
warming of the climate system is unequivocal (IPCC 2013, p. 4).
Numerous long-term climate changes have been observed including changes
in land surface temperatures, precipitation patterns, ocean temperature
and salinity, sea ice extent, and sea level (IPCC 2013, pp. 4-12).
Various types of changes in climate can have direct or indirect effects
on species. These effects may be positive, neutral, or negative and
they may change over time, depending on the species and other relevant
considerations, such as the effects of interactions of climate with
other variables (e.g., habitat fragmentation) (IPCC 2007, pp. 8-14, 18-
19). However, a large fraction of terrestrial and freshwater species
face increased extinction risk under projected climate change during
and beyond the current century, especially as climate change interacts
with habitat modification and other factors such as overexploitation,
pollution, and invasive species (Settele et al. 2014, p. 275).
Maintenance of body temperature and water retention by spiders is
critical to their survival. All spiders, including Poecilotheria, are
ectotherms; therefore, their body temperature varies with that of their
environment. While spiders keep body temperature within tolerable
limits through behaviors such as moving into shade when temperatures
rise (Pulz 1987, pp. 27, 34-35), they are susceptible to rapid
fluctuations in body temperature and severe depletion of body water
stores due to their relatively low body mass and high surface-to-volume
ratio (Pulz 1987, p. 27).
Tropical ectotherms evolved in an environment of relatively low
inter- and intra-annual climate variability, and already live near
their upper thermal limits (Settele et al. 2014, p. 301; Deutsch et al.
2008, p. 6669). Their capacity to acclimate is generally low. They have
small thermal safety margins, and small amounts of warming may decrease
their ability to perform basic physiological functions such as
development, growth, and reproduction (Deutsch et al. 2008, pp. 6668-
6669, 6671). Evidence also indicates they may have low potential to
increase their resistance to desiccation (drying out) (Schilthuizen and
Kellerman 2014, p. 61, citing several sources).
The general trend in temperature in Sri Lanka over the past several
decades is that of increasing temperature, although with considerable
variation between locations in rates and magnitudes of change (De Costa
2008, p. 87; De Silva et al. 2007, p. 21, citing several sources). Over
the six to ten decades prior to 2007, temperatures have increased
within all climate zones of the country, although rates of increase
vary from 0.065 [deg]C (0.117[emsp14][deg]F) per decade in Ratnapura
(an increase of 0.65 [deg]C (1.17[emsp14][deg]F) during the 97-year
period analyzed) in the lowland wet zone, to 0.195 [deg]C
(0.351[emsp14][deg]F) per decade in Anuradhapura (an increase of 1.50
[deg]C (2.70[emsp14][deg]F) during the 77-year period analyzed) in the
dry zone. In the montane region, temperatures increased at a rate of
0.141 [deg]C (0.254[emsp14][deg]F) per decade at Nuwara Eliya to 0.191
[deg]C (0.344[emsp14][deg]F) per decade at Badulla (increases of 1.09
and 1.47 [deg]C (1.96 and 2.65[emsp14][deg]F) during the 77-year period
analyzed, respectively) (De Costa 2008, p. 68). The rate of warming has
increased in more recent years--overall temperature in the country
increased at a rate of 0.003 [deg]C (0.005[emsp14][deg]F) per year
during 1896-1996, 0.016 [deg]C (0.029[emsp14][deg]F) per year during
1961-1990, and 0.025 [deg]C (0.045[emsp14][deg]F) per year during 1987-
1996 (Eriyagama et al. 2010, p. 2, citing several sources). Depending
on future climate scenarios, temperatures are projected to increase by
2.93 to 5.44 [deg]C (5.27 to 9.49[emsp14][deg]F) by the end of the
current century in South Asia (Cruz et al. 2007, in Eriyagama et al.
2010, p. 6). Downscaled projections for Sri Lanka using regional
climate models report increases of 2.0 to 4.0 [deg]C (3.6 to
7.2[emsp14][deg]F) by 2100, while statistical downscaling of global
climate models report increases of 0.9 to 3 [deg]C (1.62 to
5.4[emsp14][deg]F) by 2100 and 1.2 to 1.3 [deg]C (2.16 to
2.34[emsp14][deg]F) by 2050 (Eriyagama et al. 2010, p. 6, citing
several sources).
Trends in rainfall have been decreasing in Sri Lanka over the past
several decades (see De Costa 2008, p. 87; De Silva et al. 2007, p. 21,
citing several sources) although, according to the Climate Change
Secretariat of Sri Lanka (2015, p. 19), there is no consensus on this
fact. However, authors appear to agree that the intensity and frequency
of extreme events such as droughts and floods have increased (Imbulana
et al. 2016 and Ratnayake and Herath 2005, in Climate Change
Secretariat of Sri Lanka 2015, p. 19).
Rainfall in Sri Lanka is highly variable from year to year, across
seasons and across locations within any given year (Jayatillake et al.
2005, p. 70). Statistically significant declines in rainfall have been
observed for the period 1869-2007 at Anuradhapura in the northern dry
zone (12.92 mm (0.51 in) per decade), and Badulla, Kandy, and Nuwara
Eliya (19.16, 30.50, and 51.60 mm (0.75, 1.20, and 2.03 in) per decade,
respectively) in the central highlands (De Costa 2008, p. 77).
Significant declines have also been observed in more recent decades at
Kurunegala in western Sri Lanka's intermediate zone (120.57 mm (4.75
in) per decade during 1970-2007) and Ratnapura (41.02 mm (1.61 in) per
decade during 1920-2007) (De Costa 2008, p. 77). Further, a significant
trend of decreasing rainfall with increasing temperature exists at
Anuradhapura, Kurunegala, and Nuwara Eliya (De Costa 2008, pp. 79-81).
Patterns of future rainfall in the country are highly uncertain--
studies provide variable and conflicting projections (Eriyagama et al.
p. 6, citing several sources). However, an increased frequency of dry
periods and droughts are expected (MOE 2010, p. 35).
