Tuesday, December 15, 2009

Musings: Chipping Away

The mist was thick, so thick that it felt as if we were drifting among the clouds, when Koko and I walked out into the cold blackness of pre-dawn. It was caused, no doubt, by the brief rain that fell midway through the night in big, heavy drops, like small pebbles on the skylight, and then departed to leave the sky chock full of stars and all the mountain tops clear.

By the time we returned, the mist had greatly retreated, drifted far away from the road, tucked itself into the valleys, swirled itself around cinder cones, pooled into distant ghostly ponds. Yet it was still visible, even palpable, to those who cared enough to stop for a moment to see and feel.

That shifting scene serves as an apt metaphor for what’s happening today with so much of Hawaii’s native flora and fauna, as well as its indigenous culture. Reading some of the comments that are still being left on the Pondering the Path post, and then an article in The Garden Island about the dramatic decline of the endemic Newell’s shearwaters, really drove it home in an ugly way.

The Newell’s population has dropped from 80,000 in the mid-1990s to less than 20,000 today, and is continuing to decline at a rate of 60 percent every decade. Our lights and utility wires are the primary cause. These birds nest nowhere in the world but Hawaii, so when they’re gone from here, they’re gone forever. Yet KIUC still wants a permit to kill 125 each year and injure another 55.

It’s been working on the permit for the past eight years, and during that time has implemented a few token mitigation measures. Meanwhile, the birds continue to crash, literally and figuratively, but nothing of any significance is done because it’s just too expensive or bothersome or beyond the minimum legal requirements.

“We’re doing what we’re obligated to do,” [KIUC President and CEO Randy] Hee said Friday.

I imagine that when it comes to the pesky problem of imperiled native birds, Hee feels much the same way The Garden Island’s editorial writer did when he penned an opinion piece about the Path entitled “Time to move on:

We have spent far too much time and effort on this project already and there are miles still to do. Concerns for this phase have been raised and heard. Now is the time for decisive action.

What that really means, whether we’re talking about environmental issues or cultural concerns (and of course, they’re related), is damn the objections, full speed ahead. Quit spending time talking about what’s really at stake here, what might be lost by any particular course of action or whether any reasonable alternatives exist.

Just do it. Because we want it and we don’t want to deal with resistance to our wants any more.

The editorial also states:

This can not be turned into a test about measuring degrees of impact.

Why not? Isn’t that what all of the issues we’re debating so vehemently boil down to? When you’ve got species and cultures on the ropes, isn’t it all about degrees of impact?

We don’t know how far we can push the Newell’s population until it irrevocably collapses, or how much we can denigrate and suppress the Hawaiian culture in this fragile time of its renaissance until it fractures and declines once again.

But we keep acting like we do, taking just another 125 Newell’s, running a non-essential project like a bike path across sands that many hold sacred.

We keep chipping away, because we either can’t see, or don’t care, what’s happening to the whole when we do.

As Anne Punohu noted in a comment on “Pondering the Path:”

This culture is NOT DEAD. I meant it. So respect it. It is alive all around you. You must bend to IT not IT to you! Let us be respectful. If you are not Hawaiian, or hanai, or in any way knowledgable, ask first before you post judgment on what you see and here. You might just learn something.

Aloha. My goal is to educate, not dictate.


It was followed by the usual culturally derogatory remarks, of which one is particularly representative:

How bout this for education...we're in the USA now...not "old hawaii".

Chiefs don't mean shit.


Ever get the feeling that a lot of folks would just as soon the endangered birds were gone, so they didn’t have to worry about incidental take permits, that they would just as soon the Hawaiians were gone, so they didn’t have to worry about their bones and ancestors and other bothersome aspects of their culture that can’t be packaged for sale to the tourists?

I’ve been thinking a lot about what’s really behind the intensity of the debate over the path, and I believe that’s it. People are worried about what might happen if cultural pressure stemming from something as intangible as the concept of sacredness is able to effect a substantial change in the direction of an inconsequential project like a recreational path.

Heck, it just might set a nasty precedent – as nasty as the precedent of building on our beaches and hardening our coastline with a concrete path.

We know that anywhere the path is built in Wailua will have an adverse impact on iwi kupuna and the Hawaiian culture. Just as we know that installing more landscape lighting and utility lines will have an adverse impact on the Newell’s, and building along the shore will have an adverse impact on our coastline. But we keep doing it anyway, rationalizing that a little bit more won’t make any difference, until we’ve chipped away so much, that there is nothing more.

The recreational path is poorly conceived and even more poorly planned. I’ve yet to hear anyone explain just where, exactly, it is supposed to start and end, what route will it take as it encircles the island, how much it will cost and what will be lost – or rather, taken – in the process. But hey, why let those niggling questions stop us, or even slow us down? It’s time to “move on.”

Well, I, for one, and I know I’m not alone, am saying, no, it’s not. It’s time to stand firm and sort this thing out because it’s going to set some precedents, and they aren’t precedents that I and others want to live with. I don’t care if the EA has been issued, or if a small select group was planning this for years or if the federal funding will be lost if it's not used by a certain date.

Just like I don't care if KIUC has to spend a shitload of money or get its head out of the box to finally figure out a way to stop killing Newell's shearwaters.

I’m tired of the constant chipping away in the name of so-called progress -- especially when it’s being championed by people who don’t give a rat’s ass about nature or the Hawaiian culture.

I don’t know where Shilo Pa stands on the bike path, but before I left the house this morning, I had to play one of his songs, because I knew it contained the lines that speak directly to the underlying issue, and I wanted to have them going around in my head today:

“Don’t take away anymore. You already took from us before. You took our lands. Now you wanna take our sea.”

150 comments:

Anonymous said...

We live in a multicultural society here on Kauai. We all make concessions to each others' cultural values, but no one group's values are determinative. We make compromises and concessions every day to accommodate Hawaiian notions of cultural propriety, but we don't let such concerns absolutely dictate how the island is to be run. There are many more points of view to be taken into account.

Anonymous said...

but no one group's values are determinative

you're kidding, right? you can't possibly be that deluded.

Anonymous said...

write on,joan! aloha nui

Anonymous said...

Two things make these appeals to Hawaiian culture in the cause of opposing the path hard to take seriously.

1. There are native Hawaiians, some who are highly regarded and/or leaders within the Hawaiian community, who support the path on the beach. Clearly, they disagree with the more indignant voices in their community.

2. You have already expressed opposition to the path generally, based on concerns other than Hawaiian culture. So there is at least the impression that you are cherry picking which Hawaiians you throw your support behind: the ones whose opinions best support your pre-determined opposition to the path.

Anonymous said...

You'll get your chance to choose soon enough.
The electric wires will have to go underground along the highway through the Wailua flyway. This is mandated by the feds to protect the birds.
We'll have to sort out a compromise.
I vote for the birds.

Anonymous said...

That editorial makes some great points. Thanks for linking to it.

Those who argue that the path should divert behind Coco Palms because less iwi will be disturbed there than on the beach are simply trying to stall the process. Recognize this tactic for what it is and handle it accordingly.

Amen and obviously so.

The proposed boardwalk across Wailua Beach can be constructed in a way that respects the cultural concerns while fulfilling these other objectives. If the posts to anchor the path down are only every 60 feet or so, steps can be taken to ensure each does not impact burials in the area.

The boardwalk itself over the sand would seemingly fail to disturb remains any more than the multitude of people who walk across the beach on a daily basis.

Anonymous said...

The electric wires will have to go underground along the highway through the Wailua flyway. This is mandated by the feds to protect the birds.
We'll have to sort out a compromise.
I vote for the birds.


What, the birds is more important to you than the iwi that will be disturbed burying those power lines?

Anonymous said...

Joan said - "Just like I don't care if KIUC has to spend a shitload of money or get its head out of the box to finally figure out a way to stop killing Newell's shearwaters."

Joan are you a KIUC coop member? If so what you are really saying is:

"I don't care if I have to spend a shitload of money or get my head out of the box to finally figure out a way to stop killing Newell's shearwaters."

BTW - I agree with you but would nevertheless like to know how much our electric bill would be and what percentage of that bill would be devoted to saving the shearwaters. The secretive KIUC management/board of course has not made these options/figures available to the owners/coop members to make an informed judgment.

middle way said...

With people dividing themselves into makai and mauka sides, perhaps it might be a good time to reconsider the middle way. The highway on front of the beach is being expanded to four lanes with 6 feet lanes on both sides. Why not use those lanes if you have a bicycle....perhaps lower the speed limit in the outside lanes to 20 mph for the sake of safety. Six feet is a lot of space compared to many other areas next to the highway around the island where the speed limit is 50. Very little work or money would be required. Perhaps this might serve as a compromise between those opposing mauka and beach routes.

along side the highway!? said...

Uh...no.

Anonymous said...

1. There are native Hawaiians, some who are highly regarded and/or leaders within the Hawaiian community, who support the path on the beach. Clearly, they disagree with the more indignant voices in their community.

