HAIKU -- During an often highly emotional public meeting late last week on a petition seeking the return of sugar company-controlled water to five perennial streams in East Maui, Native Hawaiian taro farmers made it clear again and again that they need more water to grow their staple crop.
The crowd of more than 100 people, most of whom were Native Hawaiians with farmland, attended the meeting Thursday night before staff members of the state Commission on Water Resource Management at the Haiku Community Center.
The meeting was in response to a petition filed on behalf of local taro farmers seven years ago by the Native Hawaiian Legal Corp. Commission Deputy Director Ken Kawahara said the commission has not had the people or resources to hear the case to restore an undetermined amount of water to Honopou, Hanehoi, Piinaau, Waiokamilo and Wailuanui streams.
The petitioners said they actually want to see 27 streams restored. Because most of the streams have been diverted by East Maui Irrigation Co. mauka of Hana Highway, the natural water channels have been left as empty gulches that fill only during downpours.
Returning water won’t benefit just taro farmers, proponents said. It will also breathe life into the forests and fauna and help resurrect Maui’s ailing fish populations and reefs.
It was never made clear during the nearly four-hour meeting how much water — even at a minimum — could be returned to restore the streams and taro patches to good health. Kawahara said the issue requires more study.
The staff is accepting comments for a report to the commission, which is a separate entity within the state Department of Land and Natural Resources.
The deadline for written comments is June 10, and Kawahara said he expects the report to be completed soon after. Then, the commission will hold public hearings on the matter before rendering its final decision, he said.
About two dozen people spoke out against Alexander & Baldwin’s 130-year practice of catching and collecting surface water from the mountains before it reaches what taro farmers remain below Hana Highway. Many said they took offense that commission board members did not attend the meeting.
Former DLNR officer Charles Villalon said the land is drying and cracking up without water.
“It’s crying for water,” he said.
Since 1878, A&B and its subsidiary East Maui Irrigation have used 74 miles of ditches, flumes, tunnels and siphons to feed sugar cane fields for Hawaiian Commercial & Sugar Co., which is also owed by A&B.
A&B asserts that it provides jobs and tax dollars for residents as well as water for one in five people on the island through Maui County.
Taro farmer Carl Wendt called EMI “evil” and accused the company of cultural genocide.
“There’s nothing in the streams,” Wendt said. “They look like barren rock beds. Give the water back and give the Native Hawaiians their culture back.”
Native Hawaiian activist and cultural specialist Charles Kauluwehi Maxwell Sr. said that however A&B got the water; it was stolen.
Testifiers repeatedly accused A&B of “banking” the water or holding onto it until the sugar business goes belly up and the company can develop its land for homes and shopping malls.
“They have 35,000 acres of land in active (sugar cane) production on more than 43,000 acres in Central Maui that would be worthless without water,” said Native Hawaiian Legal Corp. attorney Moses Haia in an interview. “The way I see it; they are an openly traded company that has to justify itself to its stockholders and provide profit margins. I’m not an economist, but I have some common sense, and I am a realist. And 35,000 acres can become a gold mine on Maui, but not without water.”
Representatives of East Maui Irrigation and A&B attended the meeting, but did not testify.
“We flatly deny this assertion,” said EMI Manager Garret Hew in an e-mailed written statement Saturday responding to residents’ charges that A&B has been land and water banking. “We have repeatedly committed during the state lease process that we would use the water only for agricultural purposes. If not, the water would return to the state.”
In 2000, the Hawaii Supreme Court decided in favor of returning water that was diverted from the Waiahole ditch on Oahu since the 1920s to supply sugar crops. However, both sides acknowledge that there are differences between the Oahu and East Maui cases. On Oahu, for example, the sugar plantations disappeared by the 1990s while Maui’s HC&S operations are ongoing.
Haia said that he believes the Waiahole case strengthens the Maui taro farmers’ position here. But he also complained that A&B Vice President Meredith Ching sits on the state Commission on Water Resource Management. Even if she recuses herself, Ching’s influence will still be felt, he said.
“HC&S will say, ‘Look at the jobs and what we’re creating and doing for the community,”‘ said Haia, who is based in Honolulu. “But they pay only one-fifth of a cent per 1,000 gallons of water. You can’t get past the fact that they’re getting a sweet deal here.”
The petitioners claim that A&B uses an average of 160 million gallons of water a day in East Maui and as much as 234 million gallons per day in the dry summer months.
A&B also provides the county with about 8 million to 12 million gallons a day for Upcountry residents. The petition does not challenge the county’s rights to the water.
“What we have a problem with is A&B never justifying exactly how much water they are using,” Haia said.
He said the petitioners want to know much water the company is using per acre, per day. They also want the company to break down water use figures for the public to show how the resource is used. Haia said the petitioners know A&B also has access to wells, but accused the company of not using the wells in order avoid the electrical costs of pumping.
Some testifiers accused the state of outright racism, since much of the land is ceded Hawaiian royal land held in trust. The state is afraid of setting a precedent that favors Native Hawaiian rights to these incredibly valuable lands, Haia said.
Wailuku attorney Isaac Hall said the state and commission have chosen to ignore the state law that requires the sharing of water resources for more than 100 years.
“They could fix this tomorrow,” Hall said. “The jig is up. This equates to environmental and social injustice.”
Drafts of the instream flow standard assessment reports can be found online at www.hawaii.gov/dlnr/cwrm/ or at the public libraries in Hana, Kahului and Wailuku.
Public comments can be sent to the Commission of Water Resource Management, state Department of Land and Natural Resources, P.O. Box 621, Honolulu 96809 or send e-mail to dlnr.cwrm@hawaii.gov.
• Chris Hamilton can be reached at chamilton@mauinews.com.
