USGS ScienceSearch

USGS · 70154790

Anatomy of an eradication effort: Removing Hawaii's illegally introduced axis deer

Abstract

In February 2011, a rancher in the rural southern part of Hawaii Island reported a large mammal on her land. Her call mobilized several agencies led by the Big Island Invasive Species Committee (BIISC), a partnership to prevent, detect, and control the establishment and spread of invasive species, to sit up and take notice. Agency biologists installed camera traps to identify the animal, and a few months later verified the diagnostic field marks of a chervid with spots. The animal in questions was a chital , or axis deer ( Axis axis )--a species native to tropical and subtropical India. Although the deer are abundant on the islands of Molokai, Lānai, and Maui, officials knew they weren't capable of swimming across the notoriously treacherous ʻAlenuihāhā channel, and subsequently suspected human intervention. Soon after the rancher's report, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service launched an investigation, which revealed that in December 2009, a helicopter pilot and rancher from Maui had covertly transported four deer in exchange for about a dozen European mouflon sheep ( Ovis gmelini musimon ) (Tummons 2011a, b)--a species also valued for trophies and meat. Because neither species was established in the wild on either of the islands, in June 2012, state lawmakers responded by specifically banning "the international possession or interisland transportation or release of wild or feral deer" (Honolulu Star-Advertiser 2012). The two individuals were prosecuted under the Lacey Act for transporting wildlife between islands with the intent to guide hunting for out-of-state residents (Stephens Media 2012), while the individual who provided the mouflon was sentenced to community service. Further, the helicopter pilot agreed to provide 500 hours of flight time to locate and eradicate the Hawaii Island deer population in restitution.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 18.903688072314996° to 21.24074244508678° latitude; -157.32421875° to -154.80560302734375° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Steven C. Hess, Jake Muise, Jan Schipper. 2015. Anatomy of an eradication effort: Removing Hawaii's illegally introduced axis deer. https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/70154790

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

A RADical approach to conservation in Alaska: Rapid climate change requires a new perspective

In Alaska, conservation areas are managed to promote the persistence of wild species, habitats, cultural resources, visitor experiences, and ecosystem services. Many conservation areas are managed by federal or state agencies, and have specific boundaries, missions, and legislative mandates. Many are also the domains of Indigenous and local people who derive livelihoods and cultural identity from these lands. These areas vary considerably as to whether they are managed solely for conservation versus other additional values. Myriad threats challenge the sustainability of these values, and conservation areas often exist to mitigate such threats. But regardless of jurisdiction, legal contexts, or historical impacts, all these places face challenges, unprecedented during human habitation, from one globally pervasive threat: anthropogenic climate change. Yes, ecosystems, including people who depend on them, have adapted to constant change in Alaska over most of the Holocene if not before (at least the last 18kyr). And this experience has conferred upon its constituents learned adaptive capacity, capabilities, and knowledges among the most flexible on the planet. We discuss the implications of the Resist, Accept, Direct adaptation framework in the context of conservation management in Alaska.

Alaska

Restoring a forest icon: Could returning the American chestnut remodel our wildlife landscape?

Mother Nature was not making it easy. It was February 18, 2009, and winds were gusting, sleet was falling, and temperatures were hovering around 40° F. Our crew of 9 which consisted of personnel from the USDA Forest Service Southern Research Station, the Cherokee National Forest, and The University of Tennessee’s Tree Improvement Program, was attempting to establish the first test planting of American chestnuts ( Castanea dentata ) bred for resistance to an exotic fungal pathogen, the chestnut blight ( Cryphonectria parasitica ). With each hole dug and seedlings tamped into the ground, our hope was that we were one step closer to restoring an important wildlife food to eastern hardwood forests.

Alabama, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Illinois,