Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment

              Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
FONSI – i
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge
Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Unincorporated U.S. Territory, Central Pacific Ocean
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has completed the Comprehensive Conservation
Plan (CCP) and Environmental Assessment (EA) for Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge
(Refuge). The CCP will guide management of the Refuge for the next 15 years. The CCP and
EA describe the Service’s preferred alternative for managing the Refuge and its effects on the
human environment.
Decision
Following comprehensive review and analysis, the Service selected Alternative B in the draft EA
for implementation because it is the alternative that best meets the following criteria:
􀂄􈑁 Achieves the mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System.
􀂄􈑁 Achieves the purposes of the Refuge.
􀂄􈑗 Will be able to achieve the vision and goals for the Refuge.
􀂄􈑍 Maintains and restores the ecological integrity of the habitats and plant and animal populations
at the Refuge.
􀂄􈑁 Addresses the important issues identified during the scoping process.
􀂄􈑁 Addresses the legal mandates of the Service and the Refuge.
􀂄􈑉 Is consistent with the scientific principles of sound wildlife management.
􀂄􈑃 Can be implemented within the projected fiscal and logistical management constraints
associated with the Refuge’s remote location.
As described in detail in the CCP and EA, implementing the selected alternative will have no
significant impacts on any of the natural or cultural resources identified in the CCP and EA.
Public Review
The planning process incorporated a variety of public involvement techniques in developing and
reviewing the CCP. This included three planning updates, meetings with partners, and public
review and comment on the planning documents. The details of the Service’s public
involvement program are described in the CCP.
Conclusions
Based on review and evaluation of the information contained in the supporting references, I have
determined that implementing Alternative B as the CCP for management of Baker Island
National Wildlife Refuge is not a major Federal action that would significantly affect the quality
of the human environment within the meaning of section 102(2) (C) of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969. Accordingly, the Service is not required to prepare an
environmental impact statement.
This Finding of No Significant Impact and supporting references are on file at the Pacific
Remote Islands National Wildlife Refuge Complex, 300 Ala Moana Blvd, Room 5-211,
Honolulu, Hawaii, 96850 and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Planning and Visitor
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
i
Table of Contents
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
Introduction................................................................................................................................. 1-1
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ............................................................................................. 1-1
National Wildlife Refuge System ................................................................................................ 1-1
National Wildlife Refuges in the Pacific ..................................................................................... 1-4
Refuge Establishment, Purpose and Boundary............................................................................ 1-6
Regional and Ecosystem Conservation Plans ............................................................................1-11
Refuge Vision Statement ........................................................................................................... 1-12
Refuge Goals............................................................................................................................. 1-13
CHAPTER 2: PLANNING PROCESS, PURPOSE AND NEED, AND ISSUES
Planning Process .......................................................................................................................... 2-1
Purpose and Need ........................................................................................................................ 2-1
Planning Issues and Opportunities............................................................................................... 2-2
CHAPTER 3: MANAGEMENT DIRECTION
Overview..................................................................................................................................... 3-1
Goals, Objectives, Strategies, and Rationale ............................................................................... 3-4
CHAPTER 4: REFUGE AND RESOURCE DESCRIPTION
Geographic/Ecosystem Setting .................................................................................................... 4-1
Climate........................................................................................................................................ 4-1
Global Climate Change................................................................................................................ 4-3
Geology and Soils........................................................................................................................ 4-7
Hydrology ................................................................................................................................... 4-9
Air and Water Quality.................................................................................................................. 4-9
Environmental Contaminants....................................................................................................... 4-9
Terrestrial Vegetation and Habitats ...........................................................................................4-10
Terrestrial Wildlife..................................................................................................................... 4-11
Marine Habitats, Fish and Wildlife............................................................................................ 4-12
Threatened and Endangered Species ......................................................................................... 4-17
Invasive Species ........................................................................................................................ 4-17
Wilderness Resources ................................................................................................................ 4-17
Archaeology and Paleontology.................................................................................................. 4-18
Recent Cultural History ............................................................................................................. 4-19
Socio-economics ........................................................................................................................ 4-21
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
ii
APPENDICES
Appendix A. Glossary of Terms and Acronyms
Appendix B. Species Lists
Appendix C. References
Appendix D. Planning Team Members
Appendix E. Quarantine Protocol
Appendix F. Wilderness Review
Appendix G. Statement of Compliance
Appendix H. Plan Implementation and Costs
Appendix I. Consultation and Coordination
Appendix J. Responses to Comments
List of Figures
Figure 1.1 National Wildlife Refuges in the Pacific………………………………………… 1-5
Figure 1.2 Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge: Geographic Location and Boundary… 1-8
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 1 – Introduction 1-1
Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION
Introduction
This document is a Comprehensive Conservation Plan for Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge
(Baker). The CCP guides management of refuge operations, site visitation, and habitat
restoration for the 15-year life of the plan. Guidance within the CCP is in the form of goals,
objectives, strategies (Chapter 3), and wilderness study findings (Appendix F). The CCP was
revised as appropriate based upon public comments. The refuge manager of the Pacific Remote
Islands National Wildlife Refuge Complex (Remotes Complex) in Honolulu, Hawaii, is
responsible for implementing the CCP.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Baker is managed by the Service, within the U.S. Department of the Interior. The Service is the
primary Federal entity responsible for conserving and enhancing the Nation’s fish and wildlife
populations and their habitats. Although the Service shares this responsibility with other
Federal, State, tribal, local, and private entities, the Service has specific trust resource
responsibilities for migratory birds, threatened and endangered species, certain anadromous fish,
certain marine mammals, coral reef ecosystems, wetlands, and other special aquatic habitats.
The Service also has similar trust responsibilities for the lands and waters it administers to
support the conservation and enhancement of all fish and wildlife and their associated habitats.
National Wildlife Refuge System
President Theodore Roosevelt established Pelican Island, Florida as the first national wildlife
refuge in 1903. Since that time, the number of refuges has expanded to include 548, totaling
approximately100 million acres. These refuges, found in every state and several U.S. Territories,
are administered collectively as a national system of lands with the specific mandate of
managing for “wildlife first.” This System is the largest collection of lands specifically managed
for fish and wildlife conservation in the Nation and perhaps the world. The “wildlife first”
mandate of the System means the needs of wildlife and their habitats take priority on refuges, in
contrast to other public lands that are managed for multiple uses. The following is a description
of some of the most relevant acts and policies that guide the management of the System.
National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966, as amended
The NWRS Administration Act defines a unifying mission for all refuges, including a process
for determining compatible uses on refuges, and requiring that each refuge be managed
according to a CCP. The NWRS Administration Act expressly states that wildlife conservation
is the priority of System lands and that the Secretary shall ensure that the biological integrity,
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
1-2 Chapter 1 - Introduction
diversity, and environmental health of refuge lands are maintained. Each refuge must be
managed to fulfill the specific purposes for which the refuge was established and the System
mission. The first priority of each refuge is to conserve, manage, and if needed, restore fish and
wildlife populations and habitats according to its purpose. The Service has statutory authority
under the NWRS Administration Act to regulate activities that occur on water bodies “within” a
refuge. The NWRS Administration Act requires a CCP be completed for each refuge and that
the public has an opportunity for active involvement in plan development and revision. It is
Service policy that each CCP is developed in an open public process.
National Wildlife Refuge System Mission and Goals and Purposes (601 FW1)
In July 2006, the Service issued a policy (601 FW 1) which included the NWRS mission
statement and NWRS goals, and described how refuge purposes are determined.
The NWRS Administration Act established the following statutory mission for the System:
“The mission of the System is to administer a national network of lands and waters for
the conservation, management, and where appropriate, restoration of the fish, wildlife,
and plant resources and their habitats within the United States for the benefit of present
and future generations of Americans.”
The administration, management, and growth of the System are guided by the following goals
(601 FW 1, July 2006)….”
• Conserve a diversity of fish, wildlife, and plants and their habitats, including species that
are endangered or threatened with becoming endangered.
• Develop and maintain a network of habitats for migratory birds, anadromous and
interjurisdictional fish, and marine mammal populations that are strategically distributed
and carefully managed to meet important life history needs of these species across their
ranges.
• Conserve those ecosystems, plant communities, wetlands of national or international
significance, and landscapes and seascapes that are unique, rare, declining, or
underrepresented in existing protection efforts.
• Provide and enhance opportunities to participate in compatible wildlife-dependent
recreation (hunting, fishing, wildlife observation and photography, and environmental
education and interpretation).
• Foster understanding and instill appreciation of the diversity and interconnectedness of
fish, wildlife, plants, and their habitats.
Lastly, the NWRS Administration Act describes refuge purposes, and how these guiding
principals for the refuge are located and documented.
Appropriate Refuge Uses (603 FW1)
This policy (603 FW 1), published in July 2006, provides a national framework for determining
appropriate refuge uses. Serving as a “prescreening” for proposed uses of a national wildlife
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 1 – Introduction 1-3
refuge prior to a compatibility determination (see below); this policy requires—for most uses—a
written finding of appropriateness by the refuge manager based on 11 criteria. Findings of
appropriateness require concurrence by the State for refuges located within state boundaries.
These criteria include:
• Promotes safety of participants, other visitors, and facilities.
• Promotes compliance with applicable laws, regulations, and responsible behavior.
• Minimizes or eliminates conflicts with fish and wildlife populations or habitat goals or
objectives in a plan approved after 1997.
• Minimizes or eliminates conflicts with other compatible wildlife-dependent recreation.
• Minimizes conflicts with neighboring landowners.
• Promotes accessibility and availability to a broad spectrum of the American people.
• Promotes resource stewardship and conservation.
• Promotes public understanding and increases public appreciation of America’s natural
resources and our role in managing and protecting these resources.
• Provides reliable/reasonable opportunities to experience wildlife.
• Uses facilities that are accessible and blend into the natural setting.
• Uses visitor satisfaction to help define and evaluate programs.
Compatibility (603 FW2)
Lands within the System are different from other, multiple-use public lands in that, with few
exceptions, they are closed to all public access and use unless specifically and legally opened
(603 FW 2). No refuge use may be allowed unless it is determined to be compatible. A
compatible use is one that, in the sound professional judgment of the refuge manager, would not
materially interfere with or detract from the fulfillment of the mission of the Service or the
purpose of the refuge. The NWRS Administration Act identifies six wildlife-dependent
recreational uses: hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, photography, environmental education,
and interpretation. When compatible, these six uses become priority uses of the System. As
priority public uses, they receive special consideration over other general public uses in refuge
planning and management.
Biological Integrity, Diversity, and Environmental Health (601 FW3)
The NWRS Administration Act directs the Service to “ensure that the biological integrity,
diversity, and environmental health of the System are maintained for the benefit of present and
future generations of Americans…” This policy (601 FW 3) is an additional directive for refuge
managers to follow while achieving refuge purpose(s) and System mission. It provides for the
consideration and protection of the broad spectrum of fish, wildlife, plants, and their habitat
resources found on refuges and associated ecosystems. When evaluating the appropriate
management direction for refuges, refuge managers would use sound professional judgment to
determine their refuges��� contribution to maintenance and, where possible, restoration of
biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health (BIDEH) at multiple landscape scales.
Sound professional judgment incorporates field experience, knowledge of refuge resources,
refuge functions within an ecosystem, applicable laws, and best available science, including
consultation with others both inside and outside the Service.
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
1-4 Chapter 1 - Introduction
Wilderness (602 FW 3)
Service planning policy (602 FW 3) requires the conduct of a wilderness review in association
with the development of a refuge CCP. The wilderness review process has three phases:
inventory, study, and recommendation. After first identifying lands and waters that meet the
minimum criteria for wilderness during the inventory phase, the resulting wilderness study areas
are further evaluated to determine if they merit recommendation from the Service to the
Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) for inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation
System. A more complete discussion of wilderness inventory, study, and recommendation is
included in Appendix F.
General Guidelines for Wildlife-Dependent Recreation (605 FW1)
This set of policies (605 FW 1-7), published in July 2006, defines the System’s wildlife-dependent
recreation policy, provides guidelines used to manage wildlife-dependent recreation
on refuge lands and identifies visitor service standards.
National Wildlife Refuges in the Pacific
Nineteen individual NWRs are scattered across the central and western Pacific Ocean, with
several refuges located on the main Hawaiian Islands and others found from Guam to American
Samoa (Figure 1.1). The Hawaiian and Pacific Islands NWR Complex, which provides
administrative guidance and oversight for these 19 refuges, is located in Honolulu, Hawaii. This
Complex also co-manages the newly established Papahānaumokuākea Marine National
Monument, along with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the State of
Hawaii.
