[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 56 (Thursday, March 24, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 15052-15063]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-5640]
[[Page 15052]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
RIN 1018-AI41
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Reclassifying the
American Crocodile Distinct Population Segment in Florida From
Endangered to Threatened and Initiation of a 5-Year Review
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule and initiation of a 5-year review.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose to
reclassify the American crocodile (Crocodylus acutus) distinct
vertebrate population segment (DPS) in Florida from its present
endangered status to threatened status under the authority of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). We believe that the
endangered designation no longer correctly reflects the current status
of this taxon within this DPS due to a substantial improvement in the
species' status. Since its listing in 1975, the American crocodile
population in Florida has more than doubled, and its distribution has
expanded. Land acquisition has also provided protection for many
important nesting areas. We have determined that the American crocodile
in its range in Florida meets the criteria of a DPS as stated in our
policy of February 17, 1996. If this proposal is finalized, the
American crocodile DPS in Florida will continue to be federally
protected as a threatened species. The American crocodile throughout
the remainder of its range as described in our December 18, 1979, final
rule would remain endangered. Because a status review is also required
for the 5-year review of listed species under section 4(c)(2)(A) of the
Act, we are electing to prepare these reviews simultaneously. We are
seeking data and comments from the public on this proposal.
DATES: Comments from all interested parties must be received by May 23,
2005. Public hearing requests must be received by May 9, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Written comments and materials may be submitted to us by any
one of the following methods:
1. You may submit written comments and information to Cindy Schulz,
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1339 20th Street, Vero Beach, FL 32960.
2. You may hand-deliver written comments and information to our
South Florida Ecological Services Office, at the above address, or fax
your comments to (772) 562-4288.
3. You may send comments by electronic mail (e-mail) to [email protected]. For directions on how to submit electronic filing of
comments, see the ``Public Comments Solicited'' section.
Comments and materials received, as well as supporting
documentation used in the preparation of this proposed rule, will be
available for public inspection, by appointment, during normal business
hours at the above address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cindy Schulz, at the above address
(telephone (772) 562-3909, extension 305, facsimile (772) 562-4288).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Comments Solicited
We are requesting information for both the proposed rule and the 5-
year review, as we are conducting these reviews simultaneously.
We intend that any final action resulting from this proposed
reclassification will be as accurate and as effective as possible.
Therefore, we solicit comments or suggestions from the public, other
concerned governmental agencies, the scientific community, industry, or
any other interested parties concerning this proposal. We particularly
seek comments concerning:
(1) Biological, commercial trade, or other relevant data concerning
any threat (or lack thereof) to this species;
(2) The location of any additional populations of the American
crocodile within the extent of its range covered by this proposed rule;
(3) Additional information concerning the range, distribution, and
population size of this species in Florida;
(4) Current management plans or anticipated plan development that
incorporates actions that will benefit or impact the American crocodile
in Florida;
(5) Current or planned activities within the geographic area
addressed by this proposal and their potential impact on this species;
and
(6) Whether the current status of this population of the American
crocodile is more appropriately described as ``recovered,'' threatened
due to similarity of appearance,'' or in some other way different than
the proposal made here.
Please submit electronic comments in ASCII file format and avoid
the use of special characters and encryption. Please also include
``Attn: [RIN 1018-AI41]'' and your name and return address in your e-
mail message. If you do not receive a confirmation from the system that
we have received your e-mail message, contact us directly by calling
our South Florida Ecological Services Office (see ADDRESSES section).
Our practice is to make all 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 would withhold
also from the rulemaking record a respondent's identity, as allowable
by law. If you wish for us to withhold your name and/or address, you
must state this prominently at the beginning of your comments. However,
we will not consider anonymous comments. We will make all submissions
from organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying
themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or
businesses, available for public inspection in their entirety.
Background
The American crocodile is a large greenish-gray reptile. It is one
of two native crocodilians (the other being the American alligator
(Alligator mississippiensis)) that occur in the continental United
States, and is limited in distribution in the United States to the
southern tip of mainland Florida and the upper Florida Keys (Kushlan
and Mazzotti 1989a). At hatching, crocodiles are yellowish-tan to gray
in color with vivid dark bands on the body and tail. As they grow
older, their overall coloration becomes more pale and uniform and the
dark bands fade. All adult crocodiles have a hump above the eye, and
tough, asymmetrical armor-like scutes (scale-like plates) on their
backs. The American crocodile is distinguished from the American
alligator by a relatively narrow, more pointed snout and by an
indentation in the upper jaw that leaves the fourth tooth of the lower
jaw exposed when the mouth is closed. In Florida, the American
crocodile ranges in size from 26.0 centimeters (cm) (10.3 inches (in))
at hatching, to an upper length of 3.8 meters (m) (12.5 feet (ft))
(Moler 1991a). Larger specimens in Florida were reported in the 1800s
(Moler 1991a), and individuals as large as 6 to 7 m (19.7 to 23.0 ft)
have been reported outside the United States (Thorbjarnarson 1989).
The American crocodile occurs in coastal regions of both the
Atlantic and Pacific coasts, in southern Mexico,
[[Page 15053]]
Central America, and northern South America, as well as the Caribbean
islands (Thorbjarnarson 1989). It reaches the northern extent of its
range in the southern tip of Florida (Kushlan and Mazzotti 1989a,
Thorbjarnarson 1989). The species occurs within the jurisdictional
boundaries of many different governments in the western hemisphere,
including Belize, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominican Republic,
Ecuador, El Salvador, Florida (USA), Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras,
Jamaica, Nicaragua, Mexico, Panama, Peru, and Venezuela.
The first documented occurrence of a crocodile in the United States
resulted from the collection of a crocodile in 1869 in the Miami River
off Biscayne Bay, though crocodiles were earlier suspected to occur
there (Kushlan and Mazzotti 1989a). Within the United States, the
historic core geographic range of crocodiles includes Miami-Dade,
Broward, and Monroe Counties in Florida, but reports indicate that they
occupied areas as far north as Indian River County on the east coast
(Kushlan and Mazzotti 1989a). Crocodiles were probably never common on
the west coast of Florida, but credible reports suggest that they
occurred at least periodically as far north as Sanibel Island and
Sarasota County (Kushlan and Mazzotti 1989a). The primary historic
nesting area was on the mainland shore of Florida and Biscayne Bays,
including many of the small islands near shore, in what is today
Everglades National Park (Kushlan and Mazzotti 1989a). Nesting was also
historically well-documented in the upper Keys from Key Largo south to
Lower Matecumbe Key (Kushlan and Mazzotti 1989a). Reports of crocodile
nests on Little Pine Key (Ogden 1978), and occurrences on Key West
(Ogden 1978) suggest that crocodiles were once more common in the Keys
than they are today.
In 1976, the American crocodile population in Florida was estimated
to be between 200 and 300 individuals (40 FR 58308), with only 10 to 20
breeding females estimated in 1975 (40 FR 44149). Most of the remaining
animals and known nesting activity during this time were concentrated
in a small portion of their historic range in northeastern Florida Bay
(Kushlan and Mazzotti 1989a).
Today, the population of American crocodiles in Florida has grown
to an estimated 500 to 1,000 individuals, not including hatchlings (P.
Moler, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC),
personal communication 2004; F. Mazzotti, University of Florida (UF),
personal communication 2004). This estimate, developed by two
established American crocodile experts, is based on a demographic
characteristic that has proven true for both Nile crocodiles and
American alligators. The characteristic is based on a generality from
crocodilian research, that breeding females make up 4 to 5 percent of
the non-hatchling population size. This estimate exhibits a large
range, because the researchers used a range of 40 to 50 crocodile nests
existing in Florida to do their calculations (P. Moler, FWC, personal
communication 2004; F. Mazzotti, UF, personal communication 2004). We
believe this is a reasonable but conservative estimate, because as
stated below nesting has increased to 61 documented nests in 2003 and
not all mature females breed and nest each year.
The nesting range has also expanded on both the east and west
coasts of the State, and crocodiles are frequently being seen
throughout most of their historical range. Nesting has extended back
into Biscayne Bay on Florida's east coast, and now commonly occurs at
the Turkey Point Nuclear Plant (Brandt et al. 1995, Gaby et al. 1985).
