52310 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

■ For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 

CFR Part 165 as follows: 

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION 

AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 

■ 1. The authority citation for Part 165 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. 

Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 

1.05–1(g), 6.04–1, 6.04–6 and 160.5; Pub. L. 

107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of 

Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 

■ 2. Amend temporary § 165.T13–009 

by revising paragraphs (a)(1)(ii) and 

(a)(2)(ii) to read as follows: 

§ 165.T13–009 Safety Zones: Fireworks 

displays in the Captain of the Port Portland 

Zone. 

(a) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(i) * * * 

(ii) Enforcement time and date. 9:30 

p.m. to 11 p.m. on August 27, 2005. 

(2) * * * 

(i) * * * 

(ii) Enforcement time and date. 9:30 

p.m. to 11 p.m. on September 10, 2005. 

* * * * * 

Dated: August 23, 2005. 

Patrick G. Gerrity, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port, Portland, OR. 

[FR Doc. 05–17473 Filed 9–1–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

RIN 1018–AT95 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Exclusion of U.S. CaptiveBred Scimitar-Horned Oryx, Addax, 

and Dama Gazelle From Certain 

Prohibitions 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), are amending 

the regulations promulgated under the 

Endangered Species Act (Act) (16 U.S.C. 

1531 et seq.) to add new regulations to 

govern certain activities with U.S. 

captive-bred scimitar-horned oryx (Oryx 

dammah), addax (Addax 

nasomaculatus), and dama gazelle 

(Gazella dama), which have been listed 

as endangered. For U.S. captive-bred 

live wildlife, including embryos and 

gametes, and sport-hunted trophies of 

these three species, this rule authorizes 

certain otherwise prohibited activities 

that enhance the propagation or survival 

of the species. International trade in 

specimens of these species will 

continue to be subject to the Convention 

on International Trade in Endangered 

Species of Wild Fauna and Flora 

(CITES). We have also prepared a final 

Environmental Assessment with a 

Finding of No Significant Impact for this 

final rule under regulations 

implementing the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA). 

DATES: This rule is effective October 3, 

2005. 

ADDRESSES: The complete supporting 

file for this rule is available for public 

inspection, by appointment, during 

normal business hours at the Division of 

Scientific Authority, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, 

Room 750, Arlington, Virginia 22203. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Historically, the scimitar-horned oryx 

(Oryx dammah), addax (Addax 

nasomaculatus), and dama gazelle 

(Gazella dama) occupied the same 

general region of North Africa. Wild 

numbers of the three antelopes have 

declined drastically over the past 50 

years. The scimitar-horned oryx may 

now be extinct in the wild. The declines 

have resulted primarily from habitat 

loss, uncontrolled killing, and the 

inadequacy of existing regulatory 

mechanisms. 

Of the three antelope species, the 

scimitar-horned oryx is the most 

threatened with extinction. By the mid1980s, it was estimated that only a few 

hundred were left in the wild, with the 

only viable populations known to be in 

Chad. However, no sightings of this 

species in the wild have been reported 

since the late 1980s, and the 2003 Red 

List of Threatened Species shows the 

status of the scimitar-horned oryx as 

‘‘extinct in the wild’’ (World 

Conservation Union [IUCN] 2003). 

Captive-bred specimens of this antelope 

have been placed into large fenced areas 

for breeding in Morocco and Tunisia. 

Once animals are reintroduced, 

continuous natural breeding is 

anticipated so that wild populations 

will be re-established. 

It is believed that the addax was 

extirpated from Tunisia during the 

1930s, and the last animals were killed 

in Libya and Algeria in 1966 and 1970, 

respectively. Remnant populations may 

still exist in the remote desert areas of 

Chad, Niger, and Mali, with occasional 

movements into Libya and Algeria 

during times of good rainfall. In the 

IUCN/SSC Antelope Specialist Group’s 

Global Survey of Antelopes, the addax is 

considered to be ‘‘regionally extinct’’

(Mallon and Kingswood 2001). The 

addax is listed as critically endangered 

by IUCN (IUCN 2003) and probably 

numbers fewer than 600 in the wild 

(Noble 2002). 

The dama gazelle is able to utilize 

both semi-desert and desert habitats, 

and is smaller than the scimitar-horned 

oryx or addax. Of the three antelope 

species, the dama gazelle is the least 

susceptible to pressures from humans 

and livestock. The original cause of its 

decline was uncontrolled killing; 

however, habitat loss through human 

settlement and livestock grazing, in 

addition to civil unrest, has more 

recently contributed to the decline. It is 

estimated that only small numbers 

survive in most of the eight countries 

within its historical range. The dama 

gazelle has declined rapidly over the 

last 20 years, with recent estimates of 

fewer than 700 in the wild. Noble (2002) 

estimated that the wild population of 

addra gazelle (G. dama ruficollis) is 

fewer than 200 specimens, the wild 

population of dama gazelle (G. dama 

dama) is about 500 specimens, and the 

mhorr gazelle (G. dama mhorr) is 

extinct in the wild. The dama gazelle 

was previously extirpated from Senegal, 

but has since been reintroduced, and in 

1997, at least 25 animals existed there 

as part of a semi-captive breeding 

program (IUCN 2003). The IUCN lists all 

subspecies of dama gazelles as 

endangered. 

Captive breeding in the United States 

has enhanced the propagation or 

survival of the scimitar-horned oryx, 

addax, and dama gazelle worldwide by 

rescuing these species from near 

extinction and providing the founder 

stock necessary for reintroduction. The 

scimitar-horned oryx is possibly extinct 

in the wild; therefore, but for captive 

breeding, the species might be extinct. 

Addax and dama gazelle occur in very 

low numbers in the wild, and a 

significant percentage of remaining 

specimens survive only in captivity 

(71% and 48%, respectively). Captivebreeding programs operated by zoos and 

private ranches have effectively 

increased the numbers of these animals 

while genetically managing their herds 

(Mallon and Kingswood 2001). Threats 

that have reduced these species’

numbers to current levels in the wild 

continue throughout most of the historic 

range. As future opportunities arise for 

reintroduction in the antelope range 

countries, captive-breeding programs 

will be able to provide genetically 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 52311 

diverse and otherwise suitable 

specimens. 

Some U.S. captive-breeding facilities 

allow sport hunting of surplus captivebred animals. Sport hunting of surplus 

captive-bred animals generates revenue 

that supports these captive-breeding 

operations and may relieve hunting 

pressure on wild populations. For 

further information regarding 

background biological information, 

factors affecting the species, and 

conservation measures available to 

scimitar-horned oryx, addax, and dama 

gazelle, please refer to the November 5, 

1991; July 24, 2003; February 1, 2005; 

and today’s Federal Register documents 

discussed below. 

Previous Federal Action 

The Mhorr gazelle and Rio de Oro 

dama gazelle (G. d. lozanoi) were listed 

as endangered throughout their ranges 

on June 2, 1970 (35 FR 8495). A 

proposed rule to list all scimitar-horned 

oryx, addax, and dama gazelle as 

endangered in the List of Threatened 

and Endangered Wildlife [50 CFR 

17.11(h)] was published on November 5, 

1991 (56 FR 56491). We re-opened the 

comment period to request current 

information and comments from the 

public regarding the proposed rule on 

July 24, 2003 (68 FR 43706), and 

November 26, 2003 (68 FR 66395). 

Stakeholders and interested parties, 

including the public, governmental 

agencies, the scientific community, 

industry, and the range countries of the 

species, were requested to submit 

comments or information. In accordance 

with the Interagency Cooperative Policy 

for Peer Review in Endangered Species 

Act Activities published on July 1, 1994 

(59 FR 34270), we selected three 

appropriate independent specialists to 

review the proposed rule. The purpose 

of such peer review is to ensure that our 

listing decisions for these species are 

based on scientifically sound data, 

assumptions, and analysis. The 

reviewers selected have considerable 

knowledge and field experience with 

scimitar-horned oryx, addax, and dama 

gazelle biology and conservation. 