That's the biggest thing that changed my mind. first I was for the path. Then I was for it mauka with what I thought was the Native Hawaiian point of view until the meeting. So many Native Hawaiians didn't agree at all. So I gave up on the idea that they have this one big shared opinion about it. Now I'm for it on the beach again. I know they can miss bones when they dig the posts. And it's no different than people walking on the beach already.

Anonymous said...

Reduce the speed of all roads to 20 mph and under. Problem solved lives saved.

Anonymous said...

you know there is a decent chance the feds and co are about to bring the hammer down on monsanto RE market practices

thought it would be noted here


but ya, f the birds. underground cables cost TONS of money normally...and then (as noted here) that work will have to grapple with (ie, be diverted some by) graves? so now the costs are that much greater? result - many poor people here get further hammered financially

better to help the birds in other ways, which dont also kick the proletariat in the face


oh and yes, strong point: that little bike path section is a proxy for other stuff

(lot like the SF)


dwps

Anonymous said...

Reply to: "There are native Hawaiians, some who are highly regarded and/or leaders within the Hawaiian community, who support the path on the beach. Clearly, they disagree with the more indignant voices in their community."

Some of these "highly regarded native Hawaiians" and Hawaiians with the blood running in their veins clearly does not equal to a thorough understanding of the funerary practices, customs and beliefs of their ancestors. Someone can be "educated" in Hawaiian history, sing or dance hula and still not have an understanding of why Wailua beach - and all beaches should not be constructed upon. And then again, those Hawaiians you speak about probably do not have lineal ties to the iwi kupuna of Wailua. They may be Hawaiian but be of another belief system that doesn't regard the sacredness of the iwi kupuna. So of course, they would support a path on the beach.

You are so wrong when you generalize that all of the Hawaiians in opposition of the path on the beach are of the "indignant voices in their community". That is not so. There were very knowledgeable, articulate and respected native Hawaiian cultural practitioners - kupuna, kumu and professionals who spoke to the reasons of why the path should not be put on to the beach. I saw with my own eyes and heard with my own ears of how path proponents appreciated learning from what these native Hawaiians had to share.

The difference is there are some that are immersed in the cultural practices from a spiritual and religious perspective. Some are satisfied with reciting words to a Hawaiian song to show their Hawaiian-ness and others choose to be gracious and subtle by thanking and acknowledging people who worked so hard on the path but say nothing to the core of the issue itself. And if you paid any attention at all, many of your "highly regarded Hawaiians" came to show face, say their piece and exit. That leaves me wondering how much they care about about the cultural issues at hand.

Anonymous said...

I have edited this comment to remove a name reference. Let's stick to the subject and keep personalities out of it. -- Joan

Basically, Anonymous is just impugning the authenticity of Native Hawaiians who disagree with his/her opinion on this matter, and I for one reject his/her contention that those Hawaiians are somehow misguided or hold views less correct than her own.

Anonymous said...

The proposed boardwalk across Wailua Beach can be constructed in a way that respects the cultural concerns while fulfilling these other objectives. If the posts to anchor the path down are only every 60 feet or so, steps can be taken to ensure each does not impact burials in the area.
Correct us Beth and Bernard if we are wrong, but at the meeting, the Mayor said there were 6o posts that had to go down 13 that's thirteen feet down. i think he even said they were 2 feet wide each, but not sure if i got that right

Anonymous said...

There are certainly different factions within even the most homogenous groups on the planet, who have differing opinions. The Hawaiians are no different. The order and merit of these individual groups is variable. Some are authentic and truly care for the aina, the iwi, nature, etc. Some are opportunists, using the same (aina, iwi, etc.) to further their own causes. It is hard to ferret out at times.

Are there warriors still? Are there still kupuna who hold reverance? Where do they stand on these issues?

Remember, in ANY culture, the loudest are not necessairly the brightest or the most respected.

Anonymous said...

many of us actually support the path, or did, but not on the beach. And we loose respect for the path promoters every day they dig their heels into this crummy plan, and fail to recognize it is in the interest of the path promoters to move the path. I'm sure you can find a way to design it off the beach and make it work,

Anonymous said...

Can the County hold a "special election" of sorts, within the next few months, and have the public vote and decide on the Path placement?

Voting is anonymous so the results would be most interesting, and turnout numbers would also be interesting to analyze.

Dawson said...

As always, the issue of cultural unity vs. disunity only arises when the dominant culture wants to take something from the indigenous culture. That Whites have multiple and opposing views is given and unremarked; Hawaiian disunity sets tongues waggling.

The same tongues that waggle in Wailua are working overtime in Gallup and Flagstaff with the news of the Navajo Tribal President's recent suspension for investigation of illegalities. The same tongues that lobby for mineral rights on Hopi land, pointing to Pueblo disunity as justification.

The basis of the issue is racist -- and centuries old. Spanish conquistadors used indigenous Mesoamerican disunity to justify their own plunder.

Gold or coal; beaches, birds or bones; the only difference between then and now is what is being taken.

But the taking -- and the self-serving arguments to justify it -- continues.

Anonymous said...

Ah, the race card. It is just bizarre to have to point out that there is nothing even the least bit racist in observing that Hawaiians have different opinions about the placement of the path along the beach, especially when haole path opponents adopt the arguments of Hawaiians who also oppose the path.

If you say, "Hawaiians don't want the path on the beach, it is offensive to their culture," then you don't get to cry racism when someone points out that quite a number of Hawaiians, some of them with quite impressive cultural bona fides of their own, support the path along the beach.

Anonymous said...

Haha. That's great

A: "Hawaiians don't want the path in Wailua."

B: "Some Hawaiians want the path in Wailua."

A: "Divisive racist!"

Anonymous said...

I've seen the beach on the north end of Wailua become fairly narrow during big swells. I can't imagine the north end having a lot of burials but it doesn't seem like a good idea to put a bike path on a beach that is subject to that kind of wave action.

Anonymous said...

"Can the County hold a "special election" of sorts, within the next few months, and have the public vote and decide on the Path placement?"

First you have to inform the public. Don't think for a moment that a majority of people on this island have a clue what the issues are much less how they affect their daily lives.
But we have reps on the council let them debate it on camera and take a vote...

Anonymous said...

"Can the County hold a "special election" of sorts, within the next few months, and have the public vote and decide on the Path placement?"

no. that's why we elect officials.

Punohu's Politics,Environment and Culture said...

Thank you, and mahalo, Joan. I want to share a post that is up on your other post about the blog. It was pretty horrendous, but I feel it needs to be shared.

There has been a group of "anonymous's" ragging on me all afternoon. I just clicked to see what your new post was for the day, and saw what you had written.

Mahalo, again.

Anyway, let me share that post with you:

Al & Judy said...

We certainly haven't come to Hawaii for the "culture". We hate Hawaiian music, food, cultural (pagan) practices, etc.

We love the ocean, air, tropical environment.


We've come here for years and now own property on a couple of islands. I'll make a bleedin' fortune in the next development boom with one of them.

Wouldn't mind if it looked like Malibu Beach, though.

December 15, 2009 3:09 PM

endquote.

Pretty amazing, isn't it?

Check your other blog Musings on the path, it got pretty thick in there.

Anonymous said...

That's the character commonly known around here as "Gadfly." He's sort of a one-trick pony who gets a never-ending kick out of saying pretty much the same self-consciously offensive pap over and over day in and day out. He's like a pre-teen who discovered it annoys the adults when he talks with a potty mouth. It's long past the point however when any regular readers here bother to get offended or even notice him. It's so much background bleating of an aspirant naughty child.

Anonymous said...

"some of them with quite impressive cultural bona fides"

That's a matter of opinion. What is the Hawaiian word for "bona fides"? Sounds like a colonizer construct to confer status on those of their choosing. Does Mauneka Trask have bona fides, or is it Jeff Chandler?

I know quite a few "Hawaiians" who are respected in the White community, but no-so-much by other Hawaiians.

Many Whites know few Hawaiians and really don't have meaningful social contacts with broad cross sections of Hawaiian culture. They interact with Hawaiians most like them. Do you know how to say A-C-C-U-L-T-U-R-A-T-E-D? This limited world view based upon few social contacts in a largely insular context is ofter called the "Everybody I know voted for McCarthy" syndrome, or as a white southerner was once heard to remark, "I've lived down south all my life and never experienced even one case of racism."

Try get out more!

Anonymous said...

Anon said "i think he even said they were 2 feet wide each, but not sure if i got that right"

No you did not get it right. Bernard said "10 inches in diameter".

Anonymous said...

"Can the County hold a "special election" of sorts, within the next few months, and have the public vote and decide on the Path placement?"

can you please read some laws? its adorable but very, very naive.

you may not like them but they are controlling your world, whether you like or not.

Dawson said...

What is the Hawaiian word for "bona fides"? Sounds like a colonizer construct to confer status on those of their choosing.

That's exactly what it is -- the conferring of status by those who have it on those who don't. Its characteristic feature is that it is instigated by those in power; its function is to confirm their status. Classically colonial.

Its use by a poster who decries "the race card" is also classic: the essence of colonialism is its invisibility to those who carry and spread its seeds.

Anonymous said...

Why do you think that everyone who comes here to live want to be acculturated?

Punohu's Politics,Environment and Culture said...

Ok thanks for the headsup on the "gadfly " guy. I still think there is a major nest of gadflies on the "Musings on the Path" post string.

Do any of you over here have a can of raid?

Punohu's Politics,Environment and Culture said...

By the way, I like Dawsons posts.
And some of the anonymous posts are actually pretty good too.

Anonymous said...

Does Mauneka Trask have bona fides, or is it Jeff Chandler?

Again, you're just "besmirking" (to borrow a term) the authenticity of those Hawaiians you disagree with on this particular matter. If you are Hawaiian, then you're just playing the 'I'm more authentically Hawaiian than you are' game. And if you're not Hawaiian, then you are being unbelievably paternalistic and presumptuous.

Anonymous said...

That's exactly what it is -- the conferring of status by those who have it on those who don't. Its characteristic feature is that it is instigated by those in power; its function is to confirm their status. Classically colonial.

One thing is for sure, Dawson certainly got a classically western education. Everything he says comes right out of your standard liberal arts social sciences intro course.

Anonymous said...

Our stereotypes, strawman arguments, and attitude are much more righteous than your stereotypes, strawman arguments, and attitude.

(what Punohu and Dawson are actually saying)

Anonymous said...

"Does Mauneka Trask have bona fides, or is it Jeff Chandler?

Again, you're just "besmirking" (to borrow a term) the authenticity of those Hawaiians you disagree with on this particular matter. If you are Hawaiian, then you're just playing the 'I'm more authentically Hawaiian than you are' game. And if you're not Hawaiian, then you are being unbelievably paternalistic and presumptuous."

How does asking a question "besmirk" anyone?

Anonymous said...

Again, you're just "besmirking" (to borrow a term) the authenticity of those Hawaiians you disagree with on this particular matter. .. if you're not Hawaiian, then you are being unbelievably paternalistic and presumptuous.

Ain't THAT the truth! It's called TOKENISM and it's how white liberals have always dealt with the uncomfortable fact that not all members of white liberals' adopted client constituencies (minorities, so called "victim groups") have the decency to bend over and adopt wholesale the policies and preferences urged on them by white liberals.

White liberals have always responded to such temerity by vilifying those in the minority or other client group who do not adopt the white liberal line, and elevating those who agree with the white liberal line as the true authentic members ("a credit to their race").

Finally, when this tactic is pointed out or commented on, white liberals project their own racism onto those who recognize and call them on their tokenism and in a bizarre and illogical twist, insist that it is those who see clearly and comment on the tactic who are the racists.

Anonymous said...

"Why do you think that everyone who comes here to live want to be acculturated?"

I don't. I think that the native Hawaiians that become acculturated to colonizer ways confers "bona Fides" in the eyes of the colonizers. People who adopt the colonizers ways become "good Hawaiians".

Anonymous said...

I think that the native Hawaiians that become acculturated to colonizer ways confers "bona Fides" in the eyes of the colonizers. People who adopt the colonizers ways become "good Hawaiians".

On the contrary. The point was made that there are native Hawaiians, some who are highly regarded and/or leaders within the Hawaiian community, who support the path on the beach.

It is path opponents who are picking and choosing who is a "good Hawaiian" based on the Hawaiian individual's views about the path. Those who adopt the "correct" view that the path is a desecration are bestowed the approving "good Hawaiian" status.

Anonymous said...

Would adapting the views of "white liberals" be a part of the "colonized mentality" or are the colonizers a monolithic entity? We've been warned that Satan comes in many forms and speaks in many voices (you white devils, you).

Joan Conrow said...

If you wish to continue the discussion, do so without references to Jeff, Mauna Kea or Dawson.

Anonymous said...

Would adapting the views of "white liberals" be a part of the "colonized mentality"

Of course it would. Hawaiians who adopt the "colonization" critique from the self-reflecting western dialectic are merely borrowing from western culture and are as thoroughly "colonized" as any Hawaiian who successfully integrates in other ways (as say a doctor, lawyer, or business leader) into western culture.

Dawson said...

White liberals have always responded to such temerity by vilifying those in the minority or other client group who do not adopt the white liberal line, and elevating those who agree with the white liberal line as the true authentic members ("a credit to their race").

Finally, when this tactic is pointed out or commented on, white liberals project their own racism onto those who recognize and call them on their tokenism and in a bizarre and illogical twist, insist that it is those who see clearly and comment on the tactic who are the racists.


Bingo.

But the twist is not illogical within the framework of White privilege:

...manifestations of systemic White privilege are enabled and perpetuated at the psychological and interpersonal levels by the dominant and ethnocentric values of European Americans, conscious and unconscious beliefs in the superiority of Caucasian cultural norms over others, a sense of entitlement to resources, and the power to impose standards that continue to benefit Caucasian people and oppress people of color.

The concept of White privilege includes not only a belief in the myth of meritocracy -- that democratic choice and opportunity are equally available to all Americans regardless of race -- but also an automatic tendency to be surprised by or discount evidence to the contrary....

McIntosh [1989] has identified many examples of the White privilege of daily experience that are outside the awareness of Caucasian people yet contrast with the daily microaggressions that are unavoidably experience by people of color. Among these examples, McIntosh noted that Caucasian people take for granted the following advantages:

* ...They can do well in a challenging situation without being called a credit to their race.
* They are never asked to speak for all the people of their racial group....


- Jackson, Y. (ed.) Encyclopedia of Multicultural Psychology, 2006.

Anonymous said...

Bottom line:

Some Hawaiians think the mauka rout is desecration. Some Hawaiians don't. It is inaccurate in any objective sense to say there is a "correct" Hawaiian opinion on the subject.

Somebody claims that the observation that Hawaiians don't agree is "racist." But that is obviously self-serving and ridiculous and it doesn't change the fact that no side of the debate gets to lay claim to the "Hawaiian" position, because there isn't one.

Anonymous said...

Exactly. So McIntosh agrees. To claim claim to a group of Hawaiians who hold the opinion that the beach path is desecration, and claim they speak for all the people of their racial group is racist.

Here McIntosh makes precisely the observation that not all members of a racial group agree and that claiming that some speak for everyone in their group is racist.

It is hard to square this truism with an earlier statement that such observations are a "divisive" tactic used by colonizers.

Anonymous said...

To claim claim to a group of Hawaiians who hold the opinion that the beach path is desecration, and claim they speak for all the people of their racial group is racist.

That should say: To lay claim to a group of Hawaiians who hold the opinion that the beach path is desecration, and claim they speak for all the people of their racial group is racist.

Anonymous said...

I've seen the beach on the north end of Wailua become fairly narrow during big swells. I can't imagine the north end having a lot of burials but it doesn't seem like a good idea to put a bike path on a beach that is subject to that kind of wave action.

The surfers at Horners will lose their parking when the bike path goes through. So much for beach access.

Dawson said...

It is hard to square this truism with an earlier statement that such observations are a "divisive" tactic used by colonizers.

The point you're missing is that the psychological framework of White privilege (including especially the myth of meritocracy) dominates the discussion, be it beach paths or Brescia building on bones.

Anonymous said...

"The surfers at Horners will lose their parking when the bike path goes through. So much for beach access.
"
Wrong! At the Seashell there is a driveway across the path to access the parking area, which will be expanded.
And access is about getting the kids, on their bikes, out of the Houselots and across the highway to Horners and the other surfspots along the beach including the river mouth.

Anonymous said...

It is hard to square this truism with an earlier statement that such observations are a "divisive" tactic used by colonizers.

The point you're missing is that the psychological framework of White privilege (including especially the myth of meritocracy) dominates the discussion, be it beach paths or Brescia building on bones.


Not at all. I'm not only acknowledging that the myth of meritocracy is at work in this debate, I'm saying it is occurring when some Hawaiians (those who hold the opinion that the beach rout is desecration) are privileged over other Hawaiians (those who disagree that it is desecration) as the more authentic (the "good Hawaiians").

This privileging of Hawaiians holding the "preferred" opinion over those holding a different opinion, as it has occurred in these blog comments, is a perfect, classic example of McIntosh's observation.

It is the anti-mauka and anti path people, not the pro-mauka path people, who are claiming that a subset of Hawaiians speaks the authentic Hawaiian voice on the issue, and who are denigrating the authentic Hawaiian-ness of those Hawaiians who happen to disagree.

Punohu's Politics,Environment and Culture said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

"I think that the native Hawaiians that become acculturated to colonizer ways confers "bona Fides" in the eyes of the colonizers. People who adopt the colonizers ways become "good Hawaiians"."

