[Federal Register: July 27, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 143)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 43844-43853]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr27jy10-19]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[FWS-R9-IA-2008-0116]
[90100-1660-1FLA B6]
RIN 1018-AW38
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determination on
Listing the Black-Breasted Puffleg as Endangered Throughout its Range;
Final Rule
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, determine endangered
status under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Act), as amended, for
the black-breasted puffleg (Eriocnemis nigrivestis), a hummingbird
native to Ecuador.
DATES: This rule becomes effective August 26, 2010.
ADDRESSES: This final rule is available on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov. Comments and materials received, as well as
supporting documentation used in the preparation of this rule, is
available for public inspection by appointment during normal business
hours at: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Branch of Listing, Endangered
Species Program, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Room 400, Arlington, VA 22203;
telephone 703-358-2171.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Janine Van Norman, Chief, Branch of
Foreign Species, Endangered Species Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Room 420, Arlington, VA 22203;
telephone 703-358-2171; facsimile 703-358-1735. If you use a
telecommunications devise for the deaf (TDD), call the Federal
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On May 6, 1991, we received a petition (1991 petition) from Alison
Stattersfield, of the International Council for Bird Preservation
(ICBP), to list 53 foreign birds under the Act, including the black-
breasted puffleg (also referred to in this rule as ``puffleg'') that is
the subject of this final rule. On December 16, 1991, we made a
positive 90-day finding and announced the initiation of a status review
of the species included in the 1991 petition (56 FR 65207). On March
28, 1994 (59 FR 14496), we published a 12-month finding on the 1991
petition. In that document, we announced our finding that listing the
remaining 38 species from the 1991 petition, including the black-
breasted puffleg, was warranted but precluded because of other listing
activity.
Per the Service's listing priority guidelines (September 21, 1983;
48 FR 43098), we identified the listing priority numbers (LPNs)
(ranging from 1 to 12) for all outstanding foreign species in our 2007
Annual Notice of Review (ANOR) (72 FR 20184), published on April 23,
2007. In that notice, the black-breasted puffleg was designated with a
LPN 2 and we determined that listing continued to be warranted but
precluded. It should be noted that ``Table 1 - Candidate Review,'' in
our 2007 ANOR, erroneously noted the black-breasted puffleg as having
an LPN of 3. However, the correct LPN in 2007 was 2, as discussed in
the body of the notice (72 FR 20184, p. 20197).
Previous Federal Action
On January 12, 1995 (60 FR 2899), we reiterated the warranted-but-
precluded status of the remaining species from the 1991 petition, with
the publication of the final rule to list the 30 African birds. We made
subsequent warranted-but-precluded findings for all outstanding foreign
species from the 1991 petition, including the black-breasted puffleg,
as published in our annual notices of review (ANOR) on May 21, 2004 (69
FR 29354), and April 23, 2007 (72 FR 20184).
On January 23, 2008, the United States District Court ordered the
Service to propose listing rules for five foreign bird species, actions
which had been previously determined to be warranted but precluded: The
Andean flamingo (Phoenicoparrus andinus), black-breasted puffleg
(Eriocnemis nigrivestis), Chilean woodstar (Eulidia yarrellii), medium
tree finch (Camarhynchus pauper), and the St. Lucia forest thrush
(Cichlherminia lherminieri sanctaeluciae). The court ordered the
Service to issue proposed listing rules for these species by the end of
2008.
On July 29, 2008 (73 FR 44062), we published in the Federal
Register a notice announcing our annual petition findings for foreign
species (2008 ANOR). In that notice, we announced that listing was
warranted for 30 foreign bird species, including the black-breasted
puffleg, which is the subject of this final rule.
Summary of Comments and Recommendations
In the proposed rule published on December 8, 2008 (73 FR 74427),
we requested that all interested parties submit written comments on the
proposal by February 6, 2009. We received six comments on the proposed
rule. We received one comment from the Center for Biological Diversity
supporting the proposed listing, three comments were from peer
reviewers, and two other comments were received from the public that
contained no substantive information. We did not receive any requests
for a public hearing.
Peer Review
In accordance with our peer review policy published on July 1, 1994
(59 FR 34270), we solicited expert opinion from three knowledgeable
individuals with scientific expertise that included familiarity with
this species and its habitat, biological needs, and threats. We
received responses from all three of the peer reviewers.
We reviewed all comments received from the peer reviewers for
substantive issues and new information regarding the proposed listing
of this species. The peer reviewers generally concurred with our
methods and conclusions and provided additional information,
clarifications, and suggestions to improve the final listing
determination. Peer reviewer comments are addressed
[[Page 43845]]
in the following summary and incorporated into the final rule as
appropriate.
Peer Reviewer Comments
(1) Comment: One commenter indicated that climate change, mining
concessions, and competition from an Ecuadorian hummingbird, the
gorgeted sunangel (Heliangelus strophianus), are threats that were not
adequately addressed in the proposed rule.
Our Response: We agree that these issues were not adequately
addressed and therefore, have addressed these potential threats in the
analysis below. Climate change and interspecific competition are
addressed in the Factor E analysis. Mining impacts are addressed in the
Factor A analysis under Other Anthropogenic Factors.
(2) Comment: One peer reviewer indicated that while the science in
our proposed rule is generally correct, more recent research had been
conducted and pointed out recent research papers. The peer reviewer
also provided more recent information on where the species is currently
found.
Our Response: We addressed this comment in the analysis below by
updating information such as the species' physical description, habitat
specifics, current sightings and distribution, and food preferences. We
incorporated this new research (e.g., a small number of references
pertaining to life history) where appropriate.
(3) Comment: Two peer reviewers indicated that the population
estimate used in the proposed rule is low; they suggested that the
population estimate is more likely between 250 and 999 individuals.
Our Response: We agree and have addressed this in the Population
Estimate section and analysis below.
(4) Comment: Commenters suggested that the population trends
estimate used in the proposed rule is not based on current data and
that the estimate should be correlated with habitat loss based on the
species' current known locations.
Our Response: We have updated the trends estimate based on more
recently available data. Therefore, the final rule incorporates the
most current and best available information.
(5) Comment: Peer reviewers suggested that we update the
information on the species' food base.
Our Response: We agree and have updated this information in the
Species Information, Habitat and Life History section below.
Summary of Changes from Proposed Rule
Several changes were made to update or correct the taxonomy,
biology, and life history of the species, and current areas where the
species has been sighted. The taxonomy section has been corrected to
indicate the correct taxonomic history for this species. Bourcier &
Mulsant (1852) first described black-breasted puffleg as Trochilus
nigrivestis rather than Eriocnemis nigrivestis, as erroneously
indicated in the proposed rule. Additionally, one peer reviewer
clarified that the species' principal habitat is not necessarily
Polyleps forest. During 2007 field work mentioned in the 2008 Species
Action Plan for the black-breasted puffleg (Jahn and Santander 2008),
researchers only found the species in habitat other than Polylepis
forest; therefore, we have updated this information and incorporated it
into the analyses. The species' current known range has been updated to
include recent sightings.
