Proposed Rule2023-04088
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for 12 Species, and Not Prudent Determination for 2 Species, on Hawai'i Island
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
March 29, 2023
Issuing agencies
Interior DepartmentFish and Wildlife Service
Abstract
We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose to designate critical habitat for 12 federally endangered species on the island of Hawai[revaps]i under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Act), as amended. In total, approximately 122,277 acres (49,484 hectares) on the island of Hawai[revaps]i, in the State of Hawaii, fall within the boundaries of the proposed critical habitat designation. We announce a public informational meeting and public hearing on, and the availability of a draft economic analysis for, this proposed designation. In addition, we announce our determination that designation of critical habitat is not prudent for two federally endangered species on the island of Hawai[revaps]i under the Act.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 88 Issue 60 (Wednesday, March 29, 2023)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 60 (Wednesday, March 29, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 18756-18821]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2023-04088]
[[Page 18755]]
Vol. 88
Wednesday,
No. 60
March 29, 2023
Part III
Department of the Interior
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fish and Wildlife Service
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical
Habitat for 12 Species, and Not Prudent Determination for 2 Species, on
Hawai[revaps]i Island; Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 60 / Wednesday, March 29, 2023 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 18756]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R1-ES-2023-0017; FF09E21000 FXES1111090FEDR 234]
RIN 1018-BG65
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of
Critical Habitat for 12 Species, and Not Prudent Determination for 2
Species, on Hawai[revaps]i Island
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose to
designate critical habitat for 12 federally endangered species on the
island of Hawai[revaps]i under the Endangered Species Act of 1973
(Act), as amended. In total, approximately 122,277 acres (49,484
hectares) on the island of Hawai[revaps]i, in the State of Hawaii, fall
within the boundaries of the proposed critical habitat designation. We
announce a public informational meeting and public hearing on, and the
availability of a draft economic analysis for, this proposed
designation. In addition, we announce our determination that
designation of critical habitat is not prudent for two federally
endangered species on the island of Hawai[revaps]i under the Act.
DATES:
Comment submission: We will accept comments received or postmarked
on or before May 30, 2023. 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.
Public informational meeting and public hearing: On April 20, 2023,
we will hold a public informational meeting from 6 to 6:45 p.m.
Hawai[revaps]i time, followed by a public hearing from 6:45 to 8 p.m.
Hawai[revaps]i time. See Public Informational Meeting and Hearing,
under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION, below, for more information.
ADDRESSES:
Written comments: You may submit comments by one of the following
methods:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. In the Search box, enter FWS-R1-ES-2023-0017,
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-R1-ES-2023-0017, 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 <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. This
generally means that we will post any personal information you provide
us (see Information Requested, below, for more information).
Availability of supporting materials: The draft recovery plan, 5-
year status reviews, and other materials relating to this proposed
critical habitat designation, including coordinates or plot points or
both from which the maps are generated, are included in the decision
file and are available at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> under Docket No.
FWS-R1-ES-2023-0017.
Public informational meeting and public hearing: We are holding the
public informational meeting and public hearing via the Zoom online
video platform and via teleconference so that participants can attend
remotely. See Public Informational Meeting and Hearing, under
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION, below, for more information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Earl Campbell, Project Leader, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office,
300 Ala Moana Boulevard Room 3-122, Honolulu, HI 96850; telephone 808-
792-9400. 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.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Summary
Why we need to publish a rule. Under the Act, to the maximum extent
prudent and determinable, we must designate critical habitat for any
species that we determine to be an endangered or threatened species.
Making a critical habitat determination can be completed only by
issuing a rule through the Administrative Procedure Act rulemaking
process (5 U.S.C. 551 et seq.).
What this document does. This rule proposes to designate
approximately 122,277 acres (ac) (49,484 hectares (ha)) as critical
habitat for 12 federally endangered species (11 plants, 1 insect) on
the island of Hawai[revaps]i. We are also making a determination that
designation of critical habitat is not prudent for 2 federally
endangered species (1 plant, 1 crustacean) on the island of
Hawai[revaps]i in the State of Hawaii. In this proposed rule, we are
exempting from critical habitat designation for one of the plant
species 22,730 ac (9,198 ha) of habitat on Department of Defense (DoD)
lands that are subject to the P[omacr]hakuloa Training Area (PTA)
Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan (INRMP), which provides a
conservation benefit to this species. In addition, in this document, we
describe exclusions totaling 4,224 ac (1,710 ha) that we are
considering making at the final rule stage, based on permitted and non-
permitted plans and agreements.
The basis for our action. Under section 4(a)(3) of the Act, if we
determine that a species is an endangered or threatened species, the
Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) must designate critical habitat
to the maximum extent prudent and determinable. Section 3(5)(A) of the
Act defines critical habitat as (i) the specific areas within the
geographical area occupied by the species, at the time it is listed, on
which are found those physical or biological features essential to the
conservation of the species and which may require special management
considerations or protections; and (ii) specific areas outside the
geographical area occupied by the species at the time it is listed,
upon a determination by the Secretary that such areas are essential for
the conservation of the species. Section 4(b)(2) of the Act states that
the Secretary must make the designation on the basis of the best
scientific data available and after taking into consideration the
economic impact, the impact on national security, and any other
relevant impacts of specifying any particular area as critical habitat.
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; the Native
Hawaiian community; Native American Tribes; the scientific community;
industry; or
[[Page 18757]]
any other interested parties concerning this proposed rule.
Comments on the Determination That Designation of Critical Habitat Is
Not Prudent for Two Species Addressed in This Proposed Rule
We particularly seek comments concerning:
(1) Information regarding our determination that designating
critical habitat for the Pritchardia lanigera and Vetericaris chaceorum
is not prudent.
Comments on the Proposed Critical Habitat Designation
For the 12 species for which we are proposing to designate critical
habitat, we particularly seek comments concerning:
(1) Specific information on:
(a) The amount and distribution of the species' habitat;
(b) Any additional areas occurring within the range of the species
that should be included in the designation because they (i) are
occupied at the time of listing and contain the physical or biological
features that are essential to the conservation of the species and that
may require special management considerations, or (ii) are unoccupied
at the time of listing and are essential for the conservation of the
species;
(c) Special management considerations or protection that may be
needed in the critical habitat areas we are proposing, including
managing for the potential effects of climate change; and
(d) To evaluate the potential to include areas not occupied at the
time of listing, we particularly seek comments regarding whether
occupied areas are adequate for the conservation of the species.
Additionally, please provide specific information regarding whether or
not unoccupied areas would, with reasonable certainty, contribute to
the conservation of the species and contain at least one physical or
biological feature essential to the conservation of the species. We
also seek comments or information regarding whether areas not occupied
at the time of listing qualify as habitat for the species.
(2) Land use designations and current or planned activities in the
subject areas and their possible impacts on proposed critical habitat.
(3) Any probable economic, national security, or other relevant
impacts of designating any area that may be included in the final
designation, and the related benefits of including or excluding
specific areas.
(4) Information on the extent to which the description of probable
economic impacts in the draft economic analysis (DEA) is a reasonable
estimate of the likely economic impacts and any additional information
regarding probable economic impacts that we should consider.
(5) Whether any specific areas we are proposing for critical
habitat designation should be considered for exclusion under section
4(b)(2) of the Act, and whether the benefits of potentially excluding
any specific area outweigh the benefits of including that area under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act. If you think we should exclude any
additional areas, please provide information supporting a benefit of
exclusion. We particularly seek comments on the exclusion from critical
habitat designation of those areas addressed by a conservation program
or plan. These may include Federal, Tribal, State, county, local, or
private lands with permitted conservation plans covering the species in
the area, such as habitat conservation plans, safe harbor agreements,
or conservation easements, or nonpermitted conservation agreements and
partnerships that would be encouraged by designation of or exclusion
from critical habitat. Detailed information regarding these plans,
agreements, easements, and partnerships is also requested, including:
(a) The location and size of lands covered by the plan, agreement,
easement, or partnership;
(b) The duration of the plan, agreement, easement, or partnership;
(c) Who holds or manages the land;
(d) What management activities are conducted;
(e) What land uses are allowable; and
(f) If management activities are beneficial to the species and its
habitat.
(6) Whether we could improve or modify our approach to designating
critical habitat in any way to provide for greater public participation
and understanding, or to better accommodate public concerns and
comments.
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)(2) of
the Act directs that the Secretary shall designate critical habitat on
the basis of the best scientific 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 <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>, 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 <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>.
Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting
documentation we used in preparing this proposed rule, will be
available for public inspection on <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>.
Because we will consider all comments and information we receive
during the comment period, our final determinations may differ from
this proposal. Based on the new information we receive (and any
comments on that new information), our final designations may not
include all areas proposed, may include some additional areas that meet
the definition of critical habitat, or may exclude some areas if we
find the benefits of exclusion outweigh the benefits of inclusion and
exclusion will not result in the extinction of the species.
Public Informational Meeting and Public Hearing
We will hold a public informational meeting and public hearing on
the date and at the times listed in DATES. We are holding the public
informational meeting and public hearing via the Zoom online video
platform and via teleconference so that participants can attend
remotely. To listen and view the meeting and hearing via Zoom, listen
to the meeting and hearing by telephone, or provide oral public
comments at the public hearing via Zoom or by telephone, you must
register. For information on how to register, or if you encounter
problems joining Zoom the day of the meeting, visit <a href="https://empsi.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_qdw8pld2T06EnIInZ68e-g">https://empsi.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_qdw8pld2T06EnIInZ68e-g</a>. Registrants
will receive the Zoom link and the telephone number for the public
informational meeting and public hearing. If applicable, interested
members of the public not familiar with the Zoom platform should view
the Zoom video tutorials (<a href="https://support.zoom.us/hc/en-us/articles/206618765-Zoom-video-tutorials">https://support.zoom.us/hc/en-us/articles/206618765-Zoom-video-tutorials</a>) prior
[[Page 18758]]
to the public informational meeting and public hearing.
At the public informational meeting, the Service will provide an
overview of the proposed rule and describe the procedures for
submitting comments. The public informational meeting will provide an
opportunity for dialogue with the Service, but it will not be an
opportunity to provide verbal comments on the proposed rule; that
opportunity is only available at the public hearing. At the public
hearing, the Service will provide interested persons an opportunity to
present verbal testimony (formal, oral comments) on this proposed rule.
The purpose of the public hearing is to provide a forum for accepting
formal verbal testimony that will be recorded and transcribed and
become part of the record for this proposed rule. In the event there is
a large attendance at the public hearing, the Service may limit the
time allotted for verbal testimony. Therefore, anyone wishing to
provide verbal testimony at the public hearing is also encouraged to
provide a prepared written copy of their statement to us through the
Federal eRulemaking Portal or by U.S. mail (see ADDRESSES, above).
There are no limits on the length of written comments submitted to us.
Again, anyone wishing to provide verbal testimony at the public hearing
must register before the hearing (<a href="https://empsi.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_qdw8pld2T06EnIInZ68e-g">https://empsi.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_qdw8pld2T06EnIInZ68e-g</a>). The use of virtual public hearings
is consistent with our regulations at 50 CFR 424.16(c)(3).
Reasonable Accommodation
The Service is committed to providing access to the public
informational meeting and public hearing for all participants. Closed
captioning will be available during the public informational meeting
and public hearing. Further, a full audio and video recording and
transcript of the public hearing will be posted online at <a href="https://www.fws.gov/office/pacific-islands-fish-and-wildlife/what-we-do/projects-research">https://www.fws.gov/office/pacific-islands-fish-and-wildlife/what-we-do/projects-research</a> after the hearing. Participants will also have access
to live audio during the public informational meeting and public
hearing via their telephone or computer speakers. Persons with
disabilities requiring reasonable accommodations to participate in the
meeting and/or hearing should contact the person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT at least 5 business days prior to the date
of the meeting and hearing to help ensure availability. An accessible
version of the Service's public informational meeting presentation will
also be posted online at <a href="https://www.fws.gov/office/pacific-islands-fish-and-wildlife/what-we-do/projects-research">https://www.fws.gov/office/pacific-islands-fish-and-wildlife/what-we-do/projects-research</a> prior to the meeting and
hearing (see DATES, above). See <a href="https://www.fws.gov/office/pacific-islands-fish-and-wildlife/what-we-do/projects-research">https://www.fws.gov/office/pacific-islands-fish-and-wildlife/what-we-do/projects-research</a> for more
information about reasonable accommodation.
Peer Review
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 of
listing actions under the Act, we will seek the expert opinions of at
least three appropriate and independent specialists regarding this
proposed rule. The purpose of such review is to ensure that our
proposed critical habitat designation is based on scientifically sound
data, assumptions, and analyses. We will invite these peer reviewers to
comment, during the public comment period, on the specific assumptions
and conclusions regarding the proposed designations of critical
habitat. We will consider all comments and information we receive
during the comment period on this proposed rule during our preparation
of a final rule. Accordingly, our final decisions may differ from this
proposal.
Previous Federal Actions
On October 17, 2012, we published in the Federal Register (77 FR
63928) a proposed rule to list 15 species, including the 14 species
that are the subjects of this proposed rule, on the island of
Hawai[revaps]i as endangered species under the Act. On October 29,
2013, we published in the Federal Register (78 FR 64638) a final rule
to list those 15 species as endangered species. See the October 17,
2012, proposed rule for information on previous Federal actions
concerning the 14 species that are the subjects of this proposed rule.
In the October 27, 2012, proposed rule (77 FR 63928), we found that
critical habitat was prudent but not determinable for the 14 species
that are the subject of this proposed rule.
On October 28, 2019, the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD)
filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court, District of Hawaii (Case
No. 1:19-cv-00588), challenging the failure of the Service to designate
critical habitat for the 14 species (consisting of 12 plants (Bidens
hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana, Cyanea marksii, Cyanea tritomantha,
Cyrtandra nanawaleensis, Cyrtandra wagneri, Melicope remyi,
Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Pritchardia lanigera,
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Schiedea hawaiiensis, and Stenogyne
cranwelliae) and 2 animals (Drosophila digressa and Vetericaris
chaceorum)) within 1 additional year from the date of the proposed
listing. We entered into a settlement agreement approved by the court
on March 6, 2020, requiring that by February 28, 2023, we submit to the
Federal Register, for publication, a determination concerning the
designation of critical habitat for the 14 species and a proposed rule
for any species for which the designation of critical habitat is
prudent and determinable; the submission for publication of this
proposed rule complies with the settlement agreement.
Background
For species with Hawaiian common names, we prefer to, and will,
include Hawaiian language spellings, including diacritical marks, to
the degree possible and appropriate in the preambles of our Federal
Register documents. For the text to be codified in the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR), however, we will omit diacritical marks to ensure
that no errors are inadvertently incorporated during the codification
process.
We provide a brief description for each of the 14 species addressed
in this proposed rule, below.
Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana
(ko[revaps]oko[revaps]olau), a short-lived perennial herb in the
sunflower family (Asteraceae), occurs only on the island of
Hawai[revaps]i (Ganders and Nagata 1999, pp. 275-276). Historically, B.
hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana was known from two locations along
the windward Kohala coastline, in the coastal and dry cliff ecosystems,
often along rocks just above the ocean (Degener and Wiebke 1926, in
litt.; Flynn 1988, in litt.).
Cyanea marksii (haha), a short-lived perennial palmlike shrub in
the bellflower family (Campanulaceae), is found only on the island of
Hawai[revaps]i. Historically, C. marksii was known from the Kona
district, in the lowland wet and montane wet ecosystems (Lammers 1999,
p. 457; Hawai[revaps]i Biodiversity Mapping Program (HBMP) database
2010b).
Cyanea tritomantha ([revaps]aku), a short-lived perennial palmlike
shrub in the bellflower family (Campanulaceae), is known only from the
island of Hawai[revaps]i (Pratt and Abbott 1997, p. 13; Lammers 2004,
p. 89). Historically, this species was known from the windward slopes
of Mauna Kea, Mauna Loa, Kilauea, and the Kohala Mountains, in the
lowland wet, montane wet, and wet cliff ecosystems (Pratt and Abbott
1997, p. 13).
[[Page 18759]]
Cyrtandra nanawaleensis (ha[revaps]iwale), a short-lived perennial
shrub or small tree in the African violet family (Gesneriaceae), is
known only from the island of Hawai[revaps]i (Wagner and Herbst 2003,
p. 29; Wagner et al. 2005a). Historically, C. nanawaleensis was known
only from the lowland wet ecosystems in the Puna district (St. John
1987, p. 500; Wagner et al. 1988, in litt.; HBMP 2010d).
Cyrtandra wagneri (ha[revaps]iwale), a short-lived perennial shrub
or small tree in the African violet family (Gesneriaceae), occurs only
on the island of Hawai[revaps]i (Lorence and Perlman 2007, p. 357).
Historically, C. wagneri was known in the lowland wet ecosystem along
the northeast side of the island (Lorence and Perlman 2007, p. 359).
Melicope remyi (no common name), a long-lived perennial shrub or
shrubby tree in the rue family (Rutaceae), occurs only on the island of
Hawai[revaps]i (Stone et al. 1999, p. 1210; Service 2010, pp. A-11, 4-
74). Historically, M. remyi was known from a few scattered individuals
on the windward slopes of the Kohala Mountains and several small
populations on the windward slopes of Mauna Kea, in the lowland wet and
montane wet ecosystems (Stone et al. 1999, p. 1210; HBMP 2010f). We
will refer to Melicope remyi by this name in this proposed rule; this
plant is currently listed as Platydesma remyi, but we recently
published a direct final rule (88 FR 7134; February 2, 2023) to correct
the scientific name to Melicope remyi on the List of Endangered and
Threatened Plants.
Phyllostegia floribunda (no common name), a short-lived perennial
subshrub in the mint family (Lamiaceae), is found only on the island of
Hawai[revaps]i (Wagner 1999, p. 268; Wagner et al. 1999a, p. 815).
Historically, P. floribunda was reported in the lowland wet, montane
mesic, and montane wet ecosystems at scattered sites along the eastern
side of the island.
