Endangered and Threatened Species; Proposed Threatened Status for Elkhorn Coral and Staghorn Coral, 24359-24365 [05-9222]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 88 / Monday, May 9, 2005 / Proposed Rules
will incorporate biometric identifiers.
Because FMCSA is no longer required to
promulgate a regulation on biometric
identifiers, the agency believes TSA is
the agency in a better position to lead
further development of biometric
identifiers, thereby avoiding a potential
conflict in standards adopted by each
agency. The adoption of different
standards and/or technologies for CDLs
and a TWIC could place an unnecessary
burden on States. Therefore, FMCSA is
withdrawing its ANPRMs dated May 15,
1989, and March 8, 1991, on biometric
identifiers.
FMCSA has shared its research on
biometric identifiers with TSA. FMCSA
will continue to work in a collaborative
effort with TSA on the development of
TSA’s biometric identifier standard and
the development of a TWIC. In the
future, FMCSA may assess the impact of
the TWIC upon the Federal Motor
Carrier Safety Regulations.
Issued on: April 27, 2005.
Annette M. Sandberg,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 05–9171 Filed 5–6–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 223
[Docket No. 050304058–5113–02; I.D.
060204C]
RIN 0648–XB29
Endangered and Threatened Species;
Proposed Threatened Status for
Elkhorn Coral and Staghorn Coral
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for
comments.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We, the NMFS, have
completed a comprehensive status
review of elkhorn (Acropora palmata)
and staghorn (A. cervicornis) corals and
determined that a petitioned action to
list both species is warranted. We have
determined that fused-staghorn coral (A.
prolifera) is a hybrid and therefore does
not warrant listing. We have made our
determination based on the best
scientific and commercial data available
and efforts being made to protect the
species, and we propose to place both
elkhorn and staghorn corals on the list
of threatened species under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:24 May 06, 2005
Jkt 205001
amended (ESA). We are announcing that
hearings will be held at four locations
in June to provide additional
opportunities and formats to receive
public input.
DATES: Comments on this proposal must
be received by August 8, 2005. See
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for the
specific public hearing dates.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by the RIN 0648–XB29, by
any of the following methods:
• E-mail: Acropora.Info@noaa.gov.
Include Docket Number or RIN 0648–
XB29 in the subject line of the message.
• Mail: Assistant Regional
Administrator, Protected Resources
Division, NMFS, Southeast Regional
Office, Protected Resources Division,
263 13th Ave. South, St. Petersburg, FL
33701.
• Facsimile (fax) to: 727–824–5309.
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency name and
docket number or Regulatory
Information Number (RIN) for this
rulemaking.
• See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for
public hearing locations.
The proposed rule and status review
are also available electronically at the
NMFS website at https://
sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/protres.htm
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jennifer Moore or Stephania Bolden,
NMFS, at the address above or at 727–
824–5312, or Marta Nammack, NMFS, at
301–713–1401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On March 4, 2004, the Center for
Biological Diversity (CBD) petitioned us
to list elkhorn, staghorn, and fusedstaghorn corals as either threatened or
endangered under the ESA and to
designate critical habitat. On June 23,
2004, we made a positive 90–day
finding (69 FR 34995) that CBD
presented substantial information
indicating that the petitioned actions
may be warranted and announced the
initiation of a formal status review as
required by section 4(b)(3)(A) of the
ESA. Concurrently, we solicited
additional information from the public
on these acroporid corals regarding
historic and current distribution and
abundance, population status and
trends, areas that may qualify as critical
habitat, any current or planned
activities that may adversely affect
them, and known conservation efforts.
Additional information was requested
during two public meetings held in
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
24359
December 2004 on: (1) distribution and
abundance; (2) areas that may qualify as
critical habitat; and (3) approaches/
criteria that could be used to assess
listing potential of the acroporids (e.g.,
viability assessment, extinction risk,
etc.).
In order to conduct a comprehensive
status review, we convened an Atlantic
Acropora Biological Review Team
(BRT). The members of the BRT were a
diverse group of experts in their fields,
including coral biologists and
ecologists; specialists in coral disease,
coral monitoring and restoration,
climate change, water quality, coral
taxonomy; regional experts in coral
abundance/distribution throughout the
Caribbean Sea; and state and Federal
resource managers. The comprehensive,
peer-reviewed status review report
developed by the BRT incorporates and
summarizes the best available scientific
and commercial information as of
March 2005. It addresses the status of
the species, the five factors identified in
ESA section 4(a)(1), and current
regulatory, conservation and research
efforts that may yield protection to the
corals. The BRT also reviewed and
considered the petition and materials
we received as a result of the Federal
Register document (69 FR 34995) and
the public meetings; substantive
materials were incorporated into the
status review report.
Distribution and Abundance
Acropora spp. are widely distributed
throughout the wider Caribbean (U.S.
Florida, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands
(U.S.V.I.), Navassa; and Antigua and
Barbuda, Aruba, Bahamas, Barbados,
Belize, British Virgin Islands, Colombia,
Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominica, Dominican
Republic, Grenada, Guadeloupe, Haiti,
Honduras, Jamaica, Martinique, Mexico,
Netherlands Antilles, Nicaragua,
Panama, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia,
St. Vincent and the Grenadines,
Trinidad and Tobago, and Venezuela).
Both elkhorn and staghorn corals used
to be the most abundant and most
important species on Caribbean coral
reefs in terms of accretion of reef
structure. In general, elkhorn and
staghorn corals have the same
distribution, with few exceptions.
Staghorn coral’s northern extent
(Broward County, Florida) is farther
north than that of elkhorn coral (MiamiDade County, Florida). Relative to other
corals, both have high growth rates that
have allowed reef growth to keep pace
with past changes in sea level.
Additionally, both exhibit branching
morphologies that provide important
habitat for other reef organisms; no
other Caribbean reef-building coral
E:\FR\FM\09MYP1.SGM
09MYP1
24360
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 88 / Monday, May 9, 2005 / Proposed Rules
species is able to fulfill these ecosystem
functions. At the current reduced
abundance of A. palmata and A.
cervicornis, it is highly likely that both
these ecosystem functions have been
largely lost.
The third Acropora spp. present in
the Caribbean Sea is the fused-staghorn
coral (A. prolifera). Although it has a
history in the taxonomic literature,
recent genetic research has determined
that it is an F1 (i.e., first generation)
hybrid between A. cervicornis and A.
palmata. While there is genetic
evidence that A. prolifera has
backcrossed with A. cervicornis on
evolutionary time scales, and it
undergoes gametogenesis, there is no
evidence that it interbreeds (i.e.,
produces sexual offspring in a cross
between two A. prolifera colonies). For
this reason, the BRT did not include
fused-staghorn coral as a species within
the status review, and we determined
that it does not meet the definition of a
species under the ESA.
Both elkhorn and staghorn corals
underwent precipitous declines in
abundance in the early 1980s
throughout their range, and this decline
has continued. Although quantitative
data on former distribution and
abundance are scarce, in the few
locations where quantitative data are
available (i.e., Florida Keys, Dry
Tortugas, Jamaica and the U.S.V.I.),
declines in abundance are estimated at
greater than 97 percent. Although this
decline trend has been documented as
continuing in the late 1990s, and even
in the past 5 years in some locations,
local extirpations (i.e., at the island or
country scale) have not been
documented. While recruitment of new
colonies has been reported in various
geographic locations, new recruits
appear to be suffering mortality faster
than they can mature (to sizes greater
than 1 m in colony diameter). In a very
few locations (e.g., Buck Island Reef
National Monument) moderate recovery
of elkhorn coral appears to be
progressing. In most cases the genetic
origin of the recruits, presumably from
sexual reproduction, is unknown so that
their contribution to the corals’
Caribbean-wide recovery remains
undetermined.
Analysis of the Definitions of
Endangered and Threatened Species
We first considered whether all three
of the corals listed in the petition met
the definition of ‘‘species’’ pursuant to
section 3 of the ESA. The term
‘‘species’’ includes ‘‘any subspecies of
fish or wildlife or plants, and any
distinct population segment of any
species of vertebrate fish or wildlife
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:24 May 06, 2005
Jkt 205001
which interbreeds when mature.’’ Based
on this language, a ‘‘species’’ is given its
ordinary, accepted biological meaning.
Species diagnoses for both elkhorn
and staghorn were not debated as both
species are recognized as separate taxa
in the literature, have separate and
discrete diagnoses and morphologies,
and produce viable gametes, larvae, and
successful sexual offspring. On the other
hand, we carefully reviewed and
deliberated on the taxonomic diagnosis
for fused-staghorn coral (A. prolifera).
While A. prolifera has been recognized
in the taxonomic literature as a species
based on morphology, it has always
been rare, and little specific scientific
information is available regarding its
distribution, abundance, and trends. In
addition, a wide range of intermediate
A. prolifera morphologies exist in
nature, and this further complicates in
situ assessment of abundance and
distribution. For the purpose of the
status review, we did not consider A.
prolifera a species as it does not
interbreed with itself to produce viable
offspring, and is therefore a hybrid for
the reasons summarized below:
1. Recent scientific literature indicates
that individuals of A. prolifera sampled
from throughout the Caribbean region
were all F1 (i.e., first generation)
hybrids of A. palmata and A.
cervicornis. This finding is consistent
with the observed rarity of A. prolifera.
