Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Endangered Species Status for Sira Curassow and Southern Helmeted Curassow, 34800-34810 [2023-11471]

Agencies

• Fish and Wildlife Service
• DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 104 (Wednesday, May 31, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 34800-34810]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-11471]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

[Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-2023-0053; FF09E21000 FXES1111090FEDR 234]
RIN 1018-BG55


Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Endangered Species 
Status for Sira Curassow and Southern Helmeted Curassow

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose to 
list the Sira curassow (Pauxi koepckeae) and southern helmeted curassow 
(Pauxi unicornis), two bird species from South America, as endangered 
species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). If 
we finalize this rule as proposed, it would add these species to the 
List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and extend the Act's 
protections to these species.

DATES: We will accept comments received or postmarked on or before July 
31, 2023. Comments submitted electronically using the Federal 
eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES, below) must be received by 11:59 
p.m. eastern time on the closing date. We must receive requests for a 
public hearing, in writing, at the address shown in FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT by July 17, 2023.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by one of the following methods:
    (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, enter FWS-HQ-ES-2023-0053, 
which is the docket number for this rulemaking. Then, click on the 
Search button. On the resulting page, in the panel on the left side of 
the screen, under the Document Type heading, check the Proposed Rule 
box to locate this document. You may submit a comment by clicking on 
``Comment.''
    (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail to: Public Comments 
Processing, Attn: FWS-HQ-ES-2023-0053, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 
MS: PRB/3W, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803.
    We request that you send comments only by the methods described 
above. We will post all comments on https://www.regulations.gov. This 
generally means that we will post any personal information you provide 
us (see Information Requested, below, for more information).
    Availability of supporting materials: Supporting materials, such as 
the species status assessment report, are available at https://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-2023-0053.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rachel London, Chief, Branch of 
Delisting and Foreign Species, Ecological Services Program, 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:

Information Requested

    We intend that any final action resulting from this proposed rule 
will be based on the best scientific and commercial data available and 
be as accurate and as effective as possible. Therefore, we request 
comments or information from other governmental agencies, Native 
American Tribes, the scientific community, industry, or any other 
interested parties concerning this proposed rule. We particularly seek 
comments concerning:
    (1) The species' biology, range, and population trends, including:
    (a) Biological or ecological requirements of the species, including 
habitat requirements for feeding, breeding, and sheltering;
    (b) Genetics and taxonomy;
    (c) Historical and current range, including distribution patterns 
and the locations of any populations of these species;
    (d) Historical and current population levels, and current and 
projected trends; and
    (e) Past and ongoing conservation measures for the species, their 
habitats, or both.
    (2) Threats and conservation actions affecting the species, 
including:
    (a) Factors that may be affecting the continued existence of the 
species,

[[Page 34801]]

which may include habitat destruction, modification, or curtailment; 
overutilization; disease; predation; the inadequacy of existing 
regulatory mechanisms; or other natural or manmade factors.
    (b) Biological, commercial trade, or other relevant data concerning 
any threats (or lack thereof) to these species.
    (c) Existing regulations or conservation actions that may be 
addressing threats to these species.
    (d) Existing regulations whether either of these species are 
protected species in their range countries.
    (3) Additional information concerning the historical and current 
status of these species.
    Please include sufficient information with your submission (such as 
scientific journal articles or other publications) to allow us to 
verify any scientific or commercial information you include.
    Please note that submissions merely stating support for, or 
opposition to, the action under consideration without providing 
supporting information, although noted, do not provide substantial 
information necessary to support a determination. Section 4(b)(1)(A) of 
the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(1)(A)) directs that determinations as to 
whether any species is an endangered or a threatened species must be 
made solely on the basis of the best scientific and commercial data 
available.
    You may submit your comments and materials concerning this proposed 
rule by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. We request that you 
send comments only by the methods described in ADDRESSES.
    If you submit information via https://www.regulations.gov, your 
entire submission--including any personal identifying information--will 
be posted on the website. If your submission is made via a hardcopy 
that includes personal identifying information, you may request at the 
top of your document that we withhold this information from public 
review. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We 
will post all hardcopy submissions on https://www.regulations.gov.
    Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting 
documentation we used in preparing this proposed rule, will be 
available for public inspection on https://www.regulations.gov.
    Because we will consider all comments and information we receive 
during the comment period, our final determinations may differ from 
this proposal. Based on the new information we receive (and any 
comments on that new information), we may conclude that these species 
are threatened instead of endangered, or we may conclude that these 
species do not warrant listing as either an endangered species or a 
threatened species.

Public Hearing

    Section 4(b)(5) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(5)) provides for a 
public hearing on this proposal, if requested. Requests must be 
received by the date specified in DATES. Such requests must be sent to 
the address shown in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. We will schedule 
a public hearing on this proposal, if requested, and announce the date, 
time, and place of the hearing, as well as how to obtain reasonable 
accommodations, in the Federal Register at least 15 days before the 
hearing. We may hold the public hearing in person or virtually via 
webinar. We will announce any public hearing on our website, in 
addition to the Federal Register. The use of virtual public hearings is 
consistent with our regulations at 50 CFR 424.16(c)(3).

Previous Federal Actions

    We received a petition from the International Council for Bird 
Preservation to add 53 foreign bird species, including the southern 
helmeted curassow, to the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife on 
May 6, 1991. On December 16, 1991 (56 FR 65207), we made a substantial 
90-day finding that the 53 species may be warranted for listing. On 
March 28, 1994 (59 FR 14496), we identified the southern helmeted 
curassow as a candidate under the Act. Candidates are those fish, 
wildlife, and plants for which we have on file sufficient information 
on biological vulnerability and threats to support preparation of a 
listing proposal, but for which development of a listing rule is 
precluded by other higher priority listing activities. Subsequently, on 
May 21, 2004, we considered new information for 73 foreign taxa, 
including the southern helmeted curassow, for which we had previously 
found listing to be warranted but precluded (69 FR 29354). The 2004 
notice retained warranted but precluded findings for 51 of the 73 
foreign taxa based on information gathered since 1995; we determined 
that the southern helmeted curassow should retain its status as a 
candidate species.
    At the time we identified the southern helmeted curassow (Pauxi 
unicornis) as a candidate in 1994 and the subsequent review in 2004, 
the southern helmeted curassow and Sira curassow were considered 
subspecies of Pauxi unicornis. However, in 2014, the Sira curassow 
(Pauxi koepckeae) was recognized as a full species and became a 
candidate species under the Act in 2016 (81 FR 71457; October 17, 
2016).

Peer Review

    In 2022, a species status assessment (SSA) team prepared an SSA 
report for the Sira curassow and southern helmeted curassow. The SSA 
team was composed of Service biologists, in consultation with other 
species experts. The SSA report 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 solicited independent scientific 
review of the information contained in the SSA report. The Service sent 
the SSA report to five independent peer reviewers and received one 
response. Results of this structured peer-review process can be found 
at Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-2023-0053 on https://www.regulations.gov. In 
preparing this proposed rule, we incorporated the results of the 
review, as appropriate, into the SSA report, which is the foundation 
for this proposed rule.

Summary of Peer Reviewer Comments

    As discussed in Peer Review above, we received comments from one 
peer reviewer on the draft SSA report. We reviewed all comments we 
received from the peer reviewer for substantive issues and new 
information regarding the information contained in the SSA report.
    The peer reviewer generally concurred with our methods and 
conclusion, and provided additional information, clarifications, and 
suggestions, including updates on the threat of forest loss within the 
range of the southern helmeted curassow. Additionally, the peer 
reviewer provided updated observations and distribution of the southern 
helmeted curassow throughout its range, particularly in the northern 
extent of its range. The peer reviewer's comments did not result in 
substantive changes to our analysis and conclusions within the SSA 
report. We did not receive any peer-review comments regarding the Sira 
curassow.

Proposed Listing Determination

Background

    The Sira curassow (Pauxi koepckeae), which is endemic to central 
Peru, and

[[Page 34802]]

southern helmeted curassow (or horned curassow; Pauxi unicornis), which 
is endemic to central Bolivia, are gallinaceous birds (relating to the 
order Galliformes of heavy-bodied, largely terrestrial birds in the 
Cracidae family (subfamily Cracinae; del Hoyo 1994, in Hosner et al. 
2016, p. 6; del Hoyo et al. 2020a, unpaginated)). Both species are 
large (83-94 centimeters (32-37 inches) in length) and relatively 
heavy-bodied (about 3.6 kilograms (8 pounds)) with bright red bills and 
a pale blue ``helmet'' (casque) atop their heads (del Hoyo et al. 
2020b, unpaginated).
    Both curassow species occur on the eastern side of the Andes 
Mountains of South America, although their ranges do not overlap and 
are separated by more than 1,000 kilometers (621 miles) 
(Gasta[ntilde]aga et al. 2007, p. 63). The Sira curassow is resident in 
cloud forests at mid to high elevation (1,100 to 1,500 meters (3,609 to 
4,921 feet) above sea level (asl); Begazo 2022, unpaginated; Beirne et 
al. 2017, p. 150; Gasta[ntilde]aga et al. 2011, p. 268) and is known 
only from the Cerros del Sira in central Peru, which is an isolated 
mountain outcrop of the Peruvian Andes. Almost all the species' range 
in the El Sira Communal Reserve (Birdlife International (BLI) 2023a, 
unpaginated; Gasta[ntilde]aga et al. 2011, p. 269; Gasta[ntilde]aga et 
al. 2007, p. 63; Tobias and del Hoyo 2006, p. 61). The southern 
helmeted curassow is resident at lower elevations (400 to 1,400 meters 
(1,312 to 4,593 feet) asl) in upper tropical and lower montane zones in 
central Bolivia (Herzog and Kessler 1998, pp. 46-47; Cox et al. 1997, 
p. 200; Cordier 1971, p. 10; Birds of Bolivia 2019, unpaginated; Beirne 
et al. 2017, p. 150), although most observations are between 500 and 
900 meters (1,640 to 2,953 feet) asl (Armon[iacute]a 2021, p. 3). The 
species occurs only within three national parks in central Bolivia: 
Ambor[oacute], Carrasco, and Isiboro-Secur[eacute] Indigenous Territory 
and National Park (TIPNIS) (BLI 2023b, unpaginated).
    Both the Sira curassow and southern helmeted curassow are endemic 
to small areas in relatively narrow elevational bands and are 
considered rare, locally uncommon, and their populations are decreasing 
(BLI 2023a, unpaginated; 2023b, unpaginated). Population densities for 
both species are estimated at less than one individual per square 
kilometer. The Sira curassow was surveyed in 2006 and 2008, but 
rangewide surveys have not occurred for this species (Gasta[ntilde]aga 
et al. 2011, p. 273). The species was observed in one population at 
four locations, all located within 30 km of each other 
(Gasta[ntilde]aga et al. 2011, p. 273). The Sira curassow's population 
is very small (50-249 mature individuals) and occurs within 550 square 
kilometers (212 square miles) (BLI 2023a, unpaginated; MacLeod and 
Gasta[ntilde]aga in litt. 2014, cited in BLI 2018a, unpaginated). The 
southern helmeted curassow was surveyed in 2018 and 2021 in the three 
national parks where the species resides. The southern helmeted 
curassow's population is also small and is less than what it was 
historically, including declining by 90 percent over the past 20 years 
(Boorsma 2023, pers. comm., unpaginated). The population is currently 
estimated at 1,000-4,999 individuals within 10,700 square kilometers 
(4,131 square miles) (BLI 2023b, unpaginated; Armon[iacute]a 2018, pp. 
3-4; Boorsma 2023, pers. comm., unpaginated). Information about the 
status of both species populations is supplemented with anecdotal 
information based on interviews with local indigenous communities. The 
following table presents population information for each species:

  Table--Sira Curassow and Southern Helmeted Curassow Population Size, Country of Origin, and Distribution. as
                        Noted Above, the Population Trend for These Species is Decreasing
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Species                      Population                Country              Range/distribution
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sira curassow......................  50 to 249 mature       Peru....................  Cerros del Sira; in the El
                                      individuals.                                     Sira Communal Reserve.
Southern helmeted curassow.........  1,000 to 4,999         Bolivia.................  Ambor[oacute] and Carrasco
                                      individuals.                                     National Parks and
                                                                                       Isiboro-Secur[eacute]
                                                                                       Indigenous Territory and
                                                                                       National Park (TIPNIS).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Sira curassow and southern helmeted curassows are both large, 
ground-dwelling birds very similar in appearance and life history. 
Large body size in tropical birds is often associated with large 
territory size, small population size, and low reproductive rate 
(Pearson et al. 2010, p. 508). The Sira curassow and southern helmeted 
curassow likely take at least 2 to 3 years to reach sexual maturity and 
have low reproductive outputs as females lay one egg per clutch (Cox et 
al. 1997, p. 207; Banks 1998, p. 154). We are not aware of how many 
clutches per year these species produce in the wild; however, in 
captivity, the southern helmeted curassow produced four clutches within 
one year, each with one egg per clutch (Banks 1998, p. 154). Generation 
time, which is the average time between two consecutive generations in 
lineages of a population, is estimated at 14.5 years (BLI 2023a and 
2023b, unpaginated). Detailed information on the biology of both 
species is limited because, despite their relatively large size, these 
species are difficult to detect and not well studied.

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, no longer 
automatically applied 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;

[[Page 34803]]

    (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 encompass--either 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 species' expected response 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, 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.
    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 we 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.
    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' likely 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.

Analytical Framework

    The SSA report documents the results of our comprehensive 
biological review of the best scientific and commercial data regarding 
the status of the species, including an assessment of the potential 
threats to the species. The SSA report does not represent our decision 
on whether the species should be proposed for listing 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.
    To assess the viability of Sira curassow and southern helmeted 
curassow, we used the three conservation biology principles of 
resiliency, redundancy, and representation (Shaffer and Stein 2000, pp. 
306-310). Briefly, resiliency is the ability of the species to 
withstand environmental and demographic stochasticity (for example, wet 
or dry, warm or cold years), redundancy is the ability of the species 
to withstand catastrophic events (for example, droughts, large 
pollution events), and representation is the ability of the species to 
adapt to both near-term and long-term changes in its physical and 
biological environment (for example, climate conditions, pathogens). In 
general, species viability will increase with increases in (or decrease 
with decreases in) resiliency, redundancy, and representation (Smith et 
al. 2018, p. 306). 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 data to characterize viability as 
the ability of a species to sustain populations in the wild over time. 
We use this data to inform our regulatory decision.
    The following is a summary of the key results and conclusions from 
the SSA report; the full SSA report can be found at Docket No. FWS-HQ-
ES-2023-0053 on https://www.regulations.gov.

Summary of Biological Status and Threats

    In this discussion, we review the biological condition of the 
species and their 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.
    The Sira curassow and southern helmeted curassows are both large, 
ground-dwelling birds very similar in appearance and life history. 
These species occur in the Yungas forests and adjacent evergreen forest 
and rely on dense to semi-open primary forested areas with relatively 
open understory.
    Large tropical birds, such as the two curassow species, are often 
associated with large territory size (Pearson et al. 2010, p. 508; 
Thorton et al. 2012, p. 572; Rios et al. 2021, p. 418). However, the 
forest area or patch size required for the Sira curassow and southern 
helmeted curassow is unknown. These species are primarily frugivores 
(fruit-eaters) and they require larger forested patch sizes than non-
frugivores because they depend on naturally patchy resources in larger 
home ranges. Fragmentation into smaller forest patches could cause 
scarcity and a reduction of food resources within those smaller 
fragments. As patch size decreases, large-bodied species are generally 
at a disadvantage because they need more space to nest and forage 
compared to small-ranging species (Kattan et al.

[[Page 34804]]