Pittosporum hawaiiense (ho[revaps]awa, ha[revaps]awa), a small,
long-lived perennial tree in the pittosporum family (Pittosporaceae),
is known only from the island of Hawai[revaps]i (Wagner et al. 1999b,
p. 1,044). Historically, P. hawaiiense was known from the leeward side
of the island, from the Kohala Mountains south to Ka[revaps]u, in the
lowland mesic, montane mesic, and montane wet ecosystems (Wagner et al.
1999b, p. 1,044).
Pritchardia lanigera (loulu), a medium-sized, long-lived perennial
tree in the palm family (Arecaceae), is found only on the island of
Hawai[revaps]i (Read and Hodel 1999, p. 1,371; Hodel 2007, pp. 10, 24-
25). Historically, P. lanigera was known from the Kohala Mountains,
Hamakua district, windward slopes of Mauna Kea, and southern slopes of
Mauna Loa, in the lowland mesic, lowland wet, montane wet, and wet
cliff ecosystems (Read and Hodel 1999, p. 1,371; National Park Service
2015, pp. 467-468)
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei (no common name), a short-lived
perennial climbing herb in the pink family (Caryophyllaceae), is
reported only from the island of Hawai[revaps]i (Wagner et al. 2005b;
Wagner et al. 2005c, p. 106). Historically, S. diffusa ssp. macraei was
known from the Kohala Mountains, the windward slopes of Mauna Loa, and
the Olaa Tract of Hawai[revaps]i Volcanoes National Park, in the
montane wet ecosystem (Perlman et al. 2001, in litt.; Wagner et al.
2005c, p. 106; HBMP 2010g).
Schiedea hawaiiensis (ma[revaps]oli[revaps]oli), a short-lived
perennial herb in the pink family (Caryophyllaceae), is known only from
the island of Hawai[revaps]i (Wagner et al. 2005c, pp. 92-96).
Historically, S. hawaiiensis was known from a single site between Mauna
Loa and Mauna Kea mountains in the montane dry ecosystem (Hillebrand
1888, p. 33; Wagner et al. 2005c, pp. 92-96).
Stenogyne cranwelliae (no common name), a short-lived perennial
vine in the mint family (Lamiaceae), is known only from the island of
Hawai[revaps]i. Historically, S. cranwelliae was known from the Kohala
Mountains, in the montane wet and wet cliff ecosystems (Weller and
Sakai 1999, p. 837).
Drosophila digressa (Hawaiian picture-wing fly), a member of the
family Drosophilidae, is found only on the island of Hawai[revaps]i and
historically known from five locations on the island in elevations
ranging from approximately 2,000 to 4,500 ft (610 to 1,370 m), in the
lowland mesic, montane mesic, and montane wet ecosystems (Hardy and
Kaneshiro 1968, p. 182; Montgomery 1975, p. 95; Magnacca 2012, pers.
comm.). This species is small, with adults ranging in size from 0.15 to
0.19 in (4.0 to 5.0 mm) in length. Adults are brownish yellow in color
and have yellow-colored legs and hyaline (shiny-clear) wings with
prominent brown spots. Like many endemic Hawaiian Drosophilidae
species, D. digressa are highly host-plant-specific (Magnacca et al.
2008, p. 1), relying on the decaying stems of Charpentiera spp., Ceodes
brunoniana (previously known as Pisonia brunoniana), and Rockia
sandwicensis (previously known as Pisonia sandwicensis) for
reproduction and larval substrate (Magnacca et al. 2008, pp. 11, 13;
Magnacca 2012, pers. comm.).
Vetericaris chaceorum (anchialine pool shrimp), a small shrimp in
the family Procarididae, is endemic to anchialine pools. These pools
are coastal land-locked bodies of water that have underground
hydrological connections to the ocean, contain varying levels of
salinity, and show tidal fluctuations in water level. Vetericaris
chaceorum is one of seven described species of hypogeal (underground)
shrimp found in the Hawaiian Islands that occur in anchialine pools
(Brock 2004, p. 6) and is relatively large in size for a hypogeal
shrimp species; adult V. chaceorum measure approximately 2.0 in (5.0
cm) in total body length, excluding the primary antennae, which are
approximately the same length as the adult's body length (Kensley and
Williams 1986, p. 419). The species lacks large chelapeds (claws)
(Kensley and Williams 1986, p. 426), which are a key diagnostic
characteristic of all other known shrimp species. Vetericaris chaceorum
is largely devoid of pigment and lacks eyes, although eyestalks are
present (Kensley and Williams 1986, p. 419).
Additional information about the descriptions of each species'
occurrence can be found in the proposed (77 FR 63928, October 17, 2012)
and final (78 FR 64638, October 29, 2013) listing rules for these
species.
Critical habitat is defined in section 3 of the Act as:
(1) The specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the
species, at the time it is listed in accordance with the Act, on which
are found those physical or biological features:
(a) Essential to the conservation of the species, and
(b) Which may require special management considerations or
protection; and
(2) Specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the
species at the time it is listed, upon a determination that such areas
are essential for the conservation of the species.
Our regulations at 50 CFR 424.02 define the geographical area
occupied by the species as an area that may generally be delineated
around species' occurrences, as determined by the Secretary (i.e.,
range). Such areas may include those areas used throughout all or part
of the species' life cycle, even if not used on a regular basis (e.g.,
migratory corridors, seasonal habitats, and habitats used periodically,
but not solely by vagrant individuals).
[[Page 18760]]
Conservation, as defined under section 3 of the Act, means to use
and the use of all methods and procedures that are necessary to bring
an endangered or threatened species to the point at which the measures
provided pursuant to the Act are no longer necessary. Such methods and
procedures include, but are not limited to, all activities associated
with scientific resources management such as research, census, law
enforcement, habitat acquisition and maintenance, propagation, live
trapping, and transplantation, and, in the extraordinary case where
population pressures within a given ecosystem cannot be otherwise
relieved, may include regulated taking.
Critical habitat receives protection under section 7 of the Act
through the requirement that Federal agencies ensure, in consultation
with the Service, that any action they authorize, fund, or carry out is
not likely to result in the destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat. The designation of critical habitat does not affect
land ownership or establish a refuge, wilderness, reserve, preserve, or
other conservation area. Such designation also does not allow the
government or public to access private lands. Such designation does not
require implementation of restoration, recovery, or enhancement
measures by non-Federal landowners. Where a landowner requests Federal
agency funding or authorization for an action that may affect a listed
species or critical habitat, the Federal agency would be required to
consult with the Service under section 7(a)(2) of the Act. However,
even if the Service were to conclude that the proposed activity would
likely result in destruction or adverse modification of the critical
habitat, the Federal action agency and the landowner are not required
to abandon the proposed activity, or to restore or recover the species;
instead, they must implement ``reasonable and prudent alternatives'' to
avoid destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat.
Under the first prong of the Act's definition of critical habitat,
areas within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time
it was listed are included in a critical habitat designation if they
contain physical or biological features (1) which are essential to the
conservation of the species and (2) which may require special
management considerations or protection. For these areas, critical
habitat designations identify, to the extent known using the best
scientific and commercial data available, those physical or biological
features that are essential to the conservation of the species (such as
space, food, cover, and protected habitat).
Under the second prong of the Act's definition of critical habitat,
we can designate critical habitat in areas outside the geographical
area occupied by the species at the time it is listed, upon a
determination that such areas are essential for the conservation of the
species.
Section 4 of the Act requires that we designate critical habitat on
the basis of the best scientific data available. Further, our Policy on
Information Standards Under the Endangered Species Act (published in
the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34271)), the Information
Quality Act (section 515 of the Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106-554; H.R. 5658)),
and our associated Information Quality Guidelines provide criteria,
establish procedures, and provide guidance to ensure that our decisions
are based on the best scientific data available. They require our
biologists, to the extent consistent with the Act and with the use of
the best scientific data available, to use primary and original sources
of information as the basis for recommendations to designate critical
habitat.
When we are determining which areas should be designated as
critical habitat, our primary source of information is generally the
information from the species status reports and information developed
during the listing process for the species. Additional information
sources may include any generalized conservation strategy, criteria, or
outline that may have been developed for the species; the recovery plan
for the species; articles in peer-reviewed journals; conservation plans
developed by States and counties; scientific status surveys and
studies; biological assessments; other unpublished materials; or
experts' opinions or personal knowledge.
Habitat is dynamic, and species may move from one area to another
over time. We recognize that critical habitat designated at a
particular point in time may not include all of the habitat areas that
we may later determine are necessary for the recovery of the species.
For these reasons, a critical habitat designation does not signal that
habitat outside the designated area is unimportant or may not be needed
for recovery of the species. Areas that are important to the
conservation of the species, both inside and outside the critical
habitat designation, will continue to be subject to: (1) Conservation
actions implemented under section 7(a)(1) of the Act; (2) regulatory
protections afforded by the requirement in section 7(a)(2) of the Act
for Federal agencies to ensure their actions are not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened
species; and (3) the prohibitions found in section 9 of the Act.
Federally funded or permitted projects affecting listed species outside
their designated critical habitat areas may still result in jeopardy
findings in some cases. These protections and conservation tools will
continue to contribute to recovery of the species. Similarly, critical
habitat designations made on the basis of the best available
information at the time of designation will not control the direction
and substance of future recovery plans, habitat conservation plans, or
other species conservation planning efforts if new information
available at the time of those planning efforts calls for a different
outcome.
Prudency Determination
Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as amended, and implementing
regulations (50 CFR 424.12) require that, to the maximum extent prudent
and determinable, the Secretary shall designate critical habitat at the
time the species is determined to be an endangered or threatened
species. Our regulations (50 CFR 424.12(a)(1)) state that the Secretary
may, but is not required to, determine that a designation would not be
prudent in the following circumstances:
(i) The species is threatened by taking or other human activity and
identification of critical habitat can be expected to increase the
degree of such threat to the species;
(ii) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of a species' habitat or range is not a threat to the
species, or threats to the species' habitat stem solely from causes
that cannot be addressed through management actions resulting from
consultations under section 7(a)(2) of the Act;
(iii) Areas within the jurisdiction of the United States provide no
more than negligible conservation value, if any, for a species
occurring primarily outside the jurisdiction of the United States;
(iv) No areas meet the definition of critical habitat; or
(v) The Secretary otherwise determines that designation of critical
habitat would not be prudent based on the best scientific data
available.
We are not aware of any threats to Drosophila digressa, Bidens
hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana, Cyanea marksii, Cyanea tritomantha,
[[Page 18761]]
Cyrtandra nanawaleensis, Cyrtandra wagneri, Melicope remyi,
Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei, Schiedea hawaiiensis, and Stenogyne cranwelliae that would be
attributed to overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific,
or educational purposes. There is no documentation that these species
are threatened by taking or other human activity, and we conclude there
is currently no imminent threat of collection or vandalism identified
for these species. Further, identification and mapping of critical
habitat for these species is not expected to result in collection or
vandalism. In our species reports and 2013 listing determination (78 FR
64638; October 29, 2013), we determined that the present or threatened
destruction, modification, or curtailment of habitat or range is a
threat for these 12 species. These 12 species occur wholly in the
jurisdiction of the United States, and we are able to identify areas
that meet the definition of critical habitat. Therefore, because none
of the circumstances enumerated in our regulations at 50 CFR
424.12(a)(1) have been met and because the Secretary has not identified
other circumstances for which this designation of critical habitat
would be not prudent, we have determined that the designation of
critical habitat is prudent for these 12 species.
When we listed Pritchardia lanigera and Vetericaris chaceorum as
endangered (78 FR 64638; October 29, 2013, pp. 63978-63978) we had
reason to believe that designation of critical habitat was prudent for
these two species at that time; however, new information has become
available highlighting a new threat to these two species in the form of
collection and overutilization, as detailed below, that now make
identification and mapping of critical habitat likely to increase the
threat of collection. Designation of critical habitat requires the
publication of maps and a narrative description of specific critical
habitat areas in the Federal Register. The degree of detail in those
maps and boundary descriptions would be greater than the general
location descriptions provided in the 2013 final rule to list P.
lanigera and V. chaceorum (78 FR 64638; October 29, 2013). Designation
of critical habitat would more widely announce the exact locations of
these two species to collectors. The publication of maps and
descriptions outlining the locations of the species would likely
further facilitate unauthorized collection and trade, as collectors
would know the exact locations where these species occur.
Pritchardia species have become one of the most widely cultivated
ornamental palm genera in the world (78 FR 64638; October 29, 2013).
There are a number of websites that offer Pritchardia plants and seeds
for sale, including 22 species of Hawaiian Pritchardia. Twelve of these
species are federally protected, including P. lanigera (Shirey et al.
2013, p. 307; Weisenberger 2023, pers. comm.). Pritchardia species are
tall, they can be visible from afar, and they are attractive to
collectors of rare palms for their personal use or to trade or sell for
personal gain (Shirey et al. 2013, p. 301-302). Distinguishing
Pritchardia species from one another can be difficult, thus collection
activities targeting Prichardia species, in general, has potential to
also increase collection of P. lanigera (Weisenberger 2023, pers.
comm.). Based on the collections of Hawaiian Pritchardia plants and
seeds and the market for these collected specimens, P. lanigera are now
vulnerable to overharvesting, with collection of P. lanigera posing a
serious and ongoing threat to the species (Weisenberger 2023, pers.
comm.). Although at the time of listing known locations of P. lanigera
were extremely difficult to access (77 FR 63928, October 17, 2012, p.
63978), recent surveys have identified more accessible populations of
P. lanigera and conservation management actions have increased
accessibility in some instances (Weisenberger 2023, pers. comm.).
Because of the narrow range, life history traits, and small population
size of this species, any collection poses a threat to the species.
Coincidentally after listing V. chaceorum as endangered (78 FR
64638; October 29, 2013, pp. 63978-63978), popularity in the aquarium
trade of another Hawaiian anchialine shrimp species, Halocaridina
rubra, increased. This increase in collection activities of
Halocaridina rubra has resulted in a risk to V. chaceorum, due to these
two species sharing a similar appearance and habitat preferences. In
the past several years, Halocaridina rubra, commonly called the
Hawaiian red shrimp or volcano shrimp, has been increasingly prized by
aquarists and companies in the pet trade industry worldwide (Yamamoto
et al. 2015, p. 83). These anchialine shrimp are sought because of
their ability to live in hermetically sealed containers (Yamamoto et
al. 2015, p. 83) and as live feed for seahorses (Yamamoto et al. 2015,
p. 83). While the shrimp that are being harvested are primarily H.
rubra, which is not endangered, as the popularity of this business
increases, there is risk that the endangered Vetericaris chaceorum may
either intentionally or accidentally be harvested and become part of
the aquarium trade. Collectors may target V. chaceorum due to its
similar appearance, rarity and aesthetic, or collectors attempting to
harvest the H. rubra that occur in the same pools as V. chaceorum may
accidentally harvest both species (Sakihara 2012, entire). Because this
shrimp is so rare, a single person with a hand-net could do irreparable
damage to a population of V. chaceorum (Yamamoto 2015, pers. comm.).
Despite the prohibition on collecting within Natural Area Reserves and
the permitting process for collection elsewhere, the collection of V.
chaceorum is considered an ongoing threat because collection can occur
at any time owing to a lack of available resources for patrolling or
other monitoring or enforcement at the pools where V. chaceorum occur.
Designating critical habitat would increase human threats to
Pritchardia lanigera and Vetericaris chaceorum by increasing the
vulnerability of these species to unauthorized collection and trade
through public disclosure of their locations. The publication of maps
and a specific narrative description outlining the locations of this
species within critical habitat units in the Federal Register, as well
as any associated publication of such information in local newspapers
and on special interest websites, would facilitate unauthorized
collection and trade by detailing the exact locations where P. lanigera
and V. chaceorum occur. Publishing specific location information would
provide a high level of assurance that any person going to a specific
location would be able to successfully locate and collect specimens.
Designating critical habitat could negate the current efforts of State
and local conservation agencies to restrict access to location
information that could significantly affect future efforts to control
the threat of unauthorized collection and trade.
Summary of Prudency Determination for Pritchardia lanigera and
Vetericaris chaceorum
We have determined that designating critical habitat for
Pritchardia lanigera and Vetericaris chaceorum is not prudent.
Designation of critical habitat would increase the threats to these
species from unauthorized collection and trade. Due to the willingness
of individuals to collect these species without authorization, we have
[[Page 18762]]
determined that any action that publicly discloses the location of P.
lanigera and V. chaceorum (such as critical habitat) puts these species
in further peril. Many populations of these two species are small. One
of the basic measures to protect P. lanigera and V. chaceorum from
unauthorized collection and trade is restricting access to information
about the location of the species' populations. Publishing maps and
narrative descriptions of critical habitat for these two species would
significantly affect our ability to reduce the threat of unauthorized
collection and trade. We have, therefore, determined in accordance with
50 CFR 424.12(a)(1) that it is not prudent to designate critical
habitat for P. lanigera and V. chaceorum.
Physical or Biological Features Essential to the Conservation of the
Species
In accordance with section 3(5)(A)(i) of the Act and regulations at
50 CFR 424.12(b), in determining which areas we will designate as
critical habitat from within the geographical area occupied by the
species at the time of listing, we consider the physical or biological
features that are essential to the conservation of the species and
which may require special management considerations or protection. The
regulations at 50 CFR 424.02 define ``physical or biological features
essential to the conservation of the species'' as the features that
occur in specific areas and that are essential to support the life-
history needs of the species, including, but not limited to, water
characteristics, soil type, geological features, sites, prey,
vegetation, symbiotic species, or other features. A feature may be a
single habitat characteristic or a more complex combination of habitat
characteristics. Features may include habitat characteristics that
support ephemeral or dynamic habitat conditions. Features may also be
expressed in terms relating to principles of conservation biology, such
as patch size, distribution distances, and connectivity. For example,
physical features essential to the conservation of the species might
include gravel of a particular size required for spawning, alkaline
soil for seed germination, protective cover for migration, or
susceptibility to flooding or fire that maintains necessary early-
successional habitat characteristics. Biological features might include
prey species, forage grasses, specific kinds or ages of trees for
roosting or nesting, symbiotic fungi, or absence of a particular level
of nonnative species consistent with conservation needs of the listed
species. The features may also be combinations of habitat
characteristics and may encompass the relationship between
characteristics or the necessary amount of a characteristic essential
to support the life history of the species.
