Buildup in Guam, Cuts in Inspections<\/b><\/p>\n
Increase Brown Tree Snake Risk Here<\/b><\/p>\n
\u201cAbout a dozen species of native forest birds were present and in stable populations\u201d when the brown tree snake (Boiga irregularis<\/i>) arrived in Guam in the late 1940s, said James Stanford of the U.S. Geological Survey and a member of the brown tree snake rapid response team based on Guam.<\/p>\n
\u201cJust two species of native birds are still hanging on in very reduced numbers.\u201d<\/p>\n
Guam \u201clost native lizards and bats. The economy was devasted. Forests are showing the effects, since we no longer have seed dispersers. Forests are not regenerating because we lost a link in the chain there. It\u2019s just snowballing. Guam is in a terrible mess because of this snake,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
While people in Guam would like to see the snake eradicated, he told the audience at the Hawai`i Conservation Conference last month, \u201cthe most pressing need is management of the Guam snake population, keeping it from spreading.\u201d<\/p>\n
The snake population on Guam, Stanford said, ranges between one million and two million animals. Keeping it contained on Guam has been a challenge up to now, but recent developments make the task all the more daunting.<\/p>\n
Increasing the possibility that the snake might be carried elsewhere are activities related to the U.S. military buildup in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands and Guam. For Rota, Tinian, Saipan, and some far northern Mariana islands, \u201cthere\u2019s a super-high critical risk,\u201d Stanford said. The buildup also adds to the risk that the snake might end up in Hawai`i or other Pacific islands. \u201cEarly detection and rapid response capacities are not keeping pace with these issues,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
Pre-departure screening of planes and cargo has been ongoing for years. Despite that, brown tree snakes have made it to Hawai`i, alive, on numerous occasions, he said; \u201cwe think they\u2019ve all been captured.\u201d If the snake were to become established in Hawai`i, \u201cyou\u2019d see the exact same impacts here as on Guam, but on a larger scale. If Hawai`i had the snake established, you\u2019d become a pariah, just like Guam. It would also put the U.S. mainland at greater risk.\u201d<\/p>\n
Yet the future of the U.S. Department of Agriculture\u2019s APHIS (Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service) program in both Guam and Hawai`i is uncertain, Stanford said. \u201cWill brown tree snake control activities on Guam continue during fiscal year 2012? If not, Guam\u2019s trade partners should anticipate an increase in snake arrivals,\u201d he said. (Last month, the Department of Interior approved an agreement between the Office of Insular Affairs and the U.S. Geological Survey, calling for $1.213 million to be used by the USGS to continue developing and testing tools for capture and control of the snake on Guam.)<\/p>\n
On average, the current program removes between 200 and 300 snakes every week from cargo boxes leaving Guam. \u201cAre Hawai`i\u2019s early detection and rapid response capabilities sufficient\u201d to address the possible reduction in Guam screening? Stanford asked.<\/p>\n
Several people from Hawai`i have been trained in Guam to respond to possible snake sightings, but Stanford emphasized the need for increased capability in this area. The snake \u201cis a living organism that moves about quite regularly,\u201d he said. \u201cIf people report they\u2019ve seen a snake and they\u2019re waiting two days for me to arrive, we\u2019re not going to get many. But if we have people in-house, and can get them out there in 15 minutes or half an hour, we\u2019ll have a better chance of success.\u201d<\/p>\n
In other Pacific islands \u2013 the Federated States of Micronesia, Palau, Fiji \u2013 \u201cwe\u2019re much further behind,\u201d Stanford said. \u201cWe have a few trained responders here and there, but resources are very limited.\u201d<\/p>\n
Stanford\u2019s team has set up an \u201calien snake hotline:\u201d 671-777-HISS (4477). \u201cWe get on average about 45 calls per year regarding non-native snakes,\u201d he said, including several calls from the U.S. mainland. \u201cWe got one from Tulsa in 2010, another May 19, 2011, again near Tulsa.\u201d<\/p>\n
