[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 111 (Wednesday, June 10, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 32922-32928]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-13850]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R1-ES-2013-0003; 4500030113]
RIN 1018-AZ25
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designating
Critical Habitat on Molokai, Lanai, Maui, and Kahoolawe for 135 Species
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of comment period.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
reopening of the comment period on our June 11, 2012 (77 FR 34464),
proposal to designate or revise critical habitat for 135 plant and
animal species on the Hawaiian Islands of Molokai, Lanai, Maui, and
Kahoolawe under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act).
These 135 species include 2 plant species for which we reaffirmed their
endangered listing status on May 28, 2013 (78 FR 32014); 37 plant and
animal species we proposed for listing on June 11, 2012, and
subsequently listed as endangered on May 28, 2013 (78 FR 32014); 11
plant and animal species that are also already listed as endangered but
do not have critical habitat designations; and 85 plant species that
are already listed as endangered or threatened and have designated
critical habitat, but for which we proposed revisions to critical
habitat. We are reopening the comment period to allow all interested
parties further opportunity to comment on areas that we are considering
for exclusion in the final rule. Comments previously submitted on the
proposed rule do not need to be resubmitted, as they will be fully
considered in preparation of the final rule.
DATES: Written Comments: We will consider comments received or
postmarked on or before June 25, 2015. Please note comments submitted
electronically using the Federal eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES
section, below) must be received by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the
closing date. If you are submitting your comments by hard copy, please
mail them by June 25, 2015, to ensure that we receive them in time to
give them full consideration.
ADDRESSES: Document Availability: You may obtain copies of the June 11,
2012, proposed rule, this document, and the draft economic analysis of
the proposed designation of critical habitat at http://www.regulations.gov at Docket Number FWS-R1-ES-2013-0003, from the
Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office's Web site (http://www.fws.gov/pacificislands/), or by contacting the Pacific Islands Fish
and Wildlife Office directly (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Written Comments: You may submit written comments by one of the
following methods, or at the public information meeting or public
hearing:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Search for Docket No. FWS-R1-ES-2013-0003, which
is the docket number for this rulemaking, and follow the directions for
submitting a comment.
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public
Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-R1-ES-2013-0003; Division of Policy,
Performance, and Management Programs; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service;
MS: BPHC; 5275 Leesburg Pike; Falls Church, VA 22041-3803.
We will post all comments we receive on http://www.regulations.gov.
This generally means that we will post any personal information you
provide us (see the Public Comments section, below, for more
information).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kristi Young, Acting Field Supervisor,
Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office, 300 Ala Moana Boulevard, Room
3-122, Honolulu, HI 96850; by telephone at 808-792-9400; or by
facsimile at 808-792-9581. Persons who use a telecommunications device
for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service
(FIRS) at 800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Comments
We will accept written comments and information during this
reopened comment period on our proposed designation of critical habitat
for 135 species on the Hawaiian Islands of Molokai, Lanai, Maui, and
Kahoolawe (collectively, ``Maui Nui'') that was published in the
Federal Register on June 11, 2012 (77 FR 34464). In that proposed rule,
we proposed to list 38 species as endangered, reaffirm the listing of 2
endemic Hawaiian plants currently listed as endangered, and designate
critical habitat for 39 of these 40 plant and animal species on the
Hawaiian Islands of Molokai, Lanai, and Maui; and to designate critical
habitat for 11 plant and animal species that are already listed as
endangered, and revise critical habitat for 85 plant species that are
already listed as endangered or threatened on the Hawaiian Islands of
Molokai, Lanai, Maui, and Kahoolawe. On May 28, 2013, we published a
final rule listing 38 Maui Nui species (35 plants and 3 tree snails) as
endangered and reaffirming the listing of 2 plant species as endangered
(78 FR 32014). Critical habitat has not yet been finalized. We have
previously extended or reopened the comment period on the proposed
critical habitat twice: once for 30 days, on August 9, 2012 (77 FR
47587), and again for 30 days on January 31, 2013 (78 FR 6785).
In particular we are seeking public comment on the areas that we
are considering for exclusion from the final designation of critical
habitat. Although we had previously indicated that we were considering
the possible exclusion of non-Federal lands, especially areas in
private ownership, and asked for comment on the broad public benefits
of encouraging collaborative conservation efforts with local and
private partners, we are now offering an additional opportunity for
public comment on this issue. We will consider information and
recommendations from all interested parties.
We are particularly interested in comments concerning whether the
benefits of excluding any particular area from critical habitat
outweigh the benefits of including that area as critical habitat under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act (16 U.S. C. 1531 et se.), after considering
the potential impacts and benefits of the proposed critical habitat
designation. We are considering the possible exclusion of non-Federal
lands, especially areas in private ownership, and whether the benefits
of exclusion may outweigh the benefits of inclusion of those areas. We,
therefore, request specific information on:
The benefits of including any specific areas in the final
designation and supporting rationale.
