# Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for 12 Species on Hawai`i Island > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A2024-04588 ## Record - **Collection:** Federal Register - **Document type:** Rule - **Published:** March 12, 2024 - **Citation:** 89 FR 17902 ## Text DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 [Docket No. FWS-R1-ES-2023-0017; FXES1111090FEDR-245-FF09E21000] RIN 1018-BG65 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for 12 Species on Hawai`i Island AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), designate critical habitat for 12 federally endangered species on the island of Hawai`i under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Act), as amended. In total, approximately 119,326 acres (48,289 hectares) on the island of Hawai`i, in the State of Hawaii, fall within the boundaries of the critical habitat designation. This rule extends the Act's protections to these species' designated critical habitats. DATES: This rule is effective April 11, 2024. ADDRESSES: This final rule is available on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R1-ES-2023-0017 and at https://www.fws.gov/project/critical-habitat-hawaii-island-species . Comments and materials we received are available for public inspection at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R1-ES-2023-0017. Availability of supporting materials: Supporting materials we used in preparing this rule, such as the draft recovery plan, 5-year status reviews, and other materials relating to this critical habitat designation, including coordinates or plot points or both from which the maps are generated, are available at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R1-ES-2023-0017. 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 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. ), 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 designates approximately 119,326 acres (ac) ( 48,289 hectares (ha)) as critical habitat for 12 federally endangered species (11 plants, 1 insect) on the island of Hawai'i in the State of Hawai`i. 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 (I) essential to the conservation of the species and (II) which may require special management considerations or protection; 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. Previous Federal Actions Please refer to the proposed and final listing rules (77 FR 63928, October 17, 2012; 78 FR 64638, October 29, 2013) and proposed critical habitat rule (88 FR 18756, March 29, 2023) for a detailed description of previous Federal actions concerning the species addressed in this final rule. 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 solicited independent scientific review of the information contained in the proposed critical habitat rule (88 FR 18756, March 29, 2023). We sent the proposed rule to five independent peer reviewers and received three separate peer reviewer responses. The peer reviews can be found at https://www.regulations.gov. We incorporated the results of these reviews, as appropriate, into this final rule. A summary of the peer review comments and our responses can be found under Summary of Comments and Recommendations, below. Summary of Changes From the Proposed Rule After considering the comments we received during the public comment period on our March 29, 2023, proposed rule to designate critical habitat for the 12 federally endangered species on the island of Hawai'i (88 FR 18756) and relevant information that became available since the proposed rule published, we made changes to this final critical habitat rule. No changes were required for our economic analysis after considering public comments; thus, we finalized the economic analysis of the designation. We made many small, nonsubstantive changes and corrections throughout this document that do not affect the designation ( e.g., updating the Background discussion in this rule's preamble in response to comments, and making other minor clarifications). Below is a summary of changes made in this final rule; please note that an explanation of plant sections and their correlation to designated critical habitat units for the plants that are the subjects of this rule is provided under Final Critical Habitat Designation, below. (1) We make minor clarifications and elaborate on our rationale for concluding in our proposed rule (88 FR 18756, March 29, 2023) that the designation of critical habitat is not prudent at this time for Pritchardia lanigera (loulu) and Vetericaris chaceorum (anchialine pool shrimp). (2) We correct the range information for Cyrtandra wagneri to include only the Mauna Kea region, resulting in the removal of all unoccupied critical habitat units for this species. Specifically, this designation does not include critical habitat for C. wagneri that we proposed in units 23, 24 (Sections 8 and 9), 28, 29, 30, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, and 51. The critical habitat we are designating for C. wagneri in this rule includes only two occupied units: units 3 and 52 in Section 1. This is a decrease of approximately 72,469 ac (29,328 ha) from the critical habitat we proposed for C. wagneri on March 29, 2023 (88 FR 18756). However, because all of the unoccupied critical habitat units that we proposed for C. wagneri are also occupied by other plants for which we are designating critical habitat in this rule, not designating these units for C. wagneri does not change the total area designated as critical habitat in this rule. (3) We remove the proposed Drosophila digressa —Unit 6 from this final designation; however, this same area was proposed, and remains in this final rule, as designated critical habitat for Cyanea marksii, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae in Section 6, units 16 and 40. (4) We revise the critical habitat designation to add a new unit for Drosophila digressa (a new Drosophila digressa —Unit 6), based on new information we received in peer review comments regarding recent surveys in South Kona. Within the same boundaries of the new Drosophila digressa —Unit 6, we created a new plant Section 20 that contains Unit 56 for Cyanea marksii and Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei. The new unit ( Drosophila digressa —Unit 6, and Unit 56 for Cyanea marksii and Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei ) results in an increase of 224 ac (91 ha) of delineated critical habitat from the areas we proposed. (5) Pursuant to section 4(b)(2) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533(b)), in this final designation, we exclude lands in 12 areas in 7 units owned by the following entities: the Kamehameha Schools; Parker Ranch Waipunalei, LLC; Parker Ranch Waiemi, LLC; State Department of Hawaiian Home Lands; Laupāhoehoe Nui; Kahua Ranch; and Queen Emma Foundation. This amounts to a decrease of approximately 3,172 ac (1,284 ha) from the critical habitat areas we proposed. (6) We do not exclude The Nature Conservancy's land in Section 13 (Unit 41 for Cyanea tritomantha, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and Stenogyne cranwelliae ) and Drosophila digressa —Unit 5 based on information we received from public comments. This area of approximately 986 ac (399 ha) is designated as critical habitat in this final rule. (7) In the March 29, 2023, proposed rule (88 FR 18756), we erroneously included 125 ac (51 ha) as part of plant Section 8, Unit 24, even though those acres actually belonged in plant Section 8, Unit 44. We correct that error in this final rule by transferring in our acreage totals 125 ac (51 ha) from Unit 24 to Unit 44 in plant Section 8. (8) In the March 29, 2023, proposed rule (88 FR 18756), we erroneously included 469 ac (190 ha) as part of plant Section 11, Unit 30, even though those acres actually belonged in plant Section 11, Unit 51. We correct that error in this final rule by transferring in our acreage totals 469 ac (190 ha) from Unit 30 to Unit 51 in plant Section 11. (9) We made minor adjustments to the elevations we provided in the proposed rule related to the different ecosystem types which we used to determine the physical or biological features essential to each of the 12 species. We made these adjustments in this final rule to mirror exactly the elevations given in the scientific literature source from which each was derived. Specifically, we more accurately report: the elevation of the coastal ecosystem as less than 984 feet (ft) (300 meters (m)), instead of rounding to less than 980 ft; the elevation of the mesic forest as less than 6,562 ft (2,000 m), instead of rounding to less than 6,600 ft; the elevation of wet forest as less than 7,218 ft (2,200 m), instead of rounding to less than 7,300 ft; the elevation of mesic grassland and shrubland as 98 ft to 7,546 ft (30 to 2,300 m), instead of rounding to 100 ft to 7,500 ft; and the elevation of wet grassland and shrubland as 656 ft to 2,953 ft (200 to 900 m), instead of rounding to 660 ft to 2,950 ft. (10) There are minor differences in area measurements reported in our March 29, 2023, proposed