There is also genetic evidence that A.
prolifera has undergone rare
backcrossing with the parent A.
cervicornis on an evolutionary time
scale.
2. Data from a single unpublished
study indicate that A. prolifera does
undergo gametogenesis, but there is no
direct evidence that zygotes are
produced due to colony rarity, or that
successful sexual offspring result.
3. While it is unclear whether or not
A. prolifera’s gametes are viable, it is
highly unlikely that genetically distinct
colonies occur within sufficient
proximity to routinely accomplish
successful fertilization in nature.
Therefore, based on the best
information available and the generally
accepted biological definition of a
species (consisting of related organisms
capable of interbreeding to produce
viable offspring), we determined that A.
prolifera is a hybrid which has not been
shown to interbreed when mature, and
it does not constitute a species under
the ESA.
Furthermore, although fused-staghorn
is known to have backcrossed with
staghorn at some time, similar elkhorn
chromosome mapping has not been
conducted. Therefore, we are reluctant
to identify potential genealogy of the
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
fused-staghorn relative to either elkhorn
or staghorn coral. Instead, we
determined that the hybrid should be
considered a separate entity and that
individuals of this entity are not
considered members of either staghorn
or elkhorn coral populations.
Next, we carefully examined the
definitions of endangered and
threatened species pursuant to section 3
of the ESA wherein: (1) ‘‘endangered
species’’ is defined as ‘‘any species
which is in danger of extinction
throughout all or a significant portion of
its range;’’ and (2) ‘‘threatened species’’
is defined as ‘‘any species which is
likely to become an endangered species
within the foreseeable future throughout
all or a significant portion of its range.’’
Corals are invertebrates, and,
therefore, a listing determination must
be based on the species’ status
throughout ‘‘all or a significant portion’’
of its range. The only information
regarding discreteness or distinctiveness
of Atlantic Acropora populations is a
recent study that examined genetic
exchange and clonal population
structure in A. palmata by sampling and
genotyping colonies from eleven
locations throughout its geographic
range using microsatellite markers.
Results indicate that populations in the
eastern Caribbean (St. Vincent and the
Grenadines, U.S.V.I., Curacao, and
Bonaire) have experienced little or no
genetic exchange with populations in
the western Caribbean (Bahamas,
Florida, Mexico, Panama, Navassa, and
Mona Island). Puerto Rico is an area of
mixing where populations show genetic
contribution from both regions, though
it is more closely connected with the
western Caribbean. Within these
regions, the degree of larval exchange
appears to be asymmetrical with some
locations being entirely self-recruiting
and some receiving immigrants from
other locations within their region. No
similar information exists for A.
cervicornis. These results do not
indicate source or sink areas,
populations that are discrete or distinct,
or any other specific geographic areas
within the Caribbean Sea that should be
considered more or less significant than
another. Because there is no evidence
indicating that any elkhorn or staghorn
population within the geographic range
of the species is more or less important
than others, we considered the entire
geographic range in determining status
of these species.
Based on the ESA definition of an
endangered species, the danger of
extinction must be examined. While the
number (in terms of abundance and
coverage) of elkhorn and staghorn corals
rangewide has precipitously declined
E:\FR\FM\09MYP1.SGM
09MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 88 / Monday, May 9, 2005 / Proposed Rules
over the last 30 years, total number of
colonies and presumably individuals
remains very, very large (although the
absolute number of colonies or coverage
is unquantified). Given the high number
of colonies, the species’ large geographic
range that remains intact (no evidence
of range constriction), and the fact that
asexual reproduction (fragmentation)
provides a source for new colonies
(albeit perhaps clones) which likely
buffers natural demographic and
environmental variability, we believe
that both species retain significant
potential for persistence and are at a low
risk of extinction in the near term.
Additionally, both elkhorn and staghorn
corals have persisted through climate
cooling and heating fluctuation periods
over millions of years as determined by
the geologic record, where other corals
have gone extinct. Therefore, we have
determined as a preliminary matter that
neither elkhorn nor staghorn corals are
in danger of extinction throughout all of
their range.
For many of the same reasons
discussed above, we determined that
both elkhorn and staghorn corals may
meet the ESA definition of threatened
species. First, we established that the
appropriate period of time
corresponding to the foreseeable future
is a function of the particular kinds of
threats, the life-history characteristics,
and the specific habitat requirements for
the species under consideration. It is
also consistent with the purpose of the
ESA that the timeframe for the
foreseeable future be adequate to
provide for the conservation and
recovery of threatened species and the
ecosystems upon which they depend.
Given this conceptual framework and
the fact that some threats such as
hurricanes or major disease outbreaks
can happen at anytime and other threats
happen over longer periods of time (e.g.,
habitat degradation, global climate
change), the slow-growing and late
maturing aspects of the species life
history, and the fact that the current
decline as documented by the BRT
occurred during the last 20 to 30 years,
we have preliminarily determined the
foreseeable future for these species to be
30 years.
We then considered the following
items on the timescale outlined above in
evaluating the status of elkhorn and
staghorn corals:
1. Recent drastic declines in
abundance of both species have
occurred throughout their geographic
range and abundances are at historic
lows;
2. Broad geographic ranges could
become constricted due to local
extirpations resulting from a single
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:24 May 06, 2005
Jkt 205001
stochastic event (e.g., hurricanes, new
disease outbreak);
3. Sexual recruitment is limited in
some areas and unknown in most as
fertilization success from clones is
virtually zero; settlement of larvae is
often unsuccessful given limited
amount of appropriate habitat;
4. The Allee effect is occurring
(fertilization success declines greatly as
adult density declines).
Based upon these facts, we believe
that abundance and distribution of both
elkhorn and staghorn coral are likely to
become further reduced. Furthermore, a
series of local extirpations are likely to
occur within the next 30 years. We
believe that while elkhorn and staghorn
coral are not currently in danger of
extinction throughout all or a significant
portion of their range, they are likely to
become so within the foreseeable future.
Therefore, we propose to list them as
threatened under the ESA.
Analysis of Factors Affecting the
Species
Section 4 of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1533)
and regulations promulgated to
implement the listing provisions of the
ESA (50 CFR part 424) set forth the
procedures for adding species to the
Federal list. Section 4 requires that
listing determinations be based solely
on the best scientific and commercial
data available, without consideration of
possible economic or other impacts of
such determinations. Section 4(a)(1) of
the ESA provides that the Secretary of
Commerce shall determine whether any
species is endangered or threatened
because of any of five specified factors;
these factors and their relevance to the
status of elkhorn and staghorn corals are
analyzed below.
The Present or Threatened Destruction,
Modification, or Curtailment of its
Habitat or Range
Seven stressors (natural abrasion and
breakage, anthropogenic abrasion and
breakage, sedimentation, persistent
elevated temperature, competition,
excessive nutrients and sea level rise)
were identified as threats affecting both
species through present or threatened
destruction, modification, or
curtailment of their habitats or ranges.
This consists of both destruction or
disruption of substrate to grow on, and
modification or alteration of the aquatic
environment in which the corals live.
Although habitat loss has occurred, to
date, the range of these two species has
not been reduced. However, because of
the species’ extremely low abundance,
local extirpations are possible in the
foreseeable future, leading to a
reduction in range.
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
24361
Elkhorn and staghorn corals, like most
corals, require hard, consolidated
substrate (i.e., attached, dead coral
skeleton) for their larvae to settle or
fragments to reattach. When the
substrate is physically disturbed, and
when the attached corals are broken and
reduced to unstable rubble or sediment,
settlement and reattachment habitat is
lost. The most common causes of
natural abrasion and breakage (physical
disturbance) are severe storm events,
including hurricanes. Severe storms can
lead to the complete destruction and
mortality of entire reef zones dominated
by these species as well as destruction
of the habitat on which these species
depend (i.e., by covering settlement,
reattachment and growing surfaces with
unstable rubble and sediment). These
major storms have physically disrupted
reefs throughout the wider Caribbean
and are among the primary causes of
elkhorn and staghorn coral habitat loss
in certain locations. Human activity in
coral reef areas is another source of
abrasion and breakage (anthropogenic),
and thus destruction of A. palmata and
A. cervicornis habitat. These activities
include boating, anchoring, fishing,
recreational SCUBA diving and
snorkeling, and an increasing variety of
maritime construction and development
activities. The shallow habitat
requirements of these two species make
them especially susceptible to impacts
from these anthropogenic activities,
which have been documented as
causing effects similar to severe storms,
though usually on a smaller scale.
