Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 56 / Thursday, March 25, 2021 / Proposed Rules 15855

with the principal community coverage ■ 2. In § 73.622, amend paragraph (i) by pursuant to the CRA, 5 U.S.C. requirements of the Commission’s rules revising the Post-Transition Table of 801(a)(1)(A), because no rules are being at coordinates 31–19–53.0 N and 85–51– DTV Allotments under Georgia the entry adopted by the Commission. 43.0 W. In addition, we find that this for Albany to read as follows: Subject: Amendment of Parts 15, 73 channel change meets the technical and 74 of the Commission’s Rules to requirements set forth in our § 73.622 Digital television table of Provide for the Preservation of One allotments. regulations. Vacant Channel in the UHF Television This is a synopsis of the * * * * * Band For Use By White Spaces Devices Commission’s Notice of Proposed (i) * * * and Wireless Microphones, published Rulemaking, MB Docket No. 21–70; 86 FR 9297, February 12, 2021, in MB Community Channel No. RM–11886; DA 21–267, adopted March Docket No 15–146. This document is 4, 2021, and released March 4, 2021. being published pursuant to 47 CFR The full text of this document is ***** 1.429(e). See also 47 CFR 1.4(b)(1) and available for download at https:// 1.429(f), (g). www.fcc.gov/edocs. To request materials Number of Petitions Filed: 2. in accessible formats (braille, large Georgia print, computer diskettes, or audio Federal Communications Commission. recordings), please send an email to Marlene Dortch, [email protected] or call the Consumer & ***** Secretary, Office of the Secretary. [FR Doc. 2021–06099 Filed 3–24–21; 8:45 am] Government Affairs Bureau at (202) Albany ...... 10, 29 418–0530 (VOICE), (202) 418–0432 BILLING CODE 6712–01–P (TTY). ***** This document does not contain information collection requirements DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act [FR Doc. 2021–05990 Filed 3–24–21; 8:45 am] of 1995, Public Law 104–13. In addition, BILLING CODE 6712–01–P Fish and Wildlife Service therefore, it does not contain any proposed information collection burden 50 CFR Part 17 ‘‘for small business concerns with fewer FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION [Docket No. FWS–R1–ES–2020–0079; than 25 employees,’’ pursuant to the FF09E22000 FXES11130900000 212] Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C. 47 CFR Parts 73 and 74 RIN 1018–BE02 3506(c)(4). Provisions of the Regulatory [MB Docket No. 15–146; GN Docket No. 12– Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601– 268; Report No. 3169; FRS 17596] Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 612, do not apply to this proceeding. and Plants; Reclassification of the Members of the public should note Petition for Reconsideration of Action Hawaiian Stilt From Endangered to that all ex parte contacts are prohibited in Proceedings Threatened With a Section 4(d) Rule from the time a notice of proposed AGENCY: Federal Communications AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, rulemaking is issued to the time the Commission. Interior. matter is no longer subject to ACTION: Petition for Reconsideration. ACTION: Commission consideration or court Proposed rule. review, see 47 CFR 1.1208. There are, SUMMARY: Petition for Reconsideration SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and however, exceptions to this prohibition, (Petition) has been filed in the Wildlife Service (Service), propose to which can be found in § 1.1204(a) of the Commission’s proceeding by Michael reclassify (downlist) the Hawaiian stilt Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.1204(a). Lazarus, on behalf Sennheiser (Himantopus mexicanus knudseni) from See §§ 1.415 and 1.420 of the Electronic Corporation and Catherine endangered to threatened under the Commission’s rules for information Wang, on behalf of Shure Incorporated. Endangered Species Act of 1973, as regarding the proper filing procedures DATES: Oppositions to the Petition must amended (Act). After a review of the for comments, 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.420. be filed on or before April 9, 2021. best available scientific and commercial List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73 Replies to an opposition must be filed information, we find that the on or before April 19, 2021. subspecies’ status has improved such Television. ADDRESSES: Federal Communications that it is not currently in danger of Federal Communications Commission. Commission, 45 L Street NE, extinction throughout all or a significant Thomas Horan, Washington, DC 20554. portion of its range, but that it is still Chief of Staff, Media Bureau. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: likely to become so in the foreseeable Proposed Rule Shaun Maher, Media Bureau, (202) 418– future. We also propose a rule under 2324. section 4(d) of the Act that provides for For the reasons discussed in the the conservation of the Hawaiian stilt. preamble, the Federal Communications SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission’s Additionally, we also recognize the Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR name ‘‘aeo’’ as an alternative common part 73 as follows: document, Report No. 3169, released March 17, 2021. The full text of the name. PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST Petition can be accessed online via the DATES: We will accept comments SERVICE Commission’s Electronic Comment received or postmarked on or before Filing System at: http://apps.fcc.gov/ May 24, 2021. Comments submitted ■ 1. The authority citation for part 73 is ecfs/. The Commission will not send a electronically using the Federal revised to read as follows: Congressional Review Act (CRA) eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES, Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 155, 301, 303, submission to Congress or the below) must be received by 11:59 p.m. 307, 309, 310, 334, 336, and 339. Government Accountability Office Eastern Time on the closing date. We

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:19 Mar 24, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM 25MRP1 15856 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 56 / Thursday, March 25, 2021 / Proposed Rules

must receive requests for public What This Document Does conservation and recovery of the species hearings, in writing, at the address This rule proposes to downlist the by providing management flexibilities shown in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION Hawaiian stilt from endangered to for our State, Federal, and private CONTACT by May 10, 2021. threatened on the Federal List of partners. Additionally, these exceptions will help to guide Hawaiian stilts away ADDRESSES: You may submit comments Endangered and Threatened Wildlife, from hazardous habitat and toward by one of the following methods: based on the species’ current status, habitat managed to meet the species’ which has been improved through (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal individual and species-level needs. eRulemaking Portal: http:// implementation of conservation actions. Because we will consider all www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, In addition, we propose in this rule to comments and information we receive enter FWS–R1–ES–2020–0079, which is prohibit certain activities in relation to during the comment period, our final the docket number for this rulemaking. the species under section 4(d) of the determinations may differ from this Then, click on the Search button. On the Act. proposal. Based on the new information resulting page, in the Search panel on The Basis for Our Action we receive (and any comments on that the left side of the screen, under the new information), we may conclude that Under the Act, we may determine that Document Type heading, check the the species should remain listed as a species is an endangered species or a Proposed Rule box to locate this endangered instead of being reclassified threatened species because of any of five document. You may submit a comment as threatened, or we may conclude that factors: (A) The present or threatened by clicking on ‘‘Comment Now!’’ the species no longer warrants listing as destruction, modification, or either an endangered species or a (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail curtailment of its habitat or range; (B) to: Public Comments Processing, Attn: threatened species. In addition, we may overutilization for commercial, change the parameters of the FWS–R1–ES–2020–0079, U.S. Fish and recreational, scientific, or educational Wildlife Service, MS: PRB/3W, 5275 prohibitions and conservation measures purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D) in the 4(d) rule if we conclude it is Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041– the inadequacy of existing regulatory 3803. appropriate in light of comments and mechanisms; or (E) other natural or new information received. For example, We request that you send comments manmade factors affecting its continued we may expand the incidental-take only by the methods described above. existence. We may reclassify a species if prohibitions to include prohibiting We will post all comments on http:// the best available commercial and activities that these proposed www.regulations.gov. This generally scientific data indicate the species no regulations would allow if we conclude means that we will post any personal longer meets the applicable definition in that additional activities are likely to information you provide us (see Public the Act. For the reasons discussed cause direct injury or mortality to the Comments, Information Requested, below, we have determined that the species. Conversely, we may establish below, for more information). Hawaiian stilt is no longer in danger of additional exceptions to the incidental- Availability of supporting materials: extinction and, therefore, does not meet take prohibitions so as to allow This proposed rule and supporting the definition of an endangered species, activities that this proposed rule would documents, including the 5-year review but is still affected by the following prohibit if we conclude that the and the Recovery Plan, are available at current and ongoing threats to the extent activities would not cause direct injury https://www.fws.gov/Pacificislands/ and that the species meets the definition of or mortality to the species and will at http://www.regulations.gov under a threatened species under the Act: • facilitate the conservation and recovery Docket No. FWS–R1–ES–2020–0079. Habitat degradation, destruction, of the species. Such final decisions and modification due to urban FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: would be a logical outgrowth of this development, altered ground and proposal. Katherine Mullett, Field Supervisor, surface water, nonnative plants, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific coastal inundation and groundwater Information Requested Islands Fish and Wildlife Office, 300 flooding due to sea level rise; We intend that any final action Ala Moana Boulevard, Room 3–122, • Predation by nonnative animals resulting from this proposed rule will be Honolulu, HI 96850; telephone 808– such as mongooses, black rats, feral cats, based on the best scientific and 792–9400. Persons who use a feral dogs, bullfrogs, black-crowned commercial data available and be as telecommunications device for the deaf night herons, cattle egrets, and barn accurate and as effective as possible. (TDD) may call the Federal Relay owls, and native animals such as the Therefore, we request comments or Service at 800–877–8339. Hawaiian short-eared owl; information from other concerned • SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Disease, primarily botulism caused governmental agencies, Native by the bacterium Clostridium botulinum American tribes, the scientific Executive Summary (type C); community, industry, or any other • Why We Need To Publish a Rule Environmental contaminants interested parties concerning this resulting from human activities; and proposed rule. Under the Act, a species may warrant • Stochastic events such as We particularly seek comments reclassification from endangered to hurricanes, which are anticipated to concerning: threatened if it no longer meets the increase in frequency and intensity. (1) Reasons we should or should not definition of endangered (in danger of reclassify the Hawaiian stilt as a extinction). The Hawaiian stilt is listed We Are Proposing To Promulgate a Section 4(d) Rule threatened species. as endangered, and we are proposing to (2) New information on the historical reclassify (downlist) the Hawaiian stilt In the 4(d) rule, we propose to and current status, range, distribution, as threatened because we have prohibit all intentional take and most and population size of the Hawaiian determined is it not currently in danger incidental take of the Hawaiian stilt stilt. of extinction. Reclassifying a species under section 9(a)(1) of the Act with a (3) New information on the known can only be completed by issuing a few specific exceptions to allow and potential threats to the Hawaiian rulemaking. incidental take as a means to further the stilt, including predation; urban

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:19 Mar 24, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM 25MRP1 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 56 / Thursday, March 25, 2021 / Proposed Rules 15857

development, nonnative plants, Public Hearing This document serves as our proposed alterations in surface or ground water; Section 4(b)(5) of the Act provides for rule to reclassify the Hawaiian stilt from data on avian botulism; contaminants; a public hearing on this proposal, if endangered to threatened based on the impacts associated with climate change; requested. Requests must be received by recommendation in our 2020 5-year review. or trends in the status and abundance of the date specified in DATES. Such wetlands used by the subspecies. requests must be sent to the address Proposed Reclassification (4) New information regarding the life shown in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION Determination history, ecology, and habitat use of the CONTACT. We will schedule a public Background Hawaiian stilt. hearing on this proposal, if requested, (5) Current or planned activities and announce the date, time, and place A thorough review of the biological within the geographic range of the of the hearing, as well as how to obtain information on Hawaiian stilts including taxonomy, life history, Hawaiian stilt that may have adverse or reasonable accommodations, in the ecology, and conservation activities, as beneficial impacts on the subspecies. Federal Register and local newspapers at least 15 days before the hearing. For well as threats facing the subspecies or (6) Information on regulations that are its habitat is presented in our recent necessary and advisable to provide for the immediate future, we will provide these public hearings using webinars Hawaiian stilt 5-year review (USFWS the conservation of the Hawaiian stilt 2020, entire) and the Recovery Plan for and that the Service can consider in that will be announced on the Service’s website, in addition to the Federal Hawaiian Waterbirds (USFWS 2011, developing a 4(d) rule for the entire), which are available at http:// subspecies. Register. The use of these virtual public hearings is consistent with our www.regulations.gov under Docket No. (7) Information concerning the extent regulation at 50 CFR 424.16(c)(3). FWS–R1–ES–2020–0079. The following to which we should include any of the is a summary of the best available section 9 prohibitions in the 4(d) rule or Peer Review information on Hawaiian stilts. Please whether any other forms of take should In accordance with our policy, refer to the 2020 5-year review and 2011 be excepted from the prohibitions in the ‘‘Notice of Interagency Cooperative recovery plan for additional discussion 4(d) rule. Policy for Peer Review in Endangered and background information. Please include sufficient information Species Act Activities,’’ which was Taxonomy and Species Description published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270) with your submission (such as scientific The Hawaiian stilt (Himantopus and our August 22, 2016, Director’s journal articles or other publications) to mexicanus knudseni) is a waterbird allow us to verify any scientific or Memorandum ‘‘Peer Review Process,’’ endemic to the Hawaiian Islands commercial information you include. we will seek the expert opinion of at (Stejneger 1887, entire). Another Please note that submissions merely least three appropriate and independent commonly accepted name for the stating support for, or opposition to, the specialists regarding scientific data and Hawaiian stilt is the aeo (from a action under consideration without interpretations contained in this Hawaiian name for the bird and word providing supporting information, proposed rule. We will send copies of for stilts). The Hawaiian stilt is widely although noted, will not be considered this proposed rule to the peer reviewers recognized as a subspecies of the black- in making a determination, as section immediately following publication in necked stilt Himantopus mexicanus 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that the Federal Register. We will ensure (American Ornithology Union (AOU) determinations as to whether any that the opinions of peer reviewers are 1998). It is black and white with long, species is an endangered or a threatened objective and unbiased by following the pink legs (Bryan 1901, p. 26; species must be made ‘‘solely on the guidelines set forth in the Director’s Shallenberger 1977, p. 24), is slender in basis of the best scientific and Memo, which updates and clarifies appearance, and grows to about 16 commercial data available.’’ You may Service policy on peer review (U.S. Fish inches (in) (40 centimeters (cm)) in submit your comments and materials and Wildlife Service 2016a). The height. Plumage is black on the back, concerning this proposed rule by one of purpose of such review is to ensure that and white on the front and underside of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. We our decisions are based on scientifically the bird. Juveniles have a brownish request that you send comments only by sound data, assumptions, and analysis. back, and more extensive white on the the methods described in ADDRESSES. Accordingly, our final decision may cheeks and forehead than adults. Chicks differ from this proposal. If you submit information via http:// are well camouflaged in a downy www.regulations.gov, your entire Previous Federal Actions plumage that is tan with black speckling (Coleman 1981, pp. 33, 35, 86–87). The submission—including any personal The Hawaiian stilt was listed as an identifying information—will be posted Hawaiian stilt is a long-lived vertebrate, endangered species under the Act on as the life span of the Hawaiian Stilt can on the website. If your submission is October 13, 1970 (35 FR 16047). A made via a hardcopy that includes reach at least 30 years (Reed et al. 2014, recovery plan for four Hawaiian p. 4). personal identifying information, you waterbirds, including the Hawaiian stilt, may request at the top of your document was issued in 1978 (U.S. Fish and Range, Abundance, and Population that we withhold this information from Wildlife Service (USFWS) 1978, entire), Trends public review. However, we cannot and the first revision of this plan was Hawaiian stilts were historically guarantee that we will be able to do so. issued in 1985. The final Recovery Plan known from all the main Hawaiian We will post all hardcopy submissions for Hawaiian Waterbirds, Second Islands (i.e., Niihau, Kauai, Oahu, Maui, on http://www.regulations.gov. Revision (Service 2011, entire), was Molokai, Lanai, Kahoolawe, and Comments and materials we receive, made publicly available January 19, Hawaii) except Lanai (until recently) as well as supporting documentation we 2012 (77 FR 2753). We completed the and Kahoolawe. Hawaiian stilts move used in preparing this proposed rule, most recent 5-year review of the between islands, based on observations will be available for public inspection subspecies in March 2020, in which we of sudden large increases in numbers at on http://www.regulations.gov, under recommended downlisting the certain sites (from several hundred to a Docket No. FWS–R1–ES–2020–0079. Hawaiian stilt (Service 2020, entire). thousand or more), and concomitant

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:19 Mar 24, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM 25MRP1 15858 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 56 / Thursday, March 25, 2021 / Proposed Rules

decreases at other sites, including seasonally flooded wetlands, and winter and a single day in the summer certain wetlands over the years (Engilis readily colonize newly restored or to try to avoid counting the same birds and Pratt 1993, pp. 142, 156, 148; Banko created habitats (van Rees et al. 2020, p. twice. Niihau is no longer included in 1988, p. 6). Hawaiian stilts began 3). The population naturally fluctuates the counts as it is a privately owned colonizing the island of Lanai following according to climatic and hydrologic island that has not been surveyed since developments during the 1980s, conditions (Banko 1988, pp. 2–7; Engilis 1999; this island shares birds seasonally including construction of a water and Pratt 1993, pp. 145, 147; Reed et al. with Kauai (Engilis and Pratt 1993, p. treatment plant that provided foraging 1998b, pp. 791–797). Because the 156). However, periodic low numbers and breeding habitat (Engilis and Pratt subspecies consists of one large on Kauai are often due to Hawaiian 1993, p. 147; Pyle and Pyle 2017, population, any discussion regarding stilts moving to Niihau, particularly in unpaginated). The subspecies consists the subspecies’ needs (below) also years with increased precipitation (Laut, of one single population dispersed addresses the population’s needs. 2020, pers. comm.). across the main Hawaiian Islands The Hawaii Department of Land and (except Kahoolawe), and individuals Natural Resources, Division of Forestry Winter and summer surveys for move freely between wetlands both and Wildlife (DOFAW) conducts a Hawaiian stilts show a fluctuating within and between islands (Munro biannual waterbird population census population, which generally increased 1944, pp. 59–60; Telfer and Burr 1979, (count), and those data offer the best from 1987 to 2004 and since then has p. 8; Coleman 1981, pp. 7–8; Reed et al. available information to assess trend been roughly stable at 1,500 to 2,000 1998a, pp. 36, 38; Reed et al. 1998b, pp. and abundance of the subspecies individuals. Years where counts 791–796; Battista 2008, p. 2; Nishimoto (DOFAW 2020). Data were available surpassed 2,000 individuals have been 2014, p. 3; Paxton and Kawasaki 2015, from 1986 through 2017 for our followed in the subsequent year by a in litt.; Dibben-Young 2017, in litt.). analysis. The DOFAW surveys take decrease of 300 to 700 birds (DOFAW Hawaiian stilts disperse readily, exploit place Statewide on a single day in the 2020).