In considering whether features are essential to the conservation
of the species, we may consider an appropriate quality, quantity, and
spatial and temporal arrangement of habitat characteristics in the
context of the life-history needs, condition, and status of the
species. These characteristics include, but are not limited to, space
for individual and population growth and for normal behavior; food,
water, air, light, minerals, or other nutritional or physiological
requirements; cover or shelter; sites for breeding, reproduction, or
rearing (or development) of offspring; and habitats that are protected
from disturbance.
In this proposed rule, the physical or biological features are
based on the features of the six ecosystem types on which the 11 plant
(Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana, Cyanea marksii, Cyanea
tritomantha, Cyrtandra nanawaleensis, Cyrtandra wagneri, Melicope
remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei, Schiedea hawaiiensis, Stenogyne cranwelliae) and
1 animal (Drosophila digressa) species depend (see table 1, below).
These six ecosystems are coastal, dry forest, mesic forest, wet forest,
mesic grassland and shrubland, and wet grassland and shrubland; we
summarize the descriptions of these ecosystems and our source for the
descriptions below. The physical or biological features essential to
the conservation of the species identified in this proposed rule are
those features required for the successful functioning of the ecosystem
in which these species occur or have historically occurred (see table
2, below). Although critical habitat is identified for each species
individually, we have found that the conservation of each depends, at
least in part, on the successful functioning of the commonly shared
ecosystem. Ecosystem parameters include elevation, precipitation,
substrate, and associated native plant genera. These ecosystem
parameters describe the species-specific physical or biological
features of the functioning ecosystems on which these listed species
depend. For example, the associated native plant genera described as
physical or biological features for these 12 listed species are
representative of the native plant genera that occur in the functioning
ecosystems on which these 12 species depend, and as such, the
occurrence of these native plant genera indicate functioning native
ecosystems that provide the fundamental biological requirements for the
listed species in these areas. Additionally, Drosophila digressa relies
on native plant genera, specifically Charpentiera, Rockia, and Ceodes,
as native plant host resources, and without which this species would be
highly vulnerable to mortality, reproductive failure, and cyclical
population variation related to fluctuations in breeding resources
(Magnacca et al. 2008, p. 32).
Coastal (as Described by Kim et al. 2020, p. 2)
Coastal ecosystems are defined as near-shore areas that are
impacted by the ocean and generally occur within 328 feet (ft) (100
meters (m)) of high tide up to 984 ft (300 m) in elevation. Coastal
ecosystems are found on all the main Hawaiian Islands and include
coastal dry herblands, coastal dry grasslands, coastal mixed
communities, coastal dry shrublands, coastal dry forests, and coastal
wet-mesic forests. Coastal substrate includes well-drained talus,
calcareous slopes, and dunes. Annual precipitation ranges from less
than 47 inches (in) (120 centimeters (cm)) in coastal dry to 47 to 98
in (120 to 250 cm) in coastal mesic, and to more than 98 in (250 cm) in
coastal wet ecosystem. Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana is the
only species addressed in this proposed rule known to occupy the
coastal ecosystem.
Dry Forest (as Described by Javar-Salas et al. 2020, p. 2)
Dry forest ecosystems are found on all of the main Hawaiian Islands
and include lowland dry forest and montane-alpine dry forest. Dry
forest is found from 0 to 9,500 ft (0 to 2,900 m). Annual precipitation
ranges from 12 to 79 in (30 to 200 cm). Substrates are generally well-
drained, sandy loams from volcanic ash or cinder and weathered basaltic
lava in lowland dry forest to well-drained, loams from volcanic ash,
cinder, and weathered basaltic lava in montane-alpine dry forest.
Schiedea hawaiiensis is the only species addressed in this proposed
rule known to occupy the dry forest ecosystem.
Mesic Forest (as Described by Lowe et al. 2020, pp. 2-7)
Mesic forest ecosystems include lowland mesic forest and montane
subalpine mesic forest. Elevation ranges from 98 to 5,249 ft (30 to
1,600 m) in lowland mesic forest to 2,953 to 6,562 ft (900 to 2,000 m)
in montane subalpine mesic forest. Annual precipitation
[[Page 18763]]
ranges from 39 to 150 in (100 to 380 cm) in montane subalpine to 47 to
150 in (120 to 380 cm) in lowland mesic forest. Substrates are
generally well-drained and include rocky, shallow, organic muck soils;
steep rocky talus soils; shallow soils over weathered rock in steep
gulches; deep soils over soft weathered rock; and gravelly alluvium.
The plants Cyrtandra nanawaleensis, Phyllostegia floribunda, and
Pittosporum hawaiiense addressed in this proposed rule are found in the
mesic forest ecosystem. The picture-wing fly, Drosophila digressa,
addressed in this proposed rule is also found in the mesic forest
ecosystem.
Wet Forest (as Described by Clark et al. 2020, p. 2)
Wet forest ecosystems include lowland rainforest, montane
rainforest, and montane cloud forest. Elevation ranges from 328 to
3,937 ft (100 to 1,200 m) in lowland rainforest; 2,700 to 7,218 ft (823
to 2,200 m) in montane rainforest; and 2,461 to 6,070 ft (750 to 1,830
m) in montane cloud forest. Annual precipitation is greater than 98 in
(250 cm). Substrates range from very weathered soils to rocky substrate
with classes of undeveloped and developed soil substrates formed from
basalt lava. The plants Cyanea marksii, Cyanea tritomantha, Cyrtandra
nanawaleensis, Cyrtandra wagneri, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Melicope remyi, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and
Stenogyne cranwelliae addressed in this proposed rule are found in the
wet forest ecosystem. Drosophila digressa is also found in the wet
forest ecosystem.
Mesic Grassland and Shrubland (as Described by Ball et al. 2020, p. 2)
Mesic grassland and shrubland ecosystems include lowland mesic
shrubland, subalpine mesic shrubland, montane-subalpine mesic
grassland, and lowland mesic grassland. Elevation ranges from 98 to
7,546 ft (30 to 2,300 m). Annual precipitation ranges from 39 to 98 in
(100 to 250 cm). Substrates generally include shallow soils that
frequently dry with rocky outcrops. Cyrtandra nanawaleensis is the only
species addressed in this proposed rule known to occupy the mesic
grassland and shrubland ecosystem.
Wet Grassland and Shrubland (as Described by Nelson et al. 2020, p. 3)
Wet grassland and shrubland ecosystems include native wet sedge and
grassland and native wet cliff and crest shrubland. Elevation ranges
from 656 to 2,953 ft (200 to 900 m). Annual precipitation ranges from
98 to 197 in (250 to 500 cm). Substrates range from older, weathered
soils to younger, rocky substrates. The plants Cyanea tritomantha and
Phyllostegia floribunda addressed in this proposed rule are found in
the wet grassland and shrubland ecosystem.
Summary of Essential Physical or Biological Features
We derive the specific physical or biological features essential to
the conservation of the 12 species from studies of the species'
habitat, ecology, and life history as described below. Additional
information about the ecosystems containing these physical or
biological features and descriptions of each species' occurrence within
these ecosystems can be found in the proposed (77 FR 63928, October 17,
2012) and final (78 FR 64638, October 29, 2013) listing rules for these
species. Each species identified in this rule requires the physical or
biological features for each ecosystem in which that species occurs, as
noted in table 1. Table 2, below, identifies the physical or biological
features of a functioning ecosystem for each of the ecosystem types
identified in this proposed rule. The physical or biological features
are defined here by elevation, annual levels of precipitation,
substrate type, and the characteristic native plant genera that are
found in the canopy, subcanopy, and understory levels of the vegetative
community where applicable. Due to our limited knowledge of the
specific life-history requirements for the species that are little-
studied and occur in remote and inaccessible areas, the physical or
biological features described in this document that provide for the
successful function of the ecosystem that is essential to the
conservation of the species represents the best, and, in many cases,
the only, scientific information available. Accordingly, the physical
or biological features of a functioning ecosystem are, at least in
part, the physical or biological features essential to the conservation
of these 12 species.
Table 1--Twelve Species and Applicable Ecosystems
[Note: All species, except for Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana
and Schiedea hawaiiensis are found in multiple ecosystems.]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ecosystem Species
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coastal........................... Bidens hillebrandiana ssp.
hillebrandiana.
Dry Forest........................ Schiedea hawaiiensis.
Mesic Forest...................... Cyrtandra nanawaleensis,
Phyllostegia floribunda,
Pittosporum hawaiiense, Drosophila
digressa.
Wet Forest........................ Cyanea marksii, Cyanea tritomantha,
Cyrtandra nanawaleensis, Cyrtandra
wagneri, Drosophila digressa,
Phyllostegia floribunda,
Pittosporum hawaiiense, Melicope
remyi, Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae.
Mesic Grassland and Shrubland..... Cyrtandra nanawaleensis.
Wet Grassland and Shrubland....... Cyanea tritomantha, Phyllostegia
floribunda.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 2--Physical or Biological Features for Each Ecosystem Upon Which the 12 Species Depend
[Read in association with table 1]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contain one or more of these associated native plant
Annual genera
Ecosystem Elevation precipitation Substrate -----------------------------------------------------------
Canopy Subcanopy Understory
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coastal......................... <980 ft (<300 m).. <47 to >98 in well-drained Diospyros, Chenopodium, Eragrostis,
(<120 cm to >250 talus, calcareous Metrosideros, Gossypium, Sesuvium, Sida,
cm). slopes, dunes. Myoporum, Heliotropium, Sporobolus.
Pritchardia. Santalum,
Scaevola.
[[Page 18764]]
Dry Forest...................... <9,500 ft (<2,900 <79 in (<200 cm).. well-drained, Acacia, Colubrina, Achyranthes, Dodonaea,
m). sandy loams or Diospyros, Euphorbia, Doryopteris,
loams from Erythrina, Leptecophylla, Heteropogon,
volcanic ash or Melicope, Nototrichium. Pellaea.
cinder; weathered Metrosideros,
basaltic lava. Myoporum,
Myrsine, Sophora.
Mesic Forest.................... <6,600 ft (<2,000 39-150 in (100-380 rocky, shallow, Acacia, Antidesma, Coprosma, Ctenitis, Doodia,
m). cm). organic muck Charpentiera, Freycinetia, Dryopteris,
soils; rocky Chrysodracon, Leptecophylla, Pelea, Sadleria.
talus soils; Metrosideros, Myoporum,
shallow soils Myrsine, Pipturus, Rubus,
over weathered Nestegis, Sadleria, Sophora.
rock; deep soils Pisonia, Santalum.
over soft
weathered rock;
gravelly alluvium.
Wet Forest...................... <7,300 ft (<2,225 >98 in (>250 cm).. very weathered Acacia, Antidesma, Cibotium, Adenophorus,
m). soils to rocky Cheirodendron, Clermontia, Cibotium,
substrate, Ilex, Melicope, Coprosma, Cyanea, Cyrtandra,
basaltic lava, Metrosideros, Freycinetia, Dicranopteris,
undeveloped Myrsine, Hydrangea, Huperzia,
soils, developed Pittosporum, Vaccinium. Peperomia,
soils. Psychotria. Stenogyne.
Mesic Grassland and Shrubland... 100-7,500 ft (30- 39-98 in (100-250 shallow soils that Coprosma, Dodonaea, Bidens, Carex,
2,300 m). cm). frequently dry Metrosideros, Dubautia, Deschampsia,
with rocky Wilkesia. Leptecophylla, Dicranopteris,
outcrops. Osteomeles, Dryopteris,
Sadleria, Eragrostis,
Vaccinium. Euphorbia,
Lipochaeta.
Wet Grassland and Shrubland..... 660-2,950 ft (200- 98-197 in (250-500 older, weathered Ilex, Kadua, Cibotium, Carex, Cladium,
900 m). cm). soils to younger, Melicope, Clermontia, Deschampsia,
rocky substrates. Metrosideros, Dubautia, Dicranopteris,
Myrsine. Freycinetia, Eragrostis,
Hydrangea, Peperomia,
Lobelia, Phyllostegia,
Pipturus, Scaevola.
Touchardia,
Urera, Vaccinium.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The physical or biological features identified in this proposed
rule take into consideration the ecosystem types in which each species
occurs, as described above, and also reflect a distribution that we
believe is essential to achieving the species' recovery needs within
those ecosystems. We considered the current population status of each
species, to the extent it is known, and assessed its status relative to
the recovery objectives for that species, in terms of population goals
(numbers of populations and individuals in each population, which
contributes to population resiliency) and distribution (whether the
species occurs in habitats representative of its historic geographical
and ecological distribution, and are sufficiently redundant to
withstand the loss of some populations over time). This assessment
informed us as to whether the species requires space for population
growth and expansion in areas occupied at the time of listing, or
whether additional areas unoccupied at the time of listing may be
required for the reestablishment of populations to achieve
conservation.
Some of the species addressed in this proposed rule occur in more
than one ecosystem. The physical or biological features for these
species are described separately for each ecosystem in which they
occur. The reasoning behind this approach is that each species requires
a different suite of environmental conditions depending upon the
ecosystem in which it occurs. For example, Cyrtandra nanawaleensis will
occur in association with different native plant species, depending on
the mesic forest, wet forest, or mesic grassland and shrubland
ecosystem type where it is found. Each of the physical or biological
features described in each ecosystem in which the species occurs are
essential to the conservation of the species, which includes the
ability to support the geographical and ecological distribution across
the different ecosystem types where the species occurs. Each physical
or biological feature is also essential to retaining the genetic
representation that allows this species to successfully adapt to
different environmental conditions in various native ecosystems.
Although some of these species occur in multiple native ecosystems,
their declining abundance in the face of ongoing threats, such as
increasing numbers of nonnative plant competitors, indicates that they
are not such broad habitat generalists as to be able to persist in
highly altered habitats. Based on an analysis of the best available
scientific information, functioning native ecosystems provide the
fundamental biological requirements for the narrow-range, island-
endemic species that are addressed in this proposed rule.
Some examples may help to clarify our approach to describing the
physical or biological features for each species. To understand the
physical or biological features for the plant Bidens hillebrandiana
ssp. hillebrandiana, for example, we first look at table 1 and see that
B. hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana depends on the coastal ecosystem.
Table 2 indicates that the physical or biological features in the
coastal ecosystem include elevations of less than 980 ft (300 m);
annual precipitation ranges from less than 47 in (120 cm) to more than
98 in (250 cm); well-drained talus, calcareous slopes, and dunes; and
contain one or more genera of the subcanopy and understory plants
Chenopodium, Eragrostis, Gossypium, Heliotropium, Santalum, Scaevola,
Sesuvium, Sida, and Sporobolus, and one or more of the genera of the
canopy species Diospyros, Metrosideros, Myoporum, and Pritchardia. The
specific physical or biological features for B. hillebrandiana ssp.
hillebrandiana are intrinsically tied to the coastal ecosystem. The
physical
[[Page 18765]]
or biological features of the coastal ecosystem best approximate the
physical or biological features for B. hillebrandiana ssp.
hillebrandiana. Thus, we use the physical and biological features
provided in the ecosystem in which B. hillebrandiana ssp.
hillebrandiana is found as the physical and biological features for B.
hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana.
As another example, table 1 indicates the physical or biological
features for the plant Phyllostegia floribunda include the ecosystem-
level physical or biological features for the mesic forest, wet forest,
and wet grassland and shrubland ecosystems. The physical or biological
features for P. floribunda are thus composed of the physical or
biological features for each of the three ecosystems it occupies, as
described in table 2 for the mesic forest, wet forest, and wet
shrubland and grassland ecosystems. Table 1 is read in a similar
fashion in conjunction with table 2 to describe the physical or
biological features for each of the 12 species for which we are
proposing critical habitat.
Special Management Considerations or Protection
When designating critical habitat, we assess whether the specific
areas within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time
of listing contain features which are essential to the conservation of
the species and which may require special management considerations or
protection. The following discussion of special management needs is
applicable to each of the 12 species on the island of Hawai[revaps]i
for which we are designating critical habitat.
For the 11 plant species and Drosophila digressa, we have
determined that the features essential to their conservation are those
required for the successful functioning of the ecosystem in which they
occur (see tables 1 and 2, above); conversely, threats that act at the
ecosystem level also act at the species level. Special management
considerations or protections may be required throughout the critical
habitat areas proposed for designation here to avoid further
degradation or destruction of the physical or biological features
essential to the 12 species' conservation. Habitat degradation,
including trampling and herbivory by introduced ungulates, fire,
drought, and habitat modification by invasive plants, are the greatest
threats to these 12 species, and these threats act at the ecosystem
level. Threats specific to Drosophila digressa habitat include loss or
lack of host plants from ungulates, drought, fire, alteration of
microclimate by invasive plants or the plant disease referred to as
rapid [revaps][omacr]hi[revaps]a death (ROD), (78 FR 64638, October 29,
2013; Service 2021f, pp. 21-23). Some of these threats may be addressed
by special management considerations or protection, while others (e.g.,
sea level rise, hurricanes, drought, volcanic eruption) are beyond the
control of landowners and managers. For a more detailed description of
threats, please see the proposed listing rule (77 FR 63928, October 17,
2012, pp. 63941-63974), the final listing rule (78 FR 64638, October
29, 2013, pp. 64653-64686), and the draft recovery plan (Service 2022a,
entire).
While the 12 species share many threats, impacts to individual
species and the actions needed to eliminate or manage the threats may
differ. Special management considerations or protections may thus be
needed within critical habitat areas to address the threats for each of
the 12 species. Management activities that could minimize or ameliorate
these threats include, but are not limited to, ungulate removal and
exclusion fencing; control or eradication of significant habitat-
modifying, invasive plants; fire management planning and wildfire
response; and measures to reduce of the spread of rapid
[revaps][omacr]hi[revaps]a death (ROD) and other plant pathogens.
Management activities that could minimize or ameliorate threats
specific to Drosophila digressa include control measures to reduce and
eradicate invasive invertebrates, such as wasps and ants. These
management actions would result in the protection of areas providing
habitat for the 12 species.
