U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Recovery Plan for 

Two Plants from Rota

©Gregory A Koob, used with permission.

i 

DISCLAIMER 

Recovery plans delineate reasonable actions that are believed to be 

required to recover and protect listed species. We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, prepare and publish recovery plans, sometimes with the assistance of 

recovery teams, contractors, State agencies, Tribal agencies, and other affected 

and interested parties. The objectives of recovery plans will be attained and any 

necessary funds made available subject to budgetary and other constraints 

affecting the parties involved, as well as the need to address other priorities. 

Recovery plans do not obligate other parties to undertake specific actions and may 

not represent the views nor the official positions or approval of any individuals or 

agencies involved in recovery plan formulation, other than our own. They 

represent our official position only after they have been signed by the Regional 

Director or Director as approved. Recovery plans are reviewed by the public and 

submitted to peer review before we adopt them as approved final documents. 

Approved recovery plans are subject to modification as dictated by new findings, 

changes in species status, and the completion of recovery actions. 

Literature citation of this document should read as follows:

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2007. Recovery Plan for Two Plants from Rota 

(Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense). Portland, Oregon. 86 

pp. 

An electronic copy of this plan is available at:

<http://pacific.fws.gov/ecoservices/endangered/recovery/default.htm> and also at 

<http://endangered.fws.gov/recovery/index.html>. 
ii 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This recovery plan was prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s 

Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office in cooperation with the Commonwealth 

of the Northern Mariana Islands Department of Lands and Natural Resources. Its 

completion would not have been possible without their assistance. 

Many individuals and organizations have contributed to our knowledge of 

Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense and work cooperatively with us 

to recover these species. We would especially like to thank the following 

individuals for their support: James Manglona, Lynn Raulerson, Estanislao 

Taisacan, and Laura Williams. 
iii 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

Current Status: The plants Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense

(no common names) are found only on the island of Rota in the Commonwealth 

of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI). Nesogenes rotensis is a low-growing 

herbaceous plant in the verbena family (Verbenaceae) and Osmoxylon 

mariannense is a spindly, soft-wooded tree in the ginseng family (Arialiaceae). 

Both species were federally listed as endangered in 2004 (U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service [USFWS] 2004). Osmoxylon mariannense is also protected by the 

government of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. Currently, 

there are 2 known populations of N. rotensis of 15 to 20 plants each. The 10 

known individuals of O. mariannense are in scattered locations on the Sabana (the 

cloudswept plateau that dominates the western half of Rota). 

Habitat Requirements: Nesogenes rotensis is found on exposed, raised 

limestone flats in non-forested coastal strand habitat. These flats are subject to 

salt spray during severe storms. Osmoxylon mariannense is found in limestone 

forests on the Sabana, a raised plateau unique in the Mariana archipelago, that are 

often shrouded in clouds and mist. 

Limiting Factors: Human activities that alter native vegetation and habitat are 

believed to be the primary factors leading to the small population sizes and 

limited distribution of Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense. These 

activities include agriculture, ranching, nonnative plant and animal introductions, 

resort and beach park development in the coastal habitat of N. rotensis, and road 

construction and maintenance in the Sabana habitat of O. mariannense. In the last 

decade, several major typhoons have made landfall on Rota, severely impacting 

individuals of both species. Another factor that may affect the recovery of these 

two species is their vulnerability to extinction from reduced reproductive vigor 

due to their small population sizes. 
iv 

Recovery Strategy: Recovery of Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon 

mariannense focuses on the following actions: (1) protecting and restoring the 

native coastal strand and forest habitat of N. rotensis and O. mariannense, 

respectively; (2) establishing new populations and augmenting existing 

populations of these species through methods including controlled propagation 

and outplanting; (3) assessing the impacts of feral ungulates (deer and pigs), rats, 

mice, insects, diseases, and introduced plants, and determining methods for their 

appropriate control or eradication; (4) building public support for conservation; 

and (5) reassessing and refining recovery actions as appropriate. 

Recovery Priority Numbers: Nesogenes rotensis has a recovery priority 

number of 2 on a scale of 1 (highest) to 18 (lowest), reflecting a high degree of 

threat, high recovery potential, and its taxonomic status as a full species. 

Osmoxylon mariannense has a recovery priority number of 5, reflecting a high 

degree of threat, low recovery potential, and its taxonomic status as a full species. 

Recovery Goals: The interim goal is to control threats and increase population 

sizes and geographic distribution sufficient to reclassify or downlist these two 

endangered species to threatened status. The long-term goal is to conserve and 

recover Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense in order to remove them 

from the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants 

(delisting). 

Recovery Objectives: Restore and maintain multiple naturally reproducing 

populations of Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense on the island of 

Rota such that the protections of the Endangered Species Act are no longer 

necessary. 

Recovery Criteria: Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense may be 

considered for downlisting to threatened status when all of the following criteria 

are achieved and maintained for a minimum of 10 consecutive years: 
v 

1) A total of two populations of Nesogenes rotensis are naturally reproducing and 

stable, or increasing in numbers. Each population of N. rotensis must consist 

of at least 300 mature, reproducing individuals. A total of two populations of 

Osmoxylon mariannense are naturally reproducing and stable, or increasing in 

numbers. Each population of O. mariannense must consist of at least 100 

mature, reproducing individuals. A stable or increasing population is defined 

as having a finite rate of increase (known as 8 or lambda) greater than or equal 

to 1 over the requisite 10-year time period. 

2) Sufficient habitat is protected and managed to achieve criterion 1 above. 

3) Management and control of nonnative species by local, regional, 

Commonwealth, and Federal authorities are demonstrated to be successful and 

sufficient to achieve criterion 1 above. 

Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense may be considered for 

removal (delisting) from the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants when all of the following criteria are achieved and maintained for a 

minimum of 10 consecutive years: 

1) A total of four populations of Nesogenes rotensis are naturally reproducing and 

stable, or increasing in numbers. Each population of N. rotensis must consist 

of at least 300 mature, reproducing individuals. A total of four populations of 

Osmoxylon mariannense are naturally reproducing and stable, or increasing in 

numbers. Each population of O. mariannense must consist of at least 100 

mature, reproducing individuals. A stable or increasing population is defined 

as having a finite rate of increase (known as 8 or lambda) greater than or equal 

to 1 over the requisite 10-year time period. 

2) Sufficient habitat is protected and managed to achieve criterion 1 above. 
vi 

3) Management and control of nonnative species by local, regional, 

Commonwealth, and Federal authorities are demonstrated to be successful and 

sufficient to achieve criterion 1 above. 

Recovery Actions Needed: 1) Coordinate and monitor recovery efforts; 2) 

Address factors affecting viability of the wild populations; 3) Monitor the extant 

Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense populations, establish new 

populations, and augment existing populations; and 4) Provide educational and 

informational opportunities to build public support for conservation. 

Date of Recovery: Due to the present uncertainties regarding the roles of 

introduced species, habitat loss and degradation, and the susceptibility of the wild 

populations to random catastrophic events, we cannot realistically estimate when 

delisting of Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense might occur. We 

expect that it will likely take several decades to fully recover these species, 

depending on the status of controlling threats to the species and the status of their 

populations. As we implement the recovery actions in this plan we anticipate 

that we will be able to more accurately estimate when delisting might occur. 

Total Estimated Cost of Recovery: Due to the great number of unknown 

variables affecting the management and potential recovery of these two species, 

the total cost to recover Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense cannot 

be realistically determined at this time. Future recovery actions will be initiated, 

implemented, and modified as informed by research and monitoring of ongoing 

management actions (see Recovery Actions 1 through 3). We therefore present 

our best estimate of recovery costs for the next 15 years, a total of $6,836,000. 

Approximately $2,946,000, or close to 44 percent of the estimated total, will be 

needed during the first 5 years of recovery implementation. A detailed cost 

breakdown with expected annual costs for the first 5 years of recovery 

implementation is provided in the Implementation Schedule. We anticipate 
vii 

updating and revising this recovery plan on a 5-year time schedule, as needed, and 

recovery cost projections will be updated accordingly at that time. 

The recovery actions described in this plan are also expected to benefit the 

endangered Rota bridled white-eye (Zosterops rotensis), the endangered 

Serianthes nelsonii (tronkon guafi or hayun lagu), and the threatened Mariana 

fruit bat or fanihi (Pteropus mariannus mariannus) through habitat protection and 

restoration in the Sabana region of Rota. 

The 15-year and first 5-year costs referenced above are broken down by 

recovery action priority number as follows: 

Priority 1 Recovery Actions – Those actions that must be taken to prevent 

extinction or prevent the species from declining irreversibly in the foreseeable 

future. 

Priority 2 Recovery Actions – Those actions that must be taken to prevent a 

significant decline in population or habitat quality, or some other significant 

negative impact short of extinction. 

Priority 3 Recovery Actions – All other actions necessary to meet recovery 

objectives. 

Table 1. Recovery Plan Time and Costs ($) 

Years Priority 1 

Actions 

Priority 2 

Actions 

Priority 3 

Actions 

Totals 

2007-2012 500,000 2,146,000 248,000 2,894,000 

2013-2022 718,000 2,946,000 278,000 3,942,000 

Totals 1,218,000 5,092,000 526,000 6,836,000 

 
viii 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Executive Summary...............................................................................................iii 

List of Tables and Figures....................................................................................... x 

I. Background and Overview................................................................................. 1 

A. Introduction ......................................................................................... 1 

B. Status of the Species............................................................................ 3 

C. Species Description and Taxonomy .................................................... 4 

1. Nesogenes rotensis................................................................. 4 

2. Osmoxylon mariannense........................................................ 6 

D. Population Trends and Distribution .................................................... 6 

1. Nesogenes rotensis................................................................. 6 

2. Osmoxylon mariannense........................................................ 8 

E. Life History and Ecology .................................................................. 10 

1. Nesogenes rotensis............................................................... 10 

2. Osmoxylon mariannense...................................................... 12 

F. Habitat Descriptions.......................................................................... 12 

1. Nesogenes rotensis............................................................... 12 

2. Osmoxylon mariannense...................................................... 13 

G. Reasons for listing and Current Threats ............................................ 13 

1. Nesogenes rotensis............................................................... 15 

2. Osmoxylon mariannense...................................................... 17 

H. Conservation Efforts to Date............................................................. 20 

1. Nesogenes rotensis............................................................... 20 

2. Osmoxylon mariannense...................................................... 20 
ix 

II. Recovery Strategy and Goals ........................................................................... 23 

A. Recovery strategy .............................................................................. 23 

B. Recovery Goals ................................................................................. 24 

C. Recovery Objectives.......................................................................... 24 

D. Recovery Criteria .............................................................................. 25 

III. Recovery Program ......................................................................................... 29 

A. Stepdown Outline of Recovery Actions............................................ 29 

B. Narrative Outline of Recovery Actions............................................. 33 

IV. Implementation Schedule .............................................................................. 49 

V. References....................................................................................................... 65 

A. Literature Cited.................................................................................. 65 

B. Personal Communications................................................................. 68 

C. In Litt. References ............................................................................ 69 

VI. Appendices .................................................................................................... 70 

Appendix A. Agency and Peer Reviewers.............................................. 70 

Appendix B. Recovery Priority System.................................................. 82 

Appendix C. Recovery actions identified to address factors currently 

limiting the recovery of Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon 

mariannense and achieve the recovery criteria.................... 83 

Appendix D. Summary of Comments...................................................... 85 
x 

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

Table 1. Recovery Plan Time and Costs............................................................vii 

Figure 1. Map of the Mariana archipelago, showing the location of Rota. ......... 2 

Figure 2. Nesogenes rotensis. A. Detail of flowering and fruiting stem. B. 

Habit. C. Flower. D. Seed. E. Fruit................................................. 5 

Figure 3. Osmoxylon mariannense. A. Habit. B. Immature leaf. C. Mature 

leaves at branch tip. D. Cross section of fruit, showing seeds. E. 

Flower and flower bud cluster. ............................................................. 7 

Figure 4. Distribution of Nesogenes rotensis....................................................... 9 

Figure 5. Distribution of Osmoxylon mariannense............................................ 11 

Figure 6. Short-stature coastal strand habitat for Nesogenes rotensis. .............. 14 

Figure 7. Limestone forest habitat for Osmoxylon mariannense ....................... 14 

Figure 8. Conservation areas on Rota. ............................................................... 21 
1

I. Background and Overview 

A. INTRODUCTION 

The plants Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense (no common 

names) are historically known only from Rota, an island located approximately 

134 kilometers (80 miles) northeast of the territory of Guam. Rota is the fourth 

largest island in the Mariana archipelago (Figure 1) and is the southernmost island 

in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI). Rota is 

approximately 20 kilometers (12 miles) long and 6 kilometers (4 miles) wide with 

a land area of approximately 86 square kilometers (33 square miles). The Sabana 

region, a 12-square kilometer (5-square mile) plateau 450 meters (1,476 feet) in 

elevation, dominates the western half of the island (see Figure 6). Cliffs border 

the Sabana region on all sides but the northeastern side, where the plateau slopes 

down to 150 meters (492 feet) elevation and the Sinapalu plateau, which 

dominates the eastern half of the island. The airport and village of Sinapalu are 

situated on the Sinapalu plateau. The village of Songsong and the commercial 

port for the island are situated on the Taipingot Peninsula, a narrow peninsula 

jutting out to the southwest on the western coast of the island. Fringing reefs 

surround most of the island (Resources Northwest 1997). 

Rota is a municipality in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana 

Islands. The human population was 3,283 in 2000, a 43 percent increase from the 

1990 census estimate (U.S. Census Bureau 2003). Rota’s climate is tropical 

marine with high humidity and uniform temperatures throughout the year. 

Average daytime temperatures are approximately 27 degrees Celsius (80 degrees 

Fahrenheit) with approximately 200 centimeters (80 inches) of rain annually and 

about 80 percent humidity. Rainfall averages 27 centimeters (11 inches) per 

month during the wet season (June to December) and 10 centimeters (4 inches) 

per month during the dry season (January to May) (Resources Northwest 1997). 

The vegetation on Rota has been described in detail by Fosberg (1960), 

Falanruw et al. (1989), and Mueller-Dombois and Fosberg (1998). The 

vegetation includes primary and secondary limestone forest, atoll forest, 

agricultural forest, coconut plantations, Acacia confusa (Formosan koa) forest, 

secondary vegetation, open fields, grassland, and urban vegetation. 

Approximately 60 percent of the island is forested (Falanruw et al. 1989); 

however, much of this is of medium stature and has been degraded by 
2

Uracas

Maug

Asuncion

Agrihan

Pagan

Alamagan

Guguan

Sarigan

Anatahan

Farallon

de Medinilla

Saipan Tinian

Aguiguan

Rota

Guam

USA

Alaska

State of Hawaii

Japan

Mariana Archipelago

 ́

Equator

Mariana Archipelago

0 50 100 25

Miles

0 50 100 25

Kilometers

Figure 1. Map of the Mariana archipelago, showing the location of Rota. 
3

development activities, introduced plants and animals, logging, and the effects of 

activities from World War II (e.g., roads, defense bunkers, artillery sites, etc.). 

Historically, native limestone forest varied from semi-dry forest to more or less 

dry-season deciduous forests on the lower terraces to wet cloud forest on the 

highest terraces (Fosberg 1960; Mueller, Dombois and Fosberg 1998). 

The intent of this recovery plan is to guide the recovery and delisting of 

Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense. The Background section of the 

plan outlines the basic biology, ecology, and status of the species and their 

habitats, and describes threats to the species and conservation actions to date. The 

Recovery section provides the actions needed to recover these species and 

specific criteria for measuring when recovery has occurred. The success of this 

plan depends upon the collaboration of many people and organizations to secure 

the future existence of these species. 

