Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment

              Kakahai‘a
National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
and Environmental Assessment
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
A Vision of Conservation
Koloa moha¯
©Dan Pancamo
Na¯ ‘ike no ke¯ ia mua aku
Hulali ka la¯ ma luna o na¯ wai o ka ‘a¯ina pa¯lielie i piha i na¯ mau‘u wai ‘o¯iwi e naue ana i
ka pa¯ ‘ana mai o ka makani aheahe o ke kopikala. Ko¯kua ke¯ia mau luawai kai i na¯ ‘alae
ke‘oke‘o i ka malama ‘ana i ko la¯kou mau ‘ohana manu pihulu. Ma na¯ lihi wai kai lepo
‘u¯kele e ‘o‘o¯ aku ai “k‘ek, k‘ek, k‘ek” na¯ ae‘o wawae ‘ula‘ula lo¯‘ihi i ka la¯kou mau manu
pe¯pe¯. Kipa mai na¯ kamali‘i o Moloka‘i ka ‘A¯
ina Ho‘omalu Holoholona Lo¯hiu ‘o Kakahai‘a
no ke a‘o ana aku e pili ana i ko la¯kou mau ho‘oilina a e ho‘iho‘i hou ho‘i i ka ea i ko¯ la¯kou
mau mo‘omeheu. Na¯nea ho‘i na¯ malihini e ki‘ei ana i na¯ ‘a¯ina pa¯lielie me ko la¯kou mau
nani ku¯lohelohe mai na¯ wahi na¯na¯ holoholona i uhi ‘ia me kekahi pale huna, a e lawe pau
‘ana aku i ka nani palena ‘ole o na¯ mea ola ‘o Hawai‘i kahiko.
Refuge Vision
Sunlight sparkles off the wetland waters, surrounded by native sedges dancing in the
tropical breeze. The coastal freshwater ponds host a growing population of ‘alae ke‘oke‘o
watching over their fuzzy broods. On the soft, muddy banks, beautiful ae‘o with long
pink legs call “kip, kip, kip” to their chicks. The children of Moloka‘i come to Kakahai‘a
National Wildlife Refuge to learn of their heritage and to give back to their culture.
Visitors peer into the wetlands from a cloaked overlook to enjoy nature’s spectacle,
catching a glimpse of the verdant splendor of old Hawai‘i.
Comprehensive Conservation Plans provide long-term guidance for management decisions
and set forth goals, objectives, and strategies needed to accomplish refuge purposes and identify
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s best estimates of future needs. These plans detail program
planning levels that are sometimes substantially above current budget allocations, and as such,
are primarily used for strategic planning and program prioritization purposes. The plans do
not constitute a commitment for staffing increases, operational and maintenance increases,
or funding for future land acquisition.
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan
and Environmental Assessment
Prepared by:
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Maui National Wildlife Refuge Complex
Milepost 6 Mokulele Highway (Hwy. 311)
P.O. Box 1042
Kīhei, HI 96753
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Pacific Islands Planning Team
300 Ala Moana Boulevard, Room 5-231
Honolulu, Hawai‘i 96850
August 2011
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
Table of Contents i
Table of Contents
Readers’ Guide .................................................................................................................................... v
Chapter 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1-1
1.1 Proposed Action ................................................................................................................... 1-1
1.2 Purpose and Need for the CCP ........................................................................................... 1-2
1.3 Content and Scope of the CCP ........................................................................................... 1-3
1.4 Planning and Management Guidance ................................................................................ 1-3
1.4.1 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Mission ....................................................................... 1-4
1.4.2 National Wildlife Refuge System ................................................................................. 1-4
1.4.3 National Wildlife Refuge System Mission and Goals .................................................. 1-4
1.4.4 National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 ................................... 1-5
1.5 Refuge Establishment and Purposes .................................................................................. 1-6
1.5.1 Legal Significance of the Refuge Purpose ................................................................... 1-6
1.5.2 Refuge Establishment and Purpose .............................................................................. 1-6
1.6 Refuge Goals ......................................................................................................................... 1-6
1.7 Relationship to Previous and Future Refuge Plans .......................................................... 1-8
1.7.1 Future Planning ............................................................................................................ 1-8
1.8 Relationship to Ecosystem Planning Efforts ..................................................................... 1-8
1.9 Planning and Issue Identification ..................................................................................... 1-11
1.9.1 Public Scoping Sessions ............................................................................................. 1-11
1.9.2 Issues to be Addressed in the Draft CCP .................................................................... 1-11
1.9.3 Issues Outside the Scope of the Draft CCP ................................................................ 1-12
Chapter 2: Alternatives, Goals, Objectives, and Strategies ......................................................... 2-1
2.1 Considerations in Alternative Design ................................................................................ 2-1
2.2 Alternative Components Not Considered for Detailed Analysis ..................................... 2-1
2.3 Elements Common to All Alternatives............................................................................... 2-1
2.3.1 Implementation Subject to Funding Availability ......................................................... 2-1
2.3.2 Interagency Coordination and Collaboration ............................................................... 2-2
2.3.3 Threatened and Endangered Species Protection and Recovery .................................... 2-2
2.3.4 Historic and Cultural Resource Protection ................................................................... 2-2
2.3.5 Fire Management .......................................................................................................... 2-3
2.3.6 Participation in Planning and Review of Regional Development Activities ................ 2-3
2.3.7 Adaptive Management .................................................................................................. 2-3
2.3.8 Integrated Pest Management ........................................................................................ 2-3
2.3.9 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Compliance ........................................... 2-4
2.3.10 Law Enforcement ....................................................................................................... 2-5
2.3.11 Refuge Revenue Sharing Payments ............................................................................ 2-5
2.3.12 Regulatory Compliance .............................................................................................. 2-5
2.3.13 Volunteer Opportunities ............................................................................................. 2-5
2.3.14 Climate Change .......................................................................................................... 2-6
2.4 Alternative Descriptions ...................................................................................................... 2-6
2.4.1 Alternative A: Continue Current Management Activities ........................................... 2-7
2.4.2 Alternative B: Restoration Focus ................................................................................ 2-7
2.4.3 Alternative C: Wetland Capacity Focus (Preferred Alternative) ................................. 2-7
2.5 Goals, Objectives, Strategies, and Rationale ................................................................... 2-17
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
ii Table of Contents
2.5.1 Goal 1 ......................................................................................................................... 2-18
2.5.2 Goal 2 ......................................................................................................................... 2-22
2.5.3 Goal 3 ......................................................................................................................... 2-24
2.5.4 Goal 4 ......................................................................................................................... 2-25
2.5.5 Goal 5 ......................................................................................................................... 2-28
2.5.6 Goal 6 ......................................................................................................................... 2-30
Chapter 3. Physical Environment .................................................................................................. 3-1
3.1 Refuge Introduction ............................................................................................................. 3-1
3.2 Climate ................................................................................................................................. 3-1
3.2.1 Global Climate Change ................................................................................................ 3-3
3.2.2 Ecological Responses to Climate Change ..................................................................... 3-4
3.3 Geology and Soils ................................................................................................................. 3-5
3.4 Hydrology ............................................................................................................................. 3-6
3.5 Topography/Bathymetry ..................................................................................................... 3-9
3.6 Environmental Contaminants .......................................................................................... 3-10
3.7 Land Use ............................................................................................................................. 3-10
3.7.1 Previous Land Uses .................................................................................................... 3-10
Chapter 4: Refuge Biology and Habitat ......................................................................................... 4-1
4.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 4-1
4.2 Biological Integrity Analysis ............................................................................................... 4-1
4.3 Conservation Target Selection and Analysis ..................................................................... 4-1
4.4 Wetland Habitats .................................................................................................................. 4-2
4.5 Coastal Dry Forest ............................................................................................................... 4-3
4.6 Coastal Beach Strand .......................................................................................................... 4-4
4.7 Endangered Hawaiian Waterbirds .................................................................................... 4-7
4.7.1 Ae‘o (Himantopus mexicanus knudseni) or Hawaiian Stilt .......................................... 4-7
4.7.2 ‘Alae ke‘oke‘o (Fulica alai) or Hawaiian Coot ........................................................... 4-7
4.8 Migratory Waterfowl .......................................................................................................... 4-8
4.9 Migratory Shorebirds .......................................................................................................... 4-8
4.10 Invasive Species .................................................................................................................. 4-9
4.10.1 Mammals .................................................................................................................... 4-9
4.10.2 Birds ......................................................................................................................... 4-11
4.10.3 Amphibians............................................................................................................... 4-11
4.10.4 Invertebrates ............................................................................................................. 4-12
4.10.5 Plants ........................................................................................................................ 4-12
4.11 Wildlife and Habitat Research and Monitoring Efforts .............................................. 4-14
Chapter 5. Refuge Facilities and Public Use Programs ................................................................ 5-1
5.1 Refuge Infrastructure and Administrative Facilities ....................................................... 5-1
5.1.1 Refuge Operations ........................................................................................................ 5-1
5.1.2 Maintenance Facilities .................................................................................................. 5-1
5.1.3 Dempster Windmill ...................................................................................................... 5-1
5.1.4 Roads ............................................................................................................................ 5-1
5.1.5 Constructed Ponds and Levees ..................................................................................... 5-2
5.1.6 Wells, Pumps, Water Distribution Lines, and Water Control Structure ....................... 5-2
5.1.7 Kamehameha V Highway Culvert ................................................................................ 5-2
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
Table of Contents iii
5.1.8 Fences and Gates .......................................................................................................... 5-3
5.2 Public Use ............................................................................................................................. 5-4
5.2.1 Special Use Permits ...................................................................................................... 5-4
5.2.2 Fishing and Picnicking ................................................................................................. 5-4
5.2.3 Wildlife Observation and Photography ........................................................................ 5-4
5.2.4 Environmental Education ............................................................................................. 5-5
5.2.5 Volunteers .................................................................................................................... 5-5
Chapter 6. Cultural Resources, Social, and Economic Environment ......................................... 6-1
6.1 Refuge Cultural Resources ................................................................................................. 6-1
6.1.1 Native Hawaiian Cultural History ................................................................................. 6-1
6.1.2 Euro-American Cultural History ................................................................................... 6-2
6.1.3 The Mahele, 1848-1851 ................................................................................................. 6-4
6.1.4 Post-1850s History ........................................................................................................ 6-4
6.1.5 Archaeological/Cultural Surveys ................................................................................... 6-6
6.1.6 Paleontological Resources ............................................................................................ 6-7
6.2 Social and Economic Setting ............................................................................................... 6-8
6.2.1 Population ...................................................................................................................... 6-8
6.2.2 Housing ......................................................................................................................... 6-9
6.2.3 Education ....................................................................................................................... 6-9
6.2.4 Economics ................................................................................................................... 6-10
Chapter 7. Environmental Effects Analysis .................................................................................. 7-1
7.1 Overview of Effects Analysis .............................................................................................. 7-1
7.2 Terminology ......................................................................................................................... 7-1
7.3 Summary of Management Action Effects at Kakahai‘a NWR ........................................ 7-2
7.4 Effects Analysis .................................................................................................................... 7-5
7.4.1 Integrated Pest Management ........................................................................................ 7-5
7.4.2 Effects of Predator Control .......................................................................................... 7-5
7.4.3 Effects of Predator Control to Nonnative Predators ..................................................... 7-7
7.4.4 Effects of Predator Control to Non-target Species ....................................................... 7-7
7.4.5 Effects of Wetland Restoration to Endangered Waterbirds .......................................... 7-7
7.4.6 Effects of Management Actions to Migratory Birds .................................................... 7-8
7.4.7 Effects of Management Actions to Restore Coastal Dry Forest Habitat ...................... 7-8
7.4.8 Effects of Management Actions on Coastal Strand Habitat ......................................... 7-9
7.4.9 Effects of Promoting Research and Scientific Assessments ........................................ 7-9
7.4.10 Effects to Water, Soils, and Air Quality ..................................................................... 7-9
7.4.11 Effects to Cultural and Historic Resources .............................................................. 7-10
7.4.12 Effects to Public Use and Access ............................................................................. 7-10
7.4.13 Effects to Local Economy ........................................................................................... 7-11
7.4.14 Environmental Justice................................................................................................. 7-11
7.5 Cumulative Effects Assessment ........................................................................................ 7-11
7.5.1 Cumulative Climate Change Effects on Water Resources.............................................. 7-12
7.5.2 Summary ..................................................................................................................... 7-12
Tables
Table 2.1 Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge Management Alternatives Summary ....................... 2-9
Table 3.1 Monthly streamflow data for Kawela Gulch ..................................................................... 3-8
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
iv Table of Contents
Table 3.2 Monthly streamflow data for Kaunakakai Gulch .............................................................. 3-8
Table 4.1 Conservation targets for the CCP ...................................................................................... 4-2
Table 6.1 Population figures for selected areas ................................................................................. 6-9
Table 6.2 Census Bureau estimated median and per capita income figures, 2009 ............................ 6-9
Table 7.1 CCP Alternatives Summary of Effects for Kakahai‘a NWR ............................................. 7-2
Figures
Figure 1.1 Map of Main Hawaiian Islands ...................................................................................... 1-13
Figure 1.2 Map of Refuge Land Status & Boundary ....................................................................... 1-15
Figure 2.1 Map of Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge Alternative A Habitat Management ........ 2-11
Figure 2.2 Map of Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge Alternative B Habitat Management ........ 2-13
Figure 2.3 Map of Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge Alternative C Habitat Management ........ 2-15
Figure 3.1 Annual cycle of average monthly precipitation (top) and total annual precipitation ............ 3-2
Figure 3.2 Annual cycle of average monthly temperature (top) and mean annual temperature ........ 3-3
Figure 3.3 Old Pond water levels, 2000-2010 .................................................................................... 3-7
Figure 3.4 Annual stream discharge at USGS streamflow gauge Halawa Stream, 1918-2009 .......... 3-9
Figure 4.1 Land Cover Types ............................................................................................................. 4-5
Appendices
Appendix A: Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge Species Lists ..................................................... A-1
Appendix B: Compatibility Determinations and Appropriate Uses Findings .................................. B-1
Appendix C: Plan Implementation and Costs ................................................................................... C-1
Appendix D: Wilderness Review for Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge ..................................... D-1
Appendix E: Integrated Pest Management Program ......................................................................... E-1
Appendix F: Fire Management Plan 2004 ........................................................................................ F-1
Appendix G: Statement of Compliance ........................................................................................... G-1
Appendix H: Revenue Sharing ........................................................................................................ H-1
Appendix I: Literature Cited ............................................................................................................ I-1
Appendix J: Common Acronyms and Abbreviations ....................................................................... J-1
Note to Reviewers: Throughout the CCP document, all attempts have been made
to use appropriate diacriticals related to the Hawaiian language (i.e., ‘okina and
kahakō). However, places where diacriticals may not appear occur in the maps
and literature cited. Due to limitations of the Geospatial Information System (GIS)
software used for the maps developed in the plan, diacriticals were unable to be
used where place names or legend text appear.
