Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 9, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 26835

I 2. Revise paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) § 1200.7 What are NARA logos and how (1) The Federal Records Center of § 1200.7 to read as follows: are they used? Program; (a) * * *

(2) The National Historical Publications and Records Commission;

* * * * * This final rule implements the Federal in) of rain per year, while some leeward Dated: May 3, 2006. protections provided by the Act for coasts that lie in the rain shadow of the Allen Weinstein, these 12 species of Hawaiian picture- high volcanoes are classified as deserts, wing flies. receiving as little as 25 cm (10 in) of Archivist of the United States. DATES: This final rule is effective June rain annually. This topographic and [FR Doc. 06–4302 Filed 5–8–06; 8:45 am] 8, 2006. climatic regime has given rise to a rich BILLING CODE 7515–01–P ADDRESSES: Comments and materials diversity of plant communities, received, as well as supporting including coastal, lowland, montane, documentation used in the preparation subalpine, and alpine; dry, mesic, and DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR of this final rule, will be available for wet; and herblands, grasslands, shrublands, forests, and mixed Fish and Wildlife Service public inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours at the communities (Gagne and Cuddihy 1990). These habitats and plant 50 CFR Part 17 Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 300 Ala communities in turn support one of the RIN 1018 AG23 Moana Boulevard, Room 3–122, Box most unique arthropod faunas in the 50088, Honolulu, HI 96850. world, with an estimated 10,000 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: endemic species (Howarth 1990). and Plants; Determination of Status for Patrick Leonard, Field Supervisor, Unusual characteristics of Hawaii’s 12 Species of Picture-Wing Flies From Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office native arthropod fauna include the the Hawaiian Islands (see ADDRESSES section) (telephone 808/ presence of relict species; the absence of AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 792–9400; facsimile 808/792–9581). social insects, such as ants and termites; Interior. Persons who use a telecommunications endemic genera; extremely small geographic ranges; adaptation of species ACTION: Final rule. device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service to very specific conditions or SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and (FIRS) at 800/877–8339, 24 hours a day, environments; novel ecological shifts; Wildlife Service (Service), determine 7 days a week. flightlessness; and loss of certain endangered status pursuant to the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: antipredator behaviors (Zimmerman Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 1948, 1970; Simon et al. 1984; Howarth amended (Act), for 11 species of Background 1990). Native vegetation on all the main Hawaiian picture-wing flies— Many of the major ecological zones of Hawaiian Islands has undergone Drosophila aglaia, D. differens, D. the earth are represented in Hawaii, extreme alteration because of past and hemipeza, D. heteroneura, D. from coral reef systems through rain present land management practices, montgomeryi, D. musaphilia, D. forests to high alpine deserts, in less including ranching, introduction of neoclavisetae, D. obatai, D. ochrobasis, than 10,800 square kilometers (6,500 nonnative plants and animals, and D. substenoptera, and D. tarphytrichia. square miles) of land. The range of agricultural development (Cuddihy and We determine threatened status topographies creates a great diversity of Stone 1990). pursuant to the Act for one species of climates. Windward (northeastern) Each species of Hawaiian picture- Hawaiian picture-wing fly—D. mulli. slopes can receive up to 1,000 cm (400 wing fly described in this document is

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:32 May 08, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09MYR1.SGM 09MYR1 mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with RULES ER09MY06.000 ER09MY06.001 26836 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 9, 2006 / Rules and Regulations

found only on a single island, and the Kaneshiro 1995). While the larval stages 1971, routine sampling in the Tantalus larvae of each are dependant upon only of most species are saprophytic (feeding area has documented dramatic declines a single or a few related species of on decaying vegetation, such as rotting in the abundance of some Drosophila plants (see Table 1). These host plant leaves, bark, flowers, and fruits), some species and in other cases local species are threatened by a variety of have become highly specialized, being extirpations (Foote and Carson 1995). factors, including their direct carnivorous on egg masses of spiders, or All 12 species described below belong destruction by pigs, goats, cattle, rats, feeding on green algae growing to the species group commonly known and competition with nonnative plants, underwater on boulders in streams as the picture-wing Drosophila. This and the indirect effects of soil (Kaneshiro and Kaneshiro 1995). group consists of 106 known species, disturbance which further promotes the Hawaiian Drosophila, and in most of which are relatively large with spread of nonnative species (see Factors particular picture-wing Drosophila, are elaborate markings on the otherwise A and C below). In addition to the unique among living organisms because clear wings of both sexes, the pattern of habitat alteration, the picture-wing flies adaptive radiation (the evolution of an included in this rule are threatened by ancestral species, which was adapted to which varies among species (Hardy and a variety of introduced predatory a particular way of life, into many Kaneshiro 1981; Carson 1992). The species including yellow jackets and diverse species, each adapted to a picture-wing Drosophila have been several ant species. This suite of threats different habitat) has resulted in referred to as the ‘‘birds of paradise’’ of to the picture-wing flies and its habitat unparalleled biological diversity within the insect world because of their are discussed in more detail in the a single large, closely related group of relatively large size, colorful wing Summary of Factors Affecting the species (Foote and Carson 1995). The patterns, and the males’ elaborate Species section. banding patterns of all five major courtship displays and territorial Flies in the Drosophilidae family in chromosome arms among 106 species of defense behaviors. Hawaii represent one of the most Hawaiian picture-winged Drosophila Males occupy territories that serve as remarkable cases of specific adaptation revealed a 5 million-year-old mating arenas, or leks, to which to local conditions that has been found evolutionary history rooted to species receptive females are attracted. The in any group of animals (Hardy and on the island of Kauai (Carson 1992). male Drosophila use different Kaneshiro 1981). These insects are This work on the evolutionary history of techniques to ward off competing distributed throughout the eight main Hawaiian Drosophila augments an suitors. One species, Drosophila Hawaiian Islands (i.e., Hawaii, Maui, extensive systematic treatment of the heteroneura, butts heads like bighorn Oahu, Kauai, Molokai, Lanai, Niihau, genus (Hardy 1965; Kaneshiro 1976). sheep. Others grasp one another with and Kahoolawe), and each species is Unlike numerous Hawaiian insects legs and wings in a wrestling match. Yet typically found on a single island known only from their original another tries to intimidate with noise, (Carson and Yoon 1982). taxonomic descriptions, many aspects of creating a buzzing roar with muscles The general life cycle of Hawaiian Hawaiian Drosophilidae biology have from its abdomen. When the male has Drosophilidae is typical of that of most been researched, including their secured his position in the lek, he flies: After mating, females lay eggs from internal and external morphology, performs a detailed choreography of which larvae (immature stage) hatch; as behavior, ecology, physiology, behaviors for the females visiting that larvae grow they molt (shed their skin) biochemistry, the banding sequence of site. If he does not convey the right through three successive stages (instars); giant chromosomes, and the structure of moves and messages, she leaves without when fully grown, the larvae change their DNA (Kaneshiro and Kaneshiro mating. Each species has its own ritual; into pupae (a transitional form) in 1995). More than 80 research scientists some include dancing around the which they metamorphose and emerge and over 350 undergraduates, graduate female, buzzing of wings at a specific as adults. students, and postdoctoral fellows have Breeding generally occurs year-round, participated in research on many pitch, placing the male’s head under the but egg laying and larval development species of the Hawaiian Drosophilidae, female’s wing, tongue-tasting, or increase following the rainy season as resulting in over 600 scientific dousing the female with pheromone. the availability of decaying matter, publications. The primary dataset we used to which the flies feed on, increases in Because a large number of sites across document observations of these picture- response to the heavy rains (K. the Hawaiian Islands have been wing flies spans the years 1965 to 1999 Kaneshiro, in litt., 2005b). In general, surveyed since the 1960s using bait (K. Kaneshiro, in litt., 2005a). Drosophila lay between 50 and 200 eggs stations that are not species-specific, Additional data were obtained from in a single clutch. Eggs develop into researchers have a relatively good individuals familiar with particular adults in about a month, and adults understanding of the distribution of species and locations. Many sites were generally become sexually mature one Drosophila species and how that surveyed infrequently or have not been month later. Adults generally live for distribution has changed over time. surveyed in a long time while others one to two months. Biologists have observed a general have relatively complete records from As a group, Hawaiian Drosophilidae decline of the Hawaiian Drosophilidae 1966 to 1999. In this rule, when we state can be found in most of the natural along with other components of the the date a species was last observed in communities in Hawaii. They have native ecosystem. As noted by Spieth a particular year, we do not intend to developed and adapted ecologically to a (1980), during the early part of the imply that comprehensive surveys have tremendous diversity of ecosystems century, the Tantalus area (northeast of been conducted in subsequent years, ranging from desert-like habitats, to rain Honolulu) was a major spot for only that the specified year was the last forests, to swampland (Kaneshiro and collecting Drosophila species. Since year that the species was located.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:32 May 08, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09MYR1.SGM 09MYR1 mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 9, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 26837

TABLE 1.—DISTRIBUTION OF 12 HAWAIIAN PICTURE-WING FLIES BY ISLAND, GENERAL HABITAT TYPE, AND PRIMARY HOST PLANT(S)

Species Island General habitat type Primary host plant(s)

Drosophila aglaia ...... Oahu ...... Mesic forest ...... Urera glabra D. differens ...... Molokai ...... Wet forest ...... Clermontia sp. D. hemipeza ...... Oahu ...... Mesic forest ...... Cyanea sp., Lobelia sp., and Urera kaalae D. heteroneura ...... Hawaii ...... Mesic to wet forest ...... Cheirodendron sp., Clermontia sp., Delissea sp. D. montgomeryi ...... Oahu ...... Mesic forest ...... Urera kaalae D. mulli ...... Hawaii ...... Wet forest ...... Pritchardia beccariana D. musaphilia ...... Kauai ...... Mesic forest ...... Acacia koa D. neoclavisetae ...... Maui ...... Wet forest ...... Cyanea sp. D. obatai ...... Oahu ...... Dry to mesic forest ...... Pleomele aurea and Pleomele forbesii D. ochrobasis ...... Hawaii ...... Mesic to wet forest ...... Clermontia sp., Marattia sp., and Myrsine sp. D. substenoptera ...... Oahu ...... Wet forest ...... Cheirodendron sp. and Tetraplasandra sp. D. tarphytrichia ...... Oahu ...... Mesic forest ...... Charpentiera sp.

Discussion of the Species Urera glabra (family Urticaceae), which Campanulaceae) in wet rainforest is a small shrub-like endemic tree. The habitat (Kaneshiro and Kaneshiro 1995). Drosophila aglaia larvae of D. aglaia develop in the Approximately 10 to 25 percent of D. Drosophila aglaia was first recorded decomposing bark and stem of U. differens’ potential habitat on steep, in 1946, on Mount Kaala on the island glabra. This plant does not form large difficult to access areas and on State of Oahu, and described by Hardy (1965). stands, but is infrequently scattered Natural Reserve lands surrounding its D. aglaia is a small species, 0.15 inches throughout slopes and valley bottoms in known range remains unsurveyed for (in) (4.0 millimeters (mm)) in length, mesic and wet forest habitat on Oahu. the species (Science Panel 2005; K. with wings 0.2 in (5.0 mm) long. It has In the Waianae Mountains on the west Kaneshiro, pers. comm. 2006). a yellow head that is approximately side of Oahu, this tree occurs Drosophila hemipeza one-third wider than long. The eyes are infrequently in mesic forest. brown, and the antennae are yellow, Hardy (1965) described Drosophila Drosophila differens tinged with brown. The thorax is clear hemipeza from specimens recorded at yellow with three broad brown stripes Drosophila differens was described by Pupukea, Oahu, in 1952. The thorax of on the top, and the legs are yellow. The Hardy and Kaneshiro (1975) from D. hemipeza is predominantly yellow abdomen is brown with a large yellow specimens first recorded at South with two brown stripes on the top, and spot on each of the hind corners. The Hanalilolilo, Molokai, in 1972. This the legs are entirely yellow. This species wings are predominantly clear with species is larger than most picture- is 0.2 in (5.0 mm) long; the front legs are irregular but characteristic brown wings, approximately 0.3 in (7.0 mm) in very slender with short straight bristles; markings, and are about two and three- length, with wings 0.3 in (8.3 mm) long. and the wings are 0.2 in (6.0 mm) in quarter times longer than wide. D. differens has an entirely or length, slender, and somewhat pointed. Drosophila aglaia is historically predominantly yellow face and known from five localities in the Drosophila hemipeza is restricted to characteristic markings extending to the Waianae Mountains of Oahu between the island of Oahu where it is tip of the wings. 1,400 and 2,800 feet (ft) (427 to 853 historically known from seven localities meters (m)) above sea level. During 50 Drosophila differens is historically between 1,600 and 2,800 ft (488 to 853 survey dates between 1966 and 1990, 28 known from three sites on private land m) above sea-level (not including the individuals were observed (Kaneshiro in between 3,800 and 4,500 ft (1,158 to Pupakea site of discovery which is litt., 2005a). The 5 sites include: One 1,372 m) above sea level, within considered an extripated population). lowland mesic Diospyros sp. and montane wet ohia forest (HBMP, in litt., Since formal surveys began for the Metrosideros sp. (ohia) forest site in 2005; K. Kaneshiro, in litt., 2005a). species, 49 individuals were recorded Makaleha Valley; two lowland mesic During 40 surveys between 1965 and during a total of 56 different survey Acacia koa (koa) and ohia forest sites at 1999, 63 individuals were recorded. At dates between 1965 and 1999 (K. Peacock Flats (Kapuahikahi Gulch) and Hanalilolilo, the species was observed Kaneshiro, in litt., 2005a). The species Palikea; one site in diverse mesic forest on eight survey dates between 1967 and has been documented from seven sites, at Puu Kaua; and a lowland, dry to 1983, but was not observed on three with survey history at these sites as mesic forest site at Puu Pane (K. subsequent survey dates, the most follows: (1) The species was Kaneshiro, in litt., 2005a). recent being 1999. At a second site, documented in 1969 but not in The last observation of this species Kaunuohua, which was only surveyed subsequent surveys spanning until 1972 occurred in 1997 during the last survey twice, individuals were observed in in the Makaleha Valley; (2) individuals of the Palikea site. The species has not 1969 but not in 1999. At the third site, were detected at Puu Kaua in 1971 but been observed at the other four historic Puu Kolekole, individuals were not in subsequent surveys as recently as sites since 1970 or 1971 despite documented in 1969 and again in 1999 1999; (3) at Kaluaa Gulch, the species subsequent surveys. However, two of (K. Kaneshiro, in litt., 2005a). An was observed in 1971 but not in 1972; the sites (Kapuahikahi Gulch and estimated 75 to 90 percent of D. (4) in Makaha Valley, the species was Makaleha Valley) have not been differens’ total potential habitat has detected in 1971 and no surveys have surveyed since the 1970s and one site, been surveyed (K. Kaneshiro, pers. been conducted since; (5) at Palikea the Puu Pane, was surveyed only once again comm. 2006). last observation occurred in 1997, also in 1991 (K. Kaneshiro, in litt., 2005a). Montgomery (1975) found that the date of the last survey; and (6) the Drosophila aglaia is restricted to the Drosophila differens larvae inhabit the species has not been detected at the natural distribution of its host plant, bark and stems of Clermontia sp. (family Mauna Kapu site since 1975 despite

