National Park Service 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

Natural Resource Program Center 

Assessment of Natural Resources and Watershed 

Conditions for Kalaupapa National Historical Park 

Natural Resource Report NPS/NPRC/WRD/NRR—2010/261 
ON THE COVER 

Aerial view of the Kalaupapa Peninsula and the Offshore Islets. 

Photograph by Guy Hughes 
Assessment of Natural Resources and Watershed 

Conditions for Kalaupapa National Historical Park 

Natural Resource Report NPS/NPRC/WRD/NRR—2010/261 

Fung Associates Inc. 

1833 Kalakaua Avenue, Suite 1008 

Honolulu, Hawaii 96815 

SWCA Environmental Consultants 

201 Merchant Street, Suite 2310 

Honolulu, Hawaii 96813

October 2010 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

National Park Service 

Natural Resource Program Center

Fort Collins, Colorado 
ii 

The National Park Service Natural Resource Program Center publishes a range of reports that 

address natural resource topics of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National 

Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and 

environmental constituencies, and the public. 

The Natural Resource Report Series is used to disseminate high-priority, current natural resource 

management information with managerial application. The series targets a general, diverse 

audience, and may contain NPS policy considerations or address sensitive issues of management 

applicability. 

All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the 

information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended 

audience, and designed and published in a professional manner. This report received formal peer 

review by subject-matter experts who were not directly involved in the collection, analysis, or 

reporting of the data, and whose background and expertise put them on par technically and 

scientifically with the authors of the information. 

Views, statements, findings, conclusions, recommendations, and data in this report do not 

necessarily reflect views and policies of the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the 

Interior. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or 

recommendation for use by the U.S. Government. 

This report is available from the Water Resources Division website 

(http://www.nature.nps.gov/water/wrdpub.cfm) and the Natural Resource Publications 

Management website (http://www.nature.nps.gov/publications/NRPM). Please cite this 

publication as: 

Fung Associates Inc. and SWCA Environmental Consultants. 2010. Assessment of natural 

resources and watershed conditions for Kalaupapa National Historical Park. Natural Resource 

Report NPS/NRPC/WRD/NRR—2010/261. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado. 

NPS 491/105912, October 2010 
iii 

Contents 

Page 

Figures............................................................................................................................................. x

Tables ........................................................................................................................................... xiii

Executive Summary .................................................................................................................... xvii

Acknowledgments....................................................................................................................... xxii

Chapter 1: Park and Resources Context .......................................................................................... 1

1.1 Biogeographic and Physical Setting .................................................................................. 1

1.2 Historic Context and Park Purpose .................................................................................... 1

1.3 Land Ownership and Management .................................................................................... 2

1.4 Unique and Significant Park Natural Resources ............................................................... 5

1.4.1 Special Ecological Areas ........................................................................................... 8

1.5 Marine, Freshwater, & Terrestrial Ecosystems ................................................................. 8

Chapter 2: Description and Assessment of Park Natural Resources ............................................ 11

2.1 Terrestrial ......................................................................................................................... 11

2.1.1 Kauhakō Crater ....................................................................................................... 11

2.1.1.1 Previous and Ongoing Studies and Inventories ............................................. 13

2.1.1.2 Physical Environment .................................................................................... 15

2.1.1.3 Ecological Community .................................................................................. 15

2.1.1.4 Information Gaps ........................................................................................... 24

2.1.2 Coastal Spray Zone .................................................................................................. 25

2.1.2.1 Previous and Ongoing Studies and Inventories ............................................. 25

2.1.2.2 Physical Environment .................................................................................... 27

2.1.2.3 Ecological Community .................................................................................. 28

2.1.2.4 Information Gaps ........................................................................................... 35
iv 

2.1.3 Offshore Islets .......................................................................................................... 36

2.1.3.1 Previous and Ongoing Studies and Inventories ............................................. 36

2.1.3.2 Physical Environment .................................................................................... 38

2.1.3.3 Ecological Community .................................................................................. 38

2.1.3.4 Information Gaps ........................................................................................... 41

2.1.4 Pu‘u Ali‘i Natural Area Reserve .............................................................................. 42

2.1.4.1 Previous and Ongoing Studies and Inventories ............................................. 43

2.1.4.2 Physical Environment .................................................................................... 45

2.1.4.3 Ecological Community .................................................................................. 46

2.1.4.4 Information Gaps ........................................................................................... 57

2.1.5 Moloka‘i Forest Reserve .......................................................................................... 58

2.1.5.1 Previous and Ongoing Studies and Inventories ............................................. 58

2.1.5.2 Physical Environment .................................................................................... 60

2.1.5.3 Ecological Community .................................................................................. 61

2.1.5.4 Information Gaps ........................................................................................... 66

2.1.6 North Shore Cliffs National Natural Landmark ...................................................... 66

2.1.6.1 Previous and Ongoing Studies and Inventories ............................................. 67

2.1.6.2 Physical Environment .................................................................................... 68

2.1.6.3 Ecological Community .................................................................................. 69

2.1.6.4 Information Gaps ........................................................................................... 73

2.1.7 Lowland Coastal Area ............................................................................................. 75

2.1.7.1 Previous and Ongoing Studies and Inventories ............................................. 75

2.1.7.2 Physical Environment .................................................................................... 78

2.1.7.3 Ecological Community .................................................................................. 78

2.1.7.4 Information Gaps ........................................................................................... 87
v 

2.2 Freshwater Ecosystem ..................................................................................................... 88

2.2.1 Palustrine ................................................................................................................. 89

2.2.1.1 Previous and Ongoing Studies and Inventories ............................................. 89

2.2.1.2 Physical Environment .................................................................................... 89

2.2.1.3 Ecological Community .................................................................................. 91

2.2.1.4 Information Gaps ........................................................................................... 91

2.2.2 Lacustrine ................................................................................................................ 92

2.2.2.1 Previous and Ongoing Studies and Inventories ............................................. 92

2.2.2.2 Physical Environment .................................................................................... 93

2.2.2.3 Ecological Community .................................................................................. 96

2.2.2.4 Information Gaps ........................................................................................... 97

2.2.3 Anchialine ................................................................................................................ 98

2.2.3.1 Previous and Ongoing Studies and Inventories ............................................. 99

2.2.3.2 Physical Environment .................................................................................... 99

2.2.3.3 Ecological Community .................................................................................. 99

2.2.3.4 Information Gaps ........................................................................................... 99

2.2.4 Riverine .................................................................................................................. 100

2.2.4.1 Previous and Ongoing Studies and Inventories ........................................... 100

2.2.4.2 Physical Environment .................................................................................. 104

2.2.4.3 Ecological Community ................................................................................ 111

2.2.4.4 Information Gaps ......................................................................................... 117

2.3 Marine and Intertidal Zones ........................................................................................... 117

2.3.1 Coastal Reefs ......................................................................................................... 118

2.3.1.1 Previous and Ongoing Studies and Inventories ........................................... 118

2.3.1.2 Physical Environment .................................................................................. 119
vi 

2.3.1.3 Ecological Community ................................................................................ 122

2.3.1.4 Information Gaps ......................................................................................... 131

2.3.2 Offshore Islets ........................................................................................................ 131

2.3.2.1 Previous Studies and Inventories ................................................................. 131

2.3.2.2 Physical Environment and Water Quality ................................................... 131

2.3.2.3 Ecological Community ................................................................................ 132

2.3.2.4 Information Gaps ......................................................................................... 134

2.3.3 Intertidal Zone ....................................................................................................... 134

2.3.3.1 Previous and Ongoing Studies and Inventories ........................................... 134

2.3.3.2 Physical Environment and Water Quality ................................................... 136

2.3.3.3 Ecological Community ................................................................................ 136

2.3.3.4 Information Gaps ......................................................................................... 143

Chapter 3: Threats & Stressors ................................................................................................... 146

3.1 Invasive Species ............................................................................................................. 146

3.1.1 Invasive Ungulates ................................................................................................. 146

3.1.1.1 Impacts to the Terrestrial Ecosystem ........................................................... 147

3.1.1.2 Impacts to the Freshwater Ecosystem .......................................................... 148

3.1.1.3 Impacts to the Marine Ecosystem ................................................................ 148

3.1.2 Invasive Terrestrial Flora ...................................................................................... 149

3.1.2.1 Impacts to the Terrestrial Ecosystem ........................................................... 152

3.1.2.2 Impacts to the Freshwater Ecosystem .......................................................... 152

3.1.2.3 Impacts to the Marine Ecosystem ................................................................ 152

3.1.3 Invasive Small Mammals ....................................................................................... 152

3.1.3.1 Impacts to the Terrestrial Ecosystem ........................................................... 153

3.1.3.2 Impacts to the Freshwater Ecosystem .......................................................... 153
vii 

3.1.4 Invasive Insects ...................................................................................................... 153

3.1.4.1 Impacts to the Terrestrial Ecosystem ........................................................... 153

3.1.4.2 Impacts to the Freshwater Ecosystem .......................................................... 154

3.1.5 Invasive Reptiles and Amphibians ......................................................................... 154

3.1.5.1 Impacts to the Terrestrial Ecosystem ........................................................... 155

3.1.5.2 Impacts to the Freshwater Ecosystem .......................................................... 155

3.1.6 Invasive Fish .......................................................................................................... 155

3.1.6.1 Impacts to the Freshwater Ecosystem .......................................................... 155

3.1.6.2 Impacts to the Marine Ecosystem ................................................................ 155

3.1.7 Other Invasive Invertebrates.................................................................................. 156

3.1.7.1 Impacts to the Freshwater Ecosystem .......................................................... 156

3.1.7.2 Impacts to the Marine Ecosystem ................................................................ 156

3.1.8 Invasive Algae ........................................................................................................ 157

3.1.8.1 Impacts to the Marine Ecosystem ................................................................ 157

3.2 Diseases and Pathogens ................................................................................................. 157

3.2.1 Impacts to the Terrestrial Ecosystem ..................................................................... 157

3.2.2 Impacts to the Freshwater Ecosystem .................................................................... 158

3.2.3 Impacts to the Marine Ecosystem .......................................................................... 158

3.3 Habitat Loss, Degradation, and Fragmentation ............................................................. 158

3.3.1 Impacts to the Terrestrial Ecosystem ..................................................................... 158

3.3.2 Impacts to the Freshwater Ecosystem .................................................................... 159

3.3.3 Impacts to the Marine Ecosystem .......................................................................... 159

3.4 Harvest, Hunt, and Take ................................................................................................ 160

3.4.1 Impacts to the Terrestrial Ecosystem ..................................................................... 160

3.4.2 Impacts to the Freshwater Ecosystem .................................................................... 160
viii 

3.4.3 Impacts to the Marine Ecosystem .......................................................................... 161

3.5 Visitor Use ..................................................................................................................... 161

3.5.1 Impacts to the Terrestrial Ecosystem ..................................................................... 162

3.5.2 Impacts to the Freshwater Ecosystem .................................................................... 162

3.5.3 Impacts to the Marine Ecosystem .......................................................................... 162

3.6 Climate Change ............................................................................................................. 163

3.6.1 Impacts to the Terrestrial Ecosystem ..................................................................... 163

3.6.1.1 Species Range and Distribution ................................................................... 163

3.6.1.2 Phenology and Physiology .......................................................................... 163

3.6.1.3 Community Composition and Interaction ................................................... 164

3.6.1.4 Trade-wind Inversion ................................................................................... 164

3.6.1.5 Sea-Level Rise ............................................................................................. 164

3.6.1.6 Fire ............................................................................................................... 164

3.6.2 Impacts to the Freshwater Ecosystem .................................................................... 164

3.6.2.1 Sea-Level Rise ............................................................................................. 165

3.6.3 Impacts to the Marine Ecosystem .......................................................................... 165

3.6.3.1 Sea Surface Temperatures (SSTs) ............................................................... 165

3.6.3.2 Sea-Level Rise ............................................................................................. 165

3.6.3.3 Ocean Acidification ..................................................................................... 167

3.6.3.4 Storm Events ................................................................................................ 167

3.6.3.5 Increasing Resistance and Resilience of Coral Reefs to Climate Change ... 167

3.7 Erosion and Landslides .................................................................................................. 167

3.7.1 Impacts to the Terrestrial Ecosystem ..................................................................... 167

3.7.2 Impacts to the Freshwater Ecosystem .................................................................... 168

3.7.3 Impacts to the Marine Ecosystem .......................................................................... 168
ix 

3.8 Contaminants, Sewage, and Debris ............................................................................... 168

3.8.1 Impacts to the Terrestrial Ecosystem ..................................................................... 168

3.8.2 Impacts to the Freshwater Ecosystem .................................................................... 168

3.8.3 Impacts to the Marine Ecosystem .......................................................................... 170

3.9 Fire ................................................................................................................................. 170

3.9.1 Impacts to the Terrestrial Ecosystem ..................................................................... 170

3.10 Other Random Stochastic Events ................................................................................ 170

3.10.1 Impacts to the Terrestrial Ecosystem ................................................................... 171

3.10.2 Impacts to the Freshwater Ecosystem .................................................................. 171

3.10.3 Impacts to the Marine Ecosystem ........................................................................ 171

3.11 Summary of Threats and Stressors .............................................................................. 172

3.11.1 Identifying the Extent of the Problem at KALA ................................................... 172

3.11.2 Describing the Knowledge Base of Threats and Stressors .................................. 173

3.11.3 Quantifying the Magnitude of Impact on Ecosystems .......................................... 177

Chapter 4: Conclusion................................................................................................................. 178

Literature Cited ........................................................................................................................... 183

Appendices .................................................................................................................................. 214
x 

Figures 

Page 

Figure 1.3-1. Land ownership at KALA and the vicinity. ............................................................. 4

Figure 1.4-1. Percentage of vegetation cover throughout KALA per NPS Class. ......................... 6

Figure 1.4-2. Vegetation cover and NPS vegetation classes throughout KALA. .......................... 7

Figure 1.5-1. Marine, freshwater, and terrestrial ecosystems at KALA. ....................................... 9

Figure 2.1-1. Terrestrial management zones at KALA. ............................................................... 12

Figure 2.1-2. Soil types within the terrestrial management zones at KALA. .............................. 16

Figure 2.1-3. Percentage of native and non-native species in Kauhakō Crater. .......................... 18

Figure 2.1-4. Vegetation cover and NPS vegetation classes in Kauhakō Crater. ........................ 19

Figure 2.1-5. Selective native plants in the Kauhakō Crater. ...................................................... 20

Figure 2.1-6. Percentage of native and non-native vascular plant species in the Coastal 

Spray Zone. ................................................................................................................................... 29

Figure 2.1-7. Plant communities in the Coastal Spray Zone. ...................................................... 31

Figure 2.1-8. Vegetation cover and NPS vegetation classes in the Coastal Spray Zone. ............ 32

Figure 2.1-9. Critical habitat for threatened and endangered species in the Coastal Spray 

Zone. ............................................................................................................................................. 34

Figure 2.1-10. Percentage of native and non-native vascular plant species on the Offshore 

Islets. ............................................................................................................................................. 40

Figure 2.1-11. Vegetation communities within the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR. .......................................... 47

Figure 2.1-12. Percentage of native and non-native plant species in the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR. ......... 48

Figure 2.1-13. Vegetation cover and NPS vegetation classes in the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR. ................ 50

Figure 2.1-14. Ungulate activity documented during hunting tests in Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR. ............. 52

Figure 2.1-15. Critical habitat for threatened and endangered species in the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR. .. 55

Figure 2.1-16. Vegetation cover and NPS vegetation classes in the Molokai Forest Reserve. ... 62

Figure 2.1-17. Critical habitat for threatened and endangered species in the Molokai Forest 

Reserve. ......................................................................................................................................... 65
xi 

Figure 2.1-18. Vegetation cover and NPS vegetation classes in the North Shore Cliffs NNL. ... 71

Figure 2.1-19. Critical habitat for threatened and endangered species in the North Shore 

Cliffs NNL. ................................................................................................................................... 74

Figure 2.1-20. Vegetation cover and NPS vegetation classes in the Lowland Coastal Area. ...... 80

Figure 2.1-21. Critical habitat for threatened and endangered species in the Lowland 

Coastal Area. ................................................................................................................................. 85

Figure 2.2-1. Palustrine habitats at KALA. ................................................................................. 90

Figure 2.2-2. Bathometry of Lake Kauhakō redrawn by Donachie et al. (1999) from 

Maciolek (1982). ........................................................................................................................... 94

Figure 2.2-3. Parameters in Kauhakō Crater from Donachie et al. (1999).A) Salinity (□) and 

temperature (solid line) profiles; B) Concentrations of oxygen (○), hydrogen sulfide (■), and 

nitrous oxide (+); C) DIC ( ), TOC (●), and alkalinity ( ). ...................................................... 95

Figure 2.2-4. Salinity, alkalinity, and sulfide concentrations as a function of depth between 

1997 and 2002 from Donachie et al. (2004). ................................................................................ 96

Figure 2.2-5. Vertical distribution of A) heterotrophic (○) and autoflurescent (■) Bacteria, 

and B) Synechococcius-like cells (□), filamentous cyanobacteria ( ) and other 

autofluorescent cells (●) in Lake Kauhakō from Donachie et al. (1999). .................................... 98

Figure 2.2-6. Streams within KALA. ......................................................................................... 101

Figure 2.2-7. Molokai irrigation system in Waikolu Valley. ..................................................... 106

Figure 2.2-8. Daily discharge at USGS gage 16408000 over the period of record. .................. 108

Figure 2.2-9. Daily discharge at USGS gage 16405500 over the period of record. .................. 108

Figure 2.2-10. Daily discharge at USGS gage 16405100 over the period of record. ................ 109

Figure 2.2-11. Temperature measurements at three USGS gaging stations on Waikolu 

Stream between 1969 and 1989 from DeVerse and DiDonato (2006). ...................................... 109

Figure 2.2-12. pH values measured at two USGS continuous record stations between 1969 

and 1985 from DeVerse and DiDonato (2006). USEPA maximum and minimum water 

quality standards (WQS) are shown by solid red lines and the State of Hawaii WQS are 

indicated by green. ...................................................................................................................... 110

Figure 2.2-13. Instantaneous discharge from three USGS gaging stations along Waikolu 

stream in KALA between 1969 and 1989 from DeVerse and DiDonato (2006). ....................... 110

Figure 2.2-14. Monthly discharge at USGS gage (16410000) on Keolea Stream over the 

period of record. .......................................................................................................................... 112
xii 

Figure 2.3-1. Average cignificant wave heights (radial axis in metres) for Different Wave 

Directions (degrees) at KALA. Data are pooled from 2001 to 2008. ......................................... 120

Figure 2.3-2. Wave energy zones and wave direction. .............................................................. 121

Figure 2.3-3. Benthic cover - top five algae and coral species by wave energy zone (2004–

2007). .......................................................................................................................................... 123

Figure 2.3-4. Average percent cover of benthic substrate on coastal reefs at KALA. Data are 

pooled from 2004 to 2007. .......................................................................................................... 124

Figure 2.3-5. Average relative abundance of the top five corals at KALA. Data are pooled 

from 2004 to 2007. ...................................................................................................................... 124

Figure 2.3-6. Coral settlement at KALA from 2006-2008. Error bars are standard error. ........ 125

Figure 2.3-7. Relative abundance of top five alga in KALA from 2004–2007. ........................ 126

Figure 2.3-8. (a) Top 10 species of fish at KALA by mean percent abundance. (b) Mean 

percent abundance from 2004–2008.separated out by trophic group. P= primary consumer, S 

= secondary consumer, A = apex predator. ................................................................................ 127

Figure 2.3-9. Fish trophic abundance and biomass summary by wave energy zone from 

2006 to 2008). ............................................................................................................................. 128

Figure 2.3-10. (a) Top 10 species of fish at KALA by mean percent biomass from 2004 - 

2008. (b) Mean percent biomass from 2004–2008.separated out by trophic group. P= 

primary consumer, S = secondary consumer, A = apex predator. .............................................. 129

Figure 2.3-11. Intertidal substrates and survey locations. .......................................................... 137

Figure 2.3-12. Monk seal survey locations. ............................................................................... 138

Figure 2.3-13. Number of invertebrate species represented within their respective phyla and 

the percentage of each phyla represented within the intertidal zone at KALA. ......................... 140

Figure 2.3-14. Locations of bird sightings within the Intertidal Zone in 2005. ......................... 144

Figure 2.3-15. Monk seal sighting frequencies at different sites at KALA. .............................. 145

Figure 2.3-16. Monk seal observations at KALA for different months (all sites combined). ... 145

Figure 3.6-1. Coastline elevation map. ...................................................................................... 166

Figure 3.8-1. Existing and previous landfills at KALA. ............................................................ 169
xiii 

Tables 

Page 

Table 1.3-1. Formal cooperative agreements with NPS at KALA. ................................................ 3

Table 1.4-1. Number of federally and state listed species within KALA. ..................................... 6

Table 1.5-1. Summary of park profile. ......................................................................................... 10

Table 2.1-1. Terrestrial ecological management zones at KALA. ............................................... 11

Table 2.1-2. Soil types and key soil characteristics in Kauhakō Crater management zone. ........ 15

Table 2.1-3. Origin of plant species documented in Kauhakō Crater and immediate 

environs. ........................................................................................................................................ 18

Table 2.1-4. Vegetation cover and NPS vegetation classes in Kauhakō Crater. .......................... 21

Table 2.1-5. Summary of small mammal data in Kauhakō Crater. .............................................. 22

Table 2.1-6. Soil types and key soil characteristics in Coastal Spray Zone management 

zone. .............................................................................................................................................. 27

Table 2.1-7. Origin of plant species documented in Coastal Spray Zone. ................................... 29

Table 2.1-8. Plant communities in the Coastal Spray Zone. ........................................................ 30

Table 2.1-9. Vegetation cover and NPS vegetation vlasses in the Coastal Spray Zone. ............. 30

Table 2.1-10. Total critical habitat area for threatened and endangered plants in the Coastal 

Spray Zone. ................................................................................................................................... 33

Table 2.1-11. Origin of plant species documented on the offshore islets. ................................... 40

Table 2.1-12. Federally threatened and endangered species currently occurring on the 

offshore islets. ............................................................................................................................... 41

Table 2.1-13. Soil types and key soil characteristics in Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR management zone. ...... 45

Table 2.1-14. Vegetation communities and estimated acreage within the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR. ....... 46

Table 2.1-15. Origin of plant species documented in the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR. ................................. 48

Table 2.1-16. Vegetation cover and NPS vegetation classes in the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR. .................. 49

Table 2.1-17. Percent occurrence and birds per station for the two HFBS transects in 1979 

and 2004/2005. .............................................................................................................................. 51

Table 2.1-18. Summary of small mammal data in the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR. ...................................... 51
xiv 

Table 2.1-19. Endangered, threatened, candidate, or rare plants species that occur or 

potentially occur in the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR and surrounding area. ................................................... 54

Table 2.1-20. Total critical habitat area for threatened and endangered plants in the Pu‘u 

Ali‘i NAR...................................................................................................................................... 56

Table 2.1-21. Endangered, threatened, or rare avifauna that occur or potentially occur in the 

Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR and surrounding area. ......................................................................................... 56

Table 2.1-22. Rare snails within the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR and surrounding area. .............................. 57

Table 2.1-23. Soil types and key soil characteristics in Moloka‘i Forest Reserve 

management zone.......................................................................................................................... 60

Table 2.1-24. Vegetation cover and NPS vegetation classes in the Moloka‘i Forest Reserve. ... 61

Table 2.1-25. Relative abundance and total individuals of various forest birds recorded in 

the Moloka‘i Forest Reserve in 1977. ........................................................................................... 63

Table 2.1-26. Summary of small mammal data in the Moloka‘i Forest Reserve. ....................... 64

Table 2.1-27. Total critical habitat area for threatened and endangered plants in the 

Moloka‘i Forest Reserve. .............................................................................................................. 64

Table 2.1-28. Soil types and key soil characteristics in North Shore Cliffs NNL management 

zone. .............................................................................................................................................. 69

Table 2.1-29. Vegetation cover and NPS vegetation classes in the North Shore Cliffs NNL. .... 70

Table 2.1-30. Summary of small mammal data in the North Shore Cliffs NNL. ........................ 72

Table 2.1-31. Total critical habitat area for threatened and endangered plants in the North 

Shore Cliffs NNL. ......................................................................................................................... 73

Table 2.1-32. Soil types and key soil characteristics in Lowland Coastal Area management 

zone. .............................................................................................................................................. 79

Table 2.1-33. Vegetation cover and NPS vegetation classes in the Lowland Coastal Area. ....... 81

Table 2.1-34. Percent cover of native and non-native species inside and outside the 

Tetramolopium rockii var. rockii exclosure. ................................................................................. 82

Table 2.1-35. Percent cover of native and non-native species inside the Centaurium 

sebaeoides exclosure. .................................................................................................................... 82

Table 2.1-36. Summary of small mammal data in the Lowland Coastal Area. ........................... 84

Table 2.1-37. Total critical habitat area for threatened and endangered plants in the Lowland 

Coastal Area. ................................................................................................................................. 84
xv 

Table 2.2-1. Palustrine habitats identified at KALA from the National Wetlands Inventory 

(NWI) Program. ............................................................................................................................ 91

Table 2.2-2. Streams within KALA, from West to East. ........................................................... 104

Table 2.2-3. Resource assessment for the KALA streams from Hawaii Stream Assessment. .. 104

Table 2.2-4. USGS stream gages in Waikolu Valley. ................................................................ 105

Table 2.2-5. Characteristic stream fauna reported from riverine habitats at KALA. ................. 115

Table 2.3-1. Species richness on the reefs of the offshore islets (From Coles et al. 2008). ...... 132

Table 2.3-2. Benthic cover at the offshore islets. ....................................................................... 133

Table 2.3-3. Introduced and cryptogenic invertebrate species for the offshore islets. ............... 133

Table 2.3-4. Species composition of invertebrates in the intertidal zone. ................................. 139

Table 2.3-5. Bird species observed from the shoreline of KALA. ............................................. 142

Table 3.1-1. Invasive plant species believed to have the greatest impact to the natural 

resources within the terrestrial ecosystem at KALA. ................................................................. 150

Table 3.1-2. Characteristics of invasive plant species believed to have the greatest impact to 

the natural resources within the terrestrial ecosystem at KALA. ............................................... 151

Table 3.11-1. Summary of threats and stressors in the terrestrial environment at KALA. ........ 174

Table 3.11-2. Summary of threats and stressors in the freshwater environment at KALA. ...... 175

Table 3.11-3. Summary of threats and stressors in the marine environment at KALA. ............ 176

Table 3.11-4. Magnitude of impact of threats and stressors on ecosystems at KALA. ............. 178
xvi 
xvii 

Executive Summary 

This report is an assessment of the current natural resource conditions within Kalaupapa National 

Historic Park (KALA). This report will summarize: 1) condition/ecological status of the 

terrestrial, freshwater, and marine resources at the park based on available surveys; 2) existing 

and emerging threats or stressors that act on those resources; and 3) important information gaps 

and recommended future studies that address additional information needs (e.g., condition of 

park natural resources, known threats, and unacceptable conditions). An important component of 

the report is the development of a geographical information system (GIS) data base which 

assembles geospatial data layers to provide an integrated measure of current park resource 

conditions relative to National Park Service (NPS) Vital Signs indicators or other relevant 

indicators of resource conditions. 

This report is divided into the following four sections, and a brief summary of each section is 

provided below. 

Chapter 1 provides an overview of KALA, including a general description of the physical setting, 

historic context of the park, and land ownership and management issues. 

KALA is located on the north central coast of the Island of Moloka‘i, within the State of Hawai‘i. 

The park encompasses a total area of 4,340 hectares (ha) or 10,726 acres (ac), including roughly 

3,531 ha (8,726 ac) of land and 809 ha (2,000 ac) of water. The Kalaupapa peninsula was established 

as a quarantine settlement for people with leprosy (Hansen's disease) beginning in 1865. The historic 

Kalaupapa Settlement and the surrounding area were incorporated into the National Park System in 

December 1980. Most of the land within the park boundaries is not owned by the National Park 

Service, but is managed by the NPS through formal cooperative agreements with various federal and 

state agencies, as well as private entities. 

Although the original intention of KALA was to ensure the protection of unique cultural resources, 

the park contains significant natural resources. The National Park Service is accountable for 

preserving, maintaining, and protecting various unique habitats, as well as the native species that 

occur within those habitats. Notable habitats at KALA include the Pu‘u Ali‘i Natural Area Reserve 

(NAR), Waikolu Valley, Kauhakō Crater, offshore islets, steep cliffs (pali), caves and lava tubes, 

and submerged lands surrounding the peninsula. Over 282 species of native terrestrial plants, 33 

species of native terrestrial fauna, 19 species of native freshwater fauna, and 427 species of native 

subtidal and intertidal marine fauna are known within KALA. Of those, approximately 35 plant 

species and eight animal species are currently listed as federal or state endangered, proposed 

endangered, threatened, or candidate species. An additional 18 native plant and 6 native animal 

species are considered federal species of concern. 

Chapter 2 lists previous and ongoing surveys and inventories at KALA, describes and assesses 

the physical environment and ecological communities, and identifies areas that require more 

information to better evaluate current conditions, identify existing factors negatively impacting 

those resources, and quantify potential threats. The chapter is organized into the park’s three 

primary ecosystems—Marine, Freshwater, and Terrestrial (Figure 1.5-1). 
xviii 

The terrestrial environment within KALA is divided into the following seven ecological 

management zones: Kauhakō Crater, Coastal Spray Zone, Offshore Islets, Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR, Moloka‘i 

State Forest Reserve, North Shore Cliffs National Natural Landmark, and the Lowland Coastal Area 

(Figure 2.1-1). Similar to other areas in Hawai‘i, a myriad of factors have altered the native 

terrestrial flora and fauna that historically occurred at KALA (e.g., invasive plants, ungulates, 

rodents, human development, and cultivation practices). However, select portions of the park contain 

remnant areas of native vegetation and support native fauna. The Coastal Spray Zone supports a 

diverse and extensive native coastal vegetation community; both Huelo and Ōkala Islet support 

unusual relict vegetation and rich native species diversity; several native-dominated vegetation 

communities occur in the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR; and large, relatively healthy Erythrina sandwicensis 

(wiliwili) occur in Kauhakō Crater. 

Currently, the terrestrial ecosystem contains 35 federally endangered, threatened, or candidate 

terrestrial plant species and provides critical habitat for 12 plants. Some vegetation communities are 

known to support essential habitat for native forest birds, migrant shorebirds, and several seabird 

species. Furthermore, caves and cavernous features in the terrestrial environment provide refuge for 

rare obligate cave-adapted plants and animals and preserve paleontological resources. Most survey 

efforts in this ecosystem are limited to species checklists. Long-term monitoring programs with 

regularly monitored permanent plots (or transects) and consistent methodology would document the 

presence and abundance of native and non-native species over time to inform future management or 

restoration strategies. 

The freshwater ecosystem within KALA includes palustrine, lacustrine, anchialine, and riverine 

habitats (Figure 1.4-1). It is difficult to assess the distribution and status of the palustrine and 

anchialine habitats within the freshwater ecosystems at KALA due to the lack of information 

available for these habitats. However, the lacustrine and riverine habitats contain unique 

macrofauna and habitats. Lake Kauhakō is considered to be the forth-deepest lake in the United 

States and has the greatest relative depth (ratio of depth to surface area) of any lake in the world. 

The lake supports a dense and highly productive phytoplankton community and fauna including 

a native paleomonid shrimp, copepods, and other microzooplankton. 

Two of the 10 streams within the boundaries of KALA (Waikolu and Waihanau) were identified 

as candidate streams for preservation protection in the Hawaii Stream Assessment. This is 

significant given that few streams in Hawai‘i have any sort of protected status. Although 

diversion of Waikolu Stream at higher elevations has altered the natural base flow of the stream, 

the lower reaches of Waikolu Stream contain a rich assemblage of all five native amphidromous 

fish species. Overall, Waikolu Stream has one of the highest densities of stream gobies in the 

Hawaiian Islands and supports a dense population of the uncommon native stream snail Neritina 

granosa. The proposed federally endangered damselfly Megalagrion pacificum and federal 

candidate damselfly Megalagrion xanthomelas are also found in the streams at KALA. 

The marine ecosystem at KALA is divided into three habitats—intertidal, coastal reefs, and 

offshore islet reefs. The coastal and offshore reef ecosystems of KALA are healthy and robust 

compared to other reefs in the main Hawaiian Islands. For the nearshore coral reefs, long-term 

monitoring of the oceanographic factors, and biological monitoring of the benthos, fish 

assemblages, coral disease, and coral settlement are ongoing. Intertidal invertebrates have been 
xix 

inventoried twice, and yearly surveys are conducted to monitor the distribution and abundance of 

the commonly harvested invertebrate, Cellana spp. (opihi). Large, reproductively mature Cellana 

spp. are currently present in the intertidal habitat of KALA. The endangered Monachus 

schauinslandi (monk seal) uses the intertidal habitat at KALA for pupping, resting, and feeding, 

and their presence is closely monitored. Successful nesting by the threatened Chelonia mydas

(green sea turtle) has been also documented. Introduced species (algae, fish, and invertebrates) 

present in the various habitats have also been documented, and eradication efforts are underway 

for the potentially invasive algae Acanthophora spicifera in the intertidal. 

Although these ecosystems differ, many of the natural resources within KALA are ecologically 

connected and therefore interactions between these three ecosystems are significant. 

Chapter 3 discusses existing and potential threats and stressors to the physical environment and 

ecological communities within the marine, freshwater, and terrestrial ecosystems at KALA. A total 

of 12 biotic and five abiotic existing and potential threats and stressors were identified for KALA. 

The physical environment and ecological communities within the marine, freshwater, and terrestrial 

ecosystems at KALA have been adversely impacted and risk further degradation by a myriad of 

threats and stressors. Threats are defined as environmental trends with potentially negative impacts, 

and stressors are physical, chemical, or biological perturbations to a system that cause significant 

changes in the ecological components, patterns, and processes in natural systems. This assessment 

identified a total of 12 biotic (caused by biological or anthropogenic activities) and five abiotic 

(caused by physical or chemical processes) existing and potential threats and stressors at KALA. 

Because of the uncertainty surrounding future land management and ownership at the park, some 

issues that are not currently a problem at KALA may have the potential to become a problem in the 

long-term (>20 years) if the park is opened to the wider public, resulting in the potential of increased 

anthropogenic impacts (e.g., increased harvesting, sewage, spread of invasive species). These 

potential problems are also addressed. 

Seven threats and stressors were determined to have a significant impact on at least one of the 

ecosystems at KALA (i.e., marine, terrestrial, and freshwater). The impact of these threats and 

stressor is considered significant due to the 1) spatial scale at which they act; 2) frequency with 

which they act; and 3) number of trophic levels impacted. Threats and stressors that are significantly 

impacting resources at KALA are briefly summarized below. 

Invasive ungulates: Feral ungulates, including Sus scrofa (pig), Capra hircus (goat), and Axis axis

(deer) are a significant threat to the natural resources at KALA. Of these, A. axis are believed to be 

the most damaging. Throughout the Hawaiian Islands ungulate activity results in various impacts 

including land erosion; stream and reef siltation; spread of invasive plants and diseases; loss of 

native, threatened, and endangered plant and animal species; and degradation of native species’ 

habitat. 

Invasive terrestrial flora: Although the exact extent of specific invasive plants in the park is not 

known, invasive plant taxa have been documented in all of the terrestrial management zones in 

KALA. In Hawai‘i, invasive plants compete with native plants for resources, modify fire regimes, 

alter nutrient cycling patterns, change hydrologic regimes, and remove wildlife habitats. 
xx 

Invasive small mammals: Rattus rattus (black rats), Mus musculus (house mice), Herpestes 

javanicus (small Indian mongooses), and Felis catus (feral cats) present at KALA represent 

significant threats to park resources. These small, non-native mammals are known to consume a 

variety of native birds, invertebrates, and plants throughout the Hawaiian Islands. 

Invasive insects: Invasive non-native insects have been documented to adversely affect native 

biodiversity through herbivory, predation, parasitism, pollination disruption, and hybridization and 

competition with native species. Insects have the greatest rate of yearly establishment of all animal 

or plant groups in Hawai‘i. Few invasive insects have been documented at KALA (including 

Sophonia rufofascia [two-spotted leafhopper], Quadrastichus erythrinae [erythrina gall wasp], and

Specularius impressithorax [erythrina seed beetle]), but others likely occur within the park 

boundaries. 

Diseases and pathogens: Mosquito-borne avian diseases, principally Plasmodium relictum (avian 

malaria) and the virus Avipoxvirus sp. (avian pox), have been implicated as the main reason for 

mortality of the native Hawaiian forest birds in low-elevation areas. The entire Island of Moloka‘i 

lies within the elevation range of the primary vector of these diseases; therefore, all native (and nonnative) avifauna at KALA are threatened by these diseases. In addition, coral disease and coral 

bleaching has been documented at KALA for two years (2006–2007). 

Habitat loss and degradation: Historic and modern human activities have modified, fragmented, or 

destroyed some of the original habitat at KALA. During the prehistoric and historic eras, residential 

and religious structures, as well as extensive agriculture, removed the original habitat of portions of 

the park. The Molokai Irrigation System, which began diverting water from Waikolu Stream in 

1960, has altered the volume and frequency of flows in the stream. Densities of native stream fauna 

were found to be substantially lower in, and upstream of, the diverted sections of Waikolu Stream 

compared to the lower reaches of Waikolu Stream and to comparable areas on the undiverted 

Pelekunu Stream, likely due to the effects of dewaterment on habitat availability. The construction of 

an upgraded harbor at KALA also has the potential to impact the benthic and fish communities and 

marine mammals in adjacent areas. 

Climate change: Although the maritime location of the Hawaiian Islands makes the archipelago 

relatively well buffered climatically, climatic changes have been documented throughout the state. 

Potential impacts of climate change are widespread throughout the park. Based on information from 

outside the park, the following could be impacted at KALA as a result of climate change: species 

ranges and geographical distribution; physiology and phenology; community composition and 

interaction; trade wind inversion layer; frequency of fires; sea surface temperatures; sea level; ocean 

chemistry; and intensity of storms. 

For most threats and stressors at KALA, available information is limited to the presence/absence of a 

particular species, group of species, activity, or abiotic process in a specific area of the park. There is 

an overall lack of information that quantifies the extent of the problem on a park-wide level. In 

addition, there is a paucity of information that identifies and/or quantifies the direct and indirect 

impacts of the potential threats and stressors present throughout KALA. Because of the known 

adverse impacts of invasive species on native species and ecosystems in other areas in Hawai‘i 

(particularly mammals, plants, and invertebrates), this represents a major data gap. 
xxi 

Chapter 4 provides a brief summary of the overall current condition of the natural resources at 

KALA based on the information discussed in Chapters 2 and 3 and summarizes recommendations to 

document, maintain, or improve the current conditions. Despite the threats and stressors present at 

KALA, intact examples of native Hawaiian ecosystems and unique native species remain, and regular 

monitoring of these habitats and species is essential to preserving these resources. 
xxii 

Acknowledgments 

Fung Associates Inc. and SWCA Environmental Consultants would like to acknowledge the staff 

at the Kalaupapa National Historic Park, in particular Eric Brown and Guy Hughes, for sharing 

previous reports, data, and their local knowledge of the park. We are grateful to Eva DiDonato, 

Jeff Hughes, Sandy Margriter, and other reviewers at the National Park Service for their 

insightful comments on the draft report, as well as supplemental unpublished data. Finally, we 

thank the residents of Kalaupapa for their kind hospitality. 
1 

Chapter 1: Park and Resources Context 

1.1 Biogeographic and Physical Setting 

Kalaupapa National Historical Park (KALA) is located on the north central coast of the Island of 

Moloka‘i, within in the State of Hawai‘i. Moloka‘i Island is the fifth largest island in the 

Hawaiian chain and encompasses a total land area of 673.5 square kilometers (km2

) or 260.0 

square miles (mi2). The island is roughly 61 km (38 mi) long and 9.5 to 16 km (6–10 mi) wide 

(Juvik and Juvik 1998). The landmass was primarily formed by two coalesced shield 

volcanoes—East Moloka‘i (Wailau) and West Moloka‘i (Mauna Loa). A smaller third shield 

volcano, Pu‘u ‘Uao, arose from Kauhakō Crater approximately 230,000 years ago and formed 

the flat Kalaupapa peninsula (NPS 2006a, DOFAW 2009). 

 

KALA encompasses approximately 4,340 hectares (ha) (10,726 acres [ac]), or 15.5% of the entire 

Island of Moloka‘i. The land portion of the park consists of over 3,531 ha (8,726 ac) and includes a 

relatively flat peninsula, three deeply carved valleys (Waihanau, Wai‘ale‘ia, and Waikolu), steep 

cliffs (pali), and a strip of land along the rim of the cliffs. Approximately 25.7 km (16 mi) of 

shoreline are present within KALA. The park boundaries also stretch 0.4 km (0.25 mi) offshore to 

include roughly 809 ha (2,000 ac) of water, as well as the islets of Huelo and Okala. Elevation 

throughout the park varies greatly, ranging from sea level to more than 1,287 meters (m) or 4,222 

feet (ft) above sea level (asl). 

 

Climatic conditions at KALA vary dramatically due to its windward location in relation to the high 

cliffs, varied elevation, and local topographic features. Median annual rainfall for the peninsula 

ranges from less than 63.5 centimeters (cm) (25 inches [in]) in the lower elevation areas to 190.5 cm 

(75 in) in the higher elevations (Aruch 2006). Prevailing northeast trade winds blow 16 to 24 

km/hour (10 to 15 mi/hour) at KALA. 

 

Access to KALA is possible by foot, mule, sea, or plane; there are no vehicular roads to the 

Kalaupapa peninsula from “topside” Moloka‘i. The foot trail is a steep path approximately 4.8 km (3 

mi) long with 26 switchbacks. Commuter class aircraft arrive and depart KALA two to four times a 

day, weather permitting (NPS 2000a). A barge transports food and other goods to the community 

once a year, during the summer months when the sea is calm (NPS 2007); however, the pier and 

associated mooring structures are failing due seawater and wave impact. KALA prepared an 

Environmental Assessment (EA) that analyzed the environmental effects of stabilizing and repairing 

the seawall and dock structures (Kalaupapa National Historical Park 2010). 

1.2 Historic Context and Park Purpose 

In 1865, Kamehameha V approved an Act to Prevent the Spread of Leprosy (Hansen's disease), 

and the following year the first group of Leprosy victims was brought to the isolated Kalaupapa 

peninsula. The original Kalawao Settlement was located on the eastern side of the peninsula at 

Kalawao. As patients arrived at Kalaupapa, native Hawaiians living at Kalawao were displaced 

via land exchange, land purchase, or eviction (NPS 2006). By 1900, the Leprosy patients moved 

to the Kalaupapa Settlement on the western side of the peninsula (McCoy 2005b). Leprosy 

patients were required to live at the Kalaupapa Settlement until the isolation policy ended in 

1969; however, many individuals chose to remain on the peninsula after 1969. From 1865 to 

1969, it is estimated that 8,000 people were sent into exile at the Kalaupapa peninsula (NPS 
2 

2006). Today, KALA is home to only 27 patients. The current Kalaupapa Settlement includes 

residences, dormitories, churches, a hospital, a small grocery store, maintenance and storage 

buildings, and other infrastructure to support the small community (NPS 2006a). 

The Kalaupapa Settlement was designated as a National Historic Landmark District in 1976 and 

many historic buildings on the peninsula have been placed on the National Register of Historic 

Places (NPS 1997, 2006). In December 1980, KALA was incorporated into the National Park 

System. The Act authorizing Kalaupapa National Historical Park (Public Law 96-565 enacted 

December 22, 1980) set forth the following as the principal purposes of the park: 

 Preserve and interpret the Kalaupapa settlement for the education and inspiration of present 

and future generations; 

 Provide a well-maintained community in which the Kalaupapa Hansen's disease patients are 

guaranteed that they may remain at Kalaupapa as long as they wish; 

 Protect the current lifestyle of these patients and their individual privacy; 

 Research, preserve, and maintain the present character of the community; 

 Research, preserve, and maintain important historic structures, traditional Hawaiian sites, 

cultural values, and natural features; 

 Provide for limited visitation by the general public; 

 Provide that the preservation and interpretation of the settlement be managed and performed 

by patients and native Hawaiians to the extent practical; and 

 Provide training opportunities to such persons in management and interpretation of the 

settlement's cultural, historical, educational, and scenic resources. 

Although the original intent of KALA was to ensure the protection of unique cultural resources, 

the park contains significant natural resources. These resources are summarized in Section 1.4 

and a detailed description and assessment is provided in Chapter 2. 

1.3 Land Ownership and Management 

The Kalaupapa peninsula is located in Kalawao County, which is governed by the State of 

Hawai‘i Department of Health (DOH). Public Law 96-565, the enabling legislation for KALA 

(Appendix 1), outlines the primary management for the park. Additional rules and regulations of 

Kalawao County are adopted as necessary to manage the community. The general statutes that 

guide NPS land management nationwide are also applicable at KALA. These include the 

National Park Service Organic Act (16 U.S.C. sec 1 et seq.), the Act for Administration (16 

U.S.C. 1a-1), the Endangered Species Act, and the Historic Preservation Act (NPS 2000). 

Most of the land within the park boundaries is not owned by the National Park Service. Of the total 

park area, the National Park Service owns only nine ha (23 ac), or 0.2 percent of KALA. This area 

was formerly owned by the U.S. Coast Guard and includes two historic houses and four buildings 

that surround the Moloka‘i Light Station (NPS 2006a). The remainder of the park is managed 

through formal cooperative agreements with various federal and state agencies, as well as private 

entities (Table 1.3-1). The National Park Service has formal cooperative agreements with the State 

DOH, Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR), Department of Transportation (DOT), 

and Department of Hawaiian Home Lands (DHHL). The majority of the land (approximately 505 ha 

or 1,247 ac) is leased from DHHL. Roughly 29 ha (72 ac) of small private holdings occur within the 
3 

authorized park boundary at the top of the cliffs. Figure 1.3-1 shows land ownership in the park 

boundaries and the surrounding areas. 

Table 1.3-1. Formal cooperative agreements with NPS at KALA. 

Agency Date 

Entered 

Agreement 

Duration 

Expiration 

Date 

Hawaii Department of Health April 2004 20 yrs April 2024

Hawaii Department of Hawaiian Homelands July 1991 50 yrs July 2041

Hawaii Department of Land & Natural Resources August 1989 20 yrs August 2009

Hawaii Department of Transportation March 1987 20 yrs March 2007

Source: NPS (2000a, 2006a). 

Public Law 96-565 outlines the rights of the residents of KALA. According to this legislation, 

visitation is limited to only 100 people per day. This includes tourists on commercial tours, 

volunteers performing services projects, cultural practitioners, and guests of residents. In 

addition, no individuals under 16 years of age are allowed at KALA, except in special cases. 

Under this law, residents have the right to take fish and wildlife resources without regard to 

federal fish and game regulations and the right to take plant and other natural resources for 

traditional purposes in accordance with applicable state and federal laws (NPS 1999, 2000a, 

2006). By restricting public visitation, Public Law 96-565 limits impacts to the natural and 

cultural resources within KALA. 

Under Public Law 96-565, the National Park Service is responsible for managing the park and 

protecting the lifestyle of the patients. This includes preserving, maintaining, and protecting historic 

buildings, and prehistoric and historic cultural resources and values. The National Park Service is 

also accountable for preserving, maintaining, and protecting over 282 species of native plants, 33 

species of native terrestrial fauna, 19 species of native freshwater fauna, and 427 species of native 

subtidal and intertidal marine fauna known throughout the park. This is primarily accomplished by 

controlling non-native, invasive species. Approximately 23 of the over 160 non-native plant species 

that have been recorded in the park are targeted for treatment. Of the 17 non-native animal species 

known in the boundaries of KALA, eight are targeted for treatment (Hughes 2003). Additonally, the 

National Park Service is responsible for providing fire protection, as well as operating and 

maintaining the drinking water, electrical distribution, and solid waste management systems (NPS 

2006a). 

Land ownership and management of KALA will likely shift as the patient population at 

Kalaupapa decreases. The National Park Service can only obtain state lands by donation or 

exchange; therefore, the NPS role in the future of Kalaupapa is unknown (NPS 2000a). 

Specific areas owned and/or managed by entities other than NPS include: 

Pu‘u Ali‘i National Area Reserve: The State of Hawai‘i DLNR, Division of Forestry and 

Wildlife (DOFAW), is responsible for the National Area Reserve System (NARS). NARs are 

managed according to Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR) Title 13, Chapter 209. 
4 

Figure 1.3-1. Land ownership at KALA and vicinity. 

Source: State of Hawaii GIS; National Park Service

Legend

Park Boundary

Land Owners

Govt. FederalGovt. StateGovt. State DHHLGovt. County of MauiMolokai Ranch

Kualapu`u RanchThe Nature ConservancyF.R.W. MeyerGeorge BrownMiala Inc.Other

4,000 0 4,000 2,000

Feet

2,000 0 2,000 1,000

Meters

Pacific Ocean

Govt. State

George Brown

Govt. State

Govt. State DHHL

Miala Inc.

Govt. State

Molokai Ranch

Molokai Ranch

F.R.W. Meyer

Govt. State DHHL

Molokai Ranch

Kualapu`u Ranch

Molokai Ranch

other

other

other

Molokai Ranch

Govt. State

DHHL

other

The Nature

Conservancy

George Brown

Kalaupapa National Historic Park
5 

Moloka‘i Forest Reserve: The State of Hawai‘i Forest Reserve (FR) System is managed by the 

State of Hawai‘i DLNR, DOFAW. Management of this system is guided by HAR Chapter 104 

and Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 183. 

Seabird Sanctuaries: The two islets off the coast of KALA (Huelo and Okala) are designated as 

State Seabird Sanctuaries. These islets are owned by DOFAW and co-managed by the National 

Park Service. HAR Title 13, Chapter 125, protects wildlife and plants and restricts human 

activities in seabird sanctuaries (Swenson 2008). 

Pala‘au State Park: Pala‘au State Park is a 95-ha (234 ac) park providing a scenic overview of 

KALA. Picnicking and camping is permitted in Pala‘au State Park. This park is administered by 

the State of Hawai‘i DLNR, Division of State Parks (Division of State Parks 2008). 

North Shore Cliffs National Natural Landmark: KALA includes a portion of the North Shore 

Cliffs National Natural Landmark (NNL). Established in 1972, the NNL is a federal designation 

identifying and encouraging preservation of pristine ecological and geological examples of the 

nation’s natural heritage (NPS 1999). The area is considered a significant remaining example of 

sea cliffs within the United States. 

East Molokai Watershed Partnership: KALA is also part of the East Moloka‘i Watershed 

Partnership, a coalition formed in November 1999 for the purpose of protecting the best 

remaining native forest watershed areas on the East Moloka‘i Mountains. The partnership, which 

protects more than 10,117 ha (25,000 ac), is composed of a group of landowners, government 

agencies, and non-governmental organizations. 

1.4 Unique and Significant Park Natural Resources 

KALA abounds in significant natural resources. Rare lowland and coastal plant species occur on the 

Islets of Huelo and Okala and in areas along the coast and unique lacustrine macrofauna are present 

in the Lake Kauhakō. The marine ecosystem at KALA has a high fish biomass compared to other 

areas of the main Hawaiian Islands. There is also a high potential for undocumented rare obligate 

cave-adapted plants and animals, as well as paleontological resources, to occur in the caves at 

KALA. Appendix 2 provides the scientific, Hawaiian, and common names of all species mentioned 

throughout this assessment.1 

Numerous federally and state threatened, endangered, and rare plants and animals are known to 

occur within the park boundaries (Table 1.4-1, Appendix 3). Over 580 species of terrestrial plant 

taxa have been recorded within KALA. Of these, roughly 282 species are native to the Hawaiian 

Islands. Currently 35 native plant species within KALA are listed as federally endangered, 

threatened, or candidate species and an additional 18 plant species are considered federal species of 

concern. Of the 33 native terrestrial and 427 native marine fauna known within the park boundaries, 

six species are federally listed as endangered, proposed endangered, threatened, or candidate species, 

and one additional species is considered endangered by the State of Hawai‘i. Six invertebrate species 

present at KALA are considered federal species of concern (Hughes 2003). Threatened, endangered, 

and rare species are listed in Appendix 3. 

 

1

 Because many native plants lack unique Hawaiian or common names, scientific names are used throughout the 

report with Hawaiian names in parentheses when applicable. 
6 

Table 1.4-1. Number of federally and state listed species within KALA. 

Plants 

(terrestrial) 

Animals 

(terrestrial)

Animals 

(aquatic)

Federally Listed 

 Endangered 29 2 1 

 Proposed Endangered 0 1 0 

 Threatened 2 1 1 

 Candidate 4 1 0 

 Species of Concern 18 6 0 

State Listed 

 Endangered 0 1 0 

Source: Hughes (2003). 

Although numerous native species are present in the park, the vegetation throughout KALA is 

primarily non-native to the Hawaiian Islands. The U.S. Geological Survey and National Park 

Service created a draft vegetation cover map based on aerial remote sensing (J. Jacobi/USGS, 

pers. comm.). Each identifiable vegetation cover was categorized as Class 1–3 to provide an 

estimate of the total native and non-native species composition. Overall, the park is largely 

comprised of Class 1 vegetation, meaning the vegetation at KALA is dominated by areas with 

greater than 90% non-native species. Figure 1.4-1 shows the percentage of the vegetation cover 

classes throughout the park and Figure 1.4-2 shows the vegetation classes at a park-wide scale. 

The majority of the native vegetation occurs in the eastern portion of the park within and 

surrounding Waikolu Valley. Detailed distribution mapping of the native and non-native 

vegetation has not been conducted at KALA. 

Figure 1.4-1. Percentage of vegetation cover throughout KALA per NPS class. 

944 ac,

11%

4,933 ac,

57%

563 ac,

6%

2,282 ac,

26%

Vegetation Cover per NPS Class

CLASS 0: not classified

CLASS 1: > 90% non‐native

vegetation

CLASS 2: mixed vegetation

CLASS 3: > 90% native

vegetation
7 

Figure 1.4-2. Vegetation cover and NPS vegetation classes throughout KALA. 

Legend

Park BoundaryTerrestrial Management Zones

Vegetation Class Type

0 - no factor - 11%1 - >90% alien veg - 57%2 - mix - 6%3 - >90% native veg - 26%

4,000 0 4,000 2,000

Feet

2,000 0 2,000 1,000

Meters

Source: National Park Service

Pacific Ocean

Huelo Islet Huelo Islet

Okala Islet Okala Islet

Namoku

Lowland Coastal

Area

Puu Alii

NAR

Kauhako Crater

Offshore Islets

North Shore Cliffs NNL

Coastal Spray Zone

North Shore Cliffs NNL

Molokai Forest Reserve

(DOFAW)

Kalaupapa National Historic Park
8 

1.4.1 Special Ecological Areas 

The National Park Service has designated areas containing valuable natural resources as Special 

Ecological Areas (SEAs). These areas have been determined to be the most intact, diverse, 

unique, and manageable sites in the park. SEAs are managed to preserve the ecosystem as a 

whole and and, in doing so, preserve the individual native plant and animal species (NPS 2000a). 

There are eight SEAs within KALA including the coastal spray zone; Pu‘u Ali‘i Natural Area 

Reserve; Waikolu Valley; Kauhakō Crater; caves and lava tubes; Kauhakō Trench/Lava Tube; 

the cliffs (pali); and the submerged lands surrounding the peninsula. These SEAs are treated in 

the corresponding ecosystems defined below. 

1.5 Marine, Freshwater, & Terrestrial Ecosystems 

This assessment considers not only lands owned by the NPS, but also other lands within KALA. 

The natural resources within the park’s boundaries are divided into three primary ecosystems—

marine, freshwater, and terrestrial (Figure 1.5-1). Although these ecosystems differ, many of the 

natural resources within KALA are ecologically connected, and therefore interactions between these 

ecosystems are significant. 

The terrestrial environment within KALA is comprised of the following seven ecological 

management zones: Kauhakō Crater, Coastal Spray Zone, Offshore Islets, Pu‘u Ali‘i Natural 

Area Reserve, Moloka‘i State Forest Reserve, North Shore Cliffs National Natural Landmark, 

and the Lowland Coastal Area. Four habitats—palustrine, lacustrine, anchialine, and riverine—

are present in the freshwater ecosystem. The marine ecosystem at KALA is divided into three 

habitats—intertidal, coastal reefs, and offshore islet reefs. 

A summary of the park’s profile is provided in Table 1.5-1. 
9 

Figure 1.5-1. Marine, freshwater, and terrestrial ecosystems at KALA. 

Source: USGS; State of Hawaii GIS; National Park Service

Legend

Park Boundary

Roads/Trails

SecondaryTertiary (Class 3 & 4)4wdTrail

Marine EcosystemFreshwater EcosystemTerrestrial Ecosystem

4,000 0 4,000 2,000

Feet

2,000 0 2,000 1,000

Meters

Pacific Ocean

Huelo Islet Huelo Islet

Okala Islet Okala Islet

Kalawao Kalawao

Ha'upu Bay Ha'upu Bay

Pelekunu Pelekunu 

Bay

Kahiu Point Kahiu Point

Kalaupapa Kauhako Crater Crater

Kalaupapa Peninsula Kalaupapa Peninsula

Puu Alii Puu Alii

470

Namoku

Puwahi Puwahi

Waihanau Stream

Waialeia Stream

Waikolu Stream

Kalaupapa National Historic Park
10 

Table 1.5-1. Summary of park profile. 

Geographic 

 Total park area 4,340 ha (10,726 ac)

 Total land area within park 3,531 ha (8,726 ac)

 Total marine area within park 809 ha (2,000 ac)

 Total lands under NPS fee ownership 9 ha (22 ac)

 Percent of park boundaries 0.20%

 Elevation range 1,287 m (4,222 ft)

Population and Visitation 

 Total population 117

 Total number of patients 27

 Average total park visitors/year 76,000 

 Average total park visitors/day 27

Roads and Trails 

 Total length of road network 37 km (23 mi) 

Aquatic Habitats 

 Estuarine 0

 Marine 750 ha (1853 ac) 

 Intertidal 57 ha (141 ac) 

 Streams 8

 Continuous perennial 5

 Interrupted perennial 1

 Intermittent 2

Watersheds 

 Number of watershed systems 6

Shoreline Processes 

 Length of shoreline within park 25.7 km (16 mi) 

 Length of stabilized primary duneline 

 or artificially nourished beaches 1.6 km (1 mi) 

Native Species 

 No. of native terrestrial plant spp.1 282

 No. of native aquatic plant spp. 1

 No. of native terrestrial animals spp.2 33

 No. of native marine animal spp.3 427

 No. of native freshwater animals spp.4 19

Non-native Species 

 No. of non-native plant spp. 161

 Plant spp. targeted for treatment 23

 No. of non-native animal spp. 17

 Animal spp. targeted for treatment 8

Source: Hughes (2003) unless otherwise noted, 

1) Wysong and Hughes (2008); 2) Frasher et al. 2007, Kozar et al. 2007, 

Marshall and Kozar 2008; 3) Beets et al. 2006, Godwin and Bollick 2006; 

4) Parham et al. (2008). 
11 

Chapter 2: Description and Assessment of Park Natural 

Resources 

2.1 Terrestrial 

The terrestrial environment within KALA is divided into the following seven ecological 

management zones: Kauhakō Crater, Coastal Spray Zone, Offshore Islets, Pu‘u Ali‘i Natural Area 

Reserve (NAR), Moloka‘i State Forest Reserve (FR), North Shore Cliffs National Natural Landmark 

(NNL), and the Lowland Coastal Area. These zones are mapped in Figure 2.1-1 and an approximate 

area for each zone is provided in Table 2.1-1. 

Table 2.1-1. Terrestrial ecological management zones at KALA. 

Ecological Management Zone 

Total Area of Zones Within KALA 

Hectares Acres % of Terrestrial 

Ecosystem 

Kauhakō Crater 57 141 1.6

Coastal Spray Zone 310 766 8.76

Offshore Islets 3.7 9.1 0.10

Pu‘u Ali‘i Natural Area Reserve 538 1329 15.21

Moloka‘i State Forest Reserve 632 1562 17.86

North Shore Cliffs National Natural Landmark 904 2234 25.55

Lowland Coastal Area 1,093 2701 30.90

TOTAL 3,537.7 8,742.1 100

The following sections provide information on previous and ongoing surveys and inventories 

conducted in each terrestrial ecological management zone and the physical environment (i.e., soils, 

land use) and ecological communities within each zone. Studies and inventories conducted in each 

management zone are organized by resource and then listed chronologically. Opportunistic 

information obtained from staff, partners, and researchers visiting the park are also noted. 

Information gaps are identified and recommended studies are also provided for each management 

zone to better evaluate current conditions, identify existing factors negatively impacting those 

resources, and quantify potential threats. A complete list of surveys conducted throughout the 

terrestrial portion of the KALA is provided in Appendix 4. 

2.1.1 Kauhakō Crater 

Kauhakō Crater is a remnant of the Pu‘u ‘Uao Volcano that formed the peninsula. The ovate crater is 

roughly 600 m (1,969 ft) long by 430 m (1,410 ft) wide. The rim of the crater is approximately 3.2 

km (2.0 mi) in diameter and rises 137.2 m (450.0 ft) high. A funnel-like pit crater with a brackish 

water pool is located in the center of Kauhakō Crater (NPS 2007). A discussion of the bathymetry 

and aquatic resources in Kauhakō Crater is provided in Section 2.0 (Freshwaters). 
12 

Figure 2.1-1. Terrestrial management zones at KALA. 

Source: USGS; National Park Service

Legend

Park Boundary

Roads/Trails

SecondaryTertiary4wdTrail

Terrestrial Management Zones

Coastal Spray ZoneKauhako CraterLowland Coastal AreaMolokai Forest Reserve (DOFAW)North Shore Cliffs (NNL)Offshore IsletsPuu Alii

4,000 0 4,000 2,000

Feet

2,000 0 2,000 1,000

Meters

Pacific Ocean

Huelo Islet Huelo Islet

Okala Islet Okala Islet

Kalawao

Ha'upu Bay

Pelekunu Pelekunu 

Bay

Kahiu Point Kahiu Point

Kalaupapa Kauhako Crater Crater

Kalaupapa Peninsula Kalaupapa Peninsula

Puu Alii Puu Alii

470

Namoku Namoku

Puwahi Puwahi

a W

ai

el

ai

ert S

m

a

Waihanau Stream

Waikolu Stream Molokai Forest Reserve (DOFAW)

North Shore Cliffs NNL

Coastal Spray Zone

North Shore Cliffs NNL

Offshore Islets

Kauhako Crater

Puu Alii

NAR

Lowland Coastal

Area

Kalaupapa National Historic Park
13 

2.1.1.1 Previous and Ongoing Studies and Inventories: 

Soils & Climate: 

 Soils on the Island of Moloka‘i were classified by the U.S. Department of Agriculture 

(USDA) Soil Conservation Service (Foote et al. 1972). The survey was primarily designed to 

offer useful information for planning agriculture; therefore, mapping was conducted on 

agricultural land and generalized for other areas. 

Flora: 

 Linney (1987) described the dominant plant communities within the crater and along the 

crater’s outer slopes. Linney’s conclusion that the botanical resources in the crater are 

“unexcelled elsewhere in Hawai‘i” tagged the area for more intensive monitoring. 

 Asherman et al. (1990) conducted a reconnaissance survey along the rim and in the interior 

of the crater, creating plant species lists, collecting voucher specimens, and documenting 

localities of rare plants. 

 Based on previous vegetation surveys in the park and additional supplemental surveys, Funk 

(1991) described 20 plant communities throughout KALA. This included communities 

within Kauhakō Crater. 

 Medeiros et al. (1996) provided baseline data on vegetation components of the crater and 

established a permanent monitoring system to document vegetation changes following 

fencing and the removal of browsing herbivores. The study focused on three key native trees 

present in the crater to provide an overall picture of health and status of the forest, while also 

tagging and monitoring a few other native species. 

 Wood et al. (2005) created plant checklists for 32 sites in KALA. Kauhakō Crater was 

included as a site in this study. 

 In 2006, NPS initiated the Erythrina sandwicensis (wiliwili) seed production monitoring, 

which documented the status of E. sandwicensis trees in the crater. Every five years, this 

survey collects data on E. sandwicensis flower color and phenology, leaf phenology, and 

predation by Specularius impressithorax (erythrina seed beetle) and Quadrastichus 

erythrinae (erythrina gall wasp). This information exists primarily as raw data. 

 Analyzing data from 32 transects established in KALA, Hughes et al. (2007) examined plant 

diversity and distribution in the park. Kauhakō Crater was included as a site in this study. 

 Wysong and Hughes (2008) updated plant checklists and collected voucher specimens for 

the entire park, including Kauhakō Crater. 

 In 2007, the U.S. Geological Survey and National Park Service also created a draft 

vegetation cover map based on aerial remote sensing. Each identifiable vegetation cover is 

categorized as Class 1–3 to provide an estimate of the total native and non-native species 

composition. The final report for this project, including mapping methods and a detailed 
14 

description of the plant communities, is anticipated in early 2010 (J. Jacobi/USGS, pers. 

comm.). 

 In 2010, the National Park Service plans to re-examine legacy vegetation data within 

Kauhakō Crater to document vegetation changes within legacy vegetation plots during the 

last 10 to 20 years. 

Avifauna: 

 Marshall and Kozar (2008) conducted a forest bird survey throughout the park, including in 

the crater, to determine presence/absence and abundance. The transect at Kauhakō Crater ran 

along the crater rim and descended along the plateau above the crater’s lake. 

Mammals: 

 Although impacts by feral ungulates were not specifically focused upon during the survey by 

Medeiros et al. (1996), the presence of droppings was recorded in monitoring plots to help 

quantify the extent and distribution of feral ungulates in the crater. 

 Goltz et al. (2001) conducted a 13-month study on the population of Axis axis (axis deer) 

throughout the park, including in Kauhakō Crater, to gather information on movement 

patterns and home ranges of Axis axis. 

 Frasher et al. (2007) surveyed Lasiurus cinereus semotus (Hawaiian hoary bats) in the crater 

using acoustic detection systems along with visual observations to document the 

presence/absence of the species and general associations with habitats and elevations. The 

survey was conducted on a single night at two points in the crater–one point mid-way down 

the trail to the crater lake and another approximately 25 m (82 ft) above the lake. 

 Semi-annual monitoring of Lasiurus cinereus semotus by the National Park Service began in 

2008. The purpose of this study is to determine long-term trends in bat occupancy and 

distribution. 

 Marshall et al. (2008) conducted a one-night presence/absence survey for small mammals 

along a transect in the crater that ran along the crater rim at roughly 100 m (328 ft) elevation 

and descended to the plateau above the lake at approximately 30 m (98 ft) elevation. Large 

and small snap traps, Tomahawk® live traps, tracking tunnels, and glue boards were used. 

Reptiles and Amphibians: 

 Kraus (2005) conducted day and night surveys for reptiles and amphibians across KALA and 

along the upper rim of the park. 

Insects and Other Invertebrates: 

 No surveys specifically targeting insects or other invertebrates have been conducted in 

Kauhakō Crater; however, Medeiros et al. (1996) noted insect pests and insect signs on key 

native plant species. Furthermore, the National Park Service’s ongoing Erythrina 

sandwicensis seed production monitoring also notes damage from Quadrastichus erythrinae 

and Specularius impressithorax on E. sandwicensis. 
15 

Other: 

 The geological setting of the Kalaupapa peninsula and Kauhakō Crater was described by 

Clague et al. (1982). Samples were collected in the crater and the vicinity and analyzed for 

major elements. 

 Coombs et al. (1990) described the geology, morphology, and volcanic history of Kauhakō

Crater and channel, as well as provided measurements of caves and cavernous features. 

 The most recent survey speleological investigations within Kauhakō Crater and the vicinity 

were conducted by Halliday (2001). Unpublished data and maps from earlier work by Neller 

were an integral part of this report. 

 Additional cave animal inventories (invertebrates and vertebrates) at KALA are anticipated 

to resume in 2010. 

2.1.1.2 Physical Environment: 

Soil types found within the Kauhakō Crater management zone are mapped in Figure 2.1-2 and key 

characteristics of the soils found within the zone are listed in Table 2.1-2. There are two primary soil 

types within the crater - Kalaupapa Very Rocky Silty Clay Loam and Rough Mountainous Land. The 

Kalaupapa series soil is shallow with many stones and cobblestones on the surface and the Rough 

Mountainous Land is considered very steep land with a thin soil mantel. 

Table 2.1-2. Soil types and key soil characteristics in Kauhakō Crater management zone. 

Soil Type Farmland Erodible Soil Coverage in 

Zone (m2) 

Kalaupapa Very Rocky Silty Clay Loam, 3 to 25 

% Slopes 

Not prime 

farmland Highly erodible 321,981 

Rough Mountainous Land Not prime 

farmland Highly erodible 248,714 

Haleiwa Silty Clay Loam, 0 to 10 % Slopes Prime farmland 

(if irrigated) 

Potentially highly 

erodible 6,645 

Source: Foote et al. (1972). 

Historically, land in the crater was used for agriculture, presumably because it was sheltered from 

the elements. Patients and caretakers living in the Kalaupapa Settlement continued to cultivate crops 

in the crater, such as potatoes and vegetables (Greene 1985). The exact date when crop cultivation 

ceased is not known (Linney 1987). 

2.1.1.3 Ecological Community: 

Flora: Kauhakō Crater is a low elevation summer deciduous remnant dry forest. Historically, 

botanists described the crater as “one of the finer examples of dryland forest remaining on 

Moloka‘i or elsewhere in the Hawaiian Islands” (Medeiros et al. 1996) containing an area of 

“pristine native lowland forest” that is “unexcelled elsewhere in Hawaii” (Linney 1987). 

However, the original condition of the forest at Kauhakō Crater has been severely degraded by a 

myriad of factors. Although the crater does contain native dry forest species, it is no longer 

considered a pristine dry forest (G. Hughes/NPS, pers. comm.). 
16 

Figure 2.1-2. Soil types within the terrestrial management zones at KALA. 

