Musings: Ige's Wily Ways

Gov. David Ige has proven himself a wily politician with his nomination of The Nature Conservancy's Suzanne Case to lead the state Department of Land and Natural Resources.

Because the pick has effectively driven a wedge between environmentalists and Native Hawaiians — the only coalition that would be likely to challenge him on anything. And local hunters and fishers are piling on, too, along with animal rights advocates.

While the “greens” love Suzanne and TNC's brand of upscale environmentalism, kanaka and hunters aren't so keen on TNC's zero-tolerance of game animals, which it exterminates as invasive species, sometimes through the use of snares that PETA has proclaimed inhumane.

Sharp lines are being drawn — even as Kauai Councilman Gary Hooser sent out an email effusing over Case's nomination, which he credited to an “intense grass-roots effort supported by a strong alliance of organizations representing diverse yet common interests” that prompted Ige to ditch Carleton Ching and appoint Case instead.

Civil Beat also bought into the hype that Ige had experienced a “come to Jesus” moment and miraculously seen the light, turning on a dime to replace a developers' lobbyist with the head of a major conservation organization. Its unquestioning editorial enthused:

“This Time, Ige Nails It. In his second attempt at picking a new Department of Land and Natural Resources chief, the governor taps an experienced conservation lawyer with deep local roots.”

Even Sen. Laura Thielen, whose own legacy at DLNR was the failed “recreational renaissance” that called for the widespread privatization and commercialization of state parks — including a hotel at Kokee and admission booths — pronounced that Case passed muster. (Btw, how did Thielen ever become the darling of greens? Have they completely forgotten her tenure at DLNR?)

Meanwhile, Molokai activist Walter Ritte and others who denounced Ching — and supported Hooser on anti-GMO and anti-pesticide causes — are now blasting Case. They don't like TNC's disdain for game animals, its support for marine protected areas and its penchant for fencing off land and eradicating all the non-native mammals within.

They've launched a Move-On petition that proclaims “Protect our Hunting, Fishing, Diving & Surviving!” and calls for Suzanne Case's removal. With some 550 signatures at last check, it states:

We the residents of Hawaii depend on the animals that we're given to King Kamehameha so we the people could be self sustainable. Allowing Nature Conservancy Director Suzanne Case to head the Department of Land and Natural Resources will be a total disaster to our race and our culture. With Suzanne Case being the Chairperson of DLNR there will be no animals to harvest because of fences and eradication. People of Hawaii, one day the ships will stop coming and the only thing that we will have to eat is the animals in the forest, fish that swim in the sea, and the produce that that our farmers produce!!! Remove Nature Conservancy Director Suzanne Case NOW before its to late!

In posting the petition link on his Facebook page, Ritte wrote:

This lady is bad news for all traditional and subsistence practitioners. Sign the petition.

In signing the petition, Terrance EK Castillo of Kekaha wrote:

They already took away the KINGDOM, most of our LANDS, our major WEST SIDE FISHING AREA, What's next? Get that #$%^&@ Suzanne Case out of there. Take down the fences that are already up. #%@$^&* @!$%^*&

Robert Duerr from Hilo expressed similar sentiments:

The case against the TNC and Case? Eradication, aerial killings, citizen kapu fences are not a game management plan.

Gosh. Looks like the unraveling of Hooser's “strong alliance of organizations representing diverse yet common interests.”

Not to mention that one of Case's first chores, should she be confirmed, is dealing with the frankly unresolvable conflict over the Thirty Meter Telescope, which is on conservation land that DLNR has leased to the University of Hawaii.

Talk about an extremely hot seat. Can you spell lose-lose? Can you say hamstrung from the get-go?

And as Case gets savaged, and ultimately marginalized in the fray, Ige emerges smelling like a rose, having given some folks, at least, exactly what they wanted.

Musings: Twists and Turns

The Kauai County planning department has dramatically scaled back its proposed ordinance regulating homestays/B&Bs prior to Tuesday's public hearing on the hotly debated topic.

