There is another perspective on the proposed amendment to the state Endangered Species Act (HB 1292) that needs to be presented. The position taken by some environmentalists in their recent media blitz to drum up support for a veto by the governor is short-sighted, self-serving and will not save any endangered species on private land. Let's call a truce
in war over endangered speciesEnvironmentalists and private landowners
must cooperate to save Hawaii's rare wildlifeThe bottom line should be: How can we best save endangered species? In Hawaii, 50 percent of endangered species inhabit private land. Nationally, the figure is 70 percent. The parties mandated to carry out the recovery of endangered species, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and state Department of Land and Natural Resources, have come to realize that after 25 years, the Endangered Species Act (ESA) is not working. They also realize that the cooperation of the private landowner is essential in order to save endangered species.
This can best be accomplished by cooperation rather than antagonism. We can best save endangered species by working with private landowners and by removing all threats to their livelihood. But cooperation will remain merely a dream as long as the right to sue remains in the picture.
HB 1292 is not a "koa-cutting bill," a "large landowner bill" or a weakening of the current Endangered Species Act. Its goal is to encourage private landowners to voluntarily protect endangered species on their land by minimizing threats and creating assurances and incentives. Private landowners are in a Catch-22 situation. The more time, energy and money put into their forests for protection, enhancement or to maintain a sustainable forest economy, the greater the potential for jeopardizing their livelihoods under the present ESA. On private land, conservation happens after the bills are paid.
Habitat Conservation Plans are partnerships between the DLNR, USFWS and private landowners. They provide the opportunity for enhancement and protection of endangered species habitats while allowing the private landowner to continue approved economic activities. The biggest complaint from the environmental groups is that Habitat Conservation Plans shield the private landowner from lawsuits.
This is a big problem for the Sierra Club Legal Defense fund because it is a legal agency and its job is to sue. Hawaii's ESA has enabled these environmentalists to dictate to the DLNR, through lawsuits, how they feel conservation needs to be carried out on private land.
The Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund and Audubon Society don't manage land. They know more about the workings of the Legislature than the workings of a forest. They don't wrestle with difficult land use issues or the economics. They aren't interested in cooperation, partnerships or win-win situations. They want it their way or they sue.
The DLNR, the USFWS, the Nature Conservancy and private landowners are working on and with the land. They are getting their hands dirty. They plant trees, kill rats and mongooses, build fences, control weeds, prevent/fight fires, etc.; they are all struggling, learning, applying. They are trying to communicate and form partnerships in the name of conservation.
This is an extremely difficult task and it needs all of the help and cooperation available. Other environmentalists seem to feel that it is their job to sit on the sidelines, as intellectual "experts" rather than experiential experts and dictate policy to those of us who have been on the ground practicing conservation for many years.
History has shown that we have everything to lose by conducting business as usual. We have nothing to lose by trying something different. If there is a flaw in HB 1292, it is that it does not go far enough with assurances and incentives. Lawsuits and threats are not going to save endangered species. It is critical to endangered species that we use the carrot, not the stick; help, not threats; cooperation and not war.
Keith F. Unger is manager of McCandless Ranch
in Honaunau, Hawaii. The opinions in View Point columns are
the authors' and are not necessarily shared by the Star-Bulletin.