Federal Register, Volume 89 Issue 49 (Tuesday, March 12, 2024)

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 49 (Tuesday, March 12, 2024)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17902-17981]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-04588]

[[Page 17901]]

Vol. 89

Tuesday,

No. 49

March 12, 2024

Part II

Department of the Interior

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

Fish and Wildlife Service

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

50 CFR Part 17

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical
Habitat for 12 Species on Hawai`i Island; Final Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 89 , No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 2024 / Rules
and Regulations

[[Page 17902]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

[Docket No. FWS-R1-ES-2023-0017; FXES1111090FEDR-245-FF09E21000]
RIN 1018-BG65

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of
Critical Habitat for 12 Species on Hawai`i Island

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), designate
critical habitat for 12 federally endangered species on the island of
Hawai`i under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Act), as amended. In
total, approximately 119,326 acres (48,289 hectares) on the island of
Hawai`i, in the State of Hawaii, fall within the boundaries of the
critical habitat designation. This rule extends the Act's protections
to these species' designated critical habitats.

DATES: This rule is effective April 11, 2024.

ADDRESSES: This final rule is available on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R1-ES-2023-0017 and at https://www.fws.gov/project/critical-habitat-hawaii-island-species. Comments
and materials we received are available for public inspection at
https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R1-ES-2023-0017.
Availability of supporting materials: Supporting materials we used
in preparing this rule, such as the draft recovery plan, 5-year status
reviews, and other materials relating to this critical habitat
designation, including coordinates or plot points or both from which
the maps are generated, are available at https://www.regulations.gov
under Docket No. FWS-R1-ES-2023-0017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Earl Campbell, Project Leader, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office,
300 Ala Moana Boulevard Room 3-122, Honolulu, HI 96850; telephone 808-
792-9400. Individuals in the United States who are deaf, deafblind,
hard of hearing, or have a speech disability may dial 711 (TTY, TDD, or
TeleBraille) to access telecommunications relay services. Individuals
outside the United States should use the relay services offered within
their country to make international calls to the point-of-contact in
the United States.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Executive Summary

Why we need to publish a rule. Under the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.), to the maximum extent prudent and determinable, we must
designate critical habitat for any species that we determine to be an
endangered or threatened species. Making a critical habitat
determination can be completed only by issuing a rule through the
Administrative Procedure Act rulemaking process (5 U.S.C. 551 et seq.).
What this document does. This rule designates approximately 119,326
acres (ac) (48,289 hectares (ha)) as critical habitat for 12 federally
endangered species (11 plants, 1 insect) on the island of
Hawai[revaps]i in the State of Hawai`i.
The basis for our action. Under section 4(a)(3) of the Act, if we
determine that a species is an endangered or threatened species, the
Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) must designate critical habitat
to the maximum extent prudent and determinable. Section 3(5)(A) of the
Act defines critical habitat as (i) the specific areas within the
geographical area occupied by the species, at the time it is listed, on
which are found those physical or biological features (I) essential to
the conservation of the species and (II) which may require special
management considerations or protection; and (ii) specific areas
outside the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it is
listed, upon a determination by the Secretary that such areas are
essential for the conservation of the species. Section 4(b)(2) of the
Act states that the Secretary must make the designation on the basis of
the best scientific data available and after taking into consideration
the economic impact, the impact on national security, and any other
relevant impacts of specifying any particular area as critical habitat.

Previous Federal Actions

Please refer to the proposed and final listing rules (77 FR 63928,
October 17, 2012; 78 FR 64638, October 29, 2013) and proposed critical
habitat rule (88 FR 18756, March 29, 2023) for a detailed description
of previous Federal actions concerning the species addressed in this
final rule.

Peer Review

In accordance with our joint policy on peer review published in the
Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), and our August 22,
2016, memorandum updating and clarifying the role of peer review of
listing actions under the Act, we solicited independent scientific
review of the information contained in the proposed critical habitat
rule (88 FR 18756, March 29, 2023). We sent the proposed rule to five
independent peer reviewers and received three separate peer reviewer
responses. The peer reviews can be found at https://www.regulations.gov. We incorporated the results of these reviews, as
appropriate, into this final rule. A summary of the peer review
comments and our responses can be found under Summary of Comments and
Recommendations, below.

Summary of Changes From the Proposed Rule

After considering the comments we received during the public
comment period on our March 29, 2023, proposed rule to designate
critical habitat for the 12 federally endangered species on the island
of Hawai[revaps]i (88 FR 18756) and relevant information that became
available since the proposed rule published, we made changes to this
final critical habitat rule. No changes were required for our economic
analysis after considering public comments; thus, we finalized the
economic analysis of the designation. We made many small,
nonsubstantive changes and corrections throughout this document that do
not affect the designation (e.g., updating the Background discussion in
this rule's preamble in response to comments, and making other minor
clarifications). Below is a summary of changes made in this final rule;
please note that an explanation of plant sections and their correlation
to designated critical habitat units for the plants that are the
subjects of this rule is provided under Final Critical Habitat
Designation, below.
(1) We make minor clarifications and elaborate on our rationale for
concluding in our proposed rule (88 FR 18756, March 29, 2023) that the
designation of critical habitat is not prudent at this time for
Pritchardia lanigera (loulu) and Vetericaris chaceorum (anchialine pool
shrimp).
(2) We correct the range information for Cyrtandra wagneri to
include only the Mauna Kea region, resulting in the removal of all
unoccupied critical habitat units for this species. Specifically, this
designation does not include critical habitat for C. wagneri that we
proposed in units 23, 24 (Sections 8 and 9), 28, 29, 30, 42, 43, 44,
45, 46, and 51. The critical habitat we are designating for C. wagneri
in this rule includes only two occupied units:

[[Page 17903]]

units 3 and 52 in Section 1. This is a decrease of approximately 72,469
ac (29,328 ha) from the critical habitat we proposed for C. wagneri on
March 29, 2023 (88 FR 18756). However, because all of the unoccupied
critical habitat units that we proposed for C. wagneri are also
occupied by other plants for which we are designating critical habitat
in this rule, not designating these units for C. wagneri does not
change the total area designated as critical habitat in this rule.
(3) We remove the proposed Drosophila digressa--Unit 6 from this
final designation; however, this same area was proposed, and remains in
this final rule, as designated critical habitat for Cyanea marksii,
Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae in Section 6, units 16 and 40.
(4) We revise the critical habitat designation to add a new unit
for Drosophila digressa (a new Drosophila digressa--Unit 6), based on
new information we received in peer review comments regarding recent
surveys in South Kona. Within the same boundaries of the new Drosophila
digressa--Unit 6, we created a new plant Section 20 that contains Unit
56 for Cyanea marksii and Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei. The new unit
(Drosophila digressa--Unit 6, and Unit 56 for Cyanea marksii and
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei) results in an increase of 224 ac (91 ha)
of delineated critical habitat from the areas we proposed.
(5) Pursuant to section 4(b)(2) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533(b)), in
this final designation, we exclude lands in 12 areas in 7 units owned
by the following entities: the Kamehameha Schools; Parker Ranch
Waipunalei, LLC; Parker Ranch Waiemi, LLC; State Department of Hawaiian
Home Lands; Laup[amacr]hoehoe Nui; Kahua Ranch; and Queen Emma
Foundation. This amounts to a decrease of approximately 3,172 ac (1,284
ha) from the critical habitat areas we proposed.
(6) We do not exclude The Nature Conservancy's land in Section 13
(Unit 41 for Cyanea tritomantha, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and Stenogyne cranwelliae)
and Drosophila digressa--Unit 5 based on information we received from
public comments. This area of approximately 986 ac (399 ha) is
designated as critical habitat in this final rule.
(7) In the March 29, 2023, proposed rule (88 FR 18756), we
erroneously included 125 ac (51 ha) as part of plant Section 8, Unit
24, even though those acres actually belonged in plant Section 8, Unit
44. We correct that error in this final rule by transferring in our
acreage totals 125 ac (51 ha) from Unit 24 to Unit 44 in plant Section
8.
(8) In the March 29, 2023, proposed rule (88 FR 18756), we
erroneously included 469 ac (190 ha) as part of plant Section 11, Unit
30, even though those acres actually belonged in plant Section 11, Unit
51. We correct that error in this final rule by transferring in our
acreage totals 469 ac (190 ha) from Unit 30 to Unit 51 in plant Section
11.
(9) We made minor adjustments to the elevations we provided in the
proposed rule related to the different ecosystem types which we used to
determine the physical or biological features essential to each of the
12 species. We made these adjustments in this final rule to mirror
exactly the elevations given in the scientific literature source from
which each was derived. Specifically, we more accurately report: the
elevation of the coastal ecosystem as less than 984 feet (ft) (300
meters (m)), instead of rounding to less than 980 ft; the elevation of
the mesic forest as less than 6,562 ft (2,000 m), instead of rounding
to less than 6,600 ft; the elevation of wet forest as less than 7,218
ft (2,200 m), instead of rounding to less than 7,300 ft; the elevation
of mesic grassland and shrubland as 98 ft to 7,546 ft (30 to 2,300 m),
instead of rounding to 100 ft to 7,500 ft; and the elevation of wet
grassland and shrubland as 656 ft to 2,953 ft (200 to 900 m), instead
of rounding to 660 ft to 2,950 ft.
(10) There are minor differences in area measurements reported in
our March 29, 2023, proposed rule (88 FR 18756) compared to this final
rule due to digital mapping discrepancies between Tax Map Key (TMK)
parcel Geographic Information System (GIS) data (Hawaii Statewide GIS
Program 2022, entire) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration's (NOAA's) Coastal Change Analysis Program coastline
data (Office for Coastal Management 2023, entire). Additionally, we
received updated TMK parcel GIS data from Hawaii County that resulted
in a 23-ac (9-ha) discrepancy for Parker Ranch lands in this final rule
when compared to the acreages presented in our March 29, 2023, proposed
rule. As a result, we identified that we were considering for exclusion
349 ac (141 ha) of Parker Ranch land in Section 3, Unit 54, in the
proposed rule, but that updated acreage which we exclude in the final
rule is 372 ac (150 ha). Further, minor differences (1 to 2 acres or
hectares) in areas reported between the proposed rule and this final
rule may exist as an artifact of summing, rounding, and conversion from
acreage to hectarage.
(11) We removed 4 ac (2 ha) from the proposed plant Section 2, Unit
53 and plant Section 8, Unit 44, in this final rule. These 4 ac (2 ha)
consisted of small slivers, ranging in size from less than 0.01 ac (0
ha) to 1.09 ac (0.4 ha), that had been part of the proposed designation
in Unit 53 and Unit 44. However, once we excluded the Kamehameha
Schools land from Unit 53 and Unit 44 in the final designation, these
slivers were left because the base layer and TMK layer did not align
with each other after the removal of the Kamehameha Schools exclusion.
This misalignment of the base layer and TMK layer is due to digital
mapping discrepancies, and the slivered 4 ac (2 ha) left over as a
result of this spatial analysis are artifacts of these discrepancies
rather than real acres of land that are being included or excluded as
part of the critical habitat designation.
Beyond those changes, this critical habitat designation is
unchanged from what we proposed on March 29, 2023 (88 FR 18756).

Summary of Comments and Recommendations

In the proposed critical habitat rule published on March 29, 2023
(88 FR 18756), we requested that all interested parties submit written
comments on the proposal by May 30, 2023. We also contacted appropriate
Federal and State agencies, scientific experts and organizations, and
other interested parties and invited them to comment on the proposal.
Digital newspaper notices inviting general public comment were
published by Pacific Media Group, covering the communities of Maui and
Hawai`i Island, as well as a radio and television broadcast airing on
Hawai`i Public Radio and Hawai`i News Now, respectively. We held a
public hearing on April 20, 2023. All substantive information we
received during the comment period, as described above, on the proposal
has either been incorporated directly into this final rule or is
addressed below.

Peer Reviewer Comments

As noted above in Peer Review, we received comments from three peer
reviewers on the proposed rule. We reviewed all comments we received
from the peer reviewers for substantive issues and new information
regarding the species and their habitats. The peer reviewers generally
concurred with our designations of critical habitat and conclusions,
and provided additional information, clarifications, and

[[Page 17904]]

suggestions to improve the designation. The additional details and
information received or raised by the peer reviewers have been
incorporated into this final rule, as appropriate. Peer reviewer
comments are addressed in the following summary.
(1) Comment: One reviewer provided information regarding habitat
conditions that do not support Drosophila digressa in
K[imacr]p[amacr]hoehoe Natural Area Reserve in Drosophila digressa--
Unit 6.
Our response: The K[imacr]p[amacr]hoehoe Natural Area Reserve was
not occupied by Drosophila digressa at the time of listing. Based on
the information available at the time of our proposed critical habitat
designation, this area appeared to contain the physical or biological
features essential to the conservation of the species, and we therefore
included it in our proposed designation. The commenter provided
information on the habitat conditions of K[imacr]p[amacr]hoehoe Natural
Area Reserve in Drosophila digressa--Unit 6 that were not available to
us at the time we proposed critical habitat. After we reviewed the new
information provided by the commenter, we agree that the wet to mesic
forest there does not support the host plants for D. digressa, and that
the younger lava flows outside of the k[imacr]puka (vegetated areas
surrounded by bare lava flows) are unsuitable for the host plants of D.
digressa. Because the new information indicates that the area likely
does not contain the host plants for D. digressa, and is therefore
unsuitable for D. digressa, we removed the proposed Drosophila
digressa--Unit 6 from this final critical habitat designation.
(2) Comment: One reviewer suggested that additional critical
habitat should be designated for a new population of Drosophila
digressa discovered in 2022 in lower Honomalino Forest Reserve within
existing plant critical habitat unit Hawaii 17--Asplenium dielerectum--
a and Hawaii 17--Flueggea neowawraea--a (see 50 CFR 17.99(k) and 68 FR
39624 at 39740-39741, July 2, 2003).
Our response: In our March 29, 2023, proposed critical habitat rule
(88 FR 18756), we requested from the public any new information
regarding additional areas occurring within the range of each species
that should be included in our critical habitat designation because
they were occupied at the time of listing and contain the physical or
biological features essential to the conservation of the species. The
commenter provided new information on a population of Drosophila
digressa that was unknown to the Service at the time we delineated the
proposed critical habitat designation (Magnacca 2023a, pers. comm.;
Magnacca 2023b, pers. comm.). We expect that this D. digressa
population was present at the time the species was listed because the
location of this population contains suitable habitat for D. digressa,
is protected as State Forest Reserve land, and is within the known
range of the species. However, because this area was previously
unsurveyed, the population was not discovered until surveyed in 2022.
We considered the commenter's suggestion to add the new population of
D. digressa to the area currently designated as plant critical habitat
unit Hawaii 17--Asplenium dielerectum--a and Hawaii 17--Flueggea
neowawraea--a (see 50 CFR 17.99(k)), but we determined that the newly
discovered D. digressa population does not overlap with that existing
critical habitat. However, after reviewing the information on the new
population provided by the commenter and applying our critical habitat
delineation methodology (as described under Criteria Used To Identify
Critical Habitat in our March 29, 2023, proposed critical habitat rule
(88 FR 18756 at 18765-18767)), we determined that the new D. digressa
population area meets the criteria for designation as critical habitat.
Therefore, in this rule, we designate a new critical habitat unit in
South Kona named Drosophila digressa--Unit 6, as described above in
Summary of Changes from the Proposed Rule and detailed below. (Note
that this new Drosophila digressa--Unit 6 replaces the proposed
Drosophila digressa--Unit 6, which we discuss above in our response to
(1) Comment.)
Additionally, we applied our critical habitat delineation
methodology to the new Drosophila digressa--Unit 6 in South Kona and
found that it also meets the criteria for two plant species included in
this rule, Cyanea marksii and Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei. Using the
same boundaries of the Drosophila digressa--Unit 6, we created a new
plant Section 20, which contains Unit 56 for Cyanea marksii and
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei. The new unit (Drosophila digressa--Unit
6, and Unit 56 for Cyanea marksii and Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei) is
224 ac (91 ha) and consists of State-owned lands.
(3) Comment: One reviewer provided additional information and
commented that Cyrtandra wagneri should be added to Unit 54 because the
species was found in the Kohala Mountains as of 2009.
Our response: The reviewer did not provide specific information on
the current status of Cyrtandra wagneri in Unit 54, except for photos
of the observed plant. We asked a State of Hawaii botanist to review
the photographs provided by the reviewer, and they noticed a slight
difference in the flower structure of the photographed plant from that
of C. wagneri, which they thought suggested that the plant in the
photograph was most likely a hybrid or another species of Cyrtandra. We
reviewed the best available information describing the occurrences and
physical or biological features essential to the conservation of C.
wagneri in this unit and found no records in our database indicating
that C. wagneri occurred in the Kohala Mountains. Our species range map
for C. wagneri does not include the Kohala Mountains; therefore, this
occurrence is outside the known range of C. wagneri. In
Laup[amacr]hoehoe, where C. wagneri naturally occurs, C. wagneri has
been documented to hybridize with the endangered Cyrtandra
tintinnabula. The Service and the State no longer have access to survey
this area, and, at this time, the best available information indicates
that C. wagneri has become hybridized or been extirpated from Unit 54.
Therefore, we do not designate Unit 54 as critical habitat for C.
wagneri in this rule.

Federal Agency Comments

(4) Comment: The U.S. Army at P[omacr]hakuloa Training Area (PTA)
provided comments specific to the proposed critical habitat designation
for Schiedea hawaiiensis in the Pu`u Anahulu region adjacent to the PTA
(Unit 55). The Department of Defense (DoD) awarded Readiness and
Environmental Protection Integration (REPI) Program grants to the State
of Hawaii Division of Forestry and Wildlife (DOFAW) to implement
conservation actions at Pu`u Anahulu, creating a Federal nexus for
activities at Pu`u Anahulu that are implemented under REPI, requiring
consultation under section 7(a)(2) of the Act. As a result, the
commenter stated that these activities will likely increase their
consultation workload. They also stated that because wildfire risk to
the proposed critical habitat unit in Pu`u Anahulu is greater than that
to Schiedea hawaiiensis and its habitat at the PTA installation, they
would need to implement additional conservation measures to minimize
wildfire risk to the proposed critical habitat unit as a result of
military training at PTA. They also expressed concern that training
restrictions may increase in comparison to those currently implemented
or anticipated as part of the planned comprehensive programmatic

[[Page 17905]]

consultation for PTA. They stated that the additional economic and
administrative burden (e.g., section 7 consultation) to the U.S. Army
that would result from the proposed critical habitat at Pu`u Anahulu
was not accounted for in the draft economic analysis.
Our response: The Pu`u Anahulu area that the commenter refers to is
a State of Hawaii Game Management Area within critical habitat Unit 55.
As such, the critical habitat designation there will affect the DoD
only for activities that they fund at Pu`u Anahulu through the REPI
Program. Activities funded through the REPI Program would include
wildland fire risk management conducted by the State of Hawaii that
would provide a conservation benefit to Schiedea hawaiiensis. Due to
the nature of these management actions, we anticipate any additional
consultation burdens resulting from the Service's designation of Unit
55 as critical habitat would be primarily administrative. Further, our
understanding is that the DoD is already conducting and planning
conservation measures to minimize wildfire risk as a result of military
training at PTA both on and off of the installation, and that these
measures would be no different than those that may apply to the new
critical habitat in Unit 55. We will continue to work with the DoD's
REPI Program to assist them in meeting their section 7 consultation
requirements. Further, any additional future conservation measures to
minimize wildfire risk to Unit 55 as a result of military training at
the adjacent PTA will depend upon the U.S. Army's proposed action as
described in their upcoming biological assessment.

State Agency Comments

(5) Comment: The State of Hawaii DOFAW questioned why the lands of
Pu`u Anahulu in Unit 55 are being designated, as these lands constitute
a Game Management Area and have a draft habitat conservation plan that
covers management of the area. Additionally, the State mentioned that
DoD's REPI Program is funding fencing, fuels management, and seed
collection/banking for all known rare species in the area and is
concerned that additional compliance measures may be required if
critical habitat is designated.
Our response: As described in our March 29, 2023, proposed rule, we
delineated critical habitat areas based on the defined methodology and
identified areas that contain the physical or biological features
essential to the conservation of the species. While Section 19, Unit 55
is within a Game Management Area, the area contains the physical or
biological features essential to the conservation of Schiedea
hawaiiensis. The characteristics of Section 19 are described under
Descriptions of Critical Habitat, below. Additionally, existing
conservation actions being led by DOFAW that occur within Section 19
contribute to the conservation of S. hawaiiensis habitat despite the
area's categorization as a Game Management Area.
The most recent draft habitat conservation plan (HCP) for game
management at Pu`u Wa`awa`a and Pu`u Anahulu was published on August
14, 2017, as a ``working document.'' The DOFAW last received funding
under section 6 of the Act from the Service's habitat conservation
planning assistance program in 2011 to complete the final HCP, which
was not completed (Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources
(DLNR)-DOFAW 2017, entire). We met with DOFAW during the March 29,
2023, proposed rule's (88 FR 18756) comment period to discuss planned
actions for the Pu`u Anahulu area, and they indicated that planned
actions would support the habitat for Schiedea hawaiiensis and other
native at-risk species. However, apart from these planned actions, we
confirmed with DOFAW that development of the draft game management HCP
was discontinued. According to DOFAW and our records, there is
currently no support to continue developing the draft HCP or game
management plan. In regard to REPI, we acknowledge the importance of
the conservation actions that will benefit rare species and their
habitats resulting from the DoD's REPI Program funding to DOFAW for
conservation actions in the Pu`u Anahulu area. As such, we are working
with DoD's REPI Program to assist them in meeting their section 7
consultation requirements, independent of the potential HCP.
The Service is not relieved of its statutory obligation to
designate critical habitat based on the contention that such
designation will not provide additional conservation benefit or because
adequate protections are already in place (see Special Management
Considerations or Protection, below). If any area provides the physical
or biological features essential to the conservation of the species,
even if that area is already well managed or protected, that area still
qualifies as critical habitat under the statutory definition.
(6) Comment: The State of Hawaii DOFAW stated that plant Section 18
(Unit 50 for Cyrtandra nanawaleensis, in the Halepua`a Section of the
N[amacr]n[amacr]wale Forest Reserve) is severely degraded and unlikely
to support any more remnant Cyrtandra nanawaleensis. They stated that
the most recent monitoring of that location indicated that very few
plants remain, despite protections from pigs.
Our response: When the October 29, 2013, final listing rule for
Cyrtandra nanawaleensis was published (78 FR 64638), the Halepua`a
section of the N[amacr]n[amacr]wale Forest Reserve was one of five
known occurrences for this species. As directed by the Act, we proposed
as critical habitat those areas occupied by the species at the time of
listing that contain the physical or biological features essential to
the conservation of the species and which may require special
management considerations or protection. At this time, the best
available information indicates that C. nanawaleensis occupied plant
Section 18 (Unit 50 for Cyrtandra nanawaleensis) at the time of
listing. In addition, the best available information, which includes
the most recent 5-year review for C. nanawaleensis (Service 2020, pp.
9-10), indicates that plant Section 18 is still occupied and contains
the physical or biological features essential to the conservation of
the species. Therefore, we are designating Unit 50 as critical habitat
for Cyrtandra nanawaleensis in this rule.
(7) Comment: The State of Hawaii DOFAW stated that they are not
aware of Schiedea hawaiiensis occurring on State-owned lands in plant
Section 19 (Unit 55). They questioned why critical habitat is being
designated on State lands in this parcel, but not on Federal lands
where Schiedea hawaiiensis is known to occur. They claim that the DoD
has more protected lands with the species' suitable habitat type than
exist on the adjacent State land, and that DoD activities pose one of
the greatest threats--fire--as demonstrated by August 2022's boundary-
crossing Leilani fire.
Our response: We agree that there are no known occurrences of
Schiedea hawaiiensis on State-owned lands in Section 19 (Unit 55). We
identified Section 19 (Unit 55) as unoccupied critical habitat for S.
hawaiiensis. Unoccupied areas are needed for the expansion or
augmentation of reduced populations or the reestablishment of
populations. The Act specifically requires the Service to designate
critical habitat for listed species to the maximum extent prudent and
determinable and does not restrict such designation to particular land
ownership. Rather, areas that meet the definition of critical habitat,
as determined on the basis of the best scientific data available, are
proposed

[[Page 17906]]

for designation. We are designating critical habitat for S. hawaiiensis
only on State-owned lands in Section 19 (Unit 55) because the Federal
lands (i.e., the P[omacr]hakuloa Training Area) where S. hawaiiensis
occurs are exempt from the critical habitat designation in accordance
with section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act (see Exemptions, below).
Section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)(B)(i))
provides that the Secretary shall not designate as critical habitat any
areas owned or controlled by the DoD that are subject to an integrated
natural resources management plan (INRMP), if the Secretary determines
that such a plan provides a benefit to the species for which critical
habitat is proposed for designation. An INRMP integrates the military
mission of the installation with stewardship of the natural resources
found there and must provide benefits to wildlife and their habitats.
The DoD's current INRMP at P[omacr]hakuloa Training Area (PTA) in plant
Section 19 provides protection and enhancement of S. hawaiiensis and
its habitat through management actions including, but not limited to,
seed collection and storage, propagation and planting of cultivated
plants, and ungulate fencing for protection of wild populations. We
have determined that this INRMP provides conservation benefits to S.
hawaiiensis; as such, the PTA lands are exempt from critical habitat
designation in accordance with section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act. While
we acknowledge the State lands adjacent to the PTA may be valuable to
the conservation of S. hawaiiensis and other wildlife, the Act does not
provide for exemptions outside of DoD lands (see Exemptions, below).
Although State lands may qualify for exclusion under certain
circumstances (see Consideration of Impacts under Section 4(b)(2) of
the Act, below), we found no reason to identify the State lands
adjacent to PTA as lands we were considering for exclusion in our March
29, 2023, proposed rule, nor did we receive a request for their
exclusion after publication of the proposed rule.
(10) Comment: The State of Hawaii DOFAW stated that critical
habitat plant Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, and 13 are not
appropriate for the recovery of Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei,
Cyrtandra wagneri, and/or Stenogyne cranwelliae, because they are
outside of the species' historical ranges.
Our response: While the State of Hawaii may use a different method
to define historical ranges, we do not agree that the critical habitat
units we are designating are outside of the historical ranges of the
species to which the commenter referred. We used U.S. Geological Survey
(USGS) species' range maps (Price et al. 2012, unpaginated), which
include not only sites of known occupancy, but also geospatially
projected habitat likely to have been occupied by the species
historically based on climatic and vegetation data. We applied the
critical habitat delineation methodology (as described under Criteria
Used To Identify Critical Habitat in our March 29, 2023, proposed
critical habitat rule (88 FR 18756 at 18765-18767)) to each of the
plant sections identified in the State's comment.
As a result of this analysis, the Service is retaining in this
designation the areas noted by the commenter. The Service's range maps
for Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei and Stenogyne cranwelliae overlap
with these plant sections, and factors used to delineate the critical
habitat boundaries for these species are consistent with our critical
habitat methodology. These factors include information on known past
and present locations of the species, landcover and ecosystem data
sources by USGS Carbon Assessment Landcover Data (Selmants et al. 2017,
entire), recovery areas described by the species' draft recovery plan,
projections of geographic ranges of Hawaiian plant species (Price et
al. 2012, entire; Service 2022b-l, entire), and adequacy of habitat to
allow for the larger populations needed to meet recovery goals (as
described in the draft recovery plan (Service 2022a, entire)). We
considered all of these factors to delineate the critical habitat
boundaries for these species, and these areas are essential for the
conservation of these species. As a result, in this final rule, we
retain the designations of critical habitat for Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei and Stenogyne cranwelliae in plant Sections 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11,
12, and 13 as proposed.
For information about plant Section 7, and our final critical
habitat designation for Cyrtandra wagneri, see Summary of Changes from
the Proposed Rule, above, and Final Critical Habitat Designation,
below.
(11) Comment: The State of Hawaii DOFAW recommended that Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei not be removed from plant Section 3. The DOFAW
stated that although the Schiedea diffusa from Kohala is actually the
subspecies diffusa (confirmed by experts on the genera), and not
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, this has not been formally recognized.
Our response: We agree that critical habitat for Schiedea diffusa
ssp. macraei should be designated in Section 3 (Units 8, 9, and 54).
The additional information provided is reliable and the best available
information; therefore, we include the information provided by the
commenter in this final critical habitat designation. No change is
necessary to Section 3 (Units 8, 9, and 54), as the relevant units are
designated as critical habitat for Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei in
this final rule.
(12) Comment: The State of Hawaii commented that although Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei is not known from the geographic area of plant
Section 1 (Units 3 and 52), it is an area that supports high-quality
habitat that hosts a similar suite of species found near the historical
location for Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei and could be a potential
introduction site.
Our response: In our March 29, 2023, proposed rule, we proposed
plant Section 1 (Units 3 and 52) as critical habitat for Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei along with several other plants. The type
collection by Macrae in 1825 of Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei appears
to have come from the slopes of Mauna Kea; however, no individuals have
been collected from Mauna Kea in recent times (Wagner et al. 2005a, p.
106). We included the information provided by the commenter in this
final rule. No change is necessary to Section 1 (Units 3 and 52), as
the relevant units are designated as critical habitat for Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei in this final rule.
(13) Comment: The State of Hawaii DOFAW commented that they support
designating critical habitat but stated that the process could be
improved by incorporating a slightly more detailed assessment of
habitat quality, potential for habitat protection and ecosystem
restoration, suitability as remnant habitat, and potential as
reintroduction areas, as well as species' history and distribution. In
addition, they state that targeted outreach to private landowners and
increased collaboration could be beneficial.
Our response: As described in the March 29, 2023, proposed rule,
within areas where we have information regarding species' observation
and distribution, annual precipitation, elevation, soil, substrate,
associated native plant genera, landcover and ecosystem data, and
projections of species' geographic ranges, we included that information
in our analysis. We considered the best available information and the
physical or biological features essential to the conservation of each
species in the critical habitat designation. We met with private
landowners to help explain this critical habitat designation. We
provided information about our compilation of available information on

[[Page 17907]]

species and habitat areas on Hawai`i Island, and requested updated
information from landowners. We reviewed and incorporated new
information from these meetings into this final rule. We acknowledge
that the State has been a strong collaborator in developing our
critical habitat areas, and we look forward to continued engagement.

Public Comments

(14) Comment: One commenter requested clarification on the
exclusion policy and further justification for not including exempted
areas.
Our response: Section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act (16 U.S.C.
1533(a)(3)(B)(i)) provides that critical habitat is exempted on areas
owned or controlled by the DoD that are subject to an integrated
natural resources management plan prepared under 16 U.S.C. 670a that
provides benefit to the listed species under consideration for critical
habitat designation. In addition, an area may be excluded from critical
habitat under section 4(b)(2) of the Act based on economic impacts,
impacts on national security, or any other relevant impacts, if the
benefits of the exclusion outweigh the benefits of inclusion as
critical habitat and the failure to designate the area as critical
habitat will not result in the extinction of the species (see 50 CFR
424.19 and 81 FR 7226, February 11, 2016). Details about exemptions and
exclusions, and justification for those relevant to this critical
habitat designation, can be found below under Exemptions and
Consideration of Impacts under Section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
(15) Comment: One commenter stated that the greatest risk and
current threat to the palm (Pritchardia lanigera) are rats that consume
seeds, thereby hindering palm reproduction, and that collection is not
a threat to the palm.
Our response: Pritchardia lanigera is easy to identify and may be
attractive to collectors of rare palms for personal use, for trade, or
for sale (Shirey et al. 2013, pp. 301-302). Several nurseries advertise
and sell Pritchardia palms, including P. lanigera and other federally
listed Pritchardia species, indicating that Pritchardia are attractive
to some collectors. Collection is a threat to P. lanigera that would
likely increase if we were to designate critical habitat for the
species, as such designation would aid collectors in locating
occurrences of the species (Shirey et al. 2013, p. 307; Weisenberger
2023, pers. comm.). Therefore, the designation of critical habitat for
Pritchardia lanigera is not prudent due to the threat of collection.
(16) Comment: One commenter disagreed with the not-prudent critical
habitat determination for Vetericaris chaceorum. When the Service
listed V. chaceorum as endangered, overcollection for commercial and
recreational purposes was not listed as a threat to the species. The
commenter stated that V. chaceorum has only been documented in two
specific locations, which have already been identified in the species'
listing, have already been disclosed in the Federal Register, and are
found easily online.
Our response: Vetericaris chaceorum is one of several different
species and taxon of Hawaiian anchialine pool shrimp and is the largest
of the anchialine pool shrimp found in Hawai[revaps]i (Yamamoto et al.
2015, p. 40). Anchialine pools are sensitive discrete ecosystems, and a
single pool system can be home to many different species of anchialine
pool shrimp.
We agree with the commenter that we did not cite overcollection as
a threat to V. chaceorum when we listed it as endangered (78 FR 64638;
October 29, 2013, pp. 63978-63978). However, after listing V.
chaceorum, new information has become available highlighting a new
threat in the form of collection and overutilization, as described in
our proposed rule (88 FR 18756, March 29, 2023). Coincidentally after
listing V. chaceorum, popularity in the aquarium trade of another
Hawaiian anchialine shrimp species, Halocaridina rubra, commonly called
the Hawaiian red shrimp or volcano shrimp, has increased worldwide
(Yamamoto et al. 2015, p. 83). This increase in collection activities
of H. rubra has resulted in a risk to V. chaceorum, due to these two
species sharing a similar appearance and habitat preferences. The
shrimp that are being harvested are primarily H. rubra, which is not
endangered, but as the popularity of this business increases there is
risk that the endangered V. chaceorum may either intentionally or
accidentally be harvested and become part of the aquarium trade.
Collectors may target V. chaceorum due to its similar appearance,
rarity, and aesthetic, or collectors attempting to harvest the H. rubra
that occur in the same pools as V. chaceorum may accidentally harvest
both species (Sakihara 2012, entire). Because this shrimp is so rare, a
single person with a hand-net could do irreparable damage to a
population of V. chaceorum (Yamamoto 2015, pers. comm.).
Although more than 400 of the estimated 520 to 560 anchialine pool
habitats have been surveyed on the island of Hawai[revaps]i, V.
chaceorum has only been documented from two locations, indicating that
this species has a very limited range, likely due to its behavior and
salinity preferences (see 78 FR 64638, October 29, 2013). While general
occurrence locations were included in the October 29, 2013, rule
listing V. chaceorum as an endangered species, specifically defining
occupied areas by geographic coordinates through a critical habitat
designation may pose a risk to V. chaceorum by causing increased
unauthorized collection by individuals seeking Halocaridina rubra, a
prey source for V. chaceorum.
(17) Comment: The Nature Conservancy stated the Service should have
designated as critical habitat areas occupied by Drosophila digressa in
mesic forest below Kona Hema Preserve at Honomalino, and at
K[imacr]puka Punahou.
Our response: We have reviewed the new information provided by the
commenter, as well as similar information provided by a peer reviewer,
regarding Drosophila digressa occurrences, and we evaluated the areas
for inclusion in this critical habitat designation. The Nature
Conservancy's suggestion regarding Honomalino is supported by
information provided by one peer reviewer, as described above in
Summary of Changes from the Proposed Rule. We have determined that the
Honomalino area the commenter suggested for inclusion should be
included in this critical habitat designation, and we include it in
this designation as a new Drosophila digressa--Unit 6. The area is
occupied by D. digressa as a new population discovered in 2022, has at
least one physical or biological feature essential to the conservation
of D. digressa, and may require special management considerations or
protection.
We do not, however, include Kipuka Punahou, which is also known as
K[imacr]puka 9 located along Saddle Road, in this designation. The
commenter did not provide any information to indicate that this area is
currently occupied by Drosophila digressa, and the best available
information indicates that the species was last observed in this area
in 1986 (Hawaii Natural Heritage Program 2011, in litt.). Further,
because of the lack of breeding substrate in the area, an individual
Drosophila digressa observed in K[imacr]puka Punahou would likely be a
vagrant (Magnacca 2012, pers. comm., entire).

Background

For species with Hawaiian common names, we prefer to, and will,
include Hawaiian language spellings, including diacritical marks, to
the degree possible and appropriate in the preambles of our Federal
Register documents. For the

[[Page 17908]]

text to be codified in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), however,
we will omit diacritical marks to ensure that no errors are
inadvertently incorporated during the codification process.

Species Descriptions

We provide a brief description for each of the 14 species addressed
in this rule, below.
Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana
(ko[revaps]oko[revaps]olau), a short-lived perennial herb in the
sunflower family (Asteraceae), occurs only on the island of
Hawai[revaps]i (Ganders and Nagata 1999, pp. 275-276). Historically, B.
hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana was known from two locations along
the windward Kohala coastline, in the coastal and dry cliff ecosystems,
often along rocks just above the ocean (Degener and Wiebke 1926, in
litt.; Flynn 1988, in litt.).
Cyanea marksii (haha), a short-lived perennial palmlike shrub in
the bellflower family (Campanulaceae), is found only on the island of
Hawai[revaps]i. Historically, C. marksii was known from the Kona
district, in the lowland wet and montane wet ecosystems (Lammers 1999,
p. 457; Hawai[revaps]i Biodiversity Mapping Program (HBMP) database
2010b).xxxxxxx
Cyanea tritomantha ([revaps]aku), a short-lived perennial palmlike
shrub in the bellflower family (Campanulaceae), is known only from the
island of Hawai[revaps]i (Pratt and Abbott 1997, p. 13; Lammers 2004,
p. 89). Historically, this species was known from the windward slopes
of Mauna Kea, Mauna Loa, Kilauea, and the Kohala Mountains, in the
lowland wet, montane wet, and wet cliff ecosystems (Pratt and Abbott
1997, p. 13).
Cyrtandra nanawaleensis (ha[revaps]iwale), a short-lived perennial
shrub or small tree in the African violet family (Gesneriaceae), is
known only from the island of Hawai[revaps]i (Wagner and Herbst 2003,
p. 29; Wagner et al. 2005b). Historically, C. nanawaleensis was known
only from the lowland wet ecosystems in the Puna district (St. John
1987, p. 500; Wagner et al. 1988, in litt.; HBMP 2010d).
Cyrtandra wagneri (ha[revaps]iwale), a short-lived perennial shrub
or small tree in the African violet family (Gesneriaceae), occurs only
on the island of Hawai[revaps]i (Lorence and Perlman 2007, p. 357).
Historically, C. wagneri was known in the lowland wet ecosystem along
the northeast side of the island (Lorence and Perlman 2007, p. 359).
Melicope remyi (no common name), a long-lived perennial shrub or
shrubby tree in the rue family (Rutaceae), occurs only on the island of
Hawai[revaps]i (Stone et al. 1999, p. 1210; Service 2010, pp. A-11, 4-
74). Historically, M. remyi was known from a few scattered individuals
on the windward slopes of the Kohala Mountains and several small
populations on the windward slopes of Mauna Kea, in the lowland wet and
montane wet ecosystems (Stone et al. 1999, p. 1210; HBMP 2010f).
Phyllostegia floribunda (no common name), a short-lived perennial
subshrub in the mint family (Lamiaceae), is found only on the island of
Hawai[revaps]i (Wagner 1999, p. 268; Wagner et al. 1999a, p. 815).
Historically, P. floribunda was reported in the lowland wet, montane
mesic, and montane wet ecosystems at scattered sites along the eastern
side of the island.
Pittosporum hawaiiense (h[omacr][revaps]awa, h[amacr][revaps]awa),
a small, long-lived perennial tree in the pittosporum family
(Pittosporaceae), is known only from the island of Hawai[revaps]i
(Wagner et al. 1999b, p. 1,044). Historically, P. hawaiiense was known
from the leeward side of the island, from the Kohala Mountains south to
Ka[revaps]u, in the lowland mesic, montane mesic, and montane wet
ecosystems (Wagner et al. 1999b, p. 1,044).
Pritchardia lanigera (loulu), a medium-sized, long-lived perennial
tree in the palm family (Arecaceae), is found only on the island of
Hawai[revaps]i (Read and Hodel 1999, p. 1,371; Hodel 2007, pp. 10, 24-
25). Historically, P. lanigera was known from the Kohala Mountains,
Ha[amacr]m[amacr]kua district, windward slopes of Mauna Kea, and
southern slopes of Mauna Loa, in the lowland mesic, lowland wet,
montane wet, and wet cliff ecosystems (Read and Hodel 1999, p. 1,371;
National Park Service 2015, pp. 467-468)
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei (no common name), a short-lived
perennial climbing herb in the pink family (Caryophyllaceae), is
reported only from the island of Hawai[revaps]i (Wagner et al. 2005c;
Wagner et al. 2005a, p. 106). Historically, S. diffusa ssp. macraei was
known from the Kohala Mountains, the windward slopes of Mauna Loa, and
the Ola[revaps]a Tract of Hawai[revaps]i Volcanoes National Park, in
the montane wet ecosystem (Perlman et al. 2001, in litt.; Wagner et al.
2005a, p. 106; HBMP 2010g).
Schiedea hawaiiensis (m[amacr][revaps]oli[revaps]oli), a short-
lived perennial herb in the pink family (Caryophyllaceae), is known
only from the island of Hawai[revaps]i (Wagner et al. 2005a, pp. 92-
96). Historically, S. hawaiiensis was known from a single site between
Mauna Loa and Mauna Kea mountains in the montane dry ecosystem
(Hillebrand 1888, p. 33; Wagner et al. 2005a, pp. 92-96).
Stenogyne cranwelliae (no common name), a short-lived perennial
vine in the mint family (Lamiaceae), is known only from the island of
Hawai[revaps]i. Historically, S. cranwelliae was known from the Kohala
Mountains, in the montane wet and wet cliff ecosystems (Weller and
Sakai 1999, p. 837).
Drosophila digressa (Hawaiian picture-wing fly), a member of the
family Drosophilidae, is found only on the island of Hawai[revaps]i and
historically known from five locations on the island in elevations
ranging from approximately 2,000 to 4,500 feet (ft) (610 to 1,370
meters (m)), in the lowland mesic, montane mesic, and montane wet
ecosystems (Hardy and Kaneshiro 1968, p. 182; Montgomery 1975, p. 95;
Magnacca 2012, pers. comm.). This species is small, with adults ranging
in size from 0.15 to 0.19 inches (in) (4.0 to 5.0 millimeters (mm)) in
length. Adults are brownish yellow in color and have yellow-colored
legs and hyaline (shiny-clear) wings with prominent brown spots. Like
many endemic Hawaiian Drosophilidae species, D. digressa are highly
host-plant-specific (Magnacca et al. 2008, p. 1), relying on the
decaying stems of Charpentiera spp., Ceodes brunoniana (previously
known as Pisonia brunoniana), and Rockia sandwicensis (previously known
as Pisonia sandwicensis) for reproduction and larval substrate
(Magnacca et al. 2008, pp. 11, 13; Magnacca 2012, pers. comm.).
Vetericaris chaceorum (anchialine pool shrimp), a small shrimp in
the family Procarididae, is endemic to Hawai[revaps]i. Anchialine pools
are coastal, land-locked bodies of water that have underground
hydrological connections to the ocean, contain varying levels of
salinity, and show tidal fluctuations in water level. Vetericaris
chaceorum is one of seven described species of hypogeal (underground)
shrimp found in the Hawaiian Islands that occur in anchialine pools
(Brock 2004, p. 6) and is relatively large in size for a hypogeal
shrimp species; adult V. chaceorum measure approximately 2.0 in (5.0
centimeters (cm)) in total body length, excluding the primary antennae,
which are approximately the same length as the adult's body length
(Kensley and Williams 1986, p. 419). The species lacks large chelapeds
(claws) (Kensley and Williams 1986, p. 426), which are a key diagnostic
characteristic of all other known shrimp species. Vetericaris chaceorum
is largely devoid of pigment and lacks eyes, although eyestalks are

[[Page 17909]]

present (Kensley and Williams 1986, p. 419).
Additional information on the descriptions of each species'
occurrence can be found in the proposed (77 FR 63928, October 17, 2012)
and final (78 FR 64638, October 29, 2013) listing rules for these
species and in the proposed critical habitat rule (88 FR 18756, March
29, 2023).

Regulatory Framework

Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and the implementing
regulations in title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations set forth
the procedures for determining whether a species is an endangered
species or a threatened species, issuing protective regulations for
threatened species, and designating critical habitat for endangered and
threatened species. In 2019, jointly with the National Marine Fisheries
Service, the Service issued a final rule that revised the regulations
in 50 CFR part 424 regarding how we add, remove, and reclassify
endangered and threatened species and the criteria for designating
listed species' critical habitat (84 FR 45020; August 27, 2019).
Our analysis for this decision applied our current regulations,
portions of which were last revised in 2019. Given that we proposed
further revisions to these regulations on June 22, 2023 (88 FR 40764),
we have also undertaken an analysis of whether the decision would be
different if we were to apply those proposed revisions. We concluded
that the decision would have been the sameif we had applied the
proposed 2023 regulations. The analyses under both the regulations
currently in effect and the regulations after incorporating the June
22, 2023, proposed revisions are included in our decision file.

Critical Habitat

Section 4(a)(3) of the Act requires that, to the maximum extent
prudent and determinable, we designate a species' critical habitat
concurrently with listing the species. Critical habitat is defined in
section 3 of the Act as:
(1) The specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the
species, at the time it is listed in accordance with the Act, on which
are found those physical or biological features:
(a) Essential to the conservation of the species, and
(b) Which may require special management considerations or
protection; and
(2) Specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the
species at the time it is listed, upon a determination that such areas
are essential for the conservation of the species.
Our regulations at 50 CFR 424.02 define the geographical area
occupied by the species as an area that may generally be delineated
around species' occurrences, as determined by the Secretary (i.e.,
range). Such areas may include those areas used throughout all or part
of the species' life cycle, even if not used on a regular basis (e.g.,
migratory corridors, seasonal habitats, and habitats used periodically,
but not solely by vagrant individuals).
Conservation, as defined under section 3 of the Act, means to use
and the use of all methods and procedures that are necessary to bring
an endangered or threatened species to the point at which the measures
provided pursuant to the Act are no longer necessary. Such methods and
procedures include, but are not limited to, all activities associated
with scientific resources management such as research, census, law
enforcement, habitat acquisition and maintenance, propagation, live
trapping, and transplantation, and, in the extraordinary case where
population pressures within a given ecosystem cannot be otherwise
relieved, may include regulated taking.
Critical habitat receives protection under section 7 of the Act
through the requirement that Federal agencies ensure, in consultation
with the Service, that any action they authorize, fund, or carry out is
not likely to result in the destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat. The designation of critical habitat does not affect
land ownership or establish a refuge, wilderness, reserve, preserve, or
other conservation area. Such designation also does not allow the
government or public to access private lands. Such designation does not
require implementation of restoration, recovery, or enhancement
measures by non-Federal landowners. Rather, designation requires that,
where a landowner requests Federal agency funding or authorization for
an action that may affect a listed species or critical habitat, the
Federal agency consult with the Service under section 7(a)(2) of the
Act. If the action may affect the listed species itself (such as for
occupied critical habitat), the Federal action agency would have
already been required to consult with the Service even absent the
critical habitat designation because of the requirement to ensure that
the action is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the
species. Even if the Service were to conclude after consultation that
the proposed activity is likely to result in destruction or adverse
modification of the critical habitat, the Federal action agency and the
landowner are not required to abandon the proposed activity, or to
restore or recover the species; instead, they must implement
``reasonable and prudent alternatives'' to avoid destruction or adverse
modification of critical habitat.
Under the first prong of the Act's definition of critical habitat,
areas within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time
it was listed are included in a critical habitat designation if they
contain physical or biological features (1) which are essential to the
conservation of the species and (2) which may require special
management considerations or protection. For these areas, critical
habitat designations identify, to the extent known using the best
scientific data available, those physical or biological features that
are essential to the conservation of the species (such as space, food,
cover, and protected habitat).
Under the second prong of the Act's definition of critical habitat,
we can designate critical habitat in areas outside the geographical
area occupied by the species at the time it is listed, upon a
determination that such areas are essential for the conservation of the
species.
Section 4 of the Act requires that we designate critical habitat on
the basis of the best scientific data available. Further, our Policy on
Information Standards Under the Endangered Species Act (published in
the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34271)), the Information
Quality Act (section 515 of the Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106-554; H.R. 5658)),
and our associated Information Quality Guidelines provide criteria,
establish procedures, and provide guidance to ensure that our decisions
are based on the best scientific data available. They require our
biologists, to the extent consistent with the Act and with the use of
the best scientific data available, to use primary and original sources
of information as the basis for recommendations to designate critical
habitat.
When we are determining which areas should be designated as
critical habitat, our primary source of information is generally the
information from the species status report and information developed
during the listing process for the species. Additional information
sources may include any generalized conservation strategy, criteria, or
outline that may have been developed for the species; the recovery plan
for the

[[Page 17910]]

species; articles in peer-reviewed journals; conservation plans
developed by States and counties; scientific status surveys and
studies; biological assessments; other unpublished materials; or
experts' opinions or personal knowledge.
Habitat is dynamic, and species may move from one area to another
over time. We recognize that critical habitat designated at a
particular point in time may not include all of the habitat areas that
we may later determine are necessary for the recovery of the species.
For these reasons, a critical habitat designation does not signal that
habitat outside the designated area is unimportant or may not be needed
for recovery of the species. Areas that are important to the
conservation of the species, both inside and outside the critical
habitat designation, will continue to be subject to: (1) Conservation
actions implemented under section 7(a)(1) of the Act; (2) regulatory
protections afforded by the requirement in section 7(a)(2) of the Act
for Federal agencies to ensure their actions are not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened
species; and (3) the prohibitions found in section 9 of the Act.
Federally funded or permitted projects affecting listed species outside
their designated critical habitat areas may still result in jeopardy
findings in some cases. These protections and conservation tools will
continue to contribute to recovery of these species. Similarly,
critical habitat designations made on the basis of the best available
information at the time of designation will not control the direction
and substance of future recovery plans, habitat conservation plans
(HCPs), or other species conservation planning efforts if new
information available at the time of these planning efforts calls for a
different outcome.

