Kayangel Rodent Eradication Operational Plan 27 June 2011

Transcription

1 Kayangel Rodent Eradication Operational Plan 27 June 2011 Kayangel eradication operational plan.doc 1/33

2 1. SCOPE and TARGET SPECIES This operational plan is for the eradication of rats (Rattus rattus and Rattus norvegicus) and feral cats on the four islets (Kayangel, Ngeriungs, Ngerebelas, and Orak) of the Kayangel atoll, Palau (Figure 1). This plan addresses the operational procedures that will be used to eradicate rats and cats. Target Islands All four islands are scheduled to be eradicated of rodents at the same time (within a space of four weeks). During low tide, the islands are separated from each other by a maximum of 750 meters, with depths of 2 to 3 meters or less (Colin, 2009). Rats are known to be able to swim and could move between islands with these conditions. Total land area is around 3 km 2, located within a 12.1 km 2 lagoon. Kayangel is only accessible by boat, and separated from the nearest land by 40 kilometers of lagoon and open sea. 100% of the islands are privately owned, although most is managed by the Kayangel State Government. Kayangel hectares, inhabited (N = approx at any one time, with a registered voter population of 188 (2005)) o Human dwellings, pet cats, pet dogs, pigs present o Large taro patches, small farms, and several stone platforms present Ngeriungs hectares, uninhabited o Small marsh present, one small covered structure present Ngerebelas hectares, uninhabited, one small covered structure present Orak hectares, uninhabited Total size is ha. Target Species During a Feasibility Study in 2006, two rat species were confirmed on Kayangel, Ngeriungs, and Ngerebelas: Rattus rattus and Rattus norvegicus. Rats are present on Orak, and presumed to be one of these species. Feral cats have been confirmed on Kayangel, Ngeriungs, and Ngerebelas. No cats are thought to reside on Orak, which is likely too small to support them. Numbers of feral cats are unknown, although an Italian tourist in 2010 confirmed releasing three cats on Ngerebelas (Gupta, pers. comm. 2010). Whether cats continue to survive on Ngeriungs and Ngerebelas is unknown. There is no conclusive evidence either confirming the absence or presence of House mice (Mus musculus). During development of the Kayangel Atoll Feasibility Report (Holm et al 2006), community members said that mice were present on the island. During rat trapping on Ngerebelas island in 2007, 481 rodents were collected from the island. None were confirmed as mice, although employees at the Palau Division of Environmental Health (pers. comm., 2010) did state that they did not have the expertise to tell the difference between mice from juvenile rats. A study conducted by the USDA APHIS Wildlife Services in 2010 trapped rats on Kayangel island and targeted the home of one individual who claimed that he saw mice near his property. No mice were captured. During discussions with this individual, the USDA APHIS investigators determined that the individual could have been referring to either mice or juvenile rats his description was of a small rodent. During discussions with an expert at the Belau National Museum (Dr. Alan Olsen, pers. comm. 2010), he indicated that he doubted that mice could survive on Kayangel, given the high density of rats. Kayangel eradication operational plan.doc 2/33

3 In discussions with experts in eradication (e.g. Dan Vice, USDA, and Steve Cranwell, BirdLife International), it was determined that the most effective methods to adequately target mice for eradication would be to use a a tight grid of at least 10 x 10 m, or preferably 5 x 5 m stations, particularly if using bait stations. However, the size of Kayangel would require 49,413 stations if on a 5 x 5 m grid and 12,353 baiting points (much of it in thick forest requiring advance clearing) if on a 10 x 10 m grid. The Project Manager (Anu Gupta), with the agreement of the Palau Conservation Society s Executive Director (Elbuchel Sadang) and Kayangel s Governor Edwin Chiokai, ultimately determined that it was not feasible to mark and manage this number of baiting points due to lack of labor and the possible impact to the ecosystem. Therefore, mice were removed from consideration as target species for the following reasons: 1) the lack of conclusive evidence that mice were present; 2) the expert opinion of Dr. Olsen suggesting that the presence of mice was likely very low; and 3) the difficulty to conclusively eradicate mice if present. Kayangel eradication operational plan.doc 3/33

4 2. JUSTIFICATION Bird surveys in the late 1970s and confirmed the presence of the IUCN-listed Endangered Micronesian Megapode (Megapodius laperouse; Bekai) on Kayangel. Following BirdLife International criteria, in 2006 the island of Ngeriungs was named an Important Bird Area due to its relatively large population of megapodes (Holm et al, 2008). The megapode is known to reside permanently on all islands. In 2010 there were active nest mounds on all islands. Estimated number of Megapodes, range from surveys in Island and Kayangel At least 10 Ngeriungs 60 to 70 Ngerebelas 4 to 10 Orak 2 to 4 The megapode is a ground-dwelling bird that nests in dirt mounds. Megapodes are thought to forage on the ground, opportunistically taking food items as they are exposed. The diet is described as general and omnivorous. The two types of food most frequently mentioned, including leaf-litter invertebrates and plant fruit and seeds (Jones et al, 2005). Although the islands are home to many megapodes, there are few other resident species (including Collared Kingfisher, Micronesian Honeyeater, Red Junglefowl, and possibly the Palau Morningbird). According to community surveys in , however, the islands used to support a greater diversity of resident birds, including the culturally and economically valuable (but restricted) Micronesian Imperial Pigeon (IUCN=Near Threatened). There is no conclusive timetable to this assertion, but residents ranging from 40 to 70 years of age have made this same claim. There is also no conclusive evidence to indicate the cause for their decline, but the general suspicion is that invasive species, such as the Monitor Lizard, introduced rodents, feral cats, and introduced insects may have caused the decline in birds. One of the long-term goals of this project is to restore Kayangel s forests so that native bird species (12-17 species) eventually return. The Palau Fruit Bat (Pteropus pelewensis; Olik; IUCN=Near Threatened) (also classified as a subspecies of the Marianas Flying Fox, Pteropus mariannus IUCN=Endangered; Pratt and Etpison, 2008) resides and roosts on Kayangel. One roosting tree is known from Ngeriungs Island. The Green Sea Turtle (Chelonia mydas; IUCN=Endangered) has been known to nest on beaches throughout the atoll (Colin, 2009). Dugongs (Dugong dugon; IUCN=Vulnerable) have been reported from Kayangel s lagoon, presumably feeding on seagrass beds fringing the largest island of Kayangel (Maragos et al, 1994). Much of Kayangel s other native fauna is unknown. Kayangel is one of only two atolls in Palau, and its islands have a unique assemblage of flora and fauna. According to expert Dr. Ron Crombie (pers. comm. 2010), even the smallest islands could have endemic amphibians. Kayangel s vegetation is poorly studied and levels of endemism, if any, are unknown. Vegetation is composed of atoll and strand forest, which represents only 1% of Palau s total forests (Holm et al, 2008). Surveys conducted as part of this project in 2009 identified common tree species found elsewhere in Palau. Kayangel eradication operational plan.doc 4/33