Based on new information, we also revised the threats analysis
under factor A with respect to the construction of a pipeline being
constructed from the Amazon basin to Esmeraldas that was thought to be
in black-breasted puffleg habitat. We also updated the Factor E
analysis to include synergistic effects of El Ni[ntilde]o and
deforestation.
Species Information
Species Description
The black-breasted puffleg is endemic to Ecuador and is a member of
the hummingbird family (Trochilidae). It is approximately 3.25 inches
(in) (8.5 centimeters (cm)) long (Fjeldsa and Krabbe 1990, p. 272;
Ridgely and Greenfield 2001a, p. 373; Ridgely and Greenfield 2001b, p.
280). The species is locally known as ``Calzadito pechinegro'' or
``Zamarrito pichinegro'' (United Nations Monitoring ProgrammeWorld
Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC) 2008b, p. 1). The Black-
breasted puffleg has distinctive white leg plumage (ergo, the name
``puffleg''), but is distinctive among other species of pufflegs due to
a small, shiny blue ``gorget'' (coloration below the throat area).
Males have entirely black upperparts, mostly blackish green underparts,
and dark steel-blue forked tails. Females have shiny, green upper
plumage, turning blue toward the tail, with golden-green underparts
(BirdLife International (BLI) 2007, p. 1). As with other puffleg
hummingbirds, it has a straight black bill.
Taxonomy
This species was first taxonomically described by Bourcier and
Mulsant in 1852 and placed in Trochilidae as Trochilus nigrivestis (BLI
2009, p. 1). According to the Convention on International Trade in
Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) species database,
the black-breasted puffleg is also known by the synonym, Trichilus
nigrivestis (UNEP-WCMC 2008b). Both CITES and BirdLife International
recognize the species as Eriocnemis nigrivestis (BLI 2007, p. 1; UNEP-
WCMC. 2008b, p. 1). The Service follows the Integrated Taxonomic
Information System (ITIS 2008, p. 1) which also recognizes the species
as Eriocnemis nigrivestis; therefore, we accept the species as
Eriocnemis nigrivestis.
Habitat and Life History
Black-breasted pufflegs prefer humid high-Andean montane forest
such as elfin forests (generally forests at high elevations which
contain stunted trees) and forest borders (Fjeldsa and Krabbe 1990, p.
272; Jahn 2008, p. 29; Ridgely and Greenfield 2001a, p. 373; Ridgely
and Greenfield 2001b, p. 280). This habitat is described as wet cloud
forest: Grassy ridges surrounded by stunted montane forest with a dense
understory (de Hoyo et al. 1999, p. 639). Altitudinal migrants, the
species is found between 6,791 and 11,483 feet (ft) (2,070 - 4,570
meters (m)) (del Hoyo et al. 1999, p. 639; Fjeldsa and Krabbe 1990, p.
272; Lyons and Santander, 2006, p. 1; Ridgely and Greenfield 2001a, p.
374). During the rainy season (November-February) the species is found
mainly at higher altitudes above 10,000 ft (3,100 m). It is found at
lower elevations 9,006-10,000 ft (2,745-3,100 m) primarily between
April and September (Fjeldsa and Krabbe 1990, p. 272; del Hoyo et al.
1999, p. 639). The species' preferred habitat is mixed forest and
forest edges dominated by Ericacea plants at high elevations (Guevara,
pers. comm., Jahn 2008, p. 34, Santander et al. 2004, pp. 8-9).
Most pufflegs, including the black-breasted puffleg, are considered
to be generalist feeders (pollinators) (Ross and Allmon 1990, pp. 356-
357). The black-breasted puffleg altitudinal migration coincides with
the flowering of certain plants during the rainy season. Palicourea
huigrensis and Macleania rupestris (commonly referred to as chamburo,
chaquilulo, choglon, chupa lulun, colca macho, gualicon, hualicon
llucho, joyapa, quereme, sagalita, and yurac joyapa (New York Botanical
Garden 2009)) are commonly distributed
[[Page 43846]]
throughout the species' habitat. The species has been frequently
observed using Palicourea huigrensis (no common name (NCN)) as its
primary nectar source (Bleiweiss and Olalla 1983, pp. 657-658; del Hoyo
et al. 1999, pp. 530-531; Fjeldsa and Krabbe 1990, p. 272). The species
also feeds on flower nectar of other shrubs and vines, including:
Thibaudia floribunda (NCN), Disterigma sp. (NCN), Rubus sp. (NCN),
Tropaeolum sp. (NCN), and Psychotria uliginosa (NCN) (Bleiweiss and
Olalla 1983, pp. 657-658; Collar et al. 1992, pp. 516-517; del Hoyo et
al. 1999, pp. 530-531; Phillips 1998, p. 21). The species has been
observed feeding from at least 29 different plant species, including 8
species of Ericaceae (Jahn and Santander 2008, p. 21). Black-breasted
pufflegs feed low in the shrubbery along forest margins, often while
perched (Fjeldsa and Krabbe 1990, p. 272; Ridgely and Greenfield 2001b,
p. 280).
As recently as 1990, researchers were unaware of the puffleg's
breeding habits (Fjeldsa and Krabbe 1990, p. 272), and there continues
to be little information (BLI 2007, p. 1). Del Hoyo et al. (1999, p.
639) reported that the species breeds from October to March, producing
a clutch size of two, and that the female incubates the eggs. Based on
the species' seasonal migration (del Hoyo et al. 1999, p. 639; Fjeldsa
and Krabbe 1990, p. 272), breeding presumably occurs at altitudes above
10,000 ft (3,100 m).
Historical Range and Distribution
Historically, the black-breasted puffleg inhabited the elfin
forests along the northern ridge-crests of both Volcan Pichincha and
Volcan Atacazo in northwest Ecuador (BLI 2007, p. 2; Fjeldsa and Krabbe
1990, p. 272; Krabbe et al. 1994, p. 9). Habitat loss has been the
primary cause of black-breasted puffleg decline (Philips 1998, p. 21,
Santander 2004, pp. 10-17) (see Factor A). The number of specimens in
museum collections taken in the 19th century up until 1950 is over 100,
suggesting the species was once more common (Collar et al. 1992, p.
516). The species appears to have been extirpated from Volcan Atacazo,
but this has not been verified (World Land Trust 2007, p. 3). On Volcan
Atacazo, its presence has not been confirmed since 1902. There was a
possible sighting of a female at treeline (11,483 ft; 3,500 m) in 1983
but it has never been confirmed (BLI 2007, 2; Collar et al. 1992, p.
174; del Hoyo et al. 1999, p. 639). Confirmation of the species on
Volcan Atacazo has not been possible because there is a single
landowner and access to the area has not been allowed to confirm
existence of the species (Jahn 2008, pers. comm.). Following more than
13 years without any observation of the species, the black-breasted
puffleg was rediscovered on Volcan Pichincha in 1993 (Jahn 2008, p. 33;
Phillips 1998, p. 21).
