HAWAI'I PRIORITIES FOR MANAGEMENT IN THE MAIN HAWAIIAN ISLANDS 2010 - 2020 - DLNR
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
HAWAI‘I
C O R A L R E E F S T R AT E G Y
PRIORITIES FOR MANAGEMENT
IN THE MAIN HAWAIIAN ISLANDS
2010 – 2020
PRIORITIES FOR MANAGEMENT IN THE MAIN HAWAIIAN ISLANDS: 2010–2020
May 14, 2010 1
ABOUT THIS DOCUMENT
The State of Hawaii. 2010. Hawai’i Coral Reef Strategy: Priorities for
Management in the Main Hawaiian Islands 2010-2020. Honolulu, HI.
This document was prepared and printed with support from
the NOAA Coral Reef Conservation Program.
AUTHORS
Meghan Gombos, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, Coral Reef Conservation Program
Jill Komoto, Hawai‘i Department of Land and Natural
Resources, Division of Aquatic Resources
Kem Lowry, Lighthouse Consulting Group
Petra MacGowan, Hawai‘i Department of Land and Natural
Resources, Division of Aquatic Resources
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Hawai‘i Coral Reef Strategy was developed by DAR in
consultation with the Hawaii Coral Reef Working Group,
members of the Hawai‘i Local Action Strategy (LAS) Advisory
groups and key community partners and stakeholders.
A special mahalo to Pam Weiant, John Parks and Kim Hum
of The Nature Conservancy for their support and use of the
draft marine eco-regional assessment; Kitty Courtney of Tetra
Tech for assistance in facilitating and providing valuable
HAWAI‘I CORAL REEF STRATEGY
input and guidance for the site prioritization process; and
Christine Feinholz and Jamie Carter from NOAA Pacific
Services Center for consultation and the development of
maps for use at the prioritization workshop. Finally, this
strategy could not have been completed without time,
support and technical assistance from the Division of
Aquatic Resources (DAR) staff.
Cover photo: © James D. Watt / Oceanstock
2
HAWAI‘I CORAL REEF WORKING GROUP Larry Basch
National Park Service, University of Hawai‘i Cooperative
Terrence R. George Ecosystem Unit
Harold K.L. Castle Foundation
Cindy Barger
Mike Hamnett U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Honolulu District, Civil and
Hawai‘i Coral Reef Initiative Research Program Public Works Branch
Marnie Meyer Wendy Wiltse
Hawai‘i Department of Business, Economic Development & U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Pacific Islands Contact
Tourism, Hawai‘i Coastal Zone Management Program Office
Watson Okubo Chris Swenson
Hawai‘i Department of Health, Clean Water Branch U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific Islands Coastal Program
Bob Nishimoto Athline Clark
Hawai‘i Department of Land and Natural Resources, Division Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument
of Aquatic Resources
Kate Cullison and Sara Pelleteri
Dan Polhemus Aquatic Invasive Species LAS Coordinators
Hawai‘i Department of Land and Natural Resources, Division
of Aquatic Resources Greta Aeby
Climate Change and Marine Disease LAS Coordinator
PRIORITIES FOR MANAGEMENT IN THE MAIN HAWAIIAN ISLANDS: 2010–2020
Russell Sparks
Hawai‘i Department of Land and Natural Resources, Division Jason Philibotte
of Aquatic Resources Fishing Local Action Strategy Hawai‘i Coordinator
Ivor Williams Risa Oram
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Coral Land-Based Sources of Pollution LAS Coordinator
Reef Ecosystem Division
Emma Anders
Alan Everson Recreational Impacts to Reefs LAS Coordinator
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National
Marine Fisheries Service, Pacific Islands Regional Office,
Habitat Conservation Division
http://hawaii.gov/dlnr/dar/index.html
3
Contents
Glossary 6
Executive Summary 7
Section 1: Introduction 9
Need and Purpose of the Coral Reef Management Priorities Document 9
Section 2: Context 10
Coral Reef Ecosystem 10
Threats to Marine Resources 11
Fishing Pressure 11
Recreational Overuse 11
Land-Based Sources of Pollution 12
Invasive Species 13
Global Warming, Coral Bleaching, Ocean Acidification and Disease 14
Lack of Awareness 14
Cumulative Impacts 15
Section 3: Development of Goals and Objectives 16
Scope of the Coral Reef Management Priorities 16
Process for Development and Prioritization of Goals and Objectives 16
Background Analysis 16
Prioritization of Goals and Objectives 16
Section 4: Ten-Year Priority Goals and Objectives 19
Table 1: Hawaii’s Ten-Year Priority Goals and Objectives for Coral Reef Management 19
Section 5: Priority Site Selection Process 20
Site Selection Process 20
Table 2: Criteria for Hawai‘i Program Site Prioritizations 21
All LAS Workshop Details 21
Table 3: All LAS Meeting Site Ranking Results 23
Site Ranking Results 23
Immediate Next Steps 23
Table 4: Hawaii’s MHI Priority Coral Reef Strategy Objectives, Activities and Outcomes 24
HAWAI‘I CORAL REEF STRATEGY
Section 6: Capacity Gaps 33
Enforcement 33
Management Funding 34
Intergovernmental and Interagency Collaboration 34
Personnel Capacity 34
4
References 35
Appendix A: Hawai‘i Coral Program Structure 2010 39
Appendix B: Long-Term Goals and Objectives 40
Appendix C: Overview of the Marine Ecoregional Assessment for the Main Hawaiian Islands 43
Appendix D: Hawaii’s Coral Reef Strategy Site Prioritization Map 46
Appendix E: CRWG Ranking Results 53
PRIORITIES FOR MANAGEMENT IN THE MAIN HAWAIIAN ISLANDS: 2010–2020
5
Glossary
AIS: Aquatic Invasive Species
CCMD: Climate Change and Marine Disease (LAS)
CRWG: Coral Reef Working Group
CTAHR: College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources
CZM: State of Hawai‘i, Coastal Zone Management Program
(Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism)
DAR: DLNR–Division of Aquatic Resources
DLNR: State of Hawai‘i, Department of Land and Natural Resources
DOA: State of Hawai‘i, Department of Agriculture
DOBOR: DLNR–Division of Boating and Ocean Recreation
DOCARE: Division of Conservation and Resource Enforcement
DOFAW: DLNR–Division of Forestry and Wildlife
DOH: State of Hawai‘i, Department of Health
EPA: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FLASH: Fishing Local Action Strategy Hawai‘i
GPS: Global Positioning System
HAR: Hawai‘i Administrative Rule
HCRS: The Hawai‘i Coral Reef Strategy: Priorities for Management in the
Main Hawaiian Islands, 2010–2020
HRS: Hawai‘i Revised Statute
LAS: Local Action Strategy
LBSP: Land-Based Sources of Pollution (LAS)
LPA: Lack of Public Awareness (LAS)
MHI: Main Hawaiian Islands (Ni‘ihau, Kaua‘i, O‘ahu, Moloka‘i, Lāna‘i,
Kaho‘olawe, Maui and Hawai‘i)
NRCS: USDA–Natural Resources Conservation Service
NWHI: Northwestern Hawaiian Islands
OCCL: DLNR–Office of Coastal and Conservation Land
PMNM: Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument
HAWAI‘I CORAL REEF STRATEGY
RIR: Recreational Impacts to Reefs (LAS)
SMART: Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic and Timely (as applied
to goals and objectives)
UH: University of Hawai‘i
USDA: U.S. Department of Agriculture
USFWS: U.S Fish and Wildlife Service
6
Executive Summary
Hanauma Bay is one of Oahu’s most popular reef sites. Photo Credit: Dave Burdick
The State of Hawai‘i Department of Land Invasive Species. Other related ocean resource
PRIORITIES FOR MANAGEMENT IN THE MAIN HAWAIIAN ISLANDS: 2010–2020
and Natural Resources (DLNR) Division of management plans include: The Comprehensive
Aquatic Resources (DAR) is the primary agency Wildlife Conservation Strategy, Hawaii’s Marine
responsible for coordinating Hawaii’s reef Managed Areas Framework (DLNR–DAR) and
management efforts in the Main Hawaiian the Hawai‘i Ocean Resources Management
Islands (MHI). The Coral Reef Working Group Plan (DBEDT–CZM). All of these efforts have
(CRWG), made up of key state and federal overlapping goals, projects, personnel and
partners involved in coral reef management, was funding.
