E-mail robert_cook@nps.gov Wildlife Biologist; National Park of American Samoa
The year 1996 marked a milestone for the National Park of American Samoa and its natural resource management program. At a time when few parks are seeing staff increases, the National Park of American Samoa in the South Pacific experienced a 50% increase, as a wildlife biologist signed on. Though a workforce of three is still extremely small for a park this size (10,520 acres on three islands), placing a wildlife biologist here was a significant decision in keeping with the unique nature of the park.
When Congress authorized the park in 1988, the National Park Service embarked upon a journey into new biomes and new approaches to park management. Created to preserve Old World, mixed-species rainforest and the flying foxes (large fruit bats) that inhabit it, the park also encompasses some of the finest examples of Indo-Pacific coral reef, with species richness greater than found in Atlantic reefs. Also unique is this park's approach to management, rooted in the traditional land tenure system of American Samoa. Here, lands are held communally by villages, with all land use decisions being made by village councils, composed of the matai (head) from each of the villages' extended families. Thus, instead of owning park land, the National Park Service leases it from the eight villages that comprise the park, and works closely with village councils in developing and implementing park programs and regulations.
The decision to employ a wildlife biologist at the park resulted from the convergence of a number of NPS programs, and is a reflection of the importance placed on the natural resources. Key among these programs was the Natural Resource Management Assessment Program (NR-MAP). NR-MAP analysis indicated that the park needed the equivalent of 24 positions to conduct a comprehensive natural resource program. Based on this analysis and follow-up prioritization by the Pacific-West Region, the wildlife biologist position for the park was ranked the number-one priority in the region.
Having a biologist on staff at this early stage is a critical step toward achieving our resource stewardship goals. The park is still very much in the planning and development stages, and a staff biologist better ensures a plan with minimal resource impacts. Since arriving in American Samoa in 1996, the biologist has begun surveys of resource conditions, mapping significant features such as colonies of roosting fruit bats and seabirds, and areas of feral pig damage. Proposed trail routes are being evaluated for potential impacts long before construction funds are obligated.
While one biologist, aided by volunteers, is far from a full-blown program, it is a significant start. It accelerates the development of a more comprehensive natural resource management program as threats and issues, identified in planning documents, are reevaluated in depth. Individual, broadly focused project statements in the park resource management plan are being expanded into several statements, each detailing specific steps needed to evaluate and respond to an issue. Having a biologist to separate large issues into smaller, more discrete components has led to increased success in obtaining project funding. As a result of efforts in 1996, the park obtained funding to conduct a detailed survey of Laufuti, the park's principal perennial stream and a likely destination for visitors to the park's Ta'u Unit. Being able to quantitatively assess a resource condition before receiving visitation is certainly a strong argument for placing a resource specialist in a park at the very beginning.
While few national parks had the benefit of a professional biologist on staff at their outset, it is now fairly well accepted that parks with significant natural resources require resource specialists to accomplish resource stewardship goals. Based on a recent analysis of NPS natural resource personnel, of the approximately 250 parks with significant natural resources, roughly 90 still lack their first professional natural resource manager. Additionally, 107 of these parks have no staff classified in biological or physical science personnel series. While additional staff are difficult to fund, the long-term benefits-more effective stewardship of park natural resources-is certainly worth the cost.
Other articles in the "Meeting Demands" chapter:
Return to Front Page
http://www.aqd.nps.gov/natnet/YearInReview/yir/yr_rvw96/chapter2/tsamoa.htm
Last Update: