[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 115 (Tuesday, June 17, 2025)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 25564-25582]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office []
[FR Doc No: 2025-10288]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-2025-0028; FXES1111090FEDR-256-FF09E22000]
RIN 1018-BI11
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Endangered Species
Status for Seven Species of Pangolin
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose to
list seven species of pangolin distributed throughout Asia and Africa
as endangered under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended
(Act). This determination also serves as our 12-month finding on a
petition to list these species. After a review of the best available
scientific and commercial information, we find that listing these
species is warranted. Accordingly, we propose to list the Chinese
pangolin (Manis pentadactyla), Indian pangolin (Manis crassicaudata),
Sunda pangolin (Manis javanica), Philippine pangolin (Manis
culionensis), white-bellied pangolin (Phataginus tricuspis), black-
bellied pangolin (Phataginus tetradactyla) and giant pangolin (Smutsia
gigantea) as endangered species under the Act. Finalizing this rule as
proposed would add these species to the List of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife and extend the Act's protections to these species.
We also propose to revise the entry for Temminck's ground pangolin,
which is listed as an endangered species under the Act, to reflect the
species' current common name spelling and to use the most recently
accepted scientific name.
DATES: We will accept comments received or postmarked on or before
August 18, 2025. Comments submitted electronically using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES, below) must be received by 11:59
p.m. Eastern Time on the closing date. We must receive requests for a
public hearing, in writing, at the address shown in FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT by August 1, 2025.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by one of the following methods:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: . In the Search box, enter FWS-HQ-ES-2025-0028,
which is the docket number for this rulemaking. Then, click on the
Search button. On the resulting page, in the panel on the left side of
the screen, under the Document Type heading, check the Proposed Rule
box to locate this document. You may submit a comment by clicking on
``Comment.''
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail to: Public Comments
Processing, Attn: FWS-HQ-ES-2025-0028, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
MS: PRB/3W, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803.
We request that you send comments only by the methods described
above. We will post all comments on . This
generally means that we will post any personal information you provide
us (see Information Requested, below, for more information).
Availability of supporting materials: Supporting materials, such as
the species status assessment report, are
[[Page 25565]]
available at at Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-2025-
0028.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rachel London, Manager, Branch of
Delisting and Foreign Species, Ecological Services Program, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, MS: ES, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA
22041-3803; telephone 703-358-2171. Individuals in the United States
who are deaf, deafblind, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability
may dial 711 (TTY, TDD, or TeleBraille) to access telecommunications
relay services. Individuals outside the United States should use the
relay services offered within their country to make international calls
to the point-of-contact in the United States. Please see Docket No.
FWS-HQ-ES-2025-0028 on for a document that
summarizes this proposed rule.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Summary
Why we need to publish a rule. Under the Act, a species warrants
listing if it meets the definition of an endangered species (in danger
of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range) or
a threatened species (likely to become an endangered species within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its
range). If we determine that a species warrants listing, we must list
the species promptly and designate the species' critical habitat to the
maximum extent prudent and determinable. We have determined that the
Chinese pangolin, Indian pangolin, Sunda pangolin, Philippine pangolin,
white-bellied pangolin, black-bellied pangolin, and giant pangolin meet
the Act's definition of an endangered species; therefore, we are
proposing to list them as such. Listing a species as an endangered or
threatened species can be completed only by issuing a rule through the
Administrative Procedure Act rulemaking process (APA; 5 U.S.C. 551 et
seq.). No critical habitat will be designated for these species
because, under 50 CFR 424.12(g), we will not designate critical habitat
within foreign countries or in other areas outside of the jurisdiction
of the United States.
What this document does. We propose to list the Chinese pangolin,
Indian pangolin, Sunda pangolin, Philippine pangolin, white-bellied
pangolin, black-bellied pangolin, and giant pangolin as endangered
species under the Act. We also propose to correct the entry for another
pangolin species that is already listed under the Act.
The basis for our action. Under the Act, we may determine that a
species is an endangered or threatened species because of any of five
factors: (A) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range; (B) overutilization for
commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes; (C)
disease or predation; (D) the inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms; or (E) other natural or manmade factors affecting its
continued existence. We have determined that the Chinese pangolin,
Indian pangolin, Sunda pangolin, Philippine pangolin, white-bellied
pangolin, black-bellied pangolin, and giant pangolin meet the Act's
definition of endangered species due primarily to the threat of
overexploitation for local subsistence use, other consumptive use, and
trafficking in international markets for use in traditional medicine
products. Other factors such as habitat loss and poor genetic health
affect these species.
Information Requested
We intend that any final action resulting from this proposed rule
will be based on the best scientific and commercial data available and
be as accurate and as effective as possible. Therefore, we request
comments or information from other governmental agencies, Native
American Tribes, the scientific community, industry, or any other
interested parties concerning this proposed rule. We particularly seek
comments concerning:
(1) The species' biology, range, and population trends, including:
(a) Biological or ecological requirements of these species,
including habitat requirements for feeding, breeding, and sheltering;
(b) Genetics and taxonomy;
(c) Historical and current range, including distribution patterns
and the locations of any additional populations of these species;
(d) Historical and current population levels, and current and
projected trends; and
(e) Past and ongoing conservation measures for these species, their
habitat, or both.
(2) Threats and conservation actions affecting these species,
including:
(a) Factors that may be affecting the continued existence of these
species, which may include habitat destruction, modification, or
curtailment; overutilization; disease; predation; the inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms; or other natural or manmade factors;
(b) Biological, commercial trade, or other relevant data concerning
any threats (or lack thereof) to these species; and
(c) Existing regulations or conservation actions that may be
addressing threats to these species.
(3) Additional information concerning the historical and current
status of these species.
Please include sufficient information with your submission (such as
scientific journal articles or other publications) to allow us to
verify any scientific or commercial information you include.
Please note that submissions merely stating support for, or
opposition to, the action under consideration without providing
supporting information, although noted, do not provide substantial
information necessary to support a determination. Section 4(b)(1)(A) of
the Act directs that determinations as to whether any species is an
endangered or a threatened species must be made solely on the basis of
the best scientific and commercial data available.
You may submit your comments and materials concerning this proposed
rule by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. We request that you
send comments only by the methods described in ADDRESSES.
If you submit information via , your
entire submission--including any personal identifying information--will
be posted on the website. If your submission is made via a hardcopy
that includes personal identifying information, you may request at the
top of your document that we withhold this information from public
review. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We
will post all hardcopy submissions on .
Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting
documentation we used in preparing this proposed rule, will be
available for public inspection on .
Our final determination may differ from this proposal because we
will consider all comments we receive during the comment period as well
as any information that may become available after this proposal. Based
on the new information we receive (and, if relevant, any comments on
that new information), we may conclude that any of the seven pangolin
species are threatened instead of endangered, or we may conclude that
one or more of the seven pangolin species does not warrant listing as
either an endangered species or a threatened species. In our final
rule, we will clearly explain our rationale and the basis for our final
decision, including why we made changes, if any, that differ from this
proposal.
[[Page 25566]]
Public Hearing
Section 4(b)(5) of the Act provides for a public hearing on this
proposal, if requested. Requests must be received by the date specified
in DATES. Such requests must be sent to the address shown in FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. We will schedule a public hearing on this
proposal, if requested, and announce the date, time, and place of the
hearing, as well as how to obtain reasonable accommodations, in the
Federal Register at least 15 days before the hearing. We may hold the
public hearing in person or virtually via webinar. We will announce any
public hearing on our website, in addition to the Federal Register. The
use of virtual public hearings is consistent with our regulations at 50
CFR 424.16(c)(3).
Previous Federal Actions
On July 15, 2015, we received a petition from Born Free USA, Center
for Biological Diversity, Humane Society International, The Humane
Society of the United States, and the International Fund for Animal
Welfare that requested to list Manis pentadactyla, M. javanica, M.
culionensis, M. crasssicaudata, M. tricuspis, M. gigantea, and M.
tetradactyla as endangered species under the Act. On the same date, we
received a second petition for rulemaking under the APA from the same
group of petitioners to treat and protect these same seven species as
threatened or endangered species because of their similarity of
appearance to M. temminckii, or Temminck's ground pangolin, which is
listed as an endangered species under the Act. On March 16, 2016, we
published in the Federal Register (81 FR 14058) a 90-day finding
combining the two petitioned actions (listing each species as either a
threatened species or an endangered species based on the five factors
under section 4(a)(1) of the Act, or treating and protecting each as
threatened or endangered due to a similarity of appearance to
Temminck's ground pangolin under section 4(e) of the Act) into a single
finding that all seven species may be warranted for listing.
On May 24, 2021, we informed petitioners of our decision on the APA
petition in which we considered the requirements for treating the seven
pangolin species as endangered or threatened species under section 4(e)
on the basis of their similarity of appearance to the listed Temminck's
ground pangolin and determined that the seven petitioned pangolin
species do not meet our criteria for treating them as endangered
species or threatened species due to similarity of appearance to the
endangered Temminck's ground pangolin. In this proposed rule, we use
the valid taxonomic entities Phataginus tricuspis, Phataginus
tetradactyla, and Smutsia gigantea, rather than the prior taxonomic
synonyms M. tricuspis, M. tetradactyla, and M. gigantea, as used in the
petitions, respectively, because of changes in taxonomy of pangolin
species since the petitions were submitted (see Taxonomy, below).
Peer Review
A species status assessment (SSA) team prepared an SSA report for
the Chinese, Indian, Sunda, Philippine, white-bellied, black-bellied,
and giant pangolin. The SSA team was composed of Service biologists, in
consultation with other species experts. The SSA report represents a
compilation of the best scientific and commercial data available
concerning the status of the species, including the impacts of past,
present, and future factors (both negative and beneficial) affecting
the species.
In accordance with our joint policy on peer review published in the
Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), and our August 22,
2016, memorandum updating and clarifying the role of peer review in
listing and recovery actions under the Act (/sites/default/files/documents/peer-review-policy-directors-memo-2016-08-22.pdf), we are soliciting independent scientific review of the
information contained in the Chinese, Indian, Sunda, Philippine, white-
bellied, black-bellied, and giant pangolin SSA report. We will seek
peer review of the SSA report from at least three independent peer
reviewers. We will ensure that the opinions of peer reviewers are
objective and unbiased by following the guidelines set forth in the
August 22, 2016, memorandum, which updates and clarifies Service policy
on peer review (Service 2016, entire). The purpose of peer review is to
ensure that our decisions are based on scientifically sound data,
assumptions, and analysis. Accordingly, our final decisions may differ
from this proposal. Comments from peer reviewers will be posted at
, incorporated, as appropriate, into the SSA
report, and included in the decision file for the final rule.
Taxonomy
Eight species of pangolins within three genera (Manis, Phataginus,
and Smutsia) are distributed throughout sub-Saharan Africa and southern
Asia. The genus Manis is composed of four species found in Asia
including: Chinese pangolin (M. pentadactyla), Indian pangolin (M.
crassicaudata), Sunda pangolin (M. javanica), and Philippine pangolin
(M. culionensis). Two genera of pangolins are native to sub-Saharan
Africa including the arboreal (tree-dwelling) pangolins in genus
Phataginus, and the fossorial (burrowing) pangolins in genus Smutsia.
Genus Phataginus includes white-bellied pangolin (P. tricuspis) and
black-bellied pangolin (P. tetradactyla); and genus Smutsia includes
giant pangolin (S. gigantea) and Temminck's ground pangolin (S.
temminckii), which was listed as an endangered species under the Act in
1976 (41 FR 24062, June 14, 1976).
Although the petitions refer to the Chinese, Indian, Sunda,
Philippine, white-bellied, black-bellied, and giant pangolin as Manis
species, best available data indicate that the genus occurring in Asia
(Manis) is taxonomically distinct from the genera occurring in Africa
(Phataginus and Smutsia) (Gaudin et al., 2009, p. 236). The Integrated
Taxonomic Information System (ITIS) recognizes a single genus, Manis,
of pangolins (ITIS 2025, unpaginated). However, the International Union
for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Species Survival Commission
Pangolin Specialist Group recognizes three distinct genera following
Gaudin et al. (2009, entire). We recognize the three genera as the best
scientific and commercial data available and use that taxonomy to
inform this proposed rule.
As explained above, these taxonomic changes include revisions to
the scientific name of the Temminck's ground pangolin. The entry for
Temminck's ground pangolin on the List of Endangered and Threatened
Wildlife was last revised in 2016 (81 FR 51550; August 4, 2016).
Currently, the entry for Temminck's ground pangolin (Smutsia
temminckii) appears on the list with the common name ``Pangolin,
Temnick's ground'' and the scientific name ``Manis temmincki''. With
this document, we also propose revisions to the entry at 50 CFR
17.11(h) for Temminck's ground pangolin to reflect the species' current
common name spelling and to use the most recently accepted scientific
name.
Proposed Listing Determination
Background
Pangolins are uniquely armored mammals, covered in keratinized
scales that account for roughly 20 percent of their body weight. When
threatened they assume a defensive posture, curling into a tight ball
projecting the sharp
[[Page 25567]]
edges of their scales outward to deter predators. Pangolins have
digestive tracts specialized for eating ants and termites, and a slow
life-history strategy (e.g., delayed and infrequent reproduction over a
longer lifespan and generation length, with more parental involvement
in care of individual offspring).