1994, pp. 141-143; Lees and Peres 2009, pp. 286-288; Lees and Peres 
2010, p. 619; Vetter et al. 2011, p. 6; Thorton et al. 2012, p. 572; 
Kattan et al. 2016, pp. 27-28; Rios et al. 2021, pp. 416-418). The 
forested and steep slopes where the species occur may provide some 
protection from human influence.
    Hunting, habitat loss and degradation, small population size, 
climate change, and protected areas are the main factors that affect 
the species' viability throughout their ranges. Hunting is the primary 
factor that negatively affects the Sira curassow and southern helmeted 
curassow throughout their respective ranges (del Hoyo et al. 2020a, 
2020b, unpaginated). Habitat loss and degradation affect both species, 
although to a lesser degree than hunting (Rios et al. 2021, p. 418). 
Limited loss of forest cover and degradation has occurred within the 
range of these species because of small-scale agriculture such as coca 
plantations and roadbuilding. However, human incursions into the 
protected areas are likely to increase. Because habitat loss and 
hunting pressure often work in tandem, further human encroachment into 
their habitats that results in deforestation, roadbuilding, and other 
land clearance creates opportunities to increase human encounters and 
hunting opportunities (Laurance et al. 2009, p. 662). Literature 
reviews of several species in the cracid family, including curassows, 
demonstrate that they are more likely to persist in forested landscapes 
with low human density and greater distance from human settlements, 
primarily because these forested areas would be unaffected, or 
minimally affected by hunting pressure (Thorton et al. 2012, p. 572; 
Kattan et al. 2016, pp. 27-28; Rios et al. 2021, pp. 416-418).
    Climate change will result in additional loss of forested habitat 
for these species by shifting these species' habitat upslope, reducing 
these species' range because the geometric shape of mountains means 
there is less area on mountain slopes as elevation increases (Chen et 
al. 2011, entire; Freeman et al. 2018, p. 11983; Forero-Medina et al. 
2011, entire; Sekercioglu et al. 2012, p. 3). A meta-analysis of 
existing data for a suite of taxonomic groups across multiple 
geographic regions and a study of tropical birds within the El Sira 
Communal Reserve in Peru showed a median shift to higher elevations of 
approximately 10 meters per decade (Chen et al 2011, p. 1024; Forero-
Medina et al. 2011, p. 4). In the case of tropical bird species in the 
El Sira Communal Reserve, a gradual, upward shift occurred because of 
changes in temperature, habitat conditions, and the availability of 
food resources (Forero-Medina et al. 2011, p. 4). Because birds are 
endothermic and may tolerate a wider range of temperatures, species 
that shift their ranges may be responding more to gradual changes in 
habitat availability, food resources based on long-lived elements of 
their ecosystem (trees), and response of competitors, than to 
temperatures, per se (Forero-Medina et al. 2011, p. 4). However, 
habitat expansion to newly suitable areas will not take place at the 
same rate as habitat loss due to climate change, especially for 
relatively sedentary tropical forest species (Sekercioglu et al. 2012, 
p. 12). Vegetation changes makes it more difficult for species to find 
suitable habitat that will provide their preferred climate envelope and 
nesting and foraging needs (Forero-Medina et al. 2011, p. 4).
    Almost all the Sira curassow's range is within the El Sira Communal 
Reserve in Peru. The southern helmeted curassow's range in Bolivia is 
within three national parks: Ambor[oacute], Carrasco, and TIPNIS. The 
protected areas where these species occur were designated by laws in 
Peru and Bolivia and are primarily inhabited by local indigenous 
communities that share management responsibilities with government 
ministries. The protected areas have been somewhat successful at 
limiting the magnitude of negative effects to biodiversity within the 
protected area boundaries. However, the lack of personnel and financial 
resources make the enforcement of the protected area boundaries 
difficult, which has resulted in the loss of wildlife because of 
continued hunting by locals and people from outside the protected areas 
and loss of primary forest resulting from small-scale agriculture, 
illegal logging, and roadbuilding within the protected area boundaries 
(Bucklin 2010, p. 44; Solano 2010, p. 37).

Conservation Efforts and Regulatory Mechanisms

    Our evaluation of the status of the species takes into account the 
extent to which threats are reduced or removed as a result of 
conservation efforts or existing regulatory mechanisms.
    Within Peru and Bolivia, we do not have information on whether 
either of these species are protected species under existing laws in 
their range countries. However, the Sira curassow and southern helmeted 
curassow reside in protected areas throughout their respective ranges. 
Almost all the Sira curassow's range is within the El Sira Communal 
Reserve in Peru. The southern helmeted curassow's range in Bolivia is 
within three national parks: Ambor[oacute], Carrasco, and TIPNIS.
    In Peru, policies on protected areas were established in the 
Natural Protected Areas Act (1997), the Master Plan for Natural 
Protected Areas (1999), and the General Environmental Act (2005) 
(Solano 2010, pp. 6-7, 46-49). The primary objective of the protected 
areas is the conservation of biological diversity (Solano 2010, pp. 12-
13). Protected areas are monitored by the Intendancy of Protected 
Natural Areas and managed by the National Service for Natural Protected 
Areas, a specialized technical body under the Ministry of the 
Environment (Solano 2010, p. 6; Parkswatch 2003, p. 6).
    The El Sira Communal Reserve was established in 2001 by a Supreme 
Decree (038-2001-AG). The reserve is 616,413 hectares (1.5 million 
acres) and was established for the conservation of wildlife and to 
acknowledge the rights of indigenous communities on their lands and 
consider the traditions and cultures of the local communities (Solano 
2010, pp. 10-15, 50; WorldBank 2007, pp. 13-15; Parkswatch 2003, p. 5). 
The reserve is classified as an International Union for Conservation of 
Nature (IUCN) category VI protected area, which are protected areas 
that conserve ecosystems and habitats together with associated cultural 
values and traditional natural resource management systems (IUCN 2008, 
p. 2). A portion of the area is under sustainable natural resource 
management and where low-level non-industrial use of natural resources 
compatible with nature conservation is seen as one of the main aims of 
the area (IUCN 2023, unpaginated; UN Environment Programme 2020, 
unpaginated).
    In Bolivia, the Political Constitution of the State (2009) defines 
protected areas as a common good that is part of the natural and 
cultural heritage of the country and that fulfills environmental, 
cultural, social, and economic functions for sustainable development. 
Likewise, the Framework Law of Mother Earth and Integral Development 
for Living Well (No. 300; 2012) indicates the System of Protected Areas 
as one of the main instruments for biodiversity (Elkins et al. 2014, p. 
102; Lexivox 2023, unpaginated).
    The Bolivian National Protected Area System was established in 1992 
through Environmental Law No. 1333 as a collective of interlinked 
protected areas of different categories (Wildlife Conservation Society 
(WCS) 2017, unpaginated). The core of the system is the national 
protected areas, which

