DOCSLIB.ORG

Kaheawa Wind Power Habitat Conservation Plan Annual Report: FY 2018

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Kaheawa Wind Power Habitat Conservation Plan Annual Report: FY 2018 Kaheawa Wind Power Habitat Conservation Plan Annual Report: FY 2018 Kaheawa Wind Power, LLC 3000 Honoapi`ilani Highway Wailuku, Hawai`i 96768 August, 2018 ITL 08 and ITP TE118901-0 I certify that to the best of my knowledge, after appropriate inquiries of all relevant persons involved in the preparation of this report, the information submitted is true, accurate and complete. Hawai’i HCP Manager Terraform Power, LLC Table of Contents Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................................1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................3 Downed Wildlife Monitoring ..........................................................................................................................3 Search Area Density Weighted Proportion of the Predicted Fall Distribution ...........................................................5 Nēnē .........................................................................................................................................................................5 Hawaiian Petrel and Newell’s Shearwater ...............................................................................................................6 Hawaiian Hoary Bat ..................................................................................................................................................7 Search Interval ............................................................................................................................................................8 Canine Interactions with Wildlife ...............................................................................................................................8 Downed Wildlife Incidents .........................................................................................................................................8 Searcher Efficiency Trials ................................................................................................................................8 Carcass Retention Trials .................................................................................................................................9 Scavenger Trapping ........................................................................................................................................9 Estimating Adjusted Take ............................................................................................................................. 12 Permit Term Projected Estimated Take ......................................................................................................... 13 Hawaiian Hoary Bat Monitoring ................................................................................................................... 14 Wildlife Education and Observation Program ................................................................................................ 15 Vegetation Management ............................................................................................................................. 16 Mitigation ....................................................................................................................................................16 Hawaiian Hoary Bat-Research ................................................................................................................................. 16 East Maui Seabird Survey ........................................................................................................................................ 16 Hawaiian Petrel and Newell’s Shearwater- Makamaka’ole .................................................................................... 17 Nēnē – Haleakala Ranch Pen ................................................................................................................................... 23 Adaptive Management ................................................................................................................................. 23 Agency Visits and Reporting .......................................................................................................................... 24 Expenditures ...............................................................................................................................................24 Citations ......................................................................................................................................................25 Appendices ..................................................................................................................................................27 Figures Figure 1. KWPI WTG, building and site utility locations. ...........................................................................................4 Figure 2. The cumulative fall distribution of nēnē by distance from WTG at KWP and KWPII compared to the ballistics model of Hull and Muir (2010) for large bird/small height turbines. ..........................................................6 Figure 3. The cumulative fall distribution of medium sized fast-flying birds by distance from WTG at KWP and KWPII compared to the ballistics model of Hull and Muir (2010) for medium bird/medium height turbines. .........7 Figure 4. The cumulative fall distribution of bats by distance from WTGs at KWP and KWP II compared to the ballistics model of Hull and Muir (2010) for bats/small height turbines. ..................................................................7 Figure 5. Location of KWPI predator traps during FY 2018. .................................................................................... 11 Figure 6. Bat nightly presence at KWPI by month in FY 2013 through 2018. ......................................................... 15 Figure 7. Hours with Detections at KWPI in FY 2018 (n = 203)............................................................................... 15 Figure 8. Two completed enclosures on the Makamaka'ole Seabird Mitigation site in northern West Maui (Enclosure B is left and Enclosure A is right). ........................................................................................................... 17 Figure 9. Two NESH at burrow 26A entrance (with NESH decoy in background) inside enclosure A on April 19, 2018. ........................................................................................................................................................................ 