hello tweets,

two more bird species join a long and rapidly growing list of
human-caused casualties.

try to have a good day,

Deborah Wisti-Peterson, PhD Candidate nyneve at u.washington.edu
Department of Zoology, University of Washington, Seattle, Wash, USA
Visit me on the web: http://students.washington.edu/~nyneve/
Love the creator? Then protect the creation.

---------- Forwarded message ----------

[Federal Register: January 25, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 17)]
[Page 3675-3679]

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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

RIN 1018-AH50


Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Proposed Rule To
Remove the Mariana Mallard and the Guam Broadbill From the Federal List
of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: Under the authority of the Endangered Species Act of 1973
(Act), as amended, we, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service),
propose to remove the Mariana mallard (Anas platyrynchos oustaleti) and
the Guam broadbill (Myiagra freycineti) from the Federal List of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. All available information indicates
that these birds are extinct. The Mariana mallard was endemic to the
islands of Guam, Tinian, Saipan, and possibly Rota, of the Mariana
Archipelago in the western Pacific ocean. It was listed as endangered
on June 2, 1977, because its population was critically low due to
excessive hunting and loss of wetland habitat. No confirmed sightings
of the Mariana mallard have been made since 1979. The Guam broadbill,
endemic to Guam, was listed as endangered on August 27, 1984, because
its population was critically low. No confirmed sightings or other
evidence of the Guam broadbill in the Pajon Basin have been made since
May 15, 1984. This proposal, if made final, would remove Federal
protection provided by the Act for these species. Removal of the
Mariana mallard and the Guam broadbill from the Federal list of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife does not alter or supersede their
designation by the government of Guam as endangered species. The
Mariana mallard is not a protected wildlife species by the government
of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI).

DATES: Comments must be received by March 26, 2002. Public hearing
requests must be received by March 11, 2002.

