KAHEA’s suit against DLNR has gotten much media coverage over the last few days. The following excerpts provide the basic information about the case, please read the full articles to further your knowledge on this very important issue.
Two lawsuits filed within the past two weeks claim that the state of Hawaii is breaking its own law that requires protection of the largest conservation area in the United States.
KAHEA: The Hawaiian-Environmental Alliance Tuesday filed a lawsuit against the Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources for failing to conduct legally required environmental reviews before granting hundreds of permits for access to the protected Papahanaumokuakea Marine National Monument in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands.
The region is world renowned for its diversity of endangered species, unique deep sea coral reefs, and rare predator-dominated ecosystem.
The KAHEA lawsuit, filed in state circuit court in Honolulu, seeks an injunction to halt the unlawfully permitted activities and the granting of new permits until the state agency complies with state law.The islands are revered as sacred by Native Hawaiian cultural and religious practitioners as the path of souls to the next life, says KAHEA.
“Our Kupuna Islands are protected and revered for a reason,” said Kumu Hula Vicky Holt-Takamine, KAHEA’s Board president. “This is not the wild west; there are laws here. Laws that are meant to protect our natural resources and the best interests of Hawaii’s people.”
To read full story click here
Without doing required assessments on how the proposed work would affect the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands environment, the agency approved such activities as shark kills, extreme-sports canoe racing, harvesting of thousands of marine species and disturbing of sunken vessels, according to Kahea’s lawsuit.
To read full article click here
Kahea – The Hawaiian Environmental Alliance – sued the Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources in state court after a whistleblower accused the state agency of refusing to do its job…
Former monument policy specialist David Weingartner claims he was fired because he reported to superiors the issuance of permits without environmental review.
Weingartner’s lawsuit, filed July 8, includes a table indicating 20 permits, most of them for scientific research, which he says lack environmental assessments.
To read full article click here
After reading these articles you may ask yourself why the state can’t and didn’t follow their own laws. We ask ourselves the same question. Please keep informed and check back with us for further updates!
]]>From: Andrea
Last night at the public hearing on the Draft Science Plan for Papahanaumokuakea Marine National Monument, held at the monument office in Hawaii Kai, a troubling consequence of the lack of environmental review was elucidated.
One of the Science Plan authors stated that research activities that have already been permitted are assumed to have gone through a “rigorous” review by management. The problem?
Actually, there could be quite a few from this muddy statement. For one, this statement suggests that research activities that have already been permitted will not be scrutinized- nor, certainly, environmentally assessed- in the future. It sounds like grandfathering-in existing and previous permits, meaning some activities that have been permitted in the past will be continuously assumed to pass muster, despite never actually being environmentally reviewed.
Clearly, grandfathering-in research activities so that they never undergo environmental review creates informational ravines that make cumulative impact analysis impossible. Cumulative impacts, the incremental impacts of an action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future action, must be assessed. The managers need to understand the big picture, especially when making seemingly small decisions like permitting.
Secondly, what is this “rigorous” review that the manager mentioned? There has been no environmental assessment on any permits nor the entire permitting system nor the Science Plan, so it clearly was not environmental review. If this rigorous review were undertaken via the prioritization system of the Science Plan, that, too, is problematic.
As I have blogged before, the Science Plan has two tragic flaws: (1) the prioritization scheme that doesn’t actually prioritize permit activities (To prioritize permit activities, it asks, pros and…pros?, leading to 97% of potential research activities to be ranked as “critical” or “high” in importance.) and (2) the lack of environmental review.
But, the environmental assessment did not come with the Science Plan. The managers argue that this is the draft plan, so environmental assessment is not appropriate now. However, they also proclaim the plan to be an evolving document- not problematic necessarily. The evolving nature of the plan is problematic, however, for lack of environmental review because, if it is meant to evolve, when would the managers consider environmental review appropriate? There could always be an argument that it is not truly finalized yet if it’s an “evolving” document.
On the other side, if the monument managers, in fact, conduct an environmental assessment for the Final Science Plan, which is the next step after last night’s public hearing, the decision on permitting prioritization will have been made. And, environmental assessment is legally required to take place prior to decision-making. The whole point of environmental review is for decision-makers to be informed of environmental impacts before they make final decisions.
So, either the Science Plan truly is an evolving document, in which case an environmental review is likely to be put off forever. Or, the Science Plan will be finalized in the next step, the Final Science Plan, which frustrates the point of environmental review taking place before decisions are made.
Confusing? Yes. But it need not be.
