Retailers of products made out of endangered species have one year to purge their inventory before the sales are banned.
Originally published by Civil Beat; click here to read the article on civilbeat.org.
June 30, 2016
By Courtney Teague
After a battle at the Capitol spanning three years, Gov. David Ige has signed into law Act 125, which will prohibit the sale of many wildlife products.
Hawaii legislators have been trying to pass law to ban most ivory sales since 2013. Even this year, the bill faced opposition during a Senate floor vote.
Investigations found Hawaii has the nation's third-largest ivory market behind New York and California, respectively.
But both New York and California passed legislation restricting ivory sales before Hawaii. Combined with a thriving online black market worth more than $1.2 million, some feared Hawaii was poised to take over as the nation's largest ivory market.
Act 125 will prohibit sales of a wider range of wildlife products, tailored specifically to Hawaii's economy and local species. In addition to banning most sales of ivory, Hawaii's law bans the sale of other species including endangered shark, turtle and ray products.
State Sen. Mike Gabbard, who introduced this year's ivory bill and is chair of the Senate's Water, Land and Agriculture Committee, recalled a 2013 incident where 300 elephants were killed in Africa by cyanide that poachers placed in water holes.
The "heartbreaking" images underscored the importance for Hawaii, considered by some to be the endangered species capital of the world, to join four states – New York, California, New Jersey and Washington – that have enacted laws to ban ivory sales, he said.
"This whole thing is so barbaric," Gabbard said.
Hawaii's law is unique because it identifies numerous land and marine animal species protected under law, he said. The bill had widespread support from national and international groups, Gabbard said.
How does he feel to see the bill to become law?
"Hallelujah," he said. "I'm just really stoked."
There are some exceptions made for ivory sales. Items at least 100 years old or composed of less than 20 percent animal product are allowed. Wildlife products used for Native Hawaiian cultural practices and educational or scientific purposes are also permitted.
The law will take effect June 30, 2017, to allow retailers time to rid their inventory legally of ivory and wildlife products.
The Departments of Land and Natural Resources and the Attorney General supported the measure.
During the legislative session, crafts people, jewelers and small business owners argued the ban would make it difficult to feed their families. The National Rifle Association also opposed the bill, arguing weapon owners with items partially made of ivory would be affected.
But Act 125 will only prohibit the sale of weapons with more than 20 percent composition of ivory, not the possession.
Just days after the bill became law, Curtis Wilmington, president and CEO of Hawaiian Accessories, was sentenced to six months of jail time Tuesday for conspiracy to smuggle wildlife to traffic ivory, bone and coral carvings.
Wilmington was fined $40,000 and lost about $100,000 in ivory and black coral items, according to a U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service press release. Hawaiian Accessories was sentenced to five years probation and fined $50,000.
States like Hawaii are loosening restrictions on industrial hemp, but the real breakthrough could come at the federal level.
Originally published by Civil Beat; click here to read the article on civilbeat.org.
June 22, 2016
By Chad Blair
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Sitting on the wide green lawn that separates the U.S. Capitol and the Supreme Court building, Eric Steenstra handed over a pocket-size copy of the U.S. Constitution made from hemp paper.
"Tree-free hemp-blended paper," to be exact, and made in America.
Steenstra is president of Vote Hemp, a single-issue nonprofit founded in 2000 to remove barriers to industrial hemp farming in the United States. Vote Hemp is perhaps the leading organization dedicated to changing hemp laws, helped by nationwide grassroots networking and its location in the Washington, D.C., area.
"Check it out," Steenstra said, indicating the Constitution.
In addition to the familiar text (the one that begins, "We the People of the United States ...") the inside cover includes quotes from the first three U.S. presidents extolling hemp's virtues.
"Make the most you can of the Indian Hemp seed and sow it everywhere," said George Washington, who cultivated hemp at nearby Mount Vernon his entire life for industrial purposes — for fibers to make rope, sailing canvas, clothing and fishing nets.
"Hemp is the first necessity to the wealth and protection of the country," said fellow agronomist Thomas Jefferson.
But hemp cannot be commercially produced legally in the United States, even though U.S. hemp-based products accounted for about $600 million in sales in 2015. Instead, it must be imported from Canada, Europe, Asia and elsewhere at the cost of about $76 million, according to U.S. senators such as Jeff Merkley, D-Ore.
That's because hemp is part of the cannabis plant, which produces marijuana, which is a forbidden drug at the federal level akin to heroin, LSD, Ecstasy and peyote.
But hemp won't get you high. As a hemp advocate told The Marijuana Times earlier this year, "You can smoke all 3 acres of my hemp farm and your lungs would give out before getting high."
Hemp contains less than .3 percent tetrahydrocannabinol — THC — the ingredient in pot that gets you buzzed. Even though they are from the same plant, hemp and marijuana are genetically different and are cultivated differently.
If advocates like Steenstra are successful, hemp's federal status could soon be changing.
From Hawaii To Kentucky
Twenty-nine states, including Hawaii, have moved to define industrial hemp as distinct from marijuana and removed barriers to production.
Legislation establishing an industrial hemp pilot program to allow its cultivation and distribution of its seed in Hawaii for research purposes unanimously passed the Legislature last month and awaits Gov. David Ige's signature.
At the federal level, 70 members of the U.S. House of Representatives (including Democrats Tulsi Gabbard and Mark Takai from Hawaii) and 14 members of the U.S. Senate (including Democrats Mazie Hirono and Brian Schatz from Hawaii) are backing versions of an Industrial Hemp Farming Act.
The legislation would remove hemp from the Schedule I controlled substance list and define it as a non-drug so long as it contains less than .3 percent THC.
While political polarization has perhaps never been greater in D.C., the legislation is co-sponsored by Majority Leader Mitch McConnell in the Senate and Rep. Thomas Massie in the House. Both are Republicans and both hail from Kentucky, which is among the states most focused on developing industrial hemp.
"Mitch McConnell was not in favor of hemp five years ago, but he has really come around and changed his view," said Steenstra, who lobbies on Capitol Hill. "He's a true champion."
Steenstra credits McConnell's fellow GOP senator, Rand Paul, and James Comer, Kentucky's former agriculture commissioner who this year is a GOP candidate for Congress, for persuading McConnell to embrace hemp.
"Kentucky has a unique, historic hemp crop, and Comer saw that they could create a lot of jobs and help farming and manufacturing in the state," said Steenstra.
Meanwhile, the Hemp Industries Association — a nonprofit trade group representing businesses, farmers researchers and investors — and allies earlier this month filed a petition with the Drug Enforcement Administration to remove industrial hemp plants from the schedules established under the Controlled Substances Act of 1970.
Steenstra says changing the federal designation for hemp is critical, and it's something that the DEA can do on its own.
"But to fix this, to really solve it, we need Congress to step in," he said.
10,000 Years Of Hemp
Hemp, according to the Hemp Industries Association, "is among the oldest industries on the planet, going back more than 10,000 years to the beginnings of pottery." In addition to Washington and Jefferson growing hemp, farmers were legally required to grow it during the colonial period and into the republic for economic purposes.
"We shall, by and by, want a world of hemp more for our own consumption," said John Adams.
But in 1937, Congress passed the Marihuana Tax Act (yes, spelled with an "h" instead of a "j"), which began the era of hemp prohibition. A brief respite came during World War II, when the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor cut off hemp fiber supplies from the Philippines.
To understand that period, Steenstra encourages folks to watch a short film called "Hemp For Victory," which was shown during the war to encourage U.S. farmers to grow hemp for the war effort.
What's so great about hemp? Vote Hemp and the Hemp Industries Association identify a number of attributes:
• "Hemp is a renewable resource that can help reduce market dependency on synthetics, lumber, cotton and other non-sustainable industrial materials.
• "Hemp contributes to environmentally responsible food and fiber production, forest conservation, reduction in agricultural pesticide use, and soil remediation.
• "Hemp sequesters carbon from the atmosphere thus mitigating the rise of CO2 levels responsible for climate change.
• "Hemp seed products are among the fastest-growing categories in the natural foods industry and are rich in healthy Omega-3 essential fatty acids, highly-digestible protein and naturally occurring vitamins and minerals, such as vitamin E and iron."
There are also a lot of myths the industrial hemp folks aim to dispel. Here's one example:
Myth: Legalizing hemp while continuing the prohibition on marijuana would burden local police forces.
Reality: In countries where hemp is grown as an agricultural crop, the police have experienced no such burdens.
Hemp's chances to become a viable U.S. crop again changed dramatically two years ago, when Congress passed the 2014 Farm Bill. An amendment to the bill defined industrial hemp as distinct from the cannabis sativa L. — that is, stating that industrial hemp is not psychoactive.
The Farm Bill allowed for states that have already legalized the crop to cultivate hemp "within the parameters" of state agriculture departments and research institutions.
In Hawaii, state Rep. Cynthia Thielen, a Republican, and state Sen. Mike Gabbard, a Democrat, spearheaded the hemp pilot project legislation that now awaits the governor's action. If signed into law, it would appropriate funds for administrative costs within the state's Department of Agriculture.
In its committee report on the bill, lawmakers wrote:
Industrial hemp is well suited to Hawaii's climate and soil and can grow to over ten feet in a short period of time with little water and no pesticides. ... Industrial hemp has over 25,000 uses, including food, fiber, and fuel products, and has high potential to contribute to the future viability of the State's agricultural industry.
The bill has many supporters, including the DOA, the University of Hawaii System and the Hawaii Farm Bureau. And, though it is set to expire in 2021, lawmakers could extend the sunset date, depending on what happens nationally.