Source: National Park Service; NCSS SSURGO Soil Database

Legend

Park BoundaryTerrestrial Management Zones

Soil

AMALU-OLOKUI ASSOCIATIONCOLLUVIAL LANDGRAVELLY SILTY CLAY

PEATY SILTY CLAYROCK LANDROCK OUTCROPROUGH BROKEN LANDROUGH MOUNTAINOUS LANDSANDSILTY CLAY

SILTY CLAY LOAMSTONY ALLUVIAL LANDSTONY COLLUVIAL LANDTROPAQUODSVERY STONY SILTY CLAY LOAMVERY ROCKY SILTY CLAY LOAM

Pacific Ocean

Puu Alii NAR

Lowland Coastal

Area

North Shore Cliffs NNL

Molokai Forest Reserve (DOFAW)

Coastal Spray Zone

North Shore Cliffs NNL

Kauhako Crater

rRT

rRO

KFID

rTO

rRK

rRO

CO

rRT

rSO

CO

rSO

HdC

rRK

rSM

rRT

rTO

HID

HcB

rAOD

rAOD

rRR

HdC

JaC

rRO

rRR

KATD

HcB HcB

rRO

rRO

HcB

MUSYM DESC METER2

Coastal Spray

KFID KALAUPAPA VERY ROCKY SILTY CLAY LOAM, 3 TO 25 PERCENT SLOPES 2145239rRK ROCK LAND 599946rRO ROCK OUTCROP 248396JaC JAUCAS SAND, 0 TO 15 PERCENT SLOPES 86603HcB HALEIWA SILTY CLAY LOAM, 0 TO 10 PERCENT SLOPES 8116rRT ROUGH MOUNTAINOUS LAND 400

Kauhako Crater

KFID KALAUPAPA VERY ROCKY SILTY CLAY LOAM, 3 TO 25 PERCENT SLOPES 321981rRT ROUGH MOUNTAINOUS LAND 248714HcB HALEIWA SILTY CLAY LOAM, 0 TO 10 PERCENT SLOPES 6645

Lowland Coastal Area

HcB KALAUPAPA VERY ROCKY SILTY CLAY LOAM, 3 TO 25 PERCENT SLOPES 3022356HdC STONY COLLUVIAL LAND 1599321JaC ROCK LAND 1225574KFID HALEIWA VERY STONY SILTY CLAY LOAM, 0 TO 15 PERCENT SLOPES 1212699rRK ROCK OUTCROP 1190928CO COLLUVIAL LAND 954359rRO HALEIWA SILTY CLAY LOAM, 0 TO 10 PERCENT SLOPES 651057rRT ROUGH MOUNTAINOUS LAND 374120rSM STONY ALLUVIAL LAND 362559rSO JAUCAS SAND, 0 TO 15 PERCENT SLOPES 246993

North Shore Cliffs

HID ROUGH MOUNTAINOUS LAND 5915311HID3 ROCK OUTCROP 2159002CO COLLUVIAL LAND 305729KATD HALAWA SILTY CLAY, 3 TO 25 PERCENT SLOPES 280628KlcB ROUGH BROKEN LAND 183947OOE KAHANUI GRAVELLY SILTY CLAY, 3 TO 20 PERCENT SLOPES 96277rRO HALAWA SILTY CLAY, 3 TO 25 PERCENT SLOPES, SEVERELY ERODED 74196rRR STONY COLLUVIAL LAND 15717rRT KAWAIHAPAI SILTY CLAY LOAM, 2 TO 7 PERCENT SLOPES 9782rSO OLOKUI SILTY CLAY LOAM, 3 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES 1866

Puu Alii NAR

rAOD ROUGH MOUNTAINOUS LAND 2969595rRT TROPAQUODS 1843847rTO AMALU-OLOKUI ASSOCIATION, 3 TO 20 PERCENT SLOPES 523151rAMD AMALU PEATY SILTY CLAY, 3 TO 20 PERCENT SLOPES 11389

Molokai State Reserve

rRO ROCK OUTCROP 3030521rRT ROUGH MOUNTAINOUS LAND 2489290CO COLLUVIAL LAND 437100rSM STONY ALLUVIAL LAND 118846rRR ROUGH BROKEN LAND 109342HdC HALEIWA VERY STONY SILTY CLAY LOAM, 0 TO 15 PERCENT SLOPES 61822rSO STONY COLLUVIAL LAND 51949KATD KAHANUI GRAVELLY SILTY CLAY, 3 TO 20 PERCENT SLOPES 22482HcB HALEIWA SILTY CLAY LOAM, 0 TO 10 PERCENT SLOPES 1489OOE OLOKUI SILTY CLAY LOAM, 3 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES 1457

KALA SOILS BY MANAGEMENT UNIT

Kalaupapa National Historic Park

4,000 0 4,000 2,000

Feet

2,000 0 2,000 1,000

Meters
17 

Previous studies and inventories in Kauhakō Crater and the surrounding environs have 

documented a total of 134 vascular plant species (Table 2.1-3 and Figure 2.1-3). Most of the 

species in the crater (72 %) are introduced to the Hawaiian Islands (Medeiros et al. 1996). Nonnative monocots and dicots dominate the flora within the crater. Two monocots and five dicots 

present were Polynesian introductions. Ferns are the least-represented group in the crater, 

comprising less than 10% of the total species observed. Low fern diversity in and around the 

crater is attributed to herbivory and seasonal aridity (Medeiros et al. 1996). 

Recent aerial remote sensing determined that most of the vegetation in the crater is not native. All 

vegetation cover types identified through remote sensing were grouped into Class 1, meaning that 

greater than 90% of the vegetation is not native to the Hawaiian Islands (Table 2.1-4, Figure 2.1-4). 

On-the-ground surveys in the crater (Medeiros et al. 1996, Linney 1987) identified the following 

dominant plant communities: Casuarina (ironwood); Scaevola (naupaka); Lantana Scrub with 

Dwarf Forest; Roadside Weeds; Reynoldsia-Pleomele (‘ohe makai-hala pepe) Remnant Forest, 

Syzyhium-Schinus (Java plum-Christmas berry) Forest, and Lantana-Digitaria (sourgrass) Thicket. 

During the eight-year period from 1987 to 1996, these plant communities remained relatively similar 

in size and composition. Only the ironwood community was identified as having increased in area 

since the earlier survey (Medeiros et al. 1996). This expansion could be due to the layer of needlelike branchlets on the forest floor, which play an important role in the suppression of seedling 

recruitment in the understory. Medeiros et al. (1996) documented that ironwood is displacing the 

upper margins of the native Reynoldsia sandwicensis-Pleomele auwahiensis forest. 

During the survey by Medeiros in 1996, the greatest areas of biological interest and significance in 

the crater were: 1) the Reynoldsia sandwicensis-Pleomele auwahiensis forest on the southwest inner 

slopes of the crater and 2) the Erythrina sandwicensis stands interspersed with Reynoldsia 

sandwicensis on the crater floor. These three species were the most conspicuous native plants in the 

crater because they are locally abundant and of large stature. Today, few R. sandwicensis, P. 

auwahiensis, and E. sandwicensis are found widely scattered throughout the crater. However, the 

remaining E. sandwicensis trees are of large stature compared to other individuals in the state. In 

October 2005, the average height and basal diameter of E. sandwicensis trees in the crater was 

measured at 5.6 m (18.4 ft) and 44.3 cm (17.4 in), respectively (NPS, unpublished). Erythrina 

sandwicensis trees in the crater are taller than the maximum height given for the species by Wagner 

et al. (1999). Figure 2.1-5 shows selected native plants mapped in the crater in 2004. 

Medeiros et al. (1996) noted a lack of recruitment for three species (R. sandwicensis, P. auwahiensis, 

and E. sandwicensis), in addition to other rare native plants in the crater. The reason for the lack of 

reproduction is unknown but could be due to insect pests (see Insects and Other Invertebrates section 

below), encroachment of invasive plants, browsing and trampling by feral ungulates, and/or 

predation by rodents (see Mammals section below). Most of the non-native plant species that 

dominate the primary plant communities pose little threat to the health and survival of the crater's 

native flora. However, some are considered aggressively invasive, strangling native trees and 

suppressing seedlings (Medeiros et al. 1996). 
18 

Table 2.1-3. Origin of plant species documented in Kauhakō Crater and immediate environs. 

Non-Native Indigenous Endemic Total

Ferns/fern allies 6 6 1 13 

Monocots 19 2 2 23 

Dicots 71 16 11 98 

Total 96 24 14 134 

Source: Medeiros et al. (1996) 

Figure 2.1-3. Percentage of native and non-native species in Kauhakō Crater. 

72%

18%

10%

TOTAL

46%

46%

8%

FERNS/ FERN ALLIES

73%

16%

11%

DICOTS

82%

9%

9%

MONOCOTS

NON-NATIVE INDIGENOUS ENDEMIC
19 

Figure 2.1-4. Vegetation cover and NPS vegetation classes in Kauhakō Crater. 

Class Name Acres

unclassified 0.7

shadow 3.0

Class 0 TOTAL 3.8

Dry Schinus terebinthifolius Shrub 66.0

Dry Schinus terebinthifolius and Syzygium cumini Forest 24.9

Dry Alien Shrubs 19.7

Mesic Mixed Syzygium cumini and Psidium sp. Forest + Other Alien Trees 18.9

Dry Lantana camara + Alien Shrubs and Grasses 6.2

Dry Alien Grassland 3.1

Class 1 TOTAL 138.9

TOTAL 142.7

Figure 2.1-4

Source: USGS; National Park Service

Lowland Coastal

Area

Coastal

Spray

Zone

Kauhako Crater

Lowland Coastal

Area

Coastal

Spray

Zone

Kauhako Crater

Kalaupapa National Historic Park

Legend

Vegetation Class Name

Dry Alien Shrub

Dry Alien grassland

Dry Lantana camara + Alien Shrubs and Grasses

Dry Schinus terebinthifolius Shrub

Dry Schinus terebinthifolius and Syzygium cumini Forest

Mesic Mixed Syzygium cumini and Psidium sp. Forest + Other Alien Trees

unclassified

shadow

Legend

Vegetation Class Type

0 - no factor

1 - >90% alien veg 

2 - mix

3 - >90% native veg 

500 0 500 250

Feet

200 0 200 100

Meters
20 

Figure 2.1-5. Selected native plants in the Kauhakō Crater. 

Legend

‘akoko (Chamaesvce celastroides)

wiliwili (Erythrina sandwicensis)

lama (Diospyros sandwicensis)

‘ohe makai (Reynoldsia sandwicensis)

hala pepe (Pleomele auwahiensis)

Ulei (Osteomeles anthyllidifolia) Patch

Fences

Selective Native Plant Species

in Kauhakō Crater 200 0 200 100

Feet

100 0 100 50

Meters

Source: National Park Service

Kalaupapa National Historic Park
21 

Table 2.1-4. Vegetation cover and NPS vegetation classes in Kauhakō Crater. 

Vegetation Cover Per NPS Class1

 Acres M2

Class 0 3.8 15,183.4

Shadow 3.0 12,189.4

Unclassified 0.7 2,994.0

Class 1 138.9 562,156.8

Dry Schinus terebinthifolius shrub 66.0 267,231.4

Dry Schinus terebinthifolius and Syzygium cumini Forest 24.9 100,940.3

Dry Alien Shrubs 19.7 79,782.8

Mesic Mixed Syzygium cumini and Psidium sp. Forest + Other Alien Trees 18.9 76,642.6

Dry Lantana camara + Alien Shrubs and Grasses 6.2 24,944.9

Dry Alien Grassland 3.1 12,614.8

TOTAL 142.7 577,340.1

1) Class 0 = not classified; Class 1 = > 90% non-native vegetation; Class 2 = mixed vegetation; 

Class 3 = > 90% native vegetation. 

Source: USGS and NPS (2007). 

The following species present in the crater have been identified by Linney (1987) and Medeiros et 

al. (1996) as invasive: 

 Androponon virginicus (broomsedge) 

 Bidens pilosa (Spanish needle) 

 Casuarina equisetifolia (common ironwood) 

 Ficus microcarpa (Chinese banyan) 

 Furcraea foetida (mauritius hemp) 

 Lantana camara (lantana) 

 Melinis minutiflora (molasses grass) 

 Schinus terebinthifolius (Christmasberry) 

 Syzygium cumini (java plum) 

 Cirsium arvense (Canadian thistle) 

 Kalanchoe pinnata (airplant) 

A detailed discussion of the threats and stressors to native plants at KALA is provided in Chapter 3 

(Threats and Stressors). 

The National park Service is developing a native plant restoration project throughout the park. To 

date, no plants have been outplanted in Kauhakō Crater; however, several species are planned to be 

outplanted within fenced areas including Bidens molokaiensis, Schiedea globosa, and others (see 

Threatened and Endangered Species below). 

Avifauna: No native forest birds were recorded during the survey in the crater by Marshall and 

Kozar (2008). Non-native avifauna recorded during this survey include Francolinus francolinus 

(black francolin), Acridotheres tristis (common myna), Carpodocus mexicanus (house finch),
22 

Cettia diphone (Japanese bushwarbler), Zosterops japonicus (Japanese white-eye), Cardinalis 

cardinalis (northern cardinal), Streptophelia chinensis (spotted dove), and Copsychus 

malabaricus (white-rumped shama). 

Mammals: Prior to construction of the ungulate-proof fence, Axis axis droppings were recorded 

in 100% of the circular plots centered around E. sandwicensis trees on the western half of the 

crater floor, 37.5% of plots around Reynoldsia sandwicensis trees, and only 4% of the plots 

centered around P. auwahiensis trees. Axis axis probably have the greatest adverse impact on the 

crater floor, where all of the tagged E. sandwicensis trees are located, and are less damaging in 

areas with steeper slopes where R. sandwicensis and P. auwahiensis occur (Medeiros et al. 

1996). Goltz et al. (2001) found that A. axis remained in the crater after the area was fenced in 

1997; thus, fencing did not alter the movement patterns of A. axis in this area. The configuration 

of the fence was aligned along roads as much as possible to limit ground disturbance. However, 

the net result was that over 20 ha (50 ac) of Schinus terebinthifolius thickets were enclosed, 

creating cover for A. axis. 

Small mammals detected in the crater include Rattus rattus (black rats), Mus musculus (house mice), 

Herpestes javanicus (small Indian mongooses), and Felis catus (feral cats). A summary of the 

trapping results by Marshall et al. (2008) is provided in Table 2.1-5. The crater has the highest 

capture rate of H. javanicus and M. musculus compared to other surveyed transects in the park.

Rodent predation has been observed on P. auwahiensis seeds in the crater and is expected to impact 

other native plants as well (Medeiros et al. 1996). 

Table 2.1-5. Summary of small mammal data for Kauhakō Crater. 

Species CTN1 # of 

Captures

Capture

Rate2

% of stations 

with tracking tunnel sign 

Rattus rattus 61.5 2 3.25 9% 

Mus musculus 118.5 3 2.53 0% 

Herpestes javanicus 33 16 -- 82% 

Felis catus 33 0 -- 0% 

1) Corrected trap nights 

2) Number of individuals per 100 corrected trap nights. 

Source: Marshall et al. (2008).

Reptiles and Amphibians: Gehyra mutilate (stump-toed gecko) was the only reptile collected in 

the crater during the survey by Kraus (2005). This non-native species is common on all the main 

Hawaiian Islands, typically found near warehouses and large buildings and among debris, rocks, 

and fallen vegetation (McKeown 1996). 

Insects and Other Invertebrates: Medeiros et al. (1996) indicated the presence of two insect pests 

on several key native plants in the crater by inspecting signs of herbivory (shed casts, chlorosis 

of leaves, and immature or adult insects on undersides of leaves). Signs of Sophonia rufofascia 

(two-spotted leafhopper) were noted on native plant taxa, such as R. sandwicensis and P. 

auwahiensis (Medeiros et al. 1996). Sophonia rufofascia was most commonly observed on P. 

auwahiensis, with 43 of 50 tagged trees (86%) exhibiting some sign of the insect. Whiteflies 

were also noted on P. auwahiensis foliage, as indicated by a small powdery white ring on 
23 

affected leaves. The feeding of both insects is known to be detrimental to the health of affected 

individuals and could contribute to a more rapid decline of the remaining senescent trees in the 

crater (Medeiros et al. 1996). 

 

None of the E. sandwicensis inspected in the crater in October 2005 by the National Park Service 

exhibited damage by Quadrastichus erythrinae; however, data from more recent surveys have not 

been summarized. The National Park Service did see extensive damage from Specularius 

impressithorax on seeds on the ground and in the trees during the October 2005 survey. 

Threatened and Endangered Species: No threatened or endangered plant species currently occur 

in the crater. Portulaca villosa (ihi), a USFWS species of concern, occurs at the southwestern 

rim of the crater at roughly 155 m (508 ft) above sea level (a.s.l.). There were six P. villosa

individuals in 1990 (Asherman et al. 1990). The National Park Service has developed a Species 

Action Plan to stabilize populations of federally endangered, threatened, and candidate plants at 

KALA, as well as species of concern. In addition to outplanting more common native species, 

the federally endangered Canavalia molokaiensis (‘āwikiwiki) and federally threatened 

Peucedanum sandwicense (makou) are planned to be outplanted at Kauhakō Crater. 

The walls of the Kauhakō Crater are suitable nesting areas for the threatened Puffinus auricularis 

newelli (Newell’s shearwater or ‘a‘o) and the endangered Pterodroma sandwichensis (Hawaiian 

petrel or ua‘u). No reliable information on the occurrence of these species in the crater exists. It has 

been suggested that overgrowth of non-native vegetation in the Kauhakō Crater may have decreased 

habitat for these species (NPS 1990). 

The federally endangered Lasiurus cinereus semotus is the only extant native terrestrial mammal 

from the Hawaiian archipelago (USFWS 1998). Lasiurus cinereus semotus were not detected during 

the survey by Frasher et al. (2007); however, Kauhakō Crater is believed to be a suitable location for 

bat activity, due to the proximity to water, shelter from winds, and intact canopy cover. Ongoing bat 

surveys may detect the use of the crater environment by L. cinereus semotus. 

Important Habitats: 

Caves and cavernous features occur in the Kauhakō Crater and the surrounding vicinity (Halliday 

2001). Any material or substance occurring naturally in caves (including animals, plants, 

paleontological deposits, sediments, minerals, and relief features) are considered cave resources (16 

U.S.C. §§ 4301-4310). These habitats have the potential to contain interesting geological formations, 

provide refuge for rare and highly specialized invertebrates and native plants (Howarth et al. 2007), 

and preserve paleontological resources, such as fossil bird bones (James et al. 1987). 

A complex cavernous structure, known as Kaluaokahoalii or Kauhakō Iki, lies beneath the inner pit 

of the crater (Halliday 2001). Bird bones of two different species (Pterodroma hypoleuca and

Apteribis glenos) were collected within this feature in 1976. Kaluaokahoalii intersects a sinuous lava 

channel complex (or lava tube) that extends roughly 1.0 km (0.6 mi) from the northeast side of the 

crater. It is unknown whether this feature is a large collapsed lava tube (Clague et al. 1982, Coombs 

et al. 1990) or a lava channel complex that produced a variety of geomorphic features (Halliday 

2001). The caves and cave resources at KALA are highly threatened, primarily from over-grazing by 
24 

feral mammals (F. Howarth/Bishop Museum, pers. comm.). Human-mediated subsurface alterations 

(i.e., alteration of cave entrances and passages that change the cave microclimate) may also be 

impacting these communities (Stone and Howarth 2007). 

2.1.1.4 Information Gaps: 

Land Use: The Nature Conservancy’s (TNC’s) Measuring Conservation Actions in East Molokai, 

Hawaii (2003a) recommends that conservation managers assess changes in land use and ownership 

every seven to 10 years. An assessment of land uses adjacent to the park would allow the National 

Park Service to evaluate conservation progress or threats at the broader landscape scale. 

 

Invasive Fauna: Little data exist with respect to range, population estimates, and carrying capacity of 

ungulates in the crater (and KALA in general) (NPS 1990). Because of their known adverse impacts 

to native species and ecosystems in the crater, this represents a major data gap. This information may 

be obtained by on-the-ground transect monitoring (see Medeiros 1996) that calculates the percentage 

of transects with ungulate sign or direct counts using forward-looking infrared aerial surveys. TNC 

(2003a) suggests that baseline ungulate monitoring should precede management activities by one to 

two years (TNC 2003a). This work could be conducted in cooperation with the East Molokai 

Watershed Partnership. 

Relatively little information has been obtained on the impacts of non-native rodents (particularly 

Rattus spp.) and insects (particularly Sophonia rufofascia) on native plants in the crater. Studies 

focusing on these species could help to devise future management or restoration strategies in this 

zone, including the use of snap traps as predator control, diphacinone application, or biocontrol. 

Flora: Implementation of a long-term vegetation monitoring program with permanent transects 

would be an effective study for Kauhakō Crater. Regularly monitored plots (or transects) would 

document the presence and abundance (percent cover) of individual species and vegetation 

associations over time, as well as quantify trends in plant diversity (TNC 2003a). In addition to data 

gathering, a vital component of this program is data analysis in order to highlight useful information 

and inform management decisions. Furthermore, mapping that shows native vegetation fragments 

and patch size, both in the canopy and understory, would help to monitor areas of native relic 

vegetation (Aruch 2006). 

Mapping the distribution and abundance of high-priority, habitat-modifying weeds in relation to 

impacted native resources and subsequently focusing control efforts on these species and sites (TNC 

2003a) would address an important gap. As noted by Hughes et al. (2007), “monitoring can be an 

early warning system for detecting and eradicating invasive species that are just becoming 

established. It also serves in detecting changes in plant communities over time as a means for 

measuring the success of management strategies.” 

Once native plant restoration activities in the crater commence, monitoring will be useful in 

evaluating whether restoration goals have been achieved (SER International Science & Policy 

Working Group 2004). Developing monitoring protocols geared specifically to performance 

standards and establishing permanent monitoring fixtures (transect lines, photopoints, etc.) can 

decrease project costs and increase the success of the restoration project (Clewell et al. 2005). 
25 

Avifauna: Although no native forest birds were noted in the crater, Marshall and Kozar (2008) 

recommended conducting systematic bird surveys during periods of peak vocalization (breeding 

seasons) to ensure high detectability of native species. 

Mammals: Frasher et al. (2007) suggested continuing surveys for Lasiurus cinereus semotus in 

Kauhakō Crater and its surroundings because these areas provide intact non-native canopy cover and 

adequate protection from the strong winds (Frasher et al. 2007). Systematic surveys using Anabat 

detectors (Titley Electronics, NSW, Australia) could be conducted at various elevations in the crater 

at different times of the year. Anabat detectors are instruments that can record the ultrasonic 

echolocation calls of bats, which can then be analyzed to determine the presence/absence of bats as 

well as their activity patterns. Surveys are recommended particularly between the months of April to 

August as L. cinereus semotus show seasonal altitudinal movements and have been documented to 

increase in numbers at low altitudes during these months on the Island of Hawai‘i (Menard 2001). 

Insects and Other Invertebrates: No studies have been conducted in the crater specifically targeting 

insects or other invertebrates. Native tree snails have been found in the nearby TNC Kamakou 

Preserve (TNC 2003a); therefore, there may be some interest in expanding these surveys to areas of 

the park, including the crater. A study of the invertebrate pollinators in the crater may be useful to 

understand the future of native plants in the crater. 

Caves and Cavernous Features: At least two cave-adapted species endemic to KALA have been 

identified within the park, although outside of the crater. The potential to come across additional 

obligate cave-adapted plants and animals, as well as paleontological resources, is significant (F. 

Howarth/Bishop Museum, pers. comm.). To better evaluate the condition of the crater’s caves 

and cave resources, additional studies need to be conducted including identifying and mapping 

features, and inventorying faunal and floral resources in the features. An important component of 

this work is the development of a Cave Management Plan to ensure that cave exploration does 

not result in damage to these resources (F. Howarth/Bishop Museum, pers.comm.). 

2.1.2 Coastal Spray Zone 

The Coastal Spray Zone is a strip of land approximately 3.2 km (2.0 mi) long located along the 

northeast shore of the Kalaupapa peninsula. The area supports a diversity of habitats, including 

dunes, rock strand, and sea cliffs. Due to the prevailing northeast tradewinds combined with the low 

topography of this area, this area is characterized by high winds and abundant sea spray. As a result, 

minimal human activity has occurred in this management zone. 

2.1.2.1 Previous and Ongoing Studies and Inventories: 

Soils & Climate: 

 Soils on the Island of Moloka‘i were classified by the U.S. Department of Agriculture 

(USDA) Soil Conservation Service (Foote et al. 1972). The survey was primarily designed to 

offer useful information for planning agriculture; therefore, mapping was conducted on 

agricultural land and generalized for other areas. 

 Canfield (1990) noted more detailed descriptions of the soils and substrate in the Coastal 

Spray Zone during a vegetation survey. 
26 

 One Remote Automated Weather Station (RAWS) Network site (Makapulapai) currently 

operates in the Coastal Spray Zone. The Makapulapai site has a data record extending 

back to 1993 and measures temperature, wind, humidity, solar radiation, barometric 

pressure, fuel temperature, and precipitation (Davey et al. 2006). 

Flora: 

 In January 1987, Canfield (1990) identified and documented cover and abundance of all 

plant species in the Coastal Spray Zone. This study also mapped and described associations 

and disturbances in each vegetation community. 

 Asherman et al. (1990) conducted an eight-day reconnaissance survey in six areas of the 

park, including the Coastal Spray Zone from the Kalawao coastline to the lighthouse. 

Species list and voucher specimens were collected for plants within the area. 

 The plant communities in the Coastal Spray Zone were re-described by Funk (1991) based 

on previous vegetation surveys and additional supplemental surveys. 

 Hughes et al. (2007) examined plant diversity and distribution for species occurring in the 

Coastal Spray Zone by analyzing data from previously surveyed transects. This analysis was 

entirely based on the survey by Canfield (1990). 

 A complete inventory of the flora of KALA (including the Coastal Spray Zone) was 

conducted by Wysong and Hughes (2008). This included collecting voucher specimens to 

create a permanent and usable herbarium. 

 The U.S. Geological Survey and National Park Service also created a draft vegetation cover 

map of the Coastal Spray Zone in 2007 based on aerial remote sensing. Each identifiable 

vegetation cover was categorized as Class 1–3 to provide an estimate of the total native and 

non-native species composition. The final report for this project, including mapping methods 

and a detailed description of the plant communities, is anticipated in early 2010 (J. 

Jacobi/USGS, pers. comm.). 

 In 2009, the National Park Service will begin an inventory to collect and identify plant 

driftseeds along the high-tide driftline at Ho‘olehua beach, located at the tip of the Coastal 

Spray Zone. 

 In 2010, the National Park Service plans to re-examine legacy vegetation data within the 

Coastal Spray Zone to document recent (10–20 years) vegetation changes within legacy 

vegetation plots. 

Avifauna: 

 Hodges carried out a boat-based survey in the summer of 1996 and observed sea birds in the 

Coastal Spray Zone (Hodges 1996). 

 Marshall and Aruch (2003) completed a shoreline seabird inventory during the fall of 2003. 

It was conducted from various locations in the park, including along the Coastal Spray Zone. 
27 

 An additional shoreline bird survey was conducted along the KALA coastline by Kozar et al. 

(2007) during two days in 2005. Seasonal migrants (waterfowl, shorebirds) were the primary 

focus of the routine surveys, but seabirds, raptors, and waterbirds were also recorded. 

 Since 2008, annual seabird monitoring has been conducted throughout the park to determine 

whether Puffinus auricularis newelli and Pterodroma sandwichensis are present. Visual and 

auditory methods are used to detect seabirds. 

Mammals: 

 No surveys have been conducted to identify mammals within the Coastal Spray Zone; 

however, radio-collared Axis axis were tracked throughout the park by Goltz et al. (2001). 

Reptiles and Amphibians: 

 No previous reptile or amphibian surveys have been conducted in the Coastal Spray Zone. 

Insects and Other Invertebrates: 

 No insect or other invertebrate studies have been conducted in the Coastal Spray Zone. 

Other: 

 Coombs et al. (1990) described the geology and morphology of various caves and cavernous 

features in the Coastal Spray Zone. 

 Unpublished investigations of the flora and paleontological resources in caves throughout the 

Coastal Spray Zone have been conducted by Radewagen and Neller (unpublished). 

 Howarth and Taiti (1995) and Taiti and Howarth (1997) surveyed cave invertebrates within 

caves in the management zone. These investigations specifically focused on rare species. 

 Visual searches for obligately cavernicolous Oliarus species were conducted by Hoch and 

Howarth (1999) in lava tubes at KALA. 

 Rivera et al. (2002) sampled known populations of troglobitic Hawaiioscia and 

Littorophiloscia from caves in the Coastal Spray Zone. 

 Speleological investigations were conducted along the Kalaupapa peninsula by Halliday 

(2001). Unpublished data and maps from earlier studies were also included in the report. 

2.1.2.2 Physical Environment: 

Soil development in the Coastal Spray Zone is relatively minimal (Canfield 1990). The USDA Soil 

Conservation Service identified six soil or substrate types in the Coastal Spray Zone (Table 2.1-6 

and Figure 2.1-2). Canfield (1990) found that a more extensive sand area exists than indicated in the 

earlier soil survey. This sand area extends from Kahio benchmark to Kaupikiawa. 

Table 2.1-6. Soil types and key soil characteristics in Coastal Spray Zone management zone. 
28 

Soil Type Farmland Erodible Coverage in 

Zone (m2) 

Kalaupapa Very Rocky Silty Clay Loam, 3 

to 25 % Slopes Not prime farmland Highly erodible 2,145,239

Rock Land Not prime farmland Potentially highly 

erodible 599,946

Rock Outcrop Not prime farmland Not highly erodible 248,396

Jaucas Sand, 0 to 15 % Slopes Not prime farmland Potentially highly 

erodible 86,603

Haleiwa Silty Clay Loam, 0 to 10 % Slopes Prime farmland (if 

irrigated) 

Potentially highly 

erodible 8,116

Rough Mountainous Land Not prime farmland Highly erodible 400

Source: Foote et al. (1972). 

Former land uses that impacted the Coastal Spray Zone include agriculture, rubbish dumping, an old 

boat landing south of Kuololimu, and the Mormon beach house steps south of Lae Ho‘olehua. 

Domestic and feral ungulates brought to KALA for the leprosy settlement have had a significant 

negative impact on native resources. The previous leprosy settlement at Kalawao just south of the 

Coastal Spray Zone had minimal influence on the nearby area due to the limited mobility of the 

patients (Canfield 1990). 

2.1.2.3 Ecological Community: 

Flora: Due to the great diversity of habitats, the Coastal Spray Zone maintains a parallel 

diversity of native plant associations. Compared to other coastal areas in the main Hawaiian 

Islands, the Coastal Spray Zone at KALA supports a diverse and extensive native coastal 

vegetation community. The relatively intact nature of this area is largely due to the minimal 

amount of human contact (Canfield 1990). However, grazing by ungulates, cultivation practices, 

the introduction of alien vegetation, and other activities have altered the historic vegetation. 

Two lichens, two ferns, and 66 flowering plant species have been identified in this zone. Of this 

total, 25 species are native. Non-native species comprise the largest percentage of the plants in the 

Coastal Spray Zone (Table 2.1-7, Figure 2.1-6). Fourteen non-native species documented in the 

Coastal Spray Zone are considered noxious by the State Department of Agriculture (DOA). Nonnative plants are concentrated along the roadsides in the area. The most abundant non-native plants 

in the zone are Cynodon dactylon (Bermudagrass) and Digitaria adscendens (Henry’s crabgrass). 

Fimbristylis cymosa (mau‘u ‘aki‘aki) is the most common native species. 

Canfield (1990) identified the following five plant communities within the Coastal Spray Zone: 1) 

native dominated community on sandy strand directly in the salt spray, 2) a half native community 

on flat basalt with clayey soil above sea cliffs in the most intense salt spray, 3) native community on 

rocky strand slightly protected from salt spray, 4) small area of native-dominated prostrate shrubs on 

raised basalt domes, and 5) an alien-dominated grassland less influenced by spray. In addition, an 

adjacent non-native scrub community is present mauka2

 of the spray zone. Twenty-five localized 

plant associations were defined within the five spray zone communities. 

 

2

 Hawaiian adverb meaning toward the mountains; inland. 
29 

Table 2.1-7. Origin of plant species documented in Coastal Spray Zone. 

Non-Native Indigenous Endemic Total

Lichens 0 2 0 2 

Ferns/fern allies 1 1 0 2 

Monocots 6 3 1 10 

Dicots 38 12 6 56 

Total 45 18 7 70 

Source: Canfield (1990). 

Figure 2.1-6. Percentage of native and non-native vascular plant species in the Coastal Spray Zone. 

60%

30%

10%

MONOCOTS

68%

21%

11%

DICOTS

64%

26%

10%

TOTAL

50% 50%

0%

FERNS/ FERN ALLIES

NON-NATIVE INDIGENOUS ENDEMIC
30 

Plant communities are described in Table 2.1-8 and depicted in Figure 2.1-7. All of the Coastal 

Spray Zone vegetation cover types identified via remote sensing contain more than 90 percent nonnative species (Class 1), as shown in Table 2.1-9 and displayed in Figure 2.1-8. 

Table 2.1-8. Plant communities in the Coastal Spray Zone (makai = toward the sea; mauka = toward the 

mountains). 

Plant Community Description Vegetation 

Cover 

H 

Heliotropium anomalum/Scaevola 

taccada/Cynodon dactylon native sandy 

strand spray zone. 

Native dominated community on sandy 

strand directly in the salt spray 

20% (makai) 

70% (mauka) 

S Scaevola taccada/Fimbristylis cymosa

native protected rocky strand 

Native community on rocky strand 

slightly protected from salt spray 60% 

F Fimbristylis cymosa raised clayey spray 

zone 

Half native community on flat basalt 

with clayey soil above sea cliffs in the 

most intense salt spray 

70% 

E Chamaesyce celastroides raised basalt 

domes 

Small area of native-dominated 

prostrate shrubs on raised basalt 

domes 

50% 

C Cynodon dactylon/Digitaria ciliaris alien 

raised and subcoastal spray zone 

Alien-dominated grassland less 

influenced by spray 80% 

L Lantana camara/Schinus terebinthifolius

alien raised coastal scrub 

Alien scrub community mauka of the 

spray zone 

85% 

Source: Canfield (1990). 

Table 2.1-9. Vegetation cover and NPS vegetation classes in the Coastal Spray Zone. 

Vegetation Cover Per NPS Class1

 Acres M2

Class 0 152.5 616,970.3

Unclassified 152.4 616,928.3

Shadow 0.0 42.0

Class 1 614.6 2,487,256.8

Dry Lantana camara + Alien Shrubs and Grasses 186.5 754,869.9

Dry Alien Grassland 183.5 742,766.8

Dry Schinus terebinthifolius and Syzygium cumini Forest 102.5 414,941.8

Dry Schinus terebinthifolius Shrub 97.8 395,721.0

Dry Alien Shrubs 25.7 103,857.5

Mesic Mixed Syzygium cumini and Psidium sp. Forest + Other Alien 

Trees 14.4 58,238.8

Dry Syzygium cumini and Other Alien Trees 4.2 16,861.0

TOTAL 767.1 3,104,227.1

1) Class 0 = not classified; Class 1 = > 90% non-native vegetation; Class 2 = mixed vegetation; 

Class 3 = > 90% native vegetation. 

Source: USGS and NPS (2007). 
31 

Figure 2.1-7. Plant communities in the Coastal Spray Zone. 

Source: USGS; National Park Service

Legend

C - Alien-dominated grassland less influenced by spray

C/F - Alien-dominated grassland less influenced by spray/

Half native community on flat basalt with clayey soil above 

sea cliffs in the most intense salt spray

E - Small area of native-dominated prostrate

shrubs on raised basalt domes

F - Half native community on flat basalt with clayey

soil above sea cliffs in the most intense salt spray

H - Heliotropium anomalum/ Scaevola taccada/ 

Cynodon dactylon native sandy strand spray zone.

L - Alien scrub community mauka of the spray zone

S - Native community on rocky strand slightly

protected from salt spray

1,000 0 1,000 500

Feet

500 0 500 250

Meters

Pacific Ocean

Lowland Coastal Area

Coastal Spray Zone

Kauhako Crater

L

C

C/F

H

S

H

H

F

E

H

Kalaupapa National Historic Park
32 

Figure 2.1-8. Vegetation cover and NPS vegetation classes in the Coastal Spray Zone. 

Class Name Acres

unclassified 152.4

Class 0 TOTAL 152.4

Dry Lantana camara + Alien Shrubs and Grasses 186.5

Dry Alien Grassland 183.5

Dry Schinus terebinthifolius and Syzygium cumini Forest 102.5

Dry Schinus terebinthifolius Shrub 97.8

Dry Alien Shrubs 25.7

Mesic Mixed Syzygium cumini and Psidium sp. Forest + Other Alien Trees 14.4

Dry Syzygium cumini and Other Alien Trees 4.2

Class 1 TOTAL 614.6

TOTAL 767.1

Source: USGS; National Park Service

Lowland Coastal

Area

Kauhako

Crater

Coastal Spray

Zone

Legend

Vegetation Class Name

Dry Alien Shrub

Dry Alien grassland

Dry Lantana camara + Alien Shrubs and Grasses

Dry Schinus terebinthifolius Shrub

Dry Schinus terebinthifolius and Syzygium cumini Forest

Dry Syzygium cumini and Other Alien Trees 

Mesic Mixed Syzygium cumini and Psidium sp. Forest + Other Alien Trees

unclassified

Lowland Coastal

Area

Kauhako

Crater

Coastal Spray

Zone

Legend

Vegetation Class Type

0 - no factor

1 - >90% alien veg 

2 - mix

3 - >90% native veg 

Kalaupapa National Historic Park

2,000 0 2,000 1,000

Feet

1,000 0 1,000 500

Meters
33 

Avifauna: Seabirds are an important component of the terrestrial and marine environments of 

oceanic island ecosystems. By depositing guano, seabirds cycle nutrients derived from marine 

sources to terrestrial environments (NPS 2008). Guano deposition affects soil chemistry, which 

may ultimately influences plant richness, composition, and biomass, particularly in arid and 

island ecosystems (Anderson and Polis 1999, Wait et al. 2005). 

Hodges (1996) documented seven seabird species along the KALA coast. In 2005, several 

seabird species were observed flying over the Coastal Spray Zone including Phaethon 

rubricauda (red-tailed tropicbird), Phaethon lepturus (white-tailed tropicbird), Fregata minor

(great frigatebird), and a Sula (booby) species (Kozar et al. 2007). One of the caves in the 

Coastal Spray Zone is a well-known resting place of Anous minutus (noio or black noddy). 

Two migratory shorebirds—Pluvialis fulva (Pacific golden plover) and Arenaria interpres (ruddy 

turnstone)—were observed in the Coastal Spray Zone during the 2005 survey (Kozar et al. 2007). 

Seabirds and shorebirds documented at KALA are discussed further in the Marine and Coastal Areas 

Section. 

Mammals: Historically, the Coastal Spray Zone was browsed and trampled by various ungulates 

including Equus ferus caballus (horses), Bos primigenius (cattle), Equus africanus asinus

(donkeys), and E. caballus x E. asinus (mules). Feces of A. axis, B. primigenius, and E. ferus 

caballus were noted by Canfield (1990). The Coastal Spray Zone is currently fenced to exclude 

ungulates. 

Reptiles and Amphibians: The presence of reptiles and amphibians in the Coastal Spray Zone is 

unknown. Kraus (2005) did not survey this management zone; however, it is likely that nonnative reptiles and amphibians inhabit all lowland areas of the park. 

Insects and Other Invertebrates: It is unknown what taxa of insects and other invertebrates 

inhabit or visit the Coastal Spray Zone. Three rare bee species are known from the nearby 

Moomomi Preserve. These may be present in coastal areas of KALA (Aruch 2006). 

Threatened and Endangered Species: The only federally listed plant species recorded in the 

Coastal Spray Zone is the threatened Tetramolopium rockii var. rockii. Although Centaurium 

sebaeoides (‘āwiwi) does not currently occur in the management zone, critical habitat for this 

species has been designated in the Coastal Spray Zone. An approximate area of the critical 

habitat designations for threatened and endangered plants in the Coastal Spray Zone is listed in 

Table 2.1-10 and shown in Figure 2.1-9. 

Table 2.1-10. Total critical habitat area for threatened and endangered plants in the Coastal Spray Zone. 

Species Critical Habitat Area in Management Zone

Acres Hectares Sq. m. 

Centaurium sebaeoides 202.3 81.8 818,497.1

Tetramolopium rockii var. rockii 190.8 77.2 772,224.5

TOTAL 393.1 159.1 1,590,721.6

Source: USFWS (2004). 
34 

Figure 2.1-9. Critical habitat for threatened and endangered species in the Coastal Spray Zone. 

Figure 2.1-9

Critical Habitats for Threatened

and Endangered Species

in the Coastal Spray Zone

SPECIES ACRES HECTARES

Centaurium sebaeoides 202.3 81.8

Tetramolopium rockii 190.8 77.2

393.1 159.1

Source: USFWS 2004; USGS; National Park Service

0 2,000 4,000 1,000

ft

0 500 1,000 250

M

Lowland Coastal

Area

Kauhako

Crater

Coastal Spray

Zone

Lowland Coastal

Area

Kauhako

Crater

Coastal Spray

Zone

Centaurium sebaeoides

Tetramolopium rockii

Kalaupapa National Historic Park
35 

NPS plans to outplant Portulaca villosa (a federal species of concern) in the Coastal Spray Zone 

between Kalawao and Kahiu point on the northern tip of the peninsula. The goal of this outplanting 

is to augment the existing population and create two new populations of P. villosa comprising 500 

reproducing plants (NPS, unpublished). 

The threatened Puffinus auricularis newelli and the endangered Pterodroma sandwichensis may 

fly over the Coastal Spray Zone. These species are believed to nest in the valleys of northeastern 

Moloka‘i (Day and Cooper 2002). 

Important Habitats: The Kaupikiawa Cave System is composed of roughly ten caves located in 

the Coastal Spray Zone. This system contains the largest lava tube known on the Kalaupapa 

peninsula (Halliday 2001). One of the best known caves on the peninsula is Old Ladies Caves or 

Ananaluawahine. This cave is located outside of the Kaupikiawa Cave System (Halliday 2001) 

within the Coastal Spray Zone. 

Rare cave invertebrates have been documented in the Costal Spray Zone by various researchers 

(Howarth and Taiti 1995, Taiti and Howarth 1997, Hoch and Howarth 1999). Biospeleologists found 

a new species of blind isopod, Hawaiioscia paeninsulae, in the Kaupikiawa Cave System. This 

endemic species is distinct from similar species on Maui (Taiti and Howarth 1997, Rivera et al. 

2002). Another obligate cave species, Oliarus kalaupapae, was observed in two different caves in 

the Coastal Spray Zone of KALA (Hoch and Howarth 1999). This species was determined to be the 

least cave-adapted species of the genus, although it is found in the oldest lava tube. Hoch and 

Howarth (1999) suggest that potentially “the ancestor of O. kulaupupae colonized the lava tubes at 

Kalaupapa some time after their formation, and the population has been living in situ and adapting to 

the caves ever since.” 

Several native plants have been documented in the entrances to caves in this area, including 

Sesuvium portulacastrum (‘ākulikuli), Boerhavia repens (alena), Sida fallax (‘ilima), Heliotropium 

anomalum (hinhina), and Fimbristylis cymosa (mau‘u ‘aki‘aki) (Halliday 2001, Radewagen and 

Neller, unpublished). Paleontological remains (Radewagen and Neller, unpublished) have been 

recorded in the Kaupikiawa Cave System. 

2.1.2.4 Information Gaps: 

Invasive Fauna: No studies have been conducted to document the presence, concentration, or 

impacts of non-native mammals (particularly rodents) or non-native insects on native plants in the 

Coastal Spray Zone. Studies focusing on these species could help to devise future management or 

restoration strategies, such as predator or ungulate control. 

Flora: To document changes and trends within the vegetation, the National Park Service could resurvey established transects within the Coastal Spray Zone. In addition to non-native plant species, 

this survey could also determine the current distribution and abundance of invasive plant species. If 

coastal strand restoration efforts are initiated, long-term monitoring of restoration would provide 

valuable information for the National Park Service to ensure funds are properly allocated. Canfield 

(1990) recommended conducting an experimental salt water application study to control alien plants 

in the area. Following up on this recommendation may provide management strategies to promote 
36 

native plant growth and control invasives. Where species show poor regeneration, targeted studies 

could seek to determine the causes and make recommendations to mitigate threats. 

Avifauna: Ornithological radar and night-visual observations in the Coastal Spray Zone would 

provide information on the movement rates of threatened and endangered seabirds, such as Puffinus 

auricularis newelli and Pterodroma sandwichensis. These surveys should be conducted between 

1900 and 2200 hours in the evening to coincide with the peak time of inland movement toward their 

nesting colonies (Day et al. 2003). 

Insects and Other Invertebrates: Outside of the cave system, no studies of insects have occurred in 

the Coastal Spray Zone. Because rare insects are known to occur in nearby coastal areas, a study of 

the invertebrate pollinators in this zone may be useful to understand the future of the coastal strand 

vegetation. 

 

Caves and Cavernous Features: No recent surveys have been conducted in the extensive cave 

system to document features or resources within the caves. Similar to Kauhakō Crater, the potential 

to come across more obligate cave-adapted plants and animals, as well as paleontological resources, 

is significant (F. Howarth/Bishop Museum, pers. comm.). To better evaluate the condition of the 

caves and cave resources, additional studies need to be conducted in the Coastal Spray Zone 

including identifying the locating of these features, mapping features, and inventorying faunal and 

floral resources in the features. An important component of this work is the development of a Cave 

Management Plan to ensure that cave exploration does not damage the very resources that need 

protection (F. Howarth/Bishop Museum, pers. comm.). 

2.1.3 Offshore Islets 

Two offshore islets—Ōkala and Huelo—are currently under the jurisdiction of the National Park 

Service as part of KALA. Both islets are managed as State Seabird Sanctuaries by the National Park 

Service and the Hawai‘i Division of Forestry and Wildlife (DOFAW). Mokapu Islet is located 

within the park boundaries but is entirely under the jurisdiction of Hawai‘i DOFAW. 

2.1.3.1 Previous and Ongoing Studies and Inventories: 

Soils & Climate: 

 Specific soil surveys have not been conducted on the Offshore Islets management zone; 

however, studies focusing on the ecological communities (Duvall 2000, Wood 2001, Wood 

and Legrande 2003, Wood 2008) have documented soil types and conditions on the islets. 

Flora: 

 Wood (2000, 2001) conducted vegetation surveys on Huelo Islet. These surveys recorded 

general information on the vegetation community and listed all plants on the islet. 

 Wood and LeGrande (2002) documented observations and created a plant checklist of the 

vegetation on Huelo and Ōkala Islets. 

 In 2003, Wood and LeGrande created another checklist of vascular plants found on four 

islets offshore of Moloka‘i, including Ōkala and Huelo (Wood and Legrande 2003). 
37 

 Hughes et al. (2007) compiled data from the survey by Wood and Legrande (2003) to 

estimate plant diversity and distribution for the offshore islets. 

 In 2008, Wood provided detailed descriptions of Huelo and Ōkala Islets. This report 

provided a history of conditions on the islets, plant diversity estimates, and descriptions of 

abiotic conditions (Wood 2008). 

 Various accession data is available for Huelo Islet from 1999 to 2003 and for Ōkala Islet 

between 2002 and 2003. This data provides species location information, plant descriptions, 

abiotic condition summaries, population structure information, and identifies associated 

species and major threats (NPS, unpublished). 

 Based on aerial remote sensing, the U.S. Geological Survey and National Park Service also 

created a draft vegetation cover map with estimates of total percent native cover on the 

offshore islets. Most of the area was unclassified (Class 0) due to the small size of the 

islands and shadowing. Therefore, the results are not presented in this report. However, a 

more detailed vegetation mapping project of the entire park is scheduled to be conducted. 

Avifauna: 

 Due to their small size and the difficulty of access, the offshore islets have not been 

intensively surveyed for seabirds. Most avian surveys are conducted on the peninsula, and 

birds seen in the vicinity of the islets are noted. One seabird survey was conducted by boat 

(Hodges 1996), but shorebirds were not present due to the timing of the survey. 

 In the fall of 2003, Marshall and Aruch (2003) conducted a shoreline seabird inventory 

throughout areas of KALA, making observations of birds in the vicinity of the offshore islets. 

 Kozar et al. (2007) inventoried the relative abundance and habitat use of avian species at 

KALA. Although this survey was not conducted on the islets, birds could be seen flying over 

the islets from the Coastal Spray Zone and Lowland Coastal Area. 

Mammals: 

 No specific studies have been conducted to document mammals on the islets. 

Reptiles and Amphibians: 

 Duvall (2000) surveyed the reptiles on both Ōkala Islet and Huelo Islet. 

 No inventories of amphibian species have been done for the offshore islets, although none 

were detected by Duvall (2000). 

Insects and Other Invertebrates: 

 No insect survey data is known from Ōkala Islet. 

 Limited insect collection has occurred opportunistically on Huelo Islet (Bishop Museum 

2008, Swenson 2008). 
38 

2.1.3.2 Physical Environment: 

Huelo, which is approximately 0.7 ha (1.8 ac) in size, is located 2.5 km (1.6 mi) to the east of the 

Kalaupapa peninsula. The islet is roughly 61 m (200 ft) tall (Swenson 2008, Wood 2008). Huelo 

Islet is underlain by a mixture of guano, decomposing palm leaf litter, and humus (Duvall 2000, 

Wood 2001, Wood 2008). The islet has occasional pockets of rich, black-brown, fine-textured soil 

along with pockets of 3 to 4 mm (0.19 to 0.16 in) brown, granular soil. At the top of the islet, large 

basalt talus boulders of 1 to 2 m (3.3-6.6 ft) diameter are randomly scattered and smaller talus evenly 

dispersed (Wood 2008). 

Ōkala Islet is located 1.5 km (0.9 mi) to the east of the Kalaupapa peninsula and has an estimated 

area of 3.0 ha (7.4 ac). The islet reaches 122 m (400 ft) high and is the tallest and third largest of 

Moloka‘i’s offshore islets (Swenson 2008, Wood 2008). Ōkala Islet is underlain by crumbly 

basalt talus and boulder outcrops interspersed with pockets of brown granular soil (Sweson 

2008). 

It is believed that humans never occupied the islets (NPS 1990). However, it has been suggested that 

a man-made ahu (Hawaiian cairn) approximately 1 m2

 (3.2 ft2) in size lies at the very top of the 

south-central rim on Huelo (Wood 2008). Ancient Hawaiian legends also recount stories of 

Hawaiians using native palm leaves to glide from Huelo’s summit to the sea (Swenson 2008). 

2.1.3.3 Ecological Community: 

Flora: The offshore islets “represent the last strongholds where some of the rarest lowland and 

coastal plant species in the archipelago occur in natural populations” (Wood 2008). Both Huelo 

and Ōkala Islet support unusual relict vegetation and rich native species diversity. However, the 

native flora on the offshore islets is threatened by competition with non-native plant taxa, 

landslides, possible rat predation (only Ōkala), and loss of reproductive vigor (NPS, 

unpublished). 

Approximately 24 native plant taxa have been recorded on Huelo Islet, of which 16 are endemic and 

eight are indigenous to the Hawaiian Islands. An additional 18 non-native plants occur on the islet 

(Hughes et al. 2007, Wood 2008). Huelo is considered one of the most pristine natural areas in 

Hawai‘i likely because it never supported permanent humans occupants (NPS 1990). Wood (2008) 

has reported Huelo as the “most botanically significant islet in the Hawaiian chain” because it 

contains one of the two Pritchardia hillebrandii (loulu) coastal forests remaining in the Hawaiian 

Islands. The other P. hillebrandii forest is located on the remote Island of Nihoa. 

The P. hillebrandii forest on Huelo is approximately 1,800 m2

 (20,000 ft2) in size and is composed 

of approximately 224 mature P. hillebrandii trees between 4 and 7 m (13–23 ft) in height. The trees 

form a dense canopy on the upper slopes and small cliff terraces of the islet (Wood 2001, Wood and 

LeGrande 2002, Wood 2008). A healthy combination of juvenile and seedling palms occur in the 

understory, including 52 immature and 35 seedlings of P. hillebrandii. Other native plant species 

occur in light gaps in the understory (Wood and LeGrande 2002, Wood 2008). 

Along the borders of the palm forest, a diversified shrubland encircles the islet. This shrubland is 

dominated by Chamaesyce celastroides var. amplectens (‘akoko). Several additional taxa of native 
39 

shrubs, sedges, grasses, vines, and herbs occur in the shrubland and on the vertical, basalt cliff walls 

(Wood 2008). Numerous invasive plants, including Lantana camara and Pluchea spp., have been 

noted invading forest margins and upper cliff terraces on Huelo (Swenson 2008). 

Huelo also supports several rare native plants. It is the only islet that has representatives of 

Charpentiera and Brighamia (see Threatened and Endangered Species section below). Two 

Pittosporum halophilum (hoawa) shrubs were known to occur just above the main Brighamia colony 

on Huelo at 50 m (164 ft) elevation on the upper western cliffs; however, both have since perished 

due to erosion and landslides (Wood 2008). Over 700 mature Schiedea globosa were identified on 

the islet in 2003, and the rare Lepidium bidentatum (‘ānaunau) is known to occur on the vertical cliff 

walls (Wood 2008). 

On Ōkala, roughly 33 native plant taxa have been recorded, of which 15 are endemic and 18 are 

indigenous to Hawai‘i. It has the highest native plant diversity of all the Hawaiian Islets. Twenty-six 

additional non-native species occur on the islet (Hughes et al. 2007, Wood 2008, Swenson 2008). 

The predominant vegetation community on Ōkala is a mixed native shrubland of low-stature species. 

Ōkala is the only islet in the Hawaiian Islands that has the indigenous tree species Nesoluma 

polynesicum (keahi) or any member of the genus Tetramolopium. The endangered Scaevola 

coriacea (dwarf naupaka) also occurs on the islet (see below). According to Wood (2008), two 

mature Pittosporum halophilum individuals occur on the islet at 37 m (120 ft) elevation along the 

lower southwestern ridge. Only 12 additional P. halophilum are remaining in the wild (Swenson 

2008). The islet supports other rare native plants, such as Bidens molokaiensis (ko‘oko‘olau) and 

Senna gaudichaudii (kolomona); however, several invasive plant species have established, 

including Schinus terebinthifolius, Syzygium cumini, Lantana camara, and Pluchea spp. (Wood 

2008, Swenson 2008). 

Avifauna: The offshore islets at KALA provide suitable habitat for migrant shorebirds and 

breeding seabirds (Kozar et al. 2007). Evidence of seabird nesting (i.e., burrows) has been 

observed on Ōkala and Huelo and a number of seabird species have been seen flying close to the 

islets. On Huelo, low numbers of Phaethon lepturus, Puffinus pacificus, Bulweria bulwerii

(Bulwer's petrels), and Anous minutus (black noddies) have been recorded (Swenson 2008). Four 

seabird species are suspected to nest on Ōkala, including P. pacificus, A. minutus, P. lepturus, 

and Phaethon rubricauda (Swenson 2008). 

Phaethon lepturus was the most common species seen near the offshore islets by Kozar et al. 

(2007). An unknown booby species, most likely Sula sula (red-footed booby), was also observed 

on the offshore islets during the survey (2007). Fregata minor palmerstoni (great frigate bird or 

‘iwa) were seen soaring over Ōkala Islet (Marshall and Aruch 2003). 

Mammals: No terrestrial mammals have been documented to occur at the offshore islets, 

although rodents could potentially swim across the channel from Moloka‘i Island to Ōkala 

(Swenson 2008). 
40 

Table 2.1-11. Origin of plant species documented on the offshore islets. 

Non-Native Indigenous Endemic Total

Huelo Islet 18 8 16 42 

Ōkala Islet 26 18 15 59 

Total 44 26 31 101 

Source: Wood (2008). 

Figure 2.1-10. Percentage of native and non-native vascular plant species on the offshore islets. 

NON-NATIVE INDIGENOUS ENDEMIC

43%

19%

38%

Huelo Islet 

43%

26%

31%

TOTAL

44%

31%

25%

Okala Islet 
41 

Reptiles and Amphibians: During the survey of Huelo Islet, Duvall (2000) collected specimens of 

the Lipinia noctua (moth skink), which inhibits the leaf litter among the native Pritchardia palms 

(Kraus 2005). Lepidodactylus lugubris (mourning gecko) were also collected on the islet (Duvall 

2000). 

Insects and Other Invertebrates: Opportunistic surveys on Huelo Islet collected three endemic 

species of moths including Hyposmocoma sp. (Cosmopterigidae), Mestelobes sp. (Crambidae), 

and Philodoria sp. (Gracillariidae). A single non-native moth, Erechthias minuscula (Tineidae), 

was also collected (Bishop Museum 2008). 

Threatened and Endangered Species: Several threatened and endangered plant species occur on 

the islets (Table 2.1-12). Although no critical habitat has been designated on the offshore islets, 

the endangered Brighamia rockii (pua‘ala) and threatened Peucedanum sandwicense occur on 

Huelo Islet. Roughly 50 mature B. rockii individuals were recorded on the west side of the 

seastack in 1994, but this population has decreased over time. Only five B. rockii individuals 

were documented on the islet in 2003 (Wood 2008), and only one was noted in the most recent 

USFWS review (USFWS 2008b). Approximately 90% of the loss of B. rockii on Huelo is 

attributed to landslides, although lack of natural pollinators likely contributed to its small 

population size (Wood 2008). 

Eight mature Scaevola coriacea currently occur on Ōkala Islet (Wood 2008). This endangered plant 

is currently known from five locations in Hawai‘i, of which three are on offshore islets (Swenson 

2008). 

Table 2.1-12. Federally threatened and endangered species currently occurring on the offshore islets. 

Species Name Common Name Family Date Listed Status 

Brighamia rockii pua‘ala Campanulaceae 10/8/1992 E 

Peucedanum sandwicense makou Apiaceae 2/25/1994 T 

Scaevola coriacea dwarf naupaka Goodeniaceae 5/16/1986 E 

Source: USFWS (2008b), Wood (2008). 

Important Habitats: Sea caves have been observed around the base of the islet (Swenson 2008); 

however, features and resources within these caves have not been described. 

2.1.3.4 Information Gaps: 

Visitor Use: The current unauthorized use of the offshore islets is unknown. It may be useful to 

conduct reconnaissance-level public use surveys of Huelo and Ōkala Islet to acquire information on 

the extent that public use threatens the natural resources of the islets. These surveys should be 

conducted from the KALA shoreline using binoculars. Useful information that could be collected 

during the survey may include number of visitors, activity types, duration of stay on the islets, types 

of organisms removed, and extent of habitat disturbance (Coastal Resources Management, Inc. 

2008). Motion sensing cameras may also be an option to determine unauthorized use.

 
42 

Invasive Species: Because the offshore islets contain only small populations of some of the rarest 

lowland and coastal plant species in the archipelago, these species are especially vulnerable to 

invasive flora and fauna. To ensure protection of rare native species and the communities at large, it 

is important to regularly monitor the islets for incipient invasive plants, mammals, or insects. Early 

detection will facilitate containment or eradication of the target species as soon as possible. Surveys 

for invasive species can be conducted concurrently with general vegetation surveys. Scientists and 

resource managers should observe strict biosecurity protocols before going on the island to prevent 

accidental introduction of more invaders. 

Flora: Implementation of a long-term vegetation monitoring program with permanent transects in 

the coastal Pritchardia forest at Huelo Islet and the mixed native shrubland at Ōkala Islet could be 

used to document population dynamics. Regularly monitored plots (or transects) would document 

the presence and abundance of vegetation associations over time, as well as quantify trends in plant 

diversity (TNC 2003a). 

The small size and isolation of the offshore islets in Hawai‘i makes restoration a feasible 

management option to help safeguard remaining native populations (Eijzenga and Preston 2008). 

Any vegetation restoration on the offshore islets should be monitored to evaluate whether restoration 

goals have been achieved (SER International Science & Policy Working Group 2004). 

Avifauna: Currently, only presence/absence data is available for the avifauna on the offshore islets. 

More detailed studies of these species could demonstrate the need for seabird nest protection and 

active management. The first step for this research would require locating colonies of burrownesting seabirds by identifying signs of nesting (e.g., scat outside crevices or holes, feathers, 

carcasses) during systematic daytime surveys. 

Reptiles and Amphibians: The National Park Service has not reached the national objective to 

determine the presence or absence of 90% of all reptiles and amphibians that may occur at KALA. 

Minimal surveys for these species have been conducted on the offshore islets at KALA; however, 

offshore islands are known to be refugia for herpetofauna (Towns and Robb 1986). Although the 

impacts of these non-native species are understudied, surveys for reptiles and amphibians have the 

potential to identify predatory species which may impact native ecosystems (see Threats and 

Stressors). 

Insects and Other Invertebrates: Both Huelo and Ōkala Islet have a high richness of native 

vegetation; therefore, additional collection efforts would likely discover more native insects 

(Swenson 2008). A variety of collection methods can be used including pitfall traps, ant cards, 

sweep nets, or ground searches. Night surveys should also be conducted because many insects are 

nocturnal (Eijzenga and Preston 2008). 

Caves and Cavernous Features: As noted above, sea caves around the base of the islet may contain 

unique features and resources. A survey at these sites could evaluate the condition of the caves and 

cave resources and identify faunal and floral resources. 

2.1.4 Pu‘u Ali‘i Natural Area Reserve 

The Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR encompasses 538 ha (1,330 ac) on the southeast corner of the park between 

Pelekunu and Waikolu Valleys. Elevations in the reserve range from 686 m (2,250 ft) at the top of 
43 

the sea cliffs on the northern edge to 1,287 m (4,222 ft) at the summit (DOFAW 1991). The 

topography is difficult to transverse, composed of a northwest sloping plateau surrounded by steep 

valleys. The NAR is bordered on the south by the Kamakou Preserve, which is managed by The 

Nature Conservancy (TNC). 

The Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR, which was established in October 1985, is part of the National Area Reserve 

System. This system is managed by the State of Hawai‘i DLNR, DOFAW, according to Hawaii 

Administrative Rules (HAR) Title 13, Chapter 209. The NPS has a cooperative-operating agreement 

with DLNR to access the area. The Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR is divided into two management units—Pu‘u 

Ali‘i Unit and the Ohialele Unit. The Pu‘u Ali‘i Unit encloses 260 ha (640 ac) in the higher elevation 

portion of the reserve, while the Ohialele Unit makes up the remaining 280 ha (690 ac) in the lower 

portion of the reserve (Figure 2.1-11). 

2.1.4.1 Previous and Ongoing Studies and Inventories: 

Soils & Climate: 

 Soils on the Island of Moloka‘i were classified by the USDA Soil Conservation Service 

(Foote et al. 1972). The survey was primarily focused on agricultural land and generalized 

for other areas. More recent soil surveys have not been conducted on Moloka‘i. 

Flora: 

 In 1988, the Hawaii Heritage Program (HINHP) documented the presence and abundance of 

native and non-native vegetation along eight transects throughout the NAR. This document 

mapped and described vegetation communities based on aerial photographs, published and 

unpublished reports, personal interviews, and field inventory data; however, information 

gathered during the survey was largely incidental, and the survey was not intended to be a 

comprehensive biological inventory. 

 In 1989, Jacobi created vegetation maps for areas of the Island of Moloka‘i, including the 

Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR, based on black and white aerial photographs and subsequent field 

verification (Jacobi 1989). The maps were designed to provide a regional habitat framework 

to determine the current status of native forest birds. 

 Funk (1991) consolidated earlier surveys and maps of the park to describe 20 plant 

communities throughout KALA. This included the planeze around Pu‘u Ali‘i. 

 In 2003, Wood and Hughes developed a regional checklist of vascular plants, which 

included the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR (Wood and Hughes 2003). 

 Between 2003 and 2005, Wood et al. (2005) created plant checklists for five transects in the 

Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR. These transects covered a total area of 462 ha (1,142 ac). 

 Compiling data from Wood et al. (2005), Hughes et al. (2007) estimated plant diversity and 

distribution in the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR to compare floristic assemblages and identify priority 

areas for conservation throughout the park. 
44 

 Wysong and Hughes (2008) updated plant checklists and collected voucher specimens for 

the entire park, including transects inside the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR. 

 Using data from remote aerial sensing, the U.S. Geological Survey and National Park 

Service created a draft vegetation cover map of the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR with estimates of 

percent native cover for each vegetation cover category. The draft map was created in 2007, 

and the final report for this project, including mapping methods and a detailed description of 

the plant communities, is anticipated in early 2010 (J. Jacobi/USGS, pers. comm.). 

 KALA is planning to survey the distributional extent of Ehrharta stipoides (meadow 

ricegrass) in Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR. Eradication of this species is considered feasible because E. 

stipoides was only recently introduced to KALA (Wysong and Hughes 2008). 

Avifauna: 

 A single transect from the State of Hawai‘i Forest Bird Survey (the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR transect 

or HFBS 4) is located within the boundaries of KALA. The Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR transect bisects 

the NAR longitudinally, extending from 1,280 m (4,200 ft) at the southern boundary of the 

NAR to 940 m (3,084 ft) at the rim of Waikolu Valley. An additional HFBS transect is 

located in the upper Waikolu Valley (HFBS 3) just mauka of the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR along the 

Hanalilolilo Trail. These transects were surveyed in 1979. 

 DOFAW collected data for the Molokai Forest Bird Survey at the two HFBS transects 

between March and April 2004, as reported in Marshall and Kozar (2008). 

 An avian disease study was conducted in the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR and the surrounding Pelekunu 

and Kamakou Preserve in 2003 (as reported in Aruch 2006). This study was designed to 

assess the severity and urgency of disease risks to native avifauna. 

 Marshall and Kozar (2008) re-surveyed the two existing HFBS transects from March to May 

2005. This survey calculated the number of birds per station (BPS) and percent of 

occurrence of each species. 

Mammals: 

 The Hawaii Heritage Program survey (HINHP 1989) noted above documented and mapped 

ungulate damage along eight transects throughout the NAR. 

 Since 1993, the National Park Service has conducted annual surveys in the NAR to document 

ungulate activity. Most of this data was collected during hunting tests. 

 Goltz et al. (2001) conducted a 13-month study on the population of Axis axis throughout the 

park, gathering information on movement patterns and home ranges. 

 In March 2005, Marshall et al. (2008) conducted a small mammal survey at a single transect 

in Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR at roughly 1,160 m (3,806 ft) elevation. The transect coincides with the 

pre-existing HFBS. Snap traps, a Tomahawk® live cage trap, a tracking tunnel, and 

Catchmaster® glue traps were used to census the species present. 
45 

Reptiles and Amphibians: 

 No surveys have been conducted in the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR management zone to document 

reptiles or amphibians. 

Insects and Other Invertebrates: 

 Insects and other invertebrates have been incidentally documented during surveys for 

ungulates; however, no specific surveys have been conducted to inventory insects and other 

invertebrates in the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR management zone. 

Other: 

 The Pu‘u Ali‘i Natural Areas Reserve Management Plan was drafted in 1991 to establish 

long-range goals and outline specific management programs for the reserve (DOFAW 1991). 

 An Environmental Assessment was prepared for the Pu‘u Ali‘i fencing project in 2007 to 

protect approximately 196 ha (484 acres) of the reserve (DOFAW 2007). 

2.1.4.2 Physical Environment: 

Soils types identified in the management zone (Table 2.1-13, Figure 2.1-2) reflect the steep 

topography of the land. The two soil types that make up the majority of the NAR—Rough 

Mountainous Land and Tropaquods—consist of steep land, gulches, and mountainsides. 

Table 2.1-13. Soil types and key soil characteristics in Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR management zone. 

Soil Type Farmland Erodible Coverage in 

Zone (m2) 

Rough Mountainous Land Not prime farmland Highly erodible 2,969,595

Tropaquods Not prime farmland Highly erodible 1,843,847

Amalu-Olokui Association, 3 to 20 % 

Slopes Not prime farmland Potentially highly 

erodible 523,151

Amalu Peaty Silty Clay, 3 to 20 % Slopes Not prime farmland Potentially highly 

erodible 11,389

Source: Foote et al. (1972). 

Three helicopter landing zones and a small management cabin occur within the NAR. No roads 

exist within the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR. Access to the NAR is provided through a foot trail that connects 

the NAR to the Kamakou Preserve (DOFAW 2007). 

In the early 1990s, two fences were constructed in the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR. The 2.4 km (1.5-mi) long 

fence that bisects the NAR from east to west was constructed by DOFAW, and TNC constructed a 

2.0 km (1.25 mi) long fence that roughly follows the southern boundary (DOFAW 2007). Between 

2004 and 2007, the existing fence lines were retrofitted to increase their height, and additional 

fencing was installed along the Pelekunu and Waikolu ridgelines. DOFAW has proposed to 

construct approximately 8.0 km (5 mi) of new fence to follow the rims of Pelekunu and Waikolu 

Valleys to connect the existing fencing protecting the southern portion of the NAR and deter animals 

from entering the northern half of the NAR. Once this proposed project is complete, the fences are 

anticipated to protect approximately 405 ha (1,000 ac), or 75% of the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR (DOFAW 

2007). 
46 

2.1.4.3 Ecological Community: 

Flora: The Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR is considered an outstanding example of a Hawaiian montane wet 

forest or Metrosideros (‘ōhi‘a) forest (NPS 2007). Five natural vegetation communities have 

been identified in the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR (Table 2.1-14, Figure 2.1-11). These include 

Metrosideros/Mixed Shrub Montane Wet Forest, Metrosideros Montane Wet Shrubland, Mixed 

Fern/Mixed Shrub Montane Wet Cliffs, Metrosideros/Cheirodendron (‘ōlapa) Montane Wet 

Forest, and Metrosideros/Dicranopteris (uluhe) Montane Wet Forest (HINHP 1989). Several of 

these communities are also found on the adjacent Pelekunu Preserve (TNC 2003b). 

Table 2.1-14. Vegetation communities and estimated acreage within the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR. 

Vegetation Community Acreage Hawaii Heritage 

Program Rank1

Metrosideros/Cheirodendron Montane Wet Forest 858 3 

Metrosideros/Mixed Shrub Montane Wet Forest 238 3 

Mixed Fern/Mixed Shrub Cliff Community 234 3 

Metrosideros/Dicranopteris Montane Wet Forest ++ 3 

Metrosideros Montane Wet Shrubland + 3 

+ acreage included in Mixed Fern/Mixed Shrub Montane Wet Cliffs 

++ acreage include in Metrosideros/Cheirodendron Montane Wet Forest 

1) 3 = Restricted range with 21–100 occurrences and/or 3,000–10,000 individuals remaining; or more 

abundant, but facing moderate threats range-wide; or restricted in range. 

Source: HINHP (1989). 

The Metrosideros/Cheirodendron Montane Wet Forest is the dominant community within the Pu‘u 

Ali‘i NAR, covering a large portion of the gently to moderately sloping terrain. Within this 

community, Metrosideros polymorpha comprises more than 60% of the forest canopy and 

Cheirodendron trigynum comprised about 25% cover. A diverse assemblage of native shrubs and 

ferns occur in the understory, while relatively few weedy species have been recorded (DOFAW 

1991, 2007). The Metrosideros/Dicranopteris Montane Wet Forest forms patches in the more 

dissected portions of the Metrosideros/Cheirodendron Montane Wet Forest below 1,067 m (3,500 ft) 

elevation. This forest primarily consists of a dense layer of mat ferns with abundant M. polymorpha 

trees, as well as scattered native trees and shrubs. Transect surveys were not conducted in this 

community in 1989 (HINHP 1989). 

The Metrosideros/Mixed Shrub Montane Wet Forest occurs in the southeast corner of the reserve 

around 1,158 m (3,800 ft) elevation. Metrosideros polymorpha is the dominant canopy species in 

this community, and the understory is composed of a diversity of native shrubs and ferns. Relatively 

few weeds were reported in the community in 1989 (HINHP 1989). The two wet shrub communities 

in the NAR (Metrosideros Montane Wet Shrubland and Mixed Fern/Mixed Shrub Cliff Community) 

occur along the adjacent valley walls on the western edge of the reserve and at the eastern edge at 

Ohialele. Due to steep topography, these two shrub communities were not directly surveyed during 

the HINHP survey in 1989. The Mixed Fern/Mixed Shrub Cliff Community occurs in the slightly 

less steep faces of the NAR, while the Metrosideros Montane Wet Shrubland at KALA is 

interspersed within the steepest portions of the NAR (HINHP 1989). 
47 

Figure 2.1-11. Vegetation communities within the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR. 

Legend

Puu Alii NAR Management

Unit Boundaries

Vegetation Communities

Ohia Montane Wet Shrubland and 

Mixed Fern/Mixed Shrub Montane Wet Cliff

Ohia/Mixed Shrub Montane Wet Forest 

(with patches of Ohia/Olapa Forest)

Ohia/Olapa Montane Wet Forest 

and Ohia/Uluhe Montane Forest

Source: USGS; National Park Service

1,000 0 1,000 500

Feet

500 0 500 250

Meters

Puu Alii

Ohialele

Kalaupapa National Historic Park
48 

Roughly 160 plant species were documented in the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR in 2003 (Wood and Hughes 

2003). Seventy percent of these species are considered endemic to Hawai‘i (Figure 2.1-15). Surveys 

by Wood et al. (2005) documented at least 43 new plant records for the NAR. Approximately 34 

species within the NAR and surrounding area are considered rare plant taxa.3

 Of these, ten have been 

confirmed within the reserve boundary (see Threatened and Endangered Species). 

Table 2.1-15. Origin of plant species documented in the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR. 