And the gist of it is this:

Residents will have to accept either 10 homestays per year, or a possible flood of illegal transient vacation rentals (TVRs) seeking legitimacy before the law is changed. 

Why? Because the county has taken so damn long to deal with TVR enforcement and homestay rules.

The new proposed ordinance has eliminated all references to major and minor permits, census district allocations, complaints, enforcement, inspections and prohibitions on homestays in the agricultural district.

Instead, it simply states:

On a first-come-first-served basis of applications deemed complete by the Planning Department, no more than ten (10) applications for homestay operations shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission each year.

The proposed ordinance also amends the zoning code's current definition of homestay to read:

“Homestay” means an owner occupied dwelling unit in which overnight accommodations are provided to transient guests within the same dwelling unit in which the owner resides or in a guest house and the primary residential structure(s) used for homestay operation is the owner's primary residence, and the respective owner currently benefits under Sec. 5-A-11 of this Code for a homeowner's exemption for the homestay site.

According to the director's report that accompanied the revised ordinance, the department believes the new definition will make it clear that the homestay operator is the actual resident property owner, “which should act as a self-regulating mechanism” on the noise and other disturbances that often plague transient vacation rentals (TVRs).

The department also noted the 10-per-year limit was imposed to “ensure there is not an overage of applications...both for land use carrying capacity as well as departmental processing capabilities.”

The report said the initial proposed ordinance, which was already meeting public resistance, had to be amended in light of “recent developments” within the department's enforcement division “in order to expedite the adoption of a clear and specific standard and review parameters under which homestay applications can be processed.”

In other words, the department can't muck around too long, because people who are getting busted for operating illegal TVRs are now trying to pass them off as B&Bs in order to keep operating. The report acknowledges that some of the scofflaws have discovered the “possible loophole in applying for psuedo-TVR operations outside of the VDA (visitor destination area) and resort zoning district.”

The VDA and resort district are the only places where new TVRs can legally operate. All other TVRs are required to have transient accommodation certificates, which are no longer being issued.

So the department has to close the loophole with a simple, hopefully more palatable, ordinance before it gets choked with a flood of fake B&B/homestay applications by the illegal TVRs.

The B&B/homestay/illegal TVR folks are already staging a serious pity party, with websites, newspaper articles and letters to the editor from displaced tourists decrying the county's mean, arbitrary and completely unexpected order to cease and desist.

They're claiming through crocodile tears that they either never knew they had to have a permit to operate, and/or there was no way to get such a permit — neither of which are true. They were always required to have a use permit.

Though some have tried to pretend that homestays are the sole purview of aunty and uncle, trying to make a few bucks to supplement their social security — and no doubt that's true in a few isolated cases — for many more B&Bs/homestays are a very lucrative business, just like the TVRs that they really are.

For example, Sheila Heathcote, the owner of Hale O Nanakai, laments that upon receiving the cease and desist notice:

I took down my beautiful $7000 website, said good-bye to a young lady who was going to help me with the daily operation (and who had quit her $45,000/year job at a large Vacation Rental firm to come help me), canceled my listings on Air B&B, Kauai Vacation Resorts website and the Hawaii Visitor's Bureau gohawaii.com website.

Now, that ain't no mom and pop operation. It's a sleeps-14 mini hotel, which would not have been allowed even as a TVR because it's a multi-family dwelling unit.

Still, the county also must shoulder blame for this mess because the general plan update noted way back in 2000 the need for a “clear policy” regarding TVRs and B&Bs. It wasn't until 2008 that the Council adopted a law regulating TVRs, with B&Bs/homestays to be addressed separately.

After that wholesale giveaway of TVR permits to people who didn't deserve them, followed by a second handout to folks running TVRs on ag land, the county sat on its hands for several years. 

When this blog's 2013 Abuse Chronicles documented how many folks got TVR permits without providing the required documentation, the Council and administration decided not to crack down on them, but instead go after the “low-hanging fruit” — the zillions of TVRs, homestays and B&Bs that never even bothered to apply for a permit.

