Land plan covers The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has proposed designating 29 percent of Oahu and 17 percent of the Big Island as "critical habitats" to protect threatened and endangered plant species.
29% of Oahu
Parcels on Oahu and the Big Isle
are added to a U.S. proposal to
protect endangered speciesBy Diana Leone
dleone@starbulletin.comIf made final, the proposed rules would:
>> Establish 25 critical habitat areas on Oahu for 99 threatened and endangered plant species, encompassing 111,364 acres of private, state, and federal lands.
>> Establish critical habitat on 28 areas on the Big Island for 47 plant species encompassing 437,285 acres of private, state and federal lands.
Both proposals were published in the Federal Register yesterday and the Fish and Wildlife Service will receive comments until July 27. The service expects to make a final ruling in about a year.
Oahu and the Big Island were the last two islands to get the proposed designations. With yesterday's proposals, a total of 839,783 acres, or 20 percent, of the Hawaiian islands has been proposed as critical habitat for 255 threatened and endangered native plants.
What that means depends on whom you ask.
David Henkin, attorney with EarthJustice, said the proposals show the Fish and Wildlife Service is "moving in right direction." "Unfortunately, there is a lot of public misunderstanding about what critical habitats will do in terms of daily lives of people in Hawaii," he said.
It does not, he said, stop anyone from camping, hiking, hunting, gathering or otherwise using public or private lands as they always have, he said.
"Critical habitat has been called by some a federal land grab," Henkin said.
"What it is is an insurance policy against bad federal projects."
Unless a person is receiving federal money, needs a federal permit or is being assisted by federal employees, they will not be affected by the designation, Henkin said.
Michael Buck, director of the Division of Forestry and Wildlife in the state Department of Land and Natural Resources, disagreed. Buck said his main concern is that Fish and Wildlife is using too broad a brushstroke, taking in swaths of land where the plants in question used to live, but do not exist anymore.
Even if it is possible to bring back native plants in degraded areas plagued by invasive weeds, fire, insects and animals, it is going to take a lot of money, Buck said yesterday, estimating that fulfilling all recovery plans for Kauai alone would cost $60 million.
He thinks wildlife agencies should concentrate on maintaining more pristine areas. "We know we're going to have critical habitat," Buck said. "Let's try to make it realistic.
"Fish and Wildlife has a very narrow view of what the impacts of this law will be. I believe it sends a chilling message to other landowners."
"Status quo is not enough," countered Henkin. "The current situation is what led to the recognition that these species are clinging to survival. We need to protect unoccupied habitat (areas where plants used to grow and might grow again.)"
Proposed critical habitat areas for Oahu and the Big Island and a draft economic analysis of proposed critical habitats on Kauai and Niihau can be seen at: How to get copies of the proposals
http://pacificislands.fws.gov.
Copies may also be obtained by calling the Fish and Wildlife Service's Honolulu office at 541-3441.
Comments may be submitted until June 27 to the Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 300 Ala Moana, Room 3-122, Box 50088, Honolulu, HI, 96850; or kani_crithab@r1. fws. gov.
The Fish and Wildlife Service said critical habitat "refers to specific geographic areas that are essential for the conservation of a threatened or endangered species and that may require special management considerations. ... A critical habitat designation does not set up a preserve or refuge and does not close an area to human access or use, such as for hunting or gathering."
In a written statement yesterday, Anne Badgley, regional director of the service's Pacific Region, said, "The Service will continue to work with stakeholders to modify or clarify boundaries, eliminate inappropriate areas, or make other adjustments as appropriate before issuing a final rule. We are committed to minimizing land use conflicts."
EarthJustice filed two lawsuits that have brought things to this point.
In the early 1990s, it filed a lawsuit to get Hawaii plants named as threatened or endangered species. In response to a second EarthJustice lawsuit, the U.S. District Court of Hawaii required in 1998 that the service name habitats to promote the recovery of these plants.
Buck said he thinks the ultimate critical habitat areas will not be as large as what's now proposed by Fish and Wildlife. "I think it's going to get smaller," he said. "But I think it's a horrible process."