The benefits of excluding any specific areas from the
final designation and supporting rationale.
Whether any specific exclusions may result in the
extinction of the species and why.
For non-Federal lands in particular, we are interested in
information regarding the potential benefits of including such lands in
critical habitat versus the benefits of excluding such lands from
critical habitat. This information does not need to include a
[[Page 32923]]
detailed technical analysis of the potential effects of designated
critical habitat on non-Federal property. In weighing the potential
benefits of exclusion versus inclusion of non-Federal lands, the
Service may consider whether existing partnership agreements provide
for the management of the species. This consideration may include, for
example, the status of conservation efforts, the effectiveness of any
conservation agreements to conserve the species, and the likelihood of
the conservation agreement's future implementation. In addition, we may
consider the formation or fostering of partnerships with non-Federal
entities that result in positive conservation outcomes for the species,
as evidenced by the development of conservation agreements, as a
potential benefit of exclusion. We request comment on the broad public
benefits of encouraging collaborative efforts and encouraging local and
private conservation efforts.
Our final determination concerning the designation of critical
habitat for 135 species on the Hawaiian Islands of Molokai, Lanai,
Maui, and Kahoolawe will take into consideration all written comments
and information we receive during all comment periods; from peer
reviewers; and during the public information meeting, as well as
comments and public testimony we received during the public hearing,
that we held in Kihei, Maui, on February 21, 2013 (see 78 FR 6785;
January 31, 2013). The comments will be included in the public record
for this rulemaking, and we will fully consider them in the preparation
of our final determination. On the basis of peer reviewer and public
comments, as well as any new information we may receive, we may, during
the development of our final determination concerning critical habitat,
find that areas within the proposed critical habitat designation do not
meet the definition of critical habitat, that some modifications to the
described boundaries are appropriate, or that areas may or may not be
appropriate for exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
If you submitted comments or information on the proposed rule (June
11, 2012; 77 FR 34464) during any of the previous open comment periods
from June 11, 2012, through September 10, 2012 (77 FR 34464 and 77 FR
47587), from January 31, 2013, through March 4, 2013 (78 FR 6785), or
at the public information meeting or hearing on February 21, 2013,
please do not resubmit them. We will fully consider them in the
preparation of our final determinations.
You may submit your comments by one of the methods listed in the
ADDRESSES section. We will post your entire comment--including your
personal identifying information--on http://www.regulations.gov. If you
submit your comment via U.S. mail, you may request at the top of your
document that we withhold personal information such as your street
address, phone number, or email address from public review; however, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.
Comments and materials we receive will be available for public
inspection on http://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-R1-ES-2013-
0003, or by appointment, during normal business hours, at the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Background
The topics discussed below are relevant to designation of critical
habitat for 135 species on the Hawaiian Islands of Molokai, Lanai,
Maui, and Kahoolawe. For more information on previous Federal actions
concerning these species, refer to the proposed listing and designation
of critical habitat published in the Federal Register on June 11, 2012
(77 FR 34464), and the final listing rule for 38 species on Molokai,
Lanai, and Maui published in the Federal Register on May 28, 2013 (78
FR 32014), both of which are available online at http://www.regulations.gov (at Docket Number FWS-R1-ES-2011-0098), or from the
Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT).
Previous Federal Actions
On June 11, 2012, we published a proposed rule (77 FR 34464) to
list 38 species as endangered and designate or revise critical habitat
for 135 plant and animal species. We proposed to designate a total of
271,062 acres (ac) (109,695 hectares (ha)) on the Hawaiian Islands of
Molokai, Lanai, Maui, and Kahoolawe (collectively called Maui Nui) as
critical habitat. Approximately 47 percent of the area proposed as
critical habitat is already designated as critical habitat for other
species, including 85 plant species for which critical habitat was
designated in 1984 (49 FR 44753; November 9, 1984) and 2003 (68 FR
1220, January 9, 2003; 68 FR 12982, March 18, 2003; 68 FR 25934, May
14, 2003). Within that proposed rule, we announced a 60-day comment
period, which we subsequently extended for an additional 30 days (77 FR
47587; August 9, 2012); in total, the comment period began on June 11,
2012, and ended on September 10, 2012. On January 31, 2013, we
announced the availability of the draft economic analysis on the
proposed designation of critical habitat, and reopened the comment
period on our proposed rule, the draft economic analysis, and amended
required determinations for another 30 days, through March 4, 2013 (78
FR 6785). On January 31, 2013, we also announced a public information
meeting in Kihei, Maui, which we held on February 21, 2013, followed by
a public hearing on that same day.