KAHEA urges the monument managers to take the straightforward approach by conducting environmental review of the Science Plan, which guides the entire permitting process, prior to finalization of the plan. KAHEA also urges environmental review of all permits- no grandfathering-in. Each proposed permit should be looked at with a fresh eye, through the lens of cumulative impacts, which inherently change over time.
Let’s hope that public comments are indeed incorporated into the Final Science Plan, whenever that may be. Otherwise, the one-sided prioritization system will continue to rank most activities high, leading to excessive access and impact in a fragile, irreplaceable ecosystem.
What can you do? Speak up!
Last public hearing on the Science Plan is in Hilo tomorrow:
Hawai‘i, July 23th, 6-8 p.m.
Mokupapapa Discovery Center,
308 Kamehameha Ave, Suite 203, Hilo, HI, 96720.
All written public comments must be received by the monument managers by or before August 10.
• U.S. Mail:
Papahanaumokuakea Marine National Monument, Attn: Science Plan Comments, 6600 Kalaniana‘ole Hwy, Suite 300, Honolulu HI, 96825
• E-mail: nwhicomments@noaa.gov.
To read the plan:
http://papahanaumokuakea.gov/research/plans/draft_natressciplan.pdf
(It takes a few minutes to download, but once you’re there, skip to page 10 for the prioritization chart.)
KAHEA Suit Asks Court to Enforce Law On Permits
Complaint Follows Whistleblower Suit By State Worker
“This is not the wild west; there are laws here.”
From Stewart:
The Northwestern Hawaiian Islands are known around the globe as one of the world’s last intact, fully functional marine ecosystems. They are home to highly endangered Hawaiian monk seals and the birthplace of more than ninety percent of threatened green sea turtles. Thousands of people participated in the establishment of the islands as the Papahanaumokuakea Marine National Monument, which led state and federal regulators to commit to a “do no harm” policy for all human activities allowed in the monument. The monument is intended to be one of the most protected places on earth, with access strictly limited by the do-no-harm policy and applicable state and federal laws.
Despite these protections, the state of Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources and the Division of Aquatic Resources have ignored their legal obligations when permitting activities in the reserve. The agencies have brushed aside KAHEA’s repeated objections to the agency’s practices. And when a lawyer working as a policy specialist to the Division of Aquatic Resources dared point out that the division was failing to follow the law the law, the division responded by firing the lawyer.
KAHEA has decided enough is enough.
“This is a place of enormous cultural significance of the Hawaiian people and is intended to be one of the world’s most protected places,” said Marti Townsend, program director and staff attorney for KAHEA. “It is unfortunate that the agencies have forced us to take legal action simply to get the agencies to follow the law, but they left us no choice.”
“This is not the wild west; there are laws here. Laws that are meant to protect our natural resources and the best interests of Hawaii’s people,” said Kumu Hula Vicky Holt-Takamine, KAHEA’s Board President. “DLNR must follow these laws.”
Most people are familiar with our inalienable natural rights, as John Locke summed up as life, liberty, and property. But what about nature’s right to exist, flourish, and naturally evolve?
These are the inalienable legal rights that the town of Shapleigh, Maine, voted to grant to nature last February. Now, in the town of Shapleigh, population 2,326, natural communities and ecosystems are endowed with these inalienable, fundamental rights, and any town resident has “standing” to bring a lawsuit on behalf of natural communities and ecoystems.
Read the Boston Globe article here:
Shapleigh is on the right track. While critics may argue there are too many potential litigants, ranging from the Kukui tree to the Waimea River, there exists an entire planet of species and ecosystems deserving of the right to exist. And, sadly, counts of these potential litigants are diminishing. See:
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N01296862.htm
The above article, published July 2, reports that more than 800 animal and plant species have gone extinct in the last five-hundred years, with almost 17,000 threatened with extinction now, according to a recent International Union for Conservation of Nature report. The track record shows that we are failing at conservation. Endowing nature with the right to exist may bolster our efforts at conserving biodiversity.
Apparent in many facets of our social structure, we have consistently valued profit above nature. After all, corporations have long had the legal status of a “person” and the corresponding rights, including ability to sue. If corporations are “persons” in the sense of legal status and rights, then what is the problem with nature possessing rights to exist? Nature is fundamental to our own existence, quite unlike corporations.
We are behind the time in recognizing nature’s rights. Notwithstanding the dire situation of lost biodiversity, concepts of an ethical relationship with nature have been around for at least 100 years. Aldo Leopold, an early environmentalist, wrote about his “land ethic” in A Sand County Almanac. Based on the idea that ethics should be expanded to encompass nonhuman members of the biotic community, Leopold summed up his land ethic as follows: “A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise.” If we humans were on board with this profoundly simple land ethic- and had been during our last couple hundred years of pillaging-, then perhaps we would not be in the situation of having to pass town ordinances to grant nature the right to exist.
