HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0490.003 2004-2006 Page 1 of 3
Robello, Alfred
From: Soma Grismaijer [ssinger@coconut-wireless net]
Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2005 10:44 AM
To: counciltestimony@co.hawaii.hi.us
Subject: Re: Comm 490: (Resolution 190-05) Council Comm. on Environ. Management
November 8, 2005 _
Re: Comm 490: (Resolution 190-OS)
Council Comm. on Environmental Management
A RESOLUTION TO SUPPOR"1' THE COQUI FROG WORKING GROUP'S CONSOLIDABED
EFFORTS TO CONTROL AND ERADICA"fE COQUI FROGS IN HAWAII COUNTY -
Dear County Council Members:
Let's be realistic. Whether or not you like coqui tree frogs, there is nothing we can really do
about their presence in Hawaii. According to the experts, the frogs are here to stay. Drs. Karen Beard
and Erik O'Neill explain, "Numerous methods for managing E. coqui populations have been developed
in Hawaii; yet, there has been no report of a successfully eliminated population."1
Since we can't eradicate the coqui, there are two basic options. One is to continue spending
limited energy and resources waging an endless war on the frogs. This approach will create some
problems.
Hydrated lime is hazardous to humans and pets, and, according to the Department of Agriculture,
it is merely a matter of time until someone gets hurt by the irresponsible use of this product, which can
cause blindness, skin disease, lung disease, and lung cancer. The DOA has already reported people
spraying this product into trees using leaf blowers. This is a serious public health threat. The more
people are encouraged to kill coquis, the greater is this danger from the irresponsible use of this product.
[n addition, anti-coqui propaganda can harm Hawaii s tourism industry. Through local, national
and international media, potential tourists are being told by Hawaii's politicians and government
agencies that "shrieking" frogs are destroying the environment, causing sleepless noisy nights, and
creating a state of emergency. This is not the way to bring tourists to Hawaii. The County Council
should be promoting tourism, not discouraging it by telling people how terrible it is here because of
frogs.
Anti-coqui propaganda can also lower real estate values. Since the coquis are not harmful to
homes, plants, people, or anything but insects, there is no real basis for lowered real estate values
because of coquis. Millions of people like coqui chirping at night, and real estate in Puerto Rico with y(+Q . 3
Comm. No.
Ref. To: IPres~
MM
11/3/2005 Re#. Qot
Page 2 of 3
coquis is at a premium. It's all a perception issue. And the more the government generates and
prolongs this negative perception of coqui frogs, the more damage will be done.
Finally, using public manpower and money to temporarily reduce frog numbers because some
people do not like their chirp is a stupid excuse for using limited resources. People who want to control
coquis on their private land should use private money, just as they would for any other pest control
issue.
In the final analysis, efforts to control the coquis will be wasted. If you know you can't eliminate
the coquis, the wisest thing to do is to accept the fact that they are here, and try to find the silver lining
of this cloud.
What's good about coquis`? According to the US National Park Service, which knows about
coquis since it has parks in Puerto Rico, "The Coqui is a tiny frog native to Puerto Rico which fills
Puerto Rican nights with its unique and melodious singing, which clearly says "co-qui." According to
legend, this means "I love you."" 2
As for other benefits of coquis, they do eat mosquitoes. Again, according to the National Park
Service, "They love the hot and humid climate of Puerto Rico and eat mosquitoes and other insects
every night." 3 Hawaii residents who live with coquis have also reported that coquis eat rose beetles, tree
borers, leafhoppers, fire ants, roaches, stinging nettle caterpillars, and other pests. They make excellent
natural pest control, and can reduce the need for pesticides.
And keep in mind that frogs are disappearing worldwide due to pollution, development, and
disease. Hawaii may become one of the few places where people can have frogs, which can increase real
estate values.
In conclusion, fighting a losing battle will harm Hawaii. Acceptance is the only rational choice.
Sincerely,
Soma Grismaijer
Director, Good Shepherd Foundation
P.O. Box 1880
Pahoa. Hawaii 96778
(808)935-5563
I Infection of an invasive frog Eleutherodactylus coqui by the chy[rid fungus Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis in
Hawaii Karen H. Beard, Eric M. O'Neill Biological Conservation ]26 (2005) 591-595
2 http://www.eparks.com/eparks/productasp?id=123049&park=599
11/3/2005