Once enforcement finally began, with the planning director and county prosecutor working in tandem, lawyers came up with a new scam: pass off the illegals as B&Bs/homestays so they can get a permit. Suddenly, planners realized they needed to tighten up the language regarding home stays right quick.

And here we are. 

Better lawyer-up folks. It's gonna be a long, hard ride.

Musings: Neocolonialism in Agriculture

In following the biotech debate in America and Europe, I've been frequently repelled by the smug, neocolonial attitude of affluent Westerners who are trying to dictate agricultural policy in developing nations by funding anti-GMO activities there.

So while we were traveling through India, we frequently asked farmers: “What would you say to people in the west who believe biotech crops are harmful and you should not have access to them?”

Not one farmer voiced support for outside interference in India's agricultural policies. Instead, they invariably said farmers should decide what they want to grow. Here are some of the farmers we met, and some of the other comments we heard (though the person pictured didn't necessarily make that particular quote.)

“Those who say this are not actually connected to the crops. We live in the crops all the time and I have seen no ill effects on myself or my animals.”

“I have been paying attention to television events and debates. I hear voices against this good technology from people who have nothing to do with the crop.”

“Prior to Bt cotton I was a frequent visitor to the hospital. Now there's no need. They have made some false claims, but I am happy with Bt.”

“If Bt comes in all the crops, that would be good.”

“If a technology like Bt brinjal comes along people will be adopting it because any day you can get more for brinjal than other crops.”

“With the profits of Bt my children go to a good school and I was able to pay for my mother's [medical] treatment.”

“If seeds have an in-built capacity to resist pests, that would be welcomed by any farmer.”

“Some people say Bt is spoiling the soil. That is a belief of some. The farmer has heard this, but if Bt brinjal [eggplant] will lessen the number of sprays, I am ready to accept it.”

“I am waiting for the Bt brinjal. We cannot continue this crop with so much spraying. After two, three days, my skin is itching and I feel nausea. Sometimes I feel like maybe I am going to die.”

“What we think is if we get Bt brinjal our costs will be less and spraying will be less.”

“I would like to see Bt cotton that can also resist herbicides.”

Musings: Fine Lines

With the state Legislature pondering bills decriminalizing marijuana possession and authorizing medical marijuana dispensaries, Kauai County Council Chair Mel Rapozo has introduced a resolution opposing both.

HB 321, scheduled for a Senate committee vote today, fills a major puka in the state's 15-year-old medical marijuana law by creating a dispensary system that allows patients to legally obtain the herb. Counties could not use zoning laws to prohibit dispensaries.

Rep. Dee Morikawa voted for the bill, Rep. Derek Kamakami supported it with reservations and Rep. Jimmy Tokioka voted against it. Mel hopes to convince his colleagues today to also oppose the measure.

Hmmm. I wonder if Mel found out that former Councilman Tim Bynum wants to start a dispensary, and that soured him on the bill.  

But despite Mel's reservations, it's high time the state provided a mechanism to provide patients with a product they're legally entitled to have.

SB 879 would have eliminated the criminal penalty for possessing an ounce or less of marijuana, and instead establish a civil violation subject to a fine of $100. Unfortunately, it's essentially dead for the session. And since the dispensary bill is up for a vote this AM, Mel's reso is effectively moot. 

Still, at least Mel's asking his colleagues to weigh in with a vote, rather than pretend to represent the entire Council as Gary Hooser has in his own testimony to the Lege this year.

While Kauai Police Chief Darryl Perry and Prosecutor Justin Kollar did not weigh in on the decriminalization bill, the Honolulu Police Department wrote:

The HPD is not opposed to levying a fine for first-time ofenders. However, sentencing should also include mandatory substance abuse treatment, as it would be in the person's and the community's best interest if addiction is treated at its earliest possible stage.

Uh, possession does not equal addiction. And don't you guys think the state's valuable and scarce rehab resources should be directed to the ice users and alcoholics who are really wreaking havoc?

Meanwhile, the Honolulu Prosecutor's legislative liaison, who lobbied against bills like this, just lost his job for being a repeat drunk driver. So what does that say about substance abuse in America?