But what if the colonizers don't speak as one? How do you know which colonizer to follow in order to obtain "good" status?

Anonymous said...

And access is about getting the kids, on their bikes, out of the Houselots and across the highway to Horners and the other surfspots along the beach including the river mouth.

Then how come the path skips the Houselots?

Punohu's Politics,Environment and Culture said...

I would like to set everyone straight, if I may by clearing up a major point. Native Hawaiians, (kanaka maoli, maka ainana, kua aina , which is my preferred term) in my understanding and knowledge and opinion are not divided on several key points.

1. That the bones of the aumakua ohana (the family ancestors) are sacred.

2. That it is a desecration to put anything over them, above them or through them.

3. That the culture should hold precedent over architecture.

4. That open areas (wilderness) should be left for the enjoyment of all. (ie there doesn't need to be "something" on every square inch of sand, dirt, mountain or beach.

5. That protecting, preserving and respecting the 'aina benefits everyone.


6. That areas that have a religious use, structure or history are kapu.
There is actually no division among Native Hawaiians, cultural practitioners, hapa haoles, kama'ainas, hanais, or their caregivers about these key factors.
I know that a lot of people love seeing divisions among Hawaiians, but in this case it is not so.
What you do see is a matter of opinion and discourse on the LEVEL of impact, or what could be termed as the "lesser of two evils.
But there is absolutely no disputing that both alignments contain iwi, and are sacred.
Let me point you to two key documents to peruse. One is the 1919 Report to the Kauai Historical Society done by a Judge here on Kaua'i who documented every smallest detail of the Wailua area including all references to sacred and religious beings, and uhanes, battles language , history usage and chants.
Compare that to the cultural survey that was done by Kimura and associates.
There was no division at all among all people interviewed, many of whom were hanai'd by Hawaiians, and are Hawaiian with ties to this area.
Not one said go ahead and put a road or path on the sands of Wailua. Every single one stated clearly that the ENTIRE area was sacred.
(go to google books, type in Wailua Nui a Hoano, and the report will come up as an ebook)
http://www.irows.ucr.edu/papers/irows4.txt mentioning my former teacher, Pila Kikuchis work

http://www.kauaiworld.com/articles/2009/12/09/news/kauai_news/doc4b1f41de32430260286748.txt

http://www.kumupono.com/KPA%20Study%20Intros/Fisheries%20of%20the%20Hawaiian%20Islands%20%28KPA%20HiPae74-b%20080103%20-%20In.pdf

Further I encourage you to understand that the Hawaiian Civilization is a high one. What that means is that discussion, discourse and rationalizing and arguing and debating issues was a priority . It was done in many ways, through poetry, dancing, telling stories, and playing konane. It was also done by literally siting down and shooting riddles at each other to make a point and win an argument.
Hawaiians have never shied away from discussing and debating an issue among themselves.
But far from it being a matter of confusion and division, when it was over, proper ceremonies were held, and the animosities were eliminated.
This is the proper way within the cultural structure of many indigenous people. Westerners seem to see only division, and to western thought that always is a sign of lack of unity.
It is the opposite, really.
Mahalo.

Anonymous said...

Then how come the path skips the Houselots?

The residents there rejected the Path. If it's for their kids, wouldn't they want it?

Anonymous said...

"If you wish to continue the discussion, do so without references to Jeff, Mauna Kea or Dawson."

bravo

Anonymous said...

"And access is about getting the kids, on their bikes, out of the Houselots and across the highway to Horners and the other surfspots along the beach including the river mouth."

Two things for all of you who claim that the path HAS to be on the beach for safety purposes. 1. Crossing the highway from Wailua Houselots is no different than crossing at Kuamo`o. 2. Entering and exiting the highway into both north and south beach parking areas with a pathway going through them poses safety hazard and traffic congestion concerns too.

Three alternatives were given. The first got chucked due to safety concerns of sharing the highway with a dedicated path/lane for bikers and pedestrians. The second due to claims of impact to burials along the "ma uka of the highway". Yet a road exists already and has been used for years in the past.

Regarding burials, yes, mauka of the highway includes the Coconut grove and the Coco Palms and burials are known to exist there. Even after the Wailua burial were identified by records of LCA testimonies of native Hawaiians in the mid-1800s who knew of and accessed those burying grounds AND testimonies given by living kupuna and cultural practitioners, people are still in denial and "want proof".

If the mauka route is out of the question, then perhaps the best thing here is to just skip Wailua. I'm not going to lose sleep over the path not being at either mauka or makai designations. There's plenty of path to enjoy in Kapa`a, Kealia and Lydgate. And what about the kids that live mauka of the highway in Kapa`a and Kealia? No one's complaining about their safety in crossing the busy highways there!

Anonymous said...

Hawaiians have never shied away from discussing and debating an issue among themselves.
But far from it being a matter of confusion and division, when it was over, proper ceremonies were held, and the animosities were eliminated.


This is just way to pollyanna-idyllic and it flies in the face of historical fact. The fact is, sometimes disagreements and animosities in 'pre-contact' Hawaii were solved by warfare and killing.

This is not said to denigrate Hawaiian culture. In fact, it is these sorts of ahistoric mythical bucolic assertions that are offensive and denigrating.

Anonymous said...

How do Hawaiians feel about driving on the beach? Are there burials at those beaches where you see 4 wheelers driving all over the place?

Anonymous said...

"I would like to set everyone straight"

wow that speaks volumes

- gee - thanks Teach.

Anonymous said...

" And what about the kids that live mauka of the highway in Kapa`a and Kealia? No one's complaining about their safety in crossing the busy highways there!"

Those laterals and crossing are being addressed in the path down from Kawaihau. Plus there is the path and sidewalks in Kapa'a.

Anonymous said...

It is such a trip that all of these postings using such impressive words and philosophies are trying so hard to categorize and distinguish the positions and opinions of native Hawaiians for and against the path on the beach. So now it is a Hawaiian issue? Then let the Hawaiians hammer it out between themselves. I am not Hawaiian. Yet, I am blown away by the self-righteous "educated" westerners on this blog who just think they know everything. Those are not my ancestors who are buried in Wailua, but I have enough sense and respect to NOT want to take any chances of desecrating any burials. Especially when there has been documented testimonies that burials exist there.

Punohu's Politics,Environment and Culture said...

My post was meant to discuss only the styles of arguing an issue.

Contrary to popular belief, many issues were resolved other than with warfare which was considered a last resort.

If you knew Hawaiian history better you would not have made such an assertion.

TO claim that I was incorrect in explaining Hawaiian styles of argument and conflict resolution clearly shows your lack of understanding of Native Hawaiian religious concepts.

Of course there were wars and battles. These mostly came from the Tahitian influence.

However, for your information, Kauai was not prone to the incessant battles of the Big Island and Oahu, and even Maui.

Kauai was blessed with far less animosity aoung her peoples as is evidenced by historical fact.

Many land "battles" and aquisitions, and disputes were won using the methods I stated. Especially during the Makahiki season, when it was agreed that no battles or violence would take place.

Many of the Ali'i used this period of time to settle their differences in other ways.

It is no secret that Hawaiian history is riddled with brutal battles and warfare. However many times the practice of ho'oponopono was practiced first.

I find it very interesting that Westerners tend to see the Greco-Roman cultures as highly advanced and civilized in their debated and discourse, yet they too propagated many brutal battles even though they had an advanced system of discussing and debating the issues.

I feel that what sits like a cold knot in a lot of peoples stomachs is the assertian that the Hawaiian civilization is a "high culture" every bit as intelligent and advanced as any other in the great civilizations of the world.

As I have said many times

"To those that know, no explanation is needed. TO those that do not no explanation is sufficient."

But of course, as Joan says, "Hope Springs Eternal".

Anonymous said...

Those are not my ancestors who are buried in Wailua, but I have enough sense and respect to NOT want to take any chances of desecrating any burials.

Thanks for your western 'precautionary principle' approach. Remains that some Hawaiians want the path on the beach. So what are you saying, you have more sense and respect for their culture than they do?

Anonymous said...

Logic: let it work for you instead of against you. Make it your friend.

I said, "sometimes disagreements and animosities in 'pre-contact' Hawaii were solved by warfare and killing."

You said, "If you knew Hawaiian history better you would not have made such an assertion."

But then you said, "Of course there were wars and battles. These mostly came from the Tahitian influence."

And, "It is no secret that Hawaiian history is riddled with brutal battles and warfare."

So why would I have not asserted that sometimes disagreements and animosities in 'pre-contact' Hawaii were solved by warfare and killing if I knew Hawaiian history better?

Anonymous said...

Thanks for your western 'precautionary principle' approach. Remains that some Hawaiians want the path on the beach. So what are you saying, you have more sense and respect for their culture than they do?

"Their culture" is not what I am speaking to. The basic respect of honoring burial places whether it's here on Kaua`i or elsewhere in the world is my point.

Anonymous said...

So you believe there should be no walking paths or roads through Arlington National Cemetery then. Better start calling your elected representatives to have those removed.