20 Figure 10. A NESH in burrow 43A on July 2, 2018 .................................................................................................. 20 Figure 11. A BUPE in front of burrow entrance 42B inside enclosure B on May 4, 2018. ..................................... 21 Figure 12. Two NESH near the burrow entrance for 22B inside enclosure B on May 31, 2018. ............................ 22 Figure 13. A NESH in front of burrow 50B on July 3, 2018. ..................................................................................... 22 Figure 14. A NESH in the “Uluhe” burrow in enclosure B on July 4, 2018. ............................................................ 23 Tables Table 1. SEEF results for KWPI during FY 2018. .........................................................................................................9 Table 2. Carcass retention trial results at KWPI during FY 2018. ..............................................................................9 Table 3. Hawaiian hoary bat nights with detections and total detection nights by WTG at KWPI in FY 2018. ....... 14 Table 4. Makamaka’ole trapping data by species and location for FY 2018. .......................................................... 18 Table 5. Makamaka'ole rodent presence/absence summary, as the number of tracking tunnels with paw prints out of 10 total tunnels deployed. ............................................................................................................................ 18 Table 6. Nights per month NESH photographed at burrows 26A, 43A and 50A in calendar years 2017 and 2018. NESH eggs collected in 2017 and FY2018. ............................................................................................................... 19 Table 7. Nights per month NESH photographed at burrows 22B, 50B, 42B and the “Uluhe” burrow near to 22B in calendar years 2017 and 2018. BUPE egg collected in 2017 and none in 2018 (so far). ....................................... 21 Table 8. Expenses by category for KWPI during FY 2018. ...................................................................................... 24 Appendices Appendix 1. Density weighted proportion searched for Hawaiian goose, Hawaiian petrel and Hawaiian hoary bat at KWP I in FY 2018. ................................................................................................................................................. 27 Appendix 2. Downed wildlife monitoring dates at KWPI during FY 2018. .............................................................. 28 Appendix 3. Downed Wildlife Found at KWPI in FY2018. ...................................................................................... 30 Appendix 4. Hawaiian Hoary Bat Downed Wildlife Report at KWPI August 15, 2017. .......................................... 31 Appendix 5. Hawaiian Goose Downed Wildlife Report at KWPI December 5, 2017. ............................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Pacific Islands Area
    Habitat Planting for Pollinators Pacific Islands Area November 2014 The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation www.xerces.org Acknowledgements This document is the result of collaboration with state and federal agencies and educational institutions. The authors would like to express their sincere gratitude for the technical assistance and time spent suggesting, advising, reviewing, and editing. In particular, we would like to thank the staff at the Hoolehua Plant Materials Center on the Hawaiian Island of Molokai, NRCS staff in Hawaii and American Samoa, and researchers and extension personnel at American Samoa Community College Land Grant (especially Mark Schmaedick). Authors Written by Jolie Goldenetz-Dollar (American Samoa Community College), Brianna Borders, Eric Lee- Mäder, and Mace Vaughan (The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation), and Gregory Koob, Kawika Duvauchelle, and Glenn Sakamoto (USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service). Editing and layout Ashley Minnerath (The Xerces Society). Updated November 2014 by Sara Morris, Emily Krafft, and Anne Stine (The Xerces Society). Photographs We thank the photographers who generously allowed use of their images. Copyright of all photographs remains with the photographers. Cover main: Jolie Goldenetz-Dollar, American Samoa Community College. Cover bottom left: John Kaia, Lahaina Photography. Cover bottom right: Gregory Koob, Hawaii Natural Resources Conservation Service. Funding This technical note was funded by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and produced jointly by the NRCS and The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation. Additional support was provided by the National Institute for Food and Agriculture (USDA). Please contact Tony Ingersoll ([email protected]) for more information about this publication.
    [Show full text]
  • Manipulating Social Information to Promote Frugivory by Birds on a Hawaiian Island
    MANIPULATING SOCIAL INFORMATION TO PROMOTE FRUGIVORY BY BIRDS ON A HAWAIIAN ISLAND BY SEAN ERROLL MACDONALD THESIS Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Natural Resources and Environmental Sciences in the Graduate College of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2019 Urbana, Illinois Adviser: Adjunct Assistant Professor Jinelle H. Sperry ABSTRACT Animals across a range of taxa use social information when foraging. Fruit-eating vertebrates are no exception and use social information to find fruit, which may ultimately affect plant populations via seed dispersal. In many systems, mutualistic relationships between fruiting plants and frugivores are critical to maintain ecosystem functioning, especially in the tropics. On the island of Oʻahu, Hawaiʻi, all native, fruit-eating birds are extinct and several plant species are experiencing reduced recruitment likely due to a lack of seed dispersal. Over the years, numerous bird species have been introduced to the island many of which are frugivorous. Yet, introduced birds may not recognize native fruits as a resource and social information may be needed for introduced frugivores to target and feed on native fruits. We investigated if social information, in the form of broadcasted bird vocalizations, of introduced birds could increase visitations and more importantly frugivory on focal fruiting plants. We also tested if the visitation rates to focal plants were influenced by conspecific and/or heterospecific vocalizations. We conducted 80 playback experiments at native and introduced fruiting plants, and compared responses to silent control periods. Four times as many frugivores were detected and 10 times more frugivory events were recorded at plants during periods of broadcast vocalizations compared to control periods.
