Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Listing 15 Species on Hawaii Island as Endangered and Designating Critical Habitat for 3 Species

FederalRegulations

Ask Donna

How this section applies to your facts.

Federal Register › Vol. 77 › 77 FR 63928

This text was captured on Aug 14, 2026. It is a snapshot, not a live feed, so check the official code before relying on it.

Text

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 [Docket Number FWS-R1-ES-2012-0070: 4500030113] RIN 1018-AY09 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Listing 15 Species on Hawaii Island as Endangered and Designating Critical Habitat for 3 Species AGENCY:

Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION:

Proposed rule.

SUMMARY:

We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose to list 15 species on the Hawaiian island of Hawaii as endangered species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act), and to designate critical habitat for 1 of these species. For the remaining 14 species that we are proposing to list in this rule, we find that critical habitat is not determinable at this time. We also propose to designate critical habitat for two plant species that were listed as endangered species in 1986 and 1994. The proposed critical habitat designation totals 18,766 acres (ac) (7,597 hectares (ha)), and includes both occupied and unoccupied habitat. Approximately 55 percent of the area being proposed as critical habitat is already designated as critical habitat for 42 plants and the Blackburn's sphinx moth ( Manduca blackburni ). In addition, we propose a taxonomic change for one endangered plant species.

DATES:

We will accept comments received on or postmarked on or before December 17, 2012. Please note that if you are using the Federal eRulemaking Portal (See ADDRESSES section below), the deadline for submitting an electronic comment is 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on this date. We must receive requests for public hearings, in writing, at the address shown in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by December 3, 2012.

ADDRESSES:

You may submit comments by one of the following methods:

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Search for FWS−R1-ES-2012-0070, which is the docket number for this proposed rule. You may submit a comment by clicking on “Comment Now!”

• U.S

or public hearings, in writing, at the address shown in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by December 3, 2012.

ADDRESSES:

You may submit comments by one of the following methods:

• U.S. Mail or Hand Delivery: Public Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-R1-ES-2012-0070; Division of Policy and Directives Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS 2042-PDM; Arlington, VA 22203.

We will post all comments on http://www.regulations.gov . This generally means that we will post any personal information you provide us (see the Public Comments section below for more information).

The coordinates or plot points or both from which the maps were generated are included in the administrative record for the proposed critical habitat designation and are available at http://www.fws.gov/pacificislands, http://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-R1-ES-2011-0070, and at the Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT ). Any additional tools or supporting information that we may develop for this critical habitat designation will also be available at the above locations.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Loyal Mehrhoff, Field Supervisor, Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office, 300 Ala Moana Boulevard, Box 50088, Honolulu, HI 96850; by telephone at 808-792-9400; or by facsimile at 808-792-9581. If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Executive Summary

Why we need to publish a rule. Under the Act, we are required to list a species if we determine that it meets the definition of an endangered species or a threatened species as defined in the Act

simile at 808-792-9581. If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Executive Summary

Why we need to publish a rule. Under the Act, we are required to list a species if we determine that it meets the definition of an endangered species or a threatened species as defined in the Act. If this determination is made, we publish a proposed rule in the Federal Register , seek public comment on our proposal, and issue a final rule. This action consists of a proposed rule to list 15 species (13 plants, 1 insect (picture-wing fly), and 1 crustacean (anchialine pool shrimp)) from the Island of Hawaii in the State of Hawaii, as endangered. Further, under the Act, we are to designate critical habitat to the maximum extent prudent and determinable concurrently with a listing determination. We are proposing to designate critical habitat concurrently with listing for the plant Bidens micrantha ssp. ctenophylla, due to the imminent threat of urban development to 98 percent of the individuals known for this species and its habitat within the lowland dry ecosystem. In addition, we are proposing to designate critical habitat for two previously listed plant species. Isodendrion pyrifolium, listed as an endangered species on March 4, 1994 (59 FR 10305), and Mezoneuron kavaiense, listed as an endangered species on July 8, 1986 (51 FR 24672). These species co-occur with Bidens micrantha ssp. ctenophylla in the same lowland dry ecosystem, but do not have designated critical habitat on Hawaii Island. We are also correcting critical habitat unit maps for Cyanea shipmanii, Phyllostegia racemosa, Phyllostegia velutina, and Plantago hawaiensis to accurately reflect the designated critical habitat units for those plant species. These map corrections do not change the designated critical habitat for these plants

ame lowland dry ecosystem, but do not have designated critical habitat on Hawaii Island. We are also correcting critical habitat unit maps for Cyanea shipmanii, Phyllostegia racemosa, Phyllostegia velutina, and Plantago hawaiensis to accurately reflect the designated critical habitat units for those plant species. These map corrections do not change the designated critical habitat for these plants. For the remaining 14 species that we are proposing to list in this rule, we find that critical habitat is not determinable at this time. This proposed rule is organized by ecosystem, which will allow the Service to better prioritize, direct, and focus conservation and recovery actions on Hawaii Island.

The basis for our action. Under the Endangered Species Act, a species may be determined to be an endangered species or a threatened species based on any of five factors: (1) Destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range; (2) Overuse; (3) Disease or predation; (4) Inadequate existing regulations; or (5) Other natural or manmade factors.

One or more of the species proposed for listing in this rule face the following threats related to these criteria:

• Habitat loss and degradation due to agriculture and urban development; nonnative feral ungulates ( e.g., pigs, goats) and plants; wildfire; hurricanes; flooding; and drought.

• Predation or herbivory by nonnative feral ungulates, rats, snails, and slugs.

• Inadequate existing regulatory mechanisms to prevent the introduction and spread of nonnative plants and animals.

• Small number of individuals and populations, and lack of reproduction in the wild.

This rule proposes to designate critical habitat for 3 plant species.

• Approximately 18,766 acres (7,597 hectares) is being proposed as critical habitat in seven multi-species critical habitat units on lands owned by the U.S. National Park Service, State of Hawaii, County of Hawaii, and private interests

• Small number of individuals and populations, and lack of reproduction in the wild.

This rule proposes to designate critical habitat for 3 plant species.

• Approximately 55 percent, or 10,304 acres (4,170 hectares), of the area being proposed as critical habitat overlaps with areas already designated as critical habitat for previously listed plant and animal species.

• Approximately 45 percent, or 8,464 acres (3,426 hectares), of the area does not overlap with areas already designated as critical habitat for previously listed plant and animal species.

• The proposed critical habitat units encompass areas containing physical and biological features essential to the conservation of these species and that may require special management considerations, or are otherwise essential for the conservation of these species.

• The proposed designation includes both occupied and unoccupied critical habitat for the three species for which we are proposing to designate critical habitat.

• The Secretary may exclude an area from critical habitat if the benefits of exclusion outweigh the benefits of designation, unless the exclusion will result in the extinction of the species. We are considering excluding approximately 4,102 acres of privately owned and State lands from the critical habitat designation.

We are preparing an economic analysis of the proposed critical habitat designation. To consider economic impacts, we are preparing an analysis of the economic impacts of the proposed critical habitat designation and related factors. We will announce the availability of the draft economic analysis as soon as it is completed, at which time we will seek public review and comment

abitat designation.

We will seek peer review. We will obtain opinions from knowledgeable individuals with scientific expertise regarding our technical assumptions, analysis, adherence to regulations, and use of the best available information.

Public Comments

We intend that any final action resulting from this proposal will be based on the best scientific and commercial data available and be as accurate and as effective as possible. Therefore, we solicit comments or suggestions on this proposed rule from other concerned governmental agencies, the scientific community, industry, or other interested parties concerning this proposed rule. We are proposing to list 15 species (13 plants, 1 anchialine pool shrimp, and 1 picture-wing fly) as endangered species. We are also proposing to designate critical habitat for one of the proposed endangered plant species and two plant species that are already listed as endangered species, but that do not have designated critical habitat on Hawaii Island. We particularly seek comments concerning:

(1) Biological, commercial trade, or other relevant data concerning threats (or the lack thereof) to the 15 species proposed for listing, and the adequacy of the existing regulations that may be addressing those threats.

(2) Additional information concerning the range, distribution, and population sizes of each of the 15 species proposed for listing, including the locations of any additional populations of these species.

trade, or other relevant data concerning threats (or the lack thereof) to the 15 species proposed for listing, and the adequacy of the existing regulations that may be addressing those threats.

(3) Any information on the biological or ecological requirements of the 15 species proposed for listing.

(4) Current or planned activities within the area being proposed for critical habitat and possible impacts to these activities.

(5) The reasons why we should or should not designate areas for Bidens micrantha ssp. ctenophylla, Mezoneuron kavaiense (taxonomic revision proposed for Caesalpinia kavaiense to Mezoneuron kavaiense ), and Isodendrion pyrifolium as “critical habitat” under section 4 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act) (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. ). We specifically seek information on any threats to these species from human activity, the degree of which can be expected to increase due to the designation, and whether the benefit of designation would outweigh threats to these species caused by the designation, such that the designation of critical habitat is prudent.

(6) Specific information on:

• The amount and distribution of critical habitat for the species included in this proposed rule;

• Areas that are currently occupied and contain the necessary physical or biological features essential for the conservation of the species that we should include in the designation, and why;

• Whether special management considerations or protections may be required for the physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the species in this proposed rule; and

• What areas outside the geographical area occupied at the time of listing are essential to the conservation of the species, and why.

rvation of the species that we should include in the designation, and why;

• Whether special management considerations or protections may be required for the physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the species in this proposed rule; and

• What areas outside the geographical area occupied at the time of listing are essential to the conservation of the species, and why.

(7) Any reasonably foreseeable economic, national security, or other relevant impacts of the proposed critical habitat designation. We are particularly interested in any impacts on small entities, and the benefits of including or excluding areas that may experience these impacts.

(8) Whether the benefits of excluding any particular area from critical habitat outweigh the benefits of including that area as critical habitat under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, after considering the potential impacts and benefits of the proposed critical habitat designation. Under section 4(b)(2), the Secretary may exclude an area from critical habitat if he or she determines that the benefits of such exclusion outweigh the benefits of including that particular area as critical habitat, unless failure to designate that specific area as critical habitat will result in the extinction of the species. We request specific information on:

• The benefits of and supporting rationale for including specific areas in the final designation;

• The benefits of and supporting rationale for excluding specific areas from the final designation; and

• Whether any specific exclusions may result in the extinction of the species, and why.

(9) Whether the private and State lands being considered for exclusion from critical habitat designation under section 4(b)(2) of the Act should or should not be excluded, and why.

e final designation;

• The benefits of and supporting rationale for excluding specific areas from the final designation; and

• Whether any specific exclusions may result in the extinction of the species, and why.

(9) Whether the private and State lands being considered for exclusion from critical habitat designation under section 4(b)(2) of the Act should or should not be excluded, and why.

(10) Information on the projected and reasonably likely impact of climate change on the species included in this proposed rule, and any special management needs or protections that may be needed in the critical habitat areas we are proposing.

(11) Whether we could improve or modify our approach to designating critical habitat in any way to provide for greater public participation and understanding, or to better accommodate public concerns and comments.

(12) Specific information on ways to improve the clarity of this rule as it pertains to completion of consultations under section 7 of the Act.

(13) Comments on our proposal to revise the taxonomic classification for Caesalpinia kavaiense to Mezoneuron kavaiense.

You may submit your comments and materials concerning this proposed rule by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. We request that you send comments only by the methods described in the ADDRESSES section.

We will post your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—on http://www.regulations.gov. If you provide personal identifying information in your comment, such as your street address, phone number, or email address, you may request at the top of your document that we withhold this information from public review. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. Please include sufficient information with your comments to allow us to verify any scientific or commercial information you include

personal identifying information in your comment, such as your street address, phone number, or email address, you may request at the top of your document that we withhold this information from public review. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. Please include sufficient information with your comments to allow us to verify any scientific or commercial information you include.

Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting documentation we used in preparing this proposed rule, will be available for public inspection at http://www.regulations.gov, or by appointment, during normal business hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT ). You may obtain copies of the proposed rule by mail from the Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office (See FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT ) or by visiting the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov.

Background

Hawaii Island Species Addressed in This Proposed Rule

Table 1 below provides the scientific name, common name, listing status, and critical habitat status for the species that are the subjects of this proposed rule.

Table 1—The Hawaiian island species addressed in this proposed rule (note that many of the species share a common name. “e” denotes endangered status under the act; “c” denotes a species currently on the candidate list.) Scientific name Common name(s) Listing status Critical habitat status Plants Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana kookoolau Proposed—Endangered Not determinable. Bidens micrantha ssp. ctenophylla kookoolau Proposed—Endangered (C) Proposed. Caesalpinia kavaiense (taxonomic revision proposed, to Mezoneuron kavaiense ) uhiuhi Listed 1986—E Proposed. Cyanea marksii haha Proposed—Endangered Not determinable. Cyanea tritomantha aku Proposed—Endangered (C) Not determinable. Cyrtandra nanawaleensis haiwale Proposed—Endangered Not determinable. Cyrtandra wagneri haiwale Proposed—Endangered Not determinable

u Proposed—Endangered (C) Proposed. Caesalpinia kavaiense (taxonomic revision proposed, to Mezoneuron kavaiense ) uhiuhi Listed 1986—E Proposed. Cyanea marksii haha Proposed—Endangered Not determinable. Cyanea tritomantha aku Proposed—Endangered (C) Not determinable. Cyrtandra nanawaleensis haiwale Proposed—Endangered Not determinable. Cyrtandra wagneri haiwale Proposed—Endangered Not determinable. Isodendrion pyrifolium wahine noho kula Listed 1994—E Proposed. Phyllostegia floribunda no common name (NCN) Proposed—Endangered (C) Not determinable. Pittosporum hawaiiense hoawa, haawa Proposed—Endangered Not determinable. Platydesma remyi NCN Proposed—Endangered (C) Not determinable. Pritchardia lanigera loulu Proposed—Endangered Not determinable. Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei NCN Proposed—Endangered Not determinable. Schiedea hawaiiensis NCN Proposed—Endangered Not determinable. Stenogyne cranwelliae NCN Proposed—Endangered (C) Not determinable. Animals Drosophila digressa picture-wing fly Proposed—Endangered (C) Not determinable. Vetericaris chaceorum anchialine pool shrimp Proposed—Endangered (C) Not determinable [NCN] = no common name. Previous Federal Actions

Seven of the 15 species proposed for listing are candidate species (76 FR 66370; October 26, 2011). Candidate species are those taxa for which the Service has sufficient information on their biological status and threats to propose them for listing as endangered or threatened species under the Act, but for which the development of a listing regulation has been precluded to date by other higher priority listing activities. The current candidate species addressed in this proposed listing rule include the five plants Bidens micrantha ssp. ctenophylla, Cyanea tritomantha, Phyllostegia floribunda, Platydesma remyi, and Stenogyne cranwelliae; and the anchialine pool shrimp Vetericaris chaceorum, and the picture-wing fly Drosophila digressa

regulation has been precluded to date by other higher priority listing activities. The current candidate species addressed in this proposed listing rule include the five plants Bidens micrantha ssp. ctenophylla, Cyanea tritomantha, Phyllostegia floribunda, Platydesma remyi, and Stenogyne cranwelliae; and the anchialine pool shrimp Vetericaris chaceorum, and the picture-wing fly Drosophila digressa. The candidate status of all of these species was most recently assessed and reaffirmed in the October 26, 2011, Review of Native Species that are Candidates for Listing as Endangered or Threatened (CNOR) (76 FR 66370).

On May 4, 2004, the Center for Biological Diversity petitioned the Secretary of the Interior to list 225 species of plants and animals, including the 7 candidate species listed above, as endangered or threatened under the provisions of the Act. Since then, we have published our annual findings on the May 4, 2004, petition (including our findings on the 7 candidate species listed above) in the CNORs dated May 11, 2005 (70 FR 24870), September 12, 2006 (71 FR 53756), December 6, 2007 (72 FR 69034), and December 10, 2008 (73 FR 75176), November 9, 2009 (74 FR 57804), November 10, 2010 (75 FR 69222), and October 26, 2011 (76 FR 66370). This proposed rule constitutes a further response to the 2004 petition.

In addition to the seven candidate species, we are proposing to list four plant species, Cyanea marksii, Cyrtandra wagneri, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and Schiedea hawaiiensis, that have been identified as the “rarest of the rare” Hawaiian plant species in need of immediate conservation under the multi-agency (Federal, State, and private) Plant Extinction Prevention Program (PEPP). The goal of PEPP is to prevent the extinction of plant species that have fewer than 50 individuals remaining in the wild on the islands of Kauai, Oahu, Molokai, Lanai, Maui, and Hawaii (PEPP 2012, in litt.)

identified as the “rarest of the rare” Hawaiian plant species in need of immediate conservation under the multi-agency (Federal, State, and private) Plant Extinction Prevention Program (PEPP). The goal of PEPP is to prevent the extinction of plant species that have fewer than 50 individuals remaining in the wild on the islands of Kauai, Oahu, Molokai, Lanai, Maui, and Hawaii (PEPP 2012, in litt.). We have determined that these four plant species warrant listing under the Act for the reasons discussed in the Summary of Factors Affecting the 15 Species Proposed for Listing section (below). Because these 4 plant species occur within 4 of the ecosystems identified in this proposed rule, and share common threats with the other 11 species proposed for listing under the Act, we have included them in this proposed rule to provide them with protection under the Act in an expeditious manner.