Figure 1. Statewide census counts for Hawaiian stilt 1986-2017 (Source: DOF AW 2020).

H n It -

2500

2000

1500

1.000

500

0 \D 00 en 0 .-1 N rn LI) <..O 00 en 0 ,-! N rn LI) \D r-. 00 en 0 ,-! N m LI) <..O co 00 00 00 en en en en en en 0) 0) 0) 0) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ri ,-! ,-! ,-1 ,-! ,-1 .-I 0) "'0) 0) 0) en 0) 0) 0) ""'0) en 0) "'cr, 0) 0) a 0 0 0 ""'a a 0 0 0 a 0 0 a 0 ""'a 0 0 ....-1 ,-I ....-1 ....-1 ,-! ....-1 ,-I ....-1 ,-! ....-1 ....-1 ,-! ,-I ....-1 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N

--- Statewide Hawaiian stilt (summer) -statewide Hawaiian stilt (winter)

Variability in population count Using indices to monitor abundance can 1994, p. 6; USFWS 2005, p. 31; USFWS numbers can be partially explained by make detecting changes in populations 2011, pp. 50–60). However, Hawaiian variation in reproductive success difficult, potentially masking declines stilts are not restricted to lowland (Engilis and Pratt 1993, p. 155) and (Staples 2005, p. 1909). We recognize coastal wetlands as they have been predation. Summer counts are generally this limitation but conclude the use of observed at slightly higher elevations more variable than winter counts due to this data represents the best available and outside of the coastal wetlands, the variability in hatch-year bird information to ascertain status, trends, such as foothill impoundments, survival (Reed and Oring 1993, pp. 1, and abundance of this subspecies. reservoirs, and other wetlands (USFWS 57; Reed et al. 2011b, p. 475). Given that Habitat and Life History Requirements 2005, pp. 28–29; Kawasaki et al. 2020, the Hawaiian stilt is conspicuous and p. 431). Hawaiian stilts use areas of most wetlands are surveyed during the The Hawaiian stilt primarily occurs sparse, low-growing (up to 18 in (46 cm) Statewide waterbird surveys, the data from sea level up to 656 feet (ft) (200 tall) perennial vegetation or exposed provide a fairly reliable index of overall meters (m)) in elevation, in natural and tidal flats for nesting and breeding, and population abundance and indicate that human-made lowland coastal wetlands sometimes foraging (Smith and the population continues to be stable or (Perkins 1903, p. 452; Shallenberger Polhemus 2003, p. 61; United States increasing with short-term fluctuations 1977, pp. 23–25; Coleman 1981, pp. 8– Department of Agriculture–Natural (Reed et al. 2011b, pp. 475–476, 478– 18; Griffin et al. 1989, p. 1169; Engilis Resources Conservation Service (USDA– 479; USFWS 2011, p. iv; DOFAW 2020). and Pratt 1993, pp. 155–156; Evans et al. NRCS) 2009, p. 5 and Appendix B; Gee

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:19 Mar 24, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM 25MRP1 EP25MR21.005 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 56 / Thursday, March 25, 2021 / Proposed Rules 15859

2007, pp. 70–71; Reed et al. 2011a, pp. We consider the specific breeding and There are many paths to 3, 4). The most common foraging depth rearing conditions described above as accomplishing recovery of a species, for adults appears to be 5 in (13 cm) or necessary for both individual and and recovery may be achieved without less below the surface of the water subspecies needs. The Hawaiian stilt is all of the criteria in a recovery plan (Ohashi and Burr 1977, p. 3; Smith and considered a conservation-reliant being fully met. For example, one or Polhemus 2003, pp. 60–61; Gee 2007, p. subspecies (Reed et al. 2012, p. 888; more criteria may be exceeded while 62; Reed et al. 2011a, pp. 3–4). Shallow Underwood et al. 2013, p. 1), which other criteria may not yet be water (approximately 2–3 in (7.6 cm)) means that it will require active accomplished. and wet mudflats are particularly management into perpetuity because of In that instance, we may determine important for foraging chicks (Morin our inability to eliminate the dominant that the threats are minimized 1998, p. 11; USDA–NRCS 2009, p. 4; threats (Scott et al. 2005, pp. 383–389; sufficiently and that the species is Reed et al. 2011a, p. 4; Reed 2017, in Scott et al. 2010, pp. 92–93: Goble et al. robust enough that it no longer meets litt.). 2012, pp. 869–872). It is also considered the definition of an endangered species Hawaiian stilts typically begin conservation-reliant because it relies or a threatened species. In other cases, breeding at age two (Reed et al. 1998a, almost solely upon managed wetlands we may discover new recovery p. 36). Nests are simple scrapes on the for successful nesting and breeding opportunities after having finalized the ground (Coleman 1981, p. 53; Smith and (Reed et al. 2012, p. 888; Underwood et recovery plan. Parties seeking to Polhemus 2003, p. 61; Gee 2007, p. 98). al. 2013, p. 1). The accepted conserve the species may use these Pairs usually lay three to four eggs that management regime for creating and opportunities instead of methods are incubated for approximately 24 days maintaining optimal Hawaiian stilt identified in the recovery plan. (Coleman 1981, p. 56; Chang 1990, p. breeding and rearing habitat has three Likewise, we may learn new 43). Chicks are precocial, leaving the major components: Control of invasive information about the species after we nest within 24 hours of hatching. After introduced plant species; manipulation finalize the recovery plan. The new the last chick hatches, parents lead their of water levels to mimic natural information may change the extent to brood to shallow feeding areas (Coleman hydrological processes and benefit life- which existing criteria are appropriate 1981, p. 77). Chicks fledge history needs; and control of predators for identifying recovery of the species. approximately 28 days post-hatching (USFWS 2011, pp. 163–169; Underwood The recovery of a species is a dynamic (Reed et al. 1999, p. 478), and young et al. 2014, p. 32 and supporting process requiring adaptive management may remain with both parents for references). More information on the that may, or may not, follow all of the several months after hatching (Coleman subspecies’ management dependency is guidance provided in a recovery plan. For the purposes of this discussion, 1981, pp. 83–84). Parents are extremely presented in the Summary of Biological we assess the progress of Hawaiian stilt aggressive toward unrelated young Status and Threats, below. recovery relative to recovery targets in (Robinson et al. 1999, pp. 11–13). Recovery Criteria the second revision of the Recovery Plan During the nesting season, incubating for Hawaiian Waterbirds (Service 2011, Section 4(f) of the Act directs us to pairs move between their nest site and entire). The 2011 revision included a foraging area (USFWS 2011, p. 60). develop and implement recovery plans more specific recovery Foraging areas may be directly adjacent for the conservation and survival of recommendations for Hawaiian stilt and to the nest site or quite a distance away endangered and threatened species modified population target levels. In (Coleman 1981, p. 77; Engilis and Pratt unless we determine that such a plan developing recovery criteria for the 1993, pp. 155–156; Reed and Oring will not promote the conservation of the Hawaiian stilt, we used a 1998 1993, p. 57). Food availability is at least species. Recovery plans must, to the population viability analysis (PVA) for one factor that drives foraging at greater maximum extent practicable, include the subspecies (see Reed et al. 1998a, distances from the nest site (Reed and ‘‘objective, measurable criteria which, entire) as the basis for population target Oring 1993, p. 57). Adults with 3-day- when met, would result in a levels. For recovery criteria for the old chicks have been observed foraging determination, in accordance with the Hawaiian stilt, we also assessed and 0.3 mile (mi) (1.5 kilometer (km)) from provisions [of section 4 of the Act], that categorized wetlands on each island the nest site (Reed and Oring 1993, p. the species be removed from the list.’’ into core and supporting wetlands. Core 57). Within a few hours of the last chick Recovery plans provide a roadmap for wetlands provide habitat essential for hatching, parents lead their brood to us and our partners on methods of the larger populations of Hawaiian shallow feeding areas that may be the enhancing conservation and minimizing waterbirds that comprise the bulk of the same feeding areas used by the adults threats to listed species, as well as numbers prescribed for recovery. during incubation (Coleman 1981, p. measurable criteria against which to Supporting wetlands are additional 77). evaluate progress towards recovery and areas that provide habitat important for Hawaiian stilts are opportunistic assess the species’ likely future smaller populations or provide habitat feeders. They eat a wide variety of condition. However, they are not needed seasonally by segments of the invertebrates and other aquatic regulatory documents and do not population during part of their life organisms found in shallow water and substitute for the determinations and cycle. Wetlands identified as mudflats (Perkins 1903, p. 452; promulgation of regulations required ‘‘protected’’ (whether core, supporting, Shallenberger 1977, pp. 23–25; under section 4(a)(1) of the Act. A or neither) are those considered secure Robinson et al. 1999, pp. 8–9; USFWS decision to revise the status of a species, from development. In general, protected 2011, p. 58). They also sometimes forage or to delist a species, is ultimately based wetlands are National Wildlife Refuges in grasslands adjacent to wetlands. on an analysis of the best scientific and (NWR), State-owned wildlife Managed wetlands with desirable water commercial data available to determine sanctuaries, or mitigation wetlands, depth are common foraging sites whether a species is no longer an where the primary purpose of (Underwood et al. 2013, p. 6). Hawaiian endangered species or a threatened management is wildlife conservation or stilts move intraisland and interisland species, regardless of whether that does not conflict with the goal of as they exploit food resources (Engilis information differs from the recovery wildlife conservation. The core and and Pratt 1993, pp. 155–156). plan. supporting wetlands identified in the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:19 Mar 24, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM 25MRP1 15860 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 56 / Thursday, March 25, 2021 / Proposed Rules

2011 recovery plan are the sites on each describe and assess the recovery criteria wetlands at these sites to be secure from island that provide the greatest potential as they relate to evaluating the status of conversion to non-wetland condition for recovery of Hawaiian stilts (USFWS the Hawaiian stilt below. and to have sufficient enduring 2011, p. 114; USFWS 2020 pp. 2–3). management to recover Hawaii’s Criterion 1 for Downlisting The overall goal for recovery of the waterbirds. Hawaiian stilt is to restore and maintain Criterion 1 states that all core Currently, of the recovery plan’s 17 multiple self-sustaining populations wetlands on the island groups of Kauai- identified core wetlands, 14 are within the subspecies’ historical range Niihau, Oahu, Maui-Molokai, and protected from development and have (Service 2011, p. 120). The plan Hawaii are protected and managed in some predator and habitat management provides four criteria for reclassifying accordance with the management activities in place. Only 3 lack the Hawaiian stilt from endangered to practices outlined in the recovery plan protection from development and threatened status and two additional (Service 2011, pp. 124, 126, 163–165). predator and habitat management (see criteria for delisting the subspecies. We The plan states that it is crucial for Table 1, below). TABLE 1—STATUS AND CHARACTERISTICS OF CORE WETLANDS IDENTIFIED FOR RECOVERY OF THE HAWAIIAN STILT

Hectares Core or 1 2 Wetland name/location Island (acres) supporting Protected Managed Responsibility

Kaloko-Honokohau, National Historic Hawaii ...... 22 (55) Core ...... X predators and habitat ...... NPS. Park. Loko Waka Ponds ...... Hawaii ...... 10 (24.5) Core ...... Private. Hanalei NWR ...... Kauai ...... 371 (917) Core ...... X predators and habitat ...... USFWS. Huleia NWR ...... Kauai ...... 98 (241) Core ...... X predators and habitat ...... USFWS. Lumahai Valley Wetlands ...... Kauai ...... 51 (125) Core ...... Private. Mana Plains Forest Reserve (formerly Kauai ...... 14 (35) Core ...... X predators and habitat ...... DOFAW. Kawaiele Wild Bird Sanctuary). Kanaha Pond Wildlife Sanctuary ...... Maui ...... 59 (145) Core ...... X predators and habitat ...... DOFAW. Kealia Pond NWR ...... Maui ...... 280 (692) Core ...... X predators and habitat ...... USFWS. Kakahaia NWR ...... Molokai ...... 18 (45) Core ...... X predators and habitat ...... USFWS. Ohiapilo Pond Bird Sanctuary ...... Molokai ...... 10 (25) Core ...... X predators and habitat ...... County. Playa Lakes (wetland complex) ...... Niihau ...... 769 (1,900) Core ...... Private. Hamakua Marsh Waterbird Sanctuary .... Oahu ...... 35.6 (88) Core ...... X predators and habitat ...... DOFAW/DU. James Campbell NWR, Kii and Oahu ...... 66 (164) Core ...... X predators and habitat ...... USFWS. Punamano Units. Kawainui Marsh ...... Oahu ...... 304 (750) Core ...... X predators and habitat ...... DOFAW. Marine Core Base Hawaii, Nuupia Ponds Oahu ...... 196 (483) Core ...... X predators and habitat ...... MCBH. Pearl Harbor NWR, Honouliuli and Oahu ...... 25 (61) Core ...... X predators and habitat ...... USFWS. Waiawa Units. Pouhala Marsh Waterbird Sanctuary ...... Oahu ...... 28 (78) Core ...... X predators and habitat ...... DOFAW. Legend: 1 Protected refers to wetland areas that are secure from development. 2 Responsibility: DOFAW = Hawaii Division of Forestry and Wildlife; DU = Ducks Unlimited; MCBH = Marine Corps Base Hawaii; NPS = National Park Service; USFWS = U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; USN = U.S. Navy; County = County Government; State = State Government entity; Private = private landowner(s).