Comments were received from all of the 

peer reviewers. After review of public 

comments, we prepared a final rule 

listing the three species as endangered. 

The final listing rule is being published 

in the Federal Register concurrent with 

this final rule regarding U.S. captivebred specimens. 

A consistent theme among the 

comments received from peer reviewers 

and stakeholders on the proposed rule 

to list these species as endangered is the 

vital role of captive breeding in the 

conservation of these species. One 

reviewer noted that 100% of the world’s 

scimitar-horned oryx (including the 

reintroduced herds that are in enclosed 

areas), 71% of the addax, and 48% of 

the dama gazelles are in captive herds. 

In response to these comments, on 

February 1, 2005 (70 FR 5117), we 

announced a proposed rule and notice 

of availability of a draft environmental 

assessment to add new regulations 

under the Act to govern certain 

activities with U.S. captive-bred 

scimitar-horned oryx, addax, and dama 

gazelle, should they become listed as 

endangered. The proposed rule covered 

U.S. captive-bred live wildlife, 

including embryos and gametes, and 

sport-hunted trophies, and would 

authorize certain otherwise prohibited 

activities that enhance the propagation 

or survival of the species. The 

‘‘otherwise prohibited activities’’ were 

take; export or re-import; delivery, 

receipt, carrying, transport or shipment 

in interstate or foreign commerce, in the 

course of a commercial activity; or sale 

or offering for sale in interstate or 

foreign commerce. In the proposed rule, 

we found that the scimitar-horned oryx, 

addax, and dama gazelle are dependent 

on captive breeding and activities 

associated with captive breeding for 

their conservation, and that activities 

associated with captive breeding within 

the United States enhance the 

propagation or survival of these species. 

Comments were accepted until April 4, 

2005. 

Summary of Comments and 

Recommendations 

In response to the proposed rule and 

notice of availability of a draft 

Environmental Assessment, the Service 

received 181 comments from the public. 

Forty-two commenters expressed 

support for the proposed rule; these 

commenters included several nonprofit 

organizations and private individuals. 

Twenty-five letters of support were 

variations of a single form letter. 

Organizations in support of the rule 

were the American Zoo and Aquarium 

Association (AZA), Conservation Force 

(on behalf of over 10 hunting and 

taxidermy organizations), the Exotic 

Wildlife Association, Safari Club 

International, and the Texas Wildlife 

Association. The form letter stated that 

the present situation in which ranchers 

raise and trade these antelopes benefits 

species conservation, as well as 

ranchers and hunters. It argued that 

ranchers will not be able to contribute 

to antelope conservation if they are 

‘‘restricted or penalized’’ for raising and 

managing these species. 

There were 139 commenters who 

opposed the proposed rule (153 if cosigners are included); of these, 96 were 

form letters. Organizations that opposed 

the rule included the Animal Protection 

Institute, Defenders of Wildlife, and The 

Humane Society of the United States (in 

joint comments representing 22 

organizations), and TRAFFIC North 

America. A law firm provided a more 

detailed legal commentary on behalf of 

The Humane Society of the United 

States and Defenders of Wildlife. The 

Environmental Law Clinical Partnership 

submitted comments on behalf of the 

Center for Biological Diversity and 

Friends of Animals. The vast majority of 

the form letters critical of the proposed 

rule were the result of a press release 

issued by Friends of Animals on March 

8, 2005. All of these comments included 

a request to list the three antelope 

species as endangered wherever they 

occur and not to include an exemption 

for U.S. ranches. 

The following is a summary of the 

substantive comments and our 

responses. We have included the 

‘‘talking points’’ included in the form 

letters. We also received comments that 

were outside the rule’s scope. However, 

responses to some of these comments 

are included where doing so will help 

clarify the purpose of the rule. 

Issue 1: Although supportive of the 

proposed rule, several commenters 

suggested broadening the scope of the 

rule to cover all captive-bred animals 

from species listed under the 

Endangered Species Act, wherever they 

occur. They also requested that we 

provide an exemption for all parts and 

products from a sport-hunted specimen, 

including meat and fur. 

Service Response 1: This rule covers 

only U.S. captive-bred scimitar-horned 

oryx, addax, and dama gazelle based on 

information regarding the conservation 

needs and the role of captive breeding 

for these particular species. We have 

exempted only specimens of these three 

species captive-bred in the United 

States because an important part of the 

rule is the requirement that any person 

participating in these activities maintain 

records and make these records 

available to Service officials upon 

request. It is difficult to establish a 

record-keeping system for captivebreeding operations outside the United 

States and even more difficult to access 

records kept outside the United States. 

In addition, we have limited ability to 

monitor captive-breeding operations 

located outside the United States, and 

we do not have sufficient information 

on operations outside the United States 

to determine whether they meet the 

standards for enhancement of 

propagation or survival of the species. 

52312 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

We have limited the rule to captivebred live wildlife, including embryos 

and gametes, and sport-hunted trophies 

because live wildlife, embryos, and 

gametes are essential to propagation and 

sport-hunted trophies. The sport-hunted 

trophy includes more than the mounted 

specimen. It may be raw or tanned parts, 

such as bones, hair, head, hide, hooves, 

horns, meat, skull, rug, taxidermied 

head, shoulder, or full body mount, of 

a specimen that was taken by the hunter 

during a sport hunt for personal use. It 

does not include articles made from a 

trophy, such as worked, manufactured, 

or handicraft items for use as clothing, 

curios, ornamentation, jewelry, or other 

utilitarian items for commercial 

purposes. 

Issue 2: Some commenters suggested 

that the rule should include criteria for 

approving individual captive-breeding 

operations to receive the benefits of the 

rule. Some commenters suggested 

including criteria for managing culls on 

ranches, requiring that all profits from 

ex situ activities be used for in situ 

conservation, and that the regulated 

operations must participate in 

conservation plans to establish wild 

populations in the range countries. 

Service Response 2: The successful 

breeding of these three species in 

captivity in the United States has added 

significantly to the global populations of 

these species. Persons may operate 

under the provisions of the rule only if 

the purpose of their activity is 

associated with the transfer of live 

wildlife, including embryos and 

gametes, or with sport hunting in a 

manner that contributes to increasing or 

sustaining captive numbers or to 

potential reintroduction to range 

countries. The rule also requires that 

each person claiming the benefit of the 

exception maintain accurate written 

records of activities, including births, 

deaths, and transfers of specimens, and 

make those records accessible to Service 

officials. In the final rule we have added 

two criteria that will ensure that any 

captive-breeding facility operating 

under the rule is managing the species 

to ensure genetic integrity and diversity. 

With these criteria, we have 

determined that U.S. operations that 

maintain captive-bred specimens of 

these three species contribute to the 

enhancement of the propagation or 

survival of these species, as required 

under section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Act and 

50 CFR 17.22(a)(2). Therefore, the 

requirements in the rule are adequate 

and appropriate for these species. 

Issue 3: One commenter noted that 

the proposed rule referred to 

‘‘populations’’ of captive-bred scimitarhorned oryx, dama gazelle, and addax, 

and that this usage is inconsistent with 

the definition of this term in the 

applicable regulations. 

Service Response 3: We agree that 

captive-held animals may not qualify as 

populations as defined at 50 CFR 17.3 

and have changed the rule accordingly. 

Issue 4: Some commenters argued that 

the Service has failed to show how these 

captive-breeding operations meet the 

standards for the enhancement of 

propagation or survival under section 10 

of the Act and failed to explain how the 

Service’s approach will benefit wild 

populations. One commenter argued 

that the Service offered no support for 

its statement that hunting of captivebred animals relieves pressure on wild 

populations. 

Service Response 4: The rule 

discusses how authorizing these 

activities for U.S. captive-breeding 

operations enhances the propagation of 

these species by providing an incentive 

to continue to raise animals in captivity 

while managing their genetic diversity, 

serving as repositories for surplus 

animals, and facilitating the movement 

of specimens between breeding 

facilities. We found that authorizing 

these activities also enhances the 

survival of the species by providing an 

incentive to continue captive-breeding 

and genetic management programs, 

which have (in conjunction with foreign 

captive-breeding operations) prevented 

the possible extinction of at least one of 

the species, contributed significantly to 

the total number of remaining animals 

of the other two species, and provided 

founder stock for reintroduction. 