Physical or Biological Features Essential to the Conservation of the
Species

In accordance with section 3(5)(A)(i) of the Act and regulations at
50 CFR 424.12(b), in determining which areas we will designate as
critical habitat from within the geographical area occupied by the
species at the time of listing, we consider the physical or biological
features that are essential to the conservation of the species, and
which may require special management considerations or protection. The
regulations at 50 CFR 424.02 define ``physical or biological features
essential to the conservation of the species'' as the features that
occur in specific areas and that are essential to support the life-
history needs of the species, including, but not limited to, water
characteristics, soil type, geological features, sites, prey,
vegetation, symbiotic species, or other features. A feature may be a
single habitat characteristic or a more complex combination of habitat
characteristics. Features may include habitat characteristics that
support ephemeral or dynamic habitat conditions. Features may also be
expressed in terms relating to principles of conservation biology, such
as patch size, distribution distances, and connectivity. For example,
physical features essential to the conservation of the species might
include gravel of a particular size required for spawning, alkaline
soil for seed germination, protective cover for migration, or
susceptibility to flooding or fire that maintains necessary early-
successional habitat characteristics. Biological features might include
prey species, forage grasses, specific kinds or ages of trees for
roosting or nesting, symbiotic fungi, or absence of a particular level
of nonnative species consistent with conservation needs of the listed
species. The features may also be combinations of habitat
characteristics and may encompass the relationship between
characteristics or the necessary amount of a characteristic essential
to support the life history of the species.
In considering whether features are essential to the conservation
of the species, we may consider an appropriate quality, quantity, and
spatial and temporal arrangement of habitat characteristics in the
context of the life-history needs, condition, and status of the
species. These characteristics include, but are not limited to, space
for individual and population growth and for normal behavior; food,
water, air, light, minerals, or other nutritional or physiological
requirements; cover or shelter; sites for breeding, reproduction, or
rearing (or development) of offspring; and habitats that are protected
from disturbance.
In this rule, the physical or biological features are based on the
features of the six ecosystem types on which the 11 plant (Bidens
hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana, Cyanea marksii, Cyanea tritomantha,
Cyrtandra nanawaleensis, Cyrtandra wagneri, Melicope remyi,
Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei, Schiedea hawaiiensis, Stenogyne cranwelliae) and 1 animal
(Drosophila digressa) species depend (see table 1, below). These six
ecosystems are coastal, dry forest, mesic forest, wet forest, mesic
grassland and shrubland, and wet grassland and shrubland; we summarize
the descriptions of these ecosystems and our source for the
descriptions below. The physical or biological features essential to
the conservation of the species identified in this rule are those
features required for the successful functioning of the ecosystem in
which these species occur or have historically occurred (see table 2,
below). Although critical habitat is identified for each species
individually, we have found that the conservation of each depends, at
least in part, on the successful functioning of the commonly shared
ecosystem. Ecosystem parameters include elevation, precipitation,
substrate, and associated native plant genera. These ecosystem
parameters describe the species-specific physical or biological
features of the functioning ecosystems on which these listed species
depend. For example, the associated native plant genera described as
physical or biological features for these 12 listed species are
representative of the native plant genera that occur in the functioning
ecosystems on which these 12 species depend, and as such, the
occurrence of these native plant genera indicate functioning native
ecosystems that provide the fundamental biological requirements for the
listed species in these areas. Additionally, Drosophila digressa relies
on native plant genera, specifically Charpentiera, Rockia, and Ceodes,
as native plant host resources, and without which this species would be
highly vulnerable to mortality, reproductive failure, and cyclical
population variation related to fluctuations in breeding resources
(Magnacca et al. 2008, p. 32).

Coastal (as Described by Kim et al. 2020, p. 2)

Coastal ecosystems are defined as near-shore areas that are
impacted by the ocean and generally occur within 328 ft (100 m) of high
tide up to 984 ft (300 m) in elevation. Coastal ecosystems are found on
all the main Hawaiian Islands and include coastal dry herblands,
coastal dry grasslands, coastal mixed communities, coastal dry
shrublands, coastal dry forests, and coastal wet-mesic forests. Coastal
substrate includes well-drained talus, calcareous slopes, and dunes.
Annual precipitation ranges from less than 47 in (120 cm) in the
coastal dry ecosystem to 47 to 98 in (120 to 250 cm) in the coastal
mesic ecosystem, and to more than 98 in (250 cm) in the coastal wet
ecosystem. Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana is the only
species addressed in this rule known to occupy a coastal ecosystem, and
more

[[Page 17911]]

specifically the coastal wet ecosystem that receives higher rainfall.

Dry Forest (as Described by Javar-Salas et al. 2020, p. 2)

Dry forest ecosystems are found on all of the main Hawaiian Islands
and include lowland dry forest and montane-alpine dry forest. Dry
forest is found from 0 to 9,500 ft (0 to 2,900 m). Annual precipitation
ranges from 12 to 79 in (30 to 200 cm). Substrates are generally well-
drained, sandy loams from volcanic ash or cinder and weathered basaltic
lava in lowland dry forest to well-drained, loams from volcanic ash,
cinder, and weathered basaltic lava in montane-alpine dry forest.
Schiedea hawaiiensis is the only species addressed in this rule known
to occupy the dry forest ecosystem.

Mesic Forest (as Described by Lowe et al. 2020, pp. 2-7)

Mesic forest ecosystems include lowland mesic forest and montane
subalpine mesic forest. Elevation ranges from 98 to 5,249 ft (30 to
1,600 m) in lowland mesic forest to 2,953 to 6,562 ft (900 to 2,000 m)
in montane subalpine mesic forest. Annual precipitation ranges from 39
to 150 in (100 to 380 cm) in montane subalpine to 47 to 150 in (120 to
380 cm) in lowland mesic forest. Substrates are generally well-drained
and include rocky, shallow, organic muck soils; steep rocky talus
soils; shallow soils over weathered rock in steep gulches; deep soils
over soft weathered rock; and gravelly alluvium. The plants Cyrtandra
nanawaleensis, Phyllostegia floribunda, and Pittosporum hawaiiense
addressed in this rule are found in the mesic forest ecosystem. The
picture-wing fly, Drosophila digressa, addressed in this rule is also
found in the mesic forest ecosystem.

Wet Forest (as Described by Clark et al. 2020, p. 2)

Wet forest ecosystems include lowland rainforest, montane
rainforest, and montane cloud forest. Elevation ranges from 328 to
3,937 ft (100 to 1,200 m) in lowland rainforest; 2,700 to 7,218 ft (823
to 2,200 m) in montane rainforest; and 2,461 to 6,070 ft (750 to 1,830
m) in montane cloud forest. Annual precipitation is greater than 98 in
(250 cm). Substrates range from very weathered soils to rocky substrate
with classes of undeveloped and developed soil substrates formed from
basalt lava. The plants Cyanea marksii, Cyanea tritomantha, Cyrtandra
nanawaleensis, Cyrtandra wagneri, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Melicope remyi, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and
Stenogyne cranwelliae addressed in this rule are found in the wet
forest ecosystem. Drosophila digressa is also found in the wet forest
ecosystem.

Mesic Grassland and Shrubland (as Described by Ball et al. 2020, p. 2)

Mesic grassland and shrubland ecosystems include lowland mesic
shrubland, subalpine mesic shrubland, montane-subalpine mesic
grassland, and lowland mesic grassland. Elevation ranges from 98 to
7,546 ft (30 to 2,300 m). Annual precipitation ranges from 39 to 98 in
(100 to 250 cm). Substrates generally include shallow soils that
frequently dry with rocky outcrops. Cyrtandra nanawaleensis is the only
species addressed in this rule known to occupy the mesic grassland and
shrubland ecosystem.

Wet Grassland and Shrubland (as Described by Nelson et al. 2020, p. 3)

Wet grassland and shrubland ecosystems include native wet sedge and
grassland and native wet cliff and crest shrubland. Elevation ranges
from 656 to 2,953 ft (200 to 900 m). Annual precipitation ranges from
98 to 197 in (250 to 500 cm). Substrates range from older, weathered
soils to younger, rocky substrates. The plants Cyanea tritomantha and
Phyllostegia floribunda addressed in this rule are found in the wet
grassland and shrubland ecosystem.

Summary of Essential Physical or Biological Features

We derive the specific physical or biological features essential to
the conservation of the 12 species from studies of the species'
habitat, ecology, and life history as described below. Additional
information about the ecosystems containing these physical or
biological features and descriptions of each species' occurrence within
these ecosystems can be found in the proposed (77 FR 63928, October 17,
2012) and final (78 FR 64638, October 29, 2013) listing rules and the
proposed critical habitat rule (88 FR 18756, March 29, 2023) for these
species. Each species identified in this rule requires the physical or
biological features for each ecosystem in which that species occurs, as
noted below in table 1. Table 2, below, identifies the physical or
biological features of a functioning ecosystem for each of the
ecosystem types identified in this rule. The physical or biological
features are defined here by elevation, annual levels of precipitation,
substrate type, and the characteristic native plant genera that are
found in the canopy, subcanopy, and understory levels of the vegetative
community where applicable. Due to our limited knowledge of the
specific life-history requirements for the species that are little-
studied and occur in remote and inaccessible areas, the physical or
biological features described in this document that provide for the
successful function of the ecosystem that is essential to the
conservation of the species represents the best, and, in many cases,
the only, scientific information available. Accordingly, the physical
or biological features of a functioning ecosystem are, at least in
part, the physical or biological features essential to the conservation
of these 12 species.

Table 1--Twelve Species and Applicable Ecosystems
[Note: All species, except for Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana
and Schiedea hawaiiensis are found in multiple ecosystems]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ecosystem Species
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coastal........................... Bidens hillebrandiana ssp.
hillebrandiana.
Dry Forest........................ Schiedea hawaiiensis.
Mesic Forest...................... Cyrtandra nanawaleensis,
Phyllostegia floribunda,
Pittosporum hawaiiense, and
Drosophila digressa.
Wet Forest........................ Cyanea marksii, Cyanea tritomantha,
Cyrtandra nanawaleensis, Cyrtandra
wagneri, Phyllostegia floribunda,
Pittosporum hawaiiense, Melicope
remyi, Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae, and
Drosophila digressa.
Mesic Grassland and Shrubland..... Cyrtandra nanawaleensis.
Wet Grassland and Shrubland....... Cyanea tritomantha, Phyllostegia
floribunda.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 17912]]

Table 2--Physical or Biological Features for Each Ecosystem Upon Which the 12 Species Depend
[Read in association with table 1]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contain one or more of these associated native plant
Annual genera
Ecosystem Elevation precipitation Substrate -----------------------------------------------------------
Canopy Subcanopy Understory
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coastal......................... <984ft (<300 m)... <47 to >98 in well-drained Diospyros, Chenopodium, Eragrostis,
(<120 cm to >250 talus, calcareous Metrosideros, Gossypium, Sesuvium, Sida,
cm). slopes, dunes. Myoporum, Heliotropium, Sporobolus.
Pritchardia. Santalum,
Scaevola.
Dry Forest...................... <9,500 ft (<2,900 <79 in (<200 cm).. well-drained, Acacia, Colubrina, Achyranthes, Dodonaea,
m). sandy loams or Diospyros, Euphorbia, Doryopteris,
loams from Erythrina, Leptecophylla, Heteropogon,
volcanic ash or Melicope, Nototrichium. Pellaea.
cinder; weathered Metrosideros,
basaltic lava. Myoporum,
Myrsine, Sophora.
Mesic Forest.................... <6,562 ft (<2,000 39-150 in (100-380 rocky, shallow, Acacia, Antidesma, Coprosma, Ctenitis, Doodia,
m). cm). organic muck Charpentiera, Freycinetia, Dryopteris,
soils; rocky Chrysodracon, Leptecophylla, Pelea, Sadleria.
talus soils; Metrosideros, Myoporum,
shallow soils Myrsine, Pipturus, Rubus,
over weathered Nestegis, Sadleria, Sophora.
rock; deep soils Pisonia, Santalum.
over soft
weathered rock;
gravelly alluvium.
Wet Forest...................... <7,218 ft (<2,200 >98 in (> 250 cm). very weathered Acacia, Antidesma, Cibotium, Adenophorus,
m). soils to rocky Cheirodendron, Clermontia, Cibotium,
substrate, Ilex, Melicope, Coprosma, Cyanea, Cyrtandra,
basaltic lava, Metrosideros, Freycinetia, Dicranopteris,
undeveloped Myrsine, Hydrangea, Huperzia,
soils, developed Pittosporum, Vaccinium. Peperomia,
soils. Psychotria. Stenogyne.
Mesic Grassland and Shrubland... 98-7,546 ft (30- 39-98 in (100-250 shallow soils that Coprosma, Dodonaea, Bidens, Carex,
2,300 m). cm). frequently dry Metrosideros, Dubautia, Deschampsia,
with rocky Wilkesia. Leptecophylla, Dicranopteris,
outcrops. Osteomeles, Dryopteris,
Sadleria, Eragrostis,
Vaccinium. Euphorbia,
Lipochaeta.
Wet Grassland and Shrubland..... 656-2,953 ft (200- 98-197 in (250-500 older, weathered Ilex, Kadua, Cibotium, Carex, Cladium,
900 m). cm). soils to younger, Melicope, Clermontia, Deschampsia,
rocky substrates. Metrosideros, Dubautia, Dicranopteris,
Myrsine. Freycinetia, Eragrostis,
Hydrangea, Peperomia,
Lobelia, Phyllostegia,
Pipturus, Scaevola.
Touchardia,
Urera, Vaccinium.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The physical or biological features identified in this rule take
into consideration the ecosystem types in which each species occurs, as
described above. We considered the current population status of each
species, to the extent it is known, and assessed its status relative to
the recovery objectives for that species, in terms of population goals
(numbers of populations and individuals in each population, which
contributes to population resiliency) and essential distribution
(whether the populations occur in habitats representative of the
species' historical geographical and ecological distribution, and are
sufficiently redundant to withstand the loss of some populations over
time). This assessment informed us as to whether the species requires
space for population growth and expansion in areas occupied at the time
of listing, or whether additional areas unoccupied at the time of
listing may be required for the reestablishment of populations to
achieve recovery.
Some of the species addressed in this rule occur in more than one
ecosystem. We describe the physical or biological features for these
species separately for each ecosystem in which they occur. We took this
approach because each species requires a different suite of
environmental conditions depending upon the ecosystem in which it
occurs. For example, Cyrtandra nanawaleensis will occur in association
with different native plant species, depending on the mesic forest, wet
forest, or mesic grassland and shrubland ecosystem type where it is
found. Each of the physical or biological features described in each
ecosystem in which the species occurs are essential to the conservation
of the species, which includes the ability to support the geographical
and ecological distribution across the different ecosystem types where
the species occurs. Each physical or biological feature is also
essential to retaining the genetic representation that allows the
species to successfully adapt to different environmental conditions in
various native ecosystems. Although some of these species occur in
multiple native ecosystems, their declining abundance in the face of
ongoing threats, such as increasing numbers of nonnative plant
competitors, indicates that they are not such broad habitat generalists
as to be able to persist in highly altered habitats. Based on an
analysis of the best available scientific information, functioning
native ecosystems provide the fundamental biological requirements for
the narrow-range, island-endemic species that are addressed in this
rule.
We offer some examples to help readers understand our approach to
describing the physical or biological features for each species. For
example, to understand the physical or biological features for the
plant Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana, first look at table 1
and see that B. hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana depends on the
coastal ecosystem. Then table 2 indicates that the physical or
biological features in the coastal ecosystem include elevations of less
than 984 ft (300 m); annual precipitation ranges from less than 47 in
(120 cm) to more than 98 in (250 cm); well-drained talus, calcareous
slopes, and dunes; and one or more genera of the subcanopy and
understory plants Chenopodium, Eragrostis, Gossypium, Heliotropium,
Santalum, Scaevola, Sesuvium, Sida, and Sporobolus, and one or more of
the genera of the canopy species Diospyros, Metrosideros, Myoporum, and
Pritchardia. The specific physical or biological features for B.
hillebrandiana

[[Page 17913]]

ssp. hillebrandiana are intrinsically tied to the coastal ecosystem.
The physical or biological features of the coastal ecosystem best
approximate the physical or biological features for B. hillebrandiana
ssp. hillebrandiana. Thus, we use the physical and biological features
provided in the ecosystem in which B. hillebrandiana ssp.
hillebrandiana is found as the physical and biological features for B.
hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana.
As another example, table 1 indicates the physical or biological
features for the plant Phyllostegia floribunda include the ecosystem-
level physical or biological features for the mesic forest, wet forest,
and wet grassland and shrubland ecosystems. The physical or biological
features for P. floribunda are thus composed of the physical or
biological features for each of the three ecosystems it occupies, as
described in table 2 for the mesic forest, wet forest, and wet
shrubland and grassland ecosystems. Table 1 is read in a similar
fashion in conjunction with table 2 to describe the physical or
biological features for each of the 12 species for which we are
designating critical habitat.

Special Management Considerations or Protection

When designating critical habitat, we assess whether the specific
areas within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time
of listing contain features which are essential to the conservation of
the species and which may require special management considerations or
protection. The following discussion of special management needs is
applicable to each of the 12 species on the island of Hawai`i for which
we are designating critical habitat.
For the 11 plant species and Drosophila digressa, we have
determined that the features essential to their conservation are those
required for the successful functioning of the ecosystem in which they
occur (see tables 1 and 2, above); conversely, threats that act at the
ecosystem level also act at the species level. Special management
considerations or protections may be required throughout designated
critical habitat areas to avoid further degradation or destruction of
the physical or biological features essential to the 12 species'
conservation. Habitat degradation (resulting from, for example,
trampling and herbivory by introduced ungulates, fire, drought, and
habitat modification by invasive plants) is the greatest threat to
these 12 species, and this threat acts at the ecosystem level. Threats
specific to Drosophila digressa habitat include loss or lack of host
plants from ungulates, drought, fire, alteration of microclimate by
invasive plants or the plant disease referred to as rapid a death (ROD)
(78 FR 64638, October 29, 2013; Service 2023a, pp. 21-28). Some of
these threats may be addressed by special management considerations or
protection, while others (e.g., sea level rise, hurricanes, drought,
volcanic eruption) are beyond the control of landowners and managers.
For a more detailed description of threats, please see the proposed
listing rule (77 FR 63928 at 63941-63974, October 17, 2012), the final
listing rule (78 FR 64638 at 64653-64686, October 29, 2013), and the
draft recovery plan (Service 2022a, entire).
While the 12 species share many threats, impacts to individual
species and the actions needed to eliminate or manage the threats may
differ. Management activities that could minimize or ameliorate these
threats include, but are not limited to, ungulate removal and exclusion
fencing; control or eradication of significant habitat-modifying,
invasive plants; fire management planning and wildfire response; and
measures to reduce of the spread of ROD and other plant pathogens.
Management activities that could minimize or ameliorate threats
specific to Drosophila digressa include control measures to reduce and
eradicate invasive invertebrates, such as wasps and ants. These
management actions would result in the protection of areas providing
habitat for the 12 species.

Criteria Used To Identify Critical Habitat

As required by section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we use the best
scientific data available to designate critical habitat. In accordance
with the Act and our implementing regulations at 50 CFR 424.12(b), we
review available information pertaining to the habitat requirements of
the species and identify specific areas within the geographical area
occupied by the species at the time of listing and refer to these areas
as occupied habitat. We also review available information pertaining to
habitat requirements of the species in areas outside the geographical
area occupied by the species at the time of listing for consideration
as critical habitat, and these areas are referred to as unoccupied
habitat. We will designate as critical habitat specific areas outside
the geographical area occupied by the species only upon a determination
that such areas are essential for the conservation of the species. We
will only consider unoccupied areas to be essential where a critical
habitat designation limited to geographical areas occupied would be
inadequate to ensure the conservation of the species. In addition, for
an unoccupied area to be considered essential, we must determine that
there is a reasonable certainty both that the area will contribute to
the conservation of the species and that the area contains one or more
of those physical or biological features essential to the conservation
of the species.
We are designating both occupied and unoccupied critical habitat
for eight species (Drosophila digressa, Cyanea marksii, Cyanea
tritomantha, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and Stenogyne cranwelliae).
We are not designating any occupied areas as critical habitat for
Schiedea hawaiiensis because the single area known to be occupied by
the species at the time of listing is exempt from designation (see
Exemptions, below, for more information). For Bidens hillebrandiana
ssp. hillebrandiana, Cyrtandra nanawaleensis, and Cyrtandra wagneri, we
are not designating any areas outside the geographical area occupied by
the species because we have not identified any unoccupied areas that
meet the definition of critical habitat for these species; no
unoccupied areas had at least one physical or biological feature
essential to the conservation of the species and a reasonable certainty
of contributing to conservation.
Except for the designated critical habitat in Unit 55 for Schiedea
hawaiiensis, all unoccupied critical habitat areas overlap entirely
with a geographical area for which we are designating occupied critical
habitat for at least one of the other species that are the subjects of
this rule. The unoccupied critical habitat in Unit 55 for Schiedea
hawaiiensis has no overlap in geographic occurrence or range with the
other species addressed in this rule. We note that the new plant
critical habitat Unit 56 is not occupied by either of the plant species
for which it is designated (Cyanea marksii and Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei) or any of the other nine plant species that are part of this
critical habitat designation, but Unit 56 exists entirely within the
boundaries of Drosophila digressa--Unit 6, which is occupied by
Drosophila digressa. We are designating areas outside the geographical
area occupied by nine species (Drosophila digressa, Cyanea marksii,
Cyanea tritomantha, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda,
Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea

[[Page 17914]]

diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae, and Schiedea hawaiiensis)
due to small population sizes, few individuals, or reduced geographic
range, which make these species vulnerable to stochastic events. Many
of these species are so rare in the wild that they are at a high risk
of extirpation or even extinction from various catastrophic events,
such as hurricanes or landslides. Therefore, supporting resiliency and
redundancy in these species through the establishment of multiple,
robust populations is a key component of conservation of the species
(Service 2022a, pp. 29-30, 35, 39, 48-49). A designation limited to
occupied areas would be inadequate to ensure the conservation of these
species. Areas that may have been unoccupied at the time of listing,
together with areas occupied at the time of listing, are reasonably
certain to provide some or all of the habitat necessary for the
expansion of existing wild populations and reestablishment of wild
populations within the historical range of the species to achieve a
level that could approach recovery. The best available scientific
information suggests that the ecosystems in the unoccupied areas in
which we are designating critical habitat provide one or more of the
physical or biological features that support life-history requirements
of these nine species, and thus these unoccupied areas are considered
habitat for the conservation of these nine species. These areas support
recovery in the case of stochastic events that otherwise have potential
to eliminate a species from locations where it is currently found, and
some species are only known from one location. We find, therefore, that
designation of these unoccupied areas as critical habitat is essential
for the conservation of the species. Designating unoccupied areas as
critical habitat for these species also promotes conservation actions
to restore their historical, geographical, and ecological
representation, which are necessary for their recovery.
In this rule, we designate critical habitat for 12 species in 21
distinct areas that include 42 critical habitat units, with animal and
plant units identified separately. Each critical habitat unit contains
all or some of the physical or biological features essential to the
conservation of those individual species that occupy that particular
unit, or areas essential for the conservation of those species
identified that do not presently occupy that particular unit. The
critical habitat for all species includes the functioning ecosystems on
which they depend; thus, for those species with life-history
requirements that can be supported in multiple ecosystem types, we have
identified areas of critical habitat in multiple ecosystem types. For
example, the plant Cyrtandra nanawaleensis is found in multiple
critical habitat units across three ecosystem types: mesic forest, wet
forest, and mesic grassland and shrubland.
Because we have determined that the features essential to the
conservation of the 12 species are those required for the successful
functioning of the ecosystems in which they respectively occur, we
grouped species by the commonly shared ecosystem type to delineate
critical habitat units. We used similar methods to identify critical
habitat unit boundaries for nine plant species: Cyanea marksii, Cyanea
tritomantha, Cyrtandra nanawaleensis, Cyrtandra wagneri, Melicope
remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei, and Stenogyne cranwelliae. These nine species
were considered together because spatial data used for delineating
critical habitat are similar among these species, and these species all
occur within mesic to wet ecosystems, whereas the remaining two plant
species do not (see table 1, above). We considered each species
separately within their shared dependence on the functioning ecosystems
they have in common. We used separate methods to identify critical
habitat unit boundaries for each of the remaining three species: Bidens
hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana, Schiedea hawaiiensis, and
Drosophila digressa. Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana and
Schiedea hawaiiensis each occur in an ecosystem type not shared with
any of the other 12 species, and Drosophila digressa was considered
separately because of differences in taxonomy and life history from the
plants. Critical habitat boundaries for all species were delineated to
clearly depict and promote conservation of these species by identifying
the functioning ecosystem on which they depend. Ecosystem types that
support the species addressed here but that do not form a contiguous
area are divided geographically into separate units. In units
consisting of multiple ecosystem types, if a species' physical or
biological features are provided by one of the ecosystem types, we
designate the entire area as critical habitat for that species. We took
this approach because within these units, ecosystem types are patchily
distributed at a relatively fine resolution, intermingled, and can be
dynamic on a relatively short timescale in their distribution within
the critical habitat area.
To delineate the critical habitat units, we relied on an overall
conservation strategy in which each of the 12 species was considered
separately using a common approach for 9 plant species, and a separate
approach for the remaining 2 plant species and Drosophila digressa. The
goal of the conservation strategy was to identify the specific areas
for each species that provide essential physical or biological features
without which rangewide resiliency, redundancy, and representation
could not be achieved. The conservation strategy considered (1)
historical and current distribution of each of the 12 species; (2)
assessments of resiliency, redundancy, and representation for each
species from the most recent species reports (Service 2023a-n); and (3)
recovery planning efforts (Service 2022a, entire). Some of the critical
habitat for these 12 species overlies critical habitat already
designated for other species on the island of Hawai`i.
In summary, we completed the following basic steps to delineate
critical habitat (specific methods follow below):
(1) We compiled the best scientific data available on observations
and distributions of the 12 species that were extant at the time of
listing;
(2) We compiled all available location and landcover data,
including ecosystem type, within the ranges of the 12 species;
(3) We identified areas containing the physical or biological
features that may require special management considerations or
protection;
(4) We circumscribed boundaries of critical habitat units based on
the above information; and
(5) We removed, to the extent practicable, all areas that did not
have the specific physical or biological feature components, and
therefore are not considered essential to the conservation of one or
more of these 12 species.
Based on these five steps, for areas within and outside the
geographic area occupied by the species at the time of listing, we
delineated critical habitat unit boundaries using the following
methods:
(1) Species observation and distribution data sources: We obtained
observational and distributional data to include in our Geographic
Information System (GIS) database for each of the 12 species including
the known locations of the species from the Hawai[revaps]i Biodiversity
Mapping Program (HBMP) database (HBMP 2010a, entire; HBMP

[[Page 17915]]

2010b, entire; HBMP 2010c, entire; HBMP 2010d, entire; HBMP 2010e,
entire; HBMP 2010f, entire; HBMP 2010g, entire; HBMP 2010h, entire),
the Plant Extinction Prevention Program (PEPP) database (PEPP 2021,
unpublished), and our own rare plant database. We also obtained and
compiled species information from the plant database housed at National
Tropical Botanical Garden (https://ntbg.org/database/herbarium/). We
used Hawai`i Biodiversity Mapping Program's Geographic reference areas
for the Hawaiian Islands in conjunction with known species' location
data (Kam 2017, p. 1; Hawai`i Rare Plant Restoration Group 2020, p. 2).
For plants, we obtained and compiled species range maps, as determined
by plant species ranges in the Hawaiian Islands (Price et al. 2012,
entire), and our own plant species range layer adapted from Price et
al. 2012 (Service 2022b-l, entire). For Drosophila digressa, we created
our own potential species range layer using the U.S. Geological
Survey's (USGS's) Carbon Assessment Landcover data of 2017 for mesic
and wet forest habitats (Selmants et al. 2017, entire; Service 2023a,
entire) and the known elevational range of the species, which is
between 2,000 to 4,500 ft (600 to 1,400 m). Lastly, we obtained recent
biological surveys and reports and discussed that information with
qualified individuals familiar with these 12 species and their
ecosystems.
We used current and historical species distribution information to
develop initial critical habitat boundaries in each of the six
ecosystems that would provide for the conservation of the 12 species.
The initial boundaries were superimposed over digital topographic maps
of the island of Hawai[revaps]i and further evaluated. In general, land
areas that were identified as highly degraded were removed from the
critical habitat units, and natural or constructed features (e.g.,
ridge lines, valleys, streams, coastlines, roads, lava flows, obvious
land features, etc.) were used to delineate the critical habitat
boundaries.
(2) Identified areas containing physical or biological features: We
obtained and compiled island-wide elevation, annual precipitation, soil
substrate, and associated native plant genera data sources (Gagne and
Cuddihy 1999, pp. 45-114; LANDFIRE 2016, pp. 1177-1242; Ball et al.
2020, p. 2; Clark et al. 2020, p. 2; Javar-Salas et al. 2020, p. 2; Kim
et al. 2020, p. 2; Lowe et al. 2020, pp. 2-7; Nelson et al. 2020, p. 3;
Giambelluca et al. 2013, entire; Price and Jacobi 2012, entire). We
evaluated areas currently occupied by each species and whether they
contain the physical or biological features essential to the
conservation of the species and which may require special management
considerations or protection. We considered the degree to which the
physical or biological features were present or absent in areas as an
indication of the successful functioning of the habitat.
(3) Landcover and ecosystem data sources: We obtained and compiled
landcover and ecosystem data from the island-wide GIS coverage
including USGS Carbon Assessment Landcover data of 2017 (Selmants et
al. 2017, entire) and ArcGIS Esri World Imagery of 2022 (Esri 2023,
entire); 1:24,000 scale digital raster graphics of USGS topographic
quadrangles; and geospatial data sets associated with parcel data from
Hawai`i County (Hawaii Statewide GIS Program 2022, entire). We
evaluated areas currently occupied by each species. When a species
occurs in more than one ecosystem type, we include the full range of
ecosystem types within that species' range. For example, Phyllostegia
floribunda is known from three of the six ecosystem types addressed in
this rule: mesic forest, wet forest, and wet grassland and shrubland
ecosystem types.
(4) Circumscribed boundaries of potential critical habitat units:
We considered several factors in the selection of specific boundaries
for critical habitat for the 12 species. We determined critical habitat
unit boundaries taking into consideration the information on known past
and present locations of the species, landcover and ecosystem data
sources by USGS Carbon Assessment Landcover Data (Selmants et al. 2017,
entire), recovery areas described by the species' draft recovery plan,
projections of geographic ranges of Hawaiian plant species (Price et
al. 2012, entire; Service 2022b-l, entire) and Drosophila digressa
(Service 2023a, entire), and adequate habitat to allow for increases in
numbers of individuals and for expansion of populations to provide for
the minimum numbers required to reach delisting goals (as described in
the draft recovery plan (Service 2022a, entire)). Critical habitat
boundaries for all species were delineated to promote the conservation
of these species by identifying the functioning ecosystems on which
they depend.
(5) Removed areas lacking the identified physical or biological
features: When determining critical habitat boundaries, we made every
effort to avoid including developed areas such as lands covered by
buildings, pavement, and other structures because such lands lack the
physical or biological features necessary for these 12 species. The
scale of the maps we prepared under the parameters for publication
within the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) may not reflect the
exclusion of such developed lands. Any such lands inadvertently left
inside critical habitat boundaries shown on the maps of this rule have
been excluded by text in the rule and are not designated as critical
habitat. Therefore, a Federal action involving these lands will not
trigger section 7 consultation with respect to critical habitat and the
requirement of no adverse modification unless the specific action will
affect the physical or biological features in the adjacent critical
habitat.
We are designating as critical habitat lands that we have
determined are occupied at the time of listing and that contain one or
more of the physical or biological features that are essential to
support life-history processes of the species. We have determined that
occupied areas are inadequate to ensure the conservation of some of the
species; therefore, we have also identified, and designate as critical
habitat, unoccupied areas that are essential for the conservation of
nine of the species (see Final Critical Habitat Designation, below). We
have determined that these units are habitat for these nine species and
will both contribute to the conservation of the species and contain at
least one physical or biological feature essential to the conservation
of the species.
Units are designated based on one or more of the physical or
biological features being present to support the life-history processes
for 1 or more of the 12 species for which we designate critical
habitat. Some units contain all of the identified physical or
biological features and support multiple life-history processes. Some
units contain only some elements of the physical or biological features
necessary to support the species' particular use of that habitat.
The critical habitat designation is defined by the map or maps, as
modified by any accompanying regulatory text, presented at the end of
this document under Regulation Promulgation. We include more detailed
information on the boundaries of the critical habitat designation in
the preamble of this document. We will make the coordinates or plot
points or both on which each map is based available to the public on
https://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-R1-ES-2023-0017.

[[Page 17916]]

Final Critical Habitat Designation

We are designating approximately 119,326 ac (48,289 ha) as critical
habitat in 21 distinct areas that include 42 critical habitat units,
with 9 animal and 33 plant units identified separately, for Drosophila
digressa, Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana, Cyanea marksii,
Cyanea tritomantha, Cyrtandra nanawaleensis, Cyrtandra wagneri,
Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense,
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Schiedea hawaiiensis, and Stenogyne
cranwelliae. The critical habitat areas we describe below constitute
our current best assessment of areas that meet the definition of
critical habitat for each species. Table 3 shows the critical habitat
units and the approximate area of each unit by landowner type.
Within the 21 distinct areas, areas of critical habitat for
Drosophila digressa are described as 9 sequential numbered units,
whereas areas of critical habitat for plants are described as 20
sequential numbered sections that are then split into 1 or more units,
based on whether they overlap with existing designated critical habitat
for other plant species on the island of Hawai[revaps]i. Some of the
critical habitat for Drosophila digressa overlays critical habitat
already designated for plant species; however, critical habitat
designations for wildlife species at 50 CFR 17.95 are organized
differently than critical habitat designations for plant species on the
island of Hawai[revaps]i at 50 CFR 17.99. Therefore, the critical
habitat for Drosophila digressa is not presented as being part of any
of the existing critical habitat units for plant species. Conversely,
for Hawaiian plants only, areas of a plant section that overlay
existing Hawaiian plant critical habitat units are assigned to that
existing critical habitat unit name. Areas of a plant section that do
not overlay existing Hawaiian plant critical habitat are assigned a
sequential new critical habitat unit number. This distinction between
existing and newly designated critical habitat areas is necessary in
order to be consistent with the critical habitat unit numbering system
we established earlier for plants on the island of Hawai[revaps]i (see
50 CFR 17.99(k)). We provide the critical habitat plant section
numbers, where applicable, as well as unit numbers and the
corresponding map numbers that appear at 50 CFR 17.99 for ease of
reference in the CFR. All units in the designation, with the exception
of Unit 55 for Schiedea hawaiiensis within Section 19, are considered
occupied at the time of listing (see 78 FR 64638; October 29, 2013) by
1 or more of the 12 species for which we are designating critical
habitat (see table 4, below). Of the 21 distinct areas for which we are
designating critical habitat in this rule, 12 include animal units or
plant sections that are both occupied and unoccupied for 2 or more of
the 12 Hawai`i island species.
The areas we designate as critical habitat are located in six
ecosystem types: (1) coastal, (2) dry forest, (3) mesic forest, (4) wet
forest, (5) mesic grassland and shrubland, and (6) wet grassland and
shrubland. Critical habitat designations for plants and animals are
published in separate sections of the CFR; however, the critical
habitat for the 11 plants and Drosophila digressa overlap each other in
many areas on the island of Hawai`i. For example, ``Cyanea tritomantha,
Cyrtandra wagneri, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae--
Section 1'' and ``Drosophila digressa--Unit 1'' overlap entirely within
the same geographic area. Therefore, because the section and unit
boundaries are the same, we describe them together to avoid redundancy
and reduce publication costs for this rule, as indicated by ``and''
following the section name in the headings of the section and unit
descriptions, below.

Table 3--Critical Habitat Units by Ecosystem, Land Ownership, and Size
[Area estimates reflect all land within critical habitat unit boundaries]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Private/other (ac
Animal unit Plant section Plant unit Federal (ac (ha)) State (ac (ha)) (ha)) Total (ac (ha))
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wet Forest *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Drosophila digressa--Unit 1.... Cyanea tritomantha, Unit 3........... 3,549 (1,436) 7,963 (3,223) 547 (221) 12,059 (4,880)
Cyrtandra wagneri, Unit 52.......... 549 (222) 2,681 (1,085) 425 (172) 3,656 (1,479)
Melicope remyi,
Phyllostegia
floribunda,
Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei,
Stenogyne cranwelliae--
Section 1.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. 4,098 (1,658) 10,644 (4,308) 972 (394) 15,714 (6,359)
Drosophila digressa--Unit 7.... Cyanea marksii, Unit 15.......... ................. 182 (73) ................. 182 (73)
Phyllostegia Unit 39.......... ................. 997 (403) 167 (68) 1,164 (471)
floribunda,
Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei,
Stenogyne cranwelliae--
Section 4.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. ................. 1,179 (477) 167 (68) 1,346 (545)
Drosophila digressa--Unit 8.... Cyanea marksii, Unit 15.......... ................. 55 (22) 72 (29) 127 (51)
Phyllostegia Unit 38.......... ................. 297 (120) 237 (96) 534 (216)
floribunda,
Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei,
Stenogyne cranwelliae--
Section 5.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. ................. 352 (142) 309 (125) 661 (267)
Cyanea marksii, Unit 16.......... ................. 156 (63) ................. 156 (63)
Phyllostegia Unit 40.......... ................. 1,190 (482) 52 (21) 1,243 (503)
floribunda,
Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei,
Stenogyne cranwelliae--
Section 6.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. ................. 1,347 (545) 52 (21) 1,399 (566)
Drosophila digressa--Unit 2.... Cyanea tritomantha, Unit 29.......... ................. 494 (200) ................. 494 (200)
Phyllostegia Unit 30.......... 7,232 (2,927) 6,498 (2,630) <1 (<1) 13,730 (5,556)
floribunda, Unit 51.......... 643 (260) 16,905 (6,841) 226 (91) 17,774 (7,193)
Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei,
Stenogyne cranwelliae--
Section 11.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. 7,875 (3,187) 23,897 (9,671) 226 (91) 31,998 (12,949)

[[Page 17917]]

Drosophila digressa--Unit 9.... Cyanea marksii, Unit 37.......... 1,906 (771) ................. <1 (<1) 1,906 (771)
Phyllostegia
floribunda,
Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei,
Stenogyne cranwelliae--
Section 12.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. 1,906 (771) ................. <1 (<1) 1,906 (771)
Drosophila digressa--Unit 5.... Cyanea marksii, Unit 41.......... ................. 411 (166) 3,001 (1,214) 3,412 (1,381)
Phyllostegia
floribunda,
Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei,
Stenogyne cranwelliae--
Section 13.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. ................. 411 (166) 3,001 (1,214) 3,412 (1,381)
Cyrtandra Unit 47.......... ................. 274 (111) ................. 274 (111)
nanawaleensis--Section
15.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. ................. 274 (111) ................. 274 (111)
Cyrtandra Unit 48.......... ................. 586 (237) 3 (1) 589 (238)
nanawaleensis--Section
16.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. ................. 586 (237) 3 (1) 589 (238)
Drosophila digressa--Unit 6.... Cyanea marksii, Unit 56.......... ................. 224 (91) ................. 224 (91)
Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei--Section 20.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. ................. 224 (91) ................. 224 (91)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coastal *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bidens hillebrandiana Unit 6........... ................. 2 (1) ................. 2 (1)
ssp. hillebrandiana-- Unit 53.......... ................. 76 (31) 78 (32) 154 (62)
Section 2.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. ................. 78 (32) 78 (32) 156 (63)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wet Forest and Wet Grassland and Shrubland *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cyanea tritomantha, Unit 8........... ................. 6,805 (2,754) ................. 6,805 (2,754)
Melicope remyi, Unit 9........... ................. ................. 1 (<1) 1 (<1)
Phyllostegia Unit 54.......... ................. 5,855 (2,369) 90 (36) 5,945 (2,406)
floribunda,
Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei,
Stenogyne cranwelliae--
Section 3.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. ................. 12,660 (5,123) 91 (37) 12,751 (5,160)
Phyllostegia Unit 23.......... 9 (4) ................. ................. 9 (4)
floribunda, Unit 45.......... 5,494 (2,223) ................. ................. 5,494 (2,223)
Pittosporum
hawaiiense--Section 7.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. 5,503 (2,227) ................. ................. 5,503 (2,227)
Cyrtandra Unit 28.......... ................. 155 (63) ................. 155 (63)
nanawaleensis, Unit 46.......... ................. 12,212 (4,942) 7 (3) 12,219 (4,945)
Phyllostegia
floribunda--Section 10.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. ................. 12,368 (5,005) 7 (3) 12,374 (5,008)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wet Forest and Mesic Forest *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cyanea tritomantha, Unit 24.......... 1,956 (792) ................. ................. 1,956 (792)
Pittosporum Unit 44.......... 322 (130) 5,561 (2,251) ................. 5,884 (2,381)
hawaiiense, Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei,
Stenogyne cranwelliae--
Section 8.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. 2,278 (922) 5,561 (2,251) ................. 7,840 (3,173)
Pittosporum hawaiiense, Unit 24.......... 36 (15) 65 (26) ................. 101 (41)
Schiedea diffusa ssp. Unit 43.......... 1,693 (685) 4,180 (1,691) ................. 5,872 (2,376)
macraei, Stenogyne
cranwelliae--Section 9.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. 1,729 (700) 4,244 (1,718) ................. 5,973 (2,417)
Drosophila digressa--Unit 3.... Cyanea tritomantha, Unit 42.......... 8,773 (3,550) 8 (3) ................. 8,781 (3,554)
Phyllostegia
floribunda,
Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei,
Stenogyne cranwelliae--
Section 14.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. 8,773 (3,550) 8 (3) ................. 8,781 (3,554)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wet Forest, Mesic Forest, and Mesic Grassland and Shrubland *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cyrtandra Unit 49.......... ................. 868 (351) 6 (3) 875 (354)
nanawaleensis--Section
17.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. ................. 868 (351) 6 (3) 875 (354)
Cyrtandra Unit 50.......... ................. 562 (227) ................. 562 (227)
nanawaleensis--Section
18.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. ................. 562 (227) ................. 562 (227)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dry Forest *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Schiedea hawaiiensis-- Unit 55.......... ................. 6,822 (2,761) ................. 6,822 (2,761)
Section 19.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 17918]]

Subtotal................... ....................... ................. ................. 6,822 (2,761) ................. 6,822 (2,761)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mesic Forest *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Drosophila digressa--Unit 4.... ....................... ................. ................. 167 (67) ................. 167 (67)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................... ....................... ................. ................. 167 (67) ................. 167 (67)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total.................. ....................... ................. 32,162 (13,015) 82,252 (33,286) 4,913 (1,988) 119,326 (48,289)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Area sizes may not sum due to rounding.
* Ecosystem subheadings indicate all of the ecosystems that can be found in each unit, but not every species for which each unit is designated is found
in every ecosystem found in the unit (see table 1 for the ecosystems within each species may be found).

BILLING CODE 4333-15-P

[[Page 17919]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.000

BILLING CODE 4333-15-C

Table 5--Critical Habitat Units for Drosophila Digressa
[Picture-wing fly]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corresponding critical habitat map in the
Critical habitat unit Occupied/unoccupied Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Drosophila digressa--Unit 1............. Unoccupied................. Drosophila digressa--Hawai[revaps]i
Island, HI--Unit 1.

[[Page 17920]]

Drosophila digressa--Unit 2............. Occupied................... Drosophila digressa--Hawai[revaps]i
Island, HI--Unit 2.
Drosophila digressa--Unit 3............. Unoccupied................. Drosophila digressa--Hawai[revaps]i
Island, HI--Unit 3.
Drosophila digressa--Unit 4............. Occupied................... Drosophila digressa--Hawai[revaps]i
Island, HI--Unit 4.
------------------------------------------
Drosophila digressa--Unit 5............. Unoccupied................. Drosophila digressa--Hawai[revaps]i
Island, HI--Unit 5, Unit 6, Unit 7, Unit
8, Unit 9.
Drosophila digressa--Unit 6............. Occupied
Drosophila digressa--Unit 7............. Unoccupied
Drosophila digressa--Unit 8............. Unoccupied
Drosophila digressa--Unit 9............. Unoccupied
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We present brief descriptions of all units, and reasons why they
meet the definition of critical habitat, for each of the 12
Hawai[revaps]i Island species, below.

Descriptions of Critical Habitat

We describe each section and unit separately, below, but first
describe the common rationale for designating areas of critical habitat
as occupied and/or unoccupied critical habitat. All areas that are
designated as occupied habitat for a species are important for that
species because these areas are either the last or one of the last
remaining areas inhabited by the species and they meet the definition
of critical habitat, making these areas necessary for maintaining the
redundancy and representation for the species' conservation. This is
the case for all sections and units, with the exception of Schiedea
hawaiiensis--Section 19, which is critical habitat, but is not
currently occupied habitat for any of the 12 species. We note which
areas are the last remaining area known to be inhabited by a species.
We analyzed whether occupied areas were adequate for the
conservation of each of the 12 species based on conservation goals
within the recovery plan (Service 2022a, entire). We determined that
occupied areas are not able to provide the space needed to meet the
target number of reproductive populations and individuals for any of
the 12 species. For four species with naturally narrowly-restricted
ranges, no other areas containing their essential physical or
biological features are known. We determined that for nine species
(Drosophila digressa, Cyanea marksii, Cyanea tritomantha, Melicope
remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae, and Schiedea hawaiiensis)
there are additional areas outside the geographical area occupied by
the species that contain at least one physical or biological feature
essential to the conservation of the species. We are designating as
critical habitat all areas of unoccupied habitat that we identified for
these nine species because (1) they provide one or more of the physical
or biological features necessary for the reestablishment of wild
populations within the species' range, and (2) we have reasonable
certainty that these areas will contribute to the conservation of the
species by adding to the area required to support the numbers of
populations and reproducing individuals needed for recovery (thus
helping to ensure resiliency, redundancy, and representation needed for
the species' viability). The establishment of multiple, robust
populations (redundancy) is a key component of conservation of these
species (Service 2022a, pp. 29-30, 35, 39, 48-49). Due to the small
numbers of individuals of each of these species, they require suitable
habitat and space for expansion or introduction to achieve population
levels that could approach recovery. Designating unoccupied areas as
critical habitat for these species also supports recovery by allowing
the habitat needed to establish additional populations able to
withstand environmental stochasticity (resiliency) that otherwise has
potential to eliminate a species from locations where it is currently
found, and some species are only known from one location. Designating
these unoccupied areas as critical habitat also promotes conservation
actions to restore the species' historical, geographical, and
ecological representation (representation), necessary for their
recovery. For ease of reading and space efficiency, after first use of
the full name of a plant section, we will refer to it by its section
number only. For example, our first use of plant Section 2 is described
as ``Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana--Section 2,'' and after
that is simply referred to as ``Section 2.''

Table 6--Land Use, Threats to Habitat, and Potential Special Management Considerations for Critical Habitat
Units Designated for the 12 Hawai[revaps]i Island Species
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Plant section Drosophila unit General land use Threats Special management
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 1....................... Unit 1............ A, B, C, D, E, F, O, P, Q........... S, T, U.
G.
Section 2....................... .................. A, B, C, D, E, F, O, P, Q, R........ S, T, U.
H.
Section 3....................... .................. A, B, C, D, E, F, O, P, Q, R........ S, T, U.
H.
Section 4....................... Unit 7............ A, B, C, D, E, F, O, P, Q, R........ S, T, U.
H.
Section 5....................... Unit 8............ A, B, C, D, E, F, O, P, Q, R........ S, T, U.
H.
Section 6....................... .................. A, B, C, D, E, F, O, P, Q, R........ S, T, U.
H.
Section 7....................... .................. A, B, C, D, F, H.. O, P, Q, R........ S, T, U.
Section 8....................... .................. A, E, F, G, H, I, O, P, Q........... S, T.
J, K, L.
Section 9....................... .................. A, E, F, H, I, J.. O, P, Q, R........ S, T, U.
Section 10...................... .................. A, B, C, D, E, F, O, P, Q, R........ S, T, U.
G, H, M.
Section 11...................... Unit 2............ A, B, C, D, E, F, O, P, Q, R........ S, T, U.
H, K, N.
Section 12...................... Unit 9............ A, B, C, D, F, H.. O, P, Q, R........ S, T, U.

