Governor Cayetano's recent decision to enter into an agreement with the federal government permitting the creation of the federal Hawaiian Islands Humpback Whale Sanctuary was a big disappointment. This past May, the Board of Trustees of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs voted unanimously to oppose the sanctuary. We shared the doubts that prompted Mayor Linda Lingle and other leaders to urge Governor Cayetano to veto the plan, and we also had reasons of our own. We still don’t need
whale sanctuaryOverprotection could lead
to ecological disaster for HawaiiOur board has a duty to protect the public trust's resources derived from public lands, including the submerged lands, the water surface, the water column, the seabed and all flora, fauna and minerals they may contain. The legislation then before the governor, and in its present state, guarantees us no protection with respect to the federal government's use and control of these resources.
As fiduciaries, we could not assume that the federal government would always exercise its authority over the sanctuary in a manner consistent with the best interests of the Hawaiian trust. The governor knew this, but unfortunately paid no attention to local concerns.
Now OHA is saddled with "co-stewardship," as the federal government's Environmental Impact Statement calls its shared dominion over the submerged ceded lands comprising the sanctuary. OHA, of course, had enough problems dealing with one "steward," let alone two.
My own opposition to the sanctuary goes beyond issues involving ceded lands, sovereignty and Hawaiian rights. I'm concerned with the potential for destruction. Like many modern scientists, the Hawaiians of the pre-contact ahupua'a knew that interference with nature's delicate balance could wreak havoc. So traditionally they managed the entire eco-system rather than a single species. The wisdom of their ancient practices has been confirmed again and again.
Recently, for example, I spoke to Colin Kippen, a native Hawaiian judge for the Squamish Tribe in Oregon, about what happens when a single species reproduces to dominate its environment. Judge Kippen has listened to tribe members complain of the damage caused by an over-population of whales in sanctuary waters off the Pacific Northwest coast. He has seen where whale fecal matter has contaminated and destroyed clambeds and other sources of revenue that fishermen, including Native Americans, used to depend on. The animals are so desperate and crowded that, tragically, they are beaching themselves.
In a press release, Governor Cayetano defended his decision to bring this disastrous situation to Hawaiian waters by, incredibly, claiming to limit the sanctuary's boundaries to half of what was originally proposed. Just how the limits will work is unclear given this magnificent mammal's mobility and the legal protections in place.
As an endangered species, the humpback whale cannot be approached within 300 feet in its habitat. Existing law does not confine that habitat to an area designated by Cayetano. Rather, the habitat moves with each whale which therefore enjoys a de facto floating sanctuary with or without the recently signed agreement between the state and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
While the governor says the state will have the right to make changes in future whale sanctuary regulations, he omits the fact that the state can do nothing about the important rules already in force. He has also tried to reassure us by portraying the state-federal partnership as a five-year trial marriage. However, the agreement he signed does not provide for an easy divorce.
To anyone who has taken the time to observe the situation, the humpback whale appears to be thriving these days. To date, there have been no complaints that either boaters or fishermen have violated the animals' space.
Why then was this unnecessary state-federal partnership forced on us? The only justification seems to be the $800,000 to $1 million for research and study projects which cannot be used for any other purpose. The governor claims this chump change will, somehow, provide the state with an economic boost!
He made the wrong call on the sanctuary by listening to the wrong people -- green Nazis, out-of-state marine biologists and animal rights extremists -- rather than the Hawaiians who have worked, protected and loved these waters for generations. Others joined us in testifying against this agreement because it does not protect fishermen, the local economy or the subsistence-fishing industry.
Since the whale no longer needs special protection and the federal money will not help us, the sanctuary should be seen as another move by the powers-that-be to prevent Hawaiians from accessing resources in our submerged lands. We need to remember all this and to look for a change in 1998.
Rowena Akaka is trustee at large for the .
Office of Hawaiian Affairs. The opinions in View Point columns
are the authors' and are not necessarily shared by the Star-Bulletin