Economic Analysis of Critical Habitat Designation for Maui Nui

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Economic Analysis of Critical Habitat Designation for Maui Nui ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION FOR MAUI NUI Draft | 14 January 2013 prepared for: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 4401 N. Fairfax Drive Arlington, VA 22203 prepared by: Industrial Economics, Incorporated 2067 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02140 Draft Economic Analysis – January 14, 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 1.1 Introduction 1-1 1.2 Economic Activities Considered in this Analysis 1-4 1.3 Summary of Conclusions 1-4 1.4 Organization of the Report 1-9 CHAPTER 2 FRAMEWORK FOR THE ANALYSIS 2.1 Background 2-2 2.2 Categories of Potential Economic Effects of Species Conservation 2-4 2.3 Analytic Framework and Scope of the Analysis 2-7 2.4 Information Sources 2-20 2.5 Presentation of Results 2-21 CHAPTER 3 DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS 3.1 Introduction and Regulatory Overview 3-3 3.2 Scope and Scale of Future Development within the Proposed Critical Habitat 3-9 3.3 Economic Impacts of Critical Habitat on Development Activities 3-14 3.4 Assumptions and Limitations 3-22 CHAPTER 4 ENERGY PROJECTS 4.1 Introduction and Regulatory Overview 4-2 4.2 Scope and Scale of Renewable Energy Projects within Proposed Critical Habitat 4-5 4.3 Economic Impacts of Critical Habitat Designation on Energy Projects 4-8 4.4 Assumptions and Limitations 4-13 CHAPTER 5 GRAZING AND FARMING ACTIVITIES 5.1 Introduction and Regulatory Overview 5-3 5.2 Scope and Scale of Grazing and Farming Activities within the Proposed Critical Habitat Area 5-8 5.3 Economic Impacts of Critical Habitat on Grazing and Farming Activities 5-14 5.4 Assumptions and Limitations 5-22 Draft Economic Analysis – January 14, 2013 6 POTENTIAL ECONOMIC BENEFITS 6.1 Introduction 6-1 6.2 Quantifying Direct Economic Benefits of Critical Habitat Designation for the Maui Nui Species 6-1 6.3 Potential Incremental Benefits of Conservation Efforts for the Maui Nui Species 6-3 REFERENCES APPENDIX A DISTRIBUTIONAL ANALYSES A-1 A.1 Impacts to Small Entities A-1 A.2 Potential Impacts to the Energy Industry A-9 A.3 Potential Impacts to Governments A.4 Takings APPENDIX B SENSITIVITY OF RESULTS TO DISCOUNT RATE APPENDIX C UNDISCOUNTED IMPACTS BY ECONOMIC ACTIVITY APPENDIX D INCREMENTAL EFFECTS MEMORANDUM AND FOLLOW ON COMMUNICATION BETWEEN IEC AND THE SERVICE APPENDIX E CRITICAL HABITAT SPECIES INFORMATION APPENDIX F PARCELS SUPPORTING GRAZING THAT OVERLAP WITH PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT Draft Economic Analysis – January 14, 2013 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. The purpose of this report is to evaluate the potential economic impacts associated with the designation or revision of critical habitat for 135 species on the Hawaiian Islands of Kahoolawe, Lanai, Maui, and Molokai (hereafter “Maui Nui species”). This report was prepared by Industrial Economics, Incorporated (IEc), under contract to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service). The information contained in this report is intended to assist the Secretary of the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) in determining whether the benefits of excluding particular areas from the designation outweigh the benefits of including those areas in the designation.1 2. This analysis describes protections provided by Federal, State and local statutes and regulations that may affect proposed critical habitat areas, including the listing of the species under the Act, that are not generated by or affected by critical habitat designation for Maui Nui species. These are “baseline” protections afforded the species regardless of the designation of critical habitat. Thus the analysis will not quantify the impacts associated with baseline protections, but will describe them qualitatively. 3. The discussion of the baseline protections for the Maui Nui species provides context for the evaluation of the economic impacts of critical habitat designation, which are the focus of this analysis. These “incremental” economic impacts are those that are not expected to occur absent the designation of critical habitat. This analysis considers the potential for both direct and indirect incremental impacts of the designation. Direct incremental costs are associated with additional effort for consultations, reinitiated consultations, new consultations occurring specifically because of the designation, and additional conservation efforts that would not result from compliance with the section 7 prohibition on jeopardizing the species. Indirect costs are those that may result from the influence of critical habitat designation on the decisions of regulators and decision-makers other than the Service (e.g., State agencies and land managers) or the behavior of the public. We provide a qualitative evaluation of potential economic benefits in Chapter 6. 