[[Page 17921]]

Unit 4............ A, B, C, D, E, F, O, P, Q, R........ S, T, U.
H.
Section 13...................... Unit 5............ A, B, C, D, E, F, O, P, Q, R........ S, T, U.
G, H.
Section 14...................... Unit 3............ A, E, F, H, I, J.. O, P, Q, R........ S, T, U.
Section 15...................... .................. A, B, C, D, E, F, O, P, Q, R........ S, T, U.
N.
Section 16...................... .................. A, B, C, D, E, F, O, P, Q, R........ S, T, U.
N.
Section 17...................... .................. A, B, C, D, E, F, O, P, Q, R........ S, T, U.
N.
Section 18...................... .................. A, B, C, D, E, F, O, P, Q, R........ S, T, U.
N.
Section 19...................... .................. A, B, C, D, E, F, O, P, Q, R........ S, T, U.
H.
Section 20...................... Unit 6............ A, B, C, D, E, F, O, P, Q, R........ S, T.
J, N.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Definition of Codes Used in Table 6

General land use:

A = Watershed protection
B = Ungulate and invasive plant control
C = Natural resource monitoring
D = Rare species protection and research
E = Public hunting
F = Public use and recreation
G = Education and outreach
H = Fire control
I = Natural resource conservation, including monitoring invasive
plants and animals
J = Enhancement of native rare plant resources
K = Cultural uses
L = Personal gathering
M = Public use, including traditional and customary rights of Native
Hawaiians
N = Timber management

Threats:

O = Habitat degradation due to rooting by feral ungulates
P = Intrusion of ecosystem-altering, invasive plants
Q = Changes in canopy cover due to plant disease
R = Fire

Special management considerations (see Special Management
Considerations or Protection, in text above for additional detail):

S = Feral ungulate control
T = Measures to control spread of invasive plants
U = Fire management planning and wildfire response

Cyanea tritomantha, Cyrtandra wagneri, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia
floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei,
Stenogyne cranwelliae--Section 1 and Drosophila digressa--Unit 1

Section 1 and Drosophila digressa--Unit 1 consist of wet forest
ecosystem from [revaps][Omacr][revaps][omacr]kala to Maulua Nui on the
northeastern slope of Maunakea. Lands within this section and unit
include approximately 26 percent in Federal ownership, 68 percent in
State ownership, and 6 percent in private/other ownership (see table 3,
above). Section 1 is comprised of two units: Unit 3 is a critical
habitat unit within unit Hawaii 3 (see 50 CFR 17.99(k)), which was
previously designated for other plant species; and Unit 52 is a newly
designated critical habitat unit depicted on Map 119. All State-owned
lands in this section and unit are managed by the State of Hawaii as
part of the Hilo Forest Reserve Humu[revaps]ula, Laup[amacr]hoehoe, and
P[imacr]h[amacr] Sections; the Laup[amacr]hoehoe Natural Area Reserve;
and the Manowaiale[revaps]e Forest Reserve. All Federal lands in this
section and unit are managed by the Service within Hakalau Forest
National Wildlife Refuge, Hakalau Forest Unit. For general land use,
threats, and special management considerations or protection measures
to reduce or alleviate the threats identified within this section and
unit, see table 6, above (DLNR-DOFAW 2022, entire; DLNR and USDA 2016,
p. 4; Service 2010, pp. 1-13, 1-33-1-34; Stewart 2010, entire). The
State lands within this section and unit are managed under the
Laup[amacr]hoehoe Forest Management Plan (DLNR and USDA 2016, entire)
and the Mauna Kea Watershed Management Plan (Stewart 2010, entire). The
Federal lands within this section and unit are managed under the
Hakalau Forest National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
(Service 2010, pp. 2-20-2-40) and the Mauna Kea Watershed Management
Plan (Stewart 2010, entire).
Section 1 is occupied by the plants Cyanea tritomantha, Cyrtandra
wagneri, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, and Stenogyne
cranwelliae. This section and unit include the wet forest, the moisture
regime, and canopy, subcanopy, and understory native plant species
identified as the physical or biological features in the wet forest
ecosystem. Section 1 is important because it has the last remaining
areas inhabited by Cyrtandra wagneri and Melicope remyi, and one of the
last remaining areas inhabited by Cyanea tritomantha, Phyllostegia
floribunda, and Stenogyne cranwelliae, making it an essential area for
maintaining the redundancy and representation necessary for species'
conservation. Although Section 1 is not known to be occupied by the
plants Pittosporum hawaiiense and Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and
Drosophila digressa--Unit 1 is not known to be occupied by Drosophila
digressa, this section and unit contain unoccupied habitat that is
essential for the conservation of these species because they (1) are
habitat for these species, (2) provide at least one of the physical or
biological features essential for the conservation of each of these
species, and (3) contribute to the area of habitat needed to
reestablish wild populations within their range in support of recovery
criteria for each of these species. For recovery, each plant species
needs at least 10 populations, with at least 400 reproducing
individuals per population for Pittosporum hawaiiense and 500
reproducing individuals per population for Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei (Service 2022a, pp. 43-44). Drosophila digressa needs at least
10 stable populations for recovery (Service 2022a, p. 49). Therefore,
we are reasonably certain that this section and unit will contribute to
the conservation of these species and that this section and unit
contain one or more of the physical or biological features that are
essential to the conservation of these species. Approximately 12,059 ac
(4,880 ha) of this section and unit overlap designated critical habitat
for the federally endangered plants Clermontia peleana, Cyanea
platyphylla, Cyrtandra giffardii, Cyrtandra tintinnabula, and
Phyllostegia warshaueri (see 50 CFR 17.99(k) and 68 FR 39624, July 2,
2003).
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P

[[Page 17922]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.001

Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana--Section 2

Section 2 consists of coastal ecosystem from Polol[umacr] to
Laup[amacr]hoehoe Iki on the northeastern slope of Kohala Mountain.
Lands within this section include approximately 50 percent in State
ownership and 50 percent in private/other ownership (see table 3,
above). Section 2 is comprised of two units: Unit 6 is a critical
habitat unit within unit Hawaii 6 (see 50 CFR 17.99(k)), which was
previously designated for another plant species; and Unit 53 is a newly
designated critical habitat unit depicted on Map 120. All State-owned
lands in Section 2 are managed by the State of Hawaii as part of the
Polol[umacr] Section of the Kohala Forest Reserve and the Pu[revaps]u o
[revaps]Umi Natural Area Reserve. The State lands within this section
are managed under the Pu[revaps]u o [revaps]Umi Management Plan (DLNR-
DOFAW 1989, entire) and Kohala Mountain Watershed Management Plan Draft
(Kohala Watershed Partnership [KWP] 2007, entire). For general land
use, threats, and special management considerations or protection
measures to reduce or alleviate the threats identified within this
section, see table 6, above (DLNR-DOFAW 1989, entire; KWP 2007,
entire).
Section 2 is occupied by the plant Bidens hillebrandiana ssp.
hillebrandiana and includes the coastal habitat, the moisture regime,
and canopy, subcanopy, and understory native plant species identified
as the physical or biological features in the coastal ecosystem. This
section is especially important because it is the last remaining area
inhabited by the species, which makes it an important area for
maintaining the redundancy and representation necessary for species'
conservation. Approximately 2 ac (1 ha) of this section overlap
designated critical habitat for the federally endangered plant
Nothocestrum breviflorum (see 50 CFR 17.99(k) and 68 FR 39624, July 2,
2003).

Cyanea tritomantha, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda,
Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne
cranwelliae--Section 3

Section 3 consists of wet forest and wet grassland and shrubland
ecosystems from Kahua to Pu[revaps]ukapu on Kohala Mountain. Lands
within this section include approximately 99 percent in State ownership
and 1 percent in private/other ownership (see table 3,

[[Page 17923]]

above). Section 3 is comprised of three units: Unit 8 and Unit 9 are
critical habitat units within unit Hawaii 8 and unit Hawaii 9 (see 50
CFR 17.99(k)), which were previously designated for other plant
species; and Unit 54 is a newly designated critical habitat unit
depicted on Map 121. All State-owned lands in this section are managed
by the State of Hawaii as part of the Kohala Forest Reserve, Kohala
Watershed Forest Reserve, and Pu[revaps]u o [revaps]Umi Natural Area
Reserve. The State lands within this section are managed under the
Pu[revaps]u o [revaps]Umi Management Plan (DLNR-DOFAW 1989, entire) and
the Kohala Mountain Watershed Management Plan Draft (KWP 2007, entire).
For general land use, threats, and special management considerations or
protection measures to reduce or alleviate the threats identified
within this section, see table 6, above (DLNR-DOFAW 1989, entire; KWP
2007, entire).
Section 3 is occupied by the plants Cyanea tritomantha, Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and Stenogyne cranwelliae,
and includes the wet forest and wet grassland and shrubland ecosystems,
the moisture regime, and canopy, subcanopy, and understory native plant
species identified as the physical or biological features in the wet
forest and wet grassland and shrubland ecosystems. Although Section 3
is not known to be occupied by Melicope remyi or Phyllostegia
floribunda, this section contains unoccupied habitat that is essential
for the conservation of these species because it (1) is habitat for
these species, (2) provides at least one of the physical or biological
features essential for the conservation of each of these species, and
(3) contributes to the area of habitat needed to reestablish wild
populations within their range in support of recovery criteria for each
of these species. For recovery, each species needs at least 10
populations, with at least 200 reproducing individuals per population
for Melicope remyi and at least 500 reproducing individuals per
population for Phyllostegia floribunda (Service 2022a, pp. 43-44).
Therefore, we are reasonably certain that this section will contribute
to the conservation of these species and that this section contains one
or more of the physical or biological features that are essential to
the conservation of these species. Approximately 6,941 ac (2,809 ha) of
this section overlap designated critical habitat for the federally
endangered plants Clermontia drepanomorpha, Phyllostegia warshaueri,
and Achyranthes mutica (see 50 CFR 17.99(k) and 68 FR 39624, July 2,
2003); and for the picture-wing fly Drosophila ochrobasis Units 3
(Kohala Mountains East) and 4 (Kohala Mountains West) (see 50 CFR
17.95(i) and 73 FR 73795, December 4, 2008).

Cyanea marksii, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense,
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae--Section 4 and
Drosophila digressa--Unit 7

Section 4 and Drosophila digressa--Unit 7 consist of wet forest
ecosystem from Kukuiopa[revaps]e to [revaps][Omacr]lelomoana on the
southwestern slopes of Mauna Loa. Lands within this section and unit
include approximately 88 percent in State ownership and 12 percent in
private/other ownership (see table 3, above). Section 4 is comprised of
two units: Unit 15 is a critical habitat unit within unit Hawaii 15
(see 50 CFR 17.99(k)), which was previously designated for another
plant species; and Unit 39 is a newly designated critical habitat unit
depicted on Map 108. All State-owned lands in this section and unit are
managed by the State of Hawaii as part of the South Kona Forest Reserve
Kukuiopa[revaps]e Section. The State lands within this section and unit
are managed under the Three Mountain Alliance Management Plan (TMA
2007, entire). For general land use, threats, and special management
considerations or protection measures to reduce or alleviate the
threats identified within this section and unit, see table 6, above
(TMA 2007, pp. 26-37; DLNR-DOFAW 2022, entire).
Section 4 is occupied by the plants Cyanea marksii, Phyllostegia
floribunda, and Pittosporum hawaiiense. This section and unit include
the wet forest, the moisture regime, and canopy, subcanopy, and
understory native plant species identified as the physical or
biological features in the wet forest ecosystem. Although Section 4 is
not known to be occupied by the plants Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei
and Stenogyne cranwelliae, and Drosophila digressa--Unit 7 is not known
to be occupied by Drosophila digressa, this section and unit contain
unoccupied habitat that is essential for the conservation of these
species because they (1) are habitat for these species, (2) provide at
least one of the physical or biological features essential for the
conservation of each of these species, and (3) contribute to the area
of habitat needed to reestablish wild populations within their range in
support of recovery criteria for each of these species. For recovery,
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei needs at least 10 populations, with at
least 500 reproducing individuals per population, and Stenogyne
cranwelliae needs at least 20 populations, with at least 500
reproducing individuals per population (Service 2022a, pp. 43-44).
Drosophila digressa needs at least 10 stable populations for recovery
(Service 2022a, p. 49). Therefore, we are reasonably certain that this
section and unit will contribute to the conservation of these species
and that this section and unit contain one or more of the physical or
biological features that are essential to the conservation of these
species. Approximately 182 ac (73 ha) of this section and unit overlap
designated critical habitat for the federally endangered plant Cyanea
stictophylla (see 50 CFR 17.99(k) and 68 FR 39624, July 2, 2003).

[[Page 17924]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.002

Cyanea marksii, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense,
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae--Section 5 and
Drosophila digressa--Unit 8

Section 5 and Drosophila digressa--Unit 8 consist of wet forest
ecosystem in Ka[revaps]ohe on the southwestern slopes of Mauna Loa.
Lands within this section and unit include approximately 53 percent in
State ownership and 47 percent in private/other ownership (see table 3,
above). Section 5 is comprised of two units: Unit 15 is a critical
habitat unit within unit Hawaii 15 (see 50 CFR 17.99(k)), which was
previously designated for another plant species; and Unit 38 is a newly
designated critical habitat unit depicted on Map 107. All State-owned
lands in this section and unit are managed by the State of Hawaii as
part of the South Kona Forest Reserve, Ka[revaps]ohe Section and
Kukuiopa[revaps]e Section. The State lands within this section and unit
are managed under the Three Mountain Alliance Management Plan (TMA
2007, pp. 47-50). For general land use, threats, and special management
considerations or protection measures to reduce or alleviate the
threats identified within this section and unit, see table 6, above
(DLNR-DOFAW 2022, entire; TMA 2007, pp. 26-37).
Section 5 is occupied by the plant Cyanea marksii. This section and
unit include the wet forest, the moisture regime, and canopy,
subcanopy, and understory native plant species identified as the
physical or biological features in the wet forest ecosystem. Although
Section 5 is not known to be occupied by the plants Phyllostegia
floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and
Stenogyne cranwelliae, and Drosophila digressa--Unit 8 is not known to
be occupied by Drosophila digressa, this section and unit contain
unoccupied habitat that is essential for the conservation of these
species because they (1) are habitat for these species, (2) provide at
least one of the physical or biological features essential for the
conservation of each of these species, and (3) contribute to the area
of habitat needed to reestablish wild populations within their range in
support of recovery criteria for each of these species. For recovery,
Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, and Schiedea diffusa
ssp. macraei each need at least 10 populations, with at

[[Page 17925]]

least 500 reproducing individuals per population for Phyllostegia
floribunda and Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei and at least 400
reproducing individuals per population for Pittosporum hawaiiense
(Service 2022a, pp. 43-44). For Stenogyne cranwelliae, at least 20
populations, each with at least 500 reproducing individuals, are
necessary for recovery (Service 2022a, pp. 43-44). Drosophila digressa
needs at least 10 stable populations for recovery (Service 2022a, p.
49). Therefore, we are reasonably certain that this section and unit
will contribute to the conservation of these species and that this
section and unit contain one or more of the physical or biological
features that are essential to the conservation of these species.
Approximately 127 ac (51 ha) of this section and unit overlap
designated critical habitat for the federally endangered plant Cyanea
stictophylla (see 50 CFR 17.99(k) and 68 FR 39624, July 2, 2003).

Cyanea marksii, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense,
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae--Section 6

Section 6 consists of wet forest ecosystem in
K[imacr]p[amacr]hoehoe on the southwestern slopes of Mauna Loa. Lands
within this section include approximately 96 percent in State ownership
and 4 percent in private/other ownership (see table 3, above). Section
6 is comprised of two units: Unit 16 is a critical habitat unit within
unit Hawaii 16 (see 50 CFR 17.99(k)), which was previously designated
for another plant species; and Unit 40 is a newly designated critical
habitat unit depicted on Map 109. All State-owned lands in this section
are managed by the State of Hawaii as part of the
K[imacr]p[amacr]hoehoe Natural Area Reserve. The State lands within
this section are managed under the K[imacr]p[amacr]hoehoe Natural Area
Reserve Management Plan (DLNR-DOFAW 2002, entire) and the Three
Mountain Alliance Management Plan (TMA 2007, entire). For general land
use, threats, and special management considerations or protection
measures to reduce or alleviate the threats within this section, see
table 6, above (DLNR-DOFAW 2002, entire).
Section 6 is occupied by the plants Cyanea marksii and Phyllostegia
floribunda. This section includes the wet forest, the moisture regime,
and canopy, subcanopy, and understory native plant species identified
as the physical or biological features in the wet forest ecosystem.
Although Section 6 is not known to be occupied by Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, or Stenogyne cranwelliae,
this section contains unoccupied habitat that is essential for the
conservation of these species because it (1) is habitat for these
species, (2) provides at least one of the physical or biological
features essential for the conservation of each of these species, and
(3) contributes to the area of habitat needed to reestablish wild
populations within their range in support of recovery criteria for each
of these species. For recovery, Pittosporum hawaiiense and Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei each need at least 10 populations, with at least
400 reproducing individuals per population for Pittosporum hawaiiense
and at least 500 reproducing individuals per population for Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei, and Stenogyne cranwelliae needs at least 20
populations, each with at least 500 reproducing individuals (Service
2022a, pp. 43-44). Therefore, we are reasonably certain that this
section will contribute to the conservation of these species and that
this section contains one or more of the physical or biological
features that are essential to the conservation of these species.
Approximately 156 ac (63 ha) of this section overlap designated
critical habitat for the federally endangered plant Cyanea stictophylla
(see 50 CFR 17.99(k) and 68 FR 39624, July 2, 2003).

Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense--Section 7

Section 7 consists of wet forest and wet grassland and shrubland
ecosystems from P[amacr]nau Nui to Kamoamoa on the eastern slope of
K[imacr]lauea Volcano, entirely on Federal land (see table 3, above).
Section 7 is comprised of two units: Unit 23 is a critical habitat unit
within unit Hawaii 23 (see 50 CFR 17.99(k)), which was previously
designated for another plant species; and Unit 45 is a newly designated
critical habitat unit depicted on Map 114. Lands within this section
are entirely under Federal ownership managed by the National Park
Service within Hawai[revaps]i Volcanoes National Park. Federal lands
within this section are managed by the National Park Service under the
Hawai[revaps]i Volcanoes National Park General Management Plan
(National Park Service 2015, 2016, entire) and the Three Mountain
Alliance Management Plan (TMA 2007, entire). For general land use,
threats, and special management considerations or protection measures
to reduce or alleviate the threats within this section, see table 6,
above (National Park Service 2015, 2016, entire).
Section 7 is occupied by the plants Phyllostegia floribunda and
Pittosporum hawaiiense and includes the wet forest and wet grassland
and shrubland ecosystems, the moisture regime, and canopy, subcanopy,
and understory native plant species identified as the physical or
biological features in the wet forest and wet grassland and shrubland
ecosystems. Approximately 9 ac (4 ha) of this section overlap
designated critical habitat for the federally endangered plant Pleomele
hawaiiensis (now listed as Dracaena konaensis) (see 50 CFR 17.99(k) and
68 FR 39624, July 2, 2003).

Cyanea tritomantha, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae--Section 8

Section 8 consists of wet and mesic forest ecosystems from
N[imacr]nole to P[amacr]hala on the southern slopes of Mauna Loa. Lands
within this section include approximately 29 percent in Federal
ownership and 71 percent in State ownership (see table 3, above).
Section 8 is comprised of two units: Unit 24 is a critical habitat unit
within unit Hawaii 24 (see 50 CFR 17.99(k)), which was previously
designated for another plant species; and Unit 44 is a newly designated
critical habitat unit depicted on Map 113. Federal lands in Section 8
are managed by the National Park Service within Hawai[revaps]i
Volcanoes National Park and in accordance with the Hawai[revaps]i
Volcanoes National Park General Management Plan (National Park Service
2015, 2016, entire). All State-owned lands in this section are managed
by the State of Hawaii, are part of the Ka[revaps][umacr] Forest
Reserve, and are managed under the Ka[revaps][umacr] Forest Reserve
Management Plan (DLNR-DOFAW 2012, entire). For general land use,
threats, and special management considerations or protection measures
to reduce or alleviate the threats within Section 8, see table 6, above
(DLNR-DOFAW 2012, p. 3; TMA 2007, pp. 44-46).
Section 8 is occupied by the plants Cyanea tritomantha, Pittosporum
hawaiiense, and Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei and includes the wet and
mesic forest, the moisture regime, and canopy, subcanopy, and
understory native plant species identified as the physical or
biological features in the wet and mesic forest ecosystems. Although
Section 8 is not known to be occupied by the plant Stenogyne
cranwelliae, this section contains unoccupied habitat that is essential
for the conservation of this species because it (1) is habitat for the
species, (2) provides at least one of the physical or biological
features essential for the conservation of the species, and (3)
contributes to the area of habitat needed to reestablish wild
populations

[[Page 17926]]

within their range in support of recovery criteria for the species. For
recovery, Stenogyne cranwelliae needs at least 20 populations, each
with at least 500 reproducing individuals (Service 2022a, pp. 43-44).
Therefore, we are reasonably certain that this section will contribute
to the conservation of this species and that this section contains one
or more of the physical or biological features that are essential to
the conservation of the species. Approximately 2,081 ac (842 ha) of the
section overlap designated critical habitat for the federally
endangered plant Argyroxiphium kauense (see 50 CFR 17.99(k) and 68 FR
39624, July 2, 2003) and for the picture-wing fly Drosophila
heteroneura Unit 1 (Ka[revaps][umacr] Forest) (see 50 CFR 17.95(i) and
73 FR 73795, December 4, 2008).
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.003

BILLING CODE 4333-15-C

Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne
cranwelliae--Section 9

Section 9 consists of wet and mesic forest ecosystems from
Wai[revaps][omacr]hinu to N[imacr]nole on the southern slopes of Mauna
Loa. Lands within this section include approximately 29 percent in
Federal ownership and 71 percent in State ownership (see table 3,
above). Section 9 is comprised of two units: Unit 24 is a critical
habitat unit within unit Hawaii 24 (see 50 CFR 17.99(k)), which was
previously designated for another plant species; and Unit 43 is a newly
designated critical habitat unit depicted on Map 112. Federal lands in
Section 9 are managed by the National Park Service within
Hawai[revaps]i Volcanoes National Park and in accordance with the
Hawai[revaps]i Volcanoes National Park General Management Plan
(National Park Service 2015, 2016, entire). All State-owned lands in
this section are managed by the State of Hawaii, are part of the
Ka[revaps][umacr] Forest Reserve, and are managed under the
Ka[revaps][umacr] Forest Reserve Management Plan (DLNR-DOFAW 2012,
entire). For general land use, threats, and special management
considerations or protection measures to

[[Page 17927]]

reduce or alleviate the threats within this section, see table 6, above
(TMA 2007, pp. 26-37; DLNR-DOFAW 2012, pp. 1-3; DLNR 2017, pp. 3-5).
Section 9 is occupied by the plants Pittosporum hawaiiense and
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei and includes the wet and mesic forest,
the moisture regime, and canopy, subcanopy, and understory native plant
species identified as the physical or biological features in the wet
and mesic forest ecosystems. Although Section 9 is not known to be
occupied by Stenogyne cranwelliae, this section contains unoccupied
habitat that is essential for the conservation of this species because
it (1) is habitat for the species, (2) provides at least one of the
physical or biological features essential for the conservation of the
species, and (3) contributes to the area of habitat needed to
reestablish wild populations within their range in support of recovery
criteria for the species. For recovery, Stenogyne cranwelliae needs at
least 20 populations, each with at least 500 reproducing individuals
(Service 2022a, pp. 43-44). Therefore, we are reasonably certain that
this section will contribute to the conservation of this species and
that this section contains one or more of the physical or biological
features that are essential to the conservation of the species.
Approximately 101 ac (41 ha) of this section overlap designated
critical habitat for the federally endangered plant Argyroxiphium
kauense (see 50 CFR 17.99(k) and 68 FR 39624, July 2, 2003) and for the
picture-wing fly Drosophila ochrobasis Unit 5 (Upper Kahuku) (see 50
CFR 17.95(i) and 73 FR 73795, December 4, 2008).

Cyrtandra nanawaleensis, Phyllostegia floribunda--Section 10

Section 10 consists of wet forest and wet grassland and shrubland
ecosystems from Kahauale[revaps]a to Wao Kele o Puna near the east rift
zone of K[imacr]lauea Volcano in the district of Puna. Lands within
this section include approximately 100 percent in State ownership and
less than 1 percent in private/other ownership (see table 3, above).
Section 10 is comprised of two units: Unit 28 is a critical habitat
unit within unit Hawaii 28 (see 50 CFR 17.99(k)), which was previously
designated for another plant species; and Unit 46 is a newly designated
critical habitat unit depicted on Map 115. Lands within this section
are almost entirely under State ownership managed by the State of
Hawaii within the Kahauale[revaps]a Natural Area Reserve and the State
of Hawaii Office of Hawaiian Affairs within the Wao Kele o Puna Forest
Reserve. The State lands within this section are managed under the Wao
Kele o Puna Comprehensive Management Plan
(N[amacr]lehualawaku[revaps]ulei 2017, entire) and the Three Mountain
Alliance Management Plan (TMA 2007, entire). For general land use,
threats, and special management considerations or protection measures
to reduce or alleviate the threats within this section, see table 6,
above (DLNR-DOFAW 2022, entire; TMA 2007, pp. 26-37;
N[amacr]lehualawaku[revaps]ulei 2017, entire).
Section 10 is occupied by the plants Cyrtandra nanawaleensis and
Phyllostegia floribunda and includes the wet forest and wet grassland
and shrubland, the moisture regime, and canopy, subcanopy, and
understory native plant species identified as the physical or
biological features in the wet forest and wet grassland and shrubland
ecosystems. Approximately 155 ac (63 ha) of this section overlap
designated critical habitat for the federally endangered plant
Adenophorus periens (see 50 CFR 17.99(k) and 68 FR 39624, July 2,
2003).

Cyanea tritomantha, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense,
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae--Section 11 and
Drosophila digressa--Unit 2

Section 11 and Drosophila digressa--Unit 2 consist of wet forest
ecosystem from [revaps][Omacr]la[revaps]a to Upper Wai[amacr]kea on the
eastern slope of Mauna Loa and partially on the northern slope of
K[imacr]lauea Volcano. Lands within this section and unit include
approximately 25 percent in Federal ownership, 75 percent in State
ownership, and less than 1 percent in private/other ownership (see
table 3, above). Section 11 is comprised of three units: Unit 29 and
Unit 30 are critical habitat units within unit Hawaii 29 and unit
Hawaii 30 (see 50 CFR 17.99(k)), which were previously designated for
other plant species; and Unit 51 is a newly designated critical habitat
unit depicted on Map 118. All State-owned lands in this section and
unit are managed by the State of Hawaii as part of the Hilo Forest
Reserve K[umacr]k[umacr]au Section, [revaps][Omacr]la[revaps]a Forest
Reserve Mountain View Section, Upper Wai[amacr]kea Forest Reserve,
Wai[amacr]kea Forest Reserve, Pu[revaps]u Maka[revaps]ala Natural Area
Reserve, and Wai[amacr]kea 1942 Lava Flow Natural Area Reserve. All
Federal lands in this section and unit are managed by the National Park
Service within the Hawai[revaps]i Volcanoes National Park. The State
lands within this section and unit are managed under the Pu[revaps]u
Maka[revaps]ala Natural Area Reserve Management Plan (DLNR-DOFAW 2013,
entire) and the Three Mountain Alliance's Management Plan (TMA 2007,
entire). The Federal lands within this section and unit are managed
under the Hawai[revaps]i Volcanoes National Park General Management
Plan (National Park Service 2015, 2016, entire). For general land use,
threats, and special management considerations or protection measures
to reduce or alleviate the threats within this section and unit, see
table 6 (National Park Service 2015, 2016, entire; DLNR-DOFAW 2013, p.
21; DLNR-DOFAW 2022, entire; TMA 2007, pp. 40-43).
Section 11 is occupied by the plants Cyanea tritomantha,
Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, and Schiedea diffusa
ssp. macraei, and Drosophila digressa--Unit 2 is occupied by the
picture-wing fly Drosophila digressa. This section and unit include the
wet forest, the moisture regime, and canopy, subcanopy, and understory
native plant species identified as the physical or biological features
in the wet forest ecosystem. Although Section 11 is not known to be
occupied by Stenogyne cranwelliae, this section contains unoccupied
habitat that is essential for the conservation of this species because
it (1) is habitat for the species, (2) provides at least one of the
physical or biological features essential for the conservation of the
species, and (3) contributes to the area of habitat needed to
reestablish wild populations within their range in support of recovery
criteria for the species. For recovery, Stenogyne cranwelliae needs at
least 20 populations, each with at least 500 reproducing individuals
(Service 2022a, pp. 43-44). Therefore, we are reasonably certain that
this section will contribute to the conservation of this species and
that this section contains one or more of the physical or biological
features that are essential to the conservation of the species.
Approximately 14,695 ac (5,947 ha) of this section and unit overlap
designated critical habitat for the federally endangered plants
Clermontia peleana, Cyanea stictophylla, Cyrtandra giffardii,
Phyllostegia velutina, and Sicyos alba (see 50 CFR 17.99(k) and 68 FR
39624, July 2, 2003), and for the picture-wing fly Drosophila mulli
Unit 1 ([revaps][Omacr]la[revaps]a Forest) and Unit 3 (Wai[amacr]kea
Forest) (see 50 CFR 17.95(i) and 73 FR 73795, December 4, 2008).

Cyanea marksii, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense,
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae--Section 12 and
Drosophila digressa--Unit 9

Section 12 and Drosophila digressa--Unit 9 consist of wet forest
ecosystem in Ho[revaps]okena on the southwestern slopes of Mauna Loa.
Newly designated critical habitat for Section 12 is entirely within
critical habitat Unit 37 depicted on Map

[[Page 17928]]

106 and includes approximately 100 percent Federal land with less than
1 ac (less than 1 ha) of land that is privately owned or has other
ownership (see table 3, above). Lands within this section and unit are
almost entirely managed by the Service within Hakalau Forest National
Wildlife Refuge's Kona Forest Unit and in accordance with the Hakalau
Forest National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
(Service 2010, pp. 2-13-2-19, 2-33-2-40). The State lands within this
section and unit are managed under the Three Mountain Alliance
Management Plan (TMA 2007, pp. 47-50). For general land use, threats,
and special management considerations or protection measures to reduce
or alleviate the threats within this section and unit, see table 6,
above (Service 2010, entire; TMA 2007, pp. 26-37).
Section 12 is occupied by the plant Cyanea marksii. This section
and unit include the wet forest, the moisture regime, and canopy,
subcanopy, and understory native plant species identified as the
physical or biological features in the wet forest ecosystem. Although
Section 12 is not known to be occupied by Phyllostegia floribunda,
Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, or Stenogyne
cranwelliae, and Drosophila digressa--Unit 9 is not known to be
occupied by Drosophila digressa, this section and unit contain
unoccupied habitat that is essential for the conservation of these
species because they (1) are habitat for these species, (2) provide at
least one of the physical or biological features essential for the
conservation of each of these species, and (3) contribute to the area
of habitat needed to reestablish wild populations within their range in
support of recovery criteria for each of these species. For recovery,
Phyllostegia floribunda and Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei each need at
least 10 populations, with at least 500 reproducing individuals per
population; Pittosporum hawaiiense needs at least 10 populations, each
with at least 400 reproducing individuals; and Stenogyne cranwelliae
needs at least 20 populations, each with at least 500 reproducing
individuals (Service 2022a, pp. 43-44). Drosophila digressa needs at
least 10 stable populations for recovery (Service 2022a, p. 49).
Therefore, we are reasonably certain that this section and unit will
contribute to the conservation of these species and that this section
and unit contain one or more of the physical or biological features
that are essential to the conservation of these species. Approximately
1,482 ac (600 ha) of this section and unit overlap designated critical
habitat for the picture-wing fly Drosophila heteroneura Unit 2 (Kona
Refuge) (see 50 CFR 17.95(i) and 73 FR 73795, December 4, 2008).

Drosophila digressa--Unit 4

Drosophila digressa--Unit 4 consists of mesic forest ecosystem at
Manuk[amacr] on the southern slopes of Mauna Loa, with 100 percent of
lands in State ownership (see table 3, above). All State-owned lands in
this unit are managed by the State of Hawaii as part of the
Manuk[amacr] Natural Area Reserve, under the Manuk[amacr] Natural Area
Reserve Draft Management Plan (DLNR-DOFAW 1992, entire) and the Three
Mountain Alliance Management Plan (TMA 2007, entire). For general land
use, threats, and special management considerations or protection
measures to reduce or alleviate the threats within this unit, see table
6, above (DLNR-DOFAW 1992, entire).
Drosophila digressa--Unit 4 is occupied by the picture-wing fly
Drosophila digressa and includes the mesic forest, the moisture regime,
and canopy, subcanopy, and understory native plant species identified
as the physical or biological features in the mesic forest ecosystem.
This entire unit (167 ac, 67 ha) overlaps designated critical habitat
for the federally endangered plants Colubrina oppositifolia, Diellia
erecta (now listed as Asplenium dielerectum), Flueggea neowawraea,
Gouania vitifolia, Neraudia ovata, and Pleomele hawaiiensis (now listed
as Dracaena konaensis) (see 50 CFR 17.99(k) and 68 FR 39624, July 2,
2003).

Cyanea marksii, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense,
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae--Section 13 and
Drosophila digressa--Unit 5

Section 13 and Drosophila digressa--Unit 5 consist of wet forest
ecosystem from K[imacr]p[amacr]hoehoe to Honomalino on the southwestern
slopes of Mauna Loa. Lands within this section and unit include
approximately 12 percent in State ownership and 88 percent in private/
other ownership (see table 3, above). Newly designated critical habitat
for Section 13 is entirely within critical habitat Unit 41 depicted on
Map 110. All State-owned lands in this section and unit are managed by
the State of Hawaii as part of the K[imacr]p[amacr]hoehoe Natural Area
Reserve and South Kona Forest Reserve Kapua-Manuk[amacr] Section. Some
private lands are owned by The Nature Conservancy, within the Kona Hema
Preserve. The State lands within this section and unit are managed
under the K[imacr]p[amacr]hoehoe Natural Area Reserve Management Plan
(DLNR-DOFAW 2002, entire) and the Three Mountain Alliance Management
Plan (TMA 2007, entire). The Nature Conservancy's land is managed under
the Forest Stewardship Management Plan for the Kona Hema Preserve (The
Nature Conservancy 2017, entire). For general land use, threats, and
special management considerations or protection measures to reduce or
alleviate the threats within this section and unit, see table 6, above
(DLNR-DOFAW 2002, entire).
Section 13 is occupied by the plants Cyanea marksii, Phyllostegia
floribunda, and Pittosporum hawaiiense. This section and unit include
the wet forest, the moisture regime, and canopy, subcanopy, and
understory native plant species identified as the physical or
biological features in the wet forest ecosystem. Although Section 13 is
not known to be occupied by Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei and Stenogyne
cranwelliae, and Drosophila digressa--Unit 5 is not known to be
occupied by Drosophila digressa, this section and unit contains
unoccupied habitat that is essential for the conservation of these
species because they (1) are habitat for these species, (2) provide at
least one of the physical or biological features essential for the
conservation of each of these species, and (3) contribute to the area
of habitat needed to reestablish wild populations within their range in
support of recovery criteria for each of these species. For recovery,
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei needs at least 10 populations, each with
at least 500 reproducing individuals, and Stenogyne cranwelliae needs
at least 20 populations, each with at least 500 reproducing individuals
(Service 2022a, pp. 43-44). Drosophila digressa needs at least 10
stable populations for recovery (Service 2022a, p. 49). Therefore, we
are reasonably certain that this section and unit will contribute to
the conservation of these species and that this section and unit
contain one or more of the physical or biological features that are
essential to the conservation of these species. There is no designated
critical habitat for other listed species within this section and unit.

Cyanea tritomantha, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense,
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae--Section 14 and
Drosophila digressa--Unit 3

Section 14 and Drosophila digressa--Unit 3 are entirely overlapping
and consist of wet and mesic forest ecosystems at Kahuku on the
southern

[[Page 17929]]

slopes of Mauna Loa. Newly designated critical habitat for Section 14
is comprised of a single unit of newly designated critical habitat,
Unit 42 depicted on Map 111. Lands within this section and unit include
approximately 100 percent in Federal ownership and less than 1 percent
in State ownership (see table 3, above). Federal lands are managed by
the National Park Service within the Hawai[revaps]i Volcanoes National
Park in accordance with the Hawai[revaps]i Volcanoes National Park
General Management Plan (National Park Service 2015, 2016, entire). All
State-owned lands in this section and unit are managed by the State of
Hawaii, are part of the Ka[revaps][umacr] Forest Reserve, and are
managed under the Ka[revaps][umacr] Forest Reserve Management Plan
(DLNR-DOFAW 2012, entire). For general land use, threats, and special
management considerations or protection measures to reduce or alleviate
the threats within this section and unit, see table 6, above (TMA 2007,
pp. 26-37; DLNR-DOFAW 2012, pp. 1-3; DLNR 2017, pp. 3-5).
Section 14 is occupied by the plants Pittosporum hawaiiense and
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei. This section and unit include the wet
and mesic forest, the moisture regime, and canopy, subcanopy, and
understory native plant species identified as the physical or
biological features in the wet and mesic forest ecosystems. Although
Section 14 is not known to be occupied by the plants Cyanea
tritomantha, Phyllostegia floribunda, or Stenogyne cranwelliae, or by
the picture-wing fly Drosophila digressa in Drosophila digressa--Unit
3, this section and unit contain unoccupied habitat that is essential
for the conservation of these species because they (1) are habitat for
these species, (2) provide at least one of the physical or biological
features essential for the conservation of each of these species, and
(3) contribute to the area of habitat needed to reestablish wild
populations within their range in support of recovery criteria for each
of these species. For recovery, Cyanea tritomantha and Phyllostegia
floribunda each need at least 10 populations, with at least 500
reproducing individuals per population, and Stenogyne cranwelliae needs
at least 20 populations, each with at least 500 reproducing individuals
(Service 2022a, pp. 43-44). Drosophila digressa needs at least 10
stable populations for recovery (Service 2022a, p. 49). Therefore, we
are reasonably certain that this section and unit will contribute to
the conservation of these species and that this section and unit
contain one or more of the physical or biological features that are
essential to the conservation of these species. Approximately 681 ac
(275 ha) of this section and unit overlap designated critical habitat
for the picture-wing fly Drosophila heteroneura Unit 3 (Lower Kahuku)
(see 50 CFR 17.95(i) and 73 FR 73795, December 4, 2008).

Cyrtandra nanawaleensis--Section 15

Section 15 consists of wet forest ecosystem at
Kam[amacr][revaps]ili near the east rift zone of K[imacr]lauea Volcano
in the district of Puna. Lands within this section are entirely under
State ownership managed by the State of Hawaii within the
Keau[revaps]ohana Forest Reserve (see table 3, above). Section 15 is
comprised of one unit: Unit 47, which is a newly designated critical
habitat unit depicted on Map 116. The State lands within this section
are managed under the Three Mountain Alliance's Management Plan (TMA
2007, entire). For general land use, threats, and special management
considerations or protection measures to reduce or alleviate the
threats within this section, see table 6, above (DLNR-DOFAW 2022,
entire; TMA 2007, pp. 40-43).
Section 15 is occupied by the plant Cyrtandra nanawaleensis and
includes the wet forest, the moisture regime, and canopy, subcanopy,
and understory native plant species identified as the physical or
biological features in the wet forest ecosystem. There is no designated
critical habitat for other listed species within the section.

Cyrtandra nanawaleensis--Section 16

Section 16 consists of wet forest ecosystem in P[amacr]hoa near the
east rift zone of K[imacr]lauea Volcano in the district of Puna. Lands
within this section include approximately 99 percent under State
ownership and 1 percent in private/other ownership (see table 3,
above). Section 16 is comprised of one unit: Unit 48, which is a newly
designated critical habitat unit depicted on Map 116. All State-owned
lands in this section are managed by the State of Hawaii as part of the
N[amacr]n[amacr]wale Forest Reserve, under the Three Mountain
Alliance's Management Plan (TMA 2007, entire). For general land use,
threats, and special management considerations or protection measures
to reduce or alleviate the threats within this section, see table 6,
above (DLNR-DOFAW 2022, entire; TMA 2007, pp. 40-43).
Section 16 is occupied by the plant Cyrtandra nanawaleensis and
includes the wet forest, the moisture regime, and canopy, subcanopy,
and understory native plant species identified as the physical or
biological features in the wet forest ecosystem. There is no designated
critical habitat for other listed species within the section.

Cyrtandra nanawaleensis--Section 17

Section 17 consists of wet and mesic forest and mesic grassland and
shrubland ecosystems at Malama-K[imacr] near the east rift zone of
K[imacr]lauea Volcano in the district of Puna. Lands within this
section include approximately 99 percent under State ownership and 1
percent in private/other ownership (see table 3, above). Section 17 is
comprised of one unit: Unit 49, which is a newly designated critical
habitat unit depicted on Map 117. State-owned lands within this section
are managed by the State of Hawaii within the Malama-K[imacr] Forest
Reserve, under the Three Mountain Alliance's Management Plan (TMA 2007,
entire). For general land use, threats, and special management
considerations or protection measures to reduce or alleviate the
threats within this section, see table 6, above (DLNR-DOFAW 2022,
entire; TMA 2007, pp. 40-43).
Section 17 is occupied by the plant Cyrtandra nanawaleensis and
includes the wet forest, mesic forest, and mesic grassland and
shrubland; the moisture regime; and canopy, subcanopy, and understory
native plant species identified as the physical or biological features
in the wet forest, mesic forest, and mesic grassland and shrubland
ecosystems. There is no designated critical habitat for other listed
species within the section.

Cyrtandra nanawaleensis--Section 18

Section 18 consists of wet and mesic forest and mesic grassland and
shrubland ecosystems at Kapoho near the east rift zone of K[imacr]lauea
Volcano in the district of Puna. Lands within this section are entirely
under State ownership (see table 3, above). Section 18 is comprised of
one unit: Unit 50, which is a newly designated critical habitat unit
depicted on Map 117. State-owned lands within this section are managed
by the State of Hawaii within the N[amacr]n[amacr]wale Forest Reserve
Halepua[revaps]a section, under the Three Mountain Alliance's
Management Plan (TMA 2007, entire). For general land use, threats, and
special management considerations or protection measures to reduce or
alleviate the threats within this section, see table 6, above (DLNR-
DOFAW 2022, entire; TMA 2007, pp. 40-43).
Section 18 is occupied by the plant Cyrtandra nanawaleensis and
includes the wet forest, mesic forest, and mesic grassland and
shrubland; the moisture regime; and canopy, subcanopy, and

[[Page 17930]]

understory native plant species identified as the physical or
biological features in the wet forest, mesic forest, and mesic
grassland and shrubland ecosystems. There is no designated critical
habitat for other listed species within the section.

Schiedea hawaiiensis--Section 19

Section 19 consists of dry forest ecosystem adjacent to the
P[omacr]hakuloa Training Area in the saddle of Maunakea, Mauna Loa, and
Hual[amacr]lai. Lands within this section are entirely in State
ownership (see table 3, above). Designated critical habitat for Section
19 is entirely within critical habitat Unit 55 depicted on Map 122. The
State-owned lands in this section include the Pu[revaps]u Anahulu Game
Management Area and are managed under the Three Mountain Alliance
Management Plan (TMA 2007, entire). For general land use, threats, and
special management considerations or protection measures to reduce or
alleviate the threats within this section, see table 6, above (DLNR-
DOFAW 2015, entire; TMA 2007, pp. 51-55).
Section 19 is not known to be occupied by Schiedea hawaiiensis, but
this section includes the dry forest, the moisture regime, and canopy,
subcanopy, and understory native plant species identified as the
physical or biological features in the dry forest ecosystems. This
section also provides an area for potential population establishment,
which is essential for the conservation of Schiedea hawaiiensis because
10 populations are identified as part of the recovery criteria, but
only 1 wild population and 3 reintroduced populations are extant.
Although Section 19 contains unoccupied habitat for Schiedea
hawaiiensis, we have determined this area is essential for the
conservation of this species because it (1) is habitat for this
species, (2) provides at least one of the physical or biological
features essential for the conservation of this species, and (3)
contributes to the area of habitat needed to reestablish wild
populations within their range in support of the species' recovery
criteria. At least 10 populations, each with at least 500 reproducing
individuals, are necessary for the species' recovery (Service 2022a,
pp. 43-44). Therefore, we are reasonably certain that this section will
contribute to the conservation of this species and that this section
contains one or more of the physical or biological features that are
essential to the conservation of this species. Section 19 does not
overlap with existing critical habitat for other listed species.

Cyanea marksii, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei--Section 20 and
Drosophila digressa--Unit 6

Section 20 and Drosophila digressa--Unit 6 consist of wet forest
ecosystem from Miloli[revaps]i to Honomalino on the southwestern slopes
of Mauna Loa. Lands within this section and unit are entirely in State
ownership (see table 3, above). Newly designated critical habitat for
Section 20 is entirely within critical habitat Unit 56 depicted on Map
123. All State-owned lands in this section and unit are managed by the
State of Hawaii as part of the South Kona Forest Reserve Kapua-
Manuk[amacr] Section, under the Three Mountain Alliance's Management
Plan (TMA 2007, entire). For general land use, threats, and special
management considerations or protection measures to reduce or alleviate
the threats within this section and unit, see table 6, above (DLNR-
DOFAW 2022, entire; TMA 2007, pp. 47-50).
Drosophila digressa--Unit 6 is occupied by the picture-wing fly
Drosophila digressa. This section and unit include the wet forest, the
moisture regime, and canopy, subcanopy, and understory native plant
species identified as the physical or biological features in the wet
forest ecosystem. Although Section 20 is not known to be occupied by
Cyanea marksii and Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, this section contains
unoccupied habitat that is essential for the conservation of these
species because it (1) is habitat for these species, (2) provides at
least one of the physical or biological features essential for the
conservation of each of these species, and (3) contributes to the area
of habitat needed to reestablish wild populations within their range in
support of recovery criteria for each of these species. For recovery,
Cyanea marksii and Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei each need at least 10
populations, each with at least 500 reproducing individuals (Service
2022a, pp. 43-44). Therefore, we are reasonably certain that this
section will contribute to the conservation of these species and that
this section contains one or more of the physical or biological
features that are essential to the conservation of these species. There
is no critical habitat for other endangered or threatened species
within this section and unit.

Effects of Critical Habitat Designation

Section 7 Consultation

Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires Federal agencies, including the
Service, to ensure that any action they authorize, fund, or carry out
is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered
species or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse
modification of designated critical habitat of such species.
We published a final rule revising the definition of destruction or
adverse modification on August 27, 2019 (84 FR 44976). Destruction or
adverse modification means a direct or indirect alteration that
appreciably diminishes the value of critical habitat as a whole for the
conservation of a listed species.
Compliance with the requirements of section 7(a)(2) of the Act is
documented through our issuance of:
(1) A concurrence letter for Federal actions that may affect, but
are not likely to adversely affect, listed species or critical habitat;
or
(2) A biological opinion for Federal actions that may affect, and
are likely to adversely affect, listed species or critical habitat.
When we issue a biological opinion concluding that a project is
likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species and/or
destroy or adversely modify critical habitat, we provide reasonable and
prudent alternatives to the project, if any are identifiable, that
would avoid the likelihood of jeopardy and/or destruction or adverse
modification of critical habitat. We define ``reasonable and prudent
alternatives'' (at 50 CFR 402.02) as alternative actions identified
during consultation that:
(1) Can be implemented in a manner consistent with the intended
purpose of the action,
(2) Can be implemented consistent with the scope of the Federal
agency's legal authority and jurisdiction,
(3) Are economically and technologically feasible, and
(4) Would, in the Service Director's opinion, avoid the likelihood
of jeopardizing the continued existence of the listed species and/or
avoid the likelihood of destroying or adversely modifying critical
habitat.
Reasonable and prudent alternatives can vary from slight project
modifications to extensive redesign or relocation of the project. Costs
associated with implementing a reasonable and prudent alternative are
similarly variable.
Regulations at 50 CFR 402.16 set forth requirements for Federal
agencies to reinitiate consultation if any of the following four
conditions occur: (1) the amount or extent of taking specified in the
incidental take statement is exceeded; (2) new information reveals
effects of the action that may affect listed species or critical
habitat in a manner or to an extent not previously considered; (3) the
identified action is

[[Page 17931]]

subsequently modified in a manner that causes an effect to the listed
species or critical habitat that was not considered in the biological
opinion or written concurrence; or (4) a new species is listed or
critical habitat designated that may be affected by the identified
action. The reinitiation requirement applies only to actions that
remain subject to some discretionary Federal involvement or control. As
provided in 50 CFR 402.16, the requirement to reinitiate consultations
for new species listings or critical habitat designation does not apply
to certain agency actions (e.g., land management plans issued by the
Bureau of Land Management in certain circumstances).

