|
Many of the policies in the biocultural chapter are related to different elements of public trust without
<br /> using the term specifically each and every time, such as protection of forests, watersheds, groundwater
<br /> recharge, riparian and natural environments, etc.
<br /> "Public trust", page 41, Biocultural Stewardship Policy 1.1, "Minimize and mitigate significant
<br /> impacts, such as degradation, incompatible uses, or other threats to Native Hawaiian habitats
<br /> and public trust resources." 16. Why are cumulative impacts not addressed as required in
<br /> Hawaii Revised Statutes 343?
<br /> Cumulative impacts are inherent the policy language. Feel free to add a comment to add cumulative to
<br /> the language.
<br /> 17. Why is there no "Action" for protecting the public trust in the 7/24 draft GP?
<br /> Again, there are many actions related to public trust without using the term, such as preservation o'
<br /> wetland, native species, wildlife, rivers, coastal waters, and other noted above.
<br /> 18. Why is there no mention of the term "affirmative duty" in the 7/24 draft GP, when the state
<br /> Supreme Court has ruled the county has an affirmative duty to protect public trust resources,
<br /> which includes kanaka maoli resources, at every stage of any decision-making process?
<br /> Using such terminology is not required as stated in a court case. Per notes above plan does address
<br /> the counties public trust.
<br /> 19. Why is there no mention of the term "Precautionary principle" in the 7/24 draft GP, given
<br /> the state Supreme Court has this principle must be followed all decision-making processes
<br /> ensure protection of the public trust?
<br /> gain, notations in a court ling does not requi that we use the exact language.
<br /> "Traditional and customary practices", Collaborative Biocultural Stewardship, p. 47, p. 234,
<br /> Action 4.g., "Continue the dialogue between State and County agencies to identify guidance to
<br /> protect Native Hawaiian customary and traditional practices." 20. Given county agencies have
<br /> a policy of delegating all responsibility for the protection of Native Hawaiian cultural resources,
<br /> as well as traditional and customary practices, to the state and there is no "dialogue between
<br /> State and County agencies, why does the Planning Director believe this to be a valid action"?
<br /> "Traditional and customary practices", Land Use, p. 80, p. 237, Action 10.c, "Collaborate with
<br /> the State Office of Planning and Sustainable Development (OPSD) to create criteria to help
<br /> identify and protect Native Hawaiian customary and traditional practices." see question 20.
<br /> Above
<br /> l he county and state agencies do have dialogue, and this should be continued and even improved. In
<br /> striving to improve stewardship, it is critical that the county collaborate with other state agencies like
<br /> DLNR and OPSD to ensure consistency in how HRS is interpreted and implemented.
<br /> "Historic trails", Transportation, p. 111, Policy 17.5, "Ensure that existing active living corridors
<br /> that are publicly owned or available by easement are properly identified and that their access
<br /> elements are secured and documented. a) Primary examples include but are not limited to
<br /> historic trails and roads, roads-in-limbo, 'paper roads', former sugar cane roads, train
<br /> infrastructure remnants (Rails to Trails), and pedestrian and bicycling paths." 21. Given the list
<br /> of references includes "93., The Daily Bulletin (1892). The Highways Act, 1892.", why is there no
<br /> 5
<br />
|