Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Proposed Endangered Status for the Oahu Elepaio from the Hawaiian Islands

DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

RIN 1018-AE51

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Proposed

Endangered Status for the Oahu Elepaio from the Hawaiian Islands

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule and notice of finding.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) proposes

endangered status pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as

amended (Act), for the Oahu elepaio (Chasiempis sandwichensis ibidis).

This bird is endemic to the island of Oahu, Hawaiian Islands, where it

was formerly found in all forested areas on the island. It is currently

found in greatly reduced numbers and range in six isolated populations

occurring in mid-elevation forests in the southern Koolau Mountain

Range and parts of the Waianae Mountain Range. The Oahu elepaio is now

thought to occupy less than 80 square kilometers (sq km) (30 square

miles (sq mi)) or 8 percent of its original, historic range. Sightings

of Oahu elepaio during Christmas Bird

Counts have dropped by 75 percent since 1960. The most recent

population estimate for this taxon indicates that between 200 and 500

birds remain. The Oahu elepaio has been affected in the past and will

continue to be threatened by--habitat loss and degradation, including

habitat loss from development, and habitat modification resulting from

human activities; predation by introduced mammals; introduced avian

disease; competition from introduced birds, and; the spread of certain

alien plants which dramatically alter forest structure and/or

diversity. The Oahu elepaio is also subject to an increased likelihood

of extinction from naturally occurring events, such as hurricanes, etc.

DATES: Comments from all interested parties must be received by

December 7, 1998. Public hearing requests must be received by November

20, 1998.

introduced birds, and; the spread of certain

alien plants which dramatically alter forest structure and/or

diversity. The Oahu elepaio is also subject to an increased likelihood

of extinction from naturally occurring events, such as hurricanes, etc.

DATES: Comments from all interested parties must be received by

December 7, 1998. Public hearing requests must be received by November

20, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Comments and materials concerning this proposal should be

sent to Manager, Pacific Islands Ecoregion, U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service, 300 Ala Moana Boulevard, P.O. Box 50088, Honolulu, Hawaii

96850. Comments and material received will be available for public

inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours at the above

address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pacific Islands Ecoregion Manager (see

ADDRESSES section) (telephone 808/541-2749; facsimile 808/541-2756).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The Hawaiian archipelago is comprised of eight main islands, and

the shoals and atolls of the northwest Hawaiian Islands. The islands

were formed sequentially by basaltic lava that emerged from a crustal

hot spot located near the southeast coast of the island of Hawaii

(Stearns 1985).

The second oldest main island, Oahu, is 2.5 to 3.5 million years

old, and is heavily weathered. Oahu has two principal mountain ranges--

the Koolau and Waianae. The Koolau Mountains extend 60 km (37 mi) from

southeast to northwest along the eastern half of the island. The

windward (northeast) slope of these mountains is characterized by steep

cliffs and short ridges less than 6 km (4 mi) long. Leeward ridges as

long as 18 km (11 mi) parallel one another to the southwest and west;

alternating with steep-sided stream valleys. The peak elevation in the

Koolau Mountains occurs at Puu Konahua Nui (955 meters (m); 3,100 feet

(ft)). The Waianae Mountains run from southeast to northwest in a 32 km

(20 mi) arc along the western coast of Oahu

iffs and short ridges less than 6 km (4 mi) long. Leeward ridges as

long as 18 km (11 mi) parallel one another to the southwest and west;

alternating with steep-sided stream valleys. The peak elevation in the

Koolau Mountains occurs at Puu Konahua Nui (955 meters (m); 3,100 feet

(ft)). The Waianae Mountains run from southeast to northwest in a 32 km

(20 mi) arc along the western coast of Oahu. The steep cliffs of the

Waianae Mountains are leeward facing (western slope); both windward and

leeward ridges are less than 5 km (3 mi) in length. The peak elevation

occurs at Kaala (1,230 m (4,000 ft)).

In general, native forest vegetation on Oahu presently only occurs

above elevations of about 500 m (1,600 ft). By 1900, most lower

elevation forests had been cleared for agricultural and commercial use

or were heavily invaded by introduced vegetation. Current habitats for

Oahu elepaio occur in the Waianae Mountains and in the southern Koolau

Mountains on Oahu in a variety of wet and dry forests, including those

dominated by either native or alien tree species.

The elepaio from the island of Oahu has been recognized as a

distinct taxonomic entity since Stejneger first described the Oahu

elepaio as Chasiempis ibidis in 1887. Wilson (1891) described the bird

as C. gayi, but, as pointed out by Olson (1989), the epithet ibidis has

priority over gayi. Various taxonomic treatments of the Hawaiian

elepaio have described from one to six species and up to five

subspecies (Sclater 1885, Stejneger 1887, Wilson and Evans 1890-1899,

Wilson 1891, Rothschild 1892-1900, Henshaw 1902, Perkins 1903,

MacCaughey 1919, Bryan and Greenway 1944, Pratt 1979 and 1980, Olson

1989, Olson and James 1991). The taxonomy used in this proposed rule

follows Pyle (1992) and recognizes only a single species of elepaio in

Hawaii (Chasiempis sandwichensis) with three subspecies, each of which

is endemic to a different island. The three island-specific subspecies

of elepaio are--Kauai elepaio (C.s

ns 1903,

MacCaughey 1919, Bryan and Greenway 1944, Pratt 1979 and 1980, Olson

1989, Olson and James 1991). The taxonomy used in this proposed rule

follows Pyle (1992) and recognizes only a single species of elepaio in

Hawaii (Chasiempis sandwichensis) with three subspecies, each of which

is endemic to a different island. The three island-specific subspecies

of elepaio are--Kauai elepaio (C.s. sclateri Ridgeway 1882), Oahu

elepaio (C.s. ibidis Stejneger 1887), and Hawaii elepaio (C. s.

sandwichensis Gmelin 1789 (as cited in Pyle 1992)). These subspecies

differ considerably in plumage coloration and somewhat in

vocalizations, but are quite similar in ecology and behavior (Conant

1977, Pratt 1980, VanderWerf 1993, and 1994).

The Oahu elepaio is a member of the Old-World insect-eater family

of birds (Muscicapidae) and is most likely related to the genus

Monarcha (Mayr 1943, Conant 1977). The ancestors that gave rise to

elepaio were probably of Melanesian origin with colonization of Hawaii

occurring through Polynesia or Micronesia.