I was amused to see testimony from Bart Dame of Progressive Democrats of Hawaii, who wrote (emphasis in the original):

[W]e believe there is a lucrative niche market of tourists who would like to come to Hawaii and smoke Hawaii grown marijuana, which has an international reputation and would fetch high prices, allowing our small farmers to plant the most profitable crop suitable for our state, if only the government would get out of the way.

Yet curiously, he and other “progressives” have supported bills requiring the government to regulate every minute aspect of biotech agricultural production, and all pesticide use by every farmer.

Speaking of Bart and his fellow anti-GMO “progressives,” I wonder how they're going to respond to Gov. Ige's nomination of Suzanne Case (sister of former Hawaii Congressman Ed Case) to head the Department of Land and Natural Resources. Though Suzanne seems to hold all the desired green creds, she heads the Hawaii chapter of The Nature Conservancy, which the anti-GMO contingent denounced for accepting donations from Monsanto and the other chem companies.

Indeed, they attempted to use those donations to try and discredit Judge Barry Kurren, who struck down the Kauai and Big Island anti-GMO laws. It seems Kurren's wife was on the board of TNC, which somehow made her, and thus her husband, in collusion with the chem companies that donated to TNC.

Will the anti-GMO crowd hold Suzanne to similar scrutiny? 

Or, coming as she is on the heels of Carleton Ching's nomination, will the anti-corporate, anti-chem crowd decide that Suzanne is green enough — even though TNC is supported by the biggest corporations in the world and uses aerial applications of pesticides to control invasive species in the backcountry?

It can so challenging to straddle those ideological fine lines…..

Guest Post: Drilling Down on the Homestay Ordinance

Poipu resident Sam Lee previously wrote about homestays/B&Bs in a guest post that generated considerable comment. As the Kauai County planning commission prepares to conduct a public hearing next Tuesday on a draft bill regulating homestays/B&Bs, I asked him to revisit the issue. 

The draft bill proposed by the Planning Department seeks to establish a process to permit homestays/B&Bs in the commercial, resort and residential districts around the island. The meeting is scheduled for 9 a.m., Tuesday, April 14 rooms 2A & 2B of the Moikeha building.

Which takes us now to Sam's newest guest post:

Homestays should NOT BE ALLOWED IN THE RESIDENTIAL ZONE. There is ample land in the Commercial and Resort zones for Homestay use. More short term visitor rentals should be DISCOURAGED within neighborhoods. Visitor rentals within RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS have proven to be INCOMPATIBLE and IMPOSSIBLE TO CONTROL once they gain a foothold.

BEFORE allowing HOMESTAYS IN THE RESIDENTIAL ZONE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION MUST JUSTIFY THE NEED FOR HOMESTAYS IN THE RESIDENTIAL ZONE. IT MUST CLARIFY THAT THE NEED FOR HOMESTAYS IS DIFFERENT FROM THE DEMAND CREATED BY APPLICANTS SEEKING HOMESTAY PERMITS.

Here are some highlights of the proposed ordinance and definitions of terms used (emphasis added in CAPS), with my comments:

Census Designated Place  (CDP)

Consists of a densely settled concentration of population locally identified by name e,g. Poipu, Koloa, etc. CDPs are delineated by State, County and the census Bureau following Census Bureau Guidelines.

Homestay Quota System

Means the quota system for generally permissible homestay permits for the County of Kauai.  The quotas are established for CDPs having a (full time) resident population of at LEAST 1000 residents.   Homestay permits SHALL be limited in number for each CDP having a resident population of at LEAST 1000 residents to one Homestay Permit for every 300 residents with the CDP. The Planning Department has population data for each CDP.

Comment:

Please note, however, that the number of homestay permits issued for your area could EXCEED the number established by the quota. Read more about the loophole under “General Provisions for Homestay Quota” below. 

Homestay

Means an owner-occupied dwelling in which overnight accommodations are provided to transient  guests for compensation in the same dwelling or in a guest house.