Criteria Used To Identify Critical Habitat
As required by section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we use the best
scientific data available to designate critical habitat. In accordance
with the Act and our implementing regulations at 50 CFR 424.12(b), we
review available information pertaining to the habitat requirements of
the species and identify specific areas within the geographical area
occupied by the species at the time of listing and any specific areas
outside the geographical area occupied by the species to be considered
for designation as critical habitat. For each of the 12 species for
which we are proposing critical habitat, except Schiedea hawaiiensis,
we are proposing to designate critical habitat in areas within the
geographical area occupied by the species at the time of listing. For
Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana, Cyanea marksii, and
Cyrtandra nanawaleensis, we are not proposing to designate any areas
outside the geographical area occupied by the species because we have
not identified any unoccupied areas that meet the definition of
critical habitat for these species; no unoccupied areas had at least
one physical or biological features essential to the conservation of
the species and a reasonable certainty of contributing to conservation.
We are proposing to designate specific areas outside the
geographical area occupied by the species at the time of its listing
for nine species. For eight of these species, we are also proposing to
designate critical habitat based on occupancy at the time of listing
(Drosophila digressa, Cyanea tritomantha, Cyrtandra wagneri, Melicope
remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae). We are not proposing any
occupied areas a critical habitat for the ninth species, Schiedea
hawaiiensis. For Schiedea hawaiiensis, we are proposing to designate
only unoccupied critical habitat because the single area known to be
occupied by the species at the time of listing is exempted from
designation (see Exemptions, below, for more information) and the
amount of occupied areas were determined to be inadequate to ensure
conservation of the species. All other proposed unoccupied critical
habitat areas overlap entirely with a geographical area for which we
are proposing occupied critical habitat for at least 1 of the other 12
species. The proposed unoccupied critical habitat for Schiedea
hawaiiensis, however, has no overlap in geographic occurrence with the
other species addressed in this proposed rule.
We propose to designate areas outside the geographical area
occupied by these species (Drosophila digressa, Cyanea tritomantha,
Cyrtandra wagneri, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae, and
Schiedea hawaiiensis) due to small population sizes, few individuals,
or reduced geographic range, which make these species vulnerable to
stochastic events. Many of these species are so rare in the wild that
they are at a high risk of extirpation or even extinction from various
events, such as hurricanes or landslides. Therefore, supporting
resilience and redundancy in these species through the establishment of
multiple, robust populations is a key component of conservation of the
species (Service 2022a, pp. 29-30, 35, 39, 48-49). A designation
limited to occupied areas would be inadequate to ensure the
conservation of these species. Areas that
[[Page 18766]]
may have been unoccupied at the time of listing, together with areas
occupied at the time of listing, are reasonably certain to provide some
or all of the habitat necessary for the expansion of existing wild
populations and reestablishment of wild populations within the
historical range of the species to achieve a level that could approach
recovery. The best available scientific information suggests that the
ecosystems in the unoccupied areas in which we are proposing critical
habitat provide one or more of the physical or biological features that
support life-history requirements of these nine species, and thus these
unoccupied areas are considered habitat for the conservation of these
nine species. These areas support recovery in the case of stochastic
events that otherwise have potential to eliminate a species from the
one, or more, of the locations where it is currently found. We find,
therefore, that designation of these unoccupied areas as critical
habitat is essential for the conservation of the species. Designating
unoccupied areas as critical habitat for these species also promotes
conservation actions to restore their historical, geographical, and
ecological representation, necessary for their recovery.
In this proposed rule, we propose critical habitat for 12 species
in 20 distinct areas that include 40 critical habitat units, with
animal and plant units identified separately. Each proposed critical
habitat unit contains all or some of the physical or biological
features essential to the conservation of those individual species that
occupy that particular unit, or areas essential for the conservation of
those species identified that do not presently occupy that particular
unit. The proposed critical habitat for all species includes the
functioning ecosystems on which they depend; thus, for those species
with life-history requirements that can be supported in multiple
ecosystem types, we have identified areas of critical habitat in
multiple ecosystem types. For example, the plant Cyrtandra
nanawaleensis is found in multiple critical habitat units across three
ecosystem types: mesic forest, mesic grassland and shrubland, and wet
forest.
Because we have determined that the features essential to the
conservation of the 12 species are those required for the successful
functioning of the ecosystems in which they respectively occur, we
grouped species by the commonly shared ecosystem type to delineate
critical habitat units. We used similar methods to identify critical
habitat unit boundaries for nine plant species: Cyanea marksii, Cyanea
tritomantha, Cyrtandra nanawaleensis, Cyrtandra wagneri, Melicope
remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei, and Stenogyne cranwelliae. These nine species
were considered together because spatial data used for delineating
critical habitat are similar among these species, and these species all
occur within mesic to wet ecosystems, whereas the remaining two plant
species do not (see table 1, above). We considered each species
separately within their shared dependence on the functioning ecosystems
they have in common. We used separate methods to identify critical
habitat unit boundaries for each of the remaining three species: Bidens
hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana, Schiedea hawaiiensis, and
Drosophila digressa. Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana and
Schiedea hawaiiensis each occur in an ecosystem type not shared with
any of the other 12 species, and Drosophila digressa was considered
separately because of differences in taxonomy and life history from the
plants. Critical habitat boundaries for all species were delineated to
clearly depict and promote conservation of these species by identifying
the functioning ecosystem on which they depend. Ecosystem types that
support the species addressed here but that do not form a contiguous
area are divided geographically into separate units. In units
consisting of multiple ecosystem types, if a species' physical or
biological features are provided by one of the ecosystem types, we
propose to designate the entire area as critical habitat for that
species. We took this approach because within these units, ecosystem
types are patchily distributed at a relatively fine resolution,
intermingled, and can be dynamic on a relatively short timescale in
their distribution within the critical habitat area.
To delineate the proposed critical habitat units, we relied on an
overall conservation strategy in which each of the 12 species was
considered separately using a common approach for 9 plant species, and
a separate approach for the remaining 2 plant species and Drosophila
digressa. The goal of the conservation strategy was to identify the
specific areas for each species that provide essential physical or
biological features without which range-wide resiliency, redundancy,
and representation could not be achieved. The conservation strategy
considered (1) historical and current distribution of each of the 12
species; (2) assessments of resiliency, redundancy, and representation
for each species from the most recent species reports (Service 2021a-
n); and (3) recovery planning efforts (Service 2022a, entire). Some of
the proposed critical habitat for these 12 species overlies critical
habitat already designated for other species on the island of
Hawai[revaps]i.
In summary, we completed the following basic steps to delineate
critical habitat (specific methods follow below):
(1) We compiled the best scientific data available on observations
and distributions of the 12 species that were extant at the time of
listing;
(2) We compiled all available location and landcover data,
including ecosystem type, within the range of the 12 species;
(3) We identified areas containing the physical or biological
features that may require special management consideration or
protection;
(4) We circumscribed boundaries of potential critical habitat units
based on the above information; and
(5) We removed, to the extent practicable, all areas that did not
have the specific physical or biological feature components, and
therefore are not considered essential to the conservation of one or
more of these 12 species.
Based on these five steps, for areas within and outside the
geographic area occupied by the species at the time of listing, we
delineated critical habitat unit boundaries using the following
methods:
(1) Species observation and distribution data sources: We obtained
observational and distributional data to include in our Geographic
Information System database for each of the 12 species including the
known locations of the species from the Hawai[revaps]i Biodiversity
Mapping Program (HBMP) database (HBMP 2010a, entire; HBMP 2010b,
entire; HBMP 2010c, entire; HBMP 2010d, entire; HBMP 2010e, entire;
HBMP 2010f, entire; HBMP 2010g, entire; HBMP 2010h, entire), the Plant
Extinction Prevention Program database (PEPP 2021, unpublished), and
our own rare plant database. We also obtained and compiled species
information from the plant database housed at National Tropical
Botanical Garden (<a href="https://ntbg.org/database/herbarium/">https://ntbg.org/database/herbarium/</a>). We used
Hawai[revaps]i Biodiversity Mapping Program's Geographic reference
areas for the Hawaiian Islands in conjunction with known species'
location data (Kam 2017, p. 1; Hawai[revaps]i Rare Plant Restoration
Group 2020, p. 2). For plants, we obtained and compiled species range
maps, as determined by plant species ranges in the Hawaiian
[[Page 18767]]
Islands (Price et al. 2012, entire), and our own plant species range
layer adapted from Price et al. 2012 (Service 2022b-l, entire). For
Drosophila digressa, we created our own potential species range layer
using the U.S. Geological Survey's (USGS's) Carbon Assessment Landcover
data of 2017 for mesic and wet forest habitats (Selmants et al. 2017,
entire; Service 2021f) and the known elevational range of the species,
which is between 2,000 to 4,500 ft (600 to 1,400 m). Lastly, we
obtained recent biological surveys and reports and discussed that
information with qualified individuals familiar with these 12 species
and their ecosystems.
We used current and historical species distribution information to
develop initial critical habitat boundaries in each of the six
ecosystems that would provide for the conservation of the 12 species.
The initial boundaries were superimposed over digital topographic maps
of the island of Hawai[revaps]i and further evaluated. In general, land
areas that were identified as highly degraded were removed from the
proposed critical habitat units, and natural or constructed features
(e.g., ridge lines, valleys, streams, coastlines, roads, lava flows,
obvious land features, etc.) were used to delineate the proposed
critical habitat boundaries.
(2) Identified areas containing physical or biological features: We
obtained and compiled island-wide elevation, annual precipitation, soil
substrate, and associated native plant genera data sources (Gagne and
Cuddihy 1999, pp. 45-114; LANDFIRE 2016, pp. 1177-1242; Ball et al.
2020, p. 2; Clark et al. 2020, p. 2; Javar-Salas et al. 2020, p. 2; Kim
et al. 2020, p. 2; Lowe et al. 2020, pp. 2-7; Nelson et al. 2020, p.
3). We evaluated areas currently occupied by each species and whether
they contain the physical or biological features essential to the
conservation of the species and which may require special management
considerations or protection. We considered the degree to which the
physical or biological features were present or absent in areas as an
indication of the successful functioning of the habitat.
(3) Landcover and ecosystem data sources: We obtained and compiled
landcover and ecosystem data from the island-wide Geographic
Information System coverage including USGS Carbon Assessment Landcover
data of 2017 (Selmants et al. 2017, entire) and ArcGIS Esri World
Imagery of 2022 (Esri 2023, entire); 1:24,000 scale digital raster
graphics of USGS topographic quadrangles; and geospatial data sets
associated with parcel data from Hawai[revaps]i County (Hawaii
Statewide GIS Program 2013, entire). We evaluated areas currently
occupied by each species. When a species occurs in more than one
ecosystem type, we include the full range of ecosystem types within
that species' range. For example, Phyllostegia floribunda is known from
three of the six ecosystem types addressed in this proposed rule: mesic
forest, wet forest, and wet grassland and shrubland ecosystem types.
(4) Circumscribed boundaries of potential critical habitat units:
We considered several factors in the selection of specific boundaries
for critical habitat for the 12 species. We determined critical habitat
unit boundaries taking into consideration the information on known past
and present locations of the species, landcover and ecosystem data
sources by USGS Carbon Assessment Landcover Data (Selmants et al. 2017,
entire), recovery areas described by the species' draft recovery plan,
projections of geographic ranges of Hawaiian plant species and
Drosophila digressa (Price et al. 2012, entire; Service 2021f, entire;
Service 2022b-l, entire), and adequate habitat to allow for increases
in numbers of individuals and for expansion of populations to provide
for the minimum numbers required to reach delisting goals (as described
in the draft recovery plan (Service 2022a, entire)). Critical habitat
boundaries for all species were delineated to promote the conservation
of these species by identifying the functioning ecosystems on which
they depend.
(5) Removed areas lacking the identified physical or biological
features: When determining proposed critical habitat boundaries, we
made every effort to avoid including developed areas such as lands
covered by buildings, pavement, and other structures because such lands
lack the physical or biological features necessary for these 12
species. The scale of the maps we prepared under the parameters for
publication within the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) may not
reflect the exclusion of such developed lands. Any such lands
inadvertently left inside critical habitat boundaries shown on the maps
of this proposed rule have been excluded by text in the proposed rule
and are not proposed for designation as critical habitat. Therefore, if
the critical habitat designations are finalized as proposed, a Federal
action involving these lands would not trigger section 7 consultation
with respect to critical habitat and the requirement of no adverse
modification unless the specific action would affect the identified
physical or biological features in the critical habitat units.
We propose to designate as critical habitat lands that we have
determined are occupied at the time of listing and that contain one or
more of the physical or biological features that are essential to
support life-history processes of the species. We have determined that
occupied areas are inadequate to ensure the conservation of the
species. Therefore, we have also identified, and propose for
designation as critical habitat, unoccupied areas that are essential
for the conservation of nine of the species (see Proposed Critical
Habitat Designation, below).
Units are proposed for designation based on one or more of the
physical or biological features being present to support the life-
history processes for 1 or more of the 12 species for which we propose
critical habitat. Some units contain all of the identified physical or
biological features and support multiple life-history processes. Some
units contain only some elements of the physical or biological features
necessary to support the species' particular use of that habitat.
The proposed critical habitat designation is defined by the map or
maps, as modified by any accompanying regulatory text, presented at the
end of this document under Proposed Regulation Promulgation. We include
more detailed information on the boundaries of the critical habitat
designation in the preamble of this document. We will make the
coordinates or plot points or both on which each map is based available
to the public on <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> at Docket No. FWS-R1-ES-
2023-0017.
Proposed Critical Habitat Designation
We are proposing approximately 122,277 ac (49,484 ha) as critical
habitat in 20 distinct areas that include 40 critical habitat units,
with 9 animal and 31 plant units identified separately, for Drosophila
digressa, Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana, Cyanea marksii,
Cyanea tritomantha, Cyrtandra nanawaleensis, Cyrtandra wagneri,
Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense,
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Schiedea hawaiiensis, and Stenogyne
cranwelliae. The critical habitat areas we describe below constitute
our current best assessment of areas that meet the definition of
critical habitat for each species. Table 3 shows the proposed critical
habitat units and the approximate area of each unit by landowner type.
Within the 20 distinct areas, areas of proposed critical habitat
for Drosophila digressa are described as 9 sequential
[[Page 18768]]
numbered units, whereas areas of proposed critical habitat for plants
are described as 19 sequential numbered sections that are then split
into 1 or more units, based on whether they overlap with existing
designated critical habitat for other plant species on the island of
Hawai[revaps]i. Some of the proposed critical habitat for Drosophila
digressa overlays critical habitat already proposed or designated for
plant species; however, critical habitat designations for wildlife
species at 50 CFR 17.95 are organized differently than critical habitat
designations for plant species on the island of Hawai[revaps]i at 50
CFR 17.99. Therefore, the proposed critical habitat for Drosophila
digressa stands alone and is not incorporated into, or presented to
address, any existing critical habitat units for other species. Areas
of a section that overlay existing Hawaiian plant critical habitat
units are assigned to that existing critical habitat unit name. Areas
of a section that do not overlay existing Hawaiian plant critical
habitat are assigned a sequential new critical habitat unit number.
This distinction between existing and newly proposed critical habitat
areas is necessary in order to be consistent with the critical habitat
unit numbering system we established earlier for plants on the island
of Hawai[revaps]i (see 50 CFR 17.99(k)). We provide the critical
habitat section numbers, where applicable, as well as unit numbers and
the corresponding map numbers that would appear at 50 CFR 17.99 if we
adopt this rule as proposed for ease of reference in the CFR. All units
in the proposed designation, with the exception of Unit 55 within
Schiedea hawaiiensis--Section 19, are considered occupied at the time
of listing (see 78 FR 64638; October 29, 2013) by 1 or more of the 12
species for which we are proposing critical habitat (table 4). Of the
20 distinct areas for which critical habitat is proposed, 13 include
animal units or plant sections that are both occupied and unoccupied
for 2 or more of the 12 Hawai[revaps]i island species.
The areas we propose as critical habitat are located in six
ecosystem types: (1) coastal, (2) dry forest, (3) mesic forest, (4) wet
forest, (5) mesic grassland and shrubland, and (6) wet grassland and
shrubland. Critical habitat designations for plants and animals are
published in separate sections of the CFR; however, the proposed
critical habitat for the 11 plants and Drosophila digressa overlap each
other in many areas on the island of Hawai[revaps]i. For example,
``Cyanea tritomantha, Cyrtandra wagneri, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia
floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei,
Stenogyne cranwelliae--Section 1'' and ``Drosophila digressa--Unit 1''
overlap entirely within the same geographic area. Therefore, because
the section and unit boundaries are the same, we describe them together
to avoid redundancy and reduce publication costs for this proposed
rule, as indicated by ``and'' following the section name in the
following headings.
