[Federal Register: February 27, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 39)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 9115-9479]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr27fe03-17]
[[Page 9115]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part II
Department of the Interior
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fish and Wildlife Service
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Designation or
Nondesignation of Critical Habitat for 95 Plant Species From the
Islands of Kauai and Niihau, HI; Final Rule
[[Page 9116]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
RIN 1018-AG71
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Designation
or Nondesignation of Critical Habitat for 95 Plant Species From the
Islands of Kauai and Niihau, HI
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), designate
critical habitat pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act), for 83 of the 95 species known historically from the
Hawaiian islands of Kauai and Niihau. A total of approximately 21,266
hectares (ha) (52,549 acres (ac)) of land on the island of Kauai and
144 ha (357 ac) of land on the island of Niihau fall within the
boundaries of the 217 critical habitat units designated for the 83
species. This critical habitat designation requires the Service to
consult under section 7 of the Act with regard to actions carried out,
funded, or authorized by a Federal agency. Section 4 of the Act
requires us to consider economic and other relevant impacts when
specifying any particular area as critical habitat. This rule also
determines that designating critical habitat would not be prudent for
seven species. We solicited data and comments from the public on all
aspects of the proposed rule, including data on economic and other
impacts of the designation.
DATES: This rule becomes effective on March 31, 2003.
ADDRESSES: Comments and materials received, as well as supporting
documentation, used in the preparation of this final rule will be
available for public inspection, by appointment, during normal business
hours at U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific Islands Office, 300
Ala Moana Blvd., Room 3-122, P.O. Box 50088, Honolulu, HI 96850-0001.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Henson, Field Supervisor, Pacific
Islands Office at the above address (telephone 808/541-3441; facsimile
808/541-3470).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
In the Lists of Endangered and Threatened Plants (50 CFR 17.12),
there are 95 plant species that, at the time of listing, were reported
from the islands of Kauai and/or Niihau (Table 1). Fifty-seven of these
species are endemic to the islands of Kauai and Niihau, while 38
species are reported from one or more other islands, as well as Kauai
and/or Niihau. Each of these species is described in more detail below
in the section, ``Discussion of Plant Taxa.'' Although we considered
designating critical habitat on Kauai for each of the 95 plant species,
for the reasons described below, the final designation includes
critical habitat for 83 of 95 plant species. Species that also occur on
other islands may have critical habitat designated on other islands in
subsequent rulemakings.
Table 1.--Summary of Island Distribution of 95 Species From Kauai and Niihau
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Island distribution
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species N.W. Isles,
Kauai Oahu Molokai Lanai Maui Hawaii Kahoolawe, Niihau
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acaena exigua (liliwai)......... H .............. .............. .............. H .............. .....................
Achyranthes mutica (NCN*)....... H .............. .............. .............. .............. C .....................
Adenophorus periens (pendent C H C R R C .....................
kihi fern).
Alectryon macrococcus (mahoe)... C C C .............. C .............. .....................
Alsinidendron lychnoides C .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .....................
(kuawawaenohu).
Alsinidendron viscosum (NCN).... C .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .....................
Bonamia menziesii (NCN)......... C C H C C C .....................
Brighamia insignis (olulu)...... C .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. Ni (C)
Centaurium sebaeoides (awiwi)... C C C C C .............. .....................
Chamaesyce halemanui (NCN)...... C .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .....................
Ctenitis squamigera (pauoa)..... H C C C C H .....................
Cyanea asarifolia (haha)........ C .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .....................
Cyanea recta (haha)............. C .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .....................
Cyanea remyi (haha)............. C .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .....................
Cyanea undulata (NCN)........... C .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .....................
Cyperus trachysanthos (puukaa).. C C H H .............. .............. Ni (C)
Cyrtandra cyaneoides (mapele)... C .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .....................
Cyrtandra limahuliensis C .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .....................
(haiwale).
Delissea rhytidosperma (NCN).... C .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .....................
Delissea rivularis (oha)........ C .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .....................
Delissea undulatra (NCN)........ C .............. .............. .............. H C Ni (H)
Diellia erecta (NCN)............ C C C H C C .....................
Diellia pallida (NCN)........... C .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .....................
Diplazium molokaiense (NCN)..... H H H H C .............. .....................
Dubautia latifolia (koholapehu). C .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .....................
Dubautia pauciflorula (naenae).. C .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .....................
Euphorbia haeleeleana (akoko)... C C .............. .............. .............. .............. .....................
Exocarpos luteolus (heau)....... C .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .....................
Flueggea neowawraea (mehamehame) C C H .............. C C .....................
Gouania meyenii (NCN)........... C C .............. .............. .............. .............. .....................
Hedyotis cookiana (awiwi)....... C H H .............. .............. H .....................
Hedyotis st.-johnii (Na Pali C .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .....................
beach hedyotis).
Hesperomannia lydgatei (NCN).... C .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .....................
Hibiscadelphus woodii (hau C .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .....................
kuahiwi).
Hibiscus brackenridgei (mao hau H C H C C C Ka (R)
hele).
[[Page 9117]]
Hibiscus clayi (Clay's hibiscus) C .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .....................
Hibiscus waimeae ssp. hannerae C .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .....................
(kokio keokeo).
Ischaemum byrone (Hilo C H C .............. C C .....................
ischaemum).
Isodendrion laurifolium (aupaka) C C .............. .............. .............. .............. .....................
Isodendrion longifolium (aupaka) C C .............. .............. .............. .............. .....................
Isodendrion pyrifolium (wahine ............... H H H H C Ni (H)
noho kula).
Kokia kauaiensis (kokio)........ C .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .....................
Labordia lydgatei (kamakahala).. C .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .....................
Labordia tinifolia var. C .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .....................
wahiawaensis (kamakahala).
Lipochaeta fauriei (nehe)....... C .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .....................
Lipochaeta micrantha (nehe)..... C .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .....................
Lipochaeta waimeaensis (nehe)... C
Lobelia niihauensis............. C C .............. .............. .............. .............. Ni (H)
Lysimachia filifolia (NCN)...... C C
Mariscus pennatiformis (NCN).... H H .............. .............. C H NW (C)
Melicope haupuensis (alani)..... C
Melicope knudsenii (alani)...... C .............. .............. .............. C
Melicope pallida (alani)........ C C
Melicope quadrangularis (alani). H
Munroidendron racemosum (NCN)... C
Myrsine linearifolia (kolea).... C
Nothocestrum peltatum (aiea).... C
Panicum niihauense (lau ehu).... C .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. Ni (H)
Peucedanum sandwicense (makou).. C C C .............. C ..............
Phlegmariurus mannii (wawaeiole) H .............. .............. .............. C C
Phlegmariurus nutans (wawaeiole) H C
Phyllostegia knudsenii (NCN).... C
Phyllostegia waimeae (NCN)...... C
Phyllostegia wawrana (NCN)...... C
Plantago princeps (laukahi kuaj) C C C .............. C H
Platanthera holochila (NCN)..... C H C .............. C
Poa mannii (Mann's bluegrass)... C
Poa sandvicensis (Hawaiian C
bluegrass).
Poa siphonoglossa (NCN)......... C
Pritchardia aylmer-robinsonii ............... .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. Ni (C)
(wahane).
Pritchardia napaliensis (loulu). C
Pritchardia viscosa loulu....... C
Pteralyxia kauaiensis (kaulu)... C
Remya kauaiensis (NCN).......... C
Remya montgomeryi (NCN)......... C
Schiedea apokremnos (maolioli).. C
Schiedea helleri (NCN).......... C
Schiedea kauaiensis (NCN)....... C
Schiedea membranacea (NCN)...... C
Schiedea nuttallii (NCN)........ C C C .............. R
Schiedea spergulina var. C
leiopoda (NCN).
Schiedea spergulina var. C
spergulina (NCN).
Schiedea stellarioides (NCN).... C
Sesbania tomentosa (ohai)....... C C C H C C Ni (H), Ka (C), NW
Isles (C)
Silene lanceolata (NCN)......... H C C H .............. C
Solanum incompletum (popolo ku H .............. H H H C
mai).
Solanum sandwicense (aiakeakua, C H
popolo).
Spermolepis hawaiiensis (NCN)... C C C C C C
Stenogyne campanulata (NCN)..... C
Vigna o-wahuensis (NCN)......... ............... H C C C C Ni (H), Ka, (C)
Viola helenae (NCN)............. C
Viola kauaiensis var. C
wahiawaensis (nani waialeale).
Wilkesia hobdyi (dwarf iliau)... C
Xylosma crenatum (NCN).......... C
Zanthoxylum hawaiiense (ae)..... C .............. C H C C
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KEY
C (Current)--population last observed within the past 30 years
H (Historical)--population not seen for more than 30 years
R (Reported)--reported from undocumented observations
* NCN--No Common Name
[[Page 9118]]
The Islands of Kauai and Niihau
Because of its age and relative isolation, Kauai has levels of
floristic diversity and endemism that are higher than on any other
island in the Hawaiian archipelago. However, the vegetation on Kauai
has undergone extreme alterations because of past and present land use.
Land with rich soils was altered by the early Hawaiians and, more
recently, converted to agricultural use or pasture. Intentional or
inadvertent introduction of nonnative plant and animal species has also
contributed to the reduction of native vegetation on the island of
Kauai. Native forests are now limited to the upper elevation mesic
(moist) and wet regions within Kauai's Conservation District. The land
that supports the habitat essential to the conservation of the 83 plant
taxa is owned by various private parties, the State of Hawaii
(including State parks, forest reserves, natural area reserves, and a
wilderness area), and the Federal government. Most of the taxa included
in this final rule persist on steep slopes, precipitous cliffs, valley
headwalls, and other regions where unsuitable topography has prevented
agricultural development, or where inaccessibility has limited
encroachment by nonnative plant and animal species (Gagne and Cuddihy
1999).
Niihau's relative isolation and severe environmental conditions
have produced a few endemic species. Unfortunately, human disturbance,
primarily ungulate ranching, has drastically changed the vegetation and
hydrological parameters of the island, leaving few of the native
vegetation communities. Niihau has been privately owned since 1864 and
access has been, and continues to be, restricted (Department of
Geography 1998). Therefore, current information on plant locations and
population status is extremely limited.
Discussion of Plant Taxa
Species Endemic to Kauai and Niihau
Alsinidendron lychnoides (kuawawaenohu)
Alsinidendron lychnoides, a member of the pink family
(Caryophyllaceae), is a weakly climbing or sprawling subshrub, woody at
the base, with a dense covering of fine glandular hairs throughout.
This short-lived perennial species is distinguished from others in this
endemic Hawaiian genus by the weakly climbing or sprawling habit, color
of the sepals (modified leaves), number of flowers per cluster, and
size of the leaves. It is closely related to A. viscosum, which differs
primarily by having narrower leaves, fewer capsule valves (fruit
chambers), and fewer flowers per cluster (Wagner et al. 1999).
This species has been observed with fruits during February. No
additional life history information for this species is currently known
(Service 1998a).
Historically, Alsinidendron lychnoides was found on the island of
Kauai on the east rim of Kalalau Valley near Keanapuka, the western and
southeastern margins of the Alakai Swamp, and southwest of the Swamp
near Kaholuamano. Currently, there are four occurrences with a total of
eight individual plants. This species is extant on State-owned land in
the Alakai Swamp, the MohihiWaialae Trail, Keanapuka and Pihea in the
Alakai Wilderness Preserve, Na Pali Coast State Park, and Na Pali-Kona
Forest Reserve (Geographic Decision Systems International (GDSI) 2000;
Hawaii Natural Heritage Program (HINHP) Database 2000).
Alsinidendron lychnoides typically grows on steep riparian clay or
silty soil banks in montane wet forests dominated by Metrosideros
polymorpha (ohia) and Cheirodendron spp. (olapa), or by M. polymorpha
and Dicranopteris linearis (uluhe), at elevations between 828 and 1,344
meters (m) (2,715 and 4,408 feet (ft)). Associated native plant species
include Asplenium spp. (no common name (NCN)), Astelia spp. (painiu),
Broussaisia arguta (kanawao), Carex spp. (NCN), Cyrtandra spp.
(haiwale), Diplazium sandwichianum (NCN), Elaphoglossum spp. (ekaha),
Hedyotis terminalis (manono), Machaerina spp. (uki), Peperomia spp.
(ala ala wai nui), or Vaccinium spp. (ohelo) (61 FR 53070; Ken Wood,
National Tropical Botanical Garden (NTBG), pers. comm., 2001).
The major threats to this species are competition from the
aggressive nonnative plant species Rubus argutus (prickly Florida
blackberry); habitat degradation by feral pigs (Sus scrofa); trampling
by humans; risk of extinction from naturally occurring events, such as
landslides or hurricanes; and reduced reproductive vigor due to the
small number of extant individuals (61 FR 53070).
Alsinidendron viscosum (no common name (NCN))
Alsinidendron viscosum, a member of the pink family
(Caryophyllaceae), is a weakly climbing or sprawling subshrub densely
covered with fine glandular hairs. This short-lived perennial species
is distinguished from others in this endemic Hawaiian genus by the
weakly climbing or sprawling habit, color of the sepals, number of
flowers per cluster, and size of the leaves. It is closely related to
A. lychnoides, which differs primarily in having wider leaves and more
capsule valves and flowers per cluster (Wagner et al. 1999).
Alsinidendron viscosum has been observed in flower during January,
February, and April. No additional life history information for this
species is currently known (Service 1998a).
Historically, Alsinidendron viscosum was found at Kaholuamano,
Kokee, Halemanu, Nawaimaka, and Waialae areas of northwestern Kauai.
Currently, there are a total of seven occurrences containing about 319
individuals on the island of Kauai. These occurrences are on State-
owned land at the Halemanu-Kokee Trail, Mohihi-Waialae Trail, Kawaiiki
Valley, Waialae Falls, and Nawaimaka Valley in the Alakai Wilderness
Preserve, Kokee State Park, and the Na Pali-Kona Forest Reserve (GDSI
2000; HINHP Database 2000; 61 FR 53070).
Alsinidendron viscosum is typically found at elevations between 754
and 1,224 m (2,474 and 4,016 ft), on steep slopes in Acacia koa (koa)-
Metrosideros polymorpha lowland and montane mesic forest. Associated
native plant species include Alyxia oliviformis (maile), Asplenium
polyodon (punana manu), Bidens cosmoides (poola nui), Bobea spp.
(ahakea), Carex meyenii (NCN), Carex wahuensis (NCN), Coprosma spp.
(pilo), Dianella sandwicensis (ukiuki), Dodonaea viscosa (aalii),
Doodia kunthiana (ohupuku pulauii), Dryopteris glabra (kilau),
Dryopteris unidentata (akole), Dryopteris wallichiana (ionui), Dubautia
laevigata (naenae), Gahnia spp. (NCN), Ilex anomala (aiea), Melicope
spp. (alani), Panicum nephelophilum (konakona), Pleomele aurea (hala
pepe), Psychotria spp. (kopiko), Pteridium aquilinum var. decompositum
(bracken fern), Schiedea stellarioides (laulihilihi), or Vaccinium
dentatum (ohelo) (K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The major threats to this species are destruction of habitat by
feral pigs and goats (Capra hircus); competition with the nonnative
plant species Lantana camara (lantana), and Melinis minutiflora
(molasses grass), Rubus argutus; a risk of extinction from naturally
occurring events, such as landslides or hurricanes; and reduced
reproductive vigor due to the small number of extant populations and
individuals (61 FR 53070).
Brighamia insignis (olulu)
Brighamia insignis, a member of the bellflower family
(Campanulaceae), is an unbranched plant with a succulent stem that is
bulbous at the bottom and
[[Page 9119]]
tapers toward the top, ending in a compact rosette of fleshy leaves.
This short-lived perennial species is a member of a unique endemic
Hawaiian genus with only one other species, B. rockii (pua ala),
presently known only on Molokai, from which it differs by the color of
its petals, its shorter calyx (sepals) lobes, and its longer flower
stalks (Lammers 1999; 59 FR 9304).
Current reproduction is not thought to be sufficient to sustain
populations of this species, with poor seedling establishment due to
competition with nonnative grasses as the limiting factor. Pollination
by native sphingid moths (Sphingidae family) is likely; however,
pollination failure is common, due to either a lack of pollinators or a
reduction in genetic variability. The flower structure appears to favor
out-crossing (pollination between different parent plants). Some
vegetative cloning has been observed and flower and leaf size appear to
be dependent on moisture availability. Seeds of this species are
undoubtedly dispersed by gravity. Although they may be blown for short
distances, they are not adapted for wind dispersal, being ovoid to
ellipsoid, smooth, and lacking any sort of wing or outgrowth (Service
1995; 59 FR 9304).
Historically, Brighamia insignis was known from the headland
between Hoolulu and Waiahuakua Valleys along the Na Pali Coast on the
island of Kauai, and from Kaali Spring on the island of Niihau.
Currently, there are a total of four occurrences containing a total of
about 42 to 62 individuals on the islands of Kauai and Niihau. It is
reported on State land (Hono O Na Pali Natural Area Reserve (NAR)) and
privately owned lands at Hoolulua and Waiahuakua Valleys, Haupu, and
Keopaweo, and on the privately owned island of Niihau (GDSI 2000; HINHP
Database 2000; Service 1995; Steve Perlman, NTBG, pers. comm., 2000).
Brighamia insignis is found at elevations between 0 and 748 m (0
and 2,453 ft) on rocky ledges with little soil or on steep sea cliffs
in lowland dry grasslands or shrublands with annual rainfall that is
usually less than 165 centimeters (cm) (65 inches (in)). Associated
native plant species include Artemisia australis (ahinahina),
Chamaesyce celastroides (akoko), Eragrostis variabilis (kawelu),
Heteropogon contortus (pili grass), Hibiscus kokio (kokio), Hibiscus
kokio ssp. saintjohnianus (kokio), Lepidium serra (anaunau), Lipochaeta
succulenta (nehe), Munroidendron racemosum (NCN), or Sida fallax
(ilima) (59 FR 9304; K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The major threats to this plant are browsing and habitat
degradation by feral goats; human disturbance; fire; the introduced
carmine spider mite (Tetranychus cinnabarinus); a risk of extinction
from naturally occurring events, such as landslides or hurricanes, due
to the small number of individuals; restricted distribution; reduced
reproductive vigor; and competition from nonnative plant species such
as Ageratum conyzoides (maile hohono), Kalanchoe pinnata (air plant),
Lantana camara, Melinis minutiflora, Psidium cattleianum (strawberry
guava), Psidium guajava (guava), Setaria parviflora (yellow foxtail),
Sporobolus africanus (smutgrass), or Stachytarpheta dichotoma (owi) (59
FR 9304).
Chamaesyce halemanui (NCN)
Chamaesyce halemanui, a short-lived perennial member of the spurge
family (Euphorbiaceae), is a scandent (climbing) shrub. It is
distinguished from closely related species by its decussate leaves
(arranged in pairs at right angles to the next pair above or below),
persistent stipules (bract- or leaf-like structures), more compact
flower clusters, shorter stems on cyathia (flower cluster), and smaller
capsules (Koutnik 1987; Koutnik and Huft 1999; 57 FR 20580).
Little is known about the life history of Chamaesyce halemanui. Its
flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1995).
Historically, Chamaesyce halemanui was found in Kauhao and Makaha
Valleys in the Na Pali-Kona Forest Reserve, Mahanaloa Valley in Kuia
NAR, the Halemanu drainage in Kokee State Park, and Olokele Canyon on
the island of Kauai. Currently, there are a total of nine occurrences,
containing about 85 to 135 individuals, in Kuia Valley, Poopooiki
Valley, Kauhao Valley, Kaha Ridge, Awaawapuhi Valley, Waipio Falls,
Halemanu, and Kaluahaulu in the Kokee State Park, Kuia NAR, and Na
Pali-Kona Forest Reserve on State-owned land (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database
2000; K. Wood, in litt. 1999; K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
Chamaesyce halemanui is typically found on the steep slopes of
gulches in mesic Acacia koa forests at elevations between 556 and 1,249
m (1,825 and 4,097 ft). Associated native plant species include
Alphitonia ponderosa (kauila), Antidesma platyphyllum (hame), Asplenium
spp., Bobea brevipes (ahakea lau lii), Carex meyenii, Carex wahuensis,
Cheirodendron trigynum (olapa), Coprosma spp., Diospyros sandwicensis
(lama), Dodonaea viscosa, Elaeocarpus bifidus (kalia), Hedyotis
terminalis, Kokia kauaiensis (kokio), Leptecophylla tameiameiae
(pukiawe), Melicope haupuensis (alani), Metrosideros polymorpha,
Microlepia strigosa (palapalai), Panicum nephelophilum, Pisonia spp.
(papala kepau), Pittosporum spp. (hoawa), Pleomele aurea, Pouteria
sandwicensis (alaa), Psychotria greenwelliae (kopiko), Psychotria
mariniana (kopiko), or Santalum freycinetianum (iliahi) (57 FR 20580;
K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The major threats to this species are competition from nonnative
plants, such as Lantana camara, Psidium cattleianum, and Stenotaphrum
secundatum (St. Augustine grass); habitat degradation by feral pigs;
restricted distribution; small population size; increased potential for
extinction resulting from naturally occurring events, such as
landslides or hurricanes; and depressed reproductive vigor (57 FR
20580).
Cyanea asarifolia (haha)
Cyanea asarifolia, a member of the bellflower family
(Campanulaceae), is a sparingly branched shrub. This short-lived
perennial species is distinguished from others of the genus that grow
on Kauai by the shape of the leaf base, the leaf width in proportion to
the length, and the presence of a leaf stalk (Lammers 1999; 59 FR
9304).
Little is known about the life history of Cyanea asarifolia.
Flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1995).
Historically, Cyanea asarifolia was known only from along the bank
of Anahola Stream on Kauai. Currently, two occurrences with
approximately four or five individuals are reported from the headwaters
of the Wailua River in central Kauai on State-owned land in the Lihue-
Koloa Forest Reserve (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000).
This species typically grows in pockets of soil on sheer wet rock
cliffs and waterfalls in lowland wet forests at elevations between 182
and 1,212 m (597 and 3,976 ft). Associated native plant species include
ferns, Bidens spp. (kookoolau), Dubautia plantaginea (naenae), Hedyotis
centranthoides (NCN), Hedyotis elatior (awiwi), Lysimachia filifolia
(kolokolo kuahiwi), Machaerina angustifolia (uki), Metrosideros
polymorpha, or Panicum lineale (NCN) (59 FR 9304; K. Wood, pers. comm.,
2001).
The major threats to this species are a risk of extinction from
naturally occurring events, such as hurricanes
[[Page 9120]]
and rock slides, and/or reduced reproductive vigor due to the small
number of existing individuals; predation by introduced slugs and
rodents (roof rats (Rattus rattus) and mice (Mus musculus)); and
habitat degradation by feral pigs (59 FR 9304).
Cyanea recta (haha)
Cyanea recta, a member of the bellflower family (Campanulaceae), is
an unbranched shrub with densely hairy flowers. This short-lived
perennial species is distinguished from other species in the genus that
grow on Kauai by the following characteristics: horizontal or ascending
inflorescence; narrowly elliptic leaves 12 to 28 cm (4.7 to 11 in)
long; flat leaf margins; and purple berries (Lammers 1990).
Little is known about the life history of Cyanea recta. Its
flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1998a).
Historically, Cyanea recta was found in upper Hanalei Valley,
Waioli Valley, Hanapepe Valley, Kalalau cliffs, Wainiha Valley,
Makaleha Mountains, Limahuli Valley, Powerline Trail, and the Lehua
Makanoe-Alakai area on the island of Kauai. Currently, there is a total
of eight occurrences, with approximately 198 to 208 individuals, on
State and private lands in the following areas: Waioli Valley, the left
and right branches of Wainiha Valley, Makaleha Mountains, and Puu Eu,
including areas in Halelea Forest Reserve, Kealia Forest Reserve, and
the Lihue-Koloa Forest Reserve (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000).
Cyanea recta grows in lowland wet or mesic Metrosideros polymorpha
forest or shrubland, usually in gulches or on slopes, and typically at
elevations between 234 and 1,406 m (768 and 4,613 ft). Associated
native plant species include Antidesma platyphyllum, Cheirodendron
platyphyllum (lapalapa), Cibotium spp. (hapuu), Dicranopteris linearis,
Diplazium spp. (NCN) , or Psychotria spp. (61 FR 53070; K. Wood, pers.
comm., 2001).
The major threats to this species are bark removal and other damage
by rats; habitat degradation by feral pigs; browsing by goats;
unidentified slugs that feed on the stems; and competition with the
nonnative plant species Blechnum occidentale (blechnum fern), Clidemia
hirta (Koster's curse), Crassocephalum crepidioides (NCN), Deparia
petersenii (NCN), Erechtites valerianifolia (fireweed), Lantana camara,
Melastoma candidum (NCN), Paspalum conjugatum (Hilo grass), Rubus
rosifolius (thimbleberry), Sacciolepis indica (Glenwood grass), or
Youngia japonica (Oriental hawksbeard) (61 FR 53070).
Cyanea remyi (haha)
Cyanea remyi, a member of the bellflower family (Campanulaceae), is
a shrub with generally unbranched, unarmed (lacking prickles) stems
which are hairy toward the base. This short-lived perennial species is
distinguished from others in the genus that grow on Kauai by its
shrubby habit; relatively slender, unarmed stems; smooth or minutely
toothed leaves; densely hairy flowers; the shape of the calyx lobes;
length of the calyx and corolla; and length of the corolla lobe
relative to the floral tube (Lammers 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Cyanea remyi. Its
flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown.
Currently, there are seven known occurrences with approximately 394
to 484 individuals among them on the island of Kauai. Cyanea remyi is
reported from Pali Eleele, Waioli Valley, Makaleha, Blue Hole,
Kawaikini, and Kapalaoa on privately and State-owned lands, including
the Halelea and Lihue-Koloa Forest Reserves (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database
2000; Lammers and Lorence 1993; K. Wood, in litt. 1999).
Cyanea remyi is usually found in narrow drainages and wet
streambanks in lowland wet forest or shrubland at elevations between
215 and 1,167 m (704 and 3,829 ft). Associated native plant species
include various ``finger ferns'' (in the Grammitidaceae family) and
``filmy ferns'' (in the Hymenophyllaceae family), Adenophorus spp.
(NCN), Antidesma platyphyllum, Bidens spp., Broussaisia arguta,
Cheirodendron spp., Cyrtandra spp., Diplazium sandwichianum, Eragrostis
grandis (kawelu), Freycinetia arborea (ieie), Hedyotis terminalis,
Machaerina angustifolia, Metrosideros polymorpha, Perrottetia
sandwicensis (olomea), Pipturus spp. (mamaki), Psychotria hexandra
(kopiko), Syzygium sandwicensis (ohia ha), Thelypteris spp.
(palapalaia), Touchardia latifolia (olona), or Urera glabra (opuhe) (61
FR 53070; K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The major threats to this species are competition with the
nonnative plant species Erechtites valerianifolia, Melastoma candidum,
Paspalum conjugatum, Psidium cattleianum, or Rubus rosifolius; habitat
degradation by feral pigs; browsing by feral goats; predation by rats;
unidentified slugs that feed on the stems; and a risk of extinction
from naturally occurring events, such as landslides or hurricanes, due
to the small number of remaining populations (61 FR 53070).
Cyanea undulata (haha)
Cyanea undulata, a member of the bellflower family (Campanulaceae),
is an unbranched (or the stem is occasionally forked) shrub or subshrub
with fine rust-colored hairs covering the lower surface of the leaves.
Its undulating leaf margins distinguish the species from other Kauai
members of the genus (Lammers 1990, 1999).
Native members of the Campanulaceae (bellflower) family, including
the genus Cyanea, are generally believed to be adapted to pollination
by native nectar-eating passerine birds, such as the Hawaiian
``honeycreepers.'' The long, tubular, slightly curved flowers of C.
undulata fit this model, but field observations are lacking. The fleshy
orange fruits of this species are adapted for bird dispersal like other
species of Cyanea. Although recognized as a short-lived perennial
species, specific details of the life history of this species, such as
growth rates, age plants begin to flower, and longevity of plants, are
unknown (Lorence and Flynn 1991; Service 1994).
Historically, Cyanea undulata was known only from the Wahiawa Bog
area on Kauai. Currently, one occurrence with a total of 28 individuals
is reported on privately owned land along the bank of a tributary of
the Wahiawa Stream in the Wahiawa drainage (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database
2000).
Cyanea undulata typically grows in narrow drainages and wet
streambanks in Metrosideros polymorpha dry to montane wet forest or
shrubland at elevations between 145 and 1,066 m (476 and 3,497 ft).
Associated native species include various grammitid and filmy ferns,
Adenophorus spp., Antidesma platyphyllum, Broussaisia arguta,
Cheirodendron spp., Diplazium sandwichianum, Dryopteris glabra,
Eragrostis grandis (kawelu), Bidens spp., Freycinetia arborea,
Machaerina angustifolia, Mariscus spp. (NCN), Melicope feddei (alani),
Perrottetia sandwicensis, Pipturus spp., Psychotria mariniana,
Psychotria hexandra, Sadleria pallida (amau), Sadleria squarrosa
(apuu), Smilax melastomifolia (pioi), Sphenomeris chinensis (palaa),
Syzygium sandwicensis, or Thelypteris spp. (Service 1994; K. Wood,
pers. comm., 2001).
The primary threats to this species include competition with the
nonnative plant species Clidemia hirta, Cyathea
[[Page 9121]]
cooperi (Australian tree fern), Deparia petersenii, Elephantopus mollis
(NCN), Erechtites valerianifolia, Melaleuca quinquenervia (paperbark
tree), Melastoma candidum, Oplismenus hirtellus (basketgrass), Paspalum
conjugatum, Paspalum urvillei (Vasey grass), Pluchea carolinensis
(sourbush), Psidium cattleianum, Rhodomyrtus tomentosa (rose myrtle),
Rubus rosifolius, Sacciolepis indica, Setaria parviflora,
Stachytarpheta australis, or Youngia japonica; trampling by feral pigs;
landslides; seed predation by rats; herbivory by introduced slugs; loss
of pollinators; hurricanes; and decreased reproductive vigor,
restricted distribution, and extinction due to unforseen circumstances
because of small population size (Service 1994; 56 FR 47695).
Cyrtandra cyaneoides (mapele)
Cyrtandra cyaneoides, a member of the African violet family
(Gesneriaceae), is an erect or ascending, fleshy, usually unbranched
shrub with opposite toothed leaves which have impressed veins on the
lower surface that are sparsely covered with long hairs. This short-
lived perennial species differs from others of the genus that grow on
Kauai by being a succulent, erect or ascending shrub; a bilaterally
symmetrical calyx that is spindle-shaped in bud and falls off after
flowering; leaves that are 41 to 56 cm (16 to 22 in) long and 23 to 35
cm (9 to 14 in) wide and have a wrinkled surface; and berries with
shaggy hairs (Wagner et al. 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Cyrtandra cyaneoides. Its
flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1998a).
Historically, Cyrtandra cyaneoides was known to occur only along
the trail to Waialae Valley on Kauai until recently discovered in other
areas. It is currently known from five occurrences, containing about
354 to 454 individuals, on private and State lands (including Halelea
Forest Reserve and Alakai Wilderness Preserve) at Pihea, Waioli Valley,
Lumahai, the left branch of Wainiha Valley, and Makaleha (GDSI 2000;
HINHP Database 2000; 61 FR 53070).
Cyrtandra cyaneoides typically grows on talus rubble on steep
slopes or cliffs with water seeps running below, near streams or
waterfalls in lowland or montane wet forest or shrubland dominated by
Metrosideros polymorpha or a mixture of M. polymorpha, Cheirodendron
spp., and Dicranopteris linearis at elevations between 157 and 1,406 m
(514 and 4,614 ft). Associated native species include Bidens spp.,
Boehmeria grandis (akolea), Coprosma spp., Cyanea spp. (haha),
Cyrtandra longifolia (haiwale), Cyrtandra kauaiensis (ulunahele),
Cyrtandra limahuliensis (haiwale), Diplazium sandwichianum, Freycinetia
arborea, Gunnera kauaiensis (ape ape), Hedyotis terminalis, Hedyotis
tryblium (NCN), Machaerina spp., Melicope clusiifolia (kukaemoa),
Melicope puberula (alani), Perrottetia sandwicensis, Pipturus spp.,
Psychotria spp., Pritchardia spp. (loulu), or Stenogyne purpurea (NCN)
(61 FR 53070; K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The major threats to this species are competition with nonnative
plant species such as Deparia petersenii, Drymaria cordata (pipili),
Paspalum conjugatum, and Rubus rosifolius; predation of seeds by rats;
reduced reproductive vigor and a risk of extinction from naturally
occurring events, such as landslides and hurricanes, due to the small
number of populations; and habitat degradation by feral pigs (61 FR
53070).
Cyrtandra limahuliensis (haiwale)
Cyrtandra limahuliensis, a member of the African violet family
(Gesneriaceae), is an unbranched or few-branched shrub with moderately
or densely hairy leaves. The following combination of characteristics
distinguishes this short-lived perennial species from others of the
genus: the leaves are usually hairy (especially on lower surfaces), the
usually symmetrical calyx is tubular or funnel-shaped and encloses the
fruit at maturity, and the flowers are borne singly (Wagner et al.
1990).
Little is known about the life history of Cyrtandra limahuliensis.
Flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1995).
Historically, Cyrtandra limahuliensis was known from three
locations on Kauai: Wainiha Valley, Lumahai Valley, and near Kilauea
River, until it was recently discovered in additional areas. Currently,
a total of 13 occurrences, containing approximately 2,746 to 3,024
individuals, are reported on private and State lands (including the
Halelea, Kealia, and Lihue-Koloa Forest Reserves) at Limahuli Falls,
Lumahai Valley, Waipa Valley, Waioli Valley, Kekoiki, Makaleha, the
right fork of Wainiha Valley, Kualapa, Blue Hole, Kepalaoa, and Puu
Kolo (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000).
This species typically grows along streambanks in lowland wet
forests at elevations between 208 and 1,594 m (681 and 5,228 ft).
Associated native plant species include Antidesma platyphyllum, Bidens
spp., Boehmeria grandis, Charpentiera spp. (papala), Cibotium glaucum
(hapuu), Cyanea spp., Cyrtandra kealiae (haiwale), Dicranopteris
linearis, Diplazium sandwichianum, Dubautia spp. (naenae), Eugenia
reinwardtiana (nioi), Gunnera kauaiensis, Hedyotis terminalis, Hibiscus
waimeae (kokio keokeo), Metrosideros polymorpha, Perrottetia
sandwicensis, Pipturus spp., Pisonia spp., Pritchardia spp., Psychotria
spp., Touchardia latifolia, or Urera glabra (59 FR 9304; K. Wood, pers.
comm., 2001).
The major threats to this species are competition from nonnative
plant species (Blechnum occidentale, Clidemia hirta, Erechtites
valerianifolia, Hedychium flavescens (yellow ginger), Melastoma
candidum, Paspalum conjugatum, Psidium cattleianum, Psidium guajava,
Rubus rosifolius, or Youngia japonica); habitat degradation by feral
pigs; natural landslides; and hurricanes (59 FR 9304).
Delissea rhytidosperma (NCN)
Delissea rhytidosperma, a member of the bellflower family
(Campanulaceae), is a branched shrub with lance-shaped or elliptic
toothed leaves. This short-lived perennial species differs from other
species of the genus by the shape, length, and margins of the leaves
and by having hairs at the base of the anthers (part of stamen that
produces pollen) (Lammers 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Delissea rhytidosperma.
Flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1995).
Historically, Delissea rhytidosperma was known from as far north as
Wainiha and Limahuli Valleys, as far east as Kapaa and Kealia, and as
far south as the Haupu Range, between the elevations of 122 and 915 m
(400 and 3,000 ft) on the island of Kauai. Currently, three occurrences
on private and State lands (including Kuia NAR), with a total of 11
individuals, are reported from Kuia Valley, Puhakukane, and the Haupu
Range (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000).
This species generally grows in well-drained soils with medium or
fine-textured subsoil in Diospyros (lama) diverse lowland mesic forests
or diverse Metrosideros polymorpha-Acacia koa forests at elevations
between 167 and 895 m (547 and 2,935 ft). Associated native plant
species include grammitid
[[Page 9122]]
ferns, Adenophorus spp., Cyanea spp., Dianella sandwicensis, Diospyros
sandwicensis, Dodonaea viscosa, Doodia kunthiana, Euphorbia haeleeleana
(akoko), Hedyotis spp. (NCN), Leptecophylla tameiameiae, Microlepia
strigosa, Nestegis sandwicensis (olopua), Pisonia spp., Psychotria
hobdyi (kopiko), or Pteralyxia kauaiensis (kaulu) (59 FR 9304; K. Wood,
pers. comm., 2001).
The major threats to this species are predation and/or habitat
degradation by mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus columbianus), feral pigs,
and goats; herbivory by rats and introduced slugs; fire; and
competition with the nonnative plants Cordyline fruticosa (ti), Lantana
camara, Passiflora ligularis (sweet granadilla), and Passiflora
tarminiana (banana poka); and a risk of extinction from naturally
occurring events, such as landslides or hurricanes, and/or reduced
reproductive vigor due to the small number of existing individuals
(Service 1995; 59 FR 9304).
Delissea rivularis (oha)
Delissea rivularis, a member of the bellflower family
(Campanulaceae), is a shrub, unbranched or branched near the base, with
hairy stems and leaves arranged in a rosette at the tips of the stems.
This short-lived perennial species is distinguished from others of the
genus by the color, length, and curvature of the corolla, shape of the
leaves, and presence of hairs on the stems, leaves, flower clusters,
and corolla (Lammers 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Delissea rivularis. Its
flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1998a).
Historically, Delissea rivularis was found at Waiakealoha
Waterfall, Waialae Valley, Hanakoa Valley, and Kaholuamanu on the
island of Kauai (61 FR 53070). Currently, this species is known from
two occurrences with a total of 40 individuals. The occurrences are
reported from Moaalele and Hanakapiai on State land within the Hono o
Na Pali NAR (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000; K. Wood, in litt. 1999).
Delissea rivularis is found on steep slopes near streams in
Metrosideros polymorpha-Cheirodendron trigynum montane wet or mesic
forest at elevations between 722 and 1,306 m (2,370 and 4,286 ft).
Associated native plant species include Boehmeria grandis, Broussaisia
arguta, Carex spp., Coprosma spp., Dubautia knudsenii (naenae),
Diplazium sandwichianum, Hedyotis foggiana (NCN), Ilex anomala,
Machaerina angustifolia, Melicope anisata (mokihana), Melicope
clusiifolia, Pipturus spp., Psychotria hexandra, or Sadleria spp.
(amau) (61 FR 53070; K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The major threats to this species are competition with the
encroaching nonnative plant Rubus argutus; habitat destruction by feral
pigs; predation by rats; and reduced reproductive vigor and a risk of
extinction from naturally occurring events, such as landslides or
hurricanes, due to the small number of remaining individuals (Service
1998a; 61 FR 53070).
Diellia pallida (NCN)
Diellia pallida, a member of the spleenwort family (Aspleniaceae),
is a fern that grows in tufts of three to four light green, lance-
shaped fronds along with a few persistent dead ones, and reproduces by
spores, the minute, reproductive dispersal unit of ferns and fern
allies. This short-lived perennial species differs from others of this
endemic Hawaiian genus by the color and sheen of the midrib, the
presence and color of scales on the midrib, and the frequent fusion of
sori (a group or cluster of spore cases) (Wagner 1952, 1987).
Little is known about the life history of Diellia pallida. Its
reproductive cycles, dispersal agents, longevity, specific
environmental requirements, and limiting factors are unknown (Service
1995).
Diellia pallida was known historically from Halemanu on the island
of Kauai. More recently additional occurrences have been found and
currently, there is a total of six occurrences with 43 to 48
individuals in Mahanaloa and Kuia Valleys, Makaha Valley, Waimea
Canyon, and Koaie Canyon, all on State-owned land including Kuia NAR,
Na Pali-Kona Forest Reserve, and Puu Ka Pele Forest Reserve (GDSI 2000;
HINHP Database 2000; 59 FR 9304; K. Wood, in litt. 1999).
This species grows on bare granular soil with dry to mesophytic
leaf litter with a pH of 6.9 to 7.9 on steep talus slopes in lowland
mesic forests at elevations between 445 and 1,027 m (1,460 and 3,371
ft). Associated native plant species include Acacia koa, Alectryon
macrococcus, Alphitonia ponderosa, Alyxia oliviformis, Antidesma
platyphyllum, Asplenium spp., Carex meyenii, Diospyros hillebrandii
(lama), Diospyros sandwicensis, Doodia kunthiana, Hedyotis knudsenii
(NCN), Leptecophylla tameiameiae, Metrosideros polymorpha, Microlepia
strigosa, Myrsine lanaiensis (kolea), Nestegis sandwicensis, Psychotria
mariniana, Psydrax odorata (alahee), Pteralyxia kauaiensis, Rauvolfia
sandwicensis (hao), Tetraplasandra kavaiensis (ohe ohe), Wilkesia
gymnoxiphium (iliau), or Zanthoxylum dipetalum (ae) (59 FR 9304; K.
Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The major threats to this species include competition with the
nonnative plants Aleurites moluccana (kukui), Cordyline fruticosa,
Lantana camara, Melia azedarach (Chinaberry), Oplismenus hirtellus, or
Stenotaphrum secundatum; predation and habitat degradation by feral
goats, pigs, and deer; fire; and a risk of extinction from naturally
occurring events, such as landslides or hurricanes, and/or reduced
reproductive vigor due to the small number of existing individuals (59
FR 9304).
Dubautia latifolia (koholapehu)
Dubautia latifolia, a member of the aster family (Asteraceae), is a
diffusely branched, woody perennial vine with leaves that are
conspicuously net-veined, with the smaller veins outlining nearly
square areas. A vining habit, distinct petioles (leaf stalks), and
broad leaves with conspicuous net veins outlining squarish areas
separate this from closely related species (Carr 1982b, 1985, 1999a).
Individual plants of this species do not appear to be able to
fertilize themselves. Since at least some individuals of Dubautia
latifolia require cross-pollination, the wide spacing of individual
plants (e.g., each 0.5 kilometer (km) (0.3 mile (mi)) apart) may pose a
threat to the reproductive potential of the species. The very low seed
set noted in plants in the wild indicates a reproductive problem,
possibly asynchronous flowering or lack of pollinators. Seedling
establishment and survival to juvenile stage is also rare. Dubautia
latifolia experiences seasonal vegetative decline during the spring and
summer, often losing most of its leaves. New growth and flowering occur
in the fall, with fruits developing in November. Pollinators and seed
dispersal agents are unknown (Carr 1982b; Service 1995).
Historically, Dubautia latifolia was found in the Makaha,
Awaawapuhi, Waialae, Kawaiula, and Kauhao Valleys of the Na Pali-Kona
Forest Reserve, Nualolo Trail and Valley in Kuia NAR; Halemanu in Kokee
State Park; along Mohihi Road in both Kokee State Park and Na Pali-Kona
Forest Reserve, along the Mohihi-Waialae Trail on Mohihi and Kohua
Ridges in both Na Pali-Kona Forest Reserve and Alakai Wilderness
Preserve; and at Kaholuamanu on the
[[Page 9123]]
island of Kauai. Currently, there are a total of 26 occurrences
containing approximately 65 to 84 individuals on State-owned land in
Kauhao Valley, Makaha Valley headwaters, Kuia Valley, Kawaiula Valley,
Kumuwela Ridge, Awaawapuhi Valley, Waiakoali picnic area, Alakai picnic
area, Honopu Trail, Nualolo Trail, Waineke Swamp, Noe Stream, Kumuwela
Ridge, Mohihi Ditch, Mohihi-Waialae Trail, and Kaluahaulu Ridge in the
Alakai Wilderness Preserve, Kokee State Park, Kuia NAR, Na Pali-Kona
Forest Reserve, and Waimea Canyon State Park (Carr 1982b; GDSI 2000;
HINHP Database 2000; K. Wood, in litt. 1999).
This species typically grows on gentle to steep slopes in well
drained soil in semi-open or closed, diverse montane mesic forest
dominated by Acacia koa and/or Metrosideros polymorpha, at elevations
between 544 and 1,277 m (1,786 and 4,189 ft). Commonly associated
native plant species are Alphitonia ponderosa, Antidesma platyphyllum,
Bobea spp., Claoxylon sandwicense (poola), Coprosma waimeae (olena),
Cyrtandra spp., Dicranopteris linearis, Diplazium sandwichianum,
Dodonaea viscosa, Elaeocarpus bifidus, Hedyotis terminalis, Ilex
anomala, Melicope anisata, Nestegis sandwicensis, Pleomele aurea,
Pouteria sandwicensis, Psychotria mariniana, Scaevola spp. (naupaka),
or Xylosma spp. (maua) (59 FR 9304; K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The threats to this species include competition from the nonnative
plants Acacia mearnsii (black wattle), Erigeron karvinskianus (daisy
fleabane), Hedychium spp. (ginger), Lonicera japonica (Japanese
honeysuckle), Passiflora tarminiana, Psidium cattleianum, or Rubus
argutus; damage from trampling and grazing by feral pigs and deer;
vehicle traffic and road maintenance; seasonal dieback; the small
number of extant individuals; and restricted distribution (59 FR 9304).
Dubautia pauciflorula (naenae)
Dubautia pauciflorula, a member of the aster family (Asteraceae),
is a somewhat sprawling shrub or erect small tree with narrowly lance-
shaped or elliptic leaves clustered toward the ends of the stems. The
tiny, two- to four-flowered heads distinguish this short-lived
perennial species from its relatives (Carr 1985, 1999a).
Few details are known about the life history of any Dubautia
species under natural conditions. Certain species produce viable seed
when self-pollinated (self-fertile), although others fail to do so
(self-infertile). Low pollinator numbers resulting in reduced cross-
pollination and consequently low numbers of viable seeds could explain
the small population sizes. Because of their structure and small size,
flowers of D. pauciflorula are presumably pollinated by small
generalist insects, although field observations are lacking. The
bristle-like pappus (tuft of appendages that crowns the ovary or fruit)
probably represents an adaptation for wind dispersal. Very little is
known about the life cycle of this species, including growth rates,
longevity of the plants, and number of years the plants remain
reproductive (Carr 1985; Service 1994; 56 FR 47695).
Historically and currently, this species is found only on State
(including the Lihue-Koloa Forest Reserve) and privately owned lands in
the Wahiawa drainage on Kauai. There are four occurrences containing 42
individual plants (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000).
These populations are found in Metrosideros polymorpha-
Dicranopteris linearis lowland wet forest within stream drainages at
elevations between 564 and 1,093 m (1,849 and 3,587 ft). Associated
native plant species include Antidesma platyphyllum, Broussaisia
arguta, Cheirodendron spp., Dubautia laxa (naenae pua melemele),
Embelia pacifica (kilioe), Hesperomannia lydgatei, Labordia waialealae
(kamakahala lau lii), Melicope spp., Nothoperanema rubiginosa (NCN),
Pritchardia spp., Psychotria spp., Sadleria spp., Scaevola mollis
(naupaka kuahiwi), Syzygium sandwicensis, or Tetraplasandra spp. (ohe
ohe) (K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The threats to this plant include direct competition with nonnative
plant species such as Melastoma candidum or Psidium cattleianum, and
potential threats from Clidemia hirta, Cyathea cooperi, Deparia
petersenii, Elephantopus mollis, Erechtites valerianifolia, Melaleuca
quinquenervia, Oplismenus hirtellus, Paspalum conjugatum, Paspalum
urvillei, Pluchea carolinensis, Rhodomyrtus tomentosa, Rubus
rosifolius, Sacciolepis indica, Setaria parviflora, Stachytarpheta
australis, or Youngia japonica; trampling by feral pigs; landslides and
erosion; restricted distribution; and hurricanes (Service 1994; 56 FR
47695).
Exocarpos luteolus (heau)
Exocarpos luteolus, a member of the sandalwood family
(Santalaceae), is a moderately to densely branched shrub with knobby
branches and leaves that are either minute scales or typical leaves.
This short-lived perennial species is distinguished from others of the
genus by its generally larger fruit with four indentations and by the
color of the receptacle and fruit (Wagner et al. 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Exocarpos luteolus. This
species tends to grow at habitat edges where there is adequate light
and is likely to be semi-parasitic. Flowering cycles, pollination
vectors, seed dispersal agents, longevity, other specific environmental
requirements, and limiting factors are unknown (Service 1995).
Historically, Exocarpos luteolus was known from three general
locations on Kauai: Wahiawa Bog, Kaholuamanu, and Kumuwela Ridge.
Currently, there is a total of nine occurrences containing
approximately 75 individual plants. This species has a scattered
distribution on State (Kuia NAR, Na Pali Coast State Park, Na Pali-Kona
Forest Reserve, and Puu Ka Pele Forest Reserve) and privately owned
lands and is reported from Pohakuao, the right fork and left fork of
Kalalau Valley, Hipalau Valley, Koaie Canyon, Mahanaloa Valley, Kuia
Valley, Poopooiki Valley, Nualolo Trail, Makaha Valley, and Haeleele
Valley (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000; K. Wood, in litt. 1999).
This species is found at elevations between 361 and 1,465 m (1,183
and 4,808 ft) in wet places bordering swamps or open bogs and on open,
dry ridges in lowland or montane mesic Acacia koa-Metrosideros
polymorpha-dominated forest communities with Dicranopteris linearis.
Associated native plant species include Bobea brevipes, Cheirodendron
trigynum, Claoxylon sandwicense, Dianella sandwicensis, Dodonaea
viscosa, Dubautia laevigata, Elaeocarpus bifidus, Hedyotis terminalis,
Leptecophylla tameiameiae, Melicope haupuensis, Peperomia spp.,
Pleomele aurea, Poa sandvicensis (Hawaiian bluegrass), Pouteria
sandwicensis, Psychotria greenwelliae, Psychotria mariniana, Santalum
freycinetianum, or Schiedea stellarioides (Service 1995; 59 FR 9304; K.
Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The major threats to this species are feral goats and pigs;
competition with the nonnative plants Acacia mearnsii, Corynocarpus
laevigata (karakanut), Erigeron karvinskianus, Morella faya (firetree),
or Rubus argutus; seed predation by rats; fire; and erosion (Service
1995; 59 FR 9304).
Hedyotis st.-johnii (Na Pali beach hedyotis)
Hedyotis st.-johnii, a member of the coffee family (Rubiaceae), is
a succulent perennial herb with slightly woody, trailing, quadrangular
stems and fleshy leaves clustered towards the base of the
[[Page 9124]]
stem. This species is distinguished from related species by its
succulence, basally clustered fleshy leaves, shorter floral tube, and
large leafy calyx lobes when in fruit (Wagner et al. 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Hedyotis st.-johnii.
Flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1995).
Currently, there are a total of eleven occurrences, containing
approximately 227 to 292 individuals, on State-owned land in Nualolo
Valley, Nualolo Kai, Kaahole Valley, Keawanui, Kawaiula Valley, Milolii
Spring, Makaha Point, Polihale Spring, Kalepa Valley, and Nakeikionaiwi
Caves within the Na Pali Coast State Park and Puu Ka Pele Forest
Reserve (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000).
This plant grows in the crevices of north-facing, near-vertical
coastal cliff faces within the spray zone in sparse dry coastal
shrubland at elevations between 0 and 187 m (0 and 613 ft). Associated
native plant species include Artemisia australis, Bidens spp., Capparis
sandwichiana (maiapilo), Chamaesyce celastroides, Eragrostis
variabilis, Heteropogon contortus, Lipochaeta connata (nehe), Lycium
sandwicense (ohelo kai), Myoporum sandwicense (naio), Nototrichium
sandwicense (kului), or Schiedea apokremnos (maolioli) (56 FR 49639; K.
Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The major threats to this species are herbivory and habitat
degradation by feral goats; competition from nonnative plant species,
especially Pluchea carolinensis; landslides; fire; trampling and
grazing by cattle (Bos taurus); and a risk of extinction due to
naturally occurring events, such as landslides or hurricanes, as well
as decreased reproductive vigor because of the small population sizes
and restricted distribution (Service 1995; 56 FR 49639).
Hesperomannia lydgatei (NCN)
Hesperomannia lydgatei, a member of the aster family (Asteraceae)
is a sparsely branched, small, long-lived perennial tree 2 to 4 m (6.5
to 13 ft) tall with lance-shaped or elliptic leaves. The flower heads
are clustered at the ends of branches and pendant (hanging) when
mature. The species is distinguished from other members of this endemic
Hawaiian genus by its pendant flower heads, longer and narrower
hairless flower stalks, and shorter involucral (floral) bracts (Wagner
et al. 1999).
Almost no mature fruits develop, and it is possible that
Hesperomannia lydgatei is self-infertile and fails to set seed unless
cross-pollinated with other individuals. The flower heads with long,
tubular yellow florets suggest pollination by long-tongued insects such
as moths or butterflies, although field observation is required to
confirm this. Absence of the appropriate pollinator(s) could be
responsible for the observed lack of viable seeds. The plume-like hairs
crowning the fruit strongly suggests dispersal by wind, as in many
members of the aster family. This species grows almost exclusively
along streams, however, so dispersal by water currents is also likely.
Specific details regarding growth rates, age trees begin flowering in
the wild, length of time they remain reproductive, and longevity of the
plants are unknown (Service 1994).
Historically, Hesperomannia lydgatei was found in the Wahiawa
Mountains of Kauai. Currently, this species is known from State
(Halelea Forest Reserve) and privately owned lands in the Pali Eleele,
Waiole Valley, Wahiawa and Kapalaoa areas. There are four occurrences
containing a total of 304 individual plants (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database
2000; K. Wood, in litt. 1999).