Acropora spp. also appear to be
particularly sensitive to shading effects
resulting from increased sediments in
the water column. Because these corals
are almost entirely dependent upon
sunlight for nourishment, they are much
more susceptible to increases in water
turbidity and sedimentation than other
species. Increased sediments in the
water column, which have been
documented to impede larval
settlement, can result from, among other
things, land development and run-off,
dredging and disposal activities, and
major storm events.
Optimal water temperatures for
elkhorn and staghorn coral range from
25 to 29° C, with the species being able
to tolerate higher temperatures for a
brief period of time (e.g., order of days
to weeks depending on the magnitude of
the temperature elevation). Global
atmospheric air and sea temperatures
have been documented as rising over
the past century, and shallow reef
habitats are especially vulnerable. Water
with sea surface temperatures above the
optimal range does not provide suitable
habitat for either of the two species.
E:\FR\FM\09MYP1.SGM
09MYP1
24362
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 88 / Monday, May 9, 2005 / Proposed Rules
Because of their fast growth rates
(relative to other corals) and canopyforming morphology, A. palmata and A.
cervicornis are known to be competitive
dominants within coral communities, in
terms of their ability to overgrow other
stony and soft corals. However, other
types of reef benthic organisms (i.e.,
algae) have higher growth rates and are
expected to have greater competitive
ability than Acropora spp. Under
current physical oceanographic
conditions in shallow, coastal areas (i.e.,
elevated nutrients), algae are typically
out-competing both Acropora spp. for
space on the reef. The consequence of
this competition is that less habitat is
available for the two species to colonize.
Nutrients are added to coral reefs
from both point sources (readily
identifiable inputs where pollutants are
discharged to receiving surface waters
from a pipe or drain) and non-point
sources (inputs that occur over a wide
area and are associated with particular
land uses). Coral reefs have been
generally considered to be nutrientlimited systems, meaning that levels of
accessible nitrogen and phosphorus
limit the rates of plant growth. When
nutrients levels are raised in such a
system, plant growth can be expected to
increase, and this can yield imbalance
and changes in community structure.
The widespread increase in algae
abundance on Caribbean corals reefs has
been attributed to nutrient enrichment.
Therefore, less habitat is available for
elkhorn and staghorn coral larval
settlement or fragment reattachment.
Overutilization for Commercial,
Recreational, Scientific, or Educational
Purposes
Only one stressor under the second
factor identified in section 4(a)(1),
overutilization for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational
purposes, was identified as a potential
threat to elkhorn and staghorn corals:
overharvest for curio/aquarium demand.
Overutilization does not appear to be a
significant threat to either of these two
species given current regulation and
management.
Disease or Predation
Disease was identified as the single
largest cause of both elkhorn and
staghorn coral mortality and decline. It
is also the greatest threat to the two
species’ persistence and recovery given
its widespread, episodic, and
unpredictable occurrence resulting in
high mortality. The threat is exacerbated
by the fact that disease, though clearly
severe, is poorly understood in terms of
etiology and possible links to
anthropogenic stressors. Although the
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:24 May 06, 2005
Jkt 205001
number or identity of specific disease
conditions affecting Atlantic Acropora
spp. and the causal factors involved are
uncertain, several generalizations are
evident. First, both total number of
described Acropora spp. specific
diseases as well as the prevalence and/
or geographic range of impact have
increased over the past decade, and the
trend is expected to continue. Second,
disease has had, and continues to have,
major ongoing impacts on population
abundance and colony condition of both
elkhorn and staghorn coral. Diseases
affecting these species may prevent or
delay their recovery in the wider
Caribbean. Finally, diseases constitute
an ongoing, major threat about which
specific mechanistic and predictive
understanding is largely lacking, thus
precluding effective control or
management strategies.
Acropora spp. are also subject to
invertebrate (e.g., polychaete, mollusk,
echinoderm) and vertebrate (fish)
predation, but ‘‘plagues’’ of coral
predators such as the Indo-Pacific
crown-of-thorns outbreaks (Acanthaster
planci) have not been described in the
Atlantic. Predation may directly cause
mortality or injuries that lead to
invasion of other biota (e.g., algae,
boring sponges). The threat of predation,
while apparently much less than that of
disease, is also contributing to the status
of these species.
Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory
Mechanisms
We evaluated existing regulatory
mechanisms (fourth factor identified in
ESA section 4(a)(1)) currently in place
and consisting of enforceable provisions
which are directed at managing threats
to elkhorn and staghorn corals. Most
existing regulatory mechanisms are not
specific to the two species, but were
promulgated to manage corals or coral
reefs in general. While the impact of
many stressors were determined to be
slightly reduced with the
implementation of regulations, none
were totally abated. For example, the
Fishery Management Plan for Coral and
Coral Reefs of the Gulf of Mexico and
South Atlantic (under the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act) protects all corals
from harvest, sale and destruction on
the seabed in U.S. Federal waters during
fishing related activities. In some cases,
elkhorn and staghorn corals are
incidentally destroyed during fishing
practices, and, therefore, the regulation
does not fully abate the threat from
damaging fishing practices.
The major threats to these species’
persistence (i.e., disease, elevated
temperature and hurricanes) are severe,
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
unpredictable, and have increased over
the past 3 decades. At current levels of
knowledge, the threats are
unmanageable, and there is no apparent
indication that these trends will change
in the foreseeable future. No existing
regulatory mechanisms are currently in
place, or expected to be in place in the
foreseeable future, to control or prevent
these major threats to the two species.
In the meantime, managing some of the
stressors determined to be less severe
(e.g., anchoring, vessel groundings,
point and non-point source nutrients,
sedimentation) may assist in decreasing
the rate of A. palmata and A. cervicornis
decline by enhancing coral condition
and decreasing synergistic stress effects.
Other Natural or Manmade Factors
Affecting the Continued Existence of the
Species
We identified eleven stressors that
affect the status of elkhorn and staghorn
corals as a result of other natural or
manmade factors (fifth factor identified
in ESA section 4(a)(1)): elevated
temperature, competition, elevated
nutrients, sedimentation, sea level rise,
abrasion and breakage, contaminants,
loss of genetic diversity, African dust,
elevated carbon dioxide, and sponge
boring. Many of these threats are the
same as those identified in the first
factor (habitat) because the same
mechanism can cause direct impacts to
the organisms in addition to destroying
or disrupting their habitat. Impacts from
some of these stressors are complex,
resulting in synergistic habitat impacts
(first factor identified in ESA section
4(a)(1)).
Elevation of the typical sea surface
temperature in tropical and subtropical
oceans stresses Acropora spp. Global air
and sea surface temperatures have risen
over the past 100 years and shallow reef
habitats are especially vulnerable. When
exposed to elevated temperatures,
elkhorn and staghorn corals expel the
symbiotic algae (bleaching) on which
they depend for a photosynthetic
contribution to their energy budget,
enhancement of calcification, and color.
Temperature induced bleaching affects
growth, maintenance, reproduction, and
survival of these two species. As
summarized in the status review report,
bleaching has been documented as the
source of extensive elkhorn and
staghorn mortality in numerous
locations throughout their range. The
extent of bleaching is a function of the
intensity of the temperature elevation
and the duration of the event.
Along with elevated temperature,
atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have
increased in the last century and there
is no apparent evidence that the trend
E:\FR\FM\09MYP1.SGM
09MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 88 / Monday, May 9, 2005 / Proposed Rules
will not continue. As atmospheric
carbon dioxide is dissolved in surface
seawater, seawater becomes more
acidic, shifting the balance of inorganic
carbon species away from carbon
dioxide and carbonate toward
bicarbonate. This shift decreases the
ability of corals to calcify because corals
are thought to use carbonate (not
bicarbonate) to build their aragonite
skeletons. Experiments have shown the
reduction of calcification in response to
elevated carbon dioxide levels.
Rapid sea level rise was identified as
a potential threat to these species;
however, under current conditions, we
conclude that this stressor is not
affecting either of the two species’
status.
As discussed above, increased
sediments in the water column can
result from, among other things, land
development and run-off, dredging and
disposal activities, and major storm
events. In addition to the habitat
impacts, sedimentation has been shown
to cause direct physiological stress to
elkhorn and staghorn corals. Direct
deposition of sediments on coral tissue
and shading due to sediments in the
water column have both caused tissue
death in these species.
In addition to the habitat impacts
described above, natural and
anthropogenic sources of abrasion and
breakage (i.e., severe storms, vessel
groundings, fishing debris) cause direct
mortality to elkhorn and staghorn
corals. Their branching morphology
make them particularly susceptible to
breakage. The creation of fragments
through breakage is a natural means of
asexual reproduction for these species.
However, the fragments must encounter
suitable habitat to be able to reattach
and create a new colony. Under current
conditions, suitable habitat is often not
available, and entire elkhorn and
staghorn reefs have been destroyed after
these events.
Many of the threats identified as
contributing to the status of elkhorn and
staghorn coral are minor in intensity,
but have an impact nonetheless because
of their extremely reduced population
sizes. Direct competition with other
species, skeleton bioerosion by clionid
sponges, and effects from African dust
all are minor threats, but they are
exacerbating the species’ current status.