During 2003, 61 crocodile nests were discovered in south Florida (S.
Klett, Service, personal communication 2003; M. Cherkiss, personal
communication 2003; J. Wasilewski, Natural Selections Inc., personal
communication 2003), and nesting has been increasing for several years
(Ogden 1978, Brandt et al. 1995, Kushlan and Mazzotti 1989b, Moler
1991b, Mazzotti et al. 2000, Mazzotti and Cherkiss 2001, and Mazzotti
et al. 2002). Approximately 75 percent of reproductively mature females
breed and nest each year (F. Mazzotti, personal communication 2001),
suggesting that the actual number of nesting females may be higher than
the 61 nests recorded. Surveys detect approximately 80 to 90 percent of
nests (F. Mazzotti, personal communication 2001; J. Wasilewski,
personal communication 2002), and surveyors are generally unable to
distinguish those nests that contain more than one clutch of eggs from
different females without researchers excavating the nests. We believe
this situation lends to a possible underestimation of nests or females,
because on occasion 2 females lay eggs in the same nest.
The breeding range of the American crocodile today is still
restricted relative to its reported historic range (Kushlan and
Mazzotti 1989a), with most breeding occurring on the mainland shore of
Florida Bay between Cape Sable and Key Largo (Mazzotti et al. 2002).
Crocodiles no longer regularly occur in the Keys south of Key Largo (P.
Moler, personal communication 2002, Jacobsen 1983), though individuals
have occasionally been observed in the lower Keys in recent years. An
American crocodile was also observed for the first time near Fort
Jefferson in the Dry Tortugas in May 2002 (O. Bass, Everglades National
Park, personal communication 2002). We believe that these occasional
observations may indicate that crocodiles are expanding their range
back into the Keys, but Key Largo is the only nesting area currently
known in the Florida Keys.
Crocodiles live primarily in the sheltered, fresh, or brackish
waters of mangrove-lined bays, mangrove swamps, creeks, and inland
swamps (Kushlan and Mazzotti 1989b). Prolonged exposure to salinities
similar to that of seawater (35 parts per thousand (ppt) of sodium) may
lead to reduced growth rates, particularly for young crocodiles (Dunson
1982, Dunson and Mazzotti 1989, Mazzotti et al. 1986). Availability of
fresh water is a primary factor affecting growth and survival in young
crocodiles (Dunson and Mazzotti 1989).
American crocodiles are shy and secretive, and remain solitary for
most of the year (Mazzotti 1983); however, they are usually tolerant of
other crocodiles in the same general area. Individuals may travel
widely throughout their range, but they are generally concentrated
around the major nesting areas (Kushlan and Mazzotti 1989b, Mazzotti
1983). Prior to nesting season, males become more territorial, and
dominant males may mate with several females (Thorbjarnarson 1989).
Females do not become reproductively active until they reach a
total length of approximately 2.3 m (7.4 ft) (Mazzotti 1983), and this
generally corresponds to an age of 10 to 13 years (LeBuff 1957, Moler
1991a). Females construct earthen nests (mounds or holes) on elevated,
well-drained sites near the water, such as ditch-banks and beaches.
Nests have been reported in sand, marl, and organic peat soils, and the
nests constructed in these different soils may be susceptible to
different environmental conditions and different threats (Lutz and
Dunbar-Cooper 1984, Moler 1991b). Female crocodiles will only nest one
time per year and may not nest every year after they reach sexual
maturity. They lay an average of 38 eggs (Kushlan and Mazzotti 1989b),
which will hatch after an incubation period of approximately 90 days
(Mazzotti 1989). Flooding, over-drying, and raccoon predation all pose
threats to nests and developing eggs (Mazzotti et al. 1988, Mazzotti
1999), and suitable nest sites
[[Page 15054]]
that are protected from these threats may be limited. The reported
percent of nests from which eggs successfully hatch in any one year
range from 33 to 78 percent (Ogden 1978, Kushlan and Mazzotti 1989b,
Moler 1991b, Mazzotti et al. 2000, Mazzotti and Cherkiss 2001).
Typically, a nest was considered successful if at least one hatched
eggshell or hatchling crocodile was documented. However, Moler (19991b)
classified a nest as successful if ``it appeared to have been opened by
an adult crocodile. In all but one case, hatchling crocodiles were
tagged near each successful nest.''
Unlike alligators, female crocodiles do not defend nest sites
(Kushlan and Mazzotti 1989b). However, females remain near their nest
sites and must excavate young from the nest after hatching (Kushlan and
Mazzotti 1989b). Kushlan (1988) reported that females may be very
sensitive to disturbance at the nest site; most females that were
disturbed near their nests did not return to excavate their young after
hatching. Female crocodiles show little parental care, and young are
generally independent shortly after hatching. Hatchlings disperse from
nest sites to nursery habitats that are generally more sheltered, have
lower salinity (1 to 20 ppt), shallower water (generally), and more
vegetation cover, shortly after hatching, where they remain until they
grow larger. Growth during the first year can be rapid, and crocodiles
may double or triple in size (Moler 1991a). Growth rates in hatchling
crocodiles depend primarily on the availability of fresh water and food
in the nursery habitat they occupy and may also be influenced by
temperature (Mazzotti et al. 1986).
Adult crocodiles have few natural enemies, but hatchlings and young
crocodiles are regularly eaten by a variety of wading birds, crabs,
mammals, and reptiles, including larger crocodiles. As crocodiles grow,
their former predators become prey. The diet of American crocodiles at
all ages is varied, and crocodiles forage opportunistically. Fish,
crabs, snakes, turtles, and a variety of other small prey compose the
majority of their diet. Crocodiles are usually active at night, which
is the primary time when they pursue prey.
Land acquisition efforts by many agencies have continued to provide
protection for crocodile habitat in south Florida. Crocodile Lake NWR
was acquired in 1980 to provide over 2,205 ha (5,000 acres) of
crocodile nesting and nursery habitat. In 1980, Everglades National
Park established a crocodile sanctuary in northeastern Florida Bay. A
total of 46 public properties (including Crocodile Lake NWR and
Everglades National Park), owned and managed by Federal, State, or
county governments, as well as 3 privately-owned properties (including
Turkey Point Nuclear Power Plant) are managed at least partially or
wholly for conservation purposes and contain potential crocodile
habitat within the coastal mangrove communities in south Florida. For
example, in the early 1980s, Everglades National Park plugged canals
which allowed crocodiles to begin nesting on the canal berms. In 1976
the C-107 canal was completed and provides habitat for crocodiles at
the Turkey Point Nuclear Power Plant. Approximately 95 percent of
nesting habitat for crocodiles in Florida is under public ownership (F.
Mazzotti, personal communication 2001).
Previous Federal Action
We proposed listing of the United States population of the American
crocodile as endangered on April 21, 1975 (40 FR 17590). The proposed
listing stated that only an estimated 10 to 20 breeding females
remained in Florida, mostly concentrated in northern Florida Bay. The
primary threats cited included development pressures, lack of adequate
protection of crocodiles and their habitat, and the risk of extinction
inherent to a small, isolated population. Comments on the proposed rule
were received from 14 parties including representatives of the State of
Florida, and all supported listing the American crocodile as endangered
in Florida. We published a final rule on September 25, 1975, listing
the United States population of the American crocodile as endangered
(40 FR 44149).
On December 16, 1975, we published a proposal to designate critical
habitat for the American crocodile (40 FR 58308). The proposed critical
habitat included portions of Biscayne Bay south of Turkey Point,
northeast Florida Bay, including the Keys, and the mainland extending
as far west as Flamingo. We published a final rule designating critical
habitat on September 24, 1976 (41 FR 41914). The final rule expanded
the critical habitat to include a portion of Everglades National Park
and northern Florida Bay to the west of the previously proposed area.
The additional area lies entirely within Everglades National Park.