Chinese Pangolin--Ecology
The Chinese pangolin (Manis pentadactyla) was historically
distributed throughout southern People's Republic of China (China),
north and central Vietnam, Laos, northern Thailand, Burma, southern
Bhutan, Nepal, northern Bangladesh, and northeast India (Wu et al.,
2020a, p. 54). Suitable habitats include tropical and subtropical
forest types (rainforest, bamboo, conifer, mixed), grasslands, and
agricultural areas (Wu et al., 2020, pp. 55-56). Home ranges have been
estimated to be 96 hectares (ha) (0.37 square miles (mi\2\)) for males
and 24.4 ha (0.09 mi\2\) for females across various studies (Wu et al.,
2020, p. 56). The Chinese pangolin is primarily fossorial and digs
resident burrows for shelter surrounded by vegetation and feeding
burrows in open grassy areas that allow access to its preferred
myrmecophagous prey (termites and ants) (Heath, 1992, p. 4). Resident
burrows are used for 1-15 consecutive days before individuals move to
another burrow (Wu et al., 2020, p. 57). Males and females can occupy
up to 80 and 40 resident burrows, respectively, within their home
ranges (Challender et al., 2019, p. 7).
The mating season has been recorded from February to July, and
females give birth in burrows between September and February (Zhang et
al., 2016, p. 138). Gestation lasts from 180-225 days, usually
producing one offspring annually, although the species may be capable
of producing two offspring a year in rare cases (Zhang et al., 2016, p.
138). Offspring wean at around 4 months of age and reach sexual
maturity between 12-18 months old (Sun et al., 2018, pp. 3-4). The
lifespan of this species in the wild is unknown. In captivity, the
Chinese pangolin has been recorded to reach 18 years of age; however,
the rate of survival in captivity is generally very low (Yang et al.,
2007, p. 3).
Indian Pangolin--Ecology
The Indian pangolin (Manis crassicaudata) was historically
distributed throughout India, Sri Lanka, southern Nepal, northern
Bangladesh, and eastern Pakistan (Mahmood et al., 2020, pp. 75-77).
This species inhabits forests, grasslands, mangroves, and scrubland,
with a preference for drier areas in its range (Karawita et al., 2018,
pp. 6-8; Mahmood et al., 2020, p. 77). Behavior and life history vary
throughout its range with more arboreal behavior being exhibited in
tropical rainforest despite the species being primarily fossorial
elsewhere (Heath, 1995, p. 3). The Indian pangolin uses sloped terrain
to dig resting burrows with large rocks and boulders to offer more
structural integrity and to dig feeding burrows in forested patches
(Karawita et al., 2018, pp. 11-13; Mahmood et al., 2020, p. 79).
Breeding is year-round, and gestation has been observed to last 251
days, producing one offspring annually (Mahmood et al., 2020, p. 82;
Mohapatra et al., 2018, p. 559). Young reach sexual maturity around 3
years of age (Mahmood et al., 2020, p. 83; Mohapatra and Panda, 2014,
p. 79).
Sunda Pangolin--Ecology
The Sunda pangolin (Manis javanica) was historically distributed
throughout southeast Asia with a range extending into Thailand, Burma,
Malaysia, Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, Indonesia, Singapore and Brunei
Darussalam (Chong et al., 2020, pp. 93-95). This species typically
occurs in lower elevation tropical and evergreen forests, peat swamps,
grasslands, and agricultural areas (Chong et al., 2020, p. 95). Average
home range for the species is estimated to be 1.5 square kilometers
(km\2\) (0.58 mi\2\), regardless of habitat type, location, or sex
(Gray et al., 2023, p. 426). This species is semi-arboreal, using both
burrows and large trees for sheltering and foraging myrmecophagous prey
(Gray et al., 2023, p. 426). Its strong prehensile tail aids in
climbing and can support its entire body weight, enabling individuals
to hang from branches in defense posture to escape predators (Chong et
al., 2020, pp. 98-99).
The Sunda pangolin is primarily nocturnal and solitary, aside from
female-offspring parental care (Chong et al., 2020, p. 98). The species
does not have a defined breeding season, and gestation lasts between
106-207 days, producing one young at a time (Zhang et al., 2015, p.
133). Little is known about the age of sexual maturity for this
species, but individuals are considered adult between 1-2 years of age
(Chong et al., 2020, pp. 100-101).
Philippine Pangolin--Ecology
The Philippine pangolin (Manis culionensis) is endemic to the
Palawan region of the Philippines, which includes Palawan Island, the
Calamian Islands, and several smaller surrounding islands (Coron,
Culion, Balabac, Busuanga, and Dumaran) (Schoppe et al., 2020, pp. 113-
114). The species has also been introduced to Apulit Island. Philippine
pangolin uses a variety of forested habitats, including grassland-
forest mosaics, logged forests, coastal forests, mangroves, and
agricultural lands (Schoppe et al., 2020, p. 114). The species is
believed to prefer strangler fig (Ficus) species, which provide fruit
to attract ants and consist of structured root systems that individuals
can shelter within (Schoppe et al., 2020, p. 114). The Philippine
pangolin has a mean home range size of 47.3 ha (0.18 mi\2\), which may
vary between sexes and seasons (Schoppe, unpublished data, reported in
Schoppe et al., 2020 p. 115). Another study of six Philippine pangolins
reported female home ranges of 47 and 75 ha (0.18 and 0.29 mi\2\), and
male home ranges of 59, 96, and 120 ha (0.23, 0.37, and 0.46 mi\2\),
with males showing evidence of territoriality. Movements in the dry
season were also longer, possibly related to needing to forage over
larger distances to find food and water (Palawan Council for
Sustainable Development, 2020, p. 27). The species is semi-arboreal and
forages on the ground and in trees, eating ants and termites.
Sheltering burrows are built on the forest floor, in tree hollows,
between buttress roots, and near large rocks (Schoppe et al., 2020, p.
116).
Breeding for the Philippine pangolin is presumed to be year-round,
and traditional ecological knowledge indicates that the species
produces one young at a time (Schoppe et al., 2020, p. 118). Little is
known about gestation and age of sexual maturity, but it is believed to
be similar to the Sunda pangolin.
White-Bellied Pangolin--Ecology
The white-bellied pangolin (Phataginus tricuspis) was historically
distributed through western and central sub-Saharan Africa with a range
across Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Sierra Leone, Liberia, C[ocirc]te
d'Ivoire, Ghana, Togo, Benin, Nigeria, Cameroon, Central African
Republic, South Sudan, Uganda, Kenya, Rwanda, Burundi, Democratic
Republic of the Congo, Republic of the Congo, Gabon, Equatorial Guinea,
northern Angola, and isolated locations in Tanzania and Zambia (Jansen
et al., 2020, pp. 145-147). This species is semi-arboreal, using a
variety of forested habitats including rainforests and savanna-forest
mosaics and dense woodlands (Jansen et al., 2020, p. 146). Home ranges
vary from 3-30 ha (0.01-0.12 mi\2\), with individuals typically
[[Page 25568]]
traveling 400-700 m (0.25-0.43 mi) each night (Jansen et al., 2020, p.
147).
The white-bellied pangolin is nocturnal and shelters in tree
burrows near feeding burrow sites adjacent to ant and termite mounds
(Akpona et al., 2008, pp. 199-200). Breeding is year-round with
gestation lasting 140-209 days, producing one young annually (Jansen et
al., 2020, pp. 150-150). Little is known about sexual maturity and
lifespan, but the species has lived up to 10 years at the San Diego Zoo
(Jansen et al., 2020, p. 151); however, the rate of survival of
pangolins in captivity is generally very low (Hua et al., 2015).
Compared to other pangolin species, white-bellied pangolin scales are
thinner, potentially making it more susceptible to natural predators
such as leopards (Jansen et al., 2020, p. 150).
Black-Bellied Pangolin--Ecology
The black-bellied pangolin (Phataginus tetradactyla) has a
discontinuous historical range in sub-Saharan Africa spanning the
Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC),
Republic of the Congo, Gabon, Equatorial Guinea, Cameroon, southern
Nigeria, Ghana, C[ocirc]te d'Ivoire, Liberia, southern Guinea, and
Sierra Leone (Gudehus et al., 2020, p. 129). As an almost entirely
arboreal species, it inhabits rainforests, closed canopy forests, and
forested areas near swamps and rivers, and may prefer forests dominated
by palms (Kingdon and Hoffmann, 2013, p. 390). Home ranges vary by
individual with averages measuring 9.27 ha (0.038 mi\2\) (Gudehus et
al., 2020, p. 131).
The black-bellied pangolin is primarily diurnal and has a highly
specialized diet of tree ants. This species shelters in tree hollows,
does not typically use resident or feeding burrows, and rarely descends
to the ground (Gudehus et al., 2020, p. 132). Breeding is not seasonal,
and gestation is estimated to last 104 days. Black-bellied pangolins
are thought to reach sexual maturity around 2 years of age, but their
life span is unknown (Gudehus et al., 2020, p. 134). This species is
the most elusive species of pangolin (with one of the most severe
stress responses to disturbance) and is thought to prefer densely
vegetated, undisturbed habitat (Gudehus et al., 2020, pp. 134-135).
Giant Pangolin--Ecology
The giant pangolin (Smutsia gigantea) was historically distributed
throughout equatorial Africa, with its range extending into Senegal,
Guinea-Bissau, Guinea, Sierra Leone, Liberia, C[ocirc]te d'Ivoire,
Ghana, Nigeria, Cameroon, Central African Republic, South Sudan,
Uganda, Rwanda, Tanzania, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Republic of
Congo, Gabon, and Equatorial Guinea (Hoffmann et al., 2020, pp. 161-
163). This species inhabits forest habitats, including forest-savanna
mosaics, seasonal swamp forests, wooded savanna, and wet grasslands
(Hoffmann et al., 2020, p. 163). While quantitative ecological studies
are lacking, home ranges of the giant pangolin are believed to be
large, with fixed resting locations from which individuals will move
several kilometers in search of food (Hoffmann et al., 2020, p. 164).
Individuals may use a network of multi-species burrows throughout their
home range and may prefer to dig burrows near other supportive
structures such as fallen trees, buttresses, dense vegetation, and
caves (Hoffmann et al., 2020, p. 164).
The giant pangolin is nocturnal (Amin et al., 2023, p. 97). Prey
include ants and termites with a preference for larger species (Difouo
et al., 2021, p. 551). Breeding is year-round, producing one offspring
at a time. Young remain dependent on the mother until the next
offspring is born (Hoffmann et al., 2020, pp. 166-167). Among pangolin
species, the giant pangolin is thought to have the longest generation
time (roughly 15 years; Nixon et al., 2019 pp. 1-2).
Regulatory and Analytical Framework
Regulatory Framework
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and the implementing
regulations in title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations set forth
the procedures for determining whether a species is an endangered
species or a threatened species, issuing protective regulations for
threatened species, and designating critical habitat for endangered and
threatened species.
The Act defines an ``endangered species'' as a species that is in
danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its
range and a ``threatened species'' as a species that is likely to
become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout
all or a significant portion of its range. The Act requires that we
determine whether any species is an endangered species or a threatened
species because of any of the following factors:
(A) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range;
(B) Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes;
(C) Disease or predation;
(D) The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; or
(E) Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued
existence.
These factors represent broad categories of natural or human-caused
actions or conditions that could have an effect on a species' continued
existence. In evaluating these actions and conditions, we look for
those that may have a negative effect on individuals of the species, as
well as other actions or conditions that may ameliorate any negative
effects or may have positive effects.
We use the term ``threat'' to refer in general to actions or
conditions that are known to or are reasonably likely to negatively
affect individuals of a species. The term ``threat'' includes actions
or conditions that have a direct impact on individuals (direct
impacts), as well as those that affect individuals through alteration
of their habitat or required resources (stressors). The term ``threat''
may encompass--either together or separately--the source of the action
or condition, or the action or condition itself.
However, the mere identification of any threat(s) does not
necessarily mean that the species meets the statutory definition of an
``endangered species'' or a ``threatened species.'' In determining
whether a species meets either definition, we must evaluate all
identified threats by considering the species' expected response and
the effects of the threats--in light of those actions and conditions
that will ameliorate the threats--on an individual, population, and
species level. We evaluate each threat and its expected effects on the
species, then analyze the cumulative effect of all of the threats on
the species as a whole. We also consider the cumulative effect of the
threats in light of those actions and conditions that will have
positive effects on the species, such as any existing regulatory
mechanisms or conservation efforts. The Secretary determines whether
the species meets the definition of an ``endangered species'' or a
``threatened species'' only after conducting this cumulative analysis
and describing the expected effect on the species.
The Act does not define the term ``foreseeable future,'' which
appears in the statutory definition of ``threatened species.'' Our
implementing regulations at 50 CFR 424.11(d) set forth a framework for
evaluating the foreseeable future on a case-by-case basis, which is
further described in the 2009 Memorandum Opinion on the foreseeable
future from the Department of the Interior, Office of the Solicitor (M-
37021, January 16, 2009; ``M-Opinion,'' available online at https://
[[Page 25569]]
www.doi.gov/sites/doi.opengov.ibmcloud.com/files/uploads/M-37021.pdf).