For the most part, the hotline is not for residents of Guam, given how ubiquitous the snake is there. But if they see another type of snake, they should definitely call, he said. \u201cWe got a call last year from Guam for a non-brown tree snake\u2026 Turned out, it was a Honduran milk snake, probably brought illegally to the island as a pet.\u201d<\/p>\n
The brown tree snake on Guam \u201cwiped out birds, lizards, and one bat species. It eliminated the poultry business. Small pets, cats, dogs, puppies \u2013 gone\u2026. For a while, people thought snakes would eat through everything, and the population would then decline, but we\u2019ve got so many other non-native species that are now supporting them,\u201d Stanford said. \u201cThey\u2019re now eating a skink from the brown tree snake\u2019s native range. It\u2019s extremely plentiful, so there\u2019s no problem with high predation. As long as we have that skink, the snakes are going to be fine.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n
* * *<\/b><\/p>\n
`Amakihi Face New Threat in Mange<\/b><\/p>\n
\u201cI work with train wrecks, so don\u2019t expect any cute pictures.\u201d<\/p>\n
The audience was thus duly warned by Dennis LaPointe, a researcher with the U.S. Geological Survey\u2019s Pacific Island Ecosystems Research Center, but that hardly prepared it for the gruesome photos that he proceeded to display on the large screen in the conference room. One picture after another showed beautiful `amakihi (Hemignathus virens<\/i>) beset by horrible, scaly growths on their feet, caused by a mite, Knemidokoptes jamaicensis<\/i>, also known as the scaly-leg mite.<\/p>\n
The affected `amakihi were found in 2007, when Jacqueline Gaudioso, a graduate student at the University of Hawai`i-Hilo studying plumage coloration, mist-netted a couple of birds with \u201cpeculiar lesions,\u201d LaPointe said. She brought them to the USGS researchers, who proceeded to inform Gaudioso that she had discovered the first case of knemidokoptic mange in Hawai`i. Further surveys found the mite was present at sites from 300 meters in elevation to 600 meters, with the highest densities at the highest elevations.<\/p>\n
After that, LaPointe said, he and his colleagues \u201cdecided to get some of these birds into the aviary and see what\u2019s happening as a consequence.\u201d Infested birds were taken from Manuka, and clean ones were collected from the Upper Waiakea Forest Reserve.<\/p>\n
Over the next 16 months, they tried to discover how the mite was transmitted, but they did not succeed in infecting the clean birds. \u201cAs we progressed, we didn\u2019t see anything looking like transmission,\u201d LaPointe said. \u201cMaybe it occurred, but there were no clinical signs.\u201d<\/p>\n
What researchers were able to do was observe the progression of mange in the affected birds. \u201cIn one case,\u201d he said, \u201can advanced infestation seemed to resolve itself. Birds start to peck at the lesions, preening them off, but it depends on the individual bird. Another case was the complete opposite: the bird came in with advanced lesions, and the lesions continued to grow. Then there was a drastic drop in lesion size, and a lot of necrotic tissue. Six months out, the bird died.\u201d<\/p>\n
In a third case, the bird came in with \u201cearly stage\u201d infestation. \u201cOver time, it seems to have resolved the lesions,\u201d LaPointe said. \u201cThen the lesions started growing\u2026 We treated the bird with Moxidectin [used to treat mange]. Shortly after the treatment, the lesions started to resolve rapidly\u2026. Moxidectin speeds up the recovery process.\u201d<\/p>\n
Three of the captive birds died, allowing LaPointe and his colleagues to speculate on the cause of death. \u201cThe intermediate and advanced lesions predispose the birds\u2019 feet to injury and secondary infection, but we don\u2019t know what happens in the wild,\u201d LaPointe said. Very large lesions on the feet may interfere with the birds\u2019 ability to perch or constrict blood flow, leading to necrosis, but, he added, s
\necondary infections are the most likely cause of death.<\/p>\n
* * *<\/b><\/p>\n
Hunting of Game Mammals Gets<\/b><\/p>\n
Little Public Support in Surveys<\/b><\/p>\n
Cheryl Lohr, a graduate student in the University of Hawai`i\u2019s Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Management, has been surveying a number of groups to get an idea of public support for hunting of game mammals and game birds in Hawai`i. She presented her preliminary results in a conference poster exhibited.<\/p>\n
