WAO KELE O PUNA Biological Management Plan

WAO KELE O PUNA

BiologicalPhoto Courtesy Management Betsy Gagne Plan

PROGRAM COOPERATORS

DIVISION OF OFFICE OF PACIFIC DLNR FORESTRY & WILDLIFE LEGACY LANDS HAWAIIAN COOPERATIVE

HAWAII ISLAND AFFAIRS STUDIES UNIT

Prepared by Julie Leialoha

DLNR Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve Coordinator

WAO KELE O PUNA FOREST RESERVE

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This plan is a site-specific plan prepared by the Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR), Division of Forestry and Wildlife (DOFAW) for Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve – Hawaii County, State of Hawai‘i. This plan presents a brief history of the forest reserve owned by the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) but jointly manged with DLNR-DOFAW along with descriptions of cultural, geological and natural resources, and proposed management recommendations.

Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve was first established as the Puna Forest Reserve by Governor’s Proclamation on June 29, 1911. At the time it consisted of 16,843.89 acres. A second parcel of land consisting of 8,890.275 acres was placed into the Puna Forest Reserve by Governors Proclamation on December 22, 1928. These parcels combined or, 25,856-acres, currently makes up the Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve . However, since 1928, the reserve has undergone a number of administrative changes beginning primarily in 1981. The convoluted history of these changes will be addressed in detail in the land use (reserve history) section of this report. In short, the reserve has gone from public land under the administration of the State’s Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR), to privately owned holding by Campbell Estate in a controversial, though State supported land-swap, then back to public land currently owned by the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) and managed by DLNR’s Division of Forestry and Wildlife (DLNR/DOFAW) in a joint memorandum of agreement signed in June of 2006 (henceforth known as the “agreement”). The current agreement is scheduled to expire in June of 2016. It is expected that OHA will then take full control of all aspects to manage the reserve, unless otherwise mutually agreed upon by OHA and DLNR.

The Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve is important for preserving Hawaii’s unique 2

native forest ecosystems, its species, as well as its cultural significance. There are a wide variety of rare or endangered plants and animals. Endangered birds for which the continuing health of the Reserve may be a critical factor include the ‘I’o (Buteo solitaries), Hawai‘i Creeper (Oreomystis mana) and Hawai‘i ‘akepa (Loxops coccineus), including a known regular visitor to the reserve, the Newell Shearwater or a’o (Puffinus auricularis newell). Rare plants found in the reserve include the ‘aku (Cyanea tritomantha), an endemic species with a unique spiny-like (false thorns) features running along its stems, and the nanu or na’u, or Hawaiian gardenia (Gardenia remyil), also endemic to Hawaii’s forest ecosystems. The rare and endemic mammal, the Hawaiian hoary-bat, or ‘ope’ape’a (Lasiurus cinereus semotus) is a known in inhabitant of the reserve. In addition, surveys of cave dwelling arthropods by Bishop Musuem entomologist have found rare organisms including the cave-dwelling-plant-hopper (Oliarus polyphemus). Survival and recovery of these rare native plants and animals depend upon preservation of habitat by reducing impacts from threats such as ungulates, disease-bearing mosquitoes and other invasive insects, non-native predators, introduced diseases and invasive plants.

The Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve contains resources that are vital for maintaining Hawaiian culture and practices. Hawaiians consider native plants and animals as family and have a strong spiritual connection to the mountain landscape and the forest itself. Gathering plants such as ferns, maile (Alyxia oliviformis), flowers, fruits, and other materials cannot be perpetuated into the future unless the forest remains relatively pristine. Recent history of legal events in the reserve led to a land mark ruling solidifying gathering rights for Native Hawaiians, which focused on access into traditional gathering areas (Pele Defense Fund –vs- Campbell Estate). The ruling, which directly affected the Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve, could have wider implications on traditional gathering rights of Native Hawaiians at a state wide level. However, the intent here is to signify the importance of Wao Kele O Puna as an important resource area for traditional Native Hawaiian gatherers and/or practitioners.

Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve is an important area for public use which also includes hunting, potential recreational opportunities, and educational programs and activities. There is currently limited public access to most of this reserve. There is only one legal public access route into the reserve located just above the town of Pahoa in lower Puna. The access road traverses through neighborhood communities along a county roadway and through a private parcel owned by Olsson Trust, of which OHA owns road easement rights through Olsson Trust properties and into the reserve. The legal access route is commonly referred to as the “geothermal access road”. Though other limited access points are available, they require permission from private land owners or written negotiations with community associations for access usually for a limited period of time, prior to entering the reserve through these access points. Most access roads, particularly those in the upper Puna sub-divisions leading to the reserve, are privately held by community associations and its members. This has been a source of contention from owners who are being trespassed upon by private individuals, who use these access points without the permission of the land owner or community association. Though the reserve itself is considered public-lands, the majority of the reserve is surrounded by privately held parcels that buttress the reserve. In essence, with exception being the legal access road in lower Puna, the reserve itself is basically land-locked. There are two other public easements possible, but one would require a day-long hike through the Hawaii Volcanoes National park to get to the boundaries of Wao Kele O Puna, and the other route through the Kahau’ale’a Natural Area Reserve, which is currently closed by the State and County of Hawaii due to the continuous eruption of Pu’u ‘O’o. Though individuals have historically entered the reserve this way, they too often exit and trespass onto privately owned parcels, which has been a continuous source of disputation.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION ...... 8

II. PROJECT AREA DESCRIPTION ...... 9

A. Location and Description ...... 9 B. Land Use ...... 12 II.B.1 Reserve History ...... 12 II.B.2 SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES ...... 16 II C PHYSICAL SITE DATA ...... 21 II.C.1 HYDROLOGY…………………………………………………………………..21 II.C.2 SOILS……………………………………………………………………………23 II.C.3 GEOLOGY……………………………………………………………………...26 II.C.4 CLIMATE………………………………………………………………………..33 II D Forest Ecosystems ...... 33 II.D.1 Native Forest Communities and Flora……………………………………...33 II.D.2 Hyperspectral Imaging (LIDAR) and Field Study of Vegetion ...... 43 II.E.1 Native Wildlife ...... 58 II.E.1 Passerines (Forest Birds) ...... 58 II.E.2 Procellariid (Seabirds)...... 64 II.E.3 Native Hawaiian Hoary Bat ...... 66 II.E.4 Hawaiian Antrhopods ...... 71 II.E.2 Non-Native Wildlife II.E.2.1 Pigs ...... 72 II.E.2.2 Goats ...... 75 II.E.2.3 Black Rats and Mongoose ...... 76 II.E.2.4 Introduced Birds ...... 76 III Public Access and Recreation ...... 77 IV Revenue ...... 78 V Threats ...... 80

V.1 Invasive Non-Native Plant Species ...... 80 V.I.I Miconia ...... 81 V.I.2 Strawberry Guava ...... 89 V.1.3 Albezzia ...... 97 V.2 Wildfire and Disease ...... 98

V.3 Climate Change ...... 100

V.4 Volcanic Activity ...... 100

V.5 Illegal Human Activity ...... 101

VI Management Goals and Objectives ...... 101

VII Recommendations ...... 102

VIII Bibliography ...... 104

IV Appendices ...... 109

This page left in intentionally blank

INTRODUCTION: Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve is owned by the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. OHA entered into agreement with the DLNR to jointly manage the reserve. Since DLNR possessed the expertise in managing natural resource lands, and Wao Kele O Puna being culturally sensitive to Native Hawaiians and OHA being the expert on cultural issues, a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) was developed between the two agencies to assist in the overall management of the reserve until OHA can build capacity to manage resources on their own including developing administrative rules. Because OHA does not have any administrative rules for Wao Kele O Puna, it was agreed that the reserve would be placed back into the State’s Forest Reserve System under Forest Reserve Statues HRS Chapter 183 until such time that the MOA expires. The MOA was signed on June 27, 2006, and anticipated to expire in June of 2016 unless mutually agreed upon to extend the MOA beyond 2016 or end the MOA prior to 2016.

This particular plan, hence forth known as “The Biological Management Plan”, is a partial component of the overall Comprehensive Management Plan (CMP) being developed by OHA. The Biological Management Plan has been developed by DLNR’s Division of Forestry and Wildlife- Hawaii Island Branch. It follows protocols set forth by DOFAW with regards to management actions of all its Forest Reserves statewide. These efforts serve to assist in organizing field management as well as assisting in budgeting and funding planning.

The Biological Management Plan was developed using a number of formats including but not limited to:

DOFAW’s standard management plan format Review of DOFAW historic and current files (both at the Administrative and

Hawai‘i Branch office) and documents obtained from the Land Division,

Survey Division, Bureau of Conveyances, as well as State Archives

Reviewing State of Hawai‘i Geographic Information Systems (GIS) maps of biological, historical, and environmental resources in the forest reserve

Reviewing other plans that identified the forest reserve or the area, such as USGS-Biological Resources Division Forest Bird Inventory Data, the Hawai‘i Biodiversity and Mapping Program reports, NRCS Soil Inventory, USGS-HVO Geological Mapping Data, U.S. Forest Service research published and unpublished material, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Recovery Plans et.al. Input from DOFAW staff from all program areas both at the Hawai‘i Island Branch and Administrative offices

This particular plan will address the biological aspects of the reserve including but not limited to:

Native forest ecosystems

Native flora and fauna

Threats, including invasive species, disease, climate change and ungulates

Human activity (recreational and illegal activities)

Management actions taken by DOFAW including partnership research actions (addendums will include all action reports to date)

II PROJECT AREA AND DESCRIPTION II.A Location and Description

The Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve is a 25,856-acre assemblage of two separate land parcels (TMK: 1-2-10:2 and TMK 1-2-10:3) located in the district of Puna on the island of Hawaii. The reserve sits in the middle of Kialuea Volcano’s

east rift zone and is currently subjected to intermittent lava flows due to the current activity along the rift zone that run along the southwest boundary of the reserve. The last major intrusion took place in March of 2013. The reserve slopes across a westerly-to-easterly axis from an elevation of 2,280 feet to 1,120 feet approximately and is within the Conservation State Land Use District. The reserve is characterized by dense forest to bare lava fields.

WKOP consist primarily of ‘ohi’a-fern dominated forest, providing critical habitat for a number of rare, threatened or endangered plant, bird, and anthropod species as well as the ‘opea’pe’a or Hawaiian Hoary-bat. If left undisturbed the ‘ohi’a-fern dominated forest is considered one of the most stable ecosystem type in Hawaii. In higher elevations of the reserve the most common fern associated with ‘ohi’a is the

hapu’u (Cibotim spp.), while in the lower elevations it is the uluhe (Dicronopterus linearus.) According to early botanist Joseph F. Rock, “the Puna Forest Reserve (PFR) is one of the prime areas where ‘ohi’a reaches its largest size, up to 100 feet in height” (Rock et.al. note PRF includes Wao Kele O Puna). A vegetation baseline was mapped in 1985 by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Jacobi, et.al. 1985) using aerial photographs and selective ground surveys, including a generalized biotic survey that identified nine broadly defined ecosystem types (Lamourux, Char 1985). However these generalized descriptions do not attempt to account for all the different local variations within the reserve. Older and more varied plant communities survive in kipuka’s (islands of vegetation surrounded by lava flows). This will be discussed in detail in the Forest Ecosystems of this report.

Endangered native forest birds are found in the reserve, such as the i’iwi, ‘apapane, ‘amakihi, elepaio, ‘oma’o as well as the Hawaiian hawk, I’o, and a regular visitor to the reserve, the a’o or Newell Shearwater. Though the known species of native honey creepers can be found in the reserve, it is unclear if they have established long term thriving communities in the reserve itself as lowland-elevation forest such as Wao Kele O Puna are under constant threat of habitat fragmentation, degradation and loss and/or competition from introduced species as well as avian diseases carried by mosquitoes. Mosquitoes are known vectors of avian pox and avian malaria, nearly fatal to all honey creepers. Though larger populations of native honey-creepers are found at elevations above 5,000’ where mosquitoes may be limited due to colder temperatures, climate change and increasing temperatures, or shorter cooler winter-like periods that have allowed the occasional influx of mosquitoes above 5,000’. The highest elevation in the Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve is 3,200’.

Though no one factor can be credited to the inclement decline in native birds in Wao Kele O Puna, one thing is for sure. Recovery of native bird populations in low- elevation forest requires managing native habitat, reducing introduced threats such 11

as invasive species, and working with partners in avian disease resistance, crucial to the conservation of Hawai’I’s native forest birds. Even though native honey- creepers can be found in Wao Kele O Puna, other than the ‘amakihi and ‘apapane, little is known if there are stable and viable reproducing populations, or if the majority of honey-creepers are simply passing through to feed and return to higher elevations.

Recent surveys in 2011 also have established a population of the endangered Hawaiian hoary bat, ‘ope’ape’a, in the lower eastern corner of the reserve. This will be discussed in detail later.

Long term management of the reserve provides multiple benefits to the State. The forested watershed of Wao Kele O Puna contributes to the islands water resources. Annual rainfall in the reserve is between 125” to 150” annually (Juvik). Wao Kele O Puna is also one of the last remaining large scale intact mesic lowland rainforest in the State and should be preserved as such. It provides an enriched habitat for native species as well as rare and endangered species, including endangered entomological organisms found in lava tubes (Howarth and Stone).

A. Land Use II.B.1 Reserve History

.Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve (WKOP-FR) has had a long convoluted history of legal land designations. There are two State parcels that make up a combined total of 25,856-acres of the reserve, TMK: 1-2-10:3, known hence forth as parcel #1; and TMK: 1-2-10-2, known hence forth as parcel #2. The State of Hawaii originally owned both parcels which through Gubernatorial Proclamation created the Puna Forest Reserve, initially encompassing 19,850 acres. On December 22, 1928 an additional Proclamation expanded the boundaries of the Puna Forest Reserve by adding an additional 8,890.275 acres of parcel 2, and 3.835 acres to 12

parcel 1 expanding the Puna Forest Reserve to a total of 25,738 acres. Both Gubernatorial Proclamations were made pursuant to the laws of the time (Office of the Governor 1928).

Historically in 1903, the Territory of Hawai’I enacted Act 44, titled Reservation of Government Land for Forestry Purposes. Territorial forester C.S. Judd in a 1919 report to the governor’s office indicated that approximately 818,739 acres across the main Hawaiian Islands had been established within in the system (Judd 1919). The act established Hawaii’s forest reserve system by allowing the governor to set apart ”any government land or lands not then under lease, or on which there is a lease of two years or less, as forest reservations” (Tummons). Act 44 could also allowed the governor to included private lands. Private owners could “surrender care, custody and control of any lands whether held under lease or in fee, as a forestry reservation, either for one or more years, or forever “Territory of Hawaii Act 44”. Of the 818,739 acres of forest reserve in 1919, some 260,084 acres were on private land.

In the case of Wao Kele O Puna, the opposite holds true. Wao Kele O Puna went from being identified as a Forest Reserve, to a Natural Area Reserve, to being transferred to a private holding company in a land swap deal, to being “sold” back to the States Office of Hawaiian Affairs, with assistance from the Trust for Public Lands (TPL) and federal funds from the Legacy Lands conservation fund, placed back into the State Forest Reserve system in 2006 until OHA can develop administrative rules in which to remove Wao Kele O Puna from the State forest reserve system and into its own land base system to control Wao Kele O Puna on its own entirety.

Parcel #1: TMK: 1-2-10:3

Parcel #1 originally consisted of 16,843.89 acres and designated as the Puna Forest Reserve by Governor’s Proclamation on June 29, 1911 (Governors

Proclamation 1911). In a 1985 deal between the State of Hawaii and the James P. Campbell Estate (Campbell Estate) exchanged properties in an effort to develop geothermal energy. Parcel 1 was previously in the Natural Area Reserve system prior to 1985. Executive Order 3096 was signed in 1987 effectively removing Parcel 1 officially removing Parcel 1 from the Forest Reserve system. There is confusion as to what land designation Parcel #1 was placed into between 1985 and 1987 after the exchange took place in 1985 but from the documents it appears there was some juggling of Hawaii Revised Statutes that needed to meet compliance and EO 3096 appeared to make that clear (Scheuer, J Internal OHA memo). To add to the confusion, the author of this document after an exhaustive and thorough search of State Archives records, with the assistance of the State archivist, documents of this time period including BLNR reports covering this time frame could not be found. Source documents listed at the State Archives indicated available documents. However, upon inspection by the State archivist of the boxes listed as holding the documents, the boxes and files were found to be empty. There was no record with State Archives indicating either a document search or removal authorization form as is standard operating procedures at the State Archives. A request was made by DOFAW to the State Archivist in an attempt to locate the documents, and unfortunately they were unable to locate the files requested. A similar request was made to the DLNR Engineering Department to locate these documents again with no outcome. However, BLNR records at the State Archives do indicate reports filed. Though puzzling, we can only conclude the possibility that the records were misfiled leaving the land designation of this time frame unknown and we can only reference EO 3096 as the formal source, for now.

The following summary will attempt to explain the complicated shifting of land designations for both parcels over time.