Non-Native Indigenous Endemic Total

Ferns/fern allies 2 17 33 52 

Monocots 8 3 7 18 

Dicots 16 11 63 90 

Total 26 31 103 160 

Source: Wood and Hughes (2003). 

m 

Figure 2.1-12. Percentage of native and non-native plant species in the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR. 

 

3

 The Pu‘u Ali‘i Management Plan (1991) defines a species as rare “if it is known from 20 or fewer locations 

worldwide, or fewer than 3,000 individuals.” 

44%

17%

39%

NON-NATIVE INDIGENOUS ENDEMIC

16%

19%

65%

DICOTS

MONOCOTS 

4%

33%

63%

FERNS/ FERN ALLIES

18%

12%

70%

TOTAL
49 

Most of the vegetation cover in the NAR falls within Class 3, meaning that the vegetation cover 

types are composed of greater than 90% native species (Table 2.1-16 and displayed in Figure 

2.1-13). According to Hughes et al. (2007), the plateau areas of the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR support the 

highest species richness of the entire park, with numerous species documented. Less diversity 

occurs in the lower, more disturbed potion (Ohialele Unit). 

Table 2.1-16. Vegetation cover and NPS vegetation classes in the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR. 

Vegetation Cover Per NPS Class1

 Acres M2

Class 0 7.5 30,392.7

No Factor 6.2 25,031.4

Unclassified 1.3 5,355.4

Shadow 0.0 5.9

Class 1 8.4 33,997.8

Wet Psidium sp. 6.9 27,827.1

Wet Aleurites moluccana and Psidium guajava Forest + Shrubs and 

Alien Grasses 1.5 6,170.7

Class 2 71.1 287,660.3

Mesic Native Trees and Scattered Exotic Trees with Shrubs and 

Grasses 64.2 259,642.2

Mesic Exotic Grass and Native Shrub Community with Scattered Native 

Trees 6.9 28,018.1

Class 3 1,234.5 4,995,894.1

Wet Metrosideros polymorpha Forest with Tree Ferns and Native Shrubs 1,208.9 4,892,406.8

Wet Matted Ferns or Native Shrubs with Scattered Metrosideros 

polymorpha 25.6 103,487.4

TOTAL 1,321.5 5,347,944.9

1) Class 0 = not classified; Class 1 = > 90% non-native vegetation; Class 2 = mixed vegetation; 

Class 3 = > 90% native vegetation. 

Source: USGS and NPS (2007).

Avifauna: The vegetation communities described above support essential habitat for native forest 

birds, including rare and endangered species (NPS 1997). Six native forest birds have historically 

been recorded in Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR and the vicinity. Three are currently protected by federal or 

state law (see Threatened and Endangered Species below). More common native forest birds that 

have been recorded in the NAR include Himatione sanguinea (‘apapane), Hemignathus virens 

wilsoni (Maui ‘amakihi), and Asio flammeus sandwichensis (Hawaiian short-eared owl or pueo). 

During the 1979 HFBS, H. sanguinea and H. virens wilsoni were detected along the Pu‘u Ali‘i and 

Upper Waikolu transects (Marshall and Kozar 2008). Both species were observed along the Pu‘u 

Ali‘i transect in the 2004 and 2005 surveys, and H. sanguinea was also observed in the Upper 

Waikolu transect during these years. Himatione sanguinea are believed to forage up and down the 

valley walls at KALA (Marshall and Kozar 2008). 
50 

Figure 2.1-13. Vegetation cover and NPS vegetation classes in the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR. 

Class Name Acres

no factor 6.2

shadow 1.3

Class 0 TOTAL 7.5

Wet Psidium sp. 6.9

Wet Aleurites moluccana and Psidium guajava Forest + Shrubs and Alien Grasses 1.5

Class 1 TOTAL 8.4

Mesic Native Trees and Scattered Exotic Trees with Shrubs and Grasses 64.2

Mesic Exotic Grass and Native Shrub Community with Scattered Native Trees 6.9

Class 2 TOTAL 71.1

Wet Metrosideros polymorpha Forest with Tree Ferns and Native Shrubs 1,208.9

Wet Matted Ferns or Native Shrubs with Scattered Metrosideros polymorpha 25.6

Class 3 TOTAL 1,234.5

TOTAL 1,321.5

Figure 2.1-13 Source: USGS; National Park Service

North Shore

Cliffs (NNL)

Molokai Forest

Reserve (DOFAW)

Pu‘u Ali‘i

NAR

Legend

Vegetation Class Name

Wet Psidium sp.

Wet Aleurites moluccana and Psidium guajava Forest + Shrubs and Alien Grasses 

Mesic Exotic Grass and Native Shrub Community with Scattered Native Trees

Mesic Native Trees and Scattered Exotic Trees with Shrubs and Grasses

Wet Matted Ferns or Native Shrubs with Scattered Metrosideros polymorpha

Wet Metrosideros polymorpha Forest with Tree Ferns and Native Shrubs

no factor

shadow

North Shore

Cliffs (NNL)

Molokai Forest

Reserve (DOFAW)

Pu‘u Ali‘i

NAR Legend

Vegetation Class Type

0 - no factor

1 - >90% alien veg 

2 - mix

3 - >90% native veg 

Kalaupapa National Historic Park

2,000 0 2,000 1,000

Feet

1,000 0 1,000 500

Meters
51 

Seven non-native forest birds have been reported in the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR and surrounding area. 

Non-native forest birds commonly seen or heard in the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR include Zosterops 

japonicus (Japanese white-eye), Leiothrix lutea (red-billed leiothrix), and Cettia diphone

(Japanese bush-warbler) (DOFAW 1991, 2007). Of these, only C. diphone was not detected in 

1979, likely because it was first detected on Moloka‘i in the late 1970s (Marshall and Kozar 

2008). The percent occurrence and birds per station found along the two HFBS transects in 1979 

compared to 2004/2005 are listed in Table 2.1-17. 

Table 2.1-17. Percent occurrence and birds per station for the two HFBS transects in 1979 and 

2004/2005. 

Mammals: During the small mammal survey, Marshall et al. (2008) caught Rattus rattus, Mus 

musculus, Herpestes javanicus, and Felis catus along the single transect in the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR 

(Table 2.1-18). Canis familiaris (feral dog) tracks were also noted along the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR 

transect during the survey. These stray animals were likely left behind from ungulate hunts in the 

NAR and other adjacent reserves (Marshall et al. 2008). 

Table 2.1-18. Summary of small mammal data in the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR. 

Species CTN1 # of 

captures

Capture

Rate2

% of stations 

with tracking tunnel sign

Rattus rattus 67.5 3 4.4 0% 

Mus musculus 129.5 2 1.54 0% 

Herpestes javanicus 33 2 -- 9% 

Felis catus 33 1 -- 0% 

1) Corrected trap nights 

2) Number of individuals per 100 corrected trap nights. 

Source: Marshall et al. (2008)

Sus scrofa (pig) and Capra hircus (goats) have been reported within the NAR, and Axis axis are 

also likely to occur. Sus scrofa seem to have the greatest impact in lower elevations, with 

moderate to heavy damage noted below 1,067 m (3,500 ft) elevation (HINHP 1989). Conversely, 

Species Common Names % Occurrence1 BPS2

1979 2004/2005 1979 2004/2005 

Carpodacus mexicanus house finch 4% 6% 0.04 0.06 

Cettia diphone Japanese bush-warbler -- 100% -- 4.32 

Francolinus francolinus black francolin 20% -- 0.42 -- 

Hemignathus virens wilsoni* Maui ‘amakihi 23% 6% 0.4 0.03 

Himatione sanguine* ‘apapane 100% 94% 6.4 3.14 

Leiothrix lutea red-billed leothrix 70% 70% 2.96 1.7 

Lonchura punctulata nutmeg mannikin -- 2% -- 0.00 

Streptopelia chinensis spotted dove 34% 4% 0.88 0.04 

Zosterops japonicus Japanese white-eye 100% 88% 7.34 2.36 

* = Native species 1) Percent occurrence is calculated by dividing the number of stations occupied by birds by the number of 

stations surveyed. 

2) Birds per station (BPS) is calculated by dividing the number detected by the number of stations 

surveyed. 

Source: Marshall and Kozar (2008)
52 

C. hircus are primarily present on the ridges, steep walls, and plateau edges (DOFAW 1991). 

Capra hircus are perceived as a secondary threat after S. scrofa (NPS 2004). Axis axis are less 

evident at the NAR, potentially due to their more secretive nature (NPS 2004). Figure 2.1-14 

shows trends in ungulate activity throughout the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR from 1993 to 2000. 

Figure 2.1-14. Ungulate activity documented during hunting tests in Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR. 

Some ungulate removal and fencing has occurred in certain areas of the Pu‘u Ali‘i plateau wet 

forest (Aruch 2006). Roughly 80 S. scrofa and 20 C. hircus were removed from the Pu‘u Ali‘i 

NAR during organized hunts between 1994 and 2000 (DOFAW 2007). The fences within the 

NAR were intended to be strategic; thus, they do not completely enclose the NAR, but rely on 

the steep pali as natural barriers. Unfortunately, the animals are able to pass through these natural 

barriers (NPS 2004). Thus, additional management strategies are necessary to protect resources. 

Reptiles and Amphibians: The composition and distribution of terrestrial herpetofauna in the 

Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR are unknown; however, it is likely that suitable habitat for some of these species 

exists in the reserve. 

Insects and Other Invertebrates: Native invertebrates have been incidentally observed during 

ungulate surveys in the area. Native invertebrates observed include Theridion grallator 

(Hawaiian happyface spiders), gryllids (crickets), drosophilids (flies), tornatellinids (land snails), 

and succineids (land snails) (DOFAW 1991). Four species of achatinellid land snails have been 

reported near the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR since 1972 (see the Threatened and Endangered Species 

section below). Non-native invertebrates are more common in the lowest elevations of the Pu‘u 

Ali‘i NAR, likely due to their association with feral animals. Unidentified slugs have been 
53 

documented in the NAR. No other known invasive invertebrates were noted during the survey 

(DOFAW 1991). 

Threatened and Endangered Species: Several threatened and endangered plant species occur or 

potentially occur within the boundaries of the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR and the surrounding area (Table 2.1-

19). Many of the taxa known from adjacent areas were recorded prior to the 1920s but may still 

occur in the reserve or surrounding area (DOFAW 2007). Six plant species have critical habitat in 

the NAR (Table 2.1-20, Figure 2.1-15) but are not known to currently occur there. 

Phyllostegia hispida is a proposed endangered species only known from eastern Moloka‘i. 

Currently, only one naturally occurring individual is located within the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR, and 23 

additional naturally occurring individuals are known in the adjacent TNC's Kamakou Preserve 

(USFWS 2009a). An estimated 214 individuals have been outplanted in these areas. 

In 1997, a single Phyllostegia individual was discovered on the rim of Pelekunu Valley in the 

Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR; however, it was unclear whether this individual was P. hispida or P. manni

(USFWS 2009a). Phylostegia mannii is planned to be outplanted at Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR using 

propagules from Ohialele forest. The goal of this outplanting is to create one new population 

consisting of 150 reproducing plants (NPS, unpublished). 

Two of the plant species seen during the 1989 survey, Cyanea solenocalyx (haha) and Cytrandra 

biserrata (ha‘iwale), are considered federal species of concern. Cyanea solenocalyx and Cytrandra 

biserrata were observed within the Metrosideros/Cheirodendron Montane Wet Forest near Waikolu 

Stream. Cyanea solenocalyx was also observed along the NAR’s eastern boundary on the rim of 

Pelekunu Valley (DOFAW 1991). 

The federally endangered Paroreomyza flammea (Molokai creeper or kākāwahie) and Myadestes 

lanaiesnsis rutha (Moloka‘i thrush or oloma‘o), which are both presumed extinct, have historically 

been documented in the NAR. Paroreomyza flammea is small creeper endemic to the forests of 

eastern Moloka‘i. This species was last recorded on the eastern boundary of the NAR in 1963 

(DOFAW 1991, Mitchell et al. 2005). Until the early 1900s, the endangered Myadestes lanaiesnsis 

was abundant in eastern Moloka‘i. This species was sighted three times in the adjacent Kamakou 

Preserve in 1980, but no confirmed sightings have been documented since (Marshall and Kozar 

2008). 

The Molokai population of the Vestiaria cocinea (i‘iwi) is considered endangered by the State of 

Hawai‘i. This species is common on Maui, Kaua‘i, and Hawai‘i Island, however, only about 80 

(±65) individuals are believed to occur on Moloka‘i (Mitchell et al. 2005). A single V. cocinea was 

detected in the Upper Waikolu Valley during the 2004/2005 survey just mauka of the reserve 

boundary (Marshall and Kozar (2008). During the 1979 HFBS, three V. cocinea were detected on the 

Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR transect. 
54 

Table 2.1-19. Endangered, threatened, candidate, or rare plants species that occur or potentially occur in 

the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR and surrounding area. 

Species Name Common Name Family Date 

Listed Status1

Adenophorus periens pendant kihi fern Grammitidaceae 11/10/1994 E 

Bidens wiebkei ko‘oko‘olau Asteraceae 10/8/1992 E 

Canavalia molokaiensis ‘āwikiwiki Fabaceae 10/8/1992 E 

Clermontia oblongifolia ssp. brevipes ‘oha wai Campanulaceae 10/8/1992 E 

Cyanea procera haha Campanulaceae 10/8/1992 E 

Cyanea profuga haha Campanulaceae ------- SOC 

Cyanea solanacea haha, popolo Campanulaceae ------- SOC 

Cyanea solenocalyx haha Campanulaceae ------- SOC 

Cytrandra biserrata ha‘iwale Gesneriaceae ------- SOC 

Cyrtandra halawensis ha‘iwale Gesneriaceae ------- SOC 

Cyrtandra hematos ha‘iwale Gesneriaceae ------- SOC 

Cyrtandra macrocalyx ha‘iwale Gesneriaceae ------- SOC 

Diellia erecta ------- Aspleniaceae 11/10/1994 E 

Eurya sandwicensis anini Theaceae ------- SOC 

Exocarpos gaudichaudii heau Santalaceae ------- SOC 

Gardenia remyi nanu Rubiaceae ------- SOC 

Hedyotis mannii pilo Rubiaceae 10/8/1992 E 

Hesperomannia arborescens ------- Asteraceae 3/28/1994 E 

Hibiscus kokio ssp. kokio pualoalo Malvaceae ------- SOC 

Joinvillea ascendens ssp. ascendens ‘ohe Joinvilleaceae ------- C 

Lagenifera maviensis ------- Asteraceae ------- SOC 

Lobelia dunbariae ssp. dunbarii ------- Campanulaceae ------- SOC 

Lobelia dunbariae ssp. paniculata ------- Campanulaceae ------- SOC 

Melicope reflexa alani Rutaceae 10/8/1992 E 

Phyllostegia hispida ------- Lamiaceae 3/17/2009 E 

Phyllostegia mannii ------- Lamiaceae 10/8/1992 E 

Phyllostegia mollis ------- Lamiaceae 10/29/1991 E 

Phyllostegia stachyoides ------- Lamiaceae ------- SOC 

Plantago princes var. laxiflora kuahiwi laukahi Plantaginaceae 11/10/1994 E 

Platanthera holochila ------- Orchidaceae 10/10/1996 E 

Ranunculus mauiensis makou Ranunculaceae ------- C 

Schiedea pubescens var. pubescens ma‘oli‘oli Caryophyllaceae ------- C 

Schiedea sarmentosa (formerly diffusa) ------- Caryophyllaceae 10/10/1996 E 

Sicyos cucumerinus ‘anunu Cucurbitaceae ------- SOC 

Stenogyne bifida ------- Lamiaceae 10/9/1992 E 

Zanthoxylum hawaiiense a‘e Rutaceae 3/4/1994 E 

1) E = federally endangered; C = federally candidate endangered; SOC = species of concern (species that do not 

receive legal protection, but might be former candidate endangered species, or species otherwise considered rare by 

USFWS). 

Source: HINHP (1989), Wood et al. (2005). 
55 

Figure 2.1-15. Critical habitat for threatened and endangered species in the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR.

SPECIES ACRES HECTARES

Adenophorus periens 194.2 78.6

Clermontia oblongifolia ssp. brevipes 322.4 130.5

Cyanea procera 366.3 148.2

Lysimachia maxima 877.4 355.1

Phyllostegia mannii 1171.1 473.9

Schiedea nuttallii 340.0 137.6

3271.4 1323.9

Source: USFWS 2004; USGS; National Park Service

4,000 0 4,000 2,000

Feet

2,000 0 2,000 1,000

Meters

Puu Alii

NAR

North Shore

Cliffs NNL

Puu Alii

NAR

North Shore

Cliffs NNL

Puu Alii

NAR

North Shore

Cliffs NNL

Puu Alii

NAR

North Shore

Cliffs NNL

Adenophorus periens Clermontia oblongifolia ssp. brevipes

Cyanea procera Lysimachia maxima

Kalaupapa National Historic Park

Puu Alii

NAR

North Shore

Cliffs NNL

Puu Alii

NAR

North Shore

Cliffs NNL

Phyllostegia mannii Schiedea nuttallii
56 

Table 2.1-20. Total critical habitat area for threatened and endangered plants in the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR. 

Species Critical Habitat Area in Management Zone 

Acres Hectares Sq. m. 

Adenophorus periens 194.2 78.6 785786.3 

Clermontia oblongifolia ssp. brevipes 322.4 130.5 1304896.8 

Cyanea procera 366.3 148.2 1482281.4 

Lysimachia maxima 877.4 355.1 3550575.6 

Phyllostegia mannii 1171.1 473.9 4739365.8 

Schiedea nuttallii 340.0 137.6 1376133.9 

TOTAL 3,271.7 1,324.0 13,240,234.4 

Source: USFWS (2004). 

Marshall and Kozar (2008) concluded that the native forests of Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR (in addition to upper 

Waihanau and Hanalilolilo) possess the best possible remaining habitat for these forest birds. The 

Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR is also identified as recovery habitat for Palmeria dolei (‘ākohekohe and crested 

honeycreeper) and the Pseudonestor xanthophrys (kīkēkoa or Maui parrotbill) by the Revised 

Recovery Plan for Hawaiian Forest Birds (USFWS 2006). These endangered forest birds were 

historically present on Moloka‘i but are currently found only on Maui (DOFAW 2007). 

During a 1989 survey, a single Falco peregrinus (peregrine falcon), which is an occasional 

migrant to the Hawaiian Islands, was detected (DOFAW 2007). This species is considered a 

species of concern by the USFWS and certain subspecies are listed as federally endangered. 

Two endemic seabirds may occur in the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR. The threatened Puffinus auricularis newelli

and the endangered Pterodroma sandwichensis have historically been reported from the NAR area 

(Table 2.1-21). It is not known whether nesting occurs in the NAR or if significant habitat exists for 

these species (DOFAW 1991, 2007). 

Table 2.1-21. Endangered, threatened, or rare avifauna that occur or potentially occur in the Pu‘u Ali‘i 

NAR and surrounding area. 

Species Name Common Name Date Listed Status1

Falco peregrinus peregrine falcon -- SOC 

Myadestes lanaiensis Moloka‘i thrush or oloma‘o 10/13/1970 E 

Paroreomyza flammea Molokai creeper or kākāwahie 10/13/1970 E 

Pterodroma sandwichensis Hawaiian petrel 3/11/1967 E 

Puffinus auricularis newelli Newell's shearwater 10/28/1975 T 

Vestiaria cocinea i‘iwi SE 

1) E = federally endangered; T = federally threatened; SE = state endangered; SOC = species of concern (species 

that do not receive legal protection, but might be former candidate endangered species, or species otherwise 

considered rare by USFWS). 

Source: DOFAW (1991, 2007).
57 

Four species of achatinellid land snails have historically been documented near the Pu‘u Ali‘i 

NAR including Partulina mighelsiana, P. tessellate, P. proxima, and P. redfieldii. All four snails 

are considered federal species of concern (Table 2.1-22). These snails were found near the 

southern boundary of the NAR in the Kamakou Preserve (NPS 2004, 2007). Due to the similar 

habitats between these areas, the snails likely also occur within the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR boundary. It 

is likely that more invertebrate taxa could be documented in the NAR with more extensive 

survey work. 

Table 2.1-22. Rare snails within the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR and surrounding area. 

Species Occurrences

in NAR1

Hawaii Heritage 

Program Rank2

Federal

Status3

Partulina mighelsiana 2 1 SOC 

Partulina proxima 1 1 SOC 

Partulina redfieldii 2 1 SOC 

Partulina tessellata 2 1 SOC 

1) Occurrences reported since 1972 

2) 1 = critically imperiled globally typically with 1–5 occurrences 

3) SOC = species of concern

Source: NPS (2004, 2007).

Approximately 400 ha (988 ac) of critical habitat for the endangered Drosophila differens 

(Hawaiian picture-wing fly) also exists immediately mauka of the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR in TNC’s 

Kamakou and Pelekunu Preserves (USFWS 2008c). 

Important Habitats: No caves or other important habitats are known within the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR. 

2.1.4.4 Information Gaps: 

Invasive Species: One of the management programs outlined in the 1991 Management Plan for 

the NAR is “monitoring to determine the effectiveness of non-native animal and plant control 

programs.” Ungulate damage within the NAR should be continuously monitored to ensure that 

fencing and other management are effective. Regular monitoring surveys along permanent 

transects in the NAR could allow for detection of new non-native plants. This program should 

include both data gathering and analysis. In particular, efforts should be made to revisit the sites 

of relatively new island records to monitor spreading. During these surveys, the National Park 

Service can eradicate or control priority weeds. 

Flora: The NPS Inventory and Monitoring program has a goal of documenting 90% of the vascular 

plants in national parks. However, Wysong and Hughes (2008) report that because of the difficulty 

of the terrain, much of the park remains under-surveyed, particularly in steep areas. Due to the 

potential for rare plants species to occur in the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR, regular monitoring surveys should 

be conducted along permanent transects to document the status of rare species and track vegetation 

changes. As noted in Hughes et al. (2007), further study of fern distribution and abundance in KALA 

is warranted. Although ferns are well-suited for use as environmental indicators, this group is 

typically not a focus of botanical studies in the Hawaiian Islands (Hughes et al. 2007). 
58 

Avifauna: Marshall and Kozar (2008) recommended that future bird surveys in KALA should be 

conducted during periods of peak vocalization to ensure high detectability. Furthermore, more 

appropriate methods, such the Rare Bird Search protocol, should be conducted in the high-elevation 

intact forests of the NAR to detect rare species such as M. lanaiesnsis rutha and P. flammea 

(Marshall and Kozar 2008). 

Ornithological radar and night-visual observations in the NAR would provide information on the 

movement rates of Puffinus auricularis newelli and Pterodroma sandwichensis, which may nest in 

upper elevation areas of Moloka‘i. These surveys should be conducted between 1900 and 2200 hours 

in the evening to coincide with the peak time of inland movement toward their nesting colonies (Day 

et al. 2003). 

Insects and Other Invertebrates: Rather than noting species incidentally, focused invertebrate 

studies should be conducted in the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR. To identify molluscan fauna, an experienced 

individual could sample areas likely to harbor these species (e.g., rotting logs, tree bark, 

undersides of leaves, and inside fern stipes). Leaf litter samples could also be collected, sieved, 

and sorted in the lab. However, due to the huge diversity of invertebrates species, it may not be 

feasible to identify all of the specimens to the species level. Thus, a more cost-effective rapid 

assessment of invertebrate fauna could approximate the relative richness of invertebrate species 

without directly counting the number of species present (Haines and Foote 2005). 

2.1.5 Moloka‘i Forest Reserve 

The Moloka‘i Forest Reserve (FR) was established in September 1912 “to protect and to 

permanently maintain the forest cover on the upper mountainous parts of the island, so that the 

sources of water—the springs and streams thereon—may be safeguarded, and as far as possible the 

regularity of their flow assured” (Hosmer 1912, as reported in DOFAW 2009). It is the only State of 

Hawai‘i Forest Reserve on the Island of Moloka‘i (DOFAW 2009). The FR is managed by DOFAW 

and guided by Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 183 (Forest Reserves, Water Development, 

Zoning) and HAR, Title 13, Chapter 104 (Rules Regulating Activities within Forest). 

Currently, the Moloka‘i FR is comprised of several non-contiguous land units that encompass a total 

of roughly 4,730 ha (11,690 ac). The initial boundaries proposed for the Moloka‘i FR included a 

large amount of private land, and various boundaries changes have occurred over time. Two units of 

the Moloka‘i FR occur within KALA—Makanalua and Kalawao. These units were added to the 

reserve in 1930 (DOFAW 2009). 

2.1.5.1 Previous and Ongoing Studies and Inventories: 

Soils & Climate: 

 Soils on the Island of Moloka‘i were classified by the USDA Soil Conservation Service 

(Foote et al. 1972). The survey was primarily designed to offer useful information for 

planning agriculture; therefore, mapping was conducted on agricultural land and generalized 

for other areas. 
59 

Flora: 

 Asherman et al. (1990) conducted a reconnaissance survey at six locations throughout the 

park, including a portion of the Moloka‘i FR along the east side of Wai‘ale‘ia Valley. 

 The plant communities in the Waihanau and Wai‘ale‘ia Valleys were described by Funk 

(1991) based on previous vegetation surveys and additional supplemental surveys. 

 Four of the 32 transects inventoried by Wood et al. (2005) were located in the Moloka‘i FR. 

Two transects were surveyed along the Moloka‘i FR/North Shore Cliffs NNL boundary 

between Wai‘ale‘ia and Waikolu Valley, and three transects were inventoried just mauka of 

the FR. 

 Hughes et al. (2007) analyzed data from various transects in the park to examine plant 

diversity and distribution in KALA. Wai‘ale‘ia Valley and Waikolu Valley were included in 

this study. 

 Wysong and Hughes (2008) inventoried flora and collected voucher specimens 

opportunistically in areas of the Moloka‘i FR. These specimens are included in an electronic 

herbarium. 

 Using data from remote aerial sensing, the U.S. Geological Survey and National Park 

Service created a draft vegetation cover map of the Moloka‘i FR in 2007. Identifiable 

vegetation cover was grouped into vegetation class (Class 1–3) depending on percent native 

species composition. The final report for this project, including mapping methods and a 

detailed description of the plant communities, is anticipated in early 2010 (J. Jacobi/USGS, 

pers. comm.). 

Avifauna: 

 Scott et al. (1977) recorded observations of the forest birds in the Moloka‘i FR in July 1975. 

 Two transects were surveyed for forest birds in the Moloka‘i FR by Marshall and Kozar 

(2008). The Lower Waihanau transect was located between 160 and 320 m (525 and 1050 ft) 

elevation and the Upper Waihanau transect followed Pu‘u Kauwa Road between 700 and 800 

m (2,297 and 2,625 ft) elevation. 

Mammals: 

 The 13-month study of Axis axis by Goltz et al. (2001) tracked six radio-collared deer 

throughout KALA. This study was designed to gather information on movement patterns and 

home ranges of A. axis. 

 Frasher et al. (2007) conducted a brief survey for Lasiurus cinereus semotus in the lower and 

middle elevation portions of Waihanau Valley using acoustic detection systems along with 

visual observations. 

 The small mammal survey conducted by Marshall et al. (2008) at KALA surveyed two 

transects in the Moloka‘i FR. The lower Waihanau transect, located at 180 m (591 ft) 
60 

elevation, runs north-south along the narrow floor of the valley and the upper Waihanau 

transect occurs at about 750 m (2,460 ft) elevation. 

Reptiles and Amphibians: 

 No herpetofauna surveys have been conducted in the Moloka‘i FR management zone. 

Insects and Other Invertebrates: 

 No surveys have been conducted to inventory insects and other invertebrates in the Moloka‘i 

FR management zone. However, when surveying known populations of troglobitic 

Hawaiioscia and Littorophiloscia, Rivera et al. (2002) collected a single isopod. 

Other: 

 A Draft Management Plan was recently released for the FR in June 2009 (DOFAW 2009). In 

addition to describing the existing environment, the plan describes and prioritizes resource 

management objectives and strategies. 

2.1.5.2 Physical Environment: 

Although various soil types are present in the Moloka‘i FR at KALA, the management zone is 

dominated by two types—Rock Outcrop and Rough Mountainous Land (Table 2.1-23, Figure 

2.1-2). Rock Outcrop primarily consists of exposed bedrock and Rough Mountainous Land is 

characterized by steep valley walls and a very thin soil mantle (Foote et al. 1972). Notable 

geographic features within the KALA portions of the Moloka‘i FR include Waihanau Valley and 

Stream, Pu‘u kauwā, and Wai‘ale‘ia Valley and Stream (DOFAW 2009). 

Table 2.1-23. Soil types and key soil characteristics in Moloka‘i Forest Reserve management zone. 

Soil Type Farmland Erodible Coverage in 

Unit (m2) 

Rock Outcrop Not prime farmland Not highly 

erodible 3,030,521

Rough Mountainous Land Not prime farmland Highly erodible 2,489,290

Colluvial Land Not prime farmland Highly erodible 437,100

Stony Alluvial Land Not prime farmland Potentially highly 

erodible 118,846

Rough Broken Land Not prime farmland Highly erodible 109,342

Haleiwa Very Stony Silty Clay Loam, 0 to 

15 % Slopes Not prime farmland Potentially highly erodible 61,822

Stony Colluvial land Not prime farmland Highly erodible 51,949

Kahanui Gravelly Silty Clay, 3 to 20 % 

Slopes Not prime farmland Potentially highly erodible 22,482

Haleiwa Silty Clay Loam, 0 to 10 % Slopes Prime farmland (if 

irrigated) 

Potentially highly 

erodible 1,489

Olokui Silty Clay Loam, 3 to 30 % Slopes Not prime farmland Potentially highly 

erodible 1,457

Source: Foote et al. (1972). 

Archaeological evidence shows that land in the Moloka‘i FR was used for agriculture, habitat, 

religious uses, and other human activities. Since the reserve was established, a variety of more recent 
61 

land uses have occurred in the Moloka‘i FR. Ungulates were largely excluded from the FR once it 

was established, but grazing did continue in some areas. In the early twentieth century, efforts were 

made to reforest areas of the reserve to improve the watershed and to provide a supply of fuelwood 

and fenceposts. At least ten non-native trees were planted in the reserve including Grevillea robusta

(silk oak) and Tamarisk (DOFAW 2009). 

2.1.5.3 Ecological Community: 

Flora: The Moloka‘i FR is dominated by non-native plant species, particularly in the lower and 

middle elevation areas. Aerial remote sensing analysis indicates that vegetation cover in the 

KALA portions of the Moloka‘i FR is dominated by Class 1 cover (≥ 90% non-native 

vegetation). Common non-native species found in the FR include Schinus terebinthifolius

(Christmas berry), Syzygium cumini (java plum), Psidium cattleianum (strawberry guava), 

Aleurites moluccana (kukui), Prosopis pallida (kiawe), and Lantana camara (lantana). Some 

Class 2 (mixed vegetation) cover is scattered throughout the management zone (Table 2.1-24, 

Figure 2.1-16). 

The vegetation within upper the elevation areas of Wai‘ale‘ia Valley are largely uncharacterized 

(DOFAW 2009); however, scattered native species have been reported along the upper eastern 

ridge of the valley. 

Table 2.1-24. Vegetation cover and NPS vegetation classes in the Moloka‘i Forest Reserve. 

Vegetation Cover Per NPS Class1

 Acres M2

Class 0 335.5 1,357,523.2

Unclassified 328.3 1,328,484.8

Shadow 7.2 29,038.4

Class 1 1,066.9 4,317,539.7

Dry Schinus terebinthifolius and Syzygium cumini Forest 697.3 2,821,782.2

Mesic Mixed Syzygium cumini and Psidium sp. Forest + Other Alien

Trees 262.0 1,060,462.5

Dry Alien Shrubs 60.2 243,674.4

Dry Schinus terebinthifolius Shrub 40.9 165,460.9

Dry Alien Grassland 3.3 13,534.2

Dry Lantana camara + Alien Shrubs and Grasses 2.4 9,815.3

Dry Syzygium cumini and Other Alien Trees 0.7 2,810.2

Class 2 153.2 619,977.8

Mesic Exotic Trees and Some Native Trees with Exotic Shrubs and 

Grasses 153.2 619,977.8

TOTAL 1,555.1 6,293,126.3

1) Class 0 = not classified; Class 1 = > 90% non-native vegetation; Class 2 = mixed vegetation; Class 3 = > 90% 

native vegetation.

Source: USGS and NPS (2007).
62 

Figure 2.1-16. Vegetation cover and NPS vegetation classes in the Molokai Forest Reserve. 

Class Name Acres

unclassified 328.3

shadow 7.2

Class 0 TOTAL 335.5

Dry Schinus terebinthifolius and Syzygium cumini Forest 697.3

Mesic Mixed Syzygium cumini and Psidium sp. Forest + Other Alien Trees 262.0

Dry Alien Shrubs 60.2

Dry Schinus terebinthifolius Shrub 40.9

Dry Alien Grassland 3.3

Dry Lantana camara + Alien Shrubs and Grasses 2.4

Dry Syzygium cumini and Other Alien Trees 0.7

Class 1 TOTAL 1,066.9

Mes exot tree some native tree nat +exo shrub grass under 153.2

TOTAL 1,555.5

Figure 2.1-16

Vegetation Cover and NPS Vegetation

Classes in the Molokai Forest Reserve

Source: USGS; National Park Service

2,000 0 2,000 1,000

Feet

1,000 0 1,000 500

Meters

Lowland Coastal

Area

North Shore Cliffs

NNL

Molokai Forest

Reserve (DOFAW)

Legend

Vegetation Class Name

Dry Alien Shrub

Dry Alien grassland

Dry Lantana camara + Alien Shrubs and Grasses

Dry Schinus terebinthifolius Shrub

Dry Schinus terebinthifolius and Syzygium cumini Forest

Dry Syzygium cumini and Other Alien Trees 

Mesic Mixed Syzygium cumini and Psidium sp. Forest + Other Alien Trees

Mesic Exotic Trees and Some Native Trees with Exotic Shrubs and Grasses

unclassified

shadow

Lowland Coastal

Area

North Shore Cliffs

NNL

Molokai Forest

Reserve (DOFAW)

Legend

Vegetation Class Type

0 - no factor

1 - >90% alien veg 

2 - mix

3 - >90% native veg 

Kalaupapa National Historic Park
63 

Native species noted in Wai‘ale‘ia Valley include Dicranopteris linearis (uluhe), Carex 

sandwicensis, Pandanus odoratissimus (hala), Cyrtandra sp., Metrosideros polymorpha, and 

Boehmeria grandis (Funk 1991). The upper elevation area of Waihanau Valley has been noted to 

have a high species richness by Hughes et al. (2007). Native plants documented in Waihanau 

Valley include Scaevola procera, Metrosideros polymorpha, Lysimachia hillebrandi var. 

maxima, and Psycotria hawaiiensis (Funk 1991). 

DOFAW classified the FR vegetation into Considerably Disturbed Areas (V3) and Badly 

Degraded Areas (V4). Areas along the mauka cliff portions are defined as Considerably 

Disturbed Areas. These areas include small remnant patches dominated by native plants, patches 

of largely invasive weedy non-native plants, as well as mixed areas. More makai4

 portions of the 

FR within the lower elevation areas are considered Badly Degraded Areas, which are considered 

severely degraded or highly altered from their natural state (DOFAW 2009). 

Avifauna: Scott et al. (1977) recorded eight forest bird species in the Moloka‘i FR, of which five 

were native. Species documented during this survey and their relative abundances below and 

above 1,234 m (4,050 ft) are shown in Table 2.1-25. 

Himatione sanguinea was the only native forest bird observed in Waihanau Valley in 2005 

(Marshall and Kozar 2008). Approximately 22 and eight detections were reported in the lower 

and upper elevations of the valley, respectively (Marshall and Kozar 2008). 

Six non-native forest birds were recorded in the Waihanau Valley by Marshall and Kozar (2008). 

These species include Carpodocus mexicanus (house finch), Cettia diphone (Japanese 

bushwarbler), Zosterops japonicus (Japanese white-eye), Cardinalis cardinalis (northern 

cardinal), Streptophelia chinensis (spotted dove), and Copsychus malabaricus (white-rumped 

shama). 

Table 2.1-25. Relative abundance and total individuals of various forest birds recorded in the Moloka‘i 

Forest Reserve in 1977. 

Species Status Abundance Total Recorded 

Below 1,234m Above 1,234m Below 1,234m Above 1,234m

Hemignathus virens wilsoni E -- Rare -- 1 

Himatione sanguinea E Very Common Common 47 39 

Leiothrix lutea N Uncommon Common 4 17 

Lonchura punctulata N Rare -- 1 -- 

Myadestes lanaiesnsis rutha E -- Rare -- 1 

Streptophelia chinensis N Rare -- 1 -- 

Vestiaria cocinea E Rare Rare 1 1 

Zosterops japonicus N Abundant Common 73 39 

Source: Scott et al. (1977). 

Mammals: Lasiurus cinereus semotus were not detected during the brief survey in the Moloka‘i 

FR. However, seasonal sources of freshwater in the Waihanau Valley may provide habitat for the 

bat during portions of the year (Frasher et al. 2007). 

 

4

 Hawaiian adverb meaning toward or by the sea; seaward. 
64 

Sus scrofa, Capra hircus, and Axis axis are present within the boundaries of the Moloka‘i FR. Goltz 

et al. (2001) documented the home ranges of a few of the collared A. axis in the lower elevations of 

the Moloka‘i FR near Wai‘ale‘ia Stream and along the boundary between the Lowland Coastal Area 

management zone. 

Marshall et al. (2008) detected several small mammals in the FR including Rattus rattus, Mus 

musculus, Herpestes javanicus, and Felis catus (Table 2.1-26). Other non-native mammals that may 

occur in the Moloka‘i FR include Canis familiaris and Gallus gallus domesticus (feral chicken) 

(DOFAW 2009). 

Table 2.1-26. Summary of small mammal data in the Moloka‘i Forest Reserve. 

CTN1 # of captures Capture rate2 % of stations 

with tracking tunnel sign 

Upper Waihanau Valley 

Rattus rattus 62.5 2 3.2 0% 

Mus musculus 120.5 2 1.66 0% 

Herpestes javanicus 26 1 -- 9% 

Felis catus 26 0 -- 0% 

Lower Waihanau Valley 

Rattus rattus 63.5 1 1.5 0% 

Mus musculus 127 0 0 0% 

Herpestes javanicus 33 3 -- 82% 

Felis catus 33 0 -- 27% 

1) Corrected trap nights 

2) Number of individuals per 100 corrected trap nights. 

Source: Marshall et al. (2008).

Reptiles and Amphibians: Although no reptiles or amphibians have been identified within the 

Moloka‘i FR, suitable habitat for some terrestrial herpetofauna likely exists in the reserve. 

Insects and Other Invertebrates: The indigenous Australophiloscia societatis 

(Isopoda: Philosciidae) was collected in a forested area of Wainahau Stream (Rivera et al. 2002). 

It is unknown which additional species of insects and other invertebrates are present within the 

Moloka‘i FR; however, rare species are known to occur in the vicinity. 

Threatened and Endangered Species: In the Molokai FR, critical habitat has been designated for 

three endangered plant species (Table 2.1-27, Figure 2.1-17). These plants are historically known 

to occur in the area, but none currently occur in the FR. 

Table 2.1-27. Total critical habitat area for threatened and endangered plants in the Moloka‘i Forest 

Reserve.

Species Critical Habitat Area in Management Zone 

Acres Hectares Sq. m. 

Brighamia rockii 12.6 5.1 50,889.2 

Cyanea dunbarii 117.7 47.6 476,337.7 

Hibiscus arnottianus ssp. immaculatus 71.5 28.9 289,323.0 

TOTAL 201.8 81.7 816,549.8 

Source: USFWS (2004). 
65 

Figure 2.1-17. Critical habitat for threatened and endangered species in the Molokai Forest Reserve. Source: USFWS 2004; USGS; National Park Service SPECIES ACRES HECTARES Brighamia rockii 12.6 5.1 Cyanea dunbarii 117.7 47.6 Hibiscus arnottianus ssp. immaculatus 71.5 28.9 201.8 81.7 Molokai Forest Reserve Lowland Coastal Area Coastal Spray Zone Kauhako Crater Molokai Forest Reserve Lowland Coastal Area Coastal Spray Zone Kauhako Crater Molokai Forest Reserve Lowland Coastal Area Coastal Spray Zone Kauhako Crater Brighamia rockii Cyanea dunbarii Hibiscus arnottianus ssp. immaculatus Kalaupapa National Historic Park 2,000 0 2,000 1,000 Feet 1,000 0 1,000 500

Meters
66 

Although no threatened or endangered forest birds have been documented in the Moloka‘i FR, 

the upper Waihanau Valley was noted by Marshall and Kozar (2008) to “possess the best 

possible remaining habitat” for rare native forest birds. 

Important Habitats: No caves or other important habitats are known within the Moloka‘i FR. 

2.1.5.4 Information Gaps: 

Land Use: An assessment of adjacent land uses and ownership would allow NPS to evaluate 

conservation progress at a broader landscape scale. 

 

Invasive Species: Because rare native species exist within the vicinity of the reserve, it is important 

to monitor and control incipient invasive flora and fauna in the Moloka‘i FR. Furthermore, 

conducting annual ungulate surveys would help to protect native habitat and species. 

Flora: Hughes et al. (2007) suggested that the upper confluences of Wai‘ale‘ia and Waihanau 

Valleys should be a priority conservation area due to the high species richness. Potential activities in 

these areas may include conducting regular surveys along permanent transects in order to collect 

baseline data that will inform management. Based on these surveys, plant exclosures can be 

constructed to protect existing rare plants or outplants. 

Avifauna: No forest bird surveys have been conducted in Wai‘ale‘ia Valley, although the area has 

been noted as potential habitat for rare native forest birds (Marshall and Kozar 2008). These surveys 

should be conducted in the higher elevation intact forests during periods of peak vocalization. 

Collecting data on ground nesting seabirds would also assist in future conservation efforts for these 

species. These surveys would consist of ornithological radar and night-visual observations between 

1900 and 2200 hours in the evening to coincide with the peak time of inland movement toward their 

nesting colonies (Day et al. 2003). 

Mammals: The single survey for Lasiurus cinereus semotus should be supplemented with additional 

studies, particularly in areas with intact canopy cover, such as Wai‘ale‘ia Valley, as suggested by 

Frasher et al. (2007). 

Insects and Other Invertebrates: Specific studies to inventory endemic insects and other 

invertebrate taxa may reveal rare species that have been noted to occur in the vicinity of the 

Moloka‘i FR. Suggested methodology for these surveys is summarized in Section 2.1.4.4. 

2.1.6 North Shore Cliffs National Natural Landmark 

The North Shore Cliffs isolate the Kalaupapa peninsula from the remainder of Moloka‘i Island. The 

cliffs exceed 914 m (3,000 ft) in elevation and are considered the highest sea cliffs in the world 

(Funk 1991). The North Shore Cliffs were formed roughly 1.5 million years ago when the northern 

third of the East Molokai Volcano suddenly collapsed into the ocean (NPS 2000b, Ziegler 2002). 

This landslide is also referred to as the Wailau slide (NPS 2000b). 

The North Shore Cliffs area was designated as a National Natural Landmark (NNL) in 1972. The 

landmark includes 10,967 ha (27,100 acres) between the villages of Kalaupapa and Halawa. 

Approximately one-fifth of the NNL is located within the boundaries of KALA (NPS 2007). 
67 

2.1.6.1 Previous and Ongoing Studies and Inventories: 

Soils & Climate: 

 The USDA Soil Conservation Service classified soils on Molokai to gather useful 

information for planning agriculture (Foote et al. 1972). Soil mapping was conducted on 

agricultural land and generalized for other areas. 

 A single Cooperative Observer Program (COOP) site (Waikolu 540) operates in Waikolu 

Valley at roughly 1,082 m (3,550 ft). This site measures precipitation and has a largely 

complete data record extending back to 1965, with only occasional data gaps (Davey et 

al. 2006).

Flora: 

 In March 1981, Kepler and Kepler (1981) recorded vascular plants species during a forest 

bird survey in Waikolu Valley. 

 Various portions of the North Shore Cliffs NNL were included in the reconnaissance 

vegetation survey by Asherman et al. (1990), including Waikolu Valley, Kalaupapa Trail, 

and the coastal cliffs of Nihoa. 

 Based on previous vegetation surveys in the park and additional supplemental surveys, Funk 

(1991) described plant communities along the coastal cliffs and in Waikolu Valley, as well 

as other locations in the park. 

 Wood et al. (2005) surveyed six transects in Waikolu Valley, two transects on the boundary 

between Waikolu Valley and the Moloka‘i Forest Reserve, and one transect on the cliff at 

the western end of the park. 

 Hughes et al. (2007) compiled data from 32 transects at various locations in the park, 

including the North Shore Cliffs NNL, to estimate plant diversity and distribution. 

 Plant specimens throughout KALA were opportunistically collected and put into an 

electronic herbarium by Wysong and Hughes (2008). 

 In 2007, the U.S. Geological Survey and National Park Service created a draft vegetation 

cover map based on aerial remote sensing. Each identifiable vegetation cover is categorized 

as Class 1–3, which estimates the total native and non-native species composition within the 

NNL. The final report for this project, including mapping methods and a detailed description 

of the plant communities, is anticipated in early 2010 (J. Jacobi/USGS, pers. comm.). 

Avifauna: 

 Marshall and Aruch (2003) completed a shoreline seabird inventory during the fall of 2003. 

Kalaupapa Cliff Trail and the bottom of Waikolu Valley were included in the survey area. 

 Marshall and Kozar (2008) inventoried forest birds along the entire Kalaupapa Cliff Trail. 

This survey used the variable circular plot method. Two additional transects were surveyed 
68 

just outside the NNL boundaries. These two transects are located in the Lowland Coastal 

Area and Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR management zone, respectively. 

Mammals: 

 The 13-month study of Axis axis by Goltz et al. (2001) gathered information on the 

movement patterns and home ranges of Axis axis throughout the park, including in the North 

Shore Cliffs NNL. 

 Frasher et al. (2007) surveyed for Lasiurus cinereus semotus from the top of the Kalaupapa 

Cliff Trail to the Lowland Coastal Area using acoustic detection systems along with visual 

observations. 

 In 2005, Marshall et al. (2008) conducted a small-mammal survey at the upper Waikolu rim 

between 1,100 and 1,140 m (3,610 to 3,740 ft) elevation along the Hanalilolilo Trail. 

Reptiles and Amphibians: 

 Kraus (2005) conducted day and night surveys for reptiles and amphibians across KALA 

including in the North Shore Cliffs NNL. 

Insects and Other Invertebrates: 

 Aquatic insect surveys conducted in Waikolu Stream are listed in Section 2.2. 

 No insect or invertebrate studies have been conducted in the western portion of the NNL, 

from Nihoa to Waihanau Valley. 

Other: 

 The National Park Service (2000b) studied and analyzed lands to the east of KALA within 

the boundary of the North Shore Cliffs NNL to determine if these lands should be included in 

KALA. Although the study area is outside of KALA, the report provides descriptions of the 

general area. 

2.1.6.2 Physical Environment: 

The dominant soil types in the management zone, Rough Mountainous Land and Rock Outcrop, 

are characterized by a very thin soil mantle and exposed bedrock (Table 2.1-28; Foote et al. 

1972). This soil occurs on the steepest areas of the park. This management zone encompasses 

Waikolu Valley and the coastal cliffs stretching from Nihoa to the western boundary of 

Waihanau Valley. Waikolu Valley is approximately 6.4 km (4 mi) long and about 1.6 km (1 mi) 

wide at the mouth of the valley (Brasher 1996). 

Archaeological evidence indicates that Waikolu Valley was the first area of the park occupied by 

humans, with pondfield deposits dating occupation to around 1200 A.D. (McCoy 2005b). Early 

Hawaiians likely occupied Waikolu Valley because the permanent stream could support agricultural 

activities. Currently, the most common land use in the NNL is hiking or mule riding along the 

Kalaupapa Cliff Trail. The Kalaupapa Cliff Trail is a 4.7 km (2.9 mi) historic trail that begins at sea 

level and transverses 26 switchbacks to reach the top of the cliffs. Visitor or residents can hike or 

ride mules down the trail. 
69 

Table 2.1-28. Soil types and key soil characteristics in North Shore Cliffs NNL management zone. 

Soil Type Farmland Erodible Coverage in 

Zone (m2) 

Rough Mountainous Land Not prime farmland Highly erodible 5,915,311

Rock Outcrop Not prime farmland Not highly 

erodible 2,159,002

Colluvial Land Not prime farmland Highly erodible 305,729

Halawa Silty Clay, 3 to 25 % Slopes Not prime farmland Potentially highly 

erodible 280,628

Rough Broken Land Not prime farmland Highly erodible 183,947

Kahanui Gravelly Silty Clay, 3 to 20 % 

Slopes Not prime farmland Potentially highly 

erodible 96,277

Halawa Silty Clay, 3 to 25 % Slopes, 

Severly Eroded Not prime farmland Potentially highly erodible 74,196

Stony Colluvial Land Not prime farmland Highly erodible 15,717

Kawaihapai Silty Clay Loam, 2 to 7 % 

Slopes 

Prime farmland 

(if irrigated) 

Potentially highly 

erodible 9,782

Olokui Silty Clay Loam, 3 to 30 % Slopes Not prime farmland Potentially highly 

erodible 1,866

Source: Foote et al. (1972). 

2.1.6.3 Ecological Community: 

Flora: Vegetation in the North Shore Cliffs NNL differs on the western portion of the park 

compared to the eastern side of KALA. On the western portion of the NNL, from Nihoa to the 

western boundary of Waihanau Valley, the vegetation is composed of non-native forest 

dominated by Schinus terebinthifolius and Syzygium cumini. Lantana camara, along with other 

non-native shrubs and grasses, are also common in this area. 

The flora in Waikolu Valley, on the eastern portion of the NNL, is comprised of more native 

species. Flowering native plant species reported in the valley include Cyperus odoratus, Cyperus 

polystachyus var. polystachyus, Euphorbia celastroides, Cyanea sp., Metrosideros polymorpha, 

Pisonia sandwicensis, Canthium odoratum, Hedyotis acuminata, Psycotria hawaiiensis, 

Psycotria mariniana, Boehmeria grandis, and Touchardia latifolia (Funk 1991). Native fern 

species noted in Waikolu Valley include Dryopteris unidentata (Kepler and Kepler 1981), 

Dicranopteris linearis, Adiantum hispidulum, Pteridium aquilinum var. decompositum, Sadleria 

pallida, and Tectaria gaudichaudii. Hughes et al. (2007) found that portions of Waikolu Valley 

have low species richness; however, one area in the valley was noted as having a high diversity 

of non-native ferns (Hughes et al. 2007). 

Vegetation cover in the North Shore Cliffs NNL, based on aerial remote sensing, is provided in 

Table 2.1-29 and shown in Figure 2.1-18. All three identifiable vegetation cover classes are 

present in the North Shore Cliffs NNL; however, Class 3 (> 90% native vegetation) is the most 

common, covering roughly 44% of the NNL. There are stark differences between the vegetation 

cover classifications in the western and eastern portions of the park, with a significantly higher 

native species cover in the eastern portion of the NNL (i.e., Waikolu Valley). Although this 

difference may be largely the result of disproportionate human use throughout the park, different 

aerial remote sensing scales may also contribute to differences between the two areas. 
70 

Table 2.1-29. Vegetation cover and NPS vegetation classes in the North Shore Cliffs NNL. 

Vegetation Cover Per NPS Class1

 Acres M2

Class 0 193.8 784,325.5

unclassified 95.6 386,969.7

no factor 69.7 281,906.2

shadow 28.5 115,449.6

Class 1 745.8 3,018,092.8

Dry Schinus terebinthifolius and Syzygium cumini Forest 342.4 1,385,490.2

Wet Psidium sp. 154.1 623,656.2

Dry Alien Shrubs 58.3 235,839.5

Dry Alien Grassland 44.0 177,891.5

Dry Lantana camara + Alien Shrubs and Grasses 42.8 173,186.9

Wet Aleurites moluccana and Psidium guajava Forest + Shrubs and Alien

Grasses   41.4 167,741.0

Mesic Mixed Syzygium cumini and Psidium sp. Forest + Other Alien 

Trees 32.5 131,628.4

Dry Schinus terebinthifolius Shrub 29.5 119,524.4

Dry Syzygium cumini and Other Alien Trees 0.8 3,134.7

Class 2 316.9 1,282,414.0

Mesic Exotic Grass and Native Shrub Community with Scattered Native 

Trees 170.9 691,780.4

Mesic Native Trees and Scattered Exotic Trees with Shrubs and 

Grasses 139.9 566,009.6

Mesic Exotic Trees and Some Native Trees with Exotic Shrubs and 

Grasses 6.1 24,624.0

Class 3 977.9 3,957,570.9

Wet Metrosideros polymorpha Forest with Tree Ferns and Native Shrubs 853.4 3,453,616.7

Wet Matted Ferns or Native Shrubs with Scattered Metrosideros 

polymorpha 124.5 503,954.3

TOTAL 2,234.4 9,042,403.2

1) Class 0 = not classified; Class 1 = > 90% non-native vegetation; Class 2 = mixed vegetation; 

Class 3 = > 90% native vegetation. 

Source: USGS and NPS (2007).

Avifauna: Five Himatione sanguinea sanguinea were detected in the North Shore Cliffs NNL 

near the mid-elevation area of the Kalaupapa Cliff Trail (Marshall and Kozar 2008). Non-native 

birds observed along the Kalaupapa Cliff Trail include Alauda arvensis (skylark), Francolinus 

francolinus, Acridotheres tristis, Carpodacus mexicanus, Cettia diphone, Zosterops japonicus, 

Cardinalis cardinalis, Streptopelia chinensis, and Copsychus malabaricus (Marshall and Kozar 

2008). 

Marshall and Aruch (2003) heard Puffinus pacificus (wedge-tailed shearwater) from the Waikolu 

Valley beach. Phaethon lepturus dorotheae (white-tailed tropicbird) was also observed soaring 

over Waikolu Valley (Marshall and Aruch 2003). Sterna fuscata (sooty terns) have been detected 

flying over Waikolu Valley during the survey by Marshall et al. (2008), as reported in Kozar et 

al. (2007). 
71 

Figure 2.1-18. Vegetation cover and NPS vegetation classes in the North Shore Cliffs NNL. 

Source: USGS; National Park Service Class Name Acres

unclassified 95.6

no factor 69.7

shadow 28.5

Class 0 TOTAL 193.8

Dry Schinus terebinthifolius and Syzygium cumini Forest 342.4

Wet Psidium sp. 154.1

Dry Alien Shrubs 58.3

Dry Alien Grassland 44.0

Dry Lantana camara + Alien Shrubs and Grasses 42.8

Wet Aleurites moluccana and Psidium guajava Forest + Shrubs and Alien Grasses 41.4

Mesic Mixed Syzygium cumini and Psidium sp. Forest + Other Alien Trees 32.5

Dry Schinus terebinthifolius Shrub 29.5

Dry Syzygium cumini and Other Alien Trees 0.8

Class 1 TOTAL 745.8

Mesic Exotic Grass and Native Shrub Community with Scattered Native Trees 170.9

Mesic Native Trees and Scattered Exotic Trees with Shrubs and Grasses 139.9

Mesic Exotic Trees and Some Native Trees with Exotic Shrubs and Grasses 6.1

Class 2 TOTAL 316.9

Wet Metrosideros polymorpha Forest with Tree Ferns and Native Shrubs 853.4

Wet Matted Ferns or Native Shrubs with Scattered Metrosideros polymorpha 124.5

Class 3 TOTAL 977.9

TOTAL 2,234.4

0 4,000 8,000 2,000

ft

0 1,000 2,000 500

M

Puu Alii

NAR

Molokai Forest

Reserve (DOFAW)

Crater

Lowland Coastal

Area

North Shore

Cliffs NNL

North Shore Cliffs NNL

Vegetation Class Name

Dry Alien Shrub

Dry Alien grassland

Dry Lantana camara + Alien Shrubs and Grasses

Dry Schinus terebinthifolius Shrub

Dry Schinus terebinthifolius and Syzygium cumini Forest

Dry Syzygium cumini and Other Alien Trees 

Wet Psidium sp.

Mesic Mixed Syzygium cumini and Psidium sp. Forest + Other Alien Trees

Wet Aleurites moluccana and Psidium guajava Forest + Shrubs and Alien Grasses 

Mesic Exotic Trees and Some Native Trees with Exotic Shrubs and Grasses

Mesic Exotic Grass and Native Shrub Community with Scattered Native Trees

Mesic Native Trees and Scattered Exotic Trees with Shrubs and Grasses

Wet Matted Ferns or Native Shrubs with Scattered Metrosideros polymorpha

Wet Metrosideros polymorpha Forest with Tree Ferns and Native Shrubs

no factor

unclassified

shadow

Puu Alii

NAR

Molokai Forest

Reserve (DOFAW)

Crater

Lowland Coastal

Area

North Shore

Cliffs NNL

North Shore Cliffs NNL

Vegetation Class Type

0 - no factor

1 - >90% alien veg 

2 - mix

3 - >90% native veg 

Kalaupapa National Historic Park
72 

Mammals: Frasher et al. (2007) detected Lasiurus cinereus semotus once within a forested area in 

the eastern portion of the North Shore Cliffs NNL. A second detection occurred just outside of 

KALA at the Pālā‘au State Park picnic area. These were the only two detections for Lasiurus 

cinereus semotus during the survey in KALA; however, the entire park was not surveyed during the 

inventory (Frasher et al. 2007). According to park staff, Lasiurus cinereus semotus are active at dusk 

and dawn during the spring season at the summit of the Kalaupapa Cliff Trail (Frasher et al. 2007), 

near the locations of the incidental bat detections. 

Non-native ungulates (Sus scrofa, Axis axis, and Capra hircus) have been reported in the North 

Shore Cliffs NNL. During the study by Goltz et al. (2001), A. axis were detected in the 

management zone near the Kalaupapa Cliff Trail. Capra hircus were observed along the trail 

descending to the peninsula and on the cliffs above Waikolu Valley (Marshall and Aruch 2003). 

The Moloka‘i Hunters Association helped remove ungulates in the Waikolu Valley. Roughly 18 

S. scrofa were removed in three trips (Alexander and Lentz 2000). 

Mus musculus, Herpestes javanicus, and Felis catus have been detected in upper Waikolu Valley 

Table 2.1-30). Rattus rattus were captured or recorded along all transects in KALA, except in 

upper Waikolu Valley (Marshall et al. 2008). 

Table 2.1-30. Summary of small mammal data for the North Shore Cliffs NNL. 

Species CTN1 # of 

captures

Capture

Rate2

% of stations 

with tracking tunnel sign

Rattus rattus 62.5 0 0 0% 

Mus musculus 125 3 2.4 0% 

Herpestes javanicus 32 8 -- 45% 

Felis catus 32 0 -- 0% 

1) Corrected trap nights 

2) Number of individuals per 100 corrected trap nights. 

Source: Marshall et al. (2008).

Reptiles and Amphibians: Chamaeleo jacksonii (Jackson’s chameleons) were intentionally 

released in the upper Waikolu Valley in the early 2000s. This species continues to occur in the 

area and was collected twice by Kraus (2005). 

Other reptiles and amphibians that were collected in the North Shore Cliffs NNL include Gehyra 

mutilate (stump-toed gecko), Hemidactylus frenatus (house gecko), Hemidactylus garnotii (IndoPacific gecko), Hemidactylus typus (tree gecko), and Lampropholis delicata (rainbow skink). Lipinia 

noctua (moth skink) was also collected from this area but persists there only in small numbers 

(Kraus 2005). Bufo marinus (cane toad) may also occur in this area (Kraus 2005). 

Insects and Other Invertebrates: Aquatic insects and invertebrates collected in Waikolu Stream 

and the vicinity are discussed in Section 2.2. 

Threatened and Endangered Species: The North Shore Cliffs NNL contains designed critical 

habitat for six federally threatened and endangered species (Table 2.1-31, Figure 2.1-19), and 

three of these currently occur in the management zone. Federally endangered plant species 
73 

located in Waikolu Valley include Cyanea procera (haha), Panicum fauriei var. carteri (Carter’s 

panicgrass), and Melicope reflexa (alani). Other endangered and threatened plants known to 

grow on the coastal cliffs of KALA include Canavalia molokaiensis (‘āwikiwiki), Schiedea 

lydgatei, and Peucedanum sandwicense (makou). 

In 2005, the National Park Service fenced a small population of about five mature P. sandwicense

individuals near the top of the Kalaupapa Cliff Trail between switchbacks 2 and 3. An additional 

population of 12 P. sandwicense individuals occurs off the trail just below switchback 3. Evidence 

of herbivory has been documented on these individuals (USFWS 2003). 

The National Park Service outplanted four Brighamia rockii (pua‘ala) individuals along the 

Kalaupapa Trail switchbacks and one individual at the top of Kalaupapa Trail (USFWS 2008b). 

Other endangered species planned to be outplanted in the North Shore Cliffs NNL include Canavalia

molokaiensis, Peucedanum sandwicense, and Hibiscus arnottianus ssp. immaculatus (koki‘o 

ke‘oke‘o). 

Table 2.1-31. Total critical habitat area for threatened and endangered plants in the North Shore Cliffs 

NNL. 

Species Critical Habitat Area in Management Zone 

Acres Hectares Sq. m. 

Brighamia rockii 71.9 29.1 290,801.8 

Cyanea procera 93.0 37.6 376,461.7 

Hibiscus arnottianus ssp. immaculatus 330.4 133.7 1,337,171.5 

Lysimachia maxima 117.3 47.5 474,833.3 

Peucedanum sandwicense 102.7 41.6 415,741.3 

Phyllostegia mannii 13.7 5.5 55,397.0 

TOTAL 729.5 295.2 2,952,352.2 

Source: USFWS (2004). 

No threatened or endangered avifauna were observed in the North Shore Cliffs NNL by Marshall 

and Aruch (2003) or Marshall and Kozar (2008). However, the coastal cliffs and the walls of 

Waikolu Valley may provide nesting sites for Puffinus auricularis newelli and Pterodroma 

sandwichensis. 

Important Habitats: The cliffs within the North Shore Cliffs NNL probably contain caves and 

lava tubes; however, cave features and the resources within them have not been surveyed or 

described. 

2.1.6.4 Information Gaps: 

Flora: Due to the potential for rare plants species to occur in the NNL, regular monitoring surveys 

should be conducted along permanent transects to document the status of rare species and track 

vegetation changes. This program should also include detection of new non-native species. During 

these surveys, the National Park Service can eradicate or control priority invasive plants. 
74 

Figure 2.1-19. Critical habitat for threatened and endangered species in the North Shore Cliffs NNL. 

Source: USFWS 2004; USGS; National Park Service

SPECIES ACRES HECTARES

Brighamia rockii 71.9 29.1

Cyanea procera 93.0 37.6

Hibiscus arnottianus ssp. immaculatus 330.4 133.7

Lysimachia maxima 117.3 47.5

Peucedanum sandwicense 102.7 41.6

Phyllostegia mannii 13.7 5.5

729.1 295.0

5,000 0 5,000 2,500

Feet

2,000 0 2,000 1,000

Meters

Puu Alii

NAR

Lowland Coastal Area

North Shore Cliffs NNL

North Shore Cliffs NNL

Molokai Forest Reserve (DOFAW)

Kauhako

Crater

Brighamia rockii

Puu Alii

NAR

Lowland Coasta l Area

North Shore Cliffs NNL

North Shore Cliffs NNL

Molokai Forest Reserve (DOFAW)

Kauhako

Crater

Puu Alii

NAR

Lowland Coastal Area

North Shore Cliffs NNL

North Shore Cliffs NNL

Molokai Forest Reserve (DOFAW)

Kauhako

Crater

Puu Alii

NAR

Lowland Coasta l Area

North Shore Cliffs NNL

North Shore Cliffs NNL

Molokai Forest Reserve (DOFAW)

Kauhako

Crater

Cyanea procera

Hibiscus arnottianus ssp. immaculatus Lysimachia maxima

Kalaupapa National Historic Park

Puu Alii

NAR

Lowland Coastal Area

North Shore Cliffs NNL

North Shore Cliffs NNL

Molokai Forest Reserve (DOFAW)

Kauhako

Crater

Puu Alii

NAR

Lowland Coasta l Area

North Shore Cliffs NNL

North Shore Cliffs NNL

Molokai Forest Reserve (DOFAW)

Kauhako

Crater

Peucedanum sandwicense Phyllostegia mannii
75 

Avifauna: Radar surveys may reveal that the coastal cliffs near Nihoa and the walls of Waikolu 

Valley provide nesting sites for seabirds, including Puffinus auricularis newelli and Pterodroma 

sandwichensis. Additional forest bird inventories are warranted in the upper elevation areas of 

the Waikolu Valley, where dense forests remains. 

Mammals: The only two detections for Lasiurus cinereus semotus at KALA were in and adjacent to 

the NNL. More regular surveys for Lasiurus cinereus semotus in this management zone, particularly 

along the Kalaupapa Cliff Trail and in Waikolu Valley, may provide valuable information on this 

species’ occurrence and habitat use in the park. 

Insects and Other Invertebrates: More extensive invertebrate studies in Waikolu Valley could reveal 

rare and native species, such as tree snails that have been found in the nearby TNC Kamakou 

Preserve (TNC 2003a). 

2.1.7 Lowland Coastal Area 

The Lowland Coastal Area of KALA includes the entire coastal plain of the Kalaupapa peninsula. 

This management zone was created by lavas that emanated from Kauhakō Crater. Along the western 

coastline of the Lowland Coastal Area, small perched carbonate beaches and narrow vegetated sand 

dunes occur (Fletcher et al. 2002). Sand dunes are also present on the northeastern tip south of Lae 

Ho‘olehua. 

Kūka‘iwa‘a is a small peninsula approximately 15 ha (37 acres) in size within the Lowland Coastal 

Area. The peninsula, located at 30 m (98 ft) elevation, lies just east of Waikolu Valley close to the 

offshore islets. It is completely isolated by sheer cliffs stretching to the native forest roughly 914 m 

(3,000 ft) above (Kozar et al. 2007, Marshall et al. 2008). A 250 m (820 ft) fence transects the 

Kūka‘iwa‘a peninsula from east to west (Marshall et al. 2008). 

2.1.7.1 Previous and Ongoing Studies and Inventories: 

Soils & Climate: 

 The only soil survey in the Lowland Coastal Area was conducted by the USDA Soil 

Conservation Service (Foote et al. 1972). The survey was primarily designed to offer useful 

information for planning agriculture; therefore, mapping was conducted on agricultural land 

and generalized for other areas. 

 Kalaupapa 563, a COOP site near the Kalaupapa Settlement, records both temperature 

and precipitation. The temperature data record exists for the 1950s and from the late 

1990s to present, while the precipitation data record extends from 1933 to present, with a 

data gap during the 1960s (Davey et al. 2006). 

Flora: 

 Asherman et al. (1990) conducted a reconnaissance survey along the lower elevation areas 

of the peninsula, including Puwahi, the Kalaupapa Cliff Trail at the beach, and the entire 

coastline from Kalawao to the Kalaupapa Settlement. This survey involved creating plant 

species lists, collecting voucher specimens, and documenting localities of rare plants. 
76 

 Based on previous vegetation surveys in the park and additional supplemental surveys, Funk 

(1991) described 20 plant communities throughout KALA. 

 In 1994, Jessel and Agliam (1994) established permanent monitoring transects (using rebar) 

at Kūka‘iwa‘a to document the health, distribution, and population size of Panicum faurei

var. carteri (Carter’s panicgrass). This monitoring was conducted annually to track trends in 

the population. 

 In 1997, members of the USGS–BRD Haleakala Field Station established monitoring 

transects inside and immediately outside of the exclosure on the northeastern coast of the 

peninsula. The transects were intended to qualitatively and quantitatively document trends in 

populations of Tetramolopium rockii var. rockii and Centaurium sebaeoides, as well as other 

vegetation (Medeiros and Chimera 1997a, 1997b). 

 LeGrande (2002) documented vegetation observations and created a plant species checklist 

for Kūka‘iwa‘a in 2002. 

 In 2003, the National Park Service began a Kūka‘iwa‘a canopy gap study to examine 

succession process in 100, 200, and 400 m2

 (1,076, 2,153, and 4,306 ft2) sized gaps in 

canopy. This is conducted every five years. 

 The Kūka‘iwa‘a grass/sedge competition study began in 2004 to quantify sedge grass 

abundance in the coastal spray zone. The study is conducted annually. 

 Permanent photopoints were established at the Kūka‘iwa‘a fence in 2005. These points have 

been re-photographed annually to document the height and recruitment of Pandanus spp. 

(hala) in time series following animal exclusion. 

 Wood et al. (2005) created a plant checklist along a single transect in the Lowland Coastal 

Area in lower Wai‘ale‘ia Valley. 

 Hughes et al. (2007) examined plant diversity and distribution for species in the Lowland 

Coastal Area by analyzing data previous vegetation transects established in the area. 

 A complete vegetation description of the Kūka‘iwa‘a peninsula is provided by Wood (2008). 

This report summarizes descriptions from earlier surveys, updates the status of rare species, 

and provides information on outplanting on the peninsula. 

 Wysong and Hughes (2008) updated plant checklists, collected voucher specimens, and 

created a herbarium for the entire park, including the Lowland Coastal Area 

 Based on aerial remote sensing, the U.S. Geological Survey and National Park Service 

created a draft vegetation cover map of the entire management zone in 2007. Identifiable 

vegetation cover types were categorized as Class 1–3 to provide an estimate of the total 

native and non-native species composition. The final report for this project, including 
77 

mapping methods and a detailed description of the plant communities, is anticipated in early 

2010 (J. Jacobi/USGS, pers. comm.). 

 The National Park Service created detailed vegetation maps of areas within the settlement, 

including the Bishop Home, Bay View Home, Kana‘ana Hou Church, Doctor’s Residence, 

and McVeight Home. These maps depict individual plant species in the area. 

 In 2010, the National Park Service plans to re-examine legacy Panicum fauriei var. carteri at 

Kūka‘iwa‘a to document occurrence and distribution changes within legacy surveys. 

Avifauna: 

 Marshall and Aruch (2003) completed a shoreline seabird inventory during the fall of 2003. 

This survey area included portions of the Lowland Coastal Area. 

 An additional shoreline bird survey was conducted along the KALA coastline by Kozar et al. 

(2007) during two days in 2005. Seasonal migrants (waterfowl, shorebirds) were the primary 

focus, but seabirds, raptors, and waterbirds were also recorded. 

 Within the Lowland Coastal Area, Marshall and Kozar (2008) conducted forest bird surveys 

along a predator fence at Kūka‘iwa‘a and in the lower Waikolu Valley along an old aqueduct 

pipe, from 80 to 180 m (262 to 590 ft) in elevation. 

Mammals: 

 To gather information on movement patterns and home ranges of Axis axis, Goltz et al. 

(2001) tracked six radio-collared Axis axis over a 13-month study. 

 LeGrande noted rodent and ungulate evidence during her vegetation survey of Kūka‘iwa‘a in 

2002 (LeGrande 2002). 

 Frasher et al. (2007) surveyed Lasiurus cinereus semotus in the Lowland Coastal Area using 

acoustic detection systems along with visual observations to document the presence/absence 

of the species and general associations with habitats and elevations. The survey was 

conducted along the coastline from Puwahi to the Kalaupapa Landing Strip, throughout the 

Kalaupapa Settlement, and along the road from the settlement toward Wai‘ale‘ia Valley. 

 Marshall et al. (2008) conducted a presence/absence survey for small mammals in 2005 at 

two transects in the Lowland Coastal Area; one along the fence transecting the Kūka‘iwa‘a 

peninsula and another in Lower Waikolu between 140 and 160 m (460 and 525 ft) elevation. 

Reptiles and Amphibians: 

 Kraus (2005) conducted day and night surveys for reptiles and amphibians across KALA, 

including in portions of the Lowland Coastal Area. 

