Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Threatened Species Status With Section 4(d) Rule for Egyptian Tortoise, 19004-19017 [2023-06312]

Agencies

• Fish and Wildlife Service
• DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 61 (Thursday, March 30, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 19004-19017]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-06312]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

[Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-2020-0114; FF09E22000 FXES1111090FEDR 234]
RIN 1018-BD04


Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Threatened Species 
Status With Section 4(d) Rule for Egyptian Tortoise

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), are listing 
the Egyptian tortoise (Testudo kleinmanni; syn. Testudo werneri), a 
terrestrial tortoise from Libya, Egypt, and Israel, as a threatened 
species with a rule issued under section 4(d) of the Endangered Species 
Act of 1973 (Act), as amended. The rule issued under section 4(d) of 
the Act provides measures that are necessary and advisable to provide 
for the conservation of this species.

DATES: This rule is effective May 1, 2023.

ADDRESSES: This final rule is available on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov. Comments and materials we received, as well as 
supporting documentation we used in preparing this rule, are available 
for public inspection at https://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-
HQ-ES-2020-0114.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bridget Fahey, Chief, Division of 
Conservation and Classification, Ecological Services, U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service, MS: ES, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-
3803; telephone, 703-358-2171. Individuals in the United States who are 
deaf, deafblind, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability may dial 
711 (TTY, TDD, or TeleBraille) to access telecommunications relay 
services. Individuals outside the United States should use the relay 
services offered within their country to make international calls to 
the point-of-contact in the United States.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Previous Federal Actions

    Please refer to the proposed listing rule for the Egyptian tortoise 
published in the Federal Register on November 9, 2021 (86 FR 62122), 
for a detailed description of previous Federal actions concerning this 
species.

Summary of Changes From the Proposed Rule

    In preparing this final rule, we reviewed and fully considered 
comments from the public on our November 9, 2021, proposed rule. In 
this final rule, we make only two minor changes from the proposed rule: 
(1) We clarify that the listed entity of Egyptian tortoise (Testudo 
kleinmanni) includes the scientific name Testudo werneri as an accepted 
synonym; and (2) we present new information on the species' population 
size, based on updated information regarding the size of the population 
in Israel. Additionally, while the preambular discussion in this final 
rule is not as detailed as the proposed rule, it is not meant to imply 
any changes between the proposed and final rules.

Summary of Comments and Recommendations

    In the proposed rule published on November 9, 2021 (86 FR 62122), 
we requested that all interested parties submit written comments on the 
proposal by January 10, 2022. We also contacted appropriate Federal 
agencies, scientific experts, organizations, and management authorities 
from the range countries, as well as other interested parties, and 
invited them to comment on the proposal. All substantive information we 
received during the comment period has either been incorporated 
directly into this final determination or is addressed below.

Peer Reviewer Comments

    We received comments from three peer reviewers. We reviewed all 
comments for substantive issues and new information regarding the 
information contained in the species status assessment (SSA) report. 
The peer reviewers generally concurred with our methods and 
conclusions, and provided additional information, clarifications, and 
suggestions to improve the final SSA report. Comments from peer 
reviewers provided general technical corrections and updates on status 
of the species within the range countries. We incorporated the peer 
reviewer comments into the final SSA report as appropriate.

Public Comments

    Comment (1): Numerous commenters stated that the Act (16 U.S.C. 
1531 et seq.) was only meant to protect species native to the United 
States and the Egyptian tortoise should not be listed because it is a 
foreign species.
    Response: The Act does not distinguish between domestic and foreign 
species as it applies to our responsibilities to determine whether 
species are endangered or threatened. For example, the broad 
definitions of ``species,'' ``fish or wildlife,'' and ``plant'' in 
section 3 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1532) do not differentiate between 
species native to the United States, species native to both the United 
States and one or more other countries, and species not native to the 
United States. Further, sections 4(b)(1)(A) and 4(b)(1)(B) of the Act 
(16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(1)(A) and (b)(1)(B)) expressly require the Service 
to consider efforts by a foreign nation prior to making a listing 
determination. The Act's section 4(b)(5)(B) (16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(5)(B)) 
expressly requires the Service, insofar as practical, to provide notice 
of proposed regulations to and invite comment from foreign nations in 
which a species is believed to occur. Additionally, the findings and 
purposes at sections 2(a) and 2(b) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531(a) and 
(b)) also speak to the application of the Act to foreign species, and 
numerous provisions of the Act and its implementing regulations refer 
to foreign jurisdictions (e.g., 16 U.S.C. 1537 and 1537a, 50 CFR 
424.11(e)). In summary, if a species meets the Act's definition of an 
endangered or threatened species, the Service must list that species 
regardless of the country where it is found.
    Comment (2): Numerous commenters stated there is no demonstrable 
benefit to listing the Egyptian tortoise under the Act because it is 
already protected by the Convention on International Trade in 
Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES).
    Response: The purpose of CITES is to ensure that international 
trade in plants and animals does not threaten their survival in the 
wild. Protection provided by other laws, such as CITES, was taken into 
consideration when determining the status of the species. However, 
simply being protected by these other laws does not preclude the need 
to list a species under the Act if it meets the Act's definition of an 
endangered or threatened species. Further, while the Egyptian tortoise 
is already protected by CITES, additional conservation measures are 
provided to species listed as endangered or

[[Page 19005]]

threatened under the Act, including recognition, requirements for 
Federal protection, and prohibitions against certain activities with 
the species. Recognition through listing results in public awareness 
and may encourage and result in conservation actions by foreign 
governments, Federal and State governments, private agencies and 
interest groups, and individuals. For example, listing the Egyptian 
tortoise under the Act can support the conservation efforts undertaken 
for the species in Libya, Egypt, and Israel, as well as under the 
CITES' Appendix-I listing, including research efforts to address 
conservation needs and funding for range-country conservation.
    Listing under the Act can also help ensure that the United States 
and its citizens do not contribute to the further decline of the 
Egyptian tortoise through resulting Federal protections and 
prohibitions on certain activities such as import, export, take, 
interstate commerce, and foreign commerce (see also Available 
Conservation Measures, below). For instance, adding a violation under 
the Act on top of a CITES violation could serve as an additional 
disincentive for any illegal trade in the species.
    Comment (3): One commenter recommended that both Testudo kleinmanni 
and Testudo werneri be used as scientific names when listing the 
species under the Act.
    Response: The valid taxonomic status of the Egyptian tortoise is 
Testudo kleinmanni, and Testudo werneri is accepted as a junior synonym 
(ITIS 2022, unpaginated; Attum et al. 2007a, p. 399). Thus, in this 
rule, we clarify that the Egyptian tortoise includes Testudo werneri as 
a synonym for Testudo kleinmanni, and we include the synonym Testudo 
werneri in the entry for the species in the List of Endangered and 
Threatened Wildlife at 50 CFR 17.11(h). All Egyptian tortoises are 
included in this rule. See the SSA report for a thorough discussion of 
the taxonomic status of the species (Service 2022, pp. 2-4).
    Comment (4): One commenter stated that the species is extinct in 
Egypt, and another commenter stated that the species occurs in very low 
numbers in the North Coast of Egypt.
    Response: According to the best available information, both of 
these statements regarding the status of the species in Egypt are 
inaccurate. The Egyptian tortoise is extant in Egypt as it occurs in a 
very small population east of the Nile River in and on the periphery of 
the Zaranik Protected Area in North Sinai, Egypt. Conversely, the best 
available information indicates that the Egyptian tortoise is 
extirpated from the North Coast of Egypt where habitat quality 
decreases east of Libya, and formerly suitable habitat for the species 
has become uninhabitable to the degree that no individuals could 
survive in Egypt west of the Nile River.
    Comment (5): Numerous commenters recommended that we issue a rule 
under section 4(d) of the Act to provide an exception for the 
commercial trade of Egyptian tortoises within the United States for 
private individuals because captively-bred tortoises could be used for 
reintroductions into the wild and aid in the conservation of the 
species.
    Response: We recognize that in well-managed circumstances captive 
breeding of wildlife can support conservation, for example by producing 
animals that could be used for reintroductions. However, we are not 
aware of any captive-breeding programs for the Egyptian tortoise in the 
United States for this purpose, and thus we are also not aware of 
captive-breeding programs practicing conservation breeding in a manner 
that would produce animals suitable for reintroduction. For threatened 
wildlife, such as the Egyptian tortoise, we may issue permits for 
scientific purposes, to enhance the propagation or survival of the 
species, for incidental take in connection with otherwise lawful 
activities, for economic hardship, for zoological exhibition, for 
education purposes, and for special purposes consistent with the 
purposes of the Act.
    We may also register persons subject to the jurisdiction of the 
United States through a captive-bred wildlife (CBW) program if certain 
established requirements are met under the CBW regulations (see 50 CFR 
17.21(g); see also Available Conservation Measures, below). In 
addition, the 4(d) rule includes an exception for interstate commerce 
from public institutions to other public institutions, specifically 
museums, zoological parks, and scientific institutions, meeting the 
definition of ``public'' at 50 CFR 10.12. We found that the demand for 
Egyptian tortoises held at or captive-bred by these types of 
institutions and sold or otherwise transferred only to other qualifying 
institutions in the United States is likely not substantial nor is it 
likely to pose a significant threat to the wild population in the 
species' range countries. Only specimens that have been legally 
imported and their offspring can qualify for this exception; possession 
of specimens traded contrary to CITES and their offspring is prohibited 
(16 U.S.C. 1538(c)(1); 50 CFR 23.13).
    Comment (6): Numerous commenters stated that tortoises bred in 
captivity by private individuals in the United States provide a source 
of genetic diversity for future reintroduction efforts and they produce 
more captively-bred tortoises than just the Association of Zoos and 
Aquarium facilities. Therefore, providing an exception for interstate 
commerce for private individuals will provide a crucial source of 
genetic diversity for future captive breeding and reintroduction 
efforts.
    Response: The intent of the Act is to recover wild populations in 
their natural habitat whenever possible. Controlled propagation can 
support the recovery of some listed species and can be used to reverse 
declines and return listed species to suitable habitat in the wild. 
However, controlled propagation is not a substitute for addressing the 
primary threats to the species. Egyptian tortoises captive-bred in the 
United States by private individuals are not addressing primary threats 
to the species nor are the tortoises captive-bred for reintroduction 
purposes. Additionally, introducing captive-bred individuals increases 
the risk of releasing pathogens into wild populations. Therefore, 
captive breeding by private individuals in the United States could not 
be used to increase the wild population of the species in its range 
countries. However, well-managed captive-breeding programs by 
registered public zoos practicing conservation breeding in a manner 
that would produce animals suitable for reintroduction could be used to 
reintroduce species into the wild if that became warranted and 
justified.
    Comment (7): Some commenters stated that if the Egyptian tortoise 
is harder to obtain in the United States because of prohibitions on 
interstate commerce, prices will increase, which in turn will increase 
illegal imports of the species into the United States.
    Response: Commercial trade of the Egyptian tortoise is already 
largely prohibited as a result of species' inclusion in Appendix I of 
CITES in 1995. CITES Appendix-I species are considered threatened with 
extinction, and international trade is permitted only under exceptional 
circumstances, which generally precludes commercial trade. Very few 
live tortoises or parts have been imported into the United States since 
then (CITES 2022, unpaginated). No evidence exists that listing the 
Egyptian tortoise as a threatened species will lead to an increase in 
illegal imports to the United States. Listing under the Act can also 
help ensure that the United States and its citizens do not contribute 
to the