On April 6, 1977, we published a proposed rule to list as
endangered all populations of the American crocodile with the exception
of those in Florida and all populations of the saltwater (estuarine)
crocodile (Crocodylus porosus) due to their similarity in appearance to
the American crocodile in Florida (42 FR 18287). Under the similarity
of appearance clause of Section 4 of the Act, a species may be treated
as endangered or threatened for the purposes of commerce or taking if
it so closely resembles an endangered species that law enforcement
personnel will be unable to distinguish between the listed and unlisted
species. We did not finalize this proposed rule.
On February 5, 1979, we provided notice in the Federal Register
that a status review was being conducted for the American crocodile
(outside of Florida) and the saltwater crocodile (Crocodylus porosus).
The notice specified that we had information to suggest that the
American crocodile and the saltwater crocodile may have experienced
population declines and extensive habitat loss during the previous
decade (44 FR 7060).
On July 24, 1979, we published a proposed rule (44 FR 43442) that
recommended listing the American and saltwater crocodiles as endangered
throughout their ranges outside of Papua New Guinea, citing widespread
loss of habitat and extensive poaching for their hides. The Florida
population of the American crocodile was not included because it was
previously listed as endangered. Saltwater crocodiles were not listed
within the jurisdictional boundaries of Papua New Guinea due to strict
government control of crocodile farming and assurances that wild
populations there were not being threatened.
We listed the American crocodile, with the exception of the
previously-listed population in Florida, and the saltwater crocodile
throughout its range, with the exception of the Papua New Guinea
population, as endangered on December 18, 1979 (44 FR 75074). This
action provided protection to these crocodilians worldwide.
Since the Florida population of the American crocodile was listed
as endangered, we have conducted numerous consultations under section 7
of the Act for actions that may affect crocodiles. Most potential
conflicts have been resolved early in the informal consultation
process, resulting in our concurrence with a determination of ``not
likely to adversely affect.''
One Federal prosecution occurred in the late 1970s for a dredge-
and-fill permit violation that affected crocodile habitat on Key Largo
within the boundaries of the then-proposed Crocodile Lake National
Wildlife Refuge (U.S. v. Joseph R. Harrison, Jr. Civil Action No. 84-
1465, Judge E.B. Davis, Final Consent Judgment on September
[[Page 15055]]
22, 1984). This case was settled prior to trial.
Distinct Vertebrate Population Segment Analysis
The Act defines ``species'' to include ``* * * any distinct
population segment of any species of vertebrate fish or wildlife which
interbreeds when mature.'' On February 7, 1996, we published in the
Federal Register our Policy Regarding the Recognition of Distinct
Vertebrate Population Segments (DPS Policy) (61 FR 4722). For a
population to be listed under the Act as a distinct vertebrate
population segment, three elements are considered--(1) The discreteness
of the population segment in relation to the remainder of the species
to which it belongs; (2) the significance of the population segment to
the species to which it belongs; and (3) the population segment's
conservation status in relation to the Act's standards for listing
(i.e., is the population segment endangered or threatened?). The best
available scientific information supports recognition of the Florida
population of the American crocodile as a distinct vertebrate
population segment. We discuss the discreteness and significance of the
DPS within this section; the remainder of the document discusses the
species' status within the Florida DPS.
Discreteness: The DPS policy states that vertebrate populations may
be considered discrete if they are markedly separated from other
populations of the same taxon as a consequence of physical,
physiological, ecological, or behavioral factors; and/or they are
delimited by international governmental boundaries within which
significant differences exist in control of exploitation, management of
habitat, conservation status, or regulatory mechanisms.
The Florida population segment represents the northernmost extent
of the American crocodile's range (Kushlan and Mazzotti 1989a,
Thorbjarnarson 1989). It is spatially separated by approximately 90
miles of open ocean from the nearest adjacent American crocodile
population in Cuba (Kushlan 1988). The Gulf Stream, or the Florida
Current (the southernmost leg of the Gulf Stream), flows through this
90-mile gap. This strong current makes it unlikely that crocodiles
would regularly, or even occasionally, move between Florida and Cuba.
Behaviorally, American crocodiles are not predisposed to travel across
open ocean. They prefer calm waters with minimal wave action, and most
frequently occur in sheltered, mangrove-lined estuaries (Mazzotti
1983). No evidence is available to suggest that crocodiles have crossed
the Florida Straits. There are no other American crocodile populations
in close proximity to Florida (Richards 2003) that would allow direct
interaction of animals. The Florida DPS is effectively isolated from
other American crocodile populations and functions as a single
demographic unit. Consequently, we conclude that the Florida population
of American crocodiles is separated from other American crocodile
populations as a consequence of physical or behavioral factors.
The genetic makeup of the Florida population of the American
crocodile also is recognizably distinct from populations in other
geographic areas within its range (M. Forstner, Southwest Texas State
University, unpublished data), despite reported evidence of the
introduction of genetic material from foreign crocodile populations (M.
Forstner, personal communication 2002). Analysis of mitochondrial DNA
suggests that the Florida DPS may be genetically more closely related
to American crocodile populations in Central and South America than to
those in Cuba and the Bahamas (M. Forstner, unpublished data). However,
the Florida DPS remains genetically distinct and geographically distant
from American crocodiles in central and south America.
In addition to the effective spatial isolation of the Florida
population, the regulatory mechanisms providing protection for the
crocodile and the level of enforcement of protections are substantially
different outside of Florida, across international government
boundaries. The first listing of the American crocodile under the Act
only included the Florida population, and protection under the Act was
extended to populations outside of the United States several years
later (see ``Previous Federal Actions'' section). Florida supports the
only population of the American crocodile that is subject to the full
jurisdiction of the Act. Though the American crocodile is protected
from international commerce by the Convention on International Trade in
Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), other countries
have distinctly different regulatory mechanisms in place that do not
provide the same level of protection from exploitation, disturbance, or
loss of habitat within their jurisdictional boundaries for the American
crocodile. Cuban laws provide protection to both crocodiles and
crocodile habitat (Soberon 2000), and enforcement of those laws is
reported to be good (P. Ross, International Union for the Conservation
of Nature, Crocodile Specialists Group, personal communication 2002).
However, the threats to crocodiles in Cuba are different than in the
United States, with most human-caused mortality resulting from
subsistence hunting due to a depressed economy. In the Dominican
Republic, Jamaica, and Haiti, a wide variety of threats, conservation
regulations, and levels of enforcement make the level of protection
within these countries difficult to quantify or evaluate. Threats to
American crocodile populations vary substantially throughout their
range in Central and South America, with threats including malicious
killing, illegal subsistence hunting in areas with a depressed economy,
incidental mortality during legal caiman hunting, killing by fishermen,
and incidental mortality in fishing nets (Ross 1998, Soberon 2000,
Platt and Thorbjarnarson 2000, P. Ross personal communication, 2002).
Therefore, significant differences do exist in control of exploitation,
management of habitat, conservation status, or regulatory mechanisms in
areas of the American crocodile's range outside of Florida.
Significance: The DPS policy states that populations that are found
to be discrete will then be examined for their biological or ecological
significance. This consideration may include evidence that the loss of
the population would create a significant gap in the range of the
taxon. The Florida population of the American crocodile represents the
northernmost portion of its range in the world (Kushlan and Mazzotti
1989a, Thorbjarnarson 1989) and the only U.S. population. Loss of this
population would result in a significant reduction of the extent of the
species' range. Maintaining a species throughout its historic and
current range is important to ensure its genetic diversity and
population viability. While it is difficult to determine to what degree
the Florida population of the American crocodile contributes
substantially to the security of the species as a whole, the apparent
isolation and evidence of genetic uniqueness (M. Forstner, Southwest
Texas State University, unpublished data) suggest that the Florida
population substantially contributes to the overall diversity within
the species and is biologically or ecologically significant.
Recovery Accomplishments
The first recovery plan for the American crocodile was approved on
February 12, 1979 (Service 1979). The recovery plan was revised on
February
[[Page 15056]]
2, 1984 (Service 1984). The recovery plan for the American crocodile
was revised again and included as part of the South Florida Multi-
Species Recovery Plan (MSRP) (Service 1999). The recovery plan for the
crocodile in the MSRP, which was approved in May 1999, represents the
current recovery plan for this species.