Within this administrative structure is a subset of seven refuges known as the Remotes Complex.
The Remotes Complex straddles the Equator near the center of the Pacific Ocean. They are
farther from human population centers than any other U.S. area and represent one of the last
frontiers and havens for fish and wildlife in the World. These remote refuges are the most
widespread collection of coral reef and seabird/shorebird protected areas on the planet under a
single country’s jurisdiction. Only one of these seven refuges, Palmyra Atoll NWR, has on-island
dedicated staff members. Remotes Complex staff, located within the complex office in
Honolulu, manage all the remaining refuges, including Baker. Staff, funding, and logistical
support are often shared among these remote refuges to help defray operational costs.
The Baker CCP identifies several management strategies that are dependent upon activities and
staff support from the Remotes Complex office, ship transportation support from other Federal
agencies, or the establishment of partnerships with other organizations. Because of the great
distances involved in traveling to these remote refuges, most management activities, including
the simple act of visiting a refuge, are sometimes planned to occur concurrently during the same
voyage. For this reason, cost estimates for management activities at Baker are pro-rated amongst
the seven Remotes Complex refuges.
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 1 – Introduction 1-5
Figure 1.1 Map of National Wildlife Refuges in the Pacific.
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
1-6 Chapter 1 - Introduction
Refuge Establishment, Purpose, and Boundary
Refuge Establishment
Baker Island is an unincorporated territory under the sovereignty of the United States. The
Secretary of the Interior has broad authority over the territories of the United States by virtue of
the Act of March 1, 1873, (43 U.S.C. 1458) which transferred general authority “…to perform all
duties in relation to the Territories of the United States…” from the Secretary of State to the
Secretary of the Interior. In addition, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed Executive Order
7368 on May 13, 1936, also placing control and jurisdiction of Baker Island with the Secretary of
the Interior. Further, pursuant to the provisions of the Reorganization Act of 1949, the Secretary
of the Interior is authorized under Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1950 to re-delegate to any
officer or agency within the Department of the Interior any of the functions legally under his
jurisdiction.
Under the authority of Reorganization Plan No. 3, the Secretary of the Interior, on June 27, 1974,
designated Baker Island and its territorial sea extending to the 3 nautical mile (nmi) limit as a
unit of the National Wildlife Refuge System to be “administered under the general regulations
for the National Wildlife Refuge System published in Title 50, Code of Federal Regulations”(39
FR 27930). Section 25.21 of these regulations state that “…all areas included in the National
Wildlife Refuge System are closed to public access until and unless we open the area for a use or
uses in accordance with the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (16
U.S.C. 668dd-668ee), the Refuge Recreation Act of 1962 (16 U.S.C. 460k-460k-4) and this
subchapter C.” Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge remains closed to public access.
Refuge Purpose
Refuge purposes are often times are based upon land acquisition documents and authorities.
These statements give indications for the biological reason or justification for the acquisition or
land transfer. Purposes listed in acquisition authorities, or legislative acts, are often general in
scope. For Baker, this general purpose is:
“...for the development, advancement, management, conservation, and protection of fish and
wildlife resources...” (16 U.S.C. 742f (a) (4)), and “...for the benefit of the United States Fish
and Wildlife Service, in performing its activities and services. Such acceptance may be
subject to the terms of any restrictive or affirmative covenant, or condition of servitude...”
(16 U.S.C. 742f (b) (1)) (Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956).
Acquisition documents often contain more specific purpose statements. The specific purpose
statement for establishment of Baker identified in the biological ascertainment report at the time
of transfer to the Service is (USFWS 1973):
“…the restoration and preservation of the complete ecosystem, terrestrial and marine.
Priority must be given to allowing seabird nesting colonies to reestablish themselves on
Baker so eventually they would eventually reach the great numbers which were present there
prior to human occupancy and abuse of the island during the past 125 years.”
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 1 – Introduction 1-7
Refuge Boundary
Baker is located in the central equatorial Pacific Ocean (Figure 1.2). The boundary for Baker
includes:
“...all of Baker island…together with its territorial sea extending outward to the three-mile
limit.” (39 F R 27930).
The emergent land area for Baker encompasses 531 acres and submerged lands and waters
within the 3-mile limit encompass 31,378 acres, for a total of 31,909 acres.
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
1-8 Chapter 1 - Introduction
Figure 1.2 Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge: Geographic Location and Boundary.
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 1 – Introduction 1-11
Regional and Ecosystem Conservation Plans
Regional and ecosystem conservation plans and initiatives are also important to evaluate and
incorporate into developing each CCP. These plans typically address issues or concerns that are
site specific or of regional concern, and address needs more current than when the refuge was
established.
Remote Islands Ecosystem Plan: Howland Island, Baker Island, and Jarvis Island National
Wildlife Refuges
The ecosystem plan for Howland, Baker, and Jarvis identifies Baker as “…a model of both the
sensitivity of insular ecosystems and mechanisms by which they can recover following
disturbance” (USFWS 1998b). The plan further describes the refuge as being important to
nesting seabirds due to the fact that other nearby islands have introduced mammals or human
colonists present, thereby precluding survival of some vulnerable seabird species.
Coral Reef Initiative in the Pacific: Howland Island, Baker Island, and Jarvis Island
National Wildlife Refuges
The Coral Reef Initiative for Howland, Baker, and Jarvis restates the wildlife and ecological
values identified in the ecosystem plan (USFWS 1998a). This document identifies three
important components of the three ecosystems: “They provide a breeding platform for pelagic
birds using large areas of ocean surface, offer a migratory stopover for long distance migrating
shorebirds, and furnish reef habitat for shallow water organisms.”
Recovery Plan for U.S. Pacific Populations of the Hawksbill Turtle (Eretmochelys
imbricata)
Although theoretically within the range for hawksbill turtle, little is known about their biology,
foraging and nesting behavior, threats, and distribution surrounding Baker Island (NMFS and
USFWS 1998a). Both the NOAA – National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the Service
share responsibility at the Federal level for the research, management, and recovery of Pacific
marine turtle populations under U.S. jurisdiction.
Recovery Plan for U.S. Pacific Populations of the Green Turtle (Celonia mydas)
Few green turtles are known to forage in the waters surrounding Baker Island and nesting is not
known to occur. However, data from the area are limited and use of Baker may be greater than
currently documented (NMFS and USFWS 1998b). Both NMFS and the Service share
responsibility at the Federal level for the research, management, and recovery of Pacific marine
turtle populations under U.S. jurisdiction.
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
1-12 Chapter 1 - Introduction
U.S. Pacific Island Regional Shorebird Conservation Plan
This regional shorebird plan identifies Baker as being within the Central Pacific Islands
Subregion (Engilis and Naughton 2004). No natural wetlands are known from this subregion;
however, not only the beaches on uninhabited islands are important for shorebirds, but the entire
island. Population and habitat goals for this subregion state that determining population size and
trends for bristle-thighed curlews and other shorebirds, and their habitats is a management
priority.
United States Shorebird Conservation Plan
This nationwide shorebird plan identifies the U.S. Pacific islands being of “...critical importance
for two species of Holartic breeders, bristle-thighed curlew and Pacific golden-plover.” (Brown
et al. 2000). Further, this plan notes that these islands provide wintering habitat essential to the
maintenance of these species as well as several other migratory shorebird species.
Seabird Conservation Plan, Pacific Region
This plan provides an overarching review, discussion, and identification of conservation
priorities for seabirds in the U.S Pacific islands; ranks seabirds for conservation priority; and
includes specific species accounts including their conservation needs (USFWS 2005).
Central Pacific World Heritage Project
The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) organized and
convened meetings in Honolulu in June 2003, and Kiritimati Atoll in October 2004, to seek input
for a proposed multi-national World Heritage project now referred to as the Central Pacific
World Heritage Project (CPWHP) (UNESCO World Heritage Centre, 2003; 2004). Additional
meetings and evaluations in the U.S. and Republic of Kiribati resulted in a total of 29 atolls,
islands, and reefs belonging to four nations (United States, Cook Islands, Republic of Kiribati,
and French Polynesia) being proposed for the multi-site, multi-jurisdictional CPWHP. To date,
the Service has not acted on this proposal, but intends to do so in the future. However, the
Republic of Kiribati is drafting a World Heritage Nomination dossier for all eight Phoenix
Islands under its jurisdiction to be submitted to UNESCO in early 2009. These islands are
Baker’s and Howland’s closest neighbors.
Regional and ecosystem conservation plans and initiatives are also important to evaluate and
incorporate into developing each CCP. These plans typically address issues or concerns that are
site specific or of regional concern, and address needs more current than when the refuge was
established.
Refuge Vision Statement
The refuge vision statement is a broad general statement that describes what the refuge staff
perceives as Baker’s fundamental attributes and contributions to a healthy world environment.
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 1 – Introduction 1-13
This statement will guide management activities for the lifespan of this plan, as well into the near
future. The vision statement for Baker is as follows.
Baker is one of the only places in the world where the terrestrial and marine tropical island
ecosystems have been restored, conserved, and protected. Although signs of past human
activities are still visible on the landscape, the island now offers the opportunity to serve as a
living laboratory for measuring past human impacts and the ability of nature to recover.
Natural, physical, and ecological processes unfold with limited human interference and
support a diverse community of native marine organisms including seabirds, marine
mammals, turtles, fish, plants, corals, and other invertebrates. Nesting and foraging seabirds
dominate the landscape and seascape while sheer isolation and solitude help us see our
place in the natural world.
Refuge Goals
Goal statements are succinct statements of a desired future condition of refuge resources. Goals
comprise the whole of a refuge’s effort in pursuit of its vision and lay the foundation from which
all refuge activities arise. The goals for Baker are as follows, and will again be presented along
with objectives and strategies in Chapter 3.
1. Conserve, restore, manage, and protect native terrestrial habitats that are representative of
remote tropical Pacific islands, primarily for the benefit of seabirds.
2. Conserve, manage, and protect native marine communities that are representative of
remote tropical Pacific islands.
3. Contribute to the recovery, protection, and management efforts for all native species with
special consideration for seabirds, migratory shorebirds, federally listed threatened and
endangered species, and species of management concern.
4. Restore the wilderness character of Baker’s terrestrial community, and protect, maintain,
enhance, and preserve the wilderness character of Baker’s marine community.
5. Preserve Baker’s biological, cultural and historic resources.
6. Inform and educate the public to increase their understanding of remote Pacific island
NWRs wilderness values, cultural and historical resources, and their ecosystems, with
special emphasis on seabirds.
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
1-14 Chapter 1 - Introduction
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 2 – Planning, Purpose and Need, and Issues 2-1
Chapter 2: PLANNING, PURPOSE AND NEED, AND ISSUES
Planning Process
The CCP development process follows applicable policies contained within the Service’s Fish
and Wildlife Manual (Part 602 FW2.1, November 1996; Part 601 FW1, Part 603 FW1, and Part
605 FW1, June 2006), and the Wilderness Act of 1964 with respect to wilderness study and
review. This CCP was completed in association with an EA and is intended to meet the dual
requirements of compliance with the NWRS Administration Act and the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA). Both the NWRS Administration Act and NEPA require the Service to
actively seek public involvement in the preparation and adoption of environmental and
conservation documents and policies. Furthermore, NEPA also requires the Service to consider
a reasonable range of alternatives including its Preferred Alternative and the “No Action”
alternative; the latter defined as continuation of current management practices.
Purpose and Need
Overall, all refuges must comply with the System mission, goals, and policies, as described in or
promulgated by the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (NWRS
Administration Act), as amended (16 U.S.C. 668dd-668ee). The National Wildlife Refuge
System Improvement Act of 1997 amended the NWRS Administration Act. According to the
NWRS Administration Act, a CCP is required to identify and describe refuge purpose(s),
habitats and wildlife, archaeological and cultural values, administrative and visitor facilities,
management challenges and their solutions, and opportunities for compatible wildlife-dependent
recreation. The recreational activities referenced in the NWRS Administration Act as receiving
special consideration during planning efforts include hunting, recreational fishing, wildlife
observation, interpretation, environmental education, and photography.
The purpose of this CCP is to develop a vision, goals, and objectives for Baker, which in turn
provide guidance to identify and implement management activities, or strategies, during the next
15 years. Specifically, the CCP:
• sets a long term vision;
• establishes wildlife and habitat management goals and objectives;
• establishes goals and objectives for compatible wildlife-dependent recreational and
educational uses;
• identifies strategies for habitat enhancement and restoration projects;
• describes the highest monitoring and research priorities; and
• describes and evaluates wilderness values.
