Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Threatened Status for the Goliath Frog

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

RIN 1018-AB66

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Threatened Status

for the Goliath Frog

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Service determines threatened status for the goliath frog

of Central Africa. This huge amphibian is narrowly distributed and is

vulnerable to commercial collection for export and to other problems.

This rule implements the protection of the Endangered Species Act of

1973, as amended, for this species. Permits will be available for

scientific purposes, to enhance propagation or survival, and for

zoological exhibition.

EFFECTIVE DATE: January 9, 1995.

ADDRESSES: The complete file for this rule is available for public

inspection, by appointment, from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday through

Friday, in Room 750, 4401 Fairfax Drive, Arlington, Virginia 22203.

Express and messenger-delivered mail should be sent to the Office of

Scientific Authority at this same address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Charles W. Dane, Chief, Office of

Scientific Authority; Mail Stop: Arlington Square, Room 725; U.S. Fish

and Wildlife Service; Washington, D.C. 20240 (phone 703-358-1708; FAX

703-358-2276).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Recent investigations have suggested an alarming worldwide decline

in populations of frogs and other amphibians (Johnson 1994; Rabb 1990).

Because of their generally complex life cycles, with aquatic larval and

terrestrial adult stages, their low and high status in community food

chains, and their permeable skin, amphibians constitute a group

particularly sensitive to environmental disturbances. The precise

causes of the decline are not well understood, but indicated factors in

various cases include forest destruction, habitat fragmentation,

overhunting, acid rain, metallic pollution, pesticides, and soil

drying. Problems with frogs and other amphibians have been observed in

such diverse places as Western Canada, South Carolina, Guatemala,

Ecuador, Puerto Rico, Borneo, and Australia.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has received

information that the largest frog in the world is among those in

jeopardy. This species, the goliath frog (Conraua goliath) of Central

Africa, reaches a recorded weight of up to 7.2 pounds (3.3 kilograms),

a head and body length of 12.6 inches (320 millimeters), and a total

length, including the hind leg and foot, of about 32 inches (813

millimeters); there have been reports of even larger individuals (Klass

1990; Sabater Pi 1985; Zahl 1967). This giant amphibian has a

relatively small range. It occurs along major rivers in dense

rainforest within an area of about 10,000 square miles (26,000 square

kilometers) in Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, and southwestern Cameroon. In

contrast, the common bullfrog (Rana catesbiana), which is about half

the size, occurs all across eastern North America from Quebec to Mexico

(Frost 1985; Sabater Pi 1985; Zahl 1967).

Previous Federal Action

In a petition dated April 9, 1991, the Service was requested to add

the goliath frog to the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. The

petition was from Dr. Christina M. Richards (Biology Department, Wayne

State University, Detroit, Michigan 48202) and Dr. Victor H. Hutchison

(Department of Zoology, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma

73069). It was accompanied by extensive data on the biology of the

goliath frog, and pointed out such problems as slow maturation, rarity,

restricted distribution, habitat destruction, local hunting,

international trade, high prices for living specimens, and poor

adaptation to captivity.

Section 4(b)(3) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended

in 1982 (Act), requires two findings with respect to a petition to

list, delist, or reclassify a species. Within 90 days of receipt, a

finding must be made on whether the petition presents substantial

information indicating that the requested action may be warranted, and,

within 12 months of receipt, a finding must be made as to whether the

action is warranted, not warranted, or warranted but precluded by other

listing activity.

The Service examined the data submitted by the petitioners and

consulted other authorities. It also learned that the goliath frog is

classified as vulnerable by the World Conservation Union (IUCN). This

review led the Service to make the findings that the petition did

present substantial information and that the requested action was

warranted. These findings were incorporated in a proposal to list the

goliath frog as a threatened species, published in the Federal Register

of September 12, 1991 (56 FR 46397-46400). The comment period on the

proposal was reopened by notices in the Federal Registers of July 19,

1994 (59 FR 36737-36738), and October 25, 1994 (59 FR 53628-53629).

Summary of Comments and Recommendations

In the proposed rule of September 12, 1991, and associated

notifications, all interested parties were requested to submit

information that might contribute to development of a final rule.

