2348 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 10 / Friday, January 14, 2000 / Rules and Regulations representing them should also be the purpose of the preconstruction planning § 268.11 (b). If more than one project submitted. assistance is to develop much of this down-selected in Phase III and funded information with respect to a particular through Phase IV meets all of these § 268.17 Project selection criteria. Maglev project. The preconstruction standards, then FRA will evaluate and Except as qualified by § 268.19, the planning application requirements of this part 268 are designed to elicit whatever compare the eligible projects according following criteria will govern FRA’s to the set of project selection criteria selection of projects to receive funding information an applicant may have pertaining to these criteria. contained in § 268.17. under the Maglev Deployment Program. (c) In reviewing competing projects (a) Purpose and significance of the § 268.19 Evaluation of applications for under the project eligibility standards project. preconstruction planning assistance. and project selection criteria, the FRA (1) The degree to which the project The FRA will evaluate the will exercise particular vigilance description demonstrates attractiveness applications for their completeness and regarding the following elements of the to travelers, as measured in passengers responsiveness to the requirements preconstruction planning process, and passenger-miles. listed in § 268.15. In addition, although not to the exclusion of others: (2) The extent to which applicants are advised that the Maglev (1) The credibility of the demand and implementation of the project will Deployment Program contains a number revenue forecasts, cost estimates, and reduce congestion, and attendant delay of project eligibility standards benefit/cost comparisons; and costs, in other modes of transportation; (minimum threshold standards) and (2) The credibility of the financial will reduce emissions and/or energy project evaluation criteria that will plan. consumption; or will reduce the rate of guide the FRA’s review of the project (d) FRA intends to make periodic growth in needs for additional highway descriptions produced under the reviews of the processes and products of or airport construction. Measures for Planning Grants. The FRA’s grant recipients. Such reviews may this criterion will include but not be implementation of these standards and include, at the FRA’s option, reviews at limited to the present value of criteria appears in § 268.11 and key milestones in the preparation of congestion reduction, pollution § 268.17, respectively. Although subject project descriptions. reduction, and/or facility cost-avoidance to revision, the information in § 268.11 benefits. Issued in Washington, DC on January 4, and § 268.17 should assist the States in 2000. (3) The degree to which the project completing their applications in the Jolene M. Molitoris, will demonstrate the variety of competition for planning grants, since operating conditions which are to be the project descriptions will need to Federal Railroad Administrator. expected in the United States. respond to the standards and criteria. In [FR Doc. 00–613 Filed 1–13–00; 8:45 am] (4) The degree to which the project evaluating the applications for planning BILLING CODE 4910±06±P will augment a Maglev corridor or grants, FRA will consider how network that has been identified, by any consistent the applicant’s project is to State, group of States, or the FRA, as the standards and criteria, and the DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR having Partnership Potential. application’s likelihood of leading to a (b) Timely implementation. The speed project that meets all the standards and Fish and Wildlife Service with which the project can realistically criteria. be brought into full revenue service, 50 CFR Part 17 § 268.21 Down-selection of one or more based on the project description and on RIN 1018ÐAE39 the current and projected development Maglev projects for further study and status of the Maglev technology selected selection of one project for final design, Endangered and Threatened Wildlife engineering, and construction funding. by the applicant for the project. and Plants; Final Rule To List Two (c) Benefits for the American (a) Upon completion of Phase III of Cave Animals From Kauai, Hawaii, as economy. The extent to which the the Maglev Deployment Program, FRA Endangered project is expected to create new jobs in will down-select one or more projects to traditional and emerging industries in complete additional environmental AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, the United States. studies, investment grade revenue Interior. (d) Partnership potential. The degree forecasts, and other studies and analyses ACTION: Final rule. to which the project description necessary prior to initiation of demonstrates Partnership Potential for construction. Final design and SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and the corridor in which it is involved, engineering work will also be initiated Wildlife Service (Service), determine and/or for the project independently. for the down-selected project(s). To be endangered status pursuant to the (e) Funding limits and sources. down-selected a project must appear to Endangered Species Act of 1973, as (1) The extent and proportion to meet the project eligibility standards amended (Act), for two animals—the which States, regions, and localities contained in § 268.11 (b), rate highly in Kauai cave wolf spider (Adelocosa commit to financially contributing to the project selection criteria specified in anops), and the Kauai cave amphipod the project, both in terms of their own § 268.17, be judged by FRA to have a (Spelaeorchestia koloana). These two locally-raised, entirely non-Federal good chance of being constructed with species are found on the Hawaiian funds, and in terms of commitments of the Federal funds authorized for this island of Kauai. The Kauai cave wolf scarce Federal resources from non- program, and be successfully operated spider is known from three populations, Maglev funds; and by a public/private partnership. and the Kauai cave amphipod is known (2) The extent and proportion to (b) Only one project will be selected from five populations. These animals which the private sector contributes in Phase IV of the Maglev Deployment and their habitats have been variously financially to the project. Program and be eligible for any Federal affected or are currently threatened by Note to § 268.17: FRA recognizes that construction funds that Congress the following—habitat degradation and applicants for preconstruction planning chooses to make available. That one loss through the removal of perennial assistance may not have detailed information project must meet each and every vegetation, soil fill, grading, paving, with respect to each of these criteria, and that project eligibility standard contained in quarrying, and other activities

