[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 115 (Wednesday, June 16, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 34077-34088]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-14430]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R1-ES-2010-0012]
[MO 92210-0-0008-B2]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Finding on
Five Petitions to List Seven Species of Hawaiian Yellow-faced Bees as
Endangered
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition finding and initiation of status
review.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
90-day finding on five petitions to list seven species of Hawaiian
yellow-faced bees (Hylaeus anthracinus, H. assimulans, H. facilis, H.
hilaris, H. kuakea, H. longiceps, and H. mana) as endangered and
designate critical habitat under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act).
We find that the petitions present substantial scientific or
commercial information indicating that listing these seven species of
Hawaiian yellow-faced bees may be warranted. Therefore, with the
publication of this notice we are initiating a status review of these
species and will issue 12-month findings on our determination as to
whether the petitioned actions are warranted. To ensure that the status
reviews are comprehensive, we are soliciting scientific and commercial
data and other information regarding these species. We will make a
determination on critical habitat for these species if, and when, we
initiate a listing action.
DATES: To allow us adequate time to conduct this review, we request
that information you submit be received by us on or before August 16,
2010. Please note that if you are using the Federal eRulemaking Portal
(see ``ADDRESSES'' section, below), the deadline for submitting an
electronic comment is Eastern Standard Time on this date.
We will post all information received on http://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any
personal information you provide us (see the Request for Information
section below for more details).
After August 16, 2010, you must submit information directly to the
Field Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section below).
Please note that we might not be able to address or incorporate
information that we receive after the above requested date.
ADDRESSES: You may submit information by one of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. In
the box that reads ``Enter Keyword or ID,'' enter the Docket number for
this finding, which is FWS-R1-ES-2010-0012. Check the box that reads
``Open for Comment/Submission,'' and then click the Search button. You
should then see an icon that reads ``Submit a Comment.'' Please ensure
that you have found the correct rulemaking before submitting your
comment.
U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public Comments Processing,
Attn: FWS-R1-ES-2010-0012; Division of Policy and Directives
Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive,
Suite 222; Arlington, VA 22203.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Loyal Mehrhoff, Field Supervisor,
Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office, 300 Ala Moana Boulevard, Room
3-122, Honolulu, HI 96850; by telephone (808-792-9400); or by facsimile
(808-792-9581). Persons who use a telecommunications device for the
deaf (TTD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at
800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Request for Information
When we make a finding that a petition presents substantial
information indicating that listing a species may be warranted, we are
required to promptly review the status of the species (status review).
For the status review to be complete and based on the best available
scientific and commercial information, we request information on the
seven species of Hawaiian yellow-faced bees (H. anthracinus, H.
assimulans, H. facilis, H. hilaris, H. kuakea, H. longiceps, and H.
mana) from governmental agencies, Native American Tribes, the
scientific community, industry, or any other interested parties. We
seek information on:
(1) The species' biology, range, and population trends, including:
(a) Habitat requirements for feeding, breeding, and sheltering;
(b) Genetics and taxonomy;
(c) Historical and current range including distribution patterns;
(d) Historical and current population levels, and current and
projected trends; and
(e) Past and ongoing conservation measures for the species, its
habitat or both.
(2) Information about the seven Hawaiian yellow-faced bees relevant
to the factors that are the basis for making
[[Page 34078]]
a listing determination for a species under section 4(a) of the Act (16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), which are:
(a) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of the species' habitat or range;
(b) Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes;
(c) Disease or predation;
(d) The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; or
(e) Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued
existence.
(3) Whether insect collecting presents a threat to any of the seven
Hawaiian yellow-faced bee species.
(4) The potential cumulative effects of these factors that may
threaten or endanger the seven Hawaiian yellow-faced bee species.
(5) Management programs for the conservation of the seven Hawaiian
yellow-faced bee species.
(6) The potential effects of climate change on the seven Hawaiian
yellow-faced bee species and their habitat.
If, after the status reviews, we determine that listing any of the
seven Hawaiian yellow-faced bees is warranted, we will propose critical
habitat (see definition in section 3(5)(A) of the Act) under section 4
of the Act, to the maximum extent prudent and determinable at the time
we propose to list the species. Therefore, with regard to areas within
the geographical range currently occupied by these species, we also
request data and information on what may constitute physical or
biological features essential to the conservation of these species;
where these features are currently found; and whether any of these
features may require special management considerations or protection.
In addition, we request data and information regarding whether there
are areas outside the geographical area occupied by these species that
are essential to the conservation of these seven species. Please
provide specific comments and information as to what, if any, critical
habitat you think we should propose for designation if these species
are proposed for listing, and why such habitat meets the requirements
of section 4 of the Act. Please include sufficient information with
your submission (such as scientific journal articles or other
publications) to allow us to verify any scientific or commercial
information you include.
Please note that submissions merely stating support for or
opposition to the action under consideration without providing
supporting information, although noted, will not be considered in
making a determination, as section 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act (16 U.S.C.
1531 et seq.) directs that determinations as to whether any species is
a threatened or endangered species must be made ``solely on the basis
of the best scientific and commercial data available.''
You may submit your information concerning this status review by
one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. If you submit
information via http://www.regulations.gov, your entire submission--
including any personal identifying information--will be posted on the
website. If your submission is made via a hardcopy that includes
personal identifying information, you may request at the top of your
document that we withhold this personal identifying information from
public review. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do
so. We will post all hardcopy submissions on http://www.regulations.gov.
Information and materials we receive, as well as supporting
documentation we used in preparing this finding, is available for you
to review at http://www.regulations.gov, or you may make an appointment
during normal business hours at the Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife
Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(3)(A)) requires
that we make a finding on whether a petition to list, delist, or
reclassify a species presents substantial scientific or commercial
information to indicate that the petitioned action may be warranted. We
are to base this finding on information provided in the petition,
supporting information submitted with the petition, and information
otherwise available in our files. To the maximum extent practicable, we
are to make this finding within 90 days of our receipt of the petition
and publish our notice of this finding promptly in the Federal
Register.
Our standard for substantial scientific or commercial information
within the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) with regard to a 90-day
petition finding is ``that amount of information that would lead a
reasonable person to believe that the measure proposed in the petition
may be warranted'' (50 CFR 424.14(b)). If we find that substantial
scientific or commercial information was presented, we are required to
promptly conduct a species status review, which we subsequently
summarize in our 12-month finding.
We received five petitions dated March 23, 2009, from Scott Hoffman
Black, Executive Director of the Xerces Society (hereafter, ``the
petitioner''). The petitioner requested that we list seven species of
Hawaiian yellow-faced bees as endangered and that critical habitat be
designated under the Act. The petitions were clearly identified as
petitions and included the requisite identification of addresses and
telephone numbers, but did not include the signature of the petitioner,
as stipulated in 50 CFR 424.14(a). Nevertheless, we recognize the five
documents as petitions. Each petition contained information regarding
the species' taxonomy and ecology, historical and current distribution,
present status, and potential causes of decline and current and
potential imminent threats.
On May 8, 2009, we sent a letter to the petitioner acknowledging
our receipt of the petitions and explaining that we reviewed the
information presented in the petition and determined that issuing an
emergency regulation temporarily listing the species under section
4(b)(7) of the Act was not warranted at that time. This notice
constitutes our 90-day finding for the petitions to list seven species
of Hawaiian yellow-faced bees (Hylaeus anthracinus, H. assimulans, H.
facilis, H. hilaris, H. kuakea, H. longiceps, and H. mana).
Species Information
Taxonomy and Description of Hylaeus
The seven species of bees described in the petitions belong to the
genus Hylaeus. Hylaeus is a large, globally distributed genus comprised
of over 500 species worldwide. In the Hawaiian Islands, the genus
Hylaeus is widespread and very diverse, with 60 native species,
including 20 that are endemic to single islands (Magnacca 2007, p.
174). All 60 Hawaiian species are in the subgenus Nesoprosopis
(Magnacca and Danforth 2006, p. 393). The Hylaeus genus belongs to the
Colletidae family of bees, also known as plasterer bees due to their
habit of lining their nests with salival secretions.
The species of Hylaeus are commonly known as yellow-faced bees or
masked bees for their yellow-to-white facial markings. All of the
Hylaeus species roughly resemble small wasps in appearance, due to
their slender bodies and their seeming lack of setae (sensory hairs).
However, Hylaeus bees have plumose (branched) hairs on the body that
are longest on the sides of the thorax. To a discerning eye, it is
these plumose setae that readily distinguish them from wasps (Michener
2000, p. 55).
[[Page 34079]]
Life History of Hylaeus
Nests of Hylaeus species are usually constructed opportunistically
within dead twigs or plant stems, or other similarly small natural
cavities under bark or rocks. This is unlike the nests of many other
bee species, which are purposefully excavated or constructed
underground. Like other Hylaeus, Hawaiian Hylaeus also lack strong
mandibles and other adaptations for digging and often use nest burrows
abandoned by other insect species (Daly and Magnacca 2003, p. 9). The
adult male and female bees feed upon flower nectar for nourishment.
Many species, including the Hawaiian Hylaeus, lack an external
structure for carrying pollen, called a scopa, and instead internally
transport collected pollen, often mixed with nectar, within their crop
(stomach). Hawaiian Hylaeus species are grouped within two categories:
Ground-nesting species that require relatively dry conditions and wood-
nesting species which are found within wetter areas (Zimmerman 1972, p.
533; Daly and Magnacca 2003, p. 11).