Baker and its management and administrative activities are managed as part of the NWRS or
System within a framework provided by legal and policy guidelines. The refuge is guided by the
mission and goals of the NWRS, the purpose of the refuge as described in its acquisition
authority, Service policy, Federal laws and executive orders, and international treaties.
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
2-2 Chapter 2 – Planning, Purpose and Needs, and Issues
Supplemental guidance documents (e.g., resource plans) are also included in making
management decisions but cannot replace or be in conflict with the purposes for which the refuge
was established or the mission of the System
Planning Issues and Opportunities
Issues, concerns, and opportunities were identified through discussions with key contacts,
workshop participants, core team members, other refuge staff, and through the public scoping
process. The following section summarizes issues, concerns, and opportunities from all public
input received throughout the planning efforts. Six issues were identified and are described
below.
Issue 1: Operational Limitations
Baker is located approximately 1,690 nmi from the management staff located in Honolulu,
Hawaii. On average, it takes 6-7 days to reach Baker by ship, the only method of visiting the
island. The key issues and concerns affecting planning and management implementation are:
• distance from refuge headquarters;
• lack of affordable and reliable transportation;
• lack of infrastructure to support field operations;
• extreme environmental conditions; and
• safety concerns and logistical capacity to land people and equipment on island from
small boats.
Issue 2: Biological and Ecological Resources
Biological and ecological information sufficient for management or conservation purposes is
lacking. Due to the infrequency and limited staff time spent on Baker, biological and ecological
information is not sufficient to allow for a detailed assessment of resources. The collection of
baseline and long-term monitoring information should be a primary concern and the focus of
management objectives.
Issue 3: External Forces
The threat of the introduction of invasive species from unauthorized visits, marine debris
washing ashore and onto coral reefs, and vessel groundings are beyond current management
control. Distance, lack of funds and staff, and the inability to have a more consistent presence on
this refuge opens the opportunity for invasive species introductions, limits the ability to remove
marine debris, and delays in the response to vessel groundings.
While it is known that past human use of the island has led to contaminants and debris being left
on the island and in the surrounding surf, the extent and impact of the contamination and debris
are largely unknown.
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 2 – Planning, Purpose and Need, and Issues 2-3
Global climate change (see Chapter 4) may also affect refuge resources, but is beyond control of
refuge management staff. It is anticipated that changes in the chemical composition of the
atmosphere and oceans; surface temperatures of air, land, and sea; intensity and frequency of
rainfall and storm waves; and changes in sea level would have impacts on refuge resources.
However, the extent and nature of these impacts is being studied and the subject of considerable
academic debate.
Issue 4: Public Use Resources
The key issues related to public use are:
• adverse ecological impacts (invasive species introductions, pollution, fuel spills, trash
disposal, harassment of wildlife, damage to sensitive habitats such as coral reefs);
• whether any on-site public use should be allowed;
• to what extent the use should occur; and
• how the use should be managed.
Baker Island Refuge has never been formally opened to public access and use. Administratively,
public access to Baker is managed through use of a refuge-issued Special Use Permits (SUP).
Several recreational user groups such as amateur radio operators, bird watchers, history
enthusiasts, destination tourists, and commercial cruise vessels have expressed interest in visiting
various remote Pacific island refuges. However, before a SUP could be issued, a request for
public access would need to be evaluated for appropriateness and compatibility.
Issue 5: Education and Outreach
In general, Pacific island refuges are poorly recognized by the public and our partner agencies.
There are few entrance signs, no boundary signs, and little published information in popular
literature. Refuge boundaries are rarely portrayed on nautical charts and other maps.
The remote location and isolation of Baker and other Pacific island refuges make it difficult to
conduct on-site visits for educational or interpretative purposes. Thus, most educational and
interpretative opportunities are necessarily delivered remotely through various media.
In addition, general interest by the public and requests to visit remote Pacific island refuges by a
growing recreational yachting community has increased recently. This interest requires the
public to be better informed regarding sensitive refuge habitats, species, and regulations.
Issue 6: Communication and Cooperation
Baker’s remoteness compels a growing list of partners and cooperators to be kept informed of
and included in planning and management activities at Baker. Activities that staff and partner
agencies/organizations share include:
• expedition planning;
• collaborative research projects; and
• protection of trust resources.
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
2-4 Chapter 2 – Planning, Purpose and Needs, and Issues
Most access for refuge staff to Baker has only been possible through the cooperation and
participation with partner agencies such as NOAA and the U.S. Coast Guard. Many research
interests are shared between Service and NOAA scientists, and collaborative research projects
have been conducted in the past. Additionally, NOAA and the Service share trust resource
responsibilities for marine turtles.
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 3 – Management Direction 3-1
Chapter 3: MANAGEMENT DIRECTION
Overview
The Service reviewed and considered a variety of resource, logistic, social, and economic aspects
important for managing the refuge when developing this long-term management plan. As is
appropriate for a national wildlife refuge, resource conditions were fundamental in designing the
CCP. Marine and terrestrial resources are equally important to the management of Baker, and
are described more fully in Chapter 4. However, the logistics of reaching the island and
associated coral reefs is the primary constraint on increasing or modifying the level of
management and monitoring activity that has or currently occurs. To more fully understand this
constraint, a description of the logistical requirements and refuge management activities follows.
Marine vessels capable of traveling the open ocean for extended periods are the only opportunity
for transportation to Baker. In the recent years, NOAA, the U.S. Coast Guard, and private
charter vessels have all provided transportation. A typical voyage originating from Honolulu,
Hawaii will take approximately 6 to 7 days to arrive at Baker, possibly with intermediate stops at
Palmyra Atoll or Johnston Atoll NWRs to economize on fuel and personnel costs. Once on-site,
and if wind and wave conditions warrant the launch of a landing vessel (typically a small
outboard type inflatable boat), the marine vessel will anchor or remain stationary during the
deployment of the field camp, only venturing away from the island to complete marine surveys.
The field camp itself generally consists of two individuals, typically biologists to carry out
biological surveys and other duties, and camping gear consisting of tents, sleeping equipment,
food, water, and needed survey equipment. Cooking gear is rarely deployed since staff is only
on-island for 1 to 2 days with most of that time being engaged in work activities.
While on-island, the biologists document all bird species present, count individuals, determine if
any and the extent of nesting, casually observe vegetation and record species presence or
absence, or the presence of any invasive species, inspect boundary signs, inventory for the
presence of invasive species, visit cultural resources, monitor and investigate contaminated sites,
and collect and destroy of bird entrapments caused by rusting drums and other debris. The only
active management that occurs during these site visits is: the collection and on-island stockpile of
marine debris that washes ashore and poses a threat to seabirds and other wildlife that use Baker;
the use of solar powered electronic calling devices to encourage additional seabird species to
nest; and the development of funding proposals for island transportation and contamination
monitoring and remediation. Any evidence of illegal activity such as unauthorized access is also
documented. Photographs record general habitat conditions; however, further habitat assessment
does not occur. Although no specific activities occur with respect to wilderness values, the
simple fact that a 1 to 2 day field camp consisting of temporary lodging arrangements and
minimal activity is consistent with maintaining the wilderness values of the area.
During the period that the biologists are on Baker, marine scientists from NOAA, the Service,
and other partner organizations such as the University of Hawaii conduct surveys and monitoring
activities of the surrounding marine environment. Some monitoring activities occur on-board the
vessel, while others require the use of SCUBA equipment. All of the marine scientists, however,
are based on the vessel awaiting the conclusion of terrestrial surveys or accomplishing marine
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
3-2 Chapter 3 – Management Direction
surveys and thus do not come ashore. Marine scientists typically collect information on currents,
weather, temperature, chemical composition of the water, and the abundance and distribution of
coral and fish species. Specific marine-based surveys known as Rapid Ecological Assessments
(REA) are conducted and collect ecological data such as fish species, abundance, and predator
prey relationships. Data are also collected from permanently marked coral transects which
document coral species, age class, and percent coral cover. These data are collected over a 2-day
period (six 1-hour dives). Following the voyage, data from marine scientists are provided to the
Service and includes a full range of oceanographic, bathymetric, and marine biological
information.
Specific details of the management program are categorized below:
• Baseline Monitoring of Wildlife Populations and Habitats. Staff visits to Baker result in
inventory and monitoring efforts, documenting species presence or absence, abundance,
habitat condition, presence of invasive species and various other physical variables such
as temperature, precipitation, wind, etc.
• Voyage Preparation. The logistics of providing adequate field camp supplies such as
water, food, first aid, and communications occurs for each voyage.
• Use of extraneous unnatural lighting. Limiting and shading the lighting on vessels,
camp, and nighttime operations minimizes the threat of collision and disorientation of
wildlife that can be caused by light hazards.
• Quarantine protocols and use of Integrated Pest Management (IPM). Visitors to Baker
are required to wear new and frozen clothing and other quarantine precautions as outlined
in quarantine protocols (Appendix E). The hand pulling of weeds occurs as time
becomes available. Selective hand spray application of herbicides or pesticides, where
appropriate, may occur.
• Scientific Information Exchange. Refuge staff currently attends various professional
meetings and conferences related to Pacific island and marine resources. Additionally, a
minimal amount of staff time is devoted to the development of peer reviewed journal
articles and contributing to NOAA and Service-sponsored Web sites.
• Preservation of Wilderness Values. Since its establishment, Baker has been managed to
preserve its wilderness values and characteristics even though it has never been proposed
for wilderness designation. These values are intrinsic at this remote, uninhabited island
and coral reef ecosystem. Management activities do not impinge on these values.
• Public Access. Since establishment, Baker has never been formally opened to public
access and use. Access and public use remains closed. All individual opportunities for
compatible use such as specific research projects are administered using individual SUPs.
• Interpretation, Education, and Outreach. Current opportunities for off-site education
exist at the Maritime Museum, Honolulu, Hawaii. A hands-on exhibit representing a
Pacific island refuge is maintained to educate school-aged students about seabirds,
invasive species, marine debris, and the National Wildlife Refuge System (System).
Interpretative displays are also used periodically at conventions and professional
meetings.
• Protection and Preservation of Cultural Resources. Cultural resources remain intact and
in situ. Field camps are situated to avoid impacts to cultural resource sites.
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 3 – Management Direction 3-3
Archaeological reconnaissance to avoid impacts to cultural resources is required prior to
management activity that would potentially disturb surface or subsurface resources.
• Waste Disposal at Sea. Disposal of waste in refuge waters is prohibited.
• Waste Disposal on Island. All waste from food products, equipment, and containers that
is brought onto the island is removed during demobilization. Depending upon the
duration of the site visit, human excrement will be either bagged, stored in a chemical
toilet, or decomposed using portable biodegradable toilets, all of which are subsequently
removed during field camp demobilization.
• Refuge Boundary. There are no proposed changes to the refuge boundary.
• Baseline Contaminant Monitoring. Refuge staff conduct baseline observations of known
contaminated sites and record changes in condition since last site visit.
• Cultural Resources Inventory. Presence and condition of cultural resources on Baker is
re-evaluated.
• Wilderness Study Area. A recommendation for Wilderness Study Area (WSA)
designation is postponed until a Legislative Environmental Impact Statement (LEIS) and
wilderness proposal are developed for all other remote Pacific island national wildlife
refuges (NWRs) as part of their CCP processes.
• Marine ecosystem monitoring. Funding requests are required for additional exploration
of deep slope resources by a ship equipped with a remotely operated vehicle (ROV) or
manned submersible to operate at depths between 150 -3,000 feet.
• Seabird Nesting Restoration. Electronic calling devices are deployed and used as seabird
nesting attraction stimuli designed to encourage nesting by Phoenix petrels (Pterodroma
alba) and Polynesian storm petrels (Nesofregetta fuliginosa). These electronic call
devices consist of solar powered speakers broadcasting calls of both species in suitable
areas of the island. Both of these small ground-nesting Procellariforms are severely
depleted or extirpated throughout much of their range. The absence of cats and rats at
Baker Island makes it an ideal site within the species’ original range to restore a breeding
population of each of these petrel species.
• Contaminant Investigation Proposal. Refuge staff work cooperatively with Regional
Office staff to develop funding and operational proposals to quantify contaminant
concerns on Baker in preparation for remediation activities.
Once field operations are complete, or the weather becomes increasingly inclement, the field
camp is demobilized and all equipment and personnel are transported back to the research vessel.
Typically, the other two equatorial refuges (Howland and Jarvis) are also visited in this same
manner. Travel time between Howland and Baker is 5 hours, and Baker and Jarvis is 4-5 days.