As explained in the proposed rule, 

providing opportunities for sport 

hunting of captive-bred wildlife may 

relieve pressure on wild populations of 

the species by providing an alternative 

to legal and illegal hunting of animals 

in the wild. 

Issue 5: The majority of commenters 

opposing the proposed rule stated that 

captive-bred specimens from U.S. 

ranches do not contribute to 

reintroduction efforts in range countries, 

nor are specimens from U.S. ranches 

needed for these efforts. 

Service Response 5: In our proposed 

rule, we mentioned that 30 founder 

lines of scimitar-horned oryx are 

represented on at least one ranch that 

works closely with the Scimitar-horned 

Oryx Species Survival Plan (SSP). The 

SSP has provided specimens for 

reintroduction programs in range 

countries, and the ranch will contribute 

specimens when needed. Indeed, one 

commenter noted that he recently 

shipped 44 dama gazelles, 32 addax, 

and 10 scimitar-horned oryx that were 

captive-bred on U.S. ranches to a private 

wildlife sanctuary in the United Arab 

Emirates, where they will be bred to 

produce specimens for eventual release 

in the historic range. The commenter 

added that the Conservation Committee 

of the Exotic Wildlife Association is 

developing a feasibility study to 

determine how ranchers can best 

contribute specimens to reintroduction 

programs. Between October 2003 and 

March 2005, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service’s Division of Management 

Authority issued CITES permits for the 

export of U.S. captive-bred scimitarhorned oryx (45 specimens), addax (90 

specimens), and dama gazelle (70 

specimens) to the United Arab Emirates 

for captive breeding. Most of these 

specimens were captive-bred on U.S. 

ranches. 

We do not know when or to what 

degree any particular ranch will be 

called upon to provide specimens for 

reintroduction efforts or research 

necessary to facilitate such programs. 

However, their continued breeding of 

these species, and their monitoring and 

maintaining genetic diversity, will 

ensure that specimens will be available 

when the appropriate conditions for 

reintroduction exist in range countries. 

As one commenter pointed out, other 

species that are captive-bred on U.S. 

ranches, such as Grevy’s zebra and 

blackbuck, have been used in research 

and reintroduction projects. 

Issue 6: Several commenters indicated 

that conservation resulting from ranches 

that allow sport hunting is not 

comparable to zoo-based conservation 

programs. They also noted that the AZA 

acquisition—disposition policy 

prohibits AZA institutions from 

supplying animals to or receiving them 

from ranches that allow hunting of those 

species. Thus, they argue that few 

ranches can cooperate with zoo 

programs. 

Service Response 6: Both zoos and 

ranches may breed and otherwise 

contribute to the conservation of these 

species, whether or not there is 

collaboration. We acknowledge that 

some ranches breed these species and 

do not allow hunting of them, whereas 

others do. However, we have found that 

ranches that meet the regulatory criteria, 

whether or not they allow sport hunting 

of the three antelopes, enhance the 

propagation or survival of these species. 

According to several commenters, many 

ranches, whether offering sport hunts or 

not, have provided research 

opportunities to study these species in 

partnership with academic institutions. 

Issue 7: Some commenters contended 

that hunting on U.S. ranches may 

undermine the conservation of wild 

specimens by increasing the demand for 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 52313 

trophies or creating incentives for illegal 

trade. 

Service Response 7: There is no 

evidence that sport hunting of captivebred animals increases poaching of 

these species in the wild. Sport hunting 

of these species has been occurring on 

ranches in the U.S. for more than 20 

years. There is no evidence that the 

availability of captive-bred animals to 

trophy hunters has contributed in any 

way to hunting pressure on these 

species in the wild. Furthermore, the 

United States and range-country 

governments, as well as most countries 

worldwide, are required to strictly 

regulate trade in these species because 

the scimitar-horned oryx, addax, and 

dama gazelle are listed in Appendix I of 

CITES. Listing in CITES Appendix I 

requires strict regulation of international 

movement of these species, which may 

only be authorized in ‘‘exceptional 

circumstances.’’ With the listing of these 

three antelopes as endangered under the 

Act, the regulatory protections will be 

further strengthened, not reduced, 

because both CITES and Act regulations 

will apply. Sport hunting of surplus 

animals from captive-breeding 

operations in the United States is 

anticipated to reduce the incentive for 

removal of wild animals in their range 

countries by providing an alternative 

source of specimens. 

Issue 8: One commenter stated that 

ranches that breed specimens select for 

trophy quality, which may reduce 

genetic fitness. 

Service Response 8: We know that 30 

founder lines of scimitar-horned oryx 

are represented on at least one ranch 

that works closely with the Scimitarhorned Oryx SSP. We have received no 

indication in the literature or from 

commenters indicating that breeding 

programs on ranches have caused a loss 

in overall genetic variation in U.S. 

captive-bred antelopes. In addition, we 

have added criteria to the final rule that 

will prevent hybridization of species or 

subspecies and require that all 

specimens be managed in a manner that 

maintains genetic diversity. 

Issue 9: One commenter suggested 

that surplus captive-bred specimens 

from ranches should be relocated, not 

killed. 

Service Response 9: Although 

thousands of these animals have been 

produced in captivity, the number of 

animals released into the wild has been 

limited. Reintroduction programs 

cannot absorb the entire production of 

captive-breeding operations for 

logistical reasons and because 

reintroductions—for almost any 

mammal—are limited to small groups of 

animals that can be conditioned and 

monitored to ensure their survival. The 

amount of secure habitat for 

reintroductions is also a factor limiting 

the numbers of animals that can be 

released. In our proposed rule, we stated 

that some killing of surplus specimens 

may be necessary to manage captive 

herds (e.g., to reduce aggression among 

males) and to finance captive-breeding 

operations. In addition, the United 

States does not have the jurisdiction to 

direct another country in regard to when 

it should accept animals and when it 

should release them to the wild. 

Issue 10: One commenter asserted that 

the Service cannot propose any 

exemptions or permits for a species 

under the Act until the species is 

actually listed under the Act; in doing 

so, they argue, the Service has violated 

its consultation responsibilities under 

section 7 of the Act. 

Service Response 10: It was critical 

that development of a rule that provides 

an incentive to continue captive 

breeding of these species proceed 

concurrently with the determination of 

their legal status under the Act to ensure 

that no breeding programs would be 

disrupted by a final listing 

determination. This final rule has 

therefore been released concurrently 

with the final listing determination to 

ensure there is no confusion regarding 

the authority of the Service to regulate 

such activities for these species. There 

is no limitation under either the Act or 

the Administrative Procedure Act for 

related proposed rulemakings to 

proceed concurrently to the final rule 

stage. 

After considering all of the effects that 

would be posed by the proposed rule, 

we determined that the measures 

included in the final rule would reduce 

the threat of extinction to the species by 

facilitating captive breeding. Therefore, 

no conference procedure under section 

7(a)(4) of the Act is required. 

Issue 11: One commenter believed 

that the proposed rule would set a 

precedent for legal hunting of listed 

species in captivity. 

Service Response 11: We disagree. 

The development of this rule was 

specific to these three species and 

included consideration of specific 

threats, specific conservation needs, and 

the benefits of captive breeding to all 

three species. In no way should the 

development of this regulation for these 

species under the Act be interpreted as 

a statement of what regulatory scheme 

would be appropriate for other listed 

species also found in captivity within 

the United States. 

Issue 12: One commenter argued that 

we did not establish how conservation 

efforts for the species would be 

hampered by the application of current 

Act regulatory systems to captivebreeding operations. 

Service Response 12: The Act does 

not require a particular regulatory 

system be used to implement the Act. 

Rather, the Act requires that authorized 

activities must meet standards for 

enhancing the propagation or survival of 

the species. We have found that the 

regulatory framework established for the 

three antelope meets these standards 

and is the best management scheme to 

encourage continued captive breeding 

and management of these species. 

