The Division of Boating and Ocean Recreation, a part of the Department of Land and Natural Resources, has begun processing of its first application for commercial beach use. The application is being made by Club Lanai, a tour boat company. It is seeking DOBOR’s permission to load and unload passengers on beaches fronting the Kea Lani and Stouffer’s hotels in Wailea, Maui.
Up to the present, regulation of commercial activity on beaches, all of which are in the state Conservation District, had been under the jurisdiction of the DLNR’s Office of Conservation and Environmental Affairs. As we have previously reported, however, in May 1992, then-DLNR Director William Paty, in anticipation of DOBOR’s imminent transfer from the Department of Transportation to the DLNR (ordered by an act of the Legislature), informed DLNR staff that future applications for commercial activities that involved use of beaches would be handled by DOBOR instead of OCEA.
Is DOBOR up to the task? If the Draft Environmental Assessment that DOBOR forwarded to the Office of Environmental Quality Control is any indication, the answer would have to be “no.”
Yet, according to DOBOR Administrator David Parsons, the Club Lanai environmental assessment – which he candidly acknowledges is in need of substantial repairs is to be used as the basis for the establishment of a new ingress/egress zone off Maui. If that zone is approved (through the rule-making process), the Division of Boating and Ocean Recreation anticipates issuing many more permits for similar use, with approvals being made administratively instead of by Land Board action. Any ceiling on the number of total permits, he said, would be established during the same rule-making process.
What’s Wrong?
Whenever a project involves state land, the provisions of Chapter 343 of Hawai’i Revised Statutes must be met. For projects whose expected environmental impacts are minimal, preparation of an environmental assessment is required. For projects with greater consequences, a full environmental impact statement is needed.
The Office of Environmental Quality Control’s Bulletin is the means by which members of the public may learn of projects requiring Chapter 343 compliance. Over and above publishing twice-monthly summaries of pending environmental assessments and impact statements, the office tries to help prospective applicants by publishing regularly a check-list of items to be addressed in documents prepared pursuant to Chapter 343. In addition, the OEQC Bulletin frequently contains lists of agencies and organizations with whom applicants may wish to consult in the preparation phase of their EAs or EISes.
It was all for naught in the case of the Club Lanai’s environmental assessment. The document fails to identify the approving agency, as required by law. It does not list any agencies consulted. To show the location of the proposed activity, the EA includes tax maps and tour maps that have been reduced to near illegibility, No scale is provided, nor do the maps provide any indication of off-shore conditions.
‘Exclusive and Private’
Included in the EA prepared by Club Lanai is a copy of the DLNR’s Master Application Form that it has filled out. Part V of that application describes the information that the applicant must provide to meet minimum requirements of Chapter 343. Among the requirements is that the applicant provide a “summary description of the affected environment, including suitable and adequate location and site maps.”
As mentioned earlier, the site maps supply little useful information. One short paragraph in a two-page letter from the applicant – Steve Gibons, general manager of Club Lanai – contains the sum and substance of the “description of the affected environment.”
“We investigated the beach areas and find that there are no underwater obstructions and that the percentage of proper water conditions is very high for an operation of this matter.”
The letter, dated August 14, 1993, and addressed to the DLNR, makes reference to the fact that use of state land in front of two hotels is sought. But Gibons writes assuringly, “Although state land, both of these hotels have what seems to be exclusive and private appearances,” so that the operations proposed “would not interfere with the general public.”
Access? No Problem
When attempting to answer how access will be made to the activity site, Gibons responds: “Existing access is the ocean.”
To shore up his environmental assessment, Gibons has included a page titled, “Addendum to Present Letter.” There, he writes that he noted certain similarities between his proposal and one made in May 1987 by another charter operation in Makena. Apparently attempting to ride the coattails of agency consultation made in that 1987 application, Gibons reproduces the list of agencies consulted back then. “After all of the above departments were contacted,” he writes, “the permit to beach load was approved.”
To round out the EA, Gibons includes two pages from DOBOR’s rule book, a copy of the document forwarded to the OEQC for publication in the Bulletin, a copy of his letter last April proposing this use to DOBOR, seven pages of maps, a reproduction of an ad for the Sheraton Maui, and eight pages of information (including a certificate of inspection) on the catamaran “Ehukai.”
A Mistake?
Parsons, the DOBOR administrator, is quick to acknowledge the shortcomings of the environmental assessment. In fact, he told Environment Hawai’i, it was not his intention to have notice of availability of the EA published in the OEQC Bulletin. Instead, he said, he had forwarded it to the Office of Environmental Quality Control merely for their comments and recommendations as to format.
“We will he asking for substantial revisions” to the EA, he said. And after that?
The EA would be used “as part of an overall Land Board submittal for approval of a new ingress/egress zone” on Maui, Parsons said.
But the Club Lanai proposal, Parsons was reminded, makes no mention at all of establishment of an ingress/egress corridor. Parsons agreed, adding that his division had informed the Club Lanai “we would have to have an environmental assessment for the ingress/egress zone.”
Ingress/egress corridors are established by departmental rules that describe more generally Ocean Recreation Management Areas across the state. The level of commercial boating activity within ORMAs had been regulated by the Department of Transportation but, since the transfer of Parsons’ division to the DLNR, it now will be set ultimately by the Land Board.
But, as anticipated by Parsons, within each ORMA, his division will issue permits administratively, with no further Land Board involvement.
287 New Moorings Anticipated By DOBOR
Spurred by the requests of tour boat operators, the Division of Boating and Ocean Recreation has prepared a draft environmental assessment for the eventual installation of up to 287 day-use moorings statewide.
The bulk of the moorings – 129 – would be installed in waters off Maui County. West Hawai’i would receive 94 moorings, Kaua’i 33, and O’ahu 31.
Of the Maui moorings, 34 would be placed off Lana’i, 17 off Molokini, and six off Kaho’olawe. Five moorings are proposed off the Maui coast east and south of Ahihi-Kina’u Natural Area Reserve.
The moorings “are designed to reduce or prevent anchor damage caused by recreational and commercial boaters at sites popular for diving and snorkeling,” the draft environmental assessment states. It does not mention how many moorings now exist nor does it provide readers with a means to gauge what demand there is for such moorings.
According to the draft EA, total installation costs will run about $86,000, with maintenance costing $20,000 a year. “Much of the needed funds for installation and maintenance” is to be provided by private groups, the EA states; “in addition, they would contribute labor, boat time, use of dive equipment, and air refills.”
Use of the moorings would be on a first-come, first-serve basis, the EA says, although “in selected areas, where there is need to ensure access by recreational users, a few buoys may be reserved for non-commercial users.”
In “high-use areas with fragile environments”, the EA says, “anchoring within a defined radius of each day-use mooring may be prohibited by special DLNR rules.” Apart from that statement, the EA is silent on the matter of possible commercial overuse of marine sites.
— Patricia Tummons
Volume 4, Number 7 January 1994
Leave a Reply