We are also proposing to list four other plant species ( Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana, Cyrtandra nanawaleensis, Pittosporum hawaiiense, and Pritchardia lanigera ) that occur on Hawaii Island. We have

We are proposing critical habitat for two endangered plant species, Mezoneuron kavaiense (currently listed as Mezoneuron kavaiense but listed in error as Caesalpinia kavaiense in 50 CFR 17.12, see taxonomic change discussion below) (51 FR 24672; July 8, 1986) and Isodendrion pyrifolium (59 FR 10305, March 4, 1994; 68 FR 39624, July 2, 2003) for which critical habitat has not been previously designated on the island of Hawaii. We are also proposing critical habitat for Bidens microthia ssp. ctenophylla, a candidate species proposed for listing in this rule (76 FR 66370; October 26, 2011).

Proposed Taxonomic Change Since Listing for One Plant Species

ies proposed for listing in this rule (76 FR 66370; October 26, 2011).

Proposed Taxonomic Change Since Listing for One Plant Species

We listed Mezoneuron kavaiense as an endangered species in 1986 (51 FR 24672; July 8, 1986), based on the taxonomic treatment of Hillebrand (1888, pp. 110-111). Following the reduction of Mezoneuron to Caesalpinia by Hattink (1974, p. 5), Geesink et al. (1990, pp. 646-647) changed the name to Caesalpinia kavaiensis. In 1989, the List of Endangered and Threatened Plants was revised to identify the listed entity as Caesalpinia kavaiense. Recent phylogenetic studies support separation of Mezoneuron from Caesalpinia (Bruneau et al. 2008, p. 710). The recognized scientific name for this species is Mezoneuron kavaiense (Wagner et al. 2012, p. 37). The range of the species between the time of listing and now has not changed. Therefore, we propose to recognize the listed species as Mezoneuron kavaiense.

Critical Habitat Unit Map Corrections

Critical habitat was designated for Cyanea shipmanii, Phyllostegia racemosa, Phyllostegia velutina, and Plantago hawaiensis in 2003 (68 FR 39624; July 2, 2003). In this proposed rule, we are correcting critical habitat unit maps published in 50 CFR 17.99(k)(1) for these four species to accurately reflect their designated critical habitat units. We are amending 50 CFR 17.99(k)(1) by removing four maps (Map 97, Unit 30— Cyanea stictophylla —d; Map 100, Unit 30— Phyllostegia hawaiiensis —c; Map 101, Unit 30— Phyllostegia racemosa —c; and Map 102, Unit 30— Phyllostegia velutina —b) that are either a duplicate of another unit map or labeled with the incorrect species name. We are replacing these four maps, using the same map numbers, with correctly labeled maps that accurately represent the geographic location of each species' critical habitat unit

Unit 30— Phyllostegia hawaiiensis —c; Map 101, Unit 30— Phyllostegia racemosa —c; and Map 102, Unit 30— Phyllostegia velutina —b) that are either a duplicate of another unit map or labeled with the incorrect species name. We are replacing these four maps, using the same map numbers, with correctly labeled maps that accurately represent the geographic location of each species' critical habitat unit.

An Ecosystem-Based Approach to Listing 15 Species on Hawaii Island

On the island of Hawaii, as on most of the Hawaiian Islands, native species that occur in the same habitat types (ecosystems) depend on many of the same biological features and the successful functioning of that ecosystem to survive. We have therefore organized the species addressed in this proposed rule by common ecosystem. Although the listing determination for each species is analyzed separately, we have organized the individual analysis for each species within the context of the broader ecosystem in which it occurs to avoid redundancy. In addition, native species that share ecosystems often face a suite of common factors that may be a threat to them, and ameliorating or eliminating these threats for each individual species often requires the exact same management actions in the exact same areas. Effective management of these threats often requires implementation of conservation actions at the ecosystem scale to enhance or restore critical ecological processes and provide for long-term viability of those species in their native environment. Thus, by taking this approach, we hope not only to organize this proposed rule efficiently, but also to more effectively focus conservation management efforts on the common threats that occur across these ecosystems. Those efforts would facilitate restoration of ecosystem functionality for the recovery of each species, and provide conservation benefits for associated native species, thereby potentially precluding the need to list other species under the Act that occur in these shared ecosystems

o to more effectively focus conservation management efforts on the common threats that occur across these ecosystems. Those efforts would facilitate restoration of ecosystem functionality for the recovery of each species, and provide conservation benefits for associated native species, thereby potentially precluding the need to list other species under the Act that occur in these shared ecosystems. In addition, this approach is in accord with the primary stated purpose of the Act (see section 2(b)): “to provide a means whereby the ecosystems upon which endangered species and threatened species depend may be conserved.”

We propose to list the plants Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana, B. micrantha ssp. ctenophylla, Cyanea marksii, Cyanea tritomantha, Cyrtandra nanawaleensis, Cyrtandra wagneri, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Platydesma remyi, Pritchardia lanigera, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Schidea hawaiiensis, and Stenogyne cranwelliae; and the animals Drosophila digressa and Vetericaris chaceorum, from Hawaii Island as endangered species. These 15 species (13 plants, 1 anchialine pool shrimp, and 1 picture-wing fly) are found in 10 ecosystem types: anchialine pool, coastal, lowland dry, lowland mesic, lowland wet, montane dry, montane mesic, montane wet, dry cliff, and wet cliff (Table 2).

Table 2—Species Proposed for Listing on Hawaii Island and the Ecosystems Upon Which They Depend Ecosystem Species Plants Animals Anchialine Pool Vetericaris chaceorum. Coastal Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana Lowland Dry Bidens micrantha ssp. ctenophylla Lowland Mesic Pittosporum hawaiiense Drosophila digressa. Pritchardia lanigera Lowland Wet Cyanea marksii Cyanea tritomantha Cyrtandra nanawaleensis Cyrtandra wagneri Phyllostegia floribunda Platydesma remyi Pritchardia lanigera Montane Dry Schiedea hawaiiensis Montane Mesic Phyllostegia floribunda Drosophila digressa. Pittosporum hawaiiense Montane Wet Cyanea marksii Drosophila digressa

enophylla Lowland Mesic Pittosporum hawaiiense Drosophila digressa. Pritchardia lanigera Lowland Wet Cyanea marksii Cyanea tritomantha Cyrtandra nanawaleensis Cyrtandra wagneri Phyllostegia floribunda Platydesma remyi Pritchardia lanigera Montane Dry Schiedea hawaiiensis Montane Mesic Phyllostegia floribunda Drosophila digressa. Pittosporum hawaiiense Montane Wet Cyanea marksii Drosophila digressa. Cyanea tritomantha Phyllostegia floribunda Pittosporum hawaiiense Platydesma remyi Pritchardia lanigera Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei Stenogyne cranwelliae Dry Cliff Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana Wet Cliff Cyanea tritomantha Pritchardia lanigera Stenogyne cranwelliae For each species, we identified and evaluated those factors that threaten the species and that may be common to all of the species at the ecosystem level. For example, the degradation of habitat by nonnative ungulates is considered a threat to 14 of the 15 species proposed for listing, and is likely a threat to many, if not most or all, of the native species within a given ecosystem. We consider such a threat factor to be an “ecosystem-level threat,” as each individual species within that ecosystem faces a threat that is essentially identical in terms of the nature of the impact, its severity, its timing, and its scope. Beyond ecosystem-level threats, we further identified and evaluated threat factors that may be unique to certain species, but do not apply to all species under consideration within the same ecosystem. For example, the threat of predation by nonnative wasps is unique to the picture-wing fly in this proposed rule, and is not applicable to any of the other species proposed for listing

and its scope. Beyond ecosystem-level threats, we further identified and evaluated threat factors that may be unique to certain species, but do not apply to all species under consideration within the same ecosystem. For example, the threat of predation by nonnative wasps is unique to the picture-wing fly in this proposed rule, and is not applicable to any of the other species proposed for listing. We have identified such threat factors, which apply only to certain species within the ecosystems addressed here, as “species-specific threats.”

An Ecosystem-Based Approach to Determining Primary Constituent Elements of Critical Habitat

Under section 4(a)(3)(A) of the Act, we are required to designate critical habitat to the maximum extent prudent and determinable concurrently with the publication of a final determination that a species is an endangered or threatened species. We are proposing to designate critical habitat concurrently with listing for the plant Bidens micrantha ssp. ctenophylla, and for two previously listed plant species: Isodendrion pyrifolium, which was listed as an endangered species on March 4, 1994 (59 FR 10305), and Mezoneuron kavaiense, which was listed as an endangered species on July 8, 1986 (51 FR 24672). These two species are included in this proposed rule because they share proposed occupied and unoccupied critical habitat with Bidens micrantha ssp. ctenophylla.

ntha ssp. ctenophylla.

In this proposed rule, we propose to designate critical habitat for three species in seven multiple-species critical habitat units. 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 physical or biological features of the commonly shared ecosystem. Each critical habitat unit identified in this proposed rule contains the physical or biological features essential to the conservation of those individual species that occupy that particular unit at the time of listing, or contains areas essential for the conservation of those species identified that do not presently occupy that particular unit. Where the unit is not occupied by a particular species, we believe it is still essential for the conservation of that species because the designation allows for the expansion of its range and reintroduction of individuals into areas where it occurred historically, and provides area for recovery in the case of stochastic events that otherwise hold the potential to eliminate the species from the one or more locations where it is presently found. Under current conditions, many of these species are so rare in the wild that they are at high risk of extirpation or even extinction from various stochastic events, such as hurricanes or landslides. Therefore, building up resilience and redundancy in these species through the establishment of multiple robust populations is a key component of recovery.

Each of the areas proposed for designation represents critical habitat for multiple species, based upon their shared habitat requirements ( i.e., physical or biological features) essential for their conservation. The identification of critical habitat also takes into account any species-specific conservation needs as appropriate.

The proposed species Bidens micrantha ssp

component of recovery.

The proposed species Bidens micrantha ssp. ctenophylla, and the listed species Isodendrion pyrifolium and Mezoneuron kavaiense co-occur in the same lowland dry ecosystem on the island of Hawaii. These three species ( Bidens micrantha ssp. ctenophylla, Isodendrion pyrifolium, and Mezoneuron kavaiense ) share many of the same physical or biological features ( e.g., elevation, annual rainfall, substrate, associated native plant genera), as well as the same threats from development, fire, and nonnative ungulates and plants. However, for the remaining 14 species proposed for listing in this rule, we do not have the analysis necessary to refine the identification of the physical and biological features and delineate the specific areas that contain those features in the appropriate arrangement and quantity or the specific unoccupied areas essential to the species' conservation. As a result, we find that, for the remaining 14 species that we are proposing to list in this rule, the designation of critical habitat is not determinable at this time.

The Island of Hawaii

The island of Hawaii, located southeast of the islands of Maui and Kahoolawe, is the largest, highest, and youngest island of the Hawaiian archipelago (Figure 1). At 4,038 square et al. 1990, pp. 345-379; 59 FR 10305, March 4, 1994; USGS 2012, pp. 1-2). Hawaii Island, with its greater mass and higher elevations, has more distinctive climatic zones and ecosystems than can be found elsewhere in the State (Juvik and Juvik 1998, p. 22). The highest and lowest recorded temperatures in the State occur on Hawaii Island (USFWS 1996, p. 6; Wagner et al. 1999a, p. 38)

t 4,038 square et al. 1990, pp. 345-379; 59 FR 10305, March 4, 1994; USGS 2012, pp. 1-2). Hawaii Island, with its greater mass and higher elevations, has more distinctive climatic zones and ecosystems than can be found elsewhere in the State (Juvik and Juvik 1998, p. 22). The highest and lowest recorded temperatures in the State occur on Hawaii Island (USFWS 1996, p. 6; Wagner et al. 1999a, p. 38).

EP17OC12.000

The island of Hawaii lies within the trade wind belt. Moisture derived from the Pacific Ocean is carried to the island by north-easterly trade winds. Heavy rains fall when the moisture in clouds makes contact with windward (the direction upwind from the point of reference, usually the more wet side of an island) mountain slopes (Wagner et al. 1999a, pp. 38-42). Considerable moisture reaches the leeward (the course in which the wind is blowing, typically the dryer side of an island) slopes of the saddle area between Mauna Loa and Mauna Kea, but dries out rapidly as elevation increases. This orographic (associated with or induced by the presence of mountains) effect reaches an elevation of about 2,000 to 3,000 m (6,500 to 9,850 ft) and tends to go around rather than over the high mountains. Thus, in the leeward saddle area, and high-elevation areas of Mauna Kea and Mauna Loa, dry or arid conditions predominate (USFWS 1996, p. 6; Mitchell et al. 2005a, pp. 6-71).

A rain shadow effect, created by Mauna Kea and Mauna Loa, on the leeward side of the island prevents the Kona (west side of the island) coast from receiving precipitation from the predominantly northeasterly trade winds (Wagner et al. 1999a, pp. 36-44). However, convection-driven onshore breezes create upslope showers most afternoons, resulting in greater than expected annual rainfall (50 to more than 100 inches (in) (1,270 to more than 2,540 millimeters (m)), which supports et al. 2005a, pp. 6-71-6-91)

a (west side of the island) coast from receiving precipitation from the predominantly northeasterly trade winds (Wagner et al. 1999a, pp. 36-44). However, convection-driven onshore breezes create upslope showers most afternoons, resulting in greater than expected annual rainfall (50 to more than 100 inches (in) (1,270 to more than 2,540 millimeters (m)), which supports et al. 2005a, pp. 6-71-6-91). Another major source of rainfall is provided by winter (Kona) storms, which develop south of the island, and impact the island when trade winds subside during the winter months. Kawaihae, in south Kohala (on the northwest side of the island), is effectively cut off from the northeasterly tradewinds by the Kohala Mountains, and from southerly and southwesterly winds of winter storms by Mauna Loa and Hualalai. It is the driest place in the main (Hawaii, Kauai, Kahoolawe, Lanai, Molokai, Maui, Niihau, and Oahu) Hawaiian Islands, receiving only about 8 in (200 mm) of rain per year (Wagner et al. 1999a, p. 39).

Due to its relatively young age (less than 1 million years old), the island of Hawaii is represented by fewer soil types than the older main Hawaiian Islands. Sizable areas of lava, cinder, and rubble occur in the saddle between Mauna Kea and Mauna Loa, and on recent lava flows originating from Hualalai, Mauna Loa, and Kilauea (Juvik and Juvik 1998, pp. 44-46; Mitchell et al. 2005a, pp. 6-71-6-72). Other soil types include: histosols, which are characterized by a thin, well-drained, organic layer and occur on younger lava flows common in the Hilo and Kau areas; andisols, which occur on substrates older than 3,000 years, are characterized by the ability to take up large amounts of phosphorous and are common on the east flank of Mauna Kea and above Hilo; aridosols, which are characterized by horizons with accumulations of carbonates, gypsum, or sodium chloride, and are found in the dry soils of deserts or the dry leeward sides of the island; and mollisols, which are characterized by a distinct dark-colored surface ho

e characterized by the ability to take up large amounts of phosphorous and are common on the east flank of Mauna Kea and above Hilo; aridosols, which are characterized by horizons with accumulations of carbonates, gypsum, or sodium chloride, and are found in the dry soils of deserts or the dry leeward sides of the island; and mollisols, which are characterized by a distinct dark-colored surface horizon enriched with organic matter, and are found under the grasslands on the dry leeward areas of the island (Gavenda et al. 1998, p. 94).

The vegetation on the island of Hawaii continues to experience extreme alterations due to ongoing volcanic activity, past and present land use, and other activities. Land with rich soils was altered by the early Hawaiians and, more recently, converted to agricultural use in the production of sugar, diversified agriculture, and pasture for cattle ( Bos taurus ) ranching. For example, large areas on the eastern slopes of the Kohala Mountains, Mauna Kea, and Mauna Loa were maintained in sugarcane production until the late 1960s (Juvik and Juvik 1998, p. 22). Intentional and inadvertent introduction of alien plant and animal species has also contributed to the reduction in range of native vegetation on the island of Hawaii (throughout this rule, the terms “alien,” “feral,” “nonnative,” and “introduced” all refer to species that are not naturally native to the Hawaiian Islands). Currently, most of the native vegetation on the island persists on upper elevation slopes, valleys, and ridges; steep slopes; precipitous cliffs; valley headwalls; and other regions where unsuitable topography has prevented urbanization and agricultural development, or where inaccessibility has limited encroachment by nonnative plant and animal species.

Hawaii Island Ecosystems

hy has prevented urbanization and agricultural development, or where inaccessibility has limited encroachment by nonnative plant and animal species.

Hawaii Island Ecosystems

There are 12 different ecosystems (anchialine pool, coastal, lowland dry, lowland mesic, lowland wet, montane dry, montane mesic, montane wet, subalpine, alpine, dry cliff, and wet cliff) recognized on the island of Hawaii. The 15 species proposed for listing occur in 10 of these 12 ecosystems (none of the 15 species are reported in subalpine and alpine ecosystems). The lowland dry ecosystem supports the three species for which critical habitat is proposed. The 10 Hawaii Island ecosystems that support the 15 proposed species are described in the following section; see Table 2 (above) for a list of the species that occur in each ecosystem type.