Similar regulations, the captive-bred 

wildlife regulations at 50 CFR 17.21(g), 

have been used as a basis for developing 

this rule. However, the current 

regulations do not cover species for 

which sport hunting is an integral part 

of management of the species, and they 

do not provide an authorization for the 

interstate and foreign commerce of 

sport-hunted trophies. Thus, the 

movement of sport-hunted trophies 

taken for management purposes would 

be limited unless an Act permit or 

authorization had been granted. Not 

requiring each person to apply for a 

permit or authorization prior to 

engaging in these activities provides an 

important incentive to these operations 

to continue their captive-breeding and 

management programs. 

Issue 13: One commenter argued that 

the Service does not have the authority 

under the Act to propose this rule for an 

endangered species. 

Service Response 13: As explained 

above, captive-breeding operations 

within the United States that meet the 

criteria established by this rule meet the 

standards for both enhancing the 

propagation and enhancing the survival 

of these three species, as shown by the 

findings for each of the criteria found at 

50 CFR 17.22(a)(2). While the Service 

typically authorizes activities under 

section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Act on a caseby-case basis through the issuance of 

individual permits or authorizations, 

there is no requirement that we may do 

so only via this process. The 

requirements for notification and 

opportunity for public comment under 

section 10(c) and publication of final 

determinations under section 10(d) have 

been satisfied through this rulemaking 

process. 

Issue 14: A few commenters asserted 

that any regulatory scheme that 

facilitates killing of animals as 

contributing to conservation is not 

supported by the law except under 

extremely narrow circumstances. 

Service Response 14: Section 10 of the 

Act does not set absolute limits on the 

Service’s ability to authorize the taking 

52314 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

of an endangered species. In fact, the 

section specifically states that the 

Secretary may authorize any act 

otherwise prohibited under section 9, 

which includes take. Take includes to 

harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, 

wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect an 

endangered species, or attempt to 

engage in any such conduct (see section 

3(19) of the Act). Section 10(a)(1)(A) 

does require that any authorized activity 

must enhance the propagation or 

survival of the species overall. An 

example of when take of a listed species 

benefits conservation is our regulation 

on the import of sport-hunted African 

elephant (Loxodonta africana) trophies. 

The African elephant is listed as 

threatened under the Act. The import of 

sport-hunted trophies from African 

countries is only allowed when certain 

criteria are met, including that ‘‘a 

determination is made that the killing of 

the animal whose trophy is intended for 

import would enhance survival of the 

species’’ [50 CFR 17.40 (e)(3)(iii)(C)]. 

When evaluating a hunting program in 

an African country, Service biologists 

consider whether revenue derived from 

the hunt is used to further elephant 

conservation. These funds have been 

used to support anti-poaching activities 

and establish game management areas 

with important elephant habitat. 

Issue 15: One commenter opposed the 

rule because it would deny Act 

protection to most members of the three 

species. 

Service Response 15: This rule does 

not deny Act protection to most 

members of the three species. All of the 

prohibitions under section 9 apply to all 

animals in the wild. These same 

prohibitions also apply to any animal 

captive-bred outside the United States. 

This regulation applies only to members 

of the species that were captive-bred 

within the United States. The comments 

that noted that many of the animals 

found in captivity are located in the 

United States support the Service’s 

determination that U.S. captivebreeding operations have played a 

significant role in the propagation or 

survival of all three species and that a 

regulatory scheme that facilitates the 

continuation of these activities is 

appropriate for the species. 

Issue 16: Many commenters opposed 

the rule because of their philosophical 

opposition to trophy hunting or hunting 

in general. Others expressed concerns 

regarding ‘‘canned hunts.’’

Service Response 16: Hunting has a 

long history of contributing to 

conservation in the United States. The 

Service acknowledges that wildlife 

populations and habitats have been 

sustained through the financial 

contributions of hunters. The proposed 

rule authorizes the taking of individual 

animals, but only if the purpose of the 

taking contributes to increasing or 

sustaining captive antelope numbers or 

to potential reintroduction to range 

countries. This approach to 

management has caused captive-bred 

specimens to proliferate, thus 

contributing to their propagation and 

increasing their chances of survival. 

Contribution of Captive Breeding to 

Species Propagation or Survival 

A peer reviewer of the proposed rule 

for listing the three antelope species as 

endangered noted that 100% of the 

world’s scimitar-horned oryx 

population (including the reintroduced 

specimens that are in enclosed areas), 

71% of the addax population, and 48% 

of the dama gazelle population are in 

captive herds. Captive-breeding 

programs operated by zoos and private 

ranches have effectively increased the 

number of these animals while 

genetically managing their herds. 

International studbook keepers and 

managers of the species in captivity 

manage these programs in a manner that 

maintains the captive specimens as a 

demographically and genetically diverse 

megapopulation (Mallon and 

Kingswood 2001). In the 1980s and 

1990s, captive-breeding operations in 

Germany, the United Kingdom, and the 

United States provided scimitar-horned 

oryx, addax, and dama gazelle to BouHedma National Park in Tunisia 

(Mallon and Kingswood 2001). These 

animals have become the founding stock 

of captive in situ herds that have grown 

substantially since 1995. The IUCN 

Species Survival Commission has 

proposed that some of the antelopes 

produced be used to establish other 

captive-breeding operations within the 

range countries or, given the appropriate 

conditions in the wild, for 

reintroduction. Similar in situ breeding 

programs for future reintroduction are 

occurring in Senegal and Morocco with 

captive stock produced and provided by 

breeding operations outside of these 

countries. 

This rule does not authorize or lead 

to the removal of any specimen of the 

three species from the wild. This rule 

would not affect prohibitions against 

possession and other acts with 

unlawfully taken wildlife or 

importation. This rule only applies to 

specimens that are captive bred in the 

United States. Any person who wishes 

to engage in any act that is prohibited 

under the Endangered Species Act with 

a specimen that has not been captive 

bred in the United States will still need 

to obtain a permit or authorization 

under the Act. The issuance or denial of 

such permits or authorizations is 

decided on a case-by-case basis and 

only after all required findings have 

been made. The rule contains provisions 

that will allow the Service to monitor 

the activities being carried out by 

captive-breeding operations within the 

United States to ensure that these 

activities continue to provide a benefit 

to the three antelope species. The rule 

also does not include dead specimens 

other than sport-hunted trophies or 

specimens derived from activities that 

do not meet the criteria. 

The probable positive direct and 

indirect effects of facilitating captive 

breeding in the United States for the 

conservation of scimitar-horned oryx, 

addax, and dama gazelle are 

exemplified in the research and 

reintroduction efforts involving the 

AZA and the Sahelo-Saharan Interest 

Group (SSIG) of the United Nations 

Environment Program. In North 

America, the AZA manages captive 

scimitar-horned oryx, addax, and dama 

gazelle through SSPs. The captive 

scimitar-horned oryx in North America 

and Europe are derived from two 

captures that occurred in Chad in 1963 

and 1966. Members of the Scimitarhorned Oryx SSP are faced with three 

challenges (Antelope Taxon Advisory 

Group 2002b): They must manage the 

captive herds to maximize the genetic 

contributions of founder stock; second, 

they must find solutions for disposition 

of surplus animals given the limited 

holding space among SSP members; and 

third, they must find facilities that can 

house individual males or bachelor 

herds. Only through inter-institutional 

collaboration among members, such as 

the exchange of live specimens or 

gametes to maintain genetic diversity, 

can these challenges be surmounted. In 

one example, 30 founder lines are 

represented at 1 ranch that works 

closely with the SSP. Since typical oryx 

herds consist of 1 male and 10–30 

females, there will always be a need to 

manage nonbreeding males. Although 

the SSP consists mostly of AZAaccredited zoos, ranches can serve as 

repositories for surplus animals or assist 

in gene pool management. These 

partnerships also provide opportunities 

for behavioral and other research in 

spacious areas found in some zoos and 

ranches that can be used in forming and 

preparing groups of animals for 

reintroduction. 

