118 ! 



Part of the problem for Hawaii is that although it is unique and its ecosystems 

 are totally different froni any on the continental USA, it is legally a State of the 

 United btates and therefore international quarantine treaties do not apply for visi- 

 tors and goods from the mainland to Hawaii. Federal laws and rules aim to protect 

 large-scale mainland agriculture by preventing pests established in Hawaii from en- 

 tering the mainland, but this protection is not reciprocal: the same kinds of pre- 

 cautions are not taken with goods moving from the mainland to Hawaii. The con- 

 tinental U.S.A. IS estimated to be one of the main sources of new pest organisms 

 1 nnn"^^^"^ around 26 percent of those that became estabhshed between 1981 and 

 1990 Decreasing the introductions from that source would not solve all of Hawaii's 

 problems but it would certainly help. Ideally, the law should recognize Hawaii's vul- 

 nerability and enable the mainland U.S.A. to be treated as a "foreign" country for 

 the purposes of quarantine in Hawaii. 



An alien species that has been intercepted at Hawaii but has not to our knowl- 

 edge become established here is the brown tree snake, which has caused the extinc- 

 tion of nine of Guam's eleven forest birds. So many of Hawaii's birds are already 

 rare that the establishment of the snake would be a disaster of major proportions 

 I believe it is of the utmost importance that detection measures be improved that 

 an effective fumigant be identified for killing the snake where it is known or sus- 

 pected to be in cargo, and that a means of luring/poisoning it be develoried It is 

 essential that such means of combatting the snake be developed without delay. 



Hawaii's natuj-al environment has been badly damaged by events of the past but 

 there is still a tremendous amoimt remaining that is of scientific, aesthetic, and cul- 

 tural value that needs to be protected. It is simply inviting disaster to fail to take 

 effective action to prevent the entry of these and other pest species. 



Drastic international and national advances in setting and maintaining standards 

 are needed if the laws and regulations and the agencies that administer them are 

 to prevent further degradation of the ecosystems, plants and animals that belong 

 only in the Hawaiian islands. The time for urgency is now. 



PREPARED STATEMENT OF WALTER R. COURTENAY, JR., PH.D. 



At least 70 fish species, imported from beyond the borders of the United States, 

 and well over 160 native species transplanted beyond their historical ranges of dis- 

 tribution are now established as reproducing populations in novel habitats in waters 

 p u i^oc ^*^*®^- '^^^ figure of 160 native species represents about 20 percent 

 of the U.S. fish fauna, and is probably an underestimate, as stated in my report 

 derived from published literature; in fact, on February 20, 1994, I was advised by 

 a researcher with the National Biological Survey that their new investigations indi- 

 cate that closer to 50 percent of our native fishes have been moved by humans be- 

 yond native ranges. 



How did fishes get moved? Early introductions were made to "improve" a mostly 

 unknown native fish fauna for food and sport purposes, but most intentional intro- 

 ductions withm the present century were made only to provide for sport fishing. 

 Other fishes were introduced for aquaculture or for biological control uses, and a 

 few endemic species were moved to protect them from almost certain extinction in 

 their native habitats. Fish culture, or aquaculture of fishes, usually is accompanied 

 by escapes. Other fishes were released by hobbyists, some (like the zebra mussel) 

 from foreign ballast water releases, and through canals or other waterways built to 

 connect drainage basins. A major source of fish transfers within the U.S. has been 

 anglers releasing bait fishes netted from other drainage systems or bought from 

 bait shops" (fishes cultured in other States from other parts of the U.S. or of for- 

 eign origin). 



Were any of the intentional introductions made after research on their possible 

 negative impacts, or released only because of some perceived need that might be 

 met by their introduction? No and yes, in that order. 



Have any of the introductions been beneficial? Yes, a very few, but not without 

 their own problems to indigenous fishes in various locales. Sport fishing is largely 

 dependent on stocking and introductions, and rarely have such releases had any 

 positive biological impact to receiving habitats and ecosystems. I say this as a sport 

 angler who is also concerned with protecting fish communities. Moreover, introduc- 

 tions have often made managing fisheries more difficult in several instances because 

 introduction urges surpassed ecological concerns. 



Have any of the introductions been detrimental? Yes, many, including some that 

 have caused extinctions. In a 1989 hsting of fishes of North America considered en- 

 dangered, threatened, or of special concern, 41 percent of those fishes were cited as 

 having been negatively impacted by non indigenous fish introductions. 