Current Range and Distribution
Currently, the black-breasted puffleg is known to occur in
definitely two, but possibly four, reserves all located north of Quito,
Ecuador. The first area is the Yanacocha Reserve on the north side of
Volcan Pichincha, approximately 12 miles (mi) (20 kilometers (km))
north of Quito. The second area where it is known to occur is in the
Cotacachi-Cayapas Ecological Reserve (below Cayapachupa in the
Cordillera (mountain range) de Toisan), which is 87 mi (140 km) north
of Quito (Jahn 2008, pers. comm.). Currently the Yanacocha Reserve
encompasses approximately 3,300 acres (ac) (1,300 hectares (ha)
(WorldLand Trust 2009). A third area where it may occur is in a private
reserve, Las Gralarias. This reserve is located in the Pichincha
Province, two hours northwest of Quito, where this species was sighted
in 2005 and 2006 (Lyons and Santander, 2006, pp. 1-2; Schwartz 2006, as
cited in Hull 2009, p. 1). Las Gralarias is a 400ac (162ha) reserve, at
an elevation of 5,873 7,776 ft (1,790 2,370 m), the lowest elevation at
which a black breasted puffleg has been seen. Another sighting of this
species occurred in 2007 in a fourth location, at Hacienda Verdecocha,
a private reserve adjacent to the Yanacocha Reserve. Hacienda
Verdecocha is approximately 2,396 ac (970 ha) and likely contains
black-breasted puffleg habitat (Jahn 2008, p. 33; Jahn & Santander
2008, p. 10). It is unclear whether the birds at the Yanacocha Reserve
and the Hacienda Verdecocha Reserve are the same population. The
species' current existence at one other potential location (Volcan
Atacazo, approximately 15 mi (25 km) southwest of Quito) has not been
verified for over 100 years.
The species occurs in temperate elfin forests, generally at
altitudes between 6,791 and 11,483 ft (2,070 - 4,570 m) (Fjeldsa and
Krabbe 1990, p. 272; Jahn & Santander 2008, p. 10; Ridgely and
Greenfield 2001a, p. 373; Ridgely and Greenfield 2001b, p. 280). Volcan
Pichincha, where the species is known to occur, peaks at 15,699 ft
(4,785 m) (Phillips 1998, p. 21). The current extent of the species'
range is believed to be between 27 mi\2\ (70 km\2\) and 54 mi\2\ (139
km\2\) (BLI 2009; Jahn & Santander 2008, p. 8). This considers the
suitable habitat in two locations where the species is believed to
occur based on the best available information (BLI 2009, p. 1).
However, its range may be somewhat larger due to recent sightings in
other protected areas, and also because it may also exist in other
suitable locations where it has not been sighted (Guevara 2009 pers.
comm., Jahn & Santander 2008, pp. 21-23).
Population Estimates
The black-breasted puffleg is believed to be restricted to two to
three subpopulations (Hacienda Verdecocha is adjacent to the Yanacocha
Reserve so that is likely one combined population). Its total
population size ranges from 200 to 270 individuals, with a declining
trend (BLI 2009, p. 1; Jahn 2008, p. 35). Recent research suggested
that a more accurate estimate may be 250-999 individuals (Jahn and
Santander 2008, p. 19); however, there are no supporting data for this
estimate at this time. One additional subpopulation may exist on Volcan
Atacazo (Jahn and Santander 2008, p. 35), although it has not been
documented. BirdLife International, a global organization that consults
with and assimilates information from species experts, estimated that
the species has experienced a population decline of between 50 and 79
percent in the past 10 years, with more than 20 percent of this loss
having occurred within the past 5 years. (BLI 2007, p. 4). This rate of
decline is predicted to continue (BLI 2009, p. 1).
Conservation Status
The black-breasted puffleg is protected by various Federal, local,
and international means. It is identified as a critically endangered
species under Ecuadorian law (Rodriguez 2002, p. 91). This species is
also classified as ``Critically Endangered'' in the 2009 International
Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List. It has an extremely
small range, and the population is restricted to possibly two or three
locations (BLI 2009, p. 1, Jahn and Santander 2008, p. 10). Critically
endangered is IUCN's most severe category of extinction assessment,
which equates to extremely high risk of extinction in the wild. IUCN
criteria include rate of decline, population size, area of geographic
distribution, and degree of population and distribution fragmentation.
BirdLife International (BLI), which is cited throughout this document,
is the authority for birds on the IUCN Red List. The black-breasted
puffleg was listed on Appendix II of CITES on October 22, 1998.
Additionally, in 2005, the mayor of Quito, Ecuador, designated the
puffleg as its emblem. Lastly, several private reserves provide
protection to this
[[Page 43847]]
species. Yanacocha Reserve, managed by Fundacion Jocotoco, a private
nongovernmental organization in Ecuador, was established around 2001
specifically to protect this species. The Yanacocha Reserve is managed
for ecotourism, environmental education, and conservation initiatives.
Factors Affecting the Species
Section 4 of the Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 424)
set forth the procedures for adding species to the Federal Lists of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants. A species may be
determined to be an endangered or threatened species due to one or more
of the five factors described in section 4(a)(1) of the Act: (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. The five-factor
analysis under the Act requires an analysis of current and future
potential impacts to the species. Listing actions may be warranted
based on any of the above threat factors, singly or in combination. We
evaluated the best available scientific and commercial information
under the five listing factors to determine whether it met the
definition of endangered or threatened. Each of these factors is
discussed below.
A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment
of its Habitat or Range
The black-breasted puffleg occurs on volcanic mountain ranges
restricted to elfin forests along the northern ridge-crests within 87
miles (140 km) northwest of Quito, Ecuador (BLI 2007, p. 2; Fjeldsa and
Krabbe 1990, p. 272; Krabbe et al. 1994, p. 9). The species has not
been confirmed on Volcan Atacazo since 1902 (BLI 2007, 2; Collar et al.
1992, p. 174), although it may have been sighted there in 1983 (Jahn
2008, p. 33). The species occurs at altitudes between 6,791 and 11,483
ft (2,070 - 4,570 m) (Fjeldsa and Krabbe 1990, p. 272; Jahn & Santander
2008, p. 10, Ridgely and Greenfield 2001a, p. 373; Ridgely and
Greenfield 2001b, p. 280, Santander 2008, p. 33). Within the current
range of the black-breasted puffleg, approximately 93 percent of the
habitat has been destroyed, and the current extent of the species'
range is approximately 54 mi\2\ (139 km\2\) ((BLI 2009, p. 1;
Hirschfeld 2007, pp. 178-179; Jahn & Santander 2008, p. 8). Threats
include human population pressures such as clearing for agricultural
expansion and fires caused by slash-and-burn agricultural practices
(Jahn and Santander 2008, p. 24).
Habitat loss due to deforestation is the primary cause of black-
breasted puffleg declines (BLI 2009, p. 1; Philips 1998, p. 21).
Current threats consist primarily of deforestation due to use by local
people for firewood, charcoal, and agriculture (BLI 2009, p 2).
Deforestation activities also include clearance of forested habitat for
commercial use or grazing (Hirschfeld 2007, pp. 178-179). Habitat
destruction and alteration also occur as a result of intentional fires
to convert forested areas to pasture or cropland (Goodland 2002, pp.