Steenstra noted that he was being interviewed during Hemp History Week (June 6-11). The Senate passed a bipartisan resolution to that effect to boost the nation's agricultural industry and economy.
Lauren Stansbury, spokesperson for Hemp History Week, handed over a bag full of hemp swag like Dr. Bronner's Pure-Castile Soap (the label reads, "let us be generous, fair and loving to Spaceship Earth"), Natierra's Dark Chocolate Hemp Seeds ("a superfood snack") and Living Harvest Hemp Milk ("Non GMO Project Verified").
Steenstra then pulled out another booklet printed on tree-free hemp-blended paper. It was titled "Hemp," and it contained the research of Lyster Dewey, the lead botanist for fiber plant investigations, part of the federal Bureau of Plant Industry back in 1913. Dewey grew and studied hemp, and his test plots were on Arlington Farms, where the Pentagon now stands.
Steenstra's point was that Washington once led the way on hemp and it can lead the way again. And he credits Hawaii's lawmakers, too, noting that Alexander & Baldwin has talked about growing industrial hemp on its former sugar cane lands in Central Maui.
"It's really an incredibly sustainable and versatile crop, and I have no doubt that if Congress and the states remove restrictions and allow it to farm and grow hemp commercially, we will see hemp become one of our major commodity groups in the U.S."
Originally published by Lahaina News; click here to read the article on lahainanews.com.
June 16, 2016
By Cindy Schumacher, Lahaina News
WEST MAUI - On Friday, June 3, a special charter hosted by Trilogy Excursions, affectionately dubbed the "Boatload of Decision Makers," departed from Lahaina Harbor with a passenger list that included local business leaders, State House and Senate lawmakers, state and county officials, nonprofit representatives, state and community resource managers, and cultural practitioners.
Brought together by partners within the West Maui Ridge to Reef Initiative, the event provided a unique educational platform along with the opportunity to experience Maui's reefs firsthand with an array of experts.
"Having state legislators, county officials and potential policymakers assembled for a first-hand look at our fragile marine ecosystem is important," said Sol Kaho‘ohalahala of the Maunalei Ahupua‘a Community Managed Makai Area, who presented the pule at the beginning of the charter.
"It is important that they see mauka-makai as a single unit reliant on each other for good health, resilience and abundance, not separated by political jurisdictions. It is vitally important that we deepen our collective efforts for the betterment of our ocean, islands and home."
Liz Foote, executive director of Project S.E.A.-Link, added, "The value of an experience like this is not just having the chance to see firsthand what's happening to our reefs, but to engage with one another and explore solutions. This event helped us move forward collaboratively, with a more hopeful and optimistic message, to address the threats to reefs."
Mike Gabbard, Senate Land, Water and Agriculture Committee chair, and Ryan Yamane, House Water and Land Committee chair, said that it's important for lawmakers to take the time to get away from the capitol, to see first-hand how land-based pollutants and unsustainable fishing practices are killing coral reefs.
"We need to make sure other policymakers, our colleagues, are aware of the situation and that they understand what is happening," added Sen. Gabbard. "I would love to get all lawmakers out here, as we are not doing enough to protect reefs, the foundation of our ocean. We need to put our money where our mouth is!"
Rep. Yamane was struck to see how runoff and land-based contaminants are killing reefs, thus diminishing fish and aquatic life populations.
"It saddens me that we have these places dying off in our ocean so close to home," he said. "We, as a state, need to take a more active role in protecting these coral colonies. I'd like to see a balance of not only building roads for cars, but let's also build reefs so our fish and aquatic life can thrive."
Local threats to reefs include land-based pollution and unsustainable fishing practices. Global threats include these as well as warming ocean temperatures, all of which stress corals and lead to coral bleaching, disease and ocean acidification.
Five watersheds within West Maui have been designated by the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force as priority watershed areas for reef stewardship. The West Maui Ridge to Reef Initiative and West Maui Kumuwai Campaign are efforts aimed at reducing the impacts of land-based pollution to our near shore reefs.
Attendees onboard the Trilogy Excursions catamaran were briefed with numerous presentations and interpretive materials about the reefs. However, trading in their business suits for swimsuits, the highlight of the day was snorkeling on two reefs, Kahekili and Olowalu, in West Maui.
These reefs were chosen because of the differing stories they tell, both cautionary and hopeful.
"Seeing the reefs up close shows the habitats' health and threats to their ecosystems," said Darla White, Division of Aquatic Resources special project coordinator, who led the two in-water tours of the sites. "It is an opportunity to understand what it takes to ensure that the reefs thrive for generations to come."
"In the past seven years, we have seen a surprising amount of early success reflected in the increases in the herbivorous fish population plus habitats showing signs of resilience," White explained. "We were excited to share this data with those on board."
"Olowalu is a unique reef in that it is the largest reef on Maui that comes up to the shoreline with massive coral colonies estimated to be hundreds of years old," White said. "Data from the U.S. Geological Survey indicate that this reef is seeding the reefs of West Maui, Molokai and Lanai, and has been coined the 'Mother Reef.' "
Both Kahekili and Olowalu reefs have a variety of human stressors, and both suffered from the bleaching event last year to different degrees. The group onboard the Trilogy vessel shared an engaging dialogue about the many ways that the public can help our reefs to be resilient to ensure their longevity.
"The take-home message," White concluded, "is that we need to reduce the local stressors, the things we can control, in order to help reefs to be as healthy and resilient as they can possibly be, so that they can deal with the global stressors. Hopefully, we can all do our part to help the reefs adapt to the environmental changes that are coming and to ensure their longevity for future generations."
For those looking to learn more and get involved in reef stewardship in West Maui, a community event known as the "Ridge to Reef Rendezvous" will be held on Saturday, July 23, from 9 a.m. to noon at Kahekili Beach Park in Kaanapali. For more information, visit www.WestMauiKumuwai.org.
The Thirty Meter Telescope dispute may become one of many to gain access to an expedited appeal process that should still safeguard litigants and the public.
Originally published by Civil Beat; click here to read the editorial on civilbeat.com.
May 13, 2016
By The Civil Beat Editorial Board
Gov. David Ige quietly signed into law Wednesday what might be the legal equivalent of a zipper lane for the contested-case-hearing process that is about to open for the Thirty Meter Telescope project.
House Bill 1581 doesn't change the mechanics of the TMT hearing, soon to be conducted by Judge Riki May Amano, whose appointment was unanimously approved last Friday by the Board of Land and Natural Resources.
But if any party to a state contested-case hearing appeals a ruling, HB 1581 lets that appeal bypass appellate courts and go directly to the Hawaii Supreme Court. That could shave months, even years, off a potential resolution. Once at the high court, the case would be given priority status by justices if it were deemed to be of "significant statewide importance."
There seems little doubt that the TMT matter, involving a conservation district atop a mountain considered sacred by many Native Hawaiians, and the needs of the scientific community in this state and around the world, would meet that requirement.
The changes in the law would go into effect Aug. 1 for contested-case hearings before the commissions on Water Resource Management, Land Use, Public Utilities, the Hawaii Community Development Authority and cases involving conservation districts. Those changes seem both appropriate and desirable, in our reading of the legislation.
All parties in contested-case hearings should welcome streamlining the typically long waiting periods for such matters, owing to busy dockets and the plodding pace of too many court processes. Litigants seek resolution in such matters; eliminating needless delays is entirely reasonable.
One important way to do that is to ensure that the proper steps are followed in contested case hearings. HB 1581 provides that, when a court has remanded a matter to an agency to conduct a contested case hearing, the court can appoint a special master or monitors to ensure the subsequent process is sound and complies with the court's order.
If such a hearing results in an expedited appeal to the Supreme Court, justices could exercise the same level of discretion as in any other case. The law simply says such cases may be appealed directly to Hawaii's high court, and the most significant of them must be heard on a priority basis.
A review of the TMT case underscores why all of this is particularly important.
Last December, the state Supreme Court vacated the University of Hawaii's permit to allow TMT to be built atop Mauna Kea. The court found that the state Board of Land and Natural Resources violated due process when it granted a permit for the project before holding a required contested case hearing.
UH originally applied for the permit in 2010. The "preliminary" permit was issued in 2011, and a final permit in 2013. The Supreme Court decision came two years later. In all, it has taken more than five years of proceedings just to get to this point.
Some permit applicants might lack the financial ability to sustain such a long process. A resolution by year's end in TMT's favor might be enough for the project to be built in Hawaii rather than in one of three alternative sites in Chile, India and the Canary Islands.
It's hard to imagine a scenario, in the TMT matter or other cases, in which it would be undesirable to have a faster resolution that still protects the rights of permit applicants and the public interest.
Ensuring Faster Outcomes
Legislators and Ige showed admirable restraint in announcing the completion of this law. They took no position on whether the TMT contested-case ruling might be appealed or whether such an appeal would be of significant statewide importance. Neither Ige, whose office sent out a news release on the signing, nor House Majority Leader Scott Saiki, who is quoted in that release, even mentioned TMT.
That caution seems to have characterized the legislative process for the bill, too. Its journey was so low-key that few news outlets picked up on the bill's implications for TMT. Most Capitol reporters didn’t cover it, though the TMT saga has been one of Hawaii news media's most prominent subjects over the past year.
Saiki said that as the legislation was being crafted, he met with environmental groups and state agency leaders who are often involved in contested-case hearings, to ensure that the proposed changes would be understood and seen as improvements to the process, rather than as handing an advantage to one side or the other. That helped keep temperatures low, and no individual or group raised objections over suspicions of rights being violated or the process being rigged.