[[Page 34805]]

includes Ambor[oacute], Carrasco, and TIPNIS and covers a total of 20 
percent of Bolivia. The National Service of Protected Areas (Sernap) 
oversees the protected areas of national interest to conserve 
biological and cultural diversity (Sernap 2023, unpaginated). The 
involvement of local and indigenous communities in park management 
plays a vital role to recognize the rights of indigenous and local 
communities to preserve their cultural identity, value systems, 
knowledge and traditions, and territory (WCS 2017, unpaginated).
    Overall, the protected areas in Peru and Bolivia were designated by 
laws and have been somewhat successful to limit the magnitude of 
negative effects to biodiversity within the protected area boundaries. 
The protected areas are in remote areas and far from government 
services, which makes enforcement of the protected area boundaries 
difficult because there is a lack of personnel and financial resources. 
This has resulted in loss of wildlife because of continued hunting and 
loss of primary forest within the protected area boundaries (Solano 
2010, p. 37; Armon[iacute]a 2018, p. 7).
    The nonprofit, nongovernmental organization Asociati[oacute]n 
Armon[iacute]a (Armon[iacute]a) has initiated educational campaigns to 
raise awareness and discourage hunting of both species. The program 
works with local and indigenous communities to protect wild bird 
populations through management of protected areas and reducing threats 
(Armon[iacute]a 2018, p. 1; Gasta[ntilde]aga et al. 2011, p. 277; 
Gasta[ntilde]aga 2006, p. 11; Gasta[ntilde]aga and Hennessey 2005, p. 
21).
    The Sira curassow is classified as critically endangered on the 
IUCN Red List (IUCN 2023a, unpaginated). Sira curassow is not known to 
be in international trade and is not included in the Appendices to the 
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna 
and Flora (CITES).
    The southern helmeted curassow is classified as critically 
endangered on the IUCN Red List (IUCN 2023b, unpaginated). Trade has 
not been noted internationally and the species is not included in the 
Appendices to CITES. The species is listed on Annex D of the European 
Union Wildlife Trade Regulations; species listed on Annex D require the 
importer to complete an import-notification form.

Current Condition

    We considered the ecology of the Sira curassow and southern 
helmeted curassow and factors that influence their viability to assess 
their current conditions, including their resiliency, redundancy, 
representation, and their overall viability. We know of minimal 
occurrence records and both species are narrow endemics; thus, we 
assess resiliency, redundancy, and representation range wide for both 
species.
    We gauge resiliency for the Sira curassow and southern helmeted 
curassow by evaluating their population abundance, the availability and 
condition of habitat throughout their respective ranges, and these 
species' life history traits that minimize their ability to rapidly 
recover from disturbances and population losses.
    Both the Sira curassow and southern helmeted curassow are 
considered rare, locally uncommon, and decreasing (BLI 2023a, 2023b). 
The Sira curassow's population is very small (50-249 mature 
individuals); the southern helmeted curassow's population is also 
small, declined by 90 percent over the past 20 years, and is currently 
estimated at 1,000-4,999 individuals. The species are endemic to small 
areas in relatively narrow elevational bands. The species' ranges are 
mostly within protected areas that are intact forest landscapes that 
show no to minimal signs of human alteration. However, the species' 
habitats are subject to some deforestation resulting from small-scale 
illegal agriculture and road construction that spawns additional small-
scale development. Over a 20-year period between 2000 and 2020, only 62 
hectares (153 acres), or 0.16 percent, of forest cover has been lost 
within the range of the Sira curassow, and 27,320 hectares (67,509 
acres), or 3.33 percent, of forest cover has been lost within the range 
of the southern helmeted curassow. Most of the forest cover loss in the 
region is outside the range of the species and outside the protected 
areas where the species occur. Although, human encroachment is 
increasing into the protected areas, particularly because of small-
scale coca plantations.
    Hunting is ongoing and will continue in the future. Both species 
are more likely to persist in patches located further from settlements 
and in forested landscapes with low human density, primarily because 
these areas would be unaffected, or minimally affected by hunting. The 
presence of local indigenous communities in addition to people from 
outside the protected areas that engage in small-scale agricultural 
activities or create inroads that further increase human presence into 
the species' habitats results in overexploitation of these species. Low 
rates of reproduction and slow recovery of these species' populations 
make it difficult for these species to tolerate high levels of 
continuous hunting. Because these species are endemic to small ranges 
and have population sizes that are decreasing, combined with low rates 
of reproduction and recovery, the Sira curassow and southern helmeted 
curassow are not likely to be resilient to ongoing threats.
    We gauge redundancy of these species by assessing the number and 
distribution of their populations relative to any anticipated 
catastrophic events within the species' ranges. Redundancy also depends 
on availability of quality habitat throughout these species' respective 
ranges. Because most of the current habitat is intact, even though the 
species are restricted to relatively narrow ranges, we expect the 
species to have some level of redundancy. An increase of fires in humid 
forest habitat and road building that are directly drying the 
landscape, combined with climate change that causes suitable habitat to 
shift upslope and is expected to result in the loss of a substantial 
amount of montane forest ecosystems within these species' ranges in the 
future, could be catastrophic for these species in the future. We are 
not aware of any other catastrophic events anticipated within the range 
of these species that could lead to collapse of these species' 
populations.
    The Sira curassow is known only from the Cerros del Sira region of 
central Peru in the El Sira Communal Reserve. Surveys in 2006 and 2008 
observed the species in one population at four locations, all located 
within 30 km of each other (Gasta[ntilde]aga et al. 2011, p. 273). 
Because the population and range are very small, we assume the species 
has minimal redundancy. The southern helmeted curassow has moderate 
redundancy and is known to occur at 10 total sites in Ambor[oacute], 
Carrasco, and TIPNIS, which is an area that is likely to hold the 
largest remaining population (Armon[iacute]a 2018, pp. 3-4; 
Armon[iacute]a 2021, entire; Armon[iacute]a 2022, unpaginated; Boorsma 
2023, pers. comm). We have no information on the connectivity between 
populations (Armon[iacute]a 2018, p. 7). The available data of 
population size and distribution for these species is minimal and there 
is uncertainty regarding the number of extant populations for both 
species throughout their ranges.
    We gauge representation of these species by assessing their ability 
to adapt to changes in their physical and biological environments 
because the ability to adapt is essential for species' viability. Both 
species are restricted to narrow elevational bands of Yungas Forest and 
adjacent evergreen forest on