While observed and projected changes in temperature and
precipitation could potentially be within the tolerance limits of the
Poecilotheria species addressed in this finding, it is possible that
climate change could directly negatively affect these species through
rising land surface temperatures, changes in the amount and pattern of
precipitation, and increases in the frequency and intensity of extreme
climate events such as heat waves or
[[Page 36766]]
droughts. It is also possible that climate change could indirectly
negatively affect these species by adversely impacting populations of
their insect prey, which are also tropical ectotherms. The only
detailed observations of a Sri Lankan Poecilotheria species indicated
that P. fasciata found in natural forest were emaciated and without
spiderlings during an extended drought, while those found in an
irrigated plantation had wider girths and spiderlings (see Species-
Specific Information) (Smith et al. 2001, entire). The lack of
reproduction in natural forest during drought may have been due to
desiccation stress or lack of available prey, or both, as a result of
low moisture levels.
While at least one of the species addressed in this finding (P.
fasciata) appears to be vulnerable to drought, the responses of the
five Poecilotheria species to observed and projected climate change in
Sri Lanka are largely unknown. However, the climate in Sri Lanka has
already changed considerably in all climate zones of the country, and
continues to change at an increasing rate. These species evolved in
specific, relatively stable climates and, because they are tropical
ectotherms, may be sensitive to changing environmental conditions,
particularly temperature and moisture (Deutsch et al. 2008, pp. 6668-
6669; Schilthuizen and Kellerman 2014, pp. 59-61, citing several
sources). Moreover, because they have poor dispersal ability,
Peocilotheria are unlikely to be able to escape changing climate
conditions via range shifts. Therefore, while population-level
responses of the five species addressed in this finding to observed and
projected changes in climate are not certain, the stress imposed on
these species by increasing temperatures and changing patterns of
precipitation is likely exacerbating the effects of other factors
acting on these species such as stochastic events and habitat loss and
degradation. This is especially the case for P. fasciata because (1)
the frequency and intensity of droughts have increased and are expected
to continue increasing, (2) the species fails to reproduce in natural
forest during extended droughts, and (3) although P. fasciata is also
known to inhabit irrigated coconut plantations, most populations have
been found in natural forest.
Trade
Poecilotheria species are popular in trade due to their striking
coloration and large size (Nanayakkara 2014a, p. 86; Molur et al. 2006,
p. 23). In 2000, concerned about increasing trade in these species, Sri
Lanka and the United States co-sponsored a proposal to include the
genus in Appendix II of the Convention on International Trade in
Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) (Government of Sri
Lanka and Government of the United States 2000, entire). However, at
the 11th Conference of the Parties, the proposal was criticized as
containing too little information on international trade and on the
limits of the distribution of the genus. It was further noted that the
genus was primarily threatened by habitat destruction, and was not
protected by domestic legislation in India. Also, the delegation of Sri
Lanka promised to list the genus in Appendix III if the proposal
failed. No consensus was reached on the proposal and a vote failed to
achieve the required two-thirds majority--there were 49 votes in favor,
30 against, and 27 abstentions--and the proposal was therefore rejected
(Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna
and Flora 2000, p. 50). None of the five species addressed in this rule
are currently listed in the CITES Appendices (Convention on
International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora 2017,
p. 48).
Collection of Poecilotheria specimens from the wild could have
significant negative impacts on Poecilotheria populations. Due to the
patchy distributions and poor dispersal abilities of tarantulas,
collection of several individuals from a single location could
potentially reduce the abundance or distribution of a species,
especially those with restricted distributions (Molur et al. 2006, p.
14; West et al. 2001, unpaginated). Further, because tarantula
populations are highly structured, loss of individuals from a single
location could result in significant loss of that species' genetic
diversity (Bond 2006, p. 154). Collection of a relatively large number
of individuals from a single population could also alter population
demographics such that the survival of a species or population is more
vulnerable to the effects of other factors, such as habitat loss.
Collection of species from the wild for trade often begins when a
new species is described or when a rare species has been rediscovered.
Alerted to a new or novel species, collectors arrive at the reported
location and set out collecting the species from the wild (Molur et al.
2006, p. 15; Stuart et al. 2006, entire). For tarantulas, adult females
may be especially vulnerable to collection pressures as collectors
often attempt to capture females, which produce young that can be sold
(Capannini 2003, p. 107). Collectors then sell the collected specimens
or their offspring to hobbyists who captive-rear the species and
provide the pet trade with captive-bred specimens (Gabriel 2014,
unpaginated; Molur et al. 2006, p. 16). Thus, more individuals are
likely to be captured from the wild during the period in which captive-
breeding stocks are being established, in other words, prior to the
species becoming broadly available in trade (Gabriel 2014,
unpaginated).
All five of the endemic Sri Lankan species addressed in this rule
are bred by hobbyists and vendors and are available in the pet trade as
captive-bred individuals in the United States, Europe, and elsewhere
(see Herndon 2014, pers. comm.; Elowsky 2014, unpaginated; Gabriel
2014, unpaginated; Longhorn 2014a, unpaginated; Longhorn 2014b,
unpaginated; Mugleston 2014, unpaginated; Service 2012, in litt.). We
are not aware of any information on numbers of these species in
domestic trade within the United States or numbers solely in foreign
trade outside the United States. The Service's Law Enforcement
Management Information System contains information on U.S.
international trade in three of these species--P. fasciata, P. ornata,
and P. vittata (it does not currently collect information on P. smithi
or P. subfusca). Four hundred individuals of these species were legally
imported into, or exported or re-exported from, the United States
during 2007-2012; 298 were imported into, and 106 were exported or re-
exported from, the United States.