House Judiciary Chair Karl Rhoads, who introduced the bill, and lead Senate conferee Mike Gabbard underscored the legislation's intent — not to guarantee a particular outcome in any case, but to ensure that an outcome is had quickly. The TMT matter, Rhoads pointed out, has slogged along for a total of seven years, more than any permit applicant should have to endure.
A normal contested-case appeal would go first to circuit court, and then potentially to the Intermediate Court of Appeals, before possibly winding up at the Supreme Court. Removing those two appellate layers "almost certainly" could save years in litigation, Rhoads said.
As the TMT contested-case hearing goes forward — Judge Amano has scheduled a pre-hearing meeting Monday — there are things we'll look for to ensure the new law accomplishes its intended purpose and does no harm along the way.
• If Amano's ruling is appealed, what will the time savings be from leapfrogging appellate hearings? If the case is deemed of significant statewide importance, how quickly will the Supreme Court get to it, compared to the time it might have taken?
• The law sunsets in 2019. Over the next three years, will the expedited review of select contested-case hearings create pressure on the high court docket, such that other important matters would be disadvantaged? Saiki, for one, doesn't expect that. He points out that the Supreme Court is among the state's least burdened courts.
• Will any legitimate evidence arise that cases using this process shortchange litigants' due process rights or otherwise harm either plaintiffs or the public interest?
Acceptable answers to all those questions might provide legislators a reason to remove the July 1, 2019, sunset and allow the judicial zipper lane to remain open in perpetuity.
When Ige stepped in almost a year ago with a thoughtful plan aimed at changing the way the state has overseen telescope projects atop Mauna Kea and to "do right by the mountain," we were among those who applauded the plan's provisions. They offered a fresh approach to what had become a terribly contentious issue, drawing news coverage around the world.
HB 1851 is evidence that the commitment didn't end with the ideas in that plan, but continues to play out in a thoughtful way, with a new measure that could bring greater efficiency to an important public process.
HONOLULU, Hawai‘i - Members of the Senate Committee on Water, Land and Agriculture today voted to pass Senate Resolution 46.
SR46 requests the Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) to engage in negotiations with the current land owners of the makai lands of Kapua to acquire the lands on behalf of the state or to lease those lands in perpetuity on behalf of the state.
"Our late colleague, Senator Gil Kahele, had the dream of the state purchasing the Kapua makai lands. This resolution will make it possible to see this dream become reality," said Sen. Mike Gabbard, chair of the Water, Land and Agriculture committee, in recommending the resolution be passed.
As one of his last actions as a state legislator, the late Senator Gilbert Kahele signed SB3071 for its introduction during the 2016 session, which would have required the DLNR to engage in negotiations to acquire the Kapua makai lands. Kaiali‘i Kahele was appointed to the seat vacated by his father, following his death in January. SR46 was drafted by Sen. Kahele who was determined to ensure the process to preserve the lands would continue, despite the SB3071 being stalled in conference.
"This is not just for my dad, but for generations of keiki," said Sen. Kahele. "This area has significant archeological and culturally historical value and must be preserved."
SR46 is the final resolution to be heard this legislative session and will be voted on the floor on Thursday, May 5, 2016.
Originally published by Hawaii News Now; click here to read the article on hawaiinewsnow.com.
Published: Sunday, May 8th 2016, 9:55 pm HST
Updated: Monday, May 9th 2016, 12:22 am HST
By Rick Daysog, Reporter
Interviewer: "This is ivory, you said?
Store owner: "I'll say it's ivory so long as you don't say you're busted."
The exchange was caught on undercover video shot by the Humane Society of the United States to show how easy it is to buy ivory products in Hawaii. According to one study conducted in 2008, Hawaii was the third largest market for ivory products in the U.S., behind New York and California. "The reality is eight to $10 billion a year is spent on wildlife trafficking. It's the fourth largest criminal activity behind narcotics, counterfeiting and human trafficking," said state Sen. Mike Gabbard, (D) Kapolei. Gabbard is the co-author of a bill just approved by the state Legislature that would make Hawaii the fifth state in the the country to prohibit the sale of ivory.
But the Hawaii ban is one of the broadest so far. It not only bars the sale of elephant tusks and rhinoceros horns but it also bans the trafficking of parts from other endangered animals such as hippos, apes, tigers, leopards and cheetahs. Trade in parts from local species such as green sea turtles, whales, monk seals and some rays and sharks are also covered.
Critics are calling on Gov. David Ige to veto it. They say that animal rights advocates overstate the problem of illegal ivory and that nearly all of the product sold here is legal. Bob Hartman is the owner of the Whaler's Locker in Lahaina, which has sold carvings from whale's teeth for 45 years. He said the measure will force his store to shut down. "Millions of dollars in businesses and lives that will be wiped out," he said. "Our legislators have been sold a politically correct bunch of baloney."
Right now, federal law bars the import and export of ivory. That's the law that was used to prosecute Curtis Wilmington, owner of Hawaiian Accessories. He recently pleaded guilty of conspiring to smuggle walrus ivory and whale teeth carvings into Hawaii.
But animal protection advocates said there's a loophole. "It only regulates what's coming in and out of the state and Fish and Wildlife officials are only able to intercept about 10 percent of those items coming in," said Inga Gibson, Hawaii Director for the Humane Society of the United States. The new proposal gives the state Department of Land and Natural Resources the law enforcement authority over the illegal trade.
Gabbard says the problem of poaching is only getting worse. "I heard of one of the cases where the poachers put cyanide in one of the waterholes and poisoned 300 elephants," said Gabbard. "And last week in Kenya (there was) that mass burn of all those tusks."
If it's signed by Gov. Ige, the ban goes into effect next year.
HONOLULU, Hawai‘i - Senator Mike Gabbard, chair of the Senate Water, Land, and Agriculture Committee, applauded the passage of SB 2659 SD2 HD1 CD1 today. The bill received unanimous support in both the House and Senate.
This historic bill, authored by Sen. Gabbard, would establish a five-year industrial hemp pilot program under the Department of Agriculture to allow the cultivation of industrial hemp for agricultural and academic research, which would include the commercial sale of hemp as marketing and industry development. The provisions of this bill are consistent with the federal Farm Bill.
"We already know from a recent UH hemp study that this incredible crop will grow well in our islands," said Sen. Gabbard. “My vision is to see farmers in Hawai‘i growing hemp and the Hawai‘i branding that comes with that."
The hemp plant is part of the cannabis family, which includes marijuana, but it contains less than 1% of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) so it is unable to provide any physical or psychological effects. It is currently used in over 25,000 products. Hemp seed is used to make bread, granola, protein powder, medicine, fuel, lubricants, ink, paint, and cosmetics. Hemp stalks are used in clothing, construction materials, such as hempcrete, paper, and biofuel.
"The Hemp Industries Association estimated last year that the retail value of all hemp products sold in the U.S. was $620 million," said Sen. Gabbard. "Incredibly, all that hemp is being imported from countries like China and Canada. This makes no sense, given that we could be growing this wonderful crop here."
In 2014, Sen. Gabbard also authored SB 2175 which was signed into law as Act 56. This law authorized UH's College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources to establish a two-year hemp study. The study was an overwhelming success with the hemp growing from seed to 10 feet tall in just 16 weeks with no fertilizers or pesticide.
With this bill, Hawai‘i joins eight other states, including Colorado, Indiana, Kentucky, Minnesota, North Dakota, Oregon, Tennessee, and Vermont, in growing industrial hemp.
The text of SB 2659 SD2 HD1 CD1 can be accessed at this link: http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/measure_indiv.aspx?billtype=SB&billnumber=2659&year=2016
Legislators hand former Big Five sugar company Alexander & Baldwin water for its lands in Central Maui
Originally published by Civil Beat; click here to read the article on civilbeat.com.
May 4, 2016
By Chad Blair
In the end, the bill that aroused the most vocal protests at the Hawaii Legislature this session passed rather quietly.
On Tuesday, there was the usual chanting, music and blowing of conch shells in the Rotunda. But it did not last long, and it wasn't as intense as during other rallies. The protesters seemed to know the shape of things to come and were already focused on the next battle.
As the Senate neared voting on House Bill 2501 Tuesday, the water-rights bill that will allow Alexander & Baldwin to divert water from East Maui streams for three more years, the protesters gradually took seats in the gallery. By the time the final vote came, they stood, arms extended with fisted hands.
The vote was 17 to 8 in favor, with five of the "ayes" cast with reservations, meaning they weren't crazy about their votes. HB 2501 cleared the House of Representatives last week, where some lawmakers also expressed their worries about the bill, which now heads to Gov. David Ige for his consideration.
For supporters of the measure, its passage represents an historic shift on Maui from sugar cane to diversified agriculture. Alexander & Baldwin, one of the former Big Five companies that now focuses on agriculture and land development, said it will still need water from lush East Maui to grow crops in dry Central Maui, although it hasn't released its plans in detail. It won't be as much water as needed for sugar, the company promised, which currently amounts to 160 million gallons a day.
For opponents of the measure, HB 2501 was also a victory, of sorts. They showed that environmentalists and Native Hawaiians can raise a ruckus and nearly kill a piece of legislation that they described as the continuation of a great injustice. Their next battle is to pressure Ige to veto the legislation, and they said their vigilance is heightened to watch for future such stealth measures.
But HB 2501 also revealed other important points.
The first is that, when powerful leaders want something to pass, they usually get their way. The exact horse trading that was said to be going on behind the scenes may never be revealed, but House Speaker Joe Souki of Maui made sure his most prized bill was approved.
