# Hawaii Superferry faces waves in court



## marcmuff

I just saw this on my homepage:

Hawaii Superferry faces waves in court

By JAYMES SONG, Associated Press Writer Mon Aug 27, 6:58 PM ET

HONOLULU - Environmental groups sought court intervention Monday to ground the first passenger-vehicle ferry service among the Hawaiian Islands.
ADVERTISEMENT

The groups submitted a motion for a preliminary injunction and requested a temporary restraining order to halt the Hawaii Superferry from using Maui's Kahului harbor until an environmental assessment is conducted.

The Superferry made two sold-out trips Sunday, two days ahead of schedule, after the state Supreme Court ruled last week that the state should have required an environmental assessment before the ferry launched. State transportation officials, noting that the court didn't explicitly say the ship couldn't run, allowed the service to start.

An attorney representing three environmental groups, Isaac Hall, said state law clearly says that a project cannot be launched and state land cannot be used until an environmental assessment is being prepared.

"I'm hoping the judge will agree with us," Hall said. "I don't think operating for one day or two days in absolute bad faith should give anybody a leg up at all."

Hawaii Superferry Inc. officials said they were preparing a response to the court filings.

The environmentalists argue that the ferry's plan to ply 400 miles of Hawaii waters each day endangers whales, threatens to spread invasive species and will worsen traffic and pollution.

Superferry officials have said the ship's water jet propulsion system means there are no exposed propellers to strike aquatic animals.

Before Sunday, the only way to travel among the islands where an estimated 1.3 million people live and tens of thousands of tourists arrive each day was by the local airlines.

The $95 million ship is built to carry more than 800 passengers and 200 cars. After Sept. 5, the fares will go up significantly: Round trips from Honolulu to Maui or Kauai, with taxes and a fuel surcharge, will cost more than $240 for one passenger and a car.


----------



## Timeshare Von

marcmuff said:


> After Sept. 5, the fares will go up significantly: Round trips from Honolulu to Maui or Kauai, with taxes and a fuel surcharge, will cost more than $240 for one passenger and a car.



They MUST be kidding!  That is outrageous.  Who can afford that??


----------



## ricoba

Timeshare Von said:


> They MUST be kidding!  That is outrageous.  Who can afford that??




I don't think that is too much since it's a driver & a car.  

I would think it would be a great way for locals to get around, if it is able to keep operating.


----------



## Kona Lovers

The prices charged might be what brings the whole project to a grinding halt.  

Marty


----------



## Timeshare Von

ricoba said:


> I don't think that is too much since it's a driver & a car.
> 
> I would think it would be a great way for locals to get around, if it is able to keep operating.



Let's say for a weekend trip, someone can fly via one of the local Hawaiian discount airlines and rent a car for less.  I think if you're planning a trip to a neighboring island services by the ferry, for more than a week, perhaps then it might make some sense.  Actually the over/under break even is probably something like 5 days unless you are planning to rent a low end (compact/economy car).


----------



## Timeshare Von

martygeorge79 said:


> The prices charged might be what brings the whole project to a grinding halt.
> 
> Marty




That's what I am thinking too.  I don't know that the local market can keep them a float . . . and don't see many tourists filling up the ferry on a regular enough basis to keep them financially solvent.


----------



## Icarus

Passenger fares are around $50 depending on what day you go. More than Go! airfares of course.

A TRO was issued, so they can't dock on Maui. They are planning on continuing the Ohahu - Kauai service, but the ship didn't dock today (Monday) at Nawiliwili harbor because of protesters in the water. It just turned back and returned to Ohahu.

There's a very small, but very vocal group opposed to the ferry. Their reasons  don't really make sense given how the ferry works and the rules they have set up for themselves including monitoring for whales, etc, so I expect this will merely be a delay. The same type of ferry has been operating out of Maine for some time now.

The stories are all on the front page at honoluadvertiser.com

-David


----------



## ouaifer

In response to the OP..._the injunction for the temporary restraining order *has been granted* until September 6._

There were also several large scale protests on Kaua'i at Nawiliwili Harbor...blocking roads.  Also, kayakers and surfers were in the water, preventing the Alakai Ferry from entering the harbor.  It had to retreat back into open waters for several hours, until the protesters left and the Coast Guard cleared the way for re-entry.


----------



## ouaifer

*Superferry Alakai suspended operations!*

The Superferry has suspended operations to Kaua'i.


----------



## Icarus

Your link is broken. (The story is still there, but the breaking_news link changed, and those links are temporary.)

Here's a better story from the Honolulu Advertiser.

http://honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070829/NEWS01/708290426

It looks like from the map, anybody staying at KBC would have had a pretty good view of the festivities.

-David


----------



## ouaifer

I've corrected the link...thank you.


----------



## DaveNV

I live in the Pacific Northwest, north of Seattle.  Ferry traffic to the San Juan Islands here is enormously popular, resulting in very long lines and lots of traffic, as people come from everywhere to visit the area.  And its not cheap:  The current fare for a normal car and just the driver to one of the main islands is $43.10.  Passengers are extra.  If the vehicle happens to be longer than 20 feet, the fare goes up substantially - by about 50%.  People absorb that cost because it's the only practical way to get to the San Juans from the mainland.

So I think the $240 fare for something *this* unique will definitely appeal to a lot of visitors, who would love to see another Hawaiian island without having to go through the hassle and expense of flying and renting a car again.  How much do tourists currently pay to take a short helicopter tour, or a submarine dive, or have a fancy dinner cruise, or eat in a swanky restaurant?  Is this price too high?  Maybe.  But I think tourism will support the Hawaii ferries, if they can get the legalities sorted out, and the kinks worked out of the system.  Tourists will budget the cost into the price of their trip.  

For everyone who says it costs too much, there are bound to be many who will pay, for the convenience and novelty, if nothing else.

Dave


----------



## BocaBum99

It's unfortunate that such a small minority of people can stop such an enterprise.  I wonder what these people's real beef is with the SuperFerry?

Regarding the option for tourists, I don't see it as being very viable if the prices remain a lot higher than the alternative of taking an inter-island flight and renting a car.  That's because the tourist needs to rent a car anyway.  With cheap flights and cheap rental car rates so prevalent in Hawaii, I am not sure about how big the market is for a tourist oriented alternative.

The biggest potential market I saw was for locals who don't tend to travel much to the outer islands.  With a cost effective option, you could see locals travelling between islands like they never did before.

But, the costs are prohibitive. It's at least twice the price of renting a car and taking a flight.  Not sure if the novelty is worth that price differential.  We'll see what the market says.

With the $5 promotional rate, all the tickets sold out quickly.  We'll see if they end up having lots of promotions.


----------



## Kauai Kid

Icarus said:


> Your link is broken. (The story is still there, but the breaking_news link changed, and those links are temporary.)
> 
> Here's a better story from the Honolulu Advertiser.
> 
> http://honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070829/NEWS01/708290426
> 
> It looks like from the map, anybody staying at KBC would have had a pretty good view of the festivities.
> 
> -David



There are some very negative comments about the Kauai Coast Guard personnel in the Newspaper article that I have to challenge on this the second anniversary of Katrina.  

The Coast Guard rescued more people before, during, and after Katrina than any other agency!  

Many Katrina folks owe their very lives to these folks in the Coast Guard who put their own lives on the line to save others.   

Have these Hawaiians forgotten what the Coast Guard did for Hawaiians when Iniki clobbered Kauai?  I bet they were heros then just as they were during Katrina.

Sterling, formerly from New Orleans (its not fixed yet)


----------



## Born2Travel

Quote:  The environmentalists argue that the ferry's plan to ply 400 miles of Hawaii waters each day endangers whales, threatens to spread invasive species and will worsen traffic and pollution.

I guess I just don't understand this.  What is different about the ferry than the cruise ships and other boats that navigate the waters in Hawaii?


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte

Born2Travel said:


> Quote:  The environmentalists argue that the ferry's plan to ply 400 miles of Hawaii waters each day endangers whales, threatens to spread invasive species and will worsen traffic and pollution.
> 
> I guess I just don't understand this.  What is different about the ferry than the cruise ships and other boats that navigate the waters in Hawaii?



This isn't about environment; it's about jobs.

You're right - there is no difference between the ferry and the cruise ships.  But ferries bring tourists to the islands, who then spend money. Thus, cruise ships are good.

Superferry is perceived as being more valuable to kama'ina, thus the economic impact of people arriving on ferry will be less. Plus, those people who visit interisland now are forced to fly and to rent cars; if those people take the ferries they won't rent cars and they won't be buying airline tickets.


----------



## hibbeln

A lot of the environmental concerns center around invasive species which are a very real and very legitimate concern in the Hawaiian islands.  They are so geographically isolated that invasive species spread very rapidly and do an amazing amount of damage.  

Oahu already has a lot of trouble with invasive species.  Maui is having more and more trouble.  The other islands do NOT want invasive plants and insects from those islands.

What makes the SuperFerry different is the cars......people can drive their cars or ORV trucks up on the ferry and bring along all the dirt, seeds, spores, bugs, eggs, etc from one island to another.  It truly could be an ecological nightmare.

Does that make more sense?


----------



## BocaBum99

hibbeln said:


> A lot of the environmental concerns center around invasive species which are a very real and very legitimate concern in the Hawaiian islands.  They are so geographically isolated that invasive species spread very rapidly and do an amazing amount of damage.
> 
> Oahu already has a lot of trouble with invasive species.  Maui is having more and more trouble.  The other islands do NOT want invasive plants and insects from those islands.
> 
> What makes the SuperFerry different is the cars......people can drive their cars or ORV trucks up on the ferry and bring along all the dirt, seeds, spores, bugs, eggs, etc from one island to another.  It truly could be an ecological nightmare.
> 
> Does that make more sense?



No, this is a completely bogus argument.  If they want to stop invasive species, they need to remove all humans, cruise ships, and airplanes from the islands.  The most invasive species of all are humans.


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte

hibbeln said:


> A lot of the environmental concerns center around invasive species which are a very real and very legitimate concern in the Hawaiian islands.  They are so geographically isolated that invasive species spread very rapidly and do an amazing amount of damage.
> 
> Oahu already has a lot of trouble with invasive species.  Maui is having more and more trouble.  The other islands do NOT want invasive plants and insects from those islands.
> 
> What makes the SuperFerry different is the cars......people can drive their cars or ORV trucks up on the ferry and bring along all the dirt, seeds, spores, bugs, eggs, etc from one island to another.  It truly could be an ecological nightmare.
> 
> Does that make more sense?



Are you seriously saying that right now there aren't ample opportunities for transport of bugs and critters from island to island.  Are you saying that all of the barge traffic among islands is sanitized to ensure that dirt, spores, insects, etc, aren't being carried inside in shipping containers?  Are you saying that when companies use fork lifts to move cargo destined for interisland sevices that they clean the tires and undersides of the equipment and pallets to ensure that no interisland transport of species can occur?  Do you mean that people are not now carrying dirt, bugs, seeds, spores, etc, from island to island??  That all of the suitcases, shoes, ice chests, hunting gear, and other personal effects that people carry with them interisland are not carrying dirt, spores, bugs, etc.?

There's no way that isn't happening now, and cars and trucks moving from island to island isn't going to have a big impact on that.

****

That's not to say that interisland transport of species isn't an issue that should be ignored.  But if we're not going to ignore it, don't think that the efforts taken to combat it should be measures that will actually be effective and make a difference?  Don't you think that a person truly concerned about that issue would have any problem with implementing the measures that are likely to actually have an impact on the problem?  

By far the biggest way that invasive land species travel is in agricultural and botanical products.  Right now people haul food and botanicals from island to island with little restriction, spreading pests and critters pretty freely among the islands.  Just keep an eye open for those signs that tell you that you're entering or leaving a banana virus quarantine area, for example.  That's all tranmsitted by people moving food and plants.  

I'll be ready to believe that interisland transport of invasive species is truly the issue with the Superferry when the people screaming about the Superferry also insist on doing the single most effective step that can be done to control invasive species - namely institute agricultural inspections for interisland travelers and confiscate all foodstuffs and botanical items being transported among islands without permit.

Because if you don't do that, hyperventilating about a Superferry contribution to invasive species is like screaming about a cut on your finger while your carotid artery has been slashed.

****

With all of that said, there one aspect of possible Superferry impact on invasive species moving among the islands that does bear some consideration, and that is aquatic weeds and bugs.  That's the same situation faced with transport and spread of milfoil here in the mainland, for example.

But cruise ships are already doing a good shop of ensuring that marine aquatic species become well distributed among the islands.  In fact, because cruise ships don't have to spend all of their time in Hawai'i they actually are a much bigger source of concern for invasive species, because they could carry something in from a foreign port almost anywhere in the world, whereas the Superferry will only stay in Hawaiian waters.