The MSRP identifies 10 primary recovery actions for the American
crocodile. Species-focused recovery actions include: (1) Conduct
surveys to determine the current distribution and abundance of American
crocodiles; (2) protect and enhance existing colonies of American
crocodiles; (3) conduct research on the biology and life history of
crocodiles; (4) monitor the south Florida crocodile population; and (5)
inform the public about the recovery needs of crocodiles. Habitat-
focused recovery actions include: (1) Protect nesting, basking, and
nursery habitat of American crocodiles in south Florida; (2) manage and
restore suitable habitat of American crocodiles; (3) conduct research
on the habitat relationships of the American crocodile; (4) continue to
monitor crocodile habitat; and (5) increase public awareness of the
habitat needs of crocodiles. All of these primary recovery actions have
been initiated since the 1999 MSRP.
American crocodile nest surveys and subsequent hatchling crocodile
surveys around nest sites are conducted in all areas where crocodiles
nest (Mazzotti et al. 2000, Mazzotti and Cherkiss 2003). Nest
monitoring has been conducted nearly continuously at each of the
primary nesting areas since 1978. Without these data, we would have
little evidence to support reclassification. In addition, detailed
surveys and population monitoring have been conducted annually since
1996 throughout the American crocodile's range in Florida. These
surveys documented distribution, habitat use, population size, and age
class distribution of crocodiles. During both crocodile surveys and
nest monitoring, crocodiles of all age classes are captured and marked
(Mazzotti and Cherkiss 2003). These marked individuals continue to
provide information on survival, longevity, growth, and movements
(Mazzotti and Cherkiss 2003). All captured individuals are marked by
clipping tail scutes in a prescribed manner so that each crocodile is
given an individual identification number (Mazzotti and Cherkiss 2003).
In addition, hatchlings at Turkey Point are marked with microchips
placed under the skin.
Several ecological studies have been initiated or continued in
recent years. Study has continued on the effects of salinity on growth
rate and survival of American crocodiles in the wild. Previous
laboratory studies provided a general relationship, but field data have
improved our understanding of this relationship. In addition, analysis
of contaminants in crocodile eggs has been conducted recently at
Rookery Bay, and these analyses contribute to a record of contaminants
data as far back as the 1970s.
Protection and enhancement of nesting habitat within each of the
three primary American crocodile nesting areas has also been ongoing
for many years. Turkey Point Nuclear Plant has implemented management
actions to minimize disturbance to crocodiles and their nesting
habitat. This includes the designation of nesting ``sanctuaries'' where
access and maintenance activities are minimized. Habitat management in
these areas includes exotic vegetation control and encouraging the
growth of low-maintenance native vegetation. On Crocodile Lake National
Wildlife Refuge, management has focused on maintaining suitable nesting
substrate. The organic soils that compose the nesting substrate have
subsided over time, leading to the potential for increased risk of
flooding or unfavorable microclimate. Nesting substrate has been
augmented near nesting areas. Encroaching vegetation in nesting areas
has also been removed. In Everglades National Park, management has
included minimizing disturbance to crocodiles resulting from public
use, and relocation of crocodile nests that were placed in recently-
excavated spoil material subject to disturbance and inhospitable
environmental conditions.
Signs have been in place for several years along highways to alert
motorists to the presence of crocodiles in the areas where most
crocodile road kills have occurred. Fences were also erected along
highways to prevent crocodiles from crossing, although several of these
fences were later removed because they were ineffective. The remaining
sections of fence are intended to funnel crocodiles to culverts where
they can cross underneath roads without risk. Other efforts to reduce
human-caused mortality include law enforcement actions and signs that
inform the public about crocodiles in areas where crocodiles and people
are likely to encounter each other, such as at fish cleaning stations
along Biscayne Bay.
The FWC established a standard operating protocol in 1988 to manage
crocodile-human interactions. This protocol established a standard
procedure that included both public education to encourage tolerance of
crocodiles and translocation of crocodiles in situations that may
threaten the safety of either crocodiles or humans. While the protocol
has led to the successful resolution of many complaints, many of the
large crocodiles that have been translocated under the protocol have
shown strong site fidelity and have returned to the areas from which
they were removed (Mazzotti and Cherkiss 2003). Translocation appears
to be effective with small crocodiles (generally < 6 ft total length),
but may not completely resolve human-crocodile conflicts involving
larger, older animals. Developing an effective, proactive protocol to
address human-crocodile conflicts is necessary to ensure the safety of
crocodiles of all age groups near populated areas and to help maintain
a positive public perception of crocodiles and crocodile conservation.
We are working closely with FWC to continue development of an effective
human-crocodile conflict management plan and to improve our
understanding of how crocodiles respond to translocation.
Recovery Plan Provisions
The MSRP (Service 1999) specifies a recovery objective of
reclassifying the species to threatened, and lists recovery criteria
as:
``Previous recovery efforts identified the need for a minimum of
60 breeding females within the population before reclassification
could be considered. Since these criteria were developed, new
information, based on consistent surveys, has indicated that the
total number of nesting females has increased substantially over the
last 20 years, from about 20 animals to about 50, and that nesting
has remained stable at the major nesting areas. Based on the fact
that the population appears stable, and that all of the threats as
described in the original listing have been eliminated or reduced,
reclassification of the crocodile will be possible, provided
existing levels of protection continue to be afforded to crocodiles
and their habitat, and that management efforts continue to maintain
or enhance the amount and quality of available habitats necessary
for all life stages.''
Based on the criteria outlined in the MSRP, we can consider the
American crocodile for reclassification to threatened status in Florida
at this time, because crocodiles and their habitat are still protected
and management efforts continue to maintain or enhance the amount and
quality of available habitat. In addition, for several reasons, we
believe that we have surpassed what prior recovery plans outlined as
necessary to reclassify the American crocodile: The nesting range has
expanded on both the east and west coasts of the State; crocodiles are
[[Page 15057]]
frequently being seen throughout most of their historical range;
nesting has extended back into Biscayne Bay on Florida's east coast and
now commonly occurs at the Turkey Point Nuclear Plant; nesting has been
increasing for several years; and during 2003, 61 crocodile nests were
discovered in south Florida. The level of protection currently afforded
to the species and its habitat, as well as the status of habitat
management, are outlined in the ``Summary of Factors Affecting the
Species'' section of this proposed rule.
Summary of Factors Affecting the Species
Section 4(a)(1) of the Act and regulations promulgated to implement
the listing provisions of the Act (50 CFR part 424) set forth five
criteria to be used in determining whether to add, reclassify, or
remove a species from the list of threatened and endangered species.
These factors and their application to the American crocodile are as
follows:
A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment
of Its Habitat or Range
The original listing proposal (40 FR 17590) identified intensive
human development and subsequent loss of American crocodile habitat as
a primary threat to crocodiles. Since listing, much of the nesting
habitat in Florida for crocodiles remains and has been afforded some
form of protection. In addition, nesting activity that was concentrated
in a small portion of the historic range in northeastern Florida Bay at
the time of listing now occurs on the eastern, southern, and
southwestern portions of the Florida peninsula. The primary nesting
areas in northern Florida Bay that were active at the time of listing
in 1975 remain protected and under the management of Everglades
National Park, which has consistently supported the largest number of
nests and the largest population of American crocodiles in Florida. The
habitat in Everglades National Park is protected and maintained for
crocodiles, and ongoing hydrologic restoration efforts may improve the
quality of the habitat in the Park. Park managers emphasize maintaining
a high-quality natural habitat that includes natural crocodile nesting
areas. Restoration of disturbed sites, hydrologic restoration, and the
removal of exotic vegetation like Australian pine and Brazilian pepper
have improved crocodile nesting sites, nursery habitat, and other areas
frequented by crocodiles.