Hesperomannia lydgatei is found at elevations between 207 and 1,570
m (680 and 5,151 ft) along streambanks and forested slopes in rich
brown soil and silty clay in Metrosideros polymorpha or M. polymorpha-
Dicranopteris linearis lowland wet forest. Associated native plant
species include Adenophorus periens (pendent kihi fern), Antidesma
platyphyllum, Broussaisia arguta, Cheirodendron spp., Cyanea spp.,
Dubautia knudsenii, Dubautia laxa, Dubautia pauciflorula, Dubautia
raillardioides (naenae), Elaphoglossum spp., Freycinetia arborea,
Hedyotis terminalis, Labordia lydgatei (kamakahala), Machaerina
angustifolia, Peperomia spp., Pritchardia spp., Psychotria hexandra, or
Syzygium sandwicensis (HINHP Database 2000; Service 1994; K. Wood,
pers. comm., 2001).
Threats to the species include nonnative plants, feral goats, rats,
landslides, and erosion (Service 1994).
Hibiscadelphus woodii (hau kuahiwi)
Hibiscadelphus woodii, a member of the mallow family (Malvaceae),
is a small branched, long-lived perennial tree with a rounded crown.
Hibiscadelphus woodii differs from the other Kauai species in the genus
by characteristics of the leaf surface and whorled leaves and by bract
and flower color (Bates 1999; Lorence and Wagner 1995).
Flowering material has been collected in March, April, and
September, but no fruit set has been observed in spite of efforts to
manually outcross the flowers. A museum specimen of a flower contains
three adult Nitidulidae (sap) beetles, probably an endemic species. The
damage by these larvae may be responsible for the observed lack of
fruit set in Hibiscadelphus woodii (Lorence and Wagner 1995; Service
1998a). No additional life history information for this species is
currently known.
Hibiscadelphus woodii has been found only at the site of its
original discovery on State-owned land in the left branch of Kalalau
Valley, within the Na Pali Coast State Park on Kauai. Only two trees of
this species are currently known (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000; K.
Wood, in litt. 2001).
Hibiscadelphus woodii is found at elevations between 219 and 1,197
m (717 and 3,926 ft) on basalt talus or cliff walls in Metrosideros
polymorpha montane mesic forest. These forests contain one or more of
the following associated native plant species: Artemisia australis,
Bidens sandvicensis (kookoolau), Carex meyenii, Chamaesyce celastroides
var. hanapepensis (akoko), Dubautia spp., Hedyotis spp., Lepidium
serra, Lipochaeta spp. (nehe), Lobelia niihauensis (NCN), Lysimachia
glutinosa (kolokolo kuahiwi), Melicope pallida (alani), Myrsine spp.
(kolea), Nototrichium spp. (kului), Panicum lineale, Poa mannii (NCN),
or Stenogyne campanulata (NCN) (HINHP Database 2000; Lorence and Wagner
1995; 61 FR 53070; K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
Major threats to Hibiscadelphus woodii are habitat degradation by
feral goats and pigs; competition from the nonnative plant species
Erigeron karvinskianus; nectar robbing by the Japanese white-eye
(Zosterops japonicus), an introduced bird; and a risk of extinction
from naturally occurring events (e.g., rock slides), and reduced
reproductive vigor due to the small number of existing individuals at
the only known site (Lorence and Wagner 1995; 61 FR 53070).
Hibiscus clayi (Clay's hibiscus)
Hibiscus clayi, a member of the mallow family (Malvaceae), is a
long-lived perennial shrub or small tree. This species is distinguished
from other native Hawaiian members of the genus by the lengths of the
calyx, calyx lobes, and capsule and by the margins of the leaves (Bates
1999).
Little is known about the life history of Hibiscus clayi. Flowering
cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents, longevity, specific
[[Page 9125]]
environmental requirements, and limiting factors are unknown (Service
1995).
Historically, Hibiscus clayi was known from scattered locations on
Kauai: the Kokee region on the western side of the island, Moloaa
Valley to the north, Nounou Mountain in Wailua to the east, and as far
south as Haiku near Halii Stream. At this time, only one occurrence on
State land in the Nounou Mountains, with a total of four individuals,
is known to be extant (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000).
Hibiscus clayi generally grows on slopes at elevations between 9
and 765 m (29 and 2,509 ft) in Acacia koa or Diospyros spp.-Pisonia
spp.-Metrosideros polymorpha lowland dry or mesic forest with Artemisia
australis, Bidens spp., Cyanea hardyi (haha), Gahnia spp., Hedyotis
acuminata (au), Munroidendron racemosum (NCN), Pandanus tectorius
(hala), Panicum tenuifolium (mountain pili), Pipturus spp., Pleomele
aurea, Psychotria spp., or Psydrax odorata (HINHP Database 2000; 59 FR
9304; K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The major threats to this species are herbivory and habitat
degradation by feral pigs; competition from the nonnative plant species
Araucaria columnaris (Norfolk Island pine) and Psidium cattleianum;
trampling by humans; and a risk of extinction due to naturally
occurring events, such as landslides or hurricanes, as well as
decreased reproductive vigor because of the small population size and
restricted distribution (HINHP Database 2000; 59 FR 9304).
Hibiscus waimeae ssp. hannerae (kokio keokeo)
Hibiscus waimeae ssp. hannerae, a member of the mallow family
(Malvaceae), is a gray-barked tree with star-shaped hairs densely
covering its leaf and flower stalks and branchlets. The long-lived
perennial species is distinguished from others of the genus by the
position of the anthers along the staminal column, length of the
staminal column relative to the petals, color of the petals, and length
of the calyx. Two subspecies, ssp. hannerae and ssp. waimeae, both
endemic to Kauai, are recognized. Subspecies hannerae is
distinguishable from ssp. waimeae by its larger leaves and smaller
flowers (Bates 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Hibiscus waimeae ssp.
hannerae. Its flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal
agents, longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting
factors are unknown (Service 1998a).
Historically, Hibiscus waimeae ssp. hannerae was known from
Kalihiwai and adjacent valleys, Limahuli Valley, and Hanakapiai Valley.
This subspecies is no longer extant at Kalihiwai. Currently, there are
two occurrences containing 27 individuals on State (Na Pali Coast State
Park) and privately owned lands in Hanakapiai Valley, Limahuli Valley,
and Pohakuao (Bates 1999; GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000).
Hibiscus waimeae ssp. hannerae grows at elevations between 174 and
1,154 m (570 and 3,787 ft). It is found in Metrosideros polymorpha-
Dicranopteris linearis or Pisonia spp.-Charpentiera elliptica (papala)
lowland wet or mesic forest with Antidesma spp., Bidens spp., Bobea
spp., Cibotium spp., Cyanea spp., Cyrtandra spp., Perrottetia
sandwicensis, Pipturus spp., Psychotria spp., Sadleria spp., or
Syzygium sandwicensis (Bates 1999; HINHP Database 2000; Service 1998a;
K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
Major threats to Hibiscus waimeae ssp. hannerae are habitat
degradation by feral pigs, competition with nonnative plant species,
and a risk of extinction from naturally occurring events (e.g.,
landslides and hurricanes) and/or reduced reproductive vigor due to the
small number of remaining populations (HINHP Database 2000; 61 FR
53070).
Kokia kauaiensis (kokio)
Kokia kauaiensis, a member of the mallow family (Malvaceae), is a
small tree. This long-lived perennial species is distinguished from
others of this endemic Hawaiian genus by the length of the bracts
surrounding the flower head, number of lobes and the width of the
leaves, the length of the petals, and the length of the hairs on the
seeds (Bates 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Kokia kauaiensis. Its
flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1998a).
Historically, Kokia kauaiensis was found as seven scattered
occurrences on northwestern Kauai. Currently, there are a total of 21
occurrences with 166 to 171 individuals, found in Pohakuao, the left
branch of Kalalau Valley, Paaiki Valley, Kuia Valley, Koaie Canyon,
Kipalau Valley, and Kawaiiki Valley, all on State-owned land within
Kuia NAR, Na Pali Coast State Park, and Na Pali-Kona Forest Reserve
(GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000; K. Wood, in litt. 1999).
Kokia kauaiensis typically grows in diverse mesic forest at
elevations between 215 and 1,049 m (707 and 3,441 ft). Associated
native plant species include Acacia koa, Alyxia oliviformis, Antidesma
spp., Bobea spp., Chamaesyce celastroides, Claoxylon sandwicense,
Dicranopteris linearis, Diellia pallida, Diospyros hillebrandii,
Diospyros sandwicensis, Dodonaea viscosa, Flueggea neowawraea
(mehamehame), Hedyotis spp., Hibiscus spp. (aloalo), Isodendrion
laurifolium (aupaka), Lipochaeta fauriei (nehe), Melicope spp.,
Metrosideros polymorpha, Nestegis sandwicensis, Nototrichium spp.,
Pisonia spp., Pleomele aurea, Pouteria sandwicensis, Psydrax odorata,
Pteralyxia kauaiensis, Rauvolfia sandwicensis, Santalum freycinetianum
var. pyrularium (iliahi), Streblus pendulinus (aiai), Syzygium
sandwicensis, Tetraplasandra spp., or Xylosma spp. (Bates 1999; HINHP
Database 2000; Service 1998a; K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
Competition with and habitat degradation by invasive nonnative
plant species, substrate loss from erosion, habitat degradation and
browsing by feral goats and deer, and seed predation by rats are the
major threats affecting the survival of Kokia kauaiensis (HINHP
Database 2000; Service 1998a; Wood and Perlman 1993).
Labordia lydgatei (kamakahala)
Labordia lydgatei, a member of the logania family (Loganiaceae), is
a much-branched perennial shrub or small tree with sparsely hairy,
square stems. The small size of the flowers and capsules borne on
sessile (attached to the base) inflorescences (a flower cluster)
distinguish it from other members of the genus growing in the same area
(Wagner et al. 1999).
Immature fruits were seen on two plants during surveys in 1991 and
1992 by botanists from NTBG, and remnants of old fruiting bodies were
seen on another, suggesting that the plants are able to self-fertilize.
It is also suspected that the fruits of this species are adapted for
bird dispersal. Due to a lack of bird or other native pollinators,
pollination may be inhibited. Microhabitat requirements for seed
germination and growth may also be extremely specific. Virtually
nothing is known about the life history or ecology of this species
(Service 1994).
This species was originally known from the Wahiawa drainage, Waioli
Stream Valley, and Makaleha Mountains on Kauai. Labordia lydgatei is
currently known from six occurrences, consisting of 37 individual
plants, located on State (Lihue-Koloa and Halelea Forest Reserves) and
privately owned lands at Pali Eleele, Waioli Valley, Leleiwi, Lumahai
Valley, and Kapalaoa (GDSI
[[Page 9126]]
2000; HINHP Database 2000; K. Wood, in litt. 1999).
Labordia lydgatei is found on streambanks in Metrosideros
polymorpha-Dicranopteris linearis lowland wet forest at elevations
between 182 and 1,048 m (597 and 3,437 ft). Associated native plant
species include Antidesma platyphyllum var. hillebrandii (hame), Cyanea
spp., Cyrtandra spp., Dubautia knudsenii, Hedyotis terminalis, Ilex
anomala, Labordia hirtella (kamakahala), Psychotria spp., or Syzygium
sandwicensis (HINHP Database 2000; Service 1994; K. Wood, pers. comm.,
2001).
Competition from nonnative plants poses the greatest threat to the
survival of Labordia lydgatei (56 FR 47695). Additional threats include
habitat degradation from feral pigs; rats, a potential seed predator;
landslides and erosion; reduced germination; and a lack of dispersal or
pollination agents (Service 1994).
Labordia tinifolia var. wahiawaensis (kamakahala)
Labordia tinifolia var. wahiawaensis, a member of the logania
family (Loganiaceae), is a shrub or small tree with hairless,
cylindrical young branches. This long-lived perennial species differs
from others of the genus by having a long common flower cluster stalk,
hairless young stems and leaf surfaces, transversely wrinkled capsule
valves, and length of the corolla lobes. Three varieties of Labordia
tinifolia are recognized: var. lanaiensis on Lanai and Molokai; var.
tinifolia on Kauai, Oahu, Molokai, Maui, and Hawaii; and var.
wahiawaensis, endemic to Kauai. The variety wahiawaensis is
distinguished from the other two by its larger corolla (Wagner et al.
1999).
Little is known about the life history of Labordia tinifolia var.
wahiawaensis. Its flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal
agents, longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting
factors are unknown.
Labordia tinifolia var. wahiawaensis has only been known from one
occurrence with a current total of approximately 20 to 30 individual
plants on private land in the Wahiawa drainage in the Wahiawa Mountains
(GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000).
Labordia tinifolia var. wahiawaensis grows along streambanks in
lowland wet forests dominated by Metrosideros polymorpha at elevations
between 458 and 1,006 m (1,502 and 3,301 ft), with Antidesma
platyphyllum, Athyrium microphyllum (akolea), Cheirodendron spp.,
Cyrtandra spp., Dicranopteris linearis, Hedyotis terminalis, or
Psychotria spp. (HINHP Database 2000; K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The primary threats to the remaining individuals of Labordia
tinifolia var. wahiawaensis are competition with nonnative plants,
habitat degradation by feral pigs, trampling by humans, and a risk of
extinction from catastrophic random events or reduced reproductive
vigor due to the small number of individuals in a single population (61
FR 53070).
Lipochaeta fauriei (nehe)
Lipochaeta fauriei, a member of the aster family (Asteraceae), is a
perennial herb with somewhat woody, erect or climbing stems. This
short-lived perennial species differs from other species on Kauai by
having a greater number of disk and ray flowers per flower head, longer
ray flowers, and longer leaves and leaf stalks (Gardner 1976, 1979;
Service 1995; Wagner et al. 1985, 1990).
Little is known about the life history of Lipochaeta fauriei.
Flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1995).
Historically and currently, Lipochaeta fauriei is known from
Olokele Canyon on Kauai. This species is now found on State-owned land
in Poopooiki Valley, Kuia Valley, Haeleele Valley, and Kawaiiki Valley
within Kuia NAR, Na Pali-Kona Forest Reserve, and Puu Ka Pele Forest
Reserve. Currently there is a total of five occurrences with 82
individuals. An occurrence in Koaie Canyon previously thought to be L.
fauriei was later identified as Melanthera subcordata (nehe) (Gardner
1979; GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000; Service 1995; K. Wood, in litt.
1999).
This species grows most often in moderate shade to full sun and is
usually found on the sides of steep gulches in diverse lowland mesic
forests at elevations between 436 and 947 m (1,432 and 3,108 ft).
Associated native plant species include Acacia koa, Carex meyenii,
Carex wahuensis, Dicranopteris linearis, Diospyros spp., Dodonaea
viscosa, Euphorbia haeleeleana, Hibiscus waimeae, Kokia kauaiensis,
Myrsine lanaiensis, Nestegis sandwicensis, Pleomele aurea, Psychotria
greenwelliae, Psychotria mariniana, or Sapindus oahuensis (lonomea)
(HINHP Database 2000; K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
Major threats to Lipochaeta fauriei are predation and habitat
degradation by feral goats and pigs and competition with invasive
nonnative plants. Fire is also a significant threat to L. fauriei due
to the invasion of Melinis minutiflora, a fire-adapted grass that
creates unnaturally high fuel loads. The small total number of
individuals makes the species susceptible to extinction from naturally
occurring events, such as landslides or hurricanes, and/or reduced
reproductive vigor (HINHP Database 2000; Service 1995; 59 FR 9304).
Lipochaeta micrantha (nehe)
Lipochaeta micrantha, a member of the aster family (Asteraceae), is
a somewhat woody short-lived perennial herb. The small number of disk
flowers separates this species from the other members of the genus on
the island of Kauai. The two recognized varieties of this species, var.
exigua and var. micrantha, are distinguished by differences in leaf
length and width, degree of leaf dissection, and the length of the ray
florets (Gardner 1976, 1979; Wagner et al. 1990).
Little is known about the life histories of Lipochaeta micrantha
var. exigua and L. m. var. micrantha. Flowering cycles, pollination
vectors, seed dispersal agents, longevity, specific environmental
requirements, and limiting factors are unknown (Service 1995).
Historically, Lipochaeta micrantha var. exigua was only known from
the Haupu Range on Kauai. Currently, five occurrences of L. micrantha
var. exigua, with a total of 110 individuals, are known from privately
owned land in the vicinity of Haupu Range and southwest of Hokunui
summit. Historically, L. micrantha var. micrantha was known from
Olokele Canyon, Hanapepe Valley, and the Koloa District on Kauai.
Currently, this variety is only known from five occurrences totaling
121 individuals on State land within the Na Pali-Kona Forest Reserve in
Koaie Canyon and Kawaiiki Valley (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000).
Lipochaeta micrantha grows on cliffs, ridges, streambanks, or
slopes in mesic to wet mixed communities at elevations between 35 and
1,362 m (115 and 4,468 ft). Associated species include Acacia koa,
Antidesma spp., Artemisia australis, Bidens sandvicensis, Bobea spp.,
Chamaesyce celastroides var. hanapepensis, Diospyros spp., Dodonaea
viscosa, Eragrostis grandis, Eragrostis variabilis, Hibiscus kokio,
Lepidium bidentatum (anaunau), Lobelia niihauensis, Melicope spp.,
Metrosideros polymorpha, Neraudia kauaiensis (NCN), Nototrichium spp.,
Pipturus spp., Plectranthus parviflorus (ala ala wai nui), Pleomele
aurea, Psydrax odorata, Rumex albescens (huahuako), Sida fallax, or
Xylosma
[[Page 9127]]
hawaiiense (maua) (HINHP Database 2000; Service 1995; K. Wood, pers.
comm., 2001).
The major threats to both varieties of Lipochaeta micrantha are
habitat degradation by feral pigs and goats and competition with
nonnative plant species such as Erigeron karvinskianus, Lantana camara,
Pluchea carolinensis, or Stachytarpheta australis. The species is also
threatened by extinction from naturally occurring events, such as
landslides or hurricanes, and/or reduced reproductive vigor due to the
small number of existing populations (HINHP Database 2000; Lorence and
Flynn 1991; Service 1995).
Lipochaeta waimeaensis (nehe)
Lipochaeta waimeaensis, a member of the aster family (Asteraceae),
is a low growing, somewhat woody, short-lived perennial herb. This
species is distinguished from other Lipochaeta species on Kauai by leaf
shape and the presence of shorter leaf stalks and ray florets (Gardner
1976, 1979; Wagner et al. 1990).
Little is known about the life history of Lipochaeta waimeaensis.
Flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1995).
Lipochaeta waimeaensis has been known only from the original site
of discovery along the rim of Kauai's Waimea Canyon on State-owned
land. There are no more than 100 individuals (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database
2000).
This species grows on eroded soil on a precipitous, shrub-covered
gulch in a diverse lowland forest at elevations between 44 and 460 m
(145 and 1,509 ft) with Artemisia australis, Chamaesyce celastroides,
Dodonaea viscosa, Lipochaeta connata, Panicum spp. (NCN), Santalum
freycinetianum, or Schiedea spergulina (NCN) (HINHP Database 2000;
Wagner et al. 1999; K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The major threats to Lipochaeta waimeaensis are competition from
nonnative plants and habitat destruction by feral goats, whose presence
exacerbates the existing soil erosion problem at the site. The single
occurrence, and thus the entire species, is threatened by extinction
from naturally occurring events, such as landslides or hurricanes, and/
or reduced reproductive vigor due to the small number of existing
individuals (59 FR 9304).
Melicope haupuensis (alani)
Melicope haupuensis, a member of the rue family (Rutaceae), is a
small long-lived perennial tree. Unlike other species of this genus on
Kauai, the exocarp (outermost layer of a fruit) and endocarp (innermost
layer of a fruit) are hairless and the sepals are covered with dense
hairs (Stone et al. 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Melicope haupuensis.
Flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1995).
For 62 years, Melicope haupuensis was known only from the site of
its original discovery on the north side of Haupu Ridge on Kauai. This
occurrence is now gone. The species is now known from four occurrences
with a total of 13 individuals on State-owned land within the Alakai
Wilderness Preserve, Na Pali Coast State Park, and Na Pali-Kona Forest
Reserve in Kalahu, Awaawapuhi Valley, and Koaie Canyon (GDSI 2000;
HINHP Database 2000; K. Wood, in litt. 1999).
Melicope haupuensis grows on moist talus slopes in Metrosideros
polymorpha-dominated lowland mesic forests or M. polymorpha-Acacia koa
montane mesic forest at elevations between 111 and 1,249 m (364 and
4,097 ft). Associated native plant species include Antidesma
platyphyllum var. hillebrandii, Bobea brevipes, Cheirodendron trigynum,
Claoxylon sandwicense, Cryptocarya mannii (holio), Dianella
sandwicensis (ukiuki), Diospyros hillebrandii, Diospyros sandwicensis,
Dodonaea viscosa, Elaeocarpus bifidus, Hedyotis terminalis, Melicope
anisata, M. barbigera (uahiapele), M. ovata (alani), Pleomele aurea,
Pouteria sandwicensis, Pritchardia minor (loulu), Psychotria
greenwelliae, Psychotria mariniana, Tetraplasandra waimeae
(ohekikoola), or Zanthoxylum dipetalum (HINHP Database 2000; K. Wood,
pers. comm., 2001).
Habitat degradation by feral goats and competition with invasive
nonnative plant species are the major threats to Melicope haupuensis.
In addition, this species may be susceptible to the black twig borer
(Xylosandrus compactus). The existence of only 13 known trees
constitutes an extreme threat of extinction from naturally occurring
events, such as landslides or hurricanes, or reduced reproductive vigor
(Hara and Beardsley 1979; HINHP Database 2000; Medeiros et al. 1986; 59
FR 9304).
Melicope quadrangularis (alani)
Melicope quadrangularis, a member of the rue family (Rutaceae), is
a shrub or small tree. Young branches are generally covered with fine
yellow fuzz but become hairless with age. This species differs from
others in the genus in having the following combination of characters:
oppositely arranged leaves, only one or two flowers per cluster, cube-
shaped capsules with fused lobes, and a deep central depression at the
top of the fruit (Stone et al. 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Melicope quadrangularis.
Flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1995).
Melicope quadrangularis is known from the type locality in the
Wahiawa Bog region of Kauai. One adult plant and two seedlings were
discovered in 1991 by Ken Wood of NTBG on an east-facing slope of
Wahiawa Ridge at 853 m (2,800 ft) on privately owned land. Subsequent
exploration resulted in the location of a total of 13 individuals of
this species. Although a survey after hurricane Iniki in 1992 did not
relocate any individuals, it is hoped that there is a seed bank or that
undiscovered individuals remain to be found (Stone et al. 1999).
Melicope quadrangularis grows in Metrosideros polymorpha diverse
lowland wet forest that ranges from mesic to wet conditions at
elevations between 608 and 1,593 m (1,995 and 5,228 ft). Associated
native plant species include Antidesma platyphyllum, Broussaisia
arguta, Cheirodendron fauriei (olapa), Cibotium nealiae (hapuu),
Cyrtandra pickeringii (haiwale), Dicranopteris linearis, Machaerina
angustifolia, Machaerina mariscoides (ahaniu), other Melicope spp.,
Metrosideros waialealae (NCN), Psychotria hexandra, P. mariniana, P.
wawrae (kopiko), Sadleria pallida, Scaevola gaudichaudiana (naupaka
kuahiwi), or Syzygium sandwicensis (K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
This species is threatened by nonnative plants and habitat
disturbance by feral pigs; over-collecting for scientific purposes;
extinction from naturally occurring events, such as landslides or
hurricanes; and/or reduced reproductive vigor due to the dearth of
individuals (Service 1994).
Munroidendron racemosum (NCN)
Munroidendron racemosum, a member of the ginseng family
(Araliaceae), is a small tree with a straight gray trunk crowned with
spreading branches. This long-lived perennial species is the only
member of a genus endemic to Hawaii. The genus is distinguished from
other closely related Hawaiian genera of the family by
[[Page 9128]]
its distinct flower clusters and corolla (Constance and Affolter 1999).
Reproduction occurs year-round, with flowers and fruits found
throughout the year. Self-pollination is assumed to occur since viable
seeds have been produced by isolated individuals. Pollinators have not
been observed, but insect pollination is likely. Dispersal mechanisms
are unknown (Service 1995).
Historically, Munroidendron racemosum was known from scattered
locations throughout the island of Kauai. Occurrences are now known
from Waiahuakua, Pohakuao, the left and right branches of Kalalau
Valley, Nakeikionaiwi Valley, Awaawapuhi Valley spring, Honopu Valley,
Nualolo Valley, Poomau Valley, Kawaiiki Valley, Koaie Canyon, Nonou,
Haupu, and Keopaweo. There are currently 17 known occurrences with
approximately 59 to 99 individuals on State (Hono o Na Pali NAR, Na
Pali Coast State Park, Na Pali-Kona Forest Reserve, Nonou Forest
Reserve, and Puu Ka Pele Forest Reserve) and privately owned lands
(GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000).
Munroidendron racemosum is typically found on steep exposed cliffs
or on ridge slopes in coastal to lowland mesic forests at elevations
between 6 and 979 m (19 and 3,213 ft). Associated plant species include
Bobea brevipes, Brighamia insignis, Canavalia napaliensis (awikiwiki),
Diospyros hillebrandii, Diospyros sandwicensis, Nestegis sandwicensis,
Pisonia sandwicensis (aulu), Pisonia umbellifera (papala kepau),
Pleomele aurea, Pouteria sandwicensis, Psychotria spp., Psydrax
odorata, Rauvolfia sandwicensis, Schiedea spp. (NCN), Sida fallax, or
Tetraplasandra spp. (Gagne and Cuddihy 1999; HINHP Database 2000; 59 FR
9304; K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The threats to Munroidendron racemosum are competition with
nonnative plant species, such as Aleurites moluccana, Lantana camara,
Leucaena leucocephala (koa haole), or Psidium guajava; habitat
degradation by feral goats and fruit predation by rats; introduced
insects of the long-horned beetle family (Cerambycidae); fire;
extinction from naturally occurring events, such as landslides or
hurricanes; and reduced reproductive vigor (HINHP Database 2000;
Service 1995; 59 FR 9304).
Myrsine linearifolia (kolea)
Myrsine linearifolia, a member of the myrsine family (Myrsinaceae),
is a branched shrub. This long-lived perennial species is distinguished
from others of the genus by the shape, length, and width of the leaves,
length of the petals, and number of flowers per cluster (Wagner et al.
1999).
Little is known about the life history of Myrsine linearifolia. Its
flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1998a).
Historically, Myrsine linearifolia was found at scattered locations
on Kauai: Olokele Valley, Kalualea, Kalalau Valley, Kahuamaa Flat,
Limahuli-Hanakapiai Ridge, Koaie Stream, Pohakuao, Namolokama summit
plateau, and Haupu. There are currently 12 occurrences with
approximately 490 to 564 individuals on State (Alakai Wilderness
Preserve and Na Pali Coast State Park) and privately owned lands. The
populations are found in Limahuli Valley, Alealau, the left branch of
Kalalau Valley, Puu O Kila, Koaie Canyon, Namolokama, and Kapalaoa
(GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000; K. Wood, in litt. 1999).
Myrsine linearifolia typically grows at elevations between 105 and
1,380 m (346 and 4,526 ft) in diverse mesic or wet lowland or montane
Metrosideros polymorpha forest with Cheirodendron spp. or Dicranopteris
linearis as co-dominant species. Plants growing in association with
this species include Bobea brevipes, Cryptocarya mannii, Dubautia spp.,
Eurya sandwicensis (anini), Freycinetia arborea, Hedyotis terminalis,
Lysimachia glutinosa, Machaerina angustifolia, Melicope spp., Myrsine
spp., Nothocestrum spp. (aiea), Psychotria spp., Sadleria pallida, or
Syzygium sandwicensis (HINHP Database 2000; 61 FR 53070; K. Wood, pers.
comm., 2001).
Competition with nonnative plants, such as Erigeron karvinskianus,
Kalanchoe pinnata (air plant), Lantana camara, Psidium cattleianum,
Rubus argutus, and Rubus rosifolius and habitat degradation by feral
pigs and goats are the major threats to Myrsine linearifolia (61 FR
53070).
Nothocestrum peltatum (aiea)
Nothocestrum peltatum, a member of the nightshade family
(Solanaceae), is a small tree with ash-brown bark and woolly stems. The
usually peltate (leaf stem attached to the center) leaves and shorter
leaf stalks separate this species from others in the genus (Symon
1999).
Although plants of this long-lived perennial species have been
observed flowering, they rarely set fruit. This could be the result of
a loss of pollinators, reduced genetic variability, or an inability to
fertilize itself. Little else is known about the life history of
Nothocestrum peltatum. Flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed
dispersal agents, longevity, specific environmental requirements, and
limiting factors are unknown (59 FR 9304).
Historically, Nothocestrum peltatum was known from Kauai at
Kumuwela, Kaholuamanu, and the region of Nualolo. This species is now
known from a total of 10 occurrences with 20 individuals, located at
Kahuamaa Flats, Awaawapuhi Trail, Awaawapuhi Valley, Kawaiula Valley,
and Makaha Valley on State-owned land within the Kokee State Park, Kuia
NAR, Na Pali Coast State Park, Na Pali-Kona Forest Reserve, and Puu Ka
Pele Forest Reserve (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000; K. Wood, in litt.
1999).
This species generally grows in rich soil on steep slopes in mesic
or wet forest dominated by Acacia koa or a mixture of A. koa and
Metrosideros polymorpha, at elevations between 581 and 1,290 m (1,906
and 4,232 ft). Associated native plants include Alphitonia ponderosa,
Antidesma spp., Bobea brevipes, Broussaisia arguta, Cheirodendron
trigynum, Claoxylon sandwicense, Coprosma spp., Cryptocarya mannii,
Dianella sandwicensis, Dicranopteris linearis, Diplazium sandwichianum,
Dodonaea viscosa, Elaeocarpus bifidus, Hedyotis terminalis, Ilex
anomala, Melicope anisata, M. barbigera, M. haupuensis, Perrottetia
sandwicensis, Pleomele aurea, Pouteria sandwicensis, Psychotria
greenwelliae, Psychotria mariniana, Tetraplasandra kavaiensis, or
Xylosma spp. (HINHP Database 2000; K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
Competition with nonnative plants (such as Erigeron karvinskianus,
Lantana camara, Passiflora tarminiana, or Rubus argutus), and habitat
degradation by feral pigs, deer, and red jungle fowl (Gallus gallus)
constitute the major threats to Nothocestrum peltatum. This species is
also threatened by fire, risk of extinction from naturally occurring
events (e.g., landslides or hurricanes), and reduced reproductive vigor
due to the small number of existing individuals (HINHP Database 2000;
59 FR 9304).
Panicum niihauense (lau ehu)
Panicum niihauense, a member of the grass family (Poaceae), is a
perennial bunchgrass with unbranched culms (aerial stems). This short-
lived perennial species is distinguished from others in the genus by
the erect inflorescence branches and the densely clustered spikelets
(Davidse 1999).
Little is known about the life history of this species.
Reproductive cycles,
[[Page 9129]]
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1999).
Panicum niihauense was known historically from Niihau and one
location on Kauai. Currently, this species is only known from one
occurrence of 23 individuals at the Polihale State Park area of Kauai
on State-owned land (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000).
Panicum niihauense is found scattered in sand dunes in coastal
shrubland at elevations between 0 and 103 m (0 and 337 ft). Associated
native plant species include Cassytha filiformis (kaunaoa pehu),
Chamaesyce celastroides, Dodonaea viscosa, Nama sandwicensis (hinahina
kahakai), Ophioglossum pendulum ssp. falcatum (puapua moa), Scaevola
sericea (naupaka kahakai), Sida fallax, Sporobolus virginicus (akiaki),
or Vitex rotundifolia (kolokolo kahakai) (HINHP Database 2000; K. Wood,
pers. comm., 2001).
Primary threats to Panicum niihauense are destruction by off-road
vehicles, competition with nonnative plant species, and a risk of
extinction from naturally occurring events (e.g., landslides or
hurricanes) and reduced reproductive vigor due to the small number of
individuals in the one remaining population (HINHP Database 2000; 61 FR
53108).
Phyllostegia knudsenii (NCN)
Phyllostegia knudsenii, a nonaromatic member of the mint family
(Lamiaceae), is an erect herb or vine. This short-lived perennial
species is distinguished from others in the genus by its specialized
flower stalk; it differs from the closely related P. floribunda by
often having four flowers per group (Wagner et al. 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Phyllostegia knudsenii.
Its flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1998a).
Until 1993, Phyllostegia knudsenii was only known from the site of
its original discovery made in the 1800s from the woods of Waimea on
Kauai. There is currently one known occurrence with a total of 4 to13
individuals on State-owned land in Koaie Canyon within the Alakai
Wilderness Preserve (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000; Wagner et al.
1999; K. Wood, in litt. 1999).
Phyllostegia knudsenii is found in Metrosideros polymorpha lowland
mesic or wet forest at elevations between 399 and 1,059 m (1,309 and
3,475 ft). Associated native plant species include Bobea timonioides
(ahakea), Claoxylon sandwicense, Cryptocarya mannii, Cyrtandra
kauaiensis, Cyrtandra paludosa (moa), Diospyros sandwicensis,
Elaeocarpus bifidus, Ilex anomala, Myrsine linearifolia, Perrottetia
sandwicensis, Pittosporum kauaiense (hoawa), Pouteria sandwicensis,
Pritchardia minor, Selaginella arbuscula (lepelepeamoa), Tetraplasandra
oahuensis (ohe mauka), or Zanthoxylum dipetalum (61 FR 53070; K. Wood,
pers. comm., 2001).
Major threats to Phyllostegia knudsenii include habitat degradation
by feral pigs and goats, competition with nonnative plants, and a risk
of extinction from naturally occurring events (e.g., landslides and
hurricanes) and reduced reproductive vigor due to the small number of
individuals in the only known population (61 FR 53070; Service 1998a).
Phyllostegia waimeae (NCN)
Phyllostegia waimeae, a nonaromatic member of the mint family
(Lamiaceae), is a climbing perennial plant. Characteristics that
distinguish this species from others in the genus are the nearly
stalkless bracts that partially overlap and cover the flowers, and
relatively fewer oil glands on the leaves (Wagner et al. 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Phyllostegia waimeae.
Flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown Service 1995).
Historically, Phyllostegia waimeae was known from Kaholuamanu and
Kaaha on Kauai. Currently, one occurrence with six individuals persists
on State land in Kawaiiki Valley within the Na Pali-Kona Forest Reserve
(K. Wood, in litt. 2001).
This species typically grows in Acacia koa-Metrosideros polymorpha
dominated wet or mixed mesic forest with Cheirodendron spp. or
Dicranopteris linearis as co-dominants at elevations between 655 and
1,224 m (2,149 and 4,016 ft). Associated native plant species include
Broussaisia arguta, Claoxylon sandwicense, Diplazium sandwichianum,
Dubautia knudsenii, Elaphoglossum spp., Gunnera kauaiensis, Hedyotis
spp., Myrsine lanaiensis, Pleomele aurea, Psychotria spp., Sadleria
spp., Scaevola procera (naupaka kuahiwi), Syzygium sandwicensis, or
Vaccinium spp. (K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
Habitat destruction by feral goats, erosion, and competition with
introduced grasses are the major threats to Phyllostegia waimeae. The
species is also threatened by over-collecting for scientific purposes;
extinction from naturally occurring events, such as hurricanes; and/or
reduced reproductive vigor due to the small number of existing
individuals (Service 1995).
Phyllostegia wawrana (NCN)
Phyllostegia wawrana, a nonaromatic member of the mint family
(Lamiaceae), is a perennial vine that is woody toward the base and has
long, crinkly hairs along the stem. This short-lived perennial species
can be distinguished from the related P. floribunda and P. knudsenii by
its less specialized flower stalk (Wagner et al. 1999).
Seeds were observed in the wild in August 1993. No additional life
history information for this species is currently known (Service
1998a).
Phyllostegia wawrana was reported to be found at Hanalei on Kauai
in the 1800s and along Kokee Stream in 1926. Currently, four
occurrences with approximately 34 to 54 individuals are reported from
Koaie Canyon, Moaalele, Awaawapuhi Valley, and Makaleha on State-owned
land within the Alakai Wilderness Preserve, Hono o Na Pali NAR, and
Kokee State Park (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000).
This species grows at elevations between 398 and 1,284 m (1,306 and
4,212 ft) in Acacia koa-Metrosideros polymorpha-Cheirodendron mixed
mesic forest. Associated native plant species include Alectryon
macrococcus, Asplenium polyodon , Athyrium microphyllum, Carex spp.,
Claoxylon sandwicense, Cyanea fissa (haha), Delissea rivularis,
Dianella sandwicensis, Diplazium sandwichianum, Dodonaea viscosa,
Doodia kunthiana, Dryopteris wallichiana, Dubautia knudsenii, Dubautia
laevigata, Hedyotis tryblium, Machaerina angustifolia, Panicum
nephelophilum, Peperomia spp., Perrottetia sandwicensis, Pleomele
aurea, Poa sandvicensis, Pteridium aquilinum var. decompositum,
Sadleria pallida, Scaevola procera, Schiedea stellarioides, Syzygium
sandwicensis, Touchardia latifolia, or Vaccinium dentatum (HINHP
Database 2000; 61 FR 53070; K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
Major threats to Phyllostegia wawrana include habitat degradation
by feral pigs and competition with nonnative plant species, such as
Erechtites valerianifolia, Erigeron karvinskianus, Melastoma candidum,
Passiflora tarminiana, Rubus argutus, and Rubus rosifolius (61 FR
53070; Service 1998a).
[[Page 9130]]
Poa mannii (Mann's bluegrass)
Poa mannii, a member of the grass family (Poaceae), is a perennial
grass with short rhizomes (underground stems) and erect, tufted culms.
All three native species of Poa in the Hawaiian Islands are endemic to
the island of Kauai. Poa mannii is distinguished from both P.
siphonoglossa and P. sandvicensis by its fringed ligule (an appendage
on the leaf sheath) and from P. sandvicensis by its shorter panicle (a
flower cluster) branches (O'Connor 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Poa mannii. Flowering
cycles, pollination vectors, longevity, specific environmental
requirements, and limiting factors are unknown (Service 1995).
Historically, this species was found in Olokele Gulch on Kauai.
Currently, there is a total of six occurrences with approximately 268
individuals on State-owned land in the right and left branches of
Kalalau Valley, Awaawapuhi Valley, Kuia Valley, and Kauhao Valley
within the Kuia NAR, Na Pali Coast State Park, Na Pali-Kona Forest
Reserve, and Waimea Canyon State Park (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000;
O'Connor 1999; K. Wood, in litt. 1999).
This species typically grows on cliffs or rock faces in lowland or
montane mesic Metrosideros polymorpha or Acacia koa-M. polymorpha
forest at elevations between 327 and 1,222 m (1,072 and 4,009 ft).
Associated native plant species include Antidesma platyphyllum,
Artemisia australis, Bidens cosmoides, Bidens sandvicensis, Carex
meyenii, Carex wahuensis, Chamaesyce celastroides var. hanapepensis,
Cyperus phleoides (NCN), Diospyros sandwicensis, Dodonaea viscosa,
Eragrostis variabilis, Hedyotis terminalis, Lobelia niihauensis,
Lobelia yuccoides (panaunau), Luzula hawaiiensis (wood rush), Melicope
anisata, M. barbigera, M. pallida, Nototrichium spp., Panicum lineale,
Pleomele aurea, Pouteria sandwicensis, Psychotria greenwelliae,
Psychotria mariniana, Schiedea spp., or Wilkesia gymnoxiphium (HINHP
Database 2000; 59 FR 56330; K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
Poa mannii survives only in very steep areas that are inaccessible
to goats, suggesting that goat herbivory may have eliminated this
species from more accessible locations, as is the case for other rare
plants from northwestern Kauai. Threats to P. mannii include habitat
damage, trampling, and browsing by feral goats, and competition with
invasive nonnative plants. Erigeron karvinskianus has invaded Kalalau,
Koaie, and Waialae Valleys, three of the areas where P. mannii occurs.
Lantana camara threatens all known populations, and Rubus argutus
threatens the populations in Kalalau and Waialae Valleys. Poa mannii is
also threatened by fire and reduced reproductive vigor and/or
extinction from naturally occurring events, such as landslides or
hurricanes, due to the small number of existing populations and
individuals (59 FR 56330).
Poa sandvicensis (Hawaiian bluegrass)
Poa sandvicensis is a perennial grass (Poaceae) with densely
tufted, mostly erect culms. It is distinguished from closely related
species by its shorter rhizomes and culms which do not become rush-like
with age, closed and fused sheaths, relatively even-edged ligules, and
longer panicle branches (O'Connor 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Poa sandvicensis.
Flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1995).
Historically, this species was known from the following areas on
the island of Kauai: the rim of Kalalau Valley; Halemanu Ridge,
Kumuwela Ridge, and Kauaikanana drainage; Awaawapuhi Trail; Kohua
Ridge/Mohihi drainage; and Kaholuamanu. Hillebrand's (1888) reference
to a Maui locality is most likely an error. Currently, there is a total
of nine occurrences with 1,321 individuals on State-owned land. Poa
sandvicensis is known to be extant at Alealau, Keanapuka, Awaawapuhi
Trail, Kumuwela Ridge, Maile Flat Trail, Mohihi Stream, Mohihi-Waialae
Trail, Kawaiiki Valley, and Waialae Valley in the Alakai Wilderness
Preserve, Hono o Na Pali NAR, Kokee State Park, Na Pali Coast State
Park, and Na Pali-Kona Forest Reserve (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000;
57 FR 20580; K. Wood, in litt. 1999).
Poa sandvicensis grows on wet, shaded, gentle to steep slopes,
ridges, and rock ledges of streambanks in semi-open to closed, wet,
diverse Acacia koa-Metrosideros polymorpha montane forest, at
elevations between 473 and 1,290 m (1,553 and 4,232 ft). Associated
native plant species include Alyxia oliviformis, Bidens sandvicensis,
Cheirodendron spp., Claoxylon sandwicense, Coprosma spp., Dianella
sandwicensis, Dicranopteris linearis, Dodonaea viscosa, Dubautia spp.,
Hedyotis spp., Melicope spp., Peperomia spp., Psychotria spp., Scaevola
procera, Schiedea stellarioides, or Syzygium sandwicensis (HINHP
Database 2000; 57 FR 20580; K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The greatest immediate threats to the survival of Poa sandvicensis
are competition from nonnative plants, such as Erigeron karvinskianus,
Hedychium spp., Passiflora tarminiana, or Rubus argutus; erosion caused
by feral pigs and goats; and State Forest Reserve trail maintenance
activities and human recreation. In addition, naturally occurring
events, such as landslides and hurricanes, constitute a threat of
extinction or reduced reproductive vigor due to the species' small
population size (Service 1995; 57 FR 20580).
Poa siphonoglossa (NCN)
Poa siphonoglossa is a perennial grass (Poaceae) with extensive
tufted and flattened culms that cascade from banks in masses. It
differs from related species by its longer culms and lack of a
prominent tooth on the ligule. In addition, its shorter panicle
branches distinguish it from P. sandvicensis, and its short rhizomes
and closed and fused sheaths separate it from P. mannii (O'Connor
1999).
Little is known about the life history of Poa siphonoglossa.
Flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1995).
Historically, Poa siphonoglossa was known from five sites on the
island of Kauai: Kohua Ridge, near Kaholuamanu, Kaulaula Valley, Kuia
Valley, and Kalalau. Currently, there are a total of five occurrences
with a total of 50 individuals on State-owned land at Kahuamaa Flats,
Mohihi-Waialae Trail, Kuia Valley, Makaha Ridge, and Kaulaula Valley in
the Alakai Wilderness Preserve, Kuia NAR, Na Pali Coast State Park, Na
Pali-Kona Forest Reserve, and Puu Ka Pele Forest Reserve (GDSI 2000;
HINHP Database 2000; K. Wood, in litt. 1999).
Poa siphonoglossa typically grows on shady banks on steep slopes in
mesic Metrosideros polymorpha-Acacia koa forests at elevations between
about 480 and 1,296 m (1,573 and 4,251 ft). Associated native plant
species include Alphitonia ponderosa, Alyxia oliviformis, Bobea
brevipes, Carex meyenii, Carex wahuensis, Coprosma waimeae, Dianella
sandwicensis, Dodonaea viscosa, Dubautia spp., Hedyotis spp.,
Leptecophylla tameiameiae, Lobelia yuccoides, Melicope spp., Microlepia
strigosa, Myrsine spp., Panicum nephelophilum, Poa sandvicensis,
Psychotria spp., Scaevola procera, Tetraplasandra
[[Page 9131]]
kavaiensis, Vaccinium spp., Wilkesia gymnoxiphium, Xylosma spp., or
Zanthoxylum dipetalum (57 FR 20580; K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The primary threat to the survival of Poa siphonoglossa is habitat
degradation and/or herbivory by feral pigs and deer. The nonnative
plant Rubus argutus invading Kohua Ridge constitutes a probable threat
to that population. Small population size and the potential for one
disturbance event to destroy the majority of known individuals are also
serious threats to this species (HINHP Database 2000; Service 1995; 57
FR 20580).
Pritchardia aylmer-robinsonii (wahane)
Pritchardia aylmer-robinsonii, a member of the palm family
(Arecaceae) is a fan-leaved tree about 7 to 15 m (23 to 50 ft) tall.
This species is distinguished from others of the genus by the thin leaf
texture and drooping leaf segments, tan woolly hairs on the underside
of the petiole and the leaf blade base, stout hairless flower clusters
that do not extend beyond the fan-shaped leaves, and the smaller
spherical fruit (Read and Hodel 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Pritchardia aylmer-
robinsonii. Its flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal
agents, longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting
factors are unknown (61 FR 41020).
Historically, Pritchardia aylmer-robinsonii was found at three
sites in the eastern and central portions of the island of Niihau.
Trees were found on Kaali Cliff and in Mokouia and Haao Valleys at
elevations between 70 and 270 m (230 and 885 ft) on privately owned
land. The most recent observations indicate that two plants still
remain on Kaali Cliff (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000; Read and Hodel
1999).
Pritchardia aylmer-robinsonii typically grows on rocky talus in
seepage areas within coastal dry forest at elevations between 91 to 259
m (300 to 850 ft). Associated native plant species include Brighamia
insignis, Cyperus trachysanthos, Lipochaeta lobata var. lobata (nehe),
or Lobelia niihauensis. Originally a component of the coastal dry
forest, this species now occurs only in a rugged and steep area where
it receives some protection from grazing ungulates (HINHP Database
2000; 61 FR 41020).
The species is threatened by habitat degradation and/or herbivory
by cattle, feral pigs, and feral goats and seed predation by rats.
Small population size, limited distribution, and reduced reproductive
vigor makes this species particularly vulnerable to extinction (61 FR
41020).
Pritchardia napaliensis (loulu)
Pritchardia napaliensis, a member of the palm family (Arecaceae),
is a small tree with about 20 leaves and an open crown. This species is
distinguished from others of the genus that grow on Kauai by having
about 20 flat leaves with pale scales on the lower surface that fall
off with age, inflorescences with hairless main axes, and globose round
fruits less than 3 cm (1.2 in) long (Read and Hodel 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Pritchardia napaliensis.
Its flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1998a).
Pritchardia napaliensis has only been known from five occurrences
with 155 individuals on State-owned land in Pohakuao, Alealau,
Waiahuakua, and Hoolulu Valley within the Hono o Na Pali NAR and Na
Pali Coast State Park (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000; K. Wood, in
litt. 1999).
Pritchardia napaliensis typically grows in areas between elevations
of 152 and 1,158 m (500 and 3,800 ft) in a wide variety of habitats
ranging from lowland dry to diverse mesic forests dominated by
Diospyros spp. or montane wet forests dominated by Metrosideros
polymorpha and Dicranopteris linearis. Associated native plant species
include Alsinidendron lychnoides, Alyxia oliviformis, Boehmeria
grandis, Cheirodendron trigynum, Cibotium spp., Dubautia knudsenii,
Elaeocarpus bifidus, Hibiscus kokio ssp. saintjohnianus (kokio),
Lipochaeta connata var. acris (nehe), Melicope peduncularis (alani),
Nesoluma polynesicum (keahi), Ochrosia kauaiensis (holei), Phyllostegia
electra (NCN), Pleomele aurea, Poa sandvicensis, Pouteria sandwicensis,
Psychotria spp., Psydrax odorata, Pteralyxia kauaiensis, Rauvolfia
sandwicensis, Santalum freycinetianum var. pyrularium, Stenogyne
purpurea (NCN), Syzygium sandwicensis, Vaccinium dentatum, Wilkesia
gymnoxiphium, or Xylosma hawaiiense (HINHP Database 2000; Service
1998a; 61 FR 53070).
Major threats to Pritchardia napaliensis include habitat
degradation and grazing by feral goats and pigs; seed predation by
rats; and competition with nonnative plants such as Erigeron
karvinskianus, Kalanchoe pinnata, Lantana camara, Psidium guajava, or
possibly Cordyline fruticosa. The species is also threatened by
vandalism and over-collection. In 1993, near the Wailua River, the
State Division of Forestry and Wildlife (DOFAW) constructed a fenced
enclosure around 39 recently planted P. napaliensis individuals.
Shortly after planting, the fence was vandalized and the 39 plants were
removed. Also, because of the small number of remaining populations and
individuals, this species is susceptible to a risk of extinction from
naturally occurring events, such as landslides or hurricanes, and from
reduced reproductive vigor (61 FR 53070; Craig Koga, DOFAW, in litt.
1999; A. Kyono, pers. comm., 2000).
Pritchardia viscosa (loulu)
Pritchardia viscosa, a member of the palm family (Arecaceae), is a
small tree 3 to 8 m (10 to 26 ft) tall. This species differs from
others of the genus that grow on Kauai by the degree of hairiness of
the lower surface of the leaves and main axis of the flower cluster,
and length of the flower cluster (Read and Hodel 1999).
Historically, Pritchardia viscosa was known only from a 1920
collection from Kalihiwai Valley. It was not seen again until 1987,
when Robert Read observed it in the same general area as the type
locality, off the Powerline Road at 512 m (1,680 ft) elevation (HINHP
Database 2000). Currently, there is one occurrence with three
individuals on State-owned land within the Halelea Forest Reserve (GDSI
2000; HINHP Database 2000; 61 FR 53070).
This species is found in Metrosideros polymorpha-Dicranopteris
linearis lowland wet forest at elevations between 488 and 518 m (1,600
and 1,700 ft). Associated native species include Antidesma spp., Bobea
spp., Cibotium spp., Cyanea fissa, Cyrtandra kauaiensis, Cyrtandra
longiflora, Dubautia knudsenii, Nothocestrum spp., Perrottetia
sandwicensis, Psychotria spp., Sadleria pallida, or Syzygium
sandwicensis (Service 1998a; 61 FR 53070).
Pritchardia viscosa is threatened by Psidium cattleianum, nonnative
grasses such as Paspalum conjugatum, and seed predation by rats. At
least one of the remaining mature trees has been damaged by spiked
boots used either by a botanist or seed collector to scale the tree. In
mid-1996, a young plant and seeds from mature Pritchardia viscosa
plants were removed from the only known location of this species.
Because of this past activity, it is reasonable to assume that these
plants are threatened by over-collection and vandalism. Also, because
of the small numbers of individuals in the only known population, this
species is susceptible to
[[Page 9132]]
extinction since a single naturally occurring event (e.g., a hurricane)
could destroy all remaining plants (61 FR 53070; C. Koga, in litt.
1999; A. Kyono, pers. comm., 2000).
Pteralyxia kauaiensis (kaulu)
Pteralyxia kauaiensis, a member of the dogbane family
(Apocynaceae), is a long-lived perennial tree 3 to 8 m (10 to 26 ft)
tall. The leaves are dark green and shiny on the upper surfaces, but
pale and dull on the lower surfaces. This species differs from the only
other species of this endemic Hawaiian genus in having reduced lateral
wings on the seed (Wagner et al. 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Pteralyxia kauaiensis.
Flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1995).
Historically, Pteralyxia kauaiensis was known from the Wahiawa
Mountains in the southern portion of Kauai. This species is now known
from 39 occurrences, with a total of 1,124 to 1,161 individuals in the
following scattered locations on State land: Limahuli Valley, the left
and right branches of Kalalau Valley, Pohakuao, Makaha Valley, Kuia
Valley, Haeleele Valley, Koaie Canyon, Kawaiiki Valley, Hipalau, Haupu,
Blue Hole, Poomau Valley, and Kapalikea within the Lihue-Koloa Forest
Reserve, Na Pali Coast State Park, Na Pali-Kona Forest Reserve, and Puu
Ka Pele Forest Reserve. There is also an undocumented sighting of one
individual at Makaleha, above the town of Kapaa (HINHP Database 2000;
Wagner et al. 1999; 59 FR 9304; K. Wood, in litt. 1999).
This species is typically found in diverse mesic or Diospyros
sandwicensis mixed mesic forests with Pisonia spp. between elevations
of 127 and 1,563 m (418 and 5,128 ft). Associated native plant species
include Acacia koa, Alectryon macrococcus, Alphitonia ponderosa,
Antidesma platyphyllum var. hillebrandii, Bobea brevipes, Carex spp.,
Charpentiera elliptica, Claoxylon sandwicense, Cyanea spp., Dianella
sandwicensis, Diospyros spp. (lama), Diplazium sandwichianum, Dodonaea
viscosa, Euphorbia haeleeleana, Freycinetia arborea, Gahnia spp.,
Gardenia remyi (nanu), Hedyotis terminalis, Hibiscus kokio, Kokia
kauaiensis, Leptecophylla tameiameiae, Metrosideros polymorpha, Myrsine
lanaiensis, Neraudia spp. (NCN), Nesoluma polynesicum, Nestegis
sandwicensis, Peperomia spp., Pipturus spp., Pisonia sandwicensis,
Pleomele aurea, Poa sandvicensis, Pouteria sandwicensis, Pritchardia
spp., Psychotria spp., Psydrax odorata, Rauvolfia sandwicensis,
Santalum freycinetianum var. pyrularium, Schiedea spp., Syzygium
sandwicensis, Tetraplasandra spp., Xylosma hawaiiense, or Zanthoxylum
dipetalum (HINHP Database 2000; 59 FR 9304; K. Wood, pers. comm.,
2001).