5 Most residents in Kayangel are reliant on natural resources for some part of their diet or livelihood. Fish from the lagoon and open sea are the basis for most people s diets. 61% of adults surveyed in 2010 (N=33) derived income from a natural resource, including through handicrafts, fishing, farming, or production of other natural products. 85% of adults maintain some sort of crops. Of those 57% said that introduced rodents had damaged their crops, with some reporting a near 50% loss. Coconut crabs (Birgus latro) and land crabs (Cardisoma spp., Gecarcoidea lalandii) are also present on the islands, although 79% of adults surveyed claimed that coconut crabs were declining and 46% said that land crabs were declining. During a weeklong research project jointly conducted with USDA APHIS in September 2010, the Kayangel Conservation Officer repeatedly searched for Coconut crabs without success. During field work in March 2011 (installation of the 20 x 20 m grid), the Conservation Officer found only one small Coconut crab. Land crabs are present on the island of Ngerebelas in presumably high numbers, as the ground pockmarked with their burrows. The water sources on Kayangel are private rainwater catchment tanks and a state-run water system that pulls water from a low-lying aquifer (which lies 3 meters below the surface). Soils are well-drained sands and fine sandy loams. Both sources of freshwater are susceptible to contamination by rodents. However, there have been no confirmed vector-borne diseases (such as leptospirosis or scrub typhus) in Kayangel (Ministry of Health, pers. comm., 2011). Kayangel was targeted for rodent eradication because of the importance of its biodiversity and natural resources. A 2006 Feasibility Study (Holm et al 2006) concluded that eradication was feasible in Kayangel, in part because of the atoll s isolation and relatively low chance of reintroduction, the small size of the atoll, the ability to reach the atoll by speedboat in less than 3 hours, and the presence of a consortium of groups willing and interested to work on the project. For these same reasons, eradication of rodents was prioritized over control. In addition, control efforts have not been successful in Kayangel. In 2007 the Palau Division of Environmental Health and Kayangel State piloted a control/eradication project on Ngerebelas. This effort included intensive trapping, and 481 rodents were removed from the island. During surveys in 2010, rats were caught on Ngerebelas, with little trapping effort. 3. WIDER CONTEXT When completed and if successful, this project will meet a long-time goal of Kayangel state to remove rats and improve quality of life for the state. This desire has been repeated by the elected and traditional leaders and community of Kayangel during community meetings conducted by PCS during This project is in line with the Palau Conservation Society s Strategic Plan. Palau s National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, Theme 3, Objective 3 is Reduce the impact of existing invasive species in Palau. This project has been endorsed by Palau s National Invasive Species Committee. As stated in the Feasibility Study, the project also helps to fulfill targets in the CBD Programme of Work for Island Biodiversity, particularly Target 1 By 2010 at least 10% of each of the island ecological regions effectively conserved, Target 10 By 2010, pathways for major potential alien invasive species controlled, Target 11 Management plans in place for major alien species that threaten ecosystems, habitats or species. 4. PROJECT STAKEHOLDERS Stakeholder Effect of / Role in Project Level and type of support Kayangel Governor Final decisions about methods, final ok to Extremely supportive of all aspects of project. Kayangel eradication operational plan.doc 5/33

6 implement, Serves as political liaison and liaison to community. Organizes personnel in the state. Kayangel legislature and traditional chiefs Advises Governor on final decisions Extremely supportive of eradication. Palau Conservation Society Project Planner and All Implementer BirdLife International Funder and Technical Advice Technical advice via and skype Pacific Invasives Initiative Technical Advice Technical advice vial and skype Kayangel landowners 1 Division of Environmental Health Belau National Museum SIUL Institute for Sustainable Living EQPB Koror State USDA NWRC APHIS Kayangel community members UK Darwin Initiative, Micronesia Conservation Trust, and Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund (CEPF) Granting permission to conduct operations on land Provision of information on rats, water quality Peer review, implementation of studies on rodent scat Subproject on planning and installation of Coconut Mill Peer review, provision of data on soils, water quality, etc., and regulator for importation and use of pesticides Observation and provision of some labor Formal partner by MOU, technical advice and implementation of megapode bait interaction study; peer review and advice on operational plans; in-the-field assistance with implementation Provide labor during implementation Provide funding So far, no communication from landowners indicating any problems Limited in time, but supportive of project and willing and able to participate in final implementation and review Supportive of project, able to participate with funding Full partner on subproject Limited in time, but supportive of project and able to participate in specific components Extremely limited in time, but observing eradication whenever possible Supportive of project, provides services with cofinance Requires supervision and payment Funding only, no direct role 1 The four islands in Kayangel atoll are 100% privately owned. There are at least 15 private owners (individuals or clans) but ownership is not clear on all lots. Kayangel eradication operational plan.doc 6/33