Since the original listing, we have acquired and protected an
important nesting area for crocodiles, Crocodile Lake National Wildlife
Refuge on Key Largo. The acquisition of the Crocodile Lake National
Wildlife Refuge in 1980 provided protection for over 2,205 ha (5,000
acres) of crocodile nesting and nursery habitat on Key Largo. The
habitat on Crocodile Lake National Wildlife Refuge is protected and
managed to support the local crocodile population. All of the nesting
on Key Largo occurs within Crocodile Lake National Wildlife Refuge on
artificial substrates composed of spoil taken from adjacent ditches
that were dredged prior to acquisition of the property. These sites and
the surrounding high-quality nursery habitat consistently support five
to eight successful crocodile nests each year. The artificial substrate
at nesting sites on the Refuge has begun to settle, and in an effort to
continue maintenance of crocodile nesting habitat, the Refuge staff
recently has augmented the substrate at certain sites to bring it back
to its original elevation. Nesting has been documented at both of the
elevated mounds. In order for these areas to remain as nesting and
nursery sites, they need to be cleared of invasive exotics.
Encroachment of native and exotic plants along the levies needs to be
controlled in order for them to remain suitable for nesting crocodiles
and their young. In general, Crocodile Lake National Wildlife Refuge is
closed to public access. Access is granted by special use permit only.
Both of these sites (Crocodile Lake NWR and Everglades National Park)
have already implemented programs that provide for maintenance of
natural conditions that will benefit the crocodile and are in the
process of preparing management plans that will formalize ongoing
management actions and further protect crocodile habitat (S. Klett,
Service, personal communication 2002, Skip Snow, Everglades National
Park, personal communication 2002). A management plan as defined here
and throughout this proposal is not regulatory. These plans are
developed by the property owners, and they outline strategies and
alternatives believed to be necessary to conserve important habitat and
in some cases species on the property. Implementation of the plan is
not mandatory, but it should be updated on a regular basis so managers
and staff on site have available the latest information and guidance
for crocodile management.
In addition to these two primary core sites of publicly owned
active nesting habitat for crocodiles, additional nesting habitat has
been created within the historic range of the crocodile, but on a site
that may not have historically supported nesting. The Turkey Point
Nuclear Power Plant site, owned and operated by Florida Power and Light
(FPL), contains an extensive network of cooling canals (built in 1974)
that appear to provide good crocodile habitat in Biscayne Bay. The site
is approximately 1,214 ha (3,000 acres), and the majority is considered
crocodile habitat. The number of nests at this site has risen from 1 to
2 per year between 1978 and 1980 (Gaby et al. 1985) to 10 to 15 nests
per year in the late 1990s (Brandt et al. 1995, Cherkiss 1999, J.
Wasilewski personal communication 2002). This property now supports the
second largest breeding aggregation of American crocodiles in Florida.
The Turkey Point Nuclear Power Plant site, privately owned by FPL, has
developed and implemented a management plan for their property that
specifically addresses crocodiles for many years. Turkey Point is also
closed to access other than personnel who work at the facility. FPL
personnel maintain the canals and crocodile habitat at Turkey Point, by
activities like exotic vegetation control and planting of low-
maintenance native vegetation. They also have supported an extensive
crocodile monitoring program since 1976. Operation of the Turkey Point
Nuclear Power Plant is licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
through 2032, and FPL plans to continue crocodile management and
monitoring while the plant is in operation (J. Wasilewski, FPL,
personal communication 2003).
FPL has also developed the Everglades Mitigation Bank along the
western shore of Biscayne Bay and immediately adjacent to the Turkey
Point Nuclear Power Plant, which may help bolster the crocodile
population in Biscayne Bay in coming years. This site is a wetlands
mitigation bank, approximately 5,665 ha (14,000 acres) in size, of
which about 5,050 ha (10,000 acres) is crocodile habitat. To date,
crocodile nesting has not been recorded on this site (J. Wasilewski,
personal communication 2002); however, habitat restoration and
management actions intended to improve nesting habitat may provide
three additional nesting areas, each capable of supporting multiple
nests (J. Wasilewski, personal communication 2002). It is difficult to
estimate in advance how many potential nesting sites will occur in
these three nesting areas, but we believe that it will be roughly
equivalent to the Turkey Point Nuclear Power Plant site. This area will
be protected in perpetuity and may help offset any loss of the
artificial habitat at Turkey Point Nuclear Power
[[Page 15058]]
Plant if that site is modified after the current operating license
expires in 2032. Even though the nesting habitat at Turkey Point has
been created and all of the nesting at Crocodile Lake National Wildlife
Refuge and some areas of Everglades National Park is on artificial or
created substrate, crocodiles have successfully moved into and used
this habitat. We believe that it is important to continue to provide
protection for the artificial habitats that crocodiles
opportunistically use within their current range.
Outside of these areas that now comprise the core of nesting
habitat for American crocodiles in Florida, land acquisitions have also
provided protection to many other areas of potential habitat for
crocodiles. A total of 44 different public properties, owned and
managed by Federal, State, or county governments, as well as 2
different privately owned properties managed at least partially or
wholly for conservation purposes, contain potential habitat for
crocodiles in Florida. A total of 35 of the publicly-owned or private
conservation lands operate under current management plans (e.g.,
Florida Department of Natural Resources 1991). All of the plans
prescribe management actions that will provide conditions beneficial
for crocodiles and maintain or improve crocodile habitat and potential
nesting sites. A common action called for in many of the plans is
exotic vegetation control. Sites including Rookery Bay National
Estuarine Research Reserve, Collier-Seminole State Park, and others
list goals to restore the natural freshwater flow patterns through
hydrological restoration (e.g., Florida Department of Environmental
Protection 2000). The 44 other public properties contain about 28,330
ha (70,000 acres) of potential crocodile habitat, whereas together
Everglades National Park and Crocodile Lake National Wildlife Refuge
contain alone about 131,120 ha (324,000 acres). A total of
approximately 166,000 ha (410,000 acres) of mangrove-dominated
vegetation communities are currently present in south Florida on public
and private lands that are managed at least partially for conservation
purposes. Approximately 10,117 ha (25,000 acres) of mangrove habitat
occurs in south Florida outside of public or privately-owned
conservation lands. Only a small fraction (< 5 percent) of known nests
currently occur on unprotected sites (F. Mazzotti, personal
communication 2001), and these sites are probably less secure than
sites on properties under public ownership.
Construction and development within coastal areas continues to
grow, and still poses a threat to remaining crocodile habitat that is
not protected. However, each year only a few nests may occur on
privately-owned, unprotected sites (F. Mazzotti, personal communication
2001). With virtually all known crocodile habitat under protection for
conservation purposes, the total Florida crocodile population now
believed to be estimated between 500 and 1,000 individuals (not
including hatchlings), the expansion of the crocodile's nesting range
to both the east and west coast of Florida, and with crocodiles
frequently being seen throughout most of their historical range, we
believe that the amount and quality of crocodile habitat in south
Florida will continue to be maintained or enhanced sufficiently in
order to provide protection for all life stages of the existing
crocodile population. We also believe that available habitat can
support population growth and expansion.
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
Prior to listing in 1975, crocodiles were frequently collected for
museums and zoos, and at least occasionally shot for sport. Though it
is difficult to estimate the magnitude of collection and sport hunting,
several lines of evidence suggest that they may have significantly
impacted the Florida population prior to listing. Moore (1953) reported
on a collector who advertised that he would pay for any live crocodiles
anywhere in south Florida; these were added to his collection at a
zoological garden. This collector claimed to have the largest
collection of American crocodiles in the United States. Shooting for
sport was also common, as was both incidental and intentional killing
by fishermen in Florida Bay (Moore 1953). At the time of listing in
1975, our final rule stated that poaching for skins and eggs still
sometimes occurred and crocodiles were occasionally shot for sport from
passing boats. Ogden (1978) reported that half of the human-caused
crocodile deaths recorded between 1971 and 1975 resulted from shooting.