Cables were sent to United States embassies in countries within the

range of the subject species, requesting new data and the comments of

the governments of those counties. Of the 12 responses received on the

original proposal, 7 indicated support for classification of the

goliath frog as threatened, 2 indicated opposition, and 3 did not

clearly express an opinion in that regard. Several of the respondents

provided new information, some of which has been incorporated into this

document. Specific substantive points made in opposition to listing, or

to other aspects of the proposal, are discussed below.

Point 1.--Listing will bring about unnecessary restrictions and

paperwork, thereby interfering with legitimate importation and

research, and thus preventing efforts to propagate and maintain the

goliath frog in captivity. Service response.--The Act requires the

Service to list species that may be endangered or threatened, based on

the best scientific and commercial data available, regardless of any

inconvenience that may be caused by such listing. The Act provides for

the issuance of permits to conduct otherwise prohibited activities for

the purposes of scientific research, enhancement of propagation and

survival of the species, and zoological exhibition. The Service will

make every effort to expedite the processing of permit applications.

Point 2.--The distribution of the goliath frog is poorly known and

may extend over a considerably larger area than given in the proposal.

Service response.--Based on the species' habitat requirements, it is

possible that the range of the frog is larger than now known, but

reports to this effect have so far been anecdotal. The original

petitioners have indicated that the species does occur in a small part

of Gabon.

Point 3.--The habitat of the goliath frog is not so restricted as

indicated in the proposal, the species not being limited, for example,

to areas of cascades and rapids. Service response.--Information from

several respondents, with varying views on listing, suggests that this

is a valid point. The following statement by Dr. Peter Brazaitis (New

York Zoological Society, personal communication) may help resolve the

issue: ``I agree they are not restricted to waterfalls and rapids but

are found in small cul-de-sacs and broad deep rivers most of which

descend over waterfalls and rapids at some point and probably are well

oxygenated.''

Point 4.--The goliath frog is not rare, is easily located and

caught, and probably numbers in the hundreds of thousands, and also is

not a major food source for the native people. Service response.--The

preponderance of evidence does suggest that the species can still be

collected in small numbers by knowledgeable persons who are willing to

go out into rivers, well away from settled areas, at night, thereby

taking some risks because of the currents and other hazards. It is

utilized for food whenever practical, though there are conflicting

views on the resulting impact on over-all populations. Reports of large

numbers may in part be based on observations of other species of the

genus Conraua that occur in the same area and that may reach the size

of immature C. goliath. In any case, absolute numbers may have little

bearing on degree of threat. As noted below in the ``Summary of Factors

Affecting the Species,'' the government of Cameroon now classifies the

goliath frog as ``rare or on the way to extinction.''

Point 5.--Extensive habitat destruction has not been observed.

Service response.--While several respondents indicated this to be the

case, other authorities with experience in the involved areas, as cited

below in the ``Summary of Factors Affecting the Species.'' do consider

deforestation and various other forms of environmental disruption to be

a threat to the goliath frog.

Point 6.--There is little demand for commercial or exhibitional

purposes and few, if any, frogs are now being exported. Service

response.--Information from Dr. Brazaitis (as cited above) and

Professor Jean-Luc Amiet of the University of Yaounde (as conveyed by

the petitioners and in a telegram from the United States embassy in

Yaounde), suggests that commercial interest was stimulated following

initial collection activity and display in the 1980s. There is much

potential demand for this spectacular amphibian, for such purposes as

the pet trade, exhibition, and food production. The exact number of

individuals exported from the range states is unknown but most reports

suggest a figure in the hundreds during the 1980s. Statistics compiled

by Professor Amiet show a total of 433 licensed exports from Cameroon

from 1985 to 1990, with about 80 percent going to the United States and

the vast majority being for commercial purposes. A 1991 ban on

exportation from Cameroon reportedly has not been fully successful.

Service records indicate that at least 72 individuals were exported

from Equatorial Guinea and Cameroon to the United States in 1992; 5

more arrived in February 1993. The extremely high prices that have been

advertised may be evidence both of demand and difficulty in obtaining

specimens.