Once the three surveys are completed, or at least attempted, the voyage continues with
approximately 6 to 7 days to travel back to Honolulu, possibly with intermediate stops at
Palmyra Atoll or Johnston Island NWRs, or continuing on for 4 days to Rose Atoll NWR and
American Samoa where voyage scientists and biologists can be exchanged and then fly back to
Honolulu. In total, it is expected that in order to visit Baker, Howland, and Jarvis, for 1 to 2 days
per refuge, a biologist or marine scientist needs to devote 20 to 26 days total travel. Trip reports
are completed, distributed, and filed once field staff return to the Honolulu office.
The only difference between the management condition prior to the completion of the CCP, and
the actions described in this CCP is an increase in the frequency of staff visits from once every
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
3-4 Chapter 3 – Management Direction
two years to once every year. In order to meet the increase in the number of site visits, refuge
staff in Honolulu is administratively burdened to seek additional funding sources and develop
partnerships for additional visits. This may take the form of producing internal project proposals
(RONS), or seeking funding support through grants or partnerships with other agencies, research
institutions, and non-government organizations. Overall, wildlife and habitat management
activities remain consistent. The only additional terrestrial management activity is promoting
nesting use by seabird species with the use of solar powered electronic calling devices.
Polynesian storm-petrels calls would be placed near the coral slab habitat on the north beach
crest. Increased monitoring in the marine environment depends upon partnership opportunities
developed with NOAA, the University of Hawaii, or other partners. At a minimum, marine
scientists would resurvey REAs and other transects. Transportation to and from the island relies
upon NOAA or other partners. Public use and access remains closed.
The ability of the Service to meet the mission of the System, “…to administer a national network
of lands and waters for the conservation, management, and where appropriate, restoration of the
fish, wildlife, and plant resources and their habitats within the United States for the benefit of
present and future generations of Americans.”; and the refuge purpose of “…the restoration and
preservation of the complete ecosystem, terrestrial and marine. Special consideration must be
given to the protection of nesting seabird populations.” is limited. A one to two day visit to the
island once every year does not provide the opportunity for refuge staff to complete anything
other than basic biological surveys of species presence or absence. Restoration, preservation, or
protection of terrestrial and marine ecosystems, or nesting seabirds is not possible. However,
lack of projected budget and staffing preclude management staff from increasing management
activity beyond what is described in this CCP. If, during the lifetime of this plan, budget and
staffing become available to pursue an increased level of management activity then the CCP will
be reevaluated.
Goals, Objectives, Strategies, and Rationale
Goals and objectives are the unifying elements of successful refuge management. They identify
and focus management priorities, resolve issues, and link to refuge purposes, Service policy, and
the Refuge System Mission.
A CCP describes management actions that help bring a refuge closer to its vision. A vision
broadly reflects the refuge purposes, the Refuge System mission and goals, other statutory
requirements, and larger-scale plans as appropriate. Goals then define general targets in support
of the vision, followed by objectives that direct effort into incremental and measurable steps
toward achieving those goals. Finally, strategies identify specific tools and actions to
accomplish objectives.
The goals for Baker over the next 15 years under the CCP are presented on the following pages.
Each goal is followed by the objectives that pertain to that goal. The goal order does not imply
any priority in this CCP. Some objectives pertain to multiple goals and have simply been placed
in the most reasonable spot. Similarly, some strategies pertain to multiple objectives. Following
the goals, objectives, and strategies is a brief rationale intended to provide further background
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 3 – Management Direction 3-5
information pertaining to importance of an objective relative to legal mandates for managing
units of the System including refuge purpose, trust resource responsibilities (federally listed
threatened and endangered species and migratory birds), and maintaining/restoring biological
integrity, diversity, and environmental health.
Goal 1: Conserve, restore, manage, and protect native terrestrial habitats that
are representative of remote tropical Pacific islands, primarily for the benefit
of seabirds.
Objective 1a: Conserve, manage, and protect habitat for nesting seabirds.
Upon CCP approval and throughout the life of the CCP, conserve, manage, and protect a
mosaic of approximately 531 acres of terrestrial habitat consisting of 31 acres of beach and
beach strand, 300 acres as short grass and forbs, and 200 acres as bare ground on Baker Island
as nesting habitat for 11 seabird species.
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
Conduct and record incidental observations of invasive species.
Adhere to strict quarantine protocols for all island visitors (see Appendix E).
Monitor contaminated areas. Remove entrapment hazards due to marine and other human
debris not considered to be historically important.
Rationale:
The 11 nesting seabird species on Baker use all island habitats (see Chapter 3.9.1 and
Appendix B). Masked and brown boobies prefer to nest on bare, open ground. Gray-backed,
sooty, and white tern; and brown and blue-grey noddy also nest on the surface, but are tolerant
of vegetated areas. Lesser frigatebirds, typically known as a shrub nesting species, are found
exclusively on the ground at Baker. Red-tailed tropicbirds prefer shaded areas and can be
found nesting on the surface, under coral slabs, or in shrubs. Red-footed booby and great
frigatebird are the only two exclusive shrub nesting species. However, due to the few shrubs
on Baker, red-footed boobies have been seen to nest on the ground.
The Seabird Conservation Plan – Pacific Region (USFWS 2005) recognizes remote Pacific
islands as providing important and varied breeding habitat, specifically Baker as being
important for ground nesting species. Additionally, the plan recognizes that near-shore waters
provide areas of upwelling currents with important food resources for seabirds.
Maintaining the island free of mammalian predators, invasive insects, and invasive plants is
critical for seabird survival (USFWS 2005). Strict quarantine protocols have been previously
established for all island visitors in order to eliminate the threat of introducing invasive plants,
insects, and animals (see Appendix E).
Marine and other human generated debris poses an entrapment and entanglement threat for
multiple wildlife species. Destruction of rusting drums and stockpiling debris can reduce the
overall area impacted, thereby reducing the threat.
Objective 1b: Increase baseline information on terrestrial habitat.
Within 15 years of the CCP approval, conduct monitoring to determine vegetation species
presence/absence and distribution on Baker Island.
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
3-6 Chapter 3 – Management Direction
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
Document presence/absence of island vegetation.
Coordinate with Regional Office GIS staff to assess and/or develop remote sensing capability
to map and monitor island habitats.
Rationale:
In general, insufficient time has been spent on Baker to adequately quantify the habitat, and
how this habitat relates to seabird biology. Collection of baseline biological information is
essential to adequately understand and manage the refuge. Although it is known that the 11
nesting seabird species use all habitats on Baker, this information has only been obtained from
the short duration, infrequent visits (1 to 2 days every 2 years) to the island. There has been no
quantitative assessment of breeding species habitat associations. The distribution and
delineation of habitats itself has been estimated, but never been quantified. Remotely
collected data may provide an option for data collection in the absence of being capable of
visiting Baker.
Objective 1c: Survey and monitor refuge to document contamination.
Within 10 years of the CCP approval, monitor approximately 100 acres of known
contamination and survey remainder of island to determine if contamination level is above the
EPA threshold value for designation on the NPL under CERCLA.
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
Document presence and extent of known contamination.
Coordinate with the responsible parties such as the Coast Guard to conduct the Site
Investigation.
If the responsible parties are not willing to conduct the Site Investigation, obtain Service
funding through the Refuge Cleanup Fund.
Coordinate with regional office contaminants staff to develop funding/operational package to
conduct monitoring activity.
Coordinate and consult with EPA in design and conduct of follow-up Site Investigation.
Rationale:
In general, insufficient time has been spent on Baker to adequately quantify the extent of
contamination on Baker. A Site Investigation is used by EPA to determine if areas of the
island or surrounding waters are unacceptably contaminated. If so, the responsible parties for
the contamination, i.e., Navy, Army, and the Coast Guard will have the responsibility to clean
up the site. To date, the Site Investigation conducted by Foster Wheeler in 1998 was
inconclusive and unacceptable to EPA and the Service. The Service now has the responsibility
to determine if Baker meets CERCLA criteria. Further and follow up monitoring is required
by the Service before NPL determination can be made.
Objective 1d: Remediate contaminated areas of Baker
Within 15 years of the CCP approval, begin remediation activities on all contaminated areas of
Baker.
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
Cooperate and coordinate with the U.S. Coast Guard or Army to remediate contaminated areas
of Baker.
Institute a long-term monitoring program after remediation
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 3 – Management Direction 3-7
If required, develop a Service funding request for cleanup through the Refuge Cleanup Fund.
Rationale:
A Site Investigation is used by EPA to determine if areas of the island or waters are
unacceptably contaminated. If so, the responsible parties for the contamination, (i.e., the
Navy, Army, and the Coast Guard) have the responsibility to clean up the site. To date, the
Site Investigation conducted by Foster Wheeler in 1998 was inconclusive and unacceptable to
EPA and the Service to determine if Baker meets NPL criteria. If these criteria are met, then it
will increase the priority for remediation by the responsible parties. For the Navy and Army,
responsibility for Formerly Used Defense Sites (FUDS) has been delegated through the
Defense Environmental Restoration Act (DERA) to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(ACOE). Unfortunately, Baker can not meet the criteria used by FUDS to become a priority
site. Therefore, the ACOE through FUDS will not be able to remediate contaminated lands or
waters at Baker. Remediation will only be possible through the Coast Guard environmental
program or if funding becomes available through the Service’s Refuge Cleanup Funds. It will
be incumbent upon Service staff to work cooperatively with the responsible parties or their
delegates and the EPA to coordinate and complete remediation activities.
Goal 2: Conserve, manage, and protect native marine communities that are
representative of remote tropical Pacific islands.
Objective 2a: Conserve, manage, and protect marine habitat.
Upon CCP approval, conserve, manage, and protect approximately 31,378 acres of submerged
lands consisting of an estimated 3,000 acres coral reef and 28,378 acres of deep water/pelagic
habitat on Baker.
Strategy Applied to Achieve Objective
Continue and expand partnership with NOAA and other research institutions to manage coral
reef ecosystems.
Rationale:
The conservation and protection of the Nation’s coral reefs is becoming increasingly important
for agencies with responsibility to manage and conserve those (Executive Orders 13089 and
13158). Because the refuge boundary for Baker extends to 3 nmi from the island shoreline, all
coral reefs are contained within the refuge boundary. Threats to the coral reef system include
invasive species such as crown-of-thorns starfish and marine debris (e.g., abandoned fishing
gear, sunken landing craft) that collects on corals, smothering or breaking them. The
responsibility for protecting, managing, and conserving coral reef ecosystems is shared with
NOAA. The Service and NOAA often participate in joint management activities throughout
the Pacific; however, no active management activities have occurred at Baker.
Objective 2b: Increase baseline information on marine community.
Within 15 years of CCP approval, monitor: coral species density, diversity, and size and
spatial distribution; fish species presence/absence and habitat associations; turtle species
presence/absence; marine mammal species presence/absence; and oceanographic conditions in
relation to climate change effects.
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
Conduct and record incidental observations of corals, fish, turtles, marine mammals, and their
habitats.
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
3-8 Chapter 3 – Management Direction
Accompany NOAA or other scientific partners on marine surveys.
Conduct REA and resurvey permanent transect sites to document coral, fish and turtle density,
diversity, distribution, and habitat associations.
Develop proposals and conduct deep slope marine surveys by ROV or manned submersible to
document presence/absence, abundance and distribution of deep slope coral and fish species.
Rationale:
The status of marine resources in much of the Refuge is still largely unknown. Unless
weather conditions preclude the work marine surveys are conducted throughout the entire time
that the marine transport vessel is at Baker. Additionally, since most site visits to Baker are
aboard NOAA research vessels, the purpose of these voyages is to conduct marine surveys and
studies. Consequently, a full compliment of up to 20 marine researchers and 40 support staff
contribute to conducting marine surveys across all alternatives. As a result, marine surveys are
more comprehensive than terrestrial surveys on Baker.
REAs and permanent transect resurveys constitute baseline monitoring of the marine
ecosystem, and are one component of all alternative strategies.
Additional surveys (e.g., marine mammals, deep slope), as described beginning with
Alternative B can be achieved as components of cooperative efforts with other agencies or
research organizations. As an example, little is known of marine mammal use surrounding
Baker, although it is known that some species are found in the vicinity.
The Marine Mammal Commission has encouraged the Service to generate partnerships with
NOAA to help document baseline information. Developing additional partnerships with
NOAA or other organizations may also assist in meeting terrestrial objectives by providing the
opportunity for additional trips to Baker.
