Group News: Hawaiʻi Island, Maui, Oʻahu
Hawaiʻi Island Group
Ensuring Reef Resiliency
By Rob Culbertson | Reading time: 1.5 minutes
Throughout the state of Hawaiʻi, cries and claims on how to ensure coral reef resilience in the face of looming climate and sea chemistry change have provided the impetus for a raft of legislative proposals this year. These proposals may or may not succeed in preserving the spectacular natural pageantry of the marine environment that has long been the centerpiece of Hawaiʻi's attractiveness.
Many administrative initiatives toward reform of regulations and enforcement capabilities are welcomed by the Sierra Club, responsible marine operators and traditional fishing practitioners, as part of a long overdue solution to the problems of overfishing and poaching.
However, one long standing contentious issue that has so far failed to heel to this necessary reform awakening is the continuing effort to support the commercial 'aquarium trade'; especially on the west coast of the Big Island, the so called "Gold Coast'' (so named because of its wonderful and unique abundance of yellow tang reef fish).
Now the latest attempt to re-institute the currently outlawed commercial take of the highly prized ornamental yellow tang and seven other important reef fish is again before in the form of a 'revised' Draft Environmental Impact Statement for West Hawaiʻi. A prior 'final' EIS for commercial pet trade fish collecting was soundly rejected by the Board of Land and Natural Resources last spring.
But the industry and its remaining few pay-to-play insiders are working the ropes again with many of the same discredited arguments, even including this new wildly unsupportable statement, "collection below 10% of the biomass can increase reef resilience".
A plethora of such faulty statements and misconstruction of facts demonstrate a deliberate ignorance and resistance to the most recent evidence of science as well as socio-economic cost benefit analysis militating against such claims.
But public and conservation interests may have the last say. Comments to the Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council draft Environmental Impact Statement are invited until April 9, 2021. You can read the document here.
Mauna Kea Update
By Deborah Ward | Reading time: 1.5 minutes
The management of the Mauna Kea, and the UH lease within the Conservation District, have been contentious topics at the legislature. HR 33 and HCR 41 propose to name 15 representatives to a working group, a majority of whom would be selected by House Speaker Scott Saiki. Lawmakers heard concerns over the composition of the group and what exactly it should accomplish. Some who testified on Thursday, including some lawmakers, see the resolutions as another way to steamroll opposition to the Thirty Meter Telescope planned for construction on the summit.
“HCR 41 and HR 33 would attempt to create the illusion of inclusion while ensuring the majority of the voices will always favor the foregone conclusion of the sponsors: to promote further development,” Deborah Ward, a Big Island resident, told lawmakers. The kiaʻi, or protectors, would like to see construction of the TMT on Mauna Kea permanently halted.
The observatories hope the group can provide a path forward to get a key lease extension from the state. All the observatories operate under that master lease, which is expected to end in 2033 unless the BLNR grants UH a lease extension. The University has plans to release an updated Master Plan this spring, an EIS for a lease extension, EA documents for the decommissioning of the Caltech Submillimeter Observatory and the Hoku Kea teaching telescope. A new 28” educational telescope is proposed, and of the numerous options, the University has selected a site at the Hale Pohaku, in spite of a preponderance of comments opposing the site. In preparation for construction, UH disclosed plans to drill one geotechnical boring diameter of 4-5 inches, to a depth of up to 20 feet, and obtaining adequate soil samples from that boring to support the design for the facility.
Maui Group - Pono Water Planning for Maui's Future
The rugged Hamakualoa Maui coastline has many natural springs that support legendary fishing areas and is widely used by the local community. High capacity County wells sending Haʻikū aquifer water to south Maui could alter the natural coastal groundwater discharge patterns forever, and traditional and cultural users want to see the expensive well plan put on the hold in the Maui Water Plan.
By Lucienne de Naie | Reading time: 3 min
East Maui communities have watched their stream water be taken far away to more profitable locations for almost 150 years. Now the plan is to go after the underground water as well. Explosive luxury resort growth in Maui’s driest areas has led to proposals for high capacity municipal wells in the rural community of Haʻikū. The eight wells and an expensive 16-mile long pipeline is being touted in the current Maui Water Plan update as the only practical solution for south Maui’s future water supply. Local citizens and the Maui Group have questioned if the Haʻikū wells are really the most reliable, cost-effective and environmentally friendly choice.
In 1993, Maui Group members supported legal challenges by local coalitions when the first two wells of the Haʻikū plan, drilled in near-by Pāʻia, proved to be contaminated with agricultural toxins. Haʻikū was a major pineapple growing area, where carcinogenic DBCP was allowed to be used after it was banned nationwide. Tests found DBCP in Haʻikū's groundwater, but Maui County still proposed 8 Haʻikū well sites in the middle of former pineapple fields. A 1994 court judgement (in favor of citizens) ordered proper chemical testing to be done, a monitor well to be drilled, and a more in-depth Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to be prepared.
The Sierra Club and allies challenged the “updated” 2002 EIS, for lacking much of the same data as the 1992 version. It proposed a very expensive project, based on unreliable data, in an area where local residents had already seen portions of their groundwater contaminated and their streams drained dry by plantation agribusiness.
Many Haʻikū residents depend on small private wells and springs, due to lack of access to the Maui County water system. The $50 million taxpayer-funded plan to drill big wells in Haʻikū seemed most likely to benefit big landowners and south Maui resorts, who could “buy in” for an “allotment of future water.” Conversely, the project would most likely impact local Haʻikū residents, farmers and traditional fishers and gatherers and the small wells and natural springs they depended on.
Residents were also upset that the Haʻikū wells ignored their 1995 Community Plan which says sensibly that groundwater should not be transported from the region unless the water needs of local residents were met first. The Sierra Club and two other groups challenged the EIS and reached a 2003 legal settlement, a consent decree, with the Maui County to reshape the well project. The 2002 Consent Decree was an attempt to make sure that the Haʻikū community was fairly treated and the Maui taxpayers were not saddled with a costly project which relied on unreliable and incomplete data.
Maui County is making final decisions on its twenty year Water Use and Development Plan (WUDP) update. Unfortunately, no deep monitor well has been drilled in Haʻikū. No in-depth aquifer capacity studies have been done. No water quality testing has been done, yet the draft Water Plan concludes that Haʻikū wells are once again the most practical way to start sending water to South Maui in the next ten years.
On March 1, 2021, the Sierra Club Maui Group tackled this timely issue in an online forum on “Pono Water Planning for Maui’s Future”. The presentation focused on the controversial Haʻikū water transport plan, the historic 2003 legal settlement, and the safeguards it provides for Maui’s taxpayers, residents and Native Hawaiian water rights. The Maui Group wants to make sure that the new Maui Water Plan respects the sensible precautions built into the framework of the East Maui Consent Decree.
Let the Maui Council Agriculture and Public Trust committee know that the Haʻikū wells need to be truthfully described in the Maui Plan with all the requirements of the East Maui Consent Decree clearly outlined. Post your simple comments here. It is item (APT-57).
Watch the “Pono Water Planning” presentation on Facebook here.
Oʻahu Group - Public Meeting March 8
The Oʻahu Group is hosting its first virtual public meeting of 2021 on March 8, 5:30pm. Join the Group on Zoom for a presentation and group discussion on rail systems.