16-17; Hirschfeld 2007, pp. 178-179; Phillips 1998, pp. 20-21).
Deforestation rates and patterns: The conversion of habitat
significantly increased between 1996 and 2001 compared with the period
between 1982 and 1996. The ridge-crests within the range of the black-
breasted puffleg are relatively level. Local settlers have cleared the
majority of forested habitat within the species' range for timber
products (charcoal production) or converted it to potato cultivation
and grazing (BLI 2009, p. 2, Bleiweiss and Olalla 1983, p. 656; del
Hoyo 1999, pp. 530-531). Some ridges are almost completely devoid of
natural vegetation, and even if black-breasted pufflegs still occur in
these areas, their numbers are most likely quite low (BLI 2009, p. 2).
Within the species' range, aerial photographs of the northern and
western slopes of Volcan Pichincha between 1982 and 2001 showed a
continued loss of forested area, while agricultural area increased by
24 percent (Santander 2004, p. 10).
The areas outside of Reserves (see Refugia) but still within the
range of the black-breasted puffleg continue to be affected by habitat
loss and fragmentation. An analysis of deforestation rates and patterns
using satellite imagery in the western Andean slopes of Colombia and
Ecuador was conducted. Researchers found that from 1973 through 1996, a
total of 82,924 ha (204,909 ac) of tropical forests within the area
studied were converted to other uses (Vi[ntilde]a et al. 2004, pp. 123-
124). This corresponds to a nearly one-third total loss of primary
forest habitat or a nearly 2 percent mean annual rate within the study
area. More recent reports identified similar forest habitat losses in
Ecuador. Between the years 1990 and 2005, Ecuador lost a total of 7.31
million ac (2.96 million ha) of primary forest, which represents a 16.7
percent deforestation rate and a total loss of 21.5 percent of forested
habitat since 1990 (Butler 2006, pp. 1-3; FAO 2003, p. 1).
Other Anthropogenic Factors: Habitat destruction and pollution due
to oil development and distribution (Goodland 2002, pp. 16-17;
Hirschfeld 2007, pp. 178-179) and increased access and habitat
destruction resulting from road development (Hirschfeld 2007, pp. 178-
179) have been indicated as other threats to this species' habitat. In
the proposed rule, we discussed that, in 2001, the Ecuadorian
government agreed to construct a pipeline to transport heavy oil from
the Amazon basin to Esmeraldas on the Pacific Coast (Goodland 2002, pp.
16-17). The environmental impact study (EIS) conducted in 2001 revealed
that the proposed route went through black-breasted puffleg habitat
(Goodland 2002, pp. 16-17). However, the EIS was done almost 10 years
ago. More recent satellite mapping shows that much of the area that was
previously puffleg habitat is already destroyed, with little habitat
remaining above 9,186 ft (2,800 m). The puffleg is found at lower
elevations 9,006-10,000 ft (2,745-3,100 m) primarily between April and
September. However, the species is found mainly at higher altitudes
10,000 ft (3,100 m) above the altitude at which the pipeline was
constructed. Although this pipeline was constructed, this occurred in
the past and is not a current or future threat.
The pipeline may pass through suitable puffleg habitat on the
northwestern slope of Volcan Pichincha (Jahn and Santander 2008, p.
17). However this pipeline, in terms of its construction, is not a
significant threat impacting the black-breasted puffleg because the
pipeline construction already occurred. There is no indication that any
other pipelines will be constructed in the black-breasted puffleg's
range. There is the potential for oil spill leaks, but the threat of
this is minimal. Because the species is found mainly at higher
altitudes in reserves above the altitude of the pipeline, the puffleg
habitat that potential oil spill leaks would likely affect is small.
Therefore, we find that neither the pipeline, nor habitat destruction
and pollution due to oil development are current or future threats to
this species.
Mining was suggested to be a threat to this species by a peer
reviewer; however, mining has not been found to be a threat to this
species (also see Factor D). Mining has been controversial in Ecuador
and there has been pressure from foreign mining companies to allow
mining for resources such as copper and diamonds. In March 2009,
shortly after
[[Page 43848]]
Ecuador's new mining law was enacted, the Confederation of Indigenous
Nationalities of Ecuador (CONAIE) filed a lawsuit stating that the
country's new mining law is unconstitutional because it failed to
consult with indigenous organizations whose territories will be
affected by a proposed activity (CONAIE 2009). Although the mining law
is being disputed, mining may be allowed for resources in Junin and
Zamora, Ecuador, to the west and southwest of Quito (Ecuador Mining
News 2009, Ecometals Ltd 2009). However, mining is not allowed in the
two to three reserves where the black-breasted puffleg is currently
believed to exist. CONAIE, is working diligently to ensure that mining
does not occur (CONAIE 2009, Earthworks 2009). Mining does not appear
to be a major factor impacting the black-breasted puffleg; therefore,
we have determined that mining is not a threat to the species.
We evaluated roads as a potential threat to the species. The
existing subpopulations of black-breasted puffleg appear to be
concentrated in protected areas (see Refugia below), which are not
currently threatened by roads. Roads can destroy habitat, facilitate
invasion by exotic species, expose birds to traffic hazards, and
increase human access into habitat, facilitating further exploitation
and habitat destruction (Hunter 1996, pp. 158-159). However, in this
case, roads do not appear to be a major factor impacting the black-
breasted puffleg; therefore, we have determined that roads are not a
threat to the species.
Refugia: Although reserves exist to protect species, reserves can
also bring with them unintended consequences. Reserves may have
repercussions, such as the potential to initiate additional road
development through species' habitat, and increase pressures on
species' habitat from tourism (such as the increase in pollution,
trash, and other waste). Reserves may also increase pressure to
surrounding habitat by locals who supplement their income through
ecotourism, but who also may use the land detrimentally as described
under factor A (Stem et al. 2003, pp. 322-347; Pitts 2010, pp. 86,
197). Reserves, with their increased tourism, can also cause an
increase in invasive species (FAO 2010, p. 1).
Several reserves exist with a primary intention of protecting this
species. In the proposed rule, we found that Yanacocha Reserve was
negatively affected by human population pressures, including clearing
for agricultural expansion and fires caused by slash-and-burn
agricultural practices (Philips 1998, p. 21). Hunting, extraction of
nontimber resources (such as orchids), and tourism were considered to
have a minor impact within the Reserve (BLI 2007, p. 12). However, the
best available information now indicates that if these practices still
occur, they (1) occur outside of the reserves and (2) they do not occur
to the degree that they threaten the continued or future existence of
the species.
Summary of Factor A
The black-breasted puffleg prefers humid high-Andean montane
forests at altitudes between 6,791 and 11,483 ft (2,070 - 4,570 m)
(Jahn 2008, p. 10; Ridgely and Greenfield 2001a, p. 373; Ridgely and
Greenfield 2001b, p. 280). The current populations are small and
limited to a narrow elevational band in the volcanic mountains
generally to the north of Quito, existing in fragmented, disjunct, and
isolated habitat. Although the species' range is partly in at least two
protected areas, the habitat around the reserves continues to be
altered and destroyed by human activities. Further, some of the
protected areas are private reserves which are not officially
recognized by the Ministry of Environment (Jahn and Santander 2008, p.