rule (88 FR 18756) compared to this final rule due to digital mapping discrepancies between Tax Map Key (TMK) parcel Geographic Information System (GIS) data (Hawaii Statewide GIS Program 2022, entire) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA's) Coastal Change Analysis Program coastline data (Office for Coastal Management 2023, entire). Additionally, we received updated TMK parcel GIS data from Hawaii County that resulted in a 23-ac (9-ha) discrepancy for Parker Ranch lands in this final rule when compared to the acreages presented in our March 29, 2023, proposed rule. As a result, we identified that we were considering for exclusion 349 ac (141 ha) of Parker Ranch land in Section 3, Unit 54, in the proposed rule, but that updated acreage which we exclude in the final rule is 372 ac (150 ha). Further, minor differences (1 to 2 acres or hectares) in areas reported between the proposed rule and this final rule may exist as an artifact of summing, rounding, and conversion from acreage to hectarage. (11) We removed 4 ac (2 ha) from the proposed plant Section 2, Unit 53 and plant Section 8, Unit 44, in this final rule. These 4 ac (2 ha) consisted of small slivers, ranging in size from less than 0.01 ac (0 ha) to 1.09 ac (0.4 ha), that had been part of the proposed designation in Unit 53 and Unit 44. However, once we excluded the Kamehameha Schools land from Unit 53 and Unit 44 in the final designation, these slivers were left because the base layer and TMK layer did not align with each other after the removal of the Kamehameha Schools exclusion. This misalignment of the base layer and TMK layer is due to digital mapping discrepancies, and the slivered 4 ac (2 ha) left over as a result of this spatial analysis are artifacts of these discrepancies rather than real acres of land that are being included or excluded as part of the critical habitat designation. Beyond those changes, this critical habitat designation is unchanged from what we proposed on March 29, 2023 (88 FR 18756). Summary of Comments and Recommendations In the proposed critical habitat rule published on March 29, 2023 (88 FR 18756), we requested that all interested parties submit written comments on the proposal by May 30, 2023. We also contacted appropriate Federal and State agencies, scientific experts and organizations, and other interested parties and invited them to comment on the proposal. Digital newspaper notices inviting general public comment were published by Pacific Media Group, covering the communities of Maui and Hawai‘i Island, as well as a radio and television broadcast airing on Hawai‘i Public Radio and Hawai‘i News Now, respectively. We held a public hearing on April 20, 2023. All substantive information we received during the comment period, as described above, on the proposal has either been incorporated directly into this final rule or is addressed below. Peer Reviewer Comments As noted above in Peer Review, we received comments from three peer reviewers on the proposed rule. We reviewed all comments we received from the peer reviewers for substantive issues and new information regarding the species and their habitats. The peer reviewers generally concurred with our designations of critical habitat and conclusions, and provided additional information, clarifications, and suggestions to improve the designation. The additional details and information received or raised by the peer reviewers have been incorporated into this final rule, as appropriate. Peer reviewer comments are addressed in the following summary. (1) Comment: One reviewer provided information regarding habitat conditions that do not support Drosophila digressa in Kīpāhoehoe Natural Area Reserve in Drosophila digressa —Unit 6. Our response: The Kīpāhoehoe Natural Area Reserve was not occupied by Drosophila digressa at the time of listing. Based on the information available at the time of our proposed critical habitat designation, this area appeared to contain the physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the species, and we therefore included it in our proposed designation. The commenter provided information on the habitat conditions of Kīpāhoehoe Natural Area Reserve in Drosophila digressa —Unit 6 that were not available to us at the time we proposed critical habitat. After we reviewed the new information provided by the commenter, we agree that the wet to mesic forest there does not support the host plants for D. digressa, and that the younger lava flows outside of the kīpuka (vegetated areas surrounded by bare lava flows) are unsuitable for the host plants of D. digressa. Because the new information indicates that the area likely does not contain the host plants for D. digressa, and is therefore unsuitable for D. digressa, we removed the proposed Drosophila digressa —Unit 6 from this final critical habitat designation. (2) Comment: One reviewer suggested that additional critical habitat should be designated for a new population of Drosophila digressa discovered in 2022 in lower Honomalino Forest Reserve within existing plant critical habitat unit Hawaii 17— Asplenium dielerectum— a and Hawaii 17— Flueggea neowawraea —a (see 50 CFR 17.99(k) and 68 FR 39624 at 39740-39741, July 2, 2003). Our response: In our March 29, 2023, proposed critical habitat rule (88 FR 18756), we requested from the public any new information regarding additional areas occurring within the range of each species that should be included in our critical habitat designation because they were occupied at the time of listing and contain the physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the species. The commenter provided new information on a population of Drosophila digressa that was unknown to the Service at the time we delineated the proposed critical habitat designation (Magnacca 2023a, pers. comm.; Magnacca 2023b, pers. comm.). We expect that this D. digressa population was present at the time the species was listed because the location of this population contains suitable habitat for D. digressa, is protected as State Forest Reserve land, and is within the known range of the species. However, because this area was previously unsurveyed, the population was not discovered until surveyed in 2022. We considered the commenter's suggestion to add the new population of D. digressa to the area currently designated as plant critical habitat unit Hawaii 17— Asplenium dielerectum— a and Hawaii 17— Flueggea neowawraea —a (see 50 CFR 17.99(k)), but we determined that the newly discovered D. digressa population does not overlap with that existing critical habitat. However, after reviewing the information on the new population provided by the commenter and applying our critical habitat delineation methodology (as described under Criteria Used To Identify Critical Habitat in our March 29, 2023, proposed critical habitat rule (88 FR 18756 at 18765-18767)), we determined that the new D. digressa population area meets the criteria for designation as critical habitat. Therefore, in this rule, we designate a new critical habitat unit in South Kona named Drosophila digressa —Unit 6, as described above in Summary of Changes from the Proposed Rule and detailed below. (Note that this new Drosophila digressa —Unit 6 replaces the proposed Drosophila digressa —Unit 6, which we discuss above in our response to (1) Comment. ) Additionally, we applied our critical habitat delineation methodology to the new Drosophila digressa —Unit 6 in South Kona and found that it also meets the criteria for two plant species included in this rule, Cyanea marksii and Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei. Using the same boundaries of the Drosophila digressa —Unit 6, we created a new plant Section 20, which contains Unit 56 for Cyanea marksii and Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei. The new unit ( Drosophila digressa —Unit 6, and Unit 56 for Cyanea marksii and Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei ) is 224 ac (91 ha) and consists of State-owned lands. (3) Comment: One reviewer provided additional information and commented that Cyrtandra wagneri should be added to Unit 54 because the species was found in the Kohala Mountains as of 2009. Our response: The reviewer did not provide specific information on the current status of Cyrtandra wagneri in Unit 54, except for photos of the observed plant. We asked a State of Hawaii botanist to review the photographs provided by the reviewer, and they noticed a slight difference in the flower structure of the photographed plant from that of C. wagneri, which they thought suggested that the plant in the photograph was most likely a hybrid or another species of Cyrtandra. We reviewed the best available information describing the occurrences and physical or biological features essential to the conservation of C. wagneri in this unit and found no records in our database indicating that C. wagneri occurred in the Kohala Mountains. Our species range map for C. wagneri does not include the Kohala Mountains; therefore, this occurrence is outside the known range of C. wagneri. In