Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Listing the Medium Tree Finch (Camarhynchus pauper) as Endangered Throughout Its Range, 74434-74445 [E8-28998]
Download as PDF
74434
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 236 / Monday, December 8, 2008 / Proposed Rules
Dated: November 25, 2008.
H. Dale Hall,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. E8–29004 Filed 12–5–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[FWS–R9–IA–2008–0108; 96100–1671–
0000–B6]
RIN 1018–AW01
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Listing the Medium Tree
Finch (Camarhynchus pauper) as
Endangered Throughout Its Range
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), propose to
list the medium tree finch
(Camarhynchus pauper) as endangered
under the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (Act). This proposal,
if made final, would extend the Act’s
protection to this species. The Service
seeks data and comments from the
public on this proposed rule.
DATES: We will accept comments
received or postmarked on or before
February 6, 2009. We must receive
requests for public hearings, in writing,
at the address shown in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section by January
22, 2009.
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: FWS–R9–
IA–2008–0108; 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 comments by e-mail
or fax. 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:
Monica A. Horton, Division of Scientific
Authority, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Room
110, Arlington, VA 22203; telephone
703–358–1708; facsimile 703–358–2276.
If you use a telecommunications device
for the deaf (TDD), call the Federal
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:06 Dec 05, 2008
Jkt 217001
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at
800–877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Comments
We intend that any final action
resulting from this proposal will be as
accurate and as effective as possible.
Therefore, we request comments or
suggestions on this proposed rule. We
particularly seek comments concerning:
(1) Biological, commercial trade, or
other relevant data concerning any
threats (or lack thereof) to this species
and regulations that may be addressing
those threats.
(2) Additional information concerning
the range, distribution, and population
size of this species, including the
locations of any additional populations
of this species.
(3) Any information on the biological
or ecological requirements of the
species.
(4) Current or planned activities in the
areas occupied by the species and
possible impacts of these activities on
this species.
You may submit your comments and
materials concerning this proposed rule
by one of the methods listed in the
ADDRESSES section. We will not
consider comments sent by e-mail or fax
or to an address not listed in the
ADDRESSES section.
If you submit a comment via https://
www.regulations.gov, your entire
comment—including any personal
identifying information—will be posted
on the Web site. If you submit a
hardcopy comment that includes
personal identifying information, you
may request at the top of your document
that we withhold this information from
public review. However, we cannot
guarantee that we will be able to do so.
We will post all hardcopy comments on
https://www.regulations.gov.
Comments and materials we receive,
as well as supporting documentation we
used in preparing this proposed rule,
will be available for public inspection
on https://www.regulations.gov, or by
appointment, during normal business
hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Division of Scientific
Authority, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Room
110, Arlington, VA 22203; telephone
703–358–1708.
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires
us to make a finding (known as a ‘‘90day finding’’) on whether a petition to
add a species to, remove a species from,
or reclassify a species on the Federal
List of Endangered and Threatened
Wildlife and Plants has presented
substantial information indicating that
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
the requested action may be warranted.
To the maximum extent practicable, the
finding must be made within 90 days
following receipt of the petition and
published promptly in the Federal
Register. If we find that the petition has
presented substantial information
indicating that the requested action may
be warranted (a positive finding),
section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires us
to commence a status review of the
species if one has not already been
initiated under our internal candidate
assessment process. In addition, section
4(b)(3)(B) of the Act requires us 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’’). Section 4(b)(3)(C) of the Act
requires that a finding of warranted but
precluded for petition species should be
treated as having been resubmitted on
the date of the warranted but precluded
finding, and is, therefore, subject to a
new finding within 1 year and
subsequently thereafter until we take
action on a proposal to list or withdraw
our original finding. 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.
Previous Federal Actions
On May 6, 1991, we received a
petition (hereafter referred to as the
1991 petition) from the International
Council for Bird Preservation (ICBP) to
add 53 species of foreign birds to the
List of Endangered and Threatened
Wildlife (50 CFR 17.11(h)), including
the medium tree finch, which is the
subject of this proposed rule. In
response to the 1991 petition, we
published a positive 90-day finding on
December 16, 1991 (56 FR 65207), for all
53 species, and announced the initiation
of a status review. On March 28, 1994
(59 FR 14496), we published a 12-month
finding on the 1991 petition, along with
a proposed rule to list 30 African birds
under the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
In that document, we proposed listing
15 of the 53 bird species included in the
1991 petition, and announced our
finding that listing the remaining 38
species from the 1991 petition,
including the medium tree finch, was
warranted but precluded because of
other listing activity.
On May 21, 2004 (69 FR 29354) and
April 23, 2007 (72 FR 20184), we
published in the Federal Register
notices announcing our annual petition
findings for foreign species. In those
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 236 / Monday, December 8, 2008 / Proposed Rules
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS
notices, we made warranted but
precluded findings for all outstanding
foreign species from the 1991 petition,
including the medium tree finch, which
is the subject of this proposed rule.
Per the Service’s listing priority
guidelines (September 21, 1983; 48 FR
43098), our 2007 annual notice of
review (ANOR) (April 23, 2007; 72 FR
20184) identified the listing priority
numbers (LPNs) (ranging from 1 to 12)
for all outstanding foreign species,
including the medium tree finch, which
was designated with an LPN of 11. The
medium tree finch does not represent a
monotypic genus. As reported in the
2007 ANOR, the magnitude of threat to
the species was moderate, as the species
was common in the forested highlands
and its habitat had not been highly
degraded. The immediacy of threat was
not imminent because the species’
habitat is protected by the area’s
National Park and World Heritage Site
status.
On January 23, 2008, the United
States District Court ordered the Service
to propose listing rules for five foreign
bird species, actions which had been
previously determined to be warranted
but precluded: Andean flamingo
(Phoenicoparrus andinus), blackbreasted puffleg (Eriocnemis nigrivestis),
Chilean woodstar (Eulidia yarrellii),
medium tree finch (Camarhynchus
pauper), and St. Lucia forest thrush
(Cichlherminia lherminieri
sanctaeluciae). The court ordered the
Service to issue proposed listing rules
for these species by the end of 2008.
On July 29, 2008 (73 FR 44062), we
published in the Federal Register a
notice announcing our annual petition
findings for foreign species. In that
notice, we announced that proposing 30
taxa for listing under the Act is
warranted. In order to comply with the
recent court order, the medium tree
finch was included as one of the 30 taxa
for which listing is warranted.
Species Information
The medium tree finch
(Camarhynchus pauper) is endemic to
the island of Floreana in the Galapagos
Islands, Ecuador (BirdLife International
2008; Harris 1982, p. 150; Sibley and
Monroe 1990, p. 771). It is one of the 14
species of Darwin’s finches, collectively
named in recognition of Charles
Darwin’s work on the theory of
evolution (Grant 1986, p. 6), and is
approximately 12.5 centimeters (cm) (5
inches (in)) in length (BirdLife
International 2008; Harris 1982, p. 150).
Medium tree finches have wings and
tails that are short and rounded, and
often hold their tail slightly cocked in
a wren-like manner (Jackson 1985, p.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:29 Dec 05, 2008
Jkt 214001
188). Males have a black head, neck,
and upper breast (Fitter et al. 2000, p.
78; Harris 1982, p. 150; Jackson 1985, p.
188), and an underside that is graybrown, and white or yellowish in color
(BirdLife International 2008). Their tail
and back is olive green (Fitter et al.
2000, p. 78). Females have a head that
is more gray-brown (BirdLife
International 2008), and a body that is
generally olive-green above and pale
yellowish below (Fitter et al. 2000, p.
78). It is similar to the large and small
tree finches of the same genus, but
differs from the large tree finch
(Camarhynchus psittacula) primarily
due to its significantly smaller and less
parrot-like beak, and from the small tree
finch (Camarhynchus parvulus) because
of its larger beak (BirdLife International
2008; Harris 1982, p. 150). It is also
known as the Charles tree finch, the
Santa Maria tree finch, and the Floreana
tree finch (Sibley and Monroe 1990, p.
771), due to the fact that the island of
Floreana is also referred to as Charles
Island or Santa Maroa Island, the official
Spanish name of the island (Grant 1986,
Appendix; Harris 1973, p. 265). The
´
species is locally known as ‘‘Pinzon
´
Mediano de Arbol’’ (Castro and Phillips
1996, p. 130). The species was first
taxonomically described by Ridgeway in
1890 (Sibley and Monroe 1990, p. 771).
Habitat and Life History
Floreana, one of the 19 principal
islands that make up the Galapagos
archipelago (McEwen 1988, p. 234), is
173 square kilometers (km2) (67 square
miles (mi2)) in area, and has a maximum
elevation of 640 meters (m) (2,100 feet
(ft)) (Swash and Still 2005, p. 10).
The medium tree finch mainly occurs
in the moist highland forests (i.e., the
Scalesia zone, named for the dominant
plants, Scalesia spp., found in this zone)
(Christensen and Kleindorfer 2008, in
preparation; Stewart 2006, p. 193),
primarily above 300 m (984 ft) (Castro
and Phillips 1996, p. 130). The Scalesia
zone begins at an altitude between 180
(Wiggins and Porter 1971, p. 22) and
200 m (591–656 ft), and ends at
approximately 600 m (1,968 ft)
(Stephenson 2000, p. 34), and is the first
of the moist zones found on the
Galapagos Islands (Fitter et al. 2000, p.
137).
On Floreana, the Scalesia zone is a
lush evergreen cloud forest dominated
by Scalesia pedunculata (daisy tree), the
largest of the 20 species of Scalesia
found in the Galapagos (Fitter et al.
2000, p. 137; Jackson 1985, p. 95).
Scalesia form dense stands (Fitter et al.
2000, p. 137), with S. pedunculata
frequently reaching 15 m (49 ft) in
height, and can reach up to 20 m (66 ft)
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
74435
or more given good environmental
conditions (Fitter et al. 2000, p. 137;
Wiggins and Porter 1971, p. 22).
The Scalesia zone on Floreana is also
dominated by the endemic trees Croton
´
scouleri (Galapagos croton) and
Zanthoxylum fagara (lime prickly-ash),
with other dominant plants including
Phoradendron henslowii (mistletoe), the
shrub Macraea laricifolia, and
introduced fruit species such as Citrus
limetta, Passiflora edulis, and Psidium
guajava (Christensen and Kleindorfer
2008, in preparation). Beneath the top of
the canopy, epiphytes (plants that live
on another plant without causing harm
to the host plant) cover trunks,
branches, twigs, and even the leaves of
some plant species (Fitter et al. 2000, p.
137; Wiggins and Porter 1971, p. 24).
Common epiphytes found in the
Scalesia zone are mosses, liverworts,
ferns, Peperomia, bromeliads (such as
Tillandsia), and orchids (Fitter et al.
2000, p. 137; Jackson 1985, p. 60;
Wiggins and Porter 1971, pp. 22, 24).
Epiphytes are a prominent feature of the
moist zones of the Galapagos Islands
because of the large amount of time that
clouds and mist cover the upper
elevations of the higher islands (Fitter et
al. 2000, p. 137).
A large amount of the Scalesia zone
has been destroyed on the inhabited
islands because it is the best area for
agriculture (Fitter et al. 2000, p. 137;
´
Jackson 1985, p. 61). The garua (dense
sea mist that sometimes blankets the
highlands) keeps the area well-watered
during the cool season (Fitter et al.
2000, p. 137; Jackson 1985, p. 61),
which makes the area ideal for
agricultural use.
Stotz et al. (1996) reported that the
elevational zone in which the medium
tree finch is most common is ‘‘Hill
Tropical,’’ described as hills and lower
slopes, between 500–900 m (1,640–
2,953 ft) (pp. 121, 262). The species
reaches its minimum elevation in
relatively low-relief lowland areas and
reaches its maximum elevation at 600 m
(1,969 ft) (Stotz et al. 1996, p. 262). As
a result, one can infer from this data that
the medium tree finch is predominantly
found at the highest end of its
elevational distribution, between 500
and 600 m (1,640 and 1,969 ft).
According to Stotz et al. (1996), the
medium tree finch uses more than one
level at which it forages within its
habitat; specifically, they noted that it
can be found foraging from the
understory (undergrowth) to the canopy
(pp. 120, 262). In addition, Bowman
(1963) reports that Camarhynchus
species spend a little less than 25
percent of their time foraging at the
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
74436
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 236 / Monday, December 8, 2008 / Proposed Rules
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS
ground level, while spending the
majority of their time foraging above
ground (p. 132). The medium tree finch
uses its powerful tip-biting bill to search
under twigs and foliage, probe crevices
in the bark of trees, and cut into tough
woody tissues in search of insect larvae
(Bowman 1963, pp. 117, 125), which is
its primary food source (Bowman 1963,
p. 121). The species also feeds, to a
lesser extent, on seeds (Bowman 1963,
p. 121), nectar, young buds, and leaves
(Castro and Phillips 1996, p. 130).
The peak breeding season for the
medium tree finch is February–April
(O’Connor et al. 2008b, in preparation).
The species prefers to nest in the tree
Scalesia pedunculata (O’Connor et al.
2008b, in preparation), and has an
average clutch size of two to four eggs
(O’Connor et al. 2008a, in preparation).
The nests of Darwin’s finches are
similar in construction from one species
to another; the male builds a domeshaped nest, made from twigs, grass,
pieces of bark, lichens, feathers, and
other materials, with a small, round,
side entrance (Jackson 1985, p. 191). In
a study of the nesting success of the
small tree finch in the highlands of
Santa Cruz Island in the Galapagos,
Kleindorfer (2007) found that all nests
were located 6 to 10 m (20 to 33 ft)
above the ground, on horizontal
branches of Scalesia pedunculata, and
positioned by interweaving surrounding
smaller twigs and leaves (p. 796).
Range and Distribution
According to BirdLife International
(2008), the current range of the medium
tree finch is estimated to be 23 km2 (9
mi2). The species’ range encompasses
the entire highland area of Floreana;
however, the medium tree finch is
restricted to fragmented forest patches
within the highlands, which total
approximately 12 km2 (4.5 mi2) to 17
km2 (6.5 mi2) of available habitat
(O’Connor et al. 2008b, in preparation).
Harris (1982) reported that the species
was common in the highlands on
Floreana and uncommon to rare on the
coast (p. 150).
Population numbers of this species
are poorly known, with an indirect
estimation at 1,000 to 2,499 birds in the
year 2000 (BirdLife International 2008).
Fessl et al. (2006a) reported that there
were about 300 breeding pairs
remaining on Floreana (p. 745). In a
study by O’Connor et al. (2008b, in
preparation), they compared bird
abundance survey data from 2004 and
2008 in order to estimate the population
density of the medium tree finch in the
highlands of Floreana. Based on the
results of their study, O’Connor et al.
(2008b, in preparation) estimate that the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:06 Dec 05, 2008
Jkt 217001
total medium tree finch population
currently consists of 860–1,220
individuals (72 birds/km2 (28 birds/
mi2), calculated as an average over the
4 survey sites in 2008). Their study also
showed that the population density of
the species at Cerro Pajas, the largest
patch of prime Scalesia habitat (9 km2
(3.5 mi2)), decreased from 154 birds/
km2 (59 birds/mi2) in 2004 to 60 birds/
km2 (23 birds/mi2) in 2008 (O’Connor et
al. 2008b, in preparation).
Conservation Status
The medium tree finch is identified as
a ‘‘critically endangered’’ species under
Ecuadorian law, Decree No. 3,516—
Unified Text of the Secondary
Legislation of the Ministry of
Environment (ECOLEX 2003b). This
poorly known species is considered
‘‘Vulnerable’’ by the International Union
for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)
because it has a very small range and is
restricted to a single island where
introduced species are considered a
potential threat to the species and its
habitat (BirdLife International 2008).
Stotz et al. (1996) described the
conservation priority for the medium
tree finch as ‘‘high,’’ which they defined
as a species that is ‘‘threatened,’’ usually
because of range or habitat restriction,
and already showing signs of serious
population decline (p. 262).
Summary of Factors Affecting the
Species
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533),
and its implementing regulations at 50
CFR 424, set forth the procedures for
adding species to the Federal Lists of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants. A species may be
determined to be an endangered or
threatened species due to one or more
of the five factors described in section
4(a)(1) of the Act. The five factors are:
(A) The present or threatened
destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range; (B)
overutilization for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational
purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D)
the inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms; and (E) other natural or
manmade factors affecting its continued
existence.
A. The Present or Threatened
Destruction, Modification, or
Curtailment of its Habitat or Range
Floreana has the longest history of
human habitation of any of the
Galapagos Islands (Fitter et al. 2000, p.
207; Schofield 1989, p. 229); it was first
settled in 1832, three years before
Darwin’s historic visit (Jackson 1985, p.
