[Senate Hearing 109-209]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 109-209
INVASIVE SPECIES
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS
of the
COMMITTEE ON
ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
ON
INVASIVE SPECIES
__________
VOLCANO, HI, AUGUST 9, 2005
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
24-981 WASHINGTON : 2005
_____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402�090001
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico, Chairman
LARRY E. CRAIG, Idaho JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico
CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii
LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota
LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska RON WYDEN, Oregon
RICHARD M. BURR, North Carolina, TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota
MEL MARTINEZ, Florida MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana
JAMES M. TALENT, Missouri DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California
CONRAD BURNS, Montana MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
GEORGE ALLEN, Virginia JON S. CORZINE, New Jersey
GORDON SMITH, Oregon KEN SALAZAR, Colorado
JIM BUNNING, Kentucky
Alex Flint, Staff Director
Judith K. Pensabene, Chief Counsel
Robert M. Simon, Democratic Staff Director
Sam E. Fowler, Democratic Chief Counsel
------
Subcommittee on National Parks
CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming, Chairman
LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee, Vice Chairman
GEORGE ALLEN, Virginia DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii
RICHARD M. BURR, North Carolina RON WYDEN, Oregon
MEL MARTINEZ, Florida MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana
GORDON SMITH, Oregon JON S. CORZINE, New Jersey
KEN SALAZAR, Colorado
Pete V. Domenici and Jeff Bingaman are Ex Officio Members of the
Subcommittee
Thomas Lillie, Professional Staff Member
David Brooks, Democratic Senior Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
STATEMENTS
Page
Akaka, Hon. Daniel K., U.S. Senator from Hawaii.................. 1
Fox, Mark R., Director of External Affairs, The Nature
Conservancy of Hawaii.......................................... 15
Leialoha, Julie, Manager, Big Island Invasive Species Committee,
Hilo, HI....................................................... 36
Penniman, Teya M., Manager, Maui Invasive Species Committee,
Makawao, HI.................................................... 38
Reeser, Donald, Haleakala National Park Volunteer................ 8
Reimer, Neil, Ph.D., Plant Quarantine Branch Chief, Hawaii
Department of Agriculture...................................... 26
Simmons, Peter, Regional Asset Manager, Land Assets Division,
Endowment Group................................................ 41
Soukup, Dr. Michael, Associate Director for Natural Resources,
Stewardship and Science, National Park Service, Department of
the Interior................................................... 3
Wilkinson, Dr. Mindy, Invasive Species Coordinator, Hawaii
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Division of Forestry
and Wildlife................................................... 21
APPENDIX
Responses to additional questions................................ 49
INVASIVE SPECIES
----------
TUESDAY, AUGUST 9, 2005
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on National Parks,
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
Volcano, Hawaii.
The subcommittee met pursuant to notice at 10:06 a.m., at
Volcanoes National Park, Kilauea Visitor Center, Volcano,
Hawaii, Hon. Daniel Akaka presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL AKAKA,
SENATOR FROM HAWAII
Senator Akaka. This hearing of the Subcommittee on National
Parks of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources will
come to order. I would like to welcome everyone this morning to
the hearing. The purpose of the hearing is to examine issues
concerning the management of invasive species in and around
national parks and to look at possible legislative and
partnership solutions. I am very glad to be able to hold this
hearing here at Hawaii Volcanoes National Park, which faces
major challenges in managing invasive species.
I would like to thank Senator Craig Thomas of Wyoming, who
is a good friend. We work very well together, and he's the
chairman of this subcommittee; and Senator Pete Domenici and
Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico, the chairman and ranking member of
the Energy and Natural Resources Committee--that's another way
of saying ``Interior''--for agreeing to this field hearing in
Hawaii.
I would also like to thank Tom Lillie, who is seated here,
dressed real well, next to the flag, and thank him for being
here. He is representing the subcommittee majority committee
staff. I want to thank him for all his help and to welcome him
here on his first--I want to stress that--his first visit to
the Big Island.
I want to say mahalo nui loa to Cindy, who was up here with
the mayor, Cindy Orlando, the superintendent here at Hawaii
Volcanoes National Park, for allowing us to use this facility
and to thank her for the assistance and that of her staff--
great staff--not only with helping us put this hearing on, but
also for making this hearing room look so wonderful today.
Let's give them a big hand.
[Applause.]
Senator Akaka. You know, I must admit to you this is a
different kind of hearing room for me. Usually Tom Lillie and
Dave here and I sit in hearing rooms up there, and it doesn't
look like this, so it's wonderful. Thank you so much for how
you've transformed this room into this kind of a hearing room.
In addition, I would like to recognize Holly Bundock, who
is here from the National Park Services Pacific West regional
office in California and who has spent many days helping us
with this hearing.
Holly, will you stand up so they can see.
[Applause.]
Senator Akaka. And I haven't mentioned Dave here. Dave is
my staff in this subcommittee. And next to Dave is another
staff, Shirley, who handles this part of my office. I would
also like to welcome Councilman Bob Jacobson. Bob, are you
here?
Mr. Jacobson. Aloha.
Senator Akaka. Aloha. Thank you for being here, Bob.
Bob is a leader in the fight against invasive species,
especially of the coqui frogs. Mahalo for coming today and for
your hard work, Bob, on invasive species.
As everyone here is aware, invasive species, whether
plants, animals, or microscopic organisms, are causing billions
and billions of dollars in damages throughout the United States
and are a major threat to the survival of several threatened
and endangered species. Nowhere, however, are the impacts of
invasive species greater than here in Hawaii.
Our State, which is known for its biodiversity, has more
than 10,000 species found nowhere else on Earth. Unfortunately,
invasive species are the primary cause of decline of Hawaii's
threatened and endangered species. This is a major concern
because of the 114 species that have become extinct during the
first 20 years of the Endangered Species Act, almost half were
in Hawaii.
Invasive species also cause hundreds of millions of dollars
in damages to Hawaii's agricultural industry and floricultural
products, Hawaii's real estate, and Hawaii's water quality; and
some species significantly increase the threat of wildfires. As
serious as these problems are, we are fortunate that there are
strong efforts at the Federal, State, and local level in Hawaii
to combat invasive species threats. I wanted to hold a hearing
here, in large part, to take advantage of the unique local
knowledge and expertise, and I'm excited, really excited, to
have such a distinguished group of witnesses appearing at this
hearing today.
Last month, I introduced S. 1541, the Public Land
Protection and Conservation Act, legislation that would
encourage Federal, State, local, and tribal governments,
nonprofit organizations and private entities, to work together
through a cost-shared cooperative grant program to control and
mitigate the spread of invasive species. Senator Inouye,
Senator Levin, and Senator Lautenberg are also original co-
sponsors of this legislation. This bill is not a cure-all for
the many problems we are facing, but I hope if enacted into
law, will provide land managers and other involved governments
and organizations with an additional tool to help address the
invasive species management issues. While my bill is not the
direct subject of this hearing, I welcome any thoughts from the
witnesses on this bill or other legislative proposals that
would assist in this challenge.
Before we hear from our first panel of witnesses, I would
like to cover a few administrative details. As this is an
official Senate hearing, all written statements and any other
materials submitted will be included in their entirety in the
hearing record. Anyone may submit additional statements after
the hearing to be included in the record. You can mail your
statement to any of my offices, and we'll forward it to the
committee, or you can send it directly to the committee in
Washington. The hearing record will remain open for 2 weeks.
Finally, I would respectfully ask our witnesses today to
please try and limit your oral remarks to approximately 5
minutes so that we can have enough time for questions and any
follow-up discussions.
With that, is there anything else? I also would like to
welcome two very special people who have come today, Ms.
Suzanne Case. Suzanne, will you please stand up? Suzanne is
executive director of the Nature Conservancy of Hawaii. Thank
you for being here. And Ms. Geri Bell. I thought I caught sight
of you, Geri. Aloha. How are you, Geri? Geri is a
superintendent at Pu'uhonua O Honaunau National Historical
Park, and that's on the other side of the island, in Kona. I
want to thank both of you for being here.
Is there anybody else? Well, thank you so much for being
here. And I want you folks to feel relaxed and comfortable
here, especially in this kind of setting. And now I'll turn on
the light to begin.
With that, I'd like to begin the hearing by asking our
first panel to come forth. Dr. Mike Soukup, Associate Director
of National Park Service in Washington, DC. Thank you for going
with us last night to look at the lava flow.
And Mr. Don Reeser of Makawao, the former superintendent of
Haleakala National Park, who just retired in the last few
weeks. Congratulations, Don. Best wishes to you, and thank you
for coming for the hearing today.
I also would like to welcome Dr. Lloyd Loope, who is
accompanying Dr. Soukup and who I have asked to be here, from
the U.S. Geological Survey of Hawaii, to serve as a resource
witness today so that he can share his insights from his work
on invasive species. Dr. Loope, I'll come back to you when we
get to the questions.
May I make a request here--and I nearly did not say it, but
we normally say this because people sometimes, without
realizing it, do have it on. If you have any cell phones,
please turn them off during the hearing, we'd certainly
appreciate that.
Thank you very much, panel.
Dr. Soukup, welcome, and please proceed.
STATEMENT OF DR. MICHAEL SOUKUP, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR FOR NATURAL
RESOURCES, STEWARDSHIP AND SCIENCE, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE,
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Dr. Soukup. Thank you, Senator. I very much appreciate this
opportunity to be here and your convening this hearing on a
major issue that affects the American public in many ways, and
especially, I believe, affects the National Park System and the
health of the systems that we manage.
I also want to thank everyone for the hospitality that is
apparently just very commonplace here. It's been very warming.
I'm from that other place that Mr. Kim mentioned. I'm very
happy to be here in such a nice setting.
With me on this panel are two experts in invasives and
invasives in Hawaii. Don Reeser is the recently retired
superintendent of Haleakala National Park, and Dr. Lloyd Loope
is a former NPS scientist, National Park Service scientist, now
with USGS.
I would like to submit my written testimony, Senator, along
with two technical papers authored by Dr. Loope for the record
and briefly summarize my written testimony.
Senator Akaka. They will be included in the record.
Dr. Soukup. Thank you, sir.
Invasive species are one of the greatest threats to our
natural and cultural heritage. Invasives are responsible for
the listing of 42 percent of the endangered species listed
under the Endangered Species Act. Invasives infest 2.6 million
acres of the 83 million acres of national parks.
Nowhere in the Nation, as was said earlier, is this issue
more critical than here in Hawaii. New arrivals such as the
rust fungus, Metrosideros polymorpha, for instance, threatens
the 'Ohi'a tree and has now been found in nurseries in Oahu and
Maui, and no one knows exactly the extent of what that rust
will do to such important species in the Hawaii forests. Other
invasives threaten important coral reef communities, and I got
a chance to look at some of that recently on this trip, and
also threatens not only the coral reef communities, but the
tourism industry.
As you know, Senator, the National Park Service has been
mandated by Congress to maintain park resources unimpaired, for
the enjoyment of present and future generations. For some time,
the service has recognized and attempted to control invasives
and has many successes, especially here in Hawaii. However, the
problem grows. At the close of the 20th century, the National
Park Service committed, with the help of Congress, to doubling
its capability in natural resources management to meet the
difficult issues of the 21st century. This initiative we call
the Natural Resource Challenge. For the first time, National
Parks will have a systematic inventory of its parks. For the
first time, all parks will be monitored to help us with early
detection and early intervention of invasive species.
An important element of the Natural Resource Challenge is
the creation of 16 Exotic Plant Management Teams. We call them
EPMTs. We couldn't think of a better name. We tried to call
them SWAT teams, but that seemed too confrontational. Perhaps
they should be ``swath'' teams. These teams, which include the
Pacific Islands Exotic Plant Management Team, which is based
here in Hawaii Volcanoes are highly trained mobile teams that
serve 209 parks nationwide and work in partnership with States
and groups like the Student Conservation Association. Last
year, the teams leveraged over $4 million, had 4,000 hours of
volunteer service, and treated nearly 50,000 acres.
The invasives issue requires coordination and partnerships
to effectively attack such a pervasive problem. Hawaii has
important examples of partnerships like the Maui Invasive
Species Committee, that brings together the resources of the
Federal Government, States, and individuals.
Here at Hawaii Volcanoes, the Olaa-Kilauea Partnership is a
cooperative management effort involving State and Federal
entities and willing private landowners which protect the
survival of native ecosystems on 420,000 acres. Other partners
include the Puu Makaala National Area Reserve and the
Kamehameha Schools, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the
USGS, U.S. Forest Service, and the Nature Conservancy. The
Nature Conservancy is a valuable partner for the National Park
Service, and for important invasive projects nationwide.
There are many barriers, however, to a more effective
approach, and I would like to just mention one. An important
one for the National Park Service is that we lack authorization
to spend Federal funds on projects that treat invasives on
lands adjacent to our borders where there is a clear and direct
benefit to parks by spending that money in partnership. A
recent GAO report cited this lack of authority as a significant
impediment.
Accordingly, the administration has now drafted a
legislative proposal entitled the National Resource Protection
Cooperative Agreement Act. This proposal would provide the
Secretary of the Interior authority to protect park resources
through collaborative efforts in lands inside and outside of
National Park System units. The legislative proposal would
ensure the protection of private property rights by authorizing
collaborations with willing private landowners.
Senator, I will conclude with thanking you again for your
efforts to bring recognition to this important and growing
issue, and I would be happy to try to answer any questions you
may have. Thank you, mahalo.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Soukup follows:]
Prepared Statement of Michael Soukup, Associate Director for Natural
Resource Stewardship and Science, National Park Service, Department of
the Interior
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to provide an update to
the Committee on the accomplishments of the National Park Service in
battling invasive species on park lands.
Invasive species proliferation is considered one of the greatest
threats to our natural and cultural heritage. Invasive species
encroachment is implicated in the listing of 42% of all species
protected by the Endangered Species Act. Invasive plants are estimated
to cause more than $20 billion per year in economic damages and affect
millions of acres of public and private lands across the country. Of
the 83 million acres managed by the National Park Service, 2.6 million
acres are infested by invasive plants. Examples of invasive animal
species plaguing the parks include feral pigs and goats, hemlock woolly
adelgid insect, and New Zealand mudsnail.
Recognizing that invasive species cross geographic and
jurisdictional boundaries, collaborative efforts among Federal, State,
and local entities and willing private landowners can be highly
effective in managing a shared problem. For the National Park Service,
one of the barriers to such collaboration is the lack of the authority
to expend Federal funds for work outside of lands it manages where
there is a clear and direct benefit to park natural resources.
According to a recent General Accounting Office (GAO) report from
February 2005, of the four major land management agencies examined by
the GAO, the National Park Service was the only Federal agency that did
not have this authority. This lack of consistency among Federal
agencies is an impediment to effective collaboration and cooperation
among potential partners to manage invasive species, especially with
willing adjacent landowners.
To address this problem, the Administration recently has
transmitted to Congress a draft legislative proposal entitled, ``the
Natural Resource Protection Cooperative Agreement Act.'' The proposal
would provide the Secretary the authority to protect park resources
through collaborative efforts on lands inside or outside of National
Park System units. The legislative proposal would ensure the protection
of private property rights by only authorizing collaborations with
willing private landowners.
With the continual arrival of new invaders to Hawaii, the problem
of non-native species occupying park areas only increases. For example,
the Coqui comun frogs, which reach cacophonous densities estimated to
be between 10,000 and 40,000 per acre, are beginning to appear in
Hawaii Volcanoes National Park. Coqui comun will decimate forest
invertebrate fauna and significantly alter nutrient cycling in Hawaiian
forests, while also degrading the natural quiet of the park and
impacting the tourist industry. A recently arrived rust, Metrosideros
polymorpha, found on ohia trees in plant nurseries on Oahu and Maui has
the potential to seriously harm this most abundant native tree species
and other key species in native ecosystems in Hawaii.
Invasive marine algae are rapidly invading the Hawaiian Islands and
other Pacific Island groups. These invaders are both financially and
ecologically devastating. They can overgrow and kill corals, devastate
coral habitat, alter ecosystem processes, and significantly impact the
health and biodiversity of coral reef communities. With Hawaii's
tourism industry so dependent on marine resources, these impacts can
result in major financial losses.
The Park Service is embarking on a two-year project to rapidly
assess the threat from invasive marine plants within and adjacent to
National Parks in Hawaii, Guam, Saipan, and American Samoa. Given the
known distribution of invasive marine plants in shallow water habitats
of the Hawaiian Islands, we must document these plant distributions and
abundance in the Pacific Island Parks before they cause damage to
marine resources and native or endemic species are lost. One area that
has been invaded is Kaloko fishpond, located in Kaloko-Honokohau
National Historical Park on the Kona coast of Hawaii. The historic
fishpond is an 11-acre, spring-fed, natural embayment enclosed by a
man-made stone wall. Red alga has entered the pond and currently covers
about a third of the bottom. In addition to restoring this important
native Hawaiian historic site, our concern is that the invasive algae
will spread to the reef adjacent to the fishpond and throughout the
Kona coastline. In cooperation with University of Hawaii, the Park
Service is conducting a removal project to evaluate methods to diminish
and control this invasion and prevent its spread. These methods include
biological control using herbivorous fish, manual removal, shading, and
re-cropping.
The National Park Service has been a pioneer in combating threats
to resources posed by invasive species. This work began with the
grassroots efforts of staff in many parks; a few examples include the
removal of feral pigs at Great Smoky Mountains National Park, burros at
Grand Canyon National Park and purple loosestrife at Acadia National
Park. As more and more invasives have encroached on parklands over the
last century, the National Park Service has expanded its efforts to
develop more complex and aggressive programs and policies to prevent,
control and manage invasive species. For example, at Yellowstone
National Park, staff has removed thousands of nonnative lake trout
since 2000 because they were displacing native cutthroat trout, an
important food source for grizzly bears. In New Mexico, invasive
African oryx grew to a herd numbering more than 4,000 in White Sands
National Monument. Because of resource damage, the park initiated a
comprehensive control program in 1999 and successfully removed all oryx
from the park. At St. Croix National Scenic Riverway in Wisconsin and
Minnesota, a boat inspection program has been initiated with the State
of Minnesota and Federal agencies to prevent the spread of invasive
aquatic plants and zebra mussels into the Riverway. This prevention
program was initiated to stop the introduction of zebra mussels that
were outcompeting threatened and endangered native mussels. By
aggressively taking steps to eliminate or prevent establishment of
invasive species, native populations of animal and plant species can
thrive on parklands.
As part of the National Park Service's Natural Resource Challenge,
a new management strategy was created for addressing invasive species
in parks. Modeled after the approach used in wildland fire fighting,
field-based Exotic Plant Management Teams (EPMTs) provide highly
trained, mobile strike forces of plant management specialists who
assist parks in the identification, treatment, control, restoration,
and monitoring of areas infested with invasive plants. There are now 16
teams covering 209 parks nationwide. This successful model has now been
adopted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Student
Conservation Association as well. The success of the EPMTs derives from
its ability to adapt to local conditions and needs while still serving
multiple parks within a broad geographic area.
The Department of the Interior's Cooperative Conservation
Initiative (CCI) is an innovative and collaborative program through
which land management agencies partner with landowners and communities
to battle invasive species and restore natural areas. During 2003-2004,
the National Park Service has received about $6 million dollars for
invasive species work, primarily weed management efforts. Since 2000,
the EPMTs have entered into over 40 different cooperative efforts
throughout the United States with more than $4 million dollars in
matching support from public and private sources. In 2004 alone,
volunteers contributed over 4,000 hours to our weed management efforts.
