+- Punaweb Forum (http://punaweb.org/forum)
+-- Forum: Punaweb Forums (http://punaweb.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Punatalk (http://punaweb.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Thread: Making public beaches in Puna (/showthread.php?tid=6036)
Making public beaches in Puna - Wao nahele kane - 08-21-2009
I had no intention of high jacking the thread regarding the Kapoho Beach lots road but I am curious about a side topic that came to mind during that thread. So… I’m addressing it here as not to conflict with the road thread.
Out of curiosity I wanted to see what sort of concerns there are out there with regard to creating a beach or excavated bay with beach along the shores of the 1960 and slightly earlier flows along Kapoho point or the region just due east of the light house.
Coral heads were an issue that arose but coral is easily dislodged no matter what size and can be stored and relocated with very little precautions. These sorts of projects have been done in the past and are being done this very day in other nations. Palm Island though not a similar use example certainly shows how resilient and adaptive marine life is, not only that it has shown what a positive impact the project has had on the local marine environment.
Here's an article on a coral relocation project that is moving 5.5 ton/5 tonne coral heads on average.
http://www.constructionweekonline.com/article-5416-nakheel_coral_thriving_in_the_world_breakwaters/
The other issue was desecration of the Lava, yet chances are very high the area will one day again be inundated by lava again. Also if one cares to look at the long term effect of lava meets ocean, we see the ocean itself will erode and create a beach along the shore over time. In this case all we’re talking about is assisting nature in creating what she intends to create anyhow… a great beach that we people can enjoy as she has in countless other areas. How can we assist nature in an eventual natural process and consider it desecration? It really makes no rational or spiritual sense and resembles more a lazy minded position steeped in ignorance. If we can assist nature while providing something that is more user friendly for us, what sort of disjointed conscience could oppose such a thing? If one wants to raise an issue of desecration of lava then he or she better find a way to step off the planet so they don’t even disturb the position of a single pebble on the planet otherwise, they are practicing in pure hypocrisy.
Anyhow, aside from the county/state not fixing the proposed park or what have you (remember that when the county/states raises additional funds/income from the benefits of these projects they will have the money to maintain more things on the island). What sort of other issues truly merit consideration to block such a project? Keep in mind we’re talking municipal properties, already public owned municipal materials and a relatively free labor force to work the project.
E ho'a'o no i pau kuhihewa.
RE: Making public beaches in Puna - Rob Tucker - 08-21-2009
Puna Friends of the Parks is now working on acquiring an easement for a road to Point Kumukahi. The intention is to begin to provide access to this eastern point and then proceed with plans as determined by the citizens.
The two year or more set back of the 2% Land Preservation Fund will definitely slow down shoreline preservation and access.
RE: Making public beaches in Puna - Wao nahele kane - 08-21-2009
I drove the region last week from the lighthouse to the shore and North nearly 1.5 miles along the 4X4 trail.
So it's known as Kamukahi... it's a great area but not really access friendly for the average person.
It certainly seems to be a wonderful area for an awesome public beach park and has great potential for many uses.
I'd imagine that if we had a beach/bay put in there, it would help out many who feel ripped off regarding beach access.
A few D-9's, etc would certainly make quick work of such a project, accompany that with marine seeding and a great marine park could be established rivaling even those on the Kona Side.
E ho'a'o no i pau kuhihewa.
RE: Making public beaches in Puna - Greg - 08-21-2009
Don't forget to engineer the world class artificial point break that would take advantage of the easterly trade waves and summer south swells. (I still think the Kalapana lava flow would be a great location, with minimum environmental impact)
Build it and they will come
punatoons
RE: Making public beaches in Puna - Wao nahele kane - 08-21-2009
I think projects like this are exactly what Hawaii needs at this time. They can be relatively low budget if approached properly. The national/global exposure/interest would be phenomenal and generate many more tourism dollars than put into the projects. The scientific aspects are astounding to say the least with regard to working within the marine environment.
The Big Island has a great deal of potential that hasn’t been tapped and it far exceeds the potential found on the other Islands. It’s the States future and it’s been relatively ignored for too long.
Who ownes the road that goes to the light house? Isn't that a public road?
It seems that KD owns the surrounding land but it doesn't own the road does it?
Greg... why not do both regions?
Building one in time will prove not enough, we should make them so no-one feels they are crowded. Otherwise folks will feel like they are visiting another Waikiki. They could also make a great surf park too.
E ho'a'o no i pau kuhihewa.
RE: Making public beaches in Puna - mdd7000 - 08-21-2009
I think you have a great idea. Mention this idea to the Mayor.
side note: I would be curious to know how one could have massive quarries and landfills on the island and that is OK but how it could be considered "desecration" in the area you describe?
RE: Making public beaches in Puna - dakine - 08-21-2009
quote:
Originally posted by mdd7000
side note: I would be curious to know how one could have massive quarries and landfills on the island and that is OK but how it could be considered "desecration" in the area you describe?
OK = Nobody complains. Desecration = Somebody complains. Along the same line of thinking... to some it is sacrilegious to remove rocks from the island while at the same time they leave here by the boat load in several commercial and agricultural applications. And even though, you'd be amazed at some of the stories that come in boxes (to hvo and the nps) along with rocks taken and pleads for their return because of the bad luck that came to the taker.
RE: Making public beaches in Puna - mdd7000 - 08-21-2009
OK, but wouldn't a project like this simply be moving the rocks and not removing them? Sounds simple to me?
RE: Making public beaches in Puna - csgray - 08-21-2009
I think a lot of people on this thread are making assumptions about what some native Hawaiians would or wouldn't consider desecration. I think the only people who can speak to a set of spiritual beliefs are those who hold those beliefs, not outsiders proclaiming a mixture of assumptions and quoting the myths spoon fed to tourists concerning Hawaiian spiritual practices.
Traditionally Hawaiians used lava rock for all sorts of purposes, including altering the marine environment to create fishponds, however they did so following a strict set of guidelines and kapu set forth by kapuna who were essentially natural resource managers, they certainly didn't just start ripping up the landscape with a D9 based on a personal whim. I would love more swimming places as well, but there are always unintended consequences to changing the shape of a shoreline. For example, research has shown that installation of seawalls to protect one stretch of beach or shoreline just pushes wave erosion onto another area, which would not have had that erosion otherwise. It is easy to rip up the landscape, and impossible to put it back once done.
Carol
RE: Making public beaches in Puna - mdd7000 - 08-21-2009
Didn't King Kamehameha abolish all of the former kapu's? If so, why do any true Hawaiian's still quote or follow just the few that they want to? I guess I just answered the question...
In any event, they didn't use a D9 because they didn't have one. Didn't they routinely use slave labor and practice human sacrifice if things didn't go "right"?