Guam's last håyun lågu tree (Serianthes nelsonii) in peril

Abstract

On the island of Guåhan (Guam) native and endemic species are an integral part of the CHamoru language, rituals, and practices. They are interconnected with their culture and honored together with the ocean, the land, and their ancestors. Presently, this spiritual connection is being jeopardized as military expansion threatens the sacred lands of Tailalo’ and Litekyan. Phylogenetic and ethnographic research, connected to the principles of environmental justice, has brought attention to the social movement to protect the last håyun lågu tree (Serianthes nelsonii) at Tailalo’. This opinion piece is a rallying cry to safeguard the last håyun lågu and to confront the U.S. National Environmental Policy Act and the U.S. Endangered Species Act, as its regulations do not mirror the island's social and cultural system and fail to incorporate Indigenous and scientific perspectives to protect Indigenous biocultural heritage.

Incident Light Level Influences Elemental Budgets of Serianthes nelsonii Merr. Leaf Development

“…This unique legume tree is one of more than 220,000 plant species that occur in a single country and deserve special protection protocols in each host country [31]. The tree has emerged as a symbol of cultural preservation in the face of a militaristic colonial occupying force [5,6], which places it among the tree species recognized as venerable trees [32]. The tree was described in 1919 and Red-listed as Critically Endangered in 1998 [1].…”

“…The first large-scale nursery and out-planting project was funded in the 1990s and resulted in 100% mortality; then, numerous comparable projects were funded in the subsequent decades with the same results [6]. As of today, these same failed approaches have continued to be funded, resulting in the global population of mature individuals dwindling from more than 120 in 1994 [4] to less than 40 today [5]. This history indicates that the continued funding of propagation and out-planting projects by the same failed practitioners is not justified and resources would better propel species recovery if they were made available to capable scientists with the skills to determine the causes of the historical and ongoing plant mortality [6].…”

“…The species was listed under the United States Endangered Species Act (ESA) in 1987 [2] and a national recovery plan was published in 1994 [3]. The global population of more than 120 mature individuals at the time of the ESA-listing [4] has declined to less than 40 today [5]. The proposed derivation of these failures in species recovery has been the decades-long funding of the same conservation practitioners and the avoidance of adaptive management research in the many funded projects [6].…”