The major threats to Pteralyxia kauaiensis are habitat destruction
by feral animals and competition with introduced plants. Animals
affecting the survival of this species include feral goats and pigs,
and possibly rats, which may eat the fruit. Fire could threaten some
populations. Introduced plants competing with this species include
Aleurites moluccana, Cordyline fruticosa, Erigeron karvinskianus,
Lantana camara, Psidium cattleianum, or Psidium guajava (HINHP Database
2000; Service 1995; 59 FR 9304).
Remya kauaiensis (NCN)
Remya kauaiensis, one of three species of a genus endemic to the
Hawaiian Islands, is in the aster family (Asteraceae). Remya kauaiensis
is a small short-lived perennial shrub, about 1 m (3 ft) tall, with
many sprawling branches covered with a fine tan fuzz near their tips.
The lower surface of the leaves is covered with fine white hairs. This
species is distinguished from the other Kauai species in the genus by
being hairy, having shorter flower head stalks, and having narrower
tips on the floral bracts (Wagner et al. 1999).
Seedlings of this species have not been observed. Flowers have been
observed in April, May, June, and August, and are probably insect-
pollinated. Seeds are probably wind or water-dispersed. Remya
kauaiensis may be self-incompatible (Herbst 1988; Service 1995; 56 FR
1450).
Historically, this species was found at Koaie, Mohihi, Kalalau,
Makaha, Nualolo, Kawaiula, Kuia, Honopu, Awaawapuhi, Kopakaka, and
Kauhao on Kauai. There are currently 17 known occurrences with a total
of 106 to 114 individuals on State-owned land. They occur in Hipalau
Valley, Awini Valley, Koaie Canyon, Mohihi Stream, the left branch of
Kalalau Valley, Awaawapuhi and Nualolo Valleys, Kuia and Kawaiula
Valleys, Makaha Valley, Kauhao Valley, and Kaulaula Valley within the
Alakai Wilderness Preserve, Kuia NAR, Na Pali Coast State Park, Na
Pali-Kona Forest Reserve, Puu Ka Pele Forest Reserve, and Waimea Canyon
State Park (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000; K. Wood, in litt. 1999).
Remya kauaiensis grows chiefly on steep, north or northeast-facing
slopes at elevations between 560 and 1,247 m (1,836 and 4,090 ft). It
is found primarily in Acacia koa-Metrosideros polymorpha lowland mesic
forest with Chamaesyce spp. (akoko), Claoxylon sandwicense, Dianella
sandwicensis, Diospyros spp., Dodonaea viscosa, Hedyotis terminalis,
Melicope spp., Nestegis sandwicensis, Pouteria sandwicensis, Psychotria
spp., Schiedea spp., or Tetraplasandra spp. (HINHP Database 2000;
Herbst 1988; 56 FR 1450; K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The primary threats to Remya kauaiensis include herbivory and
habitat degradation by feral goats, pigs, cattle, and deer, and
competition from nonnative plant species. Other threats include
erosion, fire, and risk of extinction from naturally occurring events,
such as landslides or hurricanes, and/or reduced reproductive vigor due
to the small number of remaining populations and individuals (Service
1995; 56 FR 1450).
Remya montgomeryi (NCN)
Remya montgomeryi in the aster family (Asteraceae) was discovered
in 1985 by Steven Montgomery on the sheer, virtually inaccessible
cliffs below the upper rim of Kalalau Valley, Kauai. It is a small
short-lived perennial shrub, about 1 m (3 ft) tall, with many sprawling
to weakly erect, smooth branches. The species is distinguished from R.
kauaiensis by being hairless, with longer flower head stalks and
broader floral bract tips (Wagner et al. 1999).
Seedlings of this species have not been observed. Flowers have been
observed in April through August and are probably insect-pollinated.
Seeds are probably wind or water-dispersed. Remya montgomeryi may be
self-incompatible (Herbst 1988; 56 FR 1450).
Remya montgomeryi is known only from Kauai. Six occurrences with
143 individuals are reported on State-owned land in the left and right
branches of Kalalau Valley, Koaie Canyon, and Kuia Valley within the
Alakai Wilderness Preserve and Na Pali Coast State Park (GDSI 2000;
HINHP Database 2000; Herbst 1988; K. Wood, in litt. 1999).
Remya montgomeryi grows at elevations between 336 and 1,344 m
(1,102 and 4,411 ft), primarily on steep, north or northeast-facing
slopes or cliffs in transitional wet or Metrosideros polymorpha-
dominated mixed mesic forest. Associated native plant species include
Artemisia australis, Bobea spp., Boehmeria grandis, Cheirodendron spp.,
Claoxylon sandwicense, Cyrtandra spp., Dubautia spp., Ilex anomala,
Lepidium serra, Lysimachia spp. (kolokolo kuahiwi), Myrsine
linearifolia, Nototrichium spp., Pleomele aurea, Poa
[[Page 9133]]
mannii, Sadleria spp., Scaevola spp., Stenogyne campanulata,
Tetraplasandra spp., or Zanthoxylum dipetalum (HINHP Database 2000; K.
Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The primary threats to Remya montgomeryi are herbivory and habitat
degradation by feral goats, pigs, cattle, and deer, and competition
from nonnative plant species. Other threats include erosion, fire, and
an increased risk of extinction from naturally occurring events (e.g.,
landslides or hurricanes) because of the small size of the populations
and their limited distribution (Service 1995; 56 FR 1450).
Schiedea apokremnos (maolioli)
Schiedea apokremnos, a member of the pink family (Caryophyllaceae),
is a low, branching short-lived perennial shrub 20 to 51 cm (8 to 20
in) tall with leaves that are somewhat fleshy. Schiedea apokremnos is
distinguished from related species by shorter sepals, nectaries, and
capsules (Wagner et al. 1999).
Some individuals of Schiedea apokremnos are functionally female and
must be cross-pollinated to set seed. This reproductive strategy may be
ineffective in populations with few individuals. Little is known about
the life history of Schiedea apokremnos. Flowering cycles, pollination
vectors, seed dispersal agents, longevity, specific environmental
requirements, and limiting factors are unknown (Service 1995).
Schiedea apokremnos has been collected from Nualolo Kai, Kaaweiki
Ridge, and along a 10.5 km (6.5 mi) long section of the Na Pali coast
including Milolii Valley, Kalalau Beach, Kaalahina and Manono Ridges,
Haeleele Ridge, and as far north as Pohakuao Valley, all on the island
of Kauai. There is currently a total of five occurrences containing 201
individuals on State-owned lands. The species is extant at
Nakeikionaiwi, Pohakuao, Nualolo Valley, Haeleele Valley, and Kawaiiki
Valley within the Na Pali Coast State Park and Puu Ka Pele Forest
Reserve (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000; 56 FR 49639).
Schiedea apokremnos grows in the crevices of near-vertical basalt
coastal cliff faces, at elevations between 11 and 538 m (35 and 1,765
ft). The species grows in sparse dry coastal cliff shrub vegetation
along with Artemisia australis, Bidens spp., Carex meyenii, Chamaesyce
celastroides, Eragrostis variabilis, Lepidium serra, Lipochaeta
connata, Lobelia niihauensis, Myoporum sandwicense, Peperomia spp.,
Pleomele aurea, Psydrax odorata, or Wilkesia spp. (HINHP Database 2000;
56 FR 49639; K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The restriction of this species to inaccessible cliffs suggests
that goat herbivory may have eliminated it from more accessible
locations. The greatest current threat to the survival of Schiedea
apokremnos is still herbivory and habitat degradation by feral goats,
as well as competition from the nonnative plants Leucaena leucocephala
and Hyptis pectinata (comb hyptis), and trampling by humans. Given the
small size of most populations and restricted distribution, depressed
reproductive vigor may be a serious threat to the species. In addition,
a single environmental disturbance (such as a landslide or fire) could
destroy a significant percentage of the extant individuals (Service
1995; 56 FR 49639).
Schiedea helleri (NCN)
Schiedea helleri, a member of the pink family (Caryophyllaceae), is
a short-lived perennial vine. The stems are usually prostrate and at
least 15 cm (6 in) long. This species is the only member of the genus
on Kauai that grows as a vine (Wagner et al. 1999).
Three plants have been observed flowering in February. No
additional life history information for this species is currently known
(Service 1998a).
Schiedea helleri was originally found only at a single location at
Kaholuamano over 100 years ago. There is currently a total of three
occurrences with 50 to 60 individuals on State-owned land at Mohihi
Stream, Nawaimaka Valley, and Mohihi-Waialae Trail within the Alakai
Wilderness Preserve and Na Pali-Kona Forest Reserve (GDSI 2000; HINHP
Database 2000; K. Wood, in litt. 1999).
Schiedea helleri is found on ridges and steep cliffs in closed
Metrosideros polymorpha-Dicranopteris linearis montane wet forest, M.
polymorpha-Cheirodendron spp. montane wet forest, or Acacia koa-M.
polymorpha montane mesic forest at elevations between 664 and 1,361 m
(2,178 and 4,464 ft). Other native plants growing in association with
this species include Broussaisia arguta, Cheirodendron spp., Cibotium
spp., Cyanea spp., Dianella sandwicensis, Dubautia spp., Elaeocarpus
bifidus, Hedyotis terminalis, Melicope spp., Myrsine spp., Poa
sandvicensis, Scaevola procera, Syzygium sandwicensis, or Viola
wailenalenae (pamakani) (HINHP Database 2000; K. Wood, pers. comm.,
2001).
Competition with the nonnative plant Rubus argutus, a risk of
extinction from naturally occurring events (e.g., landslides or
hurricanes), and reduced reproductive vigor due to the small number of
extant individuals are serious threats to Schiedea helleri (61 FR
53070).
Schiedea kauaiensis (NCN)
Schiedea kauaiensis, a member of the pink family (Caryophyllaceae),
is an erect subshrub. This short-lived perennial species is
distinguished from others in this endemic Hawaiian genus by its habit,
larger leaves, the hairiness of the inflorescence, the number of
flowers in each inflorescence, larger flowers, and larger seeds (Wagner
et al. 1999).
Little is known about the life history of this taxon. Fruit and
flowers have been observed in July through September. There is no
evidence of regeneration from seed under field conditions. Reproductive
cycles, longevity, specific environmental requirements and limiting
factors are unknown (Service 1998a).
Historically, Schiedea kauaiensis was known from the northwestern
side of Kauai, from Papaa to Mahanaloa. It was thought to be extinct
until the five currently known occurrences in Mahanaloa and Kalalau
Valleys, with a total of 22 individuals, were found. All occurrences
are on State land within the Kuia NAR and Na Pali Coast State Park
(GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000; K. Wood, in litt. 1999).
Schiedea kauaiensis typically grows in diverse mesic to wet Acacia
koa-Metrosideros polymorpha forest on steep slopes at elevations
between 117 and 1,290 m (385 and 4,232 ft). Associated native plant
species include Alphitonia ponderosa, Cryptocarya mannii, Diospyros
spp., Dodonaea viscosa, Euphorbia haeleeleana, Exocarpos luteolus,
Leptocophylla tameiameiae, Microlepia strigosa, Nestegis sandwicensis,
Pisonia spp., Peucedanum sandwicense (makou), Psychotria spp., or
Psydrax odorata (HINHP Database 2000; 61 FR 53108; K. Wood, pers.
comm., 2001).
Threats to Schiedea kauaiensis include habitat degradation and/or
destruction by feral goats, pigs, and cattle; competition from several
nonnative plant species; predation by introduced slugs and snails; and
a risk of extinction from naturally occurring events, such as
landslides or hurricanes, and/or reduced reproductive vigor due to the
low number of individuals in only two known populations. Schiedea
kauaiensis is also potentially threatened by fire (HINHP Database 2000;
Service 1998a; 61 FR 53108).
[[Page 9134]]
Schiedea membranacea (NCN)
Schiedea membranacea, a member of the pink family
(Caryophyllaceae), is a short-lived perennial herb. This species
differs from other Schiedea species on Kauai by having five-to seven-
veined leaves and an herbaceous habit (Wagner et al. 1999).
Research suggests that this species largely requires outcrossing
for successful germination and survival to adulthood. Pollinators for
Schiedea membranacea are unknown, since none have been seen during the
daytime, and none were observed during one set of night observations.
Little else is known about the life history of S. membranacea. Its
flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1998a).
Schiedea membranacea is currently known from the western side of
the island of Kauai, on State and privately owned lands at Poopooiki
Valley, Milolii Ridge, Kuia Valley, Awaawapuhi Valley, Nualolo Valley,
Kahuamaa Flats, Waialae Falls, Koaie Canyon, and the right branch of
Wainiha Valley. On State lands it occurs within the Alakai Wilderness
Preserve, Halelea Forest Reserve, Kuia NAR, Na Pali Coast State Park,
and Na Pali-Kona Forest Reserve. There are currently 10 occurrences
containing 344 to 348 individuals (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000; Wood
and Perlman 1993; 61 FR 53070; K. Wood, in litt. 1999; ).
This species is typically found on cliffs and cliff bases in mesic
or wet habitats in lowland or montane shrubland or forest communities
dominated by Acacia koa, Pipturus spp. and Metrosideros polymorpha or
Urticaceae shrubland on talus slopes at elevations between 422 and
1,259 m (1,386 and 4,131 ft). Associated native plant species include
Alphitonia ponderosa, Alyxia oliviformis, Asplenium spp., Athyrium
sandwicensis (akolea), Bobea brevipes, Boehmeria grandis, Cyrtandra
spp., Diplazium sandwichianum, Dodonaea viscosa, Eragrostis variabilis,
Hedyotis terminalis, Hibiscus waimeae, Joinvillea ascendens ssp.
ascendens (ohe), Labordia helleri (kamakahala), Lepidium serra,
Lysimachia kalalauensis (NCN), Machaerina angustifolia, Mariscus
pennatiformis, Melicope spp., Myrsine spp., Perrottetia sandwicensis,
Pisonia spp., Pleomele aurea, Poa mannii, Poa sandvicensis, Pouteria
sandwicensis, Psychotria spp., Psydrax odorata, Remya kauaiensis,
Sadleria cyatheoides (amau), Scaevola procera, Thelypteris cyatheoides
(kikawaio), Thelypteris sandwicensis (palapalaia), or Touchardia
latifolia (HINHP Database 2000; 61 FR 53070; K. Wood, pers. comm.,
2001).
Habitat degradation by feral goats, pigs, and deer; competition
with the nonnative plant species Ageratina riparia (Hamakua pamakani),
Erigeron karvinskianus, Lantana camara, Passiflora tarminiana, Psidium
cattleianum, Rubus argutus, or R. rosifolius; loss of pollinators; and
landslides are the primary threats to Schiedea membranacea. Based on
observations indicating that snails and slugs may consume seeds and
seedlings, it is likely that introduced molluscs also represent a major
threat to this species (Service 1998a; Wood and Perlman 1993; 61 FR
53070).
Schiedea spergulina var. leiopoda and Schiedea spergulina var.
spergulina (NCN)
Schiedea spergulina, a member of the pink family (Caryophyllaceae),
is a short-lived perennial subshrub. Of the 22 species in this endemic
genus, only two other species have smooth seeds. Schiedea spergulina
differs from those two in having very compact flower clusters. The two
weakly defined varieties differ primarily in the degree of hairiness of
the inflorescences, with S. spergulina var. leiopoda being the less
hairy of the two (Wagner et al. 1999).
Little is known about the life histories of either Schiedea
spergulina var. leiopoda or S. spergulina var. spergulina. Flowering
cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents, longevity, specific
environmental requirements, and limiting factors are unknown (Service
1995).
Historically, Schiedea spergulina var. leiopoda was found on a
ridge on the east side of Hanapepe on Kauai. One occurrence with
approximately 135 to 150 individuals is now known to grow in Lawai
Valley on Kauai on privately owned land (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database
2000).
Schiedea spergulina var. spergulina was historically found in
Olokele Canyon, but is now known only from the right branch of Kalalau
Valley, Koaie Canyon, and Waimea Canyon. A total of three occurrences
numbering approximately 208 individuals is reported on State-owned land
within the Na Pali Coast State Park, Na Pali-Kona Forest Reserve, and
the Puu Ka Pele Forest Reserve. However, it has been estimated that
this species may number in the thousands on Kauai (GDSI 2000; HINHP
Database 2000; Service 1995).
Both varieties of Schiedea spergulina are usually found on bare
rock outcrops or sparsely vegetated portions of rocky cliff faces or
cliff bases in diverse lowland dry to mesic forests at elevations
between 21 and 90 m (69 and 294 ft) for S. spergulina var. leiopoda and
elevations between 144 and 828 m (474 and 2,718 ft) for S. spergulina
var. spergulina. Associated native plant species include Acacia koa,
Artemisia australis, Bidens sandvicensis, Carex meyenii, Chamaesyce
celastroides, Dianella sandwicensis, Doryopteris spp. (kumuniu),
Eragrostis variabilis, Erythrina sandwicensis (wiliwili), Gahnia spp.,
Heliotropium spp. (ahinahina), Lepidium serra, Lipochaeta connata,
Microlepia strigosa, Nestegis sandwicensis, Nototrichium sandwicense,
Panicum lineale, Peucedanum sandwicense, or Wilkesia gymnoxiphium
(HINHP Database 2000; Lorence and Flynn 1991; Service 1995; 59 FR 9304;
K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The major threats to Schiedea spergulina var. leiopoda are habitat
destruction by feral goats and competition with nonnative plants such
as Furcraea foetida (Mauritius hemp), Lantana camara, or Leucaena
leucocephala. Individuals have also been damaged and destroyed by rock
slides. This variety is potentially threatened by pesticide use in
nearby sugarcane fields, as well as being at risk of extinction from
naturally occurring events (e.g., hurricanes) and/or reduced
reproductive vigor due to the small number of existing individuals
(Lorence and Flynn 1991; Service 1995; 59 FR 9304).
Schiedea spergulina var. spergulina is threatened by competition
with nonnative plant species, including Erigeron karvinskianus, Lantana
camara, Melia azedarach, or Triumfetta semitriloba (Sacramento bur).
The area in which this variety grows is used heavily by feral goats,
and there is evidence that plants are being browsed and trampled (HINHP
Database 2000; Lorence and Flynn 1991; 59 FR 9304).
Schiedea stellarioides (laulihilihi)
Schiedea stellarioides, a member of the pink family
(Caryophyllaceae), is a slightly erect to prostrate subshrub with
branched stems. The opposite leaves are very slender to oblong-
elliptic, and one-veined. This short-lived perennial species is
distinguished from other Schiedea species on Kauai by the number of
veins in the leaves, shape of the leaves, presence of a leaf stalk,
length of the flower cluster, and shape of the seeds (Wagner et al.
1999).
[[Page 9135]]
Plants have been observed flowering in February. Little else is
known about the life history of Schiedea stellarioides. Its flowering
cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents, longevity, specific
environmental requirements, and limiting factors are unknown (Service
1995).
Historically, Schiedea stellarioides was found at the sea cliffs of
Hanakapiai Beach, Kaholuamano-Opaewela region, the ridge between
Waialae and Nawaimaka Valleys, and Haupu Range on the island of Kauai.
Currently it is found in Kawaiiki Valley and Waialae Falls within the
Na Pali-Kona Forest Reserve. There is a total of three occurrences with
1,500 individuals on State-owned land (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000;
K. Wood, in litt. 1999).
Schiedea stellarioides is found on steep slopes in closed Acacia
koa-Metrosideros polymorpha lowland to montane mesic forest or
shrubland at elevations between 376 and 1,251 m (1,135 and 4,102 ft).
Associated native plant species include Alsinidendron viscosum,
Artemisia australis, Bidens cosmoides, Chenopodium spp. (aheahea),
Dianella sandwicensis, Dodonaea viscosa, Leptecophylla tameiameiae,
Mariscus spp., Melicope spp., Nototrichium sandwicense, Pipturus spp.,
Syzygium sandwicensis, or Zanthoxylum dipetalum (HINHP Database 2000;
61 FR 53070; K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The primary threats to this species include habitat degradation and
herbivory by feral pigs and goats, competition with the nonnative
plants Melinis minutiflora and Rubus argutus, and a risk of extinction
of the two remaining populations from naturally occurring events, such
as landslides or hurricanes (61 FR 53070).
Stenogyne campanulata (NCN)
Stenogyne campanulata, a member of the mint family (Lamiaceae), is
a vine with four-angled, hairy stems. A short-lived perennial species,
Stenogyne campanulata is distinguished from closely related species by
its large and very broadly bell-shaped calyces that nearly enclose the
relatively small, straight corollas, and by small calyx teeth that are
half as long as wide (Weller and Sakai 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Stenogyne campanulata.
Flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1995).
Stenogyne campanulata is known from three occurrences with 66
individuals which were originally discovered in the left branch of
Kalalau Valley on State-owned land in the Na Pali Coast State Park
(GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000).
Stenogyne campanulata grows on the rock face of a nearly vertical,
north-facing cliff in diverse lowland or montane mesic forest at
elevations between 335 and 1,290 m (1,100 and 4,232 ft). The associated
native plant species include Lepidium serra, Lobelia niihauensis,
Lysimachia spp., Melicope pallida, Metrosideros polymorpha, Neraudia
kauaiensis, Nototrichium divaricatum (kului), Poa mannii, Remya
montgomeryi, or Wilkesia gymnoxiphium (Weller and Sakai 1999; 57 FR
20580; K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The restriction of this species to virtually inaccessible cliffs
suggests that herbivory by feral goats may have eliminated it from more
accessible locations. Goat herbivory and habitat degradation remain the
primary threat. Feral pigs have disturbed vegetation in the vicinity of
these plants. Erosion caused by feral goats or pigs exacerbates the
potential threat of landslides. Erigeron karvinskianus and Rubus
argutus are the primary nonnative plants threatening Stenogyne
campanulata. The small number of individuals and its restricted
distribution are serious potential threats to the species. The limited
population size may depress reproductive vigor, or a single
environmental disturbance, such as a landslide, could destroy all known
extant individuals (57 FR 20580).
Viola helenae (NCN)
Viola helenae is a small, unbranched perennial subshrub with an
erect stem in the violet family (Violaceae). It is distinguished from
other Kauai species of Viola by the leaf shape and width, woody stems,
and strictly chasmogamous (open at maturity for access by pollinators)
flowers (Wagner et al. 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Viola helenae. Wagner et
al. (1999) state that the flowers are all chasmogamous and not
cleistogamous (remain closed and self-fertilize in the bud) as in
certain other violet species. Therefore, it is likely that its flowers
require pollination by insects for seed set. Mature flowering plants do
produce seed; however, seed viability may be low and microhabitat
requirements for germination and growth may be very specific. Seeds
planted at NTBG on Kauai failed to germinate, although they may not
have been sufficiently mature when collected and violet seeds are often
very slow to germinate. The seeds are jettisoned when the capsule
splits open, as in most species of the genus (Service 1994).
Historically, Viola helenae was known from four populations, two
along either branch of Wahiawa Stream on Kauai. Currently, there is one
known occurrence with a total of 137 plants, on privately owned land
within the Wahiawa drainage (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000; Service
1994; 56 FR 47695).
This species is found in Metrosideros polymorpha-Dicranopteris
linearis lowland wet forest or M. polymorpha-Cheirodendron wet forest
growing on stream drainage banks or adjacent valley bottoms in light to
moderate shade at elevations between 522 and 1,006 m (1,712 and 3,301
ft). Associated native plant species include Antidesma platyphyllum
var. hillebrandii, Broussaisia arguta, Dicranopteris linearis,
Diplazium sandwichianum, Dubautia spp., Freycinetia arborea,
Hesperomannia lydgatei, Melicope spp., or Pritchardia spp. (HINHP
Database 2000; Service 1994; K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
Threats to Viola helenae include competition from nonnative plant
species, including Elephantopus mollis, Erechtites valerianifolia,
Melastoma candidum, Psidium cattleianum, Rubus rosifolius,
Stachytarpheta australis, various nonnative grasses, or potentially
Melaleuca quinquenervia; trampling and browsing damage by feral pigs;
landslides and erosion; and hurricanes (Service 1994; 56 FR 47695).
Viola kauaiensis var. wahiawaensis (nani waialeale)
Viola kauaiensis, a member of the violet family (Violaceae), is a
short-lived perennial herb with upward curving or weakly rising,
hairless, lateral stems. The species is distinguished from others of
the genus by its non-woody habit, widely spaced kidney-shaped leaves,
and by having two types of flowers: conspicuous, open flowers and
smaller, unopened flowers. Two varieties of the species are recognized,
both occurring on Kauai: var. kauaiensis and var. wahiawaensis. Viola
kauaiensis var. wahiawaensis is distinguished by having broadly wedge-
shaped leaf bases (Service 1998a; Wagner et al. 1999).
Viola kauaiensis var. wahiawaensis has been observed in flower in
December. Little else is known about the life history of V. kauaiensis
var. wahiawaensis. Its flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed
dispersal agents, longevity, specific environmental requirements, and
limiting factors are unknown (Service 1998a).
[[Page 9136]]
Viola kauaiensis var. wahiawaensis is known only from two
occurrences in the Wahiawa Mountains of Kauai with a total of 13
individual plants, on privately owned land. This taxon is not known to
have occurred beyond its current range (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database
2000).
Viola kauaiensis var. wahiawaensis is found in Machaerina
angustifolia-Rhynchospora rugosa (kuolohia) lowland bog or mixed wet
shrubland and adjacent Metrosideros polymorpha wet forest at elevations
between 393 and 1,006 m (1,291 and 3,301 ft). Associated native plant
species include Antidesma platyphyllum var. hillebrandii, Bidens
forbesii (kookoolau), Chamaesyce remyi (akoko), Chamaesyce sparsiflora
(akoko), Coprosma spp., Cyanea fissa, Dicranopteris linearis,
Diplopterygium pinnatum (uluhe lau nui), Dubautia imbricata (naenae),
Dubautia raillardioides, Gahnia vitiensis (NCN), Leptechophylla
tameiameiae, Lobelia kauaensis (NCN), Machaerina angustifolia,
Machaerina mariscoides, Melicope spp., Psychotria wawrae, Sadleria
pallida, Scaevola gaudichaudii, Sphenomeris chinensis, Syzygium
sandwicensis, Tetraplasandra oahuensis, or Vaccinium dentatum (HINHP
Database 2000; Lorence and Flynn 1991; Service 1998a; 61 FR 53070; K.
Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The primary threats to Viola kauaiensis var. wahiawaensis are a
risk of extinction from naturally occurring events, such as landslides
or hurricanes, and reduced reproductive vigor due to the small number
of existing populations and individuals; habitat degradation through
the rooting activities of feral pigs; and competition with nonnative
plants, such as Juncus planifolius (NCN) or Pterolepis glomerata (NCN)
(HINHP Database 2000; Lorence and Flynn 1991; Service 1994; 61 FR
53070).
Wilkesia hobdyi (dwarf iliau)
Wilkesia hobdyi, a member of an endemic Hawaiian genus in the aster
family (Asteraceae), is a short-lived perennial shrub which branches
from the base. The tip of each branch bears a tuft of narrow leaves
growing in whorls joined together into a short sheathing section at
their bases. The cream-colored flower heads grow in clusters. It is
distinguished from the other species of Wilkesia by having shorter
branched stems and fewer shorter leaves per whorl (Carr 1982a, 1999b).
This species is probably pollinated through outcrossing and is
probably self-incompatible. Insects are the most likely pollinators. In
1982, Carr reported that reproduction and seedling establishment were
occurring and appeared sufficient to sustain the populations. Flowering
has been observed most often in the winter months, but also during
June. Fruits may be dispersed when they stick to the feathers of birds.
Densities reach one plant per sq m (approximately one sq yard) in
localized areas, and hybridization with Wilkesia gymnoxiphium may be
occurring (Carr 1982a).
First collected in 1968 on Polihale Ridge, Kauai, this species was
not formally described until 1971 (St. John 1971). Currently, there are
nine occurrences with a total of 406 to 471 individuals. This species
occurs on State-owned lands within the Hono o Na Pali NAR, Na Pali
Coast State Park, and Puu Ka Pele Forest Reserve and on land under
Federal jurisdiction within the Pacific Missile Range Facility (PMRF)
at Makaha Ridge. The plants occur in Milolii Valley, Makaha Ridge,
Haeleele Ridge, Kaaweiki Ridge, Polihale Spring, Pohakumano, and
Pohakuao (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000).
Wilkesia hobdyi grows on coastal dry cliffs or very dry ridges at
elevations between 12 and 685 m (40 and 2,246 ft). The associated
native plant species include Artemisia australis, Dodonaea viscosa,
Eragrostis variabilis, Hibiscus kokio ssp. saint johnianus, Lipochaeta
connata, Lobelia niihauensis, Myoporum sandwicense, Peperomia blanda
(ala ala wai nui), Peperomia tetraphylla (ala ala wai nui), Peperomia
spp., Peucedanum sandwicense, Psydrax odorata, Sida fallax, Waltheria
indica (uhaloa), or Wilkesia gymnoxiphium (Service 1995; Wagner et al.
1999; 57 FR 27859; K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The greatest immediate threats to the survival of this species are
habitat disturbance and browsing by feral goats. Although the low
number of individuals and their restricted habitat could be considered
a potential threat to the survival to the species, the plant appears to
have vigorous reproduction and may survive indefinitely if goats were
eliminated from its habitat. Fire and extinction through naturally
occurring events, such as landslides or hurricanes, could also be
threats to the survival of the species (Service 1995; 57 FR 27859).
Xylosma crenatum (NCN)
Xylosma crenatum is a dioecious (plant bears only male or female
flowers, and must cross-pollinate with another plant to produce viable
seed) long-lived perennial tree in the flacourtia family
(Flacourtiaceae). The tree grows up to 14 m (45 ft) tall and has dark
gray bark. More coarsely toothed leaf edges and hairy undersides of the
leaves distinguish X. crenatum from the other Hawaiian member of this
genus (Wagner et al. 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Xylosma crenatum.
Flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1995).
Historically, Xylosma crenatum was known from three occurrences on
Kauai: along upper Nualolo Trail and along Mohihi Road between
Waiakoali and Mohihi drainages. Currently, this species is extant on
State-owned land in Kainamanu, Nualolo Trail, and Mohihi Valley within
Kokee State Park, Kuia NAR, and Na Pali-Kona Forest Reserve. There are
three occurrences with a total of 16 individual plants (GDSI 2000;
HINHP Database 2000; Service 1995; 57 FR 20580).
Xylosma crenatum is known from diverse Acacia koa-Metrosideros
polymorpha montane mesic or wet forest, or M. polymorpha-Dicranopteris
linearis montane wet forest, at elevations between 936 and 1,284 m
(3,070 and 4,212 ft). Associated native plant species include Athyrium
sandwicensis, Cheirodendron spp., Claoxylon sandwicense, Coprosma spp.,
Cyanea spp. (haha), Diplazium sandwichianum, Dubautia knudsenii,
Hedyotis spp., Ilex anomala, Lobelia yuccoides, Myrsine spp., Nestegis
sandwicensis, Perrottetia sandwicensis, Pleomele aurea, Poa
sandvicensis, Pouteria sandwicensis, Psychotria spp., Scaevola procera,
Streblus pendulinus, Tetraplasandra spp., Touchardia latifolia, or
Zanthoxylum dipetalum (HINHP Database 2000; Service 1995; 57 FR 20580;
K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The small number of individuals and scattered distribution make
this species vulnerable to human or natural environmental disturbance.
Xylosma crenatum is also threatened by competition from nonnative
plants, particularly Psidium guajava. In addition, feral pigs may
threaten this species (HINHP Database 2000; Service 1995; 57 FR 20580).
Multi-Island Species
Acaena exigua (liliwai)
Acaena exigua is a small perennial rosette herb in the rose family
(Rosaceae) with narrow, fern-like, divided leaves. It is distinguished
from the other Hawaiian rose family members by its lack of petals and
by its urn-
[[Page 9137]]
shaped, constricted receptacle (top of flower stem where floral parts
are attached) that encloses the carpels (ovule-bearing floral part)
(Wagner et al. 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Acaena exigua. Its
flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1997).
Historically, Acaena exigua was known from Puu Kukui on West Maui
and from Mount Waialeale on Kauai. On Kauai, A. exigua was last
collected between 1869 and 1870, and has not been seen in the wild
since (Wagner et al. 1999).
Acaena exigua is known only from sites with extensive cloud cover
and moderate to strong winds in wet montane shrub bog or bog margins
characterized by a thick peat substrate overlying an impervious clay
substrate, with hummocks of sedges and grasses, stunted trees, and
shrubs and elevations between 666 and 1,598 m (2,185 and 5,244 ft).
Associated native plant species include Deschampsia nubigena (hair
grass), Dichanthelium cynodon (NCN), Dichanthelium hillebrandianum
(NCN), Dichanthelium isachnoides (NCN), Dubautia spp., Melicope spp.,
Metrosideros polymorpha, Oreobolus furcatus (NCN), or Vaccinium spp.
(K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The reason for the disappearance of this species is not known.
Although impacts from herbivory and rooting by pigs are assumed and
often cited, feral pigs have become established at Waialeale (Kauai)
only within the past two decades. The main current threats to Acaena
exigua, if it exists, are believed to include small population size;
human impacts (collecting and site degradation); potentially
consumption of vegetative or floral parts of this species by nonnative
slugs and/or rats; predation and habitat disturbance by feral pigs; and
nonnative plant species, especially Juncus planifolius (57 FR 20772).
Achyranthes mutica (NCN)
Achyranthes mutica, a member of the amaranth family (Amaranthaceae)
and a short-lived perennial, is a many-branched shrub with egg-shaped
leaves and stalkless flowers. This species is distinguished from others
in the genus by the shape and size of the sepals and by characteristics
of the spike, which is short and congested (Wagner et al. 1999).
Historically, Achyranthes mutica was known from three collections
from opposite ends of the main archipelago: Kauai and Hawaii.
Currently, this species is known only from Hawaii Island, from Kilohana
Gulch on private land. It was last observed on Kauai in the 1850s (GDSI
2000; HINHP Database 2000; 61 FR 53108).
Nothing is known of the preferred habitat of or native plant
species associated with Achyranthes mutica on the island of Kauai.
Nothing is known of the threats to Achyranthes mutica on the island
of Kauai.
Adenophorus periens (pendent kihi fern)
Adenophorus periens, a member of the grammitis family
(Grammitidaceae), is a small, pendent, epiphytic (not rooted on the
ground) fern. This species differs from other species in this endemic
Hawaiian genus by having hairs along the pinna (a leaflet) margins, by
the pinnae being at right angles to the midrib axis, by the placement
of the sori on the pinnae, and the degree of dissection of each pinna
(Linney 1989).
Little is known about the life history of Adenophorus periens,
which seems to grow only in closed canopy dense forest with high
humidity. Its breeding system is unknown, but outbreeding is very
likely to be the predominant mode of reproduction. Spores are dispersed
by wind, possibly by water, and perhaps on the feet of birds or
insects. Spores lack a thick resistant coat which may indicate their
longevity is brief, probably measured in days at most. Due to the weak
differences between the seasons, there seems to be no evidence of
seasonality in growth or reproduction. Additional information on
reproductive cycles, longevity, specific environmental requirements,
and limiting factors is not known (Linney 1989).
Historically, Adenophorus periens was reported from Kauai, Oahu,
Lanai, Maui, and the island of Hawaii. Currently, it is known from
several locations on Kauai, Molokai, and Hawaii (HINHP Database 2000).
On Kauai, there is a total of seven occurrences on private and State-
owned lands (Halelea Forest Reserve, Hono o Na Pali NAR, and Kealia
Forest Reserve), with approximately 59 individuals, that occur at
Pihea, Pali Eleele, Waioli Valley, Mount Namahana, Lumahai Valley,
Wainiha Valley, and Kapalaoa (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000; 59 FR
56333;).
This epiphytic species usually growing on Metrosideros polymorpha
trunks, is found in riparian banks of stream systems in well-developed,
closed canopy that provides deep shade or high humidity in M.
polymorpha-Cibotium glaucum lowland wet forests, open M. polymorpha
montane wet forest, or M. polymorpha-Dicranopteris linearis lowland wet
forest at elevations between 107 and 1,593 m (351 and 5,228 ft).
Associated native plant species include Antidesma platyphyllum,
Athyrium sandwichianum, Broussaisia arguta, Cheirodendron trigynum,
Cyanea spp., Cyrtandra spp., Dicranopteris linearis, Freycinetia
arborea, Hedyotis terminalis, Labordia hirtella, Machaerina
angustifolia, Psychotria hexandra, Psychotria spp., Syzygium
sandwicensis, or Tetraplasandra oahuensis (Linney 1989; 59 FR 56333; K.
Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The threats to this species on Kauai include habitat degradation by
feral pigs and goats and competition with the nonnative plant Psidium
cattleianum (HINHP Database 2000; 59 FR 56333).
Alectryon macrococcus var. macrococcus (mahoe)
Alectryon macrococcus, a member of the soapberry family
(Sapindaceae), consists of two varieties, macrococcus and auwahiensis,
both trees with reddish-brown branches and leaves with one to five
pairs of sometimes asymmetrical egg-shaped leaflets. The underside of
the leaf has dense brown hairs, persistent in A. macrococcus var.
auwahiensis, but only on leaves of young A. macrococcus var.
macrococcus plants. The only member of its genus found in Hawaii, this
species is distinguished from other Hawaiian members of its family by
being a tree with a hard fruit 2.3 cm (0.9 in) or more in diameter
(Wagner et al. 1999).
Alectryon macrococcus is a relatively slow-growing, long-lived tree
that grows in xeric to mesic sites and is adapted to periodic drought.
Little else is known about the life history of Alectryon macrococcus.
Flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, and specific environmental requirements are unknown (Service
1997).
Alectryon macrococcus var. macrococcus historically and currently
occurs on Kauai, Oahu, Molokai and Maui. On Kauai, A. macrococcus var.
macrococcus occurs on State-owned land in the Alakai Wilderness
Preserve, Na Pali Coast State Park, Na Pali-Kona Forest Reserve, and
Puu Ka Pele Forest Reserve. A total of 18 occurrences of 159 to 174
individuals is known from Kalalau Valley, Kipalau Valley, Haeleele
Valley, Waimea Canyon, Hipalau Valley, and Kawaiiki Falls (GDSI 2000;
K. Wood, in litt. 1999). Alectryon macrococcus var. auwahiensis is
found
[[Page 9138]]
only on leeward east Maui (HINHP Database 2000; Medeiros et al. 1986).
The habitat of Alectryon macrococcus var. macrococcus on Kauai is
Diospyros spp.-Metrosideros polymorpha lowland mesic forest, M.
polymorpha mixed mesic forest, or Diospyros spp. mixed mesic forest on
dry slopes or in gulches, at elevations between 341 and 954 m (1,120
and 3,129 ft). Associated native plant species include Acacia koa,
Alyxia oliviformis, Antidesma spp., Bobea timonioides, Caesalpinia
kavaiense (uhiuhi), Canavalia spp. (awikiwiki), Carex meyenii, Carex
wahuensis, Doodia kunthiana, Hibiscus waimeae, Kokia kauaiensis,
Melicope knudsenii (alani), Microlepia strigosa, Munroidendron
racemosum, Myrsine lanaiensis, Nesoluma polynesicum, Nestegis
sandwicensis, Pisonia spp., Pleomele aurea, Pouteria sandwicensis,
Psychotria spp., Psydrax odorata, Pteralyxia kauaiensis, Rauvolfia
sandwicensis, Streblus pendulinus, Tetraplasandra spp., Xylosma spp.,
or Zanthoxylum spp. (HINHP Database 2000; 57 FR 20772; K. Wood, pers.
comm., 2001).
Alectryon macrococcus var. macrococcus on Kauai is threatened by
feral goats and pigs; the nonnative plant species Melinis minutiflora,
Psidium cattleianum, or Schinus terebinthifolius (Christmasberry);
damage from the black twig borer; seed predation by rats and mice;
fire; depressed reproductive vigor; seed predation by insects (probably
the endemic microlepidopteran Prays cf. fulvocanella); loss of
pollinators; and, due to the small remaining number of individuals and
their limited distribution, natural or human-caused environmental
disturbances that could easily be catastrophic (57 FR 20772).
Bonamia menziesii (NCN)
Bonamia menziesii, a member of the morning-glory family
(Convolvulaceae), is a vine with twining branches that are fuzzy when
young. This species is the only member of the genus that is endemic to
the Hawaiian Islands and differs from other genera in the family by its
two styles, longer stems and petioles, and rounder leaves (Austin
1999).
Little is known about the life history of Bonamia menziesii. Its
flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1999).
Historically, Bonamia menziesii was known from the following
general areas: scattered locations on Kauai, the Waianae Mountains of
Oahu, scattered locations on Molokai, one location on West Maui, and
eastern Hawaii. Currently, it is known from Kauai, Oahu, Lanai, Maui,
and Hawaii. On Kauai, there are nine occurrences with 36 individuals on
State (Alakai Wilderness Preserve, Hono o Na Pali NAR, Lihue-Koloa
Forest Reserve, Na Pali Coast State Park, and Na Pali-Kona Forest
Reserve) and privately owned lands in Waiahuakua, Kalalau Valley,
Awaawapuhi Valley, Paaiki Valley, Kipalau Valley, Hulua, Wahiawa Falls,
and Laauhihaihai (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000; Service 1999; K.
Wood, in litt. 1999).
Bonamia menziesii is found in dry, mesic, or wet Metrosideros
polymorpha-Cheirodendron-Dicranopteris forest at elevations between 351
and 1,415 m (1,151 and 4,644 ft). Associated native plant species
include Acacia koa, Alphitonia ponderosa, Antidesma platyphyllum,
Cyanea spp., Cyrtandra limahuliensis, Cyrtandra pickeringii, Dianella
sandwicensis, Diospyros sandwicensis, Dodonaea viscosa, Dubautia
knudsenii, Hedyotis terminalis, Isodendrion longifolium, Labordia
hirtella, Melicope anisata, Melicope barbigera (uahiapele), Myoporum
sandwicense, Nestegis sandwicensis, Pisonia spp., Pittosporum spp.,
Pouteria sandwicensis, Psychotria hexandra, Psychotria mariniana,
Psydrax odorata, Sapindus oahuensis, Scaevola procera, or Syzygium
sandwicensis (HINHP Database 2000; Service 1999; K. Wood, pers. comm.,
2001).
The primary threats to this species on Kauai include habitat
degradation and possible predation by feral pigs and goats, deer, and
cattle; competition with a variety of nonnative plants; and fire (59 FR
56333).
Centaurium sebaeoides (awiwi)
Centaurium sebaeoides, a member of the gentian family
(Gentianaceae), is an annual herb with fleshy leaves and stalkless
flowers. This species is distinguished from C. erythraea (bitter herb),
which is naturalized in Hawaii, by its fleshy leaves and the unbranched
arrangement of the flower cluster (Wagner et al. 1999).
Centaurium sebaeoides has been observed flowering in April. It is
possible that heavy rainfall induces flowering. Populations are found
in dry areas, and plants are more likely to be found following heavy
rains. Little else is known about the life history of C. sebaeoides.
Its flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1999).
Historically and currently, Centaurium sebaeoides is known from
scattered localities on the islands of Kauai, Oahu, Molokai, Lanai, and
Maui. Currently on Kauai, there are a total of three occurrences with
approximately 22 to 52 individuals on State-owned land. This species is
found at Puanaiea Point, the caves at Nakeikionaiwi, and Pohakuao
within the Na Pali Coast State Park (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000).
Centaurium sebaeoides typically grows in volcanic or clay soils or
on cliffs in arid coastal areas at elevations between 0 and 147 m (0
and 483 ft). Associated native plant species include Artemisia spp.
(hinahina), Bidens spp., Chamaesyce celastroides, Cyperus phleoides,
Dodonaea viscosa, Fimbristylis cymosa (mauu akiaki), Heteropogon
contortus, Jacquemontia ovalifolia (pauohiiaka), Lipochaeta spp.,
Lycium sandwicense, Lysimachia mauritiana (kolokolo kuahiwi),
Melanthera integrifolia (nehe), Panicum fauriei (NCN), P. torridum
(kakonakona), Scaevola sericea, Sida fallax, or Wikstroemia uva-ursi
(akia) (56 FR 55770; K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The major threats to this species on Kauai include habitat
degradation by feral goats and cattle; competition from the nonnative
plant species Casuarina equisetifolia (ironwood), Casuarina glauca
(saltmarsh), Leucaena leucocephala, Prosopis pallida (kiawe), Schinus
terebinthifolius, Syzygium cumini (Java plum), and Tournefortia
argentea (tree heliotrope); trampling by humans on or near trails; and
fire (Medeiros et al. 1999; Service 1999; 56 FR 55770).
Ctenitis squamigera (pauoa)
Ctenitis squamigera is a short-lived perennial fern of the
spleenwort family (Aspleniaceae). Ctenitis squamigera can be readily
distinguished from other Hawaiian species of Ctenitis by the dense
covering of tan-colored scales on its frond (Degener and Degener 1957;
Wagner and Wagner 1992).
Little is known about the life history of Ctenitis squamigera. Its
reproduction cycles, dispersal agents, longevity, specific
environmental requirements, and limiting factors are unknown (Service
1998c).
Historically, Ctenitis squamigera was recorded from the islands of
Kauai, Oahu, Molokai, Lanai, Maui, and Hawaii. It is currently found on
Oahu, Lanai, Molokai, and Maui. It was last seen on Kauai in 1896
(HINHP Database 2000).
This species is found on rock faces in gulches in the forest
understory at
[[Page 9139]]
elevations between 538 and 1,069 m (1,765 and 3,507 ft), in
Metrosideros polymorpha-Diospyros spp. mesic forest and diverse mesic
forest. Associated native plant species include Myrsine spp.,
Psychotria spp., and Xylosma spp. (HINHP Database 2000; Service 1998a;
K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The primary threats to Ctenitis squamigera are habitat degradation
by feral pigs and goats, competition with nonnative plant species,
especially Psidium cattleianum or Schinus terebinthifolius; fire; and
extinction from naturally occurring events due to the small number of
existing populations and individuals (Service 1998a).
Cyperus trachysanthos (puukaa)
Cyperus trachysanthos, a member of the sedge family (Cyperaceae),
is a perennial grass-like plant with a short rhizome. The culms are
densely tufted, obtusely triangular in cross section, tall, sticky, and
leafy at the base. This species is distinguished from others in the
genus by the short rhizome, the leaf sheath with partitions at the
nodes, the shape of the glumes (bract below each flower), and the
length of the culms (Koyama 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Cyperus trachysanthos.
Its flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1999).
Historically, Cyperus trachysanthos was known on Niihau, Kauai, and
scattered locations on Oahu, Molokai, and Lanai. It was last observed
on Molokai in 1912 and on Lanai in 1919. Currently, this species is
reported from Nualolo Valley on Kauai on State-owned land and west of
Mokouia Valley on the privately owned island of Niihau. There is one
known occurrence with about 300 individuals on the island of Kauai and
an unknown number of individuals on Niihau (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database
2000).
Cyperus trachysanthos is usually found in wet sites (mud flats, wet
clay soil, or wet cliff seeps) on seepy flats or talus slopes at
elevations between 0 and 235 m (0 and 771 ft). Talipariti tiliaceum
(hau) is often found in association with this species (Koyama 1999; 61
FR 53108; K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
On Kauai, the threats to this species are the loss of wetlands and
a risk of extinction from naturally occurring events, such as
landslides or hurricanes, due to the small number of populations. The
threats on Niihau are unknown (Service 1999; 61 FR 53108).
Delissea undulata (NCN)
Delissea undulata, a member of the bellflower family
(Campanulaceae), is an unbranched, palm-like, woody-stemmed perennial
tree, with a dense cluster of leaves at the tip of the stem. One or two
knob-like structures often occur on the back of the flower tube. The
three recognized subspecies are distinguishable on the basis of leaf
shape and margin characters: in D. undulata ssp. kauaiensis, the leaf
blades are oval and have a flat margin with sharp teeth; in D. undulata
ssp. niihauensis, the leaf blades are heart-shaped and have a flat
margin with shallow, rounded teeth; and in D. undulata ssp. undulata,
the leaf blades are elliptic to lance-shaped and have a wavy margin
with small, sharply pointed teeth. This species is separated from the
other closely related members of the genus by its large flowers and
berries and broad leaf bases (Lammers 1990).
On the island of Hawaii, Delissea undulata ssp. undulata has been
observed in flower and fruit (immature) in August and outplanted
individuals have been observed in flower in July. Little else is known
about the life history of Delissea undulata. Its flowering cycles,
pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents, longevity, specific
environmental requirements, and limiting factors are unknown (Service
1996; 61 FR 53124).
Historically and currently, Delissea undulata ssp. kauaiensis is
known only from Kauai. Currently, there is one known occurrence of
three individuals on State-owned land in Kuia Valley within the Kuia
NAR. Delissea undulata ssp. niihauensis was known only from Niihau, but
has not been seen since 1865. Delissea undulata ssp. undulata was known
from southwestern Maui and western Hawaii. Currently, this variety
occurs only on the island of Hawaii (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000;
Lammers 1999; 61 FR 53124; K. Wood, in litt. 1999).
Delissea undulata ssp. kauaiensis occurs in dry or open Acacia koa-
Metrosideros polymorpha mesic forests or Alphitonia ponderosa montane
forest at elevations between 139 and 1,006 m (456 and 3,299 ft).
Associated native species include Diospyros sandwicensis, Dodonaea
viscosa, Doodia kunthiana, Eragrostis variabilis, Euphorbia
haeleeleana, Kokia kauaiensis, Microlepia strigosa, Panicum spp.,
Pleomele aurea, Psychotria greenwelliae, Psychotria mariniana, and
Santalum freycinetianum (K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The threats to this subspecies on Kauai are feral goats, pigs, and
cattle; small population size; competition with the nonnative plants
Delairea odorata (German ivy) and Passiflora tarminiana; fire;
introduced slugs; seed predation by rats and introduced game birds; and
a risk of extinction due to random naturally occurring events, such as
landslides or hurricanes (Service 1996).
Diellia erecta (asplenium-leaved diellia)
Diellia erecta, a short-lived perennial fern in the spleenwort
family (Aspleniaceae), grows in tufts of three to nine lance-shaped
fronds emerging from a rhizome covered with brown to dark gray scales.
This species differs from other members of the genus in having large
brown or dark gray scales, fused or separate sori along both margins of
the pinna, shiny black midribs that have a hardened surface, and veins
that do not usually encircle the sori (Degener and Greenwell 1950;
Wagner 1952).
Little is known about the life history of Diellia erecta. Its
reproduction cycles, dispersal agents, longevity, specific
environmental requirements, and limiting factors are unknown (Service
1999).
Historically, Diellia erecta was known on Kauai, Oahu, Molokai,
Lanai, scattered locations on Maui, and various locations on the island
of Hawaii. Currently, it is known from Molokai, Maui, and Hawaii and
has recently been rediscovered on Kauai. On Kauai there is one known
occurrence with 30 individuals in Kawaiiki Valley on State-owned land
within the Na Pali-Kona Forest Reserve (Service 1999; HINHP Database
2000).
This species is found in brown granular soil with leaf litter and
occasional terrestrial moss on north-facing slopes in deep shade on
steep slopes or gulch bottoms in Metrosideros polymorpha-Dicranopteris
linearis wet forest or M. polymorpha mixed mesic forest with Acacia koa
and Acacia koaia as co-dominants, at elevations between 655 and 1,224 m
(2,149 and 4,016 ft). Associated native plant species include Asplenium
aethiopicum (NCN), Asplenium contiguum (NCN), Asplenium macraei (NCN),
Coprosma spp., Dodonaea viscosa, Dryopteris fusco-atra (ii), Dryopteris
unidentata, Hedyotis terminalis, Leptecophylla tameiameiae, Melicope
spp., Microlepia strigosa, Myrsine spp., Nestegis sandwicensis,
Psychotria spp., Syzygium sandwicensis, or Wikstroemia spp. (HINHP
Database 2000; Service 1999; K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The major threats to Diellia erecta on Kauai are habitat
degradation by pigs and goats; competition with nonnative
[[Page 9140]]
plant species, including Blechnum occidentale, Cyperus meyenianus
(NCN), Grevillea robusta (silk oak), Lantana camara, Morella faya,
Passiflora tarminiana, Rubus argutus, or Setaria palmifolia (palm
grass); and random naturally occurring events that could cause
extinction and/or reduced reproductive vigor due to the small number of
existing individuals (Service 1996; 59 FR 56333).
Diplazium molokaiense (NCN)
Diplazium molokaiense, a short-lived perennial member of the
woodfern family (Dryopteridaceae), has a short prostrate rhizome and
green or straw-colored leaf stalks with thin-textured fronds. This
species can be distinguished from other species of Diplazium in the
Hawaiian Islands by a combination of characteristics, including
venation pattern, the length and arrangement of the sori, frond shape,
and the degree of dissection of the frond (Wagner and Wagner 1992).
Little is known about the life history of Diplazium molokaiense.
Its reproductive cycles, dispersal agents, longevity, specific
environmental requirements, and limiting factors are unknown (Service
1998c).
Historically, Diplazium molokaiense was found on Kauai, Oahu,
Molokai, Lanai, and Maui. Currently, this species is only known from
Maui. It was last seen on Kauai in 1909 (HINHP Database 2000).
This species occurs in brown soil with basalt outcrops near
waterfalls in lowland or montane mesic Metrosideros polymorpha-Acacia
koa forest at elevations between 476 and 1,284 m (1,562 and 4,212 ft)
(HINHP Database 2000; Service 1998a; K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The primary threats on Kauai are habitat degradation by feral goats
and pigs and competition with nonnative plant species (HINHP Database
2000; Service 1998a; 59 FR 49025).
Euphorbia haeleeleana (akoko)
Euphorbia haeleeleana, a member of the spurge family
(Euphorbiaceae), is a dioecious tree with alternate papery leaves. This
short-lived perennial species is distinguished from others in the genus
in that it is a tree and by the large leaves with prominent veins
(Wagner et al. 1999).
Individual trees of Euphorbia haeleeleana bear only male or female
flowers, and must be cross-pollinated from a different tree to produce
viable seed. Euphorbia haeleeleana sets fruit between August and
October. Little else is known about the life history of this species.