The severity of all of the threats
(natural or manmade) ranges from high
(e.g., temperature) to low (e.g., sponge
boring). Some stressors (e.g.,
contaminants and loss of genetic
diversity) are known to be threats to
these two species, but their effect on the
status is undetermined and
understudied.
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:24 May 06, 2005
Jkt 205001
Summary and Synthesis of Analysis of
the Factors Identified in ESA Section
4(a)(1)
We determined that the major factors
affecting the two species are disease,
elevated temperature, and hurricanes.
Other factors identified as contributing
to the status of the species, given their
extremely reduced population sizes, are
sedimentation, anthropogenic abrasion
and breakage, competition, excessive
nutrients, sea level rise, predation,
contaminants, loss of genetic diversity,
African dust, elevated carbon dioxide
levels, and sponge boring.
Basis for Proposed Determination
In accordance with section 4(b)(1)(A)
of the ESA, the determination that the
petitioned action is warranted was
based on the best scientific and
commercial data available. As provided
in 50 CFR 434.13, we used scientific
and commercial publications,
administrative reports, maps, and
information received from experts on
the subject.
As further required by section 4(b)(2),
we considered those efforts being made
by States or foreign nations to protect or
conserve the two species. As discussed
above, the major threats to the two
species are currently unmanageable,
and, therefore, these efforts do not alter
the threatened status of elkhorn and
staghorn corals.
Finally, section 4(b)(1)(B) of the ESA,
requires us to give consideration to
species which (1) have been designated
as requiring protection from
unrestricted commerce by any foreign
nation, or (2) have been identified as in
danger of extinction, or likely to become
so within the foreseeable future, by any
state agency or by any agency of a
foreign nation. All corals are listed
under Appendix II of the Convention on
International Trade in Endangered
Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, which
regulates international trade of species
to ensure survival. Additionally, all
corals, including elkhorn and staghorn
corals, are protected under the U.S.V.I.
Indigenous and Endangered Species Act
of 1990, and both species have been
listed recently in the ‘‘red book’’ of
threatened marine invertebrates of
Colombia by a technical commission
coordinated by the Ministry of the
Environment. Acropora cervicornis was
considered as a critically endangered
species in Colombia and A. palmata was
included as endangered. Thus, the
proposed listing is consistent with
foreign and international actions taken
with regard to these species.
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
24363
Similarity of Appearance of the Hybrid
We also considered the risk to elkhorn
and staghorn corals of not listing fusedstaghorn coral pursuant to ESA section
4(e), Similarity of Appearance Cases.
We determined that listing fusedstaghorn coral under this provision is
not warranted given its rarity, the fact
that it is almost always found amongst
colonies of other Acropora spp., and the
conclusion by the BRT that the threat of
overharvest by curio/aquarium demand
is well regulated.
Effects of Listing
Conservation measures provided for
species listed as endangered or
threatened under the ESA include
recovery actions (16 U.S.C. 1533(f)),
critical habitat designations, Federal
agency consultation requirements (16
U.S.C. 1536), and prohibitions on taking
(16 U.S.C. 1538). Recognition of the
species’ plight through listing promotes
conservation actions by Federal and
state agencies, private groups, and
individuals. Should the proposed listing
be made final, a recovery program
would be implemented, and critical
habitat may be designated. We believe
that to be successful, protective
regulations and recovery programs for
elkhorn and staghorn corals will need to
be developed in the context of
conserving aquatic ecosystem health.
Federal, state and the private sectors
will need to cooperate to conserve the
listed elkhorn and staghorn corals and
the ecosystems upon which they
depend.
Service Policies on Role of Peer Review
On July 1, 1994, we and FWS
published a policy regarding peer
review of scientific data (59 FR 34270).
The intent of this peer review policy is
to ensure that listings are based on the
best scientific and commercial data
available. Prior to a final listing, we
formally solicit expert opinions and
analyses on one or more specific
questions or assumptions. This
solicitation process may take place
during a public comment period on any
proposed rule or draft recovery plan,
during the status review of a species
under active consideration for listing, or
at any other time deemed necessary to
clarify a scientific question. The status
review was peer reviewed by six experts
in the field, with their substantive
comments incorporated in the final
status review
Critical Habitat
Critical habitat is defined in section 3
of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1532(3)) as: (1) the
specific areas within the geographical
area occupied by a species, at the time
E:\FR\FM\09MYP1.SGM
09MYP1
24364
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 88 / Monday, May 9, 2005 / Proposed Rules
it is listed in accordance with the ESA,
on which are found those physical or
biological features (a) essential to the
conservation of the species and (b) that
may require special management
considerations or protection; and (2)
specific areas outside the geographical
area occupied by a species at the time
it is listed upon a determination that
such areas are essential for the
conservation of the species.
‘‘Conservation’’ means the use of all
methods and procedures needed to
bring the species to the point at which
listing under the ESA is no longer
necessary. Section 4(a)(3)(a) of the ESA
(16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)(A)) requires that,
to the extent prudent and determinable,
critical habitat be designated
concurrently with the listing of a
species. If we determine that it is
prudent and determinable, we will
publish a proposed designation of
critical habitat for elkhorn and staghorn
corals in a separate rule.
Public Comments Solicited
To ensure that any final action
resulting from this proposal will be as
accurate and effective as possible, we
are soliciting comments from the public,
other concerned governmental agencies,
the scientific community, industry, and
any other interested parties. Final
promulgation of any regulation(s) on
this species or withdrawal of this listing
proposal will take into consideration the
comments and any additional
information we receive, and such
communications may lead to a final
regulation that differs from this proposal
or result in a withdrawal of this listing
proposal.
Solicitation of Information
In addition to comments on the
proposed rule, we are soliciting
information on areas that may qualify as
critical habitat for elkhorn and staghorn
coral. The physical and biological
features essential to the conservation of
the species and areas that contain these
features should be identified. Areas
outside the occupied geographic area
should also be identified if such areas
are essential to the conservation of the
species. Essential features may include,
but are not limited to: (1) space for
individual growth and for normal
behavior; (2) food, water, air, light,
minerals, or other nutritional or
physiological requirements; (3) cover or
shelter; (4) sites for reproduction and
development of offspring; and (5)
habitats that are protected from
disturbance or are representative of the
historical, geographical, and ecological
distributions of the species (50 CFR
424.12(b)).
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:24 May 06, 2005
Jkt 205001
For areas potentially qualifying as
critical habitat, we also request
information describing: (1) activities or
other threats to the essential features or
activities that could be affected by
designating them as critical habitat, and
(2) the economic costs and benefits
likely to result if these areas are
designated as critical habitat.
Public Hearing Dates and Locations
Public hearings will be held at four
locations in Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin
Islands, and Florida in June. The
specific dates and locations of these
meetings are listed below:
(1) Monday, June 13, 2005, at the
Caribe Hilton, The Flamboyan, San
Geronimo Grounds, Los Rosales St., San
Juan, Puerto Rico 00901, 7–9 p.m.
(2) Tuesday, June 14, 2005, at the
Holiday Inn Windward Passage,
Veterans Drive, Caribbean B Room,
Charlotte Amalie, St. Thomas, U.S.
Virgin Islands, 00804, 7–9 p.m.
(3) Tuesday, June 21, 2005, at the
Marathon Garden Club, 5270 Overseas
Highway, Marathon, FL, 33050, 1:30–
3:30 p.m.
(4) Wednesday, June 22, 2005, at the
Courtyard by Marriott Hotel, Manatee/
Marlin Room, 400 Gulf Stream Way,
Dania Beach, FL, 33004, 7–9 p.m.
Special Accommodations
These public hearings are physically
accessible to people with disabilities.
Requests for sign language
interpretation or other auxiliary aids
should be directed to Jennifer Moore no
later than June 7, 2005 (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT)
Classification
National Environmental Policy Act
The 1982 amendments to the ESA, in
section 4(b)(1)(A), restrict the
information that may be considered
when assessing species for listing. Based
on this limitation of criteria for a listing
decision and the opinion in Pacific
Legal Foundation v. Andrus, 675 F. 2d
825 (6th Cir.1981), NMFS has
concluded that ESA listing actions are
not subject to the environmental
assessment requirements of the National
Environmental Policy Act. (See NOAA
Administrative Order 216–6.)
Executive Order 12866, Regulatory
Flexibility Act and Paperwork
Reduction Act
As noted in the Conference Report on
the 1982 amendments to the ESA,
economic impacts shall not be
considered when assessing the status of
a species. Therefore, the economic
analysis requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act are not applicable to the
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
listing process. In addition, this rule is
exempt from review under Executive
Order 12866. This proposed rule does
not contain a collection-of-information
requirement for the purposes of the
Paperwork Reduction Act.
Federalism
In keeping with the intent of the
Administration and Congress to provide
continuing and meaningful dialogue on
issues of mutual state and Federal
interest, this proposed rule will be given
to the relevant state agencies in each
state in which the species is believed to
occur, who will be invited to comment.