Although we conclude that this Criterion 2 for Downlisting must be managed, as it is possible that criterion has not been completely met, Criterion 2 states that at least 50 other sites may fulfill the same needs as we have made substantial progress percent of the supporting wetlands on those identified. toward meeting it, and the ongoing the islands of Kauai, Oahu, Maui- The recovery plan identified 34 sites management on core wetlands has Molokai-Lanai, and Hawaii are as supporting wetlands throughout the contributed toward the stabilization of protected and managed in accordance State; of these, 15 are protected, 11 have the Hawaiian stilt population and with the management practices outlined predator or habitat management or both, helped to further the recovery of the in the recovery plan. The plan states but only 7 of the 34 supporting wetlands subspecies. that protection and management of are in protective status and have some these wetlands is required to recover form of management (Table 2). Hawaii’s waterbirds, but there is more Therefore, we conclude that this flexibility with regard to which sites criterion has been partially met. TABLE 2—SUPPORTING WETLANDS AND CHARACTERISTICS IDENTIFIED FOR RECOVERY OF THE HAWAIIAN STILT

Hectares Core or 1 2 Wetland name/location Island (acres) supporting Protected Managed Responsibility

Kealakehe (Kona) Sewage Treatment Hawaii ...... 12 (30) Supporting ...... predators ...... County. Plant. Keanae Pond (Keaau/Shipman) ...... Hawaii ...... 2.9 (7.2) Supporting ...... X ...... Private. Keanakolu Road Stock Ponds (1–5) Hawaii ...... 18+ (45+) Supporting ...... Private/State. (Part of Kohala–Mauna Kea Ponds and Streams). Opaeula Pond ...... Hawaii ...... 3 (7.5) Supporting ...... Private. Waiakea Pond ...... Hawaii ...... 16 (39.5) Supporting ...... State/County. Waimanu Valley ...... Hawaii ...... (*) Supporting ...... County. Waipio Valley ...... Hawaii ...... (**) Supporting ...... X ...... County. Hanalei Trader Taro Fields (Hanalei Kauai ...... 40.4 (100) Supporting ...... Private/State. River and Taro fields that are not part of Hanalei NWR). Hanapepe Salt Ponds ...... Kauai ...... 20 (50) Supporting ...... Private/DOFAW.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:19 Mar 24, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM 25MRP1 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 56 / Thursday, March 25, 2021 / Proposed Rules 15861

TABLE 2—SUPPORTING WETLANDS AND CHARACTERISTICS IDENTIFIED FOR RECOVERY OF THE HAWAIIAN STILT— Continued

Hectares Core or 1 Managed Responsibility 2 Wetland name/location Island (acres) supporting Protected

Mana Base Pond and Wetlands (Part of Kauai ...... 81 (200) Supporting ...... X predators and habitat ...... Private/State. Mana Plain). Opaekaa Marsh ...... Kauai ...... 20 (50) Supporting ...... Private/DOFAW. Smith’s Tropical Paradise ...... Kauai ...... 1.9 (4.7) Supporting ...... X ...... Private/State. Wailua River Bottoms ...... Kauai ...... 20 (50) Supporting ...... Private/State. Waimea River System ...... Kauai ...... 64 (158) Supporting ...... Private/State. Wainiha Valley River and Taro Fields ..... Kauai ...... 44 (109) Supporting ...... Private/County. Waita Reservoir ...... Kauai ...... 151 (373) Supporting ...... Private. Lanai Sewage Treatment Ponds ...... Lanai ...... 3 (7.4) Supporting ...... predators ...... Private/County. Keanae Point ...... Maui ...... 1.5 (3.7) Supporting ...... X ...... State. Waihee Coastal Dunes and Wetlands Maui ...... 101 (250) Supporting ...... X predators and habitat ...... Private. (Waihe1e Refuge). Kaunakakai Wastewater Reclamation Molokai ...... 1.5 (3.7) Supporting ...... X predators ...... County. Facility Ponds. Kualapu1u Reservoir ...... Molokai ...... 30 (74) Supporting ...... X ...... State. Paialoa Fish Ponds ...... Molokai ...... 2 (5) Supporting ...... Private. Haleiwa Lotus and Taro Fields ...... Oahu ...... 4.2 (10.6) Supporting ...... Private/County. Haleiwa Waialua Lotus Fields ...... Oahu ...... 30 (75) Supporting ...... Private. Heeia Marsh ...... Oahu ...... 162 (400) Supporting ...... X predators and habitat ...... DOFAW. Kaelepulu Mitigation Pond (Enchanted Oahu ...... 2.2 (5.6) Supporting ...... X predators and habitat ...... Private. Lake). Kahuku Prawn Farm (Includes Amoriant Oahu ...... 41 (100) Supporting ...... Private. and Kahuku Aquaculture Farms). Laie Wetlands ...... Oahu ...... 81 (200) Supporting ...... X ...... Private. Lualualei RTF, Niulii Ponds ...... Oahu ...... 16 (40) Supporting ...... X predators and habitat ...... USN/USFWS. Paiko Lagoon Wildlife Sanctuary ...... Oahu ...... 13 (33) Supporting ...... X predators and habitat ...... DOFAW. Punahoolapa Marsh ...... Oahu ...... 41 (100) Supporting ...... X ...... Private. Turtle Bay, Kuilima Wastewater Treat- Oahu ...... 5 (12.4) Supporting ...... X ...... Private. ment Plant. Ukoa Marsh ...... Oahu ...... 122 (300) Supporting ...... predators and habitat ...... Private. Waihee Marsh ...... Oahu ...... 10 (25) Supporting ...... predators and habitat ...... Private. Legend: 1 Protected refers to wetland areas that are secure from development. 2 Responsibility: HDOFAW = Hawaii Division of Forestry and Wildlife; DU = Ducks Unlimited; MCBH = Marine Corps Base Hawaii; NPS = National Park Service; USFWS = U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; USN = U.S. Navy; County = County Government; State = State Government entity; Private = Private Landowner(s). * Large area of intermixed wetland, upland, and agricultural lands where specific habitat areal extent cannot be determined. ** Large area of intermixed wetlands and agricultural lands where specific habitat areal extent cannot be determined.

Criterion 3 for Downlisting preliminary; that said, we find that the density dependence will benefit the results inform the best available conservation of the subspecies. Criterion 3 states that a PVA should information regarding the viability of Additionally, because this density- be conducted to update the findings of Hawaiian stilt. dependence is closely associated with Reed et al. (1998a, entire), and the available managed habitat, increased population size necessary for long-term Modeling from the 2019 PVA management (i.e., predator control, viability of the subspecies should be indicates that the Hawaiian stilt’s water-level, and nonnative plant reassessed; and (2) the Statewide population growth is affected by removal) across the range of the species, surveyed number of Hawaiian stilts density-dependent population dynamics in both core and supporting wetlands, show a stable or increasing trend and on managed wetlands beginning at will create more suitable breeding has not declined below 2,000 birds (or approximately 1,000 birds. When habitat and thus increase the carrying an alternative target based on the population densities are high, the capacity. Adequate representation updated PVA) for at least 5 consecutive aggressive territorial behavior of adult across multiple sites on multiple years. Researchers have produced two stilts can lead to violent and islands—as illustrative of the approach PVAs for the subspecies to support and occasionally fatal attacks on conspecific inform the creation of recovery criteria chicks and adults, sometimes with of managed core and supporting and recovery decisions for the extensive chick fatalities as well as the wetlands developed by the recovery subspecies (Reed et al. 1998a, entire; potential for large numbers of nest team—offers the most effective pathway Reed and van Reese 2019, entire). The failures or abandonment. Local adult to recovery of this conservation-reliant most recent analysis in 2019, completed density has a strong negative correlation subspecies. with data collected since 1998, with nest success (proportion of nests The PVA suggests that, under the incorporated additional peer-reviewed hatching at least one chick) at Kealia current management efforts on core and data on adult survival rates and Pond National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) supporting wetlands the Statewide variances in adult or juvenile survival on Maui, where few alternative breeding carrying capacity of Hawaiian stilts is rates (Reed et al. 2014, entire); these habitats are available, but no such effect below 2,000 individuals. This means additional data were not available at the at a refinery pond on Oahu, where many that the Hawaiian stilt has reached its time of the initial modelling effort. The nearby alternative wetlands are equilibrium population size (i.e., the 2019 effort also included data on available. Therefore, optimizing the population size the landscape can individual movement patterns for distribution of birds during breeding currently support). Data used in the Hawaiian stilt (Reed et al. 1998b, across the landscape (as opposed to PVA was collected from sites that are entire). The authors of the 2019 PVA concentrating breeding populations on both protected and managed, as well as stressed that the results are considered one/few sites) to mitigate the effects of data from sites that are protected but do

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:19 Mar 24, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM 25MRP1 15862 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 56 / Thursday, March 25, 2021 / Proposed Rules

not have management. The vital rates nest success are not independent surveys for the subspecies show a (reproduction and mortality) used in factors. For example, if there are fewer fluctuating population, which generally this PVA come from birds almost adults there are fewer nests, so any increased from 1986 to 2004 and since exclusively from managed sites as there reduction in management or habitat then has been roughly stable at 1,500 to are few to no birds able to successfully quality is likely to impact all life stages 2,000 individuals (see Range, breed elsewhere due to the myriad of the Hawaiian stilt. Abundance, and Population Trends). threats present at non-managed sites. If Another potential limitation of the While the number of Hawaiian stilts the management practices continue and PVA is that changes in the counted during the surveys has only the environmental conditions of the environmental conditions of the occasionally exceeded 2,000 individuals managed sites are stable over the next protected and managed sites attributed during winter or summer counts over 80 years, the rangewide population has to sea-level rise or other factors was not the last 10 years, the population has no chance of extinction within the 80- included as a variable in any of the remained relatively stable over the past year modelling period. This analysis models included in this PVA. Sea-level 16 years. demonstrates that under the current rise in particular is already impacting We conclude that this criterion has management practices the rangewide some wetlands in Hawaii (see Summary not fully been met because although a population is stable within the limited of Biological Status and Threats, below) new preliminary PVA has been available managed sites and will (Kane et al. 2015, p. 353; Htun et al. produced, the Service has not yet continue to be stable as long as these 2016, pp. 50–51; van Reese and Reed reassessed the subspecies population management practices and 2018, pp. 2–3; van Reese and Reed 2019, size necessary for long-term viability. environmental conditions continue. The p. 4; van Reese 2020, pers. comm.). Over The Service will conduct this three key factors that influence the the next several decades, sea-level rise reassessment once the PVA has probability of extinction, in order of could inundate enough core wetlands undergone peer review and is published importance, are adult mortality, juvenile (e.g., Kanaha and Kealia on Maui, and in the scientific literature. Further, mortality, and nest failure rate. The PVA almost all wetlands on Molokai) across winter and summer surveys for the predicted a sharp rise in the probability the islands and result in changes to the Hawaiian stilt show a fluctuating of extinction when adult mortality rates species’ persistence estimates in the population with a stable to increasing exceeded approximately 24 percent; at PVA due to changes or loss of available trend, but the total population has not approximately 34 percent, the habitat and subsequent increases in consistently been near 2,000 birds for 5 probability of extinction for the stilt mortalities of adults, eggs, or young consecutive years (see Range, approached 80 percent (Reed and van (Kane et al. 2015, p. 353; Htun et al. Abundance, and Population Trends). 2016, pp. 50–51; van Reese and Reed Reese 2019, pp. 24, 30). Criterion 4 for Downlisting The PVA also found that the 2018, pp. 2–3; Reed and van Rees 2019, Hawaiian stilt’s viability is sensitive to p. 4; Harmon 2020, in litt.; van Reese Criterion 4 states that there should be changes in both annual juvenile 2020, pers. comm.). multiple self-sustaining breeding mortality rates and nest failure rates. The insights from the PVA justify the populations, including multiple The PVA model indicated that the need for long term conservation actions breeding populations on at least the probability of extinction begins to such as managing habitat conditions following: The island group of Kauai increase sharply when annual juvenile and controlling predation. The and Niihau, the island of Oahu, the mortality begins to exceed 40 percent, robustness of the populations on core island group of Maui, Molokai, and with almost certain extinction at 79 managed wetlands, as well as the Lanai, and the island of Hawaii. Because percent annual juvenile mortality (Reed effectiveness of management efforts the Hawaiian stilt exists in one and van Rees 2019; p. 31). Nest failure focusing on producing conditions that intermixed population, we refer to rates also influence changes in the result in the successful protection of breeding populations solely to model’s outcomes on probability of nests, chicks, and adults, are well distinguish groups of Hawaiian stilts extinction within 80 years (i.e., the established. For example, although the that breed at a specific wetland on a likelihood the species will not persist in Service’s NWR units contain only 15 specific island at any given time. They 80 years). Nest failure rate would need percent of the total coastal plan wetland may or may not be the same stilts over to double, from approximately 19 acreage in the State, they supported time. percent to approximately 40 percent to between 37 and 47 percent of the total The recovery plan defines a self- reach a high probability of extinction Hawaiian stilt Statewide population sustaining breeding population as a within 80 years, with almost certain using data from 1986 through 2007 population that is large enough to make extinction if nest failure rates reaches 50 (Underwood et al. 2013, p. 6). Effective extirpation from stochastic forces percent. and sustained habitat and predator unlikely, and that is able to remain The PVA stresses that the successful management produces conditions that stable or grow with little human reproduction and survival of stilts result in the successful protection of intervention except for predator control occurs almost exclusively at protected nests, chicks, and adults, thereby and vegetation management (USFWS and managed wetlands and that birds at significantly mitigating risk to the 2011, p. 121). The recovery strategy unmanaged wetlands tend to disappear, subspecies and improving resiliency further strengthens this concept by and consequently, a loss (or reduction) into the foreseeable future. Long-term incorporating the need to satisfy two of management would decrease the commitment towards conservation widely recognized and scientifically species persistence likelihood (Reed and management actions are essential to accepted goals for promoting viable self- van Reese 2019, p. 36). This insight continued progress towards recovery. sustaining breeding populations: (1) By means in the absence (or reduction) of Furthermore, additional and more increasing the population size and management at the currently managed expansive management on core and distribution across the islands, a single sites, the species probability of supporting wetland sites will also or series of catastrophic events will not extinction would substantially increase, benefit the status of the subspecies into result in the extinction of the and therefore, the species viability the foreseeable future. subspecies; and (2) increasing the would substantially decrease. Further, Regarding population trends for population size throughout its range to adult mortality, juvenile mortality, and Hawaiian stilt, winter and summer a level where the threats of genetic,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:19 Mar 24, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM 25MRP1 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 56 / Thursday, March 25, 2021 / Proposed Rules 15863