    [Show full text]
  • Botanical Inventory of Kalauao Valley, City & County of Honolulu, O
    Botanical Inventory of Kalauao Valley, City & County of Honolulu, O«ahu Prepared for: Kamehameha Schools 1887 Makuakane Street Honolulu, HI 96817 and Bishop Museum 1525 Bernice Street Honolulu, HI 96817 Final Report Prepared by: C. Imada and M. LeGrande Hawaii Biological Survey Bishop Museum Honolulu, HI 96817 July 2006 Contribution No. 20065032 to the Hawaii Biological Survey TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................................... 1 I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................... 3 Ia. Setting ............................................................................................................................................................. 3 Ib. Historical Surveys of Kalauao Valley ............................................................................................................. 4 Ic. Critical Habitat Designations .......................................................................................................................... 4 Id. Forestry Plantings ............................................................................................................................................ 5 II. METHODS ............................................................................................................................................................. 6 III. RESULTS .............................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Survey Report
    FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT APPENDIX E BIOLOGICAL SURVEY REPORT Na Pua Makani Wind Project BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES SURVEY NA PUA MAKANI WIND ENERGY PROJECT KAHUKU, KOOLAULOA, OAHU, HAWAII by Robert W. Hobdy Environmental Consultant Kokomo, Maui July 2013 Prepared for: Tetra Tech, Inc. 1 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES SURVEY NA PUA MAKANI WIND ENERGY PROJECT KAHUKU, KOOLAULOA, OAHU INTRODUCTION The Na Pua Makani Wind Energy Project lies on 685 acres of land above Kahuku Town, Koolauloa, Oahu TMK’s (1) 5-6-08:06 and (1) 5-6-06:16. It is surrounded by agricultural farm lands to the north and east and by undeveloped forested lands to the west and south. This biological study was initiated in fulfillment of environmental requirements of the planning process. SITE DESCRIPTION The project consists of steep, dissected ridges surrounding gently sloping valleys. Elevations rise steeply behind Kahuku Town to about 250 ft., while the inland ridges rise to nearly 350 ft. Soils include Kaena Stony Clay, 12-20% slopes (KaeD), Paumalu Badlands Complex (PZ), which is highly dissected and steep, and with coral outcrops (CR) at elevations below 100 ft. (Foote et al. 1972). Rainfall averages 45 in. to 50 in. per year with most falling during a few winter storms (Armstrong, 1983). Vegetation consists mostly of low, windblown shrubs and trees on the ridge tops and larger trees and brush on the slopes and in the gullies. BIOLOGICAL HISTORY In pre-contact times the lower, more gently sloping lands would have been extensively farmed by a large Hawaiian population that lived in the lower valleys and along the sea shore.