Anonymous said...

So you believe there should be no walking paths or roads through Arlington National Cemetery then. Better start calling your elected representatives to have those removed.

How silly you are. The subject here is not Arlington National Cemetery. We're taking about the unmarked ancient burial grounds of Wailua. If those burials were marked like those of Arlington, you wouldn't think twice about drilling down 13feet into known burials to put down your path. The paths were designed as part of that cemetary.

Anonymous said...

"If you wish to continue the discussion, do so without references to Jeff, Mauna Kea or Dawson."

bravo"

Why? are references to specific people kapu, or just those people (who will go unmentioned and without explanation because no reason has been given).

Anonymous said...

What is silly is the belief that anyone is going to drill down into a burial. You think they're just going to draw a plan of where the holes go and dig there no matter what testing discovers is underneath?

Anonymous said...

"But what if the colonizers don't speak as one? How do you know which colonizer to follow in order to obtain "good" status?"

Kiss up to those with money/political power. Avoid liberals, tree huggers, the poor, antiwar/gay/enviro activists and anyone wanting their country back.

Anonymous said...

"Bravo"

Why - because your judgments of them are irrelevant. I don't even know them but the venom from those who have judged them is hideous.

good for Joan (for once) for facilitating a discussion instead of a slander fest.

Anonymous said...

What is silly is the belief that anyone is going to drill down into a burial. You think they're just going to draw a plan of where the holes go and dig there no matter what testing discovers is underneath?

Yes there is a plan and it is not a straight path. Have you seen the design? What is your understanding of testing?

Joan Conrow said...

If you wish to continue the discussion, do so without references to Jeff, Mauna Kea or Dawson."

bravo"

Why? are references to specific people kapu, or just those people (who will go unmentioned and without explanation because no reason has been given).


Because the nature of the comments were moving into the attack realm against Dawson and there were crude references to Jeff and Mauna Kea, neither of whom were subjects of this post, nor had they commented on it.

Anonymous said...

"So you believe there should be no walking paths or roads through Arlington National Cemetery then. Better start calling your elected representatives to have those removed."

I believe they should put a figure 8 demolition derby auto racetrack at Punchbowl including a firing range, and flea market. We could charge people to visit the graves.

Anonymous said...

Because the nature of the comments were moving into the attack realm against Dawson and there were crude references to Jeff and Mauna Kea, neither of whom were subjects of this post, nor had they commented on it.

Understood. Mahalo

Anonymous said...

What is your understanding of testing?

They don't slam an auger to depth. The ground is dug and probed by hand to a certain depth to determine if there are any burials, then the auger is used to dig out the hole to that depth. Then the ground below is again dug and probed by hand and again the auger is lowered and removes the soil to the newly probed depth. And so on.

Anonymous said...

They don't slam an auger to depth. The ground is dug and probed by hand to a certain depth to determine if there are any burials, then the auger is used to dig out the hole to that depth. Then the ground below is again dug and probed by hand and again the auger is lowered and removes the soil to the newly probed depth. And so on.

Okay, so to what depth is the digging done by hand to determine if burials are present? If that is the case, then digging every one of those holes by hand would not be unreasonable. And then again, unless you are the contractor what would you know? Identifying oneself may give credibility to your statement.

Anonymous said...

First you have to inform the public.

I heard that argument as a reason not to put the County Manager on the ballot. We all is too ignorant ta vote for our self. Please inform me of how I should vote.

Punohu's Politics,Environment and Culture said...

Just the nature of testing alone is cautionary. If you read some of the accounts of how the burials were dug out on the Coco Palms property (IE the 87 re-interred bones), there was no machinery used, it was done by one person, and not in any way a professional dig.

I have seen how these are conducted. Many times bones are broken up in this manner. The burials here are in a sitting position hugging their knees more than likely.

I say that because all of the other iwi were found in this precise manner.

So if you do augar posting to 13 feet, causing 13 foot holes all over the beach in order to do the testing, you will more than likely cause cranial or fontanel fractures in the iwi.

This is extremely hewa, due to the fact that Hawaiians believe that the fontanel is THE most sacred part of the body.

Another issue, is that the "boardwalk" is NOT a bike path. It is a completely different functioning surface, with "spaces" as was mentioned by the engineer.

THe ability to "pull it up" when neccssary was not addressed. "Who, what, when, why".

The reasoning behind the engineering principal is clearly that it is anticipated there are huge climatical upheavals in this area, and the course INTO (not ontop of) the sands is questionable, thus the change in the type of surface and the necessity to "anchor" it down.

These facts alone, as I have stated before should bring up red flags to everyone.

People are still under the assertian that the path is ON the sand, rather than "screwed down into " the sand. This was shown clearly at the presentation, and caused a gasp to ripple through the entire room.

As I have stated before, this was the turning point for many people there who realized that this was far more impactful than they had supposed originally and thus changed their opinion at that moment.

Anonymous said...

Every depth that the auger reaches is first tested by hand.

Never you mind how I know. Don't believe me if you want. Find out from someone who does it or oversees it for a living.

Anonymous said...

Every depth that the auger reaches is first tested by hand.

Then what is the purpose of the auger?

Anonymous said...

Then what is the purpose of the auger?

to remove the dirt.
They don't dig the hole by hand. they test down to incremental depth by hand, then use the auger to remove the dirt.

Anonymous said...

"Kiss up to those with money/political power. Avoid liberals, tree huggers, the poor, antiwar/gay/enviro activists and anyone wanting their country back."

Liberals, tree huggers, antiwar/gay/enviro activists and those who want their country back lack money/ political power?

Anonymous said...

Never you mind how I know. Don't believe me if you want. Find out from someone who does it or oversees it for a living.

Yes ignore that man behind the curtain and ask someone making money digging or watching other people dig holes. I'm sure they are disinterested parties with impeccable bona fides!

Anonymous said...

to remove the dirt.
They don't dig the hole by hand. they test down to incremental depth by hand, then use the auger to remove the dirt.


When testing by hand:
1 cup hand
2 scoop dirt
3 remove dirt
3 repeat until desired depth is reached

This is assuming your body diameter is less than 10" or you have a very long arm to reach into a 13 foot deep hole.

Anonymous said...

Yes ignore that man behind the curtain and ask someone making money digging or watching other people dig holes. I'm sure they are disinterested parties with impeccable bona fides!

Then stand out there next time digging is being done in an area of known burials and watch it done yourself. I don't care.

Anonymous said...

As I recall themayor said they would dig some holes as test sites to check for burials then depending on what they find start augering. He never claimed they would check each and every hole.

Anonymous said...

Liberals, tree huggers, antiwar/gay/enviro activists and those who want their country back lack money/ political power?

Obviously as we have no gay marriage, less trees, more war, enviro degradation, and do not live in the Nation of Hawaii.

Anonymous said...

Then stand out there next time digging is being done in an area of known burials and watch it done yourself. I don't care.

I have and they used high pressure hoses to blast the bones out.

Anonymous said...

All these posts, and those of other blog entries, about a path in the sand.

What is it about you folks living on that little island?

We don't worry about it nearly as much on Oahu, Maui or the Big Island.

Must be that as space goes down, land use anxiety goes up.

A path in the sand....

BTW - stating that "all native hawaiians" believe a certain way (just because they are "native"?) is ridiculous. Belief systems are not inherited through genetics.

You may as well say that all "native Japanese" worship their ancestors. Absolutely not so.

Anonymous said...

What is it about you folks living on that little island?

The smaller the place the bigger the problem.

Anonymous said...

You may as well say that all "native Japanese" worship their ancestors. Absolutely not so.

Or that if they don't worship their ancestors, they are not authentically Japanese.

Anonymous said...

"there was no machinery used, it was done by one person, and not in any way a professional dig.
"
Wrong! Those burials were found during the construction of the foundation for one of the buildings. And it was a machine that found them. Read the reports.

Anonymous said...

"burials here are in a sitting position hugging their knees more than likely."
Wrong!!
Burials are found in all kinda of positions. Searted is only one of many. Most are lying down.

Dawson said...

All these posts, and those of other blog entries, about a path in the sand.

What is it about you folks living on that little island?


The path in the sand is the physical issue. But at the same time it is a symbol of -- and the result of -- a much larger, deeper, cultural issue.

Your attempt to trivialize it notwithstanding, the smaller issue will not be solved until the larger is addressed.


We don't worry about it nearly as much on Oahu, Maui or the Big Island.

Who, exactly, is this "we" of which you claim membership and knowledge?

Anonymous said...

"THe ability to "pull it up" when neccssary was not addressed.

I believe they ment that it is easily repairable if damaged by high surf as opposed to a cement path.

Anonymous said...

"Obviously as we have no gay marriage, less trees, more war, enviro degradation, and do not live in the Nation of Hawaii."

They may have less money/political power, but they are not penniless or powerless.

Punohu's Politics,Environment and Culture said...