Lohr and her professor, Christopher Lepczyk, sent questionnaires to hunters, \u201cconservation professionals,\u201d members of the Hawaiian Civic Clubs, farmers, animal welfare advocates, and \u201crandom residents.\u201d Questions were intended to gauge the degree to which a given group would tolerate game animals in their environment and how the respondents would like to see those animals be managed.<\/p>\n
At the conference, Lohr had results for four game species: axis deer, goats, mouflon sheep, and pigs. She had sent surveys to more than 5,300 residents in the various groups, more than half of them in the \u201crandom resident\u201d class. More than 1,600 hunters received questionnaires, as did 643 \u201cconservation professionals,\u201d 49 Civic Club members, 339 farmers or other agriculturalist, and 254 animal welfare advocates. The highest response rate (37 percent) came from animal welfare advocates. Thirty-three percent of conservation professionals returned their surveys; 32 percent of agriculturalists; 29 percent of Civic Club members; 10 percent of the random residents; and just 9 percent of hunters.<\/p>\n
Among all the groups, Lohr found, the hunters were alone in wanting to see an increase in game abundance. When Lohr attempted to measure the potential for conflict among the various groups, she found that the greatest potential area of dispute concerned management of axis deer and mouflon, with hunters wanting to see increased populations of both animals (as well as pigs and goats), and practically everyone else wanting to see those populations reduced. With respect to goats and pigs, on the other hand, the potential for conflict was less pronounced.<\/p>\n
Lohr hopes to follow up with further analysis of her results, hoping to weigh how important the animals are economically and culturally, the degree to which people derive enjoyment from knowing they are present in the wild, how much damage they inflict on property or income, the extent to which they pose a health and safety risk for humans and other wildlife and native plants, and how they affect water quality and soil.<\/p>\n
* * *<\/b><\/p>\n
The Threat from Above: Peregrine Falcons at Midway<\/b><\/p>\n
Pity the poor Laysan duck. With its sole population at Laysan Island subject to being wiped out in a single catastrophic event, the Fish and Wildlife Service shipped some of them off to Midway Atoll to start a new population. As Andrew McClung of the U.S. Geological Survey\u2019s Pacific Island Ecosystems Research Center noted in a poster at the conference, the ducks were easy pickings for a vagrant peregrine falcon in 2006 and again in 2008. In those years, 4 percent and 2 percent, respectively, of the Laysan duck population were killed by raptor predation. Other seabirds were taken as well, including black noddies, brown noddies, bonin petrels, Tristram\u2019s storm-petrels, ruddy turnstones, Pacific golden plovers, and white terns.<\/p>\n
Their carcasses were all found on the tarmac at Midway.<\/p>\n
McClung concludes that if the abandoned airstrips at Midway were revegetated, the birds might have greater cover against the falcons. Otherwise, \u201cvagrant Peregrine falcons overwintering on small islands could exert adverse effects on populations of endangered birds, with greater risk of significant impact for newly translocated populations.\u201d<\/p>\n
The Laysan finches that were transplanted to Midway fared better, with no documented falcon kills. Those that remained behind on Laysan, however, were hit hard by visiting Peregrine falcons in 2008, with at least 80 finches killed (as well as numerous seabirds).<\/p>\n
— P.T.<\/p>\n
* * *<\/b><\/p>\n
Slug Poison Boosts Rare Plant Survival<\/b><\/p>\n
Move over Guinness. Sluggo is now the most effective slug killer in Hawaiian forests, thanks to the O`ahu Army Natural Resource Program (OANRP).<\/p>\n
For years, beer traps and copper barriers were the best available methods to keep slugs from munching rare native plants in the wild. And although tests revealed that dark beer captured four times as many slugs as Coors Light, beer alone could not tackle the slug problem.<\/p>\n
But late in 2010, after several years of working with state and federal agencies, the OANRP won approval from the Hawai`i Department of Agriculture for a Special Local Needs label for Sluggo, an organic iron phosphate-based pesticide that kills slugs upon ingestion.<\/p>\n
\u201cThis label means that, for the first time, eradication of slugs in a natural area is possible,\u201d wrote the OANRP\u2019s Stephanie Joe in her abstract for last month\u2019s conference.<\/p>\n
