WDUP needs more work before adopting a final amended version

Water is life. As it stands, the Draft WDP still does not provide adequate data or clarity to move forward as a an operational plan. Therefore, the Plan is not yet providing a sustainable, balanced solution to the uses of these waters. In fact, it seems to be protecting certain interests. which is easier to do without the right kind of data.
The reality of climate change, growing populations are changing the world. Maui can be in leadership by taking the time/effort to Draft a Plan that will actually be of use in the future.
Groundwater is an interconnected system, not a static pool. That water moves; it affects and is affected by uses and changes elsewhere in the system. I live on Baldwin Ave., near it’s intersection with Hali’imaile. The area is developing very rapidly with Mahi Pono and housing developments. Wells are being dug and Maui Pono is creating massive irrigation systems (as Dust storms thicker than cane smoke block visibility, I’m reminded of the Oglala Aquifer and the “Okies.”).

I worked assessing outcomes of water development overseas and can report first-hand the stark, sterile land that resulted after 10 years or so of projects/plans that were hastily produced and implemented. For a while, big agricultural users (also industrial users) did produce impressive yields. But gradually water quality and quantity degraded beyond repair.
Please do the work required, or risk ruining Maui’s vital resource of water in all it’s uses (to name a few: clean drinking water, cultural uses, agriculture, beer-brewing, conservation and wetlands uses …). There are other good points that residents make when saying the Plan is not ready, with however I am not experienced in those area.

Instead of passing amended final, could folks come together to make an action plan and schedule for completing the work necessary for a sustainable Plan?

Many thanks,
Diane Minogue, Ph.D.
Makawao HI

Testimonies received from APT Committee.

Mahalo, but Ha’iku residents still feel left out.

1. Who knows what changes were made?
No one understands or can find what amendments were proposed. A summary of changes in layman style language should be created and sent to newspapers etc. The Plan should not pass out of Committee until that happens

2. Haiku wells still assumed to have no impacts, BEFORE any studies done.
The language in the plan STILL assumes that the Ha’iku aquifer can supply the rest of Central Maui with nine million gallons of wells water day with no impacts to Haiku streams, no impacts to existing family wells and springs in Haiku; no impacts to cultural users and no impacts to the nearshore marine environment and limu and fishes. The Plan language needs to truthfully say that there are uncertainties. Haiku Community Association asked for these changes and were rejected.

3. Clear input from Aha Moku Councils not seen in Plan:
Cultural users did not agree that there are no impacts from large wells. Aha Moku reps told committee staff: there is “no mitigation” for the natural underground water flows lost to the limu and the fishes from large wells pumping. Studies of shoreline resources not mentioned in WUDP as needed for Ha’iku wells.

4. Need clear language about Ha’iku streams being restored.
People want to know: Where in the water plan does it specifically say that Haiku streams should be studied and new stream flows set? The Hana aquifer section (Table 17-38) has specific wording: “The Commission on Water Resource Management to establish Instream Flow Standards on a stream-by-stream basis to protect the public interests of the Hāna aquifer sector.”

5. Haiku stream water is assumed in Plan to all “belong” to EMI/Mahi Pono
The Ko’olau Sector of the plan (“Haiku to Nahiku”) never mentions restoring Haiku streams. In fact, there’s a chart in the Water Plan (Table 15-35) that says all 8 mgd of flow from Ha’iku streams goes to EMI/Mahi Pono. Update that table! Let Ha’iku farmers have water to grow food.

Thank you,

Jennifer Valentine

Aloha Chair and Committee members,

Here we are again, asking for a user friendly summary of the updates that have been asked for and not yet received. Important questions have been raised by many community members who will be most affected by the 30 year water lease that Mahi Pono is asking for. There are streams that have gone dry in the last several months by E. Kuiaha and W. Kuiaha that were perennial streams. Even in drought years. Maliko stream has been dry as well except in extreme rain events. Where is the information regarding if these streams have had in flow standards set?
These streams run through farms and they replenish aquifers and support all kinds of stream and coastal tide pool life. When the water stops flowing the stream beds become choked with invasive species and garbage that’ll block the streams in extreme rain events like we had last March. I have contacted Mahi Pono and the Water Dept via email asking about the stream in the Huluhulu gulch behind my home and have not had the courtesy of a response. This stream has flowed the last 8 years, year round and now it is bone dry.
I’m concerned that no one is monitoring these streams in Ha’ikū? Does Mahi Pono get to divert any stream they chose with out consequences to the health of the the ecology and farmers that depends on that source of water without discussion?

I’m very concerned that Mahi Pono may be restoring minimal water flow in the identified streams in E. Maui but help themselves to water from streams in Huleo and Ha’ikū.

Besides this serious issue, there are other issues like consulting with the Kanaka that depend on these streams for farming and cultural practices, supporting upcountry water meter wait lists and outdated information. Where does it address Climate Change, water shortages and the aquifer recharge?
It has failed to follow the requirements of the Consent Decree from 2003 like conducting a rigorous Cost/Benefit analysis, a test well dug in E. Maui region to determine whether developing additional wells in the region might adversely impact stream flows.
The conditions outlines in the Consent decree must be fulfilled before WUDP is approved. This needs to be in a reader friendly format with current data, not outdated info pulled from the original E. Maui Plan.
Please do not approve this without the information addressing all the streams in Huleo and Ha’ikū, including in stream flow standards and all the other concerns brought to you today.
It is not ready

Mahalo,
Barbara Barry
W. Kuiaha Rd
Ha'ikū
Photos available of dry stream bed from Ha’ikū bridge.