demographic (population dynamics), further benefit the species. Although it to favor some wetlands over others and normal environmental uncertainties is generally accepted by wetland during different years; however, are diminished (USFWS 2011, p. 112). managers in Hawaii that all three monitoring such trends is important to Furthermore, for these population and management actions in concerted effort understanding the conservation needs of distribution goals to ensure the long- are required restore the functionality of the subspecies. Therefore, we conclude term viability of the subspecies, they wetlands to meet the life-history that this criterion is partially met. will require the successful control or requirements of waterbirds, currently, Discussion/Summary of Downlisting elimination of the identified threats. all three of these essential management Criteria Assessment Present distribution of the Hawaiian actions do not necessarily happen at the The downlisting criteria in the stilt encompasses all islands where same time on managed wetlands recovery plan (USFWS 2011, entire) historically known (Niihau, Kauai, (Underwood et al. 2013, p. 2). Sustained represented our best assessment, at the Oahu, Maui, Molokai, and Hawaii), as management over time at many core and time the plan was prepared, of the well as the island of Lanai due to the some supporting wetlands has advanced conditions that would result in a expansion in range that occurred in the the recovery of the Hawaiian stilt by determination that the Hawaiian stilt mid-1980s from the development of the securing essential breeding habitat could be considered for reclassification Lanai wastewater treatment facility. As enabling the subspecies to increase its population size and distribution. under the Act as threatened rather than previously summarized, since 1986, endangered. While the downlisting census data indicate a Statewide The wide distribution of the Hawaiian criteria in the recovery plan have not yet population that is relatively stable or stilt population, spread out across the been completely met, we have made slightly increasing (Service 2011, pp. multiple islands, provides the substantial progress as: (1) Ongoing 48–49; Service 2020, pp. 5, 18; van Rees subspecies with the resiliency and management is occurring at most core et al. 2020, p. 3; DOFAW 2020). redundancy necessary to withstand a wetlands (Criterion 1); (2) protection has Additionally, the implementation of stochastic (e.g., single wetland) or been secured for about 40 percent of adaptive management predator control catastrophic (e.g., islandwide) event, supporting wetlands, and about 33 practices over the last decade at respectively. However, within-island percent of the supporting wetlands are multiple core wetland sites has distribution can be quite limited. For being managed (Criterion 2); (3) demonstrated that the response of the example, the number of birds on the preliminary results from a 2019 PVA subspecies to predator control is island of Hawaii are still relatively low have been obtained (Criterion 3) (Reed positive, with higher fledgling success (200 to 250 at any given time on the and van Reese 2019, entire); and (4) rates and overall improvements in island) and the birds have been highly census data indicate a rangewide stable population densities of Hawaiian stilts dependent on a local wastewater to increasing population with the than in unmanaged sites (Underwood et treatment facility (Kealakehe) for resiliency and redundancy to withstand al. 2014, p. 35; Price 2020, p. 10). breeding (National Park Service (NPS) both stochastic and catastrophic events Current management of threats at most 2020, pers. comm.). Biologists at (Criterion 4). core wetlands and some supporting Kaloko-Honokohau National Park (NP) Recovery criteria for the Hawaiian wetland sites (Tables 1 and 2) has have more recently been creating stilt may need to be revisited once the contributed toward the stabilization of mudflats and more suitable habitat for PVA is finalized. Using its assessment of the population and likely also plays an Hawaiian stilts which has increased population size necessary for long-term important role in creating a Hawaiian nesting attempts (eight to 10 pairs of viability of the subspecies, the PVA stilt population that is at or near birds on average) at the park; however, indicates that under current vital rates carrying capacity (Reed and van Rees there is low nest success and very few at managed sites, current management 2019, entire; van Rees et al. 2020, fledglings (NPS 2020, pers. comm.). The effort, and current condition and entire). As noted above, carrying birds tend to increase in number outside availability of habitat, the Statewide capacity in this case is really more an of the breeding season, but are primarily carrying capacity may be below the equilibrium population, which is the just foraging (NPS 2020, pers. comm.). conditional target of 2,000 individuals population size the habitat can support Similarly, the occurrence of birds on as listed in Recovery Criterion 3. The under current conditions. If additional Lanai demonstrates an expansion in PVA notes that it can be shown easily management was implemented at more range, but they are utilizing the artificial that a long-lived species in a setting core and supporting wetlands then the habitat of a wastewater treatment with low environmental stochasticity carrying capacity or equilibrium facility and there are only could steadily decline for 80 years but population size would increase. The approximately 20 breeding pairs still have a probability of persistence, expansion of effective predator and (Pulama Lanai 2020, pers. comm.). particularly if the starting population vegetation control methods (e.g., Likewise, Hawaiian stilts on Molokai size is in the hundreds or thousands of mammalian exclusion fencing, trapping also largely depend on a wastewater individuals (van Reese and Reed 2019, methods, and vegetation control) into treatment facility, and most of Molokai’s p. 35). Further, the PVA questions the more core and supporting wetlands may coastal wetlands are only 1 ft (0.30 target goal of 2,000 individuals, citing increase the carrying capacity or meter) above sea level and thus that population sizes of long-lived equilibrium population size for the expected to be reduced by sea-level rise vertebrates tends to be greater (van subspecies and further improve the resulting in a reduction of both nesting Reese and Reed 2019, p. 38). Increasing status of the species into the foreseeable and foraging areas on the island (Jenkins management (predator control, future. Additionally, implementation of 2016, in litt.; Dibben-Young 2017, in vegetation removal, and water-level the three essential management actions litt.). Further, recent analyses of control) across the species’ range at both (predator, vegetation, and water level Hawaiian stilt numbers at several NWR core and supporting wetlands is the control) at the same time, at the same wetlands show a slight decline in most effective way to meet this recovery location, on a more regular basis, at Hawaiian stilts in recent years (Rounds criterion. See Current Voluntary and wetlands that currently receive 2020, pers. comm.), which may lead to Regulatory Conservation Efforts, below, management and expanding such reduced distribution. The population for a summary of the partnerships that practices to those that do not, will size does fluctuate, and the birds appear have contributed toward the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:19 Mar 24, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM 25MRP1 15864 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 56 / Thursday, March 25, 2021 / Proposed Rules

stabilization of the Hawaiian stilt population, which generally increased action or condition or the action or population and efforts to manage the from 1986 to 2004 and since then has condition itself. subspecies throughout its range. been roughly stable at 1,500 to 2,000 However, the mere identification of individuals (see Range, Abundance, and Delisting Criteria any threat(s) does not necessarily mean Population Trends). The number of that the species meets the statutory We provided two delisting criteria in Hawaiian stilts counted during the definition of an ‘‘endangered species’’ or our recovery plan. Criterion 1 states that surveys has only occasionally exceeded a ‘‘threatened species.’’ In determining of the supporting wetlands on the 2,000 individuals during winter or whether a species meets either islands of Kauai, Oahu, Maui–Molokai– summer counts over the last 10 years; definition, we must evaluate all Lanai, and Hawaii, at least 85 percent thus, we will revisit this target once the identified threats by considering the are protected and managed in PVA has been peer reviewed and species’ expected response and the accordance with the management published. effects of the threats—in light of those practices outlined in this recovery plan. Regulatory and Analytical Framework actions and conditions that will Criterion 2 states that the Statewide ameliorate the threats—on an surveyed number of Hawaiian stilts Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) individual, population, and species shows a stable or increasing trend and and its implementing regulations (50 level. We evaluate each threat and its has not declined below 2,000 birds (or CFR part 424) set forth the procedures expected effects on the species, then an alternative target based on the for determining whether a species is an analyze the cumulative effect of all of updated population viability analysis) ‘‘endangered species’’ or a ‘‘threatened the threats on the species as a whole. for at least 10 consecutive years. The species.’’ The Act defines an We also consider the cumulative effect information presented above for the endangered species as a species that is of the threats in light of those actions downlisting criteria indicates that the ‘‘in danger of extinction throughout all and conditions that will have positive criteria for delisting have not yet been or a significant portion of its range,’’ and effects on the species—such as any met; we provide a summary of a threatened species as a species that is existing regulatory mechanisms or information relating to the delisting ‘‘likely to become an endangered conservation efforts. The Secretary criteria below. species within the foreseeable future determines whether the species meets With regard to Criterion 1, the Service throughout all or a significant portion of finds that progress towards securing the definition of an ‘‘endangered its range.’’ The Act requires that we species’’ or a ‘‘threatened species’’ only management actions on supporting determine whether any species is an wetlands has been made and is showing after conducting this cumulative ‘‘endangered species’’ or a ‘‘threatened analysis and describing the expected success, but the criterion has not been species’’ because of any of the following fully realized to date. For supporting effect on the species now and in the factors: foreseeable future. wetland sites, producing long-term and (A) The present or threatened The Act does not define the term sustained Hawaiian stilt habitat destruction, modification, or ‘‘foreseeable future,’’ which appears in management is complicated by the curtailment of its habitat or range; the statutory definition of ‘‘threatened following factors. First, many (B) Overutilization for commercial, species.’’ Our implementing regulations supporting wetlands are owned or recreational, scientific, or educational at 50 CFR 424.11(d) set forth a managed by multiple entities, which purposes; complicates coordination and intensity (C) Disease or predation; framework for evaluating the foreseeable of management effort. Additionally, the (D) The inadequacy of existing future on a case-by-case basis. The term primary purpose of many of these sites regulatory mechanisms; or foreseeable future extends only so far is not waterbird conservation (e.g., (E) Other natural or manmade factors into the future as we can reasonably water reclamation facilities, wastewater affecting its continued existence. determine that both the future threats pond, taro production, and flood These factors represent broad and the species’ responses to those control), and, therefore, management of categories of natural or human-caused threats are likely. In other words, the conditions conducive to Hawaiian stilt actions or conditions that could have an foreseeable future is the period of time breeding is secondary. Finally, effect on a species’ continued existence. in which we can make reliable achieving long-term management efforts In evaluating these actions and predictions. ‘‘Reliable’’ does not mean on many of these sites is more uncertain conditions, we look for those that may ‘‘certain;’’ it means sufficient to provide than core and supporting sites owned by have a negative effect on individuals of a reasonable degree of confidence in the the Federal and/or State conservation the species, as well as other actions or prediction. Thus, a prediction is reliable agencies; this is due to a general lack of conditions that may ameliorate any if it is reasonable to depend on it when secured and dedicated funding sources negative effects or may have positive making decisions. and lack of internal operational effects. We consider these same five It is not always possible or necessary capacity. Partnerships at supporting factors in reclassifying a species from to define foreseeable future as a wetland sites have contributed to endangered to threatened (50 CFR particular number of years. Analysis of recovery progress for the Hawaiian stilt 424.11(c)–(e)). the foreseeable future uses the best and other waterbirds (see Current We use the term ‘‘threat’’ to refer in scientific and commercial data available Voluntary and Regulatory Conservation general to actions or conditions that are and should consider the timeframes Efforts) and are contributing to recovery. known to or are reasonably likely to applicable to the relevant threats and to Progress toward achieving this criterion negatively affect individuals of a the species’ likely responses to those is currently ongoing but not yet at an species. The term ‘‘threat’’ includes threats in view of its life-history acceptable level of permanency or actions or conditions that have a direct characteristics. Data that are typically extent to achieve the greatest impact on individuals (direct impacts), relevant to assessing the species’ conservation outcomes to meet this as well as those that affect individuals biological response include species- criterion. through alteration of their habitat or specific factors such as lifespan, With regard to delisting Criterion 2, required resources (stressors). The term reproductive rates or productivity, winter and summer surveys for ‘‘threat’’ may encompass—either certain behaviors, and other Hawaiian stilt show a fluctuating together or separately—the source of the demographic factors.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:19 Mar 24, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM 25MRP1 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 56 / Thursday, March 25, 2021 / Proposed Rules 15865

In addition to the threat analysis, to Regulatory and Analytical Framework.) 1.2 ha (3 ac)) was set aside in 1955, a assess the Hawaiian stilt’s viability, we The effects of conservation actions were remnant of the once expansive used the three conservation biology also assessed as part of the current Kaelepulu wetland. Pearl Harbor principles of resiliency, redundancy, condition of the subspecies. We note wetlands have also been greatly and representation (Shaffer and Stein that overutilization for commercial, degraded or diminished by means of 2000, pp. 306–310). Briefly, resiliency recreational, scientific, or educational filling, urban development, nonnative supports the ability of the subspecies to purposes (Factor B) was not identified plant overgrowth, and water pollution. withstand environmental and as a threat at the time of listing, and we The Mana Plains on Kauai, once the demographic stochasticity (for example, have no additional information to largest wetland in Hawaii at over 1,600 wet or dry, warm or cold years), suggest it is currently, or will become, ac (650 ha) (circa 1910) was reduced to redundancy supports the ability of the a threat in the foreseeable future; only 200 ac (80 ha) by 2006, primarily subspecies to withstand catastrophic hunting of the subspecies has been due to water diversions for sugar cane events (for example, droughts, large prohibited since the 1940s. (Munro 1944, p. 59; Shallenberger 1977, pollution events), and representation Furthermore, as per our policy, in this p. 218; Erickson and Puttock 2006, p. supports the ability of the species to proposed rule we consider regulatory 40). Within these last 200 ac (80 ha), 35 adapt over time to long-term changes in mechanisms (Factor D) with respect to ac (14 ha) are designated as the Mana the environment (for example, climate how both regulatory and volunteer Plain Forest Reserve (formerly the changes). In general, the more resilient conservation measures might reduce or Kawaiele Waterbird Sanctuary). and redundant a subspecies is and the ameliorate threats to the species, rather Although magnitudes smaller in size, it more representation it has, the more than in the context of a potential stand- is still considered a core wetland likely it is to sustain populations over alone threat. Threats to the subspecies (USFWS 2011, pp. 207, 214). The time, even under changing are reduced by voluntary and regulatory greater Mana Plain area is also an environmental conditions. Using these actions initiated by the Service, important supporting wetland habitat principles, we identified the subspecies’ DOFAW, and voluntary actions by a for the Hawaiian stilt due to remaining ecological requirements for survival and large network of organizations scattered ephemeral (temporary) reproduction at the individual, interested in wetland and waterbird wetlands (Nadig 2017, pers. comm.). population, and (sub)species levels, and conservation rangewide. A summary of The adjacent Navy wastewater treatment described the beneficial and risk factors these efforts is found in Current facility at the Pacific Missile Range influencing the subspecies’ viability. Voluntary and Regulatory Conservation Facility also serves to support the Our assessment of viability is Efforts. subspecies as a supporting (albeit categorized into three sequential stages. The primary threats to Hawaiian stilts human-made) wetland. Most wetland During the first stage, we evaluated the are habitat loss and degradation (due to losses in Hawaii have been human subspecies’ life-history needs. The next urban development, ground and surface induced, ranging from water diversions, stage involved an assessment of the water alterations that affect core and discharging fill, building dams, historical and current condition of the supporting wetlands, nonnative plants, channelizing, pumping, grubbing (the subspecies’ demographics and habitat and foreseeable changes in habitat removal of trees, shrubs, stumps, and characteristics, including an quality and quantity due to sea level rise rubbish from a site), grading, deep explanation of how the subspecies (such as groundwater flooding and ripping, and other agricultural or arrived at its current condition. The inundation and coastal flooding and military land use practices (Erickson recent PVA provided a synthesis of this inundation)) (Factor A); nonnative and Puttock 2006, p. 40). information. The third and final stage predators (Factor C); avian disease involved making predictions about the (Factor C); environmental contaminants Many of Hawaii’s wetlands, including subspecies’ responses to positive and (Factor E); and foreseeable tropical core and supporting wetlands occupied negative environmental and cyclone intensity and frequency by Hawaiian stilts, occur in coastal areas anthropogenic influences. Throughout resulting from climate change (Factor E). that are highly valued for development all of these stages, we used the best These threats should be considered in and are becoming increasingly available information to characterize the context of a stable and resilient urbanized. Although the rate of viability as the ability of a subspecies to subspecies indicated from surveys over permanent losses of coastal wetlands sustain populations in the wild over the past several decades, and peer- has significantly been slowed due to time. reviewed studies including past (Reed et wetland protection laws, suitable al. 1998, entire) and most recent (Reed Hawaiian stilt breeding wetland sites Summary of Biological Status and and van Rees 2019, entire) PVA continue to be subject to degradation Threats analyses, and radio telemetry studies effects of adjacent urbanization and In this section, we review the (Kawasaki et al. 2020, p. 431). Below we other incompatible land uses, water biological conditions of the subspecies discuss these threats and their extraction, and diversion. This and its resources, and the threats that relationship to Hawaiian stilt current continuous encroachment raises influence the subspecies’ current and and future condition. concerns regarding human disturbance, future condition, in order to assess the urban runoff impacts on water quality, subspecies’ overall viability and the Habitat Loss and Degradation Due to and an increased incidence of domestic risks to that viability. Urban Development cats and dogs in wildlife areas (Stone The sources cited in this proposed Some of the largest core wetlands 1989, pp. 129–130, 134; Wright et al. rule represent the best scientific and have been lost over the past century. On 2006, pp. 13–60). Further, ongoing commercial data available concerning Oahu, Waikiki, Pearl Harbor, Kaelepulu urbanization could limit or prohibit the the current status of the subspecies, (now Enchanted Lake), and Salt Lake inland movement of coastal wetlands as including the past, present, and future were lost to development, each with areas are inundated with groundwater threats. We used this information to only remnants left behind, some of and marine water resulting from sea evaluate the current and future which, like Waikiki, are no longer able level rise because the ground is resiliency, redundancy, representation, to support the Hawaiian stilt. A small impermeable (Clausen and Clausen and viability of the Hawaiian stilt. (See preserve (Kaelepulu Wetland Preserve, 2014, p. 177).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:19 Mar 24, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM 25MRP1 15866 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 56 / Thursday, March 25, 2021 / Proposed Rules