3; Stewart 2006, pp. 55, 68; Sulloway
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2008a, in litt.). Human settlement has
resulted in changes to the habitat on
Floreana, including clearing of native
vegetation for agriculture and ranching,
as well as the introduction of nonnative
animals and plants (Grant et al. 2005, p.
501).
The medium tree finch prefers to nest
and forage in the tree Scalesia
pedunculata (O’Connor et al. 2008b, in
preparation). Currently, S. pedunculata
only occurs in small patches in the
highlands of Floreana because the
highlands have been cleared for
agriculture, destroyed by introduced
mammals, and outcompeted by invasive
plants (O’Connor et al. 2008b, in
preparation). Although the Galapagos
National Park covers 97 percent of the
land on the Galapagos Islands, a
disproportionate amount of the limited
moist highlands falls in the remaining 3
percent (Stewart 2006, p. 105). As a
result, a large amount of this area has
been cleared or altered for farming, and
the rest has been degraded or destroyed
by the introduction of animals and
plants (Stewart 2006, p. 105). Currently,
only 12 km2 (4.5 mi2) to 17 km2 (6.5
mi2) of habitat for the medium tree finch
remains in the highlands of Floreana,
and the amount of suitable habitat
continues to decline due to the factors
described below.
Agriculture and Ranching
Birds, such as the medium tree finch,
are currently facing problems in the
highlands of inhabited islands like
Floreana, due to the extensive
destruction and degradation of habitat
resulting from agriculture (BirdLife
International 2008; Castro and Phillips
1996, pp. 22–23; Fitter et al. 2000, p.
74). On Floreana, the highlands (or
Scalesia zone) cover an area of
approximately 21 km2 (8 mi2)
(O’Connor et al. 2008b, in preparation).
Within this highland forest,
approximately 4 km2 (1.5 mi2) has been
cleared for agriculture (O’Connor et al.
2008b, in preparation). Agriculture is
concentrated at higher elevations
because of the availability of richer soil
and greater moisture (Schofield 1989, p.
233). The Scalesia zone is the richest
zone in terms of soil fertility and
productivity (Jackson 1985, p. 61), and,
therefore, has been extensively cleared
for agricultural and cattle ranching
purposes (Grant 1986, p. 30; Harris
1982, p. 37; Jackson 1985, pp. 61, 233).
When the forest is cleared for
agriculture and ranching, or when cattle
are allowed to roam freely within native
vegetation, nesting and foraging sites of
the medium tree finch are destroyed,
which can have a negative effect on the
species (Stotz et al. 1996, p. 121).
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 236 / Monday, December 8, 2008 / Proposed Rules
Introduced Species
Introduced species are currently
considered a major threat to the native
species of the Galapagos Islands
(Causton et al. 2006, p. 121; Fitter et al.
2000, p. 218). Since the early 1800s,
humans have introduced animals and
plants to the Galapagos Islands that
have threatened the native vegetation
(Schofield 1989, pp. 227, 233).
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS
Animals
When settlers arrived on the
Galapagos Islands, they brought with
them domestic animals, some of which
escaped and started feral populations
(Jackson 1985, p. 233). On Floreana,
introduced animals include goats
(Capra hircus), donkeys (Equs asinus),
cattle, and pigs (Christensen and
Kleindorfer 2008, in preparation;
Jackson 1985, p. 232). These animals
impact the island by significantly
altering the habitat (Grant et al. 2005, p.
501; Schofield 1989, pp. 229–233). This
impact, as well as predation of endemic
species by cats (Felis catus) and rats
(Rattus rattus) (discussed under Factor
C), has been linked with the extinction
of at least four bird species on the island
of Floreana: the large ground finch
(Geospiza magnirostris), the sharp
beaked ground finch (Geospiza
difficilis), the Floreana mockingbird
(Nesomimus trifasciatus) (Christensen
and Kleindorfer 2008, in preparation;
Grant et al. 2005, p. 501; Harris 1982,
pp. 36–37; Sulloway 1982, pp. 68–69,
88–89), and, most recently, the warbler
finch (Certhidea fusca) (Grant et al.
2005, p. 501).
Introduced animals magnify the
detrimental effects of clearing large
areas of native vegetation on Floreana
for agriculture and ranching (Grant
1986, p. 30), by further degrading and
destroying the habitat (Grant et al. 2005,
p. 501). The habitat of the medium tree
finch continues to be altered by
herbivore degradation caused by freeranging, domestic livestock (BirdLife
International 2008; Jackson 1985, p. 110;
Lawesson 1986, p. 12). Lawesson (1986)
reported that the Scalesia forest on
Floreana is under the most immediate
threat from introduced animals (p. 13).
Goats: Of all the introduced animals
on the Galapagos Islands, goats are the
most destructive animals (Fitter et al.
2000, p. 218; Schofield 1989, p. 227)
and the most serious threat to Galapagos
ecosystems (Harris 1982, p. 38; Smith
2005, p. 304). Goats were probably
introduced to the Galapagos Islands in
the 19th century by whalers, fisherman,
and pirates, who were looking for an
alternative source of meat (Charles
Darwin Research Station 2006a; Fitter et
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:06 Dec 05, 2008
Jkt 217001
al. 2000, p. 218). They were also
brought to the islands by settlers as
livestock (Charles Darwin Research
Station 2006a).
Goats adapt to varying conditions
extremely well, and they thrive at all
elevations on the Galapagos Islands
(Schofield 1989, p. 229), from the arid
lowlands to the moist highlands (Fitter
et al. 2000, p. 218), where the medium
tree finch occurs. They have a rapid
reproductive rate, which has allowed
their population to flourish at the
expense of native animals and
vegetation (Jackson 1985, pp. 232–233).
Goats destroy native vegetation by
eating plants down to the ground (Smith
2005, p. 304), converting forests into
barren grasslands and causing erosion
(Charles Darwin Research Station
2006a). Their ability to eat almost
anything has allowed goats to quickly
eat their way across an island (Smith
2005, p. 304). A study of goats on
Santiago Island in the Galapagos
showed that at higher elevations,
grazing by goats had eliminated young
trees of Scalesia pedunculata,
Zanthoxylum fagara, and Psidium
galapageium, in addition to the forest
understory (Schofield 1989, p. 229). On
Floreana, Schofield (1989) reports that
approximately 77 percent of the plant
species, other than cacti, were either
reduced in number or completely
eliminated by goats (p. 229). Although
feral goats have caused considerable
damage to the vegetation in the
highlands of Floreana, where the
medium tree finch occurs (O’Connor
2008, in litt.), an eradication program
begun in 2006 has most likely
eliminated goats from the island of
Floreana (Gardener 2008, in litt.;
O’Connor 2008, in litt.).
Cattle: Cattle were introduced to
Floreana in 1832 (Hoeck 1984, as cited
in Schofield 1989, p. 231). Initially,
cattle were kept at lower elevations, but
with inadequate moisture available in
the lower zones, they were allowed to
move into the highlands (Kastdalen
1982, p. 9), where the medium tree
finch occurs. Cattle trample and heavily
graze upon native vegetation (Hamann
1981 and Van der Werff 1979, as cited
in Schofield 1989, p. 231). When
allowed to roam freely through highland
forests, they essentially destroy the
understory layer (Stotz et al. 1996, p.
121). On Santa Cruz Island, cattle
inhibited growth of Scalesia
pedunculata (Kastdalen 1982, p. 8).
Schofield (1989) reported that no
organized effort had been made to
eliminate cattle, but the Galapagos
National Park Service does encourage
ranchers to fence in herds on Floreana
(p. 232). Although most cattle have been
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
74437
removed from within the boundaries of
the Galapagos National Park (Gardener
2008, in litt.), cattle are still present in
the highlands of Floreana and regularly
roam freely within the habitat of the
medium tree finch (O’Connor 2008, in
litt.)
Donkeys: In 1887, large numbers of
donkeys (Equus asinus) were seen
grazing on hillsides and at the summit
on Floreana (Slevin 1959, as cited in
Schofield 1989, p. 232). By 1932,
donkeys had already tramped out
regular paths through the vegetation on
Floreana (Wittmer 1961, as cited in
Schofield 1989, p. 232). On Santa Cruz,
Kastdalen (1982) noted that they
followed cattle into the humid
highlands (p. 9). Studies have shown
that donkeys on Floreana have depleted
some populations of Scalesia spp. and
Alternanthera nesiotes, another
endemic plant (Eliasson 1982, p. 10).
Today, donkeys still persist in the
highlands of Floreana (Gardener 2008,
in litt.; O’Connor 2008, in litt.), where
the medium tree finch occurs.
Pigs: Pigs (Sus scrofa) have lived on
the Galapagos Islands for over 150 years
(Schofield 1989, p. 232). In 1835,
Darwin remarked upon the many wild
pigs he observed in the forests on
Floreana (Schofield 1989, p. 232). Pigs
live primarily at higher elevations,
where abundant forage is available yearround (Schofield 1989, p. 232). Pigs
destroy native vegetation (Jackson 1985,
p. 233) directly by digging up and eating
plants (Hoeck 1984, as cited in
Schofield 1989, p. 232). Currently, pigs
continue to be maintained in the
agricultural areas of the highlands of
Floreana (O’Connor 2008, in litt.), where
the medium tree finch occurs.
Eradication Programs: Since the
Galapagos National Park and the Charles
Darwin Foundation were established in
1959, efforts to control and eradicate
introduced animals have been ongoing
(Galapagos Conservancy n.d.(a)). In
1965, the Charles Darwin Research
Station began the first eradication
program to rid the Galapagos island of
Santa Fe of goats (Fitter et al. 2000, p.
218). Ten years after the program began,
the last goat was culled, and now the
vegetation on the island has recovered
and native species are beginning to
thrive once again (Fitter et al. 2000, p.
218). Over the years, many of these
control programs have been successful
in eradicating introduced animals from
some of the Galapagos Islands,
including exterminating 25,000 feral
pigs on Santiago Island (Smith 2005, p.
˜
305); removing goats from Espanola,
Plaza Sur, Santa Fe, Marchena and
´
Rabida Islands (Smith 2005, p. 305); and
the very successful ‘‘Project Isabela,’’
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
74438
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 236 / Monday, December 8, 2008 / Proposed Rules
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS
which recently eliminated goats from
Pinta Island, donkeys and goats from
northern Isabela Island, and donkeys,
goats, and pigs from Santiago Island
(Galapagos Conservancy n.d.(b)).
As a result of the success of Project
Isabela, the Charles Darwin Foundation
is planning several projects, in
partnership with the Galapagos National
Park Service, including eradication of
goats and donkeys from Floreana
(Charles Darwin Foundation n.d.(c)). In
December 2006, the Galapagos National
Park started a project with the goal of
restoring the ecology of Floreana
(Galapagos Conservation Trust News
2007). The first phase of ‘‘Project
Floreana’’ is to eradicate some of the
introduced animals, such as goats and
donkeys, in order to stop the continuing
degradation of the vegetation of the
island and allow some of the native and
endemic plant species to recover
(Galapagos Conservation Trust News
2007).
From the experience gained during
Project Isabela, the program was able to
eradicate 98 percent of the donkeys and
goats on Floreana in 22 days (Galapagos
Conservation Trust News 2007).
Currently, goats have been unofficially
eradicated from Floreana; however, the
elimination of donkeys is still in
progress (Gardener 2008, in litt.). A
follow-up census and control effort will
be conducted next year to determine the
results of this eradication program
(Gardener 2008, in litt.). Due to the
removal of these invasive species, it is
expected that within the next few years
the benefits to the ecosystem on
Floreana will be seen (Galapagos
Conservation Trust News 2007). This is
expected to result in an increase in
native flora and fauna, and the
repopulation by native flora and fauna
of areas previously destroyed on
Floreana by herbivore degradation
(Galapagos Conservation Trust News
2007). However, at this time, we believe
that introduced species still pose a
threat to the medium tree finch and its
habitat.
Plants
Introduced plants outcompete native
vegetation for sunlight, water, and
nutrients (Smith 2005, p. 304). Since
agriculture is concentrated at higher
elevations because of the rich soil and
moisture available in these areas,
introduced plants are more frequently
found in the humid highland forests and
often escape from cultivated areas into
native vegetation (Schofield 1989, p.
233). Schofield (1989) found that
accidental escape of introduced plant
species, as well as the purposeful
introduction of these species, had
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:06 Dec 05, 2008
Jkt 217001
altered the highland habitat where tree
finches occur (pp. 233–235).
Christensen and Kleindorfer (2008, in
preparation) found that the medium tree
finch frequently forages on introduced
fruit species. They report that this
observation may suggest that the species
is able to adapt to and potentially
benefit from this change in their
environment (Christensen and
Kleindorfer 2008, in preparation).
However, they did not observe any
species of tree finch, including the
medium tree finch, nesting in an
introduced plant species (Christensen
and Kleindorfer 2008, in preparation). A
further study by O’Connor et al. (2008b,
in preparation) found that the majority
(99 percent) of nests built by medium
tree finches were constructed in native
species, Scalesia pedunculata (83
percent), Zanthoxylum fagara (14
percent), and Croton scouleri (2
percent), with 1 percent of the nests
built in an introduced species, guava
(Psidium guajava).
On Floreana, small populations of
Scalesia forest still exist in the
highlands, but these areas are under
pressure and competition from the
aggressive Psidium guajava and Lantana
camara (Lawesson 1986, p. 13).
Guava: The cultivated guava (Psidium
guajava) with its edible fruits is the
most widespread introduced plant
species on the Galapagos Islands
(Schofield 1989, p. 233). Guava has been
characterized as out of control and
invading vast areas of native vegetation
in the humid highlands on Floreana
(Eckhardt 1972, p. 585; Eliasson 1982, p.
11; Tuoc 1983, p. 25). It is an aggressive,
introduced plant that covers 8,000 ha
(19,768 ac) on Floreana (Parque
´
Nacional Galapagos n.d.(a)).
The dispersal of guava is aided by
introduced cattle, which eat the fruits,
and then wander from the farm into the
National Park and excrete the seeds in
their dung (De Vries and Black 1983, p.
19; Tuoc 1983, p. 25). In addition, as
cattle graze, they trample other
vegetation, providing the open spaces
and abundant light needed for the
germination of guava seeds (Van der
Werff 1979, as cited in Schofield 1989,
p. 233). Once guava becomes
established in an open habitat, they
grow quickly and shade seedlings of
native species like Scalesia
pedunculata, thus preventing their
´
growth (Parque Nacional Galapagos
n.d.(a); Perry 1974, p. 12).
One obvious step to take in order to
minimize the further spread of guava is
to fence cattle (De Vries and Black, p.
19; Tuoc 1983, p. 25). Although some
residents have already done this, herds
of free-ranging cattle are unable to be
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
restricted in this manner (Schofield
1989, pp. 233–234). In 1971, a campaign
was started to cut down guava trees on
Santa Cruz Island (Schofield 1989, p.
234). One report indicated that more
than 95,000 guava trees were eliminated
between 1980 and 1981 (Tuoc 1983, p.
25). Schofield (1989) believes that this
program should be expanded to other
islands with large populations of guava
(p. 234). Currently, we have no
information to indicate that a program
to eliminate guava has occurred on
Floreana.
Other Plant Species: Floreana is also
impacted by other introduced plant
species. Lantana camara was
introduced as an ornamental on
Floreana in 1832, and now covers 3,000
ha (7,413 ac) (Parque Nacional
´
Galapagos n.d.(a)). It is a quick
spreading, tropical shrub that displaces
native vegetation, and is now found on
Floreana from the arid region up to the
Scalesia forest (Hamann 1984, as cited
in Schofield 1989, p. 234). Citrus trees
(Citrus spp.) have been reported as
‘‘common’’ (Eliasson 1982, p. 11) and
have invaded the native vegetation at
higher elevations on Floreana (Eliasson
1982, p. 11; Porter 1973, p. 276). Cattle
and pigs aid in the further spread of
citrus trees (Citrus spp.) by feeding on
the fruits and dispersing seeds in new
locations (Wittmer 1961, as cited in
Schofield 1989, p. 234).
Summary of Factor A
The medium tree finch is found
primarily in the moist highland forests
(i.e., the Scalesia zone) on the island of
Floreana. Since the island was first
settled in 1832, the habitat of the
medium tree finch has been cleared for
agriculture and ranching, and further
degraded by introduced animals and
plants. Herbivores, such as donkeys,
cattle, and pigs, continue to destroy the
species’ habitat by trampling and
grazing heavily on native vegetation,
including Scalesia pedunculata, the tree
primarily used by the medium tree finch
for nesting and foraging. In addition,
cattle and pigs help to spread
introduced plants, such as guava and
citrus trees, by feeding on the fruits and
depositing the seeds into native
vegetation. These introduced plants
outcompete native species, such as
Scalesia pedunculata, reducing the
availability of nest sites for the medium
tree finch. Although an eradication
program was started in December 2006
to eliminate goats and donkeys from
Floreana, we are not aware of any
current programs to remove cattle and
pigs from the island. As a result, these
introduced species will continue to
destroy and degrade the habitat of the
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 236 / Monday, December 8, 2008 / Proposed Rules
medium tree finch, which has already
been reduced to an area of only 12 km2
(4.5 mi2) to 17 km2 (6.5 mi2). Therefore,
we find that habitat destruction of the
moist highland forests of Floreana, as a
result of agriculture and introduced
species, is a threat to the continued
existence of the medium tree finch.