If there are freshwater species that need to be prevented from spreading among islands (I don't know if there actually are), then it might be a good idea to prohibit people from taking boats on the superferry.


----------



## Icarus

hibbeln said:


> A lot of the environmental concerns center around invasive species which are a very real and very legitimate concern in the Hawaiian islands.  They are so geographically isolated that invasive species spread very rapidly and do an amazing amount of damage.
> 
> Oahu already has a lot of trouble with invasive species.  Maui is having more and more trouble.  The other islands do NOT want invasive plants and insects from those islands.
> 
> What makes the SuperFerry different is the cars......people can drive their cars or ORV trucks up on the ferry and bring along all the dirt, seeds, spores, bugs, eggs, etc from one island to another.  It truly could be an ecological nightmare.
> 
> Does that make more sense?



No. We transport cars today between the islands and between the islands and the mainland by barge and container ships. What's the difference?

Mitigation is possible in these cases. The cars have to be delivered clean to the barges and container ships and to the ferry. The tires and wheel wells can be high pressure sprayed at the point they enter the boats. They aren't today for any mode of transportation that currently exists, so why single out the Ferry? I don't disagree that it's an issue though, but that can be easily solved.

I agree that invasive species mitigation is very important, but why single out the ferry from the other modes of transportation that are in use today?

The other argument you hear all the time is that the Super Ferry will bring crime and drugs from Oahu. That's just nonsense, and the same arguments that light rail opponents use on the mainland. It doesn't happen there for $3 a ride and it certainly won't happen on the islands for $50 - $60 - $240 a ride. I can just imagine the criminals and drug dealers waking up one morning on Oahu and deciding to take a 3 hour expensive ferry ride to export crime and drugs to the other islands.

I'm sure there will have to be some traffic mitigation at the outer island egress point for the cars. There really isn't any now.

BTW, Steve, the Ferry doesn't discharge anything into the waters. Also for transport of boats, they could have extra inspections (empty bilges, etc.) People already travel between the islands on boats.

-David


----------



## Icarus

Kauai Kid said:


> There are some very negative comments about the Kauai Coast Guard personnel in the Newspaper article that I have to challenge on this the second anniversary of Katrina.



Sterling,

I re-read the Honolulu Advertiser article and didn't see one negative comment about the coast guard. Maybe the Kauai World article had a quote from a protester? I don't think the articles were anti-Coast Guard. Did I miss something?

-David


----------



## BocaBum99

Icarus said:


> No. We transport cars today between the islands and between the islands and the mainland by barge and container ships. What's the difference?
> 
> Mitigation is possible in these cases. The cars have to be delivered clean to the barges and container ships and to the ferry. The tires and wheel wells can be high pressure sprayed at the point they enter the boats. They aren't today for any mode of transportation that currently exists, so why single out the Ferry? I don't disagree that it's an issue though, but that can be easily solved.
> 
> I agree that invasive species mitigation is very important, but why single out the ferry from the other modes of transportation that are in use today?
> 
> The other argument you hear all the time is that the Super Ferry will bring crime and drugs from Oahu. That's just nonsense, and the same arguments that light rail opponents use on the mainland. It doesn't happen there for $3 a ride and it certainly won't happen on the islands for $50 - $60 - $240 a ride. I can just imagine the criminals and drug dealers waking up one morning on Oahu and deciding to take a 3 hour expensive ferry ride to export crime and drugs to the other islands.
> 
> I'm sure there will have to be some traffic mitigation at the outer island egress point for the cars. There really isn't any now.
> 
> BTW, Steve, the Ferry doesn't discharge anything into the waters. Also for transport of boats, they could have extra inspections (empty bilges, etc.) People already travel between the islands on boats.
> 
> -David



I agree.  Why would the criminals want to pay more by going on the SuperFerry when they can get there faster and cheaper on a Go airline flight?  And, they can just steal a car when they are there.  Why would they want to get caught in their own car?  Nonsense.


----------



## california-bighorn

I understand the possible problem of invasive species, but all life on the Hawaiian Islands is the result of invasive species carried by currents, birds, and wind. I would think the only legitimate argument would be forms of algee etc. that could be carried on the hull of the boat. But cruise ships and supply barges have the same risk. I think you just need to follow the money trail to find why there are protesters. Although I doubt I would ever use this ferry service, as eluded to previously it will cut into other businesses. What I find disturbing about this story is the timing. If there was such a perlious danger to the Islands, why did the protesters wait until the service had already started?


----------



## Kauai Kid

Icarus said:


> Sterling,
> 
> I re-read the Honolulu Advertiser article and didn't see one negative comment about the coast guard. Maybe the Kauai World article had a quote from a protester? I don't think the articles were anti-Coast Guard. Did I miss something?
> 
> -David



Right David--the article itself isn't negative but the comments and blogs and links at the bottom of the article with people trashing the Coast Guard certainly were negative.

Sterling


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte

If invasive species is being flogged here, that's only because the opponent's perceive that as the vulnerable point.  They're not really concerned about invasive species; their goal is to stop the Superferry and invasive is merely the means to the end - not the end itself.

****

Sterling - the boat doesn't have to discharge anything to provide transportation for some species.  But certainly discharging ballast and bilge does greatly increase the chances of spreading invasive species.

***

But you do provide first-hand perspective of what I was already sure of - _viz._, that there is already ample movement between islands of dirt, muck, spores, seeds without the Superferry.

Which just comes back to my main point - people aren't really battling the Superferry because of invasive species concerns.  They're battling the Superferry for other reasons and invasive species is just an argument they've latched on to.

I've been involved in many "public participation" issues in facility permitting throughout my career, and the issue is almost never the one that is being fought before the regulatory agencies.

One case I remember well involved the construction of a 240 MW cogeneration facility in California.  The intervening parties opposing the project included several labor trade unions.  Their submittals to the permitting agency opposing the project included concerns about air pollution, traffic impacts, and socio-economic impacts on the neighborhood adjacent to the plant.

Funny how all of those cocerns disappeared as soon as the developer committed to hiring union contractors to build the facility if it were permitted.  Suddenly those very same trade unions withdrew their petitions opposing the project and recommended approval based on the positive economic benefits.


----------



## Liz Wolf-Spada

The comparision to the San Juan ferry for less than $50, to me, points out a major difficulty. Even if I lived on an island with ferry service (but I'm planning on Hawaii Island for that), $240 each way would be huge, now maybe it seems that way because there are only two of us. It would have to be a long visit to make it worth the $500 spent, when we can usually fly round trip from one island to the next for $200 max round trip for two of us, plus car rental.

Personally, I really don't like being on the beach in Hawaii and looking at these mega cruise ships. They just seem to block the horizon and I liked it better when they weren't there. Oh well, progress.

Liz


----------



## Harry

*BOOM, Debie wins and got it right*



hibbeln said:


> A lot of the environmental concerns center around invasive species which are a very real and very legitimate concern in the Hawaiian islands.  They are so geographically isolated that invasive species spread very rapidly and do an amazing amount of damage.
> 
> Oahu already has a lot of trouble with invasive species.  Maui is having more and more trouble.  The other islands do NOT want invasive plants and insects from those islands.
> 
> What makes the SuperFerry different is the cars......people can drive their cars or ORV trucks up on the ferry and bring along all the dirt, seeds, spores, bugs, eggs, etc from one island to another.  It truly could be an ecological nightmare...QUOTE]
> 
> Isaac Hall is a well known attorney who specializes in enviromental issues.  He knows what he is doing and the TRO (a restraining order that can become permanent if not satisfied) was properly attached.  What happened is exactly as Debi explained.  The impact study was flawed and did not address some of the concerns she mentioned.  As we all know, Hawaii is touchy about these things (rightly so).  That State has very tough environmental impact requirements (just like California and Florida) and that means all t's must be crossed and i's dotted.   As some of you from Florida know, this has been a big issue with oil drilling there.  Apparently the ferry company did a pretty good job, but did not address some concerns regarding impact of reefs, and some of the issues mentioned by Debi.  From everything I have read, I would not be surprised if the TRO is lifted but it is going to take some time.  When and if it is lifted, I am not sure if the venture will work.  When we were in Hawaii, the locals were not that happy about it (they say it is cheaper for them and or employer to fly).  Tourists may want to use it, but as pointed out adequately above it makes more economic sense to fly.  Would I use it? Probably, at least once.


----------



## Icarus

That's factually incorrect. The state and lower courts ruled that an EIS wasn't required. There was and is no EIS.

The current judge ruled that an EIS is required because public money was used for harbor improvements in Kahului harbor and state law requires an EIS when public money is used for improvements. There was no TRO issued initially, and the ferry started service. There was no order issued stopping service when this ruling was issued.

Then the TRO was issued, but it doesn't affect Oahu to Kauai service. The super ferry agreed to stop service Oahu - Kauai based on requests from the Governor and the Coast Guard until they can determine how to create a safe environment in Nawiliwili harbor. Oahu - Kauai service can be restarted any time, according to the current rulings and TRO.

The state's position was that the Super Ferry was merely an extension of existing modes of transportation.

The really large protests and opposition seems to be on Kauai, but the only thing they have accomplished so far is to stop service to Maui. Unless there's another TRO or a modification to the current one, I'm sure Oahu - Kauai service will restart soon.

-David


----------



## Icarus

Kauai Kid said:


> Right David--the article itself isn't negative but the comments and blogs and links at the bottom of the article with people trashing the Coast Guard certainly were negative.
> 
> Sterling



Yep. There's a lot of rhetoric on both sides of the issue in the blog attached to the Honolulu Advertiser article. I read several pages of it. It was interesting, but it became repetitive after reading several posts from both sides. 

-David


----------



## Kauai Kid

The most invasive foreign species that has caused the most damage was years ago when Captain Cook "discovered" the Hawaiian Islands.

Sterling


----------



## ricoba

Kauai Kid said:


> The most invasive foreign species that has caused the most damage was years ago when Captain Cook "discovered" the Hawaiian Islands.
> 
> Sterling



Do you think it would have been better if Ferdinand Magellen had "discovered" the islands, such as he did in the Philppines, whereupon the Philippine people endured over 400 years of harsh and suppressive Spanish domination?

I am sorry, but I found your comment a bit over the top.


----------



## thinze3

Invasive species and whales? Since when did we in America start putting those things before convenience?

*
I sure hope they get it all worked out before I get back there in 2009, because I will use it.
I am for the Superferry! *


----------



## Carol C

hibbeln said:


> A lot of the environmental concerns center around invasive species which are a very real and very legitimate concern in the Hawaiian islands.  They are so geographically isolated that invasive species spread very rapidly and do an amazing amount of damage.
> 
> Oahu already has a lot of trouble with invasive species.  Maui is having more and more trouble.  The other islands do NOT want invasive plants and insects from those islands.
> 
> What makes the SuperFerry different is the cars......people can drive their cars or ORV trucks up on the ferry and bring along all the dirt, seeds, spores, bugs, eggs, etc from one island to another.  It truly could be an ecological nightmare.
> 
> Does that make more sense?



Makes perfect sense to me! That's why they'd better get an EIS done before proceeding. Oh yeah, are they going to run on regular diesel or bio-diesel/vegetable oil recyclings, etc? If the former, they'd better watch out for oil spills. Of course all the oil, grease and grime that tends to leak out of improperly maintained cars (likely locals' cars, not rental cars) can really muck up the waters. Yep...they need an EIS for sure!


----------



## Carol C

Icarus said:


> Your link is broken. (The story is still there, but the breaking_news link changed, and those links are temporary.)
> 
> Here's a better story from the Honolulu Advertiser.
> 
> http://honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070829/NEWS01/708290426
> 
> It looks like from the map, anybody staying at KBC would have had a pretty good view of the festivities.
> 
> -David



I just read the article and think the Superferry folks were stupid to disregard a court order and to start service early as a sort of act of defiance. Reminds me of certain attitudes of governing officials in DC. Here's part of the article that shows what really went down:

<snip>

"Tony Lydgate of Wailua Homesteads, Kaua'i, said: "I cannot tell you how relieved I was. I sure wasn't looking to going down to Nawiliwili tonight (to protest the ferry), but I was planning to go."

Lydgate likes the idea of the ferry and expects to use it, but said the Superferry's decision to launch service immediately after a Hawai'i Supreme Court decision calling for an environmental assessment was a poor one.

"Their message should have been: 'We regret the court's decision, but out of respect for the rule of law, we will delay the inauguration of service,' " Lydgate said. "In that instant, they galvanized the opposition. There is now a core of people opposed to the ferry..."


