\u201cWe weren\u2019t trying to do as much stuff in the NARS as we are now,\u201d says Army biologist Kapua Kawelo of the early days when the Army undertook work in the state\u2019s Natural Area Reserves System (NARS) areas as part of a mitigation plan allowing ongoing use of Makua Military Reservation on O\u2018ahu.<\/p>\n
\u201cIt was done pretty informally,\u201d she continues.<\/p>\n
But that informal relationship has broken under the strain of the Army\u2019s increasing work on state-controlled lands. For more than a year, the state and the Army have been trying to figure out formal terms under which the Army\u2019s environmental program crew, led by Kawelo, can use state lands to carry out significant parts of its Makua Implementa tion Plan. Under that plan, developed in consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Army must stabilize 29 endan gered species (28 plants, and one snail) that are in harm\u2019s way from live-fire training at Makua Valley, on the leeward coast of O\u2018ahu.<\/p>\n
In the early days of the Army\u2019s work, Talbert Takahama, a biologist with theNARS Program on O\u2018ahu, worked out of the Army\u2019s baseyard, an arrangement that lasted from 1997 to 2002. If the Army crew wanted access to a certain population of an endangered species, \u201cwe\u2019d ask him to come with us,\u201d Kawelo says. And for the most part, Takahama did just that, accompanying Army crews as they carried out mitigation activities in three O\u2018ahu Natural Area Reserves: Pahole, Ka\u2018ala, and Ka\u2018ena.<\/p>\n
As Army demands on NARS staff time increased, so, too did the staffers\u2019 frustration, as the Army\u2019s activities became more difficult to monitor and control. So in the summer of 2004, the NARS staff, following instruction from their deputy attorney general, informed the Army that it needed to get a NARS permit, if it wanted to continue its mitigative mea sures.<\/p>\n
Since then, both sides have been trying to pin down terms for such a permit, which may be voted on by the Natural Area Reserves Commission as early as this month.<\/p>\n
A Chronology<\/i><\/b>
\n\u201cMaybe the state should have been involved earlier,\u201d says Randy Kennedy, NARS Pro gram Manager with the Department of Land and Natural Resources. \u201cBut with only one or two people working on the O\u2018ahu Natural Area Reserves, it was just too difficult to attend all of the (50+) meetings,\u201d that the Army has had on its plans for Makua.<\/p>\n
In the 1990s, the Army entered into con sultation with the Fish and Wildlife Service to determine whether its training activities at Makua were threatening the more than 30 endangered species living in the valley\u2019s upper reaches. By then, the Army\u2019s use of live ammunition had set off several catastrophic wildfires that burned hundreds of acres.<\/p>\n
In 1999, the FWS issued a \u201cno jeopardy\u201d opinion for the Army, contingent upon the stabilization of most of the endangered spe cies living within the potential burn area, which includes Pahole NAR. The Army then assembled a Makua Implementation team of scientists and resource managers to develop a plan to stabilize the endangered plant and tree snail species.<\/p>\n
In October of that year, the Army invited DLNR staff to join the team, but the state, overburdened with its own management needs, was not an active participant in plan team meet ings. In May 2002, Kawelo was in vited to brief the NARS Commission on the Army\u2019s proposed work, since the state\u2019s Natural Area Reserves in the Wai\u2018anae area figure prominently in mitigation plans. Although the Makua Implementation Plan at that point was still a draft, Kawelo says, \u201cWe probably should have presented it to the NARS [Commission] sooner. They would have said we need a permit.\u201d<\/p>\n
Instead, the Army continued working in formally with NARS staff, while attempting to draft a Memorandum of Understanding with then-Division of Forestry and Wildlife administrator Mike Buck.<\/p>\n
In August 2002, the Army met with Buck and DNLR staff to discuss the draft Makua Implementation Plan. Kawelo says the state asked that some changes be made to remove hunting areas and address conflicts with the state\u2019s own rare plant management activities.<\/p>\n
In October 2002, the Army sent a draft MOU to Buck, but received no formal re sponse, Kawelo says. The Army has since signed an MOU with The Nature Conser vancy, owner of other lands in the Wai\u2018anae area where Army mitigation activities are planned. A year ago, the Army hired full-time liaison to work with TNC and provide over sight to \u201cmake sure Makua action happens,\u201d Kawelo says.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe were thinking an MOU would for malize our relationship with the state,\u201d Kawelo says. NARS rules call for Special Use Permits to be issued for all activities within the re serves, but, Kawelo adds, the SUP process is designed for research and isn\u2019t really suited for management activities (Although the per\u00admit application is geared toward researchers, it has been used to cover non-research activi ties in the past, for example, Native Hawaiian subsistence fishing at \u2018Ahihi-Kina\u2018u.)<\/p>\n
Without a final implementation plan, however, the state was concerned any MOU would be premature.<\/p>\n
While the Army negotiated with the DLNR on ways to formalize their relationship, its environmental crew continued its fieldwork on state lands. As time passed, Army efforts grew. Under the tentative working arrange ment that had evolved over the years, Army crews were allowed access to Natural Area Reserves but were required to let staff know in advance of any fieldwork.<\/p>\n