B. Overutilization for Commercial,
Recreational, Scientific, or Educational
Purposes
We are not aware of any scientific or
commercial information that indicates
overutilization of the medium tree finch
for commercial, recreational, scientific,
or educational purposes poses a threat
to this species. As a result, we are not
considering overutilization to be a
contributing factor to the continued
existence of the medium tree finch.
C. Disease or Predation
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS
Disease
The recent discovery of an introduced
parasitic fly (Philornis downsi) on
Floreana Island (Kleindorfer, pers.
comm., as cited in Grant et al. 2005, p.
502; Wiedenfeld et al. 2007, p. 17) has
raised concerns about the impact this
parasite might be having on the medium
tree finch (Dudaniec et al. 2008; Fessl et
al. 2006b, p. 59). In March 1997, Fessl,
Couri, and Tebbich observed the
presence of Philornis downsi in the
nests of Darwin’s finches on the
Galapagos Islands for the first time
(Fessl and Tebbich 2002, p. 445).
Philornis downsi was sampled by the
entomologists S.B. and J. Peck, and B.J.
Sinclair, in 1989, although the fly was
not formally identified until the
collections were examined in detail in
1998 (Fessl and Tebbich 2002, p. 445;
Fessl et al. 2001, p. 318). However, it
now appears that P. downsi was present
on the Galapagos Islands at least 40
years ago, as it was recently identified
from collections made on Santa Cruz
Island in 1964 (Causton et al. 2006, pp.
134, 143). We are not aware of any
information indicating when P. downsi
may have been introduced to the island
of Floreana.
Philornis downsi is a Muscidae (fly)
from a genus of obligate bird parasites
(Couri 1985, as cited in Fessl and
Tebbich 2002, p. 445; Fessl et al. 2001,
p. 317), depending entirely on a host for
its survival. The adult fly is nonparasitic, and feeds on fruits, flowers,
and decaying material (Fessl et al. 2001,
p. 317; Fessl et al. 2006b, p. 56). Larvae
of P. downsi belong to the group of
external haematophages (bloodsuckers);
first, second, and third instar
(developmental stage) larvae are blood
feeders, believed to suck blood from
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:06 Dec 05, 2008
Jkt 217001
nestlings during the night and then
retreat to the bottom of the nest during
the day (Dodge and Aitken 1968 and
Skidmore 1985, as cited in Fessl et al.
2006b, p. 56). Adult flies lay eggs inside
the nasal cavities of newly hatched
nestlings (usually 1 to 3 days old),
which hatch into first instar larvae
(Muth 2007, as cited in Dudaniec et al.
2008; Fessl et al. 2006a, p. 744). As the
larvae reach their second instar stage,
they exit the nasal cavities of nestlings
and begin to live as nest-dwelling
haematophagous larvae (Fessl et al.
2006a, p. 744). Second and third instar
larvae of P. downsi seem to be
exclusively external (Fessl et al. 2006b,
p. 59), feeding on the blood and tissues
of nestlings (Dudaniec and Kleindorfer
2006, pp. 15–16). The majority of larvae
reach their third instar stage at the time
of host fledging (Dudaniec et al. 2008).
At this stage, the larvae of P. downsi
detach from the nestling and form their
pupae at the bottom of the nesting
material, remaining for approximately 2
weeks before emerging as adult flies
(Dudaniec and Kleindorfer 2006, p. 16;
Fessl et al. 2006b, p. 56).
Philornis downsi occurs in finch nests
on Floreana (Wiedenfeld et al. 2007, p.
17), and has been shown to significantly
lower fledgling success of the finches
(Fessl and Tebbich 2002, pp. 448–450).
A number of studies have associated
Philornis parasitism with mortality
(Fessl and Tebbich 2002, p. 448),
reduced nestling growth and
development (Fessl et al. 2006b, p. 58),
and a reduction in hemoglobin level
(Dudaniec et al. 2006, p. 88).
A study by Fessl and Tebbich (2002)
on Santa Cruz Island found that 97
percent of finch nests were infected
with the Philornis downsi parasite, both
in the lower arid zone and the higher
Scalesia zone of the island (p. 449).
Parasitism by P. downsi caused
complete brood loss in approximately
19 percent of the infected finch nests
and partial brood loss (defined as the
successful fledging of one or two
nestlings) in an additional 8 percent of
the finch nests studied (Fessl and
Tebbich 2002, p. 448). They also found
that in parasitized nests, the percentage
of successful fledglings differed
significantly depending upon brood
size; nests with only one nestling
always failed, nests with two nestlings
successfully fledged nestlings 50
percent of the time, and nests with three
or four nestlings successfully fledged
nestlings 75–85 percent of the time
(Fessl and Tebbich 2002, p. 448). The
high nestling mortality in small broods
may be the result of the high parasiteto-nestling ratio, as compared to larger
broods (Fessl and Tebbich 2002, p. 449).
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
74439
Since P. downsi infects nests regardless
of the number of nestlings (Fessl and
Tebbich 2002, p. 450), large broods may
be able to spread the larval load among
more nestlings, thereby reducing the
number of larvae affecting each
individual nestling.
In an experimental study conducted
on Santa Cruz Island, Fessl et al. (2006b)
found that high mortality of nestlings
was directly attributable to parasitism
by Philornis downsi, as evidenced by a
near threefold increase in fledgling
success in a parasite-reduced group
(86.6 percent) versus a parasite-infested
control group (33.9 percent) (pp. 58–59).
They also found that within 4 days,
mass gain was significantly higher (an
almost two-fold positive difference) in
the parasite-reduced group than in the
parasite-infested control group (Fessl et
al. 2006b, p. 58). In studies of other
avian species, fledgling body mass has
been found to be a key factor for
juvenile survival (Magrath 1991, pp.
343–344; Tinbergen and Boerlijist 1990,
pp. 1123–1124). As a result, Fessl et al.
(2006b) concluded that the results of
their study showed that given the
significant difference in body mass
between the two groups, parasitized
nests will likely provide less
recruitment into the breeding
population (p. 59). Further, because
species with small broods have been
found to suffer higher parasite loads and
higher nestling mortality (Fessl and
Tebbich 2002, pp. 445, 449–450),
infestation of P. downsi on species with
naturally low clutch sizes, such as the
medium tree finch, is of particular
concern (Fessl et al. 2006b, p. 59).
Dudaniec et al. (2006) found a
significant negative correlation between
Philornis downsi parasite intensity and
hemoglobin concentrations, and a
positive correlation between parasite
intensity and immature red blood cell
counts, in small ground finches studied
on Santa Cruz and Floreana Islands (pp.
88, 90, 92). Small ground finch nestlings
with higher P. downsi intensities
suffered from lower hemoglobin
concentrations and reduced fledging
success (Dudaniec et al. 2006, p. 92).
Furthermore, nestlings with lower
parasite intensity had higher
hemoglobin levels and increased
fledging success (Dudaniec et al. 2006,
p. 93). Dudaniec et al. (2006) also found
a negative correlation between the
number of immature red blood cells and
hemoglobin levels in nestlings (p. 92).
The fitness impacts to nestlings of
lower hemoglobin levels are likely to be
significant (Dudaniec et al. 2006, p. 93).
The results of a study by O’Brien et al.
(2001) showed that low hemoglobin
levels in nestlings reduce the transport
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS
74440
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 236 / Monday, December 8, 2008 / Proposed Rules
of oxygen to tissues (p. 75). Thus,
fledglings that are anemic (hemoglobin
deficient) from parasite feeding may
have a reduced ability to sustain flight
and, consequently, a reduced ability to
escape predators and find food (O’Brien
et al. 2001, p. 75). The high hemoglobin
levels found by Dudaniec et al. (2006)
in mature birds, combined with their
observation that adult finches were
never found to be actively parasitized,
suggest that adult birds are not
physiologically affected by Philornis
downsi (p. 92).
Fessl et al. (2006a) reported extremely
high levels of blood loss in nestlings (18
to 55 percent) caused by Philornis
downsi larvae (p. 745). Daily blood loss
over 10 percent is likely to have
negative impacts on nestlings, including
health problems and developmental
deficiencies, while blood loss over 25
percent would become lethal (Kaneko,
pers. comm., as cited in Gold and
Dahlsten 1983, p. 569).
In 2006, nesting success in the
medium tree finch was examined for the
first time (Fessl et al. 2006a, p. 746). The
study by O’Connor et al. (2008a, in
preparation) on tree finches in the
highlands of Floreana showed that the
medium tree finch had the highest
Philornis downsi parasite intensity (an
average of 52 parasites per nest),
compared to small and large tree
finches. Of 63 medium tree finch nests,
only 16 nests had nestlings that
survived to 6 days post-hatching, and
only 4 nests produced fledglings
(O’Connor et al. 2008a, in preparation).
Most nests failed to produce fledglings;
68.8 percent (11 of 16) of medium tree
finch nests suffered total brood loss,
while 18.8 percent (3 of 16) of nests had
partial brood loss (O’Connor et al.
2008a, in preparation). Philornis downsi
larvae or pupae were found in 100
percent (16 of 16) of medium tree finch
nests, and all nestlings had P. downsi
parasites (O’Connor et al. 2008a, in
preparation). The majority (54 percent)
of nestling mortality in medium tree
finches was due to parasitism by P.
downsi (O’Connor et al. 2008a, in
preparation). All nestlings found dead
in nests had large open wounds on their
bodies and significant loss of blood or
body fluids, all of which are signs of P.
downsi parasitism (O’Connor et al.
2008a, in preparation).
O’Connor et al. (2008a, in
preparation) discuss the reasons why
the Philornis downsi parasite intensity
is high in the medium tree finch. One
possibility they explain is that the
medium tree finch’s preferred breeding
habitat is next to an agricultural area,
where the close proximity of the
agriculture fields (with citrus trees and
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:06 Dec 05, 2008
Jkt 217001
other fruits) act as a feeding location for
the adult flies (O’Connor et al. 2008a, in
preparation). In addition, moist
highlands favor consistent breeding of
medium tree finches, thus providing
flies with a dependable supply of
nestlings for P. downsi larvae to feed
upon (O’Connor et al. 2008a, in
preparation). Currently, the medium
tree finch has the highest P. downsi
parasite intensity of any finch species
on Floreana, and the second highest of
any finch species studied on the
Galapagos Islands (O’Connor et al.
2008a, in preparation).
A study by Wiedenfeld et al. (2007)
found that there was a significant
increase in the number of Philornis
downsi parasites (larvae, pupae, or
puparia) per nest at higher altitudes (i.e.,
in the humid highlands) (pp. 17–18).
According to their study, the
distribution of P. downsi seems to be
related to the amount of humidity and
moisture available on the islands
(Wiedenfeld et al. 2007, p. 18).
Although it appears that the fly does
more poorly in dry conditions (either in
the lowland, arid zone of islands, or
during drought), birds also do more
poorly in these situations (Wiedenfeld
et al. 2007, p. 18). In addition, during
years of abundant rainfall when birds
breed more successfully, the flies are
also likely to be more plentiful, and,
therefore, can cause higher mortality
(Wiedenfeld et al. 2007, p. 18).
It is believed that finches do not suffer
from any type of endemic,
haematophagous ectoparasite (a
bloodsucking parasite that lives on the
outside of its host, and not within the
host’s body) (Fessl et al. 2006b, p. 56).
Therefore, they have not developed an
adaptive response to this kind of
introduced pathogen (Altizer et al. 2003,
as cited in Dudaniec and Kleindorfer
2006, p. 19). Because the medium tree
finch is newly colonized by Philornis
downsi, it may experience significant
initial mortality since the host has not
yet developed a strong behavioral or
immunological defense mechanism
against the parasite (Dudaniec and
Kleindorfer 2006, pp. 18–19).
As many of these studies show,
finches have a slim chance of
reproducing without avoiding effects of
Philornis downsi mortality (Dudaniec
and Kleindorfer 2006, p. 18; Wiedenfeld
et al. 2007, p. 18). Causton et al. (2006)
developed a system to evaluate the
invasiveness of insect species
introduced to the Galapagos Islands
based on trophic functional role,
distribution in the Galapagos, and their
history of invasiveness elsewhere (p.
121). Philornis downsi was given the
highest invasiveness ranking affecting
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
fauna endemic to the Galapagos Islands,
because P. downsi seriously impacts
species of high conservation value in
the Galapagos (Causton et al. 2006, pp.
123, 134). Grant et al. (2005) reported
that the decline and possible local
extinction of one of Darwin’s finches,
the warbler finch (Certhidea fusca), on
Floreana by 2004 may have been
partially caused by P. downsi (p. 502;
Fessl et al. 2006b, p. 59), although there
is no conclusive evidence (Dudaniec
and Kleindorfer 2006, p. 13).
It is best to eliminate invasive species
before they are able to adapt to the local
environment in which they have
colonized (Frankham 2005, p. 385).
However, for Philornis downsi, this
introduced parasitic fly has become
firmly established in the Galapagos
Islands, prompting the need for a longterm eradication program in conjunction
with continuous quarantine and
monitoring practices (Dudaniec et al.
2008).
Programs to eradicate Philornis
downsi from the Galapagos Islands are
difficult and costly (Fessl et al. 2006b,
p. 59). In the experimental study by
Fessl et al. (2006b), they found that a
single insecticide treatment of 1 percent
pyrethrin solution (done at a nestling
age of 4 days) was sufficient to reduce
the number of parasites per nest to
almost zero (pp. 57–59). This treatment
offers one short-term solution to locally
protect single nests of species of high
conservation concern (Fessl et al. 2006b,
p. 59). However, this treatment is not
practicable as a long-term solution for
controlling the fly throughout the
Galapagos Islands because it would be
extremely labor intensive and would
require the nests of all host species to
be treated on every island in the
Galapagos where P. downsi is found (at
least 11 islands; Wiedenfeld et al. 2007,
p. 16).
The Charles Darwin Foundation
(CDF) has begun an effort to develop
biological control approaches for
Philornis downsi (Charles Darwin
Foundation n.d.(c)). In 2008, CDF
received $58,000 for Phase I of the CDF
Priority Project: ‘‘Control of the parasitic
fly Philornis downsi’’ (Charles Darwin
Foundation n.d.(a)). This project will
study the biology and life history of P.
downsi, aiding in the development of
effective, long-term control methods
that will not harm other species (Charles
Darwin Foundation 2007). CDF reports
that control methods are urgently
needed to eliminate the threat of
extinction among bird species, such as
the medium tree finch, affected by this
parasite (Charles Darwin Foundation
2007).
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 236 / Monday, December 8, 2008 / Proposed Rules
Predation
Floreana has a suite of introduced
predators including black rats (Rattus
rattus) and cats (Felis catus)
(Kleindorfer et al. 2008, in preparation).
These predators feed on eggs, nestlings,
and even adult birds (Castro and
Phillips 1996, p. 22), and have depleted
native populations (Grant et al. 2005, p.
501; Jackson 1985, p. 232).
Rats: Black rats are one of the worst
introduced species to the Galapagos
Islands, destroying bird nests and eggs,
and consuming hatchlings (Charles
Darwin Foundation n.d.(b); Charles
Darwin Research Station 2006b). Rats
arrived on the Galapagos Islands on
ships beginning in the late 1600s, and
currently are found on all inhabited
islands, including Floreana (Charles
Darwin Research Station 2006b). Rats
are currently present in the highlands of
Floreana, and can be seen running up
and down trees, or along the forest floor
in the habitat of the medium tree finch
(O’Connor 2008, in litt.). Because rats
can easily climb, they have been
implicated in the population declines of
tree-nesting birds, such as the mangrove
finch (Camarhynchus heliobates)
(Charles Darwin Research Station
2006b).
The CDF’s long-term plan is to
successfully eradicate introduced rats
on all islands, a necessary measure in
order to restore the Galapagos Islands
and its endemic species (Charles Darwin
Research Station 2006b). Currently, a
control program is ongoing in the
highlands of Floreana to control rats in
the nesting area of the Galapagos petrel
(Pterodroma phaeopygia) (Gardener
2008, in litt.). The project is being
conducted at Cerro Pajas (Cruz and Cruz
1996, pp. 25–30), the site of the largest
patch of prime Scalesia habitat (9 km2
(3.5 mi2)) (O’Connor 2008, in litt.),
where the medium tree finch occurs.