Destruction or Adverse Modification of Critical Habitat

The key factor related to the destruction or adverse modification
determination is whether implementation of the proposed Federal action
directly or indirectly alters the designated critical habitat in a way
that appreciably diminishes the value of the critical habitat as a
whole for the conservation of the listed species. As discussed above,
the role of critical habitat is to support the physical or biological
features essential to the conservation of a listed species and provide
for the conservation of the species.
Section 4(b)(8) of the Act requires us to briefly evaluate and
describe, in any proposed or final regulation that designates critical
habitat, activities involving a Federal action that may violate section
7(a)(2) of the Act by destroying or adversely modifying such habitat,
or that may be affected by such designation.
Activities that we may, during a consultation under section 7(a)(2)
of the Act, consider likely to destroy or adversely modify the critical
habitat designated in this final rule include, but are not limited to,
Federal actions that result in the removal or significant modification
of designated critical habitat, or that would pose a risk of fire. Such
activities may include military training activities with potential to
cause wildland fires. We anticipate that most Federal activities that
may cause effects to the critical habitat we are designating in this
rule will also cause effects to the listed species, and as such we will
already be in consultation with the Federal agency as to whether or not
the activity jeopardizes the listed species. The exception is Section
19 (Unit 55), which we are designating as critical habitat for Schiedea
hawaiiensis but that section is not occupied by any of the 12 species
addressed in this rulemaking. As there is not already a section 7
consultation nexus based solely on the effects to these species (in the
absence of them in the area presently), the effects of a Federal
proposed action that could remove the physical or biological features
essential to the conservation of the species--specifically, the
associated native plant genera that are part of a functioning ecosystem
in which S. hawaiiensis occurs or has historically occurred--would
trigger section 7(a)(2) consultation because of the critical habitat
designation. Within occupied areas, we do not anticipate recommending
any project modifications to avoid destruction or adverse modification
of critical habitat that would be different from those for avoiding
jeopardy.

Exemptions

Application of Section 4(a)(3) of the Act

The Sikes Act Improvement Act of 1997 (Sikes Act) (16 U.S.C. 670a)
required each military installation that includes land and water
suitable for the conservation and management of natural resources to
complete an integrated natural resources management plan (INRMP) by
November 17, 2001. An INRMP integrates implementation of the military
mission of the installation with stewardship of the natural resources
found on the base. Each INRMP includes:
(1) An assessment of the ecological needs on the installation,
including the need to provide for the conservation of listed species;
(2) A statement of goals and priorities;
(3) A detailed description of management actions to be implemented
to provide for these ecological needs; and
(4) A monitoring and adaptive management plan.
Among other things, each INRMP must, to the extent appropriate and
applicable, provide for fish and wildlife management; fish and wildlife
habitat enhancement or modification; wetland protection, enhancement,
and restoration where necessary to support fish and wildlife; and
enforcement of applicable natural resource laws.
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Pub.
L. 108-136) amended the Act to limit areas eligible for designation as
critical habitat. Specifically, section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act (16
U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)(B)(i)) provides that the Secretary shall not
designate as critical habitat any lands or other geographical areas
owned or controlled by the Department of Defense (DoD), or designated
for its use, that are subject to an INRMP prepared under section 101 of
the Sikes Act (16 U.S.C. 670a), if the Secretary determines in writing
that such plan provides a benefit to the species for which critical
habitat is proposed for designation.
We consult with the military on the development and implementation
of INRMPs for installations with listed species. Schiedea hawaiiensis
is the only species with a completed, Service-approved INRMP for DoD
lands located within the range of its critical habitat designation, as
described below.

Approved INRMPs

P[omacr]hakuloa Training Area, 132,193 ac (53,497 ha)
The P[omacr]hakuloa Training Area (PTA) is the sole installation
under DoD jurisdiction on the island of Hawai[revaps]i. The PTA is
located in the north-central portion on the island of Hawai[revaps]i,
west of the Humu[revaps]ula Saddle, in an area formed by the
convergence of three volcanic mountains: Mauna Kea, Mauna Loa, and
Hual[amacr]lai. The PTA INRMP provides for wildlife management and
habitat enhancement for four federally listed animal species and 20
federally listed plant species, including Schiedea hawaiiensis, found
within the PTA (PTA 2020, entire).
The current PTA INRMP provides specific protections for S.
hawaiiensis. Conservation actions to benefit S. hawaiiensis include
collection and storage of seed from both wild and cultivated plants,
propagation of plants from seed that are planted into suitable off-site
habitat, and quarterly monitoring of plants to gauge the efficacy of
management actions. All known wild S. hawaiiensis individuals are
protected in fenced enclosures and are monitored at least annually.
Seeds from wild and propagated S. hawaiiensis plants have been
collected and stored, and hundreds of propagated S. hawaiiensis
individuals have been outplanted at the PTA and in protected, off-site
native habitats. With partnering agencies, the DoD constructed 15
fenced units encompassing all known wild individuals of S. hawaiiensis
in addition to other high-priority species in the PTA. Combined, these
units protect roughly 37,300 ac (15,095 ha) of predominantly native
forest from ungulates. The DoD also controls invasive plants and
rodents within these fenced areas. The INRMP incorporates
recommendations made by the Service to reduce fire risk. For example,
wildland fires caused by military training activities are minimized by
managing vegetation along a system of

[[Page 17932]]

fuel breaks and by controlling invasive grasses, which function as fine
fuels, in buffers around occurrences of S. hawaiiensis and other listed
species.
Based on the above considerations, and in accordance with section
4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act, we have determined that the identified lands
are subject to the PTA INRMP and that conservation efforts identified
in the INRMP will provide a benefit to S. hawaiiensis. Therefore, lands
within this installation are exempt from critical habitat designation
under section 4(a)(3) of the Act. As such, and as we indicated in our
March 29, 2023, proposed rule (88 FR 18756), we are not including
approximately 22,730 ac (9,198 ha) of habitat in this final critical
habitat designation because of this exemption.

Consideration of Impacts Under Section 4(b)(2) of the Act

Section 4(b)(2) of the Act states that the Secretary shall
designate and make revisions to critical habitat on the basis of the
best available scientific data after taking into consideration the
economic impact, national security impact, and any other relevant
impact of specifying any particular area as critical habitat. The
Secretary may exclude an area from critical habitat based on economic
impacts, impacts on national security, or any other relevant impacts.
Exclusion decisions are governed by the regulations at 50 CFR 424.19
and the Policy Regarding Implementation of Section 4(b)(2) of the
Endangered Species Act (hereafter, the ``2016 Policy''; 81 FR 7226,
February 11, 2016)--both of which were developed jointly with the
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). We also refer to a 2008
Department of the Interior Solicitor's opinion entitled, ``The
Secretary's Authority to Exclude Areas from a Critical Habitat
Designation under Section 4(b)(2) of the Endangered Species Act'' (M-
37016). We explain each decision to exclude areas, as well as decisions
not to exclude, to demonstrate that the decision is reasonable.
The Secretary may exclude any particular area if she determines
that the benefits of such exclusion outweigh the benefits of including
such area as part of the critical habitat, unless she determines, based
on the best scientific data available, that the failure to designate
such area as critical habitat will result in the extinction of the
species. In making the determination to exclude a particular area, the
statute on its face, as well as the legislative history, are clear that
the Secretary has broad discretion regarding which factor(s) to use and
how much weight to give to any factor.
We describe below the process that we undertook for deciding
whether to exclude any areas--taking into consideration each category
of impacts and our analysis of the relevant impacts.

Exclusions Based on Economic Impacts

Section 4(b)(2) of the Act and its implementing regulations require
that we consider the economic impact that may result from a designation
of critical habitat. In order to consider economic impacts, we prepared
an incremental effects memorandum (IEM) and screening analysis which,
together with our narrative and interpretation of effects, we consider
our economic analysis of the critical habitat designation and related
factors (Service 2023o, entire; Industrial Economics, Incorporated
(IEc) 2023a, entire). The economic analysis addressed probable economic
impacts of critical habitat designation for the 12 Hawai[revaps]i
species. Following the close of the comment period, we reviewed and
evaluated all information submitted during the comment period that may
pertain to our consideration of the probable incremental economic
impacts of this critical habitat designation. Additional information
relevant to the economic analysis of the critical habitat designation
for the 12 Hawai[revaps]i species is summarized below and available in
the screening analysis for the 12 Hawai[revaps]i species (IEc 2023a,
entire), available at https://www.regulations.gov.
In our economic screening analysis (IEc, 2023a, entire), we
identified probable incremental economic impacts associated with the
critical habitat designation of the 12 Hawai[revaps]i Island species
that have a Federal nexus (Service 2023o, entire). Because we are
designating as critical habitat one area (Cyanea marksii, Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei--Section 20 and Drosophila digressa--Unit 6) in
this final rule that is in addition to the designation we originally
proposed, we considered the economic impacts of the addition in our
final economic screening analysis and concluded that the total
incremental costs of this final critical habitat designation are not
expected to change relative to those projected for our proposed
designation (IEc 2023b, p. 1).
Critical habitat designation generally will not affect activities
that do not have any Federal involvement. Under section 7 of the Act,
Federal agencies are required to consult with the Service on activities
they fund, permit, or implement that may affect the species or its
critical habitat. When this final rule is effective (see DATES, above),
Federal agencies will be required to consider the effects of their
actions on the designated critical habitat of the 12 Hawai[revaps]i
Island species. If the Federal action may affect critical habitat, our
consultations will include measures to avoid the destruction or adverse
modification of critical habitat.
In our IEM, we distinguished between the economic effects that
result from the species being listed versus those attributable to the
critical habitat designation. The following specific circumstances in
this case help to inform our evaluation: (1) the essential physical or
biological features identified for critical habitat are the same
features essential for the life requisites of the species; and (2) any
actions that would likely adversely affect the essential physical or
biological features of critical habitat are also likely to adversely
affect any one of the 12 Hawai[revaps]i Island species, if present. In
general, most of the economic effects result from the listing of the
species in the first instance, rather than resulting from the
designation of critical habitat. The IEM outlines our rationale
concerning this limited distinction between baseline conservation
efforts resulting from the listing of the species and the incremental
impacts of the designation of critical habitat for these species. This
evaluation of the incremental effects has been used as the basis to
evaluate the probable incremental economic impacts of this designation
of critical habitat.
The critical habitat designation for the 12 Hawai[revaps]i Island
species includes 21 distinct areas, subdivided into 42 units, totaling
approximately 119,326 ac (48,289 ha). Lands within the designation are
under Federal (27 percent), State (69 percent) and private/other (4
percent) ownership. All units except one were occupied by one or more
of the 12 species at the time of listing. The single unoccupied unit
(Schiedea hawaiiensis--Section 19) is not located in the PTA, and any
incremental costs to minimize wildfire risk to Section 19 (Unit 55)
because of military training is dependent upon the U.S. Army's proposed
action to be described in their upcoming biological assessment.
Overall, the incremental costs of designating critical habitat for the
12 Hawai[revaps]i Island species are likely to be limited to additional
administrative effort to the consulting Federal agencies in conducting
the adverse modification analysis. This additional administrative
effort will be part of those section 7 consultations already required
because of the Federal action's effects to listed species.
The additional administrative effort associated with considering
critical

[[Page 17933]]

habitat during the section 7 consultation process was estimated using
data regarding level of effort needed in past consultations, including
efforts to provide technical assistance to Federal agencies short of
requiring consultation, as well as efforts involving informal and
formal consultation. We estimate up to six requests for technical
assistance, one informal consultation, and two formal consultations
annually over the next 10 years. The maximum annual cost associated
with these consultations is estimated not to exceed $48,000 (2022
dollars). Therefore, the annual administrative burden is not expected
to exceed the $200 million per year threshold that is considered
economically significant under Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, as amended
by E.O. 14094.
We anticipate that in general this critical habitat designation is
not likely to add to our recommendations for project modifications
during future section 7 consultations, as any such recommendations
would likely be as a result of considering effects to the species in
the first place. However, in some instances, we may recommend
modifications associated specifically with minimizing adverse effects
to the designated critical habitat in order to ensure the Federal
activities will not result in the destruction or adverse modification
of critical habitat.
For example, for activities with a Federal nexus that would involve
entry into critical habitat that is susceptible to rapid
[revaps][omacr]hi[revaps]a death (ROD), we anticipate recommending
disinfecting gear to limit the transmission of fungal pathogens
associated with ROD, and limiting trampling or damage to
[revaps][omacr]hi[revaps]a in native-dominated forest areas.
Disinfecting and other ROD control protocols are already part of best
practices promoted by the Service and widely adopted by other agencies
and conservation organizations. Therefore, such recommendations are
unlikely to result in incremental costs because they are already part
of standard protocols absent critical habitat.
In unpredictable cases, a Federal agency may need to act to save
human lives in response to volcanic activity or other such emergencies
involving acts of God, disasters, casualties, national defense or
security emergencies. In doing so this may result in effects to listed
species and critical habitat. We expect the Federal agency would use
the emergency consultation procedures available, including obtaining
technical advice and recommendations from the Service for minimizing
adverse effects during emergency response activities whenever possible,
and subsequently consulting with the Service (see 50 CFR 402.05). We
may determine that the emergency response may adversely modify critical
habitat and recommend restoration activities to address the damage to
habitat that would not be undertaken absent a critical habitat
designation. If time allows, the Service may also be involved in
designing the emergency response in order to minimize the potential for
adverse effects on critical habitat, for example, for emergency access
road placement. Data are not available to forecast costs associated
with modifications to activities or restoration actions following
emergency response efforts during volcanic activity or other
unpredictable events. Even if historical costs were available, the
incremental costs associated with any given emergency response activity
are likely to vary widely and be highly fact- and context-specific.
The probable incremental economic impacts of the critical habitat
designations for the 12 Hawai[revaps]i Island species are expected to
be limited to additional administrative effort as well as minor costs
of conservation efforts resulting from a small number of future section
7 consultations. This limited incremental economic impact is due to a
large portion (94 percent) of the critical habitat designation being
occupied by one or more of the 12 Hawai[revaps]i Island species and
thus would require consultation for the species anyway (regardless of
critical habitat), making additional incremental economic impacts of
critical habitat designation limited mostly to administrative costs. At
approximately $30,000 or less per consultation, the burden resulting
from the designation of critical habitat for the 12 Hawai[revaps]i
Island species, based on the anticipated annual number of consultations
and associated consultation costs, is not expected to exceed a total of
$48,000 in most years, across all affected parties, including the
Service and other Federal agencies, and any other involved party. These
costs incorporate requests for technical assistance and informal and
formal consultation. We are not aware of any State or local regulations
that would add additional requirements to private activities as a
result of the Federal designation of critical habitat. Thus, the annual
administrative burden is low.
Although we do not anticipate incremental costs outside of the
section 7 consultation process, additional incremental costs may occur
if landowners or buyers perceive that the designation of critical
habitat will restrict land or water use activities in some way and,
therefore, lower the value or use of the land. Although we acknowledge
the potential for these types of speculation-based costs, the
likelihood of these potential future effects is uncertain, and data
with which to estimate incremental costs are unavailable. Similarly,
there may be economic impacts associated with the perceived beneficial
effects of critical habitat on land values. However, the likelihood and
magnitude of those such effects are also uncertain.
In summary, while the specific costs of critical habitat
designation for the 12 Hawai[revaps]i Island species are subject to
uncertainty, it is unlikely that this rule will generate costs
exceeding $200 million in a single year. Therefore, this rule is
unlikely to meet the threshold for an economically significant rule,
with regard to costs, under E.O. 12866, as amended by E.O. 14094.
As discussed above, we considered the economic impacts of the
critical habitat designation, and the Secretary is not exercising her
discretion to exclude any areas from this designation of critical
habitat for the 12 Hawai[revaps]i species based on economic impacts.

Exclusions Based on Impacts on National Security and Homeland Security

In preparing this rule, we determined that there are no lands
within the designated critical habitat for the 12 Hawai[revaps]i
species that are owned or managed by the DoD or Department of Homeland
Security, and, therefore, we anticipate no impact on national security
or homeland security. We did not receive any additional information
during the public comment period for the proposed designation regarding
impacts of the designation on national security or homeland security
that would support excluding any specific areas from the final critical
habitat designation under authority of section 4(b)(2) and our
implementing regulations at 50 CFR 424.19, as well as the 2016 Policy.

Exclusions Based on Other Relevant Impacts

Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we consider any other relevant
impacts, in addition to economic impacts and impacts on national
security. To identify other relevant impacts that may affect the
exclusion analysis, we consider a number of factors, including whether
there are permitted conservation plans covering the species in the area
such as HCPs, safe harbor agreements (SHAs), or candidate conservation
agreements with assurances (CCAAs), or whether there are non-permitted
conservation

[[Page 17934]]

agreements and partnerships that would be encouraged by designation of,
or exclusion from, critical habitat. In addition, we look at whether
Native Hawaiian Community conservation plans or partnerships, Native
Hawaiian Organization resources, or government-to-government
relationships of the United States with indigenous entities may be
affected by the designation. We also consider any State, local, social,
or other impacts that might occur because of the designation.
When identifying the benefits of inclusion for an area, we consider
the additional regulatory benefits that area would receive due to the
protection from destruction or adverse modification as a result of
actions with a Federal nexus, the educational benefits of mapping
essential habitat for recovery of the listed species, and any benefits
that may result from a designation due to State or Federal laws that
may apply to critical habitat. In the case of the 12 Hawai[revaps]i
species, the benefits of critical habitat include public awareness of
the presence of these species and the importance of habitat protection,
and, where a Federal nexus exists, increased habitat protection for
these species due to the requirement to consult with the Service to
avoid destroying or adversely modifying critical habitat.
When identifying the benefits of exclusion, we consider, among
other things, whether exclusion of a specific area is likely to result
in conservation, or in the continuation, strengthening, or
encouragement of partnerships. Additionally, continued implementation
of an ongoing management plan that provides equal to or more
conservation than a critical habitat designation would reduce the
benefits of including that specific area in the critical habitat
designation.
We evaluate the existence of a conservation plan when considering
the benefits of inclusion. We consider a variety of factors, including,
but not limited to, whether the plan is finalized; how it provides for
the conservation of the essential physical or biological features;
whether there is a reasonable expectation that the conservation
management strategies and actions contained in a management plan will
be implemented into the future; whether the conservation strategies in
the plan are likely to be effective; and whether the plan contains a
monitoring program or adaptive management to ensure that the
conservation measures are effective and can be adapted in the future in
response to new information.
After identifying the benefits of inclusion and the benefits of
exclusion, we carefully weigh the two sides to evaluate whether the
benefits of exclusion outweigh those of inclusion. If our analysis
indicates that the benefits of exclusion outweigh the benefits of
inclusion, we then determine whether exclusion would result in
extinction of the species. If exclusion of an area from critical
habitat will result in extinction, we will not exclude it from the
designation.
We evaluated whether certain lands in the proposed critical habitat
designation are appropriate for exclusion from this final designation
under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. In our March 29, 2023, proposed rule
(88 FR 18756), we identified the areas we were considering for
exclusion based largely on their conservation management; we received
no additional requests from entities seeking additional exclusions in
comments on the proposed rule. If the analysis indicates that the
benefits of excluding lands from this final designation outweigh the
benefits of designating those lands as critical habitat, then the
Secretary may exercise her discretion to exclude those lands from the
final designation. In the paragraphs below, we provide our analysis of
the areas being excluded from this designation under section 4(b)(2) of
the Act.
Private or Other Non-Federal Conservation Plans or Agreements and
Partnerships, in General
We sometimes exclude specific areas from critical habitat
designations based in part on the existence of private or other non-
Federal conservation plans or agreements and their attendant
partnerships. A conservation plan or agreement describes actions that
are designed to provide for the conservation needs of a species and its
habitat and may include actions to reduce or mitigate negative effects
on the species caused by activities on or adjacent to the area covered
by the plan. Conservation plans or agreements can be developed by
private entities with no Service involvement or in partnership with the
Service.
We evaluate a variety of factors to determine how the benefits of
any exclusion and the benefits of inclusion are affected by the
existence of private or other non-Federal conservation plans or
agreements and their attendant partnerships when we undertake a
discretionary section 4(b)(2) exclusion analysis. A non-exhaustive list
of factors that we will consider for non-permitted plans or agreements
is shown below. These factors are not required elements of plans or
agreements, and all items may not apply to every plan or agreement.
a. The degree to which the record of the plan supports a conclusion
that a critical habitat designation would impair the realization of
benefits expected from the plan, agreement, or partnership.
b. The extent of public participation in the development of the
conservation plan.
c. The degree to which there has been agency review and required
determinations (e.g., State regulatory requirements), as necessary and
appropriate.
d. Whether National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321
et seq.) compliance was required.
e. The demonstrated implementation and success of the chosen
mechanism.
f. The degree to which the plan or agreement provides for the
conservation of the essential physical or biological features for the
species.
g. Whether there is a reasonable expectation that the conservation
management strategies and actions contained in the conservation plan or
agreement will be implemented.
h. Whether the plan or agreement contains a monitoring program and
adaptive management to ensure that the conservation measures are
effective and can be modified in the future in response to new
information.
Watershed Partnerships--One factor we considered in our exclusion
analysis is whether the landowner participates in a watershed
partnership. In 2003, the State of Hawaii formally established the
Hawai[revaps]i Association of Watershed Partnerships, which consists of
more than 60 public and private landowners throughout the State; these
landowners are committed to long-term protection and conservation of
watershed areas. These watershed partnerships each have a conservation
management plan that is updated every several years to include
measurable objectives and a budget. Financial support for the watershed
partnerships includes various long-term State funds and other Federal
and private sources. Of the 10 watershed partnerships in operation, 3
have lands within the critical habitat designation: Mauna Kea Watershed
Alliance, Kohala Watershed Alliance, and Three Mountain Alliance. These
watershed partnerships fund and conduct conservation efforts, including
ungulate control and removal, and invasive weed management, that
support one or more of the 12 Hawai[revaps]i Island species. The
specific management plan associated with each watershed alliance or
partnership is described in ``Non-

[[Page 17935]]

Permitted Conservation Plans, Agreements, or Partnerships,'' below.
Private or Other Non-Federal Conservation Plans Related to Permits
Under Section 10 of the Act
HCPs for incidental take permits under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the
Act provide for partnerships with non-Federal entities to minimize and
mitigate impacts to listed species and their habitat. In some cases,
HCP permittees agree to do more for the conservation of the species and
their habitats on private lands than designation of critical habitat
would provide alone. We place great value on the partnerships that are
developed during the preparation and implementation of HCPs.
CCAAs and SHAs are voluntary agreements designed to conserve
candidate and listed species, respectively, on non-Federal lands. In
exchange for actions that contribute to the conservation of species on
non-Federal lands, participating property owners are covered by an
``enhancement of survival'' permit under section 10(a)(1)(A) of the
Act, which authorizes incidental take of the covered species that may
result from implementation of conservation actions, specific land uses,
and, in the case of SHAs, the option to return to a baseline condition
under the agreements. We also provide enrollees assurances that we will
not impose further land-, water-, or resource-use restrictions, or
require additional commitments of land, water, or finances, beyond
those agreed to in the agreements.
When we undertake a discretionary section 4(b)(2) exclusion
analysis, we will always consider areas covered by an approved CCAA/
SHA/HCP, and we anticipate consistently excluding such areas if
incidental take caused by the activities in those areas is covered by
the permit under section 10 of the Act and the CCAA/SHA/HCP meets all
of the following three factors (see the 2016 Policy for additional
details):
a. The permittee is properly implementing the CCAA/SHA/HCP and is
expected to continue to do so for the term of the agreement. A CCAA/
SHA/HCP is properly implemented if the permittee is, and has been,
fully implementing the commitments and provisions in the CCAA/SHA/HCP,
implementing agreement, and permit.
b. The species for which critical habitat is being designated is a
covered species in the CCAA/SHA/HCP, or very similar in its habitat
requirements to a covered species. The recognition that we extend to
such an agreement depends on the degree to which the conservation
measures undertaken in the CCAA/SHA/HCP would also protect the habitat
features of the similar species.
c. The CCAA/SHA/HCP specifically addresses the habitat of the
species for which critical habitat is being designated and meets the
conservation needs of the species in the planning area.
The critical habitat designation as proposed included areas that
are covered by the following permitted plan providing for the
conservation of 7 of the 12 Hawai[revaps]i Island species, as specified
below:
Safe Harbor Agreement Trustees of the Estate of Bernice P. Bishop,
DBA, Kamehameha Schools Keauhou and K[imacr]lauea Forest Lands
Hawai[revaps]i Island, Hawai[revaps]i (Kamehameha Schools Keauhou and
K[imacr]lauea Forest Lands Safe Harbor Agreement), June 2017--The
permit holder for this SHA is Kamehameha Schools. Kamehameha Schools
was established in 1887, through the will of Princess Bernice Pauahi
Paki Bishop. Kamehameha Schools owns more than 362,000 ac (146,496 ha)
of land throughout Hawaii, and part of Kamehameha Schools' mission is
to protect Hawaii's environment through recognition of the significant
cultural value of this land and its unique flora and fauna. In 2017,
the SHA was approved by the Service and Hawaii Department of Land and
Natural Resources for the Kamehameha School's Keauhou and K[imacr]lauea
Forest lands, which comprise 32,280 ac (13,063 ha) on the east slope of
Mauna Loa Volcano, on the island of Hawai[revaps]i.
Under the SHA, koa (Acacia koa) tree silviculture will be
conducted, including stand improvement through selective harvest and
establishment of new or improvement of existing forest in formerly
logged areas and degraded pasture lands (Kamehameha Schools 2017, pp.
22-23). The conservation actions of Kamehameha Schools benefit habitat
for Cyanea tritomantha, Cyrtandra wagneri, Phyllostegia floribunda,
Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne
cranwelliae, and Drosophila digressa by promoting forest regeneration,
which increases soil-water retention capacity and improves ecosystem
resilience to drying climate conditions; controlling feral ungulates,
which reduces trampling of and predation on these plants, including the
host plants of Drosophila digressa; controlling weeds, which improves
recruitment of native trees, including those that host Drosophila
digressa; and taking actions that reduce the incidence of fire, which
benefits forest habitat for these species by minimizing damage to that
habitat by wildfire.
We considered the following areas for exclusion from the critical
habitat designation on Hawai[revaps]i Island based on this permitted
plan:
Plant Unit 51 and Drosophila digressa--Unit 2--The Kamehameha
Schools are responsible for 93 ac (38 ha) of land included in the
proposed critical habitat designation for Unit 51 which overlap a
portion of Drosophila digressa--Unit 2. Conservation management actions
on these lands occur under the Kamehameha Schools Keauhou and
K[imacr]lauea Forest Lands SHA. This SHA is implemented effectively;
specifically addresses habitat for Cyanea tritomantha, Cyrtandra
wagneri, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae, and Drosophila digressa;
and meets the conservation needs for these species in the planning
area. In addition to this SHA, this area in Unit 51 is also covered
under two non-permitted conservation plans, the Kamehameha Schools
[revaps][Amacr]ina Pauahi Natural Resources Management Program and the
Three Mountain Alliance Management Plan (as described below). Both non-
permitted conservation plans are summarized below in ``Non-Permitted
Conservation Plans, Agreements, or Partnerships.'' We provide a
detailed balancing analysis for 93 ac (38 ha) in Unit 51 and Drosophila
digressa--Unit 2 for exclusion from the final critical habitat
designation because conservation actions occurring on the ground,
including forest restoration, fire control measures, ungulate fence
installation and maintenance, and control of invasive introduced
plants, provide a conservation benefit to 7 of the 12 Hawai[revaps]i
Island species, as specified below.
Non-Permitted Conservation Plans, Agreements, or Partnerships
Shown below is a non-exhaustive list of factors that we consider in
evaluating how non-permitted plans or agreements affect the benefits of
inclusion or exclusion. These are not required elements of plans or
agreements. Rather, they are some of the factors we may consider, and
not all of these factors apply to every plan or agreement.
(i) The degree to which the record of the plan, or information
provided by proponents of an exclusion, supports a conclusion that a
critical habitat designation would impair the realization of the
benefits expected from the plan, agreement, or partnership.

[[Page 17936]]

(ii) The extent of public participation in the development of the
conservation plan.
(iii) The degree to which agency review and required determinations
(e.g., State regulatory requirements) have been completed, as necessary
and appropriate.
(iv) Whether NEPA compliance was required.
(v) The demonstrated implementation and success of the chosen
mechanism.
(vi) The degree to which the plan or agreement provides for the
conservation of the physical or biological features that are essential
to the conservation of the species.
(vii) Whether there is a reasonable expectation that the
conservation management strategies and actions contained in a
management plan or agreement will be implemented.
(viii) Whether the plan or agreement contains a monitoring program
and adaptive management to ensure that the conservation measures are
effective and can be modified in the future in response to new
information.
The critical habitat designation includes areas that are covered by
the following non-permitted plans providing for the conservation of one
or more of the 12 Hawai[revaps]i Island species as specified below:
I. Watershed Partnerships
a. Mauna Kea Watershed Alliance and the Mauna Kea Watershed Management
Plan
The Mauna Kea Watershed Alliance Watershed Partnership is a
coalition of private and public landowners and supporting agencies
working to protect and restore watershed areas on Mauna Kea Volcano,
Hawai[revaps]i (Mauna Kea Watershed Alliance 2022, entire). Lands that
are managed by the Mauna Kea Watershed Alliance include more than
500,000 ac (202,343 ha) on Mauna Kea Volcano on the island of
Hawai[revaps]i. The Mauna Kea Watershed Alliance's shared vision is to
protect and enhance watershed ecosystems, biodiversity, and natural
resources through responsible management while promoting economic
sustainability and providing recreational, subsistence, educational,
and research opportunities. Staff of the Mauna Kea Watershed Alliance
work cooperatively with landowners of the alliance to achieve this
shared vision. Accordingly, fencing and ungulate control, control of
introduced plants that are invasive, and reforestation efforts are
conducted on lands within the Mauna Kea Watershed Alliance (Stewart
2010, p. viii). Ungulate control benefits habitat for Cyanea
tritomantha, Cyrtandra wagneri, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia
floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei,
Stenogyne cranwelliae, and Drosophila digressa by reducing the
trampling of and predation on these plants, including the host plants
of Drosophila digressa, leading to improved forest regeneration.
Nonnative plant control improves recruitment of native trees, including
host plants of Drosophila digressa, and reforestation provides greater
areas of native plant associations that contribute to habitat and
increases soil-water retention capacity, improving ecosystem resilience
to drying climate conditions.
b. Kohala Watershed Partnership and the Kohala Mountain Watershed
Management Plan
The Kohala Watershed Partnership is a coalition of private and
public landowners and supporting agencies whose goal is to show
improvements in water and environmental quality by enabling
comprehensive and sustainable watershed management projects that
address the threats to the watershed, while maintaining its integrity
and protecting its economic, socio-cultural, and ecological resources
(Kohala Watershed Partnership (KWP) 2007, p. 3). Lands that are managed
by Kohala Mountain Watershed Management Plan include approximately
68,000 ac (27,519 ha) of forest and grass lands on the windward and
leeward slopes of the Kohala Volcano on the island of Hawai[revaps]i
(KWP 2007, p. 3). Conservation measures of this plan benefit habitat
for Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana, Cyanea tritomantha,
Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense,
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and Stenogyne cranwelliae by promoting
native forest and shrubland regeneration and increasing soil-water
retention capacity through control of feral ungulates and weed control
that improves recruitment of native trees and shrubs. Wildfire
management and response benefits coastal habitat, forest, and shrubland
habitats used by these species by minimizing fire damage (KWP 2007, pp.
62-82).
c. Three Mountain Alliance Watershed Partnership and the Three Mountain
Alliance Management Plan
The Three Mountain Alliance Watershed Partnership is a coalition of
private and public landowners and supporting agencies that are working
to protect and restore watershed areas on Hawai[revaps]i Island (Three
Mountain Alliance Management Plan (TMA) 2007, entire). Lands that are
managed by the Three Mountain Alliance are 1,116,300 ac (451,751 ha) on
Mauna Loa, K[imacr]lauea, and Hual[amacr]lai volcanoes or roughly 45
percent of the island of Hawai[revaps]i. Project funding for the Three
Mountain Alliance currently comes from Three Mountain Alliance members
(primarily the Service, Hawaiis DOFAW, and Kamehameha Schools) and
outside grants. Other Three Mountain Alliance members provide in-kind
services to accomplish priority projects, for example, inmate labor or
sharing personnel and equipment (TMA 2007, p. 56). Management under the
Three Mountain Alliance Management Plan includes the following
conservation actions: (1) strategic fencing and removal of ungulates;
(2) regular monitoring for ungulates after fencing; (3) monitoring of
habitat recovery; (4) surveys for rare taxa prior to new fence
installations; (5) invasive, nonnative plant control; (6)
reestablishment of native plant species; and (7) activities to reduce
the threat of wildfire. Ungulate control reduces damage to native
forests, including to host plants of Drosophila digressa; control of
nonnative, invasive plants and out-planting of native plants, including
host plants of Drosophila digressa, improves recruitment of native
trees; and fire suppression activities reduce the damage from wildfires
to habitats used by Cyanea marksii, Cyanea tritomantha, Cyrtandra
wagneri, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae, and Drosophila digressa.
II. Other Partnerships
a. Parker Ranch Sustainable Forestry Initiative
Parker Ranch was founded in 1847, and currently encompasses more
than 100,000 ac (40,469 ha) of land in the Hamakua, North Kohala, and
South Kohala Districts on Mauna Kea and the Kohala Mountains on the
island of Hawai[revaps]i. Parker Ranch recognizes forest health as a
key indicator of overall ecosystem health and, as result, announced in
2021 that it is seeking to collaborate with public and private partners
to develop sustainable forestry programs on its lands (Parker Ranch
2021, entire).
For its Waipunalei lands on the eastern slope of Mauna Kea, Parker
Ranch is developing a sustainable forestry program and is seeking to
rehabilitate forest areas damaged by cattle grazing. In 2021, Parker
Ranch fenced the Waipunalei Forestry Unit, a 1,500-ac (607-ha) parcel,
and is removing feral grazing animals.

[[Page 17937]]

Waipunalei is managed to reduce threats to the native forest ecosystem
and increase native forest canopy. Over the next 3 years, thousands of
native seedlings will be planted, and weeds will be controlled across
approximately 650 ac (263 ha) within the Waipunalei Forestry Unit
(Parker Ranch 2023, pers. comm.).
For its Waiemi lands on the Kohala Mountains, Parker Ranch is
providing essential access and support to the State Department of Land
and Natural Resources for priority watershed projects in Pu`u o Umi
Natural Area Reserve and is supporting erosion control efforts above
Pelekane Bay (Parker Ranch 2021, pers. comm.).
Additionally, Parker Ranch is a member of the Mauna Kea Watershed
Alliance (see ``a. Mauna Kea Watershed Alliance and the Mauna Kea
Watershed Management Plan,'' above). Koa forestry benefits forest
habitat used by Cyanea tritomantha, Cyrtandra wagneri, Melicope remyi,
Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae, and Drosophila digressa by establishing
new or improving forest in formerly logged areas and degraded pasture
lands, increasing soil-water retention capacity, and improving
ecosystem resilience to drying climate conditions through control of
feral ungulates and weed control that improves recruitment of native
trees, including the host plants of Drosophila digressa.
b. Kamehameha Schools [revaps][Amacr]ina Pauahi Natural Resources
Management Program
Kamehameha Schools owns more than 362,000 ac (146,496 ha) of land
throughout Hawai[revaps]i. Part of Kamehameha Schools' mission is to
protect Hawaii's environment through recognition of the significant
cultural value of this land and its unique flora and fauna.
Accordingly, Kamehameha Schools established a sustainable stewardship
policy to guide the use of its lands through their [revaps][Amacr]ina
Pauahi Natural Resources Management Program that includes the
protection and conservation of natural resources, water resources, and
ancestral places (Kamehameha Schools 2022, entire).
Between 2000 and 2015, Kamehameha Schools increased active
stewardship of native ecosystems by over 35-fold, from 3,000 ac (1,124
ha) to 136,000 ac (55,037 ha); engaged in community collaborations to
leverage external resources in support of culturally appropriate land
stewardship; and developed and implemented its 2012 natural resource
and cultural resource management plans representing Kamehameha Schools'
responsibility to conduct prudent stewardship of the [revaps][amacr]ina
(land). Kamehameha Schools manages some of its forested lands for
income generation through sustainable koa and [revaps]iliahi or
sandalwood (Santalum album) forestry and collaborates with county and
other landowners in fire response planning to protect natural resources
from fires. Fire suppression protects native forests and shrubland
habitats from wildfire. These actions promote regeneration of native
forests that support the 12 Hawai`i Island species.
c. Department of Hawaiian Home Lands [revaps][Amacr]ina Mauna Legacy
Program
The Department of Hawaiian Home Lands is governed by the Hawaiian
Homes Commission Act of 1920, enacted by the U.S. Congress to protect
and improve the lives of native Hawaiians. The Hawaiian Homes
Commission Act of 1920 created a Hawaiian Homes Commission to
administer certain public lands, called Hawaiian homelands, for native
Hawaiian homesteads. These lands are not considered public lands in the
general sense. The primary responsibilities of the Department of
Hawaiian Home Lands are to serve its beneficiaries and to manage its
extensive land trust, which consists of more than 200,000 ac (80,937
ha) on the islands of Hawai[revaps]i, Maui, Moloka[revaps]i,
L[amacr]na[revaps]i, O[revaps]ahu, and Kaua[revaps]i.
The goal of the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands'
[revaps][Amacr]ina Mauna Legacy Program is to restore and protect
approximately 56,000 ac (22,662 ha) of native Hawaiian forest on Mauna
Kea Volcano on the island of Hawai[revaps]i that is ecologically,
culturally, and economically self-sustaining for the Hawaiian Home
Lands Trust, its beneficiaries, and the community (Department of
Hawaiian Home Lands 2009, p. 7). The Department of Hawaiian Home Lands
[revaps][Amacr]ina Mauna Legacy Program describes activities to be
conducted on Department of Hawaiian Home Lands lands over the next 100
years, including native forest restoration and sustainable koa
forestry; invasive plant control and remnant invasive species
eradication; nonnative wildlife control and management (i.e., feral
ungulate control); road system, fencing, and water systems
infrastructure development and maintenance; and research and community
outreach.
Some forest areas in lands managed under the [revaps][Amacr]ina
Mauna Legacy Program are degraded by a history of cattle grazing. Koa
tree silviculture is in initial stages and will be conducted (at least
during the next 100 years) on lands under this management designation,
including stand improvement through selective harvest and establishment
of new or improved forest in formerly logged areas and degraded pasture
lands. Koa silviculture benefits habitat for the 12 species addressed
in this final critical habitat designation by establishing new or
improved forest, increasing soil-water retention capacity, and
improving ecosystem resilience to drying climate conditions. Ungulate
control reduces damage to [revaps][omacr]hi[revaps]a forests, maintains
forest health, and prevents ungulates from degrading habitat for the 12
species addressed in this final critical habitat designation. Control
of nonnative, invasive plants and out-planting of native plants
improves recruitment of native trees.
d. The Nature Conservancy Forest Stewardship Management Plan for the
Kona Hema Preserve
The Nature Conservancy Kona Hema Preserve was established in 1999,
in the South Kona District of the island of Hawai[revaps]i. It is
comprised of 8,076 ac (3,268 ha) in four management units. The
management program for Kona Hema Preserve is documented in The Nature
Conservancy's Forest Stewardship Management Plan for the Kona Hema
Preserve, which details management measures to protect, restore, and
enhance rare plants and animals and their habitats within the preserve
and in adjacent areas (The Nature Conservancy 2017, entire).
The primary management goals for the Kona Hema Preserve are to: (1)
prevent degradation of native forest and shrubland by reducing feral
ungulate damage; (2) improve or maintain the integrity of native
ecosystems in selected areas of the preserve by reducing the effects of
nonnative plants; (3) conduct small mammal control and reduce the
negative impacts of small mammals where possible; (4) monitor and track
the biological and physical resources in the preserve, evaluate changes
in these resources over time, and encourage biological and
environmental research; (5) prevent extinction of rare species in the
preserve; (6) build public understanding and support for the
preservation of natural areas, and enlist volunteer assistance for
preserve management; and (7) protect the resources from fires in and
around the preserve. Ungulate control reduces damage to
[revaps][omacr]hi[revaps]a forests, maintains forest health, and
prevents ungulates from degrading habitat for the 12 species addressed
in this final critical habitat designation. Fire suppression reduces
the damage from wildfires and provides protection for

[[Page 17938]]

forest and shrubland habitat. Invasive plant control improves
recruitment of native trees, and small mammal control, particularly rat
(Rattus spp.) control, reduces the potential for seed predation by rats
on the plant species addressed in this final critical habitat
designation.
Permitted and Non-Permitted Plans in Critical Habitat Units
The Nature Conservancy manages 986 ac (399 ha) of land in plant
Unit 41 and Drosophila digressa--Unit 5 that we identified as lands we
were considering for exclusion in our March 29, 2023, proposed rule (88
FR 18756). The Nature Conservancy benefits habitat of Cyanea marksii,
Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei, and Stenogyne cranwelliae, in plant Unit 41, and Drosophila
digressa in Drosophila digressa--Unit 5, with conservation and
management activities through The Nature Conservancy's Forest
Stewardship Management Plan for the Kona Hema Preserve, and the Three
Mountain Alliance Watershed Partnership and the Three Mountain Alliance
Management Plan, described above. The Nature Conservancy lands in plant
Unit 41 and Drosophila digressa--Unit 5 are within their Kona Hema
Preserve, where they are actively conducting ungulate removal and
native forest restoration, including invasive weed removal, to improve
the habitat for all six species listed above.
We had considered excluding the 986-ac (399-ha) parcel of Nature
Conservancy land in plant Unit 41 and Drosophila digressa--Unit 5, but
during the comment period on our March 29, 2023, proposed rule (88 FR
18756), we received a request from The Nature Conservancy to include
their 986-ac (399-ha) parcel in our final critical habitat designation,
rather than exclude it. The Nature Conservancy expects that the
inclusion of their Kona Hema Preserve lands in this final critical
habitat designation will increase their potential to develop
partnerships and implement conservation in the future for these species
or for other federally listed and sensitive species in neighboring
parcels.
Therefore, because the 986 ac (399 ha) owned by The Nature
Conservancy in plant Unit 41 and Drosophila digressa--Unit 5 meets the
definition of critical habitat for Cyanea marksii, Phyllostegia
floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei,
Stenogyne cranwelliae, and Drosophila digressa, and The Nature
Conservancy supports the inclusion of their parcel in our designation,
we are including this parcel in our final critical habitat designation
without further investigation into potential benefits from excluding
it.
In the following discussion, we describe each of the parcels by
landowner where we have conducted a balancing analysis and evaluated
the benefits of inclusion in the critical habitat designation, the
benefits of exclusion, our determination of whether the benefits of
exclusion or inclusion are greater, and if exclusion would result in
the extinction of the species. Specifically, we explain the benefit to
the species of the watershed partnerships, permitted plans, or other
non-permitted conservation plans, agreements, or partnerships, as well
as other conservation actions implemented on certain lands that we have
included in our balancing analysis and how the non-permitted
conservation or management plans satisfy the non-exhaustive list of
factors provided above under ``Non-Permitted Conservation Plans,
Agreements, or Partnerships'' that we may choose to consider in our
evaluation. We indicate the acreage in each unit that we are excluding
from the critical habitat designation based on our analysis.
I. Parker Ranch Lands
Parker Ranch manages two parcels of land (403 ac (163 ha) and 372
ac (151 ha)) in Units 52 and 54, respectively. These parcels were
identified as lands we were considering for exclusion in our March 29,
2023, proposed rule (88 FR 18756). As stated in table 3, the boundary
for Drosophila digressa--Unit 1 is identical to Section 1 (plant Units
3 and 52, combined).
In the March 29, 2023, proposed rule, we reference an additional
area of 547 ac (221 ha) in plant Unit 3 that is owned and managed by
Parker Ranch but would not be considered for exclusion because it
overlaps with existing critical habitat already designated for other
species. During that proposed rule's public comment period, we held
several meetings with Parker Ranch to answer questions regarding the
critical habitat designation and obtain additional information
concerning the management of their lands. During those discussions,
Parker Ranch was supportive of the exclusion of their lands we were
considering in Units 52 and 54, and was not interested in having the
remaining 547 ac (221 ha) that are already designated for other species
be a part of that exclusion. Further, we received no subsequent request
from Parker Ranch that the 547-ac (221-ha) area be excluded, and
therefore it remains in this final critical habitat designation.
Conservation and management activities on Parker Ranch lands in
Units 52 and 54, as well as Drosophila digressa--Unit 1, include those
associated with Parker Ranch's Sustainable Forestry Initiative and
Mauna Kea Watershed Alliance (see ``a. Parker Ranch Sustainable
Forestry Initiative'' under II. Other Partnerships and ``a. Mauna Kea
Watershed Alliance and the Mauna Kea Watershed Management Plan'' under
I. Watership Partnerships, above). Conservation measures of Parker
Ranch, through its Sustainable Forestry Initiative, benefit habitat for
all species within Units 52 and 54 including Cyanea tritomantha,
Cyrtandra wagneri, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae, and
Drosophila digressa.
Parker Ranch lands in Unit 52 are within their Waipunalei Forestry
Unit, where Parker Ranch is actively conducting ungulate removal and
native forest restoration, including invasive weed removal to support
the habitat for all eight species within Unit 52. In Unit 54, within
its Waiemi lands, Parker Ranch is providing essential access and
support to the Hawaii State Department of Land and Natural Resources
for priority watershed projects in Pu[revaps]u o Umi Natural Area
Reserve and is supporting erosion control efforts above Pelekane Bay
(Parker Ranch 2021, pers. comm.). Additionally, Parker Ranch is a
member of the Mauna Kea Watershed Alliance (see ``a. Mauna Kea
Watershed Alliance and the Mauna Kea Watershed Management Plan'' under
I. Watership Partnerships, above). Parker Ranch's koa forestry
activities benefit forest habitat used by Cyanea tritomantha, Cyrtandra
wagneri, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae, and
Drosophila digressa by establishing new or improved forest in formerly
logged areas and degraded pasture lands, increasing soil-water
retention capacity, and improving ecosystem resilience to drying
climate conditions through control of feral ungulates and weed control
that improves recruitment of native trees, including the host plants of
Drosophila digressa.
Based on Parker Ranch's management, Parker Ranch's Sustainable
Forestry Initiative and participation in the Mauna Kea Watershed
Alliance, we evaluated 403 ac (163 ha) in Unit 52 and Drosophila
digressa--Unit 1, and 372 ac (151 ha) in Unit 54, of lands owned by
Parker Ranch to determine if excluding these lands from the final
critical habitat designation is appropriate.