Insects and Other Invertebrates: 
78 

 No focused invertebrate studies have been conducted in the management zone; however, 

Legrande incidentally noted several arthropod species on the Kūka‘iwa‘a peninsula during 

her vegetation survey (Legrande 2002). 

Other: 

 Cave investigations were initially conducted at KALA by Pearson in 1966 and 1967 (Pearson 

et al. 1974). 

 Clague et al. (1982) depicted cavernous features in the Lowland Costal Area and described 

the geological setting of the peninsula. 

 Coombs et al. (1990) described the geology and morphology of the discontinuous lava 

channel or tube extending from Kauhakō Crater. 

 In 1991, Neller investigated and mapped some of the caves and cavernous features in the 

eruptive alignment north of Kauhakō Crater within the Lowland Coastal Area. 

 Speleological investigations were conducted by Halliday in 2000 along the eruptive 

alignment north of Kauhakō Crater. This report also summarizes and analyzes other 

published and unpublished cave investigations at KALA (Halliday 2001). 

 Additional cave animal inventories (invertebrates and vertebrates) at KALA are anticipated 

to resume in 2010. 

2.1.7.2 Physical Environment: 

In contrast to most areas of the park, the Lowland Coastal Area is a flat, slightly sloping terrace 

located at a low elevation. The majority of the Lowland Coastal Area is underlain with 

Kalaupapa Very Rocky Silty Clay Loam (Table 2.1-32). Five beaches occur along the western 

side of the peninsula: ‘Awahua, Papaloa, ‘Iliopi‘i, Kāhili, and Ho‘olehua. Most of the beaches 

are composed of white carbonate sand derived from coral and shell (Funk 1991). At ‘Awahua, or 

Black Sands Beach, the sand has a large terrigenous detrital component (Fletcher et al. 2002). 

The remaining beaches are fairly wide and composed of white carbonate sand (Clark 1989). 

Besides early agriculture that took place in the valleys, most human activities at KALA have 

occurred in the Lowland Coastal Area. Both the Kalawao Settlement, which was located on the 

eastern side of the peninsula immediately below the Coastal Spray Zone, and the Kalaupapa 

Settlement on the western side of the peninsula occur in the Lowland Coastal Area (McCoy 2005a, 

2005b). The Kalaupapa Settlement includes residences, dormitories, churches, a hospital, a small 

grocery store, maintenance and storage buildings, and other infrastructure to support the small 

community (NPS 2006a). 

2.1.7.3 Ecological Community: 

Flora: The majority of the vegetation in the Lowland Coastal Area is composed of non-native 

species. In particular, Psidium sp., Schinus terebinthifolius, Lantana camara, and Syzygium cumini 

are common. Although all three identifiable NPS vegetation classes (Class 1–3) are present in the 
79 

management zone, Class 1 (> 90% non-native vegetation) dominates the Lowland Coastal Area 

(Table 2.1-33, Figure 2.1-20).

Table 2.1-32. Soil types and key soil characteristics in Lowland Coastal Area management zone. 

Soil Type Farmland Erodible Coverage in 

Zone (m2) 

Kalaupapa Very Rocky Silty Clay Loam, 3 

to 25 % Slopes Not prime farmland Highly erodible 

land 3,022,356 

Stony Colluvial Land Not prime farmland Highly erodible 

land 1,599,321 

Rock Land Not prime farmland Potentially highly 

erodible land 1,225,574 

Haleiwa Very Stony Silty Clay Loam, 0 to 

15 % Slopes Not prime farmland Potentially highly erodible land 1,212,699 

Rock Outcrop Not prime farmland Not highly 

erodible land 1,190,928 

Colluvial Land Not prime farmland Highly erodible 

land 954,359 

Haleiwa Silty Clay Loam, 0 to 10 % Slopes Prime farmland 

(if irrigated) 

Potentially highly 

erodible land 651,057 

Rough Mountainous Land Not prime farmland Highly erodible 

land 374,120 

Stony Alluvial Land Not prime farmland Potentially highly 

erodible land 362,559 

Jaucas Sand, 0 to 15 % Slopes Not prime farmland Potentially highly 

erodible land 246,993 

Source: Foote et al. (1972). 

The highest percentage of native vegetation is found at the Kūka‘iwa‘a peninsula. The flora of 

Kūka‘iwa‘a peninsula is composed of approximately 76 plant taxa, of which 21 are endemic and 

19 are indigenous. The remaining 36 plants species at Kūka‘iwa‘a are non-native, and four of 

these are Polynesian introductions (LeGrande 2002, Wood 2008). 

Two vegetation communities are identified on the Kūka‘iwa‘a peninsula. A littoral coastal 

vegetation community occurs in the ocean spray zone. Native halophytic plant species that occur 

in this community include Fimbristylis cymosa (mau‘u ‘aki‘aki), Panicum fauriei var. carteri, 

Tetramolopium sylvae, Artemisia australis (‘āhinahina), Bidens hillebrandiana subsp. 

polycephala (ko‘oko‘olau), and Bacopa monnieri (‘ae‘ae). A single pistillate shrub of the rare 

Pittosporum halophilum (hoawa) also occurs in the littoral coastal vegetation community on the 

eastern side of the Kūka‘iwa‘a peninsula. This individual represents the only known naturally 

occurring plant of this species still extant on the main Island of Moloka‘i (Wood 2008). 

The second vegetation community at Kūka‘iwa‘a is a relic coastal forest dominated by Pandanus 

tectorius (hala), Psydrax odorata (alahe‘e), and Diospyros sandwicensis (lama). Associated relic 

components occur around the back gulches and low ridges of the peninsula including native trees 

(Reynoldsia sandwicensis, Nestegis sandwicensis, and Metrosideros polymorpha), as well as 

native shrubs and herbs (Wikstroemia sp., Peucedanum sandwicense, Bidens molokaiensis, and 

Schiedea globosa) (LeGrande 2002, Wood 2008). 
80 

Figure 2.1-20. Vegetation cover and NPS vegetation classes in the Lowland Coastal Area. 

Class Name Acres

unclassified 173.8

no factor 40.0

shadow 29.8

Class 0 TOTAL 243.7

Mesic Mixed Syzygium cumini and Psidium sp. Forest + Other Alien Trees 474.6

Dry Schinus terebinthifolius and Syzygium cumini Forest 456.8

Dry Lantana camara + Alien Shrubs and Grasses 409.0

Dry Schinus terebinthifolius Shrub 371.2

Dry Alien Shrubs 300.2

Dry Alien Grassland 180.8

Wet Psidium sp. 142.4

Dry Syzygium cumini and Other Alien Trees 12.0

Wet Aleurites moluccana and Psidium guajava Forest + Shrubs and Alien Grasses 11.5

Class 1 TOTAL 2,358.6

Mesic Exotic Grass and Native Shrub Community with Scattered Native Trees 17.6

Mesic Exotic Trees and Some Native Trees with Exotic Shrubs and Grasses 2.3

Mesic Native Trees and Scattered Exotic Trees with Shrubs and Grasses 2.0

Class 2 TOTAL 21.8

Wet Metrosideros polymorpha Forest with Tree Ferns and Native Shrubs 55.4

Wet Matted Ferns or Native Shrubs with Scattered Metrosideros polymorpha 14.0

Class 3 TOTAL 69.4

TOTAL 2,693.4

Source: USGS; National Park Service

North Shore

Cliffs NNL Molokai Forest

Reserve (DOFAW)

North Shore Cliffs (NNL)

Kauhako

Crater

Coastal

Spray

Zone

Lowland Coastal

Area

Vegetation Class Name

Dry Alien Shrub

Dry Alien grassland

Dry Lantana camara + Alien Shrubs and Grasses

Dry Schinus terebinthifolius Shrub

Dry Schinus terebinthifolius and Syzygium cumini Forest

Dry Syzygium cumini and Other Alien Trees 

Wet Psidium sp.

Mesic Mixed Syzygium cumini and Psidium sp. Forest + Other Alien Trees

Wet Aleurites moluccana and Psidium guajava Forest + Shrubs and Alien Grasses 

Mesic Exotic Trees and Some Native Trees with Exotic Shrubs and Grasses

Mesic Exotic Grass and Native Shrub Community with Scattered Native Trees

Mesic Native Trees and Scattered Exotic Trees with Shrubs and Grasses

Wet Matted Ferns or Native Shrubs with Scattered Metrosideros polymorpha

Wet Metrosideros polymorpha Forest with Tree Ferns and Native Shrubs

no factor

unclassified

shadow

North Shore

Cliffs NNL Molokai Forest

Reserve (DOFAW)

North Shore Cliffs (NNL)

Kauhako

Crater

Coastal

Spray

Zone

Lowland Coastal

Area

Vegetation Class Type

0 - no factor

1 - >90% alien veg 

2 - mix

3 - >90% native veg 

Kalaupapa National Historic Park

0 4,000 8,000 2,000

ft

0 1,000 2,000 500

M
81 

Table 2.1-33. Vegetation cover and NPS vegetation classes in the Lowland Coastal Area. 

Vegetation Cover Per NPS Class1

 Acres M2

Class 0 243.7 986,027.2

Unclassified 173.8 703,537.3

No Factor 40.0 161,906.8

Shadow 29.8 120,583.0

Class 1 2,289.3 9,544,749.0

Mesic Mixed Syzygium cumini and Psidium sp. Forest + Other 

Alien Trees 474.6 1,920,477.0

Dry Schinus terebinthifolius and Syzygium cumini Forest 456.8 1,848,533.5

Dry Lantana camara + Alien Shrubs and Grasses 409.0 1,655,331.1

Dry Schinus terebinthifolius shrub 371.2 1,502,375.5

Dry Alien Shrubs 300.2 1,214,692.4

Dry Alien Grassland 180.8 731,763.1

Wet Psidium sp. 142.4 576,389.4

Dry Syzygium cumini and Other Alien Trees 12.0 48,480.4

Wet Aleurites moluccana and Psidium guajava Forest + Shrubs 

and Alien Grasses 11.5 46,706.4

Class 2 21.8 88,381.4

Mesic Exotic Grass and Native Shrub Community with Scattered 

Native Trees 17.6 71,326.9

Mesic Exotic Trees and Some Native Trees with Exotic Shrubs and 

Grasses 2.3 9,105.4

Mesic Native Trees and Scattered Exotic Trees with Shrubs and 

Grasses 2.0 7,949.1

Class 3 69.4 280,841.9

Wet Metrosideros polymorpha Forest with Tree Ferns and Native 

Shrubs 55.4 224,215.5

Wet Matted Ferns or Native Shrubs with Scattered Metrosideros 

polymorpha 14.0 56,626.4

TOTAL 2,693.4 10,899,999.5

1) Class 0 = not classified; Class 1 = > 90% non-native vegetation; Class 2 = mixed vegetation; 

Class 3 = > 90% native vegetation. 

Source: USGS and NPS (2007).

The National Park Service initiated the Kūka‘iwa‘a Restoration Project (KRP) to restore fenced 

portions of the coastal habitat. The plant community at the KRP is being modeled after the 

existing Pritchardia hillebrandii coastal forest on Huelo. Both common and rare native plant 

taxa are being outplanted at the site, including Pittosporum halophilum, Pritchardia hillebrandii, 

Scaevola coriacea, and Brighamia rockii (LeGrande 2002, Wood 2008). Additional native 

species have been outplanted in the Lowland Coastal Area between Wai‘ale‘ia Stream and 

Kaaia. These include Bidens molokaiensis, Shiedea globosa, and Reynoldsia sandwicensis, as 

well as several threatened and endangered species (NPS, unpublished). 
82 

Several monitoring transects have been set up in the fenced area of the Kūka‘iwa‘a peninsula to 

quantitatively and qualitatively document the long-term native and non-native vegetation 

changes within the exclosure (Tables 2.1-34 and 2.1-35) 

Table 2.1-34. Percent cover of native and non-native species inside and outside the Tetramolopium rockii

var. rockii exclosure. 

Taxa/Substrate Percent Cover

in Exclosure1

Percent Cover 

Outside Exclosure2

Sand/Rock/Litter/Bare Ground 25.56% 17.58% 

Non-Native Species 18.11% 31.42% 

Native Species 56.34% 51.00% 

 Chamaesyce degeneri 0.16% 0.00% 

 Fimbristylis cymosa, dead 21.07% 26.00% 

 Fimbristylis cymosa, live 33.62% 24.75% 

 Heliotropium anomalum 0.08% 0.00% 

 Heliotropium curassavicum 0.04% 0.00% 

 Panicum fauriei var. fauriei 0.33% 0.00% 

 Sida fallax 1.03% 0.08% 

 Tetramolopium rockii var. rockii 0.00% 0.00% 

 Wikstroemia uva-ursi 0.00% 0.17% 

1) Based on 5 parallel transects totaling 243 m. 

2) Based on 4 parallel transects totaling 120 m. 

Source: Medeiros and Chimera (1997a). 

Table 2.1-35. Percent cover of native and non-native species inside the Centaurium sebaeoides 

exclosure. 

Taxa/Substrate Percent Cover

in Exclosure1

Sand/Rock/Litter/Bare Ground 50.22% 

Non-Native Species 27.95% 

Native Species 21.84% 

 Boerhavia repens 1.68% 

 Chamaesyce degeneri 0.17% 

 Fimbristylis cymosa, live 2.12% 

 Fimbristylis cymosa, dead 0.56% 

 Heliotropium anomalum 3.52% 

 Ipomoea pes-caprae 6.85% 

 Scaevola sericea, live 1.21% 

 Scaevola sericea, dead 1.19% 

 Solanum americanum 0.02% 

 Vitex rotundifolia 1.21% 

 Wikstroemia uva-ursi 3.30% 

1) Based on 5 parallel transects totaling 463 m. 

Source: Medeiros and Chimera (1997b). 
83 

Avifauna: In Lower Waikolu Valley, both Himatione sanguinea sanguinea and Hemignathus 

virens wilsoni were observed, with 22 and 17 detections, respectively. Seven non-native forest 

bird species were recorded in the area including the Tyto alba (barn owl), Acridotheres tristis, 

Cettia diphone, Zosterops japonicus, Cardinalis cardinalis, Streptopelia chinensis, and 

Copsychus malabaricus (Marshall and Kozar 2008). 

Seven non-native forest birds were also documented at Kūka‘iwa‘a by Marshall and Kozar (2008). 

These include Acridotheres tristis, Carpodacus mexicanus, Cettia diphone, Zosterops japonicus,

Cardinalis cardinalis, Lonchura punctulata (nutmeg mannikin), and Copsychus malabaricus

(Marshall and Kozar 2008). 

Several shorebird and seabird species were recorded at Kūka‘iwa‘a during a 2005 survey. Anous 

minutus (black noddy) were observed flying among the cliffs and feeding in the ocean and 

Heteroscelus incanus (wandering tattlers) were noted in and around the rocky shore and 

tidepools. Vocalizations of Puffinus pacificus were also heard at Kūka‘iwa‘a in the evenings 

(Kozar et al. 2007). Observations of the rare Pterodroma sandwichensis have been noted at the 

Kūka‘iwa‘a Peninsula in the past, as reported in Kozar et al. (2007), but this species was not seen 

in the most recent survey. Legrande (2002) suggests that lack of seabird nesting on Kūka‘iwa‘a 

peninsula may be due to predation by non-native small mammals. 

On the western side of the peninsula along the Lowland Coastal Area, Pluvialis fulva (Pacific golden 

plover) were commonly seen during the 2005 survey. Heteroscelus incanus (wandering tattlers) 

were also observed on the rocky shoreline (Kozar et al. 2007). Puffinus pacificus, Phaethon 

rubricauda, and Phaethon lepturus were observed flying over this area during the 2005 survey. 

Sterna fuscata have previously been detected flying over the Kalaupapa Settlement and Anous 

minutus are known to nest in the rocky cliffs along the coastline (Kozar et al. 2007). 

 

Diomedea immutabilis (albatross) have been reported in the airport area. Nycticorax nycticorax

(black-crowed night heron) and Asio flammeus sandwicensis (Hawaiian short-eared owl) may 

occasionally forage in the airport and the surroundings (GK & Associates 1991). 

Mammals: The study by Goltz et al. (2001) found that the radio-collared Axis axis remained 

primarily within the Lowland Coastal Area of KALA. During the day, the deer were located in 

thick forest of Schinus terebinthifolius or Psidium spp. at the base of the cliffs. At night, the 

ungulates traveled a short distance to nearby open grassy areas (Goltz et al. 2001). LeGrande 

(2002) did not observe signs of ungulates within the fenced area of the Kūka‘iwa‘a peninsula. 

No Lasiurus cinereus semotus were detected in the Lowland Coastal Area during the single survey 

in 2005. Year-round heavy winds are believed to discourage bat activity on the Kalaupapa peninsula 

(Frasher et al. 2007). 

Kūka‘iwa‘a had the highest R. rattus capture rate in the park, with 8.3 individuals captured per 100 

corrected nights (Table 2.1-36). A transect in the lower Waikolu Valley, which runs north-south 

along an old aqueduct pipe, had the second highest R. rattus capture rate of any site surveyed in the 

park (4.72 individuals per 100 corrected trap nights). Rattus spp. have been noted caching large piles 
84 

of Aleurites moluccana (kukui) nuts and Pandanus phyllanges in the coastal forests of Kūka`iwa`a 

(LeGrande 2002, Marshall et al. 2008). 

Reptiles and Amphibians: Bufo marinus are common in the Lowland Coastal Area. Hemidactylus 

frenatus and Lepidodactylus lugubris (mourning gecko) are also abundant in the Lowland 

Coastal Area (Kraus 2005). 

Insects and Other Invertebrates: Legrande (2002) noted the following arthropods during her 

survey: Leptogenys falcigera (Hymenoptera: Formicidae), Ephydra millbrae 

(Diptera: Ephydridae), and Haematolocha rubescens (Trematoda: Haematoloechidae). A 

taxonomic list of invertebrate species occurring in the Lowland Coastal Area does not exist. 

Table 2.1-36. Summary of small mammal data in the Lowland Coastal Area. 

CTN1 # of 

captures Capture rate 

% of stations 

with tracking 

tunnel sign 

Kūka‘iwa‘a Peninsula 

Rattus rattus 48 4 8.3 0% 

Mus musculus 93.5 0 0 0% 

Herpestes javanicus 26 12 -- 88% 

Felis catus 26 0 -- 0% 

Lower Waikolu Valley 

Rattus rattus 64.5 3 4.72 9% 

Mus musculus 116 0 0 0% 

Herpestes javanicus 32.5 0 -- 0% 

Felis catus 32.5 1 -- 0% 

1) Corrected trap nights 

2) Number of individuals per 100 corrected trap nights. 

Source: Marshall et al. (2008).

Threatened and Endangered Species: Seven federally threatened or endangered plant species 

currently occur in the Lowland Coastal Area. Four of these contain critical habitat within the 

management zone. Hibiscus arnottianus ssp. immaculatus, which is not currently present, has 

designated critical habitat in the Lowland Coastal Area (Table 2.1-37, Figure 2.1-21). 

Table 2.1-37. Total critical habitat area for threatened and endangered plants in the Lowland Coastal 

Area. 

Species Critical Habitat Area in Management Zone 

Acres Hectares Sq. m. 

Brighamia rockii 61.0 24.7 246,994.0 

Centaurium sebaeoides 35.4 14.3 143,387.9 

Hibiscus arnottianus ssp. immaculatus 4.4 1.8 17,711.2 

Peucedanum sandwicense 48.2 19.5 195,238.2 

Tetramolopium rockii var. rockii 68.8 27.8 278,419.8 

TOTAL 217.9 88.2 881,751.1 

Source: USFWS (2004). 
85 

Figure 2.1-21. Critical habitat for threatened and endangered species in the Lowland Coastal Area. 

Source: USFWS 2004; USGS; National Park Service

Lowland Coastal

Area

Molokai Forest Reserve (DOFAW)

Coastal Spray Zone

Kauhako

Crater

North Shore Cliffs (NNL)

North Shore Cliffs

(NNL)

Puu Alii Peucedanum sandwicense

0 8,000 16,000 4,000

ft

0 2,000 4,000 1,000

M

Lowland Coastal

Area

Molokai Forest Reserve (DOFAW)

Coastal Spray Zone

Kauhako

Crater

North Shore Cliffs (NNL)

North Shore Cliffs

(NNL)

Puu Alii Hibiscus arnottianus ssp. immaculatus

Lowland Coastal

Area

Molokai Forest Reserve (DOFAW)

Coastal Spray Zone

Kauhako

Crater

North Shore Cliffs (NNL)

North Shore Cliffs

(NNL)

Puu Alii Tetramolopium rockii

Lowland Coastal

Area

Molokai Forest Reserve (DOFAW)

Coastal Spray Zone

Kauhako

Crater

North Shore Cliffs (NNL)

North Shore Cliffs

(NNL)

Puu Alii

Lowland Coastal

Area

Molokai Forest Reserve (DOFAW)

Coastal Spray Zone

Kauhako

Crater

North Shore Cliffs (NNL)

North Shore Cliffs

(NNL)

Puu Alii

SPECIES ACRES HECTARES

Brighamia rockii 61.0 24.7

Centaurium sebaeoides 35.4 14.3

Hibiscus arnottianus ssp. immaculatus 4.4 1.8

Peucedanum sandwicense 48.2 19.5

Tetramolopium rockii 68.8 27.8

217.9 88.2

Kalaupapa National Historic Park

Brighamia rockii Centaurium sebaeoides
86 

Numerous Panicum fauriei var. carteri individuals were documented at Kūka‘iwa‘a in 1992. The 

species was noted to grow at the edge of the cliffs likely because this area has minimal grazing and 

trampling pressure by non-native ungulates and competition from non-native plants (Jessel and 

Agliam 1994, NPS 2000a). In 2000, a total of 457 individuals were counted along the coast of the 

peninsula at the previously established monitoring stations (LeGrande 2002). 

The endangered Centaurium sebaeoides (‘āwiwi) is also known to occur in the Lowland Coastal 

Area. Centaurium sebaeoides is the only native Hawaiian gentian. It is an annual with a total 

population of approximately 6,300 to 6,600 individuals. The population on KALA is comprised of 

approximately 4,020 plants in 1997 (Medeiros et al. 2000). During the study by Medeiros and 

Chimera (1997b), no individuals were found on the transects inside the exclosure. Follow-up data 

and analysis have not been conducted to document long-term vegetation changes within the 

exclosure. 

The threatened Tetramolopium rockii var. rockii has been observed near Kalawao. The main 

concentration of this species in 1990 occurred along the coast from Kalawao to about 0.6 km (0.4 

miles) to the north (Asherman et al. 1990). No Tetramolopium rockii var. rockii individuals were 

observed inside or outside of the exclosure transects during the study at Kūka‘iwa‘a by Medeiros 

and Chimera (1997b). 

A large patch of Canavalia molokaiensis (‘āwikiwiki) has been found on the east side of the mouth 

of Wai‘ale‘ia Stream between 10 and 15 m (33 and 49 ft) elevation. At least six additional plants 

were seen along the coast between the mouth of Wai‘ale‘ia Stream and Waikolu at Keanakua 

(Asherman et al. 1990). 

Several of these plants are planned to be outplanted in the Lowland Coastal Area between Wai‘ale‘ia 

Stream and Kaaia, including the endangered Canavalia molokaiensis, endangered Brighamia rockii, 

and threatened Peucedanum sandwicensis. The National Park Service also has outplanted 117 

Brighamia rockii individuals at Kūka‘iwa‘a (USFWS 2008b), as well as the endangered Scaevola 

coriaceae (dwarf naupaka). In 2005, LeGrande noted 21 Brighamia rockii and two Scaevola 

coriaceae individuals.

Results from the radar survey conducted for the seabird inventory in 2002 suggest that both 

Pterodroma sandwichensis and Puffinus auricularis newelli nest in the valleys of northeastern 

Moloka‘i, with the Pelekunu and Wailau Valleys having the greatest potential for nesting birds 

(Day and Cooper 2002). Thus, these endangered seabirds likely transit the Lowland Coastal Area 

during the breeding season, returning to nesting colonies in March or April and leaving in June 

or July. 

Important Habitats: A sinuous lava channel or tube extends roughly 1.0 km (0.6 mi) from the 

northeast side of the Kauhakō Crater and the north end of the Kalaupapa peninsula. The feature 

is 100 to 150 m (328–492 ft) wide and up to 30 m (98 ft) deep. This alignment was first 

described by Stearns and Macdonald (1947) as a “large lava tube that has collapsed,” and this 

hypothesis has since been adopted by subsequent researchers (Clague et al. 1982, Coombs et al. 

1990, Medeiros et al. 1996). During his investigations, Halliday (2001) found no evidence that 

the feature is a lava tube but rather suggests that it is an aligned “lava channel complex with 

eruptive foci, which produced a variety of geomorphic features.” 
87 

The channel is comprised of two sections. A mauka section extends north from a wall of lava talus; 

it is about 450 m (1,476 ft) long, 90 to 100 m (295-328 ft) wide, and up to 50 m (164 ft) deep. The 

other (makai) section of the channel is narrower, shallower, and more linear than the mauka section. 

Halliday concluded that no caves or cavernous features occur in the channel complex, except a 

single structure in the mauka section. This small cavity is about 1.5 m (5 ft) in diameter and 3 m (9.8 

ft) above the channel floor (Halliday 2001). 

Several cavernous features occur makai of the alignment. “Anakahalele” is a small cave 

approximately 2.7 m (8.9 ft) wide and 2 m (6.6 ft) high. “New Crater” is a lava dome with a small 

summit extrusion, some rockshelters, and other cavernous features. This dome shares a common 

wall with a rockshelter named “Shelter Cave,” which is a large asymmetrical lava tumulus. On the 

west wall of “New Crater” is a small rockshelter approximately 3 m (9.8 ft) long and 1.3 m (4.3 ft) 

wide. Another rockshelter was found by Halliday (2001) in the vicinity, which had two boulder 

overhangs. “Noni Tree Cave” is a complex collapse sink with two short fragments of exposed lava 

tube. Several additional features have been documented north of Makapulapai (Black Hill) including 

an unnamed rockshelter, a small hollow tumulus, a small lava shield, and a small cavernous structure 

near the lighthouse (Halliday 2001). 

2.1.7.4 Information Gaps: 

Invasive Fauna: Due to the high amount of rodent capture rates during the survey by Marshall et al. 

(2008), it might be important to study seed removal/predation rates on native plants occurring on the 

Kūka‘iwa‘a peninsula. 

Flora: A large amount of raw data exists on the vegetation at the Kūka‘iwa‘a peninsula; however, 

data collected during several studies in this area—including permanent monitoring transects for 

endangered species, Kūka‘iwa‘a canopy gap study, Kūka‘iwa‘a grass/sedge competition study, and 

Kūka‘iwa‘a Fence Effects Photo Points—have not been analyzed. Before collecting additional data 

on this area of the park, it would be useful to analyze any trends in the existing data over the years. 

It is important to track the response of both native and non-native vegetation to ungulate control (i.e., 

fencing) to ensure that removal of ungulates did not result in a secondary increase in other invasive 

plant species. The monitoring should be conducted together with regular monitoring of endangered 

plant populations known to occur in the Lowland Coastal Area. 

Insects and Other Invertebrates: Invertebrate studies should be conducted in the Lowland Coastal 

Area. Invertebrate species (snails, insects, and other arthropods) play an essential role in supporting 

native Hawaiian ecosystems. Conducting a baseline invertebrate survey would increase the 

knowledge of invertebrate species present in the Lowland Coastal Area. 

Caves and Cavernous Features: Although the caves and cavernous features in the Lowland Coastal 

Area were recently described by Halliday (2001), this study did not focus on inventorying faunal and 

floral resources in the features. The potential to come across additional obligate cave-adapted plants 

and animals is significant (F. Howarth/Bishop Museum, pers. comm.). An important component of 

additional studies is the development of a Cave Management Plan to ensure that cave exploration 

does not result in damage to these unique resources (F. Howarth/Bishop Museum, pers. comm.). 
88 

2.2 Freshwater Ecosystem 

The freshwater ecosystem within KALA includes palustrine, lacustrine, anchialine, and riverine 

habitats (Figure 1.4-1). 

Palustrine habitats are lentic (standing or still), non-tidal wetlands usually less than 2 m (6 ft) 

deep (Cowardin et al. 1979). This classification includes both high- and low-elevation wetlands. 

For purposes of identifying wetlands under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Army under 

Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act, the U.S. 

Army, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and Hawai‘i Department of Health 

(HDOH) define wetlands as “Those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or 

groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal 

circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil 

conditions” (Erickson and Puttock 2006). Jurisdictional wetland boundary determinations 

involve an assessment of the relationship between indicators of vegetation, soil, and hydrologic 

regimes. This definition is subject to frequent amendment by Congress based upon political and 

legal issues and is not cited further in this document. 

Lacustrine habitats are lentic waters in definite basins with a depth exceeding 2 m (6 ft). Natural 

lacustrine habitats are rare in Hawai‘i and the insular tropical Pacific primarily due to substrate 

permeability (Maciolek 1975, 1982). Only four natural-formed freshwater lakes are known to 

occur in Hawai‘i (Polhemus et al. 1992). 

Anchialine pools are exposed portions of the groundwater table that have a subsurface 

connection to the sea (Holthuis 1973). Anchialine pools are generally found on geologically 

young and porous lavas within the coastal tropics and subtropics (Chai et al. 1989). 

Approximately 80 percent of the world’s known anchialine ponds occur on Hawai‘i Island 

(Mitchell et al. 2005). These aquatic habitats are highly threatened throughout the State of 

Hawai‘i (Stone 1989, Mitchell et al. 2005, USGS 2005). 

Riverine habitats are “limnetic surface waters flowing unidirectionally” down elevational 

gradients (Polhemus et al. 1992). These can be classified into perennial or intermittent streams. 

Perennial streams are flowing waters that drain land surfaces in discrete channels year-round, 

(Polhemus et al. 1992). Perennial can be either continuous (discharging continuously into the 

ocean) or interrupted (flowing perennially in the upper reaches but discharging only seasonally 

into the ocean). Intermittent streams contain flowing water for only part of the year. Biologically, 

intermittent streams also usually lack the amphidromous fish species present in perennial streams 

(Cowardin et al. 1979, Polhemus et al. 1992). 

The following sections provide information on previous and ongoing surveys and inventories 

conducted in the freshwater habitats of KALA, as well as the physical environment and ecological 

communities within each habitat. Studies and inventories conducted in each habitat are organized by 

resource and then listed chronologically. Information gaps are identified and recommendations for 

future studies are provided for each area. These recommended studies will allow better evaluation of 

conditions, identify existing factors negatively impacting the park’s resources, and indicate potential 

future threats. 
89 

2.2.1 Palustrine 

According to Cowardin et al. (1979), palustrine areas are characterized by the following four 

elements: 

1. area less than 8 ha (20 acres); 

2. active wave-formed or bedrock shoreline features lacking; 

3. water depth in the deepest part of the basin less than 2 m at low water; and 

4. salinity due to ocean-derived salts less than 0.5 ppt. 

Several ephemeral wetlands occur in the coastal area of KALA between the Kalaupapa 

Settlement and the airport. However, it is unknown whether these areas are true palustrine 

habitats because the salinity may exceend 0.5 ppt. Due to their low-elevation location, these 

wetlands flood during periods of high rain and high tide. Road construction in this area during 

the 1970s is believed to have cracked an impervious surface crust, decreasing the natural waterholding capacity of the wetlands. As a result, the water level in the wetlands is lower than 

previously noted (Wyban 1993, McCoy 2005a). 

2.2.1.1 Previous and Ongoing Studies and Inventories: 

Abiotic Factors: 

 In the late 1970s, USFWS Division of Ecological Services biologists used orthophoto 

quadrangle maps and spot field checks to map wetlands and other aquatic habitats in 

Hawai‘i as a part of the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Program according to the 

Cowardin et al. (1979) classification system. 

Invertebrates: 

 Biologists Ron Englund and William Puleloa collected specimens from the “fishpond 

wetlands” near the airport in 1998 (Evenhuis and Eldredge 1999). 

2.2.1.2 Physical Environment: 

In the generalized wetland/aquatic habitat maps prepared by the NWI, several palustrine systems 

were identified within KALA as listed in Table 2.2-1 and shown in Figure 2.2-1. The majority of 

these are located in the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR. However, the actual presence of these palustrine areas 

has not been confirmed in the field. 

Evidence of an abandoned historic inland fishpond named ‘Iliopi‘i Pond exists at the northern 

end of the wet areas, behind the beach houses. Wyban (1993) suggested that the pond was 

constructed early in the twentieth century by a doctor living on the Kalaupapa Peninsula. The 

brackish pond measures 50 m (164 ft) in diameter. Historically, this pond may have been 300 m 

by 150 m (984 ft by 492 ft), but road construction has since dissected the pond. A source of fresh 

water likely exists nearby since the formation of the pond is thought to be associated with an 

influx of fresh water. Historically, Hawaiians modified wetlands by constructing fishponds and 

cultivating Colocasia esculenta (taro) (USFWS 2007). Limited evidence suggests that Iliopi‘i 

Pond may have been built at the site of an ancient fishpond that was formerly connected to the 

ocean by an 'auwai kai (salt water channel) (McCoy 2005a). 
90 

Figure 2.2-1. Palustrine habitats at KALA.

Source: USGS; State of Hawaii GIS; National Park Service Legend

Park BoundaryStreams

Roads/Trails

SecondaryTertiary4wdTrail

4,000 0 4,000 2,000

Feet

2,000 0 2,000 1,000

Meters

Pacific Ocean

Huelo Islet Huelo Islet

Okala Islet Okala Islet

Kalawao

Ha'upu Bay

Pelekunu Pelekunu 

Bay

Kahiu Point Kahiu Point

Kalaupapa Kauhako Lake

Kalaupapa Peninsula Kalaupapa Peninsula

Puu Alii Puu Alii

470

Iliopii Pond Iliopii Pond Namoku

PFO3C PFO3F

PFO3F

PFO3C

PSS3F

PSS3C

PFO3F PSS3F

PSS3C

PSS3F

PUB3C

POWH

PFO3A

Waihanau Stream

rt S ai el ai a W

ae m

Waikolu Stream

Cowardin Class Count Area (m) Perimeter/ Length (m) 

PFO3C Palustrine, forested, broad-leafed evergreen, seasonal 2 1,690,506.9 18,724.9 PFO3F Palustrine, forested, broad-leafed evergreen, semipermanent 3 893,950.5 14,653.3 PFO3A1 Palustrine, forested, broad-leafed evergreen, temporary 1 -- 1,647.3 POWH2 Palustrine, open water, permanent 1 4,219.0 260.6 PSS3C Palustrine, scrub/shrub, broad-leafed evergreen, seasonal 2 236,248.8 4,702.9 PSS3F Palustrine, scrub/shrub, broad-leafed evergreen, semipermanent 2 4,233,324.0 345,56.7 PUB3C Palustrine, unconsolidated bottom, mud, seasonal 1 8,998.5 379.1 TOTAL 12 7,067,247.70 40,368.10 1) Waihanau Stream is classified as riverine. 2) Lake Kauhako is classified as lacustrine. 

Kalaupapa National Historic Park
91 

Standard physical and chemical parameters (water depth, temperature, salinity, pH, dissolved 

oxygen, conductivity, total dissolved solids) have not been measured in the palustrine habitats at 

KALA. 

Table 2.2-1. Palustrine habitats identified at KALA from the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Program. 

Cowardin et al. (1979) Class Count Area (m) Perimeter/ 

Length (m) 

PFO3C Palustrine, forested, broad-leafed 

evergreen, seasonal 2 1,690,506.9 18,724.9

PFO3F Palustrine, forested, broad-leafed 

evergreen, semipermanent 3 893,950.5 14,653.3

PFO3A1 Palustrine, forested, broad-leafed 

evergreen, temporary 1 -- 1,647.3

POWH2 Palustrine, open water, permanent 1 4,219.0 260.6

PSS3C Palustrine, scrub/shrub, broad-leafed 

evergreen, seasonal 2 236,248.8 4,702.9

PSS3F Palustrine, scrub/shrub, broad-leafed 

evergreen, semipermanent 2 4,233,324.0 345,56.7

PUB3C Palustrine, unconsolidated bottom, mud, 

seasonal 1 8,998.5 379.1

TOTAL 12 7,067,247.70 40,368.10

1) Waihanau Stream is classified as riverine in this report. 

2) Lake Kauhakō is classified as lacustrine in this report. 

Source: Cowardin et al. (1979). 

2.2.1.3 Ecological Community: 

Invertebrates: Orthemis ferruginea (Odonata: Libellulidae), an introduced dragonfly, and

Anisops kuroiwae (Heteroptera: Notonectidae), an introduced aquatic backswimmer insect, were 

collected in the ephemeral wetlands near the airport in 1998 (Evenhuis and Eldredge 1999). 

Vertebrates: Historically, Kalaupapapa residents recall that Mugil cephalis (mullet) and Kuhlia 

sandvicensis (āholehole) were raised in the fishpond during the 1920s and 1930s (Wyban 1993). 

Plants: The vegetation in and surrounding ‘Iliopi‘i Pond is primarily non-native. Pluchea indica

was documented as the most abundant species at the pond, reaching 0.6 to 1.8 m (2–6 feet) high 

(Wyban 1993). 

Threatened and Endangered Species: The wetlands near the airport contain sufficient water and 

food resources to support a small number of native waterbirds, including Himantopus mexicanus 

knudseni (Hawaiian stilt), Fulica americana alai (Hawaiian coot), and Gallinula chloropus 

sandvicensis (Hawaiian common moorhen) (GK & Associates 1991). Fulica americana alai 

were noted by a previous facilities manager at KALA (Wyban 1993). 

2.2.1.4 Information Gaps: 

Wetland delineation: Although the generalized wetland/aquatic habitat maps prepared by the 

NWI provide some indication as to the potential wetland locations on KALA, ground-truth 
92 

surveys would more accurately determine the presence of wetlands. In particular, the palustrine 

areas identified in the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR should be examined to determine if these are true 

palustrine systems. Wetlands at KALA could be delineated utilizing accepted methods 

prescribed in the 1987 Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, as amended, in 

accordance with the Honolulu Engineering District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The manual 

is available online at http://www.wetlands.com/regs/tlpge02e.htm. 

Physical environment: Standard physical and chemical parameters are not available for the 

palustrine habitats at KALA. Future studies to obtain these parameters would clarify the type of 

habitat located between the Kalaupapa Settlement and the airport. 

Ecological community: There is little to no information on the faunal and floral communities in 

the palustrine habitats at KALA. Additional information is needed on the biota in and 

surrounding the fishpond/wetlands between the Kalaupapa Settlement and the airport. These 

surveys would be part of the wetland delineation process described above. 

2.2.2 Lacustrine 

Lake Kauhakō lies at the bottom of Kauhakō Crater’s inner pit on the Kalaupapa peninsula. This 

lake has brackish water salinity in its surface waters and has marine salinity at depths greater 

than 3 m (9.8 ft) (Maciolek 1975, Donachie et al. 1999); therefore, it is not considered a 

freshwater lake. The lake is considered to be the forth deepest lake in the United States and has 

the greatest relative depth (ratio of depth to surface area) of any lake in the world (Donachie et 

al. 1999). 

2.2.2.1 Previous and Ongoing Studies and Inventories: 

Abiotic: 

 The first geochemical study of Lake Kauhakō was conducted by Dr. John A. Maciolek 

and his limnology students of the University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa in 1973 to 1974 

(Maciolek 1975). During this time he collected data on water quality parameters. 

 The U.S. Navy together with scientists from MDSU conducted large-scale 

reconnaissance surveys of Lake Kauhakō in April 1988 to assess the lake’s bathymetry 

and archaeological resources. Their experiences at Kauhako Lake were glamorized by 

Lenihan 2002. 

 Coombs et al. (1990) described and mapped the geology, morphology, and volcanic 

history of Kauhakō Crater. 

 Dr. Robert Kinzie III and his limnology students at the University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa 

have collected physiochemical data (temperature, conductivity, salinity, etc.) at the crater 

lake at various time intervals since 1995. 

 Donachie et al. (1999) conducted a microbiological and hydrochemical study of the Lake 

Kauhakō in 1997. Water samples taken from the center of the lake were analyzed for 

conductivity, dissolved oxygen, sulfide, nitrous oxide, dissolved inorganic carbon (DIC) 
93 

and alkalinity, dissolved organic carbon (DOC), and nutrients. Temperature data were 

also collected by a data logger. 

 Donachie and Zaborsky collected salinity, alkalinity, and sulfide data in the lake in 

March 1999 (as reported in Donachie et al. 2004) 

 In 1999, Kempe collected and analyzed water samples up to 150 m (492 ft) deep in the 

lake (Garman et al. 2000). 

 Halliday (2001) summarized the findings from various studies in the crater and provided 

additional descriptions of the crater features. 

 Water was collected from the surface to 200 m (656 ft) in Lake Kauhakō between August 

2000 and June 2002 (Donachie et al. 2004) and analyzed for salinity, total alkalinity, 

hydrogen sulfide, and chlorophyll a concentrations. 

Invertebrates: 

 Dr. John A. Maciolek and his students also collected invertebrates in the lake in 1973 and 

1974 (Maciolek 1975). 

 In 1996, Polhemus (1996) described the current distribution of Megalagrion xanthomelas

throughout the state, including the Lake Kauhakō area. 

Phytoplankton & Bacteria: 

 The water samples collected by Donachie et al. (1999) were also analyzed for eukaryotic 

and prokaryotic pigments, microbial ectoenzyme activities, autofluorescent Bacteria, 

filamentous cyanobacteria, and 'Synechococcus'-like autotrophic picoplankton. 

 In 2000, three mixed breathing gas dive surveys were conducted in the lake (Garman et 

al. 2000). The deepest dive descended to 123 m (405 ft). 

 Donachie et al. (2004) cultivated bacteria from the water samples and soil samples taken 

from the lake. Aerobic, heterotrophic bacteria were also cultivated from the stomach 

contents of Palaemon debilis, a penaeid shrimp found in the lake. 

2.2.2.2 Physical Environment: 

Lake Kauhakō has a surface area of approximately 3,500 m2

 (37,675 ft2) and is estimated to 

reach 248 m (814 ft) deep. The bathymetry of the pit was first mapped in 1975 (Maciolek 1982). 

Surveys by the U.S. Navy in 1988 found that the crater narrows to 20 m (66 ft) in diameter at a 

depth of roughly 100 m (328 ft) on the southern side of the lake (Coombs et al. 1990). The 

vertical profile and bathymetry of the lake are shown in Figure 2.2-2. 

Researchers have noted the presence of a stable and well-defined pycnocline (rapid change in 

water density with depth) at about 4.5 m (15 ft), indicating meromixis (Donachie et al. 1999). 

Meromixis is characterized by the formation of a layer of oxygenated surface water separated by 
94 

a pycnocline from anoxic and denser water (known as the monimolimnion). At Lake Kauhakō, 

vertical mixing is limited to the upper 2% of the water column, and anoxia begins below 2 m (6.6 

ft) (Donachie et al. 1999). 

It is believed that meromixis at Lake Kauhakō is morphogenic (the lake’s location in a 

depression restricts wind-driven mixing) and ectogenic (sustained through inflow of both fresh 

and seawater). Seawater likely intrudes into the lake from the nearby Pacific Ocean (1.6 km or 1 

mi away) by horizontal hydraulic conductivity through rock or fractures (Donachie et al. 1999). 

In 1973, Maciolek reported that the surface level of the lake fluctuated roughly a few centimeters 

likely in response to the ocean tides (Maciolek 1975, 1982); however, Maciolek and his 

limnology students did not observe a surface level change the following year and no daily or 

tidal fluctuations have been detected since. There has been no recent evidence to suggest that 

Lake Kauhakō has an open connection to the sea, even though the lake is located at sea level and 

in close proximity to the Pacific Ocean. 

The presence of the stable pycnocline is indicated by a pronounced temperature and salinity 

gradient. The pycnocline separates the shallow oxygenated surface layer from the deep anaerobic 

bottom layer. Dissolved oxygen is high at the surface, peaking at 365 ppm. The upper layer of 

the pycnocline (0 to 4.5 m) can be stratified, exhibiting a strong halocline (vertical salinity 

gradient) and dictothermy (temperature gradient); recorded temperatures in the upper pycnocline 

have ranged from 23 to 26°C (73–79°F), while salinity increased from 6.4 to 34.4 ‰ (Figure 2.2-

3). Salinity in this portion of the lake is diluted by seepage from the crater walls and surface 

rainwater (Donachie et al. 1999). 

Figure 2.2-2. Bathometry of Lake Kauhakō redrawn by Donachie et al. (1999) from Maciolek (1982). 
95 

Dissolved oxygen, total organic carbon (TOC), and nitrous oxide (N20) peaked in the upper 

pycnocline. Dissolved inorganic carbon (DIC) concentration increased with depth. The low DIC 

concentration in surface samples suggests high primary productivity and rapid uptake in 

inorganic carbon (Donachie et al. 1999). This upper portion of the water column is turbid, with a 

visibility reaching less than 10 cm (4 in). 

Physiochemical conditions in the upper lake strata can also vary over time depending on 

freshwater input. Between 1997 and 2002, salinity at the surface of the lake increased from 6 to 

19 ‰ and by approximately 10 ‰ elsewhere above the chemocline (Donachie et al. 2004). 

Alkalinity, however, remained stable (Figure 2.2-4). Differences in salinity were attributed to a 

persistent local drought. 

Below the pycnocline, the water column is homogenous. Temperature and salinity below 4.5 m 

have been recorded as 26.25°C (79.25°F) and 32 ‰, respectively (Donachie et al. 1999). The 

lake below the pycnocline consists of clear, anaerobic, well-mixed seawater. Euhaline and 

isothermic water extended to at least 100 m (328 ft). Hydrogen sulfide (H2S), which was 

undetectable at 4 m (13 ft), averaged approximately 130 pM between 5 and 28 m (16–92ft) 

(Donachie et al. 1999). The high hydrogen sulfide content of the lake is obvious from the 

characteristic odor of the deeper waters. 

Figure 2.2-3. Parameters in Kauhakō Crater from Donachie et al. (1999).A) salinity (□) and temperature 

(solid line) profiles; B) concentrations of oxygen (○), hydrogen sulfide (■), and nitrous oxide (+); C) DIC (

), TOC (●), and alkalinity ( ). 
96 

Figure 2.2-4. Salinity, alkalinity, and sulfide concentrations as a function of depth between 1997 and 

2002 from Donachie et al. (2004). 

Garman (2000) reported blunt stalactitic lava pendants on the pit walls. A biogenic carbonate 

coating, consisting primarily of aragonite, was noted beneath a microbial growth. Calcium 

sulfate and iron sulfice minerals may also be present (Halliday 2001). There are also calcareous, 

bacteria-rich deposits on the lake walls at the surface. 

2.2.2.3 Ecological Community: 

The isolated flora and macrofauna in Lake Kauhakō appears restricted to the shallow oxygenated 

strata of the lake. 

Invertebrates: Palaemon debilis, a native paleomonid shrimp, was first observed in Lake 

Kauhakō by Maciolek and his students in 1973 and 1974 (Aruch 2006). This species is 

exceedingly abundant in the lake. Palaemon debilis is common in anchialine pools throughout 

Hawai‘i, occurring in ponds in nearshore areas, and in the interstitial spaces of the basalt in 

myxohaline environments (Mitchell et al. 2005). Palaemon debilis is known to have a marine 

larval stage; however, no connection to the ocean has been noted since Maciolek (1975) so P. 

debilis in Lake Kauhakō may be completing their entire life cycle in the lake and may be a 

genetically isolated population (R. Kinzie/Zoology Department University of Hawai‘i, pers. 

comm.). 

Maciolek (1982) noted that the endemic anchialine shrimp Halocaridina rubra (‘opae ‘ula) was 

also observed in the lake, suggesting that at least the upper layer was connected to the sea. 

However, this species has not been recently seen in the lake. Rotifers (Rotifera) and copepods 

(Maxillopoda) have been taken from the lake in plankton tows. Juveniles of an unidentified 

ostracod and a small gastropod have been found (Kempe, pers. obs. as reported by Donachie et 

al. 2004). 
97 

Insect fauna in the lake and around the lake margin includes Anisops kuroiwae, an introduced 

aquatic backswimmer insect, which was collected in Lake Kauhakō in 1998. Ephydrid (shore 

fly) larvae, Coleoptera (beetles) individuals, and Zygoptera (damselfly) nymphs have also been 

documented (Evenhuis and Eldredge 1999). 

Phytoplankton & Bacteria: Nutrients above the pycnocline support a dense and highly 

productive phytoplankton fauna community. Diatoms, cyanobacteria (or bluegreen algae), 

dinoflagellates, and chromophytes have been reported by various researchers (Maciolek 1982, 

Halliday 2001, Donachie et al. 1999). Filamentous cyanobacteria were only documented in the 

upper 2 m (6.6 ft), and cells similar to Synechococcus spp. were detected below 3 m (9.8 ft). 

Prochlorococcus-like autotrophs, which were documented in the upper 2 m, were not previously 

reported in brackish waters such as Lake Kauhakō (Donachie et al. 1999). 

Pigment diversity in the upper 2 m of Lake Kauhakō is low and dominated by Chlorophyll a (chl 

a). At 0.5 m (1.6 ft) chl a was found in excess of 150 mg L-1. Below 3 m, chl a was largely 

replaced by a diverse suite of bacterial pigments (Donachie et al. 1999). 

Large populations of heterotrophic and autofluorescent bacteria have been collected at the 

surface of the lake (Donachie et al. 1999). Bacteria cell numbers increased 2.75-fold from 3 to 

4.5 m (14.8 ft) (Figure 2.2-5). The fact that heterotrophic bacterial numbers were high in anoxic 

water above the pycnocline suggests a switch to nitrate respiration (Donachie et al. 1999). 

Garman et al. (2000) also collected matted colonies of sulfur-reducing bacteria during their dives 

in the lake. 

Seventy operational taxonomic units (OTUs) from 13 bacteria phyla and subphyla 

were cultivated from samples collected at Lake Kauhakō by Donachie et al. (2004). 

Five of these OTUs could not be assigned to existing phyla. The majority of -

Proteobacteria OTUs were derived from samples taken below the pycnocline. 

Donachie et al. (2004) suggested that rare Bacteroidetes and Planctomycetes OTUs 

collected from the anoxic waters below the pycnocline are likely from sinking cells 

due to upland sedimentation. 

Threatened and Endangered Species: In 1995, a single Megalagrion xanthomelas

naiad (a candidate endangered species) was seen along the margins of Kauhakō

Lake. This individual was collected and reared to adulthood to confirm its identity 

(Evenhuis and Eldredge 1999). No adult M. xanthomelas have been observed or 

collected in the crater. 

2.2.2.4 Information Gaps: 

Biota: A complete biotic inventory of the lake, including invertebrates, has not been completed 

since 1973 (Maciolek 1975). Much more information is needed on the lake zooplankton, 

particularly depth zonation and seasonal patterns. An inventory of the lake should also assess the 

integrity of biological assemblages and habitat issues. 
98 

Figure 2.2-5. Vertical distribution of A) heterotrophic (○) and autoflurescent (■) Bacteria, and B) 

Synechococcius-like cells (□), filamentous cyanobacteria ( ) and other autofluorescent cells (●) in Lake 

Kauhakō from Donachie et al. (1999). 

Water quality: Water quality monitoring is being done in the lake by the NPS Inventory and 

Monitoring Program (I&M) program on a quarterly basis. Monitoring began in 2008, and 

parameters include temperature, salinity, turbidity, dissolved oxygen, pH, chlorophyll, and depth. 

Several important water quality parameters (organic enrichment, toxics, etc.) could also be 

inexpensively monitored using data loggers. 

Hydrogeomorphology: Installation of a permanent bench mark and water level recorder and 

chemical samplers to determine if there is an interchange between the lake and the sea. 

Invasive species: It will be very important to prevent the introduction of any organisms into the 

lake. Some introduced fishes, such as Tilapia sp. or Sarotherodon melanotheron, would probably 

survive in the lake and could devastate the existing biotic community. 

2.2.3 Anchialine 

The Hawai‘i Administrative Rules Title 11, Department of Health Chapter 54, Water Quality 

Standards, defines anchialine pools as: “...coastal bodies of standing waters that have no surface 
99 

connections to the ocean but display both tidal fluctuations and salinity ranges characteristic of 

fresh and brackish waters, indicating the presence of subsurface connections to the water table 

and ocean.” According to Polhemus et al. (1992), the surface level of these euhaline to 

mixohaline lentic waters is an “inland extension of marine water table, with mixohaline water 

resulting from diluting of intruding ocean water with seawater-percolating groundwater.” 

There are numerous caves within KALA, and many of them may be deep enough to extend into 

hypogeal water table. Thus, it is likely that anchialine pools exist within the park. However, due 

to the sensitivity of these features and the archeological resources within them, the National Park 

Service has not investigated anchialine components of the caves. 

2.2.3.1 Previous and Ongoing Studies and Inventories: 

No previous studies or inventories for anchialine pools, if in fact they do occur, have been 

conducted at KALA. 

2.2.3.2 Physical Environment: 

Since no anchialine pools have been located or identified, there is no information available on 

the physical environment of these habitats. 

2.2.3.3 Ecological Community: 

Anchialine pools represent a unique coastal ecosystem dominated by bacterial mats, algae, 

emergent aquatic plants, mollusks, and crustaceans under natural, undisturbed conditions 

(Maciolek and Brock 1974). Anchialine ponds are considered to be windows into a far more 

extensive subterranean brackish water ecosystem that is home to a unique assemblage of native 

species. The fauna of anchialine habitats usually consists of marine invertebrates that have 

invaded through subterranean interstices (Polhemus et al. 1992). 

The only anchialine species known from KALA is Halocardina rubra. This species was noted in 

Lake Kauhakō by Maciolek (1982). Although H.rubra have not recently been recorded, it is 

likely that it (as well as other anchialine creatures) continues to occur on the peninsula in 

anchialine pools and in the ground waters (R. Kinzie/Zoology Department University of Hawai‘i, 

pers. comm.). 

Threatened and Endangered Species: Anchialine ponds harbor four species of 

endemic anchialine shrimp that are listed as candidate endangered species by the 

USFWS. These are: Metabetaeus lohena, Vetericaris chaceorum, Palaemonella 

burnsi, and Procaris hawaiiana. None of these species has been recorded from 

KALA.

2.2.3.4 Information Gaps: 

Anchialine pools: The primary information gap of this freshwater habitat is to determine whether 

anchialine pools exist in KALA and the extent of these pools. 

Water quality: The water quality of the anchialine pools at KALA has not been described 

(DeVerse and DiDonato 2006). Nutrient levels in anchialine ponds are indicative of land use 

practices, on-site cultural activities, and biological process. Chemical and microbial 
100 

contaminants can leach into anchialine pools from terrestrial sources (DeVerse and DiDonato 

2006). Monitoring data will provide warning indicators if these systems are altered (NPS 2003). 

Biota: Once anchialine pools are identified at KALA, surveys could be conducted to inventory 

species present in these habitats and the integrity of the biological assemblages and habitats. 

2.2.4 Riverine 

Eight named streams plus two unnamed streams occur within the boundaries of KALA (Table 

2.2-2 and Figure 2.2-6). The principal drainages include Waikolu Stream, Wai‘ale‘ia Stream, and 

Waihanau Stream. Only small, intermittent streams reach the sea west of Waihanau Stream. 

2.2.4.1 Previous and Ongoing Studies and Inventories: 

Abiotic: 

 The U.S. Geological Survey formerly operated three stream gages on Waikolu Stream 

and a single gage on the Molokai Tunnel to measure stream discharge. The earliest gage 

began operating in 1919. The most recently operating gage was discontinued in 2003. 

Stream discharge data can be obtained from the USGS Surface-Water Data for Hawaii 

website (http://waterdata.usgs.gov/hi/nwis/sw). 

 In 1983, Takasaki drilled three wells in lower Waihanau Valley to explore groundwater 

conditions in the area. The wells were pumped to determine potential yields, and 

chemical analyses were also performed on well water samples. The purpose of this 

program was to determine the feasibility of using Waihanau groundwater as a water 

source for Kalaupapa residents as opposed to the more distant Waikolu Stream (Takasaki 

1986). 

 In 1991, GK & Associates prepared an Environmental Assessment for a boulder removal 

project at Waihanau Stream. The purpose of the project was to remove a limited quantity 

of boulders from the stream bed to contain flow within the banks and minimize flood 

hazard during high flow events (GK & Associates 1991). 

 Between 1993 and 1996, the NPS Water Resources Division (WRD) collected discharge 

data at two locations on Waikolu Stream; one just downstream of the lower-most surface 

water diversion (pump house location), and the second just above the upper-most surface 

water diversion (J. Hughes/NPS, pers. comm.). The intent of this data collection was to 

demonstrate the impact the diversions and well pumping had on the natural flow regime 

of Waikolu Stream and provide technical evidence to support a request for instream flow 

standards from the Hawaii Commission on Water Resource Management (CWRM), the 

state agency that regulates instream uses of water (J. Hughes/NPS, pers. comm.). 

 The Hawaii Division of Water and Land Development published a Draft Environmental 

Assessment and Negative Declaration for Waikolu Valley Wells Development in 1994. 

This project was designed to supplement existing surface water diversion with 

groundwater (Division of Water and Land Development 1994). 
101 

Figure 2.2-6. Streams within KALA. 

Source: USGS; State of Hawaii GIS; National Park Service

Legend

Park BoundaryStream GagesWellsDiversionsPumping StationSprings

Streams

PerennialIntermittent

Water Routes

ARTIFICIAL PATHCONNECTORPIPELINE/DITCH

4,000 0 4,000 2,000

Feet

2,000 0 2,000 1,000

Meters

Pacific Ocean

Huelo Islet Huelo Islet

Okala Islet Okala Islet

Kalawao Kalawao

Ha'upu Bay

Pelekunu Pelekunu 

Bay

Kahiu Point Kahiu Point

Kalaupapa Kauhako Lake Kauhako Lake

Kalaupapa Peninsula Kalaupapa Peninsula

Puu Alii Puu Alii

Iliopii Pond Iliopii Pond

Waihanau Stream

rt S

ai el

a

i a W

ae m

Waikolu Streamol akoohoi a W t S r

ae

m

Anapuhi

Wain

en

e

Puwahi

Awahua

16406000

16405500

16409000 16408000

16405100

Kalaupapa National Historic Park
102 

 Diaz et al. (1995) compared the geological, climatic, hydrological, and geomorphological 

similarities between the three large valleys of windward northeast Moloka‘i (Waikolu 

within KALA and the adjacent Pelekunu and Wailau basins) using GIS. 

 In 2006, DeVerse and DiDonato produced a water quality report for national parks in 

Hawai‘i as part of the Pacific Island Network Vital Signs Monitoring Plan. The report 

analyzed data from three USGS stations (lower, middle, upper) that measured 

temperature, pH, and discharge on Waikolu Stream from 1969 to 1976 (DeVerse and 

DiDonato 2006). 

 The National Park Service currently measures stream height, temperature, and discharge 

at the mouths of five streams in KALA—Awahua, Puwahi, Waihanau, Wai‘ale‘ia, and 

Waikolu (2 sites). Data collection began at three of the sites (Waihanau, Wai‘ale‘ia, and 

Waikolu) in January 2006, while the remainder began in January 2008. Data from these 

measurements are still being processed and were not available for this report. 

Fauna: 

 In 1986, the Hawai‘i Division of Aquatic Resources surveyed the freshwater aquatic 

fauna in Waikolu Stream (DAR 1986). 

 In 1987, John Ford and Andy Yuen of the USFWS Division of Ecological Services and 

John Naughton of the National Marine Fisheries Service conducted a biological 

reconnaissance of Waikolu Stream (Ford and Yuen 1987). 

 A visual goby survey was conducted in Waikolu Stream in 1987 by Bill Devick of the 

Hawaii Division of Aquatic Resources (Devick 1989). 

 Between October and December 1990, Kinzie et al. (1990) made three visits to Waikolu 

Stream to obtain baseline information on stream conditions. The surveys assessed aquatic 

macrofauna at various stations and compared results to the earlier studies by the U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service and Division of Aquatic Resources. 

 In 1991, William Puleloa, Molokai biologist for the Hawaii Division of Aquatic 

Resources, surveyed Waikolu Stream (Puleloa 1991). 

 A preliminary report on the aquatic insect fauna of Waikolu Stream was prepared by Dr. 

Dan Polhemus of the Hawaii Biological Survey Bishop Museum in 1992 (Polhemus 

1992). 

 Polhemus (1996) described the current distribution of Megalagrion xanthomelas

throughout the state, including in KALA in 1996. 

 Brasher (1996) quantified composition and abundance of native stream fish species 

utilizing quadrats at permanent monitoring stations from the mouth to the headwaters in 

Waikolu and Pelekunu streams. Surveys were conducted quarterly over a two-year period 
103 

to provide substantial baseline data and to determine natural variation in distribution and 

density over time. 

 Brasher (1997a) used six-sampling station in Waikolu Stream to evaluate longitudinal 

changes in physical parameters and habitat use by fishes, crustaceans, and mollusks. By 

comparing Waikolu with adjacent Pelekunu Stream, the study also investigated the 

impact of stream diversions on freshwater biota. 

 Between 1992 and 1994, Brasher studied the distribution and abundance of Neritina 

granosa (hihiwai) at 27 permanent monitoring stations in Waikolu Stream. This study 

also investigated the live-history characteristics of the species, including reproduction, 

recruitment, growth, and movement (Brasher 1997b). 

 Kondratieff et al. (1997) investigated the life cycle of Cheumatopsyche pettiti (caddisfly) 

in Waikolu Stream from 1992 to 1994. Samples were collected at three sites on the 

stream using a modified Hess bottom sampler. 

 Ron Englund and Randall Filbert of the Hawaii Biological Survey, Bishop Museum, 

conducted biological monitoring in Waikolu Stream in 1997 (Englund and Filbert 1997). 

 Way et al. (1998) examined the reproductive biology of Lentipes concolor in Waikolu 

Stream. Another objective of this study was to determine the impacts of diversions on the 

reproductive cycle of L. concolor by comparing diverted Waikolu with undistributed 

Makamaka‘ole Stream on West Maui. 

 In 2005, a USGS team conducted faunal inventories in Wai‘ale‘ia and Waikolu Streams. 

This study focused on insects, fishes, mollusks, and crustaceans. A publication from this 

study is still in progress. 

 In 2006, Polhemus collected survey notes and created a map of damselfly locations in 

numerous streams, including Waihanau, Wai‘ale‘ia, Waikolu, and Waioho‘okalo streams. 

Other: 

 The Hawai‘i Stream Assessment inventoried streams and rivers throughout the state and 

assessed their overall aquatic, riparian, cultural, and recreational value (Hawai‘i 

Cooperative National Park Studies Unit 1990). 

 The Hawaii Agriculture Research Center initiated a review of the Molokai Irrigation 

System in 2001, which described the existing system and recommended changes to 

mitigate the current water shortage problem on the island (Santo 2001). 

 In 2002, botanist Maya LeGrande collected freshwater algae near the Kūka‘iwa‘a 

peninsula. These algae were identified by Dr. Alison Sherwood at the University of 

Hawaii at Manoa (LeGrande 2002). 
104 

 The Hawai‘i Division of Aquatic Resources (DAR) recently published the Hawaii 

Watershed Atlas (Parham et al. 2008). The Atlas includes assessments for Waihanau, 

Wai‘ale‘ia, Waikolu, Wainēnē, Anapuhi, and Waioho‘okalo streams. 

2.2.4.2 Physical Environment: 

Table 2.2-2 summarizes the known streams and riverine habitats at KALA. Waikolu and 

Waihanau streams were identified as candidate streams for preservation protection in the Hawaii 

Stream Assessment (Hawai‘i Cooperative National Park Studies Unit 1990). Table 2.2-3 

summarizes the resource assessments in the Hawaii Stream Assessment (Hawai‘i Cooperative 

National Park Studies Unit 1990) for the various streams present at KALA. 

Table 2.2-2. Streams within KALA, from west to east. 

Stream Name Length Type DAR Watershed Notes 

Awahua 2.79 km 

(1.74 mi) Intermittent Waihanau Only lower reach within KALA 

Puwahi/Keolewa 5.33 km 

(3.31 mi) Intermittent Waihanau Only lower reach within KALA 

Waihanau 13.5 km 

(8.4 mi) 

Perennial/ 

Interrupted Waihanau Mostly within KALA except for headwaters 

Wai‘ale‘ia 9.5 km 

(5.9 mi) 

Perennial/ 

Continuous Wai'ale'ia Completely within KALA 

Waikolu 25.4 km 

(15.8 mi) 

Perennial/ 

Continuous Waikolu Mostly within KALA except for headwaters 

Wainēnē 2.1 km 

(1.3 mi) 

Perennial/ 

Continuous Wainēnē Only partially within KALA 

Anapuhi 1.9 km 

(1.2 mi) 

Perennial/ 

Continuous Anapuhi Only headwaters within KALA 

Waiohookalo 8.3 km 

(5.1 mi) 

Perennial/ 

Continuous Waiohookalo Only headwaters within KALA 

Source: Hawai‘i Cooperative National Park Studies Unit (1990), Parham et al. (2008). 

Table 2.2-3. Resource assessment for the KALA streams from Hawaii Stream Assessment. 

Stream 

Resource Assessment Candidate 

Aquatic Riparian Cultural Recreational Stream 

Waikolu Outstanding Substantial Substantial Outstanding Y 

Waiohookalo Outstanding Substantial --- Limited N 

Wainēnē --- Outstanding --- Moderate N 

Waihanau --- Substantial Outstanding Substantial Y 

Wai’ale’ia --- --- Substantial Substantial N 

Anapuhi --- Substantial Substantial Substantial N 

Source: Hawai‘i Cooperative National Park Studies Unit (1990). 

Waikolu Stream: Waikolu Stream is a perennial stream deeply entrenched in the floor of Waikolu 

Valley. It is artificially interrupted by water diversion structures in its upper reaches. The valley, 

like most north shore Moloka‘i streams, is wide at the mouth and narrow with steep valley walls 
105 

in the upper portion. The valley has a unique topography and drainage structure compared to the 

nearby Pelekunu and Wailau valleys (Diaz et al. 1995). The steep headwaters arise from 

mountain bogs between Pepeopae and Pu‘u Ali‘i just above an elevation of 1,219 m (4,000 ft) on 

the interfluve that separates Waikolu and Pelekunu valleys. The headwater reach drops rapidly to 

the midreach (500 m or 1,650 ft elevation), which has a moderate gradient and numerous small 

waterfalls and rapids. The mouth of Waikolu Stream consists of a relatively shallow boulder 

riffle (Brasher 1996, Polhemus 1996). The location of the opening to the sea can change as 

winter storms rearrange the boulder rampart at the shoreline. 

Large boulders are deposited throughout the streambed (Brasher 1996). The substratum in the 

stream is a mixture of gravel, cobble, boulders, and volcanic bedrock. Waikolu Stream has a 

dendritic (highly branched) drainage pattern with numerous small, spring-fed tributaries and 

rheocrenes entering along the middle reaches (Polhemus 1996, Way et al. 1998). The stream is 

heavily shaded in its upper reaches by Aleurites moluccana (kukui) and Psidium spp., but the 

canopy becomes progressively more open downstream (Polhemus 1996). 

Rainfall in Waikolu Valley accumulates in dike walled compartments (Division of Water and 

Land Development 1994). Waikolu Stream has a large perennial flow because the valley drains 

many of these large, near-parallel dike-impounded water bodies, as well as several perched-water 

bodies (Takasaki 1986). 

Upper Waikolu Stream has been diverted for human use by the Molokai Irrigation System since 

November 1960. Water taken from Waikolu Stream is transported through the 8.2 km (5.1 mi) 

Waikolu Tunnel for use in the western and southern portions of Moloka‘i (Brasher 1996). Three 

surface water diversion structures exist at approximately 304 m (1,000 ft) elevation; two 

diversions occur on tributaries to Waikolu Stream and one on the main stream. There is also a 

surface water diversion structure at 223 m (730 ft), which collects and pumps water up to the 

Waikolu Tunnel (Figure 2.2-7). The Molokai Irrigation System diverts roughly 710 m2

 h-1 (4.5 

MGD) (Way et al. 1998). Six wells have been drilled, five in the valley and one in the tunnel 

(Brasher 1996); however, their current operational status is unknown. 

Three USGS stream gages were recently operating on Waikolu Stream (Table 2.2-4). A single 

gage (16405500) was located in the upper reach of Waikolu Stream at altitude 275 m (900 ft). 

Another gage (16408000) was on Waikolu Stream below the pipeline crossing at 77 m (252 ft) 

from 1919 to 1996. Another gage operated in the Molokai Tunnel east portal (16405100) from 

1966 to 2002. Gage locations are shown in Figures 2.2-6 and 2.2-7. 

Table 2.2-4. USGS stream gages in Waikolu Valley. 

Gage number Elevation Period of Record 

16408000 77 m (252 ft) 1919–1996 

16406000 198 m (650 ft) 1920–1923 

16405500 275 m (900 ft) 1956–2003 

16405100 280 m (919 ft) 1966–2002 

Source: http://waterdata.usgs.gov/hi/nwis/sw
106 

Figure 2.2-7. Molokai irrigation system in Waikolu Valley. 

Source: USGS; National Park Service

Legend

Park Boundary

Stream Gages

Wells

Pumping Station

Dam/Diversion

Springs

Streams

Perennial

Intermittent

Water Routes

ARTIFICIAL PATH

CONNECTOR

PIPELINE

1,000 0 1,000 500

Feet

500 0 500 250

Meters

16405100

MOLOKAI TUNNEL AT EAST PORTAL

16406000

WAIKOLU STR AT ALT 650 FT NR KALAUPAPA

16405500

WAIKOLU STR AT ALT 900 FT NR KALAUPAPA

16408000

WAIKOLU STR BELOW PIPELINE CROSSING NR KALAUPAPA

Upper Diversions

Lower Diversion/

Pumping Station Waikolu

Kalaupapa National Historic Park
107 

Daily discharge at USGS stations 16408000, 16405500, and 16405100 is shown in Figures 2.2-8 

to 2.2-10, respectively. There are often high peaks in the mean daily flows. Base flows at the 

USGS gaging station near the mouth of Waikolu Stream (16408000) ranged from 0.28 to 0.85 

m3

 s-1 (9.89 to 30 cfs) during the rainy season and less than 0.28 m3 s-1 (9.89 cfs) during the dry 

season (Kondratieff et al. 1997). 

Temperature measurements taken at three USGS gaging stations on Waikolu Stream increased 

slightly between 1969 and 1898 (Figure 2.2-11). Polhemus (1996) found that water temperatures 

along the main channel of Waikolu Stream ranged from 18°C at 180 m (590 ft) to 21°C at 80 m 

(262 ft). The water temperature in the spring-fed tributaries was slightly colder, measured as 

19°C (Polhemus 1996). From 1969 to 1985, the lower and middle USGS stations experienced a 

drop in pH (Figure 2.2-12). During this period, the State of Hawaii Water Quality Standards 

(WQS) upper limit for pH levels in surface water resources was exceeded nine times (DeVerse 

and DiDonato 2006). 

Water diversion has altered the natural base flow of the stream. The lower reach maintains 

continuous flow due to intermediate surface runoff and groundwater accretion. In contrast, 

intermediate reaches below the diversion are dry for most of the year. It has been estimated that 

the intermediate reaches of Waikolu Stream carry only 50% of the natural undiverted flow 

conditions, while the lower reaches carry 70% (Brasher 1996); however, the accuracy of these 

estimates may be in question due to the short duration of these studies. 

Impact of these diversions to stream flow is shown in Figure 2.2-13. The instantaneous 

measurements of discharge at the upper level intake are generally higher (mean = 3.9 cfs) than at 

the station just below it (mean = 2.7 cfs) and much lower than the lowest elevation station (10.4 

cfs) (DeVerse and DiDonato 2006). The impact of water withdrawals by the diversions is also 

dependent on the amount of stream flow. The diversions have the greatest hydrological impact 

on low flows, with levels of depletions reaching 50%, and the least impact on very high flows 

(Diaz et al. 1995). 