Point 7.--The goliath frog is not necessarily difficult to

transport or maintain in captivity, and there is no reliable evidence

showing that it is slow to reach maturity. Service response.--A

consensus among respondents is that it is possible to successfully

transport and maintain the goliath frog, and that some individuals have

survived for months or years in captivity, but this involves

considerable effort and diligence, many frogs have been lost, and much

more must be learned before intensive utilization would be safe. All

individuals kept by zoos in the United States have now died. Little is

known about the biology of this species, the suggested slow maturation

being only a judgment based on the great size of full grown

individuals.

In the notices of July 19 and October 25, 1994, reopening the

comment period, the Service observed that the above concerns had been

raised and solicited additional information on these matters and other

aspects of the status and biology of the goliath frog. Cables again

were sent to United States embassies in appropriate countries and other

requests were made for new data and comments. Of the 6 new responses

received, 3 expressed support for the original proposal and 3 indicated

that no new information had been obtained. Considering these responses

and all previously collected material, the Service now is proceeding

with a final rule to determine threatened status for the goliath frog.

Summary of Factors Affecting the Species

After a thorough review and consideration of all information

available, the Service has determined that the goliath frog should be

classified as threatened. Section 4(a)(1) of the Endangered Species Act

(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and regulations (50 CFR part 424) promulgated

to implement the listing provisions of the Act were followed. A species

may be determined to be endangered or threatened due to one or more of

the five factors described in section 4(a)(1). These factors and their

application to the goliath frog (Conraua goliath) are as follows:

A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment

of Its Habitat or Range

The goliath frog has a narrowly restricted range and has been

reported to be rare therein. Despite its spectacular size it was not

formally described until 1906. Subsequent investigators have commented

repeatedly on how difficult the species is to locate, approach, and

capture (Gewalt 1977; Perret 1957; Perret and Mertens 1957). Data

compiled by the petitioners show that only 91 specimens were reported

collected through 1967. The rate of collection later increased in

response to growing scientific and commercial interest. Letters

solicited by the petitioners from authorities in Cameroon pointed out

that logging, deforestation, and dams are affecting the limited habitat

of the goliath frog. For example, Roger C. Fotso of the Laboratory of

Zoology, University of Yaounde, wrote: ``It is clear that the giant

frog suffers from habitat loss, due to intensive deforestation in the

whole region. The region in which this frog occurs corresponds to one

of the most populated parts of the country * * * urgent measures need

to be taken to protect the giant frog in Cameroon where it is not just

lucky enough to occur in a national park or reserve.'' Professor Amiet

(as cited by the United States embassy in Yaounde) noted that the

recent establishment of reserves in Cameroon appears to have slowed or

stabilized the decline of the species. With respect to the situation in

neighboring Equatorial Guinea, Sabater-Pi (1985) reported that the

habitat of the goliath frog ``has been altered mainly by human

activities, such as deforestation for agricultural purposes, forest

exploitation and establishment of new villages. All these factors

drastically have altered the ecosystem inhabited by the species.''

B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or

Educational Purposes

The goliath frog is hunted by the native peoples within its range,

some of whom consider its meat a delicacy. Information presented by

Zahl (1967) suggests that this species is so difficult to approach, its

capture is a cause for celebration. Sabater-Pi (1985) warned that it

was threatened by native hunting and that effective protective measures

were needed at the national level.

A new problem, and one causing much of the immediate concern for

the species, is capture and export of live animals. Because of its

size, the goliath frog has much potential for public and private

exhibition. Advertisements submitted by the petitioners show that the

asking price in early 1990 was $599.00 for ``small'' specimens and

$2,500.00 for individuals weighing 6-9 pounds. In July 1992, a zoo

purchased six frogs from an importer at $1,200.00 each. An individual

exported from the United States to Japan in October 1993 had a declared

value of $1,400.00. One U.S. dealer is reported to have imported many

individuals and to have attempted to enter some in the well-known Frog

Jump Jubilee in Calaveras County, California. Further information and

statistics on commercial trade are given above in ``point 6'' of the

``Summary of Comments and Recommendations.''