But, alas, so is human nature. Our attempts at control have led us to a precarious precipice: here, at the edge of continuing to diminish biodiversity, we have a choice. The town of Shapleigh recognized this watershed moment and stepped in the direction of preservation.
If my town votes for a similar ordinance, you bet I’ll holler aye. And, when critics question, “how do we know what nature wants?” and argue that the interest is actually ours, I’ll have my response.
Sure, we humans may be the ones instituting this groundbreaking regime of granting legal rights to biota. But in reality, the idea of humans bringing these suits on behalf of nature is not so far-fetched. After all, people serve as trustees to bring suits on behalf of incompetent people and trust beneficiaries. Human implementation of nature’s rights is requisite: the law is our system, and our impacts and attempts to control ecosystems thus far have led to the gross loss in biodiversity.
Humans- but not corporations- are a part of the planetary ecosystem. We are not the operators behind an enormous control panel, like we have long been masquerading. As a single species, we should make room in our legal and socioeconomic structures for the other species to survive, lest we deprive them all of their right to exist.
We should be celebrating and wholeheartedly codifying nature’s right to exist, flourish, and naturally evolve. Without nature, without Earth, homo sapiens would not exist.
Ho’okahi No Ka ‘Aina A Me Na Kanaka.
]]>The Army plans to continue on with training in Makua Valley even though over 50 species of endangered plants and animals are found in the valley, over 100 of archaeological features are present and there is much resistance from the local community.
Eight years after agreeing to do so, the Army yesterday completed an environmental examination of military training in Makua Valley by saying it wants to conduct up to 32 combined-arms live-fire exercises and 150 convoy live-fire exercises annually in the 4,190-acre Wai’anae Coast valley.
The “record of decision” by the Army scales back from the 50 combined arms and 200 convoy exercises the Army selected in June as a “preferred” alternative.
“This (Makua) environmental impact statement was a very thorough and publicly open process,” said Maj. Gen. Raymond V. Mason, commander of the Army in Hawai’i and the deciding official. “We’ve reached the best decision that allows our soldiers and small units to train locally and reduces their time away from families, all while ensuring the Army continues to protect the precious environment entrusted to us.”
To reduce the risk of range fires and threats to endangered species and cultural sites, the Army said it would not use tracer ammunition, TOW or Javelin missiles, anti-tank and 2.75-caliber rockets, or illumination rounds.
Additionally, the proposed use of added training lands at Ka’ena Point and what’s known as the “C-Ridge” in Makua are off the table, the Army said.
But Earthjustice attorney David Henkin, who has represented community group Malama Makua in a nearly nine-year lawsuit against the Army, said the level of training proposed still far exceeds anything conducted by the Army before 2004.
Under the terms of a 2001 settlement, live fire with helicopters, mortars, artillery and a company of about 150 soldiers was halted in 2004 because the Army hadn’t completed the agreed-upon environmental impact statement.
“This is a common trick, which is, let’s propose something totally horrendous … and then compromise with something that’s just awful, and people will be thankful, and that’s sort of the (Army’s) approach,” Henkin said of the Army’s record of decision issued yesterday.
Henkin said the Army proposes to do at Makua essentially the same training and use the types of weapons “that time and time again in the past have caused wildfires that have killed endangered species.”
To read the full article click here.
]]>From: Stewart
If Waianae residents want to stop people from treating their community like a garbage dump, they shouldn’t expect much from the City and County of Honolulu or the State of Hawaii. It took private citizens – namely a handful of KAHEA allies – to police the neighborhood and call attention to an illegal dump that appears to have been operating for years.
The latest reports of apparent illegal dumping in Waianae come less than a month after reports that Honolulu city workers had been dumping huge amounts of broken concrete in a stream in Waianae in violation of the federal Clean Water Act.
According to Will Hoover’s report in The Honolulu Advertiser, the more recent discovery was prompted by Lucy Gay, director of Continuing Education & Training at Leeward Community College in Wai’anae. Auntie Lucy, Hoover reported, learned about the landfill from a colleague who hiked the isolated area over the July Fourth weekend and stumbled across huge debris piles. Auntie Lucy joined Auntie Alice Greenwood and investigated the site on their own and contacted Carroll Cox of EnviroWatch. The three returned on Thursday, along with students from Leeward Community College.
