[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 193 (Tuesday, October 6, 1998)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 53623-53631]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-26736]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
RIN 1018-AE51
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Proposed
Endangered Status for the Oahu Elepaio from the Hawaiian Islands
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule and notice of finding.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) proposes
endangered status pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act), for the Oahu elepaio (Chasiempis sandwichensis ibidis).
This bird is endemic to the island of Oahu, Hawaiian Islands, where it
was formerly found in all forested areas on the island. It is currently
found in greatly reduced numbers and range in six isolated populations
occurring in mid-elevation forests in the southern Koolau Mountain
Range and parts of the Waianae Mountain Range. The Oahu elepaio is now
thought to occupy less than 80 square kilometers (sq km) (30 square
miles (sq mi)) or 8 percent of its original, historic range. Sightings
of Oahu elepaio during Christmas Bird
[[Page 53624]]
Counts have dropped by 75 percent since 1960. The most recent
population estimate for this taxon indicates that between 200 and 500
birds remain. The Oahu elepaio has been affected in the past and will
continue to be threatened by--habitat loss and degradation, including
habitat loss from development, and habitat modification resulting from
human activities; predation by introduced mammals; introduced avian
disease; competition from introduced birds, and; the spread of certain
alien plants which dramatically alter forest structure and/or
diversity. The Oahu elepaio is also subject to an increased likelihood
of extinction from naturally occurring events, such as hurricanes, etc.
DATES: Comments from all interested parties must be received by
December 7, 1998. Public hearing requests must be received by November
20, 1998.
ADDRESSES: Comments and materials concerning this proposal should be
sent to Manager, Pacific Islands Ecoregion, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, 300 Ala Moana Boulevard, P.O. Box 50088, Honolulu, Hawaii
96850. Comments and material received will be available for public
inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours at the above
address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pacific Islands Ecoregion Manager (see
ADDRESSES section) (telephone 808/541-2749; facsimile 808/541-2756).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Hawaiian archipelago is comprised of eight main islands, and
the shoals and atolls of the northwest Hawaiian Islands. The islands
were formed sequentially by basaltic lava that emerged from a crustal
hot spot located near the southeast coast of the island of Hawaii
(Stearns 1985).
The second oldest main island, Oahu, is 2.5 to 3.5 million years
old, and is heavily weathered. Oahu has two principal mountain ranges--
the Koolau and Waianae. The Koolau Mountains extend 60 km (37 mi) from
southeast to northwest along the eastern half of the island. The
windward (northeast) slope of these mountains is characterized by steep
cliffs and short ridges less than 6 km (4 mi) long. Leeward ridges as
long as 18 km (11 mi) parallel one another to the southwest and west;
alternating with steep-sided stream valleys. The peak elevation in the
Koolau Mountains occurs at Puu Konahua Nui (955 meters (m); 3,100 feet
(ft)). The Waianae Mountains run from southeast to northwest in a 32 km
(20 mi) arc along the western coast of Oahu. The steep cliffs of the
Waianae Mountains are leeward facing (western slope); both windward and
leeward ridges are less than 5 km (3 mi) in length. The peak elevation
occurs at Kaala (1,230 m (4,000 ft)).
In general, native forest vegetation on Oahu presently only occurs
above elevations of about 500 m (1,600 ft). By 1900, most lower
elevation forests had been cleared for agricultural and commercial use
or were heavily invaded by introduced vegetation. Current habitats for
Oahu elepaio occur in the Waianae Mountains and in the southern Koolau
Mountains on Oahu in a variety of wet and dry forests, including those
dominated by either native or alien tree species.
The elepaio from the island of Oahu has been recognized as a
distinct taxonomic entity since Stejneger first described the Oahu
elepaio as Chasiempis ibidis in 1887. Wilson (1891) described the bird
as C. gayi, but, as pointed out by Olson (1989), the epithet ibidis has
priority over gayi. Various taxonomic treatments of the Hawaiian
elepaio have described from one to six species and up to five
subspecies (Sclater 1885, Stejneger 1887, Wilson and Evans 1890-1899,
Wilson 1891, Rothschild 1892-1900, Henshaw 1902, Perkins 1903,
MacCaughey 1919, Bryan and Greenway 1944, Pratt 1979 and 1980, Olson
1989, Olson and James 1991). The taxonomy used in this proposed rule
follows Pyle (1992) and recognizes only a single species of elepaio in
Hawaii (Chasiempis sandwichensis) with three subspecies, each of which
is endemic to a different island. The three island-specific subspecies
of elepaio are--Kauai elepaio (C.s. sclateri Ridgeway 1882), Oahu
elepaio (C.s. ibidis Stejneger 1887), and Hawaii elepaio (C. s.
sandwichensis Gmelin 1789 (as cited in Pyle 1992)). These subspecies
differ considerably in plumage coloration and somewhat in
vocalizations, but are quite similar in ecology and behavior (Conant
1977, Pratt 1980, VanderWerf 1993, and 1994).
The Oahu elepaio is a member of the Old-World insect-eater family
of birds (Muscicapidae) and is most likely related to the genus
Monarcha (Mayr 1943, Conant 1977). The ancestors that gave rise to
elepaio were probably of Melanesian origin with colonization of Hawaii
occurring through Polynesia or Micronesia.