Captive-bred individuals appear to supply the majority of the
current legal trade in these species in the United States. Of the 400
individuals legally imported into, or exported or re-exported from, the
United States during 2007-2012, 392 (98 percent) were declared as
captive-bred (Service 2012, in litt.). However, wild individuals of at
least some of these species are still being collected (Nanayakkara
2014a, p. 86; Nanayakkara 2014b, unpublished data; Service 2012, in
litt.). Two sources indicate that there is evidence of illegal
smuggling from Sri Lanka, although they do not provide details (see
Nanayakkara 2014, p. 85; Samarawckrama et al. 2005, p. 76). Further, of
the 400 individuals of Sri Lankan Poecilotheria imported into, or
exported or re-exported from, the United States during 2007-2012, 8 P.
vittata were declared as wild-caught. It is possible that additional
wild-caught individuals of the five species addressed in this rule were
(or are) not included in this total because they are imported
[[Page 36767]]
into the United States illegally, or imported into other countries. For
example, some wild-caught specimens are imported into Europe (Merzlak
2017, unpaginated; Corcoran, 2016, unpaginated), although specific
information on this activity is not available.
Sri Lanka prohibits the commercial collection and exportation of
all Poecilotheria species, under the Sri Lanka Flora and Fauna
Protection (Amendment) Act, No. 22 of 2009, which is part of the Fauna
and Flora Protection Ordinance No. 2 (1937) (DLA Piper 2015, p. 392;
Government of Sri Lanka and Government of the United States 2000, p.
5). However, enforcement is weak and influenced by corruption (DLA
Piper 2015, p. 392; GOSL 2012, p. 2a-3-149).
In sum, individuals of at least some of these species are currently
being collected from the wild. However, the extent to which this
activity is occurring is unknown, as is the extent to which these
species have been, or are being, affected by collection. Based on the
available information on U.S. imports, exports, and re-exports, a small
amount of trade occurs in wild specimens of these species. However, it
is likely that more wild specimens enter Europe or Asia than the United
States due to the closer proximity of Sri Lanka to Europe and Asia and
consequent increased ease of travel and transport of specimens.
Further, even small amounts of collection of species with small
populations can have a negative impact on these species. Given that
collection of at least some of these species from the wild continues to
occur, it is likely that collection for trade is exacerbating
population effects of other factors negatively impacting these species,
such as stochastic events, habitat loss, and habitat degradation.
Intentional Killing
Poecilotheria spiders are feared by humans in Sri Lanka and, as a
result, are usually killed when encountered (Kekulandala and
Goonatilake 2015, unpaginated; Nanayakkara 2014a, p. 86; Gabriel 2014,
unpaginated; Smith et al. 2001, p. 49). Intentional killing of
Poecilotheria spiders may negatively impact these five species by
raising mortality rates in these species' populations to such an extent
that populations decline or are more vulnerable to the effects of other
factors, such as habitat loss. Adult male Poecilotheria are probably
more vulnerable to being intentionally killed because they wander in
search of females during the breeding season (see Tarantula General
Biology) and thus are more likely to be encountered by people.
Consequently, intentional killing could potentially reduce the density
of males in an area. Because the mating of a female depends on a male
finding her, and males search for females randomly, a reduction in the
density of males could result in a reduction in the percent of females
laying eggs in any given year (Stradling 1994, p. 96) and,
consequently, a lower population growth rate.
We do not have any information on the number of individuals of
these five species that are intentionally killed by people. However, in
areas where these species occur, higher human densities are likely to
result in higher human contact with these species and, consequently,
higher numbers of spiders killed. The human population density in Sri
Lanka is much higher in the wet zone (see Habitat Loss and
Degradation). Therefore, it is likely that P. ornata, P. smithi, and P.
subfusca are affected by intentional killing more than P. fasciata and
P. vittata. Although we do not have any information indicating the
numbers of individuals of these species that are intentionally killed
each year, it is likely that such killing is exacerbating the negative
effects of other factors on these species' populations, such as habitat
loss and degradation.
Stochastic (Random) Events and Processes
Species endemic to small regions, or known from few, widely
dispersed locations, are inherently more vulnerable to extinction than
widespread species because of the higher risks from localized
stochastic (random) events and processes, such as floods, fire,
landslides, and drought (Brooks et al. 2008, pp. 455-456; Mangel and
Tier 1994, entire; Pimm et al. 1988, p. 757). These problems can be
further magnified when populations are very small, due to genetic
bottlenecks (reduced genetic diversity resulting from fewer individuals
contributing to the species' overall gene pool) and random demographic
fluctuations (Lande 1988, pp. 1455-1458; Pimm et al. 1988, p. 757).
Species with few populations, limited geographic area, and a small
number of individuals face an increased likelihood of stochastic
extinction due to changes in demography, the environment, genetics, or
other factors, in a process described as an extinction vortex (a mutual
reinforcement that occurs among biotic and abiotic processes that
drives population size downward to extinction) (Gilpin and Soule[acute]
1986, pp. 24-25). The negative impacts associated with small population
size and vulnerability to random demographic fluctuations or natural
catastrophes can be further magnified by synergistic interactions with
other threats.
P. smithi is known from very few widely dispersed locations and is
likely very rare (see Species-Specific Information). Therefore, it is
highly likely that P. smithi is extremely vulnerable to stochastic
processes and that the species is highly likely negatively impacted by
these processes. The remaining four species have narrow ranges within
specific climate zones of Sri Lanka. It is unclear whether the range
sizes of these four are so small that stochastic processes on their own
are likely to have significant negative impacts on these species.
However, stochastic processes may have negative impacts on these
species in combination with other factors such as habitat loss, because
habitat loss can further fragment and isolate populations.
Determinations
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533), and its implementing
regulations at 50 CFR part 424, set forth the procedures for adding
species to the Federal Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and
Plants. Under section 4(a)(1) of the Act, we determine whether a
species meets the definition of a ``threatened species'' or an
``endangered species'' because of any one or more of the following five
threat factors or the cumulative effects thereof: (A) The present or
threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or
range; (B) Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes; (C) Disease or predation; (D) The inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E) Other natural or manmade factors
affecting its continued existence.