7 5. FEASIBILITY THIS INFORMATION IS FROM FEASIBILITY STUDY AND NOT NECESSARILY ENDORSED IN THIS PLAN The Feasibility Study (Holm et al, 2006) concluded that eradication of rodents, including rats, mice, and feral cats, was feasible. Findings included: 1. Risks a. The Study noted the risk of failing to eradicate mice, but recommended targeted both mice and rats because of past successes and the long-term conservation benefits. b. Failure to deliver on the plan (perhaps due to problems with logistics, motivation, training, supervision, etc.). The study recommended investment in project management and planning. c. The possibility of reinvasion. The study recommended that a biosecurity plan be written and implemented before the eradication is completed. 2. The biodiversity and socioeconomic benefits of eradication were worth the costs and risks of the eradication. 3. The study recommended the use of brodifacoum bait pellets, based on its previous use in successful mice eradications and the likelihood of eradication success. 4. The study recommended hand baiting over bait stations (at the time a helicopter was not available in Palau), based on the better likelihood of eradicating mice using hand baiting. a. The study recommended that megapodes be caught and held in captivity. b. The study recommended use of a 20x20 meter grid and a 12 kg/ha application rate, with extra bait applied on the coast. The study recommended a 20% contingency rate. c. The study recommended eradication during the dry season (April/May), preferably when food is limited, crab populations are lowest, and breeding is limited. i. The study recommended that where bait stations were to be used, they were first to be placed on a 40x40 m grid for the first month, and a 20x20 m grid until uptake was zero. The application rate was suggested at 10 kg/ha, based on a project in French Polynesia Rangiora. 5. The study recommended laying 1080 cat bait stations to kill remaining cats. 6. The study noted that a survey to determine the exact species of rodents on the island was not necessary, and that the recommended plan assumed that mice were present. 6. UNCERTAINTIES and NEW INFORMATION The Feasibility Study and the process of operational planning identified several unknowns. In some cases, studies were undertaken to remove the uncertainty. NEW INFORMATION 1. Numbers of megapodes on Kayangel island higher than previously assumed During previous studies of megapodes on the main island of Kayangel, the range of birds seen was between zero and two (0-2) ( ; 2006, 2009). The Feasibility Study concluded that the risk to megapodes on Kayangel Island from ingestion of bait was low. These earlier estimates of the number of birds on Kayangel island were based on monitoring trips that lasted, at the longest, three (3) days. In September 2010 a Megapode Mitigation Study was conducted on Kayangel. PCS staff members were stationed on the island for 2 weeks. Additionally, two staff members from the USDA APHIS Wildlife Services were on the island for one week. During this time, morning and evening surveys were conducted, plus these employees spent informal and unstructured time on the island for that entire time period. During surveys and during unstructured time (such as walking around the island road), at least 10 megapodes were Kayangel eradication operational plan.doc 7/33

8 counted, repeatedly, over at least a one-week period. Presumably, as Kayangel is an inhabited island, megapodes avoid interaction with people, therefore necessitating a longer survey period. The risk to megapodes on Kayangel island is probably higher than assumed in the Feasibility Study. 2. Interaction of Megapodes with bait pellets confirmed The Feasibility Study assumed that megapodes would be at risk from ingestion of the bait. This assumption was verified during a Megapode Mitigation Study conducted on Ngeriungs Island in September 2010 using infrared motion-sensor cameras (Pitt et al, 2011). Photographic evidence confirmed that two megapodes definitively ingested placebo Rozol 0.2g bait pellets (N=2). In some images, it appeared megapodes may have been ingesting placebo Ramik green 1.0g pellets, but this cannot be conclusively stated. 3. Captive management of megapodes deemed not feasible The Feasibility Study recommended that a proportion of megapodes be taken into captivity for the duration of the poisoning. The Feasibility Study noted that this exercise would both safeguard birds and would act as a capacity-building exercise for wildlife managers in Palau. Feedback on the plausibility and risks of moving birds was sought from several people with knowledge about megapodes and Palau s birds. Their feedback strongly suggested that moving birds was not feasible, because moving of birds would disrupt reproduction and rearing cycles, and because the birds are strong enough to fly back. There is also no capacity incountry to manage captive birds. Their comments are attached in Appendix Unlikely persistence of pesticides in water Given that the shallow aquifer in Kayangel is only 5 feet below the surface, and overlain by welldrained sandy soils, local partners were concerned that pesticides used on the surface could lead to groundwater contamination. USFWS (2007; Mokapu) states that both diphacinone and brodifacoum have extremely low solubility in water and bind tightly to organic matter, so the rodenticide would be released slowly from bait pellets. Both diphacinone and brodifacoum are tightly bound in soil, where the rodenticide is degraded by soil microorganisms and exposure to oxygen and sunlight.... Given the non-polarity of brodifacoum molecules and the ionic strength of seawater the solubility of brodifacoum is likely in the low parts per billion range (Primus et al. 2005). Therefore, potential for contamination of surface water, groundwater, or seawater is extremely low for both brodifacoum and diphacinone (p. 66). According to DOFAW (2009, Ka ena Point, Hawaii; Water sampling conducted after aerial application of diphacinone pellets to Mokapu island in February 2008 found no diphacinone residues in any of the seawater samples [Gale et al 2008]. Water quality data collected in New Zealand after a massive brodifacoum spill into nearshore waters (20 tons of bait spilled into the ocean at a single point), finding that brodifacoum levels were no longer detectable 36 hours after the spill (p. 3). REMAINING UNCERTAINTIES 1. Presence/Absence of Mice During the Feasibility Study, researchers talked to community members who said that mice were present on Kayangel island. The study noted that mice would be difficult to survey given the high density of rats. Thus, the Feasibility Study assumed that mice were present and made recommendations accordingly. Kayangel eradication operational plan.doc 8/33

9 During the September 2010 Megapode Mitigation Study, researchers from the USDA APHIS also talked to community members to determine if mice were present. These researchers determined that community members could have been describing either mice or juvenile rats. One community member who was certain that mice were present at his house allowed the USDA APHIS to place several (3-4) traps at his house. Traps were only at his house for 2-3 nights. During this time no mice were captured. USDA APHIS also noted that mice would be difficult to capture given the number of rats present. They made no conclusions about the likely presence or absence of mice. PCS then contacted the Division of Environmental Health to determine if there was any data to confirm the presence of mice on Kayangel. The Division of Environmental Health did not have any data to confirm or deny the presence of mice. Additionally, one DEH employee stated that they did not have the capacity to tell the difference between rats and mice. This same person, however, was certain that only rats were captured during an intensive trapping effort on Ngerebelas Island, when 481 rats were removed. However, the Feasibility Study also noted that the water barrier separating Ngerebelas from Ngeriungs and Kayangel Islands would most likely have precluded mice from reaching the island. Thus no mice were expected on Ngerebelas. During a December 2010 conversation with Dr. Alan Olsen, Palau s national entymologist and a scientist with previous experience examining rodent scat and determining species present, Dr. Olsen stated that he doubted that mice were present on Kayangel. He suggested that rats on the islands would have most likely have outcompeted mice. Whether mice are present on Kayangel remains an uncertainty. It is known that if mice are present on Kayangel, and they do survive the eradication, that they could pose a large risk to birds. This possibility will be addressed in the Biosecurity Plan for Kayangel. 2. Megapode breeding seasons The breeding season for the Micronesian Megapode is unknown. Jones et al (1995) state that many species appear to tend their mounds to varying degrees throughout the year, yet may lay eggs over a limited period (p. 35). USFWS (1998; Recovery plan) also discussed a variety of potential breeding months, and concluded there was no clear pattern. 3. Risk of secondary exposure Whether megapodes will be exposed to bait through secondary exposure is still uncertain. Jones et al (1995) state that Megapodes forage by raking and scratching among the debris on the ground, opportunistically taking food items as they are exposed. A wide variety of food items has been reported, including items of both plant and animal origin. The two types of food most frequently mentioned are leaf-litter invertebrates (a wide variety of insects and freshwater and terrestrial snails being most important) and plant material. However, there are also numerous references to unexpected food items such as ants, scorpions, centipedes, phasmids, and even small snakes (p. 38). Information from two specimens of Micronesian Megapodes from the Northern Mariana Islands (Jones et al, 1995; p. 157) showed a prevalence of seeds, grit, insects, and plant fragments. In one specimen, plant material formed 50% and insect material formed 32% of the stomach contents; in the other, insect material formed 5% and insect material formed 45% of the stomach contents. Pratt and Etpison (2008) state that food for megapodes can be just about anything from seeds and nuts to crabs and insects (p. 44). Kayangel eradication operational plan.doc 9/33