Aloha kakou members of the Ag and Public Trust (APT) committee,

I, Dana Keawe, a resident of Hawai'i island am asking that you DO NOT adopt or finalize the amended WUDP and am strongly opposed to finalizing the amended WUDP until the follow points are addresses and resolved first.

1. No one understands or can find what amendments were proposed. A summary of changes in layman style language should be created and sent to newspapers etc. The Plan should not pass out of Committee until that happens

2. Haiku wells still assumed to have no impacts, BEFORE any studies done.
The language in the plan STILL assumes that the Ha’iku aquifer can supply the rest of Central Maui with nine million gallons of wells water day with no impacts to Haiku streams, no impacts to existing family wells and springs in Haiku; no impacts to cultural users and no impacts to the nearshore marine environment and limu and fishes. The Plan language needs to truthfully say that there are uncertainties. Haiku Community Association asked for these changes and were rejected.

3. Clear input from Aha Moku Councils not seen in Plan:
Cultural users did not agree that there are no impacts from large wells. Aha Moku reps told committee staff: there is “no mitigation” for the natural underground water flows lost to the limu and the fishes from large wells pumping. Studies of shoreline resources not mentioned in WUDP as needed for Ha’iku wells.

4. Need clear language about Ha’iku streams being restored.
People want to know: Where in the water plan does it specifically say that Haiku streams should be studied and new stream flows set? The Hana aquifer section (Table 17-38) has specific wording: “The Commission on Water Resource Management to establish Instream Flow Standards on a stream-by-stream basis to protect the public interests of the Hāna aquifer sector.”

5. Haiku stream water is assumed in Plan to all “belong” to EMI/Mahi Pono
The Ko’olau Sector of the plan (“Haiku to Nahiku”) never mentions restoring Haiku streams. In fact, there’s a chart in the Water Plan (Table 15-35) that says all 8 mgd of flow from Ha’iku streams goes to EMI/Mahi Pono. Please update that table ASAP! Let Ha’iku farmers have water to grow food.

Committee members, until ALL of these 5 extremely important points and concerns are addressed and resolved, PLEASE DO NOT FINALIZE the amended WUDP. I am in opposition to the amended WUDP be finalized on 11/16/2021. Please do the right thing and postpone finalizing the amended WUDP until all these important points and concerns are addressed.

Sincerely,

Dana Keawe

Aloha Chair Sinenci and Members of the Agriculture and Public Trust Committee:

My name is Shay Chan Hodges and I am respectfully requesting that you delay a vote on the revised Maui Island Water Use and Development Plan until a summary is available to the public that makes it clear what items have been changed in the draft WUDP and in what way.

As you may remember, almost exactly a year ago today, I and many other members of the public testified before the joint WIT and EACP committees, asking for an extension on approval of the WUDP to ensure that the plan that is ultimately approved is accurate and comprehensible by the general public.

What I specifically said then was:

Understanding the complexity of our aquifers, our water systems, the ownership structures, the variety of uses, the history, and more is not easy. But it is crucial. While most residents will never become experts on Maui’s water – I don’t think I ever will – in order to be able to weigh in and safeguard their interests, they need to understand the basics and they need to have access to reliable and accurate data.

That’s why it is so important that any Water Use and Development Plan that is approved by the Council be usable by the general public – and by that I mean that it 1) includes accurate data, 2) reflects the issues that are of concern to the community, and 3) be easily understandable.

We need to take the time to make sure this happens.

The deadline to complete revisions to the WUDP was extended at that November 16, 2020 meeting – and I believe it’s been extended again since.

I so appreciate this committee’s work to improve the WUDP, and in particular, for taking so much time to listen to the public’s concerns. I also appreciate the hard-working community members who have testified at multiple meetings to explain the problems in the draft WUDP. And I want to thank the staff and members of the administration who have put in the work to address the issues raised.

Unfortunately, it is currently unclear what the final changes look like and how issues have been addressed. As an example, I testified on inclusion of the County’s interest in purchasing Wailuku Water Company and the Board of Water Supply’s recommendations thereof. I also testified about including the BWS’ Temporary Investigative Group report regarding a county purchase of the East Maui Irrigation system in the WUDP. I am not clear whether anything about the potential Wailuku Water Company purchase has been included in the final version and I believe the summary approved by the BWS has been included, but I can’t tell where or how it’s been included.

There are many other concerns raised by community members, but until we see a final summary of changes, residents cannot provide their input in an effective manner.
I therefore ask you to delay a vote on approval by at least two weeks so that the community has time to thoroughly review the revisions that this committee has worked so hard on.
Mahalo.
--Shay Chan Hodges, Haiku, Maui

Aloha to the Council's Ag and Public Trust Committee,

Thank you all for your hard work done on the WUDP so far. However, there are still some issues that need to be addressed and/or corrected before it is adopted.

Table 15-35 states that all water from Ha`iku streams belongs to EMI/Mahi Pono, in direct contradiction to the Hana aquifer section (Table 17-38) with this specific wording: “The Commission on Water Resource Management to establish Instream Flow Standards on a stream-by-stream basis to protect the public interests of the Hāna aquifer sector.” I live in Ha`iku and I want to know that Ha`iku streams will be studied and new stream flows set, so that Ha`iku farmers will have water for their crops.

The plan assumes that there will be no adverse results from Ha`iku wells, when there have been no studies to determine this assumption. The plan needs to clearly state that there may in fact be issues with wells in Ha`iku adversely affecting family wells and spring water, stream flow, and the nearshore marine environment, specifically limu and fishes.

In addition, no one understands or can find what amendments were proposed in this plan. A summary of the changes in layman style language should be created and sent to newspapers etc. The plan should not pass out of Committee until that happens.

Mahalo,

Jennifer Owen

1051 Kokomo Rd

Ha`iku, HI 96708

808-575-2523