Critical Habitat
Section 3 of the Act defines critical habitat as the specific areas
within the geographical area occupied by a species, at the time it is
listed in accordance with the Act, on which are found those physical or
biological features essential to the conservation of the species and
that may require special management considerations or protection, and
specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by a species at
the time it is listed, upon a determination that such areas are
essential for the conservation of the species. If the proposed rule is
made final, section 7 of the Act will prohibit destruction or adverse
modification of critical habitat by any activity funded, authorized, or
carried out by any Federal agency unless it is exempted pursuant to the
provisions of the Act (16 U.S. C. 1536(e)-(n) and (p)). Federal
agencies proposing actions affecting critical habitat must consult with
us on the effects of their proposed actions, under section 7(a)(2) of
the Act.
Consistent with the best scientific data available, the standards
of the Act, and our regulations, we have initially identified, for
public comment, a total of 271,062 ac (109,695 ha) in 100 units for the
130 plants, 44 units for each of the 2 forest birds, 5 units for each
of the Lanai tree snails, and 1 unit for the Maui tree snail, located
on the Hawaiian Islands of Molokai, Lanai, Maui, and Kahoolawe, that
meet the definition of critical habitat for the 135 plant and animal
species. In addition, the Act provides the Secretary with the
discretion to exclude certain areas from the final designation after
taking into consideration economic impacts, impacts on national
security, and any other relevant impacts of specifying any particular
area as critical habitat.
Consideration of Impacts Under Section 4(b)(2) of the Act
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act requires that we designate or revise
critical habitat based upon the best scientific data available, after
taking into consideration
[[Page 32924]]
the economic impact, impact on national security, or any other relevant
impact of specifying any particular area as critical habitat. We may
exclude an area from critical habitat if we determine that the benefits
of excluding the area outweigh the benefits of including the area as
critical habitat, provided such exclusion will not result in the
extinction of the species.
When considering the benefits of inclusion for an area, we consider
the additional regulatory benefits that area would receive from the
protection from adverse modification or destruction as a result of
actions with a Federal nexus (activities conducted, funded, permitted,
or authorized by Federal agencies), the educational benefits of mapping
areas containing essential features that aid in the recovery of the
listed species, and any benefits that may result from designation due
to State or Federal laws that may apply to critical habitat. In the
case of the 135 Maui Nui species, the benefits of critical habitat
include public awareness of the presence of one or more of these
species and the importance of habitat protection, and, where a Federal
nexus exists, increased habitat protection for the species due to
protection from adverse modification or destruction of critical
habitat. In practice, situations with a Federal nexus exist primarily
on Federal lands or for projects undertaken by Federal agencies.
Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, when considering the benefits of
exclusion, we consider, among other things, whether exclusion of a
specific area is likely to result in conservation; the continuation,
strengthening, or encouragement of conservation partnerships; or
implementation of a management plan. We also consider the potential
economic impacts that may result from the designation of critical
habitat.
In weighing the benefits of exclusion versus inclusion, we consider
a number of factors, including whether the landowners have developed
any habitat conservation plans (HCPs) or other management plans for the
area, or whether there are conservation partnerships that would be
encouraged by designation of, or exclusion from, critical habitat. We
consider the establishment and encouragement of strong conservation
partnerships with non-Federal landowners to be especially important in
the State of Hawaii, where there are relatively few lands under Federal
ownership; we cannot achieve the conservation and recovery of listed
species in Hawaii without the help and cooperation of non-Federal
landowners. We consider building partnerships and promoting voluntary
cooperation of landowners essential to understanding the status of
species on non-Federal lands and necessary to implement recovery
actions, such as the reintroduction of listed species, habitat
restoration, and habitat protection.
Many non-Federal landowners derive satisfaction from contributing
to endangered species recovery. Conservation agreements with non-
Federal landowners, safe harbor agreements, other conservation
agreements, easements, and State and local regulations enhance species
conservation by extending species protections beyond those available
through section 7 consultations. We encourage non-Federal landowners to
enter into conservation agreements based on a view that we can achieve
greater species conservation on non-Federal lands through such
partnerships than we can through regulatory methods alone, particularly
for listed plants which are not subject to the Act's section 9
prohibition on taking (USFWS and NOAA 1996c (61 FR 63854; December 2,
1996)).
