Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment

              Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
and Environmental Assessment
Prepared by:
Pacific Remote Islands National Wildlife Refuge Complex
Box 50167
Honolulu, Hawaii 96850
(800) 792-9550
August 2007
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
Abstract, Reader’s Guide, Table of Contents i
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
and
Environmental Assessment
Unincorporated U.S. Territory, Central Pacific Ocean
Type of Action: Administrative
Lead Agency: U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service
Responsible Official: Ren Lohoefener, Regional Director
For Further Information: Donald Palawski, Refuge Manager
Pacific and Remote Islands NWR Complex
Box 50167
Honolulu, HI 96850
(808) 792-9550
Abstract: Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge (Jarvis) is located in an extremely remote area
of the equatorial Central Pacific Ocean. This remote location creates extreme planning and
management bottlenecks in terms of ship transportation availability to access Jarvis and the
operational support needed to carry out comprehensive conservation. Four conservation plan
alternatives, including a Preferred Alternative and a No Action Alternative, are described,
compared, and assessed for Jarvis. Alternative A is the No Action Alternative, as required by the
National Environmental Policy Act. The selection of Alternative A would adopt and continue
current refuge management practices conducted during short staff visits (i.e. 1 to 2 days) at
approximately 2-year intervals. Management activities described in Alternatives B, C, and D
progressively increase the scale and scope of management activities described in the No Action
Alternative. Alternatives C and D describe desired improvements over current management that
enhances protection of wildlife through increased surveillance, enforcement, monitoring,
restoration, and other measures. While Alternatives C and D outline conservation measures that
would be desirable from a comprehensive conservation perspective, it is beyond the current
logistical realm of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) and financially unachievable
during the lifespan of this plan (15 years). Therefore, Alternative B is the preferred alternative
and describes improvements over current management that could be implemented until such time
that management activities described in Alternatives C or D can be implemented. The four
alternatives are summarized below:
Alternative A – No Action – This alternative assumes continuation of current management
programs and is considered the base from which to compare the action alternatives.
Alternative B – Preferred Alternative -This alternative describes a modest increase in the
frequency of staff visits to Jarvis but does not alter the scale or scope of the management
activities.
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
ii Abstract, Reader’s Guide, Table of Contents
Alternative C – This alternative provides increased frequency and duration of staff visits to
Jarvis, and moderately increases scale and scope of management activities conducted during staff
visits.
Alternative D – This alternative describes substantial increases to the scale, scope, and duration
of management activities conducted during staff visits.
Public access to Jarvis will remain closed under all CCP alternatives. Specific requests to access
Jarvis will regulated on a case-by-case basis through issuance of Special Use Permits. There are
no proposed changes to the refuge boundary under any of the alternatives. The selected
alternative would be used to guide refuge management throughout the life of the CCP (15–year
period)
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
Abstract, Reader’s Guide, Table of Contents i
Reader’s Guide
Consistent with requirements of the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 668dd-668ee), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) would manage
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge (Jarvis) in accordance with an approved Comprehensive
Conservation Plan (CCP). The CCP provides long-range guidance for refuge management
through its vision, goals, and objectives. No change in refuge size, boundaries, or public access
and use is proposed for any alternative. The CCP also provides a basis for a long-term adaptive
management process including implementation, monitoring progress, evaluating, adjusting and
revising the CCP accordingly. Additional step-down planning would be required prior to
implementation of certain programs and projects.
This document combines a draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and an Environmental
Assessment (CCP/EA). The following summaries are provided to assist readers in locating and
understanding the various components of this combined document.
Chapter 1: Introduction, Purpose and Need for Action includes the regional context;
establishment of and purposes for Jarvis; vision and goals for future management; major
planning issues, concerns and opportunities identified by refuge staff, Federal, State and local
agencies, and the general public; and policy for, guidance for, purpose of, and need for a CCP.
Chapter 2: Alternatives, Objectives, and Strategies describes four management alternatives
including the Preferred Alternative. Each alternative represents a potential comprehensive
conservation plan for the refuge. Alternative A (No Action) describes the current management
of the refuge. Alternative B, the Preferred Alternative, is the proposed Draft CCP for Jarvis.
Alternatives C and D describe progressively more intensive management activities if
substantially greater financial resources were available for future implementation. This chapter
identifies the objectives and strategies the refuge will use to meet overall goals. It also compares
all alternatives and identifies those eliminated from detailed consideration.
Chapter 3: Affected Environment describes the existing physical and biological environment,
public use, cultural resources, and socioeconomic conditions. This chapter represents the current
baseline conditions for the comparisons and 15-year projections made in Chapters 2 and 4.
Chapter 4: Environmental Consequences assesses and projects, over the 15-year period, the
affect of each alternative on the resources, programs and conditions outlined in Chapter 3 as they
relate to Jarvis. Most impacts would have a positive effect on refuge fish and wildlife
populations and their habitats. Mitigation and other measures are evaluated for all other
avoidable consequences.
Chapter 5: Consultation and Coordination with Others provides details on public
involvement and interagency coordination during the planning process.
Appendix A: Glossary of Terms and Acronyms contains a list of abbreviations, acronyms, and
terms that may be unfamiliar to the reader.
Appendix B: Species Lists of Corals, Fish, Vegetation and Birds lists wildlife observed in the
refuge.
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
ii Abstract, Reader’s Guide, Table of Contents
Appendix C: List of Cited References provides complete bibliographic references for the
citations in this document.
Appendix D: Quarantine Protocol for Jarvis Island describes mandatory precautions for
visitors to protect island and marine habitats from inadvertent introduction of alien and invasive
species and hazardous materials.
Appendix E: Plan Implementation and Costs includes the Refuge Operations Needs Summary
(RONS) and Service Asset Maintenance Management System (SAMMS), which briefly
describes projects and costs associated with the Preferred Alternative.
Appendix F: Wilderness Review for Jarvis Island NWR is required as part of this CCP. This
appendix lists the criteria used in conducting the wilderness review. Jarvis appears to meet all
the criterion for wilderness designation as defined by the Wilderness Act of 1964.
Appendix G: Statement of Compliance for Implementation of the Jarvis Island National
Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan describes the executive orders and
legislative acts that apply to this CCP.
