Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Listing the Blue-throated Macaw, 61208-61219 [2013-24215]
Download as PDF
61208
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 192 / Thursday, October 3, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
radionavigation aids are permitted
where they operate with airborne
radionavigation devices.
(c) Frequencies available for
radionavigation land test stations. (1)
The frequencies set forth in §§ 87.187(c),
(e) through (j), (r), (t), and (ff); and
87.475(b)(6) through (b)(11) may be
assigned to radionavigation land test
stations for the testing of aircraft
transmitting equipment that normally
operate on these frequencies and for the
testing of land-based receiving
equipment that operate with airborne
radionavigation equipment.
(2) The frequencies available for
assignment to radionavigation land test
stations for the testing of airborne
receiving equipment are 108.000 and
108.050 MHz for VHF omni-range;
108.100 and 108.150 MHz for localizer;
334.550 and 334.700 MHz for glide
slope; 978 and 979 MHz (X channel)/
1104 MHz (Y channel) for DME; 978
MHz for Universal Access Transceiver;
1030 MHz for air traffic control radar
beacon transponders; 1090 MHz for
Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance
Systems (TCAS); and 5031.0 MHz for
microwave landing systems.
Additionally, the frequencies in
paragraph (b) of this section may be
assigned to radionavigation land test
stations after coordination with the
FAA. The following conditions apply:
*
*
*
*
*
■ 12. Section 87.483 is added to subpart
Q to read as follows:
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 87.483
Audio visual warning systems.
An audio visual warning system
(AVWS) is a radar-based obstacle
avoidance system. AVWS activates
obstruction lighting and transmits VHF
audible warnings to alert pilots of
potential collisions with land-based
obstructions. The AVWS operations are
limited to locations where natural and
man-made obstructions exist. The
continuously operating radar calculates
the location, direction and groundspeed
of nearby aircraft that enter one of two
warning zones reasonably established
by the licensee. As aircraft enter the first
warning zone, the AVWS activates
obstruction lighting. If the aircraft
continues toward the obstacle and
enters the second warning zone, the
VHF radio transmits an audible warning
describing the obstacle.
(a) Radiodetermination (radar)
frequencies. Frequencies authorized
under § 87.475(b)(8) of this chapter are
available for use by an AVWS. The
frequency coordination requirements in
§ 87.475(a) of this chapter apply.
(b) VHF audible warning frequencies.
Frequencies authorized under
§ 87.187(j), § 87.217(a), § 87.241(b), and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:47 Oct 02, 2013
Jkt 232001
§ 87.323(b) (excluding 121.950 MHz) of
this chapter are available for use by an
AVWS. Multiple frequencies may be
authorized for an individual station,
depending on need and the use of
frequencies assigned in the vicinity of a
proposed AVWS facility. Use of these
frequencies is subject to the following
limitations:
(1) The output power shall not exceed
¥3 dBm watts for each frequency
authorized.
(2) The antenna used in transmitting
the audible warnings must be
omnidirectional with a maximum gain
equal to or lower than a half-wave
centerfed dipole above 30 degrees
elevation, and a maximum gain of +5
dBi from horizontal up to 30 degrees
elevation.
(3) The audible warning shall not
exceed two seconds in duration. No
more than six audible warnings may be
transmitted in a single transmit cycle,
which shall not exceed 12 seconds in
duration. An interval of at least twenty
seconds must occur between transmit
cycles.
[FR Doc. 2013–22500 Filed 10–2–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R9–ES–2012–0034; 450
003 0115]
RIN 1018–AY68
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Listing the Blue-throated
Macaw
AGENCY:
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
Final rule.
ACTION:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), are listing the
blue-throated macaw (Ara
glaucogularis) as endangered under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act). This species is endemic
to a small area in Bolivia, and there are
estimated to be fewer than 500
individuals remaining in the wild. Its
status remains tenuous despite
conservation efforts. Threats to the
species include: lack of reproductive
success (loss of nestlings) due to nest
failure, which primarily is caused by
competition for nest sites and predation
by larger avian species; and the lack of
suitable, available habitat in addition to
its small population size.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
This final rule is effective
November 4, 2013.
ADDRESSES: This final rule is available
on the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov under Docket No.
FWS–R9–ES–2012–0034. Comments
and materials we received, as well as
supporting documentation used in the
preparation of this rule, are available for
public inspection, by appointment,
during normal business hours at: U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401 N.
Fairfax Drive, Suite 400, Arlington, VA
22203.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Janine Van Norman, Chief, Branch of
Foreign Species, Endangered Species
Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
4401 North Fairfax Drive, Room 420,
Arlington, VA 22203; telephone 703–
358–2171. If you use a
telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD), call the Federal Information
Relay Service (FIRS) at 800–877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DATES:
Background
The Endangered Species Act of 1973,
as amended (Act) (16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.), is a law that was passed to prevent
extinction of species by providing
measures to help alleviate the loss of
species and their habitats. Before a plant
or animal species can receive the
protection provided by the Act, it must
first be added to one of the Federal Lists
of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants. Section 4 of the Act and its
implementing regulations at part 424 of
title 50 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) set forth the
procedures for adding species to these
lists.
Previous Federal Actions
We received the petition to list this
species on May 6, 1991, from Alison
Stattersfield, of the International
Council for Bird Preservation (ICBP).
That petition requested that we list 53
foreign birds under the Act, including
the blue-throated macaw, which is the
subject of this final rule. We took
several actions on this petition. On
December 16, 1991, we published a
positive 90-day finding and announced
the initiation of a status review of the
species included in the 1991 petition
(56 FR 65207). On March 28, 1994, we
published a document that served as our
12-month finding on the 1991 petition
(59 FR 14496). In that document, we
announced our finding that listing 38
species from the 1991 petition,
including the blue-throated macaw, was
warranted but precluded because of
other, higher priority listing actions.
The blue-throated macaw was assigned
E:\FR\FM\03OCR1.SGM
03OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 192 / Thursday, October 3, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
a listing priority number (LPN) of 2.
Species are assigned LPNs based on the
magnitude and immediacy of threats, as
well as their taxonomic status. A lower
LPN corresponds to a higher priority to
determine a listing status. An LPN of 2
reflects threats that are both imminent
and high in magnitude, as well as the
taxonomic classification of the bluethroated macaw as a full species. In the
May 3, 2011, Annual Notice of Review,
we announced that listing was
warranted but precluded for 20 foreign
species, including the blue-throated
macaw.
On January 10, 2013, we issued a
proposed rule (78 FR 2239) to add the
blue-throated macaw as endangered to
the Federal List of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife.
Summary of Comments
We base this rule on a review of the
best scientific and commercial
information available, including all
information we received during the
public comment period. In the January
10, 2013, proposed rule (78 FR 2239),
we requested that all interested parties
submit information that might
contribute to development of a final
rule. The public comment period was
open for 60 days, ending March 11,
2013. We also contacted appropriate
scientific experts and organizations, and
invited them to comment on the
proposed listing in accordance with our
peer review policy, described in the
section below. We received 23
comments from members of the public
including peer reviewer; these
comments are available at https://
www.regulations.gov under Docket No.
FWS–R9–ES–2012–0034).
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Peer Review
In accordance with our policy,
‘‘Notice of Interagency Cooperative
Policy for Peer Review in Endangered
Species Act Activities,’’ that was
published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR
34270), we sought the expert opinion of
three appropriate independent
specialists regarding this rule. The
purpose of such review is to ensure
listing decisions are based on
scientifically sound data, assumptions,
and analysis. We sent copies of the
proposed rule to the peer reviewers
immediately following publication in
the Federal Register. We invited these
peer reviewers to comment, during the
public comment period, on the specific
assumptions and the data that were the
basis for our conclusions regarding the
proposal to list this species as
endangered under the Act. We received
comments from three peer reviewers.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:47 Oct 02, 2013
Jkt 232001
We reviewed all comments we
received for substantive issues and new
information regarding the proposed
listing of this species; we address those
comments below. Comments that
provided support or opposition without
substantive information were noted, but
will not be addressed in this final rule.
Some of the commenters did not appear
to understand the criteria for listing
under the Act. Therefore, we are
providing clarification below. The
following summarizes the comments we
received and our responses.
(1) Comment: Many commenters,
while not opposed to the listing of the
species, asked for a special rule under
section 4(d) of the Act (also called a
‘‘4(d) rule’’) that would allow interstate
trade of the species to occur.
Response: Section 4(d) of the Act
allows the Service to develop a special
rule to apply the prohibitions of section
9 or to provide measures that are
necessary and advisable to provide for
the conservation of threatened species.
A special rule cannot be promulgated
for a species that is listed as endangered
under the Act. Because we determined
that listing the blue-throated macaw as
endangered under the Act is
appropriate, we are not able to develop
a 4(d) rule for this species. That said,
not all interstate trade is prohibited
under the ESA. Sale; offer for sale; and
delivery, receipt, carrying, transport, or
shipment in interstate or foreign
commerce in the course of a commercial
activity are prohibited. Interstate trade
that is not sale, offer for sale, or in the
course of a commercial activity is not
regulated.
(2) Comment: Several commenters,
including individual bird breeders and
the American Federation of Aviculture,
objected to our finding, but did not
provide new information relevant to the
determination (for the specific content
of these comments, see https://
www.regulations.gov under Docket No.
FWS–R9–ES–2012–0034).
Response: We thank all the
commenters for their interest in the
conservation of this species and thank
those commenters who provided
information for our consideration in
making this listing determination.
Under section 4(b) of the Act, the
Service is required to make listing
determinations solely on the basis of the
best scientific and commercial data
available after conducting a review of
the status of the species. When we
published our proposed rule, we opened
a public comment period during which
we requested any additional
information on the blue-throated
macaw. In making this listing
determination, we reviewed the best
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
61209
available scientific and commercial
information, we contacted species
experts, and we diligently searched for
the most current information on this
species. Therefore, we have obtained
and considered the ‘‘best scientific and
commercial data available’’ in our
listing determination. After careful
consideration, we conclude that this
species meets the definition of an
endangered species under the Act.
Effects of This Rule
Commercial Use
The Act does not prohibit intrastate
(within a State or U.S. territory) sale,
offer for sale, or certain other intrastate
activities of an endangered species. But,
among other things, it does prohibit
interstate (between States and U.S.
territories) sale, offer for sale, and
certain other activities such as transport
in the course of a commercial activity of
endangered species. If a person in the
course of a commercial activity can
demonstrate that such sale or other
commercial use enhances the
propagation or survival of the species,
or that it is for scientific research, he or
she may apply for a permit for these
activities.
Because interstate commercial use of
endangered species is generally
prohibited, if you wish to sell or
otherwise commercially use your
macaw(s), you would have to either sell
the bird(s) to someone who resides
within your home State, commercially
use the bird within your State, or apply
for a permit for interstate sale or
commercial use of your bird(s). In
addition, to be in compliance with the
Act, any advertisements for the sale of
your birds should include a statement
that no sale involving parties from
another state can be consummated until
a permit has been obtained from the
Service.
Captive Breeding
The Service does not regulate captive
breeding of listed species. This means
that you are not prohibited from
continuing to breed these birds.
However, the Act does prohibit
interstate and foreign sales, certain other
interstate and foreign commercial
activities, imports, and exports without
a Service permit. Therefore, if you
intend to sell any progeny, you will
either need to sell them within the State
the birds were bred to someone residing
in the same State or, if intending to sell
the birds outside the State where they
were bred, you will need to obtain a
Service permit. In addition, to be in
compliance with the Act and its
implementing regulations at 50 CFR Part
E:\FR\FM\03OCR1.SGM
03OCR1
61210
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 192 / Thursday, October 3, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
17, any advertisements for the sale of
your birds should include a statement
that no sale involving parties from
another state can occur until a permit
has been obtained from the Service. For
more information on obtaining such a
permit, see https://www.fws.gov/permits.
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Personal Pets
The Act does not restrict ownership of
your personal pet or moving your
personal pet across State lines for
noncommercial purposes. There are no
restrictions on traveling with or
transporting legally obtained
endangered species within the United
States for your own personal use. No
permit is required for you to travel or
transport your pet macaw(s) within the
United States, provided you are not
selling or otherwise engaging in a
commercial activity with the bird.
Summary of Changes From Proposed
Rule
This final rule incorporates changes to
our proposed listing based on the
comments we received and newly
available scientific and commercial
information. Peer reviewers generally
commented that the proposed rule was
thorough and comprehensive. There
were different views on what the
historical threats to the species were
and differences in thoughts on the
magnitude of the various factors
currently affecting the species. For
example, some peer reviewers and
commenters indicated that illegal
removal from the wild for the pet trade
was the most significant factor affecting
the species and that habitat loss and
competition for nest sites had less of an
effect on the species than predation.
Others questioned the degree of the
effect that botflies have on the species.
There are very few individuals studying
and working closely with this species,
and we made our determinations based
on the best available scientific and
commercial information. None of the
information collected during the
comment period changed our final
listing determination. A list of literature
used in finalizing this determination
and comments we received are available
at https://www.regulations.gov under
Docket No. FWS–R9–ES–2012–0034.
The most significant change is that,
based on recent surveys, the population
of this species appears to be greater than
was previously believed. Recent surveys
conducted by the Armonia Association
´
and the Loro Parque Fundacion indicate
that the wild population of the bluethroated macaw is likely between 350 to
400 individuals (Waugh 2013, pers.
comm.; Lebbin 2013, pers. comm.;
Hennessey 2013, pers. comm.);
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:47 Oct 02, 2013
Jkt 232001
including between 190 to 225 mature
individuals (Waugh 2013, pers. comm.).
Additionally, a population viability
analysis on the blue-throated macaw
was conducted and published in late
2012 (Strem and Bouzat 2012, pp. 12–
24). It was not available at the time we
were developing the proposed listing
determination; however, this
information is incorporated into this
final listing determination.
We also note that providing separate
legal status to captive specimens of
protected species is not permissible
under the ESA.
Species Information
Taxonomy
The taxonomic status of this species
was disputed until fairly recently. The
blue-throated macaw was previously
considered an aberrant form of the blueand-yellow macaw (A. ararauna), but
these two species are known to occur
sympatrically (in the same location)
without interbreeding (Kyle 2007a; del
Hoyo et al. 1997). Common names in
Spanish for the blue-throated macaw
include guacamayo barba azul and
guacamayo caninde. Both BirdLife
International (BLI) and the Integrated
Taxonomic Information System (ITIS)
recognize the blue-throated macaw as
Ara glaucogularis. ITIS (https://
www.itis.gov) is a database maintained
by a partnership of U.S., Canadian, and
Mexican federal government agencies,
other organizations, and taxonomic
specialists to provide taxonomic
information. Therefore, we accept the
species as Ara glaucogularis.
Population
As of 1998, the species was known to
occur in eight locations, and the total
species’ population was believed to be
100 to 150 individuals (Loro Parque
´
Fundacion (LPF) 2002, p. 13). In
October 2004, a new, small population
was found at Santa Rosa, 100 kilometers
(km) (62 miles (mi)) west of what was
believed to be the western-most edge of
the species’ range (LPF 2012; Herrera et
al. 2007, p. 18). Biologists surveying for
this species in 2004 found more birds
than in previous surveys by searching
outside known population locations in
specific habitat types believed to
support the blue throated macaw (palm
groves and forested islands) (Herrera et
al. 2007, p. 18). In 2007, a population
of approximately 25 individuals was
found one hour south of Trinidad (Kyle
2007a, p. 6). Also in 2007, a flock of
approximately 70 birds was observed
´
´
near the Rio Mamore (Asociacion
´
Armonıa), in the vicinity of where the
Barba Azul Nature Reserve is now
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
located. Population surveys conducted
´
between 2004 and 2008 by Asociacion
´
Armonıa and LPF indicate that there are
now likely between 350 to 400
individuals (Waugh 2013, pers. comm.).
We note that there are likely more
than 1,000 individual blue-throated
macaws held in captivity worldwide
according to the 2011 North American
Regional Studbook (Anderson 2011, p.
4).
Species Description
Blue-throated macaws have a blue
throat; a bare, white face containing
identifiable blue-streaks; dark grey
irises; and a large black bill (Anderson
2011, p. 4; Kyle 2007b, p. 16). Its
forehead is also blue, and there is a lack
of contrast between its remiges (large
flight feathers on the wing) and
upperwing covert (outer) feathers. This
species is approximately the same size
(85 centimeters (cm) or 33 inches) as the
blue-and-yellow macaw. However, the
blue-throated macaw is not as
competitive as the blue-and-yellow
macaw in obtaining nesting cavities
(Kyle 2007a). Male blue-throated
macaws are larger than females at about
800 grams (1.76 pounds), and females
weigh approximately 600 grams (1.32
pounds) (Kyle 2007b, p. 16).
Blue-throated macaws, like other
parrot species, are monogamous and
tend to mate for life (Strem and Bouzat
2012, pp. 12–13). There is also a
significant investment in the care for
their young; blue-throated macaws are
not fully independent of their parents
for a full year (Berkunsky 2010, p. 5).
Therefore, some breeding pairs may not
produce nestlings every breeding
season. The blue-throated macaw forms
its nests in large tree cavities; its
´
preferred nesting tree is the motacu
palm (Attalea phalerata), which is
native to Bolivia, Brazil, and Peru. The
northern population of blue-throated
macaws breeds between August to
November, and the southern population
breeds between November to March
(Berkunsky 2012, pers. comm.; Kyle
2007a). The southern population, an
hour south of Trinidad, tends to breed
around the same time as the more
commonly found blue-and-yellow
macaw. This overlap of breeding
seasons adds to competition for nest
sites.