Because so many important conservation areas for the Maui Nui
species occur on lands managed by non-Federal entities, collaborative
relationships are essential for their recovery. The Maui Nui species
and their habitat are expected to benefit substantially from voluntary
land management actions that implement appropriate and effective
conservation strategies, or that add to our knowledge of the species
and their ecological needs. The conservation benefits of critical
habitat, on the other hand, are primarily regulatory or prohibitive in
nature. Where consistent with the discretion provided by the Act, the
Service believes it is both desirable and necessary to implement
policies that provide positive incentives to non-Federal landowners and
land managers to voluntarily conserve natural resources and to remove
or reduce disincentives to conservation (Wilcove et al. 1996, pp. 1-14;
Bean 2002, p. 2). Thus, we believe it is imperative for the recovery of
the Maui Nui species to support ongoing conservation activities such as
those with non-Federal partners, and to provide positive incentives for
other non-Federal land managers who might be considering implementing
voluntary conservation activities but have concerns about incurring
incidental regulatory, administrative, or economic impacts. Many
landowners perceive critical habitat as an unnecessary and duplicative
regulatory burden, particularly if those landowners are already
developing and implementing conservation and management plans that
benefit listed species on their lands. In certain cases, we believe the
exclusion of non-Federal lands that are under positive conservation
management is likely to strengthen the partnership between the Service
and the landowner, which may encourage other conservation partnerships
with that landowner in the future. As an added benefit, by modeling
positive conservation partnerships that may result in exclusion from
critical habitat, such exclusion may also help encourage the formation
of new partnerships with other landowners, with consequent benefits to
the listed species. For all of these reasons, we place great weight on
the value of conservation partnerships with non-Federal landowners when
considering the potential benefits of inclusion versus exclusion of
areas in critical habitat.
In the proposed rule (June 11, 2012; 77 FR 34464), we identified
several specific areas under consideration for exclusion from critical
habitat, totaling approximately 40,973 ac (16,582 ha) of private lands
under perpetual conservation easement, voluntary conservation
agreement, conservation or watershed preserve designation, or similar
conservation protection. The areas initially identified for potential
exclusion, as detailed in our proposed rule, included lands owned or
managed by The Nature Conservancy (TNC), Maui Land and Pineapple
Company, Ulupalakua Ranch, Haleakala Ranch Company, and East Maui
Irrigation Company.
In the document reopening the comment period on our proposed rule,
published January 31, 2013 (78 FR 6785), we specifically noted that we
are considering the possible exclusion of non-Federal lands, especially
areas in private ownership, and whether the benefits of exclusion may
outweigh the benefits of inclusion of those areas. We asked for public
comment on such potential exclusions, and for information regarding the
potential benefits of including private lands in critical habitat
versus the benefits of excluding such lands from critical habitat. We
further noted that exclusions in the final rule would not necessarily
be limited to those we had initially identified in the proposed rule.
Subsequent to publication of the proposed rule on June 11, 2012 (77 FR
34464), we have identified additional private or non-Federal lands that
we are considering for exclusion from critical habitat. These include
lands owned or managed by Nuu Mauka Ranch; Kaupo Ranch; Wailuku Water
Company;
[[Page 32925]]
County of Maui, Department of Water Supply; Kamehameha Schools; Makila
Land Company; Kahoma Land Company; and Lanai Resorts (Pulama Lanai) and
Castle and Cooke Properties. In total, the areas being considered for
exclusion from the final critical habitat amount to roughly 85,000 ac
(34,400 ha), including approximately 59,500 ac (24,080 ha) on the
islands of Maui and Molokai, and 25,413 ac (10,284 ha) on the island of
Lanai (which would result in the exclusion of all lands proposed as
critical habitat on Lanai). No lands are currently under consideration
for exclusion on Kahoolawe. Here we present brief descriptions of the
additional non-Federal lands under consideration for exclusion from
critical habitat.
Nuu Mauka Ranch--Native Watershed Forest Restoration at Nuu Mauka
Conservation Plan, Leeward Haleakala Watershed Restoration Partnership
Management Plan, and Southern Haleakala Forest Restoration Project
We are considering exclusion of 2,094 ac (848 ha) of lands that are
owned by Nuu Mauka Ranch. The ongoing management under the Native
Watershed Forest Restoration Conservation Plan, Leeward Haleakala
Watershed Restoration Partnership (LHWRP) management plan, and the
Southern Haleakala Forest Restoration Project agreement for Nuu Mauka
Ranch lands on east Maui provides for the conservation of 46 plants and
the 2 forest birds and their habitat, and demonstrates the positive
benefits of the conservation partnership that has been established with
Nuu Mauka Ranch.