ADDRESSES: Send comments and materials concerning this proposal to the
Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific Islands
Ecoregion, 300 Ala Moana Boulevard, Room 3-122, Box 50088, Honolulu,
Hawaii 96850. Comments and materials received will be available for
public inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours at the
above address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Henson (see ADDRESSES section),
telephone 808/541-2749; facsimile 808/541-2756; e-mail
paul__;henson at fws.gov <mailto:henson at fws.gov>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The Mariana mallard (Anas platyrynchos oustaleti) (Salvadori 1894)
was first described by Salvadori based on six specimens collected from
Guam in 1887 and 1888 (Reichel and Lemke 1994, Stinson 1994). The
species is believed to have been a subspecies that originated as a
hybrid between the common mallard (Anas platyrhynchos) and the grey
duck (Anas superciliosa) (Reichel and Lemke 1994).
The Mariana mallard is known only from Guam, Tinian, and Saipan of
the Marianas Archipelago. There is an unverified sighting of two
``unidentified ducks'' on Rota on October 20, 1945 (Baker 1948) and one
specimen of Anas sp. found during a 1990 excavation of a late Holocene
deposit in Payapai Cave, Rota (Steadman 1992). Other than these
records, the Mariana mallard has never been reported on Rota. There are
no records of this species from the more northern islands in the
archipelago.
First collected by the early explorers in the late 1800s, only
sporadic notes and observations have been made on this species. Marche
(Baker 1951) collected six specimens from Guam in 1888. Collections
from the time of Marche showed that the Mariana mallard concurrently
inhabited the islands of Saipan and Tinian. A total of 38 specimens
were collected from Tinian and Saipan by Japanese collectors between
1931 and 1940 (Baker 1951). There are probably fewer than 50 specimens
of the Mariana mallard in collections in France, Japan, the United
States, and elsewhere. Reichel and Lemke (1994) were able to locate 37
specimens. Most of these were collected by the Japanese in the 1930s
and 1940s.
The Mariana mallard probably was never abundant (Baker 1951) due to
limited habitat availability. There have never been extensive
freshwater marshes or swamps in the Mariana Archipelago. The largest
number of Mariana mallards ever recorded was by Kuroda (1942) who
reported that his collector saw 2 flocks of 50 to 60 Mariana mallards
at 2 locations at Lake Hagoi, Tinian. Gleize (1945) estimated a
population of 12 mallards on Tinian. Marshall (1949) recorded their
presence at both Lake Susupe, Saipan, and Lake Hagoi, Tinian. However,
he speculated that they flew between the two islands as he never saw
them at ``both * * * lakes during any one month.'' The last confirmed
sighting of this species was in 1979 by Eugene Kridler of the Service
who estimated that there were probably fewer than a dozen Mariana
mallards remaining (Kridler 1979). At this time, Mr. Kridler collected
a pair of birds for captive propagation. Captive breeding was first
conducted at Pohakuloa, Hawaii, then at Sea World, San Diego,
California. These attempts failed and the last known Mariana mallard
died at Sea World, San Diego in 1981 (Stinson 1995).
On Guam, the last recorded sighting of the Mariana mallard was made
by G.S.A. Perez on February 25, 1967 (Drahos 1977). Wetland surveys
were conducted on Guam from the late 1960s through the 1980s; however,
no Mariana mallards were seen (Engbring et al. 1986, Stinson et al.
1991, Reichel et al. 1992).
Small populations persisted on Tinian and Saipan until the late
1970s (Pratt et al. 1979, Stinson 1995). No confirmed sightings of the
Mariana mallard have been made since 1979. Extensive surveys were
conducted intermittently from 1982 through 1984 by us and staff from
the Division of Fish and Wildlife (DFW) of the Commonwealth of the
Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI). All of the known wetland habitat in
the CNMI was surveyed. There were no confirmed sightings or
vocalizations (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1983). A special effort
was made to search for the Mariana mallard during forest bird surveys
conducted on the islands of Saipan, Tinian, Rota, and Agiguan in 1982.
Teams comprising biologists and biotechnicians simultaneously surveyed
wetlands on Saipan and Tinian from which the most recent (1979)
sightings of the mallard had been recorded to determine the status and
distribution of this species. No mallards were observed on either
island (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1983).
During the period from May, 1983, through December, 1989,
biologists from the CNMI's DFW conducted 5 to 79 surveys of each
permanent wetland and each seasonal wetland greater than 0.5 hectares
(1.2 acres) in the CNMI (230 surveys). Wetlands that contained better
mallard habitat were surveyed more often. Surveys occurred year round
and the greatest frequency occurred from May through September (112
surveys) to coincide with the historical nesting season of the Mariana
mallards. No Mariana mallards were seen during these intensive and
systematic searches. The determination of the investigators at the
conclusion of these surveys was that the Mariana mallard was extinct
(Reichel and Lemke 1994). Researchers and managers currently in Guam
and the CNMI concur that the Mariana mallard is probably extinct, as it
has not been seen since 1979 despite frequent and intensive surveys of
wetlands for waterbirds such as the endangered Mariana common moorhen
(Gallinula chloropus guami) (Evans et al. 1996; Gary Wiles, Guam
Division of Aquatic and Wildlife Resources (DAWR), pers. comm. 1998;
Mike Ritter, Service, pers. comm. 1998).
The Mariana mallard's reduction in range and eventual extinction
has been attributed to habitat loss and hunting, especially during, and
immediately after, World War II (WWII) (Baker 1948, Engbring and Fritts
1988, Reichel and Lemke 1994). Evolving without predators, the mallard
was not wary of humans and easily caught (Kuroda 1942, Stott 1947).
They were hunted and trapped for food (Fritz 1904, Safford 1904).
Safford (1904) reported that the Mariana mallard was ``the best game