The Oahu elepaio has long slender legs and a broad, soft bill,
black in color and bordered with bristles. Body length is about 14.6
centimeters (cm) (6 inches (in)). Adults are rusty brown above, with a
contrasting rufous-chestnut eyebrow and a whitish eye-ring. The chin is
white and the throat black, with some rufous-chestnut streaking on the
upper breast; the belly is white. Adult males and females are similar
in appearance. Two distinctive field marks of adults are the white wing
bars and white rump, both of which are easily seen when the bird is in
flight. Immature birds lack both the white rump and the black throat
and are relatively uniform rusty brown on the head and neck. The chest
is tinged with buff and the belly is white. The whitish eye-ring and
bold white, black, and chestnut markings of the adults are also absent
in immature birds (Pratt 1980).
Comments by early naturalists indicate that the Oahu elepaio was
once widespread in forested areas throughout Oahu at all elevations.
Perkins (1903) remarked that ``the universal distribution over the
islands they severally inhabit, from the lowest bounds to the uppermost
edge of continuous forest, as well as their extreme abundance and
obtrusive familiarity, has caused them to be noticed by many persons
who have seen no other native bird.'' Bryan (1905) noted that the
elepaio ``remains the most abundant Hawaiian species on the
mountainside all the way from the sea to well up into the higher
elevations,'' while MacCaughey (1919) wrote that ``the altitudinal
range on Oahu is approximately from 800 feet to the highest summits.''
However, even the earliest described historical range was likely to
have been somewhat modified by habitat destruction, as noted by
MacCaughey (1919) ``[o]riginally, when the forests covered much more of
the lowlands than at present, and extended down to the strand in many
districts, the elepaio was abundant at the lower levels * * *''. In
spite of the descriptions of reduced range, naturalists were optimistic
about the elepaio's chances for survival. In 1902, Henshaw (1902) wrote
``it is probable that when most of the Hawaiian birds are extinct the
elepaio will long continue to maintain itself in scarcely diminished
numbers.'' MacCaughey (1919) wrote, ``[t]he one indigenous forest bird
that appears to successfully withstand the devastating influences of
``civilization'' is the Hawaiian flycatcher elepaio.'' Munro (1944) was
similarly optimistic about the elepaio, reporting that ``[i]t is
holding its own well in the Oahu forests from which so many of the
native birds have long disappeared.''
Early observations indicate that the Oahu elepaio was widely
distributed and extremely abundant. Rothschild (1892) called the
elepaio ``one of the
[[Page 53625]]
commonest, if not the commonest, of all the small native birds on
Oahu.'' Similarly, Seale (1900) said the elepaio was ``the commonest
native land bird to be found on the island.'' MacCaughey (1919) stated
that it was ``the most abundant representative of the native woodland
avifauna'' and ``abundant in all parts of its range,'' but Bryan (1905)
found it to be ``much more frequently met with in the Waianae Mountains
than in the Koolau range back of Honolulu,'' which may indicate that
the species' optimum habitat is dry rather than wet forest.
Based on the above range descriptions, the Oahu elepaio was
historically very general in its habitat requirements, and at least
some populations occupied all types of forest at most elevations.
Several authors noted that elepaio reached their greatest abundance in
valleys at middle elevations. For example, Seale (1900) said that ``its
usual haunt is the densely wooded canons at an elevation of from [sic]
800 to 1,300 feet.'' MacCaughey (1919) observed that the elepaio is ``a
bird of the humid and mesophytic forests,'' and said it ``is most
plentiful in the protected wooded ravines and on the valley slopes.''
The generalized habitat requirements of the Oahu elepaio are also
shown by its ability to forage (as a generalized insectivore) and nest
in a variety of different plant species, including areas with non-
native vegetation. Perkins (1903) believed that ``to the changes
wrought by civilization they are less susceptible than any other bird,
and they may be seen feeding and even nesting in dense thickets of the
introduced guava, or amongst masses of the prickly lantana, as
contentedly as amongst the native vegetation.'' Conant (1977) studied a
population that existed in a forest of entirely introduced plant
species. The species shows extremely versatile foraging behavior and
uses all available plant species and all heights in forests of native
plant species (Conant 1981, VanderWerf 1993 and 1994).
More recent information indicates that the Oahu elepaio still
inhabits various types of forest. The Oahu elepaio appears to be most
common in areas of alien and mixed native/alien forest having a tall
tree canopy and well developed subcanopy and understory structure that
supports high density insect populations, and in valleys at middle
elevations. The species is much less numerous in scrubby vegetation on
higher-elevation ridges and slopes, and does not frequent forests
lacking a subcanopy or comprised of monotypes. The apparent preference
for alien or mixed alien-native forest may be a reflection of their
continued affinity for mid-elevation valleys, where disturbance has
been greater and the majority of plants are introduced. Virtually all
forests below 500 m (1,600 ft) have been degraded to the point that
they now consist almost entirely of introduced vegetation. During an
intensive bird survey of the central Koolau Mountains on Oahu in 1978,
Shallenberger and Vaughn (1978) found the greatest abundance of elepaio
in alien forests, particularly areas with kukui (Aleurites moluccana)
and guava (Psidium guajava and P. cattleianum) trees, and in mixed
alien-native forest. The occurrence of elepaio was lower in forests of
entirely native species, primarily ohia (Metrosideros polymorpha) and
koa (Acacia koa). The lesser abundance in native forest found by
Shallenberger and Vaughn (1978) is unlikely to be a sampling artifact
because the greatest effort was spent in areas of native forest. It is
likely due to a preference for certain elevations and diverse forest
structure rather than for certain plant species. The results of the
Oahu forest bird survey (Hawaii State Division of Forestry and
Wildlife, 1991), indicate that the current habitat types occupied by
the Oahu elepaio appear to be similar to what Shallenberger and Vaughn
(1978) reported.