Readers’ Guide
Native species discussed in this document are referred to by their Hawaiian names. Common English
names and scientific nomenclature can also be found in the glossary in Appendix A. The U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service endeavors to be accurate in its use of the Hawaiian language and correctly spell
Hawaiian words, including the diacritical marks that affect the meaning and aid in pronunciation. This
guide is provided to simplify pronunciation for the reader.
When Captain Cook arrived in the Hawaiian Islands in 1778, the Hawaiians had a totally oral tradition. In
1820, western missionaries standardized a written version of the Hawaiian language that features 8
consonants and 5 vowels.
Special Symbols
Two symbols appear frequently in Hawaiian words: the ‘okina and the kahakō. These two symbols change
how words are pronounced. The ‘okina itself looks like an upside-down apostrophe and is a glottal stop –
or a brief break in the word. An example of this in English is in the middle of the expression “uh-oh.” The
‘okina is an official consonant – just as any of the other consonants.
The kahakō is a stress mark (macron) that can appear over vowels only and serve to make the vowel sound
slightly longer. The vowels ā, ē, ī, ō, and ū sound just like their non-stress Hawaiian vowels with the
exception that the sound is held slightly longer. Missing the ‘okina or kahakō can greatly change not only
the how a word sounds, but also its basic meaning. A popular example of how an ‘okina and a kahakō can
change the meaning of a word is “pau”:
• pau = finished, ended, all done
• pa‘u = soot, smudge, ink powder
• pa‘ū = moist, damp
• pā‘ū = skirt
Refuge Place Names
Kakahai‘a  (kah-kah-hah-EE-ah)  meaning: fish slicing
Kawela  (kah-VEH-lah)  meaning: the heat
Consonants
H - as in English
K - as in English
L - as in English
M - as in English
N - as in English
P - as in English
W - after i and e pronounced v
- after u and o pronounced like w
- at the start of a word or after a,
pronounced like w or v
(‘) - ‘okina - a glottal stop
Vowels
A - pronounced like the a in far
E - pronounced like the e in bet
I - pronounced like the ee in beet
O - pronounced like the o in sole
U - pronounced like the oo in boot
Readers ’ Guide           v
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
Ae‘o (EYE oh)
Hawaiian Stilt Himantopus mexicanus knudseni
SPECIES STATUS:
Federally listed as Endangered
State listed as Endangered
State recognized as Indigenous
‘Alae ke‘oke‘o (ah-lye KAY oh KAY oh)
Hawaiian Coot Fulica alai
SPECIES STATUS:
Federally listed as Endangered
State listed as Endangered
State recognized as Endemic
‘Auku‘u (ow-KOO oo)
Black-crowned Night Heron Nycticorax nycticorax
hoactli
SPECIES STATUS:
State recognized as Indigenous
Koloa maoli (ko-LOWah MAOW-lee)
Hawaiian Duck Anas wyvilliana
SPECIES STATUS:
Federally listed as Endangered
State listed as Endangered
State recognized as Endemic
Waterbirds
Laura Beauregard
Laura Beauregard
Laura Beauregard
Brenda Zaun
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
vi          Readers ’ Guide
‘Akekeke (ah-kay-KAY-kay)
Ruddy Turnstone Arenaria interpres
SPECIES STATUS:
State recognized as Indigenous
U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan - High Concern
Hunakai (hoo-nah-KYE)
Sanderling Calidris alba
SPECIES STATUS:
State recognized as Indigenous
Hunakai means “sea foam.” Their habit of running along
the receding waves on the shore in search of small sand
crabs apparently reminded early Hawaiians of the sea
foam or hunakai left behind by the waves. It shares the
name with a coastal plant.
Kōlea (KOHH-lay-ah)
Pacific Golden Plover Pluvialis fulva
SPECIES STATUS:
State recognized as Indigenous
U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan - High Concern
‘Ūlili (OOO-lee-lee)
Wandering Tattler Heteroscelus incanus
SPECIES STATUS:
State recognized as Indigenous
U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan - Moderate Concern
Migrant Shorebirds
Michael Walther
Michael Walther
Michael Walther
Michael Walther
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
Readers ’ Guide           vii
‘Ākulikuli (AAH-koo-lee-KOO-lee)
Sea Purslane Sesuvium portulacastrum
SPECIES STATUS:
State recognized as Indigenous
Hala (HAH-lah)
Screw Pine Pandanus tectorius
SPECIES STATUS:
State recognized as Indigenous
Kaluhā (kah-loo-HAHH)
Alkali Bulrush Scirpus maritimus
SPECIES STATUS:
State recognized as Indigenous
Kīpūkai (KEE-POO-kye)
Seaside Heliotrope Heliotropium curassavicum
SPECIES STATUS:
State recognized as Indigenous
Native Plants
viii          Readers ’ Guide
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
Laura Beauregard
Forest & Kim Starr
Laura Beauregard
Laura Beauregard
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 1. Introduction and Background 1-1
‘Alae ke‘oke‘o chick Laura Beauregard/USFWS
Chapter 1. Introduction
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge (NWR or Refuge) is a coastal freshwater pond situated
along the south coast of Moloka‘i (Figure 1.1, page 1-13). The Refuge is managed as part of
the Maui National Wildlife Refuge Complex (Complex) headquartered on the Island of Maui.
This 44.6 acre Refuge was set aside in 1976 to protect and manage endangered Hawaiian
waterbirds ae‘o (Hawaiian stilt) and ‘alae ke‘oke‘o (Hawaiian coot) and their habitats (Figure
1.2, page 1-15).
1.1 Proposed Action
We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), manage the Kakahai‘a NWR as part of the
National Wildlife Refuge System (Refuge System). We propose to adopt and implement a
Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP) for the Refuge. This document is the Refuge’s
Draft CCP and Environmental Assessment (EA) and includes all lands within the approved
boundary. A CCP sets forth management guidance for a refuge for a period of 15 years, as
required by the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C.
668dd et seq.) as amended by the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of
1997 (Pub. Law 105-57) (Administration Act). The Administration Act requires CCPs to
identify and describe:
 The purpose(s) of the refuge;
 The fish, wildlife, and plant populations; their habitats; and the archaeological and
cultural values found on the refuge;
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
1-2 Chapter 1. Introduction and Background
 Significant problems that may adversely affect wildlife populations and habitats and
ways to correct or mitigate those problems;
 Areas suitable for administrative sites or visitor facilities; and
 Opportunities for fish and wildlife-dependent recreation.
The Refuge System planning policy (Service Manual 602 FW 3) states the purpose of CCPs
is to “describe the desired future conditions of a refuge and provide long-range guidance and
management direction to achieve refuge purposes; help fulfill the National Wildlife Refuge
System mission; maintain and, where appropriate, restore the ecological integrity of each
refuge and the Refuge System; . . . and meet other mandates.”
We have developed alternatives for managing Kakahai‘a NWR that address the major issues
and relevant mandates identified in the CCP process and are consistent with principles of
sound fish and wildlife management. Management options are consolidated into 3
alternatives with Alternative C identified as our preferred alternative. This alternative
represents the best balanced approach for achieving the Refuge’s purposes, vision, and goals;
contributing to the Refuge System mission; and addressing the relevant issues and mandates
consistent with sound principles of fish and wildlife management. However, the selected
alternative may be modified between the draft and final document depending upon comments
received from the public or other agencies and organizations. The Regional Director for the
Service’s Pacific Region will be the final decision-maker regarding the alternative that will
be adopted for implementation. For details on the specific components and actions
comprising the range of alternatives, see Chapter 2.
1.2 Purpose and Need for the CCP
The purpose of the proposed CCP is to provide the Service, the Refuge System, partners, and
citizens with a management plan for improving fish and wildlife habitat conditions and
Refuge infrastructure, for wildlife and public use on Kakahai‘a NWR over the next 15 years.
An approved CCP will ensure that the Service manages to achieve the Refuge purpose,
vision, goals, and objectives to help fulfill the mission of the Refuge System.
The CCP is needed for a variety of reasons. Primary among these is the need to establish
improved habitat conditions on the Refuge’s wetland habitats, which are degraded by
invasive plants and animals. The plan also recognizes and identifies threats to the
endangered ae‘o and ‘alae ke‘oke‘o, including predation by nonnative mammals, limited
water supply, and human disturbance.
There is also a need to analyze Refuge public use programs for wildlife-dependent priority
public uses and to determine what improvements or alterations should be made in the pursuit
of a high-quality program (See Chapter 5 for more on priority public uses). Finally, there is a
need to describe the steps that should be taken to better protect the habitats and wildlife
through strategies to accomplish our goals.