[[Page 17939]]

Benefits of Inclusion--Parker Ranch
The principal benefit of including an area in critical habitat
designation is the requirement under section 7(a)(2) of the Act that
Federal agencies ensure, in consultation with the Service, that actions
that they fund, authorize, or carry out are not likely to result in the
destruction or adverse modification of any designated critical habitat.
Federal agencies must also consult with the Service on actions that may
affect a listed species and refrain from actions that are likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of such species. If the Service
determines that the Federal action is likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of the species, or result in the destruction or
adverse modification of critical habitat, it will identify reasonable
and prudent alternatives to the Federal action to avoid such results.
The Service's analysis of effects to critical habitat (to determine
whether destruction or adverse modification is likely) is a separate
and different analysis from the Service's analysis of the effects to
the species to determine whether jeopardy to the species is likely.
Therefore, the difference in outcomes of these two analyses represents
the regulatory benefit of critical habitat.
For some actions, the outcome of these analyses will be similar,
because effects from a Federal action to habitat will often also result
in effects to the species. However, the regulatory standards are
distinct for each. For the jeopardy analysis, the Service evaluates
whether the action reasonably would be expected, directly or
indirectly, to reduce appreciably the likelihood of both the survival
and recovery of a listed species in the wild by reducing the
reproduction, numbers, or distribution of that species. For the
destruction or adverse modification analysis for critical habitat, the
Service evaluates whether the action results in a direct or indirect
alteration that appreciably diminishes the value of critical habitat as
a whole for the conservation of the listed species. Thus, the critical
habitat designation can confer additional protection to a species other
than listing alone, particularly if the proposed Federal action does
not itself impact individuals of the species, but does impact its
critical habitat. Therefore, critical habitat designation may provide a
regulatory benefit for Cyanea tritomantha, Cyrtandra wagneri, Melicope
remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae, and Drosophila digressa on
lands owned by Parker Ranch in plant Units 52 and 54, and Drosophila
digressa--Unit 1.
Another possible benefit of including lands in critical habitat is
public education regarding the potential conservation value of an area
that may help focus conservation efforts on areas of high conservation
value for certain species. We consider any information about Cyanea
tritomantha, Cyrtandra wagneri, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia
floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei,
Stenogyne cranwelliae, and Drosophila digressa and their habitat that
reaches a wide audience, including parties engaged in conservation
activities, to be valuable. Designation of critical habitat would
provide educational benefits by informing Federal agencies and the
public about the presence of the species in these units.
Therefore, because activities with a Federal nexus will require
section 7 consultations, and because of the occurrence of these species
on Parker Ranch lands, it is expected that there may be some, but
limited, benefits from including Parker Ranch lands in plant Units 52
and 54, and in Drosophila digressa--Unit 1, in the critical habitat
designation. The principal benefit of any designated critical habitat
is that activities in and affecting such habitat require consultation
under section 7 of the Act. Such consultation would ensure that
adequate protection is provided to avoid destruction or adverse
modification of critical habitat.
Benefits of Exclusion--Parker Ranch
The benefits of excluding two parcels--one in plant Unit 52 and
Drosophila digressa--Unit 1 (403 ac (163 ha)) and the other in plant
Unit 54 (372 ac (151ha))--owned by Parker Ranch from this designation
of critical habitat include: (1) the continued implementation of
conservation plans (Parker Ranch's Sustainable Forestry Initiative and
the Mauna Kea Watershed Management Plan) that include actions that
benefit Cyanea tritomantha, Cyrtandra wagneri, Melicope remyi,
Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae, and Drosophila digressa; (2)
strengthening of our effective partnership with Parker Ranch and other
neighboring landowners to promote voluntary, proactive conservation of
Cyanea tritomantha, Cyrtandra wagneri, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia
floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei,
Stenogyne cranwelliae, and Drosophila digressa and their habitats; (3)
allowance for continued meaningful collaboration and cooperation in
working toward species recovery, including conservation benefits that
might not otherwise occur; and (4) encouragement of developing and
implementing conservation and management plans in the future for these
species or other federally listed and sensitive species.
In some cases, the designation of critical habitat on (or adjacent
to) private lands may reduce the likelihood that landowners will
support and carry out conservation actions (Main et al. 1999, pp.
1,263-1,265; Bean 1998, p. 10706). The magnitude of this negative
outcome is amplified in situations where active management measures
(such as reintroduction, fire management, and control of invasive
species) are necessary for species conservation (Bean 1998, pp. 10706-
10708). We find that the exclusion of these specific areas of non-
federally owned lands from this critical habitat designation can
contribute to the species' recovery and provide a superior level of
conservation than critical habitat designation can provide alone. We
have also found that, where consistent with the discretion provided by
the Act, it is necessary to implement policies that provide positive
incentives to private landowners to voluntarily conserve natural
resources and that remove or reduce disincentives to conservation
(Wilcove et al. 1996, pp. 1-15; Bean 1998, entire). Additionally,
partnerships with non-Federal landowners are vital to the conservation
of these species, especially on non-Federal lands; therefore, the
Service is committed to supporting and encouraging such partnerships
through the recognition of positive conservation contributions.
Excluding lands owned and managed by Parker Ranch in plant Unit 52
and Drosophila digressa--Unit 1, and in plant Unit 54, from critical
habitat will help foster the partnerships the landowners and land
managers have developed with Federal and State agencies and local
conservation organizations, will encourage the continued implementation
of voluntary conservation actions for the benefit of the species and
their habitats on these lands, and may also serve as a model and aid in
fostering future cooperative relationships with other parties here and
in other locations for the benefit of other endangered or threatened
species. Therefore, we consider the positive effect of excluding from
critical habitat areas managed by active conservation partners to be a
significant benefit of exclusion.

[[Page 17940]]

Benefits of Exclusion Outweigh the Benefits of Inclusion--Parker Ranch
We evaluated approximately 403 ac (163 ha) in Unit 52 and
Drosophila digressa--Unit 1, and 372 ac (151 ha) in Unit 54, owned by
Parker Ranch for exclusion from this designation of critical habitat.
We determined the benefits of excluding these lands outweigh the
benefits of including them as critical habitat for 12 species on
Hawai[revaps]i Island. While Parker Ranch may receive Federal grants
(actions which carry a Federal nexus) occasionally, all areas of Parker
Ranch lands being evaluated for exclusion are occupied by one or more
of the 12 species addressed in this final rule. Because these areas are
occupied, the few section 7 consultations that may occur would include
an analysis of the effects to the species under the jeopardy analysis,
as described above. We expect that conservation measures that the
Service would consider in addressing effects to the species under a
jeopardy analysis would be very similar to those to address effects to
the critical habitat under an adverse modification analysis. As such,
we conclude that the additional regulatory and educational benefits of
including these lands as critical habitat are relatively small because
of the limited distinction between actions to avoid jeopardy and
adverse modification. These marginal regulatory benefits of inclusion
are further reduced by the existence of conservation plans and
implemented actions, which include habitat conservation that addresses
the special management considerations. Furthermore, the potential
educational and informational benefits of critical habitat designation
on areas of the Parker Ranch containing the physical and biological
features essential to the conservation of Cyanea tritomantha, Cyrtandra
wagneri, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae, and
Drosophila digressa would be minimal because the landowners have
demonstrated their knowledge of the species and their habitat needs in
the process of developing conservation partnerships with the Service
and others.
In contrast, the benefits derived from excluding the lands owned by
Parker Ranch and enhancing our partnership with this landowner are
significant. Because voluntary conservation efforts for the benefit of
listed species on non-Federal lands are so valuable, the Service
considers the maintenance and encouragement of conservation
partnerships to be a significant benefit of exclusion. The development
and maintenance of effective working partnerships with non-Federal
landowners for the conservation of listed species is particularly
important in Hawaii, a State with relatively little Federal land
ownership but many species of conservation concern. Excluding these
areas on the Parker Ranch from critical habitat will help foster the
partnerships Parker Ranch has developed with Federal and State agencies
and local conservation organizations, and will encourage the continued
implementation of voluntary conservation actions for the benefit of
Cyanea tritomantha, Cyrtandra wagneri, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia
floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei,
Stenogyne cranwelliae, and Drosophila digressa and their habitats.
The current active conservation efforts on Parker Ranch lands in
Unit 52 (Drosophila digressa--Unit 1) and Unit 54 benefit these
species, satisfying factor (vi) of the section 4(b)(2) exclusion
analysis, as described above under ``Non-Permitted Conservation Plans,
Agreements, or Partnerships.'' The partnerships and management plans
are longstanding and have demonstrated implementation and success, and
we have a reasonable expectation that the conservation management
strategies or actions in the plans will be implemented, satisfying
factors (v) and (vii) described above under ``Non-Permitted
Conservation Plans, Agreements, or Partnerships.'' The Parker Ranch's
Sustainable Forestry Initiative and the Mauna Kea Watershed Management
Plan include multiple objectives that satisfy factor (viii) described
above under ``Non-Permitted Conservation Plans, Agreements, or
Partnerships'' by promoting monitoring and adaptive management to
ensure conservation measures are effective. In addition, these
partnerships not only provide a benefit for the conservation of these
species but may also serve as a model and aid in fostering future
cooperative relationships with other parties in these areas of Hawai`i
and in other locations for the benefit of other endangered or
threatened species.
Management by Parker Ranch through participation in the Mauna Kea
Watershed Management Plan and implementation of their Sustainable
Forestry Initiative provides significant habitat protection for Cyanea
tritomantha, Cyrtandra wagneri, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia
floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei,
Stenogyne cranwelliae, and Drosophila digressa. We find that excluding
areas from critical habitat that are under these long-term conservation
and management plans to protect the habitat that supports these species
will preserve our partnership with Parker Ranch in the State of Hawaii
and will encourage future collaboration towards conservation and
recovery of listed species. In summary, these partnership benefits to
the subject species outweigh the small potential regulatory,
educational, and ancillary benefits of including Parker Ranch lands in
this final critical habitat designation.
Exclusion Will Not Result in Extinction of the Species--Parker Ranch
We determined that the exclusion of approximately 403 ac (163 ha)
in Unit 52 and Drosophila digressa--Unit 1, and 372 ac (151 ha) in Unit
54, owned by Parker Ranch from this designation of critical habitat
will not result in the extinction of Cyanea tritomantha, Cyrtandra
wagneri, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae, or
Drosophila digressa. Protections afforded to these species based on
their listed status, and afforded to their habitats by the management
and conservation plans, provide assurances that these species will not
go extinct as a result of excluding these lands from the critical
habitat designation.
An important consideration as we evaluate these exclusions and
their potential effect on the species in question is that a critical
habitat designation does not necessarily require affirmative actions to
restore or actively manage critical habitat for the benefit of listed
species; the regulatory effect of critical habitat is that Federal
agencies must ensure (though consultation with the Service) that any
activity they authorize, fund, or carry out is not likely to result in
the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. It is,
therefore, advantageous for the conservation of these species to
support the proactive efforts of non-Federal landowners who are
contributing to the further enhancement of essential habitat features
that support recovery of listed species through exclusion of their
lands from a critical habitat designation. The jeopardy standard of
section 7 of the Act will continue to provide protection to listed
species in these areas when there is a Federal nexus.
II. Laup[amacr]hoehoe Nui Lands
Laup[amacr]hoehoe Nui manages two parcels of land (134 ac (54 ha)
and 134 ac (54 ha)) in Units 53 and 54, respectively. These parcels
were

[[Page 17941]]

identified as lands we were considering for exclusion in our March 29,
2023, proposed rule (88 FR 18756).
Conservation and management activities on Laup[amacr]hoehoe Nui
lands in Units 53 and 54 include those associated with the Kohala
Watershed Partnership and the Kohala Mountain Watershed Management Plan
(see ``b. Kohala Watershed Partnership and the Kohala Mountain
Watershed Management Plan'' under I. Watershed Partnerships, above).
Conservation measures of Laup[amacr]hoehoe Nui, through the Kohala
Mountain Watershed Management Plan, benefit habitat for all species
within Units 53 and 54 including Bidens hillebrandiana ssp.
hillebrandiana, Cyanea tritomantha, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia
floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and
Stenogyne cranwelliae.
Laup[amacr]hoehoe Nui lands in Unit 53 are managed by the Kohala
Mountain Watershed Management Plan, where the Kohala Watershed
Partnership is actively conducting ungulate removal and native forest
restoration, including invasive weed removal to support the habitat for
Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana. In Unit 54, within its Upper
Laup[amacr]hoehoe Nui Watershed Reserve, Laup[amacr]hoehoe Nui and the
Kohala Watershed Partnership protected 2,000 ac (809 ha) important for
aquifer recharge areas on Kohala Mountain, globally rare montane bog
ecosystems, seabird nesting areas, and rare and endangered native
plants (The Kohala Center 2019, p. 3). Laup[amacr]hoehoe Nui's Upper
Laup[amacr]hoehoe Watershed Reserve benefits forest habitat used by
Cyanea tritomantha, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda,
Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and Stenogyne
cranwelliae by restoring native forest in degraded lands, increasing
soil-water retention capacity, and improving ecosystem resilience to
drying climate conditions through control of feral ungulates and weed
control that improves recruitment of native trees.
Based on Laup[amacr]hoehoe Nui's management of its land under the
Kohala Mountain Watershed Management Plan and participation in the
Kohala Watershed Partnership, we evaluated 134 ac (54 ha) in Unit 53
and 134 ac (54 ha) in Unit 54 of lands owned by Laup[amacr]hoehoe Nui
to determine if excluding these lands from the final critical habitat
designation is appropriate.
Benefits of Inclusion--Laup[amacr]hoehoe Nui
As described above under ``Benefits of Inclusion--Parker Ranch,''
the principal benefit of including an area in critical habitat
designation is the requirement of Federal agencies to consult with the
Service on actions that may affect the critical habitat. This allows
the Service to assess whether Federal actions authorized, funded, or
carried out are likely to result in the destruction or adverse
modification of designated critical habitat and, if so, to identify
alternatives to avoid that result; this is in addition to assessing
whether the Federal action is likely to jeopardize the listed species.
Thus, the critical habitat designation may provide greater benefits to
the species than the listing would alone. Therefore, critical habitat
designation may provide a regulatory benefit for Bidens hillebrandiana
ssp. hillebrandiana, Cyanea tritomantha, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia
floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and
Stenogyne cranwelliae on lands owned by Laup[amacr]hoehoe Nui in Units
53 and 54.
Another possible benefit of including lands in critical habitat is
public education regarding the potential conservation value of an area
that may help focus conservation efforts on areas of high conservation
value for certain species. We consider any information about Bidens
hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana, Cyanea tritomantha, Melicope remyi,
Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei, and Stenogyne cranwelliae and their habitats that reaches a
wide audience, including parties engaged in conservation activities, to
be valuable. Designation of critical habitat would provide educational
benefits by informing Federal agencies and the public about the
presence of the species in these units.
Therefore, because activities with a Federal nexus will require
section 7 consultations, and because of the occurrence of these species
on Laup[amacr]hoehoe Nui lands, it is expected that there may be some,
but limited, benefits from including Laup[amacr]hoehoe Nui lands in
Units 53 and 54 in the critical habitat designation. The principal
benefit of any designated critical habitat is that activities in and
affecting such habitat require consultation under section 7 of the Act.
Such consultation would ensure that adequate protection is provided to
avoid destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat.
Benefits of Exclusion--Laup[amacr]hoehoe Nui
The benefits of excluding two parcels--one in Unit 53 (134 ac (54
ha)) and the other in Unit 54 (134 ac (54 ha))--owned by
Laup[amacr]hoehoe Nui from this designation of critical habitat
include: (1) the continued implementation of the conservation plan
(Kohala Mountain Watershed Management Plan) that include actions that
benefit Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana, Cyanea tritomantha,
Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense,
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and Stenogyne cranwelliae; (2)
strengthening of our effective partnership with Laup[amacr]hoehoe Nui
and other neighboring landowners to promote voluntary, proactive
conservation of Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana, Cyanea
tritomantha, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and Stenogyne cranwelliae
and their habitat; (3) allowance for continued meaningful collaboration
and cooperation in working toward species recovery, including
conservation benefits that might not otherwise occur; and (4)
encouragement of developing and implementing conservation and
management plans in the future for these species or other federally
listed and sensitive species.
In some cases, the designation of critical habitat on (or adjacent
to) private lands may reduce the likelihood that landowners will
support and carry out conservation actions (Main et al. 1999, pp.
1,263-1,265; Bean 1998, p. 10706). The magnitude of this negative
outcome is amplified in situations where active management measures
(such as reintroduction, fire management, and control of invasive
species) are necessary for species conservation (Bean 1998, pp. 10706-
10708). We find that the exclusion of these specific areas of non-
federally owned lands from this critical habitat designation can
contribute to the species' recovery and provide a superior level of
conservation than critical habitat designation can provide alone. We
have also found that, where consistent with the discretion provided by
the Act, it is necessary to implement policies that provide positive
incentives to private landowners to voluntarily conserve natural
resources and that remove or reduce disincentives to conservation
(Wilcove et al. 1996, pp. 1-15; Bean 1998, entire). Additionally,
partnerships with non-Federal landowners are vital to the conservation
of these species, especially on non-Federal lands; therefore, the
Service is committed to supporting and encouraging such partnerships
through the recognition of positive conservation contributions.

[[Page 17942]]

Excluding lands owned and managed by Laup[amacr]hoehoe Nui in Units
53 and 54 from critical habitat will help foster the partnerships the
landowners and land managers have developed with Federal and State
agencies and local conservation organizations, will encourage the
continued implementation of voluntary conservation actions for the
benefit of the species and their habitats on these lands, and may also
serve as a model and aid in fostering future cooperative relationships
with other parties here and in other locations for the benefit of other
endangered or threatened species. Therefore, we consider the positive
effect of excluding from critical habitat areas managed by active
conservation partners to be a significant benefit of exclusion.
Benefits of Exclusion Outweigh the Benefits of Inclusion--
Laup[amacr]hoehoe Nui
We evaluated approximately 134 ac (54 ha) in Unit 53 and 134 ac (54
ha) in Unit 54 owned by Laup[amacr]hoehoe Nui for exclusion from this
designation of critical habitat. We determined the benefits of
excluding these lands outweigh the benefits of including them as
critical habitat in this designation. We conclude that the additional
regulatory and educational benefits of including these lands as
critical habitat are relatively small because of the limited
distinction between actions to avoid jeopardy and adverse modification.
While Laup[amacr]hoehoe Nui may receive Federal grants (actions which
carry a Federal nexus) from time to time, all areas of
Laup[amacr]hoehoe Nui lands being evaluated are occupied by one or more
of the 12 species addressed in this final rule. Therefore, the few
section 7 consultations that may occur will include a jeopardy
analysis, as described above, and conservation measures that apply to a
jeopardy analysis are expected to be similar to those that apply to an
adverse modification analysis. These marginal regulatory benefits are
further reduced by the existence of conservation plans and implemented
actions, which include habitat conservation that addresses the special
management considerations. Furthermore, the potential educational and
informational benefits of critical habitat designation on areas
containing the physical and biological features essential to the
conservation of Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana, Cyanea
tritomantha, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and Stenogyne cranwelliae
would be minimal because the landowner has demonstrated their knowledge
of the species and their habitat needs in the process of developing
conservation partnerships with the Service and others.
In contrast, the benefits derived from excluding the lands owned by
Laup[amacr]hoehoe Nui and enhancing our partnership with this landowner
are significant. Because voluntary conservation efforts for the benefit
of listed species on non-Federal lands are so valuable, the Service
considers the maintenance and encouragement of conservation
partnerships to be a significant benefit of exclusion. The development
and maintenance of effective working partnerships with non-Federal
landowners for the conservation of listed species is particularly
important in Hawaii, a State with relatively little Federal land
ownership but many species of conservation concern. Excluding these
areas from critical habitat will help foster the partnerships the
landowners and land managers in question have developed with Federal
and State agencies and local conservation organizations and will
encourage the continued implementation of voluntary conservation
actions for the benefit of Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana,
Cyanea tritomantha, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda,
Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and Stenogyne
cranwelliae and their habitats on these lands.
The current active conservation efforts on Laup[amacr]hoehoe Nui
lands in Units 53 and 54 benefit these species, satisfying factor (vi)
of the section 4(b)(2) exclusion analysis, as described above under
``Non-Permitted Conservation Plans, Agreements, or Partnerships.'' The
partnership and management plan are longstanding and have demonstrated
implementation and success, and we have a reasonable expectation that
the conservation management strategies or actions in the plan will be
implemented, satisfying factors (v) and (vii) described above under
``Non-Permitted Conservation Plans, Agreements, or Partnerships.'' The
Kohala Mountain Watershed Management Plan includes multiple objectives
that satisfy factor (viii) described above under ``Non-Permitted
Conservation Plans, Agreements, or Partnerships'' by promoting
monitoring and adaptive management to ensure conservation measures are
effective. In addition, this partnership not only provides a benefit
for the conservation of these species but may also serve as a model and
aid in fostering future cooperative relationships with other parties in
these areas of Hawaii and in other locations for the benefit of other
endangered or threatened species.
Management by Laup[amacr]hoehoe Nui through participation in the
Kohala Mountain Watershed Management Plan and Kohala Watershed
Partnership provides significant habitat protection for Bidens
hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana, Cyanea tritomantha, Melicope remyi,
Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei, and Stenogyne cranwelliae. We find that excluding areas from
critical habitat that are under long-term conservation and management
plans to protect the habitat that supports these species will preserve
our partnership with Laup[amacr]hoehoe Nui in the State of Hawaii and
will encourage future collaboration towards conservation and recovery
of listed species. In summary, these partnership benefits to the
subject species outweigh the small potential regulatory, educational,
and ancillary benefits of including the Laup[amacr]hoehoe Nui lands in
this final critical habitat designation.
Exclusion Will Not Result in Extinction of the Species--
Laup[amacr]hoehoe Nui
We determined that the exclusion of approximately 134 ac (54 ha) in
Unit 53 and 134 ac (54 ha) in Unit 54 owned by Laup[amacr]hoehoe Nui
from this designation of critical habitat will not result in the
extinction of Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana, Cyanea
tritomantha, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, or Stenogyne cranwelliae.
Protections afforded to these species based on their listed status, and
afforded to their habitats by the management and conservation plan,
provide assurances that these species will not go extinct as a result
of excluding these lands from the critical habitat designation.
An important consideration as we evaluate these exclusions and
their potential effect on the species in question is that a critical
habitat designation does not necessarily require affirmative actions to
restore or actively manage critical habitat for the benefit of listed
species; the regulatory effect of critical habitat is that Federal
agencies must ensure (through consultation with the Service) that any
activity they authorize, fund, or carry out is not likely to result in
the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. It is,
therefore, advantageous for the conservation of these species to
support the proactive efforts of non-Federal landowners who are
contributing to the enhancement of essential habitat features for
listed species through

[[Page 17943]]

exclusion of their lands from a critical habitat designation. The
jeopardy standard of section 7 of the Act will continue to provide
protection to listed species in these areas when there is a Federal
nexus.
III. State Department of Hawaiian Home Lands
State Department of Hawaiian Home Lands manages one parcel of land
(36 ac (15 ha)) in Unit 54. This parcel was identified as land we were
considering for exclusion in our March 29, 2023, proposed rule (88 FR
18756).
Conservation and management activities on the Department of
Hawaiian Home Lands include those associated with the Kohala Mountain
Watershed Partnership and the Kohala Watershed Management Plan,
December 2007 (see ``b. Kohala Watershed Partnership and the Kohala
Mountain Watershed Management Plan'' under I. Watershed Partnerships,
above). Conservation measures of the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands
through the Kohala Mountain Watershed Management Plan benefit habitat
used by Cyanea tritomantha, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda,
Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and Stenogyne
cranwelliae.
Based on Department of Hawaiian Home Lands management and
participation in the Kohala Mountain Watershed Partnership, we
evaluated 36 ac (15 ha) of lands owned by the Department of Hawaiian
Home Lands in Unit 54 to determine if excluding these lands from the
final critical habitat designation is appropriate.
Benefits of Inclusion--Department of Hawaiian Home Lands
As described above under ``Benefits of Inclusion--Parker Ranch,''
the principal benefit of including an area in critical habitat
designation is the requirement of Federal agencies to consult with the
Service on actions that may affect the critical habitat. This allows
the Service to assess whether Federal actions authorized, funded, or
carried out are likely to result in the destruction or adverse
modification of designated critical habitat and, if so, to identify
alternatives to avoid that result; this is in addition to assessing
whether the Federal action is likely to jeopardize the listed species.
Thus, critical habitat designation may provide greater benefits to the
recovery of a species than the listing would alone. Therefore, critical
habitat designation may provide a regulatory benefit for Cyanea
tritomantha, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and Stenogyne cranwelliae on
lands owned by the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands in Unit 54.
Another possible benefit of including lands in critical habitat is
public education regarding the potential conservation value of an area
that may help focus conservation efforts on areas of high conservation
value for certain species. We consider any information about Cyanea
tritomantha, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and Stenogyne cranwelliae
and their habitats that reaches a wide audience, including parties
engaged in conservation activities, to be valuable. Designation of
critical habitat would provide educational benefits by informing
Federal agencies and the public about the presence of the species in
these units.
Therefore, because activities with a Federal nexus will require
section 7 consultations, and because of the occurrence of these species
on Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, it is expected that there may be
some, but limited, benefits from including Department of Hawaiian Home
Lands in Unit 54 in the critical habitat designation. The principal
benefit of any designated critical habitat is that activities in and
affecting such habitat require consultation under section 7 of the Act.
Such consultation would ensure that adequate protection is provided to
avoid destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat.
Benefits of Exclusion--Department of Hawaiian Home Lands
The benefits of excluding the 36-ac (15-ha) parcel owned by the
Department of Hawaiian Home Lands in Unit 54 from this designation of
critical habitat include: (1) the continued implementation of
conservation plans (Kohala Mountain Watershed Management Plan) that
include actions that benefit Cyanea tritomantha, Melicope remyi,
Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei, and Stenogyne cranwelliae; (2) strengthening of our effective
partnership with the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands and other
neighboring landowners to promote voluntary, proactive conservation of
Cyanea tritomantha, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda,
Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and Stenogyne
cranwelliae and their habitats; (3) allowance for continued meaningful
collaboration and cooperation in working toward species recovery,
including conservation benefits that might not otherwise occur; and (4)
encouragement of developing and implementing conservation and
management plans in the future for these species or other federally
listed and sensitive species.
In some cases, the designation of critical habitat on (or adjacent
to) private lands may reduce the likelihood that landowners will
support and carry out conservation actions (Main et al. 1999, pp.
1,263-1,265; Bean 1998, p. 10706). The magnitude of this negative
outcome is amplified in situations where active management measures
(such as reintroduction, fire management, and control of invasive
species) are necessary for species conservation (Bean 1998, pp. 10706-
10708). We find that the exclusion of these specific areas of non-
federally owned lands from this critical habitat designation can
contribute to the species' recovery and provide a superior level of
conservation than critical habitat designation can provide alone. We
have also found that, where consistent with the discretion provided by
the Act, it is necessary to implement policies that provide positive
incentives to private landowners to voluntarily conserve natural
resources and that remove or reduce disincentives to conservation
(Wilcove et al. 1996, pp. 1-15; Bean 1998, entire). Additionally,
partnerships with non-Federal landowners are vital to the conservation
of these species, especially on non-Federal lands; therefore, the
Service is committed to supporting and encouraging such partnerships
through the recognition of positive conservation contributions.
Excluding lands owned and managed by the Department of Hawaiian
Home Lands in Unit 54 from critical habitat will help foster the
partnerships the landowners and land managers have developed with
Federal and State agencies and local conservation organizations, will
encourage the continued implementation of voluntary conservation
actions for the benefit of the species and their habitats on these
lands, and may also serve as a model and aid in fostering future
cooperative relationships with other parties here and in other
locations for the benefit of other endangered or threatened species.
Therefore, we consider the positive effect of excluding from critical
habitat areas managed by active conservation partners to be a
significant benefit of exclusion.

[[Page 17944]]

Benefits of Exclusion Outweigh the Benefits of Inclusion--Department of
Hawaiian Home Lands
We evaluated 36 ac (15 ha) in Unit 54 owned by the Department of
Hawaiian Home Lands for exclusion from this designation of critical
habitat. We determined the benefits of excluding these lands outweigh
the benefits of including them as critical habitat in this designation.
We conclude that the additional regulatory and educational benefits of
including these lands as critical habitat are relatively small because
of the limited distinction between actions to avoid jeopardy and
adverse modification. While the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands may
receive Federal grants (actions which carry a Federal nexus)
occasionally, all areas of Department of Hawaiian Home Lands being
evaluated are occupied by one or more of the 12 species addressed in
this final rule. Therefore, the few section 7 consultations that may
occur will include a jeopardy analysis, as described above, and
conservation measures that apply to a jeopardy analysis are expected to
be similar to those that apply to an adverse modification analysis.
These marginal regulatory benefits are further reduced by the existence
of conservation plans and implemented actions, which include habitat
conservation that addresses the special management considerations.
Furthermore, the potential educational and informational benefits of
critical habitat designation on areas containing the physical and
biological features essential to the conservation of Cyanea
tritomantha, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and Stenogyne cranwelliae
would be minimal because the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands has
demonstrated their knowledge of the species and their habitat needs in
the process of developing conservation partnerships with the Service
and others.
In contrast, the benefits derived from excluding the lands owned by
the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands and enhancing our partnership
with this landowner is significant. Because voluntary conservation
efforts for the benefit of listed species on non-Federal lands are so
valuable, the Service considers the maintenance and encouragement of
conservation partnerships to be a significant benefit of exclusion. The
development and maintenance of effective working partnerships with non-
Federal landowners for the conservation of listed species is
particularly important in Hawaii, a State with relatively little
Federal land ownership but many species of conservation concern.
Excluding these areas from critical habitat will help foster the
partnerships the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands and its associated
landowners have developed with Federal and State agencies and local
conservation organizations and will encourage the continued
implementation of voluntary conservation actions for the benefit of
Cyanea tritomantha, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda,
Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and Stenogyne
cranwelliae and their habitats on this land.
The current active conservation efforts on Department of Hawaiian
Home Lands in Unit 54 benefit these species, satisfying factor (vi) of
the section 4(b)(2) exclusion analysis, as described above under ``Non-
Permitted Conservation Plans, Agreements, or Partnerships.'' The
partnerships and management plans are longstanding and have
demonstrated implementation and success, and we have a reasonable
expectation that the conservation management strategies or actions in
the plans will be implemented, satisfying factors (v) and (vii)
described above under ``Non-Permitted Conservation Plans, Agreements,
or Partnerships.'' The Kohala Mountain Watershed Management Plan
includes multiple objectives that satisfy factor (viii) described above
under ``Non-Permitted Conservation Plans, Agreements, or Partnerships''
by promoting monitoring and adaptive management to ensure conservation
measures are effective. In addition, these partnerships not only
provide a benefit for the conservation of these species but may also
serve as a model and aid in fostering future cooperative relationships
with other parties in these areas of Hawai`i and in other locations for
the benefit of other endangered or threatened species.
Management by Department of Hawaiian Home Lands through
participation in the Kohala Mountain Watershed Partnership and the
Kohala Watershed Management Plan provides significant habitat
protection for Cyanea tritomantha, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia
floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and
Stenogyne cranwelliae. We find that excluding areas from critical
habitat that are under long-term conservation and management to protect
the habitats of these species will preserve our partnership with the
Department of Hawaiian Home Lands in the State of Hawaii and will
encourage future collaboration towards conservation and recovery of
listed species. In summary, these partnership benefits to the subject
species outweigh the small potential regulatory, educational, and
ancillary benefits of including the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands
parcels in this final critical habitat designation.
Exclusion Will Not Result in Extinction of the Species--Department of
Hawaiian Home Lands
We determined that the exclusion of approximately 36 ac (15 ha) in
Unit 54 owned by the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands from this
designation of critical habitat will not result in the extinction of
Cyanea tritomantha, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda,
Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, or Stenogyne
cranwelliae. Protections afforded to these species based on their
listed status, and afforded to their habitats by the management and
conservation plans, provide assurances that these species will not go
extinct as a result of excluding these lands from the critical habitat
designation.
An important consideration as we evaluate these exclusions and
their potential effect on the species in question is that a critical
habitat designation does not necessarily require affirmative actions to
restore or actively manage critical habitat for the benefit of listed
species; the regulatory effect of critical habitat is that Federal
agencies must ensure (through consultation with the Service) that any
activity they authorize, fund, or carry out is not likely to result in
the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. It is,
therefore, advantageous for the conservation of these species to
support the proactive efforts of non-Federal landowners who are
contributing to the enhancement of essential habitat features for
listed species through exclusion of their lands from a critical habitat
designation. The jeopardy standard of section 7 of the Act will
continue to provide protection to listed species in these areas when
there is a Federal nexus.
IV. Kahua Ranch Lands
Kahua Ranch manages 605 ac (245 ha) of land in Unit 54. This area
was identified as land we were considering for exclusion in our March
29, 2023, proposed rule (88 FR 18756).
Conservation and management activities on Kahua Ranch lands in Unit
54 include those associated with Kohala Watershed Partnership and the
Kohala Mountain Watershed Management Plan (see ``b. Kohala Watershed
Partnership and the Kohala Mountain Watershed

[[Page 17945]]

Management Plan'' under I. Watershed Partnerships, above). Conservation
measures of Kahua Ranch, through the Kohala Mountain Watershed
Management Plan, benefit habitat for all species within Unit 54,
including Cyanea tritomantha, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda,
Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and Stenogyne
cranwelliae.
Kahua Ranch lands in Unit 54 are managed according to the Kohala
Mountain Watershed Management Plan. In Unit 54, within its Pu`u Pili
Biodiversity Preserve, Kahua Ranch, the Kohala Watershed Partnership,
and volunteers protected Kahua Ranch lands important for aquifer
recharge areas on Kohala Mountain, globally rare cloud forest
ecosystems, forest birds, and rare and endangered native plants (The
Kohala Center 2019, p. 3). Additionally, Kahua Ranch is a member of the
Kohala Watershed Partnership (see ``b. Kohala Watershed Partnership and
the Kohala Mountain Watershed Management Plan'' under I. Watershed
Partnerships, above). Kahua Ranch's Biodiversity Preserve benefits
forest habitat used by Cyanea tritomantha, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia
floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and
Stenogyne cranwelliae by restoring native forest in degraded pasture
lands, increasing soil-water retention capacity, and improving
ecosystem resilience to drying climate conditions through control of
feral ungulates and weed control that improves recruitment of native
trees.
Based on Kahua Ranch's management of its land under the Kohala
Mountain Watershed Management Plan and participation in the Kohala
Watershed Partnership, we evaluated 605 ac (245 ha) of lands owned by
Kahua Ranch in Unit 54 to determine if excluding these lands from the
final critical habitat designation is appropriate.
Benefits of Inclusion--Kahua Ranch
As described above under ``Benefits of Inclusion--Parker Ranch,''
the principal benefit of including an area in critical habitat
designation is the requirement of Federal agencies to consult with the
Service on actions that may affect the critical habitat. This allows
the Service to assess whether Federal actions authorized, funded, or
carried out are likely to result in the destruction or adverse
modification of designated critical habitat and, if so, to identify
alternatives to avoid that result; this is in addition to assessing
whether the Federal action is likely to jeopardize the listed species.
As such, critical habitat designation may provide greater benefits to
the species than the listing would alone. Therefore, critical habitat
designation may provide a regulatory benefit for Cyanea tritomantha,
Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense,
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and Stenogyne cranwelliae on lands owned
by Kahua Ranch in Unit 54.
Another possible benefit of including lands in critical habitat is
public education regarding the potential conservation value of an area
that may help focus conservation efforts on areas of high conservation
value for certain species. We consider any information about Cyanea
tritomantha, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and Stenogyne cranwelliae
and their habitats that reaches a wide audience, including parties
engaged in conservation activities, to be valuable. Designation of
critical habitat would provide educational benefits by informing
Federal agencies and the public about the presence of the species in
these units.
Therefore, because activities with a Federal nexus will require
section 7 consultation, and because of the occurrence of these species
on Kahua Ranch lands, it is expected that there may be some, but
limited, benefits from including Kahua Ranch lands in Unit 54 in the
critical habitat designation. The principal benefit of any designated
critical habitat is that any activities with a Federal nexus occurring
in or affecting such habitat require consultation under section 7 of
the Act. Such consultation would ensure that adequate protection is
provided to avoid destruction or adverse modification of critical
habitat.
Benefits of Exclusion--Kahua Ranch
The benefits of excluding 605 ac (245 ha) owned by Kahua Ranch in
Unit 54 from this designation of critical habitat include: (1) the
continued implementation of conservation plans (The Kohala Mountain
Watershed Management Plan) that include actions that benefit Cyanea
tritomantha, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and Stenogyne cranwelliae;
(2) strengthening of our effective partnership with Kahua Ranch and
other neighboring landowners to promote voluntary, proactive
conservation of Cyanea tritomantha, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia
floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and
Stenogyne cranwelliae and their habitats; (3) allowance for continued
meaningful collaboration and cooperation in working toward species
recovery, including conservation benefits that might not otherwise
occur; and (4) encouragement of developing and implementing
conservation and management plans in the future for these species or
other federally listed and sensitive species.
In some cases, the designation of critical habitat on (or adjacent
to) private lands may reduce the likelihood that landowners will
support and carry out conservation actions (Main et al. 1999, pp.
1,263-1,265; Bean 1998, p. 10706). The magnitude of this negative
outcome is amplified in situations where active management measures
(such as reintroduction, fire management, and control of invasive
species) are necessary for species conservation (Bean 1998, pp. 10706-
10708). We find that the exclusion of these specific areas of non-
federally owned lands from this critical habitat designation can
contribute to the species' recovery and provide a superior level of
conservation than critical habitat designation can provide alone. We
have also found that, where consistent with the discretion provided by
the Act, it is necessary to implement policies that provide positive
incentives to private landowners to voluntarily conserve natural
resources and that remove or reduce disincentives to conservation
(Wilcove et al. 1996, pp. 1-15; Bean 1998, entire). Additionally,
partnerships with non-Federal landowners are vital to the conservation
of these species, especially on non-Federal lands; therefore, the
Service is committed to supporting and encouraging such partnerships
through the recognition of positive conservation contributions.
Excluding lands owned and managed by Kahua Ranch in Unit 54 from
critical habitat will help foster the partnerships the landowners and
land managers have developed with Federal and State agencies and local
conservation organizations, will encourage the continued implementation
of voluntary conservation actions for the benefit of the species and
their habitats on these lands, and may also serve as a model and aid in
fostering future cooperative relationships with other parties here and
in other locations for the benefit of other endangered or threatened
species. Therefore, we consider the positive effect of excluding from
critical habitat areas managed by active conservation partners to be a
significant benefit of exclusion.
Benefits of Exclusion Outweigh the Benefits of Inclusion--Kahua Ranch
We evaluated approximately 605 ac (245 ha) in Unit 54 owned by
Kahua

[[Page 17946]]

Ranch for exclusion from the designation of critical habitat. We
determined the benefits of excluding these lands outweigh the benefits
of including them as critical habitat for the subject species on
Hawai[revaps]i Island. We conclude that the additional regulatory and
educational benefits of including these lands as critical habitat are
relatively small because of the limited distinction between actions to
avoid jeopardy and adverse modification. While Kahua Ranch may receive
Federal grants (actions which carry a Federal nexus) occasionally, all
areas of Kahua Ranch lands being evaluated are occupied by one or more
of the 12 species addressed in this final rule. Therefore, the few
section 7 consultations that may occur will include a jeopardy
analysis, as described above, and conservation measures that apply to a
jeopardy analysis are expected to be similar to those that apply to an
adverse modification analysis. These marginal regulatory benefits are
further reduced by the existence of conservation plans and implemented
actions, which include habitat conservation that addresses the special
management considerations. Furthermore, the potential educational and
informational benefits of critical habitat designation on areas
containing the physical and biological features essential to the
conservation of Cyanea tritomantha, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia
floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and
Stenogyne cranwelliae would be minimal because Kahua Ranch has
demonstrated their knowledge of the species and their habitat needs in
the process of developing conservation partnerships with the Service
and others.
In contrast, the benefits derived from excluding the lands owned by
Kahua Ranch and enhancing our partnership with this landowner are
significant. Because voluntary conservation efforts for the benefit of
listed species on non-Federal lands are so valuable, the Service
considers the maintenance and encouragement of conservation
partnerships to be a significant benefit of exclusion. The development
and maintenance of effective working partnerships with non-Federal
landowners for the conservation of listed species is particularly
important in Hawaii, a State with relatively little Federal land
ownership but many species of conservation concern. Excluding these
areas from critical habitat will help foster the partnerships the
landowners and land managers in question have developed with Federal
and State agencies and local conservation organizations and will
encourage the continued implementation of voluntary conservation
actions for the benefit of Cyanea tritomantha, Melicope remyi,
Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei, and Stenogyne cranwelliae and their habitats on these lands.
The current active conservation efforts on Kahua Ranch lands in
Unit 54 benefit these species, satisfying factor (vi) of the section
4(b)(2) exclusion analysis, as described above under ``Non-Permitted
Conservation Plans, Agreements, or Partnerships.'' The partnerships and
management plans are longstanding and have demonstrated implementation
and success, and we have a reasonable expectation that the conservation
management strategies or actions in the plans will be implemented,
satisfying factors (v) and (vii) described above under ``Non-Permitted
Conservation Plans, Agreements, or Partnerships.'' The Kohala Mountain
Watershed Management Plan includes multiple objectives that satisfy
factor (viii) described above under ``Non-Permitted Conservation Plans,
Agreements, or Partnerships'' by promoting monitoring and adaptive
management to ensure conservation measures are effective. In addition,
these partnerships not only provide a benefit for the conservation of
these species but may also serve as a model and aid in fostering future
cooperative relationships with other parties in these areas of Hawaii
and in other locations for the benefit of other endangered or
threatened species.
Management by Kahua Ranch through participation in the Kohala
Watershed Partnership and implementation of the Kohala Mountain
Watershed Management Plan provides significant habitat protection for
Cyanea tritomantha, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda,
Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and Stenogyne
cranwelliae. We find that excluding areas from critical habitat that
are under these long-term conservation and management plans to protect
the habitat that supports these species will preserve our partnership
with Kahua Ranch in the State of Hawaii and will encourage future
collaboration towards conservation and recovery of listed species. In
summary, these partnership benefits to the subject species outweigh the
small potential regulatory, educational, and ancillary benefits of
including the Kahua Ranch lands in this final critical habitat
designation.
Exclusion Will Not Result in Extinction of the Species--Kahua Ranch
We determined that the exclusion of approximately 605 ac (245 ha)
owned by Kahua Ranch in Unit 54 from this designation of critical
habitat will not result in the extinction of Cyanea tritomantha,
Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense,
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, or Stenogyne cranwelliae. Protections
afforded to these species based on their listed status, and afforded to
their habitats by the management and conservation plans, provide
assurances that these species will not go extinct as a result of
excluding these lands from the critical habitat designation.
An important consideration as we evaluate these exclusions and
their potential effect on the species in question is that a critical
habitat designation does not necessarily require affirmative actions to
restore or actively manage critical habitat for the benefit of listed
species; the regulatory effect of critical habitat is that Federal
agencies must ensure (through consultation with the Service) that any
activity they authorize, fund, or carry out is not likely to result in
the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. It is,
therefore, advantageous for the conservation of these species to
support the proactive efforts of non-Federal landowners who are
contributing to the enhancement of essential habitat features for
listed species through exclusion of their lands from a critical habitat
designation. The jeopardy standard of section 7 of the Act will
continue to provide protection to listed species in these areas when
there is a Federal nexus.
V. Queen Emma Foundation Lands
Queen Emma Foundation owns and manages 475 ac (192 ha) in two
parcels in Unit 54: one is 384 ac (155 ha), and the other is 91 ac (37
ha). The 91-ac (37-ha) parcel overlaps existing designated critical
habitat for the federally endangered picture-wing fly, Drosophila
ochrobasis (see Drosophila ochrobasis--Unit 4--Kohala Mountains West at
50 CFR 17.95(i) and 73 FR 73795, December 4, 2008). In our March 29,
2023, proposed rule (88 FR 18756), we stated that we were considering
these parcels for exclusion from this final critical habitat
designation. For the purposes of distinguishing between these two Unit
54 parcels in our balancing analysis below, we hereafter refer to the
91-ac (37-ha) parcel that overlaps designated critical habitat for
Drosophila ochrobasis as the ``D. ochrobasis parcel,'' and the
remaining

[[Page 17947]]

384-ac (155-ha) parcel of Unit 54 simply as the ``Unit 54 parcel.''
Conservation and management activities on Queen Emma Foundation
lands in the Unit 54 parcel include those associated with the Kohala
Watershed Partnership (see ``b. Kohala Watershed Partnership and the
Kohala Mountain Watershed Management Plan'' under I. Watershed
Partnerships, above) and the Pelekane Bay Watershed Restoration
Project. The goal of this management plan and partnership is to improve
the Kohala watershed's condition, and stewardship actions taken to
achieve this goal include fencing to reduce feral ungulates, improving
groundcover vegetation, and restoring native riparian forest and
shrubland. Conservation measures of Queen Emma Foundation, through the
Pelekane Bay Watershed Restoration Project and the Kohala Watershed
Partnership, benefit habitat for all species in the Unit 54 parcel,
including Cyanea tritomantha, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda,
Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and Stenogyne
cranwelliae. While the D. ochrobasis parcel would otherwise benefit
from these same conservation measures, most management activities do
not occur in the D. ochrobasis parcel because these 91 acres (37 ha)
are made up of gulch areas with steep terrain which make the
conservation activities that occur throughout the rest of Unit 54
impractical here.
Based on Queen Emma Foundation management and participation in the
Kohala Watershed Partnership, we evaluated the two parcels of land
owned by Queen Emma Foundation and considered for exclusion two parcels
(384 ac (155 ha) in the Unit 54 parcel and 91 ac (37 ha) in the D.
ochrobasis parcel) in Unit 54 separately, to determine if excluding
those lands from the final critical habitat designation is appropriate.
Benefits of Inclusion--Queen Emma Foundation
As described above under ``Benefits of Inclusion--Parker Ranch,''
the principal benefit of including an area in critical habitat
designation is the requirement of Federal agencies to consult with the
Service on actions that may affect the critical habitat. This allows
the Service to assess whether Federal actions authorized, funded, or
carried out are likely to result in the destruction or adverse
modification of designated critical habitat and, if so, to identify
alternatives to avoid that result; this is in addition to assessing
whether the Federal action is likely to jeopardize the listed species.
Thus, critical habitat designation may provide greater benefits to the
species than the listing would alone. Therefore, critical habitat
designation may provide a regulatory benefit for Cyanea tritomantha,
Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense,
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and Stenogyne cranwelliae on lands owned
by Queen Emma Foundation in the Unit 54 parcel and the D. ochrobasis
parcel.
Another possible benefit of including lands in critical habitat is
public education regarding the potential conservation value of an area
that may help focus conservation efforts on areas of high conservation
value for certain species. We consider any information about Cyanea
tritomantha, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and Stenogyne cranwelliae
and their habitats that reaches a wide audience, including parties
engaged in conservation activities, to be valuable. Designation of
critical habitat would provide educational benefits by informing
Federal agencies and the public about the presence of the species in
these units.
Therefore, because activities with a Federal nexus will require
section 7 consultation, and because of the occurrence of these species
on Queen Emma Foundation lands, it is expected that there may be some,
but limited, benefits from including the Unit 54 parcel and the D.
ochrobasis parcel of Queen Emma Foundation lands in the critical
habitat designation. The principal benefit of any designated critical
habitat is that activities in and affecting such habitat require
consultation under section 7 of the Act. Such consultation would ensure
that adequate protection is provided to avoid destruction or adverse
modification of critical habitat.
Benefits of Exclusion--Queen Emma Foundation
The benefits of excluding the 384-ac (155-ha) Unit 54 parcel owned
by Queen Emma Foundation from this designation of critical habitat
include: (1) the continued implementation of conservation plans (Kohala
Mountain Watershed Management Plan) that include actions that benefit
Cyanea tritomantha, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda,
Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and Stenogyne
cranwelliae; (2) strengthening of our effective partnership with Queen
Emma Foundation and other neighboring landowners to promote voluntary,
proactive conservation of Cyanea tritomantha, Melicope remyi,
Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei, and Stenogyne cranwelliae and their habitats; (3) allowance
for continued meaningful collaboration and cooperation in working
toward species recovery, including conservation efforts that might not
otherwise occur; and (4) encouragement of developing and implementing
conservation and management plans in the future for these species or
other federally listed and sensitive species.
In some cases, the designation of critical habitat on (or adjacent
to) private lands may reduce the likelihood that landowners will
support and carry out conservation actions (Main et al. 1999, pp.
1,263-1,265; Bean 1998, p. 10706). The magnitude of this negative
outcome is amplified in situations where active management measures
(such as reintroduction, fire management, and control of invasive
species) are necessary for species conservation (Bean 1998, pp. 10706-
10708). We find that the exclusion of these specific areas of non-
federally owned lands from this critical habitat designation can
contribute to the species' recovery and provide a superior level of
conservation than critical habitat designation can provide alone. We
have also found that, where consistent with the discretion provided by
the Act, it is necessary to implement policies that provide positive
incentives to private landowners to voluntarily conserve natural
resources and that remove or reduce disincentives to conservation
(Wilcove et al. 1996, pp. 1-15; Bean 1998, entire). Additionally,
partnerships with non-Federal landowners are vital to the conservation
of these species, especially on non-Federal lands; therefore, the
Service is committed to supporting and encouraging such partnerships
through the recognition of positive conservation contributions.
Excluding the 384-ac (155-ha) Unit 54 parcel of land owned and
managed by Kahua Ranch from critical habitat will help foster the
partnerships the landowners and land managers have developed with
Federal and State agencies and local conservation organizations, will
encourage the continued implementation of voluntary conservation
actions for the benefit of the species and their habitats on these
lands, and may also serve as a model and aid in fostering future
cooperative relationships with other parties here and in other
locations for the benefit of other endangered or threatened species.
Therefore, we consider the positive