Conant (1995) has identified 598 separate observations of Oahu
elepaio dating from 1883 through 1995. Many of these sightings occurred
in the same location, but over a period of years. By consolidating
observations made at the same location, it was possible to identify 83
site-specific locations where elepaio had been seen. Sixty-nine of
these sites (84 percent) have been revisited between 1990 and 1995. Of
these revisited sites, only 31 (45 percent) still had elepaio present.
These 31 extant sites are distributed among six isolated populations in
the southern Koolau Mountains and the central Waianae Mountains.
Further analysis of both these data and the writings of early
naturalists indicates that the elepaio originally inhabited 75 percent
of Oahu's land mass. By 1960, only 30 percent of the original habitat
was still occupied. Fifteen years later, in 1975, the distribution had
declined to 14 percent of the original distribution. In 1990, the Oahu
elepaio occupied an area of 80 sq km (30 sq mi). This represents less
than 8 percent of its original range (Conant 1995).
While a collapse of the Oahu elepaio's range has clearly occurred,
decline in population density in the remaining populations has been
more difficult to determine. Williams (1987) examined the decline of
Oahu elepaio using Christmas Bird Counts from 1944 through 1985. Using
standardized data (one census per year with number of birds per hour of
observation), he documented a clear downward trend in elepaio
observations. The data show a sharp decline in Oahu elepaio
observations beginning in the late 1950s and continuing through the
1960s, when observations were one or fewer birds per observer hour,
dropping to approximately 0.5 birds per observer hour after 1974.
In their recent reports, Sherwood (1995) and Cowell (1995) called
attention to the population estimate of 200 to 500 total Oahu elepaio
made by the Hawaii Forest Bird Conservation Assessment and Management
report (Ellis et al. 1992). This report stated that two subpopulations
of Oahu elepaio exist, one in the Waianae Mountains and the other in
the Koolau Mountains. However, more detailed data suggest that there
are actually six smaller and geographically isolated populations, three
in each of the mountain ranges. Ellis et al. (1992) estimated that 20
percent of the population was in the Waianae Mountains and 80 percent
in the Koolau Mountains. In terms of the areal range, 40 percent of the
range is in the Waianae Mountains and 60 percent in the Koolau
Mountains. In 1994, at least 79 Oahu elepaio were seen (Conant 1995). A
systematic range-wide count of Oahu elepaio has not been made and the
population estimate of 200 to 500 birds by Ellis and others (1992)
remains the only range-wide estimate of numbers.
The remaining six populations occur on lands owned by Federal,
State, City and County of Honolulu, and private parties. Analysis of
major land ownership patterns identify 48 percent of occupied elepaio
areas in privately held lands, 25 percent federally owned or leased
lands, 22 percent State-owned areas and 5 percent owned by city and
county governments. Ownership patterns vary between the six
populations. Two populations have greater than fifty percent private
ownership within their ranges, three populations' ranges cover land
primarily owned by the State, and one population has the majority of
land under Federal ownership. Ninety-two percent of the current elepaio
range occurs within State-designated Conservation Districts and 29
percent of the range occurs within additional protected areas,
including State Forest Reserves, State Natural Area Reserves, and The
Nature Conservancy's Honouliuli Preserve. Only 8 percent of the elepaio
range falls outside the Conservation District and protected areas.
[[Page 53626]]
Previous Federal Action
The Service was petitioned by Mr. Vaughn Sherwood on March 22,
1994, to list the Oahu elepaio as an endangered or threatened species
with critical habitat. The November 15, 1994, Animal Notice of Review
(59 FR 58991) classified the Oahu elepaio (C. s. gayi) as a category 1
candidate. Category 1 candidates are those species for which the
Service has sufficient data in its possession to support a listing
proposal. On June 12, 1995 (60 FR 30827), the Service published a 90-
day petition finding stating that the petition presented substantial
information such that listing may be warranted. Because C. s. gayi is a
synonym of C. s. ibidis, this proposed rule constitutes the final 12-
month finding for the petitioned action.
As announced in a notice published in the February 28, 1996,
Federal Register (61 FR 7596), the designation of multiple categories
of candidates has been discontinued, and only former category 1 species
are now recognized as candidates for listing purposes. The listing
priority numbers for candidate taxa range from 1 (highest priority) to
12 (lowest priority) and are assigned by the Service based on the
immediacy and magnitude of threats, as well as taxonomic status (48 FR
43098).