Goal 3. Contribute to the recovery, protection, and management efforts for
all native species with special consideration for seabirds, migratory
shorebirds, federally listed threatened and endangered species, and species of
management concern.
Objective 3a: Develop baseline migratory bird and other species information.
Within 10 years of CCP approval, conduct monitoring to determine: seabird species
presence/absence, relative abundance, breeding chronology, distribution, and habitat use;
presence/absence of shorebirds; presence/absence and distribution of sea turtles; and
presence/absence of terrestrial invertebrates on Baker Island. The desired conditions by which
this will be met is understanding of the complete annual chronology for 5 of 11 nesting seabird
species; population trend data over the 10-year period for all 11 nesting seabird species; and
the presence/absence and distribution of shorebirds, turtles and other terrestrial invertebrates.
Strategy Applied to Achieve Objective
Record incidental observations of all species presence/absence, relative abundance, and
distribution.
Rationale:
The Seabird Conservation Plan (USFWS 2005) repeatedly recognizes the importance of the
U.S. Pacific Islands in providing predator-free seabird nesting and roosting environments.
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 3 – Management Direction 3-9
Their protected status, in concert with nearby marine forage resources contribute to their
importance. The Seabird Conservation Plan further identifies population monitoring
inventories as insufficient to accurately detect or monitor populations, suggesting instead that a
rigorous collection of population data is needed.
In addition to Baker being recognized as important habitat for seabirds, the U.S. Pacific
Islands Regional Shorebird Conservation Plan (Engilis and Naughton 2004) recommends
determining baseline information for bristle-thighed curlews, and other species, as the goal of
the Central Pacific Islands Subregion.
The endangered species recovery plans for both species of turtles indicate that little is known
about their biology in the central Pacific. Data on other terrestrial wildlife species found on
Baker Island are lacking.
Objective 3b: Restore breeding populations for 2 seabird species.
Within 10 years of CCP approval, establish up to 5 nesting pairs each of Phoenix petrel
(Pterodroma alba) and Polynesian storm-petrel (Nesofregetta fuliginosa) during a minimum of
3 consecutive years on Baker Island.
Strategy Applied to Achieve Objective
Implement and maintain electronic calling devices to promote nesting.
Rationale:
The Seabird Conservation Plan (USFWS 2005) recognizes the Polynesian storm-petrel may
flourish on Baker, as well as Jarvis and Howland, due to the removal of mammalian predators
from the islands. The Phoenix petrel is known from the Phoenix Islands, but does not
currently inhabit Baker, though it is thought that they did historically. A recommendation of
the Plan is expand efforts to assess habitat suitability and restore populations through
translocation to predator-free U.S. islands such as Baker. While the physical translocation of
species to Baker is not being suggested, electronic calling devices are designed and have been
successful in attracting and establishing nesting seabird colonies to other islands.
Objective 3c: Develop baseline data and understand turtle use of Baker.
Upon CCP approval, monitor hawksbill and green turtles to document any nesting sites, all
adjacent coral reef and nearshore water foraging sites, and overall population density and
distributions.
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
Record incidental observations of nearshore turtle use.
Develop partnership with NOAA for study of turtles at Baker.
Rationale:
There is currently little information related to use of Baker resources by sea turtles, though it is
known that they do use refuge habitats. Turtles have been photographed in the water during
joint Service/NOAA expeditions since 2000. Data collected over the life of this plan would
help to establish a baseline understanding of sea turtle populations in the central Pacific.
Objective 3d: Expand baseline information on marine community.
Upon CCP approval, monitor globally-depleted marine species populations such as giant
clams (Tridacna sp.), bumphead parrotfish (Bolbometapon muricatum), Napoleon wrasses
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
3-10 Chapter 3 – Management Direction
(Cheilinus undulatus), large groupers (e.g., Cephalopholis sp., Epinephelus sp., Variola sp.),
sharks (e.g., Carcharhinus sp., Triaenodon sp., Negaprion sp., Galeocerdo sp.), and corals
(Anthozoa, Hydrozoa) to document presence/absence, relative abundance, distribution, and
size/age structure on Baker.
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
Conduct marine surveys such as REA and permanent monitoring transect resurveys
Solicit partnership for survey of deep slope habitat.
Rationale:
Many marine species of commercial importance have been globally depleted. Protected areas
such as Baker still provide refugia. However, illegal fishing activity has been noted
surrounding several Remotes refuges. Baker, as well as other remote island refuges provide
the opportunity to study and protect the marine ecosystem.
Objective 3e: Develop baseline scientific information on marine mammal use of Baker.
Within 10 years of CCP approval, increase scientific understanding of marine mammal
presence and use of Baker marine waters. The desired conditions by which this will be met
will be to document all marine mammal use of nearshore waters.
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
Incidental observations of marine mammals
Solicit partnership for study of marine mammals at Baker.
Rationale:
NOAA, Service, Oceanic Institute, University of Hawaii, and Bishop Museum marine
biologists have collected data on marine species of concern since 2000. Only anecdotal
information exists on marine mammal use of the waters surrounding Baker Island. Studies
elsewhere in the Pacific, however, indicate that waters surrounding small islands may support
distinct local populations of marine mammals. It is also important to understand the threats
human activity may pose to this important resource (Marine Mammal Commission. pers.
comm.).
Goal 4. Restore the wilderness character of Baker’s terrestrial community,
and protect, maintain, enhance, and preserve the wilderness character of
Baker’s marine communities.
Objective 4a: Protect, enhance, and maintain wilderness values.
Upon CCP approval, continue to preserve and enhance the wilderness values (e.g., size,
naturalness, solitude, supplemental values) of Baker. Achievement of this objective will be
evaluated by assessing loss, degradation, or improvement of values that qualified or eliminated
it for potential designation (see Appendix F).
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
Use minimum tools necessary to manage refuge resources.
Continue to manage Baker as wilderness.
Monitor values of naturalness and solitude.
Rationale:
Baker has been and is managed as a wild, natural area due to its remote location and limited
human presence, even though the terrestrial portion of the refuge suffers from historic human
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 3 – Management Direction 3-11
impacts. Human generated debris, some containing contamination, remains from past
occupations. Additionally, debris such as discarded fishing nets continuously washes ashore.
This debris impinges upon the wilderness value of naturalness. A cultural resource review is
required prior to removal of any human debris, which may be considered a cultural resource.
Marine areas of Baker have been identified as meeting the criteria for a Wilderness Study Area
(Appendix F). Completion of the wilderness review process and as appropriate development
of a LEIS will be pursued for all Pacific remote island refuges once their CCPs have been
completed. In the interim, the area identified as a suitable WSA would continue to be
managed as wilderness. All management activities would be conducted in such a manner as
not to detract from the wilderness values identified in the Wilderness Inventory.
Goal 5: Preserve Baker’s biological, cultural and historic resources.
Objective 5a: Protect cultural resources.
Upon CCP approval, continue to protect existing cultural resources. The desired conditions by
which this will be met will be to document any change in condition of the Baker day beacon,
or other recognized cultural/historical resource.
Strategy Applied to Achieve Objective
Record incidental observations of condition of cultural resources.
Rationale:
Restricting human use of Baker would maintain cultural resources by limiting the opportunity
for invasive species establishment, and reducing the opportunity for unauthorized collection or
disturbance. In order to keep cultural resource sites protected, the locations and descriptions of
fragile cultural resources would not be made available to the public.
Objective 5b: Enhance Law Enforcement Capabilities
Upon CCP approval, seek to improve partnerships with the NOAA Office of Law
Enforcement to increase enforcement capacity. The desired conditions by which this will be
met will be to formalize interagency agreements and develop remote surveillance techniques to
document unauthorized access to the refuge.
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
Establish joint enforcement operational protocols with NOAA Office of Law enforcement.
Evaluate the effectiveness of deploying acoustical devices to detect ship traffic in the vicinity
of the refuge.
Rationale:
Rationale: Enhancing law enforcement capability to detect and prosecute unauthorized access
would preserve biological and cultural resources by limiting the opportunity for invasive
species establishment and deterring unauthorized collection or disturbance.
Objective 5c: Enhance Knowledge of cultural resources.
Within 10 years of CCP approval, undertake appropriate surveys to identify important cultural
and historical resources.
Strategy Applied to Achieve Objective
Coordinate with Regional Office cultural resource staff to develop funding package to conduct
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
3-12 Chapter 3 – Management Direction
monitoring activity.
Rationale:
In order to keep cultural resource sites protected, the locations and descriptions of fragile
cultural resources would not be made available to the public. Any maintenance activity and
establishment of new seasonal or annual field camps would require approval from appropriate
archeological resource professional (e.g., Service Regional Archeologist).
Goal 6: Inform and educate the public to increase their understanding of
remote Pacific island NWRs wilderness values, cultural and historical
resources, and their ecosystems, with special emphasis on seabirds.
Objective 6a: Provide off-site education and interpretation opportunities.
Within 3 years of CCP approval, develop an off-site educational opportunity for the public to
learn about Pacific Island refuge wilderness values, cultural and historical resources, tropical
island ecosystems, seabirds, and coral reefs. The desired conditions by which this will be met
will be through publications, educational programs, displays, or other media.
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
Develop, with External Affairs office, Honolulu, an interpretative brochure for all remote
Pacific island refuges.
Rationale:
While it is important for the public to understand and appreciate the resource values associated
with remote island refuges, it is logistically difficult to do this on-site at Baker and still protect
the island’s wildlife, habitats, wilderness values, cultural and historical resources, and visitor’s
safety. For these reasons, interpretative or educational opportunities for the public to learn and
appreciate the values of remote Pacific island refuges and resources will be provided primarily
as off-site programs and interpretative brochures.
Objective 6b: Increase understanding of impacts of global climate change.
Within 15 years of CCP approval, increase scientific understanding of the impacts of global
climate change on tropical island ecosystems, specifically as these impacts relate to seabird
nesting and foraging sites. The desired conditions by which this will be met will be the
development of one research project.
Strategy Applied to Achieve Objective
Coordinate with NOAA to evaluate changes in sea surface temperatures and sea level in the
vicinity of Baker over the next 15 years in relation to seabird nesting success.
Rationale:
It is increasingly important to understand the impacts that global climate change might have on
central Pacific Ocean islands and the wildlife resources they support such as seabird nesting
habitat and coral reefs. In order to determine if management activities are necessary to offset
the impacts of global climate change at Baker, refuge staff needs a baseline from which to
measure future change.
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 4 – Refuge and Resource Description 4-1
Chapter 4. REFUGE AND RESOURCE DESCRIPTION
Geographic/Ecosystem Setting
Baker Island NWR (Baker), located 12 nmi north of the Equator at approximately latitude 0º13’
N and longitude 176º31’ W is a northwest outlier island of the Phoenix Island Archipelago. It is
included in the central Pacific subregion of the Polynesian Region of the Pacific Basin. This
subregion, the largest of four in the Polynesian Region, is the most remote part of the tropical
Pacific and includes only low-lying reef islands, atolls, and submerged reefs. Vegetation
patterns are determined by the highly variable but normally low rainfall levels found along the
Equator in the central Pacific. In turn, the arid weather and ocean circulation patterns impose
limits on floating seed plant dispersal strategies. Baker falls in the central Pacific dry zone with
rainfall less than 40 inches per year, and thus “cannot support any forest or closed woody
vegetation” (Mueller-Dombois and Fosberg 1998). The nearest landmasses are Howland Island
32 nautical miles (nmi) to the north, and McKean Island 350 nmi to the southeast. Both islands
are also in the Phoenix Islands. The eight Phoenix Islands under the jurisdiction of the Republic
of Kiribati (including McKean) are the next closest neighbors to Baker, up to 480 nmi to the
southeast. The next closest landmasses outside the Phoenix Islands are the Gilbert Islands with
Beru Island closest to Baker at 420 nmi to the southwest. Tarawa Atoll, the capitol of the
Republic of Kiribati, is 600 nmi to the west in the central Gilbert Island Archipelago.
Climate
General climate and related oceanographic conditions in the central Equatorial Pacific
The climate associated with Baker can be generalized as being arid, warm, and tropical with
moderate breezes and light to moderate rainfall. Although differences in climate exist among the
islands, climate-monitoring stations are not readily available in the equatorial Pacific.
Consequently, current site-specific data are lacking for most central Pacific locations, or have
only been collected for a short period of time. In order to describe the weather conditions on
Baker Island, weather-monitoring data are taken from historic on-site weather data, or from the
closest weather monitoring station.
There are several climatic factors that influence weather on Baker: trade winds, rainfall, and
oceanic currents. Trade winds are surface winds that typically dominate airflow in tropical
regions and predominate from the east at Baker between 13 to16 miles per hour (mph).