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:32 May 08, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09MYR1.SGM 09MYR1 mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with RULES 26838 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 9, 2006 / Rules and Regulations

subsequent surveys spanning until island’s 5 volcanoes (Hualalai, Mauna recorded from Kaluaa Gulch during the 1983; (7) the species was detected at Kea, Mauna Loa, and Kilauea) in 5 last survey in 1972; (2) at Palikea, one Pauoa Flats in the Koolau Range that different montane environments individual was observed on the last was surveyed three times between 1973 (Kaneshiro and Kaneshiro 1995; HBMP, survey date in March 1997; and (3) at and 1974, with one observation of one in litt., 2005; K. Kaneshiro, in litt., Puu Kaua, historically the site with the individual during the last survey in 2005a). highest number of total individuals 1974 (K. Kaneshiro, in litt., 2005a). Based on the relatively extensive observed, the species was last detected Montgomery (1975) determined that survey data, the population decline of in 1971 despite five subsequent surveys Drosophila hemipeza larvae feed within Drosophila heteroneura has been between 1997 and 1999 (K. Kaneshiro, decomposing portions of several demonstrated clearly. For example, D. in litt., 2005a). different mesic forest plants. The larvae heteroneura was recorded 760 times Montgomery (1975) reported that the inhabit the decomposing bark of Urera during surveys between 1975 and 1979. larvae of this species feed within the kaalae (family Urticaceae), a federally- In the early 1980s, the first decaying bark of Urera kaalae, a endangered plant (USFWS 1991, 1995) disappearance of a D. heteroneura federally-endangered plant (USFWS that grows on slopes and in gulches of population was recorded from the Olaa 1991, 1995) that grows on slopes and in diverse mesic forest. In 2004, only 41 Forest site in Hawaii Volcanoes gulches of diverse mesic forest individuals of U. kaalae were known to National Park (Carson 1986; Foote and (Kaneshiro and Kaneshiro 1995). In remain in the wild (USFWS, in litt., Carson 1995). Subsequently, the absence 2004, only 41 individuals of U. kaalae 2004). The larvae also feed within the of the species was noted in several other were known to remain in the wild decomposing stems of Lobelia sp. locations in southern and western parts (USFWS, in litt., 2004). (family Campanulaceae) and the of the island where D. heteroneura had Drosophila mulli decomposing bark and stems of Cyanea previously been relatively common. By sp. (family Campanulaceae) in mesic the late 1980s, D. heteroneura was Drosophila mulli was described by forest habitat (Kaneshiro and Kaneshiro believed to be extinct until an extremely Perreira and Kaneshiro (1990) and 1995; Science Panel 2005). small population was discovered on named for William P. Mull, the private land at Hualalai Volcano in 1993 Hawaiian naturalist who first Drosophila heteroneura (Kaneshiro and Kaneshiro 1995). The discovered this species. The head of D. R.C.L. Perkins initially described this species was not observed again until mulli is yellow on the front and covered species as Idiomyia heteroneura, based 1998 when Foote (2000) recorded six with light, silvery grey fuzz. The face of on specimens from Olaa on the island specimens of D. heteroneura inhabiting the male is characteristically white, of Hawaii (Perkins 1910). This taxon a site at approximately 4,436 ft (1,352 while that of the female is brown. The was later transferred to the genus m) above sea level near a host plant top of the thorax is brownish yellow and Drosophila (Hardy 1969), forming its species, Clermontia clermontioides. D. lacks conspicuous markings or stripes. presently accepted name. Drosophila heteroneura was last observed in 2001, The legs are predominantly yellow, and heteroneura has very large spots on the at the refuge (D. Foote, pers. comm., the front legs of males bear three bases of the wings and the males have 2005). distinct rows of long, curled hairs. The a broad head with the eyes situated Drosophila heteroneura larvae wings are two and one-half times longer laterally, giving them a hammerhead primarily inhabit the decomposing bark than wide, with distinct brown appearance. The hammer-shaped head and stems of Clermontia sp. (family markings at the base and the tip. The and entirely yellow face differentiate it Campanulaceae), including C. length of the body is 0.17 to 0.2 in (4.3 from D. silvestris, a closely related clermontioides, and Delissea sp. (family to 5.0 mm), and the wings are 0.17 to species. The thorax is predominantly Campanulaceae), but it is also known to 0.19 in (4.3 to 4.8 mm) long (Kaneshiro yellow with several black streaks and feed within decomposing portions of and Kaneshiro 1995). markings on top. The legs are yellow Cheirodendron sp. (family Araliaceae) Drosophila mulli is restricted to the except for slight tinges of brown on the in open mesic and wet forest habitat island of Hawaii and is historically ends of the middle and hind femora and (Kaneshiro and Kaneshiro 1995). known from two locations between tibiae. The wings are hyaline 3,200 and 4,000 ft (985 to 1,220 m) (transparent) and are very similar in Drosophila montgomeryi above sea level. Adult flies are found markings and venation (vein markings) Drosophila montgomeryi was only on the leaf undersides of the to those of D. silvestris, except that the described by Hardy and Kaneshiro endemic fan palm, Pritchardia marking in the front margin of the wing (1971) from specimens collected in the beccariana (family Arecaceae) which is of D. heteroneura extends nearly to the Waianae Mountains of Oahu in 1970. the only known association of a marking at the end of the wing. The Morphologically, this species appears to Drosophila species with a native abdomen is shiny black with a large be most closely related to D. pisonia Hawaiian palm species. Individual P. yellow spot on the top of each segment. from the island of Hawaii. It can be beccariana are long-lived This species is about 0.22 in (5.7 mm) distinguished by the narrow, pale brown (approximately 100 years). Current in length with wings approximately 0.3 stripe on each side of the top of the regeneration of the host plant has been in (7.0 mm) long (Kaneshiro and thorax, the long hairs on the front legs, compromised by feral ungulates, rats, Kaneshiro 1995). and the second antennal segment, and scolytid beetles (see Summary of Drosophila heteroneura has been the which is yellow, tinged with brown on Factors Affecting the Species section most intensely studied of the 12 species the top. below). The larval feeding site on the discussed in this rule (Kaneshiro and Drosophila montgomeryi is plant remains unknown because Kaneshiro 1995). This species is historically known from three localities attempts to rear this species from restricted to the island of Hawaii where, in the Waianae Mountains on western decaying parts of P. beccariana have historically, it was known to be Oahu between 2,000 and 2,800 ft (610 thus far been unsuccessful (W. P. Mull, relatively widely distributed between to 853 m) above sea level. The best Volcano, Hawaii, pers. comm., 1994; 3,800 and 5,500 ft (1,158 to 1,675 m) available information concerning the Science Panel 2005). above sea level. D. heteroneura has been status of the species at these sites is as The site of the discovery for recorded from 24 localities on 4 of the follows: (1) One individual was Drosophila mulli is located within a

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:32 May 08, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09MYR1.SGM 09MYR1 mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 9, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 26839

State-owned montane wet ohia forest at and not again during numerous surveys the D. adiastola group. The abdomen is Olaa Forest Reserve at approximately through 1999; and (4) individuals were dark brown and black with numerous 3,200 ft (985 m) above sea level. This last observed in 1988 at the Pihea Trail long hairs on the hind segments of the site was surveyed at least 62 times site located at 3,000 ft (915 m), but was male (Kaneshiro and Kaneshiro 1995). between 1965 and 2001, with fewer than not relocated in five subsequent surveys Two populations of Drosophila 10 individuals observed on 4 different between 1989 and 1999 in that area neoclavisetae were found historically dates. The last recorded observation at (HBMP, in litt., 2005; Kaneshiro, in litt., along the Puu Kukui Trail within this site occurred in 2001 (K. Kaneshiro, 2005a). montane wet ohia forests on State land in litt., 2005a; D. Foote, in litt., 2006). Montgomery (1975) determined that in West Maui. One habitat site was A second locality was discovered in the host plant for Drosophila found in 1969 at 4,440 ft (1,353 m) and 1999, approximately 9.3 mi (15 km) musaphilia is Acacia koa. The females the other in 1975 at 3,500 ft (1,067 m) from the original site within a State- lay their eggs upon, and the larvae above sea level (Kaneshiro and owned montane wet ohia forest site at develop in, the moldy slime flux (seep) Kaneshiro 1995; HBMP, in litt., 2005; K. Upper Waiakea Reserve at that occasionally appears on certain Kaneshiro, in litt., 2005a). Fewer than approximately 4,000 ft (1,219 m) above trees with injured plant tissue and 10 individuals have been observed sea level (Science Panel 2005; S. seeping sap. Understanding the full despite attempts to relocate the species Montgomery, pers. comm., 2005a). range of D. musaphilia is difficult through 1997 (Kaneshiro and Kaneshiro because its host plant, Acacia koa, is 1995; K. Kaneshiro, in litt., 2005a; K. Drosophila musaphilia fairly common and stable within, and Kaneshiro pers. comm. 2006). Hardy (1965) formally described surrounding, its known range on Kauai; Researchers estimate that between 90 Drosophila musaphilia from specimens however, the frequency of suitable slime and 95 percent of D. neoclavisetae’s collected at Kokee, Kauai, in 1952. fluxes occurring on the host plant total potential range has been surveyed Although Hardy (1965) originally appears to be much more restricted and (K. Kaneshiro, pers. comm., 2006). indicated that D. musaphilia is very unpredictable (Science Panel 2005). The host plant of Drosophila similar to D. villosipedis, more recent neoclavisetae has not yet been work indicates D. musaphilia is most Drosophila neoclavisetae confirmed, although it is likely closely related to D. hawaiiensis Drosophila neoclavisetae was associated with Cyanea sp. (family (Kaneshiro et al. 1995). described by William Perreira and Campanulaceae). Because both Drosophila musaphilia is Kenneth Kaneshiro (1990) from collections of this species occurred characterized by a predominantly black specimens collected at Puu Kukui, West within a small patch of Cyanea sp. and thorax with gray fuzz and a very narrow Maui, in 1969. It was named for its because many other species in the D. gray stripe extending down the top. The obvious affinities with D. clavisetae adiastola species group use species in legs are dark brown to yellow, with the from East Maui. Both species are similar this genus and other plants in the family front tibia devoid of ornamentation, and in wing and thorax markings, and they Campanulaceae, researchers believe the the tips of the legs have abundant long, share a specialized part of the courtship Cyanea sp. found at Puu Kukui is likely black hairs on top. The wings are three behavior. The male bends its abdomen the correct host plant for D. times longer than wide with up over its head, produces a bubble of neoclavisetae (Science Panel 2005; characteristic markings of the D. liquid (believed to be a sex pheromone) Kaneshiro and Kaneshiro 1995). Due to hawaiiensis group. The abdomen is dark from its anal gland and then vibrates the its inaccessibility, some potential brown to black and densely covered abdomen, fanning the scent toward the habitat surrounding the known range of with brown fuzz. The body length is female. Both D. neoclavisetae and D. D. neoclavisetae remains unsurveyed for about 0.2 in (5.0 mm) and the wings clavisetae are members of the D. the species (Science Panel 2005). 0.207 in (5.25 mm) long (Kaneshiro and adiastola species group (Perreira and Kaneshiro 1995). Kaneshiro 1990), and while other Drosophila obatai Drosophila musaphilia is historically species in this group perform similarly Drosophila obatai was described by known from only four sites, one at 1,900 unusual mating dances, the behavior is Hardy and Kaneshiro in 1972, from ft (579 m) above sea level, and three highly exaggerated in D. clavisetae and specimens collected in the Waianae sites between 3,000 and 3,500 ft (915 to D. neoclavisetae (Kaneshiro and Mountains of Oahu. D. obatai resembles 1,065 m) above sea level. The species Kaneshiro 1995). D. sodomae from Maui and Molokai and has been observed a total of 11 times Drosophila neoclavisetae is between is distinguished by small differences in during 52 different survey dates since 0.2 and 0.25 in (6.0 and 6.4 mm) in wing markings and the black coloration its discovery (Kaneshiro and Kaneshiro length, with wings 0.26 to 0.3 in (6.5 to of the abdomen. 1995; K. Kaneshiro, in litt., 2005a). 7.0 mm) long. It is distinguished by its Drosophila obatai is historically Researchers estimate that 75 percent of amber brown head and yellow face, known from two localities between D. musaphilia’s total potential habitat with the middle portion raised to form 1,500 and 2,200 ft (457 to 670 m) above has been surveyed (K. Kaneshiro, pers. a prominent ridge. The thorax is sea level. Nine individuals were comm. 2006). The best available predominantly reddish brown with a recorded during ten surveys between information concerning the status of the distinct brown median stripe, bordered 1970 and 1991 (Kaneshiro, in litt., species at these sites is as follows: (1) A on each side by two brown stripes. The 2005a). Individuals of the species were single observation of D. musaphilia was legs are yellow, with brown on the detected in November 1971 at the time recorded from one lowland, wet ohia femora and a distinct brown band on the of the last survey at Wailupe Gulch. The forest site at Wahiawa (Alexander tips of the tibiae. The wings are broad second site (Puu Pane), has been Reservior) in 1968 (this population is and rounded, more than twice as long surveyed eight times between 1970 and believed to be extirpated); (2) at the as wide, and with the front portion 1991, with the last detection occurring Halemanu site, the species was observed covered with brown markings and large in March 1971 (Kaneshiro, in litt., in 1970 and last observed in 1972 but clear spots tinged light yellow. It shares 2005a). not in subsequent surveys as recent as with D. clavisetae an extra cross-vein in Drosophila obatai larvae feed within 1996; (3) one individual was observed the wing, which distinguishes both decomposing portions of Pleomele in 1968 at the Kokee (Nualolo Trail) site these species from the other species of forbesii, a candidate for Federal listing