We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial
information available on P. fasciata, P. ornata, P. subfusca, P.
smithi, and P. vittata. While information on species abundance or
population dynamics is not available on these species, the best
available information indicates these species' populations have
experienced extensive declines in the past and their populations
continue to decline. Tarantulas have limited dispersal ability and
sedentary habits; therefore, the loss of habitat (Factor A) likely
results in direct loss of individuals or populations and, consequently,
a reduction in the distribution of the species. As a result, the
extensive loss of forest (71 percent in the dry zone, 85 percent in the
intermediate zone, and 87 percent in the wet zone) has reduced the
amount of habitat where the species may remain,
[[Page 36768]]
and their populations will likely continue to decline with ongoing
deforestation. Further, because these species likely have highly
structured populations, reductions in these species' populations have
likely resulted in coincident loss of these species' unique genetic
diversities, eroding the adaptive and evolutionary potential of these
species (Bond 2006, p. 154).
All five Sri Lankan Poecilotheria species have restricted ranges
within specific regions and climates of Sri Lanka and are currently
estimated to occupy areas of less than 500 km\2\ (193 mi\2\), and less
than 10-15 km\2\ (4-6 mi\2\) for P. smithi. Due to the life-history
traits of tarantulas--restricted range, sedentary habits, poor
dispersal ability, and structured populations--these species are
vulnerable to habitat loss. Extensive habitat loss (Factor A) has
already occurred in all the climate zones in which these species occur,
and deforestation is ongoing in the country. Further, the cumulative
effects of changing climate, intentional killing, pesticides, capture
for the pet trade, and stochastic processes are likely significantly
exacerbating the effects of habitat loss.
Therefore, for the following reasons we conclude populations of P.
fasciata, P. ornata, P. subfusca, P. smithi, and P. vittata have been
and continue to be significantly reduced to the extent that the
viability of each of these five species is significantly compromised:
(1) These species are closely tied to their habitats, little of
their forest habitat remains, deforestation is ongoing in these
habitats, and these species are vulnerable to habitat loss;
(2) these species' have poor dispersal ability, are unlikely to be
able to escape changing climate conditions via range shifts, and Sri
Lanka's climate is changing at increasing rates;
(3) the cumulative effects of climate change, intentional killing,
pesticides, capture for the pet trade, and stochastic processes are
likely significantly exacerbating the effects of habitat loss; and
(4) P. smithi is known from few locations, is likely rare, and very
likely vulnerable to stochastic processes.
The Act defines an endangered species in section 3(6) of the Act as
any species that is ``in danger of extinction throughout all or a
significant portion of its range'' and a threatened species in section
3(20) of the Act as any species that is ``likely to become an
endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range.''
Based on the factors described above and their impacts on P.
fasciata, P. ornata, P. smithi, P. subfusca, and P. vittata, we find
the following factors to be threats to these species (i.e., factors
contributing to the risk of extinction of these species): Loss of
habitat (Factor A; all five species), stochastic processes (Factor E;
P. smithi), and the cumulative effects (Factor E; all five species) of
these and other threats including climate change, intentional killing,
pesticide use, and capture for the pet trade. Furthermore, despite laws
in place to protect these five species and the forest and other habitat
they depend on, these threats continue (Factor D), in part due to lack
of resources and challenges to enforcement. We consider the risk of
extinction of these five species to be high because these species are
vulnerable to habitat loss, this process is ongoing, and these species
have limited potential to recolonize reforested areas or move to more
favorable climate. We find that P. fasciata, P. ornata, P. smithi, P.
subfusca, and P. vittata are presently in danger of extinction
throughout their ranges based on the likely severity and immediacy of
threats currently impacting these species, and we are listing these
five tarantula species as endangered in accordance with sections 3(6)
and 4(a)(1) of the Act. We find that a threatened species status is not
appropriate for these species because of their restricted ranges,
limited distributions, and vulnerability to extinction and because the
threats are ongoing throughout their ranges at a level that places
these species in danger of extinction now, even without the worsening
of the threats, that, as discussed above, is likely.
Under the Act and our implementing regulations, a species may
warrant listing if it is endangered or threatened throughout all or a
significant portion of its range. Because we have determined that P.
fasciata, P. ornata, P. smithi, P. subfusca, and P. vittata are
endangered throughout all of their ranges, we do not need to conduct an
analysis of whether there is any significant portion of their ranges
where these species are in danger of extinction or likely to become so
in the foreseeable future. This is consistent with the Act because when
we find that a species is currently in danger of extinction throughout
all of its range (i.e., meets the definition of an endangered species),
the species is experiencing high-magnitude threats across its range or
threats are so high in particular areas that they severely affect the
species across its range. Therefore, the species is in danger of
extinction throughout every portion of its range and an analysis of
whether there is any significant portion of the range that may be in
danger of extinction or likely to become so would not result in a
different outcome.
Available Conservation Measures
Conservation measures provided to species listed as endangered or
threatened under the Act include recognition of conservation status,
requirements for Federal protection, and prohibitions against certain
practices. Recognition through listing encourages and results in public
awareness and conservation actions by Federal and State governments in
the United States, foreign governments, private agencies and groups,
and individuals.
Section 7(a) of the Act, as amended, and as implemented by
regulations at 50 CFR part 402, requires Federal agencies to evaluate
their actions that are to be conducted within the United States or upon
the high seas, with respect to any species that is listed as an
endangered or threatened species. Because P. fasciata, P. ornata, P.
smithi, P. subfusca, and P. vittata are not native to the United
States, no critical habitat is being designated with this rule.
Regulations implementing the interagency cooperation provision of the
Act are codified at 50 CFR part 402. Section 7(a)(2) of the Act
requires Federal agencies to ensure that activities they authorize,
fund, or carry out are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence
of a listed species or to destroy or adversely modify its critical
habitat. If a proposed Federal action may adversely affect a listed
species, the responsible Federal agency must enter into formal
consultation with the Service. Currently, with respect to P. fasciata,
P. ornata, P. smithi, P. subfusca, and P. vittata, no Federal
activities are known that would require consultation.
