Aloha kākou,

After watching more than fifteen hours of testimony provided at three powerful community hearings in Kahuku, Waiʻanae and Wahiawā in late July, I sat down to write my testimony regarding the renewal of the current military leases of state land. As a state representative, I am acutely aware not only that the current governor will be providing the political guidance on this issue that will take us through this lease negotiation process, but also that the legislature will also be engaged in providing oversight and making sure that our communities’ voices are included in decision-making. In my written testimony, I addressed the findings of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) concerning these three critical parcels of land currently under military control, emphasizing the need for significant changes in how these lands are managed and the importance of returning them to the state for the benefit of the Hawaiian people.

Cultural and Environmental Significance The three parcels in question are steeped in cultural significance and ecological value. Each of these areas includes fenced conservation zones vital for protecting endangered species and natural communities. However, military activities, such as low-altitude helicopter training and other exercises, disrupt the sanctity and ecological balance of these lands. The presence of military operations, despite restrictions on more invasive practices like digging or pyrotechnics, continues to undermine the spiritual and environmental integrity of these culturally significant areas.

Inadequacy of Current Use The EIS underscores the importance of these lands for specific military training purposes due to their rugged terrain and dense vegetation. However, the limited scope of training activities—restricted to aerial maneuvers without ground exercises for over a decade—calls into question the necessity of ongoing military retention of these parcels. The state has maintained critical infrastructure, such as hiking trails and conservation areas, which remain underutilized due to the restrictions imposed by military control.

Socioeconomic and Legal Considerations The continued military presence on these state-owned lands, governed by outdated leases from 1964, perpetuates historical injustices against Native Hawaiians. The primary value of these lands lies in their natural and cultural resources, not in their military utility. Returning these lands to state control and placing them in trust for the Hawaiian people would allow for more equitable and beneficial use, fostering community-led conservation and cultural preservation efforts.

Concerns with Proposed Alternatives The EIS presents two main alternatives: full retention and modified retention. Full retention would keep all the land under military control, risking further degradation of cultural and environmental resources. Modified retention would reduce the area under military control but would still permit significant ongoing military activities. While the state’s partial assumption of management responsibilities is a positive step, it does not fully address the broader issue of military occupation of these culturally significant lands.

Environmental Consequences These lands are part of larger, largely undeveloped conservation areas emphasizing their importance for ecological and cultural preservation. The Draft EIS acknowledges the potential for long-term adverse impacts from continued military use, which conflicts with state objectives and public trust purposes. Additionally, these areas offer scenic views and recreational opportunities that are currently restricted by military control, further highlighting the need for change.

Analysis of Cumulative Impacts The DEIS’s cumulative impact analysis is inadequate due to its limited scope, failing to fully integrate the impacts of both state and federal land use. This segmentation prevents a comprehensive understanding of the broader environmental and cultural effects. Moreover, the DEIS does not adequately address the cleanup and contamination issues that could arise post-lease, nor does it sufficiently assess the cultural impacts on Native Hawaiians, particularly the long-term loss of land and cultural disconnection.

Recommendations

Terminate Military Leases: End all military leases at the three parcels upon expiration, with no extensions or renewals. This action is essential to restoring the land to its rightful custodians and aligning with the public trust doctrine.

Transfer to State Trust: Return these lands to state control, managing them in trust for the benefit of Native Hawaiians. This transfer would honor historical and cultural commitments and facilitate community-led stewardship.

Environmental Restoration: Hold the military accountable for environmental remediation, including restoring native habitats and ensuring clean water resources.

Cultural and Community Engagement: Involve Native Hawaiian communities in the planning and management of these lands, ensuring that traditional practices and cultural heritage are preserved and promoted.

Conclusion The Draft EIS highlights the urgent need for a paradigm shift in land management that prioritizes cultural preservation, environmenta protection, and socioeconomic equity across these three parcels. Ending military leases and returning these lands to state trust will honor their true value and foster a sustainable future for Hawai‘i and its people. The recommendations I provided in my testimony arose from analysis of the Draft EIS and community response to the document in community hearings. We need to provide a path forward that respects the cultural, environmental, and economic needs of the Hawaiian community, ensuring that these lands remain cherished and protected for generations to come.

As always, if you have questions, issues or concerns, or feedback on my written testimony, please do not hesitate to reach out to our office at (808) 586-6700 or my cell at (808) 351-0980.
Mahalo,
Representative Amy Perruso, HD 46