Although an eradication program has
begun, it has not yet been completed,
and therefore, rats remain a threat to the
medium tree finch.
A study of tree finches in the
highlands of Floreana by O’Connor et al.
(2008a, in preparation) found that onethird of medium tree finch nests
experienced nestling predation (in both
years, 2006 and 2008), and egg
depredation was observed in 22 percent
of the nests (but only in 2008). Although
nest predation was not observed
directly, the identity of the predators
could be inferred from the condition of
the nest (O’Connor 2008, in litt.). It is
likely that rats were predominantly
responsible for the predation (O’Connor
2008, in litt.). Because agricultural areas
are close to the breeding sites of the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:06 Dec 05, 2008
Jkt 217001
medium tree finch, they provide
support for the continued persistence
and movement of introduced predators,
mainly rodents (O’Connor et al. 2008a,
in preparation).
Cats: Cats are highly predatory
animals, targeting birds and other native
species (Charles Darwin Foundation
n.d.(b); Charles Darwin Research Station
2006c; Smith 2005, p. 304). Cats were
introduced to the Galapagos Islands by
ships and as domestic pets of settlers
(Charles Darwin Research Station
2006c). Today, cats are currently found
in the agricultural areas of the highlands
of Floreana (Gardener 2008, in litt.;
O’Connor 2008, in litt.), where the
medium tree finch occurs.
Both feral and domestic cats prey
upon and impact the survival of
Darwin’s finches, and are a threat to
endemic species on Floreana (Charles
Darwin Research Station 2006c). In the
19th century, cats may have caused
significant declines in the populations
of large ground finches, sharp-beaked
ground finches, and mockingbirds,
pushing them toward extinction on
Floreana (Grant et al. 2005, p. 501).
The Galapagos National Park Service
and the CDF are working to control and
eradicate domestic and feral cats on all
of the islands (Charles Darwin Research
Station 2006c). This plan includes
working with communities to gain
acceptance of and compliance with the
sterilization or removal of domestic cats,
and the development of an eradication
program to eliminate feral cats from
natural areas on all populated islands,
such as Floreana (Charles Darwin
Research Station 2006c).
Summary of Factor C
Philornis downsi, an introduced
parasitic fly, poses a significant threat to
the survival of the medium tree finch.
The larvae feed on finch nestlings
causing mortality, reduced nestling
growth, lower fledgling success, and a
reduction in hemoglobin levels, which
all combine to severely affect the
recruitment dynamics of the species.
The medium tree finch has the highest
P. downsi parasite intensity of all the
finch species found on Floreana, and
the second highest of any finch species
studied on the Galapagos Islands.
Although a project examining the
biology of P. downsi and how to control
it was begun in 2008, a long-term
control method for the parasitic fly has
not yet been developed. As a result, the
medium tree finch and its reproductive
success will continue to be negatively
impacted by P. downsi. Therefore, we
find that parasitism by Philornis downsi
is a significant threat to the continued
existence of the medium tree finch.
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
74441
Introduced predators on Floreana,
such as black rats and cats, feed on eggs
and nestlings of birds, causing dramatic
reductions in native populations. One
study found that 33 percent of medium
tree finch nests experienced nestling
predation, while egg depredation was
observed in 22 percent of the nests.
Although nest predation was not
observed directly, rats are most likely
responsible for much of the predation.
In an effort to help restore endemic
species on the Galapagos Islands, one
goal of CDF was to develop programs to
eradicate introduced rats and cats on all
islands. Even though an effort to
eliminate rats from the Galapagos petrel
nesting area in the highlands of
Floreana has begun, it has not yet been
completed. Furthermore, we do not
have any information to indicate that an
eradication program for cats has begun
on the island of Floreana. Therefore, we
find that predation is a threat to the
continued existence of the medium tree
finch.
D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory
Mechanisms
The medium tree finch is identified as
a ‘‘critically endangered’’ species under
Ecuadorian law and Decree No. 3,516—
Unified Text of the Secondary
Legislation of the Ministry of
Environment of 2002 (ECOLEX 2003b).
Decree No. 3,516 of 2002 summarizes
the law governing environmental policy
in Ecuador and provides that the
country’s biodiversity be protected and
used primarily in a sustainable manner
(ECOLEX 2003b). Appendix 1 of Decree
No. 3,516 lists the Ecuadorian fauna and
flora that are considered threatened or
in danger of extinction. Species are
categorized as critically endangered (En
´
peligro crıtico), endangered (En peligro),
or vulnerable (Vulnerable).
Resolution No. 105—Regulatory
Control of Hunting Seasons and Wildlife
Species in the Country and Agreement
No. 143—Standards for the Control of
Hunting Seasons and Licenses for
Hunting of Wildlife, regulate and
prohibit commercial and sport hunting
of all wild bird species, except those
specifically identified by the Ministry of
the Environment or otherwise permitted
(ECOLEX 2000; ECOLEX 2003a). The
Ministry of the Environment does not
permit commercial or sport hunting of
the medium tree finch because of its
status as a ‘‘critically endangered’’
species (ECOLEX 2003b). However, we
do not consider hunting (Factor B) to be
a threat to the medium tree finch, so this
law does not address any of the threats
to the species.
The first legislation to specifically
protect the Galapagos Islands and its
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS
74442
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 236 / Monday, December 8, 2008 / Proposed Rules
wildlife and plants was enacted in 1934
and further supplemented in 1936, but
effective legislation was not passed until
1959, when the Ecuadorian government
passed new legislation declaring the
islands a National Park (Fitter et al.
2000, p. 216; Jackson 1985, pp. 7, 230;
Stewart 2006, p. 164). Ecuador
designated 97 percent of the Galapagos
land area as the National Park, leaving
the remaining 3 percent distributed
between the inhabited areas on Santa
´
Cruz, San Cristobal, Isabela, and
Floreana Islands (Jackson 1985, p. 230;
Schofield 1989, p. 236). A
disproportionate amount of the limited
moist highlands falls in the remaining 3
percent (Stewart 2006, p. 105). The land
is divided into various zones signifying
the level of human use (Parque Nacional
´
Galapagos n.d.(b)). Although Floreana
Island includes a large ‘‘conservation
and restoration’’ zone, it does include a
significant ‘‘farming’’ zone (Parque
´
Nacional Galapagos n.d.(b)), where
agricultural and grazing activities
continue to impact the habitat.
In March 1998, the National Congress
and the Ecuadorian President enacted
the Law of the Special Regimen for the
Conservation and Sustainable
Development of the Province of the
Galapogos, which has given the islands
some legislative support to establish
regulations related to the transport of
introduced species and implement a
quarantine and inspection system
(Causton et al. 2000, p. 10; Instituto
´
Nacional Galapagos n.d.; Smith 2005, p.
304).
As a result, in 1999, the Inspection
and Quarantine System for Galapagos
(SICGAL) was implemented (Causton et
al. 2006, p. 121), with the aim of
preventing introduced species from
reaching the islands (Causton et al.
2000, p. 10; Charles Darwin Foundation
n.d.(d)). Inspectors are stationed at
points of entry and exit on the
Galapagos Islands and Continental
Ecuador, where they check freight and
luggage for permitted and prohibited
items (Charles Darwin Foundation
n.d.(d)). The goal is to rapidly contain
and eliminate newly arrived species
(detected by SICGAL and early warning
monitoring programs) that are
considered threats for the Galapagos
Islands (Causton et al. 2006, p. 121).
However, a scarcity of information on
alien insect species currently on the
Galapagos Islands prevents officials
from knowing whether or not a newly
detected insect is in fact a recent
introduction (Causton et al. 2006, p.
121). Without the necessary information
to make this determination, they cannot
afford to spend the time and resources
on a rapid response when the ‘‘new
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:06 Dec 05, 2008
Jkt 217001
introduction’’ is actually a species that
already occurs elsewhere on the
Galapagos Islands (Causton et al. 2006,
p. 121).
The April 2007 World Heritage
Centre–IUCN monitoring mission report
assessed the state of conservation on the
Galapagos Islands based on information
gathered during their monitoring
mission and multiple meetings, and
found continuing problems (UNESCO
World Heritage Centre 2007). The report
found deficiencies that preclude the full
application and enforcement of the
Special Law for Galapagos (UNESCO
World Heritage Centre 2007). Also,
although the risk from invasive species
is rapidly increasing, the report found
that the Agricultural Health Service of
Ecuador (SESA) and SICGAL do not
have adequate staff and capacity to deal
with the nature and scale of the problem
(UNESCO World Heritage Centre 2007).
SICGAL estimates that 779 invertebrates
entered the Galapagos Islands via
aircraft in 2006 (UNESCO World
Heritage Centre 2007). In addition, the
report found that the staff of the
Galapagos National Park lack the
capacity and facilities for effective law
enforcement (UNESCO World Heritage
Centre 2007).
Previous UNESCO–IUCN Galapagos
mission reports (in 2005 and 2006) to
the World Heritage Committee have
consistently outlined major threats to
the long-term conservation of the
Galapagos Islands, including the
introduction of nonnative plant and
animal species (UNESCO World
Heritage Centre News 2007b). UNESCO
World Heritage Centre reports that,
despite an excellent legal framework,
national government institutions
encounter difficulties in ensuring full
application of laws (UNESCO World
Heritage Centre News 2007b).
The Galapagos Islands were declared
a World Heritage Site (WHS) under the
auspices of the United Nations
Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Organization (UNESCO) in 1978
(UNESCO World Heritage Centre
n.d.(a)), as they were recognized to be
‘‘cultural and natural heritage of
outstanding universal value that needs
to be protected and preserved’’
(UNESCO World Heritage Centre
n.d.(b)). The aim of establishment as a
WHS is conservation of the site for
future generations (UNESCO World
Heritage Centre 2008). However, due to
threats to this site posed by invasive
species, increasing tourism, and
immigration, in June 2007, the World
Heritage Committee placed the
Galapagos on the ‘‘List of World
Heritage in Danger,’’ with the intent of
increasing support for the islands’
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
conservation (UNESCO World Heritage
Centre News 2007a).
In March 2008, the UNESCO World
Heritage Centre/United Nations
Foundation project for invasive species
management provided funding of 2.19
million U.S. dollars (USD) to the
Ecuadorian National Environmental
Fund’s ‘‘Galapagos Invasive Species’’
account to support invasive species
control and eradication activities on the
islands (UNESCO World Heritage Centre
News 2008). In addition, the Ecuador
government previously had contributed
1 million USD to this fund (UNESCO
World Heritage Centre News 2008),
demonstrating the government of
Ecuador’s commitment to reducing the
threat of invasive species to the islands.
Summary of Factor D
Ecuador has developed numerous
laws and regulatory mechanisms to
administer and manage wildlife on the
Galapagos Islands. However, these laws
and regulatory mechanisms do not
target reducing the threats to this
species. The medium tree finch is listed
as ‘‘critically endangered’’ under
Ecuadorian law. Although 97 percent of
the land on the Galapagos Islands is
designated as the National Park, some of
the land on Floreana is identified as a
‘‘farming’’ zone, where agricultural and
grazing activities continue to threaten
the habitat of the species. Additional
regulations have created an inspection
and quarantine system in order to
prevent the introduction of nonnative
species. However, this program does
little to eradicate species already
introduced to the Galapagos Islands.
Therefore, we find that the existing
regulatory mechanisms are inadequate
to mitigate the current threats to the
medium tree finch.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors
Affecting Its Continued Existence
We are not aware of any scientific or
commercial information that indicates
other natural or manmade factors
affecting the continued existence of the
medium tree finch pose a threat to this
species. As a result, we are not
considering other natural or manmade
factors to be a contributing factor to the
continued existence of the medium tree
finch.
Status Determination for the Medium
Tree Finch
We have carefully assessed the best
available scientific and commercial
information regarding the past, present,
and potential future threats faced by the
medium tree finch. The species is
currently at risk throughout all of its
range primarily due to the immediate
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 236 / Monday, December 8, 2008 / Proposed Rules
and ongoing threat of the introduced
parasitic fly, Philornis downsi. The
clearing of native vegetation for
agriculture and ranching, the
destruction and degradation of habitat
caused by introduced animals and
plants (Factor A), predation (Factor C),
and inadequate existing regulatory
mechanisms (Factor D) are also
considered to be threats to this species.
Philornis downsi is the greatest
current threat to the survival of
Darwin’s finches on the Galapagos
Islands (O’Connor et al. 2008a, in
preparation). As shown in numerous
studies (Dudaniec et al. 2006; Fessel and
Tebich 2002; Fessel et al. 2006b;
O’Connor et al. 2008a), the fitness costs
of P. downsi parasitism in finches may
be severe, with high incidences of
nestling mortality, as well as lower
fledgling success, reduced nestling
growth, and reduced hemoglobin levels
in nestlings.
Currently, the medium tree finch has
the highest Philornis downsi parasite
intensity of all the finch species found
on Floreana, and the second highest of
any finch species studied on the
Galapagos Islands. Philornis downsi has
been found in 100 percent of medium
tree finch nests, causing parasitism of
all nestlings.
A recent study (O’Connor et al. 2008a)
showed that only 6.3 percent of active
medium tree finch nests produced
fledglings, with the majority (54
percent) of nestling mortality caused by
Philornis downsi parasitism. With
severely low reproductive success, the
medium tree finch is likely to provide
very little recruitment into the breeding
population. Since finches are not known
to suffer from a similar type of endemic
parasite, it appears that they have not
yet developed an adaptive response or
defense mechanism against P. downsi.
Therefore, a long-term control method
for P. downsi is needed in order to
eliminate this threat to the species.
The medium tree finch is found
primarily in the moist highland forests
(i.e., the Scalesia zone) on the island of
Floreana, which currently covers
approximately 21 km2 (8 mi2). Because
of the significant amounts of moisture
and fertile soil available in the
highlands, approximately 4 km2 (1.5
mi2) of the highland forests on Floreana
have been altered or cleared for
agricultural purposes.
Although the Galapagos National Park
covers 97 percent of the land on the
Galapagos Islands, the remaining 3
percent includes a large portion of the
moist highlands on inhabited islands,
such as Floreana, which allows farming
to continue in this area today.
Introduced animals, both domestic
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:06 Dec 05, 2008
Jkt 217001
livestock and feral populations, have
magnified the negative effects of
clearing large areas of native vegetation
for agriculture and ranching. Herbivores
destroy the species’ habitat on Floreana
by trampling and grazing heavily on
native vegetation, including Scalesia
pedunculata, the tree primarily used by
the medium tree finch for nesting and
foraging. Introduced fruit trees, which
have seeds easily spread by cattle and
pigs, grow quickly and shade native
seedlings of Scalesia pedunculata. Even
though the Galapagos National Park
Service encourages ranchers to fence in
their cattle on Floreana, cattle still stray
into native vegetation to graze.
Other introduced species, such as
black rats and cats, prey on the eggs and
nestlings of birds. One study (O’Connor
et al. 2008a) found that 33 percent of
medium tree finch nests experienced
nestling predation, while egg
depredation was observed in 22 percent
of the nests. Agricultural areas close to
the breeding sites of the medium tree
finch allow for the continued
persistence and movement of
introduced predators, mainly rats, into
the habitat of the medium tree finch.
Although an eradication program has
been developed on Floreana to
eliminate some of the introduced
species, such as donkeys, goats, and
rats, we are not aware of current
programs to remove other introduced
herbivores or introduced predators from
Floreana. In addition, the programs to
eliminate donkeys and rats from
Floreana have not yet been completed;
therefore, these introduced species
continue to pose a threat to the medium
tree finch and its habitat.
Even though the medium tree finch is
listed as a ‘‘critically endangered’’
species under Ecuadorian law and its
range includes the Galapagos National
Park, existing regulatory mechanisms do
not adequately protect the habitat of the
species, and have not reduced the
threats of introduced predators or
parasitism by Philornis downsi, the
primary threat to the medium tree finch.
Sulloway (2008a, in litt.) recently
conducted an analysis of the relative
numbers of tree finch specimens in the
California Academy of Sciences’
collections, comparing them to the
frequencies found by Dr. Sonia
Kleindorfer between 2000 and 2006. His
analysis indicates that the medium tree
finch is much less common today than
it was prior to 1961 (Sulloway 2008a, in
litt.). Specifically, the odds of seeing a
medium tree finch today are
approximately 25 percent what they
would have been more than 50 years ago
(Sulloway 2008a, in litt.). As reported
by Sulloway (2008a, in litt.) and
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
74443
O’Connor et al. (2008b, in preparation),
the population density of the medium
tree finch is declining. Sulloway (2008b,
in litt.) suggests that the decline in the
population of the medium tree finch
that he reported over the last 50 years
is probably not due to the effects of
human activities or introduced species.
He based this response on the idea that
the population of the medium tree finch
had done fine for over a century, during
which time settlers, introduced animals,
and introduced plants had been present
on Floreana (Sulloway 2008b, in litt.).