The Oahu elepaio has long slender legs and a broad, soft bill,

black in color and bordered with bristles. Body length is about 14.6

centimeters (cm) (6 inches (in)). Adults are rusty brown above, with a

contrasting rufous-chestnut eyebrow and a whitish eye-ring. The chin is

white and the throat black, with some rufous-chestnut streaking on the

upper breast; the belly is white. Adult males and females are similar

in appearance. Two distinctive field marks of adults are the white wing

bars and white rump, both of which are easily seen when the bird is in

flight. Immature birds lack both the white rump and the black throat

and are relatively uniform rusty brown on the head and neck. The chest

is tinged with buff and the belly is white. The whitish eye-ring and

bold white, black, and chestnut markings of the adults are also absent

in immature birds (Pratt 1980)

e white wing

bars and white rump, both of which are easily seen when the bird is in

flight. Immature birds lack both the white rump and the black throat

and are relatively uniform rusty brown on the head and neck. The chest

is tinged with buff and the belly is white. The whitish eye-ring and

bold white, black, and chestnut markings of the adults are also absent

in immature birds (Pratt 1980).

Comments by early naturalists indicate that the Oahu elepaio was

once widespread in forested areas throughout Oahu at all elevations.

Perkins (1903) remarked that ``the universal distribution over the

islands they severally inhabit, from the lowest bounds to the uppermost

edge of continuous forest, as well as their extreme abundance and

obtrusive familiarity, has caused them to be noticed by many persons

who have seen no other native bird.'' Bryan (1905) noted that the

elepaio ``remains the most abundant Hawaiian species on the

mountainside all the way from the sea to well up into the higher

elevations,'' while MacCaughey (1919) wrote that ``the altitudinal

range on Oahu is approximately from 800 feet to the highest summits.''

However, even the earliest described historical range was likely to

have been somewhat modified by habitat destruction, as noted by

MacCaughey (1919) ``[o]riginally, when the forests covered much more of

the lowlands than at present, and extended down to the strand in many

districts, the elepaio was abundant at the lower levels * * *''. In

spite of the descriptions of reduced range, naturalists were optimistic

about the elepaio's chances for survival

kely to

have been somewhat modified by habitat destruction, as noted by

MacCaughey (1919) ``[o]riginally, when the forests covered much more of

the lowlands than at present, and extended down to the strand in many

districts, the elepaio was abundant at the lower levels * * *''. In

spite of the descriptions of reduced range, naturalists were optimistic

about the elepaio's chances for survival. In 1902, Henshaw (1902) wrote

``it is probable that when most of the Hawaiian birds are extinct the

elepaio will long continue to maintain itself in scarcely diminished

numbers.'' MacCaughey (1919) wrote, ``[t]he one indigenous forest bird

that appears to successfully withstand the devastating influences of

``civilization'' is the Hawaiian flycatcher elepaio.'' Munro (1944) was

similarly optimistic about the elepaio, reporting that ``[i]t is

holding its own well in the Oahu forests from which so many of the

native birds have long disappeared.''

Early observations indicate that the Oahu elepaio was widely

distributed and extremely abundant. Rothschild (1892) called the

elepaio ``one of the

commonest, if not the commonest, of all the small native birds on

Oahu.'' Similarly, Seale (1900) said the elepaio was ``the commonest

native land bird to be found on the island.'' MacCaughey (1919) stated

that it was ``the most abundant representative of the native woodland

avifauna'' and ``abundant in all parts of its range,'' but Bryan (1905)

found it to be ``much more frequently met with in the Waianae Mountains

than in the Koolau range back of Honolulu,'' which may indicate that

the species' optimum habitat is dry rather than wet forest.

Based on the above range descriptions, the Oahu elepaio was

historically very general in its habitat requirements, and at least

some populations occupied all types of forest at most elevations.

Several authors noted that elepaio reached their greatest abundance in

valleys at middle elevations

k of Honolulu,'' which may indicate that

the species' optimum habitat is dry rather than wet forest.

Based on the above range descriptions, the Oahu elepaio was

historically very general in its habitat requirements, and at least

some populations occupied all types of forest at most elevations.

Several authors noted that elepaio reached their greatest abundance in

valleys at middle elevations. For example, Seale (1900) said that ``its

usual haunt is the densely wooded canons at an elevation of from [sic]

800 to 1,300 feet.'' MacCaughey (1919) observed that the elepaio is ``a

bird of the humid and mesophytic forests,'' and said it ``is most

plentiful in the protected wooded ravines and on the valley slopes.''

The generalized habitat requirements of the Oahu elepaio are also

shown by its ability to forage (as a generalized insectivore) and nest

in a variety of different plant species, including areas with non-

native vegetation. Perkins (1903) believed that ``to the changes

wrought by civilization they are less susceptible than any other bird,

and they may be seen feeding and even nesting in dense thickets of the

introduced guava, or amongst masses of the prickly lantana, as

contentedly as amongst the native vegetation.'' Conant (1977) studied a

population that existed in a forest of entirely introduced plant

species. The species shows extremely versatile foraging behavior and

uses all available plant species and all heights in forests of native

plant species (Conant 1981, VanderWerf 1993 and 1994).

More recent information indicates that the Oahu elepaio still

inhabits various types of forest. The Oahu elepaio appears to be most

common in areas of alien and mixed native/alien forest having a tall

tree canopy and well developed subcanopy and understory structure that

supports high density insect populations, and in valleys at middle

elevations

ies (Conant 1981, VanderWerf 1993 and 1994).