"there was no machinery used, it was done by one person, and not in any way a professional dig.
"
Wrong! Those burials were found during the construction of the foundation for one of the buildings. And it was a machine that found them. Read the reports."

I believe I clearly stated the RE-INTERNMENT of the bones, not the original removal of them. I got that from the eye witness account in the EA cultural assessment done by Kimura, which I have read thoroughly.

Also, to clarify yet ANOTHER point, in that same report, it stated that "These particular burials had been uncovered in a seated position, knees up facing the ocean". I never said that all burials ever found were found in this position.

Please pay closer attention to what I write, but in a way thanks for giving me the opportunity to clarify that if you didn't catch that the first time. I have given links to reports please read them.

Also, to clarify another issue that was brought up. What I was referring to is the general unity of Native Hal2waiian thought processes with regards to the cultural values that are basic. These values actually occur in a large and varied group of individuals which I also mentioned. I never implied that either just Hawaiians believe this, or must believe this or that it was in any way inherent.

Again, please read carefully. But thanks for bringing it up so I can clarify.

AS far as digging by hand. I asked my dayughter. "Kaulana, close your eyes for a sec. Ok, now pretend you are digging a 13 foot hole in moving sand with just yo9ur hand, as opposed to dirt. What happens?" My daughter, who is brilliant said, "Mom, you can't, it will just fill itself back in". I told her, "exactly".

To equate digging into dirt, as digging 13 feet into sand is like comparing apples to oranges. You will need machinery. Not only that, these are literally 13 inch screws. Go back and look at the diagrams again.

All of this as opposed to a surface path, because damage is anticipated.

If a break in the path can be tolerated by breakage, then a path here may not be necessary.

Mahalo, and thank you for the thoughtful postings. Very refreshing. Finally.

Anonymous said...

Lesson NOT learned; "Don't build on sand!

"In the early morning hours of April 1, 1946, a devastating tsunami changed the face of downtown Hilo. Residents awoke to find twisted train tracks pushed into the streets along with the houses that were located along the tracks. The houses were homes to store owners and their families who lived in the backs and top floors of the businesses along Kamehameha Avenue. Train sections were pushed into the wreckage of buildings. The Wailuku River bridge was badly damaged, too. One of the three sections was swept up the river. The Hawaii Consolidated Railway Company had to question whether or not they should rebuild the tracks. They chose to go out of business because the damage was seen as irreparable. Thus, a chapter in the transportation history of Hawaii came to an end."

Punohu's Politics,Environment and Culture said...

I went on you tube, and found a collection of videos of Coastal Bike Paths. I found some very interesting facts as I was watching them.

All of them appeared to be concrete surface paths, and almost none of them were actually on top of the beach sand, but on the edge of it, with the sandy areas left undisturbed. There were no large, enormous interpretive signs, nor were there artificial landscaping. Further, they all seemed to meander at times far away from the coast itself, and move through mauka and wooded and grassy areas as well.

THe only one I saw, the Venice/Santa Monica? Torrence one, which is situated on a stationary half mile or so stretch of beach in a straight line for miles on the California coast has a surface path.

It is not a boardwalk screwed into the sands. It has held up since 1960.

They are only now anticipating repairing it. Now, let us remember there are no sacred burials here, it is not a small area with large shifts in sand, and it is not disputed by cultural groups for its inherent sacredness.

Further, it actually seems to be a true communer route and it goes for dozens of miles.

We are not California, that's for sure. But when I took all of these videos together, I began to see that our bikepath was starting to look a bit strange against those other paths.

As my eyes have been opened by actually being able to view videos of people biking these trails from their vantage point, I see that what we have being proposed to us is really not very logical in part.

The most interesting thing I notices is that literally all of the coastal paths did not all go along the coast for one hundred percent of the time, and went on other roads, highways, bridges and backways.

Education is priceless, isnt it?

Anonymous said...

"How do Hawaiians feel about driving on the beach? Are there burials at those beaches where you see 4 wheelers driving all over the place?"

No kidding.

Guess they get to have it both ways, when it comes to the sands...

Anonymous said...

"Education is priceless, isnt it?"

You find what you are looking for to prove your own perception.

---unbelievable.

http://www.waymarking.com/cat/details.aspx?f=1&guid=d5322f6e-7a84-44f5-a7f2-a846fe0458f5

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25611122/

this research that you do - try to broaden your perception

Anonymous said...

Looks like the bike path is the issue that five or six people are excited enough about to post about twenty comments a day on.

Anonymous said...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25611122/page/2/

Oh now I see we are really building an "amusement park" not a path! What next rename the island "Astroland". Hope they reconsider and make the boardwalk at least high enough for the homeless to find some repose. Take a look at the Peoples Republic of Santa Monica and Venice beach. Go there at dawn and see the hundreds of homeless coming out from under to begin their day. Under the board walk we can have some fun, under the board walk out of the sun. Get ready for pushy mimes, jugglers, local clowns, and gangs of pickpockets joining in to fleece the tourists. Anyone want their picture taken with a parrot blessed by a Kapuna?

Anonymous said...

Looks like the bike path is the issue that five or six people are excited enough about to post about twenty comments a day on.

and if you really knew that they are not anonymous are they?

Anonymous said...

"How do Hawaiians feel about driving on the beach? Are there burials at those beaches where you see 4 wheelers driving all over the place?"

I don't condone driving on the beaches, nor do I appreciate 4WD mudding out in the mountains. It's so assuming of all of you that everyone driving on the beach is Hawaiian. Take a good look, what I see are people of different ethnicities including HAOLES!

We're talking about Mahunapu`uone at Wailua. Stick with the subject here. I don't see anyone driving on the sand there! Do you?

Anonymous said...

Anyone want their picture taken with a parrot blessed by a Kapuna?

Hmmm...that could be a grand attraction, a parrot blessed by a spoon! Stay away from the Hawaiian words if you don't know what the hell they mean.

Punohu's Politics,Environment and Culture said...

Ok, I went to both of those lnks. The first was an advertisement for a company that makes boardwalks. I presume the same company that they want to use on the Sacred Sands of
Mahunapu`uone.

The second one, took me to the "Top Ten Boardwalks in America, " and came up with this crazy picture of a total zoo like atmosphere called "astroland"! *BOL*

Here is the picture link.
http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photo_StoryLevel/080709/080709-Coney%20Island-hmed-447p.hmedium.jpg

Now, since this anonymous poster (of course), is ragging on my research skills, might I add that yours are pretty flawed. Its like comparing apples to sardines.

The boardwalk maker site, was all about boardwalks. NOT BICYCLE/Pedestrian commuter paths with brightly colored lanes painted on them, and fake looking hotel/resort type landscaping like we all saw in the designs at the meeting.

And might I also point out, there were NO ugly, bright obnoxious easel type interpretive signs, nor was there landscaping either.

My sources were ACTUAL COASTAL BIKEPATHS, and Other COMMUTER, and SCENIC BIKEPATHS.
None of them were made using boardwalks. All are concrete surface paths.

Here they are:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYajXN4pPHI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwFRJD

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Do1-NPUlssg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QeTxK6oaZnU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3TZTipvwsfA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qez_PNE7ig

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5s9v3dE3_8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUFkrQyhOsQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llXVyQA

Anonymous said...

"I don't condone driving on the beaches, nor do I appreciate 4WD mudding out in the mountains. It's so assuming of all of you that everyone driving on the beach is Hawaiian. Take a good look, what I see are people of different ethnicities including HAOLES!"

My question did not mean to imply that Hawaiians were driving on the beach. I was just curious because I see people (of all ethnic backgrounds) driving over sand dunes and onto the beaches. I don't know if there are burials there but I would imagine that the Hawaiians upset about the bike path would also be upset by driving on the beach (assuming there were burials in the dunes or on the beach). As for Wailua, they don't drive on the beach anymore because of the boulders.

Anonymous said...

Coastal bike path boardwalks - you said?

Here are some example of those

United Kingdom
http://www.guardian.co.uk/travel/2007/jul/14/beach.uk29

Monterey County, CA
http://www.mtycounty.com/pgs-parks/bike-path.html

Long Beach, WA
http://www.funbeach.com/attractions/boardwalk.html

Sand Hook to Long Branch, NJ
http://www.boblucky.com/Biking/NewJersey/Longbranch.htm

San Diego, CA
http://www.efgh.com/bike/redroute.htm

I think the post was to show you an example of how narrow your perspective is. You are limiting your search to find what you want.

Anonymous said...

youtube - the best source of information on the web.

Anonymous said...

What is silly is the belief that anyone is going to drill down into a burial. You think they're just going to draw a plan of where the holes go and dig there no matter what testing discovers is underneath?
Exactly, th state did not require an archaology inventory survey, only monitoring, which means the archaologist will be there to documnt the piercing of the Iwi. The Mayor actually said they will only monitor to the first 4 feet, but the augars go down 13 feet, all 60 of them

Anonymous said...