    [Show full text]
  • Native Coastal Flora and Plant Communities in Hawai`I: Their Composition, Distribution, and Status
    Technical Report HCSU-014 NATIVE COASTAL FLORA AND PLANT COMMUNITIES IN HAWAI`I: THEIR COMPOSITION, DISTRIBUTION, AND STATUS Fredrick R. Warshauer1 James D. Jacobi2 Jonathan P. Price1 1Hawai`i Cooperative Studies Unit, University of Hawai`i at Hilo, Pacifi c Aquaculture and Coastal Resources Center, P.O. Box 44, Hawai`i National Park, HI 96718 2U.S. Geological Survey, Pacifi c Island Ecosystems Research Center, 677 Ala Moana Blvd., Suite 615, Honolulu, HI 96813 Hawai`i Cooperative Studies Unit University of Hawai`i at Hilo Pacifi c Aquaculture and Coastal Resources Center (PACRC) 200 W. Kawili St. Hilo, HI 96720 (808) 933-0706 December 2009 The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the opinions or policies of the U.S. Government. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute their endorsement by the U.S. Government. Technical Report HCSU-014 NATIVE COASTAL FLORA AND PLANT COMMUNITIES IN HAWAʻI: THEIR COMPOSITION, DISTRIBUTION, AND STATUS Fredrick R. Warshauer1 James D. Jacobi2 Jonathan P. Price1 1 Hawai‘i Cooperative Studies Unit, University of Hawai‘i at Hilo, Pacific Aquaculture and Coastal Resources Center, Kilauea Field Station, Hawai‘i National Park, HI 96718 2U.S. Geological Survey, Pacific Island Ecosystems Research Center, 677 Ala Moana Blvd., Suite 615, Honolulu, HI 96813 KEY WORDS Hawai‘i, coastal, plants, resource management, endangered species CITATION Warshauer, F. R., J. D. Jacobi, and J. Price 2009. Native coastal flora and plant communities in Hawai‘i: Their composition, distribution, and status. Hawai‘i Cooperative Studies Unit Technical Report HCSU-014.
    [Show full text]
  • Arthropod Survey of 'Öpae 'Ula and Adjacent Summit Areas of the Ko
    Arthropod Survey of ‘Öpae ‘ula and Adjacent Summit Areas of the Ko‘olau Mountains, O‘ahu, Hawai‘i David J. Preston , Dan A. Polhemus, Keith T. Arakaki, and Myra K. K. McShane Hawaii Biological Survey, Bishop Museum, 1525 Bernice Street Honolulu, Hawaii, 96817-2704, USA Submitted to Hawaii Department of Land And Natural Recourses Division Of Forestry And Wildlife Hawaii Natural Area Reserve System 1151 Punchbowl Street, Room 325 Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 June 2004 Contribution No.2004-010 to the Hawaii Biological Survey 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................2 METHODS............................................................................................................................................2 COLLECTION SITES .........................................................................................................................2 Table 1: Collection sites .......................................................................................................................3 Figure 1. Sample sites...........................................................................................................................4 RESULTS..............................................................................................................................................4 Table 2: Insects and related arthropods collected from the upper Käluanui drainage, Ko’olau Mountains..............................................................................................................................................6
    [Show full text]
  • 2010 Rare Plant Survey, O'ahu Forest National Wildlife Refuge, Waipi'o, O
    2010 Rare Plant Survey, O‘ahu Forest National Wildlife Refuge, Waipi‘o, O‘ahu Clyde Imada, Patti Clifford, and Joel Q.C. Lau Honolulu, Hawai‘i October 2011 Cover: A vegetative specimen of an endemic species of Lobelia, likely the federally listed Endangered L. koolauensis. Photo by Alex Lau 2010 Rare Plant Survey, O‘ahu Forest National Wildlife Refuge, Waipi‘o, O‘ahu Final Report Prepared by: Clyde Imada 1, Patti Clifford 2,, and Joel Q.C. Lau Hawaii Biological Survey Bishop Museum Honolulu, HI 96817 1. Bishop Museum, Department of Natural Sciences 2. Hawai‘i Invasive Species Council, Weed Risk Assessment Prepared for: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service O‘ahu Forest National Wildlife Refuge Complex 66-590 Kamehameha Hwy, Room 2C Hale‘iwa, HI 96812 Bishop Musem Technical Report 55 Honolulu, Hawai‘i October 2011 Published by: BISHOP MUSEUM The State Museum of Natural and Cultural History 1525 Bernice Street Honolulu, Hawai’i 96817–2704, USA Copyright © 2011 Bishop Museum All Rights Reserved Printed in the United States of America ISSN 1085-455X Contribution No. 2011-022 to the Hawaii Biological Survey O‘ahu Forest National Wildlife Refuge Botanical Survey TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................ iii I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................... 1 Ia. Setting .............................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Dry Forests of Oahu, Hawaii, NEED HELP
