(PNN) THREE BURIALS UNEARTHED BY COWS AT LEPEULI UNCEREMONIOUSLY REBURIED BY SHPD’S MCMAHON WITHOUT BURIAL COUNCIL NOTIFICATION.

THREE BURIALS UNEARTHED BY COWS AT LEPEULI UNCEREMONIOUSLY REBURIED BY SHPD’S MCMAHON WITHOUT BURIAL COUNCIL NOTIFICATION.

LETTER DETAILS HARASSMENT OF TOURISTS BY LAYMON CONTINUES ON DISPUTED TRAIL

(PNN) -- Three burials that were disinterred by Bruce Laymon's cattle operation on Waioli Corporation property at Lepeuli (Larsen’s Beach) and were unceremoniously moved and reinterred by State Historical Preservation Division (SHPD) Archeologist Nancy McMahon, according to a letter from McMahon to Hope Kallai of Malama Moloa`a.

And in other developments the harassment of tourists by Laymon continues according to 62-year-old “snowbird” tourist Dennis L. Bosio.

The re-burials were apparently done without any notification or processing by the Kaua`i Burial Council (KBC).

In response to a letter from Kallai detailing her discovery of the reburials including maps to the area of the apparent re-interment, McMahon wrote to Kallai on December 17, 2009

Hi Hope,

This looks like the reinterment location that Eddie Ayau former Burial Staff of SHPD and myself did after three individuals were discovered at the base of the trail in the sandy beach as someone cut the fence or it broke and cattle wandered the area, apparently following the trail.

Thanks I will take a look as soon as possible.

Nancy McMahon,
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
Archaeology and Historic Preservation Manager
State Archaeologist

According to a Sept 11, 2009 memo marked “confidential” and obtained by Kallai. McMahon wrote to the DLNR’s Sam Lemmo:

"In Field 12 near the shoreline Hawaiian burials were found when the cattle broke the fence and eroded a trail. The reinterment is just below the fence in the boulder area in a gully at the end of Larsen's Beach Trail. In this area we recommend hand clearing no machinery and little herbicide use."

According to Kallai the burials are part of an ancient Hawaiian village as determined by archeologist David Burney of the National Tropical Botanical Gardens who has done extensive work at the caves in Maha`ulepu.

According to minutes from a Na Ala Hele meeting in 1998 Burney said the site may be “the oldest archaeological site on Kauai ”.

Kallai says that despite the fact that “Dr. Dave Burney (NTBG) corroborated the area as a significant archaeological site, with at least 2 distinct habitation layers”- a fact he reported to Waioli shortly after Hurricane ‘Iniki- “no protective measures were instituted” and no environmental assessment, which would include cultural impacts under HRS 343, has ever been conducted.

Currently there is an appeal pending before the Board of Land and Natural Resources (BLNR) for a conservation district use permit (CDUP) Laymon has obtained to do work in the area to pasture cattle, as PNN reported last month.

The incident of harassment occurred on March 6 according to Bosio, when he and a friend were “on the lateral trail where the trail becomes a road” according to a letter written that day by Bosio and obtained by PNN.

The letter says:

This morning about 9:30am... (a) man who identified himself as Bruce Laymon got out of a dump truck and confronted me.

He said " you are on private property and you know it, I am going to take your picture and the next time we see you on our property we will have you arrested". He was agitated, threatening and confrontational. He did not take my picture at this time but did yell at some workers to remember me if I came back on their property.

He accused me of being part of the group vandalizing his equipment and taking pictures and stirring up trouble. I had no idea about the damage to the equipment until the afternoon when I got the newspaper and saw today’s story.

A little while later I walked back down south on the beach a hundred yards or so and was talking to 2 guys I see there alot. We were on the sand not too far from the grass line. The guy who said he was Bruce Laymon came down on to the sand and started yelling at me again. He took my picture with a disposable camera and asked me for my name. When I smiled for the picture he said, "you better watch out, you think this is funny." He was yelling about how he was going to have 50 Hawaiians down here next week and they were going to take the beach back. "You watch and see, we will run you haoli's (sic) out of here. That's all you fucking haoli's do is come down here, get naked, and leave all kinds of shit back here in woods." He also yelled about how his entire crew was family and that's why they were doing this work, to reclaim the beach for their family and the Hawaiians.

I tried to calm him down and talk to him but he was having none of that. He kept accusing me of stirring up trouble. He also said that I was spreading lies through the newspaper.

Nice aloha spirit,
dennis

But Bosio did not make the letter public until May 5th saying

I have waited this long to make this account public because at the time my wife and I had 3 weeks remaining of vacation, we were renting near the Larsens (sic) Beach road, we walked Koolau road and Larsen’s Beach access road daily and were afraid we would run into either Bruce Laymon or one of his hired hands again. He was very threatening.

He ended by saying:

The above is a true and honest narrative of my encounter on March 6, 2010.

When I was confronted I was on a trail that I have used hundreds of times over the past seven years. There was a large truck, several pickups, guys with chain saws, and other large machinery clearing right up to the beach sand. I did not think that was right. I had taken pictures of the clearing work previous days, shared them with locals, and at least one of my pictures was in The Garden Island newspaper. I don’t know how they got it.