So, if all 60 do not encounter bones, the path is OK?

Anonymous said...

Ah, comments on the beach path multiply like the grains of sand.

Two threads approaching 200 each, plus others.

There wasn't this much chatter on the Bresca blog entries.

I'm surprised.

Punohu's Politics,Environment and Culture said...

OK, anonymous, I looked at all those links.

I was really surprised that you chose those, since they all made my point very well. Again, not one single one of them is actually on top of the beach sands, is landscaped, or has large interpretive signs on them. Again, not one single one is a continuous path on the beach, but include many variations.

Some of the mapping was deceptive, and then when the descriptions were read, in one casae it stated the bike path is broken up and not continuous and actually does not go up to the beach in many places.

I urge everyone here to check these downloads as well.

What I am looking for is a bike path that has the elements in it that are being proposed to us anywhere. So far I have not found any.

If you can find me a bike path, that goes on top of the sand on a beach, with fake landscaping, and large, four foot high easel type brightly colored interpretive signs I will eat my mu'umu'u with poi and shoyu.

ALso, make sure that bikepath exists within a sensitive cultural area, with historic, significant archeological ruins, and burial grounds around it,

ok happy hunting for that!

Punohu's Politics,Environment and Culture said...

Anonymous said...(responding to another anonymous that said...anony #1

"What is silly is the belief that anyone is going to drill down into a burial. You think they're just going to draw a plan of where the holes go and dig there no matter what testing discovers is underneath?"

anony #2 " Exactly, the state did not require an archeology inventory survey, only monitoring, which means the archeologist will be there to document the piercing of the Iwi. The Mayor actually said they will only monitor to the first 4 feet, but the augars go down 13 feet, all 60 of them

December 17, 2009 1:41 AM"

Bless you, anonymous. #2!! Finally an anonymous with some common sense!! *applause*

Anonymous said...

I'm lost. What does it mean if nobody can find an example of a path that does not exactly match in every detail the planned Kauai path?

Anonymous said...

Punohu's Politics,Environment and Culture said...

Anonymous said...(responding to another anonymous that said...anony #1
...

Ok, it's enough that you leave large numbers of lengthy, rambly, comments. You don't need to start re-posting other peoples' comments too.

Punohu's Politics,Environment and Culture said...

Anonymous said...

So, if all 60 do not encounter bones, the path is OK?

December 17, 2009 9:24 AM

Even if all 60 tesrt holes are ok, if they put posts (screws actually) into other areas and hit bones it won't be,

What they might to, to be cute, is to try and dig the posts where a line of iwei may not be. If they assume the iwi are more to the middle, they might drill towards the top, or even closer to the shore.

But the intent is to put the path smack dab on the sand. Which means they may still hit iwi. We can pretty much say without a speck of doubt that there are iwi on this beach.

THe very name of the beach implies that there are, so it is ludicrous to assume that there aren't.

The issue for me is why are we going to waste our time with this little experiment to attempt to prove Native Hawaiian beliefs, knowledge, customs and language WRONG by attempting to "prove" that there are no iwi on the beach?

THat is an exersize I do not want Fed, State, or County money spent on.

Further, as I have stated before even if you take out the cultural elements of this issue, there is still the geological and climatological science to deal with. What that means is, on this stretch of sandy beach extreme erosion and wave action and shifting of the sands have been well documented, occur with regularity and are a safety and liability issue for both the county and the state.

If you place that path in an area where someone can get hurt by say wave action, or sand erosion occurring by wave action when someone is walking or riding their bikes on it, the State and County are liable. Then there will be a lawsuit.

So, for all concerned, it is best to keep ANY path off this beach.

Punohu's Politics,Environment and Culture said...

Anonymous said...

Punohu's Politics,Environment and Culture said...

Anonymous said...(responding to another anonymous that said...anony #1...

Ok, it's enough that you leave large numbers of lengthy, rambly, comments. You don't need to start re-posting other peoples' comments too.

December 17, 2009 10:40 AM

It is called debating the issues and having an intelligent discourse.

As long as I follow the rules, and don't insult people and act like a jerk, I have every right to comment on this blog, since I have respect for Joans rules on her blog.

Wither you think my posts are rambling or not is a non issue.

I may comment on anyones comments I choose. Especially, god forbid, if they support my opinions and views.

What I would like to see is people stick to the issue and stop going all over the place. The issue is the path.

It seems there is alot of ADDH on here.

When people comment on what I write, I have every right to answer or rebutt them.

That it annoys you means nothing to me. If you care to make a statement on the subject matter of this blogpost, I would read it, and respond to it. You have that same right.

Anonymous said...

The state and county taking prudent action to prevent/limit liability???

That's crazy talk! We just don't do things that way here!

We prefer the hoopla associated with the Superferry, Bresca residence, etc etc.

It keeps lawyers in Hawaii gainfully employed. Employment is good.

Punohu's Politics,Environment and Culture said...

Anonymous said...

I'm lost. What does it mean if nobody can find an example of a path that does not exactly match in every detail the planned Kauai path?

December 17, 2009 10:35 AM

What it means is, the path as has been presented to us, is not what is being done in other places but is an enormous leap from that.

What is being presented to us is something more in the lines of one continuous resort, or tourist attraction, and not as it was originally presented to us. As a commuter path, a community path, a place where all of the people of Kauai can enjoy it.

I wanted to know how these things were done in other places. Is Kaua'i going to have what other people have? Is our path going to be better? Worse? The same?

I had questions, and I wanted answers.

What I found out is our path really is being built and designed differently.

When I looked at the videos, it seemed our path wasn't really very nature freindly but more contrived and fake. It was taking nature out of it, and making it less compatible with the natural beauty of the area.

I also wanted to see if other paths went around or through sensitive cultural areas, and if all paths were continuous, and if they were all built on top of the sand.

After all, we were led to believe that this was state of the art. What all of the best bikepaths in the world looked like. We were told that going ontop of the sand was commonplace.

Thats why I wanted to see if that was indeed true. If we are the only ones doing this, I want some answers as to why.

Explain to me why when other paths are not continuous, do not go on top of the sand, do have breaks in them and at times do go on the highways, do not have such bright markings on them, do not have fake looking landscaping around them, do not have four foot high bright interpretive signs all along them but allow nature to go as it wants, often go into the mountains or away from the coast altogether, and continue for miles and miles and miles, are of one material, and not several why ours needs to be different.

So can you answer that for me, please?

Anonymous said...

Punohu's Politics,Environment and Culture said...

I may comment on anyones comments I choose.

It is called debating the issues and having an intelligent discourse.


Of course, but do you really need to re-post the entirety of two comments just to say "yay" about one of them? It doesn't exactly move the debate along and i'm not sure it really qualifies as intelligent discourse.

Anonymous said...

There appears to be significant Hawaiian cultural sites behind Coco Palms as well as the potential for such on the beach. Say the bike path moves forward, which location is preferred? OHA and other groups choose behind the resort, many choose on the beach.

Maybe Joan could take a straw poll, then present it to the Mayor?

Or, she could write a sociological book based on this blog, there's much to consider here.

Punohu's Politics,Environment and Culture said...

Anonymous said...

Punohu's Politics,Environment and Culture said...

I may comment on anyones comments I choose.

It is called debating the issues and having an intelligent discourse.

"Of course, but do you really need to re-post the entirety of two comments just to say "yay" about one of them? It doesn't exactly move the debate along and i'm not sure it really qualifies as intelligent discourse."

December 17, 2009 11:05 AM

I have found, when discussing
anonymous posts, since there are no names it is impossible to just say "anonymous" said. It is like yelling "Hi AuUntie!", in a crowded room full of Kupuna. Everyone will turn their head and think you are talking to them!

So, the most logical path for me to decipher them out and respond to the anonymous posts, is to quote them, so we know which anonymous posts we are referring to. If everyone used names it would be far more easier to just say "Fred said", or "Kimo" said, and then make a quote from their comment. But since only myself and Joan and a few others actually use their names, that is impossible isn't it?

I hope you see the logical sense of this. After all, since I needed to respond to your post, I needed to quote it so you know it is your post I am referring too, right?

If everyone would use a name, my reposting like this would not be neccssary.

Anonymous said...

I have found, when discussing
anonymous posts, since there are no names it is impossible to just say "anonymous" said.


I'm glad we had this chat. There is a solution to your dilemma. What you do is refer to "Anonymous December 17, 2009 11:05 AM"

That way you don't have to re-post the entire post.

Anonymous said...

"Anyone want their picture taken with a parrot blessed by a Kapuna?

Hmmm...that could be a grand attraction, a parrot blessed by a spoon! Stay away from the Hawaiian words if you don't know what the hell they mean."


As a Hawaiian I know what the words mean, but mahalo for pointing out my typographical error. Feel free to stereotype all Hawaiians as bad typists based upon my bad typing.

Anonymous said...

HOW AWESOME!!!

we are going to have the BEST, most unique path - that everyone will come to see because there is no comparison anywhere.