Parcel #2: TMK: 1-2-10:2 Parcel #2 consisting of 8,890.275 acres was placed into the Puna Forest Reserve by Governors Proclamation on December 22, 1928. On January 11, 1977, a DLNR hearing was held in Hilo to propose the removal of 14

6,500 acres from the Puna Forest Reserve and placed into the Natural Area Reserve System (NARS) which had been established by the State Legislature in 1970, under Act 139 (Chapter 195 Hawaii Revised Statutes). The purpose of the NARS was to protect “irreplaceable examples of all aspects of the unique and varied, original Hawaiian ecological system. Their undisturbed condition would be perpetuated by protective measures against any exploitive use or encroachment,that would modify the dominance of the natural process.” (Environmental Assessment 1977 DLNR Natural Area Reserves Commission). On November 2, 1981 by then Executive Order 3096 (EO 3096) removed the land designation of Forest Reserve, and Executive Order 3103 dated October 16, 1981 placed 6,500 acres into the land designation of Natural Area Reserve System (NARS) initially creating the Wao Kele O Puna Natural Area Reserve. Modified boundaries to the Puna Forest Reserve added an additional 3.83 acres to the newly named Wao Kele O Puna Natural Area Reserve. At some point the Natural Area Reserve designation was lifted, but it is unclear if it was Executive Order 3359 dated March 9, 1987 succeeded in cancelling EO 3103 lifting the Natural Area Reserve System designation. It remained in NARS until 1985 when the land exchange with Campbell Estate took effect. However, once again, there is uncertainty as to whether Executive Order 3358 dated March 9, 1987 actually lifted the designation of forest reserve on Parcel #2, so the land designation between 1985 and 1987 for this parcel also remain unclear. Again Executive Order 3096 was to make the land transfer compliant with all associated State laws.

Land Exchange: At some point, discussions began between the Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) and the Estate of James Campbell (hereinafter referred to as Campbell Estate) regarding the development of geothermal energy along the Kilauea Middle East Rift Zone primarily located in the newly designated Wao Kele O Puna Natural Area Reserve (note: this consisted only of Parcel #1, Parcel #2 was never included into the NARS). A land exchange was proposed so that Campbell Estate could develop geothermal energy on the

Wao Kele O Puna combined parcels of Parcel #1 and Parcel #2. In exchange Campbell Estate proposed to exchange 25,807.055 acres of land situated at Kahauale’a, Puna, Hawai’i. The State was interested in acquiring these lands for the public purpose of “a Natural Area Reserve and for consolidation of holdings of public lands.” On December 23, 1985 the State of Hawaii and Campbell Estate signed an Exchange Deed effectively transferring 27,785.891 acres of State owned lands, which included Parcel #1 (Puna Forest Reserve) and Parcel #2 (Wao Kele O Puna Natural Area Reserve) to Campbell Estate for the sole exploration of geothermal resources, in exchange for 25,807.055 of Campbell Estate land at Kahau’ale’a, Puna, Hawaii which eventually became the Kahau’ale’a Natural Area Reserve. Though it was clear that both parcels were removed from the Forest Reserve System, and placed into the geothermal subzone, it is not clear when this geothermal subzone was legally established since administrative rules for the geothermal subzones were not created until 1991. DOFAW does not question the transfer, but it unfortunately leaves a void in the aspect of specific land designations for this time period. DOFAW needed to acquire this information in order to formulate a BLNR submittal requesting the removal of both parcels from the geothermal subzone as outline by the 1991 administrative rules governing geothermal subzones. Removal of the parcels from the geothermal subzone was a priority of the MOA between OHA and DLNR and under the administrative rules it is upon the “owner” to prove that the sight is not viable for geothermal development.

Legal Challenge Following the land exchange, community protests and court cases followed challenging the legality of the land exchange, Native Hawaiian access rights, and the granting of a geothermal development permit for Wao Kele O Puna (Dedman vs BLNR 1987 and Pele Defense Fund vs Paty 1988). These challenges did not affect the land exchange or the land designation of either parcel. It did however, lead to a ground-breaking ruling on Native Hawaiian access rights to traditional gathering areas.

Purchase of Wao Kele O Puna In 2007, the Campbell Estate trust now the legal private owners of Wao Kele O Puna, with combined parcels #1 and #2, was to dissolve as outlined in the will of James E. Campbell following 20-years after the death of his last direct heir. His last surviving daughter Beatrice Campbell Wrigley died on January 21, 1987. The Campbell Estate held 55,400 acres in trust, including Wao Kele O Puna. Concerned over the possibility of Wao Kele O Puna being sold to a potential developer, the Pele Defense Fund approached the Trust for Public Lands (TPL), a California nonprofit public benefit corporation, in an effort to thwart the potential sale of this prime piece of conservation land. TPL worked with the State to secure environmentally important private forest lands that are threatened with conversion to non-forest uses. The potential purchase of Wao Kele O Puna fit this model ideally. TPL, utilizing FLP funds ($3.2 million), entered into an “agreement of sale” in partnership with the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) who would be the new legal land owner, to purchase the Wao Kele O Puna site totaling 25,855.891acres.

Re-designated as State Forest Reserve In February 28, 2008 by Executive Order #4128 signed by Governor Linda Lingle, Wao Kele O Puna was officially placed back into the State Forest Reserve System. It will eventually be removed from the State Forest Reserve System once OHA creates its own set of administrative rules to manage the reserve independent of DLNR. In addition the Board of Land and Natural Resources (BLNR) voted unanimously to remove Wao Kele O Puna from the State geothermal subzone on August 12, 201.

The following is a general synopsis of Wao Kele O Puna’s history (courtesy of Jonathan Scheuer):

History of WKOP

• 1893 – Republic of Hawaiʻi asserts ownership of all crown and kingdom lands, including WKOP • 1898 – Republic “cedes” crown and kingdom lands • 1911 – Territory of Hawaiʻi sets aside part of WKOP as a Forest Reserve. • 1977 : Hawaiian Coalition of Native Claims retain traditional gathering rights • 1981 – The State of Hawaiʻi sets aside part of WKOP as Natural Area Reserve (highest level of protection for state lands) Oli performed by Halau O Kekuhi at WKOP

Controversial Modern History • 1982: Campbell Estate proposes land swap for geothermal • State owned WKOP (27,800 acres) for neighboring Campbell owned Kahauleʻa (25,800 acres) • 1986 – The Hawaiʻi Board of Land and Natural Resources (BLNR) and State Legislature approve land swap • 1988: Geothermal Test holes drilled • Thousands rally in protest • Decades-long legal battle occurs: health concerns, development in native forest, energy shipped to Oʻahu, native gathering rights • 1994: Pele Defense Fund (PDF) vs. Estate of James Campbell • 1994: Geothermal abandoned • 2001: Land goes up for sale

OHA’s Acquisition of Waokeleopuna Purchase Price $3.65M • Partners: • Trust for Public Land (TPL) – Negotiates Purchase with Campbell Estate • U.S. Senator Daniel Inouye – Secures Funding • USDA Forest Legacy Program (FLP) – Provides $3.35M in funding • OHA provides $300,000 to secure title • July 2007 TPL transfers title to OHA

II.B.2 Surrounding Communities

Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve is located on the southeastern slopes of Kilauea Volcano in the district of Puna, Hawaii County. Wao Kele O Puna is surrounding by, primarily privately held lands as well as State owned property (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1 Surrounding Communities

The northwestern boundary of the reserve traverses a number of private sub- divisions which include, Fern Forest, Hawaiian Acres, Kopua Farm Lots and Eden Rock. All of these sub-divisions including all of their access roads are privately owned by their respective community associations and association members (e.g. lot owners). There is no legal access into the reserve from this area without first securing permission or negotiating access terms from either, a private-owner, the community association or both. The southwest boundary buttresses the State owned Kahau’ale’a Natural Area Reserve. The southeast boundary is a mix of larger privately owned parcels such as the Kaimu-Makena Homesteads, Kauka Homesteads, and the Upper Kaimu Homesteads. Along the eastern boundary are

State Lands (under the jurisdiction of the DLNR-Lands Division), Lee Ranch and Kaohe Homesteads. The only legal public access to the reserve is through the Kaohe Homestead lots along an unpaved road, known locally as “Middle Road” (no legal County of Hawaii name exist), to the easement access owned by OHA, commonly referred to as the “Geothermal Access Road”. Driving access is restricted, blocked by a heavy-duty locked gate at the immediate entrance to the Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve. However walking access along this corridor is unrestricted. Driving access to the public would need to be negotiated with OHA on a case-by-case basis.

C. Physical Site Data

II.C.1 Hydrology Near surface rocks and substrates in many volcanic islands including Hawaii are highly permeable and infiltration rates can be extraordinary high. In the southeastern part of the Island of Hawaii, which includes Wao Kele O Puna, perennial surface water is nearly absent despite an average rainfall of 79 inches per year at lower elevations, and 125 -150 inches at higher elevations (Scholl et.al). There are areas in the reserve that appear quite swampy during rainy periods and can remain that way during dry periods, but other than these areas there are no large areas of standing water or any streams or creeks in the reserve. Most of the reserve, given its soil type and crinkly-basalt-type lava is permeable and less likely to hold surface water for long periods of time. The principal aquifers in Hawaii are basaltic flows in which fresh water can accumulate in large lens-shaped bodies (known as the Ghyben-Herzberg lens). This lens is maintained by direct recharge of rain water and discharges from the high-level dike impounded water. A fresh water lens develops as fresh water percolates down to the salt water and floats on the underlying salt water. Since lava activity along the east rift zone, which runs along the southwestern border of Wao Kele O Puna, tend to create dikes which are poorly permeable, thin and nearly vertical sheets of volcanic rock, fresh water tends 22

to get trapped (UH Department of Geography). It is likely that some areas within Wao Kele O Puna contain fresh water confined by these dikes and not floating on salt water. In other more permeable areas in the reserve, basal water would be floating on salt water. Basal water is predomintately sodium chloride. In the Puna region, particularly around the east rift area, dissolved silica values two to three times higher than the average for the rest of the Big Island (Druecher, Fan 1976). In addition hydrologic and geologic conditions around Kilauea’s east rift zone support the possibility of accumulations of superheated ground water.

Given the annual amount of rainfall in this area, it is unclear what the recharge rate of fresh water in Wao Kele O Puna would be, and further studies would be warranted.

II.C.2 Soils Soils in the Reserve were formed in and on various aged volcanic substrates including cinder, ash, pāhoehoe and a’a, and the age and type of lava substrate greatly influences soil type. However, the majority of the soils in the reserve consist of histosols, which are thin layers of organic material on geologically young lava rock.

Natural Resources Conservation Services (NRCS) has soils classification for the area that includes up to twenty-five different soil types, but being geologically young, histosoils remain dominant particularly along the southeastern region of the reserve. In 1973 the U.S. Department of Agriculture (now NRCS) created a soil-series for the entire Hawaii Island. Though up to 25 soil types have been identified in Wao Kele O Puna, the report indicates that four primary soil-series make up the majority of the reserve (U.S. Department of Agriculture 1973). These are the Manu-series, consisting of well drained silt-loams that formed in volcanic ash, cinder and pumice. Though the majority of the Manu-series soil type is found predominately within the higher elevational ranges of 3,000’ to 4,000’, the highest 23

northern elevational point of the reserve (1,900’) includes some of this soil type and also includes the Hao-series of medial-loam which consist of deep to very deep, moderately well drained soils that formed in volcanic ash. These series is usually underlain by hard Pahoehoe lava at an average depth of 36”. The bulk of the reserve is made up of the Ohi’a-series at elevations ranging from 900’ to 2,000’. Rainfall in this area is heaviest with an average rainfall of 125” to 200” annually with anticipated dense cloud cover year round, making Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve the largest lowland mesic rain forest in the nation. Soils in the Ohi’a series are well drained silty clay loams that formed in volcanic ash with annual soil temperatures averaging 65° to 69° F. In addition to the deeper volcanic ash areas of the series, a large portion of the reserve particularly within the 900’ to 1,400’ elevation of the reserve is the Ohi’a extremely stoney silty-clay regions, which anyone who has walked through Wao Kele O Puna will tell you, makes for a very challenging hike. Soils are shallow averaging 20” to 36” deep over extremely crumbly a’a lava which can make up to 20% of the overall ground cover. Ground vegetation can be thick in areas, making finding your footing very hazardous if not careful. Volcanic cracks and faults are strewn throughout this area, and some are large enough to swallow large trucks, making this an extremely hazardous region to work. Figure __ provides a map detailing some of the known geological hazards. This information is based on documents from USGS-Hawaii Volcano Observatory, but also from LiDAR imaging of Wao Kele O Puna. These series of cracks and crevices can be picked out from the imaging, however there are many more that are likely there, but could not be determined using this technology. In 2013 a professional field crew assisting DLNR from the U.S. Forest Service using this hazard map attempted to locate a potential research site from the old geothermal well head site into the forest approximately one-mile in, through thick brush and uluhe. The team could not complete their mission as they encountered numerous unmapped cracks and crevices which they were unable to cross. After an entire day of bushwhacking in an attempt to reach their research site, they later learned that they had traveled less than a quarter 24

mile from the well head site after hitting numerous cracks too large to cross. Each time they attempted to go around or traverse a hazardous cracks, they would encounter another one. It is known that one of the most hazardous areas in the reserve is around the well head site since the majority of the large cracks and faults run southwest to northeast on either side of the old geothermal well site. Fig. Hazard map

Fig. 2 Hazard Map Detailing Cracks and Fault lines . Last of the soil series found in Wao Kele O Puna is the Ola’a series which are areas of extremely cobbly, highly decomposed plant material which consists of thin, well drained soils that formed in organic material and ash overlying a’a lava and very cobbly slightly decomposed plant material formed over pāhoehoe. This series makes up a very small fraction of the lowest elevational gradient (200’ to 900’) of the reserve. The area surrounding the old geothermal well-head site is an 25

example of this soil-series.

Fig. 3 Soil Types courtesy NRCS

II.C.3 Geology In geological terms, Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve is very young. The western edge of the reserve is prone to intrusion of lava from the ongoing eruption of the Pu’u O’o vent which is currently in its 30th year of continuous eruption (as of Jan 2, 2012). Though the reserve lacks any significant cinder cone type formations, the most outstanding geological aspects are a large parasitic shield volcano, Pu’u Heiheiaulu and a series of lava tube structures, most notably the

“middle tube structure” which had been partially mapped by the State Historic Preservation office.

There are three predominate lava tube systems that have been partially surveyed by the State Historic Preservation. Though there are highly likely that numerous other lava tubes exist’s on the property, two of the more prominent systems will be discussed briefly in this section. The Northern Tube System runs diagonal of the reserve approximately a mile south of the Hawaiian Acres subdivision at 1,100 feet elevation. The tube is fragmented with two entrance points. There are significant cultural deposits, particularly in the lower section of the system at 1,160 foot elevation. Given the size of the tube and entry points a large volume of lava fed the system. The system is believe to run nearly 8 miles, however fragmentation and tube collapse made survey possible at only two sites, the longest being some 2,200 feet long located at the lower section of the system and had evidence of historic occupation and use. The second section was a 500 foot narrow corridor at the 1,200 foot elevation and did not have any presence of human occupation.

The longer, more prominent cave system known as the Middle Tube System runs continuously for 10 miles from an elevation of 470 to 1,620 feet within the reserve extending an additional four miles outside of the reserve. There are significant archaeological and cultural deposits in this system, including human built rock formations, decayed organic debris, charcoal from fires or torches and obvious burial sites. More work needs to be done in this system to document in full the archaeological aspects of this important cave systems, including protecting the entrances from potential vandalism. In addition, an extremely rich diversity of anthropodic fauna, including endangered anthropods identified by leading Bishop Museum entomologist Dr. Frank Howarth, who is considered one of the few field experts on native Hawaiian cave antrhopods. According to Dr. Howarth (per.com), this area should be considered for critical habitat listing for endangered native 27

Hawaiian cave anthropods. The upper most section of the system is fairly large with the tube being 40 foot wide and 30’ tall, but ends near the 1984 lava flow. It is likely, given the largeness of the cave in this area, that it extends further upslope, but no additonal surveys have been conducted since 1991.

Though DLNR would encourage OHA to conduct additional surveys, it should be noted that the 1991 surveys were done prior to the evolvement of the State Burial Council and its administrative rules. Any future work would need to adhere to these rules.