But that eventually proved too difficult. In August 2004, when Army crews did not or could not reach Takahama in advance of working in a NAR. \u201cThat\u2019s when they told us to apply for a NARS permit,\u201d Kawelo says.<\/p>\n
At a recent NARS Commission meeting, O\u2018ahu NARS manager Brent Liesemeyer and Takahama explained that the Army\u2019s de mands were simply overwhelming. They were spending as much as a third of their time tracking the Army\u2019s work, they said.<\/p>\n
Kawelo insists that the Army has a good working relationship with the state. But, she adds, \u201cWhat he [Takahama] said at the meet ing was true. There\u2019s more [Army] staff now. It\u2019s not possible\u201d for Takahama to accom pany them all the time.<\/p>\n
What\u2019s an \u2018Activity?\u2019<\/i><\/b>
\nDLNR rules require a permit for most activi ties in state forest reserves or natural area reserves. Last August, when Kawelo was told she\u2019d need to apply for a NARS permit, an application for a collection permit from the DLNR\u2019s Division of Forestry and Wildlife had been pending for more than a year. Under the division\u2019s guidelines for research, collec tion, and access, permit-holders need only notify DOFAW in advance of fieldwork and carry with them a copy of the permit when ever they are engaged in the permitted activ ity.<\/p>\n
Kennedy says that the NARS permit appli cation had gone up and down the Army chain of command without action and had landed \u201cin a black hole.\u201d<\/p>\n
In response to the call for a NARS permit, Kawelo says she completed the application last October, but was waiting for a revised version of the Makua Implementation Plan to be finished before she submitted the applica tion. Last December, the Army concluded work on an addendum to the plan. The permit application was brought before the NARS Commission in March 2005.<\/p>\n
But is a permit really even needed?<\/p>\n
According to deputy attorney general Linda Chow, who works with the NARS Commis sion, that\u2019s not an easy question to answer.<\/p>\n
\u201cI don\u2019t know the details of the activities the Army is doing in the NARS, but some are in conjunction with the NARS staff. I\u2019m not sure at what point a permit would be required, but if it\u2019s being done in cooperation with NARS staff, arguably it may not require a permit. If it were an independent activity, a permit would be required. It\u2019s kind of a gray area\u2026.In this situation, there is a question of what is a \u2018NARS\u2019 activity,\u201d she says.<\/p>\n
Since 1995, the Army has helped the state maintain roads and trails and has conducted surveys of rare species, including Achatinella (tree snails) and \u2018elepaio ( a native forest bird listed as an endangered species by the state for O\u2018ahu, where it is extremely rare) in the NARS. Its rare plant management activities in the NARS have included rat control, weed control, ungulate hunting, fencing, and selection, propagation and outplanting of endangered species. Its rare snail management activities have included assisting NARS staff with rat baiting and monitoring, and building a snail exclosure at the Pahole NAR. The Army has also provided seed storage and horticultural assistance there.<\/p>\n
These are just some of the things the Army environmental program crew have been doing in Pahole, Ka\u2018ena, and Ka\u2018ala NARs, the Wai\u2018anae Kai, Mokuleia, Keaau, and Kealia forest reserves, and at Pu\u2018u Poamoho.<\/p>\n
Kawelo says the crew works year-round, outplanting in the winter when survivorship is best. Crews, averaging four people, work in the NARS an average of three times a month, she says, adding, \u201cI imagine that would go up if the MOU and permit are established and we had a clearer direction.\u201d<\/p>\n
Kennedy agrees.<\/p>\n
\u201cThere are different levels of formality,\u201d he says. Landowners participating in the state\u2019s watershed partnerships \u201chave right-of-entry permits. And we have MOUs on how we access each other\u2019s lands.\u201d<\/p>\n
With regard to the Army, \u201cWhat they\u2019re doing is what we would be doing. They\u2019ve been volunteering with us. They\u2019ve just been assisting us. That\u2019s been the rationale for no permit up to this point,\u201d he says.<\/p>\n
Now that the Army has finalized its Makua mitigative measures, \u201cThe level of activity is greatly increasing and forecast to continue up to 30 years,\u201d Kennedy says.<\/p>\n
The Army\u2019s actions now are taking on the look of mitigative measures, which are tied to Army training at Makua, Kennedy says. \u201cThat\u2019s another element above and beyond a partnership,\u201d he says. \u201cThe Army has the potential to contribute a lot of manpower and funding.\u201d<\/p>\n
While he says most of the Army\u2019s pro posed actions are things that the NARS wants done on its lands, \u201cIt\u2019s moved to another level. The actions are occurring to meet Section 7 requirements,\u201d referring to a part of the Endangered Species Act relating to activi ties undertaken by federal agencies.<\/p>\n
Marjorie Ziegler, Executive Director of the Conservation Council for Hawai\u2018i, says a permit should also be required to ensure the Army\u2019s good behavior in the long term, and to make sure there is equity in enforcement of rules protecting the NARS.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe\u2019re lucky now because we have Kapua and her crew who are doing good work. But without a permit, there is the potential for that to change if or when someone new steps in. A permit is a good safeguard,\u201d she says.<\/p>\n
Crossing the Line<\/i><\/b>