    OAHU DATA FACTS, FIGURES & SPECIES LIST The Dry Forests of Oahu, Hawaii, NEED HELP. The Hawaiian Islands are home to some of the world’s most endangered forests. The most endangered dry forests are on the island of Oahu, which contains less than 0.2% native dry forest (1.7 km2) with less than 30% protected in reserves (0.5 km2). A total of 68 native tree and shrub species have been identified in the dry forest region of Oahu and 45% have been identified as threatened species according to the IUCN and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Since 2000, thirteen organizations (federal, state, private) have been involved in restoration efforts of Hawaiian dry forests at 18 locations in Oahu. However, additional extensive restoration efforts are still needed in mixed native and non-native dry forests on Oahu and in low elevation urban and rural areas. The restoration of this forest type will be of central importance to removing species from threatened and endangered species lists and preventing additional species from being listed. The following pages contain data relating to the current state of Oahu’s dry forests: FIGURE 1. Extent of native dry forest and nature reserves on the island of Oahu. www.geog.ucla.edu/TDFPacific OAHU DATA FACTS, FIGURES & SPECIES LIST FIGURE 2. GAP Analysis land cover types in the dry forest region of Oahu. Oahu Dry Region Gap Analysis Class (km2) (km2) Native Forest Closed Ohia Forest 42.5 0.9 Ohia Forest 18.5 0.0 Open Koa-Ohia Forest 28.7 0.4 Open Ohia Forest 37.5 0.4 Mixed native-non-native forest Mixed Native-Alien
    [Show full text]
  • 5-YEAR REVIEW Short Form Summary Species Reviewed: Pritchardia Napaliensis (Loulu Palm) Curre Nt Classification: Endangered
    5-YEAR REVIEW Short Form Summary Species Reviewed: Pritchardia napaliensis (loulu palm) Curre nt Classification: Endangered Federal Register Notice announcing initiation of this review: [USFWS] U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2008. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; initiation of 5-year status reviews of 70 species in Idaho, Montana, Oregon, Washington, and the Pacific Islands. Federal Register 73(83):23264- 23266. Lead Region/Field Office: Re gio n 1 /Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office, Honolulu, Hawaii Name of Reviewer(s): Marie Bruegmann, Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office, Plant Recovery Coordinator Marilet A. Zablan, Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office, Assistant Field Supervisor for Endangered Species Jeff Newman, Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office, Acting Deputy Field Supervisor Methodology used to complete this 5-year review: This review was conducted by staff of the Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), beginning on April 29, 2008. The review was based on the final critical habitat designation for Pritchardia napaliensis and other species from the island of Kauai (USFWS 2003), as well as a review of current, available information. The National Tropical Botanical Garden provided an initial draft of portions of the 5-year review and recommendations for conservation actions needed prior to the next five-year review. The evaluation of Tamara Sherrill, a biological consultant, was reviewed by the Plant Recovery Coordinator. The document was then reviewed by the Assistant Field Supervisor for Endangered Species and Acting Deputy Field Supervisor before submission to the Field Supervisor for approval. Background: For information regarding the species listing history and other facts, please refer to the Fish and Wildlife Service’s Environmental Conservation On-line System (ECOS) database for threatened and endangered species (http://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public).