Fig. 4 State Historic Preservation Map showing Northern and Middle Lava Tubes

The lava tube structures have caused some confusion as to aging portions of the reserve. It is believed that some of the reserve share vegetation and magnetic similarities to the Ailaau shield vent along the eastern slope of Kilauea (1987:300 Holcomb) similar to forest ecosystems found in the northern end of the reserve indicating an older geological age by as much as 1500 years, possibly as old as 3000 years. However, the tube systems appear to be much younger, indicating that tube fed systems came from somewhere closer to the east-rift zone which runs along the southwestern boundary of the reserve. In any case, flows within Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve are from Kilauea with nearly one-third of the northeastern section of the reserve underlain by extensive tube-fed Pahoehoe flows erupted from the Ailaau shield (Holcomb 1987). Kilauea is a vigorously active shield-stage volcano composed primarily of theoliitic basalt, characterized by relatively low levels of alkalis within its lava types (Wolf and Morris 2005). Shield-stage volcanism is a period of voluminous growth due to repeated eruptions of fluid theoliitic basalt making up as much as 98% of its overall volcanic volume or growth rate during this period. Though it is unknown how long the volcanic shield development stage may take, it is believed that it could be as long as 500,000 years (Moore, Clague 1992). Since the bulk of shield volcanism takes place at the summit or vents along the rift zone, Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve will likely anticipate continuous intrusions of lava particularly along Kilauea’s east rift zone for a significant period of time. The east-rift of Kilauea extends from the Kilauea caldera located within the Hawaii Volcanoes National Park, traverses the southeastern boundary of Wao Kele O Puna for approximately 5-miles, making a sharp bend extending east-northeast all the way to Cape Kumukahi along the Puna coastline extending along the ocean floor at least another 110 kilometers (Macdonald and Abbott 1970). Though a series of large pit craters lie along the east rift zone, a smaller parasitic shield, Heiheiahulu Cone, is the only significant geological structure within the reserve. Heiheiahulu Cone is an example of a prehistoric shield remnant. 29

The majority of the lave flows in Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve are classified as Puna Basalt or Holocene described as lava flows, vent deposits, littoral deposits, and tephra deposits of tholeiitic basalt and rare transistional and alkali basalt (Wolf and Morris 2006, Trusdell and Moore 2006). Flows are commonly pahoehoe or a’a or a mixture of both. Fissure eruptions like those found along the east-rift zone, have generally produced sheets of vesicular pahoehoe which converted to a’a with increasing distance from the vent. Fissure vents like the east-rift tend to become inactive in long continuous eruptions and lava discharge tends to concentrate at localized points generally producing elongate a’a flows. Such is the case with Pu’u O’o flows that have and will likely continue to impact Wao Kele O Puna. Pu’u O’o produced a complex lava flow field. Between 1983 and 1986, numerous individual elongate type a’a flows were created, some of which are clearly visible within Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve. There are two primary tube systems feeding the current

Fig. 5 Lava Flows eruption. Figure 5, shows the primary trajectory of the on-going flow. The system that tends to flow into Wao Kele O Puna has been intermittently active with the most recent intrusion taking place in May of 2013 (outlined in dark red).

Figure 6, simplifies the geological age structure into units for the Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve with GIS metadata provided by Dr. Frank Trusdell of the USGS Hawaii Volcanoes Observatory (per.com) from Morrison and Wolf data.

For more information and detailed age and type structure go to “www.pubs.usgs.gov/ds/2005/144” (note: BP refers to Before Present).

The Kīlauea volcano consists of Puna basalt (Holocene) with predominantly tholeiitic basalt.

Fig. 6 Geological Age Structure of Wao Kele O Puna Wolf and Morrison data, courtesy Frank Trusdell

Elevation within the reserve ranges from 1380’ to 2,300’ with an average annual rainfall of 125 to 150 inches per year. In the upper area of the reserve there are some large open areas that are quite swampy. The amount of rainfall combined with a fairly warm climate makes possible the relatively rapid comeback of plant life on new lava flows. A quick survey on a new intrusion of lava into the reserve on Thanksgiving Day 2010, shows indication of new growth of vegetation in cracks and crevices. There have been numerous studies of plant succession on barren flows, some well known ones dating back to 1912 (Forbes), with more recent studies indicating a wide variety of succession rates due primarily to variety of environmental factors. One thing is clear though, that available moisture plays an 32

important role in barren lava vegetation succession. The whitish grey lichen (Stereocaulon vulcani) is usually one of the first to colonize barren rock, but ohi’a and swordferns can often be found in cracks and fissures where moisture may accumulate.

II.C.4 Climate Trade winds dominate air flow patterns most of the year passing northeast to southwest over the coastline, usually blowing up over the rift zone and back to the ocean from the southeastern Puna coast (Juvik and Juvik 1998). This interaction of cool offshore airflow with opposing trade winds tends to cause high rainfall, particular at night and early morning. At anytime nocturnal cooling may reverse the pattern causing warmer air flow or Kona winds (Burthchard, Moblo 1994)

The average rainfall in the area is between 120 and 160 inches during normal years. In lower elevations annual rainfall is 60 – 80 inches. Temperatures are comfortable year round with average temperatures between the sixties and eighty degrees, Cooler temperatures and heavier rainfall is expected during the winter months of October through April (Juvik and Juvik).

II. D Forest Ecosystems

II.D.1 Native Forest Communities and Flora Wao Kele O Puna can be broadly classified primarily as a lowland mesic rain forest along with pioneer vegetation on newer lava flows. Mesic ecosystems can be best categorized as a transitional area between dryland ecosystems and wet forest ecosystems (areas typically found above 3,000’). Wao Kele O Puna is one of the few remaining lowland mesic rain forest in the State and by far the largest (26,000 acres), making Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve a significant conservation area. Though little is known of its hydrological value to the watershed within the Puna district, given its continuity of its vast vegetational ecosystems, one can easily 33

assume that it plays a significant role. However, threats to both the native ecosystems and potential hydrological resources from invasive species require intense scrutiny. As an example, the invasive strawberry guava can easily displace entire native ecosystems over time by forming monotypic stands, and water loss due to surface runoff in areas of dense strawberry guava have been documented (Gemballucca, Price, et.al.).

Earlier surveys done in 1985 (UH Dept. of Botany, U.S Fish and Widlife Service) broadly define nine ecosystem types. However, these types are so broadly defined and do not account for all of the different local variations throughout the reserve, and are classified as follows:

1. Lava: Recent, barren flows as well as slightly older flows which support a pioneer vegetation. These areas are important to successional stages of pioneer vegetation. Moisture plays an important part in pioneer succession. In wetter areas such as Wao Kele O Puna the development of vegetation is much more rapid as it would be in drier hotter regions of barren lava flows. The whitish-gray lichen (Sterecaulong culcani), will often appear first, however, higher plants such as ‘ohia (Metrosideros polymorpha) and swordferns (Neprholepis multiflora) may appear at the same time. ‘Ohi’a is the most common pioneer among the flowering plants and may even appear before the lichens. 2. ‘Ohi’a Woodland: ‘Ohi’ a woodland is composed of widely spaced trees with an almost continuous carpet of uluhe (Dicronopteris linearus), a matted fern between the trees. In moist meophytic situations a grass-shrub association cooupies the space between the trees. The area may vary in size fro low to tall stature trees in different localities but in any one stand, the trees are fairly uniform in size. Two sub-catagories appreas in the type. a. ‘ohi’a woodland with uluhe: this ecosystem type tends to cover large areas particularly on younger flows and lower elevations (especially below 1,000 feet). This is especially true for the lower section of Wao 34

Kele O Puna where dense mats of uluhe are interspersed with ‘ohi’a of the relatively same size. However, there can be vast areas of solid uhuhe before seeing any trees. The dense fern cover prevents the establishment of many seedlings and as a result only a few scattered plants such as kopiko (Phychotria hawaiiensis), uki (Machaerina spp.), and even invasive species like melastome’s (Melastomoma spp.), can be found in the thick uluhe mats. Uluhe can be up to 3 meters (15 feet) tall in some areas. This ecosystem type is difficult and dangerous to traverse as matted ferns obscure large earth cracks, fissures, and even tree molds. b. ‘ohi’a woodland with grass: The total area of the ecosystem type is typically not large, with the exception of areas that may have been exposed to fire where invasive grass species such bush-beard grass (Andropogon glomeratus) tend to do very well in colonizing disturbed areas. Usually this ecosystem type will consist of scattered ‘ohi’a with broomsedge (Andropongon virginicus). Bush-beard grass and smaller native species like uki, and ‘ohelo (Vaccinium reticulatum), kukae-nene (Coprosma ernodeoides), pukiawe (Styphellia tameiameiae) and ama’u (Sadleria syatheoides) can also be found. There are usually a number of other grasses associated with this ecosystem type, including velvetgrass (Holcus lanatus), foxtail (Setaria spp.) and vaseygrass (Paspalum urvillei), as well as some sedges such as tall fringe rush (Fimbristylis dichotoma), kuolohia (Rhynchospora lavarum) and Pycreus polystachyos (no common name). This ecosystem type is most common around areas of newer lava flows where areas have been burnt by lava intrusions. As mentioned, larger areas can also be found in areas that have been disturbed usually by fire. In the case of Wao Kele O Puna in areas away from the flow would likely be caused by lightning strikes or human activity, however there have been no known fires caused by man or any reports of areas showing areas exposed from lightening. However in the 35

near by Kahau’ale’a Natural Area Reserve there are areas that clearly show lightning strike changes in the habitat. These can clearly be seen from the air. Hawaii Volcanoes National Park Resource’s Management staff published an article on changes to ecosystems caused by lightning strikes in 1990 documenting this phenomenon (Tunison and Leialoha Hawaii Botanical Society). 3. ‘Ohi’a Forest: This ecosystem type covers extensive portions of the island of Hawaii and is the principal ecosystem type found within Wao Kele O Puna. This is the dominant tree species with typically three varieties of Metrosediros occurring. In wetter areas older o’hi’a forest commonly develop a dense understory of tree ferns (Cibotium spp.). There are other species of trees and often form a distinct sub-canopy layer. In native tree species. In areas least disturbed, is the principal habitat for large numbers and a variety of native bird species. However given that Wao Kele O Puna is at lower elevations subjected to mosquitoes, bird species richness is not as varied as at this ecosystem type at higher elevational gradients. Many rare plants are also found in this ecosystem type. In Wao Kele O Puna, rare plants in this ecosystem include the ‘ahakea (Bobea timiniodes), haha or aku’aku (Cyanea tritomantha), ‘ohe (Joinvellea ascendens ssp. ascendens), nanu (Gardenia remyil), a rare fern (Adenophorus periens) and two types of rare endemic mints (Phylostegia floribunda and Phylostegia vestita). There are also sub-categories in this ecosystem type and are as follows: a. Wet ‘ohi’a with native species: Consist of extensive unbroken tracts of wet ‘ohi’a forest principally found in the upper elevations. In lower elevations they tend to be more fragmented by either recent lava flows or forest which have been disturbed to some extent, including invasive species. The canopy is usually closed (>60% cover) and are composed of largely mature, tall statured (>10 meters or 30 feet plus) ‘ohi’a with trucks 1 to 1.5 meters (3 -3.5 feet) in diameter are not uncommon. Sub- canopy trees consist of ‘olapa (Cherodendron trigynum), kawa’u (Ilex anomala), alani (Pelea clusaefolia) and kopiko (Psychotria hawaiiensis). 36

Other native trees include kolea (Myrsine lesertiana), hame (Antidesma platyphyllum), alani (Melicope clusiifolia previously Pelea), ‘ohe and ‘ohe mauka (Tetraplasandra hawaiiensis & Tetraplasandra oahuensis), opuhe (Urera glabra), pilo (Coprosma species), olomea (Perrotetia sandwicensis) and papala (Pisonia species). Recent surveys in 2011 also found very large plants of the endemic ‘olona (Touchardia latifolia) in a kipuka within Wao Kele O Puna in an area with ti, wild banana and wild taro. There are indications at this particular site that the area was probably once used as a bird-catcher’s camp, but further archaeological work would need to be done to be conclusive. It is only speculative at this point. The tree ferns create a third layer sub-canopy dominated by a hapu’u (Cybotium spp.) and other tree fern species (e.g. Sadleria spp.). Patches of uluhe are scattered throughout this ecosystem type, while a large number of terrestrial and epiphytic ferns can be found here. Liverworts and mosses are abundant and form thick cushions on the trunks of trees. b. Wet ‘ohi’a forest with native species and exotic shrubs: This ecosystem type covers a large portion of Wao Kele O Puna. The ‘ohi’a is more or less smaller in composition and structure to the ecosystem discussed previously. However, it is generally an open canopy forest (<60% cover). Exotic or invasive shrubs, primarily strawberry guava and melastomes are found throughout the forest and is most abundant in disturbed areas, especially in areas were pig activity has occurred. Patches of uluhe and exotic grasses are also more frequently found here. The tree fern layer, is not as developed in this ecosystem type, and tend to be more scattered across areas. There are more signs of pig activity here, particularly in and around strawberry guava areas. The area closest to the now closed geothermal well site is a good example of this ecosystem type. In this area invasive melastomes, particularly the glory bush

(Tibouchina herbacea) and strawberry guava nearly dominate the sub- canopy. It’s also an area with lots of pig activity. c. Moderately moist ‘ohi’a forest: This ecosystem type occurs in areas which recive slightly less rainfall (about 75 to 100 inches per year) than the wet forest but do not suffer an actual moisture deficit and occur on lava flows which have been rather well weathered. Forests are open (rarely closed) with medium to tall stature trees. ‘Ohi’a is the predominate tree but a number of native tree species including lama (Diospyros sandwichensis) can be found. These other native tree species could be as tall as the ‘ohi’a or they could form their own sub- canopy. A number of dry forest tree species can also be found here such as the rare endemic ‘ahakea (Bobea timonioides), the olopua (Osmanthus sandwichesis), and ‘ohe (Tetratplasandra hawaiensis). Unlike the wet ‘ohi’a forest, this type of mesic ecosystem does not support a dense understory of tree ferns or shrubs. Instead shrubs species such as alahe’e (Canthium odoratum), mamaki (Pipturus hawaiensis), and kopiko are usually scattered and the understory is fairly open. Exotic shrubs such as sourbush (Pluchea odorata) and lantana (Lantana camara) are also common in this ecosystem type. More recent invasions like the gunpowder tree (Trema orientalis) are creeping in from the lower elevations into the boundaries of Wao Kele O Puna. Ground cover may consist of various grasses and swordferns (Nephrolepis multiflora). d. ‘Ohi’a forest with exotic sub-canopy and shrub layers: In Wao Kele O Puna this forest type can be dominated by the highly invasive strawberry guava intermixed with ‘ohi’a and other native tree species. These forests may consist of medium to tall stature trees with open or closed canopies. The understory layers of this type of forest have at some time been greatly disturbed. In Wao Kele O Puna it is primarily pig disturbance. Tall strawberry guava forms a dense sub-canopy layer, 6 to 7 meters tall 38

(18 to 21 feet). However there are areas in Wao Kele O Puna where strawberry guava exceeds 10 meters (30 feet). Meslastome species are usually a common shrub component in the understory. The ground beneath is usually heavily shaded and groundcover often consists of grass, thimbleberry (Rubus rosaefolius) downy wood fern (Christella dentata) and ginger (‘awapuhi-kua-hiwi), all considered invasive or exotic species. The more open areas tend to be filled with uluhe. Though strawberry guava is a serious threat to Wao Kele O Puna’s overall ecosystem with nearly 5,000 established acres in the reserve, it serves to note here, that only 10% of these 5,000 acres consists of densities of 90% or more. Most of the strawberry guava areas are interlaced with multiple layers of native tree and shrub species.

4. Dry forest: Composed primarily of lama-‘ohi’a mixture with other dry forest species on a’a flows. The dry forest is usually open, the trees of medium stature and usually with rounded crowns. Alahe’e (Canthium odoratum), akia (Wikstroemia phillyreaefolia) and a’ali’I (Dodonea sandwicensis) are the most commonly found shrubs in this ecosystem type. The amount of ground cover in the dry forest will vary depending on several factors such as open or closed canopy, amount of moisture available, age of lava flow, elevation etc. At lower elevations with less rainfall up to 40% of the ground is bare or lichen-covered. The lau’a’e fern (Phymatosorus scolpendria), is usually the most common species, with broomsedge (Andropogon virginicus) sword fern (Nephrolepis multiflora) and partridge pea (Cassia lechenaultiana) are also found here. Under slightly wetter conditions at higher elevations, gound cover may be 60% to nearly 100% cover. Sword fern will usually dominate mixed with lau’a’e and seedlings of dry forest tree and shrub species are also common. Other species encountered are Carex wahuensis (no common name), moa (Psilotum nudum, Spanish clover (Desmodium uncinatum) and Hilo grass (Paspalum conjugatum).