Laupāhoehoe, where C. wagneri naturally occurs, C. wagneri has been documented to hybridize with the endangered Cyrtandra tintinnabula. The Service and the State no longer have access to survey this area, and, at this time, the best available information indicates that C. wagneri has become hybridized or been extirpated from Unit 54. Therefore, we do not designate Unit 54 as critical habitat for C. wagneri in this rule. Federal Agency Comments (4) Comment: The U.S. Army at Pōhakuloa Training Area (PTA) provided comments specific to the proposed critical habitat designation for Schiedea hawaiiensis in the Pu`u Anahulu region adjacent to the PTA (Unit 55). The Department of Defense (DoD) awarded Readiness and Environmental Protection Integration (REPI) Program grants to the State of Hawaii Division of Forestry and Wildlife (DOFAW) to implement conservation actions at Pu`u Anahulu, creating a Federal nexus for activities at Pu`u Anahulu that are implemented under REPI, requiring consultation under section 7(a)(2) of the Act. As a result, the commenter stated that these activities will likely increase their consultation workload. They also stated that because wildfire risk to the proposed critical habitat unit in Pu`u Anahulu is greater than that to Schiedea hawaiiensis and its habitat at the PTA installation, they would need to implement additional conservation measures to minimize wildfire risk to the proposed critical habitat unit as a result of military training at PTA. They also expressed concern that training restrictions may increase in comparison to those currently implemented or anticipated as part of the planned comprehensive programmatic consultation for PTA. They stated that the additional economic and administrative burden ( e.g., section 7 consultation) to the U.S. Army that would result from the proposed critical habitat at Pu`u Anahulu was not accounted for in the draft economic analysis. Our response: The Pu`u Anahulu area that the commenter refers to is a State of Hawaii Game Management Area within critical habitat Unit 55. As such, the critical habitat designation there will affect the DoD only for activities that they fund at Pu`u Anahulu through the REPI Program. Activities funded through the REPI Program would include wildland fire risk management conducted by the State of Hawaii that would provide a conservation benefit to Schiedea hawaiiensis. Due to the nature of these management actions, we anticipate any additional consultation burdens resulting from the Service's designation of Unit 55 as critical habitat would be primarily administrative. Further, our understanding is that the DoD is already conducting and planning conservation measures to minimize wildfire risk as a result of military training at PTA both on and off of the installation, and that these measures would be no different than those that may apply to the new critical habitat in Unit 55. We will continue to work with the DoD's REPI Program to assist them in meeting their section 7 consultation requirements. Further, any additional future conservation measures to minimize wildfire risk to Unit 55 as a result of military training at the adjacent PTA will depend upon the U.S. Army's proposed action as described in their upcoming biological assessment. State Agency Comments (5) Comment: The State of Hawaii DOFAW questioned why the lands of Pu`u Anahulu in Unit 55 are being designated, as these lands constitute a Game Management Area and have a draft habitat conservation plan that covers management of the area. Additionally, the State mentioned that DoD's REPI Program is funding fencing, fuels management, and seed collection/banking for all known rare species in the area and is concerned that additional compliance measures may be required if critical habitat is designated. Our response: As described in our March 29, 2023, proposed rule, we delineated critical habitat areas based on the defined methodology and identified areas that contain the physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the species. While Section 19, Unit 55 is within a Game Management Area, the area contains the physical or biological features essential to the conservation of Schiedea hawaiiensis. The characteristics of Section 19 are described under Descriptions of Critical Habitat, below. Additionally, existing conservation actions being led by DOFAW that occur within Section 19 contribute to the conservation of S. hawaiiensis habitat despite the area's categorization as a Game Management Area. The most recent draft habitat conservation plan (HCP) for game management at Pu`u Wa`awa`a and Pu`u Anahulu was published on August 14, 2017, as a “working document.” The DOFAW last received funding under section 6 of the Act from the Service's habitat conservation planning assistance program in 2011 to complete the final HCP, which was not completed (Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR)-DOFAW 2017, entire). We met with DOFAW during the March 29, 2023, proposed rule's (88 FR 18756) comment period to discuss planned actions for the Pu`u Anahulu area, and they indicated that planned actions would support the habitat for Schiedea hawaiiensis and other native at-risk species. However, apart from these planned actions, we confirmed with DOFAW that development of the draft game management HCP was discontinued. According to DOFAW and our records, there is currently no support to continue developing the draft HCP or game management plan. In regard to REPI, we acknowledge the importance of the conservation actions that will benefit rare species and their habitats resulting from the DoD's REPI Program funding to DOFAW for conservation actions in the Pu`u Anahulu area. As such, we are working with DoD's REPI Program to assist them in meeting their section 7 consultation requirements, independent of the potential HCP. The Service is not relieved of its statutory obligation to designate critical habitat based on the contention that such designation will not provide additional conservation benefit or because adequate protections are already in place (see Special Management Considerations or Protection, below). If any area provides the physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the species, even if that area is already well managed or protected, that area still qualifies as critical habitat under the statutory definition. (6) Comment: The State of Hawaii DOFAW stated that plant Section 18 (Unit 50 for Cyrtandra nanawaleensis, in the Halepua`a Section of the Nānāwale Forest Reserve) is severely degraded and unlikely to support any more remnant Cyrtandra nanawaleensis. They stated that the most recent monitoring of that location indicated that very few plants remain, despite protections from pigs. Our response: When the October 29, 2013, final listing rule for Cyrtandra nanawaleensis was published (78 FR 64638), the Halepua`a section of the Nānāwale Forest Reserve was one of five known occurrences for this species. As directed by the Act, we proposed as critical habitat those areas occupied by the species at the time of listing that contain the physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the species and which may require special management considerations or protection. At this time, the best available information indicates that C. nanawaleensis occupied plant Section 18 (Unit 50 for Cyrtandra nanawaleensis ) at the time of listing. In addition, the best available information, which includes the most recent 5-year review for C. nanawaleensis (Service 2020, pp. 9-10), indicates that plant Section 18 is still occupied and contains the physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the species. Therefore, we are designating Unit 50 as critical habitat for Cyrtandra nanawaleensis in this rule. (7) Comment: The State of Hawaii DOFAW stated that they are not aware of Schiedea hawaiiensis occurring on State-owned lands in plant Section 19 (Unit 55). They questioned why critical habitat is being designated on State lands in this parcel, but not on Federal lands where Schiedea hawaiiensis is known to occur. They claim that the DoD has more protected lands with the species' suitable habitat type than exist on the adjacent State land, and that DoD activities pose one of the greatest threats—fire—as demonstrated by August 2022's boundary-crossing Leilani fire. Our response: We agree that there are no known occurrences of Schiedea hawaiiensis on State-owned lands in Section 19 (Unit 55). We identified Section 19 (Unit 55) as unoccupied critical habitat for S. hawaiiensis. Unoccupied areas are needed for the expansion or augmentation of reduced populations or the reestablishment of populations. The Act specifically requires the Service to designate critical habitat for listed species to the maximum extent prudent and determinable and does not restrict such designation to particular land ownership. Rather, areas that meet the definition of critical habitat, as determined on the basis of the best scientific data available, are proposed for designation. We are designating critical habitat for S. hawaiiensis only on State-owned lands in Section 19 (Unit 55) because the Federal lands ( i.e., the Pōhakuloa Training Area) where S. hawaiiensis occurs are exempt from the critical habitat designation in accordance with section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act (see Exemptions, below). 