Champagne Pond - Best solutions?

[Kapohocat]

"He wants to see a pile of boulders dumped on the quarter-mile road to the pools from the Kumukahi Lighthouse, which would force people to walk in. He figures that would reduce the number of campers, cruise guests and others, taking some strain off the pools."

I agree that taking care of our fragile eco-systems is important. But to continue to close off shoreline access one by one (remember Hakalau?) is deplorable. Kua Bay is another one that you can no longer camp overnight. Sorry resort stay next door to Kua Bay is not often in my budget, nor do I care to do that.

Make ponds a park, provide potties, etc. Allow overnight camping by permit only like county parks. And yes I still think change the wastewater systems.

Question to Carey - was the survey done at low or high tide? I was curious as your findings seem to contradict all the others so I would interested in hearing more.


Catherine Dumond
Blue Water Project Management
808 217-7578
http://bluewaterpm.125mb.com/index.html
"We help make building your dream home a reality"

[kapohokine]

Rob, the visual of a bus may fit your agenda, but it's grossly misleading. A 7 passenger vehicle is not a tour bus.

The point with the vacation rental thing is simple. When you've lived here a while you realize that people need to work together. Things are not as black and white as you infer by calling them illegal. The fact of the matter is that there is a lot of gray here. And when the state and local agencies that we work with allow us to go there, just as they allow the short-term rentals to exist, there must be a reason and it should be left to those of us involved to work together to find solutions. Not point fingers. I've been to the Pond almost every day for five or six years now. There is nothing depreciating about the Pond except for the increase in campers. If people are staying longer they need to relieve themselves. So figure out a way to provide some facilities for people. Otherwise you will force the government agencies to move in and totally change the area for ever.

The water tested in Champagne Pond by researchers comes out about average in quality. Average, Rob. It's not the water quality that is at issue at the Pond. When people spend several hours at the Pond and there are no facilities, then they use the strip of jungle to urinate and defecate. It's as simple as that, and it's been going on for twenty years, maybe more. Keep in mind that we've been going to the Pond for four years with no change in water quality. You began this thread with asking for ideas on how to resolve these issues. The answer can't be to keep people out.

[missydog1]

hi kapohokine --
I'm glad to see you post. Hearing your respectful position you sound "in person" very different from the callous tour operator type.

Personally, I think it's a shame that there can't be a few not so crowded spots for Puna folk to go.

Yes, I know that visitors have a right to go everywhere, and yet I can't help feeling that visitors (who are resort guests) already have control of so many of the best spots. Kauna`oa, with its paltry number of parking passes, comes to mind.

One of the nice things about having the pond gated wasn't that it protected the Beach Lots owners' pockets, but that only 4WD could access, and rental 4WD was prohibited by the rental agencies (sure, ignored, but still).

Which created a place my family could go for an outing, on the east side, that wasn't too crowded to enjoy. It was nice, you know? And now the cruise ship passengers go, my family doesn't go any more. They have nowhere to swim (with keiki). Wai Opae is getting over-run now that it's so discovered as well.

It's impossible to reconcile feeling like I don't want tours to come with my beliefs in access for all. The two feelings are in conflict.

But, I just can't feel as bad for visitors who are experiencing beaches and pools non-stop, if they have to let one spot go -- in comparison to all the local residents who can't afford to drive all the way to the west side for day trips. By afford, I mean both in time and gas money.

It would be interesting if the County cracked down on the vacation rentals. They are illegal why? because it's SFR zoning? What about Vacationland? What about HPP? Kehena? It would be unfair to enforce some and not all.

I will say that I dislike the elitism of Beach Lots.
Their gate was certainly not intended to make a better experience for locals -- the "illegal" 4WD access does that.

Anyhow, it's nice to know you tell your tour patrons not to pee in the pool. Although, that doesn't mean they don't. When you get in water, it increases the urge, no?

[Carolann R]

I think we should put something in the pond that turns bright red or purple when people pee. (Sorry, couldn't resist. I know it's a serious thing.)

Carrie

http://www.carrierojo.etsy.com


If you want others to be happy, practice compassion. If you want to be happy, practice compassion. ~Dalai Lama

[Tolleys]

KathyH

I do not understand all of the following...

"It would be interesting if the County cracked down on the vacation rentals. They are illegal why? because it's SFR zoning? What about Vacationland? What about HPP? Kehena? It would be unfair to enforce some and not all."

What is illegal about a vacation rental? What is SFR zoning?

Thanks

Susan

Edited by - Tolleys on 10/29/2007 18:58:55

[Rob Tucker]

Well for the sake of discussion Kapohokine you were the one to bring up the word illegal so I guess it took root in my thinking. Not trying to be argumentative. It may be that almost everyone there is doing something "illegal" though not all. There are families that live there and do not maintain vacation rentals.

The county is notoriously lax in enforcing code. Be it zoning or whatever.

I suspect that keeping people out would help preserve the place. The root question is guess is is the goal to preserve it or use it / exploit it?

About the only asset Hawaii has is it's environment. Lose that and kiss Hawaii goodbye. Do we start to be concerned about water quality before pollution and disease are present or before? Saying the water quality is "average" may be an improvement it may be a deterioration. What was the baseline? Not being argumentative.... just thinking.