Homestay Major

Means an owner occupied dwelling within which overnight accommodations are provided to transient guests or in a guest house , not exceeding 5 bedrooms for transient accommodations.

Homestay Minor

Means an owner occupied dwelling in which overnight accommodations are provided to transient guests within the dwelling or in a guest house, not exceeding 2 bedrooms for transient rental.   A Minor permit could TENTATIVELY be issued within 30 days from the date the Planning Department accepts an application for a Minor Permit.

Comment:

Currently on the books is language that requires any applicant who applies for a Homestay Permit to  apply through a USE PERMIT. This requirement should be maintained for Minor Permits rather than the overly simple and quick process contained in the draft.  HOMESTAY PERMITS , MINOR AND MAJOR, SHOULD BE ISSUED THROUGH A USE PERMIT.  The ordinance should include the process for a USE PERMIT

General Provisions for Homestays

A Major Homestay operation  SHALL not exceed 5 bedrooms.  A Minor operation SHALL not exceed 2 bedrooms.

Any room advertised as a transient rental for sleeping purposes within a Homestay operation MUST BE A BEDROOM.

The residential structure(s) used for the Homestay operation must be the owner’s PRIMARY RESIDENCE and the owner must provide proof of having a Homeowners Exemption Certificate for the residence in the year preceding the date of application for a homestay permit.

During Homestay operations the owner  benefitting under the Homeowners Exemption for the Homestay Site must be PHYSICALLY WITHIN THE COUNTRY OF KAUAI, RESIDING at the homestay site and PHYSICALLY available for the needs of their guests.  NO OTHER person may act as a substitute for the Owner.

Homestays are PROHIBITED in Agriculture and Open Districts.

General Provisions for Homestay Quota System

 A Homestay approved under a Class 1 or Class 11 ZONING PERMIT is subject to the Quota System.

Homestays APPROVED/REVIEWED  under a USE PERMIT are EXEMPT from the quota. 

Comment: 

DEFINE what category of Homestay Permit needs to be issued through the USE PERMIT PROCESS.   Need to DESCRIBE USE PERMIT process.

The proposed ordinance states: Any application for a Homestay Permit EXCEEDING the number established by the Quota System whether a Minor or Major permit SHALL require a USE PERMIT.

Comment:

Herein lies the possible LOOPHOLE to the QUOTA LIMIT. Poipu, for example, has a resident population that would limit the number of permits to no more than THREE. If the first three homestay permits for Poipu  are  Minor Permits, which are subject to the quota ,  then no more minor permits could be issued. BUT, since there are NO LIMITS TO THE NUMBER OF MAJOR PERMITS THAT CAN BE ISSUED,  THE PROTECTION AFFORDED BY THE QUOTA COULD BE MEANINGLESS. 

I STRONGLY SUGGEST THAT THE  INTEGRITY OF THE QUOTA BE PRESERVED BY  SAYING THE NUMBER  SET BY THE QUOTA CANNOT BE EXCEEDED BY THE COMBINED NUMBER OF PERMITS ISSUED (MINOR +MAJOR).

Development Standards for Homestays

One additional paved and designated off street parking stall for each bedroom used as Homestay.

Comment:

Clarify that homestay parking must be ADDITIONAL, PAVED DESIGNATED PARKING. Cannot be a part of an existing driveway or garage apron.  Clarify that PAVED means surfaced with concrete or asphalt.

The ordinance also states:

Homestay residence must be on DOH approved SEPTIC SYSTEM

Homestay owners MUST be available on a 24/7 basis during homestay operations.  The owner MUST provide his name and contact information to neighbors adjacent to the Homestay and to the Planning, Police, Civil Defense  and Kauai Visitors  Bureau upon issuance of a homestay permit.

No other individual or representative can act for the owner to meet the requirements of the ordinance.

Comment:

How will these provisions be enforced?

Complaints Against Homestay Operations

Neighbors within 300 feet from  a Homestay may file a complaint with the Planning Department. The Planning Director MAY require further review (of the complaint?) by the Planning Commission.  For a complaint affecting a  minor permit in a residential area,  the Planning Director MAY issue a CEASE AND DESIST NOTICE and require the operator to apply and meet the conditions for a Use Permit  before recommencing operations.