Since listing in 1975, collection of wild American crocodiles has
ceased, and few shootings have been reported (Kushlan 1988, Moler
1991a, P. Moler personal communication 2001). Kushlan (1988) reported
that only 3 of 13 human-caused mortalities between 1975 and 1984
resulted from shooting (approximately 23 percent). Moler (1991a)
reported 27 recorded human-caused mortalities from 1980 to 1991. During
this period, only one shooting was reported (approximately 4 percent of
human-caused mortalities). Since 1991, no crocodile mortalities
resulting from shooting have been recorded. This declining trend in the
number of recorded shootings suggests reduced risk to crocodiles from
this threat. The few legal cases involving take of crocodiles in south
Florida have been publicized and may have deterred poaching and killing
of crocodiles. Stories in newspapers and other popular press, as well
as radio and television reports and documentaries, have aided in
informing residents and visitors about the status and legal protection
of American crocodiles.
We receive no to few requests for recovery permits during a given
year for commercial or scientific purposes related to the crocodile in
Florida. We have no reason to believe that trade or any other type of
current or future utilization pose a risk to the American crocodile
population in Florida.
C. Disease or Predation
Depredation of American crocodile nests by raccoons was cited in
the original listing of crocodiles as a threat to the population.
However, predation on nests by raccoons at Turkey Point Nuclear Power
Plant or Crocodile Lake NWR has not been observed (F. Mazzotti,
personal communication 2004). Predation on nests has been caused by
fire ants in Everglades National Park (one nest) and Turkey Point
Nuclear Power Plant (several nests) (F. Mazzotti, personal
communication 2004). Monitoring of nest sites throughout the range of
the crocodile in Florida has shown that depredation is not a major
cause of nest loss. On average, 20.1 percent (range 2.8 to 45.0
percent) of nest failures resulted from depredation (Kushlan and
Mazzotti 1989b, Mazzotti 1989, Moler 1991b, Mazzotti et al. 2000,
Mazzotti and Cherkiss 2001).
Predation on nests in Everglades National Park has been variable
with an increasing trend that has not been tested for statistical
significance (F. Mazzotti, personal communication 2004). For example,
the majority of nests near Little Madeira Bay, within Everglades
National Park, have been depredated by raccoons in recent years
(Mazzotti and Cherkiss 2001). While a few years ago, most of the
predation in Everglades National Park was on nests in artificial
substrates, now most of the predation is on nests at beach nest sites
which are historically the most productive in Everglades National Park
(F. Mazzotti, personal communication 2004). This is of concern as these
are the only nests on
[[Page 15059]]
natural habitat left in the U.S. Nest depredation may become an
increasing problem as the density of crocodile nests increases,
allowing for raccoons and other nest predators to become specialized in
locating nests (Mazzotti 1999). However, localized efforts to control
raccoons may boost productivity rates in areas where raccoon
depredation has become problematic.
There is no evidence of disease in the American crocodile
population in Florida. Therefore, disease does not present a known
threat to the crocodile in Florida.
D. The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
The Act currently provides protection for the American crocodile as
an endangered species, and these protections would not be significantly
reduced if it were reclassified to threatened. A more complete
discussion of applicable Federal regulations is included below (see
``Available Conservation Measures'' section). In addition to the
Federal regulations described below, the National Park Service has
established regulations for general wildlife protection in units of the
National Park System that prohibit the taking of wildlife; the feeding,
touching, teasing, frightening or intentional disturbing of wildlife
nesting, breeding, or other activities; and possessing unlawfully taken
wildlife or portions thereof (36 CFR 2.2).
The State of Florida provides legal protection for the American
crocodile within the State. In 1967, the State of Florida listed the
crocodile as ``protected.'' This status was revised in 1972, when the
American crocodile was listed as ``endangered'' under Chapter 68A-27 of
the Florida Wildlife Code. Chapter 68A-27.003 of the Florida Code,
entitled ADesignation of endangered species; prohibitions; permits'
specifies that Ano person shall pursue, molest, harm, harass, capture,
possess, or sell'' any of the endangered species that are listed.
Violation of these prohibited acts can be considered a third degree
felony, and is punishable by up to 5 years in prison and a $10,000 fine
(Florida Statute 372.0725). At this time, the FWC has no immediate
plans to change the American crocodile's status, regardless of whether
or not the Service reclassifies the species to threatened (P. Moler,
FWC, personal communication 2004). The FWC also currently operates
under a cooperative agreement with us under section 6 of the Act that
formalizes a cooperative approach to the development and implementation
of programs and projects for the conservation of threatened and
endangered species.
On June 28, 1979, the American crocodile was added to Appendix II
of CITES. This designation reflected that the species, while not
currently threatened with extinction, may become so without trade
controls. On June 6, 1981, the American crocodile was moved to Appendix
I, indicating that it was considered to be threatened with extinction.
Generally, no commercial trade is allowed for Appendix I species. CITES
is a treaty established to monitor international trade to prevent
further decline in wild populations of plant or animal species. CITES
permits may not be issued if import or export of the species may be
detrimental to the species' survival, or if specimens are not legally
acquired. CITES does not regulate take or domestic trade, so it would
not apply to take within Florida or the United States. Reclassification
of the American crocodile in Florida from endangered to threatened will
not affect the species' CITES status.
Several other Federal regulations may provide protection for
American crocodiles or their habitat. Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act (33 U.S.C. 1344 et seq.) requires the issuance of a permit from the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) for the discharge of any dredged
or fill material into waters of the United States. The Corps may deny
the issuance of a permit if the project might adversely affect wildlife
and other natural resources. Also, sections 401 and 403 of the Rivers
and Harbors Act (33 U.S.C. 304 et seq.) prohibit the construction of
bridges, roads, dams, docks, weirs, or other features that would
inhibit the flow of water within any navigable waterway. The Rivers and
Harbors Act ensures the protection of estuarine waters from impoundment
or development and indirectly protects natural flow patterns that
maintain crocodile habitat. In addition, the Federal agencies
responsible for ensuring compliance with the Clean Water Act and the
Rivers and Harbors Act are required to consult with us if the issuance
of a permit may affect endangered species or their designated critical
habitat, under section 7(a)(1) of the Endangered Species Act (see
``Available Conservation Measures'' section below). This requirement
remains the same whether a species is listed as endangered or
threatened.
The Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act of 1958 (as amended),
codified at 16 U.S.C. 661 et seq. requires equal consideration and
coordination of wildlife conservation with other water resources
development. This statute allows us and State fish and game agencies to
review proposed actions and address ways to conserve wildlife and
prevent loss of or damage to wildlife resources. The Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act allows us to help ensure that American crocodiles and
their habitat are not degraded by water development projects and allows
us to incorporate improvements to habitat whenever practicable.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting Its Continued Existence
As explained in the original listing (40 FR 44149), crocodile nest
sites were vulnerable to disturbance from increasing human activity
because of the remoteness and difficulty of patrolling nesting areas.
Human disturbance of crocodiles can cause them to abandon suitable
habitat or disrupt reproduction activities (i.e., females abandoning
their nest sites). As the American crocodile population and the human
population in south Florida both grow, the number of human-crocodile
interactions has increased (Tim Regan, FWC, personal communication
2002). However, ongoing acquisition of important nesting and nursery
sites and other additional crocodile habitat by Federal, State, or
local governments and implementation of management plans on these
publicly-owned properties have improved protection to crocodile nests.
Of the three core properties that support crocodile nesting
(Everglades National Park, Crocodile Lake National Wildlife Refuge, and
Turkey Point Nuclear Power Plant), only Turkey Point has a management
plan in place that specifically addresses the American crocodile. This
plan calls for activities like road maintenance, vehicle access, and
construction to be conducted in important crocodile habitat only at
certain times or locations based on the crocodile's activity in order
to reduce human disturbance at Turkey Point. In addition, Turkey Point
is closed to access other than personnel who work at the facility. Both
Everglades National Park and Crocodile Lake National Wildlife Refuge,
even without species-specific management plans, have established rules
that provide protection from disturbance to benefit the crocodile. At
Everglades National Park, protection from disturbance is based on
guidelines for general public use, such as instructions to stay on
marked trails. Crocodile Lake National Wildlife Refuge is generally
closed to public access. However, personnel conduct necessary
activities on the property in consideration of crocodiles to reduce
disturbance. Activities conducted on or near the nesting sites are
conducted
[[Page 15060]]
during the non-breeding season in order to minimize crocodile
disturbance. Both Crocodile Lake National Wildlife Refuge and
Everglades National Park are preparing management plans that will
formalize ongoing actions and more specifically address American
crocodiles (S. Klett, personal communication 2002, Skip Snow,
Everglades National Park, personal communication 2002). In addition,
Everglades National Park has been preparing a draft wilderness plan
that will benefit the crocodile mostly by general prescribed changes in
public use in portions of the Park.