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
Abstract, Reader’s Guide, Table of Contents i
Table of Contents
Chapter 1: Introduction, Purpose, and Need for Action....................................................... 1-1
1.1 Introduction...................................................................................................................... 1-1
1.2 Purpose and Need for the Comprehensive Conservation Plan ......................................... 1-1
1.2.1 Proposed Action......................................................................................................... 1-1
1.2.2 Purpose and Need ...................................................................................................... 1-1
1.3 Description of Planning Process ........................................................................................ 1-2
1.4 Legal and Policy Guidance ................................................................................................ 1-2
1.4.1 The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ............................................................................ 1-2
1.4.2 National Wildlife Refuge System ............................................................................... 1-3
1.4.3 National Wildlife Refuges in the Pacific .................................................................... 1-5
Figure 1.1 ............................................................................................................................. 1-7
1.4.4 Refuge Establishment, Purpose, and Boundary.......................................................... 1-8
Figure 1.2 ............................................................................................................................. 1-9
1.4.5 Regional and Ecosystem Conservation Plans ........................................................... 1-10
1.5 Planning Issues, Concerns and Opportunities.................................................................. 1-11
1.6 Refuge Vision Statement ................................................................................................. 1-13
1.7 Refuge Goals.................................................................................................................... 1-13
Chapter 2: Alternatives, Objectives, and Strategies.............................................................. 2-1
2.1 Introduction to the Alternatives ......................................................................................... 2-1
2.1.1 Development of Alternatives ...................................................................................... 2-1
2.2 Similarities among Alternatives......................................................................................... 2-2
2.2.1 Features Common to All Alternatives (A-D).............................................................. 2-2
2.2.2 Features Common to All Action Alternatives (B-D).................................................. 2-4
2.3 Detailed Description of the Alternatives............................................................................ 2-4
2.3.1 Alternative A – No Action (Current Management) .................................................... 2-4
2.3.2 Alternative B - (Preferred Alternative) ....................................................................... 2-6
2.3.3 Alternative C............................................................................................................... 2-6
2.3.4 Alternative D............................................................................................................... 2-8
2.3.5 Summary..................................................................................................................... 2-9
2.4 Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Study .......................................... 2-9
Table 2.1 ............................................................................................................................ 2-11
2.5 Comparison of Alternatives A-D Funding Requirements .............................................. 2-16
Table 2.2 ............................................................................................................................ 2-17
2.6 Refuge Goals, Objectives, Strategies, and Rationale....................................................... 2-17
Chapter 3: Affected Environment........................................................................................... 3-1
3.1 Geographic/Ecosystem Setting ......................................................................................... 3-1
3.2 Climate............................................................................................................................. 3-1
3.3 Global Climate Change..................................................................................................... 3-3
3.4 Geology and Soils............................................................................................................. 3-5
3.5 Hydrology ......................................................................................................................... 3-7
3.6 Air and Water Quality....................................................................................................... 3-7
3.7 Environmental Contaminants............................................................................................ 3-7
3.8 Terrestrial Vegetation and Habitats .................................................................................. 3-8
3.9 Terrestrial Wildlife............................................................................................................ 3-8
3.9.1 Seabirds and Land Mammals..................................................................................... 3-8
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
ii Abstract, Reader’s Guide, Table of Contents
3.9.2 Shorebirds .................................................................................................................. 3-9
3.9.3 Reptiles ...................................................................................................................... 3-9
3.9.4 Invertebrates (crabs and insects)................................................................................ 3-9
3.10 Marine Habitats, Fish, and Wildlife.............................................................................. 3-10
3.10.1 Previous surveys .................................................................................................... 3-10
3.10.2 Submergent Habitats.............................................................................................. 3-10
3.10.3 Reef Life ................................................................................................................ 3-11
3.10.4 Corals ..................................................................................................................... 3-11
Figure 3.1 ........................................................................................................................... 3-12
Figure 3.2 ........................................................................................................................... 3-13
Figure 3.3 ........................................................................................................................... 3-13
3.10.5 Nearshore Fish ....................................................................................................... 3-13
3.10.6 Marine Mammals ................................................................................................... 3-14
3.10.7 Pelagic Wildlife ..................................................................................................... 3-14
3.11 Threatened and Endangered Species ............................................................................ 3-15
3.12 Invasive Species............................................................................................................ 3-15
3.13 Wilderness Resources ................................................................................................... 3-15
3.14 Archaeology and Paleontology ..................................................................................... 3-15
3.15 Recent Cultural History ................................................................................................ 3-16
3.16 Socio-economics ........................................................................................................ 3-17
Chapter 4: Environmental Consequences .............................................................................. 4-1
4.1 Introduction...................................................................................................................... 4-1
4.2 Geology and Soils........................................................................................................ 4-2
4.3 Air and Water Quality........................................................................................................ 4-2
4.3.1 Air Quality .................................................................................................................. 4-2
4.3.2 Water Quality and Ocean Environment...................................................................... 4-3
4.4 Biological Resources ........................................................................................................ 4-3
4.4.1 Terrestrial Habitats and Wildlife .........................................................................4-3
4.4.2 Marine Habitats, Fish, and Wildlife............................................................................ 4-5
4.4.3 Threatened and Endangered Species .......................................................................... 4-6
4.5 Wilderness Resources ........................................................................................................ 4-6
4.6 Cultural Resources ............................................................................................................. 4-7
4.7 Economic Effects ............................................................................................................... 4-7
4.8 Environmental Justice........................................................................................................ 4-7
4.9 Cumulative Effects............................................................................................................. 4-8
Table 4.1 Summary of Effects under CCP Alternatives ...................................................... 4-9
Chapter 5: Consultation and Coordination with Others ....................................................... 5-1
5.1 Consultation and Coordination with Others ...................................................................... 5-1
Appendix A...............................................................................................................................A-1
Glossary of Terms and Acronyms .......................................................................................... A-1
Appendix B ............................................................................................................................... B-1
Species Lists of Corals, Fish, Vegetation and Birds............................................................... B-1
Table B-1 ............................................................................................................................ B-1
Table B-2 ............................................................................................................................ B-2
Table B-3 .......................................................................................................................... B-13
Table B-4 .......................................................................................................................... B-14
Appendix C............................................................................................................................... C-1
List of Cited References.......................................................................................................... C-1
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
Abstract, Reader’s Guide, Table of Contents iii
Appendix D...............................................................................................................................D-1
Quarantine Protocol for Jarvis Island NWR ........................................................................... D-1
Appendix E ................................................................................................................................E-1
Plan Implementation and Costs ...............................................................................................E-1
Appendix F ................................................................................................................................F-1
Wilderness Review for Jarvis Island NWR .............................................................................F-1
Figure F-1. Wilderness Study Areas....................................................................................F-7
Table F-1 Wilderness Inventory Summary..........................................................................F-8
Appendix G G-1
Statement of Compliance for Implementation of the Jarvis Island National Wildlife
Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan ............................................................................ G-1
List of Figures
Figure 1.1 National Wildlife Refuges in the Pacific............................................................... 1-7
Figure 1.2 Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge: Geographic Location and Boundary..... 1-9
List of Tables
Table 2.1 Summary of CCP Actions by Alternatives ........................................................... 2-11
Table 2.2 Estimated Annual Cost Comparison of Various Field Camp Configurations ...... 2-17
Table 4.1 Summary of Effects under CCP Alternatives ......................................................... 4-9
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
iv Abstract, Reader’s Guide, Table of Contents
.
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
Chapter 1 – Introduction, Purpose, and Need 1-1
Chapter 1: Introduction, Purpose, and Need for Action
1.1 Introduction
This document is a draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and draft Environmental Assessment
(CCP/EA) for Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge (Jarvis). Once finalized, the CCP would
guide management of refuge operations, site visitation, and habitat restoration for the 15-year life
of the plan. Guidance within the CCP would be in the form of goals, objectives, strategies
(Chapter 1.7 and 2.6), and wilderness study findings (Appendix F). The CCP will be
accompanied by an appropriate NEPA document. The final CCP will be revised as appropriate
based upon public comments. The proposed action can be one of the alternatives in this draft
CCP/EA, a combination of the identified alternatives, or a new alternative derived from
substantive public comment. This draft CCP/EA evaluates and compares four alternatives
containing programs for habitat management and restoration, ecological monitoring and
research, and environmental education. It also identifies the effects of restoration and visitor use
on key physical, biological, social, and cultural resources. The refuge manager of the Pacific
Remote Islands National Wildlife Refuge Complex (Remotes Complex) in Honolulu, Hawaii, is
responsible for implementing the approved CCP.
1.2 Purpose and Need for the Comprehensive Conservation Plan
1.2.1 Proposed Action
The Service proposes to adopt and implement a CCP for Jarvis. This draft CCP/EA evaluates and
compares four alternatives and their effects on key physical, biological, social, and cultural
resources. The Service has identified Alternative B as the preferred alternative because it
achieves refuge purposes, vision, goals, and objectives; contributes to the National Wildlife
Refuge System (System) mission; addresses issues and relevant mandates; and is consistent with
sound principles of fish and wildlife management.
The alternative ultimately selected and described in the final CCP will be determined, in part, by
the comments received on the draft CCP/EA. The proposed action in the final CCP may or may
not modify the proposed action presented in this draft CCP/EA.
1.2.2 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
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
1-2 Chapter 1 – Introduction, Purpose, and Need
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 Jarvis, 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.
1.3 Description of 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 Draft CCP/EA 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.
1.4 Legal and Policy Guidance
Jarvis 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.
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. Following is a discussion of concepts and
guidance for the System covered in the NWRS Administration Act, Service policies, and
relevant supplemental guidance documents.
1.4.1 The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Jarvis 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
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
Chapter 1 – Introduction, Purpose, and Need 1-3
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.
1.4.2 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 545, totaling
approximately100 million acres. These refuges, found in every United 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,
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.”
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
1-4 Chapter 1 – Introduction, Purpose, and Need
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 is 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
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
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
Chapter 1 – Introduction, Purpose, and Need 1-5
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.
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.
1.4.3 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 office, 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.
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
1-6 Chapter 1 – Introduction, Purpose, and Need
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 Jarvis. Staff, funding, and logistical
support are often shared among these remote refuges to help defray operational costs.
The preferred alternative for the Jarvis 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 Jarvis are pro-rated amongst the seven Remotes Complex refuges in the analysis of
the alternatives.
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
Chapter 1 – Introduction, Purpose, and Need 1-7
Figure 1.1 Map of National Wildlife Refuges in the Pacific.
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
1-8 Chapter 1 – Introduction, Purpose, and Need
1.4.4 Refuge Establishment, Purpose, and Boundary
Refuge Establishment
Prior to refuge establishment, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed Executive Order 7368 on
May 13, 1936, placing control and jurisdiction of Jarvis Island with the Secretary of the Interior.