More recent information indicates that the Oahu elepaio still

inhabits various types of forest. The Oahu elepaio appears to be most

common in areas of alien and mixed native/alien forest having a tall

tree canopy and well developed subcanopy and understory structure that

supports high density insect populations, and in valleys at middle

elevations. The species is much less numerous in scrubby vegetation on

higher-elevation ridges and slopes, and does not frequent forests

lacking a subcanopy or comprised of monotypes. The apparent preference

for alien or mixed alien-native forest may be a reflection of their

continued affinity for mid-elevation valleys, where disturbance has

been greater and the majority of plants are introduced. Virtually all

forests below 500 m (1,600 ft) have been degraded to the point that

they now consist almost entirely of introduced vegetation. During an

intensive bird survey of the central Koolau Mountains on Oahu in 1978,

Shallenberger and Vaughn (1978) found the greatest abundance of elepaio

in alien forests, particularly areas with kukui (Aleurites moluccana)

and guava (Psidium guajava and P. cattleianum) trees, and in mixed

alien-native forest. The occurrence of elepaio was lower in forests of

entirely native species, primarily ohia (Metrosideros polymorpha) and

koa (Acacia koa). The lesser abundance in native forest found by

Shallenberger and Vaughn (1978) is unlikely to be a sampling artifact

because the greatest effort was spent in areas of native forest. It is

likely due to a preference for certain elevations and diverse forest

structure rather than for certain plant species. The results of the

Oahu forest bird survey (Hawaii State Division of Forestry and

Wildlife, 1991), indicate that the current habitat types occupied by

the Oahu elepaio appear to be similar to what Shallenberger and Vaughn

test effort was spent in areas of native forest. It is

likely due to a preference for certain elevations and diverse forest

structure rather than for certain plant species. The results of the

Oahu forest bird survey (Hawaii State Division of Forestry and

Wildlife, 1991), indicate that the current habitat types occupied by

the Oahu elepaio appear to be similar to what Shallenberger and Vaughn

(1978) reported.

Conant (1995) has identified 598 separate observations of Oahu

elepaio dating from 1883 through 1995. Many of these sightings occurred

in the same location, but over a period of years. By consolidating

observations made at the same location, it was possible to identify 83

site-specific locations where elepaio had been seen. Sixty-nine of

these sites (84 percent) have been revisited between 1990 and 1995. Of

these revisited sites, only 31 (45 percent) still had elepaio present.

These 31 extant sites are distributed among six isolated populations in

the southern Koolau Mountains and the central Waianae Mountains.

Further analysis of both these data and the writings of early

naturalists indicates that the elepaio originally inhabited 75 percent

of Oahu's land mass. By 1960, only 30 percent of the original habitat

was still occupied. Fifteen years later, in 1975, the distribution had

declined to 14 percent of the original distribution. In 1990, the Oahu

elepaio occupied an area of 80 sq km (30 sq mi). This represents less

than 8 percent of its original range (Conant 1995).

While a collapse of the Oahu elepaio's range has clearly occurred,

decline in population density in the remaining populations has been

more difficult to determine. Williams (1987) examined the decline of

Oahu elepaio using Christmas Bird Counts from 1944 through 1985. Using

standardized data (one census per year with number of birds per hour of

observation), he documented a clear downward trend in elepaio

observations

u elepaio's range has clearly occurred,

decline in population density in the remaining populations has been

more difficult to determine. Williams (1987) examined the decline of

Oahu elepaio using Christmas Bird Counts from 1944 through 1985. Using

standardized data (one census per year with number of birds per hour of

observation), he documented a clear downward trend in elepaio

observations. The data show a sharp decline in Oahu elepaio

observations beginning in the late 1950s and continuing through the

1960s, when observations were one or fewer birds per observer hour,

dropping to approximately 0.5 birds per observer hour after 1974.

In their recent reports, Sherwood (1995) and Cowell (1995) called

attention to the population estimate of 200 to 500 total Oahu elepaio

made by the Hawaii Forest Bird Conservation Assessment and Management

report (Ellis et al. 1992). This report stated that two subpopulations

of Oahu elepaio exist, one in the Waianae Mountains and the other in

the Koolau Mountains. However, more detailed data suggest that there

are actually six smaller and geographically isolated populations, three

in each of the mountain ranges. Ellis et al. (1992) estimated that 20

percent of the population was in the Waianae Mountains and 80 percent

in the Koolau Mountains. In terms of the areal range, 40 percent of the

range is in the Waianae Mountains and 60 percent in the Koolau

Mountains. In 1994, at least 79 Oahu elepaio were seen (Conant 1995). A

systematic range-wide count of Oahu elepaio has not been made and the

population estimate of 200 to 500 birds by Ellis and others (1992)

remains the only range-wide estimate of numbers.

The remaining six populations occur on lands owned by Federal,

State, City and County of Honolulu, and private parties

ent in the Koolau

Mountains. In 1994, at least 79 Oahu elepaio were seen (Conant 1995). A

systematic range-wide count of Oahu elepaio has not been made and the

population estimate of 200 to 500 birds by Ellis and others (1992)

remains the only range-wide estimate of numbers.

The remaining six populations occur on lands owned by Federal,

State, City and County of Honolulu, and private parties. Analysis of

major land ownership patterns identify 48 percent of occupied elepaio

areas in privately held lands, 25 percent federally owned or leased

lands, 22 percent State-owned areas and 5 percent owned by city and

county governments. Ownership patterns vary between the six

populations. Two populations have greater than fifty percent private

ownership within their ranges, three populations' ranges cover land

primarily owned by the State, and one population has the majority of

land under Federal ownership. Ninety-two percent of the current elepaio

range occurs within State-designated Conservation Districts and 29

percent of the range occurs within additional protected areas,

including State Forest Reserves, State Natural Area Reserves, and The

Nature Conservancy's Honouliuli Preserve. Only 8 percent of the elepaio

range falls outside the Conservation District and protected areas.

Previous Federal Action

The Service was petitioned by Mr. Vaughn Sherwood on March 22,

1994, to list the Oahu elepaio as an endangered or threatened species

with critical habitat. The November 15, 1994, Animal Notice of Review

(59 FR 58991) classified the Oahu elepaio (C. s. gayi) as a category 1

candidate. Category 1 candidates are those species for which the

Service has sufficient data in its possession to support a listing

proposal. On June 12, 1995 (60 FR 30827), the Service published a 90-

day petition finding stating that the petition presented substantial

information such that listing may be warranted. Because C. s. gayi is a

synonym of C. s

a limited number of proposed or final rules to delist or

reclassify species; and third priority (Tier 3) to processing proposed

or final rules designating critical habitat. Processing of this

proposed rule is a Tier 2 action. The Pacific Islands Ecoregion

currently has no outstanding Tier 1 species; therefore, processing of

Tier 2 activities is appropriate under the listing priority guidance.

This rule has been updated by the Pacific Islands Ecosystem Office to

reflect any changes in distribution, status and threats since the

effective date of the listing moratorium.

Summary of Factors Affecting the Species

Section 4 of the Act and regulations (50 CFR part 424) promulgated

to implement the listing provisions of the Act set forth the procedures

for adding species to the Federal lists. 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). These factors and their

application to the Oahu elepaio are as follows:

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

of Its Habitat or Range

Threats to the Oahu elepaio's habitat include habitat loss from

development, habitat modification resulting from human activities,

habitat damage by pigs and the spread of certain alien plants, such as

the velvet tree (Miconia calvescens), which dramatically alter forest

structure and/or diversity.