9), and their long term protection is not guaranteed. Efforts are under
way to restore and protect more suitable habitat for the species (Jahn
2008, p. 28). Outside of its refugia, the areas around the reserves is
somewhat negatively affected by tourism, local human pressures, roads,
and invasive species associated with the reserves. Nevertheless, we
find that unintended consequences of refugia are not a threat to the
species. However, habitat destruction, alteration, and conversion are
key factors in the species' historical decline and continue to be
factors negatively affecting the status of the species outside of the
Reserves where this species is found. Therefore, based on the best
available information, we find that the present destruction,
modification, and curtailment of habitat is a significant threat to the
black-breasted puffleg.
B. Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes
In 1987, the black-breasted puffleg was listed on Appendix II of
CITES. CITES is an international agreement between governments to
ensure that the international trade of CITES-listed plant and animal
species does not threaten species' survival in the wild. There are
currently 175 CITES Parties (member countries or signatories to the
Convention). Under this treaty, CITES Parties (signatories to the
Convention) regulate the import, export, and re-export of CITES-
protected plants and animal species (also see Factor D). Trade must be
authorized through a system of permits and certificates that are
provided by the designated CITES Scientific and Management Authorities
of each CITES Party (CITES 2007). In the United States, the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service serves as the Scientific and Management
Authorities.
CITES provides varying degrees of protection to more than 32,000
species of animals and plants that are traded as whole specimens,
parts, or products. Under CITES, a species is listed at one of three
levels of protection (i.e., regulation of international trade), which
have different permit requirements (CITES 2007). Appendix II includes
species requiring regulation of international trade in order to ensure
that trade of the species is compatible with the species' survival.
International trade in specimens of Appendix-II species is authorized
when the permitting authority has determined that the export will not
be detrimental to the survival of the species in the wild and that the
specimens to be exported were legally acquired (UNEP-WCMC 2008a, p. 1).
At times a species may be listed as endangered under the U.S.
Endangered Species Act, and concurrently listed under Appendix II of
CITES, rather than the more restrictive Appendix I, which does not
allow commercial trade of wild specimens. Although CITES Appendix II
allows for commercial trade, in order for specimens of this species to
be traded internationally (i.e., exported from its country of origin),
a determination has to be made that (1) The export will not be
detrimental to the survival of the species in the wild and (2) the
specimen was legally acquired. In this case, it is unlikely that a
determination could be made that the export would not be detrimental to
the survival of the species in the wild.
Between the time the puffleg was listed in CITES in 1987 and 2010,
there were 5 CITES-permitted international shipments containing 17
specimens of the black-breasted puffleg. These shipments occurred
between 1996 and 2002 (UNEP-WCMC 2008c, p. 1). According to the World
Conservation Monitoring Centre trade data (UNEP-WCMC 2008c, p. 1), all
of the CITES transactions involved the transport of dead specimens.
Nine were traded for scientific purposes, six for commercial purposes,
and two were for personal use. Trade involving the United States
included three specimens that were imported into the United States and
seven that were reexported from the United States.
[[Page 43849]]
Even though this species is listed under Appendix II of CITES, and
commercial trade is allowed, we believe that international trade
controlled via valid CITES permits is not a threat to the species.
CITES adequately regulates international trade because the export of
Appendix II species requires the determination that the export will not
be detrimental to the survival of the species in the wild. Therefore,
we find that international trade does not pose a threat to the species.
We are unaware of any other information currently available that
addresses the occurrence of overutilization for commercial, recreation,
scientific, or education purposes that may be affecting the black-
breasted puffleg. There is no known historic or cultural use of this
species by local populations. As such, we do not consider
overutilization to be a threat to the species.
C. Disease or predation
We are not aware of any occurrence of disease or predation that may
be causing a decline of the black-breasted puffleg. As a result, we do
not consider disease or predation to be a threat to the black-breasted
puffleg.
D. The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms
The black-breasted puffleg is identified as a critically endangered
species under Ecuadorian law and Decree 3,516 of 2003-Unified Text of
the Secondary Legislation of the Ministry of Environment (Ecolex 2003b,
p. 36). Decree 3,516 summarizes the law governing environmental policy
in Ecuador and provides that the country's biodiversity be protected
and used primarily in a sustainable manner. Appendix 1 of Decree No.
3,516 lists the Ecuadorian fauna and flora that are considered
endangered. Species are categorized as critically endangered (En
peligro critico), endangered (En peligro), or vulnerable (Vulnerable)
(Ecolex 2003b, p. 17). Resolution No. 105 of January 28, 2000, and
Agreement No. 143 of January 23, 2003, regulate and prohibit commercial
and sport hunting of all wild bird species, except those specifically
identified by the Ministry of the Environment or otherwise permitted
(Ecolex 2000, p. 1; Ecolex 2003a, p. 1). The Ministry of the
Environment does not permit commercial or sport hunting of the black-
breasted puffleg because of its status as a critically endangered
species (Ecolex 2003b, p. 17). However, we do not consider hunting
(Factor B) to be a current threat to the black-breasted puffleg, so
this law does not reduce any threats to the species.
Ecuador has numerous laws and regulations pertaining to forests and
forestry management. These include: The Forestry Act (comprised of Law
No. 74 of 1981 Forest Act and conservation of natural areas and
wildlife (Faolex 1981, p. 1-54), and Law No. 17 of 2004 Consolidation
of the Forest Act and conservation of natural areas and wildlife
(Faolex 2004, pp. 1-29)); a Forestry Action Plan (1991-1995); the
Ecuadorian Strategy for Forest Sustainable Development of 2000
(Estrategia para el Desarrollo Forestal Sostenible); and, Decree 346,
which recognizes that natural forests are highly vulnerable (ITTO 2006,
p. 225). However, the International Tropical Timber Organization
considered ecosystem management and conservation in Ecuador, including
effective implementation of mechanisms that would protect the black-
breasted puffleg and its habitat, to be lacking (ITTO 2006, p. 229).
The governmental institutions responsible for oversight appear to
be under-resourced, and there is a lack of law enforcement on the
ground. Despite the creation of a national forest plan, there appears
to be a lack of capacity to implement this plan due to insufficient
political support. There appears to be unclear or unrealistic forestry
standards, inconsistencies in application of regulations, discrepancies
between actual harvesting practices and forestry regulations, the lack
of management plans for protected areas, and high bureaucratic costs.
All these inadequacies have failed to prevent ongoing habitat
destruction, such as widespread unauthorized logging (ITTO 2006, p.
229), forest clearing for conversion to agriculture or grazing
(Bleiweiss and Olalla 1983, p. 656; del Hoyo 1999, pp. 530-531;
Hirschfeld 2007, pp. 178-179), habitat destruction and alteration as a
result of fire caused by slash-and-burn agriculture (Goodland 2002, pp.