We have conferred with the State of
Florida and the Territories of Puerto
Rico and the U.S.V.I. in the course of
assessing the status of the elkhorn and
staghorn corals, and considered, among
other things, Federal, state and local
conservation measures. As we proceed,
we intend to continue engaging in
informal and formal contacts with the
states and territories, and other affected
local or regional entities, giving careful
consideration to all written and oral
comments received. We also intend to
consult with appropriate elected
officials in the establishment of any
final rule.
References
Acropora Biological Review Team.
2005. Atlantic Acropora Status Review
Document. Report to National Marine
Fisheries Service, Southeast Regional
Office. March 3, 2005. 152 p + App.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 223
Endangered and threatened species,
Exports, Imports, Transportation.
Dated: May 3, 2005.
John Oliver,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Operations, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, 50 CFR part 223 is proposed
to be amended as follows:
PART 223—THREATENED MARINE
AND ANADROMOUS SPECIES
1. The authority for part 223
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq; subpart
B, § 223.12 issued under 16 U.S.C. 1361 et
seq.
2. In § 223.102, add paragraph (e) to
read as follows:
§ 223.102 Enumeration of threatened
marine and anadromous species.
*
*
*
*
*
(e) Marine invertebrates. Elkhorn
coral (Acropora palmata), rangewide,
and staghorn coral (Acropora
E:\FR\FM\09MYP1.SGM
09MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 88 / Monday, May 9, 2005 / Proposed Rules
cervicornis), rangewide. Includes United
States Florida, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin
Islands, Navassa; and wider-Caribbean Antigua and Barbuda, Aruba, Bahamas,
Barbados, Belize, British Virgin Islands,
Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominica,
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:24 May 06, 2005
Jkt 205001
Dominican Republic, Grenada,
Guadeloupe, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica,
Martinique, Mexico, Netherlands
Antilles, Nicaragua, Panama, St. Kitts
and Nevis, St. Lucia, St. Vincent and the
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
24365
Grenadines, Trinidad and Tobago, and
Venezuela.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 05–9222 Filed 5–4–05; 3:16 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
E:\FR\FM\09MYP1.SGM
09MYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 88 (Monday, May 9, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 24359-24365]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-9222]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 223
[Docket No. 050304058-5113-02; I.D. 060204C]
RIN 0648-XB29
Endangered and Threatened Species; Proposed Threatened Status for
Elkhorn Coral and Staghorn Coral
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the NMFS, have completed a comprehensive status review of
elkhorn (Acropora palmata) and staghorn (A. cervicornis) corals and
determined that a petitioned action to list both species is warranted.
We have determined that fused-staghorn coral (A. prolifera) is a hybrid
and therefore does not warrant listing. We have made our determination
based on the best scientific and commercial data available and efforts
being made to protect the species, and we propose to place both elkhorn
and staghorn corals on the list of threatened species under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA). We are announcing
that hearings will be held at four locations in June to provide
additional opportunities and formats to receive public input.
DATES: Comments on this proposal must be received by August 8, 2005.
See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for the specific public hearing dates.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by the RIN 0648-XB29, by
any of the following methods:
E-mail: Acropora.Info@noaa.gov. Include Docket Number or
RIN 0648-XB29 in the subject line of the message.
Mail: Assistant Regional Administrator, Protected
Resources Division, NMFS, Southeast Regional Office, Protected
Resources Division, 263 13th Ave. South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701.
Facsimile (fax) to: 727-824-5309.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Instructions: All
submissions received must include the agency name and docket number or
Regulatory Information Number (RIN) for this rulemaking.
See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for public hearing
locations.
The proposed rule and status review are also available
electronically at the NMFS website at https://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/
protres.htm
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer Moore or Stephania Bolden,
NMFS, at the address above or at 727-824-5312, or Marta Nammack, NMFS,
at 301-713-1401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On March 4, 2004, the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD)
petitioned us to list elkhorn, staghorn, and fused-staghorn corals as
either threatened or endangered under the ESA and to designate critical
habitat. On June 23, 2004, we made a positive 90-day finding (69 FR
34995) that CBD presented substantial information indicating that the
petitioned actions may be warranted and announced the initiation of a
formal status review as required by section 4(b)(3)(A) of the ESA.
Concurrently, we solicited additional information from the public on
these acroporid corals regarding historic and current distribution and
abundance, population status and trends, areas that may qualify as
critical habitat, any current or planned activities that may adversely
affect them, and known conservation efforts. Additional information was
requested during two public meetings held in December 2004 on: (1)
distribution and abundance; (2) areas that may qualify as critical
habitat; and (3) approaches/criteria that could be used to assess
listing potential of the acroporids (e.g., viability assessment,
extinction risk, etc.).
In order to conduct a comprehensive status review, we convened an
Atlantic Acropora Biological Review Team (BRT). The members of the BRT
were a diverse group of experts in their fields, including coral
biologists and ecologists; specialists in coral disease, coral
monitoring and restoration, climate change, water quality, coral
taxonomy; regional experts in coral abundance/distribution throughout
the Caribbean Sea; and state and Federal resource managers. The
comprehensive, peer-reviewed status review report developed by the BRT
incorporates and summarizes the best available scientific and
commercial information as of March 2005. It addresses the status of the
species, the five factors identified in ESA section 4(a)(1), and
current regulatory, conservation and research efforts that may yield
protection to the corals. The BRT also reviewed and considered the
petition and materials we received as a result of the Federal Register
document (69 FR 34995) and the public meetings; substantive materials
were incorporated into the status review report.
Distribution and Abundance
Acropora spp. are widely distributed throughout the wider Caribbean
(U.S. Florida, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands (U.S.V.I.), Navassa;
and Antigua and Barbuda, Aruba, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, British
Virgin Islands, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominica, Dominican
Republic, Grenada, Guadeloupe, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, Martinique,
Mexico, Netherlands Antilles, Nicaragua, Panama, St. Kitts and Nevis,
St. Lucia, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Trinidad and Tobago, and
Venezuela). Both elkhorn and staghorn corals used to be the most
abundant and most important species on Caribbean coral reefs in terms
of accretion of reef structure. In general, elkhorn and staghorn corals
have the same distribution, with few exceptions. Staghorn coral's
northern extent (Broward County, Florida) is farther north than that of
elkhorn coral (Miami-Dade County, Florida). Relative to other corals,
both have high growth rates that have allowed reef growth to keep pace
with past changes in sea level. Additionally, both exhibit branching
morphologies that provide important habitat for other reef organisms;
no other Caribbean reef-building coral
[[Page 24360]]
species is able to fulfill these ecosystem functions. At the current
reduced abundance of A. palmata and A. cervicornis, it is highly likely
that both these ecosystem functions have been largely lost.
The third Acropora spp. present in the Caribbean Sea is the fused-
staghorn coral (A. prolifera). Although it has a history in the
taxonomic literature, recent genetic research has determined that it is
an F1 (i.e., first generation) hybrid between A. cervicornis and A.
palmata. While there is genetic evidence that A. prolifera has
backcrossed with A. cervicornis on evolutionary time scales, and it
undergoes gametogenesis, there is no evidence that it interbreeds
(i.e., produces sexual offspring in a cross between two A. prolifera
colonies). For this reason, the BRT did not include fused-staghorn
coral as a species within the status review, and we determined that it
does not meet the definition of a species under the ESA.
Both elkhorn and staghorn corals underwent precipitous declines in
abundance in the early 1980s throughout their range, and this decline
has continued. Although quantitative data on former distribution and
abundance are scarce, in the few locations where quantitative data are
available (i.e., Florida Keys, Dry Tortugas, Jamaica and the U.S.V.I.),
declines in abundance are estimated at greater than 97 percent.
Although this decline trend has been documented as continuing in the
late 1990s, and even in the past 5 years in some locations, local
extirpations (i.e., at the island or country scale) have not been
documented. While recruitment of new colonies has been reported in
various geographic locations, new recruits appear to be suffering
mortality faster than they can mature (to sizes greater than 1 m in
colony diameter). In a very few locations (e.g., Buck Island Reef
National Monument) moderate recovery of elkhorn coral appears to be
progressing. In most cases the genetic origin of the recruits,
presumably from sexual reproduction, is unknown so that their
contribution to the corals' Caribbean-wide recovery remains
undetermined.
Analysis of the Definitions of Endangered and Threatened Species
We first considered whether all three of the corals listed in the
petition met the definition of ``species'' pursuant to section 3 of the
ESA. The term ``species'' includes ``any subspecies of fish or wildlife
or plants, and any distinct population segment of any species of
vertebrate fish or wildlife which interbreeds when mature.'' Based on
this language, a ``species'' is given its ordinary, accepted biological
meaning.