Members of the Addax SSP have also 

been involved in translocating animals 

for captive breeding and release in 

Tunisia and Morocco. Animals held by 

members of the SSP are included in an 

international studbook for this species 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 52315 

that includes addaxes in zoos and 

private facilities worldwide (Antelope 

Taxon Advisory Group 2002a). The 

dama gazelle North American studbook 

also includes zoos and ranch 

participants worldwide. Some of the 

specimens bred in zoos originated from 

ranched stock (Metzler 2000). 

Both zoos and ranches may breed and 

otherwise contribute to the conservation 

of these species, whether or not there is 

collaboration. According to several 

commenters on the proposed regulation, 

many ranches, whether offering hunts or 

not, have provided research 

opportunities to study these species in 

partnership with academic institutions. 

A commenter on the proposed 

regulation noted that he recently 

shipped 44 dama gazelles, 32 addax, 

and 10 scimitar-horned oryx that were 

captive-bred on U.S. ranches to a private 

wildlife sanctuary in the United Arab 

Emirates, where they will be bred to 

produce specimens for eventual release 

in the historic range. We note that 

between October 2003 and March 2005, 

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s 

Division of Management Authority 

issued CITES permits for the export of 

U.S. captive-bred scimitar-horned oryx 

(45 specimens), addax (90 specimens), 

and dama gazelle (70 specimens) to the 

United Arab Emirates for captive 

breeding. Most of these specimens were 

captive-bred on U.S. ranches. We do not 

know when or to what degree any 

particular ranch will be called upon to 

provide specimens for reintroduction 

efforts or research necessary to facilitate 

such programs. However, their 

continued breeding of these species, and 

their monitoring and maintaining 

genetic diversity, will ensure that 

specimens will be available when the 

appropriate conditions for 

reintroduction exist in range countries. 

We are not aware of any negative 

direct or indirect effects from this rule 

on wild populations. This rule does not 

authorize or lead to the removal of any 

specimen of the three species from the 

wild. Indeed, many facilities in the 

United States that breed these species 

are working with range countries to 

breed and reintroduce specimens in 

areas that they have occupied 

historically. In 2000, the SSIG was 

formed as a consortium of individuals 

and organizations interested in 

conserving Sahelo-Saharan antelopes 

and their ecosystems (SSIG 2002). The 

SSIG has members representing 17 

countries and shares information on 

wildlife management and conservation, 

captive breeding, wildlife health and 

husbandry, establishment and 

management of protected areas, and 

wildlife survey methods. Members are 

involved in in situ and ex situ 

conservation efforts for the scimitarhorned oryx, addax, and dama gazelle. 

Several of its projects involve the 

translocation of captive-bred antelopes 

to range countries for establishment of 

herds in large fenced breeding areas 

prior to reintroduction. A commenter on 

the proposed rule noted that the 

Conservation Committee of the Exotic 

Wildlife Association is developing a 

feasibility study to determine how 

ranchers can best contribute specimens 

to reintroduction programs. 

The rule does not directly or 

indirectly conflict with any known 

program intended to enhance the 

survival probabilities of the three 

antelope species. The SSP and SSIG 

programs work collaboratively with 

range country scientists and 

governments. Although the rule does 

not authorize or lead to the removal of 

any specimen of the three species from 

the wild, it may contribute to other 

programs by providing founder stock for 

reintroduction or research. 

This rule will reduce the threat of 

extinction facing the scimitar-horned 

oryx, addax, and dama gazelle by 

facilitating captive breeding for all three 

species in the United States. Based on 

information available to the Service, 

captive breeding in the United States 

has contributed significantly to the 

conservation of these species. Scimitarhorned oryx may be extinct in the wild; 

therefore, but for captive breeding, the 

species might be extinct. Addax and 

dama gazelle occur in very low numbers 

in the wild and a significant percentage 

of remaining specimens survive only 

through captivity (71% and 48% 

respectively). Threats that have reduced 

the species’ populations to current 

levels in the wild continue throughout 

most of the historic range. As future 

opportunities arise for reintroduction in 

the antelope range countries, captivebreeding programs will be able to 

provide genetically diverse and 

otherwise suitable specimens. Ranches 

and large captive-wildlife parks for nonnative herds (e.g., Bamberger Ranch, 

Texas; The Wilds, Ohio; Fossil Rim 

Wildlife Center, Texas) are able to 

provide large areas of land that simulate 

the species’ native habitat and can 

accommodate a larger number of 

specimens than can most urban zoos. 

Thus, they provide opportunities for 

research, breeding, and preparing 

antelopes for eventual reintroduction. 

International consortia of zoos, 

private owners, researchers, and range 

country decision makers have 

acknowledged the need to reduce 

threats in the range countries (e.g., 

habitat protection, reduce poaching) of 

the scimitar-horned oryx, addax, and 

dama gazelle. They also recognize that, 

but for captive breeding, it would be 

difficult, or in some cases impossible, to 

restore the species in the wild, 

particularly for species that have 

become extinct in the wild. 

One way this rule will reduce the 

threat of extinction is by allowing 

limited sport hunting of U.S. captivebred specimens to facilitate captive 

breeding of all three species. Given the 

cost of establishing and maintaining a 

large captive breeding operation and the 

large amount of land that is required to 

maintain bachelor herds or surplus 

animals, it is difficult for many private 

landowners to participate in such 

endeavors. An incentive to facilitate 

these captive breeding operations and 

ensure that genetically viable herds are 

available for future reintroduction 

programs is to allow the limited hunting 

of captive-bred specimens. Most of the 

available land for captive-held 

specimens is owned by private 

landowners (ranchers). In Texas, the 

number of ranched scimitar-horned oryx 

went from 32 specimens in 1979 to 

2,145 in 1996; addax increased from 2 

specimens in 1971 to 1,824 in 1996; and 

dama gazelle increased from 9 

specimens in 1979 to 369 in 2003 

(Mungall 2004). These increases were 

due mostly to captive breeding at the 

ranches supplemented with some 

imported captive-bred founder stock. 

Limited hunting of captive-bred 

specimens facilitated these increases by 

generating revenue for herd 

management and the operation of the 

facility. Ranches also need to manage 

herds demographically (i.e., appropriate 

age and gender numbers and ratios) and 

genetically (i.e., maximize genetic 

diversity). Such management may 

include culling specimens, which may 

be accomplished through hunting. For 

example, a ranch may need to reduce 

the number of adult males to achieve 

the necessary sex ratio for establishing 

a polygamous breeding group and 

facilitating the typical breeding behavior 

of the species. Hunting also provides an 

economic incentive for private 

landowners such as ranchers to 

continue to breed these species and 

maintain them as a genetic reservoir for 

future reintroduction or research, and as 

a repository for excess males from other 

captive herds. Sport hunting of U.S. 

captive-bred specimens may reduce the 

threat of extinction of wild populations 

by providing an alternative to legal and 

illegal hunting of wild specimens in 

range countries. Thus, hunting of U.S. 

captive-bred specimens of these species 

52316 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

reduces the threat of the species’

extinction. 

The movement of live U.S. captivebred specimens, both by interstate 

transport and export, is critical to the 

captive-breeding efforts to manage the 

captive herds as well as provide animals 

for reintroduction. Between October 

2003 and March 2005, CITES permits 

were issued for the export of U.S. 

captive-bred scimitar-horned oryx (45 

specimens), addax (90 specimens), and 

dama gazelle (70 specimens). Studbook 

managers may recommend that 

specimens be exchanged among 

breeding institutions to achieve 

management goals for genetic or other 

reasons. These institutions may be 

separated by State (within the United 

States) or national boundaries. Zoos in 

Germany, for example, exchange 

specimens with zoos in the United 

States, as recommended by the 

International Studbook Keeper. The 

need to quickly move U.S. captive-bred 

specimens among breeding facilities is 

reflected in this rule by allowing such 

movement without requiring a separate 

ESA permit or authorization. 