In a letter to the petitioners, Bob Johnson, Curator of Amphibians

and Reptiles at the Toronto Metropolitan Zoo, expressed concern that

current levels of commercial exploitation might be excessive in

relation to sustainability of wild populations of Conraua goliath. He

noted also that survival rates in previous importations have not been

high, primarily because of shipping stress and the time required to

acclimate the species to captive conditions.

C. Disease or Predation

While not now known to be general problems, disease and natural

predation are to be expected and may become of serious conservation

concern for populations that already have been severely reduced or

fragmented through human disturbance.

D. The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms

Although the goliath frog currently is classified as vulnerable by

the IUCN (Groombridge 1994), it is not covered by the Convention on

International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora

(CITES). Preliminary to the Eighth Meeting of the Conference of Parties

to CITES, held in Kyoto in March 1992, the Service submitted a proposal

to include the goliath frog in Appendix II of CITES. However, at the

meeting the Service withdrew this proposal, based mainly on an analysis

developed by the IUCN Species Survival Commission Trade Specialist

Group (Brautigam 1992). A subsequent review of that analysis suggests

that it is not complete; all three of the substantive listed references

are actually negative responses (two of them from the same parties) to

the Service's proposals to list the goliath frog as threatened or to

include it in Appendix II of CITES. The analysis does not utilize

information from the proposals themselves, the various positive

responses thereto, or the listing petition.

As noted above, exportation of the goliath frog from Africa

continued at least to 1993, and effectiveness of local regulation is

not well understood. However, in a letter of May 11, 1994, the Ministry

of Environment and Forests of Cameroon notified the Service that the

goliath frog is now classified as a species that is ``rare or on the

way to extinction.'' It is under complete legal protection in Cameroon

and cannot be taken without special authorization from the Ministry.

E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting its Continued Existence

Although Conraua goliath is by far the world's largest frog, its

eggs, tadpoles, and young are hardly larger than those of other frogs

(Sabater-Pi 1985; Zahl 1967). The petitioners therefore state that C.

goliath undoubtedly takes a longer time than do most frogs to become

sexually mature, and a mature animal removed from a population will not

be replaced quickly. They note also that mortality in captivity is

extremely high and zoos have been unable to keep specimens for long

term display. As pointed out in the above ``Summary of Comments and

Recommendations,'' some individuals have been successfully maintained

for lengthy periods in captivity, but only through much effort and

expense. Attempts to establish colonies at Lincoln Park Zoo, Chicago,

and Washington Park Zoo, Portland, were unsuccessful. All frogs there

now have died and the Service is not aware of any other zoos that are

maintaining the species.

The decision to determine threatened status for the goliath frog

was based on an assessment of the best available scientific

information, and of past, present, and probable future threats to the

species. This giant frog is narrowly distributed, and is vulnerable to

human exploitation and environmental disruption. In the proposed rule

the Service noted that further review might lead to a final rule

classifying the goliath frog as endangered, rather than threatened.

Information obtained during the comment period, however, supports

recognition of the species as threatened. Although there are questions

about population status and biological factors, there is general

concern regarding long-term habitat trends and potential commercial

demand. If conservation measures are not implemented, further declines

are likely to occur, increasing the danger of extinction for the

goliath frog. Critical habitat is not being determined, as its

designation is not applicable to foreign species.

Available Conservation Measures

Conservation measures provided to species listed as endangered or

threatened pursuant to the Act include recognition, requirements for

Federal protection, and prohibitions against certain practices.

Recognition through listing encourages conservation measures by

Federal, international, and private agencies, groups, and individuals.

Section 7(a) of the Act, as amended, and as implemented by

regulations at 50 CFR part 402, requires Federal agencies to evaluate

their actions that are to be conducted within the United States or on

the high seas, with respect to any species that is proposed or listed

as endangered or threatened and with respect to its proposed or

designated critical habitat (if any). Section 7(a)(2) requires Federal

agencies to ensure that activities they authorize, fund, or carry out

are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed

species or to destroy or adversely modify its critical habitat. If a

proposed Federal action may affect a listed species, the responsible

Federal agency must enter into formal consultation with the Service. No

such actions within U.S. jurisdiction are currently known with respect

to the species covered by this proposal.