[[Page 19006]]

further decline of the Egyptian tortoise through resulting Federal 
protections and prohibitions on certain activities such as import, 
export, take, interstate commerce, and foreign commerce (see also 
Available Conservation Measures, below). For instance, adding a 
violation under the Act on top of a CITES violation could serve as an 
additional disincentive for any illegal trade in the species. 
Therefore, the CITES regulations in place and the additional 
protections provided by this final rule minimize the risk of illegal 
imports of wild Egyptian tortoises coming into the United States.
    Comment (8): One commenter stated that the Service erred in its 
significant-portion-of-its-range analysis and advocated that we 
undertake a new analysis to evaluate whether the populations of the 
species are endangered in North Coast, Egypt; North Sinai, Egypt; and 
Israel. The commenter implied that because the populations are small in 
each of these three areas, the analysis should have led to a 
determination that the species is endangered in a significant portion 
of its range.
    Response: In this final rule, we expand on the analysis we included 
in the November 9, 2021, proposed rule (see Status Throughout a 
Significant Portion of Its Range, below) for the three populations the 
commenter identifies, which we summarize in this response.
    The Egyptian tortoise is extirpated from the North Coast of Egypt 
because of a combination of historical habitat loss and collection for 
the pet trade; thus, no population occurs in this area. Formerly 
suitable habitat for the species has become uninhabitable to the degree 
that no individuals could survive in Egypt west of the Nile River. As 
outlined in our Final Policy on Interpretation of the Phrase 
``Significant Portion of Its Range'' in the Endangered Species Act's 
Definitions of ``Endangered Species'' and ``Threatened Species'' (79 FR 
37578; July 1, 2014), the term ``range'' means the general geographical 
area occupied by the species at the time we make a status determination 
under section 4 of the Act (see 79 FR 37578, July 1, 2014, pp. 37583-
37585). In other words, we interpret ``range'' in these definitions to 
be current range, i.e., range at the time of our analysis. Several 
courts have upheld this interpretation (Humane Society v. Zinke, 865 
F.3d 585 (D.C. Cir. 2017); Center for Biological Diversity v. Zinke, 
900 F.3d 1053, 1066-67 (9th Cir. 2018); Desert Survivors v. Dep't of 
the Interior, F. Supp. 3d 1131 (N.D. Cal. 2018)). Therefore, under our 
significant portion of its range policy, the North Coast of Egypt does 
not merit evaluation as a significant portion of the species' range 
because the best available science indicates that the species has been 
extirpated from the North Coast of Egypt.
    The two other Egyptian tortoise populations (in North Sinai, Egypt, 
and in Israel) discussed by the commenter are extant and are much 
smaller than the population in Libya; however, the smaller sizes of 
these two populations do not necessarily equate to the species being in 
danger of extinction in these portions of its range. The current 
condition of the populations of the Egyptian tortoise in North Sinai, 
Egypt and in Israel do not have imminent threats that place the species 
in danger of extinction. These populations partially occur within 
protected areas, are protected by those countries' laws, and are not 
subject to collection pressure. Even considering the smaller population 
sizes in North Sinai, Egypt, and in Israel, we considered whether 
either of these two populations is in danger of extinction and found 
that they are not, and would not have a different status than the 
rangewide status of the species. Because we reached a negative answer 
with respect to the status question for each population, we do not need 
to evaluate the significance question for that portion of the species' 
range.

Supporting Documents

    The SSA report for the Egyptian tortoise represents a compilation 
of the best scientific and commercial data available concerning the 
status of the species, including the impacts of past, present, and 
future factors (both negative and beneficial) affecting the species.
    In accordance with our joint policy on peer review published in the 
Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), and our August 22, 
2016, memorandum updating and clarifying the role of peer review of 
listing actions under the Act, we sought peer review of the SSA report. 
We sent the SSA report to five independent peer reviewers who have 
expertise in the biology, habitat, and threats to the species, and we 
received three responses. As described above under Peer Reviewer 
Comments in Summary of Comments and Recommendations, we reviewed these 
responses for substantive issues and new information regarding the 
information contained in the SSA report, to ensure that our 
determination is based on scientifically sound data, assumptions, and 
analyses. The peer reviewers generally concurred with our methods and 
conclusions, and provided additional information, clarifications, and 
suggestions to improve the final SSA report. We incorporated the peer 
reviewer comments into the final SSA report as appropriate.

I. Final Listing Determination

Background

    A thorough review of the taxonomy, life history, distribution and 
population status, and ecology of the Egyptian tortoise is presented in 
the SSA report and the proposed rule (Service 2022; available at 
https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-2020-0114). We 
provide a very brief summary below.
    The most distinguishing characteristic of the Egyptian tortoise is 
its remarkably small size (Highfield and Martin 2014, p. 1). The 
Egyptian tortoise is the smallest and least-known tortoise species 
inhabiting the Mediterranean basin (Buskirk 1985, pp. 35, 37), and the 
second smallest species of tortoise in the world (Woodland Park Zoo 
2014, p. 1). Egyptian tortoises are herbivores with low reproductive 
potential. Males reach maturity at 5 years old, and females take at 
least 8 years because of physical limitations of laying eggs (Baha El 
Din 2020, pers. comm.; Attum et al. 2011, p. 10). One generation in the 
wild is estimated to be about 20 years (Per[auml]l[auml] 2006, p. 60; 
Macale et al. 2009, p. 143), although the average age can be much 
shorter (Egyptian Environmental Affairs Agency 2009, p. 222).
    The Egyptian tortoise is restricted to a narrow coastal zone in 
North Africa and the western and central Negev Desert in Israel, in the 
southeast Mediterranean, and has the most restricted range of all 
tortoises in the Mediterranean Basin (Baha El Din et al. 2003, entire). 
They need areas of sandy dunes to more solidified sands with plant 
cover from bushes and small shrubs and annual plants to eat. The 
species is active during the cooler part of the year and aestivates or 
experiences prolonged dormancy during the summer when temperatures are 
high and rainfall and food availability are low.
    Historically, the Egyptian tortoise occurred on both sides of the 
Nile River, distributed along the southeast Mediterranean coast in 
Libya and Egypt, and in the western and central Negev Desert in Israel. 
The species currently exists in the three regions in Libya, in five 
small subpopulations in North Sinai, Egypt, and in the western and 
central Negev Desert in Israel. The Egyptian tortoise has been 
extirpated from the North Coast of Egypt and no longer occupies the 
historical part of its

[[Page 19007]]

range from the Libyan border east to the Nile River.
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR30MR23.000

BILLING CODE 4333-15-C

Figure 1. Distribution of the Egyptian tortoise, from Libya through 
Israel

    The shaded area along the southeastern Mediterranean coast, on the 
coastline of Libya and Egypt, and into the Western and Central Negev 
Desert in Israel on the map above reflects the approximate historical 
range of the species. The Egyptian tortoise has been extirpated from 
the North Coast of Egypt; therefore, the species no longer occupies the 
historical part of the range in Egypt from the Libyan border east to 
the Nile Delta. The dots are recorded locations from the literature 
including both historical and current occurrence of the species. 
(Rhodin 2020, pers. comm; Rhodin et al. 2017).