Originally administered by the Office of Territorial Affairs, the Secretary of the Interior
(Secretary), on June 27, 1974, designated Jarvis Island and its territorial sea extending to the 3
nautical mile (nmi) limit as a unit of the System (39 FR 27930).
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 Jarvis, 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 Jarvis identified in the biological ascertainment report at the time
of transfer to the Service is (USFWS 1973):
“…the preservation of the complete ecosystem, terrestrial as well as marine. Special
emphasis to be given to the large seabird nesting colonies.”
Refuge Boundary
Jarvis is located in the central equatorial Pacific Ocean (Figure 1.2). The boundary for Jarvis
includes:
“all of said island … together with its territorial sea extending outward to the three-mile
limit.” (39 Federal Register 27930).
The emergent land area for Jarvis encompasses 1,273 acres and submerged lands and waters
within the three-mile limit encompass 36,214 acres for a total of 37,487 acres.
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
Chapter 1 – Introduction, Purpose, and Need 1-9
Figure 1.2 Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge: Geographic Location and Boundary.
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
1-10 Chapter 1 – Introduction, Purpose, and Need
1.4.5 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 Refuge
The ecosystem plan for Howland, Baker, and Jarvis identifies Jarvis as “…an important site for
the study of long term global climate change and periodic phenomena such as El Niño Southern
Oscillation” (USFWS 1998b). The plan further describes the fringing reef as a healthy coral
community resulting from its remoteness and lack of anthropogenic effects, and having 14
species of breeding seabirds and the only protected seabird island in the northern Line Islands.
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 imbricate)
Although theoretically within the range for hawksbill turtle, little is known about their biology,
foraging and nesting behavior, threats, and distribution surrounding Jarvis Island. Both the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration – National Marine Fishery 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 (NMFS and USFWS 1998).
Recovery Plan for U.S. Pacific Populations of the Green Turtle (Celonia mydas)
Few green turtles are known to forage in the waters surrounding Jarvis Island and nesting was
recorded in low densities along the west coast of Jarvis in the 1930’s. However, data from the
area is limited and use of Jarvis may be greater than currently documented. Both the 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 (NMFS and USFWS 1998).
U.S. Pacific Island Regional Shorebird Conservation Plan
This regional shorebird plan identifies Jarvis as being within the Central Pacific Islands
Subregion. No natural wetlands are known from this subregion; however, beaches on
uninhabited islands are important for shorebirds. 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 (Engilis and Naughton 2004).
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
Chapter 1 – Introduction, Purpose, and Need 1-11
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.” 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 (Brown et al. 2000).
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.
1.5 Planning Issues, Concerns 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
Jarvis is located approximately 1,263 nmi from the management staff located in Honolulu,
Hawaii. On average, it takes 8 days to reach Jarvis 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 Jarvis, biological and ecological
information is not of sufficient frequency to allow for a detailed assessment of resources. The
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
1-12 Chapter 1 – Introduction, Purpose, and Need
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 island opens the opportunity for invasive species introductions, limits the ability to remove
marine debris, and delays in the response to vessel groundings.
Global climate change (see Chapter 3.3) 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, if any, is unclear 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, sewage 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.
Jarvis has never been formally opened to public access and use. Administratively, public access
to Jarvis 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, only amateur radio operators have pursued and
obtained a SUP after an initial inquiry.
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 Jarvis 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.
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
Chapter 1 – Introduction, Purpose, and Need 1-13
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
Jarvis’s remoteness compels a growing list of partners and cooperators to be kept informed of
and included in planning and management activities at Jarvis. Activities that staff and partner
agencies/organizations share include:
• expedition planning;
• collaborative research projects; and
• jurisdictions of trust resources.
Most access for refuge staff to Jarvis 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.
1.6 Refuge Vision Statement
The refuge vision statement is a broad general statement that describes what the refuge staff
perceives as Jarvis’s fundamental attributes and contributions to a healthy world environment.
This statement will guide management activities for the lifespan of this plan, as well into the near
future. The draft vision statement for Jarvis is as follows.
Jarvis is one of the last places in the world where the terrestrial and marine tropical
island ecosystems are still intact and relatively free of human impact, offering the
opportunity to serve as a living laboratory for measuring current and future human
impacts to island, coral reef, and deep marine habitats. 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.
1.7 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 Jarvis are as follows, and will again be presented along
with objectives and strategies in Chapter 2.6.
1. Conserve, manage, and protect native terrestrial habitats that are representative of remote
tropical Pacific islands, primarily for the benefit of seabirds.
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
1-14 Chapter 1 – Introduction, Purpose, and Need
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. Protect, maintain, enhance, and preserve the wilderness character of Jarvis’s terrestrial
and marine communities.
5. Jarvis’s cultural and historic resources are preserved.
6. An informed, interested, and educated public appreciates remote Pacific Island NWRs
wilderness values, cultural and historical resources, and their ecosystems, with special
emphasis on seabirds.
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
Chapter 2 – Alternatives, Objectives, and Strategies 2-1
Chapter 2: Alternatives, Objectives, and Strategies
2.1 Introduction to the Alternatives
This chapter describes the process used to develop alternatives, including a no-action alternative
that describes the current condition and three action alternatives that describe various proposed
changes to current management programs. A preferred alternative is identified; however, the
preferred alternative may be modified between the draft and final documents depending upon
comments received from the public or other agencies and organizations. Similarities and
differences among the alternatives are presented, as are detailed descriptions of each alternative.
Summary tables comparing all alternatives are also included. Goals, objectives, strategies, and
the rationale for these are presented following the description of alternatives.
2.1.1 Development of Alternatives
Comments received on the preliminary set of alternatives and throughout the public scoping
process ultimately resulted in the four draft management alternatives presented in this draft
CCP/EA. These include a “no action” alternative (as required under NEPA) and three “action”
alternatives, each of which describes strategies for managing Jarvis over the 15-year life time of
the plan that might ultimately improve future conditions at the refuge. Each alternative describes
a combination of wildlife and habitat management strategies designed to achieve the refuge goals
and objectives. These alternatives provide different ways to address and respond to major issues,
management concerns, and opportunities identified during the planning process. All of the major
issues, activities, and management concerns were evaluated and addressed for each alternative.
The four alternatives are summarized below:
• Alternative A - No Action. This alternative assumes no change from current
management programs and is considered the baseline from which to compare the other
alternatives. Specifically, the refuge would remain closed to public access, with
compatible activities being allowed and administered through the refuge’s Special Use
Permit process. Wildlife and habitat management activities such as monitoring seabird
populations, documenting the presence of invasive plant species, stockpiling marine and
other debris, and using solar powered electronic radio calls to attract nesting seabirds
would be restricted to the 1 to 2 day period that occur once every 2 years. Transportation
to and from Jarvis would be provided by NOAA or other partners, at the discretion and
capability of the partner.
• Alternative B – Preferred Alternative. This alternative describes an increase in the
frequency of staff visits from once every two years to once every year. Overall, wildlife
and habitat management activities would be identical as those described in the No Action
alternative. The use of solar powered electronic radio calls used to encourage seabird
nesting activity would be continued. Increased monitoring in the marine environment
would be dependent upon partnership opportunities developed with NOAA, University of
Hawaii, or other partners. Transportation to and from the island would rely upon NOAA,
or other partners providing arrangements similar to those provided in the No Action
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
2-2 Chapter 2 – Alternatives, Objectives, and Strategies
Alternative. Public use and access would remain closed and be administered as described
in the No Action alternative.
• Alternative C. This alternative describes an increase in the frequency and duration of
staff visits, and increases the scale and scope of management activities conducted during
those visits. Concurrently staffed seasonal field camps (approximately 4 months
duration) would be established on Jarvis and two other nearby refuges. Increased
monitoring of seabird populations would create greater understanding of migration and
nesting chronologies of various seabird species. Seasonal field camps would allow
adequate time to control invasive species, and provide basic maintenance of cultural and
historical resources. Removal of marine debris from the island to protect seabirds and
turtles from entanglement would also occur. Transportation to and from seasonal field
camps would be provided by contract vessel. Public use and access would remain closed
and be administered as described in the No Action alternative.
• Alternative D. Management activities under this alternative are similar to those
described in Alternative C. However, a greater level of detail and understanding of
Jarvis���s wildlife resources would be possible. The primary differences between these two
alternatives is that a single field camp would be established on only 1 mid-Pacific island
refuge in a given year. Field camps would be rotated annually between these island
refuges, and transportation would be provided by a FWS-owned vessel. Public use and
access would remain closed and be administered as described in the No Action
alternative.
