Laserfiche WebLink
J;0100, <br /> P.O.Box 6321 <br /> Ocean View,HI 96737 <br /> Lamson@hawaii.edu <br /> Hawaii County Planning Department <br /> 101 Pauahi Street,Suite 3 <br /> Hilo,HI 96720 <br /> Re: Sea Mountain at Punalu`u(DEIS) <br /> 21 November 2006 <br /> Dear Mr. Chris Yuen: <br /> It is with great frustration that I am writing this letter to you today, and I only hope that <br /> you will take the time to listen. I am currently a graduate student at the University of <br /> Hawaii, Hilo studying tropical conservation biology and environmental science, with an <br /> undergraduate degree in marine biology. I am also a resident of Ka`u, and my thesis <br /> project is focused on juvenile fish ecology in the nearby Honu`apo Bay. My background <br /> is significant because it allows you to weigh the importance of this critique given my <br /> personal experience and involvement in the area. <br /> i <br /> The Ka`u District presents an amazing example of a relatively pristine coastline, <br /> especially in comparison to the rest of the Hawaii County, let alone State. I understand <br /> that a certain degree of development is inevitable, yet I plead you reconsider this <br /> exaggerated attempt of turning our beautiful land into a business venture. Multiple gaps <br /> exist in the Sea Mountain at Punalu`u DEIS prepared by Group 70 International, Inc. <br /> Therefore, I am requesting that you reject it outright, and instead address the need for a <br /> contested hearing on the issue. Below is a list of my main concerns for the inadequacy of <br /> the DEIS: <br /> -- My main argument lies in the paucity of data collection on marine biota in the <br /> marine and pond environments analysis conducted by Marine Research Consultants, <br /> Inc. (Appendix J). After spending dozens of afternoons surveying the fishes of <br /> nearby Honu`apo Bay, I can wholeheartedly say that no one can fully analyze the <br /> marine resources of an area using one single day's worth of research on species <br /> abundance. The results drawn from three days of fieldwork: two days in December <br /> where researchers"qualitatively" assessed the offshore resources from shore, and one <br /> day in the water in April do not qualify as good science. Fish and turtles are not like <br /> plants in that they move around and cannot always be found at the same location. <br /> This study, and its conclusions are bogus and do not reveal much about the <br /> Punalu`u's marine resources. In fact, the cultural analysis provided by Maria E. <br /> Ka`imipono Orr(Appendix F) of fish presence in the bay is more thorough than that <br /> of the professionals. Orr lists 11 species of fish that locals advised her were <br /> important food fishes found at Punalu`u,whereas the marine biologist's technical <br />