[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 101 (Tuesday, May 27, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 30399-30429]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-11329]
[[Page 30399]]
Vol. 79
Tuesday,
No. 101
May 27, 2014
Part IV
Department of the Interior
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fish and Wildlife Service
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
50 CFR Parts 13,17, 23, et al.
Revision of Regulations Implementing the Convention on International
Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES); Updates
Following the Fifteenth Meeting of the Conference of the Parties to
CITES; Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 79 , No. 101 / Tuesday, May 27, 2014 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 30400]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Parts 13, 17, and 23, and Appendix A to Chapter I
[Docket No. FWS-R9-IA-2010-0083; 96300-1671-0000-R4]
RIN 1018-AW82
Revision of Regulations Implementing the Convention on
International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora
(CITES); Updates Following the Fifteenth Meeting of the Conference of
the Parties to CITES
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS or Service), are
revising the regulations that implement the Convention on International
Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES or Treaty or
Convention) by incorporating certain provisions adopted at the
fourteenth and fifteenth meetings of the Conference of the Parties
(CoP14 and CoP15) to CITES and clarifying and updating certain other
provisions. These changes will bring U.S. regulations in line with new
resolutions and revisions to resolutions adopted at meetings of the
Conference of the Parties that took place in June 2007 (CoP14) and
March 2010 (CoP15). The revised regulations will help us more
effectively promote species conservation, help us continue to fulfill
our responsibilities under the Treaty, and help those affected by CITES
to understand how to conduct lawful international trade.
DATES: This rule is effective June 26, 2014. The incorporation by
reference of the material listed in this rule is approved by the
Director of the Federal Register as of June 26, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert R. Gabel, Chief, Division of
Management Authority; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax
Drive, Suite 212; Arlington, VA 22203 (telephone, (703) 358-2093; fax,
(703) 358-2280).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Summary
Why We Need To Publish a Final Rule
As a Party to CITES, the United States is obligated to implement
the Convention effectively. Over the 40-year history of CITES, online
markets and other technological advances have made it possible to sell
and ship wildlife anywhere in the world, and issues of wildlife use
have grown more complex. As international wildlife trade evolves, so
does implementation of the Convention. The CITES Parties meet every 2
to 3 years to vote on resolutions and decisions that interpret and
implement the text of the Treaty and on amendments to the lists of
species in the CITES Appendices. To keep pace with these changes, and
ensure that U.S. businesses and individuals understand the requirements
for lawful international trade in CITES specimens, it is necessary for
us to periodically update our CITES-implementing regulations.
What is the effect of this final rule?
The final rule will bring U.S. regulations in line with new
resolutions and revisions to resolutions adopted at meetings of the
Conference of the Parties that took place in June 2007 (CoP14) and
March 2010 (CoP15). Updates include: New or revised definitions for
certain specimens in trade; clarified marking requirements for certain
specimens in trade; amended restrictions for export of Appendix-I
specimens bred in captivity for commercial purposes; eased restrictions
on the allowed use of CITES specimens after import into the United
States; updated requirements for humane transport of live specimens;
and streamlined requirements for registered operations breeding
Appendix-I animals for commercial purposes. The revised regulations
will help us more effectively promote conservation of wildlife and
plants in trade, help us continue to fulfill our responsibilities under
the Treaty, and help those affected by CITES to understand how to
conduct lawful international trade.
The Basis for Our Action
The Endangered Species Act designates responsibility for CITES
implementation to the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. As the lead agency for implementation
of CITES in the United States, the Service has promulgated regulations
(50 CFR part 23) to inform the public about CITES requirements. We
revise our CITES-implementing regulations as needed to ensure they are
as up-to-date and accurate as possible.
Background
CITES was negotiated in 1973 in Washington, DC, at a conference
attended by delegations from 80 countries. The United States ratified
the Treaty on September 13, 1973, and it entered into force on July 1,
1975, after it had been ratified by 10 countries. Currently 180
countries have ratified, accepted, approved, or acceded to CITES; these
countries are known as Parties.
Section 8A of the Endangered Species Act, as amended in 1982 (16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) (ESA), designates the Secretary of the Interior as
the U.S. Management Authority and U.S. Scientific Authority for CITES.
These authorities have been delegated to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service. The original U.S. regulations implementing CITES took effect
on May 23, 1977 (42 FR 10462, February 22, 1977), after the first
meeting of the Conference of the Parties (CoP) was held. The CoP meets
every 2 to 3 years to vote on proposed resolutions and decisions that
interpret and implement the text of the Treaty and on amendments to the
lists of species in the CITES Appendices. The last major revision of
U.S. CITES regulations was in 2007 (72 FR 48402, August 23, 2007) and
incorporated provisions from applicable resolutions and decisions
adopted at meetings of the Conference of the Parties up to and
including the thirteenth meeting (CoP13), which took place in 2004. In
2008, through a direct final rule, we incorporated certain provisions
adopted at CoP14 regarding international trade in sturgeon caviar (73
FR 40983, July 17, 2008).
Proposed rule and comments received: We published a proposed rule
on March 8, 2012 (77 FR 14200), to revise the regulations that
implement CITES. We accepted public comments on the proposed rule for
60 days, until May 7, 2012.
We received 37 comments in response to the proposed rule, 34 of
which were substantive. We received comments from individuals,
organizations, and State natural resource agencies. Of the substantive
comments we received, 22 were from falconers and falconer
organizations, 3 were from State natural resource agencies and regional
associations, and 9 were from non-governmental organizations not
associated with falconry.
General comments: A number of commenters provided general comments
on U.S. CITES-implementing regulations, including the proposed
revisions, and also provided comments on specific sections of the
proposed rule. General comments are discussed here; we have addressed
comments specific to a particular section of the regulations in the
corresponding section of this preamble (see Section-by-Section
Analysis).
Several commenters recognized the importance of harmonizing U.S.
[[Page 30401]]
regulations with provisions adopted by the Parties to CITES. One
commenter believed that the proposed changes would promote species
conservation and facilitate legal possession and trade of CITES
wildlife while providing means to better detect and reduce illicit
possession and trade. Two commenters appreciated that we have relaxed
what they considered to be overly restrictive regulation of
international trade in the revision of 50 CFR part 23 published in
2007.
One commenter stated that, given our obligations under the ESA and
CITES, the Service should take a conservative and precautionary
approach in promulgating CITES regulations and generally choose
protective measures over expanding trade. Another commenter stated that
the original basis for CITES was that sustainable trade was a positive
force for conservation of wildlife but that today this is no longer the
case. The purpose of CITES is to ensure that international trade in
wildlife and plants does not threaten the survival of species. We work
with other CITES Parties to guard against over-exploitation of listed
species due to international trade and believe that use of natural
resources in a biologically sustainable and legal manner can support
conservation efforts. We have developed our CITES-implementing
regulations on this basis.
One commenter asserted that some of the proposed changes, if
adopted, will have serious negative consequences for the safari-based
conservation system in developing countries. The same commenter stated
that the regulations are difficult to navigate and should be more user
friendly and that some of the proposed changes are likely to result in
technical violations and, therefore, seizure and forfeiture of
trophies. We can see no basis for the commenter's assertions regarding
impacts of the final rule in developing countries. We strive to make
our regulations as clear and straightforward as possible and believe
that this final rule lays out, in a user-friendly manner, what is
required for lawful international trade in CITES specimens. However, we
welcome specific suggestions for making the regulations easier to
navigate.
We also received a number of general comments regarding
international trade in raptors. One commenter stated that the Service
has wrongfully treated domestically bred raptors as ``wild taken'' when
they are in fact private property. Another commenter stated that the
purpose of CITES is to control trade in wild specimens and that, except
for the California condor, there are no wild Appendix-I raptors
currently endangered or threatened with extinction. The commenter
recommended that regulation of trade in Appendix-I raptors and all
raptors from captive populations should be lessened or eliminated
entirely.
As a Party to CITES we are obligated to regulate international
trade in specimens of CITES-listed species (including Appendix-I
raptors) in accordance with the provisions of the Convention. CITES
regulates international trade in wildlife and plants, including parts,
products, and derivatives, to ensure that trade is legal and does not
threaten the survival of species in the wild. This does not mean that
only wild-caught specimens are, or should be, regulated. Both wild-
caught and captive-bred specimens are subject to CITES provisions,
including provisions that specifically pertain to specimens that are
bred in captivity.
Several commenters noted that possession of raptors in the United
States is regulated at both State and Federal levels and is monitored
by the Service's Migratory Bird Program. Therefore, they believe that
U.S. regulation of international trade in raptors should be no more
restrictive than what is required by CITES. Several commenters stated
that unnecessarily restricting trade in captive-bred raptors increases
the incentive to take raptors from the wild illegally, reduces genetic
exchange, discourages captive breeding and conservation, increases
costs, and makes U.S. breeders less competitive in the world market.
One commenter noted that the falconry community has demonstrated great
responsibility and value to the conservation of wild raptors.
We recognize and appreciate the contribution that the falconry
community has made to the conservation of wild raptors. Our regulations
do not go beyond what is required by CITES, and we do not believe that
we are unnecessarily restricting trade in captive-bred raptors. With
this final rule we have, in fact, eased restrictions on trade in
Appendix-I specimens bred in captivity (see the preamble discussions
for Sec. Sec. 23.5 and 23.18) by revising the definition of ``bred for
noncommercial purposes'' and allowing for the possibility of
noncommercial trade from a commercial breeding operation whether or not
it is registered with the CITES Secretariat.
One commenter asked why he is required to have a CITES permit to
travel from the United States to Canada to hunt with his personally
owned, captive-bred hybrid falcon since there is no trade or commerce
involved. He also objected to having to cross at specific ports, pay
fees, and have his bird inspected by FWS at border crossings. The
activity described by the commenter is ``trade'' under CITES. ``Trade''
is defined in the Treaty as ``export, re-export, import, and
introduction from the sea.'' Regulation of international trade in CITES
species, including captive-bred and hybrid specimens, is required
whether or not the export, re-export, import, or introduction from the
sea is commercial. CITES regulates trade through a system of permits
and certificates, and Parties establish an inspection process at ports
of entry and exit as part of this system. Inspection officials at ports
of entry and exit verify that CITES specimens are accompanied by valid
CITES documents and take enforcement action when trade does not comply
with the Convention. Inspection fees are outside the scope of this
regulation and are therefore not addressed here.
Section-by-Section Analysis
In the following parts of the preamble, we discuss the substantive
issues in sections for which we received public comments, and we
provide responses to those comments. For an explanation of the changes
to sections for which we did not receive comments, please see the
preamble to the proposed rule (77 FR 14200, March 8, 2012).
What are the changes to 50 CFR Part 13?
Application procedures (Sec. 13.11): This section describes
application procedures for Service permits. One commenter asserted that
the statement in Sec. 13.11(c) indicating that the Service ``will
process all applications as quickly as possible'' is not specific
enough and should be amended to say that the Service has 15 working
days from receipt of applications to process and issue permits. This
section (Sec. 13.11) contains information about application procedures
not just for CITES permits but also for other types of permits issued
by the Service, including, for example, injurious wildlife permits and
permits under the ESA, the Marine Mammal Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 1361
et seq.), the Wild Bird Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 4901-4916), and the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703-712). Some of these
applications are more complex and require more extensive review than
others. For some applications under the ESA and the Marine Mammal
Protection Act, we are required to publish a notice in the Federal
Register and seek public comment before making a decision on a permit
application. While we strive to process all applications as quickly as
[[Page 30402]]
possible, not all applications can be processed within the timeframe
suggested by the commenter.
What are the changes to 50 CFR Part 17?
50 CFR part 17 contains special rules for some species classified
as ``threatened'' under the ESA. Most of the special rules that pertain
to species that are also listed under CITES were written before the
publication of our 2007 CITES regulations. Some of the rules included
detailed CITES requirements because those requirements were not
contained in 50 CFR part 23 prior to 2007. We believe it is more
appropriate to include CITES requirements in 50 CFR part 23. Therefore,
we have removed specific CITES requirements from the special rules in
50 CFR part 17 and, if they were not there already, inserted them into
our CITES regulations in 50 CFR part 23. These changes, with a few
exceptions described in our proposed rule (77 FR 14200, March 8, 2012),
do not alter the requirements of the special rules because the
requirements added to or already contained in 50 CFR part 23 are
functionally the same as those currently contained in the special
rules. Under the special rules, specimens may only be imported into the
United States if the requirements in 50 CFR part 23 have been met.
One commenter supported the removal of detailed information on
CITES provisions for personal and household effects from the special
rules in part 17 and pointing the readers instead to the appropriate
sections in part 23. Another commenter stated that he objected to the
proposal to ``shift some of the special rules in part 17 to part 23''
and noted that part 17 and part 23 have different mandates and part 23
should only implement CITES provisions, nothing more. The commenter is
correct that the regulations in part 17 implement provisions of the ESA
and the regulations in part 23 implement CITES. This is, in fact, the
reason we have made the changes proposed. We removed components of the
special rules in part 17 that are CITES requirements and inserted them
into the CITES regulations in part 23. The special rules will remain in
part 17; only the CITES components of those rules have been moved to
part 23. We believe this will make clear what is required under CITES
(in 50 CFR part 23) for trade in a particular specimen and what is
required under the ESA (in 50 CFR part 17). As stated above, these
changes do not alter the requirements of the special rules because the
special rules require that the provisions in 50 CFR part 23 must also
be met. Likewise, as detailed in Sec. 23.3, trade in specimens of
CITES species that are also listed under the ESA or covered by other
U.S. laws must meet both the CITES requirements in 50 CFR part 23 and
requirements in other applicable U.S. regulations.
What are the changes to 50 CFR Part 23?
Deciding if the regulations apply to your proposed activity (Sec.
23.2): We had proposed adding a paragraph to the table in Sec. 23.2 to
clarify that if a CITES specimen you possess or want to enter into
intrastate or interstate commerce is subject to restrictions on its use
after import then the regulations in part 23 apply. One commenter
objected to this clarification and stated that adding restrictions to
this section for intrastate or interstate commerce would be going
beyond the intent of CITES and the mandate of part 23. The restrictions
on the use after import of certain CITES specimens are described in
Sec. 23.55 and have been in place since 2007. We were merely referring
the reader to Sec. 23.55 to determine whether the specimen in question
is subject to restrictions on its use after import, and highlighting
that if it is subject to such restrictions, then the regulations in
part 23 apply. We note that, in fact, this rule narrows appropriately
the restrictions contained in Sec. 23.55 (see the preamble discussion
and the regulatory text for Sec. 23.55).
Upon further evaluation, we have decided to remove the table from
Sec. 23.2 and replace it with a simple statement. Although the table
was intended to assist the reader in determining whether the
regulations in part 23 apply to his or her activity we believe it may
be causing confusion. Therefore, we are removing the table and adding
in its place the following sentence: ``If you are engaging in
activities with specimens of CITES-listed species these regulations
apply to you.''
Definitions (Sec. 23.5): Whenever possible we define terms using
the wording of the Treaty and the resolutions.
Definitions of ``bred for noncommercial purposes'' and
``cooperative conservation program'': Article VII, paragraph 4, of the
Treaty states that specimens of Appendix-I wildlife species bred in
captivity for commercial purposes shall be deemed to be specimens of
species included in Appendix II. Such specimens can therefore be traded
without the need for an import permit (see Sec. Sec. 23.18 and 23.46).
It also provides in Article VII, paragraph 5, that specimens that are
bred in captivity may be traded under an exemption certificate (see
Sec. Sec. 23.18 and 23.41). Although the Treaty does not use the term
``bred for noncommercial purposes'' in Article VII, paragraph 5, the
Parties have agreed to use this term as the intended meaning of
paragraph 5 because Article VII, paragraph 4, addresses specimens bred
for commercial purposes.
Our current regulations contain definitions of ``bred for
noncommercial purposes'' and ``cooperative conservation program.''
These terms were defined based on the interpretation of Article VII,
paragraph 5, adopted at CoP11 in Resolution Conf. 11.14 and
subsequently (until CoP14) contained in Resolution Conf. 12.10. Our
definition of ``bred for noncommercial purposes'' specifies that a
specimen only qualifies to be treated as bred for noncommercial
purposes, and therefore eligible for an exemption certificate, if every
donation, exchange, or loan of the specimen is between facilities that
are involved in a cooperative conservation program. At CoP14, the
Parties removed the definition of ``bred for noncommercial purposes''
from Resolution Conf. 12.10 (including the reference to cooperative
conservation programs) because it was considered to be outside the
scope of the resolution, which addresses the procedure for registering
and monitoring operations that breed Appendix-I animal species for
commercial purposes. The deletion of this paragraph from the resolution
leaves it to Parties to adopt their own interpretation of Article VII,
paragraph 5.
The changes adopted at CoP14, and our experiences since publication
of our current regulations, led us to reconsider our definition of
``bred for noncommercial purposes.'' We are amending our definition of
``bred for noncommercial purposes'' by removing the requirement that
the trade be conducted between facilities that are involved in a
cooperative conservation program and, consequently, removing from our
regulations the definition of ``cooperative conservation program,''
consistent with recent amendments to CITES resolutions. The change
allows an Appendix-I specimen that was bred in captivity to be traded
under a CITES exemption certificate when each donation, exchange, or
loan of the specimen is noncommercial, including situations where the
donation, exchange, or loan is not between two facilities that are
participating in a cooperative conservation program. Our amendment to
the definition is consistent with current CITES resolutions. (See also
the discussion in the preamble for Sec. 23.18.)
[[Page 30403]]
Several commenters opposed the removal of the definition of
``cooperative conservation program'' and the requirement that, to
qualify for an exemption certificate, trade in a specimen bred for
noncommercial purposes must be between facilities participating in a
cooperative conservation program. One commenter believed this provision
should be retained to promote species conservation and argued that we
had not provided a sufficient explanation or justification for its
removal. Another stated that linking breeding operations to
conservation efforts is the least that should be required of those
engaged in trade of captive-bred specimens of Appendix-I species.
We are removing this requirement because we believe it is overly
restrictive. While we agree with the commenters that it is important to
promote species conservation, we understand that it is not always
feasible for a breeding operation to participate in or support a
recovery activity in cooperation with a range country, sometimes due to
political realities or civil unrest, for example. In addition, there
are circumstances under which Appendix-I animals may be bred-in-
captivity for noncommercial purposes (including, for example,
noncommercial breeding by hobbyists) where we do not believe it is
reasonable to prohibit trade under Article VII, paragraph 5, solely
because the breeding facility is not participating in a cooperative
conservation program. We will continue to scrutinize this trade
carefully, to ensure that each donation, exchange, or loan of a
specimen traded under Article VII, paragraph 5, is noncommercial.
Another commenter asked that, if we delete the reference to cooperative
conservation programs as proposed, that we amend the definition of
``bred for noncommercial purposes'' by adding to the end the phrase
``where the purpose is directed towards noncommercial use.'' We have
declined to accept this suggestion as we consider it to be redundant.