The Service published Listing Priority Guidance for Fiscal Years
1998 and 1999 on May 8, 1998 (63 FR 25502). The guidance clarifies the
order in which the Service will process rulemakings giving highest
priority (Tier 1) to processing emergency rules to add species to the
Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants (Lists); second
priority (Tier 2) to processing final determinations on proposals to
add species to the Lists, processing new proposals to add species to
the Lists, processing administrative findings on petitions (to add
species to the Lists, delist species, or reclassify listed species),
and processing a limited number of proposed or final rules to delist or
reclassify species; and third priority (Tier 3) to processing proposed
or final rules designating critical habitat. Processing of this
proposed rule is a Tier 2 action. The Pacific Islands Ecoregion
currently has no outstanding Tier 1 species; therefore, processing of
Tier 2 activities is appropriate under the listing priority guidance.
This rule has been updated by the Pacific Islands Ecosystem Office to
reflect any changes in distribution, status and threats since the
effective date of the listing moratorium.
Summary of Factors Affecting the Species
Section 4 of the Act and regulations (50 CFR part 424) promulgated
to implement the listing provisions of the Act set forth the procedures
for adding species to the Federal lists. A species may be determined to
be an endangered or threatened species due to one or more of the five
factors described in section 4(a)(1). These factors and their
application to the Oahu elepaio are as follows:
A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment
of Its Habitat or Range
Threats to the Oahu elepaio's habitat include habitat loss from
development, habitat modification resulting from human activities,
habitat damage by pigs and the spread of certain alien plants, such as
the velvet tree (Miconia calvescens), which dramatically alter forest
structure and/or diversity.
Alteration of areas covered by forests, including changes in forest
composition and forest structure and the resulting habitat loss has
impacted the Oahu elepaio. Early Hawaiians significantly altered the
native vegetation of Oahu, particularly in valleys used for taro
cultivation. In uncultivated areas, trees were cut for firewood and
construction, and fire was used to encourage the growth of grasses used
for thatch (Kirch 1982). Destruction of the low-elevation forest
resulted in the extinctions of numerous birds and land snails on Oahu
(Olson and James 1982, Kirch 1982). After European contact in 1778,
habitat loss accelerated and began to occur at higher elevations. The
sandalwood trade, which played a key role for Oahu, required firewood,
which completely eliminated native forests in the vicinity of Honolulu
(Cuddihy and Stone 1990). From 1840 to about 1920, vast areas of low-
and mid-elevation forest in Hawaii were cleared for sugarcane
cultivation. By the 1970's, more than 100,000 ha (274,000 acres) were
under sugarcane cultivation. In contrast to early Hawaiian cultivation
that was largely concentrated in mesic valleys and plains, sugarcane
cultivation displaced native forest in dry leeward areas and wide
ridges and slopes such as the Leilehua Plateau between the Koolau and
Waianae Mountains on Oahu. Between 1900 and 1950, pineapple cultivation
on Oahu also resulted in a significant loss of native forests (Cuddihy
and Stone 1990). While some of the areas cleared of native forest have
either been replanted with exotic trees or regrown in alien vegetation,
Gagne (1988) estimated that less than 20 percent of the land area on
Oahu is now covered by forest, and less than 20 percent of that forest
is native vegetation.
Oahu is the population center of the Hawaiian Islands, with about
40 percent of the State's population residing in Honolulu alone. The
fastest growing areas on Oahu, however, are suburban areas and ``second
cities.'' Development can have significant impacts on Oahu elepaio
habitat through modification of forest structure and diversity.
Although the majority of lands within the elepaio's range are within
Conservation Districts and State Forest reserves, designation as such
offers varying degrees of protection and may allow activities, such as
construction of individual houses, forestry-related activities, hunting
and recreational uses, which can be detrimental to the elepaio. Other
types of development can also eliminate habitat. A portion of the H-3
freeway completed in 1997 runs through Halawa Valley, the north ridge
of which supports one population of the Oahu elepaio, and amenities
such as golf courses may displace non-native forests used by the Oahu
elepaio, particularly if the forest structure consists of tall canopy
trees and dense, diverse understory vegetation.
Military activities and related impacts on federally owned and
leased lands also affect the Ohau elepaio. Oahu elepaio presently
occupy the upper slopes of Makua Valley in and adjacent to the U.S.
Army's Makua Military Reservation. The lower section of Makua Valley is
used as a live firing range and the facility has a history of ordnance-
induced fires (Hawaii Heritage Program, 1994a). Prescribed burning
occasionally results in large fires and along with construction of
firebreaks, destroys elepaio habitat and potentially threatens the
birds. A large part of the elepaio range in the eastern Waianae
Mountains occurs on Schofield Barracks Military Reservation. Live
firing also occurs in several areas of Schofield Barracks Military
Reservation, and ordnance-induced fires pose a significant threat to
the habitat of the Oahu elepaio (Hawaii Heritage Program, 1994b).
Sus scrofa (pigs), originally native to Europe, Africa, and Asia,
were first introduced to Hawaii by the Polynesian ancestors of
Hawaiians, and later by western immigrants. The Hawaiian strain of pig
was comparatively small, and seems to have had a minimal impact on the
native forests. The European strain of pig escaped domestication and
invaded primarily wet and mesic forests on Kauai, Oahu, Molokai, Maui,
and Hawaii. These pigs
[[Page 53627]]
are large animals that threaten the continued existence of native
plants and animals within these forest habitats. While foraging, pigs
root and trample the forest floor, which promotes the establishment of
alien plants in the newly disturbed soil. Pigs also disperse alien
plant seeds through their feces and on their bodies, accelerating the
spread of alien plants through native forest (Cuddihy and Stone 1990,
Stone 1985), which may subsequently alter the structure and diversity
of the forest necessary for the survival of the Oahu elepaio. Both a
forest canopy and a diverse understory are important habitat components
for the elepaio.