Anchialine Pools

The anchialine pool ecosystem has been reported from Oahu, Molokai, Maui, Kahoolawe, and Hawaii Island. Anchialine pools are land-locked bodies of water that have indirect underground connections to the sea, contain varying levels of salinity, and show tidal fluctuations in water level. Because all anchialine pools occur within coastal areas, they are technically a part of the coastal ecosystem (see below) with many of the same applicable and overlapping habitat threats. However, in this proposal, we are addressing this unique ecosystem distinctly. Over 80 percent of the State's anchialine pools are found on the island of Hawaii, with a total of approximately 600 to 650 pools distributed over 130 sites along all but the island's northernmost and steeper northeastern shorelines. Characteristic animal species include crustaceans ( e.g., shrimps, prawns, amphipods, isopods, etc.), several fish species, molluscs, and other invertebrates adapted to the pools' surface and subterranean habitats (The Nature Conservancy (TNC) 2009, pp. 1-3). Generally, vegetation within the pools consists of various types of algal forms (blue-green, green, red, and golden-brown)

stern shorelines. Characteristic animal species include crustaceans ( e.g., shrimps, prawns, amphipods, isopods, etc.), several fish species, molluscs, and other invertebrates adapted to the pools' surface and subterranean habitats (The Nature Conservancy (TNC) 2009, pp. 1-3). Generally, vegetation within the pools consists of various types of algal forms (blue-green, green, red, and golden-brown). The majority of Hawaii's anchialine pools occur in bare or sparsely vegetated lava fields, although some pools occur in areas with various groundcover, shrub, and tree species (Chai 1989, pp. 2-24; Brock 2004, p. 35). The anchialine pool shrimp, Vetericaris chaceorum, which is proposed for listing as an endangered species in this rule, occurs in this ecosystem (Kensley and Williams 1986, pp. 417-437).

Coastal

The coastal ecosystem is found on all of the main Hawaiian Islands, with the highest native species diversity occurring in the least populated coastal areas of Kauai, Oahu, Molokai, Maui, Kahoolawe, Hawaii Island, and their associated islets. On Hawaii Island, the coastal ecosystem includes mixed herblands, shrublands, and grasslands, from sea level to 1,000 ft (300 m) in elevation, generally within a narrow zone above the influence of waves to within 330 ft (100 m) inland, sometimes extending farther inland if strong prevailing onshore winds drive sea spray and sand dunes into the lowland zone (TNC 2006a, pp. 1-3). The coastal ecosystem is typically dry, with annual rainfall of less than 20 in (50 cm); however, windward rainfall may be high enough (up to 40 in (100 centimeters (cm)) to support mesic-associated and sometimes wet-associated vegetation (Gagne and Cuddihy 1999, pp. 54-66). Biological diversity is low to moderate in this ecosystem, but may include some specialized plants and animals such as nesting seabirds and the endangered plant Sesbania tomentosa (ohai) (TNC 2006a, pp. 1-3). The plant Bidens hillebrandiana ssp

be high enough (up to 40 in (100 centimeters (cm)) to support mesic-associated and sometimes wet-associated vegetation (Gagne and Cuddihy 1999, pp. 54-66). Biological diversity is low to moderate in this ecosystem, but may include some specialized plants and animals such as nesting seabirds and the endangered plant Sesbania tomentosa (ohai) (TNC 2006a, pp. 1-3). The plant Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana, which is proposed for listing as an endangered species in this rule, occurs in this ecosystem on Hawaii Island (Hawaii Biodiversity and Mapping Program Database (TNC 2007- Ecosystem Database of ArcMap Shapefiles, unpublished; HBMP 2010a)).

Lowland Dry

The lowland dry ecosystem includes shrublands and forests generally below 3,300 ft (1,000 m) elevation that receive less than 50 in (130 cm) annual rainfall, or are in otherwise prevailingly dry substrate conditions that range from weathered reddish silty loams to stony clay soils, rocky ledges with very shallow soil, or relatively recent little-weathered lava (Gagne and Cuddihy 1999, p. 67). Areas consisting of predominantly native species in the lowland dry ecosystem are now rare; however, this ecosystem is found on the islands of Kauai, Oahu, Molokai, Lanai, Maui, Kahoolawe and Hawaii, and is et al. 2009, p. 3,167). The lowland dry ecosystem includes specialized animals and plants such as the Hawaiian owl or pueo ( Asio flammeus sandwichensis ) and Santalum ellipticum (iliahialoe or coast sandalwood) (Gagne and Cuddihy 1999, pp. 45-114; TNC 2006b, pp. 1-2). The plant Bidens micrantha ssp. ctenophylla, which is proposed for listing as an endangered species in this rule, occurs in this ecosystem on Hawaii Island (TNC 2007- Ecosystem Database of ArcMap Shapefiles, unpublished; HBMP 2010b).

Lowland Mesic

ng as an endangered species in this rule, occurs in this ecosystem on Hawaii Island (TNC 2007- Ecosystem Database of ArcMap Shapefiles, unpublished; HBMP 2010b).

Lowland Mesic

The lowland mesic ecosystem includes a variety of grasslands, shrublands, and forests, generally below 3,300 ft (1,000 m) elevation, that receive between 50 and 75 in (130 and 190 cm) annual rainfall (TNC 2006c, pp. 1-2). In the Hawaiian Islands, this ecosystem is found on Oahu, Kauai, Molokai, Lanai, Maui, and Hawaii, on both windward and leeward sides of the islands. On Hawaii Island, this ecosystem is often reduced to remnant occurrences, but can be found in north Kohala, on the southwest and southeast flanks of Mauna Loa and Kilauea (Gagne and Cuddihy 1999, p. 75; TNC 2006c, pp. 1-2). Native biological diversity is high in this system (TNC 2006c, pp. 1-2). The plants, Pittosporum hawaiiense and Pritchardia lanigera, and the picture-wing fly Drosophila digressa, which are proposed for listing as endangered species in this rule, occur in this ecosystem on Hawaii Island (TNC 2007- Ecosystem Database of ArcMap Shapefiles, unpublished; Benitez et al. 2008, p. 58; HBMP 2010c; HBMP 2010d).

Lowland Wet

The lowland wet ecosystem is generally found below 3,300 ft (1,000 m) elevation on the windward sides of the main Hawaiian Islands, except Niihau and Kahoolawe (Gagne and Cuddihy 1999, p. 85; TNC 2006d, pp. 1-2). These areas include a variety of wet grasslands, shrublands, and forests that receive greater than 75 in (190 cm) annual precipitation, or are in otherwise wet substrate conditions (TNC 2006d, pp. 1-2). On the island of Hawaii, this system is best developed in north Kohala, on the lower windward flanks of Mauna Kea and Mauna Loa, as well as leeward areas benefiting from convection-driven upslope showers on leeward Mauna Loa and Hualalai (TNC 2006d, pp. 1-2). Native biological diversity is high in this system (TNC 2006d, pp. 1-2)

, or are in otherwise wet substrate conditions (TNC 2006d, pp. 1-2). On the island of Hawaii, this system is best developed in north Kohala, on the lower windward flanks of Mauna Kea and Mauna Loa, as well as leeward areas benefiting from convection-driven upslope showers on leeward Mauna Loa and Hualalai (TNC 2006d, pp. 1-2). Native biological diversity is high in this system (TNC 2006d, pp. 1-2). The plants Cyanea marksii, Cyanea tritomantha, Cyrtandra nanawaleensis, Cyrtandra wagneri, Phyllostegia floribunda, Platydesma remyi, and Pritchardia lanigera, which are proposed for listing as endangered species in this rule, occur in this ecosystem on Hawaii Island (Lorence and Perlman 2007, pp. 357-361; TNC 2007- Ecosystem Database of ArcMap Shapefiles, unpublished; HBMP 2010c; HBMP 2010e; HBMP 2010f; HBMP 2010g; HBMP 2010h; HBMP 2010i).

Montane Dry

The montane dry ecosystem includes grasslands, shrublands, and forests at elevations between 3,300 and 6,600 ft (1,000 and 2,000 m), that receive less than 50 in (130 cm) of annual precipitation, or are in otherwise dry substrate conditions (TNC 2006e, pp. 1-2). In the Hawaiian Islands, this ecosystem is found on the islands of Maui and Hawaii (Gagne and Cuddihy 1999, pp. 93-97). On Hawaii Island, this ecosystem is best represented on the upper slopes of Hualalai and the Mauna Kea-Mauna Loa saddle area, and includes specialized animals and plants such as the elepaio ( Chasiempis sandwichensis ) and Isodendrion hosakae (aupaka) (Gagne and Cuddihy 1999, pp. 45-114; TNC 2006e, pp. 1-2). The plant Schiedea hawaiiensis, proposed for listing as an endangered species in this rule, is found in this ecosystem on Hawaii Island (U.S. Army Garrison 2006, pp. 1-55).

Montane Mesic

le, is found in this ecosystem on Hawaii Island (U.S. Army Garrison 2006, pp. 1-55).

Montane Mesic

The montane mesic ecosystem is composed of natural communities (forests and shrublands) found at elevations between 3,300 and 6,600 ft (1,000 and 2,000 m), in areas where annual precipitation is between 50 and 75 in (130 and 190 cm), or areas in otherwise mesic substrate conditions (TNC 2006f, pp. 1-2). This system is found on Kauai, Molokai, Maui, and Hawaii Island (Gagne and Cuddihy 1999, pp. 97-99; TNC 2007- Ecosystem Database of ArcMap Shapefiles, unpublished). Native biological diversity is moderate (Gagne and Cuddihy 1999, pp. 98-99; TNC 2006f, pp. 1-2). On Hawaii Island, specialized plants and animals such as io or Hawaiian hawk ( Buteo solitarius ) and Pittosporum hosmeri (hoawa) occur in the montane mesic ecosystem. The plants Phyllostegia floribunda and Pittosporum hawaiiense, and the picture-wing fly Drosophila digressa, which are proposed for listing as endangered species in this rule, are found in this ecosystem on Hawaii Island (TNC 2007- Ecosystem Database of ArcMap Shapefiles, unpublished; Benitez et al. 2008, p. 58; HBMP 2010d; HBMP 2010h).

Montane Wet

The montane wet ecosystem is composed of natural communities (grasslands, shrublands, forests, and bogs) found at elevations between 3,300 and 6,600 ft (1,000 and 2,000 m), in areas where annual precipitation is greater than 75 in (191 cm) (TNC 2006g, pp. 1-2). This system is found on all of the main Hawaiian Islands except Niihau and Kahoolawe, and only the islands of Molokai, Maui, and Hawaii have areas above 4,020 ft (1,225 m) (TNC 2006g, pp. 1-2). On Hawaii Island, the montane wet ecosystem occurs in the Kohala Mountains, in the east flank of Mauna Kea, in the Kau Forest Reserve (FR) on windward Mauna Loa, and on the upper slopes of leeward Mauna Loa (TNC 2007- Ecosystem Database of ArcMap Shapefiles, unpublished). Native biological diversity is moderate to high (TNC 2006g, pp. 1-2). The plants Cyanea marksii, C

225 m) (TNC 2006g, pp. 1-2). On Hawaii Island, the montane wet ecosystem occurs in the Kohala Mountains, in the east flank of Mauna Kea, in the Kau Forest Reserve (FR) on windward Mauna Loa, and on the upper slopes of leeward Mauna Loa (TNC 2007- Ecosystem Database of ArcMap Shapefiles, unpublished). Native biological diversity is moderate to high (TNC 2006g, pp. 1-2). The plants Cyanea marksii, C. tritomantha, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Platydesma remyi, Pritchardia lanigera, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and Stenogyne cranwelliae, and the picture-wing fly Drosophila digressa, which are proposed for listing as endangered species in this rule, occur in this ecosystem on Hawaii Island (TNC 2007- Ecosystem Database of ArcMap Shapefiles, unpublished; Benitez et al. 2008, p. 58; HBMP 2010c; HBMP 2010d; HBMP 2010e; HBMP 2010f; HBMP 2010h; HBMP 2010i; HBMP 2010j; HBMP 2010k).

Dry Cliff

The dry cliff ecosystem is composed of vegetation communities occupying steep slopes (greater than 65 degrees) in areas that receive less than 75 in (190 cm) of rainfall annually, or that are in otherwise dry substrate conditions (TNC 2006h, pp. 1-2). This ecosystem is found on all of the main Hawaiian Islands except Niihau, and is best represented along portions of the eroded cliffs of east Kohala on Hawaii Island (TNC 2006h, pp. 1-2). A variety of Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana, which is proposed for listing as an endangered species in this rule, occurs in this ecosystem on Hawaii Island (TNC 2007- Ecosystem Database of ArcMap Shapefiles, unpublished; HBMP 2010a).

Wet Cliff

of ArcMap Shapefiles, unpublished; HBMP 2010a).

Wet Cliff

The wet cliff ecosystem is generally composed of shrublands on near-vertical slopes (greater than 65 degrees) in areas that receive more than 75 in (190 cm) of annual precipitation, or that are in otherwise wet substrate conditions (TNC 2006i, pp. 1-2). This system is found on the islands of Kauai, Oahu, Molokai, Lanai, Maui, and Hawaii. On the island of Hawaii, this system is found in windward Kohala valleys and on the southeastern slope of Mauna Loa (TNC 2006i, pp. 1-2). Native biological diversity is low to moderate (TNC 2006i, pp. 1-2). The plants Cyanea tritomantha, Pritchardia lanigera, and Stenogyne cranwelliae, which are proposed for listing as endangered species in this rule, are found in this ecosystem on Hawaii Island (TNC 2007- Ecosystem Database of ArcMap Shapefiles, unpublished; HBMP 2010d; HBMP 2010f; HBMP 2010k).

Description of the 15 Species Proposed for Listing

Below is a brief description of each of the 15 species proposed for listing, presented in alphabetical order by genus. Plants are presented first, followed by animals.

Plants

In order to avoid confusion regarding the number of locations of each species (a location does not necessarily represent a viable population), we use the word “occurrence” instead of “population.” Each occurrence is composed only of wild ( i.e., not propagated and outplanted) individuals.

Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana (kookoolau), a perennial herb in the sunflower family (Asteraceae), occurs only on the island of Hawaii (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.). Currently, there are two known occurrences of B. hillebrandiana ssp

ccurs only on the island of Hawaii (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.). Currently, there are two known occurrences of B. hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana totaling 40 or fewer individuals along the windward Kohala coast, in the coastal and dry cliff ecosystems. There are 30 individuals on the Pololu seacliffs, and 5 to 10 individuals on the seacliffs between Pololu and Honokane Nui (Perlman 1998, in litt.; Perlman 2006, in litt.). Biologists speculate that this species may total as many as 100 individuals with further surveys of potential habitat along the Kohala coast (Mitchell et al. 2005b; PEPP 2006, p. 3).

Bidens micrantha ssp. ctenophylla (kookoolau), a perennial herb in the sunflower family (Asteraceae), occurs only on the island of Hawaii (Ganders and Nagata 1999, pp. 271, 273). Historically, B. micrantha ssp. ctenophylla was known from the north Kona district, in the lowland dry ecosystem (HBMP 2010b). Currently, this subspecies is restricted to an area of less than 10 sq mi (26 sq km) on the leeward slopes of Hualalai volcano, in the lowland dry ecosystem in 6 occurrences totaling fewer than 1,000 individuals. The largest occurrence is found off Hina Lani Road with over 475 individuals widely dispersed throughout the area (Zimpfer 2011, in litt.). The occurrence at Kealakehe was reported to have been abundant and common in 1992, but by 2010 had declined to low numbers (Whister 2007, pp. 1-18; Bio 2008, in litt.; HBMP 2010b; Whister 2008, pp. 1-11)

in 6 occurrences totaling fewer than 1,000 individuals. The largest occurrence is found off Hina Lani Road with over 475 individuals widely dispersed throughout the area (Zimpfer 2011, in litt.). The occurrence at Kealakehe was reported to have been abundant and common in 1992, but by 2010 had declined to low numbers (Whister 2007, pp. 1-18; Bio 2008, in litt.; HBMP 2010b; Whister 2008, pp. 1-11). In addition, there are three individuals in Kaloko-Honokohau National Historical Park (NHP) (Beavers 2010, in litt.), and three occurrences are found within close proximity to each other to the northeast: five individuals in an exclosure at Puuwaawaa Wildlife Sanctuary (HBMP 2010b); a few scattered individuals at Kaupulehu; and a few individuals on private land at Palani Ranch (Whistler 2007, pp. 1-18; Whistler 2008, pp. 1-11). Bidens micrantha ssp. ctenophylla has also been outplanted within fenced exclosures at Kaloko-Honokohau NHP (49 individuals), Koaia Tree Sanctuary (1 individual), and Puuwaawaa (5 individuals) (Boston 2008, in litt.; HBMP 2010b).

Cyanea marksii (haha), a shrub in the bellflower family (Campanulaceae), is found only on the island of Hawaii. Historically, C. marksii was known from the Kona district, in the lowland wet and montane wet ecosystems (Lammers 1999, p. 457; HBMP 2010e). Currently, there are 27 individuals distributed among 3 occurrences in south Kona, in the lowland wet and montane wet ecosystems (PEPP 2007, p. 61). There is an adult and 20 to 30 juveniles (each approximately 1 in (2.54 cm tall)) in a lava tube in the Kona unit of the Hakalau National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) (PEPP 2007, p. 61), one individual in a pit crater in the South Kona FR, and 25 individuals on private land in south Kona (PEPP 2007, p. 61; Bio 2011, pers. comm.). Fruit has been collected from the individuals on private land, and 11 plants have been successfully propagated at the Volcano Rare Plant Facility (VRPF) (PEPP 2007, p. 61; Bio 2011, pers. comm.)

e Hakalau National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) (PEPP 2007, p. 61), one individual in a pit crater in the South Kona FR, and 25 individuals on private land in south Kona (PEPP 2007, p. 61; Bio 2011, pers. comm.). Fruit has been collected from the individuals on private land, and 11 plants have been successfully propagated at the Volcano Rare Plant Facility (VRPF) (PEPP 2007, p. 61; Bio 2011, pers. comm.).