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:32 May 08, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09MYR1.SGM 09MYR1 mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with RULES 26840 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 9, 2006 / Rules and Regulations

(90 FR 24870), and Pleomele aurea (both (family Marattiaceae) (Montgomery between 2,000 and 2,800 ft (610 to 853 in the family Agavaceae) (Kaneshiro and 1975; Kaneshiro and Kaneshiro 1995). m) above sea level. A total of 31 Kaneshiro 1995; Montgomery 1975). individuals were recorded on 36 survey Drosophila substenoptera These host plants grow on slopes in dry dates between 1965 and 1999 forest and diverse mesic forest, and Hardy (1965) originally described this (Kaneshiro, in litt., 2005a). Drosophila occur singly or in small clusters, rarely species as Idiomyia substenoptera. He tarphytrichia is now apparently forming large stands (Wagner et al. later determined the genus Idiomyia to extirpated from the Koolau range where 1999). be synonymous with Drosophila (Hardy it was originally discovered near Manoa 1969), thus creating the current name of Falls, and is presently known from four Drosophila ochrobasis Drosophila substenoptera. This species localities in the Waianae Mountains Drosophila ochrobasis was originally is closely related to D. planitibia and its (Kaneshiro and Kaneshiro 1995; HBMP, described by Hardy and Kaneshiro relatives (Kaneshiro et al. 1995), but is in litt., 2005; K. Kaneshiro, in litt., (1968) based on a specimen collected distinguished by its wing markings, 2005a). from Puu Hualalai on the island of narrow wing shape, and complexity of The larvae of Drosophila tarphytrichia Hawaii at an elevation of 5,550 ft (1,692 the male genitalia. D. substenoptera is feed only within the decomposing m) above sea level. Based on predominantly yellow with two black portions of the stems and branches of chromosomal studies, D. ochrobasis is a stripes extending down the entire length Charpentiera sp. trees (family member of the D. adiastola group and of the top surface of the thorax. The legs Amaranthaceae) in mesic forest habitat appears to be most closely related to D. are yellow and lack long hairs on the (Montgomery 1975). dorsal surfaces. Body length is 0.171 in setosimentum (Kaneshiro et al. 1995). Previous Federal Action Both the body and wings of (4.35 mm), and the wings are 0.2 to 0.21 Ten of these 12 species were Drosophila ochrobasis are in (5.0 to 5.3 mm) long (Kaneshiro and classified as candidates for listing in the approximately 0.18 in (4.6 mm) in Kaneshiro 1995). Drosophila substenoptera is February 28, 1996, Notice of Review of length. The head is yellow in front and historically known from seven localities Plant and Animal Taxa That Are brown on top, and the face is white with in both the Koolau and Waianae Candidates for Listing as Endangered or a prominent ridge running down the Mountains at elevations between 1,300 Threatened Species (Notice of Review) middle. The thorax is yellow except for and 3,900 ft (396 to 1,189 m) above sea (61 FR 7596). The remaining two a large brown spot on each side. The level. Drosophila substenoptera is now species, Drosophila differens and D. legs are yellow tinged with brown. In only known to occur on the summit of ochrobasis, were classified as males, the basal three-fifths of the wings Mt. Kaala. Drosophila researchers have candidates for listing in the Notice of are predominantly clear to translucent devoted intensive efforts to relocating Review dated September 19, 1997 (62 with faint transverse streaks of brown. this species at other sites because the FR 49398). Candidates are those taxa for The outer two-thirds of the wing is dark species is considered important for which the Service has on file substantial brown with large clear spots similar to genetic studies of the D. planitibia information on biological vulnerability that portion of the wings in D. phylogeny group; unfortunately, these and threats to support preparation of setosimentum. The females of D. efforts have failed to relocate this listing proposals. ochrobasis are virtually species at other sites (Kaneshiro and On January 17, 2001, we published a indistinguishable from D. setosimentum Kaneshiro 1995; Science Panel 2005). proposed rule to list as endangered the females (Kaneshiro and Kaneshiro Montgomery (1975) determined that 12 species of Hawaiian picture-wing 1995). Drosophila substenoptera larvae inhabit flies (66 FR 3964), which included a Historically, Drosophila ochrobasis only the decomposing bark of detailed history of Federal actions was relatively widely distributed Cheirodendron sp. trees (family completed prior to the publication of between 3,900 and 5,300 ft (1,189 to Araliaceae) and Tetraplasandra sp. trees the proposal. At that time, we did not 1,615 m) above sea level. D. ochrobasis (family Araliaceae) in localized patches propose critical habitat for the 12 has been recorded from 10 localities on of wet forest habitat. picture-wing flies. In the proposed rule 4 of the island’s 5 volcanoes (Hualalai, and associated notifications, we Mauna Kea, Mauna Loa, and the Kohala Drosophila tarphytrichia requested that all interested parties mountains). Drosophila tarphytrichia was submit comments, data, or other Recorded almost every year from 1967 described by Hardy (1965) from information that might contribute to the to 1975, sometimes in relatively large specimens collected from Manoa Falls development of a final rule. A 60-day numbers (135 occurrences in the period on Oahu in 1949. This species is closely comment period on the January 17, between 1970 and 1974), Drosophila related to D. vesciseta based on the 2001, proposal closed on March 19, ochrobasis is now largely absent from structure of the male genitalia 2001; we later reopened the comment its historical localities. A single (Kaneshiro et al.1995), but can be period, as discussed below (see individual of D. ochrobasis was last differentiated by distinct wing markings Summary of Comments and observed at the 1855 lava flow (Kipuka and the ornamentation of the front legs Recommendations section). 9 and Kipuka 14) in 1986 (Kaneshiro of the male. The thorax is almost On February 28, 2005, the Center for and Kaneshiro 1995; K. Kaneshiro, in entirely yellow to red with a tinge of Biological Diversity (CBD) filed a litt., 2005a). Several surveys between brown on the top. The legs are yellow, lawsuit in the District of Oregon alleging 1995 to 1997 failed to locate the species with the tip of the front leg strongly that the Service failed to take action at many of its historical sites (K. flattened laterally and with a dense following issuance of a proposed rule to Kaneshiro, in litt., 2005a). clump of black hairs. This species is list 12 species of picture-wing flies and The larvae of this species have been 0.148 in (3.70 mm) long with wings 0.2 for failure to designate critical habitat reported to use the decomposing in (4.0 mm) long (Kaneshiro and for the species (Center for Biological portions of three different host plant Kaneshiro 1995). Diversity v. Allen, CV–05–274–HA). groups—Myrsine sp. (family Drosophila tarphytrichia was CBD and the Service subsequently Myrsinaceae), Clermontia sp. (family historically known from both the agreed to settle the case. Pursuant to the Campanulaceae), and Marattia sp. Koolau and the Waianae Mountains settlement agreement approved by the

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:32 May 08, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09MYR1.SGM 09MYR1 mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 9, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 26841

United States District Court for the conservation biology principles. We implementation of the completed District of Hawaii on August 31, 2005, received written comments from two Integrated Wildfire Management Plan the Service must make a final listing experts and incorporated their will reduce the threat of fire caused by decision for these 12 Hawaiian picture- information into this final rule. One of the Department of the Army to the wing flies by May 1, 2006, and if the peer reviewers has a doctorate habitat of these two picture-wing flies. prudent and determinable, propose degree based upon study and research However, the Integrated Wildfire critical habitat by September 15, 2006, concerning Hawaiian Drosophila Management Plan does not address the and finalize critical habitat by April 17, biology, evolution, genetics, and ecology additional threats to these species’ 2007. However, the Service will propose research. The other holds a doctorate in habitat within the Puu Pane area, critical habitat for 12 species of picture- insect taxonomy and has studied including feral ungulates, nonnative wing flies within 60 days of the Hawaiian picture-wing flies for the past weed plants, and predation by insect publication of this final rule. 10 years while working as a research predators. scientist for the U.S. Geological Survey. Comment 2: Several commenters were Summary of Comments and One peer reviewer suggested the concerned that the listing, and Recommendations threats described in the proposed rule especially the critical habitat In the proposed rule published on may not include all of the factors designation for the flies, could impact January 17, 2001 (66 FR 3964), we affecting the 12 flies, including factors native Hawaiian traditional and requested that all interested parties causing their reduction in numbers. The customary gathering rights and access, submit written comments on the reviewer noted that at least 3 of the 12 and could jeopardize cooperative proposal by March 19, 2001. We also flies proposed for listing have conservation efforts. contacted appropriate Federal and State demonstrated an apparent habitat shift Our Response: Private lands are likely agencies, scientific experts and upward in elevation, and suggested that to be important to the conservation of organizations, and other interested global warming and increased many of the picture-wing flies, and we parties and invited them to comment on temperatures on the Hawaiian Islands appreciate all opportunities to work in the proposal. Newspaper notices may be the cause. The reviewer partnerships with private landowners, inviting general public comment were suggested additional research was the State, and others to further their published in the Honolulu Advertiser. needed to validate the theory. conservation. The Act requires the No requests for a public hearing were This same reviewer provided a listing of a species to be based solely on received. synopsis, based partly on the reviewer’s whether a species is affected by any of Because the proposed rule was own 35 years of Hawaiian Drosophila the five factors (see Summary of Factors published in 2001, and public outreach research, surveys, and personal section) to such an extent that they are was conducted in 2001, we sought observations in the field and laboratory in danger of becoming extinct additional public comment on the while employed as a researcher with the (endangered status) or likely to become proposed rule by reopening the public University of Hawaii, emphasizing three endangered (threatened status). comment period from October 4 to major threats to the Hawaiian picture- According to the court settlement November 3, 2005 (70 FR 57851). We wing flies including predation by wasps related to this final listing, we are again reopened the comment period (Vespula sp.), habitat destruction by required to propose critical habitat if from November 18 to December 2, 2005 feral ungulates, and the effects of global appropriate by September 15, 2006. The (70 FR 69922). The reopened comment warming. public will be invited to comment on periods (and associated notifications in The other peer reviewer provided any such proposal. Unlike when a local media and via direct mailing) gave specific information about firsthand species is listed, economic factors and interested parties additional time to observations and evidence of declines in conservation partnerships are consider the information in the numbers and populations of three considered in a critical habitat proposed rule and provide comments Drosophila species found on the island designation. Under the Act, the and new information. of Hawaii. This peer reviewer provided Secretary has the discretion to exclude During the comment periods for the information and observational accounts areas from critical habitat designation if proposed rule, we received nine written of the effects of feral ungulates, rats, the benefits of exclusion outweigh the comments. Of those comments received, tipulid flies, and scolytid beetles upon benefits of designation and such one commenter opposed the final picture-wing fly host plants and habitat exclusion would not result in extinction listing, five commenters stated support and also the effects of predation by of the species. for the final listing, one commenter wasps (Vespula sp.) upon the 12 Comment 3: The proposed listing of expressed concern about unrestricted species. This peer reviewer also the 12 picture-wing flies lacks stringent collecting of the flies, one commenter provided comments detailing the research, detailed surveys, and up-to- provided additional information taxonomic differences recognized by date population assessments, and the regarding a fire management plan, and Drosophila experts which establish the data were spotty, hearsay, one commenter stated concerns about 12 flies as separate and distinct species. incomprehensive, and not empirical. the potential impacts of the listing and Substantive information provided in Our Response: Since 1963, a mutli- critical habitat designation on private all public comments, including the peer disciplinary team of biologists have lands. review process, either has been researched Drosophila through the incorporated directly into this final rule University of Hawaii affiliated Hawaiian Peer Review or is addressed below. Drosophila Project. This effort has In 2005, in accordance with our peer Comment 1: The U.S. Army’s resulted in over 500 scientific papers review policy published on July 1, 1994 Schofield Barracks Integrated Wildfire being published and the taxonomic (59 FR 34270), we solicited opinions Management Plan significantly reduces description of over 500 species of from researchers, land managers, and the threats to Drosophila aglaia and D. Drosophila. The information used to State officials. All 16 individuals obatai and therefore could reduce the prepare this rule includes peer reviewed solicited have expertise with the species imminent need to list these species. publications, unpublished literature, and the geographic regions where the Our Response: We agree that the and written and verbal communications species occur, and are familiar with Department of the Army’s from research and field studies covering