----------



## Icarus

That's the thing. The court ruling reversed a decision by a lower court that the people bringing the suit did not have standing to bring the suit in the first place. There was no order stopping or preventing service from starting until the TRO was issued after service started, and the TRO only applies to service to Kahului harbor, as does the ruling, because that's where public funds were used by the State for harbor improvements.

There was supposed to be a hearing yesterday where arguments were to be heard on lifting the TRO. That was postponed.

Nothing personal Carol, but your replies (and thinze's reply) are typical of the rhetoric surrounding this issue, on both sides of the issue. Facts are ignored and/or interpreted only in the way you think is the right way. It really illustrates the problem.

-David


----------



## Harry

*The Appellate Court and I disagree, David*



Icarus said:


> That's factually incorrect. The state and lower courts ruled that an EIS wasn't required. There was and is no EIS.
> 
> The current judge ruled that an EIS is required because public money was used for harbor improvements in Kahului harbor and state law requires an EIS when public money is used for improvements. There was no TRO issued initially, and the ferry started service. There was no order issued stopping service when this ruling was issued.
> 
> Then the TRO was issued, but it doesn't affect Oahu to Kauai service. The super ferry agreed to stop service Oahu - Kauai based on requests from the Governor and the Coast Guard until they can determine how to create a safe environment in Nawiliwili harbor. Oahu - Kauai service can be restarted any time, according to the current rulings and TRO.
> 
> The state's position was that the Super Ferry was merely an extension of existing modes of transportation.
> 
> The really large protests and opposition seems to be on Kauai, but the only thing they have accomplished so far is to stop service to Maui. Unless there's another TRO or a modification to the current one, I'm sure Oahu - Kauai service will restart soon.
> 
> -David




I just can't believe (and apparently the court couldn't either) that an EIS was not required.  I am not licensed to practice law in Hawaii, but I have handled a number of these things in California and I do know that Hawaii is extremely strict about any impact on their beautiful environment. It is always easy to find some kind of public link especially when your laws are pretty liberal concerning public use and rights to beaches, waterways etc.  Hawaii does have some extremely interesting exceptions that I do not pretend to know.  I think the reason the company stopped service, is they anticipated the injuction to and from the other islands.  However, a standing issue always can be anticipated in these matters.
When we were in Kauai, there was considerable opposition from the locals.  Does this not exist on the other islands?


----------



## Icarus

Harry said:


> When we were in Kauai, there was considerable opposition from the locals.  Does this not exist on the other islands?



Not as much as on Kauai.

As far as the EIS requirement goes, I wasn't posting my own position. Those were the facts about what happened and why one wasn't done.

Did the State screw up? It seems like they did based on the current ruling. They claimed all along that an EIS wasn't required because the State was simply improving a current mode of transportation. Apparently the current judge ruled that the law requires an EIS when public money is used for such improvements. The improvements that they are talking about are the $40,000,000 spent on the harbor improvements.

-David


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte

Harry said:


> I just can't believe (and apparently the court couldn't either) that an EIS was not required.



As I understand, the court reasoned that the Superferry docking at already operating terminals didn't present environmental impacts that differed substantively from those associated with cruise ship docking at the same terminals, particularly since the Supeferry is pretty small compared with the floating cities that are cruise ships.  Since the environmental impacts of cruise ship docking had already been deemed to be adequately assessed, the court decided that no additional impacts assessment was needed for the Superferry.

****

Harry - I think the more startling issue is how the cruise ships were granted permission to commence operations without requiring an EIS.  The Superferry operators are arguing that they should be treated the same as were the cruise ships operators.  The lower courts, essentially, agreed that the playing field should be level.

Frankly, I suspect that the real issue that is being battled here is cruise ship operations, not the Superferry.  But the Superferry right now is the issue that can be used to press the case.  I think the strategy is force the Superferry to conduct an EIS for its operations to establish precedent.  The cruise ship opponents will then be able to assert that if an EIS was required for the Superferry, isn't an EIS even more necessary for the cruise ship operations given the vastly greater impacts of the cruise ship activities??

If they can get the precedent they want now, they will then wait for some future opening to get into court to press the claim against the cruise ships.

*******

The argument about the Superferry presenting greater invasive species threats is just legal strategy to find some argument that might enable the case to proceed.  That case is strengthened if the plaintiffs can demonstrate that there is some substantive potential impact from ferry opreations that wouldn't exist in cruise ship operations.  If they can sustain such an argument, that would make it easier for a court to conclude that the enviromental assessment for cruise ship operations doesn't satisfactorily address the impacts of ferry operations.  

Technically I think the invasive species argument is pretty thin and flimsy - people trekking on and off cruise ships as they travel among islands present every bit as much opportunity for interisland species transport as a Superferry.  But I've seen flimsier arguments carry a case, and I've seen many more solid and viable technical arguments shot down in court.  You never know what might pass muster.  It's the classic legal strategy - when you don't have a good case, plead anything you can.  (And if that doesn't work try yelling and screaming.)

*****

Absent the cruise ships, I don't think anyone in the islands would care one whit about having an alternative to taking the airplane to visit family and friends; in fact I think the Superferry would be welcomed for that very reason.


----------



## jlr10

The last time I was in Maui I heard impassioned pleas to fight the Superferry at all costs from running in the channels where the whales are.  Interesting it was from decks of boats by tour operators who run their boats where the whales are swimming.  True they aren't as big as the ferry, but maybe a little bit of their concern is that at $50 per person for the ferry passaners can be higher and see whales for less than the cost of the tour operators?  Just a thought.

I live in San Diego. The whales travel here also.  We have cruise ships, a ferry, private boats, and the Navy running through.  We also have many whale sighting tours, that basically follow the whales down the cost, in droves.  It doesn't seem to stop the whales.  They come back every year.  Maybe no one told the whales about the problem.

I understand trying to protect the environment.  Perhaps efforts would be better in trying to get Hanauma Bay closed for a few years so the coral would have a chance to recover from the droves of people who swim there, than fighting a battle that economically has been lost already. IMHO


----------



## Kauai Kid

ricoba said:


> Do you think it would have been better if Ferdinand Magellen had "discovered" the islands, such as he did in the Philppines, whereupon the Philippine people endured over 400 years of harsh and suppressive Spanish domination?
> 
> I am sorry, but I found your comment a bit over the top.



Actually the Hawaiians discovered the Hawaiian Islands centuries before Captain Cook.  There was a Spanish helmet found on the Islands so who knows maybe the Spanish can claim they "discovered" the island.  Perhaps the Hawaiians invited the visitor to a luau as the main course as a method to get rid of the foreign invasive species.   

Because of the native Hawaiians interaction with Europeans the entire race was almost exterminated since they had no immunity to many European diseases like small pox, etc.  Estimates of Hawaiian population prior to Capt Cook are on the order of 500-600 thousand and ten years later there were fewer than 100,000.

Sterling


----------



## Poobah

*Superferry*

I think the opposition to the Superferry is more symbolic than factual. The fact that the cruise ships and barges ply the waters without (apparently) endangering the whales blows a big hole in the argument. Ditto with invasive species.

The real issue is the out of control development of the island and the attempts to turn the island "into another Maui." Following the stories in the Garden Island News (which has a bias, I am sure) there has been been the distinct smell of a railroad engine running over the island. 

The Superferry had the railroad elements witness the environmental study. The study was sure to delay the launch so it was decided that it was not necessary to do it, until last week. The fact the Superferry moved up its mainden run before the injunction went into effect is relective of the attitude of the owners. 

Elements of Kauai are trying to keep the "rural" nature of the island intact, but money (read "greed") is almost unstoppable. The Kauai County Council seems to have bought a ticket on the railroad. A 1200 home develop on the island is almost unbelievable. I don't think we have seen a development that in Minnesota for some time. 

The irony is that the reason people go to Kaua'i is falling victim to the bulldozer. Someday some one is going to turn around and say "What happened? Toursim is falling off in Kauai."

The Superferry will be cleared to run. Gov Lingle's letter to Sen Hoosier makes that pretty clear: we went through hearings, public meetings, etc and it was approved. What's the problem?

Cheers,

Paul


----------



## Kauai Kid

A couple of years ago there was a story about a cruise ship killing a whale and its' calf in Glacier Bay Alaska.  

I've taken that cruise and the ships are hardly moving and I understand whales swim about 3 mph.

I'm concerned about this 60 mph Supper Ferry injuring or killing whales and their calves.  A couple years ago we saw more whales on a cruise out of Port Allen than we did off Lahina.

One injured/killed whale is too many.

I imagine the all mighty dollar will rule as always.

Sterling


----------



## Icarus

National Geographic Channel (NGC and NGCHD) is broadcasting a show on the Hawaii Super Ferry, starting on September 6. It appears to be about the construction of the ship.

-David


----------



## Icarus

Very interesting article about the SuperFerry and the EIS with some new facts.

Hawaii Superferry fought need for EIS



> Hawaii Superferry executives told the state in early discussions on interisland ferry service that requiring an environmental assessment could jeopardize federal financing and essentially halt the project.



http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070902/NEWS01/709020359

It was no secret that the Super Ferry fought requests for the EIS, but the article reveals some facts about the State and DOTs behavior and the tie in to federal funding for the ships.

Even to me, a pretty staunch supporter, it's starting to look like the State and the Hawaii DOT just tried to ignore its own rules and requirements for the EIS because of the tie in to the federal funding.

-David


----------



## Mimi

*Super Ferry*

My family and I boarded the Super Ferry during the Open House in Kauai on August 19th.  We witnessed, first-hand, the protesters holding a multitude of signs on our way into the harbor by bus. We asked a local resident, sitting next to us, what all the concern was about. Her view was that Kauaians were concerned about the onslaught of homeless people to their island from Oahu.  Wouldn't they use Go Airlines--$19 one-way fare??? :hysterical:


----------



## Icarus

Hawaii Superferry permit challenged

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070907/NEWS01/709070380


----------



## BocaBum99

Kauai Kid said:


> A couple of years ago there was a story about a cruise ship killing a whale and its' calf in Glacier Bay Alaska.
> 
> I've taken that cruise and the ships are hardly moving and I understand whales swim about 3 mph.
> 
> I'm concerned about this 60 mph Supper Ferry injuring or killing whales and their calves.  A couple years ago we saw more whales on a cruise out of Port Allen than we did off Lahina.
> 
> One injured/killed whale is too many.
> 
> I imagine the all mighty dollar will rule as always.
> 
> Sterling



I don't agree with your one injured/killed whale is too many criterion.  If we used that standard for everything we did in this world, we would do nothing.

How about 1 person killed in the ocean by a shark?  Does that mean we shut down the oceans from swimmers?  Or, we kill off all the sharks?

How about 1 person killed by a car?  Does that mean we stop all production of cars?

How about 1 person killed by a gun.  Does that mean we stop offering guns?

How about 1 person dies on a roller coaster ride?  Does that mean we stop all roller coasters?

A person died in a timeshare once.  Maybe all timesharing should be shut down?

Clearly, one animal killed should not be the standard for a go / no go decision on such a venture.

A more common sense approach should be used like a) are reasonable precautions being used to prevent animals from being harmed?  and b) is there a plan to monitor the situation to see how many animals are indeed being harmed.  If there is evidence that it is impacting the population of animals, then and only then should something be done about it.

There already exist many options for people, animals, fugitives, bugs, etc to go from island to island.  Most of this fuss is about nothing.  Fear mongering by people who are just anti-progress of any kind.  A kind of environmentalism gone wild and to an extreme. 

I wish those against the SuperFerry would just state the real reasons why they are against it rather than use political trickery to be obstructionist about it.  I actually don't know why they are really against it.  Most of their arguments seem too incredulous to be their real motives.

I'll bet there are some people who are against it just to be against it.  There are probably a set of people who actually believe the fear being promulgated by some people.  A homeless person isn't going to spend $70 to go to Kauai on the SuperFerry when they can get there on Go for half that amount.

Very puzzling.