VerDate 04-JAN-2000 16:07 Jan 13, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14JAR1.XXX pfrm01 PsN: 14JAR1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 10 / Friday, January 14, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 2349 associated with development and animals were thought to be absent from anops) in Koloa Cave # 2 in 1971 agriculture; predation and competition tropical and island systems (Howarth (Gertsch 1973), and Willis Gertsch for space, water, and nutrients by 1987a). In the last 3 decades, however, (Gertsch 1973) formally described the introduced, alien animals; biological a remarkable assemblage of about 50 spider. This species is a member of the and chemical pesticide control species of cave-adapted animals have wolf spider family (Lycosidae). Spiders activities; and an increased likelihood of been discovered in Hawaiian caves in this family are characterized by a extinction from naturally occurring (Howarth 1972; 1987a, b). Cave-adapted distinct eye pattern, including two events due to the small number of species evolved directly from native particularly large eyes in the middle remaining populations and their limited surface-dwelling ancestors in at least 12 row (Foelix 1982). The most distribution. This final rule implements groups of Hawaiian arthropods conspicuously diagnostic character of the Federal protection and recovery (Howarth 1991a). the Kauai cave spider is its complete provisions provided by the Act for these These obligate cave-dwellers are lack of eyes. This character is unique animal taxa. generally found on the younger islands among wolf spiders and its distinction EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule takes effect where an abundance of young lava justifies the recognition of a separate February 14, 2000. flows exist (Howarth 1983a). On older genus for this taxon. A few species of ADDRESSES: The complete file for this islands, soil formation, erosion, and wolf spider have reduced eyes, rule is available for inspection, by siltation have filled in most including another cave-adapted species appointment during normal business subterranean voids, thus eliminating the on the island of Hawaii, but only in the hours, at the office of the U.S. Fish and habitat for cave animals. The island of Kauai cave wolf spider are the eyes Wildlife Service, Pacific Islands Kauai is the oldest of the eight major entirely absent. Adults of the Kauai cave Ecoregion, 300 Ala Moana Boulevard, Hawaiian islands and was formed by a wolf spider are about 12.7 to 19.0 Room 3–122, P.O. Box 50088, Honolulu, single shield volcano (formed by one millimeters (mm) (0.5 to 0.75 inches Hawaii 96850. volcano) approximately 5.6 million (in)) in total length with a reddish- years ago (Stearns 1985). Four million FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: brown carapace (hard outer covering), years of weathering eliminated most Robert P. Smith, Pacific Islands pale abdomen, and bright orange legs. cave habitats formed during this initial Ecoregion Manager, at the above address The hind margin of each chelicera vulcanism. Between 0.6 and 1.4 million (808/541–3441); facsimile: 808/541– (biting jaw) bears three large teeth: Two years ago, the Koloa series of post- situated basally (on the bottom), and the 3470. erosional lava flows again provided third at the distal (far) end of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: available habitat for subterranean chelicera. The tibiae (inner large bone of Background animals. Subsequent erosion also filled the leg) of the two anterior pairs of legs in most of the habitat in the Koloa have four pairs of ventral spines, and The Kauai cave wolf spider series, leaving only a small area of tarsi (ultimate segments) and metatarsi (Adelocosa anops) and Kauai cave suitable cave habitat along the arid (penultimate segments) of all legs bear amphipod (Spelaeorchestia koloana) are southern coast. unusually long and silky trichobothria known only from the Hawaiian island of Because of the age of Kauai and the (sensory hairs). Kauai. The Kauai cave wolf spider is extensive erosion, it was not originally The Kauai cave wolf spider is a known from three populations, and the expected to harbor any cave animals. predator and, although blind, can detect Kauai cave amphipod, from five However, in 1971, two eyeless cave the presence of potential food items by populations. arthropods, a spider and amphipod touch or by detecting chemical The Hawaiian archipelago includes were discovered in caves of the Koloa compounds; this species actively stalks eight large volcanic islands (Niihau, series lava flows. These animals are its prey (Howarth 1983b). Although Kauai, Oahu, Molokai, Lanai, known only from a single exposed lava predation has not been observed in the Kahoolawe, Maui, and Hawaii), as well flow in the ‘‘very rocky’’ to ‘‘extremely field, the spider probably feeds as offshore islets, shoals, and atolls set rocky’’ Waikomo soil series (U.S. primarily on the Kauai cave amphipod on submerged volcanic remnants at the Department of Agriculture, Soil and, to a lesser extent on alien species northwest end of the chain (the Conservation Service 1972). The lava of arthropods that enter the cave system. Northwestern Hawaiian Islands). Each flow covers approximately 10.5 square Compared to most wolf spiders, the island was built sequentially from kilometers (sq km) (4 sq miles (mi)), and reproductive capacity of the Kauai cave frequent, voluminous basaltic lava flows exhibits no covering by erosional wolf spider is extremely low, with only (Stearns 1985). The youngest island, sediments. The amphipod also occurs in 15 to 30 eggs laid per clutch (Howarth Hawaii, is still volcanically active and a younger limestone cave formed on top 1981; Wells et al. 1983). Newly hatched retains its form of coalesced, gently of a portion of the exposed Koloa series spiderlings are unusually large, and sloping, relatively unweathered shield flow. These animals are restricted to the carried on the back of the female for volcanoes. Vulcanism on the older dark, moist areas of larger caverns and only a few days (Howarth 1991a; islands has long since ceased, and smaller subterranean spaces. The Howarth and Mull 1992). subsequent erosion formed numerous amphipod is a detritivore, feeding Biologists found the Kauai cave wolf valleys with steep walls and well- primarily on rotting tree roots, whereas spider only in two lava tube systems in developed streams and soils the spider is a carnivore, preying upon the Koloa area of Kauai; specifically the (Zimmerman 1948). the amphipod and alien arthropods that Koloa Caves and Kiahuna Caves In the formation of the islands, the venture underground. The land (Gertsch 1973; Frank Howarth, Bishop lava flows created caves, cracks, gas supporting these two animal species is Museum, in litt. 1979). The spider is pockets, and smaller, interconnected privately owned, as are adjacent areas restricted to the dark zones (Howarth subterranean spaces or mesocaverns with potentially suitable habitat. 1981) of the caves and adjoining (Howarth 1973; 1987a). While unique fissures. Similar to other Hawaiian cave- subterranean faunas have long been Discussion of the Two Animal Taxa adapted spiders, this species is highly known from temperate continental cave Included in This Final Rule susceptible to desiccation (Hadley et al. systems, until the 1970s obligate cave- Frank Howarth first discovered the 1981; Ahearn and Howarth 1982). The inhabiting (dependent on cave habitat) Kauai cave wolf spider (Adelocosa spider is active in the large caverns only