Alteration of areas covered by forests, including changes in forest

composition and forest structure and the resulting habitat loss has

impacted the Oahu elepaio. Early Hawaiians significantly altered the

native vegetation of Oahu, particularly in valleys used for taro

cultivation. In uncultivated areas, trees were cut for firewood and

construction, and fire was used to encourage the growth of grasses used

for thatch (Kirch 1982). Destruction of the low-elevation forest

resulted in the extinctions of numerous birds and land snails on Oahu

(Olson and James 1982, Kirch 1982)

icantly altered the

native vegetation of Oahu, particularly in valleys used for taro

cultivation. In uncultivated areas, trees were cut for firewood and

construction, and fire was used to encourage the growth of grasses used

for thatch (Kirch 1982). Destruction of the low-elevation forest

resulted in the extinctions of numerous birds and land snails on Oahu

(Olson and James 1982, Kirch 1982). After European contact in 1778,

habitat loss accelerated and began to occur at higher elevations. The

sandalwood trade, which played a key role for Oahu, required firewood,

which completely eliminated native forests in the vicinity of Honolulu

(Cuddihy and Stone 1990). From 1840 to about 1920, vast areas of low-

and mid-elevation forest in Hawaii were cleared for sugarcane

cultivation. By the 1970's, more than 100,000 ha (274,000 acres) were

under sugarcane cultivation. In contrast to early Hawaiian cultivation

that was largely concentrated in mesic valleys and plains, sugarcane

cultivation displaced native forest in dry leeward areas and wide

ridges and slopes such as the Leilehua Plateau between the Koolau and

Waianae Mountains on Oahu. Between 1900 and 1950, pineapple cultivation

on Oahu also resulted in a significant loss of native forests (Cuddihy

and Stone 1990). While some of the areas cleared of native forest have

either been replanted with exotic trees or regrown in alien vegetation,

Gagne (1988) estimated that less than 20 percent of the land area on

Oahu is now covered by forest, and less than 20 percent of that forest

is native vegetation.

Oahu is the population center of the Hawaiian Islands, with about

40 percent of the State's population residing in Honolulu alone. The

fastest growing areas on Oahu, however, are suburban areas and ``second

cities.'' Development can have significant impacts on Oahu elepaio

habitat through modification of forest structure and diversity

less than 20 percent of that forest

is native vegetation.

Oahu is the population center of the Hawaiian Islands, with about

40 percent of the State's population residing in Honolulu alone. The

fastest growing areas on Oahu, however, are suburban areas and ``second

cities.'' Development can have significant impacts on Oahu elepaio

habitat through modification of forest structure and diversity.

Although the majority of lands within the elepaio's range are within

Conservation Districts and State Forest reserves, designation as such

offers varying degrees of protection and may allow activities, such as

construction of individual houses, forestry-related activities, hunting

and recreational uses, which can be detrimental to the elepaio. Other

types of development can also eliminate habitat. A portion of the H-3

freeway completed in 1997 runs through Halawa Valley, the north ridge

of which supports one population of the Oahu elepaio, and amenities

such as golf courses may displace non-native forests used by the Oahu

elepaio, particularly if the forest structure consists of tall canopy

trees and dense, diverse understory vegetation.

Military activities and related impacts on federally owned and

leased lands also affect the Ohau elepaio. Oahu elepaio presently

occupy the upper slopes of Makua Valley in and adjacent to the U.S.

Army's Makua Military Reservation. The lower section of Makua Valley is

used as a live firing range and the facility has a history of ordnance-

induced fires (Hawaii Heritage Program, 1994a). Prescribed burning

occasionally results in large fires and along with construction of

firebreaks, destroys elepaio habitat and potentially threatens the

birds. A large part of the elepaio range in the eastern Waianae

Mountains occurs on Schofield Barracks Military Reservation. Live

firing also occurs in several areas of Schofield Barracks Military

Reservation, and ordnance-induced fires pose a significant threat to

the habitat of the Oahu elepaio (Hawaii Heritage Program, 1994b)

rebreaks, destroys elepaio habitat and potentially threatens the

birds. A large part of the elepaio range in the eastern Waianae

Mountains occurs on Schofield Barracks Military Reservation. Live

firing also occurs in several areas of Schofield Barracks Military

Reservation, and ordnance-induced fires pose a significant threat to

the habitat of the Oahu elepaio (Hawaii Heritage Program, 1994b).

Sus scrofa (pigs), originally native to Europe, Africa, and Asia,

were first introduced to Hawaii by the Polynesian ancestors of

Hawaiians, and later by western immigrants. The Hawaiian strain of pig

was comparatively small, and seems to have had a minimal impact on the

native forests. The European strain of pig escaped domestication and

invaded primarily wet and mesic forests on Kauai, Oahu, Molokai, Maui,

and Hawaii. These pigs

are large animals that threaten the continued existence of native

plants and animals within these forest habitats. While foraging, pigs

root and trample the forest floor, which promotes the establishment of

alien plants in the newly disturbed soil. Pigs also disperse alien

plant seeds through their feces and on their bodies, accelerating the

spread of alien plants through native forest (Cuddihy and Stone 1990,

Stone 1985), which may subsequently alter the structure and diversity

of the forest necessary for the survival of the Oahu elepaio. Both a

forest canopy and a diverse understory are important habitat components

for the elepaio.

Miconia calvescens (velvet tree) is a recently naturalized species

native to tropical America. This species has become established on the

islands of Hawaii, Maui, Oahu, and Kauai. This plant species has the

potential to greatly disrupt forest canopy and understory structure and

significantly alter biological diversity. Miconia calvescens is

potentially the most invasive and damaging weed of rainforests of

Pacific islands (Medeiros et al. 1997)

lized species

native to tropical America. This species has become established on the

islands of Hawaii, Maui, Oahu, and Kauai. This plant species has the

potential to greatly disrupt forest canopy and understory structure and

significantly alter biological diversity. Miconia calvescens is

potentially the most invasive and damaging weed of rainforests of

Pacific islands (Medeiros et al. 1997). In moist conditions, this plant

grows rapidly (up to 15 m (49 ft) tall), tolerates shade, produces

abundant seed that is effectively dispersed by birds and accumulates in

a large, persistent seed-bank, and develops monospecific stands that

eliminate understory plant species and subcanopy structure by shading

and crowding (Medeiros et al. 1997). In Tahiti, it has become a

dominant plant species in habitats similar to those of Hawaii (Almeda

1990; Cuddihy and Stone, 1990.) Medeiros et al. (1997) states that

Miconia calvescens now dominates the forest composition in 65 percent

of the island through the establishment of large, monospecific stands.