Ground and Surface Water Alterations stilts (Chang 1990, pp. 65, 71, 73; Morin Sea Level Rise Resulting From Urban Development 1998, p. 27; Wirwa 2007, pp. 86, 91; Global mean sea level (GMSL) is Ground and surface water alterations, Silbernagle 2008, pers. comm. cited in rising and is expected to continue to rise such as flood control and USFWS 2011, p. 80). Further, for centuries due to thermal expansion, channelization, often make wetland invertebrate die-offs from salinity even if all Nations ceased production of habitat less suitable or unusable for changes could trigger a botulism greenhouse gasses today (Meehl et al. Hawaiian stilts by altering both water outbreak (see Avian Disease, below) 2012, p. 576; Golledge et al. 2015, pp. depth and timing of water level (Morin 1998, p. 27). Records of salinity 421, 424; DeConto and Pollard 2016, p. fluctuations. Nearly all surface-water in Hawaii’s wetlands range from 0 parts 591). This is because of the warming features (e.g., streams, lakes, reservoirs, per thousand (ppt) up to 200 ppt (Ueoka that has already occurred. Additionally, wetlands, and estuaries) interact with et al. 1979, p. 6; Coleman 1981, pp. 12, GMLS may rise even more due to ground water (United States Geological 15, 18; Wirwa 2007, p. 91; Nadig 2017, warming that is yet to occur from the Survey (USGS) 1998, p. III). As a result, pers. comm.). Alterations in ground and still uncertain level of future greenhouse withdrawal of water from streams can or surface water could result in gas emissions (National Oceanic deplete ground water. Similarly, complete habitat loss (e.g., Waikiki), as Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) pumping of ground water can deplete mentioned above under Habitat Loss 2017, p. 1). The level of projected rise water in streams, lakes, and wetlands and Modification due to Urban in GMSL is different depending on the (USGS 1998, p. III). Hawaiian stilts are Development. corresponding Representative not always able to adjust their breeding Concentration Pathway (RCP) emissions behavior to accommodate such Habitat Loss and Degradation by scenario (RCP 2.6, 4.5, 6, or 8.5) (van modifications, which results in Nonnative Plants Vuuren et al. 2011, p. 5; decreased reproductive success and Hawaii experiences a year-round Intergovernmental Panel on Climate therefore decreased resiliency. growing season; therefore, management Change 2014, p. 8). The NOAA, along Alternatively, water released after of invasive wetland plants, and with other Federal and academic science institutions, laid out six risk- prolonged diversion can negatively sometimes native plants, must be based GMSL scenarios describing impact habitat for Hawaiian stilts constant (Underwood et al. 2013, p. 1; (Morin 1998, p. 27; Underwood 2017, potential future conditions, with lower Nadig 2017, pers. comm.) to provide pers. comm.). For example, recent and upper bounds of GMSL rise good habitat for the Hawaiian stilt. (2014) water disputes on west Maui between 0.2 and 0.6 m (0.7 and 1.9 ft) Invasive species such as California resulted in less upstream water through 2040 (NOAA 2017, pp. vi–vii, grass, pickleweed, water hyacinth diversion for agriculture, and 1–55 and Appendices A–D). This is (Eichornia crassipes), Indian fleabane subsequently a more-steady stream flow highly relevant to Hawaiian stilt of water into Kealia Pond NWR. This (Pluchea indica), and mangrove conservation because, even at the lowest steady water influx decreased the (Rhizophora mangle) present serious current estimate, substantial habitat may amount of stilt habitat (i.e., mudflats problems in most Hawaiian wetlands by be lost or degraded. and shallow water areas), raising water outcompeting native species and Sea level rise is not expected to be levels so high the NWR had to breech eliminating open water, mudflats, and uniform throughout the world, due to water out into the ocean so the water shallow water areas (Shallenberger factors including, but not limited to: (1) did not get too deep (Underwood 2017, 1977, pp. 154, 184, 238; Griffin 1989, p. Variations in oceanographic factors such pers. comm.). Prior to this surface water 1171; Henry 2006, p. 26). At least one as circulation patterns; (2) changes in alteration, Kealia Pond was a common native plant, aeae (Bacopa monnieri) Earth’s gravitational field and rotation, breeding site for Hawaiian stilts may also need management as it too has and the flexure of the crust and upper (sometimes supporting over 1,000 the potential to smother wetland habitat mantle, due to melting of land-based individuals) (Nishimoto 2006, p. 40; (Nadig 2017, pers. comm.). The ice; and (3) vertical land movement due Nishimoto 2014, p. 1; Underwood 2017, alteration of wetland plant communities to glacial isostatic adjustments, pers. comm.). The shift to deeper, year- due to extensive, blanketing overgrowth sedimentation compaction, groundwater round water has resulted in reduction of of invasive plants can greatly reduce the and fossil fuel withdrawals, and other Hawaiian stilt numbers at Kealia Pond usefulness of wetland areas for native non-climactic factors (Spada et al. 2013, (Underwood 2017, pers. comm.). The waterbirds, including the Hawaiian stilt p. 484; NOAA 2017, pp. vi–vii, 9, 19). natural cycle of seasonal inundation and (Shallenberger 1977, pp. 154, 184, 238; The Hawaiian Islands are expected to evaporation of fresh or brackish water Griffin 1989, p. 1171; Morin 1994, p. 69; receive higher increases in sea level rise mudflats has been altered, resulting in Morin 1998, p. 21; Pacific Rim than the GMSL rise (Spada et al. 2013, a decrease in quality of habitat. More Conservation 2012, p. 6; Jenkins 2016, p. 484; Polhemus 2015, p. 7; NOAA recently, the NWR manager at Kealia in litt.). The establishment of nonnative 2017, p. 9). Further, sea level rise in has increased management practices red mangrove may facilitate the use of Hawaii will not be uniform across the and is starting to see more stilts on the wetlands by introduced cattle egrets and islands due, in part, to vertical land NWR again, although in low numbers the indigenous black-crowned night- motion resulting from the actively (USFWS waterbird hui 2020, pers. heron or aukuu (Nycticorax nycticorax), growing Hawaii Island (Kane 2014, p. 3 comm.). thereby increasing the threat of and references therein; Polhemus 2015, The depletion of freshwater aquifers predation on Hawaiian stilts (Rauzon p. 3). Both marine inundation and also causes saltwater intrusion into and Drigot 2002, p. 240). Efforts to groundwater inundation will contribute coastal groundwater resulting in remove such invasive species are to wetland habitat loss and changes to salinity levels in associated expensive and require ongoing modification, but as sea level rise wetlands. Changes in salinity may alter vegetation management as well as increases beyond 2.4 ft (0.74 m), marine the composition of the vegetation and periodic sweeps for removing seedlings. inundation will be the dominant source invertebrate communities, which Nonnative plant control is a key of inundation (Polhemus 2015, p. 25). subsequently may affect food problem facing wetland managers in the Lastly, sea level rise is not expected to availability at such sites for Hawaiian State of Hawaii (USFWS 2011, p. 80). be a slow, gradual, and linear

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:19 Mar 24, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM 25MRP1 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 56 / Thursday, March 25, 2021 / Proposed Rules 15867

phenomenon; it is anticipated to changing the composition of vegetation the Hawaiian Islands; five of these accelerate and at times be quite rapid in coastal wetlands (Kane et al. 2014, p. caused serious damage to the islands, (Polhemus 2015, pp. 6–7). Sea level rise 1685). This could impact shallow including stilt habitat (Businger 1998, in is of particular concern for conservation foraging and nesting mudflat areas by litt.). Impacts from a tropical cyclone of the Hawaiian stilt because most of allowing invasive, salt-tolerant, can degrade and destroy habitat as well Hawaii’s wetlands are located just emergent vegetation to become as cause direct mortality of eggs and inland of a narrow coastal strand and established which could in turn reduce chicks (e.g., flooding of nests and are dependent upon natural or pumped nesting habitat for the Hawaiian stilt. separation of chicks from parents). groundwater sources to maintain pond However, Hawaiian stilts currently water levels (Kane 2014, p. 7 and occupy core wetlands that are Groundwater Inundation and Flooding references therein). hypersaline (e.g., the Waiawa unit of As sea level rises, the water table will Our assessment of sea level rise and Pearl Harbor NWR). Usually there is a rise simultaneously, eventually rising its effects on Hawaiian stilt wetland freshwater source somewhere near these above the land surface, creating new habitat has been limited to the highly saline wetlands in Hawaii as wetlands and expanding others (Rotzoll foreseeable future. We have assessed the there are many springs scattered across foreseeable future as through the year the islands, even occurring in ocean and Fletcher 2012, p. 477). This will 2040, based that many climate models tidal zone. subsequently change surface drainage, diverge at year 2040, and the medium- Some of the most vulnerable wetlands saturate the soil, and inundate land in term forecast of 0.98 ft (0.3 m) sea level in Hawaii are on the south shore of lower lying areas (Rotzoll and Fletcher rise effects on Hawaiian coastal Molokai. Palaau and Kahanui 2012, p. 447). The rising groundwater wetlands (Kane and Fletcher 2013, wetlands—both supporting wetlands— table will change certain aspects of entire). Availability of climate change may be completely inundated at 1 ft (0.3 spatial configuration and vegetative models for this timeframe and localized m) and 2 to 3 ft (0.6 to 0.9 cm), zonation in some wetlands, and the area is limited. respectively, and Ohiapilo may freshwater resources will degrade in By 2040, marine flooding and similarly be inundated at 2 ft (0.6 m) quality due to the underlying saltwater inundation resulting from sea level rise (Jenkins 2016, in litt.). Even under some intrusion (Polhemus 2015, p. 21 and is anticipated to result in coastal of the most conservative sea level rise references therein). There are also flooding in Hawaii (Kane and Fletcher estimates, a large portion of Molokai’s several reports that note although 2013, pp. 1–33, and Appendix). Marine wetlands may be obliterated. A critical ecogeopmorphic (interactions between flooding and inundation is expected to elevation point is when sea level rise organisms and the development of occur through a combination of storm impacts will rapidly accelerate after a landforms) feedbacks will allow some surge (rising sea level associated with a particular increase of sea level occurs. coastal wetlands to adapt to the lower storm), marine overwash (waves At Kanaha State Wildlife Sanctuary on estimates of sea level rise, they all overtopping sand dunes) and tidal Maui, the critical elevation point is 0.7 predict that more rapid and higher waves (periodic tidal fluctuations ft (0.2 m) and it is predicted to be estimates of sea level rise will likely caused by gravitational pull), intensified exceeded by year 2028 [±25 years] (Kane submerge many wetlands by the year by sea level rise and increases in and Fletcher 2013, p. 18). The critical 2100 (Kirwan et al. 2010, pp. 1–5; tropical storm frequency and intensity elevation point at Kealia Pond NWR Langley et al. 2009, p. 6182). (see Tropical Cyclone Intensity and (Maui) and James Campbell NWR Effects of groundwater flooding may Frequency) (Fletcher et al. 1995, p. 193). (Oahu) is 2 ft (0.6 m) and is predicted have already begun at Kealia Pond NWR This wave action can change coastal ± to be exceeded by year 2066 [ 16 years] and wetlands with similar geomorphology, increasing the flooding (Kane and Fletcher 2013, p. 18). As on characteristics (Kane 2014, p. 13). The risks of the coastal floodplain Molokai, even the more conservative net effect, or expected rate of change, on (Theuerkauf et al. 2014, p. 5146) and estimates of sea level rise place these the narrow band of habitat suitable for low-island overwash (Hoeke et al. 2013, wetlands at risk. p. 137). In coastal wetlands with no Hawaiian stilt has not been specifically significant barrier from the ocean, Tropical Cyclone Intensity and analyzed and remains unclear. More marine inundation is expected to have Frequency research needs to be conducted to better a greater effect on Hawaiian stilt habitat Tropical cyclone frequency and understand how much wetland losses than groundwater inundation by intensity are projected to change as a and gains we can anticipate in Hawaii approximately 2040 (Kane and Fletcher result of increasing temperature and due to sea level rise, as well as the 2013, p. 16; Jenkins 2016, in litt.). changing circulation associated with impacts on the Hawaiian stilt and other Marine overwash poses a substantial climate change (Vecchi and Soden 2007, Hawaiian waterbirds, and wetland threat to Hawaiian stilt reproduction. pp. 1068–1069, Figures 2 and 3; ecosystems in general. Some actively Flooding from marine overwash during Emanuel et al. 2008, p. 360, Figure 8; Yu managed wetlands, such as NWR units the breeding season (February thru July) et al. 2010, p. 1371, Figure 14). A in Hawaii, will have some management will destroy nests with eggs (Coleman projected shift in the path of the flexibility to provide both foraging and 1981, p. 57), although Hawaiian stilts subtropical jet stream northward, away breeding habitat for Hawaiian stilts at have been observed re-nesting if nest from Hawaii, will increase the number least during the early signs of failure occurs early in the breeding of storms reaching the Hawaiian Islands groundwater inundation. However, as season (Coleman 1981, p. 59; Browning from an easterly direction similar to marine flooding and inundation 2020, in litt.). If re-nesting did not occur Hurricane Iselle in 2014 (Murakami et exacerbates this threat, NWR units may over many years at wetlands on Kauai, al. 2013, p. 751). This shift may result run out of land area to meet the needs Oahu, and Maui, the resilience and in extreme rainfall events and of the subspecies. Other core and redundancy of this subspecies (Reed et associated flooding impacts to core and supporting wetland managers may not al. 2007, p. 616) would decrease due to supporting wetland sites located on the be able to manage for adaptation as lack of natural recruitment. northern and eastern shores of the readily due to lack of funding or Marine flooding and inundation also affected islands. Between 1950 and support, or they may too find there is no will cause an increase in salinity levels, 1997, 22 hurricanes passed near or over land left for which to manage.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:19 Mar 24, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM 25MRP1 15868 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 56 / Thursday, March 25, 2021 / Proposed Rules

