Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Threatened Species Status With Section 4(d) Rule for Egyptian Tortoise, 19004-19017 [2023-06312]
Download as PDF
19004
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 61 / Thursday, March 30, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene Dortch,
Secretary.
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.
[FR Doc. 2023–06508 Filed 3–29–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Summary of Changes From the
Proposed Rule
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
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
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.
SUMMARY:
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-ofcontact in the United States.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
ADDRESSES:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Mar 29, 2023
Jkt 259001
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 61 / Thursday, March 30, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Mar 29, 2023
Jkt 259001
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 wellmanaged 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).
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
19005
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 captivebred 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, wellmanaged 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
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
19006
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 61 / Thursday, March 30, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
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 significantportion-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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Mar 29, 2023
Jkt 259001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 (Pera¨la¨
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
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 61 / Thursday, March 30, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
19007
range from the Libyan border east to the
Nile River.
BILLING CODE 4333–15–P
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 (Pera¨la¨
2005, p. 894; Pera¨la¨ 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).
Population name
Historical individuals
(estimate of
individuals present in the
1950s) 1
Libya (Cyrenaica) .........................................
Libya (Sirte) .................................................
Libya (Tripolitania) .......................................
Egypt (North Coast) .....................................
22,600 ............................
Unknown
2,500 ..............................
30,500 ............................
Egypt (North Sinai) and Israel .....................
45,000 ............................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Mar 29, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4700
Estimated population in
2005 and 2006 2
Best estimate in 2022 3
5,000 .............................................
Unknown.
2,500.
0 (was previously reintroduced in
El Omayed Protected Area).
3,150, which are mostly in Israel ..
Libya: At least 7,500 adults, not
including non-breeding adults.
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
0.
Israel: Conservative estimate for
total population of 2,000–
2,500.∧
30MRR1
ER30MR23.000
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
TABLE OF ESTIMATES OF THE HISTORICAL AND CURRENT POPULATIONS FOR THE EGYPTIAN TORTOISE
19008
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 61 / Thursday, March 30, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE OF ESTIMATES OF THE HISTORICAL AND CURRENT POPULATIONS FOR THE EGYPTIAN TORTOISE—Continued
Historical individuals
(estimate of
individuals present in the
1950s) 1
Population name
Total Individuals ....................................
100,600 ..........................
Estimated population in
2005 and 2006 2
Best estimate in 2022 3
The population in North Sinai is
about 100.
North Sinai: 5 very small subpopulations in one small population contain a total of 200–250
individuals.
10,650 ...........................................
≈ 10,000.4
1 (Pera
¨ la¨
2005; Pera¨la¨ 2006).
2005; Pera¨la¨ 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.
∧ The current population estimates (2021) in Israel have decreased since last assessed in 2006.
2 (Pera
¨ la¨
Regulatory and Analytical Framework
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
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).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Mar 29, 2023
Jkt 259001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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.
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 61 / Thursday, March 30, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
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 Dı´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 (Pera¨la¨ 2005,
p. 894; Pera¨la¨ 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; Pera¨la¨ 2005, p. 897;
Pera¨la¨ 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Mar 29, 2023
Jkt 259001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
19009
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
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
19010
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 61 / Thursday, March 30, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Mar 29, 2023
Jkt 259001
during the winter and spring when the
mean temperatures are approximately
15 to 25 degrees Celsius (°C) (59 to 77
degrees Fahrenheit (°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.
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 61 / Thursday, March 30, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Mar 29, 2023
Jkt 259001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4725
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
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
ER30MR23.001
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.
19011
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
19012
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 61 / Thursday, March 30, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
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;
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Mar 29, 2023
Jkt 259001
Wildlife Protection Law 5715–1955).
The nature reserve Holot Agur in Israel
was established in 2010, and covers
approximately 176 square kilometers
(km2) (68 square miles (mi2)) 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 CITESregistered 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
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 km2 (3,061–
6,122 mi2) of suitable habitat across the
species’ range in the Mediterranean
coastal area of Libya; North Sinai, Egypt;
and the Negev Desert in Israel (Pera¨la¨
2005, p. 894; Pera¨la¨ 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
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 61 / Thursday, March 30, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Mar 29, 2023
Jkt 259001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
19013
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
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
19014
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 61 / Thursday, March 30, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
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).