In addition, we anticipate that the Noxious Weed Act recently passed by
Congress will help provide financial and technical support to our State
partners in controlling weeds. Finally, through a new Student
Conservation Association partnership, student teams are being fielded
to build our capacity and to train new invasive species management
professionals to work beyond our boundaries.
As a result of over 20 years of active ecosystem management
starting with fencing and feral animal control, followed by invasive
plant control and rare plant stabilization, spectacular recovery of
native vegetation and associated fauna have occurred at Haleakala
National Park, protecting one of the richest and most ecologically
intact ecosystems within the National Park System. Thirteen endangered
plants and five endangered birds are harbored on parklands along with
dozens of rare plants and a diverse array of native arthropods.
However, many non-native species threaten to invade native habitats at
the park potentially reversing this recovery. For example, miconia, an
invasive tree, feared as the ``green cancer'', would transform arguably
the best remaining Hawaiian rainforest, and the only remaining home of
two critically endangered forest birds, the Maui Parrotbill and
Akohekohe, into the green and purple monoculture that has become the
fate of the forests in Tahiti. Pampas grass and silk oak also threaten
to convert native grasslands and forests into single invasive species
stands. So far these three species have been eradicated from parklands
through a joint partnership effort. However, reinvasion from adjacent
lands remains a threat.
Invasive animals are perhaps an even more imminent threat to parks
in Hawaii. For example, the veiled chameleon has escaped as a result of
the illegal pet trade and is considered by island biologists to have
the potential for decimating native bird populations similar to what
the brown tree snake has done on Guam. Much more work needs to be done
to keep these and other invasives out of parks.
As mentioned above, collaborative efforts are critical in managing
the problem of invasive species. To this end, the National Park Service
has been an active member on many partnership committees. At the
national level, the National Park Service participates in a number of
interagency partnerships and cooperative efforts of the National
Invasive Species Council (NISC), including the control of invasive
plants such as tamarisk and leafy spurge in the western United States.
NISC is an inter-departmental Council charged with coordinating Federal
invasive species programs and is co-chaired by Secretary Norton. The
National Park Service participates in the taxa-focused Federal
coordinating organizations for invasive species, the Federal
Interagency Committee for the Management of Noxious and Exotic Weeds
(FICMNEW), the Federal Interagency Committee on Invasive Terrestrial
Animals and Pathogens (ITAP), and was recently invited to be a Federal
member of the Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force. Participation in
these national efforts provides the National Park Service with
opportunities to draw on broad expertise, identify shared priorities,
pool resources, and work collaboratively on invasive species issues of
national significance.
The National Park Service also works actively with partners at the
regional and local levels. For example, we are a member of the Maui
Invasive Species Committee, an informal partnership of private, county,
State and Federal agencies and individuals that has for the last three
years worked to control invasive species through $1.6 million dollars
in county and State grants. A similar effort led by the Big Island
Invasive Species Committee is working to coordinate invasive management
actions on the island.
I would like to highlight an example of a very successful public-
private partnership, which is occurring here at Hawaii Volcanoes
National Park. The Olaa-Kilauea Partnership on the island of Hawaii is
a cooperative land management effort involving State and Federal
entities and willing private landowners. The goals of the partnership
are to enhance the long-term survival of native ecosystems and manage
420,000 acres across multiple ownership boundaries. Management and
research are currently focused on removing or reducing impacts from
feral animals such as pigs, invasive plants and non-native predators,
restoring native habitat and endangered species, and providing
education and work training in fencing, native plant horticulture and
other conservation work to Kulani Correctional Facility inmates. Other
partners include the Puu Makaala Natural Area Reserve, the Kamehameha
Schools, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the USGS Biological
Resources Division, the USDA Forest Service, and the Nature
Conservancy. The Partnership has jointly fenced 14,100 acres on State
and private lands and eliminated the feral pig population from 9,800
acres, while controlling feral pigs in an additional 4,300 acres.
The Partnership also offers valuable educational and cultural
benefits by providing staff and field sites for hands-on environmental
educational activities for teacher workshops and student programs. The
private landowner involved in the Partnership plans to restore the
ranch adjacent to the park and use the entire area for conservation,
cultural enrichment and education.
The most cost-effective and successful strategy for battling
invasive species is preventing them from ever entering our national
parks. New and innovative programs are being established in a handful
of parks to institutionalize prevention programs. In cases where this
is not possible, the sooner new introductions are detected and
addressed the greater the likelihood of eradication. The National Park
Service's Inventory and Monitoring (I&M) Program networks are helping
parks develop monitoring programs for the detection of new invasions so
a quick response can ultimately remove the threat before it becomes
unmanageable. The information is also used by EMPTs for identifying
treatment areas and coordinating control projects with parks.
The battle to manage the widely recognized and increasing problem
of invasive species in our national parks has brought together a broad-
based coalition of public and private agencies, citizens and
organizations with the shared goal of protecting our national heritage.
The Department's commitment to take aggressive action to prevent and
manage invasive species is evident by the support of programs such as
the Natural Resource Challenge and the Cooperative Conservation
Initiative.
We applaud your efforts Mr. Chairman to bring recognition to this
growing problem of invasive species on parklands across the Nation.
This concludes my statement and I will be happy to answer any questions
that you or members of the Committee may have.
Senator Akaka. Thank you very much for your testimony. Next
will be Don Reeser.
Don, I understand that you have just retired from the Park
Service after 17 years of serving as superintendent at
Haleakala National Park on Maui. I know you have worked long
and hard on many issues around Haleakala, including air tour
management and invasive species, where you've really made a
difference. I greatly appreciate your taking the time to come
to the hearing today to share your experiences, particularly
with respect to invasive species.
Congratulations, once again, on the road to your
retirement, and thank you for coming here today. We look
forward to your testimony.
STATEMENT OF DONALD REESER, HALEAKALA NATIONAL PARK VOLUNTEER
Mr. Reeser. Thank you, Senator Akaka, for allowing me to
come. For some reason, I don't feel too retired, being here,
but I served 40 years for the National Park Service, 43 for the
Federal Government, Muir Woods National Monument. I gave
programs right here in 1968 and, later on, became chief of
resources management, and then went over to Redwood National
Park. I was chief of resources management in rehabilitation,
then 17 years, as you say, at Haleakala.
Now, when I transferred to Hawaii Volcanoes in 1968, there
was concern by biologists for the impacts of two native
biological resources by the thousands of feral goats and pigs
that roamed the park. However, there was little support by the
public or higher officials at that time for necessary action.
Programs to control these animals by the National Park Service
were largely perfunctory.
By documenting feral animal impacts and demonstrating
success in excluding feral animals from large fenced areas,
public perceptions and understanding gradually changed through
the years. Discredited was the notion that control of feral
animals was enough to save native species. Finally acknowledged
was the reality that total exclusion of feral animals is
necessary to achieve native ecosystem preservation and
restoration.
In 1963, the Leopold Report on Wildlife Management, a blue-
ribbon committee, made recommendations to the National Park
Service on how to manage resources. And one sentence in there,
to me, really summed up what the policy was to be pursued, and
that is, I quote, ``A visitor who climbs a mountain in Hawaii
ought to see the money trees and silverswords, not goats.''
Since the early 1970's, the National Park Service has been
a leader in ecosystem preservation. Feral animals in Hawaii
national parks are being effectively excluded by internal and
boundary fences. Park interpretive programs emphasize ecosystem
preservation and the problems associated with invasive species.
Resource management divisions, with supporting U.S. Geological
Survey, Biological Resources Division research assistance, have
been established and dedicated to ecosystem preservation and
restoration. Active involvement in watershed partnerships is
ongoing and crucial in addressing invasive issues adjacent to
park boundaries. An Exotic Plant Management Team is assigned to
a host park, Haleakala, to help respond to the needs of several
parks in Hawaii.
Park ecosystem preservation has come a long way since the
1970's in dealing with invasive species. We had a full plate of
non-natives to deal with, including rats, mongooses, faya tree,
kahili ginger, to name a few. However, today we have new
invasive species such as Coqui frogs, Miconia and leaf hoppers,
and, now, if you've been reading the news, we've got a wiliwili
wasp we weren't even thinking about just 3 days ago, and now
it's here and there's a possibility of wiping out the wiliwili
trees. While resource management worked on programs to deal
with existing pests, new ones were arriving on the scene. Park
managers now fear that the brown tree snake and red fire ant
will soon be on the control list.
Airports and harbors are the obvious pathways for the new
arrivals that threaten public health, agricultural crops, and
native ecosystems. On Maui, the National Park Service has
played a proactive role in trying to effect change in the
infrastructure and the scope of interdiction activities at
Kahului Airport. National Park Service challenges to the
airport improvement environmental compliance documentation
resulted in an alien species program requirement that was
appended to the final record of decision. Risk assessments
conducted by the Hawaii Department of Agriculture confirmed the
validity of park concerns.
Nevertheless, after nearly a decade of meetings and
discussion among key agencies, there remains substantial
resistance or apathy for the implementation of effective and
adequately staffed interdiction programs at Kahului Airport
where implementation of an alien species action plan was
mandated. Recent legislation sponsored by Congressman Ed Case,
which would require the Secretary of Agriculture and the
Secretary of the Interior to expand Federal efforts to prevent
the introduction in Hawaii of non-native plants, animals, and
plant and animal diseases, if this is enacted, this may help
achieve the needed changes at the airports and harbors.
Harbors as an avenue for invasive species have not received
the attention they deserve because they are longstanding
existing operations. However, in the last year, a proposal for
Superferries operating between islands has raised concern for
accelerating the spread of invasive species between islands.
The NPS testified before the Maui County Council that the
enormous increase of loaded vehicles entering Maui would cause
adverse impacts to park ecosystems. Many of these vehicles
aboard the Superferries will be carrying invasive plant seeds
such as Miconia, fountain grasses, insects, spreading them from
sea level to 10,000 feet elevation. Probable impacts to a
national park require analyses and mitigations under the
National Environmental Protection Act. Hawaii Department of
Transportation has declined to prepare an Environmental Impact
Statement.
National parks should be outstanding examples of ecosystem
preservation and principal leaders in combating alien invasive
species. Major challenges facing the National Park Service
include: dealing more aggressively and effectively with
established invasive species using traditional methods, as well
as seeking and employing new biological controls; two, gaining
clear authority for targeting certain invasive species outside
park boundaries rather than waiting to fight them in the park;
and three, preventing the establishment of new pest species in
Hawaii.
Additional funding for invasive control and ecosystem
restoration programs is an obvious need. Eroding park bases
from inflation and mandated programs have made it tough for
park managers to keep adequate funding in resource protection
programs.
Special legislation that makes it easier for the National
Park Service to assist adjacent park partners in attacking
ecosystem-changing species such as Miconia is desperately
needed. Guidelines for recreational fee demonstration program
revenues received at entrance stations and from commercial
operations at national parks need to be liberalized for funding
serious invasive species programs inside and on adjacent
partnership lands.
And, finally, thank you, Senator Akaka. In my experience
here for, I think, 27 years in Hawaii, I know that you have
been very supportive of money for fencing and for alien species
control, and the national parks are in far better shape today
because of your vision and commitment to the preservation of
native Hawaiian plants and animals. Thank you.
Senator Akaka. Thank you very much for your testimony. I
would like to ask questions of you, beginning with Dr. Soukup.
How much did the National Park Service spend on invasive
species in 2004? Two parts of the question. How much of that
was spent, also, at park units in Hawaii? And what are your
estimates for the current year, and do you have any estimate as
to what percent of the need it addresses?
Dr. Soukup. Well, I can tell you the numbers of the current
expenditure insofar as we track them. There's a lot of
individual activity out at parks, and a lot of parks are
spending portions of their base funding that we can't track all
that well, but of the funds that we know that are going
directly and appear in line items that we can track, over $10
million is being spent just out of the challenge alone. That
doesn't include the park base increases. $10 million
nationwide. In 2004, I think it was something like $5 million
here in Hawaii, and $6 million in 2005 is estimated when the
year is over that we will spend. I think that's an
underestimate, but it certainly, I think, reflects a very small
proportion of what needs to be done to control what many people
consider to be a biological wildfire.
What we don't see is the order of magnitude of effort
available to us that you see for wildfires, for instance. I
think we need the same kind of approach. And I don't believe
people are aware of the consequences as they are of fire, and I
think we need to invest in making people more aware of that so
that the funding, perhaps, will catch up with the need.
Senator Akaka. As we all know, funding is very important,
and invasive species programs are extremely important to
Hawaii. We know that you will keep that high in your mind as
you think about funding.
Dr. Soukup, what is the National Park Service's highest
priority for invasive species management overall, and what is
its highest priority in Hawaii?
Dr. Soukup. Well, one of the things that has to be done
with the amount of funding that we can apply and the magnitude
of the issue is we have to have a very methodical, science-
based approach to ranking the different invasive species. As
you know, some species are not invasive to the degree that
others are. And it's very important to be able to track and
predict which ones have to be interdicted early. And that's a
real, I think, scientific challenge.
We're getting a tremendous amount of help from the USGS as
well as our cooperative ecosystem studies units that are based
at universities, in helping us target our funding and our plant
management teams to the most aggressive and most, eventually,
costly invasives. That, I think, is the best way we can go, and
that will certainly, I think, have the biggest impact, that
plus being able to partner with the States and local
organizations.
In terms of the highest priority right now, I have my own
personal list. It's the old world climbing vine in the
Everglades. I will maybe ask Dr. Loope to talk about what he
thinks is the most aggressive threat here in the islands.
Senator Akaka. I know you have what you call Exotic Plant
Management Teams working in the National Park Service, and they
are working to combat invasive species. Have these teams been
successful? And what have they accomplished in Hawaii? What do
you see as the future of this program?
Dr. Soukup. This program is only several years old, but we
believe they have already demonstrated their utility, not only
in aggressively attacking priority species; I think we've
eliminated 12 species from all parks nationwide, already
completely to a maintenance level.
We are, I think, going to find increased support from the
Department and from other agencies. There are other agencies
that are now fielding similar teams, and we're helping train
those teams. So we think the idea is a good one. It's certainly
flexible. It attracts partners. We have partners at all levels
of government and individuals who contribute their money and
their time. So we think that the idea is a good concept and
it's certainly going to be, I hope, supported in the future.
The 2007 budget proposal, I think, will be a very positive
one for us. I don't have a lot of information with me--I can
provide it for the record--of the accomplishments here in the
Hawaiian Islands. I don't know if the panel would like to speak
to that or not, but I know there's been great progress in
dealing with Miconia, for instance, and I'm sure other species
are also targeted.
Senator Akaka. I know the National Park Service has been
working diligently in the battle against invasive species. My
final question to you is what do you consider the greatest
success story for the National Park Service in the battle of
invasive species?
Dr. Soukup. I believe that I have a list--I personally like
the preclusion of the zebra mussel from the St. Croix National
Scenic Riverway. The park, on its own, with its own finances,
acted very quickly to inspect recreational boats and remove and
restrict recreational access whenever there was a threat from
the spread of the zebra mussel. I think that's a very good
example. There were communities of endemic mussels in that
river that would have been wiped out very quickly had they not
taken appropriate action very, very quickly. And they've been
very successful.
Removal of the burro from the Grand Canyon would be
another, as would Melaleuca removal from Big Cypress National
Preserve in Hawaii. We removed 100,000 acres of a very
aggressive plant and had a ribbon-cutting as we hacked the last
one down, I think, 2 years ago. I think there are lots of
successes out there. Another example would be removing the
African oryx from the White Sands National Monument. 4,000
white African oryx were removed. The rat removal from the
Channel Islands has brought the birds back.
We have a ton of success stories, and I think they prove
that with a little bit of resources, we can take on a lot of
the worst problems. And I think with concerted resources and a
cooperative approach, I think we can do a lot more.
Senator Akaka. Thank you for your testimony.
Mr. Reeser, you've said that guidelines for the use of park
fee revenues need to be liberalized to fund serious invasive
species problems. Can you explain what are the limitations of
the use of park fee revenues and what specific new authority is
needed?
Mr. Reeser. Well, the fee demonstration program is limited
to projects on Federal lands. When we started collecting fees
at Kipahulu, we had plans to use the revenues there, which
would have been a couple million dollars a year, which were
actually--that we hoped to have used that for Miconia, to
prevent it from getting in the park, but after a lot of
discussions with solicitors and higher officials, the phrase in
the law that says ``only on Federal lands'' pretty much did
away with that idea.
If we would have been able to use that money, I think we'd
be a lot further along right now with Miconia than we are now.
But those are the restrictions, and I know there is some
legislation that you are working on under certain conditions
that partners could receive some Federal funding to work on
aliens that jeopardize park resources.
Senator Akaka. I'm glad you mentioned what you did. I think
my bill will be able to help with that when it's passed.
Mr. Reeser, let me ask you a similar question to one that I
asked Dr. Soukup. What do you consider your biggest--biggest--
success at Haleakala in managing--two things--in managing the
invasive species, and what is the biggest remaining challenge?
Mr. Reeser. Well, on Haleakala, the greatest success was
building those incredibly difficult fences along the crater
walls there to exclude the goats. And there's tremendous
recovery taking place in the crater, silverswords and other
species, for a decade now or more. And Kipahulu Valley, putting
across fences in Kipahulu Valley, the boundary fences and
getting rid of the pigs. There have been documented changes
there that are quite significant.
Our biggest challenge right now is how to deal with the
greatest threat to the park, and that's that Miconia that we've
been working with the East Hawaii Partnership, with the Maui
Invasive Species Committee, and others to try to facilitate,
but that is the biggest threat. That could undo all the good
work we've done in Kipahulu Valley up to this point, and that's
one of the richest areas left in the State.
Senator Akaka. Thank you very much.
Dr. Loope, thank you for agreeing to come and provide
comments today. We have you on the witness list as a resource
person, and I'd like to ask you a few questions about invasive
species since you have worked for both the National Park
Service and the U.S. Geological Survey.
Dr. Loope, from your perspective and experience, what are
some of the invasions that pose the worst threats to the parks
in Hawaii, how did these invaders get to Hawaii in the first
place, and what damage do they do? Finally, what measures are
needed to prevent more of the same coming to Hawaii?
Dr. Loope. That's a pretty demanding question to answer,
you know, to capsulize right, but I'll do my best.
I guess I really agree with Don Reeser's mention of the
fact that thinking of Haleakala National Park, that Miconia is
just an overwhelming threat looming out there, and I think that
if--there might be a good solution if the Park Service can find
a way to use funding outside the park and to be able to use
entrance fee money. So that's one thing.
There are problems that money can actually solve. Okay? But
another type of problem--another type of invasive species that
I really get discouraged about, actually Mike Soukup mentioned,
the 'Ohi'a rust. And, usually, we think--I think you mentioned
in your introduction that invasive species are a threat to
Hawaii's endangered species. Well, unfortunately, that's an
understatement. Look outside at the 'Ohi'a trees right around
here. Hawaii isn't a basket case. We have pretty intact
ecosystems in these national parks.
