Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Proposed Rule To List Six Foreign Bird Species Under the Endangered Species Act, 71298-71315 [E7-24347]

Agencies

• Fish and Wildlife Service
• DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 241 (Monday, December 17, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 71298-71315]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-24347]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

[96100-1671-0000-W4]
RIN 1018-AV21


Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Proposed Rule To 
List Six Foreign Bird Species Under the Endangered Species Act

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose to 
list three petrel species (order Procellariiformes), the Chatham petrel 
(Pterodroma axillaris), previously referred to as (Pterodroma hypoleuca 
axillaris); Fiji petrel (Pterodroma macgillivrayi); and the magenta 
petrel (Pterodroma magentae) as endangered, pursuant to the Endangered 
Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). In addition, we propose to list 
the Cook's petrel (Pterodroma cookii); Galapagos petrel (Pterodroma 
phaeopygia), previously referred to as (Pterodroma phaeopygia 
phaeopygia); and the Heinroth's shearwater (Puffinus heinrothi) as 
threatened under the Act. This proposal, if made final, would extend 
the Act's protection to these species. The Service seeks data and 
comments from the public on this proposal.

DATES: We must receive comments and information from all interested 
parties by March 17, 2008. Public hearing requests must be received by 
January 31, 2008.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public Comments Processing, 
Attn: RIN 1018-AV21; Division of Policy and Directives Management; U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Suite 222; Arlington, 
VA 22203.
    We will not accept e-mail or faxes. We will post all comments on 
https://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any 
personal information you provide us (see the Public Comments section 
below for more information).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary M. Cogliano, PhD, Division of 
Scientific Authority, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401 N. Fairfax 
Drive, Room 110, Arlington, VA 22203; telephone 703-358-1708; fax, 703-
358-2276; or e-mail, ScientificAuthority@fws.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    In this proposed rule, we propose to list three foreign seabird 
species as endangered, pursuant to the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531, et seq.). 
These species are: the Chatham petrel (Pterodroma axillaris), Fiji 
petrel (Pterodroma macgillivrayi), and magenta petrel (Pterodroma 
magentae). We also propose to list the Cook's petrel (Pterodroma 
cookii), Galapagos petrel (Pterodroma phaeopygia), and Heinroth's 
shearwater (Puffinus heinrothi) as threatened species under the Act. 
All species are considered pelagic, occurring on the open sea generally 
out of sight of land, where they feed year round. They return to 
nesting sites on islands during the breeding season where they nest in 
colonies (Pettingill 1970, p. 206).

Chatham petrel (Pterodroma axillaris)

    The Chatham petrel is also known by its Maori name, ranguru. Fossil 
evidence indicates that this species was once widespread throughout the 
Chatham Islands of New Zealand [New Zealand Department of Conservation 
(NZDOC) 2001b]. However, the species is currently only known to breed 
on South East Island (Rangatira) (BirdLife International 2007a) and, as 
a result of recent release efforts, on Pitt Island (BirdLife 
International News 2006) within the Chatham Islands. The population of 
this species is very small, estimated at 800-1,000 birds based on 
recent research and banding studies (Taylor 2000), and is showing a 
decreasing population trend (BirdLife International 2007a). It is 
estimated that fewer than 200 pairs breed per year (NZDOC 2001b). The 
IUCN considers the Chatham petrel to be ``Critically Endangered'' 
(BirdLife International 2006a).
    Banding studies have shown that young birds of this species remain 
at sea for at least two years before returning to land to breed and 
nest. Based on limited feeding habits data, the species preys on squid 
and small fish (Heather and Robertson 1997, as cited in BirdLife 
International 2000).

Fiji petrel (Pterodroma macgillivrayi)

    Synonyms for the Fiji petrel include Pseudobulweria macgillivrayi 
and Thalassidroma macgillivrayi. Very little information is available 
on the Fiji petrel and its life history. There have only been 12 
substantiated sightings of this species on land since 1965, and a total 
of 13 historically. These sightings have all been on Gau Island 
(BirdLife International 2000), a 52.55-square mile (136.1 km\2\) island 
in Fiji's Lomaiviti archipelago (Wikipedia 2007f). The population of 
this species is very small, estimated at less than 50 birds and is 
showing a decreasing population trend (BirdLife International 2007c). 
The IUCN classifies the Fiji petrel as ``Critically Endangered'' 
(BirdLife International 2006c).

Magenta petrel (Pterodroma magentae)

    The magenta petrel, or Taiko as it is known locally, is native to 
Chatham Island, New Zealand (BirdLife International 2000), the largest 
island in the Chatham Islands chain, covering 348 square miles (900 
km\2\, Wikipedia 2007b). Based on fossil evidence and historical 
records, it is believed that the magenta petrel was once the most 
abundant burrowing seabird on Chatham Island (Bourne 1964, Sutton and 
Marshall 1977, as cited in NZDOC 2001a). It has been reported that 
prior to 1900, indigenous Moriori and Maori harvested thousands of 
petrel chicks for food (Crockett 1994). The limited feeding habits data 
show that the magenta petrel preys on squid (Heather and Robertson 
1997, as cited in BirdLife International 2000).
    The type specimen for the magenta petrel was first collected at sea 
in 1867, and after 10 years of intensive searching the species was re-
discovered in 1978 in

[[Page 71299]]

the southeast corner of Chatham Island (Crockett 1994). Since then, 
additional searches have resulted in the location and banding of 92 
birds (BirdLife International 2007d). The IUCN considers this species 
as ``Critically Endangered'' (BirdLife International 2006d). The 
magenta petrel population is estimated at 120 individuals with a 
decreasing trend (BirdLife International 2007d).

Cook's petrel (Pterodroma cookii)

    Cook's petrel is endemic to the New Zealand archipelago (del Hoyo, 
et al. 1992), which comprises two main islands, the North and South 
Islands, and numerous smaller islands. The total land area of the 
archipelago covers 103,700 square miles (268,680 km\2\, Wikipedia 
2007i). Historically, Cook's petrels were harvested in large numbers as 
a food source by native Moriori (Oliver 1955).
    Although the Cook's petrel was once considered a dominant species 
on these islands, the species' breeding and nesting activities are now 
restricted to islands at the northern and southern limits of its former 
breeding range, including Great Barrier (Aotea), Little Barrier 
(Hauturu), and Codfish (Whenua Hou) Islands (del Hoyo, et al. 1992). 
The species' diet consists primarily of cephalopods, fish, crustaceans, 
and bioluminescent tunicates that can be hunted at night (Imber 1996).
    The IUCN classifies this species as ``Endangered'' (BirdLife 
International 2006b). Although the population on Little Barrier Island 
was thought to be about 50,000 pairs (BirdLife International 2007b), 
using GIS (Geographic Information System) technology, Rayner, et al. 
(2007b) determined that the population is around 286,000 pairs. In 
2006, the Great Barrier Island population was considered to be in 
danger of extirpation because only four nest burrows had been located 
in recent years, and it was estimated that fewer than 20 pairs 
continued to breed on the island. However, the populations on Little 
Barrier and Codfish islands are likely to be increasing (BirdLife 
International 2007b).