This plant is now naturalized on Oahu at three locations in the

southeastern Koolau Mountain range, including Manoa Valley (Medeiros et

al. 1997), where one population of the Oahu elepaio is located.

B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or

Educational Purposes

Overutilization is not known to threaten the Oahu elepaio.

C. Disease and Predation

e, monospecific stands.

This plant is now naturalized on Oahu at three locations in the

southeastern Koolau Mountain range, including Manoa Valley (Medeiros et

al. 1997), where one population of the Oahu elepaio is located.

B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or

Educational Purposes

Overutilization is not known to threaten the Oahu elepaio.

C. Disease and Predation

Disease and predation may have contributed to the decline of the

Oahu elepaio (Sheila Conant, University of Hawaii, pers. comm., 1995).

Although there is some indication that nests and eggs may be destroyed

by rats (Rattus exulans, R. norwegicus, R. rattus) (Conant 1977),

studies have yet to document the extent to which the Oahu elepaio is

affected by predation by any of the small, ground-dwelling and/or

arboreal predators, including the small Indian mongoose (Herpestes

auropunctatus), feral cats (Felis domesticus), and rats. All of these

predators were established long before the recent decline of the Oahu

elepaio (Tomich 1986), but may have had a significant impact at the

time of their initial introduction.

Avian diseases have had a devastating effect on many endemic

Hawaiian forest birds that seem to have little or no resistance to

disease. Avian pox (Poxvirus avium) causes lesions on the feet, legs,

and bills, and is transmitted by physical contact or through

mosquitoes. Avian malaria (Plasmodium relictum capistranoae) is

transmitted by the southern house mosquito (Culex quinquefasciatus) and

clearly limits the lower elevational distribution of many Hawaiian

forest birds (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1984, Atkinson et al.

1993). While the Oahu elepaio appears to be less affected than other

species, the effect on this taxon could possibly contribute to the

observed declines in range and abundance.

D. The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms

o (Culex quinquefasciatus) and

clearly limits the lower elevational distribution of many Hawaiian

forest birds (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1984, Atkinson et al.

1993). While the Oahu elepaio appears to be less affected than other

species, the effect on this taxon could possibly contribute to the

observed declines in range and abundance.

D. The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms

Currently, the Oahu elepaio is protected from taking by both State

(Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS), Sect. 13-124-3A) and Federal law

(Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918, 16 U.S.C 703-712, 40 Stat. 755, as

amended). These regulations protect the taxon from capture and

collection (without appropriate permits) of individuals, nests and

eggs. However, these regulations afford no protection to the habitat of

the taxon.

E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting Its Continued Existence

Naturally occurring events, such as hurricanes, may affect the

continued existence of the Oahu elepaio. Because the subspecies now

exists as six small isolated populations, rather than one large,

continuous, interbreeding population, a population decline could be

exacerbated by random genetic, environmental, and demographic events.

Small population size can reduce reproductive rates, increase rates of

inbreeding and may result in the expression of deleterious recessive

genes occurring in the population (inbreeding depression) and less

future plasticity. Loss of genetic variability through genetic drift

reduces the ability of small populations to cope with ecological and

environmental stresses such as habitat modification, and alien species.

If disease is a factor in the decline of the Oahu elepaio, the

reproduction of any genetically-resistant individuals could be

important to the survival of this taxon.

If populations continue to decline and become extremely small,

demographic events take on greater significance

mall populations to cope with ecological and

environmental stresses such as habitat modification, and alien species.

If disease is a factor in the decline of the Oahu elepaio, the

reproduction of any genetically-resistant individuals could be

important to the survival of this taxon.

If populations continue to decline and become extremely small,

demographic events take on greater significance. For example, if

weather events (e.g., El Nino episodes) cause reproductive failure for

one or more years, and is followed by a period of high predation, a

small population has less resiliency and may be extirpated. Another

environmental factor that could cause large or total population loss is

hurricanes, which may cause direct mortality, habitat destruction or

modification, and promote the spread of invasive alien plants. Birds in

the Hawaiian Islands have long endured hurricanes, but major hurricanes

in concert with low population numbers and other factors could severely

affect the Oahu elepaio.

Introduction of alien species of plants and animals into Hawaii is

a major continuing threat to all native flora and fauna. Competition,

predation, and disease associated with alien introductions could

significantly and negatively affect the remaining populations of Oahu

elepaio. The threat of the accidental introduction of the brown tree

snake (Boiga irregularis) from Guam, Saipan, or the Solomon Islands is

of particular concern. The brown tree snake is an aggressive predator

of birds that has caused a significant decline in avifauna on Pacific

islands where this snake has been introduced. In December 1994, a live

brown tree snake was found in a Schofield Barracks warehouse on the

island of Oahu. This snake was associated with a shipment of U.S. Army

materials from Tinian via Guam.

A likely factor contributing to the decline of the Oahu elepaio is

competition with recently introduced birds. The Japanese white-eye

(Zosterops japonicus) was introduced to Hawaii in the 1930's

ed. In December 1994, a live

brown tree snake was found in a Schofield Barracks warehouse on the

island of Oahu. This snake was associated with a shipment of U.S. Army

materials from Tinian via Guam.

A likely factor contributing to the decline of the Oahu elepaio is

competition with recently introduced birds. The Japanese white-eye

(Zosterops japonicus) was introduced to Hawaii in the 1930's. It was

still expanding its range into remote areas within the last two decades

and is now probably the most abundant bird in Hawaii (Pratt et al.

1987). Scott et al. (1986) demonstrated that the Japanese white-eye was

the primary factor contributing to negative correlations between the

distributions of native and introduced birds, including elepaio.