Historic USGS data indicate that before the stream was diverted, periods of high flow greater 

than 0.30 m3

 s

-1 occurred in the winter and spring, followed by drier periods of greater than 0.14 

m3

 s

-1 in the summer and fall. Once the Molokai Irrigation System became operational, there was 

a reduction in flow for all months. 

Concerned about the potential impacts of stream dewaterment upon the native amphidromous 

fauna in Waikolu Stream, WRD initiated a project to demonstrate the impact of the diversions 

and well pumping on the natural flow regime of the stream. As stated above, WRD collected 

discharge data at two locations on Waikolu Stream between 1993 and 1996 (J. Hughes/NPS, 

pers. comm.). Immediately downstream of the lower-most diversion, the lowest and highest daily 

mean discharge collected during this time period was 0.12 and 149 cfs, respectively. Above the 

upper-most surface water diversion, the lowest and highest daily mean discharge was reported as 

0.3 and 63 cfs, respectively (NPS, unpublished). 
108 

Figure 2.2-8. Daily discharge at USGS gage 16408000 over the period of record. 

Figure 2.2-9. Daily discharge at USGS gage 16405500 over the period of record. 
109 

Figure 2.2-10. Daily discharge at USGS gage 16405100 over the period of record. 

Figure 2.2-11. Temperature measurements at three USGS gaging stations on Waikolu Stream between 

1969 and 1989 from DeVerse and DiDonato (2006). 
110 

Figure 2.2-12. pH values measured at two USGS continuous record stations between 1969 and 1985 

from DeVerse and DiDonato (2006). USEPA maximum and minimum water quality standards (WQS) are 

shown by solid red lines and the State of Hawaii WQS are indicated by green. 

Figure 2.2-13. Instantaneous discharge from three USGS gaging stations along Waikolu stream in KALA 

between 1969 and 1989 from DeVerse and DiDonato (2006). 
111 

CWRM later requested that the Hawaii Department of Agriculture install a device on the uppermost surface water diversion to allow some flow to bypass the diversion structure. However, the 

bypassed flows were lost to seepage into the stream bed before reaching the lower diversion 

structure. The project was eventually abandoned by the WRD (J. Hughes/NPS, pers. comm.). 

Brasher (1996, 1997a, 1997b) documented microhabitat and substrate composition for certain 

sections or stations of Waikolu Stream. In and just below the diverted section in Waikolu 

Stream, 93% of the macrohabitat at sampling stations was classified as "pool," indicating 

negligible flow through the section during the period of study. Boulders were the most common 

substrate. 

Wai‘ale‘ia Stream: Wai‘ale‘ia Stream is naturally intermittent and drains a narrow valley, 

discharging into the Pacific Ocean across a steep boulder beach (Clark 1989). Wai‘ale‘ia Stream 

carries little flow during the dry season because its channel cuts less deeply into suspended water 

bodies (Takasaki 1986). In dry periods, surface water in this stream does not reach the ocean. 

Waihanau Stream: Waihanau Stream bisects Waihanau Valley and enters the ocean just south of 

the Kalaupapa Settlement (GK & Associates 1991). The stream bed is filled with huge boulders 

that originated from upstream landslides (Takasaki 1986, GK & Associates 1991). These 

boulders accumulate at a bend in the stream southwest of the settlement at 18 m (60 ft) elevation. 

This accumulation threatens nearby structures in the settlement because the stream jumps the 

bank at this point during heavy flow periods. 

A single stream gage operated on Waihanau Stream (gage 16409000) between 1940 and 1944 

(DeVerse and DiDonato 2006). Three wells were drilled on the east side of lower Waihanau 

Valley to depths of 150, 200, and 582 ft. Well water was determined to be of excellent chemical 

quality during that time (Takasaki 1986). The deepest well supplies water to the residents of 

Kalaupapa. GK & Associates (1991) noted that the stream is diverted near the headwaters, 

causing the stream to be dry.5

 

Other Streams: Between 1940 and 1944, a stream gage (16410000) was placed on Keolewa 

Stream (DeVerse and DiDonato 2006). Monthly discharge at USGS gage 16410000 during that 

period is displayed in Figure 2.2-14. 

2.2.4.3 Ecological Community: 

Characteristic macrofauna of Hawaiian streams include five species of gobies: Awaous 

guamensis (o‘opu nakea), Sicyopterus stimpsoni (o‘opu nopili), Lentipes concolor (o‘opu 

alamo‘o); and the eleotrids Eleotris sandwicensis (o‘opu akupa) and Stenogobius hawaiiensis 

(o‘opu naniha). Two gastropods, Neritina granosa (hīhīwai) and the estuarine Neritina 

vespertina (hapawai) are common in many East Maui, Hawai‘i, Moloka‘i and Kaua‘i streams. 

The shrimp Atyoida bisulcata (‘ōpae kalaole) inhabits the middle and upper reaches of pristine 

mountain streams statewide and is locally abundant in plunge pools and irrigation ditches. The 

Hawaiian prawn Macrobrachium grandimanus (‘ōpae ‘oeha‘a) inhabits estuaries and the 

terminal reaches of streams. 

 

5

 GK & Associates (1991) was the only reference that mentioned diversion of Waihanau Stream. The date the stream 

was diverted was not given in the report. 
112 

Figure 2.2-14. Monthly discharge at USGS gage (16410000) on Keolea Stream over the period of record. 

Original descriptions of these species first begin to appear in scientific literature in the 19th

century. Between 1900 and 1955, several authors revised these early catalogues of fishes and 

invertebrates. Life history aspects of Hawaiian stream fauna appeared in Edmondson (1929), 

Mainland (1939), Ego (1956), and Lindstrom (1998). 

All of these species share the same life history strategy referred to as amphidromy. Myers (1949) 

used the term amphidromous to describe fishes that undergo regular, obligatory migration 

between freshwaters and the sea “at some stage in their life cycle other than the breeding 

period.” McDowall (1988) described two forms of amphidromy. All the Hawaiian 

amphidromous species exhibit ‘freshwater amphidromy’ where spawning takes place in 

freshwater and the newly hatched larvae are swept into the sea by stream currents. In the marine 

environment, the larvae undergo development in the zooplankton before returning to freshwater 

to grow to maturity. The length of time spent in marine plankton is unknown for most species. 

Once they re-enter a stream mouth, post-larvae migrate upstream rapidly where they grow and 

reproduce as adults (Maciolek 1977, Ford and Kinzie 1982, Radtke and Kinzie 1991, Nishimoto 

and Kuamo‘o 1996, 1997, Keith 2003). Lindstrom (1999) developed a method to identify newly 

hatched freshwater fish larvae, and Tate et al. (1992) developed a key for the identification of 

post-larval Hawaiian freshwater gobies. Unlike diadromous salmon, amphidromous species in 

Hawai‘i show no definitive evidence of returning to their natal stream. 

An important ecological characteristic of the amphidromous fauna is the ability (in varying 

degrees among species) to move upstream, surmounting riffles and small falls, and for some 

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

Discharge (cubic ft/sec)

Month

Monthly Discharge at Keolea Stream (1641000)

1940

1941

1942

1943

1944
113 

species even high waterfalls (Ford and Kinzie 1982, Radtke and Kinzie 1996). Amphidromous 

species occur throughout the world’s tropical and subtropical freshwater streams, especially high 

islands. The native Hawaiian species are descendents from amphidromous species elsewhere and 

developed this life style prior to their arrival in Hawai‘i (Myers 1949, Kinzie 1991, McDowall 

2003). The life history characteristics and ecological requirements of these species reflect a 

pattern common to amphidromous species throughout the world, not one specific to the 

Hawaiian Islands. 

In addition to the amphidromous macrofauna, some native marine species are important in 

Hawaiian stream ecology. Until fairly recently, these species received less attention than the 

amphidromous species. However the native insects, snails, and other invertebrates are important 

for their diversity, endemism, and their contribution to the freshwater ecosystem dynamics. 

Fishes commonly found in the terminal and lower reaches of small Hawaiian streams include the 

endemic predatory flagtails Kuhlia xenura and K. sandvicensis (‘āholehole). Kuhlia spp. are not 

amphidromous, but are itinerant marine species. Adults live and breed in nearshore coastal reefs, 

but juveniles commonly invade stream mouths in large schools, presumably to avoid predation 

and to use post-larval and juvenile gobies as a food source. Many other itinerant marine species 

may undergo juvenile development in estuaries of large streams. 

Kuhlia spp. are known to attack nests of goby eggs (Ha and Kinzie 1996) and may also consume 

returning post-larval gobies. These non-amphidromous species, however, do not have the ability 

to climb waterfalls so they typically occur only in streams with low-gradient terminal reaches or 

estuaries. Additionally, numerous alien stream animals, both amphidromous (e.g., 

Macrobrachium lar) and those restricted to freshwater, are impacting native Hawaiian species 

including fishes, amphibians, and crustaceans (Yamamoto and Tagawa 2000). 

Most prior research on Hawaiian freshwater ecology has dealt with individual species and 

populations of the characteristic macrofauna. Little is known about the response of Hawaiian 

streams to changes in stream flow (Covich 1988, Chong et al. 2000, Larned 2000, Larned et al. 

2003, Kido 1996a, 1996b, and Kinzie et al. 2006). Research over the past decade on the genetics 

of stream fishes suggests that each of the Hawaiian freshwater gobies is a member of a statewide 

metapopulation (Fitzsimons et al. 1990, Zink et al. 1996, Chubb et al. 1998, D. Lindstrom/ 

University of North Carolina, pers. comm.). A metapopulation is of a group of spatially 

separated populations of the same species in which gene flow occurs with sufficient frequency to 

prevent isolation and subsequent speciation. The native Hawaiian amphidromous fishes, shrimp, 

and mollusks found in Moloka‘i streams are members of the same metapopulations found in 

‘Oahu, Maui, Kaua‘i, and Hawai‘i Island streams. In the case of native amphidromous species, 

spatially separated (by island and stream) populations exchange individuals via their oceanic 

larval pool and recolonize sites from which the species has been extirpated. There is no evidence 

of within-archipelago diversification or speciation of the Hawaiian stream fishes, indicating 

among-island gene flow attributable to amphidromy (Zink et al. 1996, Chubb et al. 1998). 

When larvae hatch, they are swept into the sea by stream currents and temporarily undergo 

development in the marine zooplankton before returning to freshwater as 10–15mm long postlarvae to migrate upstream and continue their growth to maturity. Species with extended ocean 
114 

larval lives and those capable of delaying metamorphosis are able to achieve greater dispersal 

among island streams. Radtke et al. (1988), Radtke and Kinzie (1991), and Radtke et al. (2001) 

provide excellent data on the length of larval life (LLL) in four species of amphidromous gobies 

from Hawaiian Island streams. The mean LLL for the endemic Lentipes concolor was 84 days 

(n=236), while the mean LLL for the indigenous Awaous guamensis was 161 days (n=8) (Radtke 

et al. 2001). 

Recruitment of post-larvae from the oceanic pool, a characteristic of amphidromy, allows rapid 

recolonization of streams after catastrophic events such as landslides, floods, hurricanes, and 

droughts (Ford and Yuen 1986; Fitzsimons and Nishimoto 1995; Kido 1996a, 1996b; Kinzie 

1988; Chubb et al. 1998; Way et al. 1998; McIntosh et al. 2002; Keith 2003; and McDowall 

1993, 1995, 2003), and prevents genetic isolation of populations. Holmquist et al. (1998) noted 

that gobies will recruit to any freshwater source regardless of the suitability of the habitat from 

which it flows. 

In the recent past, aquatic biologists in Hawai‘i considered the presence of all the native 

amphidromous species described above as an indicator of outstanding environmental quality. 

Conversely, the total absence of these species in streams between sea level and 457 m (1,500 ft) 

elevation was considered a possible indicator of environmental degradation (Hawaii Cooperative 

National Park Studies Unit 1990). However, community structure in a given Hawaiian stream 

may change frequently due to random processes affecting reproduction, recruitment of postlarvae, migration, predation, competition, and survival (Kinzie and Ford 1982, Kinzie 1988). 

Therefore, the absence of a given species at any reach and time must not be interpreted as a 

negative indicator of stream quality (Parham et al. 2008). 

Stream fauna reported from riverine habitats in KALA is summarized in Table 2.2-5. 

Waikolu Stream: The lower reaches of Waikolu Stream contain a dense and diverse assemblage 

of native macrofauna (Table 2.2-5). This portion of the stream provides habitat for all five native 

amphidromous fish species. Waikolu Stream has one of the highest densities of stream gobies in 

the Hawaiian Islands, with total fish densities approaching 4 to 8 individuals per m2

 (Brasher 

1996, 1997a). Waikolu also supports a dense population of the native Hawaiian stream snail 

Neritina granosa, which can be uncommon in some streams due to overfishing or other causes. 

Overall densities of Awaous guamensis were much lower in Waikolu Stream compared to 

Pelekunu Stream. Awaous guamensis was observed in the upper stations of Waikolu Stream 

above the diversion. Brasher (1996) suggested that the lack of fish in this area may be due to 

restricted upstream movement by the two dams and the reduction of flow (Brasher 1996). 

Sicyopterus stimpsoni are slightly more abundant in Pelekunu Stream than in Waikolu Stream. In 

Hawaii, Lentipes concolor typically increase in abundance with increasing distance upstream; 

however, L. concolor were more abundant in the lower reaches of Waikolu Stream, and less 

abundant in the higher reaches, especially above the diverted section. Brasher (1996) suggested 

that the lower number of L. concolor in the mid- and upper reaches of Waikolu Stream may be a 

result of the decreased flow and periodic dewatering of the stream section below the upper dam, 

reducing available habitat for the gobies and inhibiting upstream migration. 
115 

Table 2.2-5. Characteristic stream fauna reported from riverine habitats at KALA. 

Scientific Name Hawaiian, 

Common Name(s) Status1 Stream Location2

Waihanau Wai‘ale‘ia Waikolu Waioho‘okalo

Fishes 

Awaous guamensis ‘o‘opu nākea I X X X 

Eleotris sandwicensis ‘o‘opu akupa E X 

Kuhlia sandvicensis āholehole E X 

Lentipes concolor ‘o‘opu ‘alamo‘o, 

‘o‘opu hi‘ukole E X X X 

Sicyopterus 

stimpsoni ‘o‘opu nōpili E X X X 

Stenogobius 

hawaiiensis ‘o‘opu naniha E X 

Crustaceans 

Atyoida bisulcata ‘ōpae kala‘ole E X X X 

Macrobrachium 

grandimanus ‘ōpae ‘oeha‘a E X 

Macrobrachium lar Tahitian prawn N X X 

Mollusks 

Lymnaeid sp. lymnaeid snail N X 

Neritina granosa hīhīwai E X X X 

Amphibians 

Bufo marinus cane toad N X 

Insects 

Anax junius dragonfly green 

darner I X 

Limonia advena N X X 

Megalagrion 

blackburni 

Blackburn’s 

damselfly E X X 

Megalagrion 

calliphya 

beautiful Hawaiian 

damselfly E X 

Megalagrion 

hawaiiense 

Hawaiian upland 

damselfly E X X X 

Megalagrion 

nigrohamatum 

nigrohamatum 

Nigrohamatum 

megalagrion

damselfly 

E X 

Megalagrion 

pacificum 

Pacific Hawaiian 

damselfly E X X 

Megalagrion 

xanthomelas 

orangeblack 

Hawaiian damselfly E X X 

1) Biographic status: E = endemic (occurring only in the Hawaiian Islands); I = indigenous (native to the 

Hawaiian Islands and elsewhere); N = non-native or introduced (brought to the Hawaiian Islands after 

1778). 

2) Note: Not all streams in KALA have been surveyed. 

Source: Parham et al. (2008). 
116 

In comparison, the 1986 survey by DAR biologists, found large native fish and crustaceans 

above the upper diversion dam, suggesting that stream flows are of sufficient volume and 

frequency to provide continuous ecological connectivity for amphidromous species from the 

mouth to the upper reaches. It also suggests that the diversion dam itself is not a physical barrier 

to upstream migration. 

Insects: Hawaiian stream insects primarily inhabit the algae or moss mats on rocks wetted by the 

stream. Cheumatopsyche pettiti, a North American net-spinning caddisfly, was unintentionally 

introduced to ‘Oahu and has since spread to Maui, Moloka‘i, and Kaua‘i. The larvae of C. pettiti

have become an important part of the diet of native stream fish (Kondratieff et al. 1997).

Cheumatopsyche pettiti has been recorded in Waikolu Stream. 

Other insects documented in the riverine habitat at KALA are listed in Table 2.2-5. Limonia 

advena (Diptera: Tipulidae) were collected from 43 to 335 m (141 to 1099 ft) in Waikolu, 

Wailau, and Wai‘ale‘ia streams (Evenhuis and Eldredge 1999). 

Algae: Three genera of freshwater algae have been identified in the freshwater pools and seeps 

near the Kūka‘iwa‘a peninsula. Vaucheria sp., which is a new record for the Hawaiian Islands, is 

a mat-forming Tribophyte (yellow-green algae). Two filamentous Chlorophyta (green algae) 

were also identified—Spirogya sp. and Mougeotia sp. (LeGrande 2002). 

Threatened and Endangered Species: A proposed rule was published by the U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service in July 2009 to list Megalagrion pacificum as endangered 

(USFWS 2009b). It has been a candidate endangered species since 1994.

Historically, M. pacificum was the most common and widespread of the native 

damselfly species (Gagne and Howarth 1982). Current populations are known to 

occur on Maui, Moloka‘i, and Hawai‘i Island. The species is believed to be restricted 

to seepage-fed pools along overflow channels at low elevations in the terminal 

reaches of perennial streams (USFWS 2007). 

Megalagrion xanthomelas is a candidate endangered species known to occur on

‘Oahu, Maui, Moloka‘i, and Hawai‘i Island. The species was historically abundant 

throughout all the main Hawaiian Islands. A translocation program for Megalagrion 

xanthomeles was initiated on ‘Oahu in July 2003 (USFWS 2007, 2008a). 

Both M. pacificum and M. xanthomeles have been recorded from Waikolu Stream. Megalagrion 

pacificum has been recorded in Wai‘ale‘ia Stream, and M. xanthomeles has been observed in 

Waihanau Stream. Several individuals of M. xanthomeles were observed flying along the 

margins of five slow, shallow, stream pools in July 1995 (Polhemus 1996). Megalagrion 

nigrohamatum nigrohamatum, a USFWS species of concern, has only been documented in 

Waikolu Stream. 

In the 1980s, the USFWS listed Lentipes concolor as a category 1 candidate endangered species 

based on limited distribution and abundance data (Dodd et al. 1985). Statewide reconnaissance 

surveys by DAR biologists greatly increased the number of streams in which L. concolor was 

found (Fitzsimons 1990, Higashi and Yamamoto 1993, Devick et al. 1995), leading to the 

subsequent delisting of L. concolor in 1996. 
117 

2.2.4.4 Information Gaps: 

Water Quality: Surface water quality monitoring was initiated by the National Park Service in 

2008, but no results have been reported to date. Additional studies should include water, soil, and 

tissue contaminants, organic enrichment, and sedimentation. Poor water quality can impact 

growth, survival, and reproduction rates among benthic organisms (DeVerse and DiDonato 

2006). 

Algae: There is a need to expand the knowledge of algal diversity in Hawaiian freshwater 

systems. It is also necessary to sample more stream segments, particularly concentrating on 

remote locations (Filkin et al. 2003). Algal communities can serve as indicators of ambient water 

quality conditions (DeVerse and DiDonato 2006). Macroalgae (benthic algae that have a discrete 

thallus visible to the naked eye) are important in stream ecology by serving as food and structural 

materials for fishes and invertebrates (Sherwood 2006). 

Fauna: Renewed baseline inventories of macrofauna and invertebrates in all streams are needed. 

In particular, no faunal information exists for the intermittent streams (Wainēnē, Anapuhi). 

Integrity of biological assemblages, habitat issues, and impacts of diversions also needs to be 

addressed. 

Invasive Species: Brasher (1997b) recommended that Waikolu Stream provides an ideal 

opportunity to investigate the impacts of predation by the introduced prawn Macrobrachium lar

on Neritina granosa and on other native macrofauna. 

Disease: There are no studies on the extent of parasites on native stream animals. This study can 

influence the conservation and management of native stream fishes and invertebrates (Font 

2007). 

Diversion Impacts: It would be useful to follow up on Brasher’s work in Waikolu Stream to 

determine if there has been an improvement in the flows over the dam and/or any changes in the 

distribution of Hawaiian stream species. It would also be important to install a pressure gauge 

below the lower diversion dam (where USGS gauge 16406000 was previously operated). This 

reach is sometimes dewatered, and documenting the percentage of time this occurs is critical for 

assessing the continuity of the upper reaches. More continuous stream monitoring on all streams 

with records of daily discharge would allow the National Park Service to better assess their water 

availability situation. In the future, it is possible that CWRM may require that Interim Instream 

Flow Standards (IIFS) be established for Waikolu Stream, which may require execution of 

instream studies to evaluate the potential impacts of incremental flow changes on native 

amphidromous species. 

2.3 Marine and Intertidal Zones 

The park boundary of KALA extends 0.4 km (0.25 mi) off the coastline and encompasses two 

offshore islets, ‘Ōkala and Huelo, along with one emergent pinnacle, Nāmoku. Three marine 

habitat types are identified in this report, the intertidal, the coastal reefs, and the surrounding 

reefs of the offshore islets (Figure 1.4-1). The intertidal habitat at KALA encompasses 0.57 km2

(0.22 mi2

) of the coastline and is present along both the east and west side of the peninsula. The 
118 

vertical extent of this habitat zone is defined by the Mean Higher High Water (MHHW) and 

Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW) elevations. Approximately 7.5 km2 (2.9 mi2) of marine habitat 

exists within the park boundaries to a depth of 40 m and is comprised of coral communities on 

volcanic hardbottom and sandy bottoms or unconsolidated sediments. The submerged lands 

within the KALA boundary are considered a Special Ecological Area by the National Park 

Service. 

2.3.1 Coastal Reefs 

2.3.1.1 Previous and Ongoing Studies and Inventories: 

Information from abiotic monitoring and biological studies of the coastal reefs are available for 

KALA. These studies are listed below. 

Abiotic Factors: 

 The National Park Service and I&M have monitored water quality in the marine 

environment since 2008 (unpublished). 

 NPS staff has monitored temperature at two stations on the east and west side of the 

peninsula since 2005. 

 NPS staff has monitored the physical oceanographic factors (e.g., wave height, currents, 

salinity, temperature) of the nearshore environment since 2007 using one fixed station on 

the west side of the peninsula (unpublished). 

 A long term climate trend study was scheduled to begin in 2009. 

Algae and Invertebrates: 

 UH-Manoa conducted a marine algae inventory in 2005 and then the NPS I&M program 

started monitoring marine algae at KALA in 2006 as part of the marine benthic protocol 

(unpublished). 

 NPS staff is monitoring the marine benthic community between 10 m and 20 m depths to 

determine its composition and physical structure (unpublished). Annual monitoring 

commenced in 2006. Fifteen fixed (permanent) transects were established at KALA in 

2006 to document long-term changes in benthic cover. An additional 15 temporary 

transects are also surveyed each year to increase the spatial characterization of the 

benthic community at KALA. 

 NPS staff also initiated studies on the annual rate of coral settlement for different species 

within KALA (unpublished). In 2005, one fixed site was randomly selected within three 

strata (east, west, and north) around the park as part of a pilot project. These three sites 

were subsequently incorporated into the 15 fixed sites/transects that have been monitored 

annually since 2006. 

 KALA staff initiated a marine algae study in 2006 to document changes in the nitrogen 

15 isotope ratios of three different algal species before and after the cesspool upgrade at 
119 

KALA. A classic before, after, control, and impact (BACI) design was used. Subsequent 

surveys were conducted in 2007 and 2008. 

 Brown et al. (2008) conducted a study of the coral reef benthos within KALA harbor. 

The monitoring was initiated in 2005 to assess impacts of proposed structural 

improvements. Subsequent surveys have been conducted in 2007 and 2008. 

 Acanthaster planci population genetics were documented in 2007as part of a UH-Hilo 

master’s thesis project for Molly Timmers (unpublished). 

Vertebrates: 

 Beets et al. (2006) conducted an inventory of marine fishes at KALA as part of an 

assessment of marine vertebrates in at four national parks in Hawai‘i. The other three 

national parks were on the Island of Hawai'i: Pu`ukoholā Heiau National Historical Park 

(PUHE), Kaloko - Honokōhau National Historical Park (KAHO), and Pu`uhonua o 

Hōnaunau National Historical Park (PUHO). 

 NPS staff has monitored marine fish abundance, size, and biomass between 10 m and 20 

m depth annually since 2006 to document long term trends (unpublished). The same fixed 

transects and temporary transects as for algae and invertebrates are employed. 

 Brown et al. (2008) monitored marine fish abundance, size, and biomass in 2005, 2007, 

and 2008 as part of the KALA harbor survey. 

At present, there is insufficient monitoring data to determine biologically significant long-term 

trends (E. Brown/NPS, pers. comm.); therefore, no statistical analyses of benthic cover or species 

compositions have been conducted. All comparisons between years or areas of coastal reefs are 

purely descriptive at this time. 

2.3.1.2 Physical Environment: 

Wave Energy: The wave energy along the KALA coast is dominated by the year-round 

tradewind swell and the seasonal North Pacific swell generated by winter storms (Aucan 2006). 

North Pacific swells occur in the winter and are predominantly from the north-west, though 

directionality can vary between 282° and 45° (Vitousek et al. 2008). Significant wave heights of 

north Pacific swells arriving in Hawai‘i average 7.7 m (25 ft) in deep water with peak periods of 

14–18 s. Tradewinds occur about 75% of the year, generating northeasterly tradewind swells 

resulting in choppy seas with an average wave height of 2 m (6.6 ft) and periods of 9 seconds 

(Vitousek et al 2008). However, the size and number of swell events is highly variable from year 

to year. 

Wave climate data has been collected in the nearshore environment of KALA since 2001 from 

three different stations (NPS unpublished, see Figures 2.3-1, 2.3-2). The North Pacific swells 

begin in October and continue through March. The average significant wave heights range from 

1.2 to 2.3 m (3.9–7.4 ft) with the highest waves (though less frequent) approaching from a north-
120 

west direction (Figures 2.3-1, 2.3-2). The tradewind swell is predominantly north-east with 

smaller wave heights of 1.1–1.4 m (3.6–5.0 ft, NPS unpublished). 

Figure 2.3-1. Average significant wave heights (radial axis in metres) for different wave directions 

(degrees) at KALA. Data are pooled from 2001 to 2008. 

 

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

0

22.5

45

67.5

90

112.5

135

157.5

180

202.5

225

247.5

270

292.5

315

337.5

Kalaupapa

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

0

22.5

45

67.5

90

112.5

135

157.5

180

202.5

225

247.5

270

292.5

315

337.5

Kahiu

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

0

22.5

45

67.5

90

112.5

135

157.5

180

202.5

225

247.5

270

292.5

315

337.5

Kalawao
121 

Figure 2.3-2. Wave energy zones and wave direction. 

Source: USGS; National Park Service

Legend

Park Boundary

Wave Energy Zones

Direct North Pacific SwellDirect North Pacific Swell andIndirect Northeast Trade Wind WavesDirect Northeast Trade Wind Waves andIndirect North Pacific SwellDirect North Pacific Swell andDirect Northeast Trade Wind Waves

Northeast Trade Wind WavesNorth Pacific Swells

2,000 0 2,000 1,000

Feet

1,000 0 1,000 500

Meters

Pacific Ocean

Huelo Islet Huelo Islet

Okala Islet Okala Islet

Kalawao

Kahiu Point Kahiu Point

Kalaupapa Kalaupapa

Kauhako

Crater

Kalaupapa Peninsula Kalaupapa Peninsula

Namoku

D

B

F

A

C

E

50

201510

0

22.5

45

67.5

90

112.5

135

157.5

180

202.5

225

247.5

270

292.5

315

337.5

2001‐2005

KalaupapaWave

Direction Rose

50

201510

0

22.5

45

67.5

90

112.5

135

157.5

180

202.5

225

292.5

270

247.5

315

337.5

2001‐2005 Kahiu

Wave Direction Rose

50

201510

0

22.5

45

67.5

90

112.5

135

157.5

180

202.5

225

292.5

270

247.5

315

337.5

2001‐2005 Kalawao

Wave Direction Rose

Radial axes = % of time

Radial axes = % of time Radial axes = % of time

Kalaupapa National Historic Park
122 

The KALA coastline was delineated into different wave energy zones by SWCA using the wave 

climate data (NPS, unpublished). Tradewinds and North Pacific swells were mapped onto the 

coastline using the midpoints of the two most most frequent swell directions for tradewind swell 

and North Pacific swell (e.g., the predominant wave direction for North Pacific swells was 0° 

and 337.5°; thus the swell direction was mapped as the midpoint of the two, at 348.75°). A total 

of four zones were identified (Figure 2.3-2). The area of highest wave energy is the tip of the 

Kalaupapa peninsula (Zone C), which is exposed to direct tradewind and North Pacific swell. 

The eastern-most shoreline of KALA (Zone F) similarly receives direct wave energy from both 

swells. 

The eastern side of the peninsula (Zone D) receives moderate wave energy year round, being 

exposed to direct tradewind swell and indirect wave energy from the North Pacific swell in the 

winter. The west side of the peninsula (Zone B) is protected from the tradewind swell (i.e., is 

relatively calm in the non-winter months) and is only exposed to the high energy North Pacific 

swell in the winter. The western portion of the shoreline beyond the peninsula (Zone A) is also 

directly exposed to the North Pacific swells in the winter, but also experiences tradewind swell 

wrapping from around the peninsular for the remainder of the year. Similarly, a small portion of 

the eastern coastline (Zone E) in the shadow of the offshore islets is exposed to the same wave 

regime. The following descriptions of the ecological community at KALA (Section 2.3.1.3) are 

divided into these zones. 

Water quality: Marine water quality is currently being monitored by the National Park Service as 

part of the I&M program, but data are not yet available (NPS and I&M, unpublished). The State 

DOH does not conduct water quality monitoring at KALA. However, the waters off Kalaupapa 

peninsula to the 100-fathom contour are rated AA by the Office of Environmental Planning, 

Hawaii Department of Health in their Water Quality Standard Maps (Department of Health 

1987). The objective of Class AA waters is that “these waters remain in their natural pristine 

state as nearly as possible with an absolute minimum of pollution or alteration of water quality 

from any human-caused source or actions. To the extent practicable, the wilderness character of 

these areas shall be protected” (HRS Chapter 11-54). 

Rugosity: The highest rugosity occurs at the tip of the Kalaupapa peninsula (Zone C) and 

declines as the reef progresses southward on both sides along the peninsula and further decreases 

along the coastline adjacent to the peninsula (Figure 2.3-3, NPS unpublished). 

2.3.1.3 Ecological Community: 

Benthic Community: The coastal coral reef communities at KALA are dominated by turf algae 

(69%). Corals and coralline algae comprise 14% of benthic cover, while fleshy macroalgae 

occupy 8% of the benthic cover (Figure 2.3-3 and 2.3-4). These data were summarized from 

benthic transect surveys conducted from 2004 to 2007 (NPS, unpublished). 

A total of 28 coral species have been recorded in transect surveys so far (NPS, unpublished). The 

dominant species of the coral community are Pocillopora meandrina, Porites lobata, Montipora 

patula, M. captitata, and Pocillopora eydouxi. These five coral species represent 91% of the 

coral cover observed in the coastal reefs (Figure 2.3-3 and 2.3-5, NPS unpublished). 
123 

Figure 2.3-3. Benthic cover–top five algae and coral species by wave energy zone (2004–2007). LegendPark Boundary Wave Energy Zones Direct North Pacific Swell Direct North Pacific Swell and Indirect Northeast Trade Wind Waves Direct Northeast Trade Wind Waves and

Indirect North Pacific SwellDirect North Pacific Swell andDirect Northeast Trade Wind Waves

Source: USGS; National Park Service

Algae - Top 5 Species(%Cover)

CyanobacteriaDictyota acutilobaLobophora variegataPadina australisAlgae Rhodophyta

3.6

Functional Groups(% Cover)

MacroalgaeCoralCoraline AlgaeMacroinvertsSand SubstrateTurf AlgaeOther

Coral - Top 5 Species(% Cover)

Pocillopora meandrinaPorites lobataMontipora patulaMontipora capitataPocillopora eydouxi

7

Rugosity

1.41.51.6

1.8

2,000 0 2,000 1,000

Feet

1,000 0 1,000 500

Meters

6.7

4.6

1.7

12.9

6.3

2.5

4.1

6.4

6.5

3.3

2.3

2

D

B

A

F

C

E

Kalaupapa National Historic Park
124 

Figure 2.3-4. Average percent cover of benthic substrate on coastal reefs at KALA. Data are pooled from 

2004 to 2007. 

Figure 2.3-5. Average relative abundance of the top five corals at KALA Data are pooled from 2004 to 

2007. 

It is not surprising that the coral community at KALA is dominated by the wave-resistant 

branching coral P. meandrina and the lobate coral P. lobata. These species do well along wave 

8%

9%

5%

1%

8%

69%

0%

Macroalgae

Coral

Coralline Algae

Macroinvertebrates

Sand/Substrate

Turf Algae

Other

67%

26%

3% 2% 2%

Pocillopora meandrina

Porites lobata

Montipora patula

Montipora capitata

Pocillopora eydouxi
125 

exposed north shore coastlines in Hawai‘i that are subjected to high wave energy from North 

Pacific storms (Jokiel et al. 2004). 

The highest coral and coralline algae cover (18.4% and 8.8% respectively) occurs in Zone C, the 

tip of the Kalaupapa peninsula, which partly accounts for the high rugosity in the zone (Figure 

2.3-3, NPS unpublished). However, there are few transects in this zone, and more transects 

should to be conducted by the National Park Service to determine if Zone C differs from 

surrounding zones (see Appendix 5 for transect level data). P. meandrina is the dominant coral 

species in the area. All other zones have similar coral cover to each other, and Zone A 

encompasses a wide stretch of sandy bottom (Appendix 5). 

The dominant coral species also show yearly settlement of larvae back into the population (Fig. 

2.3-6, NPS unpublished). Since coral settlement surveys started in 2006 (data from 2006–2008), 

there has been an upward trend for coral settlement for Montipora species in contrast to other 

genera. More years of data are needed to determine long-term trends due to the episodic nature 

of coral settlement. 

Figure 2.3-6. Coral settlement at KALA from 2006 to 2008. Error bars are standard error. 

A total of 39 macroalgal species was recorded in surveys (2004–2007) (NPS, unpublished). The 

dominant species of the macroalgal community are fleshy Rhodophyta (red algae), the brown 

algae (Padina australis, Lobophora variegata, and Dictyota acutiloba), and cyanobacteria (while 

not algae, these bacteria were included in the macroalgal category, Figure 2.3-3).

The five algal taxa represent 81% of the macroalga cover observed in the coastal reefs (Figure 

2.3-7 and 2.3-3). Macroalgal cover is also highest in zone C and F where wave energy is highest, 

and the macroalgal community is dominated by fleshy Rhodophytes. Fleshy Rhodophytes are 

also more prevalent on the east side of KALA than on the west side (Figure 2.3-3). 

0.0

50.0

100.0

150.0

200.0

250.0

300.0

350.0

400.0

2006 2007 2008

Coral settlement (no./m2/5 months)

Other

Porites

Pocillopora

Montipora
126 

The invasive algae Acanthophora spicifera has been documented only at one transect (NPS, 

unpublished). 

Fish Community: A total of 143 marine fish species have been recorded in the fish transect 

surveys conducted to date (surveys from 2004–2008, NPS upublished). More species occur over 

the coral reef hard bottom and uncolonized hardbottoms than over sandy substrate (Beets et al 

2006). 

Figure 2.3-7. Relative abundance of top five alga in KALA from 2004 to 2007. 

The top 10 most abundant marine fish species account for 73% of all individuals seen. The 

territorial pomacentrid Chromis vanderbilti, a small secondary consumer, accounted for 58% of 

all individuals. The top 10 most abundant species are dominated by primary and secondary 

consumers from the families Pomacentridae (damselfishes) and Acanthuridae (surgeonfishes) 

(Figure 2.3-8 a, b). Secondary consumers are the most abundant trophic level at KALA. This 

trend is consistent along the entire coastline of KALA (Figure 2.3-9 and Appendix 6 for transect 

level data). 

The biomass at KALA averages 1.71 ± 0.18 (SE) metric tons/ha (NPS, unpublished). A different 

assemblage of fishes compared to abundance make up the top 10 species by biomass. Kyphosus 

spp. (nenue), which are primary consumers, comprise 23% of the fish biomass, followed by the 

zooplanktivore (secondary consumer) Naso hexacanthus (kala holo). The remaining eight 

species are evenly represented by primary and secondary consumers as well as apex predators 

(Figure 2.3-10 a, b). Notably, the two apex predators with the highest biomass are Carangids, 

Caranx sexfaciatus (pake ulua) and Caranx melampygus ('ōmilu). The high biomass of apex 

predators (33% of the total fish biomass, Fig 2.3-10b) is a good indicator of a healthy reef 

ecosystem (Stevenson et al. 2006, Friedlander and DeMartini 2002). Total biomass of fish is 

higher along the peninsula than at coastlines adjacent to the peninsula (Figure 2.3-9). Higher 

39%

25%

23%

8%

5%

Rhodophyta

Cyanobacteria

Dictyota acutiloba

Padina australis

Lobophora variegata
127 

biomass of apex predators is also found along on the east side of the peninsula compared to the 

western side (Figure 2.3-9 and Appendix 7 for transect level data). 

(a) 

(b) 

Figure 2.3-8. (a) Top 10 species of fish at KALA by mean percent abundance. (b) Mean percent 

abundance from 2004 to 2008.separated out by trophic group. P= primary consumer, S = secondary 

consumer, A = apex predator. 

58%

7%

6%

5%

5%

4%

4%

4%

3%

2%

2%

Abundance

Chromis vanderbilti (S)

Thalassoma duperrey (S)

Kyphosusspecies (P)

Acanthurus leucopareius (P)

Acanthurus nigrofuscus (P)

Paracirrhites arcatus (S)

Chromis ovalis (S)

Naso hexacanthus (S)

Ctenochaetus strigosus (S)

Abundance

APEX

PRIMARY

SECONDARY
128 

Figure 2.3-9. Fish trophic abundance and biomass summary by wave energy zone from 2006 to 2008. 2,000 0 2,000 1,000 Feet 1,000 0 1,000 500 Meters LegendPark Boundary Wave Energy Zones Direct North Pacific Swell Direct North Pacific Swell and Indirect Northeast Trade Wind Waves Direct Northeast Trade Wind Waves and Indirect North Pacific Swell

Direct North Pacific Swell andDirect Northeast Trade Wind Waves

A - Fish Trophic Percent Abundance

7.6Apex PredatorPrimary ConsumerSecondary Consumer

B - Fish Trophic Percent Biomass

0.82Apex PredatorPrimary ConsumerSecondary Consumer

Number/ha x1000 Metric tons/ha

Source: USGS; National Park Service

30

11.9 14.8

21.3

24.3

28.8

3.9

4.1

2.2

3.3

1.3

1.9

D

B

A

F

C

E

A

B

A B

A B

A

B

A B

A B

Kalaupapa National Historic Park
129 

 (a) 

(b) 

Figure 2.3-10. (a) Top 10 species of fish at KALA by mean percent biomass from 2004 to 2008. (b) Mean 

percent biomass from 2004–2008.separated out by trophic group. P= primary consumer, S = secondary 

consumer, A = apex predator. 

The average fish species diversity of KALA is 2.08 (H’) ± 0.07 with an evenness of 0.65 (J’) ± 

0.02 (NPS, unpublished). Species diversity was derived from the Shannon-Wiener diversity 

index (H’ = -∑ipilog(pi) where pi is the proportion of each species from the total abundance of 

the ith species). Evenness (J’ = H’/H’max where H’max is the maximum possible Shannon-Wiener 

diversity value) expresses how evenly the individuals are distributed among the different species. 

23%

15%

9% 9%

8%

7%

7%

6%

6%

5%

5%

Biomass

Kyphosus species (P)

Naso hexacanthus (S)

Acanthurus leucopareius (P)

Abudefduf vaigiensis (S)

Bodianus bilunulatus (S)

Naso unicornis (P)

Acanthurus olivaceus (P)

Naso lituratus (P)

Caranx sexfasciatus (A)

Caranx melampygus (A)

Acanthurus dussumieri (P)

Biomass

APEX

PRIMARY

SECONDARY
130 

Both species of introduced Lutjantids (snappers), Lutjanus kasmira (ta‘ape) and L. fulvus (to‘au), 

as well as the introduced grouper Cephalopholis argus (roi) were present on the coastal reefs of 

KALA. However, all three species were present at very low densities (NPS, unpublished). 

Comparison with Other Areas in Hawai‘i: Beets et al. (2006) compared fish habitat utilization 

patterns at KALA on Moloka‘i with Pu‘ukoholā Heiau National Historical Park (PUHE), Kaloko 

- Honokōhau National Historical Park (KAHO), and Pu‘uhonua o Hōnaunau National Historical 

Park (PUHO) on the Island of Hawai`i. Benthic cover comparisons among these four national 

parks in Hawai‘i indicated that KALA has higher percent cover of turf algae, marcoalage, and 

the coral P. meandrina than at the other three parks. However, the cover of P. lobata and P. 

compressa was lower than at the other parks (Beets et al. 2006). Fish species richness, diversity, 

and densities at KALA were higher than PUHE but similar to the other two national parks (Beets 

et al. 2006). However, fish biomass was higher at KALA compared to all the other parks, 

suggesting larger and more abundant fish than at the other parks. The biomass present at KALA 

is also similar to the biomass of the top two Marine Life Conservation Districts (MLCD) in 

Hawai‘i (Molokini on Maui and Old Kona Airport on the Island of Hawai‘i) (Friedlander et al. 

2007). 

On a statewide scale, a comparison of fish assemblages with other sites in the main Hawaiian 

Islands (MHI) and North-west Hawaiian Islands (NWHI), shows that the biomass at KALA 

(mean 1.71 ± 0.18 (SE) mt/ha) is more than two times higher than the mean for the MHI (0.68 mt 

/ha, Friedlander at al. 2008a). In contrast, the average biomass in the NWHI, which is a marine 

sanctuary, is 2.44 mt/ha. Some islands, however, such as Kure, Mokumanamana (formerly 

known as Necker), and Maro reef had similar levels of fish biomass to KALA. These three reefs 

are at the lower end of the range of fish biomass in the NWHI (Frieldlander et al. 2008b). 

Kaho‘olawe, an uninhabited and largely unfished island in the MHI, also has a high fish biomass, 

more closely resembling those of the NWHI (Friedlander et al. 2008a). 

The composition of the trophic levels of fish is often used as an indicator of reef health. Apex 

predators are often well represented on a healthy reef ecosystem and are quickly depleted on a 

reef that is fished (Stevenson et al. 2006, Friedlander and DeMartini 2002). The composition of 

the trophic levels at KALA more closely resembles those that are found in the NWHI. In the 

NWHI, the apex predators comprise 54% of the total biomass compared to 33% at KALA and 

only 3% for the MHI. The proportion of apex predators at KALA also surpasses the proportion 

of apex predators found at Kahoolawe (12%) (Friedlander et al. 2007, 2008a). 

The characteristics of the fish assemblage at KALA, which are similar to reefs that experience 

minimal human impact, are likely due to the relatively light fishing pressure present at KALA 

(see section 3.4.3 and 3.5.3). For the more mobile fishes such as the Carangids (Weatherbee et al. 

2004, Holland et al 1996) that likely move beyond the boundaries of KALA, their biomass is 

also a reflection of the fishing the occurs along the adjacent coastlines. Compared to other areas 

in the MHI, KALA has one of the healthiest fish assemblages. In the absence of fishing, the fish 

biomass may increase to approximate more closely the biomass at the NWHI, though for more 

mobile fishes such as the apex predators that would move beyond the park boundaries, the 

effects may be attenuated to some degree by fishing that would occur beyond the park. 
131 

Threatened and Endangered Species: Threatened and endangered species reported from the 

waters at KALA include Chelonia mydas (green sea turtle–threatened) and Megaptera 

novaeangliae (humback whale–endangered) (Brown et al. 2008). Monachus schauinslandi

(Hawaiian monk seal–endangered) is regularly seen using the beaches and would therefore be 

expected to transit the coastal areas of KALA (Brown et al. 2008, section 2.3.3.3, Threatened 

and Endangered Species). 

2.3.1.4 Information Gaps: 

Monitoring of the ecological community and abiotic factors needs to be continued to determine 

long-term trends occurring in the coastal reefs at KALA and to identify threats early. Annual 

monitoring will develop a robust data set upon which changes in the fish and benthic cover can 

be determined over time. More transects are needed in zones C, E, and F, which are inaccessible 

frequently due to weather conditions, but should be surveyed as weather permits. 

Macroinvertebrate surveys documenting species and abundance are also recommended. 

2.3.2 Offshore Islets 

2.3.2.1 Previous Studies and Inventories: 

 Coles et al (2008) conducted reconnaissance and quantitative surveys at the two offshore 

islets, ‘Ōkala and Nāmoku, within the KALA boundary by Bishop Museum in 2007. An 

additional islet, Mōkapu, which lies offshore of the KALA boundary, was also surveyed 

in this study. 

Surveys by Coles et al. (2008) were conducted on the lee sides of the islands. Species 

occurrences were recorded during the reconnaissance surveys, followed by transect surveys 

where quantitative measurements were taken to determine the abundance of corals, algae, and 

fish density and size classes. Methods employed were adapted from the rapid assessment 

techniques established during the 2000 Northwestern Hawaiian Islands Expedition (Maragos and 

Gulko 2002) and later modified by Gulko (2005). Only one marine survey of the offshore islets 

has been conducted thus far. 

2.3.2.2 Physical Environment and Water Quality: 

Mokapu, Ōkala, and Huelo islets off the coast of the KALA peninsula are exposed to the 

tradewind swells year round and also to the North Pacific swells in the winter (see section 

2.3.1.2). Another small emergent pinnacle, Nāmoku, is on the leeward side of Kalaupapa 

peninsula. 

The shallow water surrounding Nāmoku was surveyed from a depth of 11–22 m (36–72 ft) 

(Coles et al 2008). The substratum was dominated by a flat basalt bench with cracks and 

grooves. Outside of this zone are numerous channels extending down to 22 m (72 ft), with large 

basalt boulders. Ōkala Islet is approximately 130 m (430 ft) north of Leinaopapio Point and 1.5 

km (0.9 mi) to the east of Kalaupapa peninsula. The western end of Ōkala Islet is dominated by a 

large cave that extends through the islet. Mokapu is the farthest offshore (1.1 km northeast of 

Leinaopapio Point) and like the other islets has a basalt substratum. Both Mokapu and Ōkala are 

characterized by vertical walls around the island extending down to sand substrates at depths of 

50 m (165 ft) and 24 m (80 ft) respectively. 
132 

Huelo Islet is another islet only 0.1 km (0.06 miles) offshore from the Kalaupapa peninsula 

within the embayment of Alapa‘i beach. This islet has yet to be surveyed. 

Of the 10 islets surveyed around the Main Hawaiian Islands, Ōkala and Nāmoku have the ninth 

and eighth lowest rugosity measurements respectively (Ōkala mean rugosity = 1.10 and Nāmoku 

mean rugosity 1.12, Coles et al 2008), which may be attributed mainly to the basaltic substratum. 

Water quality parameters (temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen, salinity, turbidity, and 

chlorophyll) at Nāmoku and Ōkala islets have been measured, but results are not available at this 

time. However, the water quality is at both islets is likely to be good due to the flushing action of 

the high water motion present at the site and the lack of any nearshore anthropogenic activities. 

2.3.2.3 Ecological Community: 

A total of 169 and 127 algae, invertebrate and fish species were recorded during the 

reconnaissance surveys at Nāmoku and Ōkala islets respectively (Table 2.3-1, Coles et al. 2008). 

The species assemblage at Mokapu offshore islet, which is outside the reserve boundary, is very 

similar. All three offshore islets have very similar assemblages compared to other islets surveyed 

in the MHI (Coles et al 2008). 

Table 2.3-1. Species richness on the reefs of the offshore islets (from Coles et al. 2008). 

No. of Species Mokapu Nāmoku ‘Ōkala 

Algae 24 29 8 

Invertebrates 65 58 62 

Fish 61 82 57 

Total 150 169 127 

Source: Coles et al. (2008) 

Benthic Community: Bethic cover at both islets was dominated by turf algae, followed by coral 

(Table 2.3-2, Coles et al 2008). However, ‘Ōkala has three times the percent coral cover of 

Nāmoku. The coral community at ‘Ōkala was unusual compared to other reefs as it was 

dominated by the soft coral Sinularia densa and, to a lesser extent, the zoanthid Palythoa caesia. 

Due to the high cover of the soft corals, stony corals were present in lower abundances. Of the 

seven species of hard coral documented, the most dominant stony coral was Pocillopora 

molokensis. The reconnaissance survey that included the cave at the western end of the islet 

reported that Rhizopsammia verrilli (red cup coral) and invasive Carijoa aff. riisei (snowflake 

coral) were abundant within the cave (Coles et al. 2008). 

There were six species of hard corals at Nāmoku dominated by Pocillopora meandrina and 

Pocillopora molokensis. Macroalgal cover was low on both islets. Most identifiable genera of 

macroalgae comprised less than 1% of the benthic assemblage except for Dictyota spp., which 

averaged 4% at Nāmoku. The majority of the coralline algae was comprised of crustose 

corallines (Coles et al. 2008). 
133 

Table 2.3-2. Benthic cover at the offshore islets. 

Hard and 

Soft Coral Macroalgae Coralline Turf Cyanobacteria Substratum Other 

‘Ōkala 30.3 0.7 5.6 55.0 4.1 2.8 1.4 

Nāmoku 9.5 4.3 6.4 71.8 7.8 0.15 0.1 

Source: Coles et al. (2008). 

Cryptogenic species are those that are not demonstrably native or introduced but considered 

potentially introduced (Chapman 1988, Chapman and Carlton 1991). A total of two cryptogenic 

species and two introduced invertebrate species were recorded on Nāmoku, and two cryptogenic 

species and three introduced invertebrate species on ‘Ōkala (see Table 2.3-3). No introduced or 

invasive algal species were found on either islet. The introduced invasive snowflake coral 

Carijoa aff. riisei occurred on both islets and was very abundant in the cave at ‘Ōkala. Other 

introduced invertebrates include the serpulid polychaete Salmacina disticha, present on both 

islets, and the bryozoan Bugula dentata on ‘Ōkala (Coles et al. 2008). Cryptogenic species for 

both islets consisted mostly of Hydroids (class: Hydrozoa). One possible source of these 

cryptogenic introductions could be from the hulls of boats that dock at Kalaupapa Harbor or 

from the emptying of ballast water in waters off the peninsula. 

Table 2.3-3. Introduced and cryptogenic invertebrate species for the offshore islets. 

Taxa Family Scientific name Origin Nāmoku ‘Ōkala 

Hydrozoa Halopterididae Antennella secundaria Cryptogenic X 

 Plumulariidae Plumularia strictocarpa Cryptogenic X 

 Sertulariidae Sertularella diaphana Cryptogenic X 

 Sertularella tongensis Cryptogenic X 

Anthozoa Telestidae Carijoa aff. riisei Introduced X X 

Polychaeta Serpulidae Samacina dysteri Introduced X X 

Entoprocta Bugulidae Bugula dentata Introduced X 

Source: Coles et al. (2008). 

Fish Community: The number of fish species within each trophic level is shown in Table 2.3-1. 

‘Ōkala had slightly fewer fish species than the average for the Main Hawaiian Islands (Coles et 

al 2008). However, ‘Ōkala exceeded the Main Hawaiian Islands in the biomass of herbivores and 

target species. Target species are fish commonly targeted by fishermen (Coles et al. 2008). 

Nāmoku also exceeded the average fish biomass as well as the target fish biomass levels of the 

MHI. Nāmoku was also one of two islets in the entire offshore islet survey (out of a total of ten) 

that recorded the presence of apex predators. Of the ten surveyed islets, ‘Ōkala and Nāmoku 

were ranked 5th and 8th respectively in terms of total fish biomass (Coles et al. 2008). 

Both species of introduced Lutjantids, Lutjanus kasmira (ta‘ape) and L. fulvus (to‘au), were 

present at Nāmoku, while the introduced grouper Cephalopholis argus (roi) was reported only 

from ‘Ōkala (Coles et al. 2008). All three introduced fish species were also found in the sub-tidal 

zones of the Kalaupapa Peninsula (NPS, unpublished), thus, even if not recorded are likely to be 

found on both islets as well. Other notable fish include the frequently targeted food fish 
134 

Monotaxis grandoculis (mu) at Nāmoku, and a prized aquarium fish, Desmoholacanthus 

arcuatus (bandit angelfish), at shallow depths (<30 m) at ‘Ōkala (Coles et al. 2008). Both species 

are also present at the coastal reefs of the Kalaupapa peninsula (NPS, unpublished), and are 

likely to occur on both islets even if not recorded thus far. Parupeneus cyclostomus (moana kea), 

a less common goatfish, was seen on both islets and is also present on the Kalaupapa peninsula 

(Coles et al. 2008). 

Threatened and Endangered Species: Coles et al. (2008) did not observe any threatened or 

endangered species during their surveys. Rare species include the alga Sporochnus dotyi at 

Nāmoku. Small colonies of the valuable black coral Myriopathes ulex are present at ‘Ōkala. This 

black coral is listed under CITES Appendix II. The rare cup coral Rhizopsammia verrilli was 

also present in the cave that extends through the islet. The densities of the soft coral Sinularis 

densa, while not rare, was unusually abundant at ‘Ōkala (Coles et al. 2008). 

2.3.2.4 Information Gaps: 

Water quality at the offshore islets should be sampled to obtain a baseline for future 

comparisons. Should nearshore water quality start to deteriorate, regular water quality 

monitoring at the offshore islets should be implemented to document if water quality at the 

offshore islets are also being affected. 

Since only one survey has been conducted at the offshore islets and it was restricted to the lee 

side of the islets, there is clearly more information needed for these sites. The islet Huelo has yet 

to be surveyed. Yearly monitoring should be conducted to document changes in the benthic 

habitat and fish assemblages and particularly to monitor the documented invasive species (e.g., 

C. riisei and introduced fish species). Surveys should also be conducted to document and 

quantify benthic habitat and species found on the windward side of the islets when weather 

permits. 

2.3.3 Intertidal Zone 

The intertidal zone at KALA encompasses sandy beaches, cobble and boulder beaches, sea cliffs, 

raised basalt and limestone benches and tide pools (Figure 2.3-11).The supra-littoral beach zones 

present at KALA consist of boulder/cobble, calcareous and basaltic rubble and sandy substrate or 

are a composite of more than one substrate. The entire range of supra-littoral zones described in 

the Hawaiian Islands are present at KALA (Godwin and Bolick, 2006). Sea cliffs dominate the 

areas immediately inland of the intertidal zone to the west of the peninsula. 

2.3.3.1 Previous and Ongoing Studies and Inventories: 

Information from abiotic monitoring and biological studies of the intertidal zone are available for 

KALA. These studies are listed below. 

Abiotic Factors: 

 The National Park Service and I&M have monitored water quality in the marine 

environment since 2008 (unpublished). 

Algae and Plants: 

 UH-Manoa initiated a marine algae inventory in 2005 but the study is still ongoing. 
135 

 NPS staff has monitored the presence of the alien red algae Acanthophora spicifera found 

in tide pools around the peninsula since 2005 and eradication efforts are ongoing. 

 Surveys by the National Park Service to collect and identify driftseeds along the high tide 

drift line at Ho‘olehua Beach were scheduled to begin in 2009. 

Invertebrates: 

 Minton and Carnevale (2006) surveyed marine invertebrates in August 2003 at seven 

intertidal locations, most of which were located on the west side of the peninsula. 

 Godwin and Bolick (2006) surveyed 12 sites for marine invertebrates, six of which were 

the same sites as those examined by Minton and Carnevale (2006) in September 2004. 

The survey locations for both studies are shown in Figure 2.3-11. Both reports presented 

species inventories and quantitative surveys; however, their results are not directly 

comparable due to the differences in methodology. Minton and Carnevale (2006) surveyed 

transects from the supra-littoral zone to within the surf zone, while Godwin and Bolick 

(2006) terminated their transects at the low-tide mark. 

 NPS staff at KALA initiated intertidal habitat surveys in 2002 with emphasis on 

quantifying the distribution and abundance of Cellana spp. (opihi) (Hughes and 

Carnevale 2004, E. Brown/NPS, pers. comm.). These surveys are ongoing and will be 

conducted semi-annually in collaboration with UH-Hilo. 

 Kay et al. (2005) undertook a study of Cellana spp. at KALA between May 2004 and 

May 2005. This was part of a larger statewide assessment of the population structure and 

reproductive patterns of C. exarata, C. sandwicensis, and C. talcosa. 

 Bird et al. (2007) sampled Cellana spp. at KALA between 2003 and 2005 to determine 

the population genetic structure of the three species within the state (main Hawaiian 

Islands and North-west Hawaiian Islands) and within individual islands. 

Avifauna: 

 Marshall and Aruch (2003) conducted shoreline bird surveys of seabirds, migratory 

shorebirds, and waterbirds in September and November 2003. Kozar et al. (2007) 

completed a similar study in April 2005. 

Mammals: 

 NPS staff is conducting surveys to document abundance of and habitat use by Monachus 

schauinslandi (monk seals) along the west side of the KALA peninsula (see Figure 2.3-

12). These surveys commenced in August 2005 and are ongoing. As of 2007, each 

location is surveyed weekly. 

 NPS staff and UH-Hilo commenced a study in 2008 recording daily observations of 

monk seal nursing behavior and mother and pup distribution patterns during the 

Monachus schauinslandi pupping season (February to July). 
136 

Other: 

 The National Park Service has been conducting ongoing surveys since 2005 to quantify 

and describe the composition of debris at Ho‘olehua Beach. The surveys are conducted 

opportunistically two to three times a year. 

2.3.3.2 Physical Environment and Water Quality: 

Physical Environment: The eastern coastline of KALA from the mouth of Waikolu Stream to 

Kahiu Point is exposed to tradewind-driven waves and is considered a high wave energy area. 

The shoreline here consists of steep high cliffs, microfjords, and basalt/boulder/cobble beaches 

(Eichenlaub 2001, Minton and Carnevale 2006). The western shore from Kahiu Point to Awahua 

Beach is characterized by zones of medium and low wave energy. The shoreline consists of 

lower cliffs, basalt sand beaches/boulders, and carbonate sand beaches (Figure 2.3-11) 

(Eichenlaub 2001, Minton and Carnevale 2006). 

Rugosity measurements of the shoreline were reported only by Minton and Carnevale (2006). 

The upper portion of Puwah Bench had the highest rugosity at 4.68, followed by Ka Lea Mau at 

2.93. All other sites had rugosity values ranging from 1.07 to 1.52. 

Water Quality: Water quality in the intertidal is currently being monitored but data are not yet 

available (NPS and I&M, unpublished). 

2.3.3.3 Ecological Community: 

Algae and Plants: UH-Manoa initiated a marine algae inventory in 2005, but results are not yet 

published. The red algae Acanthophora spicifera has been found in some of the tide pools around 

the peninsula (E. Brown/NPS, pers. comm.). NPS staff is monitoring the presence of the algae, 

and eradication efforts are ongoing. A few mangrove seedlings have also been documented but 

generally do not survive the winters (E. Brown/NPS, pers. comm.). 

Invertebrates: Surveys of the intertidal zone by Minton and Carnevale (2006), Godwin and 

Bolick (2006), and KALA biologists have identified 326 species of invertebrates comprising 11 

phyla and 24 classes (see Figure 2.3-13 and Table 2.3-4). Arthropods were the most speciose 

(123 species) with more than half the species consisting of decapod crustaceans within the class 

Malacostraca. Mollusks were represented by 95 species and dominated by gastropods. Mollusks 

had the highest degree of endemism to the Hawaiian islands of all the phyla present. 

Echinoderms are considered abundant and diverse at KALA (Godwin and Bolick 2006) with two 

new species of holothurians (as yet unnamed) discovered at KALA in 2004. One new species of 

amphipod (Psuedambasia kalaupapa, Longenecker and Bolick 2006) was also found in the same 

survey. 
137 

Figure 2.3-11. Intertidal substrates and survey locations. 

Source: USGS; National Park Service

Legend

Park Boundary

Intertidal Survey Locations

Minton et al 2006 (Surveyed in 2003)Godwin and Bolick 2006 (Surveyed in 2004)

Intertidal Substrates

Basalt sand beach/bouldersCarbonate sand beachLow basalt cliffsMicrofjordsSteep Cliffs

2,000 0 2,000 1,000

Feet

1,000 0 1,000 500

Meters

Pacific Ocean

Dock

Puwah

Kauwo

Kahili

Piko'one

Ka Laemau

Lighthouse

Mormon Pond

Puwah Bench

Lae Hoolehua

Ka Laemilo Pt

Old Lady Cave

Papaloa Beach

Church Pasture

Piko’one Bench

Carpenter Bench

Mormon Pond/Church Pasture

Kalaupapa National Historic Park
138 

Figure 2.3-12. Monk seal survey locations. 

Source: USGS; National Park Service Legend

Park Boundary

Monk Seal Survey Areas

Ilio Pt

Kahikilo

Kalaemilo

Papaloa

Tomio Pt

1,000 0 1,000 500

Feet

500 0 500 250

Meters

Pacific Ocean

Namoku Namoku

Tomio Pt

Papaloa

Ilio Pt

Kalaemilo

Kahikilo

Kalaupapa National Historic Park
139 

Table 2.3-4. Species composition of invertebrates in the intertidal zone. 

Phylum Class No. of 

species 

No. of native and 

endemic species 

No. of Species 

Introduced (I), 

Cryptogenic (C) 

Annelida Polychaeta 32 29 2I 

Arthropoda Insecta 1 1 

Arthropoda Malacostraca 119 116 2I, 1C 

Arthropoda Maxillopoda 3 3 

Cnidaria Anthozoa 15 15 

Cnidaria Hydrozoa 1 0 1I 

Echinodermata Asteroidea 3 3 

Echinodermata Echinoidea 12 12 

Echinodermata Holothuroidea 19 19 

Echinodermata Ophiuroidea 6 6 

Echuria Echiuroidea 1 1 

Hemichordata Enteropneusta 1 1 

Mollusca Bivalvia 6 6 

Mollusca Cephalopoda 1 1 

Mollusca Gastropoda 78 77 1C 

Mollusca Nudibranchia 1 1 

Mollusca Opisthobranchia 6 6 

Mollusca Polyplacophora 3 3 

Nemertina Anopla 2 2 

Porifera 2 2 

Sipuncula Phascolosomatidea 3 3 

Urochordata Ascidiacea 11 6 4I, 1C 

326 314 9I, 3C 

Source: Minton and Carnevale (2006) and Godwin and Bolick (2006). 

The marine invertebrate assemblage at KALA is similar to other windward intertidal zones 

throughout the Hawaiian Islands (Godwin and Bolick 2006). Analysis of similarity by Godwin 

and Bolick (2006), which include many of the sites surveyed by Minton and Carnevale (2006), 

indicate that the species assemblages cluster into two main groupings. One group consists of the 

assemblage found on high wave energy basaltic flows fringed by boulders. The second group 

encompassed all other habitats. The intertidal zones at Kahili (basaltic substrate with boulders 

throughout) and Ka Lae Mau (extensive tide pools) were identified as unique habitats with 

unique species (a new species of holothurid found at each site). Mormon Pond (entirely boulder 

habitat) and Papaloa Beach (drowned reef substrate) were identified as habitats with a high 

abundance of rare species (Figure 2.3-11). 
140 

 

Figure 2.3-13. Number of invertebrate species represented within their respective phyla and the 

percentage of each phylum represented within the intertidal zone at KALA. 

Nerita picea, an endemic intertidal neritid gastropod, was commonly found by both studies [0.5–

196 indiv/m2

 (Minton and Carnevale 2006), 0.2 – 43.5 indiv/m2 (Godwin and Bolick 2006)], and 

was present at nearly all transects. This species was particularly abundant at Puwah Bench in 

2003 but was present in low numbers in 2004. Another gastropod, the indigenous Littoraria 

pintado (2.2–170.2 indiv/m2

), was also common, occurring in particularly high numbers at 

Papaloa Beach (Godwin and Bolick 2006). Nesochthamalus intertextus, a barnacle (1–219.5 

indiv/m2

), was common at Puwah Bench and Papaloa Beach (Godwin and Bolick 2006). Minton 

and Carnevale (2006) also documented Cellana abundance and two species, C. exerata (2.2–37.6 

indiv/m2

) and C. sandwicensis (2.1–9.7 indiv/m2) were common. The third species, C. talcosa

(0.7–3.l indiv/m2

), occurred in smaller numbers (Minton and Carnevale 2006). The three species 

of Cellana are separated spatially: C. exarata resides high above the waterline; C. sandwicensis 

typically resides mid- to low levels above the waterline; and C. talcosa resides subtidally. 

Minton and Carnevale (2006) also stated in their report that “Hawaiian opihi [at KALA] are 

numerous and large, among the largest observed in the main eight Hawaiian Islands.” 

Annelida, 32,

9.8%

Arthropoda, 123,

37.7%

Cnidaria,

16, 4.9%

Echinodermata,

40, 12.3%

Echuria, 1, 0.3%

Hemichordata, 1,

0.3%

Mollusca, 95,

29.1%

Nemertina, 2,

0.6%

Porifera, 2, 0.6% Sipuncula, 3,

0.9%

Urochordata,

11, 3.4%
141 

The population genetics of all three species of Cellana (opihi) at KALA were studied by Kay et 

al. (2005) and Bird et al. (2007). The results of these studies suggested that high connectivity in 

C. exerata and C. sandwicensis exists between communities on the main Hawaiian Islands, while 

C. talcosa in Kaua‘i was separate from the population of Moloka‘i, Maui, and Hawai‘i. On a 

finer scale, connectivity along coastlines was higher than connectivity between adjacent islands 

(Kay et al. 2005, Bird et al. 2007). 

Cellana sandwicensis and C. exarata become reproductively mature between 20 and 25 mm 

(0.8–1.0 in) shell length (Kay 1977). Cellana talcosa matures at a larger size, 35 mm (1.4 in) 

shell length or 75% longer than C. sandwicensis. However, C. talcosa at KALA appears to grow 

faster than the other two species. Thus, C. talcosa may not necessarily take longer than C. 

sandwicensis and C. exarata to reach sexual maturity. A study conducted in 2002 (Hughes and 

Carnevale 2004) report mean sizes of Cellana spp. at 27 mm. This would indicate that 

reproductively mature individuals of C. sandwicensis and C. exarata are present. Hughes and 

Carnevale (2004) also indicated that larger individuals are found further down in the intertidal 

than smaller individuals. This observation is contrary to the behavior of other limpet species 

(Patella vulgate) where larger individuals, presumably more resistant to dessication, migrate 

upwards in the intertidal zone as they get larger (Hughes and Carnevale 2004). Possible 

explanations for this pattern reversal are pressures due to harvesting in the intertidal or the 

differences in growth rates of the different Cellana species that were not accounted for. 

Temporal growth rate measurements of opihi at KALA indicate that C. talcosa have growth rates 

that increase from May through September. Conversely, the growth rates of C. sandwicensis and 

C. exarata decrease from May through October, with a slight increase occurring from August to 

September. When the relationship between size and growth rates are examined, C. sandwicensis

and C. talcosa have a significant negative relationship between growth rate (mm shell 

length/day) and body size (i.e., larger individuals grow more slowly). For C. exarata, the growth 

rate was not affected by size. There was also no detectable relationship between growth rate and 

the reproductive state of all species of Cellana at KALA (Kay et al. 2005). 

All three species exhibited a maximum of two spawning events a year at the national parks in 

Hawai‘i. C. exarata typically exhibited a May–July spawning event and a November–January 

spawning event but at KALA the summer spawning event occurred earlier between March and 

May. Due to heavy surf, no sampling of opihi occurred at KALA in winter, and winter 

reproductive data is not available (Kay et al. 2005). C. sandwicensis studied at other national 

parks in Hawai‘i spawned primarily between November and March, with sporadic summer 

spawning events. No C. sandwicensis spawning events were observed at KALA. 

C. talcosa spawned year round with the exception of October and the timing of spawning events 

was site specific. Spawning occurred between July and August at KALA. Winter spawning also 

occurred at other national parks. The timing of spawning of the different species is believed to be 

linked to their zonation in the intertidal. C. sandwicensis and C. exarata reside above the 

waterline and utilize submergence as a spawning cue, which may account for the synchronicity 

of spawning events between sites (Kay et al. 2005; Bird et al. 2007). C. talcosa resides 

subtidally, and its spawning may be driven by other factors. Currently, it is hypothesized that 

spawning for C. exarata or C. sandwicensis at KALA may be driven by the presence of the large 
142 

winter northwest waves (Kay et al. 2005). Spawning for both species is likely to occur at the end 

of the winter wave season due to the high percentage of spent gonads found during sampling that 

commenced after the season (Kay et al. 2005). 

Introduced and Invasive Invertebrate Species: Minton and Carnevale (2006) and Godwin and 

Bolick (2006) recorded a total of nine introduced invertebrate species and three cryptogenic 

species in the surveyed locations in the intertidal zone (see Table 2.3-4). Only one species, the 

stomatopod Gonodactylaceus falcatus, is reported to compete with native fauna and has been 

documented to aggressively displace the native stomatopod Pseudosquilla ciliata (Kinzie 1968), 

which was not found at KALA. None of the introduced species were considered invasive by 

Godwin and Bolick (2006) at KALA. 

Birds: Shoreline bird surveys were conducted in September and November 2003 (Marshall and 

Aruch 2003) and April 2005 (Kozar et al. 2007). Table 2.3-5 lists the species sighted during the 

2003 and 2005 surveys. Figure 2.3-14 shows the locations of bird sightings during the April 

2005 survey. 

Table 2.3-5. Bird species observed from the shoreline of KALA. 

Black-crowned Night Heron, Pacific Golden Plover, Ruddy Turnstone, and Wandering Tattler 

were all observed foraging in the tide pools along the shoreline, on the beaches, or among the 

strand vegetation (Marshall and Aruch 2003; Kozar et al. 2007). Black Noddies are known to 

nest along the cliffs of the eastern coastline of the peninsula and possibly at Kūka‘iwa‘a (Kozar 

et al. 2007). Sooty Terns (Sterna fuscata) and Hawaiian Petrels (Pterodroma sandwichensis) 

have also been detected incidentally (Kozar et al. 2007). Wedge-tailed Shearwaters were 

detected audibly from Waikolu Valler Beach in 2003 (Marshall and Aruch 2003). 

Threatened and Endangered Species: The beaches of Kalaupapa have become a premier birthing 

location for the endangered Hawaiian monk seal (Monachus schauinslandi) (Brown et al. 2008). 

As of 2008, a total of 40 endangered M. schauinslandi, 22 males and 18 females, utilize the 

intertidal zone of KALA and up to seven pups are born annually on the peninsula (Brown et al. 

2008, NPS unpublished). M. schauinslandi has a preference for the sandy habitat found on 

Papalaoa Beach and ‘Ilio Point (Figure 2.3-15), where pupping takes place in spring and 

Species Name Type Scientific Name 2003 

Survey 

2005 

Survey 

Black-crowned Night 

Heron Waterbird Nycticorax nycticorax X 

Black Noddy Seabird Anous minutus X 

Brown Booby Seabird Sula leucogaster X X 

(Sula sp.) 