Galapagos petrel (Pterodroma phaeopygia)

    The Galapagos petrel is endemic to the Galapagos Islands, Ecuador 
(BirdLife International 2000), and is currently known to occur on the 
archipelago's islands of Santa Cruz, Floreana, Santiago, San 
Crist[oacute]bal, and Isabela, which cover a total land area of 2,680 
square miles (6,942 km\2\, Cruz and Cruz 1987; Vargas and Cruz 2000, as 
cited in BirdLife International 2000). This species feeds mostly on 
squid, fish, and crustaceans (Castro and Phillips 1996, as cited in 
BirdLife International 2000), and has been observed foraging near the 
Galapagos Islands, as well as east and north of the islands (Spear, et 
al. 1995).
    The IUCN classifies the Galapagos petrel as ``Critically 
Endangered'' (BirdLife International 2006e). The total population is 
estimated to be 20,000-60,000 birds with a decreasing population trend 
(BirdLife International 2007e).

Heinroth's shearwater (Puffinus heinrothi)

    Very little information is available on the Heinroth's shearwater 
and its life history. The species' nesting grounds have not been 
located, but observations of the species indicate that the species 
breeds on Bougainville Island in Papua New Guinea, and Kolombangara and 
Rendova Islands in the Solomon Islands (Buckingham, et al. 1995, Coates 
1985, 1990, as cited in BirdLife International 2000).
    The IUCN categorizes this species as ``Vulnerable'' (BirdLife 
International 2006f). The population is estimated at 250-999 birds, 
with an unknown population trend; however, there is no substantial 
evidence of a decline (BirdLife International 2007f).

Previous Federal Action

    Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires the Service to make a 
finding known as a ``90-day finding'' on whether a petition to add, 
remove, or reclassify a species from the list of endangered or 
threatened species has presented substantial information indicating 
that the requested action may be warranted. To the maximum extent 
practicable, the finding shall be made within 90 days following receipt 
of the petition and published promptly in the Federal Register. If the 
Service finds that the petition has presented substantial information 
indicating that the requested action may be warranted (referred to as a 
positive finding), Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires the Service 
to commence a status review of the species if one has not already been 
initiated under the Service's internal candidate assessment process. In 
addition, Section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act requires the Service to make a 
finding within 12 months following receipt of the petition on whether 
the requested action is warranted, not warranted, or warranted but 
precluded by higher-priority listing actions (this finding is referred 
to as the ``12-month finding''). If the listing of a species is found 
to be warranted but precluded by higher-priority listing actions, then 
the petition to list that species is treated as if it is a petition 
that is resubmitted on the date of the finding and is, therefore, 
subject to a new 12-month finding within one year. The Service 
publishes an Annual Notice of Resubmitted Petition Findings (annual 
notice) for all foreign species for which listings were previously 
found to be warranted but precluded.
    On November 24, 1980, we received a petition (1980 petition) from 
Dr. Warren B. King, Chairman, United States Section of the 
International Council for Bird Preservation (ICBP), to add 79 native 
and foreign bird species to the list of Threatened and Endangered 
Wildlife (50 CFR 17.11). The species covered by the 1980 petition 
comprised 19 native species and 60 foreign species, including the six 
seabird species of the family Procellariidae that are the subject of 
this proposed rule. In response to the 1980 petition, we published a 
notice to announce a positive 90-day finding on May 12, 1981 (46 FR 
26464) for 77 species, as two of the foreign species identified were 
already listed under the Act. On January 20, 1984, we published a 12-
month finding within an annual review on pending petitions and 
description of progress on all ESA listing amendments (49 FR 2485). In 
this notice, we found that listing all 58 foreign bird species on the 
1980 petition was warranted but precluded by higher-priority listing 
actions, however, the species were not listed by name. On May 10, 1985, 
we published the first annual notice (50 FR 19761) in which we 
continued to find that listing all 58 foreign bird species on the 1980 
petition was warranted but precluded by higher-priority listing 
actions. In our next annual notice (51 FR 996), published on January 9, 
1986, we found that listing 54 species from the 1980 petition, 
including the six species that are the subject of this proposed rule, 
continued to be warranted but precluded by higher-priority listing 
actions, whereas new information caused us to find that listing the 
four remaining species was no longer warranted. We published additional 
annual notices of findings on July 7, 1988 (53 FR 25511), December 29, 
1988 (53 FR 52746), April 25, 1990 (55 FR 17475), November 21, 1991 (56 
FR 58664), and May 21, 2004 (69 FR 29354). In addition, on September 
28, 1990, we published a final rule (55 FR 39858) to list six species 
from the 1980 petition to the List of Threatened and Endangered 
Wildlife.
    Per the Service's listing priority guidelines that were published 
on September 21, 1983 (48 FR 43098), in our April 23, 2007, Annual 
Notice on

[[Page 71300]]

Resubmitted Petition Findings for Foreign Species (72 FR 20184), we 
determined that listing the six seabird species of family 
Procellariidae was warranted. The six species were selected from the 
list of warranted but precluded species for two reasons. First, this 
family grouping includes more high priority species than any other 
taxonomic family group in our list of warranted but precluded species; 
and, second, because of the significance and similarity of the threats 
to the species. Combining taxonomically related species that face 
similar threats into one proposed rule allows us to maximize our 
limited staff resources and thus increases our ability to complete the 
listing process for warranted-but-precluded species.

Summary of Factors Affecting the Species

    Section 4(a)(1) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533 (a)(1)) and regulations 
promulgated to implement the listing provisions of the Act (50 CFR part 
424) set forth the procedures for adding species to the Federal lists 
of endangered and threatened wildlife and plants. A species may be 
determined to be an endangered or threatened species due to one or more 
of the five factors described in section 4(a)(1) of the Act. These 
factors and their application to the Chatham petrel, Cook's petrel, 
Fiji petrel, Galapagos petrel, magenta petrel, and Heinroth's 
shearwater follow.