VerDate 04-JAN-2000 16:07 Jan 13, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14JAR1.XXX pfrm01 PsN: 14JAR1 2350 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 10 / Friday, January 14, 2000 / Rules and Regulations during wetter times of the year When disturbed, this species typically 1988; Adam Asquith, in litt. 1994a), it (Howarth, in litt. 1979) or in smaller moves slowly away rather than jumping is unlikely that the Kauai cave animals areas of the cave that maintain a like other amphipods. Nothing is known can move among separate lava tube saturated atmosphere (Howarth 1981). of the reproductive biology of this systems. Because distinct species can Because of the seasonal and spatial amphipod, but the vestigial brood plates evolve in adjacent lava tubes even when movement of the spider, as well as an of the female suggest they give birth to cave animals can move extensively inability to mark or tag the animals, a small brood of large offspring through mesocaverns (Hoch and survey methods have not been (Bousfield and Howarth 1976; Poulson Howarth 1993), it is prudent to consider developed to obtain accurate population and White 1969). the separate localities of these animals estimates. However, survey counts of While found in the same caves as the as different populations, even though the spider have ranged from 12 to 28 in Kauai cave wolf spider, the cave intervening areas of potential habitat Koloa Cave #2, 0 to 4 in Kiahuna Cave amphipod is also known from a short cannot be surveyed. Thus, the Koloa Makai (cave #210), and 0 to 2 in lava tube (cave #210) located 1 km (0.6 Caves #1 and #2 and adjacent areas are Kiahuna Cave Mauka (Service, mi) inland of the seaward Kiahuna considered to harbor one population of unpublished data, 1998–99). Cave, the Limestone Quarry Cave 7 km the spider and one population of the Frank Howarth also discovered the (4.5 mi) to the east at Mahaulepu, and amphipod. The seaward Kiahuna Caves Kauai cave amphipod (Spelaeorchestia most recently from a small cave that was #267 and #276 harbor another koloana) along with the Kauai cave wolf exposed during construction of the population of both the spider and spider in Koloa Cave #2 in 1971 Koloa Town road (Adam Asquith, amphipod; the Kiahuna Cave #210 (Bousfield and Howarth 1976). Because Service, pers. comm. 1999; Jan harbors a separate population each of of the unusual attributes of a highly Tenbruggencate, Honolulu Star Bulletin, the spider and amphipod; the reduced pincher-like condition of the in litt. 1999). The Mahaulepu Cave Mahaulepu Cave harbors a population first gnathopod (cephalothoracic occurs in a calcareous (containing of the cave amphipod (Service, appendage—an appendage located on calcium) sandstone hill formed from a unpublished data, 1998–99); and a small the part of the amphipod which is the cemented sand-dune that was deposited cave near the Koloa Town road harbors fused head and thorax (the middle on top of a disjunct exposure of the a fifth amphipod population. region)) and the second gnathopod Koloa lava formation during a higher The restricted area where these being mitten-like in both sexes, this stand of the sea (Stearns 1985). The animals occur is rapidly undergoing taxon is placed in its own unique genus limestone cave was formed by water development. The shallow cave habitat (Spelaeorchestia) within the family erosion from the ocean and a still-active is degraded or destroyed through Talitridae (Bousfield and Howarth freshwater stream that runs through the surface alterations such as the removal 1976). This species is also distinctive in lowest cave level. The amphipod of perennial vegetation, soil fill, grading, its lack of eye facets (lenslike division probably colonized this cave by paving, and other activities associated of a compound eye) and pigment, and migrating from the underlying Koloa with development and agriculture. In extremely elongate, spiny, postcephalic lava formation. Due to the inability to fact, the Koloa cave systems are (behind the head) appendages. Adult mark amphipods for demographic considered to be 1 of the 10 most amphipods are 7 to 10 mm (0.25 to 0.4 studies, no attempt has been made to endangered cave ecosystems worldwide in) in length and very slender-bodied, estimate the population sizes of the cave (Culver in litt., 1998). These animals are with a hyaline cuticle (translucent outer amphipod. However, survey counts for also increasingly at risk from predation layer). Gnathopod 1 is highly reduced, this species in the caves where they and competition for space, water, and and gnathopod 2 is mitten-like. Antenna have been surveyed regularly range from nutrients by introduced, alien animals; 2 is slender and elongate, with the 8 to 27 in Koloa Cave #2 and 11 to 71 biological and chemical pesticide flagellum (long thread-like structure in Kiahuna Cave Mauka (Service, control activities associated with used for movement) only slightly longer unpublished data, 1998–99). residential and golf course than the peduncle (a stalklike structure). The two cave animals are restricted to development; and an increased Peraeopods (abdominal walking legs) dark, moist areas of larger caverns and likelihood of extinction from naturally are very elongate, with slender, smaller subterranean spaces or occurring events due to the small attenuated claws. All pleopods mesocaverns (Howarth 1983a). As with number of remaining individuals and (swimming legs) are reduced, with the subterranean animals on younger populations and their limited branches vestigial (small rudimentary Hawaiian islands (Howarth 1991a), the distribution. part, usually non-functioning) or small mesocaverns may be the primary Previous Federal Action lacking. Uropods (tail-like appendages) habitat for these species. For example, 1 and 2 have well developed the Kauai cave amphipod was not seen On June 16, 1978, we published a prepeduncles, and brood plates in the during initial surveys of Kiahuna cave proposal in the Federal Register (43 FR mature female are vestigial or entirely #210 (Miura and Howarth 1978). On a 26084) to list the Kauai cave wolf spider absent (Bousfield and Howarth 1976). subsequent survey however, the floor of as an endangered species and the Kauai The Kauai cave amphipod is a a small, dead end passage was saturated cave amphipod as threatened. We detritivore (feeds on organic debris from with 40 liters (10 gallons) of water, and withdrew that proposal on September 2, decomposing plants, animals, and fecal 24 hours later amphipods had moved 1980 (45 FR 58171) as a result of a material) and has been observed feeding into this area, presumably from the provision in the 1978 Amendments to on rotting roots of Pithecellobium dulce surrounding mesocaverns (Howarth, in the Endangered Species Act of 1973 that (Manila tamarind) and Ficus sp. (fig); litt. 1979; Howarth 1983a). On younger required withdrawal of all pending rotting sticks, branches, and other plant islands, these mesocaverns also allow proposals that were not made final material washed into the caves; and animals to move among larger, adjacent within 2 years of the proposal or within arthropod fecal material. In large cave lava tubes (Howarth 1991a). However, 1 year after passage of the Amendments, passages, most individuals are found on because these smaller voids become whichever period was longer. We or underneath roots or rotting debris. filled with erosional sediment in older published an initial comprehensive However, this amphipod does not flows like Koloa and as a result of Notice of Review for invertebrate appear to be particularly gregarious. surface disturbance (Hammatt et al. animals on May 22, 1984 (49 FR 21664),