Species diagnoses for both elkhorn and staghorn were not debated as
both species are recognized as separate taxa in the literature, have
separate and discrete diagnoses and morphologies, and produce viable
gametes, larvae, and successful sexual offspring. On the other hand, we
carefully reviewed and deliberated on the taxonomic diagnosis for
fused-staghorn coral (A. prolifera). While A. prolifera has been
recognized in the taxonomic literature as a species based on
morphology, it has always been rare, and little specific scientific
information is available regarding its distribution, abundance, and
trends. In addition, a wide range of intermediate A. prolifera
morphologies exist in nature, and this further complicates in situ
assessment of abundance and distribution. For the purpose of the status
review, we did not consider A. prolifera a species as it does not
interbreed with itself to produce viable offspring, and is therefore a
hybrid for the reasons summarized below:
1. Recent scientific literature indicates that individuals of A.
prolifera sampled from throughout the Caribbean region were all F1
(i.e., first generation) hybrids of A. palmata and A. cervicornis. This
finding is consistent with the observed rarity of A. prolifera. There
is also genetic evidence that A. prolifera has undergone rare
backcrossing with the parent A. cervicornis on an evolutionary time
scale.
2. Data from a single unpublished study indicate that A. prolifera
does undergo gametogenesis, but there is no direct evidence that
zygotes are produced due to colony rarity, or that successful sexual
offspring result.
3. While it is unclear whether or not A. prolifera's gametes are
viable, it is highly unlikely that genetically distinct colonies occur
within sufficient proximity to routinely accomplish successful
fertilization in nature.
Therefore, based on the best information available and the
generally accepted biological definition of a species (consisting of
related organisms capable of interbreeding to produce viable
offspring), we determined that A. prolifera is a hybrid which has not
been shown to interbreed when mature, and it does not constitute a
species under the ESA.
Furthermore, although fused-staghorn is known to have backcrossed
with staghorn at some time, similar elkhorn chromosome mapping has not
been conducted. Therefore, we are reluctant to identify potential
genealogy of the fused-staghorn relative to either elkhorn or staghorn
coral. Instead, we determined that the hybrid should be considered a
separate entity and that individuals of this entity are not considered
members of either staghorn or elkhorn coral populations.
Next, we carefully examined the definitions of endangered and
threatened species pursuant to section 3 of the ESA wherein: (1)
``endangered species'' is defined as ``any species which is in danger
of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range;''
and (2) ``threatened species'' is defined as ``any species which is
likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future
throughout all or a significant portion of its range.''
Corals are invertebrates, and, therefore, a listing determination
must be based on the species' status throughout ``all or a significant
portion'' of its range. The only information regarding discreteness or
distinctiveness of Atlantic Acropora populations is a recent study that
examined genetic exchange and clonal population structure in A. palmata
by sampling and genotyping colonies from eleven locations throughout
its geographic range using microsatellite markers. Results indicate
that populations in the eastern Caribbean (St. Vincent and the
Grenadines, U.S.V.I., Curacao, and Bonaire) have experienced little or
no genetic exchange with populations in the western Caribbean (Bahamas,
Florida, Mexico, Panama, Navassa, and Mona Island). Puerto Rico is an
area of mixing where populations show genetic contribution from both
regions, though it is more closely connected with the western
Caribbean. Within these regions, the degree of larval exchange appears
to be asymmetrical with some locations being entirely self-recruiting
and some receiving immigrants from other locations within their region.
No similar information exists for A. cervicornis. These results do not
indicate source or sink areas, populations that are discrete or
distinct, or any other specific geographic areas within the Caribbean
Sea that should be considered more or less significant than another.
Because there is no evidence indicating that any elkhorn or staghorn
population within the geographic range of the species is more or less
important than others, we considered the entire geographic range in
determining status of these species.
Based on the ESA definition of an endangered species, the danger of
extinction must be examined. While the number (in terms of abundance
and coverage) of elkhorn and staghorn corals rangewide has
precipitously declined
[[Page 24361]]
over the last 30 years, total number of colonies and presumably
individuals remains very, very large (although the absolute number of
colonies or coverage is unquantified). Given the high number of
colonies, the species' large geographic range that remains intact (no
evidence of range constriction), and the fact that asexual reproduction
(fragmentation) provides a source for new colonies (albeit perhaps
clones) which likely buffers natural demographic and environmental
variability, we believe that both species retain significant potential
for persistence and are at a low risk of extinction in the near term.
Additionally, both elkhorn and staghorn corals have persisted through
climate cooling and heating fluctuation periods over millions of years
as determined by the geologic record, where other corals have gone
extinct. Therefore, we have determined as a preliminary matter that
neither elkhorn nor staghorn corals are in danger of extinction
throughout all of their range.
For many of the same reasons discussed above, we determined that
both elkhorn and staghorn corals may meet the ESA definition of
threatened species. First, we established that the appropriate period
of time corresponding to the foreseeable future is a function of the
particular kinds of threats, the life-history characteristics, and the
specific habitat requirements for the species under consideration. It
is also consistent with the purpose of the ESA that the timeframe for
the foreseeable future be adequate to provide for the conservation and
recovery of threatened species and the ecosystems upon which they
depend. Given this conceptual framework and the fact that some threats
such as hurricanes or major disease outbreaks can happen at anytime and
other threats happen over longer periods of time (e.g., habitat
degradation, global climate change), the slow-growing and late maturing
aspects of the species life history, and the fact that the current
decline as documented by the BRT occurred during the last 20 to 30
years, we have preliminarily determined the foreseeable future for
these species to be 30 years.
We then considered the following items on the timescale outlined
above in evaluating the status of elkhorn and staghorn corals:
1. Recent drastic declines in abundance of both species have
occurred throughout their geographic range and abundances are at
historic lows;
2. Broad geographic ranges could become constricted due to local
extirpations resulting from a single stochastic event (e.g.,
hurricanes, new disease outbreak);
3. Sexual recruitment is limited in some areas and unknown in most
as fertilization success from clones is virtually zero; settlement of
larvae is often unsuccessful given limited amount of appropriate
habitat;
4. The Allee effect is occurring (fertilization success declines
greatly as adult density declines).
Based upon these facts, we believe that abundance and distribution
of both elkhorn and staghorn coral are likely to become further
reduced. Furthermore, a series of local extirpations are likely to
occur within the next 30 years. We believe that while elkhorn and
staghorn coral are not currently in danger of extinction throughout all
or a significant portion of their range, they are likely to become so
within the foreseeable future. Therefore, we propose to list them as
threatened under the ESA.
Analysis of Factors Affecting the Species
Section 4 of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1533) and regulations promulgated
to implement the listing provisions of the ESA (50 CFR part 424) set
forth the procedures for adding species to the Federal list. Section 4
requires that listing determinations be based solely on the best
scientific and commercial data available, without consideration of
possible economic or other impacts of such determinations. Section
4(a)(1) of the ESA provides that the Secretary of Commerce shall
determine whether any species is endangered or threatened because of
any of five specified factors; these factors and their relevance to the
status of elkhorn and staghorn corals are analyzed below.
The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment of
its Habitat or Range
Seven stressors (natural abrasion and breakage, anthropogenic
abrasion and breakage, sedimentation, persistent elevated temperature,
competition, excessive nutrients and sea level rise) were identified as
threats affecting both species through present or threatened
destruction, modification, or curtailment of their habitats or ranges.
This consists of both destruction or disruption of substrate to grow
on, and modification or alteration of the aquatic environment in which
the corals live. Although habitat loss has occurred, to date, the range
of these two species has not been reduced. However, because of the
species' extremely low abundance, local extirpations are possible in
the foreseeable future, leading to a reduction in range.
Elkhorn and staghorn corals, like most corals, require hard,
consolidated substrate (i.e., attached, dead coral skeleton) for their
larvae to settle or fragments to reattach. When the substrate is
physically disturbed, and when the attached corals are broken and
reduced to unstable rubble or sediment, settlement and reattachment
habitat is lost. The most common causes of natural abrasion and
breakage (physical disturbance) are severe storm events, including
hurricanes. Severe storms can lead to the complete destruction and
mortality of entire reef zones dominated by these species as well as
destruction of the habitat on which these species depend (i.e., by
covering settlement, reattachment and growing surfaces with unstable
rubble and sediment). These major storms have physically disrupted
reefs throughout the wider Caribbean and are among the primary causes
of elkhorn and staghorn coral habitat loss in certain locations. Human
activity in coral reef areas is another source of abrasion and breakage
(anthropogenic), and thus destruction of A. palmata and A. cervicornis
habitat. These activities include boating, anchoring, fishing,
recreational SCUBA diving and snorkeling, and an increasing variety of
maritime construction and development activities. The shallow habitat
requirements of these two species make them especially susceptible to
impacts from these anthropogenic activities, which have been documented
as causing effects similar to severe storms, though usually on a
smaller scale.
Acropora spp. also appear to be particularly sensitive to shading
effects resulting from increased sediments in the water column. Because
these corals are almost entirely dependent upon sunlight for
nourishment, they are much more susceptible to increases in water
turbidity and sedimentation than other species. Increased sediments in
the water column, which have been documented to impede larval
settlement, can result from, among other things, land development and
run-off, dredging and disposal activities, and major storm events.