bird'' and ``very highly esteemed for food.'' Kuroda (1942) reported
that there was a hunting season on Saipan from July through December,
but no hunting was allowed on Tinian. However, it is unknown if these
regulations were enforced. After WWII, islanders were allowed to own
firearms and hunting of the birds persisted. Even with the designation
of the species as endangered by the Trust Territories and the Service,
there was little enforcement of the regulations (Drahos 1977).
Habitat loss due to draining and fragmentation of wetlands have
greatly reduced the quantity and quality of wetlands on Guam, Tinian,
and Saipan (Stinson et al. 1991, Reichel et al. 1992, Reichel and Lemke
1994). Though early reports on Tinian mention two lakes, Lake Hagoi is
the only lake currently found on the island. It is probable that the
second lake referenced is now known as Makpo Swamp. It is currently too
overgrown with woody vegetation to be mallard habitat. Additionally,
this wetland has been drained for water for San Jose village and
converted into farmland (Bowers 1950, Reichel and Lemke 1994).
During the Japanese occupation of Saipan and Tinian between 1914 and
1945, most wetlands were channelized and converted to
rice paddies. Also during this time, sugarmill wastes were discharged
into Lake Susupe on Saipan. Since 1945, many wetlands have been drained
or filled in the course of urban development on all three islands
(Stinson et al. 1991, Reichel et al. 1992, Reichel and Lemke 1994). The
Mariana mallard, never great in number, lost most of its limited
habitat with the decimation of the wetlands, while being hunted with
little to no restriction.
The Guam broadbill (Myiagra freycineti), a member of the family
Muscicapidae, was endemic to the island of Guam in the Mariana
Archipelago (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1990). First collected by
explorers in 1820, the specimens were labeled ``kingfisher with a
russet throat'' and erroneously noted as being from Australia (Oustalet
1895). Marche collected 23 specimens in 1887 and 1888, from which
Oustalet described Myiagra freycineti (Oustalet 1895).
Although the species was probably never abundant, a reduction in
the range of the Guam broadbill was noted from 1950 into the early
1980s. Prior to 1950, the species occupied 500 square kilometers (sq
km) (193 sq miles (mi)) of habitat throughout the island of Guam. By
1950, broadbill range had been reduced to 312 sq km (120 sq mi) or 62
percent of its former range (Ernie Kosaka, Service, in litt. 1982). By
the early 1970s, the species was entirely absent from the southern two-
thirds of the island but still relatively common in northern Guam into
the mid-1970s. Decline of the Guam broadbill continued with no
individuals detected on northern roadside counts that were initiated in
1973 (Drahos 1977). Further losses were attributed to super typhoon
Pamela in 1976 (Joseph E. Ada, Acting Governor of Guam, in litt. 1979).
By 1979, the Guam broadbill was restricted to the remaining areas of
natural vegetation that occurred primarily along the northern cliff
line in a thin strip from Naval Communication Station (NCS) Beach
through Catalina Point on the eastern side of Guam (DAWR 1979-1986). At
that time, the Guam broadbill had the lowest relative abundance and the
lowest density of any native passerine during station counts. Although
relative densities of the broadbill were highest at Pati and Ritidian
Points and Tarague in 1980, the species was recorded only at Ritidian
and Urunao Points and Anderson Air Force Base in 1981. This represented
a further reduction of habitat range to 43 sq km (16.6 sq mi) or 9
percent of its original range (Engbring and Pratt 1985). Combined
broadbill densities showed a 70 percent decline since 1979 (DAWR 1979-
1986). By 1983, the population had declined 83 percent in the Ritidian
Basin area (DAWR 1979-1986) and was further restricted to the extreme
northern end of Guam in the Pajon Basin in 150 hectares (ha) (370 acres
(ac)) or 1.5 sq km (0.57 sq mi) of habitat (Savidge 1987). Estimates of
460 birds (Engbring and Ramsey 1984) in 1981 and fewer than 100
individuals (Engbring and Pratt 1985) in 1983 from the Pajon Basin had
dwindled to only one sighting of a male in October 1983 (Beck 1984a).
The last two sightings of the Guam broadbill in the wild were of
transient males in 1984. Robert E. Beck, Jr. (DAWR) and Dr. Eugene
Morton (Smithsonian Institution) sighted a male at Northwest Field in
March 1984, and Philip Bruner (Brigham Young University of Hawaii)
sighted the other in an area adjacent to the Navy golf course in
Barrigada in August 1984 (Beck 1984a). The Guam broadbill has not been
sighted in the Pajon Basin area since May 15, 1984, and the species is
believed to be extinct (DAWR 1979-1986).
In September 1983, a male was collected for captive propagation
(Beck 1984b). This captive breeding attempt failed as other wild
individuals were not located and the captive male died of unknown
causes (DAWR 1979-1986). Attempts at captively breeding the Guam
broadbill were abandoned in 1984 due to its virtual disappearance from
the wild (Beck 1984a, b).
Based on the last field sightings, the approximate date of
extirpation of the Guam broadbill is 1984 (Beck 1984a, Wiles et al.
1995), and it was presumed to be extinct by 1985 (Beck 1984a, b;
Savidge 1987; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1990; Reichel and Glass
1991; Stinson 1994).
Reduction in the range of the Guam broadbill and its eventual
extinction have been variously attributed to excessive pesticide
spraying during and after World War II, the spread of avian diseases,
and predation by introduced animals including rats (Rattus spp.), the
monitor lizard (Varanus indicus), and the brown tree snake (Boiga
irregularis). However, studies conducted by our Patuxtent Wildlife
Research Center in 1983 indicated that pesticide overuse and avian
diseases were not responsible for broadbill declines noted in the early
1980s. Instead, studies conducted by Savidge in 1986 implicated
predation by the brown tree snake as the single most important factor
in the decline of Guam's native forest birds, including the Guam
broadbill (Savidge 1986, 1987; Conry 1988; Wiles et al. 1995; Rodda et
al. 1997).