The foreseeable future extends as far into the future as the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service (for species
under that agency's jurisdiction) can make reasonably reliable
predictions about the threats to the species and the species' responses
to those threats. We need not identify the foreseeable future in terms
of a specific period of time. We will describe the foreseeable future
on a case-by-case basis, using the best available data and taking into
account considerations such as the species' life-history
characteristics, threat projection timeframes, and environmental
variability. In other words, the foreseeable future is the period of
time over which we can make reasonably reliable predictions.
``Reliable'' does not mean ``certain''; it means sufficient to provide
a reasonable degree of confidence in the prediction, in light of the
conservation purposes of the Act.
Analytical Framework
The SSA report documents the results of our comprehensive
biological review of the best scientific and commercial data regarding
the status of the species, including an assessment of the potential
threats to the species. The SSA report does not represent our decision
on whether the species should be proposed for listing as an endangered
or threatened species under the Act. However, it does provide the
scientific basis that informs our regulatory decisions, which involve
the further application of standards within the Act and its
implementing regulations and policies.
To assess the Chinese pangolin, Indian pangolin, Sunda pangolin,
Philippine pangolin, white-bellied pangolin, black-bellied pangolin and
giant pangolin viability, we used the three conservation biology
principles of resiliency, redundancy, and representation (Shaffer and
Stein, 2000, pp. 306-310). Briefly, resiliency is the ability of the
species to withstand environmental and demographic stochasticity (for
example, wet or dry, warm or cold years); redundancy is the ability of
the species to withstand catastrophic events (for example, droughts,
large pollution events); and representation is the ability of the
species to adapt to both near-term and long-term changes in its
physical and biological environment (for example, climate conditions,
pathogens). In general, species viability will increase with increases
in (and decrease with decreases in) resiliency, redundancy, and
representation (Smith et al., 2018, p. 306). Using these principles, we
identified each species' ecological requirements for survival and
reproduction at the individual, population, and species levels, and
described the beneficial and risk factors influencing the species'
viability.
The SSA process can be categorized into three sequential stages.
During the first stage, we evaluated the individual species' life-
history needs. The next stage involved an assessment of the historical
and current condition of the species' demographics and habitat
characteristics, including an explanation of how the species arrived at
its current condition. The final stage of the SSA process involved
making predictions about the species' responses to positive and
negative environmental and anthropogenic influences. Throughout all of
these stages, we used the best available information to characterize
viability as the ability of a species to sustain populations in the
wild over time, which we then used to inform our regulatory decision.
The following is a summary of the key results and conclusions from
the SSA report; the full SSA report can be found at Docket No. FWS-HQ-
ES-2025-0028 on .
Summary of Biological Status and Threats
In this discussion, we review the biological condition of each
species and its resources, and the threats that influence the species'
current and future condition, in order to assess their overall
viability and the risks to that viability.
Species Needs
Based on each species' life history described above (see discussion
under Background) and in the SSA report (Service 2025, pp. 31-33), the
seven species of pangolin all require demographically and genetically
healthy populations to be able to withstand demographic and
environmental stochasticity. Demographically healthy populations with
large population sizes and stable or increasing growth rates are better
able to endure and recover from poor environmental conditions and
stochastic events. In species that are long-lived and have a slow
reproductive rate, a stressor that causes direct mortality of adults
could rapidly reduce population size. Pangolins have a single pup per
year, long gestation periods, and generation times ranging from 7 to 15
years. Consequently, with their slow reproductive rate, pangolins
require particularly high levels of adult survival to facilitate
recruitment of new breeders into populations.
All species of pangolins also require genetically healthy
populations to be able to withstand stochasticity and maintain
evolutionary potential. Genetically healthy populations maintain high
genetic diversity within and among populations across a species'
historical range (Kardos et al., 2021, entire). These processes ensure
that populations are resistant to loss of genetic diversity through
genetic drift and inbreeding and maintain standing genetic variation
and evolutionary potential to respond to shifting environmental
conditions.
Pangolins require large, connected populations distributed across
spatially heterogeneous environments, as this scenario maximizes
evolutionary potential. When large populations are distributed across
spatially variable conditions (referred to as spatial or environmental
heterogeneity), the exposure to heterogeneous selection pressures
contribute to local adaptation and adaptive differentiation, which
increases among-population genetic diversity and evolutionary potential
(Forester et al., 2016, pp. 114-115, 2022, pp. 508-512).
Pangolins also require a wide geographic distribution across
spatially heterogeneous environments to minimize the degree to which
correlated dynamics and catastrophic events impact extinction risk.
Species with populations distributed widely across spatially
heterogeneous environments are more likely to experience differential
conditions. They are, thus, more likely to experience asynchronous
environmental conditions and asynchronous demographic fluctuations
among populations (i.e., some populations are doing well while others
are not). This, in turn, guards against concurrent population declines
and, thus, species-wide extinction (Lande et al., 2003, entire).
Conversely, loss of historical range and decline in spatial
heterogeneity increases the risk of correlated dynamics via broad,
regional-scaled environmental stochasticity (e.g., populations
experiencing poor years concurrently). Similarly, the spatial
distribution of populations across the landscape also influences
redundancy. Widely distributed populations across spatially
heterogeneous conditions can also reduce the risk of catastrophic
events affecting multiple populations simultaneously and equally.
Finally, intact landscapes that facilitate habitat connectivity and
gene flow between populations are important for ensuring that
extirpated areas can be recolonized.
[[Page 25570]]
Threats
Poaching and International Trafficking
Pangolins are the world's most heavily trafficked mammal, with
overexploitation identified as the leading cause of population declines
(United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime (UNODC) 2020, pp. 66-67).
Scales are currently the most heavily traded pangolin parts, accounting
for 97 percent of seizures involving pangolins in 2018 (UNODC, 2020, p.
66). Demand for pangolin meat and scales is not species-specific, and
species experiencing lower levels of poaching become increasingly
exploited over time as other pangolin species become rarer. Harvest
pressure has shifted geographically and across species over time as
availability of species have declined because of overexploitation
(Heinrich et al., 2016, p. 247).
Asian pangolins have been used in traditional Chinese medicine for
centuries, and more recently, unsustainable harvest has driven dramatic
declines in pangolin populations (Xing et al., 2020, pp. 227-237;
Challender et al. 2019, unpaginated). As Asian pangolins have declined,
African pangolin species have increasingly been introduced into
international trade, compounding the existing overexploitation from
traditional and bushmeat usage resulting in local declines (Zhang et
al., 2022, p. 2; Boakye et al., 2014, entire, 2015, entire; Soewu et
al., 2020, p. 253; Soewu and Adekanola, 2011, entire). This shift has
created a global trade network in which most pangolin scales are
currently exported from Africa to Southeast Asia with most trafficked
pangolins destined for China and Vietnam (UNODC, 2020, p. 65;
Goss[eacute] et al., 2024, p. 2; Tinsman et al., 2023, entire). An
estimated 0.4 to 2.7 million pangolins are harvested annually in
Central Africa, representing a roughly 150 percent increase over the
last four decades. This trend is accompanied by a growing shift toward
international commercial markets in Asia sourced from Africa (Ingram et
al., 2018, p. 6).
Habitat Loss
Other leading threats to pangolin species include habitat loss and
fragmentation. Pangolins are particularly sensitive to human
disturbance and stress and, thus, likely require minimal interactions
with humans and access to undisturbed habitats. Pangolins that interact
with humans are highly prone to stress responses that can significantly
reduce their health (Hua et al., 2015 pp. 101-103; Yan et al., 2021, p.
1017).
Pangolin habitat quality is dependent on several environmental
factors including suitable climate, canopy cover, ground cover, prey
availability, litter depth, distance to infrastructure (e.g., roads),
slope, and substrate type (Suwal et al., 2020, p. 8; Xian et al., 2022,
pp. 8-16). Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia are experiencing rapid
human population growth, and increasing natural resource and land use
demands that reduce the quality and availability of habitat for
pangolins (Ritchie, 2024, unpaginated). The leading cause of
deforestation in these areas is agricultural land conversion to support
humans as farming shifts to the production of cash crops (Ritchie and
Roser, 2024, unpaginated). In addition, agricultural conversion
increases the application of pesticides, which may lead to direct
poisoning of pangolins and reduction in their prey availability
(Pietersen et al., 2014, p. 174; Avicor et al., 2023, pp. 4-5; Ejomah
et al., 2020, pp. 6-8).
Genetic Health
Levels of genetic diversity are very low across all pangolin
species due to overexploitation, declining populations, and restricted
gene flow linked to habitat loss (Gu et al., 2023, pp. 5, 7, 10). All
species of pangolins also have elevated metrics of inbreeding and
genetic load (reduction in fitness due to homozygosity for deleterious
alleles) (Gu et al., 2023, pp. 5, 7, 10). Taken together, these
indicators of genetic health are associated with increased inbreeding
depression (reduction in fitness due to mating among related
individuals), reduced evolutionary potential (reduced ability to adapt
evolutionarily to changing conditions), and overall reduced viability.
The Sunda, Chinese, white-bellied, black-bellied, and giant pangolins
were all found to have compromised immune function due to
pseudogenization (a mutation that causes loss of function) within an
important cluster of highly conserved gene families that activate the
immune system in the presence of pathogens (Choo et al, 2016, pp. 1314-
1315). The poor genetic health of these species places them at
increased susceptibility to disease. Further, illegal trafficking
occurs under conditions that likely facilitate cross-species
transmission of viruses among pangolins and other animals (Ye et al.,
2023, p. 7).
The petitions we received presented information on additional
threats specific to each of the seven species of pangolin. We assessed
these threats and address them in detail in the SSA report (Service
2025, entire). We focus our discussion within this proposed rule on the
primary threats of overexploitation, habitat loss, and genetic health.
Conservation Efforts and Regulatory Mechanisms
All pangolins are listed in Appendix I of the Convention on
International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora
(CITES), which includes species threatened with extinction that are or
may be affected by trade. Species included in Appendix I receive the
highest level of protection under CITES (CITES Article II(1) and (4);
CITES Article III; 50 CFR part 23). International trade in species
included in Appendix I is permitted only under exceptional
circumstances. Unlike Appendix-II and -III species, international trade
in Appendix-I specimens for primarily commercial purposes is strictly
prohibited under CITES, with only narrow exceptions provided in the
Convention. Legal international trade in Appendix-I species for
commercial purposes is limited to only Appendix-I animals bred in
captivity for commercial purposes at CITES-registered captive-breeding
operations and traded under a valid CITES document with CITES source
code ``D'' in accordance with Resolution Conf. 12.10 and Article
VII(4), and to pre-Convention animals removed from the wild or born in
captivity before the species inclusion in the CITES Appendices (the
pre-Convention date) and traded under a valid CITES pre-Convention
certificate with CITES source code ``O'' in accordance with Article
VII(2) (See CITES Articles III, VII(2), VII(4); Endangered Species Act
section 9(c)(1); 50 CFR 23.5, 23.13, 23.20, 23.23, 23.24, 23.26, 23.27,
23.45, 23.46, 23.55). There are no CITES-registered captive-breeding
operations for pangolin species, so there is virtually no current legal
international trade in pangolin species for commercial purposes, and
any such trade would require a valid CITES pre-Convention certificate
(CITES, 2025a, unpaginated). The pre-Convention date for Chinese,
Indian, Philippine, Sunda, and Temminck's pangolin is July 1, 1975. The
pre-Convention date for black-bellied, giant, and white-bellied
pangolin is February 26, 1976 (CITES, 2021, pp. 56-57).
Despite the transfer of all pangolins to CITES Appendix-I in 2016,
effective January 2, 2017, many efforts to reduce illegal harvest,
poaching, and trafficking have been insufficiently effective,
reflecting some substantial barriers to implementation of CITES
protections. In addition to the lack of complete and effective
implementation of CITES
[[Page 25571]]
regulations for pangolins, there is minimal evidence that their
inclusion in Appendix-I has reduced illegal trade of pangolins
(Challender and O'Criodain, 2020, p. 315). At least 269 tons of
pangolin products have been confiscated globally in the period 2017-
2021 (Environmental Investigation Agency, 2021, p. 6).
While these enforcement efforts and confiscations are important and
necessary measures for the species, there is evidence that demand and
poorly regulated domestic markets in Asia continue to drive poaching
and illegal trade in pangolins, increasingly from poorly regulated
markets in Africa. On August 24, 2023, the Secretary of the Interior,
in consultation with the Secretary of State, certified under the Pelly
Amendment to the Fisherman's Protective Act of 1967 (22 U.S.C.
1978(a)(2)), that nationals of the People's Republic of China (PRC) are
engaging in trade or taking of pangolin, diminishing the effectiveness
of CITES (89 FR 83073, October 15, 2024 and Department of the Interior,
2023, entire). Pursuant to the Pelly Amendment (22 U.S.C. 1978(a)(5)),
while a country such as the PRC is certified under the Pelly Amendment,
the President may consider whether to direct the Secretary of the
Treasury to prohibit the importation of certain products from that
country into the United States. Any such import prohibitions would
apply until the President determines that they no longer are
appropriate or until the Secretary of the Interior, in consultation
with the Secretary of State, determines that the reasons for which the
Pelly Amendment certification was made no longer prevail and terminates
the certification. Additionally, actions that the United States and the
PRC have committed to undertake (and associated progress) related to
pangolin conservation were shared at the 33rd Meeting of the CITES
Animals Committee in July 2024 (CITES 2024a, entire; CITES 2024b,
entire) and the CITES 78th Meeting of the CITES Standing Committee in
February 2025 (CITES 2025b, entire; CITES 2025c, entire), respectively.
