Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 236 / Tuesday, December 9, 1997 / Proposed Rules 64799

PART 721—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 721

would continue to read as follows:

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2604, 2607, and

2625(c).

§ § 721.700, 721.2840, 721.2860, 721.2880,

721.2940, 721.3200, 721.4640, 721.5990,

721.8125, 721.9260, 721.9780, 721.9962

[Removed]

2. By removing § § 721.700, 721.2840,

721.2860, 721.2880, 721.2940, 721.3200,

721.4640, 721.5990, 721.8125, 721.9260,

721.9780, and 721.9962.

[FR Doc. 97–32180 Filed 12–8–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife

and Plants; 90-Day Finding for a

Petition To Delist the Red Wolf

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,

Interior.

ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition

finding.

SUMMARY: The Fish and Wildlife Service

(Service) announces a 90-day finding for

a petition to delist the red wolf (Canis

rufus) under the Endangered Species

Act of 1973, as amended. The Service

finds that the petition did not present

substantial scientific or commercial

information indicating that delisting

this species may be warranted.

DATES: The finding announced in this

notice was made on August 28, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Information, comments, or

questions regarding this petition may be

submitted to the Red Wolf Recovery

Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service, 160 Zillicoa Street, Asheville,

North Carolina 28801. The petition

finding, supporting data, and comments

are available for public inspection, by

appointment, during normal business

hours at the above address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: V.

Gary Henry (704/258–3939, Ext. 226) at

the above address.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Endangered

Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act)

(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), requires that the

Service make a finding on whether a

petition to list, delist, or reclassify a

species presents substantial scientific or

commercial information demonstrating

that the petitioned action may be

warranted. To the maximum extent

practicable, this finding is to be made

within 90 days of receipt of the petition,

and the finding is to be published

promptly in the Federal Register. If the

petition is found to present the required

information, the Service is also required

to promptly commence a review of the

status of the species.

The Service has made a finding on a

petition to delist the red wolf (Canis

rufus). The petition, dated August 5,

1995, was submitted by Mr. Rob

Gordon, Executive Director, National

Wilderness Institute, and was received

by the Service on August 15, 1995.

The processing of this petition

conforms with the Service’s final listing

priority guidance published in the

Federal Register on December 5, 1996

(61 FR 64475). The guidance clarifies

the order in which the Service will

continue to process the backlog of

rulemakings during fiscal year 1997

following two related events: (1) the

lifting, on April 26, 1996, of the

moratorium on final listings imposed on

April 10, 1995 (Public Law 104–6), and

(2) the restoration of significant funding

for listing through passage of the

omnibus budget reconciliation law on

April 26, 1996, following severe funding

constraints imposed by a number of

continuing resolutions between

November 1995 and April 1996. The

guidance calls for giving highest priority

to handling emergency situations (tier

1), second highest priority (tier 2) to

resolving the listing status of the

outstanding proposed listings, and third

priority (tier 3) to resolving the

conservation status of candidate species

and processing administrative findings

on petitions. The processing of this

petition falls under tier 3. At this time,

the Southeast Region has no pending

tier 1 actions and pending tier 2 actions

are near completion. Additionally, the

guidance states that ‘‘effective April 1,

1997, the Service will concurrently

undertake all of the activities presently

included in Tiers 1, 2, and 3’’ (61 FR

64480). The Service announced an

extension on October 23, 1997 (62 FR

55268), of the guidance for fiscal year

1997. The 1997 guidance will remain in

effect until final guidance for fiscal year

1998 is published in the Federal

Register.

The petition presents the contention

that the red wolf is a gray wolf (Canis

lupus)/coyote (C. latrans) hybrid and

references six literature citations to

support the discussion of wolf/coyote

hybridization. One of these citations

includes four separate papers. The

petition also cites two references

regarding the reason for delisting other

species. The petitioner concluded that

those delistings were due to errors in

the original data and contends that

delisting the red wolf is also valid

because of original data error. The

petitioner also contends that since the

red wolf is a cross between two species

that are secure and plentiful, the red

wolf is not the best available repository

of genetic material of an endangered

species that could be recovered through

back-breeding.

The Service has reviewed the petition,

the literature cited in the petition, other

available literature and data, and has

consulted with experts on wolves and

molecular genetics. On the basis of the

best scientific and commercial

information available, the Service finds

that the petition does not present

substantial information indicating that

delisting this species may be warranted.

The following three points summarize

the reasons for this finding:

1. Neither the submitted data nor

other available data provides conclusive

evidence for the contention that the red

wolf is a wolf/coyote hybrid.