The opinions or views of scientists or 

other persons or organizations having 

expertise concerning these species have 

been taken into account in this rule. The 

comments received from peer reviewers 

on our proposed rule for listing the 

three antelopes as endangered alerted us 

to the vital role that captive breeding, 

whether at zoos or ranches, is playing in 

species recovery and reintroduction. 

Comments on the proposed new 

regulation provided some information. 

More general comments are addressed 

in the summary of comments. Thus, the 

opinions or views of scientists or other 

persons or organizations having 

expertise concerning the three antelope 

species and other germane matters have 

been considered in the development of 

this rule. 

The U.S. expertise, facilities, and 

other resources available to captivebreeding operations have resulted in 

such a high level of breeding success 

that the SSIG estimated that there are 

4,000–5,000 scimitar-horned oryx, 1,500 

addax, and 750 dama gazelle in 

captivity worldwide, many of which are 

held in the United States. The U.S. 

specimens have resulted from very few 

wild-caught founders that have been 

carefully managed to increase the 

numbers of specimens and maintain 

genetic diversity. Husbandry methods 

are shared by participants in regional 

and international studbooks through 

specialist meetings such as the Antelope 

Taxon Advisory Group meeting held at 

the AZA Annual Meeting. Such 

cooperation allows the sharing of 

resources among participants of 

coordinated breeding programs as 

specimens are moved from one facility 

to another according to management 

recommendations. As indicated by the 

Scimitar-horned Oryx SSP, one of the 

major issues confronting the captivebreeding community is how to preserve 

the necessary genetic diversity and 

manage population surplus, particularly 

given the space limitations at some 

facilities. Some private ranches in the 

United States have contributed to the 

success of captive-breeding programs by 

absorbing the surplus specimens 

produced in zoos so that zoos can 

utilize available space for more 

genetically important specimens or the 

appropriate herd social structure. 

Ranches have also enlarged the captive 

populations because they are able to 

dedicate more space to these species, 

and therefore house more specimens, 

than can zoos. 

Based on the best available scientific 

information and comments received 

from peer reviewers, non-government 

organizations, and the public, we have 

determined that U.S. operations that 

breed scimitar-horned oryx, addax, and 

dama gazelle have already contributed 

significantly to the propagation or 

survival of the three antelope species. 

Because of the need to facilitate the 

continued captive breeding of these 

species in private ranches and zoos, this 

rule is an appropriate regulatory 

management provision for scimitarhorned oryx, addax, and dama gazelle 

captive-bred in the United States. The 

probable direct and indirect effects of 

this rule will facilitate activities 

associated with captive breeding and 

thus contribute to the propagation and 

survival of the species. The rule will 

not, directly or indirectly, conflict with 

any known program intended to 

enhance the survival of populations in 

the wild. By maintaining genetic 

diversity and providing captive-bred 

stock for reintroduction efforts and 

research, captive-breeding operations in 

the United States are reducing the threat 

of extinction of the three antelope 

species. The rule facilitates the 

functioning of conservation programs, 

including those organized by the AZA 

and SSIG, and encourages the breeding 

and management of these antelopes. In 

fact, the rule provides an incentive to 

continue captive breeding. Therefore, 

we find that authorizing certain 

otherwise prohibited activities for U.S. 

captive-bred live wildlife, including 

embryos and gametes, and sport-hunted 

trophies of the three species that meet 

specific criteria enhances the 

propagation and survival of the species. 

Endangered Species Act 10(d) Finding 

The Service may grant exceptions 

under subsections (a)(1)(A) and (b) of 

the Act only if it finds and publishes the 

findings in the Federal Register that (1) 

such exceptions were applied for in 

good faith, (2) if granted and exercised 

will not operate to the disadvantage of 

such endangered species, and (3) will be 

consistent with the purposes and policy 

set forth in section 2 of the Act. Based 

on the comments received from captivebreeding operation representatives 

demonstrating their commitment to the 

continued enhancement of the 

propagation and survival of the 

scimitar-horned oryx, addax, and dama 

gazelle, we find that the exceptions in 

this rule have been applied for in good 

faith. 

We also find that the rule will not 

operate to the disadvantage of these 

species. In fact, it will benefit them by 

assisting in their rescue from near 

extinction and providing the founder 

stock necessary for reintroduction. The 

scimitar-horned oryx is possibly extinct 

in the wild and therefore, but for captive 

breeding, the species might be extinct. 

For addax and dama gazelle, they occur 

in very low numbers in the wild, and a 

significant percentage of remaining 

specimens survive only in captivity 

(71% and 48%, respectively). Captivebreeding programs operated by zoos and 

private ranches have effectively 

increased the numbers of these animals 

while genetically managing their herds. 

As future opportunities arise for 

reintroduction in the antelope range 

countries, U.S. captive-breeding 

programs will be able to provide 

genetically diverse and otherwise 

suitable specimens. 

Section 2 of the Act defines the 

purpose of the Act as providing a means 

whereby the ecosystems upon which 

endangered species and threatened 

species depend may be conserved, 

providing a program for the 

conservation of such endangered 

species and threatened species, and 

taking such steps as may be appropriate 

to achieve the purposes of the treaties 

and conventions set forth in paragraph 

2(a) of the Act. One of the stated 

policies of the Act is for all federal 

agencies to seek to conserve listed 

species and use their authorities in 

furtherance of the purposes of the Act. 

In section 3, the term ‘‘conservation’’

means ‘‘to use and the use of all 

methods and procedures which are 

necessary to bring any endangered 

species or threatened species to the 

point at which the measures provided 

pursuant to this Act are no longer 

necessary.’’ The definition specifically 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 52317 

includes propagation and 

transplantation as methods that can lead 

to the recovery of listed species, both of 

which are components of captive 

breeding of the three antelope species. 

As discussed above, the rule provides 

incentive to U.S. captive-breeding 

operations that will ensure continued 

propagation of genetically diverse 

specimens of these three species, which 

can serve as a reservoir for future 

reintroductions and assist in research. 

Therefore, we find that this rule is 

consistent with section 2 of the Act. 

Description of This Rule 

We are amending 50 CFR 17.21 by 

adding a new paragraph (h), which will 

apply to U.S. captive-bred scimitarhorned oryx, addax, and dama gazelle. 

The provision allows for the take; export 

or re-import; delivery, receipt, carrying, 

transport or shipment in interstate or 

foreign commerce, in the course of a 

commercial activity; or sale or offering 

for sale in interstate or foreign 

commerce of U.S. captive-bred live 

scimitar-horned oryx, addax, or dama 

gazelle, including embryos and gametes, 

and sport-hunted trophies, as long as 

certain criteria are met. 

Any exports of such specimens must 

meet the marking and reporting 

requirements for export [50 CFR 

17.21(g)(4) and part 14], general permit 

requirements and conditions (50 CFR 

part 13), and all CITES requirements (50 

CFR part 23). Each specimen to be reimported must be uniquely identified by 

a tattoo or other means that is reported 

on the required documentation. Each 

specimen at the captive-breeding 

operation must be managed to prevent 

hybridization of species or subspecies 

and must be managed in a manner that 

maintains genetic diversity. 

Each person claiming the benefit of 

the exception of this rule must maintain 

accurate written records of activities, 

including births, deaths, and transfers of 

specimens, and make those records 

accessible to Service officials for 

inspection at reasonable hours set forth 

in 50 CFR 13.46 and 13.47. 

Effects of This Rule 

With this rule we find that the 

scimitar-horned oryx, addax, and dama 

gazelle are dependent on captive 

breeding and activities associated with 

captive breeding for their conservation, 

and that activities associated with 

captive breeding within the United 

States enhance the propagation and 

survival of these species. Therefore, 

persons who wish to engage in the 

specified otherwise prohibited activities 

that meet the criteria for enhancement 

of the propagation or survival of these 

species may do so without obtaining an 

individual Endangered Species Act 

permit. 

This rule does not authorize any 

activity for any specimen of the three 

species from the wild. It also does not 

affect provisions relating to importation 

or possession and other acts with 

unlawfully taken wildlife. In addition, 

this rule applies only to specimens that 

are captive-bred in the United States. 