Miconia calvescens (velvet tree) is a recently naturalized species
native to tropical America. This species has become established on the
islands of Hawaii, Maui, Oahu, and Kauai. This plant species has the
potential to greatly disrupt forest canopy and understory structure and
significantly alter biological diversity. Miconia calvescens is
potentially the most invasive and damaging weed of rainforests of
Pacific islands (Medeiros et al. 1997). In moist conditions, this plant
grows rapidly (up to 15 m (49 ft) tall), tolerates shade, produces
abundant seed that is effectively dispersed by birds and accumulates in
a large, persistent seed-bank, and develops monospecific stands that
eliminate understory plant species and subcanopy structure by shading
and crowding (Medeiros et al. 1997). In Tahiti, it has become a
dominant plant species in habitats similar to those of Hawaii (Almeda
1990; Cuddihy and Stone, 1990.) Medeiros et al. (1997) states that
Miconia calvescens now dominates the forest composition in 65 percent
of the island through the establishment of large, monospecific stands.
This plant is now naturalized on Oahu at three locations in the
southeastern Koolau Mountain range, including Manoa Valley (Medeiros et
al. 1997), where one population of the Oahu elepaio is located.
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
Overutilization is not known to threaten the Oahu elepaio.
C. Disease and Predation
Disease and predation may have contributed to the decline of the
Oahu elepaio (Sheila Conant, University of Hawaii, pers. comm., 1995).
Although there is some indication that nests and eggs may be destroyed
by rats (Rattus exulans, R. norwegicus, R. rattus) (Conant 1977),
studies have yet to document the extent to which the Oahu elepaio is
affected by predation by any of the small, ground-dwelling and/or
arboreal predators, including the small Indian mongoose (Herpestes
auropunctatus), feral cats (Felis domesticus), and rats. All of these
predators were established long before the recent decline of the Oahu
elepaio (Tomich 1986), but may have had a significant impact at the
time of their initial introduction.
Avian diseases have had a devastating effect on many endemic
Hawaiian forest birds that seem to have little or no resistance to
disease. Avian pox (Poxvirus avium) causes lesions on the feet, legs,
and bills, and is transmitted by physical contact or through
mosquitoes. Avian malaria (Plasmodium relictum capistranoae) is
transmitted by the southern house mosquito (Culex quinquefasciatus) and
clearly limits the lower elevational distribution of many Hawaiian
forest birds (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1984, Atkinson et al.
1993). While the Oahu elepaio appears to be less affected than other
species, the effect on this taxon could possibly contribute to the
observed declines in range and abundance.
D. The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
Currently, the Oahu elepaio is protected from taking by both State
(Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS), Sect. 13-124-3A) and Federal law
(Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918, 16 U.S.C 703-712, 40 Stat. 755, as
amended). These regulations protect the taxon from capture and
collection (without appropriate permits) of individuals, nests and
eggs. However, these regulations afford no protection to the habitat of
the taxon.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting Its Continued Existence
Naturally occurring events, such as hurricanes, may affect the
continued existence of the Oahu elepaio. Because the subspecies now
exists as six small isolated populations, rather than one large,
continuous, interbreeding population, a population decline could be
exacerbated by random genetic, environmental, and demographic events.
Small population size can reduce reproductive rates, increase rates of
inbreeding and may result in the expression of deleterious recessive
genes occurring in the population (inbreeding depression) and less
future plasticity. Loss of genetic variability through genetic drift
reduces the ability of small populations to cope with ecological and
environmental stresses such as habitat modification, and alien species.
If disease is a factor in the decline of the Oahu elepaio, the
reproduction of any genetically-resistant individuals could be
important to the survival of this taxon.
If populations continue to decline and become extremely small,
demographic events take on greater significance. For example, if
weather events (e.g., El Nino episodes) cause reproductive failure for
one or more years, and is followed by a period of high predation, a
small population has less resiliency and may be extirpated. Another
environmental factor that could cause large or total population loss is
hurricanes, which may cause direct mortality, habitat destruction or
modification, and promote the spread of invasive alien plants. Birds in
the Hawaiian Islands have long endured hurricanes, but major hurricanes
in concert with low population numbers and other factors could severely
affect the Oahu elepaio.
Introduction of alien species of plants and animals into Hawaii is
a major continuing threat to all native flora and fauna. Competition,
predation, and disease associated with alien introductions could
significantly and negatively affect the remaining populations of Oahu
elepaio. The threat of the accidental introduction of the brown tree
snake (Boiga irregularis) from Guam, Saipan, or the Solomon Islands is
of particular concern. The brown tree snake is an aggressive predator
of birds that has caused a significant decline in avifauna on Pacific
islands where this snake has been introduced. In December 1994, a live
brown tree snake was found in a Schofield Barracks warehouse on the
island of Oahu. This snake was associated with a shipment of U.S. Army
materials from Tinian via Guam.