VerDate 04-JAN-2000 16:07 Jan 13, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14JAR1.XXX pfrm01 PsN: 14JAR1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 10 / Friday, January 14, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 2351 in which we treated the Kauai cave wolf Summary of Comments and that the Kauai cave wolf spider and spider and Kauai cave amphipod as Recommendations Kauai cave amphipod are in danger of category 2 candidates for Federal listing. In the December 5, 1997, proposed extinction throughout a significant Category 2 taxa were those for which rule (62 FR 64340), we requested portion of their ranges. In addition, no conclusive data on biological interested parties to submit comments new information was submitted during vulnerability and threats were not or information that might contribute to the public comment period that currently available to support proposed the final listing determination for these indicated other viable populations of rules. We published an updated Notice two species. The public comment these animals existed or that the of Review for animals on January 6, period ended on February 3, 1998. We remaining populations are not at risk. HCPs provide excellent opportunities 1989 (54 FR 554). In this notice, we contacted and sent announcements of for conservation of species. We treated the Kauai cave wolf spider and the proposed rule to appropriate Federal encourage landowners and managers to Kauai cave amphipod as category 1 and State agencies, county governments, explore all the conservation candidates for Federal listing. Category scientific organizations, and other 1 taxa were those for which we had on mechanisms available. interested parties. We also published Issue 2: One commenter opposed the file substantial information on announcements of the proposed rule in listing of the Kauai cave wolf spider and biological vulnerability and threats to the following newspapers—the Garden Kauai cave amphipod because of support preparation of listing proposals. Island on December 18, 1997, the economic impacts of the listing on the In the Notice of Review for all animal Honolulu Advertiser on December 24, local economy. taxa we published on November 21, 1997, and the Honolulu Star-Bulletin on Our Response: In accordance with 16 1991 (58 FR 58804), we again listed the December 24, 1997. U.S.C. sec. 1533(b)(1)(A) and 50 CFR two Kauai cave arthropods as category We received a total of seven 424.11(b), listing decisions are made 2 candidates. In the November 15, 1994, comments. Two individuals and one solely on the basis of the best scientific Notice of Review for all animal taxa (59 conservation organization supported the and commercial data available. In FR 58982), we elevated the two Kauai proposal. Two commenters did not adding the word ‘‘solely’’ to the cave arthropods to category 1 support the proposal. Two commenters statutory criteria for listing a species, candidates. Upon publication of the neither supported nor objected to the Congress specifically addressed this February 28, 1996, Notice of Review (61 proposal, including a Kauai county issue in the 1982 amendments to the FR 7596), we stopped using category agency that asked us to identify habitat Act. The legislative history of the 1982 designations and included the two cave areas for the two cave species so that the amendments states: ‘‘The addition of the arthropods simply as candidate species. agency’s concerns about potential utility word ‘solely’ is intended to remove from Candidate species are those for which easements could be discussed. the process of the listing or delisting of we have on file sufficient information In addition, we solicited formal species any factor not related to the on biological vulnerability and threats scientific peer review of the proposal in biological status of the species. The to support proposals to list the species accordance with our July 1, 1994, Committee strongly believes that as threatened or endangered. We also Interagency Cooperative Policy (59 FR economic considerations have no included the two cave arthropods as 34270). We requested three qualified relevance to determinations regarding candidate species in the September 19, and independent specialists to review the status of species. * * *’’ H.R. Rep. 1997 (62 FR 49398), Notice of Review. the proposed rule and comment on the No. 567, Part I, 97th Cong., 2d Sess. 20 We published a proposed rule to list pertinent scientific and/or commercial (1982). Therefore, we have not these two species as endangered on data and assumptions relating to the considered the impacts of listing on December 5, 1997 (62 FR 64340). taxonomy, demography, and supportive economic development in making this biological and ecological information of listing determination. The processing of this final rule the Kauai cave wolf spider and Kauai Issue 3: One commenter argued that conforms with our Listing Priority cave amphipod. We received written we lacked authority to list the Kauai Guidance published in the Federal comments from one of these experts; cave wolf spider and Kauai cave Register on October 22, 1999 (64 FR that information is incorporated into amphipod under the Endangered 57114). The guidance clarifies the order this final rule. Species Act because such power would in which we will process rulemakings. We grouped and discussed comments exceed the scope of Federal Commerce Highest priority is processing of a similar nature under the following Clause power. emergency listing rules for any species issue headings. In addition, we Our Response: We believe that listing determined to face a significant and considered and incorporated, as these species is within the scope of the imminent risk to its well-being (Priority appropriate, into the final rule, all Commerce Clause for the reasons 1). Second priority (Priority 2) is biological and commercial information contained in Judge Wald’s opinion and processing final determinations on obtained through the public comment Judge Henderson’s concurring opinion proposed additions to the lists of period. in National Association of Home endangered and threatened wildlife and Issue 1: One commenter suggested Builders v. Babbitt, 130 F.3d 1041 (D.C. plants. Third priority is processing new that these species would be better Cir. 1997) cert. denied, 1185 S.Ct. 2340 proposals to add species to the lists. The protected if a Candidate Conservation (1998). That case involved a challenge processing of administrative petition Agreement (CCA) or Habitat to the application of the Act’s findings (petitions filed under section 4 Conservation Plan (HCP) was developed prohibitions to protect the listed Delhi of the Act) is the fourth priority. This for the animals. Sands flower-loving fly (Rhaphiomidas final rule is a Priority 2 action and is Our Response: We are required to terminatus abdominalis) under the Act. being completed in accordance with the base listing decisions on the best As with these two Kauai cave species, current Listing Priority Guidance. We available scientific and commercial the Delhi Sands flower-loving fly is have updated this rule to reflect any information. In this regard, we reviewed endemic only to one State. However, changes in information concerning information from the scientific literature Judge Wald held that application of the distribution, status, and threats since as well as commercial information. Act’s prohibition against taking of the publication of the proposed rule. Based on this information, we conclude endangered species to this fly was a

