HONOLULU, Hawaii (17 July 2004) -- The state's plan for managing the territorial waters of the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands (NWHI)—home to the world's largest intact coral reef system—will move one step closer to becoming a reality later this month when the Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) holds public meetings to consider proposed rules for a marine refuge there. Observers who have followed the drawn-out process through government channels say the proposal contains major improvements over the original plan released in 2001. However, many questions remain regarding entry permits, refuge boundaries and the state's capacity to enforce the rules in the remote islands. President Bill Clinton's creation of the 3.5-million acre NWHI Coral Reef Ecosystem Reserve (CRER) in 2000 has received widespread local and national public support. However, arguably even more critical than federal attention is the state's policy for its jurisdiction over the three-mile-wide ring of water around the islands. As one marine scientist put it, "This is the biggest natural-resource decision the state will ever make. All the cookies are up there in state waters." A place like no other The national waters surrounding the 1,200-mile stretch of sandy atolls, low coral islands and ancient volcanic islets of the NWHI, also known as the Leeward Islands, include nearly 4,500 miles of reef habitat—about 70 percent of all U.S. reef areas. Over the last several years, biologists have recorded more than 60 species of reef-building corals and thousands of species of mammals, fish, invertebrates and marine plants. Scores of them are new to science and more than a quarter of the reef animals occur only around the NWHI. Another sign of the marine ecosystem's vibrant health are the extraordinary abundance of top predators such as ulua, sharks, kahala and other jumbo fish whose numbers have dwindled from Kaua'i to the Big Island. In weight and size, fish in the NWHI dwarf those of the main Hawaiian Islands by, on average, a whopping 260 percent. Add up all these superlatives and you begin to grasp why this place ranks not just as a national treasure, but one of global significance. As Oceanic Institute ecologist Alan Friedlander has noted, "With coral reefs around the world in decline, it is extremely rare to be able to examine a coral reef ecosystem that is relatively free of human influence…The reefs of the NWHI…provide the unique opportunity to assess how natural coral reef ecosystems function." Absent landlord Although the NWHI waters within a three-mile radius of land have been part of the state's kuleana since statehood, the islands' remoteness, the DLNR's traditional reluctance to regulate marine activities and tight agency budgets have kept the Leeward Islands out of sight and out of mind. Bill Devick, director of the DLNR's Division of Aquatic Resources (DAR), said his agency began planning for regulations in the NWHI about eight years ago. "We recognized that state waters contain the most valuable resources up there, and they are vulnerable to degradation," Devick said. The DAR drafted cooperative agreements to pursue "seamless" management of the region with agencies such as the National Marine Fisheries Service and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, but they "disappeared into the bowels of the federal government," he said. The initiative remained stalled until February 2001, when the DLNR proposed a fishery management area for state waters within the federal marine reserve. "Public comment and testimony at hearings in January 2002 soundly rejected the state's attempt to create fishing zones in the fragile lagoons and reefs within state waters," recalled Cha Smith, director of Kahea, an alliance of Native Hawaiian practitioners and environmentalists. So the state went back to the drawing board. The revised rules the DLNR offered to the Land Board for approval in the summer of 2002 proposed a marine refuge and included some key new provisions. The board gave it a thumbs up and DLNR scheduled another round of public hearings for November 2003. However, a funny thing happened on the way to the forum. When the DAR released the revised draft for public comment prior to the hearings, activists familiar with the proceedings discovered that it was not the version approved by the board. "The text had been altered in ways that severely weakened the proposed protections and undermined DLNR's stated intent to establish a refuge," said Stephanie Fried, a senior scientist with the nonprofit Environmental Defense Fund. The DAR finally agreed to retract the mysteriously altered version, cancelled the November hearings, announced new hearings for February 2004, and then postponed them until July 21 to 29. Puka in the plan The eight-page proposal now on the discussion table declares the refuge's primary purposes to be "long-term conservation and protection of the unique coral reef ecosystems and the related marine resources and species…[and] their sustainable use for present and future generations." The document proclaims the intents "to manage, preserve, protect and conserve the unique resources…using the best available science and a precautionary management approach" and to implement an entry permit program "that will cause no harm to the refuge resources." The rules also recognize the rights of Native Hawaiians to access state waters for cultural, subsistence and religious practices. Protectionists applaud the conservation-oriented statement of purpose and its acknowledgement of the uniqueness of the NWHI ecosystem. "In this respect the state has clearly 'turned the ship' in the revised proposal," Fried says. Under the plan, waters around French Frigate Shoals (FFS), Pearl and Hermes Atoll, and Kure Atoll are designated as no-take zones. Strict protection of the core area waters at FFS is especially important, as the critically endangered Hawaiian monk seal and the green sea turtle—poster child for Hawaii's $800-million tourist industry—breed there. Inconsistently, the state's designated boundary at five other islands is 120 feet. This