One by one the ocean assets are going to be burdened and then over burdened.

It will still come down to are we each part of the problem or part of the solution?

I will guess that you are sincere but I also hear similar rationalizations that I hear in other parts of Puna when it comes to occupying that patch of gray between black and white.

[kapohokine]

Especially when the water is warm, Kathy...! It's funny...I could have written your reply for you, Kathy! I think that we all can remember how things "used to be". The "good old days". But at the same time I know that I've traveled to different parts of the world and visited places that I absolutely fell in love with. And we should be able to share what we have with travelers from around the globe in return. I know that Rob sounds a little jaded calling my points rationalizations. But they are realizations, realizations that we play the hand that we're dealt. And the hand we've been dealt includes increasing population, polution etc. Deal with it by having funds from the visitors go to maintaining luas for all to use. Seems simple to me. The keep people out rationale doesn't hold water. Because the part that Rob and everyone else in Beach Lots doesn't mention is that they mean keep everyone out but them. That IS part of the problem, Rob. Maybe once you get over that hurdle, you'll see the rest a little more clearly.

But seriously, Rob, I totally agree with you that you need to be part of the solution. And that's exactly what we're trying to be. But the idea that there will be less people in Puna next year or less visitors to the Big Island next year is a little head-in-the-sand at this point, isn't it? So if you have the volume of people limited by the gate and the lava road, then the problem is the level of waste. So, what is the solution? I feel that I've answered that pretty well. You were getting a little argumentative there, Rob, in your first reply to me, but you've redeemed yourself with this last one. Keep the tone, and we'll get along famously, you and I!

[Rob Tucker]

I've logged probably too many hours on the Puna Community Development Plan this last 18 months. The Land Use Working Group - which I participated in took a rather thorough look at the district and it's possible projections of the future.

Growth will occur. It can be encouraged, it can be discouraged. The general input of the community is to try to preserve Puna as a rural, agricultural district.

Personally I lean toward slow growth. No growth can work too - I've seen it succeed in places. I'm not in favor of fast growth.

Champagne Pond needs more kind attention than it has been getting. I did not mean anything specific when I used the word "bus" earlier. I could have used the word "van". They are each words in a progression of increased use of the place is what I think I was getting to.

At a recent point in time there was a path, which then became a trail, which then became a 4x road, which then became a 2x road, then came the cars, now come the vans, next come the buses.

This progression is taking place a little too quickly to have a happy result.

[Carey]

Cat, which survey?? (we did GPS studies of the 'dump sites' over 2 days....) The water quality was done at a high low tide (Aug 4th), at the low & just as the tide started in...BUT this was in the afternoon on a very sunny day....sunlight acts as a disinfectant...(Our results did surprise Dr. S. Malloy, who is looking to do more bio studies, if $$ are available)
If the proposal goes through, hopefully there will be research money to do a series of water quality tests...
All uses of state land, esp by groups that collect fees (ie tour groups) must comply with the state rules & regulations....
http://www.hawaii.gov/dlnr/dsp/rules/13-146.pdf
Permits seem to be needed by many of the recreational users, inc. the tour groups; according to the conversations I have had with some of the state & fed. employees I have worked with on this project.... Although it might sound simple to install a prtable potty, even this action would need to be looked at as a potential action to trigger an EIS.... Think of the area in terms of storm & tsunami & I think everyone would agree that portable potties would have some issues that need to be addresses.
The illegal dozing of the area did doze some cultural artifacts, and some areas of archelogical interest are now 'dump areas', so that any one who is concerned about the culture, should be concerned about those that feel that they can just bulldoze state land at their own descretion....
Any work to improve this area needs to have much more care & respect than has happened in the recent past...
For those who wonder why more research is not done & why there aren't a lot of Environmental Impact Statements, The answer is $$$, the biological survey we did in class would have been 100's of dollars to contract out, EIS's run in the mega 100's of thousands of dollars....just to have the EIS research for the illegal bulldozing could have been well over $200,000.... and should have picked up the cultural sites, and would have had to address the impact that the increased traffic that the dozing created.
OH, Kapohokine...if there is interest, are you willing to pay the impact studies for the portable toilet???



Edited by - carey on 10/29/2007 18:30:30

[kapohokine]

Rob, if we don't figure out how to make the situation work, then you're correct: the State and the County have already earmarked that area for development and you're right, then the buses will follow. Which we don't want to see. I don't think that anyone wants to see it. But you're talking about two different things. One is growth and the other is sustainability. We're working towards sustainability and trying to protect from growth and development. I've offered solutions to your "zero facilities" opening volley. Of course, it's a pretty unbelievable stretch to threaten buses are coming with the situation as it is.

Speaking of your opening volley, a private cesspool set up to serve a household of 2-4 people is not adequate to serve the 8-15 listed in the vacation rentals. That level of raw sewage seepage multiplied several times (50? 75? 100?)over for each vacation rental and I think that people swimming at the Pond with rent-a-luas available becomes a non-issue. Unless you have your vacation rental business to protect and need to keep all other people out of "your" Pond.