----------



## ricoba

BocaBum99 said:


> I don't agree with your one injured/killed whale is too many criterion.  If we used that standard for everything we did in this world, we would do nothing.
> 
> How about 1 person killed in the ocean by a shark?  Does that mean we shut down the oceans from swimmers?  Or, we kill off all the sharks?
> 
> How about 1 person killed by a car?  Does that mean we stop all production of cars?
> 
> How about 1 person killed by a gun.  Does that mean we stop offering guns?
> 
> How about 1 person dies on a roller coaster ride?  Does that mean we stop all roller coasters?
> 
> A person died in a timeshare once.  Maybe all timesharing should be shut down?
> 
> Clearly, one animal killed should not be the standard for a go / no go decision on such a venture.
> 
> A more common sense approach should be used like a) are reasonable precautions being used to prevent animals from being harmed?  and b) is there a plan to monitor the situation to see how many animals are indeed being harmed.  If there is evidence that it is impacting the population of animals, then and only then should something be done about it.
> 
> There already exist many options for people, animals, fugitives, bugs, etc to go from island to island.  Most of this fuss is about nothing.  Fear mongering by people who are just anti-progress of any kind.  A kind of environmentalism gone wild and to an extreme.
> 
> I wish those against the SuperFerry would just state the real reasons why they are against it rather than use political trickery to be obstructionist about it.  I actually don't know why they are really against it.  Most of their arguments seem too incredulous to be their real motives.
> 
> I'll bet there are some people who are against it just to be against it.  There are probably a set of people who actually believe the fear being promulgated by some people.  A homeless person isn't going to spend $70 to go to Kauai on the SuperFerry when they can get there on Go for half that amount.
> 
> Very puzzling.



Very well put


----------



## Icarus

deleted by author


----------



## Hawaiibarb

*Reactlions to protesters*

There has been a lot in the local papers about the protesters from people who live on Oahu....manyy reminding them that the people of Kauai were very happy to have the help from the people on Oahu when Iniki hit.  The local people on Oahu simply want an easier way to visit relatives on the other islands.  The protesters have been ugly, yelling things at the passengers, damaging cars, etc.  They act as though we will create a huge traffic jam, but if I drive my own car, I won't be renting a car....even trade.  I don't buy their arguments, but I'm afraid that they will drag it out until Super Ferry decides to go where they don't face such opposition.


----------



## BocaBum99

Icarus said:


> uhmmmm ...
> 
> Other than that example ...
> 
> -David



Okay, how about this one?

You don't like 1 right in the bill of rights, so you throw out the whole constitution.


----------



## Icarus

BocaBum99 said:


> Okay, how about this one?
> 
> You don't like 1 right in the bill of rights, so you throw out the whole constitution.



I always thought that the right to bare arms had to do with sleeveless clothing.


All I meant is that I thought your post was pretty good, except for that example. It's ok if we disagree about that without accusing each other of being pinko commie ***tards, or gun monging **ores isn't it?

I probably shouldn't have even posted a reply to it with the rules that TUG has about this stuff. So let's not even go there.

I'm deleting my previous reply.

-David


----------



## CaliDave

BocaBum99 said:


> How about 1 person killed in the ocean by a shark?  Does that mean we shut down the oceans from swimmers?  Or, we kill off all the sharks?
> 
> How about 1 person killed by a car?  Does that mean we stop all production of cars?
> 
> How about 1 person killed by a gun.  Does that mean we stop offering guns?
> 
> How about 1 person dies on a roller coaster ride?  Does that mean we stop all roller coasters?
> 
> A person died in a timeshare once.  Maybe all timesharing should be shut down?



Boca ,

These aren't very good arguments. You are arguing with people that typically value an animal over a person. So the answer would be no.. unless a bird got hit by the rollercoaster. 

And why is a whale more valued than a dog?  Do you know how many dogs get run over by cars each year? 
It would help if we could get a points system, similar to RCI points. So we know the value of each type of animal before making transportation and innovation decisions.


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte

CaliDave said:


> Boca ,
> 
> These aren't very good arguments. You are arguing with people that typically value an animal over a person. So the answer would be no.. unless a bird got hit by the rollercoaster.
> 
> And why is a whale more valued than a dog?  Do you know how many dogs get run over by cars each year?
> It would help if we could get a points system, similar to RCI points. So we know the value of each type of animal before making transportation and innovation decisions.



I don't think that would work at all. People who loved certain animals would manipulate the system to get more points assigned to their favorite animals, and the whole system would go awry.

No - far better to set up a private entity that would determine what value to assign to animals privately.  Then, each time someone killed an animal that group would decide what the animal was worth and how much penance needs to get paid.

_Religious reference removed._


----------



## ouaifer

_*Keep to the topic, please!*_  Some folks are actually interested in the _*facts*_ of what is going on.  Take your personal fights elsewhere.


"KAUAI Breaking News

Kaua‘i TRO denied 



By The Garden Island 

Fifth Circuit Judge Randal Valenciano today denied a petition for a temporary restraining order to bar Hawaii Superferry service to Nawiliwili Harbor.

The decision set a hearing at 9 a.m. Sept. 17 for the petitioner’s motion for a preliminary injunction to prohibit the Superferry from operating until the state conducts an environmental assessment. 

Attorneys Dan Hempey and Greg Meyers — representing 1,000 Friends of Kaua‘i, an environmental group — filed for the restraining order Tuesday to try to prevent the “Alakai” from servicing Kaua‘i until the more extensive preliminary injunction hearing. "

More here.


----------



## Kauai Kid

*Super Ferry Speed*

During sea trials the ship top speed managed just a little over 40 knots ie 46 mph not 60 mph as I previously stated.

I believe the Humpback whale is still endangered and am still concerned about their safety from a ship the size of a football field going 40 knots--shouldn't we all be??  

The Maui politicians probably would support a bill for no more time shares on "their" island.  More tax $ 

Sterling


----------



## Icarus

Did you watch the special on the National Geographic Channel?

It runs on what are essentially water jets, with movable nozzles for steering. 2 jets on each side of the catamaran. The superferry can make an instant 30 degree turn at full speed and can rotate in place when it needs to turn around. Steering is controlled by a simple small joystick.

There will be whale watchers on board on the bridge.

It also has movable underwater "wings" which provide stability during rough seas and any sudden turns.

I'm sure if forward looking sonar were available, they would put it on the ferry also.

They also plan on modifying the route during whale season.

Since the ferry is a catamaran, it has a very small profile on the water.

-David


----------



## taffy19

This sounds very promising as I wouldn't like to see any whales hurt either but a ferry is a good alternative rather than flying only.  The more competition there is in ways of traveling from one island to the other, the better it is for all of us to travel more cheaply.

I heard or read somewhere that it is still expensive to take your car on the ferry unless you are staying a while on the other island as then it makes perfect sense for the local people or the tourist.


----------



## Kauai Kid

I watched the special on NGS.  Still thinking if a 5 knot cruise ship in Glacier Bay could run over & kill a humpback & her calf there is good reason for concern with  a cat going 40 knots in prime whale habitat. 

I imagine the passengers who were not seated would be thrown about if a sharp turn were required at 40 knots.

Hopefully the design and lookouts would minimize the danger to the whales & people.

Sterling


----------



## Timeshare Von

Icarus said:


> Did you watch the special on the National Geographic Channel?
> 
> It runs on what are essentially water jets, with movable nozzles for steering. 2 jets on each side of the catamaran. The superferry can make an instant 30 degree turn at full speed and can rotate in place when it needs to turn around. Steering is controlled by a simple small joystick.
> 
> There will be whale watchers on board on the bridge.
> 
> It also has movable underwater "wings" which provide stability during rough seas and any sudden turns.
> 
> I'm sure if forward looking sonar were available, they would put it on the ferry also.
> 
> They also plan on modifying the route during whale season.
> 
> Since the ferry is a catamaran, it has a very small profile on the water.
> 
> -David




Yes, that was on this past week and was very informative.  When I mentioned to my hubby this injunction, he just rolled his eyes. 

One of the things they had to prove they were capable of doing was avoiding a humpback in open waters, essentially turning that big ferry on a dime (actually 30 degrees), just as David mentioned in his post.

I believe in protecting the environment and earth's animals, but sometimes these environmentalists, naturalists and PETA people just go too far.

Personally, I just don't see the benefit of riding the ferry given the price and the length of the trip between islands.


----------



## Icarus

Kauai Kid said:


> I watched the special on NGS.  Still thinking if a 5 knot cruise ship in Glacier Bay could run over & kill a humpback & her calf there is good reason for concern with  a cat going 40 knots in prime whale habitat.
> 
> I imagine the passengers who were not seated would be thrown about if a sharp turn were required at 40 knots.
> 
> Hopefully the design and lookouts would minimize the danger to the whales & people.
> 
> Sterling



A cruise ship has a huge profile on the water and can't make fast course corrections.

The stabilizers and the design of the cat allow it to make sharp turns like that without throwing passengers around, plus it has a really small profile on the water.

That doesn't mean that accidents won't happen, but the design of the ship and the operating procedures should help prevent them.

-David


----------



## ouaifer

There is a _*live*_ streaming video right now from the court room about this.  It will also be archived for future watching.


----------



## Hawaiibarb

*Concern for whales*

I'm concerned about the whales, too, but the article in the paper yesterday said that the precautions the Superferry will take are better than most others used in the whale channels.  Probaly the protesters will never be satisfied.  

It's true that if you are going over just for a quick trip you could probably do it cheaper by flying.  But for a timeshare you are usually there for at least a week, and taking my own care definitely will save me money.  Plus I won't miss the hassle and waiting at the airport.  All told, the time spent (I'm guessing) may be about the same when you factor in the wait for baggage, wait for your rental car, etc.  Anyway, I have three weeks reserved for 2008, and the Superferry better be running!  I'm counting on it!

Barb


----------



## Icarus

Lingle: Hawaii Superferry to resume Kauai service

Gov. Linda Lingle said this afternoon that federal, state and local authorities have cleared the Hawaii Superferry to resume ferry service to Nawiliwili Harbor on Kaua'i on Sept. 26.

...

http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2007/Sep/12/br/br1263478509.html

Let's see if this sticks .. There's a court hearing on Sept 17 on Kauai where the opposition is trying to get an injunction to stop it from going to Kauai until the EA/EIS is done.

Meanwhile, on Maui ...

Hawaii Superferry riders took Maui rocks

State conservation officers are investigating three O'ahu men who came to Maui on the Hawaii Superferry allegedly to load their three pickup trucks with river rocks and return to O'ahu.

They might have been successful except for a court order that suspended ferry service Aug. 27, stranding them on Maui.

The three pickup trucks were found parked at the Hawaii Superferry pier at Kahului Harbor filled with more than 900 large rocks, said Randy Awo, Maui branch chief for the state Department of Land and Natural Resources' Division of Conservation and Resource Enforcement.

...

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070912/NEWS01/709120411

This one is just sad .. it's exactly what the opposition on Kauai are claiming will happen to their island. The fact that they got caught (if it's true) is good.


-David


----------



## Courts

Icarus said:


> Lingle: Hawaii Superferry to resume Kauai service
> 
> Gov. Linda Lingle said this afternoon that federal, state and local authorities have cleared the Hawaii Superferry to resume ferry service to Nawiliwili Harbor on Kaua'i on Sept. 26.
> 
> ...
> 
> http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2007/Sep/12/br/br1263478509.html
> 
> Let's see if this sticks .. There's a court hearing on Sept 17 on Kauai where the opposition is trying to get an injunction to stop it from going to Kauai *until the EA/EIS is done*.


How many strikes do they get? 
from March 29, 2007
"Neighbor Island senators who wanted an environmental impact statement on the Superferry were disappointed, along with *environmentalists who have unsuccessfully tried to force a review through the courts*." http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2007/Mar/29/ln/FP703290349.html



> Meanwhile, on Maui ...
> 
> Hawaii Superferry riders took Maui rocks
> 
> State conservation officers are investigating three O'ahu men who came to Maui on the Hawaii Superferry allegedly to load their three pickup trucks with river rocks and return to O'ahu.
> 
> They might have been successful except for a court order that suspended ferry service Aug. 27, stranding them on Maui.
> 
> The three pickup trucks were found parked at the Hawaii Superferry pier at Kahului Harbor filled with more than 900 large rocks, said Randy Awo, Maui branch chief for the state Department of Land and Natural Resources' Division of Conservation and Resource Enforcement.
> 
> ...
> 
> http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070912/NEWS01/709120411
> 
> This one is just sad .. it's exactly what the opposition on Kauai are claiming will happen to their island. The fact that they got caught (if it's true) is good.
> 
> 
> -David


I agree. While visiting Maui, I was impressed with how much has been preserved and saddened by how much was destroyed through the years.
I get emotional while listening to Israel Kamakawiwo'ole's recordings.

.


----------



## Icarus

Courts said:


> How many strikes do they get?
> from March 29, 2007
> "Neighbor Island senators who wanted an environmental impact statement on the Superferry were disappointed, along with *environmentalists who have unsuccessfully tried to force a review through the courts*." http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2007/Mar/29/ln/FP703290349.html



But, if you read from the beginning of the thread, the Hawaii Supreme Court ruled that the state should have conducted an EA/EIS for the harbor improvements, and the lower courts ruling dismissing that lawsuit was in error.