Previous Federal Action

Federal action on the Mariana mallard began on May 22, 1975, when
the Fund for Animals, Inc., requested that we list 216 taxa of plants
and animals as endangered species pursuant to the Act. These species
appeared in Appendix I of the Convention on International Trade in
Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), but did not appear
on the United States List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and
Plants. On September 26, 1975, we published in the Federal Register (40
FR 44329), a proposed rule to list 216 species as endangered, including
the Mariana mallard. The rule that determined 159 of the 216 taxa to be
endangered species was published on June 14, 1976 (41 FR 24062). The
Mariana mallard was not included in this rule because the Governors of
the States (which is defined by the Act to include Guam and the CNMI)
in which this species was resident, inadvertently were not notified of
the proposal as required by the Act. These Governors were then notified
and allowed 90 days for comment. The Mariana mallard was listed as an
endangered species on June 2, 1977, without critical habitat (42 FR
28137).
Federal action on the Guam broadbill began on February 27, 1979,
when the Acting Governor of Guam petitioned us to list the Guam
broadbill and five other forest bird species as endangered. On May 18,
1979, we issued a notice of review (44 FR 29128) for 12 petitioned
animals, including the Guam broadbill. In our December 30, 1982, Review
of Vertebrate Wildlife (47 FR 58454) the Guam broadbill was considered
a category 1 candidate for Federal listing. Category 1 species were
those for which we had substantial information on biological
vulnerability and threats to support preparation of a listing proposal,
but for which a listing proposal had not yet been published because it
was precluded by other listing activities. On November 29, 1983, we
published a proposed rule (48 FR 53729) to list the Guam broadbill as
endangered. The final rule determining the Guam broadbill to be an
endangered species was published on August 27, 1984 (49 FR 33881).
Critical habitat was not designated.