Reproductive cycles, longevity, specific environmental requirements,
and limiting factors are unknown (Service 1999; Wagner et al. 1999).
Euphorbia haeleeleana is known historically and currently from
northwestern Kauai and the Waianae Mountains of Oahu. On Kauai, there
is a total of 23 occurrences with 597 individuals occurring on State-
owned land. It is found at Pohakuao, Kalalau Valley, Hipalau Valley,
Koaie Canyon, Mahanaloa Valley, Kuia Valley, Poopooiki Valley, Nualolo
Trail, Makaha Valley, and Haeleele Valley within the Kuia NAR, Na Pali
Coast State Park, Na Pali-Kona Forest Reserve, and Puu Ka Pele Forest
Reserve (HINHP Database 2000; Service 1999; 61 FR 53108; K. Wood, in
litt. 1999;).
Euphorbia haeleeleana is usually found in lowland mixed mesic or
dry Diospyros forest that is often codominated by Metrosideros
polymorpha and Alphitonia ponderosa. This plant is typically found at
elevations between 284 and 1,178 m (931 and 3,866 ft). Associated
native plant species include Acacia koaia, Antidesma platyphyllum,
Carex meyenii, Carex wahuensis, Claoxylon sandwicense, Diplazium
sandwichianum, Dodonaea viscosa, Erythrina sandwicensis, Kokia
kauaiensis, Pisonia sandwicensis, Pleomele aurea, Pouteria
sandwicensis, Psychotria greenwelliae, Psychotria mariniana, Pteralyxia
kauaiensis, Rauvolfia sandwicensis, Sapindus oahuensis, Tetraplasandra
kavaiensis, or Xylosma spp. (61 FR 53108; K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
Threats to this species on Kauai include habitat degradation and
destruction by deer, feral goats, and pigs; seed predation by rats;
fire; and competition with nonnative plants (Service 1999; 61 FR
53108).
Flueggea neowawraea (mehamehame)
Flueggea neowawraea, a member of the spurge family (Euphorbiaceae),
is a large dioecious tree with white oblong pores covering its scaly,
pale brown bark. This long-lived perennial species is the only member
of the genus found in Hawaii and can be distinguished from similar
Hawaiian species in the family by its hairless whitish lower leaf
surfaces and round fruits (Hayden 1999; Linney 1982; Neal 1965; Service
1999).
Individual trees of Flueggea neowawraea bear only male or female
flowers, and must be cross-pollinated from a different tree to produce
viable seed. Little else is known about the life history of this
species. Reproductive cycles, longevity, specific environmental
requirements, and limiting factors are unknown (Hayden 1999).
Historically, Flueggea neowawraea was known from Kauai, Oahu, Maui,
Molokai, and the island of Hawaii. Currently, it is known from Kauai,
Oahu, east Maui, and Hawaii. On Kauai, this species is reported from
Limahuli Valley, Pohakuao, the left branch of Kalalau Valley, Kuia and
Paaiki Valleys, Kipalau Valley, Koaie Falls, Kawaiiki Valley, and
Waimea Canyon. There are 10 occurrences with 62 known individuals
occurring on State (Alakai Wilderness Preserve, Na Pali Coast State
Park, and Na Pali-Kona Forest Reserve) and privately owned lands.
However, it has been estimated that the total number of individuals may
be slightly over 100 (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000; Hayden 1999;
Service 1999; K. Wood, in litt. 1999).
Flueggea neowawraea occurs in dry or mesic forests at elevations
between 210 and 1,178 m (689 and 3,865 ft). Associated native plant
species include Alectryon macrococcus, Antidesma platyphyllum, Bidens
sandvicensis, Bobea timonioides, Caesalpinia kavaiensis, Charpentiera
spp., Diospyros spp., Diplazium sandwichianum, Freycinetia arborea,
Hibiscus spp., Isodendrion laurifolium, Kokia kauaiensis, Melicope
spp., Metrosideros polymorpha, Munroidendron racemosum, Myrsine
lanaiensis, Nesoluma polynesicum, Nestegis sandwicensis, Tetraplasandra
spp., Pittosporum spp., Pouteria sandwicensis, Pritchardia minor,
Psychotria spp., Psydrax odorata, Pteralyxia kauaiensis, Rauvolfia
sandwicensis, Streblus pendulinus, Xylosma crenatum, or Xylosma
hawaiiense (HINHP Database 2000; Service 1999; 59 FR 56333; K. Wood,
pers. comm., 2001).
The threats to this species on Kauai include the black twig borer;
habitat degradation by feral pigs, goats, deer, and cattle; competition
with nonnative plant species; fire; small population size; depressed
reproductive vigor; and a potential threat of fruit predation by rats
(HINHP Database 2000; Service 1999; 59 FR 56333).
Gouania meyenii (NCN)
Gouania meyenii, a member of the buckthorn family (Rhamnaceae), is
a shrub with papery leaves with smooth margins. This short-lived
perennial species is distinguished from the two other Hawaiian species
of Gouania by its lack of tendrils on the flowering branches, the
absence of teeth on the leaves, and the lack or small amount of hair on
the fruit (Wagner et al. 1999).
[[Page 9141]]
Gouania meyenii flowers from March to May. Seed capsules develop in
about 6 to 8 weeks. Plants appear to live about 10 to 18 years in the
wild. Little else is known about the life history of Gouania meyenii.
Its flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1998b).
Historically, Gouania meyenii was known only from Oahu. It was
discovered on Kauai in 1993. Currently, this species is found on Oahu
and on Kauai on State-owned land within the Na Pali Coast State Park
and the Na Pali-Kona Forest Reserve. There is a total of three
occurrences on Kauai with nine individuals found in Kalalau and Hipalau
valleys (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000; Wagner et al. 1999; 56 FR
55770).
This species typically grows on rocky ledges, cliff faces, and
ridge tops in dry shrubland or Metrosideros polymorpha lowland diverse
mesic forest at elevations between 375 and 1,179 m (1,231 and 3,867
ft). Associated native plant species include Bidens spp., Carex
meyenii, Chamaesyce spp., Diospyros spp., Dodonaea viscosa, Eragrostis
variabilis, Euphorbia haeleeleana, Hedyotis spp., Hibiscadelphus spp.,
Lysimachia spp., Melicope pallida, Neraudia kauaiensis, Nestegis
sandwicensis, Nototrichium divaricatum, Panicum lineale, Poa mannii,
Psychotria spp., Senna gaudichaudii (kolomona), or Wilkesia
gymnoxiphium (HINHP Database 2000; 56 FR 55770; K. Wood, pers. comm.,
2001).
Threats to Gouania meyenii on Kauai include competition from the
nonnative plants Melinis minutiflora, Psidium cattleianum, or Schinus
terebinthifolius; fire; habitat degradation by feral pigs and goats;
and the small number of extant populations and individuals (Service
1998b; 56 FR 55770).
Hedyotis cookiana (awiwi)
Hedyotis cookiana, a member of the coffee family (Rubiaceae), is a
small shrub with many branches and papery-textured leaves which are
fused at the base to form a sheath around the stem. This short-lived
perennial species is distinguished from other species in the genus that
grow on Kauai by being entirely hairless (Wagner et al. 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Hedyotis cookiana.
Flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1995).
Historically, Hedyotis cookiana was known from the islands of
Hawaii, Kauai, Molokai, and Oahu. Currently, it is only known from one
occurrence of 60 to 80 individuals on State-owned land within Hono O Na
Pali NAR in Waiahuakua Valley on Kauai (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database
2000).
This species generally grows in streambeds or on steep cliffs close
to water sources in relict Metrosideros polymorpha lowland mesic and
lowland wet forest communities at elevations between 119 and 553 m (392
and 1,814 ft). Associated native plant species include Boehmeria
grandis, Chamaesyce celastroides var. hanapepensis, Hibiscus kokio ssp.
saintjohnianus, Machaerina angustifolia, Nototrichium sandwicense,
Pipturus kauaiensis (mamaki), Pleomele aurea, Pouteria sandwicensis,
Psydrax odorata, or Rauvolfia sandwicensis (Wagner et al. 1999; K.
Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The threats to this species on Kauai are risk of extinction from
naturally occurring events, such as landslides or hurricanes, and/or
reduced reproductive vigor due to the small number of individuals in
the only known population; flooding; competition with nonnative plants;
and habitat modification by feral pigs and goats (HINHP Database 2000;
Service 1995; 59 FR 9304).
Hibiscus brackenridgei (mao hau hele)
Hibiscus brackenridgei, a short-lived perennial and a member of the
mallow family (Malvaceae), is a sprawling to erect shrub or small tree.
This species differs from other members of the genus in having the
following combination of characteristics: yellow petals, a calyx
consisting of triangular lobes with raised veins and a single midrib,
bracts attached below the calyx, and thin stipules that fall off,
leaving an elliptical scar. Two subspecies are currently recognized,
Hibiscus brackenridgei ssp. brackenridgei and H. brackenridgei ssp.
mokuleianus (Bates 1990).
Hibiscus brackenridgei is known to flower continuously from early
February through late May, and intermittently at other times of year.
Intermittent flowering may possibly be tied to day length. Little else
is known about the life history of this plant. Pollination biology,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1999).
Historically, Hibiscus brackenridgei was known from the islands of
Kauai, Oahu, Lanai, Maui, Molokai, Hawaii, and possibly Kahoolawe.
Currently, Hibiscus brackenridgei ssp. mokuleianus is only known from
Oahu. Hibiscus brackenridgei ssp. brackenridgei is currently known from
Lanai, Maui, and the island of Hawaii (Bates 1990; HINHP Database 2000;
Service 1999).
Nothing is known of the preferred habitat of or native plant
species associated with Hibiscus brackenridgei on the island of Kauai.
Nothing is known of the threats to Hibiscus brackenridgei on the
island of Kauai.
Ischaemum byrone (Hilo ischaemum)
Ischaemum byrone, a short-lived perennial member of the grass
family (Poaceae), has creeping underground and erect stems. Ischaemum
byrone can be distinguished from other Hawaiian grasses by its tough
outer flower bracts, dissimilar basic flower units, which are awned and
two-flowered, and a two-or three-tiered inflorescence (O'Connor 1999).
Additional information on the life history of this plant, its
reproductive cycles, longevity, specific environmental requirements,
and limiting factors is generally unknown (Service 1996).
Historically, Ischaemum byrone was reported from Oahu, Molokai,
East Maui, Kauai and the island of Hawaii. Currently, this species is
found on Molokai, Hawaii, Maui, and recently rediscovered on the north
shore of Kauai. On Kauai, there are two occurrences with at least two
individuals at Kaweonui Point and Kauapea Beach on privately owned land
(HINHP Database 2000; 59 FR 10305).
The habitat of Ischaemum byrone is coastal shrubland, near the
ocean among rocks and seepy cliffs at elevations between 0 and 297 m (0
and 975 ft). Associated native plant species include Bidens spp.,
Chamaesyce celastroides, Fimbristylis cymosa, Lipochaeta succulenta,
Lysimachia mauritiana, or Scaevola sericea (HINHP Database 2000; K.
Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
Threats to Ischaemum byrone include the invasion of nonnative
plants, fire, grazing and browsing by feral goats and pigs. Disturbance
incurred from these ungulates further promotes the introduction and
establishment of nonnative weeds. Some populations are also threatened
from residential development (HINHP Database 2000; Service 1996; 59 FR
10305).
Isodendrion laurifolium (aupaka)
Isodendrion laurifolium, a member of the violet family (Violaceae),
is a slender, erect shrub with few branches. The short-lived perennial
species is distinguished from others in the genus
[[Page 9142]]
by its leathery, oblong-elliptic or narrowly elliptic, lance-shaped
leaves (Wagner et al. 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Isodendrion laurifolium.
Its flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1999).
Historically, Isodendrion laurifolium is known from scattered
locations on Kauai and Oahu. Currently, on Kauai, this species is found
on State-owned land within the Alakai Wilderness Preserve, Kuia NAR, Na
Pali-Kona Forest Reserve, and Puu Ka Pele Forest Reserve in the
following locations: Paaiki, Poopooiki, Kawaiula Valley, Mahanaloa
Valley, Makaha Valley, Haeleele Valley, Kipalau Valley, Kawaiiki Valley
and Kaluahaulu Ridge. There are a total of 13 occurrences with 142 to
154 individuals (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000; Service 1999).
Isodendrion laurifolium is usually found at elevations between 376
and 1,163 m (1,233 and 3,817 ft) in diverse mesic forest dominated by
Metrosideros polymorpha, Acacia koa or Diospyros spp. Associated native
species include Alphitonia ponderosa, Antidesma spp., Claoxylon
sandwicense, Dodonaea viscosa, Dubautia spp., Elaeocarpus bifidus,
Euphorbia haeleeleana, Hedyotis terminalis, Kokia kauaiensis, Melicope
anisata, Melicope barbigera, Melicope ovata (alani), Melicope
peduncularis, Myrsine lanaiensis, Nestegis sandwicensis, Pisonia spp.,
Pittosporum glabrum (hoawa), Pleomele aurea, Pouteria sandwicensis,
Psydrax odorata, Streblus pendulinus, or Xylosma hawaiiense (HINHP
Database 2000; K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The primary threats to Isodendrion laurifolium on Kauai are habitat
degradation by feral goats, pigs and deer and competition with
nonnative plants (HINHP Database 2000; Service 1999; 61 FR 53108).
Isodendrion longifolium (aupaka)
Isodendrion longifolium, a member of the violet family (Violaceae),
is a slender, erect shrub. Hairless, leathery, lance-shaped leaves
distinguish this species from others in the genus (Wagner et al. 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Isodendrion longifolium.
Its flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1999).
Historically and currently, Isodendrion longifolium is known from
scattered locations on Kauai and Oahu. On Kauai, this species is
reported from Limahuli Valley, Hanakapiai, Pohakea, Waioli Valley, the
left branch of Kalalau Valley, Honopu Valley, Kawaiula Valley, and
Haupu. There is a total of 15 occurrences on Kauai containing
approximately 804 to 854 individual plants on State (Halelea Forest
Reserve, Hono o Na Pali NAR, Kokee State Park, Na Pali Coast State
Park, and Na Pali-Kona Forest Reserve) and privately owned lands (GDSI
2000; HINHP Database 2000; Lorence and Flynn 1991, 1993; Service 1999;
61 FR 53108).
Isodendrion longifolium is found on steep slopes, gulches, or
streambanks and some flats in certain undisturbed areas in mesic or wet
Metrosideros polymorpha-Acacia koa forests, usually at elevations
between 38 and 1,541 m (125 and 5,057 ft). Associated native plant
species include Antidesma spp., Bidens spp., Bobea brevipes,
Cheirodendron spp., Cibotium spp., Cyanea hardyi, Cyrtandra spp.,
Dicranopteris linearis, Diospyros spp., Eugenia reinwardtiana, Hedyotis
spp., Ilex anomala, Melicope spp., Nestegis sandwicensis, Peperomia
spp., Perrottetia sandwicensis, Pipturus spp., Pittosporum spp.,
Pritchardia spp., Psychotria spp., Psydrax odorata, or Syzygium
sandwicensis (HINHP Database 2000; Service 1999; 61 FR 53108; K. Wood,
pers. comm., 2001).
The major threats to Isodendrion longifolium on Kauai are habitat
degradation or destruction by feral goats and pigs, and competition
with various nonnative plants (HINHP Database 2000; Lorence and Flynn
1993; Service 1999; 61 FR 53108).
Isodendrion pyrifolium (wahine noho kula)
Isodendrion pyrifolium, a short-lived perennial of the violet
family (Violaceae), is a small, branched shrub. It is distinguished
from other species in the genus by its smaller, green-yellow flowers,
and hairy stipules and leaf veins (Wagner et al. 1999).
During periods of drought, this species drops all but the newest
leaves. After sufficient rain, the plants produce flowers with seeds
ripening one to two months later. No other life history information is
currently known for this species (Service 1996).
Isodendrion pyrifolium is known historically from Niihau, Oahu,
Molokai, Lanai, Maui, and Hawaii. It is currently found only on the
island of Hawaii. It was last seen on Niihau in the 1850s (GDSI 2000;
HINHP Database 2000; Service 1996; 59 FR 10305; Marie Bruegmann, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, pers. comm., 2000).
Information on the physical and biological features that are
essential to the conservation of Isodendrion pyrifolium on the island
of Niihau is not known.
Information on the threats of Isodendrion pyrifolium on the island
of Niihau is not known.
Lobelia niihauensis (NCN)
Lobelia niihauensis, a member of the bellflower family
(Campanulaceae), is a small, branched shrub. This short-lived perennial
species is distinguished from others in the genus by lacking or nearly
lacking leaf stalks, the width of the leaf, and length of the magenta-
colored flowers (Lammers 1999).
Lobelia niihauensis flowers in late summer and early fall. Fruits
mature four to six weeks later. Plants are known to live as long as 20
years. Little else is known about the life history of Lobelia
niihauensis. Its flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal
agents, longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting
factors are unknown (Service 1998b).
Historically, Lobelia niihauensis was known from Oahu, Niihau, and
Kauai. It is now known to be extant only on Kauai and Oahu. On Kauai,
13 occurrences containing 284 to 2,134 individuals are found on State
(Hono o Na Pali NAR, Na Pali Coast State Park, Na Pali-Kona Forest
Reserve, and Puu Ka Pele Forest Reserve) and privately owned lands in
Limahuli Valley, Hoolulu Valley, Hanakoa Valley, Pohakuao, the left and
right branches of Kalalau Valley, Koaie Canyon, Kipalau Valley,
Polihale Spring, Kaaweiki Valley, and Keopaweo (GDSI 2000; HINHP
Database 2000; Service 1998b).
Lobelia niihauensis typically grows on exposed, mesic mixed
shrubland or coastal dry cliffs at elevations between 11 and 887 m (37
and 2,911 ft). Associated native plant species include Artemisia
australis, Bidens sandvicensis, Chamaesyce celastroides, Charpentiera
spp., Eragrostis variabilis, Hibiscus kokio ssp. saint-johnianus,
Lipochaeta connata var. acris, Lythrum spp. (pukamole), Nototrichium
spp., Plectranthus parviflorus, Schiedea apokremnos, or Wilkesia hobdyi
(HINHP Database 2000; Lammers 1999; Service 1998b; K. Wood, pers.
comm., 2001).
On Kauai, the major threats to this species are habitat degradation
and browsing by feral goats and competition from nonnative plants (56
FR 55770).
Lysimachia filifolia (NCN)
Lysimachia filifolia, a member of the primrose family
(Primulaceae), is a
[[Page 9143]]
small shrub. This short-lived perennial species is distinguished from
other species of the genus by its leaf shape and width, calyx lobe
shape, and corolla length (Wagner et al. 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Lysimachia filifolia.
Flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1995).
Historically, Lysimachia filifolia was known only from the upper
portion of Olokele Valley on Kauai. This species is now also known from
Oahu, and the ``Blue Hole'' area of Waialeale, Kauai. There is
currently one occurrence containing a total of 20 to 75 individuals on
State-owned land on Kauai within the Lihue-Koloa Forest Reserve (GDSI
2000; HINHP Database 2000; Service 1995).
This species typically grows on mossy banks at the base of cliff
faces within the spray zone of waterfalls or along streams in lowland
wet forests at elevations between 177 and 1,308 m (581 and 4,290 ft).
Associated native plant species include Antidesma platyphyllum, Bidens
valida (kookoolau), Bobea elatior (ahakea lau nui), Chamaesyce remyi
var kauaiensis (akoko), Cyanea asarifolia, Dubautia plantaginea ssp.
magnifolia (naenae), Eragrostis variabilis, Machaerina angustifolia,
Melicope spp., Metrosideros polymorpha, or Panicum lineale (HINHP
Database 2000; Service 1995; Wagner et al. 1999; 59 FR 9304; K. Wood,
pers. comm., 2001).
The major threats to Lysimachia filifolia on Kauai include
competition with nonnative plant species; habitat degradation by feral
pigs; and the risk of extinction on Kauai from naturally occurring
events (e.g., landslides and hurricanes), due to the small number of
individuals in the only known population (HINHP Database 2000; 59 FR
9304).
Mariscus pennatiformis (NCN)
Mariscus pennatiformis, a short-lived member of the sedge family
(Cyperaceae), is a perennial plant with a woody root system covered
with brown scales. Mariscus pennatiformis is divided into two
subspecies, ssp. bryanii and ssp. pennatiformis, which are
distinguished by the length and width of the spikelets; color, length,
and width of the glume; and by the shape and length of the fruit. This
species differs from other members of the genus by its three-sided,
slightly concave, smooth stems; the length and number of spikelets; the
leaf width; and the length and diameter of stems (Koyama 1990).
Mariscus pennatiformis is known to flower from November to December
after heavy rainfall. Additional information on the life history of
this plant, reproductive cycles, longevity, specific environmental
requirements, and limiting factors is generally unknown (Service 1999).
Historically, Mariscus pennatiformis was known from Kauai, Oahu,
East Maui, the island of Hawaii, and from Laysan Island in the
Northwestern Hawaiian Islands). Mariscus pennatiformis ssp. bryanii is
only known from Laysan Island. Mariscus pennatiformis ssp.
pennatiformis is currently found only on East Maui. It was last seen on
Kauai in 1927 (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000; K. Wood, in litt.
1999;).
Mariscus pennatiformis is found at elevations between 544 and 1,104
m (1,785 and 3,621 ft) in open sites in Metrosideros polymorpha-Acacia
koa mixed mesic forest. Associated native plant species include
Alsinidendron viscosum, Antidesma platyphyllum var. hillebrandii, Carex
alligata (NCN), Cyperus laevigatus (makaloa), Dianella sandwicensis,
Diospyros hillebrandii, Diospyros sandwicensis, Dodonaea viscosa,
Leptecophylla tameiameiae, Myrsine linearifolia, Nestegis sandwicensis,
Panicum nephelophilum, Poa sandvicensis, Psydrax odorata, Schiedea
stellarioides, or endemic ferns (HINHP Database 2000; Koyama 1990; K.
Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
Threats to Mariscus pennatiformis on Kauai include grazing and
habitat destruction caused by ungulates; competition from nonnative
plant species; and extinction from random naturally occurring events
(e.g., landslides or hurricanes) (Service 1999; 59 FR 56333).
Melicope knudsenii (alani)
Melicope knudsenii, a member of the rue family (Rutaceae), is a
tree with smooth gray bark and yellowish brown to olive-brown hairs on
the tips of the branches. This long-lived perennial species is
distinguished from M. haupuensis and other members of the genus by the
distinct carpels present in the fruit, a hairless endocarp, a larger
number of flowers per cluster, and the distribution of hairs on the
underside of the leaves (Stone et al. 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Melicope knudsenii.
Flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1995).
Historically and currently, Melicope knudsenii is known from Maui
and Kauai. On Kauai, this species is known from 10 occurrences on
State-owned land, with a total of 10 individuals, in Poopooiki Valley,
Kuia Valley, Mahanaloa Valley, Makaha Ridge, Koaie Canyon, Koaie Falls,
and Kawaiiki Valley within Kuia NAR and Na Pali-Kona Forest Reserve
(GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000; Service 1995; 59 FR 9304; K. Wood,
pers. comm., 2001).
Melicope knudsenii grows on forested flats with brown granular soil
in lowland dry to montane mesic forests at elevations between 111 and
1,141 m (364 and 3,745 ft) with Alectryon macrococcus, Antidesma
platyphylla, Bobea brevipes, Carex meyenii, Cryptocarya mannii,
Diospyros sandwicensis, Diplazium sandwichianum, Dodonaea viscosa,
Euphorbia haeleeleana, Gahnia beecheyi (NCN), Hedyotis spp., Hibiscus
waimeae, Isodendrion laurifolium, Leptecophylla tameiameiae, Melicope
spp., Metrosideros polymorpha, Myrsine lanaiensis, Nestegis
sandwicensis, Panicum nephelophilum, Peucedanum sandwicense, Pisonia
sandwicensis, Pittosporum kauaiensis, Pleomele aurea, Pouteria
sandwicensis, Pritchardia minor, Psychotria hobdyi, Psydrax odorata,
Rauvolfia sandwicensis, Remya kauaiensis, Scaevola procera, or Xylosma
hawaiiense (HINHP Database 2000; Service 1995; K. Wood, pers. comm.,
2001).
The major threats to Melicope knudsenii on Kauai include
competition with the nonnative plant Lantana camara; habitat
degradation by feral goats and pigs; fire; black twig borer; and the
risk of extinction on Kauai from naturally occurring events, such as
landslides or hurricanes, and/or reduced reproductive vigor due to the
small number of existing individuals and populations (Service 1995; 59
FR 9304).
Melicope pallida (alani)
Melicope pallida, a member of the rue family (Rutaceae), is a tree
with grayish white hairs and black, resinous new growth. The long-lived
perennial species differs from M. haupuensis, M. knudsenii, and other
members of the genus by the presence of resinous new growth, leaves
folded in clusters of three, and fruits with separate carpels (Stone et
al. 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Melicope pallida.
Flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1995).
[[Page 9144]]
Historically and currently, Melicope pallida is known from Oahu and
Kauai. On Kauai, the species is currently known from the following
locations: Pohakuao, the left branch of Kalalau Valley, Honopu Trail,
Awaawapuhi Valley, and Koaie Canyon. There is a total of six
occurrences with 181 individuals on State-owned land within the Alakai
Wilderness Preserve, Na Pali Coast State Park, and Na Pali-Kona Forest
Reserve (GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000; D.W. Mathias, U.S. Navy
(Navy), in litt. 1999; K. Wood, in litt. 1999).
Melicope pallida usually grows on steep rock faces in lowland to
montane mesic to wet forests or shrubland at elevations between 359 and
1,081 m (1,179 and 3,546 ft). Associated native plant species include
Alyxia oliviformis, Artemisia australis, Boehmeria grandis, Carex
meyenii, Chamaesyce celastroides var. hanapepensis, Coprosma kauensis
(koi), Coprosma waimeae, Dodonaea viscosa, Dryopteris spp., Hedyotis
terminalis, Lepidium serra, Melicope spp., Metrosideros polymorpha,
Nototrichium spp., Pipturus albidus (mamaki), Pleomele aurea, Poa
mannii, Pritchardia minor, Psychotria mariniana, Sapindus oahuensis,
Schiedea membranacea, Tetraplasandra waialealae, or Xylosma hawaiiense
(HINHP Database 2000; K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The major threats to Melicope pallida are habitat destruction by
feral goats and pigs; the black twig borer; fire; susceptibility to
extinction from naturally occurring events, such as landslides or
hurricanes, and/or reduced reproductive vigor due to the small number
of existing populations; and competition with nonnative plant species
(Hara and Beardsley 1979; HINHP Database 2000; Medeiros et al. 1986;
Service 1995; 59 FR 9304).
Peucedanum sandwicense (makou)
Peucedanum sandwicense, a member of the parsley family (Apiaceae),
is a parsley-scented, sprawling herb. Hollow stems arise from a short,
vertical stem with several fleshy roots. This short-lived perennial
species is the only member of the genus in the Hawaiian Islands, one of
three genera of the family with species endemic to the island of Kauai.
This species differs from the other Kauai members of the parsley family
in having larger fruit and pinnately compound leaves with broad
leaflets (Constance and Affolter 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Peucedanum sandwicense.
Flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1995).
Historically and currently, Peucedanum sandwicense is known from
Molokai, Maui, and Kauai. In 1990, it was discovered on Oahu. On Kauai,
there are 15 occurrences on State (Haena State Park, Hono o Na Pali and
Kuia NARs, Na Pali Coast State Park, and Na Pali-Kona Forest Reserve)
and privately owned lands, containing approximately 156 to 256
individuals, in Maunahou Valley, Limahuli Valley, Hoolulu, Hanakoa,
Pohakuao, Kanakou, the left branch of Kalalau Valley, Nualolo Valley,
Kuia Valley, Mahanaloa Valley, Koaie Canyon, and Haupu (GDSI 2000;
HINHP Database 2000; Service 1995; 59 FR 9304; K. Wood, in litt. 1999).
This species grows on cliff habitats in mixed shrub coastal dry
cliff communities or diverse mesic forest at elevations between 0 and
1,232 m (0 and 4,041 ft). Associated native plant species include
Acacia koa, Artemisia australis, Bidens spp., Brighamia insignis, Carex
meyenii, Chamaesyce celastroides, Diospyros spp., Dodonaea viscosa,
Eragrostis variabilis, Hibiscus kokio, Lobelia niihauensis,
Metrosideros polymorpha, Panicum lineale, Psychotria spp., Psydrax
odorata, or Wilkesia spp. (Constance and Affolter 1999; HINHP Database
2000; 59 FR 9304; K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The major threats to Peucedanum sandwicense on Kauai include
competition with introduced plants; habitat degradation and browsing by
feral goats and deer; and trampling and trail clearing (Hanakapiai
population) (HINHP Database 2000; Service 1995; 59 FR 9304).
Phlegmariurus mannii (wawaeiole)
Phlegmariurus mannii, a member of the clubmoss family
(Lycopodiaceae) and a short-lived perennial, is a pendent epiphyte with
clustered, delicate red stems and forked reproductive spikes. These
traits distinguish it from others in the genus in Hawaii (Holub 1991).
Little is known about the life history of Phlegmariurus mannii.
Reproductive cycles, dispersal agents, longevity, specific
environmental requirements, and limiting factors are unknown (Service
1997).
Historically, Phlegmariurus mannii was known from Kauai, West Maui,
and Hawaii island. Currently, this species is extant on Maui and Hawaii
island. It was last observed on Kauai in 1900 (HINHP Database 2000).
Nothing is known of the preferred habitat of or native plant
species associated with Phlegmariurus mannii on the island of Kauai.
Nothing is known of the threats to Phlegmariurus mannii on the
island of Kauai.
Phlegmariurus nutans (waewaeiole)
Phlegmariurus nutans is an erect or pendulous herbaceous epiphyte
in the clubmoss family (Lycopodiaceae). This species can be
distinguished from others of the genus in Hawaii by its epiphytic
habit, simple or forking fruiting spikes, and larger and stiffer leaves
(Wagner and Wagner 1987).
Phlegmariurus nutans has been observed fertile, with spores, in May
and December. Little else is known about the life history of
Phlegmariurus nutans. Its reproductive cycles, dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1998b).
Historically, Phlegmariurus nutans was known from the island of
Kauai and from scattered locations in the Koolau Mountains of Oahu. It
is currently only known from Oahu. It was last observed on Kauai in
1900 (HINHP Database 2000; Service 1998b).
Phlegmariurus nutans grows on tree trunks, usually on open ridges
and slopes in Metrosideros polymorpha-Dicranopteris linearis wet
forests and occasionally mesic forests at elevations between 601 and
1,594 m (1,971 and 5,228 ft). The vegetation in those areas typically
includes Antidesma platyphyllum, Broussaisia arguta, Cheirodendron
fauriei, Cibotium spp., Diplopterygium pinnatum, Hedyotis terminalis,
Hibiscus kokio ssp. kokio, Melicope waialealae (alani wai), Scaevola
gaudichaudii, Syzygium sandwicensis, Perrottetia sandwicensis,
Psychotria hexandra, Psychotria mariniana, or Psychotria wawrae (K.
Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The primary threat to Phlegmariurus nutans is extinction due to
naturally occurring events and/or reduced reproductive vigor because of
the small number of remaining individuals and limited distribution.
Additional threats to this species are feral pigs and the nonnative
plants Clidemia hirta or Psidium cattleianum (Service 1998b).
Plantago princeps (laukahi kuahiwi)
Plantago princeps, a member of the plantain family
(Plantaginaceae), is a small shrub or robust perennial herb. This
short-lived perennial species differs from other native members of the
genus in Hawaii by its large branched stems, flowers at nearly right
angles to the axis of the flower cluster, and fruits that break open at
a point two-thirds from the base. The four varieties, vars. anomala,
laxiflora, longibracteata, and
[[Page 9145]]
princeps, are distinguished by the branching and pubescence of the
stems; the size, pubescence, and venation of the leaves; the density of
the inflorescence; and the orientation of the flowers (Wagner et al.
1999).
Little is known about the life history of this plant. Reproductive
cycles, longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting
factors are generally unknown. However, individuals have been observed
in fruit from April through September (Service 1999).
Historically, Plantago princeps was found on the islands of Hawaii,
Kauai, Maui, Molokai, and Oahu. It no longer occurs on the island of
Hawaii. Two varieties of the species, totaling seven occurrences, with
542 to 670 individuals, are extant on the island of Kauai, on both
State (Halelea Forest Reserve, Lihue-Koloa Forest Reserve, and Na Pali
Coast State Park) and privately owned lands. Historically on Kauai,
Plantago princeps var. anomala was reported from a ridge west of
Hanapepe River. Currently, this variety is found in the left branch of
Kalalau Valley and Puu Ki. Plantago princeps var. longibracteata was
historically known from Hanalei, the Wahiawa Mountains, and Hanapepe
Falls. Currently, five occurrences are known from Waioli Valley, Alakai
Swamp, the left branch of Wainiha Valley, and Blue Hole (GDSI 2000;
HINHP Database 2000; Service 1999; 59 FR 56333).
Plantago princeps var. longibracteata is found in windswept areas
near waterfalls in Metrosideros polymorpha-Cheirodendron montane wet
forest with riparian vegetation at elevations between 347 and 1,598 m
(1,139 and 5,244 ft). Associated native plant species include Antidesma
platyphyllum var. hillebrandii, Bidens forbesii, Bobea elatior,
Boehmeria grandis, Cyrtandra spp., Diplazium sandwichianum, Freycinetia
arborea, Gunnera kauaiensis, Hedyotis centranthoides, Hedyotis elatior,
Huperzia spp., Isachne pallens (NCN), Machaerina angustifolia,
Perrottetia sandwicensis, Pilea peploides (NCN), Pipturus spp.,
Sadleria cyatheoides (amau), or Tetraplasandra spp. (K. Wood, pers.
comm., 2001).
Plantago princeps var. anomala is found in Metrosideros polymorpha
lowland to montane transitional wet forest on cliffs and ridges,
growing on basalt rocky outcrops. Associated native plant species
include Bidens sandvicensis, Carex meyenii, Carex wahuensis,
Charpentiera elliptica, Hedyotis spp., Lipochaeta connata, Lysimachia
glutinosa, Lysimachia kalalauensis, Melicope spp., Myrsine
linearifolia, Poa mannii, or Wilkesia gymnoxiphium (K. Wood, pers.
comm., 2001).
The primary threats to both species of Plantago princeps on Kauai
are herbivory and habitat degradation by feral pigs and goats and
competition with various nonnative plant species. Ungulate herbivory is
especially severe, with numerous observations of P. princeps
individuals exhibiting browse damage (Service 1999; 61 FR 53108).
Platanthera holochila (NCN)
Platanthera holochila, a member of the orchid family (Orchidaceae),
is an erect, deciduous herb. The stems arise from underground tubers,
the pale green leaves are lance- to egg-shaped, and the greenish-yellow
flowers occur in open spikes. This short-lived perennial is the only
species of this genus that occurs in the Hawaiian Islands. It is
distinguished from other Hawaiian orchids by its underground tubers
that lack roots at the nodes or pseudobulbs, and the shape and length
of its dorsal sepal (Wagner et al. 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Platanthera holochila.
Its flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1999).
Historically, Platanthera holochila was known from the Alakai
Swamp, Kaholuamano area, and the Wahiawa Mountains on Kauai, and
scattered locations on Oahu, Molokai, and Maui. Currently, P. holochila
is extant on Kauai, Molokai, and Maui. On Kauai, there are two
occurrences with 24 to 34 individuals reported on State-owned lands
(Alakai Wilderness Preserve) at Kilohana and the Alakai Swamp (GDSI
2000; HINHP Database 2000).
Platanthera holochila is found in montane Metrosideros polymorpha-
Dicranopteris linearis wet forest or M. polymorpha mixed bog at
elevations between 803 and 1,563 m (2,635 and 5,128 ft). Associated
native plant species include grammitid ferns, Carex montis-eeka (NCN),
Cibotium spp., Clermontia fauriei (oha wai), Coprosma elliptica (pilo),
Dichanthelium spp., Leptecophylla tameiameiae, Lobelia kauaensis,
Machaerina angustifolia, Myrsine denticulata (kolea), Oreobolus
furcatus, Rhynchospora spp. (kuolohia), Vaccinium spp., or Viola
kauaensis (Service 1999; 61 FR 53108; K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The primary threats to Platanthera holochila on Kauai are habitat
degradation and destruction by pigs; competition with nonnative plants;
and a risk of extinction on Kauai from naturally occurring events, such
as landslides or hurricanes, and/or reduced reproductive vigor, due to
the small number of remaining populations and individuals. Predation by
introduced slugs may also be a potential threat to this species
(Service 1999; 61 FR 53108).
Schiedea nuttallii (NCN)
Schiedea nuttallii, a member of the pink family (Caryophyllaceae),
is a generally hairless, erect subshrub. This long-lived perennial
species is distinguished from others in this endemic Hawaiian genus by
its habit, length of the stem internodes, length of the inflorescence,
number of flowers per inflorescence, and smaller leaves, flowers, and
seeds (Wagner et al. 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Schiedea nuttallii. Based
on field and greenhouse observations, it is hermaphroditic (flowers
contain both male and female sexual parts). Plants on Oahu have been
under observation for 10 years, and they appear to be long-lived.
Schiedea nuttallii appears to be an outcrossing species. Under
greenhouse conditions, plants fail to set seed unless hand-pollinated,
suggesting that this species requires insects for pollination. Fruits
and flowers are abundant in the wet season but can be found throughout
the year (Service 1999).
Historically, Schiedea nuttallii was known from Kauai and Oahu and
was reported from Maui. Currently, it is found on Kauai, Oahu, and
Molokai. On Kauai, one occurrence with 10 to 50 individuals is found on
Haupu Peak on privately owned land. The status of individuals
previously found in Limahuli Valley is currently unknown (GDSI 2000;
HINHP Database 2000; Service 1999; 1 FR 53108).
Schiedea nuttallii typically grows on cliffs in lowland diverse
mesic forest dominated by Metrosideros polymorpha at elevations between
37 and 702 m (120 and 2,303 ft). Associated native plant species
include Antidesma platyphyllum var. hillebrandii, Bidens valida,
Chamaesyce celastroides, Eragrostis variabilis, Hedyotis acuminata,
Hedyotis fluviatilis (kamapuaa), Heteropogon contortus, Lepidium spp.
(anaunau), Lobelia niihauensis, Perrottetia sandwicensis, Pisonia spp.,
or Psychotria spp. (Service 1999; K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
Schiedea nuttallii is threatened on Kauai by habitat degradation
and/or destruction by feral pigs, goats, and possibly deer; competition
with several nonnative plants; landslides; predation by the black twig
borer; and a risk of extinction from naturally occurring
[[Page 9146]]
events (e.g., landslides or hurricanes) and/or reduced reproductive
vigor, due to the small number of individuals in the only known
population. Based on observations that indicate that introduced snails
and slugs may consume seeds and seedlings, it is likely that introduced
molluscs also represent a major threat to this species (Service 1999;
61 FR 53108).
Sesbania tomentosa (ohai)
Sesbania tomentosa, a member of the pea family (Fabaceae), is
typically a sprawling short-lived perennial shrub, but may also be a
small tree. Each compound leaf consists of 18 to 38 oblong to elliptic
leaflets which are usually sparsely to densely covered with silky
hairs. The flowers are salmon colored, tinged with yellow, orange-red,
scarlet or, rarely, pure yellow coloration. Sesbania tomentosa is the
only endemic Hawaiian species in the genus, differing from the
naturalized S. sesban by the color of the flowers, the longer petals
and calyx, and the number of seeds per pod (Geesink et al. 1999).
The pollination biology of Sesbania tomentosa has been studied by
David Hopper, University of Hawaii. His findings suggest that although
many insects visit Sesbania flowers, the majority of successful
pollination is accomplished by native bees of the genus Hylaeus, and
that populations at Kaena Point on Oahu are probably pollinator-
limited. Flowering at Kaena Point is highest during the winter-spring
rains, and gradually declines throughout the rest of the year. Other
aspects of this plant's life history are unknown (Service 1999).
Currently, Sesbania tomentosa occurs on six of the eight main
Hawaiian Islands (Kauai, Oahu, Molokai, Kahoolawe, Maui, and Hawaii)
and in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands (Nihoa and Necker islands).
Although once found on Niihau and Lanai, it is no longer extant on
those islands. On Kauai, S. tomentosa is known from one occurrence,
with 11 individuals, on State-owned land at Polihale State Park (GDSI
2000; HINHP Database 2000; 59 FR 56333).
Sesbania tomentosa is found on sandy beaches, dunes, or pond
margins at elevations between 0 and 212 m (0 and 694 ft). It commonly
occurs in coastal dry shrublands or mixed coastal dry cliffs with the
associated native plant species Chamaesyce celastroides, Cuscuta
sandwichiana (kaunaoa), Dodonaea viscosa, Heteropogon contortus,
Myoporum sandwicense, Nama sandwicensis, Scaevola sericea, Sida fallax,
Sporobolus virginicus, Vitex rotundifolia, or Waltheria indica (HINHP
Database 2000; Service 1999; K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The primary threats to Sesbania tomentosa on Kauai are habitat
degradation caused by competition with various nonnative plant species;
lack of adequate pollination; seed predation by rats, mice, and,
potentially, nonnative insects; fire; and destruction by off-road
vehicles and other human disturbances (Service 1999; 59 FR 56333).
Silene lanceolata (NCN)
Silene lanceolata, a member of the pink family (Caryophyllaceae),
is an upright, short-lived perennial plant with stems 15 to 51 cm (6 to
20 in) long, which are woody at the base. The flowers are white with
deeply-lobed, clawed petals. This species is distinguished from other
Hawaiian Silene species by its erect stem, terminal inflorescence, and
the length of the calyx, clawed petals, and carpophore (ovary
structure) (Wagner et al. 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Silene lanceolata. Its
flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1996; 57 FR 46325).
The historical range of Silene lanceolata includes five Hawaiian
Islands: Kauai, Oahu, Molokai, Lanai, and Hawaii. Silene lanceolata is
presently extant on the islands of Molokai, Oahu, and Hawaii. It was
last observed on Kauai in the 1850s (GDSI 2000; Service 1996; 57 FR
46325).
Nothing is known of the preferred habitat of or native plant
species associated with Silene lanceolata on the island of Kauai.
Nothing is known of the threats to Silene lanceolata on the island
of Kauai.
Solanum incompletum (popolo ku mai)
Solanum incompletum, a short-lived perennial member of the
nightshade family (Solanaceae), is a woody shrub. Its stems and lower
leaf surfaces are covered with prominent reddish prickles or sometimes
with yellow fuzzy hairs on young plant parts and lower leaf surfaces.
This species differs from other native members of the genus by being
generally prickly and having loosely clustered white flowers, curved
anthers about 2 mm (0.08 in) long, and berries 1 to 2 cm (0.4 to 0.8
in) in diameter (Symon 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Solanum incompletum. Its
flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (59 FR 56333).
Historically, Solanum incompletum was known from Lanai, Maui, and
the island of Hawaii. According to David Symon (1999), the known
distribution of S. incompletum also extended to the islands of Kauai
and Molokai. Currently, the species is only known from the island of
Hawaii. The reported presence on Kauai may be erroneous (HINHP Database
2000; Christopher Puttock, Bernice P. Bishop Museum, pers comm., 2001).
Nothing is known of the preferred habitat of or native plant
species associated with Solanum incompletum on the island of Kauai.
Nothing is known of the threats to Solanum incompletum on the
island of Kauai.
Solanum sandwicense (aiakeakua, popolo)
Solanum sandwicense, a member of the nightshade family
(Solanaceae), is a large sprawling shrub. The younger branches are more
densely hairy than older branches and the oval leaves usually have up
to 4 lobes along the margins. This short-lived perennial species
differs from others of the genus in having dense hairs on young plant
parts, a greater height, and lacking prickles (Symon 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Solanum sandwicense.
Flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1995).
Historically, Solanum sandwicense was known from both Oahu and
Kauai. Currently, this species is only known from Kauai. On Kauai, this
species was historically reported from locations in the Kokee region
bounded by Kalalau Valley, Milolii Ridge, and extending to the Hanapepe
River. Currently, S. sandwicense is only known from eight occurrences
of 14 individual plants on private and State lands (Kokee State Park,
Kuia NAR, and Na Pali-Kona Forest Reserve) at Kahuamaa Flats,
Awaawapuhi Valley, Kumuwela Ridge, Waialae Valley, and Mokuone Stream
(GDSI 2000; HINHP Database 2000; Service 1995; 59 FR 9304; K. Wood, in
litt. 1999; Joan Yoshioka, The Nature Conservancy of Hawaii (TNCH),
pers. comm., 2000).
This species is typically found under forest canopies at elevations
between 445 and 1,290 m (1,460 and 4,232 ft) in diverse lowland or
montane Acacia koa or A. koa-Metrosideros polymorpha mesic forests or
occasionally in wet forests. Associated native plant species include
Alphitonia ponderosa, Athyrium sandwicensis, Bidens spp.,
[[Page 9147]]
Carex meyenii, Coprosma spp., Cryptocarya mannii, Dianella
sandwicensis, Dicranopteris linearis, Dubautia spp., Hedyotis spp.,
Ilex anomala, Melicope spp., Poa spp., Pouteria sandwicensis,
Psychotria spp., Syzygium sandwicensis, or Xylosma hawaiiense (HINHP
Database 2000; Service 1995; 59 FR 9304; K. Wood, pers. comm., 2001).
The major threats to populations of Solanum sandwicense on Kauai
are habitat degradation by feral pigs, and competition with nonnative
plant species (Hedychium gardnerianum (kahili ginger), Lonicera
japonica Passiflora tarminiana, Psidium cattleianum, or Rubus argutus);
fire; human disturbance and development; and a risk of extinction from
naturally occurring events (e.g., landslides or hurricanes) and/or
reduced reproductive vigor due to the small number of existing
individuals (HINHP Database 2000; Service 1995; 59 FR 9304).
Spermolepis hawaiiensis (NCN)
Spermolepis hawaiiensis, a member of the parsley family (Apiaceae),
is a slender annual herb with few branches. Its leaves are dissected
into narrow, lance-shaped divisions. Spermolepis hawaiiensis is the
only member of the genus native to Hawaii. It is distinguished from
other native members of the family by being a non-succulent annual with
an umbrella-shaped inflorescence (Constance and Affolter 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Spermolepis hawaiiensis.
Its flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1999).
Historically, Spermolepis hawaiiensis was known from Kauai, Oahu,
Lanai, and the island of Hawaii. Currently, it is found on Kauai, Oahu,
Molokai, Lanai, West Maui, and Hawaii. On Kauai, this species is known
from State-owned land at Koaie Canyon, the rim of Waimea Canyon, and
Kapahili Gulch within the Na Pali-Kona Forest Reserve. There are two
known occurrences with five individuals total on Kauai (GDSI 2000;
HINHP Database 2000; Service 1999; 59 FR 56333).
Spermolepis hawaiiensis is known from Metrosideros polymorpha
forest and Dodonaea viscosa lowland dry shrubland, at elevations
between 56 and 725 m (184 and 2,377 ft). Associated native plant
species include Bidens sandvicensis, Doryopteris spp., Eragrostis
variabilis, Erythrina sandwicensis, Lipochaeta spp., Schiedea
spergulina, or Sida fallax (HINHP Database 2000; Service 1999; K. Wood,
pers. comm., 2001).
The primary threats to Spermolepis hawaiiensis on Kauai are habitat
degradation by feral goats; competition with various nonnative plants;
and erosion, landslides, and rock slides due to natural weathering,
which result in the death of individual plants as well as habitat
destruction (Service 1999; 59 FR 56333).
Vigna o-wahuensis (NCN)
Vigna o-wahuensis, a member of the pea family (Fabaceae), is a
slender twining short-lived perennial herb with fuzzy stems. Each leaf
is made up of three leaflets which vary in shape from round to linear.
This species differs from others in the genus by its thin yellowish
petals, sparsely hairy calyx, and thin pods, which may or may not be
slightly inflated (Geesink et al. 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Vigna o-wahuensis. Its
flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1999).
Historically, Vigna o-wahuensis was known from Niihau, Oahu,
Molokai, Lanai, Kahoolawe, Maui, and the island of Hawaii. Currently,
Vigna o-wahuensis is known from Molokai, Lanai, Kahoolawe, Maui, and
the island of Hawaii. It was last observed on Niihau in 1912 (GDSI
2000; HINHP Database 2000; 59 FR 56333).
Nothing is known of the preferred habitat of or native plant
species associated with Vigna o-wahuensis on the island of Niihau.
Nothing is known of the threats to Vigna o-wahuensis on the island
of Niihau.
Zanthoxylum hawaiiense (ae)
Zanthoxylum hawaiiense is a medium-sized tree with pale to dark
gray bark and lemon-scented leaves in the rue family (Rutaceae). A
long-lived perennial tree, Z. hawaiiense is distinguished from other
Hawaiian members of the genus by several characteristics: three
leaflets all of similar size, one joint on the lateral leaf stalk, and
sickle-shaped fruits with a rounded tip (Stone et al. 1999).
Little is known about the life history of Zanthoxylum hawaiiense.
Its flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed dispersal agents,
longevity, specific environmental requirements, and limiting factors
are unknown (Service 1996).
Historically, Zanthoxylum hawaiiense was known from five islands:
Kauai, Molokai, Lanai, Maui, and Hawaii. Currently, Zanthoxylum
hawaiiense is found on Kauai, Molokai, Maui, and Hawaii. On Kauai, this
species is only known from three occurrences with three individuals on
State-owned land in Kawaiiki and Kipalau Valleys within the Alakai
Wilderness Preserve and Na Pali-Kona Forest Reserve (GDSI 2000; HINHP
Database 2000).
Zanthoxylum hawaiiense is reported from lowland dry or mesic
forests, at elevations between 332 and 1,151 m (1,089 and 3,774 ft).
This species is typically found in forests dominated by Metrosideros
polymorpha or Diospyros sandwicensis with associated native plant
species including Alectryon macrococcus, Antidesma platyphyllum,
Charpentiera elliptica, Dodonaea viscosa, Melicope spp., Myrsine
lanaiensis, Pisonia spp., Pleomele aurea, Streblus pendulinus, or
Zanthoxylum dipetalum (HINHP Database 2000; K. Wood, pers. comm.,
2001).
The threats to Zanthoxylum hawaiiense on Kauai include competition
with the nonnative plant species Lantana camara and Melia azedarach;
fire; human disturbance; and risk of extinction from naturally
occurring events, such as landslides or hurricanes, and/or reduced
reproductive vigor due to the small number of existing individuals
(Service 1996; 59 FR 10305).
A summary of occurrences and landownership for the 95 plant species
reported from the islands of Kauai and Niihau is given in Table 2.
Table 2.--Summary of Existing Occurrences on Kauai and Niihau, and Landownership for 95 Species Reported From
Kauai
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Landownership
Species current -----------------------------------
occurrences Federal State Private
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acaena exigua.................................................. 0 .......... .......... ..........
[[Page 9148]]
Achyranthes mutica............................................. 0 .......... .......... ..........
Adenophorus periens............................................ 7 .......... X X
Alectryon macrococcus.......................................... 18 .......... X ..........
Alsinidendron lychnoides....................................... 4 .......... X ..........
Alsinidendron viscosum......................................... 7 .......... X ..........
Bonamia menziesii.............................................. 9 .......... X X
Brighamia insignis............................................. 4 .......... X X
Centaurium sebaeoides.......................................... 3 .......... X ..........
Chamaesyce halemanui........................................... 9 .......... X ..........
Ctenitis squamigera............................................ 0 .......... .......... ..........
Cyanea asarifolia.............................................. 2 .......... X ..........
Cyanea recta................................................... 8 .......... X X
Cyanea remyi................................................... 7 .......... X X
Cyanea undulata................................................ 1 .......... .......... X
Cyperus trachysanthos.......................................... 1 .......... .......... X
Cyrtandra cyaneoides........................................... 5 .......... X X
Cyrtandra limahuliensis........................................ 13 .......... X X
Delissea rhytidosperma......................................... 3 .......... X X
Delissea rivularis............................................. 2 .......... X ..........
Delissea undulata.............................................. 1 .......... X ..........
Diellia erecta................................................. 1 .......... X ..........
Diellia pallida................................................ 6 .......... X ..........
Diplazium molokaiense.......................................... 0 .......... .......... ..........
Dubautia latifolia............................................. 26 .......... X ..........
Dubautia pauciflorula.......................................... 4 .......... X X
Euphorbia haeleeleana.......................................... 23 .......... X ..........
Exocarpos luteolus............................................. 9 .......... X X
Flueggea neowawraea............................................ 10 .......... X X
Gouania meyenii................................................ 3 .......... X ..........
Hedyotis cookiana.............................................. 1 .......... X ..........
Hedyotis st.-johnii............................................ 11 .......... X ..........
Hesperomannia lydgatei......................................... 4 .......... X X
Hibiscadelphus woodii.......................................... 2 .......... X ..........
Hibiscus brackenridgei......................................... 0 .......... .......... ..........
Hibiscus clayi................................................. 1 .......... X ..........
Hibiscus waimeae ssp. hannerae................................. 2 .......... X X
Ischaemum byrone............................................... 2 .......... .......... X
Isodendrion laurifolium........................................ 13 .......... X ..........
Isodendrion longifolium........................................ 15 .......... X X
Isodendrion pyrifolium......................................... 0 .......... .......... ..........
Kokia kauaiensis............................................... 21 .......... X ..........
Labordia lydgatei.............................................. 6 .......... X X
Labordia tinifolia var. wahiawaensis........................... 1 .......... .......... X
Lipochaeta fauriei............................................. 5 .......... X ..........
Lipochaeta micrantha........................................... 5 .......... X X
Lipochaeta waimeaensis......................................... 1 .......... X ..........
Lobelia niihauensis............................................ 13 .......... X X
Lysimachia filifolia........................................... 1 .......... X ..........
Mariscus pennatiformis......................................... 0 .......... .......... ..........
Melicope haupuensis............................................ 4 .......... X ..........
Melicope knudsenii............................................. 10 .......... X ..........