More likely, he explains, the source of
any significant and sustained changes in
population densities of the medium tree
finch since the early 1960s is parasitism
by Philornis downsi (Sulloway 2008b, in
litt.). Based on our analysis, we
determined that the medium tree finch
is currently at risk throughout all of its
range primarily due to the immediate
and ongoing threat of the introduced
parasitic fly, P. downsi. However, the
clearing of native vegetation for
agriculture and ranching, and the
destruction and degradation of habitat
caused by introduced animals and
plants are also considered to be threats
to the species.
Section 3 of the Act defines an
‘‘endangered species’’ as ‘‘any species
which is in danger of extinction
throughout all or a significant portion of
its range’’ and a ‘‘threatened species’’ as
‘‘any species which is likely to become
an endangered species within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range.’’ Based
on the immediate and ongoing
significant threats to the medium tree
finch throughout its entire range, as
described above, we determine that the
medium tree finch is in danger of
extinction throughout all of its range.
Therefore, on the basis of the best
available scientific and commercial
information, we are proposing to list the
medium tree finch as an endangered
species.
Available Conservation Measures
Conservation measures provided to
species listed as endangered or
threatened under the Act include
recognition, requirements for Federal
protection, and prohibitions against
certain practices. Recognition through
listing results in public awareness, and
encourages and results in conservation
actions by Federal governments, private
agencies and groups, and individuals.
Section 7(a) of the Act, as amended,
and as implemented by regulations at 50
CFR part 402, requires Federal agencies
to evaluate their actions within the
United States or on the high seas with
respect to any species that is proposed
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
74444
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 236 / Monday, December 8, 2008 / Proposed Rules
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS
or listed as endangered or threatened,
and with respect to its critical habitat,
if any is being designated. However,
given that the medium tree finch is not
native to the United States, no critical
habitat is being proposed for
designation in this rule.
Section 8(a) of the Act authorizes
limited financial assistance for the
development and management of
programs that the Secretary of the
Interior determines to be necessary or
useful for the conservation of
endangered and threatened species in
foreign countries. Sections 8(b) and 8(c)
of the Act authorize the Secretary to
encourage conservation programs for
foreign endangered species and to
provide assistance for such programs in
the form of personnel and the training
of personnel.
The Act and its implementing
regulations set forth a series of general
prohibitions and exceptions that apply
to all endangered and threatened
wildlife. As such, these prohibitions
would be applicable to the medium tree
finch. These prohibitions, under 50 CFR
17.21, make it illegal for any person
subject to the jurisdiction of the United
States to ‘‘take’’ (take includes harass,
harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill,
trap, capture, collect, or to attempt any
of these) within the United States or
upon the high seas, import or export,
deliver, receive, carry, transport, or ship
in interstate or foreign commerce in the
course of a commercial activity, or to
sell or offer for sale in interstate or
foreign commerce, any endangered
wildlife species. It also is illegal to
possess, sell, deliver, carry, transport, or
ship any such wildlife that has been
taken in violation of the Act. Certain
exceptions apply to agents of the
Service and State conservation agencies.
We may issue permits to carry out
otherwise prohibited activities
involving endangered and threatened
wildlife species under certain
circumstances. Regulations governing
permits are codified at 50 CFR 17.22 for
endangered species, and at 17.32 for
threatened species. With regard to
endangered wildlife, a permit must be
issued for the following purposes: for
scientific purposes, to enhance the
propagation or survival of the species,
and for incidental take in connection
with otherwise lawful activities.
Peer Review
In accordance with our joint policy
with National Marine Fisheries Service,
‘‘Notice of Interagency Cooperative
Policy for Peer Review in Endangered
Species Act Activities,’’ published in
the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59
FR 34270), we will seek the expert
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:06 Dec 05, 2008
Jkt 217001
opinions of at least three appropriate
independent specialists regarding this
proposed rule. The purpose of peer
review is to ensure that our proposed
rule is based on scientifically sound
data, assumptions, and analyses. We
will send copies of this proposed rule to
the peer reviewers immediately
following publication in the Federal
Register. We will invite these peer
reviewers to comment during the public
comment period, on our specific
assumptions and conclusions regarding
the proposal to list the medium tree
finch as endangered.
We will consider all comments and
information we receive during the
comment period on this proposed rule
during our preparation of a final
determination. Accordingly, our final
decision may differ from this proposal.
Public Hearings
The Act provides for one or more
public hearings on this proposal, if we
receive any requests for hearings. We
must receive your request for a public
hearing within 45 days after the date of
this Federal Register publication (see
DATES). Such requests must be made in
writing and be addressed to the Chief of
the Division of Scientific Authority at
the address shown in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section. We will
schedule public hearings on this
proposal, if any are requested, and
announce the dates, times, and places of
those hearings, as well as how to obtain
reasonable accommodations, in the
Federal Register at least 15 days before
the first hearing.
Required Determinations
Regulatory Planning and Review
(Executive Order 12866)
The Office of Management and Budget
has determined that this rule is not
significant under Executive Order
12866.
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)
We have determined that
environmental assessments and
environmental impact statements, as
defined under the authority of the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), need not
be prepared in connection with
regulations adopted under section 4(a)
of the Act. We published a notice
outlining our reasons for this
determination in the Federal Register
on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244).
Clarity of the Rule
We are required by Executive Orders
12866 and 12988, and by the
Presidential Memorandum of June 1,
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1998, to write all rules in plain
language. This means that each rule we
publish must:
(a) Be logically organized;
(b) Use the active voice to address
readers directly;
(c) Use clear language rather than
jargon;
(d) Be divided into short sections and
sentences; and
(e) Use lists and tables wherever
possible.
If you feel that we have not met these
requirements, send us comments by one
of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES
section. To better help us revise the
rule, your comments should be as
specific as possible. For example, you
should tell us the numbers of the
sections or paragraphs that are unclearly
written, which sections or sentences are
too long, the sections where you feel
lists or tables would be useful, etc.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited
in this proposed rule is available on the
Internet at https://www.regulations.gov
or upon request from the Division of
Scientific Authority, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
Author
The primary author of this proposed
rule is Monica A. Horton, Division of
Scientific Authority, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species,
Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements,
Transportation.
Proposed Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, we propose to amend
part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title
50 of the Code of Federal Regulations,
as set forth below:
PART 17—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 17
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 16 U.S.C.
1531–1544; 16 U.S.C. 4201–4245; Public Law
99–625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise
noted.
2. Amend § 17.11(h) by adding a new
entry for ‘‘Tree finch, medium’’ in
alphabetical order under ‘‘BIRDS’’ to the
List of Endangered and Threatened
Wildlife to read as follows:
§ 17.11 Endangered and threatened
wildlife.
*
*
*
(h) * * *
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
*
*
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 236 / Monday, December 8, 2008 / Proposed Rules
74445
Species
Special
rules
Vertebrate population
where endangered or
threatened
Historic range
Common name
Scientific name
*
BIRDS
*
*
Tree finch, medium ......
*
Camarhynchus pauper
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 21
[FWS–R9–MB–2008–0109; 91200–1231–
9BPP]
RIN 1018–AW11
Migratory Bird Permits; Revision of
Expiration Dates for Double-Crested
Cormorant Depredation Orders
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; availability of
draft environmental assessment; request
for public comment.
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS
*
*
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, propose to extend our
two existing depredation orders for
double-crested cormorants
(Phalacrocorax auritus) in the Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) at 50 CFR
21.47 and 21.48 so that we can continue
to authorize take of double-crested
cormorants without a permit under the
terms and conditions of the depredation
orders and gather data on the effects of
double-crested cormorant control
actions. If we do not extend these
depredation orders, any action to
control depredating double-crested
cormorants will require a permit. We
have prepared a draft environmental
assessment (DEA) to analyze the
environmental impacts associated with
our proposed extensions. We invite the
public to comment on the DEA and our
proposed extension. The DEA is posted
at https://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds.
DATES: We will accept comments on the
DEA, the proposed extension, or both,
that are received or postmarked on or
before January 22, 2009.
Jkt 217001
When
listed
Critical
habitat
*
*
Entire ..........................
*
*
E
*
NA
*
*
NA
*
You may submit comments
on the DEA or the proposed extension
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–
AW11; Division of Policy and Directives
Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Suite
222; Arlington, VA 22203–1610.
We will not accept e-mails or faxes. We
will post all comments on https://
www.regulations.gov. This generally
means that we will post any personal
information you provide (see the Public
Comments section below for more
information).
impacts of the depredation orders and
determined that they would not
significantly affect the status of the
species. The EIS is available by
contacting us at the address in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
The depredation orders are scheduled to
expire in April 2009. We have no data
to suggest that the orders have had any
significant negative effect on doublecrested cormorant populations.
Extending the orders for an additional
five years will not, in the judgment of
Service biologists, pose a significant,
detrimental effect on the long-term
viability of double-crested cormorant
populations.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Terry Doyle, Division of Migratory Bird
Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Division of Migratory Bird
Management, 4401 North Fairfax Drive,
Mail Stop 4107, Arlington, VA 22203–
1610, or telephone 703–358–1825.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
You may submit your comments and
materials concerning our proposed rule
and DEA by one of the methods listed
in the ADDRESSES section. We will not
accept comments sent by e-mail or fax
or to an address not listed in the
ADDRESSES section.
If you submit a comment via https://
www.regulations.gov, your entire
comment, including any personal
identifying information, will be posted
on the Web site. If you submit a
hardcopy comment that includes
personal identifying information, you
may request at the top of your document
that we withhold this information from
public review. However, we cannot
guarantee that we will be able to do so.
We will post all hardcopy comments on
https://www.regulations.gov.
ADDRESSES:
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
15:06 Dec 05, 2008
*
*
Ecuador (Galapagos
Islands).
*
Dated: November 25, 2008.
H. Dale Hall,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. E8–28998 Filed 12–5–08; 8:45 am]
VerDate Aug<31>2005
*
Status
Background
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is
the Federal agency delegated the
primary responsibility for managing
migratory birds. This delegation is
authorized by the Migratory Bird Treaty
Act (MBTA) (16 U.S.C. 703 et seq.),
which implements conventions with
Great Britain (for Canada), Mexico,
Japan, and the Soviet Union (Russia).
Part 21 of title 50 of the CFR covers
migratory bird permits. Subpart D deals
specifically with the control of
depredating birds and currently
includes eight depredation orders. A
depredation order is a regulation that
allows the take of specific species of
migratory birds, at specific locations
and for specific purposes, without a
depredation permit.
The depredation orders at 50 CFR
21.47 and 21.48 for double-crested
cormorants allow for take of the species
under the provisions of our 2003
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
(68 FR 47603), in which we assessed the
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Public Comments
Required Determinations
Regulatory Planning and Review (E.O.
12866)
The Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) has determined that this
proposed rule is not significant under
E.O. (E.O.) 12866. OMB bases its
determination upon the following four
criteria:
(a) Whether the rule will have an
annual effect of $100 million or more on
the economy or adversely affect an
economic sector, productivity, jobs, the
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 236 (Monday, December 8, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 74434-74445]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-28998]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[FWS-R9-IA-2008-0108; 96100-1671-0000-B6]
RIN 1018-AW01
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Listing the Medium
Tree Finch (Camarhynchus pauper) as Endangered Throughout Its Range
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose to
list the medium tree finch (Camarhynchus pauper) as endangered under
the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). This proposal, if
made final, would extend the Act's protection to this species. The
Service seeks data and comments from the public on this proposed rule.
DATES: We will accept comments received or postmarked on or before
February 6, 2009. We must receive requests for public hearings, in
writing, at the address shown in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section by January 22, 2009.
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: FWS-R9-IA-2008-0108; 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 comments by e-mail or fax. 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: Monica A. Horton, Division of
Scientific Authority, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401 N. Fairfax
Drive, Room 110, Arlington, VA 22203; telephone 703-358-1708; facsimile
703-358-2276. If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD), call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877-
8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Comments
We intend that any final action resulting from this proposal will
be as accurate and as effective as possible. Therefore, we request
comments or suggestions on this proposed rule. We particularly seek
comments concerning:
(1) Biological, commercial trade, or other relevant data concerning
any threats (or lack thereof) to this species and regulations that may
be addressing those threats.
(2) Additional information concerning the range, distribution, and
population size of this species, including the locations of any
additional populations of this species.
(3) Any information on the biological or ecological requirements of
the species.
(4) Current or planned activities in the areas occupied by the
species and possible impacts of these activities on this species.
You may submit your comments and materials concerning this proposed
rule by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. We will not
consider comments sent by e-mail or fax or to an address not listed in
the ADDRESSES section.
If you submit a comment via https://www.regulations.gov, your entire
comment--including any personal identifying information--will be posted
on the Web site. If you submit a hardcopy comment that includes
personal identifying information, you may request at the top of your
document that we withhold this information from public review. However,
we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We will post all
hardcopy comments on https://www.regulations.gov.
Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting
documentation we used in preparing this proposed rule, will be
available for public inspection on https://www.regulations.gov, or by
appointment, during normal business hours, at the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Division of Scientific Authority, 4401 N. Fairfax
Drive, Room 110, Arlington, VA 22203; telephone 703-358-1708.
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires us to make a finding (known
as a ``90-day finding'') on whether a petition to add a species to,
remove a species from, or reclassify a species on the Federal List of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants has presented substantial
information indicating that the requested action may be warranted. To
the maximum extent practicable, the finding must be made within 90 days
following receipt of the petition and published promptly in the Federal
Register. If we find that the petition has presented substantial
information indicating that the requested action may be warranted (a
positive finding), section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires us to
commence a status review of the species if one has not already been
initiated under our internal candidate assessment process. In addition,
section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act requires us 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''). Section 4(b)(3)(C) of the Act requires that a
finding of warranted but precluded for petition species should be
treated as having been resubmitted on the date of the warranted but
precluded finding, and is, therefore, subject to a new finding within 1
year and subsequently thereafter until we take action on a proposal to
list or withdraw our original finding. 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.
Previous Federal Actions
On May 6, 1991, we received a petition (hereafter referred to as
the 1991 petition) from the International Council for Bird Preservation
(ICBP) to add 53 species of foreign birds to the List of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife (50 CFR 17.11(h)), including the medium tree finch,
which is the subject of this proposed rule. In response to the 1991
petition, we published a positive 90-day finding on December 16, 1991
(56 FR 65207), for all 53 species, and announced the initiation of a
status review. On March 28, 1994 (59 FR 14496), we published a 12-month
finding on the 1991 petition, along with a proposed rule to list 30
African birds under the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). In that document,
we proposed listing 15 of the 53 bird species included in the 1991
petition, and announced our finding that listing the remaining 38
species from the 1991 petition, including the medium tree finch, was
warranted but precluded because of other listing activity.
On May 21, 2004 (69 FR 29354) and April 23, 2007 (72 FR 20184), we
published in the Federal Register notices announcing our annual
petition findings for foreign species. In those
[[Page 74435]]
notices, we made warranted but precluded findings for all outstanding
foreign species from the 1991 petition, including the medium tree
finch, which is the subject of this proposed rule.
Per the Service's listing priority guidelines (September 21, 1983;
48 FR 43098), our 2007 annual notice of review (ANOR) (April 23, 2007;
72 FR 20184) identified the listing priority numbers (LPNs) (ranging
from 1 to 12) for all outstanding foreign species, including the medium
tree finch, which was designated with an LPN of 11. The medium tree
finch does not represent a monotypic genus. As reported in the 2007
ANOR, the magnitude of threat to the species was moderate, as the
species was common in the forested highlands and its habitat had not
been highly degraded. The immediacy of threat was not imminent because
the species' habitat is protected by the area's National Park and World
Heritage Site status.
On January 23, 2008, the United States District Court ordered the
Service to propose listing rules for five foreign bird species, actions
which had been previously determined to be warranted but precluded:
Andean flamingo (Phoenicoparrus andinus), black-breasted puffleg
(Eriocnemis nigrivestis), Chilean woodstar (Eulidia yarrellii), medium
tree finch (Camarhynchus pauper), and St. Lucia forest thrush
(Cichlherminia lherminieri sanctaeluciae). The court ordered the
Service to issue proposed listing rules for these species by the end of
2008.
On July 29, 2008 (73 FR 44062), we published in the Federal
Register a notice announcing our annual petition findings for foreign
species. In that notice, we announced that proposing 30 taxa for
listing under the Act is warranted. In order to comply with the recent
court order, the medium tree finch was included as one of the 30 taxa
for which listing is warranted.
Species Information
The medium tree finch (Camarhynchus pauper) is endemic to the
island of Floreana in the Galapagos Islands, Ecuador (BirdLife
International 2008; Harris 1982, p. 150; Sibley and Monroe 1990, p.