B. STATUS OF THE SPECIES 

Federal action on these plants began with the publication on February 28, 

1996, of the Notice of Review of Plant and Animal Taxa (USFWS 1996). In this 

document, Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense were considered 

candidate species. These two species were again recognized as candidate species 

in the September 19, 1997, Candidate Notice of Review (USFWS 1997), and we 

proposed to list N. rotensis and O. mariannense as endangered on June 1, 2000 

(USFWS 2000). The final listing decision for both species was deferred due to 

lack of resources because our Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office (where the 

proposed listing was initiated) was under court order to designate critical habitat 

for 255 Hawaiian plants and 4 Hawaiian invertebrates. Pursuant to a settlement 

agreement approved by the U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaii on 

August 21, 2002, we had to make a final decision on whether to list these species 

and submit our determination to the Federal Register by April 1, 2004 (Center for 

Biological Diversity v. Norton, Civil No. 99–00603 [D. Haw.]). We listed N. 

rotensis and O. mariannense as endangered on April 8, 2004 (USFWS 2004). 

Nesogenes rotensis is assigned a recovery priority number of 2 based on 

its taxonomic status as a full species, a high degree of threat, and its high potential 

for recovery (USFWS 1983 a, b). Osmoxylon mariannense has a recovery 

priority number of 5, reflecting its taxonomic status as a full species, high degree 

of threat, and a currently low potential for recovery (e.g., no observed 
4

reproduction). We regularly review the status of each listed species with regard to 

their threats and potential for recovery and update the species’ recovery priority 

number as appropriate. 

C. SPECIES DESCRIPTION AND TAXONOMY 

1. Nesogenes rotensis 

Nesogenes rotensis is a low-growing herbaceous (non-woody) plant with 

small, opposite, broadly lanceolate (lance-shaped), coarsely toothed leaves. 

Flowers are axillary (located on a stem in the area between the stem and the 

petiole) and tubular in shape, with five white petals and male and female 

components (Figure 2). Often a flowering branch grows upright, which might aid 

in pollination or seed dispersal (Raulerson and Rinehart 1997). Plants typically 

branch near the base at about five to seven nodes, and stature may range from not 

quite flat-growing (subprostrate) to upward-growing (ascending), scrambling over 

flattened (appressed) shrubs, with whole plants up to almost 1 meter (3 feet) in 

diameter (Fosberg and Herbst 1983). 

The type specimen of Nesogenes rotensis was collected on April 23, 1982, 

by Derral Herbst and Marjorie Falanruw from Haaniya Point (Poña Point Fishing 

Cliff) in the Palie area on the island of Rota growing on exposed, dry raised 

limestone at 100 meters (328 feet) elevation (Fosberg and Herbst 1983). It was 

growing in association with Scaevola taccada (nanaso), Terminalia samoensis

(talisai ganu), Hedyotis strigulosa (paodedo), Pogonatherum paniceum (no 

common name), and Bikkia tetrandra (gausali). Fosberg and Herbst (1983) 

formally described the species and published the name Nesogenes rotensis and 

placed it in the family Chloanthaceae, a largely Australian family. This 

placement was a change from the historic placement of the genus Nesogenes in 

the family Verbenaceae (verbena family) and its subsequent placement in its own 

family, Nesogenaceae (Nesogenes family). At present, Mabberly (1990) 

recognizes Nesogenes as a genus of Verbenaceae. 
5

Figure 2. Nesogenes rotensis. A. Detail of flowering and fruiting stem. B. 

Habit. C. Flower. D. Seed. E. Fruit. Drawing © Gregory A. Koob 

2005, used with permission. 
6

2. Osmoxylon mariannense

Osmoxylon mariannense is a spindly, soft-wooded tree in the ginseng 

family (Araliaceae), which can reach 10 meters (33 feet) in height (Figure 3). It 

has several upward-growing (ascending), gray-barked branches that bear 

conspicuous leaf scars. Leaves vary in size; mature leaves are palmately lobed 

(hand-shaped) and about 30 centimeters (1 foot) long and 50 centimeters (1.7 

feet) wide. The seven to nine lobes are coarsely toothed, and each lobe has a 

conspicuous, depressed mid-vein. The leaves are alternate or whorled and grow 

only at the branch tips. The petioles are 35 to 40 centimeters (1 to 1.5 feet) long 

and based in distinctive, conspicuous green multiple “sockets” (Raulerson and 

Rinehart 1991). The flowers are yellow and have both male and female 

components. They are borne in many-branched, compact terminal cymes or 

umbels. The fruits are round and maroon in color when ripe (Raulerson and 

Rinehart 1991). 

Osmoxylon mariannense was first collected on Rota by French naturalist 

Alfred Marche, an active botanical explorer in the Mariana Islands from 1887 to 

1889 (Stone 1970). It was not until 1933, however, when a study of Marche’s 

collection was made, that Kanehira first described the species as 

Boerlagiodendron mariannense based on a collection he made in 1932 in dense 

primary forest at about 400 meters (1,320 feet) elevation (Kanehira 1933). In 

1980, Fosberg and Sachet (1980) published the currently accepted recombination, 

Osmoxylon mariannense, which has been upheld by Raulerson and Rinehart 

(1991). 

D. POPULATION TRENDS AND DISTRIBUTION 

1. Nesogenes rotensis 

One population of fewer than 100 plants was reported in 1982 by Derral 

Herbst at the Poña Point Fishing Cliff public park land, owned by and under the 

jurisdiction of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands Department of 

Lands and Natural Resources (L. Mehrhoff, National Park Service, pers. comm. 

1993). In 1994, Raulerson and Rinehart (1997) recorded a population of about 20 

plants, occupying 200 square meters (240 square yards) of habitat at the Poña 

Point Fishing Cliff. This is believed to be the same population reported by 

Fosberg and Herbst in their 1983 publication; Herbst was uncertain of the original 
7

Figure 3. Osmoxylon mariannense. A. Habit. B. Immature leaf. C. Mature 

leaves at branch tip. D. Cross section of fruit, showing seeds. E. 

Flower and flower bud cluster. Drawing © Gregory A. Koob, used 

with permission. 
8

location when he made the herbarium sheet (Fosberg and Herbst 1983; L. 

Mehrhoff, pers. comm. 1993). 

Biannual surveys for this species have been conducted since 2001 at Poña 

Point Fishing Cliff. A direct count was made on June 27, 2000. At that time 

there were 80 individuals within an approximate area of 800 square meters (960 

square yards). In May and November 2001, direct counts made by staff from the 

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands Division of Fish and Wildlife 

identified 458 and 579 adult plants, respectively. No individuals of Nesogenes 

rotensis were observed in May or November of 2003 following supertyphoon 

Pongsona; however, 34 adults were observed in December 2003, and about 20 

individuals (both seedlings and adults) were observed in March 2005 (USFWS 

2004; G. Koob, USFWS, in litt. 2005). 

In March 2005, a new population of Nesogenes rotensis was discovered at 

Puntan Fina Atkos on public land in the I Chenchon Park conservation area 

(Figure 4). This area had been suggested as a potential site for surveys, since it 

had habitat conditions similar to that at Poña Point in Raulerson and Rinehart 

(1997). There are 15 to 20 individuals (both seedlings and adults) in this new 

population, which expands the known range of the species (G. Koob, in litt. 

2005). To date, this species has not been propagated and does not exist in 

cultivation. 

2. Osmoxylon mariannense 

Osmoxylon mariannense was first collected more than 100 years ago by Marche 

and was not collected again until 1932 when Kanehira made at least two 

collections from dense primary forest at about 400 meters (1,320 feet) elevation 

(Kanehira 1933). However, there are no written records of the distribution and 

population size of O. mariannense until 1980. Reports from 1980 to 1995 

indicate that approximately 20 individuals from 1 scattered population were in the 

same vicinity as reported by Kanehira (L. Raulerson, University of Guam, pers. 

comm. 1998; D. Grout, USFWS, and L. Mehrhoff, pers. comms. 1997). One of 

the larger subpopulations had approximately nine individuals in 1994, but 

typhoons appeared to have damaged many of the trees and only 2 were visible in 

1997 (Raulerson and Rinehart 1997). Osmoxylon mariannense occurs as an 

understory species in Pisonia umbellifera (no common name) and Hernandia 

labyrinthica (ocshal) forests, and is often hard to see until some trunks are tall 
9

 

Figure 4. Distribution of Nesogenes rotensis.
10

enough to mingle with the trunks of the other two species (Raulerson and 

Rinehart 1997). 

In January 1998, shortly after typhoon Paka, a total of eight trees, known 

from five different locations, were observed along the Sabana road (USFWS 

2000). The trees were completely defoliated and damaged by the high typhoon 

winds. Many of the locations had several trees present 15 years earlier but by 

1998, only single trees remained in each of the areas, and none were reproducing 

naturally (G. Hughes, USFWS, pers. comm. 1998). 

In 2000, a survey conducted by biologists with the Commonwealth of the 

Northern Mariana Islands Division of Fish and Wildlife identified six living and 

five dead individuals of Osmoxylon mariannense on Rota. A survey conducted in 

2002 by E. Taisacan confirmed eight occurrences in the same vicinity, again with 

only one living mature tree in each location. Osmoxylon mariannense was found 

on both private (two individuals) and publicly owned (Commonwealth of the 

Northern Mariana Islands) land (six individuals). Osmoxylon mariannense

individuals were again defoliated in 2003 during supertyphoon Pongsona; 

however, in 2003, E. Taisacan reported that some individuals were leafing out and 

appeared to be recovering (USFWS 2004). Currently, all eight known wild 

individuals of this species occur along a simple system of unimproved roads 

crossing the top of the Sabana (Figure 5). This distribution is possibly an artifact 

of limited access for surveys, as large areas of the Sabana away from the roads are 

difficult or dangerous to survey due to natural topography and large, often hidden 

holes left from abandoned mining operations. 

Propagation of this species has been limited in its success thus far (see 

Conservation Efforts to Date). An unknown number of trees currently exist in 

cultivation, and 2 trees that were outplanted in 2002 adjacent to wild individuals 

of Osmoxylon mariannense continue to survive, bringing the total number of 

currently known individuals in the wild to 10. 

E. LIFE HISTORY AND ECOLOGY 

1. Nesogenes rotensis 

Little is known of the life history or ecology of Nesogenes rotensis. Based 

on information from collections and observations, N. rotensis flowers in March, 
11

Figure 5. Distribution of Osmoxylon mariannense. 
12

April, May, and November (Raulerson and Rinehart 1997; G. Koob, in litt. 2005; 

L. Williams, CNMI Division of Fish and Wildlife, pers. comm. 2005). It has been 

observed in fruit in January, March, and November (Raulerson and Rinehart 

1997; G. Hughes, in litt. 1998; G. Koob, in litt. 2005). All of the available 

information and recent observations suggest that these plants are perennials, but 

their above-ground parts die back annually. 

2. Osmoxylon mariannense 

Little is known of the life history or ecology of Osmoxylon mariannense. 

It occurs as an understory species in Pisonia umbellifera and Hernandia 

labyrinthica forests, and is often hard to see until some trunks are tall enough to 

mingle with the trunks of the other two species (Raulerson and Rinehart 1997). 

There are conflicting reports about the habitat requirements of O. mariannense. 

While some authorities consider O. mariannense to be an edge species (D. Grout, 

pers. comm. 1997; Raulerson and Rinehart 1997; L. Raulerson, pers. comm. 

2005), others believe it requires shade and protection from the effects of wind by 

other canopy trees (E. Taisacan, pers. comm. 1997; L. Williams, pers. comm. 

2005). Trees have been observed flowering in February, March, and October and 

fruiting in November, December, January, February, and March (Raulerson and 

Rinehart 1997; G. Hughes, in litt. 1998; G. Koob, in litt. 2005). The fruit may 

provide food for birds and bats, which may also be the dispersal agents, though 

this is not confirmed (Raulerson and Rinehart 1991; Resources Northwest 1997; J. 

Manglona, pers. comm. 2005). The seeds of O. mariannense are difficult to 

germinate and this may be due to production of “false seeds” (structures that 

appear to be seeds but aren’t) or low viability rates (J. Manglona, CNMI, pers. 

comm. 2005; L. Raulerson, pers. comm. 2005). 

F. HABITAT DESCRIPTIONS 

1. Nesogenes rotensis 

This species has been found in two locations, Poña Point on Rota’s 

southern coast and Puntan Fina Atkos on Rota’s eastern coast. At both locations a 

small population exists on an exposed, raised limestone flat above a 7.6- to 30.5-

meter (25- to 100-foot) seaside cliff. Although these flats are up to 30.5 meters 

(100 feet) above the sea, they are subject to scouring winds during severe storms. 

Nesogenes rotensis grows in association with Scaevola taccada, Terminalia 
13

samoensis, Hedyotis strigulosa, Pogonatherum paniceum, and Bikkia tetrandra

(Resources Northwest 1997). (Figure 6). 

2. Osmoxylon mariannense 

This tree is found in limestone forests that are often shrouded in clouds 

and mist on the Sabana and its escarpments. These forests occur in patches in the 

formerly mined Sabana and are dominated by Hernandia labyrinthica and 

Elaeocarpus joga (yoga) interspersed with Pandanus (kafu) thickets. Mixed with 

the Elaeocarpus and Hernandia are a few Ficus spp., Artocarpus spp., and 

Hibiscus tiliaceus (pago). Understory species include Macaranga thompsonii

(pengua) and Pipturus argenteus (amahadyan). Epiphytes are abundant and 

include Freycinetia reineckei (no common name), Asplenium nidus (galak),

Davalia solida (pugua-machena), and other ferns; Coelogyne guamensis (no 

common name) and other orchids; and mosses (Falunruw et al. 1989) (Figure 7). 

G. REASONS FOR LISTING AND CURRENT THREATS 

The threats to the two Mariana plants are each classified according to the 

five factors identified under section 4(a)(1) of the Endangered Species Act in 

consideration of listing, delisting, and reclassification decisions. These five 

factors are as follows: 

(A) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of 

habitat or range; 

(B) Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational 

purposes; 

(C) Disease or predation; 

(D) Inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; and 

(E) Other natural or man-made factors affecting the continued existence of 

the species. 
14

Figure 6. Short stature coastal strand habitat of Nesogenes rotensis. Photo by 

Gregory A. Koob, USFWS. 

Figure 7. Limestone forest habitat of Osmoxylon mariannense. Photo by 

Gregory A. Koob, USFWS. 
15

1. Nesogenes rotensis 

(a) Threats to Habitat (Factor A): Native vegetation, including open 

coastal scrubland habitat for Nesogenes rotensis on Rota, has undergone extreme 

alteration due to past and present land use practices, including ranching, 

deliberate and unintentional nonnative animal and plant introductions, agriculture, 

and military activities during World War II (Falanruw et al. 1989). 

Coastal habitat for Nesogenes rotensis is under increased pressure of 

development and is threatened by fragmentation and degradation associated with 

human use, development, and recreational activities. The species occurs in an 

area adjacent to a trail that is increasingly subject to bonfires, collecting, and 

trampling by fishermen and tourists, all human-caused threats to its habitat. 

 (b) Overutilization (Factor B): At this time, overutilization of 

Nesogenes rotensis is not known to be a limiting factor. Unrestricted scientific or 

horticultural collecting by interested individuals would significantly affect this 

species due to its extremely low numbers (USFWS 2004). 

(c) Disease or Predation (Factor C): Disease is not known to impact 

Nesogenes rotensis. 

(d) Inadequacy of Regulatory Mechanisms (Factor D): 

Nesogenes rotensis is not yet protected under Commonwealth of the Northern 

Mariana Islands Division of Fish and Wildlife (DFW) regulations but the agency 

intends to include it in the next amendment to their regulations (L. Williams, in 

litt. 2006). The species was federally listed as endangered in 2004 (USFWS 

2004). The Puntan Fina Atkos population, however, is on public land in the I 

Chenchon Park conservation area where regulations are in place that limit human 

use and prohibit removal of any plant life in the area (Rota Local Law No. 9-1, 

1994). These regulations are inadequate to protect the species from threats 

identified under section 4(a)(1) of the Endangered Species Act (Factors A, E). 