5. Dry scrub community: Usually a small area found primarily in much drier regions. This makes up less than 1% over all in Wao Kele O Puna. Ulei (Osteomeles anthyllidifolia), ilima (Sida cordifolia), hi’aloa (Waltheria indica) and pukiawe (Styphellia tameiameae) can be found in this ecosystem type. This ecosystem type is considered more xerophytic community type structure over rocky substrate areas with sparse ground cover more common in the lower Kalapana area. 6. Dry grassland: This ecosystem type is found in areas of low to medium rainfall, characterized by wide open grassy areas with rocky outcrops and scattered low shrubs and trees. A mixed association of the two Andropogon species (glomoratus and virginicus) along with natal redtop and pili grass (Heteropogon spp.) make up the dominate grass cover, with localized patches of molassesgrass. Short to medium-statured trees of the xerophytic form of ‘ohi’a can be found growing on pahoehoe knolls scattered throughout the grassland. Again, this ecosystem type make up less than 1% of Wao Kele O Puna and are confined primarily to older lava flow areas. 7. Mixed lowland forest: An area of varied mosaic of plant associations rather than integrated entity. Usually fragmented and not easily distinguishable from some of the other areas since they tend to merge together. Species found in this area can be xerophytic to moist mesophytic ‘ohi’a forest in addition to hala (Pandanus spp.), kukui (Aleurites moluccana). Since this is one of the most commonly used areas of man, given the numerous archaeological sites in Wao Kele O Puna, human introductions can be found such as, ape (Alocasia macrorrhiza), noni (Morinda ccitrigolia) as well as wild banana and wild taro. These tend to be closely associated to old Hawaiian house sites or agricultural sites, even possibly temporary camp sites for bird catchers as what seems to have been found in one of the kipuka’s in Wao Kele O Puna. The mixed lowland forests are composed most frequently of a mixture of native trees such as ‘ohi’a and lama as well as a multitude of introduced species like the gun powder tree (Treme spp.) The height of the trees here greatly vary from low stature, almost scrub-like, disturbed forest to medium or tall stature older forest. Ground cover varies considerably depending on 40

disturbances and the amount of canopy cover. Ground cover does tend to be sparse when the canopy is dense, and can be shrub thick when the canopy is open. In Wao Kele O Puna, open areas tends to be occupied by thickets of medium stature strawberry guava and glory bush (Melastoma herbacea) and maile pilau (Paederia foetida) is common. 8. Scrub: Usually dominated by exotic and invasive species. The structure of this exosystem type may vary from open, grassy areas with scattered shrubs and trees to dense, closed scrub. Broomsedge (Andropogon virginicus), molassesgrass (Melinis minutiflora), or Californiagrass (Brachiaria mutica) are usually the dominant grass species in open scrub. Napiergrass (Pennisitum purpurum), bush beardgrass (Andropogon glomeratus), and Hilo grass (Paspalum conjugatum) may be locally common in some areas. Melastomes, strawberry guava and guava (Psidium guajava) may also be abundant in scrub forest along with lantana. The herbaceous layer is poorly developed where scrub is dense, especially in strawberry guava thicket’s, however shade tolerant species such as basketgrass (Oplismenus hirtellus) and downy woodfern (Christella dentate) are more common. In less dense scrub areas Glenwoodgrass (Saccciolepis indica), swordfern (Nephrolepis multiflora), thimbleberry (Rubus rosaefolius), honohono grass (Commelina diffusa), and Stachytarpheta species are present. Few native plants are found here, but ‘ohi’a, akia (Wikstromia sandwicensis), lama (Diospyros sandwicensis) and uki (Machaerina angustifolia) can still be found scattered throughout this type of ecosystem. 9. Agricultural lands: Though the majority of Wao Kele O Puna has never been cleared for agricultural use, sections were cleared for the development of geothermal energy and a small section along the south boundary were cleared of old growth ‘ohi’a in a injudicious effort to use as bio-fuel in the form of wood chips. Both these areas have been highly disturbed, however have very different outcomes. In the area cleared for geothermal, there are grass species and strawberry guava coming in. Continuous clearing and mowing is required to keep the grasses down in this area. Quite surprisingly, the opposite is true of the old 41

wood chipping site. Scientist in partnership with DLNR-Division of Forestry Hilo, from the U.S. Forest Service, are finding incredible secondary ‘ohi’a growth in this area and the tree stands are quite large and are clearly a dominate species in this area. This was not expected since the area was nearly completely razed during wood chipping efforts in the 1980’s. This is a one-of-a-kind area, there is no other like in the State, and presents an unprecedented opportunity to study secondary regeneration of ‘ohi’a. Also surprising is the number of native understory plants that have recovered in this area. Strawberry guava is also present but is sparse enough that with control, this area could be completely restored by utilizing standard operating protocols to protect what is considered Special Ecological Areas or SEA’s. Resource managers from DLNR-Division of Forestry and Wildlife-Hawaii and the U.S. Forest Service rated the area using criteria established for identifying SEA’s (Tunison and Stone 1992). Eight criteria values were used: 1) representation and/or rarity of vegetation; 2) vegetation intactness; 3) plant species diversity/richness; 4) manageability; 5) presence of rare flora and to the extent known, rare fauna (the native Hawaiian hoary bat was found in this area, refer to wildlife section); 6) Preserve design considerations; 7) degree of immediacy of threats from alien biota; and 8) research and interpretive values. Most of the site sits just outside of the Wao Kele O Puna boundary in what is known as the Ki’ula Forest site, owned by DLNR’s Land Division. Efforts are underway to conduct research by the U.S. Forest Service in partnership with DLNR’s Land Division-Hilo, to gather enough data to 1) learn the intricacies of a secondary-growth ‘ohi’a forest, 2) to gather enough information to justify a restoration effort, and 3) establish procedures for this effort in anticipation of securing additional funding sources to support future operations. The site is approximately 900 acres, but approximately only 100 acres actually sits within the Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve. It would be of significant value for the Office of Hawaiian Affairs to consider partnering with the U.S. Forest Service in this venture.

Agricultural lands surround Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve and, with it comes the possibility of additional introduced species into the reserve. In the upper Puna area, there are multiple agri-business and plant nursery operations growing all types of flora. As an example, Miconia, a highly invasive melastome, was accidentally introduced into Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve from a now abandoned nursery in the Kopua Farm Lot area. This is just one of a number of agricultural communities that surround the reserve. The Big Island Invasive Species Committee with support from OHA and the Hawaii Invasive Species Council has since removed all large flowering Miconia plants including, the first round of seedling recruitment from the area. After four-years the project has since been terminated and it is important for OHA to consider long monitoring in anticipation of seedling recruitment.

II.D.2 Hyperspectral Imaging (LIDAR) and Field Study of Vegetation Composition

In 2007 DLNR initiated a study of vegetation composition utilizing airborne imagery (LIDAR) and hyperspectral analysis to develop a vegetation description, including species richness and canopy layering to provide reference to the airborne imagery. Carnegie Airborne Observatory provided the preliminary hyperspectral and LIDAR airborne data that had been collected in 2007. The Pacific Ecosystems Assessment Services LLC was then contracted to set up vegetation monitoring sites selected using the LIDAR images. With assistance from a top team of botanist from seven (7) institutions, including DLNR-Division of Forestry and Wildlife Honolulu Branch, U.S. Forest Service, Hawaii Volcanoes National Park, UH-Hilo, Carnegie Airborne Observatory, Hawaii Community College, Rick Warschueser and Vanessa Joughin, a series of permanent sites were selected for survey. Surveys at 52 permanent plot sites conducted in 2007 and 2008 show a mixture of native and non-native species, however these particular invasive species seem to dominate areas within the 2-5 meter understory. The exception would be areas dominated by 43

staghorn fern or Uluhe (Dicronopteris linearis). A mixture of native species tends to dominate areas above 5 meters (sub-canopy). In addition to ‘ohia, and those mentioned above, other species include Cyrtandra spp (chiefly C. paladosa) and Clermontia spp (mainly C. parvifolia). Other species of note were the native hibiscus (Hibuscus brackenridgii), mamaki (Pipturus albidus), maile (Alexia oliviformis) and olona (Touchardia latifolia). The following is an extraction of the primary report completed by the team and put together by Pacific Ecosystems Assessments Services LLC:

VEGETATION SURVEY

The objective of this vegetation study was to develop a vegetation description, including species richness and canopy layering to provide reference to the airborne imagery collected by the Carnegie Airborne Observatory.

Figure 7 P. calttleianum infestations detected from hyperspectral analysis. Courtesy of Carnegie Airborne Observatory.

Site selection was guided by the preliminary hyperspectral and LIDAR airborne data obtained collected in January 2007. Initial analysis of the hyperspectral data revealed large infestations of Psidium cattleianum, Strawberry Guava (Figure 2). These infestations were unambiguously verified by helicopter survey; therefore these regions were not a priority for on the ground survey. Instead, 12 sites were selected across the reserve to span a range of cover types distinguishable using a combination of the hyperspectral and LIDAR data (Figure 3). The unique ability for the CAO LIDAR data to penetrate the vegetation and map the terrain underneath was used to ensure that field crews were not placed into areas with large crevasses or hazardous holes or skylights which are hidden from view because of the dense understory cover.

Portion of Wao Kele O Puna Reserve Initially flown by the Carnegie Airborne Observatory H January 2007

Wellhead Site B E A I K D A C L J F

Figure 8: CAO imagery of WKOP with the vegetation survey sites are indicated by letters.

Due to hazardous terrain and dense vegetation, entry into the forest was limited to areas reachable from safe helicopter landing zones, usually lava flows or boggy

46 areas with low stature vegetation, as well as the area surrounding the wellhead site and the road leading to it. Additional acc northeast boundaries of the reserve were not explored in this survey because the initial imagery was collected over the center of the reserve.

On January 13-14 and March 12, 2008, volunteer scientists and botanists from 7 different institutions surveyed the vegetation at 12 sites in 57 plots (18 m radius each) with site maps in hand.

Fig. 9: Hyperspectral Imaging of Vegetation Plots

Plot Easting Northing D-LZ 281834 2149565 D-1 281930 2149567 Site D D-2 281897 2149536 D-3 281870 2149500 D-4 281834 2149462 D-5 281801 2149423

Top right = true color image Bottom Left = Tree Height (m) Bottom Right = ground terrain (m) Colored circles = plots (18m radius) White circles = Landing zone

1 1

4 5

20m variation total in ground elevation 0 Tree Height 18m

The center point of each plot was marked with a single ribbon and the final GPS location recorded using hand-held units. Pictures of the vegetation in four cardinal directions as well as an image toward the sky and another toward the ground were taken. Transect tapes were laid out to delineate the plot radii in four directions. For reproducibility and rapidity, a modified Braun-Blanquet method of estimating percent cover of plant species was used with vertical stratification of the canopy (Appendix 1, sampling protocol). This method was developed with the help of Jonathon Price, UH- Hilo and exploratory trips into WKOP, prior to the major vegetation survey effort, to access vegetation heights and stratification. Species abundance was estimated for each canopy layer, and the combined total cover estimation for each canopy layer was also recorded. In addition, the approximate range of trunk diameters and the modal trunk size were estimated for trees reaching the tallest tree layer. The species abundance cover scale and height classes for vertical canopy stratification utilized for sampling were:

Vegetation Layer Height Range (m) Cover Class Cover Range (%) T1 >20 1 >1 T2 10-20 2 1-5 T3 5-10 3 5-10 T4 2-5 4 10-25 Shrub 1-2 5 25-50 Ground <1 6 50-75 7 75-100

Vegetation coverage of < 1% was recorded for abundance and species which were rare, solitary or had a small area of plot coverage were indicated. Species with 1-5% cover range indicate species with low cover area, but more than one individual. However, these percentages should be used with caution for cover estimation because below 5% cover it becomes difficult to estimate the true coverage of a plot by an individual species.

RESULTS General Description of Vegetation Composition Results

Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve is a low elevation forest system with relatively intact native components. The reserve comprises 25,856 acres, and contains a wide array of vegetation types and landscape features. Across the reserve, Metrosideros polymorpha ('ohi'a lehua) was usually the only species growing taller than 20 m, and was the dominant tree species found between 10-20 m. Other native tree species reaching 10-20 m included Psychotria hawaiiensis (kopiko), Diospyros sandwicensis (lama), Ilex anamola (kawau, aiea). Occasionally, Psidium cattleianum (strawberry guava) was recorded in the 10-20 m height class such as north of the wellhead area (site G).

However, P. cattleiaum was more prevalent in the 5-10 m range where it was recorded at every plot. Large infestations of P. cattleianum, such as the middle portion of the reserve, P. cattleianum (Figure 3) were easily mapped with the hyperspectral data obtained from the CAO and often inaccessible even from helicopter, therefore survey plots were not established in them. The data presented in this report in P. cattleianum refers to plants recorded in the survey plots outside these large infestations.

Between 5-10 m a greater variety of native species was found. Tree ferns began to populate the canopy with Cibotium glaucum often in greater abundance than

Cibotium menzizii. Also distributed in small quantities (one individual to 1-5% cover) throughout this canopy layer, in addition to shorter versions of the taller trees, were a number of the less common or rare native tree species, Antidesma platyphyllum (hame), Bobea elator, Cheirodendron trigynum ('olapa), Coprosma spp. (pilo), Hedyotis terminalis (manono), Melicope clusifolia (alani), Myrsine lessertiana (Kolea), Perrotetia sandwicensis (Olomea), Pisonia spp. (papala), Tetraplasandra hawaiiensis (‘ohe ‘ohe), Urera glabra (opuhe). Patches of Dicranopterus linearus were found growing over other vegetation and larger plants of Melastoma candidum were found in some areas. Invasive species Clidemia hirta and Melastoma candidum, became increasingly abundant in the 2-5 m canopy layer, where they were co-dominant with the native fern species (D. linearus, C. glaucum and C. menzizii). Large native Broussaisia arguta as well as shorter versions of the native trees of the upper canopy layers were found in lesser quantities.The shrub layer (1-2m) was dominated by invasive shrubs

(C. hirta, M. candidum, and some Tibouchina herbacea), the only exception being where there was thick D. linearis cover. The mixture of natives was still quite high with new additions being Cyrtandra spp (chiefly C. paladosa) and Clermontia spp (mainly C. parvifolia). Other species of note were Hibuscus brackenridgii, Pipturus albidus (mamaki), Vaccinium calycinum ('ohelo), Wikstroemea spp. ('akia). One Cyanea platyphylla (haha) plant was found in the southwestern side of the reserve which became accessible in early January 2008 due to the new lava flows. There were also a number of vines and epiphytes found throughout the canopy layers, most notably, Alyxia olivaeformis (maile), a few Asplenium species, and Freycinetia arborea (ei'ei). Because the focus of the survey was on the overstory plants ground cover (0-1 m) was assessed for the most part in terms of general cover of grasses, seedling, bare ground and litter. When possible, the presence of pig damage was recorded.

Site Specific Vegetation Data

Detailed plot specific vegetation data for each site can be found in Appendix 3. Presented here are summary descriptions of the site specific native and non-native or invasive species composition presented as the richness, simply the number of native or non-native/invasive species in a given canopy layer, and an abundance for each native or non-naitve/invasive species in each canopy layer. Graphs of the data are presented in Figure 4 a-d below the descriptions. The value 0.5 was used for cover estimates recorded as <1 %. Species richness and abundance values were calculated for the ground layer and are presented in the summary graphs. However, these values are a mix of data and should be interpreted with caution. Often species were grouped as described in the protocol (Appendix 1) as mixed seedlings, grasses, mosses and ferns, but when a particular species appeared to make up a larger proportion of the abundance in this layer it was often recorded on

51 its own. In addition, some sites which were sampled by botanists knowledgeable in ferns and mosses may have been recorded in greater detail. Rather than lose this detail, I have left it in the summary graphs (Figure 4 a-d).

Site Specific Vegetation Data

53 its own. In addition, some sites which were sampled by botanists knowledgeable in ferns and mosses may have been recorded in greater detail.

Sites A, B, and I: Easy access, highly invaded Sites A, B, and I were close to the wellhead access, and had the greatest relative abundance of invasive species compared to natives. While the dominant top of canopy (10-20 m) species was M. polymorpha with cover ranging from 5-50 percent across many of the sites. The other canopy layers were dominated mostly by invasive species C. hirta, M. candidum, and P. cattleianum except where thick D. linearus appeared to prevent invasive species growth as at plots B-2 and I-1. These sites also had generally lower species richness with total species numbers averaging around five in canopy layers greater than 1 m.

Sites C, E, and K: More remote, newer flows, low native diversity Sites C, E and K were located in more remote areas, but appear to be on younger lava flows (200-400 y) near the tips of some of the young lava fingers toward the western portion of the reserve. These sites were characterized by high M. polymorpha cover (25- 75%) in the 10-20 m tree layer and dense D. linearis cover between 1-5 m, reaching nearly 100% in some areas. C. glaucum also had a significant presence (10-50%) in the 2-5 m range. C. hirta was the dominant invasive species found at these sites with cover often between 25-25% in the 1-2 m canopy layer. M. candidum was found in association with C. hirta, but in lower abundance (1-5% on average). There was little P. cattleianum at most of the sites ( < 5%). Other native species were found at a few sites as singular plants or in very low abundance (< 5%) included I. anamola, P. hawaiiensis and T. hawaiiensis.

Sites G, H, and L: Remote, older flows, higher native diversity Sites G, H and L were similar to the previous three sites (C,E, and K), in that they are remote, have a dominant cover of M. polymorpha and P. cattleianum is in fairly low abundance. However, these sites have a taller M. polymopha canopy, with

55 trees greater than 20 m covering 25% of the plots on average and comprising 25- 75% of the canopy layer between 10-20 m. There is less D. linearis cover, 25% maximum at one plot. As seen in the previous sites, C. glaucum was the dominant species in the 2-4 m canopy layer, comprising 10-25% of the cover on average. Again, C. hirta and M. candidum were the dominant invasive species. Generally, C. hirta was found in greater abundance that M. candidum with cover ranging from 10- 75% and 10-25% on average respectively. Plots such as H-4 which possessed high densities of D. linearis (75-100%) tended to have less invasive cover.