Blue-throated macaws are sexually
mature between 6 and 8 years of age
(Strem 2008; Kyle 2007a, p. 6). Females
lay one to three eggs per clutch
(generally one clutch per year is
produced), and the eggs incubate for 26
days. One to three hatchlings are raised,
depending on food availability (BLI
2010; Kyle 2007a). Nestlings fledge at
E:\FR\FM\03OCR1.SGM
03OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 192 / Thursday, October 3, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
between 13 and 14 weeks. Blue-throated
macaws are seen traveling mostly in
pairs but also have been seen in a large
flock of between 70 and 100 individuals
(Herrera 2012, pers. comm.; Macleod et
al. 2009, p. 15; Waugh 2007a, p. 53).
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Diet
This species seeks areas where palm
fruits and suitable nesting cavities are
readily available (Herrera et al. 2007,
pp. 18–24). It feeds on fruits of
approximately 12 species of trees (Kyle
2007a, pp. 1–10). There are 84 species
of palms in Bolivia (Moraes et al. 2001,
p. 234) and approximately 11 palm
species within the blue-throated
macaw’s range. Blue-throated macaws
prefer the fleshy part of the fruit, or
´
mesocarp, of motacu and also Mauritia
flexuosa (royal palms or carandai´
guazu), as well as Acrocomia aculeata
(common names include: coyoli palm,
gru-gru palm, macaw palm, acrocome,
Coyolipalme, amankayo, corojo, corozo,
baboso, tucuma, and totai) (Herrera
2007, p. 20; Yamashita and M. de Barros
1997, p. 144; Jordan and Munn 1993;
https://www.ars-grin.gov; https://
www.pacsoa.org.au). The macaws first
puncture the apex of the mesocarp and
remove the outer layer (Yamashita and
´
M. de Barros 1997, p. 144). The motacu
continually produces fruit throughout
the year. Between 80 and 90 percent of
´
motacu palms produce fruits all year,
but the peak is between July and
December (LPF 2003, p. 21; Moraes et
´
al. 1996, p. 424). Motacu is believed to
be pollinated by beetles in the Mystrops
genus (Moraes et al. 1996, p. 425). The
same palm tree may produce at any one
time between three and five racemes
(flowering stalks, each with fruits in a
different stage of development ripeness)
(Yamashita and M. de Barros 1997, p.
144).
The species has also been observed at
clay licks (Kyle 2007a, p. 2), which are
clay banks where the birds consume soil
or minerals; however, the reason for the
clay consumption remains unclear.
Range and Habitat Description
The blue-throated macaw is endemic
to the tropical savanna ecoregion of
north-central Bolivia in the Department
of Beni (Strem and Bouzat 2012, p. 13;
LPF 2010; Kingsbury 2010, p. 8). This
ecoregion is approximately 160,000
square kilometers (km2) (61,776 square
miles (mi2)). (See Appendix A in Docket
No. FWS–R9–ES–2012–0034 at https://
www.regulations.gov for a map of the
region (hereinafter referred to as
‘‘Appendix A’’)). Within this region, the
blue-throated macaw is found both in
groups and in widely dispersed isolated
pairs within an area estimated to be
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:47 Oct 02, 2013
Jkt 232001
between 2,508 and 12,900 km2 (968 and
4,981 mi2) (Waugh 2013, pers. comm.;
Strem and Bouzat 2012, p. 12; LPF 2012;
BLI 2012; Hesse 2000, p. 104). The
species is found at elevations between
200 and 300 meters (m) (656 and 984
feet (ft)) (Yamashita and M. de Barros
1997, p. 144; Brace et al. 1995). The
blue-throated macaw’s habitat was
occupied by humans for thousands of
years before European colonization
(Erickson 2000, p. 2). Its habitat consists
of lowlands in an area known as Llanos
(plains) de Mojos, also known as Llanos
de Moxos (LPF 2010; Mayle et al. 2007,
p. 301; Yamashita and M. de Barros
1997, p. 141). See Appendix A for a
photo representing the flooded habitat.
The Llanos de Mojos is a wide savannah
plain with poor drainage and, in the wet
season, is extremely susceptible to
flooding. The floods cover large areas of
the plains, and the area may remain
flooded for 5 to 7 months in some areas.
These plains include parts of the river
´
´
basins of the Itenez, Mamore, Beni, and
Madre de Dios Rivers (see Appendix A
for a map; Yamashita and M. de Barros
1997, p. 144).
The blue-throated macaw’s habitat
has progressively diminished over
thousands of years and its habitat is
now primarily restricted to small
‘‘islands’’ of suitable habitat within
privately owned cattle pastures (see
Appendix A for a photo illustrating
these islands; Milpacher 2012, pers.
comm.; Kingsbury 2010, p. 72;
Berkunsky 2008, p. 4; Kyle 2007a, p. 4;
Kyle 2006, p. 7; LPF 2003, p. 6). The
species has been observed in flocks of
up to 100 birds in the Barba Azul Nature
Reserve (Waugh 2013, pers. comm). The
blue-throated macaw is believed to
occur on ranches adjacent to the Barba
Azul Nature Reserve, Ranches Las
Gamas, Los Patos, Pelotal, and Juan
Latino, but the status of the species is
unclear in these areas (Kingsbury 2010,
p. 89). In other parts of the species’
range, the species is believed to occur
´
on the ranches Elsner with Espıritu, San
Rafael, and the Estancia El Dorado;
however, to the best of our knowledge,
these are privately managed, and the
species is not being monitored on the
ranches.
Palm Islands
Palm-dominated forest islands form
the blue-throated macaw’s primary
habitat. These ‘‘islands’’ are on elevated
terrain and are sometimes referred to as
‘‘alturas’’ (high ground). The islands
were primarily formed as mounds
resulting from prehistoric human
existence in this region (Erickson 2008,
pp. 168–169). The lowlands are
frequently inundated by water due to
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
61211
the flooding of nearby rivers (see
Appendix A). Historically, human
cultures manipulated the water flow to
create plains that were higher and
subsequently drier (Erickson 2008, pp.
168–169). The mounds are common
throughout the savannas and wetlands
of Bolivia; there may be as many as
10,000 of these mounds or islands in
Bolivia (Erickson 2008, p. 169). They
have been found to vary in size from a
few hectares to many square kilometers
(Erickson 2008, pp. 168–169; Yamashita
and M. de Barros 1997, p. 144). Most are
raised less than one meter and are often
surrounded by ponds or moat-like
ditches (Erickson 2008, pp. 168–169).
Typically, these islands are surrounded
by seasonally flooded grasslands; are
between 0.2 and 1.0 hectare (ha) (0.49
to 2.47 acre (ac)) in size; and are
approximately 130 to 235 m (426 to 771
ft) above sea level (Kingsbury et al.
2010, p. 71; Yamashita and M. de Barros
1997, p. 144).
´
Besides motacu, palm species found
on these islands are typically Syagrus
´
botryophora (sumuque) and
Astrocaryum vulgare (chontilla),
interspersed with semi-deciduous
emergent trees such as Enterolobium
spp. (no common name (NCN)),
Sterculia striata (NCN) and Tabebuia
spp. (roble), and the Curupau tree
(Anadenanthera colubrina) (also known
as yopo, vilca, huilco, wilco, cebil, or
angico) (Kyle 2005, p. 7). Some trees
such as Ceiba pentandra (mapajo or
kapok tree) and Hura crepitans
(common names include catahua,
Ochoo, arbol del diablo, acacu,
monkey’s dinner-bell, habillo, ceiba de
leche, sandbox tree, possum wood,
dynamite tree, ceiba blanca, assacu, and
posentri) can reach more than 40 m (131
ft) in height.
´
The motacu palms may have survived
on the mound islands for various
reasons: their value to human cultures,
their resistance to burning, and their
ecological suitability to the
´
microclimate. Motacu is not only vital
to the life history of blue-throated
macaws; it also has local, commercial,
and ecosystem importance (Kyle 2005,
p. 3; Moraes et al. 1996, pp. 424–425).
This species of palm is used in the local
community as thatch for housing, which
can last up to 7 years. Its fruit is
consumed by humans and various other
species; parts of the palm tree are used
to make baskets and brooms; and palm
oil is sold commercially (Zambrana et
al. 2007, p. 2785; Moraes et al. 1996, pp.
425–426).
E:\FR\FM\03OCR1.SGM
03OCR1
61212
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 192 / Thursday, October 3, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Significance of Palm Islands to BlueThroated Macaws
held in captivity create, contribute to,
reduce, or remove threats to the species.
Habitat favored by blue-throated
macaws contains tall, mature trees in
´
areas with continuous motacu palm
fruit production (Yamashita and M. de
Barros 1997, p. 145). Densities of
´
motacu, the blue-throated macaw’s
preferred nesting and feeding source,
vary greatly. In the 1997 Yamashita and
M. de Barros study, macaws were only
´
observed in areas where motacu
represented more than 60 percent of the
trees.
Natural cavities in dead or decaying
´
trees (usually motacu palms) are the
primary source of nesting sites for this
species. Blue-throated macaws prefer
dead trees that have cavities with a
minimum internal diameter of 30 cm
(11.8 inches) for nesting, and, therefore,
the tree must have a diameter at breast
height of 60 cm (23.6 inches) or greater
(see Appendix A for a picture
representing a tree cavity; Yamashita
and M. de Barros 1997, p. 145).
Loss of Palm Islands Due to Habitat
Conversion
Within the past few hundred years,
the blue-throated macaw lost much of
its remaining habitat due to conversion
of palm forests to pasture for cattle
grazing. Cattle are not native to Bolivia;
they were introduced to Bolivia in the
1600s. After the Second World War,
cattle ranching and the associated
burning of pastures began significantly
impacting the landscape (Robison et al.
2000, p. 61). The macaw’s preferred
habitat is now limited to a few small,
isolated islands of suitable habitat that
are surrounded by these cattle ranches
(Gilardi 2012, pers. comm.). During the
flooding season, which can occur for up
to 6 months of a year, cattle take refuge
´
on the motacu palm islands because the
islands are drier due to their higher
elevation (LPF 2003, p. 33). In general,
there is no direct conflict between the
cattle themselves and blue-throated
macaws, but cattle can degrade their
habitat by trampling. Adding to habitat
loss, in the preferred habitat of the blue´
throated macaw where these motacu
palms remain (within privately owned
cattle ranches), local ranchers typically
burn the pastures annually (Berkunsky
2008, p. 4; del Hoyo 1997). This type of
burning results in almost no recruitment
of native palm trees, which are vital to
the ecological needs of the blue-throated
macaw (Yamashita and M. de Barros
1997, p. 144). The reduction in habitat
´
(reduced availability of motacu palms)
´
and lack of recruitment of motacu palms
is a concern for in the future for bluethroated macaws because it takes
´
several years for motacu palms to be
able to produce fruit and to develop into
a size suitable for nesting cavities.
As mitigation, local conservation
efforts are not only planting trees that
provide food for blue-throated macaws,
they are also conducting educational
efforts directed towards land owners
within the range of the blue-throated
macaw. Additionally, the Barba Azul
Nature Reserve is currently expanding
(to 11,000 ha) (27,181 ac) to include
adjacent ranches where the bluethroated macaw is believed to breed.
The land newly incorporated into the
protected area has more palm islands
with better forest (Waugh 2013, pers.
comm.). However, projects designed to
provide additional habitat for this
species are in the early stages of
development and it is too early to
evaluate the effectiveness of these
efforts.
The lack of nesting cavities (suitable
habitat) is often a limiting factor for bird
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Factors Affecting the Species
Section 4 of the Act, and its
implementing regulations at 50 CFR part
424, set forth the procedures for adding
species to the Federal Lists of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants. Under section 4(a)(1) of the
Act, we may list a species based on any
of the following five factors: (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. Listing
actions may be warranted based on any
of the above factors, singly or in
combination. We considered all of these
factors in determining that the bluethroated macaw qualifies as an
endangered species. Each of these
factors is considered and evaluated in
this document.
In analyzing threats to a species, the
Service focuses its analysis on threats
acting upon wild specimens within the
native range of the species because the
goal of the Act is survival and recovery
of the species in its native ecosystems.
We do not separately analyze ‘‘threats’’
to captive-held specimens because the
statutory five factors are not well-suited
to consideration of specimens in
captivity and captive-held specimens
are not eligible for separate
consideration for listing. But we do
consider the extent to which specimens
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:47 Oct 02, 2013
Jkt 232001
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
species that depend on these cavities for
nesting (Sandoval and Barrantes 2009,
p. 75; Kyle 2006, p. 8). To raise their
young, blue-throated macaws require
specific nesting cavities that provide
protection from predation and flooding.
Additionally, many different species
compete for these increasingly rare nest
sites. The loss of suitable trees is one
factor that has resulted in increased
competition from other species for these
nesting cavities. The impact of habitat
loss is compounded by extreme weather
events and contributes to other factors
that affect blue-throated macaws, such
as an increase in vulnerability to
predation and competition for nests.
Nest Failure
Nest failure (the failure of nestlings to
survive to fledgling stage) continues for
various reasons, despite intensive
conservation efforts (Berkunsky 2010, p.
4; Kyle 2006, p. 8). Some of the causes
of nest failure include: predation,
infestation by botflies (parasites in the
Philornis genus), exposure to severe
weather events such as flooding, and
competition for food and shelter with
other species such as bees (Berkunsky
2010, pp. 4–5). Many nestlings die in
early developmental stages, often due to
starvation (due to lack of food or
parental neglect, exposure to cold
temperatures, or flooding (Kyle 2007a,
pp. 1–10). If parents do not have access
to enough nutritional food sources,
some nestlings are neglected so that
their other nestlings will survive.
Nestlings can also fall out of collapsed
trees before they have fledged. During
five field seasons of closely observing
nest sites, 43 percent of the active nests
(30 active nests) were predated
(Berkunsky 2008, p. 5; Kyle 2007a, pp.
7–8). See additional discussion below
under the Exposure to Extreme Weather
Events section.
Predation
Predation is a key factor limiting this
species’ population growth in some
areas of its range (Kyle 2007a, pp. 3, 6–
7; Kyle 2006, p. 8). During one season
of observation, all nestlings within three
nests of seven active blue-throated
macaw nests were lost to predation
(Kyle 2007a, pp. 6–8). Because the
species has such a small population size
with likely fewer than 500 individuals
remaining in the wild, losses such as
this have a significant effect on the
status of the species as a whole.
Predators of the blue-throated macaw
include:
• Toco toucan (Ramphastos toco),
• Crane hawk (Geranospiza
caerulescens),
E:\FR\FM\03OCR1.SGM
03OCR1
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 192 / Thursday, October 3, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
• Great-horned owl (Bubo
virginianus), and
• Southern crested caracara (Caracara
plancus, a bird of prey).
The blue-throated macaw’s habitat of
sparse, palm-forested islands scattered
among natural grasslands, increases the
species’ vulnerability to nest predation
(Kyle 2007a, pp. 6–7). Tree nest cavities
chosen by blue-throated macaws tend to
be visible to other avian species flying
overhead. In addition to nesting on
palm islands, blue-throated macaws are
also known to nest in isolated palms in
open fields, which are even more
exposed than nests on palm islands
(Herrera et al. 2007, p. 20). All of the
species that predate on adult bluethroated macaws, eggs, or nestlings have
large distributions and are commonly
found at the habitat islands used by
blue-throated macaws (Kyle 2007a, pp.
6–7). Great horned owls have been seen
at many sites where blue-throated
macaws are nesting (Kyle 2007a, p. 6).
These owls, native to South America,
have a vast range, are the most widely
distributed owl in South America, and
occupy a variety of habitats including
open forest, farmland, and grassland.
Because blue-throated macaw nests
may be concentrated in these small
‘‘islands’’ of trees within cattle pastures,
they are more easily located by
predators than species that nest in a
continuous forest setting. To discourage
and mitigate the effects of predation,
some conservation activities being
conducted include the monitoring and
discouragement of predators from
attacking blue-throated macaw nests.
These efforts are intensive. In one case,
where it appeared the nest tree was
collapsing, the tree was monitored all
night by conservation staff (Kyle 2007a,
p. 9). Often trees containing active nests
are monitored in this way if persistent
predation has been observed. The
mitigation efforts are helpful if nestlings
can survive until they are at least 300
grams (0.66 pounds), they have a greater
chance of survival (Kyle 2007a, p. 7).
However, these mitigation projects are
in the early stages of development and
it is too early to evaluate the
effectiveness of these efforts.
Botfly parasites can also cause
mortality of nestlings and have been
observed in blue-throated macaw
nestlings. During some parts of their life
cycle, botflies live subcutaneously, and
feed on macaw tissue (Olah et al. in
press; Wunderle Jr. and Arendt 2011, p.
39). Botflies significantly reduce the
energy available for nestling growth and
development (Uhazy and Arendt 1986
in Wunderle Jr. and Arendt 2011, p. 39)
and can contribute to reduced fitness
and in some cases death of nestlings. In
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:47 Oct 02, 2013
Jkt 232001
one study of avian nestlings, botfly
parasitism caused 56 percent of
mortalities, while egg and chick losses
from nest predators and competitors
accounted for less than 10 percent of
reproductive failures (Arendt 2000 in
Wunderle Jr. and Arendt 2011, p. 39).
Exposure to Extreme Weather Events
Because this species has a small
population, the blue-throated macaw is
also vulnerable to natural catastrophic
events such as flooding, drought, and
other stochastic disturbances (Strem and
Bouzat 2012, p. 12; Kyle 2006, pp. 5–6).
Bolivia is described as a ‘‘climatically
volatile region’’ and is one of the
countries in the world most affected by
natural disasters in recent years (Oxfam
International 2009, p. 5). This species’
habitat experiences extreme changes
over the course of a year.