Cyanea tritomantha (aku), a palmlike shrub in the bellflower family (Campanulaceae), is known only from the island of Hawaii (Pratt and Abbott 1997, p. 13; Lammers 2004, p. 89). Historically, this species was known from the windward slopes of Mauna Kea, Mauna Loa, Kilauea, and the Kohala Mountains, in the lowland wet, montane wet, and wet cliff ecosystems (Pratt and Abbott 1997, p. 13). Currently, there are 16 occurrences of Cyanea tritomantha totaling fewer than 400 individuals in the lowland wet, montane wet, and wet cliff ecosystems: 10 occurrences (totaling fewer than 240 individuals) in the Kohala Mountains (Perlman 1993, in litt.; Perlman 1995a, in litt.; Perlman and Wood 1996, pp. 1-14; HBMP 2010f; PEPP 2010, p. 60); 2 occurrences (totaling fewer than 75 individuals) in the Laupahoehoe Natural Area Reserve (NAR) (HBMP 2010f; Bio 2011, pers. comm.); 1 occurrence (20 adults and 30 juveniles) at Puu Makaala NAR (Perlman and Bio 2008, in litt.; Agorastos 2010, in litt.; HBMP 2010f; Bio 2011, pers. comm.); 1 occurrence (a few scattered individuals) off Tom's Trail in the Upper Waiakea FR (Perlman and Bio 2008, in litt.); and 2 occurrences (totaling 11 individuals) in Olaa Tract in HVNP (Pratt 2007a, in litt.; Pratt 2008a, in litt). In 2003, over 75 individuals were outplanted in HVNP's Olaa Tract and Small Tract; however, by 2010, less than one third of these individuals remained (Pratt 2011a, in litt.). In addition, a few individuals have been outplanted at Puu Makaala NAR and Upper Waiakea FR (Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources (HDLNR) 2006; Belfield 2007, in litt.; Agorastos 2010, in litt.)

t 2008a, in litt). In 2003, over 75 individuals were outplanted in HVNP's Olaa Tract and Small Tract; however, by 2010, less than one third of these individuals remained (Pratt 2011a, in litt.). In addition, a few individuals have been outplanted at Puu Makaala NAR and Upper Waiakea FR (Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources (HDLNR) 2006; Belfield 2007, in litt.; Agorastos 2010, in litt.). Cyanea tritomantha produces few seeds, and their viability tends to be low (Moriyasu 2009, in litt.)

Cyrtandra nanawaleensis (haiwale), a shrub or small tree in the African violet family (Gesneriaceae), is known only from the island of Hawaii (Wagner and Herbst 2003, p. 29; Wagner et al. 2005a— Flora of the Hawaiian Islands database ). Historically, C. nanawaleensis was known only from the Nanawale FR and the adjacent Malama Ki FR in the Puna district, in et al. 1988, in litt.; HBMP 2010g; Pratt 2011b, in litt.). Currently, C. nanawaleensis is known from 4 occurrences with approximately 140 individuals in the lowland wet ecosystem: 2 occurrences in Malama Ki FR totaling 70 individuals (Lau 2011, pers. comm.); 1 occurrence in Keauohana FR (with 56 individuals) (Magnacca 2011a, in litt.); and 1 occurrence in the Halepuaa section of Nanawale FR (with 13 individuals) (Johansen 2012, in litt.; Kobsa 2012, in litt.). Conversion of areas within the Halepuaa section of Nanawale FR to papaya production over the past 25 years is thought to have contributed to the decline of the species in this area (Pratt 2011b, in litt.; Kobsa 2012, in litt.; Pratt 2012, in litt.). Biologists report that C. nanawaleensis is in decline throughout its already limited range (Bio 2011, pers. comm.; Kobsa 2012, in litt.).

Cyrtandra wagneri (haiwale), a shrub or small tree in the African violet family (Gesneriaceae), occurs only on the island of Hawaii (Lorence and Perlman 2007, p. 357). Historically, C

is area (Pratt 2011b, in litt.; Kobsa 2012, in litt.; Pratt 2012, in litt.). Biologists report that C. nanawaleensis is in decline throughout its already limited range (Bio 2011, pers. comm.; Kobsa 2012, in litt.).

Cyrtandra wagneri (haiwale), a shrub or small tree in the African violet family (Gesneriaceae), occurs only on the island of Hawaii (Lorence and Perlman 2007, p. 357). Historically, C. wagneri was known from a few individuals along the steep banks of the Kaiwilahilahi Stream in the Laupahoehoe NAR, in the lowland wet ecosystem (Perlman et al. 1998, in litt.). In 2002, there were 2 known occurrences totaling fewer than 175 individuals in the Laupahoehoe NAR: one occurrence (totaling 150 individuals (50 adults and 100 juveniles)) along the steep banks of the Kilau Stream (Lorence et al. 2002, in litt.; Perlman and Perry 2003, in litt.; Lorence and Perlman 2007, p. 359), and a second occurrence (with approximately 10 sterile individuals) along the slopes of the Kaiwilahilahi stream banks (Lorence and Perlman 2007, p. 359). Currently, there are no individuals remaining at Kaiwilahilahi Stream, and the individuals at Kilau Stream appear to be hybridizing with the endangered Cyrtandra tintinnabula. Biologists have identified only eight individuals at Kilau Stream that express the true phenotype of Cyrtandra wagneri, and only three of these individuals are reproducing successfully (PEPP 2010, p. 102; Bio 2011, pers. comm.).

Phyllostegia floribunda (NCN), a perennial herb in the mint family (Lamiaceae), is found only on the island of Hawaii (Wagner 1999, p. 268; Wagner et al. 1999b, p. 815). Historically, P. floribunda was reported in the lowland wet, montane mesic, and montane wet ecosystems at scattered sites along the slopes of the Kohala Mountains; southeast through Hamakua, Laupahoehoe NAR, Waiakea FR, and Upper Waiakea FR; and southward into Hilo, HVNP, and Puna. One report exists of the species occurring from north Kona and a few occurrences in south Kona (Cuddihy et al

. 815). Historically, P. floribunda was reported in the lowland wet, montane mesic, and montane wet ecosystems at scattered sites along the slopes of the Kohala Mountains; southeast through Hamakua, Laupahoehoe NAR, Waiakea FR, and Upper Waiakea FR; and southward into Hilo, HVNP, and Puna. One report exists of the species occurring from north Kona and a few occurrences in south Kona (Cuddihy et al. 1982, in litt.; Wagner et al. 2005b— Flora of the Hawaiian Islands database; Perlman et al. 2008, in litt.; HBMP 2010h; Bishop Museum 2011— Herbarium Database ). Currently, there are 12 known occurrences of P. floribunda totaling fewer than 100 individuals, in the lowland wet, montane mesic, and montane wet ecosystems (Bruegmann 1998, in litt.; Giffin 2009, in litt.; HBMP 2010h): 2 occurrences within HVNP, at Kamoamoa (1 individual) (HBMP 2010h) and near Napau Crater (4 individuals) (Pratt 2005, in litt.; Pratt 2007b, in litt.; HBMP 2010h); 1 occurrence behind the Volcano solid waste transfer station (10 to 50 individuals) (Flynn 1984, in litt.; Perlman and Wood 1993- Hawaii Plant Conservation Maps database; Pratt 2007b, in litt.; HBMP 2010h); 1 occurrence (with an unknown number individuals) in the Wao Kele O Puna NAR (HBMP 2010h); at least 1 occurrence each (with a few individuals each) in the Puu Makaala NAR, Waiakea FR, Upper Waiakea FR, and TNC's Kona Hema Preserve (PR) (Perry 2006, in litt.; Perlman 2007, in litt.; Giffin 2009, in litt.; PEPP 2008, pp. 106-107; Perlman et al. 2008, in litt.; Pratt 2008a, in litt.; Pratt 2008b, in litt.; Agorastos 2010, in litt.); 2 occurrences (each with an unknown number of individuals) from the South Kona FR; 1 occurrence (one individual) in the Kipahoehoe NAR; and, 1 occurrence (with an unknown number of individuals) in the Lapauhoehoe NAR (Moriyasu 2009, in litt.; HBMP 2010h; Agorastos 2010, in litt.)

8, pp. 106-107; Perlman et al. 2008, in litt.; Pratt 2008a, in litt.; Pratt 2008b, in litt.; Agorastos 2010, in litt.); 2 occurrences (each with an unknown number of individuals) from the South Kona FR; 1 occurrence (one individual) in the Kipahoehoe NAR; and, 1 occurrence (with an unknown number of individuals) in the Lapauhoehoe NAR (Moriyasu 2009, in litt.; HBMP 2010h; Agorastos 2010, in litt.). Since 2003, over 400 individuals have been outplanted at HVNP, Waiakea FR, Puu Makaala NAR, Honomalino in TNC's Kona Hema PR, and Kipahoehoe NAR (Bruegmann 2006, in litt.; HDLNR 2006, p. 38; Tangalin 2006, in litt.; Belfield 2007, in litt.; Pratt 2007b, in litt.; VRPF 2008, in litt.; VRPF 2010, in litt.; Bio 2008, in litt.; Agorastos 2010, in litt.). However, for reasons unknown, approximately 90 percent of the outplantings experience high seedling mortality (Pratt 2007b, in litt.; Van DeMark et al. 2010, pp. 24-43).

Pittosporum hawaiiense (hoawa, haawa), a small tree in the pittosporum family (Pittosporaceae), is known only from the island of Hawaii (Wagner et al. 1999c, p. 1,044). Historically, P. hawaiiense was known from the leeward side of the island, from the Kohala Mountains south to Kau, in the lowland mesic, montane mesic, and montane wet ecosystems (Wagner et al. 1999c, p. 1,044). Currently, there are 14 known occurrences totaling fewer than 75 individuals, from HVNP to Puu O Umi NAR, and south Kona, in the lowland mesic, montane mesic, and montane wet ecosystems: 1 occurrence in Puu O Umi NAR (several scattered individuals) (Perlman 1995b, in litt.); 1 occurrence (with a least one individual) in TNC's Kona Hema PR (Oppenheimer et al

systems (Wagner et al. 1999c, p. 1,044). Currently, there are 14 known occurrences totaling fewer than 75 individuals, from HVNP to Puu O Umi NAR, and south Kona, in the lowland mesic, montane mesic, and montane wet ecosystems: 1 occurrence in Puu O Umi NAR (several scattered individuals) (Perlman 1995b, in litt.); 1 occurrence (with a least one individual) in TNC's Kona Hema PR (Oppenheimer et al. 1998, in litt.); 1 occurrence (with several individuals) at Kukuiopae (Perlman and Perry 2002, in litt.); 1 occurrence (with a few individuals) in the Manuka NAR (Perry 2011, in litt.); 8 occurrences (totaling fewer than 58 individuals) scattered within the Kahuku unit of HVNP; 1 occurrence in the Olaa FR (at least one individual), just adjacent to the Olaa Tract in HVNP; and 1 occurrence (with fewer than 6 individuals) at the Volcano solid waste transfer station (Wood and Perlman 1991, in litt.; McDaniel 2011a, in litt.; McDaniel 2011b, in litt.; Pratt 2011d, in litt.). Biologists have observed very low regeneration in these occurrences, which is believed to be caused, in part, by rat predation on the seeds (Bio 2011, pers. comm.).

Platydesma remyi (NCN), a shrub or shrubby tree in the rue family (Rutaceae), occurs only on the island of Hawaii (Stone et al. 1999, p. 1210; USFWS 2010, pp. 4-66-4-67, A-11, A-74). Historically, P. 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 2010i). Currently, P

ly (Rutaceae), occurs only on the island of Hawaii (Stone et al. 1999, p. 1210; USFWS 2010, pp. 4-66-4-67, A-11, A-74). Historically, P. 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 2010i). Currently, P. remyi is known from 8 occurrences totaling fewer than 40 individuals, all of which are found in the Laupahoehoe NAR or in closely surrounding areas, in the lowland wet and montane wet ecosystems: along the banks of Kaiwilahilahi Stream in the Laupahoehoe NAR (unknown number of individuals) (Perlman and Perry 2001, in litt.; Bio 2008, in litt.; HBMP 2010i); near the Spencer Hunter Trail in the Laupahoehoe NAR (fewer than 17 individuals) (PEPP 2010, p. 102); the central part of the Laupahoehoe NAR (5 to 6 scattered individuals) (HBMP 2010i); near Kilau (1 to 3 individuals) and Pahale (1 to 3 individuals) Streams in Laupahoehoe NAR; southeastern region of Laupahoehoe NAR (1 individual); Hakalau unit of the Hakalau NWR (1 individual) (USFWS 2010, p. 4-74-4-75); and the Humuula region of the Hilo FR (2 individuals) (Bruegmann P. remyi were outplanted in Laupahoehoe NAR (Bio 2008, in litt.). Their current status is unknown.

Pritchardia lanigera (loulu), a medium-sized tree in the palm family (Arecaceae), is found only on the island of Hawaii (Read and Hodel 1999, p. 1,371; Hodel 2007, pp. 10, 24-25). Historically, P. lanigera was known from the Kohala Mountains, Hamakua district, windward slopes of Mauna Kea, and southern slopes of Mauna Loa, in the lowland mesic, lowland wet, montane wet, and wet cliff ecosystems (Read and Hodel 1999, p. 1,371; HBMP 2010c). Currently, P. lanigera is known from 2 occurrences totaling fewer than 220 individuals scattered along the windward side of the Kohala Mountains, in the lowland mesic, lowland wet, montane wet, and wet cliff ecosystems

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; HBMP 2010c). Currently, P. lanigera is known from 2 occurrences totaling fewer than 220 individuals scattered along the windward side of the Kohala Mountains, in the lowland mesic, lowland wet, montane wet, and wet cliff ecosystems. Approximately 100 to 200 individuals are scattered over 1 sq mi (3 sq km) in Waimanu Valley and surrounding areas (Wood 1995, in litt.; Perlman and Wood 1996, p. 6; Wood 1998, in litt.; Perlman et al. 2004, in litt.; HBMP 2010c). There are at least five individuals in the back rim of Alakahi Gulch in Waipio Valley (HBMP 2010c). According to field biologists, pollination rates appear to be low for this species, and the absence of seedlings and juveniles at known locations suggests that regeneration is not occurring believed to be caused, in part, by beetle and rat predation on the fruits and seeds (Bio 2011, pers. comm.).

Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei (NCN), a perennial climbing herb in the pink family (Caryophyllaceae), is reported only from the island of Hawaii (Wagner et al. 2005c —Flowering Plants of the Hawaiian Islands database; Wagner et al. 2005d, p. 106). Historically, S. diffusa ssp. macraei was known from the Kohala Mountains, the windward slopes of Mauna Loa, and the Olaa Tract of HVNP, in the montane wet ecosystem (Perlman et al. 2001, in litt.; Wagner et al. 2005d, p. 106; HBMP 2010j). Currently, there is one individual of S. diffusa ssp. macraei on the slopes of Eke in the Kohala Mountains, in the montane wet ecosystem (Wagner et al. 2005d, p. 106; Bio 2011, pers. comm.).

ne wet ecosystem (Wagner et al. 2005d, p. 106; Bio 2011, pers. comm.).

Schiedea hawaiiensis (NCN), a perennial herb or subshrub in the pink family (Caryophyllaceae), is known only from the island of Hawaii (Wagner et al. 2005d, pp. 92-96). Historically, S. hawaiiensis was known from a single collection by Hillebrand (1888, p. 33) from the Waimea region, in the montane dry ecosystem (Wagner et al. 2005d, pp. 92-96). Currently, S. hawaiiensis is known from 25 to 40 individuals on the U.S. Army's Pohakuloa Training Area (PTA) in the montane dry ecosystem, in the saddle area between Moana Loa and Mauna Kea (Gon III and Tierney 1996 in Wagner et al. 2005d, p. 92; Wagner et al. 2005d, p. 92; Evans 2011, in litt.). In addition, there are over 150 individuals outplanted at PTA (Kipuka Alala and Kalawamauna), Puu Huluhulu, Puu Waawaa, and Kipuka Oweowe (Evans 2011, in litt.).

