Making public beaches in Puna

[Wao nahele kane]

Thanks Rob O. and I hear what you're saying but then developers who cited such comparatives would be comparing apples and oranges, public interest vs. private interests not to mention the type of project to be executed comparatively. I doubt such rebuttal would fly these days as private projects have lost more and more leeway in every respect including court protections, there’s nothing “clean ” or environmentally friendly about private development.

As per what sort of impact would arise from such a project, the point would be mute as no harm would come to the area and very much the opposite would occur and such a study would be more so considered an environmental promotional study. On the other hand if we had a private developer trying to put in a marina and houses… there would be negative effects known long before a study was prompted. So the nature of the project in and of itself is constructive with regard to environmental outcomes. I’ve no doubt any legitimate study would show this to not be true. In such a case, should the government protect itself from impact studies, the project could not be compared with private developments proposals by the very nature of what private development means.

I guess is what I'm getting at is the fact that the even though the county /government retains immunity from the legislation it only exercises the immunity when appropriate. A good example would be the restoration of a natural stream or river for Salmon runs or pick your cause. In this case no impact studies are warranted because there is no negative impact to take place.

In this case we could also require a Nene reserve with enclosed trail and a multitude of other natural enhancing projects.




E ho'a'o no i pau kuhihewa.

[Bob Orts]

There are two things involved. The first being the study and the second the impact/mitigation. On the second, government and some private projects do enjoy the ability to mitigate impacts based on the public good of the project. Example, Two docks being built. One for a resort to have party boats, the other for government marine restoration and enforcement. The resort will have a hard time mitigating any damage to a coral reef for the piers based on having party boats. The government would have an easier time mitigating the impact because the good the dock serves in preserving and improving the coral reef, far out weight any immediate damage. But both are required to study the impact and mitigate any issues. Government, when it comes to water, in not immune. In Hawaii, government is actually held to slightly higher standards by law.

Now the first issue is the study. This requires the project to undergo a set criteria for determining if something is a problem. Although it may appear nothing will be harmed, without the study, nobody can say it will or won’t cause harm. The whole purpose is to ensure everyone is following the same rulebook. As I said previously, if there were no criteria to follow, everyone will claim no harm. Everyone will say their project won’t cause harm and who’s to say otherwise if there are no set guidelines to be followed. Additionally, every project would find itself bogged down in legal lawsuits as people challenge everything based on any perceived impact.

Also, the final impact is just one component of a project and any study. In your example of the stream restoration, the final result isn’t the entire project. A study (since it’s a waterway) would have to be completed. If the restoration is a bunch of volunteers with sledgehammers and their hands restoring the stream, odds are the impact of the implementation is minimal and the final result will mitigate any off chance environments harm (such as spilling a frapachino in the water by mistake), But if the project requires heavy equipment, the impact of contamination of the water from oil, grease, or fuel will have to be identified, addressed and mitigated. So depending on how that restoration is carried out can result in major environmental requirements.

Where government is at a disadvantage is private interest have much deeper pockets. They can have their experts dispute claims or file claims. They can take something government did twenty years ago and twist it to their advantage. Governments have been forced to approve some projects over their better judgment because private interest have taken something government exempted itself from and used that to show the rules are not really for protection if government isn’t following them.

[Wao nahele kane]

Do we happen to have a Marine Biologist member on Puna Web or does anyone know any who might be willing to help draft up a casual study?
In this case; such a study may be suitable for the University.
I would think in this case there would be plenty of volunteers to help make something like this happen.

E ho'a'o no i pau kuhihewa.

[Wao nahele kane]

Anyone here know of any cons regarding the shore area of the 1840 flows/eruptions that created the Sand Hills region in the Nanawale Forest Reserve?
I'd like to get an overview of how much of the area is new shoreline and how much of the area nearby sank during the 1924 earthquakes. Any ideas on where that info might be available?



E ho'a'o no i pau kuhihewa.

[Bullwinkle]

http://www.hawaiitribune-herald.com/arti...ocal01.txt


looks like emily would like to make a beach

good for her

[kimo wires]

This is Great.

The first time I saw the naturally protected inshore area I thought that it would be the perfect area to bring in sand and make a really nice beach cove. The dredging will have to be done to control the High tide waters but otherwise the shallow inshore area already protects most of that shoreline from wave action. So not too much restructuring will have to take place to keep the sand from washing away.

I really hope this happens
The fact that Emily Naeole is taking on this project brings real influence to the effort.

Bravo Councilwoman Naeloe!

The one negative thing would be...
Make access to the surf break easier and suddenly one of the last, occasionaly, uncrowded surf breaks will be no uncrowded no more.

[Wao nahele kane]

I just hope she considers and addresses the entire issue with a fine tooth comb before she submits the official beach proposal. It’s a good thing to do and hopefully it flies and paves the way for more like type projects in the future.

E ho'a'o no i pau kuhihewa.

[Bob Orts]

quote:

---

Originally posted by kimo wires

The dredging will have to be done to control the High tide waters but otherwise the shallow inshore area already protects most of that shoreline from wave action. So not too much restructuring will have to take place to keep the sand from washing away.

---

COASTLINE PROJECT [] $
IN WATER CONSTRUCTION [] $$
A.C.E. INVOLVMENT [:0] $$$
DREDGING [] $$$$
ENVIROMENTALIST [:p] $$$$$

Cha-Ching!
Where do I sign up to bid on that EIS! That's a good 8 to 10 years of steady employment just to do the study!

[Bullwinkle]

will you do a volume discount?

EIS'S for all my friends please. It must be coastal development week

http://www.hawaiitribune-herald.com/arti...ocal02.txt


"A Delaware company is moving forward with plans to turn five miles of Ka'u coastline into a new community unlike any in the region"

"This facility would provide an alternate launching point closer to (Hawaii) Volcanoes National Park for sky-tour operations," the developer states in the notice. Nani Kahuku Aina promises to let Hawaii County use its helicopter or helicopters to transport people needing emergency medical care.
edit - added quote

[Dave Smith]

There's a reason there hasn't been any new marinas built on the Big Island in many years, and it isn't for lack of effort, as several developers have tried. As Bob notes, breaching the shoreline means beaucoup regulatory hassles.