16-17; Hirschfeld 2007, pp. 178-179; Phillips 1998, pp. 20-21); and
increased access and habitat destruction resulting from road
development (Hirschfeld 2007, pp. 178-179). In addition, most of
Ecuador's forests are privately owned or owned by communities (ITTO
2006, p. 224). The management and administration of Ecuador's forest
resources and forest harvest practices is insufficient and unable to
protect against unauthorized forest harvesting, degradation, and
conversion (ITTO 2006, p. 229). Thus, Ecuadorian forestry regulations
have not mitigated the threat of habitat destruction (Factor A).
The Ecuadorian government recognizes 31 different legal categories
of protected lands (e.g., national parks, biological reserves, geo-
botanical reserves, bird reserves, wildlife reserves, etc.). As of
2006, the amount of protected land (both forested and non-forested) in
Ecuador totaled approximately 11.5 million ac (4.67 million ha) (ITTO
2006, p. 228). However, only 38 percent of these lands have appropriate
conservation measures in place to be considered protected areas
according to international standards. The standards define these areas
as areas that are managed for scientific study or wilderness
protection, for ecosystem protection and recreation, for conservation
of specific natural features, or for conservation through management
intervention (IUCN 1994, pp. 17-20). Moreover, only 11 percent have
management plans, and less than 1 percent (13,000 ha (32,125 ac)) have
implemented those management plans (ITTO 2006, p. 228).
The black-breasted puffleg occurs in only a few reserves (BLI 2009,
p. 2; Jahn and Santander 2008, p. 33; Santander, et al. 2004, p. 1;
World Land Trust 2007, p. 1) in the Pichincha mountain range. Some of
the area is being managed for ecotourism, environmental education, and
conservation initiatives, including restoration (Fundacion Jocotoco
2006, p. 1). However, outside of the Reserves, there are ongoing human
population pressures from expanding agriculture, along with slash-and-
burn agricultural practices (BLI 2009, pp. 1-2) (Factor A). Thus, while
black-breasted puffleg habitat is being protected in several relatively
small government and privately owned reserves, regulatory mechanisms
associated with protected land do not mitigate the impact of threats to
the species' habitat from habitat loss and destruction.
The black-breasted puffleg is listed on Appendix II of CITES.
CITES, an international treaty among 175 nations, including Ecuador and
the United States, entered into force in 1975. In the United States,
CITES is implemented through the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA). The
Secretary of the Interior has delegated the Department's responsibility
for CITES to the Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
and established the CITES Scientific and Management Authorities to
implement the treaty. Under this treaty, member countries work together
to ensure that international trade in animal and plant species is not
detrimental to the survival of wild populations by regulating the
import, export, and re-export of CITES-listed animal and plant species
(USFWS 2008, p. 1). As discussed under Factor B, we do not consider
international trade to be
[[Page 43850]]
a threat impacting the black-breasted puffleg. Therefore, protection
under this Treaty is an adequate regulatory mechanism.
Summary of Factor D
Ecuador has adopted numerous laws and regulatory mechanisms to
administer and manage its wildlife, such as the black-breasted puffleg
and its habitat. Under Ecuadorian law, the black-breasted puffleg is
listed as endangered and ranges partly within two to three protected
areas. As discussed under Factor A, habitat destruction, degradation,
and fragmentation continue throughout the existing range of the black-
breasted puffleg. With respect to CITES, we found that CITES is an
adequate regulatory mechanism with respect to international trade or
overutilization (Factor B), and is not a threat to this species.
However, on-the-ground enforcement of Ecuador's laws and oversight of
the local jurisdictions implementing and regulating activities
destructive to the species' habitat are insufficient in conserving the
black-breasted puffleg or its habitat. Therefore, we find that the
existing regulatory mechanisms, as implemented, are inadequate to
either eliminate or mitigate the primary threat of habitat destruction
to the black-breasted puffleg.
E. Other natural or manmade factors affecting the continued existence
of the species
Interspecific Competition: One peer reviewer suggested that another
species of hummingbird, the gorgeted sunangel (Heliangelus
strophianus), may be a potential threat (Jahn 2008, pp. 34, 36-37) to
the black-breasted puffleg. This species occupies a similar ecological
niche and may be moving northward into the black breasted puffleg's
habitat due to loss of suitable habitat. The gorgeted sunangel consumes
similar plant species and is slightly larger in size than the black-
breasted puffleg. Only one aggressive interaction between the species
has been observed; however, they both aggressively defend their
territories (Guevara 2009, pers. comm.). Loss of the gorgeted
sunangel's habitat may exacerbate the threat posed to the puffleg in
the form of competition from the gorgeted sunangel moving upward in
altitude into the black-breasted puffleg's range.
Small, Declining Population Size: The black-breasted puffleg
population has declined primarily as a result of habitat loss
(Bleiweiss and Olalla 1983, pp. 656-661; BLI 2009, p. 1; Collar et al.
1992, pp. 516-517) (Factor A). A collection of over 100 museum
specimens suggests that the species was more common and more widespread
than the currently known populations (BLI 2004, p. 2; Collar et al.
1994, p. 121). The black-breasted puffleg inhabits a narrow elevational
strip between 6,791 and 11,483 ft (2070 - 4570 m) (BLI 2010, p 1;
Fjeldsa and Krabbe 1990, p. 272; Krabbe et al. 1994, pp. 8-9). Within
the species' range, aerial photographs of the northern and western
slopes of Volcan Pichincha between 1982 and 2001 showed a continued
loss of forested area while agricultural area increased by 24 percent
(Santander, et. al. 2004, p. 10). As indicated above, the current
extent of the species' range is believed to be between 27 mi\2\ (70
km\2\) and 54 mi\2\ (139 km\2\). The total population is currently
estimated to be 200-270 individuals, and believed to be in decline (BLI
2010, p. 1).
Rare species (i.e., species with small population sizes or
restricted ranges) may be vulnerable to a variety of stochastic
processes that can affect their risk of extinction on various
timescales. Whether a rare species may meet the definition of a
threatened or an endangered species under the Act depends on the
potential threats involved, the probable timescale of the potential
threat, and the characteristics of the species and its habitat. Factors
can include the species' dependence on a specific habitat type and its
inability to move away from a stressor or habitat degradation. Although
the Trochilinae hummingbirds tend to be food generalists (Ross and
Allmon 1990, pp. 356-357), the black-breasted puffleg is restricted to
a small geographic range. Rare species such as this puffleg that are
experiencing declining populations and threats are particularly
vulnerable to risks such as inbreeding depression, loss of genetic
variation, and accumulation of new mutations. Inbreeding can have
individual or population-level consequences, either by increasing the
phenotypic expression (the outward appearance or observable structure,
function, or behavior of a living organism) of recessive, deleterious
alleles or by reducing the overall fitness of individuals in the
population (Charlesworth & Charlesworth 1987, p. 231; Shaffer 1981, p.
131). Small, isolated populations of wildlife species are also
susceptible to demographic problems (Shaffer 1981, p. 131), which may
include reduced reproductive success of individuals and skewed sex
ratios. Once a population is reduced below a certain number of
individuals, it can tend to rapidly decline towards extinction
(Franklin 1980, pp. 147-148; Gilpin and Soule 1986, p. 25; Holsinger
2000, pp. 64-65; Soule 1987, p. 181).