Melicope pallida............................................... 6 .......... X ..........
Melicope quadrangularis........................................ 0 .......... .......... ..........
Munroidendron racemosum........................................ 17 .......... X X
Myrsine linearifolia........................................... 12 .......... X X
Nothocestrum peltatum.......................................... 10 .......... X ..........
Panicum niihauense............................................. 1 .......... X ..........
Peucedanum sandwicense......................................... 15 .......... X X
Phlegmariurus mannii........................................... 0 .......... .......... ..........
Phlegmariurus nutans........................................... 0 .......... .......... ..........
Phyllostegia knudsenii......................................... 3 .......... X ..........
Phyllostegia waimeae........................................... 1 .......... X ..........
Phyllostegia wawrana........................................... 4 .......... X X
Plantago princeps.............................................. 7 .......... X X
Platanthera holochila.......................................... 2 .......... X ..........
Poa mannii..................................................... 6 .......... X ..........
Poa sandvicensis............................................... 9 .......... X ..........
Poa siphonoglossa.............................................. 5 .......... X ..........
Pritchardia aylmer-robinsonii.................................. 1 .......... .......... X
[[Page 9149]]
Pritchardia napaliensis........................................ 5 .......... X ..........
Pritchardia viscosa............................................ 1 .......... X ..........
Pteralyxia kauaiensis.......................................... 39 .......... X ..........
Remya kauaiensis............................................... 17 .......... X ..........
Remya montgomeryi.............................................. 6 .......... X ..........
Schiedea apokremnos............................................ 5 .......... X ..........
Schiedea helleri............................................... 3 .......... X ..........
Schiedea kauaiensis............................................ 5 .......... X ..........
Schiedea membranacea........................................... 10 .......... X X
Schiedea nuttallii............................................. 1 .......... .......... X
Schiedea spergulina var. leiopoda.............................. 1 .......... .......... X
Schiedea spergulina var. spergulina............................ 3 .......... X ..........
Schiedea stellarioides......................................... 3 .......... X ..........
Sesbania tomentosa............................................. 1 .......... X ..........
Silene lanceolata.............................................. 0 .......... .......... ..........
Solanum incompletum............................................ 0 .......... .......... ..........
Solanum sandwicense............................................ 8 .......... X X
Spermolepis hawaiiensis........................................ 2 .......... X ..........
Stenogyne campanulata.......................................... 3 .......... X ..........
Vigna o-wahuensis.............................................. 0 .......... .......... ..........
Viola helenae.................................................. 1 .......... .......... X
Viola kauaiensis var. wahiawaensis............................. 2 .......... .......... X
Wilkesia hobdyi................................................ 9 X* X ..........
Xylosma crenatum............................................... 3 .......... X ..........
Zanthoxylum hawaiiense......................................... 3 .......... X ..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Pacific Missile Range Facility at Makaha Ridge.
Previous Federal Action
Federal action on these plants began as a result of section 12 of
the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act) (16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.), which directed the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution to
prepare a report on plants considered to be endangered, threatened, or
extinct in the United States. This report, designated as House Document
No. 94-51, was presented to Congress on January 9, 1975. In that
document, Adenophorus periens, Alectryon macrococcus (as A. macrococcum
var. macrococcum and A. mahoe), Bonamia menziesii, Brighamia insignis
(as B. citrina var. napaliensis and B. insignis), Chamaesyce halemanui
(as Euphorbia halemanui), Delissea rhytidosperma, Dubautia latifolia
(as D. latifolia var. latifolia), Exocarpos luteolus, Flueggea
neowawraea (as Drypetes phyllanthoides), Hedyotis st.-johnii,
Hesperomannia lydgatei, Hibiscus clayi (as H. clayi and H. newhousei),
H. waimeae ssp. hannerae (as H. waimeae), Kokia kauaiensis, Lipochaeta
fauriei, L. micrantha (as L. exigua), Lobelia niihauensis, Melicope
haupuensis (as Pelea haupuensis), M. knudsenii (as P. multiflora), M.
pallida (as P. leveillei and P. pallida), Melicope quadrangularis
(Pelea quadrangularis), Myrsine linearifolia (as M. linearifolia var.
linearifolia), Nothocestrum peltatum, Peucedanum sandwicense (as P.
kauaiense), Phyllostegia knudsenii, Plantago princeps (as P. princeps
var. elata, P. var. laxifolia, and P. var. princeps), Poa sandvicensis,
Pritchardia aylmer-robinsonii, Sesbania tomentosa (as S. hobdyi and S.
tomentosa var. tomentosa), Solanum sandwicense (as S. hillebrandii and
S. kauaiense), Viola helenae, V. kauaiensis var. wahiawaensis, Wilkesia
hobdyi, Xylosma crenatum (as Antidesma crenatum), and Zanthoxylum
hawaiiense (as Z. hawaiiense var. citiodora), were considered to be
endangered; Delissea rivularis, Diellia pallida (as Diellia laciniata),
Labordia lydgatei, Lipochaeta micrantha, L. waimeaensis, Lysimachia
filifolia, Schiedea membranacea, and Zanthoxylum hawaiiense (as Z.
hawaiiense var. hawaiiense and Z. hawaiiense var. velutinosum) were
considered to be threatened; and Delissea undulata (as D. undulata var.
argutidenta and D. undulata var. undulata), Gouania meyenii, Hedyotis
cookiana, Melicope knudsenii (as Pelea knudsenii and P. tomentosa),
Munroidendron racemosum (as M. racemosum var. macdanielsii), Plantago
princeps (as P. princeps var. acaulis, P. princeps var. denticulata,
and P. princeps var. queleniana), and Remya kauaiensis were considered
to be extinct. On July 1, 1975, we published a notice in the Federal
Register (40 FR 27823) of our acceptance of the Smithsonian report as a
petition within the context of section 4(c)(2) (now section 4(b)(3)) of
the Act, and gave notice of our intention to review the status of the
plant taxa named therein. As a result of that review, on June 16, 1976,
we published a proposed rule in the Federal Register (41 FR 24523) to
determine endangered status pursuant to section 4 of the Act for
approximately 1,700 vascular plant taxa, including all of the above
taxa except for Diellia pallida. The list of 1,700 plant taxa was
assembled on the basis of comments and data received by the Smithsonian
Institution and the Service in response to House Document No. 94-51 and
the July 1, 1975, Federal Register publication (40 FR 27823).
General comments received in response to the 1976 proposal were
summarized in an April 26, 1978, Federal Register publication (43 FR
17909). In 1978, amendments to the Act required that all proposals over
2 years old be withdrawn. A 1-year grace period was given to proposals
already over 2 years old. On December 10, 1979, we published a notice
in the Federal Register (44 FR 70796) withdrawing the portion of the
June 16, 1976, proposal that had not been made final, along with four
other proposals that had expired. We published updated Notices of
[[Page 9150]]
Review for plants on December 15, 1980 (45 FR 82479), September 27,
1985 (50 FR 39525), February 21, 1990 (55 FR 6183), and September 30,
1993 (58 FR 51144). We listed the 95 species as endangered or
threatened between 1991 and 1996. A summary of the listing actions can
be found in Table 3(a). A summary of the critical habitat actions can
be found in Table 3(b).
Table 3(a).--Summary of Listing Actions for 95 Plant Species From Kauai and Niihau
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed listing rule Final listing rule
Species Federal ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
status Date Federal Register Date Federal Register
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acaena exigua........................... E 5/24/1991 56 FR 23842 5/15/1992 57 FR 20772
Achyranthes mutica...................... E 10/2/1995 60 FR 51417 10/10/1996 61 FR 53108
Adenophorus periens..................... E 9/14/1993 58 FR 48012 11/10/1994 59 FR 56333
Alectryon macrococcus................... E 5/24/1991 56 FR 23842 5/15/1992 57 FR 20772
Alsinidendron lychnoides................ E 9/25/1995 60 FR 49359 10/10/1996 61 FR 53070
Alsinidendron viscosum.................. E 9/25/1995 60 FR 49359 10/10/1996 61 FR 53070
Bonamia menziesii....................... E 9/14/1993 58 FR 48012 11/10/1994 59 FR 56333
Brighamia insignis...................... E 10/30/1991 56 FR 55862 2/25/1994 59 FR 9304
Centaurium sebaeoides................... E 9/28/1990 55 FR 39664 10/29/1991 56 FR 55770
Chamaesyce halemanui.................... E 9/21/1990 55 FR 39301 5/13/1992 57 FR 20580
Ctenitis squamigera..................... E 6/24/1993 58 FR 34231 9/9/1994 59 FR 49025
Cyanea asarifolia....................... E 10/30/1991 56 FR 55862 2/25/1994 59 FR 09304
Cyanea recta............................ T 9/25/1995 60 FR 49359 10/10/1996 61 FR 53070
Cyanea remyi............................ E 9/25/1995 60 FR 49359 10/10/1996 61 FR 53070
Cyanea undulata......................... E 9/17/1990 55 FR 38242 9/20/1991 56 FR 47695
Cyperus trachysanthos................... E 10/2/1995 60 FR 51417 10/10/1996 61 FR 53108
Cyrtandra cyaneoides.................... E 9/25/1995 60 FR 49359 10/10/1996 61 FR 53070
Cyrtandra limahuliensis................. T 10/30/1991 56 FR 55862 2/25/1994 59 FR 09304
Delissea rhytidosperma.................. E 10/30/1991 56 FR 55862 2/25/1994 59 FR 09304
Delissea rivularis...................... E 9/25/1995 60 FR 49359 10/10/1996 61 FR 53070
Delissea undulata....................... E 6/27/1994 59 FR 32946 10/10/1996 61 FR 53124
Diellia erecta.......................... E 9/14/1993 58 FR 48012 11/10/1994 59 FR 56333
Diellia pallida......................... E 10/30/1991 56 FR 55862 2/25/1994 59 FR 9304
Diplazium molokaiense................... E 6/24/1993 58 FR 34231 9/9/1994 59 FR 49025
Dubautia latifolia...................... E 9/21/1990 55 FR 39301 5/13/1992 57 FR 20580
Dubautia pauciflorula................... E 9/17/1990 55 FR 38242 9/20/1991 56 FR 47695
Euphorbia haeleeleana................... E 10/2/1995 60 FR 51417 10/10/1996 61 FR 53108
Exocarpos luteolus...................... E 10/30/1991 56 FR 55862 2/25/1994 59 FR 9304
Flueggea neowawraea..................... E 9/14/1993 58 FR 48012 11/10/1994 59 FR 56333
Gouania meyenii......................... E 9/28/1990 55 FR 39664 10/29/1991 56 FR 55770
Hedyotis cookiana....................... E 10/30/1991 56 FR 55862 2/25/1994 59 FR 09304
Hedyotis st.-johnii..................... E 8/3/1990 55 FR 31612 9/30/1991 56 FR 49639
Hesperomannia lydgatei.................. E 9/17/1990 55 FR 38242 9/20/1991 56 FR 47695
Hibiscadelphus woodii................... E 9/25/1995 60 FR 49359 10/10/1996 61 FR 53070
Hibiscus brackenridgei.................. E 9/14/1993 58 FR 48012 11/10/1994 59 FR 56333
Hibiscus clayi.......................... E 10/30/1991 56 FR 55862 2/25/1994 59 FR 9304
Hibiscus waimeae ssp.................... E 9/25/1995 60 FR 49359 10/10/1996 61 FR 53070
Ischaemum byrone........................ E 12/17/1992 57 FR 59951 3/4/1994 59 FR 10305
Isodendrion laurifolium................. E 10/2/1995 60 FR 51417 10/10/1996 61 FR 53108
Isodendrion longifolium................. T 10/2/1995 60 FR 51417 10/10/1996 61 FR 53108
Isodendrion pyrifolium.................. E 12/17/1992 57 FR 59941 3/4/1994 59 FR 10305
Kokia kauaiensis........................ E 9/25/1995 60 FR 49359 10/10/1996 61 FR 53070
Labordia lydgatei....................... E 9/17/1990 55 FR 38242 9/20/1991 56 FR 47695
Labordia tinifolia var.................. E 9/25/1995 60 FR 49359 10/10/1996 61 FR 53070
Lipochaeta fauriei...................... E 10/30/1991 56 FR 55862 2/25/1994 59 FR 9304
Lipochaeta micrantha.................... E 10/30/1991 56 FR 55862 2/25/1994 59 FR 09304
Lipochaeta waimeaensis.................. E 10/30/1991 56 FR 55862 2/25/1994 59 FR 09304
Lobelia niihauensis..................... E 9/28/1990 55 FR 39664 10/29/1991 56 FR 55770
Lysimachia filifolia.................... E 10/30/1991 56 FR 55862 2/25/1994 59 FR 09304
Mariscus pennatiformis.................. E 9/14/1993 58 FR 48012 11/10/1994 59 FR 56333
Melicope haupuensis..................... E 10/30/1991 56 FR 55862 2/25/1994 59 FR 9304
Melicope knudsenii...................... E 10/30/1991 56 FR 55862 2/25/1994 59 FR 9304
Melicope pallida........................ E 10/30/1991 56 FR 55862 2/25/1994 59 FR 9304
Melicope quadrangularis................. E 10/30/1991 56 FR 55862 2/25/1994 59 FR 9304
Munroidendron racemosum................. E 10/30/1991 56 FR 55862 2/25/1994 59 FR 9304
Myrsine linearifolia.................... T 9/25/1995 60 FR 49359 10/10/1996 61 FR 53070
Nothocestrum peltatum................... E 10/30/1991 56 FR 55862 2/25/1994 59 FR 9304
Panicum niihauense...................... E 10/2/1995 60 FR 51417 10/10/1996 61 FR 53108
Peucedanum sandwicense.................. T 10/30/1991 56 FR 55862 2/25/1994 59 FR 09304
Phlegmariurus mannii.................... E 5/24/1991 56 FR 23842 5/15/1992 57 FR 20772
Phlegmariurus nutans.................... E 9/28/1990 55 FR 39664 10/29/1991 56 FR 55770
Phyllostegia knudsenii.................. E 9/25/1995 60 FR 49359 10/10/1996 61 FR 53070
Phyllostegia waimeae.................... E 10/30/1991 56 FR 55862 2/25/1994 59 FR 09304
Phyllostegia wawrana.................... E 9/25/1995 60 FR 49359 10/10/1996 61 FR 53070
[[Page 9151]]
Plantago princeps....................... E 9/14/1993 58 FR 48012 11/10/1994 59 FR 56333
Platanthera holochila................... E 10/2/1995 60 FR 51417 10/10/1996 61 FR 53108
Poa mannii.............................. E 4/7/1993 58 FR 18073 11/10/1994 59 FR 56330
Poa sandvicensis........................ E 9/21/1990 55 FR 39301 5/13/1992 57 FR 20580
Poa siphonoglossa....................... E 9/21/1990 55 FR 39301 5/13/1992 57 FR 20580
Pritchardia aylmer-robinsonii........... E 12/17/1992 57 FR 59970 8/7/1996 61 FR 41020
Pritchardia napaliensis................. E 9/25/1995 60 FR 49359 10/10/1996 61 FR 53070
Pritchardia viscosa..................... E 9/25/1995 60 FR 49359 10/10/1996 61 FR 53070
Pteralyxia kauaiensis................... E 10/30/1991 56 FR 55862 2/25/1994 59 FR 9304
Remya kauaiensis........................ E 10/2/1989 54 FR 40447 1/14/1991 56 FR 1450
Remya montgomeryi....................... E 10/2/1989 54 FR 40447 1/14/1991 56 FR 1450
Schiedea apokremnos..................... E 8/3/1990 55 FR 31612 9/30/1991 56 FR 49639
Schiedea helleri........................ E 9/25/1995 60 FR 49359 10/10/1996 61 FR 53070
Schiedea kauaiensis..................... E 10/2/1995 60 FR 51417 10/10/1996 61 FR 53108
Schiedea membranacea.................... E 9/25/1995 60 FR 49359 10/10/1996 61 FR 53070
Schiedea nuttallii...................... E 10/2/1995 60 FR 51417 10/10/1996 61 FR 53108
Schiedea spergulina var. leiopoda....... E 10/30/1991 56 FR 55862 2/25/1994 59 FR 9304
Schiedea spergulina var. spergulina..... T 10/30/1991 56 FR 55862 2/25/1994 59 FR 9304
Schiedea stellarioides.................. E 9/25/1995 60 FR 49359 10/10/1996 61 FR 53070
Sesbania tomentosa...................... E 9/14/1993 58 FR 48012 11/10/1994 59 FR 56333
Silene lanceolata....................... E 9/20/1991 56 FR 47718 10/8/1992 57 FR 46325
Solanum incompletum..................... E 9/14/1993 58 FR 48012 11/10/1994 59 FR 56333
Solanum sandwicense..................... E 10/30/1991 56 FR 55862 2/25/1994 59 FR 09304
Spermolepis hawaiiensis................. E 9/14/1993 58 FR 48012 11/10/1994 59 FR 56333
Stenogyne campanulata................... E 9/21/1990 55 FR 39301 5/13/1992 57 FR 20580
Vigna o-wahuensis....................... E 9/14/1993 58 FR 48012 11/10/1994 59 FR 56333
Viola helenae........................... E 9/17/1990 55 FR 38242 9/20/1991 56 FR 47695
Viola kauaiensis var.................... E 9/25/1995 60 FR 49359 10/10/1996 61 FR 53070
Wilkesia hobdyi......................... E 10/2/1989 54 FR 40444 6/22/1992 57 FR 27859
Xylosma crenatum........................ E 9/21/1990 55 FR 39301 5/13/1992 57 FR 20580
Zanthoxylum hawaiiense.................. E 12/17/1992 57 FR 59951 3/4/1994 59 FR 10305
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Key: E = Endangered T = Threatened
Table 3(b).--Summary of Critical Habitat Actions for 95 Plant Species From Kauai and Niihau
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed critical habitat designation Final critical habitat
or nondesignation -----------------------------------------
Species ----------------------------------------
Date(s) Federal Register Date(s) Federal Register
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acaena exigua................. 12/18/2000 65 FR 79192 NA NA
Achyranthes mutica............ 5/28/2002 67 FR 36968 NA NA
Adenophorus periens........... 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
12/29/2000 65 FR 83157
1/28/2002 67 FR 3940
3/4/2002 67 FR 9806
4/5/2002 67 FR 16492
5/28/2002 67 FR 36968
5/28/2002 67 FR 37108
Alectryon macrococcus......... 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
12/18/2000 65 FR 79192
12/29/2000 65 FR 83157
1/28/2002 67 FR 3940
4/3/2002 67 FR 15856
4/5/2002 67 FR 16492
5/28/2002 67 FR 37108
Alsinidendron lychnoides...... 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Alsinidendron viscosum........ 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Bonamia menziesii............. 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
12/18/2000 65 FR 79192
12/27/2000 65 FR 82086
1/28/2002 67 FR 3940
3/4/2002 67 FR 36968
4/3/2002 67 FR 15856
5/28/2002 67 FR 9806
5/28/2002 67 FR 37108
Brighamia insignis............ 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Centaurium sebaeoides......... 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
[[Page 9152]]
12/18/2000 65 FR 79192
12/27/2000 65 FR 82086
12/29/2000 65 FR 83157
1/28/2002 67 FR 3940
3/4/2002 67 FR 9806
4/3/2002 67 FR 15856
4/5/2002 67 FR 16492
5/28/2002 67 FR 37108
Chamaesyce halemanui.......... 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Ctenitis squamigera........... 12/18/2000 65 FR 79192 NA NA
12/27/2000 65 FR 79192
12/29/2000 65 FR 83157
1/28/2002 67 FR 3940
3/4/2002 67 FR 9806
4/3/2002 67 FR 15856
4/5/2002 67 FR 16492
5/28/2002 67 FR 36968
Cyanea asarifolia............. 11/07/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Cyanea recta.................. 11/07/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Cyanea remyi.................. 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Cyanea undulata............... 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Cyperus trachysanthos......... 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
1/28/2002 67 FR 3940 ................. .....................
3/4/2002 67 FR 9806 ................. .....................
5/28/2002 67 FR 37108 ................. .....................
Cyrtandra cyaneoides.......... 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Cyrtandra limahuliensis....... 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Delissea rhytidosperma........ 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Delissea rivularis............ 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Delissea undulata............. 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Diellia erecta................ 12/18/2000 65 FR 79192 NA NA
12/29/2000 65 FR 83158 ................. .....................
1/28/2002 67 FR 3940 ................. .....................
3/4/2002 67 FR 9806 ................. .....................
4/3/2002 67 FR 15856 ................. .....................
4/5/2002 67 FR 16492 ................. .....................
5/28/2002 67 FR 36968 ................. .....................
5/28/2002 67 FR 37108 ................. .....................
Diellia pallida............... 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Diplazium molokaiense......... 12/18/2000 65 FR 79192 NA NA
01/28/2002 67 FR 3940
4/3/2002 67 FR 15856
3/4/2002 67 FR 9806
4/5/2002 67 FR 16492
5/28/2002 67 FR 37108
Dubautia latifolia............ 11/07/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Dubautia pauciflorula......... 11/07/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Euphorbia haeleeleana......... 11/07/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
01/28/2002 67 FR 3940 ................. .....................
05/28/2002 ...................... ................. .....................
Exocarpos luteolus............ 11/07/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Flueggea neowawraea........... 11/07/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
12/18/2000 65 FR 79192
1/28/2002 67 FR 3940
4/3/2002 67 FR 15856
04/5/2002 67 FR 16492
5/28/2002 67 FR 36968
5/28/2002 67 FR 37108
Gouania meyenii............... 11/07/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
1/28/2002 67 FR 3940
Hedyotis cookiana............. 11/07/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Hedyotis st.-johnii........... 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Hesperomannia lydgatei........ 11/07/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Hibiscadelphus woodii......... 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Hibiscus brackenridgei........ 12/18/2000 65 FR 79192 NA NA
12/27/2000 65 FR 82086
3/4/2002 67 FR 9806
4/3/2002 67 FR 15856
[[Page 9153]]
4/5/2002 67 FR 16492
5/28/2002 67 FR 36968
5/28/2002 67 FR 37108
Hibiscus clayi................ 11/07/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Hibiscus waimeae ssp. hannerae 11/07/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Ischaemum byrone.............. 12/18/2000 65 FR 79192 NA NA
12/29/2000 65 FR 83158
1/28/2002 67 FR 3940
4/3/2002 67 FR 15856
4/5/2002 67 FR 16492
5/28/2002 67 FR 36968
Isodendrion laurifolium....... 11/07/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
1/28/2002 67 FR 3940
5/28/2002 67 FR 37108
Isodendrion longifolium....... 11/07/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
1/28/2002 67 FR 3940
5/28/2002 67 FR 37108
Isodendrion pyrifolium........ 3/4/2002 67 FR 9806 NA NA
4/3/2002 67 FR 15856
4/5/2002 67 FR 16492
5/28/2002 67 FR 36968
5/28/2002 67 FR 37108
Kokia kauaiensis.............. 11/07/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Labordia lydgatei............. 11/07/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Labordia tinifolia var. 11/07/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
wahiawaensis.
Lipochaeta fauriei............ 11/07/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Lipochaeta micrantha.......... 11/07/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Lipochaeta waimeaensis........ 11/07/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Lobelia niihauensis........... 11/07/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
1/28/2002 67 FR 3940
5/28/2002 67 FR 37108
Lysimachia filifolia.......... 11/07/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
1/28/2002 67 FR 3940
5/28/2002 67 FR 37108
Mariscus pennatiformis........ 12/18/2000 65 FR 79192 NA NA
1/28/2002 67 FR 3940
4/3/2002 67 FR 15856
5/14/2002 67 FR 34522
5/28/2002 67 FR 37108
Melicope haupuensis........... 11/07/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Melicope knudsenii............ 11/07/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
12/18/2000 65 FR 79192
1/28/2002 67 FR 3940
4/3/2002 67 FR 15856
Melicope pallida.............. 11/07/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
1/28/2002 67 FR 3940
5/28/2002 67 FR 37108
Melicope quadrangularis....... 11/07/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Munroidendron racemosum....... 11/07/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Myrsine linearifolia.......... 11/07/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Nothocestrum peltatum......... 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Panicum niihauense............ 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Peucedanum sandwicense........ 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
12/18/2000 65 FR 79192
12/29/2000 65 FR 83157
1/28/2002 67 FR 3940
4/3/2002 67 FR 15856
4/5/2002 67 FR 16492
5/28/2002 67 FR 37108
Phlegmariurus mannii.......... 12/18/2000 65 FR 79192 NA NA
4/3/2002 67 FR 15856
Phlegmariurus nutans.......... 1/28/2002 67 FR 3940 NA NA
5/28/2002 67 FR 37108
Phyllostegia knudsenii........ 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Phyllostegia waimeae.......... 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Phyllostegia wawrana.......... 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Plantago princeps............. 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
12/18/2000 65 FR 79192
[[Page 9154]]
12/29/2000 65 FR 83158
1/28/2002 67 FR 3940
4/3/2002 67 FR 15856
4/5/2002 67 FR 16492
Platanthera holochila......... 11/07/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
12/18/2000 65 FR 79192
12/29/2000 65 FR 83158
1/28/2002 67 FR 3940
4/3/2002 67 FR 15856
4/5/2002 67 FR 16492
5/28/2002 67 FR 37108
Poa mannii.................... 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Poa sandvicensis.............. 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Poa siphonoglossa............. 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Pritchardia aylmer-robinsonii. 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Pritchardia napaliensis....... 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Pritchardia viscosa........... 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Pteralyxia kauaiensis......... 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Remya kauaiensis.............. 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Remya montgomeryi............. 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Schiedea apokremnos........... 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Schiedea helleri.............. 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Schiedea kauaiensis........... 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Schiedea membranacea.......... 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Schiedea nuttallii............ 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
12/29/2000 65 FR 83158
1/28/2002 67 FR 3940
4/5/2002 67 FR 16492
5/28/2002 67 FR 37108
Schiedea spergulina var. 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
leiopoda.
Schiedea spergulina var. 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
spergulina.
Schiedea stellarioides........ 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Sesbania tomentosa............ 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
12/18/2000 65 FR 79192
12/29/2000 65 FR 83158
1/28/2002 67 FR 3940
3/4/2002 67 FR 9806
4/3/2002 67 FR 15856
4/5/2002 67 FR 16492
5/14/2002 67 FR 34522
5/28/2002 67 FR 36968
5/28/2002 67 FR 37108
Silene lanceolata............. 12/29/2000 65 FR 83158 NA NA
4/5/2002 67 FR 16492
5/28/2002 67 FR 36968
5/28/2002 67 FR 37108
Solanum incompletum........... 4/4/2002 67 FR 9806 NA NA
5/28/2002 67 FR 36968
Solanum sandwicense........... 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
1/28/2002 67 FR 3940
5/28/2002 67 FR 37108
Spermolepis hawaiiensis....... 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
12/29/2000 65 FR 83158
1/28/2002 67 FR 3940
3/4/2002 67 FR 9806
4/3/2002 67 FR 15856
4/5/2002 67 FR 16492
5/28/2002 67 FR 36968
5/28/2002 67 FR 37108
Stenogyne campanulata......... 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Vigna o-wahuensis............. 12/18/2000 65 FR 79192 NA NA
12/27/2000 65 FR 82086
12/29/2000 65 FR 83158
3/4/2002 67 FR 9806
4/3/2002 67 FR 15856
4/5/2002 67 FR 16492
5/28/2002 67 FR 36968
5/28/2002 67 FR 37108
[[Page 9155]]
Viola helenae................. 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Viola kauaiensis var. 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
wahiawaenis.
Wilkesia hobdyi............... 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Xylosma crenatum.............. 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
Zanthoxylum hawaiiense........ 11/7/2000 65 FR 66808 NA NA
12/18/2000 65 FR 79192
12/29/2000 65 FR 83158
1/28/2002 67 FR 3940
4/3/2002 67 FR 15856
4/5/2002 67 FR 16492
5/28/2002 67 FR 36968
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
At the time each of the 95 plants was listed, we determined that
designation of critical habitat was not prudent because it would not
benefit the plant or would increase the degree of threat to the
species. The ``not prudent'' determinations for these species, along
with others, were challenged in Conservation Council for Hawaii v.
Babbitt, 2 F. Supp. 2d 1280 (D. Haw. 1998). On March 9, 1998, the
United States District Court for the District of Hawaii directed us to
review the prudency determinations for 245 listed plant species in
Hawaii, including the 95 species reported from Kauai. Among other
things, the court held that in most cases we did not sufficiently
demonstrate that the species are threatened by human activity or that
such threats would increase with the designation of critical habitat.
The court also held that we failed to balance any risks of designating
critical habitat against any benefits (id. at 1283-85).
On August 10, 1998, the court ordered us to publish proposed
critical habitat designations or nondesignations for at least 100
species by November 30, 2000, and to publish proposed designations or
nondesignations for the remaining 145 species by April 30, 2002
(Conservation Council for Hawaii v. Babbitt, 24 F. Supp. 2d 1074 (D.
Haw. 1998)).
On November 30, 1998, we published a notice in the Federal Register
requesting public comments on our reevaluation of whether designation
of critical habitat is prudent for the 245 Hawaiian plants at issue (63
FR 65805). The comment period closed on March 1, 1999, and was reopened
from March 24, 1999, to May 24, 1999 (64 FR 14209). We received more
than 100 responses from individuals, non-profit organizations, the
DOFAW, county governments, and Federal agencies (U.S. Department of
Defense-Army, Navy, Air Force). Only a few responses offered
information on the status of individual plant species or on current
management actions for one or more of the 245 Hawaiian plants. While
some of the respondents expressed support for the designation of
critical habitat for 245 Hawaiian plants, more than 80 percent opposed
the designation of critical habitat for these plants. In general, these
respondents opposed designation because they believed it would cause
economic hardship, discourage cooperative projects, polarize
relationships with hunters, or potentially increase trespass or
vandalism on private lands. In addition, commenters also cited a lack
of information on the biological and ecological needs of these plants
which, they suggested, may lead to designation based on guesswork. The
respondents who supported the designation of critical habitat cited
that designation would provide a uniform protection plan for the
Hawaiian Islands, promote funding for management of these plants,
educate the public and State government, and protect partnerships with
landowners and build trust.
On October 5, 1999, we contacted landowners on the islands of Kauai
and Niihau, notifying them of our requirement to designate critical
habitat for 95 plant species. We included a copy of the November 30,
1998, Federal Register notice, a map showing the general locations of
the species that may be on his/her property, and a handout containing
general information on critical habitat. We held three open houses on
the island of Kauai, at the Waimea Community Center, the Kauai War
Memorial Convention Hall in Lihue, and the Kilauea Neighborhood Center,
on October 19, 20, and 21, 1999, respectively, to meet one-on-one with
local landowners and other interested members of the public. In
addition, we met with Kauai County DOFAW staff and Kauai State Parks
staff to discuss their management activities on Kauai.
On November 7, 2000, we published the first of the court-ordered
proposed critical habitat designations or nondesignations for 76 Kauai
and Niihau plants (65 FR 66808). The proposed critical habitat
designations for Maui and Kahoolawe plants were published on December
18, 2000 (65 FR 79192), for Lanai plants on December 27, 2000 (65 FR
82086), and for Molokai plants on December 29, 2000 (65 FR 83158). All
of these proposed rules had been sent to the Federal Register by or on
November 30, 2000, as required by the court's order. In those
proposals, we proposed that critical habitat was prudent for 85 species
(Adenophorus periens, Alectryon macrococcus, Alsinidendron lychnoides,
Alsinidendron viscosum, Bonamia menziesii, Brighamia insignis,
Centaurium sebaeoides, Chamaesyce halemanui, Ctenitis squamigera,
Cyanea asarifolia, Cyanea recta, Cyanea remyi, Cyanea undulata, Cyperus
trachysanthos, Cyrtandra cyaneoides, Cyrtandra limahuliensis, Delissea
rhytidosperma, Delissea rivularis, Delissea undulata, Diellia erecta,
Diellia pallida, Diplazium molokaiense, Dubautia latifolia, Dubautia
pauciflorula, Euphorbia haeleeleana, Exocarpos luteolus, Flueggea
neowawraea, Gouania meyenii, Hedyotis cookiana, Hedyotis st.-johnii,
Hesperomannia lydgatei, Hibiscadelphus woodii, Hibiscus brackenridgei,
Hibiscus clayi, Hibiscus waimeae ssp. hannerae, Ischaemum byrone,
Isodendrion laurifolium, Isodendrion longifolium, Kokia kauaiensis,
Labordia lydgatei, Labordia tinifolia var. wahiawaensis, Lipochaeta
fauriei, Lipochaeta micrantha, Lipochaeta waimeaensis, Lobelia
niihauensis, Lysimachia filifolia, Mariscus pennatiformis, Melicope
[[Page 9156]]
haupuensis, Melicope knudsenii, Melicope pallida, Munroidendron
racemosum, Myrsine linearifolia, Nothocestrum peltatum, Panicum
niihauense, Peucedanum sandwicense, Phlegmariurus mannii, Phyllostegia
knudsenii, Phyllostegia wawrana, Plantago princeps, Platanthera
holochila, Poa mannii, Poa sandvicensis, Poa siphonoglossa, Pteralyxia
kauaiensis, Remya kauaiensis, Remya montgomeryi, Schiedea apokremnos,
Schiedea helleri, Schiedea kauaiensis, Schiedea membranacea, Schiedea
nuttallii, Schiedea spergulina var. leiopoda, Schiedea spergulina var.
spergulina, Schiedea stellarioides, Sesbania tomentosa, Silene
lanceolata, Solanum sandwicense, Spermolepis hawaiiensis, Stenogyne
campanulata, Vigna o-wahuensis, Viola helenae, Viola kauaiensis var.
wahiawaensis, Wilkesia hobdyi, Xylosma crenatum, and Zanthoxylum
hawaiiense) that are reported from Kauai and/or Niihau as well as on
Maui, Kahoolawe, Lanai, and Molokai. We proposed that critical habitat
was not prudent for two species, Phyllostegia waimeae and Melicope
quadrangularis, because they had not been seen recently in the wild,
and no genetic material of these species was known to exist. We also
proposed that critical habitat was not prudent for three species,
Pritchardia aylmer-robinsonii, Pritchardia napaliensis, and Pritchardia
viscosa, because it would increase the threat of vandalism to these
species.
In the November 7, 2000 proposed rule, we proposed designation of
critical habitat on approximately 24,539 ha (60,636 ac) of land on the
islands of Kauai and Niihau. The publication of the proposed rule
opened a 60-day public comment period, which closed on January 7, 2001.
On January 18, 2001, we published a notice (66 FR 4782) announcing the
reopening of the comment period until February 19, 2001, on the
proposed rule and a notice of a public hearing. On February 6, 2001, we
held a public hearing at the Radisson Kauai Beach Resort in Lihue,
Kauai. On March 7, 2001, we published a notice (66 FR 13691) announcing
the reopening of the comment period and the availability of the draft
economic analysis for the proposed rule. This third public comment
period was open until April 6, 2001.
On October 3, 2001, we submitted a joint stipulation with
Earthjustice to the U.S. District Court requesting extension of the
court order for the final rules to designate critical habitat for
plants from Kauai and Niihau (July 30, 2002), Maui and Kahoolawe
(August 23, 2002), Lanai (September 16, 2002), and Molokai (October 16,
2002), citing the need to revise the proposals to incorporate or
address new information and comments received during the comment
periods. The joint stipulation was approved and ordered by the court on
October 5, 2001.
On January 28, 2002, in the revised proposed rule, we published
proposed prudency determinations for 95 plant species from Kauai and
Niihau (67 FR 3940). Many of these proposed prudency determinations
were incorporated from previous proposals. We also proposed that
critical habitat is prudent for four species (Achyranthes mutica,
Isodendrion pyrifolium, Phlegmariurus nutans, and Solanum incompletum)
for which a prudency determination had not been made previously and
that no longer occur on Kauai or Niihau but are reported from one or
more of the other islands.
In addition, critical habitat for 83 (Adenophorus periens,
Alectryon macrococcus, Alsinidendron lychnoides, Alsinidendron
viscosum, Bonamia menziesii, Brighamia insignis, Centaurium sebaeoides,
Chamaesyce halemanui, Ctenitis squamigera, Cyanea asarifolia, Cyanea
recta, Cyanea remyi, Cyanea undulata, Cyperus trachysanthos, Cyrtandra
cyaneoides, Cyrtandra limahuliensis, Delissea rhytidosperma, Delissea
rivularis, Delissea undulata, Diellia erecta, Diellia pallida,
Diplazium molokaiense, Dubautia latifolia, Dubautia pauciflorula,
Euphorbia haeleeleana, Exocarpos luteolus, Flueggea neowawraea, Gouania
meyenii, Hedyotis cookiana, Hedyotis st.-johnii, Hesperomannia
lydgatei, Hibiscadelphus woodii, Hibiscus clayi, Hibiscus waimeae ssp.
hannerae, Ischaemum byrone, Isodendrion laurifolium, Isodendrion
longifolium, Kokia kauaiensis, Labordia lydgatei, Labordia tinifolia
var. wahiawaensis, Lipochaeta fauriei, Lipochaeta micrantha, Lipochaeta
waimeaensis, Lobelia niihauensis, Lysimachia filifolia, Mariscus
pennatiformis, Melicope haupuensis, Melicope knudsenii, Melicope
pallida, Munroidendron racemosum, Myrsine linearifolia, Nothocestrum
peltatum, Panicum niihauense, Peucedanum sandwicense, Phlegmariurus
nutans, Phyllostegia knudsenii, Phyllostegia waimeae, Phyllostegia
wawrana, Plantago princeps, Platanthera holochila, Poa mannii, Poa
sandvicensis, Poa siphonoglossa, Pteralyxia kauaiensis, Remya
kauaiensis, Remya montgomeryi, Schiedea apokremnos, Schiedea helleri,
Schiedea kauaiensis, Schiedea membranacea, Schiedea nuttallii, Schiedea
spergulina var. leiopoda, Schiedea spergulina var. spergulina, Schiedea
stellarioides, Sesbania tomentosa, Solanum sandwicense, Spermolepis
hawaiiensis, Stenogyne campanulata, Viola helenae, Viola kauaiensis
var. wahiawaensis, Wilkesia hobdyi, Xylosma crenatum, and Zanthoxylum
hawaiiense) of the 95 plant species was proposed on approximately
40,147 ha (99,206 ac) of land on Kauai and 282 ha (697ac) of land on
Niihau (67 FR 3940). Critical habitat was not proposed for Achyranthes
mutica, Hibiscus brackenridgei, Phlegmariurus mannii, Silene
lanceolata, and Solanum incompletum on the island of Kauai and for
Isodendrion pyrifolium and Vigna o-wahuensis on the island of Niihau
because these plants no longer occur on Kauai or Niihau, and we were
unable to identify habitat essential to their conservation on these two
islands.
Because Phyllostegia waimeae had been rediscovered, we revised an
earlier proposal to suggest that critical habitat would be prudent and
propose critical habitat for this species in the revised proposed rule.
The publication of the revised proposed rule opened a 60-day public
comment period, which closed on March 29, 2002. On February 11, 2002,
we published a correction notice (67 FR 6214) correcting information
contained in the January 28, 2002, revised proposal pertaining to the
notice of a public hearing. On February 13, 2002, we held a public
hearing at the Radisson Kauai Beach Resort in Lihue, Kauai. On May 28,
2002, we published a notice (67 FR 36851) announcing the availability
of the draft economic analysis for the designation of critical habitat
for 83 Kauai plants and reopening the public comment period until June
27, 2002. On August 26, 2002, we published a notice (67 FR 54766)
reopening the public comment period until September 30, 2002. On July
11, 2002, we submitted joint stipulations with Earthjustice to the U.S.
District Court requesting extension of the court orders for the final
rules to designate critical habitat for plants from Lanai (December 30,
2002), Kauai and Niihau (January 31, 2003), Molokai (February 28,
2003), Maui and Kahoolawe (April 18, 2003), Oahu (April 30, 2003), the
Northwestern Hawaiian Islands (April 30, 2003), and the island of
Hawaii (May 30, 2003), citing the need to conduct additional review of
the proposals, address comments received during the public comment
periods, and to conduct a series of public workshops on the proposals.
The joint stipulations were approved and ordered by the court on July
12, 2002. On September 3 and 4,
[[Page 9157]]
2002, we held public meetings at the Waimea Community Center, Waimea,
Kauai, and the War Memorial Convention Center, Lihue, Kauai,
respectively.
On January 9, 2003, we determined that critical habitat was prudent
for the following 15 species: Adenophorus periens, Bonamia menziesii,
Centaurium sebaeoides, Ctenitis squamigera, Cyperus trachysanthos,
Diellia erecta, Diplazium molokaiense, Hibiscus brackenridgei,
Isodendrion pyrifolium, Sesbania tomentosa, Silene lanceolata, Solanum
incompletum, Spermolepis hawaiiensis, Vigna o-wahuensis and Zanthoxylum
hawaiiense (68 FR 1220), which also occur on Kauai or Niihau.
Summary of Comments and Recommendations
We received a total of 20 oral and 2,740 written comments during
the three comment periods. These included responses from 7 State
offices, 5 public officials, and 70 private organizations or
individuals. Of the written comments, we received approximately 680
letters by facsimile and 1,998 electronic letters by e-mail, which
stated general support for the proposed critical habitat designations,
but that did not provide substantive comments. Of the other 82
comments, nine supported the designation, 60 were opposed to it, and 13
provided information but did not state a position on the designation.
We reviewed all comments received for substantive issues and new
information regarding critical habitat and the Kauai and Niihau plants.
Similar comments were grouped into nine general issues relating
specifically to the proposed critical habitat designations and the
draft economic analysis on the proposed determinations. These are
addressed in the following summary.
Peer Review
In accordance with our policy published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR
34270), we solicited independent opinions from 23 knowledgeable
individuals with expertise in one or several fields, including
familiarity with the species, the geographic region, or the principles
of conservation biology. We received comments from eight. All eight
generally supported our methodology and conclusion, but none expressed
a position for or against the designation of critical habitat. Comments
received from the peer reviewers are summarized in the following
section and incorporated into the final rule.
Issue 1: Biological Justification and Methodology
(1) Comment: One peer reviewer commented that there is no easy way
to assess the match between the Service's proposed boundaries and the
summation of habitat requirements of the individual taxa in each unit.
Specifically, the intermediate step of indicating the species models
for each of the listed taxa that is combined into the aggregate
polygons that form the basis for the unit boundaries is not well
documented. This leaves the reviewer with little basis to assess the
match between habitat of the listed taxa and inclusion of such habitat
in the critical habitat units. Species should be addressed
individually, but the designation of conservation areas (or critical
habitat) can and should consider the use of common areas to provide for
multiple species. Another commenter stated that the Service's analysis
has not demonstrated that inclusion of controversial areas has been
minimized. There is no way to tell whether all of a given unit is
necessary for that subset of taxa, which absolutely require the habitat
found in that unit. The discussion of how each critical habitat unit
provides for individual species helps one understand the reason for
proposing the unit. However, additional information is needed in some
instances (e.g., units J and N). The Service must justify every acre of
land proposed for critical habitat designation, identify the specific
species scheduled for recovery on that land, and explain why specific
acreages are needed to do so.
Our Response: In response to these concerns, we have included the
critical habitat maps and unit justifications for each species in the
final rule, as well as descriptions of primary constituent elements and
a composite map showing the overlap of the areas for all of the species
combined.
(2) Comment: The majority of our peer reviewers agreed that the
methodology is appropriate, scientifically well-grounded and
conceptually sound. The approach of mapping the elevation, moisture,
and habitat type for the listed taxa to the landscape is a sound
approach to designating critical habitat. It seems that there is a good
match of habitat identified long-term conservation of multiple
populations of the listed species. The methodology uses information on
species elevation range, vegetation type, associated species, physical
location, and community type. It will allow the Service to revise or
update habitat units as new information becomes available. This is more
likely to provide habitat for the recovery of these species. The
proposed rulemaking represents the best scientific information
available and is a scientifically appropriate technique for determining
critical habitat on Kauai. On the other hand, some commenters felt that
the proposed rule was an overly broad approach to designating critical
habitat not based on scientific principles and knowledge of the needs
of these plant species unique to the island State of Hawaii, but on
litigation and the threat of future litigation. Additional consultation
with academic and professional experts was recommended. Some reviewers
stated that no assessment of the quality of any of the data sources is
provided, and no information is given as to how data sources of varying
qualities were weighted in making delineations of critical habitat or
how decisions were made as to what to rely on in the absence of
rigorous assessments of relative quality. These commenters agreed with
the Service's statement that ``lack of detailed scientific data makes
it impossible for us to develop a quantitative model.'' Lack of
knowledge means that the proposed critical habitat designation is based
only on the general habitat features of the areas in which the plants
currently occur. While this approach may be expedient, it has resulted
in designations based on best guess estimations, rather than on science
or the realities of plant recovery. The Service needs to give greater
weight to scientific or commercial data that is empirical and has been
field tested or verified, and needs to allow peer review by a panel of
unbiased scientists. Other commenters felt the data on which the
proposed critical habitat is based is 30 years-old and may need
updating. The proposed critical habitat covers too much acreage and was
put together too quickly, using obsolete data, sloppy science, and lots
of guess work.
Our Response: In accordance with our policy on peer review
published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), we solicited the expert
opinions of appropriate and independent specialists regarding the
proposed rule. The purpose of this peer review was to ensure that our
designation methodology of critical habitat of Kauai plants was based
on scientifically sound data, assumptions, and analysis. The comments
of the peer reviewers were taken into consideration in the development
of this final designation. The majority of the peer reviewers support
our methodology. All data and information on species status received in
preparation of this rule was equally weighted and considered to come
from reliable sources. Where
[[Page 9158]]
discrepancies existed between different data sources, the most current
data were used. Changes in this final rule that decrease the boundaries
of many units are based on additional information received during the
public comment period and in meetings with additional species experts
and land managers who were not available for comment during the
preparation of the proposals. The changes in boundaries reflected in
this final rule are based on additional information about areas lacking
primary constituent elements or those that are too degraded to be
restored. While we agree that additional time would be beneficial for
the preparation of these final rules, we are required under the court-
approved stipulation to finalize this designation by January 31, 2003.
If provided with new information, we may revise the critical habitat
designation in the future.
(3) Comment: One peer reviewer asked if the Service considered
modeling the potential distribution based on known habitat correlates,
as in Elith and Burgman (2002). Another peer reviewer stated that the
Service should use spatial modeling of estimated values of selected
habitat parameters for each species (such as elevation, median annual
rainfall, vegetation units) as a first step in the process, rather than
screen-digitizing. Some of the data on primary constituent elements
(e.g., breeding system, dispersal mechanisms) can be inferred from
similar species, but other pieces of critical information may not be
currently available and should be the subject of further research.
After the preliminary habitat polygons are identified, historic range
can be determined either objectively or subjectively based on the known
location points for a particular species. The steps going from
narrative descriptions of habitat elements to geographical units are
not well documented. The Service should elaborate on its methodology
for defining the primary constituent elements for each species and the
subsequent critical habitat.
Our Response: We agree that modeling of potential distribution
within historic range is important, and have used this type of
modeling, based on the limited available information. We did not feel
that valid habitat parameters for each species could be developed
without first digitizing known current and historic range and using
that information, along with available digitized information on
elevation, rainfall, and vegetation units, to determine potential
habitat. Using the information from existing and historically known
plant locations, we used available digitized information on elevation,
rainfall, and vegetation units, as well as advice from species experts,
to model the potentially suitable habitat for each species. The
critical habitat designated is the subset of suitable habitat that was
determined to be essential to the conservation of each species (see the
``Methods'' section for more detail).
(4) Comment: Some reviewers commented that deletion of significant
portions of any of the proposed critical units is likely to prevent the
recovery of, and lead to the extinction of, listed species. Smaller
units present real management challenges and may be so small that their
ecological integrity and the viability of listed plants can't be
maintained. The new proposal indicates that a wide range of habitats
are covered in the areas proposed by the Service as critical habitat
units. Units have been expanded to provide contiguous blocks of habitat
that will reduce fragmentation and edge effects and are large enough to
offer a variety of microsites. This will also improve the ability of
listed species to maintain gene flow, reestablish populations following
population declines or catastrophes, and to colonize new areas.
However, the amount of dry and mesic forest included in proposed
critical habitat is still very limited. Protecting critical habitat is
essential not only for the recovery of threatened and endangered plant
species, but also to protect the ecosystems on which these species rely
for their long-term survival and recovery. Management actions for
critical habitat need to allow for the expansion of populations and
include the ecological matrix in which critical habitat is embedded. It
is important that the adjacent noncritical habitat areas be managed for
control or elimination of nonnative species, if recovery is to be
achieved for the areas of less than 1,000 acres. On the other hand,
some commenters felt that the increase in acreage from the first to the
second proposal was the Service's attempt to get the community to be
willing to go back to the original proposal. One commenter asked what
the Service would do if newly obtained, good quality, scientific
information proves the current best scientific knowledge is totally
inaccurate.
Our Response: The Act requires us to use the best available
scientific and commercial information in undertaking species listing
and recovery actions, including the designation of critical habitat as
set forth in this rule. In this final rule, we concluded that many
areas were not essential for the conservation of the Kauai plant
species, based on newly available information concerning status of the
species in specific areas and level of habitat degradation. Several
units or portions of units proposed as critical habitat have been
excluded because they are not essential for the conservation of the
species. We determined them to be non-essential due to their lacking
primary constituent elements, or having primary constituent elements
but there are other places for these species that have more primary
constituent elements and/or are less degraded. See the ``Summary of
Changes from the Revised Proposed Rule'' section for the justification
for each unit's changes.
We realize that smaller areas will most likely require more
management to maintain the plant populations and their habitat, but in
many cases they are the only areas with the primary constituent
elements needed for each species. We concur on the importance of
protecting the ecosystems on which these species depend, as stated in
purpose of the Act (section 2(b)), and of managing areas large enough
to maintain and expand populations. We considered the importance of
this, as well as the location of primary constituent elements, when
delineating the boundaries of critical habitat for these final
designations of critical habitat. We included areas that provide the
biological and other processes that are essential for the conservation
of the species. We acknowledge the potential negative impacts of edge
effects on small habitat fragments. However, these species' primary
constituent elements are found only within the areas that were
designated critical habitat, and making them larger would add areas
that lack the primary constituent elements. All of the changes in
critical habitat from the first proposal, through the second, to this
final, are based on the best available information received during
comment periods, and are based on biological issues, not political or
social issues. If new information becomes available indicating the
existing critical habitat designations are not essential for the
conservation of the species and/or that other areas are, we may propose
revised designations for those species at that time.
(5) Comment: Critical habitat designation should be primarily
directed toward areas that are currently being intensively managed or
may be the subject of conservation agreements in the future for those
species that are known to naturally occur in these habitats. A
suggested method is that once realistic management units have been
identified based on the management factors to address limiting factors
(e.g. fence lines, fire control), the
[[Page 9159]]
next step is to see how many distinct populations of each plant species
exists or can be established within those units to meet the species
overall habitat needs to support eight to ten populations. Only after
this analysis has been made and found to be lacking, would you start
looking outside these management units for other lands needed. The
commenter believes that this approach not only meets the legal
requirements for critical habitat designation, but provides the best
approach for recovery of the species.
Our Response: We agree that managed areas containing current or
historic populations are vitally important to the conservation of the
species, and have included managed areas on Kauai with appropriate
primary constituent elements in critical habitat. Managed lands are not
included only if management is sufficient to demonstrate that special
management considerations or protection are not required, pursuant to
16 U.S.C. 1532(5)(A)(i). See ``Managed Lands.'' However, these areas
alone or in conjunction with other areas that may be managed in the
future do not include all of the habitat essential for the Kauai and
Niihau species. Therefore, we have designated these managed areas along
with additional areas outside of managed units as critical habitat. In
our final analysis, for each species, we ranked areas of the proposed
critical habitat by the quality of the primary constituent elements,
potential as a recovery area, and current or expected management of
known threats. Areas that contain high quality primary constituent
elements, are zoned for conservation, and have on-going or expected
threat abatement actions were given high ranks. Of these highly-ranked
areas, we selected adequate area for 8 to 10 populations distributed
among the islands of each species' historical range. Of the proposed
critical habitat for a species, areas that were not highly ranked and
that may provide habitat for populations above the recovery goal of 8
to 10, were determined not essential for the conservation of the
species and were excluded from the final designation (see ``Criteria
Used to Identify Critical Habitat'').
(6) Comment: Designate critical habitat for Federal lands only.
Our Response: Federal lands on the island of Kauai include the
Navy's Pacific Missile Range Facility (PMRF) at Barking Sands and
Makaha Ridge and the Service's Kilauea Point National Wildlife Refuge,
Hanalei National Wildlife Refuge, and Huleia National Wildlife Refuge.
In this final rule, we are designating critical habitat for Panicum
niihauense at Barking Sands, as this dune habitat is essential for the
conservation of this species. This dune habitat is not essential for
the conservation of the other 82 species at issue on Kauai. In this
final rule, we are not designating critical habitat for Wilkesia hobdyi
at Makaha Ridge, as this habitat is not essential for the conservation
of this species. This habitat is not essential for the conservation of
the other 82 species at issue on Kauai. None of the 83 species at issue
on Kauai are known currently or historically from the Service's refuges
at Kilauea Point, Hanalei, or Huleia, and these Federal lands are not
essential for the conservation of the 83 species at issue on Kauai.
(7) Comment: The Service cannot lawfully exclude areas from
critical habitat based on a finding that they currently are adequately
managed or protected. To do so would violate the mandatory duty to
designate critical habitat to the maximum extent prudent and
determinable. The commenter urges the Service not to exclude any areas
from designation on this basis (already managed or protected), since
doing so would violate the mandatory duty to designate critical habitat
``to the maximum extent prudent and determinable.''
Our Response: We disagree as ``special management considerations or
protection'' is part of the definition of critical habitat and must be
given meaning when designating critical habitat. Specifically, we
believe that adequate special management consideration or protection
could be provided by a legally operative plan or agreement that
addresses the maintenance and improvement of the primary constituent
elements important to the species and manages for the long-term
conservation of the species. However, for this designation we did not
identify essential habitat features that already have adequate
management and would not be included on that basis.