Comment:

Change MAY to SHALL.   REQUIRE Planning Director to  refer  any complaint  about a Homestay operation to the Planning Commission.  REQUIRE the Planning Director to issue a CEASE and DESIST and REQUIRE  that  the homeowner to apply for a USE PERMIT for any complaint regarding a Minor Permit  operation within a RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT.

Renewal of Homestay Permits

Provide proof of General Excise and TAT licenses and primary occupancy. The Department MAY initiate reinspection of the premises.

Comment

Require MANDATORY REINSPECTION OF the premises for which a Homestay Permit  renewal is being sought.  Annual inspection will deter otherwise hard to detect violations within the dwelling.   The number of Homestay permits issued should be low, enabling  reinspections with existing staff.

Homestays in a Residential Zoning District not included in a V.D.A.

Homestays in  Residential Zoning Districts may be issued ONLY with a USE PERMIT.

Comment:

This is misleading.  As the USE PERMIT PROCESS only applies to an application for a MAJOR HOMESTAY PERMIT.

Permitted Minor Homestay Locations in Residential Zoning District not in a V.D.A.

Minor Homestays may be permitted within a Residential District not in the V.D.A. subject to the following.

a)     only one homestay per lot of record

b)     located within a CDP with a resident population of at LEAST 1000.

Comment:

CAUTION:  A minor permit can be issued by the Planning Department within 30 days for a Homestay in the Residential  District providing no objections are filed before the approval date.  STRONGLY RECOMMEND THAT A MINOR PERMIT Application for Homestay in the Residential District be SUBJECT TO THE USE PERMIT PROCESS.

Minor Homestay Procedures.  Notification of Neighbors

Within 7 days after being notified that his application has been accepted by the Planning Department for processing, the applicant must HAND DELIVER  WRITTEN NOTICE OR SEND BY CERTIFIED MAIL WRITTEN NOTICE  of his application to at least 85% of the residents within 300 feet of the applicant’s property. 

     The Notice must include:

a)     location of the property

b)     proposed use of the property

c)     description of the homestay operation

d)    notify neighboring property owners of their right to object to the application

e)     provide the Planning Department’s address to which objections must be mailed

f)      furnish neighbors with the tentative minor homestay approval date 30 days after the Planning Department accepted the application for processing.

Objections to a Minor Homestay Application in a Residential Zone not in the V.D.A.

Any property owner within a residential neighborhood and within 300 feet of a property for which a Minor Homestay permit is being sought, may OBJECT to the application by HAND DELIVERING OR MAILING BY CERTIFIED MAIL  a NOTICE OF OBJECTION to the Planning Department BEFORE the 30 day approval date.  Upon receipt of an objection, the Planning Director shall DENY  the application, reclassify the application as a MAJOR Permit and require the necessary ZONING Permits, including a USE PERMIT.

Comment:

Clarify what Zoning Permits could be required and if granted,  would the permit count under the Quota system?

General Comments:

Revise Ordinance to include description of USE PERMIT issuance process.

Revise Ordinance to include NOTICATION OF NEIGHBORS protocol for MAJOR PERMITS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONE.

Revise Ordinance to include PROTOCOL FOR OBJECTIONS  TO MAJOR PERMIT IN RESIDENTIAL ZONE.

INCLUDE DECRIPTION OF REMEDIES RESULTING FROM OBJECTIONS TO MAJOR PERMIT IN RESIDENTIAL ZONE.

Here's a link to the ordinance so you can read it in full.

The public can submit written testimony and/or speak at the hearing. Prior to the meeting, testimony can be emailed to planner Kaina Hull at khull@kauai.gov.

Musings: Here and There

Basmati rice is unloaded manually at the grain market.

A Sirsa field worker with her children and goats.

(Tip: To get a better view of the images, click on a photo and it will enlarge and present the others as a slide show.)

