american samoa - University of Hawaii at Manoa Botany Department

More documents

Recommendations

Info

• 10 ateate (Wollastonia biflora) on the seaward side of the shoreline road culvert;• 50 togofafine (red mangroves) within the stream bed;• 25 fau (beach hibiscus) upstream of culvert between togofafine (red mangroves);• 25 ifi (Tahitian chestnut) and togo tane (oriental mangrove) along the stream bank; and,• 25 poumuli (Flueggea flexuosa) and fruit trees, e.g., mango, above the stream bank.The initial planting of mangroves should be approximately 3 feet apart. In-stream plantings ofred mangrove should be performed by ASCC Land Grant Program personnel. Within threeyears, red and oriental mangroves should be thinned to about a six-foot spacing between eachplant (Steele, 1999).The ASCC Land Grant Program would also encourage residents to participate in the planting ofthese trees along the east and west banks of the stream. ASCC Land Grant has considerableexperience with encouraging community participation through its Forestry StewardshipProgram. The enhancement of riparian vegetation and related participation of residents can bestbe accomplished by providing, at no charge, a total of about 30 tree seedlings to eachhousehold along the stream. However, the “no charge” arrangement would be conditional tothe resident’s agreement to plant the new trees within 30 feet of the stream bank (Steele, 1995).Option 2: Establish Wetland Vegetation AlongSouth Boundary of Mormon Church ComplexOption 2 would establish wetland vegetationalong the south boundary of the MormonChurch complex. Stream plantings along thisstream segment would promote long-termconservation of the wetland and FaatafeStream. This project would also help increasethe site’s bio-diversity, as well as provide asource of fruit for both humans and flyingfoxes.Plantings of ifi (Tahitian chestnut) and fuafua (Kleinhovia hospita) would be made along thesouth side of the Faatafe Stream that is immediately south of the Mormon Church complex.The plantings should extend for, at least, 150 feet along this stream segment.If desired by one or more households west of the Mormon Church complex, similar plantingswetland vegetation could continue for up to another 250 feet. The potential extension of thisproject, however, would clearly require the authorization of these residents.Comparative Benefits and ImpactsPPC’s evaluation of the two alternate restoration and enhancement strategies is summarized inTable 5-4. Option 1 would restore mangrove vegetation and provide significant improvementsto wetland vegetation for a reasonable cost. Restoration of the mangrove vegetation along thelower reach of Faatafe Stream would also enhance the attractiveness of adjoining residentialarea.Option 2 could also be developed for a reasonable cost. This option would also providesignificant improvements to wetland vegetation and help deter further encroachment into thewetland.American Samoa Wetland/Stream Restoration and Enhancement PlanFebruary 2001, Vatia Wetland, Page 5-11
TABLE 5-4COMPARATIVE EVALUATIONWETLAND RESTORATION AND ENHANCEMENT OPPORTUNITIESVATIA WETLANDOptionProjectCostResidentialLand UsesSubsistenceAgricultureFish &InvertebrateHabitatWetland/RiparianVegetationStreamBankStabilityFlood Hazards& PropertyDamage1 LC MB NBC LB SB MB NBC2 LC NBC NBC LB SB MB NBCNotes: Potential project benefits were rated by PPC as follows:SB Significant project benefitsLC Limited undesirable consequencesMB Moderate project benefitsMC Moderate undesirable consequencesLB Limited project benefitsSC Significant undesirable project impactsNBC No anticipated project benefits orundesirable consequencesSource: Pedersen Planning Consultants, 2000Recommended Option and Estimated Project CostThe restoration of the mangrove forest immediately upstream of the Faatafe Stream mouth(Option 1) is recommended for implementation. This wetland restoration project isrecommended because the project can provide significant improvements to wetland vegetation,enhance the adjoining residential area, and provide a source of food to humans and flyingfoxes.The costs associated with the restoration of the mangrove forest would primary be associatedwith the initial clearing of the Faatafe Stream mouth, culvert underneath the shoreline roadway,as well as the collection of some trash and solid waste material 450 feet upstream. Thesubsequent collection and planting of mangrove, fau, and milo tree cuttings would be carriedout by the ASCC Land Grant Program.These estimated cost associated with the initial clearing of the Faatafe Stream mouth, roadwayculvert and upstream area would be approximately $2,996 (Table 5-5). The propagation of treeseedlings, the collection of tree cuttings, as well as the planting of recommended vegetationwould cost an estimated $2,811 (Table 5-6). Consequently, overall project expenditures wouldcost an estimated $5,807.TABLE 5-5PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATECLEARING OF FAATAFE STREAM MOUTH, CULVERT, AND UPSTREAM AREALABORPersonnel Number Hours Hourly Rate ($) Cost ($)SupervisorHeavy Equip. Operator1140401513600520Laborer 2 40 6 480All Personnel 4 160 $1,600MATERIALSItem Quantity Unit Cost ($) Cost ($)PicksSledge Hammers3115254525Shovel 3 22 66Weed-eaters 3 300 900MachetesGarbage Bags320 boxes20560100Wheel BarrowsAll Materials3 50 150$1,346TOTAL LABOR AND MATERIALS $2,946American Samoa Wetland/Stream Restoration and Enhancement PlanFebruary 2001, Vatia Wetland, Page 5-12
Page 1 and 2:
Asili StreamAMERICAN SAMOAWETLAND/S
Page 3 and 4:
American SamoaWetland/Stream Restor
Page 5 and 6:
American Samoa Wetland/Stream Resto
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Figure 1-1Location of Potential Wet
Page 13 and 14:
Onsite InvestigationsNovember 1999G
Page 15 and 16:
Where appropriate, stream cross sec
Page 17 and 18:
Chapter TwoTULA WETLANDLOCATIONTula
Page 19 and 20:
Figure 2-2Tula WetlandExisting Cond
Page 21 and 22:
Improved channelization of stormwat
Page 23 and 24:
LAND USES IN THE VICINITY OF TULA W
Page 25 and 26:
Figure 2-3Option 2: Detention of St
Page 27 and 28:
Figure 2-4Option 3: Expansion of Ta
Page 29 and 30:
Comparative Benefits and ImpactsPPC
Page 31 and 32:
TABLE 2-4PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATEP
Page 33 and 34: TABLE 2-5LONG-TERM RESOURCE MONITOR
Page 35 and 36: TABLE 2-6 (CONTINUED)FIELD MONITORI
Page 37 and 38: Chapter ThreeALAO WETLANDLOCATIONAl
Page 39 and 40: Figure 3-2Taufusi MarchExisting Con
Page 41 and 42: Figure 3-3FEMA 100-Year Flood Plain
Page 43 and 44: East Portion of the MarshThe impact
Page 45 and 46: WETLAND RESTORATION AND ENHANCEMENT
Page 47 and 48: The availability of new, blight-res
Page 49 and 50: Long-Term Monitoring and Site Maint
Page 51 and 52: TABLE 3-7FIELD MONITORING WORKSHEET
Page 53 and 54: Recommended monitoring stations or
Page 55 and 56: Figure 4-1Location MapAoa Village W
Page 57 and 58: No stream flow estimates are availa
Page 59 and 60: Fresh-Water SwampThe fresh-water sw
Page 61 and 62: ecome dominant if there is a nearby
Page 63 and 64: Relative Abundance and Diversity of
Page 65 and 66: Option 4: Restore Mangrove Forest U
Page 67 and 68: TABLE 4-5COMPARATIVE EVALUATIONWETL
Page 69 and 70: Long-term resource management activ
Page 73 and 74: • begin at the Tapua Stream mouth