Chatham petrel (Pterodroma axillaris)

A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment 
of the Habitat or Range
    The range of this species changes intra-annually based on an 
established breeding cycle. During the breeding season (November to 
June) (NZDOC 2001b), breeding birds return to breeding colonies to 
breed and nest. During the non-breeding season, birds migrate far from 
their breeding range where they remain at sea until returning to breed. 
Therefore, our analysis of Factor A is separated into analyses of: (1) 
The species' breeding habitat and range, and (2) the species' non-
breeding habitat and range.
    BirdLife International (2007a) estimates the range of the Chatham 
petrel to be 436,000 km\2\ (168,300 mi\2\); however, BirdLife 
International (2000) defines ``range'' as the ``Extent of Occurrence, 
the area contained within the shortest continuous imaginary boundary 
which can be drawn to encompass all the known, inferred, or projected 
sites of present occurrence of a species, excluding cases of 
vagrancy.'' Because this reported range includes a large area of non-
breeding habitat (i.e., the sea), our analysis of Factor A with respect 
to the Chatham petrel's breeding range focuses on the islands where the 
species is known to breed.
    The Chatham petrel breeds primarily on one island (BirdLife 
International 2000; NZDOC 2001b), the 0.84 square mile (2.18 km\2\, 
Wikipedia 2007k) South East Island in the Chatham Islands (BirdLife 
International 2000; NZDOC 2001b). In 2002, the NZDOC began efforts to 
expand the species' breeding range by releasing chicks onto Pitt 
Island, an island approximately 2.5 km (1.55 mi) northwest of South 
East Island. Over a four-year time period, 200 chicks were transferred 
to the 40 ha (98.8 acre) Ellen Elizabeth Preece Conservation Covenant 
(Caravan Bush), a fenced, predator-free enclosure on Pitt Island. As of 
2006, four adult birds had returned to the island from the sea to 
breed, and in June, 2006, a pair successfully reared a chick. This 
represents the first time in more than a century that a Chatham petrel 
chick has fledged on Pitt Island (BirdLife International News 2006).
    The Chatham petrel breeds on coastal lowlands and slopes in 
habitats with low forest, bracken, or rank grass (del Hoyo, et al. 
1992). It nests in burrows on flat to moderately sloping ground among 
low vegetation and roots (Marchant and Higgins 1990, as cited in 
BirdLife International 2000). Since the arrival of European explorers, 
this breeding habitat has contracted extensively, largely as a result 
of its conversion to agricultural purposes (NZDOC 2001b; Tennyson and 
Millener 1994).
    We are not aware of any present or threatened destruction or 
modification of the Chatham petrel's habitat on South East Island. This 
island is currently un-inhabited by humans (Wikipedia 2007k), and since 
1954, it has been managed as a reserve for the Chatham petrel. Access 
to this island is restricted by permit. In addition, since 1961, all 
livestock has been removed from the island, allowing the natural 
vegetation to regenerate (Nilsson, et al. 1994). The Chatham petrel's 
fenced, 40 ha (98.8 acre) release area on Pitt Island is protected by a 
conservation covenant, and we are unaware of any present or threatened 
destruction or modification of any of the species' habitat on Pitt 
Island. Therefore, we find that the present or threatened destruction 
or modification of the species' breeding habitat is not a threat to the 
species.
    The Chatham petrel's range at sea is poorly known; the species has 
been recorded on several occasions at sea near South East Island, and 
has been recorded once 12 km (7.5 mi) south of the island (West 1994). 
It is believed that the species migrates to the North Pacific Ocean in 
the non-breeding season, based on the habits of closely related 
species; however, no sightings have been recorded in the Northern 
Hemisphere (Taylor 2000). We are unaware of any present or threatened 
destruction, modification, or curtailment of this species' current sea 
habitat or range.
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or 
Educational Purposes
    We are unaware of any commercial, recreational, scientific, or 
educational purpose for which the Chatham petrel is currently being 
utilized.
C. Disease or Predation
    The Chatham petrel's breeding range was reduced extensively 
following the arrival of European explorers, largely due to predation 
by introduced species such as rats (Rattus spp.), feral cats (Felis 
catus), and weka (Gallirallus australis), an introduced bird (Heather 
and Robertson 1997, as cited in BirdLife International 2000; NZDOC 
2001b; Taylor 2000). Although no introduced predators are currently 
present on South East Island, there is an ongoing risk that predators 
will be introduced to the island by boats transporting conservation and 
research staff to the island. Given this risk, combined with the 
devastating impact introduced predators had on Chatham petrel 
populations historically, we find that predation by introduced species 
is a threat to the Chatham petrel on South East Island, the species' 
primary breeding location.
    On Pitt Island, Chatham petrel chicks were released within a 40 ha 
(98.8 acre) fenced, predator-free breeding habitat. Although this area 
is fenced, and the threat of predation on nesting Chatham petrels is 
reduced, introduced predators, such as feral cats and weka, are present 
on this island (BirdLife International News 2002) and could potentially 
get inside the fenced area or prey on Chatham petrels that leave the 
fenced area. Therefore, we find that predation by introduced species is 
a threat to the Chatham petrel on Pitt Island.
    We are unaware of any threats due to predation on Chatham petrels 
during the non-breeding season while the species is at sea.
    The information available suggests that petrels in general are 
susceptible to a variety of diseases and parasites, particularly during 
the breeding season, when large numbers of seabirds

[[Page 71301]]