1 16 U.S.C. §1533(b)(2). ES-1 Draft Economic Analysis – January 14, 2013 OVERVIEW OF THE PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT AND STUDY AREA 4. The Service proposes to designate approximately 271,062 acres (109,695 hectares) of land on the islands of Kahoolawe, Lanai, Maui, and Molokai (hereafter referred to as Maui Nui).2 The proposed critical habitat comprises new critical habitat for 50 species (45 plant species; two bird species; and three tree snail species) and revised critical habitat for 85 plant species. Approximately 47 percent of the area proposed is currently critical habitat for 85 of the plant species included in this rule, or is already critical habitat for other listed species, including the Blackburn’s sphinx moth. The proposed designation covers 135 species (130 plant species, two forest bird species, and three tree snail species) and includes 11 ecosystem types. 5. The proposed critical habitat area includes 100 units for the plant species; 44 units for the two forest bird species; and six units for the three tree snail species. However, 49 of the proposed critical habitat units are overlapping (e.g., some units described for plant species overlap units described for the bird species), as identified in the first column of the table presented in Appendix E. The proposed designation includes both occupied and unoccupied habitat. 6. In addition, the Proposed Rule identifies several areas as “under consideration for exclusion” from the final critical habitat designation under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. The proposed critical habitat and the areas being considered for exclusion are displayed in Exhibit ES-1. Our analysis separately presents impacts in the areas being considered for exclusion from final critical habitat designation from the remainder of the area proposed for designation. 7. Overall, approximately 35 percent of the proposed designation overlaps State lands, approximately ten percent overlaps Federal lands, approximately one percent occurs on 3 county lands, and approximately 42 percent overlaps private lands. 2 2012 Proposed Listing and Critical Habitat Rule, 77 FR 34464. 3 Ibid. ES-2 Draft Economic Analysis – January 14, 2013 EXHIBIT ES-1. OVERVIEW OF MAUI NUI PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT AND AREAS CONSIDERED FOR EXCLUSION Source: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. GIS data on proposed critical habitat provided to Industrial Economics, Inc. on July 20, 2012. ES-3 Draft Economic Analysis – January 14, 2013 OVERVIEW OF ECONOMIC ACTIVITIES EVALUATED 8. This analysis focuses on the economic activities that, according to the Service, are of primary concern with respect to potential adverse modification of critical habitat. 4 Such activities include commercial and residential development, and grazing and farming activities. We also evaluate potential impacts to renewable energy projects as these projects: a) have the potential to generate ground disturbance; and b) are important in terms of their contribution to the State of Hawaii’s ability to meet its established renewable portfolio standards, which are mandated by the State. SUMMARY OF KEY FINDINGS 9. Critical habitat may generate incremental economic impacts through implementation of additional conservation measures (beyond those implemented in conjunction with the prohibition on jeopardy to the species) and additional administrative effort in section 7 consultations to consider adverse modification. The presence of the Maui Nui species provides extensive baseline protection that includes offsetting habitat loss (i.e. acquiring and managing habitat to compensate for habitat disturbed as a result of a project or activity). However, critical habitat designation may generate the additional specification that offsets be located within the affected critical habitat unit, or within critical habitat of 5 the same type. Quantified Impacts 10. For most of the ongoing and currently planned projects identified in this analysis, habitat offsets have been implemented or are currently being planned to occur within the critical unit even absent critical habitat designation and at a ratio that the Service believes will avoid adverse modification, although these projects will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis following the designation of critical habitat. Therefore, for these identified projects, incremental impacts of critical habitat designation are expected to be limited to the costs of additional administrative effort in section 7 consultations. However, for one development project – the Honua’ula project, described in detail in Chapter 3 – proposed critical habitat for the Maui Nui species has resulted in incremental impacts in the form of additional conservation measures. Specifically, following publication of the proposed rule for the Maui Nui species, the Service made additional recommendations including that additional habitat offsets
Recommended publications
  • Handbook Publication.Pub