Another commenter stated that we should remove both the definition
of ``cooperative conservation program'' and ``bred for noncommercial
purposes'' since neither of these terms is currently defined by CITES,
and retaining or modifying a definition not used by CITES goes beyond
CITES provisions and the part 23 mandate. We disagree that we should
only provide definitions for terms defined by CITES and that doing so
is beyond the part 23 ``mandate.'' The purpose of part 23 is to
explain, as clearly as possible, how we implement the Treaty and what
is required for legal international trade in CITES-listed species.
Where we feel it is useful, we have provided definitions for terms used
in the regulations to clarify the intended meaning in this context.
Two commenters suggested that falconry be specifically cited as an
example of an activity that would qualify as ``bred for noncommercial
purposes.'' We have not accepted this suggestion. Although there may be
situations in which falconry birds are bred for noncommercial purposes,
this is not always the case. Birds used in falconry are also bred and
traded for economic gain, including for profit.
Coral definitions: We are amending our definitions of ``coral
(dead),'' ``coral fragments,'' ``coral (live),'' and ``coral sand'' in
Sec. 23.5 to more closely align with the definitions in the Annex to
Resolution Conf. 11.10 (Rev. CoP15). Due to problems we have
encountered in the implementation of the requirements for trade in
stony corals, we are further revising the definitions of ``coral
fragments'' and ``coral sand'' to clarify the size of a specimen that
meets the definition of ``coral fragments'' or ``coral sand'' and may
therefore be considered exempt from the provisions of CITES. The same
clarification regarding ``coral fragments'' was adopted by the Parties
at CoP15.
Two commenters expressed concern that the proposed changes to the
definition of ``coral fragments'' will allow a broadening of the subset
of coral specimens that could be considered fragments, and therefore
exempt from CITES provisions. The commenters suggested that we
substitute the word ``all'' for ``any'' in the definition, so that it
reads ``. . . between 2 and 30 mm measured in all directions.'' It was
our intent, and the intent of the Parties at CoP15, to limit ``coral
fragments'' to specimens smaller than 30 mm. We believe that the change
proposed by the commenters further clarifies that intent. We agree that
``all'' is more precise and, to be consistent, have made the suggested
change to the definitions of both ``coral fragments'' and ``coral
sand.''
Definition of ``ranched wildlife'': The United States participated
in a working group established to evaluate the use of source code ``R''
(for ``specimens originating from a ranching operation'') for species
other than crocodilians and, if necessary, propose a revised definition
of source code ``R'' for consideration at CoP15. At CoP15, based on the
recommendations of the working group, the Parties adopted a revised
definition of source code ``R.'' In our proposed rule (77 FR 14200,
March 8, 2012), we indicated our intention to incorporate the new
definition into Sec. 23.5, consistent with the change to Resolution
Conf. 12.3 (Rev. CoP15) adopted at CoP15.
Two individual State natural resource agencies and one State
natural resource agency organization endorsed this change and stated
that the new definition more closely describes the way in which their
alligator programs operate and will allow them to export alligator
skins produced in their States under the ``R'' source code. Two
commenters strongly objected to the incorporation of the new definition
into U.S. regulations and stated that ranching is merely a subset of
wild take. Another commenter asked us to provide further rationale for
incorporating the new definition into our regulations and noted that it
is unclear how adoption of the new definition may impact protected
species in the wild and, in addition, that allowing wild-sourced
specimens to be traded as ``ranched'' will make it impossible to track
the full impact of wild collection. The commenter urged us to maintain
a clear distinction between specimens derived from a ranching operation
in accordance with Resolution Conf. 11.16 (Rev. CoP15) and wild-sourced
specimens.
We agree with those commenters who supported incorporation of the
new definition of source code ``R'' into our regulations because it
more accurately describes production systems often employed for certain
species, such as the American alligator. We also agree with the comment
suggesting that ranching production is associated with wild harvest. We
note that, before a permit can be issued for specimens entering
international trade as a result of either ranching production or wild
harvest, a non-detriment finding must be made. Thus, the Scientific
Authority will evaluate the impact of both of these activities on wild
populations. We also believe it is important to have consistent
application and implementation of CITES terms, which we intend to
achieve by incorporation of the revised definition.
Incorporation by reference (Sec. 23.9): We are adding this new
section to contain information on materials incorporated by reference,
currently located in Sec. 23.23. We believe that moving the
information regarding materials incorporated by reference into its own
section will make it easier for readers to locate and reference, and
easier for us to update, as needed, in the future.
Prohibitions (Sec. 23.13): We are adding text to this section to
clarify that violation of any of the provisions of 50 CFR part 23,
including use of CITES
[[Page 30404]]
specimens imported into the United States contrary to what is allowed
under Sec. 23.55, is unlawful. One commenter expressed support for
this clarification.
Another commenter stated that this provision would make it unlawful
to use any CITES specimen for any purposes contrary to conditions
imposed under Sec. 23.55 and that this is too broad, as Sec. 23.55
only applies to Appendix-I and certain Appendix-II specimens. The
commenter seems to have misinterpreted the provisions in Sec. 23.55.
The table in Sec. 23.55 lays out the allowed use of any CITES specimen
after it has been imported into the United States. The vast majority of
CITES specimens (including most Appendix-II and -III specimens) may be
used for any lawful purpose after import, and this is stated in
paragraphs (d), (e), and (f) of Sec. 23.55. However, the import and
subsequent use of many Appendix-I specimens and certain Appendix-II
specimens may be only for noncommercial purposes, and this information
is also provided in Sec. 23.55. We are not adding new prohibitions
here. The restrictions on use after import of certain CITES specimens
have been in place since 2007. We simply want to clarify that violation
of any of the provisions of 50 CFR part 23 is unlawful.
One commenter stated that, if an imported raptor was injured or for
some reason unable to perform as a falconry bird, these changes would
prevent the use of the raptor for breeding because FWS considers
breeding to be commercial. We reiterate that we are not adding new
prohibitions with regard to use after import. In fact, this final rule
appropriately narrows the current restrictions that have been in place
since 2007 (see the preamble discussion and the regulatory text for
Sec. 23.55). In addition, we do not consider all breeding to be
commercial and refer the commenter to the discussions in the preamble
for Sec. Sec. 23.5 and 23.18 with regard to trade in Appendix-I
specimens bred for commercial and noncommercial purposes.
Documents for the export of Appendix-I wildlife and plants (Sec.
23.18): Sections 23.18 and 23.19 contain decision trees to help readers
determine what type of CITES document is needed for export of an
Appendix-I specimen and where in the regulations they can find
information regarding the different types of documents. We have
reevaluated our requirements for export of Appendix-I wildlife and are
amending the decision tree in Sec. 23.18 accordingly. (See also the
preamble discussion for Sec. 23.5 regarding the definition of ``bred
for noncommercial purposes.'')
As noted previously, Article VII, paragraph 4, of the Treaty states
that specimens of Appendix-I wildlife species bred in captivity for
commercial purposes shall be deemed to be specimens of species included
in Appendix II. Such specimens can therefore be traded without the need
for an import permit. Our regulations required commercial breeders of
Appendix-I wildlife to be registered with the CITES Secretariat in
order to export Appendix-I specimens, regardless of the purpose of the
import. The decision tree in Sec. 23.18 asks, at several points,
whether the export of the specimen is for noncommercial purposes.
However, because of the way the decision tree is structured, export of
specimens bred in captivity (according to CITES criteria) at commercial
operations that are not registered with the CITES Secretariat was
prohibited, even in small numbers when the intended use of the
specimens in the importing country is noncommercial.
Based on our experience since publication of our regulations in
2007, we have concluded that this interpretation is overly restrictive.
The exemptions contained in Article VII allow alternatives to the
procedures contained in Articles III, IV, and V for trade in CITES-
listed species when certain criteria are met. However, if an Appendix-I
specimen does not qualify for an exemption under Article VII, it should
not, solely on that basis, also be deemed ineligible for a permit or
certificate under Article III. For this reason, we are amending our
regulations to allow for this possibility. We are amending the decision
tree in Sec. 23.18 by eliminating the boxes that ask if the export is
for noncommercial purposes, which eliminates the requirement that
commercial operations breeding Appendix-I species must be registered
with the Secretariat to export specimens under any circumstances. We
believe this change reflects the appropriate implementation of Articles
III and VII.
One commenter stated that the CITES Secretariat has confirmed that
an Appendix-I specimen can be exported from a commercial breeding
facility, not registered with the Secretariat, for a noncommercial
purpose. We agree with this interpretation and note that our revisions
to this section remove the requirement that commercial operations
breeding Appendix-I species must, in all cases, be registered with the
Secretariat to export their specimens.
Several commenters opposed this change and asserted that commercial
breeders should not be allowed to participate in noncommercial trade.
They expressed concern that allowing such trade would cause enforcement
difficulties by blurring the distinction between commercial and
noncommercial facilities. One commenter stated that all facilities
breeding Appendix-I specimens should be registered with the CITES
Secretariat to facilitate national and international oversight and that
commercial facilities that are not registered should not be allowed to
export Appendix-I specimens. The commenter argued that our proposed
revisions seem to be contrary to the intent of CITES, which is to limit
the trade in Appendix-I specimens for commercial purposes.
We agree that trade in Appendix-I specimens must be subject to
particularly strict regulation, as stated in the Treaty, and we will
continue to monitor the trade in Appendix-I specimens very carefully.
The Treaty does allow for trade in Appendix-I specimens that are bred
in captivity for commercial purposes, and we implement this provision
by requiring that operations breeding Appendix-I specimens for
commercial purposes are registered with the CITES Secretariat, as
agreed by the Parties in Resolution Conf. 12.10 (Rev. CoP15). The
Treaty also allows for trade in Appendix-I specimens bred in captivity
for noncommercial purposes, and we recognize that there are
circumstances under which a commercial breeding operation may engage in
trade where each donation, exchange, or loan of a specimen is
noncommercial. We will continue to scrutinize such trade and will
exercise our right and responsibility under the Treaty to verify
whether the Management Authority of the importing country has made the
appropriate determination of whether an import is not for primarily
commercial purposes.
Several commenters suggested that language be added to the decision
tree to indicate that falconry and propagation for falconry are
considered ``primarily noncommercial.'' We do not agree that falconry
and breeding of birds for use in falconry can always be considered
activities that are ``primarily noncommercial'' and have therefore
declined to accept this suggestion. Some commenters also recommended
that we adopt a policy that five or fewer birds exported for falconry
purposes will generally be considered noncommercial trade. We have not
adopted this suggestion. Determinations regarding the commercial or
noncommercial nature of a proposed activity are made on a case-by-case
basis after review of all relevant factors (see Sec. 23.62).
[[Page 30405]]
Several commenters expressed their belief that birds bred for
falconry should qualify for a bred-in-captivity certificate and be
traded under the source code ``C'' and not ``F.'' They stated that
source code ``F'' is not appropriate for U.S. captive-bred raptors
because it implies possible impacts to wild populations. One commenter
also noted that use of source code ``F'' creates conflict with other
countries, particularly in Europe, that do not implement Resolution
Conf. 12.10 (Rev. CoP15).
The Parties have agreed, in Resolution Conf. 12.10 (Rev. CoP15),
that the exemption in Article VII, paragraph 4, should be implemented
through the registration by the Secretariat of operations that breed
specimens of Appendix-I species in captivity for commercial purposes.
Such specimens are ``deemed to be specimens of species included in
Appendix II'' and therefore can be traded under an export permit,
without the need for an import permit. Resolution Conf. 12.3 (Rev.
CoP15) states that source code ``D'' should be used on permits for
Appendix-I animals originating at an operation registered with the
Secretariat and exported under the provisions of Article VII, paragraph
4.
Article VII, paragraph 5, of the Treaty provides that specimens
that are bred in captivity may be traded under an exemption certificate
(see Sec. 23.41). As noted previously, although the Treaty does not
use the term ``bred for noncommercial purposes'' in Article VII,
paragraph 5, the Parties have agreed to use this term as the intended
meaning of paragraph 5 because Article VII, paragraph 4, addresses
specimens bred for commercial purposes. Resolution Conf. 12.3 (Rev.
CoP15) states that source code ``C'' should be used on permits for
Appendix-I animals bred in captivity and exported under the provisions
of Article VII, paragraph 5.
We implement these provisions as follows. The exemptions provided
in Article VII, paragraphs 4 and 5, allow for trade in Appendix-I
specimens without the need for an import permit when the specimens have
been bred in captivity and certain conditions are met. To qualify for
these exemptions, an Appendix-I animal must have been bred in
captivity, in accordance with CITES criteria in Resolution Conf. 10.16
(Rev.) and U.S. regulations in Sec. 23.63, and it must have been
either: (1) Bred for commercial purposes at a facility registered with
the CITES Secretariat (Article VII, paragraph 4); or (2) bred for
noncommercial purposes (Article VII, paragraph 5). Specimens exported
under Article VII, paragraph 4 (i.e., those bred for commercial
purposes at a facility registered with the CITES Secretariat), are
``deemed to be'' Appendix-II specimens, and we therefore issue an
export permit with the source code ``D.'' For specimens exported under
Article VII, paragraph 5 (i.e., those bred in captivity for
noncommercial purposes), we issue a bred-in-captivity certificate with
the source code ``C.'' When an Appendix-I specimen bred in captivity is
exported under an exemption document (an export permit with a source
code ``D'' or a bred-in-captivity certificate with a source code
``C''), no import permit is required.
We also allow for trade in Appendix-I specimens produced in
captivity that do not qualify for the exemptions in Article VII.
However, such specimens must be traded under Article III of the Treaty,
and an import permit is required. These specimens are given the source
code ``F,'' because neither source code ``C'' nor ``D'' applies.
One commenter noted that Article VII, paragraph 4, of the Treaty
states that specimens of Appendix-I species bred or propagated for
commercial purposes shall be deemed to be specimens of species included
in Appendix II and questioned why we stated in the proposed rule that
such specimens are still included in Appendix I. The commenter stated
that there is no CITES provision that a specimen bred at a registered
facility and ``deemed to be'' Appendix II for export reverts back to
Appendix I on arrival in the importing country.
The language in Article VII, paragraph 4, stating that Appendix-I
specimens bred in captivity are deemed to be specimens of species
included in Appendix II allows such specimens to be traded
commercially. It means that a Management Authority may grant an export
permit or a re-export certificate without requiring the prior issuance
of an import permit. It does not mean that the species has been
transferred from Appendix I to Appendix II. As we indicated in the
proposed rule, the species remains listed in Appendix I, and therefore
the specimens are not eligible for any exemption limited specifically
to an Appendix-II species or taxon, such as less-restrictive provisions
for personal and household effects.
Information required on CITES documents (Sec. 23.23): This section
details information that must be included on CITES documents. We
require that CITES export and re-export documents for live wildlife
contain a specific condition that the document is only valid if the
transport complies with certain humane-transport standards. The CITES
Guidelines for transport and preparation for shipment of live wild
animals and plants (CITES Guidelines) and the International Air
Transport Association (IATA) Live Animals Regulations were incorporated
by reference into our regulations at Sec. 23.23(c)(7) in 2007. At
CoP14, recognizing that IATA regulations are amended annually and are
therefore more responsive to changing needs, and that it is important
to provide humane transport conditions for plants as well as wildlife,
the Parties agreed to promote the full and effective use of IATA's Live
Animals Regulations (for animals) and Perishable Cargo Regulations (for
plants) as the standards for the preparation and transport of live
specimens. Therefore, we are removing reference to the outdated CITES
Guidelines and incorporating by reference the 13th edition of the IATA
Perishable Cargo Regulations as the standard for the transport of
CITES-listed plants. We are further updating our regulations by
incorporating by reference the 40th edition of the IATA Live Animals
Regulations to replace the 33rd edition that is incorporated by
reference in our current regulations. One commenter supported the
updating of our humane-transport standards. For the convenience of the
reader, we have moved the information on materials incorporated by
reference into a new section, Sec. 23.9 (please see the preamble text
for Sec. 23.9). Another commenter supported our proposal to amend
Sec. 23.23(c)(16) to allow the use of official signature stamps on
CITES documents, in recognition of this global practice.
Validity of CITES documents (Sec. 23.26): We are adding three
additional circumstances in Sec. 23.26(d) for which we may request
verification of a CITES document. When the CITES Secretariat receives
information about a quota for publication, there may be technical
problems or questions about technical or administrative aspects of the
quota that need clarification. Under guidelines contained in Resolution
Conf. 14.7 (Rev. CoP15), if the Secretariat is unable to resolve these
issues with the Party concerned, the Secretariat is directed to publish
the quota with an annotation to indicate its concerns. We may request
verification of a CITES document if it is issued for a species with an
annotated quota that raises concerns about the validity of the
shipment. We may also request verification of a CITES document for a
shipment of captive-bred Appendix-I wildlife when the specimens did not
originate from a breeding operation that is registered with the CITES
Secretariat and we have reason to believe the import is for
[[Page 30406]]
commercial purposes. In addition, if we receive a CITES export document
on which the actual quantity exported has not been validated or
certified at the time of export, we may request verification of the
document.
Two commenters strongly supported inclusion of the three additional
circumstances under which we may seek verification of a CITES document.
Another commenter urged us to include two more circumstances related to
permits authorizing the export of specimens subject to a quota. Another
commenter did not see a reason to restrict the Management Authority to
a formal list of circumstances under which it may request verification
of a CITES document and noted that any indication of wrongdoing should
give the Management Authority the authority to verify the authenticity
of a permit. We agree that there may be more circumstances, in addition
to those listed in Sec. 23.26(d), under which we may request
verification of a CITES document from the CITES Secretariat or a
foreign Management Authority. The circumstances listed in Sec.
23.26(d) are provided as common examples, and the list is not intended
to be exhaustive. We direct the commenters to the first sentence of
that paragraph (d), which indicates that such circumstances include,
but are not limited to, those listed in Sec. 23.26(d).
One commenter was concerned that the proposed changes regarding
permits where the quantity had not been validated upon export do not go
far enough. He suggested that we incorporate the language adopted at
CoP15, in Resolution Conf. 12.3 (Rev. CoP15), which states that Parties
``should liaise'' with the exporting country's Management Authority and
consider any ``extenuating circumstances'' to determine the
acceptability of the document in question. We have declined to accept
this suggestion as we consider it to be redundant. The text in Sec.
23.26(d) informs the public of circumstances under which we may request
verification of a CITES document; lack of validation is one of those
circumstances.
Requirements for a bred-in-captivity certificate (Sec. 23.41):
Although we did not propose changes to this text, one commenter
objected to the language in Sec. 23.41(d)(2), which states that to
qualify for a bred-in-captivity certificate a specimen must be bred for
noncommercial purposes or be part of a traveling exhibition. The
commenter believes this provision is contrary to Article VII, paragraph
5, of the Treaty and to Resolution Conf. 10.16 (Rev.). To clarify, the
requirement in Sec. 23.41(d)(2) that a specimen must be bred for
noncommercial purposes or be part of a traveling exhibition to qualify
for a bred-in-captivity certificate applies only to Appendix-I
specimens and not to specimens of species listed in Appendix II or III.
