I think a couple giraffes and kangaroos would be good to bring in some extra bucks too.
aloha,
pog
Posts: 1,100
Threads: 6
Joined: Nov 2010
First off I want to state up front that even if I forget to qualify it in some places, when referring to "hunters" below I don't mean every hunter - I know a lot of hunters who are responsible and environmentalists. But there is a very vocal and politically powerful group who are opposed to any sort of feral animal control in native forests (while, ironically, opposing the bill in the legislature this year to lift seasons and bag limits on them).
quote:
Originally posted by KathyH
thanks so much for explaining what is making people mad regarding the sheep. Thank you for educating me on this. I'm surprised I never heard someone talk about the sheep in all this time -- see, there is always a lot to learn.
I don't know what the counter-argument would be, but on the face of your argument I would support your position. Not that I have any power.
You should definitely be aware that kipa is speaking from the hunters' point of view, and is ignorant of or deliberately avoiding the other issues. Among them:
1) He(?) says that "there are hundreds of thousands of mamane trees..." In a sense this is true, but the amount of seed set each year depends a lot on the weather. In a drought like we've had the last few years, they produce very few and the palila suffer.
2) "I can understand that over the next 100 years or so that with no new mamane tree seedlings that future populations could be affected..." The mamane have had almost no reproduction due to the sheep and goats for 200 years already. 90% of the mamane forest is already gone. The little strip on the west side of Mauna Kea, and an area in the Hualalai-Mauna Loa saddle, are all that's really left of high-quality mamane-naio forest. And even if that were not the case - the hunters (and DOFAW) have been fighting the order to eradicate the sheep for 30 years already. I have no doubt they're willing to keep it up for 100 years.
3) There is a feedback effect as the forest thins. Because it doesn't get much rain, it's dependent on fog for water, and shade to reduce evaporation. As trees die out, with none to replace them, there are fewer trees to catch fog, and less shade on the ground. So the whole area dries out and the trees that are left are more vulnerable to drought.
4) The palila is not historically restricted to this area. It used to occur all over the island, and in fact this high-elevation forest may not even be very good for them. It's just that it's all that's left, because we've spent the last 200 years (well, 1,000 really) steadily pushing them back.
quote:
I am also not one of those environmentalists who is fervent about making the world bend to the task of saving one bird. Maybe I should be, but I don't feel that way. I feel that we as humans should stop reckless actions that extinguish species, but on the other hand, species disappear all the time as part of evolution.
I actually agree. But, do you think that it's unreasonable to protect the few areas that are left intact, in order to save Hawaii's natural heritage? Because some of the hunters do. The Kohala Forest Reserve is ~23,000 acres. There is one 10-acre patch with rare plants that's fenced to keep out pigs, but evidently even 10 acres is too much, because it's been repeatedly vandalized. When it was being constructed and nearly done, some people cut it at every second post, rolled the fencing back, and tied it with wire. The last time, a year ago, they pulled out 15 pigs from this tiny area, and during the time they were in there, they had dug up a large portion of the site.
That's the kind of attitude that has to be dealt with.
quote:
Rampantly invasive species do scare me. As I said, the pigs are a big issue. If only the pigs could be up in the hunting preserves and not destroying food gardens. If the deer will stay out of my garden, I have nothing against them. I'm trying to raise food too.
The pigs and the deer would still be a problem. Killing off the upper forests causes huge amounts of erosion. The result is more runoff and flooding during heavy rains, and less streamflow when it's drier. That affects you and your garden too. Everyone needs to recognize how they are connected to everything around them; there's no way to insulate yourself, even with a fence.
Posts: 5,640
Threads: 101
Joined: Dec 2008
"Darwin would be amazed. we get a chance to see evolution right before our very eyes"
Evolution in large mammals doesn't happen over a period of 200 years.
What have they evolved, bullet-proof wool?
Posts: 12
Threads: 0
Joined: Sep 2011
Forestguy,
There is an area behind the Mauna Kea visitors center that has been fenced off for 30 years from all mammals yet you see no new mamane trees. So why is that? Blaming just the sheep is pretty narrow minded.
Midnight Rambler,
You are just another arm chair quarterback. You know nothing about me or what I do. I've hunted, gathered, replanted and hiked Mauna kea for over 40 years. So don't assume anything. This year we had a record number of Mamane seeds so stop telling lies. I work up on this mountain for over 20 years too and I drive it every day. You are the classic big mouth Haole that makes other look bad. Your momma is ignorant for raising you that way!