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:32 May 08, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09MYR1.SGM 09MYR1 mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with RULES 26842 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 9, 2006 / Rules and Regulations

a period of over 40 years of Hawaiian their existence (Science Panel 2005). A of the flies. Following this information Drosophila research. In addition, this second panel made up of four Service review, each expert was asked to rank final rule includes information gathered managers and a State manager independently the severity of each after the proposed rule was published participated in related policy threat on a scale of 1 to 5 and explain and a review of all available information discussions and considered the why they assigned a given rank to a on these species was made during available information including threat. Then the other scientists were science and managers review panels assessment of status, threats, and given the opportunity to change their conducted in November 2005. While we extinction risks. These two panels rankings based on the rationales acknowledge that additional systematic reviewed the available information and presented. In this manner three ranks surveys for the picture-wing fly species participated in a combined panel (one for each scientist) were assigned to and host plants would assist with meeting in November 2005, prior to the each threat factor for each species understanding population trends and close of the final comment period. (Science Panel 2005). The scientific status, we believe we have ample Science Panel panel discussed the strengths and information on habitat threats and weaknesses of the various data and trends in distribution for the picture- The purpose of the Science Panel was wing flies covered by this final rule. to assess threats for each of the 12 hypotheses about threats to the flies. picture-wing flies, identify and resolve Results from these exercises revealed Extinction Risk Assessment and Listing areas of scientific uncertainty, and little disagreement among the scientists Decision Making Process discuss extinction risks in a carefully regarding the type and degree of threats The Service convened a panel of three structured format. The panelists faced by each species. Each scientist scientists from outside the Service with discussed taxonomy, adaptive radiation was separately asked, based on his/her expertise in Hawaiian Drosophila to of picture-wing flies, hybridization, threats assessment and experience, to help synthesize and address sexual selection, survey methods, categorize extinction risk for each uncertainties in the scientific Drosophila lifecycle, and species’ species as high, medium, or low over information available for these 12 distribution (Science Panel 2005). They the next 40 years. The results of this picture-wing flies, particularly threats to then discussed specific threats to each exercise are presented in Table 2.

TABLE 2.—SCIENCE PANEL CATEGORIZATION OF EXTINCTION RISK (H=HIGH, M=MEDIUM, L=LOW) OVER THE NEXT 40 YEARS FOR 12 HAWAIIAN PICTURE-WING FLIES

Species Island Extinction risk

Drosophila aglaia ...... Oahu ...... H H H D. differens ...... Molokai ...... M H H D. hemipeza ...... Oahu ...... M M M D. heteroneura ...... Hawaii ...... H M M D. montgomeryi ...... Oahu ...... H M H D. mulli ...... Hawaii ...... M M M D. musaphilia ...... Kauai ...... H H H D. neoclavisetae ...... Maui ...... H H H D. obatai ...... Oahu ...... H H H D. ochrobasis ...... Hawaii ...... H H M D. substenoptera ...... Oahu ...... H M M D. tarphytrichia ...... Oahu ...... H H H

Manager Panel was asked to explain their opinion and of the five factors described in section then the managers were given the 4(a)(1) of the Act. The five listing factors The manager panel reviewed opportunity to change their opinion are: (1) The present or threatened background materials, interacted with based on the rationale presented by the destruction, modification, or the science panel during their risk other managers. The manager’s panel curtailment of its habitat or range; (2) assessment exercise, and participated in presented its recommendations to the overutilization for commercial, general and specific discussions about Regional Director. Subsequent to this, a recreational, scientific, or educational the definition of threatened and recommendation of the Regional purposes; (3) disease or predation; (4) endangered. Following these Director was forwarded to the Director the inadequacy of existing regulatory discussions, the managers were asked to for a final decision. mechanisms; and (5) other natural or give their separate opinions as to This rule is based on the record of manmade factors affecting its continued whether each of the 12 species of fly these discussions and all relevant and existence. should be listed as endangered, listed as available information pertaining to the A. The Present or Threatened threatened, or withdrawn. The managers threats and status of the species. based their assessment on the Destruction, Modification, or information in the record, including Summary of Factors Affecting the Curtailment of its Habitat or Range comments previously received, the Species Native vegetation on all the main information presented by the individual Section 4 of the Act and its Hawaiian Islands has undergone mem bers of the science panel, implementing regulations (50 CFR 424) extreme alteration because of past and information gaps and uncertainty, the set forth the procedures for adding present land management practices, number and severity of the threats species to the Federal list of endangered including ranching, introduction of affecting each species, and mitigating and threatened species. A species may nonnative plants and animals, and circumstances that might ameliorate one be determined to be an endangered or agricultural development (Cuddihy and or more of those threats. Each manager threatened species due to one or more Stone 1990). The primary threat facing

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:32 May 08, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09MYR1.SGM 09MYR1 mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 9, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 26843

these picture-wing flies is the ongoing northeastern Haleakala, Maui, resulted Magnacca, in litt., 2005; S. Montgomery, loss of habitat caused by feral animals in an increase in native plant cover from pers. comm., 2005b). The grazing by rats and nonnative plants (Kaneshiro and 6 to 95 percent after 6 years of causes host plant mortality, diminished Kaneshiro 1995). protection. vigor, and seed predation, resulting in Feral ungulates have devastated reduced host plant fecundity and Goats (Capra hircus) native vegetation in many areas of the viability (Science Panel 2005; K. Hawaiian Islands (Cuddihy and Stone Goats native to the Middle East and Magnacca, in litt., 2005; S. Montgomery, 1990). Because the endemic Hawaiian India were first successfully introduced pers. comm., 2005b). flora evolved without the presence of to the Hawaiian Islands in 1792. Feral browsing and grazing ungulates, many goats now occupy a wide variety of Fire plant groups have lost their adaptive habitats from lowland dry forests to Fire threatens species of Hawaiian defenses such as spines, thorns, stinging montane grasslands on Kauai, Oahu, picture-wing flies living in dry to mesic hairs, and defensive chemicals Molokai, Maui, and Hawaii, where they grassland, shrubland, and forests on (University of Hawaii Department of consume native vegetation, trample both the islands of Hawaii and Oahu. A Geography 1998), and cattle (Bos roots and seedlings, accelerate erosion, large factor in the alteration of Hawaiian taurus), goats (Capra hircus), pigs (Sus and promote the invasion of nonnative dry and mesic regions in the past 200 scrofa), sheep (Ovis aries), Mouflon plants (van Riper and van Riper 1982; years has been the increase in fire sheep (Ovis musimon), axis deer (Axis Stone 1985). On the island of Oahu, frequency, a condition to which the axis), and mule deer (Odocoileus encroaching urbanization and hunting native flora is not adapted. The invasion hemionus) readily eat these plants as pressure have tended to concentrate the of fire-adapted alien plants, especially well as disturbing the soil and goat population in the dry upper slopes Melinis minutiflora on Oahu and distributing nonnative plant seeds that of the Waianae Mountains (Kaneshiro Pennisetum setaceum on Hawaii, can alter the ecosystem. In addition to and Kaneshiro 1995). The population is facilitated by ungulate disturbance, has the damage these nonnative herbivores increasing and spreading, becoming an increased the susceptibility of native cause by browsing and grazing, goats, even greater threat to the native habitat areas to wildfire and increased wildfire pigs, and other ungulates that inhabit (Kapua Kawelo, U.S. Army, frequency. These plants can quickly steep and remote terrain cause severe Environmental Division, pers. comm., reestablish following a fire and erosion of whole watersheds due to 2005). effectively outcompete less fire-adapted native plants. This change in fire regime their foraging and trampling behaviors Cattle (Bos taurus) (Cuddihy and Stone 1990). has reduced the amount of forest cover Large-scale ranching of cattle on the for native species (Hughes et al. 1991; Feral Pigs (Sus scrofa) Hawaiian Islands began in the middle of Blackmore and Vitousek 2000) and On the island of Hawaii, feral pigs are the 19th century on the islands of Kauai, resulted in an intensification of feral found from dry coastal grasslands Oahu, Maui, and Hawaii (Cuddihy and ungulate herbivory in the remaining through rain forests and into the sub- Stone 1990). Large ranches, tens of native forest areas. The impact of an alpine zone of Mauna Kea and Mauna thousands of acres in size, were altered wildfire regime to these areas is Loa. On Maui, Kauai, Oahu, and developed on East Maui and Hawaii a serious and immediate threat to the Molokai feral pigs inhabit rain forests, (Cuddihy and Stone 1990) where most viability of the dry and mesic habitats mesic forests, and grasslands (Cuddihy of the State’s large ranches still exist. that support over one-third of Hawaii’s and Stone 1990). An increase in pig Degradation of native forests used for threatened and endangered species as densities and expansion of their ranching activities became evident soon well as Hawaiian picture-wing flies and distribution has caused widespread after full-scale ranching began. Feral their host plants (Hughes et al. 1991; damage to native vegetation (Cuddihy cattle now occupy a wide variety of Kaneshiro and Kaneshiro 1995; and Stone 1990). Feral pigs create open habitats from lowland dry forests to Blackmore and Vitousek 2000). areas within forest habitat by digging montane grasslands, where they Furthermore, Hawaiian picture-wing fly up, eating, and trampling native species consume native vegetation, trample habitat damaged or destroyed by fire is (Stone 1985). These open areas become roots and seedlings, accelerate erosion, more likely to be invaded and re- fertile ground for non-native plant seeds and promote the invasion of nonnative vegetated by nonnative plants that spread through their excrement and by plants (van Riper and van Riper 1982; cannot be used as host plants by transport in their hair (Stone 1985). In Stone 1985). Cattle grazing continues in picture-wing flies (Kaneshiro and nitrogen-poor soils, feral pig excrement several lowland regions in the northern Kaneshiro 1995). increases nutrient availability, portion of the Waianae Mountains of Island of Oahu—Drosophila aglaia, D. enhancing establishment of non-native Oahu, and within many areas on the hemipeza, D. montgomeryi, D. obatai, D. weeds that are more adapted to richer island of Hawaii. soils than are native plants (Cuddihy substenoptera, and D. tarphytrichia and Stone 1990). In this manner, largely Rats (Rattus spp.) The picture-wing flies on Oahu that non-native forests replace native forest Several species of nonnative rats, are addressed in this rule (Drosophila habitat (Cuddihy and Stone 1990). including the Polynesian rat (Rattus aglaia, D. hemipeza, D. montgomeryi, D. Foote and Carson (1995) found that exulans), the roof rat (Rattus rattus), and obatai, D. substenoptera, and D. pig exclosures on the Big Island the Norway rat (Rattus norvegicus), are tarphytrichia) are threatened by the loss supported significantly higher relative present on the Hawaiian Islands and of habitat due to a variety of factors. frequencies of picture-wing flies cause considerable environmental Feral pigs and goats have dramatically compared to other native and nonnative degradation (Staples and Cowie 2001). altered the native vegetation (Kaneshiro Drosophila species (7 percent of all The seeds, bark, and flowers of several and Kaneshiro 1995; Science Panel observations outside of the exclosure of the picture-wing flies’ host plants, 2005). These feral ungulates destroy and 18 percent of all observations inside including Clermontia sp., Pleomele sp., host plant seedlings and habitat by the the exclosure) and their native host and Pritchardia beccariana, are trampling action of their hooves and plants. Loope et al. (1991) showed that susceptible to grazing by all the rat through the spread of seeds of nonnative excluding pigs from a montane bog on species (Science Panel 2005; K. plants (Cuddihy and Stone 1995). Goats