Sites D, F, and J: Remote, rough terrain, possibly older flows Sites D, F, and J had the greatest species richness and comparable abundance of all the locations sampled. These sites were located in remote areas of rougher topography and often a’a lava compared to the more prevalent pahoehoe substrate. Here, M. polymorpha remained the dominant top of canopy species and was generally found in the 10-20 m canopy layer at 25-50% cover. Only at a few plots did M. polymorpha reached above 20 m and then very few trees. P. cattleianum was present in noticeable quantities in all plots at Site D, often becoming the dominant species between 5-10 m (10-50% cover). At sites F and J, C. glaucum, and to a lesser extent C. menzizii, formed the second canopy layer growing between 2-10 m. These sites also tended to have a substantial cover (25- 75%) of C. hirta below 2 m. M. candidum was also present, but in lesser quantities (10-25%) than C. hirta. T. herbacea was found in the understory at sites D and L. A large number of native tree species were found in low abundance at all these sites including, A. platyphyllum, Coprosma spp., C. trigynum, H. terminalis, M. clusifolia, M. lessertiana, P. sandwicensis, T. hawaiiensis and C. paladosa was found in the understory. B. elator, and U. glabra were found at Site J as well as C. nanwaliensis. In addition, when returning to the landing zone from site J, a C. platyphylla plant was found. Fortuitously, it was fruiting, so the location was recorded and samples were collected for necessary species validation and possible regeneration.

In 2013, DLNR-Division of Forestry and Wildlife secured an agreement with Carnegie Airborne Observatory, Stanford University, and the U.S. Forest Service to initiate additional hyperspectral analysis of Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve at no cost to OHA or DLNR. This service is being offered in-kind in an agreed upon partnership. However, DLNR has regrettably been removed from all management aspects of Wao Kele O Puna and it is imperative that OHA continue this agreement as it would benefit the program substantially in its efforts to manage the reserve.

II.E WILDLIFE

II.E.1 Native Wildlife

II.E.1.1 Passerines – Native Forest Birds and other bird species Native forest birds in Hawaii have suffered significant losses since the arrival of humans some 1,200 years ago with entire groups disappearing. A drop in native forest bird populations in lowland-forest ecosystems have been particular momentous for varying reasons. Endemic forest birds were historically found at all elevations on each island with approximately 10% of native passerines found below 1,000 meters (3,000’) with some native forest birds occurring in native dominated forest as low as 120 meters (40’) (Perkins 1903, Scott et.al. 1983). However, native habitat fragmentation, degradation and loss and/or competition from introduced species have reduced forest bird populations to critical levels. Mosquito borne avian diseases in particular have decimated passerine populations below 1700 meters (roughly 5,000’). A few native forest birds, such as the endemic ‘Apapane (Hemignathus virens)) and ‘Amakihi (Himatione sanguine sanguinea), can still be found in lower elevations, but questions remain as to their long-term survivability given a short live span and continuous environmental pressures affecting habitat at lower elevations. But on a positive note, their numbers are still quite significant, as in the ‘Apapane with populations in excess of one-million strong Statewide (Pratt et.al.). The question then becomes, what are ‘Apapane doing right to survive and what are the environmental conditions that allow them to thrive. Sadly however, for a large number of native forest bird, this is not the case, especially in lowland-forest such as Wao Kele O Puna. Native passerines found below 500 meters (150’), is now considered atypical.

‘Apapane and ‘Amakihi Courtesy of Brooks Rownd photos

Lowland-rainforest are one of the most fragmented ecosystems in the State due to human habitation, agricultural practices, introduced ungulates (goat, sheep, feral pigs, deer) as well as invasive species have all contributed to the decline and extinction of native forest birds State wide. In all appearances, native passerine decline and extinction is due to “ecosystem collapse”, where combined forces have led to low-elevation habitat loss and fragmentation (Reynolds, Camp et.al.) and no single factor is responsible for the loss of Hawaiian endemics. Other less studied factors to native passerine decline could include competition from introduced birds (Mountainspring, Scott 1985) and a potential host of arthropods (e.g. parasitoid wasps) as well as invasive ants. However, if we had to select one over all factor to the decline of native forest birds for Hawaii in general, it would likely be the loss of native dominated forest which native passerines require. Of the 52 known endemic birds, 26 are considered extinct, and 18 are endangered. In fact in Hawaii, humans have cleared so much native forest that roughly only 10% of native forest-ecosystems remain (Pratt et.al.). As late as the 1950’s it was common practice to clear huge swaths of native forest for cattle, agriculture, agribusiness and infrastructure. Lowland native forest, have taken the brunt of this, which is why Wao Kele O Puna is considered one of the most important conservation areas in the State. For one, it is the largest single lowland-mesic rainforest in the State with some 25,856 continuous acres. It runs parallel to the Kahau’ale’a Natural Area Reserve with some 22,000 acres on its southwest boundary, forming one of the largest contiguous conservation units in east Hawaii.

Wao Kele O Puna host a variety of endemic birds, plants and the only endemic land mammal, the ‘Opea’pe’a, or Hawaiian Hoary Bat. All of the native forest birds in Wao Kele O Puna are considered endangered or critically threatened by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. There are also numerous rare or endangered plant species and in addition, recent studies of cave systems in Wao Kele O Puna have found rare andendemic arthropods (Howarth, Stone)

Fig. 10: Forest Bird Transects on East Rift Courtesy USGS/BRD R. Camp

In 1979 the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service established 42 biological survey transects across east Hawaii, three of which traversed Wao Kele O Puna as well as a small portion of a fourth transect (refer to Fig.10) Bird survey data was first collected in 1979 (Jacobi et.al.) and again between August of 1993 and February of 1994 by the 60

U.S. Geological Survey/Biological Resources Division (henceforth known as BRD*). Abundance and distribution of low-elevation forest birds were evaluated including evidence of changes in species composition between 1979 and 1993. Data from four transects and 117 stations from the 1993 survey, and 117 stations of three transects from the 1979 survey were used for comparison. Unfortunately most of the stations used in the analyses were located within the Kahau’ale’a Natural Area Reserve with only a small fraction of stations located in Wao Kele O Puna along Transect 39 (Fig. 10). However, the analysis provides the best snapshot of bird activity in the area to date. Transects are approximately a distance of 3 km (2 miles) apart with survey stations along transects located every 150 meters (approximately 50’). Though methodologies altered somewhat between the 1979 and 1993 surveys to accommodate changes in landscape and property ownership, observers remained systematic during each survey period (Reynolds, Camp et.al.). Trained observers collected data at each station for a period of 8-minutes during the first four hours after sunrise (0700-1100 hours), peak hours for bird activity. All birds, including non-native species were recorded. In the Kahau’ale’a Natural Area, a total of 14 species of birds were identified between the 1979 and1993 surveys (Table 1).

*A section of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service based at Hawaii Volcanoes National Park in 1979 responsible for the initial bird survey was later reorganized and integrated into the USGS/Biological Resources Division. The 1993 survey included original members of the 1979 survey team.

Table 1 Species % Occurrence 1979 % Occurrence 1993 ‘Apapane* 99.1 94.9 ‘Oma’o * 95.7 90.6 Japanese White-eye 94.9 100 ‘Elepaio * 50.4 14.5

Hwamei 18.8 14.5

Northern Cardinal 17.9 3.4

I’iwi * 4.3 0

Hawai’i Amakihi * 1.7 0

Red-billed Leiothrix 0 4.3

‘Io * 0 1.3

Kalij Pheasant 0 1.7

Spotted dove 0 0.9

House Finch 1.7 0

‘Ou * 0.9 0

*Native

The most significant change would be the drop in occurrence of the endemic ‘Elepaio. This follows a pattern of decline in other parts of Hawaii Island (Venderwerf 1998) as well as Oahu due to habitat degradation. The beautiful long billed I’iwi remained elusive during both surveys and is most likely a passing visitor at lower elevations. Surveys in other areas of windward Hawaii indicate that the I’iwi’s range has contracted and likely rare in elevations below 1,500 meters (3,000’). Though they can be occasionally found in lower elevations, they are highly susceptible to avian diseases carried by mosquitoes, particularly avian malaria which is nearly always fatal (Atkinson et.al. 1995). The same for the ‘O’u, which is now believed to be extinct since it was last “seen” in 1987 (1979 data reflects sound only) and an extensive search in 1994-1996 did not confirm its existence on any of the Hawaiian islands (Snetsinger 1998, Reynolds and Snetsinger 2001). Habitat contraction’s of endemic bird species is likely contributed to habitat degradation and represent a significant change in low- elevation forest bird communities. Changes in populations of the native ‘Oma’o, and the non-native Japanses White-eye, may be of some biological significance. But this is more hypothesis than conclusion (Reynolds, Camp et.al.). There is not enough evidence to make any such conclusions at this time for either Kahau’ale’a NAR or Wao Kele O Puna. What is certain however, is that the native ‘Amakihi

62 and ‘Apapane inhabit and persist in Kahau’ale’a and Wao Kele O Puna. In 2003 BRD biologist found breeding individuals of both species at similar, as well as higher elevations including in Wao Kele O Puna. Both species in Wao Kele O Puna were noted “outside the breeding season” making these low-elevation populations definitely viable within the lowland rain forest (Richard Camp pers. comm.). In addition, in 2005 BRD biologist found that the low-elevation ‘Amakihi populations has gained a tolerance to avian malaria (2005 Woodworth, Atkinson unpublished, 2008 Atkinson). It is likely that ‘Apapane may also have a tolerance allowing them to sustain populations at lower elevations. But it is very difficult to show that they have a genetic resistance to malaria (Bethany Woodworth pers. comm.). A decline in the ‘Oma’o population is likely to continue since they tend to be territorial and sedentary endemic solitaire. They can be found in pairs, particularly during the breeding season (April through August) but usually only for a single season.

More extensive surveys of bird communities and analyses of landscape factors influencing bird distribution and abundance, particularly on transects located in Wao Kele O Puna would be recommended to evaluate species status. Considering the continuous decline of ‘Oma’o, in particular, within lowland rainforest, it would be imperative to get an updated and accurate estimate of this species as soon as possible. As of this writing, it has been 20-years since the last thorough bird survey in Wao Kele O Puna and it is likely that substantial changes have occurred. A partnership with USGS/BRD is highly recommended for this effort to maintain field continuity and expertise for surveying and analytical efforts. Regardless, it is imperative that the protection of native dominate forest particularly in Wao Kele O Puna be the paramount priority to maintain habitat for native passerines and other endemic species. Though Wao Kele O Puna and Kahau’ale’a form one of the largest contiguous conservation areas, numerous threats, both direct and in-direct, challenge forest bird conservation efforts. Direct threats include, not surprisingly, invasive species, while indirect threats particularly introduced ungulates, result in the loss of resources necessary for forest bird survival and can cause long term even rapid declines in avian populations. Arguably, the most dramatic and spatially widespread indirect impacts come from 63 ungulates, which modify vegetation, spread non-native plant species and promote disease vectors (Cuddihy, Stone 1990). Since there are no current efforts to curtail ungulates in Wao Kele O Puna other than individual pig hunting by private citizens, this should be evaluated once additional abundance data of forest birds can be obtained.

Japanese White-eye (Zosterops japonicas)

Elepaio (Chasiempis sandwichensis)

Christopher Taylor Photos

II.E.1.2 Procellariid - Seabirds

In addition to native passerines, Wao Kele O Puna has a frequent visitor, and more than likely an established breeding colony, of the threatened Newell’s Sherawater, or ‘A’o, (Puffinus auricularis newelli). This species of procellariid is known to breed on both the Islands of Hawaii and Kauai and suspected to breed on the other main 64 islands as well. A seafaring bird, known to feed offshore for fish, plankton and squid (Harrison 1990) to feed their young after sunset, and return to the sea before dawn (Ainley and Podolsky). Research conducted by the USGS-Biologcial Resources Division between August and September of 1993 recorded 99 total detections of ‘A’o during 11 different dates in the Pu’u Heiheiahulu Crater area within the Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve. Of these 99 detections visual confirmation was made on 4 separate individuals (Reynolds and Ritchotte). Though the research team was able to rapell into craters outside of Wao Kele O Puna to conduct searches for burrows, this was not possible at Pu’u Heheiahulu. All detections were done in the evening and night hours either visually (using night vision goggles) or by auditory detection. A team returned in June of 1997, but only spent one night at Pu’u Heiheiahulu and recorded 2 auditory detections of ‘A’o. This threatened nocturnal seabird is definitely present in Wao Kele O Puna at Pu’u Heiheiahulu Crater and is likely co-habitating with the native Hawaiian hoary bat, though none was detected during the 1993 or 1997 surveys. However, staff from DLNR have visually confirmed their presence at Pu’u Heiheiahulu (Bauchman, Wakida per.com.).

Photo courtesy Melody McFarland ‘A’o - Newell’s Shearwater (Puffinus auricularis)

II.E.1.3 Hawaiian Hoary Bat

The Hawaiian hoary bat or ope’ape’a (Lasiurus cinereus semotus) is a medium- sized (14-22 grams), nocturnal, insectivorous bat. They are heavily furred and possess a hair color that is a mixture of brown and gray inged with white, producing a frosted or “hoary” appearance. Their ears are short, thick and rounded and edged with black. Females tend to be larger than males with a wing span averaging 10.5 to 13.5. inches (Jacobi 1993a). The ope’ape’a is endemic to Hawaii and the only native land mammal species. They are considered solitary in nature, and roosts among foliage in trees. They tend to leave their roost shortly before sunset and tend to return to the same roosting areas later in the night (Jacobi 1993b). Males may be fertile year round (Tomich 1986) but breeding occurs most frequently in May or June. Bat activity apparently varies seasonally, but the nature and the timing of this variation is unclear. 66

(Photo courtesy Jim Jacobi)

A one week pilot program was initiated in October 2009. Corinna Pinzari of the USGS/Biological Resources Division set up four (4) array systems for recording bat activity in the Southeast boundary of the reserve. Access through private property via the Lee Ranch was acquired from the landowner and random sites were chosen along old logging trails or roadways in Kiula Forest and Wao Kele O Puna. A preliminary report is attached. Additional sites will likely be added in WKOP as activity was detected during the entire survey period (7 consecutive nights at all 4 array stations). The following is a report from USGS/ BRD in its entirety:

Hawaiian Hoary Bat Occupancy at Wao Kele 0 Puna Forest Reserve

Frank Bonaccorso & Corinna Pinzari- Hawaiian Hoary Bat Project United States Geological Survey, P.O. Box 44, Hawaii National Park, HI, 96718

An ultrasound microphone and data logger array to record the vocalizations of Hawaiian hoary bats (Lasiurus cine reus semotus) was deployed for a one-week pilot survey during October 2009 on the southern edge of the Wao Kele 0 Puna Forest Reserve in Kalapana. Another one-week pilot survey was conducted along the upper portion of the reserve around a retired geo-thermal energy zone off of S.Kahoe Homestead Road in Pahoa during January 2010. A pilot array consisted of 4 microphone/recording units (stations) spaced at approximately 1 kilometer intervals alongside old logging trails or roadways within the reserve (Table 1). A general elevation of 1,400 feet above sea level was sampled in the lower portion and 1,200 ft at the upper portion.

Bat vocalizations were recorded for a total of 28 nights (4 stations monitoring for 7 nights each). During the October survey, bat activity was detected every night of the survey, with an overall detectability (p) of 0.52 ± 0.11, thus bats were present at 52% of the microphone stations deployed over the week period (Figure 1). During the January survey, bat activity was detected on only one night, resulting in a very low detectability (p) of 0.03 ± 0.03. The range of detectability (p) is from 0 to 1, with 0 being no bats detected and 1 representing bat recordings at every detector every night samples.

Table 1. List of coordinates for bat monitoring stations with general site descriptions

Station Eastin2 Northin2 Station Notes Open area before dense guava IS 288829 2146604 forest 2S 288678 2146481 Open area in Ohia forest 3S 289257 2145878 Open area, trail intersect 4S 289497 2145686 Reserve edge, adjacent pasture Cleared area by geo-thermal 1N 289906 2150599 Patch Cleared area by geo-thermal 2N 289966 2150555 Patch 3N 291071 2151062 Along roadside Along roadside, close to 4N 215172 2151421 entrance gate

Table 2. Results from the pilot survey sampling period - number of nights, recorded bat passes and pulses of vocalizations, and detectability value. A bat 'pass' is the number of times bats were detected and may include one or more pulses of sound. Starred (*) columns represent data standardized to number of night detectors were recording.

Total Survey Active Total Total Detectability Dates Stations Nights Passes* Pusles• SE Nights Nights Passes Pulses (p) Sampled 10/16 to 7 4 28 10 105 3.75 321 11.46 0.11 10/22/2009 0.52 1/08 to 7 4 28 1 1 0.04 1 0.04 0.03 1/15/2010 0.03

Figure 1. Nightly echolocation activity by bats, total pulses recorded by hour for entire October survey.

Nightly Bat Activity

200 I i 150 1! 0

100 :! :; a..