VerDate 04-JAN-2000 16:07 Jan 13, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14JAR1.XXX pfrm01 PsN: 14JAR1 2352 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 10 / Friday, January 14, 2000 / Rules and Regulations proper exercise of Commerce Clause population increase after 1400 A.D., of both the spider and amphipod are in power to regulate the use of channels of heavy modification of most leeward areas never used for plantation sugar interstate commerce, and activities areas of the Hawaiian Islands probably cane cultivation. substantially affecting interstate occurred (Kirch 1982; Cuddihy and In the last 5 decades, the Koloa area commerce, because it prevented Stone 1990). This modification was due changed from an agriculture-based destruction of biodiversity and to the subsequent expansion of economy to one increasingly dependent destructive interstate competition. Judge agriculture from more favorable, mesic on tourism (Kauai Office of Economic Henderson concluded that the (an environment that is neither Development, in litt. 1994). protection of the Delhi Sands flower- extremely wet nor extremely dry) Approximately 75 percent of the loving fly was within the Federal valleys and the use of fire to clear plant original habitat available for the cave Government’s Commerce Clause communities. A perennial stream animals is now designated as ‘‘urban’’ or authority because the listing of the fly flowing directly through the Koloa area ‘‘urban residential’’ (County of Kauai, in prevents harm to the ecosystem upon allowed Polynesians to develop litt. 1994), and the human population of which interstate commerce depends, extensive irrigated fields of Colocasia the Koloa area is expected to double by and because doing so regulates esculenta (taro), Ipomoea batatas (sweet the year 2015 (KPMG Peat Marwick commercial development that is part of potato), and Saccharum officinarum 1993). This population growth has led interstate commerce. (sugar cane) and to cultivate sweet to rapid development of homes, potato on dry land (Handy and Handy condominiums, and resort hotels Summary of Factors Affecting These 1972; Hammatt and Tomonari 1978; originally centered along the coastal Species Hammatt et al. 1988; Sinoto 1975). strip. In recent years, interior lands After a thorough review and Field irrigation of traditional crops supporting both populations of the consideration of all information continued in the Koloa area until 1835, spider and all but one population of the available, we determined that the Kauai when the first sugar plantation in the amphipod have been rezoned from cave wolf spider and Kauai cave Hawaiian Islands was established at agriculture to urban usage and are amphipod should be classified as Koloa. Thereafter, most of the land with undergoing development. With the endangered species. We followed the suitable topsoil was used for large-scale construction of roads, residences, and procedures found at section 4(a)(1) of sugar cane cultivation (Hammatt et al. golf courses, the subterranean habitat is the Act and regulations implementing 1988). This activity included the degraded through the removal of the listing provisions of the Act (50 CFR mechanical clearing of stones and perennial vegetation and its root part 424). A species may be determined boulders and consolidation of smaller systems, the collapse of lava tubes from to be an endangered or threatened field plots. The surface modifications heavy construction equipment, and species due to one or more of the five associated with these past agricultural increased siltation of caves from grading factors described in section 4(a)(1). activities greatly reduced underground and filling activities (Howarth 1973; These factors and their application to root biomass through the destruction of Hammatt et al. 1988; Asquith, in litt. the Kauai cave wolf spider (Adelocosa perennial vegetation (Howarth 1981; 1994a). The population of the Kauai anops) and the Kauai cave amphipod Miller and Burgett 1995), which cave wolf spider in Koloa Cave #2 is (Spelaeorchestia koloana) are as removes the necessary food base for the threatened by a proposed bypass road, follows: amphipod and other cave-dwelling as well as blasting and excavation of a A. The present or threatened herbivores (Howarth 1973, 1981, 1982). drainage ditch from an adjacent housing destruction, modification, or Large-scale agricultural practices development (David Hopper, Service, in curtailment of its habitat or range. brought on by the sugar cane industry litt. 1998, 1999). The recent uncovering These animals are restricted to a 10.5 sq also increased the amount and mobility of a lava tube during the construction of km (4 sq mi) coastal section of the Koloa of the overlying sediments. As a the Koloa bypass road exemplifies the series lava flows that have not been consequence, the rate of sediment continuing threat posed by ongoing filled with erosional sediment. Surface deposition into the underlying development (Jan Tenbruggencate, in modifications in this area directly subterranean voids increased, litt. 1999). Until recently, the disjunct impact the subterranean habitat that eliminating or greatly reducing the population of the amphipod in the supports the spider and amphipod amount of available cave habitat limestone cave was threatened by a (Hammatt et al. 1988; Miller and Burgett (Howarth 1973; Hammatt et al. 1988; quarrying operation directly above and 1995; Asquith, in litt. 1994). Prior to Asquith, in litt. 1994). adjacent to the cave system (Howarth, in arrival of Polynesians in Hawaii, the Thus, with the exception of a narrow litt. 1977, 1978). Thus, most of the land aboveground habitat of this area 0.5 km-wide (0.25 mi-wide) strip of that potentially harbored these animals probably comprised a coastal dry particularly rocky land immediately has been highly modified, and an shrubland and would have included along the coast, most of the habitat for estimated 75 percent of the area has plants such as Sida fallax (ilima), both the spider and the amphipod was probably been rendered uninhabitable. Myoporum sandwicense (naio), heavily modified prior to the 1950s. On The remaining habitat, harboring Chamaesyce celastroides (akoko), and interior lands, small areas of exposed virtually all known populations of the Santalum ellipticum (iliahialoe) (Gagne pahoehoe lava, rock outcrops, and the spider and amphipod, is being degraded and Cuddihy 1990). On the islands of entrances to lava tubes were generally by current land use or is threatened Maui and Hawaii, these plants are unsuited for cultivation of crops and with degradation and destruction from known to produce extensive root were left less disturbed. In areas proposed development. systems into underlying lava tube improved for pasture use, however, B. Overutilization for commercial, fissures, and probably also formed the some cave entrances were filled or recreational, scientific, or educational primary nutrient source for the cave covered (Hammatt et al. 1988; Howarth, purposes. Direct overutilization of the ecosystem at Koloa. in litt. 1977). The remaining pockets of organisms is not known to be a factor, The first thousand years of Polynesian uncultivated land around collapsed lava but unrestricted collecting for scientific habitation in Hawaii had little tubes and exposed lava probably served purposes or excessive visits by significant impact on the cave system at as refugia for the cave animals. individuals interested in exploring the Koloa. However, with a rapid Significantly, all the known populations lava tubes could result from increased