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Mar 29, 2023
Jkt 259001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 61 / Thursday, March 30, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Mar 29, 2023
Jkt 259001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
19015
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 speciesspecific 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
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
19016
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 61 / Thursday, March 30, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
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 AppendixI 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Mar 29, 2023
Jkt 259001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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
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.
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
19017
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 61 / Thursday, March 30, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
2. In § 17.11, amend paragraph (h) by
adding an entry for ‘‘Tortoise, Egyptian’’
to the List of Endangered and
■
Common name
*
Threatened Wildlife in alphabetical
order under REPTILES to read as follows:
*
Scientific name
*
§ 17.11 Endangered and threatened
wildlife.
Where listed
*
*
*
*
(h) * * *
*
Listing citations and
applicable rules
Status
*
*
*
*
REPTILES
*
*
Tortoise, Egyptian .....................
*
*
Testudo kleinmanni (syn.
Testudo werneri).
*
*
3. Amend § 17.42 by adding
paragraphs (j) through (l) to read as
follows:
■
§ 17.42
Special rules—reptiles.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
*
*
*
*
*
(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
§§ 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 § 17.21(b).
(ii) Take, as set forth for endangered
wildlife at § 17.21(c)(1).
(iii) Possession and other acts with
unlawfully taken specimens, as set forth
for endangered wildlife at § 17.21(d)(1).
(iv) Interstate or foreign commerce in
the course of commercial activity, as set
forth for endangered wildlife at
§ 17.21(e).
(v) Sale or offer for sale in interstate
or foreign commerce, as set forth for
endangered wildlife at § 17.21(f).
(2) Exceptions from prohibitions. In
regard to this species, you may:
(i) Conduct activities as authorized by
a permit under § 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Mar 29, 2023
*
*
Wherever found .......................
Jkt 259001
*
*
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 § 17.21(c)(2)
through (c)(4) for endangered wildlife.
(iv) Possess and engage in other acts,
as set forth at § 17.21(d)(2) for
endangered wildlife.
(v) Conduct activities as authorized by
a captive-bred wildlife registration
under § 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
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 679
[Docket No. 230306–0065; RTID 0648–
XC882]
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic
Zone Off Alaska; Reallocation of
Pollock in the Bering Sea and Aleutian
Islands Management Area; Correction
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Temporary rule; reallocations;
correction.
AGENCY:
NMFS is correcting a
temporary rule that reallocated Aleut
Corporation and Community
Development Quota pollock from the
Aleutian Islands subarea to the Bering
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4700
T
Sfmt 4700
*
*
87 FR [Insert Federal Register page where the document begins], March 30,
2023; 50 CFR 17.42(l).4d
*
*
Sea subarea in the Bering Sea and
Aleutian Islands management area. The
amounts of pollock remaining in the
Aleutian Islands subarea were incorrect.
Effective 1200 hours, Alaska
local time (A.l.t.), March 30, 2023,
through 2400 hours, A.l.t., December 31,
2023.
DATES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Abby Jahn, 907–586–7228.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Need for Correction
NMFS published the reallocation of
pollock on March 23, 2023 (88 FR
17403). The document contains
incorrect amounts of pollock remaining
for the Aleutian Islands subarea total
allowable catch (TAC) and the Aleut
Corporation’s A and B season directed
fishing allowance. Aleutian Islands
subarea TAC is corrected from 19,000 to
4,500. Aleut Corporation is corrected
from 2,100 to 2,000 for column ‘‘2023 A
season’’ and from (100) to n/a for
column ‘‘2023 B season’’. NMFS is
republishing the table in its entirety
with the correct numbers. These
corrections will not affect the fishing
operations. These corrections are
necessary to provide the correct
information about the amount of the
pollock remaining for the Aleutian
Islands subarea TAC and the Aleut
Corporation A and B season directed
fishing allowance and eliminate
potential confusion by fishery
participants.
Correction
In the Federal Register of March 23,
2023 (88 FR 17403), in FR Doc. 2023–
06021, on page 17404, Table 4 is
corrected to read as follows:
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
Agencies
[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