For Appendix-I specimens, we will only issue bred-in-captivity
certificates for specimens bred in captivity for noncommercial
purposes, in accordance with Article VII, paragraph 5, of the Treaty,
including specimens that are part of a traveling exhibition, as
provided in Article VII, paragraph 7. Article VII, paragraph 7, allows
for the issuance of an exemption document for Appendix-I specimens that
form part of a traveling exhibition in certain circumstances, including
that they are either pre-Convention specimens (Article VII, paragraph
2) or bred in captivity for noncommercial purposes (Article VII,
paragraph 5). We refer the commenter to the discussion in the preamble
for Sec. 23.18, where we describe in detail the way in which we
implement the various CITES provisions related to trade in Appendix-I
specimens under the exemption in Article VII, paragraph 5.
Wildlife hybrids (Sec. 23.43): Section 23.43 allows for an
exemption from CITES document requirements for hybrid wildlife
specimens that meet specific criteria. We are adding language to
clarify that an individual who is unable to clearly demonstrate that
his or her wildlife specimen meets the criteria for an exempt hybrid
must obtain a CITES document. One commenter expressed support for this
clarification.
International travel with personally owned live wildlife (Sec.
23.44): Since publication of our current regulations in 2007, there has
been some confusion regarding the purpose and appropriate use of
certificates of ownership for personally owned live wildlife (also
known as ``pet passports''). We are clarifying that such documents are
to be used for frequent, short-term travel by an individual when
accompanied by his or her personally owned live wildlife (e.g., for
vacations, to attend competitions, or for similar purposes of
relatively short duration) and that this individual is to return with
the wildlife to his or her country of usual residence at the end of the
trip. We received one comment in support of this clarification.
One commenter expressed dissatisfaction with the process for
renewing a certificate of ownership for personally owned, live
wildlife. The commenter objected to having to complete an entire
application when only a few items needed to be updated and to having to
submit his original certificate along with the application for renewal,
thus preventing cross-border travel while awaiting issuance of the new
certificate. In addition, the commenter noted that having the renewed
certificate issued before the end of the period of validity of his
existing certificate effectively shortens the period of validity to
less than 3 years. He also considered the estimated time of 30 minutes
for completion of Form 3-200-64 to be ``overly conservative'' and
stated that ``a more realistic, but still conservative estimate'' would
be at least 60 minutes.
Form 3-200-64, the application form for issuance of a certificate
of ownership for personally owned live wildlife, asks for detailed
information regarding the animal to be covered under the certificate.
When a certificate holder wishes to renew a certificate of ownership,
however, he or she should complete and submit Form 3-200-52, the
application for re-issuance or renewal of a permit. This is a
simplified application on which the applicant can certify that there
have been no changes to the original application or that there have
been changes as noted on an attached page. We ask that individuals
allow 30 to 60 days for processing of applications, and we do require
submission of the original certificate before we will issue a new one.
If applying well in advance (more than 60 days before expiration of the
certificate), an applicant could submit a copy and continue to use the
original certificate, keeping in mind that he or she must return to the
United States before the certificate expires. Once travel is completed
and the animal has re-entered the United States, the original
certificate must be returned to the Management Authority. As stated
above, we will not issue a new certificate until we have received the
original certificate. We thank the commenter for his input regarding
the length of time needed to complete Form 3-200-64. We are in the
process of reviewing all of our application forms and will take his
comments into consideration during that process.
Registration of a commercial breeding operation for Appendix-I
wildlife (Sec. 23.46): Article VII, paragraph 4, of the Treaty states
that specimens of Appendix-I animal species bred in captivity for
commercial purposes shall be deemed to be specimens of species included
in Appendix II. For such specimens, a Management Authority may grant an
export permit or a re-export certificate without requiring the prior
issuance of an import permit, thus allowing the specimens to be traded
commercially. However, the species
[[Page 30407]]
remains listed in Appendix I, and therefore the specimens are not
eligible for any exemption limited specifically to an Appendix-II
species or taxon.
Resolution Conf. 12.10 (Rev. CoP15) provides guidelines for
registering and monitoring operations that breed Appendix-I animals for
commercial purposes. Section 23.46 implements the resolution by
establishing a procedure for operations that breed Appendix-I animals
for commercial purposes to become registered with the CITES
Secretariat. At CoP15, the Parties adopted changes to the registration
process to address the sometimes lengthy delays that can occur when an
objection is raised regarding an application to register a breeding
facility. We are revising Sec. 23.46(b) to incorporate changes to the
registration process adopted at CoP15, and we expect that these changes
will significantly reduce potential delays.
Under Resolution Conf. 12.10 (Rev. CoP15), registered commercial
breeding operations are to be monitored by the Management Authority, in
collaboration with the Scientific Authority, and the Management
Authority is to advise the CITES Secretariat of any major change in the
nature of an operation or in the products it is producing for export.
Our regulations include an annual reporting requirement to facilitate
monitoring of registered operations. We are eliminating the annual
reporting requirement in Sec. 23.46 and establishing instead a process
for renewal of registrations every 5 years. The registration renewal is
intended to be less burdensome for the registrants, yet will allow us
to monitor these facilities and identify major changes in their
operating practices. One commenter supported these changes.
We received a number of comments from falconers and falconry
organizations regarding our proposed requirement for renewal of
registrations for commercial breeding operations for Appendix-I
wildlife. Many of these commenters expressed either opposition or very
limited support for requiring renewal of registrations. Five commenters
noted that there is no requirement under CITES for renewal of
registrations and expressed their belief that, once a facility is
registered, the registration should not expire. While Resolution Conf.
12.10 (Rev. CoP15) does not specifically recommend renewal of
registrations or expiration dates for registrations, it does state that
Parties should monitor the management of each registered captive-
breeding operation under its jurisdiction and advise the CITES
Secretariat of any major changes in the operation. It is left to the
Parties to determine how they will accomplish such monitoring. Our
regulations (Sec. 23.46(e)(3)) require annual reporting by registered
facilities to allow us to monitor the management of these operations to
ensure that they continue to meet the criteria for registration. We are
eliminating the annual reporting requirement and establishing in its
place a 5-year renewal process that we believe will reduce the burden
on both the registered operations and the Service while providing for
the monitoring that is required under CITES. We also note that there is
a provision in Resolution Conf. 12.10 (Rev. CoP15) for removing
breeding operations from the Secretariat's registry, particularly if
they fail to continue to meet requirements, so registrations are not
necessarily meant to continue in perpetuity.
Some of the commenters stated that the renewal requirement would
create a significant burden on registered operations. They noted that
raptor breeders are already monitored by the Service, through the
Migratory Bird Program (MBP), and therefore the process for renewal of
a registration would be redundant. They argued that the annual report
and individual transactions forms provided to MBP should suffice for
any monitoring requirement for CITES. Two commenters were more
supportive of a simple registration update form and associated fee, if
the required data submission was simply a reference to the current MBP
data. One commenter suggested that if renewal of a registration is
mandated by the Service, a one-page application with accompanying
photocopies of the past five annual reports from the operation to the
MBP should be all that is required.
The regulations in Sec. 23.46, regarding the process for
registering a commercial breeding operation for Appendix-I wildlife,
apply to operations breeding any Appendix-I species, not just raptors
and other falconry birds. Although it is true, as one commenter has
noted, that all of the U.S. facilities currently registered with the
CITES Secretariat are breeding raptors, we do not anticipate that this
will always be the case. Therefore, we need to establish registration
and reporting procedures that will work not just for facilities
breeding raptors, but for any commercial breeding operation that may be
registered in the future. It is not our intention, however, to increase
the burden for raptor breeders.
We understand that U.S. raptor breeders are regulated under the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and must provide reports to the MBP on
specific activities related to the breeding of native raptors (as
defined in part 21 of this subchapter). It is also true, however, that
not all CITES-listed, Appendix-I raptors are covered by the MBTA. There
is no requirement for an operation breeding birds that are not covered
by the MBTA (including raptors that are not native raptors under the
definition in part 21) to provide reports to the MBP on activities
associated with those birds. We agree that, for operations breeding
native raptors, documents submitted to the MBP would include most, if
not all, of the information needed for the renewal of a CITES
registration. If an applicant requesting renewal of a registration is
breeding native raptors and reporting to the MBP, he or she can inform
us on the application for renewal, and we will obtain copies of the
relevant documents, covering the past 5-year period, from MBP. A
registered operation that is breeding Appendix-I species that are not
covered by the MBTA, and therefore not covered in reports provided to
the MBP, will need to include updated information relevant to those
species in its renewal application.
Four commenters that opposed renewal of registrations expressed
concern about whether the Management Authority could process
registration applications in a consistent and timely manner. They
asserted that the Service has underestimated the cost and negative
effect this requirement will have on both the breeders and the
Management Authority and stated their belief that registration renewal
will put registered breeding operations at risk every 5 years due to
potential delays in the renewal application process.
We are establishing a simplified renewal process that will be much
less burdensome and take much less time than the initial registration
process. We expect that most renewals will be completed within 30 to 60
days, provided that the renewal application contains all of the
information requested. The criteria for renewal are the same as the
criteria for registration of a new operation. However, unlike the
process for initially registering a commercial breeding operation, the
renewal process does not require us to contact the CITES Secretariat,
and there will therefore be no consultation with other CITES Parties,
as required for the initial registration. The same application used to
request registration (Form 3-200-65) will be used for renewals.
Applicants for renewal will not need to respond to all of the
questions. Instead, they will be asked to identify any changes in their
operation, such as new breeding facilities or
[[Page 30408]]
changes in breeding stock, that have occurred over the last 5 years.
Operations breeding only U.S. native raptors, that have no updates to
report beyond the information included in the annual reports and
transfer documents they have submitted to the MBP, can state as much on
their renewal application and we will obtain copies from MBP of their
reports covering the relevant 5-year period. We consider that this
process will allow us to meet our obligations under CITES and will
cause only a minimal burden on registered operations. If necessary,
upon renewal or at any time we receive significant new information on a
registered operation, we will provide the updated information to the
CITES Secretariat.
One commenter was opposed to the language in Sec. 23.46(f), which
states that requests for renewal of a registration should be submitted
at least 3 months before the registration expires. The commenter
asserted that, in the absence of such a provision, the registration
would remain in effect until renewed or denied, if the application was
received at any time before expiration.
Although we recommend, in Sec. 23.46(f), that applicants submit
requests for renewal at least 3 months before the registration expires,
we do not require that they do so. We included this language to
encourage registrants to apply for renewal early enough so that their
registration does not expire while we are reviewing their renewal
request, thus disrupting their ability to export specimens for which
they are registered. The commenter may be referring to language in the
Service's general permitting regulations in 50 CFR part 13. Under Sec.
13.22, if an application to renew a permit is submitted at least 30
days before the permit expires, continuation of some permitted activity
is allowed, subject to certain conditions, until the Service acts on
the request for renewal. However, this provision does not apply to any
permitted activities authorized under CITES (see Sec. 13.22(c)(3)).
Registrations will now have an expiration date and will be void after
that date. To avoid disruption of permitted activities, registrations
must be renewed before the expiration date. As stated earlier, we do
not anticipate that the renewal process will take longer than 30 to 60
days, provided we have received all of the necessary documentation. The
recommendation that an application for renewal of a registration be
submitted 3 months before the registration expires is intended to allow
us time to make sure the application is complete, including obtaining
information from MBP (if necessary), to help ensure that the facility
can continue operations without disruptions or delays.
One commenter questioned why the Service was proposing to eliminate
the annual reporting requirement for CITES-registered operations
breeding Appendix-I specimens and replace it with a 5-year renewal
process. The commenter stated that we had not explained why the
information currently required on an annual basis was no longer
relevant. Another commenter supported a requirement that registrations
be renewed, but urged us to limit the length of time a registration is
valid to 3 years, instead of 5, stating that conditions at captive
breeding facilities can change dramatically over a 5-year period. A
third commenter asserted that neither the current annual reporting
requirement nor the proposed registration renewal are sufficient to
monitor registered facilities and urged us to engage in ``unannounced
compliance checks'' on a regular basis.
We expect that the same information provided in an annual report
will be provided, for a 5-year period, in a renewal application.
Consolidation and submission of information on a 5-year cycle will give
us with the information necessary for monitoring activities at
registered operations while at the same time reducing the time and
resources needed both by the Service, for collecting and reviewing
reports, and by the registered operations, for preparing and submitting
reports. Further, by establishing a renewal process, and therefore an
expiration date, for registration of commercial operations, we will be
able to more easily and formally address any potential problems that
might be identified.
We are establishing a 5-year registration (instead of a 3-year
registration as recommended by the commenter) based on our experience,
since 2007, with trade from CITES-registered breeding operations in the
United States. Once registered, an operation must still obtain CITES
documents for any specimens it wishes to export. The information
provided in an application for an export permit gives us an indication
of changes that may be occurring at a registered operation and gives us
some understanding of the current status of operations at the facility.
If, in reviewing permit applications, we believe that further
evaluation of the operation is warranted, we have the authority to do
so, including conducting inspections of the facility. Under newly
designated Sec. 23.46(e)(3) and Sec. 13.21(e)(2), anyone obtaining a
CITES permit or authorization agrees, as a condition of their permitted
activity, to allow the Service to enter their operation at any
reasonable hour to inspect wildlife held or to inspect, audit, or copy
applicable records. However, due to the likelihood that we will be in
contact with a registered operation multiple times over the course of
their registration, we do not believe the additional burden on the
Service or the registrant of a 3-year renewal cycle is necessary or
beneficial. If we encounter problems or difficulties associated with
the 5-year renewal cycle for registrations, we will reevaluate the
process and propose changes.
We also received comments on this section that were not related to
the changes we had proposed regarding the process for initial
registration or the renewal of existing registrations. Two commenters
expressed concern about the way in which we implement the requirement
in Sec. 23.46(d)(2) that a breeding operation must provide sufficient
information for us to determine that its parental stock was legally
acquired. They stated that the Service asks for documentation that
founding stock, not the parental (breeding) stock, at the facility was
legally removed from the wild or imported into the United States. These
commenters argued that Resolution Conf. 12.10 (Rev. CoP15) does not
require this level of documentation and that it is an unreasonable
burden on breeding operations, especially since ``there is no
laundering of wild-taken young raptors going through breeding
projects.''
The terms ``parental stock'' and ``founder stock'' are sometimes
used interchangeably. We define ``parental stock'' in Sec. 23.5 as
``the original breeding or propagating specimens that produced the
subsequent generations of captive or cultivated specimens.'' We believe
that this definition is consistent with the Treaty and with CITES
resolutions. When an applicant is asked to provide documentation on the
legal acquisition of the parental stock, we are asking that they show
that the specimens that were either removed from the wild or imported
into the United States to establish a breeding operation were legally
obtained. We agree with the commenters that breeding operations are not
likely to be laundering illegally obtained specimens. We attribute
this, at least in part, to the oversight and documentation requirements
that have been established to ensure that such activities do not occur.
Two commenters stated that we should eliminate the existing
requirement for a registered facility to
[[Page 30409]]
provide an import permit. It is not clear from the comments what
requirement they are referencing. Once a breeding operation is
registered for certain Appendix-I species, specimens of those species
that are bred at the facility are treated as if they are specimens of a
species listed in Appendix II for permitting purposes. This means that,
under CITES, only an export permit is required; there is no requirement
for the issuance of an import permit. However, some Parties have
stricter domestic measures and require import permits in situations
where an import permit is not required under the Treaty. For example,
countries in the European Union routinely require import permits for
Appendix-II species, and the Russian Federation has recently notified
the CITES Parties (see Notification to the Parties No. 2013/008) that,
regardless of the origin of the birds, it will only allow the import of
certain falcons if the Russian Management Authority has issued an
import permit. For this reason, we advise exporters to communicate with
the Management Authority of the importing country well in advance of
export to make sure they understand and comply with all requirements.
It is the responsibility of the exporter to ensure that all legal
requirements (not just for CITES) in both the importing and exporting
country have been met before exporting any CITES-listed specimen.
Replacement documents (Sec. 23.52): A Management Authority may
issue a replacement CITES document when the original document has been
lost, damaged, stolen, or accidentally destroyed. Section 23.52
contains provisions for issuance and acceptance of replacement CITES
documents. We are clarifying the procedures and amending the criteria
for issuance and acceptance of replacement CITES documents by the
United States. We are more closely aligning the criteria for issuance
and acceptance of replacement CITES documents by the United States with
those for issuance and acceptance of retrospective documents found at
Sec. 23.53. Amendments to the criteria include: Requirements that
specimens are presented to the appropriate official at the time of
import and that the request for a replacement document is made at that
time; the need for proof of original valid documents; and a statement
of responsibility. We are also clarifying that an individual who
qualifies to receive multiple single-use CITES documents under a master
file or annual program may not use one of the documents issued under a
master file or annual program as a replacement document, but must apply
for and receive a separate replacement document.
One commenter supported the proposed changes to Sec. 23.52.
Another commenter was opposed to all of the changes proposed for this
section and disagreed with our suggestion that the criteria for
issuance and acceptance of replacement documents should be more closely
aligned with the criteria for issuance and acceptance of retrospective
documents. The commenter expressed concern that for replacement permits
for recreational hunting trophies ``the conditions and timelines will
be challenging to fulfill'' and stated that we should propose
regulations to facilitate the issuance of retrospective and replacement
permits instead of making it an ``onerous undertaking.''
We agree that the criteria for issuance and acceptance of
replacement CITES documents are, and should be, different from those
for retrospective CITES documents, and our regulations reflect those
differences. We note that in the preamble to Resolution Conf. 12.3
(Rev. CoP15), the Parties recognize that ``the efforts of importing
countries to fulfill their obligations under Article VIII, paragraph 1
(b), may be seriously obstructed by the retrospective issuance of
permits or certificates for specimens having left the exporting or re-
exporting country without such documents'' and that ``the retrospective
issuance of permits and certificates has an increasingly negative
impact on the possibilities for properly enforcing the Convention and
leads to the creation of loopholes for illegal trade.'' With regard to
replacement documents, the resolution states that, when a permit or
certificate has been cancelled, lost, stolen, or destroyed, the issuing
Management Authority should ``immediately'' inform the Management
Authority of the country of destination (as well as the Secretariat for
commercial shipments). Based on our experience since the publication of
our 2007 CITES regulations, we identified a need to clarify what is
required for issuance and acceptance of a replacement document. As we
noted in our proposed rule, we have experienced situations in which
importers or their agents have attempted to submit ``replacement''
documents when no document had ever been issued or when the original
document was invalid. In addition, individuals have significantly
delayed submission of required documents for clearance of a shipment
while they tried to obtain a replacement document without our
knowledge. We believe the revised provisions in this section will help
individuals understand the process for obtaining a replacement document
if their CITES document has been lost, damaged, stolen, or accidentally
destroyed and will help us to meet our obligations under the Treaty.
Retrospective CITES documents (Sec. 23.53): In certain limited
circumstances, CITES documents may be issued and accepted to authorize
an export or re-export that has already occurred or to correct
technical errors on a document accompanying a shipment that has already
occurred. We are adding text to clarify that we may issue or accept a
retrospective document in circumstances where a technical error was
made by the issuing Management Authority at the time the original
document was issued. As we have for replacement documents, we clarify
in this section that an individual may not use a CITES document issued
under a master file or an annual program as a retrospective document,
but must apply for and receive a separate retrospective document (see
the discussion in the preamble for replacement documents, Sec. 23.52).