The petition included attached

literature references. These references

consisted of a July 1995 Scientific

American article by Robert K. Wayne

and John L. Gittleman and the list of

further reading references in that same

article. The petition states that

substantial new evidence in the form of

peer-reviewed scientific papers

demonstrates the hybrid origin of the

red wolf, and references the research of

Wayne and Gittleman as the basis, thus

indirectly focusing on the Wayne and

Gittleman article. This article is not a

peer-reviewed paper and only the senior

author has published original research

regarding the red wolf. The Service has

reviewed the references, along with

other data, to determine their content,

significance, and relevance to the

petitioned action. The Service views the

data presented in the petition as (1) a

selective misrepresentation of the

information contained in the cited

references and (2) a misrepresentation of

the available scientific and commercial

data.

An earlier petition to delist the red

wolf as a hybrid based on the

mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) results of

Wayne and Jenks (1991) was found not

to present substantial information to

indicate that delisting was warranted

(57 FR 1246; 1992). Much of the

supporting evidence for that conclusion

is repeated in the finding for this

petition. However, the primary focus in

this finding is the results and

interpretations regarding the nuclear

DNA results of Roy et al. (1996); Roy et

al. (1994); and Roy et al. (1994).
64800 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 236 / Tuesday, December 9, 1997 / Proposed Rules

2. The petition misinterprets recent

DNA data as constituting conclusive

evidence of hybrid origin of the red

wolf.

The DNA studies referenced in the

petition support the hypothesis of past

hybridizations between the three Canis

species and that the extent of

hybridization between wolves and

coyotes in the southeastern United

States was extensive. However, the data

do not provide evidence of any

continuing coyote influence on nuclear

DNA in red wolves, and selective

captive breeding provides a likely

scenario for the possible elimination of

such coyote nuclear DNA from existing

red wolves. The data do not provide

conclusive evidence of the hybrid origin

of red wolves or any evidence of

phenotypic, morphological, or

behavioral traits of coyotes persisting in

red wolves.

3. The best scientific and commercial

data available support the continued

listing of the red wolf.

The Service is required to use the best

scientific and commercial data available

when making a decision regarding

listing or delisting. As discussed above,

the scientific data supporting

hybridization in red wolves came from

a few related studies. These studies

suggest past hybridization, but provide

no support for continuing hybridization

in the existing red wolf populations.

The remainder of the relevant scientific

data shows that historic and current red

wolves lack coyote, gray wolf, or hybrid

phenotypic and morphological traits.

Dowling et al. (1992) and Cronin (1993)

specifically address the fact that all

available data must be applied to the

question and that molecular characters

are only one piece of the puzzle and are

no more valid than other types of

scientific evidence, including

morphology, behavior, ecology,

ontogeny, and paleontology.

References Cited

A complete list of all references cited

herein, as well as others, is available

upon request from the Red Wolf

Recovery Coordinator (see ADDRESSES

section).

Author. The primary author of this

document is V. Gary Henry, Red Wolf

Recovery Coordinator (see ADDRESSES

section).

Authority

The authority for this action is the

Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C 1531

et seq.).

Dated: August 28, 1997.

Jamie Rappaport Clark,

Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.

[FR Doc. 97–31837 Filed 12–8–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife

and Plants: Reopening of Comment

Period on Status Review for Cheetah in

Namibia

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,

Interior.

ACTION: Notice of status review;

reopening of comment period.

SUMMARY: The Service gives notice that

the comment period on the status

review of the Cheetah in Namibia, as

initiated in response to a petition to

reclassify the species in that country

from endangered to threatened, will be

reopened.

DATES: Comments and information may

be submitted through February 1, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Comments, information,

and questions should be submitted to

the Chief, Office of Scientific Authority;

Room 750, 4401 North Fairfax Drive;

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service;

Arlington, Virginia 22203 (Fax number

703–358–2276). The petition finding,

supporting data, and comments will be

available for public inspection, by

appointment, from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m.,

Monday through Friday, at this address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dr. Charles W. Dane, Chief, Office of

Scientific Authority, at the above

address (phone 703–358–1708).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the

Federal Register of March 19, 1996 (61

FR 11181), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service (Service) announced the 90-day

finding that a petition to reclassify the

cheetah (Acinonyx jubatus) in Namibia

from endangered to threatened had

presented substantial information

indicating that the requested action may

be warranted. A status review was

initiated, with the original comment

period ending July 17, 1996.

Subsequently, the Service received two

new documents that may have major

relevance to this issue: a management

plan for the cheetah prepared by the

Government of Namibia and a final

report on a cheetah workshop held by

the World Conservation Union (IUCN).

In order to consider this new

information and any comments thereon,

the Service has decided to reopen the

comment period until February 1, 1998,

and will provide copies of the indicated

documents upon request. All comments

and information will be considered in

making a final decision on whether the

requested action is warranted, and will

be included in the administrative

record.

Authority: Endangered Species Act of 1973

(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

Dated: November 19, 1997.

Jamie Rappaport Clark,

Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.

[FR Doc. 97–31970 Filed 12–8–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–55–M