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 areas owned or controlled by the DoD that are subject to an integrated natural resources management plan (INRMP), if the Secretary determines that such a plan provides a benefit to the species for which critical habitat is proposed for designation. An INRMP integrates the military mission of the installation with stewardship of the natural resources found there and must provide benefits to wildlife and their habitats. The DoD's current INRMP at Pōhakuloa Training Area (PTA) in plant Section 19 provides protection and enhancement of S. hawaiiensis and its habitat through management actions including, but not limited to, seed collection and storage, propagation and planting of cultivated plants, and ungulate fencing for protection of wild populations. We have determined that this INRMP provides conservation benefits to S. hawaiiensis; as such, the PTA lands are exempt from critical habitat designation in accordance with section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act. While we acknowledge the State lands adjacent to the PTA may be valuable to the conservation of S. hawaiiensis and other wildlife, the Act does not provide for exemptions outside of DoD lands (see Exemptions, below). Although State lands may qualify for exclusion under certain circumstances (see Consideration of Impacts under Section 4(b)(2) of the Act, below), we found no reason to identify the State lands adjacent to PTA as lands we were considering for exclusion in our March 29, 2023, proposed rule, nor did we receive a request for their exclusion after publication of the proposed rule. (10) Comment: The State of Hawaii DOFAW stated that critical habitat plant Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, and 13 are not appropriate for the recovery of Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Cyrtandra wagneri, and/or Stenogyne cranwelliae, because they are outside of the species' historical ranges. Our response: While the State of Hawaii may use a different method to define historical ranges, we do not agree that the critical habitat units we are designating are outside of the historical ranges of the species to which the commenter referred. We used U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) species' range maps (Price et al. 2012, unpaginated), which include not only sites of known occupancy, but also geospatially projected habitat likely to have been occupied by the species historically based on climatic and vegetation data. We applied the critical habitat delineation methodology (as described under Criteria Used To Identify Critical Habitat in our March 29, 2023, proposed critical habitat rule (88 FR 18756 at 18765-18767)) to each of the plant sections identified in the State's comment. As a result of this analysis, the Service is retaining in this designation the areas noted by the commenter. The Service's range maps for Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei and Stenogyne cranwelliae overlap with these plant sections, and factors used to delineate the critical habitat boundaries for these species are consistent with our critical habitat methodology. These factors include 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 (Price et al. 2012, entire; Service 2022b-l, entire), and adequacy of habitat to allow for the larger populations needed to meet recovery goals (as described in the draft recovery plan (Service 2022a, entire)). We considered all of these factors to delineate the critical habitat boundaries for these species, and these areas are essential for the conservation of these species. As a result, in this final rule, we retain the designations of critical habitat for Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei and Stenogyne cranwelliae in plant Sections 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, and 13 as proposed. For information about plant Section 7, and our final critical habitat designation for Cyrtandra wagneri, see Summary of Changes from the Proposed Rule, above, and Final Critical Habitat Designation, below. (11) Comment: The State of Hawaii DOFAW recommended that Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei not be removed from plant Section 3. The DOFAW stated that although the Schiedea diffusa from Kohala is actually the subspecies diffusa (confirmed by experts on the genera), and not Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, this has not been formally recognized. Our response: We agree that critical habitat for Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei should be designated in Section 3 (Units 8, 9, and 54). The additional information provided is reliable and the best available information; therefore, we include the information provided by the commenter in this final critical habitat designation. No change is necessary to Section 3 (Units 8, 9, and 54), as the relevant units are designated as critical habitat for Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei in this final rule. (12) Comment: The State of Hawaii commented that although Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei is not known from the geographic area of plant Section 1 (Units 3 and 52), it is an area that supports high-quality habitat that hosts a similar suite of species found near the historical location for Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei and could be a potential introduction site. Our response: In our March 29, 2023, proposed rule, we proposed plant Section 1 (Units 3 and 52) as critical habitat for Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei along with several other plants. The type collection by Macrae in 1825 of Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei appears to have come from the slopes of Mauna Kea; however, no individuals have been collected from Mauna Kea in recent times (Wagner et al. 2005a, p. 106). We included the information provided by the commenter in this final rule. No change is necessary to Section 1 (Units 3 and 52), as the relevant units are designated as critical habitat for Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei in this final rule. (13) Comment: The State of Hawaii DOFAW commented that they support designating critical habitat but stated that the process could be improved by incorporating a slightly more detailed assessment of habitat quality, potential for habitat protection and ecosystem restoration, suitability as remnant habitat, and potential as reintroduction areas, as well as species' history and distribution. In addition, they state that targeted outreach to private landowners and increased collaboration could be beneficial. Our response: As described in the March 29, 2023, proposed rule, within areas where we have information regarding species' observation and distribution, annual precipitation, elevation, soil, substrate, associated native plant genera, landcover and ecosystem data, and projections of species' geographic ranges, we included that information in our analysis. We considered the best available information and the physical or biological features essential to the conservation of each species in the critical habitat designation. We met with private landowners to help explain this critical habitat designation. We provided information about our compilation of available information on species and habitat areas on Hawai`i Island, and requested updated information from landowners. We reviewed and incorporated new information from these meetings into this final rule. We acknowledge that the State has been a strong collaborator in developing our critical habitat areas, and we look forward to continued engagement. Public Comments (14) Comment: One commenter requested clarification on the exclusion policy and further justification for not including exempted areas. Our response: Section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)(B)(i)) provides that critical habitat is exempted on areas owned or controlled by the DoD that are subject to an integrated natural resources management plan prepared under 16 U.S.C. 670a that provides benefit to the listed species under consideration for critical habitat designation. In addition, an area may be excluded from critical habitat under section 4(b)(2) of the Act based on economic impacts, impacts on national security, or any other relevant impacts, if the benefits of the exclusion outweigh the benefits of inclusion as critical habitat and the failure to designate the area as critical habitat will not result in the extinction of the species (see 50 CFR 424.19 and 81 FR 7226, February 11, 2016). Details about exemptions and exclusions, and justification for those relevant to this critical habitat designation, can be found below under Exemptions and Consideration of Impacts under Section 4(b)(2) of