established to help provide guidance for the State
of Hawaii’s coral program. While DAR has sought to coordinate these
efforts, each strategy was developed somewhat
There are numerous parallel strategies and independently. In order to provide a more
programs for managing the coral reef resources cohesive strategy for coral reef management in
of the MHI. Over the past eight years, DAR led Hawai‘i, DAR and local coral program partners
the development of six multi-agency Local began development of The Hawai‘i Coral Reef
Action Strategies (LAS) under guidance from the Strategy: Priorities for Management in the Main
U.S. Coral Reef Task Force: Climate Change and Hawaiian Islands, 2010–2020 (HCRS) in May 2007.
Marine Disease, Lack of Public Awareness, Coral The process began with numerous stakeholder
Reef Fisheries, Land-Based Sources of Pollution, interviews and an analysis of recent public
Recreational Impacts to Reefs and Aquatic meetings and related ocean/coral reef strategies.
7
Recent NOAA initiatives to develop coral reef 3. Increase the abundance and average size
management priorities in the jurisdictions also of ten targeted coral reef fisheries species
provided additional impetus for the HCRS. critical to reef health and ecological
function by 2020.
Four goals and thirty objectives were developed
4. Designate a sufficient area of marine
based on the background research and analysis
waters under effective conservation by
conducted by the coral strategy planner and
2020 to ensure sustainable and resilient
consultation with the LAS advisory groups.
coral reef ecosystems.
These objectives were prioritized by the CRWG,
with the top five identified as priorities for 5. Reduce anchor damage and trampling on
coral reef management in the next ten years. coral reefs through the implementation
Intended outputs and outcomes were identified of no-anchor zones, utilization of day-use
by LAS advisory groups for each of the priority mooring buoys and other means by 2020.
objectives.
Since one of the top priority objectives mandates
The goals of The Hawai‘i Coral Reef Strategy are: site-based actions, the CRWG decided to
prioritize key coral reef sites for management
GOAL 1: Coral reefs undamaged by pollution, activities. The top two sites selected as priorities
invasive species, marine construction and for Hawaii’s coral program for the next 3–5
marine debris. years are: (1) Kahekili-Ka‘anapali (Maui), and (2)
Pelekane Bay-Puako-Anaeho‘omalu Bay (Hawai‘i).
GOAL 2: Productive and sustainable coral reef Each location will have a site-based coordinator,
fisheries and habitat. planning team and associated action plan.
GOAL 3: Coral reef ecosystems resilient to The extensive planning process used to develop
climate change, invasive species and marine the Hawai‘i Coral Strategy has led to increased
disease. participation of key stakeholders and an
enhanced dialogue between DAR staff, partner
GOAL 4: Increased public stewardship of coral agencies and other statewide ocean initiatives.
reef ecosystems. Through the collaboration of the CRWG, LAS
advisory groups and other stakeholders a more
The five priority objectives for the next ten years strategic approach to addressing threats to coral
(2010–2020): reefs in Hawai‘i has been developed.
1. Reduce key anthropogenic threats to two
priority near-shore coral reef sites by 2015
and five by 2020 using ahupua‘a1 based
management.
2. Prevent new AIS introductions and
HAWAI‘I CORAL REEF STRATEGY
minimize the spread of established AIS
populations by 2020.
1 Ahupua’a is the principal land division running from mountains seaward; basic unit of Hawaiian socioeconomic
organization.
8
Section 1: Introduction
Need and Purpose of the Coral While DAR has sought to coordinate these
Reef Management Priorities efforts, each strategy was developed somewhat
independently. This has resulted in several
Document redundancies and gaps. For example, since each
LAS was developed by a different contractor at
This document identifies a set of goals and
different times, activities that addressed multiple
objectives designed to serve as a framework
threats were sometimes included in several
for management activities affecting coral reefs
LAS and/or sometimes not mentioned at all. In
in the Main Hawaiian Islands (MHI) for the next
addition, other components of overall coral reef
decade (2010–2020). This priorities framework
management (e.g., protocols governing bio-
is the result of the analysis of relevant ocean
prospecting) are not mentioned in any of the LAS
management plans, past public meetings and
or other strategies.
interviews of key stakeholders.
To address these gaps and provide a more
The state of Hawai‘i Department of Land
cohesive strategy for coral reef management
and Natural Resources (DLNR) Division of
in Hawai‘i, DAR began development of its new
Aquatic Resources (DAR) is the primary agency
priorities for reef management in May 2007. Draft
responsible for coordinating Hawaii’s reef
priorities were completed with an initial set of
management efforts in the MHI. Over the past
goals, objectives and actions in 2008.
several years, DAR has:
PRIORITIES FOR MANAGEMENT IN THE MAIN HAWAIIAN ISLANDS: 2010–2020
Recent federal initiatives have provided
■■ Led the development of six multi-agency additional impetus to the development of
LAS (under guidance from the U.S. Coral Hawaii’s coral reef management priorities.