And, while lawmakers dismiss the idea that large campaign contributions from A&B might have influenced their vote - over half a million dollars to state and county candidates since 2006 - few believe them. Yes, donations are made because of ideological reasons, but they are also made - especially by companies with lobbyists - so that lawmakers listen to them when they need to be heard.
On HB 2501, A&B needed to be heard. It was.
The staging of a press conference at the Capitol in late April, at which A&B said it would restore water to up to eight streams, illustrated that power. That very afternoon, language making clear that A&B would be covered by HB 2501 - the Senate had cut the language, perhaps to gain leverage over Souki or even out of spite - was magically restored. Meanwhile, on Sunday, the Maui News reported that "logistical issues" could delay restoration to five of the streams.
The most important thing to understand about HB 2501 is that the Legislature is circumventing a January state court ruling that found A&B has been illegally diverting water for 15 years. The case is on appeal and the Department of Land and Natural Resources must still address A&B's invalidated diversion permits.
"As several senators noted in their speeches against the bill, this is special legislation benefiting only Alexander & Baldwin," said Marti Townsend, director for the Sierra Club of Hawaii, which led the fight to defeat HB 2501.
Sens. Gil Riviere, Laura Thielen and Les Ihara were among those speaking out against the bill.
"This is a bad bill and bad policy," said Riviere.
Thielen warned that the Legislature could come back in three years and extend the water leases "when no one is looking."
Mike Gabbard disagreed.
He characterized HB 2501 as a compromise that strikes a balance. He reiterated that the bill has a sunset date in 2019, that there is money in the state budget to fund positions to help the permit process and to survey stream use, and that the bill also requires that so-called holdover permits with the Land Board be consistent with the public trust doctrine.
Interestingly, Gabbard also spoke Tuesday about a possible new agricultural path for the state, one that places the water battle in a different context.
Gabbard discussed the potential of industrial hemp. He noted that George Washington and Thomas Jefferson grew hemp, and that the draft of the Declaration of Independence was written on hemp paper. He said he hoped that Hawaii would become the "hemp seed capitol of the world."
Gabbard was speaking about the promise of Senate Bill 2659, which passed unanimously in both chambers Tuesday. It establishes an agricultural hemp program that, for the first time in Hawaii's history, will allow hemp cultivation and the distribution of its seed by multiple licensed local farmers.
A press release from the House late Tuesday stated, "The timing of the bill's passage into law is significant, as Maui's sugar cane crops face demise in just weeks, because it provides hundreds of the 700-plus otherwise unemployed sugar workers with a viable crop to farm on Alexander & Baldwin's land, with minimal loss of income and transition."
Hemp, along with the licensing of medical marijuana sales, could be Hawaii's new cash crop. Another bill passing the House and Senate Tuesday clarifies and advances the state's med pot program.
Hawaii may well be in another historic shift. Is A&B is paying attention?
Originally published by Maui Now; click here to read the article on mauinow.com.
Posted May 3, 2016, 04:54 PM HST
Updated May 4, 2016, 12:47 AM HST
By Maui Now
The legislature today passed out Senate Bill 2647 and will now transmit the bill to the governor. If enacted, Senate Bill 2647 would ban sales of the parts and products of seventeen of the world's most critically threatened, endangered, or protected species. This includes native Hawaii species, with certain exemptions for traditional practices, antiques, and other limited uses. If enacted, the ban would be the largest on the trafficking of products made from endangered wildlife in the United States.
The measure would also ban the sale of ivory in Hawai‘i, which is the third largest market for the product in the US, behind New York and California, both of which recently passed state bans against the sale of ivory.
Groups that stood in support of the bill include: The Hawai‘i Wildlife Coalition - Vulcan Inc, a Paul G. Allen company, International Fund for Animal Welfare, Humane Society International, The Humane Society of the United States, the Wildlife Conservation Society, and the Natural Resources Defense Council.
Advocates of the measure pointed to Senate President Ron Kouchi and Senator Gilbert Keith-Agaran in helping to secure the bill's passage. "This policy protects our endangered species and curbs the illegal wildlife trade, while not unnecessarily targeting law-abiding citizens," said Mike Gabbard, chair of the Senate Water, Land and Agriculture Committee.
Representative Ryan Yamane, Chair of the House Water and Land Committee, who successfully led House effort said, "As a result of House discussions with stakeholders, the bill's final version addresses a range of legitimate issues and a number of exemptions, including those for traditional cultural practices, guns, knives, musical instruments, and antiques. Speaker Souki called this bill a 'wonderful bill' when the House took its final vote, and its unanimous passage out of our chamber reflects that."
"We are honored to welcome Hawai‘i into 'the herd' of other US states, along with nations around the world, that have taken a stand against the ivory trade. We will not let elephants go extinct on our watch," said John F. Calvelli, executive vice president for the Wildlife Conservation Society.
Humane Society International CEO Andrew Rowan said, "We (are) pleased that Hawai‘i has joined the fight to end poaching and wildlife trafficking. These islands have set an example for the world to follow."
Jared Axelrod, Government Affairs Manager at Vulcan Inc. observed that this milestone comes only days after Kenya held the world's largest burn of illegal wildlife products in history. On April 30, the Kenyan Government set fire to 100 tons of elephant ivory and rhino horn in the Nairobi National Park, the estimated street value of which was US $172 million. The event was held to encourage governments to take a stand against the ivory trade.
"While the timing of the Kenyan burn and passage of the Hawaii bill was not intentional, it is nonetheless a tremendous showing of solidarity between places on opposite ends of the world that have seen so much biodiversity loss. This moment shows how powerful global communities can be in saving our resources," said Axelrod.
"Kudos to Hawai‘i for its leadership in helping to save species from extinction. Wildlife traffickers don't respect borders, so this law takes the profit out of smuggling," said Jeff Flocken, North American Regional Director, International Fund for Animal Welfare. Humane Society International CEO Andrew Rowan also noted, "We pleased that Hawai‘i has joined the fight to end poaching and wildlife trafficking. These islands have set an example for the world to follow."
Originally published by the Honolulu Star-Advertiser; click here to read the article on staradvertiser.com.
April 29, 2016
By Sophie Cocke
The House on Thursday passed a controversial bill that would allow Alexander & Baldwin to retain the rights to the water flowing through dozens of streams in East Maui while administrative and legal challenges to its request for a long-term lease for water are resolved.
The full Senate was also scheduled to vote on the bill Thursday evening. However, Senate President Ron Kouchi, at the last minute, deferred the vote until Tuesday.
House Bill 2501 has spurred protests from Native Hawaiian advocates and environmentalists who have battled the company for 15 years to restore stream flows on Maui.
The measure has also provoked impassioned debate among lawmakers. During the House vote, Rep. Kaniela Ing spoke of the long history of stream diversions by plantations owners in Hawaii and the impacts this has had on Native Hawaiian taro farmers, customary practices and the environment.
"This session I have been hugged and kissed by elders from my home island, Maui, thanking me for standing for our water. My cheeks are soaked with the tears of my kupuna, and I long to wash these tears away under waterfalls that will be regained from the stones into which they have withered," Ing told his colleagues during a floor speech. "Many of you know that water in Hawaii means wai, and 'Hawaii' without 'wai' is just 'hai,' which means broken."
"If we make a decision today against our courts, against the will of our people, for the sole benefit of a corporate plantation, we will reveal that our democracy is broken," Ing (D, South Maui) continued. "Mr. Speaker, restore our streams."
The House voted 41-10 to approve HB 2501. If it passes the Senate next week, the bill will be sent to Gov. David Ige for final decision making.
In January, Circuit Judge Rhonda Nishimura ruled that the four state permits A&B had been operating under to divert water were invalid. The Board of Land and Natural Resources had been allowing the company to continue diverting the water for its sugar cane plantation for more than a dozen years under revocable permits that are supposed to be for temporary use only.
A&B has been seeking a long-term lease for the water since 2001, but the application has been bogged down in legal and administrative challenges brought by the Native Hawaiian Legal Corp., which is representing Maui taro farmers. Both sides have blamed each other for the years of delays in reaching a final determination on how much water the company can divert.
A&B is closing down its sugar plantation but says that it needs to hold on to the rights to a portion of the water as it tries to shift its fields to diversified agriculture. A portion of the water also goes to residents and farmers in Upcountry Maui.
HB 2501 is just one of dozens of bills that the Legislature is debating in the final days of this session, which ends May 5.
Also on Thursday, House and and Senate conference committees voted to agree on a bill that would ban ivory sales, and a measure aimed at speeding up the contested case process in light of drawn-out cases such as those involving the Thirty Meter Telescope and A&B's water lease.
Hawaii is close to joining a growing number of states that are banning the sale of ivory in an attempt to curb the slaughter of elephants in Africa for their tusks. Poachers have killed an estimated 30,000 elephants annually in recent years, raising concerns among conservationists and wildlife officials that the animals could become extinct.
Hawaii is one of the major markets for ivory, despite a federal law banning its importation.
Key senators agreed Thursday to amendments made by the House to Senate Bill 2647, meaning that the proposed ban on ivory sales only needs to pass a vote by the full Senate before it can be sent to Gov. David Ige for decision making.
An earlier version of the bill passed the Senate on a 15-7 vote. However, six senators voted yes with reservations.
Similar bills failed in the Legislature the past two years.
"Hawaii is the endangered species capital of the world, and this will take us a step toward protecting endangered species around the world," said Sen. Mike Gabbard (D, Kapolei-Makakilo), chairman of the Senate Water, Land and Agriculture Committee and the bill's main sponsor, during a conference committee meeting Thursday to formally agree on the bill.