Introduced slugs (there are no native ones) threaten 59 of Hawai`i\u2019s 273 threatened or endangered plant species, Joe said in her presentation. In particular, slugs attack two critically endangered species — Cyanea superba <\/i>and Schiedea obovata<\/i> — that the Army must manage and stabilize if it is to continue training in Makua Valley.<\/p>\n
\u201cSlugs alone can affect your outplanting success,\u201d Joe said.\u00a0<\/p>\n
So a few years ago, the OANRP began testing Sluggo in the Army\u2019s 36.5-hectare Kahanahaiki Management Unit in the Wai`anae mountain range. In addition to testing the pesticide\u2019s efficacy against slugs in montane and mesic areas, the Army also studied whether it harmed native snails.<\/p>\n
Joe found that while Sluggo did not eradicate the slugs, it caused a four-fold decrease in their numbers in treated plots and did not significantly affect native snail populations. (The Army must also stabilize two species of rare Hawaiian snails.)<\/p>\n
Other tests found that Sluggo can improve plant survival. Twice as many Cyanea superba<\/i> plants survived in slug-free areas six months after application than in untreated areas. In fact, Cyanea survival in areas without slugs was so robust it equalled that of the invasive weed, Clidemia hirta,<\/i> Joe found. She also discovered that Sluggo had a significant positive impact on Schiedea obovata<\/i> seedling emergence.<\/p>\n
While Sluggo appears to be an important tool for rare plant recovery, it cannot be applied if native snails are present, she stressed.<\/p>\n
\u201cTo ensure native snails are not impacted, make sure slugs really are the problem and have an experienced malacologist survey the area,\u201d Joe said, adding that Sluggo can\u2019t be applied within 20 meters of any tree containing Achatinella snails.\u00a0<\/p>\n
For now, the Army is doing targeted application around plants during the wet season and fruiting seasons, she said. It\u2019s also footing the bill — $3,500 a year — for the label, which is good until 2015.<\/p>\n
* * *<\/b><\/p>\n
Rare Plant Recovery: A Landowner\u2019s Perspective<\/b><\/p>\n
\u201cThere is no better way to dissuade a landowner from [doing conservation work] than to stick them with the responsibility of getting a bunch of permits and doing public hearings,\u201d said Stephanie Dunbar Co in her conference presentation on rare plant recovery from a landowner\u2019s perspective.<\/p>\n
Permitting and hearings should be taken care of by government agencies, said Co, a botanist and daughter of Kip Dunbar, who owns Molokai\u2019s 1,100-acre Kainalu Ranch. The ranch has received various state and federal grants over the years to protect its agricultural and natural resources.<\/p>\n
\u201cAccounting for approximately 50 percent of Hawai`i\u2019s total land area, private lands are critical components to successful restoration efforts th
\nroughout all available remaining habitats,\u201d Co\u2019s conference abstract states.<\/p>\n
With a grant from the state Department of Land and Natural Resources\u2019 Division of Forestry and Wildlife, Kainalu Ranch has been able to keep the palm Pritchardia munroi,<\/i> also known as lo`ulu, and the tree Cyanea dunbariae,<\/i> a.k.a. haha, from going extinct in the wild.<\/p>\n
\u201c[Pritchardia munroi<\/i>] is a species near and dear to my family,\u201d Co said, noting that it was named after her uncle James Munro, \u201cwho was really good friends with [famed botanist] Joseph Rock.\u201d<\/p>\n
With a single individual left in the wild, the ranch successfully outplanted 30 more about six years ago, she said.<\/p>\n
Cyanea dunbariae,<\/i> named after her great-grandmother, who showed it to Rock, has only eight adult individuals left in the wild, she said. Her family planned to plant 12 more last month.<\/p>\n
With a 2002 grant, the ranch also fenced its upland pasture and planted five acres with 1,000 koa and 500 koai`a to see if they held any forestry potential.\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u201cThey\u2019ve both done well,\u201d she said, adding that the ranch\u2019s conservation work has been \u201chugely satisfying.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u201cGiven my family\u2019s fine ancestry, we\u2019re really concerned with conserving things that are Hawaiian,\u201d she said, adding that \u201ceverybody needs to do their part.\u201d<\/p>\n