Most of the Mamane forest is gone due to cattle ranching and fires over the past 100 years.
Why don't you go spend more time researching instead a opening your palahi mouth.
PaulW,
come on now I was hoping this site would have more intelligent people on it but what could one expect from Puna ticks. Boy got some real dip sticks out there.
Posts: 1,100
Threads: 6
Joined: Nov 2010
quote:
Originally posted by kipa
Midnight Rambler,
You are just another arm chair quarterback. You know nothing about me or what I do. I've hunted, gathered, replanted and hiked Mauna kea for over 40 years. So don't assume anything. This year we had a record number of Mamane seeds so stop telling lies. I work up on this mountain for over 20 years too and I drive it every day. You are the classic big mouth Haole that makes other look bad. Your momma is ignorant for raising you that way!
Try taking your own advice. You know nothing about me or what I do, yet your first reponse is to call me a "classic big mouth Haole". Nice. My momma didn't raise me to automatically flip people off. Maybe yours did? I've worked, hiked, and, yes, researched in these forests for 18 years, mostly in the wetter parts but on Mauna Kea too. I've seen the akoko trees stripped of their leaves and even bark by the sheep and goats, and 20 feet away growing thick like weeds inside the fence. Seen how the kupaoa and naenae only lives inside the fences. Watched multiple herds of 50-100 sheep running through Puu Waawaa, in what used to be the best forest on the island.
quote:
Most of the Mamane forest is gone due to cattle ranching and fires over the past 100 years.
No kidding. That's exactly what I said. You, on the other hand, said it would take another 100 years for it to be lost.
quote:
come on now I was hoping this site would have more intelligent people on it but what could one expect from Puna ticks. Boy got some real dip sticks out there.
Pot -> kettle.
Posts: 92
Threads: 6
Joined: May 2009
Are we really going to argue with Kipa? The same great analytical mind that brought us this:
quote:
Originally posted by kipa
You haole's are the worst invasive species. You destroyed America and its people and now you come to Hawaii and think you know everything. You people are parasites!
Google "Fred Phelps"; just as much could be gained arguing with Phelps about gay rights.
It is pointless, and any of Kipa's arguments and observations should be taken in context of who he has shown himself to be.
Consider the source.
Posts: 12
Threads: 0
Joined: Sep 2011
PROOF BY ASSERTION!
That's all your type know.
You can't even quote someone right.
All the current and former cattle ranch lands from Parker ranch on down cleared all the mamane for firewood, fence post and the heavy footed cattle damaged a whole lot. Not to mention all the fires over the years.
That was the original habitat of the palila bird. Why I get upset about this is that people only want to blame the sheep.
There is also no proof that palila birds even existed higher up on Mauna Kea. Another assumption with no proof.
Back in the 1970's rumen content studies, which were done by Biologists confirmed that the sheep diets consisted of only 2% mamane and a few percent of other plants with over 95% of their diet to be grasses.
People come here today and attribute all the damage to the sheep.That is what people see, you know. A herd of sheep by the side of the road, oh look plenty sheep in the mountains. That is just not true anymore.
I know what the mountain looked like with tens of thousands of sheep and they did produce a good tree line under the mamane but they still had a large canopy to produce seed. The tree line allowed good green grass to grow under it and helped to collect dew. The mountain was so much more green back in the 70's. The sheep had a lot of grass to eat back then.
Look today below Hali Pohaku and the slope is choked out with mamane and dead grass and brush. The ground has become ugly and the sheep are no more.
Our DLNR should have managed our lands better.
I love our birds and landscape as much as anyone.
But killing off all our sheep is just not right. There is less then 2% of the sheep left after 30 years of aerial slaughters and yet the birds are still declining.
There is tons of mamame seed I just took pictures of it this year and the trees are over burden with them. It was a dry year last year too.
As long as they spend all the money on killing sheep they will never save the papila.
They once had good fences back in the 30's up to the 60's but they never
maintained any of it. The fences worked till they started falling apart.
That is when the sheep spread all over.
After they culled the herds they could have spent some of the millions on fencing and a good management plan but no. Gov't just can't run anything for very long. Then comes the sierra club. lets sue to get them to kill all the sheep. Why didn't they help to rebuild the fences and put up secured areas first. We would have had a good thirty years of protected area by now. At least we could have had a little more data to go by.
Posts: 92
Threads: 6
Joined: May 2009
Its too bad Kipa started his contribution by dropping a racist threadbomb, and has continued to include inflammatory ugly statements in his follow-ups.