The measure has faced stiff opposition from jewelry dealers, as well as the National Rifle Association. Some showpiece firearms have ivory in their handles.
"The NRA is opposed to SB 2647 because, if implemented, it would amount to the taking of property that had been acquired legally and in good faith," wrote Daniel Reid, state liaison for the NRA, in testimony against the bill. "Needless to say, property that cannot be sold is radically diminished in value."
The measure does not make it illegal to possess ivory.
SB 2647 also bans the sale of animal parts of other species that are at risk of extinction, such as rhinoceroses, tigers, great apes, sea turtles, walruses, narwhals, monk seals and whales.
House and Senate members also agreed Thursday to House Bill 1581, which would speed up the resolution of important contested case hearings before select state boards and commissions.
The bill is expected to shave years off the appeals process. High-profile contested cases before the Commission on Water Resource Management, Land Use Commission, Public Utilities Commission and Hawaii Community Development Authority, and cases involving conservation districts, could be appealed directly to the Supreme Court. The cases would bypass the Circuit Court and Intermediate Court of Appeals.
The author introduced a bill, now close to final passage, that would ban trafficking in Hawaii of parts or products made from endangered wildlife species.
Originally published by Civil Beat; click here to read the column on civilbeat.com.
April 22, 2016
By Mike Gabbard
On April 12, my House colleagues passed Senate Bill 2647 unanimously. House Speaker Joe Souki spoke for the legislation, calling it "a wonderful bill." I couldn't agree more. The bill prohibits trafficking of endangered wildlife species within our beautiful islands.
This is an important measure, long overdue in our state.
My counterpart, Rep. Ryan Yamane, chair of the House Water and Land Committee, and I both drafted measures to address the black market for wildlife products that exists in Hawaii. During the legislative process, we engaged a wide variety of local stakeholders, and over the course of the session, we were involved in numerous negotiations. We believe the many revisions to the legislation were the result of a truly collaborative good-faith effort.
As a result, many accommodations were made to those concerned about unintended consequences of the legislation. The final version of the bill, which is now in conference committee, provides clear evidence of the effort to successfully address a range of legitimate issues from gun enthusiasts, art and antique collectors and many other stakeholder groups.
Consequently, many exceptions to the prohibition of sales were added to our bills, including exemptions for traditional cultural practices, guns, knives, musical instruments, and antiques.
The bill will have no effect on the thousands of families who currently possess ivory heirlooms, since it does not affect possession. It targets only the sale of illicit wildlife products. Even the original stricter requirement to document the origin of heirlooms was eased to ensure only those involved in illegal trafficking, not law-abiding jewelry owners, are targeted.
The only purpose of the bill is to stop the trafficking of animals threatened with extinction, a practice that continues to grow at an alarming pace, threatening an increasing variety of endangered animal species.
The threat of extinction is due in large part to the trafficking of animal parts and products. The National Strategy for Combating Wildlife Trafficking, released in February 2014, recognized the important role states could play in protecting species subject to the illegal wildlife trade.
By passing this bill, we're doing our part as good citizens and good stewards of this earth.
The most effective way to discourage illegal trafficking is to eliminate markets and profits. It's in the public interest to protect animal species threatened with extinction by prohibiting the sales of their parts within our state.
Sadly, studies have shown that Hawaii may be the third largest market for ivory in the United States. However, New York and California, the only two states that were higher on this list, both recently passed state laws restricting ivory sales, meaning that Hawaii is now likely at the top of the list.
Now, it's our turn.
The problem is urgent. Right now, we, as a global community, are losing the race against extinction. If current trends continue, half of the world's endangered higher life forms will be extinct by the year 2100.
If Hawaii, as the endangered species capital of the world, will not take a stand for the earth's most critical threatened animals, who will?
Independent polls show that there is overwhelming support for this legislation. Among those surveyed, 80 percent were registered voters. And among this group, 86 percent supported the legislation, while a marginally smaller 85 percent of those not registered to vote supported a ban.
In September, the World Conservation Congress will be coming to Hawaii and the world will be watching us. We are an amazing conservation community. This bill is an opportunity to lead. It's an opportunity to shine. It's an opportunity to tell a new story: how the endangered species capital of the world, became the leader in endangered species protection and recovery.
We must be champions, because we are acting for those with no voice and no ability to advocate for themselves. We are acting for the most vulnerable on our planet.
The full House and Senate must now vote on the amended measure, which allows the company three more years to lease streams in East Maui.
Originally published by Civil Beat; click here to read the article on civilbeat.com.
April 22, 2016
By Chad Blair
It took several hours Friday afternoon for legislators to agree on a contentious water rights bill, mainly because lawyers needed to look over the language.
But by 5 p.m., state House and Senate committee conferees in House Bill 2501 had reached an agreement that allows the measure to move forward.
The legislation still awaits a full vote in each chamber and, assuming it passes both, Gov. David Ige's signature.
If all that happens, developer and agricultural business Alexander & Baldwin would be allowed to keep leasing stream water from East Maui to divert to Central Maui, where its soon-to-be-shuttered sugar mill still operates and where A&B says it plans to branch into diversified crops.
An estimated 10 companies, including agricultural, ranching interests and utilities on Maui, Kauai and the Big Island - would be allowed the extension of water permits.
Rep. Ryan Yamane, the author of the bill and its lead conferee for his chamber, told counterpart Sen. Mike Gabbard that the House was "very concerned" about the planned closure of the state's last sugar mill, which is owned by an A&B subsidiary on Maui.
He told Gabbard that the House appreciated the Senate's concerns that state waters are part of a public trust doctrine, and that the bill would make that clear. He said the bill would also require that annual reports to the Legislature on the lease permits be made until 2020.
Language paying for two full-time positions with the Department of Land and Natural Resources, which is responsible for the state's waters, will be removed from HB 2501 and instead be covered in the state budget.
The budget measure, House Bill 1700, would also set aside $1.5 million to study the flow of the streams in question.
"We know this is a very tough and contentious issue," said Yamane, who said the holdup on the bill's final draft was over the wording of just two sentences.
"More billable hours for the lawyers," he joked.
By that time, about 4 p.m., Gabbard said he would not be able to drive home to Kapolei until the evening rush hour had cleared.
When the final vote came - a unanimous one - at shortly after 5 p.m., the House and Senate conferees thanked each other for their work and that of their lawyers.
Gabbard said the bill was not "perfect," but described it as a "middle ground" solution that strikes a "balance."
He also said he hoped the DLNR and its Commission on Water Resource Management now work on longterm solutions regarding the water permits.
Protests To Continue
HB 2501 was introduced by Yamane and three Maui lawmakers, including House Speaker Joe Souki. It effectively would allow A&B, a powerful player on Maui and in the state, to keep diverting millions of gallons of water from East Maui.
Taro farmers and Native Hawaiian cultural practitioners in the area have sought to halt the diversion. In January, a judge determined that A&B had violated state law by continuing to divert water since 2001. The case is under appeal.
Groups like the Sierra Club of Hawaii and the Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation contend that HB 2501 is special legislation crafted for A&B, which they say is illegally diverting the streams.
The argument gained new urgency when A&B announced Wednesday that it would permanently stop diverting water to as many as eight streams in East Maui. Several lawmakers praised the plan, in particular members of the Maui delegation.
But critics like the Sierra Club and NHLC said the company had an alternative motive: to ensure that A&B would once again be covered under HB 2501. Later that day, Gabbard proposed to Yamane exactly that.
Regardless of the bill's fate, water rights struggle will continue.
A peaceful "free the streams" rally organized by the Sierra Club will be held at A&B's shareholder meeting Tuesday at the company's headquarters in downtown Honolulu.
"For decades, the people of East Maui have pushed for the return of the public's water, winning legal victories over the years, including a recent court ruling that A&B's authority to divert water for its sugar operations were invalid, and recent findings by a water commission hearings officer that A&B's diversions take more water than they need for sugar," the club stated. "Despite these victories, A&B has consistently taken more water than it needs, harming the native stream ecosystem and the community that relies on it. But we now have an opportunity to set things right."
Originally published by the Honolulu Star-Advertiser; click here to read the article on staradvertiser.com.
April 10, 2016
By Rob Perez
Nestled in the Kunia foothills, the facility is billed as Hawaii's first "doggy theme park."
The company that operates the doggy day care touts it as being unlike any other in the islands, with "a million dollar view" from six different parks spread over 2.5 acres.
"Kama‘aina K9 Adventures goes beyond the traditional day care concept by providing nearly unlimited space to sniff, splash, run and explore in a safe, outdoor, theme park environment," the company says on its website.
There's one problem.
The Kama‘aina K9 facility is on land zoned Ag 1, which limits use to agribusiness. City regulations specifically list animal kennels as an unpermitted use.
Yet the day-care business has operated for the past year at Kunia Loa Ridge Farmlands, an off-the-grid 854-acre development that's supposed to be restricted to agriculture. The entire property has become a hub for unregulated construction.
It also has become the focus of growing controversy, raising concerns among diverse groups ranging from environmental organizations to the Hawaii Farm Bureau and the state Department of Agriculture.
Dozens of houselike structures have been built or are under construction throughout the sprawling development, which has no paved roads or addresses and is unconnected to Oahu's power, water, sewer and telephone grids.
Some structures have people living in them despite statutory and Kunia Loa prohibitions against residential use, numerous people connected to the project have told the Honolulu Star-Advertiser. The newspaper has chronicled the rise of this unusual development for the past two years.