771). It is one of the 14 species of Darwin's finches, collectively
named in recognition of Charles Darwin's work on the theory of
evolution (Grant 1986, p. 6), and is approximately 12.5 centimeters
(cm) (5 inches (in)) in length (BirdLife International 2008; Harris
1982, p. 150). Medium tree finches have wings and tails that are short
and rounded, and often hold their tail slightly cocked in a wren-like
manner (Jackson 1985, p. 188). Males have a black head, neck, and upper
breast (Fitter et al. 2000, p. 78; Harris 1982, p. 150; Jackson 1985,
p. 188), and an underside that is gray-brown, and white or yellowish in
color (BirdLife International 2008). Their tail and back is olive green
(Fitter et al. 2000, p. 78). Females have a head that is more gray-
brown (BirdLife International 2008), and a body that is generally
olive-green above and pale yellowish below (Fitter et al. 2000, p. 78).
It is similar to the large and small tree finches of the same genus,
but differs from the large tree finch (Camarhynchus psittacula)
primarily due to its significantly smaller and less parrot-like beak,
and from the small tree finch (Camarhynchus parvulus) because of its
larger beak (BirdLife International 2008; Harris 1982, p. 150). It is
also known as the Charles tree finch, the Santa Maria tree finch, and
the Floreana tree finch (Sibley and Monroe 1990, p. 771), due to the
fact that the island of Floreana is also referred to as Charles Island
or Santa Maroa Island, the official Spanish name of the island (Grant
1986, Appendix; Harris 1973, p. 265). The species is locally known as
``Pinz[oacute]n Mediano de [Aacute]rbol'' (Castro and Phillips 1996, p.
130). The species was first taxonomically described by Ridgeway in 1890
(Sibley and Monroe 1990, p. 771).
Habitat and Life History
Floreana, one of the 19 principal islands that make up the
Galapagos archipelago (McEwen 1988, p. 234), is 173 square kilometers
(km2) (67 square miles (mi2)) in area, and has a
maximum elevation of 640 meters (m) (2,100 feet (ft)) (Swash and Still
2005, p. 10).
The medium tree finch mainly occurs in the moist highland forests
(i.e., the Scalesia zone, named for the dominant plants, Scalesia spp.,
found in this zone) (Christensen and Kleindorfer 2008, in preparation;
Stewart 2006, p. 193), primarily above 300 m (984 ft) (Castro and
Phillips 1996, p. 130). The Scalesia zone begins at an altitude between
180 (Wiggins and Porter 1971, p. 22) and 200 m (591-656 ft), and ends
at approximately 600 m (1,968 ft) (Stephenson 2000, p. 34), and is the
first of the moist zones found on the Galapagos Islands (Fitter et al.
2000, p. 137).
On Floreana, the Scalesia zone is a lush evergreen cloud forest
dominated by Scalesia pedunculata (daisy tree), the largest of the 20
species of Scalesia found in the Galapagos (Fitter et al. 2000, p. 137;
Jackson 1985, p. 95). Scalesia form dense stands (Fitter et al. 2000,
p. 137), with S. pedunculata frequently reaching 15 m (49 ft) in
height, and can reach up to 20 m (66 ft) or more given good
environmental conditions (Fitter et al. 2000, p. 137; Wiggins and
Porter 1971, p. 22).
The Scalesia zone on Floreana is also dominated by the endemic
trees Croton scouleri (Gal[aacute]pagos croton) and Zanthoxylum fagara
(lime prickly-ash), with other dominant plants including Phoradendron
henslowii (mistletoe), the shrub Macraea laricifolia, and introduced
fruit species such as Citrus limetta, Passiflora edulis, and Psidium
guajava (Christensen and Kleindorfer 2008, in preparation). Beneath the
top of the canopy, epiphytes (plants that live on another plant without
causing harm to the host plant) cover trunks, branches, twigs, and even
the leaves of some plant species (Fitter et al. 2000, p. 137; Wiggins
and Porter 1971, p. 24). Common epiphytes found in the Scalesia zone
are mosses, liverworts, ferns, Peperomia, bromeliads (such as
Tillandsia), and orchids (Fitter et al. 2000, p. 137; Jackson 1985, p.
60; Wiggins and Porter 1971, pp. 22, 24). Epiphytes are a prominent
feature of the moist zones of the Galapagos Islands because of the
large amount of time that clouds and mist cover the upper elevations of
the higher islands (Fitter et al. 2000, p. 137).
A large amount of the Scalesia zone has been destroyed on the
inhabited islands because it is the best area for agriculture (Fitter
et al. 2000, p. 137; Jackson 1985, p. 61). The gar[uacute]a (dense sea
mist that sometimes blankets the highlands) keeps the area well-watered
during the cool season (Fitter et al. 2000, p. 137; Jackson 1985, p.
61), which makes the area ideal for agricultural use.
Stotz et al. (1996) reported that the elevational zone in which the
medium tree finch is most common is ``Hill Tropical,'' described as
hills and lower slopes, between 500-900 m (1,640-2,953 ft) (pp. 121,
262). The species reaches its minimum elevation in relatively low-
relief lowland areas and reaches its maximum elevation at 600 m (1,969
ft) (Stotz et al. 1996, p. 262). As a result, one can infer from this
data that the medium tree finch is predominantly found at the highest
end of its elevational distribution, between 500 and 600 m (1,640 and
1,969 ft).
According to Stotz et al. (1996), the medium tree finch uses more
than one level at which it forages within its habitat; specifically,
they noted that it can be found foraging from the understory
(undergrowth) to the canopy (pp. 120, 262). In addition, Bowman (1963)
reports that Camarhynchus species spend a little less than 25 percent
of their time foraging at the
[[Page 74436]]
ground level, while spending the majority of their time foraging above
ground (p. 132). The medium tree finch uses its powerful tip-biting
bill to search under twigs and foliage, probe crevices in the bark of
trees, and cut into tough woody tissues in search of insect larvae
(Bowman 1963, pp. 117, 125), which is its primary food source (Bowman
1963, p. 121). The species also feeds, to a lesser extent, on seeds
(Bowman 1963, p. 121), nectar, young buds, and leaves (Castro and
Phillips 1996, p. 130).
The peak breeding season for the medium tree finch is February-
April (O'Connor et al. 2008b, in preparation). The species prefers to
nest in the tree Scalesia pedunculata (O'Connor et al. 2008b, in
preparation), and has an average clutch size of two to four eggs
(O'Connor et al. 2008a, in preparation). The nests of Darwin's finches
are similar in construction from one species to another; the male
builds a dome-shaped nest, made from twigs, grass, pieces of bark,
lichens, feathers, and other materials, with a small, round, side
entrance (Jackson 1985, p. 191). In a study of the nesting success of
the small tree finch in the highlands of Santa Cruz Island in the
Galapagos, Kleindorfer (2007) found that all nests were located 6 to 10
m (20 to 33 ft) above the ground, on horizontal branches of Scalesia
pedunculata, and positioned by interweaving surrounding smaller twigs
and leaves (p. 796).
Range and Distribution
According to BirdLife International (2008), the current range of
the medium tree finch is estimated to be 23 km\2\ (9 mi\2\). The
species' range encompasses the entire highland area of Floreana;
however, the medium tree finch is restricted to fragmented forest
patches within the highlands, which total approximately 12 km\2\ (4.5
mi\2\) to 17 km\2\ (6.5 mi\2\) of available habitat (O'Connor et al.
2008b, in preparation). Harris (1982) reported that the species was
common in the highlands on Floreana and uncommon to rare on the coast
(p. 150).
Population numbers of this species are poorly known, with an
indirect estimation at 1,000 to 2,499 birds in the year 2000 (BirdLife
International 2008). Fessl et al. (2006a) reported that there were
about 300 breeding pairs remaining on Floreana (p. 745). In a study by
O'Connor et al. (2008b, in preparation), they compared bird abundance
survey data from 2004 and 2008 in order to estimate the population
density of the medium tree finch in the highlands of Floreana. Based on
the results of their study, O'Connor et al. (2008b, in preparation)
estimate that the total medium tree finch population currently consists
of 860-1,220 individuals (72 birds/km\2\ (28 birds/mi\2\), calculated
as an average over the 4 survey sites in 2008). Their study also showed
that the population density of the species at Cerro Pajas, the largest
patch of prime Scalesia habitat (9 km\2\ (3.5 mi\2\)), decreased from
154 birds/km\2\ (59 birds/mi\2\) in 2004 to 60 birds/km\2\ (23 birds/
mi\2\) in 2008 (O'Connor et al. 2008b, in preparation).
Conservation Status
The medium tree finch is identified as a ``critically endangered''
species under Ecuadorian law, Decree No. 3,516--Unified Text of the
Secondary Legislation of the Ministry of Environment (ECOLEX 2003b).
This poorly known species is considered ``Vulnerable'' by the
International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) because it has a
very small range and is restricted to a single island where introduced
species are considered a potential threat to the species and its
habitat (BirdLife International 2008).
Stotz et al. (1996) described the conservation priority for the
medium tree finch as ``high,'' which they defined as a species that is
``threatened,'' usually because of range or habitat restriction, and
already showing signs of serious population decline (p. 262).
Summary of Factors Affecting the Species
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533), and its implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 424, set forth the procedures for adding species
to the Federal Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants.
A species may be determined to be an endangered or threatened species
due to one or more of the five factors described in section 4(a)(1) of
the Act. The five factors are: (A) The present or threatened
destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range; (B)
overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D) the inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms; and (E) other natural or manmade
factors affecting its continued existence.
A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment
of its Habitat or Range
Floreana has the longest history of human habitation of any of the
Galapagos Islands (Fitter et al. 2000, p. 207; Schofield 1989, p. 229);
it was first settled in 1832, three years before Darwin's historic
visit (Jackson 1985, p. 3; Stewart 2006, pp. 55, 68; Sulloway 2008a, in
litt.). Human settlement has resulted in changes to the habitat on
Floreana, including clearing of native vegetation for agriculture and
ranching, as well as the introduction of nonnative animals and plants
(Grant et al. 2005, p. 501).
The medium tree finch prefers to nest and forage in the tree
Scalesia pedunculata (O'Connor et al. 2008b, in preparation).
Currently, S. pedunculata only occurs in small patches in the highlands
of Floreana because the highlands have been cleared for agriculture,
destroyed by introduced mammals, and outcompeted by invasive plants
(O'Connor et al. 2008b, in preparation). Although the Galapagos
National Park covers 97 percent of the land on the Galapagos Islands, a
disproportionate amount of the limited moist highlands falls in the
remaining 3 percent (Stewart 2006, p. 105). As a result, a large amount
of this area has been cleared or altered for farming, and the rest has
been degraded or destroyed by the introduction of animals and plants
(Stewart 2006, p. 105). Currently, only 12 km\2\ (4.5 mi\2\) to 17
km\2\ (6.5 mi\2\) of habitat for the medium tree finch remains in the
highlands of Floreana, and the amount of suitable habitat continues to
decline due to the factors described below.
Agriculture and Ranching
Birds, such as the medium tree finch, are currently facing problems
in the highlands of inhabited islands like Floreana, due to the
extensive destruction and degradation of habitat resulting from
agriculture (BirdLife International 2008; Castro and Phillips 1996, pp.
22-23; Fitter et al. 2000, p. 74). On Floreana, the highlands (or
Scalesia zone) cover an area of approximately 21 km\2\ (8 mi\2\)
(O'Connor et al. 2008b, in preparation). Within this highland forest,
approximately 4 km2 (1.5 mi2) has been cleared for agriculture
(O'Connor et al. 2008b, in preparation). Agriculture is concentrated at
higher elevations because of the availability of richer soil and
greater moisture (Schofield 1989, p. 233). The Scalesia zone is the
richest zone in terms of soil fertility and productivity (Jackson 1985,
p. 61), and, therefore, has been extensively cleared for agricultural
and cattle ranching purposes (Grant 1986, p. 30; Harris 1982, p. 37;
Jackson 1985, pp. 61, 233). When the forest is cleared for agriculture
and ranching, or when cattle are allowed to roam freely within native
vegetation, nesting and foraging sites of the medium tree finch are
destroyed, which can have a negative effect on the species (Stotz et
al. 1996, p. 121).
[[Page 74437]]
Introduced Species
Introduced species are currently considered a major threat to the
native species of the Galapagos Islands (Causton et al. 2006, p. 121;
Fitter et al. 2000, p. 218). Since the early 1800s, humans have
introduced animals and plants to the Galapagos Islands that have
threatened the native vegetation (Schofield 1989, pp. 227, 233).
Animals
When settlers arrived on the Galapagos Islands, they brought with
them domestic animals, some of which escaped and started feral
populations (Jackson 1985, p. 233). On Floreana, introduced animals
include goats (Capra hircus), donkeys (Equs asinus), cattle, and pigs
(Christensen and Kleindorfer 2008, in preparation; Jackson 1985, p.
232). These animals impact the island by significantly altering the
habitat (Grant et al. 2005, p. 501; Schofield 1989, pp. 229-233). This
impact, as well as predation of endemic species by cats (Felis catus)
and rats (Rattus rattus) (discussed under Factor C), has been linked
with the extinction of at least four bird species on the island of
Floreana: the large ground finch (Geospiza magnirostris), the sharp
beaked ground finch (Geospiza difficilis), the Floreana mockingbird
(Nesomimus trifasciatus) (Christensen and Kleindorfer 2008, in
preparation; Grant et al. 2005, p. 501; Harris 1982, pp. 36-37;
Sulloway 1982, pp. 68-69, 88-89), and, most recently, the warbler finch
(Certhidea fusca) (Grant et al. 2005, p. 501).
Introduced animals magnify the detrimental effects of clearing
large areas of native vegetation on Floreana for agriculture and
ranching (Grant 1986, p. 30), by further degrading and destroying the
habitat (Grant et al. 2005, p. 501). The habitat of the medium tree
finch continues to be altered by herbivore degradation caused by free-
ranging, domestic livestock (BirdLife International 2008; Jackson 1985,
p. 110; Lawesson 1986, p. 12). Lawesson (1986) reported that the
Scalesia forest on Floreana is under the most immediate threat from
introduced animals (p. 13).
Goats: Of all the introduced animals on the Galapagos Islands,
goats are the most destructive animals (Fitter et al. 2000, p. 218;
Schofield 1989, p. 227) and the most serious threat to Galapagos
ecosystems (Harris 1982, p. 38; Smith 2005, p. 304). Goats were
probably introduced to the Galapagos Islands in the 19th century by
whalers, fisherman, and pirates, who were looking for an alternative
source of meat (Charles Darwin Research Station 2006a; Fitter et al.
2000, p. 218). They were also brought to the islands by settlers as
livestock (Charles Darwin Research Station 2006a).
Goats adapt to varying conditions extremely well, and they thrive
at all elevations on the Galapagos Islands (Schofield 1989, p. 229),
from the arid lowlands to the moist highlands (Fitter et al. 2000, p.
218), where the medium tree finch occurs. They have a rapid
reproductive rate, which has allowed their population to flourish at
the expense of native animals and vegetation (Jackson 1985, pp. 232-
233).
Goats destroy native vegetation by eating plants down to the ground
(Smith 2005, p. 304), converting forests into barren grasslands and
causing erosion (Charles Darwin Research Station 2006a). Their ability
to eat almost anything has allowed goats to quickly eat their way
across an island (Smith 2005, p. 304). A study of goats on Santiago
Island in the Galapagos showed that at higher elevations, grazing by
goats had eliminated young trees of Scalesia pedunculata, Zanthoxylum
fagara, and Psidium galapageium, in addition to the forest understory
(Schofield 1989, p. 229). On Floreana, Schofield (1989) reports that
approximately 77 percent of the plant species, other than cacti, were
either reduced in number or completely eliminated by goats (p. 229).
Although feral goats have caused considerable damage to the vegetation
in the highlands of Floreana, where the medium tree finch occurs
(O'Connor 2008, in litt.), an eradication program begun in 2006 has
most likely eliminated goats from the island of Floreana (Gardener
2008, in litt.; O'Connor 2008, in litt.).
Cattle: Cattle were introduced to Floreana in 1832 (Hoeck 1984, as
cited in Schofield 1989, p. 231). Initially, cattle were kept at lower
elevations, but with inadequate moisture available in the lower zones,
they were allowed to move into the highlands (Kastdalen 1982, p. 9),
where the medium tree finch occurs. Cattle trample and heavily graze
upon native vegetation (Hamann 1981 and Van der Werff 1979, as cited in
Schofield 1989, p. 231). When allowed to roam freely through highland
forests, they essentially destroy the understory layer (Stotz et al.
1996, p. 121). On Santa Cruz Island, cattle inhibited growth of
Scalesia pedunculata (Kastdalen 1982, p. 8). Schofield (1989) reported
that no organized effort had been made to eliminate cattle, but the
Galapagos National Park Service does encourage ranchers to fence in
herds on Floreana (p. 232). Although most cattle have been removed from
within the boundaries of the Galapagos National Park (Gardener 2008, in
litt.), cattle are still present in the highlands of Floreana and
regularly roam freely within the habitat of the medium tree finch
(O'Connor 2008, in litt.)
