2013-09-23 Game Management Advisory Commission Minutes

Home

Hawaii Game Management Advisory Commission Meeting Minutes – September 23, 2013 our watersheds and we repair the dams and reservoirs to the point that they’re safe and can hold the maximum amount of water then we have the maximum of water for agricultural needs as well as recreational needs as well as recharge needs. It’s part of this overall protection of the near shore reef waters, by protecting the forests and making sure we have water storage capacity in times of less rainfall going forward, which I can tell you from all the models indicate that that’s going to happen. And so you have my thoughts and I know that there are many folks that are interested in asking questions. Chair Sylvester: We’ll start with members of the commission first and then will allow the public to ask you questions. OK we’ll start with the Hawai’i Game Management Plan. Commissioners do you have anything for Mr. Aila? T. Lodge: How important is the game biologist and how much of the game biologist responsibilities will be the Hawai’i Game Management Plan. Mr. Aila: It will be a major part of the new game biologist’s responsibilities to finish off the Hawai’i Game Management Plan as soon as practical. That’s gonna take some input from the new Program Manager who we still have to hire. It will also take some input from Fish and Wildlife Service understanding where they want to do some of the critical habitat designation. No sense we come up with a plan and Fish and Wildlife Service kind of goes well forget that plan because all of the areas that you have highlighted for increase game management opportunities are in what we call critical habitat. So I would rather we do it correctly and take a little bit more time as we said correctly… T. Lodge: How much are – we’re supposed to be a sovereign state here, right, but how much are we deferring all of the decisions to the federal government? Mr. Aila: The question was how much of the decisions game management and resource management to the federal government and the answer is we work cooperatively. The State of Hawai’i is not a rubber stamp to them and we \[unclear\] that we feel that they’re doing incorrectly \[unclear\] assessment or criteria \[unclear\] to prepare criteria that they are using that has to be, could be improved. I think you need to consider some suggestions. And at some point, though, under Section 6 and under Section 7 we do have to pay attention to what they’re saying in such a way that it won’t violate federal law. If there’s a case where \[unclear\] violation of a federal law we will assert to the fullest extent from the state’s jurisdiction our ability to control our lands and our programs. \[Unclear\] just to see where they may designate critical habitat – it’s just being precautionary you know - no sense we come up with a plan and they say, hey, there’s a threat to endangered species there that we want to exercise our jurisdiction over and your plan goes out of whack. T. Lodge: Will our plans always be in jeopardy because of the federal government? 4