Many of the structures that have been built or are under construction there are not subject to building permit requirements, according to the city, because of a state law passed several years ago.
Hawaii Revised Statutes Chapter 46-88, enacted in 2012, was designed to help farmers erect tool sheds, storage units and other small ag facilities on commercial farms outside the urban district by exempting the structures from the building code.
The idea was to free farmers from the long waits and high costs of obtaining building permits for small nonresidential facilities. The law's proponents said the ag structures carried little risk of becoming safety hazards in a rural environment.
At Kunia Loa, however, numerous structures that look like houses have gone up, and some critics question whether they are ag buildings or comply with the exemptions allowed under the law. The Star-Advertiser counted about a dozen under construction during a visit last month.
One recently completed unit sits in a gulch that, according to people familiar with the area, flows with water after periods of prolonged heavy rain.
The pace of building at Kunia Loa has become so intense and general oversight so haphazard – a Buddhist temple openly operated there illegally for months – that some environmentalists, legislators and others are calling for the state to revisit the laws that allowed Kunia Loa to take hold.
"There's nobody minding the store," said Donna Wong, executive director of Hawaii's Thousand Friends, an environmental advocacy group.
The city, which opposed the 2012 legislation creating the building-code exemptions, contends the proliferation of unregulated construction at Kunia Loa has created a potentially dangerous environment and public safety risk.
"Any time significant structures are built without a permit, regardless of location, we have life-safety concerns," said George Atta, director of the Department of Planning and Permitting, which enforces building code and zoning violations, in written responses to the Star-Advertiser.
Over the past several years, the city has issued more than 40 construction and zoning-related citations at Kunia Loa, including many for building structures without a permit or not following approved plans, according to data obtained by the newspaper under a public records request.
But almost all the building-related citations eventually were dismissed after city inspectors determined the structures were nonresidential and met the other requirements under the 2012 exemption law, according to the data and the city.
Some people familiar with Kunia Loa, including a farm bureau official, told the Star-Advertiser that the laws aren't the problem; they say the city is falling short of its oversight responsibility.
Several cited the Buddhist temple, whose owners were ordered by the city to discontinue worship services only after the Star-Advertiser wrote about it, and the doggy day care as examples.
"I really think what is needed is for DPP to enforce the law," said Sen. Mike Gabbard (D, Kapolei-Makakilo), who is serving his first year as chairman of the Senate Committee on Water, Land and Agriculture.
Brian Miyamoto, executive director of the farm bureau, said in written comments to the Star-Advertiser that his organization's understanding is that illegal structures have been erected at Kunia Loa but there is little, if any, enforcement.
He noted that the exemption law applies to limited types of structures, such as pre-engineered commercial buildings no more than 1,000 square feet in floor area, but not to dwellings.
Miyamoto said the bureau and others met with the city in 2014 to discuss Kunia Loa. At the time, Atta acknowledged that the situation was "not really the fault of the legislation and he agreed that DPP needed to do enforcement but that they were having trouble due to access and limited GPS capabilities," Miyamoto wrote.
But Art Challacombe, DPP's deputy director, disputed the notion that the city is failing in its oversight.
He said in a written statement that his agency has responded to every filed complaint about Kunia Loa despite the challenges of locating alleged illegal structures in an 854-acre project without directional signs, street names or addresses. Challacombe added that his inspectors need permission to enter the private development and the structures to inspect them and that DPP lacks the staff to do regular "sweeps" of such a huge area.
Even with the challenges of limited resources and the constraints of the exemption law, "we are doing our best to meet the demands of the community," he said.
The complicated ownership structure at Kunia Loa has contributed to the muddied enforcement environment. The project is exempt from city rules regarding lot size, roadways, infrastructure and other improvements.
Individuals who bought into the project do not own their lots but own shares in the nonprofit Kunia Loa Ridge Farmlands, which owns the entire 854 acres and, through an association, oversees governance of the development's bylaws. Some Kunia Loa farmers, who have long-term leases for specific lots, have described that oversight as insufficient. An association representative could not be reached for comment.
Sen. Laura Thielen (D, Hawaii Kai-Waimanalo-Kailua), former director of the state Department of Land and Natural Resources, said Kunia Loa's designation as a condominium property regime, or CPR — an ownership form more typically used for high-rise residential buildings — has meant the huge development bypassed multiple state and county requirements dealing with land use and other areas.
"When you apply it to ag lands, that not only means a lot of concerns about bypassing land use laws but a lot of safety concerns," Thielen said, citing as one example the difficulty firefighters would have responding to emergencies in a private development with unpaved, unnamed roads and no addresses.
Thielen is among those who are concerned that other landowners might replicate the Kunia Loa model — some refer to it as a "horizontal CPR" – to develop large ag parcels around the state while capitalizing on confusion surrounding the building code exemptions.
On Kauai, alarm bells already are sounding.
Kauai County's planning director, Mike Dahilig, said in an email to the Star-Advertiser that horizontal CPRs have had a negative impact on agricultural lands.
"The recent changes to state law do make it harder to catch and enforce cheaters who try to put residential units on agricultural lands," Dahilig wrote.
Residential units are not the issue at Kama‘aina K9, which lists on its website rates for daily and extended stays for dogs.
Asked how such a business can operate on Ag 1 land, a DPP spokesman said his agency intends to send an inspector to the property.
Kama‘aina K9 representatives did not respond to multiple requests for comment.
Originally published by the Honolulu Star-Advertiser; click here to read the editorial on staradvertiser.com.
March 27, 2016
By Sen. Mike Gabbard and Rep. Ryan Yamane
Last October, after an unseasonable and unprecedented rainy summer, the U.S. Drought Monitor declared that for the first time since April 15, 2008 no part of our island chain was suffering from drought.
For seven long years, our farmers, ranchers and citizens had endured a prolonged dry period throughout Hawaii that caused cattle herds to be thinned, crops to suffer and spiked our rate of forest fires. Unfortunately, our relief was short-lived.
Today, just five months later, 54 percent of our island area is again locked in "moderate drought" and 100 percent of our islands are "abnormally dry." As we live through one of the largest El Niño events on record, our islands may get even drier through 2016.
Why is this happening now? Long-term climate change trends seem to be bringing drought to Hawaii more frequently. Over the past 30 years as temperatures have risen, our average annual rainfall amount has fallen by a staggering 22 percent. Our beloved tradewind days have declined by 28 percent - from an average of 291 trade wind days in 1973 to only 210 in 2009. And when we do get rain, increasingly it tends to come in large - even epic - events where several inches may fall in just a few hours, causing stormwater runoff instead of the soft, gentle rains that slowly seep into the soil and our precious island aquifers for later use.
The Legislature understands that water is the lifeblood of our society, and long-term fresh water security is a key element to our economic health and our unique quality of life. Even as we address critical issues such as homelessness and health care this session, we acknowledge the need to work proactively to protect our fresh water supply.
We have watched the sobering experience of California as it suffered through $2.74 billion in damage to its economy in 2015 alone as a result of the ongoing drought and water supply problems - and the clear lesson is that a few ounces of prevention are far better than many tons of cure. We are moving to preserve our supply of the best drinking water in the world with innovative new solutions and policies.
Last year in 2015, the Legislature passed several key bills signed by Gov. David Ige that will help enable water infrastructure upgrades, encourage water recycling at state facilities, and capture stormwater runoff before it enters our oceans.
This legislative session we are building on this foundation with another comprehensive package of fresh water bills that will decrease water system leaks (House Bill 2041); foster public-private partnerships to reuse, conserve and recharge our water (House Bills 2029 and 2040); commit to statewide water reuse and recycling (House Bill 1749); improve storm water retention and capture (House Bill 1750); and provide incentives to residents who adopt water-saving devices in their homes (House Bill 2042).
In concert with these policy changes, the independent, nonprofit Hawai‘i Community Foundation recently released a report from a blue-ribbon commission that said to ensure water security, Hawaii must secure 100 million gallons a day in additional, reliable fresh water supply by 2030 even as less rain falls on our Islands.
We have embraced this challenge and will continue to improve our water policies in ways that move us toward this shared statewide goal.
While these policy changes are an important start, all of us need to work together planting trees, turning off the tap, and - most importantly - teaching our keiki the value of wai in order to truly protect our shared water future.
Originally published by the Honolulu Star-Advertiser; click here to read the article on staradvertiser.com.
March 23, 2016
By Kevin Dayton
A bill that would allow Alexander & Baldwin to temporarily hold on to the rights to millions of gallons of water it diverts each day from East Maui streams survived a close vote in a key Senate committee Monday night.
After a six-hour hearing on House Bill 2501, Senate Water, Land and Agriculture Chairman Mike Gabbard amended the measure to limit the extension of A&B's water rights under the the bill to no more than three years.
The measure was approved by the committee in a 6-3 vote, with several senators who voted for the bill noting they have strong doubts about the measure. Those concerns might signal problems for the bill when it is taken up by the Senate Ways and Means Committee.
Gabbard said in an interview Tuesday he is concerned about the differing interpretations of a recent court ruling on A&B's water permits, and wanted to keep the bill alive to allow more time to sort through the issue.
"It was a tough one because both sides of the issue gave very strong arguments," Gabbard said. He said the concerns raised by Native Hawaiians, Maui taro farmers and environmental groups "need to be addressed, need to be a part of the solution for water rights on Maui and across the state."
East Maui farmers have been contesting A&B's permits since 2001, arguing the diversions are harming water ecosystems and preventing them from farming taro. The farmers are asking that flows be partially restored to 12 streams.