For many months of the year, the
blue-throated macaw’s habitat is
flooded; at other times during the year,
its habitat suffers from severe drought.
During periods of drought, nestlings are
sometimes neglected and starve.
High rainfall occurs during the
summer months; the wet season is
between September and May. Annual
precipitation is between 110 and 250 cm
(43 and 98 in) (Haase and Beck 1989 in
Kingsbury 2010, p. 9). Very heavy
rainfall in this region can continue for
long periods of time (Kyle 2006, pp. 5–
6; Hanagarth and Sarmiento 1990 in
Beck and Moraes, undated). Every 6 to
12 years, 80 to 90 percent of the region
is inundated (Beck and Moraes,
undated). Although these areas are
seasonally flooded, they are also prone
to periods of drought (Kyle 2007a, p. 3;
Mayle et al. 2007, p. 294; Yamashita and
M. de Barros 1997, p. 144).
Severe storms, such as one that
occurred in 2005, are described as ‘‘nest
killers.’’ These severe storms cause the
dead palm trees in which the nests have
been constructed to collapse or flood
(Kyle 2007b, p. 15), which causes nest
failure for the season and subsequently
no recruitment.
Dead palm trees often collapse in
these storms. During the 2006–2007
season, this phenomenon was observed
when the nest of one blue-throated
´
macaw pair in a dead motacu palm tree
collapsed due to strong winds (Kyle
2007a, p. 4). Although the reason is
unclear, these dead palm trees are
currently the preferred sites for nest
construction by the blue-throated
macaw, and the species has strong nest
site fidelity (Berkunsky 2012, pers.
comm.). The extent to which this
behavior is learned and modified is also
unclear. However, researchers are
working with the blue-throated macaw
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
61213
to introduce nest sites that are safer and
less prone to predation and nest failure
due to extreme weather events such as
flooding (Berkunsky 2010, pp. 4–5).
Flooding, a significant cause of nest
failure in the recent past, has not been
documented since 2008 at monitored
and human-manipulated nests. This is
due to one of the conservation measures
in place: drilling drain holes in the nests
and at the bottom of the dead palm trees
to prevent nest flooding. However,
flooding can still occur if nests are not
monitored and manipulated.
Competition for Nest Sites
In addition to nest failure, there is a
shortage of nests in some areas. As
described above, there is little
remaining of the preferred habitat of
´
motacu palms. The species appears to
‘‘learn’’ nesting sites, and will re-use
nesting locations that they had used in
the past (Berkunsky 2010; Kyle 2007a,
p. 4). Blue-throated macaws choose to
´
nest in the top of dead motacu palms
which provide easy access to their
preferred food source. These nesting
sites also expose the birds to predation,
competition from other species for
nests, drought, excessive rainfall, and
nest flooding. Many species, in addition
to the blue-throated macaw, use the
´
motacu palm for feeding and nesting. In
the Llanos de Mojos, there are 21
species of parrots that may compete for
nest sites (Kingsbury et al. 2010, p. 83;
Yamashita and M. de Barros 1997, p.
144). Some species known to compete
for nest sites with the blue-throated
macaw include the blue and yellow
macaw, woodpeckers, and bees (Kyle
2007a, p. 6; LPF 2003, p. 33).
In order to provide more choices for
nesting habitat, conservation
organizations are installing nest boxes.
In 2009, in the Barba Azul Nature
Reserve, 46 artificial nests were
monitored, in part by video cameras;
however, the majority of them (24 nests)
were occupied by blue and yellow
macaws (LPF 2010, p. 15). Likely due to
the larger size of the blue and yellow
macaw or perhaps their more aggressive
nature, blue and yellow macaws usually
win most confrontations for nests (Kyle
2007a, p. 6). During the 2010 field study
at the Barba Azul Nature Reserve,
researchers also observed that there
were a greater number of blue and
yellow macaws using the Barba Azul
Nature Reserve than blue-throated
macaws (Kingsbury 2010, p. 83). At an
area where both species were drinking
water, researchers noted that the bluethroated macaws exhibited agitated
behavior when blue-and-yellow macaws
were nearby (Kingsbury 2010, p. 83).
Although the Barba Azul Nature Reserve
E:\FR\FM\03OCR1.SGM
03OCR1
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
61214
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 192 / Thursday, October 3, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
was established specifically for the bluethroated macaws, other species use the
reserve and compete for nesting sites.
As stated earlier, to mitigate this
problem, at least two conservation
organizations are installing nest boxes to
create more available sites for nesting,
but despite the past 10 years of
conservation efforts and
experimentation with nest boxes, nest
failure still occurs. In addition to
predation, other reasons for nest failure
are numerous, which has instigated the
experimentation and installation of
these nest boxes. Bees and other species
continue to compete with blue-throated
macaws for these nest boxes. After many
years of experimentation, the nest boxes
are slowly becoming more effective at
providing suitable nesting sites. Bluethroated macaws seem to habituate to
certain nesting sites and locations,
likely based on food availability and
learned behavior.
Although blue-throated macaws have
begun to use some of the nest boxes, it
has been a slow and tedious process to
encourage blue-throated macaws to use
these boxes, and the population
continues to suffer losses, particularly
due to nest failure, which the
installation of suitable nest boxes is
attempting to alleviate. When nests fail
(no nestlings survive that season), a
significant amount of effort has been
expended by that breeding pair. Because
this species has such a small population
(likely there are fewer than 500
individuals remaining in the wild), each
nestling survival has great significance
to the overall species’ status. The effect
of the death of each new nestling on the
population of blue-throated macaws is
devastating to the viability of the
population. If the nestlings survive the
first season to the point that they fledge,
their chances of survival are much
greater than when they are new
nestlings and are entirely dependent on
their parents for survival.
Bees can also make both natural
nesting cavities and manmade nest
boxes inhospitable for blue-throated
macaws (Berkunsky 2008, p. 5). At the
beginning of one breeding season, 67
percent of nest boxes monitored were
occupied by bees (Berkunsky 2008, p.
5). After being removed, bees had
returned within 2 weeks. Most naturally
occurring nest sites, because there are so
few of them and they are in demand by
numerous species, require intense
monitoring and manipulation in order
to maintain an attractive, suitable
environment for blue-throated macaws.
Disease
Macaws are susceptible to many
bacterial, parasitic, and viral diseases
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:47 Oct 02, 2013
Jkt 232001
(Kistler et al. 2009, p. 2,176; Portaels et
al. 1996, p. 319; Bennett et al. 1991).
Macaws are prone to many viral
infections such as retrovirus, pox virus,
and paramyxo virus, which can cause
weakened immune systems and
subsequent death (Gaskin 1989, pp. 249,
251, 252). Recently, an examination of
tissue revealed the likely presence of the
pox virus in dead blue-throated macaw
nestlings, indicating that close contact
between blue-throated macaws and
domestic poultry may be facilitating
pathogen transmission to this species
(Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) in
litt. 2011). In one location within the
limited range of the species, bluethroated macaws share water sources
with chickens, ducks, and other birds
(WCS in litt. 2011; Kingsbury 2010, p.
83). Blue-throated macaws in this area
are being closely monitored to decrease
the possibility of transmission of the
pox virus; however, it remains a
concern.
Proventricular dilatation disease
(PDD) is one of the most serious
diseases known to affect parrots (Kistler
et al. 2008, p. 2). PDD, also known as
avian born virus (ABV) or macaw
wasting disease, is a fatal disease that
poses a serious threat to all captive-held
and wild parrots worldwide,
particularly those with very small
populations (Kistler et al. 2008, p. 1;
Abramson et al. 1995, p. 288). This
contagious disease causes damage to the
nerves of the upper digestive tract, so
that food digestion and absorption are
negatively affected. The disease has a
100-percent mortality rate in affected
birds, although the exact manner of
transmission between birds is unclear
(Kistler et al. 2008, p. 1). PDD has been
documented in several continents in
more than 50 different parrot species
and in free-ranging species in at least
five other orders of birds (Kistler et al.
2008, p. 2). This disease is concerning
because blue-throated macaws share
water sources with other species of
birds, and this disease could be
transmitted between individuals that are
within close range.
This species is closely monitored in
the wild; conservationists working with
this species are taking precautions so
that diseases are not introduced into the
wild population. Despite close
monitoring and precautions, disease is
likely to affect this extremely small
population; therefore, we are concerned
that diseases will become problematic to
this species in the wild. At this time, we
do not find that disease is contributing
to the risk of extinction of blue-throated
macaws, but it may affect this species in
the future.
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Small Population Size
An additional factor that affects the
continued existence of this species is its
small, declining population of likely
fewer than 500 individuals in the wild.
Recently, two observations have been
made: (1) Malformations in chicks, and
(2) reduced fertility in many
reproductive pairs (WCS in litt. 2011).
Small, rapidly declining populations of
species, combined with other threats
such as reduced reproductive success,
lead to an increased risk of extinction
(Strem and Bouzat 2012, p. 22; Harris
and Pimm 2008, p. 169).
Species tend to have a higher risk of
extinction if they occupy a small
geographic range and occur at low
density (Purvis et al. 2000, p. 1949). A
small, declining population size renders
a species vulnerable to any of several
risks including inbreeding depression,
loss of genetic variation, and
accumulation of new mutations. A
species’ small population size,
combined with its restricted range may
increase the species’ vulnerability to
adverse natural events and manmade
activities that destroy individuals and
their habitat (Holsinger 2000, pp. 64–65;
Young and Clarke 2000, pp. 361–366;
Primack 1998, pp. 279–308). Extinction
risk is heightened in small, declining
populations by an increased
vulnerability to the loss of genetic
variation due to inbreeding depression
and genetic drift (changes in relative
frequency of gene sequences). This, in
turn, compromises a species’ ability to
adapt genetically to changing
environments (Frankham 1996, p. 1507)
and reduces fitness, thus increasing
extinction risk (Reed and Frankham
2003, pp. 233–234). Inbreeding can have
individual or population-level
consequences either by increasing the
phenotypic expression (the outward
appearance or observable structure,
function, or behavior of a living
organism) of recessive, deleterious
alleles (harmful gene sequences) or by
reducing the overall fitness of
individuals in the population
(Charlesworth and Charlesworth 1987,
p. 231; Shaffer 1981, p. 131).
Strem and Bouzat indicated in their
population viability analysis (PVA) that
continuing threats, such as declines in
abundance, small population size, and
low population growth rates, make this
species highly vulnerable to any change
(2012, p. 12). Their study indicated that
even small increases in habitat loss (2
percent) and population harvesting (3
percent) had severe effects on the
population (2012, p. 12). We note that
Strem and Bouzat conducted the PVA
simulations using only published data
E:\FR\FM\03OCR1.SGM
03OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 192 / Thursday, October 3, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
on the blue-throated macaw population
size (2012, p. 13). However, even
considering the recent discovery of a
new population, the researchers
indicated that ‘‘multiple anthropogenic
factors threaten the species’ survival
over the long term’’ (Strem and Bouzat
2012, p. 22). They noted that the results
showed that the blue-throated macaw
has a relatively low probability of
extinction over the next 50 years.
However, they also noted that after the
50- to 100-year period considered for
the simulations, population decreased
considerably to approximately half of
the initial abundance (Strem and Bouzat
2012, p. 22).
This species faces many challenges: it
has many predators, limited suitable
habitat, and competition from other
species for nest sites, in addition to its
small population size. Any loss of
potentially reproducing individuals
could have a devastating effect on the
ability of its population to increase.
Small populations have a higher risk of
extinction due to random environmental
events (Shaffer 1987, pp. 69–75; Gilpin
and Soule 1986, pp. 24–28; Shaffer
1981, p. 131). Because of its small
population and restricted range, the
blue-throated macaw is vulnerable to
random environmental events; in
particular, it is threatened by extreme
precipitation events and nest flooding.
Removal From the Wild
Removal of macaws from the wild
over the past few hundred years
contributed to this species’ small
population size (LPF 2012; Herrera and
Hennessey 2009, p. 233; Kyle 2007a).
Macaws, both live and dead, have been
a significant part of Bolivian culture for
thousands of years. Evidence of this
exists in pre-Colombian Andean feather
art (American Museum of Natural
History 2012). Feathers have been used
historically in headdresses, and parrots
have been used in ceremonial sacrifices
(American Museum of Natural History
2012; Berdan 2004, p. 4; Creel and
McKusick 1994, pp. 510–511). Feathers
of blue-throated macaws would still be
used for headdresses today if it were not
for intervention and education programs
implemented by nongovernmental
conservation organizations (NGCOs)
(BLI 2012; LPF 2010; LPF 2003, p. 29).
In addition to being used in ceremonies
and costumes, there is evidence that
parrots have been household pets since
at least A.D. 1000 (Creel and McKusick
1994, pp. 513–515) as evidenced in
burial remains; live macaws likely had
commercial value even during that time
period. Parrots were traded over long
distances; archeological remains
indicate that parrots were found well
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:47 Oct 02, 2013
Jkt 232001
outside their native range (Creel and
McKusick 1994, pp. 515–516).
Historically, the most significant
impact to the decline of this species’
population was likely due to collection
of birds from the wild during the late
1800s and early 1900s (Yamashita and
M. de Barros 1997, p. 144). During this
time period, bird-skin traders of
European descent sold thousands of
bird skins, particularly in the United
States, for at least three generations
(Yamashita and M. de Barros 1997, p.
144; Trimble 1936, pp. 41–43).
The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory
Mechanisms
Under the Act, we are required to
evaluate whether the existing regulatory
mechanisms are adequate. There are
limited regulatory mechanisms in place
to protect this species (de la Torre et al.
2011, p. 334; Herrera and Hennessey
2007, p. 295; LPF 2003, pp. 6–7). This
species is considered critically
endangered by the International Union
for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) (BLI
2012; LPF 2012). However, IUCN
rankings do not confer any actual
protection or management. This species
is listed in Appendix I of the
Convention on International Trade in
Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and
Flora (CITES) (CITES 2012). CITES
regulates international trade in animal
and plant species listed under the
Convention. For additional information
on CITES, visit https://www.cites.org. An
Appendix-I listing includes species
threatened with extinction whose trade
is permitted only under exceptional
circumstances, which generally
precludes commercial trade. These
protections under CITES were put in
place for the blue-throated macaw
because the species had suffered
substantial population declines
throughout its range due to habitat
destruction and overexploitation.
The government of Bolivia has
enacted various laws and regulatory
mechanisms to protect and manage
wildlife and their habitats in Bolivia.
For example, the Bolivian Government
prohibits and imposes sanctions against
the possession and the trafficking of any
protected species, such as the bluethroated macaw (LPF Recovery Plan
2003, p. 7). Additionally, the CITES
listing and the ban by the Bolivian
Government in 1984 to export this
species effectively limit legal
international trade (LPF 2012; Herrera
and Hennessey 2009, pp. 233–234; LPF
Recovery Plan 2003, p. 7). However,
even after the export of this species was
prohibited in the 1980s, and despite the
laws in place and the intense
conservation efforts ongoing for this
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
61215
species, localized illegal trade is still
occurring.
International trade in this species is
now negligible (https://www.unepwcmc.org, accessed June 4, 2012).
International trade of the blue-throated
macaw was initially restricted by the
listing of the species in Appendix II of
CITES in 1981, and in 1983, the species
was transferred from Appendix II to
Appendix I. The World Conservation
Monitoring Centre (WCMC) at the
United Nations Environment
Programme (UNEP) manages a CITES
Trade Database on behalf of the CITES
Parties. Each Party to CITES is
responsible for compiling and
submitting annual reports to the CITES
Secretariat regarding their country’s
international trade in species protected
under CITES. Data obtained from
UNEP–WCMC (https://www.unepwcmc.org/citestrade) show that during
the 2-year period (1981–1982) that the
blue-throated macaw was listed in
Appendix II, a total of 29 specimens (all
live birds) were legally exported from
Bolivia. The trade database indicates
that a total of 84 specimens (all live
birds) have been exported from Bolivia
since the species was listed in
Appendix I in 1983, with no specimens
traded between 1993 and 2010). The
CITES database does not indicate any
trends in the trade data to cause
concern.
In addition to Bolivia’s restrictions
and the trade restrictions implemented
through CITES, the Wild Bird
Conservation Act (WBCA) that was
enacted in 1992 in the United States
may have assisted in dampening the
demand for this species. The purpose of
the WBCA is to promote the
conservation of exotic birds and to
ensure that importation of exotic birds
into the United States does not
negatively affect wild populations. The
WBCA generally restricts the
importation of most CITES-listed live or
dead exotic birds except for certain
limited purposes such as zoological
display or cooperative breeding
programs. Import of dead specimens is
allowed for scientific specimens and
museum specimens. The Service may
approve cooperative breeding programs
and subsequently issue import permits
under such programs. Wild-caught birds
may be imported into the United States
if certain standards are met and they are
subject to a management plans that
provides for sustainable use. Parrot
imports to the United States were
already declining before the enactment
of the WBCA, but the WBCA
contributed to curtailing the import of
wild parrots.
E:\FR\FM\03OCR1.SGM
03OCR1
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
61216
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 192 / Thursday, October 3, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Although international trade is not a
concern, poaching for local sale
continues to occur (LPF 2012; Herrera
and Hennessey 2009, p. 233; Kyle
2007a). Although Bolivia banned the
export of live parrots in 1984 (Brace et
al. 1995, pp. 27–28), localized illegal
trade within South America continued
to occur, although it became less
frequent (Herrera and Hennessey 2009,
p. 233). For example, in 1993,
investigators reported that an
Argentinian bird dealer was offering
Bolivian dealers a ‘‘high price’’ for bluethroated macaws (Jordan and Munn
1993, p. 695).