(8) Comment: Several commenters supported the Hawaii Division of
Forestry and Wildlife proposal for designating critical habitat on
existing managed areas as these areas are where the limiting factors
for species conservation can be addressed. Furthermore, one landowner
noted that a large portion of his/her lands are managed by the Hawaii
Division of Forestry and Wildlife.
Our Response: We agree that the State DOFAW staff have valuable on
the ground experience and scientific information that has been
essential to our critical habitat decision making process. However, we
did not adopt DOFAW's first proposal (January 11, 2001) as it did not
adequately address all of the conservation needs of the species in
accordance with the Act. After publication of the January 28, 2002,
revised proposed critical habitat rule, we met several times with Kauai
DOFAW staff and conducted several site assessment surveys. As a result
of the assessment surveys and information provided to us by Kauai DOFAW
staff, we were able to better identify areas that did not contain
primary constituent elements. In addition, we received important
information from Kauai DOFAW staff that enabled us to refine the final
critical habitat designations to better meet the conservation needs of
the species.
(9) Comment: One commenter stated that it is extremely difficult to
come up with a biologically sound definition of a population that can
be realistically applied to the distribution and abundance of a rare
species in the wild. However, the commenter noted that defining
separate populations as being more than 1,000 meters apart is both
biologically meaningful and operationally useful and serves as the
focus of the Army's species stabilization efforts in the Waianae
Mountains of Oahu. A commenter noted that the separation distance of
1,000 meters is probably adequate for most small-scale disturbance
events, but will be inadequate for large-scale disturbances. The
problem of defining populations requires knowledge of gene-flow
patterns. The commentor recognizes that the proposed targets for
population recovery are initial and not derived from any detailed
understanding of genetic architecture. The commentor recommends
altering these objectives, but would suggest that the Service state the
need for more studies on population genetics. In addition, the targets
present a demographic challenge to achieve a population of 100 mature
individuals and will require massive plantings to counteract mortality.
These practical challenges should be made clear.
Our Response: We agree that the operational definition of 1,000
meters between separate populations is adequate in the absence of
information on the specific biological requirements of a population for
each species. The need for genetic and demographic studies and the
understanding of challenges to reintroduction are addressed in the
species' recovery plans.
(10) Comment: Many commenters stated that a multi-population
approach is essential for the conservation of many of the rare Hawaiian
plant species, since the purpose of critical habitat and
[[Page 9160]]
recovery in general is to eventually have wild populations that are
self-sustaining and no longer in need of protection under the Act. The
strongest argument for this strategy is the fact that these populations
are subject to many types of catastrophic events, ranging from
widespread phenomena such as hurricanes, wildfire, or ungulates, to
localized events like landslides, predators, or even disease outbreaks.
The multi-population approach offers the opportunity to protect wider
latitude of genetic variability for the species as a whole, rather than
concentrating on a single or small number of areas with genetically
more similar individuals. The Service's use of Hawaii and Pacific Plant
Recovery Coordinating Committee (HPPRCC) guidelines for population size
and numbers of populations needed to maintain Hawaiian plant taxa are
probably the best general guide, since the general tenets of minimum
viable population size and numbers are not defined for Hawaiian taxa.
The targets (8 to 10 from 100 to 500) used in the critical habitat
designations are generally lower than those used by the HPPRCC to
identify essential habitat for listed plants and should be considered
as the ``low end'' of what is likely needed for recovery.
Our Response: We agree that the multi-population approach to
conservation is necessary for the recovery of Hawaii's endangered
plants. We have used the lower end of the HPPRCC guidelines, as that is
what the Service believes is essential to the conservation of the
species, based on the current conservation literature (see ``Criteria
Used to Identify Critical Habitat'' section).
(11) Comment: Two peer reviewers stated that just because a species
is found in a certain habitat now does not mean that this habitat is
the best place for it to thrive and reproduce. For example, repeated
references to steep slopes as being primary constituent elements of
critical habitat should not be construed as representing optimum
habitat; they are likely remnant populations. The current distribution
of a species today may not be a good indication of its optimal habitat,
for example dry and mesic forest plants that are historically known
only from lowland areas and not high elevation areas (where relatively
more complete data are found); areas that were extremely degraded
before good records were kept on species distribution and habitat
needs.
Our Response: Our regulations state that the Secretary shall
designate as critical habitat areas outside the geographical area
presently occupied by a species only when a designation limited to its
present range would be inadequate to ensure the conservation of the
species. In our designation, we used the best scientific and commercial
data available, both historic and current, from a variety of sources
(see ``Methods'' section) to specify any particular area as critical
habitat (section 4(b)(2) of the Act) and to determine the physical or
biological features essential to the conservation of the species
(section 3(5)(A) of the Act). As pointed out by reviewers, biological
information is extremely limited for many species, and therefore the
only information available may indicate the species is restricted to a
particular topography, soil or forest type. No critical habitat was
designated for a species outside of its known historic range or known
suitable habitat.
(12) Comment: Several comments were received in support of the
designation of unoccupied habitat. Unoccupied habitat within critical
habitat is important for natural dispersal of plant populations beyond
their current distribution as well as providing sites for
reintroduction of new populations if needed. The biological needs of
the species are well enough known to warrant the protection of
unoccupied habitat. These unoccupied areas will be especially important
to dry and mesic forest species. Protecting unoccupied habitat is
essential since currently occupied areas are inadequate for recovery.
On the other hand, several comments were also received against the
designation of unoccupied habitat. Some felt that at least 70 percent
of the proposed critical habitat is not really habitat at all, in that
it is not inhabited by any of the species but is unoccupied. Because
there is no data to show that excluding these areas will result in the
extinction of the species, the Service should omit them from
consideration. Several areas do not contain listed species or do not
contain records of historic sightings and so do not appear to be
warranted as essential for the conservation of any species. The lands
that could be excluded from critical habitat without causing the
species to go extinct include Unit D1, D2, N, L, and private lands.
Other commenters were concerned that is difficult for the Service to
justify its expanded proposed designation if it does not know what
physical and biological features are essential to the species' growth,
germination or methods of seed dispersal as required by its own rules.
The vast majority of the proposed areas are presently unoccupied by the
species in question and their successful introduction to and survival
in these areas is speculative. These commenters believe that the first
proposed designation was correct.
Our Response: Our recovery plans for these species (Service 1994,
1995, 1996, 1997, 1998a, 1998b, 1998c, 1999) identify the need to
expand existing populations and reestablish wild populations within
historic range. We have revised the designated critical habitat in the
final rule to incorporate new information and/or address comments and
new information received during the comment periods, including
information on areas of potentially suitable unoccupied habitat for
some of these species. Many of the units have been reduced based on
this newly available information. However, for most of the species,
there are not enough existing populations and most of them are not
currently viable. While they may continue to exist at their current low
numbers until a catastrophic event causes their extinction, the
Service's goal, as stated in section 2(b) of the Act, is to recover the
species. Therefore, the protection of additional unoccupied critical
habitat is essential to ensure the recovery of these species through
reintroduction. We also realize that, although propagation and
reintroduction are difficult for some species, both are vitally
important to their recovery. Many recovery plans therefore include
research into best methods of propagation and reintroduction as
important tasks prior to attempting reintroduction.
(13) Comment: Some commenters stated that good quality habitat
should be designated in lieu of more degraded habitat. However,
degraded areas should only be excluded from proposed critical habitat
if they lack the ability to become habitat in the future. On the other
hand, some commenters said that they see little on-the-ground logic to
defend designations of unoccupied habitat and believe the Service must
have other strategies rather than just carving out land areas,
especially in highly degraded or altered habitats. In some instances,
all potential habitats for a species have been degraded to the point
that alien species dominate the site. Recovery efforts in these
situations need to include both species management, coupled with
habitat restoration efforts.
Our Response: We agree that recovery of a species is more likely in
higher quality habitat containing the physical or biological features
essential to the conservation of the species. To this end, several
units have been excluded for some species, as sufficient area is
available in less degraded areas. However, for some species,
particularly
[[Page 9161]]
those only known from low elevation areas, only degraded habitat
remains. Therefore, some units still contain degraded habitat, but only
if experts agreed that the areas could be restored. Management for the
restoration of these habitats is addressed in the species' recovery
plans.
(14) Comment: The recovery effort in Hawaii will not be effective
without a well-developed and implemented management strategy. The
designation of critical habitat without adequate management does not
necessarily ensure benefit or recovery to a plant species. Some of the
critical habitat units cannot sustain the projected recovered
populations at current levels of habitat management and investment.
Control of key threats such as feral ungulates, alien weeds, and wild
fires is crucial to the recovery of listed plants. Alien species are
significant problem that need to be addressed in order to be effective
in the conservation of Hawaiian plants and animals. However, the land
managers have not been able to control some invasive weeds, such as
banana poka and lantana. There are workable methodologies for dealing
with some of the factors that affect listed species and critical
habitat (e.g., fencing and removal of ungulates). For other factors,
such as lost pollinators, dispersers, or climate change, effective and
appropriate techniques are still being sought. However, from a
practical standpoint, if efforts to save threatened and endangered
species were dependent on full knowledge of all factors relating to
their survival, few if any would have a chance. This lack of knowledge
or control tools should not be a reason to give up on recovery efforts
for the native species that are affected. Waiting for all factors to be
identified and validated would perpetuate current levels of habitat
loss and/or management inaction.
Our Response: Critical habitat designation is one of a number of
conservation tools established in the Act that can play an important
role in the recovery of the species, and the Service is directed to
designate critical habitat based on the best available scientific and
commercial information. The management of alien species is an important
conservation issue that is addressed in the recovery plans for these
species. Other, less understood issues are identified in the recovery
plans as requiring research to determine appropriate actions. The
Service's role in the recovery of these species is to work with other
agencies, organizations, and individuals to coordinate the
implementation of the recovery plans in a strategic manner.
(15) Comment: ``Reduced reproductive vigor due to small numbers of
extant individuals'' or inbreeding depression should not be cited as
potential problems unless species-specific information is available.
Hawaii's endangered species are biologically incompetent, and totally
unable to repopulate the vast areas you are proposing as critical
habitat. They should just be grown in a garden setting, since that is
the only way they will survive. Extinction is a natural part of
evolution.
Our Response: We are required under section 4 of the Act to
designate critical habitat based on the best available information we
have at the time of designation. In addition, we are directed by the
Act to recover the species and the ecosystems on which they depend, not
just preserve them in a horticulture facility. We realize that
designation of critical habitat alone will not achieve recovery. Many
of the species have been reduced to such low numbers that the recovery
plans identify propagation and reintroduction as a key step. While we
do not have direct evidence for most species to indicate that reduced
reproductive vigor or inbreeding are problems, we believe they should
be considered, based on current conservation biology theory and
practice. This is particularly important to consider when developing a
propagation and reintroduction program, to ensure that recovery efforts
do not cause or exacerbate genetic issues. We also realize that
management of the habitat is essential to the species' recovery. All of
these issues are addressed in the species' recovery plans. And, while
extinction is a natural part of evolution, there are numerous
references in the conservation literature that the rate of extinction
today is unprecedented.
(16) Comment: It should be noted that in many cases disturbance has
been shown to contribute to the survival of species when it occurs at
an appropriate level and at appropriate intervals.
Our Response: For some species it may be true that disturbance was
a natural process that may have benefitted the species in the past.
Today, however, many listed species are greatly reduced in numbers and
occur in fragmented habitats that have been highly altered by alien
species, to the point that the natural disturbance process is no longer
present. When disturbances, such as hurricanes, do occur now, the most
likely result is an increase in alien species, rather than native
habitat. In addition, the small numbers of remaining individuals in
greatly reduced ranges are far more vulnerable to extinction from one
disturbance event, whether natural or human-caused.
(17) Comment: The proposal failed to contain the total of
historically known listed plants, and therefore failed to propose
critical habitat for all listed plants statewide. About 10 percent of
the historically known listed endangered plant species from the
Hawaiian islands are missing from the proposal. The following
endangered plant species lack critical habitat on Kauai and/or Niihau:
Caesalpinia kavaiensis, Haplostachys haplostachya, Hibiscadelphus
distans, Marsilea villosa, and Scaevola coriacea.
Our Response: These species were not part of the lawsuit and
subsequent stipulations, and therefore were not included in this
rulemaking. Critical habitat for these species may be considered in the
future if warranted and funding and resources are available.
(18) Comment: One peer reviewer stated that the Service did
consider the entire range of plants found on multiple islands,
particularly since they are going through the same process of
designation of critical habitat on all of the Hawaiian Islands. On the
other hand, some commenters stated that the revised proposal's
treatment of ``multi-island'' plants historically, but not currently,
found on Kauai or Niihau makes it impossible to determine whether the
Service is complying with its statutory duty to identify adequate
habitat for these species' recovery. By proposing critical habitat
island-by-island, rather than species-by-species, there is no way for
reviewers to know what areas statewide ultimately will be proposed for
the multi-island species. The revised proposal's treatment of ``multi-
island'' plants historically, but not currently, found on Kauai or
Niihau makes it impossible to determine whether the Service is
complying with its statutory duty to identify adequate habitat for
these species' recovery.
Our Response: In response to this concern, the Service reopened the
comment periods for the proposed designations and nondesignations of
critical habitat for plant species on the islands of Kauai, Niihau,
Molokai, Maui, Kahoolawe, northwestern Hawaiian Islands, Hawaii, and
Oahu after these proposals were published. This comment period, which
was open from August 26, 2002 to September 30, 2002, allowed all
interested parties to submit written comments on these proposals
simultaneously and address issues associated with multi-island species.
(19) Comment: The boundaries of critical habitat should follow
elevation contours, ridge lines, and other natural
[[Page 9162]]
features that naturally delineate the units, rather than long,
straight-line segments.
Our Response: The boundaries of the proposed critical habitat
designations were generalized for ease of mapping. With this final
rule, the new units are separately mapped for each species and are more
true to the elevation contours, the distribution of habitat, and other
natural features.
(20) Comment: The agricultural and grazing lands proposed for
designation will never contribute to the conservation of these species,
they are certainly not essential, and it is doubtful that listed
species still occur on these lands.
Our Response: When delineating critical habitat units, we made an
effort to avoid developed areas such as towns, agricultural lands, and
other lands with similar features that do not contain the primary
constituent elements. Less than one percent of the critical habitat
designated in this final rule is within lands districted as
agricultural lands, with most of the designated critical habitat in
lands districted as conservation lands. However, some species, such as
Ischaemum byrone and Sesbania tomentosa, only occur in low elevation
areas where agriculture is most common, and enough habitat necessary
for the conservation of the species that contains some of the primary
constituent elements and can be restored to have all of the primary
constituent elements is not available outside of agriculturally zoned
lands.
(21) Comment: One commenter asked if ``historical'' equals post-
Polynesian, or post-European, or is it defined by the prevailing
climate. The dates of population extirpations should be provided (e.g.,
Delissea rhytidosperma). These dates are important in defining
``historical'' sightings.
Our Response: The Service's definition of the term ``historical''
is any plant location information gathered prior to the 1970s. The term
does not refer to post-Polynesian or post-European time periods, and is
not defined by the prevailing climate. Documented botanical collections
in the Hawaiian Islands began in the late 1700s and continued
intermittently through the early half of the 20th century. In the early
1970's there was a renaissance in Hawaiian botanical surveys that
continues today. This included the establishment of several botanical
gardens (e.g. National Tropical Botanical Garden in 1970; Lyon
Arboretum in the early 1970s), which have served as an important source
of information on native plant species status and locations. The
passage of the National Environmental Policy Act in 1969 also
encouraged increased surveys of areas as part of the EA/EIS process and
thus provided support for private contract botanists whose work entered
the public arena as addenda to EAs and EISs. This invigorated effort to
document the occurrences of Hawaiian plants was also accompanied by
observations on the loss of plant populations from previously known
locations due to habitat loss and impacts of free ranging ungulates.
These observations lead to a more regular documentation of the causes
of decline of Hawaiian plants. Prior to the 1970s, such impacts were
rarely recorded even though declines in Hawaiian plant populations were
noted. Also at this time there was a growing national recognition that
species of plants and animals were being threatened by extinction due
to human activities. This concern lead to the passage of the U.S.
Endangered Species Act in 1973.
(22) Comment: Phlegmariurus nutans has survived for at least a
century without having any habitat on Kauai. If these plants could grow
or be cultivated anywhere else, the designated area is not essential.
Designating more such areas as critical habitat would not improve that
species' chances of survival. Much of the area that would be restricted
from human use by the critical habitat designation may be useless to
the species that the Service is trying to protect. Four of the plants
have not been seen in more than 30 years, and two others were reported
as having been seen within the past 30 years on Kauai. Critical habitat
should only be designated for areas that host existing populations of
the designated species. If a species is gone from an area, it could
mean that the designated area is no longer ideally suited to support
that species for one reason or another (water table may have changed,
ground may have become more saline, animal or insect encroachment,
etc.) so no matter what actions are prescribed, the species will most
likely not return and successfully thrive in that environment. A
critical habitat area should not be designated for a species that does
not already live in it if there is no reasonable way for the species to
get to that area under its own power. If it has to be artificially
transported, then that area should not be designated. On the other
hand, two of the planitiffs supported the Service's inclusion of
critical habitat designation for seven species not currently known from
Kauai: Ctenitis squamigera, Diellia erecta, Diplazium molokaiense,
Ischaemum byrone, Mariscus pennatiformis, Phlegmariurus nutans, and
Phyllostegia waimeae.
Our Response: We designated critical habitat for those species not
recently seen on Kauai only if historic information was available on
the primary constituent elements for those species on Kauai and if such
areas still exist with those primary constituent elements or in which
the primary constituent elements can be restored. We agree that the
species will most likely not disperse to these sites under natural
circumstances, because the intervening areas are often not suitable
habitat for the species or have become too degraded, or because the
pollinator may be lacking in those areas. Therefore, recovery plans
include propagation and reintroduction into currently unoccupied but
historical habitat. While not all designated critical habitat may
contain all the primary constituent elements in their present
condition, we believe that they can be restored with management
actions.
(23) Comment: The Service has undertaken a detailed evaluation of
the proposed critical habitat areas on State lands on Kauai to assess
how much of the unoccupied habitat is really essential and which lands
can be effectively managed for the benefit of the species. The Service
should extend its evaluation to private land and land on other islands.
Our Response: We agree, and have met with any landowner who has
requested to discuss and visit their lands. Many of those discussions
have resulted in changes to some of the critical habitat units, as
described in the ``Summary of Changes from the Revised Proposed Rule''
section.
(24) Comment: The hunters, hikers, and local people are the first
line resources in protecting these plants, and at no cost to the
government. Spend Federal monies to educate and teach the local people,
rather than on critical habitat designation.
Our Response: We agree that the local people are an excellent
resource to aid in the management of endangered species. For example,
the Service has funded for several years a weed control project in the
Kokee area of Kauai which operates largely on local volunteer efforts.
While these management efforts are extremely beneficial for endangered
species protection, section 4 of the Act still requires the Service to
designate critical habitat.
(25) Comment: The statement that designating critical habitat would
not provide significant benefits to the Pritchardia species is flawed
because critical habitat designation would help them to recover to a
non-imperiled
[[Page 9163]]
status. The Service did not base its original ``not prudent'' finding
on the likelihood that designation would increase threats, as it now
attempts to do. Nor does it explain why designating critical habitat on
the privately owned island of Niihau would increase collecting beyond
current levels.
Our Response: Since the listings of the three Pritchardia species
on Kauai and Niihau as endangered, and prior to our proposed rules for
the designation of critical habitat, we received information verifying
vandalism and collection threats to Pritchardia throughout the Hawaiian
Islands. This information is included in the proposed rules. We have
revised critical habitat designations based on additional information
received during comment periods. However, no additional information was
provided during the comment periods demonstrating that the threats to
the Pritchardia species on any Hawaiian Island from vandalism or
collection would not be increased if critical habitat was designated.
We still believe that the benefits of designating critical habitat do
not outweigh the potential threats from vandalism and collection of
these three species of Pritchardia.
(26) Comment: The revised proposal identifies as critical habitat
only the habitat that Hibiscus clayi currently occupies, despite the
Service biologist's concession that this area alone is inadequate to
support the recovery of the species.
Our Response: We agree that the area proposed as critical habitat
for Hibiscus clayi is inadequate for the recovery of the species.
During the public comment period, we received additional information,
and have designated five other units of critical habitat for this
species within the previously proposed unit M (now Unit 4), based on
the presence of primary constituent elements. Habitat has been
designated for six populations, however we do not have information on
other locations or additional areas that are suitable or essential for
this species.
(27) Comment: The expansion of the area in the revised proposal
raises concerns about the limited data used in the mapping process.
Our Response: When developing the proposal to designate critical
habitat for 83 plants from Kauai and Niihau, we used the best
scientific and commercial data available, including but not limited to,
information from the known locations, site-specific species information
from the HINHP database and our own rare plant database; species
information from the Center for Plant Conservation's (CPC) rare plant
monitoring database housed at the University of Hawaii's Lyon
Arboretum; the final listing rules for these species; information
received at the three informational open houses held on Kauai at the
Waimea Community Center, the Kauai War Memorial Convention Hall in
Lihue, and the Kilauea Neighborhood Center, on October 19 to 21, 1999,
respectively; recent biological surveys and reports; our recovery plans
for these species; information received in response to outreach
materials and requests for species and management information we sent
to all landowners, land managers, and interested parties on the islands
of Kauai and Niihau; discussions with botanical experts;
recommendations from the Hawaii Pacific Plant Recovery Coordinating
Committee (HPPRCC) (Service 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998a, 1998b,
1998c, 1999; HPPRCC 1998; HINHP Database 2000; CPC in litt. 1999);
Geographic Information System (GIS) coverages (e.g. vegetation, soils,
annual rainfall, elevation contours, land ownership); new information;
completed recovery plans; and information received during the public
comment periods and public hearings.
(28) Comment: What would make sense is for the Service to develop a
plan for human intervention, including the required funding, and then
designate selected areas as critical habitat.
Our Response: Recovery plans, in which human intervention actions
are recommended for the conservation of all of the 83 plants that are
the subject of this critical habitat rulemaking, have already been
developed (Service 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998a, 1998b, 1998c, 1999).
In the recovery plans we identified habitat areas deemed essential to
the recovery of these plant species and referred to these areas during
our development of the critical habitat designations.
(29) Comment: The designation of critical habitat in unoccupied
habitat is particularly important, since this may be the only mechanism
available to ensure that Federal actions do not eliminate the habitat
needed for the survival and recovery of extremely endangered species.
Our Response: We agree. Our recovery plans for these species
(Service 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998a, 1998b, 1998c, 1999) identify
the need to expand existing populations and reestablish wild
populations within historic range.
(30) Comment: There cannot be adequate assessment of possible
impacts by a proposed Federal action to a species that is not there any
more. Such an assessment is impossible without a total analysis of why
a plant species no longer occurs in a region.
Our Response: In cases where a proposed Federal action takes place
in unoccupied critical habitat, we will assess whether the proposed
action is likely to destroy or adversely modify the primary constituent
elements that are needed for the future conservation of the species in
question. If we find that the proposed action will appreciably diminish
the habitat's value for both survival and recovery of the species, we
will recommend reasonable and prudent alternatives.
Issue 2: Site-Specific Biological Comments
(31) Comment: The proposed rule could and should have included a
more detailed discussion of why the revision included an expansion of
critical habitat units in northwestern Kauai (i.e., units O and I).
Our Response: We agree that a more detailed discussion of why areas
are included and excluded from each unit would be helpful. Therefore,
in ``Summary of Changes from the Revised Proposed Rule'' section, we
have given detailed descriptions for each species of why the units have
changed.
(32) Comment: Unit D does not contain any listed species and so
does not appear to be warranted as essential for the conservation of
the species. Areas in units D1, D2, and E that do not contain the
primary constituent elements should be remapped in the final rule. The
critical habitat area on the beach was proposed to be limited to the
dunes on the southern portion of the parcel, to what is commonly known
as ``Long Beach.'' The lower slopes of the Haupu range and the Kipu/
Kipukai/Hoary Head range in Unit E are covered by Eucalypts robusta,
Melaleuca, Grevillea, Casuarina, mango, Java plum, catclaw vine,
Rhodomyrtus, Ficus benjamina, and other introduced plants and animals,
especially below 1,500 feet elevation. These areas do not contain
suitable habitat for listed species and should not be critical habitat.
Our Response: We agree that proposed unit D1 is not essential for
the conservation of Sesbania tomentosa, and have excluded it from
critical habitat designation. We agree that parts of proposed units D2
and E do not contain the physical and biological features essential to
the conservation of Brighamia insignis, Delissea rhytidosperma,
Isodendrion longifolium, Lipochaeta micrantha, Melicope haupuensis,
Munroidendron racemosum, Myrsine linearifolia, Peucedanum sandwicense,
Pteralyxia
[[Page 9164]]
kauaiensis and Schiedea nuttallii and have modified these proposed
units to exclude areas which are not essential to the conservation of
these species.
(33) Comment: From the large scale map of the proposed area on
Niihau provided in the Department of the Interior correspondence it is
impossible to determine the exact boundaries of the proposed critical
habitat. The commenter felt that creating this entity on Niihau is
somewhat arbitrary.
Our Response: More detailed maps are available on request (see
Addresses section). We used the best available information to determine
these boundaries, and based on new information made available during
the comment period, Cyperus trachysanthos was removed from the low,
wetland area of Niihau. More appropriate habitat to reach our recovery
goals was available on other islands in areas that are less degraded
and already being managed for conservation. However, Brighamia insignis
needed more critical habitat than was available on Kauai, the only
other island on which it is currently or historically known.
(34) Comment: It is unclear why the areas between Wahiawa Bog and
Waialeale (unit N) or the central portion of unit J are necessary for
either connectivity purposes or as needed unoccupied habitat. While
these areas may be in a relatively good condition and may benefit other
listed species (such as forest birds), it is not clear what additional
value they contribute to listed plants. It is unclear why some critical
habitat units (L, J, and N) need to be so large. The portion of this
unit between Wahiawa Bog and Waialeale should be re-evaluated to
clarify its value to target plant species. Portions of the wet forest
in Unit J may potentially be deleted without compromising the recovery
of target plant species. The landowner questioned the new information
available for designating the entire Wainiha Valley as critical
habitat. At minimum, the proposed critical habitat in Wainiha Valley
should be restricted to the upper portion of the valley where occupied
endangered plant habitat has been identified. This area is not an
inconsiderable amount and may be sufficient to provide for any
additional unoccupied habitat necessary for the conservation of the
affected species.
Our Response: We agree, and have modified the units L, J, and N to
exclude areas without primary constituent elements, including the lower
reaches of Wainiha Valley. Other more intact areas are being designated
on Kauai or proposed on other islands for those species as identified
in the ``Summary of Changes from the Revised Proposed Rule'' section.
(35) Comment: If Wainiha is excluded from critical habitat
designation, the entire ecosystem would receive protection. The Nature
Conservancy of Hawaii (TNCH) would work with partners from the National
Tropical Botanical Garden and the Service concerning the area,
including specific endangered species habitat protection. In addition,
the landowner may enter into a perpetual conservation easement with
TNCH and support species management on a long term basis. On the other
hand, designating Wainiha as critical habitat will likely bring about
actions detrimental to the preservation of the area and its endangered
species. The landowner may react to critical habitat designation by
closing up all access to the valleys for survey and data collection,
conservation efforts, and management of endangered species.
Our response: We have evaluated the proposed critical habitat for
the species in Wainiha Valley and have reduced the area based on the
biological needs of the species and their recovery goals (see ``Summary
of Changes from the Revised Proposed Rule: Kauai J'').
(36) Comment: No information is available, currently or
historically, for the designation of critical habitat in the lower
elevation areas of unit M. Because none of these species currently
exist on the land, based on a survey by a botanical consultant in 1998,
there is seemingly no reason to believe that excluding the area would
lead to their extinction. The landowner is unaware of any other
reliable scientific data on this area and is unaware of any attempts by
the Service to enter the property to gather such data.
Our Response: We have revised the units for the species in unit M
to eliminate much of the area in the lower elevations of unit M to
exclude areas without primary constituent elements, based on new
information received during the public comment period. In addition,
other more intact areas are being designated or proposed on Kauai or on
other islands for those species as identified in the ``Summary of
Changes from the Revised Proposed Rule'' section.
(37) Comment: Some areas of Unit O are overgrown with Java plum,
monkeypod or kukui and have no endangered plant species and should not
be designated as critical habitat.
Our Response: We agree, and have modified the units to exclude
areas without primary constituent elements. Other more intact areas are
being designated or proposed on Kauai or on other islands for those
species as identified in the ``Summary of Changes from the Revised
Proposed Rule'' section.
(38) Comment: There is no indication that the Navy parcels are, in
fact, critical to the survival of these species. The military has
numerous structures and activities that are within proposed critical
habitat but are unsuitable for listed species. Without confirmation of
an actual link between these specific areas and the survival of Panicum
niihauense or Wilkesia hobdyi, designation of these areas as critical
habitat would be imprudent. The following should be removed from the
critical habitat designation: a 750 buffer area from the center of the
runway; which is continually mowed, restrooms, pavilion, and unpaved
parking area at Majors Bay Recreation Area; the antennae fields and
associated ground radial systems, which are continually mowed;
Amphibious Assault Training/RIMPAC Staging Area that disturb the
vegetation and substrate; other structures such as buildings, roads,
aqueducts, telecommunications equipment, telemetry antennae, radars,
missile launch sites, and other manmade features; ground hazard areas
established as safety zones around each missile launch site and launch
pads; northernmost property line where ``Smokey SAMs'' are launched;
other planned launch sites; Boresighting Tower, which is continually
mowed; Borrow Pit site, which is mined; Composting Facility; and the
Small Arms Firing Range and Construction Debris Stockpile, which will
require the removal of vegetation and sand.
Our Response: We have had numerous discussions with the Navy
regarding these areas, and as a result, have removed some sections of
the units for these species, based on the lack of primary constituent
elements. However, other areas could not be excluded because they do
contain the primary constituent elements for these species, as
described for each in the ``Hawaiian plants--Constituent elements''
section. These areas are necessary for the recovery of the species, and
not enough other areas are available containing these primary
constituent elements outside of the PMRF.
(39) Comment: The Navy has recently completed and begun
implementing their Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan (INRMP)
for the Pacific Missile Range Facility (PMRF). The Service has
indicated an apparent willingness to reassess the critical habitat
boundaries in light of this INRMP.
Our Response: We have reviewed the existing INRMP for PMRF. It is
currently
[[Continued on page 9165]]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
]
[[pp. 9165-9214]] Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Designation
or Nondesignation of Critical Habitat for 95 Plant Species From the
Islands of Kauai and Niihau, HI
[[Continued from page 9164]]
[[Page 9165]]
not adequate to find that the designated areas in PMRF are no longer in
need of special management considerations or protection and thus do not
meet the definition of critical habitat because it does not include
enough specific information on the conservation of Panicum niihauese.
As far as the Service is aware, this INRMP has not yet been updated to
address management needs of this species.
(40) Comment: Additional dry and mesic areas should be considered
for critical habitat designations, including Olokeke Canyon.
Our Response: Olokele Canyon was not included in any critical
habitat designations because no data was available on the historic or
current primary constituent elements or current species locations
within those lands.
(41) Comment: One commenter would like to see Haena State Park
removed from the critical habitat designation, because it is a high use
visitor area, wall to wall historic and cultural landscape, and very
degraded habitat with very few native plants. The cultural sites are
currently being restored by the Hawaiian community.
Our Response: Information received during the public comment period
informed us of the lack of primary constituent elements for the species
in this area. Therefore, we revised the lines for the final designation
to start around the 200-foot elevation line where a higher density of
primary constituent elements exist for the species at issue.
Issue 3: Legal Issues
(42) Comment: Critical habitat designation and the underlying
decision to list as endangered the species that are the subject of the
designation, exceed the constitutional limits of the Service's
delegated authority. Congress enacted the ESA as an exercise of its
Commerce Clause power and delegated exercise of that Commerce Clause
power to the Service to apply the ESA by regulation. The listed species
are not interstate. They exist only in Hawaii and do not cross State
lines. Nor are they in commerce as the subject of any economic
endeavor. They lack any commercial value. Therefore, the Service's
regulations listing these species and designating critical habitat for
them within Hawaii exceed the federal power to regulate interstate
commerce under the governing precedents interpreting the Commerce
Clause.
Our Response: The Federal government has the authority under the
Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution to protect this species, for
the reasons given in Judge Wald's opinion and Judge Henderson's
concurring opinion in National Association of Homebuilders v. Babbitt,
130 F. 3d 1041 (D.C. Cir. 1997), cert. denied, 1185 S.Ct, 2340 (1998).
See also Gibbs v. Babbitt, No. 99-1218 (4th Cir. 2000). The Home
Builders case involved a challenge to application of ESA prohibitions
to protect the listed Delhi Sands flower-loving fly. As with the
species at issue here, the Delhi Sands flower-loving fly is endemic to
only one state. Judge Wald held that application of the ESA to this fly
was a proper exercise of Commerce Clause power because it prevented
loss of biodiversity and destructive interstate competition.
(43) Comment: Since concerns were raised from the hunting community
and local government officials, a fair approach to resolving this issue
may be through mediation, using the State's Judiciary Center for
Alternative Dispute Resolution. To date, this will be the second
recommendation made on this issue that still has not been taken under
advisement.
Our Response: We have held several meetings with the hunting
community and local government officials to promote information
exchange and open dialogue. These meetings have served to alleviate
some of the controversy and contention that have surrounded the issue
of critical habitat designation on Kauai and other Hawaiian Islands.
However, this is a rulemaking process governed by the ESA and the
Administrative Procedures Act and not easily resolved thru mediation.
We have tried our best to have an open process with an opportunity for
all interested parties to participate, while complying with our
statutory responsibilities and court-ordered deadlines.
(44) Comment: Any activity that may degrade critical habitat,
including activities that are not subject to section 7 consultation,
could be seen as an ``injury'' to (and therefore, under State law, a
``taking'' of) an endangered plant species under the State of Hawaii's
endangered species law (Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 195D). It
is important that this receive due consideration in evaluating the
proposed critical habitat designations (for example, in completing the
economic analysis), and that the Service explain to what extent it has
considered the potential interplay between the Federal Endangered
Species Act and Hawaii endangered species laws.
Our Response: Possible costs resulting from interplay of the
Federal Endangered Species Act and Hawaii State law were discussed in
the economic analysis under indirect costs (e.g., possible conservation
management mandate for the private landowner and reduction in game
mammal populations). The economic analysis considers the economic
impacts of section 7 consultations related to critical habitat even if
they are attributable co-extensively to the listed status of the
species. In addition, the economic analysis examines any indirect costs
of critical habitat designation, such as where critical habitat
triggers the applicability of a State or local statute. However, where
it is the listing of a species that prompts action at the State or
local level, the impacts are not attributable to critical habitat
designation. Take prohibitions under Hawaii law are purely attributable
to a listing decision and do not co-extensively occur because of
critical habitat designations. There are no take prohibitions
associated with critical habitat.
(45) Comment: One commenter stated that the Service should do a
better job of communicating what critical habitat does and does not do,
including a review of recent ``Federal monies and Federal approvals,''
and which of those programs might even remotely be affected by
designations of critical habitat.
Our Response: We have made a concerted effort to provide the public
with information on what critical habitat does and does not do, through
a series of public workshops and meetings, correspondence, news
releases, and publications. A detailed review of Federal activities
that may be affected by the critical habitat designations on Kauai and
Niihau may be found in the economic analysis section of this rule. The
public could also refer to the Service's National website http://
www.fws.gov.
www.fws.gov.
Issue 4: Section 7 Consultation
(46) Comment: The draft economic analysis states that if a
landowner needs a Federal permit or receives Federal funding for a
specific activity, the Federal agency issuing the permit or dispersing
the funds would consult with the Service to determine how the action
may affect the designated critical habitat. The commenter questioned
what is meant by the term ``consult.'' The nature of the consultation
could result in control of whether the Federal government conducts its
proposed action on those lands or not, thereby controlling the land to
the extent that the private landowner could or could not do business
with the Federal government. What would consultation result in when a
proposed Federal action is being compared to the activities not
affected by critical habitat
[[Page 9166]]
designation, such as, grazing, farming, hunting or recreational use?
Our Response: The term ``consult'' refers to consultation between
the Service and other Federal agencies under the provisions of section
7 of the Act. Under this provision of the Act all Federal agencies must
consult with the Service to insure that any action that they authorize,
fund, or carry out is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence
of any endangered or threatened species or result in the destruction or
adverse modification of critical habitat. If the Service finds that the
proposed actions are likely to jeopardize the continued existence of an
endangered or threatened species or result in destruction or adverse
modification of critical habitat, we suggest reasonable and prudent
alternatives that would allow the Federal agency to implement their
proposed action without such adverse consequences. Every consultation
is unique and it is impossible to comment on what the results of a
future consultation will be without details on the proposed activity
and the status of the species and its critical habitat at the time of
the consultation.
Issue 5: Mapping and PCEs
(47) Comment: Although the text in the proposed rule appears to
indicate that unit F in Lawai Valley is restricted to land owned by the
National Tropical Botanical Garden, a map provided by the Service shows
some overlap between this unit and McBryde land above Lawai Stream,
near Luawai Reservoir. The Service should clarify whether unit F is
intended to include portions of the McBryde land, as suggested by the
map, or if any overlap is purely due to mapping inaccuracies. If the
proposal is intended to include McBryde land in this area, the Service
should consider conducting a biological survey of the area to confirm
whether the area in question actually contain any individuals of
Schiedea spergulina var. leipoda and/or whether this area is essential.
Our Response: The majority of the unit is within the lands owned by
the National Tropical Botanical Garden. However, some of the McBryde
land does fall within the unit. Efforts were made to exclude lands
currently used for cultivation. This unit is important to the
conservation of Schiedea spergulina var. leipoda because it supports an
extant colony of this species and includes habitat that is important
for the expansion of the present population, which is currently
considered non-viable. The habitat features contained in this unit that
are important for this species include, but are not limited to, bare
rock outcrops or sparsely vegetated portions of rocky cliff faces or
cliff bases in diverse lowland dry to mesic forests. Although we do not
feel that there is enough habitat designated to reach the recovery goal
of 8 to 10 populations, this species is a very narrow endemic and
probably never naturally occurred in more than a single or a few
populations.
(48) Comment: The draft economic analysis dismisses concerns about
impacts on the use of structures and features already placed in areas
to be designated as critical habitat. Although manmade features and
structures are excluded from critical habitat because they lack the
primary constituent elements, greater precision in pinning down these
``unmapped holes'' is needed to avoid a chilling effect on legitimate
uses that necessarily approach a fuzzy boundary line.
Our Response: Existing features and structures within critical
habitat areas, buildings; roads; aqueducts and other water system
features--including but not limited to pumping stations, irrigation
ditches, pipelines, siphons, tunnels, water tanks, gaging stations,
intakes, reservoirs, diversions, flumes, and wells; existing trails;
campgrounds and their immediate surrounding landscaped area; scenic
lookouts; remote helicopter landing sites; existing fences;
telecommunications equipment towers and associated structures and
equipment; electrical power transmission lines and distribution, and
communication facilities and regularly maintained associated rights-of-
way and access ways; radars, telemetry antennas; missile launch sites;
arboreta and gardens; heiau (indigenous places of worship or shrines)
and other archaeological sites; airports; other paved areas; and lawns
and other rural residential landscaped areas and other manmade features
do not contain, and are not likely to develop, primary constituent
elements, and are specifically excluded from designation under this
rule. Therefore, unless a Federal action related to such features or
structures indirectly affects nearby habitat containing the primary
constituent elements, operation and maintenance of such features or
structures generally would not be impacted by the designation of
critical habitat. We have attempted to exclude manmade structures using
aerial photos, our own field experience on Kauai and that of other
expert field botanists from DOFAW and the University of Hawaii at
Manoa. However, we were not always able to successfully exclude these
structures from the critical habitat maps because the resolution of our
imagery does not allow us to locate small structures. Higher resolution
imagery is currently unavailable on a State-wide basis.
Issue 6: Effects of Designation
(49) Comment: One commenter stated that the designation of critical
habitat would almost certainly make its private endangered species
reserve the target of a government takeover attempt.
Our Response: Section 3(5) of the Act defines critical habitat as
those specific areas which contain physical or biological features
essential to the conservation of the species and which may require
special management considerations or protection (16 U.S.C. 1532(5)).
Designations of critical habitat are to be made on the basis of the
best scientific and commercial data available, after taking into
account the economic and other relevant impacts of specifying any area
as critical habitat (16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(2)). An area may be excluded
from designation as critical habitat if the Secretary determines the
benefits of excluding the area outweigh the benefits of designating the
area as critical habitat (and provided the exclusion would not result
in the extinction of the species).
To a property owner, the designation of critical habitat becomes
important when viewed in the context of section 7 of the Act, which
requires all Federal agencies to ensure, in consultation with the
Service, that any action authorized, funded, or carried out by the
agency does not result in the destruction or adverse modification of
designated critical habitat. If, after consultation, our biological
opinion concludes that a proposed action is likely to result in the
destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat, we are
required to suggest reasonable and prudent alternatives to the action
which would avoid the destruction or adverse modification of the
critical habitat (16 U.S.C. 1536(b)(3)(A)). If we cannot suggest
acceptable reasonable and prudent alternatives, the agency (or the
applicant) may apply for an exemption from the Endangered Species
Committee under section 7(e)-(p) of the Act.
The mere promulgation of a regulation, like the enactment of a
statute, does not take private property unless the regulation on its
face denies the property owners all economically beneficial or
productive use of their land (Agins v. City of Tiburon, 447 U.S. 255,
260-263 (1980); Hodel v. Virginia Surface Mining and Reclamation Ass'n,
452 U.S. 264, 195 (1981); Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council, 505
U.S. 1003, 1014 (1992)). The designation of
[[Page 9167]]
critical habitat alone does not deny anyone economically viable use of
their property. The Act does not automatically restrict all uses of
critical habitat, but only imposes restrictions under section 7(a)(2)
on Federal agency actions that may result in destruction or adverse
modification of designated critical habitat. Furthermore, as discussed
above, if a biological opinion concludes that a proposed action is
likely to result in destruction or modification of critical habitat, we
are required to suggest reasonable and prudent alternatives.
We are aware of relatively few activities in the proposed critical
habitat areas for these 83 plants that have Federal involvement, and
thus, would require consultation or reinitiation of already completed
consultations for on-going projects. We are not aware of any commercial
activities on the Federal lands included in these proposed critical
habitat designations.
(50) Comment: If endangered species are dying through no fault of
the landowner, then the landowner should not be penalized with onerous
and costly regulations. What incentives are being provided private
landowners to act on behalf of listed plants?
Our Response: Critical habitat designation does not impose
additional regulatory requirements upon non-Federal landowners unless
they are receiving funding or authorization from a Federal agency for a
proposed action that is likely to destroy or adversely modify critical
habitat. Many threatened and endangered species occur on private lands
and the Service recognizes the importance of conservation actions by
private landowners. Cooperation from private landowners is an important
element of our conservation efforts, and we have had considerable
success in developing partnerships with large and small landowners,
government agencies, and non-governmental organizations for
conservation activities on Kauai, in the State of Hawaii, and
throughout the nation.
The Service administers several programs aimed at providing
incentives for landowners to conserve endangered and threatened species
on their lands, one of which is the Endangered Species Landowner
Incentive Program, which was first funded by Congress in fiscal year
1999. Under this program, the Service provides technical assistance and
funding to landowners for carrying out conservation actions on their
lands. In the first year alone, 145 proposals totaling $21.1 million
competed for $5 million in grant money. Additional information on
landowner incentive programs administered by the Service may be found
on our website http://endangered.fws.gov/landowner/index.html.
(51) Comment: The Service has tried to reassure the public that the
wholesale dedication of land as critical habitat will not result in
restrictions of public access and that most land use proposals will be
approved. One commenter said that this is probably not true, based on
what has happened in other parts of the country.
Our Response: Undoubtedly, human activities have had a negative
impact to many species in Hawaii. However, numerous threatened and
endangered species are currently on the road to recovery through the
direct intervention of humans. These include marine and terrestrial
vertebrates, plants, and invertebrates. The designation of an area as
critical habitat does not in itself restrict public access. The
regulatory effect of critical habitat designation is limited to
requiring consultation under section 7 of the Act for Federal actions.
Since few, if any, Federal actions affect public access to the State
and private lands designated as critical habitat for these plants, it
is unlikely that public access to these areas will be altered.
(52) Comment: By setting aside so many acres of land with no
guarantee that the plan will work it will rob the Hawaiian people of
their culture and lifestyle. Critical habitat designation should
accommodate the traditional cultural gathering rights of Native
Hawaiians as reflected in Article XII of the State Constitution and
upheld by the Hawaii Supreme Court in PASH and Ka Paakai o Ka Aina
decisions. Native Hawaiian issues should be handled by the native
Hawaiian people. The Service should make a plan to save plants where
the Hawaiian people would have a say.
Our Response: Critical habitat designation does not affect
activities, including human access, on State or private lands unless
some sort of Federal permit, license, or funding is involved and the
activities may affect endangered or threatened species. It imposes no
regulatory prohibitions on State or other non-Federal lands, nor does
it impose any restrictions on State or non-Federal activities that are
not funded or authorized by any Federal agencies.
Access to Federal lands that are designated as critical habitat is
not restricted unless access is determined to result in the destruction
or adverse modification of the critical habitat. If we determine that
access will result in such destruction or adverse modification, we will
suggest reasonable or prudent alternatives.
Activities of the State or private landowner or individual, such as
farming, grazing, logging, and gathering, generally are not affected by
a critical habitat designation, even if the property is within the
geographical boundaries of the critical habitat. A critical habitat
designation has no regulatory effect on access to State or private
lands. Recreational, commercial, and subsistence activities, including
hunting, on non-Federal lands are not regulated by this critical
habitat designation, and may be impacted only where there is Federal
involvement in the action and the action is likely to destroy or
adversely modify critical habitat.
The Service actively seeks input and participation from the public
in development and implementation of recovery plans for endangered and
threatened species and believes that it is only through such active
participation by the public that we will be able to recover these
plants.
(53) Comment: The critical habitat initiative is generating an
unwelcome degree of rift between the State Department of Land and
Natural Resources (DLNR) and the Service, and may erode public support
for needed recovery efforts. The Service should withdraw their plans
for critical habitat designation on Kauai, and instead, work with
existing agencies on their current efforts at conservation and
preservation. The testimony presented by DLNR at the February 2001
hearing recommends suggestions for working together and cites specific
methods for its implementation. They deserve the Service's utmost
attention.
Our Response: We agree that the Department of Land and Natural
Resources, Division of Forestry and Wildlife (DOFAW) comments and
suggestions should be given the utmost attention. During the public
comment periods for the November 7, 2000, proposal for plants from
Kauai and Niihau, we received written comments and a map showing the
DOFAW's vegetation classes and recommended critical habitat units. We
evaluated DOFAW's comments on a species by species basis and
incorporated their information into the revised proposal published on
January 28, 2002. DOFAW recommended deletion of some of the proposed
critical habitat units as they do not believe these areas are suitable
for the recovery of some species because they would not be able to
manage these areas with their limited staff and funding. Because the
basis for identifying areas by DOFAW was made on the manageability of
the area, their mapping of habitat is distinct from the regulatory
designation of critical habitat as defined by the Act.
[[Page 9168]]
Following publication of the revised proposal in January 2002, we
met with DOFAW on numerous occasions and conducted several site
assessment surveys to evaluate habitat that meets the legal
requirements of the Act and takes into account the on-the-ground
knowledge of DOFAW's biologists and land managers. As a result of the
assessment surveys and information provided to us by Kauai DOFAW staff
we excluded non-essential areas that did not contain primary
constituent elements. In addition, we received important information
from Kauai DOFAW staff that enabled us to refine the final critical
habitat designations to meet the conservation needs of the species.
Issue 7: Policy and Regulations
(54) Comment: Prudency cannot be determined without an analysis of
the economic impacts of critical habitat.
Our Response: The Service makes an initial determination on the
prudency of designating critical habitat according to regulations found
at 50 CFR 424.12(a). In accordance with these regulations, critical
habitat designation is not prudent only when one or both of the
following two situations exist: (1) The species is threatened by taking
or other human activity, and identification of critical habitat can be
expected to increase the degree of such threat to the species; or, (2)
such designation would not be beneficial to the species. The economic
analysis is conducted after critical habitat has been proposed in a
given area, as set forth in regulations found at 50 CFR 424.19. If the
Service finds that economic and other impacts outweigh the benefit of
designating critical habitat in a given area, that area will be
excluded from critical habitat designation unless such exclusion will
result in the extinction of the species concerned.
(55) Comment: The prudency of critical habitat designation is a
final conclusion based on weighing all relevant factors, including
economic factors. While the Service promised to complete its economic
impact analysis before it promulgates its final determination of
critical habitat, it risks putting the decision before the analysis.
The prior determination that critical habitat is prudent and therefore
required, is treated as a given, even though it ignored economic
factors.
Our Response: An economic analysis of the impact of critical
habitat cannot be done without knowing the location of the critical
habitat. This fact is easily realized by considering the difference of
proposed critical habitat on land zoned for protective conservation
versus land zoned for urban development. These types of zoning issues
as well as other issues will greatly affect any economic analysis of
critical habitat and cannot be taken into consideration until a
proposal of critical habitat is put forth. The proposed prudency
finding is not a final prudency finding since it has not considered the
economic issues. The fact that the proposed critical habitat is
published in a proposed rule emphasizes that no final decision has been
made on location or extent of critical habitat. The final designation
of critical habitat occurs after public comments have been received and
the economic analysis on the proposed critical habitat has been
completed. The effects of the public comments and the economic analysis
are then reflected in the final rulemaking.
(56) Comment: The proposed rule unfairly transfers the Service's
obligations to determine ``prudent and determinable'' areas for
designation as critical habitat from itself to the owners of the
designated lands. This action could potentially violate Section 3(5)(c)
of the ESA, which specifically provides that ``except in those
circumstances determined by the Secretary, critical habitat shall not
include the entire geographical area which can be occupied by the
threatened or endangered species.''
Our Response: All areas designated as critical habitat are
determined by the Service, after taking into account the economic
analyses and public comments. As established by the Congress of the
United States, the Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of
Commerce has the responsibility for designation of critical habitat
areas. This responsibility has been delegated to the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service for listed fish, wildlife and plants and cannot be
transferred to any other party. Proposing areas for designation as
critical habitat does not transfer any of the designation
responsibilities of the Service. As part of the Service's designation
process, the entire geographic area that could be occupied by the
threatened or endangered species is never put forth as proposed or
final critical habitat, unless circumstances unique to the species
require such a designation and only after approval by the Secretary of
the Interior (or the Secretary of Commerce).
Issue 8: Economic Issues
(57) Comment: Some reviewers commented that the DEA did not address
or did not adequately consider a variety of costs and benefits that
they believe could occur due to the implementation of section 7 for the
plants.
Our Response: Many of these possible costs were, in fact,
considered and some were addressed in the DEA. In many cases, however,
potential costs were purposely not addressed in the DEA because they
are not expected to occur. In other cases, it is impossible for them to
occur. In still other cases, the concerns no longer have substance
given the Service's modifications to the proposed critical habitat.
(58) Comment: Several commenters stated the following: The Service
did not adequately address the takings of private property as a result
of designating critical habitat for endangered plants on Kauai. If the
proposed designation of critical habitat precipitates conversion of
agricultural lands to conservation land that has no economically
beneficial use, then the Federal and State governments will have taken
private property.
Our Response: The possible costs associated with redistricting land
proposed for critical habitat designation were discussed in the DEA
under indirect costs. The final rule removes most of the land in the
Agricultural and Urban Districts from the critical habitat designation.
Redistricting the remaining privately owned parcels to the Conservation
District could result in a small probability of: (1) Approximately
$178,500 in lost property values; (2) $3,570 in an annual loss of
economic activity associated with ranching; and (3) $500 in increased
property taxes.
(59) Comment: One commenter said that estimated management costs
needed to recover a species should be part of an economic analysis
associated with critical habitat designation. Another commenter said
that management costs for the recovery of listed species are not
appropriate costs to assign to critical habitat designation.
Our Response: The Act does not obligate landowners to manage their
land to protect critical habitat, nor would landowners and managers be
obligated under the Act to participate in projects to recover a species
for which critical habitat has been established. However, Chapter VI,
section 4.d. of the DEA and section 4.c. of the Addendum does discuss
landowners' concerns that the interplay between the state's prohibition
on take and critical habitat could result in a potential mandate for
conservation management pursuant to litigation and the resulting costs
for the proposed designation on Kauai. As noted in Section 4.c. of the
Addendum, the costs of conservation management for critical habitat as
modified could reach $1.8 million per year. However, the likelihood of
this result is estimated to be low and such costs would not
[[Page 9169]]
necessarily be assigned to critical habitat.
(60) Comment: Several commenters stated the following: The Service
fails to adequately analyze the economic impact to small entities under
the Regulatory Flexibility Act, and the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act. Given Kaua'i's small population, a large
proportion of firms in the agricultural sector may well be affected and
could suffer severe impact. In addition, the prospect of indirect costs
mounting into the tens of millions of dollars on a small island
requires the Service to reconsider its blithe assumption that there
will be no significant impact on small businesses. Having mentioned
huge potential losses to landowners and the county economy, the DEA
fails to carefully consider the sum of the many ``indirect'' effects of
critical habitat designation, ignoring all but direct costs of
consultation.
Our Response: Section 5 of the addendum presents a regulatory
flexibility analysis that is consistent with the RFA/SBREFA. Federal
courts and Congress have indicated that an RFA/SBREFA analysis should
be limited to the impacts to entities subject to the requirements of
the regulation (Service, 2002). As such, entities not directly
regulated by the listing or critical habitat designation are not
considered in the RFA/SBREFA analysis. Based on the analysis, there are
no small entities that may be impacted by the implementation of the
Act's section 7 provisions for the plants on Kauai. Therefore, the
plants' critical habitat designation, as modified, will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
(61) Comment: Several commenters stated the following: While the
Service has stated that critical habitat affects only activities that
require Federal permits or funding, and does not require landowners to
carry out special management or restrict use of their land, this fails
to address the breadth of Federal activities that affect private
property in Hawaii and the extent to which private landowners are
required to obtain Federal approval before they can use their property.