The bill that was killed (that story was from March 07) was an attempt by some members of the legislature to overrule the lower courts decision.

-David


----------



## Courts

Icarus said:


> But, if you read from the beginning of the thread, the Hawaii Supreme Court ruled that the state should have conducted an EA/EIS for the harbor improvements, and the lower courts ruling dismissing that lawsuit was in error.
> 
> The bill that was killed (that story was from March 07) was an attempt by some members of the legislature to overrule the lower courts decision.
> 
> -David


So when the state gave the go ahead for harbor improvements did they circumvent the laws or is the Hawaii Supreme Court making up their own law?

It is not clear to me.

.


----------



## Icarus

Courts said:


> So when the state gave the go ahead for harbor improvements did they circumvent the laws or is the Hawaii Supreme Court making up their own law?
> 
> It is not clear to me.
> 
> .



ok, just so it's clear, you're asking for an opinion ... at the end of the day, the courts are going to decide the SFs fate for now. So here's my opinion with some facts thrown in for good measure ...

The way I read it, the state DOT should have done an EA/EIS for the harbor improvements since the project cost was $40,000,000 and was funded with public funds. Any project that has a material primary or secondary environmental impact is required to go through the EA and possibly the longer EIS process in Hawaii. If you read all the articles on the SF in recent weeks, there's one that describes HI's environmental law and when the EA/EIS process is required, and when I read that article, it was fairly clear that this project didn't meet the waiver conditions.

When the environmental groups filed lawsuits trying to overturn the DOTs decision, their lawsuit was dismissed, basically on a technicality. The recent HI Supreme Court decision overturned that dismissal and went further than that by agreeing that the DOT should have conducted an EA/EIS for the harbor improvements. If you're really interested in reading that opinion, it's published somewhere on the internet. You should be able to find it.

The DOT continues to state that the harbor improvements were minor improvements for an existing mode of transportation, but the parts of the law that were quoted in some of the articles made it pretty clear to me at least (as a non-lawyer) that they probably should have done an EA/EIS. It's hard to imagine that even the traffic coming off the ferry doesn't have some secondary impact to the outer islands environment.

The problem for them was that the $140,000,000 Superferry Federal Maritime loan guarantee used to build the ferries required that there be no EA/EIS in order to secure the loan guarantee. The loan guarantee guarantees that the SF will pay back their loans.

So, on the one hand, you have the federal agency providing the loan guarantee to build the ships writing in a clause (attempting to protect their loan guarantee) that there be no EA/EIS requirements, and on the other hand, you have the State DOT trying to provide a new mode of transportation to the islands, using public money to build harbor improvements, including floating ramps for the SF, and trying to do that in a way that circumvents state law.

The EA process can take up to 8 months. The DOT is trying to bypass the bidding process to secure a consulting contract to do the EA. If there's any material impact, the longer EIS process can then take at least 1 - 3 years, but with the way this thing is being fought, I would expect court cases to be filed at every step of the way no matter how much reasonable mitigation the State and the SF agree to.

The current court battles going on this week on Maui and Kauai will determine if the SF can operate during the EA/EIS process. Whichever way the court rules, I'm sure it will be appealed by the losing side.

-David


----------



## Dollie

*Just returned from Kaua`i*

Just a FYI.  We spoke with a native Hawaiian who was involved in the protest.  Here are two points that she made:

- They wanted a peaceful demonstration and got very upset when non-native Hawaiians started to get out-of-hand using foul language, etc.  She said this was not the "aloha way" and actually left the demonstration.

- Their biggest problem is with the cars.  If the ferry didn't have cars, things would be much better.  They are afraid of Kaua`i being invaded by some of the problems of the other islands (animals like the mongoose; plants that Kaua`i doesn't presently have problems with; etc), things that could be transported by and in the cars that can't be transported when you fly.


----------



## Courts

Thanks Dave for a great explanation.

Thank you Dollie for providing a local perspective.


I have visited Hawaii (Maui) only once, but it does get into your blood. I try to keep up with some news now and then.

.


----------



## Icarus

Dollie said:


> Just a FYI.  We spoke with a native Hawaiian who was involved in the protest.  Here are two points that she made:
> 
> - They wanted a peaceful demonstration and got very upset when non-native Hawaiians started to get out-of-hand using foul language, etc.  She said this was not the "aloha way" and actually left the demonstration.



It's amazing how polarizing the issue is to the islands. Everything is stereotyped with each group blaming the other group. I don't believe that person, sorry. There were natives and non-natives involved. I watched raw footage of the incident from one of the tv stations that they had on their web site.

-David


----------



## spicer

*We got to witness the protest while staying at the Marriott Kauai Beach Club*

We spoke to a local lady that has lived on Kauai all of her life.  She said the main reason they are protesting the ferry, is because Kauai has always been isolated in the past.  The tourists come in and then leave.  Now with cars, the locals from other islands can come and make the traffic worse, take the fish from their streams (which has the best fish according to her), and attract bums to come and live on the beach.  She mentioned she's also worried about safety, and that it has always been extremely safe for children on the island as the local's all know each other.  One more thing she's worried about is having more people live on Kauai, which would drive the already expensive rent even higher.  There seems to be a lot more to it, besides just the enviromental reasons.  -Carol


----------



## Liz Wolf-Spada

Maybe because we have had to visit either in summer or Easter week, I find the traffic on Kauai already horrible, so bringing in more cars would be horrid, but then would it really add cars or just make more of them local from other islands instead of rental cars from Lihue?

Kauai is beautiful, but we prefer the island of Hawaii because it is still open and rural in large areas.

As Hawaii has that agricultural inspection when flying in and even between islands, I do wonder how that will be covered for the ferry and especially for cars on the ferry.

Liz


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte

Liz Wolf-Spada said:


> Maybe because we have had to visit either in summer or Easter week, I find the traffic on Kauai already horrible, so bringing in more cars would be horrid, but then would it really add cars or just make more of them local from other islands instead of rental cars from Lihue?
> 
> Kauai is beautiful, but we prefer the island of Hawaii because it is still open and rural in large areas.
> 
> As Hawaii has that agricultural inspection when flying in and even between islands, I do wonder how that will be covered for the ferry and especially for cars on the ferry.
> 
> Liz


There's no agricultural inspection inter-island.


----------



## Liz Wolf-Spada

Steve, maybe it just seemed that way because our bags went through ag check in at Kona, then had to be rechecked in at HNL and retagged again because it was a different airline. Come to think of it, it seems like it was on leaving Hawaii airports as opposed to flying into them, which would make more sense in terms of protecting agriculture etc.
Liz


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte

I suppose that would have happened if the plane you took to HNL continued on to the mainland.  In that case, all baggage being loaded on that plane (and all carry-ons) would likely go through ag inspection in Kona.  Then, when you went through HNL you would have to go through ag inspection again.  And if your bags weren't checked through to the mainland at KOA, they would need to be inspected again.

But if the plane is solely interisland, there is no ag inspection.  At KOA certain gates are not used for mainland flights because those gates don't have ag screening.


----------



## Icarus

No doubt traffic on Kauai is pretty bad. It certainly was when I lived there, but we had bypass roads that you could use to bypass the worst of the traffic in Kapaa. As I understand it, a lot of the highway has been widened in Kapaa .. a project that started when I still lived there, and the state recently approved some more funds to complete that widening.

But the SF expects on normal trips to travel with around 100 vehicles. Not all those vehicles will go the same way when the SF lands.

I really don't think that the SF is going to contribute all that much to additional traffic on the islands, as long as the departing vehicles aren't unleashed on the roads all at once. They certainly won't contribute any worse than one more plane landing at the airport. And when one ferry lands, unleashing some more vehicles on the island, some vehicles will leave the island when the ferry departs.

I find it hard to imagine that homeless people that might live on the beach will pay to take the superferry over to Kauai so they can relocate. That's the same argument they use about drugs and criminals. Imagine that a criminal or low-life wakes up one morning on Ohahu and decides that Kauai would be a better target for their activities and decides to take a 3 hour $50 ride over to Kauai (without their vehicle) to ply their wares and trade on another island. That's just ridiculous, IMHO. People used the same argument to fight the light rail system in Santa Clara County, CA also, and I'm sure they use it in other places. It was just as ridiculous there.

There are some legitimate concerns about people coming over from Ohahu to fish in the streams, or take rocks from other islands, but that can be mitigated by prohibiting nets, etc. The rock incident on Maui was certainly interesting, but it was also illegal and it seems like the people (or at least their trucks) were caught in time. For $5 (the temporary introductory fare for people and normal sized non-commercial vehicles), maybe they were willing to take a chance, but at the regular price of over $200 in each direction for a vehicle, it's hard to imagine that people are going to take the SF over to get rocks and things like that, which they won't be able to return with.

-David


----------



## Icarus

Hawaii Superferry postpones Kauai route

Citing safety concerns, Hawaii Superferry last night said it would postpone its planned service to Kaua'i indefinitely.

"A temporary delay serves the community best," Superferry officials said in a news release, one day after Gov. Linda Lingle faced a boisterous Kaua'i crowd of more than 1,100 people who were mostly opposed to the ferry.

"Hawaii Superferry has made the decision that in consideration for the safety of the community, our passengers and our dedicated employees, the resumption of service to Kaua'i will be delayed to an unspecified future date."

...

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070922/NEWS01/709220344


----------



## Icarus

Ferry-borne pest risk 'negligible'



WAILUKU, Maui — The manager of the state Plant Quarantine Branch yesterday testified the Hawaii Superferry is "a new but negligible pathway" for the spread of fire ants, coqui frogs and other pests.

Carol Okada said the interisland ferry will transport a relatively small volume of passengers, vehicles and cargo compared to other maritime carriers. Combined with customers' ready compliance with screening procedures during its first voyages, that makes the vessel a "very low risk" for spreading invasive species, she said.

...

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070922/NEWS01/709220343


----------



## Icarus

Hawaii ferry ruling expected on Monday

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071006/NEWS01/710060349

Cordoza has indicated that he will hand down his ruling on Monday after hearing closing arguments in the 4 week long trial.

Personally, I would expect either or both sides to appeal his ruling.

-David


----------



## Icarus

Hawaii Superferry ruling delayed until tomorrow

WAILUKU, Maui — The fate of the Hawaii Superferry will remain in limbo for at least one more day.

After listening to attorneys' closing arguments this morning, Maui Circuit Judge Joseph Cardoza said he needed more time to consider the arguments and review additional memorandums filed this morning by the lawyers.

He said he will announce his decision at 10 a.m. tomorrow.

...

http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2007/Oct/08/br/br1267098534.html

-David


----------



## Courts

The suspense, I'm on the edge of my seat. 

I hope they do the right thing for Hawaii.


.


----------



## Icarus

Courts said:


> The suspense, I'm on the edge of my seat.
> 
> I hope they do the right thing for Hawaii.
> 
> 
> .



I know .. todays news was underwhelming, but I was wondering how he was going to render a decision today right after hearing closing arguments unless he had already made up his mind. So a days delay makes sense, or at least appears to make sense.

I'm not sure what the right thing is anymore. This is a very polarizing issue here. And no matter which side wins, the other side or both sides are sure to appeal. I think in the end, the legislature may have to step in, which will create more polarization, since their involvement will allow the SF to continue to operate while the EA/EIS is being done.

-David


----------



## Icarus

Judge rules against Hawaii Superferry

WAILUKU, Maui — The future of the Hawaii Superferry was thrown into doubt today when a Maui judge ruled the ferry will not be allowed to operate while the state prepares an environmental assessment of its impact.

An environmental assessment could take several months to complete. Hawaii Superferry President and CEO John Garibaldi has said such a ruling would essentially kill the company's plans for doing business in Hawai'i.

The survival of the Superferry in Hawai'i could now rest with the governor and Legislature.

...

http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2007/Oct/09/br/br2735804196.html

-David


----------



## Icarus

Lingle, legislators to meet on special session for ferry

Gov. Linda Lingle, state Senate President Colleen Hanabusa and state House Speaker Calvin Say have scheduled a meeting for this afternoon to discuss a possible special session to help Superferry.

...

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071009/NEWS01/710090357/1001/NEWS01


----------



## Courts

Icarus said:


> Lingle, legislators to meet on special session for ferry
> 
> Gov. Linda Lingle, state Senate President Colleen Hanabusa and state House Speaker Calvin Say have scheduled a meeting for this afternoon to discuss a possible special session to help Superferry.
> 
> ...
> 
> http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071009/NEWS01/710090357/1001/NEWS01



No offense, but this whole business sounds like how things work in my local township. After an election, a new regime takes office and starts filing law suits against other office holders in the township. 