More recently, a study of markets in
Santa Cruz, Bolivia estimated that over
22,000 individuals of 31 parrot species
were illegally traded during 2004–2005,
despite Bolivian laws (Herrera and
Hennessey 2007, p. 298). Bolivian Law
1333 (Ministerio de Desarrollo
Sostenible y Planificacion 1999), Article
111 states that all persons involved in
trade, capture, and transportation
without authorization of wild animals
will suffer a 2-year prison sentence
together with a fine equivalent to 100
percent of the value of the animal. This
law is supported by an addendum that
states that all threatened species are of
national importance and must be
protected (Herrera and Hennessey 2007,
´
´
p. 295). Asociacion Armonıa (a
nonprofit organization in Bolivia)
monitored the trade of wild birds that
passed through a pet market in Santa
Cruz, Bolivia between July 2004 to
December 2007 (Herrera and Hennessey
2009, p. 233; Herrera and Hennessey
2007, p. 295). During the 2004–2005
study period, none of the parrots found
were blue-throated macaws. In 2006,
two blue-throated macaws were found
for sale (Herrera and Hennessey 2009, p.
233). However, the blue-throated macaw
was absent in the market during the
monitoring period prior to 2006, and no
blue-throated macaws were found for
sale in this market in 2007 (Herrera and
Hennessey 2009, p. 233; Herrera and
Hennessey 2007, p. 295). This absence
of the species in the market may be due
either to the effectiveness of the ongoing
conservation programs and laws in
Bolivia, or it may be indicative of the
scarcity of blue-throated macaws in the
wild. Ninety-four percent of the birds
documented were believed to be wildcaught. This illegal activity occurs
despite the national laws that ban
unauthorized trade (Herrera and
Hennessey 2007, p. 298).
The high value of this species could
lead to continued illegal trade. An
internet search indicated that captivebred specimens of this species sell for
between $1,500 and $3,000 in the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:47 Oct 02, 2013
Jkt 232001
United States (https://www.hoobly.com,
accessed September 13, 2010). One
search advertised that this is a ‘‘very
rare species and there are only 300 left
in the wild.’’ However, alternatively,
because these birds are not difficult to
breed in captivity, the supply of captivebred birds has increased, which some
experts believe may be alleviating illegal
collection of wild birds (Waugh 2007a).
Removal of blue-throated macaws
from the wild can have a particularly
devastating effect given their low
reproductive rate and slow recovery
from various environmental pressures
(Lee 2010, p. 3; Wright et al. 2001, p.
711). Some blue-throated macaws have
even been used for fish bait (Kyle 2007a,
p. 7). The remains of a blue-throated
macaw were found near a lake stuffed
into a tree cavity with a bag of salt (Kyle
2007a, p. 7). Because this species has so
few individuals remaining, any removal
from the wild is extremely detrimental
to the survival of the species when
considered with all of the other factors
acting upon the species.
Other Factors
An additional factor that affects the
nesting success of blue-throated macaws
is the availability of food sources—not
only the abundance of food, but the
timing of its availability. Phenology
(how the timing of plant life cycle
events interacts with animal biological
processes) is influenced by variations in
´
climate. The timing of motacu palm
fruit production is critical for various
life stages of the blue-throated macaw,
particularly during the period following
´
hatching. The motacu palms, on which
blue-throated macaws depend for
nesting as well as feeding, are affected
by drought, burning, and excessive
rainfall. In years when there is
significant drought or excessive rainfall,
the fruiting abundance and timing of
fruit production can significantly affect
the success of nestlings, or it can
prohibit blue-throated macaws from
even attempting to nest (Kyle 2007). In
some seasons when food is not as
plentiful, breeding pairs may choose not
to brood, and the weakest of the
nestlings are neglected by its parents
and die of starvation (Kyle 2007a, pp. 4–
5). During these times, in some cases,
the diet is supplemented by these
conservation organizations; however, it
is a very intensive process.
In summary, there are many factors
that are causing stress to this species’
population in the wild. It is affected by
several factors such as habitat loss and
degradation (factor A), poaching to a
limited extent (factor B), predation
(factor C), and nest flooding and lack of
nest sites in part due to competition
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
from other species but also due to
habitat loss and degradation (factor E).
Despite numerous laws and regulatory
mechanisms to administer and manage
wildlife and their habitats, existing laws
are inadequate (factor D) to protect the
species and its habitat from these other
factors. Combined with its reduced
population size, the species lacks
sufficient redundancy and resiliency to
recover from present and future threats
without intervention and intense
conservation actions. This was
corroborated by the recent PVA
conducted in 2012, regarding the
viability of the population of the bluethroated macaw (Strem and Bouzat
2012, p. 22). Overall, the researchers
indicate that population growth rates
are likely not at replacement levels
because the species has undergone a
rapid population reduction over the past
50 years, in part due to habitat loss and
poaching (Strem and Bouzat 2012, p.
20). The PVA found that growth rate
estimates do not reach the rate of
replacement necessary to maintain the
viability of population over the long
term (Strem and Bouzat 2012, p. 20),
making the species particularly
vulnerable to any change or threat.
These factors acting on the species are
expected to continue into the future.
In-situ Conservation
This species is considered by many
organizations to be the most endangered
macaw remaining in the wild (BLI 2012;
World Parrot Trust (WPT) 2012; LPF
2010; LPF 2003, p. 4). Several NGCOs
are working intensely on various
conservation projects to protect this
species and its habitat. Various NGCOs
have been involved in the conservation
of this species since 1995, with
authorization from the Bolivian
Government (Waugh 2013, pers. comm.;
Gilardi 2012, pers. comm.; LPF 2002, p.
10). NGCOs involved include
´
´
Asociacion Armonıa (Bolivia’s BirdLife
International partner), the Loro Parque
´
Fundacion (LPF), and WPT. A species
recovery plan that provides the basis for
the blue-throated macaw conservation
program was approved by Bolivia’s
Ministry for Sustainable Development
in 2004, and has been in place since
then (LPF 2003, pp. 6–7).
Within its breeding range, a multitude
of efforts are in progress to conserve the
species (Waugh 2013, pers. comm.;
Gilardi 2012, pers. comm.; Berkunsky
2010, p. 5, Kyle 2007, pp. 1–11).
Conservation measures include constant
monitoring, protection, and
manipulation of nests; supplementing
nestlings’ diet when food sources are
scarce; agreements with private
landowners to protect this species’
E:\FR\FM\03OCR1.SGM
03OCR1
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 192 / Thursday, October 3, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
habitat; patrolling existing macaw
habitat by foot and motorbike; and
monitoring the Beni lowlands for
additional populations (LPF 2012; Kyle
2007a; Snyder et al. 2000). NGCOs have
implemented cooperation agreements
with the Federation of Cattle Farmers of
the Beni (FEGABENI) and the local
authorities in Trinidad, Bolivia (LPF et
al. 2003, p. 6).
Land acquisition to expand protected
habitat for this species has been funded
by the World Land Trust and the Loro
´
Parque Fundacion (Waugh 2013, pers.
´
´
comm.). In 2008, Asociacion Armonıa
and LPF purchased a 3,555-ha (8,785-ac)
reserve for the purpose of establishing a
protected area for the blue-throated
macaw (World Land Trust 2010, https://
www.worldlandtrust-us.org, accessed
July 16, 2010; BLI 2008). In 2010, the
Barba Azul Nature Reserve (‘‘Reserve’’)
was expanded by 1,123 ha (2,775 ac),
creating a total protected area for the
blue-throated macaws of 4,664 ha
´
´
(11,525 ac) (Asociacion Armonıa 2012).
Currently, this Reserve is the only
protected area designated for the bluethroated macaw. The legal protections
that apply fall under Bolivian Law 1333
(Ministerio de Desarrollo Sostenible y
Planificacion 1999), Article 111. This
Reserve protects savanna habitat, and
habitat restoration is occurring in the
Reserve, although it is unclear the
extent the Reserve is used by bluethroated macaws. The actual protections
in place include monitoring of habitat,
local education and awareness programs
about the species, and establishment of
suitable nesting sites. Approximately 70
blue-throated macaws have been
observed in or around this Reserve
(Herrera 2012, pers. comm.); however,
these macaws may be some of the same
macaws that are observed in other parts
of the species’ range during the breeding
season (Berkunsky 2012, pers. comm.).
Despite the existence of the Reserve,
there are no nests in the Reserve that are
known to be occupied by blue-throated
macaws (Herrera 2012, pers. comm.).
Although the species is present in the
Barba Azul Nature Reserve, it has not
yet been shown to be breeding there
(Waugh 2013, pers. comm). There is
evidence that they use the Reserve for
feeding (Herrera 2012, pers. comm.;
Kingsbury 2010, pp. 69–82). New
information provided indicates that the
blue-throated macaws that inhabit this
Reserve and adjacent ranches are
different than the birds in the southern
portion of its range (see Appendix A for
a map of the species’ range; Strem and
Bouzat 2012, p. 23; Milpacher 2012,
pers. comm.; Herrera 2012, pers.
comm.). Other than the Barba Azul
Nature Reserve, there are no protected
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:47 Oct 02, 2013
Jkt 232001
areas in the Llanos de Mojos except the
Beni Biosphere Reserve, which has been
in existence since 1986. However, to our
knowledge, the blue-throated macaw
does not use the Beni Biosphere Reserve
(Hesse and Duffield 2000, p. 258).
In addition to conservation efforts, the
NGCOs working in Bolivia are
conducting field research to better
understand the current state of this
species. However, the conservation
work is difficult due to various factors
that affect the species. Because some of
this species’ habitat is flooded for 6
months of the year, monitoring its
habitat is difficult during certain
seasons (Berkunsky 2010, p. 5). There
have also been discussions of
reintroducing captive-raised birds into
the wild; however, this practice could
inadvertently introduce disease into the
wild population if precautions are not
taken to minimize the transmission of
disease to other blue-throated macaws
(Sainsbury et al. 2012, p. 442).
Another conservation measure in
´
place is research on the motacu palm
(Milpacher 2012, pers. comm.) because
´
the number of motacu palms is
decreasing. This palm species plays a
significant role in the life cycle of the
blue-throated macaw. One study found
´
that the old and senescent motacu
palms are significantly more abundant
than the younger palms (LPF 2003, p.
21). Based on their findings, researchers
concluded that the islands containing
´
´
motacu are not regenerating motacu
palms sufficiently. It is likely that the
lack of regeneration is due to
overgrazing by cattle and excessive use
of fire over centuries (Kyle 2006, p. 5).
The World Parrot Trust has recently
attempted several small-scale palm
germination experiments to assess
reestablishing palm habitat (Milpacher
´
2012, pers. comm.). The motacu palm
has commercial value in addition to its
ecological role. Palm trees are used for
a multitude of purposes, such as thatch
for housing, fruit, and palm oil (de la
Torre et al. 2011, pp. 327–369;
Zambrana et al. 2007, pp. 2771–2778).
´
Motacu palm-dominated islands may
have persisted in part due to their
various ecological and commercial
values, but they certainly persist in part
because the islands are raised areas
within the lowlands that are prone to
flooding. With respect to the short term,
local researchers believe that there will
´
be adequate motacu fruits in the region
for a few more decades (LPF 2003, p.
´
21); however, research on the motacu is
vital to the conservation of the bluethroated macaw.
Educational awareness programs are
in place in addition to research and
monitoring. As an example, the
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
61217
´
´
Asociacion Armonıa is involved in an
awareness campaign to encourage that
the protection and conservation of these
birds occurs at a local level (e.g.,
protection of macaws from trappers and
the sustainable management of key
habitats, such as palm groves and forest
islands, on private property) (Llampa
2007; BLI 2008a; Snyder et al. 2000).
Two educational awareness centers
have been established in the towns of
Santa Ana del Yacuma and Santa Rosa
del Yacuma (LPF 2010, p. 16). In
response to the limited but continued
poaching that occurs in the wild, LPF
initiated a travelling exhibition,
‘‘Extinction is Forever,’’ which visited
17 urban localities in Bolivia in 2010
(LPF 2010, p. 15). The exhibition
includes 21 photographs that explain
the ancestral and present-day
relationship between people and birds,
and highlights the effects of illegal trade
of wild birds in Bolivia currently. An
estimated 1,000 visitors attended each
showing in the main cities (LPF 2010,
p. 15).
Reproductive success is vital to the
blue-throated macaw’s recovery, and
this species faces many challenges to
successfully reproducing. This species’
nests often have an open crown (i.e., no
roof) and are prone to flooding
(Berkunsky 2010, p. 4; Kyle 2007a, p. 3).
During many seasons, nests, eggs, and
nestlings are destroyed due to flooding.
´
´
Both WBT and Asociacion Armonıa
have been conducting conservation
activities, such as installation of
artificial nest boxes that provide safe
habitat, manipulating nests so that they
do not flood, and discouraging predators
and nest competitors. The installation of
a multitude and variety of nest boxes is
a way to boost breeding success.
Because many other species compete for
these nest boxes, and blue-throated
macaws tend to re-use previously used
nesting sites, the process of introducing
nest boxes and encouraging bluethroated macaws to use them, while
discouraging other species from using
them, is a very time-intensive process.
Despite all of these conservation efforts,
fewer than 500 individuals of this
species are believed to remain in the
wild. In summary, the conservation
efforts underway are abundant, but will
need to continue in order to have lasting
impacts on the species.
It is our policy that we do not
consider captive-held specimens in our
analysis of the five factors under Section
4(a) of the Act; we do not believe that
it was within the Congressional intent
when the Act was written, unless there
is some obvious reason for doing so. For
additional background on our
interpretation of the provisions of the
E:\FR\FM\03OCR1.SGM
03OCR1
61218
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 192 / Thursday, October 3, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Act, see 78 FR 35204, June 12, 2013. We
do not believe that captive-held
members of blue-throated macaws either
create or contribute to threats to the
species or remove or reduce threats to
the species. There are likely more than
1,000 individual blue-throated macaws
held in captivity worldwide according
to the 2011 North American Regional
Studbook, however, many of these birds
are of uncertain origin (Anderson 2011,
p. 4). We also note that it is not possible
to separate captive-held specimens as a
different legal status under the Act.
Finding (Listing Determination)
In assessing whether the blue-throated
macaw meets the definition of an
endangered or threatened species, we
considered the five factors in section
4(a)(1) of the Act. A species is
‘‘endangered’’ for purposes of the Act if
it is in danger of extinction throughout
all or a significant portion of its range
and is ‘‘threatened’’ if it is likely to
become endangered within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range. In
considering what factors might
constitute threats to a species, we must
look beyond the mere exposure of the
species to the factor to evaluate whether
the species may respond to the factor in
a way that causes actual impacts to the
species. If there is exposure to a factor
and the species responds negatively, the
factor may be a threat and we attempt
to determine how significant a threat it
is. The threat is significant if it drives,
or contributes to, the risk of extinction
of the species such that the species may
warrant listing as endangered or
threatened as those terms are defined in
the Act. We conducted a review of the
status of this species and assessed
whether the blue-throated macaw is
endangered or threatened throughout all
or a significant portion of its range.
We have assessed the best scientific
and commercial information available
regarding the past, present, and future
threats affecting this species.
Historically, the blue-throated macaw
existed in much higher numbers in
more continuous, connected habitat; its
suitable habitat is now extremely small.
Its small population size, combined
with its restricted range, increases the
species’ vulnerability to adverse natural
events that destroy individuals and their
habitat. It is subject to inbreeding
depression, loss of genetic variation,
and accumulation of new mutations. In
addition to its small population size,
many factors currently affect bluethroated macaws. These include:
Inadequate nest sites (both in
abundance and effectiveness); nest
(clutch) failure (when one or all of the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:47 Oct 02, 2013
Jkt 232001
nestlings fail to survive to fledgling
stage due to a variety of reasons such as
starvation, inadequate nutrition, sibling
competition); nest flooding; botflies;
competition for nests with more
competitive species, such as bees, and
other avian species, such as large
woodpeckers and other macaw species;
and predation by numerous species,
particularly other bird species (such as
toucans, owls, vultures, other raptors,
and even other macaw species).
Regulatory mechanisms are ineffective
at reducing the factors affecting the
blue-throated macaw (Factor D).
We have determined that captive-held
specimens cannot be given separate
consideration under the ESA based on
their captive state (see 78 FR 35204,
June 12, 2013), but captive-held
specimens can, in some cases, create,
contribute to, reduce, or remove threats
to the species. We have no information
in this case indicating that captive-held
blue-throated macaws either create or
contribute to threats to this species or
remove or reduce threats to the species.
Due to the effectiveness of CITES and,
in the United States, the WBCA,
international trade for pets is not a
concern. Removal of some birds from
the wild for the pet trade may still be
occurring, but there is no information
indicating to what extent animals
currently held in captivity are
motivating poachers to capture and
remove additional birds from the wild.
Regarding whether captive-held birds
reduce any threats to the species, there
are likely more than 1,000 individual
blue-throated macaws held in captivity
worldwide according to the 2011 North
American Regional Studbook. However,
many of these birds are of uncertain
origin (Anderson 2011, p. 4) and may
harbor diseases that do not exist in the
wild population and therefore may not
be suitable for reintroduction efforts.
Our review of the information
pertaining to the five threat factors
supports a conclusion that these factors
place the blue-throated macaw in
danger of extinction throughout all of its
range, such that a listing of endangered
is warranted. The species is currently in
danger of extinction because the species
exists at such low levels that it is
vulnerable to a multitude of threats.
Given the species’ low reproductive
capacity, it is very difficult to increase
to the levels of abundance that allow the
species to withstand such events. All of
these factors are now and will continue
to result in threats to the continued
existence of the species. We also
examined the blue-throated macaw to
analyze if any other listable entity under
the definition of ‘‘species,’’ such as
subspecies or distinct population
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
segments, may qualify for a different
status. However, because of the
magnitude and uniformity of the threats
throughout its range, we find that there
are no other listable entities that may
warrant a different determination of
status. Since threats extend throughout
its entire range, it is unnecessary to
determine if the blue-throated macaw is
in danger of extinction throughout a
significant portion of its range.