[[Page 17948]]

effect of excluding from critical habitat areas managed by active
conservation partners to be a significant benefit of exclusion.
The benefits of excluding the D. ochrobasis parcel (91 ac (37 ha))
owned by Queen Emma Foundation from this designation of critical
habitat are similar to those of the Unit 54 parcel, but to a lesser
degree because most of the conservation management actions prescribed
under the Kohala Mountain Watershed Management Plan are not implemented
on the D. ochrobasis parcel. Even though the D. ochrobasis parcel and
the Unit 54 parcel are both covered under the Kohala Mountain Watershed
Management Plan, the steep terrain of the gulch areas that make up the
D. ochrobasis parcel would make the actual implementation of
conservation actions challenging, and would likely require specialized
equipment to stablize gulch slopes and soils. As a result, most of the
management activities associated with the Kohala Mountain Watershed
Management Plan that the Queen Emma Foundation carries out throughout
the rest of Unit 54 are not implemented in these 91 ac (37 ha) of steep
gulch habitat. Therefore, the benefits of exclusion of the D.
ochrobasis parcel are limited mostly to the potential to encourage
effective partnerships with Queen Emma Foundation and other neighboring
landowners.
Benefits of Exclusion Outweigh the Benefits of Inclusion--Queen Emma
Foundation, the Unit 54 Parcel
We evaluated the approximately 384-ac (155-ha) parcel owned by
Queen Emma Foundation in Unit 54 for exclusion from this designation of
critical habitat. We determined the benefits of excluding the Unit 54
parcel lands outweigh the benefits of including them as critical
habitat in this designation. We conclude that the additional regulatory
and educational benefits of including these lands as critical habitat
are relatively small because of the limited distinction between actions
to avoid jeopardy and adverse modification. While Queen Emma Foundation
may receive Federal grants (actions which carry a Federal nexus)
occasionally, all areas of Queen Emma Foundation lands being evaluated
are occupied by one or more of the 12 species addressed in this final
rule. Therefore, the few section 7 consultations that may occur will
include a jeopardy analysis, as described above, and conservation
measures that apply to a jeopardy analysis are expected to be similar
to those that apply to an adverse modification analysis. These marginal
regulatory benefits are further reduced by the existence of
conservation plans and implemented actions in the Unit 54 parcel, which
include habitat conservation that addresses the special management
considerations. Furthermore, the potential educational and
informational benefits of critical habitat designation on areas
containing the physical and biological features essential to the
conservation of Cyanea tritomantha, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia
floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and
Stenogyne cranwelliae would be minimal in the Unit 54 parcel because
the landowner has demonstrated their knowledge of the species and their
habitat needs in the process of developing conservation partnerships
with the Service and others.
In contrast, the benefits derived from excluding the Unit 54 parcel
lands owned by Queen Emma Foundation and enhancing our partnership with
this landowner are significant. Because voluntary conservation efforts
for the benefit of listed species on non-Federal lands are so valuable,
the Service considers the maintenance and encouragement of conservation
partnerships to be a significant benefit of exclusion. The development
and maintenance of effective working partnerships with non-Federal
landowners for the conservation of listed species is particularly
important in Hawaii, a State with relatively little Federal land
ownership but many species of conservation concern. Excluding the Unit
54 parcel from critical habitat will help foster the partnerships the
landowners and land managers in question have developed with Federal
and State agencies and local conservation organizations and will
encourage the continued implementation of voluntary conservation
actions for the benefit of Cyanea tritomantha, Melicope remyi,
Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei, and Stenogyne cranwelliae and their habitats on these lands.
The current active conservation efforts on Queen Emma Foundation
lands in the Unit 54 parcel benefit these species, satisfying factor
(vi) of the section 4(b)(2) exclusion analysis, as described above
under ``Non-Permitted Conservation Plans, Agreements, or
Partnerships.'' The partnership and management plan are longstanding
and have demonstrated implementation and success, and we have a
reasonable expectation that the conservation management strategies or
actions in the plans will be implemented, satisfying factors (v) and
(vii) described above under ``Non-Permitted Conservation Plans,
Agreements, or Partnerships.'' The Kohala Mountain Watershed Management
Plan includes multiple objectives that satisfy factor (viii), described
above under ``Non-Permitted Conservation Plans, Agreements, or
Partnerships'' by promoting monitoring and adaptive management to
ensure conservation measures are effective. In addition, this
partnership not only provides a benefit for the conservation of these
species but may also serve as a model and aid in fostering future
cooperative relationships with other parties in these areas of Hawai`i
and in other locations for the benefit of other endangered or
threatened species.
Management by Queen Emma Foundation through participation in the
Kohala Mountain Watershed Management Plan and the Kohala Watershed
Partnership provides significant habitat protection for Cyanea
tritomantha, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, and Stenogyne cranwelliae.
We find that excluding the Unit 54 parcel from critical habitat which
is under a long-term conservation and management plan to protect the
habitats that support these species, will preserve our partnership with
the Queen Emma Foundation in the State of Hawaii and will encourage
future collaboration towards conservation and recovery of listed
species. In summary, the partnership benefits to the subject species in
the Unit 54 parcel outweigh the small potential regulatory,
educational, and ancillary benefits of including the Unit 54 parcel in
this final critical habitat designation.
Benefits of Inclusion Outweigh the Benefits of Exclusion--Queen Emma
Foundation, the D. ochrobasis Parcel
We evaluated the approximately 91-ac (37-ha) D. ochrobasis parcel
owned by Queen Emma Foundation in Unit 54 for exclusion from this
designation of critical habitat. We determined the benefits of
including these lands outweigh the benefits of excluding them as
critical habitat in this designation. We conclude that the additional
regulatory and educational benefits of including the D. ochrobasis
parcel as critical habitat outweigh the benefit afforded by the Kohala
Mountain Watershed Management Plan, because most management activities
under this plan cannot be carried out in this area due to practical
concerns. Furthermore, the potential educational and informational
benefits of critical habitat

[[Page 17949]]

designation on areas containing the physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of Cyanea tritomantha, Melicope remyi,
Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei, and Stenogyne cranwelliae within the riparian and gulch areas
of the D. ochrobasis parcel would be relatively significant. In
contrast, the benefits derived from excluding the lands owned by Queen
Emma Foundation in the D. ochrobasis parcel would be limited to
potentially enhancing partnerships. In addition, we held discussions
with the Queen Emma Foundation regarding their land management
activities in Unit 54 during the public comment period that followed
our March 29, 2023, proposed rule (88 FR 18756). They confirmed at that
time that the steep gulches that make up the 91 ac of the D. ochrobasis
parcel restrict implementation of most of the habitat management
activities that they perform on the rest of their lands in Unit 54, and
they were amenable to those 91 ac being part of the critical habitat
designation rather than excluded with the remaining 384 ac. In summary,
we conclude that though minor, the potential regulatory, educational,
and ancillary benefits of including the D. ochrobasis parcel in this
final critical habitat designation outweigh the limited potential to
enhance partnerships.
Exclusion Will Not Result in Extinction of the Species--Queen Emma
Foundation, the Unit 54 Parcel
We determined that the exclusion of approximately 384 ac (155 ha)
in the Unit 54 parcel owned by Queen Emma Foundation from this
designation of critical habitat will not result in the extinction of
Cyanea tritomantha, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda,
Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, or Stenogyne
cranwelliae. Protections afforded to these species based on their
listed status, and afforded to their habitats by the management and
conservation plans, provide assurances that these species will not go
extinct as a result of excluding these lands from the critical habitat
designation.
An important consideration as we evaluate these exclusions and
their potential effect on the species in question is that a critical
habitat designation does not necessarily require affirmative action to
restore or actively manage critical habitat for the benefit of listed
species; the regulatory effect of critical habitat is that Federal
agencies must ensure (though consultation with the Service) that any
activity they authorize, fund, or carry out is not likely to result in
the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. It is,
therefore, advantageous for the conservation of these species to
support the proactive efforts of non-Federal landowners who are
contributing to the enhancement of essential habitat features for
listed species through exclusion of their lands from a critical habitat
designation. The jeopardy standard of section 7 of the Act will
continue to provide protection to listed species in these areas when
there is a Federal nexus.
VI. Kamehameha Schools Lands
Kamehameha Schools manages five parcels of land (155 ac (63 ha), 33
ac (13 ha), 176 ac (71 ha), 647 ac (262 ha), and 93 ac (38 ha)) in
Units 52, 53, 54, 44, and 51, respectively. These parcels were
identified as lands we were considering for exclusion in our March 29,
2023, proposed rule (88 FR 18756). As stated in table 3, the boundaries
for Drosophila digressa--Units 1 and 2 are identical to Section 1
(plant Unit 52) and Section 11 (plant Unit 51), respectively.
Conservation and management activities on Kamehameha Schools lands
in Units 52, 53, 54, 44, and 51, as well as Drosophila digressa--Units
1 and 2, include activities associated with Kamehameha Schools
`[Amacr]ina Pauahi Natural Resources Management Program Units 52, 53,
54, 44, 51, 1, and 2; Mauna Kea Watershed Alliance Units 52 and 1;
Mauna Kea Watershed Management Plan Units 52 and 1; Kohala Watershed
Partnership Units 53 and 54; Kohala Mountain Watershed Management Plan
Units 53 and 54; the Three Mountain Alliance Management Plan Units 44,
51, and 2; and Safe Harbor Agreement Trustees of the Estate of Bernice
P. Bishop, Kamehameha Schools Keauhou and K[imacr]lauea Forest Lands
Safe Harbor Agreement Units 51 and 2 (see, above, Safe Harbor Agreement
Trustees of the Estate of Bernice P. Bishop, DBA, Kamehameha Schools
Keauhou and K[imacr]lauea Forest Lands Hawai`i Island, Hawai`i
(Kamehameha Schools Keauhou and K[imacr]lauea Forest Lands Safe Harbor
Agreement), June 2017 under ``Private or Other Non-Federal Conservation
Plans Related to Permits Under Section 10 of the Act''; ``a. Mauna Kea
Watershed Alliance and the Mauna Kea Watershed Management Plan,'' ``b.
Kohala Watershed Partnership and the Kohala Mountain Watershed
Management Plan,'' and ``c. Three Mountain Alliance Watershed
Partnership and the Three Mountain Alliance Management Plan'' under I.
Watershed Partnerships in ``Non-Permitted Conservation Plans,
Agreements, or Partnerships''; and ``b. Kamehameha Schools `[Amacr]ina
Pauahi Natural Resources Management Program'' under II. Other
Partnerships in ``Non-Permitted Conservation Plans, Agreements, or
Partnerships''). Conservation measures of Kamehameha Schools, through
its Kamehameha Schools `[Amacr]ina Pauahi Natural Resources Management
Program, benefit habitat for all species within Units 52, 53, 54, 44,
and 51, as well as Drosophila digressa--Units 1 and 2, including Bidens
hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana (Unit 53), Cyanea tritomantha (Units
52, 54, 44, and 51), Cyrtandra wagneri (Unit 52), Melicope remyi (Units
52 and 54), Phyllostegia floribunda (Units 52, 54, and 51), Pittosporum
hawaiiense (Units 52, 54, 44, and 51), Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei
(Units 52, 54, 44, and 51), Stenogyne cranwelliae (Units 52, 54, 44,
and 51), and Drosophila digressa (Units 1 and 2). In total, Kamehameha
Schools owns and manages 1,104 ac (447 ha) of lands that were proposed
as critical habitat for 9 of the 12 species that are the subjects of
this critical habitat designation. Of these lands owned by Kamehameha
Schools, 155 ac (63 ha) are within Section 1 and Drosophila digressa--
Unit 1; 33 ac (13 ha) are within Section 2; 176 ac (71 ha) are within
Section 3; 647 ac (262 ha) are within Section 8; and 93 ac (38 ha) are
within Section 11 and Drosophila digressa--Unit 2.
Conservation management activities on all 1,104 ac (447 ha) of
these lands include those associated with the Kamehameha Schools
`[Amacr]ina Pauahi Natural Resources Management Program, described
below. On the 155 ac (63 ha) within Section 1 and Drosophila digressa--
Unit 1, conservation management activities also include those
associated with the Mauna Kea Watershed Alliance and the Mauna Kea
Watershed Management Plan (see ``a. Mauna Kea Watershed Alliance and
the Mauna Kea Watershed Management Plan'' under I. Watershed
Partnerships in ``Non-Permitted Conservation Plans, Agreements, or
Partnerships,'' above). On the 209 ac (85 ha) within Sections 2 and 3,
conservation management activities also include those associated with
the Kohala Watershed Partnership and the Kohala Mountain Watershed
Management Plan (see ``b. Kohala Watershed Partnership and the Kohala
Mountain Watershed Management Plan'' under I. Watershed Partnerships in
``Non-Permitted Conservation Plans, Agreements, or Partnerships,''
above). On the 740 ac (299 ha) within Sections 8 and 11 and Drosophila
digressa--Unit

[[Page 17950]]

2, conservation management activities also include those associated
with the Three Mountain Alliance Watershed Partnership and the Three
Mountain Alliance Management Plan (see ``c. Three Mountain Alliance
Watershed Partnership and the Three Mountain Alliance Management Plan''
under I. Watershed Partnerships in ``Non-Permitted Conservation Plans,
Agreements, or Partnerships,'' above). The 93 ac (38 ha) within Section
11 and Drosophila digressa--Unit 2 are also covered by the Kamehameha
Schools Keauhou and K[imacr]lauea Forest Lands Safe Harbor Agreement,
described above under ``Private or Other Non-Federal Conservation Plans
Related to Permits Under Section 10 of the Act.''
The conservation actions of Kamehameha Schools benefit habitat for
Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana, Cyanea tritomantha,
Cyrtandra wagneri, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae, and
Drosophila digressa by promoting forest regeneration, which increases
soil-water retention capacity and improves ecosystem resilience to
drying climate conditions; controlling feral ungulates, which reduces
trampling of and predation on these plants, including the host plants
of Drosophila digressa; and controlling weeds, which improves
recruitment of native trees, including those that host Drosophila
digressa and support habitat for these species. Kamehameha Schools also
takes actions that reduce the incidence of fire, which benefits forest
habitat for these species by minimizing wildland fire risk.
Based on Kamehameha Schools' management; Kamehameha Schools
`[Amacr]ina Pauahi Natural Resources Management Program; and
participation in the Mauna Kea Watershed Alliance, Mauna Kea Watershed
Management Plan, Kohala Watershed Partnership, the Kohala Mountain
Watershed Management Plan, the Three Mountain Alliance Management Plan,
and the Safe Harbor Agreement Trustees of the Estate of Bernice P.
Bishop (Kamehameha Schools Keauhou and K[imacr]lauea Forest Lands Safe
Harbor Agreement), we evaluated the following lands owned by Kamehameha
Schools and considered for exclusion to determine if excluding these
lands from the final critical habitat designation is appropriate: 155
ac (63 ha), 33 ac (13 ha), 176 ac (71 ha), 647 ac (262 ha), and 93 ac
(38 ha) in Units 52, 53, 54, 44, and 51, respectively, and Drosophila
digressa--Unit 1 (155 ac (63 ha)) and Unit 2 (92 ac (37 ha)).
Benefits of Inclusion--Kamehameha Schools
As described above under ``Benefits of Inclusion--Parker Ranch,''
the principal benefit of including an area in critical habitat
designation is the requirement of Federal agencies to consult with the
Service on actions that may affect the critical habitat. This allows
the Service to assess whether Federal actions authorized, funded, or
carried out are likely to result in the destruction or adverse
modification of designated critical habitat and, if so, to identify
alternatives to avoid that result; this is in addition to assessing
whether the Federal action is likely to jeopardize the listed species.
Thus, critical habitat designation may provide greater benefits to the
species than the listing would alone. Therefore, critical habitat
designation may provide a regulatory benefit for Bidens hillebrandiana
ssp. hillebrandiana (Unit 53), Cyanea tritomantha (Units 52, 54, 44,
and 51) , Cyrtandra wagneri (Unit 52), Melicope remyi (Units 52 and
54), Phyllostegia floribunda (Units 52, 54, and 51), Pittosporum
hawaiiense Units (52, 54, 44, and 51), Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei
(Units 52, 54, 44, and 51), Stenogyne cranwelliae (Units 52, 54, 44,
and 51), and Drosophila digressa (Units 1 and 2) on lands owned by
Kamehameha Schools in Units 52, 53, 54, 44, and 51, and Drosophila
digressa--Units 1 and 2.
Another possible benefit is that the designation of critical
habitat can serve to educate the landowner and public regarding the
potential conservation value of an area, and this may focus and
contribute to conservation efforts by other parties by clearly
delineating areas of high conservation value for certain species. Due
to the reliance of these species on the remaining coastal, mesic
forest, wet forest, and wet grassland and shrubland ecosystems, the
relative importance of these parcels to the species is high, and any
information about these nine species and their habitats that reaches a
wide audience, including other parties engaged in conservation
activities, would be considered valuable. Designation of critical
habitat would provide educational benefits by informing Federal
agencies and the public about the presence of the species in these
units.
Therefore, because activities with a Federal nexus will require
section 7 consultation, and because of the occurrence of these species
on Kamehameha Schools lands, it is expected that there may be some, but
limited, benefits from including Kamehameha Schools land in this final
critical habitat designation. The principal benefit of any designated
critical habitat is that activities occurring in or affecting such
habitat require consultation under section 7 of the Act. Such
consultation would ensure that adequate protection is provided to avoid
destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat.
Benefits of Exclusion--Kamehameha Schools
The benefits of excluding the five parcels (155 ac (63 ha), 33 ac
(13 ha), 176 ac (71 ha), 647 ac (262 ha), and 93 ac (38 ha) in Units
52, 53, 54, 44, and 51, respectively, and Drosophila digressa Units 1
(155 ac (63 ha)) and 2 (92 ac (37 ha))) owned by Kamehameha Schools
from this designation of critical habitat include: (1) the continued
implementation of conservation plans (`[Amacr]ina Pauahi Natural
Resources Management Program, the Mauna Kea Watershed Management Plan,
the Kohala Mountain Watershed Management Plan, the Three Mountain
Alliance Management Plan, and the Kamehameha Schools Keauhou and
K[imacr]lauea Forest Lands Safe Harbor Agreement) that include actions
that benefit Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana, Cyanea
tritomantha, Cyrtandra wagneri, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia
floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei,
Stenogyne cranwelliae, and Drosophila digressa; (2) strengthening of
our effective partnership with Kamehameha Schools and other neighboring
landowners to promote voluntary, proactive conservation of Bidens
hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana, Cyanea tritomantha, Cyrtandra
wagneri, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae, and
Drosophila digressa and their habitats; (3) allowance for continued
meaningful collaboration and cooperation in working toward species
recovery, including conservation benefits that might not otherwise
occur; and (4) encouragement of developing and implementing
conservation and management plans in the future for these species or
other federally listed and sensitive species.
In some cases, the designation of critical habitat on (or adjacent
to) private lands may reduce the likelihood that landowners will
support and carry out conservation actions (Main et al. 1999, pp.
1,263-1,265; Bean 1998, p. 10706). The magnitude of this negative
outcome is amplified in situations where active management measures

[[Page 17951]]

(such as reintroduction, fire management, and control of invasive
species) are necessary for species conservation (Bean 1998, pp. 10706-
10708). We find that the exclusion of these specific areas of non-
federally owned lands from this critical habitat designation can
contribute to the species' recovery and provide a superior level of
conservation than critical habitat designation can provide alone. We
have also found that, where consistent with the discretion provided by
the Act, it is necessary to implement policies that provide positive
incentives to private landowners to voluntarily conserve natural
resources and that remove or reduce disincentives to conservation
(Wilcove et al. 1996, pp. 1-15; Bean 1998, entire). Additionally,
partnerships with non-Federal landowners are vital to the conservation
of these species, especially on non-Federal lands; therefore, the
Service is committed to supporting and encouraging such partnerships
through the recognition of positive conservation contributions.
Excluding lands owned and managed by Kamehameha Schools in plant
Units 52, 53, 54, 44, 51, and Drosophila digressa Units 1 and 2 from
critical habitat will help foster the partnerships the landowners and
land managers have developed with Federal and State agencies and local
conservation organizations, will encourage the continued implementation
of voluntary conservation actions for the benefit of the species and
their habitats on these lands, and may also serve as a model and aid in
fostering future cooperative relationships with other parties here and
in other locations for the benefit of other endangered or threatened
species. Therefore, we consider the positive effect of excluding from
critical habitat areas managed by active conservation partners to be a
significant benefit of exclusion.
Benefits of Exclusion Outweigh the Benefits of Inclusion--Kamehameha
Schools
We evaluated approximately 1,104 ac (447 ha) of lands in Units 52,
53, 54, 44, 51, and Drosophila digressa Units 1 and 2, owned by
Kamehameha Schools for exclusion from this designation of critical
habitat. We determined the benefits of excluding these lands outweigh
the benefits of including them as critical habitat for the subject
species on Hawai[revaps]i Island. We conclude that the additional
regulatory and educational benefits of including these lands as
critical habitat are relatively small because of the limited
distinction between actions to avoid jeopardy and adverse modification.
While Kamehameha Schools may receive Federal grants (actions which
carry a Federal nexus) from time to time, all areas of Kamehameha
Schools lands being evaluated are occupied by one or more of the 12
species addressed in this final rule. Therefore, the few section 7
consultations that may occur will include a jeopardy analysis, as
described above, and conservation measures that apply to a jeopardy
analysis and an adverse modification analysis are expected to be
similar. These marginal regulatory benefits are further reduced by the
existence of conservation plans and implemented actions, which include
habitat conservation that addresses the special management
considerations. Kamehameha Schools' `[Amacr]ina Pauahi Natural
Resources Management Program includes the protection and conservation
of natural resources, water resources, and ancestral places (Kamehameha
Schools 2022, entire). Furthermore, the potential educational and
informational benefits of critical habitat designation on areas
containing the physical and biological features essential to the
conservation of Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana (Unit 53),
Cyanea tritomantha (Units 52, 54, 44, and 51), Cyrtandra wagneri (Unit
52), Melicope remyi (Units 52 and 54), Phyllostegia floribunda (Units
52, 54, and 51), Pittosporum hawaiiense (Units 52, 54, 44, and 51),
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei (Units 52, 54, 44, and 51), Stenogyne
cranwelliae (Units 52, 54, 44, and 51), and Drosophila digressa (Units
1 and 2) would be minimal because the landowner has demonstrated their
knowledge of the species and their habitat needs in the process of
developing conservation partnerships with the Service and others.
In contrast, the benefits derived from excluding the lands owned by
Kamehameha Schools and enhancing our partnership with this landowner is
significant. Because voluntary conservation efforts for the benefit of
listed species on non-Federal lands are so valuable, the Service
considers the maintenance and encouragement of conservation
partnerships to be a significant benefit of exclusion. The development
and maintenance of effective working partnerships with non-Federal
landowners for the conservation of listed species is particularly
important in Hawaii, a State with relatively little Federal land
ownership but many species of conservation concern. Excluding these
areas from critical habitat will help foster the partnerships the
landowners and land managers in question have developed with Federal
and State agencies and local conservation organizations and will
encourage the continued implementation of voluntary conservation
actions for the benefit of Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana,
Cyanea tritomantha, Cyrtandra wagneri, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia
floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei,
Stenogyne cranwelliae and Drosophila digressa and their habitats on
these lands.
The current active conservation efforts on Kamehameha Schools lands
in Units 52, 53, 54, 44, 51 and Drosophila digressa Units 1 and 2
benefit these species, satisfying factor (vi) of the section 4(b)(2)
exclusion analysis, as described above under ``Non-Permitted
Conservation Plans, Agreements, or Partnerships.'' The partnerships and
management plans are longstanding and have demonstrated implementation
and success, and we have a reasonable expectation that the conservation
management strategies or actions in the plans will be implemented,
satisfying factors (v) and (vii) described above under ``Non-Permitted
Conservation Plans, Agreements, or Partnerships.'' The Kamehameha
Schools' `[Amacr]ina Pauahi Natural Resources Management Program, the
Mauna Kea Watershed Management Plan, the Kohala Mountain Watershed
Management Plan, the Three Mountain Alliance Management Plan, and the
Kamehameha Schools Keauhou and K[imacr]lauea Forest Lands Safe Harbor
Agreement include multiple objectives that satisfy factor (viii)
described above under ``Non-Permitted Conservation Plans, Agreements,
or Partnerships'' by promoting monitoring and adaptive management to
ensure conservation measures are effective. Kamehameha Schools
established a sustainable stewardship policy to guide the use of its
lands. In addition, these partnerships not only provide a benefit for
the conservation of these species but may also serve as a model and aid
in fostering future cooperative relationships with other parties in
these areas of Hawai`i and in other locations for the benefit of other
endangered or threatened species.
Management by Kamehameha Schools through participation in the Mauna
Kea Watershed Management Plan, the Kohala Mountain Watershed Management
Plan, the Three Mountain Alliance Management Plan, and implementation
of the `[Amacr]ina Pauahi Natural Resources Management Program and the
Kamehameha Schools Keauhou and K[imacr]lauea Forest Lands Safe Harbor

[[Page 17952]]

Agreement provides significant habitat protection for Bidens
hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana, Cyanea tritomantha, Cyrtandra
wagneri, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia floribunda, Pittosporum
hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei, Stenogyne cranwelliae, and
Drosophila digressa. We find that excluding areas from critical habitat
that are under long-term conservation and management plans to protect
the habitat that supports these species will preserve our partnership
with the Kamehameha Schools in the State of Hawaii and will encourage
future collaboration toward conservation and recovery of listed
species. In summary, these partnership benefits to the subject species
outweigh the small potential regulatory, educational, and ancillary
benefits of including the Kamehameha Schools land in this final
critical habitat designation.
Exclusion Will Not Result in Extinction of the Species--Kamehameha
Schools
We determined that the exclusion of approximately 155 ac (63 ha),
33 ac (13 ha), 176 ac (71 ha), 647 ac (262 ha), and 93 ac (38 ha) in
Units 52, 53, 54, 44, and 51, respectively, and Drosophila digressa
Units 1 (155 ac (63 ha)) and 2 (92 ac (37 ha)) owned by Kamehameha
Schools from this designation of critical habitat will not result in
the extinction of Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana, Cyanea
tritomantha, Cyrtandra wagneri, Melicope remyi, Phyllostegia
floribunda, Pittosporum hawaiiense, Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei,
Stenogyne cranwelliae, or Drosophila digressa. Protections afforded to
these species based on their listed status, and afforded to their
habitats by the management and conservation plans, provide assurances
that these species will not go extinct as a result of excluding these
lands from the critical habitat designation. While some mitigation
measures in the SHA are still underway, the primary habitat management
and restoration goals established for these parcels under the SHA and
other conservation management plans are being implemented, and
Kamehameha Schools are in compliance with the terms and conditions of
the SHA. Kamehameha Schools is fully aware of the importance of the
ecosystems that provide the habitat for these nine species for which
critical habitat was proposed on their lands and their organization
routinely provides public education on these topics.
An important consideration as we evaluate these exclusions and
their potential effect on the species in question is that a critical
habitat designation does not necessarily require affirmative actions to
restore or actively manage critical habitat for the benefit of listed
species; the regulatory effect of critical habitat is that Federal
agencies must ensure (through consultation with the Service) that any
activity they authorize, fund, or carry out is not likely to result in
the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. It is,
therefore, advantageous for the conservation of these species to
support the proactive efforts of non-Federal landowners who are
contributing to the enhancement of essential habitat features for
listed species through exclusion of their lands from a critical habitat
designation. The jeopardy standard of section 7 of the Act will
continue to provide protection to listed species in these areas when
there is a Federal nexus.

Summary of Exclusions

As discussed above, based on the information provided by entities
seeking exclusion, as well as any additional public comments we
received on our March 29, 2023, proposed rule, we evaluated whether
certain lands in the proposed critical habitat were appropriate for
exclusion from this final designation pursuant to section 4(b)(2) of
the Act. Table 7, below, summarizes the areas we are excluding from
this critical habitat designation for the 12 Hawai`i Island species;
the table provides approximate areas (ac, ha) of lands excluded from
this critical habitat designation. In addition to the acres we
evaluated for exclusion that are summarized in Table 7, we also
evaluated 91 ac (37 ha) of Queen Emma Foundation land in Unit 54 (the
D. ochrobasis parcel) for exclusion but did not ultimately exclude
them.

Table 7--Areas Excluded From Critical Habitat Designation by Critical Habitat Unit
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Area excluded from critical
habitat
Plant section and unit Drosophila unit Landowner -------------------------------
Acres Hectares
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 1, Unit 52................ Unit 1............... Kamehameha Schools... 155 63
Section 1, Unit 52................ Unit 1............... Parker Ranch 403 163
Waipunalei, LLC.
Section 2, Unit 53................ ..................... Kamehameha Schools... 33 13
Section 2, Unit 53................ ..................... Laup[amacr]hoehoe Nui 134 54
Section 3, Unit 54................ ..................... State Department of 36 15
Hawaiian Home Lands.
Section 3, Unit 54................ ..................... Kahua Ranch.......... 605 245
Section 3, Unit 54................ ..................... Kamehameha Schools... 176 71
Section 3, Unit 54................ ..................... Laup[amacr]hoehoe Nui 134 54
Section 3, Unit 54................ ..................... Parker Ranch Waiemi, 372 151
LLC.
Section 3, Unit 54................ ..................... Queen Emma Foundation 384 155
Section 8, Unit 44................ ..................... Kamehameha Schools... 647 262
Section 11, Unit 51............... Unit 2............... Kamehameha Schools... 93 38
-------------------------------
Totals........................ ..................... ..................... 3,172 1,284
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Required Determinations

Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and
14094)

Executive Order (E.O.) 14094 reaffirms the principles of E.O. 12866
and E.O. 13563 and states that regulatory analysis should facilitate
agency efforts to develop regulations that serve the public interest,
advance statutory objectives, and are consistent with E.O. 12866, E.O.
13563, and the Presidential Memorandum of January 20, 2021 (Modernizing
Regulatory Review). Regulatory analysis, as practicable and
appropriate, shall recognize distributive impacts and equity, to the
extent permitted by law.

[[Page 17953]]

E.O. 13563 emphasizes further that regulations must be based on the
best available science and that the rulemaking process must allow for
public participation and an open exchange of ideas. We have developed
this rule in a manner consistent with these requirements.
E.O. 12866, as reaffirmed by E.O. 13563 and E.O. 14094, provides
that the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) will review all significant
rules. OIRA has determined that this rule is not significant.

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA; 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.),
as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996 (SBREFA; 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), whenever an agency is required to
publish a notice of rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it must
prepare and make available for public comment a regulatory flexibility
analysis that describes the effects of the rule on small entities
(i.e., small businesses, small organizations, and small government
jurisdictions). However, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required
if the head of the agency certifies the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The SBREFA amended the RFA to require Federal agencies to provide a
certification statement of the factual basis for certifying that the
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
According to the Small Business Administration, small entities
include small organizations such as independent nonprofit
organizations; small governmental jurisdictions, including school
boards and city and town governments that serve fewer than 50,000
residents; and small businesses (13 CFR 121.201). Small businesses
include manufacturing and mining concerns with fewer than 500
employees, wholesale trade entities with fewer than 100 employees,
retail and service businesses with less than $5 million in annual
sales, general and heavy construction businesses with less than $27.5
million in annual business, special trade contractors doing less than
$11.5 million in annual business, and agricultural businesses with
annual sales less than $750,000. To determine if potential economic
impacts to these small entities are significant, we considered the
types of activities that might trigger regulatory impacts under this
designation as well as types of project modifications that may result.
In general, the term ``significant economic impact'' is meant to apply
to a typical small business firm's business operations.
Under the RFA, as amended, and following recent court decisions,
Federal agencies are required to evaluate the potential incremental
impacts of rulemaking on those entities directly regulated by the
rulemaking itself; in other words, the RFA does not require agencies to
evaluate the potential impacts to indirectly regulated entities. The
regulatory mechanism through which critical habitat protections are
realized is section 7 of the Act, which requires Federal agencies, in
consultation with the Service, to ensure that any action authorized,
funded, or carried out by the agency is not likely to destroy or
adversely modify critical habitat. Therefore, under section 7, only
Federal action agencies are directly subject to the specific regulatory
requirement (avoiding destruction and adverse modification) imposed by
critical habitat designation. Consequently, it is our position that
only Federal action agencies will be directly regulated by this
designation. The RFA does not require evaluation of the potential
impacts to entities not directly regulated. Moreover, Federal agencies
are not small entities. Therefore, because no small entities will be
directly regulated by this rulemaking, we certify that this critical
habitat designation will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
During the development of this final rule, we reviewed and
evaluated all information submitted during the comment period on the
March 29, 2023, proposed rule (88 FR 18756) that may pertain to our
consideration of the probable incremental economic impacts of this
critical habitat designation. Based on this information, we affirm our
certification that this critical habitat designation will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities,
and a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required.

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use--Executive Order 13211

Executive Order 13211 (Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use) requires
agencies to prepare statements of energy effects ``to the extent
permitted by law'' when undertaking actions identified as significant
energy actions (66 FR 28355; May 22, 2001). E.O. 13211 defines a
``significant energy action'' as an action that (i) is a significant
regulatory action under E.O. 12866 (or any successor order, including
most recently E.O. 14094 (88 FR 21879; April 11, 2023)); and (ii) is
likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. This rule is not a significant
regulatory action under E.O. 12866 or 14094. Therefore, this action is
not a significant energy action, and there is no requirement to prepare
a statement of energy effects for this action.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.)

In accordance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501
et seq.), we make the following finding:
(1) This rule will not produce a Federal mandate. In general, a
Federal mandate is a provision in legislation, statute, or regulation
that would impose an enforceable duty upon State, local, or Tribal
governments, or the private sector, and includes both ``Federal
intergovernmental mandates'' and ``Federal private sector mandates.''
These terms are defined in 2 U.S.C. 658(5)-(7). ``Federal
intergovernmental mandate'' includes a regulation that ``would impose
an enforceable duty upon State, local, or Tribal governments'' with two
exceptions. It excludes ``a condition of Federal assistance.'' It also
excludes ``a duty arising from participation in a voluntary Federal
program,'' unless the regulation ``relates to a then-existing Federal
program under which $500,000,000 or more is provided annually to State,
local, and Tribal governments under entitlement authority,'' if the
provision would ``increase the stringency of conditions of assistance''
or ``place caps upon, or otherwise decrease, the Federal Government's
responsibility to provide funding,'' and the State, local, or Tribal
governments ``lack authority'' to adjust accordingly. At the time of
enactment, these entitlement programs were: Medicaid; Aid to Families
with Dependent Children work programs; Child Nutrition; Food Stamps;
Social Services Block Grants; Vocational Rehabilitation State Grants;
Foster Care, Adoption Assistance, and Independent Living; Family
Support Welfare Services; and Child Support Enforcement. ``Federal
private sector mandate'' includes a regulation that ``would impose an
enforceable duty upon the private sector, except (i) a condition of
Federal assistance or (ii) a duty arising from participation in a
voluntary Federal program.''
The designation of critical habitat does not impose a legally
binding duty

[[Page 17954]]

on non-Federal Government entities or private parties. Under the Act,
the only regulatory effect is that Federal agencies must ensure that
their actions are not likely to destroy or adversely modify critical
habitat under section 7. While non-Federal entities that receive
Federal funding, assistance, or permits, or that otherwise require
approval or authorization from a Federal agency for an action, may be
indirectly impacted by the designation of critical habitat, the legally
binding duty to avoid destruction or adverse modification of critical
habitat rests squarely on the Federal agency. Furthermore, to the
extent that non-Federal entities are indirectly impacted because they
receive Federal assistance or participate in a voluntary Federal aid
program, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act would not apply, nor would
critical habitat shift the costs of the large entitlement programs
listed above onto State governments.
(2) We do not believe that this rule will significantly or uniquely
affect small governments. Small governments will be affected only to
the extent that any of their programs receive Federal funds, require
Federal permits, or otherwise are a result of federally authorized
activities, in which case the Federal agency must ensure that the
Federal action will not adversely affect the critical habitat. The
majority of the critical habitat units are already managed for natural
resource conservation by the Federal Government or the State of Hawaii,
and most critical habitat units have co-occurring federally listed
species that are already being considered by the State and
municipalities as a result of any Federal actions proposed in the area.
Therefore, a Small Government Agency Plan is not required.

Takings--Executive Order 12630

In accordance with E.O. 12630 (Government Actions and Interference
with Constitutionally Protected Private Property Rights), we have
analyzed the potential takings implications of designating critical
habitat for the 12 Hawai`i Island species in a takings implications
assessment. The Act does not authorize us to regulate private actions
on private lands or confiscate private property as a result of critical
habitat designation. Designation of critical habitat does not affect
land ownership, or establish any closures, or restrictions on use of or
access to the designated areas. Furthermore, the designation of
critical habitat does not affect landowner actions that do not require
Federal funding or permits, nor does it preclude development of habitat
conservation programs or issuance of incidental take permits to permit
actions that do require Federal funding or permits to go forward.
However, Federal agencies are prohibited from carrying out, funding, or
authorizing actions that would destroy or adversely modify critical
habitat. A takings implications assessment has been completed and
concludes that this designation of critical habitat for the 12 Hawai`i
Island species does not pose significant takings implications for lands
within or affected by the designation.

Federalism--Executive Order 13132

In accordance with E.O. 13132 (Federalism), this rule does not have
significant Federalism effects. A federalism summary impact statement
is not required. In keeping with Department of the Interior and
Department of Commerce policy, we requested information from, and
coordinated development of this critical habitat designation with,
appropriate State resource agencies. From a federalism perspective, the
designation of critical habitat directly affects only the
responsibilities of Federal agencies. The Act imposes no other duties
with respect to critical habitat, either for States and local
governments, or for anyone else. As a result, this final rule does not
have substantial direct effects either on the States, or on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of powers and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. The designation may have some benefit to these governments
because the areas that contain the features essential to the
conservation of the species are more clearly defined, and the physical
or biological features of the habitat necessary for the conservation of
the species are specifically identified. This information does not
alter where and what federally sponsored activities may occur. However,
it may assist State and local governments in long-range planning
because they no longer have to wait for case-by-case section 7
consultations to occur.
Where State and local governments require approval or authorization
from a Federal agency for actions that may affect critical habitat,
consultation under section 7(a)(2) of the Act will be required. While
non-Federal entities that receive Federal funding, assistance, or
permits, or that otherwise require approval or authorization from a
Federal agency for an action, may be indirectly impacted by the
designation of critical habitat, the legally binding duty to avoid
destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat rests squarely
on the Federal agency.

Civil Justice Reform--Executive Order 12988

In accordance with Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform),
the Office of the Solicitor has determined that the rule will not
unduly burden the judicial system and that it meets the requirements of
sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of the Order. We are designating critical
habitat in accordance with the provisions of the Act. To assist the
public in understanding the habitat needs of the species, this final
rule identifies the physical or biological features essential to the
conservation of the species. The designated areas of critical habitat
are presented on maps, and the rule provides several options for the
interested public to obtain more detailed location information, if
desired.

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)

This rule does not contain information collection requirements, and
a submission to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) is not
required. We may not conduct or sponsor and you are not required to
respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number.

National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)

Regulations adopted pursuant to section 4(a) of the Act are exempt
from the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et
seq.) and do not require an environmental analysis under NEPA. We
published a notice outlining our reasons for this determination in the
Federal Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244). This includes
listing, delisting, and reclassification rules, as well as critical
habitat designations. In a line of cases starting with Douglas County
v. Babbitt, 48 F.3d 1495 (9th Cir. 1995), the courts have upheld this
position.

Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes

In accordance with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994
(Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal
Governments; 59 FR 22951), Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments), and the Department of the
Interior's manual at 512 DM 2, we readily acknowledge our
responsibility to communicate meaningfully with

[[Page 17955]]

federally recognized Tribes on a government-to-government basis. In
accordance with Secretaries' Order 3206 of June 5, 1997 (American
Indian Tribal Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust Responsibilities, and the
Endangered Species Act), we readily acknowledge our responsibilities to
work directly with Tribes in developing programs for healthy
ecosystems, to acknowledge that Tribal lands are not subject to the
same controls as Federal public lands, to remain sensitive to Indian
culture, and to make information available to Tribes. We have
determined that no Tribal lands fall within the boundaries of the
critical habitat designation for the 12 Hawai`i Island species, so no
Tribal lands will be affected by this designation.

References Cited

A complete list of references cited in this rulemaking is available
on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov and upon request from
the Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).

Authors

The primary authors of this final rule are the staff members of the
Fish and Wildlife Service's Species Assessment Team and the Pacific
Islands Fish and Wildlife Office.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17

Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Plants,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Transportation, Wildlife.

Regulation Promulgation

Accordingly, we amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50
of the Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth below:

PART 17--ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 1531-1544; and 4201-4245, unless
otherwise noted.

0
2. In Sec. 17.11, in paragraph (h), amend the table ``List of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife'' by revising the entry for ``Fly,
Hawaiian picture-wing (Drosophila digressa)'' under ``Insects'' to read
as follows:

Sec. 17.11 Endangered and threatened wildlife.

* * * * *
(h) * * *

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Listing citations and
Common name Scientific name Where listed Status applicable rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Insects
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * * * *
Fly, Hawaiian picture-wing..... Drosophila Wherever found... E................ 78 FR 64638, 10/29/
digressa. 2013;
50 CFR 17.95(i).\CH\

* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

0
3. In Sec. 17.12, in paragraph (h), amend the table ``List of
Endangered and Threatened Plants'' by revising the entries for ``Bidens
hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana'', ``Cyanea marksii'', ``Cyanea
tritomantha'', ``Cyrtandra nanawaleensis'', ``Cyrtandra wagneri'',
``Melicope remyi'', ``Phyllostegia floribunda'', ``Pittosporum
hawaiiense'', ``Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei'', ``Schiedea
hawaiiensis'', and ``Stenogyne cranwelliae'' under ``Flowering Plants''
to read as follows:

Sec. 17.12 Endangered and threatened plants.

* * * * *
(h) * * *

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Listing citations and
Scientific name Common name Where listed Status applicable rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flowering Plants
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * * * *
Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. Kookoolau........ Wherever found... E................ 78 FR 64638, 10/29/
hillebrandiana. 2013; 50 CFR
17.99(k).\CH\

* * * * * * *
Cyanea marksii................. Haha............. Wherever found... E................ 78 FR 64638, 10/29/
2013; 50 CFR
17.99(k).\CH\

* * * * * * *
Cyanea tritomantha............. Aku.............. Wherever found... E................ 78 FR 64638, 10/29/
2013; 50 CFR
17.99(k).\CH\

* * * * * * *
Cyrtandra nanawaleensis........ Haiwale.......... Wherever found... E................ 78 FR 64638, 10/29/
2013; 50 CFR
17.99(k).\CH\

* * * * * * *
Cyrtandra wagneri.............. Haiwale.......... Wherever found... E................ 78 FR 64638, 10/29/
2013; 50 CFR
17.99(k).\CH\

[[Page 17956]]

* * * * * * *
Melicope remyi................. No common name... Wherever found... E................ 78 FR 64638, 10/29/
2013; 50 CFR
17.99(k).\CH\

* * * * * * *
Phyllostegia floribunda........ No common name... Wherever found... E................ 78 FR 64638, 10/29/
2013; 50 CFR
17.99(k).\CH\

* * * * * * *
Pittosporum hawaiiense......... Hoawa, haawa..... Wherever found... E................ 78 FR 64638, 10/29/
2013; 50 CFR
17.99(k).\CH\

* * * * * * *
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei.. No common name... Wherever found... E................ 78 FR 64638, 10/29/
2013; 50 CFR
17.99(k).\CH\

* * * * * * *
Schiedea hawaiiensis........... Maolioli......... Wherever found... E................ 78 FR 64638, 10/29/
2013; 50 CFR
17.99(k).\CH\

* * * * * * *
Stenogyne cranwelliae.......... No common name... Wherever found... E................ 78 FR 64638, 10/29/
2013; 50 CFR
17.99(k).\CH\

* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

0
4. In Sec. 17.95, amend paragraph (i) by adding an entry for
``Hawaiian picture-wing fly (Drosophila digressa)'' following the entry
for ``Hawaiian picture-wing fly (Drosophila differens)'' to read as
follows:

Sec. 17.95 Critical habitat--fish and wildlife.