\nThe Makua Implementation Plan is a species-management plan. The intent of the NARS is to protect intact ecosystems rather than individual species. \u201cWe want to make sure we\u2019re not crossing that line. It\u2019s really hard,\u201d says Kennedy.<\/p>\n
\u201cFor example, there is a gulch in Pahole where there are six endangered plants, an endangered snail, and it\u2019s \u2018elepaio habitat as well,\u201d he says. He goes on to describe the complications Army work in sensitive areas could entail and which any MOU or permit would need to address:<\/p>\n
\u201cThe Army is required to have three popu lations of some particular plant, 60 to 80 individuals per population. If they determine this one gulch is appropriate for a population; that would mean there\u2019s no room for other things. Also, in steep areas, it\u2019s hard to plant. And their mere presence may drive the \u2018elepaio away.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cOutplanting is a good thing,\u201d he adds, \u201cbut when you have relatively intact mircroeco systems, you want to leave it alone.\u201d<\/p>\n
Kennedy, NARS and Army staff have been working recently on permit conditions that they hope will satisfy both the Army\u2019s endan gered species goals, as well as the NARS\u2019 ecosystem management goals.<\/p>\n
As the Army establishes these popula tions, the Army accumulates credits that are applied to the stabilization goals. How the credits are assigned depends on where the Army chooses to plant. For example, the Army doesn\u2019t get as many credits for popula tions established in the potential burn area, compared to those outside the action area.<\/p>\n
To get an idea of what Army actions are appropriate in the NARS, NARS staff is com paring the Makua Implementation Plan with O\u2018ahu NARS Management Plans and goals and seeing where they overlap. Kennedy says the MIP is much more advanced than the Management Plans, and adds, \u201cThe Army is pretty much state-of-the art [when it comes to outplanting]. They follow the protocols of the Hawai\u2018i Rare Plant Recovery Group.\u201d<\/p>\n
Still, NARS staff needs to keep track of who is doing what in all their reserves. And with outplanting, Kennedy says, it\u2019s allowed, \u201conly as long as it\u2019s replacing plants that have historically been in that area.\u201d<\/p>\n
You have to be careful to avoid areas that are so degraded as to imperil plant survival, on the one hand, while on the other, you have to avoid pristine areas, where \u201cyou may dis turb the last healthy populations of a certain species\u2026or introduce disease,\u201d he warns.<\/p>\n
Having so many individuals of the same species in close proximity to one another has also been a state concern.<\/p>\n
Given the NARS staff\u2019s concerns, could the Army\u2019s MIP change once the state decides where the Army should and shouldn\u2019t carry out its implementation activities?<\/p>\n
\u201cThat\u2019s a probability,\u201d Kennedy says, \u201cand one of the reasons the state never aggressively pursued this. There are a lot of unknowns.\u201d<\/p>\n
In the Meantime<\/i><\/b>
\nAs of mid-May, Gagn\u00e9 was planning to put discussion of the Army\u2019s permit application on the NARS Commission\u2019s June 13 agenda. \u201cWhether we have the permit finalized is uncertain,\u201d Kennedy says.<\/p>\n
Terms are still being worked on, with input from Liesemeyer, Takahama, and Army staff. They\u2019ve discussed the possibility of the Army hiring additional staff to help the state manage the Makua actions, says Kennedy, who adds, \u201cEverything is in initial discussion phases.\u201d<\/p>\n
If and when a NARS permit and\/or and MOU with the DLNR is complete, Army Resource Manager Michelle Mansker says, the environmental crew will be doing more of the same work they\u2019ve been doing.<\/p>\n
Until then, they\u2019ll keep working as they have been, being limited by the number of days that \u201cTalbert can keep track of us. Sometimes we can\u2019t get in touch with him,\u201d Kawelo says.<\/p>\n
The Army has already spent roughly $1 million on its mitigation, Kawelo says, with most being used for survey work. She adds that in the last two years, an increasing amount has gone to active management.<\/p>\n
The Army\u2019s rare species surveys have iden tified at least 11 different taxa of native plants and snails, Kawelo says. She adds that the Army has also controlled feral goats and other ungulates in the lower parts of Ka\u2018ala NARS and the Mokule\u2018ia Forest Reserve; has suc cessfully reintroduced eight endangered plant species in Pahole NARS; fenced parts of Mount Ka\u2018ala; controlled a sprawling weed at Ka\u2018ena (per Takahama\u2019s specific request); and helped establish living collections of Makua plants, among other things.<\/p>\n
–Teresa Dawson<\/p>\n
Volume 15, Number 12 June 2005<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
“We weren’t trying to do as much stuff in the NARS as we are now,” says Army biologist Kapua Kawelo of the early days when the Army undertook work in the state’s Natural Area Reserves System (NARS) areas as part … Continued<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[130],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1518","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-june-2005"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1518","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1518"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1518\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1518"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1518"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1518"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}