The female Hylaeus bee lays eggs in brood cells that she constructs
in the nest and lines with a self-secreted cellophane-like material.
Prior to sealing the nest, the female provides her young with a mass of
semiliquid nectar and pollen that is left alongside her eggs. Upon
hatching, the grub-like larvae eat the provisions left for them,
pupate, and eventually emerge as adults (Michener 2000, p. 24).
The role of bees as pollinators maintaining communities of native
flora in a diversity of habitats is widely recognized (Cane and
Tepedino 2001, p. 1; Kremen et al. 2007, pp. 302, 307; National
Research Council 2007, p. 13). Recent studies of visitation records of
Hawaiian Hylaeus bees to native flowers (Daly and Magnacca 2003, p. 11)
and pollination studies of native plants (Sakai et al. 1995, pp. 2524-
2528; Cox and Elmqvist 2000, p. 1,238; Sahli et al. 2008, p. 1) have
demonstrated that Hawaiian Hylaeus species almost exclusively visit
native plants to collect nectar and pollen and, in the process,
pollinate these plants. Hylaeus bees are very rarely found visiting
nonnative plants for nectar and pollen (Magnacca 2007, pp. 186, 188),
and are almost completely absent from habitats dominated by nonnative
plant species (Daly and Magnacca 2003, p. 11). Sahli et al. (2008, p.
1) quantified pollinator visitation rates to all of the flowering plant
species in communities on a Hawaiian lava flow dating from 1855 to
understand how pollination webs and the integration of native and alien
species changes with elevation. In that study, eight flowering plants
were observed at six sites, which ranged in elevation from 880 to 2400
meters (m) (2,887 to 7874 feet (ft)). The study also found that the
proportion of native pollinators changed along the elevation gradient;
at least 40 to 50 percent of visits were from alien pollinators at low
elevation, as opposed to 4 to 20 percent of visits by alien pollinators
at mid to high elevations. Hylaeus bees were less abundant at lower
elevations, and there were lower visitation rates of any pollinators to
native plants at lower elevations, which suggests that Hylaeus may not
be easily replaceable by nonnative pollinators (Sahli et al., 2008, p.
1). Because Hylaeus species are likely critical pollinators of one or
more native Hawaiian plant species, it is believed that their decline
or eventual extinction may negatively impact dependent native plant
species (Hopper et al. 1996, p. 8; Cox and Elmqvist 2000, p. 1238).
Taxonomy and Description of Each Petitioned Hylaeus Species
Unless clearly stated that the information is from our files, all
information, statements, and references cited regarding the taxonomy,
descriptions, life history, and range and distribution are based on
information submitted in the petitions.
Hylaeus anthracinus
Taxonomy
Hylaeus anthracinus was first described as Prosopis anthracina by
Smith in 1873 (Daly and Magnacca 2003, p. 55), and transferred to
Nesoprosopis 20 years later (Perkins 1899, pp. 75), and then
Nesoprosopis was reduced to a subgenus of Hylaeus in 1923 (Meade-Waldo
1923, p. 1). Although the distinctness of this species is unquestioned,
recent genetic evidence (Magnacca and Brown, submitted) suggests that
H. anthracinus may be composed of three cryptic (not recognized)
species which represent the populations on Hawaii; Maui and Kahoolawe;
and Molokai and Oahu.
Description
Hylaeus anthracinus is a medium-sized black bee with clear to smoky
wings and black legs. The male has a single large yellow spot on his
face, while below the antennal sockets the face is yellow. The female
is entirely black and can be distinguished by the black hairs on the
end of the abdomen and an unusual mandible that has three teeth, a
characteristic that is shared only with H. flavifrons, a closely
related species on Kauai (Daly and Magnacca 2003, p. 53).
Life History
The diet of the larval stage of Hylaeus anthracinus is unknown,
although the larvae are presumed to feed on stores of pollen and nectar
collected and deposited in the nest by the adult female. Likewise, the
nesting habits of H. anthracinus are not known, but the species is
thought to nest within the stems of coastal shrubs (Magnacca 2005a, p.
2).
Hylaeus anthracinus adults have been observed visiting the flowers
of Sesbania tomentosa (oahi), Scaevola sericea (naupaka kahakai), Sida
fallax (ilima), Argemone glauca (pua kala), Chamaesyce celastroides
(akoko), Chamaesyce degeneri (akoko), Heliotropium anomalum (hinahina),
and Myoporum sandwicense (naio). This species has also been collected
from inside the fruit capsule of Kadua coriacea (kioele) (Magnacca
2005a, p. 2). Hylaeus anthracinus has also been observed visiting
Tournefortia argentea (tree heliotrope), a tree native to tropical
Asia, Madagascar, tropical Australia, and Polynesia, for nectar and
pollen (Wagner et al. 1999, p. 398; Daly and Magnacca 2003, p. 55;
Magnacca 2007a, p. 181). The species was first collected on Oahu in
1864-1865, and is naturalized and documented from all of the main
islands except Kahoolawe (Wagner et al. p. 398). It is described as
introduced by Magnacca (2007, p. 181). Hylaeus anthracinus commonly
occurs alongside other Hylaeus species, including H. longiceps and H.
flavipes.
Range and Distribution
Hylaeus anthracinus was historically known from numerous coastal
strand and lowland dry forest locations up to 2,000 feet (ft) (610
meters (m)) in elevation on the islands of Hawaii, Lanai, Maui,
Molokai, and Oahu. According to the petition, between 1997 and 2008,
surveys for Hawaiian Hylaeus were conducted at 43 sites throughout the
Hawaiian Islands that were either historic collecting localities for H.
anthracinus, or potentially suitable habitat for this species. Hylaeus
anthracinus was observed at 14 of the 43 survey sites, but had
disappeared from each of the 9 historically occupied sites that were
surveyed (petition p. 7). Several of the historical collection sites,
such as Honolulu and Waikiki on Oahu, and Kealakekua Bay on Hawaii, no
longer contain Hylaeus habitat, which has been replaced by urban
development or is dominated by nonnative vegetation (Liebherr and
Polhemus 1997, pp. 346-347; Daly and
[[Page 34080]]
Magnacca 2003, p. 55; Magnacca 2007, pp. 186-188).
Hylaeus anthracinus is currently restricted to small populations in
a few small patches of coastal and lowland dry habitat (Magnacca 2005a,
p. 2); one location on Kahoolawe; five locations on the island of
Hawaii, two locations on Maui, three locations on Molokai, and two
locations on Oahu (Xerces 2009a, pp. 9-10). The petition does not
define the context applied to the term ``small,'' and we have no
additional information in our files. Accordingly, we are presenting the
population information as characterized by the petitioner. The 2004 H.
anthracinus collection on the island of Hawaii occurred in montane dry
forest (Magnacca 2005a, p. 2). Although it was previously unknown from
the island of Kahoolawe, H. anthracinus was observed at one location on
the island in 2002 (Daly and Magnacca 2003, p. 55). According to the
petition, it is believed to be extirpated from Lanai (Daly and Magnacca
2003, p. 55).
Hylaeus assimulans
Taxonomy
Hylaeus assimulans was first described as Nesoprosopis assimulans
(Perkins 1899, pp. 75, 101-102), and then Nesoprosopis was reduced to a
subgenus of Hylaeus in 1923 (Meade-Waldo 1923, p. 1). The species was
most recently described as Hylaeus assimulans by Daly and Magnacca in
2003 (pp. 55-56).
Description
Hylaeus assimulans is distinguished by its large size relative to
other coastal Hylaeus species and slightly smoky to smoky-colored
wings. The male is black with yellow face marks, with an almost
entirely yellow clypeus (lower face region) with additional marks on
the sides that narrow dorsally (towards the top). The male also has
brown appressed (flattened) hairs on the tip of the abdomen. The female
is entirely black, large-bodied, and has no distinct punctuation on the
abdomen (Daly and Magnacca 2003, p. 56).
Life History
The diet of the larval stage of Hylaeus assimulans is unknown,
although the larvae are presumed to feed on stores of pollen and nectar
collected and deposited in the nest by the female adult (Xerces 2009b,
p. 11). Likewise, the nesting habits of H. assimulans are not known,
but the species is thought to nest underground, as do other closely
related species (Magnacca 2005b, p. 2).
Hylaeus assimulans adults have been observed visiting the flowers
of Lipochaeta lobata (nehe) and Sida fallax (ilima), this species'
likely primary host plant (Xerces 2009b, p. 10). Hylaeus assimulans
appears to be closely associated with plants in the genus Sida, and the
petitioner suggests this yellow-faced bee species may be more common
where this plant is abundant (Daly and Magnacca 2003, pp. 58, 217;
Magnacca 2007, p. 183). The petition contains information indicating
that in recent collections, H. assimulans seems to be more common in
dry forest at relatively higher elevations, and is less often found in
coastal strand habitat. The petition states that the frequency of H.
assimulans observations in higher, dry forest may be related to the
abundance of Sida in the understory (Magnacca 2005b, p. 2). The
petitioner also states that it is likely that H. assimulans visits
several other native plants, including Acacia koa (koa), Metrosideros
polymorpha (ohia), Styphelia tameiameiae (pukiawe), and species of
Scaevola (naupaka) and Chamaesyce (akoko), which are frequented by
other Hylaeus species as well.