One case in particular, a new board of supervisors took office and the Water and Sewer department was run by the opposition party whose terms would continue and could not be replaced according to the "township code". The supervisors started a law suit on some vague charges. The only people who suffer are the taxpayers. 

I guess just too many lawyers, although I'm not in a position to know much about the Hawaii situation. 

I just hope the taxpayers are not losing too much.

.


----------



## BocaBum99

Hawaii is horribly anti-business.  Just look at the decaying infrastructure.  It's no wonder that the very minor 4.0 earthquake on the big Island late last year caused a complete outage across the entire state.

There are no right or wrong answers, only consequences for each action taken.  By demonstrating their anti-business stance, this will prevent other entrepreneurial efforts from coming to the islands.  Why bother?  The investors in the SuperFerry are going to lose their shirts.  It looks like they are ready to throw in the towel.

Hawaii just relegated itself to a tourist economy for the rich with no chance of getting any other industries to relocate here.  It's already losing agriculture.  Government can't grow forever.  And, construction can only take you so far as well.  Aspirations as a high tech center?  ZERO chance of that happening.  All they need to do is travel to places like Singapore where the government is pro-business and the differences in attitude are readily apparant.  I guess Hawaiians are happy with minimum wage jobs at resorts, living 10 people in a house and having their best and brightest leaving the islands forever to find a better life.  Maybe that's what the locals want.  If so, then all is good.


----------



## ricoba

How much has the state government put in this venture so far?

It's sounding more and more like the super ferry fiasco that happened in British Columbia.


----------



## Icarus

Courts said:


> No offense, but this whole business sounds like how things work in my local township. After an election, a new regime takes office and starts filing law suits against other office holders in the township.



I don't see any similarity here. The State government was effectively the party being sued by the Sierra Club and other ad-hoc organizations. The plaintiffs successfully challenged the State DOT ruling that allowed the harbor improvements to be installed without going through the EA/EIS process.

This most recent hearing was only to determine if the SF could operate while the EA/EIS was being done. The purpose of a special legislature session would be to pass a law to permit the SF to operate while the EA/EIS is being done.

The state spent $40m on the harbor improvements, but there is an agreement in place that will ensure a revenue stream to pay for those improvements from SF revenues.

The federal Maritime Administration guaranteed the $140m loan to the SF for the ferry. The SF is a private company.

If the SF ends up leaving Hawaii to operate elsewhere, the State DOT will need to find a new revenue stream to pay for the harbor improvements.

-David


----------



## Icarus

BocaBum99 said:


> It's no wonder that the very minor 4.0 earthquake on the big Island late last year caused a complete outage across the entire state.



I guess you are talking about the 6.7 magnitude EQ on Oct 16, 2006?

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/eqinthenews/2006/ustwbh/

Compare that to the damage done by the magnitude 6.7 Northridge EQ in the Los Angeles area in 1994.

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/regional/states/events/1994_01_17.php

60 people died in the Northridge EQ, 7,000 people were injured, 20,000 people were left homeless. Still think 6.7 is a minor EQ?

The 1989 Loma Prieta (San Francisco/Oakland ) EQ was "only" magnitude 6.9.

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/regional/states/events/1989_10_18.php

Technically, each of these events were different types of EQs, and they aren't directly comparable, but nonetheless, 6.7 is by no means a minor event.

Many people lost power in the state. Many people had their power restored relatively quickly. Some people were without power for most of the day. Hawaii was relatively lucky with the Oct 2006 EQ.

Sorry, but the rest of your reply makes as much sense as the EQ statement w.r.t. the SF. The government is the entity pushing and supporting the SF. Environmentalists and ad-hoc community based organizations (mostly locals, both native and Kamaaina, from Kauai and Maui) are the ones fighting it.

-David


----------



## Icarus

Boca,

I apoligize for my harsh reply. Apparently you aren't the only linking the decision to Hawaii's business climate.



Hawaii's image affected by decision



The impact of the Maui court's ruling may extend well beyond the operation of one company, business leaders said.

The problems suffered by the Hawaii Superferry reinforce the state's image of having a poor business climate, the executives said. Even more importantly, this case may offer a glimpse of future community conflict as the state deals with larger issues involving rail transit, renewable energy and other big projects.

...

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071010/NEWS01/710100416

-David


----------



## Icarus

There's a lot of links to other good HSF stories and a pdf version of Cordoza's ruling at the top of this article ...

Special session Hawaii Superferry's only hope

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071010/NEWS01/710100420

-David


----------



## BocaBum99

Icarus said:


> I guess you are talking about the 6.7 magnitude EQ on Oct 16, 2006?
> 
> http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/eqinthenews/2006/ustwbh/
> 
> Compare that to the damage done by the magnitude 6.7 Northridge EQ in the Los Angeles area in 1994.
> 
> http://earthquake.usgs.gov/regional/states/events/1994_01_17.php
> 
> 60 people died in the Northridge EQ, 7,000 people were injured, 20,000 people were left homeless. Still think 6.7 is a minor EQ?
> 
> The 1989 Loma Prieta (San Francisco/Oakland ) EQ was "only" magnitude 6.9.
> 
> http://earthquake.usgs.gov/regional/states/events/1989_10_18.php
> 
> Technically, each of these events were different types of EQs, and they aren't directly comparable, but nonetheless, 6.7 is by no means a minor event.
> 
> Many people lost power in the state. Many people had their power restored relatively quickly. Some people were without power for most of the day. Hawaii was relatively lucky with the Oct 2006 EQ.
> 
> Sorry, but the rest of your reply makes as much sense as the EQ statement w.r.t. the SF. The government is the entity pushing and supporting the SF. Environmentalists and ad-hoc community based organizations (mostly locals, both native and Kamaaina, from Kauai and Maui) are the ones fighting it.
> 
> -David



David,

It's fun debating with you.  You are a really smart and fact based debater.  I really respect that.  Here's my come back.

Yes, that's the one.  It was indeed a 6.7 earthquake whose epicenter was near the Big Island.  But, what you failed to state in your comparison to the Northridge and World Series earthquakes is the distance of the damage to the epicenter.  So, your comparison's are actually misleading.

Let me explain.  Where I live on Oahu is about 170 miles from the epicenter of the Oct 2006 earthquake.  That is quite far away as far as earthquake damage zones go.  The damage zone for an earthquake of 6.0-7.0 earthquake is about 100 miles or less from the epicenter.  

From Wikipedia:  Wikipedia Richter Scale tutorial



> Strong 6.0-6.9 Can be destructive in areas up to about 100 miles across in populated areas. 120 per year



The Northridge earthquake had an epicenter about 30 miles from Downtown Los Angeles.  The World Series earthquake was about 60 miles from San Francisco.  So, both of those earthquakes were in striking distance of major metropolitan areas and higher in magnitude.  If we were talking about the Big Island of Hawaii only, I would say that that earthquake was a significant there.  For the island of Oahu, it was minor and yet the entire island ground to a halt for most of the day.  There were very few radio stations operating to brief citizens and even emergency generators failed in hotels.  What if there was a tsunami?  Did the warning sirens even work?  I don't even know.  We just headed for high ground in our car listening to the radio just in case.

When I say it was a 4.0 earthquake, what I should have said is that the earthquake felt like a 4.0 earthquake on Oahu where I experienced it.  I was too loose with my facts on that number.  I grew up in California, so I have experienced more than my fair share of earthquakes.  I know what a 4.0 earthquake feels like and that was what that earthquake felt like on Oahu.  After looking at the definitions on Wikipedia, they would call it more like a 3.0.

Oahu is where the major metropolitan area is.  I believe it has more than 70% of the population.  Oahu was out of power for 17 hours.  If every area in California that experienced an equivalent 4.0 earthquake had a 17 hour power outage, then California would be in the dark most of the time.

If you don't believe that Hawaii is anti-business, take a look at the infrastructure.  When water mains break, raw sewage gets spewed everywhere.  Locals get upset for a while until they patch it and then as soon as they can't smell the sewage anymore, they ignore the problem and don't fix it until it happens again.  

How about that earthquake?   What has the government done after all the hoopla immediately following the earthquake?  Not much.  Out of sight, out of mind.  Like I said, you want to see a pro-business city, then go to Singapore and compare the infrastructure to Hawaii's.  One city is a modern wonder.  The other is stuck in the dark ages.

Why isn't there a mass transit system in Honolulu?  Why isn't there development on the North Shore of Hawaii?  What will happen when Hawaii can no longer afford petrolum products.  We already have the highest gas prices in the country.  Whose going to allow a nuclear power plant or windmill in their back yard?   The answer is simple.  None of these things will happen because Hawaii is anti-business.

Hawaii has for decades tried to diversify its economy away from its services, goverment, tourism and trade base.  It made a leap into High Tech by creating the High Tech Development Corp.  I recently visited them and was astounded at the lack of progress they've made in this area after 20 years of trying.  One company I worked with relocated to Maui only to leave about a year after getting here.  Biggest issue.  No access to talent.  When Hawaii's best and brightest graduate as National Merit scholars and go to Ivy League schools, how many come back?  Where are the high paying jobs?  If it is this difficult to get something as simple as a Super Ferry approved and operating in Hawaii, just think how hard it would be to start a high tech container port to compete with Hong Kong and Singapore.  

How about competing in finance like Grand Cayman does?  Hawaii doesn't even have ONE national bank in the whole state.  Try looking for a Bank of America, Citibank, Washington Mutual or Wells Fargo.  You won't find one.  So, Hawaii citizens actually pay for banking services that everyone else in the country gets for free.  Why aren't there national banks here?  It's simple.  Hawaii doesn't want to change and keep up with the rest of the world.  As a result, it will continue to fall further and further behind.  Heck, I can go to communist china and withdraw money from a Citibank ATM:  Citibank announces ATM by Great Wall of China.  But, I can't in Hawaii.

So, this SuperFerry debacle is just indicative to me as to why it will be impossible for Hawaii to change into a more diversified economy.   It will just remain an island for the rich to visit and to retire.  Anyone with a creative idea for doing things better here will get clobbered by the locals who want to keep things the way they always were.   That's not necessarily a bad thing.  It's just the way it is. There are many who will argue that keeping Hawaii as Hawaii is better anyway.  That could be.


----------



## Icarus

All very good points. I did say that the EQs weren't directly comparable, and especially the Northridge Quake was a thrust fault quake that did a lot more damage than other EQs of the same magnitude might have done.

The only thing I disagree with is why the major banks don't have a presence here. It seems like that's more their decision than anybody else's, and I have a free checking account here .. at American Savings Bank, and Hawaii USA FCU is a pretty good CU. Personally, I try to avoid doing business with the major banks.

I also didn't realize you lived on Oahu. I thought you lived in Boca Raton. Why did you pick Oahu?

-David


----------



## BocaBum99

Icarus said:


> All very good points. I did say that the EQs weren't directly comparable, and especially the Northridge Quake was a thrust fault quake that did a lot more damage than other EQs of the same magnitude might have done.
> 
> The only thing I disagree with is why the major banks don't have a presence here. It seems like that's more their decision than anybody else's, and I have a free checking account here .. at American Savings Bank, and Hawaii USA FCU is a pretty good CU. Personally, I try to avoid doing business with the major banks.
> 
> I also didn't realize you lived on Oahu. I thought you lived in Boca Raton. Why did you pick Oahu?
> 
> -David



I actually don't know why the national banks don't come here.  When I tried to get a bank account, I had to go with First Hawaiian Bank since there are no WAMU, BofA, Wells Fargo or Citibank branches.  I just figured that the reason for it was regulatory.  Why wouldn't they want to be here?  They are everywhere else. 

I am a Florida resident.  I just spend a lot of time in Hawaii since my wife is from here and she wanted to spend more time with her family.  My oldest son goes to Iolani.  Personally, I would rather live on Maui.  I really wanted the SuperFerry to work so that I could timeshare in Maui more with my own car.  I get the feeling that that idea isn't going to happen.

My business is in headquartered in Florida and I travel about 26 weeks a year.  It's 100% online.  So, it doesn't matter where I physically reside.

I've wanted to live in Hawaii for 20 years.  I could never find a high tech job here since that is the industry from which I came.  So, instead of finding a job, I created one.  I work Wall Street hours.  My customers are all on the East Coast, so I wake up around 3am to be on East Coast time.


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte

BocaBum99 said:


> David,
> 
> It's fun debating with you.  You are a really smart and fact based debater.  I really respect that.  Here's my come back.
> 
> Yes, that's the one.  It was indeed a 6.7 earthquake whose epicenter was near the Big Island.  But, what you failed to state in your comparison to the Northridge and World Series earthquakes is the distance of the damage to the epicenter.  So, your comparison's are actually misleading.