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 1. Introduction and Background 1-3
1.3 Content and Scope of the Plan
This Draft CCP/EA provides guidance for management of Refuge habitats and wildlife and
administration of public uses on Refuge lands and waters. This CCP/EA is intended to
comply with both the Administration Act and the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321-4347). Information included in the CCP includes:
 An overall vision for the Refuge, its establishment history and purpose, and its role in
the local ecosystem (Chapter 1);
 Management alternatives, goals, and objectives for specific conservation targets and
visitor programs, as well as strategies for achieving the objectives (Chapter 2);
 A description of the Refuge’s physical environment (Chapter 3);
 A description of conservation targets, condition, and trends on the Refuge and within
the local ecosystem, the key desired ecological conditions for sustaining the targets,
and a short analysis of the threats to each conservation target (Chapter 4);
 An overview of the Refuge’s visitor programs (Chapter 5);
 An account the Refuge’s facilities and other management considerations (Chapter 6);
 An analysis of the environmental effects associated with implementing the
management actions prescribed under the alternatives described (Chapter 7);
 A list of species known to occur on the Refuge CCP/EA (Appendix A);
 Evaluations of existing and proposed appropriate public and economic uses for
appropriateness and compatibility with the Refuge’s purpose (Appendix B);
 An Implementation Plan needed to support the alternatives considered (Appendix C);
 Wilderness Review (Appendix D);
 Integrated Pest Management (Appendix E);
 Fire Management Plan (Appendix F);
 Statement of Compliance (Appendix G);
 Revenue Sharing (Appendix H);
 Literature Cited (Appendix I); and
 Common Acronyms and Abbreviations (Appendix J).
1.4 Planning and Management Guidance
The Service, an agency within the Department of the Interior, is the principal Federal agency
responsible for conserving, protecting, and enhancing fish, wildlife, plants, and their habitats.
Refuge management is guided by Federal laws, Executive orders, Service policies, and
international treaties. Fundamental guidelines are found in the mission and goals of the
Refuge System and the designated purposes of the Refuge as described in establishing
legislation, Executive orders, or other documents establishing, authorizing, or expanding a
refuge.
Key concepts and guidance of the Refuge System derive from the Administration Act, the
Refuge Recreation Act of 1962 (16 U.S.C. 460k-460k-4), as amended, Title 50 of the Code
of Federal Regulations (CFR), and the Service Manual. The Administration Act is
implemented through regulations covering the Refuge System, published in Title 50,
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
1-4 Chapter 1. Introduction and Background
subchapter C of the CFR. These regulations govern general administration of units of the
Refuge System.
1.4.1 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Mission
The mission of the Service is “working with others, to conserve, protect, and enhance fish
and wildlife and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people.” National
natural resources entrusted to the Service for conservation and protection include migratory
birds, endangered and threatened species, interjurisdictional fish, wetlands, and certain
marine mammals. The Service also manages national fish hatcheries, enforces Federal
wildlife laws and international treaties on importing and exporting wildlife, assists with State
and Territorial fish and wildlife programs, and helps other countries develop wildlife
conservation programs.
1.4.2 National Wildlife Refuge System
The Refuge System is the world’s largest network of public lands and waters set aside
specifically for conserving wildlife and protecting ecosystems. From its inception in 1903,
the Refuge System has grown to encompass over 550 national wildlife refuges in all 50
States, and waterfowl production areas in 10 States, covering more than 150 million acres of
public lands and waters. More than 40 million visitors annually fish, hunt, observe and
photograph wildlife, or participate in environmental education (EE) and interpretive activities
on national wildlife refuges.
1.4.3 National Wildlife Refuge System Mission and Goals
The mission of the Refuge System is “to administer a national network of lands and waters
for the conservation, management, and, where appropriate, restoration of the fish, wildlife,
and plant resources and their habitats within the United States for the benefit of present and
future generations of Americans.” The goals of the Refuge System, as articulated in the
Mission, Goals, and Purposes policy (601 FW 1), follow:
 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 EE and
interpretation); and
 Foster understanding and instill appreciation of the diversity and interconnectedness
of fish, wildlife, and plants and their habitats.
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 1. Introduction and Background 1-5
1.4.4 National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966
Of all the laws governing activities on national wildlife refuges, the Administration Act
exerts the greatest influence and included a unifying mission for all national wildlife refuges,
a new process for determining compatible uses on refuges, and a requirement that each
refuge will be managed under a CCP developed in an open public process. The
Administration Act states that the Secretary shall provide for the conservation of fish,
wildlife, plants, and their habitats within the Refuge System, and ensure that the biological
integrity, diversity, and environmental health of the Refuge System are maintained. House
Report 105–106 accompanying the Improvement Act states ‘‘…the fundamental mission of
our System is wildlife conservation: wildlife and wildlife conservation must come first.’’
Biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health are critical components of wildlife
conservation. As later made clear in the Biological Integrity, Diversity, and Environmental
Health (BIDEH) policy (601 FW 3), “the highest measure of biological integrity, diversity,
and environmental health is viewed as those intact and self-sustaining habitats and wildlife
populations that existed during historic conditions.”
Each refuge must be managed to fulfill the Refuge System mission as well as the specific
purposes for which it was established. The Administration Act requires the Service to
monitor the status and trends of fish, wildlife, and plants on every refuge. Additionally, six
wildlife-dependent recreational uses are granted special consideration in the planning,
management, establishment, and expansion of units of the Refuge System: hunting, fishing,
wildlife observation and photography, and EE and interpretation. When determined
compatible on a refuge-specific basis, these six uses assume priority status among all public
uses of the refuge in question. The overarching goal is to enhance wildlife-dependent
recreation opportunities and access to high-quality visitor experiences on refuges, while
managing refuges to conserve fish, wildlife, plants, and their habitats. The Service is directed
to make extra efforts to facilitate wildlife-dependent visitor opportunities.
When preparing a CCP, refuge managers must evaluate all general public, recreational, and
economic uses proposed or occurring on a refuge for appropriateness and compatibility. No
refuge use may be allowed or continued unless it is determined to be appropriate and
compatible. Generally, an appropriate use is one that contributes to fulfilling refuge purposes,
the Refuge System mission, or goals and objectives described in an approved refuge
management plan. A compatible use is defined as a use that, in the sound professional
judgment of the refuge manager, will not materially interfere with or detract from the
fulfillment of the mission of the Refuge System or the purpose(s) of the refuge. Current
Appropriate Use Findings and Compatibility Determinations for existing and proposed uses
for Kakahai‘a NWR are in Appendix B.
The Administration Act also requires that, in addition to formally established guidance, the
CCP must be developed with the participation of the public. Public comments play a role in
identifying issues, guiding alternatives considered during development of the CCP, and
selecting a preferred alternative. It is Service policy to develop CCPs in an open public
process; the agency is committed to securing public input throughout the process.
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
1-6 Chapter 1. Introduction and Background
1.5 Refuge Establishment and Refuge Purpose
1.5.1 Legal Significance of the Refuge Purpose
The purpose for which a Refuge was established or acquired is of key importance in Refuge
planning. Purposes must form the foundation for planning and management decisions. The
purpose(s) of a refuge are specified in or derived from the law, proclamation, Executive
order, agreement, public land order, donation document, or administrative memorandum
establishing, authorizing, or expanding a refuge, refuge unit, or refuge subunit.
Unless the establishing law, order, or other document indicates otherwise, purposes dealing
with the conservation, management, and restoration of fish, wildlife, plants, and the habitats
on which they depend take precedence over other purposes in the management and
administration of any unit. Where a refuge has multiple purposes related to fish, wildlife, and
plant conservation, the more specific purpose will take precedence in instances of conflict.
When an additional unit is acquired under an authority different from the authority used to
establish the original unit, the addition takes on the purpose(s) of the original unit, but the
original unit does not take on the purpose(s) of the newer addition.
By law, Refuges are to be managed so as to achieve their purpose(s). When a conflict exists
between the Refuge System mission and the purpose(s) of an individual refuge, the refuge
purpose(s) supersedes the Refuge System mission.
1.5.2 Refuge Establishment and Purpose
Kakahai‘a NWR was established in 1976 under the authority of the Endangered Species Act
of 1973 (ESA). The Refuge was funded through the Land and Water Conservation Act of
1965. Refuge purposes are the driving force in the development of the refuge vision
statements, goals, objectives, and strategies in the CCP and are critical to determining the
appropriateness and compatibility of all existing and proposed refuge uses. Kakahai‘a NWR
was established with the purpose “… to conserve (A) fish or wildlife which are listed as
endangered species or threatened species, or (B) plants.”
1.6 Refuge Goals
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 refuge purposes, Refuge System
mission and goals, other statutory requirements, and larger-scale plans as appropriate. Visitor
services and wildlife/habitat management goals then define general targets in support of the
vision, followed by objectives that direct efforts into incremental and measurable steps
toward achieving those goals. Finally, strategies identify specific tools and actions to
accomplish objectives. The Refuge vision statement is found on the inside front cover of this
document. The following are our goals; their order does not imply any priority in this CCP.
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 1. Introduction and Background 1-7
Nā Pahuhopu Pu‘uhonua Holoholona
1. Kīa‘i a mālama i nā ‘āina pālialia a me ālialia wai maoli nohokau a me nā pālialia noho
manawa no ka mālama ‘ana i ka mō‘aukala ola pono o nā manuwai Hawai‘i ‘ane make
loa.
2. Kīa‘i, ho‘ōla hou, a mālama i nā kaianoho lihikai no ka pono no ka ho‘opunana ‘ana o nā
honu kai, manu kai, a me ka kūkahi o kēia mau kaiaola pio pau wale.
3. Ho‘ola hou, kīa‘i, a ho‘oponopono in ā ululā‘au ʻoiwi i mea e pale ho‘oka‘awale ai i nā
pilikia o uka mai nā ‘āina kumu wai mai.
4. ‘Ohi‘ohi i nā waiwai ‘epekema (nānā, noi‘i, a me ka ho‘ā‘o ‘ana) no ke kāko‘o ‘ana i nā
makemake o ka mālama ‘ia ‘ana ma ka pahuhopu helu 1 a helu 3 no ka pu‘uhonua
holoholona.
5. Ho‘omākaukau i kumu waiwai nui no nā kaianoho mākaukau no na holoholona ‘āhiu, a e
kokua ho‘i i ka lehulehu ma ka ho‘onā‘auao a a‘o mai iā lākou e pili ana i nā i‘a, nā
holoholona hihiu, a me nā waiwai nohona ‘ōiwi o kēia wahi nei i kapa ‘ia o Kakahai‘a
NWR.
6. Ho‘omākaukau ho‘i i polokalamu waiwai loa no ke a‘o ‘ana i nā haumāna e pili ana i nā
kumuhana kūpono a me ka hana lima pu ma nā kaianoho holoholona hihiu.
Refuge Goals
1. Restore and maintain seasonal and permanent wetland habitats to meet the life history
needs of endangered Hawaiian waterbirds.
2. Protect, restore, and manage coastal habitat for the integrity of the fragile ecosystem.
3. Protect, restore, and manage forest habitat to provide a buffer from upper watershed
impacts.
4. Gather scientific information (survey, research, and assessments) in support of adaptive
management decisions on the Refuge under goals 1-3.
5. Provide high-quality wildlife-dependent recreation, interpretation, and outreach
opportunities to enhance public understanding, appreciation, and enjoyment of the native
wildlife, natural communities, and cultural history of the Kakahai‘a NWR.
6. Provide students and teachers high-quality hands-on environmental education programs
that foster a connection with nature and the Refuge.
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
1-8 Chapter 1. Introduction and Background
1.7 Relationship to Previous and Future Refuge Plans
Planning has been a part of Refuge operations since their beginning. Although not all were
conducted in a comprehensive fashion, or with public participation considered adequate
today, a considerable number of plans were completed over the years to guide managers.
Additional smaller “step-down” plans and management agreements (plans addressing one
program or resource) will be developed for the Refuge in conjunction with the CCP. Current
management plans include:
 Interim Management Plan - 2001
 Wildland Fire Management Plan - 2004
 Integrated Pest Management Plan - 2008
 Refuge Safety Plan - 2010
 Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza Disease Contingency Plan - 2009
 Avian Botulism Disease Contingency Plan - 2008
 Emergency Preparedness Response Plan (updated annually) - 2011
 Continuity of Operations Plan (updated annually) - 2011
 Station Hazardous Communications Plan (updated annually) - 2011
1.7.1 Future planning
The CCP will be revised every 15 years or earlier if monitoring and evaluation determine that
changes are needed to achieve the Refuge purpose, vision, goals, or objectives. The CCP
provides guidance in the form of goals, objectives, and strategies for Refuge programs areas
but may lack some of the specifics needed for implementation. Step-down management
plans will therefore be developed for individual program areas, as needed, following
completion of the CCP. Step-down plans require appropriate NEPA compliance.
