Sanctuary Designation - Hilo Comments

Scoping Meeting Comments
Wai‘anae District Park, O‘ahu, Hawai‘i
Tuesday, April 9, 2002 5:00 p.m.

Please note that these are the raw comments extracted from the scoping meeting held at the location listed above. They were edited for the purpose of clarity where necessary. Duplicate comments were not repeated. A synthesis of comments will be available soon.

(MHI) Main Hawaiian Islands
(NWHI) Northwestern Hawaiian Islands

• Concern about the current administration's view on the scoping process and the government's protection of natural areas.
• Concern about the process leaving open the opportunity to introduce restrictions of a conservative nature down the road.
• Concerned about pollution and alien seaweeds going from MHI to NWHI by vessels and people
• Concerned about the usage of the NWHI by people and boats
• Marine debris cleanup needs volunteers
• People who made the mess should clean it up - referring to marine debris, ship groundings and other pollution in the NWHI
• Fishermen are the biggest problem - vessels are grand fathered in, afraid of outsiders (foreigners) coming in
• Would like the utmost protection without any political intervention
• Why do we need a reserve at all since many impacts are natural effects such as marine debris - debris will deposit whether there is a Reserve or not.
• NWHI is the last pristine environment and is getting polluted
• At the time the EO was issued, the bottomfish fishery was in effect and over fishing - can that continue under the Sanctuary? I would like less bottomfishing than what was occurring previous to the EO.
• Concerned that the lobster fishery will be allowed through a loophole in the Executive Order; the fact that the lobster fishery was suspended is not addressed. Does not want a lobster fishery in the NWHI, regardless of Sanctuary designation.
• Sanctuary should not encroach on existing government jurisdictions
• Need better explanations about the Reserve and the role of all the management agencies
• How can we enforce this area - it seems unrealistic
• How will the NWHI replenish or restock the MHI when they are down current?
• Don't see how protecting this area will benefit the MHI - what makes more sense is a kapu on the Big Island since it is upstream.
• Wondering if people will still be able to visit the NWHI with the Sanctuary in place - although it is O.K. to limit tourism to preserve the area
• Any government program should support the people - should be accessible to all citizens of Hawaii, not just to science
• Science is a business just as much as fisheries are a business; scientists collect fish just like fishermen do. Sanctuary should not favor one business over another.
• Should allow controlled fishing for livelihood
• Disclosure of current and future budget expenditures is necessary.
• Will there be continued funding for the area if it becomes a Sanctuary?
• Need total protection to allow fish, lobster stocks to replenish. Need to preserve it.
• Concerned with the accountability process - all partners may not be in accord (agencies, organizations, etc.) and a lack of communication may exist. How will they be held accountable?
• Don't want the Sanctuary to take away from the people (such as fishermen) - make sure that they can still make a living while preserving the area
• Total moratorium should be in place until enough research is done to find out what is out there in terms of fish, lobster and other commercially harvestable resources.
• Concerned about pollution from tourist boats
• The NWHI should benefit from experience in managing (or mismanaging) the MHI.
• How do we guarantee personal or private accountability from ships transiting the area - oil spills or other pollution
• Balance is needed - develop a long term sustainable resource with fishing
• NWHI Sanctuary guidelines should be sensitive to cultural protocol
• 17 ships that fish this area are not Hawaiian owned
• Make sure that we practice protection here in the MHI first
• Sanctuary council should review the coral reef ecosystem management plan developed by the Western Pacific Fisheries Council, rather than creating a brand new plan - use the "good" parts of the existing plan
• Concerned about permit process and Native Hawaiian access
• Concerned about Washington D.C. taking control v. Native Hawaiian control
• Sanctuary should reduce uses in the NWHI by humans - if there is tourism, should be eco-tourism
• Should be restrictions on eco-tourism - sanctuary should not be exploited in any way by scientists, visitors, or fishermen
• Sanctuary should be sacred and not exploited by anyone
• Provision for Hawaiian ways of doing business