Stenogyne cranwelliae (NCN), a vine in the mint family (Lamiaceae), is known only from the island of Hawaii. Historically, S. cranwelliae was known from the Kohala Mountains, in the montane wet and wet cliff ecosystems (Weller and Sakai 1999, p. 837). Currently, there are 6 occurrences of S. cranwelliae totaling fewer than 160 individuals in the Kohala Mountains, in the montane wet and wet cliff ecosystems: roughly 1.5 sq mi (2.5 sq km) around the border between the Puu O Umi NAR and Kohala FR, near streams and bogs (ranging from 3 to 100 scattered individuals) (Perlman and Wood 1996, pp. 1-14; HBMP 2010k); Opaeloa, in the Puu O Umi NAR (3 individuals) (Perlman and Wood 1996, pp. 1-14; HBMP 2010k); Puukapu, in the Puu O Umi NAR (6-by 6-ft (2-by 2-m) “patch” of individuals) (HBMP 2010k); the rim of Kawainui Gulch (1 individual) (Perlman and Wood 1996, pp. 1-14; HBMP 2010k); along Kohakohau Stream, in the Puu O Umi NAR (a few individuals) (Perlman and Wood 1996, pp

and Wood 1996, pp. 1-14; HBMP 2010k); Opaeloa, in the Puu O Umi NAR (3 individuals) (Perlman and Wood 1996, pp. 1-14; HBMP 2010k); Puukapu, in the Puu O Umi NAR (6-by 6-ft (2-by 2-m) “patch” of individuals) (HBMP 2010k); the rim of Kawainui Gulch (1 individual) (Perlman and Wood 1996, pp. 1-14; HBMP 2010k); along Kohakohau Stream, in the Puu O Umi NAR (a few individuals) (Perlman and Wood 1996, pp. 1-14; HBMP 2010k); and Waimanu Bog Unit in the Puu O Umi NAR (a “patch” of individuals) (Agorastos 2010, in litt.)

Animals

Drosophila digressa (picture-wing fly), a member of the family Drosophilidae, was described in 1968 by Hardy and Kaneshiro and is found only on the island of Hawaii (Hardy and Kaneshiro 1968, pp. 180-1882; Carson 1986, p. 3-9). This species is small, with adults ranging in size from 0.15 to 0.19 in (4.0 to 5.0 mm) in length. Adults are brownish yellow in color and have yellow-colored legs and hyaline (shiny-clear) wings with prominent brown spots. Breeding generally occurs year round, but egg laying and larval development increase following the rainy season as the availability of decaying matter, which picture-wing flies feed on, increases in response to heavy rains. In contrast to most continental Drosophilidae, many endemic Hawaiian species are highly host-plant-specific (Magnacca et al. 2008, p. 1). Drosophila digressa relies solely on the decaying stems of Charpentiera spp. for oviposition (to deposit or lay eggs) and larval substrate (Magnacca et al. 2008, pp. 11, 13). The larvae complete development in the decaying tissue before dropping to the soil to pupate (Montgomery 1975, pp. 65-103; Spieth 1986, p. 105). Pupae develop into adults in approximately 1 month, and adults sexually mature 1 month later. Adults live for 1 to 2 months. The adult flies are generalist microbivores (microbe eating) and feed upon a variety of decomposing plant material

8, pp. 11, 13). The larvae complete development in the decaying tissue before dropping to the soil to pupate (Montgomery 1975, pp. 65-103; Spieth 1986, p. 105). Pupae develop into adults in approximately 1 month, and adults sexually mature 1 month later. Adults live for 1 to 2 months. The adult flies are generalist microbivores (microbe eating) and feed upon a variety of decomposing plant material. Drosophila digressa occurs in elevations ranging from approximately 2,000 to 4,500 ft (610 to 1,370 m), in the lowland mesic, montane mesic, and montane wet ecosystems (Magnacca 2011a, pers. comm.). Historically, Drosophila digressa was known from five sites: Moanuiahea pit crater on Hualalai, Manuka FR, Kipuka 9 and Bird Park in HVNP, and Olaa FR (Montgomery 1975, p. 98; Magnacca 2006, pers. comm.; HBMP 2010d; Magnacca 2011b, in litt.). Currently, D. digressa is known from only two locations, one population in the Manuka NAR within the Manuka FR, in the lowland mesic and montane mesic ecosystems, and a second population in the Olaa FR in the montane wet ecosystem (Magnacca 2011b, in litt.). The current number of individuals at each of these locations is unknown (Magnacca 2011b, in litt.).

Vetericaris chaceorum (anchialine pool shrimp) is a member of the family Procarididae and is considered one of the most primitive shrimp species in the world (Kensley and Williams 1986, pp. 428-429). Known only from the island of Hawaii, the species is one of seven known species of hypogeal (underground) shrimp found in the Hawaiian Islands that occur in anchialine pools (Brock 2004, p. 6). Anchialine pool habitats can be distinguished from similar systems ( i.e., tidal pools) in that they are land-locked with no surface connections to water sources either saline or fresh, but have subterranean hydrologic connections where water flows through cracks and crevices, and yet remain tidally influenced (Holthuis 1973, p. 3; Stock 1986, p. 91)

t occur in anchialine pools (Brock 2004, p. 6). Anchialine pool habitats can be distinguished from similar systems ( i.e., tidal pools) in that they are land-locked with no surface connections to water sources either saline or fresh, but have subterranean hydrologic connections where water flows through cracks and crevices, and yet remain tidally influenced (Holthuis 1973, p. 3; Stock 1986, p. 91). Anchialine habitats are ecologically distinct and unique, and while widely distributed throughout the world, they only occur in the United States in the Hawaiian Islands (Brock 2004, p. i, 2, and 12). In the Hawaiian Islands, there are estimated to be 600 to 700 anchialine pools, with the majority

Relatively large in size for a hypogeal shrimp species, adult Vetericaris chaceorum measure approximately 2.0 in (5.0 cm) in total body length, excluding the primary antennae, which are approximately the same length as the adult's body length (Kensley and Williams 1986, p. 419). The species lacks large chelapeds (claws) (Kensley and Williams 1986, p. 426), which are a key diagnostic characteristic of all other known shrimp species. Vetericaris chaceorum is largely devoid of pigment and lacks eyes, although eyestalks are present (Kensley and Williams 1986, p. 419).

Observations of V. chaceorum indicate the species is a strong swimmer and propels its body forward in an upright manner with its appendages held in a basket formation below the body. Forward movement is produced by a rhythmic movement of the thoracic and abdominal appendages, and during capture of some specimens, V. chaceorum escape tactics included only forward movement and a notable lack of tail flicking, which would allow backward movement and which is common to other shrimp species (Kensley and Williams 1986, p. 426). No response was observed when the species was exposed to light (Kensley and Williams 1986, p. 418).

The feeding habits of V. chaceorum are unknown, although Kensley and Williams (1986, p

. chaceorum escape tactics included only forward movement and a notable lack of tail flicking, which would allow backward movement and which is common to other shrimp species (Kensley and Williams 1986, p. 426). No response was observed when the species was exposed to light (Kensley and Williams 1986, p. 418).

The feeding habits of V. chaceorum are unknown, although Kensley and Williams (1986, p. 426) reported that the gut contents of a captured specimen included large quantities of an orange-colored oil and fragments of other crustaceans (including Procaris hawaiana, a co-occurring anchialine pool shrimp), indicating that the species may be carnivorous upon its associated anchialine pool shrimp species. In general, hypogeal shrimp occur within both the illuminated part of their anchialine pool habitat as well as within the cracks and crevices in the water table below the surface (Brock 2004, p. 6), and relative abundance of some Hawaii species is directly tied to food abundance (Brock 2004, p. 10). Furthermore, studies indicate that the lighted environment of anchialine pools offers refugia of high benthic productivity, resulting in higher population levels for the shrimp compared to the surrounding interstitial spaces occupied by these species, albeit in lower numbers (Brock 2004, p. 10).

Although over 400 anchialine pool habitats have been surveyed on the island of Hawaii, Vetericaris chaceorum has to date only been documented from Lua O Palahemo, which is a submerged lava tube located on the southernmost point of Hawaii Island in an area known as Ka Lae (South Point) (Kensley and Williams 1986, pp. 417-418; Brock 2004, p. 2; HBMP 2010). Age estimates for Lua O Palahemo range from as young as 11,780 years to a maximum of age of 25,000 years based upon radio carbon data (Kensley and Williams 1986, pp. 417-418). Brock (2004, p

Lua O Palahemo, which is a submerged lava tube located on the southernmost point of Hawaii Island in an area known as Ka Lae (South Point) (Kensley and Williams 1986, pp. 417-418; Brock 2004, p. 2; HBMP 2010). Age estimates for Lua O Palahemo range from as young as 11,780 years to a maximum of age of 25,000 years based upon radio carbon data (Kensley and Williams 1986, pp. 417-418). Brock (2004, p. 18) states this lava tube is the second most important anchialine pool habitat in the State because of its unique connection to the ocean, the vertical size ( i.e., depth), and the presence of a total of five different species including Halocaridina palahemo, Halocaridina rubra, Procaris hawaiiana, Calliasmata pholidota, and Vetericaris chaceorum.

Lua O Palahemo itself is actually a naturally occurring opening (surface collapse) into a large lava tube below. The opening measures approximately 33 ft (10 m) in diameter and is directly exposed to sunlight. Unlike most anchialine pools in the Hawaiian Islands, which have depths less than 4.9 ft (1.5 m) (Brock 2004, p. 3), Lua O Palahemo's deep pool includes a deep shaft with vertical sides extending downward about 46 ft (14 m) into the lava tube below, which then splits off into two directions, both ending in blockages (Holthuis 1974, p.11; Kensley and Williams 1986, p. 418). The tube runs generally north and south, extending northward for 282 ft (86 m) and southward for 718 ft (219 m) to a depth of 108 ft (33 m) below sea level (Kensley and Williams 1986, p. 418).

We have information pertaining to three distinct survey efforts at Lua O Palahemo. The first survey occurred in 1972-1973 (Holthius 1973, pp. 10-12; 22; Maciolek and Brock 1974, pp. 1-2; 17; 50); a second survey in May 1985 (Kensley and Williams 1986, pp. 417-426; Bozanic 2004, p. 1); and a third survey in July 2010 (Wada 2012, pers. comm.). Descriptions of each survey follow and are considered relevant because each survey sheds light on the decline of habitat available to Vetericaris chaceorum

occurred in 1972-1973 (Holthius 1973, pp. 10-12; 22; Maciolek and Brock 1974, pp. 1-2; 17; 50); a second survey in May 1985 (Kensley and Williams 1986, pp. 417-426; Bozanic 2004, p. 1); and a third survey in July 2010 (Wada 2012, pers. comm.). Descriptions of each survey follow and are considered relevant because each survey sheds light on the decline of habitat available to Vetericaris chaceorum.

Lua O Palahemo was first formally surveyed as anchialine pool habitat sometime between 1972-1973 (Maciolek and Brock 1974, pp. 1-2; 17). During this survey, which did not include SCUBA methods, the following physical characteristics and measurements of the pond were noted: salinity ranged between 18 to 22 parts per thousand (ppt); the pool depth was recorded as deep; the pool bottom was described as rocky with a large accumulation of sediment; and surrounding flora was noted as minimal, but included vines and succulents, grasses, and small trees or shrubs (Maciolek and Brock 1974, p. 50). According to Maciolek and Brock's (1974, pp. 17, 50) report, hypogeal shrimp species found at Lua O Palahemo at that time included Procaris hawaiiana (then, only the second known location), Calliasmata pholidota, Antecaridina lauensis, and Halocaridina rubra. Maciolek and Brock (1974, pp. 50) reported that Lua O Palahemo was inhabited by the greatest concentration of H. rubra ever observed up to that time period (1972-1973), and indeed, Holthius (1973, p. 22) reported that the density of H. rubra swimming in a swarm near the pool surface was sufficiently high enough to cause the water to appear blood red in color. Although neither scientific article written about this survey explicitly describes water clarity at Lua O Palahemo, both imply that the water was clear enough to see the various shrimp species from distances of several meters within the pool and the area directly below the pool

a swimming in a swarm near the pool surface was sufficiently high enough to cause the water to appear blood red in color. Although neither scientific article written about this survey explicitly describes water clarity at Lua O Palahemo, both imply that the water was clear enough to see the various shrimp species from distances of several meters within the pool and the area directly below the pool.

In May of 1985, a second, more thorough survey of Lua O Palahemo was conducted by local biologists, a world-renowned cave diver, and hypogeal shrimp specialists (Kensley and Williams 1986, pp. 417-426; Bozanic 2004, p. 1-2). Because this survey included SCUBA methods, the full extent of the submerged system was explored, and physical characteristics, dimensions, and water measurements were completed for the pool as well as the water column directly below and the main lava tube. Pool surface measurements revealed a temperature of 75.2 degrees Fahrenheit (24 degrees Centigrade), salinity of 20 ppt, and dissolved oxygen of 6.0 parts per million (ppm) (Kensley and Williams 1986, p. 418). At a depth of 108 ft (33 m) (or 590 ft (180 m) from the pool surface) in the southward or seaward portion of the submerged lava tube where Vetericaris chaceorum was discovered and observed, measurements revealed a salinity of 30 ppt and dissolved oxygen at 0.3 ppm (Kensley and Williams 1986, p. 418).

The 1985 survey team completed a total of three dives within the Lua o Palahemo lava tube during their 1985 exploration of the site (Kensley and Williams 1986, pp. 417, 426). During those dives, researchers made five observations of Vetericaris chaceorum in total darkness at a depth of 108 ft (33 m) and 590 ft (180 m) from the opening, collecting two specimens. Kensley and Williams (1986, p. 418) noted, however, that the area surveyed directly beneath the surface of the pool contained the highest density of animals ( e.g., shrimps and crustaceans). In addition to the V

During those dives, researchers made five observations of Vetericaris chaceorum in total darkness at a depth of 108 ft (33 m) and 590 ft (180 m) from the opening, collecting two specimens. Kensley and Williams (1986, p. 418) noted, however, that the area surveyed directly beneath the surface of the pool contained the highest density of animals ( e.g., shrimps and crustaceans). In addition to the V. chaceorum, a second new species was discovered, Halocaridina palahemo, and two known species were observed including Procaris hawaiiana and Calliasmata pholidota. Calliasmata pholidota was collected within the water column below the pool at a depth of 15 m (49 ft), and its population was estimated at less than 100. Both P. hawaiiana, numbering in the thousands and H. palahemo, numbering in the tens of thousands of individuals, were collected in the water column near the opening into the lava tube below the pool surface (Kensley and Williams 1986, p. 418). During their 1985 survey, Kensley and Williams (1986 entire) did not observe nonnative fish species within Lua O Palahemo.

Regarding water clarity and observation of sedimentation within Lua O Palahemo during the 1985 survey, both Kensley and Williams (1986, pp. 417-418) and Bozanic (2004, p. 1), noted that water clarity was good with visibility as great as 66 ft (20 m) during initial entry into the water column and the lateral lava tube below. However, during the exit phase of the dive, visibility diminished to a few centimeters as exhalation bubbles from the divers' expired air tanks disturbed sediment accumulated upon the ceiling of the lava tube and clouded the water. At the bottom of the water column below the pool and within both stretches of the lava tube, all surfaces were observed to be covered in sediment, which sometimes reached a depth of 3.3 ft (1 m)

hase of the dive, visibility diminished to a few centimeters as exhalation bubbles from the divers' expired air tanks disturbed sediment accumulated upon the ceiling of the lava tube and clouded the water. At the bottom of the water column below the pool and within both stretches of the lava tube, all surfaces were observed to be covered in sediment, which sometimes reached a depth of 3.3 ft (1 m). The survey team described the large mound located at the bottom of the water column below the pool opening as comprised of rock and silty sediment reaching at a total height of approximately 50 ft (15 m) (Kensley and Williams 1986, pp. 417-418; Bozanic 2004, p. 1). Foreign objects discovered and removed from the mound included bicycles, barbed wire, random trash, and assorted cables and lines (presumably fishing line) (Bozanic 2004, p. 1).

In July 2010, a team comprised of Service and Hawaii State Division of Aquatic Resources (DAR) biologists conducted a third survey of Lua O Palahemo. The survey team used snorkeling techniques and an underwater video camera as well as numerous trapping devices to take measurements, survey for shrimp species, and record data within the underwater site (Wada 2010, in litt., pp. 1-2). As noted during a brief 2005 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service visit to the site, the team described the immediate area surrounding the depression above the pool opening as greatly eroded, creating a large soil funnel with the pool opening in the center of the funnel (Wada 2010, in litt., p. 1). The area was also described as dry and largely barren with a few clumps of nonnative grass species scattered throughout. The water immediately within the pool area was described as extremely low in clarity with visibility estimated at 3 in (8 cm) (Wada 2010, in litt., p. 1).

ghout. The water immediately within the pool area was described as extremely low in clarity with visibility estimated at 3 in (8 cm) (Wada 2010, in litt., p. 1).

Snorkeling within the pool revealed that a partial collapse of the pool walls may have occurred in the past few years as the team experienced difficulty in locating an opening large enough for a person to explore. Wada (2010, in litt. p. 1) hypothesized that the collapse of the lava tube rock walls above the pool followed an earthquake of 6.7 magnitude (USGS 2010, in litt.) in October 2006 on Hawaii Island. Despite the blockages encountered, an underwater video camera was successfully deployed through a small opening and dropped to a depth of just over 100 ft (30 m) (Wada 2010, in litt., p. 1). The video footage showed a continuous thick cloud of sediment and detritus through the entire depth of the water column (Wada 2010, in litt., p. 1). After viewing photographs taken in 2005 of the pool and surrounding area at Lua O Palahemo, anchialine pool expert, Richard Brock (Brock 2012, pers. comm.), stated that a very obvious increase of sedimentation was occurring at the site and within the pool compared to conditions at the pool during the 1985 survey and other visits in the 1980s.