Reef Task Force): Climate Change and The National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Marine Disease, Lack of Public Awareness, Administration (NOAA) Coral Reef Conservation
Coral Reef Fisheries, Land-Based Sources Program, which provides substantial funding
of Pollution (supported by the U.S. EPA), for reef management activities, has mandated
Recreational Impacts to Reefs, and Aquatic each jurisdiction to develop reef management
Invasive Species. The LAS were developed priorities for the years 2010–2020 addressing
as three-year strategic documents and key threats to coral reefs. NOAA’s national-level
included goals, objectives and activities to goals and objectives have special emphasis
abate respective threats. on climate change, fishing impacts and land-
based sources of pollution. NOAA will use this
■■ Completed the marine component of the
document to direct its investment in activities
Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation
in each jurisdiction through grants, cooperative
Strategy.
agreements and internal funding. NOAA will
■■ Developed a framework for Marine prioritize investments where actions will address
Protected Areas (MPA) to provide clarity the national level goals and objectives as well as
on the goals, objectives and key activities the jurisdictional priorities.
that currently exist in a suite of different
types of marine managed sites.
9
Section 2: Context
Many species of reef fish found on Hawaii’s reefs are endemic to the Hawaiian Islands. Photo Credit: Luiz Rocha
Coral Reef Ecosystem intimate knowledge of their ocean resources
and employed a relatively sophisticated system
As one of the most isolated archipelagos on to manage resources in ways that reduced
earth, Hawai‘i has estimated rates of endemism waste and ensured long-term use. Some of
of 25 % or greater for most coral fish and these methods included the “kapu” system in
invertebrate species. This unique marine life which the chiefs would decree an area off limits
is found nowhere else in the world (DLNR DAR to regulate fishing during certain times (e.g.,
2005). This isolated island chain consists of two spawning season). Species restrictions were also
regions: the Main Hawaiian islands (MHI) and practiced (DLNR DAR 2005). Over time, these
the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands (NWHI). practices have eroded due to cultural, political
The MHI, where the state’s 1.3 million residents and demographic changes that have affected
reside, consists of high volcanic islands with non- water rights, land use and land ownership. These
HAWAI‘I CORAL REEF STRATEGY
structural reef communities and fringing reefs changes have disrupted ecosystem functions and
abutting the shore. In contrast, the NWHI consists sustainable management practices over just a few
of mostly uninhabited atolls, islands and banks generations (Friedlander, 2004).
that span over 2,000 kilometers (km) northwest of
the MHI (Friedlander et al., 2005). Notwithstanding these changes, reefs remain
extremely important as habitats, natural buffers,
Historically, coral reefs played an important role sites for recreation and cultural practices and
in Hawaiian culture and subsistence agriculture as a key component of the marine economy.
(Friedlander et al., 2008). Native Hawaiians had In addition to providing protection from large
10ocean swells and providing food for sustenance ■■ Most of the dominant species by weight
and commerce, it is estimated that the state’s in the NWHI were either rare or absent in
coral reefs generate approximately $800 million the MHI and the target species that were
annually in added value to the state’s economy present, regardless of trophic level, were
from marine tourism (Friedlander et al., 2008). nearly always larger in the NWHI.
Reef species also provide medical benefits,
including the development of new medicines, A trend of declining catches despite increasing
some of which are applied to the treatment of effort has been observed in several studies
HIV, cancer, ulcers and cardiovascular diseases. of time series data. In a review of commercial
Hawaii’s physical setting and extensive marine landings data between 1980 and 1990, the DAR)
science research facilities have made the state a found that “while catch per unit effort (CPUE) was
significant player in the marine biotechnology declining... an equivalent amount of landings
industry. was being shared among an increasing number
of fishermen” (Smith, 1993). This indicated the
Threats to Marine Resources decline was due to decreasing fish stocks and
not decreased fishing effort. Also, CPUE for
According to the Status of Coral Reefs in the World species that are harvested by recreational and
report (Friedlander et al., 2008), the condition of subsistence users has declined dramatically over
marine resources has generally degraded in the time, despite new developments in fisheries
MHI over the past 20 years. While Hawaii’s reefs technology (Friedlander, 2003).
are still in fair to good condition, many near-shore
ecosystems adjacent to urban areas and popular The quantitative evidence of declining
destinations have suffered from land-based reef fisheries is corroborated by qualitative
sources of pollution, fishing pressure, recreational information from public surveys, oral histories
overuse and invasive species. and interviews with members of fishing
communities. In 1997, DAR surveyed 863
fishermen and found reports of “a decline in the
PRIORITIES FOR MANAGEMENT IN THE MAIN HAWAIIAN ISLANDS: 2010–2020
Fishing Pressure
amount of fish that they’re able to catch now
Coral reef fisheries are an integral part of life in compared with what they were able to catch
Hawai‘i, providing food, recreation, commerce 20 or 30 years ago.” (Hawai‘i Division of Aquatic
and cultural resources. However, there is evidence Resources, 1998). In a compilation of over 130
from both researchers and resource users that oral history interviews with kupuna (“elders”)
coral reef fisheries have been steadily declining and kama‘aina (Hawaiian residents; literally
over the past century. Friedlander and DeMartini’s “those who are of the land”), the majority of
2002 study showed that the numerical density, interviewees reported changes in the quality of
size and biomass of fish that inhabit shallow reefs the fisheries as well as a significant decline in fish
are dramatically lower in the MHI compared to abundance, and they attributed these trends to
the remote and lightly fished NWHI. This same overfishing (Maly, K. and Maly, O. 2003).
comparative study revealed “dramatic differences”
in abundance, size and species composition: Recreational Overuse
■■ Standing fish stock in the NWHI was more Hawaii’s Local Action Strategy to Address
than 260% greater than in the MHI. Recreational Impacts to Reefs (2005) identifies
■■ More than 54% of the total fish biomass the ways in which marine recreational activities,
in the NWHI consisted of apex predators, such as snorkeling, diving and boating, may affect
compared to less than 3% in the MHI. coral reefs, as:
11(2003) found that the greatest concentration
of human-substrate contact occurred at
shoreline entry points, where people tend to
congregate. Although long-term impacts of
heavy recreational use of reefs in Hawai‘i are
not fully understood and the relative impacts
of different activities have not been evaluated,
negative impacts from recreational activities are
well documented.