Based on our evaluation of the best
available scientific and commercial
information and given its current
population size, and severely limited
distribution throughout its historical
range, we have determined the species
is in danger of extinction throughout all
of its range and thus meets the
definition of an endangered species.
Because the species is in danger of
extinction now, as opposed to in the
foreseeable future, the blue-throated
macaw meets the definition of an
endangered species rather than a
threatened species. Therefore, we are
listing the blue-throated macaw as
endangered under the Act.
Available Conservation Measures
Conservation measures provided to
species listed as endangered under the
Act include recognition, requirements
for Federal protection, and prohibitions
against certain practices. Recognition
through listing results in public
awareness, and encourages and results
in conservation actions by Federal and
State governments, private agencies and
interest groups, and individuals.
The Act and its implementing
regulations set forth a series of general
prohibitions and exceptions that apply
to all endangered wildlife. These
prohibitions, at 50 CFR 17.21, in part,
make it illegal for any person subject to
the jurisdiction of the United States to
‘‘take’’ (includes harass, harm, pursue,
hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture,
or to attempt any of these) within the
United States or upon the high seas;
import or export; deliver, receive, carry,
transport, or ship in interstate or foreign
commerce in the course of commercial
activity; or sell or offer for sale in
interstate or foreign commerce any
endangered wildlife species. It also is
illegal to possess, sell, deliver, carry,
transport, or ship any such wildlife that
has been taken in violation of the Act.
Certain exceptions apply to agents of the
Service, other Federal land management
agencies, the National Marine Fisheries
Service, and State conservation
agencies.
Permits may be issued to carry out
otherwise prohibited activities
involving endangered wildlife species
under certain circumstances.
E:\FR\FM\03OCR1.SGM
03OCR1
61219
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 192 / Thursday, October 3, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Regulations governing permits for
endangered species are codified at 50
CFR 17.22. With regard to endangered
wildlife, a permit may 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.
Clarity of Rule
We are required by Executive Orders
12866 and 12988 and by the
Presidential Memorandum of June 1,
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 names 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.
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).
*
Macaw, bluethroated.
*
*
*
*
*
*
PART 17—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 17
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 1531–
1544; and 4201–4245, unless otherwise
noted.
2. Amend § 17.11(h) by adding a new
entry for ‘‘Macaw, blue-throated’’ in
alphabetical order under BIRDS to the
List of Endangered and Threatened
Wildlife to read as follows:
■
§ 17.11 Endangered and threatened
wildlife.
Author
*
The primary author of this rule is
Amy Brisendine, Branch of Foreign
*
*
(h) * * *
Status
*
*
*
Bolivia .....................
*
E
*
814
*
*
*
Entire ......................
*
When listed
Dated: September 20, 2013.
Rowan W. Gould,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.
[FR Doc. 2013–24215 Filed 10–2–13; 8:45 am]
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:47 Oct 02, 2013
Jkt 232001
PO 00000
Frm 00067
*
*
*
*
*
Vertebrate
population where
endangered or
threatened
*
*
Ara glaucogularis ....
Accordingly, we amend part 17,
subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the
Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth
below:
A list of all references cited in this
rule is available on the Internet at
https://www.regulations.gov under
Docket No. FWS–R9–ES–2012–0034 or
upon request from the Branch of Foreign
Species, Endangered Species Program,
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Scientific name
*
Regulation Promulgation
References Cited
Historic range
*
BIRDS
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species,
Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements,
Transportation.
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)
Species
Common name
Species, Endangered Species Program,
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\03OCR1.SGM
03OCR1
Critical
habitat
Special
rules
*
*
NA
NA
*
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 192 (Thursday, October 3, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 61208-61219]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-24215]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R9-ES-2012-0034; 450 003 0115]
RIN 1018-AY68
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Listing the Blue-
throated Macaw
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), are listing
the blue-throated macaw (Ara glaucogularis) as endangered under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). This species is
endemic to a small area in Bolivia, and there are estimated to be fewer
than 500 individuals remaining in the wild. Its status remains tenuous
despite conservation efforts. Threats to the species include: lack of
reproductive success (loss of nestlings) due to nest failure, which
primarily is caused by competition for nest sites and predation by
larger avian species; and the lack of suitable, available habitat in
addition to its small population size.
DATES: This final rule is effective November 4, 2013.
ADDRESSES: This final rule is available on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R9-ES-2012-0034. Comments and
materials we received, as well as supporting documentation used in the
preparation of this rule, are available for public inspection, by
appointment, during normal business hours at: U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Suite 400, Arlington, VA 22203.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Janine Van Norman, Chief, Branch of
Foreign Species, Endangered Species Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Room 420, Arlington, VA 22203;
telephone 703-358-2171. If you use a telecommunications device for the
deaf (TDD), call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-
877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act) (16 U.S.C.
1531 et seq.), is a law that was passed to prevent extinction of
species by providing measures to help alleviate the loss of species and
their habitats. Before a plant or animal species can receive the
protection provided by the Act, it must first be added to one of the
Federal Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants. Section
4 of the Act and its implementing regulations at part 424 of title 50
of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) set forth the procedures for
adding species to these lists.
Previous Federal Actions
We received the petition to list this species on May 6, 1991, from
Alison Stattersfield, of the International Council for Bird
Preservation (ICBP). That petition requested that we list 53 foreign
birds under the Act, including the blue-throated macaw, which is the
subject of this final rule. We took several actions on this petition.
On December 16, 1991, we published a positive 90-day finding and
announced the initiation of a status review of the species included in
the 1991 petition (56 FR 65207). On March 28, 1994, we published a
document that served as our 12-month finding on the 1991 petition (59
FR 14496). In that document, we announced our finding that listing 38
species from the 1991 petition, including the blue-throated macaw, was
warranted but precluded because of other, higher priority listing
actions. The blue-throated macaw was assigned
[[Page 61209]]
a listing priority number (LPN) of 2. Species are assigned LPNs based
on the magnitude and immediacy of threats, as well as their taxonomic
status. A lower LPN corresponds to a higher priority to determine a
listing status. An LPN of 2 reflects threats that are both imminent and
high in magnitude, as well as the taxonomic classification of the blue-
throated macaw as a full species. In the May 3, 2011, Annual Notice of
Review, we announced that listing was warranted but precluded for 20
foreign species, including the blue-throated macaw.
On January 10, 2013, we issued a proposed rule (78 FR 2239) to add
the blue-throated macaw as endangered to the Federal List of Endangered
and Threatened Wildlife.
Summary of Comments
We base this rule on a review of the best scientific and commercial
information available, including all information we received during the
public comment period. In the January 10, 2013, proposed rule (78 FR
2239), we requested that all interested parties submit information that
might contribute to development of a final rule. The public comment
period was open for 60 days, ending March 11, 2013. We also contacted
appropriate scientific experts and organizations, and invited them to
comment on the proposed listing in accordance with our peer review
policy, described in the section below. We received 23 comments from
members of the public including peer reviewer; these comments are
available at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R9-ES-
2012-0034).
Peer Review
In accordance with our policy, ``Notice of Interagency Cooperative
Policy for Peer Review in Endangered Species Act Activities,'' that was
published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), we sought the expert opinion
of three appropriate independent specialists regarding this rule. The
purpose of such review is to ensure listing decisions are based on
scientifically sound data, assumptions, and analysis. We sent copies of
the proposed rule to the peer reviewers immediately following
publication in the Federal Register. We invited these peer reviewers to
comment, during the public comment period, on the specific assumptions
and the data that were the basis for our conclusions regarding the
proposal to list this species as endangered under the Act. We received
comments from three peer reviewers.
We reviewed all comments we received for substantive issues and new
information regarding the proposed listing of this species; we address
those comments below. Comments that provided support or opposition
without substantive information were noted, but will not be addressed
in this final rule. Some of the commenters did not appear to understand
the criteria for listing under the Act. Therefore, we are providing
clarification below. The following summarizes the comments we received
and our responses.
(1) Comment: Many commenters, while not opposed to the listing of
the species, asked for a special rule under section 4(d) of the Act
(also called a ``4(d) rule'') that would allow interstate trade of the
species to occur.
Response: Section 4(d) of the Act allows the Service to develop a
special rule to apply the prohibitions of section 9 or to provide
measures that are necessary and advisable to provide for the
conservation of threatened species. A special rule cannot be
promulgated for a species that is listed as endangered under the Act.
Because we determined that listing the blue-throated macaw as
endangered under the Act is appropriate, we are not able to develop a
4(d) rule for this species. That said, not all interstate trade is
prohibited under the ESA. Sale; offer for sale; and delivery, receipt,
carrying, transport, or shipment in interstate or foreign commerce in
the course of a commercial activity are prohibited. Interstate trade
that is not sale, offer for sale, or in the course of a commercial
activity is not regulated.
(2) Comment: Several commenters, including individual bird breeders
and the American Federation of Aviculture, objected to our finding, but
did not provide new information relevant to the determination (for the
specific content of these comments, see https://www.regulations.gov
under Docket No. FWS-R9-ES-2012-0034).
Response: We thank all the commenters for their interest in the
conservation of this species and thank those commenters who provided
information for our consideration in making this listing determination.
Under section 4(b) of the Act, the Service is required to make listing
determinations solely on the basis of the best scientific and
commercial data available after conducting a review of the status of
the species. When we published our proposed rule, we opened a public
comment period during which we requested any additional information on
the blue-throated macaw. In making this listing determination, we
reviewed the best available scientific and commercial information, we
contacted species experts, and we diligently searched for the most
current information on this species. Therefore, we have obtained and
considered the ``best scientific and commercial data available'' in our
listing determination. After careful consideration, we conclude that
this species meets the definition of an endangered species under the
Act.
Effects of This Rule
Commercial Use
The Act does not prohibit intrastate (within a State or U.S.
territory) sale, offer for sale, or certain other intrastate activities
of an endangered species. But, among other things, it does prohibit
interstate (between States and U.S. territories) sale, offer for sale,
and certain other activities such as transport in the course of a
commercial activity of endangered species. If a person in the course of
a commercial activity can demonstrate that such sale or other
commercial use enhances the propagation or survival of the species, or
that it is for scientific research, he or she may apply for a permit
for these activities.
Because interstate commercial use of endangered species is
generally prohibited, if you wish to sell or otherwise commercially use
your macaw(s), you would have to either sell the bird(s) to someone who
resides within your home State, commercially use the bird within your
State, or apply for a permit for interstate sale or commercial use of
your bird(s). In addition, to be in compliance with the Act, any
advertisements for the sale of your birds should include a statement
that no sale involving parties from another state can be consummated
until a permit has been obtained from the Service.
Captive Breeding
The Service does not regulate captive breeding of listed species.
This means that you are not prohibited from continuing to breed these
birds. However, the Act does prohibit interstate and foreign sales,
certain other interstate and foreign commercial activities, imports,
and exports without a Service permit. Therefore, if you intend to sell
any progeny, you will either need to sell them within the State the
birds were bred to someone residing in the same State or, if intending
to sell the birds outside the State where they were bred, you will need
to obtain a Service permit. In addition, to be in compliance with the
Act and its implementing regulations at 50 CFR Part
[[Page 61210]]
17, any advertisements for the sale of your birds should include a
statement that no sale involving parties from another state can occur
until a permit has been obtained from the Service. For more information
on obtaining such a permit, see https://www.fws.gov/permits.
Personal Pets
The Act does not restrict ownership of your personal pet or moving
your personal pet across State lines for noncommercial purposes. There
are no restrictions on traveling with or transporting legally obtained
endangered species within the United States for your own personal use.
No permit is required for you to travel or transport your pet macaw(s)
within the United States, provided you are not selling or otherwise
engaging in a commercial activity with the bird.
Summary of Changes From Proposed Rule
This final rule incorporates changes to our proposed listing based
on the comments we received and newly available scientific and
commercial information. Peer reviewers generally commented that the
proposed rule was thorough and comprehensive. There were different
views on what the historical threats to the species were and
differences in thoughts on the magnitude of the various factors
currently affecting the species. For example, some peer reviewers and
commenters indicated that illegal removal from the wild for the pet
trade was the most significant factor affecting the species and that
habitat loss and competition for nest sites had less of an effect on
the species than predation. Others questioned the degree of the effect
that botflies have on the species. There are very few individuals
studying and working closely with this species, and we made our
determinations based on the best available scientific and commercial
information. None of the information collected during the comment
period changed our final listing determination. A list of literature
used in finalizing this determination and comments we received are
available at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R9-ES-
2012-0034.
The most significant change is that, based on recent surveys, the
population of this species appears to be greater than was previously
believed. Recent surveys conducted by the Armonia Association and the
Loro Parque Fundaci[oacute]n indicate that the wild population of the
blue-throated macaw is likely between 350 to 400 individuals (Waugh
2013, pers. comm.; Lebbin 2013, pers. comm.; Hennessey 2013, pers.
comm.); including between 190 to 225 mature individuals (Waugh 2013,
pers. comm.). Additionally, a population viability analysis on the
blue-throated macaw was conducted and published in late 2012 (Strem and
Bouzat 2012, pp. 12-24). It was not available at the time we were
developing the proposed listing determination; however, this
information is incorporated into this final listing determination.
We also note that providing separate legal status to captive
specimens of protected species is not permissible under the ESA.
Species Information
Taxonomy
The taxonomic status of this species was disputed until fairly
recently. The blue-throated macaw was previously considered an aberrant
form of the blue-and-yellow macaw (A. ararauna), but these two species
are known to occur sympatrically (in the same location) without
interbreeding (Kyle 2007a; del Hoyo et al. 1997). Common names in
Spanish for the blue-throated macaw include guacamayo barba azul and
guacamayo caninde. Both BirdLife International (BLI) and the Integrated
Taxonomic Information System (ITIS) recognize the blue-throated macaw
as Ara glaucogularis. ITIS (https://www.itis.gov) is a database
maintained by a partnership of U.S., Canadian, and Mexican federal
government agencies, other organizations, and taxonomic specialists to
provide taxonomic information. Therefore, we accept the species as Ara
glaucogularis.
Population
As of 1998, the species was known to occur in eight locations, and
the total species' population was believed to be 100 to 150 individuals
(Loro Parque Fundaci[oacute]n (LPF) 2002, p. 13). In October 2004, a
new, small population was found at Santa Rosa, 100 kilometers (km) (62
miles (mi)) west of what was believed to be the western-most edge of
the species' range (LPF 2012; Herrera et al. 2007, p. 18). Biologists
surveying for this species in 2004 found more birds than in previous
surveys by searching outside known population locations in specific
habitat types believed to support the blue throated macaw (palm groves
and forested islands) (Herrera et al. 2007, p. 18). In 2007, a
population of approximately 25 individuals was found one hour south of
Trinidad (Kyle 2007a, p. 6). Also in 2007, a flock of approximately 70
birds was observed near the Rio Mamor[eacute] (Asociaci[oacute]n
Armon[iacute]a), in the vicinity of where the Barba Azul Nature Reserve
is now located. Population surveys conducted between 2004 and 2008 by
Asociaci[oacute]n Armon[iacute]a and LPF indicate that there are now
likely between 350 to 400 individuals (Waugh 2013, pers. comm.).
We note that there are likely more than 1,000 individual blue-
throated macaws held in captivity worldwide according to the 2011 North
American Regional Studbook (Anderson 2011, p. 4).
Species Description
Blue-throated macaws have a blue throat; a bare, white face
containing identifiable blue-streaks; dark grey irises; and a large
black bill (Anderson 2011, p. 4; Kyle 2007b, p. 16). Its forehead is
also blue, and there is a lack of contrast between its remiges (large
flight feathers on the wing) and upperwing covert (outer) feathers.
This species is approximately the same size (85 centimeters (cm) or 33
inches) as the blue-and-yellow macaw. However, the blue-throated macaw
is not as competitive as the blue-and-yellow macaw in obtaining nesting
cavities (Kyle 2007a). Male blue-throated macaws are larger than
females at about 800 grams (1.76 pounds), and females weigh
approximately 600 grams (1.32 pounds) (Kyle 2007b, p. 16).
Blue-throated macaws, like other parrot species, are monogamous and
tend to mate for life (Strem and Bouzat 2012, pp. 12-13). There is also
a significant investment in the care for their young; blue-throated
macaws are not fully independent of their parents for a full year
(Berkunsky 2010, p. 5). Therefore, some breeding pairs may not produce
nestlings every breeding season. The blue-throated macaw forms its
nests in large tree cavities; its preferred nesting tree is the
motac[uacute] palm (Attalea phalerata), which is native to Bolivia,
Brazil, and Peru. The northern population of blue-throated macaws
breeds between August to November, and the southern population breeds
between November to March (Berkunsky 2012, pers. comm.; Kyle 2007a).
The southern population, an hour south of Trinidad, tends to breed
around the same time as the more commonly found blue-and-yellow macaw.
This overlap of breeding seasons adds to competition for nest sites.
Blue-throated macaws are sexually mature between 6 and 8 years of
age (Strem 2008; Kyle 2007a, p. 6). Females lay one to three eggs per
clutch (generally one clutch per year is produced), and the eggs
incubate for 26 days. One to three hatchlings are raised, depending on
food availability (BLI 2010; Kyle 2007a). Nestlings fledge at
[[Page 61211]]
between 13 and 14 weeks. Blue-throated macaws are seen traveling mostly
in pairs but also have been seen in a large flock of between 70 and 100
individuals (Herrera 2012, pers. comm.; Macleod et al. 2009, p. 15;
Waugh 2007a, p. 53).