Section 8(a) of the Act authorizes the provision of limited
financial assistance for the development and management of programs
that the Secretary of the Interior determines to be necessary or useful
for the conservation of endangered or threatened species in foreign
countries. Sections 8(b) and 8(c) of the Act authorize the Secretary to
encourage conservation programs for foreign listed species, and to
provide assistance for such programs, in the form of personnel and the
training of personnel.
Section 9 of the Act and our implementing regulations at 50 CFR
17.21 set forth a series of general prohibitions that apply to all
endangered wildlife. These
[[Page 36769]]
prohibitions, in part, make it illegal for any person subject to the
jurisdiction of the United States to ``take'' (which includes harass,
harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect; or
to attempt any of these) endangered wildlife within the United States
or upon the high seas. It is also illegal to possess, sell, deliver,
carry, transport, or ship any such wildlife that has been taken
illegally. In addition, it is illegal for any person subject to the
jurisdiction of the United States to import; export; deliver, receive,
carry, transport, or ship in interstate or foreign commerce, by any
means whatsoever and in the course of commercial activity; or sell or
offer for sale in interstate or foreign commerce any listed species.
Certain exceptions apply to employees of the Service, the National
Marine Fisheries Service, other Federal land management agencies, and
State conservation agencies.
We may issue permits to carry out otherwise prohibited activities
involving endangered wildlife under certain circumstances. No permit is
required for activities that do not constitute prohibited acts.
Regulations governing permits for endangered species are codified at 50
CFR 17.22. With regard to endangered wildlife, a permit may be issued
for the following purposes: For scientific purposes, to enhance the
propagation or survival of the species, and for incidental take in
connection with otherwise lawful activities. The Service may also
register persons subject to the jurisdiction of the United States
through its captive-bred-wildlife (CBW) program if certain established
requirements are met under the CBW regulations. 50 CFR 17.21(g).
Through a CBW registration, the Service may allow a registrant to
conduct certain otherwise prohibited activities under certain
circumstances to enhance the propagation or survival of the affected
species: Take; export or re-import; deliver, receive, carry, transport
or ship in interstate or foreign commerce, in the course of a
commercial activity; or sell or offer for sale in interstate or foreign
commerce. A CBW registration may authorize interstate purchase and sale
only between entities that both hold a registration for the taxon
concerned. The CBW program is available for species having a natural
geographic distribution not including any part of the United States and
other species that the Director has determined to be eligible by
regulation. The individual specimens must have been born in captivity
in the United States. There are also certain statutory exemptions from
the prohibitions, which are found in sections 9 and 10 of the Act.
Summary of Comments and Recommendations
In the proposed rule published on December 14, 2016 (81 FR 90297),
we requested that all interested parties submit written comments on the
proposal by February 13, 2017. We also contacted appropriate scientific
experts and organizations, and other interested parties and invited
them to comment on the proposal. We did not receive any requests for a
public hearing. All substantive information provided during comment
periods has either been incorporated directly into this final
determination or is addressed below.
Peer Reviewer Comments
In accordance with our peer review policy published on July 1, 1994
(59 FR 34270), we solicited expert opinion from four knowledgeable
individuals with scientific expertise that included familiarity with
Poecilotheria species or other tarantulas, their habitats and
biological needs, and stressors acting on their populations. We
received responses from two of the peer reviewers from whom we
requested comments. One did not review the rule but provided additional
information regarding a threat to the habitat of P. smithi, and we have
incorporated this information into this final rule. The second peer
reviewer supported our determinations based on our assessment of some
threats, but disagreed with our assessment of others. This peer
reviewer also provided a technical correction pertaining to our
physical description of Poecilotheria species, and we have incorporated
this information into this final rule.
We reviewed all comments received from the peer reviewers for
substantive and new information regarding the listing of the five
species addressed in this rule. Peer reviewer comments are addressed in
the following summary and incorporated into the final rule as
appropriate.
(1) Comment: Citing the taxonomic revision done by Gabriel et al.
(2013, entire), and the World Spider Catalog, the peer reviewer states
that P. vittata is not endemic to Sri Lanka, but rather that P. vittata
was synonymized with the Indian species P. striata and recently removed
from this synonymy.
Our response: Gabriel et al. (2013, entire) not only remove P.
vittata from synonymy with the Indian species P. striata, but also show
P. vittata to be the senior synonym of P. pederseni. Further, the World
Spider Catalog (2017, unpaginated) recognizes this synonymy,
identifying P. pederseni as a synonym of P. vittata. Therefore, in this
final rule we retain the taxonomy provided in our proposed rule.
(2) Comment: The peer reviewer indicated that our conclusions
regarding the effects of climate change and pesticides on these species
are speculative because no studies have been conducted on the effects
of these factors on Poecilotheria species. The peer reviewer also
indicates that Poecilotheria are unlikely to come in direct contact
with pesticides because they live in forests, which are not generally
sprayed, and are nocturnal so are not active when spraying occurs. The
peer reviewer indicates that studies on spiders in agroecosystems show
spiders that do not have direct contact with pesticides survive.
However, the peer reviewer did not provide any new information or
evidence supporting her assertions.
Our response: While no studies have been carried out specifically
assessing the effects of stress factors on any Poecilotheria species,
the Act requires that we make our determination of species status based
on the best scientific and commercial data available at the time of our
rulemaking. In conducting our assessment of the statuses of these
species, we reviewed all relevant information available to us,
including information submitted to us following the initiation of the
12-month status reviews for these species. We subsequently based our
conclusions regarding the factors affecting these five species on the
best available information. We acknowledged in our proposed rule that
the population-level effects of climate change and pesticides on these
species are uncertain. However, as indicated in our proposed rule, the
best available information indicates that these stressors are likely
negatively affecting these species, either directly or indirectly, to
some extent. Consequently, it is reasonable to conclude, as we did in
our proposed rule, that pesticides and climate change likely exacerbate
the effects of other stressors acting on these species. Therefore,
because we based our conclusions on the best available information, and
the peer reviewer provided no evidence or new information for our
review, we did not revise our conclusions regarding the effects of
climate change or pesticides on these five species.