Land-Based Sources of Pollution
Land-based sources of pollution, such as
Careless or uninformed snorkelers and divers, such as this sediment, nutrients and other pollutants,
individual standing on a reef in Molikini on Maui, contribute to represent one of several factors threatening the
recreational impacts to Hawaii’s reefs. Photo Credit: Liz Foote
quality of coral reef ecosystems in Hawai‘i. These
pollutants are transported in surface-water runoff
■■ Breakage of coral skeletons and tissue and by groundwater seepage into coastal waters.
from direct contact, such as walking, While the complex interrelationship between
touching or gear contact; land-based sources of pollution, water quality,
■■ Breakage of coral skeletons and tissue aquatic invasive species, overfishing and the
from boat anchors; health and integrity of coral reef ecosystems is
not well understood, enough is known to require
■■ Alteration in the behavior of marine life
management policies that minimize polluted
from feeding or harassment; and
surface-water runoff and prevent overfishing
■■ Potential introduction of pollution from (Davidson et al., 2003).
discharged grey water or sunscreen or
transfer of aquatic invasive species (AIS).
Coral reefs in the MHI are under increasing
strain from recreational use as Hawaii’s resident
population and thriving marine tourism industry
continue to grow at nearly exponential rates.
From 1990 to 2007, there was a 59% increase in
tourism, which represents almost four million
visitors. Slightly over half of these visitors from
the U.S. West and Canada went snorkeling
or diving (Hawai‘i Department of Business,
HAWAI‘I CORAL REEF STRATEGY
Economic Development and Tourism, 2007).
There are over 1,000 ocean tourism companies
in Hawai‘i, generating an estimated $700 million
in gross revenues annually. This increase in
visitors and ocean tourism companies places Sediment runoff in Maunalua Bay on Oahu threatens local
additional pressure on marine resources, as many reefs with the potential for partial burial in sediment and the
visitors seek calmer waters in areas with corals potential introduction of toxins and disease. Photo Credit:
in shallow areas. A study by Holland and Meyers Malama Maunalua
12Sediment is probably the leading land-based
pollutant causing alteration of reef community
structure in the MHI (Friedlander et al., 2008).
Although some major sources of erosion have
been removed or reduced with the closure of
several large mono-crop plantations, recent
years have seen additional damage to near-shore
coral reefs due to coastal construction projects.
Other significant pollutants include pesticides,
petroleum hydrocarbons, pharmaceuticals,
heavy metals, pathogens and excess nutrients.
These pollutants can cause or exacerbate the
deleterious effects of watershed transport
Invasive algae, such as Kappaphycus spp., outcompete coral
of pollutant constituents onto coral reefs
on many reefs in the main Hawaiian islands. Photo Credit:
(Richmond, 1993). There are an estimated Russell Sparks, DAR
100,000 cesspools in Hawai‘i that contribute
to nutrient and pathogen runoff onto reefs.
Excess nutrients, including dissolved nitrogen
and phosphorus from sewage, wastewater and
fertilizers, promote the growth of algae that
Once they arrive, these new introductions can
compete with juvenile and adult corals for space
wreak havoc by displacing and outcompeting
on benthic reef surfaces and can affect success
native plants and animals, upsetting the delicate
of coral settlement (Sammarco, 1996). Many
balance of reef species that have evolved to
near-shore areas of Hawai‘i are comprised of a
inhabit Hawaiian reef ecosystems.
mix of seawater and freshwater from submarine
groundwater discharge or surface-water runoff.
Coral reefs in Hawai‘i are currently struggling with
Groundwater in Hawai‘i typically contains two to
PRIORITIES FOR MANAGEMENT IN THE MAIN HAWAIIAN ISLANDS: 2010–2020
numerous invasive species, including algae, fish
three orders of magnitude higher concentrations
and invertebrates. Several different species of
of dissolved nitrogen and phosphorus than
alien algae have smothered acres of reefs around
seawater (Friedlander, et al., 2008).
O‘ahu, while floating mats of algae have taken
Invasive Species over large areas off of Maui. Some introduced
fish have caused the decline of native species
Invasive species are organisms not native to a through competition for food and habitat. Non-
region that, when introduced either accidentally native invertebrates, such as snowflake coral
or intentionally, outcompete native species for (Carijoa riisei) and orange keyhole sponge (Mycale
available resources, reproduce prolifically, and armata) have been shown to impact coral reefs
dominate regions and ecosystems. Invasive in Hawai‘i (Grigg, 2003). When native coral reef
species are particularly damaging to Hawaiian species have been smothered or displaced by an
marine ecosystems, which are ecologically invasive species the damaged, sometimes non-
fragile due to their geographic isolation. functioning ecosystem can be very difficult or
Introduced aquatic species can arrive in Hawai‘i impossible to restore. The import of new species,
from anywhere in the world, often transported both deliberate and accidental, is a large threat.
by maritime traffic but also sometimes State efforts also work to control the spread
deliberately introduced in a misguided attempt and distribution of existing alien species so that
to supplement local fisheries and aquaculture. impacted reefs can eventually be restored.
13Global Warming, Coral Bleaching, Ocean decreasing pH levels, impacting the calcification
Acidification and Disease cycle and various organisms, including corals.
Calcification rates in reef-building and reef
Ocean warming is a result of global climate associated organisms have already been reduced
change and can be extremely dangerous to due to ocean acidification, with mass coral
coral organisms, which are very sensitive to bleaching events occurring worldwide. (De’ath et
changes in temperature. Coral bleaching can al., 2009).
occur in response to several different stressors
such as changes in salinity, light irradiance or Disease can be defined as any impairment
temperature fluctuation. Usually though, mass of vital body functions, systems or organs.
bleaching events are associated with increased There has been a worldwide increase in
sea-surface temperature. The first large-scale the reports of diseases affecting marine
coral bleaching in the Hawai‘i region occurred organisms. Outbreaks of disease in corals may
in 1996 predominantly in Kāne’ohe Bay on the be aggravated or caused by the introduction
island of O‘ahu (Jokiel and Brown, 2004). The of novel pathogens to an environment or shifts
bleaching event was attributed to increases in in environmental conditions. Water quality
sea-surface temperature and high light during and habitat deterioration have also been
a cloudless period. Bleaching has also been identified as potential environmental drivers of
documented in the NWHI in both 2002 and 2004 coral disease (Kaczamrski et. al, 2005; Harvell
(Kenyon et al., 2006; Kenyon and Brainard, 2006). et al., 2007). Because temperatures modulate
the metabolic rate and growth of organisms,
Ocean acidification is also a risk. Worldwide, pathogens can become more virulent at higher
oceans absorb approximately one-third of the temperatures. Thus, disease conditions can be
additional CO2 generated every year by human facilitated by opportunistic infectious pathogens
activities, making the ocean more acidic (Caldeira whose virulence is enhanced during increased
and Wickett 2003). This uptake of CO2 results temperature episodes. Although the study of
in changes to the chemistry of ocean waters by coral disease within Hawai‘i is still in its infancy, a
number of patterns are starting to emerge.