* * * * *
(i) * * *
Hawaiian picture-wing fly (Drosophila digressa)
(1) Critical habitat units are depicted for Hawaii County, Hawaii,
on the maps in this entry.
(2) Within these areas, the physical or biological features
essential to the conservation of Drosophila digressa consist of the
following components:
(i) In units 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9, the physical or biological
features essential to the conservation of Drosophila digressa are the
features of the wet forest ecosystem and consist of:
(A) Elevation of less than 7,218 feet (ft) (2,200 meters (m)).
(B) Annual precipitation that is greater than 98 inches (in) (250
centimeters (cm)).
(C) Substrate of very weathered soils to rocky substrate, basaltic
lava, undeveloped soils, or developed soils.
(D) Canopy contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Acacia, Antidesma, Cheirodendron, Ilex, Melicope, Metrosideros,
Myrsine, Pittosporum, Psychotria.
(E) Subcanopy contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Cibotium, Clermontia, Coprosma, Cyanea, Freycinetia, Hydrangea,
Vaccinium.
(F) Understory contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Adenophorus, Cibotium, Cyrtandra, Dicranopteris, Huperzia,
Peperomia, Stenogyne.
(ii) In unit 3, the physical or biological features essential to
the conservation of Drosophila digressa are the features of both the
wet forest ecosystem and the mesic forest ecosystem and consist of the
physical and biological features described in paragraphs (2)(i)(A)
through (F) and (2)(iii)(A) through (F) of this entry.
(iii) In unit 4, the physical or biological features essential to
the conservation of Drosophila digressa are the features of the mesic
forest ecosystem and consist of:
(A) Elevation of less than 6,562 ft (2,000 m).
(B) Annual precipitation of 39 to 150 in (100 to 380 cm).
(C) Substrate of rocky, shallow, organic muck soils; rocky talus
soils; shallow soils over weathered rock; deep soils over soft
weathered rock; or gravelly alluvium.
(D) Canopy contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Acacia, Antidesma, Charpentiera, Chrysodracon, Metrosideros,
Myrsine, Nestegis, Pisonia, Santalum.
(E) Subcanopy contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Coprosma, Freycinetia, Leptecophylla, Myoporum, Pipturus,
Rubus, Sadleria, Sophora.
(F) Understory contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Ctenitis, Doodia, Dryopteris, Pelea, Sadleria.
(3) Existing humanmade features and structures, such as buildings,
aqueducts, runways, roads, and other paved areas, and the land on which
they are located existing within the legal boundaries on April 11,
2024, are not included in the critical habitat designation.
(4) Data layers defining map units were created based on summaries
of occurrences and landcover layers including habitat characteristics
that indicate the physical or biological features essential to the
conservation of Drosophila digressa. Coordinates were created using
World Geodetic System 1984 (WGS84). The maps in this entry, as modified
by any accompanying regulatory text, establish the boundaries of the
critical habitat designation. The coordinates or plot points or both on
which each map is based are available to the public at https://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-R1-ES-2023-0017, and at the field
office responsible for this designation. You may obtain field office
location information by contacting one of the Service regional offices,
the addresses of which are listed at 50 CFR 2.2.
(5) Index map follows:

Figure 1 to Hawaiian picture-wing fly (Drosophila digressa) paragraph
(5)

Critical Habitat for Drosophila digressa

Hawaii Island, HI

Index Map

BILLING CODE 4333-15-P

[[Page 17957]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.004

(6) Drosophila digressa--Unit 1; Hawaii County, Hawaii.
(i) Drosophila digressa--Unit 1 consists of 15,714 ac (6,359 ha) of
wet forest ecosystem from Ookala to Maulua Nui on the northeastern
slope of Maunakea. Lands within this unit include approximately 4,098
ac (1,658 ha) in Federal ownership, 10,644 ac (4,308 ha) in State
ownership, and 972 ac (394 ha) in private or other ownership. Federal
lands within this unit are within the Hakalau Forest National Wildlife
Refuge Hakalau Forest Unit. State lands within this unit are part of
the Hilo Forest Reserve Humuula, Laupahoehoe, and Piha Sections; the
Laupahoehoe Natural Area Reserve; and the Manowaialee Forest Reserve.
(ii) Map of Drosophila digressa--Unit 1 follows:

Figure 2 to Hawaiian picture-wing fly (Drosophila digressa) paragraph
(6)(ii)

[[Page 17958]]

Critical Habitat for Drosophila digressa

Hawaii Island, HI

Unit 1
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.005

(7) Drosophila digressa--Unit 2; Hawaii County, Hawaii.
(i) Drosophila digressa--Unit 2 consists of 31,998 ac (12,949 ha)
of wet forest ecosystem from Olaa to Upper Waiakea on the eastern slope
of Mauna Loa and partially on the northern slope of Kilauea Volcano.
Lands within this unit include approximately 7,875 ac (3,187 ha) in
Federal ownership, 23,897 ac (9,671 ha) in State ownership, and 226 ac
(91 ha) in private or other ownership. Federal lands in this unit are
within Hawaii Volcanoes National Park. State lands in this unit are
part of the Hilo Forest Reserve Kukuau Section, Olaa Forest Reserve
Mountain View Section, Upper Wai[amacr]kea Forest Reserve,
Wai[amacr]kea Forest Reserve, Puu Makaala Natural Area Reserve, and
Waiakea 1942 Lava Flow Natural Area Reserve.
(ii) Map of Drosophila digressa--Unit 2 follows:

Figure 3 to Hawaiian picture-wing fly (Drosophila digressa) paragraph
(7)(ii)

Critical Habitat for Drosophila digressa

Hawaii Island, HI

Unit 2
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.006

(8) Drosophila digressa--Unit 3; Hawaii County, Hawaii.
(i) Drosophila digressa--Unit 3 consists of 8,781 ac (3,554 ha) of
wet and mesic forest ecosystems at Kahuku on the southern slopes of
Mauna Loa. Lands within this unit include approximately 8,773 ac (3,550
ha) in Federal ownership and 8 ac (3 ha) in State ownership. Federal
lands within this unit are within Hawaii Volcanoes National Park.
State-owned lands in this unit are part of the Ka'[umacr] Forest
Reserve.
(ii) Map of Drosophila digressa--Unit 3 follows:
Figure 4 to Hawaiian picture-wing fly (Drosophila digressa) paragraph
(8)(ii)

Critical Habitat for Drosophila digressa

Hawaii Island, HI

Unit 3
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.007

(9) Drosophila digressa--Unit 4; Hawaii County, Hawaii.
(i) Drosophila digressa--Unit 4 consists of 167 ac (67 ha) of mesic
forest ecosystem at Manuka on the southern slopes of Mauna Loa. Lands
within this unit are entirely in State ownership and are part of the
Manuka Natural Area Reserve.
(ii) Map of Drosophila digressa--Unit 4 follows:
Figure 5 to Hawaiian picture-wing fly (Drosophila digressa) paragraph
(9)(ii)

[[Page 17959]]

Critical Habitat for Drosophila digressa

Hawaii Island, HI

Unit 4
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.008

(10) Drosophila digressa--Unit 5; Hawaii County, Hawaii.
(i) Drosophila digressa--Unit 5 consists of 3,412 ac (1,381 ha) of
wet forest ecosystem from Kipahoehoe to Honomalino on the southwestern
slopes of Mauna Loa. Lands within this unit include approximately 411
ac (166 ha) in State ownership and 3,001 ac (1,214 ha) in private or
other ownership. State-owned lands in this unit are part of the
Kipahoehoe Natural Area Reserve and South Kona Forest Reserve Kapua-
Manuk[amacr] Section. Some private lands are owned by The Nature
Conservancy, within the Kona Hema Preserve.
(ii) Map of Drosophila digressa--Unit 5, Drosophila digressa--Unit
6, Drosophila digressa--Unit 7, Drosophila digressa--Unit 8, and
Drosophila digressa--Unit 9 follows:

Figure 6 to Hawaiian picture-wing fly (Drosophila digressa) paragraph
(10)(ii)

Critical Habitat for Drosophila digressa

Hawaii Island, HI

Unit 5, Unit 6, Unit 7, Unit 8, and Unit 9
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.009

(11) Drosophila digressa--Unit 6; Hawaii County, Hawaii.
(i) Drosophila digressa--Unit 6 consists of 224 ac (91 ha) of wet
forest ecosystem from Milolii to Honomalino on the southwestern slopes
of Mauna Loa. Lands within this unit are entirely in State ownership
and are part of the South Kona Forest Reserve Kapua-Manuka Section.
(ii) Map of Drosophila digressa--Unit 6 is provided at paragraph
(10)(ii) of this entry.
(12) Drosophila digressa--Unit 7; Hawaii County, Hawaii.
(i) Drosophila digressa--Unit 7 consists of 1,346 ac (545 ha) of
wet forest ecosystem from Kukuiopae to Olelomoana on the southwestern
slopes of Mauna Loa. Lands within this unit include approximately 1,179
ac (477 ha) in State ownership and 167 ac (68 ha) in private or other
ownership. State-owned lands in this unit are part of the South Kona
Forest Reserve Kukuiopae Section.
(ii) Map of Drosophila digressa--Unit 7 is provided at paragraph
(10)(ii) of this entry.
(13) Drosophila digressa--Unit 8; Hawaii County, Hawaii.
(i) Drosophila digressa--Unit 8 consists of 661 ac (267 ha) of wet
forest ecosystem in Kaohe on the southwestern slopes of Mauna Loa.
Lands within this unit include approximately 352 ac (142 ha) in State
ownership and 309 ac (125 ha) in private or other ownership. State-
owned lands in this unit are part of the South Kona Forest Reserve,
Kaohe Section and Kukuiopae Section.
(ii) Map of Drosophila digressa--Unit 8 is provided at paragraph
(10)(ii) of this entry.
(14) Drosophila digressa--Unit 9; Hawaii County, Hawaii.
(i) Drosophila digressa--Unit 9 consists of 1,906 ac (771 ha) of
wet forest ecosystem in Hookena on the southwestern slopes of Mauna
Loa. Lands within this unit include 1,906 ac (771 ha) of Federal land
within Hakalau Forest National Wildlife Refuge Kona Forest Unit and
less than 1 ac (less than 1 ha) of land that is privately owned or has
other ownership.
(ii) Map of Drosophila digressa--Unit 9 is provided at paragraph
(10)(ii) of this entry.
* * * * *

0
5. Amend Sec. 17.99 by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (k) introductory text and (k)(1);
0
b. Redesignating paragraphs (k)(115) and (116) as paragraphs (k)(238)
and (239), respectively;
0
c. Redesignating paragraphs (k)(12) through (114) as paragraphs (k)(13)
through (115), respectively;
0
d. Adding a new paragraph (k)(12);
0
e. Redesignating newly redesignated paragraphs (k)(15) through (115) as
paragraphs (k)(18) through (118), respectively;
0
f. Adding new paragraphs (k)(15) through (17);
0
g. Redesignating newly redesignated paragraphs (k)(19) through (118) as
paragraphs (k)(22) through (121), respectively;
0
h. Adding new paragraphs (k)(19) through (21);
0
i. Redesignating newly redesignated paragraphs (k)(32) through (121) as
paragraphs (k)(33) through (122), respectively;
0
j. Adding a new paragraph (k)(32);
0
k. Redesignating newly redesignated paragraphs (k)(36) through (122) as
paragraphs (k)(39) through (125), respectively;
0
l. Adding new paragraphs (k)(36) through (38);

[[Page 17960]]

0
m. Redesignating newly redesignated paragraphs (k)(40) through (125) as
paragraphs (k)(43) through (128), respectively;
0
n. Adding new paragraphs (k)(40) through (42);
0
o. Redesignating newly redesignated paragraphs (k)(53) through (128) as
paragraphs (k)(59) through (134), respectively;
0
p. Adding new paragraphs (k)(53) through (58);
0
q. Redesignating newly redesignated paragraphs (k)(79) through (134) as
paragraphs (k)(81) through (136), respectively;
0
r. Adding new paragraphs (k)(79) and (80);
0
s. Redesignating newly redesignated paragraphs (k)(82) through (136) as
paragraphs (k)(90) through (144), respectively;
0
t. Adding new paragraphs (k)(82) through (89);
0
u. Redesignating newly redesignated paragraphs (k)(91) through (144) as
paragraphs (k)(92) through (145), respectively;
0
v. Adding a new paragraph (k)(91);
0
w. Redesignating newly redesignated paragraphs (k)(93) through (145) as
paragraphs (k)(97) through (149), respectively;
0
x. Adding new paragraphs (k)(93) through (96);
0
y. Redesignating newly redesignated paragraphs (k)(110) through (149)
as paragraphs (k)(112) through (151), respectively;
0
z. Adding new paragraphs (k)(110) and (111);
0
aa. Redesignating newly redesignated paragraphs (k)(116) through (151)
as paragraphs (k)(117) through (152), respectively;
0
bb. Adding new paragraph (k)(116);
0
cc. Redesignating newly redesignated paragraphs (k)(119) through (152)
as paragraphs (k)(121) through (154), respectively;
0
dd. Adding new paragraphs (k)(119) and (120);
0
ee. Redesignating newly redesignated paragraphs (k)(122) through (154)
as paragraphs (k)(126) through (158), respectively;
0
ff. Adding new paragraphs (k)(122) through (125);
0
gg. Redesignating newly redesignated paragraphs (k)(134) through (158)
as paragraphs (k)(136) through (160), respectively;
0
hh. Adding new paragraphs (k)(134) through (135);
0
ii. Redesignating newly redesignated paragraphs (k)(138) through (160)
as paragraphs (k)(139) through (161), respectively;
0
jj. Adding a new paragraph (k)(138);
0
kk. Redesignating newly redesignated paragraphs (k)(141) through (161)
as paragraphs (k)(145) through (165), respectively;
0
ll. Adding new paragraphs (k)(141) through (144);
0
mm. Redesignating newly redesignated paragraphs (k)(150) through (165)
as paragraphs (k)(151) through (166), respectively;
0
nn. Adding a new paragraph (k)(150);
0
oo. Redesignating newly redesignated paragraphs (k)(152) through (166)
as paragraphs (k)(153) through (167), respectively;
0
pp. Adding new paragraph (k)(152);
0
qq. Redesignating newly redesignated paragraphs (k)(155) through (167)
as paragraphs (k)(156) through (168), respectively;
0
rr. Adding a new paragraph (k)(155);
0
ss. Redesignating newly redesignated paragraphs (k)(157) through (168)
as paragraphs (k)(158) through (169), respectively;
0
tt. Adding a new paragraph (k)(157);
0
uu. Redesignating newly redesignated paragraphs (k)(159) through (169)
as paragraphs (k)(160) through (170), respectively;
0
vv. Adding a new paragraph (k)(159);
0
ww. Adding new paragraphs (k)(171) through (237);
0
xx. Revising newly redesignated paragraph (k)(238); and
0
yy. In paragraph (l)(1), adding in alphabetical order entries for
``Family Asteraceae: Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana
(KOOKOOLAU)'', ``Family Campanulaceae: Cyanea marksii (HAHA)'',
``Family Campanulaceae: Cyanea tritomantha (AKU)'', ``Family
Caryophyllaceae: Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei (no common name)'',
``Family Caryophyllaceae: Schiedea hawaiiensis (MAOLIOLI)'', ``Family
Gesneriaceae: Cyrtandra nanawaleensis (HAIWALE)'', Family Gesneriaceae:
Cyrtandra wagneri (HAIWALE)'', ``Family Lamiaceae: Phyllostegia
floribunda (no common name)'', ``Family Lamiaceae: Stenogyne
cranwelliae (no common name)'', ``Family Pittosporaceae: Pittosporum
hawaiiense (HOAWA, HAAWA)'', and ``Family Rutaceae: Melicope remyi (no
common name)''.
The revisions and additions read as follows:

Sec. 17.99 Critical habitat; plants on the Hawaiian Islands, HI.

* * * * *
(k) Maps and critical habitat unit descriptions for the island of
Hawaii, HI. Critical habitat units are described in this paragraph (k).
Map coordinates were created using World Geodetic System 1984 (WGS84).
The map in paragraph (k)(1) shows the general locations of the critical
habitat units designated on the island of Hawaii. Existing humanmade
features and structures, such as buildings, aqueducts, runways, roads,
and other paved areas, and the land on which they are located existing
within the legal boundaries on April 11, 2024 are not included in the
critical habitat designation. Federal actions limited to those areas,
therefore, would not trigger a consultation under section 7 of the Act
unless they may affect the species or physical or biological features
in adjacent critical habitat.
(1) Index map follows:

Figure 1 to paragraph (k)

Map 1

Hawaii Critical Habitat--Island Index Map

[[Page 17961]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.010

* * * * *
(12) Hawaii 3--Cyanea tritomantha-a (12,059 ac; 4,880 ha).
(i) This unit is also critical habitat for Hawaii 3--Cyrtandra
wagneri-a, Hawaii 3--Melicope remyi-a, Hawaii 3--Phyllostegia
floribunda-a, Hawaii 3--Pittosporum hawaiiense-a, Hawaii 3--Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei-a, and Hawaii 3--Stenogyne cranwelliae-a (see
paragraphs (k)(15), (k)(16), (k)(17), (k)(19), (k)(20), (k)(21),
respectively, of this section).
(ii) Map 11a follows:

Figure 12 to paragraph (k)

Map 11a

Hawaii 3--Cyanea tritomantha-a, Hawaii 3--Cyrtandra wagneri-a, Hawaii
3--Melicope remyi-a, Hawaii 3--Phyllostegia floribunda-a, Hawaii 3--
Pittosporum hawaiiense-a, Hawaii 3--Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-a,
Hawaii 3--Stenogyne cranwelliae-a

[[Page 17962]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.011

* * * * *
(15) Hawaii 3--Cyrtandra wagneri-a (12,059 ac; 4,880 ha). See
paragraph (k)(12)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(16) Hawaii 3--Melicope remyi-a (12,059 ac; 4,880 ha). See
paragraph (k)(12)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(17) Hawaii 3--Phyllostegia floribunda-a (12,059 ac; 4,880 ha). See
paragraph (k)(12)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
* * * * *
(19) Hawaii 3--Pittosporum hawaiiense-a (12,059 ac; 4,880 ha). See
paragraph (k)(12)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(20) Hawaii 3--Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-a (12,059 ac; 4,880
ha). See paragraph (k)(12)(ii) of this section for the map of this
unit.
(21) Hawaii 3--Stenogyne cranwelliae-a (12,059 ac; 4,880 ha). See
paragraph (k)(12)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
* * * * *
(32) Hawaii 6--Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana-a (2 ac; 1
ha).
(i) [Reserved].
(ii) Map 24a follows:
Figure 26 to paragraph (k)

Map 24a

Hawaii 6--Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana-a
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.012

* * * * *
(36) Hawaii 8--Cyanea tritomantha-b (6,805 ac; 2,754 ha).
(i) This unit is also critical habitat for Hawaii 8--Melicope
remyi-b, Hawaii 8--Phyllostegia floribunda-b, Hawaii 8--Pittosporum
hawaiiense-b, Hawaii 8--Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-b, and Hawaii 8--
Stenogyne cranwelliae-b (see paragraphs (k)(37), (k)(38), (k)(40),
(k)(41), and (k)(42), respectively, of this section).
(ii) Map 27a follows:
Figure 30 to paragraph (k)

Map 27a

Hawaii 8--Cyanea tritomantha-b, Hawaii 8--Melicope remyi-b, Hawaii 8--
Phyllostegia floribunda-b, Hawaii 8--Pittosporum hawaiiense-b, Hawaii
8--Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-b, Hawaii 8--Stenogyne cranwelliae-b
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.013

(37) Hawaii 8--Melicope remyi-b (6,805 ac; 2,754 ha). See paragraph
(k)(36)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(38) Hawaii 8--Phyllostegia floribunda-b (6,805 ac; 2,754 ha). See
paragraph (k)(36)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
* * * * *
(40) Hawaii 8--Pittosporum hawaiiense-b (6,805 ac; 2,754 ha). See
paragraph (k)(36)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(41) Hawaii 8--Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-b (6,805 ac; 2,754
ha). See paragraph (k)(36)(ii) of this section for the map of this
unit.
(42) Hawaii 8--Stenogyne cranwelliae-b (6,805 ac; 2,754 ha). See
paragraph (k)(36)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
* * * * *
(53) Hawaii 9--Cyanea tritomantha-c (1 ac; <1 ha).
(i) This unit is also critical habitat for Hawaii 9--Melicope
remyi-c, Hawaii 9--Phyllostegia floribunda-c, Hawaii 9--Pittosporum
hawaiiense-c, Hawaii 9--Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-c, and

[[Page 17963]]

Hawaii 9--Stenogyne cranwelliae-c (see paragraphs (k)(54), (k)(55),
(k)(56), (k)(57), and (k)(58) respectively, of this section).
(ii) Map 38a follows:
Figure 42 to paragraph (k)

Map 38a

Hawaii 9--Cyanea tritomantha-c, Hawaii 9--Melicope remyi-c, Hawaii 9--
Phyllostegia floribunda-c, Hawaii 9--Pittosporum hawaiiense-c, Hawaii
9--Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-c, Hawaii 9--Stenogyne cranwelliae-c
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.014

(54) Hawaii 9--Melicope remyi-c (1 ac; <1 ha). See paragraph
(k)(53)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(55) Hawaii 9--Phyllostegia floribunda-c (1 ac; <1 ha). See
paragraph (k)(53)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(56) Hawaii 9-Pittosporum hawaiiense-c (1 ac; < 1 ha). See
paragraph (k)(53)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(57) Hawaii 9-Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-c (1 ac; < 1 ha). See
paragraph (k)(53)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(58) Hawaii 9-Stenogyne cranwelliae-c (1 ac; < 1 ha). See paragraph
(k)(53)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
* * * * *
(79) Hawaii 15-Cyanea marksii-a-Section 4 (182 ac; 73 ha).
(i) This unit is also critical habitat for Hawaii 15-Phyllostegia
floribunda-d-Section 4, Hawaii 15-Pittosporum hawaiiense-d-Section 4,
Hawaii 15-Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-d-Section 4, and Hawaii 15-
Stenogyne cranwelliae-d-Section 4 (see paragraphs (k)(82), (k)(84),
(k)(86), and (k)(88), respectively, of this section).
(ii) Map 58a follows:
Figure 60 to paragraph (k)

Map 58a

Hawaii 15-Cyanea marksii-a-Section 4, Hawaii 15-Cyanea marksii-b-
Section 5, Hawaii 15-Phyllostegia floribunda-d-Section 4, Hawaii 15-
Phyllostegia floribunda-e-Section 5, Hawaii 15-Pittosporum hawaiiense-
d-Section 4, Hawaii 15-Pittosporum hawaiiense-e-Section 5, Hawaii 15-
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-d-Section 4, Hawaii 15-Schiedea diffusa
ssp. macraei-e-Section 5, Hawaii 15-Stenogyne cranwelliae-d-Section 4,
Hawaii 15-Stenogyne cranwelliae-e-Section 5

[[Page 17964]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.015

(80) Hawaii 15-Cyanea marksii-b-Section 5 (127 ac; 51 ha).
(i) This unit is also critical habitat for Hawaii 15-Phyllostegia
floribunda-e-Section 5, Hawaii 15-Pittosporum hawaiiense-e-Section 5,
Hawaii 15-Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-e-Section 5, and Hawaii 15-
Stenogyne cranwelliae-e-Section 5 (see paragraphs (k)(83), (k)(85),
(k)(87), and (k)(89), respectively, of this section).
(ii) See paragraph (k)(79)(ii) of this section for the map of this
unit.
* * * * *
(82) Hawaii 15-Phyllostegia floribunda-d-Section 4 (182 ac; 73 ha).
See paragraph (k)(79)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(83) Hawaii 15-Phyllostegia floribunda-e-Section 5 (127 ac; 51 ha).
See paragraph (k)(79)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(84) Hawaii 15-Pittosporum hawaiiense-d-Section 4 (182 ac; 73 ha).
See paragraph (k)(79)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(85) Hawaii 15-Pittosporum hawaiiense-e-Section 5 (127 ac; 51 ha).
See paragraph (k)(79)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(86) Hawaii 15-Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-d-Section 4 (182 ac;
73 ha). See paragraph (k)(79)(ii) of this section for the map of this
unit.
(87) Hawaii 15-Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-e-Section 5 (127 ac;
51 ha). See paragraph (k)(79)(ii) of this section for the map of this
unit.
(88) Hawaii 15-Stenogyne cranwelliae-d-Section 4 (182 ac; 73 ha).
See paragraph (k)(79)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(89) Hawaii 15-Stenogyne cranwelliae-e-Section 5 (127 ac; 51 ha).
See paragraph (k)(79)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
* * * * *
(91) Hawaii 16-Cyanea marksii-c (156 ac; 63 ha).
(i) This unit is also critical habitat for Hawaii 16-Phyllostegia
floribunda-f, Hawaii 16-Pittosporum hawaiiense-f, Hawaii 16-Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei-f, and Hawaii 16-Stenogyne cranwelliae-f (see
paragraphs (k)(93), (k)(94), (k)(95), and (k)(96), respectively, of
this section).
(ii) Map 60a follows:
Figure 63 to paragraph (k)

Map 60a

Hawaii 16-Cyanea marksii-c, Hawaii 16-Phyllostegia floribunda-f, Hawaii
16-Pittosporum hawaiiense-f, Hawaii 16-Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-f,
Hawaii 16-Stenogyne cranwelliae-f
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.016

* * * * *
(93) Hawaii 16-Phyllostegia floribunda-f (156 ac; 63 ha). See
paragraph (k)(91)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(94) Hawaii 16-Pittosporum hawaiiense-f (156 ac; 63 ha). See
paragraph (k)(91)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(95) Hawaii 16-Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-f (156 ac; 63 ha). See
paragraph (k)(91)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(96) Hawaii 16-Stenogyne cranwelliae-f (156 ac; 63 ha). See
paragraph (k)(91)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
* * * * *
(110) Hawaii 23-Phyllostegia floribunda-g (9 ac; 4 ha).
(i) This unit is also critical habitat for Hawaii 23-Pittosporum
hawaiiense-g (see paragraph (k)(111) of this section).
(ii) Map 74a follows:
Figure 78 to paragraph (k)

Map 74a

Hawaii 23-Phyllostegia floribunda-g, Hawaii 23-Pittosporum hawaiiense-g

[[Page 17965]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.017

(111) Hawaii 23-Pittosporum hawaiiense-g (9 ac; 4 ha). See
paragraph (k)(110)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
* * * * *
(116) Hawaii 24-Cyanea tritomantha-d-Section 8 (1,956 ac; 792 ha).
(i) This unit is also critical habitat for Hawaii 24-Pittosporum
hawaiiense-h-Section 8, Hawaii 24-Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-g-
Section 8, and Hawaii 24-Stenogyne cranwelliae-g-Section 8 (see
paragraphs (k)(119), (k)(122), and (k)(124), respectively, of this
section).
(ii) Map 78a follows:
Figure 83 to paragraph (k)

Map 78a

Hawaii 24-Cyanea tritomantha-d-Section 8, Hawaii 24-Pittosporum
hawaiiense-h-Section 8, Hawaii 24-Pittosporum hawaiiense-i-Section 9,
Hawaii 24-Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-g-Section 8, Hawaii 24-Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei-h-Section 9, Hawaii 24-Stenogyne cranwelliae-g-
Section 8, Hawaii 24-Stenogyne cranwelliae-h-Section 9
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.018

* * * * *
(119) Hawaii 24-Pittosporum hawaiiense-h-Section 8 (1,956 ac; 792
ha). See paragraph (k)(116)(ii) of this section for the map of this
unit.
(120) Hawaii 24-Pittosporum hawaiiense-i-Section 9 (101 ac; 41 ha).
(i) This unit is also critical habitat for Hawaii 24-Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei-h-Section 9 and Hawaii 24-Stenogyne cranwelliae-h-
Section 9 (see paragraphs (k)(123) and (k)(125), respectively, of this
section).
(ii) See paragraph (k)(116)(ii) of this section for the map of this
unit.
* * * * *
(122) Hawaii 24-Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-g-Section 8 (1,956
ac; 792 ha). See paragraph (k)(116)(ii) of this section for the map of
this unit.
(123) Hawaii 24-Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-h-Section 9 (101 ac;
41 ha). See paragraph (k)(116)(ii) of this section for the map of this
unit.
(124) Hawaii 24-Stenogyne cranwelliae-g-Section 8 (1,956 ac; 792
ha). See paragraph (k)(116)(ii) of this section for the map of this
unit.
(125) Hawaii 24-Stenogyne cranwelliae-h-Section 9 (101 ac; 41 ha).
See paragraph (k)(116)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
* * * * *
(134) Hawaii 28-Cyrtandra nanawaleensis-a (155 ac; 63 ha).
(i) This unit is also critical habitat for Hawaii 28-Phyllostegia
floribunda-h (see paragraph (k)(135) of this section).
(ii) Map 89a follows:
Figure 95 to paragraph (k)

Map 89a

Hawaii 28-Cyrtandra nanawaleensis-a, Hawaii 28-Phyllostegia floribunda-
h
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.019

(135) Hawaii 28-Phyllostegia floribunda-h (155 ac; 63 ha). See
paragraph (k)(134)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
* * * * *
(138) Hawaii 29-Cyanea tritomantha-e (494 ac; 200 ha).
(i) This unit is also critical habitat for Hawaii 29-Phyllostegia
floribunda-i, Hawaii 29-Pittosporum hawaiiense-j, Hawaii 29-Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei-i, and Hawaii 29-Stenogyne cranwelliae-i (see
paragraphs (k)(141), (k)(142), (k)(143), and (k)(144), respectively, of
this section).
(ii) Map 91a follows:
Figure 98 to paragraph (k)

[[Page 17966]]

Map 91a

Hawaii 29-Cyanea tritomantha-e, Hawaii 29-Phyllostegia floribunda-i,
Hawaii 29-Pittosporum hawaiiense-j, Hawaii 29-Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei-i, Hawaii 29-Stenogyne cranwelliae-I
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.020

* * * * *
(141) Hawaii 29-Phyllostegia floribunda-i (494 ac; 200 ha). See
paragraph (k)(138)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(142) Hawaii 29-Pittosporum hawaiiense-j (494 ac; 200 ha). See
paragraph (k)(138)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(143) Hawaii 29-Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-i (494 ac; 200 ha).
See paragraph (k)(138)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(144) Hawaii 29-Stenogyne cranwelliae-i (494 ac; 200 ha). See
paragraph (k)(138)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
* * * * *
(150) Hawaii 30-Cyanea tritomantha-f (13,730 ac; 5,556 ha).
(i) This unit is also critical habitat for Hawaii 30-Phyllostegia
floribunda-j, Hawaii 30-Pittosporum hawaiiense-k, Hawaii 30-Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei-j, and Hawaii 30-Stenogyne cranwelliae-j (see
paragraphs (k)(152), (k)(155), (k)(157), and (k)(159), respectively, of
this section).
(ii) Map 98a follows:
Figure 106 to paragraph (k)

Map 98a

Hawaii 30-Cyanea tritomantha-f, Hawaii 30-Phyllostegia floribunda-j,
Hawaii 30-Pittosporum hawaiiense-k, Hawaii 30-Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei-j, Hawaii 30-Stenogyne cranwelliae-j
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.021

* * * * *
(152) Hawaii 30-Phyllostegia floribunda-j (13,730 ac; 5,556 ha).
See paragraph (k)(150)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
* * * * *
(155) Hawaii 30-Pittosporum hawaiiense-k (13,730 ac; 5,556 ha). See
paragraph (k)(150)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
* * * * *
(157) Hawaii 30-Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-j (13,730 ac; 5,556
ha). See paragraph (k)(150)(ii) of this section for the map of this
unit.
* * * * *
(159) Hawaii 30-Stenogyne cranwelliae-j (13,730 ac; 5,556 ha). See
paragraph (k)(150)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
* * * * *
(171) Hawaii 37-Cyanea marksii-d (1,906 ac; 771 ha)
(i) This unit is also critical habitat for Hawaii 37-Phyllostegia
floribunda-k, Hawaii 37-Pittosporum hawaiiense-l, Hawaii 37-Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei-k, and Hawaii 37-Stenogyne cranwelliae-k (see
paragraphs (k)(172), (k)(173), (k)(174), and (k)(175), respectively, of
this section).
(ii) Map 106 follows:
Figure 114 to paragraph (k)

Map 106

Hawaii 37-Cyanea marksii-d, Hawaii 37-Phyllostegia floribunda-k, Hawaii
37-Pittosporum hawaiiense-l, Hawaii 37-Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-k,
Hawaii 37-Stenogyne cranwelliae-k
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.022

(172) Hawaii 37-Phyllostegia floribunda-k (1,906 ac; 771 ha). See
paragraph (k)(171)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.

[[Page 17967]]

(173) Hawaii 37-Pittosporum hawaiiense-l (1,906 ac; 771 ha). See
paragraph (k)(171)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(174) Hawaii 37-Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-k (1,906 ac; 771 ha).
See paragraph (k)(171)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(175) Hawaii 37-Stenogyne cranwelliae-k (1,906 ac; 771 ha). See
paragraph (k)(171)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(176) Hawaii 38-Cyanea marksii-e (534 ac; 216 ha).
(i) This unit is also critical habitat for Hawaii 38-Phyllostegia
floribunda-l, Hawaii 38-Pittosporum hawaiiense-m, Hawaii 38-Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei-l, and Hawaii 38-Stenogyne cranwelliae-l (see
paragraphs (k)(177), (k)(178), (k)(179), and (k)(180), respectively, of
this section).
(ii) Map 107 follows:
Figure 115 to paragraph (k)

Map 107

Hawaii 38-Cyanea marksii-e, Hawaii 38-Phyllostegia floribunda-l, Hawaii
38-Pittosporum hawaiiense-m, Hawaii 38-Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-l,
Hawaii 38-Stenogyne cranwelliae-l
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.023

(177) Hawaii 38-Phyllostegia floribunda-l (534 ac; 216 ha). See
paragraph (k)(176)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(178) Hawaii 38-Pittosporum hawaiiense-m (534 ac; 216 ha). See
paragraph (k)(176)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(179) Hawaii 38-Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-l (534 ac; 216 ha).
See paragraph (k)(176)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(180) Hawaii 38-Stenogyne cranwelliae-l (534 ac; 216 ha). See
paragraph (k)(176)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(181) Hawaii 39-Cyanea marksii-f (1,164 ac; 471 ha)
(i) This unit is also critical habitat for Hawaii 39-Phyllostegia
floribunda-m, Hawaii 39-Pittosporum hawaiiense-n, Hawaii 39-Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei-m, and Hawaii 39-Stenogyne cranwelliae-m (see
paragraphs (k)(182), (k)(183), (k)(184), and (k)(185), respectively, of
this section).
(ii) Map 108 follows:
Figure 116 to paragraph (k)

Map 108

Hawaii 39-Cyanea marksii-f, Hawaii 39-Phyllostegia floribunda-m, Hawaii
39-Pittosporum hawaiiense-n, Hawaii 39-Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-m,
Hawaii 39-Stenogyne cranwelliae-m
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.024

(182) Hawaii 39-Phyllostegia floribunda-m (1,164 ac; 471 ha). See
paragraph (k)(181)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(183) Hawaii 39-Pittosporum hawaiiense-n (1,164 ac; 471 ha). See
paragraph (k)(181)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(184) Hawaii 39-Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-m (1,164 ac; 471 ha).
See paragraph (k)(181)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(185) Hawaii 39-Stenogyne cranwelliae-m (1,164 ac; 471 ha). See
paragraph (k)(181)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(186) Hawaii 40-Cyanea marksii-g (1,243 ac; 503 ha)
(i) This unit is also critical habitat for Hawaii 40-Phyllostegia
floribunda-n, Hawaii 40-Pittosporum hawaiiense-o, Hawaii 40-Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei-n, and Hawaii 40-Stenogyne cranwelliae-n (see
paragraphs (k)(187), (k)(188), (k)(189), and (k)(190), respectively, of
this section).
(ii) Map 109 follows:
Figure 117 to paragraph (k)

[[Page 17968]]

Map 109

Hawaii 40-Cyanea marksii-g, Hawaii 40-Phyllostegia floribunda-n, Hawaii
40-Pittosporum hawaiiense-o, Hawaii 40-Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-n,
Hawaii 40-Stenogyne cranwelliae-n
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.025

(187) Hawaii 40-Phyllostegia floribunda-n (1,243 ac; 503 ha). See
paragraph (k)(186)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(188) Hawaii 40-Pittosporum hawaiiense-o (1,243 ac; 503 ha). See
paragraph (k)(186)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(189) Hawaii 40-Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-n (1,243 ac; 503 ha).
See paragraph (k)(186)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(190) Hawaii 40-Stenogyne cranwelliae-n (1,243 ac; 503 ha). See
paragraph (k)(186)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(191) Hawaii 41-Cyanea marksii-h (3,412 ac; 1,381 ha)
(i) This unit is also critical habitat for Hawaii 41-Phyllostegia
floribunda-o, Hawaii 41-Pittosporum hawaiiense-p, Hawaii 41-Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei-o, and Hawaii 41-Stenogyne cranwelliae-o (see
paragraphs (k)(192), (k)(193), (k)(194), and (k)(195), respectively, of
this section).
(ii) Map 110 follows:
Figure 118 to paragraph (k)

Map 110

Hawaii 41-Cyanea marksii-h, Hawaii 41-Phyllostegia floribunda-o, Hawaii
41-Pittosporum hawaiiense-p, Hawaii 41-Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-o,
Hawaii 41-Stenogyne cranwelliae-o
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.026

(192) Hawaii 41-Phyllostegia floribunda-o (3,412 ac; 1,381 ha). See
paragraph (k)(191)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(193) Hawaii 41-Pittosporum hawaiiense-p (3,412 ac; 1,381 ha). See
paragraph (k)(191)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(194) Hawaii 41-Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-o (3,412 ac; 1,381
ha). See paragraph (k)(191)(ii) of this section for the map of this
unit.
(195) Hawaii 41-Stenogyne cranwelliae-o (3,412 ac; 1,381 ha). See
paragraph (k)(191)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(196) Hawaii 42-Cyanea tritomantha-g (8,781 ac; 3,554 ha).
(i) This unit is also critical habitat for Hawaii 42-Phyllostegia
floribunda-p, Hawaii 42-Pittosporum hawaiiense-q, Hawaii 42-Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei-p, and Hawaii 42-Stenogyne cranwelliae-p (see
paragraphs (k)(197), (k)(198), (k)(199), and (k)(200), respectively, of
this section).
(ii) Map 111 follows:

Figure 119 to paragraph (k)

Map 111 Hawaii 42-Cyanea tritomantha-g, Hawaii 42-Phyllostegia
floribunda-p, Hawaii 42-Pittosporum hawaiiense-q, Hawaii 42-Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei-p, Hawaii 42-Stenogyne cranwelliae-p
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.027

(197) Hawaii 42-Phyllostegia floribunda-p (8,781 ac; 3,554 ha). See
paragraph (k)(196)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(198) Hawaii 42-Pittosporum hawaiiense-q (8,781 ac; 3,554 ha). See
paragraph (k)(196)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(199) Hawaii 42-Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-p (8,781 ac; 3,554
ha). See paragraph (k)(196)(ii) of this section for the map of this
unit.
(200) Hawaii 42-Stenogyne cranwelliae-p (8,781 ac; 3,554 ha). See
paragraph (k)(196)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.

[[Page 17969]]

(201) Hawaii 43-Pittosporum hawaiiense-r (5,872 ac; 2,376 ha).
(i) This unit is also critical habitat for Hawaii 43-Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei-q and Hawaii 43-Stenogyne cranwelliae-q (see
paragraphs (k)(202) and (k)(203), respectively, of this section).
(ii) Map 112 follows:

Figure 120 to paragraph (k)

Map 112

Hawaii 43-Pittosporum hawaiiense-r, Hawaii 43-Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei-q, Hawaii 43-Stenogyne cranwelliae-q
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.028

(202) Hawaii 43-Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-q (5,872 ac; 2,376
ha). See paragraph (k)(201)(ii) of this section for the map of this
unit.
(203) Hawaii 43-Stenogyne cranwelliae-q (5,872 ac; 2,376 ha). See
paragraph (k)(201)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(204) Hawaii 44-Cyanea tritomantha-h (5,884 ac; 2,381 ha).
(i) This unit is also critical habitat for Hawaii 44-Pittosporum
hawaiiense-s, Hawaii 44-Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-r, and Hawaii 44-
Stenogyne cranwelliae-r (see paragraphs (k)(205), (k)(206), and
(k)(207), respectively, of this section).
(ii) Map 113 follows:

Figure 121 to paragraph (k)

Map 113

Hawaii 44-Cyanea tritomantha-h, Hawaii 44-Pittosporum hawaiiense-s,
Hawaii 44-Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-r, Hawaii 44-Stenogyne
cranwelliae-r
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.029

(205) Hawaii 44-Pittosporum hawaiiense-s (5,884 ac; 2,381 ha). See
paragraph (k)(204)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(206) Hawaii 44-Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-r (5,884 ac; 2,381
ha). See paragraph (k)(204)(ii) of this section for the map of this
unit.
(207) Hawaii 44-Stenogyne cranwelliae-r (5,884 ac; 2,381 ha). See
paragraph (k)(204)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(208) Hawaii 45-Phyllostegia floribunda-q (5,494 ac; 2,223 ha).
(i) This unit is also critical habitat for Hawaii 45-Pittosporum
hawaiiense-t (see paragraph (k)(209) of this section).
(ii) Map 114 follows:

Figure 122 to paragraph (k)

Map 114

Hawaii 45-Phyllostegia floribunda-q, Hawaii 45-Pittosporum hawaiiense-t
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.030

(209) Hawaii 45-Pittosporum hawaiiense-t (5,494 ac; 2,223 ha). See
paragraph (k)(208)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(210) Hawaii 46-Cyrtandra nanawaleensis-b (12,219 ac; 4,945 ha)
(i) This unit is also critical habitat for Hawaii 46-Phyllostegia
floribunda-r (see paragraph (k)(211) of this section).
(ii) Map 115 follows:

Figure 123 to paragraph (k)

Map 115

Hawaii 46-Cyrtandra nanawaleensis-b, Hawaii 46-Phyllostegia floribunda-
r

[[Page 17970]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.031

(211) Hawaii 46-Phyllostegia floribunda-r (12,219 ac; 4,945 ha).
See paragraph (k)(210)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(212) Hawaii 47-Cyrtandra nanawaleensis-c (274 ac; 111 ha)
(i) [Reserved].
(ii) Map 116 follows:

Figure 124 to paragraph (k)

Map 116

Hawaii 47-Cyrtandra nanawaleensis-c, Hawaii 48-Cyrtandra nanawaleensis-
d
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.032

(213) Hawaii 48-Cyrtandra nanawaleensis-d (589 ac; 238 ha). See
paragraph (k)(212)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(214) Hawaii 49-Cyrtandra nanawaleensis-e (875 ac; 354 ha)
(i) [Reserved].
(ii) Map 117 follows:

Figure 125 to paragraph (k)

Map 117

Hawaii 49-Cyrtandra nanawaleensis-e, Hawaii 50-Cyrtandra nanawaleensis-
f
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.033

(215) Hawaii 50-Cyrtandra nanawaleensis-f (562 ac; 227 ha). See
paragraph (k)(214)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(216) Hawaii 51-Cyanea tritomantha-i (17,774 ac; 7,193 ha).
(i) This unit is also critical habitat for Hawaii 51-Phyllostegia
floribunda-s, Hawaii 51-Pittosporum hawaiiense-u, Hawaii 51-Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei-s, and Hawaii 51-Stenogyne cranwelliae-s (see
paragraphs (k)(217), (k)(218), (k)(219), and (k)(220), respectively, of
this section).
(ii) Map 118 follows:

Figure 126 to paragraph (k)

Map 118

Hawaii 51-Cyanea tritomantha-i, Hawaii 51-Phyllostegia floribunda-s,
Hawaii 51-Pittosporum hawaiiense-u, Hawaii 51-Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei-s, Hawaii 51-Stenogyne cranwelliae-s

[[Page 17971]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.034

(217) Hawaii 51-Phyllostegia floribunda-s (17,774 ac; 7,193 ha).
See paragraph (k)(216)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(218) Hawaii 51-Pittosporum hawaiiense-u (17,774 ac; 7,193 ha). See
paragraph (k)(216)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(219) Hawaii 51-Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-s (17,774 ac; 7,193
ha). See paragraph (k)(216)(ii) of this section for the map of this
unit.
(220) Hawaii 51-Stenogyne cranwelliae-s (17,774 ac; 7,193 ha). See
paragraph (k)(216)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(221) Hawaii 52-Cyanea tritomantha-j (3,656 ac; 1,479 ha).
(i) This unit is also critical habitat for Hawaii 52-Cyrtandra
wagneri-b, Hawaii 52-Melicope remyi-d, Hawaii 52-Phyllostegia
floribunda-t, Hawaii 52-Pittosporum hawaiiense-v, Hawaii 52-Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei-t, and Hawaii 52-Stenogyne cranwelliae-t (see
paragraphs (k)(222), (k)(223), (k)(224), (k)(225), (k)(226), and
(k)(227), respectively, of this section).
(ii) Map 119 follows:

Figure 127 to paragraph (k)

Map 119

Hawaii 52-Cyanea tritomantha-j, Hawaii 52-Cyrtandra wagneri-b, Hawaii
52-Melicope remyi-d, Hawaii 52-Phyllostegia floribunda-t, Hawaii 52-
Pittosporum hawaiiense-v, Hawaii 52-Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-t,
Hawaii 52-Stenogyne cranwelliae-t
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.035

(222) Hawaii 52-Cyrtandra wagneri-b (3,656 ac; 1,479 ha). See
paragraph (k)(221)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(223) Hawaii 52-Melicope remyi-d (3,656 ac; 1,479 ha). See
paragraph (k)(221)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(224) Hawaii 52-Phyllostegia floribunda-t (3,656 ac; 1,479 ha). See
paragraph (k)(221)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(225) Hawaii 52-Pittosporum hawaiiense-v (3,656 ac; 1,479 ha). See
paragraph (k)(221)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(226) Hawaii 52-Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-t (3,656 ac; 1,479
ha). See paragraph (k)(221)(ii) of this section for the map of this
unit.
(227) Hawaii 52-Stenogyne cranwelliae-t (3,656 ac; 1,479 ha). See
paragraph (k)(221)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(228) Hawaii 53-Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana-b (154
ac; 62 ha)
(i) [Reserved].
(ii) Map 120 follows:

Figure 128 to paragraph (k)

Map 120

Hawaii 53-Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana-b

[[Page 17972]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.036

[[Page 17973]]

(229) Hawaii 54-Cyanea tritomantha-k (5,945 ac; 2,406 ha).
(i) This unit is also critical habitat for Hawaii 54-Melicope
remyi-e, Hawaii 54-Phyllostegia floribunda-u, Hawaii 54-Pittosporum
hawaiiense-w, Hawaii 54-Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-u, and Hawaii 54-
Stenogyne cranwelliae-u (see paragraphs (k)(230), (k)(231), (k)(232),
(k)(233), and (k)(234), respectively, of this section).
(ii) Map 121 follows:

Figure 129 to paragraph (k)

Map 121

Hawaii 54-Cyanea tritomantha-k, Hawaii 54-Melicope remyi-e, Hawaii 54-
Phyllostegia floribunda-u, Hawaii 54-Pittosporum hawaiiense-w, Hawaii
54-Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-u, Hawaii 54-Stenogyne cranwelliae-u
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.037

(230) Hawaii 54-Melicope remyi-e (5,945 ac; 2,406 ha). See
paragraph (k)(229)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(231) Hawaii 54-Phyllostegia floribunda-u (5,945 ac; 2,406 ha). See
paragraph (k)(229)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(232) Hawaii 54-Pittosporum hawaiiense-w (5,945 ac; 2,406 ha). See
paragraph (k)(229)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(233) Hawaii 54-Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-u (5,945 ac; 2,406
ha). See paragraph (k)(229)(ii) of this section for the map of this
unit.
(234) Hawaii 54-Stenogyne cranwelliae-u (5,945 ac; 2,406 ha). See
paragraph (k)(229)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(235) Hawaii 55-Schiedea hawaiiensis-a (6,822 ac; 2,761 ha)
(i) [Reserved].
(ii) Map 122 follows:

Figure 130 to paragraph (k)

Map 122

Hawaii 55-Schiedea hawaiiensis-a
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.038

(236) Hawaii 56-Cyanea marksii-i (224 ac; 91 ha)
(i) This unit is also critical habitat for Hawaii 56-Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei-v (see paragraph (k)(237) of this section).
(ii) Map 123 follows:

Figure 131 to paragraph (k)

Map 123

Hawaii 56-Cyanea marksii-i, Hawaii 56-Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-v
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR24.039

BILLING CODE 4333-15-C
(237) Hawaii 56-Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-v (224 ac; 91 ha).
See paragraph (k)(236)(ii) of this section for the map of this unit.
(238) Table of Listed Species Within Each Critical Habitat Unit for
the Island of Hawaii.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit name Species occupied Species unoccupied
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hawaii 1--Clermontia Clermontia Clermontia
lindseyana-a. lindseyana. lindseyana.
Hawaii 1--Clermontia peleana- Clermontia peleana.. Clermontia peleana.
a.

[[Page 17974]]

Hawaii 1--Clermontia .................... Clermontia
pyrularia-a. pyrularia.
Hawaii 1--Cyanea shipmanii-a Cyanea shipmanii.... Cyanea shipmanii.
Hawaii 1--Phyllostegia Phyllostegia Phyllostegia
racemosa-a. racemosa. racemosa.
Hawaii 2--Clermontia Clermontia Clermontia
lindseyana-b. lindseyana. lindseyana.
Hawaii 2--Clermontia Clermontia pyrularia Clermontia
pyrularia-b. pyrularia.
Hawaii 2--Phyllostegia Phyllostegia Phyllostegia
racemosa-b. racemosa. racemosa.
Hawaii 3--Clermontia peleana- Clermontia peleana.. Clermontia peleana.
b.
Hawaii 3--Cyanea platyphylla- Cyanea platyphylla.. Cyanea platyphylla.
a.
Hawaii 3--Cyanea tritomantha- Cyanea tritomantha.. Cyanea tritomantha.
a.
Hawaii 3--Cyrtandra Cyrtandra giffardii. Cyrtandra giffardii.
giffardii-a.
Hawaii 3--Cyrtandra Cyrtandra Cyrtandra
tintinnabula-a. tintinnabula. tintinnabula.
Hawaii 3--Cyrtandra wagneri- Cyrtandra wagneri... Cyrtandra wagneri.
a.
Hawaii 3--Melicope remyi-a.. Melicope remyi...... Melicope remyi.
Hawaii 3--Phyllostegia Phyllostegia Phyllostegia
floribunda-a. floribunda. floribunda.
Hawaii 3--Phyllostegia Phyllostegia Phyllostegia
warshaueri-a. warshaueri. warshaueri.
Hawaii 3--Pittosporum .................... Pittosporum
hawaiiense-a. hawaiiense.
Hawaii 3--Schiedea diffusa .................... Schiedea diffusa
ssp. macraei-a. ssp. macraei.
Hawaii 3--Stenogyne Stenogyne Stenogyne
cranwelliae-a. cranwelliae. cranwelliae.
Hawaii 4--Isodendrion .................... Isodendrion hosakae.
hosakae-a.
Hawaii 4--Isodendrion .................... Isodendrion hosakae.
hosakae-b.
Hawaii 4--Isodendrion .................... Isodendrion hosakae.
hosakae-c.
Hawaii 4--Isodendrion .................... Isodendrion hosakae.
hosakae-d.
Hawaii 4--Isodendrion .................... Isodendrion hosakae.
hosakae-e.
Hawaii 4--Isodendrion Isodendrion hosakae. Isodendrion hosakae.
hosakae-f.
Hawaii 4--Vigna o-wahuensis- .................... Vigna o-wahuensi..
a.
Hawaii 4--Vigna o-wahuensis- .................... Vigna o-wahuensis.
b.
Hawaii 4--Vigna o-wahuensis- .................... Vigna o-wahuensis.
c.
Hawaii 5--Nothocestrum .................... Nothocestrum
breviflorum-a. breviflorum.
Hawaii 6--Bidens Bidens Bidens
hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana ssp.
hillebrandiana-a. hillebrandiana. hillebrandiana.
Hawaii 6--Nothocestrum Nothocestrum Nothocestrum
breviflorum-b. breviflorum. breviflorum.
Hawaii 7--Dracaena konaensis- Dracaena konaensis.. Dracaena konaensis.
a.
Hawaii 8--Clermontia Clermontia Clermontia
drepanomorpha-a. drepanomorpha. drepanomorpha.
Hawaii 8--Cyanea tritomantha- Cyanea tritomantha.. Cyanea tritomantha.
b.
Hawaii 8--Melicope remyi-b.. .................... Melicope remyi.
Hawaii 8--Phyllostegia .................... Phyllostegia
floribunda-b. floribunda.
Hawaii 8--Phyllostegia Phyllostegia Phyllostegia
warshaueri-b. warshaueri. warshaueri.
Hawaii 8--Pittosporum Pittosporum Pittosporum
hawaiiense-b. hawaiiense. hawaiiense.
Hawaii 8--Schiedea diffusa Schiedea diffusa Schiedea diffusa
ssp. macraei-b. ssp. macraei. ssp. macraei.
Hawaii 8--Stenogyne Stenogyne Stenogyne
cranwelliae-b. cranwelliae. cranwelliae.
Hawaii 9--Achyranthes mutica- .................... Achyranthes mutica.
a.
Hawaii 9--Achyranthes mutica- Achyranthes mutica.. Achyranthes mutica.
b.
Hawaii 9--Achyranthes mutica- .................... Achyranthes mutica.
c.
Hawaii 9--Achyranthes mutica- .................... Achyranthes mutica.
d.
Hawaii 9--Achyranthes mutica- .................... Achyranthes mutica.
e.
Hawaii 9--Achyranthes mutica- .................... Achyranthes mutica.
f.
Hawaii 9--Achyranthes mutica- .................... Achyranthes mutica.
g.
Hawaii 9--Achyranthes mutica- .................... Achyranthes mutica.
h.
Hawaii 9--Achyranthes mutica- .................... Achyranthes mutica.
i.
Hawaii 9--Achyranthes mutica- .................... Achyranthes mutica.
j.
Hawaii 9--Cyanea tritomantha- Cyanea tritomantha.. Cyanea tritomantha.
c.
Hawaii 9--Melicope remyi-c.. .................... Melicope remyi.
Hawaii 9--Phyllostegia .................... Phyllostegia
floribunda-c. floribunda.
Hawaii 9--Pittosporum Pittosporum Pittosporum
hawaiiense-c. hawaiiense. hawaiiense.
Hawaii 9--Schiedea diffusa Schiedea diffusa Schiedea diffusa
ssp. macraei-c. ssp. macraei. ssp. macraei.
Hawaii 9--Stenogyne Stenogyne Stenogyne
cranwelliae-c. cranwelliae. cranwelliae.
Hawaii 10--Argyroxiphium .................... Argyroxiphium
kauense-a. kauense.
Hawaii 10--Bidens micrantha .................... Bidens micrantha
ssp. ctenophylla-a. ssp. ctenophylla.
Hawaii 10--Bonamia menziesii- .................... Bonamia menziesii.
a.
Hawaii 10--Colubrina Colubrina Colubrina
oppositifolia-a. oppositifolia. oppositifolia.
Hawaii 10--Delissea undulata- .................... Delissea undulata.
a.
Hawaii 10--Delissea undulata- Delissea undulata... Delissea undulata.
b.
Hawaii 10--Dracaena Dracaena konaensis.. Dracaena konaensis.
konaensis-b.
Hawaii 10--Hibiscadelphus Hibiscadelphus Hibiscadelphus
hualalaiensis-a. hualalaiensis. hualalaiensis.
Hawaii 10--Hibiscus Hibiscus Hibiscus
brackenridgei-a. brackenridgei. brackenridgei.
Hawaii 10--Isodendrion .................... Isodendrion
pyrifolium-a. pyrifolium.
Hawaii 10--Mezoneuron Mezoneuron kavaiense Mezoneuron
kavaiense-a. kavaiense.
Hawaii 10--Neraudia ovata-a. .................... Neraudia ovata.
Hawaii 10--Nothocestrum Nothocestrum Nothocestrum
breviflorum-c. breviflorum. breviflorum.
Hawaii 10--Solanum .................... Solanum incompletum.
incompletum-a.
Hawaii 10--Zanthoxylum Zanthoxylum Zanthoxylum
dipetalum ssp. tomentosum-a. dipetalum ssp. dipetalum ssp.
tomentosum. tomentosum.
Hawaii 11--Cyanea Cyanea hamatiflora Cyanea hamatiflora
hamatiflora ssp. carlsonii- ssp. carlsonii. ssp. carlsonii.
a.