Table 3--Proposed Critical Habitat Units by Ecosystem, Land Ownership, and Size
[Area estimates reflect all land within critical habitat unit boundaries]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Private/other (ac
Animal unit Plant section Plant unit Federal (ac (ha)) State (ac (ha)) (ha)) Total (ac (ha))
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wet Forest
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Drosophila digressa--Unit 1.... Cyanea tritomantha, Unit 3........... 3,550 (1,436) 7,962 (3,222) 547 (221) 12,059 (4,880)
Cyrtandra wagneri, Unit 52.......... 548 (222) 2,682 (1,085) 984 (398) 4,213 (1,705)
Melicope remyi,
Phyllostegia
floribunda,
Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei,
Stenogyne cranwelliae--
Section 1.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. 4,097 (1,658) 10,644 (4,307) 1,531 (619) 16,272 (6,585)
Drosophila digressa--Unit 7.... Cyanea marksii, Unit 15.......... ................. 182 (73) ................. 182 (73)
Phyllostegia Unit 39.......... ................. 1,021 (413) 144 (58) 1,164 (471)
floribunda,
Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei,
Stenogyne cranwelliae--
Section 4.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. ................. 1,202 (486) 144 (58) 1,346 (545)
Drosophila digressa--Unit 8.... Cyanea marksii, Unit 15.......... ................. 55 (22) 72 (29) 127 (51)
Phyllostegia Unit 38.......... ................. 298 (121) 236 (95) 534 (216)
floribunda,
Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei,
Stenogyne cranwelliae--
Section 5.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. ................. 353 (143) 308 (125) 661 (267)
Drosophila digressa--Unit 6.... Cyanea marksii, Unit 16.......... ................. 156 (63) ................. 156 (63)
Phyllostegia Unit 40.......... ................. 1,239 (501) 4 (2) 1,243 (503)
floribunda,
Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei,
Stenogyne cranwelliae--
Section 6.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. ................. 1,395 (565) 4 (2) 1,399 (566)
Drosophila digressa--Unit 2.... Cyanea tritomantha, Unit 29.......... ................. 494 (200) ................. 494 (200)
Cyrtandra wagneri, Unit 30.......... 7,235 (2,928) 6,498 (2,630) ................. 13,732 (5,557)
Phyllostegia Unit 51.......... 643 (260) 16,906 (6,841) 316 (128) 17,865 (7,230)
floribunda,
Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei,
Stenogyne cranwelliae--
Section 11.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. 7,877 (3,188) 23,898 (9,671) 316 (128) 32,091 (12,987)
Drosophila digressa--Unit 9.... Cyanea marksii, Unit 37.......... 1,906 (771) ................. <1 (<1) 1,906 (771)
Phyllostegia
floribunda,
Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei,
Stenogyne cranwelliae--
Section 12.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. 1,906 (771) ................. <1 (<1) 1,906 (771)
[[Page 18769]]
Drosophila digressa--Unit 5.... Cyanea marksii, Unit 41.......... ................. 411 (166) 3,001 (1,214) 3,412 (1,381)
Phyllostegia
floribunda,
Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei,
Stenogyne cranwelliae--
Section 13.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. ................. 411 (166) 3,001 (1,214) 3,412 (1,381)
Cyrtandra Unit 47.......... ................. 274 (111) ................. 274 (111)
nanawaleensis--Section
15.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. ................. 274 (111) ................. 274 (111)
Cyrtandra Unit 48.......... ................. 582 (235) 7 (3) 589 (238)
nanawaleensis--Section
16.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. ................. 582 (235) 7 (3) 589 (238)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mesic Coastal
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bidens hillebrandiana Unit 6........... ................. 2 (1) ................. 2 (1)
ssp. hillebrandiana-- Unit 53.......... ................. 80 (33) 245 (99) 325 (132)
Section 2.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. ................. 82 (33) 245 (99) 327 (132)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wet Forest and Wet Grassland and Shrubland
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cyanea tritomantha, Unit 8........... ................. 6,805 (2,754) ................. 6,805 (2,754)
Melicope remyi, Unit 9........... ................. <1 (<1) 1 (<1) 1 (<1)
Phyllostegia Unit 54.......... ................. 5,913 (2,392) 1,738 (703) 7,651 (3,096)
floribunda,
Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei,
Stenogyne cranwelliae--
Section 3.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. ................. 12,718 (5,147) 1,739 (704) 14,457 (5,851)
Cyrtandra wagneri, Unit 23.......... 9 (4) ................. ................. 9 (4)
Phyllostegia Unit 45.......... 5,494 (2,223) ................. ................. 5,494 (2,223)
floribunda,
Pittosporum
hawaiiense--Section 7.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. 5,503 (2,227) ................. ................. 5,503 (2,227)
Cyrtandra Unit 28.......... ................. 155 (63) ................. 155 (63)
nanawaleensis, Unit 46.......... ................. 12,213 (4,942) 6 (2) 12,219 (4,945)
Cyrtandra wagneri,
Phyllostegia
floribunda--Section 10.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. ................. 12,368 (5,005) 6 (2) 12,374 (5,008)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wet Forest and Mesic Forest
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cyanea tritomantha, Unit 24.......... 1,956 (792) 125 (51) ................. 2,081 (842)
Cyrtandra wagneri, Unit 44.......... 318 (129) 5,439 (2,201) 649 (263) 6,406 (2,593)
Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei,
Stenogyne cranwelliae--
Section 8.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. 2,274 (920) 5,564 (2,252) 649 (263) 8,487 (3,435)
Cyrtandra wagneri, Unit 24.......... 36 (14) 65 (26) ................. 101 (41)
Pittosporum Unit 43.......... 1,689 (683) 4,183 (1,693) ................. 5,872 (2,376)
hawaiiense, Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei,
Stenogyne cranwelliae--
Section 9.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. 1,725 (698) 4,248 (1,719) ................. 5,973 (2,417)
Drosophila digressa--Unit 3.... Cyanea tritomantha, Unit 42.......... 8,769 (3,549) 12 (5) ................. 8,781 (3,554)
Cyrtandra wagneri,
Phyllostegia
floribunda,
Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei,
Stenogyne cranwelliae--
Section 14.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. 8,769 (3,549) 12 (5) ................. 8,781 (3,554)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wet Forest, Mesic Forest, and Mesic Grassland and Shrubland
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cyrtandra Unit 49.......... ................. 875 (354) 1 (<1) 875 (354)
nanawaleensis--Section
17.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. ................. 875 (354) 1 (<1) 875 (354)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cyrtandra Unit 50.......... ................. 562 (227) 1 (<1) 562 (227)
nanawaleensis--Section
18.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. ................. 562 (227) 1 (<1) 562 (227)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dry Forest
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Schiedea hawaiiensis-- Unit 55.......... ................. 6,822 (2,761) ................. 6,822 (2,761)
Section 19.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. ................. 6,822 (2,761) ................. 6,822 (2,761)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 18770]]
Mesic Forest
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Drosophila digressa--Unit 4.... ....................... ................. ................. 167 (67) ................. 167 (67)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. ................. 167 (67) ................. 167 (67)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total.................. ....................... ................. 32,151 (13,011) 82,177 (33,256) 7,950 (3,217) 122,277 (49,484)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Area sizes may not sum due to rounding.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP29MR23.020
[[Page 18771]]
Table 5--Proposed Critical Habitat Units for Drosophila Digressa (Picture-Wing Fly)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corresponding critical habitat map in the
Critical habitat unit Occupied/unoccupied Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Drosophila digressa--Unit 1............. Unoccupied................. Drosophila digressa--Hawai[revaps]i
Island, HI--Unit 1.
Drosophila digressa--Unit 2............. Occupied................... Drosophila digressa--Hawai[revaps]i
Island, HI--Unit 2.
Drosophila digressa--Unit 3............. Unoccupied................. Drosophila digressa--Hawai[revaps]i
Island, HI--Unit 3.
Drosophila digressa--Unit 4............. Occupied................... Drosophila digressa--Hawai[revaps]i
Island, HI--Unit 4.
------------------------------------------
Drosophila digressa--Unit 5............. Unoccupied................. Drosophila digressa--Hawai[revaps]i
Island, HI--Unit 5, Unit 6, Unit 7, Unit
8, Unit 9.
Drosophila digressa--Unit 6............. Unoccupied.................
Drosophila digressa--Unit 7............. Unoccupied.................
Drosophila digressa--Unit 8............. Unoccupied.................
Drosophila digressa--Unit 9............. Unoccupied.................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We present brief descriptions of all units, and reasons why they
meet the definition of critical habitat, for each of the 12
Hawai[revaps]i Island species, below.
Descriptions of Proposed Critical Habitat
We describe each section and unit separately, below, but first
describe the common rationale for proposing areas of critical habitat
as occupied and/or unoccupied critical habitat. All areas that are
proposed as occupied habitat for a species are important for that
species because these areas are either the last or one of the last
remaining areas inhabited by the species and they meet the definition
of critical habitat, making these areas necessary for maintaining the
redundancy and representation for the species' conservation. This is
the case for all sections and units, with the exception of Schiedea
hawaiiensis--Section 19, which is proposed critical habitat, but is not
currently occupied habitat for any of the 12 species. We note which
areas are the last remaining area known to be inhabited by a species.
We analyzed whether occupied areas were adequate for the
conservation of each of the 12 species based on conservation goals
within the recovery plan (Service 2022a, entire). Occupied areas were
not able to provide the space needed to meet the target number of
reproductive populations and individuals for any of the 12 species, but
for three species, no other areas containing physical or biological
features are known, leaving nine species (Drosophila digressa, Cyanea
tritomantha, Cyrtandra wagneri, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia
floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei,
Stenogyne cranwelliae, and Schiedea hawaiiensis) for which additional
areas containing at least one physical or biological feature essential
to the conservation of the species are known. We have determined that
all areas of unoccupied habitat that are proposed critical habitat for
these species are essential for the conservation of these species
because (1) they provide one or more of the physical or biological
features necessary for the reestablishment of wild populations within
their range, and (2) we have reasonable certainty that these areas will
contribute to the conservation of the species by contributing to the
areas needed to support the numbers of populations and reproducing
individuals needed for recovery, thus helping to ensure resiliency,
redundancy, and representation needed for conservation of these
species. The establishment of multiple (redundancy), robust populations
is a key component of conservation of these species (Service 2022a, pp.
29-30, 35, 39, 48-49). Due to the small numbers of individuals of each
of these species, they require suitable habitat and space for expansion
or introduction to achieve population levels that could approach
recovery. Designating unoccupied areas as critical habitat for these
species also supports recovery by allowing the habitat needed to
establish additional populations able to withstand environmental
stochasticity (resiliency) that otherwise has potential to eliminate a
species from the one, or more, of the locations where it is currently
found. Designating these unoccupied areas as critical habitat also
promotes conservation actions to restore their historical,
geographical, and ecological representation (representation), necessary
for their recovery. For ease of reading and space efficiency, after
first use of the full name of a plant section, we will refer to it by
its section number only.
Table 6--Land Use, Threats to Habitat, and Potential Special Management Considerations for Critical Habitat
Units Designated for the 12 Hawai[revaps]i Island Species
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Plant section Drosophila unit General land use Threats Special management
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 1....................... Unit 1............ A, B, C, D, E, F, O, P, Q........... S, T, U.
G.
Section 2....................... .................. A, B, C, D, E, F, O, P, Q, R........ S, T, U.
H.
Section 3....................... .................. A, B, C, D, E, F, O, P, Q, R........ S, T, U.
H.
Section 4....................... Unit 7............ A, B, C, D, E, F, O, P, Q, R........ S, T, U.
H.
Section 5....................... Unit 8............ A, B, C, D, E, F, O, P, Q, R........ S, T, U.
H.
Section 6....................... Unit 6............ A, B, C, D, E, F, O, P, Q, R........ S, T, U.
H.
Section 7....................... .................. A, B, C, D, F, H.. O, P, Q, R........ S, T, U.
Section 8....................... .................. A, E, F, G, H, I, O, P, Q........... S, T.
J, K, L.
Section 9....................... .................. A, E, F, H, I, J.. O, P, Q, R........ S, T, U.
Section 10...................... .................. A, B, C, D, E, F, O, P, Q, R........ S, T, U.
G, H, M.
Section 11...................... Unit 2............ A, B, C, D, E, F, O, P, Q, R........ S, T, U.
H, K, N.
Section 12...................... Unit 9............ A, B, C, D, F, H.. O, P, Q, R........ S, T, U.
Unit 4............ A, B, C, D, E, F, O, P, Q, R........ S, T, U.
H.
Section 13...................... Unit 5............ A, B, C, D, E, F, O, P, Q, R........ S, T, U.
G, H.
Section 14...................... Unit 3............ A, E, F, H, I, J.. O, P, Q, R........ S, T, U.
[[Page 18772]]
Section 15...................... .................. A, B, C, D, E, F, O, P, Q, R........ S, T, U.
N.
Section 16...................... .................. A, B, C, D, E, F, O, P, Q, R........ S, T, U.
N.
Section 17...................... .................. A, B, C, D, E, F, O, P, Q, R........ S, T, U.
N.
Section 18...................... .................. A, B, C, D, E, F, O, P, Q, R........ S, T, U.
N.
Section 19...................... .................. A, B, C, D, E, F, O, P, Q, R........ S, T, U.
H.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Definition of Codes Used in Table 6
General land use:
(A) Watershed protection
(B) Ungulate and invasive plant control
(C) Natural resource monitoring
(D) Rare species protection and research
(E) Public hunting
(F) Public use and recreation
(G) Education and outreach
(H) Fire control
(I) Natural resource conservation including monitoring invasive
plants and animals
(J) Enhancement of native rare plant resources
(K) Cultural uses
(L) Personal gathering
(M) Public use including traditional and customary rights of Native
Hawaiians
(N) Timber management
Threats:
(O) Habitat degradation due to rooting by feral ungulates
(P) Intrusion of ecosystem altering invasive plants
(Q) Changes in canopy cover due to plant disease
(R) Fire
Special management considerations (see Special Management
Considerations or Protection, in text above for additional detail):
(S) Feral ungulate control
(T Measures to control spread of invasive plants
(U) Fire management planning and wildfire response
Cyanea tritomantha, Cyrtandra wagneri, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia
floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei,
Stenogyne cranwelliae--Section 1 and Drosophila digressa--Unit 1
Section 1 and Drosophila digressa--Unit 1 consist of wet forest
ecosystem from [revaps][Omacr][revaps][omacr]kala to Maulua Nui on the
northeastern slope of Maunakea. Lands within this section and unit
include approximately 25 percent in Federal ownership, 65 percent in
State ownership, and 9 percent in private/other ownership (see table 3,
above). Section 1 is comprised of two units: Unit 3 is a critical
habitat unit within unit Hawaii 3 (see 50 CFR 17.99(k)(10) through
(14)), which was previously designated for other plant species; and
Unit 52 is a newly proposed critical habitat unit depicted on Map 119.
All State-owned lands in this section and unit are managed by the State
of Hawaii as part of the Hilo Forest Reserve Humu[revaps]ula,
Laup[amacr]hoehoe, and P[imacr]h[amacr] Sections; the Laup[amacr]hoehoe
Natural Area Reserve; and the Manowaiale[revaps]e Forest Reserve. All
Federal lands in this section and unit are managed by the Service
within Hakalau Forest National Wildlife Refuge, Hakalau Forest Unit.
For general land use, threats, and special management considerations or
protection measures to reduce or alleviate the threats identified
within this section and unit, see table 6, above (DLNR-DOFAW 2022,
entire; DLNR and USDA 2016, p. 4; Service 2010, pp. 1-13, 1-33-1-34;
Stewart 2010, entire). The State lands within this section and unit are
managed under the Laup[amacr]hoehoe Forest Management Plan (DLNR and
USDA 2016, entire) and the Mauna Kea Watershed Management Plan (Stewart
2010, entire). The Federal lands within this section and unit are
managed under the Hakalau Forest National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive
Conservation Plan (Service 2010, pp. 2-20-2-40) and the Mauna Kea
Watershed Management Plan (Stewart 2010, entire).
Section 1 is occupied by the plants Cyanea tritomantha, Cyrtandra
wagneri, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, and Stenogyne
cranwelliae. This section and unit include the wet forest, the moisture
regime, and canopy, subcanopy, and understory native plant species
identified as the physical or biological features in the wet forest
ecosystem. Section 1 is important because it has the last remaining
areas inhabited by Cyrtandra wagneri and Melicope remyi, and one of the
last remaining areas inhabited by Cyanea tritomantha, Phyllostegia
floribunda, and Stenogyne cranwelliae, making it an essential area for
maintaining the redundancy and representation necessary for species'
conservation. Although Section 1 is not known to be occupied by the
plants Pittosporum hawaiiense and Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and
Drosophila digressa--Unit 1 is not known to be occupied by Drosophila
digressa, this section and unit contain unoccupied habitat that is
essential for the conservation of these species because they (1) are
habitat for these species, (2) provide at least one the physical or
biological features essential for the conservation of each of these
species, and (3) contribute to the area of habitat needed to
reestablish wild populations within their range in support of recovery
criteria for each of these species. For recovery, each plant species
needs at least 10 populations, with at least 400 reproducing
individuals per population for Pittosporum hawaiiense and 500
reproducing individuals per population for Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei (Service 2022a, p. 43-44). Drosophila digressa needs at least
10 stable populations for recovery (Service 2022a, p. 49). Therefore,
we are reasonably certain that this section and unit will contribute to
the conservation of these species and that this section and unit
contain one or more of the physical or biological features that are
essential to the conservation of these species. Approximately 12,059 ac
(4,880 ha) of this section and unit overlap designated critical habitat
for the federally endangered plants Clermontia peleana, Cyanea
platyphylla, Cyrtandra giffardii, Cyrtandra tintinnabula, and
Phyllostegia warshaueri (see 68 FR 39624; July 2, 2003).
[[Page 18773]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP29MR23.021
Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana--Section 2
Section 2 consists of coastal ecosystem from Polol[umacr] to
Laup[amacr]hoehoe Iki on the northeastern slope of Kohala Mountain.
Lands within this section include approximately 25 percent in State
ownership and 75 percent in private/other ownership (see table 3,
above). Section 2 is comprised of two units: Unit 6 is a critical
habitat unit within unit Hawaii 6 (see 50 CFR 17.99(k)(25)), which was
previously designated for another plant species; and Unit 53 is a newly
proposed critical habitat unit depicted on Map 120. All State-owned
lands in Section 2 are managed by the State of Hawaii as part of the
Polol[umacr] Section of the Kohala Forest Reserve and the Pu[revaps]u o
[revaps]Umi Natural Area Reserve. The State lands within this section
are managed under the Pu[revaps]u o [revaps]Umi Management Plan (DLNR-
DOFAW 1989, entire) and Kohala Mountain Watershed Management Plan Draft
(Kohala Watershed Partnership [KWP] 2007, entire). For general land
use, threats, and special management considerations or protection
measures to reduce or alleviate the threats identified within this
section, see table 6, above (DLNR-DOFAW 1989, entire; KWP 2007,
entire).
Section 2 is occupied by the plant Bidens hillebrandiana ssp.
hillebrandiana and includes the coastal habitat, the moisture regime,
and canopy, subcanopy, and understory native plant species identified
as the physical or biological features in the coastal ecosystem. This
section is especially important because it is the last remaining area
inhabited by the species, which makes it an important area for
maintaining the redundancy and representation necessary for species'
conservation. Approximately 2 ac (1 ha) of this section overlaps
designated critical habitat for the federally endangered plant
Nothocestrum breviflorum (see 68 FR 39624; July 2, 2003).