the Act. (15) Comment: One commenter stated that the greatest risk and current threat to the palm ( Pritchardia lanigera ) are rats that consume seeds, thereby hindering palm reproduction, and that collection is not a threat to the palm. Our response: Pritchardia lanigera is easy to identify and may be attractive to collectors of rare palms for personal use, for trade, or for sale (Shirey et al. 2013, pp. 301-302). Several nurseries advertise and sell Pritchardia palms, including P. lanigera and other federally listed Pritchardia species, indicating that Pritchardia are attractive to some collectors. Collection is a threat to P. lanigera that would likely increase if we were to designate critical habitat for the species, as such designation would aid collectors in locating occurrences of the species (Shirey et al. 2013, p. 307; Weisenberger 2023, pers. comm.). Therefore, the designation of critical habitat for Pritchardia lanigera is not prudent due to the threat of collection. (16) Comment: One commenter disagreed with the not-prudent critical habitat determination for Vetericaris chaceorum. When the Service listed V. chaceorum as endangered, overcollection for commercial and recreational purposes was not listed as a threat to the species. The commenter stated that V. chaceorum has only been documented in two specific locations, which have already been identified in the species' listing, have already been disclosed in the Federal Register , and are found easily online. Our response: Vetericaris chaceorum is one of several different species and taxon of Hawaiian anchialine pool shrimp and is the largest of the anchialine pool shrimp found in Hawai'i (Yamamoto et al. 2015, p. 40). Anchialine pools are sensitive discrete ecosystems, and a single pool system can be home to many different species of anchialine pool shrimp. We agree with the commenter that we did not cite overcollection as a threat to V. chaceorum when we listed it as endangered (78 FR 64638; October 29, 2013, pp. 63978-63978). However, after listing V. chaceorum, new information has become available highlighting a new threat in the form of collection and overutilization, as described in our proposed rule (88 FR 18756, March 29, 2023). Coincidentally after listing V. chaceorum, popularity in the aquarium trade of another Hawaiian anchialine shrimp species, Halocaridina rubra, commonly called the Hawaiian red shrimp or volcano shrimp, has increased worldwide (Yamamoto et al. 2015, p. 83). This increase in collection activities of H. rubra has resulted in a risk to V. chaceorum, due to these two species sharing a similar appearance and habitat preferences. The shrimp that are being harvested are primarily H. rubra, which is not endangered, but as the popularity of this business increases there is risk that the endangered V. 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.). Although more than 400 of the estimated 520 to 560 anchialine pool habitats have been surveyed on the island of Hawai'i, V. chaceorum has only been documented from two locations, indicating that this species has a very limited range, likely due to its behavior and salinity preferences (see 78 FR 64638, October 29, 2013). While general occurrence locations were included in the October 29, 2013, rule listing V. chaceorum as an endangered species, specifically defining occupied areas by geographic coordinates through a critical habitat designation may pose a risk to V. chaceorum by causing increased unauthorized collection by individuals seeking Halocaridina rubra, a prey source for V. chaceorum. (17) Comment: The Nature Conservancy stated the Service should have designated as critical habitat areas occupied by Drosophila digressa in mesic forest below Kona Hema Preserve at Honomalino, and at Kīpuka Punahou. Our response: We have reviewed the new information provided by the commenter, as well as similar information provided by a peer reviewer, regarding Drosophila digressa occurrences, and we evaluated the areas for inclusion in this critical habitat designation. The Nature Conservancy's suggestion regarding Honomalino is supported by information provided by one peer reviewer, as described above in Summary of Changes from the Proposed Rule. We have determined that the Honomalino area the commenter suggested for inclusion should be included in this critical habitat designation, and we include it in this designation as a new Drosophila digressa —Unit 6. The area is occupied by D. digressa as a new population discovered in 2022, has at least one physical or biological feature essential to the conservation of D. digressa, and may require special management considerations or protection. We do not, however, include Ki puka Punahou, which is also known as Kīpuka 9 located along Saddle Road, in this designation. The commenter did not provide any information to indicate that this area is currently occupied by Drosophila digressa, and the best available information indicates that the species was last observed in this area in 1986 (Hawaii Natural Heritage Program 2011, in litt.). Further, because of the lack of breeding substrate in the area, an individual Drosophila digressa observed in Kīpuka Punahou would likely be a vagrant (Magnacca 2012, pers. comm., entire). 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. Species Descriptions We provide a brief description for each of the 14 species addressed in this rule, below. Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana (ko'oko'olau), a short-lived perennial herb in the sunflower family (Asteraceae), occurs only on the island of Hawai'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 (ha ha ), a short-lived perennial palmlike shrub in the bellflower family (Campanulaceae), is found only on the island of Hawai'i. Historically, C. marksii was known from the Kona district, in the lowland wet and montane wet ecosystems (Lammers 1999, p. 457; Hawai'i Biodiversity Mapping Program (HBMP) database 2010b).xxxxxxx Cyanea tritomantha ('aku ), a short-lived perennial palmlike shrub in the bellflower family (Campanulaceae), is known only from the island of Hawai'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, Ki lauea, and the Kohala Mountains, in the lowland wet, montane wet, and wet cliff ecosystems (Pratt and Abbott 1997, p. 13). Cyrtandra nanawaleensis (ha'iwale), a short-lived perennial shrub or small tree in the African violet family (Gesneriaceae), is known only from the island of Hawai'i (Wagner and Herbst 2003, p. 29; Wagner et al. 2005b). 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'iwale), a short-lived perennial shrub or small tree in the African violet family (Gesneriaceae), occurs only on the island of Hawai'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'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). Phyllostegia floribunda (no common name), a short-lived perennial subshrub in the mint family (Lamiaceae), is found only on the island of Hawai'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 (hō'awa, hā'awa), a small, long-lived perennial tree in the pittosporum family (Pittosporaceae), is known only from the island of Hawai'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'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'i (Read and Hodel 1999, p. 1,371; Hodel 2007, pp. 10, 24-25). Historically, P. lanigera was known from the Kohala Mountains, Haāmākua 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'i (Wagner et al. 2005c; Wagner et al. 2005a, p. 106). Historically, S. diffusa ssp. macraei was known from the Kohala Mountains, the windward slopes of Mauna Loa, and the Ola'a Tract of Hawai'i Volcanoes National Park, in the montane wet ecosystem (Perlman et al. 2001, in litt.; Wagner et al. 2005a, p. 106; HBMP 2010g). Schiedea hawaiiensis (mā'oli'oli), a short-lived perennial herb in the pink family (Caryophyllaceae), is known only from the island of Hawai'i (Wagner et al. 2005a, 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. 2005a, 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'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'i and historically known from five locations on the island in elevations ranging from approximately 2,000 to 4,500 feet (ft) (610 to 1,370 meters (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 inches (in) (4.0 to 5.0 millimeters (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 Hawai'i. Anchialine 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 centimeters (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 on 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 and in the proposed critical habitat rule (88 FR 18756, March 29, 2023). Regulatory Framework Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and the implementing regulations in title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations set forth the procedures for determining whether a species is an endangered species or a threatened species, issuing protective regulations for threatened species, and designating critical habitat for endangered and threatened species. In 2019, jointly with the National Marine Fisheries Service, the Service issued a final rule that revised the regulations in 50 CFR part 424 regarding how we add, remove, and reclassify endangered and threatened species and the criteria for designating listed species' critical habitat (84 FR 45020; August 27, 2019). Our analysis for this decision applied our current regulations, portions of which were last revised in 2019. Given that we proposed further revisions to these regulations on June 22, 2023 (88 FR 40764), we have also undertaken an analysis of whether the decision would be different if we were to apply those proposed revisions. We concluded that the decision would have been the sameif we had applied the proposed 2023 regulations. The analyses under both the regulations currently in effect and the regulations after incorporating the June 22, 2023, proposed revisions are included in our decision file. Critical Habitat Section 4(a)(3) of the Act requires that, to the maximum extent prudent and determinable, we designate a species' critical habitat concurrently with listing the 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). 