(e) Other Factors (Factor E): Rota has a long history of disturbances 

by tropical typhoons (Weir 1991). While native species are adapted to these 

events, these typhoons, in combination with human-caused disturbances and the 

relatively new presence of invasive species, threaten the continued existence of 

Nesogenes rotensis. Within the past decade, frequent typhoons have made 
16

landfall on Rota, severely affecting the island. Most recently, in 2003 

supertyphoon Pongsona affected the Mariana Islands, particularly Guam and 

Rota, with winds of up to 296 kilometers (184 miles) per hour. Nesogenes 

rotensis is particularly susceptible to extirpation or extinction from a natural 

disaster because of its limited distribution and small numbers of individuals. 

Typhoons are a common occurrence in the Mariana Islands. The nearby 

island of Guam, for example, has been affected by typhoons in 37 of the last 50 

years (based on records compiled by the U.S. Navy, Joint Typhoon Warning 

Center, http://www.npmoc.navy.mil/jtwc.html). Supertyphoons (a category of 

severe storm, defined as having gusts exceeding 240 kilometers [150 miles] per 

hour) occur about once every 5 to 10 years. There is some evidence that the 

frequency of severe storms (estimated gusts exceeding 160 kilometers [100 miles] 

per hour) is increasing in the Mariana Islands. With reference to Guam, the 

historical record shows increasing numbers of mild (estimated gusts in the range 

of 80 to 160 kilometers [50 to 100 miles] per hour) and severe storms over the last 

three centuries, as well as in just the last decade. While some underreporting of 

storms may have occurred in prior centuries, even mild storms were noticed in the 

colonial era because they destroyed the relatively flimsy structures used for early 

housing. Furthermore, these data are consistent with trends expected on the basis 

of increasing sea surface temperatures that have been documented in recent years 

(e.g., Strong et al. 1998; U.S. Department of State 1999). The two populations of 

N. rotensis are especially vulnerable to the extreme impact of typhoons, storm 

surge, and high surf because their open scrubland habitats are located in coastal 

areas. 

Nesogenes rotensis is also threatened by Casuarina equisetifolia (gagu or 

ironwood), which is becoming established in the coastal scrubland habitat at Poña 

Point Fishing Cliff. This tree is known to spread by root suckers and, as observed 

in other areas with similar habitat, may change the coastal scrubland into a 

monotypic gagu forest. Casuarina equisetifolia forest habitat is characterized by 

an absence of understory vegetation due to the restriction of available sunlight and 

soil nutrients, and possibly the release of a chemical agent that prevents other 

plants from growing beneath the trees (Smith 1985; L. Williams, pers. comm. 

2004). Additionally, the native parasitic vine Cassytha filiformis (agasi) has been 

reported to parasitize individuals of N. rotensis, but deleterious effects have not 

been documented (L. Williams, pers. comm. 2005). 
17

One population of Nesogenes rotensis is located in a public park (Poña 

Point). Human activities not only threaten the habitat for the species at this 

location, but the plants may also experience direct mortality and lower 

reproductive success due to trampling from foot traffic and bonfires set by tourists 

and fishermen. The small population size and extremely limited distribution of 

this species makes it particularly vulnerable to extinction from reduced 

reproductive vigor. With only 2 populations of 15 to 20 individuals each, a 

decline of successful reproduction in N. rotensis could lead to the extinction of the 

species (USFWS 2004). 

2. Osmoxylon mariannense 

(a) Threats to Habitat (Factor A): Native vegetation, including 

Sabana limestone forest habitat for Osmoxylon mariannense, has undergone 

extreme alteration due to past and present land use practices, including ranching, 

deliberate and unintentional nonnative animal and plant introductions, agriculture, 

and military activities during World War II (Falanruw et al. 1989). 

Rota was subject to extensive agricultural development (particularly the 

cultivation of sugar cane in the lowland areas) by the Japanese prior to World War 

II. Currently, Rota retains less than 60 percent of its historical native forest 

(Falanruw et al. 1989). Continued loss of native forest is attributable to 

application of the Agricultural Homestead Act of 1990, which allows for the 

distribution of 1-hectare (2.5-acre) parcels of public land to eligible participants. 

Land use plans have proposed that approximately 25 to 45 percent of Rota be 

designated private agricultural homestead land or land likely to be converted to 

agricultural homesteads (Resources Northwest 1997). In 2001, the Agricultural 

Homestead Act of 1990 was amended to allow agricultural homestead permitting 

on any public lands not required for government use or reserved for other 

purposes by any other provision of the law. Thus, individuals awaiting permits 

may choose many areas of Rota’s public lands for agricultural homesteads, rather 

than areas planned and reserved specifically for those purposes (Public Law 12–

53). Therefore, the potential for agricultural development continues to threaten 

the remaining limestone forests on Rota, which includes habitat for Osmoxylon 

mariannense within the Sabana Protected Area. Remaining forest habitat is 

threatened by fragmentation and degradation associated with agricultural 

activities, and road maintenance and construction (D. Grout, USFWS and L. 

Mehrhoff, National Park Service, pers. comms. 1997). Individuals of 
18

O. mariannense on Rota were almost lost during road widening activities that 

occurred in the late 1990s (D. Grout and L. Mehrhoff, pers. comms. 1997). 

Throughout the Mariana Islands, introduced goats (Capra hircus), pigs 

(Sus scrofa), cattle (Bos taurus), and Philippine deer (Cervus mariannus) have 

severely damaged forest vegetation by browsing on plants, causing habitat 

degradation and erosion (Kessler 1997; Wiles et. al. 1999, 2005; Worthington et. 

al. 2001) that then retards forest growth and regeneration (Lemke 1992). Of these 

nonnative ungulates, deer and feral pigs are degrading the forests of the Sabana 

(L. Williams, pers. comm. 2005, G. Wiles in litt. 2006). These animals may also 

directly browse on young individuals of Osmoxylon mariannense (see Factor C, 

below). 

(b) Overutilization (Factor B): At this time, overutilization of 

Osmoxylon mariannense is not known to be a limiting factor, although 

unrestricted scientific or horticultural collecting would significantly affect this 

species due to its extremely low numbers (USFWS 2004). 

(c) Disease or Predation (Factor C): To date, no specific diseases 

have been identified for Osmoxylon mariannense, although individuals have 

suffered defoliation by an unknown agent (E. Taisacan, pers. comm. 1997). 

Defoliation (due to the poor health of the leaves), the lack of seedlings and 

juveniles of O. mariannense, and the death of several previously mapped older 

individual plants are suspected to be caused by unidentified invertebrate pests, 

mice (Mus musculus), rats (Rattus spp.), or disease (D. Grout, pers. comm. 1997). 

Deer are reported to browse on seedlings of Osmoxylon mariannense

(USFWS 2004; L. Williams, pers. comm. 2004). Cooperative efforts between the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Rota Division of Fish and Wildlife have 

resulted in the construction of fenced exclosures around two individuals in the 

wild. The remaining eight individuals are not currently fenced (USFWS 2004). 

(d) Inadequacy of Regulatory Mechanisms (Factor D): 

Osmoxylon mariannense was federally listed as endangered in 2004 

(USFWS 2004) and is included in the list of species protected by the government 

of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (DFW Non-commercial 

fishing and hunting regulations, April 2000). These regulations prohibit the 
19

collection or possession of protected plant species but provide no requirements for 

the analysis of potential adverse effects associated with new projects proposed in 

the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. 

(e) Other Factors (Factor E): The combination of frequent storm 

disturbances and resultant competition from invasive, nonnative plant species 

adversely affects the habitat occupied by Osmoxylon mariannense (L. Williams, 

pers. comm. 2004). While O. mariannense is expected to have adapted to high 

winds and typhoons, its distribution and numbers have been reduced significantly 

due to human activities, making the few remaining individuals particularly 

susceptible to extirpation or extinction from a natural disaster. Destruction of the 

Sabana forest canopy by typhoons has adversely affected O. mariannense,

altering sub-canopy vegetation conditions over the long term by opening up and 

drying out older, closed forest habitat (E. Taisacan, pers. comm. 1998; L. 

Williams, pers. comm. 2004). As discussed above for Nesogenes rotensis, all 

evidence points to the increasing frequency and intensity of the threat from 

typhoons in this region. 

Osmoxylon mariannense is threatened by competition from invasive, 

nonnative plant species including Momordica charantia (bitter melon), Mikania 

scandens (climbing hempvine), and Passiflora suberosa (corky-stem 

passionflower). In opened forest areas, these opportunistic, weedy vines cover the 

ground (Fosberg 1960; G. Hughes, pers. comm. 1998) and may alter the 

conditions necessary for seed germination and seedling growth provided in 

closed-canopy, high-stature forests covered with mosses and various epiphytic 

species. 

Small population size and limited distribution make this species 

particularly vulnerable to extinction from reduced reproductive vigor or random 

environmental events. There are currently only 10 known individuals of 

Osmoxylon mariannense remaining in the wild, 2 of which were outplanted from 

past controlled propagation efforts. A single adverse environmental event or a 

decline of successful reproduction in O. mariannense could lead to the extirpation 

of this species. 
20

H. CONSERVATION EFFORTS TO DATE 

1. Nesogenes rotensis 

Attempts to propagate Nesogenes rotensis from seeds and cuttings have 

not been successful (J. Manglona, pers. comm. 2005; L. Mehrhoff, pers. comm. 

2005). Surveys of the Poña Point population have been conducted twice a year 

every year since 2001 (L. Williams, pers. comm. 2005). 

In 1994, the I Chenchon Park area was designated as a protected area 

through Rota Local Law No. 9-1 (Figure 8). The purpose of this protected area, 

according to the law, is to establish a Wildlife Conservation Area to “prohibit 

persons from engaging in certain activities within the ... I Chenchon Park area that 

may have an adverse impact on the wildlife and vegetation” (CNMI Rota Senate 

Local Law No. 9-1, 1994). In addition, “all persons are ... prohibited from taking 

or in any way harassing or disturbing ... all plant life, including any fungi, forest 

vegetation or grasses, with the exception of those plants that possess medicinal 

properties and/or those that have been used in traditional healing practices ...; and 

any soil, sand, or rock, within or from the area of Rota known and referred to as ... 

I Chenchon Park.” The definition of “take” in the law includes harvesting or 

gathering by any method the entire plant or any part of the plant. “Harassing or 

disturbing” are also partly defined as “... excavation of surface land for the 

removal of any type of soil or plant life ... or the destruction of plant life or 

soil/rock/coral compositions.” 

2. Osmoxylon mariannense 

Staff of the Rota Forestry Service are currently collecting seeds from wild 

individuals and propagating seedlings, in cooperation with E. Taisacan, 

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Division of Fish and Wildlife 

(retired) (J. Manglona, pers. comm. 2005). Earlier propagation efforts have had 

limited success. In 2001, seeds were collected from wild individuals and planted 

in October and March 2002. Approximately 150 individuals from the October 

planting had germinated by November. In March 2003, 11 individuals were 

surviving in a nursery, however they have since died. The seeds planted in March

2002 produced approximately 100 seedlings. Thirty-five of these individuals 
21

Figure 8. Conservation areas on Rota. 
22

initially survived but currently only 2 are living and have been outplanted 

adjacent to wild individuals (USFWS 2004; G. Koob, in litt. 2005). Fenced 

exclosures were constructed around these two individuals through cooperative 

efforts with the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands Division of Fish 

and Wildlife on Rota. The remaining eight individuals are not currently fenced 

(USFWS 2004). In 1994, part of the Sabana region was designated as a protected 

area through Rota Local Law No. 9-1 (see Figure 8). The purpose of this 

protected area, according to the law, is to establish a Wildlife Conservation Area 

to, “prohibit persons from engaging in certain activities within the Sabana area 

that may have an adverse impact on the wildlife and vegetation.” The law also 

calls for groundwater protection, and the continuation of the traditional use of 

medicinal plants and agricultural practices (CNMI Rota Senate Local Law No. 9-

1, 1994). In 1996, a management plan for the Sabana Conservation Area was 

developed which defined the purpose of the protected area, identified zones for 

each use (tourism, agriculture, wildlife conservation, firing range, and 

communication facilities), and suggested rules for each zone (Sabana Protected 

Area Management Committee 1996). As of 2005, this management plan had not 

been implemented and the rules, regulations, and prohibitions had not been 

promulgated to manage the Sabana Conservation Area as required under Rota 

Local Law No. 9-1 (L. Williams, DFW, pers. comm. 2005). At present, the Rota 

Division of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) has been unable to implement 

the plan due to insufficient funding for programs, facilities, and staff (H. Apatang, 

in litt. 2006). 
23

II. Recovery Strategy and Goals 

A. RECOVERY STRATEGY 

Due to their small population sizes and limited distributions, both 

Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense are highly vulnerable to 

extirpation or even extinction from random catastrophic events such as typhoons 

and the accidental introduction of new predators. The first step in the recovery 

strategy is therefore to protect the known populations and individuals from 

current threats. In order to achieve full recovery, the threats to the species must 

be eliminated or controlled sufficiently to be confident in the long-term 

persistence of the species and the ecosystems upon which they depend. 

Unfortunately, beyond the inherent risk posed by the small number of individuals 

and restricted distribution of these species, the nature and relative magnitude of 

any specific threats to these species is not clear and therefore cannot be addressed 

in an efficient manner without further research. Currently available information 

indicates that habitat loss and degradation and predation by introduced animals 

are negatively impacting O. mariannense, but the impact of each of these threats 

is unclear and needs to be assessed. It is unclear why N. rotensis is found in such 

low numbers. Identifying and assessing the impacts of key threats to the species 

and determining methods for their control and eradication is a fundamental 

component of the long-term recovery strategy. 

The next step in the recovery of these two species is to establish additional 

populations and to increase the size of extant populations. The development of a 

successful propagation and outplanting protocol will be necessary for both 

species, and will serve in both population augmentation and establishment efforts. 

Population monitoring and collection of demographic data will reveal whether 

successful reproduction is occurring, and assist in evaluating progress toward 

population recovery goals. The specific habitat requirements of both Nesogenes 

rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense must be determined, and the protection and 

restoration of forests in the Sabana region and non-forested coastal shrubland on 

the south and east coasts must be a high priority. The potential impacts of feral 

ungulates (deer and pigs), rats, mice, insects, diseases, and introduced plants must 

be assessed and controlled as appropriate. For O. mariannense, the fencing of 

some individual trees is a stop-gap defense against deer and pigs, but we propose 

the effective control or elimination of feral ungulates from the forest as a more 

effective long-term approach to ecosystem restoration. A similar holistic 
24

approach is proposed for any other nonnative species that are found to pose a 

threat to the viability of the ecosystem, as practicable. Community support and 

involvement will be integral to the successful recovery of these species and their 

habitats, and we suggest an outreach program to involve the people of Rota in the 

conservation of N. rotensis, O. mariannense, and other native species of the 

island. As we learn more about the specific needs of these species through the 

recovery process, we will reassess and refine the proposed recovery actions to 

ensure that these activities lead to their successful recovery, downlisting, and 

delisting. 

B. RECOVERY GOALS 

The ultimate goal of this plan is to conserve and recover Nesogenes 

rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense to the point that they may be removed from 

the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants (delisted). 