Any person who wishes to engage in 

any act that is prohibited under the 

Endangered Species Act with a 

specimen that has not been captive-bred 

in the United States or from a facility 

that does not meet the criteria of this 

rule will need to obtain an individual 

permit under the Act. The issuance or 

denial of such permits is decided on a 

case-by-case basis and only after all 

required findings have been made. 

This rule does not affect the CITES 

requirements for these species. 

Therefore, any import into or export 

from the United States of specimens of 

these species would not be authorized 

until all CITES requirements have been 

met. See the proposed rule for more 

information on the application of CITES 

to these activities. The existing 

protections under CITES, in conjunction 

with the new provisions for the species 

under this rule, create an appropriate 

regulatory framework that protects 

populations in the wild, ensures 

appropriate management of U.S. 

captive-bred specimens, and provides 

an incentive for future captive breeding. 

Required Determinations 

A Record of Compliance was prepared 

for the proposed rule. A Record of 

Compliance certifies that a rulemaking 

action complies with the various 

statutory, Executive Order, and 

Department Manual requirements 

applicable to rulemaking. Without this 

new regulation, individuals subject to 

the jurisdiction of the United States 

would need individual permits to 

engage in various otherwise prohibited 

activities, including domestic and 

international trade in live and sporthunted captive-bred specimens for 

commercial purposes. Captive-bred 

specimens in international trade for 

noncommercial purposes (e.g., breeding 

loans requiring export) would have to be 

authorized through the permit process. 

This process takes time, sometimes 

causing delays in moving animals for 

breeding or reintroduction. Such 

movements must often be completed 

within a narrow timeframe and can be 

further complicated by quarantine 

requirements and other logistics. We 

note that the economic effects of this 

rule do not rise to the level of 

‘‘significant’’ under the following 

required determinations. 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

In accordance with the criteria in 

Executive Order 12866, the Office of 

Management and Budget has 

determined that this rule is not a 

significant regulatory action. The rule 

will not have an annual economic 

impact of more than $100 million, or 

significantly affect any economic sector, 

productivity, jobs, the environment, or 

other units of government. This rule 

will reduce the regulatory impacts on 

captive-breeding operations that breed 

the endangered scimitar-horned oryx, 

addax, and dama gazelle because it 

provides exemptions to certain 

prohibitions of section 9 of the Act that 

would otherwise apply to businesses 

and individuals under U.S. jurisdiction. 

The exemptions to the prohibitions of 

the Act provided by this rule will 

reduce economic costs of the listing. 

The economic effect of the rule is a 

benefit to the captive-breeding 

operations for the three antelopes 

because it allows the take and interstate 

commerce of captive-bred specimens. 

The rule, by itself, will not have an 

annual economic impact of more than 

$100 million, or significantly affect any 

economic sector, productivity, jobs, the 

environment, or other units of 

government. A cost-benefit and 

economic analysis is not required. This 

rule does not create inconsistencies 

with other Federal agencies’ actions. 

Thus, no Federal agency’s actions are 

affected by this final rule. 

This rule will not materially affect 

entitlements, grants, user fees, loan 

programs, or the rights and obligations 

of their recipients. The rule will not 

raise novel legal or policy issues. The 

Service has previously promulgated 

species-specific rules for other 

endangered and threatened species, 

including other rules for captive-bred 

specimens. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

To assess the effects of the rule on 

small entities, we focused on the exotic 

wildlife ranching community in the 

United States because these are the 

entities most likely to be affected by the 

rule. We determined that this rule will 

not have a significant economic effect 

on a substantial number of small entities 

as defined under the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) 

because it allows for the continued 

breeding of the species and trade in live 

specimens, embryos, gametes, and 

sport-hunted trophies of the three 

antelopes. An initial Regulatory 

Flexibility Analysis was not required. 

52318 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

Accordingly, a Small Entity Compliance 

Guide was not required. This rule 

reduces the regulatory impact, because 

without this rule all prohibitions of 

section 9 of the Endangered Species Act 

would apply (i.e., take; export; delivery, 

receipt, carrying, transport or shipment 

in interstate or foreign commerce, in the 

course of a commercial activity; or sale 

or offering for sale in interstate or 

foreign commerce). 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act 

This rule is not a major rule under 5 

U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. 

This rule would reduce certain 

regulatory obligations and will not have 

an annual effect on the economy of $100 

million or more; will not cause a major 

increase in costs or prices for 

consumers, individual industries, 

Federal, State, or local government 

agencies, or geographic regions; and will 

not have significant adverse effects on 

competition, employment, investment, 

productivity, innovation, or the ability 

of U.S.-based enterprises to compete 

with foreign-based enterprises. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

In accordance with the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501, et 

seq.), this rule does not impose an 

unfunded mandate on State, local, or 

tribal governments or the private sector 

of more than $100 million per year. This 

final rule will not have a significant or 

unique effect on State, local, or tribal 

governments or the private sector. A 

Small Government Agency Plan is not 

required. 

Takings 

In accordance with Executive Order 

12630, this final rule does not have 

significant takings implications. By 

reducing the regulatory burden placed 

on affected individuals resulting from 

the listing of the three antelopes as 

endangered species, this rule will not 

affect the likelihood of potential takings. 

Affected individuals will have more 

freedom to pursue activities that involve 

captive-bred specimens without first 

obtaining individual authorization. 

Federalism 

In accordance with Executive Order 

13132, this final rule does not have 

sufficient federalism implications to 

warrant the preparation of a federalism 

assessment. 

Civil Justice Reform 

In accordance with Executive Order 

12988, the Office of the Solicitor has 

determined that this final rule does not 

unduly burden the judicial system and 

meets the requirements of sections 3(a) 

and 3(b)(2) of the Executive Order. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

The Office of Management and Budget 

approved the information collection in 

part 17 and assigned OMB Control 

Numbers 1018–0093 and 1018–0094. 

This rule does not impose new reporting 

or recordkeeping requirements on State 

or local governments, individuals, 

businesses, or organizations. We cannot 

conduct or sponsor, and you are not 

required to respond to, a collection of 

information unless it displays a 

currently valid OMB control number. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

Council on Environmental Quality 

regulations in 40 CFR 1501.3(b) state 

that an agency ‘‘may prepare an 

environmental assessment on any action 

at any time in order to assist agency 

planning and decision making.’’ We 

drafted an environmental assessment for 

the proposed rule in accordance with 

the criteria of the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA). A final environmental 

assessment was prepared based on 

comments received and a Finding of No 

Significant Impact was prepared. 

Government-to-Government 

Relationship With Tribes 

In accordance with the President’s 

memorandum of April 29, 1994, 

‘‘Government-to-Government Relations 

with Native American Tribal 

Governments’’ (59 FR 22951) and 512 

DM 2, we have evaluated possible 

effects on Federally recognized Indian 

tribes and have determined that there 

are no effects. 

Executive Order 13211 

We have evaluated this final rule in 

accordance with E.O. 13211 and have 

determined that this rule will have no 

effects on energy supply, distribution, or 

use. Therefore, this action is not a 

significant energy action, and no 

Statement of Energy Effects is required. 

References Cited 

Antelope Taxon Advisory Group. 2002a. 

Addax Fact Sheet. American Zoo and 

Aquarium Association. http:// 

www.csew.com/antelopetag. 

Antelope Taxon Advisory Group. 2002b. 

Scimitar-Horned Oryx Fact Sheet. American 

Zoo and Aquarium Association. http:// 

www.csew.com/antelopetag. 

IUCN (World Conservation Union). 2003. 

2003 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. 

http://www.iucn.org. 

Mallon, D.P., and S.C. Kingswood 

(Compilers). 2001. Antelopes. Part 4: North 

Africa, the Middle East, and Asia. Global 

Survey and Regional Action Plans. SSC 

Antelope Specialist Group. IUCN, Gland, 

Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. Viii + 260 

pp. 

Metzler, S. 2000. Addra Gazelle Gazella 

dama ruficollis North American Regional 

Studbook: December 31, 1999 Update. 