These requirements also extend to State agencies requiring Federal
funds or approvals.
Our Response: The analysis in the DEA, as revised by the Addendum,
is based on a review of all projects, activities, and land uses that
may be directly affected by the implementation of section 7 for the
listed plants. The DEA and the Addendum present any reasonably
foreseeable Federal involvement (Federal permit, license, or other
authorization, or Federal funding) for these projects, activities, and
land uses. These results of this analysis are presented in Table ES-1
in the DEA and Table Add-2 in the Addendum.
(62) Comment: Several commenters stated the following: The impact
of the proposed designations under State law is potentially more
extensive than under Federal law since the Act contains at least
general criteria for determining when alteration of critical habitat
constitutes ``destruction or adverse modification.'' The lack of
analogous provisions under State law lends itself to a much broader
interpretation of what activities might be considered injurious to the
species (and therefore prohibited). One commenter asked if, to the
extent that the Service has considered the potential interplay between
the Act and State statutes, whether the Service is aware of any
circumstances where similar issues have been raised under other State
conservation statutes when critical habitat was designated. Another
commenter noted, however, that because Hawaii's land use laws are
uniquely onerous, precedent from other states is of little value. The
current wave of proposals to designate critical habitat are the first
time that the Act has been applied to significant areas of private land
in Hawaii. Consequently, even prior experience in Hawaii is of little
relevance.
Our Response: Possible costs resulting from interplay of Federal
Endangered Species Act and Hawaii State law are already discussed in
the DEA and Addendum under indirect costs (e.g., possible conservation
management mandate for the private landowner and reduction in game
mammals population). The lack of experience with critical habitat on
private land in Hawaii is reflected in the uncertainty regarding the
probabilities that certain indirect costs will occur.
(63) Comment: Several commenters stated the following: The DEA
fails to consider economic impacts of listing and critical habitat that
result through interaction with State law, specifically Hawaii's
Endangered Species Act. New Mexico Cattlegrowers Association v. U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service requires consideration of the impact of
listing as well as the impact of designating an area as critical
habitat. Instead, the analysis is expressly limited to the impact of
Federal agency consultation under the jeopardy standard. However, since
listing triggers listing under State law, the Service must consider the
impact of take prohibitions under State law (and consequently Federal
law which prohibits destruction of plants in knowing violation of State
law).
Our Response: The DEA and Addendum consider the economic impacts of
section 7 consultations related to critical habitat even if they are
attributable co-extensively to the listed status of the species. In
addition, they examine any indirect costs of critical habitat
designation such as where critical habitat triggers the applicability
of a State or local statute. However, where it is the listing of a
species that prompts action at the State or local level, the impacts
are not attributable to critical habitat designation. Take prohibitions
under Hawaii law are purely attributable to a listing decision and do
not co-extensively occur because of critical habitat designations.
There are no take prohibitions associated with critical habitat.
(64) Comment: Several commenters stated the following: The DEA
fails to consider economic impacts of critical habitat that result
through interaction with State law, specifically Hawaii's Land Use Law.
Critical habitat could result in downzoning under State law. HRS Sec.
205-2(e) states that conservation districts shall include areas
necessary for conserving endangered species. HRS 195D-5.1 states that
DLNR shall initiate amendments in order to include the habitat of rare
species. Even if DLNR does not act, the Land Use Commission may
initiate such changes, or they may be forced by citizen suits. Areas
for endangered species are placed in the protected subzone with the
most severe restrictions. While existing uses can be grandfathered in,
downzoning will prevent landowners from being able to shift uses in the
future, reduce market value, and make the land unmortgageable. Although
the Service acknowledges that there could be substantial indirect costs
relating to redistricting of land to the Conservation District, several
commentators disagreed with the characterization of these costs as
``minor'' and with the statement that the probabilities of
redistricting as ``slight to small.''
Our Response: About 370 acres of privately owned agricultural lands
and 12 acres of privately owned urban lands are included in the final
designation. Most of the agricultural land is on Niihau and all of the
urban land is on steep ocean cliffs. The potential economic costs
discussed in the DEA of over $10 million associated with urban Land in
Unit D1 are no longer anticipated because Unit D1 has been removed from
the final critical habitat designation for biological reasons.
Reduction in land values due to redistricting land from Agricultural or
[[Page 9170]]
Urban District to Conservation District could result in a loss of
$178,500 in property values on Niihau. The loss of the economic
activity from ranching and the increase in property taxes is estimated
at $4,070 per year. Under this scenario, even if a landowner has no
plans to sell the land, the loss in land value could reduce potential
mortgage financing.
(65) Comment: One commenter stated the following: The State
currently leases some of its lands for agriculture or ranching uses.
There is uncertainty whether any endangered plant species exists on
these lands, which have historically been used for agricultural and
ranching purposes, and have been subject to grazing and cultivation
activities. If such species do exist, State law would completely
prohibit or substantially restrict the continued use of these lands for
agriculture or ranching purposes and would clearly have an adverse
impact on the operations of the lessees and lease revenues. The DEA
fails to establish that the benefits of including specific leased
parcels outweigh the costs.
Our Response: Approximately 37 acres of State owned land are
included in critical habitat Units H1 and M, as modified in the final
rule. The 33 acres in Unit H1 comprise a sliver of land that is makai
(toward the ocean) of the existing road in the northern portion of the
unit and does not include any fields or grazing land. The State does
not have any agricultural leases for the four acres of Agricultural
land in Unit M. As such, the designation of critical habitat is not
anticipated to have adverse effects on agricultural activities on State
land.
(66) Comment: Several commenters stated the following: The DEA
fails to consider economic impacts of critical habitat that result
through interaction with State law, specifically Hawaii's Environmental
Impact Statement Law. HRS 343-5 applies to any use of conservation
land, and a full Environmental Impact Statement is required if any of
the significance criteria listed in HAR 11-200-12 apply. One of these
criteria is that an action is significant if it ``substantially affects
a rare, threatened or endangered species or its habitat.'' This will
result in costly procedural requirements and delays. However, the DEA
does not acknowledge that any impact on endangered species habitat will
be deemed to be ``significant.'' In addition, multiple commenters
stated that the DEA fails to evaluate the practical effect critical
habitat designation will have on development. Special Management Area
permits administered by Kauai County as required by Hawaii's Coastal
Zone Management Act will be harder to get, will result in delays, will
cause a decline in property values and may make it impossible to
develop. This economic impact disappears because the DEA's bottom line
erroneously counts only so-called ``direct'' costs of consultation.
Several commenters also stated the following: The Service has taken
the position in other states that it has a right to intervene in local
land use proceedings if they affect endangered species on private
property, as evidenced by the Service's petition to the local zoning
board in Arizona to postpone approval of a rezoning petition pending a
survey to determine the extent to which an endangered plant was present
on the property even though no Federal approval was being sought. That
the Service does not address these activities in the DEA is a
fundamental error of the analysis.
Our Response: Chapter VI, Section 4.f.(2) of the DEA discusses
State and county environmental review, with and emphasis on Hawaii's
Environmental Impact Statement Law. This section indicates that if a
project is required to do an Environmental Assessment (EA) and is
located in critical habitat, a more expensive EIS may have to be
prepared. The estimated increase in costs to prepare an EIS is $25,000
to $75,000 per project. There is one project that may require an EA and
is located in critical habitat, as modified. As such, the additional
environmental review cost potentially attributable to critical habitat
is $25,000 to $75,000.
However, there are no planned development projects that will
require State and county development approvals and are located in
critical habitat, as modified in this final rule. The following factors
make future development projects in the proposed critical habitat
highly unlikely: (1) As modified, 99 percent of the proposed critical
habitat is in Conservation District where development is severely
limited; (2) almost all of the remaining agricultural land is on Niihau
in an area not subject to development pressure; and (3) all of the land
in the Urban District is on steep ocean cliffs that cannot support
development. Thus, the probability that the Service will intervene in
State and county development approvals is regarded as negligible
because there is no development planned and almost no development
potential in critical habitat.
(67) Comment: Several commenters stated the following: The DEA
fails to consider economic impacts of critical habitat that result
through interaction with State law, specifically the State Water Code.
HRS 174C-2 states that ``adequate provision shall be made for
protection of fish and wildlife. HRS 174C-71 instructs the Commission
of Water Resource Management to establish an instream use protection
program to protect fish and wildlife. Since landowners may depend on
water pumped from other watersheds, these effects can be far-reaching.
It is impossible to tell from the descriptions in the proposal whether
any water diversions will have to be reduced as a result of listing and
critical habitat designation. It is unfair to dismiss costly but vital
sources of energy and inexpensive irrigation water while maintaining
the highest level of effort to protect primary constituent element for
species that do not physically reside in the area but may somehow be
transported. If the critical habitat proposal would require reducing
water diversions from any stream, the Service should investigate
whether that would take anyone's vested water rights. The Service has
an obligation to thoroughly investigate this issue and refrain from
designating critical habitat until it has determined whether its
actions will affect water use. Water sources and irrigation ditches
that are part of the former Kekaha irrigation system for the former
Kekaha Sugar Plantation should be removed from designation. At minimum,
portions of specific parcels that include water sources or water
systems should be removed.
Our Response: No costs are expected to occur from such impacts to
water systems, because none of the listed plants are aquatic and
therefore would not cause a reduction in water diversion. In addition,
water infrastructure, including the Kekaha irrigation system, is
considered a manmade feature and therefore would not be included in
critical habitat pursuant to the rule, because these features and
structures normally do not contain, and are not likely to develop, any
primary constituent elements. Thus, unless its operation and
maintenance would indirectly affect critical habitat, which is not
anticipated, it should not be affected by section 7 of the Act. (See
comment 7.m. of the Economic Analysis for a discussion of the impacts
of the proposed designation on potential new water diversions.)
(68) Comment: Several commenters stated the following: The
irrigation system stemming from the North Fork diversion of the Wailua
River and the hydropower plant located in Wainiha Valley are necessary
for the continued viability and possible expansion of agricultural
activities on Kauai.
[[Page 9171]]
Continued operation of the systems require registration permits from
the State and, depending on the nature of the maintenance, may require
Army Corps of Engineers (COE) permits. These uses should not be
burdened with the threat of potential Federal or civil action
prohibiting or delaying their continued or expanded use. Furthermore,
any additional requirement brought about by a critical habitat
designation would be borne by the system's end users. Similarly,
restoration of the taro fields in Haena State Park would require a COE
permit. The designation of this area as critical habitat would make it
unlikely that this permit would be approved, thus frustrating the
efforts and development of the park. Additional analysis of costs
associated with hydropower development is warranted. Such analysis
would indicate that agricultural lands and hydropower development
should be excluded from designation of critical habitat because
benefits of exclusion would far outweigh the benefits of designation
and the exclusion would not result in the extinction of the species.
Our Response: The irrigation system stemming from the North Fork
diversion of the Wailua River, the diversion and hydropower plant
located in Wainiha Valley, the taro fields in Haena State Park, and all
areas downstream from these water systems/improvements have been
removed from the critical habitat as modified in this final rule. In
addition, as noted in responses to other comments, none of the listed
plants are aquatic and therefore would not cause a reduction in water
diversion. Thus, no costs are expected from continued operation of
these water systems.
Chapter VI, section 3.i. of the DEA discusses the potential for
additional hydropower development in the areas proposed as critical
habitat. Since the publication of the DEA, information regarding a
hydropower diversion and powerhouse in the upper Wainiha Valley was
made available. This hydropower plant was proposed in the 1980's, but
due to the landowner's capital limitations at the time, it was not
constructed. There are no current plans to continue to investigate the
feasibility of the project, but the potential for future development
adds to the land value of the Upper Wainiha Valley. However, the area
planned for the diversion, powerhouse, and other project elements are
no longer included in critical habitat as modified. As such, no costs
associated with future hydropower development potential are
anticipated.
(69) Comment: One commenter stated the following: In discussing
possible future hydropower facilities, the DEA appears to contradict
itself by saying that in May 2001 a company filed an application with
the Federal Energy Regulation Commission for a preliminary permit and
then saying it is ``highly unlikely'' that any additional hydro plants
will be built. If critical habitat designations make it all but
impossible to build a new hydropower facility, which seems to be the
implication of the DEA, then the designations contradict the State and
national policies of promoting energy independence.
Our Response: Chapter VI, Section 3.i. of the DEA does mention that
in May 2001, a company filed an application with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (FERC) to build a dam on the lower Wailua River
and that the area affected by this project is outside of critical
habitat. The DEA also states that ``it is highly unlikely that
additional plants will be built in the next 10 years in areas that
could impact the proposed critical habitat.'' This statement is
supported by studies performed by the State Department of Business,
Economic Development, and Tourism (DBEDT) of the areas in critical
habitat, and current plans of those who own land in critical habitat.
In addition, the planned generating capacity on Kauai is sufficient to
supply projected demand over the 10-year period of the analysis. Since
the proposed critical habitat does not cover the entire island of
Kauai, these two statements are not contradictory.
Furthermore, development of a new hydropower plant would still be
possible even if the hydropower plant was located upstream or within
critical habitat. If the project had Federal involvement, and the
Federal action agency determined the project may affect critical
habitat or listed species, the Federal action agency would enter into
section 7 consultation with the Service. The section 7 consultation
process is described in detail in Chapter III of the DEA.
(70) Comment: One commenter stated the following: On Maui, there is
an administrative contested case proceeding pending before the Board of
Land and Natural Resources that involves the diversion of millions of
gallons of water. Any diversion in or upstream of critical habitat will
be challenged by people who oppose all diversions on principle. They
will contend that diverting water from endangered plants risk driving
them to extinction. Opponents of diversions could use the critical
habitat designations to invent a colorable argument sufficient to delay
and confuse water use decisions.
Our Response: Chapter VI, section 3.j.(2). of the DEA states that
it is highly unlikely that a new ditch system or major expansion to an
existing one (including new diversions) would be proposed or approved
in the proposed critical habitat. This assessment is made due to the
existing protections provided by the baseline environmental regulations
(described in Chapter IV of the DEA), the projected demand for
additional diversions for irrigation above and beyond the existing
supply, and current environmental concerns, as well as likely public
opposition to stream diversions.
None of the plants for which critical habitat is designated on
Kauai or Niihau in this final rule are aquatic. These plants rely on
rainwater that percolates down through the substratum and is absorbed
by the plant's roots. Thus, local rainfall and localized surface runoff
are the critical factors that affect the habitat of the listed plants.
In addition, water infrastructure, including irrigation systems, are
considered manmade features and therefore would not be included in
critical habitat pursuant to the rule, because these features and
structures normally do not contain, and are not likely to develop, any
primary constituent elements. Thus, unless its operation and
maintenance would indirectly affect critical habitat, which is not
anticipated, it should not be affected by section 7 of the Act. (See
comment 7.m. of the Economic Analysis for a discussion of the impacts
of the proposed designation on potential new water diversions.)
We are unable to find documentation of extinction of Hawaiian
plants due to water diversions and are unable to comment on the
speculation that people who oppose all water diversions on principle
will challenge any future or current diversions by contending that
diverting water from endangered plants risks driving them to
extinction.
(71) Comment: Two commenters stated the following: The estimated
total costs of designating critical habitat are deceptively low because
they exclude costs that ``are difficult to estimate.'' However, the
costs of conservation management are quantifiable and examples of cost
per acre are available from watershed management projects around the
State. There is no reason why these costs should be ignored in the DEA.
If included, these costs will certainly outweigh the benefits of
designation. The DEA also underestimates the economic costs because
they are limited to what is
[[Page 9172]]
likely to occur within 10 years even though critical habitat
designation is permanent and not automatically revised if there is new
evidence of the benefits of non-designation, or if the species is
delisted.
Our Response: As noted above, the illustrative cost of conservation
management of the entire critical habitat as modified is $1.8 million
per year. In addition, as discussed in the economic analysis, while
there is no existing obligation to proactively manage lands in critical
habitat to control threats, there is a undetermined probability that a
State or Federal court could mandate conservation management.
A listed species is delisted when it is recovered or has gone
extinct. Recovery is defined as no longer needing the protections
provided by the Endangered Species Act, including critical habitat. As
such, when a species is delisted, its critical habitat would also be
``undesignated.'' Furthermore, as indicated by the DEA, many landowners
and managers do not have specific plans for projects beyond 10 years,
and forecasts of future economic activity are based on current socio-
economic trends and the current level of technology, both of which are
likely to change over the long term. However, information available in
documents with planning horizons that are longer than 10 years such as
the Kauai Planning Department's Kauai General Plan (2002), and the
State Department of Transportation Kauai Long Range Land Transportation
Plan (1997) are considered in the preparation of the DEA and the
Addendum.
(72) Comment: One commenter stated the following: The conclusion
under E.O. 12866 that the rule will not have an annual economic effect
of $100 million or more, or adversely affect in a material way any
sector of the economy or State or local governments or communities, is
flawed because it does not consider the major adverse impacts from
secondary effects.
Our Response: For the reasons explained in the economic analysis,
the rule is not expected to have an annual economic effect of $100
million or more. As indicated in Table Add-2, the annualized direct
costs of the implementation of section 7 for the listed plants ranges
from approximately $17,800 to $112,500. While the probability that many
of the indirect effects will occur is low or unknown, the total worst
case scenario for the indirect costs of critical habitat, as modified,
includes (1) $513,000 in direct and indirect annual sales from the loss
of economic activity associated with hunting (however, the decrease in
expenditures by the displaced hunters would probably be spent on other
recreational activities, goods and services, so this figure is likely
to overstate the economic costs); (2) $149,000 per year in the loss of
hunter benefits (however, as above, some of this loss will be offset by
benefits derived from alternative recreational activity); (3) $1.8
million in annual conservation management costs (some of which may be
in the form of new Federal funds to Hawaii and thus represent an
increase the regional economy instead of a loss); (4) approximately
$178,500 in lost property values; (5) $3,570 in an annual loss of
economic activity associated with ranching; (6) $500 in increased
property taxes; (7) $25,000 to $75,000 in the additional cost to
prepare an EIS; and (8) $53,000 to $169,000 in the costs to investigate
the implications of critical habitat. Annualized, these indirect costs
amount to $2.49 million to $2.51 million per year. The sum of the
direct and indirect costs, annually, ranges from $2.51 million to $2.62
million, significantly less than the $100 million level of
significance.
(73) Comment: Several commenters stated the following: Critical
habitat designation could indirectly result in limitations or special
management requirements, such as fencing or control of invasive
species, being established on private lands. These requirements could
result in considerable cost to both the State and private landowners.
The DEA estimates that the Palila case may be interpreted to mandate
private conservation and could cost Kauai landowners $3 million or more
per year. These costs should be considered. Where such costs are likely
to outweigh the benefits, the Service should determine that critical
habitat designation is not prudent. At minimum, areas proposed for
designation should be significantly reduced so that any special
management measures that may eventually be mandated through litigation
are of a scale that is reasonable and cost effective to implement.
Our Response: Section 4(a)(3)(A) of the Act directs the Secretary
to designate critical habitat to the ``maximum extent prudent and
determinable.'' Critical habitat is not prudent when one or both the
following situations exist: (i) A species is threatened by taking or
other human activity and identification of critical habitat would
increase the degree of threat; or (ii) designation would not be
beneficial to the species. 50 CFR 424.12(a)(1). Thus the costs of
designation are not considered in analyzing whether critical habitat is
prudent. However, such costs are considered under section 4(b)(2) of
the Act, which directs the Secretary to take into consideration the
economic and other impacts of designation and authorizes the Secretary
to exclude any area if she determines that the benefits of exclusion
outweigh the benefits of designating it as critical habitat, unless it
will result in extinction of the species.
The Act does not obligate landowners to manage their land to
protect critical habitat, nor would landowners and managers be
obligated under the Act to participate in projects to recover a species
for which critical habitat has been established. However, the DEA and
the Addendum discuss the potential mandate for conservation management
pursuant to litigation and the resulting costs for the proposed
designation on Kauai. The cost of conservation management for the
critical habitat as modified could be approximately $1.8 million per
year. However, there is an undetermined probability that this impact
will occur.
(74) Comment: Several commenters stated the following: The cost of
potential citizen suits preventing certain activities or requiring some
sort of management in critical habitat was not discussed in the DEA.
Litigation regarding land management requirements is not only
foreseeable, but likely. The proposals will give the government and the
environmental groups a legal excuse to attack and severely damage
anyone who grows endangered Hawaiian plants, and also anyone whose land
is listed as critical habitat. Human freedom and constitutional
principles are far more important than biologically incompetent plants.
Critical habitat designation will bring unnecessary and costly
litigation, thus creating an economic disaster that would severely
challenge one private landowner's economic viability. These official
listings will also give the government and the environmental groups a
legal excuse to meddle destructively in the affairs of Niihau.
Our Response: As discussed in the DEA and in the Addendum, an
undetermined probability exists that a Federal or State court could
mandate certain indirect impacts as a result of critical habitat.
However, it is beyond the scope of the economic analysis to assess the
legal merits of the arguments for or against the various indirect
impacts, the probability that a lawsuit will be filled, and, if filed,
to identify possible outcomes of a court decision and the associated
probabilities. However, whenever possible, the DEA and the Addendum
present the worst-
[[Page 9173]]
case scenario of the costs associated with the potential outcomes of
third party lawsuits.
(75) Comment: Several commenters stated the following: A strip of
Grove Farm-owned land along the coastline from the Poipu Bay Golf
Course to Kawelikoa Point is being proposed for critical habitat.
Although much of this land is within the Conservation District and
development, if any, is expected to be minimal, critical habitat
designations may affect current activities that exist in this area, as
well as possible future activities, such as, hiking, kayaking or
horseback riding. The Poipu Mahaulepu property also has future
potential as a quality resort development, with potential construction
valued in the hundreds of millions of dollars and employment and
housing for over a thousand residents. The U.S. Navy currently has 14
beach cottages and an officers beach facility within its Pacific
Missile Range Facility (PMRF). Funding has been appropriated to add six
cottages and future plans provide for additional cottages to follow.
Completed documents also identify construction plans for other new
facilities and structures on PMRF. The economic analysis does not
adequately consider such future costs.
Our Response: Activities such as hiking, kayaking, and horseback
riding are not identified as threats to critical habitat in the
proposed rule. As such, any additional environmental review or
modification to these activities directly or indirectly attributable to
critical habitat is anticipated to be negligible. The planned site for
the Poipu Mahaulepu resort and the 14 beach cottages at PMRF are not
included in critical habitat as modified. The potential costs
associated with other planned construction at PMRF are discussed in
Chapter VI, section 3.m. of the DEA and in section 3.b. of the
Addendum.
(76) Comment: Several commenters stated the following: Portions of
the proposed critical habitat designations are within the Conservation
District. Although there are no intense activities occurring on these
lands, roadway and water systems traverse some of these lands. Critical
habitat designations may affect operations and maintenance of these
systems as well as any future change in use of the lands.
Our Response: As mentioned in the proposed rule and in Chapter I of
the DEA, existing manmade features and structures do not contain, and
are not likely to develop, primary constituent elements essential for
the conservation of the listed species. These features and structures
are considered ``unmapped holes'' that are found within the boundaries
of critical habitat units but are not considered by the Service to be
part of critical habitat. As such, there are unlikely to be any direct
section 7 related costs to the operation and maintenance (O&M) of
existing features and structures.
The inclusion of these features and structures in the critical
habitat boundaries could indirectly affect the activities associated
with the existing features due to an increase in State and county
environmental review. However, any additional delays or modifications
as a result of the increased State and county review are anticipated to
be negligible because manmade features and structures do not contain
the primary constituent elements for the listed plants.
The DEA and the Addendum present all of the reasonably forseeable
projects, land uses, and activities that could occur within critical
habitat over the next ten years. While there may be some unknown future
change in the use of the land in the Conservation District in critical
habitat, there is insufficient information to assess the potential
indirect or direct effects critical habitat will have on the land use.
However, any impact attributable to critical habitat is anticipated to
be minor due to the existing protections provided by Conservation
District and other baseline regulations discussed in Chapter IV of the
DEA.
(77) Comment: Several commenters stated the following: Kauai's
economy is far from robust and serious consideration must be given to
the economic consequences of designating critical habitat. The total
designation of 99,206 acres on Kauai and 697 acres on Niihau encompass
approximately one-fourth of the total land area of Kauai County and is
of grave concern.
Our Response: Critical habitat, as modified, includes roughly 15
percent of the island of Kauai and less than one percent of the island
of Niihau. The economic costs to the economy of Kauai County (which
includes both Kauai and Niihau) are expected to be minimal because (1)
as modified, 99 percent of the proposed critical habitat is in
Conservation District where development and other economic activity is
severely limited; (2) almost all of the remaining agricultural land is
on Niihau in an area not subject to development pressure; and (3) all
of the land in the Urban District is on steep ocean cliffs that cannot
support development.
(78) Comment: Several commenters stated the following: All Hawaiian
plant recovery plans call for fencing to keep feral animals away from
the plants. Yet the Service has stated that the 99,000 acres being
designated as critical habitat on Kauai will have no impact on the
hunters. Clarification of this statement is needed. Critical habitat
designation will greatly impact the public hunting program and deprive
hunters access to lands they have used for generations for recreation
as well as food supplement for their families. This loss is of further
significance, given Kauai's hard-pressed economy and the recent
closures of Amfac and Kekaha Sugar plantations. The State could also
lose much needed revenues to continue its game and area management
services as sales of hunting licenses would decrease. This, in turn,
would result in the overgrowth of non-endangered plant species that
will eventually overrun the protected endangered species population.
Also, limitations on game hunting in areas of critical habitat may lead
to an increase in the numbers of wild pigs and goats, which would feed
on the endangered plant species.
Our Response: Chapter VI, sections 3.a. and 4.b. of the DEA and
section 4.a. of the Addendum discuss the potential effects the
implementation of section 7 for the listed plants will likely have on
hunting, as well as the potential indirect effect critical habitat
could have on hunting. The direct effects include costs ranging from
$9,000 to $17,600 for two section 7 consultation between the Service
and DLNR and costs ranging from $50,000 to $100,000 for project
modifications associated with State game management activities. The
indirect effects include a slight probability of a change in State game
management policy and an undetermined probability of a successful third
party lawsuit to mandate conservation management of State and private
lands, which could include fencing to exclude feral ungulates. The
potential drop in hunting activity translates into a decrease in annual
economic activity related to hunting on Kauai of about $297,000 in
direct sales (a figure that includes expenditures on hunting licenses);
$513,000 in total direct and indirect sales; nine jobs; and $176,000 in
income, as well as a loss of $149,000 in hunter benefits. However, the
decrease in expenditures and hunter benefits would probably be off-set
by expenditures and benefits associated with other recreational
activities, so these figures are likely to overstate the economic
costs. If the critical habitat, as modified, is fenced to exclude
ungulates, the annual cost of conservation management for the listed
[[Page 9174]]
plants would be approximately $1.8 million.
A critical habitat designation does not in any way create a
wilderness area, preserve or wildlife refuge, nor does it close an area
to human access or use. It applies only to activities sponsored at
least in part by Federal agencies. Land uses such as logging, grazing
and recreation that may require Federal permits may take place if they
do not adversely modify critical habitat. Critical habitat designations
do not constitute land management plans. A designation of critical
habitat does not require a private or State landowner to fence the
designated area and/or remove game mammals. However, feral ungulates
have been extremely important causes of vegetation decline in Hawaii
(Cuddihy and Stone 1990) and have been identified as a primary threat
to many of the listed plant species on Kauai. The Service recognizes
that populations of many game mammal species affect the distribution
and abundance of many listed endangered plant and animal species to
varying degrees, either directly or indirectly. We also recognize that
game mammal hunting is a highly valued activity to a portion of the
present-day Hawaiian culture. We recognize hunting as an important tool
to manage wild populations of game and support hunting as a
recreational activity and the maintenance of game mammal hunting
programs within the State of Hawaii. However, Federal and State law
dictate that hunting programs should be designed and executed in a way
that is compatible with endangered species conservation. Game mammal
hunting programs should not only prevent extinction, but allow for the
recovery of federally listed endangered and threatened species. The
Service also recognizes that under certain circumstances, removal of
ungulates can result in an increase in weedy growth and associated fire
risk, and we recommend that ungulate management programs assess and
address this issue.
(79) Comment: The Navy commented that: There is no indication that
the specific Navy parcels are, in fact, critical to the survival of
these species; the vast majority of the proposed areas to be designated
are presently unoccupied by the species in question and their
successful introduction to and survival in these areas is speculative;
and the proposed areas are presently utilized for national defense
operations that may present incompatibilities with the objective of
species preservation. Therefore, the benefits of excluding the areas
outweigh the benefits of specifying these areas as part of the critical
habitat.
Our Response: We have had numerous discussions with the Navy
regarding these areas, and as a result, have removed some sections of
the units for these species, based on either the lack of primary
constituent elements or the presence of structures and areas used for
Navy training operations. The remaining areas are not excluded because
they contain at least one of the primary constituent elements for
Panicum niihauense as described in the ``Hawaiian plants--Constituent
elements'' section. These areas are essential to the recovery of
Panicum niihauense because not enough other areas that contain these
primary constituent elements outside of the PMRF are known to exist in
order to meet our goals of 8 to 10 populations.
(80) Comment: One commenter stated the following: It is not prudent
to designate critical habitat on Niihau as it may serve to restrict
Federal actions that promote the readiness of our nation's fighting
forces. The operations most likely to be impacted would be the Special
Warfare and the downed pilot recovery training exercised by the U.S.
Marine Corps and U.S. Navy. Disruption of these activities may also
result in negative economic impact to Niihau residents.
Our Response: The potential project modifications as a result of
the implementation of section 7 for the plants on military activities
on Niihau are discussed in Chapter VI, section 3.m. of the DEA. These
project modifications include placing stakes in the ground to mark the
boundaries of the areas which should be avoided. The Navy may also give
maps to military personnel before they are deployed to the area to
delineate these areas. The total cost of these project modifications is
estimated at $6,000. Given that the proposed critical habitat as
modified covers less than one percent of Niihau, and the military uses
much of the island for Special Warfare and the downed pilot recovery
training, the avoidance of the areas in critical habitat is not
anticipated to have an effect on the readiness of our nation's fighting
forces or Niihau residents.
(81) Comment: One commenter stated the DEA lacks a thorough
benefits analysis. Multiple commenters stated that the DEA ignored the
benefit of keeping other native species off the endangered species
list, of maintaining water quality and quantity, of promoting ground
water recharge, and of preventing siltation of the marine environment,
thus protecting coral reefs. Another commenter noted that additional
benefits of critical habitat include combating global warming,
providing recreational opportunities, attracting ecotourism, and
preserving Hawaii's natural heritage. Although the DEA makes general
observations of the benefits associated with designating critical
habitat, it makes no attempt to quantify these acknowledged benefits.
The Service must use the tools available such as a University of Hawaii
Secretariat for Conservation Biology study that estimated the value of
ecosystem services, to determine the benefits of critical habitat. On
the other hand, one commenter stated that the DEA overestimates
economic benefits and many of the alleged benefits are entirely
speculative, unquantifiable or lack any commercial value. In addition,
treating ``better siting of projects by developers so as to avoid
costly project delays,'' as an economic benefit is circular. The costly
project delays result from regulations. They could be avoided by not
imposing the regulations in the first place.
Our Response: Chapter VI, Sections 6 and 7 of the DEA discusses the
potential benefits addressed in the above comments. However, the DEA
also indicates that these benefits are not quantified due to lack of
information on the value of the environmental benefits that would be
attributable specifically to the critical habitat designations (i.e.,
the benefits over and above those which will occur due to other
existing protections, and over and above the benefits from other
conservation projects). In addition, there is a lack of (1) scientific
studies regarding ecosystem changes due to critical habitat, and (2)
economic studies on the per-unit value of the changes.
The 1999 analysis by University of Hawaii (UH) economists on the
total value of environmental services provided by Oahu's Koolau
Mountains was used in the DEA as a resource document for concepts, and
for identifying documents that report the original research on certain
subjects.
However, the UH study has limited applicability for valuing the
benefits of plants critical habitat designation for a number of
reasons. First, the UH study had a different purpose which was to
estimate the total value of environmental benefits provided by the
entire Koolau Mountains on the island of Oahu versus the value of the
more limited benefits provided by the proposed plants critical habitat
on the island of Kauai. Consistent with its purpose, the UH study
provides no estimates of the changes in environmental conditions
resulting from changes in land management due to critical habitat
designations.
[[Page 9175]]
Furthermore, many of the assumptions and much of the analysis in
the UH study are not transferable to the economic analysis for the
plants critical habitat. For example, the value of water recharge in
the UH study reflects projected water supply and demand conditions on
Oahu--an island which is nine percent larger than Kauai but has a
population of more than 12 times that of Kauai. Also, the UH benefit
analysis of reducing soil runoff is unique to three valleys that drain
through partially channelized streams in urban areas into the manmade
Ala Wai Canal. Since this canal was designed with inadequate flushing
from stream or ocean currents, it functions as an unintended settling
basin so must be dredged periodically. In addition, the recreational
and ecotourism values provided in the UH study apply to areas that are
accessible to most hikers, which is not the case with most of the
plants critical habitat. As mentioned in the DEA, most of the plants
critical habitat units are located in the mountainous interior of
Kauai. Much of the proposed critical habitat has steep slopes, remote
locations, and difficult access; some of the units are accessible only
by helicopter and are rarely visited.
Chapter VI, section 6.c. of the DEA discusses a potential benefit
of critical habitat to developers. By knowing the critical habitat
boundaries, developers can site projects outside the boundaries,
thereby avoiding certain issues related to threatened and endangered
species. As such, the benefit is not circular, because, as a result of
critical habitat, developers can avoid take issues associated with
section 9 of the Act and the other baseline regulations protecting
listed species discussed in Chapter IV of the DEA.
(82) Comment: Several commenters stated the following: Existence
values should be quantified. Studies referenced in the analysis contain
information about how much people would be willing to pay to save
various species. Even assuming plants are non-charismatic and therefore
would justify lower values, there would still be a value of $6 per
household per year. If the study is able to take values for a day of
hunting from the State of Idaho and apply them to Hawaii, it should be
equally able to take values from studies which have looked at other
species to get some sense of what people would pay to make sure these
species recover and do not go extinct.
Our Response: When primary research on benefits is not feasible,
economists frequently rely on the method of benefits transfer. Benefits
transfer involves application of results of existing valuation studies
to a new policy question. Two core principals of defensible benefits
transfer are (1) the use of studies that apply acceptable techniques to
generate welfare values, and (2) similarity between the good being
valued in the literature and the good being valued in the policy
context to which the transfer is being made (i.e., the protection
afforded the plants by critical habitat). No known studies exist on
quantified data on the value of plants. Therefore, applying results of
existing valuation studies on non-plants to the Kauai plants is not
feasible.
(83) Comment: Several commenters stated the following: Active
management by private landowners would be more beneficial than critical
habitat designations because private landowners can carry out
conservation actions that might otherwise not happen. The proposal
fails to properly consider the importance of cooperation and goodwill
between the Service and private landowners, and the impact critical
habitat designations will have in discouraging voluntary partnerships
on private lands.
Our Response: Chapter VI, section 4.j. of the DEA discusses the
potential for reduced cooperation on conservation projects as a result
of critical habitat. The DEA determines that a modest but undetermined
reduction in cooperation may occur, along with a corresponding but
undetermined environmental loss to society.
Summary of Changes From the Revised Proposed Rule
Based on a review of public comments received on the proposed
determinations of critical habitat, we have reevaluated our proposed
designations and included several changes to the final designations of
critical habitat. These changes include the following:
(1) The scientific names changed for the following associated
species with the listed species found in the ``Supplementary
Information: Discussion of the Plant Taxa'' section: Lipochaeta
integrifolia changed to Melanthera integrifolia for Centaurium
sebaeoides; L. subcordata changed to Melanthera subcordata for
Lipochaeta fauriei; Styphelia tameiameiae changed to Leptecophylla
tameiameiae for Chamaesyce halemanui, Delissea rhytidosperma, Diellia
erecta, Diellia pallida, Exocarpos luteolus, Mariscus pennatiformis,
Melicope knudsenii, Platanthera holochila, Poa siphonoglossa,
Pteralyxia kauaiensis, Schiedea kauaiensis, Schiedea stellarioides,
Viola kauaiensis var. wahiawaensis, and Xylosma hawaiiense; Hibiscus
tiliaceus changed to Talipariti tiliaceum for Cyperus trachysanthos;
Myrica faya changed to Morella faya for Diellia erecta and Exocarpos
luteolus; Stachytarpheta dichotoma changed to S. australis for
Brighamia insignis, Cyanea undulata, Dubautia pauciflorula, Lipochaeta
micrantha, and Viola helenae; Mariscus meyenianus changed to Cyperus
meyenianus for Diellia erecta and Poa mannii; Mariscus phleoides
changed to Cyperus phleoides for Centaurium sebaeoides; Pluchea
symphytifolia changed to P. carolinensis for Cyanea undulata, Dubautia
pauciflorula, Hedyotis st.-johnii, and Lipochaeta micrantha; Athyrium
sandwichianum changed to Diplazium sandwichianum for Plantago princeps,
Melicope knudsenii, Flueggea neowawraea, Euphorbia haeleeleana, Xylosma
crenatum, Viola helenae, Schiedea membranacea, Pteralyxia kauaiensis,
Phyllostegia wawrana, Phyllostegia waimeae, Nothocestrum peltatum,
Dubautia latifolia, Delissea rivularis, Cyrtandra limahuliensis,
Cyrtandra cyaneoides, Cyanea undulata, Cyanea remyi, and Alsinidendron
lychnoides; and Setaria gracilis changed to Setaria parviflora for
Brighamia insignis, Cyanea undulata, and Dubautia pauciflorula.
(2) We corrected the misidentification of Passiflora mollissima to
P. tarminiana which is an associated species found with the following
listed species: Delissea rhytidosperma, Dubautia latifolia,
Nothocestrum peltatum, Phyllostegia wawrana, Poa sandvicensis, Schiedea
membranacea, Delissea undulata, Diellia erecta, and Solanum sandwicense
in the threat section of the species descriptions in the
``Supplementary Information: Discussion of the Plant Taxa''.
(3) We changed ``spp.'' to the specific species which are
associated with the following listed species found on Kauai in the
``Supplementary Information: Discussion of the Plant Taxa'' and section
17.99: Touchardia spp. changed to Touchardia latifolia for Cyanea
remyi; Syzygium spp. changed to Syzygium sandwicensis for Isodendrion
longifolium; Gunnera spp. changed to Gunnera kauaiensis for Cyrtandra
cyaneoides, Plantago princeps, and Phyllostegia waimeae; Eugenia spp.
changed to Eugenia reinwardtiana for Cyrtandra limahuliensis and
Isodendrion longifolium; Pteralyxia spp. changed to Pteralyxia
kauaiensis for Alectryon macrococcus, Delissea rhytidosperma, and
Euphorbia haeleeleana; Alectryon spp. changed to Alectryon macrococcus
for Phyllostegia wawrana; Broussaisia spp. changed to
[[Page 9176]]
Broussaisia arguta for Adenophorus periens; Pleomele spp. changed to
Pleomele aurea for Alsinidendron viscosum, Dubautia latifolia,
Pritchardia napaliensis, and Alectryon macrococcus; and Antidesma spp.
changed to Antidesma platyphyllum for Cyanea remyi, Cyanea undulata,
Cyrtandra limahuliensis, Dubautia latifolia, Hesperomannia lydgatei,
Hibiscus waimeae ssp. hannerae, Kokia kauaiensis, Lipochaeta micrantha,
Nothocestrum peltatum, Pritchardia viscosa, Alectryon macrococcus,
Fleuggia neowawraea, Isodendrion laurifolium, and Isodendrion
longifolium.
(4) For species associated with listed species, we replaced
specific species names for those that do not exist on Kauai with
``spp.'' for genera with multiple species on Kauai in the
``Supplementary Information: Discussion of the Plant Taxa'' and section
17.99 as follows: Cibotium chamissoi changed to Cibotium spp. for
Phlegmariurus nutans; Peperomia leptostachya changed to Peperomia spp.
for Wilkesia hobdyi; Lipochaeta succulenta and Lipochaeta heterophylla
changed to Lipochaeta spp. for Centaurium sebaeoides; Coprosma grayana
changed to Coprosma spp. for Viola kauaiensis var. wahiawaensis;
Peperomia macraeana changed to Peperomia spp. for Exocarpos luteolus
and Phyllostegia wawrana; Schiedea lydgatei var. attenuata changed to
Schiedea spp. for Poa mannii; Adenophorus oligadenus changed to
Adenophorus spp. for Delissea rhytidosperma; and Cyanea hirta changed
to Cyanea spp. for Xylosma crenatum.
(5) We corrected the species name to the species that occurs on
Kauai for species associated with listed species in the ``Supplementary
Information: Discussion of the Plant Taxa'' and section 17.99 as
follows: Santalum ellipticum changed to Santalum freycinetianum for
Lipochaeta waimeaensis and Delissea undulata; and Pteralyxia
sandwicensis changed to Pteralyxia kauaiensis for Delissea
rhytidosperma and Euphorbia haeleeleana.
(6) We removed the following species from the list of associated
species from the ``Supplementary Information: Discussion of the Plant
Taxa'' and section 17.99 as they do not occur on Kauai: Abutilon
sandwicense was removed from Melicope pallida; Reynoldsia sandwicensis
was removed from Euphorbia haeleeleana; Rhynchospora laxa was removed
from Platanthera holochila; and Antidesma pulvinatum was removed from
Flueggea neowawraea.
(7) In order to avoid confusion regarding the number of location
occurrences for each species (that does not necessary represent a
viable population) and the number of recovery populations (8 to 10 with
100, 300, or 500 reproducing individuals) we changed the word
``population'' to ``occurrence'' and updated the number of occurrences
and/or individuals for the following species found in the
``Supplementary Information: Discussion of the Plant Taxa'' section and
``Table 2.--Summary of existing occurrences on Kauai and Niihau, and
landownership for 95 species reported from Kauai and Niiahu'':
Adenophorus periens changed from 80 individuals to 59; Alectryon
macrococcus changed from six populations to 18 occurrences and from 204
individuals to 159-174; Alsinidendron lychnoides changed from two
populations to four occurrences and from 10 individuals to eight;
Alsinidendron viscosum changed from five populations to seven
occurrences and from 263 individuals to 319; Bonamia menziesii changed
from eight populations to nine occurrences and from 62 individuals to
36; Brighamia insignis changed from 65 individuals to 42-62; Centaurium
sebaeoides changed from 52 individuals to 22-52; Chamaesyce halemanui
changed from six populations to nine occurrences and from 143
individuals to 85-135; Cyanea asarifolia changed from one population to
two occurrences and from five individuals to 4-5; Cyanea recta changed
from seven populations to eight occurrences and from 609 individuals to
198-208; Cyanea remyi changed from 374 individuals to 394-484; Cyperus
trachysanthos changed from two populations to one occurrence; Cyrtandra
cyaneoides changed from 404 individuals to 354-454; Cyrtandra
limahuliensis changed from 11 populations to 13 occurrences and from
822 individuals to 2,746-3,024; Delissea rhytidosperma changed from 19
individuals to 11; Diellia pallida changed from four populations to six
occurrences and from 20-25 individuals to 43-48; Dubautia latifolia
changed from nine populations to 26 occurrences and from 80 individuals
to 65-84; Dubautia pauciflorula changed from two populations to four
occurrences; Euphorbia haeleeleana changed from seven populations to 23
occurrences; Exocarpos luteolus changed from eight populations to nine
occurrences; Flueggea neowawraea changed from eight populations to 10
occurrences and from 85 individuals to 62; Hedyotis st.-johnii changed
from four populations to 11 occurrences and from 296 individuals to
227-292; Hesperomannia lydgatei changed from three populations to four
occurrences and from 295 individuals to 298; Hibiscadelphus woodii
changed from one population to two occurrences; Hibiscus clayi changed
from six individuals to four; Hibiscus waimeae ssp. hannerae changed
from three populations to two occurrences; Isodendrion laurifolium
changed from five populations to 13 occurrences and from 151
individuals to 142-154; Isodendrion longifolium changed from nine
populations to 15 occurrences and from 521 individuals to 804-854;
Kokia kauaiensis changed from five populations to 21 occurrences and
from 166 individuals to 166-171; Labordia tinifolia var. wahiawaensis
changed from 100 individuals to 20-30; Lipochaeta fauriei changed from
four populations to five occurrences and from 183 individuals to 82;
Lipochaeta micrantha changed from 231 individuals to 171; Lobelia
niihauensis changed from 11 populations to 13 occurrences and from
1,106 individuals to 284-2,134; Lysimachia filifolia changed from 75
individuals to 20-75; Melicope haupuensis changed from five individuals
to 13; Melicope knudsenii changed from seven populations to 10
occurrences; Melicope pallida changed from five populations to six
occurrences; Munroidendron racemosum changed from 14 populations to 17
occurrences and from 101 individuals to 59-99; Myrsine linearifolia
changed from eight populations to 12 occurrences and from 522
individuals to 490-564; Nothocestrum peltatum changed from six
populations to 10 occurrences and from 19 individuals to 20; Peucedanum
sandwicense changed from 14 populations to 15 occurrences and from 340
individuals to 156-256; Phyllostegia knudsenii changed from one
population to three occurrences and from 17 individuals to 4-13;
Phyllostegia wawrana changed from 49 individuals to 34-54; Plantago
princeps changed from six populations to seven occurrences and from 471
individuals to 542-670; Platanthera holochila changed from 28
individuals to 24-34; Poa sandvicensis changed from 1,740 individuals
to 1,321; Pritchardia napaliensis changed from three populations to
five occurrences; Pteralyxia kauaiensis changed from 15 populations to
39 occurrences and from 807 individuals to 1,124-1,161; Remya
kauaiensis changed from 12 populations to 17 occurrences and from 124
individuals to 106-114; Remya
[[Page 9177]]
montgomeryi changed from three populations to six occurrences and from
113 individuals to 143; Schiedea apokremnos changed from 751
individuals to 819-1,751; Schiedea helleri changed from 63 individuals
to 50-60; Schiedea kauaiensis changed from two populations to five
occurrences; Schiedea membranacea changed from seven populations to 10
occurrences and from 195 individuals to 344-348; Schiedea nuttallii
changed from 50 individuals to 10-50; Schiedea spergulina var. leiopoda
changed from 50 individuals to 135-150; Schiedea spergulina var.
spergulina changed from 206 individuals to 208; Schiedea stellarioides
changed from two populations to three occurrences and from 400
individuals to 1,500; Sesbania tomentosa changed from 18 individuals to
11; Solanum sandwicense changed from six populations to eight
occurrences; Spermolepis hawaiiensis changed from three populations to
two occurrences; Stenogyne campanulata changed from two populations to
three occurrences; Wilkesia hobdyi changed from six populations to nine
occurrences and from 491 individuals to 406-471; Xylosma crenatum
changed from 8 individuals to 16; and Zanthoxylum hawaiiense changed
from two populations to three occurrences.
(8) We changed ``flowering cycles, pollination vectors, seed
dispersal agents'' to ``reproduction cycles, dispersal agents'' in the
life history portion of the ``Supplementary Information: Discussion of
the Plant Taxa'' section for the fern species Adenophorus periens,
Ctenitis squamigera, Diellia erecta, Diellia pallida, Diplazium
molokaiense, and Phlegmariurus nutans.
(9) We revised the list of excluded, manmade features in the
``Criteria Used to Identify Critical Habitat'' and section 17.99 to
include additional features based on information received during the
public comment periods.
(10) We updated the elevation ranges in section 17.99 for
Adenophorus periens, Alectryon macrococcus, Alsinidendron lychnoides,
Bonamia menziesii, Chamaesyce halemanui, Ctenitis squamigera, Cyanea
recta, Cyanea remyi, Cyanea undulata, Cyperus trachysanthos, Cyrtandra
cyaneoides, Cyrtandra limahuliensis, Delissea rivularis, Diellia
pallida, Diplazium molokaiense, Dubautia latifolia, Dubautia
pauciflorula, Euphorbia haeleeleana, Exocarpos luteolus, Gouania
meyenii, Hesperomannia lydgatei, Hibiscus clayi, Ischaemum byrone,
Isodendrion laurifolium, Isodendrion longifolium, Kokia kauaiensis,
Labordia lydgatei, Lipochaeta fauriei, Lipochaeta micrantha, Lipochaeta
waimeaensis, Lobelia niihauensis, Lysimachia filifolia, Mariscus
pennatiformis, Melicope haupuensis, Melicope knudsenii, Melicope
pallida, Munroidendron racemosum, Myrsine linearifolia, Nothocestrum
peltatum, Panicum niihauense, Peucedanum sandwicense, Phlegmariurus
nutans, Phyllostegia knudsenii, Phyllostegia wawrana, Plantago
princeps, Platanthera holochila, Poa sandvicensis, Poa siphonoglossa,
Pteralyxia kauaiensis, Remya kauaiensis, Schiedea apokremnos, Schiedea
helleri, Schiedea kauaiensis, Schiedea membranacea, Schiedea nuttallii,
Schiedea spergulina var. leiopoda, Schiedea stellarioides, Sesbania
tomentosa, Solanum sandwicense, Spermolepis hawaiiensis, Xylosma
crenatum, and Zanthoxylum hawaiiense.
(11) We made revisions to the unit boundaries based on information
supplied by commenters, as well as information gained from field visits
to some of the sites, that indicated that the primary constituent
elements were not present in certain portions of the proposed unit,
that certain changes in land use had occurred on lands within the
proposed critical habitat that would preclude those areas from
supporting the primary constituent elements, or that the areas were not
essential to the conservation of the species in question.
A brief summary of the modifications made to each unit is given
below (see also Figure 1).
[[Page 9178]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27FE03.000
Kauai A
This unit was proposed as critical habitat for two multi-island
species: Centaurium sebaeoides and Ischaemum byrone. We excluded the
proposed critical habitat for Centaurium sebaeoides. This area is not
essential for the conservation of Centaurium sebaeoides because it
lacks one or more of the primary constituent elements, has a lower
proportion of associated native species than other areas we consider to
be essential to the conservation of Centaurium sebaeoides, is not
currently managed for the conservation of this species, and there are
at least 10 other locations in its historical range on Kauai and other
islands which provide habitat for this species and which are either
designated as critical habitat in this rule or have been proposed for
designation in other rules.
Modifications were made to this unit to exclude areas that do not
contain the primary constituent elements for Ischaemum byrone. The area
designated as critical habitat for this species provides habitat within
its historical range for two populations.
This modification resulted in the reduction from 15 ha (38 ac) to
13 ha (32 ac). This unit was renamed Kauai 1--Ischaemum byrone--a,
Kauai 2--Ischaemum byrone--b, and Kauai 3--Ischaemum byrone--c.
Kauai B
This unit was proposed as critical habitat for two species:
Hibiscus clayi and Munroidendron racemosum. Modifications were made to
this unit to exclude areas that do not contain the primary constituent
elements essential to the conservation of Hibiscus clayi and
Munroidendron racemosum. The area designated as critical habitat for
these two Kauai endemic species provides habitat within their
historical ranges for one population of each species.
This modification resulted in the reduction from 271 ha (669 ac) to
60 ha (148 ac). This unit was renamed Kauai 5--Hibiscus clayi--f and
Kauai 5--Munroidendron racemosum--a.
[[Page 9179]]
Kauai C
This unit was proposed as critical habitat for two species:
Brighamia insignis and Lobelia niihauensis. We excluded the proposed
critical habitat for Lobelia niihauensis. This area is not essential
for the conservation of Lobelia niihauensis because it has a lower
proportion of associated native species than other areas we consider to
be essential for the conservation of Lobelia niihauensis, and there are
10 other locations within its historical range on Kauai and Oahu which
provide habitat for two species and which are either designated as
critical habitat in this rule or have been proposed for designation in
other rules.
Modifications were made to this unit to exclude degraded areas not
essential to the conservation of Brighamia insignis. The remaining area
designated as critical habitat for this endemic species provides
habitat within its historical range for one population.
This modification resulted in the reduction from 97 ha (239 ac) to
63 ha (156 ac). This unit was renamed Kauai 6--Brighamia insignis--a.
Kauai D
This unit was proposed as critical habitat for the multi-island
species Sesbania tomentosa. Modifications were made to this unit to
exclude degraded areas not essential to the conservation of Sesbania
tomentosa, including the removal of subunit D1. The remaining area
designated as critical habitat for this species provides habitat within
its historical range for one population.
This modification resulted in the reduction from 255 ha (629 ac) to
47 ha (117 ac). This unit was renamed Kauai 8--Sesbania tomentosa--a.
Kauai E
This unit was proposed as critical habitat for 10 species:
Brighamia insignis, Delissea rhytidosperma, Isodendrion longifolium,
Lipochaeta micrantha, Melicope haupuensis, Munroidendron racemosum,
Myrsine linearifolia, Peucedanum sandwicense, Pteralyxia kauaiensis and
Schiedea nuttallii. Modifications were made to this unit to exclude
areas that do not contain the primary constituent elements essential to
the conservation of these 10 species.
The area designated as critical habitat for the Kauai and Niihau
endemic species Brighamia insignis provides habitat within its
historical range for one population. The area designated as critical
habitat provides habitat within the historical ranges for two
populations each of Delissea rhytidosperma, Lipochaeta micrantha, and
Melicope haupuensis, and one population each of Munroidendron
racemosum, Myrsine linearifolia, and Pteralyxia kauaiensis, all Kauai
endemic species.
The area designated as critical habitat for the multi-island
species Isodendrion longifolium and Peucedanum sandwicense provides
habitat within their historical ranges for one population each and for
two populations of Schiedea nuttallii.