Skimming through news of the Islands from thousands of miles and 16 hours distant, it's so sad to hear kanaka crying and see them getting arrested on Mauna Kea to protest yet another telescope on that peak. Hawaiians need more say over what happens to their land, especially the most sacred parts of it.

And it's sad — as in pathetic — to see Babes Against Biotech capitalizing on the 30-meter telescope demonstration, posting video from the mountain with references to “our 31 arrests” and “our kupuna” and “our brothers and sisters,” like the Babes aren't a collection of mainland haole transplants trying to impose their own version of “we know best” colonialism on the Islands.

One of my favorite lines from their Facebook posts: “WOW UH is being really misleading!” Uh, hello...

They were also promoting a crowd funder for bail and legal assistance. Hey, I've got an idea. Instead of vindictively parking the domain names of all the people who call you on your bullshit, why not put that dough toward something useful like bail?

One of their followers, no doubt soon to be barred from their Facebook page, commented:

Did BAB change their mission? I'm confused. Other people probably will be too. Might want to start a separate group for this. Doesn't seem like BAB's kuleana.

Guess it's a little slow in the anti-GMO realm, what with all their bills dead in the Lege and their crappy laws tied up in court, so they have to find something else to do. But then, wherever the cameras are, the Babes — and Dustin Barca — are sure to go.

Which is why he posted this photo with the caption:

Locked and Loaded With Aloha. OUR Aloha for OUR Aina will only Grow in Numbers . This is about the Future of OUR Natural resources for the future of of OUR Keiki and their Keiki From Hilo to Hanalei!! Today was an Honor to be arrested with Aloha Ainā Warriors to Protect OUR sister Mauna Kea. From Wai'ale'ale to Mauna Kea We are united in the Light.

So if it's all about OUR and WE, and neither the Babes nor Dustin are kanaka, whose interests exactly are they promoting?

I also noticed that Jan TenBruggencate had posted a commentary on Civil Beat about pesticides, and how much more likely it is that homeowners will be misusing the stuff than agricultural entities, which are actually trained in their application and have machines that can pinpoint their delivery.

This prompted Theresa Menard, a Hawaiian bat expert, to post a link to a CDC study on “Acute Pesticide Illnesses Associated with Off-Target Pesticide Drift from Agricultural Applications: 11 States, 1998–2006.” She noted that it found:

Common factors contributing to drift cases included weather conditions, improper seal of the fumigation site, and applicator carelessness near nontarget areas. Agricultural workers and residents in agricultural regions had the highest rate of pesticide poisoning from drift exposure, and soil fumigations were a major hazard, causing large drift incidents. Our findings highlight areas where interventions to reduce off-target drift could be focused. Drift included off-target movement of pesticide spray, volatiles, and contaminated dust.

So I checked out the report, which was quite interesting, especially its conclusion, which Theresa apparently missed:

These study findings suggest that the incidence of acute illness from off-target pesticide drift exposure was relatively low during 1998–2006 and that most cases presented with low-severity illness.

Aerial applications were the most frequent method associated with drift events, and soil fumigations were a major cause of large drift events.

Granted, soil fumigation could cause drift from Hawaii fields. But when you consider that they aren't doing aerial applications here, and acute illnesses from drift incidences were relatively low even in places where they are doing aerial spraying, how likely is it that westside residents truly are getting sick and dying from the pesticides used there? Especially when there hasn't been even one case of worker pesticide poisoning in those fields.

Fear mongering, anyone?

Meanwhile, the state has posted data on all the restricted use pesticides sold in each county. Civil Beat took credit for pushing the state to comply with Act 105, without also noting that the data is essentially meaningless, as those of us who opposed this time-wasting bill had predicted.

But Kauai folks should take some comfort in the fact that a total of 15,949 pounds were sold in their county — how did Councilman Gary Hooser ever come up with his claim that the seed companies alone were using 18 tons? — compared to 138,632 pounds on the Big Island, 334,097 in Maui County and 906,890 on Oahu. And the bulk of it was chlorine, used in water and sewage treatment facilities.