1.8 Relationship to Ecosystem Planning Efforts
When developing a CCP, the Service considers the goals and objectives of existing national,
regional, and ecosystem plans; State/Territorial fish and wildlife conservation plans; and
other landscape-scale plans developed for the same watershed or ecosystem in which the
refuge is located. To the extent possible, the CCP is expected to be consistent with these
existing plans and assist in meeting their conservation goals and objectives (602 FW 3.3).
This section summarizes some of the key plans that were reviewed by members of the
planning team during CCP development.
Hawai‘i’s Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy, 2005. With passage of the
Commerce, Justice, and State Appropriations Act of 2001, Congress mandated each State and
Territory to develop its own comprehensive wildlife conservation strategy. Hawai‘i’s
Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy thoroughly reviews the status of the full range
of the State’s native terrestrial and aquatic species, over 10,000 of which are found nowhere
else on earth. Hawai‘i’s Species of Greatest Conservation Need include all native terrestrial
animals, all endemic aquatic animals, additional indigenous aquatic animals identified as in
need of conservation attention, a range of native plants identified as in need of conservation
attention, and all identified endemic algae. This list includes: a terrestrial mammal (1), birds
(77), terrestrial invertebrates (~5,000), freshwater fishes (5), freshwater invertebrates (12),
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 1. Introduction and Background 1-9
anchialine pond-associated fauna (20), marine mammals (26), marine reptiles (6), marine
fishes (154), marine invertebrates (197), and flora (over 600). Details on all the listed wildlife
taxa are provided in fact sheets that contain information for taxa, closely related groups of
species, and species facing similar threats.
Hawai‘i Nongame Management Program (Draft), 2000. The goal of the Hawai‘i Nongame
Management Program is to manage, preserve and protect the native avifauna and their
habitats for their intrinsic, recreational, scientific, and educational values and to provide
opportunities for the residents and visitors to Hawai‘i to use and enjoy these resources. A
major focus of the program is on management and recovery of endangered species, including
projects to monitor, manage habitat, and recover populations and control of predators
affecting endangered species. Other nongame projects include increased surveillance of non-native
pests, construction of facilities and infrastructure to promote management or
recreational opportunities to enjoy nongame resources, and maintenance of those facilities.
Draft Revised Recovery Plan for Hawaiian Waterbirds, (Second Draft of Second Revision),
May 2005. The ultimate goal of the recovery program is to restore and maintain multiple self-sustaining
populations of Hawaiian waterbirds within their historic ranges. The recovery of
the endangered waterbirds focuses on the following objectives:
 Increasing population numbers to Statewide baseline levels (consistently stable or
increasing with a minimum of 2,000 birds for each species);
 Establishing multiple, self-sustaining breeding populations throughout each species’
historic range;
 Establishing and protecting a network of both core and supporting wetlands that are
managed as habitat suitable for waterbirds, including the maintenance of appropriate
hydrological conditions and control of invasive nonnative plants;
 For all four species, eliminating or controlling the threats posed by introduced
predators, avian diseases, and contaminants; and
 For the koloa maoli (Hawaiian duck), removing the threat of hybridization with feral
mallards.
U.S. Pacific Islands Regional Shorebird Conservation Plan, 2004. Conservation and
restoration of shorebird habitats is essential for the protection of endangered and declining
shorebird populations. Wetlands, beach strand, coastal forests, and mangrove habitats are
particularly vulnerable on Pacific islands due to increasing development pressures and
already limited acreage. Monitoring and research needs include assessment of population
sizes and trends; assessment of the timing and abundance of birds at key wintering and
migration stopover sites; assessment of habitat use and requirements at wintering and
migration areas; exploration of the geographic linkages between wintering, stopover, and
breeding areas; and evaluation of habitat restoration and management techniques to meet the
needs of resident and migratory species. Education and public outreach are critical
components of this plan. Resource management agencies of Federal, Territorial,
Commonwealth, and State governments will need to work together with military agencies,
nongovernmental organizations, and the scientific community. On a larger scale,
coordination at the international level will be key to the conservation of vulnerable species,
both migratory and resident.
Pacific Coast Joint Venture, Hawai‘i, 2006. This strategic plan for waterbirds and wetlands
identifies management strategies for a diversity of resident and migratory species with
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
1-10 Chapter 1. Introduction and Background
varying life history requirements across multiple sites to fulfill archipelago-wide
conservation goals to “protect, restore, increase, and enhance all types of wetlands, riparian
habitats, and associated uplands throughout the Pacific Coast region to benefit birds, fish and
other wildlife” (Henry 2006). To accomplish this goal, six strategies are employed:
protection, restoration, enhancement and management advocacy, outreach, and research.
Habitat goals for the Pacific Coast Joint Venture (PCJV) strategic conservation plan in
Hawai‘i represent long ranging concepts that provide direction for conservation objectives
and actions. They are based on the strategies identified by the PCJV and support goals
identified by other avian conservation plans for Hawai‘i.
Moloka‘i Community Plan, 2001. One of nine community plans for the County of Maui
describing planning goals, objectives, policies and implementation strategies to guide
decision-making, this plan is currently under revision. It provides specific direction in
addressing the goals, objectives and policies contained in the County’s General Plan, while
recognizing the values and unique attributes of Moloka‘i in order to enhance the region's
overall living environment. The environmental goal is to “Preserve, protect and manage
Moloka‘i’s exceptional natural land and water resources to ensure that future generations
may continue to enjoy and protect the island environment.” Many of the Moloka‘i
Community Plan objectives apply to the Refuge, including:
 Protect and encourage the restoration of native habitats through government and
private conservation, land management and educational programs.
 Restore the environmental integrity of Moloka‘i’s land resources through
development of a comprehensive reforestation program utilizing native species.
 Manage, protect and preserve shoreline dune formations throughout the planning
region.
 Manage, protect, and where appropriate, restore reef habitats, fish ponds and other
 coastal resources unique to the Island of Moloka‘i.
 Protect and manage coastal water quality through best management land treatment
practices.
 Recognize and preserve traditional access and uses of the environment to address
subsistence needs of the residents of Moloka‘i.
 Encourage the development of environmentally sensitive drainage master plans
which consider development opportunities and constraints in flood prone areas,
stream channels and gulches.
 Encourage alternative means of pest control in order to limit the use of chemical
pesticides.
 Require fire prevention and suppression strategies as a means of protecting and
preserving Moloka‘i’s land and coastal water resources.
 Promote the inclusion of environmental education within the curriculum at all
educational levels to foster respect for Moloka‘i’s land, water and marine resources.
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 1. Introduction and Background 1-11
1.9 Planning and Issue Identification
In September 2009, approximately 250 copies of Planning Update 1 were mailed and hand-distributed
to interested individuals, local conservation groups, and research organizations;
County, State, and Federal government agencies; and the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA).
Planning Update 1 described the planning process, Refuge purpose, and draft wildlife,
habitat, and public use goals, and preliminary issues to be considered in the CCP.
1.9.1 Public Scoping Sessions
The public scoping period for this CCP opened November 2009. A public meeting was held
in Kaunakakai, Moloka‘i, on November 4, 2009. At the meeting, the Refuge staff explained
the CCP planning process; the Refuge purposes, vision, and management; and preliminary
management issues, concerns, and opportunities. We received written comments and
answered questions that addressed a number of issues and concerns from residents. Planning
Update 2 (mailed February 2010) summarized the comments we received and listed
preliminary management issues we used to draft alternatives and refine goals and objectives.
The core planning team evaluated the issues and the topics documented during scoping.
Issues (defined as matters of controversy, dispute, or general concern over resource
management activities, the environment, land uses, or public use activities) are important to
the planning process to help identify topics to be addressed in the plan, pinpoint the types of
information to gather, and help define alternatives for the plan. In Planning Update 3 (mailed
March 2011), we described the three alternatives being considered with the preferred
alternative identified. Concurrent with mailing, Planning Updates 1-3 were also posted on
the Refuge website (http://www.fws.gov/Kakahaia).
It is the Service’s responsibility to focus planning and the EA analysis on the major issues.
Major issues typically suggest different actions or alternative solutions and are typically those
within the Refuge’s jurisdiction which have a positive or negative effect on the resource.
Major issues will influence the decisions proposed in the plan. Summaries of the issues
identified to date follow.
1.9.2 Issues to be Addressed in the Draft CCP
Restoration of the Wetlands: The primary purpose of the Refuge is to protect endangered
waterbirds and restore their habitat. The continuous encroachment of pest plants, particularly
California bulrush, has been a serious dilemma. Strategic planning is needed to efficiently
remove and restore the wetlands and provide for endangered waterbirds and migratory
species that once thrived. The Refuge will prepare a comprehensive Habitat Management
Plan that will outline the restoration activities needed to remove and reconfigure Old Pond
back to an open water pond that is naturally fed by springs. This work is likely to include
deconstruction of the radial levees that were constructed in 1983; these levees pose a threat to
the integrity of the pond by limiting water flow, capturing sediment, and are host to non-wetland
vegetation.
New Pond was intended to provide shallow water habitat for wading birds, primarily ae‘o;
however, the original plan to receive water from Old Pond is not ideal and requires a separate
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
1-12 Chapter 1. Introduction and Background
source of water. Prior to construction of a water source, we need to identify the soil type and
New Pond’s capability to hold water.
Staff Presence on the Refuge and in the Community: Refuge staff, operation, and
management of Kakahai‘a NWR are based at Keālia Pond NWR on Maui. A Maintenance
Worker makes a day trip to Moloka‘i every other week to check on the property and perform
work, primarily invasive plant control (fence line, New Pond). When the wetland is restored,
the Refuge will need on-site staff or increased visits to maintain the wetlands and ensure the
habitat does not revert to its existing condition. Strategic and efficient planning to restore
Old Pond is necessary given the year-round growing season for California bulrush and
natural source of underground springs.
Wildlife and Habitat Resources: In the absence of quality habitat, endangered waterbirds are
no longer present on the Refuge, except after heavy rains when water pools in New Pond for
a short period of time (typically less than 1 week). The Service is concerned with threats
posed to native habitats and wildlife at Kakahai‘a from invasive plants like California bulrush
and pickleweed, and pest animals such as rats, Indian mongooses, and cats.
Coastal erosion: The coastal property within the Refuge has undergone heavy erosion over
the past decade. The reasons are unknown and emphasize the need to consult with coastal
geologists and identify methods of securing the integrity of the coastal property without
impacts to other adjacent areas. Refuge staff will seek partnerships to address effects of
climate change.
Information about unlawful removal of sand at the culvert adjacent to the Refuge road was
revealed at the scoping meeting. Whether or not the removal is being performed by the State,
County, or individuals, the Refuge will investigate this to ensure the proper information is
distributed and install signs along the Refuge’s coastal property citing County ordnance.
Visitor Services Activities: The absence of staff at Kakahai‘a NWR makes it difficult to
allow public access on a daily basis and the Refuge will continue providing Special Use
Permits (SUPs) to allow non-government educational organizations to provide school group
access. Within the past number of years, these groups have decreased due to the absence of
waterbirds. This Draft CCP/EA will evaluate different levels of public access when the
wetlands are restored and endangered waterbirds are present, as well as other wildlife-dependent
opportunities.
1.9.3 Issues Outside the Scope of the Draft CCP/EA
Off-shore Fishing Activities: Fishing activities at Kakahai‘a Beach are not within the scope
of this Draft CCP/EA as ocean-related opportunities and regulations fall within the
jurisdiction of the State of Hawai‘i Division of Aquatic Resources (DAR) and Division of
Conservation and Resource Enforcement (DOCARE).