VerDate 04-JAN-2000 16:07 Jan 13, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14JAR1.XXX pfrm01 PsN: 14JAR1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 10 / Friday, January 14, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 2353 publicity associated with listing under wolf spider and the Kauai cave Brennan et al. 1992). Predators, such as the Act. amphipod are found entirely on private the Kauai cave wolf spider, are generally Increased human use of caves can land. One population of the cave spider more susceptible to insecticides than result in the direct trampling, is provided some protection by a County the target pests (Croft 1990). Even if not intentional or otherwise, of cave ordinance requiring the landowner to killed outright, the sublethal effects of animals as well as indirect impacts due conserve two Kiahuna lava tubes known both insecticides and herbicides on the to destruction of root systems (Howarth to harbor the spider (County of Kauai cave animals could include reduced 1982; Culver 1992). In addition to direct Development Plan 1979). However, fecundity (reproductive capacity), habitat destruction, human impacts existing conservation measures under reduced lifespan, slowed development include the use of campfires (D. Hopper, this ordinance protect only the cave rate, and impaired mobility and feeding pers. comm. 1988) as well as entrances and not the surface footprint, efficiency (Messing and Croft 1990). introduction of cigarette smoke into the adjacent mesocaverns, or surrounding In addition to the use of pesticides on cave environment. Cigarette smoke aboveground habitat that help to golf courses, pesticide usage on contains a strong insecticide which, maintain the microhabitat conditions residential property also poses a threat. within the enclosed cave, is likely to within the caves that the animals need It is estimated that residential lots use negatively impact the resident cave to survive. Evaluation of one of the more pesticides per unit area than either animals (Howarth 1982). Both the caves conserved under this ordinance sugar cane cultivation or golf courses smoke from cigarettes and fires dries the showed significant degradation from and that 90 percent of this use involves cave air, and studies and observations surface disturbance over the dark zone insecticides. Much of this insecticide is have shown that reduced cave humidity of the cave (Asquith, in litt. 1994). In applied directly to the ground for is detrimental to cave organisms addition, this ordinance protects only a termite control (Hawaii Office of State (Ahearn and Howarth 1982; Howarth single population of each of the cave Planning 1992). With an estimated 1981, 1982). Such disturbances by animals, which is not sufficient to increase of 4,000 houses in the Koloa human visitation can also promote ensure the continued existence of these area by the year 2015 (KPMG Peat greater invasion by alien arthropod species, given the range of threats that Marwick 1993), residential pesticides species, such as cockroaches and their affect all remaining populations. are considered a serious threat to the predators, through the introduction of No State laws or existing regulatory cave animals. trash (Howarth 1982; D. Hopper, pers. mechanisms at the present time protect These cave animals are particularly comm. 1998). Howarth (1982) indicated or prevent further decline of these susceptible to pesticides because of that species diversity and population animals. However, Federal listing would their tendency to seek water sources levels of cave invertebrates are inversely automatically invoke listing under (Howarth 1983a; Asquith, in litt. 1994a). related to human visitation and Hawaii State law, which prohibits Even if pesticides are not used directly disturbance. taking and encourages conservation by above a lava tube, pesticides that leach C. Disease and predation. Several State government agencies (see ‘‘Hawaii into adjacent subterranean caverns with alien spiders including the brown violin State Law’’ section of this final rule). water from runoff or irrigation are spider (Loxosceles rufescens), spitting E. Other natural or manmade factors serious threats because the animals may spider (Scytodes longipes), and Dysdera affecting its continued existence. be attracted to the water and come into crocata (no common name (NCN)) have Insecticide use, coincident with the contact with the chemicals. invaded the cave habitats in Koloa change to urban land development, Biological control agents (living (Gerstch 1973; F. Howarth, pers comm. poses a serious threat to the cave organisms used to control pests) are 1994; Asquith, in litt. 1994b), and prey animals (Howarth and Stone 1993). usually perceived as preferable to the on immature stages of the Kauai cave While plantation-scale sugar cane use of chemicals because they represent wolf spider and probably all life stages cultivation in the Koloa area involves less of a threat to human health and of the cave amphipod (Howarth 1981). seasonal use of herbicides, intensive generally do not stimulate resistance in The American cockroach (Periplaneta usage is generally limited to spot pests. Some of these organisms, americana) is abundant in some of the applications of glyphosate (trademark however, attack species other than their caves (Bousfield and Howarth 1976; name, Roundup), and generally no intended targets and have caused or Asquith, in litt. 1994a) and probably insecticides are used (Murdoch and contributed to the decline and opportunistically preys on immature Green 1989). Furthermore, in recent extinction of several Hawaiian insects cave amphipods (F. Howarth, pers. years most sugar cane cultivation in the (Gagne and Howarth 1985; Howarth comm. 1994) and competes for space at area has been restricted to land with 1983b; Howarth 1991b). The nematode amphipod food sources (Asquith, in litt. deep soil, which is generally unsuitable Steinernema carpocapsae (NCN) is 1994a). In the Limestone Quarry Cave, habitat for the cave animals. marketed for use against turf pests and the introduced amphipod Tallitroides Golf courses exist on, or are proposed has been petitioned for use on golf topitotum (NCN) may compete with the for, the land directly above or adjacent courses in Hawaii (Faust 1992). This Kauai cave amphipod for detritus food to both populations of the spider and all nematode can infect at least 250 species (Bousfield and Howarth 1976; F. but one population of the amphipod. At of arthropods (Poinar 1979), including Howarth, pers. comm. 1994). least 30 different pesticides are used on arachnids such as the Kauai cave wolf In addition, as noted in the golf courses in Hawaii, including spider (Poinar and Thomas 1985). Other Background section of this final rule, insecticides to control pests of turf grass biocontrol agents such as Bacillus the Kauai cave wolf spider is a predator. (Murdoch and Mitchell 1975; Murdoch bacteria, which have been used for Although predation has not been and Green 1989). Most golf courses in mosquito control, have caused serious observed in the field, this spider Hawaii apply the insecticide damage to nontarget species of insects probably feeds primarily on the Kauai chlorpyrifos at the rate of 453 grams (Howarth 1991b). Unlike most chemical cave amphipod and, to a lesser extent, active ingredient per 0.41 hectares (1 pesticides, biocontrol agents will not on alien species of arthropods that pound active ingredients per acre), 1 to break down or decay. Should such periodically enter the cave system. 3 times per year, but rates and frequency biocontrols become established, they D. The inadequacy of existing of applications are sometimes much will likely remain resident in the area, regulatory mechanisms. The Kauai cave higher (Murdoch and Green 1989; spread to new areas with suitable host

VerDate 04-JAN-2000 16:07 Jan 13, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14JAR1.XXX pfrm01 PsN: 14JAR1 2354 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 10 / Friday, January 14, 2000 / Rules and Regulations arthropods, and become impossible to the following—habitat degradation and 2d 1280 (D. Hawaii 1998)). Based on the eliminate. Lastly, biocontrol agents may loss through the removal of perennial standards applied in those judicial undergo great proliferations in the vegetation, soil fill, grading, paving, opinions, we have reexamined the presence of ubiquitous and numerous quarrying, and other activities question of whether critical habitat for arthropod pests and other species. The associated with development and the Kauai cave wolf spider and Kauai resultant population increase of agriculture; predation and competition cave amphipod would be prudent. biocontrol predators or parasites would for space, water, and nutrients by Due to the small number of have devastating impacts on species introduced, alien animals; direct or populations, the Kauai cave wolf spider such as the Kauai cave spider and cave indirect mortality from the use of and Kauai cave amphipod are amphipod, given their restricted ranges biological control agents and chemical vulnerable to collection, vandalism, or and low fecundities. Biological controls pesticides; and an increased likelihood other disturbance. We remain concerned have been emphasized for golf course of extinction from naturally occurring that these threats might be exacerbated management in the Koloa area events due to the small number of by the publication of critical habitat (Townscape 1993) and are a potential remaining populations and their limited maps and further dissemination of threat to the cave spider and amphipod. distribution. Because the two species locational information. However, we The small number of populations and are in danger of extinction throughout have examined the evidence available small numbers of observed individuals all or a significant portion of their for the Kauai cave wolf spider and of the Kauai cave wolf spider (three ranges, they fit the definition of Kauai cave amphipod and have not populations) and Kauai cave amphipod endangered, as defined in the Act. found specific evidence of taking, (five populations) increases the risk of Therefore, the determination of vandalism, collection, or trade of these extinction from naturally occurring endangered status for the Kauai cave species or any similarly situated events such as storms or earthquakes. wolf spider and Kauai cave amphipod is species. Consequently, consistent with At present, there are a number of warranted. applicable regulations (50 CFR conservation activities that are planned 424.12(a)(1)(i)) and recent case law, at for three of the Koloa caves. In 1995, we Critical Habitat this time we cannot make a finding that signed a Cooperative Agreement with Critical habitat is defined in section 3 the identification of critical habitat will the Kukui‘ula Development Company (a of the Act as—(i) The specific areas increase the degree of threat to these subsidiary of Alexander & Baldwin), within the geographical area occupied species of taking or other human which includes a number of by a species, at the time it is listed in activity. conservation activities for two caves accordance with the Act, on which are In the absence of a finding that critical (Koloa Caves # 1 & 2). These activities found those biological features (I) habitat would increase threats to a include gating of the cave openings to essential to the conservation of the species, if there are any benefits to restrict human access and reduce air- species and (II) that may require special critical habitat designation, then a flow (to increase ambient humidity) and management considerations or prudent finding is warranted. In the planting of native plant species over the protection and; (ii) specific areas case of these species, there may be some caves to develop a root system that will outside the geographical area occupied benefits to designation of critical serve as a food base for the cave by a species at the time it is listed, upon habitat. The primary regulatory effect of animals. Kukui‘ula Development a determination that such areas are critical habitat is the section 7 Company agreed to set aside the land essential for the conservation of the requirement that Federal agencies area above these two caves as either a species. ‘‘Conservation’’ means the use refrain from taking any action that limited-use park or reserve. The entire of all methods and procedures needed destroys or adversely modifies critical land area to be protected includes a to bring the species to the point at habitat. While a critical habitat 45.7-meter (150-foot) wide buffer area which listing under the Act is no longer designation for habitat currently around both caves, in which restricted necessary. occupied by these species would not be or no development will occur. In In the proposed rule, we indicated likely to change the section 7 addition, no pesticides or dumping will that designation of critical habitat was consultation outcome because an action be allowed within this buffer area or not prudent for the Kauai cave wolf that destroys or adversely modifies such above the caves. At present, the spider and Kauai cave amphipod critical habitat would also be likely to National Resource Conservation Service because of a concern that publication of result in jeopardy to these species, there (NRCS) is planning to assist the precise maps and descriptions of critical may be a few instances where section 7 Kukui‘ula Development Company in habitat in the Federal Register could consultation would be triggered only if more extensive planting of native plants increase human visitation to their critical habitat is designated, such as in the park/reserve area. We and the highly sensitive cave habitats which habitat that may become unoccupied in NRCS are currently working with a could lead to incidents of vandalism the future. There may also be some second landowner (Sport Shinko Group) and destruction of habitat. We also educational or informational benefits to to conduct similar conservation indicated that designation of critical designating critical habitat. Therefore, activities over a single cave located habitat was not prudent because we while we believe the benefits of below a portion of their golf course believed it would not provide any designating critical habitat for these (Kiahuna Golf Club). We are currently additional benefit beyond that provided species would not be significant, we reviewing a Cooperative Agreement through listing as endangered. find that critical habitat is prudent for between us and the Sport Shinko Group. In the last few years, a series of court the Kauai cave wolf spider and Kauai We carefully assessed the best decisions have overturned Service cave amphipod. scientific and commercial information determinations regarding a variety of The Final Listing Priority Guidance available regarding the past, present, species that designation of critical for FY 2000 (64 FR 57114) states, ‘‘The and future threats faced by these species habitat would not be prudent (e.g., processing of critical habitat and determined that the Kauai cave wolf Natural Resources Defense Council v. determinations (prudency and spider and Kauai cave amphipod should U.S. Department of the Interior 113 F. determinability decisions) and proposed be listed as endangered. These two 3d 1121 (9th Cir. 1997); Conservation or final designations of critical habitat species are threatened by one or more of Council for Hawaii v. Babbitt, 2 F. Supp. will be funded separately from other