Of the five species of hypogeal shrimp known from Lua O Palahemo, only Procaris hawaiiana was observed. One specimen was captured within the pool and the underwater video camera captured footage of seven individuals, which were tentatively identified as P. hawaiiana, based upon their bright orange coloration (Wada 2010, in litt., p. 1). The survey team used standard and accepted methods while attempting to capture and survey for shrimp species. Specific trap types used included soft traps ( i.e., traps using netting), bottle traps, cylindrical traps, and specially designed traps devised by State DAR staff

als, which were tentatively identified as P. hawaiiana, based upon their bright orange coloration (Wada 2010, in litt., p. 1). The survey team used standard and accepted methods while attempting to capture and survey for shrimp species. Specific trap types used included soft traps ( i.e., traps using netting), bottle traps, cylindrical traps, and specially designed traps devised by State DAR staff. Within the water column below the pool opening, trapping measures were employed at depths of 10 ft (3.04 m), 15 ft (4.57 m), 25 ft (7.62 m), 50 ft (15.24 m), and 100 ft (30.48 m) (Wada 2010, in litt., p. 1). According to the same report, no nonnative fish were observed. Hypogeal shrimp species known from Lua O Palahemo and notably absent during the survey included Calliasmata pholidota, Antecaridina lauensis, Halocaridina rubra, and Vetericaris chaceorum. Regarding the latter species, it is important to note that the survey team did not survey as deeply (108 ft (33 m) below sea level or 590 ft (180 m)) from the pool surface) as was done during 1985 survey, in which the species was first and last observed. Accordingly, it is uncertain whether surveys conducted after the 1985 effort would have detected V. chaceorum, given the different methods that were used. For the other species, based on what is known about the species' behavior, their presence would have been expected at the depths and locations where trapping was conducted; however, these species were notably absent during this survey.

In June 2012, Service biologists briefly revisited Lua O Palahemo to assess current conditions there (Richardson 2012, in litt., pp. 1-2). During this visit, we took measurements of the depression surrounding the opening to the pool. Roughly oval in shape, the depression measured approximately 195 ft (65 m) wide by 210 ft (70 m) long. We noted that there is no outlet for runoff from rain out of the depression other than into the anchialine pool itself

O Palahemo to assess current conditions there (Richardson 2012, in litt., pp. 1-2). During this visit, we took measurements of the depression surrounding the opening to the pool. Roughly oval in shape, the depression measured approximately 195 ft (65 m) wide by 210 ft (70 m) long. We noted that there is no outlet for runoff from rain out of the depression other than into the anchialine pool itself. A total of 7 distinct off-road vehicle tracks into the depression surrounding the pool were counted and photographed. Snorkeling within the pool revealed no hypogeal shrimp species, although a common marine species, Palaemonella burnsi, was abundant and numbered approximately 1,000 individuals. No nonnative fish were observed; however, we noted approximately 10 mature and young native Hawaiian gobies. Gobies (family Gobiidae) are distinguished by their fused pelvic fins that form a disc-shaped sucker. Hawaii has several indigenous goby species, including the species observed at Lua O Palahemo, Bathygobius coalitus (Smith 2012, in litt.). Visibility in the water was estimated at approximately 4 ft (1.2 m), and no trash or debris was seen in the pool other than a large amount of grass seeds floating on the surface of the water. We did not dive deep enough to ascertain the condition of the pool bottom, however all submerged rock surfaces were covered in a 1-in (2.54-cm) thick layer of algae and mud, and the water smelled strongly of soil, similar to a smell encountered in wet caves (Richardson 2012, in litt., pp. 1-2). Lastly, the sign previously posted above the opening of the pool, and which included a warning and fine against disturbance of the site, was gone.

Our best understanding of hypogeal shrimp population dynamics in Hawaii and elsewhere is based upon studies of the comparatively common species, Halocaridina rubra

soil, similar to a smell encountered in wet caves (Richardson 2012, in litt., pp. 1-2). Lastly, the sign previously posted above the opening of the pool, and which included a warning and fine against disturbance of the site, was gone.

Our best understanding of hypogeal shrimp population dynamics in Hawaii and elsewhere is based upon studies of the comparatively common species, Halocaridina rubra. Studies and i.e., greater than 1 individual per 3,500 cubic ft (approximately 100 cubic m)), compared to the anchialine pool areas, where abundance may reach many hundreds per square meter of bottom (Brock and Bailey-Brock 1998, p. 65; Brock 2004, p. 10).

Because of the ability of hypogeal shrimp species to inhabit the interstitial and crevicular spaces in the water table bedrock surrounding anchialine pools, it is very difficult to estimate population size of a given species within a given area (Brock 2004, pp. 10-11). Therefore, based upon these considerations and the fact that a total of five individuals have been observed on three occasions during one survey in 1985, we are unable to estimate the population size of Vetericaris chaceorum. Furthermore, the methods used and depths explored between the three surveys (in 1973, 1985, and 2010) of Lua O Palahemo were not sufficiently comparable for us to determine that there has been a decline in V. chaceorum abundance.

Brock (2004, p. 7) estimated that there are likely no more than a couple of dozen individuals of this species remaining in this pool; however, he provided no basis for this statement. Therefore, it is our opinion that Vetericaris chaceorum is extant, albeit in low numbers, and that additional surveys using SCUBA methods and conducted at the same depths explored in 1985 are warranted. Despite the lack of information regarding V. chaceorum biology and population demographics, the Service believes information from the three surveys presents compelling evidence of habitat decline at Lua O Palahemo

our opinion that Vetericaris chaceorum is extant, albeit in low numbers, and that additional surveys using SCUBA methods and conducted at the same depths explored in 1985 are warranted. Despite the lack of information regarding V. chaceorum biology and population demographics, the Service believes information from the three surveys presents compelling evidence of habitat decline at Lua O Palahemo. The other four hypogeal shrimp species formerly known from the site are either entirely absent or present in very low numbers, and at least three of those species are considered likely food sources for V. chaceorum. It is our opinion that these shrimp species have experienced drastic population decline due to degradation of the water quality at Lua O Palahemo. This degradation is a result of excessive siltation and sedimentation of the anchialine pool system at Lua O Palahemo, combined with the diminished ability of the system to flush, which Brock (2004, pp. 11, 35-36) described as necessary for a functioning anchialine pool system.

Summary of Factors Affecting the 15 Species Proposed for Listing

Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and its implementing regulations (50 CFR part 424) set forth the procedures for adding species to the Federal Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants. A species may be determined to be an endangered or threatened species due to one or more of the five factors described in section 4(a)(1) of the Act: (A) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range; (B) overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D) the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; and (E) other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued existence. Listing actions may be warranted based on any of the above threat factors, singly or in combination. Each of these factors is discussed below

bitat or range; (B) overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D) the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; and (E) other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued existence. Listing actions may be warranted based on any of the above threat factors, singly or in combination. Each of these factors is discussed below.

In considering what factors might constitute threats to a species; we must look beyond the exposure of the species to a particular factor to evaluate whether the species may respond to that factor in a way that causes actual impacts to the species. If there is exposure to a factor and the species responds negatively, the factor may be a threat and, during the status review, we attempt to determine how significant a threat it is. The threat is significant if it drives, or contributes to, the risk of extinction of the species such that the species warrants listing as endangered or threatened as those terms are defined in the Act. However, the identification of factors that could impact a species negatively may not be sufficient to warrant listing the species under the Act. The information must include evidence sufficient to show that these factors are operative threats that act on the species to the point that the species meets the definition of endangered or threatened under the Act.

are operative threats that act on the species to the point that the species meets the definition of endangered or threatened under the Act.

If we determine that the level of threat posed to a species by one or more of the five listing factors is such that the species meets the definition of either endangered or threatened under section 3 of the Act, that species may then be proposed for listing. The Act defines an endangered species as “in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range,” and a threatened species as “likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range.” The threats to each of the individual 15 species proposed for listing in this document are summarized in Table 3, and discussed in detail below.

BILLING CODE 4310-55-P EP17OC12.001

EP17OC12.002

EP17OC12.003

BILLING CODE 4310-55-C Assumptions

We acknowledge that the specific nature of the threats to the individual species being proposed for listing are not completely understood. Scientific research directed toward each of the species proposed for listing is limited because of their rarity and the challenging logistics associated with conducting field work in Hawaii ( e.g., areas are typically remote, difficult to access and work in, and expensive to survey in a comprehensive manner). However, there is information available on many of the threats that act on Hawaiian ecosystems, and, for some ecosystems, these threats are well studied and understood. Each of the native species that occur in Hawaiian ecosystems suffers from exposure to those threats to differing degrees. For the purposes of our listing determination, our assumption is that the threats that act at the ecosystem level also act on each of the species that occur in those ecosystems, although in some cases we have additionally identified species-specific threats, such as predation by nonnative invertebrates

s that occur in Hawaiian ecosystems suffers from exposure to those threats to differing degrees. For the purposes of our listing determination, our assumption is that the threats that act at the ecosystem level also act on each of the species that occur in those ecosystems, although in some cases we have additionally identified species-specific threats, such as predation by nonnative invertebrates. Similarly, for the purposes of our critical habitat determinations, our assumption is that the physical or biological features that support an adequately functioning ecosystem represent the physical or biological features required by the species that occur in those ecosystems (see Critical Habitat section, below). The species discussed in this proposed rule are the components of the native ecosystems that have shown declines in number of individuals, number of occurrences, or changes in species abundance and species composition that can be reasonably attributed to the threats discussed below.

The following constitutes a list of ecosystem-scale threats that affect the species proposed for listing in 10 of the described ecosystems on Hawaii Island:

(1) Foraging and trampling of native plants by feral pigs ( Sus scrofa ), goats ( Capra hircus ), cattle ( Bos taurus ), sheep ( Ovis aries ), or mouflon sheep ( Ovis gmelini musimon ), which can result in severe erosion of watersheds because these mammals inhabit terrain that is often steep and remote (Cuddihy and Stone 1990, p. 63). Foraging and trampling events destabilize soils that support native plant communities, bury or damage native plants, and have adverse water quality effects due to runoff over exposed soils.

(2) Ungulate destruction of seeds and seedlings of native plant species via foraging and trampling (Cuddihy and Stone 1990, pp. 63, 65) facilitates the conversion of disturbed areas from native to nonnative vegetative communities.

events destabilize soils that support native plant communities, bury or damage native plants, and have adverse water quality effects due to runoff over exposed soils.

(3) Disturbance of soils by feral pigs from rooting can create fertile seedbeds for alien plants (Cuddihy and Stone 1990, p. 65), some of them spread by ingestion and excretion by pigs.

(4) Increased nutrient availability as a result of pigs rooting in nitrogen-poor soils, which facilitates establishment of alien weeds. Introduced vertebrates are known to enhance the germination of alien plants through seed scarification in digestive tracts or through rooting and fertilization with feces of potential seedbeds (Stone 1985, p, 253). In addition, alien weeds are more adapted to nutrient-rich soils than native plants (Cuddihy and Stone 1990, p. 65), and rooting activity creates open areas in forests allowing alien species to completely replace native stands.

(5) Rodent damage to plant propagules, seedlings, or native trees, which changes forest composition and structure (Cuddihy and Stone 1990, p. 67).

(6) Feeding or defoliation of native plants from alien insects, which can reduce geographic ranges of some species because of damage (Cuddihy and Stone 1990, p. 71).

(7) Alien insect predation on native insects, which affects pollination of native plant species (Cuddihy and Stone 1990, p. 71).

gs, or native trees, which changes forest composition and structure (Cuddihy and Stone 1990, p. 67).

(6) Feeding or defoliation of native plants from alien insects, which can reduce geographic ranges of some species because of damage (Cuddihy and Stone 1990, p. 71).

(7) Alien insect predation on native insects, which affects pollination of native plant species (Cuddihy and Stone 1990, p. 71).

(8) Significant changes in nutrient cycling processes because of large numbers of alien invertebrates such as earthworms, ants, slugs, isopods, millipedes, and snails, resulting in changes to the composition and structure of plant communities (Cuddihy and Stone 1990, p. 73).

Each of the above threats is discussed in more detail below, and summarized in Table 3. The most-often cited effects of nonnative plants on native plant species are competition and displacement. Competition may be for water, light, or nutrients, or it may involve allelopathy (chemical inhibition of other plants). Alien plants may displace native species of plants by preventing their reproduction, usually by shading and taking up available sites for seedling establishment. Alien plant invasions may also alter entire ecosystems by forming monotypic stands, changing fire characteristics of native communities, altering soil-water regimes, changing nutrient cycling, or encouraging other nonnative organisms (Smith 1989, pp. 61-69; Vitousek et al. 1987, pp. 224-227).

Factor A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range

The Hawaiian Islands are located over 2,000 mi (3,200 km) from the nearest continent. This isolation has allowed the few plants and animals that arrived in the Hawaiian Islands to evolve into many highly varied and endemic species (species that occur nowhere else in the world). The only native terrestrial mammals in the Hawaiian Islands are two bat taxa, the extant Hawaiian hoary bat ( Lasiurus cinereus semotus ) and an extinct, unnamed insectivorous bat (Ziegler 2002, p. 245)

ent. This isolation has allowed the few plants and animals that arrived in the Hawaiian Islands to evolve into many highly varied and endemic species (species that occur nowhere else in the world). The only native terrestrial mammals in the Hawaiian Islands are two bat taxa, the extant Hawaiian hoary bat ( Lasiurus cinereus semotus ) and an extinct, unnamed insectivorous bat (Ziegler 2002, p. 245). The native plants of the Hawaiian Islands, therefore, evolved in the absence of mammalian predators, browsers, or grazers. As a result, many of the native species have lost unneeded defenses against threats such as mammalian predation and competition with aggressive, weedy plant species that are typical of continental environments (Loope 1992, p. 11; Gagne and Cuddihy 1999, p. 45; Wagner et al. 1999d, pp. 3-6). For example, Carlquist (in Carlquist and Cole 1974, p. 29) notes that “Hawaiian plants are notably free from many characteristics thought to be deterrents to herbivores (toxins, oils, resins, stinging hairs, coarse texture).”

Native Hawaiian plants are therefore highly vulnerable to the impacts of introduced mammals and alien plants. In addition, species restricted and adapted to highly specialized locations ( e.g., Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana ) are particularly vulnerable to changes ( e.g., nonnative species, hurricanes, fire, and climate change) in their habitat (Carlquist and Cole 1974, pp. 28-29; Loope 1992, pp. 3-6; Stone 1992, pp. 88-102).

Habitat Destruction and Modification by Agriculture and Urban Development

n and Modification by Agriculture and Urban Development

The consequences of past land use practices, such as agricultural or urban development, have resulted in little or no native vegetation below 2,000 ft (600 m) throughout the Hawaiian Islands (TNC 2007— Ecosystem Database of ArcMap Shapefiles, unpublished), largely impacting the coastal, lowland dry, lowland mesic, and lowland wet ecosystems. Although agriculture has been declining in importance, large tracts of former agricultural lands are being converted into residential areas or left fallow (TNC 2007— Ecosystem Database of ArcMap Shapefiles, unpublished). In addition, Hawaii's population has increased almost 7 percent in the past 10 years, further increasing demands on limited land and water resources in the islands (Hawaii

Development and urbanization of the lowland dry ecosystem on Hawaii Island is a threat to one species proposed for listing in this rule, Bidens micrantha ssp. ctenophylla, which is dependent on this ecosystem. Bidens micrantha ssp. ctenophylla is currently found in an area less than 10 sq mi (26 sq km) on the leeward slopes of Hualalai volcano in the lowland dry ecosystem. The leeward slopes of Hualalai volcano encompass the increasingly urbanized region of north Kona, where there is very little undisturbed habitat (Pratt and Abbott 1997, p. 25). Approximately 25 percent (119 individuals of 475) of the largest of the 6 occurrences of this species is in the right-of-way of the proposed Ane Keohokalole Highway Project (USFWS 2010, in litt.) and Kaloko Makai Development, although 154 ac (62 ha) will be set aside as a lowland dry forest preserve (Kaloko Makai Dryland Forest Preserve) (see Kaloko Makai Development, below) to compensate for the loss of these individuals as a result of highway construction and prior to the Kaloko Makai Development. In addition, individuals of Bidens micrantha ssp

ole Highway Project (USFWS 2010, in litt.) and Kaloko Makai Development, although 154 ac (62 ha) will be set aside as a lowland dry forest preserve (Kaloko Makai Dryland Forest Preserve) (see Kaloko Makai Development, below) to compensate for the loss of these individuals as a result of highway construction and prior to the Kaloko Makai Development. In addition, individuals of Bidens micrantha ssp. ctenophylla occur in areas where the development of the Villages of Laiopua Development at Kealakehe (see Department of Hawaiian Home Lands (DHHL), below) and of the Keahuolu affordable housing project (Whistler 2007, pp. 1-18; DHHL 2009, p. 15) is a threat to the species.