    Table of Contents Maui County’s Landscape and Gardening Handbook Xeriscaping in Maui County ................................................................. 1 Planning and Design................................................................................................................. 1 Hydro-zones.............................................................................................................................. 1 Plant Selection and the Maui jkCounty Planting Zones............................................................ 2 Soil Preparation ........................................................................................................................ 4 Mulching.................................................................................................................................... 5 Irrigation .................................................................................................................................... 5 Maintenance ............................................................................................................................. 7 Other Interesting Techniques for the Ambitious ..................................... 8 Xeriscape Ponds....................................................................................................................... 8 Aquaponics in the Backyard ..................................................................................................... 9 Water Polymer Crystals ...........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Geology of Hawaii Reefs
    11 Geology of Hawaii Reefs Charles H. Fletcher, Chris Bochicchio, Chris L. Conger, Mary S. Engels, Eden J. Feirstein, Neil Frazer, Craig R. Glenn, Richard W. Grigg, Eric E. Grossman, Jodi N. Harney, Ebitari Isoun, Colin V. Murray-Wallace, John J. Rooney, Ken H. Rubin, Clark E. Sherman, and Sean Vitousek 11.1 Geologic Framework The eight main islands in the state: Hawaii, Maui, Kahoolawe , Lanai , Molokai , Oahu , Kauai , of the Hawaii Islands and Niihau , make up 99% of the land area of the Hawaii Archipelago. The remainder comprises 11.1.1 Introduction 124 small volcanic and carbonate islets offshore The Hawaii hot spot lies in the mantle under, or of the main islands, and to the northwest. Each just to the south of, the Big Island of Hawaii. Two main island is the top of one or more massive active subaerial volcanoes and one active submarine shield volcanoes (named after their long low pro- volcano reveal its productivity. Centrally located on file like a warriors shield) extending thousands of the Pacific Plate, the hot spot is the source of the meters to the seafloor below. Mauna Kea , on the Hawaii Island Archipelago and its northern arm, the island of Hawaii, stands 4,200 m above sea level Emperor Seamount Chain (Fig. 11.1). and 9,450 m from seafloor to summit, taller than This system of high volcanic islands and asso- any other mountain on Earth from base to peak. ciated reefs, banks, atolls, sandy shoals, and Mauna Loa , the “long” mountain, is the most seamounts spans over 30° of latitude across the massive single topographic feature on the planet.
    [Show full text]
  • Topographic History of the Maui Nui Complex, Hawai'i, and Its Implications for Biogeography1
    Topographic History ofthe Maui Nui Complex, Hawai'i, and Its Implications for Biogeography 1 Jonathan Paul Price 2,4 and Deborah Elliott-Fisk3 Abstract: The Maui Nui complex of the Hawaiian Islands consists of the islands of Maui, Moloka'i, Lana'i, and Kaho'olawe, which were connected as a single landmass in the past. Aspects of volcanic landform construction, island subsi­ dence, and erosion were modeled to reconstruct the physical history of this complex. This model estimates the timing, duration, and topographic attributes of different island configurations by accounting for volcano growth and subsi­ dence, changes in sea level, and geomorphological processes. The model indi­ cates that Maui Nui was a single landmass that reached its maximum areal extent around 1.2 Ma, when it was larger than the current island of Hawai'i. As subsi­ dence ensued, the island divided during high sea stands of interglacial periods starting around 0.6 Ma; however during lower sea stands of glacial periods, islands reunited. The net effect is that the Maui Nui complex was a single large landmass for more than 75% of its history and included a high proportion of lowland area compared with the contemporary landscape. Because the Hawaiian Archipelago is an isolated system where most of the biota is a result of in situ evolution, landscape history is an important detertninant of biogeographic pat­ terns. Maui Nui's historical landscape contrasts sharply with the current land­ scape but is equally relevant to biogeographical analyses. THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS present an ideal logic histories that can be reconstructed more setting in which to weigh the relative influ­ easily and accurately than in most regions.