Donkeys: In 1887, large numbers of donkeys (Equus asinus) were seen
grazing on hillsides and at the summit on Floreana (Slevin 1959, as
cited in Schofield 1989, p. 232). By 1932, donkeys had already tramped
out regular paths through the vegetation on Floreana (Wittmer 1961, as
cited in Schofield 1989, p. 232). On Santa Cruz, Kastdalen (1982) noted
that they followed cattle into the humid highlands (p. 9). Studies have
shown that donkeys on Floreana have depleted some populations of
Scalesia spp. and Alternanthera nesiotes, another endemic plant
(Eliasson 1982, p. 10). Today, donkeys still persist in the highlands
of Floreana (Gardener 2008, in litt.; O'Connor 2008, in litt.), where
the medium tree finch occurs.
Pigs: Pigs (Sus scrofa) have lived on the Galapagos Islands for
over 150 years (Schofield 1989, p. 232). In 1835, Darwin remarked upon
the many wild pigs he observed in the forests on Floreana (Schofield
1989, p. 232). Pigs live primarily at higher elevations, where abundant
forage is available year-round (Schofield 1989, p. 232). Pigs destroy
native vegetation (Jackson 1985, p. 233) directly by digging up and
eating plants (Hoeck 1984, as cited in Schofield 1989, p. 232).
Currently, pigs continue to be maintained in the agricultural areas of
the highlands of Floreana (O'Connor 2008, in litt.), where the medium
tree finch occurs.
Eradication Programs: Since the Galapagos National Park and the
Charles Darwin Foundation were established in 1959, efforts to control
and eradicate introduced animals have been ongoing (Galapagos
Conservancy n.d.(a)). In 1965, the Charles Darwin Research Station
began the first eradication program to rid the Galapagos island of
Santa Fe of goats (Fitter et al. 2000, p. 218). Ten years after the
program began, the last goat was culled, and now the vegetation on the
island has recovered and native species are beginning to thrive once
again (Fitter et al. 2000, p. 218). Over the years, many of these
control programs have been successful in eradicating introduced animals
from some of the Galapagos Islands, including exterminating 25,000
feral pigs on Santiago Island (Smith 2005, p. 305); removing goats from
Espanola, Plaza Sur, Santa Fe, Marchena and Rabida Islands (Smith 2005,
p. 305); and the very successful ``Project Isabela,''
[[Page 74438]]
which recently eliminated goats from Pinta Island, donkeys and goats
from northern Isabela Island, and donkeys, goats, and pigs from
Santiago Island (Galapagos Conservancy n.d.(b)).
As a result of the success of Project Isabela, the Charles Darwin
Foundation is planning several projects, in partnership with the
Galapagos National Park Service, including eradication of goats and
donkeys from Floreana (Charles Darwin Foundation n.d.(c)). In December
2006, the Galapagos National Park started a project with the goal of
restoring the ecology of Floreana (Galapagos Conservation Trust News
2007). The first phase of ``Project Floreana'' is to eradicate some of
the introduced animals, such as goats and donkeys, in order to stop the
continuing degradation of the vegetation of the island and allow some
of the native and endemic plant species to recover (Galapagos
Conservation Trust News 2007).
From the experience gained during Project Isabela, the program was
able to eradicate 98 percent of the donkeys and goats on Floreana in 22
days (Galapagos Conservation Trust News 2007). Currently, goats have
been unofficially eradicated from Floreana; however, the elimination of
donkeys is still in progress (Gardener 2008, in litt.). A follow-up
census and control effort will be conducted next year to determine the
results of this eradication program (Gardener 2008, in litt.). Due to
the removal of these invasive species, it is expected that within the
next few years the benefits to the ecosystem on Floreana will be seen
(Galapagos Conservation Trust News 2007). This is expected to result in
an increase in native flora and fauna, and the repopulation by native
flora and fauna of areas previously destroyed on Floreana by herbivore
degradation (Galapagos Conservation Trust News 2007). However, at this
time, we believe that introduced species still pose a threat to the
medium tree finch and its habitat.
Plants
Introduced plants outcompete native vegetation for sunlight, water,
and nutrients (Smith 2005, p. 304). Since agriculture is concentrated
at higher elevations because of the rich soil and moisture available in
these areas, introduced plants are more frequently found in the humid
highland forests and often escape from cultivated areas into native
vegetation (Schofield 1989, p. 233). Schofield (1989) found that
accidental escape of introduced plant species, as well as the
purposeful introduction of these species, had altered the highland
habitat where tree finches occur (pp. 233-235).
Christensen and Kleindorfer (2008, in preparation) found that the
medium tree finch frequently forages on introduced fruit species. They
report that this observation may suggest that the species is able to
adapt to and potentially benefit from this change in their environment
(Christensen and Kleindorfer 2008, in preparation). However, they did
not observe any species of tree finch, including the medium tree finch,
nesting in an introduced plant species (Christensen and Kleindorfer
2008, in preparation). A further study by O'Connor et al. (2008b, in
preparation) found that the majority (99 percent) of nests built by
medium tree finches were constructed in native species, Scalesia
pedunculata (83 percent), Zanthoxylum fagara (14 percent), and Croton
scouleri (2 percent), with 1 percent of the nests built in an
introduced species, guava (Psidium guajava).
On Floreana, small populations of Scalesia forest still exist in
the highlands, but these areas are under pressure and competition from
the aggressive Psidium guajava and Lantana camara (Lawesson 1986, p.
13).
Guava: The cultivated guava (Psidium guajava) with its edible
fruits is the most widespread introduced plant species on the Galapagos
Islands (Schofield 1989, p. 233). Guava has been characterized as out
of control and invading vast areas of native vegetation in the humid
highlands on Floreana (Eckhardt 1972, p. 585; Eliasson 1982, p. 11;
Tuoc 1983, p. 25). It is an aggressive, introduced plant that covers
8,000 ha (19,768 ac) on Floreana (Parque Nacional Gal[aacute]pagos
n.d.(a)).
The dispersal of guava is aided by introduced cattle, which eat the
fruits, and then wander from the farm into the National Park and
excrete the seeds in their dung (De Vries and Black 1983, p. 19; Tuoc
1983, p. 25). In addition, as cattle graze, they trample other
vegetation, providing the open spaces and abundant light needed for the
germination of guava seeds (Van der Werff 1979, as cited in Schofield
1989, p. 233). Once guava becomes established in an open habitat, they
grow quickly and shade seedlings of native species like Scalesia
pedunculata, thus preventing their growth (Parque Nacional
Gal[aacute]pagos n.d.(a); Perry 1974, p. 12).
One obvious step to take in order to minimize the further spread of
guava is to fence cattle (De Vries and Black, p. 19; Tuoc 1983, p. 25).
Although some residents have already done this, herds of free-ranging
cattle are unable to be restricted in this manner (Schofield 1989, pp.
233-234). In 1971, a campaign was started to cut down guava trees on
Santa Cruz Island (Schofield 1989, p. 234). One report indicated that
more than 95,000 guava trees were eliminated between 1980 and 1981
(Tuoc 1983, p. 25). Schofield (1989) believes that this program should
be expanded to other islands with large populations of guava (p. 234).
Currently, we have no information to indicate that a program to
eliminate guava has occurred on Floreana.
Other Plant Species: Floreana is also impacted by other introduced
plant species. Lantana camara was introduced as an ornamental on
Floreana in 1832, and now covers 3,000 ha (7,413 ac) (Parque Nacional
Gal[aacute]pagos n.d.(a)). It is a quick spreading, tropical shrub that
displaces native vegetation, and is now found on Floreana from the arid
region up to the Scalesia forest (Hamann 1984, as cited in Schofield
1989, p. 234). Citrus trees (Citrus spp.) have been reported as
``common'' (Eliasson 1982, p. 11) and have invaded the native
vegetation at higher elevations on Floreana (Eliasson 1982, p. 11;
Porter 1973, p. 276). Cattle and pigs aid in the further spread of
citrus trees (Citrus spp.) by feeding on the fruits and dispersing
seeds in new locations (Wittmer 1961, as cited in Schofield 1989, p.
234).
Summary of Factor A
The medium tree finch is found primarily in the moist highland
forests (i.e., the Scalesia zone) on the island of Floreana. Since the
island was first settled in 1832, the habitat of the medium tree finch
has been cleared for agriculture and ranching, and further degraded by
introduced animals and plants. Herbivores, such as donkeys, cattle, and
pigs, continue to destroy the species' habitat by trampling and grazing
heavily on native vegetation, including Scalesia pedunculata, the tree
primarily used by the medium tree finch for nesting and foraging. In
addition, cattle and pigs help to spread introduced plants, such as
guava and citrus trees, by feeding on the fruits and depositing the
seeds into native vegetation. These introduced plants outcompete native
species, such as Scalesia pedunculata, reducing the availability of
nest sites for the medium tree finch. Although an eradication program
was started in December 2006 to eliminate goats and donkeys from
Floreana, we are not aware of any current programs to remove cattle and
pigs from the island. As a result, these introduced species will
continue to destroy and degrade the habitat of the
[[Page 74439]]
medium tree finch, which has already been reduced to an area of only 12
km2 (4.5 mi2) to 17 km2 (6.5
mi2). Therefore, we find that habitat destruction of the
moist highland forests of Floreana, as a result of agriculture and
introduced species, is a threat to the continued existence of the
medium tree finch.
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
We are not aware of any scientific or commercial information that
indicates overutilization of the medium tree finch for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational purposes poses a threat to
this species. As a result, we are not considering overutilization to be
a contributing factor to the continued existence of the medium tree
finch.
C. Disease or Predation
Disease
The recent discovery of an introduced parasitic fly (Philornis
downsi) on Floreana Island (Kleindorfer, pers. comm., as cited in Grant
et al. 2005, p. 502; Wiedenfeld et al. 2007, p. 17) has raised concerns
about the impact this parasite might be having on the medium tree finch
(Dudaniec et al. 2008; Fessl et al. 2006b, p. 59). In March 1997,
Fessl, Couri, and Tebbich observed the presence of Philornis downsi in
the nests of Darwin's finches on the Galapagos Islands for the first
time (Fessl and Tebbich 2002, p. 445).
Philornis downsi was sampled by the entomologists S.B. and J. Peck,
and B.J. Sinclair, in 1989, although the fly was not formally
identified until the collections were examined in detail in 1998 (Fessl
and Tebbich 2002, p. 445; Fessl et al. 2001, p. 318). However, it now
appears that P. downsi was present on the Galapagos Islands at least 40
years ago, as it was recently identified from collections made on Santa
Cruz Island in 1964 (Causton et al. 2006, pp. 134, 143). We are not
aware of any information indicating when P. downsi may have been
introduced to the island of Floreana.
Philornis downsi is a Muscidae (fly) from a genus of obligate bird
parasites (Couri 1985, as cited in Fessl and Tebbich 2002, p. 445;
Fessl et al. 2001, p. 317), depending entirely on a host for its
survival. The adult fly is non-parasitic, and feeds on fruits, flowers,
and decaying material (Fessl et al. 2001, p. 317; Fessl et al. 2006b,
p. 56). Larvae of P. downsi belong to the group of external
haematophages (bloodsuckers); first, second, and third instar
(developmental stage) larvae are blood feeders, believed to suck blood
from nestlings during the night and then retreat to the bottom of the
nest during the day (Dodge and Aitken 1968 and Skidmore 1985, as cited
in Fessl et al. 2006b, p. 56). Adult flies lay eggs inside the nasal
cavities of newly hatched nestlings (usually 1 to 3 days old), which
hatch into first instar larvae (Muth 2007, as cited in Dudaniec et al.
2008; Fessl et al. 2006a, p. 744). As the larvae reach their second
instar stage, they exit the nasal cavities of nestlings and begin to
live as nest-dwelling haematophagous larvae (Fessl et al. 2006a, p.
744). Second and third instar larvae of P. downsi seem to be
exclusively external (Fessl et al. 2006b, p. 59), feeding on the blood
and tissues of nestlings (Dudaniec and Kleindorfer 2006, pp. 15-16).
The majority of larvae reach their third instar stage at the time of
host fledging (Dudaniec et al. 2008). At this stage, the larvae of P.
downsi detach from the nestling and form their pupae at the bottom of
the nesting material, remaining for approximately 2 weeks before
emerging as adult flies (Dudaniec and Kleindorfer 2006, p. 16; Fessl et
al. 2006b, p. 56).
Philornis downsi occurs in finch nests on Floreana (Wiedenfeld et
al. 2007, p. 17), and has been shown to significantly lower fledgling
success of the finches (Fessl and Tebbich 2002, pp. 448-450). A number
of studies have associated Philornis parasitism with mortality (Fessl
and Tebbich 2002, p. 448), reduced nestling growth and development
(Fessl et al. 2006b, p. 58), and a reduction in hemoglobin level
(Dudaniec et al. 2006, p. 88).
A study by Fessl and Tebbich (2002) on Santa Cruz Island found that
97 percent of finch nests were infected with the Philornis downsi
parasite, both in the lower arid zone and the higher Scalesia zone of
the island (p. 449). Parasitism by P. downsi caused complete brood loss
in approximately 19 percent of the infected finch nests and partial
brood loss (defined as the successful fledging of one or two nestlings)
in an additional 8 percent of the finch nests studied (Fessl and
Tebbich 2002, p. 448). They also found that in parasitized nests, the
percentage of successful fledglings differed significantly depending
upon brood size; nests with only one nestling always failed, nests with
two nestlings successfully fledged nestlings 50 percent of the time,
and nests with three or four nestlings successfully fledged nestlings
75-85 percent of the time (Fessl and Tebbich 2002, p. 448). The high
nestling mortality in small broods may be the result of the high
parasite-to-nestling ratio, as compared to larger broods (Fessl and
Tebbich 2002, p. 449). Since P. downsi infects nests regardless of the
number of nestlings (Fessl and Tebbich 2002, p. 450), large broods may
be able to spread the larval load among more nestlings, thereby
reducing the number of larvae affecting each individual nestling.
In an experimental study conducted on Santa Cruz Island, Fessl et
al. (2006b) found that high mortality of nestlings was directly
attributable to parasitism by Philornis downsi, as evidenced by a near
threefold increase in fledgling success in a parasite-reduced group
(86.6 percent) versus a parasite-infested control group (33.9 percent)
(pp. 58-59). They also found that within 4 days, mass gain was
significantly higher (an almost two-fold positive difference) in the
parasite-reduced group than in the parasite-infested control group
(Fessl et al. 2006b, p. 58). In studies of other avian species,
fledgling body mass has been found to be a key factor for juvenile
survival (Magrath 1991, pp. 343-344; Tinbergen and Boerlijist 1990, pp.
1123-1124). As a result, Fessl et al. (2006b) concluded that the
results of their study showed that given the significant difference in
body mass between the two groups, parasitized nests will likely provide
less recruitment into the breeding population (p. 59). Further, because
species with small broods have been found to suffer higher parasite
loads and higher nestling mortality (Fessl and Tebbich 2002, pp. 445,
449-450), infestation of P. downsi on species with naturally low clutch
sizes, such as the medium tree finch, is of particular concern (Fessl
et al. 2006b, p. 59).
Dudaniec et al. (2006) found a significant negative correlation
between Philornis downsi parasite intensity and hemoglobin
concentrations, and a positive correlation between parasite intensity
and immature red blood cell counts, in small ground finches studied on
Santa Cruz and Floreana Islands (pp. 88, 90, 92). Small ground finch
nestlings with higher P. downsi intensities suffered from lower
hemoglobin concentrations and reduced fledging success (Dudaniec et al.
2006, p. 92). Furthermore, nestlings with lower parasite intensity had
higher hemoglobin levels and increased fledging success (Dudaniec et
al. 2006, p. 93). Dudaniec et al. (2006) also found a negative
correlation between the number of immature red blood cells and
hemoglobin levels in nestlings (p. 92).
The fitness impacts to nestlings of lower hemoglobin levels are
likely to be significant (Dudaniec et al. 2006, p. 93). The results of
a study by O'Brien et al. (2001) showed that low hemoglobin levels in
nestlings reduce the transport
[[Page 74440]]
of oxygen to tissues (p. 75). Thus, fledglings that are anemic
(hemoglobin deficient) from parasite feeding may have a reduced ability
to sustain flight and, consequently, a reduced ability to escape
predators and find food (O'Brien et al. 2001, p. 75). The high
hemoglobin levels found by Dudaniec et al. (2006) in mature birds,
combined with their observation that adult finches were never found to
be actively parasitized, suggest that adult birds are not
physiologically affected by Philornis downsi (p. 92).