Attaining this goal requires that the threats that led to their listing have been 

successfully addressed, and the increased population sizes and geographic 

distribution have been maintained and monitored for a period of time sufficient to 

ensure confidence in the long-term security of the species. The interim goal is to 

identify and address threats and increase population sizes and geographic 

distribution sufficient to reclassify or downlist these two endangered species to 

threatened status. This recovery plan outlines actions necessary to conserve these 

species and the ecosystems upon which they depend. The conservation of N. 

rotensis and O. mariannensein the wild will depend upon the conservation of nonforested coastal shrubland and Sabana limestone forest, respectively, in 

appropriate quantity and quality to support multiple self-sustaining populations of 

these species and their habitats.

C. RECOVERY OBJECTIVES 

To reach the recovery goals for Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon 

mariannense the target recovery objectives are: 

(1) Restore and maintain multiple self-sustaining populations of Nesogenes 

rotensis at Poña Point and Puntan Fina Atkos, and of Osmoxylon 

mariannense in the Sabana region of Rota. 

(2) Secure protection of the non-forested coastal regions on the southern and 

northeastern coasts and of the Sabana forests of Rota for long-term 
25

maintenance of the ecosystems upon which Nesogenes rotensis and 

Osmoxylon mariannense rely. 

(3) Reduce human-induced alterations of the ecosystems in which Nesogenes

rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense occur and restore ecosystem 

function to maintain the ecological conditions required by these and other 

native species. 

D. RECOVERY CRITERIA 

Downlisting or delisting is warranted when a listed species no longer 

meets the definition of threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species 

Act (Box 1). We set recovery criteria to serve as objective, measurable guidelines 

to assist us in determining when a species has recovered to the point that the 

protections afforded by the Endangered Species Act are no longer necessary. 

However, the actual change in listing status is not solely dependent upon 

achieving the recovery criteria set forth in a recovery plan; it requires a formal 

rulemaking process based upon an analysis of the same five factors considered in 

the listing of a species. The recovery criteria presented in this recovery plan thus 

represent our best assessment of the conditions that would most likely result in a 

determination that downlisting or delisting of Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon 

mariannense is warranted as the outcome of a formal five-factor analysis in a 

subsequent regulatory rulemaking. 

Box 1. Definitions according to section 3 of the Endangered Species Act. 

Endangered Species : (In part) Any species which is in danger of extinction 

throughout all or a significant portion of its range. 

Threatened Species: Any species which is likely to become an endangered 

species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of 

its range. 
26

In this plan, initial criteria for downlisting and delisting are provided to 

guide recovery efforts. These criteria are based on reaching and maintaining 

population goals to ensure long-term viability, protecting and preserving habitat, 

and removing or reducing and controlling threats to Nesogenes rotensis and 

Osmoxylon mariannense. However, additional threats to these species may be 

identified as recovery efforts continue. These criteria will be revised as additional 

information about the species and their threats is accumulated as we implement 

the recovery actions outlined in this plan. 

Mature individuals are defined as those either known or believed to be 

capable of reproduction. In general, long-lived perennials are those taxa either 

known or believed to have life spans greater than 10 years and short-lived 

perennials are those known or believed to have life spans greater than 1 year but 

less than 10 years. Nesogenes rotensis is a short-lived perennial, while 

Osmoxylon mariannense is a long-lived perennial. 

 

Because we have only limited knowledge of the life history of each of 

these species with respect to specific requirements for both their short-term and 

long-term survival, this plan establishes only tentative criteria for downlisting and 

delisting. These criteria were formulated based on recommendations by the 

Hawaii and Pacific Plants Recovery Coordinating Committee (HPPRCC 1994) 

and discussions with various biologists and knowledgeable individuals. The 

Hawaii and Pacific Plants Recovery Coordinating Committee was appointed by 

the Regional Director for the Fish and Wildlife Service in April 1993 to guide all 

aspects of recovery for the listed, proposed, and candidate plants of the Hawaiian 

and other Pacific Islands. 

For the purposes of this recovery plan, a population is defined as a discrete 

unit with sufficient distance between it and neighboring populations that they are 

not affected by the same small-scale events (such as a landslide). In general, the 

downlisting criteria for each population of short-lived perennials are naturally 

reproducing, stable or increasing in numbers, with a minimum of 300 mature, 

reproducing individuals, and a minimum of 100 mature, reproducing individuals 

for each population of long-lived perennials. Additional information is needed 

about both of these plants so that recovery criteria can be quantified and made 

more meaningful. Recovery actions have been developed to address these 

uncertainties. 
27

Downlisting Criteria

Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense may be considered for 

downlisting to threatened status when all of the following criteria are achieved 

and maintained for a minimum of 10 consecutive years: 

1) A total of two populations of Nesogenes rotensis are naturally reproducing 

and stable, or increasing in numbers. Each population of Nesogenes rotensis

must consist of at least 300 mature, reproducing individuals. A total of two 

populations of Osmoxylon mariannense are naturally reproducing and stable, 

or increasing in numbers. Each population of Osmoxylon mariannense must 

consist of at least 100 mature, reproducing individuals. A stable or increasing 

population is defined as having a finite rate of increase (known as lambda or 8) 

greater than or equal to 1 over the requisite 10-year time period. 

2) Sufficient habitat is protected and managed to achieve criterion 1 above. 

3) Management and control of nonnative species by local, Commonwealth, and 

Federal authorities are demonstrated to be successful and sufficient to achieve 

criterion 1 above. 

Delisting Criteria

Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense may be considered for 

removal from the Federal list of endangered and threatened species when all of 

the following criteria are achieved and maintained for a minimum of 10 

consecutive years: 

1) A total of four populations of Nesogenes rotensis are naturally reproducing 

and stable, or increasing in numbers. Each population of Nesogenes rotensis

must consist of at least 300 mature, reproducing individuals. A total of four 

populations of Osmoxylon mariannense are naturally reproducing and stable, 

or increasing in numbers. Each population of Osmoxylon mariannense must 

consist of at least 100 mature, reproducing individuals. A stable or increasing 
28

population is defined as having a finite rate of increase (known as lambda or 8) 

greater than or equal to 1 over the requisite 10-year time period. 

2) Sufficient habitat is protected and managed to achieve criterion 1 above. 

3) Management and control of nonnative species by local, Commonwealth, and 

Federal authorities are demonstrated to be successful and sufficient to achieve 

criterion 1 above. 
29

III.Recovery Program 

A. STEPDOWN OUTLINE OF RECOVERY ACTIONS 

1. Coordinate and monitor recovery efforts 

1.1. Coordinate recovery actions with other recovery and ecosystem 

management efforts 

1.2. Update or revise recovery plan as needed 

1.3. Monitor recovery efforts and develop a post-delisting monitoring plan 

2. Address factors affecting viability of the wild populations 

2.1. Protect and restore Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense 

habitat 

2.1.1. Conduct research on Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon 

mariannense habitat requirements 

2.1.2. Protect, manage, and restore strand habitat of Nesogenes rotensis by 

working with the Mariana Public Lands Authority (MPLA) and the 

Division of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) on lands they 

administer 

2.1.3. Protect, manage, and restore limestone forest habitat of Osmoxylon 

mariannense by working with interested private landowners and the 

Mariana Public Lands Authority (MPLA) and the Division of Land 

and Natural Resources (DLNR) on their lands or lands they 

administer 

2.1.3.1. Develop techniques for restoring native forest within the 

historical range of Osmoxylon mariannense 

2.1.3.2. Develop and implement a reforestation plan for the Sabana 

2.1.4. Evaluate the impact of feral ungulates (deer and pigs) on native forest 

regeneration 
30

2.1.4.1. Conduct research to determine the impact of feral ungulates on 

the native forest on the Sabana 

2.1.4.2. Develop and implement a control program for feral ungulates 

2.2. Conduct surveys for Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense in 

potentially suitably habitat. Evaluate the use of remote sensing technology 

as a tool to identify suitable habitat for targeting surveys 

2.3. Assess and address the impact of introduced predators on Nesogenes 

rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense populations 

2.3.1 Evaluate impact of invertebrates on Nesogenes rotensis and 

Osmoxylon mariannense populations and control, if necessary 

2.3.1.1. Conduct research to determine the impact of invertebrates on 

Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense populations 

2.3.1.2. Conduct research on methods to control invertebrates, if 

necessary 

2.3.1.3. Develop and implement an invertebrate control and/or 

eradication program, if necessary 

2.3.2. Evaluate the impact of introduced rats and mice on Osmoxylon 

mariannense populations and control or eradicate, if necessary 

2.3.2.1. Conduct research on Osmoxylon mariannense fruit predators 

2.3.2.2. Develop and implement a rat and mouse control or 

eradication program, if necessary 

2.3.3. Evaluate the impact of feral ungulates (deer and pigs) on Osmoxylon 

mariannense populations and control, if necessary 

2.3.3.1. Conduct research to determine the impact of feral ungulates 

on Osmoxylon mariannense populations 

2.3.3.2. Conduct research on methods to control feral ungulates

2.3.3.3. Develop and implement a control program for feral ungulates 

(see recovery action 2.1.4.2.), if necessary 
31

2.4. Evaluate the impact of disease on Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon 

mariannense populations and control, if necessary 

2.4.1. Conduct research to determine the impact of disease on Nesogenes 

rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense populations 

2.4.2. Conduct research on methods to control disease, if necessary 

2.4.3. Develop and implement a disease control or eradication program, 

if necessary 

2.5. Evaluate the impact of the parasitic vine Cassytha filiformis on Nesogenes 

rotensis populations and control, if necessary 

2.5.1. Conduct research to determine the impact of Cassytha filiformis on 

Nesogenes rotensis populations 

2.5.2. Conduct research on methods to control Cassytha filiformis

2.5.3. Develop and implement a control program for Cassytha filiformis, if 

necessary 

2.6 Evaluate the impact of Casuarina equisetifolia on Nesogenes rotensis

populations and control, if necessary 

2.6.1. Conduct research to determine the impact of Casuarina equisetifolia

on Nesogenes rotensis populations 

2.6.2. Conduct research on methods to control Casuarina equisetifolia

2.6.3. Develop and implement a control program for Casuarina 

equisetifolia, if necessary 

2.7. Evaluate the impact of nonnative plants on Nesogenes rotensis and 

Osmoxylon mariannense populations and control, if necessary 

2.7.1 Conduct research to determine the impact of nonnative plants on 

Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense populations 

2.7.2 Conduct research on methods to control nonnative plants 
32

2.7.3 Develop and implement a control or eradication program for 

nonnative plants, if necessary 

3. Monitor Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense populations, 

establish new populations, and augment existing populations 

3.1. Develop and implement long-term population monitoring programs for 

Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense 

3.2. Develop and implement a plan(s) for establishing additional populations 

and augmenting existing populations 

3.2.1. Develop collection and propagation protocols and maintain genetic 

stock of Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense

3.2.2. Determine locations for augmenting existing populations and 

establishing new populations of Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon 

mariannense

3.2.3. Develop outplanting protocols for Nesogenes rotensis and 

Osmoxylon mariannense

4. Provide educational information opportunities to build public support for 

conservation 

4.1. Develop educational programs that can be incorporated into school 

curricula on Rota 

4.1.1. Develop educator’s packets for elementary to high school students 

4.1.2. Develop workshops for teachers 

4.2. Develop a public awareness campaign that targets citizens, community 

groups, and lawmakers 

4.2.1. Develop and broadcast Public Service Announcements 

4.2.2. Promote a poster and essay contest 

4.2.3. Encourage media coverage of environmental issues 
33

4.3. Develop and promote “hands-on” community outreach activities that 

protect and conserve native species and their habitat 

4.3.1. Establish a series of small community-based native plant nurseries 

and botanical gardens, or upgrade existing facilities 

4.3.2. Conduct a minimum of one community “Native Seed Collection 

Day” per year 

4.3.3. Conduct a minimum of one community outplanting day per year 

4.3.4. Promote interpretation and educational programs on the 

identification and importance of native plants 

4.3.5. Coordinate community involvement in at least one environmental 

protection activity each year 

4.3.6. Promote the development of nature trails in the Sabana or other areas 

rich in native species 

4.3.7. Promote the use of native plants in environmentally appropriate 

landscaping projects 

B. NARRATIVE OUTLINE OF RECOVERY ACTIONS 

1. Coordinate and monitor recovery efforts 

Due to the complexity of issues associated with Nesogenes rotensis and 

Osmoxylon mariannense recovery, a recovery effort that is coordinated with 

the major stakeholders and interested individuals is needed. In addition, the 

effectiveness of this effort will depend on monitoring recovery actions and 

goals, and refinement or modification of management plans and programs 

that reflect the knowledge gained to maximize the success of the recovery 

program for these two plants. 

1.1. Coordinate recovery actions with other recovery and ecosystem 

management efforts 

Due to the similarities in recovery issues for listed species in the Mariana 

Islands, we recommend that recovery groups, Federal and Commonwealth 

agencies, and interested parties coordinate their conservation efforts. 
34

Holding joint meetings of agencies and other interested parties associated 

with recovery efforts in the Mariana Islands and maintaining open lines of 

communication will enable these groups and individuals to assess the 

progress being made in recovering listed species. 

1.2. Update or revise recovery plan as needed 

The recovery plan should be reviewed, updated, and revised, as necessary, 

as we gain further information and knowledge of the life history and 

ecology of Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense, their habitats, 

and the specific nature of the threats to their persistence through research 

and management efforts. 

1.3. Monitor recovery efforts and develop a post-delisting monitoring plan 

A successful recovery program requires frequent and regular monitoring 

and reporting of recovery efforts. Each recovery action includes a 

monitoring component that will allow for review to determine its 

effectiveness. Prior to delisting, a post-delisting monitoring plan must be 

ready for implementation to ensure the ongoing recovery of the species 

and continuing effectiveness of monitoring actions. Monitoring under this 

plan must continue for a minimum of 5 years after delisting occurs. 

2. Address factors affecting viability of the wild populations 

Habitat loss and degradation, and predation by introduced animals are 

believed to be impacting the Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon 

mariannense populations. In addition, the accidental or intentional 

introduction of new predators, diseases, and invasive, nonnative plants also 

threaten the wild populations. These factors need to be assessed and 

addressed. 

2.1. Protect and restore Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense

habitat 

Nesogenes rotensis is restricted in distribution to native coastal shrubland 

while Osmoxylon mariannense is restricted to the Sabana native limestone 

forest. We surmise that the most intact native ecosystems will most likely 

provide suitable habitat for augmenting existing wild populations and 

establishing new populations of Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon 
35

mariannense. Therefore, these ecosystems need to be protected from 

human and other disturbances and restored as necessary. The remaining 

populations of both species are very small, consisting of 2 small localized 

populations of Nesogenes rotensis, and 1 small scattered population of 10 

individual Osmoxylon mariannense in the Sabana region. For this reason, 

all remaining populations and individuals making up these populations 

require immediate protection. Protection may involve creating protected 

areas, fencing, and changing public access routes/trails. 

2.1.1. Conduct research on Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon 

mariannense habitat requirements 

Research on the specific habitat requirements of Nesogenes rotensis

and Osmoxylon mariannense is needed to determine the best areas for 

reintroduction. 

2.1.2. Protect, manage, and restore strand habitat of Nesogenes rotensis

by working with the Mariana Public Lands Authority and the 

Department of Lands and Natural Resources on lands they 

administer 

Currently, Nesogenes rotensis is found in coastal shrubland on public 

lands. In order to promote the recovery of this species, efforts should 

be undertaken to protect and manage habitat on these public lands. 

2.1.3. Protect, manage, and restore limestone forest habitat of 

Osmoxylon mariannense by working with interested private 

landowners, the Mariana Public Lands Authority and the 

Department of Lands and Natural Resources, on their lands or 

lands they administer 

Osmoxylon mariannense habitat is found on and adjacent to some 

private lands on the Sabana. Assistance should be provided to 

interested landowners to protect, restore, and manage this habitat 

through programs such as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

Landowner Incentive and Partners for Fish and Wildlife programs, and 

U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation 

Service Wildlife Habitat Improvement Program. Assistance to protect, 

restore, and manage public lands may come from programs 
36

administered by the Office of Insular Affairs, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, or the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana 

Islands Division of Fish and Wildlife. 