Although the dump found by Auntie Lucy and Auntie Alice appears to be illegal, the City and County of Honolulu seems intent on taking more formal action to make Waianae the official trash heap of Oahu. Namely, the Honolulu Department of Planning and Permitting is drafting a new development plan for Waianae that will serve as the basis for zoning decisions in the area, and it seems Mayor Hannemann wants to let a landowner rezone some agriculture land into industrial land to allow for a garbage dump. The new plan will have to allow for this change.
The first battle will be before the City Council, which will need to approve the Mayor’s development plan. As with the illegal dump, citizens are going to have to step up. As recent history has shown, City Hall would just as well let Waianae get trashed.
From: Andrea
U.S. Army Garrison-Hawaii is soliciting community interest in creating a Restoration Advisory Board as part of the Military Munitions Response Program for two sites near the U.S. Army’s Pohakuloa Training Area. The motivation for the Restoration Advisory Board is to enable community participation in environmental issues on previously used military training sites.
Currently, the focus of the Restoration Advisory Board would be the remedial investigation of two response sites: the closed Humuula Sheep Station and the Kulani Boys’ Home.
The Board will be formed if enough community interest is expressed. The Board would be composed of community members, government representatives, and other stakeholders. The Board members would attend meetings and review and comment on plans and reports related to the investigation.
For more information or to request an application, contact:
Environmental Divison
MMRP Program Manager
Director of Public Works, USAG-HI
948 Santos Dumont Ave.
Building 105, 3rd Floor, WAAF
Schofield Barracks, HI 96857
Phone: 808-656-3109
Fax: 808-656-1039
*Applications must be postmarked or emailed by August 14!
The U.S. Coast Guard removed 32 tons of debris from the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands over the Fourth of July weekend. Much thanks to the Coast Guard for ameliorating the health of our oceans! See the Honolulu Advertiser article:
While I am glad that efforts to clean up marine litter are taking place, especially in such an irreplaceable, nationally protected locale, 32 tons is only the tip of the iceberg. The scale of this problem is vast. Marine litter filling our oceans is a global problem affecting all people and nations. Marine litter, of which 80% are plastics, harms marine life, degrades human health, and results in tremendous social, economic, and cultural costs.
The United Nations Environment Programme recognizes this immense ocean dilemma that affects everyone. In April 2009, the UN Environment Programme released a report titled “Marine Litter: A Global Challenge.” Find the report at:
http://www.unep.org/pdf/UNEP_Marine_Litter-A_Global_Challenge.pdf
“There is an increasingly urgent need to approach the issue of marine litter through better enforcement of laws and regulations, expanded outreach and educational campaigns, and the employment of strong economic instruments and incentives,” the report says.
The report also notes that the “overall situation is not improving.” Thank you, Coast Guard, for your part. But, we must do our part, too.
What can you do to help reduce marine litter?
From: Andrea
Sparked by curiosity about the legal procedure for chemical spills and releases, I have been researching the Hawaii Emergency Planning and Community-Right-to-Know Act. After days picking apart the details of this Act and related regulations, I am left to wonder where I may find the “Community-Right-to-Know” aspect.
It seems like it should be called Department of Health-Right-to-Know. Nowhere in this Act is there a mandate for notifying the public when there is a chemical release or spill. Facilities that store hazardous and extremely hazardous substances over a threshold amount are bound to report their chemical inventory and releases or spills to the Department. But, what about notifying the public of this danger?
As discovered by a call to the Hawaii Office of Hazard Evaluation and Emergency Response, the Department of Health is not bound to notify the public. The Department decides, within its discretion, whether to notify the public through a general statement about a chemical release in the community.
When I started researching this law, I expected to find public notification requirements about what hazardous substances are present in the community and when they are accidentally released. The only public right-to-know is the ability to request records on particular facilities from the Department of Health. But, this policy does not truly inform the community because members of the public must know exactly what they are looking for in order to request that information.
If the apparent goal of the Act is the community’s right-to-know about the presence and release of hazardous substances within the community, there should be a provision binding the Department of Health to notify the public. In other words, the Department should make records on these hazardous substances more accessible to the public, actually informing the community in a meaningful way.
As it stands now, the Hawaii Emergency Planning and Community-Right-to-Know Act requires notifying the Department, but there is an essential step missing in the process: notifying the public, rather than requiring the public to specifically request information that is not generally public knowledge. The onus should be on the Department, the information-bearing party, not the public.
These guys on Maui are dedicated to helping ensure the future health of our islands. From a bamboo construction company to a new recycling center, living in an environmentally-friendly fashion day-to-day has become more accessible to the average person on Maui than ever before.
Check out the following article and support the companies who make it their mission to support our ʻāina!