congregate in relatively small areas to breed and nest (BirdLife 
International 2007a; Carlile, et al. 2003). However, there are no 
documented records of diseases impacting the persistence of the Chatham 
petrel. Therefore, we find that the threat of diseases is not a 
significant threat to this species.
D. The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
    The Chatham petrel is protected from disturbance and harvest under 
New Zealand's Wildlife Act of 1953 and its Reserves Act of 1977. The 
petrel is designated as a Category A species by the NZDOC, which 
signifies the species is of the highest priority for conservation 
management (Molloy and Davis 1999). As such, the NZDOC developed a ten-
year recovery plan for the Chatham petrel in 2001, with the goals of 
protecting the species' breeding burrows on South East Island from the 
broad-billed prion (Pachyptila vittata) (see Factor E below) and 
establishing a reintroduced population elsewhere within the species' 
historic breeding range (NZDOC 2001b). A measure of the success of this 
recovery plan is the successful establishment of breeding individuals 
on Pitt Island (see Factor A above) in 2006, thereby increasing the 
breeding range of the species. These efforts are beginning to show some 
success (see Factor E below), but it is too early to know the level of 
success, because it can take fledged seabirds years to return to their 
breeding colony to breed and nest (Taylor 2000). Similarly, protection 
of Chatham petrel burrows has reduced the population impacts resulting 
from competition with the broad-billed prion (see Factor E below), 
however, this threat remains the greatest threat to the species.
    New Zealand ratified the Agreement on the Conservation of 
Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP) in November 2001, which is designed to 
reduce impacts of fishing operations on populations of Procellariids 
(ACAP 2001), however the Chatham petrel is not listed in Annex 1 to 
this Agreement and, therefore, is not protected under this Agreement. 
Therefore, implementation of this Agreement has not reduced the threat 
of incidental take of this species in long-line fisheries (see Factor E 
below).
    Therefore we find that existing regulatory protections have not 
significantly reduced or removed the threats to the Chatham petrel.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting the Continued Existence 
of the Species
    Based on the information available, the predominant threat to the 
Chatham petrel is nest burrow competition between this species and the 
more abundant broad-billed prion, which numbers around 300,000 
individuals. The prion not only occupies potential Chatham petrel 
burrows, but has been observed actively evicting or lethally attacking 
eggs, nestlings, and occasionally adults of the Chatham petrel. Such 
competition has resulted in a high rate of pair bond disruption and a 
low rate of breeding success in Chatham petrels, despite the high 
percentage of egg-fertility (BirdLife International 2000; NZDOC 2001b).
    To reduce the threat posed by competition with the broad-billed 
prion on South East Island, the NZDOC has implemented nest site 
protection efforts for the Chatham petrel, including placement of 
artificial nest sites and the blockage of burrows to prevent occupation 
by the broad-billed prion (NZDOC 2001b). During the 2005-2006 breeding 
season, out of 155 known breeding pairs, 83 percent of the pairs 
successfully fledged one chick per pair (Wikipedia 2007d). Although 
these actions are improving the petrel's breeding success (NZDOC 2001b; 
Taylor 1999, as cited in BirdLife International 2000), only a small 
proportion of breeding burrows occupied by Chatham petrels have been 
located and, therefore, protected (Taylor 1999, as cited in BirdLife 
International 2000). Therefore, we consider nest burrow competition 
between this species and the broad-billed prion to be a significant 
threat to the Chatham petrel.
    The Chatham petrel's restricted breeding range puts the species at 
a greater risk of extinction. Breeding colonies were once widespread 
throughout the Chatham Islands (NZDOC 2001b), a group of about 10 
islands within a 24.85 mile [40-kilometer (km)] radius covering a total 
land area of 373 square miles (966 km\2\, Wikipedia 2007c). Currently, 
however, breeding of this species is restricted to South East Island 
(BirdLife International 2007a) and, as a result of recent release 
efforts, Pitt Island (BirdLife International News 2006), a total land 
area of less than 1 mi\2\ (Wikipedia 2007j,k). This habitat area is 
insufficient for the long-term survival of the Chatham petrel, 
particularly since breeding pairs, eggs, and nestlings on South East 
Island, the primary breeding area of this species, face the pervasive 
threat of nest-site competition with the broad-billed prion. It is 
estimated that the self-sustainability of the breeding population on 
Pitt Island as a result of the release program will take longer than 
four more years to achieve (NZDOC 2001b).
    The Chatham petrel's restricted breeding range combined with its 
colonial nesting habits and small population size of 800-1,000 birds 
(Taylor 2000) makes the species particularly vulnerable to the threat 
of adverse random, naturally occurring events (e.g., cyclones, fire) 
that destroy breeding individuals and their breeding habitat. Fire is a 
high risk in the Chatham Islands because the climate is very dry during 
the summer, and the vegetation becomes tinder dry. If fires do occur, 
the remoteness of the islands renders the fires unlikely to be 
exterminated by human intervention. Burrow-nesting species such as the 
Chatham petrel are at a high risk because they are likely to suffocate 
from smoke inhalation or to be lethally burned inside or while 
attempting to escape from their burrows (Taylor 2000).
    Another natural disaster, severe storms, has impacted New Zealand 
historically, and so the likelihood of future impacts of storms is 
high. A severe storm in 1985 stripped two islands in the Chatham 
Islands chain bare of vegetation and soil cover, causing high increases 
in egg mortality of nesting albatrosses (Taylor 2000). Considered the 
worst recorded cyclone in New Zealand's history, Cyclone Giselle hit 
New Zealand April 10, 1968, with wind speeds of 275 km/h (Wikipedia 
2007). Although we are unaware of the impact of this cyclone on the 
Chatham petrel's population numbers or breeding habitat, the severity 
of the wind or waves created by such a storm has potential to 
significantly damage Chatham petrel burrows. These burrows are 
particularly vulnerable because they are located on coastal lowlands 
(del Hoyo, et al. 1992), and they are extremely fragile, occurring in 
soft soils (Taylor 2000).
    While species with more extensive breeding ranges or higher 
population numbers could recover from adverse random, naturally 
occurring events such as fire or storms, the Chatham petrel does not 
have such resiliency. Its very small population size and restricted 
breeding range puts the species at higher risk for experiencing the 
irreversible adverse effects of random, naturally occurring events. 
Therefore, we find that the combination of factors--the species' small 
population size, restricted breeding range, and likelihood of adverse 
random, naturally occurring events--to be a significant threat to the 
species.
    We are unaware of any documented cases of incidental take of 
Chatham petrels by commercial long-line fishing operations or 
entanglement in marine

[[Page 71302]]

debris; however, it is generally recognized that all seabirds are at 
high risk of injury or mortality when they attempt to take bait from 
long-line fishing gear. The lack of data on these impacts could be a 
result of the species' low population number. Dr. Michael Rands, 
Director and Chief Executive of BirdLife International, has reported 
that the number of seabirds killed in long-line fishery operations 
continues to increase, and the long-line fishery, especially operations 
by unlicensed ``pirate'' vessels, is the single greatest threat to all 
seabirds [Australian Antarctic Division (AAD) 2007; BirdLife 
International News 2003]. Therefore, we consider the incidental take of 
Chatham petrels by commercial long-line fishing operations to be a 
significant threat to the species.

Conclusion

    Predation by introduced species is an ongoing threat to the Chatham 
petrel, which historically reduced the species' population numbers. 
Nest burrow competition between the Chatham petrel and the more 
abundant broad-billed prion is a current, on-going threat to the 
Chatham petrel that is of high magnitude that has not been controlled 
by human intervention. The broad-billed prion occupies Chatham petrel 
burrows, actively evicting or lethally attacking eggs, nestlings, and 
occasionally adults of the Chatham petrel, and as a result is reducing 
the Chatham petrel's population which is already very small, estimated 
at 800-1000 individuals. Although the NZDOC has been actively working 
to protect Chatham petrel nest sites from the broad-billed prion, only 
a small proportion of Chatham petrel breeding burrows have been located 
and protected (Taylor 1999, as cited in BirdLife International 2000). 
This threat is magnified by the fact that the impacted area is the 
Chatham petrel's primary breeding location, and the breeding area is 
extremely small, less than 1 mi\2\ in size. The only other location 
where the species has been documented to breed is the 40 ha (98.8 acre) 
enclosed area on Pitt Island where Chatham Petrels were reintroduced. 
It is currently uncertain whether the species will maintain this 
portion of its range as a breeding area; as of 2006, only one pair 
breeding in this area had successfully reared a chick.
    Once a population is reduced below a certain number of individuals, 
it tends to rapidly decline towards extinction (Franklin 1980; Gilpin 
and Soule 1986; Soule 1987). The Chatham petrel's small population, 
combined with its restricted breeding range and colonial nesting habits 
makes the species particularly vulnerable to the threat of random, 
naturally occurring events. These catastrophic events, such as cyclones 
and fire, are known to occur in New Zealand and have the potential to 
destroy breeding individuals and their breeding habitat.
    The threats within the species' breeding range are compounded by 
the threat posed by long-line fishing in the species' non-breeding 
range. Although New Zealand implements measures to protect other 
seabird species from this threat under the Agreement on the 
Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels, the Chatham petrel is not 
currently offered protection by this Agreement. We are unaware of any 
documentation on the level of Chatham petrel mortality caused by long-
line fisheries; however, the number of seabirds killed in long-line 
fishery operations continues to increase, and the long-line fishery, 
especially operations by unlicensed ``pirate'' vessels, is the single 
greatest threat to all seabirds (AAD 2007; BirdLife International News 
2003). Therefore, the magnitude of this threat to the species in its 
non-breeding range is significant. Because the survival of this species 
is dependent on recruitment of chicks from its breeding range, the 
severity of threats to the Chatham petrel within its breeding range 
puts the species in danger of extinction throughout its range. 
Therefore, we find the Chatham petrel to be in danger of extinction 
throughout all of its range. Because we find that the Chatham petrel is 
endangered throughout all of its range, there is no reason to consider 
its status in a significant portion of its range.