Range and Distribution
Historically, Hylaeus assimulans was known from numerous coastal
strand and lowland dry locations up to 2,000 ft (610 m) in elevation on
the islands of Lanai, Maui, and Oahu. Although there are no collections
from Molokai, the petition states that H. assimulans also occurred
there because all other species of Hylaeus known from Maui, Lanai, and
Oahu also occurred on Molokai (Xerces 2009b, p. 6). Between 1997 and
2008, surveys for Hawaiian Hylaeus were conducted in 25 sites on Oahu,
Maui, Kahoolawe, Lanai, and Molokai. Hylaeus assimulans was absent from
six of its historic localities on Oahu, Maui, and Lanai (Xerces 2009b,
pp. 6-7). Hylaeus assimulans was not observed at 19 other sites with
potentially suitable habitat on Oahu, Maui, Lanai, and Molokai,
including several sites from which other native Hylaeus species have
been recently collected (Daly and Magnacca 2003, p. 56; Xerces 2009b,
p. 7).
Currently, Hylaeus assimulans is found in a few small patches of
coastal and lowland dry habitat at two locations on Lanai, two
locations on Maui, and one location on Kahoolawe (Daly and Magnacca
2003, p. 58; Magnacca 2005, p. 2). According to the petition, this
species has likely been extirpated from Oahu since it was absent from
the island's best extant coastal strand habitat at Kaena Point (Kaena
Point Natural Area Reserve (NAR)) (Magnacca 2005, p. 2).
Hylaeus facilis
Taxonomy
According to the petitioner, Hylaeus facilis is a member of the H.
difficilis species group, and is closely related to H. chlorostictus
and H. simplex. Hylaeus facilis was first described as Prosopis facilis
by Smith in 1879 (Daly and Magnacca, p. 80), based on a specimen
erroneously reported from Maui. According to Blackburn and Cameron
(1886 and 1887), the species' type locality was Pauoa Valley on Oahu
(Daly and Magnacca 2003, p. 80). The species was later transferred to
the genus Nesoprosopis (Perkins 1899, pp. 75, 77). Nesoprosopis was
subsequently reduced to a subgenus of Hylaeus (Meade-Waldo 1923, p. 1).
The species was most recently recognized by Daly and Magnacca (2003, p.
80) as Hylaeus facilis.
Description
Hylaeus facilis is a medium-sized bee with smoky colored wings. The
male has an oval yellow mark on its face that covers the entire clypeus
(lower face region), and a narrow stripe beside the eyes, but is
otherwise unmarked. The large, externally visible gonoforceps (paired
lateral outer parts of the male genitalia) distinguish H. facilis from
the closely related H. simplex (Daly and Magnacca 2003, p. 83). The
female is entirely black, and indistinguishable from females of H.
difficilis and H. simplex (Daly and Magnacca 2003, pp. 81-82).
Life History
The diet of the larval stage of Hylaeus facilis is unknown,
although the larvae are presumed to feed on stores of pollen and nectar
collected and deposited in the nest by the adult female. The nesting
habits of H. facilis have not been observed, but the species is thought
to nest underground as do the closely related species H. chlorostictus
and H. simplex (Daly and Magnacca 2003, p. 83; Magnacca 2005c, p. 2).
According to the petition, the native host plants of adult Hylaeus
facilis are unknown, but it is likely that this species visits several
plants that other Hylaeus species are known to frequent, including
Acacia koa (koa), Metrosideros polymorpha (ohia), Styphelia tameiameiae
(pukiawe), Scaevola spp. (naupaka), and Chamaesyce spp. (akoko).
Hylaeus facilis has also been observed visiting the nonnative
Tourneforia argentea (tree heliotrope) for nectar and pollen (Magnacca
2007, p. 181).
[[Page 34081]]
Range and Distribution
Hylaeus facilis was historically known from Lanai, Maui, Molokai,
and Oahu, in dry shrubland to wet forest, from coastal to montane
habitat up to 3,281 ft (1,000 m) in elevation (Gagne and Cuddihy 1999,
p. 93; Daly and Magnacca 2003, pp. 81, 83). Perkins (1899, p. 77)
remarked that H. facilis was among the most common and widespread
Hylaeus species on Oahu and all of Maui Nui (Lanai, Molokai, and Maui)
(Magnacca 2007, p. 183). The petitioner contends that although the
species was widely collected within a diverse range of habitats, it
probably prefers dry to mesic forest and shrubland (Magnacca 2005c, p.
2), which are increasingly rare and patchily distributed habitats
(Smith 1985, pp. 227-233; Juvik and Juvik 1998, p. 124; Wagner et al.
1999, pp. 66-67, 75; Magnacca 2005c, p. 2).
The petition states that Hylaeus facilis has almost entirely
disappeared from most of its historical range (Daly and Magnacca 2003,
p. 7; Magnacca 2007, p. 183), and the abundance of specimens in the
collections at the Bishop Museum in Honolulu demonstrates the historic
prevalence of this species in a diverse array of habitats and
elevations (Magnacca 2007, p. 183). Between 1998 and 2006, 39 sites on
Oahu, Maui, Lanai, and Molokai were surveyed; H. facilis was absent
from each of the 13 historical localities that were revisited (Magnacca
2007, p. 183). Hylaeus facilis was not observed at 26 other sites with
potentially suitable habitat, including many sites from which other
native Hylaeus species have been recently collected (Daly and Magnacca
2003, pp. 7, 81-82; Magnacca 2007, p. 183).
Currently, Hylaeus facilis is only known from three sites, one each
on the islands of Maui, Molokai, and Oahu (Daly and Magnacca 2003, pp.
81-82; Magnacca 2005c, p. 2). According to the petitioner, this species
is likely extirpated from Lanai (Xerces 2009c, p. 7).
Hylaeus hilaris
Taxonomy
Hylaeus hilaris was first described as Prosopis hilaris by Smith in
1879 (Daly and Magnacca 2003, pp. 103-104), transferred to the genus
Nesoprosopis 20 years later (Perkins 1899, pp. 75), and then
Nesoprosopis was reduced to a subgenus of Hylaeus in 1923 (Meade-Waldo
1923, p. 1). In 2003, Daly and Magnacca described the species as
Hylaeus hilaris (Daly and Magnacca 2003, pp. 103-104).
Description
Hylaeus hilaris is distinguished by its large size (male wing
length is 0.185 inches (in) (4.7 millimeters (mm)) relative to other
coastal Hylaeus species. The wings of this species are slightly smoky
to smoky colored, and it is the most colorful of the Hawaiian Hyaleus
species. The face of the male is almost entirely yellow, with yellow
markings on the legs and thorax, and the metasoma (middle portion of
the abdomen) are usually predominantly red. Females are drably colored,
with various brownish markings. As with other cleptoparasitic (see
``Life History'' below) species, H. hilaris lacks the specialized
pollen-sweeping hairs of the front legs (Daly and Magnacca 2003, pp. 9,
106). It is also one of only two Hawaiian Hyaleus species to possess
apical (at the end or tip of a structure) bands of fine white hairs on
the segments of the metasoma.
Life History
Most adult Hawaiian Hylaeus species consume nectar for energy;
however, Hylaeus hilaris has yet to be observed actually feeding from
flowers. Hylaeus hilaris and the four species related to it (H.
hostilis, H. inquilina, H. sphecodoides, and H. volatilis) are known as
cleptoparasites or cuckoo bees. The mated female does not construct a
nest or collect pollen, but instead enters the nest of another species
and lays an egg in a partially provisioned cell. Upon emerging, the
cleptoparasitic larva kills the host egg and consumes the provisions,
pupates, and eventually emerges as an adult. As a result of this
lifestyle shift, H. hilaris bees have lost the pollen-collecting hairs
that other species possess on the front legs. Cleptoparasitism is
actually quite common among bees: approximately 25 percent of known bee
species have evolved to become cleptoparasites. Among the world's bees,
other than the Hawaiian Hylaeus group, no cleptoparasites are known
from the family Colletidae (Daly and Magnacca 2003, p. 9). The larvae
of H. hilaris and their diet are unknown (Magnacca 2005d, p. 2);
however, the species is known to lay its eggs within the nests of H.
anthracinus, H. assimulans, and H. longiceps (Perkins 1913, p. lxxxi).
Although the species has never been observed at flowers, H. hilaris
adults presumably consume nectar as a food source (Xerces 2009 d, p.
9). Hylaeus hilaris depends on a number of related Hylaeus host species
for its parasitic larvae, and its population size is inherently much
smaller than its host species (Xerces 2009d, p. 9).
Range and Distribution
Hylaeus hilaris was historically known from coastal strand habitat
on the islands of Lanai, Maui, and Molokai. The petitioner states that
it is believed to have occurred along much of the coast of these
islands since its primary hosts, H. anthracinus, H. assimulans, and H.
longiceps, likely extended throughout this habitat. According to the
petition, nearly all of the coastal strand habitat has been either
developed or degraded, and is no longer suitable for H. hilaris
(Liebherr and Polhemus 1997, pp. 346-347; Magnacca 2007, pp. 186-188).
Hylaeus hilaris was absent from three of its historical population
sites revisited by researchers between 1998 and 2006. It was also not
observed at 10 additional sites with potentially suitable habitat where
other native Hylaeus species have been recently collected (Daly and
Magnacca 2003, pp. 103, 106).
The petitioner states that this species has been collected only
twice in the last 70 years, but acknowledges a gap of about 70 years
between major collecting efforts (Xerces 2009d, p. 6). Hylaeus hilaris
has recently been collected on two occasions; once in 1989 and again in
1999. The species was absent from each of its historical localities
that were revisited between 1998 and 2006 (Xerces 2009d, p. 6).