Summary of Factors Affecting the Species

In accordance with the Act and implementing regulations at 50 CFR
part 424, a species shall be listed if the Secretary of the Interior
determines that one or more of five factors listed in section 4(a)(1)
of the Act threatens the continued existence of the species. A species
may be delisted according to Sec. 424.11(d) if the best available
scientific and commercial data indicate that the species is neither
endangered nor threatened because of (1) extinction, (2) recovery, or
(3) original data for classification of the species were in error.

A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment
of Its Habitat or Range

Habitat loss was a major factor in the decline and subsequent
extinction of the Mariana mallard. Since 1945, draining, fragmentation,
and filling of wetlands for urban development has greatly reduced their
quantity and quality on Guam, Tinian, and Saipan (Stinson et al. 1991,
Reichel et al. 1992, Reichel and Lemke 1994). Between 1914 and 1945,
during the Japanese occupation of Saipan and Tinian, most wetlands were
converted to rice paddies. In more recent times, wetlands have been
drained to provide potable water for new villages and converted into
farmland (Bowers 1950, Reichel and Lemke 1994).
The Guam broadbill was endemic to the island of Guam and, until the
mid-1970s, common in the northern half of the island. This species was
found in woodland areas, forests with brushy undercover, areas
dominated by the alien shrub, tangantangan (Leucaena leucocephala),
southern riparian areas, coastal strand, and mangrove swamps. Though
the island of Guam has undergone massive development and urbanization
over the last 20 years, habitat destruction or modification is not
believed to have been a major factor in the decline of this bird
because population numbers declined in areas with intact habitat over
this time period.

B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes

Over-hunting is believed to have been a major factor leading to the
decline and subsequent extinction of the Mariana mallard, particularly
during and immediately after WW II (Kuroda 1942, Baker 1948, Engbring
and Fritts 1988, Reichel and Lemke 1994). Overutilization is not known
to be a factor in the decline of the Guam broadbill.

C. Disease or Predation

Disease or predation is not known to have been a factor in the
decline of the Mariana mallard. While the brown tree snake is believed
to have been accidentally introduced to Guam between 1945 and 1952
(Rodda et al. 1992), it is not believed to have been a factor in the
decline of the mallard because the snake prefers forest habitat. While
a population of this voracious predator may now be established on
Saipan, it is not believed to have been present on the island during
the 1970s, when the last sighting of the Mariana mallard was made. The
brown tree snake is not known to be established on Tinian.
The spread of avian disease and predation by introduced animals,
including the monitor lizard, rats (Rattus spp.), cats (Felis catus),
dogs (Canis familiaris), pigs (Sus scrofa), and the brown tree snake,
were suspected as factors in the decline of the Guam broadbill at the
time of its listing. However, later studies concluded that predation by
the brown tree snake was probably the single most important factor in
the drastic decline and subsequent extinction of the Guam broadbill
(Savidge 1986, 1987; Conry 1988). These studies provided no evidence of
its decline due to avian disease (Savidge 1986, 1987). By 1986, the
snake was probably present throughout the island (Savidge 1986, 1987).
Primarily arboreal, this snake preys upon eggs and hatchlings in nests,
and roosting young and adults.

D. The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms

The Mariana mallard was listed as an endangered species by the
Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands in 1976 and by us in 1977. It is
currently protected as endangered under Guam's Endangered Species Act
(Pub. L. 15-36). The Mariana mallard was not listed as a threatened or
endangered species by the CNMI government (CNMI 1991).
The Guam broadbill is presently protected as endangered under
Guam's Endangered Species Act (Pub. L. 15-36) and is federally
protected as an endangered species under the Endangered Species Act of
1973.
Protection as endangered species by the Federal government and
governments of Guam and the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, was
probably too late to compensate for the earlier effects of unrestricted
hunting and habitat loss, in the case of the Mariana mallard, and for
the accidental introduction and subsequent spread of the brown tree
snake, in the case of the Guam broadbill.