This modification resulted in the reduction from 563 ha (1,390 ac)
to 349 ha (862 ac). This unit was renamed Kauai 7--Brighamia insignis--
b, Kauai 7--Delissea rhytidosperma--a, Kauai 7-- Isodendrion
longifolium--a, Kauai 7-- Lipochaeta micrantha--a, Kauai 7-- Melicope
haupuensis--a, Kauai 7-- Munroidendron racemosum--b, Kauai 7-- Myrsine
linearifolia--a, Kauai 7-- Peucedanum sandwicense--a, Kauai 7--
Pteralyxia kauaiensis--a, and Kauai 7--Schiedea nuttallii--a.
Kauai F
No changes were made to Kauai F. However, due to revising the
polygon to more closely follow geographical and topographical features,
a correction has been made to the total acreage. The reduction in area
does not affect the ability of this unit to provide habitat for one
population of Schiedea spergulina var. leiopoda in this unit.
The area designated as critical habitat for the Kauai endemic
species Schiedea spergulina var. leiopoda provides habitat within its
historical range for one population. The correction resulted in a total
of 5 ha (11 ac). This unit was renamed Kauai 9--Schiedea spergulina
var. leiopoda--a.
Kauai G
This unit was proposed as critical habitat for three species:
Lipochaeta waimeaensis, Schiedea spergulina var. spergulina, and
Spermolepis hawaiiensis. Modifications were made to this unit to
exclude areas that do not contain the primary constituent elements
essential to the conservation of these three species. The reduction in
area does not affect the ability of this unit to provide for one to two
populations of these three species.
The area designated as critical habitat provides habitat for one
population of Lipochaeta waimeaensis and two populations of Schiedea
spergulina var. spergulina within the historical ranges of these Kauai
endemic species. The area designated as critical habitat for the multi-
island species Spermolepis hawaiiensis provides habitat within its
historical range for one population.
This modification resulted in the reduction from 317 ha (784 ac) to
289 ha (713 ac). This unit was renamed Kauai 13--Lipochaeta
waimeaensis--a, Kauai 13--Schiedea spergulina var. spergulina--c, Kauai
13--Spermolepis hawaiiensis--b, and Kauai 13--Spermolepis hawaiiensis--
c.
Kauai H
This unit was proposed as critical habitat for two species, Panicum
niihauense (a Kauai and Niihau endemic) and Sesbania tomentosa.
Modifications were made to this unit to exclude areas that do not
contain the primary constituent elements essential to the conservation
of Panicum niihauense based on a site visit conducted during the public
comment period. This reduction in area did not affect the ability of
this unit to provide habitat for seven populations of this species in
this unit. The remaining area designated as critical habitat for
Panicum niihauense provides habitat within its historical range for
seven populations.
Modifications were made to this unit to exclude degraded areas not
essential to the conservation of the multi-island species Sesbania
tomentosa. The area designated as critical habitat for this species
provides habitat within its historical range for one population.
These modifications resulted in the reduction from 329 ha (812 ac)
to 175 ha (431 ac). This unit was renamed Kauai 14--Panicum
niihauense--a, Kauai 14--Sesbania tomentosa--b, Kauai 15--Panicum
niihauense--b, Kauai 16--Panicum niihauense--c, and Kauai 17--Panicum
niihauense--d.
Kauai I
This unit was proposed as critical habitat for 60 species:
Adenophorus periens, Alectryon macrococcus, Alsinidendron lychnoides,
Bonamia menziesii, Brighamia insignis, Centaurium sebaeoides,
Chamaesyce halemanui, Ctenitis squamigera, Cyanea recta, Cyanea remyi,
Cyperus trachysanthos, Cyrtandra limahuliensis, Delissea rhytidosperma,
Delissea rivularis, Delissea undulata, Diellia pallida, Diplazium
molokaiense, Dubautia latifolia, Euphorbia haeleeleana, Exocarpos
luteolus, Flueggea neowawraea, Gouania meyenii, Hedyotis cookiana,
Hedyotis st.-johnii, Hesperomannia lydgatei, Hibiscadelphus woodii,
Hibiscus waimeae ssp. hannerae, Ischaemum byrone, Isodendrion
laurifolium, Isodendrion longifolium, Kokia kauaiensis, Labordia
lydgatei, Lipochaeta fauriei, Lobelia niihauensis, Melicope haupuensis,
Melicope
[[Page 9180]]
knudsenii, Melicope pallida, Munroidendron racemosum, Myrsine
linearifolia, Nothocestrum peltatum, Panicum niihauense, Peucedanum
sandwicense, Phyllostegia wawrana, Plantago princeps, Platanthera
holochila, Poa mannii, Poa sandvicensis, Poa siphonoglossa, Pteralyxia
kauaiensis, Remya kauaiensis, Remya montgomeryi, Schiedea apokremnos,
Schiedea kauaiensis, Schiedea membranacea, Schiedea spergulina var.
spergulina, Sesbania tomentosa, Solanum sandwicense, Stenogyne
campanulata, Wilkesia hobdyi, and Xylosma crenatum.
We excluded the proposed critical habitat for Bonamia menziesii.
This area is not essential for the conservation of Bonamia menziesii
because it has a lower proportion of associated native species than
other areas we consider to be essential for the conservation of Bonamia
menziesii, and there are at least 10 other locations within its
historical range on Kauai and on other islands that provides habitat
for this species and that are either designated as critical habitat in
this rule or have been proposed for designation in other rules.
Modifications were made to this unit to exclude degraded areas not
essential to the conservation of Brighamia insignis, Cyperus
trachysanthos, Hedyotis st.-johnii, Ischaemum byrone, Lobelia
niihauensis, Melicope knudsenii, Munroidendron racemosum, Nothocestrum
peltatum, Peucedanum sandwicense, Poa mannii, Pteralyxia kauaiensis,
Remya kauaiensis, Schiedea apokremnos, Schiedea membranacea, and
Wilkesia hobdyi and not managed for the conservation of these 15
species. There are other locations that have been identified to meet
the recovery goal of 8 to 10 populations throughout their historical
ranges on Kauai (Brighamia insignis, Hedyotis st.-johnii, Munroidendron
racemosum, Nothocestrum peltatum, Poa mannii, Pteralyxia kauaiensis,
Remya kauaiensis, Schiedea apokremnos, Schiedea membranacea, and
Wilkesia hobdyi) and on other islands (Cyperus trachysanthos, Ischaemum
byrone, Lobelia niihauensis, Melicope knudsenii, and Peucedanum
sandwicense).
The area designated as critical habitat for the Kauai and Niihau
endemic species Brighamia insignis provides habitat within its
historical range for seven populations. The remaining area designated
as critical habitat provides habitat within the historical ranges for
six populations of Alsinidendron lychnoides, eight populations of
Chamaesyce halemanui, three populations each of Cyanea recta and Cyanea
remyi, two populations of Cyrtandra limahuliensis, four populations of
Delissea rhytidosperma, three populations of Delissea rivularis, two
populations of Diellia pallida, one population of Dubautia latifolia,
eight populations of Exocarpos luteolus, seven populations of Hedyotis
st.-johnii, one population of Hesperomannia lydgatei, five populations
of Hibiscadelphus woodii, eight populations of Hibiscus waimeae ssp.
hannerae, five populations of Kokia kauaiensis, one population of
Labordia lydgatei, four populations of Lipochaeta fauriei, three
populations of Melicope haupuensis, six populations of Munroidendron
racemosum, three populations of Myrsine linearifolia, five populations
of Nothocestrum peltatum, four populations of Phyllostegia wawrana,
seven populations of Poa mannii, one population of Poa sandvicensis,
five populations each of Poa siphonoglossa and Pteralyxia kauaiensis,
six populations of Remya kauaiensis, three populations of Remya
montgomeryi, nine populations of Schiedea apokremnos, six populations
of Schiedea kauaiensis, five populations of Schiedea membranacea, two
populations of Schiedea spergulina var. spergulina, three populations
of Stenogyne campanulata, nine populations of Wilkesia hobdyi, and four
populations of Xylosma crenatum. All of these are Kauai endemic
species.
The area designated as critical habitat for the following multi-
island species provides habitat within their historical ranges for one
population each of Adenophorus periens and Alectryon macrococcus, four
populations of Centaurium sebaeoides, one population of Ctenitis
squamigera, six populations of Cyperus trachysanthos, three populations
of Delissea undulata, one population of Diplazium molokaiense, four
populations of Euphorbia haeleeleana, three populations each of
Flueggea neowawraea and Gouania meyenii, seven populations of Hedyotis
cookiana, one population of Ischaemum byrone, two populations of
Isodendrion laurifolium, three populations of Isodendrion longifolium,
four populations of Lobelia niihauensis, three populations each of
Mariscus pennatiformis and Melicope knudsenii, two populations of
Melicope pallida, three populations of Peucedanum sandwicense, two
populations of Plantago princeps, four populations of Platanthera
holochila, and five populations of Solanum sandwicense.
These modifications resulted in the reduction from 8,238 ha (20,355
ac) to 6,102 ha (15,078 ac). This unit was renamed Kauai 11--
Adenophorus periens--d, Kauai 11--Alectryon macroccus--b, Kauai 11--
Alsinidendron lychnoides--a, Kauai 11--Brighamia insignis--c, Kauai
11--Centaurium sebaeoides--a, Kauai 11--Chamaesyce halemanui--c, Kauai
11--Ctenitis squamigera--a, Kauai 11--Cyanea recta--d, Kauai 11--Cyanea
remyi--d, Kauai 11--Cyperus trachysanthos--a, Kauai 11--Cyrtandra
limahuliensis--e, Kauai 11--Delissea rhytidosperma--b, Kauai 11--
Delissea rhytidosperma--c, Kauai 11--Delissea rivularis--a, Kauai 11--
Delissea undulata--a, Kauai 11--Delissea undulata--b, Kauai 11--Diellia
pallida--a, Kauai 11--Diplazium molokaiense--a, Kauai 11--Dubautia
latifolia--b, Kauai 11--Euphorbia haeleeleana--a, Kauai 11--Euphorbia
haeleeleana--b, Kauai 11--Exocarpos luteolus--b, Kauai 11--Exocarpos
luteolus--c, Kauai 11--Exocarpos luteolus--e, Kauai 11--Flueggea
neowawraea--a, Kauai 11--Flueggea neowawraea--b, Kauai 11--Flueggea
neowawraea--d, Kauai 11--Flueggea neowawraea--e, Kauai 11--Flueggea
neowawraea--f, Kauai 11--Gouania meyenii--a, Kauai 11--Gouania
meyenii--b, Kauai 11--Hedyotis cookiana--a, Kauai 11--Hedyotis st.-
johnii--a, Kauai 11--Hesperomannia lydgatei--c, Kauai 11--
Hibiscadelphus woodii--a, Kauai 11--Hibiscadelphus woodii--b, Kauai
11--Hibiscus waimeae ssp. hannerae--a, Kauai 11--Ischaemum byrone--d,
Kauai 11--Isodendrion laurifolium--a, Kauai 11--Isodendrion
longifolium--c, Kauai 11--Isodendrion longifolium--e, Kauai 11--Kokia
kauaiensis--b, Kauai 11--Kokia kauaiensis--c, Kauai 11--Kokia
kauaiensis--d, Kauai 11--Labordia lydgatei--e, Kauai 11--Lipochaeta
fauriei--b, Kauai 11--Lobelia niihauensis--b, Kauai 11--Mariscus
pennatiformis--a, Kauai 11--Melicope haupuensis--b, Kauai 11--Melicope
knudsenii--a, Kauai 11--Melicope pallida--b, Kauai 11--Munroidendron
racemosum--c, Kauai 11--Myrsine linearifolia--d, Kauai 11--Myrsine
linearifolia--e, Kauai 11--Nothocestrum peltatum--b, Kauai 11--
Nothocestrum peltatum--c, Kauai 11--Peucedanum sandwicense--b, Kauai
11--Peucedanum sandwicense--c, Kauai 11--Phyllostegia wawrana--b, Kauai
11--Phyllostegia wawrana--d, Kauai 11--Plantago princeps--b, Kauai 11--
Plantago princeps--d, Kauai 11--Platanthera holochila--a, Kauai 11--Poa
mannii--a, Kauai 11--Poa mannii--c, Kauai 11--Poa mannii--d, Kauai 11--
Poa sandvicensis--b, Kauai 11--Poa siphonoglossa--a, Kauai 11--
[[Page 9181]]
Pteralyxia kauaiensis--c, Kauai 11--Pteralyxia kauaiensis--d, Kauai
11--Pteralyxia kauaiensis--e, Kauai 11--Pteralyxia kauaiensis--g, Kauai
11--Remya kauaiensis--b, Kauai 11--Remya kauaiensis--c, Kauai 11--Remya
montgomeryi--a, Kauai 11--Remya montgomeryi--c, Kauai 11--Schiedea
apokremnos--a, Kauai 11--Schiedea apokremnos--b, Kauai 11--Schiedea
apokremnos--c, Kauai 11--Schiedea kauaiensis--b, Kauai 11--Schiedea
kauaiensis--c, Kauai 11--Schiedea kauaiensis--d, Kauai 11--Schiedea
membranacea--b, Kauai 11--Schiedea membranacea--c, Kauai 11--Schiedea
membranacea--d, Kauai 11--Schiedea spergulina var. spergulina--a, Kauai
11--Solanum sandwicense--a, Kauai 11--Stenogyne campanulata--a, Kauai
11--Wilkesia hobdyi--a, Kauai 11--Xylosma crenatum--a, Kauai 14--
Panicum niihauense--a, and Kauai 14--Sesbania tomentosa--b.
Kauai J
This unit was proposed as critical habitat for 26 species:
Adenophorus periens, Alsinidendron lychnoides, Bonamia menziesii,
Brighamia insignis, Cyanea recta, Cyanea remyi, Cyrtandra cyaneoides,
Cyrtandra limahuliensis, Delissea rivularis, Delissea undulata,
Euphorbia haeleeleana, Exocarpos luteolus, Hesperomannia lydgatei,
Hibiscus waimeae ssp. hannerae, Isodendrion longifolium, Labordia
lydgatei, Lobelia niihauensis, Munroidendron racemosum, Myrsine
linearifolia, Peucedanum sandwicense, Phyllostegia wawrana, Plantago
princeps, Platanthera holochila, Remya montgomeryi, Schiedea kauaiensis
and Schiedea membranacea.
We excluded the proposed critical habitat for the Kauai endemic
species Schiedea membranacea. This area is not essential for the
conservation of this species because there are at least 10 other
locations throughout its historical range on Kauai that contain a
higher quality habitat or are on lands with a management mandate.
We excluded the proposed critical habitat for the Kauai and Niihau
endemic species Brighamia insignis. This area is not essential for the
conservation of this species because there are at least 10 other
locations that have been identified to meet the recovery goal of 8 to
10 populations throughout its historical range on Kauai and Niihau that
contain a higher quality habitat and/or are on lands with a management
mandate.
We excluded the proposed critical habitat for the multi-island
species Bonamia menziesii, Euphorbia haeleeleana, and Peucedanum
sandwicense. These areas are not essential for the conservation of
these three species because there are at least 10 other locations that
have been identified to meet the recovery goal of 8 to 10 populations
of each species throughout their historical ranges on Kauai and other
islands that contain a higher quality habitat and/or are on lands with
a management mandate.
Modifications were made to this unit to exclude degraded areas not
essential to the conservation of Adenophorus periens, Alsinidendron
lychnoides, Cyanea recta, Cyanea remyi, Cyrtandra cyaneoides, Cyrtandra
limahuliensis, Delissea rivularis, Delissea undulata, Exocarpos
luteolus, Hesperomannia lydgatei, Hibiscus waimeae ssp. hannerae,
Isodendrion longifolium, Labordia lydgatei, Lobelia niihauensis,
Myrsine linearifolia, Phyllostegia wawrana, Plantago princeps,
Platanthera holochila, Remya montgomeryi, and Schiedea kauaiensis.
The area designated as critical habitat provides habitat for six
populations of Alsinidendron lychnoides, three populations each of
Cyanea recta and Cyanea remyi, four populations of Cyrtandra
cyaneoides, six populations of Cyrtandra limahuliensis, three
populations of Delissea rivularis, four populations of Exocarpos
luteolus, one population of Hesperomannia lydgatei, eight populations
of Hibiscus waimeae ssp. hannerae, one population of Labordia lydgatei,
four populations of Remya montgomeryi, and one population of Schiedea
kauaiensis within the historical ranges of these Kauai endemic species.
The area designated as critical habitat provides habitat for one
population each of Adenophorus periens and Delissea undulata, two
populations of Isodendrion longifolium, five populations of Lobelia
niihauensis, six populations of Munroidendron racemosum, one population
of Myrsine linearifolia, three populations of Phyllostegia wawrana, one
population of Plantago princeps, and four populations of Platanthera
holochila within the historical ranges of these multi-island species.
These modifications resulted in the reduction from 5,536 ha (13,681
ac) to 2,026 ha (5,006 ac). This unit was renamed Kauai 11--Adenophorus
periens--d, Kauai 11--Alsinidendron lychnoides--a, Kauai 11--Cyanea
recta--d, Kauai 11--Cyanea remyi--d, Kauai 11--Cyrtandra cyaneoides--c,
Kauai 10--Cyrtandra limahuliensis--c, Kauai 11--Cyrtandra
limahuliensis--e, Kauai 11--Delissea rivularis--a, Kauai 11--Delissea
undulata--a, Kauai 11--Exocarpos luteolus--b, Kauai 11--Hesperomannia
lydgatei--c, Kauai 11--Hibiscus waimeae ssp. hannerae--a, Kauai 11--
Isodendrion longifolium--e, Kauai 11--Labordia lydgatei--e, Kauai 11--
Lobelia niihauensis--b, Kauai 11--Munroidendron racemosum--c, Kauai
11--Myrsine linearifolia--d, Kauai 11--Phyllostegia wawrana--b, Kauai
10--Plantago princeps--a, Kauai 11--Platanthera holochila--a, Kauai
10--Pteralyxia kauaiensis--b, Kauai 11--Remya montgomeryi--b, and Kauai
11--Schiedea kauaiensis--a.
Kauai K
This unit was proposed as critical habitat for 13 species:
Adenophorus periens, Alsinidendron lychnoides, Bonamia menziesii,
Cyanea recta, Cyanea remyi, Cyrtandra cyaneoides, Cyrtandra
limahuliensis, Hesperomannia lydgatei, Isodendrion longifolium,
Labordia lydgatei, Myrsine linearifolia, Plantago princeps, and
Schiedea membranacea.
We excluded the proposed critical habitat for Alsinidendron
lychnoides, and Schiedea membranacea, two Kauai endemic species, and
for Bonamia menziesii, a multi-island species. These areas are not
essential for the conservation of these three species because they are
more degraded than other areas that have been designated to provide
habitat for 8 to 10 populations throughout their historical ranges on
Kauai (Alsinidendron lychnoides and Schiedea membranacea) or proposed
on other islands (Bonamia menziesii.)
Modifications were made to this unit to exclude degraded areas not
essential to the conservation of Adenophorus periens, Cyanea recta,
Cyanea remyi, Cyrtandra cyaneoides, Cyrtandra limahuliensis,
Isodendrion longifolium, or Plantago princeps. There are other areas
that have been identified to meet the recovery goals of 8 to 10
populations of each species throughout their historical ranges on Kauai
(Cyanea recta, Cyanea remyi, Cyrtandra cyaneoides, and Cyrtandra
limahuliensis) and other islands (Adenophorus periens, Isodendrion
longifolium and Plantago princeps).
The area designated as critical habitat provides habitat for three
populations of Cyanea recta, one population of Cyanea remyi, eight
populations of Cyrtandra cyaneoides, two populations of Cyrtandra
limahuliensis, four populations of Hesperomannia lydgatei, and one
population each of Labordia lydgatei and Myrsine linearifolia within
the historical ranges of these Kauai endemic species.
The area designated as critical habitat provides habitat for one
population each of Adenophorus periens, Isodendrion
[[Page 9182]]
longifolium, and Plantago princeps within the historical ranges for
these multi-island species.
These modifications resulted in the reduction from 1,752 ha (4,330
ac) to 1,667 ha (4,119 ac). This unit was renamed Kauai 11--Adenophorus
periens--c, Kauai 11--Cyanea recta--c, Kauai 11--Cyanea remyi--c, Kauai
11--Cyrtandra cyaneoides--b, Kauai 11--Cyrtandra cyaneoides--c, Kauai
11--Cyrtandra limahuliensis--d, Kauai 11--Hesperomannia lydgatei--b,
Kauai 11--Isodendrion longifolium--d, Kauai 11--Labordia lydgatei--c,
Kauai 11--Labordia lydgatei--d, Kauai 11--Myrsine linearifolia--f, and
Kauai 11--Plantago princeps--c.
Kauai L
This unit was proposed as critical habitat for 13 species:
Adenophorus periens, Bonamia menziesii, Cyanea recta, Cyanea remyi,
Cyrtandra cyaneoides, Cyrtandra limahuliensis, Hesperomannia lydgatei,
Isodendrion longifolium, Labordia lydgatei, Lysimachia filifolia,
Myrsine linearifolia, Plantago princeps and Platanthera holochila.
We excluded the proposed critical habitat for the Kauai endemic
species Hesperomannia lydgatei and for the multi-island species Bonamia
menziesii, Lysimachia filifolia, and Platanthera holochila. These areas
are not essential for the conservation of these four species because
they are highly degraded and are unlikely to be restored by the State
or private landowners (Buck 2002). There are other locations that have
been identified to meet the recovery goals of 8 to 10 populations
throughout their historical ranges on Kauai (Hesperomannia lydgatei) or
on other islands (Bonamia menziesii, Lysimachia filifolia, and
Platanthera holochila).
Modifications were made to this unit to exclude highly degraded
areas not essential to the conservation of Adenophorus periens, Cyanea
recta, Cyanea remyi, Cyrtandra limahuliensis, Labordia lydgatei,
Myrsine linearifolia, or Plantago princeps. In addition, it is unlikely
that the State or private landowners will restore these areas (Buck
2002). Other locations are being designated that will provide habitat
for 8 to 10 populations of each species throughout their historical
ranges on Kauai (Cyanea recta, Cyanea remyi, Cyrtandra limahuliensis,
Labordia lydgatei, Myrsine linearifolia) and on other islands
(Adenophorus periens and Plantago princeps).
The area designated as critical habitat provides habitat for three
populations of Cyanea recta, one population of Cyanea remyi, eight
populations of Cyrtandra cyaneoides, six populations of Cyrtandra
limahuliensis, one population of Labordia lydgatei, and one population
each of Myrsine linearifolia and Pteralyxia kauaiensis within the
historical ranges for these Kauai and Niihau endemic species.
The area designated as critical habitat provides habitat for one
population each of Adenophorus periens, Isodendrion longifolium, and
Plantago princeps within the historical ranges for these multi-island
species.
These modifications resulted in the reduction from 3,407 ha (8,418
ac) to 240 ha (592 ac). This unit was renamed Kauai 11--Adenophorus
periens--c, Kauai 11--Cyanea recta--c, Kauai 11--Cyanea remyi--c, Kauai
11--Cyrtandra cyaneoides--b, Kauai 11--Cyrtandra cyaneoides--c, Kauai
10--Cyrtandra limahuliensis--c, Kauai 11--Cyrtandra limahuliensis--d,
Kauai 11--Isodendrion longifolium--d, Kauai 11--Labordia lydgatei--d,
Kauai 11--Myrsine linearifolia--f, Kauai 10--Plantago princeps--a,
Kauai 11--Plantago princeps--c, and Kauai 10--Pteralyxia kauaiensis--b.
Kauai M
This unit was proposed as critical habitat for nine species:
Adenophorus periens, Bonamia menziesii, Cyanea asarifolia, Cyanea
recta, Cyanea remyi, Cyrtandra cyaneoides, Cyrtandra limahuliensis,
Labordia lydgatei, and Phyllostegia wawrana.
We excluded the proposed critical habitat for the multi-island
species Bonamia menziesii. This area is not essential for the
conservation of this species because it is highly degraded and is
unlikely to be restored by the State or private landowners (Buck 2002).
There are at least 10 other locations that have been designated or
proposed for Bonamia menziesii throughout its historical range on Kauai
and on other islands.
Modifications were made to this unit to exclude highly degraded
areas not essential to the conservation of Adenophorus periens, Cyanea
asarifolia, Cyanea recta, Cyanea remyi, Cyrtandra limahuliensis,
Labordia lydgatei, and Phyllostegia wawrana. In addition, it is
unlikely that the State or private landowners will restore these areas
(Buck 2002). There are other locations that have been designated to
meet the recovery goals of 8 to 10 populations of each species
throughout their historical ranges on Kauai (Cyanea asarifolia, Cyanea
recta, Cyanea remyi, Cyrtandra limahuliensis, Labordia lydgatei, and
Phyllostegia wawrana) and proposed on other islands (Adenophorus
periens).
The area designated as critical habitat provides habitat for two
populations of Cyanea asarifolia, four populations of Cyanea recta, two
populations of Cyanea remyi, two populations each of Cyrtandra
cyaneoides and Cyrtandra limahuliensis, five populations of Hibiscus
clayi, and two populations each of Labordia lydgatei and Phyllostegia
wawrana within the historical ranges for these Kauai endemic species.
The area designated as critical habitat for the multi-island
species Adenophorus periens provides habitat within its historical
range for one population.
These modifications resulted in the reduction from 3,302 ha (8,160
ac) to 1,040 ha (2,570 ac). This unit was renamed Kauai 4--Adenophorus
periens--a, Kauai 4--Cyanea asarifolia--a, Kauai 4--Cyanea recta--a,
Kauai 4--Cyanea recta--b, Kauai 4--Cyanea remyi--a, Kauai 4--Cyrtandra
cyaneoides--a, Kauai 4--Cyrtandra limahuliensis--a, Kauai 4--Cyrtandra
limahuliensis--b, Kauai 4--Hibiscus clayi--a, Kauai 4--Hibiscus clayi--
b, Kauai 4--Hibiscus clayi--c, Kauai 4--Hibiscus clayi--d, Kauai 4--
Hibiscus clayi--e, Kauai 4--Labordia lydgatei--a, and Kauai 4--
Phyllostegia wawrana--a.
Kauai N
This unit was proposed as critical habitat for 23 species:
Adenophorus periens, Bonamia menziesii, Cyanea asarifolia, Cyanea
recta, Cyanea remyi, Cyanea undulata, Cyrtandra cyaneoides, Cyrtandra
limahuliensis, Delissea rivularis, Dubautia pauciflorula, Exocarpos
luteolus, Hesperomannia lydgatei, Isodendrion longifolium, Labordia
lydgatei, Labordia tinifolia var. wahiawaensis, Lysimachia filifolia,
Myrsine linearifolia, Phlegmariurus nutans, Phyllostegia wawrana,
Plantago princeps, Platanthera holochila, Viola helenae, and Viola
kauaiensis var. wahiawaensis.
We excluded the proposed critical habitat for the Kauai endemic
species Cyanea recta, Cyrtandra cyaneoides, Delissea rivularis, and
Phyllostegia wawrana, and for the multi-island species Platanthera
holochila. These areas are not essential to the conservation of these
five species because they are highly degraded and are unlikely to be
restored by the State or private landowners (Buck 2002). There are
other locations that have been designated to meet the recovery goals of
8 to 10 populations of each species throughout their historical ranges
on Kauai (Cyanea recta, Cyrtandra
[[Page 9183]]
cyaneoides, Delissea rivularis, and Phyllostegia wawrana) or proposed
on other islands (Platanthera holochila).
Modifications were made to this unit to exclude highly degraded
areas not essential to the conservation of Adenophorus periens, Bonamia
menziesii, Cyanea remyi, Cyrtandra limahuliensis, Isodendrion
longifolium, Labordia lydgatei, Lysimachia filifolia, and Plantago
princeps. In addition, it is unlikely that the State or private
landowners will restore these areas (Buck 2002). There are other
locations that have been designated to meet the recovery goals of 8 to
10 populations of each species throughout their historical ranges on
Kauai (Cyanea remyi, Cyrtandra limahuliensis, and Labordia lydgatei) or
proposed on other islands (Adenophorus periens, Bonamia menziesii,
Isodendrion longifolium, Lysimachia filifolia, and Plantago princeps).
The area designated as critical habitat provides for seven
populations of Cyanea asarifolia; four populations of Cyanea remyi; six
populations of Cyanea undulata; four populations each of Cyrtandra
limahuliensis and Dubautia pauciflorula; one population of Exocarpos
luteolus; four populations of Hesperomannia lydgatei; three populations
of Labordia lydgatei; four populations of Labordia tinifolia var.
wahiawaensis; one population each of Myrsine linearifolia and
Pteralyxia kauaiensis; and five populations each of Viola helenae and
Viola kauaiensis var. wahiawaensis within the historical ranges for
these Kauai endemic species.
The area designated as critical habitat provides for one population
each of Adenophorus periens, Bonamia menziesii, and Isodendrion
longifolium, four populations of Lysimachia filifolia, three
populations of Phlegmariurus nutans, and one population of Plantago
princeps within the historical ranges for these multi-island species.
These modifications resulted in the reduction from 6,599 ha (16,307
ac) to 3,274 ha (8,090 ac). This unit was renamed Kauai 10--Adenophorus
periens--b, Kauai 10--Bonamia menziesii--a, Kauai 10--Cyanea
asarifolia--b, Kauai 10--Cyanea remyi--b, Kauai 10--Cyanea undulata--a,
Kauai 10--Cyrtandra limahuliensis--c, Kauai 10--Dubautia pauciflorula--
a, Kauai 10--Exocarpos luteolus--a, Kauai 10--Hesperomannia lydgatei--
a, Kauai 10--Isodendrion longifolium--b, Kauai 10--Labordia lydgatei--
b, Kauai 10--Labordia tinifolia var. wahiawaensis--a, Kauai 10--
Lysimachia filifolia--a, Kauai 10--Myrsine linearifolia--b, Kauai 10--
Phlegmariurus nutans--a, Kauai 10--Plantago princeps--a, Kauai 10--
Pteralyxia kauaiensis--b, Kauai 10--Viola helenae--a, and Kauai 10--
Viola kauaiensis--a.
Kauai O
This unit was proposed as critical habitat for 51 species:
Adenophorus periens, Alectryon macrococcus, Alsinidendron lychnoides,
Alsinidendron viscosum, Bonamia menziesii, Chamaesyce halemanui, Cyanea
recta, Delissea rivularis, Diellia erecta, Diellia pallida, Diplazium
molokaiensis, Dubautia latifolia, Euphorbia haeleeleana, Exocarpos
luteolus, Flueggea neowawraea, Gouania meyenii, Isodendrion
laurifolium, Isodendrion longifolium, Kokia kauaiensis, Lipochaeta
fauriei, Lipochaeta micrantha, Lobelia niihauensis, Mariscus
pennatiformis, Melicope haupuensis, Melicope knudsenii, Melicope
pallida, Munroidendron racemosum, Myrsine linearifolia, Nothocestrum
peltatum, Peucedanum sandwicense, Phyllostegia knudsenii, Phyllostegia
waimeae, Phyllostegia wawrana, Plantago princeps, Platanthera
holochila, Poa mannii, Poa sandvicensis, Poa siphonoglossa, Pteralyxia
kauaiensis, Remya kauaiensis, Remya montgomeryi, Schiedea helleri,
Schiedea kauaiensis, Schiedea membranacea, Schiedea spergulina var.
spergulina, Schiedea stellarioides, Solanum sandwicense, Spermolepis
hawaiiensis, Stenogyne campanulata, Xylosma crenatum, and Zanthoxylum
hawaiiense.
We excluded the proposed critical habitat for the Kauai endemic
species Cyanea recta and for the multi-island species Adenophorus
periens, Diplazium molokaiensis, Isodendrion longifolium, Mariscus
pennatiformis, Peucedanum sandwicense, and Plantago princeps. These
areas are not essential for the conservation of these seven species
because there are other locations that have been designated to meet the
recovery goals of 8 to 10 populations of each species on Kauai (Cyanea
recta) and proposed on other islands (Adenophorus periens, Diplazium
molokaiensis, Isodendrion longifolium, Mariscus pennatiformis,
Peucedanum sandwicense, and Plantago princeps) that either contain
higher quality habitat or have a management mandate.
Modifications were made to this unit to exclude degraded areas not
essential to the conservation of Alectryon macrococcus, Alsinidendron
lychnoides, Alsinidendron viscosum, Chamaesyce halemanui, Delissea
rivularis, Diellia erecta, Diellia pallida, Dubautia latifolia,
Euphorbia haeleeleana, Exocarpos luteolus, Flueggea neowawraea, Gouania
meyenii, Isodendrion laurifolium, Kokia kauaiensis, Lipochaeta fauriei,
Lipochaeta micrantha, Lobelia niihauensis, Melicope haupuensis,
Melicope knudsenii, Melicope pallida, Munroidendron racemosum, Myrsine
linearifolia, Nothocestrum peltatum, Phyllostegia knudsenii,
Platanthera holochila, Poa mannii, Poa sandvicensis, Poa siphonoglossa,
Pteralyxia kauaiensis, Remya kauaiensis, Remya montgomeryi, Schiedea
helleri, Schiedea membranacea, Schiedea spergulina var. spergulina,
Schiedea stellarioides, Solanum sandwicense, Spermolepis hawaiiensis,
Xylosma crenatum, Zanthoxylum hawaiiense.
The area designated as critical habitat provides for ten
populations of Alsinidendron lychnoides, nine populations of
Alsinidendron viscosum, two populations of Chamaesyce halemanui, three
populations of Delissea rivularis, one population of Diellia pallida,
seven populations of Dubautia latifolia, eight populations of Exocarpos
luteolus, three populations of Kokia kauaiensis, two populations each
of Lipochaeta fauriei, Lipochaeta micrantha, Melicope haupuensis, and
Munroidendron racemosum, five populations of Myrsine linearifolia, nine
populations of Nothocestrum peltatum, three populations of Phyllostegia
waimeae, two populations of Phyllostegia wawrana, three populations of
Poa mannii, six populations of Poa sandvicensis, ten populations of Poa
siphonoglossa, two populations of Pteralyxia kauaiensis, four
populations of Remya kauaiensis, six populations of Remya montgomeryi,
seven populations of Schiedea helleri, two populations each of Schiedea
kauaiense, Schiedea membranacea, and Schiedea spergulina var.
spergulina, six populations of Schiedea stellarioides, three
populations of Stenogyne campanulata, and five populations of Xylosma
crenatum within the historical ranges for these Kauai endemic species.
The area designated as critical habitat provides for one population
each of Alectryon macrococcus, Bonamia menziesii, and Diellia erecta,
two populations of Euphorbia haeleeleana, one population of Flueggea
neowawraea, two populations each of Gouania meyenii, Isodendrion
laurifolium, Lobelia niihauensis, and Melicope knudsenii, one
population of Melicope pallida, four populations of Platanthera
holochila, six populations of Solanum sandwicense, one population of
Spermolepis hawaiiensis, and two populations of Zanthoxylum
[[Page 9184]]
hawaiiense within the historical range for these multi-island species.
These modifications resulted in the reduction from 9,462 ha (23,382
ac) to 5,933 ha (14,661 ac). This unit was renamed Kauai 11--Alectryon
macroccus--a, Kauai 11--Alsinidendron lychnoides--a, Kauai 11--
Alsinidendron lychnoides--b, Kauai 11--Alsinidendron lychnoides--c,
Kauai 11--Alsinidendron viscosum--a, Kauai 11--Alsinidendron viscosum--
b, Kauai 11--Alsinidendron viscosum--c, Kauai 11--Alsinidendron
viscosum--d, Kauai 11--Bonamia menziesii--b, Kauai 11--Chamaesyce
halemanui--a, Kauai 11--Chamaesyce halemanui--b, Kauai 11--Delissea
rivularis--a, Kauai 11--Diellia erecta--a, Kauai 11--Diellia pallida--
b, Kauai 11--Dubautia latifolia--a, Kauai 11--Dubautia latifolia--b,
Kauai 11--Dubautia latifolia--c, Kauai 11--Euphorbia haeleeleana--c,
Kauai 11--Exocarpos luteolus--b, Kauai 11--Exocarpos luteolus--d, Kauai
11--Exocarpos luteolus--e, Kauai 11--Flueggea neowawraea--c, Kauai 11--
Gouania meyenii--c, Kauai 11--Isodendrion laurifolium--b, Kauai 11--
Kokia kauaiensis--a, Kauai 11--Lipochaeta fauriei--a, Kauai 11--
Lipochaeta micrantha--b, Kauai 11--Lobelia niihauensis--a, Kauai 11--
Melicope haupuensis--c, Kauai 11--Melicope knudsenii--b, Kauai 11--
Melicope pallida--a, Kauai 11--Munroidendron racemosum--d, Kauai 11--
Myrsine linearifolia--c, Kauai 11--Myrsine linearifolia--e, Kauai 11--
Nothocestrum peltatum--a, Kauai 11--Nothocestrum peltatum--b, Kauai
11--Nothocestrum peltatum--c, Kauai 12--Nothocestrum peltatum--d, Kauai
11--Phyllostegia knudsenii--a, Kauai 11--Phyllostegia waimeae--a, Kauai
11--Phyllostegia waimeae--b, Kauai 11--Phyllostegia wawrana--c, Kauai
11--Platanthera holochila--a, Kauai 11--Poa mannii--b, Kauai 11--Poa
sandvicensis--a, Kauai 11--Poa siphonoglossa--a, Kauai 11--Poa
siphonoglossa--b, Kauai 11--Pteralyxia kauaiensis--f, Kauai 11--Remya
kauaiensis--a, Kauai 11--Remya kauaiensis--d, Kauai 11--Remya
kauaiensis--e, Kauai 12--Remya kauaiensis--f, Kauai 11--Remya
montgomeryi--b, Kauai 11--Remya montgomeryi--c, Kauai 11--Schiedea
helleri--a, Kauai 11--Schiedea helleri--b, Kauai 11--Schiedea helleri--
c, Kauai 11--Schiedea kauaiensis--b, Kauai 11--Schiedea membranacea--a,
Kauai 11--Schiedea spergulina var. spergulina--b, Kauai 11--Schiedea
stellarioides--a, Kauai 11--Schiedea stellarioides--b, Kauai 11--
Solanum sandwicense--a, Kauai 11--Solanum sandwicense--b, Kauai 11--
Spermolepis hawaiiensis--a, Kauai 11--Stenogyne campanulata--a, Kauai
11--Xylosma crenatum--a, Kauai 12--Xylosma crenatum--b, and Kauai 11--
Zanthoxylum hawaiiense--a.
Niihau A
This unit was proposed as critical habitat for two species,
Brighamia insignis and Cyperus trachysanthos. We excluded the proposed
critical habitat for the multi-island species Cyperus trachysanthos.
This area is not essential for the conservation of Cyperus
trachysanthos because it is more degraded than other areas and is not
managed for the conservation of this species, and there are at least 10
other locations that have been designated to meet the recovery goal of
8 to 10 populations throughout its historical range on Kauai and
proposed on other islands.
The area designated as critical habitat for the Kauai and Niihau
endemic species Brighamia insignis provides habitat within its
historical range for one population.
This modification resulted in the reduction from 282 ha (697 ac) to
144 ha (357 ac). This unit was renamed Niihau 1--Brighamia insignis--a.
Critical Habitat
Critical habitat is defined in section 3 of the Act as--(i) The
specific areas within the geographic area occupied by a species, at the
time it is listed in accordance with the Act, on which are found those
physical or biological features (I) essential to the conservation of
the species and (II) that may require special management considerations
or protection; and, (ii) specific areas outside the geographic area
occupied by a species at the time it is listed, upon a determination
that such areas are essential for the conservation of the species.
``Conservation,'' as defined by the Act, means the use of all methods
and procedures that are necessary to bring an endangered or a
threatened species to the point at which listing under the Act is no
longer necessary.
Critical habitat receives protection under section 7 of the Act
through the prohibition against destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat with regard to actions carried out, funded, or
authorized by a Federal agency. Section 7 also requires conferences on
Federal actions that are likely to result in the destruction or adverse
modification of proposed critical habitat. In our regulations at 50 CFR
402.02, we define destruction or adverse modification as ``* * * the
direct or indirect alteration that appreciably diminishes the value of
critical habitat for both the survival and recovery of a listed
species. Such alterations include, but are not limited to, alterations
adversely modifying any of those physical or biological features that
were the basis for determining the habitat to be critical.'' The
relationship between a species survival and its recovery has been a
source of confusion to some in the past. We believe that a species'
ability to recover depends on its ability to survive into the future
when its recovery can be achieved; thus, the concepts of long-term
survival and recovery are intricately linked. However, in the March 15,
2001, decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth
Circuit (Sierra Club v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service et al., 245 F.3d
434) regarding a not prudent finding the Court found our definition of
destruction or adverse modification as currently contained in 50 CFR
402.02 to be invalid. In response to this decision, we are reviewing
the regulatory definition of adverse modification in relation to the
conservation of the species.
In order to be included in a critical habitat designation, the
habitat must first be ``essential to the conservation of the species.''
Critical habitat designations identify, to the extent known, using the
best scientific and commercial data available, habitat areas that
provide essential life-cycle needs of the species (i.e., areas on which
are found the primary constituent elements, as defined at 50 CFR
424.12(b)).
Section 4 requires that we designate critical habitat for a
species, to the extent such habitat is determinable, at the time of
listing. When we designate critical habitat at the time of listing or
under short court-ordered deadlines, we may not have sufficient
information to identify all the areas essential for the conservation of
the species. Nevertheless, we are required to designate those areas we
know to be critical habitat, using the best information available to
us.
Within the geographic areas occupied by the species, we will
designate only areas currently known to be essential. Essential areas
should already have some of the features and habitat characteristics
that are necessary to sustain the species. We will not speculate about
what areas might be found to be essential if better information became
available, or what areas may become essential over time. If the
information available at the time of designation does not show that an
area provides essential life cycle needs of the species, then the area
should not be
[[Page 9185]]
included in the critical habitat designation.
Our regulations State that ``The Secretary shall designate as
critical habitat areas outside the geographical area presently occupied
by a species only when a designation limited to its present range would
be inadequate to ensure the conservation of the species'' (50 CFR
424.12(e)). Accordingly, when the best available scientific and
commercial data do not demonstrate that the conservation needs of the
species require designation of critical habitat outside of occupied
areas, we will not designate critical habitat in areas outside the
geographic area occupied by the species.
Our Policy on Information Standards Under the Endangered Species
Act, published in the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34271),
provides criteria, establishes procedures, and provides guidance to
ensure that our decisions represent the best scientific and commercial
data available. It requires our biologists, to the extent consistent
with the Act and with the use of the best scientific and commercial
data available, to use primary and original sources of information as
the basis for recommendations to designate critical habitat. When
determining which areas are critical habitat, a primary source of
information should be the listing package for the species. Additional
information may be obtained from recovery plans, articles in peer-
reviewed journals, conservation plans developed by States and counties,
scientific status surveys and studies, and biological assessments or
other unpublished materials.
It is important to clearly understand that critical habitat
designations do not signal that habitat outside the designation is
unimportant or may not be required for recovery. Areas outside the
critical habitat designation will continue to be subject to
conservation actions that may be implemented under section 7(a)(1) and
to the regulatory protections afforded by the Act's 7(a)(2) jeopardy
standard and section 9 prohibitions, as determined on the basis of the
best available information at the time of the action. We specifically
anticipate that federally funded or assisted projects affecting listed
species outside their designated critical habitat areas may still
result in jeopardy findings in some cases. Similarly, critical habitat
designations made on the basis of the best available information at the
time of designation will not control the direction and substance of
future recovery plans, habitat conservation plans, or other species
conservation planning efforts if new information available to these
planning efforts calls for a different outcome. Furthermore, we
recognize that designation of critical habitat may not include all of
the habitat areas that may eventually be determined to be necessary for
the recovery of the species.
A. Prudency
Designation of critical habitat is not prudent when one or both of
the following situations exist: (i) the species is threatened by taking
or other human activity, and identification of critical habitat can be
expected to increase the degree of such threat to the species; or (ii)
such designation of critical habitat would not be beneficial to the
species (50 CFR 424.12(a)(1)).
To determine whether critical habitat would be prudent for each
species, we analyzed the potential threats and benefits for each
species in accordance with the court's order. Two species, Acaena
exigua, a multi-island species, and Melicope quadrangularis, a Kauai
endemic species, are no longer extant in the wild. Acaena exigua was
last seen in 2000 and no individuals were seen in a subsequent visit in
2001 to the last known location (Oppenhiemer, pers. comm. 2002).
Melicope quadrangularis was last observed in the Wahiawa drainage area
in 1991. This species has not been seen in surveys of this area
subsequent to Hurricane Iniki in 1992 (S. Perlman and K. Wood, pers.
comm. 2000). In addition, neither species is known to be in storage or
under propagation. Under these circumstances, designation of critical
habitat for Acaena exigua and Melicope quadrangularis is not prudent
because such designation would be of no benefit to these species. If
either species is relocated we may revise this final determination to
incorporate or address new information as new data becomes available
(See 16 U.S.C. 1532 (5)(B); 50 CFR 424.13(f)).
Due to low numbers of individuals and/or populations and their
inherent immobility, the other 93 plants may be vulnerable to
unrestricted collection, vandalism, or disturbance. We examined the
evidence currently available for each of these taxa and found specific
evidence of vandalism, disturbance, and/or the threat of unrestricted
collection for three species of Pritchardia, the native palm, on Kauai
and Niihau. At the time of listing we determined that designation of
critical habitat was not prudent for Pritchardia napaliensis, P.
aylmer-robinsonii, and P. viscosa because it would increase the degree
of threat from vandalism or collecting, and would provide no benefits
(60 FR 53070). At that time, we had information that at least one of
the remaining adult plants has been damaged by spiked boots used either
by a botanist or seed collector to scale these trees (61 FR 53070).
Since publication of the listing rule, we learned of additional
instances of vandalism, collection, and commercial trade involving
these three species of Pritchardia. In 1993, the State's DOFAW planted
39 young Pritchardia napaliensis plants within a fenced exclosure near
the Wailua River. A short time after this, the fence was vandalized and
all 39 plants were removed (A. Kyono, pers. comm. 2000; Craig Koga,
DOFAW, in litt. 1999). In mid-1996, a young plant and seeds of
Pritchardia viscosa were removed from the only known location of this
species (A. Kyono, pers. comm. 2000; C. Koga, in litt. 1999). Recently
we received information on the commercial trade in palms conducted
through the internet (Grant Canterbury, USFWS, in litt. 2000). Several
nurseries advertise and sell seedlings and young plants, including 13
species of Hawaiian Pritchardia. Seven of these species are federally
protected, including Pritchardia aylmer-robinsonii and P. napaliensis.
In light of this information, we believe that designation of
critical habitat would likely increase the threat to these three
species of Pritchardia on Kauai and Niihau from vandalism or
collection. These plants are easy to identify, and they are attractive
to collectors of rare palms either for their personal use or to trade
or sell for personal gain (Johnson 1996). The final listing rules for
these three species contained only general information on their
distribution, but the publication of precise maps and descriptions of
critical habitat in the Federal Register would make these species more
vulnerable to incidents of vandalism or collection, and, therefore,
contribute to the decline of these species and make recovery more
difficult (61 FR 53070).
In addition, we believe that designation would not provide
significant benefits that would outweigh these increased risks. First,
Pritchardia napaliensis and P. viscosa do not occur on Federal land,
and the State lands where they are found are zoned for conservation.
Some of the plants are on lands set aside in perpetuity to conserve
their natural flora and fauna, or as geological sites (State of Hawaii
natural area reserves) (HRS 195-1). In addition, these species are
found in areas that are remote and accessible only by four-wheel drive
(Pritchardia viscosa only), foot, boat, or helicopter. It is,
therefore, unlikely that the lands on which these
[[Page 9186]]
species are found will be developed. Since there do not appear to be
any actions in the future that would involve a Federal agency,
designation of critical habitat would not provide any additional
protection to the species than they do not already have through listing
alone. If, however, in the future any Federal involvement did occur,
such as through the permitting process or funding by the U.S.
Department of Agriculture, the U.S. Department of Interior, the Corps
through section 404 of the Clean Water Act, the U.S. Federal Department
of Housing and Urban Development or the Federal Highway Administration,
the actions would be subject to consultation under section 7 of the
Act.
Pritchardia aylmer-robinsonii is only found on Niihau, which is
presently zoned for agriculture. There are no hotels, resorts, or other
commercial development on the island. Public access to the island is
not generally authorized by the landowner. Most of the people living on
this island (fewer than 300) are employed in ranching activities
(Department of Geography 1998). While future activities on the island
are unknown, it is unlikely that the land on which this species is
found will be developed. Future projects that would require Federal
permitting or funding such as those mentioned above are particularly
unlikely on this privately owned island. Although access to the island
has been and continues to be restricted, P. aylmer-robinsonii is
endemic only to Niihau, so any commercial availability indicates that
collection, either with or without the land owner's permission, has
occurred in the past and may still be occurring.
We acknowledge that critical habitat designation, in some
situations, may provide some value to the species, for example, by
identifying areas important for conservation and calling attention to
those areas in need of special protection. However, for these three
species, we believe that the benefits of designating critical habitat
do not outweigh the potential increased threats from vandalism or
collection. Given all of the above considerations, we determine that
designation of critical habitat for Pritchardia aylmer-robinsonii, P.
napaliensis, and P. viscosa is not prudent.
On January 9, 2003, we found that critical habitat was prudent for
the following 15 multi-island species: Adenophorus periens, Bonamia
menziesii, Centaurium sebaeoides, Ctenitis squamigera, Cyperus
trachysanthos, Diellia erecta, Diplazium molokaiense, Hibiscus
brackenridgei, Isodendrion pyrifolium, Sesbania tomentosa, Silene
lanceolata, Solanum incompletum, Spermolepis hawaiiensis, Vigna o-
wahuensis and Zanthoxylum hawaiiense (68 FR 1220), which also occur on
Kauai or Niihau.
Four species no longer occur on Kauai or Niihau but are reported
from one or more other islands. To find whether critical habitat would
be prudent for these four species we analyzed the potential threats and
benefits for each species in accordance with the court's orders. These
four plants were listed as endangered species under the Act between
1991 and 1996. At the time each plant was listed, we determined that
designation of critical habitat was not prudent because designation
would increase the degree of threat to the species and/or would not
benefit the plant. We examined the evidence available for these four
species and have not, at this time, found specific evidence of taking,
vandalism, collection, or trade of these species or of similar species.
Consequently, while we remain concerned that these activities could
potentially threaten Achyranthes mutica, Mariscus pennatiformis,
Phlegmariurus manni, and Phlegmariurus nutans in the future, consistent
with applicable regulations (50 CFR 424.12(a)(1)(i) and the court's
discussion of these regulations, we do not find that these species are
currently threatened by taking or other human activity, which would be
exacerbated by the designation of critical habitat. In the absence of
finding that critical habitat would increase threats to a species, if
there are any benefits to critical habitat designation, then a prudent
finding is warranted. The potential benefits include (1) triggering
section 7 consultation in new areas where it would not otherwise occur
because, for example, it is or has become unoccupied or the occupancy
is in question; (2) focusing conservation activities on the most
essential areas; (3) providing educational benefits to State or county
governments or private entities; and (4) preventing people from causing
inadvertent harm to the species. In the case of Achyranthes mutica,
Mariscus pennatiformis, Phlegmariurus manni, and Phlegmariurus nutans
there would be some benefits to critical habitat. The primary
regulatory effect of critical habitat is the section 7 requirement that
Federal agencies refrain from taking any action that destroys or
adversely affects critical habitat. None of these four species are
reported from Federal lands on Kauai (the entire island of Niihau is
privately owned) where actions are subject to section 7 consultation.
However, two of these species, Phlegmariurus manni, and Phlegmariurus
nutans are reported from Federal lands or lands that are administered
by a Federal agency on other islands (Phlegmariurus nutans is reported
from the United States Army's Schofield Barracks Military Reservation
and Kawailoa Training Area, and the Service's Oahu Forest National
Wildlife Refuge on Oahu, and Phlegmariurus manni is reported from
Haleakala National Park on Maui). Although Achyranthes mutica and
Mariscus pennatiformis are located exclusively on non-Federal lands
with limited Federal activities on Oahu and Maui, there could be
Federal actions affecting these lands in the future. While a critical
habitat designation for habitat currently occupied by Achyranthes
mutica, Mariscus pennatiformis, Phlegmariurus manni, and Phlegmariurus
nutans would not likely change the section 7 consultation outcome,
since an action that destroys or adversely modifies such critical
habitat would also be likely to result in jeopardy to the species,
there may be instances where section 7 consultation would be triggered
only if critical habitat were designated. There may also be some
educational or informational benefits to the designation of critical
habitat. Educational benefits include the notification of landowner(s),
land managers, and the general public of the importance of protecting
the habitat of these species and dissemination of information regarding
their essential habitat requirements. Therefore, we find that critical
habitat is prudent for these four species (Achyranthes mutica, Mariscus
pennatiformis, Phlegmariurus manni, and Phlegmariurus nutans).
We examined the evidence available for the other 71 taxa and have
not, at this time, found specific evidence of taking, vandalism,
collection or trade of these taxa or of similar species. Consequently,
while we remain concerned that these activities could potentially
threaten these 71 plant species in the future, consistent with
applicable regulations (50 CFR 424.12(a)(1)(i)) and the court's
discussion of these regulations, we do not find that any of these
species are currently threatened by taking or other human activity,
which would be exacerbated by the designation of critical habitat.
In the absence of finding that critical habitat would increase
threats to a species, if there are any benefits to critical habitat
designation, then a prudent finding is warranted. The potential
benefits include: (1) Triggering section 7 consultation in new areas
where it would not otherwise occur because, for example, it is or has
[[Page 9187]]
become unoccupied; (2) focusing conservation activities; (3) providing
educational benefits to State or county governments or private
entities; and (4) preventing people from causing inadvertent harm to
the species.
In the case of these 71 species, there would be some benefits to
critical habitat. The primary regulatory effect of critical habitat is
the section 7 requirement that Federal agencies refrain from taking any
action that destroys or adversely affects critical habitat. One of
these species is reported on or near Federal lands (see Table 2), where
actions are subject to section 7 consultation. Although a majority of
the species considered in this rule are located exclusively on non-
Federal lands with limited Federal activiti