    Over the last three generations (or about 60 years), the Egyptian 
tortoise population has been reduced by approximately 90 percent 
throughout its range, including the extirpation of the species in North 
Coast, Egypt, which accounted for about 30 percent of the species' 
historical population (Per[auml]l[auml] 2005, p. 894; Per[auml]l[auml] 
2006, p. 61; Rhodin 2020, pers. comm; Rhodin et al. 2017, p. 154; Baha 
El Din 1994, p. 6; Baha El Din et al. 2003, p. 651). The best available 
information indicates that the current population of Egyptian tortoise 
is approximately 10,000 individuals (see table, below).

             Table of Estimates of the Historical and Current Populations for the Egyptian Tortoise
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Historical individuals (estimate of       Estimated
         Population name             individuals present in the 1950s)  population in  2005    Best estimate in
                                                   \1\                      and 2006 \2\           2022 \3\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Libya (Cyrenaica)................  22,600.............................  5,000..............  Libya: At least
Libya (Sirte)....................  Unknown............................  Unknown............   7,500 adults, not
                                                                                              including non-
                                                                                              breeding adults.
Libya (Tripolitania).............  2,500..............................  2,500.
Egypt (North Coast)..............  30,500.............................  0 (was previously    0.
                                                                         reintroduced in El
                                                                         Omayed Protected
                                                                         Area).
Egypt (North Sinai) and Israel...  45,000.............................  3,150, which are     Israel:
                                                                         mostly in Israel.    Conservative
                                                                                              estimate for total
                                                                                              population of
                                                                                              2,000-2,500.[supca
                                                                                              ret]

[[Page 19008]]

 
                                                                        The population in    North Sinai: 5 very
                                                                         North Sinai is       small
                                                                         about 100.           subpopulations in
                                                                                              one small
                                                                                              population contain
                                                                                              a total of 200-250
                                                                                              individuals.
                                  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total Individuals............  100,600............................  10,650.............  [ap] 10,000.\4\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ (Per[auml]l[auml] 2005; Per[auml]l[auml] 2006).
\2\ (Per[auml]l[auml] 2005; Per[auml]l[auml] 2006; Schneider and Schneider 2008).
\3\ (Baha El Din 2020, pers. comm.; Attum 2020, pers. comm.; Israel Nature and Parks Authority (INPA) 2021).
\4\ The current total population may be similar to the population estimated in 2005 and 2006. The current
  population in Libya is uncertain due to a lack of any recent field surveys.
[supcaret] The current population estimates (2021) in Israel have decreased since last assessed in 2006.

Regulatory and Analytical Framework

Regulatory Framework

    Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and the implementing 
regulations in title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations set forth 
the procedures for determining whether a species is an endangered 
species or a threatened species, issuing protective regulations for 
threatened species, and designating critical habitat for endangered and 
threatened species. In 2019, jointly with the National Marine Fisheries 
Service, the Service issued a final rule that revised the regulations 
in 50 CFR part 424 regarding how we add, remove, and reclassify 
endangered and threatened species and the criteria for designating 
listed species' critical habitat (84 FR 45020; August 27, 2019). On the 
same day, the Service also issued final regulations that, for species 
listed as threatened species after September 26, 2019, eliminated the 
Service's general protective regulations automatically applying to 
threatened species the prohibitions that section 9 of the Act applies 
to endangered species (84 FR 44753; August 27, 2019).
    The regulations that are in effect and therefore applicable to this 
final rule are 50 CFR part 424, as amended by (a) revisions that we 
issued jointly with the National Marine Fisheries Service in 2019 
regarding both the listing, delisting, and reclassification of 
endangered and threatened species and the criteria for designating 
listed species' critical habitat (84 FR 45020; August 27, 2019); and 
(b) revisions that we issued in 2019 eliminating for species listed as 
threatened species are September 26, 2019, the Service's general 
protective regulations that had automatically applied to threatened 
species the prohibitions that section 9 of the Act applies to 
endangered species (84 FR 44753; August 27, 2019).
    The Act defines an ``endangered species'' as a species that is in 
danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its 
range, and a ``threatened species'' as a species that is likely to 
become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout 
all or a significant portion of its range. The Act requires that we 
determine whether any species is an endangered species or a threatened 
species because of any of the following 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; or
    (E) Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued 
existence.
    These factors represent broad categories of natural or human-caused 
actions or conditions that could have an effect on a species' continued 
existence. In evaluating these actions and conditions, we look for 
those that may have a negative effect on individuals of the species, as 
well as other actions or conditions that may ameliorate any negative 
effects or may have positive effects.
    We use the term ``threat'' to refer in general to actions or 
conditions that are known to or are reasonably likely to negatively 
affect individuals of a species. The term ``threat'' includes actions 
or conditions that have a direct impact on individuals (direct 
impacts), as well as those that affect individuals through alteration 
of their habitat or required resources (stressors). The term ``threat'' 
may either encompass--together or separately--the source of the action 
or condition or the action or condition itself.
    However, the mere identification of any threat(s) does not 
necessarily mean that the species meets the statutory definition of an 
``endangered species'' or a ``threatened species.'' In determining 
whether a species meets either definition, we must evaluate all 
identified threats by considering the expected response by the species, 
and the effects of the threats--in light of those actions and 
conditions that will ameliorate the threats--on an individual, 
population, and species level. We evaluate each threat and its expected 
effects on the species, and then analyze the cumulative effect of all 
of the threats on the species as a whole. We also consider the 
cumulative effect of the threats in light of those actions and 
conditions that will have positive effects on the species, such as any 
existing regulatory mechanisms or conservation efforts. The Secretary 
determines whether the species meets the definition of an ``endangered 
species'' or a ``threatened species'' only after conducting this 
cumulative analysis and describing the expected effect on the species 
now and in the foreseeable future.

Foreseeable Future

    The Act does not define the term ``foreseeable future,'' which 
appears in the statutory definition of ``threatened species.'' Our 
implementing regulations at 50 CFR 424.11(d) set forth a framework for 
evaluating the foreseeable future on a case-by-case basis. The term 
``foreseeable future'' extends only so far into the future as the 
Services can reasonably determine that both the future threats and the 
species' responses to those threats are likely. In other words, the 
foreseeable future is the period of time in which we can make reliable 
predictions. ``Reliable'' does not mean ``certain''; it means 
sufficient to provide a reasonable degree of confidence in the 
prediction. Thus, a prediction is reliable if it is reasonable to 
depend on it when making decisions.

[[Page 19009]]

    It is not always possible or necessary to define the foreseeable 
future as a particular number of years. Analysis of the foreseeable 
future uses the best scientific and commercial data available and 
should consider the timeframes applicable to the relevant threats and 
to the species' responses to those threats in view of its life-history 
characteristics. Data that are typically relevant to assessing the 
species' biological response include species-specific factors such as 
lifespan, reproductive rates or productivity, certain behaviors, and 
other demographic factors.
    We considered the threats of habitat loss and degradation and 
collection of the species for the pet trade, along with demographic 
factors of Egyptian tortoises, and determined that the foreseeable 
future was approximately 60 years. This timeline for the foreseeable 
future is based on several factors. The Egyptian tortoise matures 
slowly, and in the best of conditions has a low reproductive rate. 
Thus, the species depends on high survival rates and long reproductive 
lifespans of adults to increase population size (Wilbur and Morin 1988, 
in D[iacute]az-Paniagua et al. 2001, p. 707). Because of the long 
generation length (up to 20 years) and slow reproductive rate, 
demographic responses of the species to the threats that are already 
ongoing will manifest increasingly over a significant period of time. 
Additionally, existing studies already document the species' responses 
to threats over the past three generations or approximately 60 years 
(Per[auml]l[auml] 2005, p. 894; Per[auml]l[auml] 2006, p. 61; Rhodin 
2020, pers. comm; Rhodin et al. 2017, p. 154; Baha El Din 1994, p. 6; 
Baha El Din et al. 2003, p. 651). We considered and incorporated the 
information underlying IUCN's Red List assessment of the species that 
also takes into account the decline in abundance and range of the 
species, levels of exploitation, and direct observations by experts 
(IUCN 2012, unpaginated; Per[auml]l[auml] 2005, p. 897; 
Per[auml]l[auml] 2006, p. 65). We found the IUCN's information to be 
part of the best scientific and commercial information available for 
this species, and that predictions based on IUCN's information for this 
species can be reliable over approximately the next 60 years. We also 
note that IUCN reasonably projects that the species faces a greater-
than-80-percent chance of extinction in the wild within the next 60 
years.
    Therefore, based on the best scientific and commercial data 
available, we conclude that over a period of 60 years we can make 
reliable predictions that both the future threats to the species and 
the species' response to those threats are likely. ``Reliable'' does 
not mean ``certain''; it means sufficient to provide a reasonable 
degree of confidence in the prediction. Thus, a prediction is reliable 
if it is reasonable to depend on it when making decisions. Under this 
approach, because habitat loss and collection for the pet trade are the 
primary threats to the Egyptian tortoise currently and into the future, 
and the species has a slow reproductive rate in the best of conditions 
that depends on high survival rates and long reproductive lifespans of 
adults to increase population size, we evaluate how far into the future 
we can make reliable prediction about habitat loss and collection of 
the species and the responses of Egyptian tortoises to these threats. 
In addition to the slow, innate reproductive capacity of Egyptian 
tortoises, we considered and incorporated the information underlying 
IUCN's Red List assessment of the species that projects that the 
species faces a greater-than-80-percent chance of extinction in the 
wild within the next 60 years, taking into account the decline in 
abundance and range of the species, levels of exploitation, and direct 
observations by experts. We found the IUCN's information to be part of 
the best scientific and commercial information available for this 
species, and that predictions based on IUCN's information for this 
species can be reliable over approximately the next 60 years. 
Therefore, we identified 60 years, or 2080, as the foreseeable future 
for the threats of habitat loss and collection because that is the 
period over which we can make reliable predictions as to the future 
condition of Egyptian tortoises.

