In 1982, the Department of Land and Natural Resources was presented with the first evidence that F. Newell Bohnett was logging koa. A letter September 13, 1982 from the artist Herb Kane informed the Board’s Big Island representative that “salvage lumbering is now being done” on state land under lease to Pu`uwa`awa`a Ranch, and asked that permission be granted to take four koa trees to be made into canoes.
The Hilo office of the Division of Forestry and Wildlife forwarded the letter to DOFAW administrator Libert Landgraf along with a memo from the Hawai`i district forester, Charles Wakida. “Since the request is for logs from land under the jurisdiction of Land Management,” Wakida wrote, “we would not be involved in this matter unless technical assistance is requested by them.”
The logging again was brought to the Department’s attention following a field survey of `alala habitat made on April 19, 1983 by staff from the Division of Forestry and Wildlife. “Rather serious and extensive habitat alteration has occurred within the koa belt as a result of logging and clearing in the area,” Ronald Bachman, district wildlife biologist for Hawai`i, wrote Landgraf on April 29, 1983. James Detor, DLM administrator, was forwarded notice of the logging on May 10. “Please advise as to whether the terms of Pu`uwa`awa`a Ranch’s lease permit this activity,” Detor was asked.
Detor replied that “the lessee is in fact permitted to cut trees where it is necessary for pasture management purposes. The lessee is not, however, authorized to market any wood or wood products resulting from the cutting of trees, for such sale does not constitute pasturage in character.”
On May 12, a memorandum to the files from Ron Walker, DOFAW’s chief biologist, noted: that the logging had been going on for at least a year; that hundreds of acres were involved; that strips of native understory were being bulldozed to haul the logs; that they were being hauled out on trucks; that a portable saw mill was on the property. He questioned whether the logging was on Conservation District land, and, if so, whether logging was a permitted use.
Cease and Desist
In June, the Division of Land Management inspected the ranch “in response to a complaint of illegal koa harvesting.” In a memo August 1, 1983, from Glenn Y. Taguchi, the Hawai`i District land agent to Detor, Taguchi noted that the inspection team found a portable sawmill being operated by Dale Andrews and two of his sons. Andrews told the team that he had been taking koa from the area for about two years. Every two to three months, Andrews said, he would ship a container of koa to Honolulu. “There was evidence of the taking of down trees as well as what appeared to be the cutting of live trees,” the inspection team found. Also, “the logging operation has extended into the conservation zoned lands… However, there is no approved CDUA” — Conservation District Use Application — “on file in the Hilo office for commercial harvest of timber products.”
On August 15, 1983, BLNR Chairman Susumo Ono wrote Bohnett: “you are hereby ordered to immediately stop all koa logging operations on land covered by the subject lease and on land classified as conservation district.”
Bohnett’s response, dated August 23, 1983, is noteworthy. “We received your letter … in which you recommend [emphasis added] that we cease our ‘logging’ operations,” Bohnett wrote. The logging will cease “until we can get official approval from your department,” he added, stating that, in any case, only dead trees had been taken and that it was his impression that the area involved is outside the Conservation District.
The logging was determined by the Attorney General’s office to be in violation of the lease terms. Moreover, Ono wrote Bohnett on November 10, 1983, it was a “certainty” that the lease could not be amended to permit koa logging, given past court rulings upholding the “nonreformation of public-auction-leases.”
“Accordingly, in light of the foregoing,” Ono’s letter continued, “we sincerely urge that you discontinue the logging of koa… Should you disregard this request, we may have no recourse but to institute termination proceedings for breach of lease conditions…”
Ongoing Violations
Logging operations did not cease. In January, Bachman notified Landgraf that a district staff biologist and a biologist from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service “encountered evidence of recent logging activity,” including a saw mill site, skid trails, a new logging road and stumps of freshly harvested koa trees.” In February, Allan Marmelstein, Pacific Islands administrator for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, wrote Ono, informing him that the logging was ongoing and reminding Ono that the FWS had “brought this situation to your attention” last fall.
Again in March, the Division of Land Management sent inspectors to Pu`uwa`awa`a Ranch. The inspection team’s observations confirmed the contents of Bachman’s memos, its report stated, adding that, “While both saw mill sites are in the … Agriculture District, it is obvious that the logging operations extend well inside the Conservation District.”
Notwithstanding the clear evidence of recent logging, Bohnett wrote to Ono on April 2, 1984, that “We have not done any logging on the ranch since we were told to cease operations by your department.” “It appears to me that the ‘SAGA of the KOA Harvest’ is getting a lot more attention than it deserves,” Bohnett said. Among other things, Bohnett stated that the canoe club that approached him with a request to harvest “a few” koa trees said they did so on the suggestion of the Big Island board member at the time, Roland Higashi.
A Rap on the Knuckles
It was September 1984 before the Board of Land and Natural Resources entertained a report from the Division of Land Management on a series of issues relating to Bohnett’s operations at Pu`uwa`awa`a Ranch, including the koa logging, unpermitted use of water from a state well, withdrawal of a large area for hunting, as well as the DLM’s recommendations on rental renewal. Because Bohnett was unable to attend the meeting in person, the Board deferred action on any of the matters relating to Bohnett until its October 12, 1984, meeting.
At that meeting, the Board of Land and Natural Resources decided to fine Bohnett for logging and clearing in the Conservation District area, although the specific amount was to be determined by the Division of Forestry and Wildlife.
Following up on Board action, DOFAW sent a survey team to the ranch to study the logged areas. It found that “no logical pattern” to the trees taken for harvest, the harvesting pattern itself, nor the actual milling of koa lumber. “Trees were taken from widely dispersed areas,” the survey report stated, “some of which were obviously cull, while others containing higher value wood were left behind.”
By Bohnett’s admission, he received at least $9,000 as his share of the timber taken by Andrews. Nonetheless, Detor recommended to the Board on November 12, 1984, that Bohnett be fined $34,600 (for 173 trees taken from the Conservation District, at $200 per tree) and be ordered to pay just $8,541 for the commercial value of the logged trees.
The Conservation Council for Hawai`i submitted a statement to the Board challenging the proposed fine, noting, among other things, that the DLNR staff seriously undervalued the koa by employing a rate of $75 per 1,000 board feet whereas in fact, the going wholesale rate for koa boards in Honolulu was between $6 and $7 per board foot. It noted further that by statute, the fine for Conservation District violations (with each tree removed constituting a separate violation) is set at $500, not $200.
New Tires and a Muffler
Over the Conservation Council’s objections, the Board approved the recommended fine and restitution, with the fine being used against the costs of establishing the proposed `alala sanctuary. According to records at the Division of Land Management, Bohnett deposited $10,000 with the DLNR soon after the fine was assessed. Out of that, $6,360 was used to pay for the survey conducted by the Department of Accounting and General Services in 1988. The DLM records show these other charges against the fine: $410.67 (to reimburse Bohnett the cost of two new tires in May 1989) and $228.05 (Bohnett’s costs for a muffler and tailpipe that same month).
The $24,600 balance of the fine was to be paid out by Pu`uwa`awa`a Ranch as fencing. According to a memo June 27, 1990 from Jon Giffin to Mike Buck, administrator of the Division of Forestry and Wildlife, the ranch completed a 1.3 mile section of boundary fence. Cost of material was reported to be about $8,900. Cost of labor was placed at $15,713.
Volume 1, Number 9 March 1991
Leave a Reply