That's grossly oversimplified to the point where it is inaccurate and misleading.

First off all, magnitude is really irrelevant.  Intensity is what causes damage, not magnitude.  Magnitude is a measure of the energy released; intensity is the ground motion at a given location. Intensity is what causes damage.

Intensity is a function of three key elements: magnitude, distance to epicenter, and geologic setting.  Of those three, until a certain distance is reached from the epicenter, geologic setting is the principal factor that determines intensity.

Examples: during the 1906 earthquake the degree of ground shaking (and damage) was greater in Stockton than it was on Twin Peaks in San Francisco, even through Twin Peaks was vastly closer to the rupture zone.  

A similar pattern was occurred in the Loma Prieta quake. During the Loma Prieta quake I personally witnessed three foot high seismic waves passing through the ground in the Emeryville area.  Much closer to the epicenter in San Jose and Mountain View, there wasn't nearly the same degree of ground motion.  What caused the elevated freeway to collapse was not distance to the epicenter - if that were the case the Dumbarton and San Mateo bridges would have collapsed as well.  The damage occurred where it did because of geologic setting.

Intensity is also greatly affected by the *depth* at which an earthquake occurs.  With two identical magnitudes, a shallow quake will tend to produce higher intensities, but with more localized impacts.  Deep centered earthquakes yield lower peak intensities, but the effects are felt over a wider area.  One reason why the Northridge quake was damaging over a wide area is because it's epicenter was significantly deeper than most quakes that have been recorded in the LA Basin.  In fact, the Northridge quake revealed the presence of some previously unknown or understudied deep thrust faults in the LA basin.  The increased awareness of those deep thrust faults has caused a reassessment of the seismic hazards of southern California. Turns out that the the seismic hazards in LA have been significantly understated.

****

So with all of that you can't simply draw any kind of meaningful conclusions about extent of damage based on magnitude and distance to epicenter.  It simply cannot be done.  

The statement that a 6.7 quake can be destructive to 100 miles merely indicates the zone within which typically damage might occur.  It does not mean that damage will occur within that zone; that is where the role of local geologic setting comes into play.

****

The geologic setting that is the most conducive to earthquake damage is loose sedimentary soils and fill.  The effects are amplified in  areas with shallow groundwater.  Areas such as the flatlands around San Francisco (or the San Joaquin Delta where Stockton is located) are prime examples.  Many area in the LA basin have similar settings.  One of the reasons that California earthquakes are destructive is because so much development has occurred in settings that are the most susceptible to damage during an earthquake.

Hawai'i has relatively few shallow sedimentary soils. Wa'ikiki and the entire waterfront area from Diamond Head through Pearl Harber, though, does have a lot of shallow sedimentary and fill soils with shallow groundwater.  Hawai'i does have many loosely consolidated rock formations on hillsides.  When quakes hit in Hawai'i, the most significant damages usually comes from landslides and debris avalanches triggered by the quake, and not directly from ground shaking


----------



## BocaBum99

David,

By the way, what I didn't say is that I love Hawaii.  I love the people.  I love the weather.  I love the food.  I love the Ocean and the Mountains.  And most of all, I love being connected with nature.  Nothing beats hearing the  birds singing in the morning and the cool trade winds blowing through your hair (well, what's left of my hair.  lol).  The fact that Hawaii isn't pro business doesn't really impact me since my business is on the mainland.  I just wish it had a bit more balance between modernization and preservation.  I believe you can do both.


----------



## BocaBum99

T_R_Oglodyte said:


> That's grossly oversimplified to the point where it is inaccurate and misleading.
> 
> First off all, magnitude is really irrelevant.  Intensity is what causes damage, not magnitude.  Magnitude is a measure of the energy released; intensity is the ground motion at a given location. Intensity is what causes damage.
> 
> Intensity is a function of three key elements: magnitude, distance to epicenter, and geologic setting.  Of those three, until a certain distance is reached from the epicenter, geologic setting is the principal factor that determines intensity.
> 
> Examples: during the 1906 earthquake the degree of ground shaking (and damage) was greater in Stockton than it was on Twin Peaks in San Francisco, even through Twin Peaks was vastly closer to the rupture zone.
> 
> A similar pattern was occurred in the Loma Prieta quake. During the Loma Prieta quake I personally witnessed three foot high seismic waves passing through the ground in the Emeryville area.  Much closer to the epicenter in San Jose and Mountain View, there wasn't nearly the same degree of ground motion.  What caused the elevated freeway to collapse was not distance to the epicenter - if that were the case the Dumbarton and San Mateo bridges would have collapsed as well.  The damage occurred where it did because of geologic setting.
> 
> Intensity is also greatly affected by the *depth* at which an earthquake occurs.  With two identical magnitudes, a shallow quake will tend to produce higher intensities, but with more localized impacts.  Deep centered earthquakes yield lower peak intensities, but the effects are felt over a wider area.  One reason why the Northridge quake was damaging over a wide area is because it's epicenter was significantly deeper than most quakes that have been recorded in the LA Basin.  In fact, the Northridge quake revealed the presence of some previously unknown or understudied deep thrust faults in the LA basin.  The increased awareness of those deep thrust faults has caused a reassessment of the seismic hazards of southern California. Turns out that the the seismic hazards in LA have been significantly understated.
> 
> ****
> 
> So with all of that you can't simply draw any kind of meaningful conclusions about extent of damage based on magnitude and distance to epicenter.  It simply cannot be done.
> 
> The statement that a 6.7 quake can be destructive to 100 miles merely indicates the zone within which typically damage might occur.  It does not mean that damage will occur within that zone; that is where the role of local geologic setting comes into play.
> 
> ****
> 
> The geologic setting that is the most conducive to earthquake damage is loose sedimentary soils and fill.  The effects are amplified in  areas with shallow groundwater.  Areas such as the flatlands around San Francisco (or the San Joaquin Delta where Stockton is located) are prime examples.  Many area in the LA basin have similar settings.  One of the reasons that California earthquakes are destructive is because so much development has occurred in settings that are the most susceptible to damage during an earthquake.
> 
> Hawai'i has relatively few shallow sedimentary soils. Wa'ikiki and the entire waterfront area from Diamond Head through Pearl Harber, though, does have a lot of shallow sedimentary and fill soils with shallow groundwater.  Hawai'i does have many loosely consolidated rock formations on hillsides.  When quakes hit in Hawai'i, the most significant damages usually comes from landslides and debris avalanches triggered by the quake, and not directly from ground shaking



Steve,

You are probably right.  My 1/2 hour research into earthquakes was flawed.  But, you've got to admit, it sounded pretty good.  lol.  I've got to believe that the further away you are from the epicenter of an earthquake, the more the energy dissipates and the lighter the potential damage. 

In any event, I believe my main points still hold which is that the earthquake near the Big Island and the Northridge and San Francisco are not directly comparable even though the magnitudes were similar.  I'll just need for you to describe the science for why that is. 

The bottom line is that I was in the earthquake and the amount of shaking was so minimal that it shouldn't have paralyzed the entire state for as long as it did.


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte

BocaBum99 said:


> Steve,
> 
> You are probably right.  My 1/2 hour research into earthquakes was flawed.  But, you've got to admit, it sounded pretty good.  lol.  I've got to believe that the further away you are from the epicenter of an earthquake, the more the energy dissipates and the lighter the potential damage.



That's true after a distance, but utterly untrue inside the primary shaking area.

In a locale such as San Francisco Bay, you simply can't do better than being on bedrock.  The difference in ground motion between say, Twin Peaks and North Beach or the Marina District is at least one-thousand fold.

You can be a quarter mile from the rupture zone, but if you're on bedrock you won't get nearly as much damage as someone 40 miles but who happens to be located on an alluvial marsh.

***

I'll give you the scientiific explanation and it's pretty easy to understand.  

The earthquake wave is nothing but a wave of energy traveling through the ground.  As that pulse travels through the ground, the ground needs to move in response to the pulse.

The ground acts like a spring.  As the wave arrives, the ground compresses to absorb the energy, then it expands to release the energy.

Now imagine that energy hitting solid rock.  It takes a lot of energy to compress solid rock only a tiny amount, because all of the mass in the rock is bound together in a solid block.  That's like hitting the springs in the suspension of a car.

Now imagine that same pulse hits a loose deposit of sand. The sand crystals can move around, and pack closer together.  Compared with a mass of solid rock, sand is pretty easy to move and deflect. So think of sand as being like a common household spring.

Imagine that you are hitting a spring with a hammer; that's an energy pulse and the spring deflects in response.  How much the spring deflects depends on how stiff the spring is.  If the spring is an auto suspension spring (like the bedrock in my analogy) the suspension spring will absorb the impact of the hammer with little movement.  The household spring, having a lower spring constant, will deflect a long way after receiving the same hammer strike. 

Distance really doesn't begin to matter until you are so far away from the epicenter that the wave has attenuated sufficiently so that the differences in souls are no longer significant.


----------



## Carol C

*The Latest...*

Hawaii Superferry Cannot Sail During Environmental Assessment

HONOLULU, Hawaii, October 9, 2007 (ENS) - A Maui judge today ruled that the brand new the $85 million Hawaii Superferry cannot operate while the state prepares an environmental assessment.

The state waived an environmental assessment back in 2005 at the request of the Superferry management, who feared that their funding might evaporate if they had to wait for a study of changes made to Kahului Harbor on Maui to accommodate the big catamaran.

The U.S. Department of Transportation's Maritime Administration approved $140 million in loan guarantees for the Superferry in January 2005 on the condition that the state give all governmental and environmental clearances, including confirmation that there was no need for an environment assessment.

Maui Circuit Judge Joseph Cardoza's decision will keep the Superferry tied up in Honolulu while the required environmental work is completed, which could take at least a few months and as long as a year.

Superferry president and CEO John Garibaldi said, "Obviously, we are disappointed. While the ruling is a loss for Hawaii Superferry and our employees, it is a greater loss for the state of Hawaii."

Garibaldi said the company has been absorbing weekly costs of $650,000 and cannot afford to keep its 350-foot, high-speed ferry sitting idle while the state conducts the assessment. He has said that the Superferry might be pulled out of the state if it was not allowed to operate.

State legislators and Governor Linda Lingle said today that a special session of the Legislature to address the Superferry issue is likely now in view of the judge's ruling.

In his ruling, Judge Cardoza also determined that the Hawaii Department of Transportation's 22 year operating agreement with the Superferry is invalid. That could mean that the vessel cannot use port facilities in the state.

At the end of August, just days before the Superferry was set to launch its inter-island service, a state Supreme Court judge granted environmentalists their wish - an environmental impact assessment. The ruling reversed the July 2005 judgment of a lower court that no such assessment was necessary.

In response to the argument the Superferry is no different from barges, cruise ships or airplanes that do not have to conduct environmental assessments before being permitted, Judge Cardoza said the ferry is a new technology and a new chapter in transportation in Hawaii.

The decision capped a month-long hearing on a request to halt ferry service brought by the Sierra Club, Maui Tomorrow and the Kahului Harbor Coalition.

Increased traffic around ports, the potential spread of invasive species and collisions with humpback whales top the groups' list of concerns, in addition to the fear that increasing numbers of visitors to the outer islands will change their laid-back, relaxed lifestyle. Some also fear the rip-off of natural resources by an increasing stream of visitors.

The Superferry has operated for only two days in August. Dozens of protesters swam and rode surfboards into its path and prevented the big catamaran from docking at Nawiliwili Harbor on Kauai.

Although the U.S. Coast Guard established a designated protest area to allow the Superferry to enter the harbor, management decided to postpone Kauai trips.

In federal court last week, attorney Lanny Sinkin from Hawaii Island lost a challenge to the Coast Guard's security zone on the grounds that it prohibits free speech. Sinkin has appealed that ruling to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Hawaii Superferry and the state have not said whether they will appeal Judge Cardoza's ruling to the Intermediate Court of Appeals.

The state Transportation Department last week selected the firm Belt Collins to conduct a $1 million environmental assessment of Superferry operations.


----------



## Icarus

Already posted in post #84.

-David


----------



## Icarus

Todays news:

The SF furloughed 259 workers.

A bill is being drafted by the AG to permit the SF to continue to operate during the EA process. The legislature says the bill must come from the administration. It's likely to contain some environmental mitigation.

I'm too lazy to post quotes and the links today.