Nonprofit organizations from around the world have worked
extensively to raise awareness of pangolin conservation issues. Local
rescue groups have been established to attempt to rehabilitate and
release poached pangolins; however, the success rate of rehabilitation
and conservation impact is unknown. Captive-breeding of pangolins has
been attempted by more than 100 zoos and institutions over the last 150
years with very limited success, with most offspring dying before
reaching 6 months of age (Hua et al., 2015, pp. 101). Adult pangolins
held in captivity also have a very high mortality rate, with many only
surviving days to weeks in captivity (Wu and Ma, 2007, p. 7). Large-
scale pangolin captive-breeding is unlikely to ever feasibly satisfy
trade demands due to the rarity of the species, complex dietary needs,
stress-induced immune suppression, unsuccessful captive transport and
holding, breeding, and rearing, and consumer reception of captive-bred
products (Challender et al., 2019, pp. 5-6). Failure of captive-
breeding also limits the feasibility of conservation breeding programs
that could replace individuals harvested from the wild or maintain
captive populations to conserve genetic diversity (Snyder et al., 1996,
entire).
Cumulative Effects
We note that, by using the SSA framework to guide our analysis of
the scientific information documented in the SSA report, we have
analyzed the cumulative effects of identified threats and conservation
actions on these species. To assess the current and future condition of
these species, we evaluate the effects of all the relevant factors that
may be influencing these species, including threats and conservation
efforts. Because the SSA framework considers not just the presence of
the factors, but to what degree they collectively influence risk to the
entire species, our assessment integrates the cumulative effects of the
factors and replaces a standalone cumulative-effects analysis.
Current Condition
We now describe the current condition of each species of pangolin
based upon the key historical and ongoing threats of overexploitation,
habitat loss, and genetic health, and the effects of these threats on
the viability of populations of these species, as indicated by the best
scientific and commercial data available.
Chinese Pangolin--Current Condition
Historically, the Chinese pangolin has been harvested in large
numbers, primarily for meat consumption in southern China, leather
production, and traditional medicine (Challender et al., 2019a,
entire). An unsustainable rate of harvest led to ``commercial
extinction'' (i.e., insufficient population to meet demand) of Chinese
pangolin in mainland China by the 1990s, prompting China to illegally
import large numbers of Chinese pangolins from Laos, Vietnam, and Burma
(Challender et al., 2020, p. 265; Zhang, 2009, p. 70).
In response to harvest pressure, the supply of pangolins in
Southeast Asia subsequently collapsed in 1995, and the price of scales
more than doubled by 1996. As a result, contemporary trafficking in
pangolins has shifted harvest of Chinese pangolin away from local
subsistence use to international markets (Challender et al., 2020, p.
265). Poaching remains widespread in mainland China. It is estimated
that illegal trade involved at least 3,500 Chinese pangolins in the
period 2000-2019; these estimates are minimum values because roughly
105,000 pangolins sourced from Asia could not be identified to the
species level (Challender et al., 2020, p. 268). Furthermore, these
estimates are all based on seizures and reported CITES international
trade; substantially more harvest likely occurred than has been
observed, detected, or reported.
Land cover loss is another threat reducing the number, health, and
distribution of Chinese pangolin populations. Throughout the historical
range of the Chinese pangolin, 19.4 million ha of tree cover was lost
from 2001 to 2023, constituting a roughly 12 percent decrease since
2000 (Hansen et al., 2013, unpaginated; Global Forest Watch, 2014,
unpaginated). In the last few decades, China has implemented an
afforestation program designed to help meet climate change goals
(planting trees in areas that did not previously have forests, as
contrasted with reforestation efforts that would be designed to restore
lost forest habitat). However, this program has not fully offset
overall forest declines, and more importantly for pangolin
conservation, these efforts include a substantial amount of monoculture
plantations that are not conducive to restoring or establishing usable
pangolin habitat (Hua et al., 2018, p. 113).
Quantitative data on the census sizes of Chinese pangolin
populations has been lacking due to the species' rarity, and its
nocturnal and elusive behavior (Challender et al., 2019a, p. 5). The
IUCN Red List Assessment for Chinese pangolin estimates that
populations have declined by more than 80 percent (Challender et al.,
2019c., p. 1). The population in mainland China was estimated at
50,000-100,000 individuals at the end of the 1990s, which equates to
roughly an 89-94 percent decline overall in mainland China from the
1960s to the 1990s. In 2008, the population in mainland China was
estimated to be 25,000-49,450 (Wu, 2004, p. 1; Zhang et al., 2022, p.
6). The Chinese pangolin has also disappeared
[[Page 25572]]
from more than half of its historical range in southern China (Gao et
al., 2022, p. 7).
Genetic data provide a meaningful proxy for population health
(Service 2025, p. 60). Recent genomics studies provide information on
historical population trajectories, current population structure,
effective population sizes, and genetic health across the species'
range (Hu et al., 2020, entire; Wang et al., 2022, entire; Wei et al.,
2024, entire). The most recent and comprehensive of these studies
identified three main populations distributed across southern China.
Within these populations, genomic data indicate declining population
trends, reduced genetic diversity, high levels of inbreeding, and very
small effective population sizes, all of which point to compromised
population health (Wei et al., 2024, pp. 2-6). These findings
corroborate other genetic studies that have identified reduced genetic
diversity (Gu et al., 2023, pp. 5-7; Hu et al., 2020, pp. 802-807; Wang
et al., 2022, pp. 4-7).
The Chinese pangolin is currently characterized by small effective
population sizes, reduced genetic diversity, elevated levels of
inbreeding, and increased genetic load, all of which are strong
indicators of reduced viability and elevated extinction risk. Small
effective population size makes a population more vulnerable to loss of
genetic diversity through genetic drift and more likely to be impacted
by inbreeding, which in turn, can reduce birth and survival rates. The
highly reduced distribution of the Chinese pangolin adversely impacts
the species' ability to withstand catastrophic events. The Chinese
pangolin is therefore less able to withstand demographic and
environmental stochasticity (i.e., reduced resiliency) or catastrophic
events (i.e., reduced redundancy) and less able to show an evolutionary
response to changing conditions (i.e., reduced adaptive capacity or
representation). These indicators suggest that the Chinese pangolin is
currently experiencing and will continue to experience compromised
population fitness, adaptability, and viability, even in the absence of
threats.
Indian Pangolin--Current Condition
Harvest for bushmeat and other local uses is a historical and
ongoing threat to Indian pangolins. Hunting by Tribal communities is
deeply rooted in tradition because they rely on the meat as a source of
protein and use the scales and claws for curios and traditional
medicinal purposes (Mahmood et al., 2020, p. 84). Estimating the volume
of domestic use of Indian pangolin bushmeat and scales throughout the
species' range is challenging, in part because in India the legality of
hunting varies by region. However, the Indian pangolin is thought to be
declining across all range countries, as its low reproductive rate
cannot keep pace with the rates of hunting (Gayen et al., 2024, p. 30).
Population growth in rural areas increases the demand for bushmeat for
subsistence hunting and pangolin parts for generating income (Nielsen
et al., 2017, p. 285).
Starting in the early 2000s, Indian pangolin scales have been
sourced in India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and potentially Nepal for use in
China (Mahmood et al., 2020, p. 84). Data from seizures of Indian
pangolin scales suggest that around 1,724 Indian pangolins were
trafficked internationally between 2011 and 2017 (Mahmood et al., 2020,
p. 85). The apparent rise in trafficking of this species may be linked
to the declining populations of Chinese and Sunda pangolins. It could
also be associated with growing awareness of the financial value of
pangolin scales (Mahmood et al., 2020, pp. 84-85). There is also
evidence that organized crime networks are involved in the trafficking
of Indian pangolins. Seized scales have been found in shipments also
containing illegal arms, ammunition, drugs, and parts of other
illegally traded species, implicating involvement of organized crime
(Mohapatra et al., 2015, p. 34).
Habitat loss compounds the effects of harvest and poaching to
reduce the number, health, and distribution of Indian pangolin
populations. India, which encompasses the majority of the species'
range, has the largest human population in the world and has
experienced rapid land cover changes. Between 1880 and 2010, India lost
26 million ha of forest and 20 million ha of grasslands and shrublands
to the expansion of croplands and urban development (H. Tian et al.,
2014, p. 81). By 2000, only 8.6 percent of the Indian pangolin's range
remained forested (Hansen et al. 2013, unpaginated; Global Forest Watch
2014, unpaginated).
The Indian pangolin is classified as critically endangered by the
IUCN, with projected population declines exceeding 80 percent between
2019 and 2040, driven by extensive overexploitation and habitat loss
(Mahmood et al., 2019, p. 1). Quantitative data on abundance is
limited; however, reports of declines across several parts of the
species' range are available (Mahmood et al., 2020, p. 83). Surveys
conducted among local community members and indigenous hunters indicate
that the Indian pangolin is considered very rare and is experiencing
declines throughout most of its range (Akrim et al., 2017, p. 9924;
D'Cruze et al., 2018, p. 98; Gayen et al., 2024, p. 30).
Genetic data provide a meaningful proxy for population health
(Service 2025, p. 60). A genetic study using whole genome resequencing
identified several metrics of poor genetic health for Indian pangolins.
In particular, genetic diversity is very low (Gu et al., 2023, p. 5),
lower even than the critically endangered black rhino. Genomic
inbreeding is also elevated as are levels of genetic load, which point
to potential negative fitness impacts of overall low genetic diversity
and elevated inbreeding of Indian pangolin (Gu et al., 2023, p. 5).
These indicators of poor genetic health are likely to be associated
with overall reduced population fitness, adaptability, and viability
(Kardos et al., 2021, entire; Willi et al., 2022, entire).
Indian pangolin is currently characterized by very low genetic
diversity, highly elevated levels of inbreeding, and increased genetic
load, all of which are strong indicators of reduced viability and
elevated extinction risk. In addition, populations of Indian pangolins
are declining. The Indian pangolin is therefore less able to withstand
demographic and environmental stochasticity (i.e., reduced resiliency).
The reduced distribution of Indian pangolin populations within a small
and fragmented range adversely impacts the species' ability to
withstand catastrophic events (i.e., reduced redundancy). Due to poor
genetic health, the Indian pangolin is less able to show an
evolutionary response to changing conditions (i.e., reduced adaptive
capacity or representation). These indicators suggest that the Indian
pangolin is currently experiencing and will continue to experience
compromised population fitness, adaptability, and viability, even in
the absence of threats.
Sunda Pangolin--Current Condition
Harvest and poaching have been important historical stressors for
the Sunda pangolin and have occurred throughout the species' range. The
species has been widely used as a source of bushmeat and traditional
medicine in Peninsular Malaysia, Malaysian Borneo, and Indonesia, as
well as in Vietnam, where the species is also consumed as a luxury meat
in urban areas (Challender et al., 2019b, pp. 11-12).
[[Page 25573]]
There is a long history of harvesting this species for its scales
and leather for international trade. Harvest of the Sunda pangolin has
increased over time as the availability of Chinese pangolins declined
due to overexploitation (Challender et al., 2020, p. 261). Despite
being a protected species in primary exporting countries (e.g.,
Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand), between 1975 and 2000, trade
reported to CITES involved an estimated 442,966 Sunda pangolins, most
of which went to the United States and Mexico for leather goods
(Challender et al., 2020, p. 261). In addition, between 1994 and 2000,
an estimated 47,000 Sunda pangolins were reportedly traded from
Malaysia to China and Hong Kong (PRC) for use of scales in traditional
medicine (Challender et al., 2020, p. 262). The introduction of zero
annual--export quotas in 2000 caused a decline in reported trade of
Sunda pangolin skins (Challender et al., 2020, p. 265), but also marked
a shift toward more profitable international trafficking in scales
(Gomez et al., 2017, p. 12). Since only a small proportion of illegal
trade is observed or confiscated, these numbers represent minimum
estimates of harvest for Sunda pangolin.
Habitat loss is another threat interacting with harvest and
poaching that is reducing the number, health, and distribution of Sunda
pangolin populations. Since 2000, tree cover has decreased by 25
percent within the Sunda pangolin's range, a reduction driven by
industrial plantations (e.g., palm oil and rubber plantations),
shifting agriculture, fuelwood production, and urban development
(Hansen et al., 2013, unpaginated; Global Forest Watch, 2014,
unpaginated). These land cover changes have had dramatic impacts on the
availability of suitable habitat for the Sunda pangolin. In Malaysian
Borneo, 91 percent of suitable habitat for the Sunda pangolin is highly
to moderately accessible to humans, resulting in pangolins being
readily available in local markets (Panjang et al., 2024, p. 11). The
Sunda pangolin's home range decreases with suitable forest cover,
terrain, and resources, indicating that the species does not disperse
to avoid habitat and resource constrictions (Gray et al., 2023, p.
430).
The Sunda pangolin is listed as critically endangered on the IUCN
Red List of Threatened Species due to population declines attributed to
overexploitation (Challender et al., 2019b, p. 1). The species is
declining in the majority of its range (Chong et al., 2020, p. 101).