Currently, the only known population of H. hilaris is located on The
Nature Conservancy's Moomomi Preserve on Molokai (Daly and Magnacca
2003, pp. 103, 106; Magnacca 2005d, p. 2). According to the petition,
it is no longer extant on Lanai (Xerces 2009d, p. 6).
Hylaeus kuakea
Taxonomy and Description
Hylaeus kuakea was first described by Daly and Magnacca (2003, pp.
1, 125-127) from specimens collected in 1997 in the Waianae Mountains
on Oahu. Hylaeus kuakea is a small, black bee with slightly smoky
colored wings. This species does not fit into any of the well-defined
Hylaeus species groups. Its facial marks are similar to those of the H.
difficilis group and to H. anthracinus, but it can be distinguished by
its unusual ivory facial marking covering the clypeus (the lower face
region). Hylaeus kuakea also resembles H. anthracinus, but has a
denser, more distinct arrangement of setae (sensory hairs) on the head
and generally narrower marks next to the compound eyes (Daly and
Magnacca 2003, p. 125; Magnacca 2005e, p. 2). Only two adult
[[Page 34082]]
male specimens have been collected; females have yet to be collected or
observed.
Life History
The diet of the larval stage of Hylaeus kuakea is unknown, although
the larvae are presumed to feed on stores of pollen and nectar
collected and deposited in the nest by the adult female (Xerces 2009e,
p. 7). The nesting habits of H. kuakea have not been observed, but the
species is believed to be related to other wood-nesting Hawaiian
Hylaeus species (Magnacca and Danforth 2006, p. 403).
According to information in the petition, the native host plants of
the adult Hylaeus kuakea are unknown, but it is likely that this
species visits several plants that other Hylaeus species are known to
frequent, including Acacia koa, Metrosideros polymorpha, Styphelia
tameiameiae, Scaevola spp., and Chamaesyce spp. (Magnacca 2005e, p. 2).
Range and Distribution
Hylaeus kuakea is only known from two collections made in Moho
Gulch Ridge, at the northern end of Honouliuli Preserve, at an
elevation of about 1,900 ft (579 m) in the Waianae Mountains on Oahu.
Hylaeus kuakea is found in lowland mesic forest, which is increasingly
rare and patchily distributed on Oahu (Smith 1985, pp. 227-233; Juvik
and Juvik 1998, p. 124; Wagner et al. 1999, pp. 66-67, 75).
According to the petitioner, although there is potentially suitable
lowland mesic habitat in Honouliuli Preserve, no other individuals of
Hylaeus kuakea were found in surveys subsequent to the type collection
in 1997 (Magnacca 2007, p. 184). In addition, Perkins did not collect
this species in surveys in the Honouliuli Preserve vicinity or in
nearby areas in 1899, 1910, and 1911 (Xerces 2009e, p. 6). The
petitioner therefore concludes that the extreme rarity of this species,
its absence from nearby sites, and the fact that it was not discovered
until very recently suggest that very few populations remain (Magnacca
2005e, p. 2).
Hylaeus longiceps
Taxonomy
Hylaeus longiceps was first described in 1899 as Nesoprosopis
longiceps (Perkins 1899, pp. 75, 98), and then Nesoprosopis was reduced
to a subgenus of Hylaeus in 1923 (Meade-Waldo 1923, p. 1). Daly and
Magnacca (2003, pp. 133-134) most recently described the species as
Hylaeus longiceps.
Description
Hylaeus longiceps is a small to medium-sized, black bee with clear
to slightly smoky colored wings. Its distinguishing characteristics are
its long head and the facial marks of the male. The lower face of the
male is marked with a yellow band that extends at the sides of the face
in a broad stripe above the antennal sockets. The area above the
clypeus (lower face region) is very long and narrow, and the scape (the
first antennal segment) is noticeably twice as long as it is wide. The
female is entirely black and unmarked (Daly and Magnacca 2003, p. 133).
Life History
The diet of the larval stage of Hylaeus longiceps is unknown,
although the larvae are presumed to feed on stores of pollen and nectar
collected and deposited in the nest by the female adult (Xerces 2009a,
p. 15). The nesting habits of H. longiceps are unknown, but the species
is thought to nest underground, as in other closely related species
(Magnacca 2005f, p. 2).
Hylaeus longiceps adults have been observed visiting the flowers of
a wide variety of plants, including Scaevola coriacea (dwarf naupaka),
Sida fallax, Scaevola spp. (naupaka kahakai), Sesbania tomentosa
(ohai), Myoposum sandwicense (naio), Santalum ellipticum (iliahialoe,
coast sandalwood), Chamaesyce degeneri (akoko), and Vitex rotundifolia
(pohinahina) (Xerces 2009a, p. 14). The petitioner reports that it is
likely that H. longiceps visits several plant species that other
Hylaeus species are known to frequently visit, including Scaevola spp.,
Chamaesyce spp., Tournefortia argentea, Jacquemontia ovata (pau o
hiiaka), and Sida fallax (Magnacca 2005f, p. 2).
Range and Distribution
Hylaeus longiceps is historically known from numerous coastal
strand and lowland dry shrubland locations up to 2,000 ft (610 m) in
elevation on the islands of Lanai, Maui, Molokai, and Oahu. The species
is primarily known from coastal habitat, but is infrequently collected
in dry shrubland. Hylaeus longiceps is rarely observed in higher
elevation dry forests. Perkins (1899, p. 98) noted that H. longiceps
was locally abundant, and probably occurred historically throughout
much of the leeward and lowland areas on Maui Nui (Maui, Molokai,
Lanai, and Kahoolawe) and Oahu, since its host plants, Sida fallax,
Chamaesyce spp., Scaevola spp., and Jaquemontia ovata, occurred
throughout these areas (Magnacca 2005f, p. 2). The petitioner states
that most of the habitat in these areas has been either developed or
degraded and is no longer suitable for H. longiceps (Liebherr and
Polhemus 1997, pp. 346-347; Magnacca 2007, pp. 186-188).
Hylaeus longiceps is now restricted to small populations in small
patches of coastal and lowland habitat on Lanai, Maui, Molokai, and
Oahu (Magnacca 2005f, p. 2). Twenty-five sites that were either
historic collecting localities for H. longiceps or contained
potentially suitable habitat for this species were surveyed between
1997 and 2008. Hylaeus longiceps was observed at only six of the
surveyed sites: three sites on Lanai, one site on Maui, one site on
Molokai, and one site on Oahu. Only one historic location, Waieu Dune
on Maui, still supports a population of H. longiceps (Daly and Magnacca
2003, p. 135).
Hylaeus mana
Taxonomy and Description
Hylaeus mana was first described by Daly and Magnacca (2003, pp.
135-136) from four specimens collected in 2002 on the leeward side of
the Koolau Mountains on Oahu. This species is an extremely small,
gracile (gracefully slender) black bee with yellow markings on the
face. The smallest of all Hawaiian Hylaeus species, H. mana is a member
of the dumetorum species group. The face of the male is largely yellow
below the antennae, extending dorsally in a narrowing stripe. The
female's face has three yellow lines, one against each eye, and a
transverse stripe at the apex of the clypeus (lower face region). The
female's other markings are the same as the male's (Daly and Magnacca
2003, p. 135). Hylaeus mana can be distinguished from H. mimicus and H.
specularis, with whom its range overlaps, by its extremely small size,
the shape of the male's genitalia, the female's extensive facial marks,
and a transverse rather than longitudinal clypeal marking (Daly and
Magnacca 2003, p. 138).
Life History
The diet of the larval stage of Hylaeus mana is unknown, although
the larvae are presumed to feed on stores of pollen and nectar
collected and deposited in the nest by the adult female (Xerces 2009e,
p. 7). The nesting habits of H. mana are not well known, but it is
assumed the species is closely related to other wood-nesting Hawaiian
Hylaeus species (Magnacca and Danforth 2006, p. 403).
Adult specimens of Hylaeus mana were collected while they visited
[[Page 34083]]
flowers of Santalum freycinetianum var. freycinetianum (iliahi,
sandalwood), a native Hawaiian plant found only on Oahu and Molokai
(Wagner et al. 1999, p. 1221). The petitioner asserts that it is likely
that H. mana visits several other native plant species, including
Acacia koa, Metrosideros polymorpha, Styphelia tameiameiae, Scaevola
spp., and Chamaesyce spp. (Magnacca 2005g, p. 2).
Range and Distribution
Hylaeus mana is only known from lowland mesic forest located along
the Manana Trail in the Koolau Mountains on Oahu, at an elevation of
about 1,400 ft (427 m). Few Hylaeus bees have been found in this type
of koa-dominated, lowland mesic forest on Oahu (Daly and Magnacca 2003,
p. 138). This type of forest is increasingly rare and patchily
distributed on Oahu (Smith 1985, pp. 227-233; Juvik and Juvik 1998, p.
124; Wagner et al. 1999, pp. 66-67, 75).
According to the petition, because the first collection of Hylaeus
mana was made in 2002, the historic range and current distribution,
other than the collection on Manana Trail, are unknown at this time
(Magnacca 2005g, p. 2). This species was not found in surveys of
potentially suitable habitat in the same general area by Perkins in
1899, 1910, and 1911 (Xerces 2009e, p. 6). The petitioner therefore
concludes that the extreme rarity of this species, its absence from
nearby sites, and the fact that it was not discovered until very
recently suggest that very few populations remain (Magnacca 2005g, p.