A likely factor contributing to the decline of the Oahu elepaio is
competition with recently introduced birds. The Japanese white-eye
(Zosterops japonicus) was introduced to Hawaii in the 1930's. It was
still expanding its range into remote areas within the last two decades
and is now probably the most abundant bird in Hawaii (Pratt et al.
1987). Scott et al. (1986) demonstrated that the Japanese white-eye was
the primary factor contributing to negative correlations between the
distributions of native and introduced birds, including elepaio.
Elepaio have frequently been known to defend territories against
Japanese white-eye (Conant 1975). Japanese bush-warblers (Cettia
diphone) were also introduced to Oahu in the 1930's (Pratt et al. 1987)
but for many years were uncommon and restricted to the Waianae
Mountains (Bob Pyle, Bishop
[[Page 53628]]
Museum, pers. comm., 1995). In recent decades, however, the Japanese
bush-warbler has expanded its range to occupy most of Oahu's forested
areas and is now very abundant. Thus, the expansion of the bush-warbler
also roughly corresponds with the recent decline of the elepaio (Pyle,
pers. comm., 1995). The bush warbler is also an insectivore that
forages in the understory and is a likely competitor of the Oahu
elepaio. The red-vented bulbul (Pycnonotus cafer) was introduced to
Oahu in 1965, greatly increasing in numbers after 1970 (Williams 1987)
and is now extremely abundant in forested habitats. While primarily a
fruit-eater, red-vented bulbuls take insect prey (Sheila Conant, pers.
comm., 1995) and are a particularly aggressive species, known to chase
other birds (Berger 1981).
The Service has carefully assessed the best scientific and
commercial information available regarding the past, present, and
future threats faced by this taxon in determining to propose this rule.
Based on this evaluation, the preferred action is to list the Oahu
elepaio as endangered. The most recent estimates indicate that the Oahu
elepaio numbers no more than 200 to 500 individuals, occurring in six
small and geographically isolated populations (Ellis et al. 1992). This
bird is threatened by--habitat degradation and loss, including habitat
fragmentation due primarily to human impacts; competition with
introduced birds; disease, including avian pox and malaria; and
possible predation by non-indigenous mammals. Small total population
size, limited distribution, and population fragmentation make this
taxon particularly vulnerable to reduced reproductive vigor and the
effects of naturally occurring events. Because the Oahu elepaio is in
danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its
range, it fits the definition of endangered as defined in the Act.
Therefore, the determination of endangered status for the Oahu elepaio
is appropriate.
Critical Habitat
Critical habitat is defined in section 3 of the Act as--(i) the
specific areas within the geographical area occupied by a species, at
the time it is listed in accordance with the Act, on which are found
those physical or biological features (I) essential to the conservation
of the species and (II) that may require special management
considerations or protection and; (ii) specific areas outside the
geographical area occupied by a species at the time it is listed, upon
a determination that such areas are essential for the conservation of
the species. ``Conservation'' means the use of all methods and
procedures needed to bring the species to the point at which listing
under the Act is no longer necessary.
Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as amended, and implementing
regulations (50 CFR 424.12) require that, to the maximum extent prudent
and determinable, the Secretary designate critical habitat at the time
the species is determined to be endangered or threatened. The Service
finds that designation of critical habitat is not prudent for C. s.
ibidis. Service regulations (50 CFR 424.12(a)(1)) state that
designation of critical habitat is not prudent when one or both of the
following situations exist--(1) the species is threatened by taking or
other human activity, and identification of critical habitat can be
expected to increase the degree of threat to the species, or (2) such
designation of critical habitat would not be beneficial to the species.
Critical habitat designation for C. s. ibidis is not prudent due to
lack of benefit. There are only 200-500 of these birds remaining, all
of which are restricted to six geographically isolated populations
occupying a total area of about 80 sq km (30 sq mi). As discussed in
the ``Background'' section of this rule, within this restricted range,
the Oahu elepaio has a preference for certain elevations and forest
structure. These forest birds are located on one island with less than
20 percent of the land area now covered by forest, and less than 20
percent of that forest is comprised of native vegetation. Therefore,
the destruction or adverse modification of habitat within the
restricted range of the Oahu elepaio would cause further reduction in
the area available for this bird to feed, nest, breed, and rear young.
In light of these facts, any action that would adversely modify
critical habitat also would be likely to jeopardize the continued
existence of the the Oahu elepaio. The designation of critical habitat
therefore would not provide additional benefit for the Oahu elepaio
beyond the protection afforded by listing.
Critical habitat receives consideration under section 7 of the Act
with regard to actions carried out, authorized, or funded by a Federal
agency. Federal agencies are required to ensure that their actions do
not jeopardize the continued existence of a species or result in
destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. However, both
jeopardizing the continued existence of a species and adverse
modification of critical habitat have similar standards and thus
similar thresholds for violation of section 7 of the Act. Federal
involvement is most likely in two situations--(1) where the species
occurs on Federal lands and (2) when a Federal agency is involved in
authorizing or funding actions on non-Federal lands. One quarter of the
current range of the Oahu elepaios' range is Federally owned or leased.