Lack of Awareness
A lack of public awareness and appreciation
regarding the significance of coral reef
communities and how they can be harmed is
another threat to reefs. While Hawai‘i is an ocean
state, many residents and visitors are not aware
of the direct or indirect impacts their activities
have on ocean environments. Several surveys
HAWAI‘I CORAL REEF STRATEGY
of Hawai‘i residents conducted with regards to
public awareness found high levels of public
awareness of the declining reefs (Ward Research,
2001). However, in another study, focus group
participants had a difficult time connecting
Bleaching, such as this Montipora sp. from Lanai, is primarily
their personal behavior to the impacts on
attributed to the effects of climate change, and exacerbated by
other local threats.. Photo Credit: Jean Kenyon, NOAA PIFSC local reefs and had little knowledge as to what
CRED caused the reefs to decline or how to preserve
14them. Participants did state a need to be given this knowledge into their resource management
specific instructions and directions to save or actions. As a result of lessons learned from
help protect coral reefs (Ward Research, 2007). coral reef awareness outreach campaigns and
In 2004, a major outreach campaign with the community stewardship projects, the current
slogan “A living reef gives our islands life” aimed outreach efforts through the Hawai‘i Coral
to build and increase general public awareness Program are focused on specific audiences with
of the importance of the coral reef ecosystem key messages.
to Hawaii’s lifestyle. This statewide campaign
was based on the belief that increased public Cumulative Impacts
knowledge and community involvement in the
protection of coral reefs will help to decrease the While each of these threats is described
threats to this valuable natural resource. separately, it is nearly impossible to separate
only one as the main threat to coral reefs in the
Active community involvement in marine Hawaiian Islands. For example, excessive nutrient
resource management often results in locally runoff increases macro-algae (often invasive)
acceptable resolution of resource management blooms. The problem is exacerbated through
issues, increased conservation and compliance overfishing with the removal of herbivores, which
with the rules, and greater capabilities within the normally control algal populations. Collectively,
community to influence resource management threats reduce coral fitness, which in turn
decisions. Opportunities for communities reduces the organism’s ability to withstand and
to become involved in coastal and marine recover from impacts such as elevated water
stewardship projects in Hawai‘i have resulted in temperatures and the resulting bleaching. To
a network of at least 32 communities statewide improve ecosystem health these threats have to
taking action. Many of these groups are also be managed comprehensively and in a holistic
interested in preserving traditional knowledge manner.
and have incorporated mechanisms to document
PRIORITIES FOR MANAGEMENT IN THE MAIN HAWAIIAN ISLANDS: 2010–2020
15Section 3: Development of
Goals and Objectives
Scope of the Coral Reef questions were asked of members of the Coral
Management Priorities Reef Working Group (CRWG) members and
Local Action Strategy (LAS) advisory groups
The scope of these priorities covers coral reef and other key stakeholders. Comments from
ecosystems and related land management public meetings on marine protected areas held
activities in the MHI from 2010–2020. around the state were reviewed and analyzed. A
flowchart of the Hawai‘i Coral Program Structure
can be found in Appendix A. Draft goals and
Process for Development and objectives were developed by the coral strategy
Prioritization of Goals and planner based on the background research and
Objectives analysis and consultations with the LAS advisory
groups.
Background Analysis
Prioritization of Goals and Objectives
To provide a more cohesive strategy for coral reef
management in Hawai‘i, DAR began development Refining and ranking goals and objectives for the
of The Hawai’i Coral Reef Strategy (HCRS) in May HCRS began in November 2008. DAR partnered
2007. One of the first steps completed in the with the NOAA Coral Reef Conservation Program
development of the HCRS involved extensive (CRCP) consultant, and local NOAA staff to design
background research conducted by the coral and implement a priority-setting process for the
strategy planner. A review of numerous ocean, ten-year strategy. The CRWG, made up of key
coral reef, watershed, coastal zone management state and federal partners involved in coral reef
and ecosystem-based management plans management, was reorganized to participate in
from around Hawai‘i and the world was the planning process and to provide guidance for
completed. A list of these plans can be found the HCRS throughout implementation.
in the Reference section of this document. The
HAWAI‘I CORAL REEF STRATEGY
DLNR-DAR administrator, program managers The process of refining and ranking goals
and biologists were interviewed to gather their included an ongoing exchange of expert opinion
insights regarding gaps in coral reef conservation, between the Hawai‘i CRWG, LAS advisory groups
new policies needed, emerging priorities and and DAR biologists. See process timeline below
key management tasks necessary to improve for further details:
overall coral reef conservation in Hawai‘i. Similar
16An ulua cruises the shallow waters of a Hawaiian reef. Photo Credit: Claire Fackler, CINMS, NOAA
July 2008–September 2008 February 2009–March 2009
■■ Reorganization of the Hawai‘i CRWG ■■ LAS advisory groups reviewed and refined
objectives
■■ Development of CRWG mission and
charter ■■ DAR staff and the NOAA consultant
refined objectives to make them more
■■ Commitment by the CRWG to guide the
specific and measurable
development of The Hawai‘i Coral Reef
PRIORITIES FOR MANAGEMENT IN THE MAIN HAWAIIAN ISLANDS: 2010–2020
Strategy ■■ CRWG members ranked the objectives
into high, medium and low priority groups
■■ Addition of key CRWG members identified
in terms of their impact on key threats to
by the CRWG and NOAA
reefs and other criteria.
