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

Hakalau Forest National Wildlife Refuge
Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Invasive Weed Control:
One commenter supported the inclusion of biocontrol in all three alternatives as an important tool for
controlling weeds (e.g., naio thrips in Kona could be a threat to naio trees at the Refuge).
Response: We appreciate your support and agree that biocontrol can be an effective tool as part of
an Integrated Pest Management program. It is further discussed in Appendix G of the final CCP.
Fire Management:
One commenter stated wildfire response should include development of interagency protocols, early
detection, maintenance of water sources, and mobilization of equipment and firefighters.
Response: A strategy under Alternative B (the selected alternative) for habitats in both units calls
for the development of a fire prevention program, which will address the issues identified by the
commenter. Additionally, the Refuge has fire management plans, and we are a member of the
interagency Big Island Wildfire Coordinating Group, which also incorporates the issues above.
Forest Bird Management:
A commenter stated that ‘i‘iwi and ‘apapane do not live above 4,100 ft as they migrate to lower
elevations during summer.
Response: We have clarified this information in the final CCP.
Another commenter said avian diseases and parasites should be emphasized as one of the top priority
threats to all forest birds, including the Hawai‘i ‘elepaio.
Response: We have clarified the text as requested.
Research and Monitoring
Two commenters expressed concern that the plan is an attempt to prioritize the management needs
and activities for the next 15 years without a full discussion of avian population trends. They believe
conclusions cited in the plan about forest bird recovery are untrue because they are based on flawed
analysis and models, and that management actions are being proposed without fully understanding
population trends. They stated that increased scrutiny needs to be given to ‘ākepa in light of its
significant declines and that control of Japanese white-eyes should be at the core of adaptive
management as they are limiting the food supply for native birds. They further stated that university
scientists conducting research independent of agency bias have the potential to contribute
significantly to the mission of the Refuge, and that these benefits outweigh any perceived
disadvantages.
Another commenter asked that we give weight to the research of Drs. Lenny Freed and Rebecca
Cann on the decline of native honeycreepers in this part of Hawai‘i due to introduced forest birds and
stated the Refuge needs to make decisions based on the best available science. An additional
commenter suggested allowing an independent expert bird ecologist to conduct a study on the impact
of white-eye competition on native birds at Hakalau, suggesting that funding could be arranged from
other sources so as not to interfere with Refuge priorities.
K-10 Appendix K. Public Involvement