Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan - U.S. Fish and Wildlife ...

Availability of Resources:
Hakalau Forest National Wildlife Refuge
Comprehensive Conservation Plan
The Refuge has sufficient staff time and other resources to allow this use at the current levels.
Currently the Refuge has a Deputy Refuge Manager to administer and monitor the activities, and a
Maintenance Supervisor and crew of two maintenance workers to maintain public facilities and
access points.
Category and Itemization One-time ($) Annual ($/yr)
Administration and Management No fees charged $7,600
The above annual cost reflects the cost to manage the program and prevent impacts to natural
resources. Estimated costs were calculated using 2 percent of the base cost of a GS-12 Deputy
Refuge Manager, 1 percent of the GS-13 Refuge Manager, 2 percent of the GS-12 Wildlife Biologist,
2 percent of the GS-9 Administrative, and 2 percent of the WS-4 Maintenance Supervisor’s staff
time, the “portion of the year” each position would use to administer and coordinate wildlife
observation and photography activities on the Refuge.
Anticipated Impacts of the Use(s):
The Refuge wildlife-dependent uses being evaluated (wildlife observation and photography) will
impose minimal negative impacts on specific physical resources such as trails and on natural
resources such as wildlife and vegetation.
Wildlife Observation:
Physical and habitat alteration: The impact of these activities depends upon the size of the group
(typically a single car or SUV at one time in Upper Maulua), the season of use, the location within
the Upper Maulua Unit and the duration of the activity. The construction and maintenance of visitor
use facilities (i.e., trail, parking lot) would have some effect on soils, vegetation, and possibly
hydrology in specific areas. This could potentially increase erosion and cause localized soil
compaction (Liddle 1975), reduced seed emergence (Cole and Landres1995), alteration of vegetative
structure and composition, and sediment loading (Cole and Marion 1988).
Human disturbance - general: The presence of people observing or photographing wildlife will also
cause some impact to wildlife. Numerous studies have confirmed that people on foot can cause a
variety of disturbance reactions in wildlife, including flushing or displacement (Erwin 1989; Fraser et
al. 1985; Freddy 1986), heart rate increases (MacArthur et al. 1982), altered foraging patterns
(Burger and Gochfeld, 1991), and even, in some cases, diminished reproductive success (Boyle and
Samson 1985). These studies and others have shown that the severity of the effects depends upon the
distance to the disturbance and its duration, frequency, predictability, and visibility to wildlife
(Knight and Cole 1991). The variables found to have the greatest influence on wildlife behavior are
(a) the distance from the animal to the disturbance and (b) the duration of the disturbance. Animals
show greater flight response to humans moving unpredictably than to humans following a distinct
path (Gabrielsen and Smith 1995). Short-term and immediate responses to disturbance are fairly
simple to document. A question that has received less research attention is whether these short-term
responses, which generally require increased energetic expenditures on the part of the individual,
ultimately diminish an individual or population’s capacity to survive and breed successfully (fitness).
Appendix B: Appropriate Uses and Compatibility Determinations B-29