i’he most conspicuous component of the flora is an endemic species 
of the palrn^/ Pritchardia remote. , found only in the East and the West 
(l^* &J * 
: u 1k Valj„eys^ There 3.1*0 3 i gw orees ——mos t of which ar g in at u r o— 
gro\*/xng at the bases of basaltic cliffs on the steep, outer sloues 
* «. 
of each valley. Most of the population, however, is crowded into 
small, dense groves on the .terraces lower in the valleys* Kramer (*J^) 
suggests that their distribution may be determined by soil depth and 
availability of water* The faces of the cliffs may act as natural 
catchment areas which would add to the moisture at their bases, while 
part of the run-off during ruins would he held by the deep accumulations 
of debris in the ancient^ man-made terraces. 
The palms have been counted four times in the last 45 years. 
G. S. Judd of the Tanager Expedition of 1923 reported 347 trees in 
West Palm Valley and 168 in East Palm Valley. The count did not in¬ 
clude small seedlings. The 1961, report of Fish and Wildlife biologists 
R.J. Kramer and G. Swedberg lists 229 trees in West Palm Valley and 
54 in the east valley. Seedlings under 1 meter were om|iitted, and 
the report noted that immature fruits were present on some of the 
plants. C.R. Long divided his count of 1964. into six categories: 
w O 
West Palm Valley contained 107 seedlings, 148 nonflowering or non¬ 
fruiting trees, and 127 with flowers or fruit; East Palm Valley had 
32 seedlings, 69 nonflowering or nonfrutting, and 46 with flowers 
or fruios. His total is 390 mature trees and 139 seedlings. I attempted 
to follow Long's system when I counted the trees in 1968. My census 
is as follows: in the west valley. 142 seedlings, 106 nonflowerin^ 
or nonfruiting and 139 with flowers or fruits; the east valley, 238 
seedlings, 11 nonflowering or nonfruiting plants^ and 43 with flov/ers 
or iruits. This total of 516 palms does not include the very young 
seedlings with less than five leaves* 