Although the upslope expansion or Eijzenga 2004, in litt.; K. Viernes pers. p. 183). Analysis of data collected over creation of new wetlands from comm. 1994, in Service 2011, p. 58). two nesting seasons across Oahu groundwater and marine flooding and Mongooses were first introduced to revealed hatching success (number of inundation (ecogeomorphic feedback) the island of Hawaii in 1883, and nests that produced at least one chick could help to counteract at least some subsequently to Oahu, Maui, and per number of total nests) averaged habitat losses from sea level rise, many Molokai. They do not seem to have between 40 and 60 percent across of these sites would be outside of established on Kauai, although sightings wetlands, with predation at 65 percent current landownership as well as continue to be reported (Phillips and of all nest failures (Harmon 2020, in predator control programs on current Lucey 2016, pp. 1–23). Mongoose have litt.). All data used in this analysis were core or supporting wetlands. To take become a serious threat to Hawaiian collected in wetlands that actively trap advantage of these changes, State and stilts where they occur, taking eggs, and remove introduced predators, thus Federal agencies would need to commit young birds, and nesting adults. Feral predation is expected to be higher and potentially increase funding to cats became established in Hawaii without predator removal. Managed adjust predator control programs at shortly after European contact and were wetlands using mammal exclusion newly created or expanded core and common in Oahu forests as early as fences (e.g., Honouliuli Unit of Pearl supporting wetlands, and perhaps 1892 (Tomich 1986, pp. 101–102). Feral Harbor NWR) result in a greater number acquire new lands; historically, predator cats range from sea level to at least 2,900 of eggs laid per nest and a greater control funding has not always been m (9,500 ft) on Hawaii Island (Hu et al. number of eggs hatched per nest than consistent (Nadig 2018, pers. comm.). 2001, p. 236) and 3,055 m (10,000 ft) on managed wetlands that rely solely on Additionally, urban development Maui (Hodges and Nagata 2001, pp. 308, mammalian trapping methods (e.g., directly adjacent to coastal wetlands, or 312). The proliferation of feral cat Waiawa Unit of Pearl Harbor NWR and surrounding wetlands as is the situation feeding stations near parks and other most other managed wetlands in at Kanaha Pond State Wildlife areas that support Hawaiian stilts Hawaii) (Price 2020, p. 7; Christensen Sanctuary, will limit or prohibit such contributes toward the predation. Cats 2020, in litt. in Harmon 2020, in litt.). wetlands from a natural landward have been observed taking adult Notably, nearly as many nests were migration or ecogeomorphic shift (Kane Hawaiian waterbirds (including abandoned as were depredated in this 2014, p. 29). Hawaiian stilts) and are presumed to study. Cause of abandonment is often Because Hawaiian stilts compete for take chicks as well (Dibben-Young 2017, difficult to determine as there are brood territories and nesting ground in in litt.). Rats are known to prey on eggs several potential causes: Presence or mudflats and shallow water, reduction and young Hawaiian stilts (Underwood harassment from predators, competition of this habitat may have negative et al. 2014, pp. 32, 37). Other introduced between Hawaiian stilts, poor egg impacts on the population, specifically species, such as the cattle egret, development, undetected flooding, and reduced resiliency, redundancy, bullfrog, and barn owl, are known to human disturbance (Price 2020, p. 19). representation, and therefore reduced prey on Hawaiian waterbirds. The viability. Hawaiian stilts that are forced introduced bullfrog is considered a Predator control programs continue to to use nest sites and brood-rearing voracious predator of all small animals be implemented in most core wetland habitat outside predator control areas (Berger 1981, p. 86; Viernes 1995 cited areas (See Recovery Criteria and Table are likely to suffer higher mortality in Adams and Pearl 2007, p. 680; 1); the resulting level of reproductive (Price 2020, p. 10). Robinson et al. 1999, p. 13; Eijzenga success, has been sufficient to support 2004, in litt.). Underwood and stable to increasing population indices Predation Letchworth (2016, pp. 380–383) over several decades. Improvements in Predation by nonnative animals is one hypothesize that improving bullfrog predator control continue to be of the greatest threats influencing the trapping will result in the improved implemented (e.g., predator-proof overall viability of the Hawaiian stilt survival of waterbird chicks. Cattle fencing at the Honouliuli Unit of Pearl (USFWS 2011, p. v; Underwood et al. egrets play an unquantified role as a Harbor NWR). New trapping 2013, pp. 1–2; Underwood et al. 2014, predator of nestling birds. Nonnative technologies are also being pp. 32–38; Price 2020, p. 1; Harmon cats, rats, mongooses, dogs, and, to a implemented (e.g., automatic self- 2020, in litt.). Introduced predators have lesser extent, pigs, barn owls, cattle resetting traps such as Goodnature A–24 negatively influenced the overall egrets, predatory fish and bullfrogs all devices). Because this technology is less viability of the Hawaiian stilt since the directly depredate either eggs, young, or labor-intensive to implement, effective mid-1800s (Griffin et al. 1989, pp. 1165– adult Hawaiian waterbirds (Underwood trapping areas can be increased so that 1174). Birds in the Hawaiian Islands et al. 2013, p. 1). predator populations can be reduced evolved in the absence of mammalian The effect of predation on over broader areas. As previously predators and are consequently highly reproductive success is a known point summarized above, ongoing vulnerable to these introduced animals. of vulnerability for viability of Hawaiian management and predation control Predators of Hawaiian stilts include stilt populations and if unmanaged programs need to continue into the both introduced and native animals, could result in rangewide population foreseeable future. For core and including mongooses (Herpestes declines. Predator control programs in supporting wetlands under federal or javanicus), black rats (Rattus rattus), wetlands result in higher fledgling state control, we expect these efforts to feral cats (Felis catus), feral dogs (Canis success rates and overall population continue so long as supporting budgets lupus familiaris), black-crowned night densities of Hawaiian stilts (Underwood are funded at current levels. This effort herons or aukuu (Nycticorax et al. 2014, p. 35). Without active has currently resulted in a stable or nycticorax), cattle egrets (Bubulcus ibis), predator control, survival is expected to slightly increasing population to the Hawaiian short-eared owl or pueo (Asio be lower, particularly in the hatch-year point at which it is approaching flammeus sandwichensis), barn owls class (Reed et al. 2015, p. 183). Some population equilibrium under current (Tyto alba), common mynas predation of hatch-year individuals management practices (See Recovery (Acridotheres tristis), and bullfrogs continues to occur even where extensive Criteria discussion above). Continuation (Anas wyvilliana) (Coleman 1981, pp. predator control programs are in effect of, and expansion of, these predator 70–73; Robinson et al. 1999, p. 13; (Coleman 1981, p. 89; Reed et. al. 2015, control and habitat management actions

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:19 Mar 24, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM 25MRP1 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 56 / Thursday, March 25, 2021 / Proposed Rules 15869

will further the stability (and expansion) point source pollution from septic outbreak events (Rocke and Samual of the conservation-reliant Hawaiian wastewater, agricultural runoff, roads, 1999, pp. 1250, 1255–1256). However, stilt population and its ability to and contaminated storm water can Hawaiian stilts have demonstrated withstand stochastic (i.e., resiliency) overwhelm the filtering capacity of strong resilience and adaptability, as and catastrophic (i.e., redundancy) wetlands, including wetlands in Hawaii, long as active management of predators, events, as well as maintain its impacting downstream coastal waters vegetation, and water levels give them a widespread distribution on multiple (DeCarlo and Anthony 2002, p. 490; safe place with suitable habitat to meet islands (i.e., representation) and Zhang and Zhang 2011, entire; DOFAW their needs for breeding, foraging, and therefore its long-term viability. 2015, in litt.; Einoder et al. 2018, p. 102; sheltering. More wetlands are being van Reese 2018, p. 38). Additionally, fenced to exclude predators and most Avian Disease two featherless chicks have been found core wetlands are managed to some Avian botulism is the most prevalent at Marine Corp Base Hawaii, one each extent to meet the needs of Hawaiian disease affecting waterbirds in Hawaii, in the 2018–2019 and 2019–2020 stilts (see Recovery Criteria). including Hawaiian stilts, and has been nesting seasons, the latter of which is Management is the influencing factor documented at two dozen or more undergoing a toxicology analysis (DOD that counters all of the above influence wetlands (including many core and 2017, entire; Fry 2020, pers. comm.). factors, easing the burden of predation, supporting wetlands) across the State Several core wetlands are on or adjacent habitat loss and modification, and (Dibben-Young 2016, p. 4; USFWS 2016, to military installations and airports disease. Continuing the current level of in litt.). Some wetlands have more which further increase the risk of habitat management and predation recurrence than others (e.g., Kauai: contaminants (Fry 2020, pers. comm.). control efforts has resulted in a largely Hanalei NWR; Oahu: James Campbell Contaminants in wetlands can enter the stable population to a point at which the NWR, Kaelepulu Pond, Kawainui diet of waterbirds, resulting in subspecies may have reached an Marsh; Maui: Kanaha Pond State accumulation of toxins (Ratner 2000, equilibrium population size (the Wildlife Sanctuary, Kealia Pond NWR; entire; Einoder et al. 2018, p. 103). In number of birds the existing habitat can Molokai: Ohiapilo Pond) (Dibben-Young Switzerland, polychlorinated biphenyls support) (See Recovery Criteria 2016, p. 4). Since December 2011, have been detected in waterbirds at discussion above). Expansion of Hanalei NWR has experienced year- levels within the range that could result management on additional acreage and round avian botulism type C and has in reproductive impairment at additional locations should create reported deaths of Hawaiian stilts from (Zimmerman et al. 1997, p. 1379). Due enhanced stability (and expansion of) of this disease (USFWS 2016, in litt.). to ocean current patterns and Hawaii’s the Hawaiian stilt population Avian botulism is caused by a toxin location in the Pacific Ocean, Hawaii rangewide. Further, expansion and produced by the anaerobic bacteria receives an enormous amount of plastic continuation of these essential actions Clostridium botulinum type C in marine debris each year. This debris not will allow the subspecies to withstand stagnant water. The disease may only impacts Hawaii’s beaches, but also stochastic (i.e., resiliency) and reappear annually and can affect all pollutes Hawaii’s coastal wetlands. At catastrophic (i.e., redundancy) events, native and migratory waterbirds, this time, we know of no contaminant as well as maintain its widespread causing paralysis evidenced by surveys being conducted in Hawaii distribution on multiple islands (i.e., staggering and the eventual loss of use wetlands or specific information about representation) and therefore its long- of legs. Death is likely due to respiratory contaminant effects on the Hawaiian term viability. failure or drowning from the inability to stilt; however, because Hawaiian stilts Current Voluntary and Regulatory hold their head above water. eat fish and aquatic invertebrates, they Conservation Efforts Botulism is an ongoing issue for are particularly at risk from elevated mortality risk, and we have no specific concentrations of contaminants that The recovery of Hawaiian stilt data or information suggesting the accumulate in streams around Hawaii, requires strong partnerships among degree of threat will change in the many of which are tributaries to Federal, State, local, and private groups. future. Procedures have been developed Hawaii’s coastal wetlands (Brasher and The State of Hawaii and the Department for response to botulism outbreaks Wolff 2007, p. 284). of Defense have been important partners through Hawaii’s State Wildlife Action with the NWRs’ efforts to protect, Plan, in coordination with the DOFAW, Cumulative Threats Analysis manage, and conserve the significant wildlife centers, and veterinarians. The Hawaiian stilt is threatened by wetland habitats and to support Improvements in response to outbreaks ongoing predation, combined with loss Hawaiian stilt populations over the last may benefit in reducing mortality rates, or degradation of habitat resulting from 30 years. The U.S. Marine Corps Base— as quick carcass disposal is essential to urban development, ground and surface Hawaii has worked to maintain contain the diseases’ spread. This threat water alterations associated with urban Hawaiian stilt habitat on its properties remains persistent and rangewide. development, nonnative plants, and and facilitated events that promote flooding and inundation of habitat Hawaiian stilt conservation and involve Environmental Contaminants resulting from sea level rise. Threats both the public and military personnel. Many wetlands in Hawaii are adjacent such as botulism and environmental Their overall goal is to contribute to to urban development (Kane 2014, p. contaminants are also rangewide and regional recovery efforts of the Hawaiian 29). This proximity results in potential persistent. Torrential rains associated stilt, with a view to building regional for the Hawaiian stilt to be exposed to with increases in hurricane frequency partnerships and strengthening the contaminants from storm drains and and intensity will increase urban runoff Hawaiian stilt population outside of the roadside ditches that empty into of oil, heavy metals, and other core habitat on the Marine Corps Base. streams, wetlands, and the ocean (Stone undesirable chemicals into Hawaii’s The Navy’s Pacific Missile Range 1989, p. 132; Wright et al. 2006, pp. 13– lowland coastal wetlands. Similarly, Facility on Kauai has committed to 60). Some wetlands used as flood torrential rain will increase habitat restoration and management control basins, such as Kawai Nui sedimentation which, among other actions in important nearby wetland marsh, are expected to accumulate factors (increased temperature, pH, and habitat in proximity to actions involving contaminants from urban runoff. Non- salinity), is linked to increased botulism military readiness associated with

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:19 Mar 24, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM 25MRP1 15870 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 56 / Thursday, March 25, 2021 / Proposed Rules

implementation of their Integrated In addition to these federal and state complex was purchased by IES Natural Resources Management Plans regulatory programs, a variety of Downstream, LLC (IES), and in 2018, and associated section 7 biological voluntary conservation partnerships IES sold a portion of the refinery to PAR opinions. Several wastewater treatment have been formed to protect and manage Hawaii Refining, LLC (PAR). Rowland’s facilities across the islands conduct waterbird habitat. Examples of such pond remains within the IES owned predator control to protect nesting partnership opportunities include our portion of the refinery but IES has not Hawaiian stilts and adults with chicks. Pacific Coast Joint Venture, Partners for yet reached out to the Service for Local and county governments also Fish and Wildlife Program, Coastal consultation. The Service is currently contribute to conservation actions. Program, and Habitat Conservation Plan providing technical assistance to PAR, Additionally, several academic and Safe Harbor Agreement Programs; who is currently seeking a Habitat researchers continue to produce data the multiagency Coastal America Conservation Plan for a low level of that help guide management actions and program; restoration plans for hazardous take. There are no recent updates inform policy. materials spills that target waterbird regarding the status of the Hawaiian In addition to the protections afforded habitat; and the Natural Resources stilts at this site. by the Endangered Species Act, the Conservation Service’s wetland Hawaiian stilt is protected under a restoration programs. Partnerships aim The Service has also worked with a variety of other laws, including the to encourage landowners and private variety of partners implementing Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). The citizens to protect and preserve management techniques that benefit MBTA (16 U.S.C. 703–712, 50 CFR waterbirds and their habitats through Hawaiian stilts throughout its range. 10.13), is a domestic law that cooperative agreements and funding for Habitat management activities for the implements the U.S. commitment to habitat restoration and creation. conservation of the Hawaiian stilt four international conventions (with Additional conservation organizations include activities that maintain suitable Canada, Japan, Mexico, and Russia) for are contributing to the recovery of habitat conditions. These include the protection of shared migratory bird Hawaii’s endangered waterbirds, vegetation management activities (for resources. including the Hawaiian stilt. The Nature example, weeding, mowing, herbicide The Hawaii Endangered Species law Conservancy manages several ecological application, out-planting of native (Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) 195D) preserves in the State. Ahahui Malama plants, mud flat creation), activities that prohibits take, possession, sale, I Ka Lokahi and Kawai Nui Heritage maintain water levels suitable for transport, or commerce in designated Foundation are watchdog organizations breeding or that maintain water quality species. This State law also recognizes that oversee the future of Kawainui (for example, irrigating wetland habitat as endangered or threatened those Marsh on Oahu. They sponsor and lead for conservation purposes), activities for species determined to be endangered or educational tours and coordinate plant minimizing disease outbreaks (for threatened pursuant to the Federal restoration projects at Na Pohaku o example, monitoring for and addressing Endangered Species Act. This Hawaii Hauwahine. The Nature Center, Wildlife dead or decaying animals, emergency law states that a threatened species Society, and University of Hawaii’s botulism outbreak responses), and large- (under the Act) or an indigenous species Pacific Cooperative Studies Unit all scale restoration of native habitat (e.g., may be determined to be an endangered work on waterbird recovery issues. feral ungulate, rat, and mongoose, species under State law. Protection of Private landowners that also contribute control, and fencing). these species is under the authority of to waterbird recovery include Hawaii’s DLNR, and under Kamehameha Schools, Midler Family Determination of Hawaiian Stilt Status administrative rule (Hawaii Trust, Arleone Dibben-Young (Nene O Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) Administrative Rules (HAR) 13–124– Molokai), and Kaelepulu Wetland and its implementing regulations (50 11). Incidental take of threatened and Preserve. Additionally, Ducks CFR part 424) set forth the procedures endangered species may be authorized Unlimited, a nonprofit wetlands for determining whether a species meets through the issuance of a temporary conservation organization, works the definition of an ‘‘endangered license as part of a safe harbor cooperatively with State and Federal species’’ or a ‘‘threatened species.’’ The agreement (SHA) or habitat conservation agencies as well as with private plan (HCP) (HRS 195D–21, HCPs; 195D– landowners and local corporations on Act defines endangered species as a 22, SHAs). Although this State law can wetlands conservation and habitat species that is ‘‘in danger of extinction address threats such as habitat restoration and protection efforts. throughout all or a significant portion of modification, collisions, and other The Service also facilitates recovery its range,’’ and a threatened species as human-caused mortality through HCPs implementation, including a a species that is ‘‘likely to become an that address the effects of individual cooperative agreement with Chevron endangered species within the projects or programs on Hawaiian stilt, Refinery on Oahu during 1993–2004 foreseeable future throughout all or a it does not address the pervasive threats that implemented terms to manage significant portion of its range.’’ The Act to the Hawaiian stilt posed by Rowland’s Pond to maintain it as requires that we determine whether a introduced mammalian predators. nesting habitat for Hawaiian stilts. species meets the definition of The federal Clean Water Act (CWA) Activities included predator control and ‘‘endangered species’’ or ‘‘threatened (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq. (1972)) was vegetation management at Rowland’s species’’ because of any of the following designed, in part, to protect surface Pond, the Impounding Basin, and factors: (A) The present or threatened waters of the United States from Oxidation Ponds. From 2004 through destruction, modification, or unregulated pollution from point 2016, Chevron Refinery continued to curtailment of its habitat or range; (B) sources. The CWA provides some manage the refinery grounds for the Overutilization for commercial, benefit to Hawaiian stilts through the benefit of the Hawaiian stilt and recreational, scientific, or educational regulation of discharge into surface Hawaiian coot under a Safe Harbor purposes; (C) Disease or predation; (D) waters through a permitting process. Agreement. As a result of this The inadequacy of existing regulatory The CWA has significantly slowed the agreement, at least 419 Hawaiian stilt mechanisms; or (E) Other natural or permanent loss of wetlands throughout chicks fledged at Chevron Refinery manmade factors affecting its continued Hawaii. Hawaii during this period. In 2016, the existence.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:19 Mar 24, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM 25MRP1 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 56 / Thursday, March 25, 2021 / Proposed Rules 15871