10 From this information it appears that there is little risk of secondary exposure from direct ingestion of a rodent carcass (containing toxin). However, there is some risk associated with ingestion of crabs that have ingested bait. Given the food preferences of the megapode, it seems unlikely that they would eat larger Coconut crabs or Land Crabs. Additionally, the scarcity of these crabs also reduces the likelihood that megapodes will be at risk of secondary exposure through eating them. The smaller Hermit crabs (Coenobita spp.) are plentiful on all islands in Kayangel, and could possibly be consumed. Additional secondary exposure could arise from ingestion of Coenobita that have scavenged on dead rodents (Wegmann et al 2008). Spurr and Drew (1999) found that only a very small fraction of invertebrates present were found to feed on bait in the study forests, making the probability that they would provide a secondary hazard to insectivores that may feed on them very low (taken from USFWS, 2007 (Mokapu)). 4. Risk of mortality or sub-lethal effects in megapodes from exposure to brodifacoum or diphacinone active ingredients For a study of Micronesian Megapodes on Farallon de Medinilla in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, based on a calculation of body weight and LD50, Swift (~2009; Appendix 2) concluded that Micronesian megapodes would not be at risk of mortality from direct ingestion of pellets of diphacinone and that secondary exposure by ingestion of invertebrates or rodents having ingested diphacinone was low. However, Swift concluded that the risk of sublethal effects from use of diphacinone was high, and could be achieved by feeding on one pellet or one rodent per day. Lujan et al (2010) found no mortality or sublethal effects in Micronesian Starlings on Cocos Island in Guam during a 2009 rodent eradication using diphacinone. Micronesian Starlings were observed eating bait pellets directly. Micronesian Starlings around approximately 250 grams. It appears there is little risk of mortality or sublethal effects from direct or indirect ingestion of diphacinone. Given that the Avian LD50 of brodifacoum is 0.26 mg/kg and the Avian LD50 of diphacinone is mg/kg (Dunlevey and Swift, 2010), this means that brodifacoum is 10,000 times more toxic than diphacinone to birds. Simply dividing Swift s (~2009) calculations by an order of 10,000 means that megapodes could suffer lethal effects by ingestion of 0.28 g of bait, 2.79 g insects, or 4.5 g rodents. Thus there is a definite risk of mortality from direct or indirect ingestion of brodifacoum. However, a rodent eradication on the island of Sangalaki Island, Indonesia, in 2003 (Guntram G. Meier, pers. comm., 2010) used brodifacoum in bait stations. One megapode chick was found dead during the later stages of the operation. The chick was found dead near a bait station, but with monitor lizard bite marks on its neck. Although it cannot be said conclusively, this experience seems to indicate that on Sangalaki Island, there was possibly little to no mortality of megapodes due to scavenging of dead rats or contaminated insects. According to Meier, megapodes are still present on the island. 5. Rat density and Crab density The rat density is unknown. Based on the trapping effort at Ngerebelas in 2007, the density of rats on Ngerebelas was at least 1 rat per 178 square meters (85,891 sq.m. / 481 rats; equivalent to one rat per 13x13m area). From mere visual censuses, the density of rats on Ngeriungs appears to be higher than that on Ngerebelas (in ), and the density of rats on Kayangel and Orak appears to be much lower. Kayangel eradication operational plan.doc 10/33

11 The density of crabs is unknown. Coconut crabs and land crabs are thought to be present in low densities. Hermit crabs are known to blanket the ground in some locations, but their distribution is patchy. From field work started in March 2011 to install baiting points on a 20x20 m grid, it appears that there are few crabs on Orak. Ngerebelas has many crabs, with a small hermit crab (1-5 cm) present under each footstep. Additionally, the sandy soil on Ngerebelas is pockmarked with the holes for Land Crabs. Ngeriungs has far fewer Land Crab holes. The distribution of Hermit crabs on Ngeriungs is patchy, with some patches having few hermit crabs and some with dense patches. Although field work has just started on the large island of Kayangel, during installation of reference lines there was little evidence of Land crabs and few Hermit crabs. Additionally, the community of Kayangel has stated repeatedly during meetings and during the 2010 socioeconomic survey that the population of Coconut Crabs and Land Crabs was very low throughout the islands. During the Megapode Mitigation study conducted by USDA in September 2010 on Ngeriungs, crab activity was only noted in 10% of the cameras (2 out of 20 cameras) over the 8-day study period. 6. Uptake rate and bait preference The uptake rate of bait is unknown. Although the Megapode Mitigation Study in September 2010 was not designed to measure the uptake rate, it can provide some information about possible minimum uptake rates. During the study on Ngeriungs Island, placebo bait was placed in 20 stations that were 25 m 2 and contained 10 flags (Appendix 3). This was repeated for six days. 3 pellets of Placebo Ramik Green and 3 pellets of Placebo Rozol were placed at each flag daily, for a total of 30 Placebo Ramik Green pellets and 30 Pacebo Rozol pellets per 25 m 2. All of the Placebo Ramik Green pellets were removed from each station every day, and all but two (2) pellets of the Placebo Rozol were removed during the study period (Ketebengang, pers. comm.). This indicates that the uptake rate was at least 1.2 g/m 2 (12 kg/ha) of Placebo Ramik Green and 0.24 g/m 2 (2.4 kg/ha) of Placebo Rozol, or at least 1.44 g/m 2 (14.4 kg/ha) total in each plot. This calculation assumed each pellet of Placebo Ramik Green was 1.0 grams (Pitt et al, 2011) and each pellet of Placebo Rozol was 0.2 g (based on 2 Additionally, during the last week of the trial (6 days) placebo bait was thrown randomly by multiple handfuls, equivalent to more than the 14.4 kg/ha rate. All placebo bait was consumed every day at every station. Rats were observed eating the bait even while researchers were still in the station. On several occasions, as researchers retraced their steps along the transect after baiting all 20 stations they saw that rats had removed all of the placebo pellets by the time they returned. The uptake rate for all islands, but particularly Kayangel, Ngerebelas, and Orak is still unknown. Researchers observed that rats that entered the stations as bait was being applied and ate the Placebo Ramik Green pellets first, but other than two Placebo Rozol pellets, all placebo bait was removed. Bait preference appears to be unique to circumstances. On Wake Island rats appeared to prefer a bait compound containing brodifacoum (Mosher et al, 2007). Baits 2 The study was not designed to measure uptake rate, and does not substitute for actual uptake studies. In this case, bait was widely available and in placebo form. This information is included here simply as an addendum following the adage, some information is better than no information. Kayangel eradication operational plan.doc 11/33