[[Page 34806]]

the east side of the Andes Mountains. Microhabitats within these 
species' ranges are likely present because the birds move within their 
respective habitats in response to patchy resource availability. In 
2014, these species were determined to be distinct species, but we have 
no information about the genetic diversity within each species and 
there is no information on the degree to which these species exhibit 
behavioral plasticity, so the ability to assess representation is 
limited.
    As part of the SSA, we developed two future-condition scenarios to 
capture the range of uncertainties regarding future threats and the 
projected responses by the Sira curassow and southern helmeted 
curassow. The scenarios assumed an increased probability of forest 
cover loss, continued hunting pressure, and ongoing designation of the 
protected areas where the species occur. The best available information 
indicates that both species' populations and distributions will decline 
in the future. However, because we have determined that the Sira 
curassow and southern helmeted curassow meet the definition of an 
endangered species based on their current conditions (see 
Determinations for the Status of Sira Curassow and Southern Helmeted 
Curassow, below), we are not presenting the results of the future 
scenarios in this proposed rule. Please refer to the SSA report 
(Service 2023, entire) for the full analysis of future scenarios.
    We note that, by using the SSA framework to guide our analysis of 
the scientific information documented in the SSA report, we have 
analyzed the cumulative effects of identified threats and conservation 
actions on the species. To assess the current and future condition of 
the species, we evaluate the effects of all the relevant 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.

Determinations for the Status of Sira Curassow and Southern Helmeted 
Curassow

    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 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.

Status Throughout All of Its Range--Sira Curassow

    We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial data 
available regarding the past, present, and future threats to the Sira 
curassow. The best available information indicates that the Sira 
curassow is a narrow endemic with a very small population size of 50 to 
249 mature individuals that is decreasing (BLI 2023a; unpaginated; 
MacLeod and Gasta[ntilde]aga in litt. 2014, cited in BLI 2018a, 
unpaginated).
    The species is known only from the Cerros del Sira region of 
central Peru in the El Sira Communal Reserve. The Sira curassow is not 
likely to be highly resilient to ongoing threats. The resilience of the 
Sira curassow is based on population abundance, the availability of 
quality habitat throughout its range, and the species' life history 
traits that minimize recovery from disturbances and population losses. 
The El Sira Communal Reserve has been somewhat successful at limiting 
the loss of forest cover from small-scale agriculture activities, 
although small-scale agriculture is increasing within the protected 
area. Over a 20-year period between 2000 and 2020, only 62 hectares 
(153 acres), or 0.16 percent, of forest cover has been lost within the 
range of the species. However, the species has historically faced and 
continues to face hunting pressure, and human incursions into the 
protected area are increasing.
    Precise estimates of hunting pressure on the Sira curassow do not 
exist given the difficulty of monitoring and documenting hunting 
activities. Generally, curassows rank as the highest category of avian 
biomass taken by subsistence hunters (Strahl and Grajal 1991, p. 51). 
Local indigenous communities in addition to people from outside the 
protected areas that encroach into the species' habitat results in 
overexploitation of the species. Literature reviews of several species 
in the cracid family, including curassows, demonstrate that they are 
more likely to occur in forested landscapes with low human density and 
in patches located further from settlements, primarily because these 
forested areas would be unaffected, or minimally affected by hunting 
pressure (Kattan et al. 2016, pp. 27-28; Rios et al. 2021, pp. 416-418; 
Thorton et al. 2012, p. 572). The viability of the Sira curassow is 
likely more affected by hunting than habitat loss and degradation, 
although habitat loss and hunting pressure often work in tandem because 
incursions into forested areas for small-scale agriculture and 
roadbuilding create more opportunities for hunters (Rios et al. 2021, 
p. 418).
    Climate change has caused and will cause a loss of the species' 
habitat, which is particularly detrimental to endemic species that are 
restricted to narrow elevational bands (Velasquez-Tibata et al. 2012, 
p. 235). Climate change shifts the species' habitat upslope, reducing 
the species' range because the geometric shape of mountains means there 
is less area on mountain slopes as elevation increases (Chen et al. 
2011, entire; Freeman et al. 2018, p. 11983; Forero-Medina et al. 2011, 
entire; Sekercioglu et al. 2012, p. 3). Even though birds are 
endothermic and may tolerate a wider range of temperatures, the Sira 
curassow is not known to have great dispersal capabilities, making them 
unlikely to colonize new areas if their current habitat is damaged by 
climate change and other anthropogenic factors (Foster 2001, p. 73).
    We are not aware of the number of Sira curassow populations that 
occur within its limited range in the El Sira Mountains because the 
species is not well studied and rangewide surveys for the species do 
not exist, but the best available information indicates that the 
species has a low area of occurrence and occupancy. Because the 
population size and its range are very small, we find the species 
likely has minimal redundancy throughout its range. We are also not 
aware of any information about the genetic diversity in the Sira 
curassow, and there is no information on the degree to which the 
species exhibits behavioral plasticity, so the ability to assess 
representation is limited for the species. However, the species likely 
has low representation because it is endemic to the El Sira Mountains 
and occurs only within 550 square kilometers (212 square miles) in a 
narrow elevational band.