[[Page 18774]]
Cyanea tritomantha, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda,
Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne
cranwelliae--Section 3
Section 3 consists of wet forest and wet grassland and shrubland
ecosystems from Kahua to Pu[revaps]ukapu on Kohala Mountain. Lands
within this section include approximately 88 percent in State ownership
and 12 percent in private/other ownership (see table 3, above). Section
3 is comprised of three units: Unit 8 and Unit 9 are critical habitat
units within unit Hawaii 8 and unit Hawaii 9 (see 50 CFR 17.99(k)(27)
through (38)), which were previously designated for other plant
species; and Unit 54 is a newly proposed critical habitat unit depicted
on Map 121. All State-owned lands in this section are managed by the
State of Hawaii as part of the Kohala Forest Reserve, Kohala Watershed
Forest Reserve, and Pu[revaps]u o [revaps]Umi Natural Area Reserve. The
State lands within this section are managed under the Pu[revaps]u o
[revaps]Umi Management Plan (DLNR-DOFAW 1989, entire) and the Kohala
Mountain Watershed Management Plan Draft (KWP 2007, entire). For
general land use, threats, and special management considerations or
protection measures to reduce or alleviate the threats identified
within this section, see table 6, above (DLNR-DOFAW 1989, entire; KWP
2007, entire).
Section 3 is occupied by the plants Cyanea tritomantha, Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and Stenogyne cranwelliae,
and includes the wet forest and wet grassland and shrubland ecosystems,
the moisture regime, and canopy, subcanopy, and understory native plant
species identified as the physical or biological features in the wet
forest and wet grassland and shrubland ecosystems. Although Section 3
is not known to be occupied by Melicope remyi or Phyllostegia
floribunda, this section contains unoccupied habitat that is essential
for the conservation of these species because they (1) are habitat for
these species, (2) provide at least one the physical or biological
features essential for the conservation of each of these species, and
(3) contribute to the area of habitat needed to reestablish wild
populations within their range in support of recovery criteria for each
of these species. For recovery, each species needs at least 10
populations, with at least 200 reproducing individuals per population
for Melicope remyi and at least 500 reproducing individuals per
population for Phyllostegia floribunda (Service 2022a, p. 43-44).
Therefore, we are reasonably certain that this section will contribute
to the conservation of these species and that this section contains one
or more of the physical or biological features that are essential to
the conservation of these species. Approximately 6,938 ac (2,808 ha) of
this section overlaps designated critical habitat for the federally
endangered plants Clermontia drepanomorpha, Phyllostegia warshaueri,
and Achyranthes mutica (see 68 FR 39624; July 2, 2003); and for the
picture-wing fly Drosophila ochrobasis Units 3 (Kohala Mountains East)
and 4 (Kohala Mountains West) (see 50 CFR 17.95(i) and 73 FR 73795,
December 4, 2008).
Cyanea marksii, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense,
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae--Section 4 and
Drosophila digressa--Unit 7
Section 4 and Drosophila digressa--Unit 7 consist of wet forest
ecosystem from Kukuiopa[revaps]e to [revaps][Omacr]lelomoana on the
southwestern slopes of Mauna Loa. Lands within this section and unit
include approximately 89 percent in State ownership and 11 percent in
private/other ownership (see table 3, above). Section 4 is comprised of
two units: Unit 15 is a critical habitat unit within unit Hawaii 15
(see 50 CFR 17.99(k)(58) through (59)), which was previously designated
for another plant species; and Unit 39 is a newly proposed critical
habitat unit depicted on Map 108. All State-owned lands in this section
and unit are managed by the State of Hawaii as part of the South Kona
Forest Reserve Kukuiopa[revaps]e Section. The State lands within this
section and unit are managed under the Three Mountain Alliance
Management Plan (TMA 2007, entire). For general land use, threats, and
special management considerations or protection measures to reduce or
alleviate the threats identified within this section and unit, see
table 6, above (TMA 2007, pp. 26-37; DLNR-DOFAW 2022, entire).
Section 4 is occupied by the plants Cyanea marksii, Phyllostegia
floribunda, and Pittosporum hawaiiense. This section and unit include
the wet forest, the moisture regime, and canopy, subcanopy, and
understory native plant species identified as the physical or
biological features in the wet forest ecosystem. Although Section 4 is
not known to be occupied by the plants Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei
and Stenogyne cranwelliae, and Drosophila digressa--Unit 7 is not known
to be occupied by Drosophila digressa, this section and unit contain
unoccupied habitat that is essential for the conservation of these
species because they (1) are habitat for these species, (2) provide at
least one the physical or biological features essential for the
conservation of each of these species, and (3) contribute to the area
of habitat needed to reestablish wild populations within their range in
support of recovery criteria for each of these species. For recovery,
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei needs at least 10 populations, with at
least 500 reproducing individuals per population, and Stenogyne
cranwelliae needs at least 20 populations, with at least 500
reproducing individuals per population (Service 2022a, p. 43-44).
Drosophila digressa needs at least 10 stable populations for recovery
(Service 2022a, p. 49). Therefore, we are reasonably certain that this
section and unit will contribute to the conservation of these species
and that this section and unit contain one or more of the physical or
biological features that are essential to the conservation of these
species. Approximately 182 ac (73 ha) of this section and unit overlap
designated critical habitat for the federally endangered plant Cyanea
stictophylla (68 FR 39624; July 2, 2003).
[[Page 18775]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP29MR23.022
Cyanea marksii, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense,
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae--Section 5 and
Drosophila digressa--Unit 8
Section 5 and Drosophila digressa--Unit 8 consist of wet forest
ecosystem in Ka[revaps]ohe on the southwestern slopes of Mauna Loa.
Lands within this section and unit include approximately 53 percent in
State ownership and 47 percent in private/other ownership (see table 3,
above). Section 5 is comprised of two units: Unit 15 is a critical
habitat unit within unit Hawaii 15 (see 50 CFR 17.99(k)(58) through
(59)), which was previously designated for another plant species; and
Unit 38 is a newly proposed critical habitat unit depicted on Map 107.
All State-owned lands in this section and unit are managed by the State
of Hawaii as part of the South Kona Forest Reserve, Ka[revaps]ohe
Section and Kukuiopa[revaps]e Section. The State lands within this
section and unit are managed under the Three Mountain Alliance
Management Plan (TMA 2007, pp. 47-50). For general land use, threats,
and special management considerations or protection measures to reduce
or alleviate the threats identified within this section and unit, see
table 6, above (DLNR-DOFAW 2022, entire; TMA 2007, pp. 26-37).
Section 5 is occupied by the plant Cyanea marksii. This section and
unit include the wet forest, the moisture regime, and canopy,
subcanopy, and understory native plant species identified as the
physical or biological features in the wet forest ecosystem. Although
Section 5 is not known to be occupied by the plants Phyllostegia
floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and
Stenogyne cranwelliae, and Drosophila digressa--Unit 8 is not known to
be occupied by Drosophila digressa, this section and unit contain
unoccupied habitat that is essential for the conservation of these
species because they (1) are habitat for these species, (2) provide at
least one the physical or biological features essential for the
conservation of each of these species, and (3) contribute to the area
of habitat needed to reestablish wild populations within their range in
support of recovery criteria for each of these species. For recovery,
Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, and Schiedea diffusa
ssp. macraei each need at least 10 populations, with at least 500
reproducing individuals per population for Phyllostegia floribunda and
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei and at least 400 reproducing individuals
per population for Pittosporum hawaiiense (Service 2022a, p. 43-44).
For Stenogyne cranwelliae, at least 20 populations, each with at least
500 reproducing
[[Page 18776]]
individuals, are necessary for recovery (Service 2022a, p. 43-44).
Drosophila digressa needs at least 10 stable populations for recovery
(Service 2022a, p. 49). Therefore, we are reasonably certain that this
section and unit will contribute to the conservation of these species
and that this section and unit contain one or more of the physical or
biological features that are essential to the conservation of these
species. Approximately 127 ac (51 ha) of this section and unit overlap
designated critical habitat for the federally endangered plant Cyanea
stictophylla (68 FR 39624; July 2, 2003).
Cyanea marksii, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense,
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae--Section 6 and
Drosophila digressa--Unit 6
Section 6 and Drosophila digressa--Unit 6 consist of wet forest
ecosystem in K[imacr]p[amacr]hoehoe on the southwestern slopes of Mauna
Loa. Lands within this section and unit include approximately 99.7
percent in State ownership and 0.3 percent in private/other ownership
(see table 3, above). Section 6 is comprised of two units: Unit 16 is a
critical habitat unit within unit Hawaii 16 (see 50 CFR 17.99(k)(60)
through (61)), which was previously designated for another plant
species; and Unit 40 is a newly proposed critical habitat unit depicted
on Map 109. All State-owned lands in this section and unit are managed
by the State of Hawaii as part of the K[imacr]p[amacr]hoehoe Natural
Area Reserve. The State lands within this section and unit are managed
under the K[imacr]p[amacr]hoehoe Natural Area Reserve Management Plan
(DLNR-DOFAW 2002, entire) and the Three Mountain Alliance Management
Plan (TMA 2007, entire). For general land use, threats, and special
management considerations or protection measures to reduce or alleviate
the threats within this section and unit, see table 6, above (DLNR-
DOFAW 2002, entire).
Section 6 is occupied by the plants Cyanea marksii and Phyllostegia
floribunda. This section and unit include the wet forest, the moisture
regime, and canopy, subcanopy, and understory native plant species
identified as the physical or biological features in the wet forest
ecosystem. Although Section 6 is not known to be occupied by
Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, or Stenogyne
cranwelliae, and Drosophila digressa--Unit 6 is not known to be
occupied by Drosophila digressa, this section and unit contain
unoccupied habitat that is essential for the conservation of these
species because they (1) are habitat for these species, (2) provide at
least one the physical or biological features essential for the
conservation of each of these species, and (3) contribute to the area
of habitat needed to reestablish wild populations within their range in
support of recovery criteria for each of these species. For recovery,
Pittosporum hawaiiense and Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei each need at
least 10 populations, with at least 400 reproducing individuals per
population for Pittosporum hawaiiense and at least 500 reproducing
individuals per population for Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and
Stenogyne cranwelliae needs at least 20 populations, each with at least
500 reproducing individuals (Service 2022a, p. 43-44). Drosophila
digressa needs at least 10 stable populations for recovery (Service
2022a, p. 49). Therefore, we are reasonably certain that this section
and unit will contribute to the conservation of these species and that
this section and unit contain one or more of the physical or biological
features that are essential to the conservation of these species.
Approximately 156 ac (63 ha) of this section and unit overlap
designated critical habitat for the federally endangered plant Cyanea
stictophylla (68 FR 39624; July 2, 2003).
Cyrtandra wagneri, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense--
Section 7
Section 7 consists of wet forest and wet grassland and shrubland
ecosystems from P[amacr]nau Nui to Kamoamoa on eastern slope of
K[imacr]lauea Volcano, entirely on Federal land (see table 3, above).
Section 7 is comprised of two units: Unit 23 is a critical habitat unit
within unit Hawaii 23 (see 50 CFR 17.99(k)(74) through (75)), which was
previously designated for another plant species; and Unit 45 is a newly
proposed critical habitat unit depicted on Map 114. Lands within this
section are entirely under Federal ownership managed by the National
Park Service within Hawai[revaps]i Volcanoes National Park. Federal
lands within this section are managed by the National Park Service
under the Hawai[revaps]i Volcanoes National Park General Management
Plan (National Park Service 2015, 2016, entire) and the Three Mountain
Alliance Management Plan (TMA 2007, entire). For general land use,
threats, and special management considerations or protection measures
to reduce or alleviate the threats within this section, see table 6,
above (National Park Service 2015, 2016, entire).
Section 7 is occupied by the plants Phyllostegia floribunda and
Pittosporum hawaiiense and includes the wet forest and wet grassland
and shrubland ecosystems, the moisture regime, and canopy, subcanopy,
and understory native plant species identified as the physical or
biological features in the wet forest and wet grassland and shrubland
ecosystems. Although Section 7 is not known to be occupied by Cyrtandra
wagneri, this section contains unoccupied habitat that is essential for
the conservation of this species because it (1) is habitat for this
species, (2) provides at least one the physical or biological features
essential for the conservation of this species, and (3) contributes to
the area of habitat needed to reestablish wild populations within its
range in support of recovery criteria. At least 10 populations, each
with at least 500 reproducing individuals are necessary for recovery of
Cyrtandra wagneri (Service 2022a, p. 43-44). Therefore, we are
reasonably certain that this section will contribute to the
conservation of this species and that this section contains one or more
of the physical or biological features that are essential to the
conservation of this species. Approximately 9 ac (4 ha) of this section
overlaps designated critical habitat for the federally endangered plant
Pleomele hawaiiensis (68 FR 39624; July 2, 2003).
Cyanea tritomantha, Cyrtandra wagneri, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae--Section 8
Section 8 consists of wet and mesic forest ecosystems from
N[imacr]nole to P[amacr]hala on the southern slopes of Mauna Loa. Lands
within this section include approximately 27 percent in Federal
ownership, 66 percent in State ownership, and 8 percent in private/
other ownership (see table 3, above). Section 8 is comprised of two
units: Unit 24 is a critical habitat unit within unit Hawaii 24 (see 50
CFR 17.99(k)(76) through (81)), which was previously designated for
another plant species; and Unit 44 is a newly proposed critical habitat
unit depicted on Map 113. Federal lands in Section 8 are managed by the
National Park Service within the Hawai[revaps]i Volcanoes National Park
and in accordance with their Hawai[revaps]i Volcanoes National Park
General Management Plan (National Park Service 2015, 2016, entire). All
State-owned lands in this section are managed by the State of Hawaii,
are part of the Ka[revaps][umacr] Forest Reserve, and are managed under
the Ka[revaps][umacr] Forest Reserve Management Plan (DLNR-DOFAW 2012,
entire). For general land use, threats, and special management
considerations or protection measures to
[[Page 18777]]
reduce or alleviate the threats within Section 8, see table 6, above
(DLNR-DOFAW 2012, p. 3; TMA 2007, pp. 44-46).
Section 8 is occupied by the plants Cyanea tritomantha, Pittosporum
hawaiiense, and Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei and includes the wet and
mesic forest, the moisture regime, and canopy, subcanopy, and
understory native plant species identified as the physical or
biological features in the wet and mesic forest ecosystems. Although
Section 8 is not known to be occupied by the plants Cyrtandra wagneri
or Stenogyne cranwelliae, this section contains unoccupied habitat that
is essential for the conservation of these species because it (1) is
habitat for these species, (2) provides at least one the physical or
biological features essential for the conservation of each of these
species, and (3) contributes to the area of habitat needed to
reestablish wild populations within their range in support of recovery
criteria for each of these species. For recovery, Cyrtandra wagneri
needs at least 10 populations, each with at least 500 reproducing
individuals, and Stenogyne cranwelliae needs at least 20 populations,
each with at least 500 reproducing individuals (Service 2022a, p. 43-
44). Therefore, we are reasonably certain that this section will
contribute to the conservation of these species and that this section
contains one or more of the physical or biological features that are
essential to the conservation of these species. Approximately 2,081 ac
(842 ha) of the section overlaps designated critical habitat for the
federally endangered plant Argyroxiphium kauense (68 FR 39624; July 2,
2003) and for the picture-wing fly Drosophila heteroneura Unit 1
(Ka[revaps][umacr] Forest) (see 50 CFR 17.95(i) and 73 FR 73795,
December 4, 2008).
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP29MR23.023
[[Page 18778]]
Cyrtandra wagneri, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae--Section 9
Section 9 consists of wet and mesic forest ecosystems from
Wai[revaps][omacr]hinu to N[imacr]nole on the southern slopes of Mauna
Loa. Lands within this section include approximately 29 percent in
Federal ownership and 71 percent in State ownership (see table 3,
above). Section 9 is comprised of two units: Unit 24 is a critical
habitat unit within unit Hawaii 24 (see 50 CFR 17.99(k)(76) through
(81)), which was previously designated for another plant species; and
Unit 43 is a newly proposed critical habitat unit depicted on Map 112.
Federal lands in Section 9 are managed by the National Park Service
within the Hawai[revaps]i Volcanoes National Park and in accordance
with their Hawai[revaps]i Volcanoes National Park General Management
Plan (National Park Service 2015, 2016, entire). All State-owned lands
in this section are managed by the State of Hawaii, are part of the
Ka[revaps][umacr] Forest Reserve, and are managed under the
Ka[revaps][umacr] Forest Reserve Management Plan (DLNR-DOFAW 2012,
entire). For general land use, threats, and special management
considerations or protection measures to reduce or alleviate the
threats within this section, see table 6, above (TMA 2007, pp. 26-37;
DLNR-DOFAW 2012, pp. 1-3; DLNR 2017, pp. 3-5).
Section 9 is occupied by the plants Pittosporum hawaiiense and
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei and includes the wet and mesic forest,
the moisture regime, and canopy, subcanopy, and understory native plant
species identified as the physical or biological features in the wet
and mesic forest ecosystems. Although Section 9 is not known to be
occupied by Cyrtandra wagneri or Stenogyne cranwelliae, this section
contains unoccupied habitat that is essential for the conservation of
these species because it (1) is habitat for these species, (2) provides
at least one the physical or biological features essential for the
conservation of each of these species, and (3) contributes to the area
of habitat needed to reestablish wild populations within their range in
support of recovery criteria for each of these species. For recovery,
Cyrtandra wagneri needs at least 10 populations, each with at least 500
reproducing individuals, and Stenogyne cranwelliae needs at least 20
populations, each with at least 500 reproducing individuals (Service
2022a, p. 43-44). Therefore, we are reasonably certain that this
section will contribute to the conservation of these species and that
this section contains one or more of the physical or biological
features that are essential to the conservation of these species.
Approximately 101 ac (41 ha) of this section overlap designated
critical habitat for the federally endangered plant Argyroxiphium
kauense (68 FR 39624; July 2, 2003) and for the picture-wing fly
Drosophila ochrobasis Unit 5 (Upper Kahuku) (see 50 CFR 17.95(i) and 73
FR 73795, December 4, 2008).