VerDate 04-JAN-2000 17:33 Jan 13, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14JAR1.XXX pfrm08 PsN: 14JAR1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 10 / Friday, January 14, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 2355 section 4 listing actions and will no designated. Regulations implementing increase public awareness of the effect longer be subject to prioritization under this interagency cooperation provision of this listing on proposed and ongoing the Listing Priority Guidance. Critical of the Act are codified at 50 CFR part activities within the species’ range. We habitat determinations, which were 402. Section 7(a)(4) requires Federal believe that, based on the best available previously included in final listing rules agencies to confer with us on any action information, the following actions will published in the Federal Register, may that is likely to jeopardize the continued not likely result in a violation of section now be processed separately, in which existence of a species proposed for 9: case stand-alone critical habitat listing or result in destruction or (1) Possession, delivery, or movement, determinations will be published as adverse modification of proposed including interstate transport, involving notices in the Federal Register. We will critical habitat. If a species is listed no commercial activity, of dead undertake critical habitat subsequently, section 7(a)(2) requires specimens of these taxa that were determinations and designations during Federal agencies to insure that activities collected prior to the publication in the FY 2000 as allowed by our funding they authorize, fund, or carry out are not Federal Register of the final regulation allocation for that year.’’ As explained likely to jeopardize the continued adding these taxa to the list of in detail in the Listing Priority existence of a listed species or to endangered species; and Guidance, our listing budget is currently destroy or adversely modify its critical (2) Landscaping that does not include insufficient to allow us to immediately habitat. If a Federal action may affect a filling or grading the area above or complete all of the listing actions listed species or its critical habitat, the adjacent to the surface footprint of the required by the Act. Deferral of the responsible Federal agency must enter caves. critical habitat designation for the Kauai into formal consultation with us. Potential activities involving these cave wolf spider and Kauai cave All known populations of the Kauai taxa that we believe will likely be amphipod will allow us to concentrate cave wolf spider and the Kauai cave considered a violation of section 9 our limited resources on higher priority amphipod are located on private include, but are not limited to, the critical habitat and other listing actions, property. Federally supported activities following: while allowing us to put in place that could affect these taxa and their (1) Collection of specimens of these protections needed for the conservation habitat in the future include, but are not taxa for private possession or deposition of the Kauai cave wolf spider and Kauai limited to, the following—construction in an institutional collection; cave amphipod without further delay. of roads and highways; construction of (2) The use of chemical insecticides We plan to employ a priority system public or private facilities; construction that results in killing or injuring these for deciding which outstanding critical of diversions for flood control; pesticide taxa; habitat designations should be use; and the release of biological control (3) The unauthorized release of addressed first. We will focus our efforts agents. biological control agents that attack any on those designations that will provide The Act and its implementing life stage of these taxa; and the most conservation benefit, taking regulations set forth a series of general (4) Habitat modification that results in into consideration the efficacy of critical prohibitions and exceptions that apply actually killing or injuring these taxa by habitat designation in addressing the to all endangered wildlife. The significantly impairing essential life- threats to the species, and the prohibitions, codified at 50 CFR 17.21, sustaining requirements such as magnitude and immediacy of those in part, make it illegal for any person breeding, feeding, and shelter. Such threats. We will develop a proposal to subject to the jurisdiction of the United habitat modification may include but designate critical habitat for the Kauai States to take (includes harass, harm, may not be limited to—removal or cave wolf spider and Kauai cave pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, destruction of perennial vegetation amphipod as soon as feasible, or collect; or attempt any of these), within or adjacent to the surface considering our workload priorities. import or export, ship in interstate footprint of the caves; construction, commerce in the course of a commercial clearing, grading, digging, or filling Available Conservation Measures activity, or sell or offer for sale in within or adjacent to the surface Conservation measures provided to interstate or foreign commerce any footprint of the caves; blasting for species listed as endangered or endangered wildlife. It is also illegal to construction in proximity to the caves; threatened under the Act include possess, sell, deliver, carry, transport, or and alteration of the natural drainage of recognition, recovery actions, ship any such wildlife that has been surface and subsurface water flow into requirements for Federal protection, and taken illegally. Certain exceptions apply the caves. prohibitions against certain activities. to our agents and agents of State You should direct any questions Recognition through listing results in conservation agencies. regarding whether specific activities public awareness and conservation We may issue permits to carry out will constitute a violation of section 9 actions by Federal, State, and local otherwise prohibited activities of the Act to the Field Supervisor of the agencies, private organizations, and involving endangered wildlife under Service’s Pacific Islands Ecoregion (see individuals. The Act provides for certain circumstances. Regulations ADDRESSES section). Address your possible land acquisition and governing permits are codified at 50 requests for copies of the regulations cooperation with the States and requires CFR 17.22 and 17.23. Such permits are concerning listed wildlife and inquiries that recovery actions be carried out for available for scientific purposes, to about prohibitions and permits to the all listed species. The protection enhance the propagation or survival of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, required of Federal agencies and the the species, and/or for incidental take in Endangered Species Permits, 911 N.E. prohibitions against taking and harm are the course of otherwise lawful activities. 11th Avenue, Portland, Oregon, 97232– discussed, in part, below. Our policy, published in the Federal 4181 (telephone 503/231–6241; Section 7(a) of the Act requires Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34272), facsimile 503/231–6243). Federal agencies to evaluate their is to identify to the maximum extent actions with respect to any species that practicable at the time a species is listed Hawaii State Law is proposed or listed as endangered or those activities that would or would not Federal listing will automatically threatened and with respect to its constitute a violation of section 9 of the invoke listing under the State’s critical habitat, if any is being Act. The intent of this policy is to endangered species act. Hawaii’s

VerDate 04-JAN-2000 16:07 Jan 13, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14JAR1.XXX pfrm01 PsN: 14JAR1 2356 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 10 / Friday, January 14, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

Endangered Species Act (HRS, Sect. 1969, in connection with regulations 808/541-3441; or facsimile 808/541– 195D–4(a)) states, ‘‘Any species of adopted pursuant to section 4(a) of the 3470) (see ADDRESSES section). aquatic life, wildlife, or land plant that Endangered Species Act of 1973, as List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 has been determined to be an amended. On October 25, 1983, we endangered species pursuant to the published in the Federal Register (48 Endangered and threatened species, (Federal) Endangered Species Act shall FR 49244), a notice outlining our Exports, Imports, Reporting and record be deemed to be an endangered species reasons for this determination. keeping requirements, Transportation. under the provisions of this chapter and Required Determinations Regulation Promulgated any indigenous species of aquatic life, wildlife, or land plant that has been This rule does not contain any new Amend part 17, subchapter B of determined to be a threatened species collections of information other than chapter I, title 50 of the Code of Federal pursuant to the (Federal) Endangered those already approved under the Regulations, as set forth below: Species Act shall be deemed to be a Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. threatened species under the provisions 3501 et seq., and assigned Office of PART 17Ð[AMENDED] of this chapter.’’ Listing of these two Management and Budget clearance arthropod species will, therefore, also number 1018–0094. For additional 1. The authority citation for part 17 invoke protection available under State information concerning permit and continues to read as follows: law, which prohibits the taking of listed associated requirements for endangered Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 16 U.S.C. wildlife species in the State, encourages species, see 50 CFR 17.22. 1531–1544; 16 U.S.C. 4201–4245; Pub. L. 99– conservation of such species by State References Cited 625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted. agencies, and triggers other State A complete list of all references we 2. We amend section 17.11(h) by regulations to protect the species (HRS, cited is available upon request from the adding the following, in alphabetical sect. 195AD–4 and 5). Pacific Islands Ecoregion (see order under ARACHNIDS and National Environmental Policy Act ADDRESSES above). CRUSTACEANS, to the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife: We determined that we do not need Author to prepare Environmental Assessments The primary author of this final rule § 17.11 Endangered and threatened and Environmental Impact Statements, is Mr. David Hopper, with significant wildlife. as defined under the authority of the contributions by Dr. Adam Asquith, * * * * * National Environmental Policy Act of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (phone (h) * * *

VerDate 04-JAN-2000 16:07 Jan 13, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14JAR1.XXX pfrm01 PsN: 14JAR1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 10 / Friday, January 14, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 2357

Species Vertebrate population Historic where When Critical Special range endan- Status listed habitat rules Common name Scientific name gered or threatened

ARACHNIDS:

******* Spider, Kauai cave wolf ...... Adelocosa anops ...... U.S.A. (HI) NA E 676 NA NA

******* CRUSTACEANS:

******* Amphipod, Kauai cave ...... Spelaeorchestia koloana ...... U.S.A. (HI) NA E 676 NA NA

*******

Dated: December 31, 1999. Jamie Rappaport Clark, Director, Fish and Wildlife Service. [FR Doc. 00–982 Filed 1–13–00; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310±55±P

VerDate 04-JAN-2000 16:07 Jan 13, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14JAR1.XXX pfrm01 PsN: 14JAR1