Page 75 and 76: Figure 5-1Location MapSoutheast Wet
Page 77 and 78: Tufu Stream and two stream branches
Page 79 and 80: Mr. Whistler was part of a three-pe
Page 81 and 82: InvertebratesCrustacean densities w
Page 83: FIGURE 5-3OPTION 1: RESTORE RIPARIA
Page 87 and 88: Long term monitoring of the Vatia w
Page 91 and 92: More specific monitoring of stream
Page 93 and 94: Figure 6-1Location MapVaipito Strea
Page 95 and 96: Stream FlowsHistorical Stream Flows
Page 97 and 98: California grass (Brachiaria mutica
Page 99 and 100: FIGURE 6-3FISH AND INVERTEBRATE SUR
Page 101 and 102: Most of lower Vaipito Stream segmen
Page 103 and 104: Red mangrove should be planted with
Page 105 and 106: TABLE 6-7PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATEC
Page 109 and 110: TABLE 6-10 (Continued)FIELD MONITOR
Page 111 and 112: Vehicular and pedestrian access to
Page 113 and 114: Figure 7-1Location MapLeele-Papa-Ta
Page 115 and 116: Stream flow, in some cases, is cons
Page 117 and 118: Stormwater Discharges and Related F
Page 119 and 120: AQUATIC FISH AND INVERTEBRATESGener
Page 121 and 122: Opportunities and StrategiesOption
Page 123 and 124: Figure 7-3Option 2: Reduction of Er
Page 125 and 126: TABLE 7-8PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATEP
Page 129 and 130: TABLE 7-10 (Continued)FIELD MONITOR
Page 131 and 132: More specific monitoring of stream
Page 133 and 134: Figure 8-1Location MapSauino Stream
Page 135 and 136:
Stream FlowsHistorical Stream Flows
Page 137 and 138:
AQUATIC FISH AND INVERTEBRATESGener
Page 139 and 140:
Figure 8-3Option 1: Construction of
Page 141 and 142:
FIGURE 8-5OPTION 2: PLANT NATIVE RI
Page 143 and 144:
Long-Term Monitoring and Site Maint
Page 145 and 146:
TABLE 8-8FIELD MONITORING WORKSHEET
Page 147 and 148:
TABLE 8-8 (Continued)FIELD MONITORI
Page 149 and 150:
LOCATIONChapter NineLEAFU STREAMLea
Page 151 and 152:
Figure 9-2Leone Pala and 300-Foot L
Page 153 and 154:
However, during and following heavi
Page 155 and 156:
Vegetation TrendsThe lower Leafu St
Page 157 and 158:
LAND USES ADJACENT TOLOWER LEAFU ST
Page 159 and 160:
Option 2: Construct Basaltic Wall,
Page 161 and 162:
Figure 9-5:Stabilize East Stream Ba
Page 163 and 164:
TABLE 9-7PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATEP
Page 165 and 166:
TABLE 9-8LONG-TERM RESOURCE MONITOR
Page 167 and 168:
TABLE 9-9 (Continued)FIELD MONITORI
Page 169 and 170:
Chapter TenASILI STREAMLOCATIONAsil
Page 171 and 172:
Figure 10-2Asili Stream SegmentExis
Page 173 and 174:
Stormwater Discharges and Related F
Page 175 and 176:
Further downstream, the stream chan
Page 177 and 178:
TABLE 10-4SUMMARY OF MACROFAUNAL OR
Page 179 and 180:
American Samoa Wetlands/Streams Res
Page 181 and 182:
CLEAN-UP OF LOWER ASILI STREAMLABOR
Page 183 and 184:
TABLE 10-9LONG-TERM RESOURCE MONITO
Page 185 and 186:
TABLE 10-10 (Continued)FIELD MONITO
Page 187 and 188:
Vehicular and pedestrian access to
Page 189 and 190:
Figure 11-1Location MapFusi Wetland
Page 191 and 192:
WETLAND VEGETATIONNovember 1999 Sur
Page 193 and 194:
The lack of stream flow entering th
Page 195 and 196:
Figure 11-3Option 1: Remove Solid W
Page 197 and 198:
Recommended Option and Estimated Pr
Page 199 and 200:
TABLE 11-6FIELD MONITORING WORKSHEE
Page 201 and 202:
Any future monitoring stations or s
Page 203 and 204:
Project ManagerRepresentatives of a
Page 205 and 206:
REFERENCESBiosystems Analysis, Inc.
Page 207 and 208:
APPENDIX ASUMMARY OFPLANTSOBSERVED
Page 209 and 210:
Species Family EnglishNameSamoanNam
Page 213:
APPENDIX CSUMMARY OFAQUATIC MACROFA
show all

american samoa - University of Hawaii at Manoa Botany Department

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?