In addition to these core nesting sites, approximately 44 public
properties, managed as conservation lands by Federal, State, or county
governments, provide potential habitat for crocodiles in south Florida.
In addition, two other privately-owned sites that are maintained as
conservation lands or that conduct natural lands management provide
potential crocodile habitat. A total of 35 of these 46 properties
operate under current management plans. Only two specifically mention
management actions intended to benefit the American crocodile. However,
other actions mentioned in management plans that will reduce
disturbance to crocodiles include restrictions on public use,
implementation of boat speed limits (including areas of no-wake zones),
and prohibition of wildlife harassment. Managing potential
human'crocodile conflicts remains an important factor in providing
adequate protection for and reducing disturbance to crocodiles.
The original proposed listing cites the risk of a hurricane or
another natural disaster as a serious threat to the American crocodile
population (40 FR 17590). Hurricanes and freezing temperatures may also
kill some adult crocodiles (Moler 1991a), but their susceptibility to
mortality from extreme weather is poorly documented. These events still
have the potential to threaten the historically restricted nesting
distribution of the American crocodile in south Florida. However,
increased nesting activity in western Florida Bay, Cape Sable, and
Turkey Point Nuclear Power Plant have broadened the nesting range.
Nesting now occurs on the eastern, southern, and southwestern portions
of the Florida peninsula. While a single storm could still easily
affect all portions of the population, it is less likely now that the
impact to all population segments would be severe.
The original listing rule cited the restriction of the flow of
freshwater to the Everglades because of increasing human development as
a potential threat to the American crocodile population in Florida.
Ongoing efforts to restore the Everglades ecosystem and restore a more
natural hydropattern to south Florida will affect the amount of
freshwater entering the estuarine systems. Because growth rates of
hatchling crocodiles are closely tied to the salinity in the estuaries,
restoration efforts will affect both quality and availability of
suitable nursery habitat. Decreased salinity should increase growth
rates and survival among hatchling crocodiles. Proposed restoration
activities in and around Taylor Slough and the C-111 canal are
projected to increase the amount of fresh water entering the estuarine
system, and extend the duration of freshwater flow into Florida Bay (T.
Dean, H. McSarry, P. Pitts, Service, personal communication 2004). The
addition of fresh water will also occur throughout many of the
tributaries and small natural drainages along the shore of Florida Bay,
instead of primarily from the mouth of the C-111 canal (T. Dean, H.
McSarry, P. Pitts, Service, personal communication 2004). Salinities in
nesting areas, including Joe, Little Madeira, and Terrapin Bays, are
projected to be lower for longer periods than they currently are within
this area (based on alternative D13R hydrologic plan simulation--U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers and South Florida Water Management District
1999). This restoration project should increase the amount and
suitability of crocodile habitat in northern Florida Bay, and increase
juvenile growth rates and survival (Mazzotti and Brandt 1995).
Hydrological restoration may also affect crocodile habitat in
Biscayne Bay. Reductions in freshwater discharge will occur in the
Miami River, Snake Creek, and central and south Biscayne Bay (H.
McSharry, Service, personal communication 2004). These projected
changes would appear to reduce habitat quality in a portion of Biscayne
Bay. Consequently, the effect of the proposed hydrological
modifications on the crocodile population in Biscayne Bay is likely
negative. However, over the entire range of crocodile habitat that will
be affected by Everglades restoration, we expect a benefit to the
species.
Mortality of crocodiles on south Florida roads has consistently
been the primary source of adult mortality, and this trend has not
changed (Mazzotti and Cherkiss 2003). Road kills have occurred
throughout the crocodile's range in Florida, but most have occurred on
Key Largo and around Florida Bay, especially around Card and Barnes
Sounds (Mazzotti and Cherkiss 2003). Many of the recorded crocodile
road kills are of adults, which may result from the increased
likelihood of large individuals being reported. We cannot accurately
estimate the proportion of road-killed crocodiles that are reported.
Therefore, it is difficult to accurately estimate the magnitude of this
source of mortality or its effect on the population. However, all
segments of the crocodile population in Florida have continued to grow
despite this continuing mortality factor. Signs cautioning drivers of
the risk of colliding with crocodiles have been posted along the major
highways throughout crocodile habitat in south Florida. As discussed
above, measures that have been identified to help reduce road kill
mortality include installing fencing in appropriate places to prevent
crocodiles from entering roadways and installation of box culverts
under roadways so that crocodiles can safely cross roads.
As the MSRP details, the success of American crocodile nesting is
largely dependent on the maintenance of suitable egg cavity moisture
throughout incubation, and flooding may also affect nest success. On
Key Largo and other islands, failure of crocodile nests is typically
attributed to desiccation due to low rainfall (Moler 1991b). Data
compiled by Mazzotti and Cherkiss (2003) document an average of 47.5
percent nest success from 1978 through 1999 (excluding 1991 and 1992
due to lack of data) at Crocodile Lake NWR on north Key Largo. Nest
failures on the mainland may be associated with flooding or desiccation
(Mazzotti et al. 1988, Mazzotti 1989). In certain areas, flooding and
over-drying affect nest success. Data compiled by Mazzotti and Cherkiss
(2003) document an average of 64.4 percent nest success from 1970
through 1999 at Everglades National Park (excluding 1975, 1976, 1983,
1984, and 1996 due to lack of data) and 98 percent nest success from
1978 through 1999 at Turkey Point Nuclear Power Plant (excluding 1980
and 1982 due to lack of data). However, overall, the crocodile
population in Florida has more than doubled its size since it was
listed to an estimated 500 to 1,000 individuals and appears to be
compensating for these potential threats.
The final rule listing crocodiles did not reference contaminants as
a potential threat. However, several studies have shown that
contaminants occur in American crocodiles in south Florida (Hall et al.
1979, Stoneburger and Kushlan 1984, Mazzotti unpublished data). Though
we have no evidence that contaminants have affected the crocodile
population, we recognize that contaminants have been
[[Page 15061]]
documented in crocodile eggs. Contaminants such as pesticides and heavy
metals may pose a threat to crocodiles in south Florida at some levels,
but we have not yet detected them at the population level. A variety of
organochlorine pesticide residues (DDT, DDE, and Dieldrin, among
others), and PCBs have been documented in crocodile eggs collected from
south Florida (Hall et al. 1979). Acute exposure to pesticides and
heavy metals may result in death, while prolonged exposure to lower
concentrations of organochlorines include liver damage, reproductive
failure, behavioral abnormalities, or deformities. Despite the fact
that contaminants have been documented in crocodile eggs in south
Florida, the crocodile population and nesting are increasing. Little
information is known at this time about what constitutes dangerous
levels of these contaminants in crocodiles or other crocodilians.
We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial
information available regarding the past, present, and future threats
faced by the American crocodile in Florida in determining this proposed
rule. Based on this evaluation, we have determined that the American
crocodile in its range in Florida meets the criteria of a DPS as stated
in our policy of February 17, 1996 (61 FR 4722), and in regard to its
status, the preferred action is to reclassify the American crocodile in
the Florida DPS from an endangered species to a threatened species. The
recovery plan for the crocodile states that, ``Based on the fact that
the population appears stable, and that all of the threats as described
in the original listing have been eliminated or reduced,
reclassification of the crocodile will be possible, provided existing
levels of protection continue to be afforded to crocodiles and their
habitat, and that management efforts continue to maintain or enhance
the amount and quality of available habitats necessary for all life
stages.'' We believe based on our evaluation that the criteria for
downlisting the American crocodile in the Florida DPS have been met
because:
(1) The amount and quality of crocodile habitat in Florida will
continue to be maintained or enhanced sufficiently in order to provide
protection for all life stages of the existing crocodile population and
available habitat can support population growth and expansion; and
(2) Acquisition of important nesting and nursery sites and other
additional crocodile habitat by Federal, State, or local governments
and implementation of management on these publicly-owned properties
have improved protection to crocodiles and crocodile nests.