Optimal water temperatures for elkhorn and staghorn coral range
from 25 to 29[deg] C, with the species being able to tolerate higher
temperatures for a brief period of time (e.g., order of days to weeks
depending on the magnitude of the temperature elevation). Global
atmospheric air and sea temperatures have been documented as rising
over the past century, and shallow reef habitats are especially
vulnerable. Water with sea surface temperatures above the optimal range
does not provide suitable habitat for either of the two species.
[[Page 24362]]
Because of their fast growth rates (relative to other corals) and
canopy-forming morphology, A. palmata and A. cervicornis are known to
be competitive dominants within coral communities, in terms of their
ability to overgrow other stony and soft corals. However, other types
of reef benthic organisms (i.e., algae) have higher growth rates and
are expected to have greater competitive ability than Acropora spp.
Under current physical oceanographic conditions in shallow, coastal
areas (i.e., elevated nutrients), algae are typically out-competing
both Acropora spp. for space on the reef. The consequence of this
competition is that less habitat is available for the two species to
colonize.
Nutrients are added to coral reefs from both point sources (readily
identifiable inputs where pollutants are discharged to receiving
surface waters from a pipe or drain) and non-point sources (inputs that
occur over a wide area and are associated with particular land uses).
Coral reefs have been generally considered to be nutrient-limited
systems, meaning that levels of accessible nitrogen and phosphorus
limit the rates of plant growth. When nutrients levels are raised in
such a system, plant growth can be expected to increase, and this can
yield imbalance and changes in community structure. The widespread
increase in algae abundance on Caribbean corals reefs has been
attributed to nutrient enrichment. Therefore, less habitat is available
for elkhorn and staghorn coral larval settlement or fragment
reattachment.
Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
Only one stressor under the second factor identified in section
4(a)(1), overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes, was identified as a potential threat to elkhorn
and staghorn corals: overharvest for curio/aquarium demand.
Overutilization does not appear to be a significant threat to either of
these two species given current regulation and management.
Disease or Predation
Disease was identified as the single largest cause of both elkhorn
and staghorn coral mortality and decline. It is also the greatest
threat to the two species' persistence and recovery given its
widespread, episodic, and unpredictable occurrence resulting in high
mortality. The threat is exacerbated by the fact that disease, though
clearly severe, is poorly understood in terms of etiology and possible
links to anthropogenic stressors. Although the number or identity of
specific disease conditions affecting Atlantic Acropora spp. and the
causal factors involved are uncertain, several generalizations are
evident. First, both total number of described Acropora spp. specific
diseases as well as the prevalence and/or geographic range of impact
have increased over the past decade, and the trend is expected to
continue. Second, disease has had, and continues to have, major ongoing
impacts on population abundance and colony condition of both elkhorn
and staghorn coral. Diseases affecting these species may prevent or
delay their recovery in the wider Caribbean. Finally, diseases
constitute an ongoing, major threat about which specific mechanistic
and predictive understanding is largely lacking, thus precluding
effective control or management strategies.
Acropora spp. are also subject to invertebrate (e.g., polychaete,
mollusk, echinoderm) and vertebrate (fish) predation, but ``plagues''
of coral predators such as the Indo-Pacific crown-of-thorns outbreaks
(Acanthaster planci) have not been described in the Atlantic. Predation
may directly cause mortality or injuries that lead to invasion of other
biota (e.g., algae, boring sponges). The threat of predation, while
apparently much less than that of disease, is also contributing to the
status of these species.
Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
We evaluated existing regulatory mechanisms (fourth factor
identified in ESA section 4(a)(1)) currently in place and consisting of
enforceable provisions which are directed at managing threats to
elkhorn and staghorn corals. Most existing regulatory mechanisms are
not specific to the two species, but were promulgated to manage corals
or coral reefs in general. While the impact of many stressors were
determined to be slightly reduced with the implementation of
regulations, none were totally abated. For example, the Fishery
Management Plan for Coral and Coral Reefs of the Gulf of Mexico and
South Atlantic (under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act) protects all corals from harvest, sale and destruction
on the seabed in U.S. Federal waters during fishing related activities.
In some cases, elkhorn and staghorn corals are incidentally destroyed
during fishing practices, and, therefore, the regulation does not fully
abate the threat from damaging fishing practices.
The major threats to these species' persistence (i.e., disease,
elevated temperature and hurricanes) are severe, unpredictable, and
have increased over the past 3 decades. At current levels of knowledge,
the threats are unmanageable, and there is no apparent indication that
these trends will change in the foreseeable future. No existing
regulatory mechanisms are currently in place, or expected to be in
place in the foreseeable future, to control or prevent these major
threats to the two species. In the meantime, managing some of the
stressors determined to be less severe (e.g., anchoring, vessel
groundings, point and non-point source nutrients, sedimentation) may
assist in decreasing the rate of A. palmata and A. cervicornis decline
by enhancing coral condition and decreasing synergistic stress effects.
Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting the Continued Existence of
the Species
We identified eleven stressors that affect the status of elkhorn
and staghorn corals as a result of other natural or manmade factors
(fifth factor identified in ESA section 4(a)(1)): elevated temperature,
competition, elevated nutrients, sedimentation, sea level rise,
abrasion and breakage, contaminants, loss of genetic diversity, African
dust, elevated carbon dioxide, and sponge boring. Many of these threats
are the same as those identified in the first factor (habitat) because
the same mechanism can cause direct impacts to the organisms in
addition to destroying or disrupting their habitat. Impacts from some
of these stressors are complex, resulting in synergistic habitat
impacts (first factor identified in ESA section 4(a)(1)).
Elevation of the typical sea surface temperature in tropical and
subtropical oceans stresses Acropora spp. Global air and sea surface
temperatures have risen over the past 100 years and shallow reef
habitats are especially vulnerable. When exposed to elevated
temperatures, elkhorn and staghorn corals expel the symbiotic algae
(bleaching) on which they depend for a photosynthetic contribution to
their energy budget, enhancement of calcification, and color.
Temperature induced bleaching affects growth, maintenance,
reproduction, and survival of these two species. As summarized in the
status review report, bleaching has been documented as the source of
extensive elkhorn and staghorn mortality in numerous locations
throughout their range. The extent of bleaching is a function of the
intensity of the temperature elevation and the duration of the event.
Along with elevated temperature, atmospheric carbon dioxide levels
have increased in the last century and there is no apparent evidence
that the trend
[[Page 24363]]
will not continue. As atmospheric carbon dioxide is dissolved in
surface seawater, seawater becomes more acidic, shifting the balance of
inorganic carbon species away from carbon dioxide and carbonate toward
bicarbonate. This shift decreases the ability of corals to calcify
because corals are thought to use carbonate (not bicarbonate) to build
their aragonite skeletons. Experiments have shown the reduction of
calcification in response to elevated carbon dioxide levels.
Rapid sea level rise was identified as a potential threat to these
species; however, under current conditions, we conclude that this
stressor is not affecting either of the two species' status.
As discussed above, increased sediments in the water column can
result from, among other things, land development and run-off, dredging
and disposal activities, and major storm events. In addition to the
habitat impacts, sedimentation has been shown to cause direct
physiological stress to elkhorn and staghorn corals. Direct deposition
of sediments on coral tissue and shading due to sediments in the water
column have both caused tissue death in these species.
In addition to the habitat impacts described above, natural and
anthropogenic sources of abrasion and breakage (i.e., severe storms,
vessel groundings, fishing debris) cause direct mortality to elkhorn
and staghorn corals. Their branching morphology make them particularly
susceptible to breakage. The creation of fragments through breakage is
a natural means of asexual reproduction for these species. However, the
fragments must encounter suitable habitat to be able to reattach and
create a new colony. Under current conditions, suitable habitat is
often not available, and entire elkhorn and staghorn reefs have been
destroyed after these events.
Many of the threats identified as contributing to the status of
elkhorn and staghorn coral are minor in intensity, but have an impact
nonetheless because of their extremely reduced population sizes. Direct
competition with other species, skeleton bioerosion by clionid sponges,
and effects from African dust all are minor threats, but they are
exacerbating the species' current status.
The severity of all of the threats (natural or manmade) ranges from
high (e.g., temperature) to low (e.g., sponge boring). Some stressors
(e.g., contaminants and loss of genetic diversity) are known to be
threats to these two species, but their effect on the status is
undetermined and understudied.
Summary and Synthesis of Analysis of the Factors Identified in ESA
Section 4(a)(1)
We determined that the major factors affecting the two species are
disease, elevated temperature, and hurricanes. Other factors identified
as contributing to the status of the species, given their extremely
reduced population sizes, are sedimentation, anthropogenic abrasion and
breakage, competition, excessive nutrients, sea level rise, predation,
contaminants, loss of genetic diversity, African dust, elevated carbon
dioxide levels, and sponge boring.
Basis for Proposed Determination
In accordance with section 4(b)(1)(A) of the ESA, the determination
that the petitioned action is warranted was based on the best
scientific and commercial data available. As provided in 50 CFR 434.13,
we used scientific and commercial publications, administrative reports,
maps, and information received from experts on the subject.