Furthermore, designation of critical habitat may affect non-Federal
lands only where a Federal nexus exists. The designation of critical
habitat on private or State lands provides no additional benefit for
the Oahu elepaio over that provided as a result of listing when there
are no Federal nexus actions taking place. Designating critical habitat
does not create a management plan for the areas where the listed
species occurs; does not establish numerical population goals or
prescribe specific management actions (inside or outside of critical
habitat); and does not have a direct effect on areas not designated as
critical habitat.
All involved Federal, State, City, County and private landowners
have been notified of the importance of protecting the habitat of the
remaining populations of the Oahu elepaio. The Service believes that
Federal involvement in the areas where this bird occurs can be
identified without the designation of critical habitat. Where Oahu
elepaio are found on Federal lands, the agencies are aware of the
species and are addressing conservation efforts (see ``Available
Conservation Measures'' section below). Non-Federal landowners have
also been appraised of the population locations and importance of
protecting the bird and its habitat. Protection of the Oahu elepaio
will be addressed through the section 4 recovery process and the
section 7 consultation process. For the reasons discussed above, the
Service finds that the designation of critical habitat for the C. s.
ibidis is not prudent.
Available Conservation Measures
Conservation measures provided to species listed as endangered or
threatened under the Endangered Species Act include recognition,
recovery actions, requirements for Federal protection, and prohibitions
against certain activities. Recognition through listing encourages
public awareness and results in conservation actions by Federal, State
and private agencies, groups, and individuals. The Act provides for
possible land acquisition and cooperation with states and requires that
recovery actions be carried out for all listed species. The protection
required of Federal agencies
[[Page 53629]]
and the prohibitions against certain activities involving listed
animals are discussed, in part, below.
Section 7(a) of the Act, as amended, requires Federal agencies to
evaluate their actions with respect to any species that is proposed or
listed as endangered or threatened and with respect to its critical
habitat, if any is being designated. Regulations implementing this
interagency cooperation provision of the Act are codified at 50 CFR
part 402. Section 7(a)(4) requires Federal agencies to confer with the
Service on any action that is likely to jeopardize the continued
existence of a species proposed for listing or result in destruction or
adverse modification of proposed critical habitat. If a species is
listed subsequently, section 7(a)(2) requires Federal agencies to
ensure that activities they authorize, fund, or carry out are not
likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or
destroy or adversely modify its critical habitat if any is designated.
If a Federal action may affect a listed species or its critical
habitat, the responsible Federal agency must enter into formal
consultation with the Service.
Federal agency actions that may require conference and/or
consultation as described in the preceding paragraph includes--military
activities, such as military training, troop movements, or fire
resulting from the military's use of live ammunition during training,
which take place on federally owned or leased lands; the involvement of
the Army Corps of Engineers in projects subject to section 404 of the
Clean Water Act and section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899
such as the construction of roads, bridges, and dredging projects ;
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency-authorized discharges under the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System; U.S. Department of
Agriculture/Natural Resources Conservation Service and U.S. Department
of Housing and Urban Development projects; and other activities with a
possible Federal nexus, such as golf course and firebreak construction.
Several of the remaining populations of this bird are located on
State land leased by the Federal government and utilized for military
training, particularly by the U.S. Army. In the Waianae Mountains,
those populations are found in the following areas--Pahole to Makaha,
including both leeward and windward sides; Schofield to Palehua, on the
windward side. In the Koolau Mountains, only a fraction of one elepaio
population area (Aiea ridge south to the Kahauiki Stream) is under
military control. Therefore, section 7 consultation will be required
before any military activities, such as military training, troop
movements, or use of live ammunition during training, that may impact
the Oahu elepaio may take place.
The Act and its implementing regulations set forth a series of
general trade prohibitions and exceptions that apply to all endangered
wildlife. The prohibitions, codified at 50 CFR 17.21, in part, make it
illegal for any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States
to take (includes harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap,
capture, or collect; or to attempt any of these), import or export,
ship in interstate or commerce in the course of a commercial activity,
or sell or offer for sale in interstate or foreign commerce any listed
species. It is also illegal to possess, sell, deliver, carry,
transport, or ship any such wildlife that has been taken illegally.
Certain exceptions apply to agents of the Service and State
conservation agencies.
Permits may be issued to carry out otherwise prohibited activities
involving endangered wildlife under certain circumstances. Regulations
governing permits are codified at 50 CFR 17.22 and 17.23. Such permits
are available for scientific purposes, to enhance the propagation or
survival of the species, and/or for incidental take in the course of
otherwise lawful activities. Requests for copies of the regulations
regarding listed wildlife and inquiries about permits and prohibitions
may be addressed to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Endangered
Species Permits, 911 N.E. 11th Avenue, Portland, Oregon 97232-4181
(telephone 503-231-6241; facsimile 503-231-6243).
At the time a species is proposed, it is the policy of the Service
(59 FR 34272) to identify to the maximum extent practicable those
activities that would or would not constitute a violation of section 9
of the Act. The intent of this policy is to increase public awareness
of the effect of the listing on proposed and ongoing activities within
a species' range. Likely activities that the Service believes could
potentially result in a violation of section 9 of the Act include, but
are not limited to, the following: Road or firebreak construction,
military troop training or other activities that disturb the normal
behavior (e.g., breeding, nesting, feeding) of Oahu elepaio, or damage
habitat used by the species. Activities that the Service believes would
not likely result in a violation of section 9 of the Act include, but
are not limited to, non-destructive activities in areas occupied by
Oahu elepaio such as hiking, collecting plants for cultural usage
(e.g., hula halau), and hunting game animals. Activities that occur
under a valid incidental take permit issued through a section 7
consultation or section 10 HCP permit would not violate section 9.