Diet
This species seeks areas where palm fruits and suitable nesting
cavities are readily available (Herrera et al. 2007, pp. 18-24). It
feeds on fruits of approximately 12 species of trees (Kyle 2007a, pp.
1-10). There are 84 species of palms in Bolivia (Moraes et al. 2001, p.
234) and approximately 11 palm species within the blue-throated macaw's
range. Blue-throated macaws prefer the fleshy part of the fruit, or
mesocarp, of motac[uacute] and also Mauritia flexuosa (royal palms or
carandai-guaz[uacute]), as well as Acrocomia aculeata (common names
include: coyoli palm, gru-gru palm, macaw palm, acrocome, Coyolipalme,
amankayo, corojo, corozo, baboso, tucuma, and totai) (Herrera 2007, p.
20; Yamashita and M. de Barros 1997, p. 144; Jordan and Munn 1993;
https://www.ars-grin.gov; https://www.pacsoa.org.au). The macaws first
puncture the apex of the mesocarp and remove the outer layer (Yamashita
and M. de Barros 1997, p. 144). The motac[uacute] continually produces
fruit throughout the year. Between 80 and 90 percent of motac[uacute]
palms produce fruits all year, but the peak is between July and
December (LPF 2003, p. 21; Moraes et al. 1996, p. 424). Motac[uacute]
is believed to be pollinated by beetles in the Mystrops genus (Moraes
et al. 1996, p. 425). The same palm tree may produce at any one time
between three and five racemes (flowering stalks, each with fruits in a
different stage of development ripeness) (Yamashita and M. de Barros
1997, p. 144).
The species has also been observed at clay licks (Kyle 2007a, p.
2), which are clay banks where the birds consume soil or minerals;
however, the reason for the clay consumption remains unclear.
Range and Habitat Description
The blue-throated macaw is endemic to the tropical savanna
ecoregion of north-central Bolivia in the Department of Beni (Strem and
Bouzat 2012, p. 13; LPF 2010; Kingsbury 2010, p. 8). This ecoregion is
approximately 160,000 square kilometers (km\2\) (61,776 square miles
(mi\2\)). (See Appendix A in Docket No. FWS-R9-ES-2012-0034 at https://www.regulations.gov for a map of the region (hereinafter referred to as
``Appendix A'')). Within this region, the blue-throated macaw is found
both in groups and in widely dispersed isolated pairs within an area
estimated to be between 2,508 and 12,900 km\2\ (968 and 4,981 mi\2\)
(Waugh 2013, pers. comm.; Strem and Bouzat 2012, p. 12; LPF 2012; BLI
2012; Hesse 2000, p. 104). The species is found at elevations between
200 and 300 meters (m) (656 and 984 feet (ft)) (Yamashita and M. de
Barros 1997, p. 144; Brace et al. 1995). The blue-throated macaw's
habitat was occupied by humans for thousands of years before European
colonization (Erickson 2000, p. 2). Its habitat consists of lowlands in
an area known as Llanos (plains) de Mojos, also known as Llanos de
Moxos (LPF 2010; Mayle et al. 2007, p. 301; Yamashita and M. de Barros
1997, p. 141). See Appendix A for a photo representing the flooded
habitat. The Llanos de Mojos is a wide savannah plain with poor
drainage and, in the wet season, is extremely susceptible to flooding.
The floods cover large areas of the plains, and the area may remain
flooded for 5 to 7 months in some areas. These plains include parts of
the river basins of the It[eacute]nez, Mamor[eacute], Beni, and Madre
de Dios Rivers (see Appendix A for a map; Yamashita and M. de Barros
1997, p. 144).
The blue-throated macaw's habitat has progressively diminished over
thousands of years and its habitat is now primarily restricted to small
``islands'' of suitable habitat within privately owned cattle pastures
(see Appendix A for a photo illustrating these islands; Milpacher 2012,
pers. comm.; Kingsbury 2010, p. 72; Berkunsky 2008, p. 4; Kyle 2007a,
p. 4; Kyle 2006, p. 7; LPF 2003, p. 6). The species has been observed
in flocks of up to 100 birds in the Barba Azul Nature Reserve (Waugh
2013, pers. comm). The blue-throated macaw is believed to occur on
ranches adjacent to the Barba Azul Nature Reserve, Ranches Las Gamas,
Los Patos, Pelotal, and Juan Latino, but the status of the species is
unclear in these areas (Kingsbury 2010, p. 89). In other parts of the
species' range, the species is believed to occur on the ranches Elsner
with Esp[iacute]ritu, San Rafael, and the Estancia El Dorado; however,
to the best of our knowledge, these are privately managed, and the
species is not being monitored on the ranches.
Palm Islands
Palm-dominated forest islands form the blue-throated macaw's
primary habitat. These ``islands'' are on elevated terrain and are
sometimes referred to as ``alturas'' (high ground). The islands were
primarily formed as mounds resulting from prehistoric human existence
in this region (Erickson 2008, pp. 168-169). The lowlands are
frequently inundated by water due to the flooding of nearby rivers (see
Appendix A). Historically, human cultures manipulated the water flow to
create plains that were higher and subsequently drier (Erickson 2008,
pp. 168-169). The mounds are common throughout the savannas and
wetlands of Bolivia; there may be as many as 10,000 of these mounds or
islands in Bolivia (Erickson 2008, p. 169). They have been found to
vary in size from a few hectares to many square kilometers (Erickson
2008, pp. 168-169; Yamashita and M. de Barros 1997, p. 144). Most are
raised less than one meter and are often surrounded by ponds or moat-
like ditches (Erickson 2008, pp. 168-169). Typically, these islands are
surrounded by seasonally flooded grasslands; are between 0.2 and 1.0
hectare (ha) (0.49 to 2.47 acre (ac)) in size; and are approximately
130 to 235 m (426 to 771 ft) above sea level (Kingsbury et al. 2010, p.
71; Yamashita and M. de Barros 1997, p. 144).
Besides motac[uacute], palm species found on these islands are
typically Syagrus botryophora (sumuqu[eacute]) and Astrocaryum vulgare
(chontilla), interspersed with semi-deciduous emergent trees such as
Enterolobium spp. (no common name (NCN)), Sterculia striata (NCN) and
Tabebuia spp. (roble), and the Curupau tree (Anadenanthera colubrina)
(also known as yopo, vilca, huilco, wilco, cebil, or angico) (Kyle
2005, p. 7). Some trees such as Ceiba pentandra (mapajo or kapok tree)
and Hura crepitans (common names include catahua, Ochoo, arbol del
diablo, acacu, monkey's dinner-bell, habillo, ceiba de leche, sandbox
tree, possum wood, dynamite tree, ceiba blanca, assacu, and posentri)
can reach more than 40 m (131 ft) in height.
The motac[uacute] palms may have survived on the mound islands for
various reasons: their value to human cultures, their resistance to
burning, and their ecological suitability to the microclimate.
Motac[uacute] is not only vital to the life history of blue-throated
macaws; it also has local, commercial, and ecosystem importance (Kyle
2005, p. 3; Moraes et al. 1996, pp. 424-425). This species of palm is
used in the local community as thatch for housing, which can last up to
7 years. Its fruit is consumed by humans and various other species;
parts of the palm tree are used to make baskets and brooms; and palm
oil is sold commercially (Zambrana et al. 2007, p. 2785; Moraes et al.
1996, pp. 425-426).
[[Page 61212]]
Significance of Palm Islands to Blue-Throated Macaws
Habitat favored by blue-throated macaws contains tall, mature trees
in areas with continuous motac[uacute] palm fruit production (Yamashita
and M. de Barros 1997, p. 145). Densities of motac[uacute], the blue-
throated macaw's preferred nesting and feeding source, vary greatly. In
the 1997 Yamashita and M. de Barros study, macaws were only observed in
areas where motac[uacute] represented more than 60 percent of the
trees.
Natural cavities in dead or decaying trees (usually motac[uacute]
palms) are the primary source of nesting sites for this species. Blue-
throated macaws prefer dead trees that have cavities with a minimum
internal diameter of 30 cm (11.8 inches) for nesting, and, therefore,
the tree must have a diameter at breast height of 60 cm (23.6 inches)
or greater (see Appendix A for a picture representing a tree cavity;
Yamashita and M. de Barros 1997, p. 145).
Factors Affecting the Species
Section 4 of the Act, and its implementing regulations at 50 CFR
part 424, set forth the procedures for adding species to the Federal
Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants. Under section
4(a)(1) of the Act, we may list a species based on any of the following
five factors: (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. Listing actions may be warranted based on any of
the above factors, singly or in combination. We considered all of these
factors in determining that the blue-throated macaw qualifies as an
endangered species. Each of these factors is considered and evaluated
in this document.
In analyzing threats to a species, the Service focuses its analysis
on threats acting upon wild specimens within the native range of the
species because the goal of the Act is survival and recovery of the
species in its native ecosystems. We do not separately analyze
``threats'' to captive-held specimens because the statutory five
factors are not well-suited to consideration of specimens in captivity
and captive-held specimens are not eligible for separate consideration
for listing. But we do consider the extent to which specimens held in
captivity create, contribute to, reduce, or remove threats to the
species.
Loss of Palm Islands Due to Habitat Conversion
Within the past few hundred years, the blue-throated macaw lost
much of its remaining habitat due to conversion of palm forests to
pasture for cattle grazing. Cattle are not native to Bolivia; they were
introduced to Bolivia in the 1600s. After the Second World War, cattle
ranching and the associated burning of pastures began significantly
impacting the landscape (Robison et al. 2000, p. 61). The macaw's
preferred habitat is now limited to a few small, isolated islands of
suitable habitat that are surrounded by these cattle ranches (Gilardi
2012, pers. comm.). During the flooding season, which can occur for up
to 6 months of a year, cattle take refuge on the motac[uacute] palm
islands because the islands are drier due to their higher elevation
(LPF 2003, p. 33). In general, there is no direct conflict between the
cattle themselves and blue-throated macaws, but cattle can degrade
their habitat by trampling. Adding to habitat loss, in the preferred
habitat of the blue-throated macaw where these motac[uacute] palms
remain (within privately owned cattle ranches), local ranchers
typically burn the pastures annually (Berkunsky 2008, p. 4; del Hoyo
1997). This type of burning results in almost no recruitment of native
palm trees, which are vital to the ecological needs of the blue-
throated macaw (Yamashita and M. de Barros 1997, p. 144). The reduction
in habitat (reduced availability of motac[uacute] palms) and lack of
recruitment of motac[uacute] palms is a concern for in the future for
blue-throated macaws because it takes several years for motac[uacute]
palms to be able to produce fruit and to develop into a size suitable
for nesting cavities.
As mitigation, local conservation efforts are not only planting
trees that provide food for blue-throated macaws, they are also
conducting educational efforts directed towards land owners within the
range of the blue-throated macaw. Additionally, the Barba Azul Nature
Reserve is currently expanding (to 11,000 ha) (27,181 ac) to include
adjacent ranches where the blue-throated macaw is believed to breed.
The land newly incorporated into the protected area has more palm
islands with better forest (Waugh 2013, pers. comm.). However, projects
designed to provide additional habitat for this species are in the
early stages of development and it is too early to evaluate the
effectiveness of these efforts.
The lack of nesting cavities (suitable habitat) is often a limiting
factor for bird species that depend on these cavities for nesting
(Sandoval and Barrantes 2009, p. 75; Kyle 2006, p. 8). To raise their
young, blue-throated macaws require specific nesting cavities that
provide protection from predation and flooding. Additionally, many
different species compete for these increasingly rare nest sites. The
loss of suitable trees is one factor that has resulted in increased
competition from other species for these nesting cavities. The impact
of habitat loss is compounded by extreme weather events and contributes
to other factors that affect blue-throated macaws, such as an increase
in vulnerability to predation and competition for nests.
Nest Failure
Nest failure (the failure of nestlings to survive to fledgling
stage) continues for various reasons, despite intensive conservation
efforts (Berkunsky 2010, p. 4; Kyle 2006, p. 8). Some of the causes of
nest failure include: predation, infestation by botflies (parasites in
the Philornis genus), exposure to severe weather events such as
flooding, and competition for food and shelter with other species such
as bees (Berkunsky 2010, pp. 4-5). Many nestlings die in early
developmental stages, often due to starvation (due to lack of food or
parental neglect, exposure to cold temperatures, or flooding (Kyle
2007a, pp. 1-10). If parents do not have access to enough nutritional
food sources, some nestlings are neglected so that their other
nestlings will survive. Nestlings can also fall out of collapsed trees
before they have fledged. During five field seasons of closely
observing nest sites, 43 percent of the active nests (30 active nests)
were predated (Berkunsky 2008, p. 5; Kyle 2007a, pp. 7-8). See
additional discussion below under the Exposure to Extreme Weather
Events section.
Predation
Predation is a key factor limiting this species' population growth
in some areas of its range (Kyle 2007a, pp. 3, 6-7; Kyle 2006, p. 8).
During one season of observation, all nestlings within three nests of
seven active blue-throated macaw nests were lost to predation (Kyle
2007a, pp. 6-8). Because the species has such a small population size
with likely fewer than 500 individuals remaining in the wild, losses
such as this have a significant effect on the status of the species as
a whole. Predators of the blue-throated macaw include:
Toco toucan (Ramphastos toco),
Crane hawk (Geranospiza caerulescens),
[[Page 61213]]
Great-horned owl (Bubo virginianus), and
Southern crested caracara (Caracara plancus, a bird of
prey).
The blue-throated macaw's habitat of sparse, palm-forested islands
scattered among natural grasslands, increases the species'
vulnerability to nest predation (Kyle 2007a, pp. 6-7). Tree nest
cavities chosen by blue-throated macaws tend to be visible to other
avian species flying overhead. In addition to nesting on palm islands,
blue-throated macaws are also known to nest in isolated palms in open
fields, which are even more exposed than nests on palm islands (Herrera
et al. 2007, p. 20). All of the species that predate on adult blue-
throated macaws, eggs, or nestlings have large distributions and are
commonly found at the habitat islands used by blue-throated macaws
(Kyle 2007a, pp. 6-7). Great horned owls have been seen at many sites
where blue-throated macaws are nesting (Kyle 2007a, p. 6). These owls,
native to South America, have a vast range, are the most widely
distributed owl in South America, and occupy a variety of habitats
including open forest, farmland, and grassland.
Because blue-throated macaw nests may be concentrated in these
small ``islands'' of trees within cattle pastures, they are more easily
located by predators than species that nest in a continuous forest
setting. To discourage and mitigate the effects of predation, some
conservation activities being conducted include the monitoring and
discouragement of predators from attacking blue-throated macaw nests.
These efforts are intensive. In one case, where it appeared the nest
tree was collapsing, the tree was monitored all night by conservation
staff (Kyle 2007a, p. 9). Often trees containing active nests are
monitored in this way if persistent predation has been observed. The
mitigation efforts are helpful if nestlings can survive until they are
at least 300 grams (0.66 pounds), they have a greater chance of
survival (Kyle 2007a, p. 7). However, these mitigation projects are in
the early stages of development and it is too early to evaluate the
effectiveness of these efforts.
Botfly parasites can also cause mortality of nestlings and have
been observed in blue-throated macaw nestlings. During some parts of
their life cycle, botflies live subcutaneously, and feed on macaw
tissue (Olah et al. in press; Wunderle Jr. and Arendt 2011, p. 39).
Botflies significantly reduce the energy available for nestling growth
and development (Uhazy and Arendt 1986 in Wunderle Jr. and Arendt 2011,
p. 39) and can contribute to reduced fitness and in some cases death of
nestlings. In one study of avian nestlings, botfly parasitism caused 56
percent of mortalities, while egg and chick losses from nest predators
and competitors accounted for less than 10 percent of reproductive
failures (Arendt 2000 in Wunderle Jr. and Arendt 2011, p. 39).
Exposure to Extreme Weather Events
Because this species has a small population, the blue-throated
macaw is also vulnerable to natural catastrophic events such as
flooding, drought, and other stochastic disturbances (Strem and Bouzat
2012, p. 12; Kyle 2006, pp. 5-6). Bolivia is described as a
``climatically volatile region'' and is one of the countries in the
world most affected by natural disasters in recent years (Oxfam
International 2009, p. 5). This species' habitat experiences extreme
changes over the course of a year.
For many months of the year, the blue-throated macaw's habitat is
flooded; at other times during the year, its habitat suffers from
severe drought. During periods of drought, nestlings are sometimes
neglected and starve.
High rainfall occurs during the summer months; the wet season is
between September and May. Annual precipitation is between 110 and 250
cm (43 and 98 in) (Haase and Beck 1989 in Kingsbury 2010, p. 9). Very
heavy rainfall in this region can continue for long periods of time
(Kyle 2006, pp. 5-6; Hanagarth and Sarmiento 1990 in Beck and Moraes,
undated). Every 6 to 12 years, 80 to 90 percent of the region is
inundated (Beck and Moraes, undated). Although these areas are
seasonally flooded, they are also prone to periods of drought (Kyle
2007a, p. 3; Mayle et al. 2007, p. 294; Yamashita and M. de Barros
1997, p. 144).
Severe storms, such as one that occurred in 2005, are described as
``nest killers.'' These severe storms cause the dead palm trees in
which the nests have been constructed to collapse or flood (Kyle 2007b,
p. 15), which causes nest failure for the season and subsequently no
recruitment.