50 1-

1700 1800 1900 2000 2100 2200 2300 2400 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 Time of Night (Hour)

Conclusions

A. The endangered Hawaiian Hoary Bat has an occupancy rate bordering 50% of stations sampled, and is present during October in the southern border of Wao Kele 0 Puna Forest Reserve. B. Bat echolocation recordings collected at the southern area of WKOP contain feeding buzzes, meaning that bats forage for insect prey arou nd this area. C. Bats were not occupying the upper portion of Wao Kele 0 Pu na during the time sampled in Januaury, however the one pulse docuemented during the week

Bat echolocation survey station in Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve Photo: Julie Leialoha

II.E.1.4 Native Antrhopods

Lava tube cave systems on the island of Hawaii support communities of rare and highly specialized cave arthropods (Hoch, Howargh 1993). It is particularly true for lava tube cave systems found in Wao Kele O Puna. In these cave ecosystems, plant roots, both living and dead, provide the main energy source for cave animals. Cave animals rely on these plant roots for food, shelter and cocoon-building materials. Root patches provide resources for a wide variety of cave organisms, including root-feeders, scavengers, as well as predators. In addition, cave cracks and gaps between successive lava flow units, and volcanic gas vesicles provide intermediate if not larger voids which assist in providing habitat to support diverse communities of organisms. Leaf litter, organic debris and sedimentation provide nutrients to many varieties of cave organisms. Many are highly specialized and restricted to living permanently in subterranean habitats. Pale, blind, slow-moving insects, spiders, and related arthropods comprise the dominant terrestrial animals in Hawaiian caves (Howarth 1988, 1991). Over 25 cave species occur in the Wao Kele O Puna caves (Stone, Howarth 2007) including the small-eyed and big-eyed hunting spider (Lycosa howarthi) the Onopid cave spider (Oonops spp.), and a host of cave moths (Schrankia spp.) of which there are some cave moths so specialized, that they inhabit only the innermost troglobitic (completely darkened) regions of these systems. Currently, no cave species on Hawai‘i Island is listed as endangered or threatened by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) or the state of Hawaii, however, several species are considered “species of concern” (SOC), an informal category created for species considered rare but for which more information is needed to determine their conservation status. Populations of SOC expected to occur within Wao Kele O Puna caves include but are not limited to: Caconemobius and Thaumatogryllus crickets, the terrestrial water treader Cavaticovelia aaa, and the cave thread-legged bug, Nesidiolestes ana (Howart 2007). In addition, many Hawai‘i Island cave animals have diverged into distinct geographic populations (or species) so that each lava tube system may harbor a unique community of animals different from relatives found in neighboring systems (Stone and Howarth, 2007); for example, the Caconemobius crickets (Otte, 1994), Oliarus planthoppers Hoch and Howarth, 1993), 71

Schrankia moths (Medieros et al., 2009), and Nannolene millipedes. This happenstance makes Hawaiian caves ideal natural laboratories for biological studies and worthy of protection (Howarth, 1983).

It is recommended that additional surveys be conducted in these habitats, particularly those in the middle-tube cave system. Dr. Frank Howarth of Bishop Museum has specialized in Hawaiian cave organisms and is considered the leading expert of troglobitic fauna in Hawaii. He and Dr. Fred Stone led surveys in the tube systems in Wao Kele O Puna. It is likely that these types of habitat in Hawaii would be considered as potential critical habitat as some of these highly specialized anthropods identified by Dr. Howarth and Dr. Stone, are considered being listed on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife’s endangered species list. At the moment they are only considered species of concern (SOC), but OHA should anticipate potential listing of such species in the near future. More importantly, the role of identifying critical habitat for cave organisms, which would likely include the lava-tube cave systems in Wao Kele O Puna.

II.E.2 Non-Native Wildlife

II.E.2.1 Pigs Feral pigs (Sus scrofa) are abundant in Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve. Feral pigs damage native biota through rooting and wallowing, consuming tree ferns and other favorite native plants species such as pa’iniu (Astelis spp.). Native plant-understory are displaced creating mosquito breeding sites, and causing conditions favorable for the spread and establishment of invasive plant species. It is well documented that the removal of feral pigs will result in the recovery of native vegetation, increase native diversity and reduce the spread of invasive plant species including reducing mosquito breeding sites. This sort of continuous depredation is detrimental to the overall health and longevity to sustain a native forest ecosystem. Depredation is defined here as, “the eating or otherwise destroying of plants by animals. Consumption, trampling, or uprooting of native plants (or plant parts) by alien mammals are examples. Depredations on plants influence other animals through impacts on their habitats” (Stone 1984).

In addition pig can have additional, subtle effects on native ecosystems and biota by transmitting diseases to native species through alien vertebrate reservoirs. In this case it would primarily be the transmission of avian diseases to native birds through mosquitoes that breed in open pig wallows (Van Riper & Van Riper). Understory rooting can sometimes enhance germination on introduced plants through seed scarification in digestive tracts, or through digging up and or fertilization with feces of potential seedbeds. This is particularly true for the spread of strawberry guava in Wao Kele O Puna. Birds also play a role in the seed distribution of this species. Weather there is a significant difference in the amount each animal may distribute is unknown, but it is clear that pigs are certainly a vector. Long term disruption by pigs as well as other ungulates can disrupt nutrient cycling, initiate and accelerate erosion, radically change compositions of plant and animal communities, and alter evolution of other species through disruption of natural selection (Stone 1984).

Though it is currently unknown what the population of pigs are in Wao Kele O Puna, in lower rain forest pigs can apparently reach levels of anywhere from 19 to 79 animals per square meter, unmatched anywhere else in any other forest ecosystem type (Singer 1981 and John Giffen per.comm.). Feral pigs are the dominate modifiers of Hawaiian forest, where damage has reached extreme levels in this century, perhaps as a result of increasing densities as well as expanding distributions. It has been postulated that animal protein in the form of earthworms, and mutualistic relationships with certain dominant alien plants, like strawberry guava, may have made conditions more favorable for feral pigs (Diong 1983). This could be the case in Wao Kele O Puna, but at this point is only speculative. However what is known is that the population in the reserve is substantial.

Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve is not a defined “managed” hunting area/unit under the State of Hawaii Title 13 Chapter123 that regulates game mammal hunting. However, since Wao Kele O Puna was placed back into the State Forest Reserve system by executive order E.O. #4218) on February 28, 2008 hunting is allowed legally. Under the State Forest Reserve system, hunters can take pigs, wild sheep (no sheep

73 exists in the reserve), and wild goats. Bag limits are limited to 2-pigs, 1-goat and 1-wild sheep per day. There is no season limit, and is open daily. Rifle, muzzleloader, shotgun, handgun, bow and arrows, spears and knives are allowed as are dogs. Dogs must be kept under control at all times except when actually hunting. When utilizing bows, knives or spears, hunters are required to be dressed in bright-orange vest. All hunters are required to be licensed by the State of Hawaii to hunt anywhere in Hawaii, and must have a “valid” hunting license on their person while actively hunting. Firearms must be legally registered. No permits are required to hunt in Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve at this time. Currently, DLNR’s Department of Conservation and Resource Enforcement (DOCARE) routinely checks the area, and violators are subject to regulatory hunting laws in the State of Hawaii.

Hunting is an important aspect of Hawaii, and many, particularly on the Big Island, do subsistence hunting to supplement their food resources. The number of subsistence hunters, in the reserve is unknown, but given its long history as a “localized” traditional hunting area, and its proximity to numerous improvised communities, one can speculate that it could be significant. Though hunters are regularly encountered here, there is only one legal access point, open year round, near the lower end of the reserve through the old geothermal access road. Access is currently limited to walking along the access road. Driving access is restricted and requests would need to be considered and approved by OHA to access the road by vehicle beyond the closed locked gate. Vehicles are allowed to park outside the gate, but should not block the access road.

Limited access into Wao Kele O Puna has been a source of contention, particularly in communities where individuals continuously trespass on private land to either access or exit the reserve. Much of the reserve is landlocked and the majority of roads surrounding the reserve are either privately owned by large owners (ranchers) or private community associations. Poaching and illegal hunting in these areas is also a problem. There are no public corridors in the upper areas of the reserve other than taking a day- long hike through the Hawaii Volcanoes National Park through the Kahau’ale’a Natural Area Reserve before reaching Wao Kele O Puna (refer to surrounding community map).

Trespassing complaints are common and are addressed by DOCARE or by Hawaii County Police. DOCARE can only respond on potential illegal actions taking place on forest reserve lands under DLNR’s control, all other actions are handled by local police.

II.E.2.2 Goats Though goats (Carpa hircus) are not as common as pigs in Wao Kele O Puna, but likely there are goats that may intrude into the reserve from the open lava flows. Goats were commonly found along the Kahau’ale’a Natural Area Reserve boundary with Hawaii Volcanoes National Park in the 1980’s. Though the park has done a good job in removing goats from their boundaries, it is likely that some migrated lower along the barren flows as regular hunts by the Park Service forced them to move further down, and are likely found along the barren flows along the southwestern boundary of Wao Kele O Puna. Like pigs, large populations of goats will alter the forest ecosystems. Large herds of goats numbering in the thousands completely altered the lowland dry- forest ecosystems of Hawaii Volcanoes National Park before large eradication efforts began in the 1920’s escalating in the 1970’s and 1980’s. Overall the Park Service removed some 70,000 goats from the park between the 1920’s and 1980’s (Katahira and Stone 1982). These herds could be easily spotted by large dust clouds created as they moved across open plains. Browsing animals, goats will eat just about any herbaceous species, including stripping the bark from larger trees. They will eat the plants down to the roots leaving nothing but dust in their wake. Historically goats in Hawaii have reduced or eliminated whole populations of native plants, leaving remnant plant populations behind only on the steepest and most inaccessible cliffs. Kauai’s Kalalau Valley is a classic example of this sort of depredation. There are whole areas stripped of vegetation, causing massive erosion in Kalalau Valley.

The population of goats in Wao Kele O Puna is unknown, as is the number taken annually by hunters. Goats have been spotted on the lava flows from recent aerial reconnaissance of Wao Kele O Puna, either below the reserve or above in the Kahau’alea Natural Area reserve region. These were small groups (< 10) or individuals. No large herds were seen.

II.E.2.3 Black Rats and Mongoose Black rats (Rattus rattus) have severely impacted native forest ecosystems as well as native bird species since they were introduced to Hawaii in the late 1800’s and into the mid 1900’s (Stone et.al.). Nesting seabirds were particularly venerable as are tree- nesting birds such as our honey-creepers (Drepanidinae) by this arboreal (tree- climbing) species. Black rats are now abundant in dry to very wet areas and range from sea level to high elevations on Mauna Kea and Mauna Loa. Black rats are common in Wao Kele O Puna and the author of this document has been subjected to rats falling from trees on numerous occasions. They have the ability to limit native seed distribution as they will eat native seeds and seedlings and will prey on eggs from nest. Black rats can be very aggressive and will attack adult birds as well.

The small Indian Mongoose (Herpestes auropunctatus) also common in Wao Kele O Puna first introduced from Jamaica to Hawaii around 1883 (Stone and Stone) to control rat damage to sugar cane fields. Mongoose, do eat rats, but mongoose tend to be active during the day, while rats are most active at night. The mongoose is not a good tree climber but is an opportunistic and omnivorous feeder if given the chance. Seabirds and the endangered nene ( Nesochen sandvicensis) are most vulnerable to mongoose predation.

II.E.2.4 Introduced Birds The Japanese White-eye Zosterops japonicas) is perhaps the most competitive bird to native forest birds in Wao Kele O Puna. They will compete for food resources shared by native passerines such as the ‘I’iwo and ‘oma’o. Along with the Japanese white-eye, the red-billed leiothris (Leiothrix lutea), the barn owl (Tyto alba), the cattle egret (Bubulcus ibis) and other various gallinaceous birds are among the alien species that cause the most problems for native birds species (Stone and Stone). Barn owls will also compete for food with the native short eared owl or pueo (Asio flammeus). The common house finch (Carpodacus mexicanus) and Myna (Acridotheres tristis) are regulars in the lower elevations of the reserve.

III. Public Access and Recreation

As mentioned earlier, there is only one public access into Wao Kele O Puna. This is the only legitimate and legal entrance for walking and driving (restricted to staff and approved agents). There is a second roadway leading to the southern and western boundaries of the reserve, but it passes through a private parcel owned by Lee Ranch and requires approval from the owners to access. There are locked gates along the ranch corridor. Once past the Lee Ranch, the road connects into Kiula Forest under the management of DLNR’s Land Division and requires access permission from the Hilo Land Division office. The roads in Kiula forest end at the Wao Kele O Puna boundary. A recommendation would be for OHA to either create a long term access agreement with surrounding communities, or managing entities, or purchase a private parcel, especially in the upper mauka reserve area that abuts the reserve directly. However this option will need exploring as not all community associations will allow a State entities to utilize their private roads for public access into the reserve.

Each community association as their own set of covenant codes on how their private roads are utilized. This can be complex and requires time and lots of patience to work out access agreements. In the mauka communities in particular, expect to deal with a wide range of eclectic individuals. Many choose to live here up against the forest reserve in isolation to stay off the grid and off the social radar. It is prudent to work with these communities to build trust or you will undoubtedly have problems, and the program has had its share of issues. This has included having equipment tossed from the back of trucks while parked, vehicle tires flattened, and one extreme incident involving booby-traps set along a temporary trail access to a monitoring and invasive species control site which required DOCARE and HPD involvement. Fortunately, the issue was resolved amicably, but notably it shuttered operations for nearly 6-months while resolving and alleviating community concerns. Public announcements tend to be of no value in these areas as many do not have radios, televisions, phones or read the paper. They literally want nothing to do with the outside world. It is one of the few areas where the associations and HELCO (when utilizing their utility poles) will allow us

77 to post signs to get the word out. Identifying key respected individuals in each community is crucial to assisting in this effort. Most people in these areas are armed (legally or other) and avoiding any physical confrontation is a priority.

Other than hunting, the only other notable recreational activity in the reserve center on gathering of plant material, especially around Merrie Monarch Hula Festival time in April. DLNR does require a plant picking permit under Forest Reserve administrative rules, however permits are free and can be acquired directly from the Hilo Division of Forestry and Wildlife office in Hilo. How many people utilize the area for picking plant material is unknown. Native Hawaiian cultural practitioners are known to utilize the area for spiritual or other purposes associated to their practice.

IV Revenue

Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve would be difficult for OHA to implement revenue generating sources, but not impossible. Regulatory constraints of the State Land use Conservation District “protective” subzone and the DLNR Forest Reserve designation would be the two largest hurdles, but site remoteness, natural hazards including the current eruption of Pu’u O’o and Kilauea Craters, cracks and crevices and inaccessibility to most of the reserve by land are other considerations. OHA would either have to create their own administrative rules or work within the confines of the existing statues to formulate a potential revenue generating program. In 2011 OHA hired Townscape to conduct an economic feasibility study on potential revenue generating opportunities. The study identified the statutes governing Wao Kele O Puna as being the principal barriers to moving forward on most of the potential identified projects. It suggests that OHA develop a master plan and its own set of rules for the property, which would allow at least a “portion” of the site to be removed from the Forest Reserve. In addition some potential on-site activities would also require changing the Conservation District designation to a less restrictive subzone, a lengthy process requiring Board of Land and Natural Resources approval.

Ten potential income/revenue opportunities were identified and analyzed for feasibility. These included; 1) Hawaiian Culture and Wao Kele O Puna phone applications, 2) Individual donor-based programs, 3) native and Hawaiian cultural plants cultivation, 4) sustainable forestry, 5) Invasive species extraction, 6) overnight retreat destination, 7) ecotourism and volun-tourism, 8) Wao Kele O Puna Makana/virtual shop, 9) movies and documentaries, and 10) niche carbon credits. Six categories were identified rating proposed opportunities, including 1) time for land use changes and permits, 2) time period before revenue, 3) initial capital cost, 4) annual operating cost, 5) gross annual revenue potential and 6) risk (low, moderate, high).

In short, none of the concepts analyzed offered easy solutions for providing potential income to help support forest management activities primarily due to the designation of the property as a Forest Reserve. Most of these identified potential opportunities would require a land use change to move forward and also require land use permits which would require several years to process. The study suggests that revenue generating concepts would benefit by operating under a different entity other than a government agency. Some of the concepts could be operated under a limited liability company or a non-profit entity, such as the donor-based conservation program concept. However this would not exclude such operators from any of the stated requirements. In addition, the study points out other governing requirements that would need to be considered such as the *Forest Legacy Program Implementation Guidelines that exclude non-compatible uses, Federal regulations governing endangered species, as well as the Pele Defense Fund State ruling.

Potentially revenues from these concepts would be relatively low and would require operating cost kept very low to anticipate any sort of profit. Some were considered risky due to a variety of reasons including unreliable and emerging markets (e.g. bio-fuels, bio-char, carbon credits), environmental hazards, lack of local knowledge etc.

(*Forest Legacy Program Implementation Guidelines are mandated here since Forest Legacy Funds were utilized in the purchase of the Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve.) 79

V Threats

V.1 Invasive Plant Species Invasive species is a very serious problem in Wao Kele O Puna as in most conservation areas State wide. A wide array of invasive species exists in the reserve, some considered highly invasive with the known potential to displace and alter entire forest ecosystems such as Miconia (Miconia calvenscens), Albezzia (Albezzia spp.) and Strawberry guava (Psidium cattleianum). Other invasive species are slower growing, but still pose a threat in Wao Kele O Puna, such as the gunpowder tree (Trema orientalis) , shrubby fleabane (Pluchea odorata) and java plum (Syzygium cumini). Others will disrupt and displace ground cover and shrub species, including highly invasive melastomes such as Melastoma candidum, Oxyspora paniculata, Melestoma candidum, Tibouchina herbacea and Tibouchina urvileana (glorybush), and the ever noxious kusters curse (Clidemia hirta). All commonly found in Wao Kele O Puna, especially at lower elevations closer, particularly thick around the geothermal well head and access road areas. Awapuhi or shampoo ginger (Zingiber zerumbet) considered invasive poses a threat as well, as thick spreading rhizomes will undermine native species. Invasive grasses such as bushbeard grass (Andropogon glomeratus), broomsedge (Andropogon virginicus) and guinea grass (Paspalum spp.) pose a fire threat to the reserve.