2.1.3.1. Develop techniques for restoring native forest within the 

historical range of Osmoxylon mariannense 

Techniques for restoring unforested and degraded areas need 

to be developed and evaluated to determine the most 

effective measures for restoring mature forest within the 

species' historical range (any suitable habitat within the 

Sabana region). These techniques might include determining 

how to propagate suitable native plant species, determining 

how to increase the regeneration of canopy and understory 

species in degraded areas, and determining which native 

plant species are best for restoring cleared areas. 

2.1.3.2. Develop and implement a reforestation plan for the 

Sabana 

Once effective techniques have been determined for 

restoration of native forest, an implementation plan should be 

developed for the Sabana. This plan should include the 

locations of proposed reforestation actions, an 

implementation schedule, monitoring protocols and schedule, 

and estimated costs to implement the plan. The plan could be 

used to obtain funding for implementing specific tasks. 

2.1.4. Evaluate impact of feral ungulates (deer and pigs) on 

regeneration of native forest on the Sabana 

Feral ungulates (deer and pigs) negatively impact the natural 

regeneration of native forest in the Sabana region. Ungulate 

exclosure plots should be established within degraded forest and 

open fields on the Sabana and monitored to determine the impacts of 

ungulate exclusion on forest regeneration. 

 
37

2.1.4.1. Conduct research to determine the impact of feral 

ungulates on the native forest on the Sabana 

Research on effective ungulate control methods is needed if 

deer and pigs are found to significantly impact the forests of 

the Sabana. It is not known if a reduced number of ungulates

would be acceptable or if complete eradication of ungulates 

is needed. 

2.1.4.2. Develop and implement a feral ungulate control program 

A feral ungulate control or eradication plan should be 

developed and implemented to benefit the health of the 

forests on the Sabana.

2.2. Conduct surveys for Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense

in potentially suitable habitat 

The recent discovery of a new population of Nesogenes rotensis indicates 

that potentially suitable habitat may harbor more individuals and 

populations of this species than are currently known (G. Koob in litt. 

2005). There are also several areas of the Sabana limestone forests that 

may provide suitable habitat for Osmoxylon mariannense that have not 

been surveyed. Surveys should be conducted in areas of suitable habitat 

and remote sensing should be evaluated as a tool for identifying additional 

areas. 

2.3. Assess and address the impact of introduced predators on Nesogenes 

rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense populations 

Introduced predators are probably impacting Nesogenes rotensis and 

Osmoxylon mariannense populations. The predators need to be identified 

and the extent of these impacts needs to be assessed and addressed, as 

necessary. 

2.3.1. Evaluate the impact of invertebrates on Nesogenes rotensis and 

Osmoxylon mariannense populations and control, if necessary 

It is not known if Nesogenes rotensis is threatened by introduced 

invertebrates. Slugs and various insects have been observed on 
38

individuals of Osmoxylon mariannense, and insects are suspected 

in killing seedlings of this species (J. Manglona, pers. comm. 2005; 

L. Williams, pers. comm. 2005). Research identifying the species 

and assessing the impact of invertebrates on N. rotensis and O. 

mariannense needs to be conducted, and invertebrate control 

techniques should be developed, if needed. 

2.3.1.1. Conduct research to determine the impact of 

invertebrates on the Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon 

mariannense populations 

Currently, only anecdotal evidence is available on the impact 

of invertebrates on Osmoxylon mariannense and there is no 

information regarding their impact on Nesogenes rotensis. 

Research to identify the species and determine the impact of 

invertebrates on these listed species will enable managers to 

determine if control of invertebrate pests is necessary for the 

recovery of one or both listed species. 

2.3.1.2. Conduct research on methods to control invertebrates, if 

necessary 

Research on effective control methods may be needed if 

invertebrates are found to be negatively impacting either 

Nesogenes rotensis or Osmoxylon mariannense populations. 

2.3.1.3. Develop and implement an invertebrate control or 

eradication program, if necessary 

An invertebrate control or eradication plan should be 

developed and implemented if adequate control techniques 

are available and if it is determined that invertebrate control 

would be beneficial to Nesogenes rotensis and/or Osmoxylon 

mariannense populations. 

2.3.2. Evaluate the impact of introduced rats and mice on Osmoxylon 

mariannense populations and control or eradicate, if necessary 

Rat and mouse predation on Osmoxylon mariannense fruit appears 

to affect its regeneration (D. Grout, pers. comm. 1997; E. Taisacan, 
39

CNMI Division of Fish and Wildlife, retired, pers. comm. 2005). 

However, the extent of this impact is unknown at this time and 

should be evaluated to determine if control of these rodents is 

necessary for the conservation of O. mariannense.

2.3.2.1. Conduct research on Osmoxylon mariannense fruit 

predators 

Currently, it is only suspected that rats or mice are affecting 

fruit availability of Osmoxylon mariannense. Rat-damaged 

fruits have been observed but it is unknown to what extent 

rodents are affecting the reproductive capabilities of O. 

mariannense. 

2.3.2.2. Develop and implement a rat and mouse control or 

eradication program, if necessary 

A plan for control or eradication of rats and mice should be 

developed and implemented if it is determined that rodent 

control would be beneficial to the reproductive success of 

Osmoxylon mariannense. This plan should identify the 

actions to be conducted, additional information needed, and 

permit requirements. The plan could be used to obtain 

funding for implementing specific rodent control tasks. 

2.3.3. Evaluate the impact of feral ungulates on Osmoxylon 

mariannense populations and control, if necessary 

The extent of negative impacts by feral ungulates (deer and pigs) 

on Osmoxylon mariannense populations should be evaluated. 

 2.3.3.1. Conduct research to determine the impact of feral 

 ungulates on Osmoxylon mariannense populations 

Research on the impacts of feral ungulates on individuals of 

Osmoxylon marianense will enable managers to determine if 

control is needed. 
40

2.3.3.2. Conduct research on methods to control feral ungulates 

Research on effective control methods is needed if feral 

ungulates are found to significantly impact individuals of 

Osmoxylon mariannense. It is not known if a reduced 

number of ungulates (deer and pigs) would be acceptable or 

if complete eradication of feral ungulates in O. mariannense 

habitat is needed. 

2.3.3.3. Develop and implement a feral ungulate control program, 

if necessary 

A feral ungulate control or eradication plan should be 

developed and implemented if it is determined that their 

control would be beneficial to individuals of Osmoxylon 

mariannense.

2.4. Evaluate the impact of disease on Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon 

mariannense populations and control, if necessary 

It is not known if diseases are affecting Nesogenes rotensis. It is possible 

disease is responsible for the defoliation and dieback that has been observed 

on Osmoxylon mariannense. Research assessing the impact of disease on N. 

rotensis and O. mariannense needs to be conducted, and pathogen control 

techniques need to be researched, developed, and implemented, if necessary. 

2.4.1. Conduct research to determine the impact of disease on 

Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense populations 

Currently, it is only suspected that disease affects Osmoxylon 

mariannense, and there is no information regarding the impact of 

diseases on Nesogenes rotensis. Research on the impact of disease 

on these species will enable managers to determine if disease 

control is necessary for the recovery of one or both listed plants. 

2.4.2. Conduct research on methods to control disease, if necessary 

Research on effective disease control methods will be needed if 

disease(s) is found to be damaging to individuals of Nesogenes 

rotensis or Osmoxylon mariannense. 
41

2.4.3. Develop and implement a disease control or eradication 

program, if necessary 

If it is determined that disease control will be beneficial to the 

recovery of either Nesogenes rotensis or Osmoxylon mariannense, 

and effective control techniques are available, a disease control or 

eradication plan should be developed and implemented. 

2.5. Evaluate the impact of the parasitic vine Cassytha filiformis on 

Nesogenes rotensis populations and control, if necessary 

Cassytha filiformis is a native parasitic vine known to grow on 

individuals of Nesogenes rotensis. Its effect on populations of this 

listed species needs to be evaluated. 

2.5.1. Conduct research to determine the impact of Cassytha 

filiformis on Nesogenes rotensis populations 

Currently Cassytha filiformis is known to parasitize some 

individuals of Nesogenes rotensis. Research on the impact of 

this parasite on N. rotensis will enable managers to determine 

if control of C. filiformis is necessary for recovery. 

2.5.2. Conduct research on methods to control Cassytha filiformis

Research on effective control methods is needed if Cassytha 

filiformis is found to significantly impact individuals of 

Nesogenes rotensis. 

2.5.3. Develop and implement a control program for Cassytha 

filiformis, if necessary 

A control or eradication plan should be developed and 

implemented if effective control techniques are available, and 

if control or removal of this parasitic vine would be beneficial 

to individuals of Nesogenes rotensis. 
42

2.6. Evaluate the impact of Casuarina equisetifolia on Nesogenes rotensis

populations and control, if necessary 

Research assessing the impact of Casuarina equisetifolia on 

Nesogenes rotensis needs to be conducted, control techniques need to 

be researched and developed, and implemented if necessary. 

2.6.1. Conduct research to determine the impact of Casuarina 

equisetifolia on Nesogenes rotensis populations 

Casuarina species are known to spread extensively by root 

suckers, and shade out and chemically hinder understory 

vegetation. Research on the impacts of C. equisetifolia on 

Nesogenes rotensis will enable managers to determine if their 

control is necessary for the recovery of the listed plant species. 

2.6.2. Conduct research on methods to control Casuarina 

equisetifolia 

Research on effective control methods may be needed if Casuarina 

equisetifolia are found to significantly impact recovery of 

Nesogenes rotensis. 

2.6.3. Develop and implement a control program for Casuarina 

equisetifolia, if necessary 

A control plan for Casuarina equisetifolia should be developed 

and implemented if effective control techniques are available and it 

is determined that control would be beneficial to recover 

Nesogenes rotensis. 

2.7. Evaluate the impact of nonnative plants on Nesogenes rotensis and 

Osmoxylon mariannense populations and control, if necessary 

Nonnative, invasive plant species can alter the function of ecosystems and 

compete with native species for light, water, and space. Research assessing 

the impact of nonnative plant species on Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon 

mariannense needs to be conducted, and control techniques need to be 

researched, developed, and implemented if necessary. 
43

2.7.1. Conduct research to determine the impact of nonnative plants 

on Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense populations 

Currently nonnative plants are suspected of negatively impacting 

the Nesogenes rotensis population at Poña Point. Nonnative plants 

have invaded the Sabana forest and are changing the native 

limestone forest habitat of Osmoxylon mariannense. Research on 

the impacts of nonnative plant species on N. rotensis and O. 

mariannense will enable managers to determine if their control is 

necessary for the recovery of the listed plant species. 

2.7.2. Conduct research on methods to control nonnative plants 

Research on effective control methods may be needed if nonnative 

plants are found to significantly impact recovery of Nesogenes 

rotensis or Osmoxylon mariannense. 

2.7.3. Develop and implement a control or eradication program for 

nonnative plants, if necessary 

A control or eradication plan for nonnative plants should be 

developed and implemented if effective control techniques are 

available and it is determined that nonnative plant control would be 

beneficial to recover Nesogenes rotensis or Osmoxylon 

mariannense populations. 

3. Monitor Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense populations, 

establish new populations, and augment existing populations 

Both Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense exist in very low 

numbers. Monitoring various parameters (such as seedling establishment, 

population structure, etc.) is necessary to determine the effectiveness of 

recovery actions, evaluate recovery of the species, and indicate when timely 

action should be taken to prevent complete extinction or loss of individuals in 

the wild. 
44

3.1. Develop and implement long-term population monitoring programs 

for Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense

Long-term population monitoring programs for Nesogenes rotensis and 

Osmoxylon mariannense will enable managers implementing recovery 

actions for these species to assess the current status of individuals and/or 

populations, evaluate population trends, determine effectiveness of 

recovery actions, and modify recovery actions to ensure their 

effectiveness. 

Currently the population of Nesogenes rotensis at Poña Point is 

monitored twice a year by staff of the Commonwealth of the Northern 

Mariana Islands Division of Fish and Wildlife (L. Williams, pers. comm. 

2005). The population at Punta Fina Atkos was only recently discovered 

and a monitoring program is not yet in place for it. The 10 known 

individuals of Osmoxylon mariannense, including 8 wild and 2 

outplanted trees, are occasionally monitored by Forestry Services 

Section staff on Rota and contactors of the Commonwealth of the 

Northern Mariana Islands Division of Fish and Wildlife (J. Manglona, 

pers. comm. 2005; E. Taisacan, pers. comm. 2005). 

Monitoring of Nesogenes rotensis should occur during the mid-wet 

season in order to address the species perennial die-back in the dry 

season (L. Williams, in litt., 2006). Consideration will also be given to 

the timing of population surveys following typhoons. 

3.2. Develop and implement a plan(s) for establishing new populations 

and augmenting existing populations 

A plan for establishing a propagation program should be developed and 

implemented. The plan should be developed cooperatively by the 

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands Division of Fish and 

Wildlife, the Forestry Services Section, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, and periodically reviewed and revised as new populations are 

established and extant wild populations are augmented. Specific tasks 

should be identified and a schedule for completing the tasks should be 

provided. 
45

3.2.1. Develop collection and propagation protocols and maintain 

genetic stock of Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense

To prevent extinction of both species, effective ex situ propagation 

techniques must be developed and implemented. Currently little is 

known regarding effective methods to collect propagules and 

successfully propagate either species. Development of effective 

collection, propagation, and seed storage protocols will enable 

managers to effectively produce the plants needed to recover these 

species. 

3.2.2. Determine locations for augmenting existing populations and 

establishing new populations of Nesogenes rotensis and 

Osmoxylon mariannense

The locations for establishing new populations and augmenting 

existing populations should be selected once the habitat 

requirements of Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense

are determined (see Recovery Action 2.1.1.). 

3.2.3. Develop outplanting protocols for Nesogenes rotensis and 

Osmoxylon mariannense

Currently little is known regarding the most effective methods to 

outplant individuals of Nesogenes rotensis or Osmoxylon 

mariannense. Research on the most effective outplanting 

protocols will enable managers to effectively establish new 

populations and augment existing populations of each of the listed 

species. 

4. Provide educational and informational opportunities to build public 

support for conservation 

Public understanding and support of recovery efforts for Nesogenes rotensis

and Osmoxylon mariannense and other rare species is essential to their 

recovery. Programs that inform teachers and educate students, lawmakers, 

community groups, local governmental agencies, and interested individuals 

should be supported, funded, and promoted. 
46

4.1. Develop educational programs that can be incorporated into school 

curricula on Rota 

4.1.1. Develop educator’s packets for elementary through high school 

students 

Contract with a highly skilled individual with knowledge of Rota’s 

peoples and culture and expertise in developing outreach products 

that comply with local curriculum standards. This individual should 

then help develop an educational packet focusing on elementary 

grades through high school that incorporates the basic skills 

(reading, writing, arithmetic, and science), while creating a positive 

environmental ethic toward Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon 

mariannense (as well as other rare species of Rota) and their 

habitats. Initially, the educator’s packets should be utilized for 2 

years before a thorough evaluation of their effectiveness is 

conducted. The results of this evaluation should be used to revise 

the packets to ensure accuracy and effectiveness. The packets 

should be revised periodically, as needed. 

4.1.2. Develop workshops for teachers 

Teacher workshops should be developed and subsequently offered to 

provide orientation and guidance for the implementation of the 

educator’s packets. 

4.2. Develop a public awareness campaign that targets citizens, 

community groups, and lawmakers 

Develop a media campaign that promotes the conservation of native 

species and their habitat. Ensure that residents of Rota and other islands 

of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands have direct 

involvement in the development and implementation of the campaign. 