Dead palm trees often collapse in these storms. During the 2006-
2007 season, this phenomenon was observed when the nest of one blue-
throated macaw pair in a dead motac[uacute] palm tree collapsed due to
strong winds (Kyle 2007a, p. 4). Although the reason is unclear, these
dead palm trees are currently the preferred sites for nest construction
by the blue-throated macaw, and the species has strong nest site
fidelity (Berkunsky 2012, pers. comm.). The extent to which this
behavior is learned and modified is also unclear. However, researchers
are working with the blue-throated macaw to introduce nest sites that
are safer and less prone to predation and nest failure due to extreme
weather events such as flooding (Berkunsky 2010, pp. 4-5).
Flooding, a significant cause of nest failure in the recent past,
has not been documented since 2008 at monitored and human-manipulated
nests. This is due to one of the conservation measures in place:
drilling drain holes in the nests and at the bottom of the dead palm
trees to prevent nest flooding. However, flooding can still occur if
nests are not monitored and manipulated.
Competition for Nest Sites
In addition to nest failure, there is a shortage of nests in some
areas. As described above, there is little remaining of the preferred
habitat of motac[uacute] palms. The species appears to ``learn''
nesting sites, and will re-use nesting locations that they had used in
the past (Berkunsky 2010; Kyle 2007a, p. 4). Blue-throated macaws
choose to nest in the top of dead motac[uacute] palms which provide
easy access to their preferred food source. These nesting sites also
expose the birds to predation, competition from other species for
nests, drought, excessive rainfall, and nest flooding. Many species, in
addition to the blue-throated macaw, use the motac[uacute] palm for
feeding and nesting. In the Llanos de Mojos, there are 21 species of
parrots that may compete for nest sites (Kingsbury et al. 2010, p. 83;
Yamashita and M. de Barros 1997, p. 144). Some species known to compete
for nest sites with the blue-throated macaw include the blue and yellow
macaw, woodpeckers, and bees (Kyle 2007a, p. 6; LPF 2003, p. 33).
In order to provide more choices for nesting habitat, conservation
organizations are installing nest boxes. In 2009, in the Barba Azul
Nature Reserve, 46 artificial nests were monitored, in part by video
cameras; however, the majority of them (24 nests) were occupied by blue
and yellow macaws (LPF 2010, p. 15). Likely due to the larger size of
the blue and yellow macaw or perhaps their more aggressive nature, blue
and yellow macaws usually win most confrontations for nests (Kyle
2007a, p. 6). During the 2010 field study at the Barba Azul Nature
Reserve, researchers also observed that there were a greater number of
blue and yellow macaws using the Barba Azul Nature Reserve than blue-
throated macaws (Kingsbury 2010, p. 83). At an area where both species
were drinking water, researchers noted that the blue-throated macaws
exhibited agitated behavior when blue-and-yellow macaws were nearby
(Kingsbury 2010, p. 83). Although the Barba Azul Nature Reserve
[[Page 61214]]
was established specifically for the blue-throated macaws, other
species use the reserve and compete for nesting sites.
As stated earlier, to mitigate this problem, at least two
conservation organizations are installing nest boxes to create more
available sites for nesting, but despite the past 10 years of
conservation efforts and experimentation with nest boxes, nest failure
still occurs. In addition to predation, other reasons for nest failure
are numerous, which has instigated the experimentation and installation
of these nest boxes. Bees and other species continue to compete with
blue-throated macaws for these nest boxes. After many years of
experimentation, the nest boxes are slowly becoming more effective at
providing suitable nesting sites. Blue-throated macaws seem to
habituate to certain nesting sites and locations, likely based on food
availability and learned behavior.
Although blue-throated macaws have begun to use some of the nest
boxes, it has been a slow and tedious process to encourage blue-
throated macaws to use these boxes, and the population continues to
suffer losses, particularly due to nest failure, which the installation
of suitable nest boxes is attempting to alleviate. When nests fail (no
nestlings survive that season), a significant amount of effort has been
expended by that breeding pair. Because this species has such a small
population (likely there are fewer than 500 individuals remaining in
the wild), each nestling survival has great significance to the overall
species' status. The effect of the death of each new nestling on the
population of blue-throated macaws is devastating to the viability of
the population. If the nestlings survive the first season to the point
that they fledge, their chances of survival are much greater than when
they are new nestlings and are entirely dependent on their parents for
survival.
Bees can also make both natural nesting cavities and manmade nest
boxes inhospitable for blue-throated macaws (Berkunsky 2008, p. 5). At
the beginning of one breeding season, 67 percent of nest boxes
monitored were occupied by bees (Berkunsky 2008, p. 5). After being
removed, bees had returned within 2 weeks. Most naturally occurring
nest sites, because there are so few of them and they are in demand by
numerous species, require intense monitoring and manipulation in order
to maintain an attractive, suitable environment for blue-throated
macaws.
Disease
Macaws are susceptible to many bacterial, parasitic, and viral
diseases (Kistler et al. 2009, p. 2,176; Portaels et al. 1996, p. 319;
Bennett et al. 1991). Macaws are prone to many viral infections such as
retrovirus, pox virus, and paramyxo virus, which can cause weakened
immune systems and subsequent death (Gaskin 1989, pp. 249, 251, 252).
Recently, an examination of tissue revealed the likely presence of the
pox virus in dead blue-throated macaw nestlings, indicating that close
contact between blue-throated macaws and domestic poultry may be
facilitating pathogen transmission to this species (Wildlife
Conservation Society (WCS) in litt. 2011). In one location within the
limited range of the species, blue-throated macaws share water sources
with chickens, ducks, and other birds (WCS in litt. 2011; Kingsbury
2010, p. 83). Blue-throated macaws in this area are being closely
monitored to decrease the possibility of transmission of the pox virus;
however, it remains a concern.
Proventricular dilatation disease (PDD) is one of the most serious
diseases known to affect parrots (Kistler et al. 2008, p. 2). PDD, also
known as avian born virus (ABV) or macaw wasting disease, is a fatal
disease that poses a serious threat to all captive-held and wild
parrots worldwide, particularly those with very small populations
(Kistler et al. 2008, p. 1; Abramson et al. 1995, p. 288). This
contagious disease causes damage to the nerves of the upper digestive
tract, so that food digestion and absorption are negatively affected.
The disease has a 100-percent mortality rate in affected birds,
although the exact manner of transmission between birds is unclear
(Kistler et al. 2008, p. 1). PDD has been documented in several
continents in more than 50 different parrot species and in free-ranging
species in at least five other orders of birds (Kistler et al. 2008, p.
2). This disease is concerning because blue-throated macaws share water
sources with other species of birds, and this disease could be
transmitted between individuals that are within close range.
This species is closely monitored in the wild; conservationists
working with this species are taking precautions so that diseases are
not introduced into the wild population. Despite close monitoring and
precautions, disease is likely to affect this extremely small
population; therefore, we are concerned that diseases will become
problematic to this species in the wild. At this time, we do not find
that disease is contributing to the risk of extinction of blue-throated
macaws, but it may affect this species in the future.
Small Population Size
An additional factor that affects the continued existence of this
species is its small, declining population of likely fewer than 500
individuals in the wild. Recently, two observations have been made: (1)
Malformations in chicks, and (2) reduced fertility in many reproductive
pairs (WCS in litt. 2011). Small, rapidly declining populations of
species, combined with other threats such as reduced reproductive
success, lead to an increased risk of extinction (Strem and Bouzat
2012, p. 22; Harris and Pimm 2008, p. 169).
Species tend to have a higher risk of extinction if they occupy a
small geographic range and occur at low density (Purvis et al. 2000, p.
1949). A small, declining population size renders a species vulnerable
to any of several risks including inbreeding depression, loss of
genetic variation, and accumulation of new mutations. A species' small
population size, combined with its restricted range may increase the
species' vulnerability to adverse natural events and manmade activities
that destroy individuals and their habitat (Holsinger 2000, pp. 64-65;
Young and Clarke 2000, pp. 361-366; Primack 1998, pp. 279-308).
Extinction risk is heightened in small, declining populations by an
increased vulnerability to the loss of genetic variation due to
inbreeding depression and genetic drift (changes in relative frequency
of gene sequences). This, in turn, compromises a species' ability to
adapt genetically to changing environments (Frankham 1996, p. 1507) and
reduces fitness, thus increasing extinction risk (Reed and Frankham
2003, pp. 233-234). Inbreeding can have individual or population-level
consequences either by increasing the phenotypic expression (the
outward appearance or observable structure, function, or behavior of a
living organism) of recessive, deleterious alleles (harmful gene
sequences) or by reducing the overall fitness of individuals in the
population (Charlesworth and Charlesworth 1987, p. 231; Shaffer 1981,
p. 131).
Strem and Bouzat indicated in their population viability analysis
(PVA) that continuing threats, such as declines in abundance, small
population size, and low population growth rates, make this species
highly vulnerable to any change (2012, p. 12). Their study indicated
that even small increases in habitat loss (2 percent) and population
harvesting (3 percent) had severe effects on the population (2012, p.
12). We note that Strem and Bouzat conducted the PVA simulations using
only published data
[[Page 61215]]
on the blue-throated macaw population size (2012, p. 13). However, even
considering the recent discovery of a new population, the researchers
indicated that ``multiple anthropogenic factors threaten the species'
survival over the long term'' (Strem and Bouzat 2012, p. 22). They
noted that the results showed that the blue-throated macaw has a
relatively low probability of extinction over the next 50 years.
However, they also noted that after the 50- to 100-year period
considered for the simulations, population decreased considerably to
approximately half of the initial abundance (Strem and Bouzat 2012, p.
22).
This species faces many challenges: it has many predators, limited
suitable habitat, and competition from other species for nest sites, in
addition to its small population size. Any loss of potentially
reproducing individuals could have a devastating effect on the ability
of its population to increase. Small populations have a higher risk of
extinction due to random environmental events (Shaffer 1987, pp. 69-75;
Gilpin and Soule 1986, pp. 24-28; Shaffer 1981, p. 131). Because of its
small population and restricted range, the blue-throated macaw is
vulnerable to random environmental events; in particular, it is
threatened by extreme precipitation events and nest flooding.
Removal From the Wild
Removal of macaws from the wild over the past few hundred years
contributed to this species' small population size (LPF 2012; Herrera
and Hennessey 2009, p. 233; Kyle 2007a). Macaws, both live and dead,
have been a significant part of Bolivian culture for thousands of
years. Evidence of this exists in pre-Colombian Andean feather art
(American Museum of Natural History 2012). Feathers have been used
historically in headdresses, and parrots have been used in ceremonial
sacrifices (American Museum of Natural History 2012; Berdan 2004, p. 4;
Creel and McKusick 1994, pp. 510-511). Feathers of blue-throated macaws
would still be used for headdresses today if it were not for
intervention and education programs implemented by nongovernmental
conservation organizations (NGCOs) (BLI 2012; LPF 2010; LPF 2003, p.
29). In addition to being used in ceremonies and costumes, there is
evidence that parrots have been household pets since at least A.D. 1000
(Creel and McKusick 1994, pp. 513-515) as evidenced in burial remains;
live macaws likely had commercial value even during that time period.
Parrots were traded over long distances; archeological remains indicate
that parrots were found well outside their native range (Creel and
McKusick 1994, pp. 515-516).
Historically, the most significant impact to the decline of this
species' population was likely due to collection of birds from the wild
during the late 1800s and early 1900s (Yamashita and M. de Barros 1997,
p. 144). During this time period, bird-skin traders of European descent
sold thousands of bird skins, particularly in the United States, for at
least three generations (Yamashita and M. de Barros 1997, p. 144;
Trimble 1936, pp. 41-43).
The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
Under the Act, we are required to evaluate whether the existing
regulatory mechanisms are adequate. There are limited regulatory
mechanisms in place to protect this species (de la Torre et al. 2011,
p. 334; Herrera and Hennessey 2007, p. 295; LPF 2003, pp. 6-7). This
species is considered critically endangered by the International Union
for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) (BLI 2012; LPF 2012). However, IUCN
rankings do not confer any actual protection or management. This
species is listed in Appendix I of the Convention on International
Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) (CITES
2012). CITES regulates international trade in animal and plant species
listed under the Convention. For additional information on CITES, visit
https://www.cites.org. An Appendix-I listing includes species threatened
with extinction whose trade is permitted only under exceptional
circumstances, which generally precludes commercial trade. These
protections under CITES were put in place for the blue-throated macaw
because the species had suffered substantial population declines
throughout its range due to habitat destruction and overexploitation.
The government of Bolivia has enacted various laws and regulatory
mechanisms to protect and manage wildlife and their habitats in
Bolivia. For example, the Bolivian Government prohibits and imposes
sanctions against the possession and the trafficking of any protected
species, such as the blue-throated macaw (LPF Recovery Plan 2003, p.
7). Additionally, the CITES listing and the ban by the Bolivian
Government in 1984 to export this species effectively limit legal
international trade (LPF 2012; Herrera and Hennessey 2009, pp. 233-234;
LPF Recovery Plan 2003, p. 7). However, even after the export of this
species was prohibited in the 1980s, and despite the laws in place and
the intense conservation efforts ongoing for this species, localized
illegal trade is still occurring.
International trade in this species is now negligible (https://www.unep-wcmc.org, accessed June 4, 2012). International trade of the
blue-throated macaw was initially restricted by the listing of the
species in Appendix II of CITES in 1981, and in 1983, the species was
transferred from Appendix II to Appendix I. The World Conservation
Monitoring Centre (WCMC) at the United Nations Environment Programme
(UNEP) manages a CITES Trade Database on behalf of the CITES Parties.
Each Party to CITES is responsible for compiling and submitting annual
reports to the CITES Secretariat regarding their country's
international trade in species protected under CITES. Data obtained
from UNEP-WCMC (https://www.unep-wcmc.org/citestrade) show that during
the 2-year period (1981-1982) that the blue-throated macaw was listed
in Appendix II, a total of 29 specimens (all live birds) were legally
exported from Bolivia. The trade database indicates that a total of 84
specimens (all live birds) have been exported from Bolivia since the
species was listed in Appendix I in 1983, with no specimens traded
between 1993 and 2010). The CITES database does not indicate any trends
in the trade data to cause concern.
In addition to Bolivia's restrictions and the trade restrictions
implemented through CITES, the Wild Bird Conservation Act (WBCA) that
was enacted in 1992 in the United States may have assisted in dampening
the demand for this species. The purpose of the WBCA is to promote the
conservation of exotic birds and to ensure that importation of exotic
birds into the United States does not negatively affect wild
populations. The WBCA generally restricts the importation of most
CITES-listed live or dead exotic birds except for certain limited
purposes such as zoological display or cooperative breeding programs.
Import of dead specimens is allowed for scientific specimens and museum
specimens. The Service may approve cooperative breeding programs and
subsequently issue import permits under such programs. Wild-caught
birds may be imported into the United States if certain standards are
met and they are subject to a management plans that provides for
sustainable use. Parrot imports to the United States were already
declining before the enactment of the WBCA, but the WBCA contributed to
curtailing the import of wild parrots.
[[Page 61216]]
Although international trade is not a concern, poaching for local
sale continues to occur (LPF 2012; Herrera and Hennessey 2009, p. 233;
Kyle 2007a). Although Bolivia banned the export of live parrots in 1984
(Brace et al. 1995, pp. 27-28), localized illegal trade within South
America continued to occur, although it became less frequent (Herrera
and Hennessey 2009, p. 233). For example, in 1993, investigators
reported that an Argentinian bird dealer was offering Bolivian dealers
a ``high price'' for blue-throated macaws (Jordan and Munn 1993, p.
695).
More recently, a study of markets in Santa Cruz, Bolivia estimated
that over 22,000 individuals of 31 parrot species were illegally traded
during 2004-2005, despite Bolivian laws (Herrera and Hennessey 2007, p.
298). Bolivian Law 1333 (Ministerio de Desarrollo Sostenible y
Planificacion 1999), Article 111 states that all persons involved in
trade, capture, and transportation without authorization of wild
animals will suffer a 2-year prison sentence together with a fine
equivalent to 100 percent of the value of the animal. This law is
supported by an addendum that states that all threatened species are of
national importance and must be protected (Herrera and Hennessey 2007,
p. 295). Asociaci[oacute]n Armon[iacute]a (a nonprofit organization in
Bolivia) monitored the trade of wild birds that passed through a pet
market in Santa Cruz, Bolivia between July 2004 to December 2007
(Herrera and Hennessey 2009, p. 233; Herrera and Hennessey 2007, p.
295). During the 2004-2005 study period, none of the parrots found were
blue-throated macaws. In 2006, two blue-throated macaws were found for
sale (Herrera and Hennessey 2009, p. 233). However, the blue-throated
macaw was absent in the market during the monitoring period prior to
2006, and no blue-throated macaws were found for sale in this market in
2007 (Herrera and Hennessey 2009, p. 233; Herrera and Hennessey 2007,
p. 295). This absence of the species in the market may be due either to
the effectiveness of the ongoing conservation programs and laws in
Bolivia, or it may be indicative of the scarcity of blue-throated
macaws in the wild. Ninety-four percent of the birds documented were
believed to be wild-caught. This illegal activity occurs despite the
national laws that ban unauthorized trade (Herrera and Hennessey 2007,
p. 298).
The high value of this species could lead to continued illegal
trade. An internet search indicated that captive-bred specimens of this
species sell for between $1,500 and $3,000 in the United States (https://www.hoobly.com, accessed September 13, 2010). One search advertised
that this is a ``very rare species and there are only 300 left in the
wild.'' However, alternatively, because these birds are not difficult
to breed in captivity, the supply of captive-bred birds has increased,
which some experts believe may be alleviating illegal collection of
wild birds (Waugh 2007a).