It is likely that a multitude of other potential invasive species exists in Wao Kele O Puna which may pose lesser threat to resources in the reserve, but never the less are a potential threat to the over well being of a native ecosystem. Surveys conducted in 1985, 1993 and more recently 2007, document an array of invasive species. For a list of current known invasive species refer to appendices. Keep in mind that this list is only a small snapshot of invasive species given that 90% - 95% of the reserve has not been systematically surveyed.

V.1.1 Miconia

For this purpose, the highly invasive Miconia and strawberry guava species will be the primary focus of discussion. Miconia first introduced into Hawaii as an ornamental it is now considered to be one of the top 100 most highly invasive plant species in the world according to the Global Invasive Species Database (1993). A large shrub to tree species with its distinctive large purple leaves, it has displaced entire plant communities in Tahiti, where it was first introduced in 1937 and commonly referred to as the “purple- plague”. Tahiti’s forest has been completely altered with its canopy now covered by nearly 70% Miconia and 30-40 endemic Tahitian plant species are near extinction solely due to this species (USGS/BRD unpublished data). Its shallow root system has led to enormous landslides in Tahiti where in areas dominated by Miconia.

These trees can grow up to 50 feet tall, has large oval-shaped leaves, green on top, purple underneath, with three main midribs running from the steam to the tip of the leaf. It is native to South and Central America, and believed to have been first introduced to Hawaii in 1961 and spread across the State by plant enthusiasts. This species will form dense thick stands that will shade out native plants and completely take over moist to

Large landslide on Moorea Island, Tahiti Large stand of Miconia on Big Island Photo courtesy of Jean Yves-Meyer Photo courtesy of BIISC

The underside of a Miconia leaf with its distinct purple color wet forest. A full sized tree can produce 50-200+ clusters of inflorescences (flowers) each consisting of 1,000 to 3,000 pinkish-white flowers. This species can grow rapidly up to 1-meter (3 feet) per-year. It can grow from seed to mature seedling tree in three to four years (depending on climate) and a single mature tree can produce some 3 million sand-grained sized seeds, several times per year. Seed viability of this species is incredibly long and there is no doubt that seedling recruitment in Wao Kele O Puna will be challenging in the near future. On average, those controlling Miconia can expect to return to treated sites to monitor seedling recruitment every 18-months for a period no less than 10-years. It was thought that seed viability averaged 10 years, however, recent research in Tahiti has since upped seed viability to 25 to if not more (Unpublished data and per.com. Jean-Yves Meyer). Nutrient changes in its understory

83 prevent native species from establishing especially when a dense canopy of Miconia blocks sunlight from reaching the forest floor.

Miconia was found in the Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve in September of 2006 when helicopter pilot David Okita reported seeing a population fairly close to the Kopua Farm Lot subdivision while conducting marijuana eradication efforts for the State. Upon review, this population was found to be outside of the control area maintained by the Big Island Invasive Species Committee (henceforth known as BIISC) and at least 1200 meters southwest of the containment perimeter. BIISC identified this population as a priority control site, but due to difficult terrain, recalcitrant property owners along the border limiting staff access to the site and the distance to the work site from the ground, BIISC utilized aerial control methods with the intent to kill all adult and/or flowering trees. Three (3) aerial and control operations were initiated in October of 2007 and December of 2007. During this period BIISC worked on securing access into the area through a private road access point owned by the Community Association of the Kopua Farm Lot subdivision. As mentioned previously, this turned out to be a prolonged and difficult task. Initial aerial surveys indicated a population of approximately 2 acres. However, once staff was able to get on the ground, the population was found to much more extensive with the primary population spread throughout an estimated 15.2 acres. Staff was able to treat 396 mature plants, and 6 immature plants. By November of 2008, the primary population had been knocked back significantly. The initial 2007 control effort cost a little over $16,000 covered by funds from the Hawaii Invasive Species Council (HISC) and Hilo’s Division of Forestry. However, standard operating procedures, employed by BIISC to control this species requires that monitoring surveys be expanded to no less than 500 meters beyond “each” flowering plant individual or cluster of flowering plants. This is the estimated distance of seed dispersal by wind. This tactic greatly increases the survey and control area as well as the cost to maintain operations. Since control cost, were expected to increase BIISC requested and received additional funding from OHA funds held within DLNR administrative offices in Honolulu. At the time, the program was being administered by State Foresters in the DLNR headquarters in Honolulu while OHA and the DLNR searched for a full-time Wao

Kele O Puna Coordinator. BIISC was able to conduct field operations in three phases with additional funding.

Utilizing aerial control for large plants works well, but for smaller plants that could be hiding in forest under-story or in dense thickets of uluhe, requires on the ground staffing systematically surveying. Ground crews line up no more than three feet apart (depending on the density of the area) and conduct survey sweeps back and forth across a pre-determined area. This provides a buffer-zone to the primary infestation. This tactic has proven extremely effective, not only for Miconia but for other invasive species. By 2009, the survey and control area expanded to 120 acres. Aerial surveys during this period expanded the buffer-zone by an additional 85 acres. By 2011, the survey and control area expanded to a total of 195 acres with a buffer-zone totaling 459 acres (Fig. 11).

Unfortunately, the project came to a screeching halt in late 2011 through early 2012 when BIISC encountered difficulties in accessing the control area. Funding was limited to ground access by this time, and BIISC continued to encounter difficult and, at times, recalcitrant community members in the access area, leading to damaged vehicles and a more serious threat of booby-traps along the temporary trail leading to the work site. Staff was immediately pulled out for safety reasons and DLNR initiated re-negotiation for access with community members and its association while enforcement investigations ensued by DOCARE and HPD. Though re-negotiating terms turned out to be an unanticipated prolonged period of time (6 months), access terms were reached amicably with all parties and the project did not encounter any further problems.

By the third phase in 2013, the project completed 95% of the anticipated survey area, 225 acres total, finding and treating an additional 2 mature and 15 immature plants. This may sound minuscule compared to the amount of effort that went into finding these 17 plants, but considering that one adult plant can disperse up to 3 million seeds, 3 to 4 times per year, the effort is required to keep this species from spreading. Also during Phase 3, BIISC monitored the core infestation area and found large areas of seedlings

carpeting the area, which they manually sprayed using back-pack sprayers. This was anticipated given the number of adult trees initially treated in 2006 and 2007. As mentioned, standard protocol for monitoring is to regularly return to the treatment site every 18-months, if possible, to deal with the seed recruitment for a period of no less than 10-years, again if possible. This would drastically reduce the possibility of re- establishment of the population in Wao Kele O Puna. It would be prudent of OHA to revisit the site by March of 2014 to monitor for potential seedling recruitment. It is highly recommended that OHA work with partners, particularly the invasive species committees, who have the expertise in planning field operations, analyzing data that is part of a State wide data initiative developed with assistance from the Hawaii Invasive Species Council, DLNR, and the USGS/Pacific Basin Information Node (PBIN), and utilizes standard protocols for any invasive species campaign. This is imperative to maintaining efforts that began in 2007.

There are two primary recommendations provided here based on Fig. 11 showing the map of the Miconia control area which outlines buffer zone areas. These are as follows:

1. Approximately 5% of the “core” infestation area (outlined in a red circle) has not been completed, and should be completed as soon as possible. BIISC was initially contracted to complete this section in fiscal 2014, but the project has since been terminated by OHA, and DLNR would urge OHA to set this as a priority to complete the surveys in the core infestation region. Given the large number of seedlings found within the core area (purple dots) in early 2013, the strategy would be to determine if any potential flowering plants might be found within this 5% un-surveyed area to limit the spread outside of the primary contained buffer zone (red circle). 2. Surveys should be expanded in the buffer zone outlined in blue, prioritizing areas where known adult flowing trees were removed (purple dots). The expanded surveys should be no less than 500 meters in all directions of the last known flowing adult.

These recommendations will provide a defined large containment field of the known population of Miconia in Wao Kele O Puna.

This particular population of Miconia in Wao Kele O Puna likely came from an abandoned nursery in the Kopua Farm Lot area which is the closest known population of Miconia in the area. The nursery is nearly a mile away. BIISC will continue to monitor the nursery site for seedling recruitment (depending on funding), but unless other wised agreed upon will not expand control to Wao Kele O Puna. There is also evidence that indicated an old marijuana cultivation site in the core area, with old grow bags (since destroyed). It could be speculated that the medium used in this cultivation could have contained Miconia seeds, or unwittingly passed on in clothing or shoes worn by individuals passing through the area and into the forest from an infested area, or bird or pig dispersal from fecal droppings. Population establishment could have come from multitude of scenarios.

Fig. 11: Miconia map of control area in Wao Kele O Puna courtesy of BIISC Note: It is recommended that the remaining 5% of the un-surveyed area (red-circle) be completed

V.1.2 Strawberry Guava Hyperspectral analysis of Wao Kele O Puna, indicate that approximately 5,000 acres of dense strawberry guava are in the reserve. However, less than 10% of the total overall population have densities of 95% cover or more. Most of the strawberry guava populations are intermixed with native and non-native plant species as shown in Fig. 12, from the State HI-GAP database in the State GIS system, cross referenced from LIDAR imaging and hyperspectral analysis by Dr. Greg Asner (Carnegie Airborne Observatory and Stanford University).

Fig. 12 Vegetation Data in Wao Kele O Puna (Courtesy Dr. Greg Asner 2013)

A highly invasive plant species, and habitat-altering pest, it poses a major threat to native forest ecosystems. If forms shade-casting thickets with dense mats of surface feeder roots that make it difficult for other species to coexist. It is a prolific fruiting and aggressive vegetative growth species, which can displace entire plant communities in a relatively short period of time. Erosion is a serious threat in dense thickest where surface run off will diminish top soil. In addition, this run off prevents water from draining into potential aquifers (Tom Giamballuca per.com.).

Stawberry guava in Wao Kele O Puna Densities in this area near Lee Ranch are estimated at 30% - 40% cover

Strawberry Guava Fruit: A prolific fruiting species spread by birds and pigs in particular throughout Wao Kele O Puna.

A hardy plant, it is very difficult and extremely expensive to control. Cost is a significant factor in managing this species and in 2003 the Big Island Invasive Species Committee worked with an economics team from the University of Florida to evaluate the cost of controlling strawberry guava in east Hawaii conservation areas, including Wao Kele O Puna. Data from various entities, including DLNR, BIISC, Hawaii Volcanoes National Park Service, Kamehameha Schools (Forest Solutions LLC.), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the U.S. Forest Service were used in the analysis. The following is the report in its entirety:

Estimating the Cost of Controlling Strawberry Guava in East Hawaii Conservation Areas

Assumptions

Labor costs are estimated at $15 per hour plus benefits for $200 per worker day

Based on consultation with various conservation agencies and organizations, we conservatively estimate dense infestations to take about 50 worker days per acre and incipient invasions (scattered trees) to take about one worker day per acre

Control methods include cutting all stems of Strawberry Guava and applying herbicide to prevent resprouting. Control of the numerous seedlings and any subsequent growth would occur during a secondary sweep of each control area.

Because only a few areas are easily accessible by road, we considered extra costs associated with work in more remote areas. Away from roads, workers would need to carry equipment through dense vegetation and over rugged terrain. Areas more than 0.5 km (0.3 miles) require extra time for work crews to access and therefore a higher cost per acre. Areas more than 2.5 km (1.5 miles) are too remote to work on a day by day basis (too much time would be spent getting to and from access points along roads); therefore these areas would require work crews to camp and would likely involve helicopter transport for equipment and camping gear.

Costs were broken down according to the severity of the infestation and the distance from roads (see Tables 1 and 2). Maps of these attributes were combined in a Geographic Information System (GIS) in order to determine how much area has a given combination of characteristics (see Maps 1, 2, and 3).

Estimated Costs

Incipient Invasions

Near roads: 31,600 acres × $250/acre = $7,900,000

Moderate Distance: 86,800 acres × $3,250/acre = $282,100,000

Remote: 61,300 acres × $4,250/acre = $260,525,000

Dense Infestations

Near roads: 9,200 acres × $10,500/acre = $96,000,000

Moderate Distance: 11,900 acres × $15,500/acre = $184,450,000

Remote: 2,700 acres × $16,500/acre = $44,550,000

Total Cost: $876,125,000

Additional Considerations

While removal of Strawberry Guava for biomass fuel or material uses has been proposed as a way to defray the cost of control, this would only be feasible in areas close to roads (a small fraction of the total area). Removal of large amounts of biomass from remote areas would only be possible by helicopter which would add far more cost than any potential value gained. 92

Building of additional roads for access is not considered feasible due to added costs and the legal limitations of road construction in areas zoned for conservation or designated as endangered species habitat.

Because Strawberry Guava produces numerous seeds, a secondary sweep (after perhaps one year) of each treated are would be necessary to control seedlings. This would likely incur a cost similar to that for incipient invasion across the entire region (estimated at about $60,000,000 total for the secondary sweep). Continued dispersal from non-controlled areas may require additional sweeps near the boundaries of controlled areas, adding an unknown cost.

Considering the costs outlined here, a more realistic scenario might involve selecting those habitats harboring the largest concentrations of rare native species. Control of Strawberry Guava in only 5% of conservation areas (about 10,000 acres) and only in areas with incipient invasion would reduce the cost to about $30,000,000 not including secondary sweep cost.

Table 1. Cost per Acre for Control of Incipient Invasion

Labor Equipment Additional Total Close to roads 1 worker day * $200/day $50 0 $250 (within 0.3 mi or = $200 0.5 km) Walking distance 16 worker days * $50 0 $3,250 from roads (.5-2.5 $200/day = $3,200 km or 0.3-1.5 mi) Remote/Helicopter 16 worker days * $50 $1000 $4,250 <2.5 km/1.5 mi $200/day = $3,200

Table 2. Cost per Acre for Control of Dense Infestation

Labor Equipment Additional Total Close to roads 50 worker days * $500 0 $10,500 (within 0.3 mi or $200/day = $10,000 0.5 km) Walking distance 75 worker days * $500 0 15,500 from (.5-2.5 km or $200/day = $15,000 0.3-1.5 mi) Remote/Helicopter 75 worker days * $500 $1000 16,500 <2.5 km/1.5 mi $200/day = $15,000

Map 1. Strawberry Guava in East Hawaii Conservation Areas. Dense infestations were mapped using satellite imagery. Recorded locations include extensive fieldwork and indicate areas where the species occurs but was not visible in satellite imagery. The entire area either partially or potentially invaded by Strawberry Guava was estimated based on rainfall, elevation and lava flow age.

Map 2. Distance from Roads in East Hawaii Conservation Areas. A Geographic Information System (GIS) was used to calculate the distance from each given location to the nearest road.

Map 3. Cost Zones for Control of Strawberry Guava within East Hawaii Conservation Areas. Control cost is a function of both the severity of infestation and the distance from the nearest road. Costs given in the legend reflect estimates outlined in Tables 1 and 2.

The report is only an estimation to manually control strawberry guava in east Hawaii extrapolated from known data banks from multiple agencies and sources. Similar estimations can be done directly for Wao Kele O Puna, but any way you look at it, the cost to control this species will be significant. New chemical application treatments appear to work and may help in reducing some cost, but dealing with remote populations will be especially costly. Utilizing bio-control should be considered in this case.

Bio-control has been suggested for Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve using a known natural enemy of strawberry guava, the gall-forming scale insect (Tectococcus ovatus). This is a recommendation to consider, and will be discussed later in this report under management recommendations.

V.1.3 Albezzia spp. The large umbrella like tree species, Albezzia is highly invasive. Populations in Wao Kele O Puna are considered low enough for complete eradication efforts. BIISC, in its efforts to control Miconia, simultaneously controlled Albezzia, using aerial control girdling techniques by hand. By mid-2012 all of the large trees in the remote areas of the reserve were killed. In 2013, BIISC crews with assistance from staff from U.S. Forest Service began an intensive control effort on the exterior boundaries of the reserve, particularly in the southwestern section of the reserve. This effort has since been halted by OHA, and it is recommended that OHA continue the eradication effort to limit the spread of Albezzia into the reserve. Controlling Albezzia on the perimeter of the reserve is imperative to keep this species from re-establishing in the reserve.