Unfortunately, this 'Ohi'a rust, there's almost nothing we
can do about it, since it's already been introduced. Possibly a
species like this could wipe out all of our 'Ohi'a trees. That
sounds like an exaggeration, and I wouldn't have said it even
last week, except there's a lot in the press on Maui about this
new insect--it's a gallwasp. It came to us from Asia, and it's
basically killing all of our native wiliwili trees, endemic
species. And like Geraldine over at Hula Hanua, she's got
wiliwili trees, right? I mean, this snuck up on us. It was
recorded first on Oahu in April. And all of a sudden--we find
out that it's killing all the wiliwili trees on Oahu, and all
of a sudden it's on all the other islands. It was found at Kona
Airport on the 21st of July, Kauai a few days later, and now
Maui, and we realize it's probably been on Maui for a month. We
really want to do something about it, but it's just too late.
And so I guess I would just like to say that we have to find a
way to stop these new invasions from coming in. And I'm sad to
say just those two species, one--the gallwasp certainly came
from the direction of Asia. It was probably originally native
to Africa. Came to us from Asia. And, actually, there was no
chance, with the quarantine system that we have, of stopping
something like that.
And the same thing about the 'Ohi'a rust. It possibly came
from Florida, but more likely Colombia or Venezuela, in nursery
material. I think the 'Ohi'a rust came in on a host plant. And
so it's kind of unclear. You'll hear more in the testimony
later on that it's, understandably, the U.S. Department of
Agriculture's quarantine system that protects our borders. The
Department of Homeland Security, they have priorities that are
very understandable--security, right?--in protecting
agriculture. And so it seems that the 'Ohi'a trees and wiliwili
are not something that's focused on. I would just think that
maybe you might want to look into this more, because if we
don't, we're finding out what's going to happen. On Maui we're
losing all our wiliwili trees. Unfortunately, Geraldine is
going to lose hers, too, probably. I just hope that the 'Ohi'a
trees around here don't succumb to this strain of rust. If they
don't, we'd better try doubly hard to keep out future strains.
Thank you so much for the opportunity to speak. I just
think that's we're going to lose unless we can keep new
invasions out at least better than we are now.
Senator Akaka. Dr. Loope, this has been one of our huge
problems, and that is to prevent these invasive species from
coming in to Hawaii. Do you have any ideas? You mentioned the
Department of Agriculture in checking whatever comes in with
people who come to the islands. Do you have any specific
measures in mind that we might be able to use to prevent
further invasive species from coming in to Hawaii?
Dr. Loope. Well, it's hard to make specific recommendations
without upsetting somebody, but I guess I'll have to say it
because you asked me. It just seems like it's the plant trade.
If we looked very carefully at the plants that are allowed to
come in to Hawaii from both the east and from the west. I am
not saying cut it off. The costs aren't just costs to
agriculture and horticulture when the pests get in. They're a
tremendous cost for national resources and specifically for
national parks.
I think looking at it in terms of economics is fine, but we
can't look at it just as protecting national security and
agriculture. We've got to think about--in other words,
basically, it's what's allowed to be traded in this world of
free trade. That's just my suggestion.
Senator Akaka. Well, I thank you very much for your
responses. I want to thank the first panel of witnesses very
much. We look forward to your responses as to how we can help
the problem of invasive species, and hopefully the bills that
we are crafting and proposing will make a difference, and your
testimony will help us do that. So thank you very much to the
first panel.
As you leave, Mike, I want to say aloha to you. I know you
have to catch a plane. And thank you very much for being here.
Dr. Soukup. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Akaka. I would like to call the next panel. Mr.
Mark Fox, director of external affairs, Nature Conservancy of
Hawaii; also Dr.. Mindy Wilkinson, invasive species
coordinator, Division of Forestry and Wildlife; and Dr. Neil
Reimer, branch chief, Plant Quarantine, Hawaii Department of
Agriculture.
Many of you don't know this, but I've known Mark for a few
years. Mark, it's good to see you again here in Hawaii.
And I would like to express my great appreciation for all
the wonderful work that the Nature Conservancy has done in
Hawaii for conservation, endangered species, and battling
invasive species to help preserve our native habitat. So why
don't you proceed with your testimony, Mark.
STATEMENT OF MARK R. FOX, DIRECTOR OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS, THE
NATURE CONSERVANCY OF HAWAII
Mr. Fox. Thank you, Senator. It's very good to see you as
well. And thank you, also, for hosting this important hearing.
The Nature Conservancy's experience as a land manager in
Hawaii for the last 25 years has shown us that the single
greatest threat to the survival of Hawaii's natural environment
is the damage done by non-native, invasive species. Indeed,
more than 90 percent of our work in the field is directly
connected to dealing with invasive species.
In that regard, we greatly appreciate your sponsorship of
important bills moving us in the right direction on this issue:
The Natural Resource Protection Cooperative Agreement, the
Public Land Protection and Conservation Act, and also your
sponsorship of the very comprehensive National Aquatic Invasive
Species Act. All of those measures--and I'm going to just
briefly mention them because we support them so much. I just
want you to know that we appreciate them but don't mean to
diminish their importance by not going into depth. You've got
our full support on those, and we can't thank you enough for
your sponsorship of those measures.
I would like to turn to some things that the previous panel
was talking about and add a little bit to that, and that's the
area of prevention. And we all know, and it's been proven, that
the best way to deal with invasive species is to prevent their
introduction in the first place. And this issue--it's not
directly within the jurisdiction, necessarily, of the
subcommittee, but it's an area of critical importance. And as
Don Reeser mentioned, as a direct result of National Park
Service leadership, the model for prevention is beginning to be
realized at Kahului Airport on Maui. That important progress
that's going on there traces back to Don Reeser's insistence on
protecting against new pest introductions that might result
from, at that time, a proposed runway extension on Maui.
The end result of Don's leadership, and much collaboration
between Federal and State agencies, are that we're now having
some more inspectors placed at Kahului International Airport,
and there's plans to construct a modern and enclosed inspection
facility at Kahului Airport. You can imagine now, when
agricultural inspection is done on Maui, when you open a
container, and how windy it is there, once you open the doors
of that container, that stuff is scattered to the wind. So
soon, hopefully, we'll have a new inspection facility. But all
of that is a direct result of national park leadership not only
recognizing the need to protect the resources of Haleakala
there, but natural landscapes and the economy of Maui County.
But even with the progress at Kahului, there are formidable
challenges to developing a truly effective prevention system.
This goes right up to and includes the U.S. Constitution and
the free market principles this Nation was founded upon. For
centuries, this country has promoted the important notions of
free trade and open borders to commence.
The Constitution's Commerce and Supremacy Clauses, together
with the specific preemption provisions of the Federal Plant
Protection Act, are interpreted to prevent States from being
more restrictive than the Federal Government in regulating the
movement of plants and plant products in interstate and foreign
commerce. So the State of Hawaii runs directly into this
Federal preemption if it wishes to strengthen its statutes
regarding plants or plant pests or implement stricter
quarantine regulations in order to protect the islands from
invasive species. The only available choice for the State of
Hawaii is a long and laborious process of securing exemptions
on a species-by-species basis from the Secretary of
Agriculture.
Now, to begin to try to address this problem, the Hawaii
Invasive Species Prevention Act, or H.R. 3468, has been
introduced in the House. The bill would establish an expedited
review process for the State of Hawaii to impose greater
restrictions on the movement of invasive species, it would
mandate a Federal quarantine to protect Hawaii from new
introductions of pests, and it would allow for the Federal
enforcement of State quarantine laws. So we're hopeful, and
I've talked to your staff a little bit about this bill, that
you'll have an opportunity to consider and potentially
introduce a Senate companion measure.
Last, I would like to make a few comments on the threat of
the brown tree snake. The subject came up on the earlier panel
as well. Current and planned expansion of military activities
on Guam is putting enormous pressure on military facilities
there, and as a result, it's putting enormous pressure on the
U.S. Department of Ag Wildlife Services personnel that have to
do all the inspections. They're really being pushed to the
brink. They're in substandard facilities there, they have
limited financial resources, and now, with all the cargo moving
in and out of Guam, things are leaving uninspected daily from
Guam for brown tree snakes. As a matter of fact, over 300,000
pounds of cargo left Guam uninspected in the last 2 weeks of
June.
The 2003 reauthorization of the Federal Sikes Act required
that the Integrated Natural Resource Management Plan for
Anderson Air Force Base include invasive species
considerations. We hope that the Armed Services Committee can
review the progress on that INRMP and consider applying that
kind of assistance to INRMPs across Defense Department
activities. It's really important, with the Defense Department
movement of cargo, that invasive species mitigation be
considered, and we're hopeful something like this can be taken
up by the Armed Services Committee and your Readiness and
Management Support Subcommittee.
With that, I'll close my remarks and thank you again for
this opportunity. I really, really appreciate your leadership
on this issue. I can't thank you enough.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Fox follows:]
Prepared Statement of Mark R. Fox, Director of External Affairs,
The Nature Conservancy, Hawai'i Program
INTRODUCTION
Senator Akaka, thank you for hosting this hearing and for the
opportunity to testify on invasive species issues and legislative
solutions to this serious threat. My name is Mark Fox, and I am the
Director of External Affairs for The Nature Conservancy of Hawai'i.
The mission of The Nature Conservancy is to preserve the plants,
animals and natural communities that represent the diversity of life on
Earth by protecting the lands and waters they need to survive. With the
support of approximately 1 million members, The Nature Conservancy has
protected more than 120 million acres and 5,000 river miles around the
world.
The Hawaii Chapter of the Conservancy has been in operation for 25
years and we currently manage a network of 12 preserves encompassing
about 32,000 acres across the main Hawaiian islands. In addition to our
core field work on our own preserves, we work with public and private
colleagues throughout the state to organize and operate partnership
entities that help protect and manage the islands' globally unique, but
extremely fragile natural resources.
Examples of these partnerships include the five Island Invasive
Species Committees that you hear a lot about today, and nine watershed
partnerships around the islands that are managing nearly 1 million
acres of Hawaii's most important forested watersheds. Another example
of such collaboration can now be enjoyed here at Hawai'i Volcanoes
National Park. With leadership from the entire Hawaii Congressional
delegation, we acquired and transferred to the Park Service the
115,000-acre Kahuku Ranch. That single transaction, valued at
$22,000,000 and completed in 2004, expanded the Park's land ownership
by one-half and is the largest single conservation land acquisition in
the history of the State.
BACKGROUND ON INVASIVE SPECIES
Our organization's experience over the last quarter century
demonstrates that the single greatest threat to the survival of
Hawaii's natural environment is the damage done by non-native, invasive
species. Indeed, more than 90% of our field work and that of our
conservation partners in Hawai'i is directed to preventing, detecting,
and controlling invasive species, both plants and animals, that alter
and ultimately devastate the islands' natural environment.
As you know, however, this is not just an environmental problem.
Under unfortunate circumstances, we are finding strong allies across a
wide variety of sectors including the visitor industry, health care,
agriculture, and real estate as we all try to figure out how to deal
with pests ranging from alien algae that blanket coral reefs, mosquito
borne diseases, fire ants and stinging caterpillars, forest-choking
weeds, ear-splitting coqui frogs, and costly crop diseases.
We have been working hard over many years to physically control
invasive species once they have arrived and become established.
However, it is only in the last 10 years that we have undertaken an
organized effort in Hawai'i to affect public policy with respect to
invasive species. Our work at the county, state and federal levels
includes efforts to enhance recognition of the ecological, economic,
health, and lifestyle threats from invasive species, to secure more
funding to address these threats, and to support improved government
policy in this area.
INTERIOR DEPARTMENT LEGISLATION
We appreciate the leadership of Senator Akaka and Senator Wyden in
sponsoring important bills that move us in the right direction of
addressing pressing invasive species policy needs. The Natural Resource
Protection Cooperative Agreement Act (S. 1288) will help with a very
practical problem that has challenged the National Park Service. This
important legislation addresses the fact that no authority now exists
to allow a park to expend resources or enter into partnerships to
control imminent invasive species threats outside park boundaries. The
provisions of S. 1288 would simply and effectively resolve this
problem, as well as provide additional authority for the Park Service
to enter into collaborative relationships that will benefit park
resources. We trust the Administration will support this legislative
version of the principles underlying the President's Executive Order on
Cooperative Conservation.
The Park Service has the expertise to provide significant national
leadership in this area. For example, using the teams that fight
wildfires as a model, the National Park Service established Exotic
Plant Management Teams (EPMT) across the country to serve as a highly-
trained, mobile strike force that now protects hundreds of National
Parks from the threat of invasive plants. Thanks to this program, the
Pacific Islands EPMT proactively manages aggressive weeds in all the
national parks in Hawai'i, protecting rare native communities from
invasion.
We also appreciate your planned reintroduction of the Public Land
Protection and Conservation Act (S. 2598, 108th Cong.). This measure
creates an excellent framework of federal granting authority to assist
states with assessment and rapid response to invasive species threats,
and to foster partnerships to control pests on and adjacent to Interior
and Forest Service lands. This bill would provide an important
additional source of revenue to leverage existing state and local
funding for invasive species, including funding for rapid response
programs to eradicate incipient invasions before they become widely
established. Together with other members of the National Environmental
Coalition on Invasive Species, the Conservancy endorses this
legislation and looks forward to working with you to gain passage of
this bill.
PREVENTION AND QUARANTINE
We can and will spend vast amounts of time and money battling pests
that become established in Hawai'i and elsewhere in the United States.
However, it is a documented fact that the most effective, especially
cost effective, way to deal with invasive species is to prevent their
introduction in the first place.
Legislation designed, in part, to prevent the further introduction
of aquatic invasive species to the United States, has already been
introduced in both the House and Senate (S. 770 and H.R. 1591/1592).
The Conservancy supports the National Aquatic Invasive Species Act
(NAISA), which is a comprehensive legislative approach to the threat of
aquatic invasive species. This bill will cover all waters of the U.S.,
including marine and coastal waters, as well as inland lakes and
streams. The provisions providing for the pre-screening of intentional
introductions and the establishment of an early warning system coupled
with rapid response capability are important new authorities that would
protect all of our nation's aquatic resources, whether Great Lake,
trout stream, bayou, or coral reef
The need for NAISA is demonstrated by existing invasions of
national parks. For example, the New Zealand mud snail was accidentally
introduced into Yellowstone National Park by recreational fishermen.
This tiny snail is now alarmingly abundant and could prove to have
major effects on some of the most pristine streams in the country.
Likewise, the hitchhiking zebra mussel has spread to Wisconsin and is
now smothering rare and endangered native mussels in the NPS
administered St. Croix National Scenic Riverway.
Another major threat to the resources of many National Parks is the
existing and potential effects of introduced forest insects and
diseases. The forests of such eastern parks as Great Smoky Mountains
National Park and Shenandoah National Park no longer represent the
primeval forest of the Appalachians. The most noticeable missing tree
is the American chestnut, which was virtually eradicated during the
early 1900s by the introduced chestnut blight. Other trees in the
Appalachians have succumbed to and are threatened by a succession of
invasions. Increasing attention is currently focused on the hemlock
woolly adelgid pest, which is killing the towering hemlocks that form
unique ecosystems of great beauty and biological importance. This year,
the U.S. Forest Service's Forest Health Management program will fund
more than $350,000 to map and develop a response to this pest in Great
Smoky and Shenandoah National Parks, the Blue Ridge Parkway, and
several smaller historic park units. The response to this alien invader
will probably rely largely on biological control and attempts to breed
resistant trees.
Great Smoky Mountains National Park might soon face an even greater
menace, the sudden oak death pathogen. This plant disease, currently
found in California where it is killing oaks and infesting other trees
and plants in Redwoods National Park and Point Reyes National Seashore,
can easily be spread by the movement of nursery stock. If the USDA's
Animal and Plant Health Protection Service (APHIS) fails to prevent
such transmission, sudden oak death could infect a high proportion of
the oak trees in Great Smoky Mountains and other parks, as well as the
rhododendron shrubs that contribute so much to spring floral displays.
In addition, white pine blister rust is killing ninety percent or
more of high-elevation five-needle pines in Glacier, Yellowstone, and
Crater Lake National parks. The disease was recently found in the
mountains above Great Sand Dunes National Park. As the disease
continues to spread in the Rockies, it will threaten pines in Rocky
Mountain and Great Basin National parks.
As noted above, much of the National Park Service' current effort
to combat introduced forest insects and pathogens is funded through the
USDA Forest Service Forest Health Management Program. Chairman Charles
Taylor of the House Interior Appropriations Subcommittee has provided
key Congressional leadership to increase funding for this program.
However, the agency responsible for preventing introductions of forest
pests and eradicating those that evade border controls is USDA APHIS.
Unfortunately, APHIS has not received adequate funding to carry out
effective eradication programs targeting even the pests which pose the
greatest risk, such as the emerald ash borer and Asian longhorned
beetle. Congress and the governors of affected states have urged the
Administration to provide emergency funds from the Commodity Credit
Corporation, but the Administration has so far rejected such requests.
Turning more directly to the issue of prevention and the threat of
new pest introductions in Hawai'i, I would like to offer some specific
comments on inspection and quarantine activities at ports of entry.
While this may not be directly within the jurisdiction of this
subcommittee, it is an area of critical importance to any entity trying
to manage invasive species threats.
As a direct result of National Park Service leadership, a model for
prevention is being realized on the island of Maui where we are all
benefiting from improved understanding of pest risks and enhanced
quarantine and inspection capacity at Kahului International Airport.
These enhancements include additional inspectors and a modern and
secure inspection facility that will soon be constructed at the
airport.
This process, which began with a proposed runway extension, was not
easy for anyone involved particularly on an island that relies heavily
on visitor and cargo arrivals to support its economy. However, the
model now being established at Kahului airport is the product of hard
work and understanding by a number of individuals and agencies like the
National Park Service, the Federal Aviation Administration, the U.S.
Fish & Wildlife Service, the Hawaii Department of Transportation
Airports Division, the Hawaii Department of Agriculture, and others.
The important progress at Kahului airport traces back to Haleakala
National Park leadership, particularly Superintendent Don Reeser who is
here today, that insisted on the importance of protecting against new
pest introductions. This position by the Park Service was primarily for
the protection of the globally unique resources at Haleakala National
Park, but it also was based in the much broader appreciation of the
role of natural landscapes on Maui and across the island chain. After
all, Hawaii's natural environment is what drives our visitor economy,
provides the year-round climate for our diversified agriculture
industry, delivers the most basic necessities like clean fresh water
from healthy forested watersheds, and allows us the lifestyle that all
residents enjoy.
It is also worth noting that the Park Service in Hawai'i and
Channels Island National Park has been a leader in protecting globally
significant resources from feral animals, including pigs, goats and
sheep.
Federal Preemption
Even with this spirit of collaboration and example of success at
Kahului airport, there are formidable challenges to developing a truly
effective prevention system--right up to and including the United State
Constitution and the free market principles this nation is founded
upon. For centuries this country has promoted the important notions of
free trade and open boarders to commerce.
The Constitution's Commerce Clause (Art I., Sec. 8, Clause 3) and
Supremacy Clause (Art VI, Clause 2) set that stage by giving Congress
the authority to regulate commerce with other nations and between the
states, and confirming that federal law is the supreme law of the land.
In the area of pest prevention, the federal Plant Protection Act takes
it a step further by specifically preempting states from being more
restrictive than the federal government in regulating the movement of
plants and plant products. (7 U.S.C. Sec. 7756) The federal government
is not so preemptive with respect to regulating the movement of
animals, both terrestrial and aquatic.