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. Rather, designation requires that, where a landowner requests Federal agency funding or authorization for an action that may affect a listed species or critical habitat, the Federal agency consult with the Service under section 7(a)(2) of the Act. If the action may affect the listed species itself (such as for occupied critical habitat), the Federal action agency would have already been required to consult with the Service even absent the critical habitat designation because of the requirement to ensure that the action is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Even if the Service were to conclude after consultation that the proposed activity is likely to 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 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 report 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 these 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 (HCPs), or other species conservation planning efforts if new information available at the time of these planning efforts calls for a different outcome. 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 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 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 ft (100 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 in (120 cm) in the coastal dry ecosystem to 47 to 98 in (120 to 250 cm) in the coastal mesic ecosystem, and to more than 98 in (250 cm) in the coastal wet ecosystem. Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana is the only species addressed in this rule known to occupy a coastal ecosystem, and more specifically the coastal wet ecosystem that receives higher rainfall. 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 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 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 rule are found in the mesic forest ecosystem. The picture-wing fly, Drosophila digressa, addressed in this 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 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 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 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 and the proposed critical habitat rule (88 FR 18756, March 29, 2023) 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 below 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 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, and Drosophila digressa . Wet Forest Cyanea marksii, Cyanea tritomantha, Cyrtandra nanawaleensis, Cyrtandra wagneri, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Melicope remyi, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae, and Drosophila digressa . 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] Ecosystem Elevation Annual precipitation Substrate Contain one or more of these associated native plant genera Canopy Subcanopy Understory Coastal <984ft (<300 m) <47 to >98 in (<120 cm to >250 cm) well-drained talus, calcareous slopes, dunes Diospyros, Metrosideros, Myoporum, Pritchardia Chenopodium, Gossypium, Heliotropium, Santalum, Scaevola Eragrostis, Sesuvium, Sida, Sporobolus. Dry Forest <9,500 ft (<2,900 m) <79 in (<200 cm) well-drained, sandy loams or loams from volcanic ash or cinder; weathered basaltic lava Acacia, Colubrina, Diospyros, Erythrina, Melicope, Metrosideros, Myoporum, Myrsine, Sophora Achyranthes, Euphorbia, Leptecophylla, Nototrichium Dodonaea, Doryopteris, Heteropogon, Pellaea. Mesic Forest <6,562 ft (<2,000 m) 39-150 in (100-380 cm) rocky, shallow, organic muck soils; rocky talus soils; shallow soils over weathered rock; deep soils over soft weathered rock; gravelly alluvium Acacia, Antidesma, Charpentiera, Chrysodracon, Metrosideros, Myrsine, Nestegis, Pisonia, Santalum Coprosma, Freycinetia, Leptecophylla, Myoporum, Pipturus, Rubus, Sadleria, Sophora Ctenitis, Doodia, Dryopteris, Pelea, Sadleria. Wet Forest <7,218 ft (<2,200 m) >98 in (> 250 cm) very weathered soils to rocky substrate, basaltic lava, undeveloped soils, developed soils Acacia, Antidesma, Cheirodendron, Ilex, Melicope, Metrosideros, Myrsine, Pittosporum, Psychotria Cibotium, Clermontia, Coprosma, Cyanea, Freycinetia, Hydrangea, Vaccinium Adenophorus, Cibotium, Cyrtandra, Dicranopteris, Huperzia, Peperomia, Stenogyne. Mesic Grassland and Shrubland 98-7,546 ft (30-2,300 m) 39-98 in (100-250 cm) shallow soils that frequently dry with rocky outcrops Coprosma, Metrosideros, Wilkesia Dodonaea, Dubautia, Leptecophylla, Osteomeles, Sadleria, Vaccinium Bidens, Carex, Deschampsia, Dicranopteris, Dryopteris, Eragrostis, Euphorbia, Lipochaeta. Wet Grassland and Shrubland 656-2,953 ft (200-900 m) 98-197 in (250-500 cm) older, weathered soils to younger, rocky substrates Ilex, Kadua, Melicope, Metrosideros, Myrsine Cibotium, Clermontia, Dubautia, Freycinetia, Hydrangea, Lobelia, Pipturus, Touchardia, Urera, Vaccinium Carex, Cladium, Deschampsia, Dicranopteris, Eragrostis, Peperomia, Phyllostegia, Scaevola. The physical or biological features identified in this rule take into consideration the ecosystem types in which each species occurs, as described above. 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 essential distribution (whether the populations occur in habitats representative of the species' historical 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 recovery. Some of the species addressed in this rule occur in more than one ecosystem. We describe the physical or biological features for these species separately for each ecosystem in which they occur. We took this approach because 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 the 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 rule. We offer some examples to help readers understand our approach to describing the physical or biological features for each species. For example, to understand the physical or biological features for the plant Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana, first look at table 1 and see that B. hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana depends on the coastal ecosystem. Then table 2 indicates that the physical or biological features in the coastal ecosystem include elevations of less than 984 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 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 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 designating 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`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 designated critical habitat areas to avoid further degradation or destruction of the physical or biological features essential to the 12 species' conservation. Habitat degradation (resulting from, for example, trampling and herbivory by introduced ungulates, fire, drought, and habitat modification by invasive plants) is the greatest threat to these 12 species, and this threat acts 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 a death (ROD) (78 FR 64638, October 29, 2013; Service 2023a, pp. 21-28). 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 at 63941-63974, October 17, 2012), the final listing rule (78 FR 64638 at 64653-64686, October 29, 2013), 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. 