Atmospheric pressure gradients range from high pressure areas located near latitude 30º N. and
latitude 30º S., to the low pressure band located near latitude 5º N., driving both the northeast
and southeast trade winds. This area of low pressure located just north of the Equator is referred
to as the ‘doldrums’ or the Intertropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ) and lacks these prevailing
trade winds because the northeast and southeast tradewinds collide or converge and rise upward.
Solar heating also allows the moist air mass of the ITCZ to rise, thus cooling the air mass and
producing a band of heavy precipitation several degrees to either side of the ITCZ (Wallace and
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
4-2 Chapter 4 – Refuge and Resource Description
Hobbs 1977). Baker normally lies south of the ITCZ. Changes in these typical patterns occur
seasonally along a north-south axis and during periodic events known as the El Niño Southern
Oscillation (ENSO) along an east-west axis. During an ENSO event, the ITCZ shifts east toward
unusually warmer waters. This shift typically leads to lighter wind speeds and variability in
rainfall depending upon geographic location in the central Pacific region (USFWS 2001,
USFWS 1998a, Vitousek et al. 1980).
Prevailing ocean currents surrounding Baker also influence weather patterns on the island by
moderating the surrounding surface air temperatures. These currents, except the Equatorial
Undercurrent (EUC), and North Equatorial Countercurrent (NECC), also roughly mimic the
direction of the trade winds. The eastward-flowing NECC is a relatively narrow surface current
that seasonally meanders between latitude 5º and 10º N, flows counter to the major westward-flowing
currents of the northern and southern hemispheres, and is situated just below the ITCZ
(USFWS 2001). In a sense, the NECC is a return flow of surface seawater running down-slope
back towards the eastern Pacific because of the lack of trade winds that would otherwise drag
surface waters in the opposite direction. Baker lies south of the NECC and is rarely directly
influenced by the current.
The westward-flowing current lying north of the NECC is known as the North Equatorial
Current (NEC) and is not known to influence current and weather patterns near Baker. Just
south of the NECC is the westward-flowing South Equatorial Current (SEC). Baker is most
always within the flow regime of the SEC.
Baker also lies in the path of the subsurface easterly flowing Equatorial Undercurrent (EUC) also
referred to as the Cromwell Current. As the EUC strikes the submerged western slopes of Baker
Island, nutrient rich waters are deflected upward, enriching the primary productivity of the
surface waters surrounding Baker. These upwelling waters from the EUC are slightly cooler
than adjacent sea surface waters and may moderate the effects of localized and periodic sea
surface warming events.
Baker climate and related oceanographic conditions
Baker’s location on the Equator puts it squarely within the arid southeast trade wind belt except
during an ENSO and other periodic fronts or storms when rainfall may be higher and winds more
variable. Baker is also in an area with high probability of mesoscale eddy formation and intra-annual
variation due to north-south movement of the ITCZ and inter-annual variation due to
variation in strength of the ENSO (Longhurst and Pauly 1987).
There are very little weather data available from Baker. Weather observations were made during
the military occupation of Baker and Howland Islands from 1935-1945 (USAEC 1963).
However, these military records could not be located. A single reconnaissance trip to Howland
and Baker Islands by the Logistics Planning Group of Holmes & Narver Inc, for the Atomic
Energy Commission in October 1963, recorded seawater temperatures between 86ºF and 87ºF
(USAEC 1963). Air temperatures during that time period ranged from 80ºF to 94ºF with an
average of 85ºF. Wind speeds during this visit averaged 13 mph with a range of 6 to 23 mph. In
winter, the average daily range of air temperature is reported as 78ºF to 88ºF, and during summer
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 4 – Refuge and Resource Description 4-3
the average daily range is 78ºF to 90ºF (NOAA 1991). Kanton Atoll (formerly Canton Island) is
located in the Phoenix Islands at 02º46’ South latitude and 171º43’ West longitude, and is the
nearest (370 nmi) historic weather station to Baker (NOAA 1991, USFWS 1998a). Weather data
at Kanton support the conclusions of arid conditions in the northern Phoenix Islands. The
Kanton Atoll weather station reported total annual rainfall is approximately 30 inches annually
(NOAA 1991) with precipitation consistent throughout the year. The trade winds, low rainfall,
high equatorial sunshine and high evapo-transpiration levels all combine to produce a relatively
arid climate at Baker, except during some anomalous storm and wind conditions.
Global Climate Change
A continuously growing body of unequivocal scientific evidence has emerged supporting the
anthropogenic nature of current global climate change. During the 20th century, the global
environment experienced variations in average worldwide temperatures, sea levels, and chemical
concentrations. Global air temperatures on the earth’s surface have increased by 1.3°F since the
mid 19th century (IPCC. 2007a). Eleven of 12 years from 1995 to 2006 are the warmest on
record since 1850 (IPCC 2007b). Global water temperatures have increased by 0.31º F on
average in the upper 300 m during the past 60 years since 1948 and changes in ocean heat
content have penetrated as deep as 3000 meters (Levitus et al. 2005). Subsequently, sea levels
rose approximately 1.7 mm (0.07 in) ± 0.5 mm/yr during the 20th century (IPCC. 2007a); this
rate rose dramatically to 3.1 mm (0.122 in) ± 0.7mm/yr since 1993 (IPCC 2007b). While the
concept of climate change is widely accepted, the extent and impact of future changes as well as
the exact source (natural or human induced) remains a debate (OPIC 2000). Emerging
consensus contends that increasing quantities of greenhouse gases (GHGs) in the atmosphere,
especially carbon dioxide (CO2), are beginning to affect climate and may be the dominant force
driving recent warming trends. The amount of GHGs globally has grown due to human activities
since pre-industrial times, with an increase of 70% between 1970 and 2004 (IPCC 2007b).
Carbon dioxide has increased by about 80% in the same time period. The atmospheric
concentrations of CO2 and methane in 2005 were 379 ppm³ and 1774 ppb, respectively. These
amounts greatly exceed concentrations recorded in the global environment over the last 650,000
years (IPCC, 2007a). Other emissions and GHGs from human activity have enhanced the heat
trapping capability of the earth’s atmosphere, causing warmer temperatures. Although the
increase in carbon dioxide is largely attributed to fossil fuel use, land use changes have also
increased the amount of cleared land surfaces, thereby reflecting more solar radiation (IPCC
2001, IPCC 2007a, IPCC, 2007b).
Global forecasting models offer a variety of predictions based on different emission scenarios.
OPIC (2000) suggests that a further increase in GHG emissions could double atmospheric
concentrations of CO2 by 2060 and subsequently increase temperatures by as much as 2 to 6.5°F
over the next century. Recent model experiments by the IPCC (2007a) show that if GHGs and
other emissions remain at 2000 levels, a further global average temperature warming of about
0.18°F per decade is expected. Sea-level rise is expected to accelerate by two to five times the
current rates due to both ocean thermal expansion and the melting of glaciers and polar ice caps.
Consequently, patterns of precipitation and evaporation may be altered. These changes may lead
to more severe weather, shifts in ocean circulation (currents, upwelling), as well as adverse
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
4-4 Chapter 4 – Refuge and Resource Description
impacts to economies and human health (OPIC 2000, IPCC 2001, Buddemeier et al. 2004, IPCC
2007a). Hansen, et al. (2008) propose that current models may underestimate the slower
feedback processes such as ice sheet disintegration, vegetation migration, and greenhouse gas
release from soils and that these factors may come into play in this century. These changes will
have a significant effect on the national wildlife refuges in the tropical Pacific. The changing
global environment and the implications this may have for ecological and geological processes in
the Central Tropical Pacific are important considerations for future management of trust
resources there. The four areas of impact linked to global climate change that may have the
greatest potential effect on Baker Island NWR and its wildlife are sea level rise, weather and
ocean circulation changes, ecological disruptions and coral bleaching due to increased ocean
temperature, and oceanic chemical composition change.
Vitousek (1994) reported, “Changes in both climate and biological diversity are known with less
certainty than are changes in C02 concentrations, global biogeochemistry or land use.” Because
temperature is more variable both spatially and temporally than C02 concentration, it is difficult
to separate human-caused vs. natural background variation. However, it is certain that increasing
concentrations of C02 and other greenhouse gasses will cause increasing climate change
(Vitousek, 1994).
The equatorial locale for Baker places it near the path of anomalous water current and surface
wind conditions during ENSO events, but the paucity of weather and oceanographic data at
Baker renders it difficult to assess the impacts and trends of global climate change at the island.
The upward deflection of cool subsurface waters into shallow water by the upwelling effects of
the EUC further complicates an assessment of climate change effects, because this phenomenon
has been rarely reported outside of the three equatorial refuges (Howland, Baker, Jarvis).
The insular nature of both the terrestrial and coral reef habitats of Baker will result in the same
high vulnerability of resident organisms that is seen in range restricted or mountaintop species
elsewhere (Parmesan, 2006).
Sea Level Rise
While global temperature is projected to rise by 3.6 to 9ºF and sea level to rise by more than 31.5
inches during the next two centuries, sea levels have fluctuated by an order of 328 feet over the
past 18,000 years as natural background variation and thawing out from the last ice age
(Michener et al. 1997). Contributions to sea level rise by climate change are ice-sheet melting,
alpine glacier melting and thermal expansion of the sea. Sea levels have risen by 4-8 inches
during the past century (Michener et al. 1997). The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC 2001) predicted a sea level rise of 3.5 inches to 34.6 inches by the year 2100 unless
greenhouse gas emissions were reduced substantially. They also suggested that continuing
greenhouse gas emissions could trigger polar ice-cap melting after 2100 accompanied by sea
level rise greater than 16 feet. More recent modeling indicates that melting could occur faster
than the IPCC predicted (Overpeck, et al. 2006).
Evidence also suggests that the world’s oceans are regionally divisible with regard to historic
fluctuations in sea level. Localized variations in subsidence and emergence of the sea floor and
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 4 – Refuge and Resource Description 4-5
plate-tectonics activity prevent extrapolations in sea level fluctuations and trends between
different regions. While researchers in IPCC (2007a) state that water levels in the equatorial
Pacific are rising at a rate of 1.2 to 2 mm per year, it may not be possible to discuss uniform
changes in sea level on a global scale, or the magnitude of greenhouse gas-forced changes as
these changes may vary regionally (Michener et al. 1997). As an example, tide gauge records on
the Atlantic coast indicate a sea level rise of .06 to .16 in/year over the past century, whereas,
they have indicated a .35 to .39 in/year increase along the Gulf coast of the United States
(Michener et al. 1997).
Increases in sea level and associated increases in storm surges and storm intensity will affect
Baker Island. Shoreline erosion and salt water intrusion into subsurface freshwater aquifers have
been noted throughout the Pacific (Shea et al. 2001). Due to the deep marine slopes directly
adjacent to Baker Island, increases in sea level could significantly erode shorelines and overall
island surface area since opportunities for accretion of lands do not exist. Loss of breeding
habitat for seabirds, wintering grounds for migratory shorebirds, and habitat for native plants,
and land crabs are predicted at current rates of sea level rise.
Ocean Temperature Increases
Most climate projections suggest that more intense wind speeds and precipitation amounts will
accompany more frequent tropical typhoon/cyclones and increased tropical-sea surface
temperatures in the next 50 years (Walther et al. 2002, IPCC, 2007). The third IPCC (2001) has
concluded, with “moderate confidence” that the intensity of tropical cyclones is likely to increase
by 10 to 20 percent in the Pacific region when atmospheric levels of CO2 reach double pre-industrial
levels (IPCC 2001). One model projects a doubling of the frequency of 4 inches per
day rainfall events and a 15-18 percent increase in rainfall intensity over large areas of the
Pacific (IPCC 2001). The IPCCl (2007) states that it is “more likely than not” that the rise in
intense tropical cyclones is due to anthropogenic activity.