Elepaio have frequently been known to defend territories against

Japanese white-eye (Conant 1975). Japanese bush-warblers (Cettia

diphone) were also introduced to Oahu in the 1930's (Pratt et al. 1987)

but for many years were uncommon and restricted to the Waianae

Mountains (Bob Pyle, Bishop

Museum, pers. comm., 1995). In recent decades, however, the Japanese

bush-warbler has expanded its range to occupy most of Oahu's forested

areas and is now very abundant. Thus, the expansion of the bush-warbler

also roughly corresponds with the recent decline of the elepaio (Pyle,

pers. comm., 1995). The bush warbler is also an insectivore that

forages in the understory and is a likely competitor of the Oahu

elepaio. The red-vented bulbul (Pycnonotus cafer) was introduced to

Oahu in 1965, greatly increasing in numbers after 1970 (Williams 1987)

and is now extremely abundant in forested habitats. While primarily a

fruit-eater, red-vented bulbuls take insect prey (Sheila Conant, pers.

comm., 1995) and are a particularly aggressive species, known to chase

other birds (Berger 1981)

titor of the Oahu

elepaio. The red-vented bulbul (Pycnonotus cafer) was introduced to

Oahu in 1965, greatly increasing in numbers after 1970 (Williams 1987)

and is now extremely abundant in forested habitats. While primarily a

fruit-eater, red-vented bulbuls take insect prey (Sheila Conant, pers.

comm., 1995) and are a particularly aggressive species, known to chase

other birds (Berger 1981).

The Service has carefully assessed the best scientific and

commercial information available regarding the past, present, and

future threats faced by this taxon in determining to propose this rule.

Based on this evaluation, the preferred action is to list the Oahu

elepaio as endangered. The most recent estimates indicate that the Oahu

elepaio numbers no more than 200 to 500 individuals, occurring in six

small and geographically isolated populations (Ellis et al. 1992). This

bird is threatened by--habitat degradation and loss, including habitat

fragmentation due primarily to human impacts; competition with

introduced birds; disease, including avian pox and malaria; and

possible predation by non-indigenous mammals. Small total population

size, limited distribution, and population fragmentation make this

taxon particularly vulnerable to reduced reproductive vigor and the

effects of naturally occurring events. Because the Oahu elepaio is in

danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its

range, it fits the definition of endangered as defined in the Act.

Therefore, the determination of endangered status for the Oahu elepaio

is appropriate.

Critical Habitat

tation make this

taxon particularly vulnerable to reduced reproductive vigor and the

effects of naturally occurring events. Because the Oahu elepaio is in

danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its

range, it fits the definition of endangered as defined in the Act.

Therefore, the determination of endangered status for the Oahu elepaio

is appropriate.

Critical Habitat

Critical habitat is defined in section 3 of the Act as--(i) the

specific areas within the geographical area occupied by a species, at

the time it is listed in accordance with the Act, on which are found

those physical or biological features (I) essential to the conservation

of the species and (II) that may require special management

considerations or protection and; (ii) specific areas outside the

geographical area occupied by a species at the time it is listed, upon

a determination that such areas are essential for the conservation of

the species. ``Conservation'' means the use of all methods and

procedures needed to bring the species to the point at which listing

under the Act is no longer necessary.

Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as amended, and implementing

regulations (50 CFR 424.12) require that, to the maximum extent prudent

and determinable, the Secretary designate critical habitat at the time

the species is determined to be endangered or threatened. The Service

finds that designation of critical habitat is not prudent for C. s.

ibidis. Service regulations (50 CFR 424.12(a)(1)) state that

designation of critical habitat is not prudent when one or both of the

following situations exist--(1) the species is threatened by taking or

other human activity, and identification of critical habitat can be

expected to increase the degree of threat to the species, or (2) such

designation of critical habitat would not be beneficial to the species.

Critical habitat designation for C. s. ibidis is not prudent due to

lack of benefit

udent when one or both of the

following situations exist--(1) the species is threatened by taking or

other human activity, and identification of critical habitat can be

expected to increase the degree of threat to the species, or (2) such

designation of critical habitat would not be beneficial to the species.

Critical habitat designation for C. s. ibidis is not prudent due to

lack of benefit. There are only 200-500 of these birds remaining, all

of which are restricted to six geographically isolated populations

occupying a total area of about 80 sq km (30 sq mi). As discussed in

the ``Background'' section of this rule, within this restricted range,

the Oahu elepaio has a preference for certain elevations and forest

structure. These forest birds are located on one island with less than

20 percent of the land area now covered by forest, and less than 20

percent of that forest is comprised of native vegetation. Therefore,

the destruction or adverse modification of habitat within the

restricted range of the Oahu elepaio would cause further reduction in

the area available for this bird to feed, nest, breed, and rear young.

In light of these facts, any action that would adversely modify

critical habitat also would be likely to jeopardize the continued

existence of the the Oahu elepaio. The designation of critical habitat

therefore would not provide additional benefit for the Oahu elepaio

beyond the protection afforded by listing.

Critical habitat receives consideration under section 7 of the Act

with regard to actions carried out, authorized, or funded by a Federal

agency. Federal agencies are required to ensure that their actions do

not jeopardize the continued existence of a species or result in

destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. However, both

jeopardizing the continued existence of a species and adverse

modification of critical habitat have similar standards and thus

similar thresholds for violation of section 7 of the Act

eral

agency. Federal agencies are required to ensure that their actions do

not jeopardize the continued existence of a species or result in

destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. However, both

jeopardizing the continued existence of a species and adverse

modification of critical habitat have similar standards and thus

similar thresholds for violation of section 7 of the Act. Federal

involvement is most likely in two situations--(1) where the species

occurs on Federal lands and (2) when a Federal agency is involved in

authorizing or funding actions on non-Federal lands. One quarter of the

current range of the Oahu elepaios' range is Federally owned or leased.

Furthermore, designation of critical habitat may affect non-Federal

lands only where a Federal nexus exists. The designation of critical

habitat on private or State lands provides no additional benefit for

the Oahu elepaio over that provided as a result of listing when there

are no Federal nexus actions taking place. Designating critical habitat

does not create a management plan for the areas where the listed

species occurs; does not establish numerical population goals or

prescribe specific management actions (inside or outside of critical

habitat); and does not have a direct effect on areas not designated as

critical habitat.