We also clarify that ``personal or household effects'' in Sec.
23.53(d)(7)(i) means specimens that meet the definition of ``personal
effect'' or ``household effect'' in Sec. 23.5. One commenter supported
these changes.
Use of CITES specimens after import into the United States (Sec.
23.55): This section provides conditions for the import and subsequent
use of certain CITES specimens. Its purpose is to prevent commercial
use of specimens after import into the United States when the trade
allowed under CITES is only for a noncommercial purpose. Under Article
II of the Treaty, trade in Appendix-I specimens ``must only be
authorized in exceptional circumstances.'' Unless an Appendix-I
wildlife or plant specimen qualifies for an exemption under Article VII
of the Treaty, it can be imported only when the use is not for
primarily commercial purposes. The import and subsequent use of
Appendix-I specimens and certain Appendix-II specimens, including
transfer, donation, or exchange, may be only for noncommercial
purposes. Other Appendix-II specimens and any Appendix-III specimen may
be used for any otherwise lawful purpose after import, unless the trade
allowed under CITES is only for noncommercial purposes. See the
preambles in our previous rulemaking documents, 71 FR 20167, April 19,
2006 (proposed rule), and 72 FR 48402, August 23, 2007 (final rule),
for further discussion.
Since publication of our regulations in 2007, we have given further
[[Page 30410]]
consideration to the allowed use of a specimen within the United States
when the listing status of the species changes after a specimen has
been imported. We are amending this section to clarify that the allowed
use after import into the United States is determined by the status of
the specimen under CITES and the ESA at the time it is imported, except
for a CITES specimen that was imported before the species was listed in
Appendix I, or listed in Appendix II with an annotation disallowing
commercial use, or listed in Appendix II or III and threatened under
the ESA. Where an individual can clearly demonstrate that his or her
specimen was imported with no restrictions on its use after import,
prior to the species being listed under CITES with restrictions on its
use after import, we will continue to allow use of the specimens as
allowed at the time of import.
We have considered the individual who may, for example, have
imported Appendix-II specimens that had no restrictions on their
domestic use and be lawfully utilizing the specimens as part of a
commercial breeding operation. Under our current regulations, he or she
may be precluded from continuing such activities if the species is
subsequently listed in Appendix I. We do not believe it is necessary
for ensuring the conservation and sustainable use of the species to
retroactively apply current import/export restrictions to domestic
activities involving specimens that were legally imported prior to the
imposition of those restrictions. Therefore, where an individual can
clearly demonstrate that his or her specimens were legally imported
prior to the Appendix-I listing, we will not treat those specimens as
specimens of an Appendix-I species with regard to their use within the
United States.
Consistent with our current regulations, we continue to believe
that restrictions on the allowed use after import of specimens of
Appendix-I species may be relaxed if the status of the species improves
and it is subsequently listed in Appendix II or removed from the
Appendices. If the status of a species has changed so that it no longer
requires the strict protections (including the prohibition on
commercial trade) provided by an Appendix-I listing, and it is not
listed under the ESA, we see no conservation need for requiring that
specimens imported when the species was listed in Appendix I continue
to be used only for noncommercial purposes. Other applicable laws,
however, may continue to restrict use of the specimen.
Under this final rule, if an Appendix-II specimen is imported with
no restrictions on its use (i.e., it is not protected under the ESA and
it is not subject to an annotation requiring that it be used only for
noncommercial purposes) and the species is subsequently transferred to
Appendix I, if you can clearly demonstrate that your specimen was
imported prior to the Appendix-I listing, use of the specimen within
the United States will not change (i.e., it will not be restricted to
noncommercial use) with the change in the status of the species under
CITES. As is currently the case, the allowed use of an Appendix-I
specimen imported for noncommercial purposes may change if the species
is subsequently transferred to Appendix II or removed from the
Appendices. In such a case, the allowed use of the specimen within the
United States will be determined by the current listing status of the
species, not the status of the species at the time it was imported.
One commenter opposed any regulation of the use after import of
CITES specimens, stating that it is beyond the control of CITES. The
same commenter suggested that trophy trade ``deserves preferential
treatment'' because of its conservation value and lack of biological
consequence after lawful import. The commenter stated that
``unnecessary restrictions on long-term use have a negative effect on
the trade and the benefits of the trade.''
Other commenters expressed support for restricting the use after
import of certain specimens and for some of the proposed changes. One
commenter stated that we should retain the current restriction on
domestic trade of all Appendix-I specimens, including those that were
imported into the United States as Appendix-II specimens. Another
commenter expressed support for our current treatment of specimens
imported when the species was listed in Appendix I and then
subsequently transferred to Appendix II (which we did not propose to
revise). The commenter stated that allowing a change in treatment of
such specimens within the United States was pragmatic from an
enforcement point of view and noted that the change in listing status
would mean that the previous conservation concerns would no longer
exist. However, the same commenter was opposed to our proposed change
in treatment for specimens imported when the species was listed in
Appendix II and subsequently transferred to Appendix I, stating that it
does not make sense to change the rules for one category on the basis
of conservation and enforcement and then not apply the same logic to
another category. The commenter believes that allowing an individual to
demonstrate that a specimen was imported before the species was
transferred to Appendix I creates a loophole for illegal use of
wildlife. One commenter, although not necessarily opposed to the
proposed revisions, questioned the logistics of implementing and
enforcing the changes. Two commenters urged us to retain the option of
restricting domestic commercial use of specimens if there are
reasonable grounds to conclude that doing so is necessary for the
conservation of the species. One of them cautioned that domestic
markets for specimens of Appendix-I species can be strong drivers of
poaching and illegal trade.
This issue has been the subject of considerable discussion. The
changes to this section are intended to be a balance of fairness to
individuals who have complied with the law in their acquisition of
CITES-listed specimens and the conservation needs of listed species. We
recognized in our 2007 regulations that there is no conservation
benefit to be derived from a prohibition on the commercial use of
specimens imported when the species was listed in Appendix I or in
Appendix II with an annotation prohibiting commercial use after the
species has been transferred to Appendix II or the annotation removed--
or possibly delisted altogether. We did not propose changes to the
regulations with regard to these specimens because it is not reasonable
to prohibit the commercial use of such specimens, but allow the import
and commercial use of other specimens of the same species, as would be
possible under an Appendix-II listing or if the species has been
removed from the Appendices altogether.
Upon further reflection, we conclude that it would similarly not
result in a conservation benefit to disallow the commercial use within
the United States of specimens imported when the species was listed in
Appendix II if the species is subsequently transferred to Appendix I.
We have further evaluated this section since publication of our 2007
regulations and do not believe there is a basis to retrospectively
apply restrictions on the use of specimens imported when the species
was listed in Appendix II because the required findings for allowing
the trade in those specimens were made prior to import and did not
include a determination regarding commerciality. We consider this to be
comparable to the exemption in Article VII, paragraph 2, for pre-
Convention specimens, which allows a specimen of an Appendix-I species
to be
[[Page 30411]]
traded for commercial purposes if it was acquired prior to listing
under the Convention. Allowing specimens imported when the species was
listed in Appendix II to continue to be used for commercial purposes
within the United States, even after the species has been transferred
to Appendix I or has an annotation added to the Appendix-II listing
that prohibits commercial trade, recognizes the legal framework that
applied to the specimens at the time they were traded. The arguments
for prohibiting commercial use of specimens imported when the species
was listed in Appendix II, after it has been listed in Appendix I or
annotated to prohibit commercial use, could be as aptly applied to pre-
Convention specimens, but the Convention allows that pre-Convention
specimens are not subject to its requirements (if the Management
Authority issues a certificate to that effect), whether the species is
listed in Appendix I, II, or III.
It is important to emphasize that our regulations in Sec. 23.55
apply only to use within the United States. If a species has been
transferred from Appendix II to Appendix I, specimens imported when the
species was listed in Appendix II become Appendix-I specimens and
international trade in such specimens must be in accordance with the
Treaty requirements for trade in Appendix-I specimens. It is only the
allowed use within the United States that does not change under our
revised regulations.
We do not believe that it should be difficult for individuals
engaged in commercial activities to provide the documentation necessary
to demonstrate that their specimens were acquired prior to the
Appendix-I listing. However, we will assess these situations carefully
to determine if this change results in undue enforcement challenges.
We are making minor changes to the text in the proposed rule for
the table in Sec. 23.55, for clarity and precision. We added the
phrase ``without an annotation for noncommercial purposes'' immediately
following ``Appendix II'' in paragraph (c) of Sec. 23.55, to draw a
clear distinction between the Appendix-II specimens covered by
paragraph (b) and those covered by paragraph (c). We also further
revised the text in the right-hand column of the table in Sec. 23.55
associated with paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) to make it easier to read
and understand.
Factors considered in making a finding of not for primarily
commercial purposes (Sec. 23.62): We did not propose changes to this
section, but one commenter has expressed concern that, although the
determination of whether or not an Appendix-I specimen is to be used
for ``primarily commercial purposes'' is to be made by the importing
country, the U.S. Management Authority considers it is also a duty of
the exporting country, which is contrary to CITES provisions. We agree
with the commenter that it is the responsibility of the Management
Authority in the importing country, prior to issuing an import permit,
to determine whether an Appendix-I specimen is to be used for primarily
commercial purposes. However, as noted previously, we will exercise our
right and responsibility under the Treaty to verify whether the
Management Authority of the importing country has made the appropriate
determination of whether an import is not for primarily commercial
purposes.
Trade in native CITES furbearer species (Sec. 23.69): Our previous
regulations at Sec. 23.69 defined ``CITES furbearers'' to mean bobcat
(Lynx rufus), river otter (Lontra canadensis), Canada lynx (Lynx
canadensis), and the Alaskan populations of gray wolf (Canis lupus) and
brown bear (Ursus arctos). For consistency and clarity, we have further
amended our definition of ``CITES furbearers'' to include all U.S.
populations of gray wolf and brown bear. All five of the species
included in our definition of ``CITES furbearers'' are listed in CITES
Appendix II. Certain populations of three of these species, Canada
lynx, gray wolf, and brown bear, are also listed under the ESA. We
initially considered that only the Alaskan populations of gray wolf and
brown bear should be included in our definition of ``CITES furbearers''
because the Alaskan populations are not ESA-listed. However, the same
is true for the Canada lynx, which is included in our definition
throughout its U.S. range. Upon further review, we believe it is more
appropriate to base the definition of ``CITES furbearers'' on the CITES
listings of these species. The definition in Sec. 23.69 includes those
native furbearers for which States may request approval of a CITES
export program. Although the State of Alaska is the only State that
currently has CITES export approval for gray wolf or brown bear, we do
not want to prohibit other States from seeking export approval for
these species in the future if the legal and conservation status of
their populations change. Section 23.69 details the CITES requirements
for import, export, or re-export of fur skins from CITES furbearers and
the requirements that must be met for export approval of State or
tribal programs for CITES furbearers. We remind readers that activities
involving specimens from populations of CITES furbearers that are
protected under the ESA must also meet the requirements for ESA-listed
species in part 17 and elsewhere in this title (see Sec. 23.3).
We received support for the amendment of our definition of ``CITES
furbearers'' from two commenters who believed it to be a sensible
change and noted that it would facilitate possible future requests from
States for CITES export approvals if the legal and conservation status
of listed species changes. One of these commenters recommended that we
also include the American black bear in our definition of ``CITES
furbearer'' in this section. Although we are not necessarily opposed to
this suggestion, we have not received requests from States wishing to
develop a CITES export program for black bear. If there are States
interested in developing such a program in the future, we will work
with them to explore the possibility of including the American black
bear in our definition of ``CITES furbearers'' and creating a CITES
export program for black bear.
Tagging of CITES fur skins and crocodilian skins (Sec. Sec. 23.69
and 23.70): We are amending Sec. 23.70 to incorporate changes to the
tagging requirements for crocodilian skins adopted by the Parties at
CoP15. We are also amending Sec. Sec. 23.69 and 23.70 to clarify the
appropriate use of CITES replacement tags for CITES fur skins and
crocodilian skins. These sections specify that skins with broken, cut,
or missing tags may not be exported and provide a procedure for
obtaining replacement tags where this is the case. However, the
regulations are not intended to allow for the use of CITES replacement
tags in place of tags that have been deliberately removed to facilitate
processing or for other reasons. Replacement tags are intended to be
used to replace CITES tags that have been inadvertently cut or damaged,
or where the original CITES tags are lost. Although CITES tags
sometimes break during transport or processing and may sometimes fail
as a result of a defect, it has been our experience that the failure
rate is very low (less than 5 percent) and that replacement tags are
needed infrequently. We are also amending the phrases in Sec. 23.69,
paragraphs (c)(3) and (c)(3)(i), and in Sec. 23.70, paragraphs (d)(3)
and (d)(3)(i), referring to ``broken, cut, or missing'' tags to be more
consistent with the terminology used in Resolution Conf. 11.12 (Rev.
CoP15).
Two commenters supported the amendments to this section consistent
with the changes to Resolution Conf. 11.12 (Rev. CoP15). However, they
and
[[Page 30412]]
another commenter expressed concern about our clarifications regarding
the proper use of replacement tags. They noted that tags are sometimes
deliberately removed for processing and asked that we develop a policy
to recognize that ``lawfully acquired and documented hides'' whose tags
have been removed for finishing should qualify for replacement tags.
One of these commenters also noted that the current process for
obtaining replacement tags is time-consuming and ``frequently
negatively impacts business transactions,'' and asked that a protocol
be developed to allow tanners to obtain replacement tags from FWS in a
timely manner. The commenter stated that, when a tanner attempts to
export skins from which he has removed the tags due to the particular
processing used, he is limited as to the proportion of skins with
replacement tags that can be included in an individual shipment. The
commenter believes this limitation is arbitrary.
As for all CITES species, before we can issue a CITES document to
allow export of CITES furbearer skins or crocodilian skins, we must
find that the specimens were legally acquired and that the export is
not detrimental to the survival of the species. We have worked with
States and Tribes to develop procedures that allow us to make the
necessary findings for native species programmatically (i.e., at the
State or tribal level) rather than on a permit-by-permit basis. When
States and Tribes have established a management program that ensures
sustainable harvest and they have the means to identify or mark
specimens that have been legally taken under their system, we are able
to make findings for specimens harvested within their jurisdiction,
thereby approving their program. A tag issued by the State or Tribe
demonstrates that a particular specimen was harvested under an approved
program and that the appropriate findings have been made. As noted
previously, the regulations are not intended to allow for the use of
CITES replacement tags in place of tags that have been deliberately
removed to facilitate processing. We are always willing, however, to
work with State and tribal governments to explore ways to improve our
established procedures. The comment regarding limitations on the
proportion of skins with replacement tags in a particular shipment
appears to be a reference to the special rule for threatened
crocodilians (50 CFR 17. 42(c)) under the ESA. The special rule states
that, if a shipment of threatened crocodilian skins contains more that
25 percent replacement tags, the U.S. Management Authority will consult
with the Management Authority of the re-exporting country before
clearing the shipment (see 50 CFR 17.42(c)(3)(i)(C)). We note that this
provision applies only to threatened crocodilians (as defined in Sec.
17.42(c)(1)(i)) and not to the American alligator.
The same two commenters suggested that we delete the second
sentence in Sec. 23.70(e)(2), which describes information to be
included on a marked American alligator skull. With this sentence
deleted, Sec. 23.70(e)(2) would read, ``Each American alligator skull
must be marked as required by State and tribal law or regulation.''
They argue that this would allow each State or Tribe to determine
whether marking of individual skulls is necessary. We fully support
this suggestion. Marking of skulls is not a CITES requirement, and it
was included in our regulations because we were aware that some States
and Tribes required that American alligator skulls be marked. We agree
that it is appropriate to allow each State and Tribe to decide whether
or not to require marking of skulls and are incorporating the
recommended revision into this rule.
These commenters also requested that we remove the requirement in
Sec. 23.70(f)(1) that crocodilian parts, other than meat and skulls,
must be packed in transparent, sealed containers. They note that
certain parts, particularly alligator backstrips, are large and heavy
and would be more easily transported in sealed wooden crates or
cardboard boxes that would be less likely than transparent plastic or
vinyl containers to crack or split during handling. We believe that
this is a reasonable suggestion. However, the recommendation that
tails, feet, backstrips, and other parts be exported in transparent,
sealed containers was accepted by the CITES Parties at CoP9 (1994) and
is currently contained in Resolution Conf. 11.12 (Rev. CoP15). Because
it is not just a U.S. requirement, changing this provision, both in
terms of what the United States allows on export and what other
countries allow upon import, cannot be achieved by simply revising our
regulations. We will, however, explore with other Parties the
possibility of revising Resolution Conf. 11.12 (Rev. CoP15) at CoP17 to
update the provisions for transport of crocodilian parts.
Sport-hunted trophies (Sec. 23.74): At the time our current
regulations were written, the CITES Parties had not defined ``sport-
hunted trophy.'' We therefore developed the definition in Sec.
23.74(b) based on our experience with international trade in these
items and the commonly understood meaning of the term from the
dictionary and other wildlife regulations. (See 72 FR 48402, August 23,
2007, for further background.)
Prior to CoP15, as part of its regular review of resolutions, the
Secretariat suggested that the Parties consider developing a definition
of ``hunting trophy'' that could be added to a CITES resolution. The
United States participated in discussions through an online forum prior
to CoP15 and in a working group established at CoP15 to consider a
CITES definition of ``hunting trophy.'' At CoP15, the Parties adopted a
definition of ``hunting trophy'' in Resolution Conf. 12.3 (Rev. CoP15).
The major difference between the definition in our CITES regulations
and the definition adopted by the Parties is that the definition in
Resolution Conf. 12.3 (Rev. CoP15) allows manufactured items derived
from the hunted animal to be considered part of a hunting trophy,
whereas our definition in 50 CFR part 23 specifically excludes such
items. We continue to have concerns about the possible import of fully
manufactured products as part of a hunting trophy that were actually
purchased at a store or from a taxidermist, for example, and were not
made from the sport-hunted trophy animal. Therefore, we have
incorporated into Sec. 23.74(b) the definition contained in Resolution
Conf. 12.3 (Rev. CoP15) with some additional text to clarify the
conditions under which we will allow the import into the United States
of manufactured items as part of a hunting trophy.
Five commenters expressed strong opposition to incorporating the
definition of ``hunting trophy'' adopted at CoP15 because they do not
believe that manufactured items should be considered part of a trophy.
Some noted that the Parties have not yet agreed on the treatment of
hunting trophies with respect to CITES provisions for personal and
household effects and purpose codes on permits, and they argued that we
should wait for those discussions to be concluded before revising our
definition. Others pointed to the ``rise of sport-hunting as a loophole
for illegal trade'' and expressed concern that the proposed change
would present enforcement challenges and could allow laundering of
commercial items as sport-hunted trophies. One commenter did not
believe that we had provided sufficient justification for including
products manufactured from the trophy animal in the definition of
``sport-hunted trophy.'' Another commenter noted that the United States
has the
[[Page 30413]]
authority to adopt stricter domestic measures and should do so in this
case.