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:32 May 08, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09MYR1.SGM 09MYR1 mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with RULES 26844 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 9, 2006 / Rules and Regulations

directly feed upon the host plants of D. significant amount of habitat loss and ungulates (K. Magnacca, pers. comm. aglaia, D. obatai, and D. substenoptera, degradation throughout their range. 2006). and contribute to erosion on some Furthermore, the host plant species for The invasion of several nonnative steeper slopes where the host plants D. aglaia, D. hemipeza, D. montgomeryi, plants, particularly Psidium occur; rats feed upon the host plants of and D. obatai are rare or sparsely cattleianum, Rubus ellipticus, Passiflora D. hemipeza and D. obatai; pigs feed distributed and threatened by ongoing mollissima, and Penniisetum setaceum, upon the host plants of D. hemipeza, D. habitat degradation. contributes to the degradation of montgomeryi, D. obatai, and D. picture-wing host plant habitat on the Island of Hawaii—Drosophila substenoptera; and cattle feed upon the island of Hawaii (Kaneshiro and heteroneura, D. mulli, and D. ochrobasis host plants of D. obatai and contribute Kaneshiro 1995; Wagner et al. 1999; to erosion on some steeper slopes where The picture-wing flies on the island of Science Panel 2005). Jacobi and the host plants occur (S. Montgomery, Hawaii addressed in this rule Warshauer (1992) reported that pers. comm., 2005b). (Drosophila heteroneura, D. mulli, and nonnative plants, including Passiflora The invasion of several nonnative D. ochrobasis) are threatened by the loss mollissima, Penniisetum setaceum, and plants, particularly Psidium of habitat due to a variety of factors. Psidium cattleianum, were found in 72 cattleianum, Lantana camara, Melinis Feral pigs and goats have dramatically percent of 64 vegetation types sampled minutiflora, Schinus terebinthifolius, altered the native vegetation (Kaneshiro in a 5,000 km2 (1,930 mi2) study area on and Clidemia hirta, further contributes and Kaneshiro 1995; D. Foote, pers. the island of Hawaii. Psidium to the degradation of native forests and comm., 2005; Science Panel 2005). cattleianum and Rubus ellipticus form the host plants of picture-wing flies These feral ungulates destroy host plant dense stands that exclude other plant (Kaneshiro and Kaneshiro 1995; Wagner seedlings and habitat by the trampling species (Cuddihy and Stone 1990; et al. 1999; Science Panel 2005). action of their hooves and through the Wagner et al. 1999). Passiflora Psidium cattleianum, Lantana camara, spread of seeds of nonnative plants mollissima is a vine that causes damage Melinis minutiflora, and Schinus (Cuddihy and Stone 1995; D. Foote, or death to native trees by overloading terebinthifolius form dense stands, pers. comm., 2005). Goats, pigs, and rats branches, causing breakage, or by thickets, or mats that shade or directly feed upon D. heteroneura and forming a dense canopy cover, outcompete native plants. M. D. ochrobasis host plants. Cattle also intercepting sunlight and shading out minutiflora is a grass that burns readily, feed on D. ochrobasis host plants. Rats native plants below (Wagner et al. often grows at the border of forests, and directly feed upon the seeds produced 1999). Penniisetum setaceum has greatly tends to carry fire into areas with woody by D. mulli host plants (K. Magnacca, in increased fire risk in some regions, native plants (Smith 1985; Cuddihy and litt., 2005; S. Montgomery, pers. comm., especially on the dry slopes of Hualalai, Stone 1990). It is able to spread 2005b), and feral cattle and goats Kilauea, and Mauna Loa Volcanoes on prolifically after a fire and effectively contribute to erosion on some steeper the island of Hawaii (Wagner et al. outcompete less fire-adapted native slopes where D. heteroneura and D. 1999). This species quickly reestablishes plant species, ultimately creating a ochrobasis host plants occur. itself after fires, unlike its native stand of nonnative grass where forest The Hawaiian Islands now support Hawaiian plant counterparts (Wagner et once stood. Lantana camera produces several species of nonnative beetles al. 1999). chemicals that inhibit the growth of (family Scolytidae, genus Coccotrypes), In summary, picture-wing flies on the other plant species (Smith 1985; Wagner a few of which bore into and feed on the island of Hawaii addressed in this rule et al. 1999). nuts produced by certain native plant continue to experience a significant Drosophila aglaia and D. obatai occur species including Pritchardia amount of habitat loss and degradation at Puu Pane, located above the United beccariana, the host plant of Drosophila throughout their range. The threats to D. States Army’s Schofield Barracks mulli. Affected Pritchardia sp., mulli, in light of the ongoing Military Reservation. The gently sloping including P. beccariana, drop their management efforts and the long-lived lands below Puu Pane are used as a live palm nuts before the nuts reach nature of its host plant, do not appear firing range, and ordnance-induced fires maturity due to the boring action of the to be of sufficient magnitude to warrant have been a common occurrence in this scolytid beetles. Little natural a listing as endangered at this time; area (U.S. Army, in litt., 2005). The U.S. regeneration of this host plant species however, the current lack of host plant Army recently completed and is has been observed in the wild since the regeneration and other threats suggest implementing an Integrated Wildfire arrival of this scolytid beetle (Science that D. mulli is likely to become an Management Plan to reduce the risk and Panel 2005; K. Magnacca, in litt., 2005). endangered species within the improve control of training-related fires Compared to the host plants of the other foreseeable future. in this area. As part of the Integrated picture-wing flies, P. beccariana is long Island of Molokai—Drosophila differens Wildfire Management Plan, firebreak lived (up to 100 years), but over time roads have been constructed around the scolytid beetles may have a significant Drosophila differens is threatened by perimeter of the live-fire training area. impact on the availability of habitat for the loss of habitat due to a variety of We believe that the Integrated Wildfire D. mulli. factors. The primary threats to this Management Plan will reduce the threat Near the original discovery site for D. species’ habitat are from feral pigs and and magnitude of wildfires caused by mulli in the State-owned Olaa Forest the nonnative weed, Psidium the U.S. Army; however wildfires Reserve, fencing and pig and rat control cattleianum, in a manner similar to caused by the Army and other sources, has been implemented on Hawaii picture-wing fly habitat on Oahu and and which may escape control, remain Volcanoes National Park lands, thereby Hawaii (see above). In addition, axis a potential threat to these species and providing some protection to the host deer are present on Molokai, and they their habitat located in gullies up-slope plants and D. mulli’s habitat there (K. continue to degrade native forest habitat from the firing ranges (Kaneshiro and Magnacca, pers. comm. 2006). Within by trampling and overgrazing Kaneshiro 1995; U.S. Army, in litt., the Upper Waikea Reserve site, fencing vegetation, which removes ground cover 2005). has recently been installed and exposes the soil to erosion. In summary, the picture-wing flies on encompassing some of D. mulli’s host Although goats were described as a Oahu continue to experience a plants, protecting them from feral threat to at least one population of D.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:32 May 08, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09MYR1.SGM 09MYR1 mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 9, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 26845

differens at Pu’u Kolekole in the Island of Maui— Drosophila alien insects such as the yellow-jackets proposed rule, we have subsequently neoclavisetae and various species of ants were learned that they may not be present in Drosophila neoclavisetae is limited to introduced, many native insects this area (K. Kaneshiro, pers. comm. the highlands of West Maui, where including the Hawaiian Drosophila were 2006). degradation and modification of its decimated.’’ Island of Kauai—Drosophila musaphilia habitat, particularly from the effects of Wasps feral pigs, have occurred (Kaneshiro and Degradation and modification of In 1977, an aggressive race of the Kaneshiro 1995; Science Panel 2005). western yellow-jacket wasp (Vespula Drosophila musaphilia habitat, Rats are also a significant factor particularly from the effects of feral pennsylvanica) became established in threatening D. neoclavisetae habitat and the State of Hawaii, and this species is ungulates and the nonnative weed are abundant in the areas where D. Psidium cattleianum, have occurred and now abundant between 1,969 and 3,445 neoclavisetae has been observed ft (600 and 1,050 m) in elevation are likely to continue into the future (Science Panel 2005). (Kaneshiro and Kaneshiro 1995; Science (Gambino et al. 1990). On Maui, Panel 2005). In addition to pigs and B. Overutilization for Commercial, Gambino et al. (1990) reported a gap in goats (see Oahu and Hawaii species for Recreational, Scientific, or Educational nest distribution between 4,429 and a discussion of the effects of these Purposes 6,890 ft (1,350 and 2,100 m) in elevation, with an increase in ungulates on picture-wing fly habitat), Overutilization is not known to be a D. musaphilia habitat is threatened by abundance above 7,546 ft (2,300 m). threat to any of the 12 picture-wing fly They attributed this distributional black-tailed deer, which feed on a species addressed in this rule. variety of alien and native plants, pattern to higher relative humidity and including the host plant, Acacia koa C. Disease or Predation decreased insolation associated with a (van Riper and van Riper 1982). cloud layer that forms at middle Commercial shipping and air cargo to elevations on Maui and appears to have The invasion of several nonnative Hawaii have resulted in the an adverse effect on Vespula plants, particularly Psidium establishment of over 3,372 species of physiology. cattleianum, Lantana camara, Melinis nonnative insects (Howarth 1990; Compared with typical North minutiflora, Rubus argutus, Clidemia Howarth et al. 1995; Staples and Cowie American populations, yellow-jackets in hirta, and Passiflora mollissima, further 2001), with an estimated continuing Hawaii display a high incidence of contributes to the degradation of native establishment rate of 20 to 30 new colonies that overwinter and persist into forests and the host plants of D. species per year (Beardsley 1962, 1979; at least a second year. The result is that musaphilia (Kaneshiro and Kaneshiro Staples and Cowie 2001). numbers of workers at such colonies are 1995; Wagner et al. 1999; Science Panel In addition to the accidental much greater than at annual colonies 2005). Psidium cattleianum, Lantana establishment of nonnative species, (Gambino et al. 1987). Yellow-jacket camara, Melinis minutiflora, and Rubus nonnative predators and parasites for colonies in Hawaii can each produce argutus form dense stands, thickets, or biological control of pests have been over a half-million foragers that mats that shade or outcompete native purposefully imported and released in consume tens of millions of arthropods plants. Passiflora mollissima is a vine Hawaii since 1865. Between 1890 and (Gambino and Loope 1992). In that causes damage or death to native 2004, 387 nonnative species were Haleakala National Park on Maui, trees by overloading branches, causing introduced, sometimes with the specific yellow-jackets were found to forage breakage, or by forming a dense canopy intent of reducing populations of native predominantly on native arthropods cover, intercepting sunlight and shading Hawaiian insects (Funasaki et al. 1988; (Gambino et al. 1987, 1990; Gambino out native plants below (Wagner et al. Lai 1988; Staples and Cowie 2001). and Loope 1992) and have been 1999). Lantana camera produces Nonnative arthropods pose a serious observed carrying and feeding upon chemicals that inhibit the growth of threat to Hawaii’s native Drosophila, recently captured adult Hawaiian other plant species (Smith 1985; Wagner both through direct predation or Drosophila (Kaneshiro and Kaneshiro et al. 1999). parasitism as well as competition for 1995). Picture-wing flies may be Fire and the resultant invasion by food or space (Howarth and Medeiros particularly vulnerable to predation by alien species remains a significant threat 1989; Howarth and Ramsay 1991; wasps due to their lekking behavior, to the mesic forests that Drosophila Kaneshiro and Kaneshiro 1995; Staples conspicuous courtship displays that can musaphilia inhabits on Kauai (Science and Cowie 2001). last for several minutes, and relatively Panel 2005). M. minutiflora is a grass Due to their large colony sizes and large size (K. Kaneshiro, pers. comm. that burns readily, often grows at the systematic foraging habits, species of 2006). border of forests, and tends to carry fire social Hymenoptera (ants and some The disappearance of several of the 12 into areas with woody native plants wasps) and parasitic wasps pose the picture-wing flies in this rule from (Smith 1985; Cuddihy and Stone 1990). greatest predation threat to the historical observation sites, including It is able to spread prolifically after a Hawaiian picture-wing flies (Carson Drosophila differens, D. neoclavisetae, fire and effectively outcompete less fire- 1982b; Gambino et al. 1987; Kaneshiro D. heteroneura, and D. mulli, may be adapted native plant species, ultimately and Kaneshiro 1995). Several alien ant due to a variety of factors, and there is creating a stand of nonnative grass species have been implicated in the no documentation that conclusively ties where forest once stood. extinction or local loss of many native this decrease in observations with the D. musaphilia is known to be species, including much of the lowland establishment of yellow-jacket wasps inherently rare since the larvae feed Hawaiian insect fauna (Howarth and within their habitats, although the within slime fluxes, which develop on Medeiros 1989). According to Kaneshiro concurrent arrival of wasps and decline Acacia koa. Yet, while threats from feral and Kaneshiro (1995), ‘‘many of of picture-wing fly observations in some ungulates and nonnative weeds are Hawaii’s native species evolved in the areas suggest that the wasps may have affecting the regeneration of Acacia koa, absence of predators and thus do not played a significant role in the decline the adult trees within this area remain have the adaptive traits to compete with of some of the picture-wing fly relatively stable (Science Panel 2005). these alien species. Therefore, when populations (Carson 1982b, 1986; Foote