Whenever applicable, the Chamorro language and culture should be 

incorporated into the materials. 

4.2.1. Develop and broadcast Public Service Announcements 

Develop and broadcast a minimum of one Public Service 

Announcement per year that promotes conservation of Nesogenes 
47

rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense (and other native species) and 

their habitats. Public Service Announcements should utilize radio, 

television, and print media. 

4.2.2 Promote a poster and essay contest 

Promote a poster and essay contest among local school children and 

adults with prizes awarded from local businesses. Contest themes 

should focus on native species and habitat protection. The winning 

selections should be highlighted in a calendar and distributed on 

Rota.

4.2.3. Encourage media coverage of environmental issues 

Encourage media coverage of environmental issues that highlight 

efforts by the local community to conserve and protect native species 

and their habitat. 

4.3. Develop and promote “hands-on” community outreach activities that 

protect and conserve native species and their habitat 

Develop a community outreach program that unites the people of Rota to 

actively participate in conservation activities, while learning to appreciate 

and conserve Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense (and other 

native species) and their habitats. Whenever applicable, the Chamorro 

language and culture should be incorporated into the materials. 

4.3.1. Establish a series of small community-based native plant 

nurseries and botanical gardens, or upgrade existing facilities 

These nurseries and botanical gardens should be used to promote the 

propagation and outplanting of native plants. Locate at least one 

nursery in each local elementary and high school. 

4.3.2. Conduct at least one community “Native Seed Collection Day” 

per year 

Collecting native seeds several times a year for the nurseries will 

ensure genetic integrity and diversity, and allow participants to better 

understand and appreciate Rota’s native plants and their habitats. 
48

4.3.3. Conduct at least one community outplanting day per year 

Outplanting sites will focus on areas of high ecological value, 

watersheds, and high profile, ecologically appropriate, public places. 

4.3.4. Promote interpretation and educational programs on the 

identification and importance of native plants 

Utilize the school nurseries to educate school children on the 

identification and importance of native plant species, while 

beautifying school grounds and providing potential habitat for native 

animal species. The students could produce informational signs 

identifying each native species planted. 

4.3.5. Coordinate community involvement in a minimum of one 

environmental protection activity a year 

These activities could include beach clean-ups, streamside clean-ups, 

soil conservation, Earth Day, and local festivals. These activities 

should provide participants the opportunity to actively participate in 

conservation, promote Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon 

mariannense related outreach products, raise awareness of these and 

other rare species on Rota, and create community pride. 

4.3.6. Promote the development of nature trails in the Sabana or other 

areas rich in native species 

Trails can be used as part of educational programs including school 

field trips, for ecotourism, and for educating local residents about 

their heritage and environment. Native plant species can be labeled 

and interpretative signs or brochures be developed. 

4.3.7. Promote the use of native plants in environmentally appropriate 

landscaping projects 

Work with landscape managers to incorporate native plants into 

landscape plantings around local hotels and resorts. Educational or 

interpretative information can be incorporated. 
49

IV. Implementation Schedule 

The Implementation Schedule that follows outlines recovery actions and 

estimated costs for two plants from Rota, as set forth in this recovery plan. It is a 

guide for accomplishing the objectives and actions discussed in Parts II and III of 

this plan. This schedule indicates recovery action priority numbers (defined 

below), action numbers from the recovery action outline in Part III-A, action 

descriptions, anticipated duration of actions, the responsible parties, and lastly, 

estimated costs. In addition, the schedule indicates which of the five listing 

factors the action is intended to address and ameliorate. The initiation and 

completion of these recovery actions is subject to the availability of funds, as well 

as other constraints affecting the parties involved. 

We have the statutory responsibility for implementing this recovery plan, 

and only Federal agencies are mandated to take part in recovery efforts for 

threatened and endangered species. However, recovery of the two plants from 

Rota will require the involvement of the full range of Federal, Commonwealth, 

private, and local interests. The expertise and contributions of additional agencies 

and interested parties is needed to implement certain recovery actions and to 

accomplish education and outreach objectives. For each recovery action 

described in the Implementation Schedule, the column titled “Responsible 

Parties” lists the primary agencies having the authority or responsibility for 

implementing recovery actions and other groups, such as Commonwealth, private, 

and non-profit organizations, that also may wish to be involved in recovery 

implementation. The listing of a party in the implementation schedule does not 

require, nor imply a requirement, that the identified party has agreed to implement 

the action(s) or to secure funding for implementing the action(s). When more 

than one party is listed, the most appropriate lead agency (based on authorities, 

mandates, and capabilities), has been identified in bold type. 
50

Definition of Recovery Action Priorities: 

Priority 1 — An action that must be taken to prevent extinction or prevent the 

species from declining irreversibly in the foreseeable future. 

Priority 2 — An action that must be taken to prevent a significant decline in 

species population or habitat quality, or some other significant negative impact 

short of extinction. 

Priority 3 — All other actions necessary to meet the recovery objectives. 

Definition of Recovery Action Durations:

Continual (C) — An action that will be implemented on a routine basis once 

begun. 

To Be Determined (TBD) — The action duration is not known at this time or 

implementation of the action is dependent on the outcome of other recovery 

actions. 

Definitions and Acronyms 

Key to Acronyms used in the Implementation Schedule: 

BRD U.S. Geological Survey, Biological Resources Discipline 

DFW Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Division 

 of Fish and Wildlife 

DLNR Department of Lands and Natural Resources 

DOE Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, 

 Department of Education 

OIA Office of Insular Affairs 

FWS-PIFWO U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific Islands Fish and 

 Wildlife Office 

MPLA Mariana Public Lands Authority 

NRCS U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources 

Conservation Service 

RFS Rota Forestry Service 
51

Implementation Schedule for the Recovery Plan 

Two Plants from Rota (Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense) 

Cost estimates by fi

(in $1,000 uni

Recovery 

Action 

Priority 

Recovery 

Action 

Number 

Listing 

Factor 

Recovery Action 

Description 

Recovery 

Action 

Duration 

(Years) 

Responsible 

Parties 

Total Cost 

(15 years) 

2007 2008 2009 

1 2.1.2. A 

Protect, manage, and restore strand habitat of Nesogenes rotensis

C 

FWS-PIFWO DFWMPLA DLNR NRCS

120 2 2 52 

1 2.1.3. A 

Protect, manage, and restore limestone forest habitat of Osmoxylon mariannense

C 

FWS-PIFWO DFWMPLA DLNR NRCS Private 

540 10 10 180 

1 3.2.1. E 

Develop collection and propagation protocols and maintain genetic stock of Nesogenes rotensis and 

Osmoxylon mariannense

5 

BRD DFWRFS 

558 40 40 40 
52

Implementation Schedule for the Recovery Plan 

Two Plants from Rota (Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense) 

Cost estimates by fi

(in $1,000 uni

Recovery 

Action 

Priority 

Recovery 

Action 

Number 

Listing 

Factor 

Recovery Action 

Description 

Recovery 

Action 

Duration 

(Years) 

Responsible 

Parties 

Total Cost 

(15 years) 

2007 2008 2009 

2 2.1.1. A 

Conduct research on Nesogenes rotensis

and Osmoxylon mariannense habitat requirements 

5 

FWS-PIFWO BRD DFWRFS Research Institutions 

90 18 18 18 

2 2.2. A, E 

Conduct surveys for Nesogenes rotensis

and Osmoxylon mariannense in potentially suitable habitat 

2 FWS-PIFWO DFW 90 45 45 - 

2 2.3.1.1. C 

Conduct research to determine the impact of invertebrates on Nesogenes rotensis

and Osmoxylon mariannensepopulations 

5 

FWS-PIFWO DFW OIA BRD Research Institutions 

100 20 20 20 
53

Implementation Schedule for the Recovery Plan 

Two Plants from Rota (Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense) 

Cost estimates by fi

(in $1,000 uni

Recovery 

Action 

Priority 

Recovery 

Action 

Number 

Listing 

Factor 

Recovery Action 

Description 

Recovery 

Action 

Duration 

(Years) 

Responsible 

Parties 

Total Cost 

(15 years) 

2007 2008 2009 

2 2.3.2.1. C 

Conduct research on Osmoxylon mariannense fruit 

predators 

5 

FWS-PIFWO OIA BRD Research Institutions 

100 20 20 20 

2 2.3.3.1. C 

Conduct research to determine the impact of feral ungulates (deer and pigs) on Osmoxylon mariannense

populations 

5 

BRD FWS-PIFWO DFW Research Institutions 

250 50 25 25 

2 2.4.1. C 

Conduct research to determine the impact of disease on Nesogenes rotensis

and Osmoxylon mariannensepopulations 

3 

FWS-PIFWO DFW BRD Research Institutions 

75 25 25 25 
54

Implementation Schedule for the Recovery Plan 

Two Plants from Rota (Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense) 

Cost estimates by fi

(in $1,000 uni

Recovery 

Action 

Priority 

Recovery 

Action 

Number 

Listing 

Factor 

Recovery Action 

Description 

Recovery 

Action 

Duration 

(Years) 

Responsible 

Parties 

Total Cost 

(15 years) 

2007 2008 2009 

2 2.6.1. E 

Conduct research to determine the impact of nonnative plants on Nesogenes rotensis and 

Osmoxylon mariannensepopulations 

5 

FWS-PIFWO DFW BRD Research Institutions 

100 20 20 20 

2 3.1. E 

Develop and implement long-term population monitoring programs for Nesogenes rotensis and 

Osmoxylon mariannense

C 

FWS-PIFWODFWRFS 

98 8 8 8 
55

Implementation Schedule for the Recovery Plan 

Two Plants from Rota (Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense) 

Cost estimates by fi

(in $1,000 uni

Recovery 

Action 

Priority 

Recovery 

Action 

Number 

Listing 

Factor 

Recovery Action 

Description 

Recovery 

Action 

Duration 

(Years) 

Responsible 

Parties 

Total Cost 

(15 years) 

2007 2008 2009 

2 3.2.2. E 

Determine locations for augmenting existing populations and establishing new populations of Nesogenes rotensis

and Osmoxylon mariannense

3 

FWS-PIFWO DFW MPLA RFS 

60 - - 20 

2 3.2.3. E 

Develop outplanting protocols for Nesogenes rotensis

and Osmoxylon mariannense

5 

FWS-PIFWODFW BRD

150 - - - 

2 2.1.3.1. A 

Develop techniques for restoring native forest within the historical range of

Osmoxylon mariannense

5 

DFWRFS BRD 

125 - - 25 
56

Implementation Schedule for the Recovery Plan 

Two Plants from Rota (Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense) 

Cost estimates by fi

(in $1,000 uni

Recovery 

Action 

Priority 

Recovery 

Action 

Number 

Listing 

Factor 

Recovery Action 

Description 

Recovery 

Action 

Duration 

(Years) 

Responsible 

Parties 

Total Cost 

(15 years) 

2007 2008 2009 

2 2.1.3.2. A 

Develop and implement a reforestation plan for the Sabana 

C 

FWS-PIFWODFW MPLA RFS private 

750 50 50 50 

2 2.1.4.1. C 

Evaluate impact of feral ungulates (deer and pigs) on regeneration of native forest on the Sabana 

C 

BRD DFWRFS 

104 - - - 

2 

2.1.4.2. 

and 

2.3.3.3. 

C 

Develop and implement a feral ungulate control program, if necessary 

TBD 

FWS-PIFWO DFW RFS OIA NRCS 

TBD - - - 
57

Implementation Schedule for the Recovery Plan 

Two Plants from Rota (Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense) 

Cost estimates by fi

(in $1,000 uni

Recovery 

Action 

Priority 

Recovery 

Action 

Number 

Listing 

Factor 

Recovery Action 

Description 

Recovery 

Action 

Duration 

(Years) 

Responsible 

Parties 

Total Cost 

(15 years) 

2007 2008 2009 

2 2.3.1.2. C 

Conduct research on methods to control invertebrates, if necessary 

5 

DFW BRD Research Institutions 

TBD - - - 

2 2.3.1.3. C 

Develop and implement an invertebrate control or eradication program, if necessary 

TBD DFW FWS-PIFWO TBD - - - 

2 2.3.2.2. C 

Develop and implement a rat and mouse control or eradication program, if necessary 

C 

FWS-PIFWODFWOIA RFS 

TBD - - - 

2 2.3.3.2. C 

Conduct research on methods to control feral ungulates 

3 

FWS-PIFWODFW BRD Research Institutions 

TBD - - - 
58

Implementation Schedule for the Recovery Plan 

Two Plants from Rota (Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense) 

Cost estimates by fi

(in $1,000 uni

Recovery 

Action 

Priority 

Recovery 

Action 

Number 

Listing 

Factor 

Recovery Action 

Description 

Recovery 

Action 

Duration 

(Years) 

Responsible 

Parties 

Total Cost 

(15 years) 

2007 2008 2009 

2 2.4.2. C 

Conduct research on methods to control disease 

TBD 

BRD Research Institutions 

TBD - - - 

2 2.4.3. C 

Develop and implement a disease control or eradication program, if necessary 

TBD 

FWS-PIFWO DFWRFS 

TBD - - - 

2 2.6.2. E 

Conduct research on methods to control Casuarina equisetifolia

3 

FWS-PIFWO DFW BRD 

3,000 200 200 200 

2 2.6.3 E 

Develop and implement a control program forCasuarina equisetifolia if 

necessary 

TBD 

FWS-PIFWO DFW RFS

TBD - - - 
59

Implementation Schedule for the Recovery Plan 

Two Plants from Rota (Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense) 

Cost estimates by fi

(in $1,000 uni

Recovery 

Action 

Priority 

Recovery 

Action 

Number 

Listing 

Factor 

Recovery Action 

Description 

Recovery 

Action 

Duration 

(Years) 

Responsible 

Parties 

Total Cost 

(15 years) 

2007 2008 2009 

2 2.7.2. E 

Conduct research on methods to control nonnative plants 

TBD 

FWS-PIFWO DFW BRD

RFS Research Institutions 

TBD - - - 

2 2.7.3. E 

Develop and implement a control or eradication program for nonnative plants, if necessary 

C 

FWS-PIFWO DFW RFS

TBD - - - 

3 2.5.1. E 

Conduct research to determine the impact of Cassytha filiformison the Nesogenes rotensis populations 

3 

FWS-PIFWO DFW BRD Research Institutions 

60 - - - 
60

Implementation Schedule for the Recovery Plan 

Two Plants from Rota (Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense) 

Cost estimates by fi

(in $1,000 uni

Recovery 

Action 

Priority 

Recovery 

Action 

Number 

Listing 

Factor 

Recovery Action 

Description 

Recovery 

Action 

Duration 

(Years) 

Responsible 

Parties 

Total Cost 

(15 years) 

2007 2008 2009 

3 1.1. A, C, E 

Coordinate recovery actions with other recovery and ecosystem management efforts 

C 

FWS-PIFWODFW MPLA Private Landowners RFS 

6 0.4 0.4 0.4 

3 1.2. A, C, E 

Update or revise recovery plan as needed 

C FWS-PIFWO 36 - - - 

3 1.3. A, C, E Monitor recovery efforts C FWS-PIFWO DFW 30 2 2 2 3 2.5.2. E 

Conduct research on methods to control Cassytha filiformis

3 

FWS-PIFWO DFW BRD

15 - - - 
61

Implementation Schedule for the Recovery Plan 

Two Plants from Rota (Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense) 

Cost estimates by fi

(in $1,000 uni

Recovery 

Action 

Priority 

Recovery 

Action 

Number 

Listing 

Factor 

Recovery Action 

Description 

Recovery 

Action 

Duration 

(Years) 

Responsible 

Parties 

Total Cost 

(15 years) 

2007 2008 2009 

3 2.5.3. E 

Develop and implement a control program forCassytha filiformis, if necessary 

TBD 

FWS-PIFWO DFW RFS 

TBD - - - 

3 4.1.1. A, C, E 

Develop educator’s packets for elementary to high school students 

3 

FWS-PIFWODFW DOE 

26 4 2 20 

3 4.1.2. A, C, E Develop workshops for teachers 3 FWS-PIFWO DFW DOE 14 2 2 10 3 4.2.1. A, C, E 

Develop and broadcast Public Service Announcements 

6 

FWS-PIFWODFW DOE 

30 5 5 5 
62

Implementation Schedule for the Recovery Plan 

Two Plants from Rota (Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense) 

Cost estimates by fi

(in $1,000 uni

Recovery 

Action 

Priority 

Recovery 

Action 

Number 

Listing 

Factor 

Recovery Action 

Description 

Recovery 

Action 

Duration 

(Years) 

Responsible 

Parties 

Total Cost 

(15 years) 

2007 2008 2009 

3 4.2.2. A, C, E Promote a poster and essay contest 1 FWS-PIFWO DFW DOE 10 - - 10 3 4.2.3. A, C, E 

Encourage media coverage of environmental issues 

C 

FWS-PIFWODFW RFS 

15 1 1 1 

3 4.3.1. A, C, E 

Establish a series of small communitybased native plant nurseries and botanical gardens, or upgrade existing facilities 

5 

FWS-PIFWO DFWRFS

50 10 10 10 

3 4.3.2. A, C, E 

Conduct a minimum of one community “Native Seed Collection Day” a year. 