The differences in Hawai'i state law regarding the introduction of
plants and non-domestic animals (Hawai'i Revised Statutes
Sec. Sec. 150A-6.1 and -6.2) directly reflect the preference for
movement of plants through federal preemption of state regulatory
regimes. Basically, Hawaii uses a black list (noxious weed list)
approach to plants, and a white list approach to animals. What this
means is that virtually all plants are allowed to be introduced to
Hawai'i unless on a very short noxious weed list (approximately 80
identified plants). Conversely, no non-domestic animals are allowed
entry into the state unless on one of two short approved lists.
The State of Hawai'i runs directly into federal preemption if it
wishes to strengthen its statutes regarding plants or implement
stricter state quarantine regulations. The only available choice is a
long and laborious process of securing approval for heightened
restrictions on a species-by-species basis from the Secretary of
Agriculture. (7 U.S.C. Sec. 7756(b)(2)(B))
With this problem in mind and recognizing Hawaii's unique risk from
invasive species, a bill has been introduced in the House of
Representatives that would provide Hawai'i with additional federal
support on incoming quarantine inspections and establish an expedited
process for the State to implement regulations to protect itself from
pest threats. In particular, H. R. 3468, the Hawaii Invasive Species
Prevention Act, would:
Mandate federal quarantine protection for the State of
Hawai'i to prevent the introduction of invasive species,
including a system of post-arrival protocols for all passengers
and cargo;
Allow for federal enforcement of State quarantine laws;
Establish an expedited review process for the State of
Hawai'i to impose restrictions on the movement of invasive
species or diseases that are in addition to federal
restrictions; and
Allow the State of Hawai'i to impose limited emergency
restrictions upon the introduction or movement of a pest or
disease.
We hope you will review this bill and consider introducing a
companion measure in the Senate.
Brown Tree Snakes and the Department of Defense
The build up of U.S. military activities in the global war on
terrorism has resulted in unprecedented growth and movement of military
personnel and cargo at many installations in the United States and
abroad. Current and planned expansion of military facilities on Guam
are putting enormous pressure on military facilities there and, as a
result, on U.S. Department of Agriculture Wildlife Services personnel
tasked with inspecting the vast amounts of cargo leaving Guam.
Available funding from the Departments of Defense, Interior and
Agriculture for Wildlife Service's inspection operations has been level
for about a decade and has, therefore, not kept pace with the
military's massive operational expansion on Guam and elsewhere in the
Pacific. Additionally, Wildlife Services personnel, equipment and
canines are being housed in substandard facilities, if not crowded off
Anderson Air Force Base altogether, and cargo is regularly leaving Guam
without any inspection.
In the last two weeks of June alone:
7 military aircraft left Guam uninspected by Wildlife
Services personnel.
These aircraft contained 131 military household goods
packouts.
These packouts included 312,780 lbs. of cargo.
This cargo was bound for locations throughout the Pacific,
the U.S. mainland, and Europe.
Final destinations included temperate locations such as
Hawaii, American Samoa, Okinawa, Puerto Rico, California,
Texas, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Arkansas, South Carolina, and
Louisiana where brown tree snakes could survive year-round and
pose significant ecological, economic and human health threats.
(Source: USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services, Guam)
The 2003 reauthorization of the federal Sikes Act (16 U.S.C.
Sec. Sec. 670a-670f) included a pilot program requiring that the
Integrated Natural Resource Management Plan (INRMP) for Anderson Air
Force Base on Guam contain specific elements on invasive species. We
recommend a review of this pilot test, including consideration that it
be applied to all Defense Department INRMPs through either further
amendment to the Sikes Act or the annual Defense Authorization Act.
We also recommend specific requirements concerning not only the
impact of invasive species to natural resources on military bases, but
also the threats posed to outside locations as the result of exports of
pests in military transport. Further, it is important that invasive
species mitigation, especially regarding the movement of pests in
military transport, become an integral component of the budgeting for
base operations and military readiness. Important language that would
have required this type of consideration was stricken from the Brown
Tree Snake Control and Eradication Act of 2004 before it passed the
Congress last year.
CONCLUSION
Thank you again for this opportunity to offer The Nature
Conservancy's comments on the critical issues related to invasive
species policy. The global economy and our ability to quickly and
efficiently move people and goods around the globe benefit all of us.
However, these same modern advancements are exponentially elevating the
potentially catastrophic threats of invasive pests and diseases. We
greatly appreciate your recognition of this serious issue and your
willingness to take a leadership role in enhancing federal policies and
resources to address this problem.
Senator Akaka. Thank you very much. I'm glad you mentioned
others. We are certainly in need of partnerships in doing this,
and the Armed Services might be able to be primed to help in
this respect. Thank you for mentioning that.
But to begin with, let me give high compliments to Governor
Lingle and our chairperson, Mr. Peter Young, and to Mr. Paul
Conry, the head of the Department of Forestry and Wildlife,
when it comes to invasive species.
The State of Hawaii, along with the county Invasive Species
Committees, are head and shoulders above most other States in
the acknowledgement of and planning for the arrival of invasive
species. I am proud of our State's efforts, and I'm working
with them to increase the Federal side of the equation by
getting more funding to States and local groups to fight
invasives. So I'm glad to have you all here with us and to have
the testimony of Dr. Mindy Wilkinson.
STATEMENT OF DR. MINDY WILKINSON, INVASIVE SPECIES COORDINATOR,
HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES, DIVISION OF
FORESTRY AND WILDLIFE
Dr. Wilkinson. Thank you, Senator. I'm very happy to be
here. I again appreciate your support very much, and aloha
kakou to the staff that are here today. We appreciate your
traveling so far.
I have been asked to discuss legislation and legislative
solutions to invasive species, but as you point out, to discuss
how Hawaii can be a model for additional legislation. I'm going
to do this by describing the partnerships, collaborations, and
people who have put lifetimes of hard work into preserving what
we see around us today. These partnerships and innovations in
management developed here in Hawaii I think really do serve as
good models for national programs.
One of the key things that is different about Hawaii is
that we have a clear border, and because of this, we can truly
show what can be accomplished with a comprehensive effort to
control invasive species. And we recognize that, for many
invasive species, concerns waiting to start managing them until
they are within a management unit like a national park or have
crossed a regional boundary is not sufficient, just as, right
now, spread of America faya is proving extremely difficult to
check in the park.
The most effective option for avoiding the further
degradation of ecosystems by invasive species is prevention
followed by trying to find them early, early detection and then
rapid response, having the capacity to respond quickly, no
matter whose land the invasive species is found on. It's very
important not to risk losing another acre, another native
plant, another bird to brown tree snakes, red imported fire
ants, or the next pest that's lurking around the corner.
Protecting Hawaii from invasive species by working together to
improve prevention and quarantine networks and preventing the
establishment of invasive species are both key, and we really
appreciate your support of partnerships that have tried to
accomplish that.
As you point out, the State of Hawaii is committed to
invasive species management through the stewardship of our own
lands, which includes the 102-year-old forest reserve system
and through our partnerships, including the Invasive Species
Committees, as you've mentioned, that manage newly established
species--this is similar in concept to the Exotic Plant
Management Teams except that our goal is statewide eradication
of our target species--and to the watershed partnerships that
allow neighboring landowners to collaborate to manage
landscapes. The Olaa-Kilauea Partnership was mentioned earlier.
In 2003, the State legislature created the Hawaii Invasive
Species Council to provide cabinet-level leadership for this
issue on the State of Hawaii, and subsequently the Governor
assigned her key cabinet members to be a part of that council
and dedicated $4 million in new funding to control invasive
species and support partnership efforts throughout the State.
This program has been in existence for 1 year now, and I'm
happy to report that with this new funding and in cooperation
with the counties and our Federal partners, we have carried out
research at ports to identify the goods in vessels that pose
the greatest risk of introducing new invasive species to the
State of Hawaii. We've expanded our operations to control
invasive species that threaten the environment, such as coqui
frogs and Miconia. We've provided over $600,000 in grants for
improved research and technology to control and prevent the
introduction of invasive species, and we've created an
integrated outreach network that links together groups such as
public health, agriculture, and the environment that all have
something in common. And that's trying to slow the impact--or
slow the introduction of invasive species and reduce the impact
of those that have been established.
The National Parks are what brought us here today, so I
just want to say that they have contributed greatly to
conservation in Hawaii and made strides--great strides--in the
two aspects of invasive species management that provide the
most significant long-term biological impact, both prevention
and early response and control.
We think that the National Resource Protection Cooperative
Agreement, S. 1288, will build on the contributions that the
national parks have made and allow cooperations that will
continue to benefit both the resources of the national park and
the State of Hawaii. Those of us that live and work in Hawaii
appreciate the results of the conservation of the native
ecosystems of our national parks. What we assume to be
Conservation Management 101 was developed in many cases locally
by managers such as current Hawaii Volcanoes National Park
research manager Tim Tunison who's here today, who caused us to
focus, instead of on the core of a population of weeds, on the
outlying populations and develop a strategy that's made us more
effective statewide, and also to Don Reeser, whose
contributions have been noted about Kahului Airport. We're also
concerned about brown tree snakes and all of the other species
that could come in.
And between your initiative to fund conservation
partnerships as well as supporting bills that strengthen our
ability to keep out species that pose a great risk to Hawaii,
we feel that we can continue to improve the outlook for
Hawaii's ecosystems and environment. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Wilkinson follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dr. Mindy Wilkinson, Invasive Species
Coordinator, Hawai'i Department of Land and Natural Resources, Division
of Forestry and Wildlife
INTRODUCTION
Aloha Senator Akaka. Thank you for traveling here to Hawai'i
Volcanoes National Park to experience our unique and diverse Hawaiian
ecosystems. My name is Mindy Wilkinson and I am the Invasive Species
Coordinator for the Hawai'i Department of Land and Natural Resources.
Finding solutions to the impacts caused by invasive species is one of
the key priorities of our Department.
While I've been asked to discuss legislation and legislative
solutions with you today I will only be able to do this by describing
the partnerships, collaborations and lifetimes of hard work that have
gone into preserving what you see around you. The partnerships and
innovations in management developed in Hawai'i serve as models for
developing better legislative solutions to the problems caused by
invasive species.
Cooperating to control invasive species across landscapes has
improved management of native ecosystems by including entire watersheds
and allowing ecosystems to function instead of relying on constant
mitigative measures to make up for the loss of key pieces of habitat.
For many invasive species concerns, waiting to initiate management
until they are on your property or have crossed a regional boundary is
not sufficient. The most effective option for avoiding degradation of
ecosystems by invasive species is prevention followed by early
detection and rapid response to these species, no matter who's land the
species is found on. It is important to not risk loosing another acre,
another host plant or native bird to Brown Treesnakes, Red Imported
Fire Ants or the next threat around the corner. Protecting Hawai'i from
invasive species by working together to improve our prevention and
quarantine network and preventing the establishment of invasive species
and eradicate incipient populations of invasive species is key to
preserving our ecosystems.
The State of Hawai'i is committed to invasive species management
through the stewardship of our own lands which includes the 102 year
old forest reserve system and through partnerships including the
Invasive Species Committees that manage newly established invasive
species and Watershed Partnerships that allow neighboring landowners to
collaborate to manage landscapes. In 2003 the Hawai'i State Legislature
created the Hawai'i Invasive Species Council to provide Cabinet level
leadership and the Governor subsequently asked key Cabinet members to
participate as well as committing $4,000,000 in new state funding to
improve programs devoted to invasive species prevention, early
detection and rapid response, research and the application of new
technology and public outreach.
With the cooperation of the Counties, Federal partners and private
groups we have:
carried out research at our ports to identify the goods and
vessels that pose the greatest risk of introducing invasive
species,
expanded our operations to control invasive species that
threaten the environment and economy as well as creating an
innovative aquatic species response team that will help protect
our vital reefs,
provided 17 research and technology grants totaling $600,000
to improve our ability to respond to invasive species, and
created an integrated invasive species outreach program to
link together groups representing public health, agriculture,
environment and tourism.
Our goal is to provide the commitment and matching funds to
encourage increased participation by our partners.
NATIONAL PARKS
The National Parks Service has contributed greatly to conservation
in Hawai'i and has made great strides in the two aspects of invasive
species management that provide the most significant long term
biological impact, prevention and early detection and rapid response.
The National Resources Protection Cooperative Agreement Act S. 1288
will build on the contributions that the National Parks have made and
allow cooperation and partnerships that will continue to benefit both
the resources of the National Park as well as the State of Hawaii.
Those of us that live and work in Hawai'i and appreciate the
results of the conservation of native ecosystems owe so much to our
local National Parks. So much of what is locally assumed to be
Conservation Management 101 was developed locally by National Parks
resource managers. While the introduction of invasive weeds that have
altered and replaced native forests spread out of control, the Hawai'i
Volcanoes National Park Resource Manager Tim Tunison recognized that by
setting aside Special Ecological Areas and managing them intensively,
tracks of valuable native ecosystems could be preserved. By focusing on
the outlying populations of invasive plants instead of the heavily
infested cores of the populations the rate of spread could be slowed,
stopped and potentially a strategy for the island wide eradication of
invasive species was developed and is applied across the state by the
Invasive Species Committees.
Even the threat posed by direct flights from the mainland to the
island of Maui was not given adequate consideration until Haleakala
National Park Superintendent Don Reeser stood up to the expansion at
Kahului Airport that without mitigation would have increased the rate
of introduction of invasive species. His support prompted years of
study and effort that among other successes have produced a Pest Risk
Assessment that details the highest risk pathways for the introduction
of invasive species as well and the development of a new quarantine
facility at the airport that will allow the inspection of incoming
goods and thereby reduce the risk to Maui. Even the mechanism that
allows agencies to pool resources to hire the Invasive Species
Committee and Watershed Partnership field crews that carry out invasive
species management is based on the original Parks Cooperative Studies
Unit that evolved to include all of Hawai'i.
The Natural Resource Protection Cooperative Agreement Act S. 1288
is a positive extension of the partnerships that Hawai'i's National
Parks have fostered. By providing protected areas that act as
laboratories for the most intensive cutting edge management the NPS
fosters the development of a valuable core of dedicated individuals.
The insights from the management of the parks themselves can lead to
conservation measures that improve the conservations of lands across
boundaries to include entire landscapes. From working together to stop
the spread of the invasive tree Miconia into native rainforests to
partnerships with neighboring landowners to create tracts of
cooperatively protected forests the National Parks in Hawai'i are one
of our most valuable partners.
PROTECTING HAWAI'I FROM INVASIVE SPECIES
Hawai'i is the most isolated island group in the world but the
regulations that we rely on to maintain our unique environment are
written with a continent in mind. Hawaii needs special consideration
and special protective measures. Many of the species that have spread
across the mainland United States have not arrived here and will not
get here without the aid of a direct flight or shipment. Even native
species from the mainland US and those species no longer considered a
national interdiction priority are of utmost importance for Hawai'i to
be able to intercept on arrival. Recent studies funded by the Hawai'i
Invasive Species Council and carried out by the Hawai'i Department of
Agriculture expanded on the initial risk assessments carried out at the
Kahului Airport on Maui and have shown that even pre-inspected goods
contain insects and pathogens not known to occur in Hawai'i.
While the inspections of goods leaving Hawai'i are for the
protection of California, Hawai'i has no comparable federal inspection
of incoming domestic goods and is left vulnerable to the import of
materials both domestic and foreign containing invasive species that
threaten our health, economy and environment. We rely completely on our
environment and its protection must become our foremost concern. H.R.
3468 will reduce the risk to Hawai'i from uninspected goods. We support
the intent of H.R. 3468 and ask that you consider introducing a
companion measure in the Senate.
BROWN TREESNAKE COORDINATION AND COOPERATION
The state of Hawai'i is extremely fortunate in having so many
treasured endemic flora and fauna remaining in the islands. Invasive
species threaten that heritage. The impact that even one invasive
species can have on Pacific Island flora and fauna has been made clear
by the cases of Tahiti where Miconia, the invasive tree from Central
and South America has replaced over 2/3 of the forests, and on Guam
where the Brown Treesnake introduced by United States military traffic
has caused the extinction of 9 of the 13 remaining native bird species.
Miconia has already arrived and is a high priority for control on all
Hawaiian island where it occurs. It is equally a high priority to
prevent the introduction and establishment of the Brown Treesnake.
In 2003, legislation was introduced to the Hawai'i State
Legislature that would have required all cargo arriving from Guam must
be inspected by USDA Wildlife Services. One of the barriers to passing
this legislation at the time was uncertainty as to whether or not a
certification method could be developed for cargo originating on Guam.
Through a cooperative agreement funded by the Hawaii Invasive Species
Council a Wildlife Services a pilot program was developed to test both
the cost of the inspection process and the seal or verification of the
cargo. Based on preliminary results, the pilot program did work and it
now seems feasible to develop a system to increase the standards
applied to civilian cargo departing from Guam. In our view efforts to
prevent the establishment of Brown Treesnakes in Hawai'i will be less
effective unless all high risk cargo departing from Guam is subjected
to the same level of inspection effort. All entities moving materials
from Guam to Hawai'i must be willing to participate in an interdiction
effort that prevents the spread of the Brown Treesnake.
In the Pacific we are fortunate to have a tradition of working
together. The Brown Tree Snake Control and Eradication Act of 2004 was
a welcome recognition of the personal commitment of many dedicated
individuals and cooperation between agencies. The greatest success of
all from Hawai'i's perspective has been that no Brown Treesnakes have
been captured on Hawaiian soil since the initiation of the Wildlife
Services inspections of military and civilian aircraft and cargo on
Guam.
We have concerns that Wildlife Services is not receiving adequate
funding to continue these services and that increased military activity
in and through Guam will increase the risk of a future Brown Treesnake
introduction. We hope that the various military services will increase
their support and participation in the Brown Treesnake interdiction
efforts as their operations expand.
The statement of the sense of Congress in the Brown Tree Snake
Control and Eradication Act of 2004 is that there should be better
coordination on control, interdiction, research, and eradication of
Brown Treesnakes. We believe it is vital that the preventative steps
needed to protect the Pacific islands from Brown Treesnakes become part
of the operation directive given to all federal agencies, including the
Department of Defense, that carry out operations that may spread
invasive species that would cause long-lasting harm. The original
congressional statement of concern over Brown Treesnakes provides this
directive. We hope it will be included in future appropriations that
support operations on Guam:
``No Federal agency may authorize, fund, or carry out any action
that would likely cause or promote the introduction or spread of the
brown tree snake in the United States or the Freely Associated States.
All Federal agencies must consider brown tree snake interdiction issues
when planning any activity that may cause the accidental introduction
of any brown tree snake to uninfested areas in the United States and
the Freely Associated States.
Each Federal agency shall provide cooperative support, such as
office space, laboratory space, laboratory animal holding facilities,
kennel facilities, short-and long-term housing for staff, access to
infested snake lands, commissary privileges, power, water, and
communication lines to Federal agencies and staff of Federal agencies
conducting brown tree snake control, interdiction, research, and
eradication.
Each Federal agency that manages any lands where the brown tree
snake occurs shall fund the control and eradication of this species.''
CONCLUSION
Thank you for the chance to offer a management agency's perspective
on invasive species issues in Hawai'i. We believe that continued
support for interagency partnerships that ensure there are no gaps
between invasive species prevention, early detection and rapid response
efforts, as well as supporting research and outreach programs, is key
to our continued success.