Nuu Mauka Ranch is involved in several important voluntary
conservation agreements with the Service and other agencies, and is
currently carrying out activities on their lands for the conservation
of rare and endangered species and their habitats. In 2008, the Ranch
worked with the United States Geological Survey (USGS)-Pacific Island
Ecosystem Research Center and Natural Resources Conservation Service
(NRCS) to develop cost-effective, substrate appropriate restoration
methodologies for establishment of native koa (Acacia koa) forests in
degraded pasturelands. Nuu Mauka Ranch is a current partner of the
LHWRP, with the main goal of protection and restoration of leeward
Haleakala's upland watershed. In 2012, Nuu Mauka Ranch obtained a
conservation district use permit for a watershed protection project.
The ultimate goal of this project is to improve water quality and
groundwater recharge through the restoration of degraded agricultural
land to a native forest community. Nuu Mauka Ranch has contributed
approximately $500,000 of their own funds, and received additional
funding through the Service and NRCS, for construction of a 7.6-mile
(12-kilometer) long deer-proof fence to prevent access by deer and
goats into a 1,023-ac (414-ha), upper elevation watershed area on the
south slopes of leeward Haleakala (Southern Haleakala Forest
Restoration Project). Nuu Mauka Ranch has also prepared a conservation
plan, ``Native Watershed Forest Restoration at Nuu Mauka'' (2012), and
has appended it to the LHWRP management plan. Restoration activities
outlined in the plan include mechanical and chemical control of
invasive plant species, which are known threats to the 48 species and
their habitat. Currently, Nuu Mauka Ranch conducts removal of feral
ungulates from all fenced areas, along with fence monitoring and
follow-up monitoring to assess erosion rates. Also, with fencing and
ungulate removal completed, the plan includes continued restoration
activities such as replanting and seed scattering of common native
plant species.
Kaupo Ranch--Leeward Haleakala Watershed Restoration Partnership
Management Plan and Southern Haleakala Forest Restoration Project
We are considering exclusion of 931 ac (377 ha) of lands that are
owned or managed by Kaupo Ranch. Kaupo Ranch has undertaken voluntary
conservation measures on their lands, demonstrating their value as a
partner through participation in the LHWRP management plans and the
appended written commitments by Kaupo Ranch, and the Southern Haleakala
Forest Restoration Project for Kaupo Ranch lands on east Maui. These
actions provide positive conservation benefits for 25 plant species and
their habitat.
Kaupo Ranch is a current partner of the LHWRP, with the main goal
of protection and restoration of leeward Haleakala's upland. Kaupo
Ranch has identified the following conservation actions that will be
appended to the LHWRP: (1) Fence existing native koa forest and remove
ungulates. Kaupo Ranch also plans to expand koa forest restoration on
their lands. These actions will benefit adjacent koa forest managed by
the State (Kipahulu Forest Reserve (FR)). (2) Continue nonnative plant
control, not only to improve their pasturelands, but to benefit
adjacent conservation lands (Haleakala National Park (HNP) and Kipahulu
FR) by serving as a buffer area. (3) Fence areas dominated by native
vegetation on Kaupo Ranch lands, with some fencing already completed in
cooperation with HNP and Nuu Mauka Ranch. (4) Fence some of their
coastal lands and control feral goats.
In addition, Kaupo Ranch has been a long time cooperator with HNP,
providing access to the park's Kaupo Gap hiking trail across their
private lands. This trail extends from the park's boundary near the
summit of Haleakala through Kaupo Ranch lands to the coast. The Ranch
was also a cooperator with the Service in the creation of Nuu Makai
Wetland Reserve, contributing 87 ac (35 ha) of their ranch lands in the
coastal area to support landscape-scale wetland protection. In
addition, Kaupo Ranch participated in the construction of an ungulate
exclusion fence on the upper portion of their lands, bordering HNP,
that protects 50 ac (20 ha) of native montane dry forest habitat
(Southern Haleakala Forest Restoration Project) and acts as a buffer to
the lower boundary of the montane mesic ecosystem that provides habitat
for forest birds. Additional conservation actions in this fenced area
include weed control and outplanting of native plants.
Wailuku Water Company--West Maui Mountains Watershed Partnership
Management Plan, and Partners for Fish and Wildlife Agreements
We are considering exclusion of 7,410 ac (2,999 ha) of lands owned
or managed by Wailuku Water Company on west Maui, and under management
as part of the West Maui Mountains Watershed Partnership (WMMWP).
Ongoing conservation actions through the WMMWP management plan and
Partners for Fish and Wildlife Agreements for Wailuku Water Company
lands on west Maui provide important conservation benefits for 51
plants and 2 forest birds and their habitat, and demonstrate the
positive benefits of the conservation partnership that has been
established with Wailuku Water Company.