A&B has been allowed for more than a decade to use or divert water from dozens of streams pending a final decision by the Board of Land and Natural Resources on the company's application for a long-term lease of the water. The Land Board has allowed A&B to continue diverting water under four revocable permits that are supposed to be temporary while legal challenges to the water requests are resolved.
BLNR had been extending the permits on a "holdover basis" for 13 years, and on Jan. 8 Circuit Judge Rhonda Nishimura ruled that A&B's four revocable permits were invalid.
Nishimura said in her ruling that allowing holdover tenants to "occupy public lands almost in perpetuity for continuous, multiple one-year periods" is inconsistent with the public interest and lawmakers' intent.
Maui County is appealing Nishimura's ruling with the support of A&B and the Land Board. In the meantime A&B has asked the Legislature to pass HB 2501 to allow the company to hold on to its water rights while the Land Board makes a determination on its long-term water lease. A&B has been seeking such a lease for the past 16 years.
Nearly 600 pieces of testimony were submitted on the bill before Monday's hearing. Environmental and Native Hawaiian groups argued for restoration of flows to the Maui streams, while farmers and ranchers raised concerns that the ruling could threaten their access to water and public lands.
Gabbard (D, Kapolei - Makakilo) said BLNR needs more time to resolve the issue of revocable permits, and has a task force working on the problem. He said it is still unclear to him whether the ruling affects only A&B's permits or whether it might affect other farmers and ranchers. "I'm still not convinced either way, to tell you the truth," he said.
Sen. Russell Ruderman, who voted against the bill, said in an interview Tuesday the measure "only benefits one company who has taken advantage of their situation for a very long time."
A&B engaged in "fear mongering" to convince other farmers and ranchers that Nishimura's ruling might also affect them, Ruderman said, adding that he obtained an opinion from the state attorney general saying the court ruling applies only to A&B.
Five of the nine state revocable water permits are in Ruderman's district, "and I care about those guys a lot and I work closely with them," he said. "I'm clear in my belief that the court ruling does not apply to them, and they’re not in jeopardy of losing their revocable permit."
Ruderman (D, Puna) said lawmakers ought not to reward a "bad actor" that diverted water for 100 years and allowed streams to run dry. "They don't need this water, and if they do need it, they can pay a fair market value," he said.
Christopher Benjamin, president and CEO of A&B, told lawmakers Monday the bill is needed because the Nishimura ruling abruptly rendered a number of the company's water permits invalid and clouded the status of more than 300 land permits issued by the state Department of Land and Natural Resources.
"At risk is the water currently relied upon by 36,000 Upcountry Maui residents and farmers, and by HC&S (Hawaiian Commercial & Sugar Co.) to complete its last crop of sugar and transition to a diversified agriculture model so as to keep the central valley of Maui in cultivated open space," Benjamin testified.
Originally published by the Honolulu Star-Advertiser; click here to read the article on staradvertiser.com.
March 22, 2016
By Kevin Dayton
Opponents turned out in force Monday to testify against a bill that would allow Alexander & Baldwin to temporarily hold on to the rights to millions of gallons of water it diverts each day from East Maui streams.
At the start of the hearing by the Senate Water, Land and Agriculture Committee, Chairman Mike Gabbard announced that 577 pieces of testimony had been submitted on House Bill 2501.
The measure appeared in large part to pit environmental and Native Hawaiian groups who want flows restored to a dozen Maui streams against farmers and ranchers who worry a recent court ruling against A&B could threaten their access to water and public lands.
Summer Sylva, staff attorney for Native Hawaiian Legal Corp., said A&B is the only entity that would benefit from House Bill 2501 because A&B is the only company with water rights on "holdover" status that are addressed in the bill. Although there might be nine other revocable water permits, "nobody has objected to their use," she said.
She alleged that "A&B has thumbed its nose at state laws and is now inciting unfounded fears" among people who hold revocable state permits as a way to build support for House Bill 2501 that protects the company's interests.
Christopher Benjamin, president and CEO of A&B, told lawmakers the bill is needed because the recent court decision "abruptly rendered a number of water permits invalid" and clouded the status of more than 300 land permits issued by the state Department of Land and Natural Resources.
He added that 36,000 Upcountry Maui residents and businesses also rely on A&B to deliver water to Maui County for their needs.
"Many have said that the legislation helps only A&B," he said. "This isn’t true."
A&B has been allowed for more than a decade to use or divert water from dozens of streams pending a final decision by the Board of Land and Natural Resources on the company's application for a long-term lease of the water. The Land Board has allowed A&B to continue diverting water under four revocable permits that are supposed to be temporary while legal challenges to the water are resolved.
East Maui farmers have been contesting A&B's permits since 2001, arguing that the diversions are harming kalo, or taro, farming and water ecosystems. The taro farmers are asking that stream flows be partially restored to 12 streams.
On Jan. 8 Circuit Judge Rhonda Nishimura ruled that A&B's four revocable permits were invalid.
BLNR had been extending the permits on a "holdover basis" for more than a dozen years, and Nishimura said in her ruling that allowing holdover tenants to "occupy public lands almost in perpetuity for continuous, multiple one-year periods" is inconsistent with the "public interest and legislative intent."
Maui County is appealing Nishimura's ruling with the support of A&B and the Land Board.
A&B then went to the Legislature to press for the bill to allow the company to hold on to its water rights while the Land Board makes a determination on its long-term water lease. A&B has been seeking such a lease for the past 16 years.
Kekoa Kaluhiwa, first deputy director of the state Department of Land and Natural Resources, said in written testimony that it could take years for an applicant for a water lease to meet the requirements for a lease.
"Accordingly, it is understandable that an applicant for a water lease would want to continue water use under a revocable permit in the interim," Kaluhiwa said. "In many cases, the water uses have existed for many years or decades, and so an interruption of the water supply under a permit could have serious impacts on residents, schools, hospitals, businesses and agricultural communities that rely on the water."
The bill would allow the BLNR to maintain the status quo while addressing the lease application, Kaluhiwa said.
Scott Enright, chairman of the state Board of Agriculture, said farmers and ranchers across the state rely on water sources that are covered by revocable permits. Enright said the department strongly supports HB 2501 because "without a continued water source, there may be significant economic and social impacts on Hawaii's agricultural community."
The bill is opposed by the state Office of Hawaiian Affairs, which argued Maui taro farmers "have long sought the modest return of water to just 27 of 100-plus East Maui streams."
Hawaii law recognizes water as a public trust resource, but for more than a century Hawaii's large plantation interests made exclusive claim to substantial amounts of water for their own private profit, according to the OHA testimony. Monopolizing the water in that way "continuously deprived farmers, cultural practitioners and native species alike of the water resources they depend upon," according to OHA.
The bill was also opposed by the Hawaii Green Party, the Hawaii Wildlife Fund and others, and was supported by the Hawaii Farm Bureau and the Chamber of Commerce of Hawaii.
Originally published by the Honolulu Star-Advertiser; click here to read the article on staradvertiser.com.
February 19, 2016
By Rob Perez and Dana Williams
The state Department of Land and Natural Resources' controversial revocable-permit program could be in for some big changes.
Suzanne Case, chairwoman of the agency's board, announced Thursday the formation of an eight-member task force, including several members from outside the department, to review the program and recommend revisions to ensure the process serves the public trust and provides transparency and consistency.
The move was prompted by several factors, according to the department, including a front-page story Sunday in the Honolulu Star-Advertiser that exposed major problems with the program. Revocable permits are designed for the temporary, month-to-month use of state land.
The newspaper found dozens of the monthly permits that were decades old, including some that have not had their discounted rents changed since the 1990s. The Star-Advertiser also disclosed that the program has been operating without administrative rules, giving the department and board wide discretion as they rely on a relatively vague law to award and oversee the permits.
It also reported that some tenants are paying only pennies per acre monthly for pastureland.
Concerns raised by board members in December about a bulk approval process - staff asked the panel to renew 340 permits in one shot - also provided impetus for the appointment of the task force. In addition, board members voiced concerns about the duration of some permits.
Setting a relatively ambitious schedule, Case said she is expecting the task force to come up with recommendations to report to the Legislature by the end of April and that the new practices would be in place by the end of June.
Case told the Star-Advertiser in an interview Thursday that she will keep an open mind about what the task force recommends, but she knows the agency can do better by making the system more transparent and creating opportunities for competition for parcels. Such changes presumably would result in better deals financially for the state.
The planned actions will include a review of all existing revocable permits, and the task force could recommend administrative rules for the program, according to the department.
Changes are needed to improve the system without completely bogging down the process, according to Case.
"It's a balancing act," she told the newspaper. "What is the best process to ensure transparency, (public) notice and good practices with revocable permits that are efficient and realistic? You can't have a perfect process. But what is the best process given our resources?"
Case said the board will begin considering smaller groups of permit renewals periodically this year, not as one bulk list at year's end, as has traditionally been done in the past.
That will allow the board to get more information about individual permits and enable members to ask more questions based on that information, she said.
Critics of the department's management of the program applauded Thursday's announcement, saying they were pleased DLNR recognized that reforms were needed. But they cautioned that until the recommendations are unveiled and acted upon, it was too early to determine whether meaningful changes actually will result.
"It's a good first step," said Marti Townsend, director of Sierra Club of Hawaii.
Sen. Mike Gabbard, chairman of the Senate Committee on Water, Land and Agriculture, likewise called Thursday's announcement a positive step.
"I'm glad they responded quickly," Gabbard said of the department.
Once the recommendations are made, the senator said he plans to hold an informational briefing to determine whether proposed legislation needs to be introduced in next year's session.