12 compared on Wake Island were Brodifacoum 25 wet, Brodifacoum 25 dry, and Diphacinone 50 ( ramik ), all grain-based. However, compounds containing diphacinone were preferred in other studies in Hawaii and Alaska. 7. Risks to other species USFWS (2007, Mokapu) concluded that there was little risk of direct adverse impact to terrestrial invertebrates from ingesting rodenticides in Mokapu Island in Hawaii. The study did note that there is some evidence that mollusks are susceptible to brodifacoum, but at concentrations that were unlikely to be encountered in the field. Similarly, the study concluded that there was little risk to marine invertebrates. The study also concluded that there was little risk to marine fishes. During a placebo bait study in Mokapu Island, no marine fish were observed eating placebo bait in the water. Additionally, baiting designs generally preclude direct application to marine environments, and rough ocean conditions facilitate the rapid disintegration of bait pellets, making them unavailable to marine fish. According to DOFAW (2009, Ka ena Point), sampling results at Mokapu after aerial drops found no detectable rodenticide residues in marine tissues of limpets and fish after two diphacinone applications, and tests after the 20-ton brodifacoum spill (which would exceed any potential exposure at Ka ena by several orders of magnitude) noted above found unexpectedly low rodenticide levels in marine organisms (p. 3). USFWS (2007, Mokapu) states that there is little information on impacts to reptiles. There is some evidence to confirm consumption of brodifacoum by geckos in New Zealand, and some evidence of mortality to a skink in Mauritius. However, the study concludes the potential risk to reptiles is considered to be low, as reptiles have a distinct blood coagulation chemistry compared to that of mammals (p. 96). This report also notes claims that the use of brodifacoum has had wider impacts to non-target species than evident in the published literature. Fisher (2010) wrote the level of public concern around island eradications is reflected in responses to two recent operations. After the diphacinone operation on Lehua, and a recent eradication operation using brodifacoum on Rangitoto and Motutapu islands (close to Auckland, New Zealand), some community groups claimed that a range of non-target species found dead in the local areas were killed by the aerial application of rodenticide. The website for the organization Ocean Aware ( showcases local community concerns over the use of rodenticides. Therefore, most published literature indicates that the risks to other species are low. 8. Weather The most recent Pacific ENSO update (April 30, 2011; 17:2) noted signs that the current La Niña system is fading, and predicted a return to ENSO-neutral conditions by July of Rainfall predications for Palau were revised to expect 100% of rainfall during July to September Palau s dry season usually begins in February (rainfall averages 250 mm per month in the dry season). In March 2011, there were repeated storms in Palau, and rainfall in Koror was 171% of normal. In Kayangel in mid-march there were only a few heavy rains. Despite rain, work on establishing baiting points was only delayed for weather twice in the month, and there were few heavy rains. There are no rain gauges in Kayangel. As always, there is only a slight risk of a tropical cyclone in Palau (5-10%) in all of 2011, with the greatest threat latest in the year. Kayangel eradication operational plan.doc 12/33

13 Bait will not arrive in Palau until July 27, According to the Pacific ENSO update, rainfall for the period from July through September 2011 is predicted to be at 100% of normal. July has Palau s highest annual rainfall (510 mm on average), while August has a slight dip (350 mm on average). Rainfall in the dry season averages 250 mm per month. The hand broadcast is slated to occur in August. This project makes the decision to proceed with the operation in August rather than wait for the expected dry season in January to March This is for two reasons: 1) this timeframe will place the project outside of the timeframe agreed upon with donors, and 2) due to the unpredictability of weather, as shown by the extremely wet dry season of 2011 (171% of normal) there is no guarantee that waiting until 2012 will produce any better results than conducting the operation in August Furthermore, additional gains to protected areas and community buy-in and support for eradications and conservation may be eroded if the project is delayed. 9. Eradication failure in Fanna PCS attempted an eradication of rats on the uninhabited island of Fanna in Sonsorol State in March The operation used a hand broadcast of brodifacoum (Pestoff Rodent Bait 20R 10mm, dyed green, 20 ppm brodifacoum) on a 25 x 25m grid (350 baiting points). In April 2010 rats were confirmed on the island. In March 2011 two individuals travelled to Fanna to collect rat tails for genetic analysis. 25 rat tails from March 2011 were sent to Landcare Research in New Zealand for genetic analysis against 11 samples collected from March 2009 (before the attempted eradication). Only 5 samples were analyzed from each year (5 pre-eradication, 5 post-eradication attempt). Genetic analysis indicated very low genetic variability between the pre- and post-eradication samples, although with such a small sample, this cannot be verified conclusively. However, this evidence suggests that the original eradication operation failed to eradicate rats, rather than suggesting a re-invasion. The cause of the failure is unknown, but is most likely because: Several of the people who were on the island noted that coconut crabs and land crabs ate much of the bait. There had been no study to determine the expected crab uptake rate of bait. Fanna is known for its high population of crabs. Additional causes could be: The post-operational report (Isechal, 2010) stated that the planned application rate of bait was cut in half (from 50 kg/ha to 25 kg/ha) because of logistical difficulties in getting the bait to Fanna. The post-operational report also noted difficulties in achieving uniformity in bait coverage. Heavy rains started two days after the last application of the bait (William Carlos, pers. comm., 2011). In terms of lessons learned from the Fanna operation failure, it is important to know that: There was no immediate post-operational monitoring. There was and still is no biosecurity plan for the island, including procedures for a contingency. Kayangel eradication operational plan.doc 13/33