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:32 May 08, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09MYR1.SGM 09MYR1 mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with RULES 26846 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 9, 2006 / Rules and Regulations

and Carson 1995; Kaneshiro and Big-headed ants (Pheidole megacephala) are also significant threats to native Kaneshiro 1999; Science Panel 2005). With few exceptions, native insects, invertebrates (Gillespie and Reimer The number of native parasitic including many fly species, have been 1993) and occur on all the main Hymenoptera (parasitic wasps) in eliminated in Hawaiian habitats where Hawaiian Islands (Reimer et al. 1990; Hawaii is limited, and only species in the big-headed ant is present (Perkins Nishida 1997). Solenopsis geminata is the family Eucoiliidae are known to use 1913; Gagne 1979; Gillespie and Reimer known to be a significant predator on Hawaiian picture-wing flies as hosts 1993). Although it has only been pest fruit flies in Hawaii (Wong and (Kaneshiro and Kaneshiro 1995). observed attacking laboratory Wong 1988). Solenopsis papuana is the However, species of nonnative braconid populations of fruit flies (Wong et al. only abundant, aggressive ant that has wasps, including Diaschasmimorpha 1984), big-headed ants are thought to be invaded intact mesic forest above 2,000 tryoni, D. longicaudatus, Opius a threat to picture-wing flies on Oahu ft (600 m), and it is expanding its range vandenboschi, and Biosteres arisanus, and Hawaii occurring in mesic areas in Hawaii (Reimer 1993). were purposefully introduced into (i.e., D. aglaia, D. hemipeza, D. Based on the findings discussed Hawaii to control several species of heteroneura, D. montgomeryi, D. obatai, above, nonnative predatory and nonnative pest tephritid fruit flies D. ochrobasis, and D. tarphytrichia). parasitic insects are considered significant factors contributing to the (Funasaki et al. 1988). These parasitic Argentine ants (Iridomyrmex humilis) wasps are also known to attack other reduction in range and abundance of the The Argentine ant was discovered on species of flies, including native flies in Hawaiian picture-wing flies and, in the island of Oahu in 1940, and is now the family Tephritidae. While these combination with habitat loss, are a established on all the main Hawaiin parasitic wasps have not been recorded threat to their continued existence Islands (Reimer et al. 1990). Unlike the (Science Panel 2005). Some of these parasitizing Hawaiian picture-wing big-headed ant, the Argentine ant is flies, and may not successfully develop nonnative species were intentionally primarily confined to higher elevations introduced by the State of Hawaii’s in Drosophilidae, females will sting any (Reimer et al. 1990). This species has fly larva available in their attempts to Department of Agriculture or other been demonstrated to reduce agricultural agencies (Funasaki et al. oviposit (lay eggs) and can cause populations, or even eliminate native 1988), and importations and mortality (T. Duan, University of arthropods, at high elevations in augmentations of lepidopteran Hawaii, pers. comm., 1995). Haleakala National Park on Maui (Cole parasitoids continue. Although the State Ants et al. 1992). Also on Maui, Argentine of Hawaii requires new introductions be ants are significant predators on pest reviewed before release (Hawaii State Ants are not a natural component of fruit flies (Wong et al. 1984). Argentine Department of Agriculture, in litt., Hawaii’s arthropod fauna, and native ants do not disperse by flight. Instead 1994), post-release biology and host species evolved in the absence of colonies are moved about with soil and range cannot be fully predicted from predation pressure from ants. Ants can construction material; a colony was laboratory studies (Gonzalez and be particularly destructive predators recently discovered on an isolated peak Gilstrap 1992; Roderick 1992), and the because of their high densities, on the island of Oahu under a radio purposeful release or augmentation of recruitment behavior, aggressiveness, tower. While we are not aware of any fly predator or parasitoid is a and broad range of diet (Reimer 1993). documented occurrences of predation potential threat to the conservation of The threat to picture-wing flies is by Argentine ants on picture-wing flies, picture-wing flies (Kaneshiro and amplified by the fact that most ant they are considered to be a threat to Kaneshiro 1995; Simberloff 1992). species have winged reproductive native arthropods generally at higher Disease is not known to be a threat to adults (Borror et al. 1989) and can elevations (Cole et al. 1992) and thus any of the 12 picture-wing flies potentially to picture-wing flies quickly establish new colonies in addressed in this rule. additional suitable habitats (Staples and (Science Panel 2005). D. The Inadequacy of Existing Cowie 2001). These attributes allow Long-legged ants (Anoplolepis longipes) some ants to destroy isolated prey Regulatory Mechanisms populations (Nafus 1993a, 1993b). The long-legged ant appeared in Hawaii in 1952, and now occurs on Currently, no Federal, State, or local At least 44 species of ants are known Kauai, Oahu, Maui, and Hawaii (Reimer laws, treaties, or regulations specifically to be established on the Hawaiian et al. 1990). Direct observations indicate apply to any of these 12 species of Islands (Hawaiian Ecosystems at Risk that Hawaiian arthropods are picture-wing flies. However, regulations Project (HEAR) database, 2005), and at susceptible to predation by this species. limiting release of biological controls in least 4 particularly aggressive species Gillespie and Reimer (1993), and Hardy Hawaii and the fact that numerous host have severely affected the native insect (1979) documented the disappearance of plants are listed as threatened or fauna (Zimmerman 1948; HEAR most native insects from Kipahulu endangered provide indirect database, 2005). Numerous other ant Stream on Maui after the area was mechanisms which afford the picture- species are recognized as threats to invaded by the long-legged ant. wing flies some protection. native invertebrates, and additional Although only cursory observations Release of Biological Controls species become established regularly. exist, long-legged ants are thought to be While the larvae of most of the a threat to picture-wing flies at the As discussed in the Disease and Hawaiian picture-wing flies feed deep lower elevations of Oahu and Hawaii in Predation section (above), regulatory in the substrate of their host plants, they mesic areas (i.e., D. aglaia, D. hemipeza, mechanisms designed to prevent the emerge and pupate in the ground, where D. heteroneura, D. montgomeryi, D. establishment of nonnative insects are they are exposed to predation by ants. obatai, D. ochrobasis, and D. inadequate given that 3,372 species of Newly emerging adults are particularly tarphytrichia) (Science Panel 2005). nonnative insects have become susceptible to predation, and adult established in Hawaii (Howarth 1990; picture-wing flies have been observed Fire ants (Solenopsis spp.) Howarth et al. 1995; Staples and Cowie with ants attached to their legs At least two species of fire ants, 2001), with an estimated continuing (Kaneshiro and Kaneshiro 1995). Solenopsis geminata and S. papuana, establishment rate of 20 to 30 new

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:32 May 08, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09MYR1.SGM 09MYR1 mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 9, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 26847

species per year (Beardsley 1962, 1979; or endangered, and D. heteroneura is decline. The destruction of native plants Staples and Cowie 2001). currently known from only two and host plants within their habitat Under Hawaii’s Plant Quarantine Law locations, one on Federal land and one exacerbates the opening of niches for (Hawaii Revised Statues Chapter 150A), on private land. additional, introduced nonnative plant the State of Hawaii requires that Under section 9, endangered plants species. Once nonnative species are introductions of biological controls be cannot be removed, reduced to established, it is difficult for native reviewed by the Board of Agriculture possession, or maliciously damaged or plants, including host plants, to recover before release. The U.S. Department of destroyed from areas under Federal (Kaneshiro and Kaneshiro 1995; Science Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health jurisdiction. Endangered plants outside Panel 2005). Inspection Service (APHIS) regulates the of Federal jurisdiction cannot be cut, importation and release of biological dug up, damaged, or destroyed in Conclusion controls through the Plant Protection knowing violation of any State law or Island of Oahu—Drosophila aglaia, D. Act of 2000 (7 U.S.C. 7701 et seq.). regulation. Because all federally-listed hemipeza, D. montgomeryi, D. obatai, D. APHIS requires a risk analysis for each species automatically become State- substenoptera, and D. tarphytrichia species proposed for release. In order for listed species, listed plants on non- a species to be approved for releases, the Federal land are protected under section The major threats to Drosophila risk analysis must ensure that 9 of the Act. They are also protected aglaia, D. hemipeza, D. montgomeryi, D. introduced biological control agents are under section 13–107–3 of the Hawaii obatai, D. substenoptera, and D. limited in host range and do not pose a Administrative Rules which prohibits tarphytrichia include current and future threat to listed species or native plants, the take (i.e. cut, collect, uproot, degradation and modification to the or crops. Nevertheless, some nonnative destroy, injure, possess) and sale of limited remaining habitat from feral wasp species have been introduced by native endangered or threatened plants ungulates, such as pigs; nonnative Federal and State agencies for biological on all lands in the State of Hawaii. plants, particularly Psidium control of pest flies to the possible However, these regulations are difficult Cattleianum and Clidemia hirta; and detriment of picture-wing flies. Because to enforce because of limited funding fire (Cuddihy and Stone 1995; the post-release biology and host range and personnel. Kaneshiro and Kaneshiro 1995; Science are difficult to predict from laboratory Panel 2005). The picture-wing flies on E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors studies done prior to all releases Oahu continue to experience a Affecting Their Continued Existence (Gonzalez and Gilstrap 1992; Roderick significant amount of habitat loss and 1992), the purposeful release or The Hawaiian Islands now support degradation throughout their range. augmentation of any dipteran predator several established species of nonnative Furthermore, the host plant species for or parasitoid is a potential threat to all tipulid flies, and the larvae of a few of D. aglaia, D. hemipeza, D. montgomeryi, picture-wing flies (Kaneshiro and these feed within the decomposing bark and D. obatai are rare or sparsely Kaneshiro 1995; Simberloff 1992). of some host plants of the picture-wing distributed and threatened by ongoing flies, including Charpentiera, habitat degradation. Endangered Species Act Protections for Cheirodendron, Clermontia, and Additionally, D. aglaia, D. hemipeza, Host Plants Pleomele sp. (Science Panel 2005; K. D. montgomeryi, D. obatai, D. Some of the host plants used by the Magnacca, in litt., 2005; S. Montgomery, substenoptera, and D. tarphytrichia face 12 picture-wing flies in this rule are pers. comm., 2005a). All of the picture- competition at the larval stage from listed as threatened or endangered wing flies addressed in this rule, except nonnative tipulid flies, and all stages under the Act (e.g., Urera kaalae, the for D. mulli and D. musaphilia, face face substantial predation pressure from only known host plant for Drosophila larval-stage competition from nonnative nonnative insects such as ants and montgomeryi, is endangered). Under tipulid flies. These tipulid larvae feed yellow-jacket wasps (Science Panel Hawaii State law, Federal listing within the same portion of the 2005; Kaneshiro and Kaneshiro 1995). automatically invokes State listing (HRS decomposing host plant area normally Currently, existing regulations offer § 195D–4(a)). Furthermore, critical occupied by the picture-wing fly larvae. inadequate protection to these species. habitat has also been designated for a The effect of this competition is a Because of the significance of the number of these listed plants. As such, reduction in available host plant threats, we conclude that all of the Oahu these plants and their habitats are material for picture-wing fly larvae picture-wing flies addressed in this rule afforded certain protections under (Science Panel 2005). In laboratory are in danger of extinction throughout sections 7 and 9 of the Act and under studies, Grimaldi and Jaenike (1984) their range. Therefore, D. aglaia, D. section 13–107–3 of the Hawaii demonstrated that competition between hemipeza, D. montgomeryi, D. obatai, D. Administrative Rules. Drosophila larvae and other fly larvae substenoptera, and D. tarphytrichia Under section 7, all Federal agencies can exhaust food resources, which meet the Act’s definition of endangered must ensure, in consultation with the affects both the probability of larval and warrant protection as endangered Service, that any action they authorize, survival and the body size of adults, under the Act. fund, or carry out is not likely to resulting in reduced adult fitness, Island of Hawaii—Drosophila jeopardize the continued existence of fecundity, and lifespan. any listed species or result in the Hawaiian picture-wing flies evolved heteroneura, D. mulli, and D. ochrobasis destruction or adverse modification of in isolated habitats, resulting in Drosophila heteroneura and D. critical habitat. This protection does not tremendous speciation (Williamson ochrobasis were historically widely apply to activities conducted on non- 1981); as a result, small population size distributed across Hawaii, known from Federal land that do not involve Federal may be less of a threat component than 24 sites and 10 sites, respectively. permitting or funding. Drosophila small habitat size (Science Panel 2005). However, these species have not been aglaia, D. obatai, and D. heteroneura are Many of these picture-wing flies are recently observed at many of these sites the only 3 flies addressed in this rule now reduced to just a few populations and may now be limited to two sites and that have been recorded on federally- within localized patches of their host one site, respectively (Kaneshiro and owned land. D. aglaia and D. obatai’s plants, compounding the effects of Kaneshiro 1995; K. Kaneshiro, in litt., host plants are not listed as threatened numerous other factors causing their 2005a; Science Panel 2005). D. mulli