Cyrtandra nanawaleensis, Cyrtandra wagneri, Phyllostegia floribunda--
Section 10
Section 10 consists of wet forest and wet grassland and shrubland
ecosystems from Kahauale[revaps]a to Wao Kele o Puna near the east rift
zone of Kilauea Volcano in the district of Puna. Lands within this
section include approximately 100 percent in State ownership and less
than 1 percent in private/other ownership (see table 3, above). Section
10 is comprised of two units: Unit 28 is a critical habitat unit within
unit Hawaii 28 (see 50 CFR 17.99(k)(89)), which was previously
designated for another plant species; and Unit 46 is a newly proposed
critical habitat unit depicted on Map 115. Lands within this section
are almost entirely under State ownership managed by the State of
Hawaii within the Kahauale[revaps]a Natural Area Reserve and the State
of Hawaii Office of Hawaiian Affairs within the Wao Kele o Puna Forest
Reserve. The State lands within this section are managed under the Wao
Kele o Puna Comprehensive Management Plan (Nalehualawaku[revaps]ulei
2017, entire) and the Three Mountain Alliance Management Plan (TMA
2007, entire). For general land use, threats, and special management
considerations or protection measures to reduce or alleviate the
threats within this section, see table 6, above (DLNR-DOFAW 2022,
entire; TMA 2007, pp. 26-37; Nalehualawaku[revaps]ulei 2017, entire).
Section 10 is occupied by the plants Cyrtandra nanawaleensis and
Phyllostegia floribunda and includes the wet forest and wet grassland
and shrubland, the moisture regime, and canopy, subcanopy, and
understory native plant species identified as the physical or
biological features in the wet forest and wet grassland and shrubland
ecosystems. Although Section 10 is not known to be occupied by
Cyrtandra wagneri, this section contains unoccupied habitat that is
essential for the conservation of this species because it (1) is
habitat for this species, (2) provides at least one the physical or
biological features essential for the conservation of this species, and
(3) contributes to the area of habitat needed to reestablish wild
populations within its range in support of recovery criteria. At least
10 populations, each with at least 500 reproducing individuals are
necessary for recovery of Cyrtandra wagneri (Service 2022a, p. 43-44).
Therefore, we are reasonably certain that this section will contribute
to the conservation of this species and that this section contains one
or more of the physical or biological features that are essential to
the conservation of this species. Approximately 155 ac (63 ha) of this
section overlaps designated critical habitat for the federally
endangered plant Adenophorus periens (68 FR 39624; July 2, 2003).
Cyanea tritomantha, Cyrtandra wagneri, Phyllostegia floribunda,
Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne
cranwelliae--Section 11 and Drosophila digressa--Unit 2
Section 11 and Drosophila digressa--Unit 2 consist of wet forest
ecosystem from [revaps]Ola[revaps]a to Upper Waiakea on the eastern
slope of Mauna Loa and partially on the northern slope of Kilauea
Volcano. Lands within this section and unit include approximately 25
percent in Federal ownership, 74 percent in State ownership, and 1
percent in private/other ownership (see table 3, above). Section 11 is
comprised of three units: Unit 29 and Unit 30 are critical habitat
units within unit Hawaii 29 and unit Hawaii 30 (see 50 CFR 17.99(k)(90)
through (103)), which were previously designated for other plant
species; and Unit 51 is a newly proposed critical habitat unit depicted
on Map 118. All State-owned lands in this section and unit are managed
by the State of Hawaii as part of the Hilo Forest Reserve Kukuau
Section, [revaps]Ola[revaps]a Forest Reserve Mountain View Section,
Upper Waiakea Forest Reserve, Waiakea Forest Reserve, Pu[revaps]u
Maka[revaps]ala Natural Area Reserve, and Waiakea 1942 Lava Flow
Natural Area Reserve. All Federal lands in this section and unit are
managed by the National Park Service within the Hawai[revaps]i
Volcanoes National Park. The State lands within this section and unit
are managed under the Pu[revaps]u Maka[revaps]ala Natural Area Reserve
Management Plan (DLNR-DOFAW 2013, entire) and the Three Mountain
Alliance's Management Plan (TMA 2007, entire). The Federal lands within
this section and unit are managed under the Hawai[revaps]i Volcanoes
National Park General Management Plan (National Park Service 2015,
2016, entire). For general land use, threats, and special management
considerations or protection measures to reduce or alleviate the
threats within this section and unit, see table 6 (National Park
[[Page 18779]]
Service 2015, 2016, entire; DLNR-DOFAW 2013, p. 21; DLNR-DOFAW 2022,
entire; TMA 2007, pp. 40-43).
Section 11 is occupied by the plants Cyanea tritomantha,
Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, and Schiedea diffusa
ssp. macraei, and Drosophila digressa--Unit 2 is occupied by the
picture-wing fly Drosophila digressa. This section and unit include the
wet forest, the moisture regime, and canopy, subcanopy, and understory
native plant species identified as the physical or biological features
in the wet forest ecosystem. Although Section 11 is not known to be
occupied by Cyrtandra wagneri or Stenogyne cranwelliae, this section
contains unoccupied habitat that is essential for the conservation of
these species because it (1) is habitat for these species, (2) provides
at least one the physical or biological features essential for the
conservation of each of these species, and (3) contributes to the area
of habitat needed to reestablish wild populations within their range in
support of recovery criteria for each of these species. For recovery,
Cyrtandra wagneri needs at least 10 populations, each with at least 500
reproducing individuals, and Stenogyne cranwelliae needs at least 20
populations, each with at least 500 reproducing individuals (Service
2022a, p. 43-44). Therefore, we are reasonably certain that this
section will contribute to the conservation of these species and that
this section contains one or more of the physical or biological
features that are essential to the conservation of these species.
Approximately 14,665 ac (5,935 ha) of this section and unit overlaps
designated critical habitat for the federally endangered plants
Clermontia peleana, Cyanea stictophylla, Cyrtandra giffardii,
Phyllostegia velutina, and Sicyos alba (68 FR 39624; July 2, 2003), and
for the picture-wing fly Drosophila mulli Unit 1 (Ola[revaps]a Forest)
and Unit 3 (Waiakea Forest) (see 50 CFR 17.95(i) and 73 FR 73795,
December 4, 2008).
Cyanea marksii, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense,
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae--Section 12 and
Drosophila digressa--Unit 9
Section 12 and Drosophila digressa--Unit 9 consist of wet forest
ecosystem in Ho[revaps]okena on the southwestern slopes of Mauna Loa.
Newly proposed critical habitat for Section 12 is entirely within
critical habitat Unit 37 depicted on Map 106 and includes approximately
100 percent Federal land with less than 1 ac (less than 1 ha) of land
that is privately owned or has other ownership (see table 3, above).
Lands within this section and unit are almost entirely managed by the
Service within Hakalau Forest National Wildlife Refuge's Kona Forest
Unit and in accordance with the Hakalau Forest National Wildlife Refuge
Comprehensive Conservation Plan (Service 2010, pp. 2-13-2-19, 2-33-2-
40). The State lands within this section and unit are managed under the
Three Mountain Alliance Management Plan (TMA 2007, pp. 47-50). For
general land use, threats, and special management considerations or
protection measures to reduce or alleviate the threats within this
section and unit, see table 6, above (Service 2010, entire; TMA 2007,
pp. 26-37).
Section 12 is occupied by the plant Cyanea marksii. This section
and unit include the wet forest, the moisture regime, and canopy,
subcanopy, and understory native plant species identified as the
physical or biological features in the wet forest ecosystem. Although
Section 12 is not known to be occupied by Phyllostegia floribunda,
Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, or Stenogyne
cranwelliae, and Drosophila digressa--Unit 9 is not known to be
occupied by Drosophila digressa, this section and unit contain
unoccupied habitat that is essential for the conservation of these
species because they (1) are habitat for these species, (2) provide at
least one the physical or biological features essential for the
conservation of each of these species, and (3) contribute to the area
of habitat needed to reestablish wild populations within their range in
support of recovery criteria for each of these species. For recovery,
Phyllostegia floribunda and Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei each need at
least 10 populations, with at least 500 reproducing individuals per
population; Pittosporum hawaiiense needs at least 10 populations, each
with at least 400 reproducing individuals; and Stenogyne cranwelliae
needs at least 20 populations, each with at least 500 reproducing
individuals (Service 2022a, p. 43-44). For (Service 2022a, p. 43-44).
Drosophila digressa needs at least 10 stable populations for recovery
(Service 2022a, p. 49). Therefore, we are reasonably certain that this
section and unit will contribute to the conservation of these species
and that this section and unit contain one or more of the physical or
biological features that are essential to the conservation of these
species. Approximately 1,482 ac (600 ha) of this section and unit
overlap designated critical habitat for the picture-wing fly Drosophila
heteroneura Unit 2 (Kona Refuge) (see 50 CFR 17.95(i) and 73 FR 73795,
December 4, 2008).
Drosophila digressa--Unit 4
Drosophila digressa--Unit 4 consists of mesic forest ecosystem at
Manuka on the southern slopes of Mauna Loa, with 100 percent of lands
in State ownership (see table 3, above). All State-owned lands in this
unit are managed by the State of Hawaii as part of the Manuka Natural
Area Reserve, under the Manuka Natural Area Reserve Draft Management
Plan (DLNR-DOFAW 1992, entire) and the Three Mountain Alliance
Management Plan (TMA 2007, entire). For general land use, threats, and
special management considerations or protection measures to reduce or
alleviate the threats within this unit, see table 6, above (DLNR-DOFAW
1992, entire).
Drosophila digressa--Unit 4 is occupied by the picture-wing fly
Drosophila digressa and includes the mesic forest, the moisture regime,
and canopy, subcanopy, and understory native plant species identified
as the physical or biological features in the mesic forest ecosystem.
This entire unit (167 ac, 67 ha) overlaps designated critical habitat
(50 CFR 17.99(k)(64) through (69)) for the federally endangered plants
Colubrina oppositifolia, Diellia erecta (now listed as Asplenium
dielerectum), Flueggea neowawraea, Gouania vitifolia, Neraudia ovata,
and Pleomele hawaiiensis (68 FR 39624; July 2, 2003).
Cyanea marksii, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense,
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae--Section 13 and
Drosophila digressa--Unit 5
Section 13 and Drosophila digressa--Unit 5 consist of wet forest
ecosystem from Kipahoehoe to Honomalino on the southwestern slopes of
Mauna Loa. Lands within this section and unit include approximately 12
percent in State ownership and 88 percent in private/other ownership
(see table 3, above). Newly proposed critical habitat for Section 13 is
entirely within critical habitat Unit 41 depicted on Map 110. All
State-owned lands in this section and unit are managed by the State of
Hawaii as part of the Kipahoehoe Natural Area Reserve and South Kona
Forest Reserve Kapua-Manuka Section. Some private lands are owned by
The Nature Conservancy, within the Kona Hema Preserve. The State lands
within this section and unit are managed under the Kipahoehoe Natural
Area Reserve Management Plan (DLNR-DOFAW 2002, entire) and the Three
Mountain Alliance Management Plan (TMA 2007, entire). The Nature
Conservancy's land is managed under the Forest
[[Page 18780]]
Stewardship Management Plan for the Kona Hema Preserve (Giffin 2017,
entire). For general land use, threats, and special management
considerations or protection measures to reduce or alleviate the
threats within this section and unit, see table 6, above (DLNR-DOFAW
2002, entire).
Section 13 is occupied by the plants Cyanea marksii, Phyllostegia
floribunda, and Pittosporum hawaiiense. This section and unit include
the wet forest, the moisture regime, and canopy, subcanopy, and
understory native plant species identified as the physical or
biological features in the wet forest ecosystem. Although Section 13 is
not known to be occupied by Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei and Stenogyne
cranwelliae, and Drosophila digressa--Unit 5 is not known to be
occupied by Drosophila digressa, this section and unit contains
unoccupied habitat that is essential for the conservation of these
species because they (1) are habitat for these species, (2) provide at
least one the physical or biological features essential for the
conservation of each of these species, and (3) contribute to the area
of habitat needed to reestablish wild populations within their range in
support of recovery criteria for each of these species. For recovery,
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei needs at least 10 populations, each with
at least 500 reproducing individuals, and Stenogyne cranwelliae needs
at least 20 populations, each with at least 500 reproducing individuals
(Service 2022a, p. 43-44). Drosophila digressa needs at least 10 stable
populations for recovery (Service 2022a, p. 49). Therefore, we are
reasonably certain that this section and unit will contribute to the
conservation of these species and that this section and unit contain
one or more of the physical or biological features that are essential
to the conservation of these species. There is no critical habitat for
other endangered or threatened species within this section and unit.
Cyanea tritomantha, Cyrtandra wagneri, Phyllostegia floribunda,
Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne
cranwelliae--Section 14 and Drosophila digressa--Unit 3
Section 14 and Drosophila digressa--Unit 3 are entirely overlapping
and consist of wet and mesic forest ecosystems at Kahuku on the
southern slopes of Mauna Loa. Newly proposed critical habitat for
Section 14 is comprised of a single unit of newly proposed critical
habitat, Unit 42 depicted on Map 111. Lands within this section and
unit include approximately 100 percent in Federal ownership and less
than 1 percent in State ownership (see table 3, above). Federal lands
are managed by the National Park Service within the Hawai[revaps]i
Volcanoes National Park in accordance with the Hawai[revaps]i Volcanoes
National Park General Management Plan (National Park Service 2015,
2016, entire). All State-owned lands in this section and unit are
managed by the State of Hawaii, are part of the Ka[revaps][umacr]
Forest Reserve, and are managed under the Ka[revaps][umacr] Forest
Reserve Management Plan (DLNR-DOFAW 2012, entire). For general land
use, threats, and special management considerations or protection
measures to reduce or alleviate the threats within this section and
unit, see table 6, above (TMA 2007, pp. 26-37; DLNR-DOFAW 2012, pp. 1-
3; DLNR 2017, pp. 3-5).
Section 14 is occupied by the plants Pittosporum hawaiiense and
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei. This section and unit include the wet
and mesic forest, the moisture regime, and canopy, subcanopy, and
understory native plant species identified as the physical or
biological features in the wet and mesic forest ecosystems. Although
Section 14 is not known to be occupied by the plants Cyanea
tritomantha, Cyrtandra wagneri, Phyllostegia floribunda, or Stenogyne
cranwelliae, or by the picture-wing fly Drosophila digressa in
Drosophila digressa--Unit 3, this section and unit contain unoccupied
habitat that is essential for the conservation of these species because
they (1) are habitat for these species, (2) provide at least one the
physical or biological features essential for the conservation of each
of these species, and (3) contribute to the area of habitat needed to
reestablish wild populations within their range in support of recovery
criteria for each of these species. For recovery, Cyanea tritomantha,
Cyrtandra wagneri, and Phyllostegia floribunda each need at least 10
populations, with at least 500 reproducing individuals per population,
and Stenogyne cranwelliae needs at least 20 populations, each with at
least 500 reproducing individuals (Service 2022a, p. 43-44). Drosophila
digressa needs at least 10 stable populations for recovery (Service
2022a, p. 49). Therefore, we are reasonably certain that this section
and unit will contribute to the conservation of these species and that
this section and unit contain one or more of the physical or biological
features that are essential to the conservation of these species.
Approximately 681 ac (275 ha) of this section and unit overlap
designated critical habitat for the picture-wing fly Drosophila
heteroneura Unit 3 (Lower Kahuku) (see 50 CFR 17.95(i) and 73 FR 73795,
December 4, 2008).
Cyrtandra nanawaleensis--Section 15
Section 15 consists of wet forest ecosystem at
Kam[amacr][revaps]ili near the east rift zone of K[imacr]lauea Volcano
in the district of Puna. Lands within this section are entirely under
State ownership managed by the State of Hawaii within the
Keau[revaps]ohana Forest Reserve (see table 3, above). Section 15 is
comprised of one unit: Unit 47, which is a newly proposed critical
habitat unit depicted on Map 116. The State lands within this section
are managed under the Three Mountain Alliance's Management Plan (TMA
2007, entire). For general land use, threats, and special management
considerations or protection measures to reduce or alleviate the
threats within this section, see table 6, above (DLNR-DOFAW 2022,
entire; TMA 2007, pp. 40-43).
Section 15 is occupied by the plant Cyrtandra nanawaleensis and
includes the wet forest, the moisture regime, and canopy, subcanopy,
and understory native plant species identified as the physical or
biological features in the wet forest ecosystem. There is no critical
habitat for other endangered or threatened species within the section.
Cyrtandra nanawaleensis--Section 16
Section 16 consists of wet forest ecosystem in P[amacr]hoa near the
east rift zone of K[imacr]lauea Volcano in the district of Puna. Lands
within this section include approximately 99 percent under State
ownership and 1 percent in private/other ownership (see table 3,
above). Section 16 is comprised of one unit: Unit 48, which is a newly
proposed critical habitat unit depicted on Map 116. All State-owned
lands in this section are managed by the State of Hawaii as part of the
N[amacr]n[amacr]wale Forest Reserve, under the Three Mountain
Alliance's Management Plan (TMA 2007, entire). For general land use,
threats, and special management considerations or protection measures
to reduce or alleviate the threats within this section, see table 6,
above (DLNR-DOFAW 2022, entire; TMA 2007, pp. 40-43).
Section 16 is occupied by the plant Cyrtandra nanawaleensis and
includes the wet forest, the moisture regime, and canopy, subcanopy,
and understory native plant species identified as the physical or
biological features in the wet forest ecosystem. There is no critical
habitat for other endangered or threatened species within the section.
[[Page 18781]]
Cyrtandra nanawaleensis--Section 17
Section 17 consists of wet and mesic forest and mesic grassland and
shrubland ecosystems at Malama-K[imacr] near the east rift zone of
K[imacr]lauea Volcano in the district of Puna. Lands within this
section include approximately 99 percent under State ownership and 1
percent in private/other ownership (see table 3, above). Section 17 is
comprised of one unit: Unit 49, which is a newly proposed critical
habitat unit depicted on Map 117. State-owned lands within this section
are managed by the State of Hawaii within the Malama-K[imacr] Forest
Reserve, under the Three Mountain Alliance's Management Plan (TMA 2007,
entire). For general land use, threats, and special management
considerations or protection measures to reduce or alleviate the
threats within this section, see table 6, above (DLNR-DOFAW 2022,
entire; TMA 2007, pp. 40-43).