Fessl et al. (2006a) reported extremely high levels of blood loss
in nestlings (18 to 55 percent) caused by Philornis downsi larvae (p.
745). Daily blood loss over 10 percent is likely to have negative
impacts on nestlings, including health problems and developmental
deficiencies, while blood loss over 25 percent would become lethal
(Kaneko, pers. comm., as cited in Gold and Dahlsten 1983, p. 569).
In 2006, nesting success in the medium tree finch was examined for
the first time (Fessl et al. 2006a, p. 746). The study by O'Connor et
al. (2008a, in preparation) on tree finches in the highlands of
Floreana showed that the medium tree finch had the highest Philornis
downsi parasite intensity (an average of 52 parasites per nest),
compared to small and large tree finches. Of 63 medium tree finch
nests, only 16 nests had nestlings that survived to 6 days post-
hatching, and only 4 nests produced fledglings (O'Connor et al. 2008a,
in preparation). Most nests failed to produce fledglings; 68.8 percent
(11 of 16) of medium tree finch nests suffered total brood loss, while
18.8 percent (3 of 16) of nests had partial brood loss (O'Connor et al.
2008a, in preparation). Philornis downsi larvae or pupae were found in
100 percent (16 of 16) of medium tree finch nests, and all nestlings
had P. downsi parasites (O'Connor et al. 2008a, in preparation). The
majority (54 percent) of nestling mortality in medium tree finches was
due to parasitism by P. downsi (O'Connor et al. 2008a, in preparation).
All nestlings found dead in nests had large open wounds on their bodies
and significant loss of blood or body fluids, all of which are signs of
P. downsi parasitism (O'Connor et al. 2008a, in preparation).
O'Connor et al. (2008a, in preparation) discuss the reasons why the
Philornis downsi parasite intensity is high in the medium tree finch.
One possibility they explain is that the medium tree finch's preferred
breeding habitat is next to an agricultural area, where the close
proximity of the agriculture fields (with citrus trees and other
fruits) act as a feeding location for the adult flies (O'Connor et al.
2008a, in preparation). In addition, moist highlands favor consistent
breeding of medium tree finches, thus providing flies with a dependable
supply of nestlings for P. downsi larvae to feed upon (O'Connor et al.
2008a, in preparation). Currently, the medium tree finch has the
highest P. downsi parasite intensity of any finch species on Floreana,
and the second highest of any finch species studied on the Galapagos
Islands (O'Connor et al. 2008a, in preparation).
A study by Wiedenfeld et al. (2007) found that there was a
significant increase in the number of Philornis downsi parasites
(larvae, pupae, or puparia) per nest at higher altitudes (i.e., in the
humid highlands) (pp. 17-18). According to their study, the
distribution of P. downsi seems to be related to the amount of humidity
and moisture available on the islands (Wiedenfeld et al. 2007, p. 18).
Although it appears that the fly does more poorly in dry conditions
(either in the lowland, arid zone of islands, or during drought), birds
also do more poorly in these situations (Wiedenfeld et al. 2007, p.
18). In addition, during years of abundant rainfall when birds breed
more successfully, the flies are also likely to be more plentiful, and,
therefore, can cause higher mortality (Wiedenfeld et al. 2007, p. 18).
It is believed that finches do not suffer from any type of endemic,
haematophagous ectoparasite (a bloodsucking parasite that lives on the
outside of its host, and not within the host's body) (Fessl et al.
2006b, p. 56). Therefore, they have not developed an adaptive response
to this kind of introduced pathogen (Altizer et al. 2003, as cited in
Dudaniec and Kleindorfer 2006, p. 19). Because the medium tree finch is
newly colonized by Philornis downsi, it may experience significant
initial mortality since the host has not yet developed a strong
behavioral or immunological defense mechanism against the parasite
(Dudaniec and Kleindorfer 2006, pp. 18-19).
As many of these studies show, finches have a slim chance of
reproducing without avoiding effects of Philornis downsi mortality
(Dudaniec and Kleindorfer 2006, p. 18; Wiedenfeld et al. 2007, p. 18).
Causton et al. (2006) developed a system to evaluate the invasiveness
of insect species introduced to the Galapagos Islands based on trophic
functional role, distribution in the Galapagos, and their history of
invasiveness elsewhere (p. 121). Philornis downsi was given the highest
invasiveness ranking affecting fauna endemic to the Galapagos Islands,
because P. downsi seriously impacts species of high conservation value
in the Galapagos (Causton et al. 2006, pp. 123, 134). Grant et al.
(2005) reported that the decline and possible local extinction of one
of Darwin's finches, the warbler finch (Certhidea fusca), on Floreana
by 2004 may have been partially caused by P. downsi (p. 502; Fessl et
al. 2006b, p. 59), although there is no conclusive evidence (Dudaniec
and Kleindorfer 2006, p. 13).
It is best to eliminate invasive species before they are able to
adapt to the local environment in which they have colonized (Frankham
2005, p. 385). However, for Philornis downsi, this introduced parasitic
fly has become firmly established in the Galapagos Islands, prompting
the need for a long-term eradication program in conjunction with
continuous quarantine and monitoring practices (Dudaniec et al. 2008).
Programs to eradicate Philornis downsi from the Galapagos Islands
are difficult and costly (Fessl et al. 2006b, p. 59). In the
experimental study by Fessl et al. (2006b), they found that a single
insecticide treatment of 1 percent pyrethrin solution (done at a
nestling age of 4 days) was sufficient to reduce the number of
parasites per nest to almost zero (pp. 57-59). This treatment offers
one short-term solution to locally protect single nests of species of
high conservation concern (Fessl et al. 2006b, p. 59). However, this
treatment is not practicable as a long-term solution for controlling
the fly throughout the Galapagos Islands because it would be extremely
labor intensive and would require the nests of all host species to be
treated on every island in the Galapagos where P. downsi is found (at
least 11 islands; Wiedenfeld et al. 2007, p. 16).
The Charles Darwin Foundation (CDF) has begun an effort to develop
biological control approaches for Philornis downsi (Charles Darwin
Foundation n.d.(c)). In 2008, CDF received $58,000 for Phase I of the
CDF Priority Project: ``Control of the parasitic fly Philornis downsi''
(Charles Darwin Foundation n.d.(a)). This project will study the
biology and life history of P. downsi, aiding in the development of
effective, long-term control methods that will not harm other species
(Charles Darwin Foundation 2007). CDF reports that control methods are
urgently needed to eliminate the threat of extinction among bird
species, such as the medium tree finch, affected by this parasite
(Charles Darwin Foundation 2007).
[[Page 74441]]
Predation
Floreana has a suite of introduced predators including black rats
(Rattus rattus) and cats (Felis catus) (Kleindorfer et al. 2008, in
preparation). These predators feed on eggs, nestlings, and even adult
birds (Castro and Phillips 1996, p. 22), and have depleted native
populations (Grant et al. 2005, p. 501; Jackson 1985, p. 232).
Rats: Black rats are one of the worst introduced species to the
Galapagos Islands, destroying bird nests and eggs, and consuming
hatchlings (Charles Darwin Foundation n.d.(b); Charles Darwin Research
Station 2006b). Rats arrived on the Galapagos Islands on ships
beginning in the late 1600s, and currently are found on all inhabited
islands, including Floreana (Charles Darwin Research Station 2006b).
Rats are currently present in the highlands of Floreana, and can be
seen running up and down trees, or along the forest floor in the
habitat of the medium tree finch (O'Connor 2008, in litt.). Because
rats can easily climb, they have been implicated in the population
declines of tree-nesting birds, such as the mangrove finch
(Camarhynchus heliobates) (Charles Darwin Research Station 2006b).
The CDF's long-term plan is to successfully eradicate introduced
rats on all islands, a necessary measure in order to restore the
Galapagos Islands and its endemic species (Charles Darwin Research
Station 2006b). Currently, a control program is ongoing in the
highlands of Floreana to control rats in the nesting area of the
Galapagos petrel (Pterodroma phaeopygia) (Gardener 2008, in litt.). The
project is being conducted at Cerro Pajas (Cruz and Cruz 1996, pp. 25-
30), the site of the largest patch of prime Scalesia habitat (9 km\2\
(3.5 mi\2\)) (O'Connor 2008, in litt.), where the medium tree finch
occurs. Although an eradication program has begun, it has not yet been
completed, and therefore, rats remain a threat to the medium tree
finch.
A study of tree finches in the highlands of Floreana by O'Connor et
al. (2008a, in preparation) found that one-third of medium tree finch
nests experienced nestling predation (in both years, 2006 and 2008),
and egg depredation was observed in 22 percent of the nests (but only
in 2008). Although nest predation was not observed directly, the
identity of the predators could be inferred from the condition of the
nest (O'Connor 2008, in litt.). It is likely that rats were
predominantly responsible for the predation (O'Connor 2008, in litt.).
Because agricultural areas are close to the breeding sites of the
medium tree finch, they provide support for the continued persistence
and movement of introduced predators, mainly rodents (O'Connor et al.
2008a, in preparation).
Cats: Cats are highly predatory animals, targeting birds and other
native species (Charles Darwin Foundation n.d.(b); Charles Darwin
Research Station 2006c; Smith 2005, p. 304). Cats were introduced to
the Galapagos Islands by ships and as domestic pets of settlers
(Charles Darwin Research Station 2006c). Today, cats are currently
found in the agricultural areas of the highlands of Floreana (Gardener
2008, in litt.; O'Connor 2008, in litt.), where the medium tree finch
occurs.
Both feral and domestic cats prey upon and impact the survival of
Darwin's finches, and are a threat to endemic species on Floreana
(Charles Darwin Research Station 2006c). In the 19th century, cats may
have caused significant declines in the populations of large ground
finches, sharp-beaked ground finches, and mockingbirds, pushing them
toward extinction on Floreana (Grant et al. 2005, p. 501).
The Galapagos National Park Service and the CDF are working to
control and eradicate domestic and feral cats on all of the islands
(Charles Darwin Research Station 2006c). This plan includes working
with communities to gain acceptance of and compliance with the
sterilization or removal of domestic cats, and the development of an
eradication program to eliminate feral cats from natural areas on all
populated islands, such as Floreana (Charles Darwin Research Station
2006c).
Summary of Factor C
Philornis downsi, an introduced parasitic fly, poses a significant
threat to the survival of the medium tree finch. The larvae feed on
finch nestlings causing mortality, reduced nestling growth, lower
fledgling success, and a reduction in hemoglobin levels, which all
combine to severely affect the recruitment dynamics of the species. The
medium tree finch has the highest P. downsi parasite intensity of all
the finch species found on Floreana, and the second highest of any
finch species studied on the Galapagos Islands. Although a project
examining the biology of P. downsi and how to control it was begun in
2008, a long-term control method for the parasitic fly has not yet been
developed. As a result, the medium tree finch and its reproductive
success will continue to be negatively impacted by P. downsi.
Therefore, we find that parasitism by Philornis downsi is a significant
threat to the continued existence of the medium tree finch.
Introduced predators on Floreana, such as black rats and cats, feed
on eggs and nestlings of birds, causing dramatic reductions in native
populations. One study found that 33 percent of medium tree finch nests
experienced nestling predation, while egg depredation was observed in
22 percent of the nests. Although nest predation was not observed
directly, rats are most likely responsible for much of the predation.
In an effort to help restore endemic species on the Galapagos Islands,
one goal of CDF was to develop programs to eradicate introduced rats
and cats on all islands. Even though an effort to eliminate rats from
the Galapagos petrel nesting area in the highlands of Floreana has
begun, it has not yet been completed. Furthermore, we do not have any
information to indicate that an eradication program for cats has begun
on the island of Floreana. Therefore, we find that predation is a
threat to the continued existence of the medium tree finch.
D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
The medium tree finch is identified as a ``critically endangered''
species under Ecuadorian law and Decree No. 3,516--Unified Text of the
Secondary Legislation of the Ministry of Environment of 2002 (ECOLEX
2003b). Decree No. 3,516 of 2002 summarizes the law governing
environmental policy in Ecuador and provides that the country's
biodiversity be protected and used primarily in a sustainable manner
(ECOLEX 2003b). Appendix 1 of Decree No. 3,516 lists the Ecuadorian
fauna and flora that are considered threatened or in danger of
extinction. Species are categorized as critically endangered (En
peligro cr[iacute]tico), endangered (En peligro), or vulnerable
(Vulnerable).
Resolution No. 105--Regulatory Control of Hunting Seasons and
Wildlife Species in the Country and Agreement No. 143--Standards for
the Control of Hunting Seasons and Licenses for Hunting of Wildlife,
regulate and prohibit commercial and sport hunting of all wild bird
species, except those specifically identified by the Ministry of the
Environment or otherwise permitted (ECOLEX 2000; ECOLEX 2003a). The
Ministry of the Environment does not permit commercial or sport hunting
of the medium tree finch because of its status as a ``critically
endangered'' species (ECOLEX 2003b). However, we do not consider
hunting (Factor B) to be a threat to the medium tree finch, so this law
does not address any of the threats to the species.
The first legislation to specifically protect the Galapagos Islands
and its
[[Page 74442]]
wildlife and plants was enacted in 1934 and further supplemented in
1936, but effective legislation was not passed until 1959, when the
Ecuadorian government passed new legislation declaring the islands a
National Park (Fitter et al. 2000, p. 216; Jackson 1985, pp. 7, 230;
Stewart 2006, p. 164). Ecuador designated 97 percent of the Galapagos
land area as the National Park, leaving the remaining 3 percent
distributed between the inhabited areas on Santa Cruz, San
Crist[oacute]bal, Isabela, and Floreana Islands (Jackson 1985, p. 230;
Schofield 1989, p. 236). A disproportionate amount of the limited moist
highlands falls in the remaining 3 percent (Stewart 2006, p. 105). The
land is divided into various zones signifying the level of human use
(Parque Nacional Gal[aacute]pagos n.d.(b)). Although Floreana Island
includes a large ``conservation and restoration'' zone, it does include
a significant ``farming'' zone (Parque Nacional Gal[aacute]pagos
n.d.(b)), where agricultural and grazing activities continue to impact
the habitat.
In March 1998, the National Congress and the Ecuadorian President
enacted the Law of the Special Regimen for the Conservation and
Sustainable Development of the Province of the Galapogos, which has
given the islands some legislative support to establish regulations
related to the transport of introduced species and implement a
quarantine and inspection system (Causton et al. 2000, p. 10; Instituto
Nacional Gal[aacute]pagos n.d.; Smith 2005, p. 304).
As a result, in 1999, the Inspection and Quarantine System for
Galapagos (SICGAL) was implemented (Causton et al. 2006, p. 121), with
the aim of preventing introduced species from reaching the islands
(Causton et al. 2000, p. 10; Charles Darwin Foundation n.d.(d)).
Inspectors are stationed at points of entry and exit on the Galapagos
Islands and Continental Ecuador, where they check freight and luggage
for permitted and prohibited items (Charles Darwin Foundation n.d.(d)).
The goal is to rapidly contain and eliminate newly arrived species
(detected by SICGAL and early warning monitoring programs) that are
considered threats for the Galapagos Islands (Causton et al. 2006, p.
121). However, a scarcity of information on alien insect species
currently on the Galapagos Islands prevents officials from knowing
whether or not a newly detected insect is in fact a recent introduction
(Causton et al. 2006, p. 121). Without the necessary information to
make this determination, they cannot afford to spend the time and
resources on a rapid response when the ``new introduction'' is actually
a species that already occurs elsewhere on the Galapagos Islands
(Causton et al. 2006, p. 121).
The April 2007 World Heritage Centre-IUCN monitoring mission report
assessed the state of conservation on the Galapagos Islands based on
information gathered during their monitoring mission and multiple
meetings, and found continuing problems (UNESCO World Heritage Centre
2007). The report found deficiencies that preclude the full application
and enforcement of the Special Law for Galapagos (UNESCO World Heritage
Centre 2007). Also, although the risk from invasive species is rapidly
increasing, the report found that the Agricultural Health Service of
Ecuador (SESA) and SICGAL do not have adequate staff and capacity to
deal with the nature and scale of the problem (UNESCO World Heritage
Centre 2007). SICGAL estimates that 779 invertebrates entered the
Galapagos Islands via aircraft in 2006 (UNESCO World Heritage Centre
2007). In addition, the report found that the staff of the Galapagos
National Park lack the capacity and facilities for effective law
enforcement (UNESCO World Heritage Centre 2007).
Previous UNESCO-IUCN Galapagos mission reports (in 2005 and 2006)
to the World Heritage Committee have consistently outlined major
threats to the long-term conservation of the Galapagos Islands,
including the introduction of nonnative plant and animal species
(UNESCO World Heritage Centre News 2007b). UNESCO World Heritage Centre
reports that, despite an excellent legal framework, national government
institutions encoun