Great Frigate Bird Seabird Fregata minor X X 

Pacific Golden Plover Migratory shorebird Pluvialis fulva X X 

Red-tailed Tropic Bird Seabird Phaethon rubricauda X X 

Ruddy Turnstone Migratory shorebird Arenaria interpres X X 

Wandering Tattler Migratory shorebird Heteroscelus incanus X X 

Wedge-tailed Shearwater Seabird Puffinus pacificus X X 

White-tailed Tropic Bird Seabird Phaethon lepturus X X 

Source: Marshall and Aruch (2003) and Kozar et al. (2007). 
143 

summer. Fewer sighting occur on the neighboring basaltic habitats. A total of 38 pups have been 

born at KALA since 1997 (E. Brown/NPS, pers. comm., Molokai Dispatch June 18, 2008. 

http://www.themolokaidispatch.com/node/2160). Monk seals are most often observed from the 

months of May through August (Figure 2.3-15) and decrease in density from January to March 

as M. schauinslandi depart the peninsula (Figure 2.3-16). 

Threatened green sea turtles (Chelonia mydas) have been regularly seen foraging in the 

nearshore environment, but have not been observed to haul out in the intertidal to rest (Brown et 

al. 2008). Nesting activities have been recorded on the main black sand beach (Piko‘one) every 

year since 2005, but prior to 2009 most of these nests appeared to be false nests. In 2009, 

however, two successful nests hatched on August 20th and September 5th, releasing 49 and 50 

hatchlings respectively (E. Brown/NPS, pers. comm.). 

2.3.3.4 Information Gaps: 

The mollusk and echinoderm inventories are probably the most complete (33–66 % complete, 

Minton and Carnevale 2006). Surveys of all other phyla of invertebrates have yet to approach 

this level (Minton and Carnevale 2006). The two existing surveys of marine invertebrates in the 

intertidal also do not adequately document fast-moving species due to the sampling 

methodology. As sampling was conducted in the day, nocturnal species are under-represented 

(Minton and Carnevale 2006), as are species found in the sediment (infaunal species) and microinvertebrates (under approximately 1 cm in size). 
144 

Figure 2.3-14. Locations of bird sightings within the intertidal zone in 2005. 
145 

Figure 2.3-15. Monk seal sighting frequencies at different sites at KALA. 

Figure 2.3-16. Monk seal observations at KALA for different months (all sites combined). 

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Tomio Pt Ilio Pii Kalaemilo Papaloa Kahikilo

Average no. of sightings per year

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Average no. of sightings per month
146 

Chapter 3: Threats & Stressors 

The following section discusses existing and potential threats and stressors to the physical 

environment and ecological communities within the marine, freshwater, and terrestrial 

ecosystems at KALA. Threats are defined as “environmental trends with potentially negative 

impacts” (Bruckner et al. 2005). According to the National Park Service, stressors are the 

“physical, chemical, or biological perturbations to a system that are either (a) foreign to that 

system or (b) natural to the system but applied at an excessive [or deficient] level. Stressors 

cause significant changes in the ecological components, patterns, and processes in natural 

systems” (NPS 2006b). In this report, threats and stressors are classified as biotic or abiotic. 

Biotic threats and stressors are caused by biological or anthropogenic activities, while abiotic 

threats and stressors are caused by physical or chemical processes, such as weather patterns. It is 

recognized that the origins of the abiotic threats and stressors (such as climate change) may be 

biotic or anthropogenic. 

A total of 12 biotic and five abiotic existing and potential threats and stressors were identified for 

KALA. These are discussed in detail in Sections 3.1 to 3.10 below. A summary of the threats and 

stressors and their knowledge base is presented in Section 3.11. The various threats and stressors 

are also ranked based on the estimated magnitude of impact of each threat or stressor on the 

different ecosystems. 

3.1 Invasive Species 

An invasive species is defined as “an alien species whose introduction does or is likely to cause 

economic or environmental harm or harm to human health” (Executive Order 13112). Isolated island 

ecosystems, such as Hawai‘i, are vulnerable to non-native species due to a variety of factors (Loope 

and Muller-Dombois 1989, Clements and Daehler 2007). Islands typically have high habitat 

diversity, favorable climate, high resource availability, low biotic resistance, small populations, and 

limited social capital (Denslow et al. 2008). 

Invasive species are recognized as a major threat to native ecosystems and to the survival of 

threatened and endangered species (Pimental 2005). They affect island ecosystems in a variety of 

ways. Invasive species compete with native flora and fauna, carry diseases, affect trophic structure, 

change fire regimes, alter nutrient cycling patterns, modify surface runoff of water, and alter 

biodiversity (Vitousek 1990; D’Antonio and Vitousek 1992; Vitousek 1992; Belt Collins Hawai‘i 

LTD 2008). Due to the prevalence of invasive plant and animal species at KALA, invasive species 

are separated into several categories to better characterize the impacts. 

3.1.1 Invasive Ungulates 

Feral ungulates, including Sus scrofa, Capra hircus, and Axis axis, are a significant threat to the 

natural resources at KALA. Of these, A. axis are believed to be the most damaging (Aruch 2006). 

Ungulates are known to adversely affect the Hawaiian Islands wherever they occur and are attributed 

as some of the leading causes for the decline of Hawai‘i’s natural ecosystems. By grazing, browsing, 

wallowing, and rooting, ungulate activity results in a myriad of impacts including land erosion; 

stream and reef siltation; spread of invasive plants and diseases; loss of native, threatened, and 

endangered plant and animal species; and degradation of native species’ habitat (Scowcroft and 

Conrad 1992, Stone et al. 1992, Nowak 1999, Aruch 2006). 
147 

Sus scrofa were introduced to the Hawaiian Islands by Polynesian settlers as early as 400 A.D. and 

again by the European explorer Captain James Cook in 1778 (Katahira et al. 1993). At KALA, Sus 

scrofa and evidence of S. scrofa are primarily concentrated on the outskirts of the existing 

Kalaupapa Settlement, specifically near the landfill and in the woody areas south of Kalawao Road 

(NPS 2006a). Over 50 S. scrofa are believed to occur in the fenced coastal area of KALA (G. 

Hughes/NPS, pers. comm.). Extensive S. scrofa damage has been noted on the Pu‘u Ali‘i plateau and 

in Waikolu Valley (Aruch 2006). In 2002, NPS staff estimated that S. scrofa inhabited roughly 2,833 

ha (7,000 ac). 

Captain Cook first introduced Capra hircus to Ni‘ihau in 1778 (Spatz and Mueller-Dombois 1973, 

Coblentz 1978, Stone and Anderson 1988). By 1793, C. hircus appeared common on most of the 

inhabited Hawaiian Islands and have since dispersed into all vegetation types where dry seasons 

occur on the islands of Kaua‘i, Maui, Moloka‘i, Kaho‘olawe, and Hawai‘i (Spatz and MuellerDombois 1973, Stone and Anderson 1988, KWA 2005). Capra hircus primarily occur in the more 

remote areas of KALA. NPS staff estimated that C. hircus inhabited roughly ha 2,428 ha (6,000 ac) 

of KALA in 2002. 

 

Axis axis were released on Moloka‘i in 1868 as a gift to King Kamehameha V (Canfield 1990, Goltz 

et al. 2001). Between 1868 and 1898 the number of deer jumped from 1,868 to 7,000. In 1961, after 

several professional hunts, the population was estimated at 3,000. By 1998, the deer population on 

the peninsula had declined to over 1,000, with more than 400 occurring inside the settlement (NPS, 

unpublished). 

 

Goltz et al. (2001) reported that A. axis at KALA have a relatively small, localized home range size 

relative to the available landscape compared to other locations. This is likely due to abundant cover, 

forage, and water in close proximity, limiting the need for deer to travel far for resources. Of the five 

deer tracked throughout KALA, the average home range size was 52.7 ha (130 ac). During daytime, 

A. axis concentrate in areas with the thickest vegetation cover (usually Schinus terebinthefolius), 

while at night they graze in grassy areas. Goltz et al. (2001) reported that A. axis at KALA seem 

relatively habituated to human disturbance, such as construction and activity at landfills. 

3.1.1.1 Impacts to the Terrestrial Ecosystem: 

The behavior and activities of S. scrofa, C. hircus, and A. axis have significant, cascading adverse 

impacts on all of the terrestrial management zones at KALA (except the ungulate-free offshore 

islets). Because native Hawaiian species did not evolve with mammals, plants are not adapted to 

grazing by ungulate herbivores, and native birds are susceptible to mammalian depredation (Stone 

1985; Moors et al. 1992; Scowcroft and Conrad 1992; Stone et al. 1992). Non-native ungulates 

contribute to the loss of native plant habitat and alter or destroy ecological relationships (Ikuma et al. 

2002, Courchamp et al. 2003, Cruz et al. 2009). These animals trample, graze, and consume a 

variety of plant material, including leaves, fruits, flowers, bark, seeds, rhizomes, and tubers (Diong 

1982, Chimera et al. 1995, DEH 2004, Shi et al. 2005). Sus scrofa also forage for plant material and 

invertebrates using their noses to dig in the soil and expose fresh roots and shoots (Conry 1989, 

KWA 2005, Department of Navy 2006). 

These activities can decrease the distribution of single species, as well as overall forest composition 

and canopy cover, which ultimately can disrupt ecological processes, such as succession (Lowe et al. 
148 

2000). Sus scrofa disturbance also negatively affects seedling regeneration by reducing the density 

and basal area of seedlings (Diong 1982, Busby in press). Foraging behaviors may also indirectly 

impact native birds by reducing the amount of nectar produced by understory plants (Stone 1985, 

Nogueira-Filho, in press). Axis axis have been specifically identified in the decline of local 

populations of several native plants, including Scaevola gaudichaudii (naupaka), Vitex rotendifolia 

(pohinahina), and Sida fallax (‘ilima) (Yost and Wright 1999, Goltz et al. 2001). 

Damage to the understory creates forest gaps for colonization by new plants and seeds, thereby 

facilitating the spread of invasive plant species that out-compete native species (Diong 1982, Linney 

1987, LaRosa 1992, Stone et al. 1992). Ungulates can further spread invasive plant seeds by 

consuming fruits and large seeds. Conversely, the consumption of native fruit and large seeds by 

non-native ungulates further reduces the potential for successful plant reproduction and forest 

regeneration (Wiles et al. 1999, Ali 2004). Invasive species can also be vectors for pathogens and 

diseases (Atkinson et al. 2005), which is discussed further in Section 3.2. 

Overgrazing, rooting, trampling, and other behaviors can denude areas and cause extensive soil 

erosion (Tep and Gaines 2003, Liddle et al. 2006). By reducing canopy cover and disturbing soil, 

ungulates also increase the amount of sunlight reaching the soil surface, which alters soil properties 

such as temperature, salinity, elevation, and soil structure. Cascading effects of changes to soil 

properties cause a disruption to ecosystem function by increasing the rate of decomposition and 

evaporation (Ford and Grace 1998). Constant trampling causes soil compaction that can deplete the 

soil of needed oxygen (Van Driesche and Van Driesche 2004). Furthermore, ungulates directly 

influence understory invertebrates by removing food resources from lower trophic levels (Allombert 

et al. 2005). 

Caves and cave resources throughout KALA are highly threatened due to removal or modification of 

surface vegetation (F. Howarth/Bishop Museum, pers. comm.). Plant roots that penetrate deep 

underground to obtain water and nutrients are the main energy source for cave ecosystems. This 

important food base is disrupted by grazing and trampling of ungulates (Stone and Howarth 2007). 

3.1.1.2 Impacts to the Freshwater Ecosystem: 

Invasive ungulates degrade freshwater resources by facilitating erosion and subsequent siltation and 

pollution of surface waters. Riparian vegetation prevents erosion and traps sediments during heavy 

rain events. By trampling and removing this vegetation and compacting the soil, ungulates can alter 

the rate of infiltration and surface runoff (Strauch et al. 2009). Ungulate activity can cause 

geomorphological changes to riparian ecosystems by increasing bank instability and widening 

stream channels (McIver and McInnis 2007). Erosion and geomorphological alterations have been 

documented to reduce water quality and also impact benthic macroinvertebrate communities 

(Magner et al. 2008, Strauch et al. 2009). 

3.1.1.3 Impacts to the Marine Ecosystem: 

Ungulates have the potential to indirectly degrade coastal marine ecosystems and water quality 

through sedimentation carried to the sea by storm waters and winds. Rooting and digging by pigs, 

deer, and goats result in barren land and accelerate erosion and subsequent sedimentation on the 

coral reefs (Stone et al. 1992, Ikagawa 2006). During rainstorms, sediments generated from upland 

areas can cascade onto the beach area (CRAMP 2008). 
149 

However, there are currently no documented impacts of ungulates or ungulate-induced erosion 

affecting the intertidal or subtidal zones of the marine ecosystem. Sedimentation is not considered to 

be a problem at KALA at this time (E. Brown/NPS, pers. comm.). 

3.1.2 Invasive Terrestrial Flora 

Many of the over 10,000 introduced plant species and cultivars have become invasive in the 

Hawaiian Islands, dominating watersheds and ecological communities (Staples and Herbst 2005; 

Zouhar et al. 2008). Compared to native plants, non-native plants lack their natural enemies in 

the introduced range, which gives them a competitive edge over native species. Invasive plants 

are also reported to be faster growing and can therefore easily and quickly colonize, establish, 

and displace native species (Blossey and Notzold 1995). 

The exact extent of specific invasive plant species in the park is not known. An annual early 

detection inventory of invasive plants is expected to begin in 2011 to determine the spatial 

patterns of invasive plants throughout the park. In addition, an annual monitoring program will 

be set up to determine long-term trends in the distribution and abundance of invasive plants 

(NPS, unpublished). However, approximately 23 invasive plants encompassing 1,776 ha (4,388 

ac) have been targeted for control. Some species are also removed opportunistically during 

surveys or other management activities (NPS, unpublished). 

Table 3.1-1 lists the invasive plant species believed to have the greatest adverse impact to the natural 

resources at KALA. This list is primarily based on assessments by the Hawaii-Pacific Weed Risk 

Assessment (WRA; University of Hawai‘i 2009) and the Pacific Island Ecosystem at Risk (PIER; 

USDA Forest Service 2009). Species with a WRA or PIER score greater than six are considered 

“high-risk plant species (pests and likely pests)” in these assessments (University of Hawai‘i 2009). 

Because well-known invasive species are often not screened by the WRA or PIER, determinations 

about the invasive ability of a species and its potential impact to natural resources were also 

supplemented with literature about invasive species throughout the state (Wagner et al. 1999, 

Motooka et al. 2003) and the globe (Holm et al. 1977). Additionally, the best professional judgment 

of SWCA and input from NPS staff were considered. Potential invasive characteristics of these 

species are listed in Table 3.1-2. 

It is important to note that although these species are believed to have the greatest negative impact to 

natural resources at KALA, the species in Table 3.1-1 should not automatically be targeted for 

control. Control should be directed at addressing the most unacceptable impacts to high-value 

natural resources. 

Except for the case of incipient species, decisions about which species to control are not defined so 

much by the species’ particular characteristics or reputation as much as by any observed impacts to a 

valued resource. Priorities for control should be based on the value of the resources being impacted 

and the urgency of addressing the threats posed by the invasives (IUCN 2000). Determinations on 

species to target for control should also consider whether 1) control methods for the species are 

available and effective and 2) the time and costs required to benefit the ecosystem are feasible. 
150 

Table 3.1-1. Invasive plant species believed to have the greatest impact to the natural resources within 

the terrestrial ecosystem at KALA. 

Species Common Name(s) Family Distribution1

WRA2/ 

PIER3

Score 

Androponon virginicus broomsedge Poaceae K, PU, NS, L 13 

Antigonon leptopus Mexican creeper Polygonaceae L 19 

Argemone mexicana Mexican poppy Papaveraceae L 18 

Asystasia gangetica Chinese violet Acanthaceae PU, L 12 

Axonopus fissifolius carpet grass Poaceae PU, NS 16 

Canna indica African arrowroot Cannaceae L 17 

Casuarina equisetifolia ironwood Casuarinaceae K, PU, NS, L 21 

Cenchrus echinatus sandbur grass Poaceae K, PU, L 11 

Cirsium vulgare bull thistle Asteraceae L 21 

Clidemia hirta Koster’s curse Melastomataceae PU, L 27 

Ehrharta stipoides meadow ricegrass Poaceae PU -- 

Ficus microcarpa Chinese banyan Moraceae K, OI, PU, L 10 

Fraxinus uhdei tropical ash Oleaceae PU 11 

Furcraea foetida mauritius hemp Agavaceae K, PU, L -- 

Kalanchoe pinnata airplant Crassulaceae K, OI, PU, NS, L -- 

Lantana camara lantana Verbenaceae All zones 21 

Leonotis nepetifolia annual lion's ear Lamiaceae CS, PU, L 19 

Leucaena leucocephala koa haole Fabaceae K, PU, NS, L 15 

Melinis minutiflora molassesgrass Poaceae K, OI, PU, NS, L 7 

Paspalum conjugatum Hilo grass Poaceae PU, NS 28 

Phoenix dactylifera date palm Arecaceae K, PU, NS, L 10 

Pithecellobium dulce Madras thorn Fabaceae PU, MR 14 

Prosopis pallida kiawe Fabaceae K, CS, PU, MR, L 20 

Psidium cattleianum strawberry guava Myrtaceae All zones 18 

Psidium guajava common guava Myrtaceae All zones 21 

Ricinus communis castorbean Eurphorbiaceae K, PU, NS, L 21 

Rubus argutus prickly blackberry Roseaceae PU 21.5 

Schefflera actinophylla octopus tree Araliaceae PU, L 13 

Schinus terebinthefolius Christmas berry Anacardiaceae All zones 19 

Solanum capsicoides cockroach berry Solanaceae K, PU, NS, L 15 

Spathodea campanulata African tulip Bignoniaceae PU, L 14 

Sphagneticola trilobata wedelia Asteraceae L 13 

Stachytarpheta cayennensis oī Verbenaceae K, PU, L 20 

Stachytarpheta jamaicensis Jamaica vervain Verbenaceae K, CS, PU, NS, L -- 

Syzygium cumini java plum Myrtaceae All zones -- 

Tibouchina herbacea cane tibouchina Melastomataceae MR, NS 24 

Urochloa maxima Guinea grass Poaceae PU, MR 17 

Verbesina encelioides golden crownbeard Asteraceae Unknown -- 

Xanthium strumarium var. 

canadense cocklebur, kīkānia Asteraceae K, CS, PU, L -- 

1) Represents the known extent of the species; however, the species may occur in additional management zones.

Source: Asherman et al. (1990), Medeiros et al. (1996), Wood et al. (2005), Wood (2008), Wysong and Hughes 

(2008). 

2) Source: University of Hawai‘i (2009); 3) Source: USDA Forest Service (2009).
151 

Table 3.1-2. Characteristics of invasive plant species believed to have the greatest impact to the natural 

resources within the terrestrial ecosystem at KALA. 

Species 

Forms 

Dense 

Thickets 

Vegetative 

Reproduction 

Prolific Seed 

Production 

Persistent 

Propagule 

bank 

Androponon virginicus N -- -- -- 

Antigonon leptopus N Y -- -- 

Argemone mexicana -- N Y Y 

Asystasia gangetica Y Y Y Y 

Axonopus fissifolius N Y Y -- 

Canna indica Y Y -- Y 

Casuarina equisetifolia Y Y Y Y 

Cenchrus echinatus N -- N -- 

Cirsium vulgare N Y N Y 

Clidemia hirta Y Y Y Y 

Ehrharta stipoides -- -- -- -- 

Ficus microcarpa N N Y -- 

Fraxinus uhdei Y N -- Y 

Furcraea foetida Y Y -- -- 

Kalanchoe pinnata Y Y -- -- 

Lantana camara Y N Y Y 

Leonotis nepetifolia Y N Y Y 

Leucaena leucocephala Y N N Y 

Melinis minutiflora -- Y -- -- 

Panicum maximum Y Y Y N 

Paspalum conjugatum Y Y Y Y 

Phoenix dactylifera Y Y N Y 

Pithecellobium dulce Y Y N N 

Prosopis pallida Y -- N Y 

Psidium cattleianum Y Y Y N 

Psidium guajava Y N Y N 

Ricinus communis Y N Y Y 

Rubus argutus Y Y -- Y 

Schefflera actinophylla Y N Y N 

Schinus terebinthefolius Y Y Y N 

Solanum capsicoides N N -- -- 

Spathodea campanulata N N Y -- 

Sphagneticola trilobata N Y N -- 

Stachytarpheta cayennensis Y Y -- -- 

Stachytarpheta jamaicensis -- -- -- -- 

Syzygium cumini Y -- -- N 

Tibouchina herbacea Y Y Y Y 

Verbesina encelioides Y N Y -- 

Xanthium strumarium var. canadense Y N -- -- 

 Source: Wagner et al. (1999), Motooka et al. (2003), University of Hawai‘i (2009), USDA Forest Service (2009). 
152 

3.1.2.1 Impacts to the Terrestrial Ecosystem: 

Invasive plants have been documented in all of the terrestrial management zones in KALA. Some of 

the invasive plants species in the park (Syzygium cumini and Psidium spp.) have an open understory 

due to grazing by ungulates, while others (Schinus terebinthefolius and Lantana camara) form dense 

thickets (NPS 2000a, 2004, Marshall et al. 2008). 

Invasive plant species pose a serious threat to terrestrial ecosystems in Hawai‘i by competing with 

native plants for space, light, and nutrients. Native plants are generally slower growing than nonnatives and thus are often physically displaced after disturbances. This enables invasives to form 

monotypic stands, reducing biodiversity (Smith 1985). At the ecosystem level, invasive plants have 

been shown to be capable of changing fire regimes (D’Antonio and Vitosek 1992), altering nutrient 

cycling patterns (Vitousek 1990), and modifying the surface runoff of water (Vitousek 1992). By 

impacting native plants, invasive plant species in turn impact the animals that depend on them 

(CTAHR 2003). 

3.1.2.2 Impacts to the Freshwater Ecosystem: 

Invasive vegetation can change hydrologic regimes in lakes, streams, wetlands, and other freshwater 

habitats. These species can eliminate open water (USFWS 2007) and remove wildlife habitat, such 

as egg-laying sites for stream fishes and invertebrates (Parham et al. 2008). Invasive plants can alter 

exposure to solar radiation; shading influences stream ecosystems by modifying water temperature 

and primary production of aquatic plants, which can have important consequences on water quality 

(Wilcock et al. 2002). Compared to native plants, invasive (or non-native) plants can have greater 

transpiration rates (Going and Dudley 2008, Kagawa et al. 2009). This difference in water use can 

impact several hydrological processes, such as streamflow or groundwater recharge (Gordon 1998, 

Kagawa et al. 2009). 

3.1.2.3 Impacts to the Marine Ecosystem: 

A few mangrove seedlings have been found along the coastal area of the park; however, there is no 

stand or grove of these trees and most of them have not survived the winters. Consequently, there is 

no intensive eradication effort (E. Brown/NPS, pers. comm.), and the presence of the mangrove 

seedlings is currently not a cause for concern. 

3.1.3 Invasive Small Mammals 

Rattus rattus, Mus musculus, Herpestes javanicus, and Felis catus are present in the park boundaries. 

Marshall et al. (2008) found that R. rattus was the most ubiquitous species at KALA, followed by H. 

javanicus, M. musculus, and F. catus. However, H. javanicus had the most captures and the most 

evidence recorded of all four species. Rattus norvegicus (Norway rats) and Rattus exulans 

(Polynesian rats) were not detected during the survey potentially due to the relatively low elevation 

of the island or the relatively low number of trap nights. Canis familiaris were heard and tracks were 

seen within the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR (Marshall et al. 2008). 

Because many residents own or feed F. catus within the Kalaupapa Settlement, control of these 

animals is an extremely sensitive issue. Occasionally, F. catus are trapped, neutered, and 

released to decrease threats to natural resources (G. Hughes/NPS, pers. comm.). NPS staff and 

volunteer veterinarians captured and spayed or neutered 481 F. catus between January 1998 and 

March 2007 (Marshall et al. 2008). 

 
153 

3.1.3.1 Impacts to the Terrestrial Ecosystem: 

Small, non-native mammals consume a variety of native bird, invertebrate, and plant foods, 

including snails, plant seeds, and bird eggs (Courchamp et al. 2003, Aruch 2006, Wanless et al. 

2007, Marshall et al. 2008). These animals not only impact above ground ecosystems but also prey 

on or compete with native species in caves (Stone and Howarth 2007). 

Rattus spp., H. javanicus, F. catus, and C. familiaris have been observed preying upon groundnesting seabirds or contributing to seabird nesting failures (Simons 1983, Stone 1985, Winter 2003, 

Kozar et al. 2007). The most serious land-based threat to Puffinus newelli and Pterodroma 

sandwichensis populations is predation of eggs and young in the breeding colonies by introduced 

small mammalian predators (Ainley et al. 1997, Mitchell et al. 2005, Hays and Conant 2007). 

Although the KALA coastline has good habitat for nesting seabirds, relatively low numbers of 

species and individuals of species were observed, possibly due to the abundance of predatory threats 

(Kozar et al. 2007). 

Rattus rattus are known to strip the bark from native trees, thereby inhibiting growth (Scowcroft and 

Sakai 1984, Hess et al. 2004). Similar stripping of Reynoldsia sandwicensis by Rattus spp. been 

observed at Kauhakō Crater. Rattus spp. also consume seeds and fruits and prevent the regeneration 

of rare and endangered plants. Marshall et al. (2008) noted evidence of predation by Rattus spp. on 

Diospyros sandwicensis, Pittosporum halophilum, and Pandanus tectorius in coastal forests at 

Kūka‘iwa‘a and Ka‘aloa and on Pritchardia hillebrandii seeds at higher elevation forest at the back 

of Wai‘ale‘ia Valley (Hughes, unpublished data). 

3.1.3.2 Impacts to the Freshwater Ecosystem: 

Rattus spp. may potentially wade into streams to feed on Neritina granosa; however, this activity 

has not been quantified and is therefore uncertain (J. Ford/SWCA, pers. comm.). 

3.1.4 Invasive Insects 

Invasive non-native insects have been documented to adversely affect native biodiversity through 

herbivory, predation, parasitism, pollination disruption, and hybridization and competition with 

native species. Insects have the greatest rate of yearly establishment of all animal or plant groups in 

Hawai’i (Staples and Cowie 2001). More than 2,500 non-native insects have established in Hawai‘i 

(Kenis et al. 2009). Although few studies have been conducted on the impact of invasive insects at 

KALA, it is presumed that few insects are negatively impacting native flora, fauna, and ecosystem 

processes. 

Invasive insects known to occur at KALA include ants, Sophonia rufofascia, Quadrastichus 

erythrinae, and Specularius impressithorax. Other non-native insects known to impact native 

ecosystems in the Hawaiian Islands, such as cockroaches, millipedes, Klambothrips myopori, and

Vespula pensylvanica (western yellowjacket wasps), have not been documented at KALA, but may 

occur within the park boundaries (Staples and Cowie 2001, Mitchell et al. 2005, Stone and Howarth 

2007). 

3.1.4.1 Impacts to the Terrestrial Ecosystem: 

Approximately 45 species of ants have established in Hawai‘i from coastal strand to subalpine 

shrubland over 2,700 m (8,858 ft) elevation. Invasive ants threaten native arthropod species and 

community structure by directly preying upon native arthropods or competing for food resources, 
154 

nesting areas, or shelter sites (Krushelnyckyet al. 2005). Ants also have the potential to reduce 

hatching success, growth rates, and overall reproductive success of ground-nesting birds in Hawai‘i. 

These insects also indirectly impact native plants by preying on pollinators or excluding pollinators 

from flowers or other floral resources (Gillespie and Reimer 1993, Krushelnyckyet al. 2005). 

Finally, ants may impact native plants, as well as the animals that depend on them, by interfering 

with biological control of invasive plants (Krushelnyckyet al. 2005). It is unknown which ant species 

occur at KALA and the extent of their impact; however, Swenson (2008) noted that ant species 

present on the offshore islets may be preying on native insects, seeds, and seabird chicks. 

Sophonia rufofascia was discovered in Hawai‘i in 1987. It has subsequently been recorded on more 

than 310 plant species in 87 families, of which 67 species are endemic or indigenous and 14 are 

either federally endangered or candidates for listing (Jones et al. 2000; Lenz and Taylor 2001). 

Feeding and oviposition on plants results in leaf chlorosis, stunting, necrosis, and even plant death. 

At KALA, S. rufofascia has been noted to adversely affect seedling recruitment for many of the 

native species in the crater by impacting seeds. Currently, a management strategy has not been 

developed to control S. rufofascia. 

Quadrastichus erythrinae was first described in the Hawaiian Islands in April 2005. The adult 

female wasps insert their eggs into young leaves and stems and the developing larvae feed on the 

leaf tissue. Erythrina species respond to this feeding by producing galls. After pupation, the wasp 

exits through a small hole in the gall. Heavy infestations of Q. erythrinae result in loss of tree growth 

and vigor, and possibly death (Heu et al. 2006, Xu et al. 2006). Chemical injection systems and soil 

drenches have been shown to be effective for some E. sandwicensis; however, these treatments are 

expensive and time consuming (HDOA 2008). Eurytoma sp. (Hymenoptera: Eurytomidae) was 

released in areas of the state as a biological control agent to suppress infestations of Q. erythrinae.

Specularius impressithorax feeds on the seeds of various Erythrina species. Alkaloids and amino 

acids present in Erythrina seeds typically thwart attacks of most bruchid species (Kingsolver and 

Decelle 1979); however, extensive feeding damage to E. sandwicensis seeds shows that these toxic 

components have little effect on S. impressithorax. NPS staff found extensive damage from S. 

impressithorax on E. sandwicensis seeds on the ground and in the trees in Kauhakō Crater (G. 

Hughes/NPS, pers. comm.). 

3.1.4.2 Impacts to the Freshwater Ecosystem: 

Several species of non-native backswimmers, including Buenoa pallipes, Anisops kuroiwae, and 

Notonecta indica, are known to feed on damselfly naiads (Polhemus 1995, USFWS 2007). 

Native damselflies are also potentially threatened by non-native caddisflies (Trichoptera); these 

species compete with native damselflies for space and resources (USFWS 2007). Non-native 

caddisflies and A. kuroiwae have been collected from KALA. 

3.1.5 Invasive Reptiles and Amphibians 

The impacts of non-native reptiles and amphibians in island ecosystems are generally understudied 

(Sin et al. 2008). However, the predatory nature of these species suggests impacts to native 

ecosystems (Staples and Cowie 2001). On Guam, herpetofauna have been found to displace native 

species and provide food for other introduced species (Christy et al. 2007). 
155 

Kraus (2005) identified several reptiles and amphibians at KALA with the potential to become 

invasive. Chamaeleo jacksonii, which were brought to Hawai‘i in 1972, are known to occur in the 

upper elevations along Waikolu Valley, but probably inhabit all mesic and wet forests in KALA. 

Lampropholis delicata was collected from the North Shore Cliffs NNL. Bufo marinus are common 

on the peninsula and were recorded in Wai‘ale‘ia Stream, but likely occur in low densities 

throughout KALA (Kraus 2005). 

3.1.5.1 Impacts to the Terrestrial Ecosystem: 

Chamaeleo jacksonii eat native insects, tree snails, birds eggs, and potentially passerine nestlings 

(Loope et al. 2001; Staples and Cowie 2001; Kraus 2005). Recently, they have been observed 

preying on native Achatinella snails (V. Costello/University of Hawai‘i, pers. comm.). These lizards 

introduce a novel feeding mechanism to Hawai‘i, capturing prey with its long tongue. The ecological 

consequences of this are not known. Control options for this species are complicated because it is 

cryptic and inhabits canopies (Kraus 2005). Lampropholis delicata may also adversely impact native 

soil invertebrates, but this has not been investigated (Kraus 2005). 

3.1.5.2 Impacts to the Freshwater Ecosystem: 

Bufo marinus are indiscriminate eaters, feeding on a wide range of insects and aquatic plant 

material (Staples and Cowie 2001, Yamamoto and Tagawa 2000). Breeding habitat for B. 

marinus occurs in the park boundaries, but the impact of this species is believed to be minimal 

because it forms only moderate densities (Kraus 2005). 

3.1.6 Invasive Fish 

3.1.6.1 Impacts to the Freshwater Ecosystem: 

Numerous non-native fish have been introduced to Hawaiian streams. Invasive fish can impact 

the freshwater ecosystem through predation, competition, and interference (Font 2007). 

Hawaiian damselflies are particularly vulnerable to predation by non-native fish introductions 

(Englund 1999). Non-native fish can transfer their parasites to native hosts (see Section 3.2). 

Currently no non-native fishes have been reported from the freshwater habitats at KALA; 

however, the National Park Service should make every effort to insure that no non-native fish are 

introduced to these habitats. Potential predatory fish species include Gambusia affinis (mosquito 

fish), Poecilia latipinna (sailfin molly), Xiphophorus helleri (green swordtail), Xiphophorus 

maculatus (moonfish), and Poecilia reticulata (guppy). Introduction of these non-native fishes 

could completely alter existing biotic systems. 

3.1.6.2 Impacts to the Marine Ecosystem: 

No marine fish are currently considered invasive in Hawai‘i, though the biomass of introduced 

species such as Lutjanus kasmira (ta‘ape) and Cephalopholis argus (roi) can be high in some 

areas of the main Hawaiian Islands. These two species have been documented in the coastal reefs 

of KALA (Beets et al. 2006, NPS unpublished). 

L. kasmira does not appear to compete with the native Mullids (goatfishes) for food as 

previously perceived (Schumacher and Parrish 2008), but large numbers of L. kasmira have been 

demonstrated to affect the schooling behavior of Mulloidichthys vanicolensis (weke ‘ula). 

Individuals of M. vanicolensis were found higher up in the water column when schools of L. 
156 

kasmira were present, thereby potentially increasing their vulnerability to predators or fishers 

(Schumacher and Parrish 2006). 

C. argus can also consume significant quantities of juvenile reef fish, though no negative impact 

on the population of native fish has been recorded (Dierking 2007). It is presumed that C. argus 

has filled in as an apex predator in the reef ecosystem due to the overfishing of native apex 

predators such as Carangids (http://hawaii.gov/dlnr/dar/coral/pdfs/10_FISHTALK_Roi.pdf, 

Dierking 2007). 

L. kasmira and C. argus comprise only 1.6% and 2.5% of the fish biomass present on the coastal 

reefs of KALA, respectively (Beets et al. 2006). These species are likely to be found on both 

offshore islets as well, even though they have yet to be recorded. However, due to their low 

biomass, the current presence of these introduced species is not likely to be negatively impacting 

the marine ecosystem.

3.1.7 Other Invasive Invertebrates 

3.1.7.1 Impacts to the Freshwater Ecosystem: 

Macrobrachium lar (Tahitian prawn) is a non-native amphidromous species common in 

Hawaiian streams. It has been observed in Wai‘ale‘ia and Waikolu streams at KALA. This 

species impacts stream systems by predating on and competing with native fishes, crustaceans, 

and mollusks (Brasher 1997b, Staples and Cowie 2001, Yamamoto and Tagawa 2000). However, 

there are few published studies available that quantify these impacts. 

3.1.7.2 Impacts to the Marine Ecosystem: 

Introduced Carijoa aff. riisei (snowflake coral) occurred on both offshore islets but was very 

abundant in the caves at ‘Ōkala. Carijoa aff. riisei has been described as the most invasive of the 

287 non-indigenous marine invertebrates in Hawai‘i (Toonen 2004, ISSG 2005, 

http://www.hawaiiinvasivespecies.org/pests/snowflakecoral.html). C. aff. riisei can compete with 

other fauna for benthic substrate; inferring from its abundance at ‘Ōkala, this is likely to be 

occurring. This species can propagate vegetatively or sexually by planktonic larvae. They are 

also commonly transported to new locations as hull fouling on ships 

(http://www.hawaiiinvasivespecies.org/pests/snowflakecoral.html). Currently, there exists no 

established method of control for C. aff. riisei but the introduced nudibranch, Phyllodesmium 

poindimiei, which is also found in Hawai‘i, is believed to be an obligate predator of C. aff. riisei

(Wagner et al. 2007). 

Only one invasive species, the stomatopod Gonodactylaceus falcatus, was reported in the 

intertidal zone. This species is known to compete with native fauna and has been documented to 

aggressively displace the native stomatopod Pseudosquilla ciliata (Kinzie 1968). However, P. 

ciliate was not found at KALA, and G. falcatus is not likely to be a problem at this time. 
157 

3.1.8 Invasive Algae 

3.1.8.1 Impacts to the Marine Ecosystem: 

The red algae Acanthophora spicifera has been found in some of the tide pools at KALA (E. 

Brown/NPS, pers. comm.) and from one transect on the coastal reef. Acanthophora spicifera

often outcompetes with other native species such as Laurencia and Hypnea (Russell 1992, 

http://www.hawaii.edu/reefalgae/invasive_algae/rhodo/acanthophora_spicifera.htm) and 

Laurencia has been documented on the coastal reef of KALA. Currently, efforts are underway to 

remove A. spicifera by hand-collecting the invasive algae from the tide pools with the help of 

volunteers. These efforts began in 2005 and are ongoing, occurring opportunistically two to three 

times a year. In 2009 this algae was discovered in several new locations, but is it not known if 

this algae is spreading since these locations were not previously surveyed. 

The presence of A. spicifera in the coastal reefs is very low and is unlikely to be displacing native 

benthic communities at this time. A. spicifera is also a preferred algae for numerous herbivorous 

fishes (Stimson et al. 2001, Weijerman et al. 2008), and the high biomass of herbivores at KALA 

likely contributes to the containment of this introduced algae. 

3.2 Diseases and Pathogens 

Endemic island species are particularly susceptible to introduced pathogens and disease, which have 

been recognized as a major threat to global biodiversity (Bataille et al. 2009). 

3.2.1 Impacts to the Terrestrial Ecosystem 

Mosquito-borne avian diseases, principally Plasmodium relictum (avian malaria) and the virus 

Avipoxvirus sp. (avian pox), have been implicated as the main reason for mortality of the native 

Hawaiian forest birds in low-elevation areas. Although other species transmit these diseases, Culex 

quinquefasciatus (southern house mosquito) has been identified as the primary vector (Van Riper et 

al. 2002, LaPointe et al. 2005, Reiter and LaPoint 2007). Other non-native species augment the 

spread of these pathogens. S. scrofa create large, nutrient-rich mud wallows that serve as breeding 

habitat for C. quinquefasciatus (Atkinson et al. 2005, USGS 2006, LaPointe 2008) and introduced 

birds, which are relatively resistant to these diseases, serve as reservoirs for the diseases (DOFAW 

2009). 

The entire Island of Moloka‘i lies within the elevation range of C. quinquefasciatus; therefore, all 

native (and non-native) avifauna are threatened by these diseases (Marshall and Kozar 2008). An 

avian disease study was conducted at Kalaupapa (Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR) and the surrounding Pelekunu 

and Kamakou preserves in 2003. Reiter et al. (2003) found that 95% of forest birds in the adjacent 

Kamakou Preserve were infected with avian malaria, and 50% were infected with avian pox. 

In other islands in the state, detections of Hemignathus flavus (‘Oahu ‘amakihi) and H. virens

(Hawai‘i ‘amakihi) at low elevations may indicate that some populations are developing a resistance 

to avian malaria that can be passed to their offspring, thereby facilitating the repopulation of lowelevation areas (Shehata et al. 2001, Woodworth et al. 2005, Kilpatrick et al. 2006, Foster et al. 

2007). The presence of Himatione sanguinea and Hemignathus virens wilsoni at the low-elevation 

sites in KALA may be evidence of some immunity or resistance to disease (Marshall and Kozar 

2008). 
158 

3.2.2 Impacts to the Freshwater Ecosystem 

Approximately 14 species of helminths (worms) parasitize native gobioid stream fishes. Of these, 

approximately six are non-native to Hawai‘i, introduced through alien Poeciliids or other 

anthropogenic activities. Although no parasites have been observed on fish in KALA, these 

freshwater helminthes represent a potential disease threat to the five species of native gobioid fishes 

(Font 2007). 

3.2.3 Impacts to the Marine Ecosystem 

Coral disease is rapidly emerging as a threat to the reefs of Hawaii (Aeby 2008 

http://hawaii.conference-services.net/resources/337/1232/pdf/HCC16_0067.pdf) with 18 disease 

states documented. Coral disease frequency has been examined at all sites (100% frequency) 

surveyed on O‘ahu, Maui, and the Island of Hawai‘i, averaging a 1.0–1.4 % of the colonies 

inspected (Friedlander et al. 2008a). Disease and coral bleaching have only been documented at 

KALA for two years (2006–2007). In 2006, the prevalence of disease/bleaching averaged 3.7% 

(range 0–15.4%). However, in 2007, the incidence of disease/bleaching had dropped to 0.3% (range 

0–3.8%). Given the high occurrence of disease/bleaching in 2006, disease/bleaching could be a 

potential threat to KALA and should be closely monitored. 

3.3 Habitat Loss, Degradation, and Fragmentation 

Habitat loss and degradation have been acknowledged as a major threat to terrestrial, freshwater, and 

marine environments in the Pacific (Kingsford et al. 2009). Although historic and modern human 

activities (habitation, agriculture, water diversions, land clearing, etc.) have modified, fragmented, or 

destroyed some of the original habitats at KALA, these developments have been relatively small and 

concentrated compared to other areas in the state. However, human-related activities have promoted 

encroachment of invasive species, which has decreased suitable habitat for native species. 

3.3.1 Impacts to the Terrestrial Ecosystem 

Archaeological research suggests that permanent settlers first established in the Waikolu Valley and 

later on the peninsula itself. Evidence of early human habitation has been found on the peninsula, in 

the valleys, and in Kauhakō Crater through several periods of history (Greene 1985, McCoy 2005a, 

2005b). Heiau (altars) and alawai (waterways) were noted in Waikolu and Wai‘ale‘ia valleys 

(Asherman et al. 1990) and house sites, cemeteries, a hōlua (sled), and other archaeological features 

have been noted elsewhere in KALA (Greene 1985). 

Development was more intensive during the period of the Kalawao and Kalaupapa settlements 

(1866–present). Over 300 resident and guest houses were built on the peninsula during this time. 

Other buildings included cemeteries, churches, a hospital complex, schools, dormitories, a store, a 

recreation hall, a drug-shop, a storehouse, a prison, and a slaughtering house (Greene 1985). These 

structures removed the original habitat in these areas. 

Agriculture has also resulted in habitat loss, degradation, and fragmentation. Evidence shows that 

portions of KALA were altered for agriculture during the prehistoric era (A.D. 1778–1200) and 

historic era (A.D. 1866–1778) (McCoy 2005b). Agriculture occurred in Kauhakō Crater, along the 

Coastal Spray Zone, in the Lowland Coastal Area, and within the deep valleys of the park. Prior to 

the establishment of the leprosy settlement, large areas of the peninsula were cultivated with sweet 

potatoes (NPS 2006a). To prevent strong winds from affecting crop growth, stone field walls were 

constructed to act as windbreaks (McCoy 2005b). Once the Kalaupapa Settlement was established, 
159 

most of the peninsula was grazed over by livestock, including horses, cows, and mules. Patients also 

constructed lo‘i, or terraces of Colocasia esculenta (taro), in Waikolu Valley (NPS 2006a). Small 

amounts of other crops were also grown on the peninsula and in the valleys (Greene 1985). 

3.3.2 Impacts to the Freshwater Ecosystem 

The Molokai Irrigation System began diverting water from Waikolu Stream in 1960. The impacts of 

diversion structures have been examined by various researchers in Hawai‘i. Dams, diversions, and 

similar man-made structures can disturb longitudinal or linear connectivity of Hawaiian stream 

habitats by altering the volume and frequency of flows necessary to sustain native amphidromous 

species. Dewatering prevents both downstream dispersal by larvae and upstream migration by postlarvae and juveniles. Prolonged low-flow conditions have the potential to reduce available habitat 

and food supply for benthic invertebrates, alter invertebrate drift, and affect trophic interactions 

(Brasher 1997a, Brasher 1997b, Way et al. 1998, Benbow 1999, Kinzie et al. 2006, McIntosh et al. 

2002). Diversions also indirectly impact native species by creating a favorable environment (e.g., 

lower flow velocity and increased water temperature) for non-native predatory species, such as M. 

lar (Brasher 1997b). 

Way et al. (1998) concluded that the diversion structure on Waikolu Stream has “dampened the 

natural seasonal discharge cycle of the stream, exacerbated natural low flow conditions, and 

increased the likelihood of prolonged periods of extremely low flow” (Way et al. 1998). Since it was 

diverted, Waikolu Stream commonly experiences prolonged periods of extremely low flows (<0.06 

m3

 s

-1). Brasher (1996, 1997a, 1997b) investigated the impacts of diversion structures and 

dewaterment on native species in Waikolu Stream. Her studies found that densities of three native 

fish species were substantially lower in, and upstream of, the diverted sections of Waikolu Stream 

compared to the lower reaches of Waikolu Stream and to comparable areas on undiverted Pelekunu 

Stream (Brasher 1997a). There was also a dramatic decrease in Neritina granosa densities in and 

above the areas affected by water diversion. These results are likely due to the effects of 

dewaterment on habitat availability. 

Some native Hawaiian amphidromous species are able to surmount many low dams and weirs to 

inhabit upstream reaches (Gingerich and Wolff 2005, DAR 2008, SWCA 2007, SWCA 2008); 

however, this ability is strongly influenced by the location and type of diversion structures (March et 

al. 2003, Resh 2005, SWCA 2004 and 2005). Furthermore, ecological connectivity can be restored 

when dry stream reaches below diversion structures are wetted by freshets, allowing migration to 

occur (Gingerich and Wolff 2005). 

NPS staff review the monthly summary of applications for surface and groundwater use on Moloka‘i 

that are published in CWRM’s Water Resource Bulletin. New applications are evaluated to 

determine if proposed uses might affect the surface or groundwater resources of KALA (J. 

Hughes/NPS, pers. comm.). Staff comments are prepared and forwarded for consideration by 

CWRM, as appropriate. 

3.3.3 Impacts to the Marine Ecosystem 

There are currently plans to upgrade the harbor at KALA to ensure that future barge operations 

continue to supply the settlement. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is being prepared to 

assess the environmental impacts of proposed improvements to the existing pier and associated 

structures (http://parkplanning.nps.gov/projectHome.cfm--parkID=313&projectId=17209). One 
160 

of the alternative plans calls for dredging the turning basin. The construction has potential to 

impact the benthic and fish communities through habitat loss, displacement, sedimentation, and 

temporarily alteration of habitat use by the endangered monk seal and other marine mammals in 

adjacent areas. 

Compared to reef communities outside of the harbor and surrounding the park, the substrate 

within the harbor has substantially less coral, less coralline algae, less macroalgae, and more 

sand (Brown et al 2008). This construction is likely to result in some loss of coral cover 

(estimated 1,783 ft2

 [164 m2]), which may be mitigated in part by the creation of new habitat 

with the installation of the mooring dolphin and the increase in surface area from the deeper 

turning basin. It may take up to 10–15 years to recolonize these surfaces. Construction may also 

temporarily displace fish assemblages, but the fish are expected to recolonize the habitat within 

16 months (Walsh 1983). The construction will also cause temporary suspension of sediments 

but as KALA does not have fine sediment, the sediment is not expected to smother coral present 

in the area. The North Pacific swell will most likely flush out any sediment generated during 

construction. Consequently, is not expected that the sediment dynamics in the area will be altered 

much (Brown et al 2008). 

Construction may also cause acoustic disturbance to marine mammals, such as the endangered 

monk seal, resulting in temporary avoidance of the surrounding areas (Brown et al. 2008). It is 

recommended that construction, when it occurs, be regulated and timed to avoid disturbance to 

the monk seal (Brown et al. 2008). 

3.4 Harvest, Hunt, and Take 

Excessive fishing, hunting, or gathering has the potential for adverse ecological impacts. Due to the 

minimal human population and limited access to KALA, however, the current impacts of these 

activities are considered negligible. 

3.4.1 Impacts to the Terrestrial Ecosystem 

Currently, there is no documented harvesting or hunting of native terrestrial species at KALA. 

Hunting of non-native ungulates is permitted in the park. Because these species are known to have 

an adverse impact on native species and ecosystem, ungulate hunting is not perceived as a threat or 

stressor to KALA. Non-timber forest products may be collected within the Molokai State Forest 

Reserve if individuals obtain a Special Use Permit from DOFAW. None of these species can be 

designated as federal or state threatened or endangered species (DOFAW 2009). 

3.4.2 Impacts to the Freshwater Ecosystem 

Historically, pre-Captain Cook Hawaiians directly influenced stream fauna by fishing and collecting 

returning post-larvae, or hinana (Titcomb 1972). In the 1950s, the Hawai‘i State Fish and Game 

Division (now Division of Aquatic Resources) outlawed the practice of collecting goby fry or hinana 

in response to declining stocks. Brasher (1997b) noted that few people have access to the mouth of 

Waikolu Stream and the upper reaches can only be accessed by driving through the water diversion 

tunnel. Because of the relative isolation, human predation pressure is likely less than in other 

Hawaiian streams. 
161 

3.4.3 Impacts to the Marine Ecosystem 

The only harvesting of marine resources that occurs in the intertidal zone is opihi picking. 

However, fishing regulations at KALA only allow patients to pick opihi. Take is also limited to a 

shell diameter of at least 1.25 in long (HAR 13-92). There is an ongoing project to assess the 

impact of subsistence opihi picking at KALA, but given the large size of opihi still present (e.g., 

Hughes and Carnevale 2004, Minton and Carnevale 2006) the current rate of harvesting is likely 

to be sustainable. 

Due to the small human population present on the peninsula and the remoteness of the area, 

fishing pressure is very low and concentrated around a few access points such as the harbor 

(Brown et al. 2008). The fish assemblage of KALA is healthy with a good representation of apex 

predators and large herbivores. However, there are is potential for the biomass of target fish, 

particularly of apex predators, to further increase if fishing stops. 

While the two islets are within the KALA park boundary, there are no fishing restrictions for 

waters around the islets. Residents at KALA typically do not fish off the islets, but these waters 

are occasionally visited by fishing boats from other areas during periods of good weather (E. 

Brown/NPS, pers. comm.). The remoteness of the islets and their relative inaccessibility from 

shore probably accounts for the high biomass of target fish species in the area. 

As future land use and management practices for KALA remain uncertain, it is not possible to 

predict how much, if any, the human population will increase, or what fishing management rules 

may be emplaced in the future. It is likely that fishing pressure may increase due to relaxed 

fishing rules or an influx of people to the peninsula. In such an event, fishing pressure at all 

marine zones (intertidal, coastal, and offshore islets) will also likely increase and may cause a 

significant drop in the biomass of target species present (Friedlander et al 2007). 

3.5 Visitor Use 

Visitor impacts on the natural resources at KALA are minimized as a result of legislation, 

geography, and costs. Public Law 96-565 states that only 100 people per day are provided 

permits to visit the peninsula. This includes tourists on commercial tours, volunteers performing 

services projects, and friends or relatives of residents, but does not include people providing 

contracted services or government officials. Additionally, no individuals under 16 years of age 

are allowed at KALA, except in special cases (NPS 1999). Public access into the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR 

is also limited due to rugged terrain and impacts to natural communities (DOFAW 1991). 

Furthermore, the physical access down the steep cliffs restricts access to KALA and controls 

visitor impacts on terrestrial habitats. 

In 1998, approximately 10,318 individuals visited the peninsula, the majority of which arrived by 

plane. Over 150 of these visitors were volunteers (NPS 1999). Other access includes mule rides, 

hiking, or by boat. On average, about 58,000 people visit the overlook in Pala‘au State Park each 

year (USFWS 2006). 

Visitors with permits to KALA participate in the following recreational activities: pole fishing, 

swimming, visiting wayside exhibits, visiting the Americans of Japanese Ancestry (AJA) visitor 

center, hiking the three-mile Kalaupapa Trail, and riding a mule down the trail (via an NPS 

concession, Molokai’i Mule Rides, Inc.). Tour groups have been a regular feature at KALA since 
162 

the 1970s (NPS 2000a). Damien Tours, a patient-owned and operated commercial tour service, 

provides tours six days a week. It stops at several locations within the settlement, and visitors are 

allowed off the bus (NPS 1999). 

Currently the National Park Service does not manage visitation. Because of the uncertainty 

surrounding future land management and ownership, the National Park Service’s role in managing 

visitation in the future is unknown. It is possible that visitor services and interpretation programs will 

be expanded in the future (NPS 1999). 

3.5.1 Impacts to the Terrestrial Ecosystem 

The current impact of visitor use on the terrestrial ecosystem is minimal. In general, visitors 

remain along maintained trails or roadways, thereby minimizing impacts to more intact habitats. 

The management zones that receive the most visitor use are the Lowland Coastal Area, Kauhakō

Crater, and the North Shore Cliffs NNL. 

 

The number of visitors to the offshore islets is unknown because these areas are not easily 

monitored by the National Park Service. Overuse or improper visitation to the offshore islands 

has been listed as a potential threat to the natural resources by NPS staff (NPS, unpublished). 

If visitor services and interpretation programs increase in the future, threats due to visitor 

impacts could also increase. Potential impacts of increased visitation could include loss of native 

vegetation due to trampling, introduction of additional non-native species, soil erosion or 

compaction, and disturbance of sensitive native avifauna or mammals. Many of the rare species 

present in KALA, notably Panicum fauriei var. carteri, are particularly vulnerable to trampling 

(USFWS 1994). 

3.5.2 Impacts to the Freshwater Ecosystem 

Similar to the terrestrial ecosystem, visitor use is not believed to be adversely impacting the 

freshwater habitats at KALA. However, if visitor use increases due to changes in land management, 

the freshwater habitats would be more vulnerable to the introduction of invasive species (see 

Sections 3.1.2.2 and 3.1.6.1). 

3.5.3 Impacts to the Marine Ecosystem 

The State of Hawai‘i Department of Health (DOH) regulations indicate that visitors are only allowed 

to fish with poles from shore. Short-term (<1 month) volunteers are also allowed to fish with poles 

from shore. Visitors and volunteers are not allowed to pick opihi, spearfish, or net fish and may not 

take marine life on behalf of the patients, employees, or long-term (>1 month) volunteers. 

Residents/employees are allowed to participate in the other activities with the exception of opihi 

harvesting. Only patients are allowed to pick opihi. In addition, no SCUBA diving, surfing, or 

boogie boarding is allowed for visitors and residents so impacts are further reduced. The KALA 

marine program staff has been granted an exemption for SCUBA diving for research purposes. All 

state and federal fish and game rules apply for both visitors and residents. It should be noted, 

however, that visitors entering park waters by boat and not landing on shore are exempt from the 

DOH regulations specific to the settlement. At present, current visitor impact on the marine 

environment is negligible. However, if visitor use increases due to changes in management, and 

visitors are allowed to freely harvest the marine resources, the population of Cellana species and 

biomass of fish at KALA could significantly decrease. 
163 

3.6 Climate Change 

It is now recognized that climate change is not speculative, but rather that “the harms associated 

with climate change are serious and well-recognized” (Massachusetts v. EPA, 127 S.Ct. at 1455). 

During the twentieth century, the global environment experienced variations in climatic 

conditions. According to the Fourth Assessment Report by the Intergovernmental Panel on 

Climate Change (IPCC), global temperatures on the Earth’s surface have increased by 0.74°C 

(1.33°F) over the last 100 years. This warming trend has accelerated within the last 50 years, 

increasing by 0.13°C (0.23°F) each decade (Solomon et al. 2007). Global ocean temperatures 

have also increased, rising by 0.10°C (0.18°F) between 1961 and 2003. Global mean sea levels 

are also rising at twice the rate of the 20th century (3 mm/yr instead of 1.6 mm/yr). A 1 m (3.3 ft) 

rise in sea level is expected by the end of the century for Hawai‘i (Fletcher 2009). The expected 

increase of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere will also result in the additional acidification 

of ocean waters (Anthony et al. 2008). 

The maritime location of the Hawaiian Islands makes the archipelago relatively well buffered 

climatically (Benning et al. 2002). However, climatic changes have been documented throughout the 

state. Sea surface temperatures near the islands has been increasing recently (Jokiel and Brown 

2004), showing a 0.4°C (0.72°F) rise between 1957 and 1987 (Giambelluca et al. 1996) and is 

expected to rise a minimum of 1.5–2 °C by the end of the century (IPCC 2007). The increase in sea 

surface temperatures has been associated with more intense hurricanes in the Pacific and Atlantic 

(Webster et. al 2005, US Climate Change Science Program 2009) and could result in higher peak 

wind speeds and heavier rainfall (IPCC 2007). Air temperature increases of 0.1776 °C /decade have 

also been recorded in Hawai‘i (Giambelluca et al. 2008), with higher elevations warming faster than 

lower elevations. The temperature range has also decreased, largely because of an increase in the 

minimum temperatures at night (Giambelluca et al. 2008). In addition, studies show the tradewind 

inversion has already responded substantially to past climate changes (Benning et al. 2002). The 

tradewind inversion is currently present about 80% of the time in Hawai‘I, and it is suggested that 

the persistence of the trade-wind inversion due to climate change will result in a 5–10% decrease in 

rainfall during the wet season. All these climatic changes could potentially impact the natural 

resources at KALA. 

3.6.1 Impacts to the Terrestrial Ecosystem 

3.6.1.1 Species Range and Distribution: 

Plant and animal range boundaries are often determined by tolerances to certain temperatures, 

precipitation amounts, and other climatic factors. Changes in these factors can produce range shifts, 

or changes in the geographical distribution of species. Shifts in habitat composition can also 

influence species’ distributions (Both and Visser 2001). Globally, climate shifts have already caused 

species to migrate to new areas, particularly towards higher altitudes (Dow and Downing 2006, 

Parmesan and Matthews 2006). 

3.6.1.2 Phenology and Physiology: 

The reproductive physiology and population dynamics of insects, amphibians, reptiles, seabirds, and 

waterbirds are highly influenced by environmental conditions such as temperature and humidity 

(Duffy 1993, Benning et al. 2002, Baker et al. 2006). Sex is often determined by the temperature of 

the nest environment; thus, higher temperatures could result in a higher female to male ratio (Baker 

et al. 2006). 
164 

 

Furthermore, global climate change has already caused changes in the timing of biological events, 

such as breeding and flower blooming (Parmesan and Matthews 2006). Increased temperature and 

CO2 levels have shown to influence flowering and seed production of perennial woody dicots. 

Flowering in perennial grass populations has also shown potential to increase as a result of warming 

(Hovenden et al. 2007). 

3.6.1.3 Community Composition and Interaction: 

Changes in climatic conditions can alter community composition and competition. Increases in CO2

levels can impact plant photosynthetic rates, alter plant species composition, decrease nutrient levels, 

and lower herbivore weights (Ehleringer et al. 2002). Similarly, increases in nitrogen availability can 

alter species composition by favoring those plant species that respond to nitrogen rises (Vitousek 

1994). Furthermore, climate change may enhance existing invasive species issues. Alterations in the 

environment may increase the dispersal ability of non-native flora or fauna (Walther et al. 2002). 

Parmesan and Matthews (2006) suggest that invasive species might be better able to adapt to a 

changing climate than native ones. 

3.6.1.4 Trade-wind Inversion: 

Climate change may raise or lower the altitude at which the current orographic trade wind inversion 

layer occurs (Pounds et al. 1999, Still et al. 1999). A lowering of the trade-wind inversion will result 

in a lower elevational cap on rainfall (Miller 2008). By altering this formation, critical precipitation 

inputs from mist and fog drip will be reduced (Benning et al. 2002). Changes in precipitation will 

further influence hydrologic process and stress vegetation. 

3.6.1.5 Sea-Level Rise: 

Tide gauges at sea level at the Honolulu Harbor estimate that sea level has risen at 1.4 ± 0.3 mm/yr 

over the past century. The sea-level rise rate at Hilo Harbor is 3.1 ± 0.6 mm/yr since 1946 variable 

subsidence of the Hawaiian Islands interdecadal variations in upper ocean temperature (Caccamise et 

al. 2005). Fletcher et al. (2002) determined that the threat of sea-level rise is moderately low along 

the Kalaupapa peninsula and low on either side of the isthmus. Rising sea levels will inundate lowlying areas, decreasing habitat for marine and terrestrial species. For example, coastal inundation 

will result in a loss of coastal vegetation, waterbird habitat, and nesting sites. 

3.6.1.6 Fire: 

It is predicted that the warmer temperatures and hydrological changes related to climate change 

could enhance drought conditions throughout the state and increase the possibility and frequency of 

fires (USEPA 1998). Fires have larger ecosystems impacts; because non-native plant species are 

more adapted to fires, increased fires may further enhance the competitive ability of non-native 

species, increase dominance of non-native species, and limit forest structural complexity (HDBEDT 

and DOH 1999, Ainsworth and Kauffman 2009). 

3.6.2 Impacts to the Freshwater Ecosystem 

The impact of climate change on freshwater resources is dependent on shifts in precipitation 

amounts, evaporation rates, storms, and climatic events such as the El Niño Southern Oscillation 

(ENSO). 
165 

3.6.2.1 Sea-Level Rise: 

Sea-level rise will affect freshwater resources, particularly coastal wetlands, anchialine pools, and 

historical fishponds (DeVerse and DiDonato 2006). In addition to changing depths, freshwater 

habitats near the coast will experience increases in salinity. Salinity alterations have the potential to 

shift aquatic plants and animal communities that do not tolerate high salinity. 

3.6.3 Impacts to the Marine Ecosystem 

It is expected that all marine habitats in KALA will be affected by increasing sea surface 

temperatures, sea-level rise, ocean acidification, and an increase in intensity of storms 

(Friedlander et al. 2008a). 

3.6.3.1 Sea Surface Temperatures (SSTs): 

An increase in SST in Hawai‘i is expected to increase the frequency of bleaching events 

(Friedlander 2008a). Bleaching usually occurs when temperatures exceed a ‘threshold’ of about 

0.8–1°C above mean summer maximum levels for at least four weeks (Rosenzweig et al. 2007). 

This is well within the estimated increase of a minimum of 1.5–2 °C that is expected for Hawai‘i 

by the end of the century (IPCC 2007). Local bleaching events have already been documented at 

KALA from 2006 to 2009 but only on isolated coral colonies. Only three bleaching events have 

been documented in Hawai‘i, with one occurring in the MHI (1996) and two in the NWHI (2002, 

2004) (Friedlander et al. 2008a,b). As SSTs are expected to further increase in the waters of 

Hawai‘i, it is anticipated that bleaching will be observed with increasing frequency at KALA and 

around the MHI and will be the dominant cause of reef decline in the middle of the century 

(Jokiel et al. 2009). Bleaching that occurs for an extended period of time results in coral 

mortality, which can lead to a loss of structural complexity and shifts in reef fish species 

composition (Rosenzweig et al. 2007). It has also been documented that branching corals (such 

as those in the genus Pocillopora) are less likely to recover from bleaching (Grimsditch and 

Salm 2006). This is a cause for concern at KALA since the branching corals P.meandrina and P. 

edouxi constitute 69% of the coral cover currently present (Figure 2.3-5). However, lobate corals 

such as Porites lobata may be more resilient and there could be a shift in community structure 

towards Porites species at KALA and perhaps a loss of coral diversity (Grimsditch and Salm 

2006). 

3.6.3.2 Sea-Level Rise: 

The sea level is expected to increase by approximately 1 m by the end of the century. It is expected 

that coral growth will be able to keep apace of the sea-level rise (Buddermeir et al. 2004). As there is 

no high-resolution elevation dataset for the terrestrial portion of the park at this time, a detailed 

analysis of sea-level rise within the park is not possible. Instead a more coarse-scale analysis was 

conducted using the U.S. Geological Survey 10-meter resolution National Elevation Dataset (NED). 

NED datasets have an absolute vertical accuracy of 3.99 m (National Map Accuracy Standards 90% 

confidence intervals). Therefore, an actual 1 m rise in sea level should not extend past the 5- m 

elevation mark in the NED dataset. The area within KALA with 5 m elevation or less was mapped to 

represent the maximum extent of additional submerged land possible due to sea-level rise (Figure 

3.6-1). Results show that an increase in sea level of 1 m is expected to submerge at most 40 ha (98.9 

ac) of coastal land (1.2 % of the land area of the park). This would result in a small increase in 

available coastal habitat for corals on the KALA peninsula and offshore islets and a shift of the 

intertidal zone landward from its current distribution. 
166 

Figure 3.6-1. Coastline elevation map.

Source: State of Hawaii GIS; National Park Service; USGS 10m National Elevation Dataset Digital Elevation Model

Legend

Park BoundaryBuildingsStreams

Roads/Trails

SecondaryTertiary4wdTrail

Elevation in Meters

0 (Sea Level)1 - 5 (436,100 m2)6 - 99100 - 199200 - 299300 - 399

400 - 499500 - 599600 - 699700 - 799800 - 899900 - 9991,000 +

Pacific Ocean

Huelo Islet Huelo Islet

Okala Islet Okala Islet

Kalawao

Kahiu Point Kahiu Point

Kalaupapa

Kauhako Kauhako

Crater

Kalaupapa Peninsula Kalaupapa Peninsula

Namoku

Waihanau Stream

ai a W

ai

e

l

Stre

ma Waikol

u

Stream

Kalaupapa National Historic Park

2,000 0 2,000 1,000

Feet

1,000 0 1,000 500

Meters
167 

3.6.3.3 Ocean Acidification: 

It is expected that ocean acidification will become a dominant cause of reef decline in the latter part 

of this century (Jokiel et al. 2009). Research in Hawai‘i has shown that the recruitment and growth 

of coralline algae will be reduced by 80–90 % with expected rates of ocean acidification. Coralline 

algae are important for cementing the reef framework together, and a lack of growth or recruitment 

of coralline algae may affect the structural integrity of the reef. Coral calcification will also decrease 

by 15–30 % under increased acidification and will result in decreased structural resilience to storms 

and an increased vulnerability to bleaching (Jokiel et al. 2009, Anthony et al. 2008). Due to the 

expected rapid increase in ocean acidification, it is generally assumed that genetic adaptation by 

corals and coralline algae to the change will not be possible. 

3.6.3.4 Storm Events: 

Storm events (tropical storms and hurricanes) in the Pacific have intensified in the past 35 years 

(Webster et al. 2005). Increased intensity results in greater wind speed and higher surf (IPCC 2007) 

and consequently greater coral damage from the waves and storm surge. It has not yet been 

documented that storm frequency will increase. The recovery of corals from the damage of 

Hurricane Iwa (1982) and Hurricane Iniki (1992) has varied widely even at sites in close proximity 

(100 m–1 km) (Coles and Brown 2007). Recovery is driven by recruitment pulses that are decadal, 

varying from 10–12 years for P. meandrina and 15 years or more for P. lobata (Coles and Brown 

2007). Coral damage may be exacerbated in storm events if the coral structure is weakened due to 

ocean acidification (see above). 

3.6.3.5 Increasing Resistance and Resilience of Coral Reefs to Climate Change: 

Recommendations for increasing coral reef resistance and resilience to bleaching include 

establishment of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs), implementing Integrated Coastal Management 

(ICM), and fisheries management (Grimsditch and Salm 2006). All three measures protect 

biodiversity and reduce other anthropogenic stressors, thereby increasing resistance to bleaching. 

MPAs should be situated at sites that show low occurrence of bleaching events and have high 

diversity of corals. A few large MPAs are favored over numerous small ones. Fisheries 

management is also recommended to prevent the overharvesting of keystone functional groups 

such as grazers or apex predators, which can result in losses of biodiversity and functional 

diversity, thereby decreasing resilience of the reef. ICM would address other issues related to 

human activity, such as coastal development and land-based sources of pollution and 

sedimentation (Grimsditch and Salm 2006). It is expected that these recommendations will 

similarly buffer the coral reefs from other stressors that can occur with climate change, such as 

increased resistance to storm damage or faster recovery (resilience) of a reef from a storm event. 

3.7 Erosion and Landslides 

Erosion and landslides are a significant concern for the vegetation on the two offshore islets. Signs 

of landslides and subsequent erosion were observed along the western cliffs of Huelo Islet. 

3.7.1 Impacts to the Terrestrial Ecosystem 

Landslides often completely remove vegetation, including rare native species. Wood (2008) 

attributed the 90% loss of Brighamia rockii on Huelo Islet to landslides. In addition, two 

Pittosporum halophilum were lost on the islet due to landslides. By denuding slopes, landslides 

strongly affect soil characteristics and disrupt soil seed banks. These events can also favor the 

establishment of non-native species; shallow rooted non-native plants that establish following 
168 

landslides could increase the frequency of landslides and further spread non-native plants (Restrepo 

and Vitousek 2001). 

3.7.2 Impacts to the Freshwater Ecosystem 

Erosion and landslides can pollute surface waters by increased sedimentation. These events often 

remove riparian vegetation that traps sediments during heavy rain events. Because sedimentation 

reduces water quality, erosion and landslides can also adversely impact biotic communities in 

wetlands, lakes, and streams. No erosions or landslides have been documented to impact the 

freshwater ecosystem at KALA. 

3.7.3 Impacts to the Marine Ecosystem 

Landslides and erosion can lead to subsequent sedimentation on the coral reefs. The quantity of landbased sediment on the reef has yet to be quantified, but currently there is no evidence that the 

intertidal, coastal, or offshore reefs are threatened by sedimentation. 

3.8 Contaminants, Sewage, and Debris 

There are two active landfills at KALA—the household waste landfill and the commercial waste 

landfill. Both are located west of Damien Road roughly 305 m (1,000 ft) from the Kalaupapa 

Settlement. About 79% of the solid waste generated at KALA is disposed of in these landfills (NPS 

2006a). Neither landfill meets EPA standards as they are not lined and are within the coastal zone. 

Due to the lack of nearby soil to cover the landfills, solid waste is occasionally found lying around, 

and debris is blown from the landfills during storm events. An old landfill/disposal area also exists 

on the shoreline south of Kalawao Road near ‘Awahua Beach (Figure 3.8-1). The National Park 

Service is currently investigating options to improve solid waste operations on the peninsula. 

Household wastewater from Kalaupapa residents, State of Hawai‘i employees, and NPS staff goes 

into cesspools. Some of the cesspools at public facilities (e.g., the hospital) were replaced by septic 

tanks with leach fields in the summer of 2007. Upland agriculture and urban development may also 

contribute sewage and contaminants to the peninsula. 

Debris (fishing nets, plastic bags, etc.) is also carried to KALA on oceanic currents. These items can 

accumulate on beaches and shoreline areas. 

3.8.1 Impacts to the Terrestrial Ecosystem 

Debris blown from the lands and brought from sea can threaten the survival and health of some 

terrestrial wildlife, especially seabirds that nest in the terrestrial ecosystem. Wildlife can ingest and 

become entangled in debris, resulting in digestive issues and restricted movements. 

3.8.2 Impacts to the Freshwater Ecosystem 

The commercial waste landfill is located 90–360 m (300–1190 ft) south of Waihanau Stream (NPS 

2006a). The impact of the landfills on this stream and other freshwater habitats is unknown. It is not 

known whether cesspools are impacting the freshwater ecosystem; however, most human habitation 

is not close to the freshwater habitats. 
169 

Figure 3.8-1. Existing and previous landfills at KALA. 

Source: State of Hawaii GIS; National Park Service

Legend

Park Boundary

Streams 500 0 500 250

Feet

200 0 200 100

Meters

Waih anau Stream

Kalaupapa National Historic Park
170 

3.8.3 Impacts to the Marine Ecosystem 

The presence of blue-green algae fronting the settlement at depths of 0–10 m suggested localized 

high nutrients that may be associated with cesspool leaching. However, 15N tracer studies, conducted 

before and after the installation of the septic tanks, indicate that the excess nutrients from the 

settlement were minimal compared to other sources such as upslope agriculture (E. Brown/NPS, 

pers. comm.). 