Section 17 is occupied by the plant Cyrtandra nanawaleensis and
includes the wet forest, mesic forest, and mesic grassland and
shrubland; the moisture regime; and canopy, subcanopy, and understory
native plant species identified as the physical or biological features
in the wet forest, mesic forest, and mesic grassland and shrubland
ecosystems. There is no critical habitat for other endangered or
threatened species within the section.
Cyrtandra nanawaleensis--Section 18
Section 18 consists of wet and mesic forest and mesic grassland and
shrubland ecosystems at Kapoho near the east rift zone of K[imacr]lauea
Volcano in the district of Puna. Lands within this section include
approximately 99 percent under State ownership and 1 percent in
private/other ownership (see table 3, above). Section 18 is comprised
of one unit: Unit 50, which is a newly proposed critical habitat unit
depicted on Map 117. State-owned lands within this section are managed
by the State of Hawaii within the N[amacr]n[amacr]wale Forest Reserve
Halepua[revaps]a section, under the Three Mountain Alliance's
Management Plan (TMA 2007, entire). For general land use, threats, and
special management considerations or protection measures to reduce or
alleviate the threats within this section, see table 6, above (DLNR-
DOFAW 2022, entire; TMA 2007, pp. 40-43).
Section 18 is occupied by the plant Cyrtandra nanawaleensis and
includes the wet forest, mesic forest, and mesic grassland and
shrubland; the moisture regime; and canopy, subcanopy, and understory
native plant species identified as the physical or biological features
in the wet forest, mesic forest, and mesic grassland and shrubland
ecosystems. There is no critical habitat for other endangered or
threatened species within the section.
Schiedea hawaiiensis--Section 19
Section 19 consists of dry forest ecosystems adjacent to the
P[omacr]hakuloa Training Area in the saddle of Maunakea, Mauna Loa, and
Hual[amacr]lai. Lands within this section are entirely in State
ownership (see table 3, above). Proposed critical habitat for Section
19 is entirely within proposed critical habitat Unit 55 depicted on Map
122. The State-owned lands in this section include the Pu[revaps]u
Anahulu Game Management Area and are managed under the Mauna Kea
Watershed Management Plan (Stewart 2010, entire) and the Three Mountain
Alliance Management Plan (TMA 2007, entire). For general land use,
threats, and special management considerations or protection measures
to reduce or alleviate the threats within this section, see table 6,
above (DLNR-DOFAW 2015, entire; TMA 2007, pp. 51-55).
Section 19 is not known to be occupied by Schiedea hawaiiensis, but
this section includes the dry forest, the moisture regime, and canopy,
subcanopy, and understory native plant species identified as the
physical or biological features in the dry forest ecosystems. This
section also provides an area for potential population establishment,
which is essential for the conservation of Schiedea hawaiiensis because
10 populations are identified as part of the recovery criteria, but
only 1 wild population and 3 reintroduced populations are extant.
Although Section 19 contains unoccupied habitat for Schiedea
hawaiiensis, we have determined this area is essential for the
conservation of this species because it (1) is habitat for this
species, (2) provides at least one the physical or biological features
essential for the conservation of this species, and (3) contributes to
the area of habitat needed to reestablish wild populations within its
range in support of recovery criteria. At least 10 populations, each
with at least 500 reproducing individuals for, are necessary for
recovery (Service 2022a, p. 43-44). Therefore, we are reasonably
certain that this section will contribute to the conservation of this
species and that this section contains one or more of the physical or
biological features that are essential to the conservation of this
species. Section 19 does not overlap with existing critical habitat for
other listed species.
Effects of Critical Habitat Designation
Section 7 Consultation
Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires Federal agencies, including the
Service, to ensure that any action they fund, authorize, or carry out
is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered
species or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse
modification of designated critical habitat of such species. In
addition, section 7(a)(4) of the Act requires Federal agencies to
confer with the Service on any agency action which is likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of any species proposed to be listed
under the Act or result in the destruction or adverse modification of
proposed critical habitat.
We published a final rule revising the definition of destruction or
adverse modification on August 27, 2019 (84 FR 44976). Destruction or
adverse modification means a direct or indirect alteration that
appreciably diminishes the value of critical habitat as a whole for the
conservation of a listed species.
If a Federal action may affect a listed species or its critical
habitat, the responsible Federal agency (action agency) must enter into
consultation with us. Examples of actions that are subject to the
section 7 consultation process are actions on State, Tribal, local, or
private lands that require a Federal permit ((such as a permit from the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) or a permit from the Service under section 10
of the Act)) or that involve some other Federal action (such as funding
from the Federal Highway Administration, Federal Aviation
Administration, or the Federal Emergency Management Agency). Federal
actions not affecting listed species or critical habitat--and actions
on State, Tribal, local, or private lands that are not federally
funded, authorized, or carried out by a Federal agency--do not require
section 7 consultation.
Compliance with the requirements of section 7(a)(2) is documented
through our issuance of:
(1) A concurrence letter for Federal actions that may affect, but
are not likely to adversely affect, listed species or critical habitat;
or
(2) A biological opinion for Federal actions that may affect, and
are likely to adversely affect, listed species or critical habitat.
When we issue a biological opinion concluding that a project is
likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species and/or
destroy or adversely modify critical habitat, we
[[Page 18782]]
provide reasonable and prudent alternatives to the project, if any are
identifiable, that would avoid the likelihood of jeopardy and/or
destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. We define
``reasonable and prudent alternatives'' (at 50 CFR 402.02) as
alternative actions identified during consultation that:
(1) Can be implemented in a manner consistent with the intended
purpose of the action,
(2) Can be implemented consistent with the scope of the Federal
agency's legal authority and jurisdiction,
(3) Are economically and technologically feasible, and
(4) Would, in the Service Director's opinion, avoid the likelihood
of jeopardizing the continued existence of the listed species and/or
avoid the likelihood of destroying or adversely modifying critical
habitat.
Reasonable and prudent alternatives can vary from slight project
modifications to extensive redesign or relocation of the project. Costs
associated with implementing a reasonable and prudent alternative are
similarly variable.
Regulations at 50 CFR 402.16 set forth requirements for Federal
agencies to reinitiate consultation on previously reviewed actions.
These requirements apply when the Federal agency has retained
discretionary involvement or control over the action (or the agency's
discretionary involvement or control is authorized by law) and,
subsequent to the previous consultation: (a) if the amount or extent of
taking specified in the incidental take statement is exceeded; (b) if
new information reveals effects of the action that may affect listed
species or critical habitat in a manner or to an extent not previously
considered; (c) if the identified action is subsequently modified in a
manner that causes an effect to the listed species or critical habitat
that was not considered in the biological opinion or written
concurrence; or (d) if a new species is listed or critical habitat
designated that may be affected by the identified action.
In such situations, Federal agencies sometimes may need to request
reinitiation of consultation with us, but Congress also enacted some
exceptions in 2018 to the requirement to reinitiate consultation on
certain land management plans on the basis of a new species listing or
new designation of critical habitat that may be affected by the subject
federal action. See 2018 Consolidated Appropriations Act, Public Law
115-141, Div, O, 132 Stat. 1059 (2018).
Application of the ``Destruction or Adverse Modification'' Standard
The key factor related to the destruction or adverse modification
determination is whether implementation of the proposed Federal action
directly or indirectly alters the designated critical habitat in a way
that appreciably diminishes the value of the critical habitat as a
whole for the conservation of the listed species. As discussed above,
the role of critical habitat is to support physical or biological
features essential to the conservation of a listed species and provide
for the conservation of the species.
Section 4(b)(8) of the Act requires us to briefly evaluate and
describe, in any proposed or final regulation that designates critical
habitat, activities involving a Federal action that may violate section
7(a)(2) of the Act by destroying or adversely modifying such habitat,
or that may be affected by such designation.
Activities that the Service may, during a consultation under
section 7(a)(2) of the Act, consider likely to destroy or adversely
modify critical habitat include, but are not limited to, Federal
actions that result in the removal or significant modification of
designated critical habitat, or that would pose a risk of fire. Such
activities could include, but are not limited to, military training
activities with potential to cause wildland fires. We anticipate that
most Federal activities that may cause effects to critical habitat will
also cause effects to the listed species, and as such we will already
be in consultation with the Federal agency as to whether or not the
activity jeopardizes the listed species. The exception is the one area
proposed for critical habitat designation that is presently unoccupied
by any of the listed species, Section 19, which is proposed for
designation for Schiedea hawaiiensis. There, as there is not already a
section 7 consultation nexus, the effects of a Federal proposed action
that could remove physical or biological features essential to the
conservation of the species--specifically, the associated native plant
genera that are part of a functioning ecosystem in which S. hawaiiensis
occurs or has historically occurred--would trigger section 7(a)(2)
consultation because of the critical habitat designation. Within
occupied areas, we do not anticipate recommending any project
modifications to avoid destruction or adverse modification of critical
habitat that would be different from those for avoiding jeopardy.
Exemptions
Application of Section 4(a)(3) of the Act
The Sikes Act Improvement Act of 1997 (Sikes Act) (16 U.S.C. 670a)
required each military installation that includes land and water
suitable for the conservation and management of natural resources to
complete an integrated natural resources management plan (INRMP) by
November 17, 2001. An INRMP integrates implementation of the military
mission of the installation with stewardship of the natural resources
found on the base. Each INRMP includes:
(1) An assessment of the ecological needs on the installation,
including the need to provide for the conservation of listed species;
(2) A statement of goals and priorities;
(3) A detailed description of management actions to be implemented
to provide for these ecological needs; and
(4) A monitoring and adaptive management plan.
Among other things, each INRMP must, to the extent appropriate and
applicable, provide for fish and wildlife management; fish and wildlife
habitat enhancement or modification; wetland protection, enhancement,
and restoration where necessary to support fish and wildlife; and
enforcement of applicable natural resource laws.
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Pub.
L. 108-136) amended the Act to limit areas eligible for designation as
critical habitat. Specifically, section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act (16
U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)(B)(i)) provides that the Secretary shall not
designate as critical habitat any lands or other geographical areas
owned or controlled by the Department of Defense (DoD), or designated
for its use, that are subject to an INRMP prepared under section 101 of
the Sikes Act (16 U.S.C. 670a), if the Secretary determines in writing
that such plan provides a benefit to the species for which critical
habitat is proposed for designation.
We consult with the military on the development and implementation
of INRMPs for installations with listed species. Schiedea hawaiiensis
is the only species with an INRMP located within the range of its
proposed critical habitat designation. The following area is DoD lands
with a completed, Service-approved INRMP within the proposed critical
habitat designation.
[[Page 18783]]
Approved INRMPs
P[omacr]hakuloa Training Area, 132,193 ac (53,497 ha)
P[omacr]hakuloa Training Area (PTA) is the sole installation under
DoD jurisdiction on the island of Hawai[revaps]i. PTA is located in the
north-central portion on the island of Hawai[revaps]i, west of the
Humu[revaps]ula Saddle, in an area formed by the convergence of three
volcanic mountains: Mauna Kea, Mauna Loa, and Hual[amacr]lai. The PTA
INRMP provides for wildlife management and habitat enhancement for four
federally listed animal species and 20 federally listed plant species,
including Schiedea hawaiiensis, found within PTA (PTA 2020, entire).
The current INRMP provides specific protections for S. hawaiiensis.
Conservation actions to benefit S. hawaiiensis include collection and
storage of seed from both wild and cultivated plants, propagation of
plants from seed that are planted into suitable habitat off site, and
quarterly monitoring of plants to gauge the efficacy of management
actions. All known wild S. hawaiiensis individuals are protected in
fenced enclosures and are monitored at least annually. Seeds from wild
and propagated S. hawaiiensis plants have been collected and stored,
and hundreds of propagated S. hawaiiensis individuals have been
outplanted at PTA and in protected, off-site native habitats. With
partnering agencies, PTA constructed 15 fenced units encompassing all
known wild individuals of S. hawaiiensis in addition to other high-
priority species. Combined, these units protect roughly 37,300 ac
(15,095 ha) of predominantly native forest from ungulates. Invasive
plants and rodents are also managed within these areas. The INRMP
incorporates recommendations made in a 2008 biological opinion to
reduce fire risk. For example, wildland fires caused by military
training activities are minimized by managing vegetation along a system
of fuel breaks and by controlling invasive grasses, which function as
fine fuels, in buffers around S. hawaiiensis and other listed species.
Based on the above considerations, and in accordance with section
4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act, we have determined that the identified lands
are subject to the PTA INRMP and that conservation efforts identified
in the INRMP will provide a conservation benefit to S. hawaiiensis.
Therefore, lands within this installation are exempt from critical
habitat designation under section 4(a)(3) of the Act. We are not
including approximately 22,730 ac (9,198 ha) of S. hawaiiensis habitat
in this proposed critical habitat designation because of this
exemption.
Consideration of Impacts Under Section 4(b)(2) of the Act
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act states that the Secretary shall
designate and make revisions to critical habitat on the basis of the
best available scientific data after taking into consideration the
economic impact, national security impact, and any other relevant
impact of specifying any particular area as critical habitat. The
Secretary may exclude an area from designated critical habitat based on
economic impacts, impacts on national security, or any other relevant
impacts. Exclusion decisions are governed by the regulations at 50 CFR
424.19 and the Policy Regarding Implementation of Section 4(b)(2) of
the Endangered Species Act (hereafter, the ``2016 Policy''; 81 FR 7226,
February 11, 2016), both of which were developed jointly with the
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). We also refer to a 2008
Department of the Interior Solicitor's opinion entitled ``The
Secretary's Authority to Exclude Areas from a Critical Habitat
Designation under Section 4(b)(2) of the Endangered Species Act'' (M-
37016). In a final rule, we explain each decision to exclude areas, as
well as decisions not to exclude, to demonstrate that the decision is
reasonable. Below, we provide information on the areas we are
considering for exclusion.
In considering whether to exclude a particular area from the
designation, we identify the benefits of including the area in the
designation, identify the benefits of excluding the area from the
designation, and evaluate whether the benefits of exclusion outweigh
the benefits of inclusion. If the analysis indicates that the benefits
of exclusion outweigh the benefits of inclusion, the Secretary may
exercise discretion to exclude the area only if such exclusion would
not result in the extinction of the species. In making the
determination to exclude a particular area, the statute on its face, as
well as the legislative history, are clear that the Secretary has broad
discretion regarding which factor(s) to use and how much weight to give
to any factor. We describe below the process that we are taking to
consider each category of impacts and our analyses of the relevant
impacts.
Consideration of Economic Impacts
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act and its implementing regulations require
that we consider the economic impact that may result from a designation
of critical habitat. To assess the probable economic impacts of a
designation, we must first evaluate specific land uses or activities
and projects that may occur in the area of the critical habitat. We
then must evaluate the impacts that a specific critical habitat
designation may have on restricting or modifying specific land uses or
activities for the benefit of the species and its habitat within the
areas proposed. We then identify which conservation efforts may be the
result of the species being listed under the Act versus those
attributed solely to the designation of critical habitat for the
particular species. The probable economic impact of a proposed critical
habitat designation is analyzed by comparing scenarios both ``with
critical habitat'' and ``without critical habitat.''
The ``without critical habitat'' scenario represents the baseline
for the analysis, which includes the existing regulatory and socio-
economic burden imposed on landowners, managers, or other resource
users potentially affected by the designation of critical habitat
(e.g., under the Federal listing as well as other Federal, State, and
local regulations). Therefore, the baseline represents the costs of all
efforts attributable to the listing of the species under the Act (i.e.,
conservation of the species and its habitat incurred regardless of
whether critical habitat is designated). The ``with critical habitat''
scenario describes the incremental impacts associated specifically with
the designation of critical habitat for the species. The incremental
conservation efforts and associated impacts would not be expected
without the designation of critical habitat for the species. In other
words, the incremental costs are those attributable solely to the
designation of critical habitat, above and beyond the baseline costs.
These are the costs we use when evaluating the benefits of inclusion
and exclusion of particular areas from the final designation of
critical habitat should we choose to conduct a discretionary 4(b)(2)
exclusion analysis.
Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and 13563 direct Federal agencies to
assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives in
quantitative (to the extent feasible) and qualitative terms. Consistent
with the E.O. regulatory analysis requirements, our effects analysis
under the Act may take into consideration impacts to both directly and
indirectly affected entities, where practicable and reasonable. If
sufficient data are available, we assess to the extent practicable the
probable impacts to both directly and indirectly affected entities.
Section 3(f) of E.O. 12866 identifies four criteria for when a
regulation is considered a ``significant'' rulemaking, and requires
additional
[[Page 18784]]
analysis, review, and approval if met. The criterion relevant here is
whether the designation of critical habitat may have an economic effect
of $100 million or more in any given year (section 3(f)(1)). Therefore,
our consideration of economic impacts uses a screening analysis to
assess whether a designation of critical habitat for the 12
Hawai[revaps]i species is likely to exceed the economically significant
threshold.
For this particular designation, we developed an incremental
effects memorandum (IEM) considering the probable incremental economic
impacts that may result from this proposed designation of critical
habitat. The information contained in our IEM was then used to develop
a screening analysis of the probable effects of the designation of
critical habitat for the 12 Hawai[revaps]i species (Industrial
Economics, Incorporated 2022). We began by conducting a screening
analysis of the proposed designation of critical habitat in order to
focus our analysis on the key factors that are likely to result in
incremental economic impacts. The purpose of the screening analysis is
to filter out particular geographic areas of critical habitat that are
already subject to such protections and are, therefore, unlikely to
incur incremental economic impacts. In particular, the screening
analysis considers baseline costs (i.e., absent critical habitat
designation) and includes any probable incremental economic impacts
where land and water use may already be subject to conservation plans,
land management plans, best management practices, or regulations that
protect the habitat area as a result of the Federal listing status of
the species. Ultimately, the screening analysis allows us to focus our
analysis on evaluating the specific areas or sectors that may incur
probable incremental economic impacts as a result of the designation.
The presence of the list
[…truncated; see source link]Indexed from Federal Register on March 29, 2023.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.