Kawela Stream: Although Kawela Stream has tributaries that enter the north side of the
Refuge, it is located 0.2 miles west of the Refuge boundary and beyond the Refuge’s
jurisdiction.
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 1. Introduction and Background 1-13
Figure 1.1 – Main Hawaiian Islands
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
1-14 Chapter 1. Introduction and Background
To preserve the quality of the map, this side was left blank intentionally.
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 1. Introduction and Background 1-15
Figure 1.2 – Refuge Land Status & Boundary
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
1-16 Chapter 1. Introduction and Background
To preserve the quality of the map, this side was left blank intentionally.
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 2. Alternatives, Goals, Objectives, and Strategies 2-1
Chapter 2. Alternatives, Goals, Objectives, and Strategies
2.1 Considerations in Alternative Design
During development of the Draft CCP/EA alternatives presented in this chapter, the Service reviewed
and considered a variety of resources, social, economic, and organizational aspects important for
managing the Refuge. As is appropriate for a national wildlife refuge, resource considerations were
fundamental in designing alternatives. House Report 105-106 accompanying the Improvement Act
states “…the fundamental mission of our System is wildlife conservation: wildlife and wildlife
conservation must come first.”
The Service planning team reviewed and utilized available scientific information (reports and
studies) to better understand ecosystem trends and the latest scientific recommendations for species
and habitats. The team also met with staff from local, State and Federal agencies, and elected
officials to ascertain priorities and problems as perceived by others. Refuge staff also met with
Refuge users, non-profit groups, and community organizations to ensure their comments and ideas
were considered during CCP development.
2.2 Alternative Components Not Considered for Detailed Analysis
This Draft CCP/EA for Kakahai‘a NWR will not cover issues related to Kawela Stream, which is
located 0.2 miles west of the Refuge boundary. Although this large stream has tributaries that enter
the north side of the Refuge, the stream is beyond the Service’s jurisdiction. A suggestion was made
at a scoping meeting to construct a brush dam (cut trees and bushes) at a narrow section of the gulch
to slow down water, collect debris, and prevent erosion. Such a project is beyond the scope of this
document and also results in impacts to jurisdictional waters of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE).
2.3 Elements Common to All Alternatives
All the alternatives contain some common features. To reduce the length and redundancy of the
individual alternative descriptions, common elements are presented below.
2.3.1 Implementation Subject to Funding Availability
Under each alternative, actions will be implemented over a period of 15 years as funding becomes
available. Routine maintenance, repair, replacement, and improvement of existing facilities will
continue, also dependent on funding. It is the intent of the Refuge that annual priorities would follow
the final CCP guidelines, although funding initiatives, unforeseen management issues, and budgets
may vary from year to year. The CCP will be reviewed annually and updated as necessary
throughout its life.
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
2-2 Chapter 2. Alternatives, Goals, Objectives, and Strategies
2.3.2 Interagency Coordination and Collaboration
Ecosystem planning efforts discussed in Chapter 1, Section 1.8, involve collaboration among Federal,
State, and local agencies toward mutual goals. Under all alternatives, the Service will continue to
maintain regular discussions and partnership with the Hawai‘i Department of Land and Natural
Resources (DLNR). Topics for discussion continue to be the endangered waterbirds at Kakahai‘a
NWR and surrounding private and public lands, and wildlife monitoring.
2.3.3 Threatened and Endangered Species Protection and Recovery
Protection of threatened and endangered species is common across all alternatives. It is Service
policy to give priority consideration to the protection, enhancement, and recovery of these species on
national wildlife refuges. The protection of federally listed species mandated through Section 7 of the
ESA, called "Interagency Cooperation," is the mechanism by which Federal agencies ensure the
actions they take, including those they fund or authorize, do not jeopardize the existence of any listed
species. To ensure adequate protection, the Refuge is required to review all activities, programs, and
projects occurring on lands and waters of the Refuge to determine if they may affect listed species. If
the determination is that an action may affect an endangered species, then the Refuge conducts a
formal review, known as a consultation, to identify those effects and means to mitigate those effects.
Consultation is being conducted concurrent with development of the CCP.
2.3.4 Historic and Cultural Resource Protection
Cultural resources on Refuge lands receive protection and consideration in accordance with Federal
cultural resources laws, Executive orders, and regulations, as well as policies and procedures
established by the Department of the Interior (DOI) and the Service. Although the presence of
cultural resources, including historic properties, does not preclude a Federal activity, the Refuge will
seek to identify and protect cultural resources whenever possible. Refuge management actions will
support the State of Hawai‘i’s vision statement “to promote the use and conservation of historic and
cultural resources for the education, inspiration, pleasure and enrichment of the public in a spirit of
stewardship and trusteeship for future generations” (State Historic Preservation Plan 2010-2014).
The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) is a Federal law passed in
1990 that provides a process for museums and Federal agencies to return certain Native American
cultural items — human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects, or objects of cultural patrimony —
to lineal descendants, and culturally affiliated Indian tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations. A
Native Hawaiian organization includes any organization that: (a) serves and represents the interests
of Native Hawaiians, (b) has as a primary and stated purpose of the provision of services to Native
Hawaiians, and (c) has expertise in Native Hawaiian Affairs, and includes the Office of Hawaiian
Affairs and Hui Malama i na Kupuna ‘o Hawai‘i Nei. The DOI has interpreted this definition to also
include the Hawaiian island burial councils and various ‘ohana (extended families).
During early planning of any projects, the Refuge will provide the Service’s Regional Historic
Preservation Officer (RHPO) a description and location of all projects and activities that affect
ground and structures, including project requests from third parties. Information will also include any
alternatives being considered. The RHPO will analyze these undertakings for potential to affect
historic properties and enter into consultation with the State Historic Preservation Division and other
parties as appropriate. The Refuge will also ask the public and local government officials to identify
any cultural resource impact concerns. This notification is generally done in conjunction with the
review required by NEPA or Service regulations on compatibility of uses.
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 2. Alternatives, Goals, Objectives, and Strategies 2-3
2.3.5 Fire Management
The suppression of wildfires and the use of prescribed or controlled fire are long-standing parts of
resource protection, public safety, and habitat management on national wildlife refuges. The Fire
Management Plan (Appendix F) provides detailed guidance for the suppression and use of prescribed
fire. That plan's actions and effects are incorporated through reference in this CCP/EA. The plan
outlines wildfire response and prescribed fire objectives, strategies, responsibilities, equipment and
staffing; burn units; implementation; monitoring; and evaluation.
2.3.6 Participation in Planning and Review of Regional Development
Activities
The Service will actively participate in planning and studies for ongoing and future industrial and
urban development, contamination, and other potential concerns that may affect the Refuge’s wildlife
resources and habitats. The Service will continue to cultivate working relationships with pertinent
State and Federal agencies to stay abreast of current and potential developments and will utilize
effective outreach tools and technologies and EE as needed to raise awareness of the Refuge’s
resources. The Refuge will participate in local community initiatives to protect, steward, and enhance
natural landscapes and wildlife habitat. We will continue to identify and pursue new opportunities for
land acquisition that will benefit Refuge purposes.
2.3.7 Adaptive Management
Based upon 522 Departmental Manual (DM) 1 (Adaptive Management Implementation policy),
Refuge staff shall utilize adaptive management for conserving, protecting, and, where appropriate,
restoring lands and resources. Within 43 CFR 46.30, adaptive management is defined as a system of
management practices based upon clearly identified outcomes, where monitoring evaluates whether
management actions are achieving desired results (objectives). The recently published DOI Adaptive
Management Technical Guide also defines adaptive management as a decision process that
“promotes flexible decision making that can be adjusted in the face of uncertainties as outcomes from
management actions and other events become better understood.”
Adaptive management accounts for the fact that complete knowledge about fish, wildlife, plants,
habitats, and the ecological processes supporting them may be lacking. The role of natural variability
contributing to ecological resilience also is recognized as an important principle of adaptive
management. It is not a “trial and error” process, but rather emphasizes learning while doing based
upon available scientific information and best professional judgment considering site-specific biotic
and abiotic factors on Refuge lands. Adaptive management results in effective monitoring and
evaluation of the CCP.
Part of measuring the success of and adaptively managing the Refuge also includes the formal 15-
year revision of the CCP. The revision will be initiated by the Service and will involve many of the
same steps as this Draft CCP, including comprehensive review of management plans and research;
working closely with partners; and engaging the public.
2.3.8 Integrated Pest Management
In accordance with DOI policy 517 DM 1 and Service policy 569 FW 1, an integrated pest
management (IPM) approach will be utilized, where practicable, to eradicate, control, or contain pest
and invasive species (herein collectively referred to as pests) on Refuge lands. The IPM would
involve using methods based upon effectiveness, cost, and minimal ecological disruption, which
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
2-4 Chapter 2. Alternatives, Goals, Objectives, and Strategies
considers minimum potential effects to nontarget species and the Refuge environment. Pesticides may
be used where physical, cultural, and biological methods or combinations thereof are impractical or
incapable of providing adequate control, eradication, or containment. If a pesticide would be needed
on Refuge lands, the most specific (selective) chemical available for the target species would be used
unless considerations of persistence or other environmental and/or biotic hazards would preclude it.
In accordance with 517 DM 1, pesticide usage would be further restricted because only pesticides
registered with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in full compliance with the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act and as provided in regulations, orders, or permits issued
by EPA may be applied on lands and waters under Refuge jurisdiction.
Environmental harm by pest species would refer to a biologically substantial decrease in
environmental quality as indicated by a variety of potential factors, including declines in native
species populations or communities, degraded habitat quality or long-term habitat loss, and/or altered
ecological processes. Environmental harm may be a result of direct effects of pests on native species,
including preying and feeding on them; causing or vectoring diseases; preventing them from
reproducing or killing their young; outcompeting them for food, nutrients, light, nest sites, or other
vital resources; or hybridizing with them so frequently that within a few generations, few if any truly
native individuals remain. Environmental harm also can be the result of an indirect effect of pest
species. For example, decreased waterfowl use may result from pest plant infestations reducing the
availability and/or abundance of native wetland plants that provide forage during the winter.
Throughout the life of the CCP, most proposed pesticide uses on Refuge lands would be evaluated
for potential effects to Refuge biological resources and environmental quality. Pesticide uses with
appropriate and practical best management practices (BMP) for habitat management as well as
facilities maintenance would be approved for use on Refuge lands where there likely would be only
minor, temporary, and localized effects to species and environmental quality based upon non-exceedance
of threshold values in chemical profiles. However, pesticides may be used on Refuge
lands where substantial effects to species and the environment are possible (exceed threshold values)
in order to protect human health and safety (e.g., mosquito-borne disease). For more information on
strategies related to control of pests, see Appendix E.
2.3.9 National Environmental Policy Act Compliance
Since this EA and CCP are programmatic in many issue areas, it may not contain the necessary detail
on every future action outlined to adequately present and evaluate all physical, biological, and
socioeconomic impacts. For example, although the EA and CCP alternatives may show the proposed
number and location of features such as fences, overlooks, and roads, the exact location, size, design,
and other criteria related to these features would be determined at a later date depending on funding
and implementation schedules. Another example is the various sub or “step-down” plans required
for various management actions such as biological monitoring and predator control. Thus, before
certain objectives or actions are implemented, a decision will be made in coordination with the
Regional NEPA Coordinator on whether this EA was adequate for each specific construction,
planning, or other action, or whether separate step-down NEPA compliance (categorical exclusion,
EA, or an environmental impact statement) is needed.
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 2. Alternatives, Goals, Objectives, and Strategies 2-5
2.3.10 Law Enforcement
Officers’ Responsibilities
Fish and wildlife law enforcement issues on lands and waters of the Kakahai‘a NWR are under the
jurisdiction of the Service Zone Officer based in Honolulu. The role of the Zone Officer is to conduct
and document law enforcement incidents and coordinate and/or meet with all refuge project leaders,
law enforcement supervisors, and refuge officers. The Hawaiian and Pacific Islands Zone Officer is
highly mobile and is frequently deployed temporarily to various areas throughout the State of
Hawai‘i and across the Pacific Region. The need for a dedicated Refuge Officer for the Complex has
been identified in the Implementation Plan (Appendix C).