    [Show full text]
  • Bark of Dirca L.: Tensile Properties, Anatomy, and Utility for Handmade Asian-Style Bark Paper Zachary Hudson Iowa State University
    Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Graduate Theses and Dissertations Dissertations 2019 Bark of Dirca L.: Tensile properties, anatomy, and utility for handmade Asian-style bark paper Zachary Hudson Iowa State University Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/etd Part of the Botany Commons Recommended Citation Hudson, Zachary, "Bark of Dirca L.: Tensile properties, anatomy, and utility for handmade Asian-style bark paper" (2019). Graduate Theses and Dissertations. 17031. https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/etd/17031 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Dissertations at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Bark of Dirca L.: Tensile properties, anatomy, and utility for handmade Asian-style bark paper by Zachary Hudson A dissertation submitted to the graduate faculty in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Co-Majors: Horticulture; Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Program of Study Committee: William Graves, Major Professor Grant Arndt Lynn Clark Christopher Currey Robert Wallace Mark Widrlechner The student author, whose presentation of the scholarship herein was approved by the program of study committee, is solely responsible for the content of this dissertation. The Graduate College will ensure this dissertation is globally accessible and will not permit alterations after a degree is conferred. Iowa State University Ames, Iowa 2019 Copyright © Zachary Hudson, 2019. All rights reserved. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT .............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • APGA-USFS 2017 Scouting/Collecting Trip for Ochrosia Kauaiensis
    Final Report: APGA-USFS 2017 Scouting/Collecting Trip for Ochrosia kauaiensis Prepared by Seana K. Walsh, Conservation Biologist and Kenneth R. Wood, Research Biologist National Tropical Botanical Garden, 3530 Papalina Rd, Kalāheo, Kauaʻi, Hawaiʻi 96741 February 2018 Project Summary Over the past six months conservation research was conducted on Ochrosia kauaiensis H. St. John (Apocynaceae), a rare single-island endemic tree species from Kauaʻi. A total of seven trips (see Table 1 and Figures 1-3) were made by the National Tropical Botanical Garden (NTBG) to voucher, map, tag and collect fruits and DNA samples. Methods. Individual plants were tagged utilizing a “Population Reference Code” ID system standardized within the State of Hawaiʻi. The unique ID was embossed on a metal tag and attached to a small branch of the plant or on an adjacent tree using plastic-coated wire with flagging. This unique plant ID system will ensure consistency and streamline future monitoring. All associated data with a collection were entered into the NTBG Collections Management Database System. Images and videos were labelled and entered into the NTBG Digital Asset Management program using ResourceSpace. Voucher specimens were deposited in NTBG’s herbarium (PTBG) and duplicates were sent to United States National Arboretum and Bishop Museum (BISH). Seed collections from individual plants were kept separate. Depending on the number of seeds collected from an individual, a portion was mailed to the Montgomery Botanical Center (MBC). Remaining seeds were propagated in NTBG’s Conservation and Horticulture Center on Kauaʻi for future ex situ conservation collections in NTBG’s McBryde and Limahuli Gardens on Kauaʻi and NTBG’s Kahanu Garden on Maui.
    [Show full text]
  • Wikstroemia Oahuensis (Gray) Rock the Wood of Another Species (W
    Common Forest Trees of Hawaii (Native and Introduced) ‘Akia low to orange, fleshy, bitter. Seed single, egg-shaped, 5 ⁄16 inch (8 mm) long, pointed, blackish. Wikstroemia oahuensis (Gray) Rock The wood of another species (W. sandwicensis Meisn.) is whitish and very soft, subject to blue stain. Mezereum family (Thymelaeaceae) Scattered in understory of wet forests of Oahu, for example, Niu Valley, Mt. Konahuanui, and Poamoho Native species (endemic) Ridge, to 4600 ft (1402 m) elevation. Plants of ‘akia, genus Wikstroemia, are easily recognized, Range though further identification of the species, about 12, Kauai, Oahu, Molokai, Lanai, Maui found through the Hawaiian Islands is not so easy. Most species are evergreen shrubs, and only a few reach tree Other common names size. They have blackish or gray, often reddish brown, asasa, false ‘ohelo very tough bark with strong fibers, which served early Hawaiians as rope. These reputedly poisonous plants Botanical synonyms formerly were pounded into pulp and thrown into water Wikstroemia basicordata Skottsb., W. degeneri Skottsb., to stupefy fish to aid in their capture. Plants of ‘akia are W. elongata Gray, W. eugenioides Skottsb., W. known by the mostly small narrow paired leaves, slen- haleakalensis Skottsb., W. isae Skottsb., W. lanaiensis der very tough twigs with strong fibers difficult to break, Skottsb., W leptantha Skottsb., W. macrosiphon Skottsb., with raised triangular leaf-scars, small narrowly tubular W. palustris Hochr.; W. recurva (Hillebr.) Skottsb., W. four-lobed greenish to yellow fragrant flowers, and small sellingii Skottsb., W. vaccinifolia Skottsb. orange stone fruits. This species varies from a low shrub of 2–4 ft (0.6– Plants of ‘akia are extremely poisonous if eaten, ac- 1.2 m) to a small tree to 25 ft (7.6 m) high and 6 inches cording to Degener (1930), though harmless to the touch.
    [Show full text]