Section 8(a) of the Act authorizes the provision of limited

financial assistance for the development and management of programs

that the Secretary of the Interior determines to be necessary or useful

for the conservation of endangered species in foreign countries.

Sections 8(b) and 8(c) of the Act authorize the Secretary to encourage

conservation programs for foreign endangered species, and to provide

assistance for such programs, in the form of personnel and the training

of personnel.

Section 9 of the Act, and implementing regulations found at 50 CFR

17.21 and 17.31 set forth a series of general prohibitions and

exceptions that apply to all threatened wildlife. These prohibitions,

in part, make it illegal for any person subject to the jurisdiction of

the United States to take, 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 threatened wildlife. It also

is illegal to possess, sell, deliver, transport, or ship any such

wildlife that has been taken in violation of the Act. Certain

exceptions apply to agents of the Service and State conservation

agencies.

Permits may be issued to carry out otherwise prohibited activities

involving endangered and threatened wildlife under certain

circumstances. Regulations governing permits are codified at 50 CFR

17.22, 17.23, and 17.32. Such permits are available for scientific

purposes, to enhance propagation or survival, or for incidental take in

connection with other such lawful activities. For threatened species,

there are also permits for zoological exhibition, educational purposes,

or special purposes consistent with the purposes of the Act.

National Environmental Policy Act

The Service has 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, as amended. A

notice outlining the Service's reasons for this determination was

published in the Federal Register of October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244).

Literature Cited

Brautigam, A. 1992. Analyses of proposals to amend the CITES

Appendices. Submitted to the Eighth Meeting of the Conference of the

Parties, Kyoto, Japan. World Conservation Union Species Survival

Commission Trade Specialist Group.

Frost, D.R., ed. 1985. Amphibian species of the world. A taxonomic

and geographical reference. Allen Press and Association of

Systematic Collections, Lawrence, Kansas, v + 732 pp.

Gewalt, W. 1977. Einige Bemerkungen uber Fang, Transport und Haltung

des Goliathfrosches (Conraua goliath, Boulenger). Zool. Garten

47:161-192.

Groombridge, B., ed. 1994. 1994 IUCN red list of threatened animals.

World Conservation Union, Gland, Switzerland, lv + 286 pp.

Johnson, B. 1994. Declining amphibian populations task force.

Species, no. 21-22, pp. 118-119.

Klass, T. 1990. Monster frogs have leg up on other jumpers. Ann

Arbor News, January 9.

Perret, J.L. 1957. Observations sur Rana goliath Blgr. Bull. Soc.

Neuchateloise Sci. Nat. 80:195-202.

Perret, J.L., and R. Mertens. 1957. Etude d'une collection

herpetologique faite au Cameroun de 1952 a 1955. Bull. de I.F.A.N.

19:548-601.

Rabb, G.B. 1990. Declining amphibian populations. Species, no. 13-

14, pp. 33-34.

Sabater-Pi, J. 1985. Contribution to the biology of the giant frog

(Conraua goliath, Boulenger). Amphibia-Reptilia 6:143-153.

Zahl, P.A. 1967. In quest of the world's largest frog. Natl. Geogr.

134:446-452.

Author

The primary author of this rule is Ronald M. Nowak, Office of

Scientific Authority, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C.

20240 (703-358-1708).

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17

Endangered and threatened wildlife, Exports, Imports, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements, Transportation, and Wildlife.

Regulation Promulgation

Accordingly, part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the

Code of Federal Regulations, is hereby amended 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; Public Law 99-625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise

noted.

2. Section 17.11(h) is amended by adding the following, in

alphabetical order under AMPHIBIANS, to the List of Endangered and

Threatened Wildlife:

Sec. 17.11 Endangered and threatened wildlife.

* * * * *

(h) * * *

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

Species Vertebrate population

--------------------------------------------------- Historic range where endangered or Status When listed Critical Special

Common name Scientific name threatened habitat rules

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

Amphibians

* * * * * * *

Frog, goliath........... Conraua goliath......... Cameroon, Equatorial Entire................. T 566 NA NA

Guinea, Gabon.

* * * * * * *

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

Dated: November 30, 1994.

Mollie H. Beattie,

Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.

[FR Doc. 94-30132 Filed 12-5-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-55-M