2).
We accept the characterization of the seven species of Hawaiian
yellow-faced bees (Hylaeus anthracinus, H. assimulans, H. facilis, H.
hilaris, H. kuakea, H. longiceps, and H. mana) as described in the
information provided by the petitioner.
Factors Affecting the Species
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533), and its implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 424, set forth procedures for adding species to
the Federal Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants. A
species may be determined to be an endangered or threatened species due
to one or more of the five factors described in section 4(a)(1) of the
Act: (A) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range; (B) overutilization for
commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes; (C)
disease or predation; (D) the inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms; or (E) other natural or manmade factors affecting its
continued existence. In making this 90-day finding, we evaluated
whether information on threats to the seven Hawaiian Hylaeus bee
species presented in the petitions and available in our files at the
time of the review of the petitions constitute substantial scientific
or commercial information such that listing the species may be
warranted. Our evaluation of this information is discussed below.
Unless clearly stated that the information is from our files, all
threats described below and their effects on the seven Hawaiian Hylaeus
bee species are based on information submitted in the petitions. Any
references provided in support of particular statements related to
potential threats are the petitioner's references, unless specifically
identified otherwise.
A. Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment of
the Species' Habitat or Range
According to the petitions, degradation and loss of coastal and
lowland habitat used by Hylaeus bees on all of the main Hawaiian
Islands is the primary threat to these seven species (Cuddihy and Stone
1990, pp. 60-61; Daly and Magnacca 2003, pp. 55, 173). Coastal and
lowland habitats have been severely altered and degraded, partly
because of past and present land management practices, including
agriculture, grazing, and urban development; the deliberate and
accidental introductions of nonnative animals and plants; and
recreational activities. In addition, the petitions present information
indicating that fire is a potential threat to the habitat of these
seven species in some locations.
Habitat Destruction and Modification by Urbanization and Land Use
Conversion
Increased access to coastal areas, and resulting habitat
disturbance, has been facilitated by coastal development and
roadbuilding (Cuddihy and Stone 1990, pp. 94-95). As described in the
petitions, five species (Hylaeus anthracinus, H. assimulans, H.
facilis, H. hilaris, and H. longiceps) were once widespread and common
in coastal strand habitat (Perkins 1912, p. 688). These five Hylaeus
species are now absent from all of Perkins' coastal collection
localities. Hylaeus facilis has recently been collected in coastal
habitat at Kuololimu Point, and H. hilaris has recently been collected
in coastal habitat at Moomomi Preserve, Molokai (Xerces 2009c, p. 9).
The petitioner states that lowland dry forests and shrublands have
been heavily impacted by urbanization and conversion to agriculture or
pasture throughout the Hawaiian Islands, with the estimated loss of
more than 90 percent of dry forests and shrublands (Bruegmann 1996, p.
26; Juvik and Juvik 1998, p. 124). Four species (Hylaeus anthracinus,
H. assimulans, H. facilis, and H. longiceps) were once widespread and
found within lowland dry habitat on several islands, including Hawaii,
Lanai, Maui, Molokai, and Oahu, but are largely absent from their
historical population sites on these islands.
Mesic forest, once abundant and considered the most diverse of all
Hawaiian forest types (Rock 1913, p. 9), is now very rare, with much of
it converted to pasture, or military or agricultural use, or lost to
urbanization (Cuddihy and Stone 1990, p. 61; Magnacca 2007, p. 187).
Fire has also negatively impacted this habitat type, as is discussed
below. Hylaeus facilis was historically the most wide ranging of the
seven bee species in terms of the variety of habitats from which it was
recorded, which included mesic forest on Lanai, Maui, Molokai, and
Oahu. This species is now restricted to single locations on the islands
of Molokai and Oahu.
The petitioner identified the loss of coastal, dry lowland, and
montane wet forest habitat on Oahu, Lanai, Maui, and Molokai as a
contributing factor to the decline of H. facilis, but acknowledges that
``although recorded from several sites currently considered to be wet
forest, it is possible that H. facilis would not normally inhabit this
[habitat] in a natural state.'' The petitioner attributes the current
observation of this species at sites now known to be wetter than they
were during the early Perkins' collecting period to the more open
understory vegetation (Perkins 1899, p. 76). It is conceivable that the
loss of mesic forest habitat used by H. kuakea is due to urbanization
and land use conversion, although the petitioner presents no
information in this regard, nor do we have information in our files
regarding the historical locations of these two species, both of which
were only recently collected (H. kuakea in 1997; H. mana in 2002).
Habitat Destruction and Modification by Nonnative Plants
The petitioner states that the spread of nonnative plant species is
one of the primary causes of decline, and a current threat to the
existing populations of each of the seven Hylaeus bee species, because
they depend closely on native vegetation for nectar and pollen, and the
bees are almost entirely absent from habitat dominated by invasive,
nonnative vegetation (Sakai et al. 2002, pp. 276, 291; Daly and
Magnacca 2003, p. 11; Liebherr 2005, p. 186). According to information
available in our files and
[[Page 34084]]
presented by the petitioner, the native flora within a majority of
lowland habitat on the Hawaiian Islands below 1,969 ft (600 m) is being
replaced by aggressive, nonnative plant species (Cuddihy and Stone
1990, pp. 73-74; Wagner et al. 1999, p. 52). The petitioner states that
many native plant species that are replaced by nonnative plants were
once foraging resources for numerous Hylaeus species (Cox and Elmqvist
2000, p. 1238; Daly and Magnacca 2003, p. 11; USFWS 1999, pp. 145, 163,
171, 180; USFWS 2008, pp. 7, 9). Six of the seven Hylaeus bee species
(Hylaeus anthracinus, H. assimulans, H. facilis, H. kuakea, H.
longiceps, and H. mana) are most often found in dry and mesic forest
and shrubland habitat (Daly and Magnacca 2003, p. 11), and the greatest
proportion of endangered or at-risk Hawaiian plant species are also
limited to these same habitats; 25 percent of Hawaiian listed plant
species are from dry forest and shrubland alone (Sakai et al. 2002, pp.
276, 291, 292). The petitioner asserts that lowland dry and mesic
forests now support less-diverse Hylaeus communities because many
native plants used for foraging are extirpated from these habitats
(Magnacca 2007, pp. 186-187).
The petitioner states that besides Scaevola sericea (naupaka
kahakai), native vegetation is lacking along most of the coastline of
the major Hawaiian Islands, and that Hylaeus bees cannot survive on
this plant alone (Magnacca 2007, p. 187). The petitioner also states
that native coastal vegetation in many areas, such as Moomomi Preserve
on Molokai, which currently is the only known location for Hylaeus
hilaris, is threatened by Prosopis pallida (kiawe), an invasive,
nonnative, deciduous thorny tree (Xerces 2009a, p. 25; 2009b, p. 17;
2009c, p. 21; 2009d, p. 11).
According to the petitions, many of the native plants that serve as
foraging resources for the adults of the seven Hylaeus bee species are
declining due to a lack of pollinators (Daly and Magnacca 2003, p. 11;
USFWS 2008, pp. 7, 9) and are found only in very small populations
(USFWS 1999, pp. 145, 163, 171, 180; Cox and Elmqvist 2000, p. 1238).
The petitioner points out, for example, that H. longiceps and H.
anthracinus are known to forage on the federally endangered plant
Sesbania tomentosa (ohai). Both H. longiceps and H. anthracinus also
visit Chamaesyce celastroides var. kaenana (akoko), a federally
endangered plant endemic to coastal dry shrubland on Oahu (Daly and
Magnacca 2003, pp. 55, 74). Hylaeus longiceps is also known to forage
on the endangered Scaevola coriacea (dwarf naupaka) (USFWS 1999, p.
145; Daly and Magnacca 2003, pp. 55, 135). In addition, H. anthracinus
has been collected from inside the fruit capsule of Kadua coriacea
(kioele), a federally endangered dry forest plant, known from fewer
than 300 individuals on the island of Hawaii (USFWS 2008, p. 5;
Christian Torres, USFWS, pers. comm. 2009).
Habitat Destruction and Modification by Nonnative Ungulates
The petitioner claims that the decline of native plant communities
has likely had a negative impact on Hawaii's Hylaeus bee species
(Cuddihy and Stone 1990, pp. 59-66, 88-94, 73-76; USFWS 2006, p. 2684).
The presence of nonnative mammals, such as feral pigs (Sus scrofa),
cattle (Bos taurus), goats (Capra hircus), and axis deer (Axis axis),
is considered one of the primary factors underlying the alteration and
degradation of native vegetation and habitat in the Hawaiian Islands
(Stone 1985, pp. 262-263; Cuddihy and Stone 1990, pp. 60-66; 73 FR
73801). Beyond the direct effects of trampling and consuming native
plants, nonnative ungulates contribute significantly to increased
erosion, and their behavior (i.e., rooting, moving across large
expanses) facilitates the spread and establishment of competing,
invasive, nonnative plant species (Xerces 2009a, p. 26; 2009b, p. 18;
2009c, pp. 21-22, 2009d, pp. 12-13, 2009e, p. 10). Several endangered
coastal and lowland plant species that are threatened by the browsing,
trampling, and digging activities of nonnative ungulates are confirmed
foraging sources for Hylaeus species and, therefore, are likely
foraging sources for these seven Hylaeus species (USFWS 1999, pp. 145,
163, 171, 180; Daly and Magnacca 2003, pp. 11, 13).
