2013-09-23 Game Management Advisory Commission Minutes

Home

Hawaii Game Management Advisory Commission Meeting Minutes – September 23, 2013 Mr. Aila: The question is, will the Game Management Plan the State of Hawai’i creates - will always be in jeopardy because of the federal government – the short answer is only where there are threatened and endangered species present. If there’s no threatened and endangered species present then… For the last two years – we’ve been working on recognizing that the rainfalls of the forest is going to basically remove ungulates from an additional 5% of the area. We have been in discussion with the federal government – meaning the Fish and Wildlife Service – saying hey – before you take a look at designating critical habitat outside of our areas – give our areas consideration first. So that would help what we believe having larger landscape scale areas that are already gonna be protected – have them considered by Fish and Wildlife Service for as \[unclear\] so that we don’t have Fish and Wildlife Service doing something someplace and the state doing something someplace and national parks doing something someplace. Try to work together to find the best areas that it makes sense for all three of our agencies to work together so that we don’t get \[unclear\] limit other areas that could be used for game management. So if you were asking which areas right now we can’t tell you because Fish and Wildlife Service hasn’t shared that with us. T. Lodge: That’s right and the red and mustard areas represent the areas that are priority 1 and priority 2 of which are to be eradicated. Mr. Aila: Of which are to be fenced, yes. T. Lodge: No, eradicated. The plan itself says to remove the ungulates from those areas. Mr. Aila: Correct T. Lodge: And, so you’re saying that, that represents 5%? Mr. Aila: It would represent 10%. T. Lodge: So the entire island is what that represents as far as the forest. Chair Sylvester: We’re confused by this map, it’s 5 or 10%. Please clarify. L. Hadway: So within that area 5% is already protected and the goal is to be at 10%. The whole red area is identified as priority 1 and priority 2 watersheds. But right now we have 5% protected. The ten year goal is to have 10% protected. It would be with fences and with the animals removed from those areas. T. Lodge: Right but for the watershed plan \[unclear\] that very first item is to remove all ungulates from priority 1 and priority 2 areas. Not just fencing. 5