Fiji petrel (Pterodroma macgillivrayi)

A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment 
of the Habitat or Range
    Although little is known about the Fiji petrel and its life 
history, based on general information common to all other Procellariid 
species, we know that the range of the Fiji petrel changes intra-
annually based on an established breeding cycle. During the breeding 
season, breeding birds return to breeding colonies to breed and nest. 
During the non-breeding season, birds migrate far from their breeding 
range where they remain at sea until returning to breed. Therefore, our 
analysis of Factor A is separated into analyses of: (1) The species' 
breeding habitat and range, and (2) the species' non-breeding habitat 
and range.
    BirdLife International (2007c) estimates the range of the Fiji 
petrel to be 154,000 km2 (59,460 mi2); however, 
BirdLife International (2000) defines ``range'' as the ``Extent of 
Occurrence, the area contained within the shortest continuous imaginary 
boundary which can be drawn to encompass all the known, inferred, or 
projected sites of present occurrence of a species, excluding cases of 
vagrancy.'' Because this reported range includes a large area of non-
breeding habitat (i.e., the sea), our analysis of Factor A with respect 
to the Fiji petrel's breeding range focuses on the island where the 
species breeds.
    Although the nesting area of this species has not been located 
(Priddel, et al. draft), the information available indicates that the 
species breeds on Gau Island, Fiji, where the few recorded sightings of 
this species on land have occurred (Priddel, et al. draft; RARE 
Conservation 2006a; Watling and Lewanavanua 1985). The species was 
originally known from just one specimen collected in 1855 on Gau 
Island. There were no additional confirmed sightings of the species 
until 1984 when an extensive, 16-month search on Gau Island revealed 
one additional sighting. The researchers used spotlights and recorded 
collared petrel calls in an attempt to attract petrels to the highlands 
area where the researchers were searching. On the first night of 
spotlighting, a single Fiji petrel flew into the researchers' light. No 
additional birds were found on this search expedition (Watling 1986; 
Watling and Lewanavanua 1985). There have been an additional 16 
reported sightings of this species on land, all on Gau Island, and ten 
additional sightings at sea, however, many of these reports have not 
been substantiated (Priddel, et al. draft). In 2007, Priddell, et al. 
(draft) summarized all these records, specifying which records were 
credible. The researchers determined that of the 17 recorded sightings 
on land between 1965 and 2007, 12 were highly credible based on 
researchers' identification of dead specimens, photographs of 
specimens, or live specimens. In addition to the sightings on land, 
there have been ten sightings at sea, all since 1960. However, none of 
these reports have been substantiated. Based on researcher observation 
or detailed descriptions, three of these reports are considered by 
Priddel, et al. (draft) to be credible.
    We consider the evidence sufficient to conclude that the Fiji 
petrel breeds on Gau Island because: (1) all 12 substantiated sightings 
of the species on land have been on Gau Island; (2) Procellariids 
return to land only for breeding purposes, and (3) the original 
specimen of this species collected in

[[Page 71303]]

1855 was determined to be an immature bird, based on its feathers and 
skull morphology (Bourne 1981, as cited in Priddel, et al. draft; Imber 
1985b; Priddel, et al. draft); so it is reasonable to believe that its 
nest was in the vicinity.
    Based on the locations of Fiji petrel sightings on Gau Island, the 
species' breeding habitat is most likely to be undisturbed mature 
forest on rocky, mountainous ground within the island's cloud forest 
highlands (del Hoyo, et al. 1992; RARE Conservation 2006a). Based on 
the nesting habits of other colonial seabirds, it has been suggested 
that Fiji petrels nest in close proximity to collared petrels 
(Pterodroma leucoptera), which nest on the ground in this rugged 
terrain of interior Gau Island (Watling and Lewanavanua 1985).
    In 1985, it was estimated that over 27 square miles (70 km\2\) of 
forest habitat up to 2,346 feet (715 meters) in elevation is 
potentially suitable for breeding and nesting of Fiji petrels on Gau 
Island (Watling and Lewanavanua 1985). Unlike the lowlands of Gau 
Island which have been cleared to a large extent for settlement, 
agriculture, and forest plantations, the upland interior forests where 
the species is believed to breed, has not been logged (Priddel, et al. 
draft; Veitayaki 2006). The only maintained inland trail leads to a 
telecommunication tower on a mountain peak just below Delaco. The 3,115 
inhabitants of Gau Island live in coastal villages, where the majority 
live by subsistence fishing and farming, maintaining gardens up to 300 
m in elevation. Although low-level forestry activities occur in lowland 
areas, no other intensive industry or agriculture is practiced on the 
island (Priddel, et al. draft). Veitayaki (2006) noted that the 
practice of shifting cultivation on Gau Island using improved machinery 
and the indiscriminant use of fire is rapidly progressing toward the 
cloud forests within the interior of the island. However, no 
information was provided to show this is actually occurring.
    Veitayaki (2006), described a community-based conservation project 
on Gau Island that has been in place since 2001, whereby villagers in 
the district of Vanuaso Tikina are collaborating with the University of 
the South Pacific to sustainably manage their environmental resources. 
Goals of the project include preservation of the upland cloud forest, 
adoption of sustainable land use practices, protection of drinking 
water, and development of alternative sources of livelihood. The 
success of this project has provided momentum beyond the Vanuaso Tikina 
district, as there is interest in incorporating the same sustainable-
use practices in the other villages on Gau Island (Veitayaki 2006).
    In 2003, the World Resources Institute (WRI) reported that less 
than 1% (.88%) of Fiji's total land area is protected to such an extent 
that it is preserved in its natural condition (Earth Trends 2003a). Gau 
Island, however, is relatively pristine compared to most areas of Fiji 
due to the semi-subsistence lifestyle (Veitayaki 2006). The Fiji people 
show great pride in the Fiji petrel, making it the emblem of the 
national airline (Air Fiji) and presenting it on the Fijian Fifty-
dollar banknote (Priddel, et al. draft). Legislation has been drafted 
to protect the Fiji petrel's habitat on Gau Island, once nesting 
colonies have been located (RARE Conservation 2006a) (see Factor D, 
below). Because Gau Island's upland forest habitat, where the species 
is most likely to breed, remains in a pristine condition and does not 
appear to be threatened with destruction or modification, we find that 
the present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of 
this species' breeding habitat or range is not a threat to the species.
    The Fiji petrel's range at sea is poorly known; the species has 
been recorded once at sea near Gau Island and once at sea 200 km (124.3 
mi) north of Gau Island (Watling 2000, as cited in BirdLife 
International 2000; Watling and Lewanavanua 1985). We are unaware of 
any present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of 
this species' current sea habitat or range.
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or 
Educational Purposes
    We are unaware of any commercial, recreational, scientific, or 
educational purpose for which the Fiji petrel is currently being 
utilized.
C. Disease or Predation
    The greatest threat to the long-term survival of the Fiji petrel is 
thought to be predation on breeding birds and their eggs and chicks by 
introduced predators such as rats and feral cats on Gau Island 
(BirdLife International 2000). Since nesting colonies of Fiji petrels 
have not been located, predation on the Fiji petrel has not been 
directly observed. However, cats and Pacific rats (R. exulans) have 
been found in the highland forests of Gau Island, where this species is 
most likely to breed (Imber 1986, as cited in Priddel, et al. draft; 
Watling and Lewanavanua 1985). The path to the telecommunications 
transmitter on the summit of Gau Island may have facilitated the 
movement of feral cats and Pacific and brown rats (R. norvegicus) into 
the Fiji petrel's breeding habitat (Watling 2000, as cited in BirdLife 
International 2000).
    The remains of collared petrels have been found in feral cat scats 
and killings in the highland forests of Gau Island, where the Fiji 
petrel is also believed to breed. It is suggested that the collared 
petrel nests successfully despite this predation threat because its 
synchronized nesting during the first half of the year swamps cat 
predation. The collection of a first-flight young of the Fiji petrel on 
Gau Island in the month of October, however, indicates that this 
species has a more extended or later breeding season, putting this more 
sparsely populated species at greater risk of predation (Watling 1986). 
Cats and rats are known to have caused many local extirpations of other 
petrel species (Moors and Atkinson 1984, as cited in Priddel, et al. 
draft). According to Priddel, et al. (draft) there do not appear to be 
any inaccessible cliffs or mountainous ledges where Fiji petrels could 
nest out of the reach of cats or rats.
    A feral pig (Sus scrofa) population has recently established in 
southern areas of Gau Island and is considered an emerging threat to 
the Fiji petrel (Priddel et al. draft). Feral pigs have caused the 
local extinction of other species of seabirds on numerous islands 
(Moors and Atkinson 1984, as cited in Priddel, et al. draft).
    Protecting Fiji petrel nest sites from introduced predators by 
creating barriers around the nests is not possible at this time because 
the exact location of the nesting sites is unknown. There is no 
information indicating that predator eradication has been attempted on 
Gau Island. Even if a predator eradication program were to be 
implemented, protection of the nest sites would be difficult due to the 
permanent habitation of humans on the island. Even if cats were 
prohibited as pets, there is still a high potential for cats and rats 
to be transported to Gau Island in boats transporting humans or other 
shipments.
    Because the threat of predation by introduced cats and rats has 
severely impacted closely related petrel species, and there are records 
of these introduced predators on Gau Island, especially feral cats and 
rats in the highland forests of Gau where the Fiji petrel is most 
likely to breed, we find that predation is a significant threat to the 
Fiji petrel.
    We are unaware of any threats due to predation on Fiji petrels 
during the non-breeding season while the species is at sea.