Officers’ Authority
The Zone and Refuge Officers are primarily responsible for enforcing refuge and wildlife laws,
including but not limited to:
 Administration Act;
 The Lacey Act;
 Archaeological Resource Protection Act;
 ESA;
 Migratory Bird Treaty Act; and
 Marine Mammal Protection Act.
Zone and Refuge Officers are also empowered to enforce all criminal laws, including traffic
violations, drugs, and warrants for arrest as they relate to trespass, hunting, fishing, and the taking
wildlife on Federal lands, and in some instances boating safety related to refuge lands and waters.
Service Officers work joint patrols and coordinate with the DOCARE, Maui Police Department, and
the Sheriff Division of the Hawai‘i Department of Public Safety.
2.3.11 Refuge Revenue Sharing Payments
Annual payments to the County of Maui under the Refuge Revenue Sharing Program in lieu of
property taxes will continue according to the established formula and subject to payments authorized
by Congress.
2.3.12 Regulatory Compliance
Activities under all alternatives requiring additional review, permits, and clearances (e.g., Section 106
of the National Historic Preservation Act, ESA Section 7 endangered species consultation, 401 water
quality permits, etc.) will undergo appropriate review and obtain permits and/or clearances as
needed.
2.3.13 Volunteer Opportunities
Volunteer opportunities occur in all alternatives. These are recognized as components of the
successful management of public lands and may become vital to the implementation of Refuge
programs, plans, and projects, especially in times of declining budgets. Currently, the Refuge hosts
intermittent volunteer projects with 40 volunteers.
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
2-6 Chapter 2. Alternatives, Goals, Objectives, and Strategies
2.3.14 Climate Change
Climate change is expected to place enormous pressure on coastal refuges particularly vulnerable to
sea level rise (SLR) resulting from melting glaciers and thermal expansion of oceans. Estimates by
the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) project that global sea level will rise 0.6-2
feet by the end of the century. This threatens to erode shorelines, inundate low-lying areas, and
contaminate freshwater resources through saltwater intrusion. Other impacts of climate change
include species’ range shifts, phenological changes, decoupling of species assemblages, hydrological
changes, and changes in disturbance regimes. Such impacts could result in dramatically different
ecosystem compositions than currently exist on the refuges, and planning decisions will consider this
issue.
There is overwhelming scientific consensus that the earth’s climate is rapidly changing and that the
primary cause of global warming is human-caused increases in greenhouse gas emissions. Much less
is understood about the complex effects that a rapidly changing climate will have on ecosystems and
wildlife. The Service is participating in the Pacific Islands Climate Change Cooperative (PICCC) to
develop protocols for monitoring the status and trends of fish, wildlife, and plants in relation to
climate changes. A collaborative program throughout the region will best equip stakeholders to
discern changes in abundance or distribution of indicator species. Because regional data
accumulation and analysis is requisite, we will coordinate efforts with other Federal agencies, State
agencies, conservation organizations, universities, local landowners, and climate change scientists.
Such coordinated studies and monitoring data benefit our understanding and appropriate response to
changes throughout the region.
2.4 Alternatives Descriptions
Each alternative describes a combination of habitat and visitor management strategies designed to
achieve the Refuge purpose, goals, and vision. These alternatives provide different ways to address
and respond to major public 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 and are shown in the corresponding maps found in this chapter. A
summary of the key differences between the alternatives is presented in Table 2.1 on page 2-9.
These alternatives represent broad, thematic approaches to management of the Refuge, recognizing
the latitude managers have within the framework of Refuge System laws and policy. The alternatives
reflect direction in the Administration Act, Service policy for administration and management of
refuges, and a host of ongoing conservation initiatives affecting the Hawaiian Islands. The
alternatives were developed to address a suite of issues, and indeed are structured to track the issues,
challenges, and opportunities presented in Chapter 1.
As an integrated CCP and EA, the details of the alternatives are described in terms of the main
components of a CCP, namely measurable objectives and strategies to achieve those objectives. Most
importantly, these alternatives are designed to help Kakahai‘a NWR contribute to the mission of the
Refuge System; meet the purposes for which the Refuge was established, and help achieve the
Refuge vision, goals, and objectives. Stepdown plans for Habitat Restoration would be developed
under Alternatives B and C.
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 2. Alternatives, Goals, Objectives, and Strategies 2-7
2.4.1 Alternative A: Continue Current Management Activities
This alternative assumes no change in current management programs and is considered the base from
which to compare the other alternatives. Under this alternative, Refuge management, consistent with
available funding and staffing, would continue. No significant changes would be initiated by the
Service. Wetland management at Kakahai‘a NWR has decreased significantly over the past 10 years
due to limited staff and funding. Overgrowth of pest plants, including trees and shrubs on levees, has
hindered efforts to manage the habitat on a small scale. Sedimentation from the upper watershed has
resulted in a degraded wetland. Failure to provide adequate wetland habitat has resulted in an
absence of waterbirds; thus, all predator control activities have been halted. Current management
activities at Kakahai‘a are limited to herbicide and mechanical treatments to set back pest plant
species at New Pond and along the fence line. Other management includes maintaining access to
staff gages and piezometers; monitoring water levels; and replacing the perimeter fence, as funding
permits. The Refuge is closed to visitors.
2.4.2 Alternative B: Restoration Focus
This alternative will restore 10.5 acres of wetland habitat at Kakahai‘a NWR. Development of a
water source for 5.5 acre New Pond would be accomplished with the construction of a well,
installation of a pump and water distribution line, and repair of the electric panel. Depending on the
capability of retaining and manipulating water level in the pond, this alternative is expected to create
foraging and resting habitat for ae‘o and ‘alae ke‘oke‘o, and potential nesting habitat for ae‘o. Water
would be used to set back vegetation; however, IPM treatments would continue to be performed
during the dry months (October-December). Water level management in both ponds would also
enhance invertebrate abundance. Removal of 5 acres of invasive vegetation would recreate open
water habitat in Old Pond. Continuous pest plant management will be needed to discourage regrowth
and allow re-establishment of native sedges.
If feasible, the pond topography will be re-contoured in areas where California bulrush has been
removed. This hemi-marsh will create foraging and nesting habitat for ‘alae ke‘oke‘o. Monitoring of
waterbirds and predator control would resume, particularly during breeding season. The perimeter
fence will be repaired or replaced to minimize some pest mammals (e.g., axis deer, pigs, dogs) but
not all. This alternative includes a compilation of available data on the ecology of the wetlands and
initiation of research to evaluate the geomorphology, hydrology, and elevation in preparation for a
restoration design that would meet the needs of two focal species: ae‘o and ‘alae ke‘oke‘o.
The Refuge will remain closed to the public except those authorized through an SUP for EE and
interpretation. An earthen platform would be constructed along the road outside the fence for viewing
opportunities. Volunteer work groups will be coordinated with staff visits from Maui. All
earthmoving projects will be conducted in previously disturbed areas with a preexisting cultural
resource clearance.
2.4.3 Alternative C: Wetland Capacity Focus (Preferred Alternative)
This alternative would maximize wetland habitat with complete restoration of the 15-acre Old Pond
and 5.5 acres of New Pond. Physical restoration of the Old Pond would include removal of
California bulrush and other aggressive pest species, dredging accumulated sediment, reconfiguring
bathymetry and radial levees, reconstructing perimeter levees, replacing the water control structure,
and replacing the pump between the two ponds. Restoration of Old Pond would provide open water
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
2-8 Chapter 2. Alternatives, Goals, Objectives, and Strategies
and emergent habitat for breeding, foraging, and nesting ‘alae ke‘oke‘o with minimum supplemental
water due to the presence of natural groundwater springs.
This alternative includes a compilation of available data on the ecology of the wetlands and initiation
of research to evaluate the geomorphology, hydrology, and elevation in preparation for a restoration
design that would meet the needs of two focal species: ae‘o and ‘alae ke‘oke‘o. A new well, pump,
water distribution line, and control outlet for New Pond would be constructed and existing levees
would be reconstructed. The capability of flooding and dewatering the ponds will provide permanent
and the seasonal habitat for ae‘o and ‘alae ke‘oke‘o, and indirectly benefit migratory waterbirds. All
monitoring activities would resume with the presence of wetland function. A predator-proof fence
would be installed to minimize or eliminate predators from entering the wetlands.
The Service will work with Hawai‘i Department of Transportation (HDOT) on planning and design
to modify the culvert passing under Kamehameha V Highway to allow water from the upper
watershed and periodic dewatering of the wetlands to flow to the ocean naturally without blockage
from sand. We will contract a comprehensive archaeological and cultural investigation for the
Refuge and surrounding lands prior to expanding restoration efforts beyond previously disturbed
lands.
Maintaining the wetlands at Kakahai‘a NWR will require a regular on-site staff presence. The
opportunities for visitors to engage in wildlife-dependent recreation may expand depending on
staffing, and, at a minimum, a kiosk would be constructed on the earthen platform along the Refuge
entrance road. Volunteer groups would be coordinated to assist staff with restoration and
maintenance activities.
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 2. Alternatives, Goals, Objectives, and Strategies 2-9
Table 2.1.
Kakahai‘a NWR Management Alternatives Summary
Key
Themes
Objectives Alt A Alt B Alt C
HABITATS
1.1 Seasonal wetland
habitat for ae‘o 0-2 ac 2-4 ac 5.5-7 ac
1.2 Permanent wetland
habitat for ‘alae
ke‘oke‘o
0-0.5 ac 4 ac 14 ac
2.1 Coastal strand 0-2 ac 1-2 ac 2 ac
2.2 Grassland 0-1.5 ac 0.5-1.5 ac 2.3 ac
3.1 Dry forest 0-1 ac 1 ac 7 ac
SCIENTIFIC DATA
4.1 Conduct inventory
and monitoring
Monitor water
quantity and water
levels
Monitor nesting
success; impacts of
pest plants & animals;
water quantity and
quality; and
abundance of
endangered waterbirds
Monitor nesting success;
impacts of pest plants &
animals; water quantity
and quality; and
abundance of
endangered waterbirds
4.2 Conduct research
projects
Climate change
research projects
only
Study most effective
IPM strategies
Study most effective
IPM strategies
4.3 Conduct scientific
assessments
Develop climate
change assessment
protocols
Assess water
resources; assess
bathymetric
configurations;
develop climate
change assessment
protocols; and
evaluate SLAMM
analyses
Assess water resources,
assess bathymetric
configurations; develop
climate change
assessment protocols;
evaluate SLAMM
analyses; and conduct
comprehensive cultural
resource survey
VISITOR SERVICES
5.1 Wildlife
observation and
photography
0
Visitors/year
20-40
Visitors/year
Up to 500
Visitors/year
5.2 Interpretation,
outreach, partnerships,
and volunteer programs
0
Programs/year
2-10
Programs/year
Up to 10
Programs/year
6.1 Expand EE
partnerships 1-2
Programs/year
2-5
Programs/year
5-12
Programs/year
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
2-10 Chapter 2. Alternatives, Goals, Objectives, and Strategies
Kakahai„a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 2. Alternatives, Goals, Objectives, and Strategies 2-11
Figure 2.1 – Alternative A: Habitat Management
Kakahai„a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
2-12 Chapter 2. Alternatives, Goals, Objectives, and Strategies
To preserve the quality of the map, this side was left blank intentionally.
Kakahai„a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 2. Alternatives, Goals, Objectives, and Strategies 2-13
Figure 2.2 – Alternative B: Habitat Management
Kakahai„a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
2-14 Chapter 2. Alternatives, Goals, Objectives, and Strategies
To preserve the quality of the map, this side was left blank intentionally.
Kakahai„a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 2. Alternatives, Goals, Objectives, and Strategies 2-15
Figure 2.3 – Alternative C: Habitat Management (Preferred Alternative)
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
2-16 Chapter 2. Alternatives, Goals, Objectives, and Strategies
To preserve the quality of the map, this side was left blank intentionally.