Analytical Framework

    The SSA report documents the results of our comprehensive 
biological review of the best scientific and commercial data available 
regarding the status of the species, including an assessment of the 
potential threats to the species. The SSA report does not represent a 
decision by the Service on whether the species should be listed as an 
endangered or threatened species under the Act. However, it does 
provide the scientific basis that informs our regulatory decisions, 
which involve the further application of standards within the Act and 
its implementing regulations and policies. The following is a summary 
of the key results and conclusions from the SSA report; the full SSA 
report can be found at Docket FWS-HQ-ES-2020-0114 on https://www.regulations.gov. As noted above, the proposed rule includes more 
detail than this final rule, but that does not imply a change between 
the proposed and final rules.
    To assess Egyptian tortoise's viability, we used the three 
conservation biology principles of resiliency, redundancy, and 
representation (Shaffer and Stein 2000, pp. 306-310). Briefly, 
resiliency supports the ability of the species to withstand 
environmental and demographic stochasticity (for example, wet or dry, 
warm or cold years), redundancy supports the ability of the species to 
withstand catastrophic events (for example, droughts, large pollution 
events), and representation supports the ability of the species to 
adapt over time to long-term changes in the environment (for example, 
climate change). In general, the more resilient and redundant a species 
is and the more representation it has, the more likely it is to sustain 
populations over time, even under changing environmental conditions. 
Using these principles, we identified the species' ecological 
requirements for survival and reproduction at the individual, 
population, and species levels, and described the beneficial and risk 
factors influencing the species' viability.
    The SSA process can be categorized into three sequential stages. 
During the first stage, we evaluated the individual species' life-
history needs. The next stage involved an assessment of the historical 
and current condition of the species' demographics and habitat 
characteristics, including an explanation of how the species arrived at 
its current condition. The final stage of the SSA involved making 
predictions about the species' responses to positive and negative 
environmental and anthropogenic influences. Throughout all of these 
stages, we used the best available information to characterize 
viability as the ability of a species to sustain populations in the 
wild over time. We use this information to inform our regulatory 
decision.

Summary of Biological Status and Threats

    In this discussion, we review the biological condition of the 
species and its resources, and the threats that influence the species' 
current and future condition, in order to assess the species' overall 
viability and the risks to that viability.
    Egyptian tortoises face similar threats to their viability 
throughout their range, although the magnitude may vary among Libya, 
Egypt, and Israel. The primary threats to the species are loss of 
habitat and collection of the species for the pet trade (Service 2022, 
pp. 30-39). Because Egyptian tortoises need areas of sandy dunes to 
more solidified sands

[[Page 19010]]

with plant cover from bushes and small shrubs and annual plants to eat, 
habitat destruction throughout the range of the species caused by human 
activities is the major factor limiting suitable habitat necessary for 
the species' survival. Habitat loss may also occur because of changing 
environmental conditions from climate change. Protected areas, national 
parks, and nature reserves offer some suitable habitat and protection 
for the Egyptian tortoise. However, even the habitat in these areas is 
degraded and is also used for pastoral livestock grazing, which 
competes with Egyptian tortoise for vegetation (Attum et al. 2007b, 
entire; Baha El Din et al. 2003, p. 653; Attum et al. 2013, p. 74). 
Because of the land-use changes and habitat loss, the populations in 
each country have no connectivity across international borders, 
including the populations in North Sinai, Egypt, and in Israel that are 
both on the east side of the Nile and are relatively close in 
proximity.
    Egyptian tortoises were heavily collected from Egypt through much 
of the first half of the 20th century for sale as pets (Baha El Din 
1994, p. 25). The mass collection of the species for the pet trade was 
recognized as early as 1933 (Flower 1933, p. 746) and continued until 
the late 1970s, by which time the species' population was extirpated 
from large parts of the North Coast of Egypt. Currently, the only 
populations in Egypt are very small and managed by locals in the 
Zaranik Protected Area in North Sinai. Commercial collection of the 
species is not currently a factor at this location. However, collection 
for the pet trade is the biggest threat to the species in Libya, which 
has the largest remaining population of the species. Collection of 
Egyptian tortoises is minimal in Israel. Bedouins use shells from dead 
tortoises and do not collect live tortoises, but some poaching by 
agricultural workers does occur, which has been reduced through 
increased outreach and enforcement by Israel Nature and Parks Authority 
(INPA 2021, p. 4).
    Egyptian tortoises are highly sensitive to thermal stress, 
particularly increased temperature. Therefore, any marginal increase 
caused by climatic change would be limiting to their survival in the 
wild (Baha El Din 2020, pers. comm.). This impact has been observed 
first-hand in captive populations near Cairo, Egypt (only 100 
kilometers (62 miles) south of the natural range) (Baha El Din 2020, 
pers. comm.). Tortoises aestivate under shrubs in the summer when the 
temperature is highest, food availability is least, and the warming is 
projected to be the most intense. However, tortoises are more active 
during the winter and spring when the mean temperatures are 
approximately 15 to 25 degrees Celsius ([deg]C) (59 to 77 degrees 
Fahrenheit ([deg]F)). Temperature is projected to rise moderately 
during the winter and may not reach levels that are directly 
detrimental to the tortoise.
    The Egyptian tortoise is afforded some protection based on existing 
regulations in each of the range countries. These regulations have had 
varying success protecting the species' habitat from destruction and 
the species from collection for the pet trade. As discussed in further 
detail below, the inclusion of the Egyptian tortoise in Appendix I of 
CITES in 1995 was an important action for the conservation of the 
species, considering the decreasing population numbers and the amount 
of trade occurring up through the 1980s. However, despite its status in 
Appendix I of CITES, the best available information indicates that 
Egyptian tortoises are illegally traded internationally. The collection 
pressure from this illegal trade continues to harm the species, though 
at a reduced level that was previously attributed to the legal 
commercial trade while the species was in Appendix II of CITES (CITES 
Trade Database 2020; Theile et al. 2004, p. iii; Stengel et al. 2011, 
pp. 10-11, 19).

Current Conditions

    The Egyptian tortoise's viability is influenced by its resiliency, 
adaptive capacity (representation), and redundancy. Resiliency for the 
Egyptian tortoise is measured by population size, distribution, and 
health throughout its range. Population size, quality of habitat where 
the species occurs (taking into account anthropogenic effects), whether 
a population is in a protected area, and the collection pressure of a 
population all influence the resiliency of the Egyptian tortoise. 
Overall, the Egyptian tortoise has remained relatively stable since 
2005 (see table above). The species occurs in fragmented populations 
with moderate resiliency because there are multiple populations, some 
of which are partially in protected areas, and ongoing habitat 
degradation and collection pressure. The Egyptian tortoise resides in 
representative habitats on both sides of the Nile River, which provides 
the species with its resource needs and some ecological diversity in 
habitat west and east of the river. The existence of multiple, 
resilient populations reduces the likelihood that any single 
catastrophic event could affect one or more of the populations 
simultaneously. We have not identified any catastrophic events that 
would affect the Egyptian tortoise across its entire range.

Future Condition

    We projected the resiliency, representation, and redundancy of the 
Egyptian tortoise under two plausible future scenarios: (1) a status 
quo scenario in which human-caused impacts and tortoise population 
responses continue as the current trends indicate; and (2) a reduced-
collection scenario in which the collection of Egyptian tortoises for 
the pet trade from Libya decreases as a result of Libyan authorities 
enacting regulations that improve enforcement and reduce the collection 
of the species. However, reducing collection in Libya is uncertain 
given the ongoing collection of Egyptian tortoises and geopolitical 
instability in the country. The two scenarios do not include variance 
or change in the rate of habitat loss caused by human activities such 
as development, agriculture and grazing, and military activities. The 
habitat is highly degraded and continues to decline throughout the 
range of the species. Additionally, we recognize the effects of climate 
change in the future but do not differentiate between representative 
concentration pathway (RCP) 4.5 and RCP 8.5 in the future scenarios 
because we could not distinguish between RCPs 4.5 and 8.5 at which 
temperature or timeframe the Egyptian tortoise would show signs of 
stress. Habitat loss and collection for the pet trade will have a more 
immediate and pronounced effect on the species and its habitat 
suitability. Therefore, we focused the future condition on habitat loss 
and collection pressure because of human activities.
Scenario 1
    We project rangewide habitat degradation into the future under 
Scenario 1, and collection pressure continuing on the same trajectory 
as current conditions. Human population and development pressure are 
higher in North Coast, Egypt, and in Israel than in Libya and North 
Sinai, Egypt. Thus, we would not expect as much habitat loss from 
development in Libya and North Sinai. However, because collection 
pressure is higher in Libya, we anticipate that the population in Libya 
will be substantially reduced. Populations in Libya (one population 
across three regions), North Sinai, Egypt (one small population made up 
of five very small subpopulations), and Israel (one population in the 
Negev Desert) would decrease and become more fragmented, and we 
conclude that the resiliency of the species will decrease from moderate 
to low-to-moderate within the foreseeable future because of ongoing 
habitat degradation and