C 

FWS-PIFWO DFW RFS

30 2 2 2 
63

Implementation Schedule for the Recovery Plan 

Two Plants from Rota (Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense) 

Cost estimates by fi

(in $1,000 uni

Recovery 

Action 

Priority 

Recovery 

Action 

Number 

Listing 

Factor 

Recovery Action 

Description 

Recovery 

Action 

Duration 

(Years) 

Responsible 

Parties 

Total Cost 

(15 years) 

2007 2008 2009 

3 4.3.3. A, C, E 

Conduct a minimum of one community outplanting day a year 

C 

FWS-PIFWO DFW RFS

30 2 2 2 

3 4.3.4. A, C, E 

Promote interpretation and educational programs on the identification and importance of native plants 

C 

FWS-PIFWODFW RFS 

15 1 1 1 

3 4.3.5. A, C, E 

Coordinate community involvement in a minimum of one environmental protection activity a year 

C 

FWS-PIFWO DFWRFS 

30 2 2 2 
64

Implementation Schedule for the Recovery Plan 

Two Plants from Rota (Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense) 

Cost estimates by fi

(in $1,000 uni

Recovery 

Action 

Priority 

Recovery 

Action 

Number 

Listing 

Factor 

Recovery Action 

Description 

Recovery 

Action 

Duration 

(Years) 

Responsible 

Parties 

Total Cost 

(15 years) 

2007 2008 2009 

 3 4.3.6 A, C, E 

Promote the development of nature trails in the Sabana area or other areas rich in native species 

C 

FWS-PIFWO DFWRFS 

95 20 10 5 

 3 4.3.7 A, C, E 

Promote the use of native plants in environmentally appropriate landscaping projects 

C 

FWS-PIFWODFWRFS 

34 4 4 2 

TOTAL 6,836 563.4 526.4 775.4 
65

V. References 

A. LITERATURE CITED 

Falanruw, M.C., T.G. Cole, and A.H. Ambacher. 1989. Vegetation survey of 

Rota, Tinian, and Saipan, CNMI. Resource Bulletin PSW-27. Berkeley, 

California: Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, 

Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture: 11 pages. 

Fosberg, F.R. 1960. The vegetation of Micronesia. Bulletin of the American 

Museum of Natural History. 119:1-76 and plates 1-40. 

Fosberg, F.R., M.H. Sachet and R.L. Oliver. 1979. A geographical checklist of 

the Micronesian dicotyledonae. Micronesica 15:1-295. 

Fosberg, F.R. and D. Herbst. 1983. A Nesogenes (Chloanthaceae) from 

Micronesia. Micronesica 19(1-2):11-15. 

Fosberg, F.R. and M.H. Sachet. 1980. Systematic studies of Micronesian plants. 

Smithsonian Contributions to Botany 45:1-40. 

Hawaii and Pacific Plants Recovery Coordinating Committee. 1994. Minutes of 

the July 7-8, 1994 meeting. Prepared for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

Pacific Islands Ecoregion, Honolulu, Hawaii. 

Kanehira, R. 1933. New or noteworthy trees from Micronesia 1-15. Botanical 

Magazine of Tokyo 47:676. 

Kessler, C. 1997. Feral animal monitoring and management. In: Annual 

progress report, fiscal year 1996. Pittman-Robertson Federal Aid in 

Wildlife Restoration Program. Division of Fish and Wildlife, CNMI, 

pages 8-14. 

Lemke, T.O. 1992. Status of the Mariana fruit bat (Pteropus mariannus) in the 

Northern Mariana Islands north of Saipan. Pages 68-73 in D.E. Wilson 

and G.L. Graham (eds.), Pacific Island Flying Foxes: Proceedings of an 

international conservation conference. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

Biological Report 90(23):68-73. 
66

Mabberley, D.J. 1990. The Plant Book. Cambridge University Press. New York, 

New York. 707 pages. 

Mueller-Dombois, D. and Fosberg, R.F. 1998. Vegetation of the tropical Pacific 

Islands. Springer-Verlag New York, Inc., New York. 733 pages. 

Raulerson, L. and A. Rinehart. 1991. Page 15 in Trees and shrubs of the 

Northern Mariana Islands. Coastal Resources Management, 

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. 

Raulerson, L. and A. Rinehart. 1997. Three species from Rota. University of 

Guam Herbarium (GUAM) Contribution No. 34, University of Guam, 

Territory of Guam. 18 pages. 

Resources Northwest, Inc. 1997. Draft island of Rota natural resources 

conservation plan, June 5, 1997. Prepared for the Commonwealth of the 

Northern Mariana Islands by Resources Northwest, Inc., Tigard, Oregon. 

80 pages. 

Sabana Protected Area Management Committee. 1996. Management plan for 

the Sabana Protected Area, Rota/Luta, Commonwealth of the Northern 

Mariana Islands. 31 pages. 

Smith, C.W. 1985. Impact of alien plants on Hawaii’s native biota. Pages 180-

250 in C.P. Stone and J.M. Scott (eds.), Hawaii’s terrestrial ecosystems 

preservation and management. Cooperative National Park Resources 

Studies Unit, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii. 

Stone, B.B. 1970. The flora of Guam. Micronesia 6:485. 

Strong, A.E., T.J. Goreau and R.L. Hayes. 1998. Ocean hot spots and coral reef 

bleaching: January-July 1998. Reef Encounter 24:20-22. 

U.S. Census Bureau. 2003. Population and housing profile 2000: 2000 census 

population and housing, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, 

issued May 2003. Available online at 

<http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2000/island/CNMIprofile.pdf>. 

Accessed May 12, 2005. 
67

U.S. Department of State. 1999. Coral bleaching, coral mortality, and global 

climate change. Report presented by Rafe Pomerance, Deputy Assistant 

Secretary of State for the Environment and Development to the U.S. 

Coral Reef Task Force, 5 March 1999, Maui, Hawaii. Released by the 

Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs, 

U.S. Department of State, March 5, 1999. Available online at 

<http://www.state.gov/www/global/global_issues/coral_reefs/990305_cor

alreef_rpt.html>. Accessed September 27, 2005. 

[USFWS] U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1983a. Endangered and threatened 

species listing and recovery priority guidelines. Federal Register 

48(184):43098-43105. 

[USFWS] U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1983b. Endangered and threatened 

species listing and recovery priority guidelines correction 48(221):51985. 

[USFWS] U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1996. Endangered and threatened 

wildlife and plants; review of plant and animal taxa that are candidates for 

listing as endangered or threatened species. Federal Register 61(40):7595-

7613. 

[USFWS] U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1997. Endangered and threatened 

wildlife and plants; review of plant and animal taxa that are candidates or 

proposed for listing as endangered or threatened, annual notice of findings 

on recycled petitions, and annual description of progress on listing actions. 

Federal Register 62(182):49397-49411. 

[USFWS] U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2000. Endangered and threatened 

wildlife and plants; proposed endangered status for three plants from the 

Mariana Islands and Guam. Federal Register 65(106):35025-35033. 

[USFWS] U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2004. Endangered and threatened 

wildlife and plants; determination of endangered status and prudency 

determination for designation of critical habitat for two plant species from 

the CNMI. Federal Register 69(68):18499-18507. 
68

Weir, R.C. 1991. Tropical cyclones affecting Guam (1671-1991). F.P.O. San 

Francisco: U.S. Naval Oceanography Command Center, Joint Typhoon 

Warning Center, 1991. Technical Note 91-2. 

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. 

Wiles G.J. 2005. Decline of a population of wild seeded breadfruit (Artocarpus 

mariannensis) on Guam, Mariana Islands. Pacific Science 59:509-522. 

Worthington, D.J. A.P. Marshall, G.J. Wiles, and C.C. Kessler. 2001. 

Abundance and management of Mariana fruit bats and feral ungulates on 

Anatahan, Mariana Islands. Pacific Conservation Biology 7:134-142. 

B. PERSONAL COMMUNICATIONS 

Grout, Dan. 1997. Wildlife Biologist, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Rota, 

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. 

Hughes, Guy. 1998. Wildlife Biologist, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Honolulu, Hawaii. 

 Manglona, James. 2005. Forester III, Rota Forestry Services Section, Rota, 

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. 

Mehrhoff, Loyal. 1993, 1997, 2005. Chief, Biological Resource Management 

Division, National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado. 

Pangelinan, Arlene. 2005. Conservation Planning and Permits Coordinator, U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service, Honolulu, Hawaii. 

Raulerson, Lynn. 1998, 2005. Professor of Biology, Biology Department, 

University of Guam, UOG Station Mangilao, Guam. 

Taisacan, Estanislao M. 1997, 1998, and 2005. Retired, Commonwealth of the 

Northern Mariana Islands Division of Fish and Wildlife, Rota, 

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. 
69

Williams, Laura. 2004, 2005, 2006. Wildlife Supervisor. Commonwealth of the 

Northern Mariana Islands Division of Fish and Wildlife, Saipan, 

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. 

C. IN LITT. REFERENCES 

Apatang, H. 2006. Resident Director, Department of Lands and Natural 

Resources, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. E-mail to 

Donna Ball, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific Islands Fish and 

Wildlife Office, dated September 12, 2006. Subject: Sabana 

Management Plan. 

Hughes, Guy. 1998. Wildlife Biologist. Field notes on three plants from Rota 

provided to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Honolulu, Hawaii. 

Koob, Gregory. 2005. Mariana trip report – Guam, Rota, and Saipan; March 4 to 

17, 2005 Guam time provided to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service, Honolulu, Hawaii. 

Wiles, G. 2006. Wildlife Biologist, Washington Department of Fish and 

Wildlife. Letter addressed to Patrick Leonard, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Pacific Islands Office, dated June 11, 2006. Subject: comment 

letter on the Draft Recovery Plan for Two Plants from Rota. 

Williams, L. 2006. Wildlife Supervisor, Division of Fish and Wildlife, 

Department of Lands and Natural Resources, Commonwealth of the 

Northern Mariana Islands. Letter addressed to Patrick Leonard, U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, Pacific Islands Office, dated June 5, 2006. Subject: 

comment letter on the Draft Recovery Plan for Two Plants from Rota. 
70

VI. Appendices 

APPENDIX A. Agency and Peer Reviewers 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service - Washington D.C.

Chief, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

Division of Endangered Species 

Arlington Square Building 

4401 N. Fairfax Dr., Room 452 

Arlington, VA 22203 

Chief, Office of Public Affairs 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, DOI 

Main Interior Building 

1849 C. St., NW, Room 3447 

Washington, DC 20240 

Chief, Office of Internal Affairs 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

Washington, DC 20240 

Chief, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

Division of Refuges and Wildlife 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

4401 N. Fairfax Dr., Room 670 

Arlington, VA 22203 

Others – Washington D.C.

Environmental Protection Agency 

Hazard Evaluation Division – EEB 

(TS769C) 

401 M Street, SW 

Washington, DC 20460 

Biological Resources Discipline 

U.S. Geological Survey 

Office of Research Support 

4401 N. Fairfax Dr., Room 725 

Arlington, VA 22203 

Ms. Peggy Olwell 

Bureau of Land Management 

Room 204, Building LJB 

Washington, DC 20240-0001 
71

Dr. Loyal Mehrhoff * 

Chief, Biological Resource Management Division 

National Park Service 

102 Oak Ridge Drive, Suite 200 

Fort Collins, CO 80525 

Dr. Warren L. Wagner 

Curator of Pacific Botany 

Botany Department, NHB #166 

Smithsonian Institution 

Washington, DC 20560 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service - Pacific Islands Offices

Dr. Earl Campbell 

Invasive Species Coordinator 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office 

300 Ala Moana Blvd., Room 3-122 

Box 50888 

Honolulu, HI 96850 

Mr. Eugene Hester 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

Division of Law Enforcement 

3375 Koapaka St. B296 

Honolulu, HI 96819 

Mr. Ernest Kosaka 

Federal Assistance Coordinator 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

300 Ala Moana Blvd., Room 5-207 

Box 50167 

Honolulu, HI 96850 
72

Mr. Patrick Leonard 

Field Supervisor – Ecological Services 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office 

300 Ala Moana Blvd., Room 3-122 

Box 50888 

Honolulu, HI 96850 

Dr. Stephen Miller 

Ecosystem Management Coordinator 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office 

300 Ala Moana Blvd., Room 3-122 

Box 50888 

Honolulu, HI 96850 

Mr. Michael Molina 

Environmental Review Coordinator 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office 

300 Ala Moana Blvd., Room 3-122 

Box 50888 

Honolulu, HI 96850 

Mr. Jeff Newman 

Assistant Field Supervisor, Habitat Conservation 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office 

300 Ala Moana Blvd., Room 3-122 

Box 50888 

Honolulu, HI 96850 

Mr. Craig Rowland 

Conservation Partnerships Coordinator 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office 

300 Ala Moana Blvd., Room 3-122 

Box 50888 

Honolulu, HI 96850 

Ms. Christa Russell 

Prelisting and Listing Program Leader, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office 

300 Ala Moana Blvd., Room 3-122 

Box 50888 

Honolulu, HI 96850 
73

Ms. Gina Shultz 

Assistant Field Supervisor, Endangered Species 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office 

300 Ala Moana Blvd., Room 3-122 

Box 50888 

Honolulu, HI 96850 

Mr. Barry Stieglitz 

Refuge Complex Manager 

Hawaiian and Pacific Islands National Wildlife Refuge Complex 

300 Ala Moana Blvd., Room 5-231 

P.O. Box 50167 

Honolulu, HI 96850 

Ms. Marilet Zablan 

Endangered Species Recovery Program Leader, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office 