His argument is conjecture, even though he at least put some thought into it with his last post.
If you accept his argument you have to remember you are accepting the reasoning of someone that casts a whole people as "parasites".
As I already said, I don't appreciate the haole comments and I find that entirely unproductive as a way to move towards a solution -- but I'm going to try to focus only getting at the facts of the situation.
Thanks to both kipa and Midnight Rambler, I was impelled to read something on the mamane and palila
I know that Wikipedia is far from an unimpeachable source, but here is the section of the Mauna Kea article on the mamane-naio forest, which discusses the litigation history.
Can you guys tell me what if anything is in error in this article?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mauna_Kea quote:
M#257;mane–naio forest
The highest forested zone on the volcano, at an elevation of 2,000–3,000 m (6,600–9,800 ft), is dominated by M#257;mane (Sophora chrysophylla) and Naio (Myoporum sandwicense), both endemic tree species, and is thus known as m#257;mane–naio forest. M#257;mane seeds and Naio fruit are the chief foods of the birds in this zone, especially the Palila (Loxioides bailleui). The Palila was formerly found on the slopes of Mauna Kea, Mauna Loa, and Hual#257;lai, but is now confined to the slopes of Mauna Kea—only 10% of its former range—and has been declared critically endangered.[35]
The largest threat to the ecosystem is grazing by feral sheep (Ovis aries), cattle (Bos primigenius),[45] and goats (Capra hircus) introduced to the island in the late 18th century. Feral animal competition with commercial grazing was severe enough that a program to eradicate them existed as far back as the late 1920s,[35] and continued through to 1949. One of the results of this grazing was the increased prevalence of herbaceous and woody plants, both endemic and introduced, that were resistant to browsing.[45]
The feral animals were almost eradicated, and numbered a few hundred in the 1950s. However, an influx of local hunters led to the feral species being valued as game animals, and in 1959 the Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources, the governing body in charge of conservation and land use management, changed its policy to a sustained-control program designed to facilitate the sport.[35]
Mouflon (Ovis aries orientalis) was introduced from 1962–1964,[46] and a plan to release Axis Deer (Axis axis) in 1964 was prevented only by protests from the ranching industry, who said that they would damage crops and spread disease. The hunting industry fought back, and the back-and-forth between the ranchers and hunters eventually gave way to a rise in public environmental concern.
With the development of astronomical facilities on Mauna Kea commencing, conservationists demanded protection of Mauna Kea's ecosystem. A plan was proposed to fence 25% of the forests for protection, and manage the remaining 75% for game hunting. Despite opposition from conservationists the plan was put into action. While the land was partitioned no money was allocated for the building of the fence. In the midst of this wrangling the Endangered Species Act was passed; the National Audubon Society and Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund filed a lawsuit against the Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources, claiming that they were violating federal law, in the landmark case Palila v. Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources (1978).[35][47]
The court ruled in favor of conservationists and upheld the precedence of federal laws before state control of wildlife. Having violated the Endangered Species Act, Hawaii state was required to remove all feral animals from the mountainside.[35] This decision was followed by a second court order in 1981. A public hunting program removed many of the feral animals,[39] at least temporarily. An active control program is in place,[4] though it is not conducted with sufficient rigor to allow significant recovery of the m#257;mane-naio ecosystem.[48]
There are many other species and ecosystems on the island, and on Mauna Kea, that remain threatened by human development and invasive species.[35]
The Mauna Kea Forest Reserve protects 52,500 acres (212 km2) of m#257;mane-naio forest under the jurisdiction of the Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources. Ungulate hunting is allowed year-round.[4] A small part of the m#257;mane–naio forest is encompassed by the Mauna Kea State Recreation Area.[49]
I also read the articles on the palila and the mamane, and it is fascinating how the palila have adapted to eat a toxic seed that kills ordinary finches.
Palila article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palila
The article giving background on the litigation is perhaps more to the point with this discussion, so I'm going to paste it it. Again, if anyone feels that Wikipedia has missed the mark with this summary, please do say.
What interests me the most is learning that DLNR was sued and the management became subject to court order. If either of you mentioned that earlier, I apologize for missing it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palila_v._H..._Resources quote:
Palila v. Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources was an ecological court case pertaining to the Palila and the M#257;mane-Naio ecosystem of Mauna Kea. The case stems from the introduction of goats and sheep onto Hawai#699;i island in the late 18th century, which became feral and damaged the local ecosystem.