[[Page 34807]]

    Overall, the species has a very small population and is considered 
rare, locally uncommon, and its population is decreasing (BLI 2023a, 
unpaginated). The species is long-lived, has a long generation time and 
low reproductive output. Low reproductive output in conjunction with 
other factors like a high degree of habitat specialization, small 
population size, and low vagility (ability of an organism to move 
freely) typically equate to low innate adaptive capacity (Thurman et 
al. 2020, entire). The Sira curassow's low redundancy combined with the 
species not likely being highly resilient to ongoing threats and having 
minimal capacity to adapt to ongoing threats limits the viability of 
the Sira curassow in the face of ongoing threats. After assessing the 
best scientific and commercial information available, we conclude that 
the Sira curassow currently lacks sufficient resiliency, redundancy, 
and representation for its continued existence to be secure.
    Thus, after evaluating the best scientific and commercial data 
available regarding threats to the species and assessing the cumulative 
effect of the threats under the Act's section 4(a)(1) factors, we 
determine that the Sira curassow is in danger of extinction throughout 
all of its range. The species does not fit the statutory definition of 
a threatened species because it is currently in danger of extinction, 
whereas threatened species are those likely to become in danger of 
extinction within the foreseeable future.

Status Throughout All of Its Range--Southern Helmeted Curassow

    We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial 
information available regarding the past, present, and future threats 
to the southern helmeted curassow. The best available information 
indicates that the southern helmeted curassow is a narrow endemic with 
a small population size of 1,000 to 4,999 mature individuals that is 
decreasing (BLI 2023b, unpaginated; BLI 2018b, unpaginated).
    The southern helmeted curassow is not likely to be highly resilient 
to ongoing threats. The species' resiliency is based on population 
abundance, the availability of quality habitat throughout its range, 
and the species' life history traits that minimize recovery from 
disturbances and population losses. Even though the species resides in 
three national parks in central Bolivia that have been somewhat 
successful at limiting the loss of forest cover from small-scale 
agriculture activities, small-scale agriculture is increasing within 
the protected areas, particularly because of coca plantations. Over a 
20-year period between 2000 and 2020, 27,320 hectares (67,509 acres), 
or 3.33 percent, of forest cover has been lost within the range of the 
species. The southern helmeted curassow is likely more affected by 
hunting than habitat loss and degradation (Rios et al. 2021, p. 418). 
The species has historically faced and continues to face hunting 
pressure. Hunting increases with associated habitat loss, and human 
incursions into the protected areas are increasing.
    Precise estimates of hunting pressure do not exist given the 
difficulty of monitoring and documenting hunting activities. Between 
2001 and 2004, surveys showed that the largest known population of 
southern helmeted curassow declined from 20 singing males to zero 
because the birds were hunted by incursions of coca growers into the 
area (MacLeod et al. 2006, p. 62; MacLeod 2009, p. 16). However, in 
2017-2018, curassows were observed at this site (Boorsma 2023, pers. 
comm.). Additionally, in TIPNIS, there are records of southern helmeted 
curassows being hunted and eaten by community members (Boorsma 2023, 
pers. comm.). Local indigenous communities in addition to people from 
outside the protected areas that encroach into the species' habitat 
results in overexploitation of the species. Generally, curassows rank 
as the highest category of avian biomass taken by subsistence hunters 
(Strahl and Grajal 1991, p. 51). Literature reviews of several cracid 
species, including curassows, demonstrate that they are more likely to 
occur in forested landscapes with low human density and in patches 
located further from settlements (Kattan et al. 2016, pp. 27-28; Rios 
et al. 2021, pp. 416-418; Thorton et al. 2012, p. 572).
    Climate change has caused and will cause a loss of the species' 
habitat, which is particularly detrimental to endemic species that are 
restricted to narrow elevational bands (Velasquez-Tibata et al. 2012, 
p. 235). Climate change shifts the species' habitat upslope, reducing 
the species' range because the geometric shape of mountains means there 
is less area on mountain slopes as elevation increases (Chen et al. 
2011, entire; Freeman et al. 2018, p. 11983; Forero-Medina et al. 2011, 
entire; Sekercioglu et al. 2012, p. 3). Even though birds are 
endothermic and may tolerate a wider range of temperatures, the 
southern helmeted curassow is not known to have great dispersal 
capabilities, making them unlikely to colonize new areas if their 
current habitat is damaged by climate change and other anthropogenic 
factors (Foster 2001, p. 73).
    The best available data indicates the southern helmeted curassow is 
known from 10 locations spread throughout the 3 national parks; we are 
not aware of any information regarding the connectivity between the 
known occurrences. Therefore, even though the species' population and 
range are small, the species has some redundancy throughout its range. 
However, the species' range is smaller than it was historically, and 
its population has been reduced by 90 percent over the past 20 years 
(Armon[iacute]a 2018, p. 7; Boorsma 2023, pers. comm). We are not aware 
of any information about the genetic diversity in the southern helmeted 
curassow, and there is no information on the degree to which the 
species exhibits behavioral plasticity, so the ability to assess 
representation is limited for the species. However, the species likely 
has low representation because it is endemic to the three national 
parks within a narrow elevational band and occurs only within 10,700 
square kilometers (2,644,028 acres).
    Overall, the species has a small population and is considered rare, 
locally uncommon, and its population is decreasing (BLI 2018b, 
unpaginated; Birds of Bolivia 2019, unpaginated; BLI 2023b, 
unpaginated). The species is long-lived, has a long generation time, 
and low reproductive output. Low reproductive output in conjunction 
with other factors like a high degree of habitat specialization, small 
population size, and low vagility typically equates to low innate 
adaptive capacity (Thurman et al. 2020, entire). The southern helmeted 
curassow's moderate redundancy combined with the species not likely 
being highly resilient to ongoing threats and having minimal capacity 
to adapt to ongoing threats limits the viability of the southern 
helmeted curassow in the face of ongoing threats. After assessing the 
best scientific and commercial information available, we conclude that 
the southern helmeted curassow currently lacks sufficient resiliency, 
redundancy, and representation for its continued existence to be 
secure.
    Thus, after evaluating the best scientific and commercial data 
available regarding threats to the species and assessing the cumulative 
effect of the threats under the Act's section 4(a)(1) factors, we 
determine that the southern helmeted curassow is in danger of 
extinction throughout all of its range. The species does not fit the 
statutory definition of a threatened species because it is currently in 
danger of

[[Page 34808]]

extinction, whereas threatened species are those likely to become in 
danger of extinction within the foreseeable future.