Although it is true that discussions regarding CITES provisions for
treatment of personal and household effects and the use of purpose
codes on CITES documents are ongoing, the definition of ``hunting
trophy'' is not dependent on the outcome of those discussions. We share
the concern that adopting the definition of ``hunting trophy'' in
Resolution Conf. 12.3 (Rev. CoP15) could result in enforcement
challenges and trade in commercial products as hunting trophies. For
these reasons, we are adding the provisions in Sec. 23.74(b)(4) to
describe the conditions under which we will allow import of
manufactured or handicraft items as part of a sport-hunted trophy. Our
new definition is consistent with the definition adopted by CITES
Parties, but provides us additional measures to ensure that this trade
is limited to items made from the sport-hunted animal for the personal
use of the hunter.
Two commenters expressed support for the definition of ``hunting
trophy'' adopted at CoP15 and for incorporation of the new definition
into U.S. regulations. These commenters objected, however, to the
additional text we have proposed to clarify the circumstances under
which we would allow import into the United States of manufactured
items as part of a hunting trophy.
Both commenters objected to the requirement in Sec. 23.74(b)(4)(i)
that items manufactured from the sport-hunted animal be contained in
the same shipment as raw or tanned parts of the animal, noting that the
definition in Res. Conf. 12.3 (Rev. CoP15) allows for the possibility
that manufactured items made from a sport-hunted animal are the only
items a hunter wishes to export and import. As we have stated
previously, we have concerns about the import of fully manufactured
products as a hunting trophy when the items were not actually made from
the sport-hunted trophy animal. Requiring that manufactured items be
contained in the same shipment as raw or tanned parts helps provide
assurance that these items were, in fact, manufactured from the sport-
hunted trophy animal. One commenter objected to the requirement that
these manufactured items must be for the personal use of the hunter. To
meet both the CITES definition of ``hunting trophy'' in Res. Conf. 12.3
(Rev. CoP15) and our definition of ``sport-hunted trophy'' in Sec.
23.74, the animal must have been killed by the hunter for his or her
personal use. If we are to consider items manufactured from the trophy
animal to be part of the sport-hunted trophy, they must therefore also
be for the personal use of the hunter.
Both commenters objected to the text in Sec. 23.74(b)(4)(ii),
which states that the quantity of manufactured items imported as a
sport-hunted trophy must be no more than could ``reasonably be expected
given the number of animals taken by the hunter.'' One felt this
provision was too broad and the other felt that it provides too much
discretion for inspectors to determine ``reasonable quantities.'' These
same commenters also objected to the text in Sec. 23.74(b)(4)(iii)
requiring that the accompanying CITES document contain a complete
itemization and description of all items included in the sport-hunted
trophy shipment. We disagree with these comments and believe that the
provisions in Sec. 23.74(b)(4) provide reasonable measures for us to
ensure that the expansion of our existing definition of ``sport-hunted
trophy,'' to include items manufactured from the trophy animal, will
not result in negative impacts to populations subject to sport hunting.
The definition of ``sport-hunted trophy'' has been the subject of
considerable discussion and debate both here in the United States and
at CITES meetings. We have been active participants in those
discussions and have carefully considered whether and how to change our
existing definition in Sec. 23.74. As we indicated in the preamble to
our proposed rule, we will carefully monitor imports of sport-hunted
trophies, particularly imports of manufactured items as parts of sport-
hunted trophies, to evaluate the impact of this change. If we identify
problems with implementation of the new definition that result in
increased conservation risks to these species, we will revisit our
definition of ``sport-hunted trophy'' and propose revisions as needed.
We are moving the CITES marking requirements for African elephant
trophies and the definition of ``lip mark area'' from the African
elephant special rule (50 CFR 17.40(e)) into Sec. 23.74. (See the
discussion in the preamble on proposed changes to 50 CFR part 17.) In
addition, at CoP15, the Parties adopted a change to the accepted
methods for marking of elephant ivory to allow the use of new
technologies for permanent marking, including the use of lasers. We are
incorporating this change and clarifying the marking requirements for
elephant ivory consistent with Resolution Conf. 10.10 (Rev. CoP15). Two
commenters expressed support for these changes.
One commenter noted the difference between requirements for
reporting the year on marks or tags for different species and suggested
that the year on a mark or tag should represent the year of harvest in
all cases, as recommended in Resolution Conf. 14.7. We agree with the
commenter that it would be helpful to standardize the marking
requirements for sport-hunted trophies, to the extent possible.
However, we note that Resolution Conf. 14.7 provides general guidance
with regard to nationally established export quotas. The marking
requirements in Sec. 23.74 are for specimens of species for which the
Parties have adopted resolutions specific to trade in those species
(i.e., elephant, leopard, markhor, and black rhinoceros, each of which
contains marking requirements). The marking requirements in Sec. 23.74
mirror the requirements in the various resolutions specific to trade in
these specimens. In response to the comment, we are adding a
clarification to the marking requirements for African elephant hunting
trophies to indicate that the year included in the formula for marking
(in Resolution Conf. 10.10 (Rev. CoP15)) is the year in which the
elephant was harvested for export. We will continue to work with other
CITES Parties to clarify and standardize marking requirements for
sport-hunted trophies, where practicable.
Trade in vicu[ntilde]a (Sec. 23.75): We are adding a new section
to the regulations to address the requirements for international trade
in specimens of vicu[ntilde]a. Certain populations of vicu[ntilde]a are
listed in Appendix II for the exclusive purpose of allowing
international trade in wool sheared from live animals, cloth made from
that wool, and products made from the cloth or wool. The CITES Parties
have adopted specific requirements for labeling of these vicu[ntilde]a
products in international trade. These requirements are currently
contained in our special rule for threatened vicu[ntilde]a in 50 CFR
part 17. We believe it is more appropriate to include these specific
CITES requirements in our CITES regulations, and therefore we are
removing them from part 17 and inserting them into a new section (Sec.
23.75) in part 23. (See the discussion in the preamble regarding
changes to part 17.) One commenter expressed support for these proposed
changes.
Required Determinations
Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Orders 12866 and 13563):
Executive Order 12866 provides that the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) will review all significant rules. The Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs has determined that this rule is
not significant.
[[Page 30414]]
Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the principles of E.O. 12866 while
calling for improvements in the nation's regulatory system to promote
predictability, to reduce uncertainty, and to use the best, most
innovative, and least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory ends.
The executive order directs agencies to consider regulatory approaches
that reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of choice for
the public where these approaches are relevant, feasible, and
consistent with regulatory objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes further
that regulations must be based on the best available science and that
the rulemaking process must allow for public participation and an open
exchange of ideas. We have developed this rule in a manner consistent
with these requirements.
Regulatory Flexibility Act: Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
(SBREFA) of 1996), whenever a Federal agency is required to publish a
notice of rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it must prepare
and make available for public comment a regulatory flexibility analysis
that describes the effect of the rule on small entities (i.e., small
businesses, small organizations, and small government jurisdictions) (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.). However, no regulatory flexibility analysis is
required if the head of an agency certifies that the rule would not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. Thus, for a regulatory flexibility analysis to be required,
impacts must exceed a threshold for ``significant impact'' and a
threshold for a ``substantial number of small entities.'' See 5 U.S.C.
605(b). SBREFA amended the Regulatory Flexibility Act to require
Federal agencies to provide a statement of the factual basis for
certifying that a rule would not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) defines a small
business as one with annual revenue or employment that meets or is
below an established size standard. We expect that the majority of the
entities involved with international trade in CITES specimens would be
considered small as defined by the SBA. The declared value for U.S.
international trade in CITES wildlife (not including plants) was $819
million in 2000, $428 million in 2001, $345 million in 2002, $394
million in 2003, $1.5 billion in 2004 (including one export of a single
panda to China with a declared value of $1 billion), $737 million in
2005, $748 million in 2006, $1.0 billion in 2007, $846 million in 2008,
$637 million in 2009, $665 million in 2010, and $871 million in 2011.
These new regulations create no substantial fee or paperwork
changes in the permitting process. The regulatory changes are not major
in scope and will create only a modest financial or paperwork burden on
the affected members of the general public. The change from the current
annual reporting requirement for registered facilities breeding
Appendix-I wildlife to a 5-year renewal requirement actually reduces
the paperwork burden for these facilities.
This final rule will benefit businesses engaged in international
trade by providing updated and clearer regulations for the
international trade of CITES specimens. We do not expect these benefits
to be significant under the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The authority
to enforce CITES requirements already exists under the ESA and is
carried out by regulations contained in 50 CFR part 23. The
requirements that must be met to import, export, and re-export CITES
species are based on the text of CITES, which has been in effect in the
United States since 1975.
We therefore certify that this final rule will not have a
significant economic effect on a substantial number of small entities
as defined under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).
A Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is not required. Accordingly, a Small
Entity Compliance Guide is not required.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act: This rule is
not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act. This rule:
a. Does not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or
more. This rule provides the importing and exporting community in the
United States with updated and more clearly written regulations
implementing CITES. This rule will not have a negative effect on this
part of the economy. It will affect all importers, exporters, and re-
exporters of CITES specimens equally, and the benefits of having
updated guidance on complying with CITES requirements will be evenly
spread among all businesses, whether large or small. There is not a
disproportionate share of benefits for small or large businesses.
b. Will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for
consumers; individual industries; Federal, State, tribal, or local
government agencies; or geographic regions. This final rule will result
in a small increase in fees for registered operations breeding
Appendix-I species due to the requirement for renewal of registrations
every 5 years.
c. Does not have significant adverse effects on competition,
employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of
U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises. This
rule will assist U.S. businesses and individuals traveling abroad in
ensuring that they are meeting all current CITES requirements, thereby
decreasing the possibility that shipments may be delayed or even seized
in another country that has implemented CITES resolutions not yet
incorporated into U.S. regulations.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act: Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.):
a. This final rule will not significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. A Small Government Agency Plan is not required. As the
lead agency for implementing CITES in the United States, we are
responsible for monitoring import and export of CITES wildlife and
plants, including their parts, products, and derivatives, and issuing
import and export documents under CITES. The structure of the program
imposes no unfunded mandates. Therefore, this rule will have no effect
on small governments' responsibilities.
b. This rule will not produce a Federal requirement of $100 million
or greater in any year and is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.
Takings: Under Executive Order 12630, this rule does not have
significant takings implications. A takings implication assessment is
not required because this final rule will not further restrict the
import, export, or re-export of CITES specimens. Rather, the rule
updates and clarifies the regulations for the import, export, and re-
export of CITES specimens, which will assist the importing and
exporting community in conducting international trade in CITES
specimens.
Federalism: These revisions to part 23 do not contain significant
Federalism implications. A federalism summary impact statement under
Executive Order 13132 is not required.
Civil Justice Reform: Under Executive Order 12988, the Office of
the Solicitor has determined that this final rule does not unduly
burden the judicial system and meets the requirements of sections 3(a)
and 3(b)(2) of the Order. Specifically, this rule has been reviewed to
eliminate errors and ensure clarity, has been written to minimize
potential disagreements, provides a clear legal
[[Page 30415]]
standard for affected actions, and specifies in clear language the
effect on existing Federal law or regulation.
Paperwork Reduction Act: This rule contains a collection of
information that OMB has approved under the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). We may not conduct or sponsor and a
person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless
it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
OMB approved the information collection requirements associated
with CITES permit applications and reports and assigned OMB Control
Number 1018-0093, which expires May 31, 2017. This approval includes
the application for the initial registration of commercial facilities
that breed CITES Appendix-I animals (FWS Form 3-200-65) as well as
other CITES requirements. This rule does not change the information
collection requirements currently approved under 1018-0093. OMB has
reviewed the following new requirements and assigned OMB Control Number
1018-0150, which expires April 30, 2017. When this final rule is
effective, we will incorporate burden for the new information
collections into OMB Control No. 1018-0093 and discontinue OMB Control
Number 1018-0150.
Renewal of Registration for Commercial Breeding Operations
(Sec. 23.46). We are limiting the length of time a registration is
valid to no more than 5 years. Applicants will use FWS Form 3-200-65,
the same form used to request the initial registration, to request
renewal of a registration. We will use the information collected
through the renewal process to determine if an operation still meets
the requirements for registration under CITES.
Reporting take of grizzly bears (Sec. 17.40(b)(1)(i)(B)).
Grizzly bears may be taken in self-defense or in defense of others, but
such taking must be reported by the individual who has taken the bear
or his designee within 5 days of occurrence to the appropriate Service
Law Enforcement Office and to appropriate State and tribal authorities.
Reporting take of mountain lions (Sec. 17.40(h)(5)).
Free-living mountain lions in Florida may be taken for human safety
reasons. Such take must be reported in writing within 5 days to the
Service's Office of Law Enforcement.
Marking of vicu[ntilde]a products (Sec. 23.75(f)), beluga
sturgeon caviar (Sec. 23.71), and African elephant sport-hunted
trophies (Sec. 23.74(e)(2)). CITES requires that specimens of these
species in international trade are marked or labeled in a specific
manner. Export permits, issued by the range countries for these
species, must include the required marking/labeling information in
order for the documents to be considered valid and for the United
States to allow the import. Foreign export permits are reviewed by U.S.
Fish and Wildlife inspectors at the time of import. These marking
requirements are not new. All were contained in special rules in 50
part 17 (17.40 and 17.44). They are CITES marking requirements that
were included in the special rules in part 17 at a time when we did not
have such detailed information in our CITES regulations (prior to
publication of the 2007 revisions to part 23). We are moving them from
part 17 into part 23 to make a clear distinction between CITES
requirements and ESA requirements.
Beluga sturgeon exemption (Sec. 17.44(y)(5)). Our
regulations allow for aquaculture facilities in countries where beluga
sturgeon do not naturally occur to request an exemption from ESA
permitting requirements for trade in beluga sturgeon caviar if they
meet certain conditions. The facility must provide information
demonstrating that it meets these conditions (i.e.; they are using best
management practices, they do not rely on wild beluga sturgeon for
brood stock, and they have entered into a formal agreement with a
beluga sturgeon range State to enhance the survival of wild beluga
sturgeon). Facilities granted such an exemption must file biennial
reports with the Service documenting continued compliance with these
conditions.
Exempt wildlife hybrids (Sec. 23.43(f)(2)). Our
regulations allow the international trade of certain wildlife hybrids
without CITES documents, if an individual can provide documentation at
the port of entry/exit that his or her animal meets the criteria for
the exemption. This provision has been in place since 2007. With this
final rule we have provided examples of the type of documentation an
individual could use to demonstrate that his/her animal qualifies for
the exemption. The information provided must clearly identify the
specimen and demonstrate its recent lineage. Such information may
include, but is not limited to, the following:
(1) Records that identify the name and address of the breeder and
identify the specimen by birth or hatch date and by sex, band number,
microchip number, or other mark.
(2) A certified pedigree issued by an internationally recognized
association that contains scientific names of the animals in the
specimen's recent lineage and clearly illustrates its genetic history.
If the pedigree contains codes, a key or guide that explains the
meaning of the codes must be provided.
Exception to use of CITES specimens after import (Sec.
23.55). Our regulations provide an exception to the restrictions on use
after import into the United States of certain CITES specimens. To take
advantage of this exception, documentation (written records or other
documentary evidence) must be provided that clearly demonstrates the
specimen was imported prior to the CITES listing, with no restrictions
on its use after import. If documentation does not clearly demonstrate
that this exception applies, the specimen may be used only for
noncommercial purposes. OMB Control No.: 1018-0150.
Title: Renewal of Registration for Appendix I Commercial Breeding
Operations (CITES) and Other CITES Requirements, 50 CFR 17 and 23.
Service Form Number(s): 3-200-65.
Description of Respondents: Registered commercial facilities that
breed Appendix-I (CITES) animals; individuals; businesses; and State,
local, and tribal government agencies.
Respondent's Obligation: Required to obtain or retain a benefit.
Frequency of Collection: Once every 5 years for renewal of
registration; on occasion for other requirements.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Completion
Number of Number of time per Total annual
Activity annual annual response burden hours*
respondents responses (hours)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Renewal of Registration (FWS Form 3-200-65)..... 5 5 20 100
Report Take--Grizzly Bears...................... 25 25 .25 6
Report Take--Mountain Lions..................... 15 15 .25 4
Marking/Labeling:
Vicuna products............................. 20 150 .5 75
African Elephant Sport-Hunted Trophies...... 450 450 .5 225
Beluga Sturgeon Caviar...................... 1 1 .5 1
[[Page 30416]]
Beluga Sturgeon Exemption....................... 1 1 16 16
Exempt Wildlife Hybrids......................... 75 150 .5 75
Exception to Restrictions on Use of Certain 500 500 .5 250
CITES Specimens After Import into the United
States.........................................
---------------------------------------------------------------
Totals.................................. 1,092 1,297 .............. 752
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*rounded.
Total Annual Non-hour Cost Burden: $250 (application fee of $50 for
each renewal of registration for commercial breeding facilities).
During the proposed rule stage, we solicited comments on the new
information collection (FWS Form 3-200-65). We received 9 comments, all
from falconers and raptor breeders, regarding information collection
requirements for renewal of registrations for breeding facilities. We
responded to all comments in the preamble (see the sections on
International travel with personally owned live wildlife (Sec. 23.44)
and Registration of a commercial breeding operation for Appendix-I
wildlife (Sec. 23.46)), and provide a summary here.
One falconer expressed dissatisfaction with the process for
renewing a certificate of ownership for personally owned, live wildlife
(Sec. 23.44). The commenter objected to having to complete an entire
application when only a few items needed to be updated. He also
considered the estimated time of 30 minutes for completion of Form 3-
200-64 to be ``overly conservative'' and stated that ``a more
realistic, but still conservative estimate'' would be at least 60
minutes.
Form 3-200-64, the application form for issuance of a certificate
of ownership for personally owned live wildlife, asks for detailed
information regarding the animal to be covered under the certificate.
When a certificate holder wishes to renew a certificate of ownership,
however, he or she should complete and submit Form 3-200-52, the
application for re-issuance or renewal of a permit. This is a
simplified application on which the applicant can certify that there
have been no changes to the original application or that there have
been changes as noted on an attached page. We thank the commenter for
his input regarding the length of time needed to complete Form 3-200-
64. We have reviewed all of our application forms and took his comments
into consideration during the renewal process for OMB Control Number
1018-0093.
Some of the commenters stated that the new requirement for renewal
of commercial breeding operation for Appendix-I wildlife (Sec. 23.46)
would create a significant burden on registered operations. They noted
that raptor breeders are already monitored by the Service, through the
Migratory Bird Program (MBP), and therefore the process for renewal of
a registration would be redundant. They argued that the annual report
and individual transactions forms provided to MBP should suffice for
any monitoring requirement for CITES. Two commenters were more
supportive of a simple registration update form and associated fee, if
the required data submission was simply a reference to the current MBP
data. One commenter suggested that if renewal of a registration is
mandated by the Service, a one-page application with accompanying
photocopies of the past five annual reports from the operation to the
MBP should be all that is required.