    [Show full text]
  • A Landscape-Based Assessment of Climate Change Vulnerability for All Native Hawaiian Plants
    Technical Report HCSU-044 A LANDscape-bASED ASSESSMENT OF CLIMatE CHANGE VULNEraBILITY FOR ALL NatIVE HAWAIIAN PLANts Lucas Fortini1,2, Jonathan Price3, James Jacobi2, Adam Vorsino4, Jeff Burgett1,4, Kevin Brinck5, Fred Amidon4, Steve Miller4, Sam `Ohukani`ohi`a Gon III6, Gregory Koob7, and Eben Paxton2 1 Pacific Islands Climate Change Cooperative, Honolulu, HI 96813 2 U.S. Geological Survey, Pacific Island Ecosystems Research Center, Hawaii National Park, HI 96718 3 Department of Geography & Environmental Studies, University of Hawai‘i at Hilo, Hilo, HI 96720 4 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service —Ecological Services, Division of Climate Change and Strategic Habitat Management, Honolulu, HI 96850 5 Hawai‘i Cooperative Studies Unit, Pacific Island Ecosystems Research Center, Hawai‘i National Park, HI 96718 6 The Nature Conservancy, Hawai‘i Chapter, Honolulu, HI 96817 7 USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, Hawaii/Pacific Islands Area State Office, Honolulu, HI 96850 Hawai‘i Cooperative Studies Unit University of Hawai‘i at Hilo 200 W. Kawili St. Hilo, HI 96720 (808) 933-0706 November 2013 This product was prepared under Cooperative Agreement CAG09AC00070 for the Pacific Island Ecosystems Research Center of the U.S. Geological Survey. Technical Report HCSU-044 A LANDSCAPE-BASED ASSESSMENT OF CLIMATE CHANGE VULNERABILITY FOR ALL NATIVE HAWAIIAN PLANTS LUCAS FORTINI1,2, JONATHAN PRICE3, JAMES JACOBI2, ADAM VORSINO4, JEFF BURGETT1,4, KEVIN BRINCK5, FRED AMIDON4, STEVE MILLER4, SAM ʽOHUKANIʽOHIʽA GON III 6, GREGORY KOOB7, AND EBEN PAXTON2 1 Pacific Islands Climate Change Cooperative, Honolulu, HI 96813 2 U.S. Geological Survey, Pacific Island Ecosystems Research Center, Hawaiʽi National Park, HI 96718 3 Department of Geography & Environmental Studies, University of Hawaiʽi at Hilo, Hilo, HI 96720 4 U.
    [Show full text]
  • United States of America
    anran Forestry Department Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations GLOBAL FOREST RESOURCES ASSESSMENT COUNTRY REPORTS NITED TATES OF MERICA U S A FRA2005/040 Rome, 2005 FRA 2005 – Country Report 040 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA The Forest Resources Assessment Programme Sustainably managed forests have multiple environmental and socio-economic functions important at the global, national and local scales, and play a vital part in sustainable development. Reliable and up- to-date information on the state of forest resources - not only on area and area change, but also on such variables as growing stock, wood and non-wood products, carbon, protected areas, use of forests for recreation and other services, biological diversity and forests’ contribution to national economies - is crucial to support decision-making for policies and programmes in forestry and sustainable development at all levels. FAO, at the request of its member countries, regularly monitors the world’s forests and their management and uses through the Forest Resources Assessment Programme. This country report forms part of the Global Forest Resources Assessment 2005 (FRA 2005), which is the most comprehensive assessment to date. More than 800 people have been involved, including 172 national correspondents and their colleagues, an Advisory Group, international experts, FAO staff, consultants and volunteers. Information has been collated from 229 countries and territories for three points in time: 1990, 2000 and 2005. The reporting framework for FRA 2005 is based on the thematic elements of sustainable forest management acknowledged in intergovernmental forest-related fora and includes more than 40 variables related to the extent, condition, uses and values of forest resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 28, 1996 / Proposed Rules
    7596 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 28, 1996 / Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR appointment in the Regional Offices SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: listed below. Fish and Wildlife Service Information relating to particular taxa Background in this notice may be obtained from the The Endangered Species Act (Act) of 50 CFR Part 17 Service's Endangered Species 1973, as amended, (16 U.S.C. 1531 et Coordinator in the lead Regional Office seq.) requires the Service to identify Endangered and Threatened Wildlife identified for each taxon and listed species of wildlife and plants that are and Plants; Review of Plant and below: endangered or threatened, based on the Animal Taxa That Are Candidates for Region 1. California, Commonwealth best available scientific and commercial Listing as Endangered or Threatened of the Northern Mariana Islands, information. As part of the program to Species Hawaii, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Pacific accomplish this, the Service has AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Territories of the United States, and maintained a list of species regarded as Interior. Washington. candidates for listing. The Service maintains this list for a variety of ACTION: Notice of review. Regional Director (TE), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Eastside Federal reasons, includingÐto provide advance SUMMARY: In this notice the Fish and Complex, 911 N.E. 11th Avenue, knowledge of potential listings that Wildlife Service (Service) presents an Portland, Oregon 97232±4181 (503± could affect decisions of environmental updated list of plant and animal taxa 231±6131). planners and developers; to solicit input native to the United States that are Region 2.