April 2009
November 2008–March 2009
■■ The CRWG reviewed the ranking results
■■ Development of four goals and thirty
objectives based on the background ■■ Five priority objectives for The Hawai‘i
research and analysis conducted by the Coral Reef Strategy were selected and
coral strategy planner and consultation refined
with the LAS advisory groups
■■ The CRWG determined that given limited
management resources, greater emphasis
January 2009
should be placed on the management of
■■ The Hawai‘i CRWG reviewed the draft activities in a limited number of reef areas
goals and objectives and approved the with high biological value and that were
goals subject to manageable threats
■■ Revised draft objectives were sent to the ■■ Process for site prioritization began
LAS advisory groups for further review
17July–August 2009 September 2009
■■ “All LAS Meeting” held with CRWG ■■ Held meetings on Maui and Hawaii
members, LAS advisory group members Islands with local experts to provide
and key biologists to share knowledge recommendations on the scope of the site
about and rank 43 sites identified in for program focus
preliminary results of the The Nature
■■ CRWG reviewed and evaluated
Conservancy Hawaii’s Marine Ecoregional
feedback from local experts to define
Assessment for the Main Hawaiian Islands.
site boundaries for grant funding and
Top nine sites sent to CRWG for further
planning purposes
ranking
■■ CRWG reconvened to narrow results May 2010
of July meeting based on information
■■ Completed The Hawai‘i Coral Reef
gathered at “All LAS Meeting” biological
Strategy with input and approval of CRWG
and criteria and opportunities for
partnership (see Section 5: Priority Site
Selection Process and Next Steps)
■■ LAS advisory groups developed and
ranked activities and outcomes for top
five objectives and top two priority sites
HAWAI‘I CORAL REEF STRATEGY
Honu are one of the most popular creatures found on Hawaii’s reefs. Photo Credit: Claire Fackler, CINMS, NOAA
18Section 4: Ten-Year Priority
Goals and Objectives
The intent of The Hawai‘i Coral Reef Strategy: Priorities for Management in the Main Hawaiian Islands,
2010–2020 is to identify medium-term goals and objectives for conserving Hawaii’s coral reefs.
The goals of The Hawai‘i Coral Reef Strategy are:
GOAL 1: Coral reefs undamaged by pollution, invasive species, marine construction and marine
debris.
GOAL 2: Productive and sustainable coral reef fisheries and habitat.
GOAL 3: Coral reef ecosystems resilient to climate change, invasive species and marine disease.
GOAL 4: Increased public stewardship of coral reef ecosystems.
These priority objectives listed in Table 1 will guide coral reef management activities in the MHI over
the next ten years. The objectives address the goals identified in the left-hand column of the table.
The complete list of draft “Long-Term Goals and Objectives” for coral conservation developed and
considered through this process can be found in Appendix B.
Table 1: Hawaii’s Ten-Year Priority Objectives for Coral Reef Management
PRIORITIES FOR MANAGEMENT IN THE MAIN HAWAIIAN ISLANDS: 2010–2020
GOAL OBJECTIVE
G1/G2 Reduce key anthropogenic threats to two priority near-shore coral reef sites by 2015 and five
G3/G4 by 2020 using ahupua‘a based management.*
* Two sites—Ka‘anapali-Kahekili (Maui) and Pelekane Bay-Puako-Anaeho‘omalu Bay (Hawai‘i)
—were identified as 3–5 year priority areas for the program funding support.
G1/G3 Prevent new AIS introductions and minimize the spread of established AIS populations by
2020. **
**Common priority developed in collaboration with the Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument
(PMNM)
G2 Increase the abundance and average size of ten targeted coral reef fisheries species critical to
reef health and ecological function by 2020.***
***Species to be determined by FLASH advisory group
G2/G3 Designate a sufficient area of marine waters under effective conservation by 2020 to ensure
sustainable and resilient coral reef ecosystems.
G2/G3 Reduce anchor damage and trampling on coral reefs through the implementation of no-an-
chor zones, utilization of day-use mooring buoys and other means by 2020.
19Section 5: Priority Site
Selection Process
An ariel view of Puako, one of Hawaii’s priority sites. Photo Credit: Rob Shallenberger
Site Selection Process To do this a process was developed to utilize the
expertise of LAS advisory groups, the CRWG and
The CRWG recognized early in the planning key biologists to assess and prioritize reef sites for
process that many of the management activities future Hawai‘i Coral Reef Program funding and
identified in the goals and objectives need to be technical support. Site prioritization was guided
HAWAI‘I CORAL REEF STRATEGY
implemented at a site specific level to effectively by (1) criteria developed by the CRWG (see Table
and realistically show success (e.g., reduction of 2 below), and (2) the priority goals and objectives
sediment and nutrient runoff, sufficient areas for The Hawai‘i Coral Reef Strategy.
under effective conservation, etc.). For this
reason, the group decided that identifying at Several current efforts by agencies and
least two priority sites to implement specific conservation organizations to rank watersheds,
ridge-to-reef management activities was critical. streams, coastal and marine areas were reviewed
by program staff. With the support of the CRWG,
20Table 2: Criteria for Hawai‘i Program Site Prioritizations
Biological value Degree of threat Conservation viability
Coral cover AIS presence/absence Watershed partnerships
Species richness Sedimentation Number of active agencies/
groups
Representative habitat/areas fac- Wastewater discharge Availability of watershed or other
ing the greatest threats management plans
Unique habitats and species Pathogens/disease Opportunity to leverage funding
(endemism)
Spawning sites, nursery habitats, Accessibility; vulnerability to: Within or next to managed area
or other areas critical to particu- • Fishing pressure
lar life-history stages • Recreational use
Critical function of ecosystem Shoreline development Existing monitoring data
Species diversity/biodiversity Vulnerability to impacts of cli- Existing LAS site/partnership
hotspots mate change
Resilience to climate change Community support
it was decided to utilize the results of the Marine
Ecoregional Assessment for the Main Hawaiian
Islands, recently completed by The Nature
Conservancy (TNC), as a starting point for site
prioritization. This plan identified 43 areas of
biological importance for long-term resiliency of
PRIORITIES FOR MANAGEMENT IN THE MAIN HAWAIIAN ISLANDS: 2010–2020
coral reefs based on similar criteria as the CRWG,
extensive databases of scientific information,
rigorous analyses and expert reviews. A detailed
description of the TNC process can be found in
Appendix C.