[[Page 71304]]

    Although several diseases have been documented in other species of 
petrels (see Chatham petrel Factor C), disease has not been documented 
in the Fiji petrel. Therefore, the significance of this threat to the 
Fiji petrel is unknown.
D. The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
    Although the Fiji petrel is protected from international trade 
under Fijian law (Government of Fiji 2002, 2003), this protection has 
not significantly reduced or removed the threat of predation within the 
species' breeding range, nor has it reduced the threat posed by long-
line fisheries (see Factor E below) within its range at sea.
    Community awareness of the conservation significance of the Fiji 
petrel has been promoted in Fiji. From 2002-2004, Milika Rati, a local 
conservationist on Gau Island, led a ``Pride campaign'' (RARE 
Conservation 2006a), a constituency-building program developed by the 
conservation organization RARE (RARE Conservation 2006b). Ms. Rati 
chose the Fiji petrel as the flagship mascot for this movement and used 
a series of high-profile activities to raise awareness of the 
conservation urgency of the species. This campaign resulted in a 
confirmed sighting of a Fiji petrel (RARE Conservation 2006a). A 
follow-up survey to the campaign revealed that 99 percent of the 
participants believed natural resource protection to be important, and 
94 percent were aware that the Fiji petrel is at risk of extinction.
    Based on increased public awareness of the Pride campaign, a formal 
agreement supporting the creation of a bird sanctuary for the species 
was signed by all 16 of Fiji's village chiefs (RARE Conservation 
2006a).
    The Australian Regional National Heritage Programme continues to 
fund the Pride campaign on Gau Island. The Wildlife Conservation 
Society, BirdLife International, and the National Trust of the Fiji 
Islands are collaborating to work towards implementation of 
conservation recommendations made by Ms. Rati, including minimizing 
predators (RARE Conservation 2006a).
    Although the Fiji petrel is protected from international trade 
(Government of Fiji 2002, 2003) by Fijian law and public awareness and 
support for the species' protection on Gau Island is strong, these 
conservation measures have not significantly reduced the threats to the 
species.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting the Continued Existence 
of the Species
    Because of the paucity of recorded sightings of this species (see 
discussion of Factor A above), the population is apparently very small. 
The IUCN estimates the population to be less than 50 individuals, with 
a decreasing trend due to predation by introduced predators (BirdLife 
International 2007c). Species with such small population sizes are at 
greater risk of extinction. Once a population is reduced below a 
certain number of individuals, it tends to rapidly decline towards 
extinction (Franklin 1980; Gilpin and Soule 1986; Soule 1987).
    This species' risk of extinction is further compounded by its 
restricted current breeding range, which according to the best 
available information is limited to Gau Island, where an estimated 27 
square miles (70 km\2\) of potential breeding habitat is available. 
However, based on what is known about the species, this is considered a 
relatively small amount of appropriate habitat for breeding, 
particularly since breeding pairs, eggs, and nestlings on Gau Island 
face the pervasive threat of predation by introduced species such as 
feral cats and rats.
    The Fiji petrel's restricted breeding range combined with its 
colonial nesting habits and small population size of less than 50 birds 
(BirdLife International 2007c) makes the species particularly 
vulnerable to the threat of adverse random, naturally occurring events 
(e.g., cyclones, flooding, and landslides) that destroy breeding 
individuals and their breeding habitat. Fiji is vulnerable to the 
devastating affects of cyclones inter-annually between November and 
April. On average, 15 cyclones affect this country each decade (World 
Meteorological Organization 2004). The most severe cyclone in within 
the past 100 years was cyclone Kina in January, 1993, with wind speeds 
of 120 knots spanning an area 180 miles (289.7 km) from its center. The 
Government of Fiji declared the area a disaster, because virtually all 
areas of Fiji were impacted by this cyclone and the associated flooding 
(UN Department of Humanitarian Affairs 1993). Landslides are common in 
Fiji's mountainous areas during these severe weather conditions (World 
Meteorological Organization 2004), and would be particularly 
threatening to breeding Fiji petrels and their breeding habitat.
    While species with more extensive breeding ranges or higher 
population numbers could recover from adverse random, naturally 
occurring events such as cyclones, the Fiji petrel does not have such 
resiliency. Its very small population size and restricted breeding 
range puts the species at higher risk for experiencing the irreversible 
adverse effects of random, naturally occurring events. One such event 
could destroy the entire known breeding population on Gau Island.
    Therefore, we find that the combination of factors--the species' 
small population size, restricted breeding range, and likelihood of 
adverse random, naturally occurring events--to be a significant threat 
to the species.
    Although we are unaware of any documented cases of incidental take 
of Fiji petrels by commercial long-line fishing operations or 
entanglement in marine debris, these long-line fishing operations have 
been identified as a threat to all seabird species (see analysis under 
Chatham petrel, Factor E). Moreover, the lack of data on these impacts 
to the Fiji petrel could be a result of the species' low population 
number. Therefore, we find the incidental take of Fiji petrels by 
commercial long-line fishing operations to be a significant threat to 
the species.