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 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 refer to these areas as occupied habitat. We also review available information pertaining to habitat requirements of the species in areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species at the time of listing for consideration as critical habitat, and these areas are referred to as unoccupied habitat. We will designate as critical habitat specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species only upon a determination that such areas are essential for the conservation of the species. We will only consider unoccupied areas to be essential where a critical habitat designation limited to geographical areas occupied would be inadequate to ensure the conservation of the species. In addition, for an unoccupied area to be considered essential, we must determine that there is a reasonable certainty both that the area will contribute to the conservation of the species and that the area contains one or more of those physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the species. We are designating both occupied and unoccupied critical habitat for eight species ( Drosophila digressa, Cyanea marksii, Cyanea tritomantha, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and Stenogyne cranwelliae ). We are not designating any occupied areas as critical habitat for Schiedea hawaiiensis because the single area known to be occupied by the species at the time of listing is exempt from designation (see Exemptions, below, for more information). For Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana, Cyrtandra nanawaleensis, and Cyrtandra wagneri, we are not designating 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 feature essential to the conservation of the species and a reasonable certainty of contributing to conservation. Except for the designated critical habitat in Unit 55 for Schiedea hawaiiensis, all unoccupied critical habitat areas overlap entirely with a geographical area for which we are designating occupied critical habitat for at least one of the other species that are the subjects of this rule. The unoccupied critical habitat in Unit 55 for Schiedea hawaiiensis has no overlap in geographic occurrence or range with the other species addressed in this rule. We note that the new plant critical habitat Unit 56 is not occupied by either of the plant species for which it is designated ( Cyanea marksii and Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei ) or any of the other nine plant species that are part of this critical habitat designation, but Unit 56 exists entirely within the boundaries of Drosophila digressa —Unit 6, which is occupied by Drosophila digressa. We are designating areas outside the geographical area occupied by nine species ( Drosophila digressa, Cyanea marksii, Cyanea tritomantha, 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 catastrophic events, such as hurricanes or landslides. Therefore, supporting resiliency 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 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 designating 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 locations where it is currently found, and some species are only known from one location. 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, which are necessary for their recovery. In this rule, we designate critical habitat for 12 species in 21 distinct areas that include 42 critical habitat units, with animal and plant units identified separately. Each 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 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, wet forest, and mesic grassland and shrubland. 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 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 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 rangewide 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 2023a-n); and (3) recovery planning efforts (Service 2022a, entire). Some of the critical habitat for these 12 species overlies critical habitat already designated for other species on the island of Hawai`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 ranges of the 12 species; (3) We identified areas containing the physical or biological features that may require special management considerations or protection; (4) We circumscribed boundaries of 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 (GIS) database for each of the 12 species including the known locations of the species from the Hawai'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 (PEPP) 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 ( https://ntbg.org/database/herbarium/ ). We used Hawai`i Biodiversity Mapping Program's Geographic reference areas for the Hawaiian Islands in conjunction with known species' location data (Kam 2017, p. 1; Hawai`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 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 2023a, entire) 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'i and further evaluated. In general, land areas that were identified as highly degraded were removed from the 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 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; Giambelluca et al. 2013, entire; Price and Jacobi 2012, entire). 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 GIS 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`i County (Hawaii Statewide GIS Program 2022, 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 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 (Price et al. 2012, entire; Service 2022b-l, entire) and Drosophila digressa (Service 2023a, 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 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 rule have been excluded by text in the rule and are not designated as critical habitat. Therefore, a Federal action involving these lands will not trigger section 7 consultation with respect to critical habitat and the requirement of no adverse modification unless the specific action will affect the physical or biological features in the adjacent critical habitat. We are designating 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 some of the species; therefore, we have also identified, and designate as critical habitat, unoccupied areas that are essential for the conservation of nine of the species (see Final Critical Habitat Designation, below). We have determined that these units are habitat for these nine species and will both contribute to the conservation of the species and contain at least one physical or biological feature essential to the conservation of the species. Units are designated 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 designate 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 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 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 https://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-R1-ES-2023-0017. Final Critical Habitat Designation We are designating approximately 119,326 ac (48,289 ha) as critical habitat in 21 distinct areas that include 42 critical habitat units, with 9 animal and 33 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 critical habitat units and the approximate area of each unit by landowner type. Within the 21 distinct areas, areas of critical habitat for Drosophila digressa are described as 9 sequential numbered units, whereas areas of critical habitat for plants are described as 20 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'i. Some of the critical habitat for Drosophila digressa overlays critical habitat already 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'i at 50 CFR 17.99. Therefore, the critical habitat for Drosophila digressa is not presented as being part of any of the existing critical habitat units for plant species. Conversely, for Hawaiian plants only, areas of a plant section that overlay existing Hawaiian plant critical habitat units are assigned to that existing critical habitat unit name. Areas of a plant 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 designated 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'i (see 50 CFR 17.99(k)). We provide the critical habitat plant section numbers, where applicable, as well as unit numbers and the corresponding map numbers that appear at 50 CFR 17.99 for ease of reference in the CFR. All units in the designation, with the exception of Unit 55 for Schiedea hawaiiensis within 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 designating critical habitat (see table 4, below). Of the 21 distinct areas for which we are designating critical habitat in this rule, 12 include animal units or plant sections that are both occupied and unoccupied for 2 or more of the 12 Hawai`i island species. The areas we designate 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 critical habitat for the 11 plants and Drosophila digressa overlap each other in many areas on the island of Hawai`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 rule, as indicated by “and” following the section name in the headings of the section and unit descriptions, below. Table 3—Critical Habitat Units by Ecosystem, Land Ownership, and Size [Area estimates reflect all land within critical habitat unit boundaries] Animal unit Plant section Plant unit Federal (ac (ha)) State (ac (ha)) Private/other (ac (ha)) Total (ac (ha)) Wet Forest * Drosophila digressa —Unit 1 Cyanea tritomantha, Cyrtandra wagneri, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae —Section 1 Unit 3 Unit 52 3,549 (1,436) 549 (222) 7,963 (3,223) 2,681 (1,085) 547 (221) 425 (172) 12,059 (4,880) 3,656 (1,479) Subtotal 4,098 (1,658) 10,644 (4,308) 972 (394) 15,714 (6,359) Drosophila digressa —Unit 7 Cyanea marksii, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae —Section 4 Unit 15 Unit 