[[Page 17975]]

Hawaii 11--Solanum .................... Solanum incompletum.
incompletum-b.
Hawaii 14--Cyanea .................... Cyanea hamatiflora
hamatiflora ssp. carlsonii- ssp. carlsonii.
b.
Hawaii 15--Cyanea .................... Cyanea hamatiflora
hamatiflora ssp. carlsonii- ssp. carlsonii.
c.
Hawaii 15--Cyanea marksii-a Cyanea marksii...... Cyanea marksii.
Section 4.
Hawaii 15--Cyanea marksii-b-- Cyanea marksii...... Cyanea marksii.
Section 5.
Hawaii 15--Cyanea Cyanea stictophylla. Cyanea stictophylla.
stictophylla-a.
Hawaii 15--Phyllostegia Phyllostegia Phyllostegia
floribunda-d--Section 4. floribunda. floribunda.
Hawaii 15--Phyllostegia .................... Phyllostegia
floribunda-e--Section 5. floribunda.
Hawaii 15--Pittosporum Pittosporum Pittosporum
hawaiiense-d--Section 4. hawaiiense. hawaiiense.
Hawaii 15--Pittosporum .................... Pittosporum
hawaiiense-e--Section 5. hawaiiense.
Hawaii 15--Schiedea diffusa .................... Schiedea diffusa
ssp. macraei-d--Section 4. ssp. macraei.
Hawaii 15--Schiedea diffusa .................... Schiedea diffusa
ssp. macraei-e--Section 5. ssp. macraei.
Hawaii 15--Stenogyne .................... Stenogyne
cranwelliae-d--Section 4. cranwelliae.
Hawaii 15--Stenogyne .................... Stenogyne
cranwelliae-e--Section 5. cranwelliae.
Hawaii 16--Cyanea Cyanea hamatiflora Cyanea hamatiflora
hamatiflora ssp. carlsonii- ssp. carlsonii. ssp. carlsonii.
d.
Hawaii 16--Cyanea marksii-c. Cyanea marksii...... Cyanea marksii.
Hawaii 16--Cyanea Cyanea stictophylla. Cyanea stictophylla.
stictophylla-b.
Hawaii 16--Phyllostegia Phyllostegia Phyllostegia
floribunda-f. floribunda. floribunda.
Hawaii 16--Pittosporum .................... Pittosporum
hawaiiense-f. hawaiiense.
Hawaii 16--Schiedea diffusa .................... Schiedea diffusa
ssp. macraei-f. ssp. macraei.
Hawaii 16--Stenogyne .................... Stenogyne
cranwelliae-f. cranwelliae.
Hawaii 17--Asplenium Asplenium Asplenium
dielerectum-a. dielerectum. dielerectum.
Hawaii 17--Flueggea Flueggea neowawraea. Flueggea neowawraea.
neowawraea-a.
Hawaii 18--Asplenium Asplenium Asplenium
dielerectum-b. dielerectum. dielerectum.
Hawaii 18--Colubrina Colubrina Colubrina
oppositifolia-b. oppositifolia. oppositifolia.
Hawaii 18--Dracaena Dracaena konaensis.. Dracaena konaensis.
konaensis-c.
Hawaii 18--Flueggea Flueggea neowawraea. Flueggea neowawraea.
neowawraea-b.
Hawaii 18--Gouania vitifolia- Gouania vitifolia... Gouania vitifolia.
a.
Hawaii 18--Neraudia ovata-d. Neraudia ovata...... Neraudia ovata.
Hawaii 19--Mariscus fauriei- Mariscus fauriei.... Mariscus fauriei.
a.
Hawaii 20--Sesbania Sesbania tomentosa.. Sesbania tomentosa.
tomentosa-a.
Hawaii 21--Ischaemum byrone- .................... Ischaemum byrone.
a.
Hawaii 22--Ischaemum byrone- Ischaemum byrone.... Ischaemum byrone.
b.
Hawaii 23--Dracaena Dracaena konaensis.. Dracaena konaensis.
konaensis-d.
Hawaii 23--Phyllostegia Phyllostegia Phyllostegia
floribunda-g. floribunda. floribunda.
Hawaii 23--Pittosporum Pittosporum Pittosporum
hawaiiense-g. hawaiiense. hawaiiense.
Hawaii 23--Sesbania Sesbania tomentosa.. Sesbania tomentosa.
tomentosa-b.
Hawaii 24--Argyroxiphium Argyroxiphium Argyroxiphium
kauense-b. kauense. kauense.
Hawaii 24--Asplenium fragile Asplenium fragile Asplenium fragile
var. insulare-a. var. insulare. var. insulare..
Hawaii 24--Cyanea .................... Cyanea stictophylla.
stictophylla-c.
Hawaii 24--Cyanea Cyanea tritomantha.. Cyanea tritomantha.
tritomantha-d--Section 8.
Hawaii 24--Melicope .................... Melicope
zahlbruckneri-a. zahlbruckneri.
Hawaii 24--Phyllostegia Phyllostegia Phyllostegia
velutina-a. velutina. velutina.
Hawaii 24--Pittosporum Pittosporum Pittosporum
hawaiiense-h--Section 8. hawaiiense. hawaiiense.
Hawaii 24--Pittosporum Pittosporum Pittosporum
hawaiiense-i--Section 9. hawaiiense. hawaiiense.
Hawaii 24--Plantago Plantago hawaiensis. Plantago hawaiensis.
hawaiensis-a.
Hawaii 24--Schiedea diffusa Schiedea diffusa Schiedea diffusa
ssp. macraei-g--Section 8. ssp. macraei. ssp. macraei.
Hawaii 24--Schiedea diffusa Schiedea diffusa Schiedea diffusa
ssp. macraei-h--Section 9. ssp. macraei. ssp. macraei.
Hawaii 24--Stenogyne .................... Stenogyne
cranwelliae-g--Section 8. cranwelliae.
Hawaii 24--Stenogyne .................... Stenogyne
cranwelliae-h--Section 9. cranwelliae.
Hawaii 25--Argyroxiphium Argyroxiphium Argyroxiphium
kauense-c. kauense. kauense.
Hawaii 25--Plantago Plantago hawaiensis. Plantago hawaiensis.
hawaiensis-b.
Hawaii 25--Silene Silene hawaiiensis.. Silene hawaiiensis.
hawaiiensis-a.
Hawaii 26--Hibiscadelphus Hibiscadelphus Hibiscadelphus
giffardianus-a. giffardianus. giffardianus.
Hawaii 26--Melicope Melicope Melicope
zahlbruckneri-b. zahlbruckneri. zahlbruckneri.
Hawaii 27--Portulaca Portulaca Portulaca
sclerocarpa-a. sclerocarpa. sclerocarpa.
Hawaii 27--Silene Silene hawaiiensis.. Silene hawaiiensis.
hawaiiensis-b.
Hawaii 28--Adenophorus Adenophorus periens. Adenophorus periens.
periens-a.
Hawaii 28--Cyrtandra Cyrtandra Cyrtandra
nanawaleensis-a. nanawaleensis. nanawaleensis.
Hawaii 28--Phyllostegia Phyllostegia Phyllostegia
floribunda-h. floribunda. floribunda.

[[Page 17976]]

Hawaii 29--Clermontia Clermontia peleana.. Clermontia peleana.
peleana-c.
Hawaii 29--Cyanea Cyanea platyphylla.. Cyanea platyphylla.
platyphylla-b.
Hawaii 29--Cyanea Cyanea tritomantha.. Cyanea tritomantha.
tritomantha-e.
Hawaii 29--Cyrtandra .................... Cyrtandra giffardii.
giffardii-b.
Hawaii 29--Cyrtandra .................... Cyrtandra
tintinnabula-b. tintinnabula.
Hawaii 29--Phyllostegia Phyllostegia Phyllostegia
floribunda-i. floribunda. floribunda.
Hawaii 29--Pittosporum Pittosporum Pittosporum
hawaiiense-j. hawaiiense. hawaiiense.
Hawaii 29--Schiedea diffusa Schiedea diffusa Schiedea diffusa
ssp. macraei-i. ssp. macraei. ssp. macraei.
Hawaii 29--Stenogyne .................... Stenogyne
cranwelliae-i. cranwelliae.
Hawaii 30--Argyroxiphium Argyroxiphium Argyroxiphium
kauense-d. kauense. kauense.
Hawaii 30--Clermontia Clermontia Clermontia
lindseyana-c. lindseyana. lindseyana.
Hawaii 30--Cyanea shipmanii- Cyanea shipmanii.... Cyanea shipmanii.
b.
Hawaii 30--Cyanea shipmanii- .................... Cyanea shipmanii.
c.
Hawaii 30--Cyanea .................... Cyanea stictophylla.
stictophylla-d.
Hawaii 30--Cyanea Cyanea tritomantha.. Cyanea tritomantha.
tritomantha-f.
Hawaii 30--Cyrtandra Cyrtandra giffardii. Cyrtandra giffardii.
giffardii-c.
Hawaii 30--Phyllostegia Phyllostegia Phyllostegia
floribunda-j. floribunda. floribunda.
Hawaii 30--Phyllostegia .................... Phyllostegia
racemosa-c. racemosa.
Hawaii 30--Phyllostegia Phyllostegia Phyllostegia
velutina-b. velutina. velutina.
Hawaii 30--Pittosporum Pittosporum Pittosporum
hawaiiense-k. hawaiiense. hawaiiense.
Hawaii 30--Plantago Plantago hawaiensis. Plantago hawaiensis.
hawaiensis-c.
Hawaii 30--Schiedea diffusa Schiedea diffusa Schiedea diffusa
ssp. macraei-j. ssp. macraei. ssp. macraei.
Hawaii 30--Sicyos alba-a.... Sicyos alba......... Sicyos alba.
Hawaii 30--Stenogyne .................... Stenogyne
cranwelliae-j. cranwelliae.
Hawaii 31--Bidens micrantha .................... Bidens micrantha
ssp. ctenophylla-b. ssp. ctenophylla.
Hawaii 31--Isodendrion .................... Isodendrion
pyrifolium-b. pyrifolium.
Hawaii 31--Mezoneuron Mezoneuron kavaiense Mezoneuron
kavaiense-b. kavaiense.
Hawaii 33--Bidens micrantha .................... Bidens micrantha
ssp. ctenophylla-d. ssp. ctenophylla.
Hawaii 33--Isodendrion .................... Isodendrion
pyrifolium-d. pyrifolium.
Hawaii 33--Mezoneuron .................... Mezoneuron
kavaiense-d. kavaiense.
Hawaii 34--Bidens micrantha .................... Bidens micrantha
ssp. ctenophylla-e. ssp. ctenophylla.
Hawaii 34--Isodendrion .................... Isodendrion
pyrifolium-e. pyrifolium.
Hawaii 34--Mezoneuron .................... Mezoneuron
kavaiense-e. kavaiense.
Hawaii 36--Bidens micrantha Bidens micrantha Bidens micrantha
ssp. ctenophylla-g. ssp. ctenophylla. ssp. ctenophylla.
Hawaii 36--Isodendrion .................... Isodendrion
pyrifolium-g. pyrifolium.
Hawaii 37--Cyanea marksii-d. Cyanea marksii...... Cyanea marksii.
Hawaii 37--Phyllostegia .................... Phyllostegia
floribunda-k. floribunda.
Hawaii 37--Pittosporum .................... Pittosporum
hawaiiense-l. hawaiiense.
Hawaii 37--Schiedea diffusa .................... Schiedea diffusa
ssp. macraei-k. ssp. macraei.
Hawaii 37--Stenogyne .................... Stenogyne
cranwelliae-k. cranwelliae.
Hawaii 38--Cyanea marksii-e. Cyanea marksii...... Cyanea marksii.
Hawaii 38--Phyllostegia .................... Phyllostegia
floribunda-l. floribunda.
Hawaii 38--Pittosporum .................... Pittosporum
hawaiiense-m. hawaiiense.
Hawaii 38--Schiedea diffusa .................... Schiedea diffusa
ssp. macraei-l. ssp. macraei.
Hawaii 38--Stenogyne .................... Stenogyne
cranwelliae-l. cranwelliae.
Hawaii 39--Cyanea marksii-f. Cyanea marksii...... Cyanea marksii.
Hawaii 39--Phyllostegia Phyllostegia Phyllostegia
floribunda-m. floribunda. floribunda.
Hawaii 39--Pittosporum Pittosporum Pittosporum
hawaiiense-n. hawaiiense. hawaiiense.
Hawaii 39--Schiedea diffusa .................... Schiedea diffusa
ssp. macraei-m. ssp. macrae.
Hawaii 39--Stenogyne .................... Stenogyne
cranwelliae-m. cranwelliae.
Hawaii 40--Cyanea marksii-g. Cyanea marksii...... Cyanea marksii.
Hawaii 40--Phyllostegia Phyllostegia Phyllostegia
floribunda-n. floribunda. floribunda.
Hawaii 40--Pittosporum .................... Pittosporum
hawaiiense-o. hawaiiense.
Hawaii 40--Schiedea diffusa .................... Schiedea diffusa
ssp. macraei-n. ssp. macraei.
Hawaii 40--Stenogyne .................... Stenogyne
cranwelliae-n. cranwelliae.
Hawaii 41--Cyanea marksii-h. Cyanea marksii...... Cyanea marksii.
Hawaii 41--Phyllostegia Phyllostegia Phyllostegia
floribunda-o. floribunda. floribunda.
Hawaii 41--Pittosporum Pittosporum Pittosporum
hawaiiense-p. hawaiiense. hawaiiense.
Hawaii 41--Schiedea diffusa .................... Schiedea diffusa
ssp. macraei-o. ssp. macraei.
Hawaii 41--Stenogyne .................... Stenogyne
cranwelliae-o. cranwelliae.
Hawaii 42--Cyanea .................... Cyanea tritomantha.
tritomantha-g.
Hawaii 42--Phyllostegia .................... Phyllostegia
floribunda-p. floribunda.
Hawaii 42--Pittosporum Pittosporum Pittosporum
hawaiiense-q. hawaiiense. hawaiiense.
Hawaii 42--Schiedea diffusa Schiedea diffusa Schiedea diffusa
ssp. macraei-p. ssp. macraei. ssp. macrae..
Hawaii 42--Stenogyne .................... Stenogyne
cranwelliae-p. cranwelliae.
Hawaii 43--Pittosporum Pittosporum Pittosporum
hawaiiense-r. hawaiiense. hawaiiense.
Hawaii 43--Schiedea diffusa Schiedea diffusa Schiedea diffusa
ssp. macraei-q. ssp. macraei. ssp. macrae..
Hawaii 43--Stenogyne .................... Stenogyne
cranwelliae-q. cranwelliae.
Hawaii 44--Cyanea Cyanea tritomantha.. Cyanea tritomantha.
tritomantha-h.
Hawaii 44--Pittosporum Pittosporum Pittosporum
hawaiiense-s. hawaiiense. hawaiiense.

[[Page 17977]]

Hawaii 44--Schiedea diffusa Schiedea diffusa Schiedea diffusa
ssp. macraei-r. ssp. macraei. ssp. macraei.
Hawaii 44--Stenogyne .................... Stenogyne
cranwelliae-r. cranwelliae.
Hawaii 45--Phyllostegia Phyllostegia Phyllostegia
floribunda-q. floribunda. floribunda.
Hawaii 45--Pittosporum Pittosporum Pittosporum
hawaiiense-t. hawaiiense. hawaiiense.
Hawaii 46--Cyrtandra Cyrtandra Cyrtandra
nanawaleensis-b. nanawaleensis. nanawaleensis.
Hawaii 46--Phyllostegia Phyllostegia Phyllostegia
floribunda-r. floribunda. floribunda.
Hawaii 47--Cyrtandra Cyrtandra Cyrtandra
nanawaleensis-c. nanawaleensis. nanawaleensis.
Hawaii 48--Cyrtandra Cyrtandra Cyrtandra
nanawaleensis-d. nanawaleensis. nanawaleensis.
Hawaii 49--Cyrtandra Cyrtandra Cyrtandra
nanawaleensis-e. nanawaleensis. nanawaleensis.
Hawaii 50--Cyrtandra Cyrtandra Cyrtandra
nanawaleensis-f. nanawaleensis. nanawaleensis..
Hawaii 51--Cyanea Cyanea tritomantha.. Cyanea tritomantha.
tritomantha-i.
Hawaii 51--Phyllostegia Phyllostegia Phyllostegia
floribunda-s. floribunda. floribunda.
Hawaii 51--Pittosporum Pittosporum Pittosporum
hawaiiense-u. hawaiiense. hawaiiense.
Hawaii 51--Schiedea diffusa Schiedea diffusa Schiedea diffusa
ssp. macraei-s. ssp. macraei. ssp. macraei.
Hawaii 51--Stenogyne .................... Stenogyne
cranwelliae-s. cranwelliae.
Hawaii 52--Cyanea Cyanea tritomantha.. Cyanea tritomantha.
tritomantha-j.
Hawaii 52--Cyrtandra wagneri- Cyrtandra wagneri... Cyrtandra wagneri.
b.
Hawaii 52--Melicope remyi-d. Melicope remyi...... Melicope remyi.
Hawaii 52--Phyllostegia Phyllostegia Phyllostegia
floribunda-t. floribunda. floribunda.
Hawaii 52--Pittosporum .................... Pittosporum
hawaiiense-v. hawaiiense.
Hawaii 52--Schiedea diffusa .................... Schiedea diffusa
ssp. macraei-t. ssp. macraei.
Hawaii 52--Stenogyne Stenogyne Stenogyne
cranwelliae-t. cranwelliae. cranwelliae.
Hawaii 53--Bidens Bidens Bidens
hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana ssp.
hillebrandiana-b. hillebrandiana. hillebrandiana.
Hawaii 54--Cyanea Cyanea tritomantha.. Cyanea tritomantha.
tritomantha-k.
Hawaii 54--Melicope remyi-e. .................... Melicope remyi.
Hawaii 54--Phyllostegia .................... Phyllostegia
floribunda-u. floribunda.
Hawaii 54--Pittosporum Pittosporum Pittosporum
hawaiiense-w. hawaiiense. hawaiiense.
Hawaii 54--Schiedea diffusa Schiedea diffusa Schiedea diffusa
ssp. macraei-u. ssp. macraei. ssp. macraei.
Hawaii 54--Stenogyne Stenogyne Stenogyne
cranwelliae-u. cranwelliae. cranwelliae.
Hawaii 55--Schiedea .................... Schiedea
hawaiiensis-a. hawaiiensis.
Hawaii 56--Cyanea marksii-i. .................... Cyanea marksii.
Hawaii 56--Schiedea diffusa .................... Schiedea diffusa
ssp. macraei-v. ssp. macraei
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
(1) Plants on the island of Hawaii; Constituent elements.--(1)
Flowering plants.
* * * * *
Family Asteraceae: Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana
(KOOKOOLAU)
Hawaii 6--Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana-a and Hawaii
53--Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana-b, identified in the
legal descriptions in paragraph (k) of this section, constitute
critical habitat for Bidens hillebrandiana ssp. hillebrandiana on
Hawaii Island. In units Hawaii 6--Bidens hillebrandiana ssp.
hillebrandiana-a and Hawaii 53--Bidens hillebrandiana ssp.
hillebrandiana-b, the physical and biological features of critical
habitat in coastal ecosystem are:
(i) Elevation: Less than 984feet (ft) (300 meters (m)).
(ii) Annual precipitation: Less than 47 inches (in) (120
centimeters (cm)) to greater than 98 in (250 cm).
(iii) Substrate: Well-drained talus, calcareous slopes, dunes.
(iv) Canopy contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Diospyros, Metrosideros, Myoporum, Pritchardia.
(v) Subcanopy contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Chenopodium, Gossypium, Heliotropium, Santalum, Scaevola.
(vi) Understory contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Eragrostis, Sesuvium, Sida, Sporobolus.
* * * * *
Family Campanulaceae: Cyanea marksii (HAHA)
Hawaii 15--Cyanea marksii-a-Section 4, Hawaii 15--Cyanea marksii-b-
Section 5, Hawaii 16--Cyanea marksii-c, Hawaii 37--Cyanea marksii-d,
Hawaii 38--Cyanea marksii-e, Hawaii 39--Cyanea marksii-f, Hawaii 40--
Cyanea marksii-g, Hawaii 41--Cyanea marksii-h, and Hawaii 56--Cyanea
marksii-i, identified in the legal descriptions in paragraph (k) of
this section, constitute critical habitat for Cyanea marksii on Hawaii
Island. In units Hawaii 15--Cyanea marksii-a-Section 4, Hawaii 15--
Cyanea marksii-b-Section 5, Hawaii 16--Cyanea marksii-c, Hawaii 37--
Cyanea marksii-d, Hawaii 38--Cyanea marksii-e, Hawaii 39--Cyanea
marksii-f, Hawaii 40--Cyanea marksii-g, Hawaii 41--Cyanea marksii-h,
and Hawaii 56--Cyanea marksii-i, the physical and biological features
of critical habitat in wet forest ecosystem are:
(i) Elevation: Less than 7,218 ft (2,200 m).
(ii) Annual precipitation: Greater than 98 in (250 cm).
(iii) Substrate: Very weathered soils to rocky substrate, basaltic
lava, undeveloped soils, developed soils.
(iv) Canopy contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Acacia, Antidesma, Cheirodendron, Ilex, Melicope, Metrosideros,
Myrsine, Pittosporum, Psychotria.
(v) Subcanopy contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Cibotium, Clermontia, Coprosma, Cyanea, Freycinetia, Hydrangea,
Vaccinium.
(vi) Understory contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Adenophorus, Cibotium, Cyrtandra, Dicranopteris, Huperzia,
Peperomia, Stenogyne.
* * * * *
Family Campanulaceae: Cyanea tritomantha (AKU)
Hawaii 3--Cyanea tritomantha-a, Hawaii 8--Cyanea tritomantha-b,
Hawaii 9--Cyanea tritomantha-c, Hawaii 24--Cyanea tritomantha-d-Section
8, Hawaii 29--Cyanea tritomantha-e, Hawaii 30--Cyanea tritomantha-f,
Hawaii 42--Cyanea tritomantha-g, Hawaii 44--Cyanea

[[Page 17978]]

tritomantha-h, Hawaii 51--Cyanea tritomantha-i, Hawaii 52--Cyanea
tritomantha-j, and Hawaii 54--Cyanea tritomantha-k, identified in the
legal descriptions in paragraph (k) of this section, constitute
critical habitat for Cyanea tritomantha on Hawaii Island.
(i) In units Hawaii 3--Cyanea tritomantha-a, Hawaii 24--Cyanea
tritomantha-d-Section 8, Hawaii 29--Cyanea tritomantha-e, Hawaii 30--
Cyanea tritomantha-f, Hawaii 42--Cyanea tritomantha-g, Hawaii 44--
Cyanea tritomantha-h, Hawaii 51--Cyanea tritomantha-i, and Hawaii 52--
Cyanea tritomantha-j, the physical and biological features of critical
habitat in wet forest ecosystem are:
(A) Elevation: Less than 7,218 ft (2,200 m).
(B) Annual precipitation: Greater than 98 in (250 cm).
(C) Substrate: Very weathered soils to rocky substrate, basaltic
lava, undeveloped soils, developed soils.
(D) Canopy contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Acacia, Antidesma, Cheirodendron, Ilex, Melicope, Metrosideros,
Myrsine, Pittosporum, Psychotria.
(E) Subcanopy contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Cibotium, Clermontia, Coprosma, Cyanea, Freycinetia, Hydrangea,
Vaccinium.
(F) Understory contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Adenophorus, Cibotium, Cyrtandra, Dicranopteris, Huperzia,
Peperomia, Stenogyne.
(ii) In units Hawaii 8--Cyanea tritomantha-b, Hawaii 9--Cyanea
tritomantha-c, and Hawaii 54--Cyanea tritomantha-k, the physical and
biological features of critical habitat in wet forest ecosystem are
those provided above in paragraphs (i)(A) through (F) of this entry,
and in wet grassland and shrubland ecosystem are:
(A) Elevation: 656 to 2,953 ft (200 to 900 m).
(B) Annual precipitation: 98 to 197 in (250 to 500 cm).
(C) Substrate: Older, weathered soils to younger, rocky substrates.
(D) Canopy contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Ilex, Kadua, Melicope, Metrosideros, Myrsine.
(E) Subcanopy contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Cibotium, Clermontia, Dubautia, Freycinetia, Hydrangea,
Lobelia, Pipturus, Touchardia, Urera, Vaccinium.
(F) Understory contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Carex, Cladium, Deschampsia, Dicranopteris, Eragrostis,
Peperomia, Phyllostegia, Scaevola.
* * * * *
Family Caryophyllaceae: Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei (no common name)
Hawaii 3--Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-a, Hawaii 8--Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei-b, Hawaii 9--Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-c,
Hawaii 15--Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-d-Section 4, Hawaii 15--
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-e-Section 5, Hawaii 16--Schiedea diffusa
ssp. macraei-f, Hawaii 24--Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-g-Section 8,
Hawaii 24--Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-h-Section 9, Hawaii 29--
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-i, Hawaii 30--Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei-j, Hawaii 37--Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-k, Hawaii 38--
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-l, Hawaii 39--Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei-m, Hawaii 40--Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-n, Hawaii 41--
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-o, Hawaii 42--Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei-p, Hawaii 43--Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-q, Hawaii 44--
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-r, Hawaii 51--Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei-s, Hawaii 52--Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-t, Hawaii 54--
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-u, and Hawaii 56--Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei-v, identified in the legal descriptions in paragraph (k) of
this section, constitute critical habitat for Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei on Hawaii Island. In units Hawaii 3--Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei-a, Hawaii 8--Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-b, Hawaii 9--
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-c, Hawaii 15--Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei-d-Section 4, Hawaii 15--Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-e-Section
5, Hawaii 16--Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-f, Hawaii 24--Schiedea
diffusa ssp. macraei-g-Section 8, Hawaii 24--Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei-h-Section 9, Hawaii 29--Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-i, Hawaii
30--Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-j, Hawaii 37--Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei-k, Hawaii 38--Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-l, Hawaii 39--
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-m, Hawaii 40--Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei-n, Hawaii 41--Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-o, Hawaii 42--
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-p, Hawaii 43--Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei-q, Hawaii 44--Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-r, Hawaii 51--
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-s, Hawaii 52--Schiedea diffusa ssp.
macraei-t, Hawaii 54--Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-u, and Hawaii 56--
Schiedea diffusa ssp. macraei-v, the physical and biological features
of critical habitat in wet forest ecosystem are:
(i) Elevation: Less than 7,218 ft (2,200 m).
(ii) Annual precipitation: Greater than 98 in (250 cm).
(iii) Substrate: Very weathered soils to rocky substrate, basaltic
lava, undeveloped soils, developed soils.
(iv) Canopy contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Acacia, Antidesma, Cheirodendron, Ilex, Melicope, Metrosideros,
Myrsine, Pittosporum, Psychotria.
(v) Subcanopy contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Cibotium, Clermontia, Coprosma, Cyanea, Freycinetia, Hydrangea,
Vaccinium.
(vi) Understory contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Adenophorus, Cibotium, Cyrtandra, Dicranopteris, Huperzia,
Peperomia, Stenogyne.
* * * * *
Family Caryophyllaceae: Schiedea hawaiiensis (MAOLIOLI)
Hawaii 55--Schiedea hawaiiensis-a, identified in the legal
descriptions in paragraph (k) of this section, constitutes critical
habitat for Schiedea hawaiiensis on Hawaii Island. In unit Hawaii 55--
Schiedea hawaiiensis-a, the physical and biological features of
critical habitat in dry forest ecosystem are:
(i) Elevation: Less than 9,500 ft (2,900 m).
(ii) Annual precipitation: Less than 79 in (200 cm).
(iii) Substrate: Well-drained, sandy loams or loams from volcanic
ash or cinder; weathered basaltic lava.
(iv) Canopy contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Acacia, Colubrina, Diospyros, Erythrina, Melicope,
Metrosideros, Myoporum, Myrsine, Sophora.
(v) Subcanopy contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Achyranthes, Euphorbia, Leptecophylla, Nototrichium.
(vi) Understory contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Dodonaea, Doryopteris, Heteropogon, Pellaea.
* * * * *
Family Gesneriaceae: Cyrtandra nanawaleensis (HAIWALE)
Hawaii 28--Cyrtandra nanawaleensis-a, Hawaii 46--Cyrtandra
nanawaleensis-b, Hawaii 47--Cyrtandra nanawaleensis-c, Hawaii 48--
Cyrtandra nanawaleensis-d, Hawaii 49--Cyrtandra nanawaleensis-e, and
Hawaii 50--Cyrtandra nanawaleensis-f, identified in the legal
descriptions in paragraph (k) of this section, constitute critical
habitat for Cyrtandra nanawaleensis on Hawaii Island.

[[Page 17979]]

(i) In units Hawaii 28--Cyrtandra nanawaleensis-a, Hawaii 46--
Cyrtandra nanawaleensis-b, Hawaii 47--Cyrtandra nanawaleensis-c, and
Hawaii 48--Cyrtandra nanawaleensis-d, the physical and biological
features of critical habitat in wet forest ecosystem are:
(A) Elevation: Less than 7,218 ft (2,200 m).
(B) Annual precipitation: Greater than 98 in (250 cm).
(C) Substrate: Very weathered soils to rocky substrate, basaltic
lava, undeveloped soils, developed soils.
(D) Canopy contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Acacia, Antidesma, Cheirodendron, Ilex, Melicope, Metrosideros,
Myrsine, Pittosporum, Psychotria.
(E) Subcanopy contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Cibotium, Clermontia, Coprosma, Cyanea, Freycinetia, Hydrangea,
Vaccinium.
(F) Understory contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Adenophorus, Cibotium, Cyrtandra, Dicranopteris, Huperzia,
Peperomia, Stenogyne.
(ii) In units Hawaii 49--Cyrtandra nanawaleensis-e and Hawaii 50--
Cyrtandra nanawaleensis-f, the physical and biological features of
critical habitat in wet forest ecosystem are those provided above in
paragraphs (i)(A) through (F) of this entry, and in the mesic forest
ecosystem and mesic grassland and shrubland ecosystem are:
(A) Elevation: Less than 6,562 ft (2,000 m) in mesic forest
ecosystem, and 98 to 7,546ft (30 to 2,300 m) in mesic grassland and
shrubland ecosystem.
(B) Annual precipitation: 39 to 150 in (100 to 380 cm) in mesic
forest ecosystem, and 39 to 98 in (100 to 250 cm) in mesic grassland
and shrubland ecosystem.
(C) Substrate: Rocky, shallow, organic muck soils; rocky talus
soils; shallow soils over weathered rock; deep soils over soft
weathered rock; and gravelly alluvium in mesic forest ecosystem; and
shallow soils that frequently dry with rocky outcrops in mesic
grassland and shrubland ecosystem.
(D) Canopy contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Acacia, Antidesma, Charpentiera, Chrysodracon, Metrosideros,
Myrsine, Nestegis, Pisonia, Santalum in mesic forest ecosystem; and
Coprosma, Metrosideros, Wilkesia in mesic grassland and shrubland
ecosystem.
(E) Subcanopy contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Coprosma, Freycinetia, Leptecophylla, Myoporum, Pipturus,
Rubus, Sadleria, Sophora in mesic forest ecosystem; and Dodonaea,
Dubautia, Leptecophylla, Osteomeles, Sadleria, Vaccinium in mesic
grassland and shrubland ecosystem.
(F) Understory contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Ctenitis, Doodia, Dryopteris, Pelea, Sadleria in mesic forest
ecosystem; and Bidens, Carex, Deschampsia, Dicranopteris, Dryopteris,
Eragrostis, Euphorbia, Lipochaeta in mesic grassland and shrubland
ecosystem.
* * * * *
Family Gesneriaceae: Cyrtandra wagneri (HAIWALE)
Hawaii 3--Cyrtandra wagneri-a and Hawaii 52--Cyrtandra wagneri-b,
identified in the legal descriptions in paragraph (k) of this section,
constitute critical habitat for Cyrtandra wagneri on Hawaii Island. In
units Hawaii 3--Cyrtandra wagneri-a and Hawaii 52--Cyrtandra wagneri-b,
the physical and biological features of critical habitat in wet forest
ecosystem are:
(i) Elevation: Less than 7,218 ft (2,200 m).
(ii) Annual precipitation: Greater than 98 in (250 cm).
(iii) Substrate: Very weathered soils to rocky substrate, basaltic
lava, undeveloped soils, developed soils.
(iv) Canopy contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Acacia, Antidesma, Cheirodendron, Ilex, Melicope, Metrosideros,
Myrsine, Pittosporum, Psychotria.
(v) Subcanopy contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Cibotium, Clermontia, Coprosma, Cyanea, Freycinetia, Hydrangea,
Vaccinium.
(vi) Understory contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Adenophorus, Cibotium, Cyrtandra, Dicranopteris, Huperzia,
Peperomia, Stenogyne.
* * * * *
Family Lamiaceae: Phyllostegia floribunda (no common name)
Hawaii 3--Phyllostegia floribunda-a, Hawaii 8--Phyllostegia
floribunda-b, Hawaii 9--Phyllostegia floribunda-c, Hawaii 15--
Phyllostegia floribunda-d-Section 4, Hawaii 15--Phyllostegia
floribunda-e-Section 5, Hawaii 16--Phyllostegia floribunda-f, Hawaii
23--Phyllostegia floribunda-g, Hawaii 28--Phyllostegia floribunda-h,
Hawaii 29--Phyllostegia floribunda-i, Hawaii 30--Phyllostegia
floribunda-j, Hawaii 37--Phyllostegia floribunda-k, Hawaii 38--
Phyllostegia floribunda-l, Hawaii 39--Phyllostegia floribunda-m, Hawaii
40--Phyllostegia floribunda-n, Hawaii 41--Phyllostegia floribunda-o,
Hawaii 42--Phyllostegia floribunda-p, Hawaii 45--Phyllostegia
floribunda-q, Hawaii 46--Phyllostegia floribunda-r, Hawaii 51--
Phyllostegia floribunda-s, Hawaii 52--Phyllostegia floribunda-t, and
Hawaii 54--Phyllostegia floribunda-u, identified in the legal
descriptions in paragraph (k) of this section, constitute critical
habitat for Phyllostegia floribunda on Hawaii Island.
(i) In units Hawaii 3--Phyllostegia floribunda-a, Hawaii 15--
Phyllostegia floribunda-d-Section 4, Hawaii 15--Phyllostegia
floribunda-e-Section 5, Hawaii 16--Phyllostegia floribunda-f, Hawaii
29--Phyllostegia floribunda-i, Hawaii 30--Phyllostegia floribunda-j,
Hawaii 37--Phyllostegia floribunda-k, Hawaii 38--Phyllostegia
floribunda-l, Hawaii 39--Phyllostegia floribunda-m, Hawaii 40--
Phyllostegia floribunda-n, Hawaii 41--Phyllostegia floribunda-o, Hawaii
51--Phyllostegia floribunda-s, and Hawaii 52--Phyllostegia floribunda-
t, the physical and biological features of critical habitat in wet
forest ecosystem are:
(A) Elevation: Less than 7,218 ft (2,200 m).
(B) Annual precipitation: Greater than 98 in (250 cm).
(C) Substrate: Very weathered soils to rocky substrate, basaltic
lava, undeveloped soils, developed soils.
(D) Canopy contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Acacia, Antidesma, Cheirodendron, Ilex, Melicope, Metrosideros,
Myrsine, Pittosporum, Psychotria.
(E) Subcanopy contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Cibotium, Clermontia, Coprosma, Cyanea, Freycinetia, Hydrangea,
Vaccinium.
(F) Understory contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Adenophorus, Cibotium, Cyrtandra, Dicranopteris, Huperzia,
Peperomia, Stenogyne.
(ii) In units Hawaii 8--Phyllostegia floribunda-b, Hawaii 9--
Phyllostegia floribunda-c, Hawaii 23--Phyllostegia floribunda-g, Hawaii
28--Phyllostegia floribunda-h, Hawaii 45--Phyllostegia floribunda-q,
Hawaii 46--Phyllostegia floribunda-r, and Hawaii 54--Phyllostegia
floribunda-u, the physical and biological features of critical habitat
in wet forest ecosystem are those provided above in paragraphs (i)(A)
through (F) of this entry, and in wet grassland and shrubland ecosystem
are:
(A) Elevation: 656 to 2,953 ft (200 to 900 m).
(B) Annual precipitation: 98 to 197 in (250 to 500 cm).
(C) Substrate: Older, weathered soils to younger, rocky substrates.

[[Page 17980]]

(D) Canopy contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Ilex, Kadua, Melicope, Metrosideros, Myrsine.
(E) Subcanopy contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Cibotium, Clermontia, Dubautia, Freycinetia, Hydrangea,
Lobelia, Pipturus, Touchardia, Urera, Vaccinium.
(F) Understory contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Carex, Cladium, Deschampsia, Dicranopteris, Eragrostis,
Peperomia, Phyllostegia, Scaevola.
(iii) In unit Hawaii 42--Phyllostegia floribunda-p, the physical
and biological features of critical habitat in wet forest ecosystem are
those provided above in paragraphs (i)(A) through (F) of this entry,
and in mesic forest ecosystem are:
(A) Elevation of less than 6,562 ft (2,000 m).
(B) Annual precipitation of 39 to 150 in (100 to 380 cm).
(C) Substrate of rocky, shallow, organic muck soils; rocky talus
soils; shallow soils over weathered rock; deep soils over soft
weathered rock; or gravelly alluvium.
(D) Canopy contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Acacia, Antidesma, Charpentiera, Chrysodracon, Metrosideros,
Myrsine, Nestegis, Pisonia, Santalum.
(E) Subcanopy contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Coprosma, Freycinetia, Leptecophylla, Myoporum, Pipturus,
Rubus, Sadleria, Sophora.
(F) Understory contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Ctenitis, Doodia, Dryopteris, Pelea, Sadleria.
* * * * *
Family Lamiaceae: Stenogyne cranwelliae (no common name)
Hawaii 3--Stenogyne cranwelliae-a, Hawaii 8--Stenogyne cranwelliae-
b, Hawaii 9--Stenogyne cranwelliae-c, Hawaii 15--Stenogyne cranwelliae-
d-Section 4, Hawaii 15--Stenogyne cranwelliae-e-Section 5, Hawaii 16--
Stenogyne cranwelliae-f, Hawaii 24--Stenogyne cranwelliae-g-Section 8,
Hawaii 24--Stenogyne cranwelliae-h-Section 9, Hawaii 29--Stenogyne
cranwelliae-i, Hawaii 30--Stenogyne cranwelliae-j, Hawaii 37--Stenogyne
cranwelliae-k, Hawaii 38--Stenogyne cranwelliae-l, Hawaii 39--Stenogyne
cranwelliae-m, Hawaii 40--Stenogyne cranwelliae-n, Hawaii 41--Stenogyne
cranwelliae-o, Hawaii 42--Stenogyne cranwelliae-p, Hawaii 43--Stenogyne
cranwelliae-q, Hawaii 44--Stenogyne cranwelliae-r, Hawaii 51--Stenogyne
cranwelliae-s, Hawaii 52--Stenogyne cranwelliae-t, and Hawaii 54--
Stenogyne cranwelliae-u, identified in the legal descriptions in
paragraph (k) of this section, constitute critical habitat for
Stenogyne cranwelliae on Hawaii Island. In units Hawaii 3--Stenogyne
cranwelliae-a, Hawaii 8--Stenogyne cranwelliae-b, Hawaii 9--Stenogyne
cranwelliae-c, Hawaii 15--Stenogyne cranwelliae-d-Section 4, Hawaii
15--Stenogyne cranwelliae-e-Section 5, Hawaii 16--Stenogyne
cranwelliae-f, Hawaii 24--Stenogyne cranwelliae-g-Section 8, Hawaii
24--Stenogyne cranwelliae-h-Section 9, Hawaii 29--Stenogyne
cranwelliae-i, Hawaii 30--Stenogyne cranwelliae-j, Hawaii 37--Stenogyne
cranwelliae-k, Hawaii 38--Stenogyne cranwelliae-l, Hawaii 39--Stenogyne
cranwelliae-m, Hawaii 40--Stenogyne cranwelliae-n, Hawaii 41--Stenogyne
cranwelliae-o, Hawaii 42--Stenogyne cranwelliae-p, Hawaii 43--Stenogyne
cranwelliae-q, Hawaii 44--Stenogyne cranwelliae-r, Hawaii 51--Stenogyne
cranwelliae-s, Hawaii 52--Stenogyne cranwelliae-t, and Hawaii 54--
Stenogyne cranwelliae-u, the physical and biological features of
critical habitat in wet forest ecosystem are:
(i) Elevation: Less than 7,218 ft (2,200 m).
(ii) Annual precipitation: Greater than 98 in (250 cm).
(iii) Substrate: Very weathered soils to rocky substrate, basaltic
lava, undeveloped soils, developed soils.
(iv) Canopy contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Acacia, Antidesma, Cheirodendron, Ilex, Melicope, Metrosideros,
Myrsine, Pittosporum, Psychotria.
(v) Subcanopy contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Cibotium, Clermontia, Coprosma, Cyanea, Freycinetia, Hydrangea,
Vaccinium.
(vi) Understory contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Adenophorus, Cibotium, Cyrtandra, Dicranopteris, Huperzia,
Peperomia, Stenogyne.
* * * * *
Family Pittosporaceae: Pittosporum hawaiiense (HOAWA, HAAWA)
Hawaii 3--Pittosporum hawaiiense-a, Hawaii 8--Pittosporum
hawaiiense-b, Hawaii 9--Pittosporum hawaiiense-c, Hawaii 15--
Pittosporum hawaiiense-d-Section 4, Hawaii 15--Pittosporum hawaiiense-
e-Section 5, Hawaii 16--Pittosporum hawaiiense-f, Hawaii 23--
Pittosporum hawaiiense-g, Hawaii 24--Pittosporum hawaiiense-h-Section
8, Hawaii 24--Pittosporum hawaiiense-i-Section 9, Hawaii 29--
Pittosporum hawaiiense-j, Hawaii 30--Pittosporum hawaiiense-k, Hawaii
37--Pittosporum hawaiiense-l, Hawaii 38--Pittosporum hawaiiense-m,
Hawaii 39--Pittosporum hawaiiense-n, Hawaii 40--Pittosporum hawaiiense-
o, Hawaii 41--Pittosporum hawaiiense-p, Hawaii 42--Pittosporum
hawaiiense-q, Hawaii 43--Pittosporum hawaiiense-r, Hawaii 44--
Pittosporum hawaiiense-s, Hawaii 45--Pittosporum hawaiiense-t, Hawaii
51--Pittosporum hawaiiense-u, Hawaii 52--Pittosporum hawaiiense-v, and
Hawaii 54--Pittosporum hawaiiense-w, identified in the legal
descriptions in paragraph (k) of this section, constitute critical
habitat for Pittosporum hawaiiense on Hawaii Island.
(i) In units Hawaii 3--Pittosporum hawaiiense-a, Hawaii 8--
Pittosporum hawaiiense-b, Hawaii 9--Pittosporum hawaiiense-c, Hawaii
15--Pittosporum hawaiiense-d-Section 4, Hawaii 15--Pittosporum
hawaiiense-e-Section 5, Hawaii 16--Pittosporum hawaiiense-f, Hawaii
23--Pittosporum hawaiiense-g, Hawaii 29--Pittosporum hawaiiense-j,
Hawaii 30--Pittosporum hawaiiense-k, Hawaii 37--Pittosporum hawaiiense-
l, Hawaii 38--Pittosporum hawaiiense-m, Hawaii 39--Pittosporum
hawaiiense-n, Hawaii 40--Pittosporum hawaiiense-o, Hawaii 41--
Pittosporum hawaiiense-p, Hawaii 45--Pittosporum hawaiiense-t, Hawaii
51--Pittosporum hawaiiense-u, Hawaii 52--Pittosporum hawaiiense-v, and
Hawaii 54--Pittosporum hawaiiense-w, the physical and biological
features of critical habitat in wet forest ecosystem are:
(A) Elevation: Less than 7,218 ft (2,200 m).
(B) Annual precipitation: Greater than 98 in (250 cm).
(C) Substrate: Very weathered soils to rocky substrate, basaltic
lava, undeveloped soils, developed soils.
(D) Canopy contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Acacia, Antidesma, Cheirodendron, Ilex, Melicope, Metrosideros,
Myrsine, Pittosporum, Psychotria.
(E) Subcanopy contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Cibotium, Clermontia, Coprosma, Cyanea, Freycinetia, Hydrangea,
Vaccinium.
(F) Understory contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Adenophorus, Cibotium, Cyrtandra, Dicranopteris, Huperzia,
Peperomia, Stenogyne.
(ii) In units Hawaii 24--Pittosporum hawaiiense-h-Section 8, Hawaii
24--Pittosporum hawaiiense-i-Section 9, Hawaii 42--Pittosporum
hawaiiense-q, Hawaii 43--Pittosporum hawaiiense-r, and Hawaii 44--
Pittosporum hawaiiense-s, the physical and

[[Page 17981]]

biological features of critical habitat in wet forest ecosystem are
those provided above in paragraphs (i)(A) through (F) of this entry,
and in mesic forest ecosystem are:
(A) Elevation: Less than 6,562 ft (2,000 m).
(B) Annual precipitation: 39 to 150 in (100 to 380 cm).
(C) Substrate: Rocky, shallow, organic muck soils; rocky talus
soils; shallow soils over weathered rock; deep soils over soft
weathered rock; gravelly alluvium.
(D) Canopy contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Acacia, Antidesma, Charpentiera, Chrysodracon, Metrosideros,
Myrsine, Nestegis, Pisonia, Santalum.
(E) Subcanopy contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Coprosma, Freycinetia, Leptecophylla, Myoporum, Pipturus,
Rubus, Sadleria, Sophora.
(F) Understory contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Ctenitis, Doodia, Dryopteris, Pelea, Sadleria.
* * * * *
Family Rutaceae: Melicope remyi (no common name)
Hawaii 3--Melicope remyi-a, Hawaii 8--Melicope remyi-b, Hawaii 9--
Melicope remyi-c, Hawaii 52--Melicope remyi-d, and Hawaii 54--Melicope
remyi-e, identified in the legal descriptions in paragraph (k) of this
section, constitute critical habitat for Melicope remyi on Hawaii
Island. In units Hawaii 3--Melicope remyi-a, Hawaii 8--Melicope remyi-
b, Hawaii 9--Melicope remyi-c, Hawaii 52--Melicope remyi-d, and Hawaii
54--Melicope remyi-e, the physical and biological features of critical
habitat in wet forest ecosystem are:
(i) Elevation: Less than 7,218 ft (2,200 m).
(ii) Annual precipitation: Greater than 98 in (250 cm).
(iii) Substrate: Very weathered soils to rocky substrate, basaltic
lava, undeveloped soils, developed soils.
(iv) Canopy contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Acacia, Antidesma, Cheirodendron, Ilex, Melicope, Metrosideros,
Myrsine, Pittosporum, Psychotria.
(v) Subcanopy contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Cibotium, Clermontia, Coprosma, Cyanea, Freycinetia, Hydrangea,
Vaccinium.
(vi) Understory contains one or more of the following native plant
genera: Adenophorus, Cibotium, Cyrtandra, Dicranopteris, Huperzia,
Peperomia, Stenogyne.
* * * * *

Stephen Guertin,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2024-04588 Filed 3-11-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P