creates two puka of unregulated waters at Mokumanamana. In contrast, Nihoa has a 60-foot limit—to keep state waters open to bottom-fishing there, Devick explained. Nihoa doesn't contain the same reef resources as elsewhere and the state doesn't see the same need for protection there, he said. Located 240 miles from O'ahu, Nihoa is generally steep-sided, with offshore depths dropping off rapidly. However, a sandy beach tucked in its rocky folds is a monk seal haven, where the animals haul out and birth pups. Bill Gilmartin, who spent many months in the NWHI during his 25 years as a monk seal researcher, said, "The proposed boundary at Nihoa essentially means no habitat protection at all. There's no scientific basis for it." Monk seals are notoriously sensitive to disturbance, particularly when nurturing their pups, and allowing fishing past such a shallow boundary sets the stage for interactions with humans and removal of their prey, he said. Important cultural sites, burials and heiau are on Nihoa as well. "Under the state's proposal, vessels can approach to within a stone's throw of this sensitive area, which is unacceptable for cultural and environmental reasons," Smith said. There appears to be no compelling reason for the state to keep Nihoa open to fishing. A recent report by the Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council (Wespac)—which grants permits under the aegis of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries—says the most productive bottom-fishing grounds occur at depths of 300 to 600 feet. At the three-mile edge of the state's jurisdiction, Nihoa's depths are 100 to 200 feet. For now, a wide swath of reserve waters around Nihoa remains open to commercial bottom-fishing and commercial and recreational trolling under permits that were grandfathered into the reserve. Fishing is the No.1 hot-button issue in the NWHI, and there's no doubt it will continue to simmer and boil throughout deliberations on whether to morph the reserve into a national marine sanctuary, with the state fated to be a key player. A 2002 report summarizing federal, state and academic research (and co-authored by DAR biologists) states, "'Sustainable' fishing may not be possible in the shallow coral reef waters…if we want to preserve these unique ecosystems in their present state." And a 2004 report by Sustainable Resources Group International (SRG), commissioned by the National Marine Sanctuary Program, concludes that "the potential risk accompanying commercial fishing far outweigh the limited socioeconomic benefits." According to SRG, nine bottom-fishing vessels operate in the islands, four of them in the southernmost zone. They target slow-growing species such as onaga, opakapaka and ehu. The annual revenue of this handful of fishers amounts to about $480,000 after expenses. Fisheries data from the last couple of decades shows that bottom fishers have been working longer and harder, and catching fewer fish—a pattern that suggests overfishing. The Reserve Advisory Council has proposed a buy-out of their permits, said Gilmartin, who serves on the panel. "The permit holders seem in favor of this, but Wespac director Kitty Simmonds is adamantly opposed," he said. | | Earthjustice attorney Paul Achitoff, veteran litigator on cases involving the NWHI and member of the Advisory Council, says continued fishing in state waters would create "holes" in a true sanctuary. "The council has been working to hammer out a plan for vigorous protections in the reserve. It would be very unfortunate to have a highly protective sanctuary surrounding pockets of extractive activities simply because the state doesn't have the will to create a true refuge," he said. Devil in the details Fishing at Nihoa is not the only point of controversy. "As the rules are worded, it's not the refuge it's made out to be," Gilmartin said. Despite ostensibly closing most state waters to fishing and other commercial activities, the rules allow permits for activities that "do not degrade the coral reef ecosystem, related marine resources and species …such as, but not limited to…scientific or educational purposes, non-extractive purposes," and cultural uses by Native Hawaiians. "This loophole amounts to allowing pretty much anything to go on up there," Gilmartin said. "The only limitation here—that you don't degrade the resources—is highly subjective," Achitoff pointed out. "Wespac consistently argues that they never authorize activities that degrade the resources. Yet their decisions have led to the crash of the lobster fishery and other negative impacts in the NWHI." The state may not have intended this meaning, he says, "but it could easily be interpreted that as long as you can argue persuasively that you aren't going to degrade resources you can get a permit." The proposal contains other vague language. For example, the DLNR "may" (rather than "shall") require permit applicants to provide information such as their address, vessel name and registration number, proposed dates and purpose of entry, area of activities and number of vessel passengers. Likewise, the department "may" deny a permit based on past violations. Fried finds the wishy-washy phrasing dismaying. "It's imperative that applicants supply such essential information and that the state bars access to known violators," she emphasized. Such tentative language "just doesn't make sense from a legal viewpoint," Achitoff said. Devick said permits for aquarium collecting, ecotourism, bioprospecting or cruise ship visits would be "difficult to get approved by the Land Board." However, the proposal also allows an "authorized representative" of the Land Board to issue permits, without describing the necessary qualifications for the person holding such powers. In this, the DLNR has sidestepped public input calling for an independent panel of experts to review all permit applications, contending the competence of its staff makes this "unnecessary and unwarranted." The lack of a mechanism for independent scientific review of permit applications runs contrary to state precedent, said a government source who spoke on the condition of