Hawaii Superferry faces waves in court

[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

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]

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]

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]

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]

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

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.