Habitat Destruction and Modification by Fire
The petitions state that fire can dramatically alter the species
composition of plant communities in coastal and lowland habitats
(Hughes et al. 1991, p. 743; Blackmore and Vitousek 2000, p. 625), and
thus potentially impact Hylaeus populations. The petitioner also
suggests that ordnance-induced fires on the Army's Pohakuloa Training
Area on the island of Hawaii may threaten the dry forest habitat of
Hylaeus anthracinus. Fires were uncommon in the Hawaiian Islands until
the arrival of humans about 2,000 years ago (Smith and Tunison 1992,
pp. 394-395). Native habitat in the Hawaiian Islands has been
increasingly colonized by fire-adapted invasive plant species that take
the place of, and permanently replace, native plant species (Cuddihy
and Stone, pp. 88-94; Smith and Tunison 1992, pp. 394-395; D'Antonio et
al. 2000, pp. 73-74). This process has been facilitated by nonnative
ungulates, which alter the floral composition of native habitats,
making conditions more conducive to fire. This impact occurs because of
the browsing and trampling of native vegetation, and the spreading of
seeds of nonnative, fire-adapted plant species such as Melinis
minutiflora (molasses grass) and Schizachyrium condensatum (tufted
beardgrass) (D'Antonio et al. 2000, pp. 73-74).
Habitat Destruction and Modification by Recreational Activities
The petitions state that some of the best habitat areas for Hylaeus
species are also popular recreational sites, particularly those areas
located within coastal strand habitat (Xerces 2009a, p. 27; 2009c, p.
22). Human impacts at recreational sites may include removal or
trampling of vegetation on or near trails and the compaction of
vegetation by off-road vehicles (Xerces 2009a, p. 27; 2009c, p. 22). In
particular, the petitioner claims that Hylaeus facilis habitat may be
threatened by recreational activities, such as hunting and hiking on
the Poamoho Trail on Oahu (Hawaii Department of Land and Natural
Resources 2000, p. 15; Xerces 2009c, p. 22). According to the
petitions, some of the best remaining habitat for H. anthracinus and H.
longiceps includes Kaena Point (on Oahu), Kona Coast State Park,
Makalawena, Mokuauia, and South Point (on the island of Hawaii), areas
that are popular recreational sites with largely unregulated access
(Xerces 2009a, p. 27).
Habitat Destruction and Modification by Climate Change
The petitioner asserts that a changing climate may cause shifts in
the range of Hylaeus host plant species, which can be especially
detrimental to dependent pollinators like these seven species when
combined with habitat loss (National Research Council 2007, p. 102).
Most bees have difficulty crossing large geographical barriers
(Michener 2000, p. 103), and successive generations of solitary species
like Hylaeus tend to nest in the same area year after year. The
petitioner points out that the seven Hylaeus bee species are restricted
to habitat patches where native host plant species are present, and
argues that they are not likely to disperse far to find new habitat
(Xerces 2009a, p. 30; 2009b, p. 21; 2009c, p. 25; 2009d, p. 14; 2009e,
p. 13). Thus, the
[[Page 34085]]
ecology of these seven species, combined with the patchy distribution
of their remaining habitat, may hinder their dispersal if relocation
becomes necessary due to climate-influenced changes in distribution of
host plant species (Magnacca 2007, pp. 173, 181-183, 188) and cause the
extirpation of remaining populations of Hylaeus anthracinus, H.
assimulans, H. facilis, H. hilaris, H. kuakea, H. longiceps, and H.
mana.
The petitioner states that climate change may also have a
deleterious effect upon the seven Hylaeus bee species due to climate-
induced changes in rainfall patterns, since these species prefer
relatively dry habitats, some of which lack groundwater sources. The
petitioner presents a concern that a predicted rise in sea level in the
Hawaiian Islands (Baker et al. 2006, p. 1) might threaten coastal
strand populations of the seven Hylaeus bee species. The petitions cite
one study that predicted that sea level rise in the Northwestern
Hawaiian Islands will cause a median projected loss of land of 3 to 65
percent with a 19-in (48-cm) sea level rise, and a maximum projected
loss of land of 5 to 75 percent with a 35-in (88-cm) sea level rise
(Baker et al. 2006, p. 1). Although none of the seven Hylaeus bees
occurs on the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands, the petitioner concludes
that sea level rise will also impact the populations of the five
species of Hawaiian yellow-faced bees (Hylaeus anthracinus, H.
assimulans, H. facilis, H. hilaris, and H. longiceps) inhabiting
coastal sites on the main Hawaiian Islands.
Summary of Factor A
In summary, we find that the information provided in the petitions
presents substantial scientific or commercial information indicating
that the petitioned actions may be warranted due to the present or
threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of the species'
habitat or range. The petitioner has provided no information, and we
have no information in our files to substantiate the claim that there
will be climate-induced changes in rainfall patterns in the areas where
the seven species occur, or that relatively dry habitats will be
negatively impacted. The petitions did identify numerous potential
factors that may be affecting Hylaeus anthracinus, H. assimulans, H.
facilis, H. hilaris, H. kuakea, H. longiceps, and H. mana, including
habitat loss and degradation due to urbanization and land conversion;
replacement of native host plants by nonnative plants caused by the
browsing, trampling, and rooting activities of nonnative ungulates,
which facilitates the establishment of nonnative plants in disturbed
areas; conversion by fire of native plant communities to plant
communities dominated by nonnative, fire-adapted plants; and the
removal or trampling of native vegetation by people and compaction of
native vegetation by off-road vehicles in popular recreational areas,
particularly in coastal strand habitat. Information in our files also
indicates these factors may present a threat to the seven species of
Hylaeus. We, therefore, conclude the petitions present substantial
information to indicate that the present or threatened destruction or
modification of habitat may present a threat to H. anthracinus, H.
assimulans, H. facilis, H. hilaris, H. kuakea, H. longiceps, and H.
mana.
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
According to the petitioner, Hylaeus facilis, H. hilaris, H.
kuakea, and H. mana, each with two or fewer known populations, are
especially vulnerable to overcollection because the collection of even
a few individuals could significantly reduce the production of
offspring (Xerces 2009c, p. 23; 2009d, p. 13; 2009e, p. 11). However,
the petitions also acknowledge that because of the high fecundity of
individual insects, the collection of insects does not pose a threat to
their populations (Xerces 2009c, p. 23; 2009d, p. 11; 2009e, p. 11),
which introduces an element of uncertainty concerning this claim.
Insect collecting is a valuable component of research, including
taxonomic work, and is often necessary for documenting the existence of
populations and population trends. The petitioner has not presented
information with which we can evaluate whether the overcollection of
Hylaeus facilis, H. hilaris, H. kuakea, or H. mana may present a threat
to any of these species, or determine whether this activity has
resulted in population declines. In this regard, neither the petitions,
nor information available in our files, presents information that would
indicate overcollection may present a significant threat to H.
anthracinus, H. assimulans, H. facilis, H. hilaris, H. kuakea, H.
longiceps, or H. mana.
C. Disease or predation
Neither the petitions nor information in our files presents
information that would indicate disease is a current threat to Hylaeus
anthracinus, H. assimulans, H. facilis, H. hilaris, H. kuakea, H.
longiceps, or H. mana.
Predation by Nonnative Ants
Ants are known to prey upon Hylaeus species (Medeiros et al. 1986,
pp. 45-46; Reimer 1994, p. 17), thereby directly eliminating them from
specific areas. The petitions state that ants are not a natural
component of Hawaii's arthropod fauna, and the native species of the
islands evolved in the absence of predation pressure from ants. They
also state that ants can be particularly destructive predators because
of their high densities, recruitment behavior, aggressiveness, and
broad range of diet (Reimer 1993, pp. 17-18). The petitions also state
that the threat of ant predation on the seven Hylaeus bee species is
amplified by the fact that most ant species have winged reproductive
adults (Borror et al. 1989, p. 738) and can quickly establish new
colonies in suitable habitats (Staples and Cowie 2001, p. 55). In
addition, the petitions state that these attributes allow some ants to
destroy otherwise geographically isolated populations of native
arthropods (Nafus 1993, pp. 19, 22-23).
According to the petitions, at least 47 species of ants are known
to be established in the Hawaiian Islands (Hawaii Ants 2008, pp. 1-11).
Native insect fauna, likely including Hylaeus bees (Zimmerman 1948, p.
173; Reimer et al. 1990, pp. 40-43; HEAR database 2005, pp. 1-2), have
been severely impacted by at least four particularly aggressive ant
species: The big-headed ant (Pheidole megacephala), the long-legged ant
(also known as the yellow crazy ant) (Anoplolepis gracilipes),
Solenopsis papuana (no common name), and Solenopsis geminata (no common
name). The petitions state that numerous other species of ants are
recognized as threats to Hawaii's native invertebrates, and an unknown
number of new species of ants are established every few years (Staples
and Cowie 2001, p. 53). The petitions state that due to their
preference for drier habitat sites, ants are more likely to occur in
high densities in the dry and mesic habitat currently occupied by the
seven bees (Xerces 2009a, p. 28; 2009b, p. 19; 2009c, p. 24; 2009d, pp.
13-14; 2009e, pp. 11-12).