While I'm on the topic of pesticides, we interviewed Dr. Gulab Singh Sihag in Sirsa, who said that pesticide poisonings had decreased in the intensively agricultural Punjab region since 1995, due to increased awareness, the use of different chemicals and most importantly, the mechanization of pesticide applications.

And with that, I'll leave you with some more images of life in rural India.

A farmer transports silage for his cows.

A cow snacks at the grain market.

Workers clean mustard seed at the grain market.

Vendors buy veggies from farmers for daily sale at market.

Seed and pesticide shops line the main street.

Another one of the all-purpose farm shops.

Seeds and pesticides are big sellers here.

Bt cotton, India-style.

A water buffalo cruises the vegetable market.

Vendors hire men to hawk veggies throughout town.

Women and men clean basmati rice at the grain market.

Wheat is damaged by unseasonal wind and rain.

Though Punjab farms are largely mechanized, they still require manual labor.

Musings: Pesticides in India

The dogs of India, of which there are many, don't howl like their American counterparts. Instead, their nighttime chorus begins with a sharply anguished aaar-aarp, followed by a deep-throated wail, almost a dirge, that woke me in the night and left me lying there, reflecting on this vast and teeming country.

We are in Sirsa, a farming town about 270 km, or six-hours' drive, north of Delhi, in the Punjab region that is literally India's breadbasket. Fields of wheat, guar, barley and mustard are intermixed with lush rice paddies, vegetables like okra, bittermelon, eggplant (which they call brinjal), peppers, potatoes and cauliflower, fruit orchards, the chick peas that provide protein for the many vegetarian diets.

Broad canals channel the region's many rivers, fed by Himalayan rainfall, into the fields, giving farmers the production boost of irrigation. In many other parts of India, the fields are rainfall dependent, which is always a risky venture, especially in this time of changing climate.

Sirsa is newly prosperous, its residents enriched in large part by the profits of Bt cotton, which rescued a cotton industry that had been so plagued by insect pests, especially bollworm, that an entire field could be destroyed overnight if farmers skipped even a day of spraying pesticides.

Though pesticide applications have been dramatically reduced, some farmers told us they are still paying off the pesticide bills they racked up in the pre-Bt era, a time when farmers were indeed committing suicide because they could not earn enough from their ravaged cotton crops to pay off loans they'd taken out to buy seeds, fertilizer and chemicals.

Pesticides are ubiquitous in Indian farming. Prior to coming to Sirsa, we spent time with farmers in Nadia, outside Kolkata, where they grow rice, vegetables and fruit in a landscape that looks a lot like Hawaii and sell it to wholesalers in bustling roadside markets.

Many of these farmers grow brinjal, a popular Indian vegetable that brings a high price — 20 rupees per kilogram — if it's perfect, and much less — 5 to 6 rupees per kilogram — if it's not. 

So they spray, to make sure their fields survive the devastation of the fruit borer, which sometimes damages 50 percent of the crop.

The farmers begin spraying when the crops are just one inch tall, and admitted that sometimes they spray right up until the day of harvest, even though at least a week should elapse between application and consumption. But they can't risk incurring damage that lowers their profit in that time.

They also spray to control weeks. This farmer is using paraquat as weed control, applying what in America is a restricted use pesticide, with no protective gear and bare feet.

The farmers told us of burning eyes, back pain and even scars from carrying the sprayer, itching skin, trips to the hospital. But given the intensity of the pests, they feel they have no choice, even though they do so many of the things that Westerners think they should: crop rotation, applying micronutrients to the soil, adding animal manure to supplement chemical fertilizer.

"I cannot see my crop die without giving spray,” one farmer told me.

They see Bt brinjal, which has been genetically engineered to resist the fruit borer, as offering them relief from the pest, reduced pesticide use, higher profits. Field trials are currently under way in neighboring Bangladesh, and they are eagerly awaiting the results and hoping that is approved for use in India.

"The farmer has heard the Bt brinjal will lessen the number of sprays," one grower told me. "We are ready to accept it."

Added another: “We're wondering when we the brinjal farmer can grow brinjal successfully with profit. We want the seed.”