Senator Akaka. Thank you very much, Mindy. I next call on
Neil Reimer.
I want to thank the State Department of Agriculture and the
U.S. Department of Agriculture for their work on intervening
with pests and preventing them from reaching the islands. I
thank you for all you do to keep us free from brown tree snakes
and other species. You have one of the most difficult jobs
there can possibly be with respect to invasive species. I look
forward to hearing the challenges and solutions as you see
them.
So will you begin, Dr. Reimer?
STATEMENT OF NEIL REIMER, Ph.D., PLANT QUARANTINE BRANCH CHIEF,
HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Dr. Reimer. Thank you, Senator, for those kind words, and
thank you for allowing me to testify at this hearing. You have
my written testimony. What I will do is take up excerpts from
that so that the audience can also get a sense of what was in
the written testimony.
Again, my name is Neil Reimer, and I'm branch chief of the
Plant Quarantine Branch within the Hawaii Department of
Agriculture.
The Plant Quarantine Branch within HDOA is mandated by
State law to protect Hawaii's agricultural and horticultural
industries, as well as the State's natural environment and
human health, through the interdiction and exclusion of
invasive alien species. Invasive species regulated by the
branch include non-domestic animals, plants, and microorganisms
that may be harmful and/or pathogenic to humans, animals,
plants, and the environment. And you've heard some examples of
that in some of the earlier testimonies.
Recently, there has been heightened awareness of the
problems associated with the entry of invasive alien species
into Hawaii and increased interest and concern in protecting
Hawaii's environment and endangered species. The demand that
HDOA continue to exclude invasive alien species from Hawaii is
growing as evidenced by the strong concerns engendered by the
Kahului, Maui Airport Runway Extension Project, which you heard
a little bit about, and the creation of the Hawaii Invasive
Species Council.
The Kahului Airport Runway Extension Project consisted of
plans for major improvements for the airport on Maui to enhance
airport services and operational safety. These improvements
included lengthening and strengthening of an existing runway,
constructing a new, state-of-the-art cargo handling facility,
expanding bulk fuel storage capacity and distribution lines,
and improving roadways and support facilities.
What came was a joint Federal-State Environmental Impact
Statement that identified alien species introduction as an
environmental risk associated with the direct overseas flights
landing on Maui at Kahului Airport. Because of concerns
regarding the adequacy of the EIS, the U.S. Department of the
Interior asked the U.S. Council on Environmental Quality to
undertake a review of the environmental assessment and to make
recommendations. One result of this MOU was the implementation
of a risk assessment of invasive species introductions at
Kahului Airport.
The program that I manage was mandated to conduct this risk
assessment. The Kahului risk assessment involved intensive
assessments of checked and carry-on baggage by inspectors and
detector dog teams, inspection of aircraft cabins and cargo
holds of mainland flights and 100 percent inspections of
agricultural products shipped by air cargo. The intent was to
get a very good scientific handle on exactly what is getting
into the State at this one port of entry and what remedies we
can come up with to address the problems that we find.
A total of 1,400 interceptions were made in the 130-day
blitz that we called it, for an average of ten interceptions of
invasive species per day. This compares to an average of 780
interceptions per year, which is about two interceptions we
have per day on a statewide basis. Now, it's quite a
discrepancy. And a lot of that has to do with the degree of
searching that we were able to do with this. It actually
involved a lot of work by the inspectors on an overtime basis
and other ways of handling that.
To address the problems found in this risk assessment,
inspector staffing at the airport was increased from five,
which was the normal at that time, to 14 inspectors. Positions
were changed from temporary to permanent, and a cargo
inspection facility is planned to be built now, among other
things.
Once an alien species bypasses prevention efforts at the
ports and becomes established in the State, it's virtually
impossible to eradicate. The result is spread throughout the
State, including into the national parks. It has been well-
demonstrated that it's less costly to prevent the entry of
invasive species than it is to attempt to control them once
established. Therefore, there should be a strong focus on
prevention efforts to ensure that the problem never arises in
the first place.
In these prevention efforts in Hawaii, a number of issues
have surfaced which could be addressed by Federal legislation.
I will include three in this testimony, which are preemption,
the brown tree snakes, and border inspections, and I'll very
briefly summarize those, since I only have thirty seconds.
Preemption. In the past, Hawaii has asked for exemption
from the preemption clause in the Plant Protection Act. The
preemption clause establishes that no State may regulate in
foreign commerce any article, plant, biocontrol organism, plant
pest, or noxious weed to control, eradicate, or prevent the
introduction of the pest into the State. It also established
that the State may not regulate these pests in interstate
commerce unless the State's regulations are equal to or less
restrictive than the Federal regulations. The clause does not
allow or--I'm sorry--the clause does allow for the States to
petition the Secretary of Agriculture to add additional
restrictions on a case-by-case basis, which is a timely
process. And Mr. Fox addressed some of the solutions that are
being confronted now with Representative Case.
A request to exempt Hawaii from the importation of ivy
gourd fruits was denied because of a USDA finding that it did
not represent a pest risk to the United States. This was in
spite of Hawaii's testimony that ivy is one of the State's more
serious noxious weeds. The State is still working with
governing the importation of orchids grown in media from
Taiwan. Orchids are normally held in quarantine in Hawaii
because of the many various snails, slugs, and beetles, biting
flies, and viruses that we have found on these orchids even
when they were brought in to quarantine bare-rooted. The State
of Hawaii and the Hawaii Orchid Growers Association requested
USDA to be more restrictive on the requirements for orchid
imports into Hawaii. In fact, there's still a pending case
between Hawaii Orchid Growers Association and the USDA on this.
The importation of orchids in media without any inspection or
quarantine will exacerbate an already serious problem that
affects one of Hawaii's major ornamentals. And, again, some of
these pests have the potential--may not be host-specific to
orchids, such as snails and slugs, could become problems in
other areas as well.
Brown tree snakes. Hawaii is concerned with the impact
increased military activities in Guam will have on the State of
Hawaii. The impact to Hawaii of the proposed expansion and
cumulative effects of current and future expansions of the Air
Force and Navy on Guam need to be addressed. Hawaii would like
to see 100 percent inspection of military vehicles and
household goods as well as 100 percent coverage by an
interdiction program at Guam seaports and airports specifically
looking for brown tree snake.
Border inspections. Following September 11, the inspections
of agricultural commodities from foreign ports for invasive
species has shifted from USDA Plant Protection Quarantine to
the Department of Homeland Security CBP, Customs and Border
Protection. Federal agricultural inspectors have been
reassigned from PPQ to CBP with assurances that there would not
be any decrease for invasive species.
The reality appears to be that the focus within CBP has
been shifted from invasive species detection to the detection
of potential acts of terrorism, which, of course, is of grave
concern as well; however, a mechanism needs to be found to
ensure that the inspection for invasive species from foreign
sources remains a high priority within the Federal Government.
Again, I thank you for the opportunity to testify and look
forward to any questions you may pose. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Reimer follows:]
Prepared Statement of Neil J. Reimer, Ph.D., Plant Quarantine Branch
Chief, Hawaii Department of Agriculture
Senator Akaka and Senator Wyden, thank you for conducting this
hearing and for granting me the opportunity to testify on existing
legislation and legislative solutions as it relates to invasive
species. My name is Neil Reimer. I am the Branch Chief for the Plant
Quarantine Branch within the Hawaii Department of Agriculture (HDOA).
The Hawaii Department of Agriculture's mission is to ensure that
agriculture is a respected and significant driver of the State's
economy. The Plant Quarantine Branch within the Hawaii Department of
Agriculture is mandated by state law to protect Hawaii's agricultural
and horticultural industries, as well as the State's natural
environment and human health through the interdiction and exclusion of
invasive alien species. Invasive species regulated by the branch
include non-domestic animals, plants, and microorganisms that may be
harmful and/or pathogenic to humans, animals, plants, and the
environment.
Our counterparts within the federal government include Customs and
Border Protection (CBP) within the Department of Homeland Security, the
United States Department of Agriculture Plant Protection and Quarantine
(PPQ), and the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). CBP is mandated to
enforce federal agriculture importation laws for material arriving from
foreign sources. USDA enforces domestic quarantines for the movement of
certain pests between states, and FWS enforces animal importations
through the Lacey Act.
Recently, there has been heightened awareness of the problems
associated with the entry of invasive alien species into Hawaii and
increased interest and concern in protecting Hawaii's environment and
endangered species. The demand that HDOA continue to exclude invasive
alien species from Hawaii is growing as evidenced by the strong
concerns engendered by the Kahului, Maui airport runway extension
project and the creation of the Hawaii Invasive Species Council under
the governors office, to name a few.
The Kahului Airport runway extension project consisted of plans for
major improvements for the airport on Maui to enhance airport services
and operational safety. These improvements included lengthening and
strengthening of an existing runway, constructing a new, state-of-art,
cargo handling facility, expanding bulk fuel storage capacity and
distribution lines, and improving airport roadways and support
facilities.
A joint Federal-State Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
identified alien species introduction as an environmental risk
associated with direct overseas flights landing on Maui at Kahului
Airport. Because of concerns regarding the adequacy of the EIS, the
U.S. Department of Interior (USDOI) asked the U.S. Council on
Environmental Quality (CEQ) to undertake a review of the environmental
assessment and to make recommendations. CEQ convened working sessions
involving the U.S. Departments of Transportation, Interior, and
Agriculture, and the State of Hawaii Departments of Transportation,
Agriculture, and Land and Natural Resources, to address appropriate
mitigation measures. These discussions led to adoption of a Memorandum
of Understanding (MOU), dated August 24, 1998, and signed by
participating federal and state agencies, for the ``Prevention of Alien
Species Introduction through the Kahului Airport''. One result of this
MOU was implementation of a risk assessment of invasive species
introductions at Kahului Airport.
The Kahului Airport Pest Risk Assessment (KARA) involved intensive
inspections of checked and carry-on-baggage by inspectors and detector
dog teams; inspections of aircraft cabins and cargo holds of mainland
flights; and 100% inspections of agricultural products shipped by air
cargo.
A total of 1,897 commercial direct overseas flights, with 399,463
passengers and crew on board, were inspected. Agricultural commodities
in baggage or the aircraft cabin were found in 1,539 of the 1,897
flights. While passengers and the aircraft were found to be potential
pathways of entry of agricultural commodities and pests into Maui, the
risk of pest introduction through these pathways was found to be small.
Inspectors examined 4,644 agricultural items recovered from the cabins
of aircraft or the carry-on or checked baggage (4,396) of passengers.
Passengers declared 3,873 of the 4,644 agricultural products
intercepted by inspectors. The remaining 771 agricultural items (16%)
were interceptions of items that were not declared on Plant and Animal
Declaration Forms distributed on the aircraft prior to landing. Only 11
of the 771 intercepted items were found to be infested with a pest and
were confiscated.
Detector dog teams monitored 422 flights in the baggage claim area
and found 1,143 agricultural products in baggage. Apples, bananas, and
oranges were the products commonly intercepted. Only 3 restricted
agricultural commodities were found, all Florida citrus without proper
documentation for entry into Hawaii. These were confiscated and
destroyed. Passengers declared 343 of the 1,143 agricultural items
intercepted by the detector dog teams. The remaining 800 items (70%)
were interceptions that were not declared on Plant and Animal
Declaration Forms distributed on the aircraft prior to landing.
Cargo was identified as a high-risk pathway for the entry of pests
into Maui. A total of 480 different agricultural products were
identified in cargo shipments and subjected to inspection. Pests were
found on 114 different agricultural products: 51% of the products were
infested less than 10% of the time; 49% of the commodities were
infested more than 10% of the time. A total of 1,401 insect
interceptions were made on agricultural commodities. Of the 279 species
intercepted, 125 were not known to occur in Hawaii; 103 were
established in Hawaii; and 51 were of undetermined status. One hundred
fifty-six interceptions involved plant disease organisms, 47 of which
were determined to be pathogenic species.
A total of 1,401 interceptions were made in the 130-day blitz for
an average of 10.8 interceptions per day for the KARA. This compares to
an average of 782 interceptions per year (2.1 quarantine pest
interceptions per day) on a statewide basis for the years 1995 through
2001.
These numbers give information on the problems with prevention of
invasive species importations at one port of entry. In fact, this is a
limited port of entry in that only certain commodities are allowed into
the state through this port. The problem is worse at other ports.
To address the problems found in this risk assessment, inspector
staffing at the airport was increased from 5 to 14 inspectors,
positions were changed from temporary to permanent, and a cargo
inspection facility will be built, among others.
Once an alien species bypasses prevention efforts at the ports and
becomes established in the State it is virtually impossible to
eradicate. The result is spread throughout the State including into the
National Parks. What follows is environmental degradation, loss of
species diversity, extinction of species, and other continuous economic
losses for the rest of history. It has been well demonstrated that it
is less costly to prevent the entry of invasive species than it is to
attempt to control them once established. Therefore, there should be a
strong focus on prevention efforts to ensure that the problem never
arrives.
In these prevention efforts in Hawaii, a number of issues have
surfaced which could be addressed by federal legislation. I will
include three in this testimony; preemption, brown tree snake, and
border inspections.
PREEMPTION
In the past, Hawaii has asked for exemption from the preemption
clause (sec. 436) in the Plant Protection Act. The preemption clause
establishes that no state may regulate in foreign commerce any article,
plant, biocontrol organism, plant pest, or noxious weed to control,
eradicate, or prevent the introduction of the pest into the state. It
also established that the state may not regulate these pests in
interstate commerce unless the state's regulations are equal to or less
restrictive than the federal regulations. The clause does allow for the
states to petition the Secretary of Agriculture to add additional
restrictions on a case by case basis.
A request to exempt Hawaii from the importation of ivy gourd fruits
was denied because of a USDA finding that it did not represent a pest
risk to the United States. This was in spite of Hawaii's testimony that
ivy gourd is one of the State's most serious noxious weeds. This
aggressive vine has invaded the lowlands, covering up trees and
telephone poles alike. If a Federal preemption clause had been invoked
on the regulation that allowed the interstate movement of honey bees,
it would have also allowed honey bees to enter the State even though
Hawaii does not have the Varroa and tracheal mites, has a State law
that prohibits the entry of honey bees, and has the means for keeping
them out of the State through interstate cargo, baggage, and mail
inspections. If bromeliads were allowed to enter Hawaii with media
attached as proposed earlier and a preemption clause had been invoked,
it would have been an avenue for tropical biting midges to enter the
islands and become established. The State is still very much concerned
about the preemption in Federal rules governing the importation of
orchids grown in media from Taiwan, and proposals for importations of
orchids from other tropical and subtropical areas of the world. Orchids
are normally held in quarantine in Hawaii because of the many various
snails, slugs, ants, beetles, biting flies, and viruses that have been
found associated with even bare-rooted plants. The State of Hawaii and
the Hawaii Orchid Growers Association (HOGA) requested USDA to be more
restrictive on the requirements for orchid imports into Hawaii. At a
minimum, the request was to allow for inspection of the imported
orchids. The main concern was for the accidental importation of slugs
and snails as has been seen on orchid imports in the past. HOGA has
initiated a lawsuit against USDA because of this decision. The
importation of orchids in media without any inspection or quarantine
will exacerbate an already serious problem that affects one of Hawaii's
major ornamentals.
Finally, an exemption from the Federal preemption clause is
especially important for places like Hawaii when one also considers
that Federal quarantines are frequently established to protect major
crops that are grown in the continental U.S., which it should. Because
of climatic differences between the continental U.S. and the non-
contiguous states, however, Hawaii's most important crops are
considered minor. Case in point, for several decades mealybugs have
been entering the continental U.S. on foreign bananas. These bananas
are inspected and released by federal agencies in California (U.S. port
of entry) based on bananas not being a major agricultural crop in the
continental U.S. and, therefore, banana consumed as food not being
considered a high pest risk. Banana was and still is a major crop in
Hawaii, however. Whenever mealybug-infested bananas enter Hawaii from
California, they are treated by freezing, fumigated with methyl
bromide, or rejected. In 1984, a mealybug on bananas from Central
America that had entered the U.S. via California became established in
Hawaii and found its way onto some Hawaii flowers that were exported to
California. The flowers were rejected in California. The mealybug is
still being found on bananas that are imported into Hawaii from Central
America via California.
Awareness of these issues has prompted Representative Ed Case to
introduce a bill (H.R. 3468) which would provide additional inspections
and establish an expedited process for States to seek approval of the
Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior for specific prohibitions or
restrictions upon the introduction or movement of invasive species from
domestic or foreign locations to Hawaii. HDOA hopes you will review
this bill and introduce a companion into the Senate.
BROWN TREE SNAKE
Hawaii is concerned with the impact increased military activities
on Guam will have on the State of Hawaii. The impact to Hawaii of the
proposed expansion and the cumulative effects of current and future
expansions of the Air Force and Navy on Guam need to be considered.
Current military activities on Guam have increased the risk of
accidental importation to Hawaii of brown tree snake and other alien
species. Brown tree snakes have been intercepted eight times in Hawaii
in association with the movement of military aircraft, equipment,
supplies, empty containers and household goods of military personnel.
An increase in military movement will increase the risks for the
movement of these pests to Hawaii.
The brown tree snake was likely introduced to the island of Guam in
materials moved by the military during the late 1940's. The snake has
caused, and continues to cause, significant economic, ecological, and
human health impacts to Guam. The brown tree snake is responsible for
the extinction of 9 of 13 native forest bird species on Guam. The brown
tree snake causes frequent electrical power outages and is a concern
for human health and safety. Snakes currently occur at high densities
on Guam and there is a significant risk that these snakes will be
transported off Guam in military transport and cargo.
Similar impacts would be experienced in Hawaii should the snake
become established here. Experts estimate the potential economic impact
to Hawaii would be between $400 million and $1.8 billion annually.
Hawaii would like to see 100% inspection of military vehicles and
household goods, as well as 100% coverage by an interdiction program at
Guam sea ports and airports. It is important that invasive species
mitigation, especially regarding the movement of pests in military
aircraft, cargo, and personal effects, become a required component in
military budgeting for base operations. The military needs to take
responsibility for the movement of these pests. This is especially
problematic during times of war as the movement of military equipment
increases but the repercussions of not taking this into consideration
are the movement and establishment of invasive species which will cause
ecological, health, and economic losses long after the war is over and
potentially for all future generations.
BORDER INSPECTIONS
Following September 11 the inspections of agricultural commodities
from foreign ports for invasive species has shifted from USDA/PPQ to
DHS/CBP. Federal agriculture inspectors have been reassigned from PPQ
to CBP with assurances that there would not be any decrease in the
inspection of foreign agriculture commodities for invasive species. The
reality appears to be that the focus within CBP has shifted from
invasive species detection to the detection of potential acts of
terrorism. This has become a great concern among the state departments
of agriculture as an increase establishment of invasive species from
foreign sources will have a severe negative impact on the agricultural
economy. Many of these pests will also reach the National Parks. A
mechanism needs to be found to ensure that the inspection for invasive
species from foreign sources remains a high priority within the federal
government.
CONCLUSION
Thank you for the opportunity to testify before this committee.
Some of these concerns may appear to be removed from the National Park
system but all of the alien invasive species that are currently causing
serious problems in the parks came into the State from outside sources,
many unintentionally. We appreciate you taking the time to listen to
testimony on these serious issues.
Senator Akaka. Thank you. Thank you very much, Dr. Reimer.