The IUCN Red List assessment estimates that populations have declined
80 percent between 1998 and 2019 due to overexploitation (Challender et
al., 2019b, p. 1). Singapore may be home to the only stable population
of Sunda pangolins, and it is estimated at roughly 1,046 individuals in
2019 (Chong et al., 2020, p. 101).
Genetic data provide a meaningful proxy for population health
(Service 2025, p. 60). Two genetic studies using whole genome
resequencing have identified several metrics of very poor genetic
health for the Sunda pangolin. Both studies have found extremely low
genetic diversity in Sunda pangolin populations (Gu et al., 2023, p. 5;
Hu et al., 2020, p. 802), with values among the lowest for pangolin
species, and much lower than heterozygosity values for the critically
endangered black rhino. These studies also identified high levels of
genomic inbreeding in Sunda pangolin populations, the highest of all
pangolin species (Gu et al., 2023, p. 5). Finally, both studies
identified elevated levels of genetic load, which point to potential
negative fitness impacts of overall low genetic diversity and elevated
inbreeding. These indicators of poor genetic health are likely to be
associated with reduced fitness due to inbreeding, the accumulation of
deleterious alleles (i.e., genetic load), reduced evolutionary
potential, and overall reduced population fitness, adaptability, and
viability (Kardos et al., 2021, entire; Willi et al., 2022, entire).
Genetic structure within Sunda pangolin populations also varied
between mainland individuals and those occupying Southeast Asian
islands except Java (Hu et al., 2020, pp. 800-807), with mainland
populations having lower genetic health metrics (Hu et al., 2020, pp.
802-806). These results indicate that while all Sunda pangolin
populations included in the study have highly compromised genetic
health, the mainland population is at even higher risk of more
immediate deleterious impacts on fitness and viability.
The Sunda pangolin is currently characterized by very low genetic
diversity, very high levels of inbreeding, and increased genetic load,
all of which are strong indicators of reduced viability and elevated
extinction risk. The reduced distribution of Sunda pangolin populations
adversely impacts the species' ability to withstand catastrophic
events. The Sunda pangolin is, therefore, less able to withstand
demographic and environmental stochasticity (i.e., reduced resiliency)
or catastrophic events (i.e., reduced redundancy) and less able to show
an evolutionary response to changing conditions (i.e., reduced adaptive
capacity or representation). These indicators suggest that the Sunda
pangolin is currently experiencing and will continue to experience
compromised population fitness, adaptability, and viability, even in
the absence of threats.
Philippine Pangolin--Current Condition
Harvest for subsistence and traditional medicine has been an
important historical stressor for the Philippine pangolin. Hunting is
the leading threat to biodiversity in the Palawan region where the
Philippine pangolin is endemic, and the species is harvested for food
and traditional medicine throughout its range (Schoppe and Cruz, 2009,
pp. 177, 182). The Philippine pangolin is a narrow endemic species,
meaning its range is limited to Palawan Island and smaller surrounding
islands (Schoppe et al., 2020, pp. 113-114). Though harvest for
domestic use persists today, in the 2000s, several ethnic groups in the
Palawan region began to shift from subsistence to market economies,
with a concurrent increase in harvest of pangolins (Schoppe and Cruz,
2009, pp. 181-182). Consequently, the Philippine pangolin is currently
hunted by both local and non-local hunters throughout the region and
trafficked through the northern areas of Palawan; these pangolins are
then traded locally, domestically, and internationally (Archer et al.,
2021, pp. 5-8).
Although the Philippine pangolin has not historically been reported
much in international trade and seizure records, there has been an
increase in reports since 2010 (Archer et al., 2021, p. 4), and a sharp
acceleration since 2016 (MacBeath et al., 2022, p. 1). The precise
magnitude of this increase is unclear as some Philippine pangolins
historically described in international trade and seizure records could
have been Sunda pangolins, as they were not differentiated as separate
species until 2005. Since 2013, the number of pangolin trade networks
and actors involved in pangolin trafficking in Palawan has also
increased and diversified (MacBeath et al., 2022, p. 19). The price of
Philippine pangolin parts has also increased over the last few decades,
likely due to growing demand in international markets (Schoppe and
Cruz, 2009, p. 177; Archer et al., 2021, p. 9).
Habitat loss is also interacting with overexploitation to reduce
the number, health, and distribution of the Philippine pangolin. Though
peak deforestation in the Philippines occurred between 1977 and 1988,
largely due to logging, high rates of
[[Page 25574]]
deforestation are still occurring throughout much of the country. Today
the nation is estimated to have less than 10 percent of its historical
forest cover (Nolos et al., 2023, p. 45). As forested areas are opened
to roads and hunters, mortality rates of Philippine pangolins can
increase due to more frequent motor vehicle collisions, and greater
ease of opportunistic harvest (Schoppe et al., 2020, p. 120).
The Philippine pangolin is currently listed as critically
endangered on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, and the
population is declining, primarily due to overexploitation (Schoppe et
al., 2019, p. 1). While there is a lack of quantitative data on
populations, interviews with Indigenous peoples in the Palawan region
and beyond indicate that the Philippine pangolin is becoming
increasingly rare, and populations are declining throughout the region.
Starting in the 2000s, reports of the species in the southern Palawan
region were rare; however, in the north and central parts of the
island, sightings of the Philippine pangolin were still commonly
reported (Schoppe and Cruz, 2009, p. 178). More recently, declines in
Philippine pangolin populations are reported to be particularly marked
in the north. Locals estimate the population in the north has declined
from 10,000 individuals to 500 between 1960 and 2018 (95 percent
decline), and only 15 percent of the original population remains in the
south (Acosta-Lagrada and Schoppe, 2018, p. 5).
Genetic data also provide a meaningful proxy for population health
(Service 2025, p. 60). A genetic study using whole genome resequencing
identified several metrics of poor genetic health for the Philippine
pangolin; however, the sample size for the Philippine pangolin in the
study was very small relative to other species (a single individual),
so inferences are somewhat limited. From this one individual Philippine
pangolin, the study identified the lowest genetic diversity of all
pangolin species (Gu et al., 2023, p. 5). Genomic inbreeding was
elevated (Gu et al., 2023, p. 5). Philippine pangolin also showed
elevated levels of genetic load, which point to potential negative
fitness impacts of overall low genetic diversity. These indicators of
poor genetic health are likely to be associated with the accumulation
of deleterious alleles (i.e., genetic load), reduced evolutionary
potential, and overall reduced population fitness, adaptability, and
viability (Kardos et al., 2021, entire; Willi et al., 2022, entire).
The Philippine pangolin is currently characterized by very low
genetic diversity, very high levels of inbreeding, and increased
genetic load, all of which are strong indicators of reduced viability
and elevated extinction risk. The reduced distribution of Philippine
pangolin populations adversely impacts the species' ability to
withstand catastrophic events. The Philippine pangolin is therefore
less able to withstand demographic and environmental stochasticity
(i.e., reduced resiliency) or catastrophic events (i.e., reduced
redundancy), and less able to show an evolutionary response to changing
conditions (i.e., reduced adaptive capacity or representation). These
indicators suggest that the Philippine pangolin is currently
experiencing and will continue to experience compromised population
fitness, adaptability, and viability, even in the absence of threats.
White-Bellied Pangolin--Current Condition
Harvest for bushmeat and other local uses is a historical and
ongoing threat to white-bellied pangolins. Pangolin meat is openly sold
in markets and restaurants throughout the species' range (Soewu et al.,
2020, p. 248). Bushmeat consumption in general has increased in West
and Central Africa over the last few decades (Ziegler et al., 2016, p.
405), as has the availability of pangolins in markets in some areas
(Soewu et al., 2020, p. 248). Pangolin products are also used in
traditional medicine and for ritualistic purposes in Central Africa and
in rural areas of West Africa, where most people depend on traditional
medicine for healthcare (Soewu et al., 2020, pp. 243, 249; Soewu and
Adekanola, 2011, p. 1). The white-bellied pangolin, in particular, is
used extensively for traditional medicinal and ritualistic purposes in
Benin and Nigeria (Jansen et al., 2020, p. 153; Zanvo et al., 2021, p.
1).
Two decades ago, there were an estimated 400,000 white-bellied
pangolins harvested annually in Central Africa, and the species was
estimated to constitute roughly 73 percent of the total pangolin
harvest at that time (Fa and Peres, 2001, p. 228). A more recent study
estimated a 150 percent increase in harvest of African pangolin species
in Central Africa over the last four decades, and that harvest rates
have averaged roughly 0.4 to 2.7 million pangolins annually during that
time (Ingram et al., 2018, p. 1). The higher estimates of total harvest
of African pangolin species, as compared to Asian pangolin species, is
indicative of the shift in harvest pressure from Asia to Africa as
populations of Asian pangolin species have declined due to
overexploitation. Though some of this escalation in harvest is driven
by local consumption, international trade is also a strong driver.
Before 2001, roughly 93 percent of reported CITES trade in pangolins
was Asian species; however, since 2001, roughly 67 percent involved
African species (Heinrich et al., 2016, p. 247). As Asian pangolins
have declined, harvest and trade of African pangolins has increased
dramatically to meet the demand for scales in Asia (Tinsman et al.,
2023, pp. 3-5; F. Zhang et al., 2022, p. 2). Consequently, a growing
global trade network exists wherein the majority of pangolin scales are
exported from Africa to Southeast Asia (Tinsman et al., 2023, entire;
Zhang et al., 2020, pp. 4-8). Records indicate that at least 8,000
white-bellied pangolins were traded (mostly from Central Africa to
China) from 2013 to 2016. This number importantly does not include
unreported trade, illegal trade, or harvest for subsistence (Challender
et al., 2020, p. 265).
Concurrently, the illegal trafficking of African pangolin species
has increased over the last decade (Ingram et al., 2019a, p. 8). The
price of pangolin products has increased dramatically across many
regions of West and Central Africa, which can signal growing species
rarity and motivate a shift toward harvest for income over subsistence.
Importantly, protected areas within the species' range do not provide
refuge for pangolin populations, as multiple protected areas are
identified as poaching hotspots across the white-bellied pangolin range
(Tinsman et al., 2023, pp. 2-5).
Organized crime is also increasingly implicated in the trafficking
of African pangolin species, including the white-bellied pangolin.
Cameroon is recognized as a major hub for trafficking, with its growing
infrastructure and networks for siphoning pangolins from rural areas
into urban markets, particularly as prices increase (Simo et al., 2023,
pp. 704, 711; Zhang et al., 2020, pp. 4-8). Over the last decade,
seizures in Cameroon have increasingly shifted from pangolin meat to
scales and have included products from other protected species,
indicative of involvement of organized crime (Ingram et al., 2019a, p.
8). White-bellied pangolins are commonly encountered in most seizures
involving pangolins, and often the most commonly encountered in the
wild. White-bellied pangolins are thought to represent a majority of
the 624,000 African pangolin species seized between 2016 and 2019;
however, these seizure
[[Page 25575]]
numbers are dramatic underestimates of the true magnitude of
trafficking, most of which goes undetected (Challender et al., 2020,
pp. 267-268).
Extensive deforestation has occurred within the range of the white-
bellied pangolin, particularly within the western portions. In the
rainforest regions that the white-bellied pangolin occupies, an average
of roughly 0.59 million hectares of rainforest were lost annually
between 1990 and 2000 to logging, roads, urban development, and
agricultural expansion (Mayaux et al., 2013, pp. 4-5). From 2001 to
2023, the white-bellied pangolin experienced an additional 10 percent
loss of forested habitat (Hansen et al., 2013, unpaginated; Global
Forest Watch, 2014, unpaginated). Though forest loss has occurred
throughout the species' range in the last two decades, it has been
greatest in West Africa, where deforestation rates were three times
higher than in the rest of the species' range (Ingram et al., 2019b, p.
2; Mayaux et al., 2013, p. 1). Forest losses have reduced the
availability and quality of habitat for the white-bellied pangolin,
while also increasing human interactions and harvest pressure. Forest
loss can directly impact the white-bellied pangolin, particularly since
forest age appears to be a strong driver of occurrence for the species,
which appears to prefer older successional forests (Akpona et al.,
2008, pp. 198, 200).
Overexploitation and habitat loss have caused substantial declines
in the number, health, and distribution of white-bellied pangolin
populations. Though it is one of the more commonly encountered African
pangolin species, it is not considered to be common within its range
(Jansen et al., 2020, pp. 151-152; Waterman et al., 2014, p. 4). The
white-bellied pangolin is estimated to have experienced a 40 percent
decline in the period 1998-2019 (Pietersen et al., 2019, p. 1).
Genetic data also provide a meaningful proxy for population health
(Service 2025, p. 60). The white-bellied pangolin shows the best
metrics of genetic health of the eight pangolin species (Gu et al.,
2023, pp. 5-7). Despite this, genetic diversity in particular is
relatively low, falling between IUCN endangered ring-tailed lemurs and
IUCN critically endangered black rhinos (Wilder et al., 2023, entire;
Service, 2025, p. 126). Additionally, genetic indicators show a time
lag relative to recent population declines, meaning that contemporary
population declines are likely not yet manifesting in genomic sequence
data (Gargiulo et al., 2024, entire). As populations continue to
decline due to poaching and other threats, indicators of genetic health
are expected to further deteriorate along a trajectory that is similar
to genetic health metrics seen in other pangolin species.