These four alternatives are described in more detail below starting with the similarities among
the alternatives, followed by a detailed description of each alternative, and finally a summary
that defines the rationale for selecting the Preferred Alternative.
2.2 Similarities among Alternatives
Although the alternatives differ in several ways, there are similarities (i.e. shared features or
management components) among them as well. Following is a description of the features
common to all the alternatives (A-D); and features common to all action alternatives (B-D).
2.2.1 Features Common to All Alternatives (A-D)
All alternatives contain some common features. These are presented below to reduce the length
and redundancy of the individual alternative descriptions.
• Baseline Monitoring of Wildlife Populations and Habitats. At a minimum, staff visits to
Jarvis requires baseline monitoring efforts to document species presence or absence,
abundance, habitat condition, presence of invasive species and various other physical
variables such as temperature, precipitation, wind, etc. This basic biophysical monitoring
would be constant throughout the alternatives. However, some alternatives would build
upon this minimum level of visitation and monitoring.
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
Chapter 2 – Alternatives, Objectives, and Strategies 2-3
• Voyage Preparation. The logistics of providing adequate field camp supplies such as
water, food, first aid, and communications would also remain constant. However, some
alternatives would require an additional volume or frequency of subsistence supplies to
support greater numbers or staff-days on the refuge.
• Use of extraneous unnatural lighting. Nighttime operations of the support vessel and the
use of light sources by staff in the camp would be carried out in order to minimize
collision and disorientation of wildlife that can be caused by light hazards. This would
include minimizing lighting on the vessel and in camp, shading windows, and limiting
use of hand-held lights.
• Use of stringent quarantine protocols and when invasive species are discovered, use of
IPM to eradicate or control them. Visitors to Jarvis would be required to wear new and
frozen clothing and other soft gear as outlined in quarantine protocols (Appendix D).
Other quarantine precautions include prohibiting fresh fruits or vegetables, cardboard
boxes, and disinfecting surfaces of tools and other hard surfaces. Time permitting; the
hand pulling of weeds would occur. The selective hand spray application of herbicides or
pesticides, where appropriate, may also occur.
• Scientific Information Exchange. Refuge staff currently attend 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. These activities
would remain constant, although there may be opportunities to increase this involvement
with some alternatives.
• Preservation of Wilderness Values. Since its establishment, Jarvis 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 across all alternatives would not
impinge on these values.
• Public Access. Since establishment, Jarvis has never been formally opened to public
access and use. Access and public use remains closed across all alternatives. All
individual opportunities for compatible use such as specific research projects would
continue to be 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 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 across all alternatives. Field camps would be situated to avoid impacts to cultural
resource sites. Archaeological reconnaissance and possible testing to avoid impacts to
cultural resources would be 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 under all
alternatives.
• Waste Disposal on Island. All waste from food products, equipment, and containers that
is brought onto the island will be removed during demobilization. Depending upon the
duration of the site visit, human excrement will be either bagged, stored in a chemical
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
2-4 Chapter 2 – Alternatives, Objectives, and Strategies
toilet, or decomposed using portable biodegradable toilets, all of which will subsequently
be removed during field camp demobilization.
• Refuge Boundary. There are no changes being proposed to the refuge boundary under any
alternative.
• Seabird Nesting Restoration. All alternatives include the deployment of electronic calls
as seabird nesting attraction devices designed to attract 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 mammal-free status of Jarvis
Island makes it an ideal site within the species’ original range to restore a breeding
population of each species.
2.2.2 Features Common to All Action Alternatives (B-D)
These features are common to Alternatives B, C, and D but would not be implemented as part of
the No-Action Alternative.
• Cultural Resources Inventory. Jarvis would be re-evaluated for the presence and
condition of cultural resources. Visits that are more frequent would provide the
opportunity for on-site review and documentation of cultural resources. However, the
duration of the site visit across the alternatives would determine the level of review.
• Wilderness Study Area. A recommendation for Wilderness Study Area designation
would apply to all action alternatives. However, wilderness recommendation would be
postponed until an LEIS and wilderness proposal are developed for all other remote
Pacific Island NWRs as part of their CCP processes.
• Marine ecosystem monitoring. Funding will be sought for additional exploration of deep
slope resources. Use of a University of Hawaii ship equipped with a remotely operated
vehicle (ROV) to operate at depths between 150 to 3,300 feet may be possible across all
action alternatives.
2.3 Detailed Description of the Alternatives
A narrative description outlining each alternative follows. Additionally, Table 2.1 contrasts how
various themes/issues identified in this CCP are addressed by the alternatives. Table 2.2
compares the cost estimates for each alternative.
2.3.1 Alternative A – No Action (Current Management)
This alternative assumes no change from present management programs and is considered the
base from which to compare the action alternatives (Table 2-1). The Service’s Remotes
Complex office would continue to maintain jurisdiction and management of Jarvis Island and the
associated coral reefs and marine habitats out to three nmi as a NWR. Site visits to Jarvis would
occur approximately once every 2 years as they have for the past 6 years. Staff visits would be
arranged through the cooperation of partner agencies such as NOAA, U.S. Coast Guard, and
other organizations providing berths for refuge staff. During these staff visits, two refuge staff
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
Chapter 2 – Alternatives, Objectives, and Strategies 2-5
would spend approximately 1 to 2 days on the island conducting baseline scientific data
collection, inspecting boundary signs, inventorying for the presence of invasive species, visiting
cultural resources, and collecting and stockpiling marine debris. The brief and infrequent visits
in this alternative preclude any habitat management other than stockpiling entrapment hazards
that may wash ashore or remain because of human habitation during the guano mining and
military eras.
Marine vessels capable of traveling the open ocean for extended periods are the only opportunity
for transportation to Jarvis. In the recent years, NOAA, the U.S. Coast Guard, and private
charter vessels have all provided transportation. Typically, Baker, Howland, and Johnston Island
NWR (Johnston) are visited as part of the first leg of a comprehensive biennial NOAA scientific
ship expedition to all central Pacific Ocean insular properties. For this first leg, the ship arrives
at Johnston after 3 days of travel from Honolulu. Four days of research time are spent at
Johnston before departing for Howland. After 7 days of travel, the ship arrives at Howland and
spends the next 4 days at both Howland and nearby Baker conducting research before departing
for American Samoa. Jarvis is typically completed on the second leg of the expedition.
Biologists are not allowed to go ashore if surf conditions are too rough near Howland, Baker, or
Jarvis. Consequently, only marine surveys would be conducted. Based upon prior attempts,
there is a 50% chance that biologists will make it onto Howland, Baker, or Jarvis. After 5
additional days of travel, the ship arrives at Pago Pago, American Samoa, allowing a change-out
of crew and scientists for the second leg of the expedition, continuing from American Samoa to
Rose Atoll NWR, Jarvis, Palmyra Atoll NWR, and Kingman Reef NWR. An equal amount of
time, about 25 days, is spent for the second leg of the expedition to conduct research and return
to Honolulu
Once on- site on Jarvis, 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 are only on-island for 1 to 2 days with most of that time being engaged in work
activities.
While on-island, the biologists will 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. Cultural sites will be visited with
observations made about condition and deterioration. 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 utilize Jarvis. Any evidence of
illegal activity such as unauthorized access will also be documented. Photographs will record
general habitat conditions; however, further habitat assessments would 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.
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
2-6 Chapter 2 – Alternatives, Objectives, and Strategies
During the period that the biologists are on Jarvis, marine scientists from NOAA, the Service,
and other partner organizations such as the University of Hawaii conduct surveys and monitoring
activities of the marine environment. Some monitoring activities occur on-board the vessel,
while others require the use of SCUBA equipment and divers. All of the marine scientists,
however, are based on the vessel awaiting the conclusion of terrestrial 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 ecological data such as fish species, abundance, and predator prey relationships is collected.
Data is 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 is provided to the Service that includes a full range of
oceanographic, bathymetric, and marine biological data. 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. A NOAA cruise report for the first leg
is completed before the ship arrives at Pago Pago. Service trip reports are completed,
distributed, and filed once field staff returns to the Honolulu office.