All involved Federal, State, City, County and private landowners

have been notified of the importance of protecting the habitat of the

remaining populations of the Oahu elepaio. The Service believes that

Federal involvement in the areas where this bird occurs can be

identified without the designation of critical habitat. Where Oahu

elepaio are found on Federal lands, the agencies are aware of the

species and are addressing conservation efforts (see ``Available

Conservation Measures'' section below). Non-Federal landowners have

also been appraised of the population locations and importance of

protecting the bird and its habitat

re this bird occurs can be

identified without the designation of critical habitat. Where Oahu

elepaio are found on Federal lands, the agencies are aware of the

species and are addressing conservation efforts (see ``Available

Conservation Measures'' section below). Non-Federal landowners have

also been appraised of the population locations and importance of

protecting the bird and its habitat. Protection of the Oahu elepaio

will be addressed through the section 4 recovery process and the

section 7 consultation process. For the reasons discussed above, the

Service finds that the designation of critical habitat for the C. s.

ibidis is not prudent.

Available Conservation Measures

Conservation measures provided to species listed as endangered or

threatened under the Endangered Species Act include recognition,

recovery actions, requirements for Federal protection, and prohibitions

against certain activities. Recognition through listing encourages

public awareness and results in conservation actions by Federal, State

and private agencies, groups, and individuals. The Act provides for

possible land acquisition and cooperation with states and requires that

recovery actions be carried out for all listed species. The protection

required of Federal agencies

and the prohibitions against certain activities involving listed

animals are discussed, in part, below.

Section 7(a) of the Act, as amended, requires Federal agencies to

evaluate their actions with respect to any species that is proposed or

listed as endangered or threatened and with respect to its critical

habitat, if any is being designated. Regulations implementing this

interagency cooperation provision of the Act are codified at 50 CFR

part 402. Section 7(a)(4) requires Federal agencies to confer with the

Service on any action that is likely to jeopardize the continued

existence of a species proposed for listing or result in destruction or

adverse modification of proposed critical habitat

l

habitat, if any is being designated. Regulations implementing this

interagency cooperation provision of the Act are codified at 50 CFR

part 402. Section 7(a)(4) requires Federal agencies to confer with the

Service on any action that is likely to jeopardize the continued

existence of a species proposed for listing or result in destruction or

adverse modification of proposed critical habitat. If a species is

listed subsequently, section 7(a)(2) requires Federal agencies to

ensure that activities they authorize, fund, or carry out are not

likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or

destroy or adversely modify its critical habitat if any is designated.

If a Federal action may affect a listed species or its critical

habitat, the responsible Federal agency must enter into formal

consultation with the Service.

Federal agency actions that may require conference and/or

consultation as described in the preceding paragraph includes--military

activities, such as military training, troop movements, or fire

resulting from the military's use of live ammunition during training,

which take place on federally owned or leased lands; the involvement of

the Army Corps of Engineers in projects subject to section 404 of the

Clean Water Act and section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899

such as the construction of roads, bridges, and dredging projects ;

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency-authorized discharges under the

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System; U.S. Department of

Agriculture/Natural Resources Conservation Service and U.S. Department

of Housing and Urban Development projects; and other activities with a

possible Federal nexus, such as golf course and firebreak construction.

Several of the remaining populations of this bird are located on

State land leased by the Federal government and utilized for military

training, particularly by the U.S. Army

nt of

Agriculture/Natural Resources Conservation Service and U.S. Department

of Housing and Urban Development projects; and other activities with a

possible Federal nexus, such as golf course and firebreak construction.

Several of the remaining populations of this bird are located on

State land leased by the Federal government and utilized for military

training, particularly by the U.S. Army. In the Waianae Mountains,

those populations are found in the following areas--Pahole to Makaha,

including both leeward and windward sides; Schofield to Palehua, on the

windward side. In the Koolau Mountains, only a fraction of one elepaio

population area (Aiea ridge south to the Kahauiki Stream) is under

military control. Therefore, section 7 consultation will be required

before any military activities, such as military training, troop

movements, or use of live ammunition during training, that may impact

the Oahu elepaio may take place.

The Act and its implementing regulations set forth a series of

general trade prohibitions and exceptions that apply to all endangered

wildlife. The prohibitions, codified at 50 CFR 17.21, in part, make it

illegal for any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States

to take (includes harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap,

capture, or collect; or to attempt any of these), import or export,

ship in interstate or commerce in the course of a commercial activity,

or sell or offer for sale in interstate or foreign commerce any listed

species. It is also illegal to possess, sell, deliver, carry,

transport, or ship any such wildlife that has been taken illegally.

Certain exceptions apply to agents of the Service and State

conservation agencies.

Permits may be issued to carry out otherwise prohibited activities

involving endangered wildlife under certain circumstances. Regulations

governing permits are codified at 50 CFR 17.22 and 17.23

s also illegal to possess, sell, deliver, carry,

transport, or ship any such wildlife that has been taken illegally.

Certain exceptions apply to agents of the Service and State

conservation agencies.

Permits may be issued to carry out otherwise prohibited activities

involving endangered wildlife under certain circumstances. Regulations

governing permits are codified at 50 CFR 17.22 and 17.23. Such permits

are available for scientific purposes, to enhance the propagation or

survival of the species, and/or for incidental take in the course of

otherwise lawful activities. Requests for copies of the regulations

regarding listed wildlife and inquiries about permits and prohibitions

may be addressed to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Endangered

Species Permits, 911 N.E. 11th Avenue, Portland, Oregon 97232-4181

(telephone 503-231-6241; facsimile 503-231-6243).

At the time a species is proposed, it is the policy of the Service

(59 FR 34272) to identify to the maximum extent practicable those

activities that would or would not constitute a violation of section 9

of the Act. The intent of this policy is to increase public awareness

of the effect of the listing on proposed and ongoing activities within

a species' range. Likely activities that the Service believes could

potentially result in a violation of section 9 of the Act include, but

are not limited to, the following: Road or firebreak construction,

military troop training or other activities that disturb the normal

behavior (e.g., breeding, nesting, feeding) of Oahu elepaio, or damage

habitat used by the species. Activities that the Service believes would

not likely result in a violation of section 9 of the Act include, but

are not limited to, non-destructive activities in areas occupied by

Oahu elepaio such as hiking, collecting plants for cultural usage

(e.g., hula halau), and hunting game animals

al

behavior (e.g., breeding, nesting, feeding) of Oahu elepaio, or damage

habitat used by the species. Activities that the Service believes would

not likely result in a violation of section 9 of the Act include, but

are not limited to, non-destructive activities in areas occupied by

Oahu elepaio such as hiking, collecting plants for cultural usage

(e.g., hula halau), and hunting game animals. Activities that occur

under a valid incidental take permit issued through a section 7

consultation or section 10 HCP permit would not violate section 9.