The white-bellied pangolin is currently characterized by reduced
genetic diversity and increased genetic load, both of which are strong
indicators of reduced viability and elevated extinction risk. The
reduced distribution of white-bellied pangolin adversely impacts the
species' ability to withstand catastrophic events. The white-bellied
pangolin is therefore less able to withstand demographic and
environmental stochasticity (i.e., reduced resiliency) or catastrophic
events (i.e., reduced redundancy) and less able to show an evolutionary
response to changing conditions (i.e., reduced adaptive capacity or
representation). These indicators suggest that the white-bellied
pangolin is currently experiencing and will continue to experience
compromised population fitness, adaptability, and viability, even in
the absence of threats.
Black-Bellied Pangolin--Current Condition
Harvest for bushmeat and other local uses is a historical and
ongoing threat to black-bellied pangolins. Pangolin meat is openly sold
in markets and restaurants throughout the species' range (Soewu et al.,
2020, p. 248). Bushmeat consumption in general has increased in West
and Central Africa over the last few decades (Ziegler et al., 2016, p.
405), as has the availability of pangolins in markets in some areas
(Soewu et al., 2020, p. 248). Pangolin products are also used in
traditional medicine and for ritualistic purposes in Central Africa and
in rural areas of West Africa, where most people depend on traditional
medicine for healthcare (Soewu et al., 2020, pp. 243, 249; Soewu and
Adekanola, 2011, p. 1; Zanvo et al., 2021, p. 1).
Harvest of African pangolin species has intensified in recent
decades and pangolins are increasingly reaching commercial
international markets. The higher estimates of total harvest of African
pangolin species, as compared to Asian pangolin species, is indicative
of the shift in harvest pressure from Asia to Africa as Asian pangolin
species have declined due to overexploitation. Though some of this
escalation in harvest may be driven by local consumption, international
trade is also strongly implicated. Before 2001, Asian species accounted
for roughly 93 percent of reported CITES trade in pangolins. However,
since 2001, roughly 67 percent of reported trade involved African
species (Heinrich et al., 2016, p. 247). As Asian pangolins have
declined, harvest and trade of African pangolins has increased
dramatically to meet the demand for scales and meat in Asia (Zhang et
al., 2022, p. 2). There is consequently a growing global trade network
where the majority of pangolin scales are exported from Africa to
Southeast Asia (Goss[eacute] et al., 2024, p. 2).
Concurrently, illegal trafficking of African pangolin species has
increased over the last decade (Ingram et al., 2019a, p. 8). An
estimated 624,000 African pangolin species were seized between 2016 and
2019 alone; however, the actual volume of illegal trade is dramatically
higher as most trafficking goes undetected (Challender et al., 2020,
pp. 267-268). Though authorities know with high confidence that the
trade in African pangolin species has increased over time, and that all
four species of African pangolin are involved, less information is
available on how much of this trade is specifically composed of black-
bellied pangolins, or of specific harvest rates for this pangolin
species (Challender et al., 2020, p. 268).
Extensive deforestation has occurred in the range of the black-
bellied pangolin, particularly in West Africa and the Democratic
Republic of Congo (DRC). In the rainforest regions occupied by the
black-bellied pangolin, an average of 0.59 million ha of rainforest
were lost annually between 1990 and 2000 due to logging, roads, urban
development, and agricultural expansion (Mayaux et al., 2013, pp. 4-5).
From 2001 to 2023, the black-bellied pangolin experienced an additional
11 percent loss of tree cover throughout its range. Though forest loss
has occurred throughout the species' range in the last two decades, it
has been greatest in West Africa, where deforestation rates were three
times higher than in the rest of the species' range (Ingram et al.,
2019b, p. 2; Mayaux et al., 2013, p. 1). Collectively, these land cover
changes have reduced the availability and quality of habitat for the
black-bellied pangolin, while also increasing human interactions and
harvest pressure.
Forest loss can have a pronounced impact on the black-bellied
pangolin as it is highly arboreal, and shows a preference for densely
vegetated, undisturbed habitat (Gudehus et al., 2020a, pp. 134-135).
Even in areas where plantations provide some tree cover, habitat
quality can be markedly diminished, due to fragmentation from roads and
infrastructure, and the presence of pesticides that reduce prey
diversity and availability (Pietersen et
[[Page 25576]]
al., 2014, pp. 168-171; Laurance et al., 2006, pp. 1258-1259; Mahmood
et al., 2020, p. 85). Forest loss and land cover changes also increase
hunting pressure, as accessibility to previously remote forest areas
increases (Ingram et al., 2019, pp. 1-2). The black-bellied pangolin
spends most of its time in the tree crown, which makes it harder to
detect, and harder to capture. However, as the connectivity of the
forest crown decreases, the species is more vulnerable to harvest as it
travels on the ground to move from tree to tree (Gudehus et al., 2020,
pp. 133-134). Furthermore, in the lower-stature trees found in
secondary forest and oil-palm plantations, black-bellied pangolins can
be harvested by hunters from the ground (Gudehus et al., 2020, p. 130).
Overexploitation, and habitat loss have caused substantial declines
in the number, health, and distribution of black-bellied pangolin
populations. The black-bellied pangolin is considered in decline
throughout its range (Ingram et al., 2019, p. 2). The IUCN has
estimated that the species has experienced 30-40 percent population
decline since 2005 due to loss of suitable habitat and unsustainable
hunting, though declines are likely greater, and as high as 50 percent
in West Africa where deforestation rates and human population density
are particularly high (Ingram et al., 2019, pp. 1-2).
Genetic data also provide a meaningful proxy for population health
(Service 2025, p. 60). A genetic study identified several metrics of
poor genetic health for black-bellied pangolin populations. In
particular, genetic diversity is low (Gu et al., 2023, p. 5), lower
than the critically endangered black rhino. Genomic inbreeding is also
elevated (Gu et al., 2023, p. 5). The study also identified elevated
levels of genetic load, which point to potential negative fitness
impacts of overall low genetic diversity and elevated inbreeding. These
indicators of poor genetic health are likely associated with reduced
fitness due to inbreeding, the accumulation of deleterious alleles
(i.e., genetic load), reduced evolutionary potential, and overall
reduced population fitness, adaptability, and viability (Kardos et al.,
2021, entire; Willi et al., 2022, entire).
The black-bellied pangolin is currently characterized by low
genetic diversity, elevated levels of genomic inbreeding, and increased
genetic load, all of which are indicators of reduced viability and
elevated extinction risk. The reduced distribution of black-bellied
pangolin populations adversely impacts the species' ability to
withstand catastrophic events. The black-bellied pangolin is therefore
less able to withstand demographic and environmental stochasticity
(i.e., reduced resiliency) or catastrophic events (i.e., reduced
redundancy) and less able to show an evolutionary response to changing
conditions (i.e., reduced adaptive capacity or representation). These
indicators suggest that the black-bellied pangolin is currently
experiencing and will continue to experience compromised population
fitness, adaptability, and viability, even in the absence of threats.
Giant Pangolin--Current Condition
Harvest for bushmeat and other local uses is a historical and
ongoing threat to the giant pangolin. Unsustainable hunting for
bushmeat is a primary threat to the species. This threat is becoming
more frequently observed and is compounded by growing international
trafficking (Hoffmann et al., 2020, p. 169). Pangolin meat is sold in
markets throughout the species' range (Soewu et al., 2020, p. 248), and
the giant pangolin is the most valuable target for hunters in Cameroon
due to its size and large scales (Simo et al., 2023, p. 711). Bushmeat
consumption in general has increased in West and Central Africa over
the last few decades (Ziegler et al., 2016, p. 405), as has the
availability of pangolins in markets in some areas (Soewu et al., 2020,
p. 248). Pangolin products are also used in traditional medicine and
for ritualistic purposes in Central Africa and in rural areas of West
Africa, where most people depend on traditional medicine for healthcare
(Soewu et al., 2020, pp. 243, 249; Soewu and Adekanola, 2011, p. 1).
There has been an estimated 150 percent increase in the harvest of
African pangolin species in Central Africa over the last four decades,
with an estimated 0.4 to 2.7 million pangolins harvested annually on
average (Ingram et al., 2018, p. 1). Though some of this escalation in
harvest is driven by local consumption, international trade is also
strongly implicated. Before 2001, roughly 93 percent of reported CITES
trade in pangolins was of Asian species (7 percent African). However,
since 2001, roughly 67 percent of pangolin trade involved African
species (33 percent Asian) (Heinrich et al., 2016, p. 247). As Asian
pangolin species have declined, harvest and trade of African pangolin
species has increased dramatically to meet the demand for scales and
meat in Asia (Zhang et al., 2022, p. 2). Consequently, a global trade
network is growing, with the majority of pangolin scales currently
exported from Africa to Southeast Asia (Goss[eacute] et al., 2024, p.
2).
There has been a concurrent increase in illegal trafficking of
African pangolin species, including the giant pangolin, over the last
decade (Ingram et al., 2019, p. 8). Over the last decade, seizures have
increasingly shifted from pangolin meat to scales and include products
from other protected species, implicating the involvement of organized
crime (Ingram et al., 2019, p. 8). The prevalence, number of, and price
of giant pangolin products has also increased dramatically across many
regions of West and Central Africa, which can signal growing species
rarity and motivate a shift toward harvest for income as well as
subsistence (Hoffmann et al., 2020, pp. 168-169).
Collectively, land cover changes have reduced the availability and
quality of habitat for the giant pangolin, while also increasing human
interactions and harvest pressure. Extensive deforestation has occurred
in the range of the giant pangolin, particularly in the west. In the
rainforest regions that the giant pangolin occupies, an average of
roughly 0.59 million ha of rainforest were lost annually between 1990
and 2000 due to logging, roads, urban development, and agricultural
expansion (Mayaux et al., 2013, pp. 4-5). From 2001 to 2023, the giant
pangolin lost an additional 11 percent of tree cover. Though forest
loss has occurred throughout the species' range in the last two
decades, loss has been greatest in West Africa, where deforestation
rates were three times higher than in Central Africa (Ingram et al.,
2019, p. 2; Mayaux et al., 2013, p. 1).
Available data suggest that the giant pangolin is not common in any
part of its range and is generally rare (Hoffmann et al., 2020, p.
167). The giant pangolin has been considered to be rare, declining
throughout much of its range, and since the 1990s, is considered to be
extirpated in Rwanda, Niger, and southwest Nigeria (Br[auml]utigam et
al., 1994, p. 17). Genetic data also provide a meaningful proxy for
population health (Service 2025, p. 60).
A genetic study using whole genome resequencing identified several
metrics of poor genetic health for the giant pangolin. In particular,
genetic diversity is low (Gu et al., 2023, p. 5), comparable to the
critically endangered black rhino. Genomic inbreeding is also elevated
(Gu et al., 2023, p. 5). The study also identified elevated levels of
genetic load, which point to potential negative fitness impacts due to
inbreeding, the accumulation of deleterious alleles, reduced
evolutionary potential, and overall reduced population fitness,
[[Page 25577]]
adaptability, and viability (Kardos et al., 2021, entire; Willi et al.,
2022, entire).
The giant pangolin is currently characterized by low genetic
diversity, elevated levels of genomic inbreeding, and increased genetic
load, all of which are indicators of elevated extinction risk. The
reduced distribution of giant pangolin populations adversely impacts
the species' ability to withstand catastrophic events. The giant
pangolin is therefore less able to withstand demographic and
environmental stochasticity (i.e., reduced resiliency) or catastrophic
events (i.e., reduced redundancy) and less able to show an evolutionary
response to changing conditions (i.e., reduced adaptive capacity or
representation). These indicators suggest that the giant pangolin is
currently experiencing and will continue to experience compromised
population fitness, adaptability, and viability, even in the absence of
threats.
Future Condition
As part of the SSA, we also considered the future magnitude of
threats of overexploitation, land cover trends, and climate change and
the projected responses of the Chinese, Indian, Sunda, Philippine,
white-bellied, black-bellied, and giant pangolin. We assumed that
current trends are anticipated to continue into the future, and that
these species' responses would remain similar to observed responses in
current conditions. Because we determined that the current condition of
the Chinese, Indian, Sunda, Philippine, white-bellied, black-bellied,
and giant pangolin are consistent with an endangered species (see
Determination of Status for Seven Pangolin Species, below), we are not
presenting the results of the assessment of magnitude and extent of
future threats in this proposed rule. Please refer to the SSA report
(Service 2025, pp. 74, 83-84, 95-98, 108-110, 126-130, 141-145, 158-
162).) for the full analysis of future magnitude of threats.
Determination of Status for Seven Pangolin Species
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and its implementing
regulations (50 CFR part 424) set forth the procedures for determining
whether a species meets the definition of an endangered species or a
threatened species. The Act defines an ``endangered species'' as a
species in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion
of its range and a ``threatened species'' as a species likely to become
an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range. The Act requires that we determine
whether a species meets the definition of an endangered species or a
threatened species because of any of the following factors: (A) The
present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its
habitat or range; (B) overutilization for commercial, recreational,
scientific, or educational purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D) the
inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E) other natural or
manmade factors affecting its continued existence.