Wailuku Water Company is one of the founding members and a funder
of the WMMWP, created in 1998. This partnership serves to protect over
47,000 ac (19,000 ha) of forest and watershed vegetation on the summit
and slopes of the west Maui mountains (WMMWP 2013). Management
priorities of the watershed partnership are: (1) Feral animal control;
(2) nonnative plant control; (3) human activities management; (4)
public education and awareness; (5) water and watershed monitoring; and
(6) management coordination (WMMWP 2013). Four principal streams,
Waihee, Waiehu, Iao, and Waikapu, are part of the watershed area owned
by the Wailuku Water
[[Page 32926]]
Company on west Maui, which primarily provide water for agricultural
use. Conservation actions described in the WMMWP management plan are
partly funded by Service grants through the Partners for Fish and
Wildlife Program, with at least three grants recently funding projects
on Wailuku Water Company lands. Wailuku Water Company's conservation
commitments include the following conservation actions: (1) Strategic
fencing and removal of ungulates; (2) regular monitoring for ungulates
after fencing; (3) monitoring of habitat recovery through photopoints
and vegetation succession analyses; and (4) continued surveys for rare
taxa prior to fence installations. In 2009, four strategic fences were
installed in Waiehu on Wailuku Water Company lands through a Service
Partnership agreement. Wailuku Water Company allows surveys for rare
taxa on their lands. Additional conservation actions in this area
include weed control and outplanting of native plants.
County of Maui, Department of Water Supply (DWS)--West Maui Mountains
Watershed Partnership Management Plan, and Partners for Fish and
Wildlife Agreements
We are considering exclusion of 3,690 ac (1,493 ha) of lands owned
by the County of Maui DWS on west Maui, and under management as part of
the WMMWP. The County of Maui DWS is a founding partner and funder of
the WMMWP, which provides for important conservation actions that
benefit the Maui Nui species through implementation of the WMMWP
management plan on west Maui. The management plans and projects
supported by the County of Maui DWS provide for the conservation of 38
plants and the 2 forest birds and their habitat on their lands, and
demonstrate their value as a conservation partner.
Maui County DWS provides water to approximately 35,000 customers on
Maui and Molokai combined. The DWS is a founding partner and funder of
the WMMWP, with the main goal of protection and restoration of west
Maui's upland watershed. The Maui County DWS provides financial support
to both the Maui and Molokai watershed partnerships, and to other
organizations, private landowners, Federal, and State agencies.
Conservation actions by Maui County DWS conducted through the WMMWP are
also partly funded by Service grants through the Partners for Fish and
Wildlife Program. Maui County DWS's conservation commitments include
the following conservation actions: (1) Strategic fencing and removal
of ungulates and removal of invasive nonnative plants; (2) regular
monitoring to detect changes in management programs; (3) reduce the
threat of fire; and (4) gain community support for conservation
programs. In addition, the DWS received funding for installation of an
ungulate exclusion fence on the upper portion of their lands on west
Maui that protects native habitat and acts as a buffer to the lower
boundary of the habitat for plants and the two forest birds. The DWS
also received funding in 2010 for feral animal removal from their
lands. Other conservation actions in this fenced area include weed
control and outplanting of native plants.
Kamehameha Schools--West Maui Mountains Watershed Partnership
Management Plan, and Partners for Fish and Wildlife Agreements
We are considering excluding 1,217 ac (492 ha) of lands owned or
managed by Kamehameha Schools on west Maui, and under management as
part of the WMMWP. Kamehameha Schools is an established conservation
partner, and has participated the development, implementation, and
funding of management plans and projects that benefit the Maui Nui
species and other listed species throughout the Hawaiian Islands. In
this case, the ongoing conservation actions through the WMMWP
management plan for Kamehameha Schools' lands on west Maui provide for
the conservation of 42 plants and 2 forest birds and their habitat.
Kamehameha Schools was established in 1887, through the will of
Princess Bernice Pauahi Paki Bishop. The trust is used primarily to
operate a college preparatory program; however, part of Kamehameha
School's mission is to protect Hawaii's environment through recognition
of the significant cultural value of the land and its unique flora and
fauna. Kamehameha Schools has established a policy to guide the
sustainable stewardship of its lands including natural resources, water
resources, and ancestral places. Kamehameha Schools is a founder and
funder of the WMMWP, and also participates in the watershed
partnerships for Oahu, Molokai, Kauai, and the island of Hawaii.
Conservation actions conducted by the WMMWP are partly funded by
Service grants through the Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program.