Removal of blue-throated macaws from the wild can have a
particularly devastating effect given their low reproductive rate and
slow recovery from various environmental pressures (Lee 2010, p. 3;
Wright et al. 2001, p. 711). Some blue-throated macaws have even been
used for fish bait (Kyle 2007a, p. 7). The remains of a blue-throated
macaw were found near a lake stuffed into a tree cavity with a bag of
salt (Kyle 2007a, p. 7). Because this species has so few individuals
remaining, any removal from the wild is extremely detrimental to the
survival of the species when considered with all of the other factors
acting upon the species.
Other Factors
An additional factor that affects the nesting success of blue-
throated macaws is the availability of food sources--not only the
abundance of food, but the timing of its availability. Phenology (how
the timing of plant life cycle events interacts with animal biological
processes) is influenced by variations in climate. The timing of
motac[uacute] palm fruit production is critical for various life stages
of the blue-throated macaw, particularly during the period following
hatching. The motac[uacute] palms, on which blue-throated macaws depend
for nesting as well as feeding, are affected by drought, burning, and
excessive rainfall. In years when there is significant drought or
excessive rainfall, the fruiting abundance and timing of fruit
production can significantly affect the success of nestlings, or it can
prohibit blue-throated macaws from even attempting to nest (Kyle 2007).
In some seasons when food is not as plentiful, breeding pairs may
choose not to brood, and the weakest of the nestlings are neglected by
its parents and die of starvation (Kyle 2007a, pp. 4-5). During these
times, in some cases, the diet is supplemented by these conservation
organizations; however, it is a very intensive process.
In summary, there are many factors that are causing stress to this
species' population in the wild. It is affected by several factors such
as habitat loss and degradation (factor A), poaching to a limited
extent (factor B), predation (factor C), and nest flooding and lack of
nest sites in part due to competition from other species but also due
to habitat loss and degradation (factor E). Despite numerous laws and
regulatory mechanisms to administer and manage wildlife and their
habitats, existing laws are inadequate (factor D) to protect the
species and its habitat from these other factors. Combined with its
reduced population size, the species lacks sufficient redundancy and
resiliency to recover from present and future threats without
intervention and intense conservation actions. This was corroborated by
the recent PVA conducted in 2012, regarding the viability of the
population of the blue-throated macaw (Strem and Bouzat 2012, p. 22).
Overall, the researchers indicate that population growth rates are
likely not at replacement levels because the species has undergone a
rapid population reduction over the past 50 years, in part due to
habitat loss and poaching (Strem and Bouzat 2012, p. 20). The PVA found
that growth rate estimates do not reach the rate of replacement
necessary to maintain the viability of population over the long term
(Strem and Bouzat 2012, p. 20), making the species particularly
vulnerable to any change or threat. These factors acting on the species
are expected to continue into the future.
In-situ Conservation
This species is considered by many organizations to be the most
endangered macaw remaining in the wild (BLI 2012; World Parrot Trust
(WPT) 2012; LPF 2010; LPF 2003, p. 4). Several NGCOs are working
intensely on various conservation projects to protect this species and
its habitat. Various NGCOs have been involved in the conservation of
this species since 1995, with authorization from the Bolivian
Government (Waugh 2013, pers. comm.; Gilardi 2012, pers. comm.; LPF
2002, p. 10). NGCOs involved include Asociaci[oacute]n Armon[iacute]a
(Bolivia's BirdLife International partner), the Loro Parque
Fundaci[oacute]n (LPF), and WPT. A species recovery plan that provides
the basis for the blue-throated macaw conservation program was approved
by Bolivia's Ministry for Sustainable Development in 2004, and has been
in place since then (LPF 2003, pp. 6-7).
Within its breeding range, a multitude of efforts are in progress
to conserve the species (Waugh 2013, pers. comm.; Gilardi 2012, pers.
comm.; Berkunsky 2010, p. 5, Kyle 2007, pp. 1-11). Conservation
measures include constant monitoring, protection, and manipulation of
nests; supplementing nestlings' diet when food sources are scarce;
agreements with private landowners to protect this species'
[[Page 61217]]
habitat; patrolling existing macaw habitat by foot and motorbike; and
monitoring the Beni lowlands for additional populations (LPF 2012; Kyle
2007a; Snyder et al. 2000). NGCOs have implemented cooperation
agreements with the Federation of Cattle Farmers of the Beni (FEGABENI)
and the local authorities in Trinidad, Bolivia (LPF et al. 2003, p. 6).
Land acquisition to expand protected habitat for this species has
been funded by the World Land Trust and the Loro Parque
Fundaci[oacute]n (Waugh 2013, pers. comm.). In 2008, Asociaci[oacute]n
Armon[iacute]a and LPF purchased a 3,555-ha (8,785-ac) reserve for the
purpose of establishing a protected area for the blue-throated macaw
(World Land Trust 2010, https://www.worldlandtrust-us.org, accessed July
16, 2010; BLI 2008). In 2010, the Barba Azul Nature Reserve
(``Reserve'') was expanded by 1,123 ha (2,775 ac), creating a total
protected area for the blue-throated macaws of 4,664 ha (11,525 ac)
(Asociaci[oacute]n Armon[iacute]a 2012). Currently, this Reserve is the
only protected area designated for the blue-throated macaw. The legal
protections that apply fall under Bolivian Law 1333 (Ministerio de
Desarrollo Sostenible y Planificacion 1999), Article 111. This Reserve
protects savanna habitat, and habitat restoration is occurring in the
Reserve, although it is unclear the extent the Reserve is used by blue-
throated macaws. The actual protections in place include monitoring of
habitat, local education and awareness programs about the species, and
establishment of suitable nesting sites. Approximately 70 blue-throated
macaws have been observed in or around this Reserve (Herrera 2012,
pers. comm.); however, these macaws may be some of the same macaws that
are observed in other parts of the species' range during the breeding
season (Berkunsky 2012, pers. comm.).
Despite the existence of the Reserve, there are no nests in the
Reserve that are known to be occupied by blue-throated macaws (Herrera
2012, pers. comm.). Although the species is present in the Barba Azul
Nature Reserve, it has not yet been shown to be breeding there (Waugh
2013, pers. comm). There is evidence that they use the Reserve for
feeding (Herrera 2012, pers. comm.; Kingsbury 2010, pp. 69-82). New
information provided indicates that the blue-throated macaws that
inhabit this Reserve and adjacent ranches are different than the birds
in the southern portion of its range (see Appendix A for a map of the
species' range; Strem and Bouzat 2012, p. 23; Milpacher 2012, pers.
comm.; Herrera 2012, pers. comm.). Other than the Barba Azul Nature
Reserve, there are no protected areas in the Llanos de Mojos except the
Beni Biosphere Reserve, which has been in existence since 1986.
However, to our knowledge, the blue-throated macaw does not use the
Beni Biosphere Reserve (Hesse and Duffield 2000, p. 258).
In addition to conservation efforts, the NGCOs working in Bolivia
are conducting field research to better understand the current state of
this species. However, the conservation work is difficult due to
various factors that affect the species. Because some of this species'
habitat is flooded for 6 months of the year, monitoring its habitat is
difficult during certain seasons (Berkunsky 2010, p. 5). There have
also been discussions of reintroducing captive-raised birds into the
wild; however, this practice could inadvertently introduce disease into
the wild population if precautions are not taken to minimize the
transmission of disease to other blue-throated macaws (Sainsbury et al.
2012, p. 442).
Another conservation measure in place is research on the
motac[uacute] palm (Milpacher 2012, pers. comm.) because the number of
motac[uacute] palms is decreasing. This palm species plays a
significant role in the life cycle of the blue-throated macaw. One
study found that the old and senescent motac[uacute] palms are
significantly more abundant than the younger palms (LPF 2003, p. 21).
Based on their findings, researchers concluded that the islands
containing motac[uacute] are not regenerating motac[uacute] palms
sufficiently. It is likely that the lack of regeneration is due to
overgrazing by cattle and excessive use of fire over centuries (Kyle
2006, p. 5). The World Parrot Trust has recently attempted several
small-scale palm germination experiments to assess reestablishing palm
habitat (Milpacher 2012, pers. comm.). The motac[uacute] palm has
commercial value in addition to its ecological role. Palm trees are
used for a multitude of purposes, such as thatch for housing, fruit,
and palm oil (de la Torre et al. 2011, pp. 327-369; Zambrana et al.
2007, pp. 2771-2778). Motac[uacute] palm-dominated islands may have
persisted in part due to their various ecological and commercial
values, but they certainly persist in part because the islands are
raised areas within the lowlands that are prone to flooding. With
respect to the short term, local researchers believe that there will be
adequate motac[uacute] fruits in the region for a few more decades (LPF
2003, p. 21); however, research on the motac[uacute] is vital to the
conservation of the blue-throated macaw.
Educational awareness programs are in place in addition to research
and monitoring. As an example, the Asociaci[oacute]n Armon[iacute]a is
involved in an awareness campaign to encourage that the protection and
conservation of these birds occurs at a local level (e.g., protection
of macaws from trappers and the sustainable management of key habitats,
such as palm groves and forest islands, on private property) (Llampa
2007; BLI 2008a; Snyder et al. 2000). Two educational awareness centers
have been established in the towns of Santa Ana del Yacuma and Santa
Rosa del Yacuma (LPF 2010, p. 16). In response to the limited but
continued poaching that occurs in the wild, LPF initiated a travelling
exhibition, ``Extinction is Forever,'' which visited 17 urban
localities in Bolivia in 2010 (LPF 2010, p. 15). The exhibition
includes 21 photographs that explain the ancestral and present-day
relationship between people and birds, and highlights the effects of
illegal trade of wild birds in Bolivia currently. An estimated 1,000
visitors attended each showing in the main cities (LPF 2010, p. 15).
Reproductive success is vital to the blue-throated macaw's
recovery, and this species faces many challenges to successfully
reproducing. This species' nests often have an open crown (i.e., no
roof) and are prone to flooding (Berkunsky 2010, p. 4; Kyle 2007a, p.
3). During many seasons, nests, eggs, and nestlings are destroyed due
to flooding. Both WBT and Asociaci[oacute]n Armon[iacute]a have been
conducting conservation activities, such as installation of artificial
nest boxes that provide safe habitat, manipulating nests so that they
do not flood, and discouraging predators and nest competitors. The
installation of a multitude and variety of nest boxes is a way to boost
breeding success. Because many other species compete for these nest
boxes, and blue-throated macaws tend to re-use previously used nesting
sites, the process of introducing nest boxes and encouraging blue-
throated macaws to use them, while discouraging other species from
using them, is a very time-intensive process. Despite all of these
conservation efforts, fewer than 500 individuals of this species are
believed to remain in the wild. In summary, the conservation efforts
underway are abundant, but will need to continue in order to have
lasting impacts on the species.
It is our policy that we do not consider captive-held specimens in
our analysis of the five factors under Section 4(a) of the Act; we do
not believe that it was within the Congressional intent when the Act
was written, unless there is some obvious reason for doing so. For
additional background on our interpretation of the provisions of the
[[Page 61218]]
Act, see 78 FR 35204, June 12, 2013. We do not believe that captive-
held members of blue-throated macaws either create or contribute to
threats to the species or remove or reduce threats to the species.
There are likely more than 1,000 individual blue-throated macaws held
in captivity worldwide according to the 2011 North American Regional
Studbook, however, many of these birds are of uncertain origin
(Anderson 2011, p. 4). We also note that it is not possible to separate
captive-held specimens as a different legal status under the Act.
Finding (Listing Determination)
In assessing whether the blue-throated macaw meets the definition
of an endangered or threatened species, we considered the five factors
in section 4(a)(1) of the Act. A species is ``endangered'' for purposes
of the Act if it is in danger of extinction throughout all or a
significant portion of its range and is ``threatened'' if it is likely
to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range. In considering what factors might
constitute threats to a species, we must look beyond the mere exposure
of the species to the factor to evaluate whether the species may
respond to the factor in a way that causes actual impacts to the
species. If there is exposure to a factor and the species responds
negatively, the factor may be a threat and we attempt to determine how
significant a threat it is. The threat is significant if it drives, or
contributes to, the risk of extinction of the species such that the
species may warrant listing as endangered or threatened as those terms
are defined in the Act. We conducted a review of the status of this
species and assessed whether the blue-throated macaw is endangered or
threatened throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
We have assessed the best scientific and commercial information
available regarding the past, present, and future threats affecting
this species. Historically, the blue-throated macaw existed in much
higher numbers in more continuous, connected habitat; its suitable
habitat is now extremely small. Its small population size, combined
with its restricted range, increases the species' vulnerability to
adverse natural events that destroy individuals and their habitat. It
is subject to inbreeding depression, loss of genetic variation, and
accumulation of new mutations. In addition to its small population
size, many factors currently affect blue-throated macaws. These
include: Inadequate nest sites (both in abundance and effectiveness);
nest (clutch) failure (when one or all of the nestlings fail to survive
to fledgling stage due to a variety of reasons such as starvation,
inadequate nutrition, sibling competition); nest flooding; botflies;
competition for nests with more competitive species, such as bees, and
other avian species, such as large woodpeckers and other macaw species;
and predation by numerous species, particularly other bird species
(such as toucans, owls, vultures, other raptors, and even other macaw
species). Regulatory mechanisms are ineffective at reducing the factors
affecting the blue-throated macaw (Factor D).
We have determined that captive-held specimens cannot be given
separate consideration under the ESA based on their captive state (see
78 FR 35204, June 12, 2013), but captive-held specimens can, in some
cases, create, contribute to, reduce, or remove threats to the species.
We have no information in this case indicating that captive-held blue-
throated macaws either create or contribute to threats to this species
or remove or reduce threats to the species. Due to the effectiveness of
CITES and, in the United States, the WBCA, international trade for pets
is not a concern. Removal of some birds from the wild for the pet trade
may still be occurring, but there is no information indicating to what
extent animals currently held in captivity are motivating poachers to
capture and remove additional birds from the wild. Regarding whether
captive-held birds reduce any threats to the species, there are likely
more than 1,000 individual blue-throated macaws held in captivity
worldwide according to the 2011 North American Regional Studbook.
However, many of these birds are of uncertain origin (Anderson 2011, p.
4) and may harbor diseases that do not exist in the wild population and
therefore may not be suitable for reintroduction efforts.
Our review of the information pertaining to the five threat factors
supports a conclusion that these factors place the blue-throated macaw
in danger of extinction throughout all of its range, such that a
listing of endangered is warranted. The species is currently in danger
of extinction because the species exists at such low levels that it is
vulnerable to a multitude of threats. Given the species' low
reproductive capacity, it is very difficult to increase to the levels
of abundance that allow the species to withstand such events. All of
these factors are now and will continue to result in threats to the
continued existence of the species. We also examined the blue-throated
macaw to analyze if any other listable entity under the definition of
``species,'' such as subspecies or distinct population segments, may
qualify for a different status. However, because of the magnitude and
uniformity of the threats throughout its range, we find that there are
no other listable entities that may warrant a different determination
of status. Since threats extend throughout its entire range, it is
unnecessary to determine if the blue-throated macaw is in danger of
extinction throughout a significant portion of its range.
Based on our evaluation of the best available scientific and
commercial information and given its current population size, and
severely limited distribution throughout its historical range, we have
determined the species is in danger of extinction throughout all of its
range and thus meets the definition of an endangered species. Because
the species is in danger of extinction now, as opposed to in the
foreseeable future, the blue-throated macaw meets the definition of an
endangered species rather than a threatened species. Therefore, we are
listing the blue-throated macaw as endangered under the Act.
Available Conservation Measures
Conservation measures provided to species listed as endangered
under the Act include recognition, requirements for Federal protection,
and prohibitions against certain practices. Recognition through listing
results in public awareness, and encourages and results in conservation
actions by Federal and State governments, private agencies and interest
groups, and individuals.
The Act and its implementing regulations set forth a series of
general prohibitions and exceptions that apply to all endangered
wildlife. These prohibitions, at 50 CFR 17.21, in part, make it illegal
for any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States to
``take'' (includes harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill,
trap, capture, or to attempt any of these) within the United States or
upon the high seas; import or export; deliver, receive, carry,
transport, or ship in interstate or foreign commerce in the course of
commercial activity; or sell or offer for sale in interstate or foreign
commerce any endangered wildlife species. It also is illegal to
possess, sell, deliver, carry, transport, or ship any such wildlife
that has been taken in violation of the Act. Certain exceptions apply
to agents of the Service, other Federal land management agencies, the
National Marine Fisheries Service, and State conservation agencies.
Permits may be issued to carry out otherwise prohibited activities
involving endangered wildlife species under certain circumstances.
[[Page 61219]]
Regulations governing permits for endangered species are codified at 50
CFR 17.22. With regard to endangered wildlife, a permit may 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.
Clarity of Rule
We are required by Executive Orders 12866 and 12988 and by the
Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 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 names 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.
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).
References Cited
A list of all references cited in this rule is available on the
Internet at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R9-ES-2012-
0034 or upon request from the Branch of Foreign Species, Endangered
Species Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Author
The primary author of this rule is Amy Brisendine, Branch of
Foreign Species, Endangered Species Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.
Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, we amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50
of the Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth below:
PART 17--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 1531-1544; and 4201-4245, unless
otherwise noted.
0
2. Amend Sec. 17.11(h) by adding a new entry for ``Macaw, blue-
throated'' in alphabetical order under BIRDS to the List of Endangered
and Threatened Wildlife to read as follows:
Sec. 17.11 Endangered and threatened wildlife.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species Vertebrate
-------------------------------------------------------- population where Critical Special
Historic range endangered or Status When listed habitat rules
Common name Scientific name threatened
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Birds
* * * * * * *
Macaw, blue-throated............. Ara glaucogularis... Bolivia............ Entire............. E 814 NA NA
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Dated: September 20, 2013.
Rowan W. Gould,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-24215 Filed 10-2-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P