I have questions here for Mark Fox. We look upon the Nature
Conservancy as having a broad view of Hawaii and conservation
efforts throughout the State, and I would like to ask this
question of you. In combating invasive species in Hawaii, where
do you see the greatest opportunity for success?
Mr. Fox. Well, we've all been commenting on the issue of
prevention, and while we may lose battles and even wars if we
don't deal with the pests that we have here now, like Miconia
and now things like the wiliwili gallwasp, we've got to fight
this battle on two fronts: Detecting and responding to and
controlling the devastating pests we have now. But to answer
your question, I think, again, the best opportunity for the
greatest successes are figuring out systems of quarantine and
inspection and managing incoming cargo that will prevent new
introductions.
We may need to spend a few million more dollars a year in
improving Neil's program and giving him the inspectors he
needs, but that's going to pale in comparison to the tens of
millions, if not hundreds of millions, of dollars we're going
to need to spend once new pests get established. I think the
best opportunity for actual success, as opposed to just
controlling the things we have, is preventing the new
introductions.
Senator Akaka. Since we are limiting it, in a sense, to
national parks, is the strategy that you are mentioning
appropriate for national parks and public lands, or are there
other approaches that would work for them?
Mr. Fox. I think the strategy is eminently appropriate for
national parks and public lands. We're very lucky in Hawaii and
all over the country to have the National Park System and other
public lands. I include in that especially Defense Department
lands. Some of these places contain the best examples of native
ecosystems across our country because they have been under
management regimes for long periods of time and haven't been
developed, and, again, I say I include the Defense Department
in that they've got vast tracks of land that, while they're
certainly impacted by military training to a large degree, they
have been left in their natural state and undeveloped.
And so, again, preventing new introductions is supremely
important to making sure that these areas that represent some
of the best of the national ecosystems that we have left in
this country are protected.
Senator Akaka. Have there been specific Hawaii statutes
that have been enacted which have contributed to the success of
invasive species management?
Mr. Fox. Sure.
As Mindy mentioned, the Hawaii Invasive Species Council
Authorization Act, a couple of years ago, has really put us
leaps ahead of where we were just a couple of years ago, and
the follow-up funding for that. It was the catalyst of all of
that, to bring us all around, focusing collaborative efforts on
prevention of new species, controlling species that are already
here, doing scientific research on how to deal with pest
species, doing public outreach and education so more people can
understand why they shouldn't bring things back with them when
they come to Hawaii, how they should report things that they
see, and how they should prevent moving things around. So the
Hawaiian Invasive Species Council legislation has been a
wonderful piece of legislation that's progressed us forward.
Unfortunately, we have missed the boat a couple of times on
a few things that we're going to continue to try to get
introduced and passed in the Hawaii State legislature, and that
would include creating dedicated sources of State funding for
invasive species. Right now, it's annual appropriations at the
State level as well as methods to allow the State Department of
Agriculture to protect itself from things like the brown tree
snake introduction.
A bill that was worked on at the legislature a couple years
ago to try to require that anything coming from Guam had to be
certified as having been inspected on Guam before it left
failed in the State legislature, but we're gathering better
data on how that type of predeparture inspection program would
work on Guam so that it would be a smooth operating system that
would not impact commerce negatively or movement of stuff
between----
Senator Akaka. On the Federal level, looking at
Representative Case's H.R. 3468 and my bill being proposed, do
you think these bills will help, or is there something else
that's needed on a Federal level in legislation?
Mr. Fox. Those are the ones. You've got them. A combination
of those two and others that you're sponsoring, like the
Aquatic Invasive Species Act, excellent.
Senator Akaka. Comes out to be prevention and response and
control.
Mr. Fox. Yes, sir.
Senator Akaka. Well, thank you.
Dr. Wilkinson, I understand that the State has a
coordinated effort for the control of both aquatic and
terrestrial invasive species. In your opinion, which invasive
species poses the greatest threat to the ecology of Hawaii, and
what do you estimate it will cost to control the spread of
these species?
Dr. Wilkinson. Well, there are good arguments for a number
of species, and some of the best arguments would probably be
for species that aren't here yet, such as the brown tree snake,
that as far back as August 1, 1905, we had the cooperation of
the U.S. Department of Agriculture in saying that they would
ban the importation or stop allowing permits for the
importation of snakes into Hawaii, and still we're struggling
with that.
The Brown Tree Snake Control Act of 2004 also had a
provision to improve quarantine for brown tree snakes, and
still, you know, we're relying on, right now, our State effort
to look at what we can do to improve our quarantine. But as far
as species that are already here, I'm going to pick Miconia
calvescens, the tree that's impacting the forests here on the
Big Island, that's widespread on Maui, and that we actually
think we can eradicate on Oahu and Kauai islandwide.
I think it's a good example because although it is a
terrestrial species, a plant species, it negatively affects the
watershed, which not only impacts agriculture and the resources
available to the people that live here, but potentially
negatively impacts the coastal resources as well, increased
sedimentation, and the changes in the forest affect the reef.
What could be done to improve our coordinated control
efforts for this species? I think that the bill that you
proposed to allow the National Parks to form partnerships, S.
1288, is an important step. We're not just asking for the
national parks to step up and take responsibility. We're just
asking that they be allowed to participate to the extent that
they want to. We have crews controlling Miconia near the
national park on Maui, and it would really help to have that
other crew working in closer coordination with them across that
border.
The other bill that you proposed, the Public Lands Act, is
exactly the kind of support that we would like to match with
our increased State commitment in resources to fund crews,
cooperative crews, to go out and control these invasive species
wherever they occur on a species-by-species basis where we know
we can eradicate them and have a true long-term biological
impact here in Hawaii. So we really appreciate your efforts
there.
Senator Akaka. Thank you, Mindy. As you can tell, besides
asking a lot what the State is doing, I'm asking what you think
the Federal Government should be doing. And I thank you for
your response on that, too, and that of Mr. Fox.
Dr. Reimer, your testimony noted that the U.S. Department
of Agriculture has several times refused to grant Hawaii an
exemption from the Plant Protection Act to allow it to better
protect against potential invasive species or other dangerous
pests. What has been the rationale of the USDA in denying
Hawaii these protective exemptions? Is Federal legislation
exempting Hawaii from that the only viable solution?
Dr. Reimer. The rationale varies, but essentially, they go
through a risk assessment, and based on the risk assessment
conducted by the USDA staff, they conclude that it's not high
risk for the importation of these into Hawaii. But what we see
is they don't always look at the same data that we do, if you
will. For example, for the orchids, they did not consider slugs
and snails is my understanding, or biting flies that have been
associated with sphagnum moss. They feel that in this case, the
mitigation measures are in place because of the way it's being
grown in Taiwan and felt that it should be safe to come in
under those conditions, with very minimal inspection. In
reality, we know that that may be true for the first year,
maximum, but that those inspections are going to decrease over
time.
The greenhouse conditions on the other side in Taiwan are
not going to be how they are now when they initiate the
program. It's going to lapse. So we have serious concerns to
base it on that. That's why we prefer, at a minimum, that we at
least be able to inspect these when they come in, even as a
back-up. And that was denied.
Senator Akaka. Let me mention another concern you have. I
know that the possible introduction of brown tree snakes into
Hawaii is of great concern of all of us. You have raised the
possibility of increased military activity in Guam as
increasing the threat of accidental introduction of the snake
here in Hawaii. Short of curtailing these increased military
activities, what additional actions can be taken to minimize
this threat?
Also, I heard about the possible snake sighting on Kauai
recently. Do you have any new information on that?
Dr. Reimer. The brown tree snake is probably one of our
major concerns. And also what is happening now on Guam with the
cooperation between the U.S. military and USDA Wildlife
Services nationally is a breakdown, and that is of great
concern to us. We feel, to be blunt, that DOD is not taking
their share in the responsibility of ensuring that the brown
tree snake does not leave in the products that they're moving
from Guam. We feel they should take much higher responsibility
to ensure that there is 100 percent inspection. The mechanism
I'm not sure, but right now the entity in place there to do
that is USDA Wildlife Services.
As far as curtailing buildup of the military, I don't think
that's an option. I wouldn't even suggest that. But I think the
fact that there is a buildup of military needs to be considered
and needs to increase the inspection level for things leaving
Guam. And not just for Hawaii; they need to consider moving to
the other islands as well which are free of brown tree snakes.
As far as the update of the snake on Kauai, there was a
sighting. There was some--it's not--well, how do I put this?
There was a sighting. A 16-year-old girl made a sighting. There
was some evidence. Different testimonies came in which were
contradictory. So it very possibly was a credible sighting;
we're not certain of that, but that's beside the point. When we
do get information like that, we always do consider it to be a
credible sighting and go in 100 percent. We have been doing the
follow-up on that. By ``we,'' I mean--I'm not speaking for the
Department of Ag, just a cooperative effort with the Department
of Agriculture, Department of the Land and Natural Resources,
USDA Wildlife Services, and BIISC, the Big Island Invasive
Species Committee. There may be others which I have missed, and
I'm sorry, but they're out there daily, setting up traps, doing
searches in the area, and have not found any evidence of a
snake at this point.
Senator Akaka. Well, thank you. Thank you for your
testimony. It will certainly be helpful to us, so thank you
very much.
Dr. Reimer. Thank you, sir.
Senator Akaka. The panel, too. Thank you very much.
I would like to call on the next panel, on partnerships:
Julie Leialoha, who is manager of the Big Island Invasive
Species Committee. Also, Teya Penniman, manager of the Maui
invasive Species Committee, and Mr. Peter Simmons, regional
operations director, Kamehameha Schools, Kailua-Kona.
Will you, please, come forward. Thank you very much.
Since you are from the Big Island, Julie, I would like to
say a special mahalo nui loa for hosting us today and for
coming to the hearing. The county committees are the ground-
zero level in fighting invasive species, and I thank all the
county committees for their dedication and hard work on the
front lines of this battle. I look forward to hearing your
testimony of partnerships and your suggestions, also, for them.
So will you please begin, Julie?
STATEMENT OF JULIE LEIALOHA, MANAGER BIG ISLAND INVASIVE
SPECIES COMMITTEE, HILO, HI
Ms. Leialoha. Thank you, Senator Akaka, and distinguished
members of the committee. I appreciate being invited here to
speak today. I wanted to focus my testimony primarily on our
partnership programs for the Big Island.
As the Big Island Invasive Species Committee manager, I'm
responsible for ensuring that our program complies with our
strategic plan, a plan that was developed with the aid of all
our participating partners, including the staff of the National
Park Service who has been instrumental in developing control
strategies of invasive species within its boundaries.
BIISC, or the Big Island Invasive Species Committee, is a
voluntary partnership of private citizens, community
organizations, businesses, landowners, and government agencies
such as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Forest
Service, the Institute of Pacific Island Forestry, National
Park Service, State Department of Land and National Resources,
University of Hawaii, Research Corporation of the University of
Hawaii, and the Pacific Cooperative Studies Unit, who are
united to address the invasive species issues on the island of
Hawaii.
Partnerships of this nature are imperative in today's
complex world of dealing with the species. Others have already
pointed out the tremendous influx of organisms we face every
day. How do we fully address the impacts of invasive species on
our national environment, cultural heritage significant to
Hawaii, as well as meet the economic goals and growth of our
islands? I must refer back to our partnerships. Though agencies
may have boundaries, our invasive species have no such
boundaries and very few environmental limitations. BIISC, along
with the other invasive species programs, was formed to fill a
void in assisting other agencies in its war on invasive
species.
We strive to avoid the creation of a new bureaucratic
structure, which is very challenging, I must add, and, instead,
focus on working with existing organizations and agencies to
achieve goals. We are one of the few agencies that deals with
invasive species on private property while also assisting
partner agencies, such as the State Department of Agriculture,
Department of Land and Natural Resources, and the National Park
Service. Our program priorities are organized around a key list
of target invasive species, a hit list of sorts. This hit list
is intended to identify plants and organisms that pose a
serious threat to Hawaii so control measures can be organized.
The main goal is for effective pest prevention before it
becomes a serious problem requiring enormous resources. We call
this early detection and rapid response. Like all of the other
invasive species committees, we prefer to measure our success
in terms of pest infestations prevented, contained, or
eradicated. And the only way we can do this is with our
partners.
Like any other program, our resources are limited. We're
happy to assist partners when we can and often request services
of our partners as well. Most of the Federal lands of Hawaii
Island are identified as high resource value lands. Lands
immediately adjacent to Federal lands, such as the Park
Service, are also considered a high priority for protection
purposes. BIISC does spend a portion of our financial resources
to ensure that invasive species stay out of high value resource
zones like Hawaii Volcanoes National Park and would like to see
Park Service employees involved in these control efforts as
well, invasive species outside as well as vice versa. All
available resources should be utilized to attack the problem as
a whole. We should not allow political boundaries to dictate
invasive species control efforts.
Obviously, for this reason, the islands' invasive species
committees were formed to fill that gap. However, we can't do
it alone. It's imperative that our Federal brethren be
authorized to work with its partners including fiscal
expenditures outside of its jurisdictional boundaries. Though
scientific partnerships help programs like BIISC create solid
control efforts on the ground, we lack the staffing resources
many of these organisms require to make a dent. Combining
efforts makes the most sense. Our goal is not only to work with
our partner agencies, but to create community cooperators to
help control targeted species within their own communities.
Community partnerships are also instrumental in invasive
species control efforts.
Our community partners have been very involved in invasive
species control efforts, particularly with focus on controlling
coqui frogs. This has been the focus point of invasive species
on the Big Island lately, which Mayor Kim can attest to. I call
it, however--in my case, I sort of call it the flavor of the
month since there are other invasive species that probably
require the same amount of attention this little frog is
currently getting. There are other threats that actually pose a
much larger problem, and they don't make as much noise, such as
the little red fire ant that can blind domestic animals, which
many of us believe may be a much larger problem than coqui, or
a new species of mosquitoes, for example, that was recently
identified on the Big Island known to be a carrier of West Nile
Virus.
The question was posed to me of what invasive species would
pose the greatest threat to the Hawaii Volcanoes National Park.
For Hawaii Island, I would have to say probably the coqui frog.
This tiny frog is now zapping a tremendous amount of BIISC
resources. Breeding populations exist on the boundaries of this
park, and the march continues, as there have been confirmed
captures of this pest within the park's boundaries. The next
species probably could be the fire ant or perhaps the stinging
nettle caterpillar, or a host of invasive plant species. This
list is endless. The key is to identify the threat before it
becomes a problem, coordinate a rapid response, and utilize all
existing means to eradicate the threat immediately.
Just made it. Thank you.
Senator Akaka. Thank you.
Ms. Penniman, thank you for coming from Maui and for
representing the first of the county invasive species
committees to be established. I appreciate hearing the wisdom
from your experiences on Maui and also appreciate the
partnership with the Maui County Council and its strong support
of your efforts. So would you please provide us with your
testimony.
STATEMENT OF TEYA M. PENNIMAN, MANAGER, MAUI INVASIVE SPECIES
COMMITTEE, MAKAWAO, HI
Ms. Penniman. Thank you, Senator Akaka. I'm pleased to be
here today and presenting testimony about the importance of
partnerships in Hawaii that are working to address the impacts
of invasive species on our environment, economy, and quality of
life. Hawaii is an excellent forum to discuss invasive species,
not only because of the wealth of resources and risks here, but
also because of the innovative approaches that the Aloha State
has developed.
As is true, and as others have mentioned, throughout the 50
States and all U.S. territories, invasive species in Hawaii
know no boundaries. When a species is found on private, county,
State and/or Federal lands, jurisdictional conflicts or
uncertainty can arise, hindering efforts to quickly mount an
effective response. Additionally, for many national resource
agencies, addressing invasive species threats often falls into
the category of extra, not primary, responsibilities. At times,
despite the best intentions of government agencies to cooperate
on cross-boundary issues, significant jurisdictional and
resource gaps exist, affecting our ability to detect and engage
a coordinated response to invasive pests.
Often, the public must be engaged in efforts to detect or
control a target species. Thus, ongoing education and public
outreach efforts are essential to building and maintaining
public support, yet the public is susceptible to becoming war-
weary if too many or conflicting messages are broadcast about
each new invasive pest to reach our shores. Clearly, a means
for coordinating efforts at the local level is needed in order
to be effective at detecting and responding to invasive pest
species. One other aspect is that sometimes the logistics of
and manpower required to address particular species may
outstrip resources of a single agency.
On Maui, concerned local resource managers first began
meeting in the 1990's to consider how to stop the spread of
Miconia calvescens and other closely related plants. The group
soon recognized the need to broaden the scope of activity and
formed the Maui Invasive Species Committee. The committee
secured funding to hire staff in 1999. Today, we have nearly 30
staff members working to control targeted plants and animals in
the county of Maui. Now, on each of the other major islands,
Kauai, Oahu, Maui, Molokai, and Hawaii, an invasive species
committee is working to prevent the establishment of new
invasive species, control targeted incipient species, and
involve the public in prevention and control activities.
This work has been possible only because of an exemplary
commitment from our partner agencies. MISC partners include
private landowners, government agencies, and nonprofit
organizations, pretty much the same list of Federal agencies
that we heard Julie mention. And particularly, on Maui, the
National Park Service has been a very important partner for us.
These partners have provided significant funding, which has
allowed us to make progress on our targeted species.
However, MISC partners do much more than simply provide
funding. Local knowledge of national resources and threats has
been critical to its effectiveness. Agency representatives,
among the most knowledgeable in the State, if not the Nation,
meet bimonthly to share information, evaluate potential target
species, suggest management practices, review progress, and of
course always agree 100 percent on what we should do.
I believe that the existence of the Invasive Species
Committees, along with their demonstrated ability to translate
action plans into concrete results, was a significant factor in
helping to convince the Hawaii legislature and administration
to provide the significant funding in recent years to addresses
invasive species.
The Hawaii model has practical applications nationwide.
Representatives from Hawaii regularly participate in national
workshops, review panels and symposia, including a recent
workshop on pythons in the Everglades National Park. MISC is
currently collaborating with economists at the University of
Hawaii to apply cost/benefit analyses to management of the
invasive weed Miconia. MISC staff is working to introduce local
teachers to a Maui-based science curriculum developed under the
leadership of Haleakala National Park. Using this curriculum,
students on Maui are learning to capture and identify ant
species to help detect any incipient populations of fire ants
on Maui.
One of the driving reasons for our work is to keep invasive
pests out of the natural areas, including the spectacular
Haleakala National Park, by surveying and controlling target
species elsewhere on the island. Our staff actually rarely
visit the pristine areas because we work at the interface of
the urban areas and the rural areas, working to keep those
pests out of the park. Thus, our efforts, which are supported
by State and county funds, in addition to Federal funds,
provide significant benefits to Federal resources, in
particular park resources.
I would like to conclude by noting that partnerships are
the key to bridging jurisdictional and resource gaps.
Partnerships help tap collective knowledge of local scientists,
resource managers, and policymakers and focus their problem-
solving abilities on the most pressing invasive species issues.
Partnerships help generate and, importantly, leverage funding
to get workers on the ground when government agencies may be
unable to take direct action.
Federal agencies are and, I hope, will continue to be
valued members of the Invasive Species Committee partnerships.