2.3.2 Alternative B - (Preferred Alternative)
Management under Alternative B would increase the frequency of staff visits to Jarvis and would
not alter the current management regime. Habitat assessments and wildlife monitoring data
would continue to be collected as described in the No Action Alternative. The travel to,
establishment of, and conduct of field camps would also remain the same. The primary
difference between Alternative A and Alternative B is the frequency of visitation from once
every two years to once every year respectively. Thus, at the end of the 15-year lifespan of the
plan, it is anticipated that there will have been 15 visits to Jarvis. In order to meet the increase in
the number of site visits, refuge staff in Honolulu would be 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. The
scale and scope of marine surveys would also be maintained. At a minimum, marine scientists
would resurvey REAs and other transects described in Alternative A.
2.3.3 Alternative C
Management activity on Jarvis would increase under this alternative. Seasonal field camps
lasting approximately 4 months would be established concurrently on Jarvis and two other
remote Pacific Ocean refuges (Howland and Baker). Subsequent years would find the seasonal
field camps deployed during alternating 4 month periods. Thus, the field camp would return to
Jarvis once every year during a different 4 month period. At the end of three years, it is expected
that field camp staff would have spent twelve months on the island and have been present on the
island during each month of the year. Due to the relatively short duration of each field camp, it
would be possible to deploy and demobilize without any re-supply trips. Thus, a contract vessel
for two charter periods (deployment and demobilization) would be required. Yearly funding to
charter a research vessel would be required to implement this alternative. Aside from
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
Chapter 2 – Alternatives, Objectives, and Strategies 2-7
deployment and demobilization, no small vessels would be required during field camp
operations.
Access provided by a charter vessel would substantially increase Service presence and ability to
monitor, survey, restore, and otherwise manage refuge resources. Seabird species nesting at
latitudes near the equator are extremely asynchronous and vary between years in their schedule
of breeding. Longer periods of residency at Jarvis would foster a better understanding of
breeding chronology of seabirds. Longer visits would enable the staff to map vegetation and
detect rare species of all taxa that may be missed on shorter trips. Surveys of shorebirds and
terrestrial invertebrates would also be conducted. By concurrently operating field camps on
these three refuges it would be possible to compare, wildlife use between the refuges, but it
would not be able to provide a complete assessment of annual use on any one individual refuge.
Nearshore surveys of the marine environment, not requiring SCUBA could be increased, but due
to safety concerns, most marine surveys would only occur during the period when the transport
vessel was near the island during deployment and demobilization.
Terrestrial and marine invasive plant and invertebrate species have the capacity to alter plant and
animal communities, specifically posing a threat to seabird nesting habitat and coral reefs. Staff
being present on the island each year would provide the opportunity to complete comprehensive
surveys for both native and exotic species. The extended duration of site visits will allow for the
early detection of any exotic or invasive species, and provide for the rapid response and control
before any invasive species has the ability to negatively affect refuge resources. Invasive species
control would be in the form of hand-pulling plants and algae, hand spray applications of
herbicide or insecticide or physical removal of invertebrates such as crown-of-thorns starfish. It
should be noted again, however, that concerns for ocean safety during extended field camps
without nearby vessel support will severely limit marine surveys and activities.
Marine debris poses an entanglement threat to seabirds and turtles. The extended field camp
operations proposed in Alternative C would provide refuge staff the opportunity to not only
collect and stockpile marine debris such as discarded fishing nets and plastic waste, but prepare
the debris for off-site removal during demobilization activities.
Additional time on the island would allow field camp staff to conduct visual surveys for sea
turtle use of nearshore waters. Turtles are often found basking on shorelines, or foraging in
shallow nearshore waters where they find plant growth to graze. Habitat use and behaviors of
turtles found in the area would be documented in this alternative. While surveys could be
conducted to document turtle use in the nearshore waters, the availability of a contract vessel
only during deployment and demobilization would limit the ability to search for other sites of
turtle or marine mammal use outside of nearshore waters.
Remotely operated cameras, hydrophones, listening devices, and satellite linkages may also be
used to collect data and imagery primarily on seabird use, breeding chronology, habitat selection,
seabird productivity, and other ecological attributes. These biotic and abiotic characteristics
could be monitored during periods when field camps are not present on the island. These data
would also be used for law enforcement purposes to detect trespass and for monitoring condition
of vegetation, presence or absence of all avian species using the refuge, monitoring of
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
2-8 Chapter 2 – Alternatives, Objectives, and Strategies
invertebrate (land crab) population indices, and to detect invasive species. However, the level of
implementation and the use of this technology would be dependent upon available funding.
A limited amount of time would be available for the maintenance of existing cultural and
historical resources. For instance, it would be reasonable to assume that minor masonry repair or
repainting of the Jarvis Light day beacon could be accomplished during one of the 3-year
periods. Cultural resource surveys would need to be completed prior to any cultural resource
restoration and maintenance, or the establishment of the field camp.
Additional research opportunities would present themselves with a 4 month field camp. The
primary increase would be in documenting the effects of a changing global environment. While
it is certain that our climate is changing, it is uncertain how this change will affect mid-Pacific
Ocean islands and their wildlife resources. Changes in sea level, current patterns, temperature,
nutrients, and storm intensities could all have impacts on these areas, or the distribution of
seabird food resources. Without the opportunity to monitor these parameters, it will be
impossible to discuss their impacts, and ultimately to make any changes to management
activities to minimize the impacts.
A regularly chartered vessel would also provide the opportunity to provide a law enforcement
presence, better understand the equatorial Pacific Island ecosystems, and increase opportunities
for cooperation with partner institutions, organizations and agencies. A chartered vessel would
allow refuge staff be more time efficient and independent of schedules and availability of other
agencies and organizations for access to Jarvis and other refuges.
2.3.4 Alternative D
Alternative D proposes to establish a year-round field camp on Jarvis, with provisions to rotate
the camp to Howland, Baker, Johnston Island NWR and Rose Atoll NWR in subsequent and
alternating years. The purchase of a Service vessel for field camp safety and support, and to
increase the ability to monitor and manage refuge resources of all remote Pacific Island refuges
is an integral component of this alternative. Interim staff change and re-supply trips for a 12
month field camp would occur a minimum of three times per year. A Service-owned vessel
could also be stationed and available on-site to complete additional surveys, especially of the
marine system.
All wildlife populations, particularly seabirds, could be monitored in greater detail. Annual
nesting chronology, seabird recruitment by species, nest site selection, and other biological and
ecological parameters could be documented. Any invasive species that are detected could be
controlled and eradicated in the same manner as described in Alternative C. A rotation among
Pacific Island refuges, also including Johnston Island, and Rose Atoll NWRs, would allow each
island to host an annual field camp once every 5 years. Coordination with other agencies
sponsoring vessel access and affording berths for Service personnel would continue under this
alternative, including possible re-supply and staff change-outs. In addition, the Service would
also be able to provide access to Jarvis and other refuges for visiting researchers, archeologists,
and cultural resource specialists. The use and benefit of remotely operated cameras,
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
Chapter 2 – Alternatives, Objectives, and Strategies 2-9
hydrophones, listening devices, and satellite linkages are identical to those described in
Alternative C.
Surveys and monitoring efforts under this alternative would provide the greatest understanding
and most biologically effective management of refuge resources. Research and documentation
beyond basic qualitative surveys and monitoring would be encouraged and enhanced, with the
opportunity for Jarvis and other Pacific Island refuges to serve as baseline sites for monitoring
global climate change and locations where seabird foraging ecology as it relates to changing
oceanographic conditions near the equator could be investigated.
2.3.5 Summary
The ability of the No Action and Preferred Alternatives to contribute to meeting 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.” is limited. Likewise, the No Action and the Preferred Action provide a minimal
benefit to meeting the refuge purpose of, “…the preservation of the complete ecosystem,
terrestrial as well as marine. Special emphasis to be given to large seabird nesting seabird
colonies.” A 1 to 2 day visit to the island once every 2 years or once every year respectively 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 with the No Action or Preferred
Alternative.
Alternative C and Alternative D both contribute to meeting the refuge purpose and System
mission by providing the opportunity to actively work toward restoration of nesting seabird
populations, potentially controlling invasive species (early detection, rapid response), removing
marine debris harmful to individual animals, and contributing to our general understanding of the
implications and impacts of global climate change on seabird populations.
However, lack of projected budget and staffing preclude management staff from looking for
increased management activity beyond Alternative B. It is for this reason that Alternative B has
been selected as the Preferred Alternative. If, during the lifetime of this plan, budget and staffing
become available to pursue Alternative C or D, then the CCP will be reevaluated with the
potential selection of a new Preferred Alternative. Until that time, the Service is proposing
Alternative B as the Preferred Alternative.
2.4 Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Study
The concept of placing Jarvis in custodial status, or in other words doing less than the No Action
alternative was considered but eliminated from further study. At present, refuge staff visits
Jarvis once every two years, thereby managing the refuge just above a custodial or bare
minimum level. Reducing the frequency of current staff visitation would not be sufficient to
meet the purposes for which the refuge was established, or the obligations of several laws such
as the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, Endangered Species Act, or the Administration Act. Custodial
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
2-10 Chapter 2 – Alternatives, Objectives, and Strategies
status for Jarvis – not visiting or preparing to visit - would reduce or eliminate any management
activity to meet these obligations. In addition, the current limited visitation to the island ensures
U.S. sovereignty. Eliminating visitation by placing the refuge in custodial status may jeopardize
the U.S. claim of territorial ownership. Thus, custodial status as an alternative was not further
evaluated.
Two Wilderness Study Areas were evaluated and determined to meet the minimum criteria for
wilderness recommendation. Recommendation for wilderness designation as a component of
any alternative was not considered at this time, but will be included in a LEIS at the completion
of the CCP process for all other remote Pacific island refuges.
No other alternatives or components of alternatives were considered beyond those mentioned
above.
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
Chapter 2 – Alternatives, Objectives, and Strategies 2-11
Table 2.1 Summary of CCP Actions, by Alternative
Key Themes/Issues Alternative A No Action
(Current Management)
Alternative B Preferred
Alternative
Alternative C Alternative D
Access to Refuge
Voyage Preparation and
Administration
Logistic planning
required for 1 to 2 day
visit and a 20-26 day
voyage. Funding
required for passenger
aboard partner vessel,
one trip every 2 years.
Logistic planning
required for 1 to 2 day
visit and a 20-26 day
voyage. Funding
required for passenger
aboard partner or charter
vessel, one trip every
year.
Logistic planning
required for 4 month
long field camp.
Funding required for
two contract vessel trips
per year, but is cost-shared
with other
NWRs.
Logistic planning for
year long field camp.
Funding required
annually for vessel
operation, but is cost-shared
with other
NWRs.
Method/Cost of Voyage
Transportation
Transportation provided
aboard partner vessels.
No transportation cost to
FWS incurred. Least
expensive of all
alternatives.
Transportation provided
aboard partner vessels
with additional effort to
charter and partner. No
cost on partner vessel.
Charter vessel would
incur cost of one charter
per year. Least
expensive of all action
alternatives.
Transportation provided
aboard partner vessels
on irregular basis.
Chartered vessel
required on regular basis
would incur cost of two
charters per year, pro-rated
among 3 refuges.
Most expensive of all
alternatives.
Transportation provided
aboard partner vessels.
Service-owned vessel
required would incur
annual cost, with cost
pro-rated among 7
refuges. Slightly less
than most expensive
alternative.
Frequency of Site Visit One- to 2- day visit
every 2 years.
One- to 2-day visit every
year.
Annually host a 4-
month per year field
camp.
A 12-month long field
camp hosted every 5
years.
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
2-12 Chapter 2 – Alternatives, Objectives, and Strategies
Key Themes/Issues Alternative A No Action
(Current Management)
Alternative B Preferred
Alternative
Alternative C Alternative D
Field Camp Duration
and Staff Required
One- to 2- persons
overnight for 1 to 2
days.
One- to 2-persons
overnight for 1 to 2
days.
Two- to 3- person
seasonal field camp
established concurrently
on Howland and two
other nearby refuge
islands.
Two- to 3- person year-round
field camp
established on Howland
and rotated annually
with nearby refuge
islands.
Quarantine Procedures Standard, strict visitation
and importation
restrictions are in place
across all alternatives to
control threat for
invasive species.
Same as Alternative A.
Same as Alternative A.
Same as Alternative A.
Seabirds, Other Wildlife, and Habitats
Seabird Monitoring Basic monitoring of
seabird species,
abundance, and nesting
status occurs every other
year with a 1- to 2- day
monitoring period.
Basic monitoring of
seabird species,
abundance, and nesting
status occurs once every
year with a 1- to 2- day
monitoring period.
Fundamental monitoring
of nesting chronology,
seasonality as well as
species presence and
abundance occurs once
every 8 months with up
to a 4 months duration
monitoring period.
Fundamental monitoring
of nesting chronology,
seasonality as well as
species presence and
abundance occurs once
every 5 years with a 12-
month duration
monitoring period.
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
Chapter 2 – Alternatives, Objectives, and Strategies 2-13
Key Themes/Issues Alternative A No Action
(Current Management)
Alternative B Preferred
Alternative
Alternative C Alternative D
Seabird Nesting
Restoration
Seabird nest attraction
devices (electronic bird
calls) currently on-island,
but inoperative.
Maintenance of
equipment occurs every
other year. Monitoring
for seabird response
occurs once every other
year with a 1- to 2-day
monitoring period.
Seabird nest attraction
devices (electronic bird
calls) placed on-island.
Maintenance of
equipment occurs
annually. Monitoring
for seabird response
occurs once every year
with a 1- to 2-day
monitoring period.
Use of remote cameras,
in addition to electronic
calls increases
monitoring activity.
Maintenance of
equipment occurs
annually. Monitoring
for seabird response
occurs once every 8-
months during a 4-
month monitoring
period. Remote cameras
allow continuous
monitoring.
Use of remote cameras,
in addition to electronic
calls increases
monitoring activity.
Maintenance of
equipment occurs
annually. Monitoring
for seabird response
occurs once every 5
years during a 12-month
monitoring period.
Remote cameras allow
continuous monitoring.
Other Wildlife and
Habitat Monitoring
Each visit will
document species
presence or absence of
species, presence of
invasive species, and
abiotic variables
(temperature, wind
speed, etc…).
Each visit will document
species presence or
absence of species,
presence of invasive
species, and abiotic
variables (temperature,
wind speed, etc…).
Each visit will
document species
presence or absence,
abundance, habitat
condition, presence and
distribution of invasive
species, and abiotic
variables (temperature,
wind speed, etc…).
Each visit will document
species presence or
absence, abundance,
habitat condition,
presence and distribution
of invasive species, and
abiotic variables
(temperature, wind
speed, etc…).
Vegetation Mapping None. None. Mapping of vegetation
will occur seasonally
during field camps, but
will only be capable of
documenting seasonal
growth patterns.
Mapping of vegetation
will occur during field
camps. Annual growth
patterns documented, but
not repeated for 5 years.
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
2-14 Chapter 2 – Alternatives, Objectives, and Strategies
Key Themes/Issues Alternative A No Action
(Current Management)
Alternative B Preferred
Alternative
Alternative C Alternative D
Habitat Management
Activities
No habitat management
activities occur other
than collection and
stockpile of marine and
other debris.
No habitat management
activities occur other
than collection and
stockpile of marine and
other debris.
Control of invasive
species occurs as
occurrences are detected.
Control of invasive
species occurs as
occurrences are detected.
Wilderness
Wilderness Resource
Management
Refuge activities will
continue to preserve
wilderness resource
values.
Management activities
will continue to preserve
wilderness resource
values.
Management activities
will continue to preserve
wilderness resource
values.
Management activities
will continue to preserve
wilderness resource
values.
Wilderness Study Area No current WSA. WSA identified.
Wilderness
recommendation delayed
until all Pacific Island
CCPs are complete.
WSA identified.
Wilderness
recommendation delayed
until all Pacific Island
CCPs are complete.
WSA identified.
Wilderness
recommendation delayed
until all Pacific Island
CCPs are complete.
Marine Monitoring
Marine Exploration No current activity. Deep slope monitoring
by ROV proposed, but
dependent upon funding.
Deep slope monitoring
by ROV proposed, but
dependent upon funding.
Deep slope monitoring
by ROV proposed, but
dependent upon funding.
Marine Monitoring Marine ecosystem
monitored. REA and
established surveys
completed once every
two years.
Marine ecosystem
monitored. REA and
established surveys
completed once every
year. No new surveys.
Marine ecosystem
monitored. REA and
established surveys
completed twice per
year. No new surveys
proposed.
Marine ecosystem
monitored. REA and
established surveys
completed twice per
year. Additional survey
sites possible.
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
Chapter 2 – Alternatives, Objectives, and Strategies 2-15
Key Themes/Issues Alternative A No Action
(Current Management)
Alternative B Preferred
Alternative
Alternative C Alternative D
Cultural Resources
Cultural Resource Cultural resources
preserved.