Disney’s Animal Kingdom: Orlando, Florida. 

Mungall, E.C. 2004. Submission for the 

Comment Period Listing of Scimitar-horned 

Oryx, Addax, and Dama Gazelle Under the 

Endangered Species Act: A Technical Report 

Prepared for the Exotic Wildlife Association. 

Noble, D. 2002. Overview and status of 

captive antelope populations. Third Annual 

Sahelo-Saharan Interest Group Meeting, p.41 

SSIG (Sahelo—Saharan Interest Group) 

2002. Third Annual Sahelo—Saharan Interest 

Group Meeting Proceedings. Available from 

S. Monfort, Chair SSIG, National Zoological 

Park. Smithsonian Institution: Washington, 

DC. 

Author 

The primary author of this notice is 

Robert R. Gabel, Chief, Division of 

Scientific Authority, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (see ADDRESSES

section). 

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 

Endangered and threatened species, 

Exports, Imports, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, and 

Transportation. 

Regulation Promulgation 

■ Accordingly, we hereby amend part 

17 of subpart C, subchapter B of chapter 

I, title 50 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations, as set forth below: 

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 § 17.21 by adding paragraph 

(h) to read as follows: 

§ 17.21 Prohibitions. 

* * * * * 

(h) U.S. captive-bred scimitar-horned 

oryx, addax, and dama gazelle. 

Notwithstanding paragraphs (b), (c), (e), 

and (f) of this section, any person 

subject to the jurisdiction of the United 

States may take; export or re-import; 

deliver, receive, carry, transport or ship 

in interstate or foreign commerce, in the 

course of a commercial activity; or sell 

or offer for sale in interstate or foreign 

commerce live wildlife, including 

embryos and gametes, and sport-hunted 

trophies of scimitar-horned oryx (Oryx 

dammah), addax (Addax 

nasomaculatus), and dama gazelle 

(Gazella dama) provided: 

(1) The purpose of such activity is 

associated with the management or 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 52319 

transfer of live wildlife, including 

embryos and gametes, or sport hunting 

in a manner that contributes to 

increasing or sustaining captive 

numbers or to potential reintroduction 

to range countries; 

(2) The specimen was captive-bred, in 

accordance with § 17.3, within the 

United States; 

(3) All live specimens of that species 

held by the captive-breeding operation 

are managed in a manner that prevents 

hybridization of the species or 

subspecies. 

(4) All live specimens of that species 

held by the captive-breeding operation 

are managed in a manner that maintains 

genetic diversity. 

(5) Any export of or foreign commerce 

in a specimen meets the requirements of 

paragraph (g)(4) of this section, as well 

as parts 13, 14, and 23 of this chapter; 

(6) Each specimen to be re-imported 

is uniquely identified by a tattoo or 

other means that is reported on the 

documentation required under 

paragraph (h)(5) of this section; and 

(7) Each person claiming the benefit 

of the exception of this paragraph (h) 

must maintain accurate written records 

of activities, including births, deaths, 

and transfers of specimens, and make 

those records accessible to Service 

officials for inspection at reasonable 

hours set forth in §§ 13.46 and 13.47 of 

this chapter. 

(8) The sport-hunted trophy consists 

of raw or tanned parts, such as bones, 

hair, head, hide, hooves, horns, meat, 

skull, rug, taxidermied head, shoulder, 

or full body mount, of a specimen that 

was taken by the hunter during a sport 

hunt for personal use. It does not 

include articles made from a trophy, 

such as worked, manufactured, or 

handicraft items for use as clothing, 

curios, ornamentation, jewelry, or other 

utilitarian items for commercial 

purposes. 

Dated: August 25, 2005. 

Paul Hoffman, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and 

Wildlife and Parks. 

[FR Doc. 05–17432 Filed 9–1–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

RIN 1018–AI82 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Final Rule To List the 

Scimitar-Horned Oryx, Addax, and 

Dama Gazelle as Endangered 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), determine 

endangered status for scimitar-horned 

oryx (Oryx dammah), addax (Addax 

nasomaculatus), and dama gazelle 

(Gazella dama) throughout their ranges, 

pursuant to the Endangered Species Act 

of 1973, as amended (Act). The best 

available information indicates that the 

causes of decline of these antelopes are 

(1) habitat loss through desertification, 

permanent human settlement, and 

competition with domestic livestock, 

and (2) regional military activity and 

uncontrolled killing. These threats have 

caused the possible extinction in the 

wild of the scimitar-horned oryx and the 

near-extinction of the addax in the wild. 

All three species are in danger of 

extinction throughout their ranges. 

Accordingly, we are listing these three 

antelopes as endangered. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

October 3, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: The complete file for this 

rule is available for inspection, by 

appointment, during normal business 

hours in the office of the Division of 

Scientific Authority, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, 4401 North Fairfax 

Drive, Room 750, Arlington, Virginia 

22203. 

Requests for copies of the regulations 

regarding listed wildlife and inquiries 

about prohibitions and permits may be 

addressed to: Division of Management 

Authority, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Room 

700, Arlington, Virginia 22203 

(telephone, 703–358–2104; fax, 703–

358–2281). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Robert R. Gabel, Chief, Division of 

Scientific Authority, at the above 

address; by telephone, 703–358–1708; 

by fax, 703–358–2276; or by e-mail, 

Scientificauthority@fws.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The scimitar-horned oryx stands 

about 47 inches [in, 119 centimeters 

(cm)] tall and weighs around 450 

pounds [lb, 204 kilograms (kg)]. It is 

generally pale in color, but the neck and 

chest are dark reddish brown. As the 

name suggests, adult animals possess a 

pair of horns curving back in an arc up 

to 50 in (127 cm) long. The scimitarhorned oryx once had an extensive 

range in North Africa throughout the 

semi-deserts and steppes north of the 

Sahara, from Morocco to Egypt. 

The addax stands about 42 in (106 

cm) tall at the shoulder and weighs 

around 220 lb (100 kg). It is grayish 

white and its horns twist in a spiral up 

to 43 in (109 cm) long. The addax once 

occurred throughout the deserts and 

sub-deserts of North Africa, from the 

Atlantic Ocean to the Nile River. 

The dama gazelle stands about 39 in 

(99 cm) tall at the shoulder and weighs 

around 160 lb (72 kg). The upper part 

of its body is mostly reddish brown, 

whereas the head, rump, and underparts 

are white. Its horns curve back and up, 

but reach a length of only about 17 in 

(43 cm) long. The dama gazelle, the 

largest of the gazelles, was once 

common and widespread in arid and 

semi-arid regions of the Sahara. 

Of the three antelope species, the 

scimitar-horned oryx has been the most 

susceptible to the threats it faced. In 

Egypt, the species became extinct over 

a century ago (M. Riad, Minister of State 

for Environmental Affairs, in litt., 

August 2003). By the mid-1900s, 

intensive killing had extirpated the 

scimitar-horned oryx from Morocco 

(Fact sheet submitted to the Service by 

M. Anechoum, Secretary General, 

Department of Waters and Forests in the 

Campaign Against Desertification, 

Morocco, pers. com., September 2003). 

By the mid-1980s, it was estimated that 

only a few hundred were left in the 

wild, with the only viable populations 

known to be in Chad. There have been 

no reported sightings of this species in 

the wild since the late 1980s. The World 

Conservation Union (IUCN) has 

declared the species extinct in the wild 

(IUCN 2003). In 1983, it was listed in 

Appendix I of the Convention on 

International Trade in Endangered 

Species of Wild Fauna and Flora 

(CITES). Captive-bred specimens are 

being introduced into large fenced areas 

in Morocco and Tunisia, and these 

animals may be released into the wild 

when adequately protected habitat is 

available (Antelope Taxon Advisory 

Group 2002b). 

It is believed that the addax was 

extirpated from Tunisia during the 

1930s, and the last animals were killed 

in Libya and Algeria in 1966 and 1970, 

respectively. The last observation of 

addax in Egypt was in the 1970s (Riad,