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:32 May 08, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09MYR1.SGM 09MYR1 mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with RULES 26848 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 9, 2006 / Rules and Regulations

was historically known from two sites, in a 5,000 km2 (1,930 mi2) study area on Island of Molokai—Drosophila differens both of which were still occupied as of the island of Hawaii. Psidium Drosophila differens is historically the last survey. cattleianum and Rubus ellipticus form known from only three sites. It is The major threats to Drosophila dense stands that exclude other plant threatened by pigs, axis deer, rats, heteroneura and D. ochrobasis include species (Cuddihy and Stone 1990; nonnative plants, tipulid competition, current and future degradation and Wagner et al. 1999). Passiflora and yellow-jacket predation. The modification to their limited remaining mollissima is a vine that causes damage primary threats to this species’ habitat habitat from feral ungulates, such as or death to native trees by overloading are from feral pigs and the nonnative pigs; non-native plants, particularly branches, causing breakage, or by weed, Psidium cattleianum, in a manner Psidium cattleianum and Pennisetum forming a dense canopy cover, similar to picture-wing fly habitat on setaceum; and fire (Cuddihy and Stone intercepting sunlight and shading out Oahu and Hawaii (see above). In 1995; Kaneshiro and Kaneshiro 1995; native plants below (Wagner et al. addition, axis deer are present on Science Panel 2005). Feral pigs and 1999). Pennisetum setaceum has greatly goats have dramatically altered the Molokai, and they continue to degrade increased fire risk in some regions, native vegetation (Kaneshiro and native forest habitat by trampling and especially on the dry slopes of Hualalai, Kaneshiro 1995; D. Foote, pers. comm., overgrazing vegetation, which removes Kilauea, and Mauna Loa Volcanoes on 2005; Science Panel 2005). These feral ground cover and exposes the soil to ungulates destroy host plant seedlings the island of Hawaii (Wagner et al. erosion. Although goats were described and habitat by the trampling action of 1999). This species quickly reestablishes as a threat to at least one population of their hooves and through the spread of itself after fires, unlike its native D. differens at Pu’u Kolekole in the seeds of nonnative plants (Cuddihy and Hawaiian plant counterparts (Wagner et proposed rule, we have subsequently Stone 1995; D. Foote, pers. comm., al. 1999). learned that they may not be present in 2005). Goats, pigs, and rats directly feed Additionally, these species face this area (K. Kaneshiro, pers. comm. upon D. heteroneura and D. ochrobasis competition at the larval stage from 2006). Nonnative predatory and host plants. Cattle also feed on D. nonnative tipulid flies within the host parasitic insects are considered ochrobasis host plants. Rats directly plant, and all stages face substantial significant factors contributing to the feed upon the seeds produced by D. predation pressure from nonnative reduction in range and abundance of the Hawaiian picture-wing flies and, in mulli host plants (K. Magnacca, in litt., insects such as long-legged ants and combination with habitat loss, are 2005; S. Montgomery, pers. comm., yellow-jacket wasps (Kaneshiro and threats to their continued existence 2005b), and feral cattle and goats Kaneshiro 1995; Science Panel 2005). (Science Panel 2005). contribute to erosion on some steeper Currently, existing regulations offer These threats, considered in the slopes where D. heteroneura and D. inadequate protection to these species. ochrobasis host plants occur. context of the small number of The Hawaiian Islands now support Because of the significance of the individuals of the species (as inferred several species of nonnative beetles threats, we conclude that Drosophila from the lack of positive survey results, (family Scolytidae, genus Coccotrypes), heteroneura and D. ochrobasis are in despite extensive, focused efforts to a few of which bore into and feed on the danger of extinction throughout their relocate this species), are magnified and nuts produced by certain native plant range. Therefore, these species meet the place D. differens in danger of species including Pritchardia Act’s definition of endangered and extinction. Therefore, D. differens meets beccariana, the host plant of Drosophila warrant protection as endangered under the Act’s definition of endangered and mulli. Affected Pritchardia sp., the Act. warrants protection as endangered including P. beccariana, drop their Drosophila mulli faces similar threats under the Act. palm nuts before the nuts reach but its host plant is long-lived, and Island of Kauai—Drosophila musaphilia maturity due to the boring action of the management efforts in Volcanoes Drosophila musaphilia is historically scolytid beetles. Little natural National Park (in forest adjacent to a known from only four sites, but has only regeneration of this host plant species known D. mulli site) are being been observed once since 1972, in 1988 has been observed in the wild since the undertaken to reduce the severity of arrival of this scolytid beetle (Science at the Pihea Trail. It is threatened by those threats to its host plant. As a pigs, goats, black-tailed deer, nonnative Panel 2005; K. Magnacca, in litt., 2005). result of these actions, some Compared to the host plants of the other plants, nonnative ants, yellow-jacket regeneration of the host plant has been picture-wing flies, P. beccariana is long predation, and wildfire. Degradation observed (K. Magnacca, pers. comm., lived (up to 100 years), but over time and modification of Drosophila 2006). Within the second site, the Upper scolytid beetles may have a significant musaphilia habitat, particularly from impact on the availability of habitat for Waikea Reserve area, pig fencing is the effects of feral ungulates and the D. mulli. expected to reduce the effects of nonnative weed Psidium cattleianum, The invasion of several nonnative browsing pigs upon the host plant have occurred and are likely to continue plants, particularly Psidium population (K. Magnacca, pers. comm., into the future (Kaneshiro and cattleianum, Rubus ellipticus, Passiflora 2006). Because of ongoing management Kaneshiro 1995; Science Panel 2005). In mollissima, and Pennisetum setaceum, efforts benefiting D. mulli, and because addition to pigs and goats (see Oahu and contributes to the degradation of its host plant can live for 100 years, we Hawaii species for a discussion of the picture-wing host plant habitat on the conclude that D. mulli is not effects of these ungulates on picture- island of Hawaii (Kaneshiro and immediately at risk of extinction. wing fly habitat), D. musaphilia habitat Kaneshiro 1995; Wagner et al. 1999; However, given the threats to the is threatened by black-tailed deer, Science Panel 2005). Jacobi and species and to the persistence of the which feed on a variety of alien and Warshauer (1992) reported that host plant, as described above, we find native plants, including the host plant, nonnative plants, including Passiflora that this species is likely to become Acacia koa (van Riper and van Riper mollissima, Pennisetum setaceum, and endangered in the foreseeable future, 1982). Psidium cattleianum, were found in 72 and thus meets the Act’s definition of a The invasion of several nonnative percent of 64 vegetation types sampled threatened species. plants, particularly Psidium

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:32 May 08, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09MYR1.SGM 09MYR1 mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 9, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 26849

cattleianum, Lantana camara, Melinis jacket predation. Drosophila determination by the Secretary that such minutiflora, Rubus argutus, Clidemia neoclavisetae is limited to the highlands areas are essential for the conservation hirta, and Passiflora mollissima, further of West Maui, where degradation and of the species. ‘‘Conservation’’ means contributes to the degradation of native modification of its habitat, particularly the use of all methods and procedures forests and the host plants of D. from the effects of feral pigs, have needed to bring the species to the point musaphilia (Kaneshiro and Kaneshiro occurred (Kaneshiro and Kaneshiro at which protection under the Act is no 1995; Wagner et al. 1999; Science Panel 1995; Science Panel 2005). Rats are also longer necessary. 2005). Psidium cattleianum, Lantana a significant factor threatening D. Pursuant to a settlement agreement camara, Melinis minutiflora, and Rubus neoclavisetae habitat and are abundant approved by the United States District argutus form dense stands, thickets, or in the areas where D. neoclavisetae has Court for the District of Hawaii on mats that shade or outcompete native been observed (Science Panel 2005). August 31, 2005 (CBD v. Allen, CV–05– plants. Passiflora mollissima is a vine Nonnative predatory and parasitic 274–HA), the Service must submit, for that causes damage or death to native insects are considered significant factors publication to the Federal Register, a trees by overloading branches, causing contributing to the reduction in range prudency determination for designating breakage, or by forming a dense canopy and abundance of the Hawaiian picture- critical habitat for the 12 species of cover, intercepting sunlight and shading wing flies and, in combination with picture-wing flies, pursuant to the Act’s out native plants below (Wagner et al. habitat loss, are a threat to their sections 4(b)(6)(A) and (C), concurrent 1999). Lantana camera produces continued existence (Science Panel with the final listing on or by April 17, chemicals that inhibit the growth of 2005). These threats, considered in the 2006. The settlement further stipulates other plant species (Smith 1985; Wagner context of the small number of that if the final listing determination et al. 1999). individuals of the species (as inferred results in the listing of one or more of Fire and the resultant invasion by from the lack of positive survey results, the 12 species and a critical habitat alien species remains a significant threat despite extensive, focused efforts to designation is found to be prudent, the to the mesic forests that Drosophila relocate this species), are magnified and Service must submit, for publication in musaphilia inhabits on Kauai (Science place D. neoclavisetae in danger of the Federal Register, a proposed critical Panel 2005). M. minutiflora is a grass extinction. Therefore, D. neoclavisetae habitat designation for the listed species that burns readily, often grows at the meets the Act’s definition of endangered for which critical habitat is prudent on border of forests, and tends to carry fire and warrants protection as endangered or by September 15, 2006, and a final into areas with woody native plants under the Act. critical habitat determination by April (Smith 1985; Cuddihy and Stone 1990). 17, 2007. However, the Service will It is able to spread prolifically after a Summary propose critical habitat for 12 species of fire and effectively outcompete less fire- The Service has assessed the best picture-wing flies within 60 days of the adapted native plant species, ultimately scientific and commercial information publication of this final rule. creating a stand of nonnative grass available regarding the past, present, Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as where forest once stood. and future threats faced by the 12 amended, and implementing regulations D. musaphilia is known to be picture-wing fly species in determining (50 CFR 424.12) require that, to the inherently rare since the larvae feed this final rule. Based on this evaluation, maximum extent prudent and within slime fluxes, which develop on this final rule notice lists Drosophila determinable, the Secretary designate Acacia koa. Yet, while threats from feral aglaia, D. differens, D. hemipeza, D. critical habitat at the time the species is ungulates and nonnative weeds are heteroneura, D. montgomeryi, D. determined to be endangered or affecting the regeneration of Acacia koa, musaphilia, D. neoclavisetae, D. obatai, threatened. Our regulations (50 CFR the adult trees within this area remain D. ochrobasis, D. substenoptera, and D. 424.12(a)(1)) state that designation of relatively stable (Science Panel 2005). tarphytrichia as endangered and lists D. critical habitat is not prudent when one These threats, considered in the mulli as threatened. These species are or both of the following situations context of the small number of endangered or threatened by one or exist—(1) The species is threatened by individuals of the species (as inferred more of the following: Habitat taking or other activity and the from the lack of positive survey results, degradation by pigs, goats, deer, rats, identification of critical habitat can be despite substantial survey effort within cattle, nonnative insects, and nonnative expected to increase the degree of threat potential habitat for the species), are plants, all of which reduce the quality to the species, or (2) such designation of magnified and place D. musaphilia in of habitat; direct host plant loss and critical habitat would not be beneficial danger of extinction. Nonnative host plant habitat loss from fire; direct to the species. predatory and parasitic insects are predation by ants and nonnative wasps; Identification of critical habitat will considered significant factors and competition with nonnative insects. not increase the degree of threats to the contributing to the reduction in range species because they are not threatened Critical Habitat and abundance of the Hawaiian picture- by overcollection or malicious wing flies and, in combination with Critical habitat is defined in section 3 destruction of habitat. Furthermore, habitat loss, are a threat to their of the Act as: (i) The specific areas designation may be beneficial through continued existence (Science Panel within the geographical area occupied the protections afforded critical habitat 2005). Therefore, D. musaphilia meets by a species, at the time it is listed in areas under section 7 of the Act. the Act’s definition of endangered and accordance with the Act, on which are Therefore, we believe that designation warrants protection as endangered found those physical or biological of critical habitat is prudent for those under the Act. features (I) essential to the conservation flies being listed in this final rule. of the species, and (II) that may require Island of Maui—Drosophila special management considerations or Available Conservation Measures neoclavisetae protection, and (ii) specific areas Conservation measures provided to Drosophila neoclavisetae has only outside the geographical area occupied species listed as endangered or been observed twice in one area of west by a species at the time it is listed in threatened under the Act include Maui. It is threatened by pigs, nonnative accordance with the provisions of recognition, recovery actions, plants, tipulid competition, and yellow- section 4 of the Act, upon a requirements for Federal protection, and