-David


----------



## Icarus

House passes Hawaii Superferry bill 39-11



> The state House voted 39-11 today for a bill that allows Hawaii Superferry to resume service while the state conducts an environmental review of the project.
> 
> The state Senate approved the bill 20-5 on Monday, so it now goes to Gov. Linda Lingle, who is expected to sign it into law.



http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2007/Oct/31/br/br9681437052.html


----------



## BocaBum99

Also, Go Airlines loses an $80M judgement to Hawaiian Airlines for using confidential information to gain advantage in the Hawaii market.  

This may bring an end to the Airfare wars in Hawaii.  If Go backs out of the Hawaii market.  Fares should rise.  This wil help the Superferry.

Bad for locals and travellers.


----------



## Icarus

Here's a more thorough article on the bill that the state Senate and House passed and have sent to Gov Linda Lingle to sign. It has a lot more background and lists key provisions of the bill. SF execs are planning on resuming service on Nov 15. It's a good article and worth reading if you're interested in this topic.

House gives final OK to Hawaii Superferry bill

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071101/NEWS01/711010371

-David


----------



## Hawaiibarb

*Superferry may still make it!*

I have a hunch that all these restrictions that are being imposed on the Superferry (which aren't required of other vessels going between the islands) are going to result in higher fares, perhaps to the point that fewer people will feel they can afford the Superferry.  I'm not convinced that this is all about the environment;  I think a lot of it is opposition to the Superferry as a  business, hoping that all the politics, restrictions and opposition will cause them to leave.  It's such a shame.....so many of the people who live here really want the superferry.


----------



## Icarus

*Lingle signs Superferry bill*

Lingle signs Superferry bill



> Gov. Linda Lingle has signed a bill allowing Hawaii Superferry to resume service while the state conducts an environmental impact statement.
> 
> Lingle also released a set of 40 operating conditions on Superferry aimed at protecting the environment.
> 
> In addition, the state and Hawaii Superferry will file a motion before Circuit Court Judge Joseph Cardoza today asking him to immediately lift his injunction and allow Superferry to operate out of Kahului Harbor.
> 
> ...



http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2007/Nov/05/br/br6347092158.html


----------



## Courts

Maybe they should require everyone wear a grass skirt also before boarding the ferry?  

.


----------



## Icarus

Hawaii Superferry not yet cleared for Maui



> The Hawaii Superferry and the rest of the state will have to wait at least one more week to learn whether the new interisland transport has clear sailing to return to Maui.
> 
> ...
> 
> Although Gov. Linda Lingle and the Legislature last week approved a new law that essentially overturned Cardoza's Oct. 9 order granting the injunction, Hawaii Superferry cannot relaunch while the order officially remains in effect.
> 
> ...
> 
> 
> 
> "What we have seen in this case is the state and Hawaii Superferry want to speed through everything that they do," Hall said. "They want to speed through the whale sanctuary and strike whales just for their economic benefit. They want to speed through the process of inspections, jeopardizing our farmers through lack of inspections and invasive species being introduced to our islands. They want to speed through the legislative process so that they can get a new law stripping us of rights the Hawai'i Supreme Court gave us through a final judgment. We need to slow down and look at this thoughtfully and deliberately."
> 
> The attorney also indicated he plans to argue on Wednesday that the injunction should remain in place because Act 2 is unconstitutional. Hall said the law does not adequately protect the environment from the possible impacts of ferry operations.
> 
> ...



http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071108/NEWS09/711080331/1019/NEWS09


----------



## Icarus

Judge clears Hawaii Superferry to sail



> ...
> 
> Maui Circuit Judge Joseph Cardoza today lifted a court injunction that has kept the high-speed ferry from operating to Maui since Aug. 27.
> 
> The judge ruled this afternoon, after hearing arguments from state Attorney General Mark Bennett and Wailuku attorney Isaac Hall, who is representing three groups pushing for an environmental review before the ferry can resume service.
> 
> Hawaii Superferry President and CEO John Garibaldi, who is attending the hearing, told The Advertiser today that if the injunction is lifted, the company would announce a startup date by week's end.
> 
> He said it would take about two weeks to rehire furloughed workers and gear back up to provide service to between Honolulu, Maui and Kauai.
> 
> ...




http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2007/Nov/14/br/br9265074183.html


----------



## Hawaiibarb

*Maybe it will actually go!*

Icarus, what is your feeling on the Superferry?  I know there is opposition on Maui, but do you feel that reflects the majority?  

They are in the process of re-hiring their workers now, and hope to be running shortly.  I'm still waiting for the next crisis.  I do have three weeks reserved on Kauai in August, and I would really like to take the Superferry over.


----------



## Icarus

Hawaiibarb said:


> Icarus, what is your feeling on the Superferry?  I know there is opposition on Maui, but do you feel that reflects the majority?
> 
> They are in the process of re-hiring their workers now, and hope to be running shortly.  I'm still waiting for the next crisis.  I do have three weeks reserved on Kauai in August, and I would really like to take the Superferry over.



No, I don't believe that the opposition reflects the majority on any of the islands. I've always been in favor of the Super Ferry as an alternate means of transportation between the islands and an easier way to transport a vehicle between the islands. With Young Brothers, it can take a week or more to get a vehicle from one island to another.

I didn't post links to them here, but did you read the quotes from opposition attorney Isaac Hall in the last hearing on Maui?

There's also a court order from another judge on Maui which limits them to releasing no more than 2 cars per minute on to the streets of Maui.

-David


----------



## Icarus

Breaking news ...

Hawaii Superferry resumes service Dec. 1 [ Oahu - Maui only ]



> The Hawaii Superferry will resume service to Maui on Dec. 1 with $29 special one-way fares from Dec. 1 to Dec. 20.
> 
> The company said a date for commencing service to and from Kaua'i has not yet been determined.
> 
> "We have already begun community outreach efforts on Kaua'i." said Hawaii Superferry CEO John Garibaldi. "We will make our decision about when we commence our Kauai service once that process is completed."
> 
> ...
> 
> The Superferry said after its initial $29 fare it will offer $39 one-way fares beginning Dec. 21 and through March 12, 2008.
> 
> The company said reservations will open at 6:00 a.m. tomorrow. These special inaugural fares will only be available on an advance-purchase basis and reservations must be made online through www.HawaiiSuperferry.com or through the call center at 877-HI-FERRY (877-443-3779). The call center is open daily from 6 a.m. to 7 p.m. HST.
> 
> The company said a reduced passenger vehicle fare will also be offered at $55 each way.
> 
> ...



http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2007/Nov/16/br/br4195738620.html


----------



## BocaBum99

Icarus,

Thanks for the tip.  I just booked a roundtrip for my car and me for Dec 16-23to coincide with my stay at the Westin Maui.  Total roundtrip cost is $199.05.
for an adult and a convertible.  The rest of my family is flying.  Now that is the rate I was hoping for all the time.


----------



## Icarus

It looks like the full price voyages including the 34% fuel surcharge (which they aren't charging on this special fare) will make it pretty pricey.

-David


----------



## mamadot

What is the lastest on this?


----------



## DeniseM

mamadot said:


> What is the lastest on this?



Did you see post #113 above?  David posted that last night, so it's pretty current.


----------



## Hawaiibarb

*Traffic control*

I read in the paper yesterday that the judge who had earlier said he was controlling traffic off the Super  Ferry to 2/minute might now be willing to consider other options.  Perhaps traffic direction by the police?  Hope they will come up with a better solution than 2 cars/minute!


----------



## Icarus

Looks like he lifted it today.

http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2007/Nov/19/br/br7035421896.html

-David


----------



## Hawaiibarb

*Traffic control*

OK.....that is more reasonable!


----------



## Icarus

When I got the email about the promotional rates (and early access to them as a newsletter subscriber) I thought about trying it out, but then I realized it would be pretty expensive to take my car just for a day or two, so I considered just going as a passenger and getting a rental car if I needed it. Then I realized that there's absolutely no parking anywhere near the pier.

Effectively, I would have to park at the airport and get a cab over to the SF. Or get somebody to take me and pick me up, I guess. So, I guess I'm not going anytime soon.

One of the articles said they were instructed to allow use of the long term overflow lot at OGG, but I didn't read anything about a shuttle between that lot and the SF pier. If they had some sort of shuttle, I might try it. Otherwise, it just seems like too much of a hassle just to take it to try it with no other reason to make the trip. If it was easy (and cheap) I would certainly hop over to Oahu for a day, take my daughter to the museum, walk around Waikiki, go shopping, stay overnight and return in the morning.

-David


----------



## Icarus

The Super Ferry finally set sail on Dec 13th for Maui (after several more delays in the starting date.)

There's a nice picture gallery here:

http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2007/Dec/14/ln/ferry.html

Article here:

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2007712140375

I went to Hong Kong last week, and took a high speed ferry to Macau and back. Our SF looks a lot bigger and nicer than the ferry I took. Ferries are leaving the HK ferry terminal every few minutes, and there's nobody there protesting the ferry service. 

-David


----------



## ricoba

David, thanks for the link with the photo's.  The ferry looks quite nice and the protest groups seemed pretty small from the pictures.


----------



## BocaBum99

I actually travelled on the SuperFerry yesterday from Oahu to Maui.  It was a very nice trip.

I had to arrive before 6:00 am when they shut the gates.  I was actually supposed to take it on Sunday, but I showed up at 6:05 am and they wouldn't let me on.  Don't be late.  

The SF left Oahu at about 6:30 am.  We arrived to Maui at about 10 am.  It took a full 1/2 hour to dock before we could exit the SF.

The main lounge is very nice.  There is seating in 3 sections.  A first class lounge up front was $20 for an upgrade.  The mid and aft sections of the boat had seating along the sides, a cafe for food which was reasonably priced.  I had a breakfast bento which included rice, spam, porteguese sausage and eggs.  It was good for $5.

There is a gift shop, some game terminals, a kids play area, eating tables and very nice seating.  Overall it was a very pleasant passenger lounge.

The hardest part of the trip was the stretch from Oahu to Molokai.  For about 45 minutes we were rocking enough to make a lot of people seasick.  It was calm when we travelled on the leeward side of Molokai.  But, when we hit the Maui/Mololai channel, it got really rough again for another 45 minutes or so.  I would highly recommend Bonine or dramamine.  I didn't get sick myself, but I was on verge of it.  I'm definitely taking some on the return trip on Sunday.

Got off the SF at 10:30 am.  4.5 hours from start to finish.  It is very nice having your own car.  And, you don't need to pack.  Just put stuff in your trunk.

Would I do it again?  Definitely if the price is right.


----------



## ricoba

BocaBum99 said:


> The hardest part of the trip was the stretch from Oahu to Molokai.  For about 45 minutes we were rocking enough to make a lot of people seasick.  It was calm when we travelled on the leeward side of Molokai.  But, when we hit the Maui/Mololai channel, it got really rough again for another 45 minutes or so.  I would highly recommend Bonine or dramamine.  I didn't get sick myself, but I was on verge of it.  I'm definitely taking some on the return trip on Sunday.




I am not a sailor, but I thought the purpose of the double hulled catamaran was to make the sail smoother.


----------



## BocaBum99

ricoba said:


> I am not a sailor, but I thought the purpose of the double hulled catamaran was to make the sail smoother.



It did make it smoother.  Just think how bad it would have been if it weren't.


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte

BocaBum99 said:


> The hardest part of the trip was the stretch from Oahu to Molokai.  For about 45 minutes we were rocking enough to make a lot of people seasick.  It was calm when we travelled on the leeward side of Molokai.  But, when we hit the Maui/Mololai channel, it got really rough again for another 45 minutes or so.



There's a reason the channel between Moloka'i and Maui is called the Pakololo Channel.


----------



## humuhumu nukunukuapua'a

*Check Your Channel!*

Aloha Steve,

I read your last post with interest:

"There's a reason the channel between Moloka'i and Maui is called the Pakololo Channel."

I happen to be sitting on our lanai and and just looked out at the ocean, where a sign is clearly posted...in mid-channel, and labels it accurately as the "Pailolo Channel."  Nice try, though.

Actually, you DID "make me look"...it up! 

Bob Cohen


----------



## Jim Bryan

It's not that I don't want to read the thread. It has gotten to be a pain in the a** to follow. Hope someone can find this.


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte

humuhumu nukunukuapua'a said:


> Aloha Steve,
> 
> I read your last post with interest:
> 
> "There's a reason the channel between Moloka'i and Maui is called the Pakololo Channel."
> 
> I happen to be sitting on our lanai and and just looked out at the ocean, where a sign is clearly posted...in mid-channel, and labels it accurately as the "Pailolo Channel."  Nice try, though.
> 
> Actually, you DID "make me look"...it up!
> 
> Bob Cohen



Pakololo is, shall we say, a more "colloquial" name.


----------