Cultural resources
preserved. On-site
cultural resource survey
if funding allows.
Cultural resources
preserved. On-site
cultural resource survey
required prior to
establishment of
seasonal field camp.
Cultural resources
preserved. On-site
cultural resource survey
required prior to
establishment of year-long
field camp.
Recreational, Educational and Research Use
Recreational,
Educational, and
Research Use
Public access would
remain closed. Proposed
uses by researchers and
other visitors managed
by issuance of Special
Use Permits on a case-by-
case basis.
Opportunities for
environmental education
exist off-site.
Same as Alternative A.
Same as Alternative A.
Same as Alternative A.
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
2-16 Chapter 2 – Alternatives, Objectives, and Strategies
2.5 Comparison of Alternatives A-D Funding Requirements
The costs associated with implementing each Alternative are shown in Table 2-3. For
Alternative A (No Action), the costs incurred by the Service are associated with staff working on
the island for 1 to 2 days once every two years and relies on the ability of refuge staff to be
transported on a NOAA research or partner vessel to Jarvis. The costs associated with
Alternative B include staff working on the island for 1 to 2 days and relies on the ability of
refuge staff to be transported on a NOAA research vessel or another vessel provided through
other partnerships or grant funding to facilitate yearly staff visits. Alternative C includes costs
for two vessel charters per year to deploy and demobilize a seasonal field camp (4-month
deployment of 2 personnel) to survey, restore and otherwise manage refuge resources. The
adjusted annual personnel and operating costs for Alternative C reflect the pro rated amount for
the Jarvis portion of establishing concurrent field camps on Howland, Baker and Jarvis.
Alternative D includes the cost of acquiring and maintaining a vessel to facilitate the
establishment of a year-round field camp that would be deployed once every five years in a
rotational schedule that would include deployments at Howland, Baker, and Jarvis as well as
Johnston Atoll and Rose Atoll, in the other years. The vessel purchase and operational costs in
Alternative D represents costs that are distributed among all remote island refuges that would
utilize this vessel to accomplish management activities throughout these Central Pacific Ocean
locations. The adjusted annual cost for Alternative D reflects the pro-rated amount it would cost
to implement the alternative at Jarvis.
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
Chapter 2 – Alternatives, Objectives, and Strategies 2-17
Table 2.2 Estimated Annual Cost Comparison of Various Field Camp Configurations.
Field Camp Budget
for Jarvis
Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C Alternative D
Staff $17,000 (0.3
FTE every 2
years)
$34,000 (0.3
FTE per year)
$66,000 (0.66
FTE per year)
$200,000 (2 FTE
once every 5
years)
Supplies $5,000 $7,000 $100,000 $200,000
Remote Sensing
equipment
N/A N/A $100,000 N/A
Remote Sensing
operations
N/A N/A $20,000 $20,000
Deep sea exploration N/A $25,000 per
submersible
vessel dive
$25,000 per
submersible
vessel dive
$25,000 per
submersible
vessel dive
Seabird recolonization
initiative
N/A $10,000 $10,000 $10,000
Vessel Charter N/A N/A $12,000/day
for 50 days =
$600,000 per
year
N/A
Vessel Purchase (one
time cost)
N/A N/A N/A $ 8 million
Vessel operation N/A N/A N/A $200,000 once
every 5 years
Adjusted annual
personnel and
operating costs
$22,000/yr $76,000/yr $256,000/yr $210,000/yr
2.6 Refuge 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.
In the development of this CCP, the Service has prepared an environmental assessment. The
environmental assessment evaluates alternative sets of management actions derived from a
variety of management goals, objectives and implementation strategies.
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
2-18 Chapter 2 – Alternatives, Objectives, and Strategies
The goals for Jarvis over the next fifteen 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 information pertaining to importance of an objective relative to legal mandates for
managing units of the NWRS including refuge purpose, trust resource responsibilities (federally
listed Threatened and Endangered species and migratory birds), and maintaining/restoring
biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health.
Readers, please note the following:
The objective statement as written is the objective statement that applies to the Service’s
Preferred Alternative, Alternative 2. If an objective is not in a particular alternative, a blank is
used to indicate that this objective is not addressed in that alternative. Below each objective
statement are the strategies that could be employed in order to accomplish the objectives. Check
marks alongside each strategy show which alternatives include that strategy. If a column for a
particular alternative does not include a check mark for a listed strategy, it means that strategy
will not be used in that alternative.
Goal 1: Conserve, 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 1,273 acres of terrestrial habitat consisting of 73 acres of beach
and beach strand, 500 acres as short grass and forbs, 200 acres as scrub shrub, and 500
acres as bare ground on Jarvis Island as nesting habitat for 11 seabird species.
Alternatives Alt A Alt B Alt C Alt D
Objective as written above applies to
Alternatives (✓)
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective Alt A Alt B Alt C Alt D
Conduct and record incidental observations
of invasive species.
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Control and where possible, eradicate
invasive species (e.g., crabgrass) using IPM
tools including hand pulling and selective
application of pesticides.
✓ ✓
Eradicate mammalian pests (e.g., mice) using
IPM tools as needed to protect nesting
seabirds.
✓ ✓
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
Chapter 2 – Alternatives, Objectives, and Strategies 2-19
Adhere to strict quarantine protocols for all
island visitors (see Appendix D).
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Collect and stockpile marine and other
human debris not considered to be
historically important.
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Remove stockpiled marine and other debris. ✓ ✓
Rationale:
The 11 nesting seabird species on Jarvis utilize 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 Jarvis. 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.
The Seabird Conservation Plan (2005) recognizes remote Pacific islands as providing
important and varied breeding habitat, specifically Jarvis 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 D).
Marine and other human generated debris poses an entanglement threat for multiple
wildlife species. Stockpiling debris can reduce the overall area impacted, thereby
reducing the entanglement 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 Jarvis Island.
Alternatives Alt A Alt B Alt C Alt D
Objective as written above applies to
Alternatives (✓)
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective Alt A Alt B Alt C Alt D
Document presence/absence island
vegetation.
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Conduct inventory of plant species
distribution, including use of GPS and
vegetation transects.
✓ ✓
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
2-20 Chapter 2 – Alternatives, Objectives, and Strategies
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 Jarvis to adequately quantify habitat on
Jarvis, 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 Jarvis, 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 Jarvis.
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 36,214 acres of
submerged lands consisting of an estimated 3,000 acres coral reef and 33,214 acres of
deep water/pelagic habitat on Jarvis.
Alternatives Alt A Alt B Alt C Alt D
Objective as written above applies to
Alternatives (✓)
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective Alt A Alt B Alt C Alt D
Use IPM tools to control and where possible,
eradicate invasive marine species (e.g.
crown-of-thorns starfish).
✓
Collect, remove, and stockpile marine debris
from shallow coral reefs.
✓
Continue and expand partnership with
NOAA 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 Jarvis 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) 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 Jarvis.
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
Chapter 2 – Alternatives, Objectives, and Strategies 2-21
Objective 2b: Increase baseline information on marine community.
Within 15 years of CCP approval, monitor: coral species density, diversity, and
distribution; fish species presence/absence and habitat associations; sea turtle species
presence/absence; and marine mammal species presence/absence.
Alternatives Alt A AltB2 Alt C Alt D
Objective as written above applies to
Alternatives (✓)
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective Alt A Alt B Alt C Alt D
Conduct and record incidental observations
of corals, fish, sea turtles, marine mammals,
and their habitats.
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Accompany NOAA or other scientific
partners on marine surveys.
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Conduct REA (Rapid Ecological
Assessments) on all existing survey routes to
document coral, fish and turtle density,
diversity, distribution, and habitat
associations.
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Develop proposals and conduct deep slope
marine surveys by ROV (remotely operated
vessel) to document presence/absence of
deep slope coral and fish species .
✓ ✓ ✓
Conduct comprehensive survey for invasive
species.
✓
Increase level of REA and other marine
habitat surveys by 20%.
✓
Conduct specific surveys for marine mammal
presence/absence.
✓
Rationale:
Responsibility for managing marine resources is shared with NOAA, and has led to many
cooperative studies. Unlike the logistic constraints of completing terrestrial surveys,
marine surveys are conducted throughout the entire time that the marine transport vessel
is at Jarvis. Additionally, since most site visits to Jarvis 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 Jarvis.
REAs constitute baseline monitoring of the marine ecosystem, and are one component of
all alternative strategies. Further expansion of REA’s could be accomplished only as a
component of Alternative D.