We cannot assess the studies to which the reviewer refers regarding
the effects of pesticides on spiders because the reviewer did not
provide copies of these studies or the citations for them. Further,
while we agree that some
[[Page 36770]]
members of these species' populations are unlikely to have direct
contact with pesticides, we do not agree that is the case for all
members, particularly those inhabiting fragmented forests or remnant
forest patches. As indicated in our proposed rule, these species could
be exposed to pesticides via pesticide drift into forests that are
adjacent to crop-growing areas, by traveling over pesticide treated
land when dispersing between forest patches, or by consuming prey that
have been exposed to pesticides (see Pesticides). Also, the most
commonly used insecticides in Sri Lanka--carbofuran, chlorpyrifos, and
diazinon--can remain active in the environment for days after
application (Kamrin 1997, in Christensen et al. 2009, unpaginated;
Karmin 1997, in Harper et al. 2009, unpaginated; U.S. National Library
of Medicine 1995, in EXTOXNET 1996, unpaginated). Therefore, these five
species could be directly and negatively affected by these pesticides
after spraying occurs. They could also be indirectly affected by
pesticides through consumption of contaminated prey, or reduction or
depletion of prey populations. Taken together, and considering the
extent of pesticide use and misuse in the country, it is likely that
the five species addressed in this rule are directly or indirectly
negatively affected by pesticides to some extent and that these effects
likely exacerbate the effects of other threats acting on these species.
Public Comments
We received 115 public comments on the proposed listing of these
species, most from people involved in the tarantula hobby as owners,
breeders, or sellers. We reviewed all comments received from the public
for substantive issues and new information regarding the listing of the
five species addressed in this rule. Public comments are addressed in
the following summary and incorporated into the final rule as
appropriate. A few commenters provided new information on Poecilotheria
biology or trade, and we have incorporated this information into the
corresponding sections of this rule.
(1) Comment: Several commenters questioned certain information in
our proposed rule. Several claimed that we inaccurately characterized
the degree or effects (or both) of inbreeding or maladaptation in
captive specimens of these species. Another questioned our assessment
of the ability of these species to adapt to changing climate in Sri
Lanka. Many of these commenters cited their own anecdotal observations
of captive specimens to support their claims while the remaining
commenters provided no new information. A few other commenters claimed,
more generally, that we used outdated references or erroneous
information, or misrepresented the findings of cited authors. However,
these commenters also provided no new references or information
supporting their claims.
Our Response: The Act requires that we use the best available
scientific and commercial data to determine if a species meets the
definition of a ``threatened species'' or an ``endangered species''
because of any one or a combination of the five factors found in
section 4(a)(1) of the Act. This analysis includes an analysis of the
extent to which captive-held members of a species create or contribute
to threats to the species (for example, by fueling trade) or the extent
to which captive-held members of a species remove or reduce threats to
the species by contributing to the conservation of the species (for
example, by providing specimens for population augmentation or
reintroduction). In conducting our analysis, we reviewed all relevant
information available to us on these species, including information
submitted to us following the initiation of the 12-month status reviews
for these species. We based our proposed rule, including the discussion
and conclusions regarding captive Poecilotheria, on the best scientific
and commercial data available to us at the time of our proposed rule.
In addition, we reviewed all comments and information submitted by the
public and peer reviewers during the public comment period for our
proposed rule and base this final rule on the best available
information.
Although some commenters provided anecdotal observations of captive
specimens to support their assertions regarding the effects of
inbreeding and maladaptation in captive specimens, or the ability of
captive specimens to adapt to climate conditions, observations of
health or survivability in captive conditions are not informative to
predicting health or survivability in wild conditions because selection
pressures in the wild differ greatly from those in captivity.
Therefore, in this final rule we did not change any of our conclusions
on these topics. However, we revised the section on Captive
Poecilotheria to clarify the bases of our conclusions.
(2) Comment: A few commenters suggested that we did not consider
the knowledge or efforts of hobbyists in our proposal.
Our Response: As required by the Act, we based our determinations
on the best scientific and commercial information available. In doing
so, we reviewed all information available to us on these species,
including information submitted to us by the public following
initiation of our 12-month status reviews for these species. This
included information and dozens of articles from hobbyist publications.
Further, we cited several of these sources in our proposal and retained
these citations in this final rule.
(3) Comment: Some commenters believe that we inaccurately suggested
in our proposed rule that all captive-bred specimens of these species
have limited value to the conservation of these species--that all are
inbred, maladapted to conditions in the wild, or hybridized--and that
we did not acknowledge the knowledge and good practices of reputable
breeders. A few suggest that genetic tests could determine which
captives could potentially be useful for a conservation breeding
program.
Our Response: We appreciate the level of knowledge and care taken
by reputable hobbyists when breeding these species. However, we
acknowledged the uncertainties pertaining to the levels of inbreeding
and hybridization in pet trade specimens in our proposed rule by
indicating that captive individuals of these species ``may be inbred or
maladapted to conditions in the wild'' and ``likely include an unknown
number of hybrids'' (see Captive Poecilotheria). Further, as indicated
above, we have revised the section on captive Poecilotheria to clarify
the bases of our conclusions. With respect to determining the genetic
appropriateness of captive specimens for conservation via genetic
testing, the Act requires us to make our decision based on the best
available information at the time we make our decision, and we are not
aware of any genetic studies on any individuals of these species,
captive or wild. Even if such information existed, we have no
information indicating that pet trade specimens are contributing to the
conservation of these species in the wild, for instance, as part of a
reintroduction program. Therefore, we have not changed our conclusions
regarding captive specimens of these species.
(4) Comment: A few commenters assert that the extent of
hybridization of these species in the pet trade is likely low because
tarantula hobbyists are strongly opposed to hybridization of species,
and because breeders can distinguish between species of adult specimens
and take care not to cross-breed them.
[[Page 36771]]
Our Response: Again, we appreciate the level of knowledge and care
taken by reputable hobbyists when breeding these species. However,
because (1) genetic studies have not been conducted on any of these
species, (2) evidence indicates that hybrids do occur in the hobby, (3)
hybridization may not be visually apparent in captive individuals, and
(4) the lineages of pet trade specimens of these species are not
documented, the extent of hybridization in any particular captive
specimen--be it high, low, or nonexistent--is unknown.