14 The Kayangel biosecurity plan (a separate document) thus includes biosecurity monitoring and a contingency plan. 7. RATIONALE FOR SELECTION OF METHOD AND BAIT Studies have concluded that trapping is not effective at eradicating rodents without large amouints of manpower. Additionally, given the failure of the intensive Ngerebelas trapping effort to eradicate rats, this method was not considered for Kayangel. The conclusion here is that use of rodenticide is the preferred method for use in Kayangel. The rodenticides under consideration were brodifacoum and diphacinone, which have been used in many successful rodent eradications. Three delivery methods (and any variety of combinations per island) were initially considered: 1) aerial broadcast using a helicopter, 2) hand broadcast, and 3) bait stations. In December 2010 the single helicopter company in Palau communicated that it was too busy to commit to the Kayangel project and by May 2011 had ceased operations in Palau. As explained below, the preferred method will be a hand broadcast, with bait stations near homes and in taro patches and swamps. Hand broadcast of brodifacoum Direct delivery of brodifacoum to the environment and land surface (through hand broadcast) is an option for the island of Kayangel only. This is because the findings of the Megapode Mitigation Study suggested that megapodes would ingest pellet bait. Brodifacoum is known to cause significant non-target mortality. Because Kayangel has a relatively low population of megapodes compared to other islands, brodifacoum was considered an option on Kayangel (0.1 bird/ha). It is not considered an option on the other three islands, where the presence of more megapodes poses a larger overall risk of non-target loss (1.1 to 2.3 birds/ha). The risks of using brodifacoum to humans, pets, and livestock can be controlled for confidently on the island of Kayangel (through use of bait stations near human habitation, use of cages and traps for pets, outreach, and monitoring), because of the small and very engaged community. Hand broadcast of diphacinone Hand broadcast of diphacinone-containing compounds is the preferred option for Ngeriungs, Ngerebelas, and Orak. Diphacinone has been used successfully to eradicate rats (Witmer et al., in prep; Donlan et al, 2003; Dunlevey and Swift, 2010; Will Pitt, pers. comm., 2011). In March-April 2009, Diphacinone 50 was used in a 10 x 10 m grid on 33.6-ha Cocos Island, Guam to eradicate Rattus exulans and possibly House Mice (if they were present) (Lujan, et al, 2010). Lujan et al (2010) documented direct ingestion of diphacinone by Micronesian Starlings during the Cocos Island eradication on Guam, with no documented mortality or sublethal effects after substantial monitoring. Starlings weigh approximately 100 grams less than Micronesian Megapodes. As of June 2011 rats had not been detected on Cocos Island. Lujan et al (2010) described the island as having abundant terrestrial crabs (Coconut and Land crabs (Cardisoma carnifex)). Cocos Island was successful at below the US EPA broadcast limits of 13.8 and 11.1 (the first broadcast on Cocos was approximately 10.7 kg/ha and the second was approximately 8.5 kg/ha). This project is choosing diphacinone for the hand broadcast on Ngeriungs, Ngerebelas, and Orak partly because the successful eradication at Cocos Island shows that rodents can be eradicated using diphacinone. Cocos is an atoll-like island and thus has similar characteristics to Kayangel. Cocos has more bait consumers than Kayangel (large hermit crabs were more Kayangel eradication operational plan.doc 14/33

15 prevalent on Cocos and Starlings are not present on Kayangel). Thus the risks of bait competition are likely lower than they were on Cocos. Like Kayangel, Cocos Island has human use and includes a day-time resort. Both islands have monitor lizards. Hand broadcast versus bait stations Stakeholders in Palau concluded that their highest priority was minimizing risks to non-target species. Thus, initial planning efforts for this eradication favoured use of bait stations over hand broadcast because of the restricted access to the bait. However, during the set up of the 4300 baiting points (started on March 1, 2011) it became clear that maintenance of that number of bait stations would be extremely difficult. The terrain on all islands is very uneven. Within the first two weeks the group of volunteers and paid staff working on the project had amassed 4 medical injuries: one twisted knee, a cut to the finger requiring five stitches, one medicallydetermined case of dehydration, and one large superficial wound. Three of these injuries happened to individuals who work in the field regularly. Even experienced field veterans were falling down daily as they moved through the forest. Thus, the project manager feared that if repeated maintenance of bait stations was necessary, it could lead to additional injuries. Additionally, as the teams put in the baiting points, it also became clear that it would be difficult for the people available for long-term work to maintain that number of stations. Additionally, after putting in the baiting points on Ngerebelas, there were also fears that the many hermit and land crabs on the island would dominate the bait stations. This could also be a problem in Ngeriungs, where hermit crabs occur in dense but unpredictable patches. Additionally, each island has an abundance of food in the form of coconuts, wax apples, and other fruit. The original project design included removal of coconuts from the islands, but within the first day it became clear that this was not feasible. Coconuts cover nearly every square meter of land on the islands, in layers. Although eradications are generally timed for the dry season when rats are stressed to find food sources, this year the dry season is delayed and there are ample rains leading to many fruiting trees. Thus, there is a fear that rats will not be attracted to bait stations when so much other food is easily available. Thus, a method that makes bait more readily available, such as the hand broadcast, was favoured. Currently, the operational plan is to use a hand broadcast with some bait stations. Bait stations will be used on the 20 x 20m grid around homes, in taro patches, and in swampy areas of Ngeriungs (which were only discovered during the operation to put in the baiting points). Homes require use of extra precautions to keep people and pets safe. Taro patches and swampy areas are flooded in some areas, requiring bait to remain elevated, dry, and stationary. In an ideal world, it would be good to have both a hand broadcast and bait stations, in this circumstance because: Uncertainties associated with weather and the fear of putting all of our eggs in one basket (such as that in Fanna) Unlike eradications operated by US or New Zealand government agencies, which regularly plan for repeat treatments in the case of failure, PCS s budget is for a one-time operation only. Thus the single operation needs to maximize chance of success while reducing non-target exposure and considering all other uncertainties. Without full certainty about the density of rats per island, the uptake rate, and the impact of crabs, there was uncertainty about the amount of bait necessary during a hand broadcast. Bait stations would provide some long-term availability and replenishment of bait. Kayangel eradication operational plan.doc 15/33