Additional surveys (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
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
2-22 Chapter 2 – Alternatives, Objectives, and Strategies
surrounding Jarvis, 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 Jarvis.
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 (in rank order) 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 Jarvis 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.
Alternatives Alt A Alt B Alt C Alt D
Objective as written above applies to
Alternatives (✓)
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective Alt A Alt B Alt C Alt D
Record incidental observations of all species
presence/absence, relative abundance, and
distribution.
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Conduct seabird monitoring activities for
breeding chronology, and habitat use.
✓ ✓
Coordinate with Migratory Bird Office and
Office of Refuge Biology, Region 1 Regional
Office to develop specific monitoring needs
and data collection protocols.
✓ ✓
Rationale:
The Seabird Conservation Plan (2005) repeatedly recognizes the importance of the U.S.
Pacific Islands in providing predator-free seabird nesting and roosting environments.
Their protected status, in concert with nearby marine forage resources contribute to their
importance. The Seabird Plan further identifies population monitoring inventories are
insufficient to accurately detect or monitor populations, suggesting instead that a rigorous
collection of population data is needed.
In addition to Jarvis being recognized as important habitat for seabirds, the U.S. Pacific
Islands Regional Shorebird Conservation Plan (2004) lists determining baseline
information for bristle-thighed curlews, and other species, as the goal of the Central
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
Chapter 2 – Alternatives, Objectives, and Strategies 2-23
Pacific Islands Subregion. The endangered species recovery plans for both species of sea
turtles indicate that little is known about their biology in the central Pacific. Data on
other terrestrial wildlife species found on Jarvis Island is 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 three consecutive years on Jarvis Island.
Alternatives Alt A Alt B Alt C Alt D
Objective as written above applies to
Alternatives (✓)
✓ ✓ ✓
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective Alt A Alt B Alt C Alt D
Implement and maintain electronic calling
devices to promote nesting
✓ ✓ ✓
Coordinate with RO and develop capabilities
for remote surveillance equipment
✓ ✓
Rationale:
The Seabird Conservation Plan (2005) recognizes the Polynesian storm-petrel may
flourish on Jarvis, as well as Baker and Howland, due to the removal of predators from
the islands. The Phoenix petrel is known from the Phoenix Islands, but does not
currently inhabit Jarvis, though it is thought that they did historically. A recommendation
of the Seabird Conservation Plan (2005) is expand efforts to assess habitat suitability and
restore populations through translocation to predator-free U.S. islands such as Jarvis.
While the physical translocation of species to Jarvis is not being suggested, electronic
calling devises are designed, and have been successful, in attracting and establishing
nesting seabird colonies to other islands.
Objective 3c: Develop baseline data and understand sea turtle use of Jarvis.
Upon CCP approval, monitor hawksbill and green sea turtles to document any nesting
sites, all adjacent coral reef and nearshore water foraging sites, and overall population
density and distributions.
Alternatives Alt A Alt B Alt C Alt D
Objective as written above applies to
Alternatives (✓)
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective Alt A Alt B Alt C Alt D
Record incidental observations of nearshore
turtle use.
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Develop and conduct survey of nearshore
turtle use.
✓ ✓
Develop and conduct survey of other marine
areas for turtle use.
✓
Develop partnership with NOAA for study of
turtles at Jarvis.
✓ ✓ ✓
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
2-24 Chapter 2 – Alternatives, Objectives, and Strategies
Rationale:
There is currently little information related to use of Jarvis resources by sea turtles,
though it is known that they do use refuge habitats. Sea 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 populations of globally depleted marine species such as
giant clams (Tridacna sp.), bumphead parrotfish (Bolbometapon muricatum), Napoleon
wrasses (Cheilinus undulatus), large groupers (Cephalopholis sp., Epinephelus spp.,
Variola spp., etc.), sharks (Carcharhinus spp., Triaenodon spp., Negaprion spp.,
Galeocerdo spp., etc.), and corals (Anthozoa, Hydrozoa) to document their
presence/absence and relative abundance on Jarvis.
Alternatives Alt A Alt B Alt C Alt D
Objective as written above applies to
Alternatives (✓)
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective Alt A Alt B Alt C Alt D
Conduct marine surveys such as REA ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Solicit partnership for survey of deep slope
habitat
✓ ✓ ✓
Expand marine surveys (REA) efforts to
other reef areas surrounding the island
✓
Rationale:
Many marine species of commercial importance have been globally depleted. Protected
areas such as Jarvis still provide sanctuary areas. However, illegal fishing activity has
been noted surrounding several Remotes refuges. Jarvis, 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 Jarvis.
Within 10 years of CCP approval, increase scientific understanding of marine mammal
presence and use of Jarvis marine waters. The desired conditions by which this will be
met will be to document all marine mammal use of nearshore waters.
Alternatives Alt A Alt B Alt C Alt D
Objective as written above applies to
Alternatives (✓)
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective Alt A Alt B Alt C Alt D
Incidental observations of marine mammal ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Solicit partnership for study of marine
mammals at Jarvis
✓ ✓ ✓
Rationale:
NOAA, the Service, Oceanic Institute, University of Hawaii, and Bishop Museum marine
biologists have collected data on marine species of concern since 2000. Only anecdotal
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
Chapter 2 – Alternatives, Objectives, and Strategies 2-25
information exists on marine mammal use of the waters surrounding Jarvis Island.
However, studies elsewhere in the Pacific 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: Protect, maintain, enhance, and preserve the wilderness character of
Jarvis’s terrestrial and marine communities.
Objective 4a: Protect and maintain wilderness values.
Upon CCP approval, continue to preserve the wilderness values (e.g. size, naturalness,
solitude, supplemental values) of Jarvis. Achievement of this objective will be evaluated
by assessing loss or degradation of values that qualified it for potential designation (see
Appendix F).
Alternatives Alt A Alt B Alt C Alt D
Objective as written above applies to
Alternatives (✓)
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective Alt A Alt B Alt C Alt D
Use minimum tools necessary to manage
refuge resources
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Continue to manage Jarvis as wilderness ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Monitor values of naturalness and solitude. ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Remove debris remaining from military or
other past human use, not considered cultural
resources.
✓ ✓
Rationale:
Jarvis has been and is currently managed as a wild, natural area due to its remote
location, historic lack of human impact, and limited human presence. Areas of Jarvis
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
Legislative EIS will be pursued for all Pacific Remote Island Refuges once their CCP’s
have been completed.
Some human generated debris remains from past occupations. Additionally, debris such
as discarded fishing nets continuously washes ashore. This debris impinges upon
wilderness values. A cultural resource review is required prior to removal of any human
debris, identified as a component of Alternatives C and D, which may be considered a
cultural resource.
In the interim, all areas identified as suitable WSAs 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.
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
2-26 Chapter 2 – Alternatives, Objectives, and Strategies
Goal 5: Jarvis’s cultural and historic resources are preserved.
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
Jarvis Light day beacon, or other recognized cultural/historical resource.
Alternatives Alt A Alt B Alt C Alt D
Objective as written above applies to
Alternatives (✓)
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective Alt A Alt B Alt C Alt D
Record incidental observations of condition
of cultural resources
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Rationale:
Rationale: Restricting human use of Jarvis 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 Knowledge of cultural resources.
Within 10 years of CCP approval, undertake appropriate surveys to identify important
cultural and historical resources.
Alternatives Alt A Alt B Alt C Alt D
Objective as written above applies to
Alternatives (✓)
✓ ✓
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective Alt A Alt B Alt C Alt D
Conduct cultural resource survey of island
and marine habitat
✓ ✓
Conduct basic maintenance of cultural
resources (paint, clean surfaces of avian
excrement)
✓ ✓
Rationale:
Restricting human use of Jarvis 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. Any maintenance activity, and establishment of seasonal or annual field
camps would require approval from appropriate archeological resource professional
(Service’s Regional Archeologist).
Jarvis Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
Chapter 2 – Alternatives, Objectives, and Strategies 2-27
Goal 6: An informed, interested, and educated public appreciates 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 three 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.
Alternatives Alt A Alt B Alt C Alt D
Objective as written above applies to
Alternatives (✓)
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective Alt A Alt B Alt C Alt D
Develop, with External Affairs office,
Honolulu, an interpretative brochure for all
remote Pacific Island refuges.
✓ ✓ ✓
Work with External Affairs office, Honolulu
to develop outreach/interpretation strategy.
✓ ✓
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 Jarvis
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 remo