[[Page 19011]]

collection pressure. A decreasing population of Egyptian tortoise 
residing in increasingly degraded habitat reduces the species' ability 
to sustain populations in the event of stochastic variation. We project 
that the population in Libya would be substantially reduced because of 
ongoing collection, but would still occur within the three regions in 
Libya at much smaller population sizes. The tortoise populations in 
North Sinai, Egypt, and the Negev Desert in Israel would remain, but 
would decrease. Therefore, the species will continue to occupy the same 
areas as it currently occupies. The Egyptian tortoise would occur in 
each country, west and east of the Nile River, and maintain some 
ecological diversity between the populations. Thus, representation 
would likely be similar to current conditions. However, representative 
habitat types in which the species occurs would continue to be much 
fewer than they were historically, and would continue to decline. We 
have not identified any catastrophic events that would affect Egyptian 
tortoises across its entire range. Therefore, the species would have 
redundancy to withstand catastrophic events.
Scenario 2
    Similar to Scenario 1, we project that rangewide habitat 
degradation will continue in the future, but under Scenario 2, the 
collection pressure in Libya will be reduced. Libyan authorities and 
local academics had been seeking to end collection and exportation of 
Egyptian tortoise from Libya. However, we acknowledge that with the 
ongoing collection of the species and geopolitical instability in 
Libya, implementing conservation measures to reduce collection for the 
pet trade is uncertain. Nonetheless, if collection is reduced, the 
population in Libya would not decline at the current trajectory, and at 
a minimum, the Libyan population of Egyptian tortoises would decline at 
a slower rate compared to current conditions. However, this population 
would have low-to-moderate resiliency within the foreseeable future 
because the habitat will continue to be degraded, the population is not 
in a protected area, and even if conservation measures are implemented, 
we conclude some collection for the pet trade will continue. The 
populations in North Sinai, Egypt, and the Negev Desert in Israel would 
experience a decrease in resiliency in the foreseeable future as 
described under Scenario 1.
    Because the populations in Libya, in North Sinai, Egypt, and in 
Israel would remain, the Egyptian tortoise would occur in each country, 
west and east of the Nile River, and represent the same ecological 
diversity and habitats between the populations as current conditions, 
although at decreasing levels in each population. Similar to Scenario 
1, the species would occupy the same areas as it currently occupies, 
which are fewer than the species historically occupied, and suitable 
habitat will continue to decline. Because we have not identified any 
catastrophic event that would affect the species throughout its range, 
the species will have redundancy to withstand catastrophic events.
    We note that, by using the SSA framework to guide our analysis of 
the scientific information documented in the SSA report, we have not 
only analyzed individual effects on the species, but we have also 
analyzed their potential cumulative effects. We incorporate the 
cumulative effects into our SSA analysis when we characterize the 
current and future condition of the species. To assess the current and 
future condition of the species, we undertake an iterative analysis 
that encompasses and incorporates the threats individually and then 
accumulates and evaluates the effects of all the factors that may be 
influencing the species, including threats and conservation efforts. 
Because the SSA framework considers not just the presence of the 
factors, but to what degree they collectively influence risk to the 
entire species, our assessment integrates the cumulative effects of the 
factors and replaces a standalone cumulative-effects analysis.

Table of Abundance, Habitat Quality, Presence of Protected Areas, and 
Collection Pressure of Egyptian Tortoises Comparing the Current 
Condition to Future Conditions Under Scenarios 1 and 2
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR30MR23.001


[[Page 19012]]



Conservation Efforts and Regulatory Mechanisms

    The Egyptian tortoise is afforded some protection based on existing 
regulations in each of the range countries. However, these regulations 
have had varying success protecting the species' habitat from 
destruction and the species from collection for the pet trade. 
Protected areas, national parks, and nature reserves offer some 
suitable habitat and protection for the Egyptian tortoise, although 
habitat in protected areas is degraded and is subject to livestock 
grazing. Additionally, lax enforcement in these areas may provide 
opportunities for tortoise poaching and smuggling.
    In Egypt it is illegal to collect, possess, or sell protected 
species or wild animals, dead or alive (Law No. 4 of 1994, Ministry of 
State for Environmental Affairs 2022, unpaginated). Although 
enforcement is sporadic, it is increasing, and implementation and 
screening at airports for species listed under CITES has resulted in 
confiscation of some Egyptian tortoises intended for the illegal pet 
trade (Baha El Din et al. 2003, p. 653). Zaranik Protected Area in 
North Sinai, Egypt, contains Egyptian tortoises, and local Bedouins 
manage the population and protect the species from habitat degradation 
and collection. A program operated by Bedouin women contributes to 
raising awareness for the species through the production of handicrafts 
with tortoise motifs (Baha El Din et al. 2003, p. 654; Attum et al. 
2007b, p. 399).
    In Libya, the Egyptian tortoise is covered by a resolution from the 
Minister of Agriculture in favor of their protection and to prevent 
trading and export (Khalifa in litt., to IUCN Species Survival 
Commission (SSC) Trade Specialist Group 1993, in CITES uplisting 
proposal 1995, p. 25). However, we have no information to indicate the 
resolution is enforceable. Additionally, the lists of species protected 
in Libya do not include the Egyptian tortoise (Baha El Din 2002, p. 2; 
McGrath 2011, unpaginated). Accordingly, domestic regulatory mechanisms 
in Libya are either nonexistent or potentially lacking enforcement 
authority.
    In Israel, the Wildlife Protection Law (enacted in 1955 and amended 
in 1999) has proved to be an effective instrument in the protection of 
wildlife. All species of wild animals anywhere in Israel are completely 
protected, except for designated pest species and declared game species 
(Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs (IMFA) 1997, unpaginated; Wildlife 
Protection Law 5715-1955). The nature reserve Holot Agur in Israel was 
established in 2010, and covers approximately 176 square kilometers 
(km\2\) (68 square miles (mi\2\)) of the Holot Agur sands area in the 
western Negev Desert, which overlaps about one-fifth of the best known 
and studied population of Egyptian tortoises in Israel (Buskirk 1993, 
unpaginated).
    Libya, Egypt, and Israel are all Parties to CITES, and the Egyptian 
tortoise is a CITES-protected species. The Egyptian tortoise was 
included in Appendix II of CITES in 1975, under the genus-level listing 
of Testudo spp., and the species subsequently was transferred to 
Appendix I on February 16, 1995. Species included in Appendix I receive 
the highest level of protection under CITES (CITES Article II, 1. and 
4.; CITES Article III; 50 CFR part 23). Including the species in 
Appendix I of CITES was an important action for the conservation of the 
species, considering the decreasing population numbers and the level of 
trade occurring through the 1980s. However, despite the species' status 
in Appendix I of CITES, the best available information indicates that 
Egyptian tortoises are illegally traded internationally. The collection 
pressure continues to harm the species, although at a reduced level 
compared to the collection pressure while the species was in Appendix 
II (CITES Trade Database 2020; Theile et al. 2004, p. iii; Stengel et 
al. 2011, pp. 10-11, 19). International trade for Appendix-I species is 
permitted only under exceptional circumstances, and trade primarily for 
commercial purposes is prohibited, with limited exceptions for 
qualifying specimens bred in captivity for commercial purposes by 
CITES-registered facilities and pre-Convention specimens (CITES Article 
II, 1. and 4.; CITES Article III; CITES Article VII, 2. and 4.; 50 CFR 
part 23). There are currently no CITES-registered breeding facilities 
for the species.

Determination of Egyptian Tortoise's Status

    Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and its implementing 
regulations (50 CFR part 424) set forth the procedures for determining 
whether a species meets the definition of an endangered species or a 
threatened species. The Act defines an ``endangered species'' as a 
species in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion 
of its range, and a ``threatened species'' as a species likely to 
become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout 
all or a significant portion of its range. The Act requires that we 
determine whether a species meets the definition of endangered species 
or threatened species because of any of the following 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; or (E) other natural or 
manmade factors affecting its continued existence.