Conclusion

    The primary threat to the Fiji petrel is most likely predation by 
introduced feral cats and rats within the species' breeding range. The 
probability of introduced predators preying on this species is high 
given that introduced feral cats are documented to prey upon the 
closely related collared petrel in the interior forests of Gau Island 
where the Fiji petrel is most likely to nest. Furthermore, the 
devastating impact of predation by introduced species has been 
documented in several closely-related species. There is no information 
indicating that predator eradication has been attempted on Gau Island. 
This threat is magnified by the fact that the threat likely threatens 
the species throughout its breeding range, the interior forests of Gau 
Island. Although the Fiji petrel is legally protected from 
international trade, to our knowledge Fiji has not successfully 
implemented measures to protect the species from the threat of 
predation.
    The Fiji petrel's low population size of less than 50 individuals 
puts the species at a high risk of extinction. The low population size 
combined with its restricted breeding and colonial nesting habits, 
typical of all Procellariid species, makes the species particularly 
vulnerable to the threat of random, naturally occurring events (e.g., 
cyclones) that are known to occur in Fiji

[[Page 71305]]

and have the potential to destroy breeding individuals and their 
breeding habitat.
    The threats within the species' breeding range are compounded by 
the threat posed by long-line fishing in the species' non-breeding 
range. There is no information indicating that Fiji has implemented 
measures to protect the species from long-line fishery activities. 
However, because the survival of this species is dependent on 
recruitment of chicks from its breeding range, the severity of threats 
to the Fiji petrel within its breeding range puts the species in danger 
of extinction throughout all of its range. Therefore, we find the Fiji 
petrel to be in danger of extinction throughout all of its range. 
Because we find that the Fiji petrel is endangered throughout all of 
its range, there is no reason to consider its status in a significant 
portion of its range.

Magenta petrel (Pterodroma magentae)

A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment 
of the Habitat or Range of the Magenta Petrel
    The range of this species changes intra-annually based on an 
established breeding cycle. During the breeding season (September to 
May) (Imber, et al. 1994b; Taylor 1991), breeding birds return to 
breeding colonies to breed and nest. During the non-breeding season, 
birds migrate far from their breeding range where they remain at sea 
until returning to breed. Therefore, our analysis of Factor A is 
separated into analyses of: (1) The species' breeding habitat and 
range, and (2) the species' non-breeding habitat and range.
    BirdLife International (2007d) estimates the range of the magenta 
petrel to be 1,960,000 km\2\ (7,568,000 mi\2\); however, BirdLife 
International (2000) defines ``range'' as the ``Extent of Occurrence, 
the area contained within the shortest continuous imaginary boundary 
which can be drawn to encompass all the known, inferred, or projected 
sites of present occurrence of a species, excluding cases of 
vagrancy.'' Because this reported range includes a large area of non-
breeding habitat (i.e., the sea), our analysis of Factor A with respect 
to the magenta petrel's breeding range focuses on the islands where the 
species is known to breed.
    The magenta petrel breeds exclusively on Chatham Island, New 
Zealand, within relatively undisturbed inland forests (Crockett 1994; 
Imber, et al. 1994a). At least 23 breeding burrows have been 
discovered, all located near the Tuku-a-Tamatea River (BirdLife 
International 2007d; Brooke 2004, Hilhorst 2000, Taylor 2005, as cited 
in BirdLife International 2007d). Although some breeding burrows are on 
private land (Taylor 2000), the majority of known breeding burrows are 
located within the Tuku Nature Reserve (Reserve) (Chatham Island Taiko 
Trust 2007). This Reserve was established in 1984 to protect 5 square 
miles (12 km\2\) of magenta petrel breeding habitat. In 1993, 1 square 
mile (2 km\2\) of contiguous forested land was added to the Reserve by 
covenant, and a second covenant expected to be approved in the near 
future will protect an additional 4 square miles (11 km\2\) of 
contiguous habitat to the Reserve (Chatham Island Taiko Trust 2007).
    As a result of New Zealand's Biodiversity Strategy, initiated in 
the year 2000, all logging of indigenous forests on government land has 
been halted, and logging on private land is required to be sustainable 
(Green and Clarkson 2005). Breeding burrows have been found on private 
land (Taylor 2000), and sustainable logging practices would not 
necessarily protect these magenta petrel nest sites. The significant 
loss of magenta petrel burrows and colonies historically due to the 
alteration of habitat on Chatham Island for livestock grazing purposes 
(Crockett 1994) demonstrates the severe impacts that habitat alteration 
has on magenta petrel populations. Besides logging, fire is a threat to 
the magenta petrel's breeding habitat. Although the species' recovery 
plan identifies accidental fire as a threat to the magenta petrel, it 
does not address mitigation of this threat (NZDOC 2001a). The NZDOC 
deals with an average of 160 fires in New Zealand each year, suggesting 
that fires are relatively common in New Zealand (NZDOC n.d.). Taylor 
(2000) identifies flooding of burrows as a threat, given that most 
known burrows are in wet areas in valley floors. He also notes that 
destruction of nest-sites by pigs and dogs accompanying pig-hunters 
near the burrows threatens the magenta petrel's breeding habitat. These 
threats to the magenta petrel's breeding habitat are magnified by the 
species' restricted habitat area on Chatham Island. Because of the very 
small number of breeding pairs, any loss of breeders from the 
population would increase the species' threat of extinction. Therefore, 
we find that the present and threatened destruction of the habitat of 
this species to be a significant threat to the species.
    The magenta petrel's range at sea is poorly known; however, 
research has documented foraging behavior south and east of the Chatham 
Islands (Imber, et al. 1994a). In addition, because the original 
specimen of this species was shot at sea eastwards in the temperate 
South Pacific Ocean, it is believed birds disperse there during the 
non-breeding season. We are unaware of any present or threatened 
destruction, modification, or curtailment of this species' current sea 
habitat or range.
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or 
Educational Purposes
    We are unaware of any commercial, recreational, scientific, or 
educational purpose for which the magenta petrel is currently being 
utilized.
C. Disease or Predation
    The available information suggests that the most serious threat to 
the magenta petrel is predation on all life stages (eggs, chicks, and 
adults) of the species by introduced predators, including feral cats, 
pigs, weka, and rats. It is reported that periodically the species' 
entire annual breeding production is lost due to predation of eggs and 
chicks (BirdLife International 2007d). Permanent eradication of these 
introduced predators from Chatham Island is difficult due to the 
permanent habitation of humans on the island. Since the early 1990's, 
however, the NZDOC has monitored known breeding burrows and has 
implemented an intensive predator control program, including setting 
extensive trap lines and poisoning to remove introduced predators from 
the magenta petrel's breeding areas (Taylor 2000). This effort has 
significantly reduced the threat of predation on adult petrels, with 
only two being found dead in 20 years, as of the year 2000. However, a 
number of chicks are still lost in some seasons (Imber, et al. 1998). 
As additional burrows have been located and protection from predation 
expanded over the years, breeding has increased and breeding success 
has improved. In 1994, only four breeding pairs were known, but in 
2004, 15 breeding pairs were observed (Brooke 2004, Hilhorst 2000, 
Taylor 2005, as cited in BirdLife International 2007d). Sixteen chicks 
were known to have fledged from 1987-2000 (Taylor 2000), and within a 
single year, 2002, a total of seven chicks fledged (BirdLife 
International 2007d). Eight birds fledged in the 2005 season, and a 
record 11 magenta petrel chicks fledged in the 2006 season (Chatham 
Island Taiko Trust 2006).
    Even though the predator control program has decreased the threat 
of predation to the magenta petrel, birds, especially chicks, are still 
killed by introduced predators, and only areas where petrels are known 
to breed are