The regulations in Sec. 23.46, regarding the process for
registering a commercial breeding operation for Appendix-I wildlife,
apply to operations breeding any Appendix-I species, not just raptors
and other falconry birds. Although it is true, as one commenter has
noted, that all of the U.S. facilities currently registered with the
CITES Secretariat are breeding raptors, we do not anticipate that this
will always be the case. Therefore, we need to establish registration
and reporting procedures that will work not just for facilities
breeding raptors, but for any commercial breeding operation that may be
registered in the future. It is not our intention, however, to increase
the burden for raptor breeders.
We understand that U.S. raptor breeders are regulated under the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and must provide reports to the MBP on
specific activities related to the breeding of native raptors (as
defined in part 21 of this subchapter). It is also true, however, that
not all CITES-listed, Appendix-I raptors are covered by the MBTA. There
is no requirement for an operation breeding birds that are not covered
by the MBTA (including raptors that are not native raptors under the
definition in part 21) to provide reports to the MBP on activities
associated with those birds. We agree that, for operations breeding
native raptors, documents submitted to the MBP would include most, if
not all, of the information needed for the renewal of a CITES
registration. If an applicant requesting renewal of a registration is
breeding native raptors and reporting to the MBP, he or she can inform
us on the application for renewal, and we will obtain copies of the
relevant documents, covering the past 5-year period, from MBP. A
registered operation that is breeding Appendix-I species that are not
covered by the MBTA, and therefore not covered in reports provided to
the MBP, will need to include updated information relevant to those
species in its renewal application.
You may send comments on any aspect of these information collection
requirements to the Service Information Collection Clearance Officer,
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Mail Stop 2042-
PDM, Arlington, VA 22203.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA): This final rule has been
analyzed under the criteria of the National Environmental Policy Act
(42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the Department of the Interior procedures for
compliance with NEPA (Departmental Manual (DM) and 43 CFR part 46), and
Council on Environmental Quality regulations for implementing the
procedural provisions of NEPA (40 CFR 1500-1508). This final rule does
not amount to a major Federal action significantly affecting the
quality of the human environment. An environmental impact statement or
evaluation is not required. This final rule is a regulation that is of
an administrative, legal, technical, or procedural nature, and its
environmental effects are too broad, speculative, or conjectural to
lend themselves to meaningful analysis under NEPA. The FWS has
determined that this final rule is categorically excluded from further
NEPA review as provided by 516 DM 2, Appendix 1.9,
[[Page 30417]]
of the Department of the Interior National Environmental Policy Act
Revised Implementing Procedures and 43 CFR 46.210(i). No further
documentation will be made.
Government-to-Government Relationship with Tribes: Under the
President's memorandum of April 29, 1994, ``Government-to-Government
Relations with Native American Tribal Governments'' (59 FR 22951) and
512 DM 2, we have evaluated possible effects on Federally recognized
Indian Tribes and have determined that there are no effects. Individual
tribal members must meet the same regulatory requirements as other
individuals who trade internationally in CITES species.
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use: On May 18, 2001, the President
issued Executive Order 13211 on regulations that significantly affect
energy supply, distribution, or use. This rule revises the current
regulations in 50 CFR part 23 that implement CITES. The regulations
provide procedures to assist individuals and businesses that import,
export, and re-export CITES wildlife and plants, and their parts,
products, and derivatives, to meet international requirements. This
final rule will not significantly affect energy supplies, distribution,
and use. Therefore, this action is a not a significant energy action
and no Statement of Energy Effects is required.
List of Subjects
50 CFR Part 13
Administrative practice and procedure, Exports, Fish, Imports,
Plants, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Transportation,
Wildlife.
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.
50 CFR Part 23
Animals, Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Fish, Foreign
trade, Forest and forest products, Imports, Incorporation by reference,
Marine mammals, Plants, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Transportation, Treaties, Wildlife.
Regulation Promulgation
For the reasons given in the preamble, under the authority of 16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq., we amend title 50, chapter I, of the Code of
Federal Regulations as follows:
PART 13--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 13 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 668a, 704, 712, 742j-l, 1374(g), 1382,
1538(d), 1539, 1540(f), 3374, 4901-4916; 18 U.S.C. 42; 19 U.S.C.
1202; 31 U.S.C. 9701.
Sec. 13.3 [Amended]
0
2. Section 13.3 is amended by removing the words `` `Endangered Species
Convention' (the Convention on International Trade in Endangered
Species of Wild Fauna and Flora)'' from the first sentence and adding
in their place the words `` `Convention on International Trade in
Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES)'.''
0
3. Section 13.11 is amended by:
0
a. Adding the words ``the Service's permits Web page at http://www.fws.gov/permits/; and the'' immediately following the colon in the
first sentence of paragraph (b)(3);
0
b. Removing the words ``Room 700'' from the first sentence of paragraph
(b)(3) and adding in their place the words ``Room 212'';
0
c. Adding the word ``street'' immediately before the word ``address''
in the last sentence of paragraph (b)(3); and
0
d. Adding an entry to the table in paragraph (d)(4) under the section
titled ``Endangered Species Act/CITES/Lacey Act'' immediately following
the entry for ``CITES Registration of Commercial Breeding Operations
for Appendix-I Wildlife'' to read as set forth below.
Sec. 13.11 Application procedures.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(4) * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Permit
Type of permit CFR Citation application fee Amendment fee
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Endangered Species Act/CITES/Lacey Act
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
--Renewal of Registration of Commercial 50 CFR 23....................... 50 ................
Breeding Operations for Appendix-I
wildlife.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
4. Section 13.12(b) is amended by:
0
a. Revising the introductory text to read as set forth below;
0
b. In the table, under the heading ``Threatened wildlife and plant
permits:'' removing the entry for ``American alligator--buyer or
tanner''; and
0
c. In the table, removing the final entry, ``Endangered Species
Convention permits.''
Sec. 13.12 General information requirements on applications for
permits.
* * * * *
(b) Additional information required on permit applications. As
stated in paragraph (a)(3) of this section, certain additional
information is required on all permit applications. For CITES permit
applications, see part 23 of this subchapter. Additional information
required on applications for other types of permits may be found by
referring to the sections of this subchapter cited in the following
table:
* * * * *
PART 17--[AMENDED]
0
5. 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.
Sec. 17.9 [Amended]
0
6. Section 17.9(a)(2) is amended by:
0
a. Removing the words ``Office of'' and adding in their place the words
``Division of''; and
0
b. Removing the words ``Room 700'' and adding in their place the words
``Room 212''.
[[Page 30418]]
Sec. 17.21 [Amended]
0
7. Section 17.21(g)(2) is amended by:
0
a. Removing the words ``Office of'' in the first sentence and adding in
their place the words ``Division of''; and
0
b. Adding the words ``Room 212,'' in the first sentence immediately
following the words ``Fairfax Drive,''.
0
8. Section 17.40 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (b)(1)(i)(B) to read as set forth below;
0
b. Removing the words ``Assistant Regional Director, Division of Law
Enforcement, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service'' from paragraphs
(b)(1)(i)(C)(3), (b)(1)(i)(D), and (b)(1)(ii)(A) and adding in their
place the words ``U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service law enforcement
office'';
0
c. Removing paragraph (e)(1)(iv);
0
d. Revising paragraph (e)(3)(iii)(D) to read as set forth below;
0
e. Revising the heading of paragraph (f) to read as set forth below;
0
f. Revising the first sentence of paragraph (h)(5) to read as set forth
below;
0
g. Revising the heading of paragraph (m) to read as set forth below;
0
h. Removing the first sentence following the heading of paragraph (m);
0
i. Revising paragraphs (m)(1)(ii) and (m)(1)(iii) to read as set forth
below;
0
j. Revising paragraph (m)(2) to read as set forth below;
0
k. Removing the words ``an information notice'' from the introductory
text of paragraph (m)(3) and adding in their place the words ``a public
bulletin'';
0
l. Removing paragraphs (m)(3)(i) and (m)(3)(iv); and
0
m. Redesignating paragraphs (m)(3)(ii) and (m)(3)(iii) as paragraphs
(m)(3)(i) and (m)(3)(ii).
Sec. 17.40 Special rules--mammals.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) * * *
(B) Grizzly bears may be taken in self-defense or in defense of
others, but such taking shall be reported by the individual who has
taken the bear or his designee within 5 days of occurrence to the
Resident Agent in Charge, Office of Law Enforcement, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, 2900 4th Avenue North, Suite 301, Billings, MT 59101
(406-247-7355), if occurring in Montana or Wyoming, or the Special
Agent in Charge, Office of Law Enforcement, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, P.O. Box 9, Sherwood, OR 97140 (503-521-5300), if occurring in
Idaho or Washington, and to appropriate State and Tribal authorities.
Grizzly bears taken in self-defense or in defense of others, including
the parts of such bears, shall not be possessed, delivered, carried,
transported, shipped, exported, received, or sold, except by Federal,
State, or Tribal authorities.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(3) * * *
(iii) * * *
(D) The trophy is legibly marked in accordance with part 23 of this
subchapter.
* * * * *
(f) Leopard (Panthera pardus) * * *
* * * * *
(h) * * *
(5) Any take pursuant to paragraph (h)(4) of this section must be
reported in writing to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of
Law Enforcement, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, LE-3000, Arlington, VA 22203,
within 5 days. * * *
* * * * *
(m) Vicu[ntilde]a (Vicugna vicugna).
(1) * * *
(ii) Import, export, and re-export. Except as provided in paragraph
(m)(2) of this section, it is unlawful to import, export, or re-export,
or present for export or re-export without valid permits as required
under parts 17 and 23 of this subchapter, any vicu[ntilde]a or
vicu[ntilde]a parts and products. For import of embryos, blood, other
tissue samples, or live vicu[ntilde]a, permits required under Sec.
17.32 and part 23 will be issued only for bona fide scientific research
contributing to the conservation of the species in the wild.
(iii) Other activities. Except as provided in paragraph (m)(2) of
this section, it is unlawful to sell or offer for sale, deliver,
receive, carry, transport, or ship in interstate or foreign commerce
and in the course of a commercial activity any vicu[ntilde]a or
vicu[ntilde]a parts and products.
* * * * *
(2) What activities involving vicu[ntilde]a are allowed by this
rule? You may import, export, or re-export, or conduct interstate or
foreign commerce in raw wool sheared from live vicu[ntilde]as, cloth
made from such wool, or manufactured or handicraft products and
articles made from or consisting of such wool or cloth without a
threatened species permit issued according to Sec. 17.32 only when the
following provisions have been met:
(i) The specimens originated from a population listed in CITES
Appendix II.
(ii) The provisions in parts 13, 14, and 23 of this subchapter are
met, including the specific labeling provisions in part 23.
(iii) Personal and household effects. Under the provisions of this
special rule, raw wool sheared from live vicu[ntilde]as, cloth made
from such wool, or manufactured or handicraft products and articles
made from or consisting of such wool or cloth are not granted the
personal or household effects exemption described in part 23 of this
subchapter. In addition to the provisions of this paragraph (m)(2),
such specimens may only be imported, exported, or re-exported when
accompanied by a valid CITES document.
(iv) Labeling of wool sheared from live vicu[ntilde]as. Any
shipment of raw wool sheared from live vicu[ntilde]as must be sealed
with a tamper-proof seal and have the following:
(A) An identification tag with a code identifying the country of
origin of the raw vicu[ntilde]a wool and the CITES export permit
number; and
(B) The vicu[ntilde]a logotype as defined in 50 CFR part 23 and the
words ``VICU[Ntilde]A--COUNTRY OF ORIGIN'', where country of origin is
the name of the country from which the raw vicu[ntilde]a wool was first
exported.
(v) At the time of import, the country of origin and each country
of re-export involved in the trade of a particular shipment have not
been identified by the CITES Conference of the Parties, the CITES
Standing Committee, or in a Notification from the CITES Secretariat as
a country from which Parties should not accept permits.
* * * * *
0
9. Section 17.44 is amended by:
0
a. Revising the heading of paragraph (y) to read as set forth below;
0
b. Removing the first sentence following the heading of paragraph (y);
0
c. Revising paragraph (y)(3)(i)(A) to read as set forth below;
0
d. Revising paragraph (y)(3)(ii) to read as set forth below;
0
e. Removing paragraph (y)(4)(iii);
0
f. Redesignating paragraphs (y)(4)(iv) through (y)(4)(vi) as
(y)(4)(iii) through (y)(4)(v);
0
g. Revising newly redesignated paragraph (y)(4)(iii) to read as set
forth below;
0
h. Revising the fourth sentence of paragraph (y)(5) introductory text
to read as set forth below;
0
i. Removing the words ``an information bulletin'' from the introductory
text of paragraph (y)(6) and adding in their place the words ``a public
bulletin''; and
0
j. Removing the words ``Room 700'' in the NOTE to paragraph (y)(6) and
adding in their place the words ``Room 212''.
[[Page 30419]]
Sec. 17.44 Special rules--fishes.
* * * * *
(y) Beluga sturgeon (Huso huso). * * *
(3) * * *
(i) * * *
(A) Beluga sturgeon caviar, including beluga sturgeon caviar in
interstate commerce in the United States, must be labeled in accordance
with the CITES labeling requirements in 50 CFR part 23.
* * * * *
(ii) Personal and household effects. You may import, export, or re-
export, or conduct interstate or foreign commerce in beluga sturgeon
specimens that qualify as personal or household effects under 50 CFR
part 23 without a threatened species permit otherwise required under
Sec. 17.32. Trade suspensions or trade restrictions administratively
imposed by the Service under paragraphs (y)(6) or (y)(7) of this
section may also apply to personal and household effects of beluga
sturgeon caviar.
* * * * *
(4) * * *
(iii) CITES compliance. Trade in beluga sturgeon specimens must
comply with CITES requirements in 50 CFR part 23. Except for specimens
that qualify as personal or household effects under 50 CFR part 23, all
beluga sturgeon specimens, including those exempted from threatened
species permits under this special rule, must be accompanied by valid
CITES documents upon import, export, or re-export. Beluga sturgeon
caviar, including beluga sturgeon caviar in interstate commerce in the
United States, must be labeled in accordance with the CITES labeling
requirements in 50 CFR part 23.
(5) * * * Facilities outside the littoral states wishing to obtain
such exemptions must submit a written request to the Division of
Management Authority, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401 N. Fairfax
Drive, Room 212, Arlington, VA 22203, and provide information that
shows at a minimum, all of the following: * * *
* * * * *
0
10. Section 17.62 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a)(4), and removing the undesignated paragraph
and paragraphs (1) through (8) following paragraph (a)(4); and
0
b. Revising the third sentence of paragraph (c)(3), and adding a
sentence to the end of that paragraph, to read as set forth below.
Sec. 17.62 Permits for scientific purposes or for the enhancement of
propagation or survival.
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(4) When the activity applied for involves a species also regulated
by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild
Fauna and Flora, additional requirements in part 23 of this subchapter
must be met.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(3) * * * If the specimens are of taxa also regulated by the
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna
and Flora, specific information must be entered on the Customs
declaration label affixed to the outside of each shipping container or
package. See part 23 of this subchapter for requirements for trade in
CITES specimens between registered scientific institutions.
* * * * *
0
11. Section 17.72 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a)(4), and removing the undesignated paragraph
and paragraphs (1) through (8) following paragraph (a)(4); and
0
b. Revising the third sentence of paragraph (c)(3), and adding a
sentence to the end of that paragraph, to read as set forth below.
Sec. 17.72 Permits--general.
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(4) When the activity applied for involves a species also regulated
by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild
Fauna and Flora, additional requirements in part 23 of this subchapter
must be met.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(3) * * * If the specimens are of taxa also regulated by the
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna
and Flora, specific information must be entered on the Customs
declaration label affixed to the outside of each shipping container or
package. See part 23 of this subchapter for requirements for trade in
CITES specimens between registered scientific institutions.
* * * * *
PART 23--[AMENDED]
0
12. The authority citation for part 23 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Convention on International Trade in Endangered
Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (March 3, 1973), 27 U.S.T. 1087; and
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.
0
13. Section 23.2 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 23.2 How do I decide if these regulations apply to my shipment
or me?
If you are engaging in activities with specimens of CITES-listed
species these regulations apply to you.
0
14. Section 23.5 is amended by:
0
a. Amending the definition of Bred for noncommercial purposes by
removing the words ``and is conducted between facilities that are
involved in a cooperative conservation program'' from the end of the
sentence;
0
b. Removing the definition of Cooperative conservation program;
0
c. Revising the definitions of Coral (dead), Coral fragments, Coral
(live), and Coral sand to read as set forth below;
0
d. Revising the first sentence, and adding a sentence to the end, of
the definition of Coral rock to read as set forth below;
0
e. Adding, in alphabetical order, a definition of Coral (stony) to read
as set forth below;
0
f. Revising the definition of Cultivar to read as set forth below;
0
g. Revising the definition of Introduction from the sea to read as set
forth below; and
0
h. Adding, in alphabetical order, a definition of Ranched wildlife to
read as set forth below.
Sec. 23.5 How are the terms used in these regulations defined?
* * * * *
Coral (dead) means pieces of stony coral that contain no living
coral tissue and in which the structure of the corallites (skeletons of
the individual polyps) is still intact and the specimens are therefore
identifiable to the level of species or genus. See also Sec.
23.23(c)(13).
Coral fragments, including coral gravel and coral rubble, means
loose pieces of broken finger-like stony coral between 2 and 30 mm
measured in all directions that contain no living coral tissue and are
not identifiable to the level of genus (see Sec. 23.92 for
exemptions).
Coral (live) means pieces of stony coral that are alive and are
therefore identifiable to the level of species or genus. See also Sec.
23.23(c)(13).
Coral rock means hard consolidated material greater than 30 mm
measured in any direction that consists of pieces of stony coral that
contain no living coral tissue and possibly also cemented sand,
coralline algae, or other sedimentary rocks. * * * See also Sec.
23.23(c)(13).
Coral sand means material that consists entirely or in part of
finely crushed stony coral no larger than 2 mm measured in all
directions that contains no living coral tissue and is not
[[Page 30420]]
identifiable to the level of genus (see Sec. 23.92 for exemptions).
Coral (stony) means any coral in the orders Helioporacea,
Milleporina, Scleractinia, Stolonifera, and Stylasterina.
* * * * *
Cultivar means a horticulturally derived plant variety that: has
been selected for a particular character or combination of characters;
is distinct, uniform, and stable in these characters; and when
propagated by appropriate means, retains these characters. The cultivar
name and description must be formally published in order to be
recognized under CITES.
* * * * *
Introduction from the sea means transportation into a country of
specimens of any species that were taken in the marine environment not
under the jurisdiction of any country, i.e., taken in those marine
areas beyond the areas subject to the sovereignty or sovereign rights
of a country consistent with international law, as reflected in the
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.
* * * * *
Ranched wildlife means specimens of animals reared in a controlled
environment that were taken from the wild as eggs or juveniles where
they would otherwise have had a very low probability of surviving to
adulthood. See also Sec. 23.34.