As further required by section 4(b)(2), we considered those efforts
being made by States or foreign nations to protect or conserve the two
species. As discussed above, the major threats to the two species are
currently unmanageable, and, therefore, these efforts do not alter the
threatened status of elkhorn and staghorn corals.
Finally, section 4(b)(1)(B) of the ESA, requires us to give
consideration to species which (1) have been designated as requiring
protection from unrestricted commerce by any foreign nation, or (2)
have been identified as in danger of extinction, or likely to become so
within the foreseeable future, by any state agency or by any agency of
a foreign nation. All corals are listed under Appendix II of the
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna
and Flora, which regulates international trade of species to ensure
survival. Additionally, all corals, including elkhorn and staghorn
corals, are protected under the U.S.V.I. Indigenous and Endangered
Species Act of 1990, and both species have been listed recently in the
``red book'' of threatened marine invertebrates of Colombia by a
technical commission coordinated by the Ministry of the Environment.
Acropora cervicornis was considered as a critically endangered species
in Colombia and A. palmata was included as endangered. Thus, the
proposed listing is consistent with foreign and international actions
taken with regard to these species.
Similarity of Appearance of the Hybrid
We also considered the risk to elkhorn and staghorn corals of not
listing fused-staghorn coral pursuant to ESA section 4(e), Similarity
of Appearance Cases. We determined that listing fused-staghorn coral
under this provision is not warranted given its rarity, the fact that
it is almost always found amongst colonies of other Acropora spp., and
the conclusion by the BRT that the threat of overharvest by curio/
aquarium demand is well regulated.
Effects of Listing
Conservation measures provided for species listed as endangered or
threatened under the ESA include recovery actions (16 U.S.C. 1533(f)),
critical habitat designations, Federal agency consultation requirements
(16 U.S.C. 1536), and prohibitions on taking (16 U.S.C. 1538).
Recognition of the species' plight through listing promotes
conservation actions by Federal and state agencies, private groups, and
individuals. Should the proposed listing be made final, a recovery
program would be implemented, and critical habitat may be designated.
We believe that to be successful, protective regulations and recovery
programs for elkhorn and staghorn corals will need to be developed in
the context of conserving aquatic ecosystem health. Federal, state and
the private sectors will need to cooperate to conserve the listed
elkhorn and staghorn corals and the ecosystems upon which they depend.
Service Policies on Role of Peer Review
On July 1, 1994, we and FWS published a policy regarding peer
review of scientific data (59 FR 34270). The intent of this peer review
policy is to ensure that listings are based on the best scientific and
commercial data available. Prior to a final listing, we formally
solicit expert opinions and analyses on one or more specific questions
or assumptions. This solicitation process may take place during a
public comment period on any proposed rule or draft recovery plan,
during the status review of a species under active consideration for
listing, or at any other time deemed necessary to clarify a scientific
question. The status review was peer reviewed by six experts in the
field, with their substantive comments incorporated in the final status
review
Critical Habitat
Critical habitat is defined in section 3 of the ESA (16 U.S.C.
1532(3)) as: (1) the specific areas within the geographical area
occupied by a species, at the time
[[Page 24364]]
it is listed in accordance with the ESA, on which are found those
physical or biological features (a) essential to the conservation of
the species and (b) that may require special management considerations
or protection; and (2) specific areas outside the geographical area
occupied by a species at the time it is listed upon a determination
that such areas are essential for the conservation of the species.
``Conservation'' means the use of all methods and procedures needed to
bring the species to the point at which listing under the ESA is no
longer necessary. Section 4(a)(3)(a) of the ESA (16 U.S.C.
1533(a)(3)(A)) requires that, to the extent prudent and determinable,
critical habitat be designated concurrently with the listing of a
species. If we determine that it is prudent and determinable, we will
publish a proposed designation of critical habitat for elkhorn and
staghorn corals in a separate rule.
Public Comments Solicited
To ensure that any final action resulting from this proposal will
be as accurate and effective as possible, we are soliciting comments
from the public, other concerned governmental agencies, the scientific
community, industry, and any other interested parties. Final
promulgation of any regulation(s) on this species or withdrawal of this
listing proposal will take into consideration the comments and any
additional information we receive, and such communications may lead to
a final regulation that differs from this proposal or result in a
withdrawal of this listing proposal.
Solicitation of Information
In addition to comments on the proposed rule, we are soliciting
information on areas that may qualify as critical habitat for elkhorn
and staghorn coral. The physical and biological features essential to
the conservation of the species and areas that contain these features
should be identified. Areas outside the occupied geographic area should
also be identified if such areas are essential to the conservation of
the species. Essential features may include, but are not limited to:
(1) space for individual growth and for normal behavior; (2) food,
water, air, light, minerals, or other nutritional or physiological
requirements; (3) cover or shelter; (4) sites for reproduction and
development of offspring; and (5) habitats that are protected from
disturbance or are representative of the historical, geographical, and
ecological distributions of the species (50 CFR 424.12(b)).
For areas potentially qualifying as critical habitat, we also
request information describing: (1) activities or other threats to the
essential features or activities that could be affected by designating
them as critical habitat, and (2) the economic costs and benefits
likely to result if these areas are designated as critical habitat.
Public Hearing Dates and Locations
Public hearings will be held at four locations in Puerto Rico, the
U.S. Virgin Islands, and Florida in June. The specific dates and
locations of these meetings are listed below:
(1) Monday, June 13, 2005, at the Caribe Hilton, The Flamboyan, San
Geronimo Grounds, Los Rosales St., San Juan, Puerto Rico 00901, 7-9
p.m.
(2) Tuesday, June 14, 2005, at the Holiday Inn Windward Passage,
Veterans Drive, Caribbean B Room, Charlotte Amalie, St. Thomas, U.S.
Virgin Islands, 00804, 7-9 p.m.
(3) Tuesday, June 21, 2005, at the Marathon Garden Club, 5270
Overseas Highway, Marathon, FL, 33050, 1:30-3:30 p.m.
(4) Wednesday, June 22, 2005, at the Courtyard by Marriott Hotel,
Manatee/Marlin Room, 400 Gulf Stream Way, Dania Beach, FL, 33004, 7-9
p.m.
Special Accommodations
These public hearings are physically accessible to people with
disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other
auxiliary aids should be directed to Jennifer Moore no later than June
7, 2005 (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT)
Classification
National Environmental Policy Act
The 1982 amendments to the ESA, in section 4(b)(1)(A), restrict the
information that may be considered when assessing species for listing.
Based on this limitation of criteria for a listing decision and the
opinion in Pacific Legal Foundation v. Andrus, 675 F. 2d 825 (6th
Cir.1981), NMFS has concluded that ESA listing actions are not subject
to the environmental assessment requirements of the National
Environmental Policy Act. (See NOAA Administrative Order 216-6.)
Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Flexibility Act and Paperwork
Reduction Act
As noted in the Conference Report on the 1982 amendments to the
ESA, economic impacts shall not be considered when assessing the status
of a species. Therefore, the economic analysis requirements of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act are not applicable to the listing process.
In addition, this rule is exempt from review under Executive Order
12866. This proposed rule does not contain a collection-of-information
requirement for the purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act.
Federalism
In keeping with the intent of the Administration and Congress to
provide continuing and meaningful dialogue on issues of mutual state
and Federal interest, this proposed rule will be given to the relevant
state agencies in each state in which the species is believed to occur,
who will be invited to comment. We have conferred with the State of
Florida and the Territories of Puerto Rico and the U.S.V.I. in the
course of assessing the status of the elkhorn and staghorn corals, and
considered, among other things, Federal, state and local conservation
measures. As we proceed, we intend to continue engaging in informal and
formal contacts with the states and territories, and other affected
local or regional entities, giving careful consideration to all written
and oral comments received. We also intend to consult with appropriate
elected officials in the establishment of any final rule.
References
Acropora Biological Review Team. 2005. Atlantic Acropora Status
Review Document. Report to National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast
Regional Office. March 3, 2005. 152 p + App.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 223
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports,
Transportation.
Dated: May 3, 2005.
John Oliver,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Operations, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 223 is
proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 223--THREATENED MARINE AND ANADROMOUS SPECIES
1. The authority for part 223 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq; subpart B, Sec. 223.12 issued
under 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.
2. In Sec. 223.102, add paragraph (e) to read as follows:
Sec. 223.102 Enumeration of threatened marine and anadromous species.
* * * * *
(e) Marine invertebrates. Elkhorn coral (Acropora palmata),
rangewide, and staghorn coral (Acropora
[[Page 24365]]
cervicornis), rangewide. Includes United States Florida, Puerto Rico,
U.S. Virgin Islands, Navassa; and wider-Caribbean - Antigua and
Barbuda, Aruba, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, British Virgin Islands,
Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Grenada,
Guadeloupe, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, Martinique, Mexico, Netherlands
Antilles, Nicaragua, Panama, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, St.
Vincent and the Grenadines, Trinidad and Tobago, and Venezuela.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 05-9222 Filed 5-4-05; 3:16 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S