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 2. Alternatives, Goals, Objectives, and Strategies 2-17
2.5 Goals, Objectives, Strategies􀀏􀼠 and Rationale
Goals and objectives are the unifying elements for successful, adaptive refuge management. They
identify and focus management priorities, resolve issues, and link to refuge purpose(s), 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, 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. Unless specifically
stated, all objectives are applicable throughout the life of this plan.
In the development of this Draft CCP/EA, the Service has provided effects analysis in Chapter 7. The
effects analysis evaluates alternative sets of management actions derived from management goals,
objectives, and implementation strategies. The goals for the Kakahai‘a NWR are presented on the
following pages. Each goal is followed by one or more objectives that pertain to it. The goal order
does not imply any priority in this Draft CCP/EA. Some objectives pertain to multiple goals and
have simply been placed in the most reasonable spot. Similarly, some strategies pertain to multiple
objectives and for clarity these strategies are listed under each relevant objective. Following the
goals, objectives, and strategies, a brief rationale is provided. This rationale generally describes how
management strategies will be implemented to achieve the intended objectives. The rationale may
also, where necessary, discuss means to minimize potential impacts to nontarget species and
habitats. It also provides further background information pertaining to the importance of an objective
relative to legal mandates for managing units of the Refuge System, including refuge purpose, trust
resource responsibilities (federally listed threatened and endangered species and migratory birds),
and maintaining/restoring biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health.
‘Alae k‘eok‘eo nest USFWS
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
2-18 Chapter 2. Alternatives, Goals, Objectives, and Strategies
2.5.1 GOAL 1. Restore and maintain seasonal and permanent wetland
habitats to meet the life history needs of endangered Hawaiian
waterbirds.
Objective 1.1: Restore and maintain seasonal wetland habitat for ae‘o.
Restore and maintain 5.5 acres of seasonal wetland habitat for ae‘o throughout the year in New
Pond with the following characteristics:
 A mix of saturated and dry mudflat with small, low islands with dimensions of at least 30
ft diameter and 5:1 side slopes;
 75% of the bottom with undulating, irregular topography that creates exposed unsaturated
substrate (e.g., shoreline, islands) with gradual slopes during drawdown for nesting sites
adjacent to foraging habitat;
 Levees with 4:1 slopes to provide loafing and foraging habitat;
 Open water (<4-6 in. depth) and mudflat (saturated and unsaturated) with <30% cover of
vegetation (e.g., sprangletop, kaluhā, makaloa) as a mosaic to provide protection from
wind and adequate foraging areas;
 80% water coverage for breeding ae‘o;
 Predation of less than 5 ae‘o adults documented per year, to achieve nest success of 70% or
greater;
 <10% pest plants (California bulrush, California grass, and Indian marsh fleabane);
 No tilapia present;
 Abundant aquatic invertebrates with densities of 400-600 invertebrates/yd2; and
 Limited human disturbance during ae‘o breeding season (April-July).
Strategies for Achieving the Objective Alt A Alt B Alt C
Acreage meeting objective 0-2 ac 0-5 ac 5.5 ac
Control pest plants using mowing, brush cutting, excavation, water
level management, prescribed fire, and herbicides (see IPM,
Appendix E)
  
Propagate and plant native species to establish natural vegetative
cover on pond levees and slopes  
Use IPM techniques to promote a mosaic of vegetation/open water  
Develop wetland restoration plan and design  
Construct water source (well, pump, water distribution line) for
supplemental flooding by 2014  
Pulse water during flooding, drawdown, and nonbreeding season to
promote abundance and availability of invertebrates  
Allow periodic dewatering September-December to recycle nutrients
and promote invertebrate abundance and diversity  
Control predators using spring traps, bait stations, and water level
management  
Block visitor access to nesting areas during breeding activity  
Use heavy equipment to rebuild levees (4:1 slopes) by 2015 
Use heavy equipment to form and maintain islands by 2015 
Replace New Pond water control structures by 2015 
Install new piezometers by 2013 
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 2. Alternatives, Goals, Objectives, and Strategies 2-19
Strategies for Achieving the Objective Alt A Alt B Alt C
Slow drawdown of water to eliminate fish and promote
invertebrate/algal growth and plant response 
Station employee (Maintenance Worker or Biologist) at Kakahai‘a
NWR to oversee Refuge programs by 2014 
Rationale
Originally, New Pond was flooded from water pumped from Old Pond; however, the
encroachment of California bulrush throughout Old Pond has resulted in an unavailability of water.
Construction of a well and installation of a pump with electrical service is needed to provide
forage, resting, and nesting habitat as well as use water level to control pest plants and promote
invertebrate diversity and abundance. Ae‘o require different loafing and foraging habitats during
the breeding and nonbreeding seasons. Recently hatched chicks (less than 14 days old) require
shallow water of less than 2 inches to forage. During the remainder of the year, fledglings and
adults can forage in water as deep as 6 inches.
Seasonally regulating water depth stimulates germination of desirable and beneficial plant species,
controls pest plants, and provides a variety of macroinvertebrates for young and adult ae‘o to feed
upon, thereby creating and maintaining maximized production and carrying capacity of the
wetlands. In addition to providing forage, seasonally regulated water depths provide a mosaic of
open water and vegetation as microhabitat for thermoregulation. Dewatering the pond during
nonbreeding season is beneficial for recycling nutrients and allowing staff to perform IPM
(herbicide and mechanical treatment) before flooding. This drying cycle enhances soil aeration
and invertebrate productivity.
Invertebrates are the primary food source for waterbirds but labor intensive to monitor. Random
sampling and subsampling of sieved invertebrates will provide densities of species composition
and abundance, and response to IPM techniques.
Management techniques including, mowing, herbicide application, prescribed fire, rototilling and
water level management are all techniques suitable for creating the desired mosaic of vegetation,
open water, and mudflats. These practices also benefit a variety of other wetland-dependent
species including ‘alae ke‘oke‘o, wintering waterfowl (dabbling ducks), and shorebirds. The pond
would be flooded from a groundwater well or from Old Pond, and ocean water is not likely to
inundate the pond.
Declining water levels increase areas of suitable nesting habitat. Ae‘o breeding season drawdowns
maximize the number of nests that an area can support. The target distance between nest site to
vegetation and water is approximately 0-20 feet. These slow breeding season drawdown rates also
stimulate ample numbers and diversity of invertebrates throughout the brood rearing period,
allowing adults with broods to establish feeding territories and reduce inter-brood conflicts that can
result in injury or death to young chicks.
Ae‘o are very easily disturbed during the nesting season. One behavior of the adult is to depart the
nest when perceived danger is detected, leaving the nest, eggs, or young exposed to ground or
avian predators and the weather. Eggs can also be destroyed by prolonged exposure to high
temperature, wind chill, and rain, all of which occur frequently in Hawai‘i. Human disturbance
must be minimized during the nesting period to reduce the risk of nest abandonment.
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
2-20 Chapter 2. Alternatives, Goals, Objectives, and Strategies
Ae‘o nests, eggs, and young are vulnerable to a variety of predators including rats, mongooses,
dogs, cats, cattle egrets, and ‘auku‘u. It is critical to control predators during the nesting season,
thereby increasing nesting and fledging success. During this period, control will include two
layers of perimeter trapping at a maximum distance of 218 yards apart, with traps placed 109 yards
apart, or less. Predator control during the nonbreeding season is reliant on available staff
(permanent or contracted) to monitor the program; therefore, trapping effort will be minimal (live
traps and bait stations) along the perimeter of the ponds.
Objective 1.2: Restore and maintain permanent wetland habitat for ‘alae ke‘oke‘o.
Restore and manage 15 acres of permanent wetland habitat for loafing and foraging ‘alae ke‘oke‘o
in Old Pond throughout the year with the following characteristics:
 Low native, vegetation cover (<4 in) on levees for foraging and loafing;
 >90% reduction in tilapia maintained at a level promoting algal growth and plants as
forage;
 Abundant aquatic invertebrates with densities of 400-600 invertebrates/yd2 ;
 <50 ft width of emergent vegetation along shorelines;
 Open water (<12 in) and/or mudflat interspersed with 30-60% cover of emergent
vegetation and algae that provides seeds and green browse, concealment, and thermal
cover;
 20 ft of open water between levees and emergent vegetation to protect nests from
predation;
 4:1 slope on levees;
 >90% reduction of marsh fleabane, California bulrush, and California grass;
 Slow drawdown of water prior to breeding (October-December);
 50:50 percentage of open water to emergent vegetation;
 Extended hydro periods to promote epiphytic invertebrates (e.g., dragonflies);
 <25% cover of pest plants;
 Documented predation level of less than 5 ‘alae ke‘oke‘o annually;
 Brood rearing within 150 ft from nesting habitat ; and
 Stable water levels (1.0-2.5 ft depth) during ‘alae ke‘oke‘o laying and incubation
(December-April).
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objectives Alt A Alt B Alt C
Total acreage meeting objective characteristics 0.5 ac 5 ac 15 ac
Prepare restoration plan for Old Pond with engineering specifications
and estimated costs by 2013
  
Clear vegetation and maintain open water around staff gages and
piezometers
  
Implement partial to complete access closures on levees to minimize
human disturbance during breeding season
  
Use IPM strategies including mechanical/physical, water levels,
prescribed fire, chemical, and biological to control pest plants
(Appendix E)
 
Identify methods to isolate groundwater springs  
Implement predator controls including spring traps, bait stations,
shooting, vegetation management, and water level management
 
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 2. Alternatives, Goals, Objectives, and Strategies 2-21
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objectives Alt A Alt B Alt C
Repair and maintain boundary fence and wetland perimeter fence  
Install predator-proof fence along perimeter of ponds by 2016 
Remove interior levees and accumulated sediment in Old Pond and
recontour pond bottom to create microtopography for varying water
level conditions by 2015

Remove pest plant species from levees and restore elevation, width,
and slopes by 2015

Replace Old Pond water control structures by 2015 
Install additional piezometers to monitor groundwater levels by 2013 
Install water level recorder in Old Pond by 2015 
Replace pump between Old and New Ponds, if feasible, by 2015 
Propagate and plant native species on levees, levee slopes, and within
ponds for erosion control and forage

Slow drawdown to maximize access to invertebrates as forage for
chicks

Periodic dewatering areas of the pond to recycle nutrients, aerate soil,
and manage vegetation

Design and construct sediment basin along north boundary to
minimize sedimentation entering the ponds by 2014

Rationale
Natural weather patterns, runoff, and subsurface ground water movement control the hydrology of
the wetlands. Old Pond is naturally fed by groundwater springs resulting in a permanent
hydrological unit. This natural watering is advantageous in that pumping is not required; however,
California bulrush has become well established and currently covers more than 90 percent of the
pond. The pond currently has no open water available to ‘alae ke‘oke‘o. Restoration of Old Pond
for endangered and migratory waterbirds needs to incorporate an evaluation of the groundwater
aquifer, topography, geotechnical data, and identification of methods to isolate the springs (e.g.,
temporary cofferdams) to allow the enclosed area to be pumped out, creating a dry work
environment for the major work to proceed. The levees extending into the pond (radials) produce
exposed areas where dryland species (e.g., kiawe, monkeypod, and Indian marsh fleabane) have
become established. These radial levees need to be removed to improve the function of the
wetland.
Previous efforts to remove California bulrush from Old Pond were futile because it was not
maintained and eventually filled in from adjacent bulrush stands. Removing 5 acres of bulrush
(Alternative 2) is feasible only if the regrowth can be controlled. Areas adjacent to the levees are
targeted because they are more accessible for IPM techniques to be employed.
The ideal wetland, a mosaic of open water and native vegetation, provides thermoregulation cover
during periods of high wind and rain, as well as increasing pair bond and brood rearing habitat.
Where possible, drawdown of water will promote growth of native sedges and invertebrates.