While her family has strong personal reasons to preserve rare native plants, \u201crarely does rare plant recovery work positively affect a landowner\u2019s bottom line,\u201d she said.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Establishing a baseline for threatened and endangered plants, excessive permitting, excessive public meetings, providing access, the lack of technical and\/or financial resources by government agencies, and the requisite in-kind and financial contributions are just some of the challenges private landowners interested in doing conservation face, she said.<\/p>\n
Despite the challenges, landowners are likely to participate in projects where they have a good rapport with the partnering agency and individuals, and where there is appropriate technical expertise, assistance with permitting, complete implementation funds, controlled access, and some long-term maintenance funds, she said.<\/p>\n
Government agencies need to provide incentives for landowners to undertake conservation efforts and recognize their need to remain fiscally sound, she concluded.<\/p>\n
\u201cUnderstand that long-term biological success requires short-term political and economic incentives,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n
* * *<\/b><\/p>\n
An Overview: DOFAW T&E Plantings on Kaua`i<\/b><\/p>\n
\u201cWe\u2019re getting a lot of seedling recovery in mesic forests and are really starting to get a lot of [native plants] coming up on their own. In terms of rare plants, not so much,\u201d said Michael Wysong, a botanist and manager of the Kaua`i Natural Area Reserves.<\/p>\n
Wysong, who was hired by the DLNR\u2019s Division of Forestry and Wildlife in 2007, provided an overview of his agency\u2019s success with rare plant restoration on Kaua`i.<\/p>\n
Results have been mixed, at best.<\/p>\n
Between 1987 and 2007, DOFAW built 44 rare plant exclosures on Kaua`i totaling nearly 120 acres. Thirty-three protected areas contained threatened or endangered species, while 11 were created specifically for outplanting. (Outplanting also occurred in six of the 33 protective exclosures.) Most of the exclosures were less than an acre in size.<\/p>\n
Between December 1990 and August 2007, DOFAW outplanted 4,119 threatened and endangered plants representing 53 species. Most species had fewer than 50 individuals planted, he said.<\/p>\n
After conducting an inventory of 10 of the 17 exclosures where outplanting occurred, Wysong and his staff found that outplantings survived in seven of them. Overall species survival at all sites was a mere 15 percent, he said, adding that of the 53 species planted, only 33 (62 percent) remained.<\/p>\n
Because survivorship was better when more individuals were planted, Wysong concluded that DOFAW needs greater nursery production.\u00a0<\/p>\n
He added, \u201cIf we put a lot of plants out, to ensure survival of the outplants, we need to better match outplants to their habitat requirements and discontinue outplanting with species or sites that don\u2019t work.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n
Better genetic tracking, greater species representation, and prioritized outplanting are also needed. The rarest should come first, he said.<\/p>\n
His abstract notes that in the past five years, \u201cfocus for rare plant protection on Kaua`i has shifted from an emphasis on individual plant population protection to larger scale habitat and watershed protection.\u201d<\/p>\n
Since 2007, larger exclosures totaling more than five thousand acres have been built, mostly by the Nature Conservancy of Hawai`i. Wysong said that once all planned fencing is complete, more than 8,000 acres and an additional 29 species will be protected.<\/p>\n
Teresa Dawson and Patricia Tummons<\/b><\/p>\n
Volume 22, Number 3 — September 2011<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Buildup in Guam, Cuts in Inspections Increase Brown Tree Snake Risk Here “About a dozen species of native forest birds were present and in stable populations” when the brown tree snake (Boiga irregularis) arrived in Guam in the late 1940s, … 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":[59],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-786","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-september-2011"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/786","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=786"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/786\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=786"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=786"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=786"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}