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:32 May 08, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09MYR1.SGM 09MYR1 mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with RULES 26850 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 9, 2006 / Rules and Regulations

prohibitions against certain activities. governmental organizations, businesses, Federal agency actions that may Recognition through listing results in and private landowners. Examples of require consultation for the 12 picture- public awareness and encourages recovery actions include habitat wing flies include, but are not limited conservation actions by Federal, State, restoration (e.g., restoration of to, actions within the jurisdiction of the Tribal, and local agencies; non- vegetation), research, captive U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Federal governmental conservation propagation and reintroduction, and Emergency Management Agency, organizations; and private individuals. outreach and education. The recovery of Federal Highways Administration, The Act provides for possible land many listed species cannot be Natural Resources Conservation Service, acquisition and cooperation with States accomplished solely on Federal lands. National Park Service, Fish and Wildlife and requires that recovery actions be To achieve recovery of these species Service, and branches of the Department carried out for listed species. Recovery requires cooperative conservation efforts of Defense (DOD). Activities will trigger planning and implementation, the on private lands as many occur consultation under section 7 if they may protection required by Federal agencies, primarily or solely on private lands. affect the picture-wing flies addressed and the prohibitions against certain The funding for recovery actions can in this rule. Federally supported activities involving listed animals are come from a variety of sources, activities that could affect the picture- discussed, in part, below. including Federal budgets, State wing flies or their habitat in the future The primary purpose of the Act is the programs, and cost share grants for non- include, but are not limited to: conservation of endangered and Federal landowners, the academic Bombardment and live-fire exercises; threatened species and the ecosystems community, and non-governmental troop movements; agricultural projects; upon which they depend. The ultimate organizations. In addition, pursuant to and construction or improvement of goal of such conservation efforts is the section 6 of the Act, we would be able roads, airports, firebreaks, radio towers, recovery of these listed species, so that to grant funds to the State of Hawaii for and housing and other buildings. they no longer need the protective management actions that promote the The Act and its implementing measures of the Act. Subsection 4(f) of protection and recovery of the 12 regulations set forth a series of general the Act requires the Service to develop Hawaiian picture-wing flies. prohibitions and exceptions that apply and implement plans for the Information on our grant programs that to all endangered and threatened conservation of endangered and are available to aid species recovery can wildlife. The prohibitions of section threatened species (‘‘recovery plans’’). be found at: http://endangered.fws.gov/ 9(a)(2) of the Act, implemented by 50 The recovery process involves halting or grants/index.html. In the event that our CFR 17.21 and 17.31 for endangered and reversing the species’ decline by Internet connection is inaccessible, threatened species, make it illegal for addressing the threats to its survival. please check http://www.grants.gov or any person subject to the jurisdiction of The goal of this process is to restore check with our grant programs contact the United States to take (includes listed species to a point where they are harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, at U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, secure, self-sustaining, and functioning wound, kill, trap, or collect; or attempt Ecological Services, 911 NE. 11th components of their ecosystems, thus any of these), import or export, ship in Avenue, Portland, OR 97232–4181 allowing delisting. interstate commerce in the course of a (telephone 503/231–6154; facsimile Recovery planning includes the commercial activity, or sell or offer for 503/231–6846). development of a recovery outline sale in interstate or foreign commerce shortly after a species is listed, then Please let us know if you are any listed species. It is also illegal to preparation of draft and final recovery interested in participating in recovery possess, sell, deliver, carry, transport, or plans, and finally revision of the plan as efforts for the 12 species of Hawaiian ship any such wildlife that has been significant new information becomes picture-wing flies. Additionally, we taken illegally. Further, it is illegal for available. The recovery outline, the first invite you to submit any further any person to attempt to commit, to step in recovery planning, guides the information on the species whenever it solicit another person to commit, or to immediate implementation of urgent becomes available and any information cause to be committed, any of these acts. recovery actions and describes the you may have for recovery planning Certain exceptions apply to our agents process to be used to develop a recovery purposes (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION and State conservation agencies. plan. The recovery plan identifies site- CONTACT section). Permits may be issued to carry out specific management actions that will Section 7(a) of the Act, as amended, otherwise prohibited activities achieve recovery of the species, requires Federal agencies to evaluate involving threatened and endangered measurable criteria that determine when their actions with respect to any species species under certain circumstances. a species may be downlisted or delisted, that is proposed or listed as endangered Regulations governing permits are and methods for monitoring recovery or threatened, and with respect to its codified at 50 CFR 17.22 and 17.32. progress. Recovery teams, consisting of critical habitat if any is being Such permits are available for scientific species experts, Federal and State designated. Regulations implementing purposes, to enhance the propagation or agencies, non-government this interagency cooperation provision survival of the species, and/or for organizations, and stakeholders, are of the Act are codified at 50 CFR part incidental take in connection with often established to develop recovery 402. Section 7(a)(2) requires Federal otherwise lawful activities. For plans. When completed, a copy of the agencies, including the Service, to threatened species, permits are also recovery outline, draft recovery plan, or ensure that activities they authorize, available for zoological exhibition, final recovery plan will be available fund, or carry out are not likely to educational purposes, or special from our Web site (http:// jeopardize the continued existence of a purposes consistent with the purposes endangered.fws.gov), or if unavailable or listed species or to destroy or adversely of the Act. Requests for copies of the inaccessible, from our office (see FOR modify its critical habitat if any has regulations regarding listed wildlife and FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section). been designated. If a Federal action may inquiries about permits and prohibitions Implementation of recovery actions adversely affect a listed species or its may be addressed to U.S. Fish and generally requires the participation of a critical habitat, the responsible Federal Wildlife Service, Endangered Species broad range of partners, including other agency must enter into formal Permits, 911 NE. 11th Avenue, Portland, Federal agencies, States, non- consultation with us. OR 97232–4181.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:32 May 08, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09MYR1.SGM 09MYR1 mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 9, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 26851

It is our policy, published in the Portland, OR 97232–4181 (telephone conduct or sponsor, and a person is not Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 503/231–2063; facsimile 503/231–6243). required to respond to, a collection of 34272), to identify to the maximum For the 12 Hawaiian picture-wing information unless it displays a extent practicable at the time a species flies listed under the Act, the State of currently valid OMB control number. is listed, those activities that would or Hawaii Endangered Species Act (HRS, References Cited would not constitute a violation of Sect. 195D–4(a)) is automatically section 9 of the Act. The intent of this invoked, prohibiting take and A complete list of all references cited policy is to increase public awareness of encouraging conservation by State herein is available upon request from the effect of this listing on proposed and government agencies. Further, the State our Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife ongoing activities within the range of may enter into agreements with Federal Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION the species. We believe, based on the agencies to administer and manage any CONTACT section). best available information that most area required for the conservation, scientific or recreational activities that management, enhancement, or Author protection of endangered species (HRS, do not damage habitat within native The primary author of this document Sect. 195D–5(c)). Funds for these forest areas that support the 12 is Michael Richardson, Pacific Islands Hawaiian picture-wings would not activities could be made available under Fish and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES section 6 of the Act (State Cooperative likely result in violations of section 9. section). We believe the following activities Agreements). Thus, the Federal could potentially result in a violation of protection afforded to these species by List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 section 9, but possible violations are not listing them as endangered and limited to these actions alone: threatened species will be reinforced Endangered and threatened species, (1) Unauthorized collecting, handling, and supplemented by protection under Exports, Imports, Reporting and possessing, selling, delivering, carrying, State law. recordkeeping requirements, or transporting of the species, including Transportation. National Environmental Policy Act import or export across State lines and Regulation Promulgation international boundaries; We have determined that (2) Introduction of exotic species that environmental assessments and I Accordingly, part 17, subchapter B of compete with or prey upon the flies, environmental impact statements, as chapter I, title 50 of the Code of Federal such as the introduction of parasitic defined under the authority of the Regulations, is amended as set forth flies or predatory wasps to the State of National Environmental Policy Act of below: Hawaii; 1969, need not be prepared in (3) Activities that disturb adult or connection with regulations adopted PART 17—[AMENDED] larval fly feeding areas; and pursuant to section 4(a) of the Act. We (4) Unauthorized destruction or published a notice outlining our reasons I 1. The authority citation for part 17 alteration of forested areas that are for this determination in the Federal continues to read as follows: required by the flies for foraging or Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 16 U.S.C. breeding. 49244). 1531–1544; 16 U.S.C. 4201–4245; Pub. L. 99– Questions regarding whether specific 625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted. activities would constitute a violation of Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 section 9 should be sent to the Pacific U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) I 2. Amend § 17.11(h) by adding the Islands Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR This rule does not contain any new following, in alphabetical order under FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section). collections of information that require Insects, to the List of Endangered and Requests for copies of the regulations approval by OMB under the Paperwork Threatened Wildlife to read as follows: concerning listed animals and general Reduction Act. This rule will not inquiries regarding prohibitions and impose recordkeeping or reporting § 17.11 Endangered and threatened permits may be addressed to the U.S. requirements on State or local wildlife. Fish and Wildlife Service, Endangered governments, individuals, businesses, or * * * * * Species Permits, 911 NE. 11th Avenue, organizations. An agency may not (h) * * *

Species Vertebrate population Historic range where en- Status When listed Critical habi- Special Common name Scientific name dangered or tat rules threatened

******* INSECTS

******* Fly, Hawaiian picture- Drosophila aglaia ...... U.S.A. (HI) ...... NA E 756 NA NA wing. Fly, Hawaiian picture- Drosophila differens .. U.S.A. (HI) ...... NA E 756 NA NA wing. Fly, Hawaiian picture- Drosophila hemipeza U.S.A. (HI) ...... NA E 756 NA NA wing. Fly, Hawaiian picture- Drosophila U.S.A. (HI) ...... NA E 756 NA NA wing. heteroneura. Fly, Hawaiian picture- Drosophila U.S.A. (HI) ...... NA E 756 NA NA wing. montgomeryi.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:32 May 08, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09MYR1.SGM 09MYR1 mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with RULES 26852 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 9, 2006 / Rules and Regulations

Species Vertebrate population Historic range where en- Status When listed Critical habi- Special Common name Scientific name dangered or tat rules threatened

Fly, Hawaiian picture- Drosophila mulli ...... U.S.A. (HI) ...... NA T 756 NA NA wing. Fly, Hawaiian picture- Drosophila musaphilia U.S.A. (HI) ...... NA E 756 NA NA wing. Fly, Hawaiian picture- Drosophila U.S.A. (HI) ...... NA E 756 NA NA wing. neoclavisetae. Fly, Hawaiian picture- Drosophila obatai ...... U.S.A. (HI) ...... NA E 756 NA NA wing. Fly, Hawaiian picture- Drosophila U.S.A. (HI) ...... NA E 756 NA NA wing. ochrobasis. Fly, Hawaiian picture- Drosophila U.S.A. (HI) ...... NA E 756 NA NA wing. substenoptera. Fly, Hawaiian picture- Drosophila U.S.A. (HI) ...... NA E 756 NA NA wing. tarphytrichia.

*******

Dated: May 2, 2006. DATES: The effective date of this rule is ‘‘species of concern’’ list to differentiate H. Dale Hall, June 8, 2006. Responses to the request those species for which we had Director, Fish and Wildlife Service. for information regarding a subsequent concerns regarding their status from [FR Doc. 06–4299 Filed 5–8–06; 8:45 am] ESA section 4(d) Rule and critical those species that were truly candidates BILLING CODE 4310–55–P habitat designation must be received by for listing under the ESA (69 FR 19976). June 2, 2006. When we established this new list, we ADDRESSES: NMFS, Southeast Regional transferred both elkhorn and staghorn DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Office, Protected Resources Division, corals from the candidate species list to 263 13th Ave. South, St. Petersburg, FL the species of concern list. National Oceanic and Atmospheric 33701. On March 4, 2004, the Center for Administration FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Biological Diversity (CBD) petitioned us Jennifer Moore or Stephania Bolden, to list elkhorn, staghorn, and fused- 50 CFR Part 223 NMFS, Southeast Region, at the address staghorn corals as either threatened or above or at (727) 824–5312, or Marta endangered under the ESA and to [Docket No. 050304058–6116–03; I.D. No. Nammack, NMFS, Office of Protected designate critical habitat. On June 23, 060204C] Resources, at (301) 713–1401. Reference 2004, we made a positive 90–day materials regarding these finding (69 FR 34995) that CBD had RIN No. 0648–XB29 determinations are available upon presented substantial information request or on the Internet at http:// indicating the petitioned actions may be Endangered and Threatened Species: sero.nmfs.noaa.gov. warranted and announced the initiation Final Listing Determinations for SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: of a formal status review as required by Elkhorn Coral and Staghorn Coral section 4(b)(3)(A) of the ESA. AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Background Concurrently, we solicited additional Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and On June 11, 1991, we identified information from the public on these Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), elkhorn and staghorn corals as Acroporid corals regarding historic and Commerce. ‘‘candidates’’ for listing under the ESA current distribution and abundance, population status and trends, areas that ACTION: Final rule. (56 FR 26797). Both species were subsequently removed from the may qualify as critical habitat, any SUMMARY: We, the National Marine candidate list on December 18, 1997, current or planned activities that may Fisheries Service (NMFS), are because we were not able to obtain adversely affect them, and known publishing this final rule to implement sufficient information on their conservation efforts. Additional our determination to list elkhorn biological status and threats to meet the information was also requested during (Acropora palmata) and staghorn (A. scientific documentation required for two public meetings held in December cervicornis) corals as threatened species inclusion on the 1997 candidate species 2004 on: (1) distribution and under the Endangered Species Act list (62 FR 37560). abundance; (2) areas that may qualify as (ESA) of 1973, as amended. We have Using data from a 1998 analysis and critical habitat; and (3) approaches or reviewed the status of the species and information obtained during a public criteria that could be used to assess efforts being made to protect the comment period, we again added the listing potential of the Acroporids (e.g., species, and we have made our two species to the ESA candidate viability assessment, extinction risk, determinations based on the best species list on June 23, 1999 (64 FR etc.). scientific and commercial data 33466). These two species qualified as In order to conduct a comprehensive available. We also solicit information ESA candidate species at that time status review, we convened an Atlantic that may be relevant to our analysis of because there was some evidence they Acropora Biological Review Team (BRT) protective regulations and to the had undergone substantial declines in to compile and analyze the best designation of critical habitat for these abundance or range from historic levels. available scientific and commercial two species. On April 15, 2004, we established a information on these species. The

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:32 May 08, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09MYR1.SGM 09MYR1 mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with RULES