Gabbard this week shelved a controversial revocable-permit bill on the Senate side that has added fuel to critics' calls for reforming the DLNR program.
Opponents of Senate Bill 3001 said it would circumvent a January court ruling, allowing Alexander & Baldwin Inc. to retain the right to divert millions of gallons daily from East Maui streams for agriculture and other needs.
Maui Circuit Judge Rhonda Nishimura ruled the four month-to-month permits that A&B has held for the water rights for more than a dozen years were invalid, saying they defied the state law about temporary use.
A House version of the bill, HB 2501, is still alive.
In her interview with the newspaper, Case said revocable permits enable the department to get tenants on state land - some of it remote or landlocked - that otherwise would be unoccupied, reducing the state's potential liability and such issues as fire and health hazards.
"There are a lot of things that could come up with unoccupied land that's a huge headache for us," she added.
Originally published by the Honolulu Star-Advertiser; click here to read the article on staradvertiser.com.
February 18, 2016
By Sophie Cocke
The chairman of the Senate Committee on Water, Land and Agriculture on Wednesday shelved a bill that would allow Alexander & Baldwin to hold on to the rights of millions of gallons of water that it diverts from East Maui streams even as the company plans to close its water-intensive sugar plantation on Maui in the coming months and lay off more than 650 workers.
"Obviously, we got a huge amount of opposition from taro farmers, Native Hawaiians and Maui residents who were asking for the streams to be restored," said Sen. Mike Gabbard, the committee's chairman, after the hearing on Senate Bill 3001.
A House version of the bill, House Bill 2501, is still alive and needs to be heard by the House Finance Committee to cross over to the Senate. Gabbard (D, Kapolei-Makakilo) said he may be open to considering the House bill.
Opponents of the bill, including advocates for Native Hawaiian taro farmers and environmentalists, hailed the move as a significant victory in their efforts to derail the legislation.
The bill "was poor public policy and would have unraveled our water code," Marti Townsend, executive director of the Hawaii Sierra Club, said after the hearing.
In January, Maui Circuit Judge Rhonda Nishimura declared four temporary permits that have allowed A&B to divert water from streams that run through state lands invalid. The month-to-month revocable permits are supposed to be held on a temporary basis, but since 2001 the Board of Land and Natural Resources has been renewing the permits or maintaining them on a "holdover basis" while it resolved legal challenges.
Nishimura said that allowing A&B to hold on to the permits for more than a decade defied the meaning of the word "temporary."
Shortly after Nishimura's ruling, lawmakers introduced two bills, backed by A&B, that would overturn the judge's decision and allow the company to hold on to its water permits while legal challenges to obtaining long-term leases for the water are resolved.
A&B has been entangled in a contentious legal battle with taro farmers and environmentalists over the diversion of stream water for more than a decade, entailing both court cases and an ongoing contested case before the Land Board.
Gabbard said that A&B should be pursuing nonlegislative routes to solving the water disputes.
The County of Maui, with the support of A&B and the Board of Land and Natural Resources, is currently appealing Nishimura's ruling.
Gabbard said that for now A&B should be filing a motion to stay the court decision and should be demonstrating its actual water needs.
Attorneys for local taro farmers have argued that the company has been diverting more water than it needs. Furthermore, those needs are sure to change as the company shuts down its Hawaiian Commercial & Sugar Co. subsidiary and its 36,000-acre sugar plantation and tries to convert their use to diversified agriculture.
Gabbard said A&B should also begin conducting an environmental impact statement in preparation for obtaining a long-term lease.
"I am not opposed to taking another look at the issue if it crosses over to the Senate and if A&B shows good faith as it relates to these other nonlegislative routes," he said.
The legislation allowing companies to hold on to their water rights as long-term leases are sought would not only affect A&B. Ten other companies, farmers and developers have also been allowed to tap water on state lands under temporary permits, some of which date back to the 1990s.
The temporary permits have allowed companies to circumvent more stringent requirements for obtaining long-term leases, including completing environmental assessments; consulting with the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands to see whether beneficiaries need the water for customary practices; and, in some cases, obtaining a conservation district use permit. Long-term leases also come with competitive bidding requirements.
Meredith Ching, a senior vice president for A&B, said in a statement that Gabbard's decision to defer SB 3001 was "extremely disappointing."
It "leaves a number of permittees who depend on state lands and waters in limbo, as a result of the recent Circuit Court ruling," Ching wrote. "These are permit holders who are farmers, nonprofits, utilities, etc. - as well as HC&S - who are now operating under a cloud of uncertainty."
Ching said she hopes that "many misconceptions can be clarified" about the House measure.
The company has said that the legislation is meant to ensure that it can continue providing water to 36,000 Upcountry Maui residents and farmers and allow the company to transition to diversified agriculture.
Ching said that "in the short term" A&B is looking into pursuing a stay to the court ruling.
"A stay, however, is not a substitute for the relief this bill would provide," she said.
Originally published by Hawaii News Now; click here to read the article on hawaiinewsnow.com.
By Chris Tanaka | Posted: Jul 23, 2015 4:13 PM HST | Updated: Jul 23, 2015 4:25 PM HST
WAIMANALO, OAHU (HawaiiNewsNow) - "It's crazy. It's crazy fast". That's how Dr. Harry Ako, the lead researcher on UH Manoa's industrial hemp project, describes how well one of the varieties has taken to the local environment.
In just ten weeks, several plants have grown to nearly 10 feet in height.
"Notice they destroy the weeds underneath because they grow so much faster than the weeds" he continued.
Longtime advocates were thrilled with the results.
"I'm so excited. It means so much for our farmers, it means so much for our entrepreneurs" said State Representative Cynthia Thielen, who has long championed the effort.
"This is an amazing plant. It's going to be a boon for Hawaii farmers, for the Hawaii economy" said State Senator Mike Gabbard, Chair of the Committee on Water, Land and Agriculture.
While the plants have flourished, the industry is still stunted. In Hawaii, industrial hemp growth is illegal.
"There are a few, a very few number of legislators that still are afraid of a crop that won't get anyone high. Unfortunately, some of them were in key positions last year" said Thielen, in reference to a bill that died in committee.
She and Gabbard, however, remain steadfast in getting legislation passed that will allow farmers to cultivate the crop for one of its thousands of applications.
State Representative Chris Lee sees it as an economic driver. "With the demise of sugarcane, pineapple...this can be something that can truly replace that on a massive scale. This can put people to work, can put dollars back in our economy, and market globally".
Researchers will now test the harvested hemp for a variety of factors. Doctor Ako said if politics weren’t involved, Hawaii could have an established hemp economy in as little as five years.
Industrial hemp, he notes, has a low THC count and does not get you high.
Originally published by KITV; click here to read the article on kitv.com.
Updated 6:56 PM HST Jul 23, 2015
UH researchers celebrate first harvest of hemp plants
HONOLULU - Some are calling it a field of dreams, and after decades of dreaming, the first hemp plants are in the ground and ready for harvest.
Click here to watch Catherine Cruz's report.
"They are beasts. I call them monsters. It's crazy. They are ten weeks old, and they got this big," said UH researcher Harry Ako.
According to Ako, the plants are not only drought-resistant and self-weeding, they're organic too. There has been no use of pesticides or fertilizer.
The ceremonial harvest celebrated results that have yielded robust plants in a short window of time.
With the potential of three crops a year, lawmakers who support the development of a Hawaii hemp industry say it's time to drop the stigma.
"No one should be afraid of a crop that has 25,000 uses, none of which get you high. So, it's time to get rid of the fear," said Rep. Cynthia Thielen.
"The fact that you are getting plants that are 10 feet high in 16 weeks-- this could be an amazing boon for our farmers and our economy," said Sen. Mike Gabbard.
Ako says for him, it's all about jobs for the future, and he is hopeful now that local businesses are starting to get interested.
"HC&S is thinking of grabbing the market on seeds, so if Kentucky wants to buy hemp they have to come to Hawaii to buy seeds," said Ako.
He pointed to one plant bursting with seeds.
There is also the potential for hempcrete, a building material that could be produced in the islands.
"We need to do the nuts and bolts of farming. We need to figure out irrigation. Once we release it to the private sector, farmers will need to know," said Ako.
It's a promising start, but there's more research work ahead to get this fledgling crop in more than just this one test field.
Originally published by KHON; click here to read the article on khon2.com.
By Web Staff | Published: July 23, 2015, 7:04 pm
Work began Thursday to harvest the first crop from the University of Hawaii's Industrial Hemp Research Project.
The field is located in Waimanalo and housed three varieties of industrial hemp: temperate zone hemp, tropical seed hemp, and tropical fiber hemp.
Initial findings from the project indicate that the tropical fiber hemp is flourishing and has grown over 10 feet tall during its crop cycle of 15 weeks. The tropical seed hemp is much shorter, but is heavily producing seed.
Meanwhile, the temperate zone hemp flowered and died after eight weeks.
Rep. Cynthia Thielen, R, Kailua, Kaneohe Bay, who helped lead the hemp farming movement in Hawaii, said it's been a challenge to ease the state's restrictions on hemp growing.
"Hemp is not a drug. Hemp is an agricultural crop that will keep our (agricultural) land and active production, provide a product for entrepreneurs," she said. "We'll be able to build our houses out of hemp, create and not import those materials."
The project was made possible by Hawaii’s Act 56 which allowed industrial hemp to be grown as a state or university research initiative.
Unlike marijuana, hemp has a very low tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) content, which is the active component that can make people feel "high."
Experts say today's U.S. market for hemp seed oil and fiber is approximately $600 million a year.