Status Throughout a Significant Portion of Their Ranges

    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. We have determined that the Sira curassow is in danger of 
extinction throughout all of its range, and the southern helmeted 
curassow is in danger of extinction throughout all of its range, and 
accordingly did not undertake an analysis of any significant portion of 
their ranges. Because the Sira curassow and southern helmeted curassow 
warrant listing as endangered throughout all of their ranges, our 
determination does not conflict with the decision in Center for 
Biological Diversity v. Everson, 435 F. Supp. 3d 69 (D.D.C. 2020), 
which vacated the provision 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'' (79 FR 37578, July 1, 2014) providing that if the Services 
determine that a species is threatened throughout all of its range, the 
Services will not analyze whether the species is endangered in a 
significant portion of its range.

Determination of Status for the Sira Curassow and Southern Helmeted 
Curassow

    Our review of the best available scientific and commercial data 
indicates that both the Sira curassow and the southern helmeted 
curassow meet the definition of an endangered species. Therefore, in 
accordance with sections 3(6) and 4(a)(1) of the Act, we propose to add 
the Sira curassow and southern helmeted curassow as endangered species 
to the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife in 50 CFR 17.11(h).

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. Under the Act, a number of steps are 
available to advance the conservation of species listed as endangered 
or threatened species. 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 activities.
    Recognition through listing results in public awareness, as well as 
in conservation by Federal, State, Tribal, and local agencies, foreign 
governments, private organizations, and individuals. The Act encourages 
cooperation with the States and other countries and calls for recovery 
actions to be carried out for listed species.
    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) 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 the Sira curassow and 
southern helmeted curassow, no known actions require consultation under 
section 7(a)(2) of the Act. Given the regulatory definition of 
``action,'' which clarifies that it applies to activities or programs 
``in the United States or upon the high seas,'' the Sira curassow and 
southern helmeted curassow are unlikely to be the subject of section 7 
consultations, because the entire life cycles of the species occur in 
terrestrial areas outside of the United States and are unlikely to be 
affected by U.S. Federal actions. Additionally, no critical habitat 
will be designated for these 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.
    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.
    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.
    We may issue permits to carry out otherwise prohibited activities 
involving endangered wildlife species under certain circumstances. 
Regulations governing permits for endangered species are codified at 50 
CFR 17.22, and general Service permitting regulations are codified at 
50 CFR part 13. With regard to endangered wildlife, a permit may be 
issued: for scientific purposes, for enhancing the propagation or 
survival of the species, or for take incidental to otherwise lawful 
activities. The statute also contains certain exemptions from the 
prohibitions, which are found in sections 9 and 10 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

[[Page 34809]]

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.
    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.
    At this time, we are unable to identify specific activities that 
will not be considered likely to result in a violation of section 9 of 
the Act beyond what is already clear from the descriptions of 
prohibitions or already excepted through our regulations at 50 CFR 
17.21. Also, as discussed above, certain activities that are prohibited 
under section 9 may be permitted under section 10 of the Act. 
Additionally, we are unable to identify specific activities that will 
be considered likely to result in a violation of section 9 of the Act 
beyond what is already clear from the descriptions of the prohibitions 
at 50 CFR 17.21.
    Applicable wildlife import/export requirements established under 
Section 9(d)-(f) of the Act, the Lacey Act Amendments of 1981 (16 
U.S.C. 3371, et seq.), and 50 CFR part 14 must also be met for the Sira 
curassow and southern helmeted curassow imports and exports. Questions 
regarding whether specific activities would constitute a violation of 
section 9 of the Act should be directed to the Management Authority 
([email protected]; 703-358-2104).

Required Determinations

Clarity of the Rule

    We are required by Executive Orders 12866 and 12988 and by the 
Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain 
language. This means that each rule we publish must:
    (1) Be logically organized;
    (2) Use the active voice to address readers directly;
    (3) Use clear language rather than jargon;
    (4) Be divided into short sections and sentences; and
    (5) Use lists and tables wherever possible.
    If you feel that we have not met these requirements, send us 
comments by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. To better help us 
revise the rule, your comments should be as specific as possible. For 
example, you should tell us the numbers of the sections or paragraphs 
that are unclearly written, which sections or sentences are too long, 
the sections where you feel lists or tables would be useful, etc.

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 in Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-
2023-0053 and upon request from the Headquarters Ecological Services 
Field Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

Authors

    The primary authors of this proposed rule are the staff members of 
the 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.

Proposed Regulation Promulgation

    Accordingly, we propose to amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter 
I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth below:

PART 17--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.

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


Sec.  17.11  Endangered and threatened wildlife.

* * * * *
    (h) * * *

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                          Listing citations and
           Common name              Scientific name       Where listed        Status         applicable rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
              Birds
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Curassow, Sira..................  Pauxi koepckeae....  Wherever found....            E   [Federal Register
                                                                                          citation when
                                                                                          published as a final
                                                                                          rule].
Curassow, southern helmeted       Pauxi unicornis....  Wherever found....            E   [Federal Register
 (=horned curassow).                                                                      citation when
                                                                                          published as a final
                                                                                          rule].
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



[[Page 34810]]

Martha Williams,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2023-11471 Filed 5-30-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P