16 However, the expected costs of a hand broadcast of bait and a full distribution of bait stations, including their long-term upkeep, is prohibited by the funds available for this project. If additional funds permit, additional bait stations may be purchased. Most hand broadcasts occur twice, separated by a period of 7-10 days. On Kayangel island, the hand broadcast of brodifacoum will be done two times. On Ngeriungs, Ngerebelas, and Orak, the hand broadcast of diphacinone will be done three (3) times. This is because for diphacinone to successfully cause mortality in rodents, it needs to be available for repeated ingestion. The third broadcast ensures longer availability of bait (at less of a risk to non-target species). Two hand broadcasts of brodifacoum are essentially industry-standard and will minimize the amount of time that brodifacoum is available on Kayangel island. A third hand broadcast of diphacinone will provide additional insurance that rats are exposed to bait even though there is food available in the environment, and will help mitigate for the unpredictable weather and possible above-average rains. The third broadcast, although planned for, will only be implemented if monitoring shows ongoing presence of rats or rat activity after the second broadcast. Bait stations will be replenished until there is no more rat activity. This is expected to be six (6) times. Bait stations with brodifacoum versus diphacinone Bait stations with both diphacinone and brodifacoum were considered, for those locations where bait stations will be used (around homes, taro patches, and swamps). This conclusion is based on the assumption that bait is secured in the bait station or otherwise restricts non-target access. Specifically, PCS has conducted significant education with the Kayangel community, who are well aware that bait should not be touched or ingested by humans, pets, or livestock. Megapodes are not generally found in taro patches or swamps. For this reason, where bait stations will be used, the preferred bait it brodifacoum. Additionally, particularly in wetlands and swamps, it is possible that bait will degrade quickly, if the rodents are wet when they enter the bait stations. To maximize the chances of mortality from minimal feeding, brodifacoum is selected as the preferred bait. Bait in bait stations will be in block form to minimize loss of bait to the wet environment. On Ngeriungs, the number of swampy stations was approximately 100 stations out of the 1100 baiting points on the island (9%). On Kayangel, the number of bait stations around homes will be approximately 200, and the number in taro patches will be approximately 300, out of Kayangel s 4000 baiting points (13%). Neophobia is not likely to be an issue with this operation, as USFWS (2007) states: Rats isolated on islands for many generations may be less fearful of new objects present in their home range (neophobic) and more opportunistic than rodents from areas where toxicants and traps have been used for years.... Thus, neophobia might be less of an issue at least during the initial eradication attempts of an isolated population. Interest in abundant, newly available foods may have been a factor in the many successful eradication projects conducted to date (p. 47). There have been no previous efforts to use toxicants in Kayangel. Regarding use of brodifacoum in bait stations on Ngeriungs, this report concludes here that although there is uncertainty about the level of secondary exposure that can occur and uncertainty about possible mortality from that secondary exposure, the risks are relatively low and these risks are acceptable, for the few bait stations that will be used. Density of bait stations Kayangel eradication operational plan.doc 16/33

17 Baiting points will be placed on a 20 x 20m (65x65ft) grid. Rat eradications have successfully used 25 x 25m or greater grids. However, Kayangel s islands have high or unpredictable hermit crab densities and crab interference with bait is expected. Crab interference may be mitigated by raising bait stations where possible, and by increasing the density of bait (Wegmann et al, 2008; Bill Simmons, pers. comm., 2011). On a 20 x 20m grid, this will be the equivalent of 4300 bait stations. From the ongoing field work, fieldwork to establish the 4300 baiting points in the two months scheduled for the setup can be completed according to schedule. During fieldwork to set up the baiting points, we also determined that there are patches of forest that are extremely thick. Thus, putting the baiting points as close together as possible would maximize the possibility of delivery of the bait to every rat territory. A 20 x 20m grid is feasible given the number of volunteers and paid staff available. Form of bait For the hand broadcasts, bait will be in pellet form. The supplier, Animal Control Products, Ltd., in New Zealand, offers Pestoff Rat Bait 50D, a grain-based pellet bait containing 0.05g/kg diphacinone and Pestoff Rodent Bait, a pellet bait for bait stations containing 0.02g/kg brodifacoum (5.5 mm). For the bait stations, the bait is Pestoff Rodent Blocks, a cereal composite bait block. Bait blocks have a hole through their center which allows them to be fixed into bait stations and which forces rats to eat bait inside the bait station, thus minimizing the chance that bait will be wasted if dropped into the swamp or wetlands. The composite blocks should also withstand wet conditions longer than pellets. Blocks contain 0.002% brodifacoum and weigh around 40 g each. Blocks have been used in eradications in Australia and Seychelles (Bill Simmons, pers. comm., 2011). Animal Control Products, Ltd. provided bait to PCS in 2009 for the Fanna eradication. Type of bait station Bait stations will be the Dead Rat Cafe, supplied by Animal Control Products, Ltd. This is a child-proof bait station that requires rats to eat the bait in-situ. Amount of Bait Without knowing the actual uptake rate, a precautionary approach will be used to ensure that enough bait is applied to the islands. However, due to the uncertainty associated with possible non-target losses, the limits of bait will be those allowed for by the US Environmental Protection Agency on their labels for products containing diphacinone and brodifacoum. The US EPA limits diphacinone used in multiple broadcasts to a maximum of 13.8 kg/ha per broadcast or 22.5 kg/ha if in a single broadcast. Limits for brodifacoum are 18 kg/ha in a first broadcast and 9 kg/ha in subsequent broadcasts. Limits for a single broadcast are 18 kg/ha. Although the US EPA limits serve as a guide in the Kayangel project, Palau is not subject to US law. Bait for the hand broadcast will be as follows: Island ha First throw Amount / island / application Second throw Amount / island / application Third throw Amount / island / application TOTAL 20% kg/ha kg kg/ha kg kg/ha kg kg kg kg Kayangel brod Grand Total bait Kayangel eradication operational plan.doc 17/33