Habitat Destruction and Modification by Introduced Ungulates

Introduced mammals have greatly impacted the native vegetation, as well as the native fauna, of the Hawaiian Islands. Impacts to the native species and ecosystems of Hawaii accelerated following the arrival of Captain James Cook in 1778. The Cook expedition and subsequent explorers intentionally introduced a European race of pigs or boars and other livestock, such as goats, to serve as food sources for seagoing explorers (Tomich 1986, p. 120-121; Loope 1998, p. 752). The mild climate of the islands, combined with the lack of competitors or predators, led to the successful establishment of large populations of these introduced mammals, to the detriment of native Hawaiian species and ecosystems. The presence of introduced alien mammals is considered one of the primary factors underlying the alteration and degradation of native plant communities and habitats on the island of Hawaii. The destruction or degradation of habitat due to nonnative ungulates (hoofed mammals), including pigs, goats, cattle, sheep, and mouflon, is currently a threat to the ten ecosystems (lowland dry, lowland mesic, lowland wet, montane dry, montane mesic, montane wet, coastal, anchialine pool, dry cliff, and wet cliff) on Hawaii Island and their associated species

and habitats on the island of Hawaii. The destruction or degradation of habitat due to nonnative ungulates (hoofed mammals), including pigs, goats, cattle, sheep, and mouflon, is currently a threat to the ten ecosystems (lowland dry, lowland mesic, lowland wet, montane dry, montane mesic, montane wet, coastal, anchialine pool, dry cliff, and wet cliff) on Hawaii Island and their associated species. Habitat degradation or destruction by ungulates is also a threat to all 13 plant species ( Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana, B. micrantha ssp. ctenophylla, Cyanea marksii, C. tritomantha, Cyrtandra nanawaleensis, C. wagneri, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Platydesma remyi, Pritchardia lanigera, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, S. hawaiiensis, and Stenogyne cranwelliae ), the picture-wing fly Drosophila digressa, and the anchialine pool shrimp Vetericaris chaceorum, which are proposed for listing in this rule (Table 3).

The destruction or degradation of habitat due to pigs is currently a threat to nine of the Hawaii Island ecosystems (coastal, lowland dry, lowland mesic, lowland wet, montane dry, montane mesic, montane wet, dry cliff, and wet cliff) and their associated species. Feral pigs are known to cause deleterious impacts to ecosystem processes and functions throughout their worldwide distribution (Campbell and Long 2009, p. 2319). In Hawaii, pigs have been described as the most pervasive and disruptive nonnative influence on the unique native forests of the Hawaiian Islands, and are widely recognized as one of the greatest current threats to forest ecosystems (Aplet et al. 1991, p. 56; Anderson and Stone 1993, p. 195). European pigs, introduced to Hawaii by Captain James Cook in 1778, hybridized with domesticated Polynesian pigs, became feral, and invaded forested areas, especially wet and mesic forests and dry areas at high elevations

forests of the Hawaiian Islands, and are widely recognized as one of the greatest current threats to forest ecosystems (Aplet et al. 1991, p. 56; Anderson and Stone 1993, p. 195). European pigs, introduced to Hawaii by Captain James Cook in 1778, hybridized with domesticated Polynesian pigs, became feral, and invaded forested areas, especially wet and mesic forests and dry areas at high elevations. The Hawaii Territorial Board of Agriculture and Forestry started a feral pig eradication project in the early 1900s that continued through 1958, removing 170,000 pigs from forests Statewide (Diong 1982, p. 63). Feral pigs are currently present on Niihau, Kauai, Oahu, Molokai, Maui, and Hawaii.

These feral animals are extremely destructive and have both direct and indirect impacts on native plant communities. While rooting in the earth in search of invertebrates and plant material, pigs directly impact native plants by disturbing and destroying vegetative cover, and trampling plants and seedlings. It has been estimated that at a conservative rooting rate of 2 sq yards (yd) (1.7 sq m) per minute, with only 4 hours of foraging a day, a single pig could disturb over 1,600 sq yd (1,340 sq m) (or approximately 0.3 ac, or 0.12 ha) of groundcover per week (Anderson et al. 2007, p. 2).

Pigs may also reduce or eliminate plant regeneration by damaging or eating seeds and seedlings (further discussion of predation by nonnative ungulates is provided under Factor C. Disease or Predation, below). Pigs are a major vector for the establishment and spread of competing invasive, nonnative plant species by dispersing plant seeds on their hooves and fur, and in their feces (Diong 1982, pp. 169-170), which also serves to fertilize disturbed soil (Matson 1990, p. 245; Siemann et al. 2009, p. 547). Pigs feed on the fruits of many nonnative plants, such as Passiflora tarminiana (banana poka) and Psidium cattleianum (strawberry guava), spreading the seeds of these invasive species through their feces as they travel in search of food

eir hooves and fur, and in their feces (Diong 1982, pp. 169-170), which also serves to fertilize disturbed soil (Matson 1990, p. 245; Siemann et al. 2009, p. 547). Pigs feed on the fruits of many nonnative plants, such as Passiflora tarminiana (banana poka) and Psidium cattleianum (strawberry guava), spreading the seeds of these invasive species through their feces as they travel in search of food. Pigs also feed on native plants, such as Hawaiian tree ferns that they root up to eat the core of the trunk (Baker 1975, p. 79). In addition, rooting pigs contribute to erosion by clearing vegetation and creating large areas of disturbed soil, especially on slopes (Smith 1985, pp. 190, 192, 196, 200, 204, 230-231; Stone 1985, pp. 254-255, 262-264; Medeiros et al. 1986, pp. 27-28; Scott et al. 1986, pp. 360-361; Tomich 1986, pp. 120-126; Cuddihy and Stone 1990, pp. 64-65; Aplet et al. 1991, p. 56; Loope et al. 1991, pp. 1-21; Gagne and Cuddihy 1999, p. 52; Nogueira-Filho et al. 2009, pp. 3,677-3,682; Dunkell et al. 2011, pp. 175-177). Erosion impacts native plant communities by watershed degradation and alteration of plant nutrient status, as well as damage to individual plants from landslides (Vitousek et al. 2009, pp. 3074-3086; Chan-Halbrendt et al. 2010, p. 252).

Pigs have been cited as one of the greatest threats to the public and private lands within the Olaa Kilauea Partnership (an area of land that includes approximately 32,000 ac (12,950 ha) in the upper sections of the Olaa and Waiakea forests above Volcano village) that comprise the lowland mesic, lowland wet, montane mesic, and montane wet ecosystems that support individuals of three of the plant species proposed for listing ( Cyanea tritomantha, Phyllostegia floribunda, and Pittosporum hawaiiense ) (Olaa Kilauea Partnership Area Feral Animal Monitoring Report 2005, pp. 1-4; Perlman 2007, in litt.; Pratt 2007a, in litt.; Pratt 2007b, in litt.; Benitez et al. 2008, p. 58; HBMP 2010f; HBMP 2010h; PEPP 2010, p. 60, TNC 2012, in litt.)

ecosystems that support individuals of three of the plant species proposed for listing ( Cyanea tritomantha, Phyllostegia floribunda, and Pittosporum hawaiiense ) (Olaa Kilauea Partnership Area Feral Animal Monitoring Report 2005, pp. 1-4; Perlman 2007, in litt.; Pratt 2007a, in litt.; Pratt 2007b, in litt.; Benitez et al. 2008, p. 58; HBMP 2010f; HBMP 2010h; PEPP 2010, p. 60, TNC 2012, in litt.). Impacts from feral pigs are also a threat to the coastal, lowland mesic, lowland Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana, Cyanea tritomantha, Cyrtandra wagneri, Platydesma remyi, Pritchardia lanigera, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and Stenogyne cranwelliae ) (Wood 1995, in litt.; Wood 1998, in litt.; Perlman et al. 2001, in litt.; Wagner et al. 2005d, pp. 31-33; Kohala Mountain Watershed Partnership (KMWP) 2007, pp. 54-56; Lorence and Perlman 2007, pp. 357-361; HBMP 2010a; HBMP 2010c; HBMP 2010f; HBMP 2010i; HBMP 2010j; HBMP 2010k; PEPP 2010, pp. 63, 101, 106; Bio 2011, pers. comm.). In addition, feral pigs are a threat to the lowland wet and montane wet ecosystems in south Kona and the Puna district that support the plants Cyanea marksii and Cyrtandra nanawaleensis (Bio 2011, pers. comm.; Magnacca 2011b, pers. comm.; Maui Forest Bird Recovery Project 2011, in litt.). Feral pigs have also been reported in the lowland dry ecosystem that supports the plants Bidens micrantha ssp. ctenophylla (Bio 2011, pers. comm.) and the montane dry ecosystem that supports habitat for the only known occurrence of the plant Schiedea hawaiiensis (Mitchell et al. 2005c; U.S. Army Garrison 2006, pp. 27, 34, 95-97, 100-107, 112.). Although we do not have direct evidence of feral pigs threatening the particular species on Hawaii Island that are proposed for listing in this proposed rule, those threats have been documented on other islands where pigs have been introduced (Mitchell et al. 2005c; U.S. Army Garrison 2006, pp. 27, 34, 95-97, 100-107, 112)

l et al. 2005c; U.S. Army Garrison 2006, pp. 27, 34, 95-97, 100-107, 112.). Although we do not have direct evidence of feral pigs threatening the particular species on Hawaii Island that are proposed for listing in this proposed rule, those threats have been documented on other islands where pigs have been introduced (Mitchell et al. 2005c; U.S. Army Garrison 2006, pp. 27, 34, 95-97, 100-107, 112). We believe it is reasonable to infer that feral pig threats to these species that have been observed on other Hawaiian islands would act in a similar manner on Hawaii Island, where those species interact.

Many of the most important host plants of Hawaiian picture-wing flies ( Charpentiera, Pleomele, Reynoldsia, Tetraplasandra, Urera, and the lobelioids ( e.g., Cyanea spp.)) are also among the most susceptible to damage from feral ungulates, such as pigs (Foote and Carson 1995, p. 370; Kaneshiro and Kaneshiro 1995, pp. 8, 39; Magnacca et al. 2008, p. 32). Feral pig browsing alters the essential microclimate in picture-wing fly habitat by opening up the canopy, leading to increased desiccation of soil and host plants, which disrupts the host plant life cycle and decay processes, resulting in disruption of the picture-wing fly life cycle, particularly oviposition and larvae substrate (Magnacca et al. 2008, pp. 1, 32). Foote and Carson (1995, p. 369) have experimentally demonstrated the above detrimental effects of feral pigs on Drosophila spp. in wet forest habitat on the island of Hawaii. In addition, Montgomery (2005, in litt.; 2007, in litt.) and Foote (2005, pers. comm.) have observed feral pig damage to host plants ( e.g., Charpentiera sp., Cheirodendron sp., Pleomele sp., Tetraplasandra sp., Urera kaalae ) of Hawaiian picture-wing flies on the island of Hawaii (Foote 2005, pers. comm.) and throughout the main Hawaiian Islands (Montgomery 2005, in litt.; 2007, in litt.). Magnacca (2012, pers

ontgomery (2005, in litt.; 2007, in litt.) and Foote (2005, pers. comm.) have observed feral pig damage to host plants ( e.g., Charpentiera sp., Cheirodendron sp., Pleomele sp., Tetraplasandra sp., Urera kaalae ) of Hawaiian picture-wing flies on the island of Hawaii (Foote 2005, pers. comm.) and throughout the main Hawaiian Islands (Montgomery 2005, in litt.; 2007, in litt.). Magnacca (2012, pers. comm.) has observed the lack of regeneration of picture-wing fly host plants due to destruction of seedlings caused by pig rooting and herbivory.

The destruction or degradation of habitat due to goats is currently a threat to all 10 of the described ecosystems on Hawaii Island (anchialine pool, coastal, lowland dry, lowland mesic, lowland wet, montane dry, montane mesic, montane wet, dry cliff, and wet cliff) and their associated species. Goats, native to the Middle East and India, were also successfully introduced to the Hawaiian Islands in the late 1700s. Actions to control feral goat populations began in the 1920s (Tomich 1986, pp. 152-153); however, goats still occupy a wide variety of habitats on Hawaii Island, where they consume native vegetation, trample roots and seedlings, accelerate erosion, and promote the invasion of alien plants (van Riper and van Riper 1982, pp. 34-35; Stone 1985, p. 261; Kessler 2011, pers. comm.). Goats are able to access, and forage in, extremely rugged terrain, and they have a high reproductive capacity (Clarke and Cuddihy 1980, pp. C-19, C-20; Culliney 1988, p. 336; Cuddihy and Stone 1990, p. 64). Because of these factors, goats are believed to have completely eliminated some plant species from islands (Atkinson and Atkinson 2000, p. 21)

5; Stone 1985, p. 261; Kessler 2011, pers. comm.). Goats are able to access, and forage in, extremely rugged terrain, and they have a high reproductive capacity (Clarke and Cuddihy 1980, pp. C-19, C-20; Culliney 1988, p. 336; Cuddihy and Stone 1990, p. 64). Because of these factors, goats are believed to have completely eliminated some plant species from islands (Atkinson and Atkinson 2000, p. 21).

Goats can be highly destructive to native vegetation, and contribute to erosion by eating young trees and young shoots of plants before they can become established, creating trails that damage native vegetative cover, promoting erosion by destabilizing substrate and creating gullies that convey water, and dislodging stones from ledges that can cause rockfalls and landslides and damage vegetation below (Cuddihy and Stone 1990, pp. 63-64). A recent study by Chynoweth et al. (2011, in litt.), which deployed GPS (global positioning system) satellite collars on 12 feral goats to track movement patterns every 2 hours for 1 year in Pohakuloa Training Area, found that goats prefer native-dominated shrublands in the montane dry ecosystem during the day and barren lava at night. Pohakuloa Training Area supports one of the few montane dry forest ecosystems on Hawaii Island that supports native plants in the montane dry ecosystem, including the only occurrence of the plant Schiedea hawaiiensis (U.S. Army Garrison 2006, pp. 27, 34; Evans 2011, in litt.). In addition, one of the two occurrences of the proposed plant species Pritchardia lanigera is known from an unfenced area of the Kohala Mountains, where herds of wild goats and other ungulates occur (Maly and Maly 2004 in KMWP 2007, p. 55; KMWP 2007, pp. 54-55; Warshauer et al. 2009, pp. 10, 24; Laws et al. 2010, in litt.; Ikagawa 2011, in litt.). Maly and Maly (2004 in KMWP 2007, p

11, in litt.). In addition, one of the two occurrences of the proposed plant species Pritchardia lanigera is known from an unfenced area of the Kohala Mountains, where herds of wild goats and other ungulates occur (Maly and Maly 2004 in KMWP 2007, p. 55; KMWP 2007, pp. 54-55; Warshauer et al. 2009, pp. 10, 24; Laws et al. 2010, in litt.; Ikagawa 2011, in litt.). Maly and Maly (2004 in KMWP 2007, p. 55) report that “herds of wild goats roam throughout this region, trampling, grubbing, and rending, grinding the bark of old trees and eat the young ones * * * which will destroy the beauty and alter the climate of the mountainous region of Hawaii.” There are direct observations that goats are also altering the coastal ecosystem along the Kohala Mountains, the location of the only known wild individuals of the plant Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana (Warshauer et al. 2009, p. 24; Bio 2011, pers. comm.). Goats are also found in North Kona and have been observed browsing in the lowland dry ecosystem that supports the plant B. micrantha ssp. ctenophylla (Bio 2011, pers. comm.; Knoche 2011, in litt.). Fresh seedlings from native plants attract goats to the dry and rough lava (Bio 2011, pers. comm.). Further, the host plant ( Charpentiera spp.) of the proposed picture-wing fly appears to be decreasing throughout its range due to impacts from browsing goats (Foote and Carson 1995, p. 369; Science Panel 2005, pp. 1-23; Magnacca et al. 2008, p. 32). Feral goat browsing alters the picture-wing fly's essential microclimate by opening up the canopy leading to increased desiccation of soil and host plants, which disrupts the host plant life cycle and decay processes, resulting in the disruption of the picture-wing fly life cycle, particularly oviposition and larvae substrate (Magnacca et al. 2008, pp. 1, 32). Based on observations of goats and their scat (Magnacca 2012, pers

e picture-wing fly's essential microclimate by opening up the canopy leading to increased desiccation of soil and host plants, which disrupts the host plant life cycle and decay processes, resulting in the disruption of the picture-wing fly life cycle, particularly oviposition and larvae substrate (Magnacca et al. 2008, pp. 1, 32). Based on observations of goats and their scat (Magnacca 2012, pers. comm.) within the Ka Lae region where the Lua O Palahemo anchialine pool is located, the Service believes that goats contribute to the degradation of the anchialine pool habitat and, thus, are a threat to Vetericaris chaceorum. Feral goats trample and forage on both native and

The destruction or degradation of habitat due to cattle is currently a threat to five of the described ecosystems (anchialine pool, lowland mesic, lowland wet, montane mesic, and montane wet) on Hawaii Island and their associated species. Cattle, the wild progenitors of which were native to Europe, northern Africa, and southwestern Asia, were introduced to the Hawaiian Islands in 1793. Large feral herds (as many as 12,000 on the island of Hawaii) developed as a result of restrictions on killing cattle decreed by King Kamehameha I (Cuddihy and Stone 1990, p. 40). While small cattle ranches were developed on Kauai, Oahu, Molokai, west Maui, and Kahoolawe, very large ranches of tens of thousands of acres (thousands of hectares) were created on east Maui and Hawaii Island (Stone 1985, pp. 256, 260; Broadbent 2010, in litt.). Logging of native Acacia koa was combined with establishment of cattle ranches, quickly converting native forest to grassland (Tomich 1986, p. 140; Cuddihy and Stone 1990, p. 47). Feral cattle can presently be found on the islands of Maui and Hawaii, where ranching is still a major commercial activity.

rest to grassland (Tomich 1986, p. 140; Cuddihy and Stone 1990, p. 47). Feral cattle can presently be found on the islands of Maui and Hawaii, where ranching is still a major commercial activity.

Feral cattle eat native vegetation, trample roots and seedlings, cause erosion, create disturbed areas into which alien plants invade, and spread seeds of alien plants in their feces and on their bodies. The forest in areas grazed by cattle degrades to grassland pasture, and plant cover is reduced for many years following removal of cattle from an area. In addition, several alien grasses and legumes purposely introduced for cattle forage have become noxious weeds (Tomich 1986, pp. 140-150; Cuddihy and Stone 1990, p. 29).