Albezzia (light green) in Wao Kele O Puna

V.2 Wildfire and Disease

Wildfire is detrimental to most native species, since most do not recover from fires. Ohi’a is extremely sensitive to intense heat generated by fires, but can regenerate from its root base if the fire intensity is very low, but will likely die at higher intensities (Tunison, Leialoha, Loh). Three native species in particular, Koa (Acacia koa), mamane (Sophora chrysophylla), and a’ali’I (Dodonaea spp.), tend to recover better as seedlings tend to reproduce shortly following a fire, especially a’ali’i (Tunison and Leialoha). Ulehe can pose an extreme fire hazard to Wao Kele O Puna as will invasive grasses, particularly bushbeard and molasses grass. Uluhe poses an additional threat as this 98 species can allow fire to run through its underground root system, allowing fires to pop up outside of contained fire line. Uluhe does not recover well and will likely be displaced by invasive grasses. Based on fire documentation collected by the National Park Service in 1987 for the east rift zone area (Leialoha and Loh unpublished) no known fires have taken place historically in the Wao Kele O Puna area. However, smaller fires usually spread out from the base of a tree hit by lightening have been documented in the Kahau’ale’a Natural Area Reserve, but none reported in Wao Kele O Puna. These are usually indicated by circular burn patterns in a small space around the affected tree (Tunison and Leialoha). There have been fires caused by intruding lava flows in the reserve, but these have never grown to become large uncontrollable fires. They tend to be restricted to the immediate area of the flow site.

Disease however, is a different story. Certain rust species such as Puccinia psidii, are known to severely impact members of the Myrtaceae, which include the native ‘ohi’a. ‘Ohi’a (Metrosideros polymorpha) could be decimated by this infestation that has recently also decimated rose-apple trees across lower Puna (albeit they are considered invasive. Land managers have been watching for potential signs of outbreaks in ‘ohi’a forest. There has been a recent die-back of ‘ohi’a across the lower section of Puna, particularly around the Pahoa area, Nanawale and Leilani Sub-divisions just below Wao Kele O Puna. Recent aerial surveys conducted by the U.S. Forest Service have found large patches of dead or dying ‘ohi’a trees, but it is yet unclear if this is a naturally occurring phenomenon (‘ohi’a die-back) or if this is caused by Puccinia or some other unknown pathogen. OHA managers will need to be diligent here in keeping an eye for any unusual die-back patterns and address them immediately and report occurrences directly to the Hilo based U.S. Forestry office.

Introduced diseases and pathogens threaten native animals and plants. Given the lack of bio-security in Hawai‘i, the introduction of new diseases and pathogens is highly likely.

V.3 Climate Change

Climate change may affect the reserve by altering rainfall patterns and amounts. Changing climate may affect the abundance and seasonality of precipitation, thereby altering forest composition, growth and structure. Rare ecosystems and species may be negatively affected by relatively rapid changes in precipitation, temperature, and humidity that result from a rapid and drastic change in regional or local climate patterns (e.g. prolonged drought, higher temperatures). Detrimental invasive species may change their distribution and abundance due to changes in the climate (e.g. mosquitoes may be more frequently found at higher elevations due to warming temperatures).

V.4 Volcanic Activity

The on-going Kilauea eruption poses a threat to the entire reserve. Fingers of lava have intruded into the reserve since 1986, with the most recent being in 2012. There is no end to the eruptive phases at either Pu’u O’o vent or the Kilauea caldera summit regions and the reserve can anticipate being affected by volcanic activity as well as high levels of sulpher-dioxide (SO2) which can cause breathing difficulties among other ailments to those sensitive to SO2. DLNR maintains continuous contact with the Hawaii Volcanoes Observatory (HVO) on any potential changes to the eruption and the State Department of Health has a website in which anyone can check on SO2 emissions across the Big Island. Field workers in the area will often carry portable SO2 meters to monitor effects. HVO has requested to place monitoring equipment in Wao Kele O Puna. It is recommended that OHA pursue this with HVO Chief Scientist Jim Kauaikaua and allow a permit to place monitoring equipment in the reserve. This will assist in monitoring current flow events as well as assist in the protection of life and property in the lower Puna area.

100

V.5 Illegal Human Activity

The most prevalent of illegal human activity in Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve is marijuana cultivation, particularly along sub-division boundaries in the upper Puna regions. It has not been as prolific recently as it was in the 1980’s and 1990’s when large scale cultivation sites were found, but smaller planting sites still remains a constant threat. Cultivation in natural areas can alter plant communities and the potential for booby-traps to protect plants are always there. DOCARE continues to monitor this area for potential cultivation and removes them when they can. Field crews have come across plants, and are instructed to leave them alone. The use of fertilizers can be problematic for seed feeding birds in particular. Nene geese have been known to have died or sickened from ingesting fertilizer. Currently staff will report any illegal cultivation directly to DOCARE as long as the reserve remains under Forest Reserve Statutes. In 2013, DLNR received a report of a potential cultivation site in the reserve, however it was determined to be an old abandoned cultivation site located directly outside of the reserve on DLNR/Land Division lease- hold property. No action was required.

The only other issue would be recreational hunting violations, usually from unregistered firearms or expired hunting license. This is also currently monitored by DOCARE, and no citations have been issued as of yet in 2013.

VI Management Goals and Objectives

Forest Reserves are multi-use areas that encompass and incorporate a variety of public uses and benefits, from fresh water supply to recreation. Each Forest Reserve within the system has differing goals depending on the nature of the resources found within it. DOFAW manages the Forest Reserves individually for their unique resources as well as provides an overall management philosophy for the entire Forest Reserve System, in keeping with the rules it must abide by. OHA will need to determine its strategy based on its own management philosophy for Wao Kele O

101

Puna. It is recommended that OHA develop a strategic plan specifically for Wao Kele O Puna to identify management goals and objectives. As an example for DLNR, categories of broad management action within the Forest Reserve System include: Watershed Values (aquifer recharge and erosion control) Native Ecosystems (landscape level protection) Invasive Species Control (incipient and established plants and animals)

Threatened and Endangered (T&E) Species Management (Federally listed,

State listed, and rare plants and animals) Public Activity (non-income generating uses, such as recreation, cultural activities, personal gathering, educational or research activities, and events, among others) Resource Protection (fire, insects, and disease) Game Animal Management (areas managed to enhance public access for hunting game birds and mammals)

Commercial Activity (income generating activities such as timber, tours,

etc.) From these broad management action categories, specific management goals for Wao Kele O Puna should be determined. Creating specific guidelines (examples can be found in any DLNR Forest Reserve Management Plan accessible online), that guide management efforts.

VII Recommendations

The following is a recommended list of goals which are prioritized for Wao Kele O Puna: I. Create a coordinated strategic plan specifically for Wao Kele O Puna that would encompass the long-term vision and philosophy of OHA to guide management goals and objective. II. Native Ecosystems: Maintain native ecosystems and rare and endangered species. Expand surveys across the reserve to identify high 102

value natural resource sites that include rare and endangered species. Consider fencing, pig and invasive species eradication (including black rats) in these sites to maintain native habitat intactness, especially if rare and endangered plant species are found. Work with partner agencies like USGS/BRD to re-survey for forest bird richness, it has been 20 years since the last surveys were conducted. III. Invasive Species: Maintain management levels through 2017 to continue monitoring and control efforts of Miconia and Albezzia. A huge effort went into eradication of both of these species, but maintenance at this point is a priority to prevent re-infestation. For strawberry guava, consider if using bio-control by releasing Tectocaccus in area of dense and remote strawberry guava areas, is an option to limit if not, contain the continuous spread of this species in the reserve. The newly-hatched nymphs of this scale insect, crawl to young strawberry guava leaves, triggering the plant to form tissue around the nymph. These tissue lumps are called “galls”, and they reduce plant vigor by diverting resources normally used for plant growth and reproduction. Strawberry guava is the only plant in Hawai‘i that this insect is able to feed and make galls on. This is a cost consideration factor in addition to potential manual removal at “selective” sites, especially extremely remote areas like those found in Wao Kele O Puna. OHA should maintain or create partnerships with agencies how have the expertise to assist in control operations of invasive species (including Coordinating Groups on Alien Pest Species (CGAPS), BIISC, HISC, US Forest Service, US Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service, UH-PCSU and DLNR et.al.). An enormous amount of effort has already gone into many of these control efforts so OHA will not have to reinvent the wheel when it comes to invasive species. IV. Public access: Work toward finding alternative access points into the reserve, particularly in the upper Puna area. Consider purchasing a parcel that butts up to the reserve. It is imperative to maintain a good

103

working relationship with surrounding communities. V. Actions: There are no recommended actions at this time as OHA has yet to develop administrative rules for Wao Kele O Puna. Additional actions which could, and should include game management, fencing of identified high priority areas to protect rare and endangered species, cave management and the protection of cultural resources to name a few. It is imperative that OHA maintain partnerships to assist in managing the reserve. Collaborative initiatives such as the Three Mountain Alliance Watershed Partnerships are crucial to maintain to assist in the management of Wao Kele O Puna. OHA has yet to formalize this inclusion into the partnership as of August 2013. VI. Management Actions and Measures of Success: Once a strategic plan is developed, management actions need to be determined to meet a direct goal. Once initiated pre-determined measurements to gauge success of these management actions/goals should be outlined. These could be anything from acres cleared of a specific invasive plant species, to number of pigs removed from a fenced unit. Basically any type of measurement to determine program success rates.

VIII Bibliography

Ainley, D.G. and R. Podolsky 1993: Kauai Seabird Study Task 2 – Ecological Study, Final Report prepared for Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA, by PRBO International Biological Research, Stintson Beach, CA. 35 pp.

Aplet, G. H., S.J. Anderson, and C.P. Stone. 1991. Association between feral pig disturbance and the composition of some alien plant assemblages in Hawai‘i Volcanoes National Park. Vegetation 95: 55-62.

Bonaccorso, Frank & Corinna Pinzari -Hawaiian Hoary Bat Project United States Geological Survey, P.O. Box 44, Hawaii National Park, HI, 96718 Unpublished

Cuddihy, Linda and C.P. Stone. 1990. Alteration of native Hawaiian vegetation; Effects of humans, their activities and introductions. University of Hawai‘i Cooperative National Park Resources Studies Unit. Honolulu, Hawai‘i. 138 pp.

104

Conant, S 1980 Birds of the Kalapana Extension. CPSU/UH Tech. Rep. No. 36

Diong, G.H. 1983 Population Ecolocy and Mangement of the Feral Pig in Kipahulu Valley, Maui PH.D Diss., University of Hawaii, Honolulu

Druecher, Michael, Pow-foong Fan 1976: Hydrology and Chemistry of Ground Water in Puna, Hawaii

Forbes, C.N. 1912 New Hawaiian Plants III. Plant invasion on lava flows. B.P. Bishop Museum Occasional Paper V (1). Honolulu

Giffen, John – Retired DLNR/DOFAW Hilo Manager

Giambelluca, T. W., M. A. Nullet, and T. A. Schroeder. 1986. Rainfall Atlas of Hawai‘i. Water Resources Research Center/Department of Meteorology, University of Hawai‘i at Manoa. State of Hawai‘i, DLNR, Division of Water and Land Development, Report R76. Honolulu, Hawai‘i.

Harrison, C.S. 1990 Seabirds of Hawaii: natural history and conservation. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York 249 pp.

Hoc H, Frank Howarth 1993 – Evolutionary dynamics of behavioral divergence among populations of the Hawaiian cave dwelling planthopper Oliarus polyphemus. Pac. Sci.

Holcomb, R.T. 1987 Eruptive history and long term behavior of Kilauea Volcano: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1350, v.1., p. 261-350

Howarth, Frank G. 1983 Ecology of cave arthropods. Ann Rev Entomol 28:365-389

Howarth, Frank G. 1988 The evolution of non-relictual tropical troglobites. Intl J Speleololgy 16:1-16

Howarth, Frank G. 1991 hawaiian cave faunas: macroevolution on oung islands. In: Dudley EC (ed) The unity of evolutionary biology, vol. 1. Dioscorides Press, Portland, OR. Pp 285-295

Howarth, Frank G., H. Hoch 2004 Adaptive shirts. In: Culver DC White WB (eds) Encyclopedia of caves. Elsevier Academic Press, Burlington, MA. Pp 17-24

Howarth, Frank G., Shelley james, Wendy McDowell, David J. Preston and Clyde T. Imada 2007 White paper – Identificatin of roots in lava tubes using molecular techniques: implications for conservation of cave arthropod faunas

Judd, C.S. 1919 Report to the Governor on Forest Reserves

105

Lamoureux, Charles H., Winona P. Char, et.al. Department of Botany University of Hawaii at Manoa April 1985 Final Report: “Puna Geothermal Area Biotic Assessment”

Leialoha, Julie – Historical Fires at Hawaii Volcanoes National Park and Kilauea’s East Rift – Hawaii Conservation Conference 1989

Macdonald, G.A and A.T. Abbott 1970 Volcanoes in the Sea. University Press of Hawaii, Honolulu p. 441

Moore J.G. and Clague, D.A. 1992 Volcano growth and evolution of the island of Hawaii: Geological Society of America Bulletin v.104 no. 11 p. 1471-1484

Office of the Governor December 22, 1928 Proclamation of Modification of Boundaries of the Forest Reserve District of Puna Island (sic) and County of Hawaii Territory of Hawaii. (Note: There is some discrepancy in the documentation as the Puna Forest Reserve was considered a part of the Forest Reserve System in 1911, the proclamation signed in 1928 included both Nanawale forest Reserve and Puna Forest Reserve which actually expanded both reserves. Prior to 1928, both the Nanawale and Puna Forest Reserve were identified as the “Puna Forest Reserve”, the 1928 proclamation appeared to distinguish between two “separated” reserves. References to both can be found in boundary descriptions in Executive Order 3358 and Executive Order 3069. [Jonathan Likeke Scheuer from Davianna McGregor 2006])

Pratt, Thane K., Carter Atkinson, Paul C. Banko, James D. Jacobi, Bethany L. Woodworth 2009 Conservation Biology of Hawaiian Forest Birds: Implications for Island Avifauna

Proclamantion of Forest Reserve in The District of Puna Island and County of Hawaii (Office of the Governor of Hawaii, June 29, 1911).

Proclamation of Modifications of Boundaries Of The Forest Reserve District of Punaa Island and County of Hawaii Territory of Hawaii (Office of the Governor of Hawaii, December 22, 1928)

Reynolds, Michelle H.; Richard J. Camp, Bonnie M.B. Nielson 2003 “Evidence of change in a low-elevation forest bird community of Hawai’I since 1979” Bird Conservation International 13:175-187 DOI: 10.1017/S0959270903003149

Reynolds, Michelle and George L. Ritthotte 1997: Evidence of Newell’s Shearwater Breeding in Puna District, Hawaii

Scheuer, Jonathan Likeke 2006 Internal Memo Office of Hawaiian Affairs “The Current Designation of Wao Kele O Puna parcels TMK: 1-2-10:02 and TMK: 1-2- 10:3

106

Snetsinger, T.J., Michelle H. Reynolds, C.M. Herrmann 1998 ‘O’u (Psittirostra psittaccea) and Lana;I Hookbill (Dysmorodrepepanis munroi). The birds of North America Philadelphia, PA: The birds of North America

Scholl, Ingerbritsen, Janick, Kauahikaua 1995: An Isotope Hydrology Study of the Kilauea Volcano Area, Hawaii

Singer, F.J. 1981 Wild pig poulations in the National Parks. Environmental management 51 (3): 263-270

Stone, Charles P. 1984 Alien Animals in hawaii’e Native Exosystems: Toward Controlling the Adverse Effects of Introduced Vertebrates - Hawaii’s Terrestrial Ecosystems: Preservation and Management pp.251

Stone, Fred, Frank Howarth, H. Hoch, M Asche 2004 – Root communities in lava tubes. In: Culver DC, White WB (eds) Encyclopedia of caves. Elsevier Academic Press, Burlington, MA. Pp 477-484

Tunison, Tim J., Julie Leialoha – Lightening Strikes in Hawaii Volcanoes National Park, Changes in Forest Ecosystems PCSU-Tech Report

Tunison, Tim J., Julie Leialoha, Rhonda Loh – Fire and Changes in Forest Ecosystems: Hawaii Botanical Society

Tummons, Patricia Hawaii Environment August 2004

Vanderwerf, E.A. 1998 Elepaio (chsiempsis sandwichensis). The birds of North America. Philadelphia, PA: The birds of North America

Wakida, Charlie – Retired DLNR/DOFAW Hilo Manager

Wolf, Edward G. and Jean Morris 2005 Geologic Map of Hawaii Island: U.S. Geological Survey DS144 accompanying map 1-2524-A. On the web: pubs.usgs.gov/ds/2005/144 (note: Report accompanies both Map I-2525-A, but referenced here, in relationship to Geologic Investigations Series I-2614 2006 by Frank A. Trusdell and Richard B. Moore).

U.S. Department of Agriculture 1973 – Soil Survey of Hawaii Island, Hawaii Series in cooperation with the University of Hawaii Agricultural Experiment Station (note: 2013 currently found in NRCS website at http://soildatamart.nrcs.usda.gov/manuscripts/HI801/0/hawaii.pdf)

Van Riper, Sandra and Charles van Riper III 1984 A summary of Known Parasites and Diseased Recorded from the Avifauna of the Hawaiian Islands: Hawaii’s Terrestril Ecosystems Preservation and management pp. 298

107

IX APPENDICES

A. Internal OHA Memo of Wao Kele O Puna Land Designation

B. Pacific Ecosystems Assessment Services LLC.: Interim Report on Field Study of Vegetation Composition in Wao Kele O Puna Reserve, Puna District, Hawaii

C. Ecomomic Analyis

108

109