300 Ala Moana Blvd., Room 3-122 

Box 50888 

Honolulu, HI 96850 

Hawaii and Pacific Plants Recovery Coordinating Committee

Ms. Marie Bruegmann* 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office 

300 Ala Moana Blvd., Room 3-122 

Box 50088 

Honolulu, HI 96850 

Ms. Vickie Caraway 

Hawaii Division of Forestry and Wildlife 

1151 Punchbowl Street 

Honolulu, HI 96822 

Dr. Sam Gon 

The Nature Conservancy of Hawaii 

923 Nuuanu Avenue 

Honolulu, HI 96817 

Mr. Robert Hobdy 

Haiku, HI 
74

Dr. James D. Jacobi 

U.S. Geological Survey –Biological Resources Discipline 

Pacific Islands Ecosystem Research Center 

P.O. Box 44 

Hawaii Volcanoes National Park, HI 96718 

Ms. Kapua Kawelo 

U.S. Army Garrison Hawaii 

Directorate of Public Works 

Attn: APVG-GWV 

Schofield Barracks, HI 96857-5000 

Mr. Joel Lau 

Hawaii Natural Heritage Program 

677 Ala Moana Boulevard, Suite 705 

Honolulu, HI 96813 

Dr. Lloyd Loope 

U.S. Geological Survey, Biological Resources Discipline 

Haleakala Station 

P.O. Box 369 

Makawao, HI 96768 

Dr. Mike Maunder 

Fairchild Tropical Garden 

10901 Old Cutler Road 

Miami, FL 33156-4296 

Dr. Cliff Morden 

Dept. of Botany 

University of Hawaii at Manoa 

3190 Maile Way 

Honolulu, HI 96822 

Ms. Linda Pratt 

U.S. Geological Survey, Biological Resource Division 

Pacific Islands Ecosystem Research Center 

P.O. Box 44 

Hawaii Volcanoes National Park, HI 96718 

Dr. Robert Robichaux 

University of Arizona 

Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology 

Tucson, AZ 85721 
75

Other Federal Offices

Ms. Jacqueline Bamba 

Biologist 

U.S. Department of Agriculture – Natural Resources Conservation Service 

P. O. Box 5082 CHRB 

Saipan, MP 96950-5082 

Ms. Lauren Bjorkman 

Resource Conservationist 

U.S. Department of Agriculture – Natural Resources Conservation Service 

P.O. Box 5004 

Honolulu, HI 96850 

Ms. Mary Blevins 

Environmental Protection Agency 

75 Hawthorne Street, H-32 

San Francisco, CA 94105 

Mr. Jonathan B. Jarvis 

Director, Pacific Area Office 

National Park Service 

P.O. Box 50165 

Honolulu, HI 96850 

Dr. Boone Kaufman, Director 

Institute of Pacific Islands Forestry 

U.S. Forest Service 

23 East Kawili St. 

Hilo, HI 96720 

Mr. Ken Kramer 

Soil Conservationist 

U.S. Department of Agriculture – Natural Resources Conservation Service 

P.O. Box 5082 CHRB 

Saipan, MP 96950-5080 

Mr. Bill Moran 

District Conservationist 

U.S. Department of Agriculture – Natural Resources Conservation Service 

P. O. Box 5082 CHRB 

Saipan, MP 96950-5082 

Mr. Jeffrey Schorr 

Field Representative, CNMI 

Department of the Interior 
76

Office of Insular Affairs 

Third floor, Horiguchi Bldg. 

P. O. Box 502622 

Saipan, MP 96950 

Ms. Patricia Young 

Program Manager CNMI and Republic of Palau 

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Pacific Insular Area Programs 

75 Hawthorne St. (CMD-5) 

San Francisco, CA 94105 

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands

Governor Juan N. Babauta 

Office of the Governor 

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands 

Capitol Hill, Caller Box 10007 

Saipan, MP 96950 

Mr. Thorne Abbott 

Natural Resource Planner 

Division of Fish and Wildlife 

P.O. Box 10007, Lower Base 

Saipan, MP 96950 

Mr. Tomas Aldan, Chair 

CNMI Board of Public Lands 

c/o Division of Public Lands 

P.O. Box 380 

Saipan, MP 96950 

Mr. Ben Atalig, Resident Director 

CNMI Department of Lands and Natural Resources 

Box 924 

Songsong Village 

Rota, MP 96951 

Mr. Felipe Atalig, Director 

Coastal Resources Management Office 

CNMI Department of Lands and Natural Resources 

AAA 2852, Box 10001 

San Jose 

Saipan, MP 96950 
77

Mr. Ignacio V. Cabrera, Acting Director 

CNMI Division of Environmental Quality 

P.O. Box 1034 CK 

Saipan, MP 96950 

Mr. Isaac Calvo 

CNMI Department of Lands and Natural Resources 

Box 924 

Songsong Village, Rota, MP 96951 

Mr. Vince Castro 

Office of Public Lands 

P.O. Box 100380 

Saipan, MP 96950 

Mr. Pete A. Duenas, Jr. 

Department of Community and Cultural Affairs 

CNMI Division of Historic Preservation 

P.O. Box 827 

Rota, MP 96951 

Mr. Frank M. Eliptico 

Chief, Real Estate Division 

Office of Public Lands 

P.O. Box 500380 

Saipan, MP 96950 

Rep. Melvin L.O. Faisao 

Chairman, Committee on Federal and Foreign Relations 

House of Representatives 

Eleventh Northern Marianas 

Commonwealth Legislature 

P.O. Box 586 CK 

Saipan, MP 96950 

Ms. Bertha C. Leon Guerrero 

Director, Office of Public Lands 

P.O. Box 500380 

Saipan, MP 96950 

Mr. Joe Guerrero 

CNMI Division of Historic Preservation 

Department of Community and Cultural Affairs 

Office of the Governor 

Airport Road 

Saipan, MP 96950 
78

Ms. Patricia Guerrero 

Federal Program Coordinator of Policy 

Technical Services Division 

CNMI Department of Public Works 

Lower Base 

Saipan, MP 96950 

Mr. Henry Hofschneider, Commissioner 

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands 

Marianas Public Lands Authority 

P.O. Box 500380, CK 

Saipan, MP 96950 

Mr. James C. Manglona * 

Forester III 

Forestry Services Section 

Department of Lands and Natural Resources 

P.O. Box 924 

Rota, MP 96951 

Mr. Richard Seman, Acting Secretary 

Department of Lands and Natural Resources 

P.O. Box 10007, Lower Base 

CNMI 

Saipan, MP 96950 

Mr. Juan Reyes, Secretary 

CNMI Department of Public Works 

P.O. Box 10007 

Saipan, MP 96950 

Mr. Joseph Ruak 

Public Information and Education Officer 

Division of Fish and Wildlife 

P.O. Box 10007, Lower Base 

Saipan, MP 96950 

Mr. Paul Hamilton, Acting Director 

CNMI Division of Fish and Wildlife 

P.O. Box 10007, Lower Base 

Saipan, MP 96950 

Ms. Laura L. Williams * 

Wildlife Supervisor 

CNMI Division of Fish and Wildlife 
79

P.O. Box 10007, Lower Base 

Saipan, MP 96950 

Counties

Honorable Benjamin T. Manglona 

Mayor, Municipality of Rota 

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands 

P.O. Box 537 

Songsong Village, Rota, MP 96951 

Mr. Thomas Bruce 

Legal Counsel, Office of the Mayor 

P.O. Box 537 

Songsong Village, Rota, MP 96951 

Mr. William (Bill) Pendergrass 

Rota Coastal Resources Management 

P.O. Box 1025 

Songsong Village, Rota, MP 96951 

Other Interested Parties

Mr. David Henkin 

223 South King Street 

Austin Building, Suite 400 

Honolulu, HI 96813 

Dr. Derral Herbst * 

Bishop Museum, Botany Department 

1525 Bernice Street 

P.O. Box 19000A 

Honolulu, HI 96817-2704 

Mr. Clyde Imada 

Bishop Museum, Botany Department 

1525 Bernice Street 

P.O. Box 19000A 

Honolulu, HI 96817-2704 

Dr. John Marzluff 

College of Forest Resources 

Ecosystem Science and Conservation Division 

University of Washington 

Box 352100 

Seattle, WA 98195-2100 
80

Mr. Frank M. Norita 

Student Activities Coordinator 

Northern Mariana College 

Upward Bound Program 

P.O. Box 879 

Rota, MP 96951 

Mr. David Orr 

Waimea Valley Audubon Center 

59-864 Kamehameha Highway 

Haleiwa, HI 96712-9406 

Dr. Lynn Raulerson* 

Biology Department, University of Guam 

UOG Station Mangilao, Guam 96923 

Ms. Agnes Rinehart 

P.O. Box 428 

Agana, Guam 96910 

Mr. Gregory Schroer 

President, Resources Northwest 

P.O. Box 675 

Kirkland, WA 98083-0675 

Mr. Estanislao Taisacan* 

Rota, MP 

Dr. Gregory Witteman 

Biology Department, University of Guam 

UOG Station Mangilao, GU 96923 

Mr. Gary Wiles * 

521 Rogers St. SW 

Olympia, WA 98502 

Libraries

Commonwealth Judiciary Law Library 

P.O. Box 502165 

Saipan, MP 96950 
81

Commonwealth Superior Court Law Library 

Civic Centre, Susupe 

P.O. Box 309 

Saipan, MP 96950 

Department of Land and Natural Resources, Resource Center 

Caller Box 10007 

Saipan, MP 96950 

CNMI Division of Fish and Wildlife Reference Library 

Department of Natural Resources 

Caller Box 10007 

Saipan, MP 96950 

Joeten-Kiyu Public Library 

P.O. Box 501092 

Saipan, MP 96950 

Rota High School Library 

P.O. Box 1105 

Rota, MP 96950 

School Library Program 

Attn: Commissioner of Education 

P.O. Box 501370 

Saipan, MP 96950 

U.S. District Court Law Library 

P.O. Box 500687 

Saipan, MP 96950 

Thomas Hale Hamilton Library 

University of Hawaii at Manoa 

2550 The Mall 

Honolulu, HI 96822 

Hawaii State Library 

478 S. King 

Honolulu, HI 96813 

(*) Persons and agencies that provided information necessary for the 

development of the Plan.
82

APPENDIX B. Recovery Priority System

The Recovery Priority System uses the criteria of degree of threat, 

recovery potential, and taxonomy (level of genetic distinctiveness). By applying 

these criteria, all listed species are assigned a species recovery priority number of 

1 through 18. A fourth factor, conflict, is a supplementary element in determining 

what actions are to be implemented for recovery of a species. In addition, the 

fourth factor gives priority, within each category, to those species that are or may 

be in conflict with construction or development projects. Thus, the species retains 

its numerical rank and acquires the letter designation of “C,” indicating conflict 

(1C-18C). The conflict designation elevates the priority ranking, thus the highest 

recovery priority ranking is 1C (i.e., a ranking of 1C is higher than a ranking of 

1). 

A detailed discussion of the Recovery Priority System can be found in 

pages 43098 through 43105 of the Federal Register volume 48, number 184 of the 

issue from Wednesday, September 21, 1983 (with corrected table issued on page 

51985 of volume 48, number 221, issued Tuesday, November 15, 1983). This 

table is reproduced on page 83. 
83

Recovery Priority Table in Federal Register

Vol. 48, No. 221, page 51985 

Degree of Threat Recovery Potential Taxonomy Priority 

High 

High 

High 

High 

Low 

Low 

Low 

Monotypic genus 

Species 

Subspecies 

Monotypic genus 

Species 

Subspecies 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

Moderate 

High 

High 

High 

Low 

Low 

Low 

Monotypic genus 

Species 

Subspecies 

Monotypic genus 

Species 

Subspecies 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

Low 

High 

High 

High 

Low 

Low 

Low 

Monotypic genus 

Species 

Subspecies 

Monotypic genus 

Species 

Subspecies 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 
84

APPENDIX C. Recovery actions identified to address factors 

currently limiting the recovery of Nesogenes rotensis

and Osmoxylon mariannense and achieve the 

recovery criteria. 

Listing Factor Threats Recovery 

Criteria 

Recovery Actions (including all sub-actions) 

A, C, E All 1, 2, 3 1. Coordinate and monitor recovery efforts 

4. Provide educational opportunities to build 

public support for conservation 

Factor A Habitat 

alteration and 

loss 

2 2.1. Protect and restore habitat 

2.2. Conduct surveys 

Factor B None 

identified 

Not 

applicable 

Not applicable 

Factor C Predators and 

disease 

2 2.3. Evaluate impact of introduced predators 

on Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon 

mariannense populations 

Factor D None 

identified 

Not 

applicable 

Not applicable 

Native and 

Nonnative 

invasive plants 

3 2.5. Evaluate impact of parasitic vine 

Cassytha filiformis on Nesogenes rotensis and 

control 

2.6. Evaluate impact of Casuarina 

equisetifolia and control 

2.7. Evaluate impact of nonnative plants and 

control

Factor E 

Small 

population size 

and limited 

distribution 

1 and 3 3. Monitor Nesogenes rotensis and Osmoxylon 

mariannense populations, establish new 

populations, and augment existing populations 
85

 APPENDIX D. Summary of Comments 

 In April 2006, we released the Draft Recovery Plan for Two Plants from 

Rota for review and comment by Federal agencies, State and local governments, 

and members of the public. The public comment period was announced in the 

Federal Register (71 FR 23942 ) on April 25, 2006 and closed on June 26, 2006. 

A total of 89 copies of the draft plan were sent to interested parties for review 

during the comment period, and it was also made available online. We received 

five comment letters during the comment period, and some additional comments, 

information, and updates after the comment period ended. We carefully 

considered all comments received in finalizing this recovery plan. We thank all 

the commenters and peer reviewers for their time and interest in the recovery 

plan, and we feel the final Recovery Plan for Two Plants from Rota has been 

improved by the comments we received. Many of the editorial and organizational 

comments provided have been incorporated in the text of this document. 

Additional comments are addressed specifically below. 

Comment 1: The draft downlisting and delisting criteria for Nesogenes rotensis

and Osmoxylon mariannense should be more flexible as there is not enough 

information about their reproduction, habitat requirements, and historical 

abundance to provide for one set of criteria. In addition, a minimum of 10 years 

is needed to safely establish increasing population trends for both species because 

of the occasional occurrence of major typhoons striking Rota. 

Response: We agree that we have only limited knowledge of the life history of 

each of these species with respect to specific requirements for both their shortterm and long-term survival. The criteria for downlisting and delisting each of 

these species in this final recovery plan are based on recommendations by the 

Hawaii and Pacific Plants Recovery Coordinating Committee (HPPRCC 1994), 

discussions with various biologists and knowledgeable individuals, and comments 

received during the public review period for the draft recovery plan. These 

revisions are incorporated in this final recovery plan under section II.D. 

Recovery Criteria (“Downlisting Criteria” and “Delisting Criteria”). The criteria 
86

for downlisting and delisting these species can be considered tentative in a sense, 

in that we will review and revise, as appropriate, these criteria for Nesogenes 

rotensis and Osmoxylon mariannense as numbers of plants increase and as new 

information emerges on the life histories of these two species. 

Comment 2: The boundaries of the population should be defined. 

Response: For the purposes of this recovery plan, a population is defined as a 

discrete unit with sufficient distance between it and neighboring populations that 

they are not affected by the same small-scale events (such as a landslide). 

Comment 3: Fosberg states in his Micronesian Checklist that Casuarina is native 

to the Mariana Islands. 

Response: Fosberg et al (1979) and Raulerson and Rinehart (1991) both agree 

that Casuarina equisetifolia is indigenous (not introduced) to the Mariana Islands. 

Therefore, we have addressed its impacts to Nesogenes rotensis separate from 

impacts of nonnative plants. 

Comment 4: Although feral pigs may not currently occur in the areas occupied 

by Osmoxylon and Nesogenes, it would nonetheless be appropriate to mention 

their occurrence on the island. Reference to pig control should also be included 

as a possibility later in the plan. 

Response: We agree that while feral pigs may not currently inhabit areas occupied 

by Nesogenes and Osmoxylon, they may impact the two plant species in the future 

if pig populations are left uncontrolled. Also, because there are other species of 

introduced ungulates on the island, the plan has been revised to cover any 

introduced ungulate which could currently impact, or which may impact 

Nesogenes or Osmoxylon populations in the future. 
Region 1

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Ecological Services

911 NE. 11th Avenue

Portland, Oregon 97232-4181

February 2007