(5) Comment: Several commenters believe that captive-bred specimens
in the pet trade are beneficial or necessary to the conservation of
these species. They believe captive-bred specimens provide a safety net
for these species to prevent extinction, increase public awareness,
provide for education and research, supply zoos, and take the
collection pressure off wild populations by fulling the demand for
these species as pets. Two commenters assert that these species are not
in danger of extinction because many exist in captivity.
Our Response: The goal of the Act is survival and recovery of
endangered and threatened species and the ecosystems on which they
depend. Therefore, when analyzing threats to a species, we focus our
analysis on threats acting upon its survival in the wild, generally
within the native range of the species. In our assessment of the status
of a species, the extent to which captive-held members of a species
create or contribute to threats to the species (for example, by fueling
trade) or the extent to which captive-held members of a species remove
or reduce threats to the species by contributing to the conservation of
the species in the wild (for example, by providing specimens for
population augmentation or reintroduction) is part of the analysis we
conduct under section 4(a)(1) of the Act to determine if the species
meets the definition of an endangered species or a threatened species.
Further, the Act requires that we make our decision based on the best
scientific and commercial data available at the time our decision is
made. As indicated in our proposed rule, we are not aware of any
existing conservation programs for these species or information
indicating that pet trade specimens contribute to the viability of
these species within their native ranges in the wild, and have
clarified this in revisions to the Captive Poecilotheria section of
this rule. We also determined that pet trade specimens likely hold
limited value to the conservation of these species in the wild.
However, we acknowledge that some pet trade specimens could potentially
contribute to the conservation of these species in the wild if, for
example, they became part of a genetically managed conservation
breeding program. Persons seeking to engage in otherwise prohibited
activities with endangered wildlife for scientific purposes or to
enhance the propagation or survival of these species may seek
authorization from the Service (see Available Conservation Measures).
We also have no information indicating that current or future
education or research efforts are being conducted or planned with
captive-bred pet trade specimens of these species for conservation
purposes, or any evidence that populations in the wild are benefiting
from current education or research efforts using captive-bred pet trade
specimens. The best scientific and commercial data available indicate
that as of September 2017 there were only 19 specimens in captivity in
zoos worldwide (11 P. fasciata, 1 P. ornata, 2 P. vitatta, 5 P.
subfusca) (Species360 2017, unpaginated).
With respect to trade, certain prohibitions, certain exceptions,
and other conservation measures established through the Act are
available for endangered species upon listing (see Available
Conservation Measures). Therefore, they are provided by law to fulfill
the purposes and policy of the Act. The effects of legal trade of a
species on wild populations and market demand for that species is a
complex phenomenon influenced by a variety of factors (Bulte and
Damania 2005, entire; Fischer 2004, entire), and we are not aware of
any evidence indicating that the pet trade of captive-bred specimens of
these species are benefitting wild populations.
(6) Comment: One commenter expressed concern that listing these
species as endangered would likely result in their extinction due to
forcing breeders to stop breeding unless they apply for a permit. The
commenter also indicated that specimens possessed by hobbyists that are
unable to be used in repopulation efforts would not fall under the
protections of the Act because they are ``unpure specimens''.
Our Response: As explained in response to comments below, captive
breeding and many activities related to captive breeding are not
prohibited under the Act. Persons seeking to engage in activities that
are not prohibited under the Act do not need a permit under the Act.
While we are not certain how this commenter defines ``unpure'', the
protections of the Act apply to all members of these five species as
explained in response to comments below. We recommend that breeding
records be maintained to show parentage.
(7) Comment: Several commenters requested we exempt captive-bred
specimens and their offspring from possession and interstate sales
regulations, allowing ownership and interstate trade of these species
to occur without obtaining a permit under the Act.
Our Response: Because we determined that all five of these species
meet the definition of an ``endangered species'' under the Act, section
9(a)(1) of the Act and our implementing regulations at 50 CFR 17.21 set
forth a series of general prohibitions that apply to all members of
each of these species, whether captive or wild. The prohibitions cannot
be revised through a regulation under section 4(d) of the Act, because
such regulations apply to threatened species. The Act also does not
allow for captive-bred specimens of these listed species to be assigned
separate legal status from their wild counterparts. However, no permit
is required for activities that do not constitute prohibited acts. As
noted in response to comments below, the Act does not prohibit captive
breeding of listed species and also does not prohibit a number of
activities related to captive breeding, such as ownership. Furthermore,
we may authorize otherwise prohibited activities for scientific
purposes or to enhance the propagation or survival of these species, in
accordance with the Act and our regulations (see Available Conservation
Measures).
(8) Comment: Several commenters suggested that, rather than list
these species as endangered species under the Act, we instead take
another action such as: List them in a CITES Appendix, list them as
threatened species with a section 4(d) rule that allows interstate
trade, do not list them at all, or focus on ameliorating threats within
these species' native ranges rather than on regulating domestic trade.
Our Response: When we receive a petition to list a species under
the Act, we are required to make a determination as to whether that
species meets the Act's definition of a threatened species or an
endangered species. We are required to do this based solely on the best
scientific and commercial data available, as it relates to the five
listing factors in section 4(a)(1) of the Act. When we determine that a
species meets the Act's definition of a threatened species or
endangered species, we must list that species accordingly under the
Act. We determined that these species
[[Page 36772]]
meet the definition of endangered species, and as such we must list
them as endangered species. The Act and our regulations provide
prohibitions and other conservation measures that apply to all
endangered species as described above (see Available Conservation
Measures). Because we found that listing these species as endangered is
warranted, not listing them is not an option. We also cannot list them
as threatened species with a section 4(d) rule because we found that
they are endangered, not threatened species. Furthermore, because we
found them warranted for listing, not listing them is not feasible.