E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting Their Continued Existence

At the time it was listed, one of the factors believed to have
contributed to the critically low population levels of the Guam
broadbill was overuse of pesticides. However, pesticide use has not
been found to be a major factor in the decline of this species (Grue
1986, Savidge 1986, 1987).
In summary, all available information indicates that the Mariana
mallard and the Guam broadbill are extinct. Previous population
estimates made on Guam (1944), Tinian (1945), and Saipan (1947) for the
Mariana mallard reported 12 or fewer individuals on each of these
islands (Baker 1951). No confirmed sightings or vocalizations have been
reported for this bird since 1979, and the last captive bird died in
1981. The Guam broadbill was reported to be on the verge of extinction
at the time of its listing, and population estimates of 460 and less
than 100 individuals were reported in 1981 and 1983, respectively. No
confirmed sightings or vocalizations have been reported for this
species since May 14, 1984, and the last captive bird died in February
1984. We propose to remove the Mariana mallard and the Guam broadbill
from the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife.

Effects of This Rule

This rule, if made final, would revise Sec. 17.11(h) to remove the
Mariana mallard and the Guam broadbill from the Federal list of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife due to extinction. The prohibitions
and conservation measures provided by the Act, particularly sections 7
and 9, will no longer apply to these species if this rule is made
final. There is no designated critical habitat for these species.
The Mariana mallard and the Guam broadbill are protected by the
government of Guam (Pub. L. 15-36). Removal of these species from the
Federal list of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife does not alter or
supersede their designation by the government of Guam as endangered
species.

Public Comments Solicited

We intend for any final action resulting from this proposal to be
as accurate as possible. Therefore, we solicit data, comments, or
suggestions from the public, other concerned government agencies, the
scientific community, industry, or any other interested party
concerning this proposed rule. We particularly seek comments
concerning:
(1) Biological, commercial trade, or other relevant data concerning
the Mariana mallard and the Guam broadbill not included in this document;
and
(2) The location of any individuals or populations of the Mariana
mallard and the Guam broadbill.
The final decision on this proposal will take into consideration
the comments and any additional information we receive, and such
communications may lead to a final determination that differs from this
proposal.
Our practice is to make comments, including names and home
addresses of respondents, available for public review during regular
business hours. Individual respondents may request that we withhold
their home address from the rulemaking record, which we will honor to
the extent allowable by law. In some circumstances, we will withhold a
respondent's identity from the rulemaking record, as allowable by law.
If you wish for us to withhold your name and/or address, you must state
this request prominently at the beginning of your comment. However, we
will not consider anonymous comments. We will make all submissions from
organizations or businesses available for public inspection in their
entirety.

Public Hearings

You may request a public hearing on this proposal. Your request for
a hearing must be made in writing and filed within 45 days of the date
of publication of this proposal in the Federal Register. Address your
request to the Field Supervisor (see ADDRESSES section).

Clarity of This regulation

Executive Order 12866 requires each agency to write regulations
that are easy to understand. We invite your comments on how to make
this rule easier to understand including answers to the following: (1)
Are the requirements of the rule clear? (2) Is the discussion of the
rule in the Supplementary Information section of the preamble helpful
to understanding the rule? (3) What else could we do to make the rule
easier to understand?
Send a copy of any comments that concern how we could make this
rule easier to understand to: Office of Regulatory Affairs, Department
of the Interior, Room 7229, 1849 C Street NW., Washington, DC 20240.
You may also e-mail the comments to this address: Exsec at ios.doi.gov
<mailto:Exsec at ios.doi.gov>.
References Cited

A complete list of all references cited herein is available upon
request from the Pacific Islands Ecoregion (see ADDRESSES section).

Authors

The primary authors of this proposed rule are Arlene Pangelinan and
Lee Ann Woodward, Ecological Services, Pacific Islands Ecoregion, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (see ADDRESSES section).