* * * * *
Sec. 23.7 [Amended]
0
15. Section 23.7 is amended by:
0
a. In paragraph (a) under the ``Office to contact'' table heading,
removing the words ``Room 700'' and adding in their place the words
``Room 212''; and
0
b. In paragraph (b) under the ``Office to contact'' table heading,
removing the words ``Room 750'' and adding in their place the words
``Room 110''.
Sec. 23.8 [Amended]
0
16. Section 23.8 is amended by removing the words ``Numbers 1018-0093
and 1018-0137'' from the end of the first sentence and adding in their
place the words ``Number 1018-0093''.
0
17. Section 23.9 is added to subpart A to read as set forth below:
Sec. 23.9 Incorporation by reference.
(a) Certain material is incorporated by reference into this part
with the approval of the Director of the Federal Register in accordance
with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. You may inspect copies at the
U.S. Management Authority, Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401 N. Fairfax
Dr., Room 212, Arlington, VA 22203 or at the National Archives and
Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of
this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.
(b) International Air Transport Association (IATA), 800 Place
Victoria, P.O. Box 113, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H4Z 1M1, 1-800-716-
6326, http://www.iata.org.
(1) Live Animals Regulations (LAR) 40th edition, effective October
1, 2013, into Sec. Sec. 23.23, 23.26, and 23.56.
(2) Perishable Cargo Regulations (PCR) 13th edition, effective July
1, 2013, into Sec. Sec. 23.23, 23.26, and 23.56.
0
18. Section 23.13 is amended by:
0
a. Redesignating paragraph (d) as paragraph (f);
0
b. Adding a new paragraph (d) and a new paragraph (e) to read as set
forth below; and
0
c. In the newly redesignated paragraph (f), removing the words ``(a)
through (c)'' and adding in their place the words ``(a) through (e)''.
Sec. 23.13 What is prohibited?
* * * * *
(d) Use any specimen of a species listed in Appendix I, II, or III
of CITES for any purpose contrary to what is allowed under Sec. 23.55.
(e) Violate any other provisions of this part.
* * * * *
0
19. Section 23.18 is amended by revising the decision tree to read as
follows:
Sec. 23.18 What CITES documents are required to export Appendix-I
wildlife?
* * * * *
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
[[Page 30421]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27MY14.000
0
20. Section 23.19 is amended by revising the decision tree to read as
follows:
Sec. 23.19 What CITES documents are required to export Appendix-I
plants?
* * * * *
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
[[Page 30422]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27MY14.001
0
21. Section 23.23 is amended by:
0
a. Removing the words ``on a form printed'' in the first sentence of
paragraph (b) and adding in their place the word ``issued'';
0
b. Revising paragraph (c)(1) to read as set forth below;
0
c. Revising paragraph (c)(7) to read as set forth below;
0
d. Revising the introductory text of paragraph (c)(12) to read as set
forth below;
0
e. Revising the introductory text of paragraph (c)(13) to read as set
forth below;
0
f. Redesignating paragraphs (c)(13)(i)(B) and (c)(13)(i)(C) as
(c)(13)(i)(C) and (c)(13)(i)(D);
0
g. Revising paragraph (c)(13)(i)(B) to read as set forth below;
0
h. Adding the words ``or signature stamp'' immediately following the
words ``original handwritten signature'' in the first sentence of
paragraph (c)(16);
0
i. Revising paragraph (c)(18) to read as set forth below;
0
j. Revising the introductory text of paragraph (c)(21) to read as set
forth below;
0
k. Removing the word ``calendar'' from paragraph (e)(5)(i);
0
l. Adding a new paragraph (e)(10)(iv) to read as set forth below; and
0
m. Removing the words ``include hybrids'' from paragraph (f)(2)(ii) and
[[Page 30423]]
adding in their place the words ``treat hybrids as Appendix-I
specimens''.
Sec. 23.23 What information is required on U.S. and foreign CITES
documents?
* * * * *
(c) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Required information Description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Appendix................. The CITES Appendix in which the species,
subspecies, or population is listed (see
Sec. 23.21 when a Party has taken a
reservation on a listing). For products
that contain or consist of more than one
CITES species, the Appendix in which
each species is listed must be indicated
on the CITES document.
* * * * * * *
(7) Humane transport of live If the CITES document authorizes the
specimens. export or re-export of live specimens, a
statement that the document is valid
only if the transport conditions comply
with the International Air Transport
Association Live Animals Regulations or
the International Air Transport
Association Perishable Cargo Regulations
(incorporated by reference, see Sec.
23.9). A shipment containing live
animals must comply with the
requirements of the Live Animals
Regulations (LAR). A shipment containing
live plants must comply with the
requirements for plants in the
Perishable Cargo Regulations (PCR).
* * * * * * *
(12) Quantity................ The quantity of specimens authorized in
the shipment and, if appropriate, the
unit of measurement using the metric
system. For products that contain or
consist of more than one CITES species,
the quantity of each species must be
indicated on the CITES document.
* * * * * * *
(13) Scientific name......... The scientific name of the species,
including the subspecies when needed to
determine the level of protection of the
specimen under CITES. For products that
contain or consist of more than one
CITES species, the scientific name of
each species must be indicated on the
CITES document. Scientific names must be
in the standard nomenclature as it
appears in the CITES Appendices or the
references adopted by the CoP. A list of
current references is available from the
CITES website or us (see Sec. 23.7). A
CITES document may contain higher-taxon
names in lieu of the species name only
under one of the following
circumstances:
(i) * * *
(B) If the species cannot be determined
for worked specimens of black coral,
specimens may be identified at the genus
level. If the genus cannot be determined
for worked specimens of black coral, the
scientific name to be used is the order
Antipatharia. Raw black coral and live
black coral must be identified to the
level of species.
* * * * * * *
(18) Source.................. The source of the specimen. For products
that contain or consist of more than one
CITES species, the source code of each
species must be indicated on the CITES
document. For re-export, unless there is
information to indicate otherwise, the
source code on the CITES document used
for import of the specimen must be used.
See Sec. 23.24 for a list of codes.
* * * * * * *
(21) Validation or Except as provided for replacement (Sec.
certification. 23.52(f)) or retrospective (Sec.
23.53(f)) CITES documents, the actual
quantity of specimens exported or re-
exported: * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
(e) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Type of document Additional required information
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
(10) * * *
(iv) For products that contain or consist
of more than one CITES species, the
information in paragraphs (e)(10)(i)
through (iii) of this section for each
species must be indicated on the CITES
document.
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 23.24 [Amended]
0
22. Section 23.24 is amended by:
0
a. Removing the words ``which should be'' in the first sentence of the
introductory text and adding in their place the words ``which may be'';
0
b. Adding the words ``(see Sec. 23.5)'' immediately following the
words ``Captive-bred'' in paragraph (d)(2)(i);
0
c. Removing paragraph (d)(2)(iii);
0
d. Removing the words ``to be used'' in paragraph (f) and adding in
their place the words ``may be used''; and
0
e. Removing the words ``(wildlife that originated from a ranching
operation).'' in paragraph (g) and adding in their place the words
``(see Sec. 23.5).''.
0
23. Section 23.26 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (c)(8) to read as set forth below;
0
b. Redesignating paragraphs (d)(4) through (d)(8) as (d)(5) through
(d)(9);
0
c. Adding new paragraph (d)(4) to read as set forth below;
0
d. Further redesignating newly designated paragraphs (d)(7) through
(d)(9) as paragraphs (d)(8) through (d)(10);
0
e. Adding new paragraph (d)(7) to read as set forth below; and
[[Page 30424]]
0
f. Adding new paragraph (d)(11) to read as set forth below.
Sec. 23.26 When is a U.S. or foreign CITES document valid?
* * * * *
(c) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conditions for an acceptable CITES
Key phrase document
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
(8) Humane transport......... Live wildlife or plants were transported
in compliance with the International Air
Transport Association Live Animals
Regulations (for animals) or the
International Air Transport Association
Perishable Cargo Regulations (for
plants) (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 23.9).
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(d) * * *
(4) The CITES document includes a species for which the Secretariat
has published an annotated quota.
* * * * *
(7) We know or have reasonable grounds to believe that an Appendix-
I specimen was not bred at a facility registered with the CITES
Secretariat and that the purpose of the import is commercial.
* * * * *
(11) The export permit or re-export certificate does not contain
validation or certification by an inspecting official at the time of
export of the actual quantity exported or re-exported.
0
24. Section 23.27 is amended by:
0
a. Adding two sentences to the end of paragraph (a) to read as set
forth below; and
0
b. Adding the words ``exporting or re-exporting'' immediately following
the words ``Officials in each'' in the first sentence of paragraph (c).
Sec. 23.27 What CITES documents do I present at the port?
(a) * * * Article VI, paragraph 6, of the Treaty requires that the
Management Authority of the importing country cancel and retain the
export permit or re-export certificate and any corresponding import
permit presented. In the United States, for imports of CITES-listed
plant specimens, CITES inspecting officials cancel and submit original
CITES documents to the U.S. Management Authority.
* * * * *
0
25. Section 23.34 is amended by:
0
a. Removing the words ``Exempt plant material'' from the left-hand
column of paragraph (b)(3) and adding in their place the words ``Grown
from exempt plant material'';
0
b. Redesignating paragraphs (b)(6) through (b)(8) as paragraphs (b)(7)
through (b)(9);
0
c. Adding a new paragraph (b)(6) to read as set forth below; and
0
d. Revising footnote 1 at the end of paragraph (b) to read as set forth
below.
Sec. 23.34 What kinds of records may I use to show the origin of a
specimen when I apply for a U.S. CITES document?
* * * * *
(b) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source of specimen Types of records
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
(6) Ranched wildlife......... (i) Records, such as permits, licenses,
and tags, that demonstrate that the
specimen was legally removed from the
wild under relevant Federal, tribal,
State, or local wildlife conservation
laws or regulations:
(A) If taken on private or tribal land,
permission of the landowner if required
under applicable law.
(B) If taken in a national, State, or
local park, refuge or other protected
area, permission from the applicable
agency, if required.
(ii) Records that document the rearing of
specimens at the facility:
(A) Number of specimens (by sex and age-
or size-class) at the facility.
(B) How long the specimens were reared at
the facility.
(C) Signed and dated statement by the
owner or manager of the facility that
the specimens were reared at the
facility in a controlled environment.
(D) Marking system, if applicable.
(E) Photographs or video of the facility.
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ If the wildlife was born in captivity from an egg collected
in the wild or from parents that mated or exchanged genetic material
in the wild, see paragraphs (b)(6) and (b)(9) of this section. If
the plant was propagated from a non-exempt propagule collected from
a wild plant, see paragraph (b)(9) of this section.
* * * * *
0
26. Section 23.36 is amended by:
0
a. Adding, in alphabetical order, two entries to the table in paragraph
(b)(1), to read as set forth below;
0
b. In paragraph (b)(1) of the table, removing the entry ``Export of
Skins/Products of Bobcat, Canada Lynx, River Otter, Brown Bear, Gray
Wolf, and American Alligator Taken under an Approved State or Tribal
Program'' and adding in its place the entry ``Export of Skins of
Bobcat, Canada Lynx, River Otter, Brown Bear, Gray Wolf, and American
Alligator Taken under an Approved State or Tribal Program'';
0
c. In paragraph (b)(1) of the table, removing the entry ``Trophies by
Taxidermists'' and adding in its place the entry ``Trophies by Hunters
or Taxidermists''; and
0
d. In the last entry of paragraph (b)(1), adding the words ``(Live
Animals/Samples/Parts/Products)'' immediately following the words
``Wildlife, Removed from the Wild''.
Sec. 23.36 What are the requirements for an export permit?
* * * * *
(b) * * *
[[Page 30425]]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Type of application for an export permit Form No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) CITES:
* * * * * * *
Caviar/Live Eggs/Meat of Paddlefish or Sturgeon, From an 3-200-80
Aquaculture Facility...................................
* * * * * * *
Master File for the Export of Live Animals Bred in 3-200-85
Captivity..............................................
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Sec. 23.40 [Amended]
0
27. Section 23.40 is amended by:
0
a. Removing the words ``include hybrids in the listing'' from paragraph
(d)(2)(iii) and adding in their place the words ``treat hybrids as
Appendix-I specimens'';
0
b. Adding the words ``or spore'' in paragraph (e)(1) immediately
following the words ``from a wild seed'';
0
c. Removing the words ``include hybrids in the listing'' from paragraph
(e)(2) and adding in their place the words ``treat hybrids as Appendix-
I specimens''; and
0
d. Adding the words ``(See Sec. 23.47.)'' after the last sentence in
paragraph (e)(2).
Sec. 23.41 [Amended]
0
28. Section 23.41 is amended by adding the words ``, 3-200-80, or 3-
200-85'' immediately following the words ``Form 3-200-24'' in paragraph
(c).
Sec. 23.42 [Amended]
0
29. Section 23.42 is amended by removing the words ``include hybrids''
from paragraph (b) and adding in their place the words ``treat hybrids
as Appendix-I specimens''.
0
30. Section 23.43 is amended by revising paragraph (f)(2) and adding a
new paragraph (f)(3) to read as set forth below.
Sec. 23.43 What are the requirements for a wildlife hybrid?
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(2) For import, export, or re-export of an exempt wildlife hybrid
without CITES documents, you must provide information at the time of
import or export to clearly demonstrate that your specimen has no
purebred CITES specimens in the previous four generations of its
ancestry. If you are unable to clearly demonstrate this, you must
obtain CITES documents. The information you provide must clearly
identify the specimen and demonstrate its recent lineage. Such
information may include, but is not limited to, the following:
(i) Records that identify the name and address of the breeder and
identify the specimen by birth or hatch date and by sex, band number,
microchip number, or other mark.
(ii) A certified pedigree issued by an internationally recognized
association that contains scientific names of the animals in the
specimen's recent lineage and clearly illustrates its genetic history.
If the pedigree contains codes, you must provide a key or guide that
explains the meaning of the codes.
(3) Although a CITES document is not required for an exempt
wildlife hybrid, you must follow the clearance requirements for
wildlife in part 14 of this subchapter, including the prior
notification requirements for live wildlife.
0
31. Section 23.44 is amended by revising the section heading and adding
a new paragraph (e)(7) to read as set forth below.
Sec. 23.44 What are the requirements for traveling internationally
with my personally owned live wildlife?
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(7) You must return the wildlife to the United States before the
certificate expires.
0
32. Section 23.46 is amended by:
0
a. Removing the words ``facilitate a dialogue for resolution of the
identified problems within 60 days.'' from the end of the last sentence
of paragraph (b)(3) and adding in their place the words ``allow a
further 30 days for resolution of the identified problems.'';
0
b. Revising paragraph (b)(4) to read as set forth below;
0
c. Removing paragraphs (b)(5) and (b)(6);
0
d. Redesignating paragraphs (b)(7) through (b)(12) as paragraphs (b)(5)
through (b)(10);
0
e. Revising the first sentence of newly redesignated paragraph (b)(7),
and adding a sentence following the first sentence of that paragraph to
read as set forth below;
0
f. Adding a sentence immediately following the first sentence of newly
redesignated paragraph (b)(8) to read as set forth below;
0
g. Amending the last sentence of newly redesignated paragraph (b)(8) by
removing the words ``, and the Animals Committee will review the
operation to determine whether it should remain registered'';
0
h. Amending newly redesignated paragraph (b)(10) by removing the words
``bred at a commercial breeding operation that is registered with the
CITES Secretariat as provided in this section'' and adding in their
place the words ``bred in captivity (see Sec. 23.63)'';
0
i. Removing paragraph (e)(3);
0
j. Redesignating paragraph (e)(4) as paragraph (e)(3);
0
k. Adding a new paragraph (e)(4) to read as set forth below;
0
l. Redesignating paragraphs (f) through (h) as paragraphs (h) through
(j);
0
m. Adding a new paragraph (f) to read as set forth below;
0
n. Adding a new paragraph (g) to read as set forth below; and
0
o. Removing the words ``Form 3-200-24'' from newly designated paragraph
(i) and adding in their place the words ``the appropriate form (see
Sec. 23.36)''.
Sec. 23.46 What are the requirements for registering a commercial
breeding operation for Appendix-I wildlife and commercially exporting
specimens?
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(4) If the objection is not withdrawn or the identified problems
are not resolved within the 30-day period, the Secretariat will submit
the application to the Standing Committee at its next regular meeting.
The Standing Committee will determine whether the objection is
justified and decide whether to accept the application.
* * * * *
(7) If a Party believes that a registered operation does not meet
the bred-in-captivity requirements, it may, after consultation with the
Secretariat and the Party concerned, propose to the Standing Committee
that the operation be deleted from the register. At its following
meeting, the Standing Committee will consider the concerns raised by
the objecting Party, and any
[[Page 30426]]
comments from the registering Party and the Secretariat, and determine
whether the operation should be deleted from the register. * * *
(8) * * * In the United States, we will monitor registered
operations, in part, by requiring each operation to apply for renewal
and demonstrate that it continues to qualify for registration at least
once every 5 years. (See paragraphs (e)(4) and (f) of this section.) *
* *
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(4) Registrations will be valid for a period not to exceed 5 years.
Registrants who wish to remain registered must request renewal before
the end of the period of validity of the registration.
(f) U.S. application to renew a registration. Requests for renewal
of a registration should be submitted at least 3 months before the
registration expires. Complete Form 3-200-65 and submit it to the U.S.
Management Authority.
(g) Criteria for renewal of U.S. registrations. To renew your
registration, you must provide sufficient information for us to find
that your proposed activity continues to meet all of the criteria in
paragraph (d) of this section.
* * * * *
0
33. Section 23.47 is amended by adding a sentence to the end of
paragraph (a) to read as set forth below.
Sec. 23.47 What are the requirements for export of an Appendix-I
plant artificially propagated for commercial purposes?
(a) * * * This section does not apply to hybrids of one or more
Appendix-I species or taxa that are not annotated to treat hybrids as
Appendix-I specimens (see Sec. 23.40).
* * * * *
0
34. Section 23.52 is amended by:
0
a. Removing the last sentence of paragraph (a) and adding in its place
two new sentences to read as set forth below;
0
b. Adding a new paragraph (b)(6) to read as set forth below;
0
c. Revising the introductory text of paragraph (d) to read as set forth
below;
0
d. Redesignating paragraphs (d)(1) and (d)(2) as (d)(1)(i) and
(d)(1)(ii);
0
e. Adding new introductory text to paragraph (d)(1) to read as set
forth below;
0
f. Adding a new paragraph (d)(1)(iii) to read as set forth below; and
0
g. Adding a new paragraph (d)(2) to read as set forth below.
Sec. 23.52 What are the requirements for replacing a lost, damaged,
stolen, or accidentally destroyed CITES document?
(a) * * * To renew a U.S. CITES document, see part 13 of this
subchapter. To amend a U.S. CITES document, see part 13 of this
subchapter if the activity has not yet occurred or, if the activity has
already occurred, see Sec. 23.53 of this part.
(b) * * *
(6) In the United States, you may not use an original single-use
CITES document issued under a CITES master file or CITES annual program
as a replacement document for a shipment that has already left the
country.
* * * * *
(d) Criteria. The criteria in this paragraph (d) apply to the
issuance and acceptance of U.S. and foreign documents.