anonymity. "Compare this proposed system with the Natural Area Reserves, where the independent NAR Commission approves permits with input from other agencies as well as its staff. There's a serious lack of transparency and oversight in this proposal." While the rules provide for a 30-day public comment period on applications, this puts the burden on citizen watchdogs. Making the rules stick So who will police the islands? Since it's unrealistic to expect the state to have enforcement officers in the NWHI, the most sensible options for guarding against poaching and other illegal activities seem to be remote monitoring of vessels and close cooperation with federal enforcement officers there. (Enforcement currently depends on a handful of FWS agents stationed at Midway while the Coast Guard is diverted to "homeland security" duties elsewhere.) Public input, the 2002 federal-state research report, and a 2003 NOAA workshop on NWHI management and conservation (with 100 scientist participants) all call for access permits to require vessels to carry vessel monitoring systems (VMS). Devick conceded this should be looked into in the future, but for now DAR dismisses VMS as "expensive" and "limited in its ability to track activities." A VMS is programmed to send out via satellite real-time signals that reveal a vessel's location, speed and heading. The technology is used around the world and costs about $1,000 per vessel. Australian authorities use it to monitor activities on the Great Barrier Reef, and NOAA Fisheries mandates Hawai'i-based longline boats (though not bottom-fishers) to use it. The USFWS has required monitoring systems on the small number of vessels permitted to visit the National Wildlife Refuges in the NWHI, said Reserve Coordinator Robert Smith. FWS hired a mainland company to track vessels and report on their transits through federal waters. "It allowed the agency to know vessel locations on a 24/7 basis—a very useful service and not all that expensive," he says. When the 85-foot longliner Swordman I, carrying more than 6,000 gallons of diesel fuel and hydraulic oil, ran aground at Pearl and Hermes Atoll in 2000, VMS technology allowed agents to track the disaster and quickly send out equipment for a clean-up that cost upwards of $300,000. (The O'ahu-based owners refused to respond to the spill, and the government sued for damages.) Unfortunately, the legacy of a similar event remains. In October 1998, the Paradise Queen II ran aground off Kure, after catching 3,000 pounds of lobster. The boat was carrying about 11,500 gallons of diesel fuel and oil, more than 1,000 plastic lobster traps with toxic lead weights, 11 miles of fishing line and boating equipment. To this day, wreckage from the vessel and its contents litters the atoll's offshore waters and southeastern shore, a favored haul-out spot for monk seals. Researchers have found dead monk seals tangled in the beach wreckage, and offshore debris continues to bang up the reef. DLNR reports following the event concluded the shipwreck's impact "appeared to be light," despite the voluminous debris, and claimed the boat wasn't removed because the owner didn't allow government responders in. But government staff intimate with the incident say the owner—who didn't have sufficient insurance to pay for salvage and debris removal—asked that the state agree not to prosecute if further reef damage resulted from clean-up activities, and DLNR refused. The vast majority of Hawai'i residents will be able to experience the wilds of the archipelago's far reaches only through the photos, films and writings of people fortunate enough to visit the region and the multimedia exhibits of the reserve's Mokupapapa Discovery Center in Hilo. Nonetheless, the economy and quality of life in the main islands directly benefits from the conservation and protection of NWHI resources. It's common knowledge that the seabirds and sea turtles seen in the main islands originate from the NWHI, and there's growing evidence that the waters there serve as a nursery and reservoir for our fisheries as well. Ulua, papio and kahala tagged by fishers in the NWHI are showing up in O'ahu and Kona waters. Preliminary results from work done by DAR biologist Bill Walsh shows that gene flow in populations of damselfish is more than 200 times greater from the Northwest to the main islands than vice versa. If this pattern holds true for other fish species, it's entirely possible that depleted fish populations of the main islands could be replenished back to robust health thanks to their cousins up the island chain. Present and future generations have a stake in the long-term, big-picture conservation of the world-class marine riches off Hawai'i's shores. The near future will show if the state can become a steward equal to the job. SOURCE - Honolulu WeeklyThe Leeward Islands (in order of distance from the main island) | Nihoa 171 acres, 900-foot cliffs, basalt rock surface. Home to Hawaiians between ad 1000 and ad 1700, Nihoa has more than 80 known cultural sites. Mokumanana (Necker Island) 46 acres, basalt surface. Second smallest island, but second largest surrounding marine habitat (385,000 acres). Numerous religious places and cultural objects. French Frigate Shoals 67 acres, classic coral atoll. Includes Tern Island. Gardner Pinnacles 5 acres. The smallest island is known for its profusion of opihi. Maro Reef About 478,000 acres of reef—the largest coral reef in the chain. Laysan Island 1,015 acres, second largest land mass in the NWHI behind Sand Island at Midway. Part of the Hawaiian Islands Bird Reservation (including Lisianski and Kure), which Theodore Roosevelt created in 1909. Lisianski Island 381 acres, reef area is almost the size of O'ahu. Nearly three-fourths of the Bonin petrels nesting in Hawai'i make this island their home. Pearl and Hermes Atoll 80 acres land, 194,000 acres reef. About 160,000 birds of 22 species. Midway Atoll 1,535 acres. The WWII military base is home to the world's largest Laysan albatross colony. Kure Atoll The northernmost coral atoll in the world. Last year, 2,700 pounds of marine debris were removed from Kure. |
|
|