[[Page 71306]]

protected. Therefore, we find predation by introduced species to be a 
significant threat to the species.
    We are unaware of any threats due to predation on magenta petrels 
during the non-breeding season while the species is at sea.
    Although several diseases have been documented in other species of 
petrels (see Chatham petrel Factor C), disease has not been documented 
in the magenta petrel. Therefore, the significance of this threat to 
this species is unknown.
D. The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
    The magenta petrel is protected from disturbance and harvest under 
New Zealand's Wildlife Act of 1953 and its Reserves Act of 1977. The 
petrel is designated as a Category A species by the NZDOC, which 
signifies the species is of the highest priority for conservation 
management (Molloy and Davis 1999). As such, the NZDOC developed a ten-
year recovery plan for the magenta petrel in 2001, with the goals of 
preventing further loss of known breeding pairs, maximizing 
productivity at known breeding burrows, locating and protecting 
additional burrows, and establishing an additional predator-proof 
breeding area in southern Chatham Island (NZDOC 2001a). A measure of 
success of the recovery plan has been demonstrated by the successful 
protection of breeding pairs and increased productivity resulting from 
predator control efforts (see Factor C above). However, the threat of 
predation on magenta petrels by introduced species remains the greatest 
threat to the species. In 2006, a second protected area was established 
near the southern coast of Chatham Island at a location where magenta 
petrels were known to have bred in reasonable numbers 90 years ago. 
This 7.5-ha area, protected by landowner covenant, has been fenced to 
exclude livestock in an effort to allow the forest to recover. Within 
this area, 3 ha are enclosed by a predator-proof fence. Loudspeakers 
were placed on the site, and pre-recorded magenta petrel calls are 
being played to attract young males to the ground where it is hoped 
they will begin to dig burrows and eventually find a mate to breed. It 
is too early to know the success of this effort because it is 
anticipated that it will take several years for breeding to begin once 
young males start digging burrows. Captive rearing studies of the 
closely related grey-faced petrel (P. macroptera) have been undertaken, 
and its diet analyzed, to develop methods for captive rearing of 
magenta petrels in captivity should it ever be necessary to `rescue' 
abandoned or malnourished magenta petrel chicks (NZDOC 2001a; Taylor 
2000).
    New Zealand ratified the Agreement on the Conservation of 
Albatrosses and Petrels in November 2001, which is designed to reduce 
impacts of fishing operations on populations of Procellariids (ACAP 
2001), however the magenta petrel is not listed in Annex 1 to this 
Agreement and, therefore, is not protected under this Agreement. 
Therefore, implementation of this Agreement has not significantly 
reduced or removed the threat of incidental take of this species in 
long-line fisheries (see Factor E below).
    Therefore, we find that regulatory protections have not 
significantly reduced the threats to the magenta petrel.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting the Continued Existence 
of the Species
    The magenta petrel population is extremely small, estimated at 120 
individuals based on population surveys (Brooke 2004, Hilhorst 2000, 
Taylor 2005, as cited in BirdLife International 2007d) and is believed 
to be decreasing due to predation by introduced species (BirdLife 
International 2007d). The fact that it took 10 years of intensive 
searching to rediscover the species in 1978 is an indication of the 
rarity of the species. Species with such small population sizes are at 
greater risk of extinction. Once a population is reduced below a 
certain number of individuals, it tends to rapidly decline towards 
extinction (Franklin 1980; Gilpin and Soule 1986; Soule 1987).
    This species' risk of extinction is compounded by its restricted 
breeding range, which is limited to Chatham Island. Based on what is 
known about the species, the breeding habitat available on Chatham 
Island is a relatively small amount of appropriate habitat for 
breeding, particularly since breeding pairs, eggs, and nestlings on 
Chatham Island continue to be threatened by introduced species such as 
feral cats and rats.
    The magenta petrel's restricted breeding range combined with its 
colonial nesting habits and small population size of less than 
approximately 120 birds makes the species particularly vulnerable to 
the threat of adverse random, naturally occurring events (e.g., storms, 
fire) that destroy breeding individuals and their breeding habitat 
(NCDOC 2001b). Fire is a high risk in the Chatham Islands because the 
climate is very dry during the summer, and the vegetation becomes 
tinder dry. Burrow-nesting species such as the magenta petrel are at a 
high risk because they are likely to suffocate from smoke inhalation or 
to be lethally burned inside or while attempting to escape from their 
burrows (Taylor 2000).
    Another natural disaster, severe storms, has impacted New Zealand 
historically (see Chatham petrel discussion of Factor E), and so the 
likelihood of future impacts of storms is high. Although we are unaware 
of the impact of previous cyclones on the magenta petrel's population 
numbers or breeding habitat, the severity of the wind or waves created 
by such storms or flooding associated with storms has potential to 
significantly damage magenta petrel burrows. These known burrows are 
particularly vulnerable to flooding because they are located on valley 
floors (NZDOC 2001a).
    While species with more extensive breeding ranges o