Eradicating California bulrush and obtaining water control will result in proper management of the
soils to enhance macro and other aquatic invertebrate production.
Low vegetation on levees creates important habitat for ‘alae ke‘oke‘o as well as other species.
Maintaining vegetation height of less than 4 inches provides foraging areas where ‘alae ke‘oke‘o
can graze on short grass and feed on associated invertebrates. Levees are used as loafing habitat
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
2-22 Chapter 2. Alternatives, Goals, Objectives, and Strategies
by shorebirds. Planting of native vegetation along levee slopes also prevents erosion and provides
nesting structure and visual obscurity for nest territories.
A diversity of wetland habitats are beneficial for ‘alae ke‘oke‘o during the nonbreeding season,
from saturated mudflats to emergent wetlands where birds can forage on seeds and seek cover.
‘Alae ke‘oke‘o are primarily herbivores, but opportunistically forage on epiphytic invertebrates,
especially during egg laying and early growth (chick) stages. When preparing the pond for
nesting, water levels are maintained at a constant level to provide adequate nest sites that are
secure from predation. Fluctuating water levels would require nesting adults to continually
expend energy to build the nest up or have it isolated on dry ground and subject to greater
predation.
During brood-rearing periods, however, water levels would be pulsed to provide physical barriers
between brood territories and stimulate macroinvertebrates that are eaten by adults in breeding
condition and also fed to developing chicks. These invertebrates are an important protein source
for proper development. Water levels are managed to help achieve a ratio of 50:50 vegetation to
open water. Providing a mosaic of open water and desirable plant species promotes the greatest
number of nesting and brood-rearing territories, while minimizing intraspecific strife between
family units. It is important to maintain restricted access to minimize human disturbance during
the nesting period. This includes visits from the general public, tours/educational groups, and
Refuge staff.
2.5.2 GOAL 2. Protect, restore, and manage coastal habitat for the integrity
of the fragile ecosystem.
Objective 2.1: Protect and maintain ocean shoreline habitat.
First restore and thereafter maintain 2 acres of the ocean shoreline habitat along Kamehameha V
Highway on Moloka‘i. Implement methods to protect the beach strand from further erosion to provide
a protective barrier to the refuge wetlands and highway. The coastal strand will be restored and
maintained for the following characteristics:
 Patchy distribution of low growing (2-8 in), native woody species (e.g., ‘ilima, naupaka
kahakai, and pilo) as a mosaic to naturally construct a dune system;
 30-40% cover of native grasses (e.g., ‘aki‘aki) and herbaceous vegetation (e.g., ‘akulikuli and
kīpūkai) along shoreline;
 <25% of woody pest plant species (e.g., Indian marsh fleabane, kiawe, and koa haole); and
 <70% cover of herbaceous pest plant species (e.g., saltbush) and grasses (buffel grass, swollen
finger grass).
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objectives Alt A Alt B Alt C
Total acreage meeting objective characteristics 0 ac 1-2 ac 2 ac
Install signs referencing regulations prohibiting removal of sand from
beach habitat by 2012  
Use appropriate IPM techniques to eradicate pest plant species that
would not result in additional erosion  
Plant native coastal species to ameliorate erosion  
Install temporary sand fencing to facilitate restoration of impacted
shoreline by 2013  
Consult with coastal specialists on the future impacts of climate change 
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 2. Alternatives, Goals, Objectives, and Strategies 2-23
Rationale
Management of Kakahai‘a NWRs coastal property is a collaborative effort with the County of Maui
and has been managed as a park since the Refuge’s establishment in 1976. Nonnative grasses, kiawe
trees, coconut trees, and marsh fleabane are currently maintaining the integrity of the soils/sand.
Removing all of these established (rooted) plants from the coast without immediate replacement would
be detrimental to the integrity of this site. Additional planting of native species along the beach would
be accomplished to protect the existing area and provide structure upon which sand can build.
Coastal dune communities are important to several rare and endangered plant and potentially animal
species. Coastal dunes are also fragile and easily altered by human activity. Coastal dune and beach
strand habitat also provides important foraging and loafing habitat for migratory bird species such as
the ‘ulili (wandering tattler), kōlea (Pacific golden plover), hunakai (sanderling), and ‘akekeke (ruddy
turnstone. Given the soil texture, relative position to the shoreline, and desirable plants species; the
strand provides suitable subterranean nest burrow habitat for ‘ua‘u kani and ‘a‘o. The coastal strand
habitat at Kakahai‘a may be suitable for ‘īlio-holo-i-ka‘uaua pupping and rearing and by honu ‘ea
(hawksbill sea turtle) and honu (Hawaiian green turtle) for laying eggs and basking.
Objective 2.2: Restore and maintain coastal grassland habitat.
First restore and thereafter maintain 2.3 acres of grassland habitat along both sides of the entrance road
on the west side of the Refuge with the following characteristics:
 Patchy distribution of low growing (2-8 in), native woody species (e.g., ‘ilima and pilo);
 30-40% cover of native grasses (e.g., ‘aki‘aki and pili);
 <25% of woody pest plant species (e.g., Indian marsh fleabane, kiawe, and koa haole); and
 <70% cover of herbaceous pest plant species (e.g., saltbush) and grasses (buffel grass, swollen
finger grass).
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objectives Alt A Alt B Alt C
Total acreage meeting objective characteristics 0-1.5
ac
1.5 ac 2.3 ac
Remove/control pest plant species by 2013   
Plant native species   
Implement native hydroseeding and/or hydromulching project, if
feasible, by 2014  
Rationale
The dominant grass in Hawai‘i prior to nonnative grasses was probably pili. ‘Aki‘aki grass is salt-tolerant
and can be grown adjacent to the beach and for roads that use nonpotable water, which
tends to have higher salinity in Hawai‘i (pers. comm. Chris Dacus). Hydroseeding can be
significantly less expensive than hand planting. HDOT has provided grant funding for University
of Hawai‘i Professor Joe DeFrank for native hydroseed experiments, currently underway at other
locations on the Island. There is potential for a future collaboration opportunity at the Refuge.
Restoration of native grassland plants on the Refuge will benefit ‘alae ke‘oke‘o who graze on grass
adjacent to wetlands.
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
2-24 Chapter 2. Alternatives, Goals, Objectives, and Strategies
2.5.3 GOAL 3. Protect, restore, and manage forest habitat to provide a
buffer from upper watershed impacts.
Objective 3.1: Restore and maintain native dry forest habitat.
Restore and maintain native dry forest habitat with the following characteristics:
 50 ft width of trees around ponds to protect from upper watershed impacts;
 >40% native plants consistent with historic dry forest habitats; and
 <60% pest plants and annual grasses.
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objectives Alt A Alt B Alt C
Total acreage meeting objective characteristics 0-3 ac 3-5 ac 7 ac
Maintain 50 ft buffer zone of kiawe trees around ponds until
replacement with native plants is feasible
✓ ✓ ✓
Use IPM techniques to control/eradicate pest plants in buffer zone ✓ ✓
Develop/implement restoration program, to include outplanting of
native species by 2016 ✓
Rationale
Much of the Refuge is currently covered with pest trees and shrubs which provide a buffer from
the upper watershed (e.g., slows down water and allows groundwater seepage, filters sediments
and pollutants before entering the ponds). This area is dominated by dense stands of nonnative
kiawe and haole koa trees. The seed dispersal from these nonnative pest species does have a
negative impact on the wetland habitat. While native plants are desirable, the existing vegetation
provides a buffer to shield endangered waterbird habitats from urban disturbances. Suspended
sediments contained in stream flows from the upper watershed primarily derive from urban
development and settle in the Refuge wetlands.
One of the most significant influences leading to the degradation and loss of native Hawaiian
habitats has been the relentless influx of pest plants, many of these highly invasive. The Refuge
plans to work with partners to gradually restore a viable natural native plant community through
removal of pest plants and outplanting of native plants that were part of the historic vegetative
community.
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 2. Alternatives, Goals, Objectives, and Strategies 2-25
2.5.4 GOAL 4. Gather scientific information in support of adaptive
management decisions on the Refuge under Goals 1-3.
Objective 4.1: Conduct inventory, monitoring, and research to document progress and
evaluate management strategies to guide management decisions.
Conduct high-priority inventory and monitoring activities that evaluate resource management and
public use activities to facilitate adaptive management. These surveys contribute to the
enhancement, protection, use, preservation, and management of wildlife populations and their
habitats on- and off-refuge. Specifically, they can be used to evaluate achievement of resource
management objectives identified in this CCP. These surveys have the following attributes:
 Data collection techniques would have zero to minimal animal mortality or disturbance and
zero to minimal habitat destruction;
 Collect minimum number of samples (i.e., water, soils, vegetative litter, plants,
macroinvertebrates, vertebrates) to meet statistical analysis requirements for identification
and/or experimentation in order to minimize long-term or cumulative impacts;
 Use proper cleaning of investigator equipment and clothing as well as quarantine methods,
where necessary, to minimize the potential spread or introduction of pest species; and
 Projects will adhere to scientifically defensible protocols for data collection, where
available and applicable.
The following is a prioritized list of survey activities to support resource
management decisions on the Refuge
Alt A Alt B Alt C
Monitor water quantity (surface water and groundwater)   
Identify the primary sources of sediment loads and solutions to
minimize accumulation at lower elevations   
Identify the sources of water entering the Refuge and mechanisms to
enhance water quantity  
Inventory and monitor bird abundance with monthly census to obtain
descriptive statistics of counts and trends  
Monitor breeding ‘alae ke‘oke‘o December-March for reproductive
success (incubation period is 25 days-requires on-site staff)  
Monitor breeding ae‘o April-July for reproductive success (requires
on-site staff)  
Research potential for hydroseeding/mulching native grasses  
Monitor vegetation response to IPM techniques  
Monitor mongoose and rat abundance with tracking tunnel surveys at
least every 60-90 days  
Conduct studies to determine desirable native plant community based
on local site conditions (e.g., soil type, elevation, groundwater table,
and proximity to shore)
✓
Contract a comprehensive archaeological and cultural investigation for
the Refuge and surrounding lands 
Monitor human activities at the coastal park for potential effects that
jeopardize the integrity of the coastal strand (e.g., erosion) 
Monitor banded ae‘o and ‘alae ke‘oke‘o 
Monitor water quality (abiotic parameters: pH, temperature, salinity,
conductivity, turbidity, dissolved O2) 
Maintain and monitor weather station 
Kakahai‘a National Wildlife Refuge
Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
2-26 Chapter 2. Alternatives, Goals, Objectives, and Strategies
Rationale
The Administration Act requires us to ‘‘… monitor the status and trends of fish, wildlife, and
plants in each refuge.’’ Surveys are used primarily to evaluate resource response to assess
progress toward achieving Refuge management objectives derived from the Refuge System
mission, refuge purpose(s), and maintenance of biological integrity, diversity, and environmental
health. Determining resource status and evaluating progress toward achieving objectives is
essential to implementing adaptive management on DOI lands as required by policy (522 DM 1).
Specifically, results of surveys would be used to refine management strategies, where necessary,
over time in order to achieve resource objectives. Surveys would provide the best available
scientific information to promote transparent decisionmaking processes for resource management
over time on Refuge lands.
Inventory, monitoring, and research studies are essential to high-quality habitat and population
management. Conducting censuses for endangered waterbirds and compiling data is critical to
evaluate population status and measure progress towards goals. Similarly, other waterbird
populations, habitat conditions and habitat management practices, including restoration efforts
must be monitored to evaluate their status and effectiveness. Population trends can be used to
evaluate habitat effectiveness and guide management actions.
Refuges must collect site-specific information and conduct defensible research to provide
information for devising, guiding and adapting management practices. Monitoring habitat
conditions provides valuable support and sound decisionmaking as applied to Refuge resource
management and also contributes to the Service’s ability to modify management practices
(adaptive management). Applied research on the Refuge will help address management issues and
questions, in theory, will result in improved management decisions on both the Refuge and on a
regional basis. The Refuge has always maintained a close working relationship with several State
and local agencies, and universities to adv