The black-breasted puffleg's restricted range, combined with its
small, declining population (BLI 2009, unpaginated; del Hoyo et al.
1999, p. 639; Fjeldsa and Krabbe 1990, p. 272; Krabbe et al. 1994, p.
9), makes the species particularly vulnerable to the threat of adverse
natural (e.g., genetic, demographic, or environmental) and manmade
(e.g., deforestation, habitat alteration, fire) events that destroy
individuals and their habitat (Harris and Pimm, 2008, p. 164; Holsinger
2000, pp. 64-65; Primack 1998, pp. 279-308; Young and Clarke 2000, pp.
361-366). Due to lack of short- and long term viability of its existing
population, we consider the black-breasted puffleg to be at risk of
extinction.
Climate Change: The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC) was established in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organization
and the United Nations Environment Program in response to growing
concerns about climate change and, in particular, the effects of global
warming. Although the extent of warming likely to occur is not known
with certainty at this time, the IPCC has concluded that warming of the
climate is unequivocal, and that continued greenhouse gas emissions at
or above current rates will cause further warming (Meehl et al. 2007,
p. 749). Eleven of the 12 years from 1995 through 2006 rank among the
12 warmest years in the instrumental record of global surface
temperature since 1850 (IPCC 2007). Climate-change scenarios estimate
that the mean air temperature could increase by more than 3 [deg]C (5.4
[deg]F) by 2100 (IPCC 2007, p. 46). We recognize that there are
scientific differences of opinion on many aspects of climate change,
including the role of natural variability in climate. We rely primarily
on synthesis documents (e.g., IPCC 2007) that present the consensus
view of a very large number of experts on climate change from around
the world. We have found that these synthesis reports, as well as the
scientific papers used in those reports or resulting from those
reports, represent the best available scientific information we can use
to inform our decision.
However, climate change models that are currently available are not
yet able to make meaningful predictions of climate change for specific,
local areas (Parmesan and Matthews 2005, p. 354). We do not have models
to predict how the climate in the range of this bird species will
change, and we do not know how any change that may occur would affect
these species. However,
[[Page 43851]]
models and research suggest that climate change is an additional stress
for species such as the black breasted puffleg that are already
threatened by other environmental changes to their habitats (McCarty
2001, p. 325; Brook et al 2008, pp. 453-454). Warming has been
predicted to occur to a greater degree in the higher altitudes than in
the lower altitudes (Bradley 2006, p. 1). Although we do not find that
climate change, in and of itself, is a threat to the species, a
discussion of the synergistic effects of El Ni[ntilde]o, deforestation,
and drought follows.
Regional and localized models are less prevalent and sometimes
absent with respect to climate change. Research has been conducted with
respect to the interactions between El Ni[ntilde]o and deforestation
and how it affects montane cloud forests (Laurance 1998, p. 413,
Laurance and Williamson 2001, p. 1529; Still 1999, p. 608). From this
research, we can predict how increases in temperature due to climate
change may subsequently interact with other stressors. In ecosystems
such as the one where the black breasted puffleg exists, mountains are
frequently shrouded in trade wind clouds and mist in combination with
rainfall. This habitat type is termed tropical montane cloud forest.
Many features of these ecosystems, such as vegetation morphology, are
related to cloud formation. One of the most significant characteristics
is horizontal precipitation, where frequent cloud cover is the
deposition of cloud droplets on vegetation (Laurance and Williamson
2001, p. 1529; Still 1999, p. 608). Fragmented forests, such as the one
where the black breasted puffleg exists, are more susceptible to
droughts in El Ni[ntilde]o years (Laurance and Williamson 2001, p.
1529). With increased deforestation, plant evapotranspiration is
reduced, subsequently causing a decrease in rainfall, which could in
turn increase the vulnerability of the forest to fire. Researchers
suggest that there may be a deforestation threshold (Laurance and
Williamson 2001, p. 1529). All of these stressors act synergistically,
and warming climate could exacerbate the likelihood of drought and
subsequent forest fire (Foden et al. 2008, pp. 1-4). The relationship
between El Ni[ntilde]o (and increased El Ni[ntilde]o events),
deforestation, drought, and forest fires all interacting
synergistically increase the likelihood of increased severity in
drought and forest fires (Laurance 1998, p. 413).
Research suggests that birds are moving northward to cooler
climates in response to climate change (Sorte and Jetz 2008, pp. 865,
866). In part, because the black breasted puffleg's habitat is at high
elevations, it has been suggested there may no longer be habitat for
this species. The higher elevations could potentially be affected by
the synergistic effects of drought, El Ni[ntilde]o, and forest fires as
discussed above. Plant nectar and other food sources upon which the
black-breasted puffleg depends may require a particular humidity level
that is associated with cloud forest conditions. Conditions associated
with this shift in elevation include possible physiological changes and
changes in species assemblages in part due to phenology (when plants
bloom based on temperature and daylight), all of which could
potentially affect the black breasted puffleg's fitness (Foden et al
2008, pp. 1-5). These potential changes act in concert with other
threats to the species such as habitat loss and degradation, magnifying
the synergistic effects on this species. However, several reserves
exist for the explicit protection of black breasted puffleg habitat.
Because these reserves exist and contain large swaths of protected
forested habitat (believed to be at least 6,096 ac/2,467 ha), the
threat of drought and forest fires is ameliorated. Therefore, we do not
consider the synergistic effects of drought, El Ni[ntilde]o, and forest
fires to have a significant impact on the species' habitat now or in
the foreseeable future.
Invasive species. An increase in the atmospheric concentration of
carbon dioxide (CO2) has implications beyond those associated with
warming temperatures. The change in CO2 may increase the ability of
invasive plant species to outcompete native plant species on which the
black-breasted puffleg feeds. Higher concentrations of CO2 may be
favorable to invasive plant species (Smith et al. 2000, pp. 79-82).
Emissions of CO2, considered to be the most significant anthropogenic
greenhouse gas, increased due to human activities by approximately 80
percent between 1970 and 2004 (IPCC 2007, p. 36). CO2 emissions from
energy use have been projected to increase by 40 to 110 percent between
2000 and 2030 (IPCC 2007, p. 44). We therefore expect continuing
production of atmospheric CO2, at or above current levels, as
predicted, to contribute to the spread of invasive plant species and
have a detrimental impact on the species' habitat.
Summary of Factor E
Projected climate change and its associated consequences (change in
species composition, distribution, and elevation) has the potential to
affect the black-breasted puffleg. Warmer temperatures may interact
with other stressors such as habitat degradation and loss (Brook et al.
2008, p. 1). Competition with other species and an increase in invasive
plant species, which could outcompete the black-breasted puffleg's food
sources, are other potential stressors. Warmer temperatures and greater
concentrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide will likely cause changes
in the plant species composition in this species' habitat, as well as
likely shift the black-breasted puffleg altitudinal distribution (Jahn
2008). However, this species is a generalist feeder and has been seen
in lower elevations in reserves and protected areas. We believe that
the above stresses to the species are buffered by the establishment of
reserves and protected areas for this species.