Questions regarding whether specific activities will constitute a

violation of section 9 of the Act should be directed to the Manager of

the Pacific Islands Ecoregion (see ADDRESSES section).

If the Oahu elepaio were given Federal protection under the Act,

the State of Hawaii Endangered Species Act (HRS, Sect. 195D-4(a)) would

be automatically invoked, prohibiting taking and encouraging

conservation by State government agencies. State regulations prohibit

the removal, destruction, or damage of any federally listed animals

found on State lands. Hawaii's Endangered Species Act states, ``Any

species of aquatic life, wildlife, or land plant that has been

determined to be an endangered species pursuant to the Act shall be

deemed to be an endangered species under the provisions of this chapter

and any indigenous species of aquatic life, wildlife, or land plant

that has been determined to be a threatened species pursuant to the Act

shall be deemed to be a threatened species under the provisions of this

chapter.'' Further, the State may enter into agreements with Federal

agencies to administer and manage any area required for the

conservation, management, enhancement, or protection of endangered

species (HRS, Sect. 195D-5(c)). Funds for these activities could be

made available under section 6 of the Act (State Cooperative

Agreements)

d to be a threatened species under the provisions of this

chapter.'' Further, the State may enter into agreements with Federal

agencies to administer and manage any area required for the

conservation, management, enhancement, or protection of endangered

species (HRS, Sect. 195D-5(c)). Funds for these activities could be

made available under section 6 of the Act (State Cooperative

Agreements). Thus, the Federal protection afforded to the Oahu elepaio

by listing as an endangered species will be reinforced and supplemented

by protection under State law.

Public Comments Solicited

The Service intends that any final action resulting from this

proposal will be as accurate and as effective as possible. Therefore,

comments or suggestions from the public, other concerned governmental

agencies, the scientific community, industry, or any other interested

party concerning this proposed rule are hereby solicited. Comments are

particularly sought concerning:

(1) biological, commercial, or other relevant data concerning any

threat (or lack thereof) to this taxon;

(2) the location of any additional populations of this species and

the reasons why habitat should or should not be determined to be

critical habitat pursuant to section 4 of the Act;

(3) additional information concerning the range, distribution, and

population size of this species; and

(4) current or planned activities in the subject area and their

possible impacts on this species.

Final promulgation of the regulation(s) on this species will take

into consideration the comments and any additional information received

by the Service, and such communications may lead to a final regulation

that differs from this proposal.

The Act provides for one or more public hearings on this proposal,

if requested. Requests must be received within 45 days of the date of

publication of this proposal in the Federal Register. Such requests

must be made in writing and be addressed to the Pacific Islands

Ecoregion Manager (see ADDRESSES section)

such communications may lead to a final regulation

that differs from this proposal.

The Act provides for one or more public hearings on this proposal,

if requested. Requests must be received within 45 days of the date of

publication of this proposal in the Federal Register. Such requests

must be made in writing and be addressed to the Pacific Islands

Ecoregion Manager (see ADDRESSES section).

Executive Order 12866 requires each agency to write regulations/

notices that are easy to understand. We invite your comments on how to

make this notice easier to understand including answers to questions

such as the following: (1) Are the requirements in the notice clearly

stated? (2) Does the notice contain technical language or jargon that

interferes with its clarity? (3) Does the format of the notice

(grouping and order of sections, use of headings, paragraphing, etc.)

aid or reduce its clarity? (4) Is the description of the notice in the

Supplementary Information section of the preamble helpful in

understanding the notice? What else could we do to make the notice

easier to understand?

Send a copy of any comments that concern how we could make this

regulation easier to understand to: Office of Regulatory Affairs,

Department of the Interior, room 7229, 1849 C Street, NW, Washington,

DC 20240. You may also e-mail the comments to this address:

E[email protected]

National Environmental Policy Act

The Fish and Wildlife Service has determined that Environmental

Assessments and Environmental Impact Statements, as defined under the

authority of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, need not be

prepared in connection with regulations adopted pursuant to section

4(a) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. A notice

outlining the Service's reasons for this determination was published in

the Federal Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244).

Paperwork Reduction Act

pact Statements, as defined under the

authority of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, need not be

prepared in connection with regulations adopted pursuant to section

4(a) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. A notice

outlining the Service's reasons for this determination was published in

the Federal Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244).

Paperwork Reduction Act

This rule does not contain any new collections of information other

than those already approved under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44

U.S.C. 3501 et seq., and assigned Office of Management and Budget

clearance number 1018-0094. For additional information concerning

permit and associated requirements for threatened species, see 50 CFR

17.32.

References Cited

A complete list of all references and data cited herein, is

available upon request from the Pacific Islands Ecoregion (see

ADDRESSES section).

Author. The primary author of this proposed rule is Loyal A.

Mehrhoff, Pacific Islands Ecoregion (see ADDRESSES section). Recent

data on the distribution and status of the Oahu elepaio were compiled

by Dr. Sheila Conant of the University of Hawaii.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17

Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.

Proposed Regulation Promulgation

Accordingly, the Service hereby proposes to amend part 17,

subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations,

as set forth below:

PART 17--[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 16 U.S.C. 1531-1544; 16 U.S.C.

4201-4245; Pub. L. 99-625, 100 Stat. 3500, unless otherwise noted.

2. Amend Sec. 17.11(h) by adding the following, in alphabetical

order under BIRDS, to the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife to

read as follows:

Sec. 17.11 Endangered and threatened wildlife.

* * * * *

citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 16 U.S.C. 1531-1544; 16 U.S.C.

4201-4245; Pub. L. 99-625, 100 Stat. 3500, unless otherwise noted.

2. Amend Sec. 17.11(h) by adding the following, in alphabetical

order under BIRDS, to the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife to

read as follows:

Sec. 17.11 Endangered and threatened wildlife.

* * * * *

(h) * * *

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

Species Vertebrate

-------------------------------------------------------- population where Critical Special

Historic range endangered or Status When listed habitat rules

Common name Scientific name threatened

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

* * * * * * *

Birds

* * * * * * *

Elepaio, Oahu.................... Chasiempis U.S.A.(HI).......... Entire.............. E NA NA

sandwichensis

ibidis.

* * * * * * *

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

Dated: September 29, 1998.

Jamie Rappaport Clark,

Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.

[FR Doc. 98-26736 Filed 10-5-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-55-P