Section 3 of the Act defines ``endangered species'' and
``threatened species.'' An endangered species is any species which is
in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its
range, and a threatened species is any species which is likely to
become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout
all or a significant portion of its range. Both definitions include not
only the phrase ``throughout all,'' but also the phrase ``or a
significant portion of its range.'' Thus, there are ultimately four
bases for listing a species under the Act: (1) in danger of extinction
throughout all of its range, (2) in danger of extinction throughout a
significant portion of its range, (3) likely to become an endangered
species within the foreseeable future throughout all of its range, or
(4) likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable
future throughout a significant portion of its range. These four bases
are made up of two classifications (i.e., endangered or threatened) and
two components (i.e., throughout all of its range or throughout a
significant portion of its range).
Beginning in 2001, a number of judicial opinions addressed our
interpretation of the phrase ``or a significant portion of its range''
(the SPR phrase) in the statutory definitions of ``endangered species''
and ``threatened species.'' In Defenders of Wildlife v. Norton, 258
F.3d 1136 (9th Cir. 2001) regarding the flat-tailed horned lizard, the
court held that the interpretation of the SPR phrase that we had
applied in analyzing the status of the flat-tailed horned lizard was
unacceptable because it would allow for a species to warrant listing
throughout a significant portion of a species' range only when the
species ``is in danger of extinction everywhere'' (id. at 1141). The
court held that the SPR phrase must be given independent meaning from
the ``throughout all'' phrase to avoid making the SPR phrase in the
statute superfluous.
In an attempt to address the judicial opinions calling into
question our approach to evaluating whether a species was endangered or
threatened throughout a significant portion of its range, the Service
and the National Marine Fisheries Service published a ``Final Policy on
Interpretation of the Phrase ``Significant Portion of Its Range'' in
the Endangered Species Act's Definitions of `Endangered Species' and
`Threatened Species' (2014 SPR Policy; 79 FR 37578, July 1, 2014). The
notice of the draft policy provides more detail about litigation before
2014 regarding the phrase (76 FR 76987, December 9, 2011). The 2014 SPR
Policy included four elements:
(1) Consequence--that the consequence of determining that a species
warrants listing based on its status in a significant portion of its
range is to list the species throughout all of its range;
(2) Significance--a definition of the term ``significant'';
(3) Range--that the species' ``range'' is the current range of the
species; and
(4) Distinct Population Segment (DPS)--that, if a [vertebrate]
species is endangered or threatened in an SPR and the population in
that SPR is a DPS, the Service will list just the DPS.
Subsequently, two district courts vacated the definition of
``significant'' contained in the 2014 SPR Policy (Ctr. for Biological
Diversity v. Jewell, 248 F. Supp. 3d 946, 959 (D. Ariz. 2017) (CBD v.
Jewell) and Desert Survivors v. U.S. Dep't of the Interior, 321 F.
Supp. 3d 1011, 1070-74 (N.D. Cal. 2018) (Desert Survivors)). The courts
found that the definition in the 2014 SPR Policy set too high a
threshold and rendered the SPR language in the statute superfluous,
failing to give it independent meaning from the ``throughout all''
phrase.
In 2020, another court (Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Everson,
435 F. Supp. 3d 69 (D.D.C. 2020) (Everson)) also vacated the specific
aspect of the 2014 SPR Policy under which, ``if the Services determine
that a species is threatened throughout all of its range, the Services
will not analyze whether the species is endangered in a significant
portion of its range'' (id. at 98). This was an extension of the
definition of ``significant,'' which required a stepwise process in
which we only considered whether a species may be endangered or
threatened throughout a significant portion of its range when the
species was not endangered or threatened throughout all of its range.
In an extension of the earlier rulings from CBD v. Jewell and Desert
Survivors, the court found that this aspect of the definition of the
2014 SPR Policy was not only inconsistent with the statute because it
``rendered the `endangered in
[[Page 25578]]
a significant portion of its range' basis for listing superfluous,''
but was also ``inconsistent with ESA principles'' and ``not a logical
outgrowth from the draft policy.'' Under this ruling, if we find a
species is not in danger of extinction throughout all of its range, we
must evaluate whether the species is in danger of extinction throughout
a significant portion of its range, even in cases where we have
determined that the species is likely to become in danger of extinction
within the foreseeable future (threatened) throughout all of its range.
The remaining three elements of the 2014 SPR Policy remain intact.
In short, the courts have directed that the definition of
``significant'' must afford the phrase ``or a significant portion of
its range'' an independent meaning from the ``throughout all of its
range'' phrase. Therefore, to determine whether any species warrants
listing, we determine for each classification (endangered and
threatened) the appropriate component to evaluate (throughout all of
its range or throughout a significant portion of its range).
We make this determination based on whether the best scientific and
commercial data available indicate that the species has a similar
extinction risk in all areas across its range (at a scale that is
biologically appropriate for that species). When a species has a
similar extinction risk in all areas across its range, we determine its
regulatory status using the component ``throughout all of its range.''
For example, in some cases there is no way to divide a species' range
in a way that is biologically appropriate. This could be because the
range is so small that there is only one population or because the
species functions as a metapopulation such that effects to one
population directly result in effects to another population. On the
other hand, when the species' extinction risk varies across its range,
we determine its regulatory status using the component ``throughout a
significant portion of its range.''
For either classification (endangered or threatened), we consider
the five factors and the species' responses to those factors regardless
of which component (throughout all of its range or throughout a
significant portion of its range) we have determined is appropriate for
that classification. When assessing whether a species is endangered or
threatened throughout a significant portion of its range, we address
two questions because we must determine whether there is any portion of
the species' range for which both (1) the portion is ``significant''
and (2) the species is in danger of extinction or likely to become in
danger of extinction within the foreseeable future throughout that
portion. We may address either question first. Regardless of which
question we address first, if we reach a negative answer with respect
to the first question that we address, we do not need to evaluate the
other question for that portion of the species' range.
Chinese Pangolin--Status
Best available commercial and scientific data indicate a high rate
of decline in abundance and distribution of the Chinese pangolin,
further supported by genetic analysis indicating high levels of
inbreeding and very low genetic diversity. Overexploitation and habitat
loss, the primary threats to the Chinese pangolin, have reduced the
resiliency, redundancy, and representation of the species to the point
that even in the absence of existing threats, the species would have
very low viability.
After evaluating threats to the species and assessing the
cumulative effect of the threats under the Act's section 4(a)(1)
factors, we find that the Chinese pangolin has declined in abundance,
genetic health, and range because of the historical and ongoing threats
of overexploitation (Factor B) and habitat loss (Factor A) and that
these declines have continued unabated under existing regulatory
mechanisms such as the insufficient implementation and enforcement of
CITES protections by importing, transit, and exporting countries
(Factor D), such that the species is at risk of extinction. This risk
is immediate rather than based upon future conditions. Thus, after
assessing the best scientific and commercial data available, we
determine that the Chinese pangolin is in danger of extinction
throughout all of its range.
Chinese Pangolin--Determination of Status
Based on the best scientific and commercial data available, we
determine that the Chinese pangolin meets the Act's definition of an
endangered species because it is in danger of extinction throughout all
of its range. Therefore, we propose to list the Chinese pangolin as an
endangered species in accordance with sections 3(6) and 4(a)(1) of the
Act.
Indian Pangolin--Status
The best available commercial and scientific data indicate that the
Indian pangolin is considered rare and declining throughout its
historical range primarily due to overexploitation and habitat loss and
fragmentation. In addition, genetic analysis indicates very low genetic
diversity and elevated rates of inbreeding and genetic load, all of
which limit adaptive capacity and contribute to compromised overall
viability of the species. The primary threats to the Indian pangolin
have reduced the resiliency, redundancy, and representation of the
species to the point that even in the absence of existing threats, the
species would have very low viability.
After evaluating threats to the species and assessing the
cumulative effect of the threats under the Act's section 4(a)(1)
factors, we find that the Indian pangolin has declined in abundance,
genetic health, and range because of the historical and ongoing threats
of overexploitation (Factor B) and habitat loss (Factor A) and that
these declines have continued unabated under existing regulatory
mechanisms such as the insufficient implementation and enforcement of
CITES protections by importing, transit, and exporting countries
(Factor D), such that the species is at risk of extinction. This risk
is immediate rather than based upon future conditions. Thus, after
assessing the best scientific and commercial data available, we
determine that the Indian pangolin is in danger of extinction
throughout all of its range.
Indian Pangolin--Determination of Status
Based on the best scientific and commercial data available, we
determine that the Indian pangolin meets the Act's definition of an
endangered species because it is in danger of extinction throughout all
of its range. Therefore, we propose to list the Indian pangolin as an
endangered species in accordance with sections 3(6) and 4(a)(1) of the
Act.
Sunda Pangolin--Status
The best available commercial and scientific data indicate a high
rate of decline in abundance and distribution of the Sunda pangolin,
and this information is further supported by genetic analysis
indicating high levels of inbreeding, elevated levels of genetic load,
and very low genetic diversity. Overexploitation and habitat loss, the
primary threats to the species, have reduced the resiliency,
redundancy, and representation of the species to the point that even in
the absence of existing threats, the species would have very low
viability.
After evaluating threats to the species and assessing the
cumulative effect of the threats under the Act's section 4(a)(1)
factors, we find that the Sunda pangolin has declined in abundance,
genetic health, and range because of the
[[Page 25579]]
historical and ongoing threats of overexploitation (Factor B) and
habitat loss (Factor A) and that these declines have continued unabated
under existing regulatory mechanisms such as the insufficient
implementation and enforcement of CITES protections by importing,
transit, and exporting countries (Factor D), such that the species is
at risk of extinction. This risk is immediate rather than based upon
future conditions. Thus, after assessing the best scientific and
commercial data available, we determine that the Sunda pangolin is in
danger of extinction throughout all of its range.
Sunda Pangolin--Determination of Status
Based on the best scientific and commercial data available, we
determine that the Sunda pangolin meets the Act's definition of an
endangered species because it is in danger of extinction throughout all
of its range. Therefore, we propose to list the Sunda pangolin as an
endangered species in accordance with sections 3(6) and 4(a)(1) of the
Act.
Philippine Pangolin--Status
The best available commercial and scientific data indicate a high
rate of decline in abundance within the Philippine pangolin's limited
range, and this information is further supported by genetic analysis
indicating high levels of inbreeding, elevated levels of genetic load,
and very low genetic diversity. Overexploitation and habitat loss, the
primary historical and ongoing threats to the Philippine pangolin, have
reduced the resiliency, redundancy, and representation of the species
to the point that even in the absence of existing threats, the species
would have very low viability.
After evaluating threats to the species and assessing the
cumulative effect of the threats under the Act's section 4(a)(1)
factors, we find that the Philippine pangolin has declined in
abundance, genetic health, and range because of the historical and
ongoing threats of overexploitation (Factor B) and habitat loss (Factor
A). We further find that these declines have continued unabated under
existing regulatory mechanisms, such as the insufficient implementation
and enforcement of CITES protections by importing, transit, and
exporting countries (Factor D), such that the species is at risk of
extinction. This risk is immediate rather than based upon future
conditions. Thus, after assessing the best scientific and commercial
data available, we determine that the Philippine pangolin is in danger
of extinction throughout all of its range.
Philippine Pangolin--Determination of Status
Based on the best scientific and commercial data available, we
determine that the Philippine pangolin meets the Act's definition of an
endangered species because it is in danger of extinction throughout all
of its range. Therefore, we propose to list the Philippine pangolin as
an endangered species in accordance with sections 3(6) and 4(a)(1) of
the Act.
White-Bellied Pangolin--Status
The best available commercial and scientific data indicate a trend
of declining abundance and constricting distribution of the white-
bellied pangolin, and this information is further supported by genetic
analysis indicating elevated levels of genetic load and low genetic
diversity. The shift over time from poaching and hunting in the western
portion of the species' range to Central Africa, as well as the
shifting changes in land use, indicate a pattern that, although there
may be higher abundance in Central Africa as compared with western
Africa, declines in abundance have already occurred and will continue
in Central Africa such that the western and central portions of the
species' range are equally at risk of extinction. Overexploitation and
habitat loss, the primary threats to the species, have reduced the
resiliency, redundancy, and representation of the species to the point
that even in the absence of existing threats, the species would have
very low viability.
After evaluating threats to the species and assessing the
cumulative effect of the threats under the Act's section 4(a)(1)
factors, we find that the white-bellied pangolin has declined in
abundance, genetic health, and range because of the historical and
ongoing threats of overexploitation (Factor B) and habitat loss (Factor
A). We further find that these declines have continued unabated under
existing regulatory mechanisms, such as the insufficient implementation
and enforcement of CITES protections by importing, transit, and
exporting countries (Factor D), such that the species is at risk of
extinction. This risk is immediate rather than based upon future
conditions. Thus, after assessing the best scientific and commercial
data available, we determine that the white-bellied pangolin is in
danger of extinction throughout all of its range.
White-Bellied Pangolin--Determination of Status
Based on the best scientific and commercial data available, we
determine that the white-bellied pangolin meets the Act's definition of
an endangered species because it is in danger of extinction throughout
all of its range. Therefore, we propose to list the white-bellied
pangolin as an endangered species in accordance with sections 3(6) and
4(a)(1) of the Act.
Black-Bellied Pangolin--Status
The best available commercial and scientific data indicate a trend
of declining abundance and constricting distribution of the
historically rare, black-bellied pangolin, and this information is
further supported by genetic analysis indicating elevated levels of
genetic load and low genetic diversity among populations. The shift
over time from poaching and hunting in the western range to Central
Africa, as well as the shifting changes in land use, indicate a pattern
that, although there may be higher abundance in Central Africa as
compared with western Africa, declines in abundance have already
occurred and will continue in Central Africa such that the western and
central portions of the species' range are equally at risk of
extinction. Overexploitation and habitat loss, the primary threats to
the species, have reduced the resiliency, redundancy, and
representation of the species to the point that even in the absence of
existing threats, the species would have very low viability.