Above normal mean sea surface temperatures have been shown to cause bleaching and mortality
in corals both in nature and in the laboratory with bleaching generally occurring in shallower
waters (Floros et al. 2004). Coral bleaching, the expulsion of symbiotic zooxanthellae from
coral polyps and subsequent loss of photosynthetic pigments is the result of both natural and
anthropogenic stresses. Although corals may pale in response to seasonal increases in sea
surface temperature, there has been a higher frequency of large scale bleaching events since the
1980s (Nicholls et al. 2007). The most severe global bleaching event ever recorded occurred in
1997-98 when over 50 countries showed signs of bleaching (Grimsditch and Salm 2005). Many
species of coral currently exist in the upper limits of their specific temperature range; thus, an
increase in average sea surface temperatures (even by 1.8 or 3.6ºF) over a sustained period has
been shown to cause mass bleaching, especially in shallow waters habitats (Grimsditch and Salm
2005). Other variables have also been implicated in bleaching and mortality events, including,
extended periods of high temperatures, low wind velocity, clear skies, calm seas, low rainfall,
high rainfall, salinity changes, high turbidity or acute pollution. Floros et al. (2004) goes on to
note that, “The causes of coral bleaching are debatable, but widely thought to be the result of a
variety of stresses, both natural and human-induced, that cause the degeneration and the loss of
the colored zooxanthellae from the coral tissues.”
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
4-6 Chapter 4 – Refuge and Resource Description
Bleaching episodes in equatorial islands appear to be linked to the ENSO. Widespread bleaching
events occurred during the El Niños of 1982-83, 1987-88, and 1997-98 (Buddemeier et al. 2004).
During the warm phase of ENSO, or El Niño, sea-surface temperatures are usually warm, trade
winds weak, and sea level decreases in the western Pacific (IPCC 2001, Buddemeier et al. 2004).
These combined factors result in a dramatic increase in coral bleaching (Buddemeier et al. 2004).
While El Niño events have increased in intensity and frequency over the past decades, some
longer-term records have not found a direct link to global warming (Cobb et al. 2003) and do not
predict significant changes in El Niño; however, they do suggest an evolution toward more “El
Niño-like” patterns (Buddemeier et al. 2004). Most climate projections reveal that this trend is
likely to increase rapidly in the next 50 years (Walther et al. 2002).
If coral reef ecosystems do not acclimate to projected thermal stresses, more frequent bleaching
events and widespread mortality will occur. The ability of coral reef ecosystems to withstand
these impacts will depend on the extent of degradation from other anthropogenic pressures and
the frequency of future bleaching events (Nicholls et al. 2007).
Field observation of corals at Baker, Howland, and Jarvis during five separate expeditions from
2000-2006 indicate that corals may be recovering from a bleaching event that took place during
the previous few years (1997-1998). Corals continued to increase in cover and sizes, based upon
observations during all subsequent (post 2000) visits, including those at permanent transect sites
(Maragos 2008; Maragos et al. 2008a & 2008b, Miller et al. 2008). Although coral bleaching
was predicted to occur at Jarvis in 2003 based upon NOAA satellite based temperature and wind
data, no evidence of bleaching was reported there during the early 2004 and 2006 visits
(Maragos 2000-2006, unpublished data). One possible explanation is that the cool upwelling
waters of the EUC are buffering the effects of the otherwise warmer seawater temperatures at the
island.
Tudhope (2000) sampled 6 cores obtained from 2 large, 3-4 meter Porites coral heads at Jarvis in
1999 to track sea surface temperature and coral growth rates over several or more decades using
stable oxygen isotope as a measure of Sea Surface Temperature. He found a good correlation
between this measure and the NINO3.4 Index, which is one of the most widely used and reliable
indicators of the status of ENSO. The results of their work at Jarvis and at four other tropical
sites in the Line and Cook Islands contributed to demonstrating linkages between the tropics and
the North Pacific over hundreds of years (D’arrigo et al 2005). Hawaii Undersea Research
Laboratory (HURL) submersible dives at Jarvis in July 2005 revealed many deep-water corals,
and samples of some were taken for climate change and paleo-climate analyses. The results of
these analyses are not yet available.
Oceanic Acidification and Atmospheric Chemistry
Glacial and interglacial periods in the Earth’s history, as measured from deep Antarctic ice cores,
reveal cyclical fluctuations in the concentration of global CO2. However, recent increases fall
outside the range of peak prehistoric CO2 levels. Current atmospheric CO2 concentrations are at
their highest levels in more than 160,000 years, with humans emitting 25 billion tons of CO2
annually (Buddemeier et al. 2004). The rate of increase is also five to ten times more rapid than
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 4 – Refuge and Resource Description 4-7
any of the sustained changes in the ice-core record (Vitousek 1994). The higher the
concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere, the greater the amount of CO2 dissolved in the surface
ocean. When CO2 dissolves in seawater it forms carbonic acid (H2CO3), a weak acid that
releases additional hydrogen ions and increases the acidity of the ocean. In order to buffer this
acidity, the hydrogen ions react with carbonate (CO3
2-) ions and convert them to bicarbonate ions
(HCO3
-). However, this buffering ability has diminished due to the rapid rising CO2
concentrations and the global seawater pH has decreased by 0.1 units since 1750, with regional
variations (Royal Society 2005, IPCC 2007). Models predict that over the 21st century average
surface ocean pH will continue to fall between 0.14 and 0.35 units (IPCC 2007a).
Increased atmospheric CO2 and ocean acidification affect marine organisms. As the
concentration of carbonic acid and bicarbonate ions rises, the concentration of carbonate ions
decreases. Many corals and marine organisms use calcium (Ca2+) and carbonate ions from
seawater to secrete CaCO3 skeletons (Buddemeier et al. 2004, IPCC 2007). Change in carbon
dioxide levels will increase the partial pressure of carbon dioxide in seawater, thus reducing the
over-saturation of aragonite, a form of calcium carbonate that is the major building block for
coral reefs (Vitousek, 1994). On a transect in the Pacific Ocean that ran very near Jarvis, Feeley
et al. (2004) show that the aragonite saturation horizon is shallow and is shoaling compared to
the pre-industrial aragonite saturation horizon. This reduces the width of the zone in which
marine organisms have optimum aragonite concentrations for shell-building. The result of this is
uncertain but is thought to reduce the rate at which corals can deposit calcium carbonate, thus
reducing the rate at which coral reefs will be able to keep up with any increases in sea level. A
lowered calcification rate means calcifying organisms (corals) may grow skeletons at a slower
rate, lower density, and/or decreasing strength. Thus, changes in global seawater chemistry
reduce the ability of corals to successfully compete for space and increase susceptibility to
breakage (Grimsditch and Salm 2005). In addition to changes in the carbonate system, changes
in ocean chemistry may affect the availability of nutrients and toxins to marine organisms.
It should also be noted that chemical composition changes in the atmosphere may also affect
terrestrial ecosystems. For instance, the quantity of nitrogen available to organisms affects
species composition and productivity. Increase in nitrogen can alter species composition by
favoring those plant species that respond to nitrogen increases (Vitousek, 1994). Increased
carbon dioxide can also affect photosynthetic rates in plants, change levels and characteristics of
secondary compounds in plant tissues, change plant species composition, lower nutrient levels,
and lower weight gain by herbivores.
Geology and Soils
Baker is a low-lying, nearly level island surrounded by a narrow shallow fringing reef and with a
broader submerged reef terrace off the east side of the island. The submarine slopes descend
steeply to great depths beyond the fringing reefs. Surface deposits on the island consist of
calcareous sands and coral rock. The small central depression of the island is likely the result of
the combined effects of guano mining more than a century ago. The island was likely formed as
a result of submarine volcanic activity and changes in the earth’s crust caused by continental
tectonic plate movement, including emergence of a high volcanic island, its later subsidence, reef
accretion, and its gradual northwesterly drift way from the East Pacific Rise over the past 50-80
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
4-8 Chapter 4 – Refuge and Resource Description
million years. Although scientists since Darwin (1842) have been pondering seamount, island,
and atoll formation in the Pacific since the mid-1800s, the specifics of how Baker Island was
formed have not been specifically investigated although this was reviewed (Joyce Miller in
Maragos et al. 2008a). The specifics likely follow the general sequence first postulated by
Darwin.
The dominant theory of atoll formation states that islands form in deep tropical oceans as a result
of underwater volcanoes that grow to the surface to form high volcanic islands, giving coral
polyps a foundation to grow upon and form reefs fringing the island. In time, the volcano
becomes dormant, and its mass pushes down on the earth’s crust causing it and its island to
subside and shrink in size, while its fringing reefs continue to grow upward and maintain
proximity to the sea surface. Coral reefs, originally fringing the edges of a large island, become
a barrier reef around larger islands outlining the contour of the original coastline, with a lagoon
occupying the space vacated by the shrinking island. Eventually, further subsidence causes the
island to disappear completely from the lagoon leaving behind an atoll. However, for small
islands such as Baker, lagoons may not have formed at latter stages, and continued subsidence
has left only a small low reef island in its wake. Based upon deep drilling through the atolls in
the Marshall Islands in the 1940s and 1950s, it is believed that these processes encompassed
more than 50-70 million years and up to several thousand feet of reef growth equal to the degree
of subsidence over that time span. In addition, it is hypothesized that changes in sea level
associated with the end of the last ice age and the deposition of highly permeable coralline
limestone (calcium carbonate) derived from the remains of marine organisms likely contributed
to the carbonate platform that characterizes the contemporary geologic structure of Baker Island.
The western (leeward) shoreline of the island is sandy, while all other sides are covered with
coral rubble. There is no pronounced beach crest or central basin (dried up lagoon) typically
found on some larger low-lying reef islands. A small borrow pit with an interior island is located
near the eastern shore. Soils of low-lying atolls in the Pacific frequently consist of
accumulations organic matter, guano, pumice or other transported material on top of a calcareous
sand or limestone substratum (Morrison 1990). The soil of Baker Island is composed of coral
fragments and light brown coral sand with a low percentage of organic matter.
Hutchinson (1950) concluded that phosphates accumulate preferentially on islands, such as
Howland, Baker and Jarvis Islands, that are situated in climatic dry belts used by large
populations of seabirds. Deposits of phosphate-rich soils have formed over time from guano
deposited on the island by fish-eating seabirds. Mild acids formed from the decomposition of
organic matter carry the guano downward in the soil to limestone soil layers were acids are
neutralized and calcium phosphate accumulated from the chemical changes. In addition, when
guano-beds are exposed to rain their soluble constituents are removed and the insoluble matter is
left behind. The soluble phosphates washed out of the guano may also become fixed to the coral
sand and limestone by the process described above. The calcium phosphate rocks and soil occur
among the sedimentary strata and were the principal sources of phosphate rock targeted for
commercial fertilizer and military use during the guano mining period between 1861 and 1891
(see Chapter 3.15). Even after the guano mining era, the soil profile still contained heavy guano
deposits (Christophersen 1927).
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 4 – Refuge and Resource Description 4-9
Hydrology
No information is available on the subsurface hydrology of Baker Island. However, its small
size and prevailing arid rainfall conditions would not likely result in the formation of a drinkable
groundwater lens. During staff visits to Baker, potable water is carried in containers to the island
for short visits, and could be produced on-site via reverse osmosis technology for prolonged
visits, just as it is now produced for permanent field stations at other remote Pacific island
NWRs.
Air and Water Quality
Due to the lack of human presence, oceanic and air quality are expected to be good and lacking
in pollutants. Vapors from abandoned spilled fuel storage drums left behind during the World
War II era are likely to be confined to the immediate vicinity of the drums and have probably all
volatized. However, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and other contaminants may have
entered the groundwater or nearshore environment. The acoustic environment at Baker is
completely natural without any anthropogenic noise except during periodic visits. On the island,
dominant natural sounds include the wind, calls of seabird and shorebirds, and seawater lapping
on the shoreline with wave action crashing further offshore on the outer reef margin.
Underwater the dominant sounds are wave action and surge striking the reef slopes and the
sounds of thousands of feeding and moving invertebrates and fish.
Environmental Contaminants
Debris from past human occupation is scattered throughout the island and in offshore waters.
Most of this debris is left from the U.S. military and Coast Guard occupation of the island from
1942-46. The most noticeable remnant remaining from the military is the 150-foot wide, 5,400-
foot long airstrip. At the northeast section, apparently the main camp area, are the remains of
several buildings and heavy equipment. Five wooden antenna poles about 40 feet in height
remain standing in the camp. Several crashed airplanes and large equipment such as bulldozers
are scattered around the island. Numerous bulldozer excavations containing the remnants of
metal, fuel, and water drums are scattered about the north central portion and northern edge of
the island. The Navy reported the loss of 11 landing craft in the surf during World War II
(WWII).
Thousands of fuel storage drums, cylinders of pressurized gases, piles of old batteries, cans of
waste materials, paints, kerosene, oils, grease, and unidentified substances were left behind by
the U.S. military and Coast Guard after occupation during the WWII era. In 1987, the ACOE,
sponsored by funds from the Defense Environmental Restoration Program, organized an
expedition to Howland and Baker to dispose of the fuel by burning it on-site while in the drums
(ACOE 1987). However, ACOE efforts did not completely consume the fuel, and the burning
left toxic residues in many of the drums and surrounding soils (Lee Ann Woodward, pers. comm.
with Helene Takemoto). Another large source of contamination is rusting steel and iron from
various machine parts and drums.