It is possible that contaminants from the two landfills are affecting the water quality in the 

intertidal, but at present, no measurements have been made for contaminants. The landfill near 

‘Awahua Beach spans approximately 250 m (820 ft) of the shoreline. Debris, such as glass from 

bottles and rusted metal from discarded vehicles, is exposed on the surface and has been washed 

out and deposited elsewhere along the shore by storm waves (G. Hughes/NPS, pers. comm.). 

Some beaches (such as Ho‘olehua Beach) also concentrate marine debris brought in by the 

tradewinds (E. Brown/NPS, pers. comm.). 

3.9 Fire 

No known fires have occurred at KALA. Currently, the threat of fire is minimized by the 

presence of ungulates grazing understory species, particularly non-native grasses. Non-native 

vegetation that is not grazed by ungulates becomes fuel for wildfires (CTAHR 2003). The threat 

of wildland fire associated with an accumulation in fuel biomass could increase in certain areas 

(such as the crater) if management shifts and the exclusion of feral ungulates increases (Mederios 

et al. 1996). According to the Molokai Forest Reserve Draft Management Plan (DOFAW 2009), 

fire is a threat in the drier western section of the reserve, such as those within KALA. Areas near 

TNC’s Kamakou Preserve have a history of frequent fire activity (DOFAW 2009). 

3.9.1 Impacts to the Terrestrial Ecosystem 

Plants with a high standing biomass and a high dead-to-live biomass ratio (notably non-native 

grasses) facilitate the spread of fire and recover rapidly after fire with increased vigor. The presence 

of these species can alter fuel characteristics of the communities (Ainsworth et al. 2005, D’Antonio 

et al. 2000), creating an invasive plant-fire cycle that is self-sustaining and persistent (Hughes et al. 

1991, D’Antonio and Vitousek 1992). Fire resulting from invasion by introduced grasses has the 

potential to increase the abundance of non-native invasive plants, reduce native species diversity, 

convert native communities to grasslands, and alter ecosystem functions, such as primary 

productivity, decomposition, and nutrient cycling (D’Antonio et al. 2001). 

3.10 Other Random Stochastic Events 

Random stochastic events (e.g., tsunamis, hurricanes, earthquakes, volcanoes, massive droughts, 

lake turnovers) have the potential to threaten the natural resources at KALA. These events can 

damage species or habitats and have the potential to cause the extinction of entire species if 

populations are composed of very small numbers of individuals (USFWS 2003). In general, 

stochastic events have a stronger influence on smaller populations because larger populations are 

better buffered against stochasticity (Maschinski 2006). 

Tsunamis are a series of ocean waves with very long wavelengths that can travel great distances 

at high speed. These events are usually generated by an underwater earthquake or landslide, but 

are occasionally caused by volcanic eruptions or major landslides into the ocean (Morrissey 
171 

2005). Tsunamis have historically been recorded on the Kalaupapa peninsula in 1946 and 1960, 

and the threat of tsunamis is considered high (Fletcher et al. 2002). 

KALA is vulnerable to hurricanes and tropical storms, which have been recorded to hit KALA in 

the past. The threat of storms is considered moderately high along the peninsula and moderately 

low to either side of the peninsula (Fletcher et al. 2002). The threat of volcanic activity and 

earthquakes is considered moderately high throughout the entire region due to the proximity to 

the active volcano on the Big Island and the Molokai Seismic Zone (Fletcher et al. 2002). 

3.10.1 Impacts to the Terrestrial Ecosystem 

At KALA, locally generated and teleseismic tsunamis (from Alaska or Chile), hurricanes, and 

tropical storms can impact terrestrial areas of the park due to flooding and wave impacts. Tsunamis 

can inundate low-lying coastal areas, exposing vegetation to excessive salt and water stress. 

Hurricanes and tropical storms bring strong winds and heavy rains that can knock down plants and 

snap branches, as well as accelerate erosion. Earthquakes trigger slope failures (landslides) and 

subsequent removal of vegetation. 

Random stochastic events are particularly harmful to the small populations present in the terrestrial 

ecosystem at KALA, such as on the offshore islets. 

3.10.2 Impacts to the Freshwater Ecosystem 

Tsunamis, hurricanes, and earthquakes can result in flash floods, landslides, and other 

unpredictable changes that alter freshwater resources. Hurricanes have been shown to impact the 

abundance, distribution, and social behavior of native Hawaiian stream fishes (Fitzsimons and 

Nishimoto 1995). 

Meromictic lakes can experience turnovers in which the water column is no longer stratified, but 

anoxia and sulfide are present throughout. By shifting the typical ecological conditions of the 

lake, this event can result in massive death of planktonic and benthic organisms (Ciglenecki et al. 

2005). As hydrogen sulfide reaches the surface, this gas can also affect vegetation and fauna 

surrounding the lake. 

3.10.3 Impacts to the Marine Ecosystem 

Coral reefs are particularly susceptible to damage by tsunamis because severe wave action can 

break, overturn, crush, or dislodge corals (Scheffers et al. 2009). Furthermore, sedimentation 

produced by tsunamis can smother coral colonies, and large vegetation washing across the reef can 

also be damaging (Foster et al. 2006). 

The impact of hurricanes on the marine ecosystem is discussed in section 3.6.3.4. 

Earthquakes may result in erosion and landslides, which will increase sedimentation in the marine 

environment. Eroded soil can bury coral and other substrates leading to direct mortality and reduced 

recruitment due to loss of available habitat and attachment sites for marine species (Field et al. 

2008). In addition, the suspended sediment inhibits light penetration, thereby reducing 

photosynthesis. The stress results in bleaching from expulsion of the zooxanthellae and further coral 

mortality. Sediment from run-off can also block gills and the filter feeder apparatus for fish and 

other invertebrates. Furthermore, corals can be forced to expend valuable energy to remove the 
172 

sediment, which decreases survival. All of these factors can lead to altered species composition, 

shallower depth distribution limits, and a loss of biodiversity in coastal marine ecosystems (Field et 

al. 2008). 

3.11 Summary of Threats and Stressors 

This section summarizes the extent of the problem, describes the knowledge base, and quantifies 

the magnitude of the impact for each of the threats and stressors discussed above. For most 

terrestrial threats and stressors at KALA, available information is limited to the presence/absence 

of a particular species, group of species, activity, or abiotic process in a specific area of the park. 

There is an overall lack of information that quantifies the extent of the problem on a park-wide 

level. In addition, there is a paucity of information that identifies and/or quantifies the direct and 

indirect impacts of the potential threats and stressors present throughout KALA. For the marine 

environment, more quantitative data exists, which allows for greater confidence in the 

assessment of the extent of the problem. Therefore, the determinations provided below are 

primarily based on 1) available data from investigations conducted by various researchers at 

KALA, 2) discussions with KALA staff and other knowledgeable researchers, and 3) SWCA’s 

best professional judgment derived from experiences in other ecosystems in Hawai‘i and the 

Pacific. 

3.11.1 Identifying the Extent of the Problem at KALA 

Threats and stressors are classified into the four categories based on available data. If no data or 

observations were available for the threat and stressor at KALA during the drafting of this report, 

and no information could be derived from outside of KALA, it was not possible to confidently 

assess the extent of the problem, and the threat/stressor was classified as unknown. The 

categories are as follows: 

Not Currently a 

Problem 

The issue has been investigated and it does not seem to represent a 

problem based on available data, which may be limited. 

Potential Problem 

No recent, reliable evidence exists to show that the problem is 

currently occurring at KALA; however, anecdotal evidence or evidence 

external to KALA suggests that there might be a problem at KALA. 

Existing Problem Recent, reliable evidence shows that the problem is currently occurring 

at KALA. 

Unknown Not enough evidence to determine if a problem exists at KALA. 

 Potentially Increasing 

Problem Problem likely to increase if KALA is opened to the wider public. 

Because of the uncertainty surrounding future land management and ownership at the park, some 

issues may have the potential to become a problem in the long-term (>20 years) if the park is opened 

to the wider public. This action could potentially result in increased anthropogenic impacts (e.g., 

increased harvesting, sewage, spread of invasive species). If a threat or stressor is anticipated to 

increase under this scenario, an up arrow () is included in that cell. 
173 

3.11.2 Describing the Knowledge Base of Threats and Stressors 

Threats and stressors are accompanied with a determination of the extent of the knowledge base 

available for each problem. This categorization is designed to identify both the quality and quantity 

of the information present for each problem. 

Ranking Level of Analysis Description 

A Data w/ Trends Quantitative data collected over multiple years at KALA. 

B Status Data Quantitative data collected only once at KALA. 

C Limited Data 

Quantitative data collected at KALA without analysis (i.e., raw data) 

or knowledge base limited to presence/absence information or 

anecdotal evidence/observations at KALA. 

D Inferred All information derived entirely from outside of KALA. 

F No Data 

Tables for all three ecosystems identifying problems and their knowledge base are included below 

(Table 3.11-1 to 3.11-3). 
174 

Table 3.11-1. Summary of threats and stressors in the terrestrial environment at KALA. 

 

Kauhak

ō

Crater 

Coastal 

Spray Zone 

Offshore 

Islets 

Pu‘u Ali‘i 

NAR 

Moloka‘i 

Forest 

Reserve 

North Shore 

Cliffs NHL 

Lowland 

Coastal 

Area 

Biotic 

Invasive Ungulates C C C A C C B 

Invasive Terrestrial Flora A  B  A  B  B  B  A 

Invasive Small Mammals B C D B B B B 

Invasive Insects C  F  D  D  D  D  D 

Invasive Reptiles/Amphibians B F B F F B B 

Diseases/Pathogens D  F  F  F  F  F  F 

Habitat Loss/Degradation C  C  C C  C  C  C 

Harvest/Hunt/Take C  C  C  C  C  C  C 

Visitor Use F C F C C F F 

Abiotic 

Climate Change D D D D D D D 

Erosion/Landslides F F A F F F F 

Contaminants/Sewage/Debris F D D F F F D 

Fire D D C D D D D 

Random Stochastic Events D D D D D D D 

KEY 

Extent of problem 

 Not Currently a Problem 

 Potential Problem 

 Existing Problem 

 Unknown 

 Potentially Increasing Problem 

Knowledge base 

A Data w/ Trends 

B Status Data 

C Limited Data /Incidental Observations 

D Inferred 

F No Data 
175 

Table 3.11-2. Summary of threats and stressors in the freshwater environment at KALA. 

 Palustrine Lacustrine Anchialine Riverine 

Biotic 

Invasive Ungulates D D D D 

Invasive Terrestrial Flora D  D  D  D 

Invasive Small Mammals F F F D 

Invasive Insects F  F  F  D 

Invasive Reptiles/Amphibians F F F D 

Invasive Fish C  C  C  A 

Other Invasive Invertebrates F  F  F  A 

Diseases/Pathogens F  F  F  D 

Habitat Loss/Degradation F F F A 

Harvest/Hunt/Take C  C  C  C 

Visitor Use C  C  C  C 

Abiotic 

Climate Change D D D D 

Erosion/Landslides F F F F 

Contaminants/Sewage/Debris F F F F 

Fire C C C C 

Random Stochastic Events D D D D 

KEY 

Extent of problem 

 Not Currently a Problem 

 Potential Problem 

 Existing Problem 

 Unknown 

 Potentially Increasing Problem 

Knowledge base 

A Data w/ Trends 

B Status Data 

C Limited Data/Incidental Observations 

D Inferred 

F No Data 
176 

Table 3.11-3. Summary of threats and stressors in the marine environment at KALA. 

 Intertidal Coastal Offshore 

Islets 

Biotic 

 Invasive Ungulates F F F 

 Invasive Terrestrial Flora C A B 

Invasive Fish B A B 

Invasive Invertebrates B A B 

Invasive Algae A  A B 

Diseases/Pathogens F A F 

Habitat Loss/Degradation B A B 

Harvest/Hunt/Take B  A  F 

Visitor Use F  F  F 

Abiotic 

Climate Change D D D 

Erosion/Landslides F F F 

Contaminants/Sewage/Debris C F F 

Fire F F F 

Random Stochastic Events D D D 

KEY 

Extent of problem 

 Not Currently a Problem 

 Potential Problem 

 Existing Problem 

 Unknown 

 Potentially Increasing Problem 

Knowledge base 

A Data w/ Trends 

B Status Data 

C Limited Data/Incidental Observations 

D Inferred 

F No Data 
177 

3.11.3 Quantifying the Magnitude of Impact on Ecosystems 

The magnitude of impact for each threat or stressor is evaluated on an ecosystem-wide scale (i.e., 

marine, terrestrial, and freshwater) based on the vulnerability of the three ecosystems to that stressor. 

Only threats and stressors previously identified as existing or potential problems within the 

respective ecosystems are addressed. Vulnerability is defined as “a combination of exposure and 

sensitivity and resilience” (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005, Selkoe et al. 2009). The 

vulnerability of the terrestrial, marine, and freshwater ecosystems at KALA is based on three criteria 

that focus mainly on categorizing exposure and is modified from Halpern et al. (2007): 1) the spatial 

scale at which the stressor acts; 2) the frequency with which it acts; and 3) the number of trophic 

levels impacted. The criteria were evaluated using the following ranking system: 

Criteria Magnitude of 

impact Classification scheme 

Scale 

0 Ecosystem not impacted. 

1 ≤ 25% of the ecosystem impacted. 

2 26 - 50% of the ecosystem impacted. 

3 51 - 75% of the ecosystem impacted. 

4 76 -100% of the ecosystem impacted. 

Frequency 

1 Infrequent. 

2 Frequent, but irregular. 

3 Frequent and often seasonal or periodic. 

4 More or less constant year-round, lasting through multiple years 

or decades. 

Functional Impact 

0 No species affected. 

1 Affecting one or more species in a single or different trophic 

levels. 

2 Multiple species affected; entire trophic level changes. 

3 Multiple species affected; multiple trophic levels change. 

4 Cascading effect that alters the entire ecosystem. 

The three criteria are addressed in Table 3.11-4 then summed to provide a metric for the 

magnitude of impact for the threat or stressor on the ecosystem (the “impact score”). A higher 

impact score indicates that the threat or stressor has a greater impact on the natural resources. A 

comparison of the impact scores for different threats and stressors enables the identification of 

key threats and stressors to the ecosystem. The impact scores can potentially range from 1 to 12 

and are classified as follows: 

 minor impact (1–6) 

 moderate impact (7–9) 

 significant impact (10–12) 

The magnitude of each threat and stressor is then summed for each ecosystem. The grand total is 

used as a relative value to identify the ecosystem experiencing the greatest impact and most in 

need of immediate remedial action. 
178 

Table 3.11-4. Magnitude of impact of threats and stressors on ecosystems at KALA. 

Threat or Stressor 

Spatial Scale Frequency Species/Trophic 

Level Impact Total 

Marine 

Freshwater 

Terrestrial 

Marine 

Freshwater 

Terrestrial 

Marine 

Freshwater 

Terrestrial 

Marine 

Freshwater 

Terrestrial 

Biotic 

Invasive Species 

 Ungulates 0 4 4 4 4 4 0 4 4 4 12 12 

 Terrestrial flora 1 3 3 4 4 4 0 4 4 5 11 11 

 Small mammals - 2 4 - 2 4 - 1 3 - 5 11 

 Insects - 4 4 - 4 4 - 1 2 - 9 10 

 Reptiles & amphibians - 2 1 - 3 3 - 2 3 - 7 7 

 Fish 1 - - 4 - - 1 - - 6 - - 

 Other Invertebrates 1 2 - 4 4 - 1 3 - 6 9 - 

 Algae 1 - - 4 - - 1 - - 6 - - 

Diseases & Pathogens 1 - 4 2 - 4 2 - 2 5 - 10 

Habitat Loss & Degradation 1 2 2 1 4 4 1 4 4 3 10 10 

Harvest, Hunt & Take 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 4 3 4 

Visitor Use 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 4 6 6 

Abiotic 

Climate Change 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 12 12 12 

Erosion & Landslides 1 3 3 1 1 1 0 2 2 2 6 6 

Contaminants, Sewage, & 

Debris 1 - 1 2 - 4 1 - 2 4 - 7 

Fire - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Other Random Stochastic 

Events 4 2 4 1 1 1 4 4 4 9 7 9 

 Grand total for ecosystem 70 97 115

KEY 

Impact score 

 minor impact (1–6) 

 moderate impact (7–9) 

 significant impact (10–12) 
Chapter 4: Conclusion 

Despite the threats and stressors present at KALA (see Chapter 3), intact native Hawaiian ecosystems 

and unique native species persist in the terrestrial, freshwater, and marine ecosystems. To preserve these 

resources, additional surveys and regular monitoring of these habitats and species are essential. Specific 

recommendations to address information needs (e.g., condition of park natural resources, known 

threats, and unacceptable conditions) are summarized for each ecosystem. 

Of the three ecosystems, the terrestrial ecosystem probably requires the most immediate action to 

address potential and existing problems. The threats and stressors that have the most significant 

impact on this ecosystem are invasive non-native ungulates, terrestrial flora, and small mammals. 

These groups of organisms continuously degrade habitat and prevent regeneration/reproduction 

of native species. 

The information available for the terrestrial ecosystem at KALA is mainly data describing the 

status of each zone. Additional surveys are recommended in each terrestrial management zone to 

obtain long-term data to document ecological changes and emerging threats. Major data gaps in 

the terrestrial ecosystem are: 

Invasive Species: There is a paucity of data that identifies and quantifies the range, density, and 

impacts of non-native mammals, particularly ungulates and rodents. This is significant because 

non-native mammals are adversely impacting native species and ecosystems in other areas in 

Hawai‘i. Information is also lacking on the distribution and abundance of invasive plant taxa 

throughout the park. It would be useful for the National Park Service to map the distribution and 

abundance of high-priority, habitat-modifying weeds in relation to impacted native resources to 

focus control efforts. This information could be collected during the vegetation inventory project 

at KALA, which will classify, describe, and map detailed vegetation communities throughout the 

park. The inventory project is scheduled to begin in 2010, and the complete final report, 

metadata, and GIS layers from the inventory project are anticipated in 2013 (G. Kudray/NPS, 

pers. comm.). Furthermore, regular monitoring for incipient invasive plants could reduce the 

severity of future invasions. 

Native Flora: Due to the potential for rare plants to occur throughout the park, regular monitoring 

surveys should be conducted along permanent transects. Implementation of a long-term 

vegetation monitoring program would document the status of rare species, as well as track the 

presence and abundance of vegetation associations over time. Data analysis is a vital component 

of this program in order to highlight useful information and inform management decisions. Data 

collected during several flora studies at KALA have not been analyzed or compared to previous 

surveys. 

Native Fauna: Additional systematic bird surveys during periods of peak vocalization (breeding 

seasons) are needed to ensure high detectability of native avifauna. Ornithological radar and 

night-visual observations would provide information on the movement rates of rare seabirds, 

which may nest in upper elevation areas of Moloka‘i. More regular surveys for Lasiurus cinereus 

semotus would be useful in specific areas of the terrestrial ecosystem. Statewide, information on 

this species is limited. 
179 

Insects and Invertebrates: No focused invertebrate studies have been conducted at KALA. 

Specific studies are needed to inventory native insects and other invertebrate taxa (snails, insects, 

and other arthropods), which play an essential role in supporting native Hawaiian ecosystems. 

Caves: No recent surveys have been conducted in the extensive cave system at KALA to 

document features or resources within the caves. However, the potential for more obligate caveadapted plants and animals, as well as paleontological resources, is significant. The development 

of a Cave Management Plan would ensure that cave exploration does not result in damage to 

these resources. 

Very little information exists for the freshwater habitats at KALA. Information is lacking for the 

status of palustrine, lacustine, and anchialine habitats, with slightly more information on the 

riverine habitat. The ephemeral nature of the palustrine habitats and the National Park Service’s 

desire to restrict location information for caves and lava tubes is, in part, responsible for this lack 

of information. Invasive ungulates and terrestrial plants are the largest potential problems to the 

freshwater ecosystem. These species can cause significant adverse impacts due to erosion, 

siltation, and changes in the hydrologic regime. More surveys should be conducted in the 

freshwater ecosystem to better document the resources present. Specifically, the following 

studies are recommended: 

Anchialine Pools: An important gap in the freshwater ecosystem is the documentation and 

mapping of anchialine pools, as well as determining the biota present in these pools. The 

National Park Service’s understandable concern for the security of lava tubes and caves at 

KALA, which may have important cultural value, needs to be balanced by the need to fill the 

information gap regarding anchialine systems. Once anchialine pools are identified at KALA, 

surveys could be conducted to inventory species present in these habitats and the integrity of the 

biological assemblages and habitats by collecting water quality parameters. Data from 

monitoring efforts would provide warning indicators if these systems are being altered from 

chemical and microbial contaminants leaching into the pools from aboveground terrestrial 

sources. 

Wetland Delineation: Ground-truth surveys should be conducted to more accurately determine 

whether wetlands are present, particularly in the Pu‘u Ali‘i NAR, as indicated by the NWI. 

Wetlands could be delineated utilizing accepted methods prescribed in the 1987 Army Corps of 

Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, as amended, in accordance with the U.S. Army Corps 

of Engineers (http://www.wetlands.com/regs/tlpge02e.htm). These surveys should also include 

collecting standard physical and chemical parameters in potential wetland areas. 

Water Quality: Several important water quality parameters (water, soil, and tissue contaminants; 

organic enrichment; sedimentation; toxics; etc.) could be monitored in the lake and rivers. Some 

of these parameters could be inexpensively monitored using data loggers. Poor water quality can 

impact growth, survival, and reproduction rates of benthic organisms. Because freshwater 

resources at KALA are used for domestic purposes, water quality is also a human health concern. 

Ecological Communities: There is little to no information on the faunal and floral communities 

in the palustrine habitats at KALA. Furthermore, a complete biotic inventory of the lake, 
180 

including invertebrates, has not been completed since 1973 (Maciolek 1975). Much more 

information is needed on the lake zooplankton, particularly depth zonation and seasonal patterns, 

and the integrity of biological assemblages and habitat issues. Renewed baseline inventories of 

macrofauna and invertebrates in all streams are needed and baseline inventories of fauna in the 

intermittent streams (Wainēnē, Anapuhi) are needed. Ecological community studies could also 

indicate whether ecologically harmful invasive species have been introduced into the freshwater 

habitats and the extent of parasites on native freshwater animals. 

Status data for the offshore islets and intertidal zones describe the resources present in these 

habitats. Long-term monitoring is in place for the coastal reefs of KALA. Currently, the main 

threats to the marine ecosystem at KALA are invasive algae and invasive marine invertebrates; 

however, the impacts to the marine ecosystem are relatively minor at present. An area of future 

concern is the potential for increased harvesting of intertidal invertebrates and marine life, should 

the existing fishing regulations be relaxed and human population increase in the area. Should 

harvesting and fishing pressure increase, a decrease in biomass and reduction of size of harvested 

species could be observed within a short period of time (a few years). Specifically, the following 

studies are recommended: 

Intertidal: An invertebrate inventory of the KALA intertidal needs to be completed. The mollusk 

and echinoderm inventories are the most complete (33–66%) and other phyla less so. Emphasis 

also needs to be placed on nocturnal species, fast-moving species, infaunal (sediment) species, 

and microinvertebrates (under 1 cm in size) that have not been targeted in the existing surveys to 

date. 

Offshore Islets: Water quality at the offshore islets should be sampled. A marine survey of the 

benthos and fauna for the offshore islet Huelo should be conducted. Both windward and leeward 

sites of all the offshore islets should be surveyed on a yearly basis to document changes in the 

benthic habitat and fish assemblages and particularly to monitor the documented invasive species 

(e.g., C. riisei and introduced fish species). Windward sites may be difficult to access due to 

weather conditions. 

Coastal Reefs: A good baseline documenting the relatively pristine condition of the coastal reefs 

of KALA has been established with the surveys conducted to date. The continued monitoring of 

the ecological community and abiotic factors using the existing protocol is recommended. More 

transects are needed in zones C, E, and F, which are inaccessible frequently due to weather 

conditions but should be surveyed as weather permits. Macroinvertebrate surveys documenting 

species and abundance are also recommended. 

183 

Literature Cited 

Aeby, G., T. Work, T. Lewis, S. Coles, and J. Kenyon. 2008. Coral disease across the Hawaiian 

Archipelago. 2008 Hawaii Conservation Conference. 

Ainley, D. G., T. C. Telfer, and M. H. Reynolds. 1997. Townsend’s and Newell’s shearwater 

Pufinus auricularis. In A. Poole and F. Gill, editors. The Birds of North America, No. 297. 

The Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 

Ainsworth, A., M. Tetteh, and B. J. Kaufmann. 2005. Relationships of an alien plant, fuel 

dynamics, fire weather, and unprecedented wildfires in Hawaiian rain forests: implications 

for fire management at Hawaii Volcanoes National Park. Unpublished report, on file at 

Hawai`i Volcanoes National Park, Hawai‘i National Park, Hawaii. 

Ainsworth, A. and J. B. Kauffman. 2009. Response of native Hawaiian woody species to lavaignited wildfires in tropical forests and shrublands. Plant Ecology 201(1):197–209. 

Alexander, D. and D. Lentz. 2000. Kalaupapa National Historical Park superintendent’s annual 

report, fiscal year 2000. National Park Service, Kalaupapa, Molokai, Hawaii. 

Allombert, S., S. Stockton, and J. Martin. 2005. A natural experiment on the impact of 

overabundant deer on forest invertebrates. Conservation Biology 19:1917–1929. 

Ali, R. 2004. The effect of introduced herbivores on vegetation in the Andaman Islands. Current 

Science 86(8):1103–1112. 

Anderson, W. B. and G. A. Polis. 1999. Nutrient fluxes from water to land: seabirds affect plant 

nutrient status on Gulf of California islands. Oecologia 118(3):324–332. 

Anthony, R. N., D. I. Kline, G. Diaz-Pulido, S. Dove, and O. Hoegh-Guldberg. 2008. Ocean 

acidification causes bleaching and productivity loss in coral reef builders. PNAS 105(45), 

doi.10.1073, pnas. 0804478105. 

Aruch, S. 2006. Appendix A: Kalaupapa National Historical Park resource overview. In L. 

HaySmith, F. L. Klasner, S. H. Stephens, and G.H. Dicus. Pacific Island Network vital signs 

monitoring plan. Natural Resource Report NPS/PACN/NRR-2006/003 National Park 

Service, Fort Collins, Colorado. 

Asherman, K. E., J. M. Crumme, and J. Q. C. Lau. 1990. A botanical reconnaissance of 

Kalaupapa National Historical Park, November 27–December 5, 1989. Unpublished report. 

Atkinson, C. T., J. K. Lease, R.J. Dusek, and M. D. Samuel. 2005. Prevalence of pox-like lesions 

and malaria in forest bird communities on leeward Mauna Loa Volcano, Hawaii. The Condor 

107:537–546. 
184 

Aucan J. 2006. Directional wave climatology for the Hawaiian Islands from buoy data and the 

influence of ENSP on extreme wave events from the wave model hindcast. 9th international 

workshop on wave hindcasting and forecasting, 2006, Victoria, Canada. 

Baker, J. D., C. L. Littnan, and D. W. Johnston. 2006. Potential effects of sea level rise on the 

terrestrial habitats of endangered and endemic megafauna in the Northwestern Hawaiian 

Islands. Endangered Species Research 2:21–30. 

Bataille, A., A. A. Cunningham, V. Cedeño, L. Patiño, A. Constantinou, L. D. Kramer, and S. J. 

Goodman. 2009. Natural colonization and adaptation of a mosquito species in Galapagos and 

its implications for disease threats to endemic wildlife. PNAS 106(25):10230–10235. 

Beets, J., E. Brown, and A. Friedlander. 2006. Inventory of marine vertebrate species and fishhabitat utilization patterns in coastal waters off four national parks in Hawai’i. USDI 

National Park Service, Inventory and Monitoring Program, Pacific Island Network. Hawaii 

Volcanoes National Park, Hawaii. 

Belt Collins Hawai‘i LTD. 2008. Statewide large-capacity inter-island ferry, draft environmental 

impact statement. Prepared for State of Hawai‘i Department of Transportation, Harbors 

Division. 

Benbow, M. E. 1999. Natural spate disturbance and decreased discharge in a Hawaiian stream: 

fluctuating stability in a torrential environment. Dissertation. University of Dayton, Dayton, 

Ohio. 

Benbow, M. E., A. J. Burky and C. M. Way. 1997. Larval habitat preference of the endemic 

Hawaiian midge, Telmatogeton torrenticola Terry (Telmatogetoninae). Hydrobiologia 346: 

129–136. 

Benning T. L., D. LaPointe, C. T. Atkinson, and P. M. Vitousek. 2002. Interactions of climate 

change with biological invasions and land use in the Hawaiian Islands: Modeling the fate of 

endemic birds using a geographic information system. PNAS 99(22):14246–14249. 

Blossey, B. and R. Notzold. 1995. Evolution of increased competitive ability in invasive 

nonindigenous plants: a hypothesis. Journal of Ecology 83:887–889. 

Bird C. E., B. S. Holland, B. W. Bowen, R. J. Toonen. 2007. Contrasting phylogeography in 

three endemic Hawaiian limpets (Cellana spp.) with similar life histories. Molecular Ecology 

(15):3173–86 

Bishop Museum. 2008. Offshore islet project. Available from http://www2.bishopmuseum.org/ 

HBS/islets/?isl=Moloka'i (accessed 10 November 2009). 

Both, C. and M. E. Visser. 2001. Adjustment to climate change is constrained by arrival date in a 

long-distance migrant bird. Nature 411:296–298. 
185 

Brasher, A. M. 1996. Monitoring the distribution and abundance of native gobies (‘o‘opu) in 

Waikolu and Pelekunu Stream on the Island of Moloka‘i. Cooperative National Park 

Resources Studies Unit Technical Report 113. University of Hawaii at Manoa. 

Brasher, A. M. 1997a. Habitat use by fish (‘o‘opu), snails (hihiwai), shrimp (‘opae) and prawns 

in two streams on the Island of Moloka’i. Cooperative National Park Resources Studies Unit 

Technical Report 116. University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu, Hawaii. 

Brasher, A. M. 1997b. Life history characteristics of the native Hawaiian stream snail Neritina 

granosa (hihiwai). Cooperative National Park Resources Studies Unit Technical Report 114. 

University of Hawaii at Manoa. 

Brown, E., K. Kageyama, and R. Watanuki. 2008. Biological Assessment of Marine Resources 

in Kalaupapa Harbor, Moloka‘i, Hawai‘i. Natural Resource Report 

NPS/MWR/HTLN/NRR—2008/001. National Park Service, Omaha, Nebraska. 

Bruckner, A., K. Buja, L. Fairey, K. Gleason, M. Harmon, S. Heron, T. Hourigan, C. Jeffrey, J. 

Kellner, R. Kelty, B. Leeworthy, G. Liu, S. Pittman, A. Shapiro, A. Strong, J. Waddell, P. 

Wiley. Threats and stressors to U.S. coral reef ecosystems. Pages 12–44 in J. Waddell, editor. 

The state of coral reef ecosystems of the United States and Pacific freely associated states: 

2005. NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS NCCOS 11. NOAA/NCCOS Center for Coastal 

Monitoring and Assessment’s Biogeography Team. Silver Spring, Maryland. 

Buddemeir, R. W., J. A. Kleypas, R. B. Aronson. 2004. Coral reefs and global climate change: 

potential contributions of climate change to stresses on coral reef ecosystems. Pew Center on 

Global Climate Change. 

Busby, P. E, P. Vitousek, and R. Dirzo. 2010. Prevalence of tree regeneration by sprouting and 

seeding along a rainfall gradient in Hawai’i. Biotropica 42:80–86. 

Caccamise, D. J., M. A. Merrifield, M. Bevis, J. Foster, Y. L. Firing, M. S. Schenewerk, F. W. 

Taylor, D. A. Thomas. 2005. Sea level rise at Honolulu and Hilo, Hawaii: GPS estimates of 

differential land motion. Geophysical Research Letters 32, L03607. 

Canfield, J. E. 1990. Description and map of the plant communities of the northeast coastal spray 

zone of Kalaupapa National Historical Park. Cooperative National Park Resources Studies 

Unit Technical Report 71. University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu, Hawaii. 

Chai, D. K., L. W. Cuddihy, and C. P. Stone. 1989. An inventory and assessment of anchialine 

pools in Hawaii Volcanoes National Park from Waha'uia to Ka'aha, Puna and Ka'a, Hawai'i. 

Cooperative National Park Resources Studies Unit Technical Report 69. 

Chapman, J. W. and J. T. Carlton. 1991. A test of criteria for introduced species: the global 

invasion by the isopod Synidotea laevidorsalis (Miers, 1881). J. Crustacean Biol. 11:386–

400. 
186 

Chapman, J. W. 1988. Invasions of the northeast Pacific by Asian and Atlantic gammaridean 

amphipod crustaceans, including a new species of Corophium. J. Crustacean Biol. 8:364–

382. 

Chimera, C., M. C. Coleman, and J. P. Parkes. 1995. Diet of feral goats and feral pigs on 

Auckland Island, New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 19(2):203–207. 

Chong, C. T., S. T. Larned, A. P. Covich and R. A. Kinzie III. 2000. Species interactions 

between estuarine detritivores: inhibition or facilitation? Hydrobiologia 387:1–6. 

Christy, M. T., C. S. Clark, D. E. Gee, II, D. Vice, D. S. Vice, M. P. Warner, C. L. Tyrrell, G. H. 

Rodda, and J. A. Savidge. 2007. Recent records of alien anurans on the Pacific island of 

Guam. Pacific Science 61:469–483. 

Chubb, A. L., R. M. Zink, and J. M. Fitzsimons. 1998. Patterns of mtDNA variation in Hawaiian 

freshwater fishes; the phylogenetic consequences of amphidromy. Journal of Heredity 89:8–

16. 

Ciglenecki, I., M. Caric, F. Krsinic, D. Vilicic, B. Cosovic. 2005. The extinction by sulfide—

turnover and recovery of a naturally eutrophic, meromictic seawater lake. Journal of Marine 

Systems 56(1–2):29–44. 

Clague, D. A., C. Dao-Gong, R. Murnane, M. H. Beeson, M. A. Lanphere, G. B. Dalrymple, W. 

Friesen, and R. T. Holcomb. 1982. Age and petrology of the Kalaupapa Basalt, Molokai, 

Hawaii. Pacific Science 36(4):411–420. 

Clark, J. R. K. 1989. The Beaches of Maui County: revised and updated. A Latitude 20 Book, 

University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu, Hawaii. 

Clements, D. R. and C. C. Daehler. 2007. Introducing a new series: biology and impacts of 

Pacific Island invasive species. Pacific Science 61(1):1. 

Clewell, A., J. Rieger, and J. Munro. 2005. Society for Ecological Restoration International: 

Guidelines for developing and managing ecological restoration projects, 2nd edition. 

www.ser.org and Tucson: Society for Ecological Restoration International. Available from 

http://www.ser.org/content/guidelines_ecological_restoration.asp (accessed 6 November 

2009). 

Coastal Resources Management, Inc. 2008. Treasure Island public use monitoring final report, 

2002–2006 monitoring surveys. Prepared for City of Laguna Beach Water Quality Division. 

Coblentz, B. E. and D. W. Baber. 1987. Biology and control of feral pigs on Isla Santiago, 

Galapagos, Equador. Journal of Applied Ecology 24:403–418. 

Coles, S. L. and E. K. Brown. 2007. Twenty-five years of change in coral coverage on a 

hurricane impacted reef in Hawai‘i: the importance of recruitment. Coral Reefs 26:705–717. 
187 

Coles, S. L., L. Giuseffi, and M. Hutchinson. 2008. Assessment of species composition, diversity 

and biomass in marine habitats and sunhabitats around offshore islets in the main Hawaiian 

islands. Bishop Museum Technical Report Report No. 39. Honolulu, Hawai‘i. 

Coombs, C, B. R. Hawke, and L. Wilson. 1990. Terrestrial analogues to lunar sinuous rilles: 

Kauhako Crater and channel, Kalaupapa, Molokai, and other Hawaiian lava conduit systems. 

Proc. 20th Lunar and Planetary Sci. Conf., Houston, Lunar and Planetary Institute, 195–206. 

Conry, P. J. 1989. Ecology of the wild (feral) pig (Sus scrofa) on Guam. Technical report no. 7, 

Guam, Division of Aquatic and Wildlife Resources, Mangilao, Guam. 

Courchamp, F., J. Chapuis, and M. Pascal. 2003. Mammal invaders on islands: impact, control 

and control impact. Biol. Rev. 78:347–383. 

Covich, A. P. 1988. Geographical and historical comparisons of neotropical streams: biotic 

diversity and detrital processing in highly variable habitats. JNABS 7: 361–386 

Cowardin, L. M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, and E. T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and 

deepwater habitats of the United States. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Washington, D.C. (Version 04DEC98). 

CRAMP (Coral Reef Assessment & Monitoring Program). 2008. Miloli‘i sampling site 

description. Coral Reef Assessment & Monitoring Program, Hawaii Institute of Marine 

Biology, University of Hawaii. Available from http://cramp.wcc.hawaii.edu/ 

LT_Montoring_files/lt_study_sites_Kauai_Milolii_NaPali.htm (accessed 2 June 2008). 

Cruz, F., C. J. Donlan, K. Campbell, K., and V. Carrion. 2005. Conservation action in the 

Gala ́pagos: feral pig (Sus scrofa) eradication from Santiago Island. Biological Conservation 

121:473–478. 

CTAHR (College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources). 2003. Weeds of Hawai‘i’s 

pastures and natural areas: an identification and management guide. University of Hawaii at 

Manoa, Honolulu, Hawaii. 

D’Antonio, C. M., J. T. Tunison, R. K. Loh. 2000. Variations in impact of exotic grasses and fire 

on native plant communities in Hawaii. Journal of Australian Ecology. 25:507–22. 

D’Antonio, C. M. and P. M Vitousek. 1992. Biological invasions by exotic grasses, the grass/fire 

cycle, and global change. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics. 23:63–87. 

DAR (Division of Aquatic Resources), Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources 

(DLNR). 1986. Survey of the freshwater aquatic fauna in Waikolu Stream, Island of 

Molokai. 

DAR, Hawaii DLNR. 2008. Freshwater Database. Available from 

http://www.state.hi.us/dlnr/dar/streams/stream_data.htm (accessed 23 July 23 2009). 
188 

Day, R. H. and B. A. Cooper. 2002. Petrel and Shearwater surveys near Kalaupapa, Molokai 

Island, June 2002. Final report, prepared by ABR, Inc.—Environmental Research & 

Services. Fairbanks, AK. 

Day, R. H., B. A. Cooper, and R. J. Blaha. 2003. Movement Patterns of Hawaiian Petrels and 

Newell’s Shearwaters on the Island of Hawai‘i. Pacific Science 57(2):147–159. 

Davey, C. A., K. T. Redmond, and D. B. Simeral. 2006. Weather and climate inventory, National 

Park Service, Pacific Island Network. Natural Resource Technical Report 

NPS/PACN/NRTR—2006/003. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado. 

DEH (Department of the Environment and Heritage). 2004. The feral goat (Capra hircus). 

Australian Government, Canberra. 

Denslow, J. S, S. C. Space, and P. H. Thomas. 2008. Invasive exotic plants in the tropical Pacific 

Islands: patterns of diversity. Biotropica 41:162–170. 

DBEDT (Department of Business, Economic Development & Tourism) and DOH (Department 

of Health). 1998. Hawaii climate change action plan. Available from 

http://hawaii.gov/dbedt/info/energy/publications/ccap.pdf (accessed 16 January 2008). 

Department of Health. 1987. Water quality standards maps. Available from 

http://hawaii.gov/health/environmental/water/cleanwater/wqsmaps/index.html (accessed 6 

November 2009). 

Department of the Navy. 2006. Integrated natural resources management plan guidance gor Navy 

installations. Headquarters, U.S. Marine Corps, Washington D.C. 

DeVerse, K. and E. DiDonato. 2006. Appendix I: Water Quality Report. In L. HaySmith, F. L. 

Klasner, S. H. Stephens, and G. H. Dicus. Pacific Island Network Vital Signs Monitoring 

Plan: Phase III (draft) report. National Park Service, Pacific Island Network, Hawaii 

National Park, Hawaii. 

Devick, W. S. 1989. Analysis of October Waikolu visual survey for gobies. Unpblished report, 

State of Hawaii DLNR, Division of Aquatic Resources. 

Devick, W. S., J. M. Fitzsimons and R. T. Nishimoto. 1995. Threatened fishes of the world: 

Lentipes concolor Gill 1860 (Gobiidae). Environmental Biology of Fishes 44:325–326. 

Diaz, G. E., O. Elbadawy, J. C. Hughes and J. D. Salas. 1995. In search of hydrologic similarity: 

a case study on Molokai, Hawaii. In Proceedings of the Summer Symposium, American 

Water Resources Association. June 25–28, 1995. Edited by R. Herrmann, W. Black,R.C. 

Sidle and A.I. Johnson. Honolulu, Hawaii. 
189 

Dierking, J. 2007. Effects of the introduced predatory fish Cephalopholis argus on native reef 

fish populations on Hawaii. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Zoology, University of Hawaii 

at Manoa. 

Diong, C. H. 1982. Population biology and management of the feral pig (Sus scrofa L.) in 

Kipahulu Valley, Maui. Dissertation. University of Hawai‘i, Honolulu, Hawai‘i. 

 DOFAW (Division of Forestry and Wildlife), Hawaii DLNR. 1991. Puu Alii Natural Area 

Reserve management plan. Natural Area Reserves System Program. 

DOFAW, Hawaii DLNR. 2007. Final environmental assessment Pu‘u Ali‘i conservation fencing 

project, Upper Pu‘u Ali‘i Plateau Pu‘u Ali‘i Natural Area Reserve, Molokai. 

DOFAW, Hawaii DLNR. 2009. Molokai Forest Reserve draft management plan. State of 

Hawaii, Department of Land and Natural Resources, Division of Forestry and Wildlife, 

Forest Management Section. Available from 

http://hawaii.gov/dlnr/dofaw/forestry/FRS/reserves/mauinuifr/molokai-forestreserve/Molokai%20FINAL_small%20file.pdf (accessed 5 January 2010).

Division of State Parks, Hawaii DLNR. 2008. Hawaii State Parks website. Available from 

http://www.hawaiistateparks.org/parks/hawaii/ (accessed 26 March 2009). 

Division of Water and Land Development, Hawaii DLNR. 1994. Draft environmental 

assessment and negative declaration for Waikolu Valley Wells Development (0855–05 & 06) 

Pump Controls and Connecting Pipeline, Molokai Irrigation System, Kalawao, Molokai, 

Hawaii. 

Dodd, C. K., Jr., G. E. Drewry, R. M. Nowak, J. M. Sheppard, and J. D. Williams. 1985. 

Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; review of vertebrate wildlife. Federal 

Register 50:37957–37967. 

Donachie, S. P., R. A. Kinzie III, R. R. Bidigare, D. W. Sadler, D. M. Karl. 1999. Lake Kauhakō,

Moloka‘i, Hawai‘i: biological and chemical aspects of a morpho-ectogenic meromictic lake. 

Aquatic Mircobial Ecology Vol. 19:93–103.

Donachie, S. P., S. Hou, K. S. Lee, C. W. Riley, A. Pikina, C. Belisle, S. Kempe, T. S. Gregory, 

A. Bossuyt, J. Boerema, J. Liu, T. A. Freitas, A. Malahoff, and M. Alam. 2004. The 

Hawaiian Archipelago: a microbial diversity hotspot. Microbial Ecology 48:509–520. 

Dow, K. and T. E. Downing. 2006. The atlas of climate change. University of California Press, 

Berkeley and Los Angeles, California. 

Duffy, D. C. 1993. Stalking the Southern Oscillation: environmental uncertainty, climate change, 

and North Pacific seabirds. The status, ecology, and conservation of marine birds of the 

North Pacific. Can. Wildl. Serv. Spec. Publ., Ottawa, Canada. 
190 

Duvall, F. 2000. Report on 2-day biological survey Huelo Islet: vertebrates. Draft report, 

Department of Land and Natural Resources, Kahului, Maui, Hawaii. 

Edmondson, C. H. 1929. Hawaiian Atyidae. Bernice P. Bishop Museum Bulletin 66, Honolulu, 

Hawaii. 

Ego, K. 1956. Life history of freshwater gobies. Project Number 4-4-R, freshwater game fish 

management research, Department of Land and Natural Resources, Honolulu, Hawaii. 

Ehleringer, J. R., T. E. Cerling, and D. Dearing. 2002. Atmospheric CO2 as a global change 

driver influencing plant-animal interactions. Integrated and Comparative Physiology 42:424–

430. 

Eichenlaub B. 2001. Introduction to the Kalaupapa marine environment. Unpublished report. 

Eijzenga, H. and D. J. Preston. 2008. Inventory of seabirds, plants, and arthropods on twenty 

offshore islets in the main Hawaiian Islands. Bishop Museum Technical Report 43. 

Englund R. A. 1999. The impacts of introduced poeciliid fish and Odonata on the endemic 

Megalagrion (Odonata) damselflies of Oahu Island, Hawaii. Journal of Insect Conservation. 

3:225–243. 

Englund, R. A. and R. B. Filbert. 1997. Waikolu Stream, Molokai Biological Monitoring. 

Erickson, T. A. and C. F. Puttock. 2006. Hawai’i wetland field guide: An ecological and 

identification guide to wetlands and wetland plants of the Hawaiian Islands. Bess Press 

Books, Honolulu, Hawaii. 

Evenhuis, N. L. and L. G. Eldredge. 1999. Records of the Hawaii Biological Survey for 1998: 

Part 2: Notes. Bishop Mus. Occas. Pap. 59:1–55. 

Filkin, N. R., A. R. Sherwood, and M. L. Vis. 2003. Macroalgae from 23 stream segments in the 

Hawaiian Islands. Pacific Science 57(4):421–431. 

Fitzsimons, J. M. 1990. Letter to Mr. Ernest Kosaka, Field Supervisor, Fish and Wildlife 

Enhancement, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific Islands Office, Honolulu, Hawaii. 

Fitzsimons, J. M. and R. T. Nishimoto 1995. Use of fish behavior in assessing the effects of 

Hurricane Iniki on the Hawaiian Island of Kauai. Environmental Biology of Fishes 43(1):39–

50. 

Fitzsimons, J. M., R. M Zink, and R. T. Nishimoto. 1990. Genetic variation in the Hawaiian 

stream goby, Lentipes concolor. Biochemical Systematics and Ecology 18(1):81–83 

Fletcher, C. H. 2009. Sea level by the end of the 21st century: a review. Shore and Beach 

77(4):1–9. 
191 

Fletcher, C. H. III, E. E. Grossman, B. M. Richmond, and A. E. Gibbs. 2002. Atlas of natural 

hazards in the Hawaiian Coastal Zone. USGS Geologic Investigations Series I-2761. U.S. 

Government Printing Office. 

Foote, D. E., E. L. Hill, S. Nakamura, and F. Stephens. 1972. Soil survey of the islands of 

Kaua‘i, O‘ahu, Maui, Moloka‘i, and Lana‘i, State of Hawai‘i. U. S. Department of 

Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 

Font, W. F. 2007. Parasites of Hawaiian stream fishes: sources and impacts. Biology of 

Hawaiian Streams and Estuaries. Edited by N.L. Evenhuis & J.M. Fitzsimons. Bishop 

Museum Bulletin in Cultural and Environmental Studies 3:157–169. 

Ford, J. I. and R. A. Kinzie III. 1982. Life crawls upstream. Natural History 91(12):51–66. 

Ford, J. I. and A. R. Yuen. 1986. Biological survey of Pelekunu Stream, Moloka’i. USFWS 

contract report prepared for The Nature Conservancy of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii. 

Ford, M. A. and J. B. Grace. 1998. Effects of vertebrate herbivores on soil processes, plant 

biomass, litter accumulation and soil elevation changes in a coastal marsh. The Journal of 

Ecology 86(6):974–982. 

Foster, J. T., B. L. Woodworht, L. E. Eggert, P. J. Hart, D. Palmer, D. C. Duffy, and R. D. 

Fleischer. 2007. Genetic structure and evolved malaria resistance in Hawaiian honeycreepers. 

Molecular Ecology 16:4738–4746. 

Foster R., A Hagan, N. Perera, C. A. Gunawan, I. Silaban, Y. Yaha, Y. Manuputty, I. Hazam, 

and G. Hodgson. 2006. Tsunami and earthquake damage to coral reefs of Aceh, Indonesia. 

Reef check foundation, Pacific Palisades, California. 

Frasher, H. R., V. Parker-Geisman, and G.R. Parish. 2007. Hawaiian hoary bat inventory in 

national parks on the islands of Hawai‘i, Maui, and Moloka‘i. Pacific Cooperative Studies 

Unit Technical Report 140. University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu, Hawaii. 

Friedlander, A. M. and E. E. DeMartini. 2002. Contrasts in density, size, and biomass of reef 

fishes between the northwestern and the main Hawaiian Islands: the effects of fishing down 

apex predators. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 230:253–264. 

Friedlander, A. M., E. Brown, and M. E. Monaco. 2007. Defining reef fish habitat utilization 

patterns in Hawaii: comparisons between marine protected areas and areas open to fishing. 

Marine Ecology Progress Series 351:221–233. 

Friedlander, A., G. Aeby, R. Brainard, E. Brown, K. Chaston, A. Clark, P. McGowan, T. 

Montgomery, W. Walsh, I. Williams, and W. Wiltse. 2008a. The state of coral reef 

ecosystems of the main Hawaiian Islands. Pages 219–261 in J. E. Waddell and A. M. Clarke, 

editors. The state of coral reef ecosystems of the United States and Pacific Freely Associated 
192 

States: 2008. NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS NCCOS 11. NOAA/NCCOS Center for 

Coastal Monitoring and Assessment’s Biogeography Team. Silver Spring, Maryland. 

Friedlander A., G. Aeby, S. Balwani, B. Bowen, R. Brainard, A. Clark, J. Kenyon, J. Maragos, 

C. Meyer, P. Vroom and J. Zamzow. 2008b. The state of coral reef ecosystems of the 

northwest Hawaiian Islands. Pages 263–306 in J. E. Waddell and A. M. Clarke, editors. The 

state of coral reef ecosystems of the United States and Pacific Freely Associated States: 

2008. NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS NCCOS 11. NOAA/NCCOS Center for Coastal 

Monitoring and Assessment’s Biogeography Team. Silver Spring, Maryland. 

Funk, E. J. 1991. Vegetation Map of Kalaupapa National Historical Park, Molokai, Hawaii. 

Cooperative National Park Resource Studies Unit. Technical Report 77. 

Gagne, W. C. and F. G. Howarth. 1982. Assessment of endangered and threatened status of 

Hawaiian arthropods. Report to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Honolulu. 

Garman, M. 2000. Preliminary report, March 2000 research diving, Kauhako Crater Lake, 

Kalaupapa National Historical Park. 

Garman, M., S. Garman, and S. Kempe. 2000. First dives into Kauhako Crater Lake, Kalaupapa, 

Molokai, Hawaii: a deep volcanic vent dominated by microbial life. 2000 National 

Speleological Society Convention. Elkins, West Virginia. 

Giambelluca, T., M. Ridgley, M. Nullet. 1996. Water balance, climate change and land-use 

planning in the Pearl Harbor Basin, Hawaii. Water Resources Development 12(4):515–530. 

Giambelluca, T. W., Diaz, H. F., and Luke, M. S. A. 2008. Secular temperature changes in 

Hawai‘i. Geophysical Research Letters 35, L12702. 

Gillespie, R. G. and N. Reimer. 1993. The effect of alien predatory ants (Hymenoptera: 

Formicidae) on Hawaiian endemic spiders (Araneae: Tetragnathidae). Pac Sci 47:21–33. 

Gingerich, S. B. and R. H. Wolff. 2005. Effects of surface-water diversion on habitat availability 

for native macrofauna, Northeast Maui, Hawaii. Honolulu, Hawaii, U.S. Geological Survey, 

Scientific Investigations Report 2005-5213. 

GK & Associates. 1991. Environmental assessment for boulder removal project, Waihanau 

Stream, Kalaupapa National Historical Park, Molokai, Hawaii. Prepared for Edward K. Noda 

and Associated, Inc. 

Godwin, S. and H. Bollick. 2006. Inventory of intertidal and shallow subtidal marine invertebrate 

at Kalaupapa National Historic Park Moloka‘i, Hawai‘i. The Bishop Museum Contribution 

No. 2006–003 to the Hawaii Biological Survey for the National Park Service. 

Going, B. M. and T. L. Dudley. 2008. Invasive riparian plant litter alters aquatic insect growth. 

Biol Invasions 10:1041–1051. 
193 

Goltz, D. M., A. M. Agness and P. C. Banko. 2001. Axis deer home range, movements, and 

survival at Kalaupapa, Molokai. USGS-BRD unpublished report, Hawaii Volcanoes National 

Park. 

Gordon, D. R. 1998. Effects of invasive, non-indigenous plant species on ecosystem processes: 

lessons from Florida. Ecological Applications 8(4):975–989. 

Greene, L. W. 1985. Historic resource study, exile in paradise: the isolation of Hawaii’s leprosy 

victims and development of Kalaupapa Settlement, 1986 to present. Unpublished report. 

Grimsditch, G. D. and R. V. Salm. 2006. Coral reef resilience and resistance to bleaching. IUCN, 

Gland, Switzerland. 

Gulko, D. A. 2005. Main Hawaiian Island remote islet coral reef rapid ecological assessments, 

Final Technical Report. Coral Reef Management Program, National Ocean Service, NOAA, 

#NA03NOS4260112. 

Ha, P. Y. and R. A. Kinzie III. 1996. Reproductive biology of Awaous guamensis, an 

amphidromous Hawaiian goby. Environmental Biology of Fishes 45:383–396 

Haines, W. and D. Foote. 2005. Rapid assessment of invertebrate fauna of the Kona Forest Unit 

of Hakalau National Wildlife Refuge. Hawai‘i Cooperative Studies Unit, Technical Report 

HCSU- 001. University of Hawai‘i at Hilo, Hawaii. 

Halliday, W. R. 2001. Caves and cavernous features of Kalaupapa Peninsula. Hawaii 

Speleological Survey of the National Speleological Society Report #01-1. 

Halpern, B. S., K. A. Selkoe, F. Micheli, C. V. Kappel. 2007. Evaluating and ranking the 

vulnerability of marine ecosystems to anthropogenic threats. Conserv Biol 21:1301–1315. 

Hawai‘i Cooperative National Park Studies Unit. 1990. Hawai‘i stream assessment: a 

preliminary appraisal of Hawai‘i stream resources. Report R84. Prepared for the Commission 

of Water Resources Management. Honolulu, Hawai’i. 

HDOA (Hawai‘i Department of Agriculture), Plant Quarantine Branch. 2008. Final 

environmental assessment: field release of Eurytoma sp. (Hymenoptera: Eurytomidae), for 

biological control of the Erythrina gall wasp, Quadrastichus erythrinae Kim (Hymenoptera: 

Eulophidae), in Hawaii. Plant Pest Control Branch, Hawaii Department of Agriculture, 

Honolulu, Hawaii. 

HINHP (Hawaii Heritage Program). 1989. Puu Alii Natural Area Reserve resource information, 

notebook 1. Prepared for State of Hawaii, Natural Area Reserves System. Hawaii Heritage 

Program, The Natural Conservancy of Hawaii. Honolulu, Hawaii. 
194 

Hays, W. S. T. and S. Conant. 2007. Biology and impacts of Pacific Island invasive species. 1. A 

worldwide review of effects of the small Indian mongoose, Herpestes javanicus (Carnivora: 

Herpestidae). Pacific Science 61(1):3–16. 

Hess, S. C., J. J. Jeffrey, D. L. Ball, and L. Babich. 2006. Efficacy of feral pig removals at 

Hakalau Forest National Wildlife Refuge. Hawai`i Cooperative Studies Unit Technical 

Report HCSU-004. University of Hawai‘i, Hilo, Hawaii. 

Heu, R. A., D. M. Tsuda, W. T. Nagamine, J. A. Yalemar, and T. H. Suh. 2006. Erythrina gall 

wasp Quadrastichus erythrinae Kim (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae), new pest advisory. 

Department of Agriculture, Manoa, Hawaii. 

Higashi, G. R. and M. N. Yamamoto. 1993. Rediscovery of “Extinct” Lentipes concolor (Pisces: 

Gobiidae) on the Island of Oahu. Hawaii. Pac. Sci. 47:115-117. 

 

Hoch, H. and F. G. Howarth. 1999. Multiple cave invasions by species of the planthopper genus 

Oliarus in Hawaii (Homoptera: Fulgoroidea: Cixiidae). Zoological Journal of the Linnean 

Society. 127(4):453–475. 

Hodges, C. N. 1996. Observation of seabird survey at Kalaupapa. Memorandum to Rick Potts, 

KALA Wildlife Biologist. June 27, 1996. 

Holland, K. N., C. G. Lowe, and B. M. Wetherbee. 1996. Movements and dispersal patterns of 

blue trevally (Caranx melampygus) in a fisheries conservation zone. Fisheries Research 25: 

279–292. 

Holthuis, L. B. 1973. Caridean shrimps found in land-locked saltwater pools at four Indo-west 

Pacific localities (Sinai Peninsula, Funafuti Atoll, Maui and Hawaii Islands), with the 

description of one new genus and four new species. Zool. Verhadenlingen 128:3–55. 

Holm, L. G., D. L. Plucknett, J. V. Pancho, and J. P. Herberger. 1977. The world’s worst weeds: 

distribution and biology. University of Hawai‘i Press, Honolulu, Hawaii. 

Holmquist, J. G., J. M. Schmidt-Gengenbach, and B. B Yoshioka. 1998. High dams and marinefreshwater linkages: Effects on native and introduced fauna in the Caribbean. Conservation 

Biology 12(3):621–630. 

Hovenden, M. J., K. E. Wills, J. K. Vander Schoor, R. E. Chaplin, A. L. Williams, M. J. Nolan, 

and P. C. D. Newton. 2007. Flowering, seed production and seed mass in a species-rich 

temperate grassland exposed to FACE and warming. Australian Journal of Botany 55:780–

794. 

Howarth, F. and S. Taiti. 1995. Trip report for Kalaupapa National Historical Park, Molokai, 14–

16 November 1995. B.P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu, Hawaii. 
195 

Howarth, F. G., S. James, W. McDowell, D. Preston, C. Imada. 2007. Identification of roots in 

lava tube caves using molecular techniques: implications for conservation of cave arthropod 

faunas. Journal of Insect Conservation 11(3):251–261. 

Hughes, G. 2003. R-Map park profile input. Unpublished document dated January 1, 2003. 

Hughes, G. D., K. R. Wood, M. L. Wysong, and E. K. Brown. 2007. Kalaupapa National 

Historical Park, vascular plant inventory, Kalawao, Molokai, Hawaii. National Park Service, 

Inventory and Monitoring Program, Pacific Island Network. 

Hughes, G. and M. Carnevale. 2004. Protocol development assessing opihi (Cellana spp.) 

densities and population structure. Unpublished report. 

Hughes, R. F., P. M. Vitousek, J. T. Tunison. 1991. Alien grass invasion and fire in the seasonal 

submontane zone of Hawaii. Ecology 72:743–746. 

Ikagawa, M. Wildllife in the garden. Honolulu Star-Bulletin 6 August 2006, 11. Available from 

http://archives.starbulletin.com/2006/08/06/editorial/special.html (accessed 3 March 2009). 

Ikuma, E. K., D. Sugano, and J. K. Mardfin. 2002. Filling the gaps in the fight against invasive 

species. Legislative Reference Bureau, Honolulu, Hawaii. 

ISSG (Invasive Species Specialist Group). 2005. Carijoa riisei (coral). Available from 

http://www.issg.org/database/species/ecology.asp?si=694&fr=1&sts= (accessed 20 August 

2009). 

IPCC (Intergovermental Panel on Climate Change). 2007. 2007: Summary for policymakers. In

S. Solomon, D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K. B. Averyt, M. Tignor and H. L. 

Miller, editors. Climate change 2007: the physical science basis, contribution of Working 

Group I to the fourth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 

Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, and New York, New York.

IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature). 2000. Guidelines for the prevention of 

biodiversity loss caused by alien invasive species. Prepared by the IUCN/SSC Invasive 

Species Specialist Group (ISSG) and approved by the 51st meeting of the IUCN Council, 

Gland, Switzerland. 

Jacobi, J. D. 1989. Vegetation maps of the upland plant communities on the islands of Hawaii, 

Maui, Molokai, and Lanai. Cooperative National Park Resources Studies Unit Technical 

Report 68. University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu, Hawaii. 

James, H. F., T. W. Stafford, D. W. Steadman, S. L. Olson, P. S. Martin, A. J. T. Jull, P. C. 

McCoy. 1987. Radiocarbon dates on bones of extinct birds from Hawaii. PNAS 84(8):2350–

2354. 
196 

Jessel, S. and R. Agliam. 1994. Kukaiwaa, North Shore Molokai, Carter's panic grass (Panicum

fauriei var. carteri), August 22–25, 1994. Unpublished report. 

Jokiel, P. L. and E. K. Brown. 2004. Global warming, regional trends and inshore environmental 

conditions influence coral bleaching in Hawaii. Global Change Biology 10:1627–1641. 

Jokiel, P. L., E. K. Brown, A. M. Friedlander, S. K. Rodgers, and W. R. Smith. 2004. Hawaii 

coral reef assessment and monitoring program: Spatial patterns and temporal dynamics in 

reef coral communities. Pacific Science 58:159–174. 

Jokiel P., K. Rodgers, I. Kuffner, A. Anderson, F. Cox, F. Mackenzie. 2009. Impact of ocean 

acidification on Hawaiian coral reefs in the 21st century abstract. In Hawai‘i Conservation 

Conference 2009, Hawai‘i in a changing climate: ecological, cultural, economic and policy 

challenges and solutions. Abstracts of the 2009 Hawaii Conservation Conference. Available 

from http://hawaiiconservation.org/_library/documents/2009hcc/

2009hccabstractbookfinal2.pdf (accessed 22 September 2009). 

Jones, V. P., P. Anderson-Wong, P. A. Follett, P. Yang, D. M. Westcot, J. S. Hu, and D. E. 

Ullman. 2000. Feeding damage of the introduced leafhopper Sophonia rufofascia

(Homoptera: Cicadellidae) to plants in forests and watersheds of the Hawaiian Islands. 

Environmental Entomology 29(2):71–180. 

Juvik, S. P. and J. O. Juvik. 1998. Atlas of Hawai‘i, third edition. University of Hawai‘i Press, 

Honolulu, Hawaii. 

Kagawa, A., L. Sack, K. Duarte, and S. James. 2009. Hawaiian native forest conserves water 

relative to timber plantation: Species and stand traits influence water use. Ecological 

Applications 19(6):1429–1443. 

Kalaupapa National Historic Park. 2010. Project to repair the Kalaupapa dock structures 

environmental assessment. Kalaupapa National Historic Park, Kalaupapa, Hawaii. 

Katahira, L. 1995. Draft environmental assessment. Construct feral animal proof fence at 

Kauhakō Crater, Kalaupapa National Historical Park, Molokai. Unpublished report. 

Katahira, L. K., P. Finnegan, and C.P. Stone. 1993. Eradicating feral pigs in montane mesic 

habitat at Hawaii Volcanoes National Park. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 21:269–273. 

Kay, E.A. 1977. The biology of opihi. Department of Planning and Economic Development, 

Honolulu, Hawaii. 

Kay, E. A., C. E. Bird, B. S. Holland, and C. M. Smith. 2005. Growth rates, reproductive cycles, 

and population genetics of Opihi from the national parks in the Hawaiian Islands. 

Unpublished report. 
197 

Keith, P. 2003. Biology and ecology of amphidromous Gobiidae of the Indo-Pacific and the 

Caribbean regions. Journal of Fish Biology 63:831–847 

Kenis, M., M. A. Auger-Rozenberg, A. Roques, L. Timms, C. Pere, M. J. W. Cock, J. Settele, S. 

Augustin, and C. Lopez-Vaamonde. 2009. Ecological effects of invasive alien insects. Biol 

Invasions 11:12–45. 

Kepler, C. and K. Kepler. 1981. Plant notes, including transects 26 and 27, USFWS Surveys, 

Kalaupapa Peninsula - Waikolu Valley. Mar 28–31, 1981. 

Kido, M. H. 1996a. Recovery processes in Hawaiian streams. In W. Devick, editor. Proceedings 

of the Hawaii Stream Restoration Symposium, 1994, Honolulu, Hawaii. Technical Report 

96-01. State of Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources, Aquatic Resources 

Division. 

Kido, M. H. 1996b. Diet and food selection in the endemic Hawaiian amphidromous goby, 

Sicyopterus stimpsoni (Pisces: Gobiidae). Environmental Biology of Fishes 45:199–209 

Kilpatrick, A. M., D. A. LaPointe, C. T. Atkinson, B. L. Woodworth, J. K. Lease, M. E. Reiter, 

and K. Gross. 2006. Effects of chronic avian malaria (Plasmodium relictum) infection on the 

reproductive success of the Hawaii amakihi (Hemignathus virens) The Auk 123(3):764–774. 

Kingsford, R. T., J. E. M. Watson, C. J. Lundquist, O. Venter, L. Hughes, E. L. Johnston, J. 

Atherton, M. Gawel, D. A. Keith, B. G. Mackey, C. Morley, H. P. Possingham, B. Raynor, 

H. F. Recher, and K. A. Wilson. 2009. Major conservation policy issues for biodiversity in 

Oceania. Conservation Biology 23(4):834–840. 

Kingsolver, J. M. and J. E. Decelle. 1979. Host associations of Specularius impressithorax 

(Insecta, Coleoptera, Bruchidae) with species of Erythrina (Fabales, Fabaceae). Annuals of 

the Missouri Botanical Garden 66(3):528–532. 

Kinzie, R. A. III. 1968. The ecology of replacement of Pseudosquilla ciliata (Fabricius) by 

Gondactylus falcatus (Forskål) (Crustacea: Stomatopoda) recently introduced into the 

Hawaiian Islands. Pacific Science 22(4):465–475. 

Kinzie, R. A. III. 1988. Habitat utilization by Hawaiian stream fishes with reference to 

community structure in oceanic island streams. Environmental Biology of Fishes 22:179–

192. 

Kinzie, R. A., III. 1991. How unique are Hawaiian freshwater gobies? Pages 142–150 in W. 

Devick, editor. Invitational symposium on freshwater stream biology and fisheries 

management. State of Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources, Division of 

Aquatic Resources, Honolulu, Hawaii. 

Kinzie, R. A. III. 1997. Evolution and life history patterns in freshwater gobies. Micronesica 30: 

27–40. 
198 

Kinzie, R. A., III., J. I. Ford. 1982. Population biology in small Hawaiian streams. Water 

Resources Research Center Cooperative Report No. 147, Hawai’i Cooperative Fishery 

Research Unit, No. A-080-HI. 

Kinzie, R. A. III, A. M. Brasher and G. Smith. 1990. Reconnaissance Survey of Waikolu Stream.

Report prepared for the Cooperative National Park Resources Studies Unit. University of 

Hawaii, Manoa, Hawaii. 

Kinzie, R. A. III., C. Chong, J. Devrell, D. Lindstrom, and R. Wolff. 2006. Effects of water 

removal on a Hawaiian stream ecosystem. Pacific Science 60(1):1–47. 

Kondratieff, B. C., R. J. Bishop, A. M. Brasher. 1997. The life cycle of an introduced caddisfly, 

Cheumatopsyche pettiti (Banks) (Trichoptera: Hydropsychidae) in Waikolu stream, Molokai, 

Hawaii. Hydrobiologia 350:81–85. 

Kozar, K., R. Swift, and S. Marshall. 2007. Shoreline bird inventories in three national parks in 

Hawaii: Kalaupapa National Historical Park, Haleakala National Park, and Hawaii Volcanoes 

National Park. Pacific Cooperative Studies Unit Technical Report 149. University of Hawaii 

at Manoa, Honolulu, Hawaii. 

Kraus, F. 2005. Inventory of reptiles and amphibians in Hawaii Volcanoes, Haleakala, and 

Kalaupapa national parks. Contribution No. 2005-013 to the Hawaii Biological Survey. 

Prepared for Pacific Cooperative Studies Unit. University of Hawai‘i at Manoa, Honolulu, 

Hawaii. 

Krushelnyckyet, P. D., L. L. Loope, and N. J. Reimer. 2005. The ecology, policy, and 

management of ants in Hawaii. Proc. Hawaiian Entomol. Soc. 37:1–25. 

KWA (Kaua‘i Watershed Alliance). 2005. Kaua‘i Watershed Management Plan: overall 

management strategy – April 2005. Available from 

http://www.kauaiwatershed.org/KWA_management_plan.pdf (accessed 9 September 2009). 

LaPointe, D. A., M. L. Goff, and C. T. Atkinson. 2005. Comparative susceptibility of introduced 

forest-dwelling mosquitoes in Hawaii to avian malaria Plasmodium relictum. J. Parasitol. 91: 

843–849. 

LaPointe, D. A. 2008. Dispersal of Culex quinquefasciatus (Diptera: Culicidae) in a Hawaiian rain 

forest. Journal of Medical Entomology 45(4):600–609. 

Larned, S.T. 2000. Dynamics of riparian detritus in a Hawaiian stream ecosystem: a comparison 

of drought and post-drought conditions. JNABS 19:215–234 

Larned, S. T., R. A. Kinzie III, A. P. Covich, and C. T. Chong. 2003. Detritus processing by 

endemic and non-native Hawaiian stream invertebrates: a microcosm study of speciesspecific interactions. Arch. fur Hydrobiologia 156:241–254 
199 

LaRosa, A. M. 1992. The status of banana poka in Hawaii. Pages 271–299 in C. P. Stone, C. W. 

Smith, and J. T. Tunison, editors. Alien plant invasions in native ecosystems of Hawaii: 

management and research. Cooperative National Park Resources Studies Unit, University of 

Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii. 

LeGrande, M. 2002. Survey of Kukaiwaa Peninsula, Kalaupapa National Historical Park, 

Molokai, Hawaii, Special Report Prepared for Kalaupapa National Historical Park. 

Lenz L., J. A. Taylor. 2001. The influence of an invasive tree species (Myrica faya) on the 

abundance of an alien insect (Sophonia rufofascia) in Hawai'i Volcanoes National Park. 

Biological Conservation 102(3):301–307. 

Liddle, D. T., B. W. Brook, J. Matthews, S. M. Taylor, P. Caley. 2006. Threat and response: A 

decade of decline in a regionally endangered rainforest palm affected by fire and introduced 

animals. Biological Conservation 132:362–375. 

Lindstrom, D. P. 1998. Complete watershed reproductive patterns for amphidromous Hawaiian 

gobioids. PhD Dissertation, Department of Zoology, University of Hawaii at Manoa. 

Lindstrom, D. P. 1999. Molecular species identification of newly hatched Hawaiian 

amphidromous gobioid larvae. Molecular Marine Biology and Biotechnology 1:167–174 

Linney, G. 1987. Botanical survey of Kauhakō Crater, Kalaupapa National Historical Park, 

Molokai. National Park Service, Kalaupapa National Park files, Kalupapa, Hawaii. 

Loope, L. and D. Mueller-Dombois. 1989. Characteristics of invaded islands, with special 

reference to Hawaii. In J. Drake et al., editors. Biological invasions: a global perspective. 

John Wiley & Sons. SCOPE 37:257–280. 

Loope. L. L., F. G. Howarth, F. Kraus, and T. K. Pratt. 2001. Newly emergent and future threats 

of alien species to Pacific birds and ecosystems. Studies in Avian Biology 22:291–304. 

Lowe, S., M. Browne, S. Boudjelas, M. De Poorter. 2000. 100 of the world’s worst invasive 

alien species, a selection from the Global Invasive Species Database. Invasive Species 

Specialist Group (ISSG), a specialist group of the Species Survival Commission (SSC) of the 

World Conservation Union (IUCN). 

Maciolek, J. A. 1975. Limnological ecosystems and Hawaii’s preservational planning. Intl. Ver. 