• Concern that if fishing is more restricted in NWHI then these fishermen will fish the MHI and deplete stocks in MHI
• Preservation vs Conservation - preservation will exclude all access except for Coast Guard - conservation is better
• State should leave enough resources to manage their jurisdiction
• Sanctuary should go up to the shoreline and include state waters
• Look at past history to see most effective way of managing this 3 mile region
• Learn lessons from other Sanctuaries for management and delineation of the borders
• Makes good business sense to have one organization to manage - one managing entity is most efficient
• Make sure permit system is accessible to Native Hawaiians
• Dialogue should occur of what kind of activities will be permitted or prohibited
• Permit system is not like kapu system - disregards natural spawning of marine environment
• Scientists should study the spawning of different types of fish and manage based on spawning rates; if regulations are based on actual spawning rates they will make more sense instead of being based on models from other ecosystems like the Northern Pacific
• Sanctuary should include all forms of life - birds, fish, etc. - commenter has seen the reefs disappear, piers built on pristine coral
• Native Hawaiians should have access to native birds in NWHI for cultural practices - i.e. use of bones
• Cultural and burial sites need to be protected; need stricter penalties and enforcement
• Management regime should use traditional Native Hawaiian practices - i.e. need to use Native Hawaiian fish management (kapu system)
• This is the last pristine grounds, every other place has been fished out
• What is done on land impacts the ocean - impacts not seen immediately, must be forward looking
• Since September 11, the military can do almost anything - is there a way that the military cannot be exempt from Sanctuary guidelines? The military needs to be held accountable for their actions in the Sanctuary
• Fine the buyers or market for purchasing illegally harvested fish
• Not enough enforcement or knowledge in the courts to enforce laws - there should be increased enforcement for fishing
• Other countries don't have to follow our laws, how do we deal with international violations?
• Should make sure that eco-tourism is limited to boat-based tours and nothing on shore or land
• If you don't allow some sort of access to the public will not get support
• Nets and marine debris are coming from foreign ships. How do we link marine debris to the polluter?
• Is there evidence of overfishing, coral harvesting or aquarium trade? What is the status of the stocks now?
• Everybody should be continuously educated starting in grade school to teach ocean management and preservation of marine resources. More people will get involved if they have a better understanding.
• Sanctuary should be used as a teaching tool and added to the teaching curriculum with Department of Education
• Concerned that reef fish, if harvested, will not recover (coral reef fish stocks do not recover as quickly as pelagic fish)
• Why are species distribution such as the ulua and other large predators different in NWHI than MHI
• Need public backing to get the support - Sanctuary can help - use Kaho`olawe as an example for a teaching tool
• Add more hours to the curriculum "Malama Aina"
• Don't use fishermen as an excuse for why fish stocks are depleted, may be due to lack of estuaries in the MHI
• Include as partners Hawaiian schools and universities with the Sanctuary
• Concern that Hawaiians are not included in managing the NWHI
• Should do whatever possible to include Hawaiians in the fishery; concern that bottomfish fishery permits do not include any Hawaiians
• Need to integrate the Sanctuary with the schools and use it as a teaching resource - develops strong partnerships
• Estuaries require flowing waters and streams are not diverted and not flowing and fish need estuaries that in turn need streams
• Don't want commercial activity such as on Midway Atoll
• NWHI is too fragile for tourists
• Reserve/Sanctuary cannot be viewed in isolation - need to care for the whole Hawaiian chain including the MHI
• Solutions in the Hawaiian islands need to be holistic throughout the islands
• All of the Hawaiian islands are related to the "pico" - policy of the whole
• Fishermen have little time to participate in the public process, and need to be smart to manage these meetings
  

For more information contact the Reserve office at:

Northwestern Hawaiian Islands
Coral Reef Ecosystem Reserve
Sean Corson, Sanctuary Designation Coordinator
6700 Kalanianaole Hwy, #215
Honolulu, HI 96825
(808)397-2668
sean.corson@noaa.gov