    [Show full text]
  • *Wagner Et Al. --Intro
    NUMBER 60, 58 pages 15 September 1999 BISHOP MUSEUM OCCASIONAL PAPERS HAWAIIAN VASCULAR PLANTS AT RISK: 1999 WARREN L. WAGNER, MARIE M. BRUEGMANN, DERRAL M. HERBST, AND JOEL Q.C. LAU BISHOP MUSEUM PRESS HONOLULU Printed on recycled paper Cover illustration: Lobelia gloria-montis Rock, an endemic lobeliad from Maui. [From Wagner et al., 1990, Manual of flowering plants of Hawai‘i, pl. 57.] A SPECIAL PUBLICATION OF THE RECORDS OF THE HAWAII BIOLOGICAL SURVEY FOR 1998 Research publications of Bishop Museum are issued irregularly in the RESEARCH following active series: • Bishop Museum Occasional Papers. A series of short papers PUBLICATIONS OF describing original research in the natural and cultural sciences. Publications containing larger, monographic works are issued in BISHOP MUSEUM four areas: • Bishop Museum Bulletins in Anthropology • Bishop Museum Bulletins in Botany • Bishop Museum Bulletins in Entomology • Bishop Museum Bulletins in Zoology Numbering by volume of Occasional Papers ceased with volume 31. Each Occasional Paper now has its own individual number starting with Number 32. Each paper is separately paginated. The Museum also publishes Bishop Museum Technical Reports, a series containing information relative to scholarly research and collections activities. Issue is authorized by the Museum’s Scientific Publications Committee, but manuscripts do not necessarily receive peer review and are not intended as formal publications. Institutions and individuals may subscribe to any of the above or pur- chase separate publications from Bishop Museum Press, 1525 Bernice Street, Honolulu, Hawai‘i 96817-0916, USA. Phone: (808) 848-4135; fax: (808) 841-8968; email: [email protected]. Institutional libraries interested in exchanging publications should write to: Library Exchange Program, Bishop Museum Library, 1525 Bernice Street, Honolulu, Hawai‘i 96817-0916, USA; fax: (808) 848-4133; email: [email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • Maui County Tourism Industry Strategic Plan 2017-2026 Maui County Tourism Industry Strategic Plan 2017-2026
    MAUI COUNTY TOURISM INDUSTRY STRATEGIC PLAN 2017-2026 Volume 1: Maui County Tourism Overview and Plan Maui County Tourism Industry Strategic Plan 2017-2026 Maui County Tourism Industry Strategic Plan 2017-2026 Contents I. Executive Summary ........................................................................................... 1 II. Introduction and Background ............................................................................ 5 A. Purpose of the Plan .................................................................................................................. 5 B. State and County Plans ............................................................................................................ 6 C. Development Process .............................................................................................................. 6 D. Guiding Principles .................................................................................................................... 6 E. Implementation Framework .................................................................................................... 7 III. Overview of Tourism ......................................................................................... 8 A. State Level ................................................................................................................................ 8 1. Historical Trends ................................................................................................................ 8 2. Vital Issues Facing Hawai‘i
    [Show full text]