Status Throughout All of Its Range breeding habitat. Expansion of current Despite these ongoing threats, the We have carefully assessed the best wetlands and newly created wetlands Hawaiian stilt population is stable to scientific and commercial information from rising groundwater will create increasing population (Reed et al. available regarding the past, present, some new shallow water and mudflat 2011b, pp. 475–476, 478–479; USFWS and future threats to the Hawaiian stilt areas for foraging and breeding; 2011a, p. iv; DOFAW 2020). We and its habitat. After evaluating threats however, currently existing shallow conclude that the Hawaiian stilt to the subspecies and assessing the water and mudflat areas will also be population has maintained resiliency, cumulative effect of the threats under flooded (Rotzoll and Fletcher 2012, p. redundancy, and representation over the the section 4(a)(1) factors, we have 477). Coastal plain wetlands are also at past few decades. Having multiple concluded that threats identified in the risk of marine flooding and inundation breeding populations spread out across earlier 5-year status review (USFWS by storm surges, marine overwash, and the main Hawaiian Islands affords the subspecies some protection from both 2010, entire) and the recovery plan high tides due to coastal erosion from stochastic and catastrophic events. (USFWS 2011, entire) are ongoing at rising sea levels that elevate normal Additionally, the subspecies will similar to increasing levels (USFWS tides (Fletcher et al. 1995, p. 203). continue to be monitored in the 2020, p. 20). The main threats to the Inundation can cause mortality to eggs biannual waterbird count, as well as at Hawaiian stilt continue to be the loss and chicks, with impacts that vary numerous NWRs across the State, to and degradation of habitat, including temporally and spatially (Peakall 1970, detect any changes that reflect a change urban development, alteration in ground p. 73; Staples et al. 2005, p. 1910; in the current status of the subspecies. and surface water associated with urban Holmes and York 2003, p. 1795; Miles The current status of the subspecies has development, invasion of habitat by et al. 2015, p. 1). Creation of new or improved from the time of listing. nonnative plants, and sea level rise expansion of existing wetlands due to marine flooding and inundation may Considering the best available (Factor A); predation by a variety of information, including the stability of introduced mammalian species (Factor also change the salinity in wetlands which may encourage the expansion of the population demonstrated over C); and botulism (Factor C). decades, the new data presented in the Environmental contaminants are also salt tolerant nonnative plants on mudflats. Increased vegetation on preliminary 2019 PVA, and the considered a rangewide threat (Factor demonstrated adaptability and E). A variety of voluntary and regulatory mudflats can reduce available Hawaiian stilt nesting habitat. Marine inundation resiliency of the subspecies, in conservation measures have helped to combination with the expectation that limit or reduce the impact of these and groundwater inundation will modify wetland habitat, but whether existing conservation actions at their threats to the subspecies, and are present scope and intensity will anticipated to continue into the there will be a net gain or loss of habitat is unknown (Polhemus 2015, p. 25). continue into the foreseeable future, we foreseeable future (Factor D). A conclude that the subspecies no longer summary of these efforts are outlined in Increases in foraging and breeding habitat from expanding or newly created meets the Act’s definition of an Current Voluntary and Regulatory endangered species throughout all of its Conservation Efforts, above. The best wetlands could offset losses from sea level rise; however, this may occur range. Therefore, we proceed with available information does not suggest determining whether the Hawaiian stilt that collection of Hawaiian stilt is a outside of the area of current predator control programs (Factor C). State and is likely to become endangered within current or future concern (Factor B) and the foreseeable future throughout all of Federal land managers may need to no other natural or manmade factors its range. adjust existing programs and/or acquire that operate at a scope, magnitude, and To determine if a species is intensity as to affect the viability of the lands in order to effectively support considered a threatened species under subspecies, either currently or in the Hawaiian stilt habitat in the new areas. the Act, we look to future threats facing future (Factor E). Avian botulism (Factor C) continues the species and how the species will The three key aspects of successful to be documented at wetlands Statewide likely respond to those threats. The management of Hawaiian stilt breeding as a cause of mortality events in foreseeable future considers population populations are predator control, Hawaiian stilt and other waterbird and status, trends, and threats for the vegetation management to provide more waterfowl species (Dibben-Young 2016, species. Collective management efforts open areas, and water-level controls. pp. 4–5). Environmental contaminants aimed at the subspecies for the These actions are in place for the vast (Factor E) may also be a threat to conservation of Hawaiian stilt have been majority of the core wetlands (see Hawaiian stilts using wetland habitats sufficient to maintain a stable Recovery Criteria and Table 1). Further, near urban areas. population, and it appears that the 15 of the 34 supporting wetlands are in As previously stated, the Hawaiian subspecies is at or near carrying protected status, and 11 have some form stilt is a conservation-reliant subspecies capacity—limited primarily by amount of either habitat or predator (Reed et al. 2012, p. 888; Underwood et of managed wetland habitat as this is a management (see Recovery Criteria and al. 2013, p. 1), which means that it will conservation-reliant subspecies. Table 2). require active management in perpetuity Hawaiian stilts continue to face Based on predictions of groundwater (Scott et al. 2005, pp. 383–389; Scott et significant ongoing threats, as discussed and coastal flooding and inundation in al. 2010, pp. 92–93: Goble et al. 2012, under Summary of Biological Status and Hawaiian coastal wetlands, sea level pp. 869–872). Management actions Threats. The threat of predation of rise is likely to continue to progressively aimed at reducing or eliminating Hawaiian stilt eggs, chicks, and adults affect Hawaiian stilt habitat (Factor A), predators and control of both vegetation by a myriad of animals is ongoing, as by 2040, wetlands that exist at and water levels occurs in the majority despite implementation of predator elevations near sea level without dune of the core wetlands. Sea level rise due control at most core wetlands and many barriers may be most affected (Kane and to climate change adds a high degree of supporting wetlands (Tables 1 and 2). Fletcher 2013, p. 10). The resulting uncertainty to the net gain or loss of Impacts of sea level rise are expected to groundwater and marine flooding and foraging and breeding habitat, which progressively increase, resulting in inundation can change the amount of will likely challenge current moderate impacts on coastal habitat by available Hawaiian stilt foraging and management strategies. 2040. Pressure to alter ground and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:19 Mar 24, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM 25MRP1 15872 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 56 / Thursday, March 25, 2021 / Proposed Rules

surface water continues with ongoing the Act’s definition of a threatened basis for determining that the urban development. Although the species). subspecies is in danger of extinction in preliminary results from a 2019 PVA a significant portion of its range, and we Status Throughout a Significant Portion predict a zero percent chance of determine that the subspecies is likely of Its Range extinction over 80 years as long as to become in danger of extinction current management practices continue, Under the Act and our implementing within the foreseeable future throughout it also notes that the population is regulations, a species may warrant all of its range. Our analysis is sensitive to changes in vital rates. For listing if it is in danger of extinction or consistent with the courts’ holdings in example, if adult mortality increases by likely to become so in the foreseeable Desert Survivors v. Department of the just 10 percent, the species has a high future throughout all or a significant Interior, No. 16–cv–01165–JCS, 2018 probability of extinction (Reed and van portion of its range. The court in Center WL 4053447 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 24, 2018), Rees 2019 p. 1). Thus, the best available for Biological Diversity v. Everson, 2020 and Center for Biological Diversity v. information is consistent with these WL 437289 (D.D.C. Jan. 28, 2020) Jewell, 248 F. Supp. 3d, 946, 959 (D. threats (excluding sea-level rise) having (Center for Biological Diversity), vacated Ariz. 2017). been managed sufficiently over the past the aspect of the 2014 Significant several decades such that reproductive Portion of its Range Policy that provided Determination of Status success in managed sites supports a that the Services do not undertake an Our review of the best available stable Statewide population, so that the analysis of significant portions of a scientific and commercial information subspecies is not immediately in danger species’ range if the species warrants indicates that the Hawaiian stilt meets of extinction. The PVA does have listing as threatened throughout all of its the definition of a threatened several limitations that suggests this is range. Therefore, we proceed to subspecies. Therefore, we propose to only one tool for us to consider evaluating whether the species is reclassify the Hawaiian stilt as a reclassification. Foremost is that the endangered in a significant portion of its threatened subspecies in accordance PVA does not account for changes in range—that is, whether there is any with sections 3(20) and 4(a)(1) of the quality or availability of currently portion of the species’ range for which Act. managed habitat due to the effects of sea both (1) the portion is significant; and level rise. (2) the species is in danger of extinction Proposed Rule Issued Under Section The Hawaiian stilt remains vulnerable in that portion. Depending on the case, 4(d) of the Act to the continuing threat of predation it might be more efficient for us to Background and habitat loss and degradation by address the ‘‘significance’’ question or several means, and maintaining current the ‘‘status’’ question first. We can Section 4(d) of the Act contains two population levels (and viability) is choose to address either question first. sentences. The first sentence states that contingent upon ongoing commitment Regardless of which question we the ‘‘Secretary shall issue such to management of wetland habitat and address first, if we reach a negative regulations as he deems necessary and predators at their present scope and answer with respect to the first question advisable to provide for the intensity. In particular, the demographic that we address, we do not need to conservation’’ of species listed as data used to provide working evaluate the other question for that threatened. The U.S. Supreme Court has assumptions of the preliminary results portion of the species’ range. noted that statutory language like of the 2019 PVA derives from studies on Following the court’s holding in ‘‘necessary and advisable’’ demonstrates sites with active habitat and predator Center for Biological Diversity, we now a large degree of deference to the agency management, so reducing management consider whether there are any (see Webster v. Doe, 486 U.S. 592 efforts would render its conclusions less significant portions of the subspecies’ (1988)). Conservation is defined in the applicable; risk of extinction appears range where the subspecies is in danger Act to mean ‘‘the use of all methods and particularly sensitive to increases in of extinction now (i.e., endangered). In procedures which are necessary to bring adult mortality (Reed and van Rees 2019 undertaking this analysis for Hawaiian any endangered species or threatened p. 24). Sustained management stilt, we choose to address the status species to the point at which the commitments are necessary to keep question first—we consider information measures provided pursuant to [the Act] these vital rates at manageable levels pertaining to the geographic distribution are no longer necessary.’’ Additionally, (e.g., below 34 percent annual adult of both the subspecies and the threats the second sentence of section 4(d) of mortality). Expansion of existing efforts that the subspecies faces to identify any the Act states that the Secretary ‘‘may by on current core and supporting portions of the range where the regulation prohibit with respect to any wetlands and expansion of the habitat subspecies is endangered. threatened species any act prohibited and predator management onto new Based upon best available under section 9(a)(1), in the case of fish sites (other core, other supporting information, Hawaiian stilts disperse or wildlife, or section 9(a)(2), in the case wetlands or other suitable locations) frequently between the main Hawaiian of plants.’’ Thus, the combination of the would greatly enhance the recovery Islands and they readily colonize newly two sentences of section 4(d) provides potential of this subspecies. restored or created habitats suggesting the Secretary with wide latitude of The threat of sea level rise is also that Hawaiian stilt in Hawaii form one discretion to select and promulgate likely to increase over time and can be large population (van Rees et al.. 2020, appropriate regulations tailored to the expected to alter the spatial distribution p. 3, with supporting literature). Thus, specific conservation needs of the and quality of wetland habitats and there is no biologically meaningful way threatened species. The second sentence require adaptive changes in which sites to break this subspecies’ range into grants particularly broad discretion to will be the focus of management. Thus, portions, and the threats that the us when adopting the prohibitions after assessing the best available subspecies faces affect the subspecies under section 9. information, we conclude that the throughout its entire range. This means The courts have recognized the extent Hawaiian stilt is not currently in danger that no portions of the subspecies’ range of the Secretary’s discretion under this of extinction, but is likely to become in have a different status from its standard to develop rules that are danger of extinction in the foreseeable rangewide status. Therefore, no portion appropriate for the conservation of a throughout all of its range (i.e., meets of the subspecies’ range can provide a species. For example, courts have

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:19 Mar 24, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM 25MRP1 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 56 / Thursday, March 25, 2021 / Proposed Rules 15873

upheld rules developed under section The provisions of this proposed 4(d) impacts, intentionally or incidentally. 4(d) as a valid exercise of agency rule would promote conservation of the Regulating incidental and intentional authority where they prohibit take of Hawaiian stilt by encouraging activities take will help preserve the Hawaiian threatened wildlife or include a limited that facilitate conservation and stilt population and decrease taking prohibition (see Alsea Valley management of the Hawaiian stilt and synergistic, negative effects from other Alliance v. Lautenbacher, 2007 U.S. its habitat where it currently occurs and threats. Dist. Lexis 60203 (D. Or. 2007); may occur in the future. Thus, we are Rangewide threats continue to act on Washington Environmental Council v. encouraging management of the the subspecies, and its viability remains National Marine Fisheries Service, 2002 landscape in ways that meet both land reliant on the implementation of U.S. Dist. Lexis 5432 (W.D. Wash. management considerations and the conservation actions (see Summary of 2002)). Courts have also upheld 4(d) conservation needs of the Hawaiian Biological Status and Threats). rules that do not address all of the stilt. The provisions of this proposed However, as explained below, there are threats a species faces (see State of rule are one of many tools that we a few circumstances in which allowing Louisiana v. Verity, 853 F.2d 322 (5th would use to promote the conservation either intentional or incidental take will Cir. 1988)). As noted in the legislative of the Hawaiian stilt. This proposed 4(d) benefit the Hawaiian stilt as a history when the Act was initially rule would apply only if and when we subspecies and further its recovery. We enacted, ‘‘once an animal is on the make final the reclassification of the have outlined three circumstances threatened list, the Secretary has an Hawaiian stilt as a threatened below as proposed exceptions to the almost infinite number of options subspecies. proposed prohibition of take. By allowing take under these three available to him with regard to the Provisions of the Proposed 4(d) Rule permitted activities for those species. He circumstances, the proposed rule would may, for example, permit taking, but not This proposed 4(d) rule would provide needed protection to the importation of such species, or he may provide for the conservation of the subspecies while allowing management choose to forbid both taking and Hawaiian stilt by prohibiting the flexibility to benefit the subspecies’ importation but allow the transportation following activities, except as otherwise long-term conservation. authorized or permitted: Take (i.e., of such species’’ (H.R. Rep. No. 412, Proposed Take Exceptions 93rd Cong., 1st Sess. 1973). harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or 1. Take that is incidental to Exercising this authority under attempt to engage in any such conduct); conducting lawful nonnative predator section 4(d), we have developed a importing or exporting; possession and control or conducting lawful habitat proposed rule that is designed to other acts with unlawfully taken management activities (from a Service address the specific threats to and specimens; delivering, receiving, and DOFAW-approved list of such conservation needs of the Hawaiian transporting, or shipping in interstate or activities) for the conservation benefit of stilt. Although the statute does not foreign commerce in the course of Hawaiian stilts or other native require us to make a ‘‘necessary and commercial activity; or selling or waterbirds. advisable’’ finding with respect to the offering for sale in interstate or foreign Rationale: Control of introduced adoption of specific prohibitions under commerce. These prohibitions would predators and habitat management are section 9, we find that this proposed result in regulating a range of human identified as primary recovery actions rule as a whole satisfies the requirement activities that have the potential to for the Hawaiian stilt (USFWS 2011, p. in section 4(d) of the Act to issue affect the viability of the Hawaiian stilt, 10). Predation is the greatest threat to regulations deemed necessary and including agricultural or urban Hawaiian stilts, followed by habitat loss advisable to provide for the development; recreational and and degradation or modification. We conservation of the Hawaiian stilt. commercial activities; introduction of propose a take exception for the As discussed under Summary of predators; and direct capture, injury, or incidental take of stilts during control of Biological Status and Threats, we have killing of Hawaiian stilts. Regulating predators (e.g., mongoose, dogs (feral concluded that the Hawaiian stilt is these activities will help preserve the and domestic), feral pigs, cats (feral and likely to become in danger of extinction Hawaiian stilt population. This domestic), rats, bullfrogs, cattle egrets, within the foreseeable future primarily proposed 4(d) rule would also provide and barn owls) designed to protect stilts due to predation by nonnative animals for the conservation of the subspecies by (or other native waterbirds) or habitat (i.e., mongooses, rats, cats, dogs, providing select exceptions to the management activities designed to carnivorous birds, and bullfrogs); prohibitions for the purpose of protect stilts (or other native habitat loss and degradation by urban promoting conservation of Hawaiian waterbirds). This exception to the development, altered ground and stilt and expansion of their range by prohibition of take will help to reduce surface water for urban expansion, increasing flexibility in management or eliminate the depredation of overgrowth of nonnative plants, sea activities for State and private Hawaiian stilts during all life stages, level rise associated with climate landowners. Below we outline each provide sufficient nesting habitat to change (both coastal and groundwater prohibition and any exceptions, as well support the reproductive needs of the flooding and inundation); disease, as provide our justification for their population, and provide our primarily botulism caused by the inclusion in this proposed 4(d) rule. conservation partners the flexibility to bacterium Clostridium botulinum (type practice adaptive management to meet C); and environmental contaminants. Prohibition of Take the needs of the subspecies. The Service Additionally, Hawaiian stilt habitat is Under the Act, ‘‘take’’ means to and DOFAW will maintain a list of anticipated to be negatively impacted in harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, acceptable habitat conservation the near future by an increase in wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or management activities; for the current frequency and intensity of hurricanes to attempt to engage in any such list, contact the Service or DOFAW. We associated with climate change, which conduct. Some of these provisions have propose this exception to take year- may also directly harm individuals, been further defined in regulation at 50 round. eggs, or nesting success through CFR 17.3. Take can result knowingly or Predators are managed using a variety flooding. otherwise, by direct and indirect of methods, including fencing, trapping,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:19 Mar 24, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM 25MRP1 15874 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 56 / Thursday, March 25, 2021 / Proposed Rules

