NUKOLII — Kaua’i hunters voiced a need for fewer restrictions and environmentalists voiced a need for more at a meeting the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service held yesterday on its proposal for special protection for threatened and endangered native plants
NUKOLII — Kaua’i hunters voiced a need for fewer restrictions and environmentalists voiced a need for more at a meeting the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service held yesterday on its proposal for special protection for threatened and endangered native plants on 60,000 acres of state and private lands on Kaua’i and Ni’ihau.
At a public hearing at the Radisson Hotel, hunters said the proposed critical-habitat zones could prevent them from hunting pigs and goats in the area, a longtime Kaua’i tradition.
Environmentalists said they support the plan but wanted additional protections in the proposal.
If a solution is not found, conflicts among environmentalists, hunting groups and federal and state governments could arise, warned Marjorie Ziegler of the O’ahu-based EarthJustice Legal Defense Fund.
The Fish and Wildlife Service is proposing the zones to restore healthy populations of plant species so that they can be removed from the list of threatened or endangered species.
Through the Endangered Species Act, the federal agency is proposing rules to create zones to protect 255 threatened or endangered species statewide.
The Kaua’i plan calls for zones mostly concentrated on the northwest side of the island. They include the Alakai Wilderness Preserve, parts of Koke’e State Park and Waimea Canyon State Park, several state-owned natural areas and forest reserves, and land owned or leased by the U.S. Department of Defense.
Two other habitat areas are located in the northwestern corner of Ni’ihau.
Opposition to the plan came yesterday from Joe Manini Sr. of Waimea, who said the taking of 60,000 acres that could greatly reduce hunting activities and deprive Hawaiians of traditional gathering rights was “outrageous” and should “go back to the drawing board.”
The plan will work in the U.S. mainland, but not in Hawai’i because there isn’t enough land available for implementation of such a plan, Manini said.
The plan provoked opposition from the 100-member Kaua’i Hunting Association and 40 other hunters in the audience.
Kaua’i County Councilman Ron Kouchi, saying he spoke as a private citizen because the council has not taken an official stand on the plan, said it would deprive hunters access to lands they have used for generations.
Kouchi said his father, a retired police detective, hunted in some of the areas proposed for federal protection and bagged game that supplemented family meals.
“It is a reflection of many of the people here,” Kouchi said.
Both Kouchi and Councilman Daryl Kaneshiro said the game hunters take home for their families has taken on more importance with the recent closing of Amfac Sugar and the resulting loss of 400 jobs.
A hunter for more than a decade, Winifred Cummings of east Kaua’i said the plan would penalize hunters unjustly.
“The hunters have done no wrong to have their hunting areas taken away from them,” she said.
Kaneshiro said the presence of hunters has helped protect the areas. With them gone from the area, there will be reduced management of forestry areas and overgrowth of non-endangered plant species, the plants that pose a threat to the endangered plant species proposed for federal protection.
Kaua’i Hunting Association spokesman Ken Yamauchi said the data on which the plan is based is at least 30 years old and needs updating.
“I think it should be better put together,” added Wesley Masumura, who spoke on behalf of hunters.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service spokeswoman Christa Russell said the data appears to be accurate and was gathered from the National Tropical Botanical Garden, the state Department of Land and Natural Resources Forestry and Wildlife Division and botanists.
Karen Blue of Big Island-based Conservation Council for Hawai’i, and state wildlife biologist Don Heacock supported the plan to provide protection for 76 plants on Kaua’i. But they said the federal agency should list another 19 endangered plants for protection, as required by law.
The federal agency is not proposing protection for two plant species it believes may be extinct, but still erroneously lists them (a native mint and an alani plant) as endangered species, Blue said.
Blue also said the agency is not proposing any critical habitat on Kaua’i or Ni’ihau for three endangered species of loulu palms.
Russell said the palms are not proposed for special protection because designating the special zones for them could result in their being vandalized or stolen.
To develop a proper plan, the federal agency should work with state government wildlife and plant experts and private landowners on whose land are found some of the plant species, said Ann Leighton, a longtime community business leader and activist.
“You have to listen to local folks,” she said.
The plan appears to be a ” knee-jerk reaction” to a court decision requiring the federal agency to produce the plan, Leighton said.
The basis for the lawsuit stems from a decision by the federal government not to identify certain plant species because of the threat of vandalism of certain plants and because of the belief other plants have become extinct.
That decision was challenged in the lawsuit that resulted in a decision in 1998 by the U.S. District Court in Hawai’i to designate the protection zones.
As a tool that could help create a plan that would be fair to all involved, Kouchi recommended using the state Judiciary’s Center for Alternative Dispute Resolution.
Russell said the center’s services might be used before a final plan is fashioned.
The federal agency will accept written comments on the proposal until Feb. 19, and a 30-day public comment period will start when an economic analysis is published in the Federal Register, Russell said. A plan is expected to be in place by November.
Staff writer Lester Chang can be reached at 245-3681 (ext. 225) and mailto:lchang@pulitzer.net