All LAS Workshop Details
As stated earlier in this document, in June 2009
an “All LAS Meeting” was held to obtain input
from key stakeholders on priority coral reef
areas for the HCRS focus. Invitees included all
members of the LAS advisory groups (out-of-
state members could not attend because of
prohibitive travel expenses), the CRWG and key
partner organizations. Participants were asked
to assess the proposed reef sites in terms of
Ta‘ape (blue line snapper) is an alien fish species introduced biological value, degree and type of threats and
from the Marquesas in 1958. This picture was taken within conservation viability.
the Ahihi Kinau Natural Area Reserve. Photo Credit: Russell
Sparks, DAR
21Pennantfish within the Molokini Marine Life Conservation District. Photo Credit: Russell Sparks, DAR
Five island groups were formed from meeting dots, or why an area was not selected. After this
participants: Kaua‘i, O‘ahu, Maui and Lāna‘i, discussion, the participants each placed two red
Moloka‘i, and Hawai‘i. O‘ahu, Maui/Lāna‘i, and dots on any of the areas to identify priority areas
Hawai‘i were further divided into two groups. throughout the MHI for program focus. Again,
Kaho‘olawe Island was not considered in the participants could use their dots or votes at
prioritization process due to the extensive one site or at more than one, and were allowed
protection of the island and current plans already to select any site statewide. Table 3 on the
underway by the Kaho‘olawe Island Reserve following page summarizes the results of the
Commission (KIRC). A worksheet was developed site prioritization exercise at the All LAS Meeting
to capture additional information about each and subsequent follow-up meetings with DAR
area identified by the TNC Marine Ecoregional biologists on Maui and O‘ahu who could not
Assessment for the MHI. Meeting participants attend the All LAS Meeting.
shared information on the proposed sites: threats,
supporting mechanisms, other challenges, In July 2009, based on the information provided
unique features, adjacent areas that should be by participants at the All LAS Meeting, reef
included and then ranked priority areas for the profiles were developed for the nine top-
HCRS. After the information-sharing session, ranked reef areas. The CRWG was convened to
each person selected two priority areas on his/ evaluate the results from the All LAS Meeting
HAWAI‘I CORAL REEF STRATEGY
her island work group with a rationale for their and, using the profiles developed, members
choice. Then they placed two yellow dots on large were asked to identify the top two reef areas
maps of the area(s) to signify their vote for one for management focus during the first three
or two sites. Participants could place both dots to five years of The Hawai‘i Coral Reef Strategy.
on the same area if they felt strongly about the After discussion of the nine sites, working group
area. The groups were then brought together in members further ranked in terms of “readiness”
a plenary discussion and were asked why they (availability of information, ability to leverage
collectively chose particular areas with many funding, availability of potential partners and
22Table 3. Top Nine Sites Ranked by the CRWG and Level of Support Available
Site Level of Support Available
Ka‘anapali-Kahekili (M-7) HCRS Priority Site 3–5 years to receive funding and
Pelekane Bay-Puako-Anaeho‘omalu Bay (H-1) technical assistance
Maunalua Bay (O-4)
Kāne’ohe Bay (O-2) Technical support from DAR, LAS advisory groups
and partner organizations
Olowalu (M-6)
LAS projects through 2010
Hā'ena-Hanalei (K-2)
Kealakekua (H-9)
Wai‘anae (O-6) No action at this time/reevaluate site after 3 years/
sites in need of additional community/agency en-
South Shore Moloka‘i (MO-4) gagement
existing plans), “urgency” (current or potential engagement before designation as a HCRS
threats such as land based pollution, AIS, over- priority site. Sites will be reevaluated in 2013 and
fishing, near-shore development, etc.), “cross-LAS additional sites could be added as priorities at
potential” (opportunities for LAS to collaborate) that time.
and “potential for effective management”
(potential for success in maintaining or improving Immediate Next Steps
reef health). Two sites—Ka‘anapali-Kahekili
(Maui) and Pelekane Bay-Puako-Anaeho‘omalu In 2010 the CRWG has worked to initate site-
Bay (Hawai‘i)—were identified as priority areas for based management planning for Ka‘anapali-
the program. See appendix E for detailed results Kahekili and Pelekane Bay-Puako-Anaeho‘omalu
PRIORITIES FOR MANAGEMENT IN THE MAIN HAWAIIAN ISLANDS: 2010–2020
and priority site profiles. Bay. Some of the initial tasks have included:
further defining the scope of the site, assembling
Site Ranking Results a planning team and coordinator, and carrying
out a stakeholder analysis. The development of
Table 3 above lists all nine sites considered by the strategies and activities for objectives not related
CRWG and levels of support that will be provided to site-based management are being led by the
based on the ranking LAS advisory groups. Table 4 on the following
results. The two priority two sites will receive page summarizes the HCRS primary objectives as
program funding and technical assistance well as key activities and outcomes identified by
support from the Hawai‘i Coral the LAS advisory groups.
Management Grant in the initial three to
five years. Some sites will continue to have
technical support and also receive funds for
implementation of LAS projects throughout
2010. Several sites identified have received large
amounts of LAS funds in the past and there is
a continued desire on the part of several LAS
advisory groups to support initiatives in these
areas when possible. The final group of sites
are in need of additional community/agency
23Table 4: Hawaii’s MHI Priority Coral Reef Strategy Objectives, Activities and Outcomes
Priority Immediate
GOAL Activities Long-Term Outcomes
Objective Outcomes
G1/G2 Reduce key • Development of a • Identification of • All Hawai‘i Coral
G3/G4 anthropogenic conservation action plan process leader Program priority sites
threats to two for addressing specific • Creation of juris- are being guided by a
priority near- threats that includes the dictional maps reef-to-ridge manage-
shore reef areas following steps: • Shared vision for ment plan including
by 2015 and five Identification of people stakeholders and implementation, out-
by 2020 using involved in the project managers created reach, biological and
ahupua‘a based o Select core project team • Determination social monitoring and
management members and assign of conservation enforcement/compli-
roles targets ance programs.