Your vision, Senator Akaka, your interest, and your support are
crucial to our work. Thank you for the opportunity to testify.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Penniman follows:]
Prepared Statement of Teya M. Penniman, Manager, Maui Invasive Species
Committee, Makawao, HI
I am pleased to present testimony on the use of partnerships in
Hawaii to address the impacts of invasive species on our environment,
economy and quality of life. Hawaii is an excellent forum to discuss
invasive species, not only because of the wealth of resources at risk
here, but also because of the innovative approach the Aloha State has
developed. As the Manager of the Maui Invasive Species Committee, I
would like to highlight the importance of partnerships at all levels of
our work.
Partnerships are the key to bridging jurisdictional and resource
gaps. Partnerships help tap the collective knowledge of local
scientists, resource managers, and policy makers and focus their
problem-solving abilities on the most pressing invasive species issues.
Partnerships help generate and leverage funding to get workers on the
ground when government agencies may be unable to take direct action.
Partnerships help ensure that actions are coordinated, not duplicated,
to maximize efficiency and ensure the wise use of limited resources.
1. EFFECTIVE PARTNERSHIPS ARE NEEDED TO CONTROL INVASIVE SPECIES
As is true throughout the 50 States and all U.S. territories,
invasive species in Hawaii know no boundaries. When a species is found
on private, county, state and federal lands, jurisdictional conflicts
or uncertainty can arise, hindering efforts to quickly mount an
effective response. Additionally, for many natural resource agencies,
addressing invasive species threats often falls into the category of
extra--as opposed to primary--responsibilities. At times, despite the
best intentions of government agencies to cooperate on cross-boundary
issues, significant jurisdictional and resource gaps exist, affecting
our ability to detect and engage a coordinated response to invasive
pests.
Given the plethora of potential targets affecting Hawaii, knowing
when to marshal and deploy appropriate resources requires having a
clear set of decision criteria. Without an existing system or
infrastructure, critical response time can be lost. Often, the public
must be engaged in efforts to detect or control a target species. Thus,
ongoing education and public outreach efforts are essential to building
and maintaining public support. Yet, the public is susceptible to
becoming war-weary, if too many or conflicting messages are broadcast
about each new invasive pest to reach our shores. Clearly, a means for
coordinating efforts at the local level is needed in order to be
effective at detecting and responding to invasive pest species.
2. PARTNERSHIPS IN HAWAII
In Hawaii, on each of the major islands--Kauai, Oahu, Maui,
Molokai, and Hawaii--an Invasive Species Committee (ISC) is working to
prevent the establishment of new invasive species, control targeted
incipient species, and educate and involve the public in prevention and
control activities. On Maui, concerned local resource managers first
began meeting in the early 1990's to consider how to stop the spread of
Miconia calvescens and other closely-related plants. The group
recognized the need to broaden the scope of activity and formed the
Maui Invasive Species Committee in 1997. The Committee secured funding
to hire staff in 1999. Today, we have nearly 30 staff members working
to control targeted terrestrial plants and animals in the County of
Maui.
MISC's work has been possible only because of exemplary commitment
from our partner agencies. MISC's partners include the following
private landowners, government agencies, and nonprofit organizations:
the County of Maui; State of Hawaii, including the Department of Land &
Natural Resources and Department of Agriculture; National Park Service;
US Fish & Wildlife Service; USDA Forest Service; USDA Wildlife
Services; US Department of Defense; and several other community-based
companies and nonprofits, such as Maui Land & Pineapple Company, and
The Nature Conservancy. Financial support from these and other agencies
and organizations, such as the National Fish & Wildlife Foundation, has
allowed us to make significant progress detecting and controlling a
host of target species.
However, MISC's partners do much more than simply provide funding.
Local knowledge of natural resources and threats has been critical to
MISC's effectiveness. Agency representatives, among the most
knowledgeable in the state, if not the nation, meet bimonthly to share
information, evaluate potential target species, suggest management
practices, and review progress. Most of Maui's committee members have
been involved with MISC since its early beginnings, fourteen (14) years
ago.
The existence of the Invasive Species Committees, along with their
demonstrated ability to translate action plans into concrete results,
was a significant factor in convincing the Hawaii legislature and
administration to dedicate $8 million in state funding for invasive
species over the last two years. Because the ISCs had the
infrastructure to put more crew to work combating miconia, coqui frogs,
pampas grass, and other identified pest species, it was possible to
quickly demonstrate results from additional funding. Additionally,
because receipt of State funding was contingent upon generating
matching funds from non-State sources, federal funding was crucial to
securing these additional funds over the last two years. These funds
supported four components of a state-wide strategy: prevention,
response & control, research & technology, and public outreach.
The Hawaii model has practical applications nationwide.
Representatives from Hawaii regularly participate in national
workshops, review panels and symposia, including a recent workshop on
pythons in the Everglades National Park. MISC is collaborating with
economists at the University of Hawaii to apply cost/benefit analyses
to management of the invasive weed, miconia. MISC staff is working to
introduce local teachers to a Maui-based science curriculum developed
under the leadership of Haleakala National Park. Using this curriculum,
students on Maui are learning to capture and identify ant species to
help detect any incipient populations of fire ants.
Similar efforts to select and prioritize target species, evaluate
ongoing activities, and share knowledge and resources are occurring
across the state, on each island. The Coordinating Group on Alien Pest
Species (CGAPS) provides an important statewide forum for invasive
species issues. These island-based partnerships along with CGAPS are
helping to sustain a successful collaboration of private landowners,
government agencies and nonprofits.
3. THE ROLE OF FEDERAL PARTNERS
One of driving reasons for our work is to keep invasive pests out
of the natural areas, including the spectacular Haleakala National
Park, by surveying and controlling target species elsewhere on the
island. We frequently work in residential areas and at the interface of
natural areas and rural lands, often in habitats that have already been
largely altered. Our crews rarely see the pristine habitats they are
protecting. Thus, our efforts, which are supported by state and county
funds in addition to federal funds, provide significant benefits to
federal resources, in particular, park resources. As noted above,
invasive species have no respect for political or jurisdictional
boundaries. Two of our primary target species, pampas grass and
miconia, have been found within park boundaries. Without continued
vigilance, these species would flourish within the Park. Allowing the
National Park Service to use federal resources for work on invasive
species outside park boundaries, as contemplated in the Natural
Resources Protection Cooperative Agreement Act, S. 1288, is not only
logical from a resource management perspective, but also equitable,
from the perspective of shared responsibilities among partners.
Other cooperative funding avenues are essential to maintain the
progress we have made on pushing back the most threatening species on
Maui and elsewhere in the islands. The life history and sheer
competitiveness of most invasive pests require a long-term commitment
to the effort. Continued and enhanced cost-share federal programs, such
as the Cooperative Conservation Initiative, and the Federal Noxious
Weed Bill, will be essential to ensuring on-the-ground success. New
funding sources are needed to address species such as the coqui frog.
4. CONCLUSION
Effective partnerships are essential to detect and control the most
serious invasive plant and animals threats, but are not adequate
without other important components. In addition to response and
control, Hawaii must be able to develop and implement meaningful
prevention measures to stem the seemingly endless onslaught of new
pests that are sapping our resources and decimating our irreplaceable
natural treasures. The Hawaii Invasive Species Prevention Act,
introduced in the House, would be a positive step in this direction by
helping to reduce the risk of unwanted introductions to Hawai'i.
Continued efforts to find safe, host-specific biocontrol agents must
continue to be supported. In summary, innovative approaches are working
in Hawai'i. The need for continued partnering and additional resources
is critical. Your vision, interest and support are crucial to our work.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify.
Senator Akaka. Thank you for your testimony, Teya.
Mr. Simmons, as you know, I am a proud graduate of
Kamehameha Schools and have fond memories and current
connections with the school. I'm pleased to hear about this
partnership that the school has with the Park Service to
involve and teach students about invasive species on Kamehameha
land and park land, and I look forward to hearing your
testimony on this partnership. You may proceed.
STATEMENT OF PETER SIMMONS, REGIONAL ASSET
MANAGER, LAND ASSETS DIVISION/ENDOWMENT GROUP,
KAMEHAMEHA SCHOOLS
Mr. Simmons. I wasn't going to talk about the partnership.
No, just kidding.
I have submitted written testimony, so I don't want to go
over that in detail. I'd like to maybe discuss a little bit
about what drives us to the partnership and then how we're
trying to do our part.
As you know, this has been a tremendous period of
transition these last 5 to 7 years with Kamehameha, and one
thing that emerges very clearly is that we are a Hawaiian
institution. And that's not obvious to--it was not obvious to
everyone who works with Kamehameha Schools 7 years ago, because
many thought we were an institution that taught Hawaiian
children, and not everyone that works for Kamehameha Schools is
Hawaiian. But being a Hawaiian institution means that we need
to understand what it is to be a Hawaiian institution. And
that's led us in the area of natural resource management to
seek our roots, to understand in a primitive and primal way,
what does that mean? And some of the things that are emerging,
No. 1, from the Kumulipo, we didn't come first; we came last.
Well, what does that mean, to come last?
We understand that coming last means that we have a
responsibility to our elders, those who came before us, in the
family that we're a part of. It doesn't mean that the elders
don't sacrifice for the family, and it doesn't mean that we
don't sacrifice for the family. But consider the difference
between that view and a view that was expressed at one of the
conservation conferences a couple years ago where it was stated
that conservation is what this person did after the bills were
paid. And in the context of what we've heard today, I think the
people that spoke out are taking the Hawaiian view that it's
not after. Conservation and taking care of your family is not
what you do after the bills are paid.
So what does that mean programmatically, and what are we
trying to do with our land? I believe that it's our
responsibility to create and protect what we would call the
aina momona. How are we going to build wealth to our land? And,
again, I go back to the turmoil of the years past. In the past,
building wealth to our land meant, in many cases, displacing
Hawaiian people to create wealth in the economic sense, cash-
flow. And God knows we needed it at certain times during our
existence. But today, and in the last several years, it's meant
something else, especially on the land. It's meant how can we
create the kind of wealth that is wai-wai on these lands? What
does it mean to have the kind of Hawaiian wealth? A place
where, yes, there's an abundance of natural resources endemic,
yes, there's an abundance of cultural opportunities and
practices that are going on on those lands, and that education
is happening on those lands, and that we're looking at those
lands in an entirely different way than just how can we create
more money to educate Hawaiian children? It's far more complex.
It exposes us far more deeply to the risk of the extremes,
if you will, but I think it's the only way for us to do our
part. But we can't create aina momona in a society that's sick.
We can't do that in a community that has got ice problems and
has families that are broken apart, working several jobs, or
sick neighbors that aren't participating in a similar vision.
I thank God, really, for the National Park over these many
years. In my testimony, you'll see that I take credit for
Kamehameha Schools for starting the National Park--only 30,000
acres, but it was the first acres. And I think it came from a
good place in our trustee's heart. They felt that it was in
better hands, safer hands, hands that could do better by it.
Geri Bell is in the back there, and she's done Pu'uhonua O
Honaunau and other places that Kamehameha Schools owned. And I
know especially at that time, looking back at the
correspondence, it was painful to give something up. And that's
good; it should be painful. But it was in better hands.
We have 26 miles of boundary with the park, and it's my
goal that we create our own national park model based on what
we've learned from this national park, only it needs to be
Hawaiian because of our Hawaiian institution. So I'm going to
leave a few seconds on my testimony, but I hope I've answered
your question.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Simmons follows:]
Prepared Statement of Peter Simmons, Regional Asset Manager, Land
Assets Division/Endowment Group, Kamehameha Schools
My Name is Peter Simmons I am testifying today on behalf of
Kamehameha Schools. I am the Regional Asset Manger of our Land Assets
Division on Hawai'i Island. Our divisions' areas of responsibility on
Hawai'i Island include 292,000 acres of Agricultural and Conservation
lands on Hawaii Island. Hawaii Volcano National Park was created in the
early 1920's in the ma kai lower portion of the 'ili (smaller land
division) of Keauhou, which is in the ahupua'a (larger land division)
of Kapapala, Ka'u. These lands were owned by KS and they were given to
the Federal Government; they comprise the core of the park. These lands
include Halema'uma'u Crater and the lands surrounding it. In subsequent
years, through a series of transactions Hawai'i Volcanoes National Park
acquired from KS the remainder of our ma kai lands in Keauhou. In total
about 30,000 acres of former KS land is a part of HVNP. In addition,
the national park at Pu'u Honua o' Honaunau was acquired from KS.
We share 26 miles of boundary with the national park which includes
11 miles of HVNP's recently acquired Kahuku property. At times, in the
past our land use and the parks were similar (cattle were grazed in the
park in its early days) as they were on our lands. Sometimes our land
uses have been complementary as is the case today in that our weed and
ungulate control at Keauhou, Ka'u enhances the parks environmental as
their control of certain aggressive exotic species helps us achieve our
environmental goals more efficiently. There are places where our
management activities and strategies differ from those of the park.
Presently we believe that while there are lands on which we desire to
have no ungulates, there are other lands where we believe that the
native ecosystems can and do significantly show signs of improved
health by reducing but not eliminating ungulates. In some of these
lands we have hunting, in some of these lands we have grazing
especially to reduce fire risk through the reduction of fuels
especially pyrophytic exotic grasses.
Before the current era of large-scale, watershed, land partnership,
there was sharing sometimes more limited than others of information,
values and goals that influence how we viewed and mitigated the
presence of aggressive exotic plants and animals. In the present era of
watershed partnerships with the park and others, our alignment of
values, agreement of common goals and accelerated and open information
sharing is proving to be successful in the battle to control aggressive
alien organisms.
We are grateful to have HVNP as our neighbor, partner and friend in
conservation. Areas where we can improve our control over exotic pests
are being addressed and include:
Fire modeling and control (Exotic plants generally reoccupy
the land after fires),
General community and landowner education and outreach
(neighborhood plants, cats, and mosquitoes negatively affect
the quality of our native plants and animals), and
Endeavoring to reach deeper understanding Na mea o' Hawai'i
(Hawaiian Culture) to understand the indigenous culture's
perspective on ethno-ecological issues.
Senator Akaka. Thank you very much, Peter, for your mana'o,
and I'm so glad you raised aina momona and also wai-wai as
concepts in the life of the people.
I have questions here for either Julie or Teya, and I have
questions for both of you, but please feel free to respond to
any of the questions.
You both have identified several other Federal and State
agencies that are partners with the committee in working on
invasive species issues. Are there any lessons that can be
learned from your work with any of the other Federal or State
agencies that would be useful in improving your partnership
with the National Park Service?
Ms. Leialoha. As far as improving, I'm a person who
actually started my career at this park, under the guidance of
Tim Tunison. We've worked really closely for a very, very long
time on a number of invasive species.
With the Big Island Invasive Species Committee, our Federal
partnership and our Federal partners have been very, very
supportive and very strong with our partnership. We've been
building additional partnerships with more concern with
bringing in additional public partnership programs. There's
always room for improvement.
The only thing I can say is that, like Teya mentioned, as a
committee, we do meet on a quarterly basis, and, yes, we always
agree 100 percent on everything. That's a very constant
challenge. But our goal--and I have to say that the Big Island
Invasive Species Committee, we're a little ahead of the other
invasive species committees by actually developing a completed
strategic plan that we would like to expand at some point. And
we do have a number of signed-on partners, actually signed on
to our Memorandum of Understanding and Agreement. I can't
really say any more other than our current partnership program
has been working relatively well, and the one thing that we do
agree upon is that we agree to disagree. That's about all I can
say about partnerships.
For the National Park Service, they have been, probably,
the key instrument in developing our control strategies, which
we've sort of taken from them and plagiarized to utilize in our
control strategy programs. The Park Service has been very
instrumental, with the help of Don Reeser and the early work of
Tim Tunison and others in this room, and these are formulas
that have laid the groundwork for actual invasive species
control efforts.
Teya, do you want to expand on that?
Ms. Penniman. I think I would have to say the same thing,
just in terms of the importance of our partnership, especially
with the National Park Service.
But in addition to the funding and the strategy and the
collectively trying to figure out how we do this and, to a
certain extent, I don't like to say, but I sometimes say, we're
just making it up as we go along. I mean, we don't really have
models for this. And I think that's true for the EPMT program
as well. It's a very innovative program. But one of the most
powerful things that I experience is when we pull together with
our partners and actually work together on the ground. And one
of the places we see that is when we're working in Haleakala
National Park, trying to control pampas grass, there's nothing
like seeing 25, 30 people strung out across the mountain, all
engaged collectively in the same effort. There's just a lot of
power and strength to that.
Senator Akaka. You have highlighted, both of you, the
importance of coordinating a rapid control response effort to
combat an invasive species before it becomes a problem. From
your experiences, what are the keys to a successful rapid
control response?
Julie?
Ms. Leialoha. For our efforts, one of the key things is
really public education, because we need the public to be our
eyes and our ears in finding these organisms. As a classic
example, the gallwasp, that was, again, a find by a member of
the general public. We count on those things coming in, and
then we count on our partners, especially our scientists, that
are more in tune with identifying whether or not these will
become invasive species. And then it's our efforts in actually
developing the rapid response with our partners to go out and
actually do the control work.
Our hit list, it's not an ad hoc hit list. These are
organisms that have been clearly identified as posing a serious
threat to Hawaiian ecosystems. And one of our goals--and we
constantly have to keep up--is the constant training of our
staff in identifying these organisms, especially when it comes
to bugs. We're not trained entomologists. Many of our staff
members are not trained botanists. We consistently have to
train our staff to identify these species. And it's also
something we like to get more public participation in getting
them educated in what we're looking for so they can call it in
and help us identify these species, and then create the
coordinated effort to go out and do the actual control work.
Ms. Penniman. May I follow up?
Senator Akaka. Yes.
Ms. Penniman. A couple of things.
I just would like to add, too, that one of our biggest
obstacles as we're working is always, of course, with imperfect
information. The adage of invasive species work is ``The more
you look, the more you find.'' So when conducting a rapid
response, we're responding to what we know. So one of our
challenges is to constantly reassess, to build in feedback
loops to ensure that we're getting enough information that's
accurate, that's timely, to know should we keep doing what
we're doing? Is it still feasible? Is what we're doing doable,
or should we cut our losses and move on?
One of the models that is helping, I think, that's been
developed on Guam in particular is for addressing brown tree
snakes. And the State has been very proactive in trying to
train workers throughout the State in how to identify, how to
locate, how to find snakes, and also developing and training
people on how to initiate a rapid response so that there are
people now throughout the State who will be able to set that up
in a coordinated, consistent way, as opposed to all of us
having to make it up each time we're faced with that kind of a
situation.
Senator Akaka. Teya, after reading your testimony, I was
interested in the work that the Maui Invasive Species Committee
is doing with local teachers and schools. Is the Park Service
or any other Federal agency involved in the work with the
schools, and can you tell me more about your work to involve
local schools in this issue?
Ms. Penniman. Yes. This actually was an idea that came out
of the Haleakala National Park education staff, which was to
develop a curriculum that was Maui-based, essentially Hawaii-
based, but using Maui as the model, with the concept that so
many students in Hawaii have no concept of what there is here
in terms of natural resources, in part because what they're
taught with are textbooks that come from the mainland, so they
have no real context that they can relate to when they're
trying to learn basic scientific principles.
And so a number of educators and interpretive staff at the
National Park got together and began to develop a curriculum to
address that need, developing a number of modules that will
take the different parts, the different ecosystems, from the
shore to the summit, and teach students about that, developing
activities that they can conduct in their own back yards to
learn about these very basic principles of ecology and science.