  • MAUI NUI DESTINATION MANAGEMENT ACTION PLAN 2021–2023 Contents
    MAUI NUI DESTINATION MANAGEMENT ACTION PLAN 2021–2023 Contents 2 I. INTRODUCTION 20 VI. MOLOKA‘I DESTINATION MANAGEMENT 2 Purpose of the Plan ACTION PLAN 4 Formation of the DMAP 20 Moloka‘i Tourism Situation Analysis 5 Implementation Framework 22 Vision for Moloka‘i’s Tourism 6 II. OVERVIEW OF TOURISM IN HAWAI‘I 22 Moloka‘i Destination Management Actions 6 Overall Trends 28 Moloka‘i Tourism Hotspots 7 Tourism Forecast 30 VII. LĀNA‘I DESTINATION MANAGEMENT ACTION PLAN 7 Resident Sentiment 30 Lāna‘i Tourism Situation Analysis 8 III. GOAL 32 Vision for Lāna‘i’s Tourism 8 IV. OBJECTIVES 32 Lāna‘i Destination Management Actions 10 V. MAUI DESTINATION MANAGEMENT ACTION PLAN 38 Lāna‘i Tourism Hotspots 10 Maui Tourism Situation Analysis 12 Vision for Maui Tourism 39 Acknowledgement 12 Maui Destination Management Actions 41 Glossary 18 Maui Actions for Future Consideration 42 Sources 18 Maui’s Tourism Hotspots 1 I. Introduction PURPOSE OF THE PLAN In 2019, the Hawaiian Islands received a record high of 10.4 million visitors. While this brought in $17.75 billion in total visitor spending to Hawai‘i’s businesses, generated $2.07 billion in taxes, and supported 216,000 jobs statewide, it also put pressure on some of our destinations and communities. This situa- tion is not unique to Hawai‘i. Other popular destinations—from Venice, Italy to Machu Picchu, Peru, to Kyoto, Japan—have also felt the negative efects of tourism, which not only impacts residents’ quality of life but also the quality of the visitor experience. 2 MAUI NUI DESTINATION MANAGEMENT ACTION PLAN 2021–2023 In recognition of these challenges, the Hawai‘i Tour- The idea of “regenerative tourism” gained momentum ism Authority (HTA), in partnership with the coun- in 2020, as the global COVID-19 pandemic increased ties and the respective visitor bureaus, initiated the awareness of tourism’s opportunities and vulnerabili- process of developing community-based Destination ties.
    [Show full text]
  • County Profile INTRODUCTION COUNTY PROFILE
    County Profile INTRODUCTION COUNTY PROFILE GEOGRAPHY The County of Maui is the second largest county by land area in the State of Hawai‘i. It consists of four main islands: Maui, Moloka‘i, Lāna‘i, and Kaho‘olawe. The combined area of these islands is 1,171 square miles, including over 9 square miles of inland water; the island of Maui is the largest, with 734.5 square miles, and the islands have a total coastline of 210 statute miles. Kalawao County, a state- managed hospital community (Kalaupapa), is situated on the Source: County of Maui Geographic Information Systems island of Moloka‘i. The island Processed by: State of Hawaii GIS Program of Kaho‘olawe is uninhabited and is in the process of being restored from a military Figure 1-11 known as the “Friendly Isle,” practice site to a cultural has a population that is largely Demographic Characteristics reserve. Hawaiian or part-Hawaiian and traditional pursuits like Population as of July 2016: 165,386 The island of Maui, known Median Age: 40.0 fishing and farming have as the “Valley Isle,” is the Average Family Size: 2.96 contributed to preserving its second largest in the Hawaiian Official Labor Force: 84,200 cultural heritage. archipelago. It has a land area Housing Units as of July 2016: 72,138 of 735 square miles, is 48 Median Household Income: $66,476 The island of Lana‘i has miles long and 26 miles wide. Per capita income: $29,664 historically been called the It is the economic center and Median Price of Single-Family Home “Pineapple Isle” because for home to most of the County’s Maui: $619,500 many years most of its 141 residents and businesses.