18 Ngeriungs rd app 2295 diph Ngerebelas rd app 675 diph Orak rd app 135 diph TOTAL Pellets 6495 Thus, the total pelletized bait for hand broadcast will be 6495kg. Each bait station holds up to four bait blocks, or a maximum of 160 g bait at one time. The initial placement, with four blocks per station in 600 stations, will require 600 x 160 g = 96 kg bait. By planning to refill each station at least five (5) times (for a total of 6 applications ), this would require a total of 576 kg, plus the 15% contingency, will require a total of kg brodifacoum-containing block bait. This is a total of = 7,158 kg bait, or 7.2 tonnes. 8. COMPROMISES AND RISKS ACCEPTED AS PART OF THIS PROJECT In selecting these methods, this project accepts these risks: 1. The risk and high likelihood of mortality of megapodes on the island of Kayangel with the use of a brodifacoum hand broadcast. This project makes the explicit decision that the conservation and socioeconomic benefits of ensuring that rats are eradicated through the use of brodifacoum, on Kayangel island only, are greater than the benefits associated with ensuring that the small population of megapodes on Kayangel island suffers no non-target mortality. 2. The risk that if mice are present, they may not be eradicated through this operation. This risk is accepted because it is deemed infeasible to treat for mice, because the grid necessary to adequately treat for mice would require at minimum a 10 x 10m grid (Lord Howe, 2009), which would require 12,353 stations on Kayangel alone and is not feasible. 3. This project accepts the risk of secondary exposure of brodifacoum to megapodes via ingestion of contaminated insects, crabs, and rats from the 600 bait stations on Kayangel and Ngeriungs. This risk is deemed low as megapodes do not frequent homes, taro patches, and wetlands, where the bait stations will be place. 4. This project accepts the possible risk of failure to eradicate rats by using diphacinone over brodifacoum for the hand broadcast on Ngeriungs, Ngerebelas, and Orak, in return for the assurance that risks to non-target species on these islands will be minimized. That is, although hand broadcast of brodifacoum would maximize accessibility and enable quicker death, the risks to non-targets are too high. This project explicitly balances the needs of non-target species with the chance of eradication failure on those islands. This project also explicitly prioritizes the certainty of minimizing non-target exposure over the uncertainty of long-term conservation gains for those three islands. 5. Given that bait preference has not been determined, but that eradications using diphacinone have been successful in other parts of the world, this project accepts the risk that rats may not be attracted to diphacinone. Kayangel eradication operational plan.doc 18/33

19 6. This project accepts the risks associated with application of bait when seasonality of breeding and food availability is not known. The relatively high application rate is designed to mitigate for this threat. 7. This project accepts the risk associated with not knowing the actual sowing rate. It mitigates for this uncertainty by planning for a third broadcast on Ngeriungs, Ngerebelas, and Orak. 9. PROJECT DESIGN This project is composed of four phases: 1) set up, 2) initial implementation, 3) follow-up implementation, and 4) monitoring. SETUP Expected outcomes: Before bait arrives in Kayangel, plots and linking transect lines will be clearly marked. 2. Warning signs about the use of bait will be designed, printed, and transported to Kayangel 3. Every resident will understand the risks and activities necessary to stay safe during the period of bait availability 4. Structures will be in place to ensure safety of pets (e.g. construction of chicken coops, tethers for pigs and dogs) 5. Bait and bait stations will be ordered and customs clearance obtained 6. All other materials will be ordered. 7. Logistics for the placement of bait will be secured. 8. A sample of at least 20 rat tails will be preserved for future DNA analysis. 9. Open dumps and trash piles will be burned or covered. 10. Follow-up biological monitoring will be conducted INITIAL IMPLEMENTATION Expected outcomes: Within the first month of bait arrival in Koror, 1. Bait will be transported from Koror to Kayangel, with no loss or degradation 2. Bait will be safely stored in the Kayangel State Office 3. Tracking tunnels and tracking papers will be placed at plots 4. Bait will be staged and hand broadcast on all islands. 5. Bait stations and bait will be placed around homes and wetlands. 6. Rats will access toxic bait and eat bait. 7. Warning signs will be posted. 8. Pets will be secured. 9. Dead or dying rats that are encountered will be removed and burned/buried. FOLLOW-UP IMPLEMENTATION Expected outcomes: 1. Bait stations will be regularly checked, at least twice per week, and bait replenished until no more bait is taken. 2. Crabs will be removed from bait stations during monitoring 3. Rat activity will be monitored in tracking tunnels until there is no more rat activity. 4. Once bait activity stops, bait stations will be removed from Kayangel (except those specified in biosecurity plan) and transported to Koror. 5. If excess bait remains, excess bait will be transported to Koror and disposed of. 6. Follow-up biological and sociological monitoring will be completed. Kayangel eradication operational plan.doc 19/33

20 OPERATIONAL DETAILS Timing Preparation of baiting points began on March 2 and will be completed by July 31. During the expected lag time between completion of the setup and the arrival of the bait (July), personnel will maintain the existing transects and manufacture bait stations (e.g. by drilling holes in buckets, using wood to elevate them. Empty bait stations will be put in place by the end of July. Bait will be ordered on March 31, 2011, with an anticipated arrival date in Koror on July 27, Bait will be transported to Kayangel by August 3, The hand broadcast will occur in August Three hand broadcasts will be scheduled, separated by 8 days. It is anticipated that it will take 1 day to treat Orak and Ngerebelas, 2 days to treat Ngeriungs, and 4 days to treat Kayangel (total of 7 days). (TOTAL: Orak and Ngerebelas: 3; Ngeriungs: 6; Kayangel: 8; Rest days: 2). Teams will have one day of rest. Then the process will be repeated at least once, and twice (for Ngeriungs, Ngerebelas, and Orak) if necessary. This will be a total of 17 active field days, spread out over a period of 19 days. Bait stations will be checked for at least six weeks, or until activity stops, thus extending into September or October if necessary. If bait is delayed or if rain delays the project, field work will be delayed until bait has arrived and conditions are right for the application. Kayangel s conditions should allow for bait application on most days, as heavy rains (>10 mm) rarely occur for more than a few hours at a time. All participants in the project are local and most have flexible schedules, thus accommodating for flexibility in the schedule is possible. Bait packing, transport and storage Bait will be ordered from the supplier and shipped in one 40-foot container. Pellet bait will be packed in 25 kg multiwall sacks and shipped 40 sacks per wooden pallet. Upon arrival in Koror, bait will be transported, on pallet, to Kayangel using a small barge provided by Surangel and Sons Company. Surangel and Sons will provide the labor and equipment to move the bait from the shipping container to the small barge. 5 separate trips will be necessary to transport bait, with an estimated travel time of 3 hours per trip (one-way) (5 days total). Surangel and Sons will use existing vehicles in Kayangel to transport bait to the Kayangel State Office, a secured cement building with double French doors and a ramp leading to its foyer. For Orak, Ngerebelas, and Ngeriungs, the amount of bait needed for the day will be moved by hand to trucks (through a human chain) and transported to the dock for loading onto the PCS speedboat and if necessary, the Kayangel State speedboat. Upon arrival at the island, participants will form a human chain and pass sacks of bait to the staging point. For Kayangel, the amount of bait needed for the day will be moved by hand to the trucks. Staging points will be selected along existing roads. Bait will be placed at each staging point (e.g. where the Transect hits the road). If it is raining, removal of the bait will be delayed, or bait will be placed in black 30-gallon trash bags. Site Preparations Kayangel eradication operational plan.doc 20/33