(1) When applying for a U.S. replacement document, you must provide
sufficient information for us to find that your proposed activity meets
all of the following criteria:
(i) * * *
(ii) * * *
(iii) The specimens were presented to the appropriate official for
inspection at the time of import and a request for a replacement CITES
document was made at that time.
(2) For acceptance of foreign CITES replacement documents in the
United States, you must provide sufficient information for us to find
that your proposed activity meets all of the following criteria:
(i) The specimens were presented to the appropriate official for
inspection at the time of import and a request for a replacement CITES
document was made at that time.
(ii) The importer or the importer's agent submitted a signed,
dated, and notarized statement at the time of import that describes the
circumstances that resulted in the CITES document being lost, damaged,
stolen, or accidentally destroyed.
(iii) The importer or the importer's agent provided a copy of the
original lost, stolen, or accidentally destroyed document at the time
of import showing that the document met the requirements in Sec. Sec.
23.23, 23.24, and 23.25.
* * * * *
0
35. Section 23.53 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a) to read as set forth below;
0
b. Adding a new paragraph (b)(8) to read as set forth below;
0
c. Revising paragraph (d)(6)(ii) to read as set forth below; and
0
d. Adding the words ``as defined in Sec. 23.5'' to the end of the
sentence in paragraph (d)(7)(i).
Sec. 23.53 What are the requirements for obtaining a retrospective
CITES document?
(a) Retrospective CITES documents may be issued and accepted in
certain limited situations after an export or re-export has occurred,
but before the shipment is cleared for import. When specific conditions
are met, a retrospective CITES document may be issued to authorize
trade that has taken place without a CITES document or to correct
certain technical errors in a CITES document after the authorized
activity has occurred.
(b) * * *
(8) In the United States, you may not use a U.S. CITES document
issued under a CITES master file or CITES annual program as a
retrospective CITES document.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(6) * * *
(ii) The Management Authority made a technical error when issuing
the CITES document that was not prompted by information provided by the
applicant.
* * * * *
0
36. Section 23.55 is amended by:
0
a. Revising the introductory text to read as set forth below;
0
b. Revising the table's headings to read as set forth below;
0
c. Revising paragraph (c) to read as set forth below;
0
d. Revising the text in the first block of the right-hand column of the
table, which corresponds to paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) in the left-
hand column of the table, to read as set forth below;
0
e. Adding the word ``lawful'' immediately before the word ``purpose''
in the second block of the right-hand column of the table, which
corresponds to paragraphs (d), (e), and (f) in the left-hand column of
the table;
0
f. Redesignating paragraph (d)(5) as (d)(6);
0
g. Adding a new paragraph (d)(5) to read as set forth below; and
0
h. Revising paragraph (f) to read as set forth below.
Sec. 23.55 How may I use a CITES specimen after import into the
United States?
In addition to the provisions in Sec. 23.3, you may only use CITES
specimens after import into the United States for the following
purposes:
[[Page 30427]]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allowed use within the United
If the species is listed in States
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) * * *.............................. The specimen may be used only
for noncommercial purposes
(see Sec. 23.5).
(b) * * *
(c) Appendix II without an annotation Exception:
for noncommercial purposes, or If the specimen was lawfully
Appendix III, and threatened under the imported, with no restrictions
ESA, except as provided in a special on its use after import,
rule in Sec. Sec. 17.40 through before the species was listed
17.48 or under a permit granted under as described in paragraphs
Sec. Sec. 17.32 or 17.52. (a), (b), or (c) of this
section, you may continue to
use the specimen as indicated
for paragraphs (d), (e) and
(f) of this section provided
you can clearly demonstrate
(using written records or
other documentary evidence)
that your specimen was
imported prior to the CITES
listing, with no restrictions
on its use after import. If
you are unable to clearly
demonstrate that this
exception applies, the
specimen may be used only for
noncommercial purposes.
* * * * * * *
(d) * * *
(5) Certificate for artificially
propagated plants with a source code
of ``A'' for artificially propagated
hybrid specimens derived from one or
more unannotated Appendix-I species or
other taxa.
* * * * * * *
(f) Appendix III, other than those in
paragraph (c) of this section.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
37. Section 23.56 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(2) to read as
set forth below.
Sec. 23.56 What U.S. CITES document conditions do I need to follow?
(a) * * *
(2) For export and re-export of live wildlife and plants, transport
conditions must comply with the International Air Transport Association
Live Animals Regulations (for animals) or the International Air
Transport Association Perishable Cargo Regulations (for plants)
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 23.9).
* * * * *
Sec. 23.64 [Amended]
0
38. In Sec. 23.64, paragraph (g)(4)(ii) is amended by adding the words
``or spores'' immediately following the words ``to collect seeds''.
0
39. Section 23.69 is amended by:
0
a. Revising the heading of the section and the first sentence of
paragraph (a) to read as set forth below;
0
b. Revising the first two sentences of paragraph (c)(3) to read as set
forth below;
0
c. Removing the words ``broken, cut, or missing'' from the first
sentence of paragraph (c)(3)(i) and adding in their place the words
``inadvertently removed, damaged, or lost'';
0
d. Removing the words ``is broken or cut'' from the third sentence of
paragraph (c)(3)(i) and adding in their place the words ``has been
inadvertently removed or damaged'';
0
e. Removing the word ``missing'' in the fourth sentence of paragraph
(c)(3)(i) and adding in its place the word ``lost'';
0
f. Adding the words ``or to export products made from fur skins''
immediately following the words ``approved program'' in paragraph
(e)(2); and
0
g. Adding the words ``or products made from fur skins'' immediately
following the words ``To re-export fur skins'' in paragraph (e)(3).
Sec. 23.69 How can I trade internationally in fur skins and fur skin
products of bobcat, river otter, Canada lynx, gray wolf, and brown bear
harvested in the United States?
(a) * * * For purposes of this section, CITES furbearers means
bobcat (Lynx rufus), river otter (Lontra canadensis), Canada lynx (Lynx
canadensis), gray wolf (Canis lupus), and brown bear (Ursus arctos)
harvested in the United States. * * *
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(3) Fur skins without a CITES tag permanently attached may not be
exported or re-exported. If the CITES tag has been inadvertently
removed, damaged, or lost you may obtain a replacement tag. * * *
* * * * *
0
40. Section 23.70 is amended by:
0
a. Adding the word ``tamper-resistant,'' immediately following the word
``Be'' in paragraph (d)(1)(i);
0
b. Revising paragraph (d)(1)(ii) to read as set forth below;
0
c. Adding the word ``skin'' immediately before the words ``production
or harvest'' in paragraph (d)(1)(iii);
0
d. Revising paragraph (d)(2) to read as set forth below;
0
e. Removing the first two sentences of paragraph (d)(3) introductory
text and adding one sentence in their place to read as set forth below;
0
f. Removing the words ``broken, cut, or missing'' from the first
sentence of paragraph (d)(3)(i) and adding in their place the words
``inadvertently removed, damaged, or lost'';
0
g. Removing the words ``is broken or cut'' from the fourth sentence of
paragraph (d)(3)(i) and adding in their place the words ``has been
inadvertently removed or damaged'';
0
h. Removing the word ``missing'' in the fifth sentence of paragraph
(d)(3)(i) and adding in its place the word ``lost'';
0
i. Adding the word ``skin'' immediately before the words ``production
or harvest'' in the first sentence of paragraph (d)(3)(ii);
0
j. Removing the second sentence in paragraph (e)(2);
0
k. Adding the words ``, except for products made from American
alligators,'' immediately following the words ``State or tribal
program'' in paragraph (h)(1);
0
l. Adding the words ``or to export products made from American
alligators,'' immediately following the words ``approved program,'' in
paragraph (h)(2);
0
m. Redesignating paragraph (h)(3) as paragraph (h)(4); and
0
n. Adding a new paragraph (h)(3) to read as set forth below.
Sec. 23.70 How can I trade internationally in American alligator and
other crocodilian skins, parts, and products?
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(1) * * *
(ii) Be permanently stamped with the two-letter ISO code for the
country of origin, a unique serial number, a standardized species code
(available on our Web site; see Sec. 23.7), and for
[[Page 30428]]
specimens of species from populations that have been transferred from
Appendix I to Appendix II for ranching, the year of skin production or
harvest. For American alligator, the export tags include the US-CITES
logo, an abbreviation for the State or Tribe of harvest, a standard
species code (MIS = Alligator mississippiensis), the year of skin
production or harvest, and a unique serial number.
* * * * *
(2) Skins, flanks, and chalecos must be individually tagged.
(3) Skins without a non-reusable tag permanently attached may not
be exported or re-exported. * * *
* * * * *
(h) * * *
(3) To re-export crocodilian specimens, complete Form 3-200-73 and
submit it to either FWS Law Enforcement or the U.S. Management
Authority.
* * * * *
0
41. Section 23.71 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a) to read as set forth below;
0
b. Adding a sentence to the end of paragraphs (b)(1)(i), (b)(1)(iv),
and (b)(1)(v) to read as set forth below;
0
c. Revising paragraph (b)(1)(ii) to read as set forth below;
0
d. Adding a sentence to the end of paragraph (b)(2)(iv) to read as set
forth below;
0
e. Revising paragraph (b)(3)(iii) to read as set forth below;
0
f. Removing the words ``and caviar products that consist'' from
paragraph (g) and adding in their place the words ``that consists'';
0
g. Adding the words ``or Form 3-200-80'' immediately following the
words ``Form 3-200-76'' in the third sentence of paragraph (h);
0
h. Removing the words ``to FWS Law Enforcement'' from the end of the
last sentence in paragraph (h) and adding in their place the words
``either to FWS Law Enforcement or the U.S. Management Authority''; and
0
i. Adding new paragraph (i) to read as set forth below.
Sec. 23.71 How can I trade internationally in sturgeon caviar?
(a) U.S. and foreign provisions. For the purposes of this section,
sturgeon caviar or caviar means the processed roe of any species of
sturgeon or paddlefish (order Acipenseriformes). It does not include
sturgeon or paddlefish eggs contained in shampoos, cosmetics, lotions,
or other products for topical application. The import, export, or re-
export of sturgeon caviar must meet the requirements of this section
and the other requirements of this part. The import, export, or re-
export of Acipenseriformes specimens other than caviar must meet the
other requirements of this part. See subparts B and C for prohibitions
and application procedures.
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) * * * In the United States, the design of the label will be
determined by the labeler in accordance with the requirements of this
section.
(ii) Primary container means any container (tin, jar, pail or other
receptacle) in direct contact with the caviar.
* * * * *
(iv) * * * In the United States, this may be done by the person who
harvested the roe.
(v) * * * This includes any facility where caviar is removed from
the container in which it was received and placed in a different
container.
* * * * *
(2) * * *
(iv) * * * This is either the calendar year in which caviar was
harvested or, for caviar imported from shared stocks subject to quotas,
the quota year in which it was harvested.
* * * * *
(3) * * *
(iii) Lot identification number or, for caviar that is being re-
exported, the CITES document number under which it was imported may be
used in place of the lot identification number.
* * * * *
(i) CITES register of exporters and of processing and repackaging
plants. The CITES Secretariat maintains a ``Register of licensed
exporters and of processing and repackaging plants for specimens of
sturgeon and paddlefish species'' on its Web site. If you hold a
current import-export license issued by FWS Law Enforcement and wish to
be added to the CITES register, you may submit your contact information
and processing or repackaging plant codes to the U.S. Management
Authority for submission to the CITES Secretariat.
0
42. Section 23.74 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (b) to read as set forth below;
0
b. Revising paragraph (d) to read as set forth below; and
0
c. Adding a new paragraph (e) to read as set forth below.
Sec. 23.74 How can I trade internationally in personal sport-hunted
trophies?
* * * * *
(b) Sport-hunted trophy means a whole dead animal or a readily
recognizable part or derivative of an animal specifically identified on
accompanying CITES documents that meets the following criteria:
(1) Is raw, processed, or manufactured;
(2) Was legally obtained by the hunter through hunting for his or
her personal use;
(3) Is being imported, exported, or re-exported by or on behalf of
the hunter as part of the transfer from its country of origin
ultimately to the hunter's country of usual residence; and
(4) Includes worked, manufactured, or handicraft items made from
the sport-hunted animal only when:
(i) Such items are contained in the same shipment as raw or tanned
parts of the sport-hunted animal and are for the personal use of the
hunter;
(ii) The quantity of such items is no more than could reasonably be
expected given the number of animals taken by the hunter as shown on
the license or other documentation of the authorized hunt accompanying
the shipment; and
(iii) The accompanying CITES documents (export document and, if
appropriate, import permit) contain a complete itemization and
description of all items included in the shipment.
* * * * *
(d) Quantity. The following provisions apply to the issuance and
acceptance of U.S. and foreign documents for sport-hunted trophies
originating from a population for which the Conference of the Parties
has established an export quota. The number of trophies that one hunter
may import in any calendar year for the following species is:
(1) No more than two leopard (Panthera pardus) trophies.
(2) No more than one markhor (Capra falconeri) trophy.
(3) No more than one black rhinoceros (Diceros bicornis) trophy.
(e) Marking or tagging. (1) The following provisions apply to the
issuance and acceptance of U.S. and foreign documents for sport-hunted
trophies originating from a population for which the Conference of the
Parties has established an export quota. Each trophy imported,
exported, or re-exported must be marked or tagged in the following
manner:
(i) Leopard and markhor: Each raw or tanned skin must have a self-
locking tag inserted through the skin and permanently locked in place
using the locking mechanism of the tag. The tag must indicate the
country of origin, the number of the specimen in relation to the annual
quota, and the calendar year in which the specimen was taken in the
wild. A mounted sport-hunted trophy
[[Page 30429]]
must be accompanied by the tag from the skin used to make the mount.
(ii) Black rhinoceros: Parts of the trophy, including, but not
limited to, skin, skull, or horns, whether mounted or loose, should be
individually marked with reference to the country of origin, species,
the number of the specimen in relation to the annual quota, and the
year of export.
(iii) Crocodilians: See marking requirements in Sec. 23.70.
(iv) The export permit or re-export certificate or an annex
attached to the permit or certificate must contain all the information
that is given on the tag.
(2) African elephant (Loxodonta africana). The following provisions
apply to the issuance and acceptance of U.S. and foreign documents for
sport-hunted trophies of African elephant. The trophy ivory must be
legibly marked by means of punch-dies, indelible ink, or other form of
permanent marking, under a marking and registration system established
by the country of origin, with the following formula: The country of
origin represented by the corresponding two-letter ISO country code;
the last two digits of the year in which the elephant was harvested for
export; the serial number for the year in question; and the weight of
the ivory in kilograms. The mark must be highlighted with a flash of
color and placed on the lip mark area. The lip mark area is the area of
a whole African elephant tusk where the tusk emerges from the skull and
which is usually denoted by a prominent ring of staining on the tusk in
its natural state.
0
43. Section 23.75 is added to subpart E to read as set forth below:
Sec. 23.75 How can I trade internationally in vicu[ntilde]a (Vicugna
vicugna)?
(a) U.S. and foreign general provisions. The import, export, or re-
export of specimens of vicu[ntilde]a must meet the requirements of this
section and the other requirements of this part (see subparts B and C
of this part for prohibitions and application procedures). Certain
populations of vicu[ntilde]a are listed in Appendix II for the
exclusive purpose of allowing international trade in wool sheared from
live vicu[ntilde]as, cloth made from such wool, and products
manufactured from such wool or cloth. All other specimens of
vicu[ntilde]a are deemed to be specimens of a species included in
Appendix I.
(b) Vicu[ntilde]a Convention means the Convenio para la
Conservaci[oacute]n y Manejo de la Vicu[ntilde]a, of which
vicu[ntilde]a range countries are signatories.
(c) Vicu[ntilde]a logotype means the logotype adopted by the
vicu[ntilde]a range countries under the Vicu[ntilde]a Convention.
(d) Country of origin for the purposes of the vicu[ntilde]a label
means the name of the country where the vicu[ntilde]a wool in the cloth
or product originated.
(e) Wool sheared from live vicu[ntilde]as, cloth from such wool,
and products manufactured from such wool or cloth may be imported from
Appendix-II populations only when they meet the labeling requirements
in paragraph (f) of this section.
(f) Labeling requirements. Except for cloth containing CITES pre-
Convention wool of vicu[ntilde]a, you may import, export, or re-export
vicu[ntilde]a cloth only when the reverse side of the cloth bears the
vicu[ntilde]a logotype and the selvages bear the words
``VICU[Ntilde]A--COUNTRY OF ORIGIN''. Specimens of other products
manufactured from vicu[ntilde]a wool or cloth must bear a label that
has the vicu[ntilde]a logotype and the designation ``VICU[Ntilde]A--
COUNTRY OF ORIGIN--ARTESANIA''. Each specimen must bear such a label.
For import into the United States of raw wool sheared from live
vicu[ntilde]a, see the labeling requirements in 50 CFR 17.40(m).
0
44. Section 23.84 is amended by:
0
a. Removing the word ``four'' and adding in its place the word
``three'' in the first sentence of paragraph (b);
0
b. Removing the words ``assist the Nomenclature Committee in the
development and maintenance of'' in paragraph (b)(2)(i) and adding in
their place the words ``develop and maintain'';
0
c. Adding paragraph (b)(2)(iii) to read as set forth below; and
0
d. Removing paragraph (b)(3).
Sec. 23.84 What are the roles of the Secretariat and the committees?
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(iii) The CoP appoints a specialist in zoological nomenclature to
the Animals Committee and a specialist in botanical nomenclature to the
Plants Committee. These specialists are ex officio and non-voting, and
are responsible for developing or identifying standard nomenclature
references for wildlife and plant taxa and making recommendations on
nomenclature to Parties, the CoP, other committees, working groups, and
the Secretariat.
0
45. Section 23.92 is amended by:
0
a. Removing the words ``paragraph (b)'' and adding in their place the
words ``paragraphs (b) and (c)'' in paragraph (a);
0
b. Removing the words ``and do not need CITES documents'' from the
first sentence of paragraph (b);
0
c. Revising paragraph (b)(2) to read as set forth below;
0
d. Adding the introductory text of a new paragraph (c) and a paragraph
(c)(1) to read as set forth below; and
0
e. Redesignating paragraphs (b)(3) through (b)(8) as paragraphs (c)(2)
through (c)(7).
Sec. 23.92 Are any wildlife or plants, and their parts, products, or
derivatives, exempt?
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) Plant hybrids. Specimens of an Appendix-II or -III plant taxon
with an annotation that specifically excludes hybrids.
(c) The following are exempt from CITES document requirements when
certain criteria are met.
(1) Plant hybrids. Seeds and pollen (including pollinia), cut
flowers, and flasked seedlings or tissue cultures of hybrids that
qualify as artificially propagated (see Sec. 23.64) and that were
produced from one or more Appendix-I species or taxa that are not
annotated to treat hybrids as Appendix-I specimens.
* * * * *
Appendix A to 50 CFR Chapter I--[Removed]
0
46. Remove Appendix A to Chapter I.
Dated: March 27, 2014
Rachel Jacobson,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 2014-11329 Filed 5-23-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P