Status Throughout All of Its Range

    After evaluating threats to the species and assessing the 
cumulative effect of the threats under the Act's section 4(a)(1) 
factors, we found that habitat loss and degradation continue throughout 
the species' range because of a suite of ongoing human activities, and 
are the major factor limiting the availability of suitable habitat 
(Factor A). Collection of the species is ongoing and a significant 
threat in Libya, where the largest remaining population of Egyptian 
tortoise occurs (Factor B). Collection for the pet trade is not known 
to be a major factor in North Sinai, Egypt, or in Israel, although 
minimal poaching likely occurs in Israel. However, the potential exists 
that commercial collectors may target Egyptian tortoises in Zaranik 
Protected Area in the future. The Egyptian tortoise is afforded some 
protection in Egypt and Israel based on existing regulations, which 
have had minimal success protecting the species and its habitat. No 
enforceable conservation measures for the species are in place in 
Libya. The species' inclusion in Appendix I of CITES in 1995 
substantially reduced the international trade in wild specimens that 
was occurring primarily for commercial purposes, although some illegal 
commercial trade continues despite the species' status in Appendix I.
    The total Egyptian tortoise population is estimated to be nominally 
fewer in 2022 than it was in 2005 2006. Despite losses in numbers and 
habitat, approximately 10,000 Egyptian tortoises occur within 7,929-
15,857 km\2\ (3,061-6,122 mi\2\) of suitable habitat across the 
species' range in the Mediterranean coastal area of Libya; North Sinai, 
Egypt; and the Negev Desert in Israel (Per[auml]l[auml] 2005, p. 894; 
Per[auml]l[auml] 2006, p. 61; Rhodin 2020, pers. comm.).
    Based on the best available information, the population over the 
last 15 years may be steady but appears to have slightly declined. This 
appearance of a steady population over the past 15 years could be a 
result of a combination of factors. It could be uncertainty in the 
data. It could reflect the possibility that

[[Page 19013]]

more tortoises exist in Libya than previously understood. It could also 
be because collection for the pet trade briefly slowed at the start of 
the uprising against the Libyan Government in 2011. In any case, the 
species occurs in multiple populations, with a total population that 
has drastically declined from historical levels. The species retains 
representation across most of its historical range even though it has 
been extirpated from North Coast of Egypt. The two populations east of 
the Nile River in North Sinai, Egypt, and the Negev Desert, Israel, are 
partially in protected areas with varying levels of enforcement. We 
also considered whether the future species' response to past, currently 
occurring, or imminent future threats would significantly change the 
species' current viability, and concluded it would not. Therefore, 
after assessing the best available information, we conclude the 
Egyptian tortoise has sufficient resiliency, redundancy, and 
representation that with its current numbers and distribution it is not 
in danger of extinction throughout all of its range.
    We next considered whether the Egyptian tortoise is likely to 
become in danger of extinction throughout all of its range within the 
foreseeable future, which we determined for the species to be three 
generations of the species (approximately 60 years). Based on projected 
increases in the human population along the Mediterranean coast within 
the range of the species, we expect both the species' population and 
habitat to decline into the future because of ongoing habitat 
degradation and loss, and collection for the pet trade. Additionally, 
habitat degradation and loss are likely to be amplified by synergistic 
effects associated with the consequences of climate change. Projections 
for the Mediterranean region reveal warming in all seasons and reduced 
precipitation throughout the year. Egyptian tortoises are highly 
sensitive to thermal stress, particularly increased temperature. 
Therefore, any marginal increase resulting from climatic change, 
combined with the loss of habitat (i.e., shrubs needed for thermal 
buffering), would limit the species' ability to survive in the wild.
    We project that the multiple threats to the species and its habitat 
will cause the size of the population and the amount of suitable 
habitat for the species to decline, thereby decreasing the resilience 
of the population into the future. Existing regulatory measures have 
had minimal success conserving the species' habitat and but have 
reduced the number of tortoises collected for the pet trade. Although 
the species is not in danger of extinction throughout all of its range 
now, the factors identified above continue to negatively affect the 
Egyptian tortoise and its habitat such that it is likely to become in 
danger of extinction within the foreseeable future throughout all of 
its range. Based on the best available scientific studies and 
information assessing land-use trends, collection pressure, adequacy of 
law enforcement, temperature and rainfall projections because of 
climate change, and predictions about how those threats may affect the 
Egyptian tortoise, we conclude that the Egyptian tortoise will lack 
sufficient resiliency, redundancy, and representation for its continued 
existence to be secure within the foreseeable future. We, therefore, 
determine that the Egyptian tortoise is likely to be in danger of 
extinction within the foreseeable future throughout all of its range.

Status Throughout a Significant Portion of Its Range

    Under the Act and our implementing regulations, a species may 
warrant listing if it is in danger of extinction or likely to become so 
in the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of 
its range. The court in Center for Biological Diversity v. Everson, 
2020 WL 437289 (D.D.C. 2020) (Everson), vacated the aspect of the Final 
Policy on Interpretation of the Phrase ``Significant Portion of Its 
Range'' in the Endangered Species Act's Definitions of ``Endangered 
Species'' and ``Threatened Species'' (Final Policy; 79 FR 37578; July 
1, 2014) that provided that the Service does not undertake an analysis 
of significant portions of a species' range if the species warrants 
listing as threatened throughout all of its range. Therefore, we 
proceed to evaluating whether the species is endangered in a 
significant portion of its range--that is, whether there is any portion 
of the species' range for which both (1) the portion is significant; 
and (2) the species is in danger of extinction in that portion. 
Depending on the case, it might be more efficient for us to address the 
``significance'' question or the ``status'' question first. We can 
choose to address either question first. Regardless of which question 
we address first, if we reach a negative answer with respect to the 
first question that we address, we do not need to evaluate the other 
question for that portion of the species' range.
    Following the court's holding in Everson, we consider whether there 
are any significant portions of the species' range where the species is 
in danger of extinction now (i.e., endangered). In undertaking this 
analysis for the Egyptian tortoise, we choose to address the status 
question first--we consider information pertaining to the geographic 
distribution of both the species and the threats that the species faces 
to identify any portions of the range where the species is endangered. 
We examined whether the threats are geographically concentrated in any 
portion of the species' range at a biologically meaningful scale. We 
considered the following threats: habitat degradation and loss, 
collection for the pet trade, and small population size, including 
cumulative effects. The suite of activities, such as urban development, 
agriculture, grazing, and military exercises, that has caused, and 
continues to cause, the loss and degradation of habitat occurs across 
all populations throughout the species' range. The available data do 
not suggest that these threats to the habitat are concentrated in any 
area at a biologically meaningful scale. Therefore, the threats causing 
habitat loss do not themselves result in the species being in danger of 
extinction in any portion of its range.
    Collection for the pet trade is the most significant threat to the 
species in Libya and is currently concentrated in this part of the 
species' range. Collection has historically been a significant threat 
across Egypt, particularly in the North Coast, which combined with 
habitat loss led to the extirpation of the species from this part of 
its range. Collection for the pet trade is not known to be a factor in 
North Sinai, Egypt, or in Israel, although minimal poaching occurs in 
Israel and there is concern that commercial collectors will target 
Egyptian tortoises in Zaranik Protected Area in the future. Libya 
contains the majority of the population of Egyptian tortoises. While 
the threat of collection for the pet trade is concentrated in Libya, 
which is the only population on the west side of the Nile River, the 
effect of collection does not place the species in danger of extinction 
in this portion of its range, even in combination with other threats to 
the species such as habitat loss. In other words, the concentrated 
collection pressure in Libya is not severe enough to make the species 
currently endangered in this portion of its range given its size and 
distribution throughout its historical range in this portion.
    We also considered whether the populations of Egyptian tortoises in 
North Sinai, Egypt, and in the Negev Desert in Israel may each be more 
vulnerable because of their smaller population sizes. These two 
populations are smaller than historical estimates and are the only 
populations east of the Nile

[[Page 19014]]

River, including the only remaining population in Egypt that 
historically occurred along a much larger area of coastline in Egypt. 
However, the smaller size of the populations themselves do not equate 
to the populations being in danger of extinction.
    Each population may be more vulnerable to a loss of genetic 
diversity and catastrophic events because of their small sizes; 
however, we have no information that the species is affected by 
inbreeding depression, and we are not aware of catastrophic events that 
would make the species currently in danger of extinction in these 
portions of its range. While the populations in North Sinai, Egypt, and 
in Israel are smaller, particularly the population in North Sinai, the 
populations do not currently face collection pressure. Additionally, 
because of awareness and management of the species in these two 
populations, and protections provided to the species and its habitat 
through existing laws and designation of protected areas that overlap 
parts of where these populations occur, the populations in North Sinai, 
Egypt, and in Israel are not currently in danger of extinction in these 
portions of the species' range.
    We determined there is no portion of the species' range where it 
may be in danger of extinction, and because we reached a negative 
answer with respect to the ``status'' question, we do not need to 
evaluate the ``significance'' question for that portion of the species' 
range. Our approach to this analysis is consistent with the courts' 
holdings in Desert Survivors v. Dep't of the Interior, F. Supp. 3d 1131 
(N.D. Cal. 2018), and Center for Biological Diversity v. Jewell, 248 F. 
Supp. 3d, 946, 959 (D. Ariz. 2017).

Determination of Status

    Our review of the best available scientific and commercial 
information indicates that the Egyptian tortoise meets the Act's 
definition of a threatened species. Therefore, we list the Egyptian 
tortoise as a threatened species in accordance with sections 3(20) and 
4(a)(1) of the Act.