    [Show full text]
  • Atoll Research Bulletin No. 311 a Bibliography of Plant
    ATOLL RESEARCH BULLETIN NO. 311 A BIBLIOGRAPHY OF PLANT CONSERVATION IN THE PACIFIC ISLANDS: ENDANGERED SPECIES, HABITAT CONVERSION, INTRODUCED BIOTA BY ROBERT A. DEFILIPPS ISSUED BY NATIONAL MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION WASHINGTON, D.C., U.S.A. October 1987 @ COPYKTGHT 1.987 by IIAIJP~I' J GECIGRAPIITC SOCIETY & HAWAIIAN TELEPHONE COMPANY - -a]. 1 r i.~htsreserved Permission to use or reprint must be obtained in writing from ~awai'iGeographic Society .5A*.* Northern / I .LYCU." An 18 x 25" (45 x 62 cm) en- .I.. "l-*ln i Y",W Mariana 1.................................................................. I I rour* rrc,rr courllllor I ........ I largement of this map is avail- able postpaid for $5; the same size, deluxe edition, sent rolled in a tube via airmail is $10. A complete list of available maps will be sent on request. Send orders, requests for informa- tion, and suggestions to: Hawai'i Geographic Society Post Office Box 1698 Honolulu, 96806-1698, HAWAII 2oS-53&-3S52 ......... 80U-323-3723-~h5~......... I i I A BIBLIOGRAPHY OF PLANT CONSERVATION IN THE PACIFIC ISLANDS: ENDANGERED SPECIES, HABITAT CONVERSION, INTRODUCED BIOTA BY ROBERT A. DEFILIPPS Introduction To plant conservationists who must fervently gather botanical intelligence against a time-frame of rapidly dwindling plant populations and habitats, the following statements expressed by M.-H. Sachet and F.R. Fosberg (1955, 1971) are both pertinent and self-explanatory: "The great unsolved problem of modern scientific methodology is that of bibliography, that of knowing what has been accomplished already. In starting any line of investigation the scientist is faced with the choice of ignoring his predeces- sors, possibly wasting much time on work that has already been done and missing valuable information and ideas, or of spending a large proportion of his time in study of current and past literature on the field.
    [Show full text]
  • Federally Listed Species Occurring in the U.S
    Federally Listed Species Occurring in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Pacific Region Region 1, Recovery Permit TE-702631-29 Common Name Scientific Name Listing Status Mammals Rabbit, Columbia Basin pygmy Brachylagus idahoensis E Wolf, gray Canis lupus E Bat, Pacific sheath-tailed (Mariana Emballonura semicaudata rotensis E subspecies) Bat, Pacific sheath-tailed (South Emballonura semicaudata semicaudata E Pacific subspecies) Bat, Hawaiian hoary Lasiurus cinereus semotus E Lynx, Canada Lynx canadensis T Deer, Columbian white-tailed Odocoileus virginianus leucurus T Bat, Mariana fruit (=Mariana flying Pteropus mariannus mariannus T fox) Bat, little Mariana fruit Pteropus tokudae E Caribou, woodland Rangifer tarandus caribou E Pocket gopher, Roy Prairie Thomomys mazama glacialis T Pocket gopher, Olympia Thomomys mazama pugetensis T Pocket gopher, Tenino Thomomys mazama tumuli T Pocket gopher, Yelm Thomomys mazama yelmensis T Squirrel, northern Idaho ground Urocitellus brunneus T Bear, grizzly Ursus arctos horribilis T Birds Millerbird, Nihoa (old world Acrocephalus familiaris kingi E warbler) Warbler, nightingale reed (old world Acrocephalus luscinia E warbler) Swiftlet, Mariana gray Aerodramus vanikorensis bartschi E Akialoa, Kauai (honeycreeper) Akialoa stejnegeri E Duck, Laysan Anas laysanensis E Duck, Hawaiian (=koloa) Anas wyvilliana E Murrelet, marbled Brachyramphus marmoratus T Goose, Hawaiian Branta (=Nesochen) sandvicensis E Hawk, Hawaiian (='lo) Buteo solitarius E Plover, western snowy Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus T Elepaio,
    [Show full text]