Finally, CITES has a different process and set of criteria for listing
species in the CITES Appendices that is independent of listing under
the Act. The portion of the comment suggesting a CITES listing is
outside the scope of this agency action to consider whether these
species should be listed as endangered species under the Act.
(9) Comment: One commenter asked how to acquire a permit for
exemption from the prohibitions of the Act and how often permits need
to be renewed.
Our Response: Information regarding permits for activities related
to these five species can be obtained at our International Affairs
program website at https://www.fws.gov/international/.
(10) Comment: Several commenters believe that trade in these
species has little or no effect on wild populations and provided
various reasons, including: They had never seen, or heard of others
seeing, a wild-caught specimen; the captive stock is self-sustaining;
wild-caught specimens are frowned upon in the hobby; and there is no
financial incentive for the trade of wild-caught specimens. Others
contend that listing and/or regulating trade in the United States is
not necessary or useful because U.S. trade does not affect wild
populations and because the primary threats to these species occur
outside U.S. jurisdiction, in Sri Lanka.
Our Response: Evidence shows that wild-caught specimens of some of
these species occur in trade (see Trade). Although the amount of trade
in wild-caught specimens in the United States appears to be small, this
does not mean trade, or U.S. trade, has no, or even little, effect on
wild populations. As indicated in our proposed rule, collection of
small numbers of individuals of these species could potentially have
significant negative effects on wild populations of these species. With
respect to U.S. jurisdiction and the regulation of trade, the Act
requires the Service to determine if species qualify as endangered or
threatened species regardless of whether a species is native to the
United States. The protections of the Act include prohibitions on
certain activities including import, export, take, and certain
commercial activity in interstate or foreign commerce (see Available
Conservation Measures). By regulating these activities, the Act helps
to ensure that people under the jurisdiction of the United States do
not contribute to the further decline of listed species.
(11) Comment: Several commenters raise concerns that listing would
provide a disincentive to captive-breeding these species.
Our Response: It is not our intention to cause difficulties for
breeders of these species or a decline in the pool of captive-held
specimens. The Act does not prohibit or ``ban'' captive breeding of
listed species. The Act also does not prohibit a number of activities
related to captive breeding. For example, ownership, possession, or
keeping of a listed species that was legally acquired and not taken in
violation of the Act is not prohibited by the Act--nor is interstate
transport of animals that are not for sale, not offered for sale, or
not transported in the course of a commercial activity. Further, while
the Act prohibits harassment of listed species (via the definition of
``take''), our regulations specify that, when captive animals are
involved, harassment does not include generally accepted animal
husbandry practices that meet or exceed AWA standards, breeding
procedures, or provisions of veterinary care for confining,
tranquilizing, or anesthetizing, when such practices, procedures, or
provisions are not likely to result in injury (see the definition of
harass at 50 CFR 17.3). In addition, activities that do not adversely
affect these species, such as observations in behavioral research, are
not considered take. Activities that are not prohibited by the Act do
not require a permit under the Act.
The protections of the Act for endangered species include
prohibitions on certain activities with any member of the listed
species including import, export, take, and certain commercial activity
in interstate or foreign commerce (see Available Conservation
Measures). Permits may be issued to carry out otherwise prohibited
activities, for scientific purposes or to enhance the propagation or
survival of the species. For example, a permit could potentially be
issued for import or export of captive-bred specimens if the activity
were determined to enhance the propagation or survival of the species.
Section 10(g) of the Act provides that any person claiming the benefit
of any exemption or permit under the Act shall have the burden of
proving that the exemption or permit is applicable, has been granted,
and was valid and in force at the time of an alleged violation. While
the Service may have information available to it that may assist in
making required determinations prior to authorizing otherwise
prohibited activities with listed species, the burden is on the
applicant to provide necessary information for the Service to issue a
permit.
Required Determinations
National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)
We have determined that environmental assessments and environmental
impact statements, as defined under the authority of the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), need not be
prepared in connection with listing a species as an endangered or
threatened species under the Endangered Species Act. We published a
notice outlining our reasons for this determination in the Federal
Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244).
References Cited
A complete list of references cited in this rulemaking is available
on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov in Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-
2016-0076 and upon request from the Branch of Foreign Species,
Ecological Services (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Authors
The primary authors of this final rule are the staff members of the
Branch of Foreign Species, Ecological Services, Falls Church, VA.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.
Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, we amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50
of the Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth below:
PART 17--ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS
0
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 1531-1544; and 4201-4245;
unless otherwise noted.
0
2. In Sec. 17.11(h), add the following entries to the List of
Endangered and
[[Page 36773]]
Threatened Wildlife in alphabetical order under Arachnids:
0
a. Spider, ivory ornamental tiger;
0
b. Spider, ornate tiger;
0
c. Spider, Pedersen's tiger;
0
d. Spider, Smith's tiger; and
0
e. Spider, Sri Lanka ornamental tiger.
The additions read as follows:
Sec. 17.11 Endangered and threatened wildlife.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Common name Scientific name Where listed Status Listing citations and applicable rules
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Arachnids
* * * * * * *
Spider, ivory ornamental tiger...... Poecilotheria subfusca Wherever found........ E 83 FR [Insert Federal Register page where the
document begins], 7/31/2018.
* * * * * * *
Spider, ornate tiger................ Poecilotheria ornata.. Wherever found........ E 83 FR [Insert Federal Register page where the
document begins], 7/31/2018.
Spider, Pedersen's tiger............ Poecilotheria vittata. Wherever found........ E 83 FR [Insert Federal Register page where the
document begins], 7/31/2018.
Spider, Smith's tiger............... Poecilotheria smithi.. Wherever found........ E 83 FR [Insert Federal Register page where the
document begins], 7/31/2018.
* * * * * * *
Spider, Sri Lanka ornamental tiger.. Poecilotheria fasciata Wherever found........ E 83 FR [Insert Federal Register page where the
document begins], 7/31/2018.
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Dated: May 29, 2018.
James W. Kurth,
Deputy Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Exercising the
Authority of the Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-16359 Filed 7-30-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P