Questions regarding whether specific activities will constitute a
violation of section 9 of the Act should be directed to the Manager of
the Pacific Islands Ecoregion (see ADDRESSES section).
If the Oahu elepaio were given Federal protection under the Act,
the State of Hawaii Endangered Species Act (HRS, Sect. 195D-4(a)) would
be automatically invoked, prohibiting taking and encouraging
conservation by State government agencies. State regulations prohibit
the removal, destruction, or damage of any federally listed animals
found on State lands. Hawaii's Endangered Species Act states, ``Any
species of aquatic life, wildlife, or land plant that has been
determined to be an endangered species pursuant to the Act shall be
deemed to be an endangered species under the provisions of this chapter
and any indigenous species of aquatic life, wildlife, or land plant
that has been determined to be a threatened species pursuant to the Act
shall be deemed to be a threatened species under the provisions of this
chapter.'' Further, the State may enter into agreements with Federal
agencies to administer and manage any area required for the
conservation, management, enhancement, or protection of endangered
species (HRS, Sect. 195D-5(c)). Funds for these activities could be
made available under section 6 of the Act (State Cooperative
Agreements). Thus, the Federal protection afforded to the Oahu elepaio
by listing as an endangered species will be reinforced and supplemented
by protection under State law.
Public Comments Solicited
The Service intends that any final action resulting from this
proposal will be as accurate and as effective as possible. Therefore,
comments or suggestions from the public, other concerned governmental
agencies, the scientific community, industry, or any other interested
party concerning this proposed rule are hereby solicited. Comments are
particularly sought concerning:
(1) biological, commercial, or other relevant data concerning any
threat (or lack thereof) to this taxon;
(2) the location of any additional populations of this species and
the reasons why habitat should or should not be determined to be
critical habitat pursuant to section 4 of the Act;
[[Page 53630]]
(3) additional information concerning the range, distribution, and
population size of this species; and
(4) current or planned activities in the subject area and their
possible impacts on this species.
Final promulgation of the regulation(s) on this species will take
into consideration the comments and any additional information received
by the Service, and such communications may lead to a final regulation
that differs from this proposal.
The Act provides for one or more public hearings on this proposal,
if requested. Requests must be received within 45 days of the date of
publication of this proposal in the Federal Register. Such requests
must be made in writing and be addressed to the Pacific Islands
Ecoregion Manager (see ADDRESSES section).
Executive Order 12866 requires each agency to write regulations/
notices that are easy to understand. We invite your comments on how to
make this notice easier to understand including answers to questions
such as the following: (1) Are the requirements in the notice clearly
stated? (2) Does the notice contain technical language or jargon that
interferes with its clarity? (3) Does the format of the notice
(grouping and order of sections, use of headings, paragraphing, etc.)
aid or reduce its clarity? (4) Is the description of the notice in the
Supplementary Information section of the preamble helpful in
understanding the notice? What else could we do to make the notice
easier to understand?
Send a copy of any comments that concern how we could make this
regulation easier to understand to: Office of Regulatory Affairs,
Department of the Interior, room 7229, 1849 C Street, NW, Washington,
DC 20240. You may also e-mail the comments to this address:
E[email protected]
National Environmental Policy Act
The Fish and Wildlife Service has determined that Environmental
Assessments and Environmental Impact Statements, as defined under the
authority of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, need not be
prepared in connection with regulations adopted pursuant to section
4(a) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. A notice
outlining the Service's reasons for this determination was published in
the Federal Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244).
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not contain any new collections of information other
than those already approved under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq., and assigned Office of Management and Budget
clearance number 1018-0094. For additional information concerning
permit and associated requirements for threatened species, see 50 CFR
17.32.
References Cited
A complete list of all references and data cited herein, is
available upon request from the Pacific Islands Ecoregion (see
ADDRESSES section).
Author. The primary author of this proposed rule is Loyal A.
Mehrhoff, Pacific Islands Ecoregion (see ADDRESSES section). Recent
data on the distribution and status of the Oahu elepaio were compiled
by Dr. Sheila Conant of the University of Hawaii.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.
Proposed Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, the Service hereby proposes to amend part 17,
subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations,
as set forth below:
PART 17--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 16 U.S.C. 1531-1544; 16 U.S.C.
4201-4245; Pub. L. 99-625, 100 Stat. 3500, unless otherwise noted.
2. Amend Sec. 17.11(h) by adding the following, in alphabetical
order under BIRDS, to the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife to
read as follows:
Sec. 17.11 Endangered and threatened wildlife.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species Vertebrate
-------------------------------------------------------- population where Critical Special
Historic range endangered or Status When listed habitat rules
Common name Scientific name threatened
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Birds
* * * * * * *
Elepaio, Oahu.................... Chasiempis U.S.A.(HI).......... Entire.............. E NA NA
sandwichensis
ibidis.
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 53631]]
Dated: September 29, 1998.
Jamie Rappaport Clark,
Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 98-26736 Filed 10-5-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P