The petitions state that the long-legged ant appeared in Hawaii in
1952; now occurs on Kauai, Oahu, Maui, and Hawaii (Reimer et al. 1990,
p. 42); and inhabits low-to-mid-elevation (less than 2,000-ft (600-m))
rocky areas of moderate rainfall (less than 100 in (250 cm) annually)
(Reimer et al. 1990, p. 42). The petitioner also states that direct
observations indicate that Hawaiian arthropods are susceptible to
predation by this species; Gillespie and Reimer
[[Page 34086]]
(1993, p. 21) and Hardy (1979, p. 34) documented the impacts to native
insects within the Kipahulu area on Maui after this area was invaded by
the long-legged ant. The petitioner concludes that although only
cursory observations exist, long-legged ants are thought to be a threat
to populations of the seven Hylaeus bees within dry to mesic areas
within their elevation range (Reimer et al. 1990, p. 42).
Solenopsis papuana is the only abundant, aggressive ant that has
invaded intact mesic to wet forest from sea level to over 2,000 ft (600
m) on all of the main Hawaiian Islands, and is still expanding its
range (Reimer 1993, p. 14). The petitions state that because of this
species' expanding range, it may threaten populations of Hylaeus
facilis in mesic areas up to 2,000 ft (600 m) in elevation (Reimer
1993, p. 14).
The petitions state that the presence of ants in nearly all of the
low-elevation habitat sites historically and currently occupied by the
seven Hylaeus bee species may increase the uncertainty of Hylaeus
recovery within these areas. Hylaeus populations are known to be
drastically reduced in ant-infested areas (Medeiros et al. 1986, pp.
45-46; Stone and Loope 1987, p. 251; Cole et al. 1992, pp. 1313, 1317,
1320; Reimer 1994, p. 17). Although ant species' primary impact on the
native invertebrate fauna is via predation (Reimer 1994, p. 17), they
also compete for nectar (Howarth 1985, p. 155; Hopper et al. 1996, p.
9; Holway et al. 2002, pp. 188, 209; Daly and Magnacca 2003, p. 9; Lach
2008, p. 155) and nest sites (Krushelnycky et al. 2005, pp. 6-7). Some
ant species may impact Hylaeus species indirectly as well, by predating
on seeds of native plants (Bond and Slingsby 1984, p. 1031). The
petitioner suggests that the greatest ecosystem-level effect of
invasive ants has been on pollination. Additionally, where ranges
overlap, ants compete with native pollinators such as Hylaeus species
and preclude them from pollinating native plants. For example, the big-
headed ant is known to actively rob nectar from flowers without
pollinating them (Howarth 1985, p. 157). Lach (2008, p. 155) found that
Hylaeus species that regularly collect pollen from flowers of
Metrosideros polymorpha were entirely absent from trees that had their
flowers exposed to big-headed ant foraging.
The Hylaeus egg, larvae, and pupal stages are more vulnerable to
attack by ants than the mobile adult bee (Daly and Magnacca 2003, p.
10). Invasive ants have severely impacted ground-nesting Hylaeus
species in particular (Cole et al. 1992, pp. 1317, 1320; Medeiros et
al. 1986, pp. 45-46), because their nests are easily accessible, and in
or near the ground. Since Hylaeus anthracinus, H. facilis, H. hilaris,
and H. longiceps are related to other ground-nesting Hylaeus species,
they may also be susceptible to ant predation (Magnacca 2005g, p. 2).
The rarity or disappearance of native Hylaeus species, including
the seven petitioned Hawaiian yellow-faced bee species, from
historically documented localities over the past 100 years is likely
due to a variety of factors. There is no information that conclusively
correlates the decrease in Hylaeus observations with the establishment
of nonnative ants in low-to-montane and dry-to-wet habitats on the
Hawaiian Islands; however, their collective presence suggests that
nonnative ants may have played a role in the decline of some
populations of the seven Hylaeus bee species evaluated in this finding.
Predation by Nonnative Western Yellowjacket Wasps
The petitioner suggests that Vespula pensylvanica (the western
yellowjacket wasp) is a potentially serious threat to the seven Hylaeus
bees. This assertion is supported by literature available in our files
(Gambino et al. 1987, p. 170; Wilson et al. 2009, pp. 1-5). The western
yellowjacket wasp is a social wasp species native to the mainland of
North America. It was first reported from Oahu in the 1930s (Sherley
2000, p. 121), and an aggressive race became established in 1977
(Gambino et al. 1987, p. 170). In temperate climates, the western
yellowjacket wasp has an annual life cycle, but in Hawaii's tropical
climate, colonies of this species persist through a second year,
allowing them to have larger numbers of individuals (Gambino et al.
1987, p. 170) and thus a greater impact on prey populations. Most
colonies are found between 1,969 and 3,445 ft (600 and 1,050 m) in
elevation (Gambino et al. 1990, p. 1,088), although they can also occur
at sea level. The western yellowjacket wasp is known to be an
aggressive, generalist predator (Gambino et al. 1987, p. 170), and has
been documented preying upon Hawaiian Hylaeus species (Wilson et al.
2009, p. 2). The petitioner argues that predation by the western
yellowjacket wasp is a potentially significant threat to Hylaeus
anthracinus, H. assimulans, H. facilis, H. hilaris, H. kuakea, H.
longiceps, and H. mana because of their small population sizes. This
may present a particular threat to H. facilis, H. hilaris, H. kuakea,
and H. mana because each species has two or fewer populations. The
petitions also suggest that the western yellowjacket wasp may compete
for nectar with Hylaeus species, but the petitions provide no
information indicating that competition for nectar is a threat.
Predation by Nonnative Parasitoid Wasps
The petitions state that native and nonnative parasitoid wasps
parasitize some Oahu Hylaeus species and may pose a threat to H. kuakea
and H. mana (Xerces 2009e, p. 12). The petitions also state that
Hylaeus larvae are known to be attacked by parasitoid wasps within the
Encyrtidae and Eupelmidae families, although it is unconfirmed whether
parasitoid wasps utilize H. kuakea and H. mana as nutritional hosts for
their larvae (Xerces 2009e, p. 12). However, the petitions did not
provide any evidence, and we have nothing in our files, to support
these claims.
Summary of Factor C
Overall, the petitions provided substantial scientific or
commercial information indicating that the petitioned actions may be
warranted due to disease or predation. Neither the petitions, nor
information available in our files, present data that would indicate
that predation by parasitoid wasps presents a threat to any of the
Hylaeus species addressed in this finding. Although the petitions
suggest that the western yellowjacket wasp may compete for nectar with
Hylaeus species, no information was presented that would allow us to
evaluate whether this presents a significant threat to any of the
petitioned species. However, observations and reports have documented
that ants are particularly destructive predators because of their high
densities, broad range of diet, and ability to establish new colonies
in otherwise geographically isolated locations, because the
reproductive adults are able to fly (Xerces 2009a, pp. 27-28; 2009b,
pp. 19-20; 2009c, p. 23; 2009d, pp. 13-14, 2009e, p. 11). In addition,
the western yellowjacket wasp has been documented to prey upon Hawaiian
Hylaeus species (Xerces 2009a, p. 29; 2009b, p 20; 2009c, p. 24; 2009d,
pp. 14-15, 2009e, pp. 12-13). Accordingly, we conclude the petitions
present substantial information indicating that Hylaeus anthracinus, H.
assimulans, H. facilis, H. hilaris, H. kuakea, H. longiceps, and H.
mana may be threatened because of predation by nonnative ants and the
nonnative western yellowjacket wasp.
D. The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
The petitioner stated that there are no existing Federal, State, or
local laws,
[[Page 34087]]
treaties, or regulations that specifically conserve or protect habitat
for the seven Hylaeus bee species. The petitioner does acknowledge that
some historic and current collection localities are protected from
development by Federal or State agencies; one of two known populations
of H. facilis occurs at Kalaupapa National Historical Park on Molokai,
and three species (H. anthracinus, H. hilaris, and H. longiceps) occur
at the State's Kaena Point Natural Area Reserve (NAR) on Oahu, Kanaio
NAR on Maui, or The Nature Conservancy's Moomomi Preserve on Molokai.
The petitioner asserts that conservation of the seven Hylaeus bees will
likely require active management of their known population sites,
involving exclusion and removal of feral ungulates, control and removal
of nonnative plant and insect species, and the restoration of native
vegetation (Magnacca 2007, p. 185). The petitions state that existing
regulatory mechanisms are inadequate to provide the necessary active
management needed to protect the seven Hylaeus species (Xerces 2000a,
p. 29; 2000b, p. 20; 2000c, p 24; 2000d, p. 15, 2000e, p. 13). However,
there was no specific information provided in the petitions about
existing regulatory mechanisms that could protect these species. We are
also not aware of any regulatory mechanisms that address the seven
Hylaeus species.
The petitioners claim that there are no protections provided by
existing State or Federal regulations to effectively address potential
threats to the seven species of Hawaiian yellow-faced bees (Xerces
2000a, p. 29; 2000b, p. 20; 2000c, p 24; 2000d, p. 15; 2000e, p. 13).