shooting, and toxicants. All methods Prohibition of Import, Export, and We may issue permits to carry out must be used in compliance with State Interstate and Foreign Commerce otherwise prohibited activities, and Federal regulations. In addition to including those described above, the application of the above tools, We have proposed to include the involving threatened wildlife under predator control as defined includes prohibition of import, export, interstate certain circumstances. Regulations activities related to predator control, and foreign commerce, and sale or governing permits are codified at 50 such as performing efficacy surveys, offering for sale in such commerce of CFR 17.32. With regard to threatened trap checks, and maintenance duties. the Hawaiian stilt in this proposed rule wildlife, a permit may be issued for the Nesting success is higher for Hawaiian to complement and support our following purposes: Scientific purposes, stilts that nest earlier in the season; proposal to include the prohibition of to enhance propagation or survival, for therefore, implementing predator take. Because the Hawaiian stilt is not economic hardship, for zoological control during this time may be most known to be held in captivity for exhibition, for educational purposes, for beneficial to the subspecies (Price 2020, commercial, recreational, scientific, or incidental taking, or for special p. 1). educational purposes, any such purposes consistent with the purposes exchange of the subspecies would of the Act. There are also certain During lawful predator control, or require removing one or more statutory exemptions from the lawful habitat management activities individuals (including eggs) from the prohibitions, which are found in from the Service and DOFAW-approved sole population of the subspecies sections 9 and 10 of the Act. list, incidental take of Hawaiian stilts resulting in take. Additionally, because We recognize the special and unique (eggs, chicks, fledglings, or adults) may the Hawaiian stilt is a conservation- relationship with our State natural occur in the form of temporary reliant subspecies and likely to become resource agency partners in contributing displacement due to human presence, in danger of extinction within the to conservation of listed subspecies. unintentional injury, or death (e.g., foreseeable future due to the threats State agencies often possess scientific accidental ingestion of chemical discussed above and under Summary of data and valuable expertise on the status approved for predator control, collision Biological Status and Threats, any major and distribution of endangered, or crushing by means of mechanical reduction in population size by threatened, and candidate species of machinery). Reasonable care must be intentional removal of individuals wildlife and plants. State agencies, practiced to minimize the effects of such would negatively impact the viability of because of their authorities and their taking and may include, but is not the subspecies. Therefore, regulating the close working relationships with local limited to: (a) Procuring and import, export, and interstate and governments and landowners, are in a implementing technical assistance from foreign commerce of Hawaiian stilt will unique position to assist us in a qualified biologist(s) on predator help to preserve their population. There implementing all aspects of the Act. In control or habitat management methods, are no proposed exceptions for these this regard, section 6 of the Act provides techniques, and protocols prior to prohibitions. that we shall cooperate to the maximum application of methods; (b) compliance extent practicable with the States in Prohibition of Possession and Other with all applicable regulations and carrying out programs authorized by the Acts With Unlawfully Taken Specimens following principles of integrated pest Act. Therefore, any qualified employee or agent of a State conservation agency management and habitat management; Although the Hawaiian stilt that is a party to a cooperative and (c) judicious use of methods and population is currently stable, it is agreement with us in accordance with tool adaptations to reduce hazards to considered a conservation-reliant section 6(c) of the Act, who is Hawaiian stilts (e.g., ingest bait, injury subspecies and requires active designated by his or her agency for such or death from an interaction with management to maintain this stability. purposes, would be able to conduct mechanical devices). The Hawaiian stilt is not thriving to the activities designed to conserve the 2. Take by authorized law degree that its population is considered Hawaiian stilt that may result in enforcement officers for the purposes of capable of sustaining unrestricted otherwise prohibited take without aiding or euthanizing sick, injured, or capture or collection from the wild additional authorization. orphaned Hawaiian stilts; disposing of without the likelihood of negative Nothing in this proposed 4(d) rule dead specimens; and salvaging a dead impacts to the long-term viability of the would change in any way the recovery specimen that may be used for scientific subspecies. Because capture and planning provisions of section 4(f) of the study. collection of Hawaiian stilts remains Act, the consultation requirements prohibited as discussed above, under section 7 of the Act, or our ability Rationale: The increased interaction maintaining the complementary to enter into partnerships for the of Hawaiian stilts with the human prohibition on possession and other acts management and protection of the environment subsequently increases the with illegally taken Hawaiian stilts will Hawaiian stilt. However, interagency likelihood of encounters with orphaned, further discourage such illegal take. cooperation may be further streamlined injured, sick, or dead Hawaiian stilts. By Thus, we propose to prohibit the through planned programmatic providing an exception for law possession, sale, offering for sale, consultations for the subspecies enforcement officers in consultation delivery, receiving, carrying, between us and other Federal agencies, with State wildlife biologists to provide transporting, or shipping of illegally where appropriate. We ask the public, aid to orphaned, injured, or sick taken Hawaiian stilts intrastate (within particularly State agencies and other Hawaiian stilts, or disposal or salvage of State), interstate (between States), and interested stakeholders that may be dead Hawaiian stilts, we increase the internationally in order to maintain the affected by the proposed 4(d) rule, to odds for saving orphaned, injured, or viability of the Hawaiian stilt provide comments and suggestions sick Hawaiian stilts and may maximize population. Regulating these human regarding additional guidance and the use of carcasses for research activities will contribute to the methods that we could provide or use, purposes that may inform management preservation of the subspecies. There respectively, to streamline the decisions and further the recovery of the are no proposed exceptions to these implementation of this proposed 4(d) subspecies. prohibitions. rule (see Information Requested).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:19 Mar 24, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM 25MRP1 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 56 / Thursday, March 25, 2021 / Proposed Rules 15875

If finalized, the provisions in this (4) Be divided into short sections and Authors proposed 4(d) rule would address only sentences; and Federal Endangered Species Act (5) Use lists and tables wherever The primary authors of this proposed requirements, and would not change possible. rule are the staff members of the U.S. State law. State law requires the If you feel that we have not met these Fish and Wildlife Service’s Species issuance of a temporary license for the requirements, send us comments by one Assessment Team and the Pacific take of endangered and threatened of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. To Islands Fish and Wildlife Office. animal species, if the activity otherwise better help us revise the rule, your List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 prohibited is: (1) For scientific purposes comments should be as specific as or to enhance the propagation or possible. For example, you should tell Endangered and threatened species, survival of the affected species (HRS us the numbers of the sections or Exports, Imports, Reporting and 195D–4(f)); or (2) incidental to an paragraphs that are unclearly written, recordkeeping requirements, otherwise lawful activity (HRS 195D– which sections or sentences are too Transportation. 4(g)). Incidental take licenses require the long, the sections where you feel lists or Proposed Regulation Promulgation development of a habitat conservation tables would be useful, etc. plan (HRS 195D–21) or a safe harbor Accordingly, we propose to amend agreement (HRS 195D–22), and National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title consultation with the State’s 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Endangered Species Recovery We have determined that as set forth below: Committee. Therefore, if this rule is environmental analyses as defined finalized, persons would still need to under the authority of the National PART 17—ENDANGERED AND obtain a State permit for some of the Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS actions described in this proposed 4(d) U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), need not be rule. prepared in connection with ■ 1. The authority citation for part 17 Required Determinations determining and implementing a continues to read as follows: species’ listing status under the Clarity of the Rule Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 1531– Endangered Species Act. We published 1544; and 4201–4245, unless otherwise We are required by Executive Orders a notice outlining our reasons for this noted. 12866 and 12988 and by the determination in the Federal Register Presidential Memorandum of June 1, on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244). ■ 2. Amend § 17.11(h) by revising the entry for ‘‘Stilt, Hawaiian’’ under BIRDS 1998, to write all rules in plain References Cited language. This means that each rule we in the List of Endangered and publish must: A complete list of references cited in Threatened Wildlife to read as follows: (1) Be logically organized; this rulemaking is available on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov § 17.11 Endangered and threatened (2) Use the active voice to address wildlife. readers directly; and upon request from the Pacific (3) Use clear language rather than Islands Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR * * * * * jargon; FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). (h) * * *

Listing citations and Common name Scientific name Where listed Status applicable rules

******* Birds

******* Stilt, Hawaiian (aeo) ...... Himantopus mexicanus Wherever found...... T 35 FR 16047, 10/13/1970; [Federal knudseni. Register citation of the final rule]; 50 CFR 17.41(j)4d.

*******

■ 3. Amend § 17.41 by adding paragraph (2) Prohibitions. The following (iii) Possession and other acts with (j) to read as follows: prohibitions that apply to endangered unlawfully taken specimens, as set forth wildlife also apply to the Hawaiian stilt. at § 17.21(d)(1) for endangered wildlife. § 17.41 Special rules—birds. Except as provided under paragraph (iv) Interstate or foreign commerce in * * * * * (j)(3) of this section and §§ 17.4 through the course of commercial activity, as set (j) Hawaiian stilt (Himantopus 17.6, it is unlawful for any person forth at § 17.21(e) for endangered mexicanus knudseni) (aeo). subject to the jurisdiction of the United wildlife. (1) Definition. For the purposes of this States to commit, to attempt to commit, (v) Sale or offer for sale, as set forth paragraph (j), ‘‘qualified biologist’’ to solicit another to commit, or cause to at § 17.21(f) for endangered wildlife. means an individual with a combination be committed, any of the following acts (3) Exceptions from prohibitions. In of academic training in the area of in regard to this species: regard to this species, you may: wildlife biology or related discipline (i) Import or export, as set forth at (i) Conduct activities as authorized by and demonstrated field experience in § 17.21(b) for endangered wildlife. a permit under § 17.32. the identification and life history of the (ii) Take, as set forth at § 17.21(c)(1) (ii) Take, as set forth at § 17.21(c)(2) Hawaiian stilt. for endangered wildlife. through (4) for endangered wildlife and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:19 Mar 24, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM 25MRP1 15876 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 56 / Thursday, March 25, 2021 / Proposed Rules

(c)(6) and (7) for endangered migratory activities benefit Hawaiian stilts, which (4) Possession and other acts with birds. may include: Weeding, mowing, unlawfully taken specimens as provided (iii) Take when the take is incidental fertilizing, herbicide application, water in § 17.21(d)(2) through (4). to an otherwise lawful activity caused level maintenance, water quality (4) Reporting and disposal by: monitoring and maintenance, requirements. Any injury or mortality of (A) Nonnative predator control or sedimentation and dead or decaying Hawaiian stilt associated with the habitat management activities for animal monitoring and maintenance, actions excepted under paragraphs Hawaiian stilt or other native waterbird outplanting native plants, creating (j)(3)(iii)(A) and (B) of this section must conservation purposes. A qualified mudflats, and irrigating wetland habitat be reported to the Service and biologist, or personnel working under for conservation purposes (if authorized State wildlife officials within their direct supervision, may mechanical mowing of pastures adjacent 48 hours, and specimens may be incidentally take Hawaiian stilt in the to wetlands for conservation disposed of only in accordance with course of carrying out nonnative management purposes is not feasible, directions from the Service. Reports predator control or habitat management alternate methods of keeping grass short should be made to the Service’s Office activities for Hawaiian stilt conservation may be used, such as grazing); of Law Enforcement (contact purposes if reasonable care is practiced emergency botulism outbreak responses; information is at 50 CFR 10.22) or the to minimize effects to the Hawaiian stilt and large-scale restoration of native Service’s Pacific Islands Fish and as follows: habitat (e.g., feral ungulate control, Wildlife Office (contact information for (1) Nonnative predator control fencing). Reasonable care for habitat the Service regional offices is at 50 CFR activities for the conservation of the management may include, but is not 2.2). Alternatively, the State of Hawaii Hawaiian stilt, or other native Hawaiian limited to, procuring and implementing Department of Land and Natural waterbirds, which may include the use technical assistance from a qualified Resources, Division of Forestry and of fencing, trapping, shooting, and biologist on habitat management Wildlife, may be contacted. toxicants to control predators, and activities, and documented best efforts related activities such as performing Signing Authority to minimize Hawaiian stilt exposure to efficacy surveys, trap checks, and hazards (e.g., predation, crushing by The Principal Deputy Director, maintenance duties. Reasonable care for Exercising the Delegated Authority of predator control activities may include, vehicle or machinery). A list of currently acceptable management the Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife but is not limited to, procuring and Service, approved this document and implementing technical assistance from activities is available by contacting the Service or State of Hawaii Department authorized the undersigned to sign and a qualified biologist on predator control submit the document to the Office of the methods and protocols prior to of Land and Natural Resources, Division of Forestry and Wildlife. Federal Register for publication application of methods; compliance electronically as an official document of with all State and Federal regulations (B) Actions carried out by law the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. and guidelines for application of enforcement officers in the course of Martha Williams, Principal Deputy predator control methods; and judicious official law enforcement duties. When Director, Exercising the Delegated use of methods and tool adaptations to acting in the course of their official Authority of the Director, U.S. Fish and reduce the likelihood of Hawaiian stilt duties, State and local government law Wildlife Service, approved this ingesting bait or being injured or dying enforcement officers, working in document on March 16, 2021, for from interaction with mechanical conjunction with authorized wildlife publication. devices. A list of currently acceptable biologists and wildlife rehabilitators in Dated: March 16, 2021. predator control methods is available by the State of Hawaii, may take Hawaiian contacting the Service or State of Hawaii stilt for the following purposes: Madonna Baucum, Regulations and Policy Chief, Division of Department of Land and Natural (1) Aiding or euthanizing sick, Resources, Division of Forestry and Policy, Economics, Risk Management, and injured, or orphaned Hawaiian stilt; Analytics, Joint Administrative Operations, Wildlife. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. (2) Habitat management activities for (2) Disposing of a dead specimen; or the conservation of the Hawaiian stilt, (3) Salvaging a dead specimen that [FR Doc. 2021–05846 Filed 3–24–21; 8:45 am] or other native waterbirds, as long as the may be used for scientific study; or BILLING CODE 4333–15–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:19 Mar 24, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM 25MRP1