Enthusiast from all over the world will flock here to learn about the sacred lands and be informed about the Hawaiian culture. While walking ABOVE the sand.

I so excited!

We are all lucky and blessed to have such a great plan for a beach boardwalk bike path.

Anonymous said...

"Is our path going to be better?"

Yes!!!!! A resounding yes, this is a great capital improvement project. That everyone will have the opportunity to benefit from.

Anonymous said...

Anne-

"fake landscaping"

why, where, what are you talking about?

why are you looking for examples?

Is there a Kauai somewhere else in the world?

Dawson said...

Explain to me why when other paths are not continuous, do not go on top of the sand, do have breaks in them and at times do go on the highways, do not have such bright markings on them, do not have fake looking landscaping around them, do not have four foot high bright interpretive signs all along them but allow nature to go as it wants, often go into the mountains or away from the coast altogether, and continue for miles and miles and miles, are of one material, and not several why ours needs to be different.

So can you answer that for me, please?


Those other paths are not the sort the Kaua'i tourism industry can Bali Hi-jack and $ell.

Build a boardwalk on Wailua Beach, and before it even opens you'll see brochure photos of Beautiful Touristy Couples recreating on it -- or Beautiful Touristy Families, depending on which demographic the industry is pimping this year.

Not as big a bonanza as the monstrosity on Maha'ulepu, of course. Just another bit of Kaua'i chipped away.

A bit of beach, a bit of culture, a bit of spirit, a bit of soul.

Anonymous said...

Build a boardwalk on Wailua Beach, and before it even opens you'll see brochure photos of Beautiful Touristy Couples recreating on it -- or Beautiful Touristy Families, depending on which demographic the industry is pimping this year.

But you already see brochure photos of Beautiful Touristy Couples and Beautiful Touristy Families recreating on Wailua Beach without the boardwalk. So I'm not sure what your comment proves, or even what it is trying to prove. That the path is only for tourists/tourism? That's obviously bogus if you've ever walked on the path and noticed all the locals enjoying it.

Just because somebody might be too culturally or politically "correct" to deign to walk on the path doesn't mean lots and lots of their neighbors aren't walking on it and enjoying it. We are.

Anonymous said...

That's obviously bogus if you've ever walked on the path and noticed all the locals enjoying it.

That what we were afraid of -- locals using facilities built for tourists, but I'm sure if we all put our heads together we can prevent this. Perhaps brightly colored wristbands to denote bona fide tourists.

Anonymous said...

Hahahah There is a solution to your dilemma. What you do is refer to "Anonymous December 17, 2009 11:05 AM

That way you don't have to re-post the entire post.


Good one December 17, 2009 12:21 PM! Education is wonderful, but you would figure that such a prolific poster would have figured that out a looooong time ago.

Punohu's Politics,Environment and Culture said...

I agree with Dawson. The rest of you are missing my point entirely.

When I say "fale landscaping", if I hear one more time "we are going to replant with all indigenous plants", then I see a sketch of something that looks like it is a landscaping project from a hotel, I don't see that as real, I see it as fake, contrived and uneccessary in what is supposed to be a natural area.

If there are unwanted pesky plants along the trail, then kalai them out. Nature does a fine job of its own putting plants where they belong. If something is invasive, remove it, so other plants can grow. It is entirely uneccessary to on purpose create a fake environment.

Leave that to the hotel gardens,

Also, those of you who thought the interpretive signs were such a great idea. DId you actually see them? Horrendous. There was a disgusted gasp when they were revealed.

I would advocate pohaku and wood culturally appropriate signage that blended in with the natural environment and were only placed where absolutely necessary.

But the sketches I say, of those "easil" thingies were ridiculous.
It made the path look like Disneyland.

I want a path that is as natural and uncontrived as possible. It is my path too. We do not need a path for the tourists we need a path for us. If they want to walk or bike on it too thats fine,

But stay off the iwi, stay away from the sacred areas, and respect the culture. I don't like to say the "host" culture anymore. I think the culture is tired of "hosting" people.

Punohu's Politics,Environment and Culture said...

PS thank you for explaining how to post anonymous posts. I am new to blogging. I may be prolific here, but that is just because it is a topic I feel strongly about.

Mahalo

Anonymous said...

the two of you who agree (no names) have the same problem; a very narrow perception of the world.

Anonymous said...

PS thank you for explaining how to post anonymous posts. I am new to blogging. I may be prolific here, but that is just because it is a topic I feel strongly about.

Mahalo

------------
Happy to give you a hand up here.

Before I kick your ass down again.

Welcome to Kauai Eccentric.

Punohu's Politics,Environment and Culture said...

You must not know me very well. I am 330, and 6 feet tall. No body kicks me anywhere, down, up or otherwise.

But hey, give it your best shot.

You will fail miserably but it is always fun to see you little people try.

muwahahahaha.

Lol. Thanks for the Ke kakahiaka aka'aka nui.

Oh sorry, I forgot, you don't speak 'olelo.

Too bad, I am not interpreting that for you.

Anonymous said...

You did look like a potential supersize from your head shot on your blog. I was imagining what the rest of you looked like. The Michelin Man came to mind.

Well, that explains your well-honed "give it back to 'em" style. Been using it most of your life, I suppose.

Punohu's Politics,Environment and Culture said...

Anonymous said...

You did look like a potential supersize from your head shot on your blog. I was imagining what the rest of you looked like. The Michelin Man came to mind.

Well, that explains your well-honed "give it back to 'em" style. Been using it most of your life, I suppose.

December 18, 2009 7:31 AM

Oh, really I wan't aware that only women my size could "give it back to em."

I have an auntie, she is 5 foot 4 weighs all of 110. I wouldn't get on her bad side for anything in the world. She can fling a 3 foot wok at 50 paces and knock anyone out.

You must be terrified of strong women that don't take crap.

To bad, Charlie Tuna. You are in my world now. Buck it up or pack it in.

Anonymous said...

Your world now?

I thought this was Joan's blog, or are you taking over?

"Your world" is down the street a ways. You give directions to it with every post.

Punohu's Politics,Environment and Culture said...

I do not attempt to take over Joans blog ever. I leave that to you nameless anonymous Children of the Blog. Or maybe that would more aptly be : Children of the Fog.

The fact that when I sign in it gives a link back to my blog is not my fault. That I like to visit Joans blog and share my opinions, and debate the issues of our time is none of your business.

Joan knows she can come and visit me anytime on mine.

You see, this site is called Blogger for a reason. We are encouraged to visit each others sites, follow each others blogs, and comment and read the contents of each others blog. It is a blogging community.

Both Joan and I own blogs here, on blogger. Therefore the free exchange of ideas and comments is a natural occurence of that simple fact.

That it bothers you means absolutely nothing to me.

As long as it doesn't bother Joan.

If it bothers her, I am sure she will let me know. Just like if you bother her she will let you know.

Ok, grashoppah....got it now?

class is dismissed.

Anne P said...

Well, as you know, that was COPYRIGHTED, and lifted OFF MY BLOG WITHOUT MY PERMISSION.

YOU HAVE JUST VIOLATED US COPYRIGHT LAW.

I HAVE A VALID COPYRIGHT FOR MY INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY.

IT WAS CLEARLY STATED ON THAT STORY< WHICH WAS LIFTED OFF MY BLOG WITHOUT MY PERMISSION THAT IT MAY NOT BE USED WITHOUT MY PERMISSION>

THEREFORE YOU ARE A THIEF

Therefore, I will ask Joan to REMOVE YOUR POST, SINCE IT VIOLATES COPYRIGHT LAW

Anne P said...

THis was STOLEN OFF MY BLOG WITHOUT MY PERMISSION NOT EVEN THAT YOU WROTE IT AS YOUR OWN PLAGARISM

I HAVE NOW BLOCKED MY SITE TEMPORARILY UNTIL WE CAN FIGURE OUT WHAT TO DO ABOUT THE THIEVES AND COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT LAWS

IT CLEARLY STATES THAT ANYTHING I WRITE ON MY BLOG IS COVERED BY (c)Anne Punohu 2009, and (C) Anne Punohu 2010. THAT PARTICULAR STORY PARTICULARLY HAD A CLEAR COPYRIGHT WARNING ON IT AFTER IT.

NOTHING CAN BE COPIED WITHOUT MY EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION

YOU ARE A THIEF:December 19, 2009 8:19 AM Anonymous poster

fair use said...

Fair use is a doctrine in United States copyright law that allows limited use of copyrighted material without requiring permission from the rights holders, such as for commentary, criticism, news reporting, research, teaching or scholarship. It provides for the legal, non-licensed citation or incorporation of copyrighted material in another author's work

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use

Anonymous said...

i find it very interesting that there has not been any more posts for a while on all of the blog posts where a certain poster actually stopped posting, so did the others. hmm. Now if I was a conspiracy theorist.............lol. Guess everyone got tired, took their ball and went home.