Available Conservation Measures
Two of the three primary nesting areas for American crocodiles in
Florida occur on Federal conservation lands and are consequently
afforded protection from development and large-scale habitat
disturbance. Crocodiles also occur on a variety of State-owned
properties, and existing State and Federal regulations provide
protection on these sites. The fact that American crocodile habitat is
primarily wetlands also assures the opportunity for conference or
consultation on most projects that occur in crocodile habitat under the
authorities described below.
Conservation measures provided to species listed as endangered or
threatened under the Act include recognition, recovery actions,
requirements for Federal protection, and prohibitions against certain
practices. Recognition through listing increases public awareness of
threats to the American crocodile, and promotes conservation actions by
Federal, State, and local agencies, private organizations, and
individuals. The Act provides for possible land acquisition and
cooperation with the State, and requires that recovery actions be
carried out. The protection required of Federal agencies and the
prohibitions against taking and harm are discussed, in part below.
Section 7(a) of the Act, as amended, requires Federal agencies to
evaluate their actions with respect to the American crocodile and its
designated critical habitat (41 FR 41914). Regulations implementing
this interagency cooperation provision of the Act are codified at 50
CFR part 402. If a Federal action may affect the American crocodile or
its designated critical habitat, the responsible Federal agency must
enter into formal consultation with us. Federal agency actions that may
require consultation with us include Corps of Engineers involvement in
projects such as residential development that requires dredge/fill
permits, the construction of roads and bridges, and dredging projects.
Power plant development and operation under license from the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission/Nuclear Regulatory Commission may also
require consultation with respect to licensing and re-licensing.
The Act and its implementing regulations set forth a series of
general prohibitions and exceptions that apply to all threatened
wildlife. The prohibitions, codified at 50 CFR 17.21 and 50 CFR 17.31,
in part, make it illegal for any person subject to the jurisdiction of
the United States to take (includes harass, harm, and pursue, hunt,
shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect; or to attempt any of
these), import or export, ship in interstate commerce in the course of
commercial activity, or sell or offer for sale in interstate or foreign
commerce any listed species. It is also illegal to possess, sell,
deliver, carry, transport, or ship any such wildlife that has been
taken illegally. Certain exceptions apply to our agents and agents of
State conservation agencies.
We may issue permits to carry out otherwise prohibited activities
involving threatened wildlife under certain circumstances. Regulations
governing permits are codified at 50 CFR 17.32. Such permits are
available for scientific purposes, to enhance the propagation or
survival of the species, and/or for incidental take in the course of
otherwise lawful activities. For threatened species, permits also are
available for zoological exhibition, educational purposes, or special
purposes consistent with the purposes of the Act.
Questions regarding whether specific activities will constitute a
violation of section 9 should be directed to Cindy Schulz of the South
Florida Ecological Services Office (see ADDRESSES section). Requests
for copies of the regulations regarding listed species and inquiries
about prohibitions and permits may be addressed to the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Ecological Services Division, 1875 Century Boulevard,
Suite 200, Atlanta, Georgia 30345 (telephone 404/679-4176, facsimile
404/679-7081).
This proposed rule recommends a change in status of the American
crocodile at 50 CFR 17.11, from endangered to threatened. If made
final, this rule would formally recognize that this species is no
longer in imminent danger of extinction throughout all or a significant
portion of its range in Florida. However, this reclassification would
not significantly change the protection afforded this species under the
Act. Anyone taking, attempting to take, or otherwise possessing an
American crocodile, or parts thereof, in violation of section 9 would
still be subject to a penalty under section 11 of the Act. Section 7 of
the Act would still continue to protect the American crocodile from
Federal actions that might jeopardize its continued existence or
destroy or adversely modify its critical habitat.
If the crocodile is listed as threatened, recovery actions directed
at the crocodile would continue to be implemented as outlined in the
MSRP.
[[Page 15062]]
The MSRP identifies actions that will result in the recovery of the
American crocodile, including--(1) Determining the current distribution
and abundance; (2) protecting and enhancing existing crocodile
colonies; (3) conducting research on the American crocodile's biology
and life history; (4) monitoring the south Florida crocodile
population; and (5) informing the public about the recovery needs of
crocodiles. The MSRP also outlines restoration activities that should
be undertaken to adequately restore the mangrove community that the
crocodile occupies. These actions include--(1) Protecting crocodile
nesting, basking, and nursery habitat; (2) managing and restoring
suitable crocodile habitat; (3) conducting research on the habitat
relationships of the crocodile; (4) continuing to monitor crocodile
habitat; and (5) increasing public awareness of the habitat needs of
the crocodile.
Finalization of this proposed rule would not constitute an
irreversible commitment on our part. Reclassification of the American
crocodile in Florida to endangered status would be possible if changes
occur in management, population status, and habitat or other actions
detrimentally affect the population or increase threats to its
survival.
Peer Review
In accordance with our policy published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR
34270), we will seek the expert opinions of at least three appropriate
and independent specialists regarding this proposed rule. The purpose
of this review is to ensure that listing decisions are based on
scientifically sound data, assumptions, and analyses. We will send
these peer reviewers copies of this proposed rule immediately following
publication in the Federal Register. We will invite these peer
reviewers to comment, during the comment period, on the specific
assumptions and conclusions regarding the proposed reclassification of
the American crocodile in Florida.
The final decision on this proposed rule will take into
consideration the comments and any additional information we receive,
and such communications may lead to a final regulation that differs
from this proposal.
The Act provides for one or more public hearings on this proposal,
if requested. We must receive requests within 45 days of the date of
publication of the proposal in the Federal Register. Such requests must
be made in writing and be sent to the South Florida Ecological Services
Office, 1339 20th Street, Vero Beach, FL 32960.
Executive Order 12866
Executive Order 12866 requires agencies 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) Is
the discussion in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of the preamble
helpful in understanding the proposal?; (2) does the proposal contain
technical language or jargon that interferes with its clarity?; (3)
does the format of the proposal (grouping and order of sections, use of
headings, etc.) aid or reduce its clarity; and (4) 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
proposed rule easier to understand to the Office of Regulatory Affairs,
Department of the Interior, Room 7229, 1849 C St., NW., Washington, DC
20240.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)
This rule does not contain any new collections of information for
which Office of Management and Budget Approval is required under the
Paperwork Reduction Act. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a
person is not required to respond to, a collection of information,
unless it displays a currently valid control number. For additional
information concerning permit and associated requirements for
threatened species, see 50 CFR 17.72.
National Environmental Policy Act
We have determined that an Environmental Assessment, as defined
under the authority of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969,
need not be prepared in connection with regulations adopted pursuant to
section 4(a) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. 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 all references cited in this document, as well
as others, is available upon request from the South Florida Ecological
Services Office (see ADDRESSES section).
Author
The primary author of this document is Tylan Dean, Fish and
Wildlife Biologist (see ADDRESSES section).
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.
Proposed Regulation Promulgation
We propose to amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of
the Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:
PART 17--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 16 U.S.C. 1531-1544; 16 U.S.C
4201-4245; Pub. L. 99-625, 100 Stat. 3500, unless otherwise noted.
2. Amend Sec. 17.11(h) by revising the entry in the List of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife for ``Crocodile, American'' under
REPTILES to read as follows:
Sec. 17.11 Endangered and threatened wildlife.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species Vertebrate
---------------------------------------------------- population where Critical Special
Historic range endangered or Status When listed habitat rules
Common name Scientific name threatened
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Reptiles
* * * * * * *
Crocodile, American............ Crocodylus acutus. U.S.A. (FL), Entire, except in E 10, 87, -- NA NA
Mexico, U.S.A. (FL).
Caribbean,
Central and South
America.
[[Page 15063]]
Do............................ ......do.......... ......do.......... U.S.A. (FL)....... T 10, 87, -- 17.95(c) NA
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dated: January 28, 2005.
Marshall P. Jones,
Acting Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 05-5640 Filed 3-23-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P