Theor. Angew. Limnol. Ver. 19:1461–1467. 

Maciolek, J. A. 1977. Taxonomic status, biology, and distribution of Hawaiian Lentipes, a 

diadromous goby. Pacific Science 31(4):355–362 

Maciolek, J. A. 1982. Lakes and lake-like waters of the Hawaiian archipelago. Occas Pap 

Bernice P Bishop Mus 25:1–14. 
200 

Maciolek, J. A. and R. E. Brock. 1974. Aquatic survey of the Kona Coast ponds, Hawaii Island. 

Sea Grant Advisory Report. UNIHI-SEAGRANT-AR-74-04. 

Magner, J. A., B. Vondracek, K. N. Brooks. 2008. Grazed riparian management and stream 

channel response in southeastern Minnesota (USA) streams. Environmental Management 

42(3):377–390. 

Mainland, G. B. 1939. Gobioidea and freshwater fishes on the Island of O’ahu. M.A. Thesis. 

University of Hawaii, Honolulu. 

Maragos, J. E. and D. A. Gulko. 2002. Coral reef ecosystems of the northwestern Hawaiian 

Islands: results of the 2000 expeditions. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service and the Department of 

Land and Natural Resources, Honolulu, Hawaii. 

March, J. G., J. P. Benstead, C. M. Pringle, and F. N. Scatena. 2003. Damming tropical island 

streams: problems, solutions, and alternatives. BioScience 53(11):1069–1078. 

Marshall, S. and S. N. R. Aruch 2003. Kalaupapa shoreline seabird survey, 1 December 2003. 

Unpublished report. 

Marshall, S. and K. Kozar. 2008. Forest bird inventory, Kalaupapa National Historical Park. 

Pacific Cooperative Studies Unit Technical Report 154. University of Hawaii at Manoa, 

Honolulu, Hawaii. 

Marshall S., G. Hughes and K. Kozar. 2008. Small, non-native mammal inventory in Kalaupapa 

National Historical Park. Pacific Cooperative Studies Unit Technical Report 158. National 

Park Service Inventory and Monitoring Program, Pacific Island Network, Hawaii National 

Park, Hawaii. 

Maschinski, J. 2006. Implications of population dynamic and metapopulation theory for 

restoration. Pages 59–87 in D. A. Falk, M. A. Palmer, and J. B. Zedler, editors. Foundations 

of Restoration Ecology. Society of Ecological Restoration International. Island Press, 

Washington, DC. 

McCoy, M. D. 2005a. Kalaupapa archaeology: a collection of five archaeological surveys in 

Kalaupapa National Historical Park, Hawai‘i. Unpublished report. 

McCoy, M. 2005b. The lands of Hina: an archaeological overview and assessment of Kalaupapa 

National Historic Park, Molokai. Pacific Cooperative Studies Unit Technical Report 135. 

University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu, Hawaii. 

McDowall, R. M. 1988. Diadromy in fishes. Timber Press, Portland, Oregon. 

McDowall, R. M. 1993. Implications of diadromy for the structuring and modeling of riverine 

fish communities in New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater 

Research 27(4):453–462 
201 

McDowall, R. M. 1995. Seasonal pulses in migrations of New Zealand diadromous fish and the 

potential impacts of river mouth closure. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater 

Research 29:517–526. 

McDowall, R. M. 2003. Hawaiian biogeography and the islands freshwater fish fauna. Journal of 

Biogeography 30:703–710. 

McIntosh, M. D., M. E. Benbow, and A. J. Burky. 2002. Effects of stream diversion on riffle 

macroinvertebrate communities in a Maui, Hawaii, stream. River Research and Applications 

18:569–581. 

McIver, J. D. and M. L. McInnis. 2007. Cattle grazing effects on macroinvertebrates in an 

Oregon mountain stream. Rangeland Ecology & Management 60(3):293–303. 

McKeown, S. 1996. A field guide to reptiles and amphibians in the Hawaiian Islands. Diamond 

Head Publishing, Inc., Los Osos, California. 

Medeiros, A. C. and C. G. Chimera. 1997a. Monitoring methods for Tetramolopium rockii

exclosure, Kalaupapa NHP, Molokai April 8–9. Unpublished report. 

Medeiros, A.C. and C. G. Chimera. 1997b. Monitoring methods for Centaurium sebaeoides

exclosure, Kalaupapa NHP, Molokai April 9–10, 1997. Unpublished report. 

Medeiros, A. C., C. G. Chimera, and L. L. Loope. 1996. Kauhakō Crater botanical resource and 

treat monitoring, Kalaupapa National Historical Park, Island of Moloka‘i, Hawai‘i. 

Cooperative National Park Resources Studies Unit Technical Report 110. University of 

Hawai‘i at Manoa. Honolulu, Hawaii. 

Medeiros, A. C., C. G. Chimera, and L. L. Loope, S. M. Joe, and P. D. Krushelnycky. 2000. 

Notes on status and ecology of the endangered Hawaiian annual ‘Āwiwi, Centaurium 

sebaeoides (Gentianaceae). Pacific Science 54(4):417–422. 

Menard, T. 2001. Activity patterns of the Hawaiian hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus semotus) in 

relation to reproductive time periods. M.S. Thesis, University of Hawaii, Honolulu. Hawaii. 

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2005. Ecosystems and human well-being: biodiversity 

synthesis. World Resources Institute, Washington, D.C. 

Miller, S. E. 2008. Presentation: HCA climate change forum. Presented at the Hawaii 

Conservation Conference, July 29, 2008, Honolulu, Hawaii. 

Minton, D. and M. Carnevale. 2006. A preliminary survey of the marine and intertidal 

invertebrates at Kalaupapa National Historical Park (Molokai, Hawaii). Report submitted to 

Kalaupapa National Historical Park, Natural Resources Division. 

Mitchell, C., C. Ogura, D. W. Meadows, A. Kane, L. Strommer, S. Fretz, D. Leonard, and A. 

McClung. 2005. Hawaii’s comprehensive wildlife conservation strategy. Department of Land 
202 

and Natural Resources. Honolulu, Hawaii. Available from http://www.state.hi.us/lnr/ofaw/ 

wcs/index.html (accessed 21 August 2008). 

Moors, P. J., I. A. E. Atkinson, and G. H. Shelly. 1992. Reducing the rat threat to island birds. 

Bird Conservation International 2:93–114. 

Morrissey, W. A. 2005. Tsunamis: monitoring, detection, and early warning systems. 

Congressional Research Service, The Library of Congress, Washington D.C. 

Myers, G. S. 1949. Usage of anadromous, catadromous and allied terms in migratory fishes. 

Copeia 1949:89–97. 

Nishimoto, R. T. and D. G. K. Kuamo'o. 1996. Recruitment of decapod crustacean postlarvae 

into Hakalau Stream, Hawaii Island. Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, 

Sustainable Natural Resource Management in the 21st Century. Waikiki Beach, Honolulu, 

Hawaii, July 22–26, 1996. 

Nishimoto, R. T. and D. G. K. Kuamo’o. 1997. Recruitment of goby post larvae into Hakalau 

Stream, Hawaii Island. Micronesica 30: 41–49. 

Nogueira-Filho, S. L .G., S. S. C. Nogueira, J. M. V. Fragoso. In press. Ecological impacts of 

feral pigs in the Hawaiian Islands. Biodivers Conserv. 

Nowak, R. M. 1999. Walker’s mammals of the world. Volume 2. Johns Hopkins Press, 

Baltimore, Maryland. 

NPS (National Park Service). 1990. Resource management plan. Kalaupapa National Historical 

Park, Kalaupapa, Hawaii. 

NPS. 1997. Kalaupapa National Historic Park Strategic Plan, Government Performance and 

Results Act. National Park Service, Kalaupapa, Molokai, Hawaii 

NPS. 1999. Long-range interpretative plan. Kalaupapa National Historic Park. National Park 

Service, Kalaupapa, Molokai, Hawaii. 

NPS. 2000a. Resource management plan, Kalaupapa National Historical Park, Kalaupapa, Hawaii. 

National Park Service, Kalaupapa, Molokai, Hawaii. 

NPS. 2000b. Section VI: Kalaupapa settlement boundary study along north shore to Halawa Valley, 

Molokai. Of Hawaii Area Studies Public Law 105-355, Section 511. 

NPS. 2003. A planning meeting for water quality monitoring, Pacific Island I&M Network, 12–

14 August 2003, Kailua-Kona, Hawaii. 

NPS. 2004. Final environmental assessment, construction of ungulate-proof fencing, Upper Pu‘u 

Ali‘i Plateau. Pu‘u Ali‘i Natural Areas Reserve, Moloka‘i, Hawai‘i. Unpublished report. 
203 

NPS. 2006a. Environmental assessment, solid waste management, Kalaupapa National Historical 

Park. National Park Service, Kalaupapa, Molokai, Hawaii. 

NPS. 2006b. Glossary of terms used by the NPS Inventory & Monitoring Program. Available 

from http://science.nature.nps.gov/im/monitor/Glossary.cfm (accessed 14 August 2009). 

NPS. 2007. Draft foundation statement Kalaupapa National Historical Park, Molokai, Hawaii. 

National Park Service, Kalaupapa, Molokai, Hawaii. 

NPS. 2008. Seabird monitoring. Quarterly newsletter of the Pacific Island Network Inventory & 

Monitoring Program. July–September 2008, issue no. 13. 

Parham, J. E., G. R. Higashi, E. K. Lapp, D. G. K. Kuamoo, R. T. Nishimoto, S. Hau, J. M. 

Fitzsimons, D. A. Polhemus, and W. S. Devick. 2008. Atlas of Hawaiian watersheds & their 

aquatic resources, Island of Kauai, Bishop Museum & Division of Aquatic Resources. 

Available from http://www.hawaiiwatershedatlas.com/ (accessed 10 December 2009). 

Parmesan, C. and J. Matthews. 2006. Biological impact of climate change. Pages 333–374 in M. 

J. Groom, G. K. Meffe, and C. R. Carroll, editors. Principles of Conservation Biology, Third 

Edition. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts. 

Pearson, R. , J. Hirata , L. Potts , and F. Harby . 1974. Test pitting of Cave 1, Kalaupapa 

Peninsula, Molokai, Hawaii. N. Z. Archaeol. Assoc. Newsl 17:44–49. 

Pimental, D. R. Zuniga and D. Morrison. 2005. Update on the environmental and economic costs 

associated with alien-invasive species in the United States. Ecological Economics 52:273–

288. 

Polhemus, D. A. 1992. A preliminary report on the aquatic insect fauna of Waikolu Stream, 

Molokai, Hawaii. Unpublished report for Division of Aquatic Resources, Department of 

Land and Natural Resources, Honolulu, Hawaii. 

Polhemus, D. A. 1995. New Heteroptera and Odonata (Insecta) records and range extensions in 

the Hawaiian Islands. Bishop Mus. Occas. Pap. 42:42–43. 

Polhemus, D. A. 1996. The orangeblack Hawaiian damselfly, Megalagrion xanthomelas

(Odonata: Coenagrionidae): clarifying the current range of a threatened species. Bishop 

Museum Occasional Papers 45:30–53. 

Polhemus, D. A., J. Maciolek, and J. Ford. 1992. An ecosystem classification of inland waters 

for the tropical Pacific Islands. Micronesica 25(2):155–173. 

Pounds, A. J., M. P. Fogden, and J. H. Campbell. 1999. Biological response to climate change on 

a tropical mountain. Nature 398:611–614. 
204 

Puleloa, B. 1991. Waikolu stream survey, Molokai. State of Hawaii DLNR, Division of Aquatic 

Resources, unpublished report. 

Radewagen, E. and E. Neller. An interim report on the Kaupikiawa lava tube system, Kalaupapa, 

Molokai, Hawaii. Third draft on file, Kalaupapa National Historical Park, Kalaupapa, 

Hawaii. 

Radtke, R. L., R. A. Kinzie III, and D. J. Shafer. 2001. Temporal and spatial variation in length 

of larval life and size at settlement of the Hawaiian amphidromous goby Lentipes concolor. 

Journal of Fish Biology 58:928–938. 

Radtke, R. L. and R. A. Kinzie III. 1996. Evidence of a marine larval stage in endemic Hawaiian 

stream gobies from isolated high-elevation localities. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 125:613–621. 

Radtke, R. L., and R. A. Kinzie III. 1991. Hawaiian amphidromous gobies: perspectives on 

recruitment process and life history events. Pages 125–141 in Proceedings of the 1990 

symposium on fresh water stream biology and fisheries management. State of Hawaii 

Department of Land and Natural Resources, Division of Aquatic Resources, Honolulu, 

Hawaii. 

Reiter, M. E. and D. A. Lapointe. 2007. Landscape factors influencing the spatial distribution 

and abundance of mosquito vector Culex quinquefasciatus (Diptera: Culicidae) in a mixed 

residential–agricultural community in Hawai‘i. Journal of Medical Entomology 44(5):861–

868. 

Reiter, M. E., J. K. Lease, C. T. Atkinson, and D. A. LaPointe. 2003. Evaluating the potential for 

management of avian disease (Plasmodium relictum) in a mesic dry forest of Hawai‘i 

Volcanoes National Park. Talk presented at the 2003 Hawai‘i Conservation Conference, 

Honolulu, Hawaii. July 11, 2003. 

Resh, V. H. 2005. Stream crossings and the conservation of diadromous invertebrates in South 

Pacific island streams. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 15:313–

317. 

Restrepo, C. and P. Vitousek. 2001. Landslides, alien species, and the diversity of a Hawaiian 

montane mesic ecosystem. BioiTropica 33(3):409–420. 

Rivera, M. A. J., F. G. Howarth, S. Taiti, and G.K. Roderick. 2002. Evolution in Hawaiian caveadapted isopods (Oniscidea: Philosciidae): vicariant speciation or adaptive shift. Molecular 

Phylogenetics and Evolution 25:1–9. 

Rosenzweig, C., G. Casassa, D. J. Karoly, A. Imeson, C. Liu, A. Menzel, S. Rawlins, T. L. Root, 

B. Seguin, P. Tryjanowski. 2007. Assessment of observed changes and responses in natural 

and managed systems. Pages 79–131 in M. L. Parry, O. F. Canziani, J. P. Palutikof, P. J. van 

der Linden and C. E. Hanson, editors. Climate change 2007: impacts, adaptation and 
205 

vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the 

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. 

Russell, D. J., 1992. The ecological invasion of Hawaiian reefs by two marine red algae, 

Acanthophora spicifera (Vahl) Bøerg. and Hypnea musciformis (Wulfen) J.Ag., and their 

association with two native species, Laurencia nidifica and Hypnea cervicornis J.Ag. ICES 

Mar. Sci. Symp. 194:110–125. 

Santo, L. T. 2001. Assessment and improvement recommendations for the Molokai Irrigation 

System. Hawaii Agriculture Research Center. Aiea, Hawaii. 

Scheffers, S. R. J. Haviser, T. Browne, and A. Scheffers. 2009. Tsunamis, hurricanes, the demise 

of coral reefs and shifts in prehistoric human populations in the Caribbean. Quaternary 

International 195:69–87. 

Schumacher, B. and J. Parrish. 2006. Spatial relationships between an introduced snapper and 

native goatfishes on Hawaiian Reefs. Biological Invasions 7(6):925–933. 

Schumacher, B. and J. Parrish. 2008. Comparison of the feeding ecology of the introduced 

snapper Lutjanus kasmira and native goatfishes in Hawai‘i. Abstract. Proceedings of the 11th 

International Coral Reef Symposium, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida. 

Scowcroft, P. G. and H. F. Sakai. 1984. Stripping of Acacia koa bark by rats on Hawaii and 

Maui. Pacific Science 38(1):80–86. 

Scott, J. M., D. H. Woodside, and T. L. C. Casey. 1977. Observations of birds in the Molokai 

Forest Reserve, July 1975. Journal of the Hawaii Audubon Society 38(3):25–27. 

Scowcroft, P.G. and C.E. Conrad. 1992. Alien and native plant response to release from feral 

sheep browsing on Mauna Kea. Pages 625–665 in C. P. Stone, C. W. Smith, and J. T. 

Tunison, editors. Alien plant invasions in native ecosystems of Hawaii: management and 

research. Cooperative National Park Resources Studies Unit, University of Hawaii, 

Honolulu, Hawaii. 

Shehata, C., L. Freed and R. L. Cann. 2001. Changes in native and introduced bird populations 

on Oahu: infectious disease and species replacement. Studies in Avian Biology 22:264–273. 

Sherwood, A. R. and Kido, M. H. 2002. Watershed-scale comparisons of algal biodiversity in 

high quality proximate Hawaiian stream ecosystems. Pacific Science 56:431–440. 

Sherwood, A. R. 2006. Stream macroalgae of the Hawaiian Islands: a floristic survey. Pacific 

Science 60(2):191–205. 

Shi, J., R. I. M. Dunbar, D. Buckland, and D. Miller. 2005. Dynamics of grouping patterns and 

social segregation in feral goats (Capra hircus) on the Isle of Rum, NW Scotland. Mammalia 

69:185–199. 
206 

Simons, T. R. 1983. Biology and conservation of the endangered Hawaiian dark-rumped petrel

(Pterodroma phaeopygia sandwichensis). National Park Service, Cooperative Park Studies 

Unit, College of Forest Resources, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. 

CPSU/UW 83-2. 

Sin, H., K. H. Beard, and W. C. Pitt. 2008. An invasive frog, Eleutherodactylus coqui, increases 

new leaf production and leaf litter decomposition rates through nutrient cycling in Hawaii. 

Biological Invasions 10(3):335–345. 

Smith, C.W. 1985. Impact of alien plants on Hawaii's native biota. Pages 180–250 in C. P. Stone 

and J. M. Scott, editors. Hawaii’s terrestrial ecosystems: preservation and management. 

University of Hawaii, Cooperative national Park Resources Studies Unit, Honolulu, Hawaii. 

Society for Ecological Restoration (SER) International Science & Policy Working Group. 2004. 

The SER international primer on ecological restoration. Available from 

http://www.ser.org/pdf/primer3.pdf (accessed 2 November 2009). 

Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K. B. Averyt, M. Tignor and H. L. 

Miller. 2007. Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. Contribution of Working 

Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 

Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, United Kingdom, and New York, New York. 

Spatz, G. and D. Mueller-Dombois. 1973. The influence of feral goats on Koa tree reproduction 

in Hawaii Volcanoes National Park. Ecology 54(4):870–876.

Staples, G. W. and R. H. Cowie. 2001. Hawai'i's invasive species. A guide to invasive plants and 

animals in the Hawaiian Islands. Mutual Publishing & Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu, 

Hawaii. 

Staples, G. W. and D. H. Herbst. 2005. A tropical garden flora. Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu, 

Hawaii. 

Sterns, H. T. and G. A. Macdonald. 1947. Geology and ground-water resourcesw of the island of 

Molokai, Hawaii. Bulletin No. 11, Hawaii Division of Hydrography, Honolulu, Hawaii. 

Stevenson C., L. S. Katz, F. Micheli , B. Block, K. W. Heiman, C. Perle, K. Weng, R. Dunbar 

and J. Witting. 2006. High apex predator biomass on remote Pacific island. Earth and 

Environmental Science 26(1):47–51 

Still, C. J., P. N. Foster, and S. Schneider. 1999. Simulating the effects of climate change on 

tropical montane cloud forests. Nature 398:608–610. 

Stimson, J. S. T. Larned , and E. J. Conklin . 2001. Effects of herbivory, nutrient levels, and 

introduced algae on the distribution and abundance of the invasive alga Dictyosphaeria 

cavernosa in Kane'ohe Bay, Hawai'i. Coral Reefs 19(4):343–357. 
207 

Stone, C. P. 1985. Alien animals in Hawaii's native ecosystems: toward controlling the adverse 

effects of introduced vertebrates. Pages 251–297 in C.P. Stone and J.M. Scott, editors. 

Hawaii's terrestrial ecosystems: preservation and management. University of Hawaii 

Cooperative Resources Studies Unit, University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu, Hawaii. 

Stone, C. P. 1989. Hawaii wetlands, streams, fishponds and pools. Pages 125–136 in C. P. Stone 

and D. B. Stone, editors. Conservation biology in Hawaii. Univ. of Hawaii Press, Honolulu, 

Hawaii. 

Stone, C. P., and S. J. Anderson. 1988. Introduced animals and Hawaii’s natural area. 

Proceedings of the Vertebrate Pest Conference 13:134–140. 

Stone, C. P., L. W. Cuddihy, and J. T. Tunison. 1992. Responses of Hawaiian ecosystems to the 

removal of feral pigs and goats. Pages 666–704 in C.P. Stone, C.W. Smith, and J.T. Tunison, 

editors. Alien plant invasions in native ecosystems of Hawaii: management and research. 

Cooperative National Park Resources Studies Unit, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii. 

Stone, F. D. and F. G. Howarth. 2007. Hawaiian cave biology: status of conservation and 

mangement. In T. Rea, editor. Proceedings of the 2005 National Cave and Karst 

Management Symposium 19:21–26. 

Strauch, A. M., A. R. Kapust, and C. C. Jost. 2009. Impact of livestock management on water 

quality and streambank structure in a semi-arid, African ecosystem. Journal of Arid 

Environments 73(9):795–803. 

SWCA. 2004. Biological assessment of Honokohau Stream and Bay, West Maui, Hawai’i. 

Contract report prepared for Kapalua Land Company, Ltd., Kapalua, Hawaii. 

SWCA. 2005. Biological monitoring study of Honokohau Stream, West Maui, Hawai’i: First 

post-flow release assessment. Contract report prepared for Kapalua Land Company, Ltd., 

Kapalua, Hawaii. 

SWCA. 2007. Long-term biological monitoring survey of Honokohau Stream, West Maui 

Hawai’i: spring 2007 report. Contract report prepared for Kapalua Land Company, Ltd., 

Kapalua, Hawaii. 

SWCA. 2008. Survey of native Hawaiian stream fauna in Nā Wai ‘Ehā, West Maui. Contract 

report prepared for Cades Schutte, LLC, Honolulu, Hawaii. 

Swenson, C. 2008. Offshore Islet Restoration Committee (OIRC). Available from 

http://www.hawaiioirc.org/OIRC-ISLETS.htm (accessed 26 March 2009). 

Taiti, S., and F. G. Howarth. 1997. Terrestrial isopods (Crustacea, Oniscoidea) from Hawaiian 

caves. Memoires de Biospeologie 24:97–118. 
208 

Takasaki, K. J. 1986. Results of exploratory drilling for water in Waihanau Valley, Molokai, 

Hawaii. USGS Water-Resources Investigations Report 85-4332. 

Tate, D. C., J. M. Fitzsimons and R. P. Cody. 1992. Hawaii freshwater fishes (Osteichthyes, 

Gobiodei): a field key to the species of larvae and postlarvae during recruitment into 

freshwater. Occasional Papers of the Museum of Natural Science, Louisiana State University 

65:1–10. 

Tep, P. and K. Gaines, 2003. Reversing the impacts of feral pig on the Hawaiian tropical 

rainforest ecosystem. Restoration and Reclamation Review, University of Minnesota. 

Available from http://conservancy.umn.edu/bitstream/60237/1/8.3.TepGaines.pdf

(accessed 7 November 2009). 

Titcomb, M. 1972. Native use of fish in Hawai‘i. University of Hawai’i Press, Honolulu, Hawaii. 

Toonen, R. 2004. Reproduction and developmental characteristics of an alien soft coral (Carijoa 

riisei) in Hawai‘i (FY 2004–2005). Technical Report of the Hawai’i Institute of Marine 

Biology, Kaneohe, Hawaii. 

TNC (The Nature Conservancy). 2003a. Draft: measuring conservation actions in East Molokai, 

Hawaii. Unpublished report. 

TNC. 2003b. Pelekunu Preserve long-range management plan, fiscal years 2004–2009. Molokai, 

Hawaii. Submitted to the Department of Land & Natural Resources, Natural Area Partnership 

Program. Unpublished report. 

Towns, D. R. and J. Robb. 1986. The importance of northern offshore islands as refugia for 

endangered lizard and frog species. The offshore islands of northern New Zealand. New 

Zealand Department of Lands and Survey Information Series 16:197–210. 

University of Hawai‘i. 2009. Weed risk assessments for Hawaii and Pacific Islands. 

Available from http://www.botany.hawaii.edu/faculty/daehler/wra/ (accessed 20 July 2009). 

U.S. Climate Change Science Program. 2009. Climate and coasts. Abstracts of the Hawai‘i 

Conservation Conference 2009, Concurrent Session 1, July 28, 2009. Honolulu, Hawaii. 

USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture) Forest Service. 2009. Pacific Island Ecosystems at Risk 

(PIER). Available from http://www.hear.org/pier (accessed 11 August 2009). 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1998. Climate change and Hawaii. EPA 236-F98-007e. Office of Policy, Washington, D.C.,. 

USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 1994. Recovery plan for Panicum fauriei var. carteri. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon. 
209 

USFWS. 1998. Recovery plan for the Hawaiian hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus semotus). U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon. 

USFWS. 2003. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; final designations and 

nondesignations of critical habitat for 42 plant species from the Island of Molokai, Hawaii; final 

rule. 68(52):12982– 13030. 

USFWS. 2004. Final critical habitat for the 41 plant species from the Hawaiian Island of 

Molokai. ESRI Shapefiles. Available from 

http://mercury.ornl.gov/clearinghouse/send/xsltText2?fileURL=http://mercury.ornl.gov/meta

data/nbii/html/usfws/www.fws.gov_filedownloads_ftp_gis_fws_metadata_doi_fws_itm_d_m

o_crhb_plant.html&full_datasource=U.S.%20Fish%20and%20Wildlife%20Service&full_qu

eryString=%20text%20:%20molokai%20text%20:%20critical%20text%20:%20habitat%20A

ND%20Decade:2000%20to%202009%20AND%20Presentation%20Category:Maps%20and

%20Data%20AND%20Originator:usfws&ds_id. 

USFWS. 2006. Revised recovery plan for Hawaiian forest birds. Region 1, Portland, Oregon. 

USFWS. 2007. Candidate assessment and listing priority assignment form Magalagrion 

pacificum. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific Islands Office. 

USFWS. 2008a. Megalagrion xanthomelas, species assessment and listing priority assignment 

form. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific Islands Office. 

USFWS. 2008b. Brighamia rockii (Pua‘ala) 5-year review: summary and evaluation. Pacific 

Islands Fish and Wildlife Office, Honolulu, Hawaii. 

USFWS. 2008c. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; designation of critical habitat for 

12 species of picture-wing flies from the Hawaiian Islands. Federal Register 73(234):73794–

73843. 

USFWS. 2009a. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; listing Phyllostegia hispida (no 

common name) as endangered throughout its range. Federal Register 74(50):11319–11327. 

USFWS. 2009b. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; proposed endangered status for 

flying earwig Hawaiian damselfly (Megalagrion nesiotes) and Pacific Hawaiian damselfly 

(M. pacificum) throughout their ranges. Federal Register 74(129):32490–32510. 

USGS (U.S. Geological Survey). 2005. Inventory of anchialine pools in Hawai‘i’s national 

parks. USGS FS 2005–3129. 

USGS. 2006. Feral pigs, introduced mosquitoes, and the decline of Hawai‘i’s native birds. 

Available from http://biology.usgs.gov/pierc/Fact_Sheets/Pigs_and_mosquitoes.pdf 

(accessed 5 November 2009). 
210 

Van Driesche, J. and R. Van Driesche. 2004. Nature out of place, biological invasions in the 

global age. Island Press, Washington, D.C. 

Van Riper, C., III, S. G. Van Riper, and W. R. Hansen. 2002. Epizootiology and effect of avian 

pox on Hawaiian forest birds. Auk 119:929–942. 

Vitousek, P. M. 1990. Biological invasions and ecosystem processes: towards an integration of 

population biology and ecosystem studies. Oikos 57:7–13. 

Vitousek, P. M. 1992. Effects of alien plants on native ecosystems. Pages 29–41 in C. P. Stone, 

C. W. Smith, and J. T. Tunison, editors. Alien plant invasions in native ecosystems of 

Hawai‘i: management and research. Cooperative National Park Resources Studies Unit, 

University of Hawai‘i, Honolulu, Hawaii. 

Vitousek, P. M. 1994. Beyond global warming: ecology and global change. Ecology 75(7): 

1861–1876. 

Vitousek, S., C. H. Fletcher, M. M. Barbee. 2008. A practical approach to mapping extreme 

wave inundation: consequences of sea-level rise and coastal erosion. Pages 85–96 in ASCE 

Solutions to Coastal Disasters 2008, Wallendorf, L., L. Ewing, C. Jones, and B. Jaffe, (eds.). 

ASCE / COPRI, 978-0-7844-0968-8, Reston, Virginia. 

Vitousek, S., M. M.Barbee, C. H. Fletcher, B. M. Richmond, and A. S. Genz. 2009. Pu‘ukoholā

Heiau National Historic Site and Kaloko-Honokōhau Historical Park, Big Island of Hawai‘i. 

Coastal Hazard Analysis Report. Unpublished report. 

Wagner, D., S. E. Kahng, R. J. Toonen. 2007. New report of predators (Order Nudibranchia) of 

the alien octocoral Carijoa riisei in the main Hawaiian Islands. Coral Reefs 26(2):411. 

Wait, D. A., D. P. Aubrey, and W. B. Anderson. 2005. Seabird guano influences on desert 

islands: soil chemistry and herbaceous species richness and productivity. Journal of Arid 

Environments 60(4): 681–695. 

Wagner, W. L., D. R. Herbst, and S. H. Sohmer. 1999. Manual of the flowering plants of 

Hawai'i, revised edition. 2 vols, Bishop Museum Special Publication 97. University of 

Hawaii Press and Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu, Hawaii. 

Walsh, W. J. 1983. Stability of a coral reef fish community following a catastrophic storm. Coral 

Reefs 2:49–63. 

Walther, G., E. Post, P. Convey, A. Menzel, C. Parmesan, T. J. C. Beebee, J. Fromentin, O. 

Hoegh-Guldberg, and F. Bairlein. 2002. Ecological responses to recent climate change. 

Nature 416:389–395. 

Wanless, R. M., A. Angel, R. J. Cuthbert, G. M. Hilton, and P. G. Ryan. 2007. Can predation by 

invasive mice drive seabird extinctions? Biology Letters 3:241–244. 
211 

Way, C. M, A. J. Burky, J. M. Harding, S. Hau, W. K. L. C. Puleloa. 1998. Reproductive biology 

of the endemic goby, Lentipes concolor, from Makamaka'ole Stream, Maui and Waikolu 

Stream, Moloka'i. Environmental Biology of Fishes 51(1):53–65. 

Webster, P. J., G. J. Holland, J. A. Curry, and H. R. Chang. 2005. Changes in tropical cyclone 

number, duration, and intensity in a warming environment. Science 309(5742):1844–1846. 

Weijerman M., R. Most, K. Wong, and S. Beavers. 2008. Attempt to control the invasive red 

alga Acanthophora spicifera (Rhodophyta: Ceramiales) in a Hawaiian fishpond: an 

assessment of removal techniques and management pptions. Pacific Science 62(4):517–532. 

Wetherbee, B. M., K. N. Holland, C. G. Meyer, and C. G. Lowe. 2004. Use of a marine reserve 

in Hawaii by the giant trevally, Caranx ignobilis. Fisheries Research 67:253–263 

Wilcock, R. J., M. R. Scarsbrook, K. J. Costley, and J. W. Nagels. 2002. Controlled release 

experiments to determine the effects of shade and plants on nutrient retention in a lowland 

stream. HYDROBIOLOGIA 485(1–3):153–162. 

Wiles, G. J., D. W. Buden, and D. J. Worthington. 1999. History of introduction, population 

status, and management of Philippine deer (Cervus mariannus) on Micronesian Islands. 

Mammalia 63:193–215. 

Winter, L. 2003. Popoki and Hawai‘i’s native birds. ‘Elepaio 63:43–46. 

Wood, K. R. 2000. Personal observations and checklist of vascular plants: Huelo Islet, Moloka‘i, 

Hawai‘i. Biological report prepared for Kalaupapa National Historic Park. Unpublished 

report. 

Wood, K. R. 2001. Pritchardia coastal forest on Huelo Islet, Moloka‘i, Hawai‘i. Biological 

Report prepared for Kalaupapa National Historic Park. Unpublished report. 

Wood, K. R. 2008. Vegetation descriptions of the offshore islets, Kalaupapa, Moloka‘i, Hawai‘i 

and Kukaiwa‘a Peninsula. Special Report prepared for Kalaupapa National Historic 

Historical Park. Unpublished report. 

Wood, K. R. and G. O. Hughes. 2003. Regional checklist of vascular plants, Pu‘u Ali‘i Natural 

Area Reserve, Moloka‘i, Hawai‘i. 

Wood, K. R. and M. LeGrande. 2002. Personal observations of Okala Islet, Moloka‘i, Hawai‘i, 

including a regional checklist of vascular plants, Pritchardia coastal forest on Huelo Islet, 

Molokai, Hawaii. Special Report prepared for Kalaupapa National Historic Historical Park. 

Unpublished report. 

Wood, K. R. and M. Legrande. 2003. Checklist of vascular plants found on four offshore islets 

Huelo, Mokapu, Okala and Mokuhooniki, Molokai, Hawaii. 
212 

Wood, K. R., G. O. Hughes, M. L. Wysong, and J. Espaniola. 2005. Plant distributional checklist 

of 32 sites in Kalaupapa National Historical Park, Kalawao County, Molokai. Unpublished. 

Woodworth, B. L., C. Atkinson, D. A. LaPointe, P. J. Hart, C. Spiegel, E. J. Tweed, C. 

Henneman, J. LeBrun, T. Denette, R. DeMots, K. L. Kozar, D. Triglia, D. Lease, A. Gregor, 

T. Smith, and D. Duffy. 2005. Host population persistence in the face of introduced vectorborne diseases: Hawaii Amakihi and avian malaria. PNAS 102:1531–1536. 

Woodworth, B. L., C. T. Atkinson, D. A. LaPointe. 2005. Host population persistence in the face 

of introduced vectorborne diseases: Hawaii amakihi and avian malaria. PNAS 102:1532–

1536. 

Wyban, C. A., 1993. Report on the Kalaupapa Fishpond. On file with the National Park Service, 

U.S. Department of the Interior. 

Wysong, M. L. and G. D. Hughes. 2005. Plant collections of Kalaupapa National Historical Park. 

Wysong, M. and G. Hughes. 2008. New Hawaiian plant records for the Island of Molokai. In N. 

L. Evenhuis and L. G. Eldredge, editors. Records of the Hawaii Biological Survey for 2006, 

Part 2: Notes. Bishop Museum Occasional Papers 96:1–8.

Wysong, M. L. and G. D. Hughes. 2008. Kalaupapa National Historical Park, vascular plant 

inventory, voucher collections, and electronic herbarium. Cooperative National Park 

Resources Studies Unit Technical Report #159. University of Hawai‘i at Manoa, Honolulu, 

Hawaii. 

Xu, T., C. M. Jacobsen, I. K.CHO, A. H Hara, and Q. X. Li. 2006. Application of an enzymelinked immunosorbent assay for the analysis of imidacloprid in Wiliwili tree, Erythrina 

sandwicensis O. Deg, for control of the wasp Quadrastichus erythrinae. J. Agric. Food 

Chem. 54:8444–8449. 

Yamamoto, M. N. and A. W. Tagawa. 2000. Hawai’i’s native & exotic freshwater animals. 

Mutual Publishing, Honolulu, Hawaii. 

Yost, A. and R. G. Wright. 1999. A preliminary study of axis deer distribution, movements and 

food habits at Kalaupapa National Historic Park–Final Report. Idaho Cooperative Fish and 

Wildlife Research Unit, Moscow, Idaho. 

Ziegler, A. L. 2002. Hawaiian natural history, ecology, and evolution. University of Hawai‘i 

Press, Honolulu, Hawaii. 

Zink, R. M., J. M. Fitzsimons, D. L. Dittmann, D. R. Reynolds, R. T. Nishimoto. 1996. 

Evolutionary genetics of Hawaiian freshwater fish. Copeia 2:330–335. 
213 

Zouhar, K., J. K. Smith, S. Sutherland, M. L. Brooks. 2008. Wildland fire in ecosystems: fire and 

nonnative invasive plants. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-42-vol. 6. U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Ogden, Utah. 
214 
215 

Appendices 
216 

Appendix 1. Park Enabling Legislation. 
217 

National Park Service

U.S. Department of the Interior

Kalaupapa National Historical Park

Enabling Legislation

as of 12 April 2005

Public Law 95-565

Public Law 100-202

National Park Service 

U.S. Department of the Interior 
218 

NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARKS 259 

6. 

Kalaupapa

PUBLIC LAW 96-565—DEC. 22, 1980 94 STAT. 3321

Public Law 96-

565

96th Congress An Act

Dec. 22, 1980

To establish the Kalaupapa National Historical Park in the State of Hawaii, and 

for other purposes.

[H.R. 7217]

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the

United States of America in Congress assembled,

SEC. 101. In order to provide for the preservation of the unique

nationally and internationally significant cultural, historic,

educational, and scenic resources of the Kalaupapa settlement on 

the island of Molokai in the State of Hawaii, there is hereby

established the Kalaupapa National Historical Park (hereinafter referred to as the “park”).

SEC. 102. The Congress declares the following to constitute the 

principal purposes of the park: (1) to preserve and interpret the Kalaupapa settlement for

the education and inspirationof present and future generations.

(2) to provide a well-maintained community in which the 

Kalaupapa leprosy patients are guaranteed that they may 

remain at Kalaupapa as long as they wish; to protect the 

current lifestyle of these patients and their individual 

privacy; to research, preserve, and maintain the present 

character of the community; to research, preserve, and 

maintain important historic structures, traditional Hawaiian 

sites, cultural values, and natural features: and to provide 

for limited visitation by the general public and

(3) to provide that the preservation and interpretation of

the settlement be managed and performed by patient and

Native Hawaiians to the extent practical, and that training

opportunities be provided such person in management and 

interpretation of the settlement's culture, historical, educational and scenic resources.

SEC. 103. The boundaries of the park shall include the lands, waters, and interests therein within the area generally depicted on

the map entitled “Boundary Map, Kalaupapa National Historical 

Park”, numbered P07 80024, and dated May 1980, which shall be on 

file and available for public inspection in the local and Washington, District of Columbia offices of the National Park Service, 

Department of the Interior. The Secretary of the Interior 

(hereinafter referred to as the “Secretary”) may make minor 

revisions in the boundary of the park by publication of a revised 

boundary map or other description to that efect in the Federal 

Register.

SEC. 104. (a) Within the boundary of the park, the Secretary is authorized to acquire those lands owned by the State of Hawaii or 

by political subdivision thereof only by donation or exchange, and 

only with the consent of the owner. Any such exchange shall be 

accomplished in accordance with the provisions of sections 5 (b) and 

(c) of the Act approved July 15, 1968 (82 Stat. 354). Any property 

conveyed to the State or a political subdivision thereof in exchange 

for property within the park which is held in trust for the benefit of 

Native

Kalaupapa 

National 

Historical Park, Hawaii. Establishment.

16 USC 410jj.

Purposes.

16 USC 410jj-1.

Boundaries; 

public 

inspection.

16 USC 410jj-2.

Land acquisition.

16 USC 410jj-2.

16 USC 460l-22.
219 

260 NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARKS

94 STAT. 3322 PUBLIC LAW 96-565—DEC. 22, 1980

48 USC 691.

48 USC 697.

48 USC 698.

Administration.

16 USC 410jj-4.

43 USC 1457, 16

USC 1, 2, 3, 4, 22,

43.

16 USC 461-467.

Cooperative agreements.

Hawaiians, as defined in the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act of

1920 shall, as a matter of Federal law, be held by the grantee subject

to an equitable estate of the same class and degree as encumbers the property within the preserve; and “available lands” defined in section 203 of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act may be 

exchanged in accordance with section 204 of said Act. The vesting of 

title in the United States to property within the park shall operate to 

extinguish any such equitable estate with respect to property 

acquired by exchange within the park.

(b) The Secretary is authorized to acquire privately–owned lands 

within the boundary of the park by donation, purchase with donated 

or appropriated funds, or exchange.

(c) The Secretary is authorized to acquire by any of the forgoing 

methods except condemnation, lands, waters and interests therein 

outside the boundary of the park and outside the boundaries of any 

other unit of the National Park System but within the State of 

Hawaii, and to convey the same to the Department of Hawaiian 

Home Lands in exchange for lands, waters, and interests therein 

within the park owned by that Department. Any such exchange shall 

be accomplished in accordance with the provisions defined in 

subsection (a) of this section.

SEC. 105. (a) The Secretary shall administer the park in accordance with the provisions of the Act of August 25, 1916 (39

Stat. 535), the Act of August 21, 1935 (49 Stat. 666), and the 

provisions of this Act. (b)(1) With the approval of the owner thereof, the Secretary may

undertake critical or emergency stabilization of utilities and historic structures, develop and occupy temporary office space, and conduct

interim interpretive and visitor services on non-Federal property 

within the park. (2) The Secretary shall seek and may enter into cooperative

agreements with the owner or owners of property within the park 

pursuant to which the Secretary may preserve, protect, maintain, construct, reconstruct, develop, improve, and interpret sites, 

facilities, and resources of historic, natural, architectural, and 

cultural significance. Such agreements shall be of not less than 

twenty years duration, may be extended and amended by mutual 

agreement, and shall include, without limitation, provisions that the Secretary shall have the right of access at reasonable times to public 

portions of the property for interpretive and other purpose, and that 

no changes or alterations shall be made in the property except by 

mutual agreement. Each such agreement shall also provide that the 

owner shall be liable to the United States in an amount equal to the fair market value of any capital improvements made to or placed 

upon the property in the event the agreement is terminated prior to 

its natural expiration, or any extension thereof, by the owner, such 

value to be determined as of the date of such termination, or, at the 

election of the Secretary, that the Secretary be permitted to remove such capital improvements within a reasonable time of such 

termination. Upon the expirationof such agreement, the improvements thereon shall become the property of the owner, 

unless the United States desires to remove such capital 

improvements and restore the property to its natural state within a 

reasonable time for such expiration.

(3) Except for emergency, temporary, and interim activity as

authorized in paragraph (1) of this subsection, no funds appropriated 

pursuant to this Act shall be expended on non-Federal property

unless such expenditure is pursuant to a cooperative agreement with 

the owner.
220 

NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARKS 261 

PUBLIC LAW 96-565—DEC. 22, 1980 94 STAT. 3323

(4) The Secretary may stabilize and rehabilitate structures and 

other properties used for religious or sectarian purposes only if such 

properties constitute a substantial and integral part of the 

historical fabric of the Kalaupapa settlement, and only to the extent 

necessary and appropriate to interpret adequately the nationally 

significant historical features and events of the settlement for the benefit of the public.

SEC. 106. The following provisions are made with respect to the special needs of the leprosy patients residing in the Kalaupapa settlement—

(1) So long as the patient may direct, the Secretary shall

not permit public visitation to the settlement in excess of one hundred persons in any one day.

(2) Heath care for the patient shall continue to be provided 

by the State of Hawaii, with assistance from Federal 

programs other than those authorized herein.

(3) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 

Secretary shall provide patients a first right of refusal to provide revenue–producing visitor services, including such 

services as providing food, accommodations, transportation, 

tours, and guides.

(4) Patients shall continue to have the right to take and 

utilize fish and wildlife resources without regard to Federal 

fish and game laws and regulations.

(5) Patients shall continue to have the right to take and

utilize plant and other natural resources for traditional

purposes in accordance with applicable State and Federal 

laws.

SEC. 107. The following provisions are made with respect to 

additional needs of the leprosy patients and Native Hawaiians for 

employment and training. (The term “Native Hawaiian” as used in this title, means a descendant of not less than one-half part of the blood of the races inhabiting the Hawaiian Islands previous to the 

year 1778.)—

(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the

Secretary shall give first preference to qualified patients and

Native Hawaiians in making appointments to positions

established for the administration of the park, and the

appointment of patients and Native Hawaiians shall be without regard to any provision of the Federal civil service

laws giving an employment preference to any other class of 

applicant and without regard to any numerical limitation on 

personnel otherwise applicable.

(2) The Secretary shall provide training opportunities for patients and Native Hawaiians to develop skills necessary to qualify for the provision of visitor services and for appointment to positions referred to in paragraph (1).

SEC. 108 (a) There is hereby established the Kalaupapa National 

Historical Park Advisory Commission (hereinafter referred to as the 

“Commission”), which shall consist of eleven members each 

appointed by the Secretary for a term of five years as followers:

(1) seven members who shall be present or former patients,

elected by the patient community, and

(2) four members appointed from recommendations 

submitted by the Governor of Hawaii, at least one of whom

shall be a Native Hawaiian.

Religious 

structures.

Leprosy 

patients.

16 USC 410jj-5

Employment 

and training. 16 USC 410jj-6.

“Native

Hawaiian.”

Kalaupapa 

National 

Historical Park 

Advisory 

Commission. 

Establishment. 

Membership.

16 USC 410jj-7.
221 

262 NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARKS

94 STAT. 3323 PUBLIC LAW 96-565—DEC. 22, 1980

Chairman. Vacancies.

Compensation. Expenses.

94 STAT. 3324

Expiration. 

Reevaluation.

16 USC 410jj-8.

Appropriation

Authorization.

16 USC 410jj-9.

(b) The Secretary shall designate one member to be Chairman. Any vacancy in the Commission shall be filled in the same manner in which the original appointment was made. (c) A member of the Commission shall serve without

compensation as such. The Secretary is authorized to pay the expenses reasonably incurred by the Commission in carrying out its

responsibilities under this Act on vouchers signed by the Chairman. (d) The Secretary shall consult with and seek the advice of the

Commission with respect to the development and operation of the 

park including training program The Commission shall, in addition, advise the Secretary concerning public visitation to the park, and 

such advice with respect to numbers of visitors shall be binding upon 

the Secretary if the Commission certifies to him that such advice is 

based on a referendum, held under the auspices of the Commission, 

of all patients on the official Kalaupapa Registry.

(e) The Commission shall expire twenty-five years from the date

of enactment of this Act.

SEC. 109. At such time when there is no longer a resident patient

community at Kalaupapa, the Secretary shall reevaluate the policies governing the management, administration, and public use of the

park is order to identify any changes deemed to be appropriate.

SEC. 110. Effective October 1, 1981, there are hereby authorized 

to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out the

purposes of this title but not to exceed $2,500,000 for acquisition of 

lands and interests in lands and $1,000,000 for development.

* * * * * * *
222 

NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARKS 263

PUBLIC LAW 96-565—DEC. 22, 1980

Approved December 22, 1980.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:

HOUSE REPORT No. 96–1019 (Comm. on Interior and Insular Affairs). 

SENATE REPORT No. 96–1027 (Comm. on Energy and Natural Resources). CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. Vol. 126 (1980):

May 19, considered and passed House.

Dec. 4, considered and passed Senate, amended.

Dec. 5, House concurred in Senate amendments. 

94 STAT. 3327
223 

NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARKS 465 

7. Kalaupapa

PUBLIC LAW 100–202—DEC. 22, 1987 101 STAT. 1329

Public Law 100–

202

100th Congress

Joint Resolution

Making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 1988, and for other Dec. 22, 1987

purposes. [H.J. Res. 395]

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United

States of America in Congress assembled,

* * * * * * *

AN ACT

Making appropriations for the Department of the Interior and Related Agencies for the fiscal Year ending September 30, 1988, and for other purposes.

TITLE I—DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

* * * * * * * 

NATIONAL PARK SERVICE

OPERATION OF THE NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM

* * * * * * *

. . . Provided further, That notwithstanding any other provision 

of law, Public Law 96–565 is amended by adding the following 

at the end of section 104(a): “The Secretary may lease from the 

Department of Hawaiian Home Lands said trust lands until 

such time as said lands may be acquired by exchange as set 

forth herein or otherwise acquired. The Secretary may enter into 

such a lease without regard to fiscal year limitations.”: . . .

* * * * * * * 

Approved December 22, 1987.

Certified April 20, 1988.

* * * * * * *

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.J. Res. 395:

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 100–415 (Comm. on Appropriations) and No. 100–

498

(Comm. of Conference). SENATE REPORTS: No. 100–238 (Comm. on Appropriations). CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 133 (1987):

Dec. 3, considered and passed House.

Dec. 11, considered and passed Senate, amended.

Dec. 21, House and Senate agreed to conference report.

WEEKLY COMPILATION OF PRESIDENTIAL DOCUMENTS, Vol. 23 (1987):

Dec. 22, Presidential remarks.

101 STAT.

1329-214

101 STAT. 1329-218

101 STAT. 1329-220

16 USC 410jj-3.

101 STAT. 1329-450
224 

Appendix 2. Species Scientific, Hawaiian, and Common 

Names. 

Scientific Name Hawaiian/Common Name(s) Status1

Achatina fulica giant African snail X 

Acridotheres tristis common myna X 

Adenophorus periens pendant kihi fern, palai la‘au E 

Alauda arvensis skylark X 

Androponon virginicus broomsedge X 

Anous minutus noio, black noddy V 

Arenaria interpres ruddy turnstone V 

Artemisia australis ‘ahinahina, hinahina, hinahina 

kuahiwi E 

Asio flammeus sandwichensis pueo, Hawaiian owl E 

Atyoida bisulcata ‘opae kala‘ole E 

Awaous guamensis ‘o‘opu nākea I 

Axis axis axis deer X 

Bacopa monnieri ‘ae‘ae I 

Bidens hillebrandiana subsp. 

polycephala ko‘oko‘olau E 

Bidens molokaiensis ko‘oko‘olau E 

Bidens pilosa Spanish needle X 

Bidens wiebkei ko‘oko‘olau E 

Boerhavia repens alena I 

Bos primigenius cattle X 

Brighamia rockii pua‘ala E 

Bulweria bulwerii Bulwer's petrel I 

Canavalia molokaiensis ‘āwikiwiki E 

Canis familiaris feral dog X 

Capra hircus goat X 

Cardinalis cardinalis northern cardinal X 

Carpodacus mexicanus house finch X 

Casuarina equisetifolia common ironwood X 

Centaurium sebaeoides ‘āwiwi E 

Cettia diphone Japanese bush-warbler X 

Chamaeleo jacksonii Jackson’s chameleons X 

Chamaesyce celastroides var. 

amplectens ‘akoko E 

Cheirodendron ‘ōlapa E 

Cirsium arvense Canadian thistle X 
225 

Scientific Name Hawaiian/Common Name(s) Status1

Clermontia oblongifolia ssp. brevipes ‘oha wai E 

Copsychus malabaricus white-rumped shama X 

Cyanea dunbarii haha E 

Cyanea procera haha E 

Cyanea profuga haha E 

Cyanea solanaceae popolo E 

Cyanea solenocalyx haha E 

Cynodon dactylon Bermudagrass X 

Cyrtandra halawensis ha‘iwale E 

Cyrtandra hematos ha‘iwale E 

Cyrtandra macrocalyx ha‘iwale E 

Cyrtrandra biserrata ha‘iwale E 

Dicranopteris linearis uluhe I 

Diellia erecta ------- E 

Digitaria adscendens Henry's crabgrass X 

Digitariai nsularis sourgrass X 

Diospyros sandwicensis lama E 

Drosophila differens Hawaiian picture-wing fly E 

Ehrharta stipoides meadow ricegrass X 

Emoia impar azure-tailed skink X 

Equus africanus asinus donkey X 

Equus caballus x Equus asinus mule X 

Equus ferus caballus horse X 

Erythrina sandwicensis wiliwili E 

Euglandina rosea rosy wolf snail X 

Eurya sandwicensis anini, wanini E 

Exocarpos gaudichaudii hulumoa, kaumahana, heau, au E 

Falco peregrinus peregrine falcon V 

Felis catus feral cat X 

Ficus microcarpa Chinese banyan X 

Fimbristylis cymosa mau‘u ‘aki‘aki I 

Francolinus erckelii Erckel francolin X 

Francolinus francolinus black francolin X 

Fregata minor great frigatebird, ‘iwa I 

Furcraea foetida mauritius hemp X 

Gallus gallus domesticus feral chicken X 

Gardenia remyi nanu E 

Gehyra mutilate stump-toed gecko X 
226 

Scientific Name Hawaiian/Common Name(s) Status1

Geopelia striata zebra dove X 

Hawaiioscia paeninsulae blind isopod E 

Hedyotis mannii pilo E 

Heliotropium anomalum hinahina E 

Hemidactylus frenatus house gecko X 

Hemidactylus garnotii Indo-Pacific gecko X 

Hemidactylus typus tree gecko X 

Hemignathus virens wilsoni Maui ‘amakihi E 

Herpestes javanicus small Indian mongoose X 

Hesperomannia arborescens ------- E 

Heteroscelus incanus wandering tattler, ‘ulili V 

Hibiscus arnottianus ssp. immaculatus koki‘o ke‘oke‘o E 

Hibiscus kokio ssp. kokio pualoalo E 

Himatione sanguinea sanguinea ‘apapane E 

Joinvillea ascendens ssp. ascendens ‘ohe E 

Kalanchoe pinnata airplant X 

Kuhlia sandvicensis āholehole I 

Lagenifera maviensi howaiaulu E 

Lantana camara lantana X 

Lasiurus cinereus semotus Hawaiian hoary bat E 

Leiothrix lutea red-billed leiothrix X 

Lentipes concolor ‘o‘opu ‘alamo‘o E 

Lepidium bidentatum ‘ānaunau E 

Lepidodactylus lugubris mourning gecko X 

Lipinia noctua moth skink X 

Lobelia dunbariae ssp. paniculata ------- E 

Lobelia dunbariae subsp. dunbariae ------- E 

Lonchura punctulata nutmeg mannikin, spotted munia X 

Melicope reflexa alani E 

Macrobrachium lar Tahitian prawn X 

Macrobrachium grandimanus ‘opae ‘oeha‘a E 

Melinis minutiflora molasses grass X 

Metrosideros polymorpha ‘ōhi‘a E 

Mugil cephalis mullet X 

Mus musculus house mouse X 

Myadestes lanaiensis rutha oloma`o, Molokai thrush E 

Neritina granosa hīhīwai E 

Nesoluma polynesicum keahi I 
227 

Scientific Name Hawaiian/Common Name(s) Status1

Oreochromis tilapia X 

Palmeria dolei ‘ākohekohe, crested honeycreeper E 

Pandanus tectorius hala I 

Panicum fauriei var. carteri Carter’s panicgrass E 

Paroreomyza flammea kakawaihie, Molokai creeper E 

Peucedanum sandwicense makou E 

Phaethon lepturus white-tailed tropicbird I 

Phaethon rubricauda red-tailed tropicbird I 

Phyllostegia hispida ------- E 

Phyllostegia mannii ------- E 

Phyllostegia mollis ------- E 

Phyllostegia stachyoides ------- E 

Pittosporum halophilum hoawa E 

Plantago princes var. laxiflora kuahiwi laukahi E 

Platanthera holochila fringed orchid E 

Pleomele auwahiensis hala pepe E 

Pluchea indica Indian fleabane, marsh fleabane X 

Pluvialis fulva Pacific golden plover V 

Poecilia reticulata guppy X 

Portulaca villosa ihi E 

Pritchardia hillebrandii loulu E 

Pseudonestor xanthophrys kīkēkoa, Maui parrotbill E 

Psydrax odorata alahe‘e I 

Pterodroma sandwichensis Hawaiian dark-rumped petrel or ua‘u E 

Puffinus auricularis newelli Newell's shearwater or ‘a‘o E 

Puffinus pacificus wedge-tailed shearwater I 

Quadrastichus erythrinae erythrina gall wasp X 

Ranunculus mauiensis makou E 

Rattus rattus black rat X 

Reynoldsia sandwicensis ‘ohe makai E 

Sarotherodon tilapia X 

Scaevola coriacea dwarf naupaka E 

Schiedea diffusa ------- E 

Schiedea lydgatei ------- E 

Schiedea pubescens var. pubescens ma‘oli‘oli E 

Schinus terebinthifolius Christmasberry X 

Senna gaudichaudii kolomona I 

Sesuvium portulacastrum ‘äkulikuli, sea purslane I 
228 

Scientific Name Hawaiian/Common Name(s) Status1

Sicyopterus stimpsoni ‘o‘opu nōpili E 

Sicyos cucumerinus ‘anunu E 

Sida fallax ‘ilima I 

Sophonia rufofascia two-spotted leafhopper X 

Specularius impressithorax erythrina seedbeetle X 

Stenogyne bifida ------- E 

Streptopelia chinensis spotted dove X 

Sula sula red-footed booby I 

Sus scrofa pig X 

Syzygium cumini java plum X 

Tetramolopium rockii var. rockii ------- E 

Tetramolopium sylvae ------- I 

Tilapia tilapia X 

Tyto alba barn owl X 

Vespula pensylvanica yellowjackets X 

Vestiaria coccinea ‘i‘iwi E 

Zanthoxylum hawaiiense a‘e E 

Zosterops japonicus Japanese white-eye X 

1) E = endemic; I = indigenous; V = visitor; X = non-native. 

230 

Appendix 3. Federally and State Listed Plants and Animals 

Known to Occur at KALA. 

Scientific Name Common Name Date Listed Status1

FLORA 

Achyranthes splendens var. 

rotundata ------- 3/26/1986 E 

Adenophorus periens pendant kihi fern 11/10/1994 E 

Alectryon macrococcus var. 

macrococcus 

‘ala‘alahua 5/15/1992 E 

Bidens molokaiensis ko‘oko‘olau SOC 

Bidens wiebkei ko‘oko‘olau 10/8/1992 E 

Brighamia rockii pua‘ala 10/8/1992 E 

Canavalia molokaiensis ‘āwikiwiki 10/8/1992 E 

Centaurium sebaeoides ‘āwiwi 10/29/1991 E 

Clermontia oblongifolia ssp. brevipes ‘oha wai 10/8/1992 E 

Cyanea dunbarii haha 10/10/1996 E 

Cyanea procera haha 10/8/1992 E 

Cyanea profuga haha ------- SOC 

Cyanea solanacea haha, popolo ------- SOC 

Cyanea solenocalyx haha ------- SOC 

Cyrtandra halawensis ha‘iwale ------- SOC 

Cyrtandra hematos ha‘iwale ------- SOC 

Cyrtandra macrocalyx ha‘iwale ------- SOC 

Cytrandra biserrata ha‘iwale ------- SOC 

Diellia erecta ------- 11/10/1994 E 

Eurya sandwicensis anini ------- SOC 

Exocarpos gaudichaudii heau ------- SOC 

Gardenia remyi nanu ------- C 

Hedyotis littoralis ------- ------- SOC 

Hedyotis mannii pilo 10/8/1992 E 

Hesperomannia arborescens ------- 3/28/1994 E 

Hibiscus arnottianus ssp.

immaculatus koki`o ke`oke`o 10/8/1992 E 

Hibiscus kokio ssp. kokio pualoalo ------- SOC 

Joinvillea ascendens ssp. 

ascendens ‘ohe ------- C 

Lagenifera maviensis ------- ------- SOC 

Lobelia dunbariaessp. dunbarii ------- ------- SOC 

Lobelia dunbariaessp. paniculata ------- ------- SOC 

Lysimachia maxima ------- 10/10/1996 E 

Melicope reflexa alani 10/8/1992 E 

Panicum fauriei var. carteri Carter's panicgrass 10/12/1983 E 
231 

Scientific Name Common Name Date Listed Status1

Peucedanum sandwicense makou 2/25/1994 T 

Phyllostegia hispida 3/17/2009 E 

Phyllostegia mannii ------- 10/8/1992 E 

Phyllostegia mollis ------- 10/29/1991 E 

Phyllostegia stachyoides ------- SOC 

Plantago princeps var. laxiflora kuahiwi laukahi 11/10/1994 E 

Platanthera holochila ------- 10/10/1996 E 

Portulaca villosa ihi ------- SOC 

Ranunculus mauiensis makou ------- C 

Scaevola coriacea dwarf naupaka 5/16/1986 E 

Schiedea lydgatei ------- 10/8/1992 E 

Schiedea nuttallii ------- 10/10/1996 E 

Schiedea pubescens ma‘oli‘oli ------- C 

Schiedea sarmentosa ------- 10/10/1996 E 

Sicyos cucumerinus ‘anunu ------- SOC 

Stenogyne angustifolia 11/29/1979 E 

Stenogyne bifida ------- 10/9/1992 E 

Tetramolopium rockii var. rockii ------- 10/8/1992 T 

Zanthoxylum hawaiiense a‘e 3/4/1994 E 

FAUNA 

Chelonia mydas Green sea turtle 7/28/1978 T 

Lasiurus cinereus semotus Hawaiian hoary bat, 

‘ope‘ape‘a 10/13/1970 E 

Megalagrion nigrohamatum 

nigrohamatum 

Blackhook Hawaiian 

damselfly ------- SOC 

Megalagrion pacificum Pacific Hawaiian 

damselfly ------- PE 

Megalagrion xanthomelas Orangeblack 

Hawaiian damselfly ------- C 

Monachus schauinslandi Hawaiian monk seal 12/23/1976 E 

Partulina mighelsiana ------- ------- SOC 

Partulina proxima ------- ------- SOC 

Partulina redfieldii ------- ------- SOC 

Partulina tessellata ------- ------- SOC 

Perdicella helena ------- ------- SOC 

Pterodroma sandwichensis Hawaiian petrel, ua‘u 3/11/1967 E 

Puffinus auricularis newelli Newell’s shearwater, 

‘a‘o 10/28/1975 T 

Vestiaria coccinea i‘iwi SE 

1) Status: E = federally endangered; T = federally threatened; PE = Proposed federally 

endangered; SE = state endangered; C = candidate federally endangered; 

SOC = species of concern. 
232 

Appendix 4. Surveys Conducted in the Terrestrial Ecosystem 

by Resource. 

Date Author(s) 

Kauhako 

Crater 

Coastal 

Spray Zone 

Offshore 

Islets 

Pu‘u Ali‘i 

NAR 

Moloka‘i FR 

North Shore 

Cliffs NNL 

Lowland 

Coastal Area 

FLORA 

1981 Kepler and Kepler 

1987 Linney X 

1989 HINHP X 

1989 Jacobi X 

1990 Asherman, Crummer, 

Lau X X X X X 

1990 Canfield, J. X 

1991 Funk, J. X X X X X X 

1994 Jessel and Agliam X 

1996 Medeiros, Chimera, 

Loope X 

1997 Medeiros and 

Chimera X 

1997 Medeiros and 

Chimera X 

2000 Wood X 

2001 Wood X 

2002 Legrande X 

2002 Wood and Legrande X 

2003 Wood and Legrande X 

2005 Wood, Hughes, 

Wysong, Espaniola X X X X X X 

2007 Hughes et al. X X X X X X X 

2008 Wood X X 

2008 Wysong and Hughes x X X X X X 

FAUNA 

1977 Scott, Woodside, 

Casey X 

1989 HINHP X 

1996 Hodges X X 

2000 Duvall X 

2001 Goltz, Agness, Banko X X X X X X 
233 

Date Author(s) 

Kauhako 

Crater 

Coastal 

Spray Zone 

Offshore 

Islets 

Pu‘u Ali‘i 

NAR 

Moloka‘i FR 

North Shore 

Cliffs NNL 

Lowland 

Coastal Area 

2003 Marshall and Aruch X X X X 

2004 Molokai Forest Bird 

Survey (DOFAW) X X 

2005 Kraus (HBS) X X X 

2007 Frasher, Geisman, 

Parish X X X X 

2007 Kozar, Swift, Marshall X X X 

2008 Marshall and Kozar X X X X X 

2008 Marshall, Hughes, 

Kozar X X X X X 

OTHER

1972 Foote et al. X X X X X X 

1990 Combs et al. X X 

2001 Halliday X X 

Neller X 

1995 Howarth and Taiti X 

1997 Taiti and Howarth X 
234 

Appendix 5. Benthic data by transect for coastal reefs at 

KALA. 
235 

 

Benthic Data Analysis Areas

Functional Groups

Zone A

Kalaupapa

NHP

D

B

A

F

C

E

Legend

Park Boundary

Depth in Meters

-5 - 0-10 - -5-15 - -10-20 - -15-25 - -20-30 - -25-35 - -30-40 - -35-42 - -40

Functional Groups (% Cover)

MacroalgaeCoralCoralline AlgaeMacroInvertsSand SubstrateTurf AlgaeOther

1,000 0 1,000 500

Feet

500 0 500 250

Meters

Source: National Park Service

N.T.S
236 

Kalaupapa

NHP

D

B

A

F

C

E

Legend

Park Boundary

Depth

-5 - 0

-10 - -5

-15 - -10

-20 - -15

-25 - -20

-30 - -25

-35 - -30

-40 - -35

-42 - -40

Functional Groups (% Cover)

Macroalgae

Coral 

Coralline Algae

MacroInverts

Sand Substrate

Turf Algae

Other

1,000 0 1,000 500

Feet

500 0 500 250

Meters

Benthic Data Analysis Areas

Functional Groups

Zone B

Source: National Park Service

N.T.S
237 

Benthic Data Analysis Areas

Functional Groups

Zone C

Kalaupapa

NHP

D

B

A

F

C

E

Legend

Park Boundary

Depth in Meters

-5 - 0-10 - -5-15 - -10-20 - -15-25 - -20-30 - -25-35 - -30-40 - -35-42 - -40

Functional Groups (% Cover)

MacroalgaeCoralCoralline AlgaeMacroInvertsSand SubstrateTurf AlgaeOther

1,000 0 1,000 500

Feet

500 0 500 250

Meters

Source: National Park Service

N.T.S
238 

Kalaupapa

NHP

D

B

A

F

C

E

Legend

Park Boundary

Depth

-5 - 0

-10 - -5

-15 - -10

-20 - -15

-25 - -20

-30 - -25

-35 - -30

-40 - -35

-42 - -40

Functional Groups (% Cover)

Macroalgae

Coral 

Coralline Algae

MacroInverts

Sand Substrate

Turf Algae

Other

1,000 0 1,000 500

Feet

500 0 500 250

Meters

Benthic Data Analysis Areas

Functional Groups

Zone D

Source: National Park Service

N.T.S
239 

Benthic Data Analysis Areas

Functional Groups

Zone E and F

Kalaupapa

NHP

D

B

A

F

C

E

Legend

Park Boundary

Functional Groups (% Cover)

MacroalgaeCoralCoralline AlgaeMacroInvertsSand SubstrateTurf AlgaeOther

1,000 0 1,000 500

Feet

500 0 500 250

Meters

Source: National Park Service

N.T.S
240 

Appendix 6. Fish abundance by trophic levels for coastal 

reefs at KALA. 
241 

 

Fish Abundance

Trophic

Zone A

Kalaupapa

NHP

D

B

A

F

C

E

Legend

Park Boundary

Depth in Meters

-5 - 0-10 - -5-15 - -10-20 - -15-25 - -20-30 - -25-35 - -30-40 - -35-42 - -40

Fish Trophic Percent Abundance

37Apex PredatorPrimary ConsumerSecondary Consumer

1,000 0 1,000 500

Feet

500 0 500 250

Meters

Source: National Park Service

N.T.S

Number/ha x1000
242 

Kalaupapa

NHP

D

B

A

F

C

E

Legend

Park Boundary

Depth

-5 - 0

-10 - -5

-15 - -10

-20 - -15

-25 - -20

-30 - -25

-35 - -30

-40 - -35

-42 - -40

Fish Trophic Percent Abundance

37

Apex Predator

Primary Consumer

Secondary Consumer

1,000 0 1,000 500

Feet

500 0 500 250

Meters

Fish Abundance

Trophic

Zone B

Source: National Park Service

N.T.S

Number/ha x1000
243 

Fish Abundance

Trophic

Zone C

Kalaupapa

NHP

D

B

A

F

C

E

Legend

Park Boundary

Depth in Meters

-5 - 0-10 - -5-15 - -10-20 - -15-25 - -20-30 - -25-35 - -30-40 - -35-42 - -40

Fish Trophic Percent Abundance

37Apex PredatorPrimary ConsumerSecondary Consumer

1,000 0 1,000 500

Feet

500 0 500 250

Meters

Source: National Park Service

N.T.S

Number/ha x1000
244 

Kalaupapa

NHP

D

B

A

F

C

E

Legend

Park Boundary

Depth

-5 - 0

-10 - -5

-15 - -10

-20 - -15

-25 - -20

-30 - -25

-35 - -30

-40 - -35

-42 - -40

Fish Trophic Percent Abundance

37

Apex Predator

Primary Consumer

Secondary Consumer

1,000 0 1,000 500

Feet

500 0 500 250

Meters

Fish Abundance

Trophic

Zone D

Source: National Park Service

N.T.S

Number/ha x1000
245 

Fish Abundance

Trophic

Zone E and F

Kalaupapa

NHP

D

B

A

F

C

E

Legend

Park Boundary

Fish Trophic Percent Abundance

37Apex PredatorPrimary ConsumerSecondary Consumer

1,000 0 1,000 500

Feet

500 0 500 250

Meters

Source: National Park Service

N.T.S

Number/ha x1000
246 

Appendix 7. Fish biomass by trophic levels for coastal reefs 

at KALA. 
247 

 

Fish Biomass

Trophic

Zone A

Kalaupapa

NHP

D

B

A

F

C

E

Legend

Park Boundary

Depth in Meters

-5 - 0-10 - -5-15 - -10-20 - -15-25 - -20-30 - -25-35 - -30-40 - -35-42 - -40

Fish Trophic Percent Biomass

6.7Apex PredatorPrimary ConsumerSecondary Consumer

1,000 0 1,000 500

Feet

500 0 500 250

Meters

Source: National Park Service

N.T.S

Metric tons/ha
248 

Kalaupapa

NHP

D

B

A

F

C

E

Legend

Park Boundary

Depth

-5 - 0

-10 - -5

-15 - -10

-20 - -15

-25 - -20

-30 - -25

-35 - -30

-40 - -35

-42 - -40

Fish Trophic Percent Biomass

6.7

Apex Predator

Primary Consumer

Secondary Consumer

1,000 0 1,000 500

Feet

500 0 500 250

Meters

Fish Biomass

Trophic

Zone B

Source: National Park Service

N.T.S

Metric tons/ha
249 

Fish Biomass

Trophic

Zone C

Kalaupapa

NHP

D

B

A

F

C

E

Legend

Park Boundary

Depth in Meters

-5 - 0-10 - -5-15 - -10-20 - -15-25 - -20-30 - -25-35 - -30-40 - -35-42 - -40

Fish Trophic Percent Biomass

6.7Apex PredatorPrimary ConsumerSecondary Consumer

1,000 0 1,000 500

Feet

500 0 500 250

Meters

Source: National Park Service

N.T.S

Metric tons/ha
250 

Kalaupapa

NHP

D

B

A

F

C

E

Legend

Park Boundary

Depth

-5 - 0

-10 - -5

-15 - -10

-20 - -15

-25 - -20

-30 - -25

-35 - -30

-40 - -35

-42 - -40

Fish Trophic Percent Biomass

6.7

Apex Predator

Primary Consumer

Secondary Consumer

1,000 0 1,000 500

Feet

500 0 500 250

Meters

Fish Biomass

Trophic

Zone D

Source: National Park Service

N.T.S

Metric tons/ha
251 

Fish Biomass

Trophic

Zone E and F

Kalaupapa

NHP

D

B

A

F

C

E

Legend

Park Boundary

Fish Trophic Percent Biomass

6.7Apex PredatorPrimary ConsumerSecondary Consumer

1,000 0 1,000 500

Feet

500 0 500 250

Meters

Source: National Park Service

N.T.S

Metric tons/ha

The Department of the Interior protects and manages the nation’s natural resources and cultural heritage; provides scientific and 

other information about those resources; and honors its special responsibilities to American Indians, Alaska Natives, and affiliated 

Island Communities. 

NPS 491/105912, October 2010 
National Park Service 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

Natural Resource Program Center

1201 Oakridge Drive, Suite 150 

Fort Collins, CO 80525 

www.nature.nps.gov 

EXPERIENCE YOUR AMERICA TM