It has been really gratifying. And then built into each of
those modules are specific invasive species components.
Unfortunately, because of lack of funding, the full nine
modules have yet to be completed, but we do hope to be able to
finish that to see that fully completed. One of the activities
was to take students and train them to look at and to try and
detect, try and learn what's here and hopefully to be some of
our early detectors.
Also gratifying is that some local teachers took that
concept and got additional funding from private foundations to
implement that at their own school. So it's been a very
positive snowballing effect.
Senator Akaka. Thank you, Teya, for that.
I mentioned that I was interested in the schools. And, of
course, Peter Simmons represents Kamehameha, and did speak
about Hawaiian values and Hawaiian life, which is really basic
in the culture and traditions of this land. And so I want to
thank him for his written statement as well.
And, Peter, I'd like to visit a little more with you about
what you folks are doing with invasive species at Kamehameha.
Mr. Simmons. When I first came to work with Kamehameha in
the field of conservation and forestry and large landscape
level agriculture, our entire budget was somewhat less than
$40,000 a year statewide. That was mainly centered around our
forestation program across the road that was being run by Ely
Nahulu. I think we need to credit Ely Nahulu with the
consistency from the early days. I believe he's in his 27th
year.
With that little bit of money and our combined effort,
every year and many times a year, students and staff go up and
learn about what it is to be Hawaiian, what it is to be in that
environment, and what it is to do restoration work. But in a
year, $40,000 for this landscape that we are responsible for
wasn't nearly enough, and we were lucky that we had partners
such as the National Park to help us and the Fish and Wildlife
Service, and a great number of partners to help us even
leverage that little bit of money at that time.
In recent years, I'm happy to say that in terms of exotic
plants and aggressive plants and animals, we are probably
spending $1.4 million directly. Right across the street again,
Kamakani Dancil, who is here right now, is responsible for
having initiated our rubus ellipticus program. I think he's
convinced us we need to spend a quarter million dollars next
year, and that's on top of $180,000 this year, and that's on
top of $10,000 or $12,000 to get it going. And Keala Kanakoli
is sitting over next to Kama, and he's helping oversee that
both for us in terms of how people have addressed the land, but
also did they bring the right cultural sense to it?
Now we know that the kind of budget that we have right now
statewide is not sufficient to do all that we need to do, and
we're not going to go out and start doing interdiction at the
ports, although we agree with that.
Inoa Thompson, our trustee, asked me how much money did I
think was needed to take care of our natural resources? And I
used a quick figure which was based on kind of a statewide
assessment for bird habitat. I said for bird habitat, to
improve it and make it ready to replace endangered birds that
are growing across the way, the figure we have is $200 million
a year. We own about 10 percent of the State, and I quickly
came up with $20 million. And I thought the other trustees were
not going to be so happy with me. They weren't so happy to hear
that.
And Inoa, quite sagely, he was thinking, and he was
pondering that, and he said, ``You'll never be successful, even
with that kind of money, unless you get the people involved,
and that's not just through education, but through the cultural
commitment and every means that we can, unless the people of
Hawaii really get it, will never be successful even with that
kind of money.''
Now we have initiated a complimentary program to our Malama
Aina program, which is called Aina Ulu: Grow the land, grow the
people. We have about 22 small programs that are in various
stages of development, from very mature programs, like the
Edith Kanakaole Foundation, where we gave them land and they're
doing just fine with their curriculum, thank you very much, to
other places, all the way to Kauai, to the Waipa Foundation,
where they needed more help. We're not trying to make these
people who we're trying to help become Kamehameha Schools.
We're trying to help them do what they do well, as long as it's
aligned with Kamehameha Schools.
So we are beginning more and more to get people back to the
land so that the people can help. Just like Ms. Penniman was
saying, seeing 25 people lined up as volunteers is a lot more
than just 25 laborers going out to kill something. They take it
to their family. The family gets it. And I think that's how
we're going to change the society. We're not proud enough of
what we have. We don't understand as a community what it is to
be proud of what we have. We're surrounded by exotic plants and
animals, and people have commented on it at other locations.
I would just like to mention one other piece, and that is
something that I'm awfully proud about. And that's one of our
contractors, an outfit named Forest Solutions. They do the
everyday work. They're the ones that we pay to take care of
some of the rubus problems and the like. For the last couple of
summers, first with Kama's help and always with Keala's help,
they have been hiring local kids to go out, as employees, but
it's not just a summer job; I think it's a summer job like no
other. They're out with Keala, they're learning what it is to
be Hawaiian and being on the land as Hawaiian people, and
they're learning to take care of the land. And their families,
I'm sure, appreciate the education and the fact that their
children are learning a lot more than just about a summer job.
So in every way that we can, we are determined to use what
means we have, both in the classroom and the classroom that's
up at Keauhou.
I should mention quickly that a little less than a year
ago, we bought back the lease at Keauhou Ranch, the upper
section of the 'ili of Keauhou that we're in right now. We
bought that back from the lessee, and with the help of many of
the people in this room, we went through a very, very rigorous
planning process, and we are using the entire 34,000 acres for
education, for cultural enrichment, for stewardship, and to the
extent that it bouys up those goals, those items we will
consider economic development. It's a plan like no other, and I
appreciate the help of the people in the room that have helped
build the plan.
Senator Akaka. Well, mahalo, Peter, for all of this--for
your mana'o, your feelings, and I like your thought of, you
know, we're the last here, and we're responsible. We're
responsible for what's here, and that's true. And what we are
trying to do here is just a part of being responsible. And I
say mahalo nui loa for your part in this and all of the people
that you mentioned as well.
Before we conclude this hearing, I want to thank all of you
for coming today, and I want to again thank all of our
excellent witnesses for their testimony. I think this hearing
has made clear the enormous needs and challenges to control
invasive species in Hawaii and nationally, and I would like to
inject that we need to keep in mind doing it culturally and
traditionally as well.
The message I will take home to my colleagues in the Senate
is that successful control of invasive species means strategies
for both prevention and not just treatment or control. This
hearing has made clear that we must do more at the national
level, both in terms of new authorizing legislation and
increased appropriations, to allow the Federal Government to be
a better partner with States and with nonprofit entities as
well if we are to make a difference with this issue.
Finally, I would like to again say mahalo nui loa to Cindy
and the wonderful staff here at Volcanoes National Park for all
your help with this hearing. This has been a beautiful hearing.
The set-up has been so nice. The results have been great. And
it's all because of what you've done, Cindy, you and your
wonderful staff, and many others here.
I also want to say thanks to our staff, Tom, Dave, and
Shirley from Washington, who came all the way out here to help
with this hearing.
And with no further ado here, I'd like to say again mahalo
nui loa, thank you very much, and this hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 12:27 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
APPENDIX
Responses to Additional Questions
----------
Responses of Lloyd Loope to Questions From Senator Akaka
Question 1-3. What are some of the invasions that pose the worst
threats to the parks in Hawaii? How did these invaders get to Hawaii in
the first place and what damage do they do? What measures are needed to
prevent more of the same?
Answers. Senator Akaka and Senator Wyden, thank you so much for the
opportunity to give the best answers I can to these challenging
questions. I came to Hawaii in 1980 as the first Research Biologist for
the National Park Service at Haleakala National Park on the island of
Maui. My job was to conduct research and advise the park on strategies
and techniques for protecting its biodiversity and ecosystems. I was
transferred to my current agency, U.S. Geological Survey, in the mid-
1990s, with little change in mission and fortunately more authority to
work outside the park.
In the 25 years I've been in my job on Maui I've learned the hard
way that by far the greatest threat to the national parks and the
highly endemic island biota is the barrage of invasive non-native
species introductions. Many of them are introduced intentionally,
including most of our worst invasive plants, as for example the
invasive tree Miconia, which was regarded as just another pretty plant
when it was introduced to Hawaii in about 1960. Many others--including
insect pests and diseases--are not introduced on purpose but are
hitchhikers primarily on horticultural and other agricultural goods
that come in through our ports-of-entry--our airports and harbors--both
from foreign countries or from the U.S. mainland.
Hawaii, an isolated oceanic archipelago with 10,000 endemic species
that occur nowhere else in the world, is especially vulnerable to
biological invasions. One consultant to USDA (Russell McGregor) back in
the 1970s noted that per unit area, the rate of alien insect
introduction in Hawaii is 500x that of the continental United States.
And it's no better today, yet remarkably Hawaii still has largely
intact natural areas. Yet Hawaii doesn't get any special consideration
from the federal government's effort at our borders for prevention from
invasive species. Allowing the NPS to work with and assist in funding
of partnerships to combat invasive species before they reach park
boundaries seems to me to be a sound first step in untying the hands of
the NPS to more fully address the invasive species threats to our
natural and cultural heritage.
Often there are huge gaps among agency mandates. An important event
in my personal education was an outbreak of rabbits at Haleakala
National Park that took place in 1990, 15 years ago this month. The
park dodged a bullet and eradicated the rabbits, but not until we had
removed 100 rabbits. Afterward, we learned that a thoughtless pet owner
had released about 6 rabbits in the park 10 months earlier. It was one
of the more spectacular success stories I've ever been involved with.
If we hadn't succeeded, the island of Maui, including the cabbage
farmers in the upcountry agricultural area, would have had to deal with
millions of rabbits within a few years. Maui people instinctively
realized this, and the park has never enjoyed so much praise from the
local community as during those months right after we eliminated the
rabbits. But we learned that if the infestation had been outside the
park, no one other than the landowner would have had a mandate to
eliminate the rabbits. The Hawaii Department of Agriculture told us
that their mandate was to encourage rabbit raising, in cages, of
course. We wondered whether, and still wonder, if the rabbit
infestation had occurred just outside the park boundary on ranch land,
for example, would the park have been able to legally act to eradicate
rabbits in cooperation with the ranch? The national parks definitely
need such a mandate.
The rabbit incident inspired me while still working for the NPS, to
take on the Miconia issue in 1991 after that destructive neotropical
tree was first discovered on Maui in the Hana area, about 5 miles from
the park. Then park superintendent Don Reeser, though very supportive
of my efforts, cautioned me that people might question whether a NPS
employee had any authority to get involved with on-the-ground work on
land outside the park. Fortunately, partners recognized the severity of
the situation and came forward to work with us in a succession of
events that eventually led to formation of the island invasive species
committees. But the National Park Service desperately needs authority
to work with partners and spend funds outside park boundaries to
protect the parks. There are many examples of this need, but I believe
there are no better examples than rabbits and Miconia on Maui.
I mentioned above that many of the destructive invasive species
that threaten the parks and Hawaiian biodiversity were introduced
intentionally and many others were introduced unintentionally.
Prevention of such introductions to Hawaii, both intentional and
unintentional, at U.S. and State borders (ports of entry), is almost
entirely under the mandate of the U.S. Department of Agriculture
(USDA), the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and the Hawaii
Department of Agriculture (HDOA). Prevention of invasive pests that
threaten natural areas is, however, at best a secondary priority for
any of these federal or state departments. For Homeland Security, the
priority is obvious--national security. For the agriculture
departments, the priority (quite understandably) is protecting
agriculture. Border protection is of course an extremely difficult
undertaking and secondary priorities understandably tend to fall
through the cracks. But Hawaii needs special protection if there is to
be hope of protecting more than fragments of its natural heritage into
the future. I must say that in my opinion HDOA's Plant Quarantine
Branch under Neil Reimer is striving as best they can to prevent
threats to natural resources as well as agriculture. Dr. Reimer as well
as Mark Fox of The Nature Conservancy, part of the second panel today,
will address the phenomenon of federal preemption and some measures
that could be effective toward shoring up the best prevention efforts
of HDOA.
Some very damaging invaders of have recently breached federal and
state border control efforts. Many of these are not just threats to
natural areas but threats to horticulture, agriculture, and in some
cases human and animal health as well. HDOA has an informative system
of New Pest Alerts at http://www.hawaiiag.org/hdoa/npa.htm.
Adequately conveying the severity of Hawaii's current invasive
species crisis as it affects national parks, endemic biodiversity, and
Hawaiian culture in Hawaii is a daunting task, but I'll briefly
summarize the status of just six recently introduced pests that are
especially damaging. I could be wrong (and would be delighted to stand
corrected) but I'm pretty sure that the ones that likely came to Hawaii
from foreign countries would not have been considered actionable
quarantine pests if intercepted by DHS/USDA at the international Ports
of Honolulu or Kona, because none of them would be considered threats
to mainstream U.S. agriculture. This may well be a rational national
response to the challenging demands of protecting U.S. agriculture from
foreign pests in this age of free trade. But I think it is important to
at least consider the cumulative toll being taken on the natural and
cultural heritage of Hawaii and Pacific islands, as manifested in
national parks and elsewhere.
Erythrina gall wasp (Quadrastichus erythrinae): This species was
first reported on Oahu in April 2005. It was originally probably from
Africa but most likely passed to us from Taiwan (where the species is
invasive and recent outbreaks occurred) in flowers or nursery material.
All of a sudden, this very tiny wasp (males are 1mm long, females
1.5mm) is currently in the process of killing almost all Erythrina on
Oahu, both the endemic species (wiliwili) and the cultivated species.
There are recent reports of new neighbor island records of the gall
wasp near the Kona (Hawaii island) airport (7/21/05), the Kauai airport
(7/26/05) and downtown Kahului, Maui (7/30/05). Sadly, the prospects
for Maui's Pu'u-o-Kali wiliwili preserve and the wiliwili in all the
national parks on Hawaii island are absolutely frightening. As little
as three years ago, the magnificent native wiliwili trees on Maui
seemed to be ``bulletproof.'' Three years ago a seed-eating bruchid
beetle (Specularius impressithorax) from Africa suddenly arrived and
was soon attacking almost all wiliwili seeds. Today, as a result of
arrival of the Erythrina gall wasp, the possibility of survival of
wiliwili, until now one of the few abundant endemic tree species in
remnant areas of lowland dry areas of Hawaii, into next year is even in
doubt. This is especially unfortunate because of the traditional
importance of wiliwili for native Hawaiians in making outriggers of
canoes, surfboards, and lei.
For updates on this rapidly evolving issue, see http://
www.hear.org/issues/wiliwilionmaui/
'Ohi'a rust disease (Puccinia psidii): Another plant trade-related
introduction, this newly established (April 2005) rust, most likely
arrived with a plant shipment from Florida or possibly a foreign
country somewhere in the neotropics, poses a potentially formidable
threat to Hawaii's 'ohi'a (Metrosideros polymorpha) forests. This is of
course alarming since 'ohi'a comprises over 80% of Hawaii's still-
intact forest. The rust seems to have a broad host range within its
family (Myrtaceae, including mountain apple, guavas, eucalyptus, etc.).
This rust disease that attacks new, actively growing leaves is not just
a threat to Hawaii's forests. New Zealand will be looking out to
protect its beloved Metrosideros forests. Australia is definitely
concerned for its 600+ endemic species of Eucalyptus. Though it has so
far been detected only in forests on Oahu, Maui HDOA has found 'ohi'a
rust disease in shipments from Oahu to at least two big box stores on
Maui.
Nettle caterpillar (Darna pallivitta): Another one from Taiwan,
this is a human health threat (various levels of discomfort ranging to
occasional anaphylactic shock and blindness) as well as a serious
environmental pest, attacking palms and related plants. Dr. Arnold Hara
of UH-CTAHR in Hilo has stated (quoted in the Honolulu Star-Bulletin)
that it is a worse pest than the notorious coqui frogs. The vector via
which it arrived is obviously nursery material, and it is likely spread
daily on Hawaii island (along with coqui, etc.) by infested nurseries.
In spite of HDOA efforts at interisland quarantine, Maui HDOA has
documented it at least once in a shipment from the Big Island to a Maui
nursery. Unless some biocontrol agent is located and processed rapidly
through the extremely restrictive system, this pest will soon be in
rain forests of Hawaii Volcanoes National Park.
Little fire ant (Wasmannia auropunctata): This tiny neotropical ant
has devastating effects on biodiversity and human quality-of-life in
its invaded range in far-flung parts of the world (e.g., Galapagos, New
Caledonia, West Africa). It was first detected here in Puna, Hawaii, in
1999, and HDOA is now reporting it from 50 sites on Hawaii island. Its
localized spread after its initial discovery has been associated with
transport of nursery plants. There is an HDOA interisland quarantine
for little fire ant, and to date it remains confined to Hawaii island,
except for a small population on Kauai that is under control but not
eradicated. The poorly understood effects of this species in blinding
mammals, perhaps by stinging their corneas [e.g., P.W.Walsh, P.
Henschel, and K.A. Abernathy, 2004, Logging speeds little red fire ant
invasion of Africa. Biotropica 36(4):637-641] are just now starting to
appear in housecats in the Puna area of Hawaii island.
Scale insect of hala (Thysanococcus pandani): Hala (Pandanus
tectorius) is common to abundant in many Hawaiian coastal ecosystems
and an extremely important plant species for native Hawaiians, who have
traditionally used it for cordage, thatching, healing, decoration, etc.
The scale insect arrived on the island of Maui in 1995, apparently on a
shipment of hala brought in to a botanical garden from somewhere in the
western/southern Pacific. Hala is currently sickly with yellowing
leaves over much of windward East Maui, though the insect's effects
have not yet reached the Kipahulu section of Haleakala National Park.
Hala is an important component of the national parks in the Kona area
of Hawaii island. Long-term effects of scale attack on hala populations
are likely to be severe, but that is uncertain at this point in time.
The South Pacific island of Rarotonga, in the Cook Islands, apparently
lost its Pandanus in the 1920s from a similar accidental insect
introduction.
Cycad scale or sago palm scale (Aulacaspis yamatsui): This hearing
is focused on national parks in Hawaii, but my agency, the USGS Pacific
Island Ecosystems Research Center, also does work in other Pacific
islands, including Guam, the location of War in the Pacific National
Historical Park. Guam has more than one million trees of the
Micronesian endemic cycad Cycas micronesica, a magnificent tree that
reaches heights of 80-100 ft., and all currently seem to be at risk
from attack by this scale insect. Cycad scale reached Florida,
transported on cycads from native Thailand in 1996, reached Hawaii
(which has no native cycads) on cultivated cycads from Florida in 1999,
and reached Guam from Hawaii in 2003. There are said to be 30 nurseries
in Guam that bring in nursery stock from Hawaii. Guam is said to be
tightening up its regulations for horticultural imports because of
recent pest incursions, including cycad scale and coqui frogs.
And finally I must mention a species not in Hawaii or any Pacific
island yet--the Red Imported Fire Ant (RIFA, Solenopsis invicta) that
is poised to invade from either side of the Pacific Rim--from
California (where Hawaii gets most of its goods and where RIFA was
first discovered in 1998) and China/Taiwan/Hong Kong (where RIFA first
got a foothold in 2004-05). It seems clear that RIFA can invade Hawaii
and Pacific islands based on various models of potential habitat, as
well as by the fact that it has invaded many Caribbean islands over the
past two decades.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to submit for the record as well my
article ``The Challenge of Effectively Addressing the Threat of
Invasive Species to the National Park System.'' This was published last
fall in the journal Park Science, and I have an electronic copy.*
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The article has been retained in subcommittee files.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: The views expressed in this testimony are those of the
author, given as a conservation scientist in response to Senator
Akaka's questions, and do not necessarily reflect the views of USGS,
the Department of the Interior, or the United States Government.