39 182 (73) 997 (403) 167 (68) 182 (73) 1,164 (471) Subtotal 1,179 (477) 167 (68) 1,346 (545) Drosophila digressa —Unit 8 Cyanea marksii, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae —Section 5 Unit 15 Unit 38 55 (22) 297 (120) 72 (29) 237 (96) 127 (51) 534 (216) Subtotal 352 (142) 309 (125) 661 (267) Cyanea marksii, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae —Section 6 Unit 16 Unit 40 156 (63) 1,190 (482) 52 (21) 156 (63) 1,243 (503) Subtotal 1,347 (545) 52 (21) 1,399 (566) Drosophila digressa —Unit 2 Cyanea tritomantha, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae —Section 11 Unit 29 Unit 30 Unit 51 7,232 (2,927) 643 (260) 494 (200) 6,498 (2,630) 16,905 (6,841) <1 (<1) 226 (91) 494 (200) 13,730 (5,556) 17,774 (7,193) Subtotal 7,875 (3,187) 23,897 (9,671) 226 (91) 31,998 (12,949) Drosophila digressa —Unit 9 Cyanea marksii, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae —Section 12 Unit 37 1,906 (771) <1 (<1) 1,906 (771) Subtotal 1,906 (771) <1 (<1) 1,906 (771) Drosophila digressa —Unit 5 Cyanea marksii, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae —Section 13 Unit 41 411 (166) 3,001 (1,214) 3,412 (1,381) Subtotal 411 (166) 3,001 (1,214) 3,412 (1,381) Cyrtandra nanawaleensis —Section 15 Unit 47 274 (111) 274 (111) Subtotal 274 (111) 274 (111) Cyrtandra nanawaleensis —Section 16 Unit 48 586 (237) 3 (1) 589 (238) Subtotal 586 (237) 3 (1) 589 (238) Drosophila digressa —Unit 6 Cyanea marksii, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei —Section 20 Unit 56 224 (91) 224 (91) Subtotal 224 (91) 224 (91) Coastal * Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana —Section 2 Unit 6 Unit 53 2 (1) 76 (31) 78 (32) 2 (1) 154 (62) Subtotal 78 (32) 78 (32) 156 (63) Wet Forest and Wet Grassland and Shrubland * Cyanea tritomantha, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae —Section 3 Unit 8 Unit 9 Unit 54 6,805 (2,754) 5,855 (2,369) 1 (<1) 90 (36) 6,805 (2,754) 1 (<1) 5,945 (2,406) Subtotal 12,660 (5,123) 91 (37) 12,751 (5,160) Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense —Section 7 Unit 23 Unit 45 9 (4) 5,494 (2,223) 9 (4) 5,494 (2,223) Subtotal 5,503 (2,227) 5,503 (2,227) Cyrtandra nanawaleensis, Phyllostegia floribunda —Section 10 Unit 28 Unit 46 155 (63) 12,212 (4,942) 7 (3) 155 (63) 12,219 (4,945) Subtotal 12,368 (5,005) 7 (3) 12,374 (5,008) Wet Forest and Mesic Forest * Cyanea tritomantha, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae —Section 8 Unit 24 Unit 44 1,956 (792) 322 (130) 5,561 (2,251) 1,956 (792) 5,884 (2,381) Subtotal 2,278 (922) 5,561 (2,251) 7,840 (3,173) Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae —Section 9 Unit 24 Unit 43 36 (15) 1,693 (685) 65 (26) 4,180 (1,691) 101 (41) 5,872 (2,376) Subtotal 1,729 (700) 4,244 (1,718) 5,973 (2,417) Drosophila digressa —Unit 3 Cyanea tritomantha, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae —Section 14 Unit 42 8,773 (3,550) 8 (3) 8,781 (3,554) Subtotal 8,773 (3,550) 8 (3) 8,781 (3,554) Wet Forest, Mesic Forest, and Mesic Grassland and Shrubland * Cyrtandra nanawaleensis —Section 17 Unit 49 868 (351) 6 (3) 875 (354) Subtotal 868 (351) 6 (3) 875 (354) Cyrtandra nanawaleensis —Section 18 Unit 50 562 (227) 562 (227) Subtotal 562 (227) 562 (227) Dry Forest * Schiedea hawaiiensis —Section 19 Unit 55 6,822 (2,761) 6,822 (2,761) Subtotal 6,822 (2,761) 6,822 (2,761) Mesic Forest * Drosophila digressa —Unit 4 167 (67) 167 (67) Subtotal 167 (67) 167 (67) Total 32,162 (13,015) 82,252 (33,286) 4,913 (1,988) 119,326 (48,289) Note: Area sizes may not sum due to rounding. * Ecosystem subheadings indicate all of the ecosystems that can be found in each unit, but not every species for which each unit is designated is found in every ecosystem found in the unit (see table 1 for the ecosystems within each species may be found). BILLING CODE 4333-15-P ER12MR24.000 BILLING CODE 4333-15-C Table 5—Critical Habitat Units for Drosophila Digressa [Picture-wing fly] Critical habitat unit Occupied/unoccupied Corresponding critical habitat map in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Drosophila digressa —Unit 1 Unoccupied Drosophila digressa —Hawai'i Island, HI—Unit 1. Drosophila digressa —Unit 2 Occupied Drosophila digressa —Hawai'i Island, HI—Unit 2. Drosophila digressa —Unit 3 Unoccupied Drosophila digressa —Hawai'i Island, HI—Unit 3. Drosophila digressa —Unit 4 Occupied Drosophila digressa —Hawai'i Island, HI—Unit 4. Drosophila digressa —Unit 5 Unoccupied Drosophila digressa —Hawai'i Island, HI—Unit 5, Unit 6, Unit 7, Unit 8, Unit 9. Drosophila digressa —Unit 6 Occupied 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'i Island species, below. Descriptions of Critical Habitat We describe each section and unit separately, below, but first describe the common rationale for designating areas of critical habitat as occupied and/or unoccupied critical habitat. All areas that are designated 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 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). We determined that occupied areas are not able to provide the space needed to meet the target number of reproductive populations and individuals for any of the 12 species. For four species with naturally narrowly-restricted ranges, no other areas containing their essential physical or biological features are known. We determined that for nine species ( Drosophila digressa, Cyanea marksii, Cyanea tritomantha, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae, and Schiedea hawaiiensis ) there are additional areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species that contain at least one physical or biological feature essential to the conservation of the species. We are designating as critical habitat all areas of unoccupied habitat that we identified for these nine species because (1) they provide one or more of the physical or biological features necessary for the reestablishment of wild populations within the species' range, and (2) we have reasonable certainty that these areas will contribute to the conservation of the species by adding to the area required to support the numbers of populations and reproducing individuals needed for recovery (thus helping to ensure resiliency, redundancy, and representation needed for the species' viability). The establishment of multiple, robust populations (redundancy) 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 locations where it is currently found, and some species are only known from one location. Designating these unoccupied areas as critical habitat also promotes conservation actions to restore the species' 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. For example, our first use of plant Section 2 is described as “ Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana —Section 2,” and after that is simply referred to as “Section 2.” Table 6—Land Use, Threats to Habitat, and Potential Special Management Considerations for Critical Habitat Units Designated for the 12 Hawai'i Island Species Plant section Drosophila unit General land use Threats Special management Section 1 Unit 1 A, B, C, D, E, F, G O, P, Q S, T, U. Section 2 A, B, C, D, E, F, H O, P, Q, R S, T, U. Section 3 A, B, C, D, E, F, H O, P, Q, R S, T, U. Section 4 Unit 7 A, B, C, D, E, F, H O, P, Q, R S, T, U. Section 5 Unit 8 A, B, C, D, E, F, H O, P, Q, R S, T, U. Section 6 A, B, C, D, E, F, H O, P, Q, R S, T, U. Section 7 A, B, C, D, F, H O, P, Q, R S, T, U. Section 8 A, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L O, P, Q S, T. Section 9 A, E, F, H, I, J O, P, Q, R S, T, U. Section 10 A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, M O, P, Q, R S, T, U. Section 11 Unit 2 A, B, C, D, E, F, H, K, N O, P, Q, R S, T, U. 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, H O, P, Q, R S, T, U. Section 13 Unit 5 A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H O, P, Q, R S, T, U. Section 14 Unit 3 A, E, F, H, I, J O, P, Q, R S, T, U. Section 15 A, B, C, D, E, F, N O, P, Q, R S, T, U. Section 16 A, B, C, D, E, F, N O, P, Q, R S, T, U. Section 17 A, B, C, D, E, F, N O, P, Q, R S, T, U. Section 18 A, B, C, D, E, F, N O, P, Q, R S, T, U. Section 19 A, B, C, D, E, F, H O, P, Q, R S, T, U. Section 20 Unit 6 A, B, C, D, E, F, J, N O, P, Q, R S, T. 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 'Ō'ōkala to Maulua Nui on the northeastern slope of Maunakea. Lands within this section and unit include approximately 26 percent in Federal ownership, 68 percent in State ownership, and 6 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)), which was previously designated for other plant species; and Unit 52 is a newly designated 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'ula, Laupāhoehoe, and Pīhā Sections; the Laupāhoehoe Natural Area Reserve; and the Manowaiale'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 Laupāhoehoe 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 of the physic [Text truncated at 120,000 characters. The full text is on the page linked above.] --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A2024-04588. Public record. Not legal advice.