However, the petitioners did not provide any additional information
about existing regulatory mechanisms that could protect these species,
and we have nothing in our files that describes any regulatory
mechanisms that address the seven Hylaeus species. While information
presented by the petitioner indicates that threats to the petitioned
species may be posed by habitat destruction and degradation by
nonnative ungulates and nonnative plants and through predation by
nonnative insects, none of these threats are posed by an inadequacy of
regulatory mechanisms. We, therefore, find that the petitions do not
present substantial information indicating that the inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms may present a threat to Hylaeus
anthracinus, H. assimulans, H. facilis, H. hilaris, H. kuakea, H.
longiceps, or H. mana. However, we will further evaluate the adequacy
of existing regulatory mechanisms for protecting the seven species of
Hawaiian yellow-faced bees and their habitats during our status review.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting the Species' Continued
Existence
Small Number of Populations and Individuals
Species that are endemic to single islands or known from few,
widely dispersed locations are inherently more vulnerable to extinction
than widespread species because of the higher risks from genetic
bottlenecks, random demographic fluctuations, climate change, and
localized catastrophes such as hurricanes, landslides, and drought
(Lande 1988, p. 1455; Mangel and Tier 1994, p. 607; Pimm et al. 1988,
p. 757). These problems can be further magnified when populations are
few and restricted to a limited geographic area, and the number of
individuals is very small. Populations with these characteristics face
an increased likelihood of stochastic extinction due to changes in
demography, the environment, genetics, or other factors, in a process
described as an extinction vortex (Gilpin and Soule 1986, pp. 24-25).
Small, isolated populations often exhibit a reduced level of genetic
variability or genetic depression due to inbreeding, which diminishes
the species' capacity to adapt and respond to environmental changes,
thereby lessening the probability of long-term persistence (Frankham
2003, pp. S22-S29; Soule 1986, pp. 31-34). The negative impacts
associated with small population size and vulnerability to random
demographic fluctuations or natural catastrophes can be further
magnified by synergistic interactions with other threats.
The petitioner states that all of the petitioned Hylaeus bee
species are rare, have very small populations, and are likely more
vulnerable to habitat change and stochastic events due to low genetic
variability (Daly and Magnacca 2003, p. 3; Magnacca 2007, p. 173,
Petition p. 13). Literature cited by the petitioner states that about
three-quarters of the species described from the Hawaiian Islands by
Perkins (1899, 1910, 1911) have been collected recently. Some are still
as rare or as abundant as he observed, yet others, formerly abundant,
have not been collected recently (Daly and Magnacca 2003, p. 3). Five
species have not been collected recently from one or more islands from
which they are historically known, 7 are restricted to endangered
habitat, 10 are considered to be very rare and potentially endangered,
and 10 have not been collected recently and could be extinct (Magnacca
2007, p. 3). The petitioner asserts that Hylaeus facilis, H. hilaris,
H. kuakea, and H. mana have not been recently observed at some
historical collection sites, and that each of these species now has two
or fewer known populations, which could increase the risk of extinction
due to stochastic events such as hurricanes, landslides, large
wildfires, or prolonged drought (Jones et al. 1984, p. 209; Smith and
Tunison 1992, p. 398; Petition p. 13). Since H. hilaris is
cleptoparasitic and restricted to one known remaining population, it is
at particularly high risk of extinction because of the rarity of its
hosts and the fact that it is the most habitat-specific of all Hawaiian
bees (Daly and Magnacca 2003). The recurrence intervals for stochastic
events of this nature have not been explicitly defined, which
introduces some uncertainty regarding potential effects to the
petitioned species. The fact that a species is potentially vulnerable
to stochastic processes does not necessarily mean that it is reasonably
likely to experience, or have its status affected by, a given
stochastic process within timescales that are meaningful under the Act.
While we recognize the inherent species risks of small population
size and small numbers of individuals, we currently lack information
needed to assess this potential threat to the status of the petitioned
species. We will investigate issues related to Hylaeus population size
and species susceptibility to catastrophic stochastic events during the
status review in order to better address this concern in the 12-month
finding.
Competition with Nonnative Insects
There are 15 known species of nonnative bees in Hawaii (Snelling
2003, p. 342), including two nonnative Hylaeus species (Magnacca 2007,
p. 188). According to the petitioner, most nonnative bees inhabit areas
dominated by nonnative vegetation and do not compete with native
Hawaiian bees (Daly and Magnacca 2003, p. 13). The European honey bee
(Apis mellifera) is an exception; this social species is often very
abundant in areas with native vegetation and aggressively competes with
Hylaeus for nectar and pollen (Hopper et al. 1996, p. 9; Daly and
Magnacca 2003, p. 13; Snelling 2003, p. 345). The European honey bee
was first introduced to the Hawaiian Islands in 1875, and currently
inhabits areas from sea level to tree line (Howarth 1985, p. 156). The
petitioner reports that European honey bees have been
[[Page 34088]]
observed foraging on Hylaeus host plants such as Scaevola spp. and
Sesbania tomentosa. However, the petitioner does not present
information indicating that Hawaiian Hylaeus populations have declined
because of competition with European honey bees for nectar and pollen
(Magnacca 2007, p. 188). The petitioner asserts that populations of the
European honey bee are not as vulnerable to predation by nonnative ant
species as are Hylaeus bees (see Factor C above). The petitioner refers
to a study by Lach (2008, p. 155), who observed that although Hylaeus
bees that regularly collect pollen from the flowers of Metrosideros
polymorpha trees were entirely absent from trees whose flowers had been
visited by the big-headed ant, visits by the European honey bee were
not affected by big-headed ant presence.
As described by the petitioner, other nonnative bees found in areas
of native vegetation include Ceratina species (carpenter bees), Hylaeus
albonitens (Australian colletid bees), and Lasioglossum impavidum (no
common name) (Magnacca 2007, p. 188). The petitioner suggests that
these nonnative bees may impact native Hylaeus bees such as H. facilis
through competition for pollen, based on their similar size and flower
preferences. However, the petitioner acknowledges that the impact of
these species on native Hylaeus bees has not been studied (Magnacca
2007, p. 188). The petitioner also suggests that parasitoid wasps may
compete for nectar with native Hylaeus species (Daly and Magnacca 2003,
p. 10), but did not present supporting information in this regard. No
information on the potential threat to the species from parasitoid
wasps is available in our files.
Summary of Factor E
In summary, the petitions provided substantial scientific or
commercial information indicating that the petitioned actions may be
warranted due to other factors affecting the species' continued
existence. The petitioner did not present information, nor is
information available in our files, indicating that competition from
parasitoid wasps or other nonnative bees, such as Ceratina species,
Hylaeus albonitens, and Lasioglossum impavidum, presents a threat to
the petitioned species. However, the petitions do present information
indicating that Hylaeus anthracinus, H. assimulans, H. facilis, H.
hilaris, H. kuakea, H. longiceps, and H. mana may be threatened because
of their very small populations and low genetic variability, which may
make them vulnerable to habitat change and stochastic events such as
droughts. Each of the petitions characterizes the population status of
the petitioned species as ``small and isolated'' or ``extremely rare,
very small populations,'' and we do not have any contrary information
in our files. The petitioner also presents information indicating that
competition with the European honey bee may present a threat to the
seven Hylaeus bee species. We, therefore, conclude that the petition
presents substantial scientific information indicating that other
natural or manmade factors affecting the species' continued existence
may threaten Hylaeus anthracinus, H. assimulans, H. facilis, H.
hilaris, H. kuakea, H. longiceps, and H. mana. These factors include
the species' small numbers of populations and individuals and
competition with nonnative European honey bees.
Finding
We have reviewed the petitions, supporting information provided by
the petitioner, and information in our files, and we evaluated that
information to determine whether the sources cited support the claims
made in the petitions. On the basis of our evaluation of the petition
under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act, we have determined that the
petition presents substantial scientific or commercial information
indicating that listing the seven Hylaeus bees as threatened or
endangered may be warranted. This finding is based on information that
indicates these species' continued existence may be affected by
destruction or modification of their coastal strand and lowland forest
and shrubland habitat from urbanization and land conversion, nonnative
plants, nonnative ungulates, fire, recreational activities (Factor A);
predation by nonnative ants and the western yellowjacket wasp (Factor
C); inadequate protection from threats by existing regulatory
mechanisms (Factor D); and other natural or manmade factors such as
small population size, and competition with the European honey bee
(Factor E). The petitioner does not present substantial information
that these seven Hylaeus bees are threatened by overcollection (Factor
B) currently or in the future.
Because we have found that the petition presents substantial
information indicating that listing the seven Hylaeus bee species may
be warranted, we are initiating status reviews to determine whether
listing these seven species under the Act is warranted. At the
conclusion of the status reviews we will issue 12-month findings, in
accordance with section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act, as to whether or not the
Service believes a proposal to list Hylaeus anthracinus, H. assimulans,
H. facilis, H. hilaris, H. kuakea, H. longiceps, and H. mana is
warranted.
The ``substantial information'' standard for a 90-day finding
differs from the Act's ``best scientific and commercial data'' standard
that applies to a status review to determine whether a petitioned
action is warranted. A 90-day finding does not constitute a status
review under the Act. In a 12-month finding, we will determine whether
a petitioned action is warranted after we have completed a thorough
status review of the species, which is conducted following a
substantial 90-day finding. Because the Act's standards for 90-day and
12-month findings are different, as described above, a substantial 90-
day finding does not mean that the 12-month finding will determine that
listing is warranted.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited herein is available on the
Internet at http://www.regulations.govand upon request from the Pacific
Islands Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Author
The primary authors of this notice are the staff of the Pacific
Islands Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Authority
The authority for this action is the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: June 3, 2010.
Daniel M. Ashe,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-14430 Filed 6-15-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S