Kamehameha Schools' conservation commitments include the following
conservation actions: (1) Strategic fencing and removal of ungulates;
(2) regular monitoring for ungulates after fencing; (3) monitoring of
habitat recovery; and (4) continued surveys for rare taxa prior to new
fence installations. In addition, Kamehameha Schools participated in
the construction of strategic ungulate exclusion fences on the upper
elevations of their lands on west Maui, that protect native habitat and
act as a buffer to the lower boundary of the lowland mesic, montane
wet, and wet cliff ecosystems. Other conservation actions in this area
include weed control and outplanting of native plants. Kamehameha
Schools is also conducting voluntary actions to promote the
conservation of rare and endangered species and their lowland dry
ecosystem habitats on the island of Hawaii, including installing
fencing to exclude ungulates, restoring habitat, conducting actions to
reduce rodent populations, reestablishing native plant species, and
conducting activities to reducing the threat of wildfire.
Makila Land Company--West Maui Mountains Watershed Partnership
Management Plan, and Partners for Fish and Wildlife Agreements
We are considering exclusion of 3,150 ac (1,275 ha) of lands owned
and managed by Makila Land Company on west Maui, and under management
as part of the WMMWP. The Makila Land Company is an established partner
in the WMMWP, and ongoing conservation actions through the WMMWP
management plan for Makila Land Company lands on west Maui provide for
the conservation of 47 plants and 2 forest birds and their habitat.
Makila Land Company has set aside upper elevation areas of their
property at Puehuehunui and Kauaula on west Maui for conservation and
protection of rare dry to mesic forest communities. Makila Land Company
is a long-time cooperator with the WMMWP. Conservation actions
conducted by the WMMWP are partly funded by Service grants through the
Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program. Makila Land Company's
conservation commitments include the following conservation actions:
(1) Strategic fencing and removal of ungulates; (2) regular monitoring
for ungulates after fencing; (3) vegetation monitoring; and (4)
allowing surveys for rare taxa by the State and Service's Plant
Extinction Prevention Program (PEPP) staff. Much of the area is
accessible only by helicopter due to waterfalls and steep terrain. The
installation of strategic ungulate exclusion fences on the higher
elevation portions of its lands protects native habitat and acts as a
buffer to the boundaries of the montane wet and wet cliff ecosystem
habitat. Additional conservation actions in these fenced
[[Page 32927]]
areas include weed control and outplanting of native plants.
Kahoma Land Company--West Maui Mountains Watershed Partnership
Management Plan, and Partners for Fish and Wildlife Agreements
We are considering exclusion of 46 ac (19 ha) of lands owned or
managed by Kahoma Land Company on west Maui, and under management as
part of the WMMWP. The ongoing conservation actions through the WMMWP
management plan for Kahoma Land Company lands on west Maui provide for
the conservation of 25 plants and 2 forest birds and their habitat, and
demonstrate their value as a conservation partner.
Kahoma Land Company is a coalition of Maui residents formed in
June, 2000, to acquire former sugar cane land adjacent to Kahoma Valley
on west Maui. Kahoma Land Company's long-term management goals for this
area include development of land tracts, diversified agriculture, and
ecotourism ventures. Approximately 690 ac (279 ha) of the coalition's
lands are within the WMMWP boundaries between two State Natural Area
Reserves, and 46 ac (19 ha) are within proposed critical habitat.
Kahoma Land Company is also a current member of the WMMWP. Kahoma Land
Company's conservation actions conducted by the WMMWP are partly funded
by Service grants through the Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program.
Its conservation commitments include the following conservation
actions: (1) Strategic fencing and removal of ungulates; (2) regular
monitoring for ungulates after fencing; (3) monitoring of habitat
recovery through vegetation succession analyses; and (4) continued
surveys for rare taxa prior to new fence installations. The WMMWP
management plan includes actions taken on Kahoma lands to control
ungulates, including construction of strategic fencing. Ungulate
control checks are currently underway on Kahoma lands, with addition of
new check installations. Additional conservation actions in this area
include weed control and outplanting of native plants.
Lanai Resorts, LLC, and Castle & Cooke Properties, Inc.--Lanai
Conservation Plan and Lanai Conservation Agreement
We are considering exclusion of 25,413 ac (10,284 ha) of lands from
critical habitat, under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, that are owned by
Lanai Resorts, also known as Pulama Lanai (PL) and Castle & Cooke
Properties, Inc. (CCPI). Our partnership with PL and CCPI provides
significant conservation benefits to 38 plant and 2 Lanai tree snail
species on Lanai, as demonstrated by the ongoing conversation efforts
on the island, the commitment to develop the Lanai Natural Resources
Plan (LNRP), and the recently signed memorandum of understanding (MOU)
between the Service and PL and CCPI.
