Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Chief Mahuna at HPD referred Maj. Picicco, who informed us that the <br />HPD probably under it's present structure would not be able to handle <br />additional marine duties and recommended perhaps considering a <br />County Boating Enforcement Division. <br />Other agencies who may potentially have enforcement authority or <br />interests regarding the County of Hawaii in the transfer of State Harbors <br /> <br />1. Division of Aquatic Resources <br />2. Office of Conservation and Costal lands <br />3. Commission on Water Resource Management <br />4. Federal Agencies: National Marine Fisheries, Marine mammal <br />Protection Act enforcement, <br />5. Office of Hawaiian Affairs, submerged lands <br />6. State Attorney General's Office, enforcement ofHRS <br />7. State Land Use Commission Sec.205A SMA (Special Management <br />Areas )enforcement <br />8. County of Hawaii, enforcement of County Codes and Ordinances <br />9. USCG Auxiliary, safety inspections, registration, and rescue. <br />10. Dept. of Hawaiian Home Lands ?? <br />11. National Guard ( under emergencies, floods, tsunamis, etc. <br />12 US Navy, US Army, US Marines under emergencies or wartime. <br /> <br />CONCLUSION: The County Council may entertain establishing a <br />Boating and Harbor Commission to assist with the transfer process and <br />to further research enforcement practices and duties related to Boating <br />and Ocean Recreation in the State of Hawaii. It has been mentioned that <br />Federal monies are potentially available for security and enforcement, as <br />well as State grants. There has been mention of state owned boats and <br />equipment used in enforcement ,however, more research time is needed to <br />acquire and update inventories. This committee will continue to gather <br />information and advice on enforcement. The Committee can be reached at <br />808-938-0101, and eagerly awaits your input and suggestions. <br />Also reviewed by this Sub-Committee was the Management Audit <br />Of the Division of Conservation and Resource Enforcement, report no. <br />06-01 January 2006. Conclusions state that the Division of Conservation <br />And Resource Enforcement ( DOCARE ) have not provided the leadership <br />necessary to provide for their effective and efficient enforcement. The Sub- <br />Committee believes this report needs to be evaluated more closely and <br />consider options for an alternate enforcement agency. <br />