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
4-10 Chapter 4 – Refuge and Resource Description
Baker is slowly being evaluated by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (EPA ID
HI6143690075) for inclusion on the National Priority List (NPL) as directed by the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) (42
U.S.C. § 9601 et seq.). The evaluation is due to the large amounts of fuel, debris, and dumps left
behind by the military and the Coast Guard when they abandoned the island. While the Service
is responsible for monitoring and reporting in a timely fashion, the EPA has allowed an extended
evaluation period due to the remoteness of the site. A brief summary of activities relevant to this
action follows.
Beginning in 1978, the Service and Coast Guard visited the island and reported several large
ditches containing “hundreds” of corroded and leaking 55-gallon drums. Open, upright drums
were reported to be fatal traps for red-footed boobies that fell in while roosting on the drum rims.
An estimated 25% of the upright drums were reported to contain bird remains. By 1984, the
Service filed a “Notification of Hazardous Waste Site” form with EPA. Another joint Service
and Coast Guard expedition in 1986 identified 2,758 55-gallon drums of diesel fuel, kerosene,
motor oil, and unidentified liquids, and hundreds of smaller containers of powders, grease, paint,
and unidentified substances. Most of the drums and other containers had rusted through and
spilled their contents, however, 640 55-gallon drums were found to be intact with their original
contents (USCG 1986).
Again in 1986 Service and ACOE personnel mounted an expedition resulting in burning, in situ,
approximately one-third of the wastes identified in previous expeditions. No sampling or
cleanup of the remaining ash was done following the waste/fuel burn (ACOE 1987).
In 1988, EPA published the “Federal Agency Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket” in the
Federal Register listing Baker as a potential, uncontrolled, “federal facility” hazardous waste site
requiring Preliminary Assessment (PA) and Site Investigation (SI) reports within 18 months of
being placed on the docket. The EPA submitted a letter to the Service in 1991 requesting the PA
and SI reports be completed for Baker. The Service conducted a SI in 1992 to further map and
characterize trenches and drums identified from previous investigations. Samples were also
collected to satisfy Service reporting requirements to EPA under the provisions of Section 107 of
CERCLA. However, no report was filed with EPA. Further investigations by the Service
contractor, Foster Wheeler Environmental Corporation (Foster Wheeler 1998), were deemed by
EPA and the Service to be inconclusive.
Terrestrial Vegetation and Habitats
Baker Island is vegetated with grasses, herbaceous plants, and shrubs. Only strand species able
to survive long periods of drought and irregular opportunities to reproduce during the infrequent
wet years of the ENSO persist there. By 1924 when Christophersen (1927) did the first thorough
survey of Baker Island’s vegetation, there had already been approximately a century of visits by
Europeans and guano mining. Despite this traffic and the potential for introductions,
Christophersen found 16 species, consisting of 8 native species (Digitaria pacifica, Eragrostis
whitneyi, Lepturus repens, Fimbristylus cymosa, Boerhavia sp., Portulaca lutea, Tribulus
cistoides, and Triumfetta procumbens) and 8 that had probably been accidentally introduced.
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 4 – Refuge and Resource Description 4-11
Since then some species have been lost and new wave-carried adventives have resulted in a
modern day total of only 16 species (see Appendix B). Flint and Woodside found 16 species in
1993. It is likely that seeds of additional species are regularly washing up on the beach and then
dying back as conditions become too dry or high surf washes the plant away. Table B-3,
Appendix B, lists all the plant species of Baker Island, collections or first observations.
Terrestrial Wildlife
Seabirds, shorebirds, lizards, vegetation, insects, crabs, and alien rats, house mice, and cats have
been observed and studied at Baker Island during the current century.
Seabirds and Land Mammals
There are no native land mammals at Baker Island. Numerically dominant vertebrates are
seabirds and migratory shorebirds. Earliest ornithological surveys at Baker Island took place
long after the introduction of the rat (Rattus norvegicus) so the composition of the avian
community prior to human contact can only be surmised by looking at other islands in the
Phoenix Archipelago that did not suffer the invasion of rats. The rats were present in the 1930s
when the Panala’au colonists arrived but they were exterminated some time after 1937 when the
colonists introduced cats (Clapp and Sibley 1965). House mice (Mus musculus) were not
recorded by the Whippoorwill Expedition in 1924 but were mentioned by Rodman in 1935.
They persist today and their population size fluctuates with rainfall levels. Cats were introduced
in 1937 or 1938 by colonists to control the rats. Additional cats may have been brought during
the military occupation. The scientists of the Pacific Ocean Biological Survey Program
eradicated most of the cats in 1964 and the last sighting was in 1965. Dogs (Canis lupus
familiaris) were used to guard the LORAN station, but were removed at the termination of
operation (USCG 1946).
The findings of the ornithologist on the Whippoorwill Expedition of 1924 are the only
ornithological records prior to 1963, when scientists from the Smithsonian Institution visited
eight times between 1963 and 1965. Table B-4 in Appendix B lists species and estimates of
numbers for seabird species on all visits since 1973. Munro (1924) found eight species of
seabirds breeding in 1924. Cats were introduced during 1935-1942 and the numbers and kinds
of seabirds breeding at Baker decreased to four species by 1963 (Sibley and Clapp 1965). After
the cats were removed in 1965, the bird populations rebounded, and now 11 species breed there.
The three most numerous breeding species at Baker are the lesser frigatebird (Fregata ariel),
brown noddy (Anous stolidus), and sooty tern (Onychoprion fuscatus). Table B-4 also indicates
the breeding seabird species at Baker.
Several species of concern exist or have the potential to exist on Baker. The Phoenix petrel
(Pterodroma alba) is considered a bird of National Conservation Concern by the Service and is
listed by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) as Vulnerable. The
Polynesian storm-petrel (Nesofregetta fuliginosa) and blue-gray noddy (Procelsterna cerulea)
are Birds of Conservation Concern at the regional level (USFWS 2005). Both the Phoenix petrel
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
4-12 Chapter 4 – Refuge and Resource Description
and the Polynesian storm-petrel probably occurred at Baker Island prior to the introduction of
rats.
Shorebirds
Species occurrence and counts of the nine migratory shorebird species recorded from Baker
Island are displayed in Table B-4, Appendix B. The four most common migrants wintering at
Baker are ruddy turnstone (Arenaria interpres), Pacific golden plover (Pluvialis fulva), bristle-thighed
curlew (Numenius tahitiensis), and wandering tattler (Heteroscelus incanus). Of all
shorebirds reported from Baker, the ruddy turnstone, bar-tailed godwit, sanderling, bristle-thighed
curlew and the Pacific golden plover are considered species of High Concern in the
national conservation priority scheme for shorebirds (Engilis and Naughton 2004). These islands
provide crucial wintering habitat and may also serve as rest-stops for arctic-breeding shorebirds
going to winter farther south in the Pacific islands. In addition, the bristle-thighed curlew and
Pacific golden plover are recognized in the Birds of Conservation Concern, BCR 68 (USFWS
2002). These islands provide crucial wintering habitat and may serve as rest-stops for arctic-breeding
shorebirds wintering farther south in the Pacific islands.
Reptiles
Only two species of terrestrial reptiles have been reported from Baker Island, the snake-eyed
skink (Cryptoblepharus poecilopleurus) and the mourning gecko (Leipidodactylus lugubris).
The skink was first reported by Hague in 1862, and the gecko by Bryan in 1935 (cited in Clapp
and Sibley 1965). Both species were seen by Flint and Woodside (1993). The green sea turtle
(Chelonia mydas) and the hawksbill turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata) have been observed
foraging offshore at Baker.
Terrestrial Invertebrates
Baker Island is home to a large number of the land crab Coenobita perlata. Their large biomass
plays a dominant role in terrestrial food webs on the island where they consume a wide variety of
organic matter of all types. Other terrestrial arthropods and mollusks are very poorly known.
The entomologist Edward L. Caum visited Baker Island in 1924 and a number of other
naturalists collected insects on subsequent trips but there are no published accounts or lists.
Recent observations and collections during visits by Service biologists include house flies, small
ants, moths and millers, butterflies, spiders, and an earthworm.
Marine Habitats, Fish, and Wildlife
Previous surveys
Five sets of recent surveys from 2000-2006 have been accomplished in cooperation with the
NOAA Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center (PIFSC) and their research vessels (Townsend
Cromwell, Oscar Elton Sette, and Hi‛ialakai), primarily through the sponsorship of the Center’s
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 4 – Refuge and Resource Description 4-13
Coral Reef Ecosystem Division (CRED). General results of these surveys have been published
in NOAA sponsored State of the Reefs Reports (Turgeon et al. 2002, Brainard et al. 2005, and
Miller et al. 2008). Additionally two other reports on Baker and the remaining U.S. Phoenix and
Line Islands were published in the first of a series of books on the coral reefs of the world
(Maragos et al. 2008a, b). The field surveys since 2000, are of several types including
oceanographic data collection, towed diver surveys, rapid ecological assessments (REA) at
stationary sites, and collections of marine animals and plants for identification and description in
the lab. The Service, with assistance from CRED established three permanently marked
transects to document trends in corals and some macro-invertebrates over time since 2000.
Despite these intense efforts, several important habitats at Baker have not been adequately
surveyed, especially below depths of 65 feet. The NOAA collected high resolution bathymetry
of Baker from Multi-Beam™ surveys in 2006 and published the maps (Miller et al. 2008; Miller
in Maragos et al. 2008a), and substantial oceanographic data have been collected since 2000
(Gove in Maragos et al. 2008a; R. Brainard, pers. comm.). Remotely operated vehicles (ROVs)
have been launched to collect video- and camera-based data at depths greater than 65 feet.
Before 1998, Baker had not been surveyed for corals. Specimens of corals were collected at
Baker by Service biologist John Schmerfeld in 1998 and 28 species were identified (Schmerfeld
and Maragos, unpubl.). NOAA and the Service sponsored field studies at Baker in 2000, 2001,
2002, 2004, 2006, and early 2008. Studies through 2002 focused on the collection of
biodiversity information and the relative abundance of each coral species at the REA sites.
During 2004 and 2006 coral surveys shifted to population censuses following the methodology
described in Maragos and coworkers (2004). Maragos accomplished the censuses at eight sites
in 2006 and the incidence of coral diseases were assessed at the same sites by Greta Aeby in
2004 and Bernardo Vargas in 2006. Coral population data has also been assessed at three
permanently marked transect sites from 2000-2006. In 2006, a deeper (90 feet.) area off the
historic western anchorage was examined for metallic debris, including anchors and chains that
appear to be degrading corals and facilitating the spread of an invasive corallimorph, Rhodactis
howesii at depth and further upslope.
Submergent Habitats
Baker’s shallow marine benthic habitats consist of fringing reef crests, shallow back reefs, steep
fore reefs, spurs-and-grooves, and small reef terraces. The last two habitats are restricted to the
windward (east side) of the island. In addition, a shallow short channel was blasted through the
narrow fringing reef during the pre-World War II era to facilitate small boat access between the
shoreline and ocean. Pelagic habitats occur further offshore beyond the influence of upwelling
and nearshore oceanographic processes. Nearshore habitats include distinct nutrient-rich
upwelling zones off the west side of the island and oligotrophic (nutrient-poor) waters off the
windward reefs. The PIFSC is researching the differences between these zones (Gove et al.
2006; Gove in Maragos et al. 2008.
Baker Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
4-14 Chapter 4 – Refuge and Resource Description
Reef Life
The dominant reef life studied during the post-1997 expeditions includes benthic algae (Peter
Vroom, Kim Paige pers. comm.) corals and anemones (John Schmerfeld, Jim Maragos, Greta
Aeby and Jean Kenyon pers. comm.), other reef invertebrates (Scott Godwin, Dwayne Minton,
and Robin Newbold pers. comm.), and reef fishes (Ed DeMartini, Bruce Mundy, Brian
Zgliczynski, Brian Green, Richard Wass, Alan Friedlander, Stephanie Holzwarth, and others
pers. comm.). Additionally extensive collections of reef fishes were accomplished by Fowler
(1927), anon. (1950), Helfrich (1962), Wass (1966), Smithsonian Institution Pacific Ocean
Biological Survey (SIPOBS), and others cited in Mundy et al (2002). At the time of this CCP,
only data from coral (Table 3.1) and fish surveys (A