HONOLULU STAR - BULLETIN
Mon., September 3, 2007
by Jeff Mikulina, Judith Michaels & Jeffrey Parker
The Hawaii Superferry presents a classic case of how not to do business
in Hawaii. Superferry's lack of planning and violation of the Hawaii
Environmental Protection Act has created a public debacle,
inconvenienced its customers and put Hawaii's environment at risk.
Three years ago the Sierra Club, Maui Tomorrow and Kahului Harbor
Coalition asked the Hawaii Superferry and the Lingle administration to
complete an environmental review of the Superferry. Unknown
environmental and public safety risks, concerned neighbor island
communities and a clear reading of the law demanded it.
The review would have occurred while other planning proceeded. The
administration and Superferry corporation, however, decided to gamble
and chose to skip this mandatory environmental disclosure process. A
unanimous Supreme Court decision -- announced just hours after oral
argument -- called their bluff.
Then, despite the decision from Hawaii's highest court, Superferry
executives decided to roll the dice again and start service early.
Again, they lost when a judge ordered them to cease service to Maui.
A responsible company doesn't allow a problem to get to the point where
it receives a restraining order. The company lost in court, lost
neighbor island support and lost credibility.
Now poor planning and lack of community involvement angered some Kauai
residents to the point of taking justice into their own hands, risking
arrest (or their lives) to block the arrival of the Superferry. The
Sierra Club, Maui Tomorrow and Kahului Harbor Coalition do not condone
lawbreaking -- either by the Superferry or by the protesters. The
protests, however, surely reflect the deep sense of injustice many
neighbor islanders feel toward the Superferry -- contempt that has been
irresponsibly inflamed by its proceeding in open disregard of the law.
This is why the public review process is so important in the first
place: to involve the affected communities, to understand the
environmental tradeoffs, to separate fact from fiction and to protect
the environment against unintended consequences. Unintended
consequences like the spread of mongoose to Kauai. Or the disastrous
varroa bee mite to Maui. Or coqui frogs everywhere. These pests can
easily become stowaways underneath car or truck bodies or inside the
bushels of produce being transported.
And with the Superferry shuttling hundreds of private vehicles and farm
trucks daily, spreading these pests is all but guaranteed -- unless
proper protections are put in place and funded. For neighbor island
farmers, the cost of new invasive species brought by the Superferry
could be their livelihood.
The high-speed vessel operation itself may pose a threat to the marine
mammals. Traveling at 25 knots through known whale calving areas may
make riders sick in more ways than one. Environmental reviews are used
to fix problems before they occur. They don't just look at wildlife but
at social consequences such as unbearable traffic, curtailment of
traditional Hawaiian activities and costly freight increases to small
businesses. What are the best ways to minimize harm to Hawaii's unique
environment and communities? That's what we'll learn with an
environmental review. Ultimately, the review process produces a better
outcome for all involved, island-style.
When public taxpayer dollars are used as they are with the Superferry,
the public has a right to ask questions -- and get answers. Otherwise
we might all be taken for a ride.
The environmental review process is a routine procedure. Private
companies and state and federal agencies complete reviews all the time.
The state Department of Transportation has completed numerous such
reviews in the past year. New roads, harbor improvements, airport
upgrades -- they all go through the process. Significantly, the DOT
even required and conducted a full environmental impact statement when
a ferry system just on the Island of Oahu was proposed. And what about
existing modes of transit between islands, such as air travel or barge
traffic?
As the Supreme Court stated in its unanimous decision, "The Superferry
presents particular risks that are not borne by the existing methods of
transportation."
Yes, the review process can be messy because you have to deal with real
science -- not soundbites and promises -- and real public input.
Superferry would actually have to respond to questions in writing and
publish the answers. Yes, it takes a few months to complete. But the
resulting document provides clear answers on what adverse impacts are
expected -- and how best to prepare for them.
So why did Superferry and the administration choose to skip this
process three years ago? Why did they choose not to complete an
environmental review after the community groups asked, after neighbor
island lawmakers asked, after the Maui, Kauai and Big Island county
councils asked, even after the state's own Environmental Council ruled
that it was required? Why not? Were they worried about disclosing
something the public wouldn't like to hear?
Hawaii is like no other place on Earth, with hundreds of species found
nowhere else on the planet and deep community values. To protect this
uniqueness, the Sierra Club, Maui Tomorrow and Kahului Harbor Coalition
requested Superferry and the DOT to comply with our keystone
environmental law years ago. They chose to ignore the law. Our position
hasn't changed: If the Superferry is going to operate in Hawaii's
waters, we all deserve that it be done right.
Three decades ago when the Hawaii Environmental Protection Act was
enacted, state elected leaders made clear that the environmental review
be a "condition precedent" to implementation of a proposed action. In
other words, the study must be complete before the project starts. We
must look before we leap. It's not only common sense, it's the law.
Jeff Mikulina is director of the Sierra Club, Hawaii Chapter; Judith
Michaels is acting president of Maui Tomorrow; and Jeffrey Parker is
director of the Kahului Harbor Coalition.