After evaluating threats to the species and assessing the
cumulative effect of the threats under the Act's section 4(a)(1)
factors, we find that the black-bellied pangolin has declined in
abundance, genetic health, and range because of the historical and
ongoing threats of overexploitation (Factor B) and habitat loss (Factor
A). We further find that these declines have continued unabated under
existing regulatory mechanisms, such as the insufficient implementation
and enforcement of CITES protections by importing, transit, and
exporting countries (Factor D), such that the species is at risk of
extinction. This risk is immediate rather than based upon future
conditions. Thus, after assessing the best scientific and commercial
data available, we determine that the black-bellied pangolin is in
danger of extinction throughout all of its range.
[[Page 25580]]
Black-Bellied Pangolin--Determination of Status
Based on the best scientific and commercial data available, we
determine that the black-bellied pangolin meets the Act's definition of
an endangered species because it is in danger of extinction throughout
all of its range. Therefore, we propose to list the black-bellied
pangolin as an endangered species in accordance with sections 3(6) and
4(a)(1) of the Act.
Giant Pangolin--Status
The best available commercial and scientific data indicate a trend
of declining abundance and highly restricted distribution of giant
pangolin populations as compared with its historical range, and this
information is further supported by genetic analysis indicating
elevated levels of genetic load, inbreeding, and low genetic diversity.
Overexploitation and habitat loss, the primary threats to the species,
have reduced the resiliency, redundancy, and representation of the
species to the point that even in the absence of existing threats, the
species would have very low viability.
After evaluating threats to the species and assessing the
cumulative effect of the threats under the Act's section 4(a)(1)
factors, we find that the giant pangolin has declined in abundance,
genetic health, and range because of the historical and ongoing threats
of overexploitation (Factor B) and habitat loss (Factor A). We further
find that these declines have continued unabated under existing
regulatory mechanisms, such as the insufficient implementation and
enforcement of CITES protections by importing, transit, and exporting
countries (Factor D), such that the species is at risk of extinction.
This risk is immediate rather than based upon future conditions. Thus,
after assessing the best scientific and commercial data available, we
determine that the giant pangolin is in danger of extinction throughout
all of its range.
Giant Pangolin--Determination of Status
Based on the best scientific and commercial data available, we
determine that the giant pangolin meets the Act's definition of an
endangered species because it is in danger of extinction throughout all
of its range. Therefore, we propose to list the giant pangolin as an
endangered species in accordance with sections 3(6) and 4(a)(1) of the
Act.
Available Conservation Measures
The primary purpose of the Act is the conservation of endangered
and threatened species and the ecosystems upon which they depend. The
ultimate goal of such conservation efforts is the recovery of these
listed species, so that they no longer need the protective measures of
the Act.
Conservation measures provided to species listed as endangered or
threatened species under the Act include recognition as a listed
species, planning and implementation of recovery actions, requirements
for Federal protection, and prohibitions against certain practices.
Recognition through listing results in public awareness, and
conservation by Federal, State, Tribal, and local agencies, foreign
governments, private organizations, and individuals. The Act encourages
cooperation with the States and other countries and calls for recovery
actions to be carried out for listed species. The protection required
by Federal agencies, including the Service, and the prohibitions
against certain activities are discussed, in part, below.
Section 7 of the Act is titled, ``Interagency Cooperation,'' and it
mandates all Federal action agencies to use their existing authorities
to further the conservation purposes of the Act and to ensure that
their actions are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of
listed species or adversely modify critical habitat. Regulations
implementing section 7 are codified at 50 CFR part 402.
Section 7(a)(2) states that each Federal action agency shall, in
consultation with the Secretary, ensure that any action they authorize,
fund, or carry out is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence
of a listed species or result in the destruction or adverse
modification of designated critical habitat. With respect to all
pangolin species, no known actions require consultation under section
7(a)(2) of the Act. Given the regulatory definition of ``action'' at 50
CFR 402.02, which clarifies that it applies to activities or programs
carried out ``in the United States or upon the high seas,'' the
pangolin is unlikely to be the subject of section 7 consultations,
because the entire life cycles of these seven species occur in
terrestrial areas outside of the United States and these species are
unlikely to be affected by U.S. Federal actions. Additionally, no
critical habitat will be designated for any pangolin species because,
under 50 CFR 424.12(g), we will not designate critical habitat within
foreign countries or in other areas outside of the jurisdiction of the
United States.
Section 8(a) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1537(a)) 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 or threatened
species in foreign countries. Sections 8(b) and 8(c) of the Act (16
U.S.C. 1537(b) and (c)) authorize the Secretary to encourage
conservation programs for foreign listed species, and to provide
assistance for such programs, in the form of personnel and the training
of personnel.
The Act and its implementing regulations set forth a series of
prohibitions and exceptions that apply to endangered wildlife. The
prohibitions of section 9(a)(1) of the Act, and the Service's
implementing regulations codified at 50 CFR 17.21, make it illegal for
any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States to commit,
to attempt to commit, to solicit another to commit or to cause to be
committed any of the following acts with regard to any endangered
wildlife: (1) import into, or export from, the United States; (2) take
(which includes harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap,
capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct)
within the United States, within the territorial sea of the United
States, or on the high seas; (3) possess, sell, deliver, carry,
transport, or ship, by any means whatsoever, any such wildlife that has
been taken illegally; (4) deliver, receive, carry, transport, or ship
in interstate or foreign commerce, by any means whatsoever and in the
course of commercial activity; or (5) sell or offer for sale in
interstate or foreign commerce. Certain exceptions to these
prohibitions apply to employees or agents of the Service, the National
Marine Fisheries Service, other Federal land management agencies, and
State conservation agencies.
We may issue permits to carry out otherwise prohibited activities
involving endangered wildlife under certain circumstances. Regulations
governing permits for endangered wildlife are codified at 50 CFR 17.22,
and general Service permitting regulations are codified at 50 CFR part
13. With regard to endangered wildlife, a permit may be issued: for
scientific purposes, for enhancing the propagation or survival of the
species, or for take incidental to otherwise lawful activities.
The statute also contains certain exemptions from the prohibitions,
which are found in sections 9 and 10 of the Act. For example, the
provisions in section 9(b)(1) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1538(b)(1)) provide
a limited exemption from certain otherwise prohibited activities
regarding wildlife specimens held in captivity or in a controlled
environment on the date they were first subject to the Act, provided
that such
[[Page 25581]]
holding and any subsequent holding or use of the wildlife was not in
the course of a commercial activity (commonly referred to as ``pre-
Act'' specimens). Therefore, if a pangolin is held in captivity prior
to receiving protections under the Act (and the holding is not in the
course of commercial activity), several activities are allowed without
the need for a permit in accordance with section 9(b)(1) of the Act.
Section 9(b)(1) was amended in the 1982 amendments to the Act (96
Stat. 1426-27), to clarify that the scope of the 9(b)(1) exemption is
limited to only certain section 9(a)(1) prohibitions, that the
exemption does not apply to pre-Act wildlife held or used in the course
of a commercial activity on or after the pre-Act date for the species,
and that the pre-Act date for species first listed after the enactment
of the Act is the date of publication in the Federal Register of the
final regulation adding such species to the List of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife for the first time (H.R. Rep. No. 97-835, 97th
Cong., 2nd Sess., at 35 (1982) (Conf. Rep.); S. Rep. No. 97-418, 97th
Cong., 2nd Sess., at 24-25 (1982)). Specifically, section 9(b)(1) of
the Act states that the prohibitions of sections 9(a)(1)(A) and
9(a)(1)(G) shall not apply to any fish or wildlife which was held in
captivity or in a controlled environment on (A) December 28, 1973, or
(B) the date of the publication in the Federal Register of a final
regulation adding such fish or wildlife to any list of species
published pursuant to section 4(c) of the Act (as relevant to listed
wildlife, the list of endangered and threatened wildlife (50 CFR
17.11(h)) that such holding and any subsequent holding or use of the
fish or wildlife was not in the course of a commercial activity.
Therefore, for pre-Act wildlife, there is a limited exemption from
the prohibitions associated with: (1) import into, or export from the
United States of any endangered wildlife, or (2) violation of
regulations pertaining to threatened or endangered wildlife. Other
prohibitions of section 9--including those at section 9(a)(1)(B)-(F),
regarding take of endangered wildlife, possession and other acts with
unlawfully taken wildlife, interstate or foreign commerce in endangered
wildlife, and sale or offer for sale of endangered wildlife--continue
to apply to activities with qualifying endangered pre-Act wildlife
specimens. For threatened species, prohibitions are promulgated by
regulation under section 4(d) of the Act, and a specimen may qualify
for the exemption in 9(a)(1)(G) with regard to regulatory violations.
Specimens born after the listing date and specimens taken from the wild
after the listing date do not qualify as pre-Act wildlife under the
text of section 9(b)(1) of the Act. If a person engages in any
commercial activity with a pre-Act specimen, the wildlife would
immediately cease to qualify as pre-Act wildlife and become subject to
the relevant prohibitions, because it has been held or used in the
course of a commercial activity.
Additional requirements apply to activities with all pangolins,
separate from their proposed listing as endangered species. As CITES-
listed species, all international trade of any pangolin by persons
subject to the jurisdiction of the United States must also comply with
CITES requirements pursuant to section 9 paragraphs (c) and (g) of the
Act (16 U.S.C. 1538(c) and (g)) and to 50 CFR part 23. As ``fish or
wildlife'' (16 U.S.C. 1532(8)), pangolin imports and exports must also
meet applicable wildlife import/export requirements established under
section 9, paragraphs (d), (e), and (f), of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1538(d),
(e), and (f)); the Lacey Act Amendments of 1981 (16 U.S.C. 3371 et
seq.); and 50 CFR part 14. Questions regarding whether specific
activities with pangolins would constitute a violation of section 9 of
the Act should be directed to the Service's Division of Management
Authority ([email protected]; 703-358-2104).
Required Determinations
Clarity of the Proposed Rule
We are required by E.O.s 12866 and 12988 and by the Presidential
memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain language. This
means that each rule we publish must:
(1) Be logically organized;
(2) Use the active voice to address readers directly;
(3) Use clear language rather than jargon;
(4) Be divided into short sections and sentences; and
(5) Use lists and tables wherever possible.
If you feel that we have not met these requirements, send us
comments by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. To better help us
revise the rule, your comments should be as specific as possible. For
example, you should tell us the numbers of the sections or paragraphs
that are unclearly written, which sections or sentences are too long,
the sections where you feel lists or tables would be useful, etc.
References Cited
A complete list of references cited in this rulemaking is available
on the internet at and upon request from
the Branch of Delisting and Foreign Species (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Plants,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Transportation, Wildlife.
Signing Authority
Paul Souza, Regional Director, Region 8, Exercising the Delegated
Authority of the Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
approved this action on May 6, 2025, for publication. On May 30, 2025,
Paul Souza authorized the undersigned to sign the document
electronically and submit it to the Office of the Federal Register for
publication as an official document of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.
Proposed Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, we propose to amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter
I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth below:
PART 17--ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS
0
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 1531-1544; and 4201-4245,
unless otherwise noted.
0
2. In Sec. 17.11, in paragraph (h), amend the List of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife, under MAMMALS, by:
0
a. Adding entries for ``Pangolin, black-bellied'', ``Pangolin,
Chinese'', ``Pangolin, giant'', ``Pangolin, Indian'', ``Pangolin,
Philippine'', and ``Pangolin, Sunda'' in alphabetical order;
0
b. Revising the entry for ``Pangolin, Temnick's ground''; and
0
c. Adding an entry for ``Pangolin, white-bellied'' in alphabetical
order.
The additions and revision read as follows:
Sec. 17.11 Endangered and threatened wildlife.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
[[Page 25582]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Listing citations and
Common name Scientific name Where listed Status applicable rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mammals
* * * * * * *
Pangolin, black-bellied......... Phataginus Wherever found.... E [Federal Register
tetradactyla. citation when
published as a final
rule].
Pangolin, Chinese............... Manis pentadactyla Wherever found.... E [Federal Register
citation when
published as a final
rule].
Pangolin, giant................. Smutsia gigantea.. Wherever found.... E [Federal Register
citation when
published as a final
rule].
Pangolin, Indian................ Manis Wherever found.... E [Federal Register
crassicaudata. citation when
published as a final
rule].
Pangolin, Philippine............ Manis culionensis. Wherever found.... E [Federal Register
citation when
published as a final
rule].
Pangolin, Sunda................. Manis javanica.... Wherever found.... E [Federal Register
citation when
published as a final
rule].
Pangolin, Temminck's ground..... Smutsia temminckii Wherever found.... E 41 FR 24062, 6/14/1976.
Pangolin, white-bellied......... Phataginus Wherever found.... E [Federal Register
tricuspis. citation when
published as a final
rule].
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jillian Eanett,
Acting Regulations and Policy Chief, Division of Policy, Economics,
Risk Management, and Analytics of the Joint Administrative Operations,
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2025-10288 Filed 6-16-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P