Maui organizations promote environment throughout the year
Kahana residents have not ceased their tireless fight to stay in their homes. Since their homeland was condemned as a state park in the ’60s, the people of Kahana have had to battle the State of Hawaii to stay in their homes.
And, now, after the State found illegal the law passed in ’93 to allow long-term leases for pre-existing residents in Kahana State Park, legislation has been proposed to ameliorate this unsettling situation for now.
House Bill 1552 presented Kahana residents an interim solution from being forced to leave their homes. Public process gave them a way to voice their interests within the decision-making arena. Reflecting Kahana residents’ input, the bill would help Kahana residents in the following ways:
But, now, Governor Lingle has voiced her intent to veto the bill, apparently under the guise of prohibiting illegal activities in Kahana. If that’s the case, go after the illegal activities as the government would do so anywhere else! The State should not perpetuate the suffering of long-time Kahana residents who are not participating in illegal activities because some residents are breaking the law there.
Want to support Kahana residents in their fight to protect their homes?
Oppose Governor Lingle’s intent to veto HB 1522:
Wednesday, July 8, 11 a.m.
Demonstration at the State Capitol
]]>From Melissa:
Federal stimulus money will soon be used to put people to work restoring our shorelines and increasing coral reef health.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration will send more than $6 million in federal stimulus money to support two Hawaii projects dedicated to restoring shorelines.
On Oahu, NOAA announced today that The Nature Conservancy and Malama Maunalua’s invasive algae removal project will receive $3.4 million in federal stimulus money to create 73 new jobs and restore marine habitat in Maunalua Bay.
NOAA said it also will send $2.69 million in stimulus money to the Kohala Watershed Partnership as a coastal restoration grant to improve conditions at the Pelekane Bay watershed on the Big Island.
NOAA received $167 million in stimulus funding and today announced the selection of 50 high-priority projects that will support more than 5,000 jobs and help restore American shorelines.
To read the full article, click here.
From: Andrea
Good news: bioprospecting is now prohibited in the Papahanaumokuakea Marine National Monument!
KAHEA has been pushing for this prohibition from the beginning of the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands’ protection. State permits have prohibited bioprospecting for some time. But, with only permits issued in the state refuge prohibiting bioprospecting, the entire Monument was not protected.
But, now, the federal co-trustees are prohibiting bioprospecting, too. KAHEA’s victory is evident in the Final Monument Management Plan where the prohibition on bioprospecting is required on all permits issued in the Monument.
Prohibiting bioprospecting in this irreplacable locale is necessary to protect fully the Monument and its cultural and natural resources. Bioprospecting, essentially, entails the search for new chemical compounds, genes, and their products in living things that will have value to people, often through development of marketable commodities like pesticides, pharmaceuticals, and cosmetics.
Thanks to the prohibition, our public trust resources are prioritized for their conservation, not their profitability. No opportunity to plunder for profit in the Monument- at least not legally.
Commenting on the Draft Science Plan, KAHEA continues to urge for responsible science in the Monument. To learn more about responsible science:
http://www.kahea.org/more.php?id=451_0_3_0_C
From: Andrea
The article says Hawaiians are shrugging off the North Korean missile threat.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/23/us/23hawaii.html?ref=americas
After all, Hawaiians are accustomed to the various threats and dangers of inhabiting the Planet’s most isolated archipelago. We are out here far from quick and convenient aid from the mainland.
But, perhaps, this threat should be an opportunity to reconsider how secure and independent Hawaii truly is, out here in the middle of the Pacific. While it may not be time to start worrying about missiles and the universe of possible terroristic threats, which may be unstoppable on a community level, the time is ripe to consider security the people of Hawaii can control.
For instance, food security is something as tangible as dirt in your hands and food in your belly. Obvious to everyone who buys groceries around here, a huge amount of food sold in stores is imported, reflected by the price. The exact percentage of imported food may be debatable, but the need for more food production here in Hawaii is undebatable.
What’s an easy way to improve food security here in Hawaii? Support local farmers markets! For instance:
Kapiolani Community College Farmers Market
4303 Diamond Head Road
Honolulu, HI 96805
Saturdays, 7:30 a.m. – 11 a.m.
For more info, see:
From Melissa:
The Environmental Protection Agency gets on the Department of Transportation’s Harbor division to clean up their act. It’s a start, thanks guys.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said today it recently ordered the state Department of Transportation’s Harbors Division to comply with federal Clean Water Act stormwater regulations at Honolulu and Kalaeloa-Barbers Point Harbors.
Fuel, oil and debris carried by stormwater from the Harbors Division and tenant facilities discharge directly into harbor waters and through municipal storm drains running to harbor waters.
To read the full article click here