Priority Sites: o Hire coordinators for • Baseline data on • Stakeholders and
Ka‘anapali- each priority site coral reef and landowners are
Kahekili and o Identify steering com- water quality actively engaged in
Pelekane mittee members and conditions either watershed activities to
Bay-Puako- advisors available or being address LBSP threats
Anaeho‘omalu Definition of project scope collected • Pollution reduced and
Bay and focal conservation • Economy of area conservation targets
targets and impact on remain within accept-
o Statement developed on marine resource able range of variation
overall vision of project uses understood o Increase in popu-
o Complete literature • Brief descrip- lation of priority
review/gather basic info tion of project species at specific
on each site including: area and scope sites
▪ Compilation of GIS completed o Reef quality is
layers • Basic map of maintained or im-
▪ Identification of project area using proved (increased
development and computer-based living coral cover,
land-use plans GIS program reproduction,
▪ Identification of cul- • “State of the recruitment and re-
tural uses of sites Reef ” for priority duced algal cover)
▪ Identification of pub- area understood • Reduction of anthro-
lic monitoring data • Major human pogenic pollutant
sources uses and impacts load to surface water
▪ Historical impacts of areas are un- and groundwater
due to weather and derstood through site-specific
other natural cycles • Historical actions and best man-
HAWAI‘I CORAL REEF STRATEGY
▪ Economic analysis of impacts due to agement practices
the area fluctuations in • Entry/exit points
▪ Identification of key weather and used
stakeholders other natural • Enforcement person-
▫▫ Land and water cycles are better nel are able to detect
managers/owners understood at least 75% of
▫▫ Existing commu- incidents of noncom-
nity efforts pliance with rules and
laws
24Priority Immediate
GOAL Activities Long-Term Outcomes
Objective Outcomes
G1/G2 (continued from (continued from previous page) (continued from (continued from
G3/G4 previous page) ▫▫ Area stewardship previous page) previous page)
(continued Reduce key activities • Identification and • All priority sites have
from previ- anthropogenic ▫▫ Development of prioritization of initiated watershed
ous page) threats to two conservation targets threats to conser- plan implementa-
priority near- Assessment of the viability of vation targets tion in the form of
shore reef areas focal conservation targets • Pollution controls land management
by 2015 and five o Compile baseline measure- are developed and and pollution control
by 2020 using ments of coral cover, di- implemented activities
ahupua‘a based versity and fish abundance, • Watershed plans • Precautionary ap-
management water quality developed proach used in giving
o Conduct rapid LBSP • Completion of permits for special
Priority Sites: appraisals by LBSP com- priority rule revi- use or commercial
Ka‘anapali- mittee members/USGS sions activity
Kahekili and including remote sensing • Development of • Partnerships with
Pelekane and walking the watershed a list of realistic community steward-
Bay-Puako- o Complete use-pattern indicators to ship and monitoring
Anaeho‘omalu maps showing: existing measure and track groups are strength-
Bay and future permits, rec- effectiveness of ened
reation activities location site-based actions • Management ac-
and intensity, moorings, • Summary of tions and funding at
temporal and seasonal use project capacity the site directed to
and projected future use and gaps threats posing great-
o Standardization of public est impact
PRIORITIES FOR MANAGEMENT IN THE MAIN HAWAIIAN ISLANDS: 2010–2020
monitoring efforts and • All site-based ad-
compilation of data in an ministrative rules for
accessible database recreational use and
Identification of critical threats fishing are based on
o Analysis and prioritization best available biologi-
of specific threats for each cal and social science
conservation target • Degree of primary
o Conduct Knowledge At- threats is measurably
titudes Perceptions (KAP) lessened
survey to gauge support • Community under-
and knowledge for Marine stands threats to the
Managed Area (MMA) and site and impacts of
recreation rules human activities and
o LBSP specific information is engaged with other
needs users, scientists and
▪ Nutrient budget (includ- managers in imple-
ing golf courses and menting actions to
agriculture) improve resource
▪ Sediment erosion analy- condition
sis (causes and sources)
Table 4 continued
25Priority Immediate
GOAL Activities Long-Term Outcomes
Objective Outcomes
G1/G2 (continued from (continued from previous page)
G3/G4 previous page) ▪ Watershed processes
(continued Reduce key ▫▫ Land cover
from previ- anthropogenic ▫▫ Condition of streams
ous page) threats to two ▫▫ Existing data
priority near- ▫▫ Stream and ground-
shore reef areas water discharge
by 2015 and five o FLASH specific needs:
by 2020 using ▪ Quantify resource viola-
ahupua‘a based tions in representative
management areas
▪ Quantify and qualify
Priority Sites: presence of DOCARE
Ka‘anapali- officers at key sites.
Kahekili and Completion of a situation
Pelekane analysis
Bay-Puako- Development of strategies
Anaeho‘omalu o Examples include:
Bay ▪ Development of site
based fisheries enforce-
ment plans (FLASH)
▪ Identification and priori-
tization of needed rule
revisions
▪ Establishment and
marking of recreation
entry/exit points for
(RIR)
▪ Development of place-
based rules for permit
holders for special
events (RIR)
▪ Identification of needed
watershed plans (LBSP)
▪ Creation or expansion
of Makai Watch pro-
gram
HAWAI‘I CORAL REEF STRATEGY
Development of a work plan
for actions and measurement
of results
Table 4 continued
26Priority Immediate
GOAL Activities Long-Term Outcomes
Objective Outcomes
G1/G3 Prevent new • Mitigate the dispersal of • Vectors and • No marine aquatic
AIS introduc- established AIS pathways of AIS invasive species in-
tions and o Restoration actions: su- are prioritized for troduced to Hawai‘i
minimize the per sucker, native grazer program focus • Targeted reefs
spread of replenishment • Develop restora- cleared of invasive
established AIS o Temporal and spatial tion tools, both species
populations by mapping of AIS infesta- mechanical and • Native grazers
2020 tions biological, and employed to control
• Identify vectors and path- evaluate for ef- alien algae
*Overlap- ways of AIS with regard ficacy • Existing invasive al-
ping MHI and to likelihood of transmis- • Identify vulner- gae distributions are
PMNM objec- sion and establishment of able sites for contained
tive aquatic invasive species increased moni- • Ecologically sensi-
• Risk Assessment: Identify toring tive marine areas are
and prioritize threat level, • Early detection identified for protec-
invasiveness and practicali- system in place tion and monitoring
ty of eradication or control to notice and • Accidental introduc-
of non-native organisms identify acciden- tions are controlled
• Development of preven- tal introductions with rapid response
tion policy operational in- • Approval of • Implementation of
terdiction plans in partner- a coordinated new public policies
ship with federal and state approach to that prevent AIS in-
agencies eradication using troduction and allow
• Development of sustain- the best possible for efficient eradica-
able funding strategies for means. tion
PRIORITIES FOR MANAGEMENT IN THE MAIN HAWAIIAN ISLANDS: 2010–2020
AIS efforts
• Prioritize species of con-
cern for Eyes of the Reef
volunteers to monitor
G2 Increase the • Analyze and validate the • Key coral reef • To have statisti-
abundance and existing commercial coral species are identi- cally valid and useful
average size reef fisheries data and fied and priori- knowledge for
of ten targeted produce a report detailing tized management on all
coral reef fish- coral reef fisheries catch, • Fishing manage- catch and effort for
eries species effort and economic in- ment strategies Hawaii’s CR fisheries
critical to reef formation either by island are developed by 2012
health and eco- or for the state as a whole • Funding sources
logical function (use the most recent 5 are identified and
by 2020. years of data) accessed
• Conduct cost/benefit • Operational plans
analysis of fishing license are developed
in Hawai‘i, comparison and implemented
among states
Table 4 continued
27You can also read