In 2001, the Board of Land and Natural Resources (BLNR) approved
its department's (Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR))
participation in a Lanai watershed management program that included the
Service (through a private stewardship grant), the Hawaii Department of
Health, and CCPI. In 2002, the Service and CCPI entered into a
memorandum of agreement (MOA) for construction of ungulate-proof fence
at Lanaihale, intended to prevent entry by ungulates and to protect the
watershed and the listed species within the area. The term of the MOA
was for 10 years. The fencing of the summit at Lanaihale was planned to
be constructed in three stages or ``increments.'' In 2004, the DLNR
also provided funding through the Landowner Incentive Program to the
Bishop Museum to remove nonnative plants and outplant and establish a
population of more than 500 individuals of Bidens micrantha ssp.
kalealaha and Pleomele fernaldii in Waiapaa Gulch at Lanaihale. Museum
staff were to also collect seed for long-term storage and provide
educational experiences for local Lanai students. In 2006, a fire
resulted in the loss of half of the remaining wild individuals of B.
micrantha ssp. kalealaha, and by 2007, none remained. Outplanting was
conducted within an ungulate-free exclosure at Awehi Gulch. Also in
2007, the west side (Increment II) of the Lanaihale summit fence
perimeter was completed; however, ungulates were able to access the
fenced area because the gates were not completed. In 2008, more wild
individuals of B. micrantha ssp. kalealaha were discovered in Waiapaa
Gulch, and many seedlings were grown for outplanting by a student group
at the local high school, with a second outplanted population
established in 2009. This population was fenced by the Lanai Institute
for the Environment (LIFE).
The Service and PL and CCPI signed an expansive MOU on January 26,
2015, with a term that extends through 2028. Among the commitments made
by PL and CCPI in this MOU are the following: (1) The completion of a
Lanai natural resources plan (LNRP) within 18 months of the date of the
agreement. Implementation of the LNRP will include identification of
priority ecosystems and species, prioritization of management actions
required, and commitment of funding; (2) maintenance and monitoring of
the completed existing Lanaihale predator-proof fences; (3) ungulate
eradication within the Lanaihale fences and other priority areas as
identified in the LNRP; (4) cooperation with, and support of management
and monitoring within, TNC's Kanepuu Preserve units; (5) protection of
rare plant clusters; (6) Lanai tree snail protection, management, and
monitoring; (7) identification of rare species for immediate protective
intervention efforts; (8) protection of coastal areas; (9)
establishment of nearly 7,000 ac (2,800 ha) of ``no development areas''
as determined by the LNRP, within which enhancement of overall
ecological condition and conservation of listed species will be
emphasized; and (10) an overall commitment to ensuring a net
conversation benefit for listed species on Lanai. PL and CCPI
additionally agree to provide more than $200,000 annually in funding
toward achievement of the conservation measures described in the MOU.
Under the terms of the MOU, PL and CCPI are currently developing
the LNRP. This plan will include a description of detailed management
actions with timelines that will benefit and provide protection for 38
plant species, the two Lanai tree snails, and their habitat on the
island of Lanai. The Service is a member of the LNRP planning and
implementation team, and will therefore be an active participant in the
ongoing conservation efforts on the island of Lanai.
PL has committed to implementing certain protective measures in
advance of the LNRP to ensure species conversation. Actions currently
being implemented include: (1) Planning and construction of an
enclosure for the protection of the two Lanai tree snails; (2)
planning, construction, and maintenance of fences around three rare
plant populations; (3) out-planting of rare species in protected
locations; (4) implementation of bio-security measures to avoid the
incursion and spread of invasive species; (5) maintenance of all
existing fences; (6) predator control where necessary and appropriate
to protect listed species; and (7) identification of other priority
actions and sites. These measures are currently underway and being
conducted in coordination with the Service.
Summary of Potential Exclusions
We are considering exclusion of these non-Federal lands because we
believe the exclusion would be likely to result
[[Page 32928]]
in the continuation, strengthening, or encouragement of important
conservation partnerships that will contribute to the long-term
conservation of the Maui Nui species. The development and
implementation of management plans, and ability to access private lands
necessary for surveys or monitoring designed to promote the
conservation of these federally listed plant species and their habitat,
as well as provide for other native species of concern, are important
outcomes of these conservation partnerships.
These specific exclusions will be considered on an individual basis
or in any combination thereof. In addition, the final designation may
not be limited to these exclusions, but may also consider other
exclusions as a result of continuing analysis of relevant
considerations (scientific, economic, and other relevant factors, as
required by the Act) and the public comment process. In particular, we
solicit comments from the public on whether to make the specific
exclusions we are considering, and whether there are other areas that
are appropriate for exclusion.
The final decision on whether to exclude any area will be based on
the best scientific data available at the time of the final
designation, including information obtained during the comment periods
and information about the economic impact of the designation.
Authors
The primary authors of this notice are the staff members of the
Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office, Pacific Region, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service.
Authority
The authority for this action is the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Date: June 1, 2015.
Michael Bean,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 2015-13850 Filed 6-9-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P