The black-breasted puffleg is currently restricted to possibly
three small and declining populations within a small geographic range.
The limited availability of suitable habitat makes it vulnerable to
genetic and demographic risks that negatively impact the species'
short- and long-term viability. The species' population size has
declined considerably within the past 10 years (50-79 percent), and
this rate of decline is expected to continue. Other threats to the
species include possible competition and displacement by the Gorgeted
sunangel, displacement of the black-breasted puffleg's food sources by
nonnative invasive plant species, and genetic isolation due to habitat
fragmentation and isolation of small populations.
Based on the best available information, we have determined that
the species is particularly vulnerable to the threat of adverse natural
(e.g., genetic, demographic) and manmade events (introduction of
invasive species and drought and fires caused by habitat loss and
destruction) that destroy individuals and their habitat. The genetic
and demographic risks are exacerbated by the manmade factors.
Therefore, we find that other natural or manmade factors are threats to
the continued existence of the black-breasted puffleg.
Conclusion and Determination
We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial
information available regarding the past, present, and future threats
to the black-breasted puffleg. The extreme lack of data for this
species makes it difficult to discern a trend in population numbers
with statistical confidence. We believe it is reasonable to infer that
the trend is downward; the best available scientific and commercial
data suggest that over the past two decades, this species has
[[Page 43852]]
likely significantly declined in abundance.
There are three primary factors impacting the continued existence
of the black-breasted puffleg: (1) Habitat destruction, fragmentation,
and degradation (factor A); (2) limited, declining population size and
isolation of remaining subpopulations (factor E); and (3) inadequate
regulatory mechanisms (factor D). The black-breasted puffleg, a small
hummingbird with two to three subpopulations, occupies a narrow range
of distribution, preferring temperate elfin forests at altitudes of
between 6,791 and 11,483 ft (2,070 and 4,570 m). The species is an
altitudinal migrant, spending the breeding season (November-February)
in the humid elfin forest and the rest of the year at slightly lower
elevations based on available food sources.
The primary threat to this species, widespread deforestation, has
led to habitat loss. Conversion of primary forests to human settlement
and agricultural uses has led to the fragmentation of habitat
throughout the range of the black-breasted puffleg and isolation of the
remaining populations. Its habitat, which is already disturbed and
fragmented, continues to be altered by anthropogenic factors such as
habitat alteration, introduction of invasive species, and habitat
destruction and fragmentation as a result of local sustenance use,
particularly agriculture. Although the puffleg is listed as a
critically endangered species under Ecuadorian law and part of its
range occurs within a protected area, implementation of existing
regulatory mechanisms are inadequate to protect the species (Factor D),
as they have been ineffective in curbing the primary threat to the
black-breasted puffleg, which is habitat loss or alteration (Factor A).
The total population size of the black-breasted puffleg is
estimated to range from 200 to 270 adult individuals, with a declining
trend. The black-breasted puffleg's restricted range, combined with its
small population size, makes the species particularly vulnerable to the
threat of adverse natural (e.g., genetic, demographic, or
environmental) and manmade (e.g., deforestation, habitat alteration,
fire) events that destroy individuals and their habitat.
The population of this species has declined between 50 and 79
percent in the past 11 years. More than 20 percent of this loss
occurred within the past 6 years, including the possible local
extirpation of the species from Volcan Atacazo. These rates of decline
are expected to continue. Habitat destruction, alteration, conversion,
and fragmentation (Factor A) have been and continue to be factors in
the black-breasted puffleg's decline. The impacts of habitat loss are
exacerbated by the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms (Factor
D) and the species' already small and declining population size, making
the black-breasted puffleg particularly vulnerable to natural and human
factors (e.g., genetic isolation and possible inbreeding, and the
introduction of invasive species) (Factor E). We consider the threats
to the black-breasted puffleg to be equally present and of the same
magnitude throughout the species' current range. Based on the best
available scientific and commercial information regarding the past,
present, and potential future threats faced by the black-breasted
puffleg, this species warrants protection under the Act, and we
determine that the black-breasted puffleg is endangered throughout its
range.
Available Conservation Measures
Conservation measures provided to species listed as endangered or
threatened under the Act include recognition, requirements for Federal
protection, and prohibitions against certain practices. Recognition
through listing results in public awareness, and encourages and results
in conservation actions by Federal and State 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 within the United States or on the high seas with respect
to any species that is proposed or listed as endangered or threatened,
and with respect to its critical habitat, if any is being designated.
However, given that the black-breasted puffleg is not native to the
United States, no critical habitat is being proposed for designation
with this rule.
Section 8(a) of the Act authorizes 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 and threatened species in foreign countries. Sections 8(b)
and 8(c) of the Act authorize the Secretary to encourage conservation
programs for foreign endangered species and to provide assistance for
such programs in the form of personnel and the training of personnel.
The Act and its implementing regulations set forth a series of
general prohibitions and exceptions that apply to all endangered and
threatened wildlife. As such, these prohibitions would be applicable to
the black-breasted puffleg. These prohibitions, pursuant to 50 CFR
17.21, make it illegal for any person subject to the jurisdiction of
the United States to ``take'' (take includes: Harass, harm, pursue,
hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or to attempt any of these)
within the United States or upon the high seas, import or export,
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, any endangered wildlife
species. It also is illegal to possess, sell, deliver, carry,
transport, or ship any such wildlife that has been taken in violation
of the Act. Certain exceptions apply to agents of the Service and State
conservation agencies.
Permits may be issued to carry out otherwise prohibited activities
involving endangered and threatened wildlife species under certain
circumstances. Regulations governing permits are codified at 50 CFR
17.22 for endangered species and 17.32 for threatened species. With
regard to endangered wildlife, a permit must 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.
Required Determinations
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (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 of 1969, need not be prepared in connection
with regulations adopted pursuant to section 4(a) of the Act. A notice
outlining our reasons for this determination was published in the
Federal Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244).
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited in this proposed rule is
available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov or upon request
from the Endangered Species Program, Branch of Listing, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Author(s)
The primary authors of this final rule are the staff of the
Endangered Species Program, Branch of Foreign Species, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (see ADDRESSES section).
[[Page 43853]]
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.
Regulation Promulgation
0
Accordingly, we amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of
the Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth below:
PART 17--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 16 U.S.C. 1531-1544; 16 U.S.C.
4201-4245; Pub. L. 99-625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted.
0
2. Amend Sec. 17.11(h) by adding a new entry for ``Puffleg, black-
breasted'' in alphabetical order under BIRDS, to the List of Endangered
and Threatened Wildlife, to read as follows:
Sec. 17.11 Endangered and threatened wildlife.
* * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species Vertebrate
------------------------------------------------ population where Critical
Historic range endangered or Status When listed habitat Special rules
Common name Scientific name threatened
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BIRDS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Puffleg, black-breasted Eriocnemis Ecuador, South Entire E 767 NA NA
nigrivestis America
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dated: June 29, 2010
Jeffrey L. Underwood,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-18018 Filed 7-26-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S