Available Conservation Measures

    The purposes of the Act are to provide a means whereby the 
ecosystems upon which endangered species and threatened species depend 
may be conserved, to provide a program for the conservation of such 
endangered species and threatened species, and to take such steps as 
may be appropriate to achieve the purposes of the treaties and 
conventions set forth in the Act. There are a number of steps available 
to advance the conservation of species listed as endangered or 
threatened species under the Act. As explained further below, these 
conservation measures include: (1) recognition, (2) recovery actions, 
(3) requirements for Federal protection, (4) financial assistance for 
conservation programs, and (5) prohibitions against certain practices.
    First, recognition through listing results in public awareness, as 
well as in conservation actions by Federal, State, Tribal, and local 
agencies; foreign governments; private organizations; and individuals. 
Second, the Act encourages cooperation with the States and other 
countries and calls for recovery actions to be carried out for listed 
species.
    Third, our regulations at 50 CFR part 402 implement the interagency 
cooperation provisions found under section 7 of the Act. Under section 
7(a)(1) of the Act, Federal agencies are to use, in consultation with 
and with the assistance of the Service, their authorities in 
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Section 7(a)(2) of the Act, as 
amended, requires Federal agencies to ensure, in consultation with the 
Service, that any action authorized, funded, or carried out by such 
agency is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed 
species or result in destruction or adverse modification of its 
critical habitat.
    A Federal ``action'' that is subject to the consultation provisions 
of section 7(a)(2) of the Act is defined in our implementing 
regulations at 50 CFR 402.02 as all activities or programs of any kind 
authorized, funded, or carried out, in whole or in part, by Federal 
agencies in the United States or upon the high seas. With respect to 
this species, there are no actions known to require consultation under 
section 7(a)(2) of the Act. Given the regulatory definition of 
``action,'' which clarifies that it applies to activities or program 
``in the United States or upon the high seas,'' the Egyptian tortoise 
is unlikely to be the subject of section 7 consultations, because the 
entire life cycle of the species occurs in terrestrial areas outside of 
the United States unlikely to be affected by U.S. Federal actions. 
Additionally, no critical habitat will be designated for this species 
because, under 50 CFR 424.12(g), we will not designate critical habitat 
within foreign countries or in other areas outside of the jurisdiction 
of the United States.
    Fourth, section 8(a) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1537(a)) authorizes the 
provision of limited financial assistance for the development and 
management of programs that the Secretary of the Interior determines to 
be necessary or useful for the conservation of endangered or threatened 
species in foreign countries. Sections 8(b) and 8(c) of the Act (16 
U.S.C. 1537(b) and (c)) authorize the Secretary to encourage 
conservation programs for foreign listed species, and to provide 
assistance for such programs, in the form of personnel and the training 
of personnel.
    Fifth, the Act puts in place prohibitions against particular 
actions. When a species is listed as endangered, certain actions are 
prohibited under section 9 of the Act and are implemented through our 
regulations in 50 CFR 17.21. For endangered wildlife, these include 
prohibitions under section 9(a)(1) of the Act on import; export; 
delivery, receipt, carriage, transport, or shipment in interstate or 
foreign commerce, by any means whatsoever and in the course of 
commercial activity; and sale or offer for sale in interstate or 
foreign commerce of any endangered species. It is also illegal to take 
within the United States or on the high seas; or to possess, sell, 
deliver, carry, transport, or ship, by any means whatsoever, any 
endangered species that have been taken in violation of the Act. It is 
unlawful to attempt to commit, to solicit another to commit or to cause 
to be committed, any of these acts. Exceptions to the prohibitions for 
endangered species may be granted in accordance with section 10 of the 
Act and our regulations at 50 CFR 17.22.
    The Act does not specify particular prohibitions and exceptions to 
those prohibitions for threatened species. Instead, under section 4(d) 
of the Act, the Secretary, as well as the Secretary of Commerce 
depending on the species, are given the discretion to issue such 
regulations as deemed necessary and advisable to provide for the 
conservation of species listed as threatened species. The Secretary 
also has the discretion to prohibit by regulation with respect to any 
threatened species any act prohibited under section 9(a)(1) of the Act. 
Exercising this discretion, the Service has developed general 
prohibitions in the Act's regulations (50 CFR 17.31) and exceptions to 
those prohibitions (50 CFR 17.32) that apply to most threatened 
wildlife species. Under 50 CFR 17.32, permits may be issued to allow 
persons to engage in otherwise prohibited acts for certain purposes.
    Under section 4(d) of the Act, the Secretary, who has delegated 
this authority to the Service, may also develop specific prohibitions 
and exceptions tailored to the particular conservation needs of a 
threatened species. In such cases, the Service issues

[[Page 19015]]

a 4(d) rule that may include some or all of the prohibitions and 
authorizations set out in 50 CFR 17.31 and 17.32, but which also may be 
more or less restrictive than the general provisions at 50 CFR 17.31 
and 17.32. For Egyptian tortoise, the Service has determined that a 
species-specific 4(d) rule is necessary and advisable.
    As explained below, the 4(d) rule for the Egyptian tortoise, in 
part, makes it illegal for any person subject to the jurisdiction of 
the United States to import or export; deliver, receive, carry, 
transport, or ship in interstate or foreign commerce, by any means 
whatsoever and in the course of commercial activity; or sell or offer 
for sale in interstate or foreign commerce any Egyptian tortoise. It is 
also illegal to take (which includes harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, 
wound, kill, trap, capture, or to attempt any of these) any Egyptian 
tortoise within the United States or on the high seas; or possess, 
sell, deliver, carry, transport, or ship, by any means whatsoever any 
Egyptian tortoise that has been taken in violation of the Act. It is 
unlawful to attempt to commit, to solicit another to commit or to cause 
to be committed, any of these acts. Certain exceptions apply to agents 
of the Service and State conservation agencies. An exception is also 
provided in the 4(d) rule for interstate commerce from public 
institutions to other public institutions, specifically museums, 
zoological parks, and scientific institutions that meet the definition 
of ``public'' at 50 CFR 10.12.
    We may issue permits to carry out otherwise prohibited activities 
involving endangered and threatened wildlife species under certain 
circumstances. Regulations governing permits for threatened species are 
codified at 50 CFR 17.32, and general Service permitting regulations 
are codified at 50 CFR part 13. With regard to threatened wildlife, a 
permit may be issued for scientific purposes, to enhance the 
propagation or survival of the species, for incidental take in 
connection with otherwise lawful activities, for economic hardship, for 
zoological exhibition, for educational purposes, and for special 
purposes consistent with the purposes of the Act. The Service may also 
register persons subject to the jurisdiction of the United States 
through its captive-bred wildlife (CBW) program if certain established 
requirements are met under the CBW regulations (see 50 CFR 17.21(g)). 
Through a CBW registration, the Service may allow a registrant to 
conduct certain otherwise prohibited activities under certain 
circumstances to enhance the propagation or survival of the affected 
species, including take; export or re-import; delivery, receipt, 
carriage, transport, or shipment in interstate or foreign commerce, in 
the course of a commercial activity; or sale or offer for sale in 
interstate or foreign commerce. A CBW registration may authorize 
interstate purchase and sale only between entities that both hold a 
registration for the taxon concerned. The CBW program is available for 
species having a natural geographic distribution not including any part 
of the United States and other species that the Service Director has 
determined to be eligible by regulation. The individual specimens must 
have been born in captivity in the United States. There are also 
certain statutory exemptions from the prohibitions, which are found in 
sections 9 and 10 of the Act.
    It is our policy, as published in the Federal Register on July 1, 
1994 (59 FR 34272), to identify to the maximum extent practicable at 
the time a species is listed, those activities that would or would not 
constitute a violation of section 9 of the Act. The intent of this 
policy is to increase public awareness of the effect of a listing on 
proposed and ongoing activities within the range of the species. The 
discussion below regarding protective regulations under section 4(d) of 
the Act complies with our policy.

II. Final Rule Issued Under Section 4(d) of the Act

Background

    Section 4(d) of the Act contains two sentences. The first sentence 
states that the Secretary shall issue such regulations as she deems 
necessary and advisable to provide for the conservation of species 
listed as threatened. The U.S. Supreme Court has noted that statutory 
language like ``necessary and advisable'' demonstrates a large degree 
of deference to the agency (see Webster v. Doe, 486 U.S. 592 (1988)). 
Conservation is defined in the Act to mean the use of all methods and 
procedures which are necessary to bring any endangered species or 
threatened species to the point at which the measures provided pursuant 
to the Act are no longer necessary. Additionally, the second sentence 
of section 4(d) of the Act states that the Secretary may by regulation 
prohibit with respect to any threatened species any act prohibited 
under section 9(a)(1), in the case of fish or wildlife, or section 
9(a)(2), in the case of plants. Thus, the combination of the two 
sentences of section 4(d) provides the Secretary with wide discretion 
to select and promulgate appropriate regulations tailored to the 
specific conservation needs of the threatened species. The second 
sentence grants particularly broad discretion to the Service when 
adopting the prohibitions under section 9.
    The courts have recognized the extent of the Secretary's discretion 
under this standard to develop rules that are appropriate for the 
conservation of a species. For example, courts have upheld rules 
developed under section 4(d) as a valid exercise of agency authority 
where they prohibited take of threatened wildlife, or include a limited 
taking prohibition (see Alsea Valley Alliance v. Lautenbacher, 2007 
U.S. Dist. Lexis 60203 (D. Or. 2007); Washington Environmental Council 
v. National Marine Fisheries Service, 2002 U.S. Dist. Lexis 5432 (W.D. 
Wash. 2002)). Courts have also upheld 4(d) rules that do not address 
all of the threats a species faces (see State of Louisiana v. Verity, 
853 F.2d 322 (5th Cir. 1988)). As noted in the legislative history when 
the Act was initially enacted, ``once an animal is on the threatened 
list, the Secretary has an almost infinite number of options available 
to [her] with regard to the permitted activities for those species. 
[She] may, for example, permit taking, but not importation of such 
species, or [s]he may choose to forbid both taking and importation but 
allow the transportation of such species'' (H.R. Rep. No. 412, 93rd 
Cong., 1st Sess. 1973).
    Exercising this authority under section 4(d), as explained below, 
we developed and are adopting a species-specific rule that sets out all 
of the protections and prohibitions designed to address the Egyptian 
tortoise's specific threats and conservation needs. Although the 
statute does not require us to make a ``necessary and advisable'' 
finding with respect to the adoption of specific prohibitions under 
section 9, we find that this rule as a whole satisfies the requirement 
in section 4(d) of the Act to issue regulations deemed necessary and 
advisable to provide for the conservation of the Egyptian tortoise.
    As discussed above under Summary of Biological Status and Threats, 
we have concluded that the Egyptian tortoise is likely to become in 
danger of extinction within the foreseeable future primarily because of 
habitat loss and degradation and collection for the pet trade, in 
concert with climate change. Under the 4(d) rule, certain prohibitions 
and provisions that apply to endangered wildlife under section 9(a)(1) 
prohibitions will help minimize threats that could cause further 
declines in the species' status. The provisions of the