Before the 1920s elimination program was completed, it was replaced with a game control plan that caused controversy between hunters and conservationists. Claiming that the state of Hawaii was violating the Endangered Species Act, a suit was filed to the Ninth District Court; as a result the state was ordered to eradicate all feral animals on the island within two years. A public hunting program was put in place, and has been largely effective; the Palila has begun to recover, and the case demonstrated federal power to protect endangered species.
The roots of the case go as far back as the late 18th century, when goats (Capra hircus) and sheep (Ovis aries) were released on the island and became feral. They were highly damaging to the endemic ecosystem (especially Palila (Loxioides bailleui), which became critically endangered), and competed with commercial livestock for resources.
A government program for their elimination was put in place in the late 1920s. The numbers were reduced from an estimated 40,000 to 200 in 1950. However, they were not fully eradicated; an increase in leisure time and greater ease of access to the mountains drove an influx of hunters who saw the remaining feral species as game animals. The Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources conceded, and in place of the eradication program a sustained-control program was introduced. This was followed by introducing feral mouflon (Ovis aries orientalis) onto the island for hunters.[2]
In addition to mouflon, axis deer (Axis axis) were proposed for introduction. This was met with protests against their introduction by farmers and ranchers, who saw them as a threat to food resources and a vehicle for bovine disease. The hunting industry fought back, and the back-and-forth between the ranching industry and hunters eventually gave way to a rise in public environmental concern; reports were published that showed that there was no environmentally sustainable way the deer could be introduced onto the island, and the issue was finally laid to rest.[2]
With conservationists demanding protection of Mauna Kea's ecosystem, plans were made to fence off 25% of the forests from foreign influence, and leave the remaining 75% under the same regulations. This plan was met by extreme opposition from conservationists, who questioned the effectiveness of such a plan as well as where the money for the fence, an expensive project, would be found. While the land was partitioned as planned, no money was allocated for the building of the fence. During these wranglings, the federal Endangered Species Act was passed. The National Audubon Society and Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund filed a lawsuit against the Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources, claiming that they were violating federal laws of conservation.
Basis
The arguments of Palila et al. were based on wording in the Endangered Species Act that extended protection to "critical habitats...the loss of which would appreciably decrease the likelihood of the survival and recovery of the listed species." These arguments were centered on the Palila, an endemic species of finch-billed Hawaiian honeycreeper. Because of deforestation, the Palila, which used to range on Mauna Kea, Mauna Loa, and Hual#257;lai, had its range cut to limited areas of Mauna Kea representing just 10% of its former range.
A mass of records, reports, and studies had been amassed, all pointing to the feral game animals as the main perpetrator of the species' endangernment, and all recommending their total removal from the mountainside. In 1977 the species was included by the US Department of the Interior in a list of 10 extremely endangered animals. The defense argued that the game animals were no threat to the species, and that the Tenth Amendment gives states the power to control non-migratory birds within their own borders.[2]
Results
The district court found the state violated the ESA, and ordered it to initiate steps towards the removal of feral sheep from the island within two years. Plans were approved for the eradication of the feral animals through a public hunting campaign. A request for appeal by the state was denied.[1]
There were several important outcomes from the legal debate:[1]
The Palila became the first critically endangered species in the world to pull itself back from the brink.[citation needed] Although numbers remain small, the protection enacted by the ruling protects the species from further decreases, and numbers have been rising slowly.
It established the right to protection of endangered animals to human conventions that damage the ecosystems which they live on.
It showed that the federal government has over-reaching power in what was prior an internal state matter.
The ability of endangered species to have standing to sue as plaintiffs in their own right was not questioned. (The trial court's opinion began, "The Palila (Psittirostra bailleui) seeks the protection of this Court . . . ."[3] The appellate court did not object.)
While the Palila has been rescued from extinction hundreds of Hawaiian ecosystems and organisms remain in danger, and it is likely there will be a similar debates on similar topics in the future.[1]
References
"Palila v. Hawaii Dept. of Land & Natural Resources, 639 F. 2d 495". Google Scholar. Retrieved 12 August 2010.
Mauna Kea and the Myth of Multiple Use: Endangered Species and Mountain Management in Hawaii. 4. International Mountain Society. August 1984. pp. 191–202. JSTOR 3673140.
Palila v. Hawaii Dep't of Land & Nat. Resources, 471 F. Supp. 985, 987 (D. Hawaii 1979).
|