The wet forests of the Kohala Mountains are reported to have a feral cattle population of at least 100 individuals that are causing forest degradation by trampling and browsing, which leads to subsequent increased nitrogen availability through deposition of feces (Stone 1985, p. 253), all of which contribute to the influx of nonnative plant and animal species (KMWP 2007, pp. 54-55; Laws 2010, in litt.). Feral cattle are reported from remote regions on Hawaii Island, including the back of both Pololu and Waipio Valleys (KMWP 2007, p. 55). Feral cattle are a threat to the lowland wet and montane wet ecosystems in the Kohala Mountains where individuals of Cyanea tritomantha and Pritchardia lanigera, and the last wild individual of Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, are reported (PEPP 2010, pp. 59-60; Bio 2011, pers. comm.). According to a 2010 Service report (USFWS 2010, pp. 3-15, 4-86), a herd of 200 to 300 feral cattle roams the Kona unit of the Hakalau Forest NWR (USFWS 2010, p. 3-15, 4-86). Field biologists have observed cattle-induced habitat degradation at all elevations in this refuge unit, including within the montane wet ecosystem that supports individuals of Cyanea marksii (PEPP 2007, p. 61; USFWS 2010, pp. 1-15, 2-13, 4-10, 4-58-4-59, 4-82, 4-86; Bio 2011, pers. comm.; Krauss 2012, pers. comm.)

l cattle roams the Kona unit of the Hakalau Forest NWR (USFWS 2010, p. 3-15, 4-86). Field biologists have observed cattle-induced habitat degradation at all elevations in this refuge unit, including within the montane wet ecosystem that supports individuals of Cyanea marksii (PEPP 2007, p. 61; USFWS 2010, pp. 1-15, 2-13, 4-10, 4-58-4-59, 4-82, 4-86; Bio 2011, pers. comm.; Krauss 2012, pers. comm.). In addition, the host plant ( Charpentiera spp.) of the proposed picture-wing fly species ( Drosophila digressa ) appears to be decreasing throughout its range due to impacts from cattle browsing in the lowland mesic and montane mesic ecosystems (Science Panel 2005, pp. 1-23; Magnacca 2011b, in litt.). Feral cattle browsing alters the picture-wing fly's essential microclimate by opening up the canopy, leading to increased desiccation of soil and host plants, which disrupts the host plant life cycle and decay processes, resulting in the disruption of the picture-wing fly life cycle, particularly oviposition and larvae substrate (Magnacca et al. 2008, pp. 1, 32). According to Palikapu Dedman with the Pele Defense Fund, observations of feral cattle in the Ka Lae region where the Lua O Palahemo anchialine pool is located contribute to the degradation of the anchialine pool habitat. We therefore conclude that feral cattle are a threat to Vetericaris chaceorum (Richardson 2012, in litt., pp. 1-2). Feral cattle trample and forage on both native and nonnative plants around and near the pool opening at Lua O Palahemo, and increase erosion around the pool and sediment entering the pool.

The destruction or degradation of habitat due to feral sheep is currently a threat to the montane dry ecosystem on Hawaii Island and its associated species. Sheep were introduced to Hawaii Island in 1791, when Captain Vancouver brought five rams and two ewes from California (Tomich 1986, pp. 156-163). Soon after, stock was brought from Australia, Germany, and the Mediterranean for sheep production (Tomich 1986, pp

r degradation of habitat due to feral sheep is currently a threat to the montane dry ecosystem on Hawaii Island and its associated species. Sheep were introduced to Hawaii Island in 1791, when Captain Vancouver brought five rams and two ewes from California (Tomich 1986, pp. 156-163). Soon after, stock was brought from Australia, Germany, and the Mediterranean for sheep production (Tomich 1986, pp. 156-163; Cuddihy and Stone 1990, p. 65-66). Feral sheep became established on leeward Mauna Kea by 1876 (Cuddihy and Stone 1990, p. 65-66), and by the early 1930s, reached close to 40,000 individuals (Scowcroft and Conrad 1992, p. 627). Acquiring the majority of their water needs by consuming vegetation, sheep inhabited dry forests in remote regions of Mauna Kea and Mauna Loa, including the saddle between the two volcanoes. Feral sheep browse and trample native vegetation and have decimated large areas of native forest and shrubland on Hawaii Island (Tomich 1986, pp. 156-163; Cuddihy and Stone 1990, p. 65-66). Browsing erodes top soil, which alters moisture regimes and micro-environments and results in the loss of native plant and animal taxa (Tomich 1986, pp. 156-163; Cuddihy and Stone 1990, p. 65-66). In addition, nonnative opportunistic plant seeds get dispersed to disturbed forest sites by adhering to sheep wool coats (Hawaii Division of Forestry and Wildlife (HDOFAW) 2002, p. 3).

In 1962, game hunters intentionally crossbred feral sheep with mouflon sheep and released them on Mauna Kea (Tomich 1986, pp. 156-163). In Palila v. Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources (471 F. Supp. 985 (Haw. 1979)), the Federal court ordered complete removal of feral sheep from Mauna Kea in 1979, because they were harming the endangered palila ( Loxioides bailleui ) by degrading and destroying palila habitat in the montane dry ecosystem. Throughout the past 30 years, attempts to protect the vegetation of Mauna Kea and the saddle from sheep have only been sporadically effective (Scowcroft and Conrad 1992, p. 628)

Federal court ordered complete removal of feral sheep from Mauna Kea in 1979, because they were harming the endangered palila ( Loxioides bailleui ) by degrading and destroying palila habitat in the montane dry ecosystem. Throughout the past 30 years, attempts to protect the vegetation of Mauna Kea and the saddle from sheep have only been sporadically effective (Scowcroft and Conrad 1992, p. 628). Currently, a large feral population surrounds Mauna Kea and extends into the saddle and northern part of Mauna Loa, including the State forest reserves where they trample and browse endangered plants (Hess 2008, p. 1). At the U.S. Army's Pohakuloa Training Area, located in the saddle area of the island, biologists have reported that feral sheep are a threat to the last occurrence of the plant species Schiedea hawaiiensis, which occurs in the montane dry ecosystem (Mitchell et al. 2005a; U.S. Army Garrison 2006, pp. 27, 34).

Five of the described ecosystems (lowland mesic, lowland wet, montane dry, montane mesic, and montane wet) on Hawaii Island, and their associated species are currently threatened by the destruction or degradation of habitat due to mouflon sheep. The mouflon sheep (mouflon), native to Asia Minor, was introduced to the islands of Lanai and Hawaii in the 1950s, as a managed game species, and has become widely established on these islands (Tomich 1986, pp. 163-168; Cuddihy and Stone 1990, p. 66; Hess 2008, p. 1). In 1968, mouflon were introduced to Kahuku Ranch (now a unit of HVNP) on Mauna Loa for trophy hunting. By 2008, mouflon ranged over the southern part Cyanea marksii, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Pritchardia lanigera, and Schiedea hawaiiensis ) (Bio 2011, pers. comm.; Ikagawa 2011, in litt.; Pratt 2011d, in litt.), and the picture-wing fly ( Drosophila digressa ) (Magnacca 2011b, pers. comm.). Many of the current and proposed fenced exclosures on Hawaii Island are only 4 ft (1.3 m) in height, as they are designed to exclude feral pigs, goats, and sheep

anea marksii, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Pritchardia lanigera, and Schiedea hawaiiensis ) (Bio 2011, pers. comm.; Ikagawa 2011, in litt.; Pratt 2011d, in litt.), and the picture-wing fly ( Drosophila digressa ) (Magnacca 2011b, pers. comm.). Many of the current and proposed fenced exclosures on Hawaii Island are only 4 ft (1.3 m) in height, as they are designed to exclude feral pigs, goats, and sheep. However, a fence height of at least 6 ft (2 m) is required to exclude mouflon sheep, as they can easily jump a 4-ft (1.3-m) fence (Ikagawa 2011, in litt.). The increased range of mouflon, as well as the lack of adequately protected habitat, increase the threat of mouflon sheep to additional ecosystems on Hawaii Island.

Axis deer ( Axis axis ) were first introduced to Molokai in 1868, Lanai in 1920, and Maui in 1959 (Hobdy 1993, p. 207; Erdman 1996, pers. comm. cited in Waring 1996, in litt., p. 2; Hess 2008, p. 2). Recently (2010-2011), unauthorized introduction of axis deer to the island of Hawaii as a game animal has occurred (Kessler 2011, in litt.; Aila 2012a, in litt.). They have been observed in the regions of Kohala, Kau, Kona, and Mauna Kea (HDLNR 2011, in litt.). The HDLNR-HDOFAW has developed a response-and-removal plan, including a partnership now underway between HDLNR, Hawaii Department of Agriculture (HDOA), the Big Island Invasive Species Committee (BIISC), Federal natural resource management agencies, ranchers, farmers, private landowners, and concerned citizens (Big Island-Big Island.com, June 6, 2011). The partnership is working with animal trackers and game cameras to survey locations where axis deer have been observed in an effort to eradicate them on the island (Big Island-Big Island.com, June 6, 2011; Osher 2012, in litt.). There is a high level of concern by the partnership due to the negative impacts of axis deer on agriculture and native ecosystems on neighboring islands ( e.g., Maui) (Aila 2011, in litt.; Schipper 2011, in litt.; Aila 2012b, in litt.)

to survey locations where axis deer have been observed in an effort to eradicate them on the island (Big Island-Big Island.com, June 6, 2011; Osher 2012, in litt.). There is a high level of concern by the partnership due to the negative impacts of axis deer on agriculture and native ecosystems on neighboring islands ( e.g., Maui) (Aila 2011, in litt.; Schipper 2011, in litt.; Aila 2012b, in litt.). In response to the presence of axis deer on Hawaii Island, the Hawaii Invasive Species Council drafted House Bill 2593 (Draft 2), to amend House Revised Statutes (Haw. Rev. Stat.) 91, which allowed agencies to adopt emergency rules in instances of imminent peril to the public health, safety, or morals, or to livestock and poultry health (Aila 2012a, in litt.). House Bill 2593 (Draft 2) addresses the gap in the current emergency rules authority, expanding the ability of State agencies to adopt emergency rules to address situations that impose imminent threats to natural resources (Aila 2012a, in litt.; Martin 2012, in litt.) (see Factor D. The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms, below). Emergency rules are valid for 120 days after they are registered and approved, and after 6 months a permanent rule can be enacted (Cravalho 2012, pers. comm). On June 21, 2012, House Bill 2593 was enacted into law as Act 149 (“Relating to Emergency Rules for Threats to Natural Resources or the Health of the Environment”).

Axis deer are primarily grazers, but also browse numerous palatable plant species, including those grown as commercial crops (Waring 1996, in litt., p. 3; Simpson 2001, in litt.). They prefer the lower, more openly vegetated areas for browsing and grazing; however, during episodes of drought ( e.g., from 1998-2001 on Maui (Medeiros 2010, pers. comm.)), axis deer move into urban and forested areas in search of food (Waring 1996, in litt., p. 5; Nishibayashi 2001, in litt.)

ecies, including those grown as commercial crops (Waring 1996, in litt., p. 3; Simpson 2001, in litt.). They prefer the lower, more openly vegetated areas for browsing and grazing; however, during episodes of drought ( e.g., from 1998-2001 on Maui (Medeiros 2010, pers. comm.)), axis deer move into urban and forested areas in search of food (Waring 1996, in litt., p. 5; Nishibayashi 2001, in litt.). Like goats, axis deer can be highly destructive to native vegetation and contribute to erosion by eating young trees and young shoots of plants before they can become established, creating trails that can damage native vegetative cover, promoting erosion by destabilizing substrate and creating gullies that convey water, and by dislodging stones from ledges that can cause rockfalls and landslides and damage vegetation below (Cuddihy and Stone 1990, pp. 63-64). The unauthorized introduction of axis deer on Hawaii Island is a concern due to the devastating impacts of habitat destruction by axis deer in nine ecosystems (coastal, lowland dry, lowland mesic, lowland wet, montane dry, montane mesic, montane wet, dry cliff, and wet cliff) on the islands of Kahoolawe, Lanai, and Maui (Mehrhoff 1993, p. 11; Anderson 2002, poster; Swedberg and Walker 1978, cited in Anderson 2003, pp. 124-125 Perlman 2009, in litt., pp. 4-5; Hess 2008, p. 3; Hess 2010, pers. comm.; Kessler 2010, pers. comm.; Medeiros 2010, pers. comm.). As reported on the islands of Kahoolawe, Lanai, and Maui, the spread of axis deer into nine of the described ecosystems (coastal, lowland dry, lowland mesic, lowland wet, montane dry, montane mesic, montane wet, dry cliff, and wet cliff) on Hawaii Island is expected to lead to similar habitat degradation and destruction if the deer are not controlled. The results from the studies above, in addition to the confirmed sightings of axis deer on Hawaii Island, suggest that axis deer can significantly alter these ecosystems and directly damage or destroy native plants

t, montane dry, montane mesic, montane wet, dry cliff, and wet cliff) on Hawaii Island is expected to lead to similar habitat degradation and destruction if the deer are not controlled. The results from the studies above, in addition to the confirmed sightings of axis deer on Hawaii Island, suggest that axis deer can significantly alter these ecosystems and directly damage or destroy native plants. Although habitat degradation due to axis deer has not yet been observed on Hawaii Island, we believe it is reasonable to assume similar habitat effects on this island. Based on the prevailing evidence of the documented impacts to native ecosystems and individual plants on the other islands, we determine that the expanding population of axis deer on the Island of Hawaii, while not currently resulting in population-level effects to native plants, is expected to do so in the future if the deer are not managed or controlled. As a result, we currently do not believe that the existing population of axis deer on Hawaii Island is a threat; however, we expect that as the population of axis deer expands, axis deer will become a significant threat to the native plants and ecosystems on Hawaii Island in the future.

In summary, all of the 15 species proposed for listing and that are dependent upon the 10 ecosystems (anchialine pool, coastal, lowland dry, lowland mesic, lowland wet, montane dry, montane mesic, montane wet, dry cliff, and wet cliff) identified in this proposed rule are exposed to the ongoing threat of feral ungulates (pigs, et al. 2011, pp. 175-194). As early as 1900, there was increasing concern expressed about the integrity of island watersheds, due to effects of ungulates and other factors, leading to the establishment of a professional forestry program emphasizing soil and water conservation (Nelson 1989, p. 3)

wet cliff) identified in this proposed rule are exposed to the ongoing threat of feral ungulates (pigs, et al. 2011, pp. 175-194). As early as 1900, there was increasing concern expressed about the integrity of island watersheds, due to effects of ungulates and other factors, leading to the establishment of a professional forestry program emphasizing soil and water conservation (Nelson 1989, p. 3).

Habitat Destruction and Modification by Nonnative Plants

Native vegetation on all of the main Hawaiian Islands has undergone extreme alteration because of past and present land management practices, including ranching, the deliberate introduction of nonnative plants and animals, and agricultural development (Cuddihy and Stone 1990, pp. 27, 58). The original native flora of Hawaii (species that were present before humans arrived) consisted of about 1,000 taxa, 89 percent of which were endemic (species that occur only in the Hawaiian Islands). Over 800 plant taxa have been introduced from elsewhere, and nearly 100 of these have become pests ( e.g., injurious plants) in Hawaii (Smith 1985, p. 180; Cuddihy and Stone 1990, p. 73; Gagne and Cuddihy 1999, p. 45). Of these 100 nonnative pest plant species, over 35 species have altered the habitat of 14 of the 15 species proposed for listing (only the proposed anchialine pool shrimp is not directly impacted by nonnative plants (see Table 3)). Some of the nonnative plants were brought to Hawaii by various groups of people, including the Polynesians, for food or cultural reasons. Plantation owners (and the territorial government of Hawaii), alarmed at the reduction of water resources for their crops caused by the destruction of native forest cover by grazing feral and domestic animals, introduced nonnative trees for reforestation. Ranchers intentionally introduced pasture grasses and other nonnative plants for agriculture, and sometimes inadvertently introduced weeds as well. Other plants were brought to Hawaii for their potential horticultural value (Scott et al. 1986, pp

ces for their crops caused by the destruction of native forest cover by grazing feral and domestic animals, introduced nonnative trees for reforestation. Ranchers intentionally introduced pasture grasses and other nonnative plants for agriculture, and sometimes inadvertently introduced weeds as well. Other plants were brought to Hawaii for their potential horticultural value (Scott et al. 1986, pp. 361-363; Cuddihy and Stone 1990, p. 73).

Nonnative plants impact native habitat in Hawaii, including 9 of the described Hawaii Island ecosystems that support 14 of the 15 proposed species (all except the anchialine pool shrimp), and directly adversely impact the 13 proposed plant species, by: (1) Modifying the availability of light through alterations of the canopy structure; (2) altering soil-water regimes; (3) modifying nutrient cycling; (4) altering the fire regime affecting native plant communities ( e.g., successive fires that burn farther and farther into native habitat, destroying native plants and removing habitat for native species by altering microclimatic conditions to favor alien species); and (5) ultimately converting native-dominated plant communities to nonnative plant communities (Smith 1985, pp. 180-181; Cuddihy and Stone, 1990, p. 74; D'Antonio and Vitousek 1992, p. 73; Vitousek et al. 1997, p.

This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.