[[Page 19016]]

4(d) rule promote conservation of the Egyptian tortoise by ensuring 
that activities undertaken with the species by any person under the 
jurisdiction of the United States are also supportive of the 
conservation efforts undertaken for the species in Libya, Egypt, and 
Israel, as well as under the CITES Appendix-I listing. The provisions 
of the 4(d) rule are one of many tools we will use to promote the 
conservation of the Egyptian tortoise.

Provisions of the 4(d) Rule

    In the SSA report, we identify factors such as habitat loss and 
degradation and collection of the species for the pet trade, in concert 
with climate change, that have negative effects on this species and its 
habitat. Additionally, we identify existing regulatory mechanisms in 
the tortoise's range countries of Libya, Egypt, and Israel to conserve 
the Egyptian tortoise, as well as the international measures of CITES 
for Appendix-I species. While we have found these regulatory mechanisms 
are not sufficient to prevent the species from likely becoming in 
danger of extinction within the foreseeable future throughout all of 
its range, we recognize the benefits of these regulatory mechanisms in 
helping to conserve the species.
    The 4(d) rule provides for the conservation of the Egyptian 
tortoise by prohibiting the following activities, except as otherwise 
authorized or permitted: importing or exporting; take; possession and 
other acts with unlawfully taken specimens; delivering, receiving, 
transporting, or shipping in interstate or foreign commerce in the 
course of commercial activity; or selling or offering for sale in 
interstate or foreign commerce unlawfully taken specimens or offspring 
of unlawfully taken specimens.
    As discussed above under Summary of Biological Status and Threats, 
habitat loss and degradation and collection of the species for the pet 
trade are affecting the status of the Egyptian tortoise. A suite of 
activities has the potential to affect the Egyptian tortoise in its 
range countries, including urban development, agricultural conversion, 
grazing, military exercises, and collection for the pet trade. Habitat 
degradation will continue in the species' range countries. Prohibiting 
take (which applies to take within the United States, within the 
territorial sea of the United States, or upon the high seas) will 
indirectly contribute to conservation of the species in its range 
countries of Libya, Egypt, and Israel by helping prevent any captive-
held Egyptian tortoises in the United States being used to establish a 
domestic market for trade of Egyptian tortoise parts or for the 
commercial pet trade. For the same reason, regulating interstate 
commerce in the species in the course of commercial activity by persons 
subject to the jurisdiction of the United States can benefit the 
species in the wild by limiting demand in the United States to 
noncommercial activities and permitted commercial activities for 
scientific purposes or to enhance the propagation or survival of the 
species in the wild, such as activities associated with bona fide 
conservation breeding. The United States is not a primary destination 
for Egyptian tortoises. However, collection of the species for the 
illegal international pet trade is ongoing. Further regulating import 
and export to, from, and through the United States and foreign commerce 
by persons subject to the jurisdiction of the United States could deter 
breeding and demand for the species, and help conserve the species by 
eliminating the United States as a potential market for illegally 
collected and traded Egyptian tortoises.
    The 4(d) rule provides an exception for interstate commerce from 
public institutions to other public institutions, specifically museums, 
zoological parks, and scientific institutions that meet the definition 
of ``public'' at 50 CFR 10.12. Demand for Egyptian tortoises held at or 
captive-bred by these types of institutions in the United States is not 
substantial, nor is it likely to pose a significant threat to the wild 
population in the species' range countries. As defined in our 
regulations, ``public'' museums, zoological parks, and scientific 
institutions refers to such as are open to the general public and are 
either established, maintained, and operated as a governmental service 
or are privately endowed and organized but not operated for profit. 
This exception applies unless prohibited by CITES regulations, for 
example if use after import is restricted under 50 CFR 23.55.
    We may issue permits to carry out otherwise prohibited activities, 
including those described above, involving threatened wildlife under 
certain circumstances. Regulations governing permits are codified at 50 
CFR 17.32. With regard to threatened wildlife, a permit may be issued 
for the following purposes: for scientific purposes, to enhance 
propagation or survival, for economic hardship, for zoological 
exhibition, for educational purposes, for incidental taking, or for 
special purposes consistent with the purposes of the Act. As noted 
above, we may also authorize certain activities associated with 
conservation breeding under CBW registrations. We recognize that 
captive breeding of wildlife can support conservation, for example by 
producing animals that could be used for reintroductions. We are not 
aware of any captive-breeding programs for the Egyptian tortoise for 
this purpose. There are also certain statutory exemptions from the 
prohibitions, which are found in sections 9 and 10 of the Act. The 4(d) 
rule applies to all live and dead Egyptian tortoise parts and products, 
and supports conservation management efforts for Egyptian tortoise in 
the wild in Libya, Egypt, and Israel.

Required Determinations

National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)

    We have determined that environmental assessments and environmental 
impact statements, as defined under the authority of the National 
Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) need not be prepared 
in connection with listing a species as an endangered or threatened 
species under the Endangered Species 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 complete list of references cited in this rulemaking is available 
on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov and upon request from 
the Branch of Delisting and Foreign Species (see FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT).

Authors

    The primary authors of this rule are the staff members of the U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service's Species Assessment Team and the Branch of 
Delisting and Foreign Species.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17

    Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Plants, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Transportation, Wildlife.

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--ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS

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.


[[Page 19017]]



0
2. In Sec.  17.11, amend paragraph (h) by adding an entry for 
``Tortoise, Egyptian'' to the List of Endangered and Threatened 
Wildlife in alphabetical order under Reptiles to read as follows:


Sec.  17.11   Endangered and threatened wildlife.

* * * * *
    (h) * * *

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                              Listing citations
            Common name                Scientific name        Where listed        Status    and applicable rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
             Reptiles
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Tortoise, Egyptian................  Testudo kleinmanni    Wherever found......          T   87 FR [Insert
                                     (syn. Testudo                                           Federal Register
                                     werneri).                                               page where the
                                                                                             document begins],
                                                                                             March 30, 2023; 50
                                                                                             CFR 17.42(l).\4d\
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


0
3. Amend Sec.  17.42 by adding paragraphs (j) through (l) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  17.42  Special rules--reptiles.

* * * * *
    (j) [Reserved]
    (k) [Reserved]
    (l) Egyptian tortoise (Testudo kleinmanni, syn. Testudo werneri).
    (1) Prohibitions. The following prohibitions that apply to 
endangered wildlife also apply to the Egyptian tortoise. Except as 
provided under paragraph (l)(2) of this section and Sec. Sec.  17.4 and 
17.5, it is unlawful for any person subject to the jurisdiction of the 
United States to commit, to attempt to commit, to solicit another to 
commit, or cause to be committed, any of the following acts in regard 
to this species:
    (i) Import or export, as set forth for endangered wildlife at Sec.  
17.21(b).
    (ii) Take, as set forth for endangered wildlife at Sec.  
17.21(c)(1).
    (iii) Possession and other acts with unlawfully taken specimens, as 
set forth for endangered wildlife at Sec.  17.21(d)(1).
    (iv) Interstate or foreign commerce in the course of commercial 
activity, as set forth for endangered wildlife at Sec.  17.21(e).
    (v) Sale or offer for sale in interstate or foreign commerce, as 
set forth for endangered wildlife at Sec.  17.21(f).
    (2) Exceptions from prohibitions. In regard to this species, you 
may:
    (i) Conduct activities as authorized by a permit under Sec.  17.32.
    (ii) Sell, offer for sale, deliver, receive, carry, transport, or 
ship in interstate commerce live Egyptian tortoises from one public 
institution to another public institution, if such activity is in 
accordance with 50 CFR part 23. For the purposes of this paragraph, 
``public institution'' means a museum, zoological park, and scientific 
institution that meets the definition of ``public'' at 50 CFR 10.12.
    (iii) Take, as set forth at Sec.  17.21(c)(2) through (c)(4) for 
endangered wildlife.
    (iv) Possess and engage in other acts, as set forth at Sec.  
17.21(d)(2) for endangered wildlife.
    (v) Conduct activities as authorized by a captive-bred wildlife 
registration under Sec.  17.21(g) for endangered wildlife.

Martha Williams,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2023-06312 Filed 3-29-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P