HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 1026.011 2004-2006
Murashige Laura
From: Sherman Warner [shermw@hawaiiantel.netj
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 9:29 AM ;,y q
To: counciltestimony@co.hawaii.hi.us 7,.! I
Subject: Testimony re Res. 432-06
Attachments: Testimony.pdf -
Testimony.pdf (68
KB)
The attached testimony is in support of Resolution 432-06, which is on the
agenda for the October 17 meeting of the Committee on Human Services & Economic
Development.
Sherman Warner
P.O. Box 1185
Kamuela, HI 96743
Comm. No. 0 1
Rif. TOffesso
Ref, Date. OCT 17 2006
t
Sherman Warner
P.O. Box 1185
Kamuela, HI 96743
885-1725
shermw@Hawai'iantel.net
Testimony submitted 10/17/06
To: Hawai'i County Council Committee on Human Services and Economic Development
In support of Resolution 432-06 OPPOSING THE COMMENCEMENT OF SERVICE
OF THE HAWAI'l SUPERFERRY AT KAWAIHAE HARBOR UNTIL ECONOMIC,
SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERENS ARE ADDRESSED.
My remarks have little to do with opposing or supporting the Superferry; they are
remarks in support of good planning. What we have now is the apparent absence of
planning. With an EIS not currently mandated by the courts, it is astonishing to believe
that out of all the areas of concern that an EIS would cover State officials appear to
believe that none of those subjects deserve a level of study similar to that which occurs
when an EIS is prepared. Because not having to prepare an EIS appears to mean to the
State that it is relieved of the responsibility to assess the Superferry's impact on traffic,
the environment, the whale sanctuary, marine resource depletion, introduction of alien
species, impact on parks and other community assets which are already poorly
maintained, and the potential influx of the homeless, I support the resolution which calls
for an EIS. Without an obligation to prepare an EIS, I believe that Hawai'i Superferry
and State officials will fail to assess the potential adverse effects of the superferry and
inform the public of their findings.
I live in Waimea and over the past two years I have attended many community meetings
regarding the Superferry. These meetings have been marked by evasions and deceptive
answers on the part of superferry officials and a dismissive attitude on the part of State
officials toward local concerns.
Allow me address a couple of my concerns, which are shared by virtually all of the
people with whom I speak.
Traffic
For a long time, we were told that there would be no impact on local traffic resulting
from the superferry's Kawaihae service. Superferry executive John Garibaldi frequently
made the absurd argument that if 200 vehicles arrived on the Superferry and 200 left then
there would be a net zero and therefore no impact on local traffic. Of course, the correct
answer is that 400 cars would be added to local traffic. This is an absurd argument, but it
is one that Garibaldi stuck with, and recently Terry O'Halloran of the Superferry has
repeated it.
1
For a long time, HSF officials, with the concurrence of the State Department of
Transportation, have argued that there would be no adverse impact on traffic. Recently,
HSF revised its schedule so that they will depart from Kawaihae at mid-day rather than
9:00 p.m. HSF and DOT officials now claim that the change was made to reduce the
impact on local traffic. Interesting. First we're told there will be no impact on traffic, and
then we're told that the schedule change was made to avoid compounding our traffic
problems. They can't have it both ways. More likely, HSF made a business decision
when they realized that a 9:00 p.m. departure from Kawaihae with a 1:00 a.m. arrival in
Honolulu might not be popular, and, having made a that business decision, they took the
opportunity to put some spin on it by claiming that the decision was driven by concern
for local traffic.
At a recent community meeting in Waimea, we saw a computerized simulation of traffic
in Waimea that allowed planners to demonstrate the effects on traffic backups of various
modifications to roads and traffic lights. Why not a similar study at Kawaihae? At a
recent meeting at Kealakehe High School, Harbors Director Barry Fukunaga, in response
to a question, repeated his frequent assertion that no traffic study was needed. Later in the
meeting, Director of Transportation Rod Hiraga mentioned that HSF had prepared a
traffic plan that DOT sent back for revisions. Which is it? No plan necessary or a plan
that was deemed deficient? Does the public get to see these plans? Apparently not.
Whales
I have spent time on the water in the Kawaihae area during whale season on fishing
boats, kayaks, and outrigger canoes, and I have had very close and unexpected encounters
with whales on all three. Based on my experience, I can say that HSF's claim that they
will avoid whales by slowing down to 25 knots is nonsense. In very calm waters while
traveling at trolling speed (8 knots), when whale sighting should be easiest, I have had
encounters with whales that required immediate and abrupt evasive action. In one case,
the captain of a 35 foot fishing boat and two others were paying special attention to
watching for whales when one suddenly surfaced directly in front of us. The captain
slammed the boat into reverse and we shuddered to a stop less than 20 feet from the
whale, which floated directly in front of us for a few moments before slowly swimming
off. To claim that a vessel ten times as long as our fishing boat, traveling at three times
our speed could have evaded that whale displays a lack of appreciation of the density of
the whale population during winter months.
Resource depletion
The impact of Oahu fishermen on local fishery resources is a concern to local residents,
and this concern has been echoed by Dr. Bill Walsh of DLNR. At a public information
meeting, this concern was been dismissed by Harbors Director Barry Fukunaga, who says
that he believes that just as many Big Island fishermen will travel to Oahu as will travel
to the Big Island. By itself, the difference in population between the two islands renders
his statement absurd. To compare the over-fished waters of Oahu with the offshore
fishing of the Kona Coast and the ulua fishing of South Point is a display of ignorance.
Mr. Fukunaga's assertion that all Hawai'i residents should have equal opportunity to fish
where they please misses the point-that preservation of threatened resources is very
2
important-by suggesting that equally depleting resources across the state is a right of
citizens of Hawai'i.
Invasive Species
At a meeting of the Kawaihae Local Resource Council, staff from the Department of
Agriculture stated that concerns about invasive plant and animal species are very real.
Understaffing, underfunding, and limited political will were all cited as impediments to
developing an effective program to combat these dangers. Examples were given of
methods adopted by other island groups to combat the spread of invasive species by ferry
systems similar to HSF. Several of the most effective measures are not being taken here.
And on Maui, one foreign algae, hypnea, has covered large areas of the coastline causing
a drop in waterfront property values, loss of income to the tourist industry, and
substantial expense to remove tons of alien limu every week. To date there is no
assessment of the risk to the coastlines of the Big Island and the tourist industry which is
the island's economic engine.
Homelessness
Oahu, particularly the Waianae coast, has a major homelessness problem, and as
authorities make a greater effort to clear Waianae beach parks, the Superferry will
provide a way for people living in their cars to move to the Big Island. The real issue is
not whether they can prevented from traveling to the Big Island but whether agencies and
organizations serving the homeless will be prepared if there is an influx which will
further stress our local agencies and limited parks.
rv
Summa
Without an EIS, it has become apparent that an honest study of the potential impacts of
the superferry will not be forthcoming. We live on an island where the absence of
planning is coming to be the accepted norm. State officials seem to regard an EIS
requirement as an attempt to block the superferry and respond to citizens' concerns by
saying, "it's coming whether you like it or not." Instead, an EIS should be regarded as a
requirement to anticipate and plan so that the arrival of the superferry causes minimal
damage to the Big Island. The dismissive tone of State officials when questioned about
any of these concerns suggests that they can't be trusted to represent our best interest
unless required to do so. Superferry officials "gamed" the system by resisting an EIS
until they could claim that it was too late to do one. While the necessity for an EIS has
been debated and pursued in the courts, State officials have continued to demonstrate, by
their lack of concern, why an EIS should be required.
3