My wife and I are 62 year old retirees and have been coming to Kauai each winter for a month or two. We have real reservations about spending our vacation dollars on Kauai in the future. Just the lodging and rental car taxes for our two month’s on island this year were over $1,300. Larsen’s Beach is a unique natural treasure and the Larsen’s Beach experience is one that attracts a great deal of tourist revenue to Kauai . I hope it is protected for future generations.

Dennis L. Bosio

Kallai’s research into the significant cultural activities at Lepeuli are summarized in a letter to Office of Hawaiian Affairs Chief Executive Officer Clyde Nāmu'o.

The letter details the history of the region and so the need for a cultural impact statement according to Kallai. For those with an interest it is reprinted in full below.

RE: Cultural Impact Assessment Request
CDUA Permit Application 3525
DOCARE KA 09-12
Lepeuli, Ko`olau District, Kauai

Aloha no Mr. Nāmu'o and OHA:
There is a very distressing situation in the Lepeuli ahupua`a, Ko`olau District, of Kauai . A Conservation District Use Application has been submitted by Paradise Ranch, LLC and its attorney, Lorna Nishimitsu. This ahupua`a was acquired by Abner Wilcox in 1851 (Land Grant 530 for 535 acres for $535.68), with reservations (Koe ke kuleana o na kanaka) for the following kuleana(see attached): Kamokuliu (0519), Koleaka (05020), Kawelo(09073) , Kalawa (09149), Luahine (10014 also RP 4233), Makulu (0000K01), and a 20 acre Land Grant to Kane (523 in 2 apana). These kuleana areas are proposed to be disked, fenced and cross fenced for pasturage for commercial cattle production.

The Lepeuli Ahupua`a in the Ko`olau District of Kauai was a densely occupied coastal community of several hundred Native Hawaiians for about a thousand years, with features including ancient habitation sites,`auwai, agricultural sites and lo`i kalo, mala of noni, wauke, and u`ala, ponds and fish ponds, heiau and pa, and burial sites of `iwi kupuna. Coastal Alaloa connected the inter-related ahuua`a of the Koolau District from Kealia to Hanalei, through neigh boring areas of Moloa`a, Ka`aka`aniu, Lepeuli, Waipake, Pila`a, Kahili,Namahana, Kilauea and Waiakalua. Waipake kuleana landholders had kula of wauke in Moloa`a, connected by the coastal Ala Loa. A houselot in a Ka`aka`aniu kuleana had lo`i kalo in Lepeuli, documenting the inter-connectedness of these coastal fishing and agricultural communities

Taro production continued in Lepeuli Stream valley until the mid-1930's, when it was replaced by rice grown by the Japanese famers of Waipake. Contact period historic features include a four-room school, church, cemetery, pasture lands and piggery, sugar plantation ditches, and railroad tracks and the summer house of the plantation luna, L. David Larsen.

There has been no archaeological or cultural impact assessment of the potential impacts of proposed Paradise Ranch project on Waioli Corporation lands. There has never been any survey or inventory of Lepeuli. Applicant is applying for federal funds through the EQIP conservation program, subject to National Environmental Policy Act, which requires an assessment of environmental injustice assessment for particular impacts to subsistence hunters and gathers, dis-advantaged economic groups, races and cultural minorities.

According to Articles IX and XII of the State Constitution and other state laws, the state requires government agencies to "promote and preserve cultural beliefs, practices, and resources of Native Hawaiians and other ethnic groups."

The Department of Health (DOH), Chapter 343, requires an Environmental Assessment of cultural resources in determining significance and potential impacts of a proposed project.

Lepeuli has significant cultural and historic resources. The Ka`aka`aniu Reef system is the most highly documented tended limu in Hawai`i Nei, still of great important to the local residents. According to the predictive model of nearby archaeological assessments in Waipake and Moloa`a Bay Ranch, habitation sites and agricultural developments are expected to be in the stream valley with dryland terracing and agriculture on the slopes. Ancient and earlier prehistoric sites are predicted to be under the kuleana land filings. The historic ala loa joined the coastal communities throughout the Ko`olau District from Kealia to Hanalei.

The large swells of early December, 2009 exposed a significant archaeological site overlooking the stream channel of (de-watered) Lepeuli Stream. I notified SHPD (see attached); they claim it as one of their re-interments (see attached) - but there are significant features and charcoal firepits. I don't believe Nancy McMahon has been out to take a look.

There must be an archaeological and cultural impact assessment of the potential impacts of this Paradise Ranch CDUA to the Native Hawaiian community and it's special cultural resources and practices, including religious, subsistence fishing and gathering, by considering the impact of agricultural runoff to the reef resources of Ka`aka`aniu and cattle upon the historic kuleana lands of native Hawaiians in Lepeuli. Historic use by Japanese workers of Kilauea Sugar Plantation is highly documented. The only current residents of Lepeuli are descendents of Ko` olau School students.

I read with great respect your comments on the Moloa`a Bay Ranch CDUA. This Paradise Ranch project is of greater (more habitation and cultural uses) or equal importance, yet the Hawaiian community was not included for comments. The only history (and wildlife biology) was done by the applicant's attorney. Most of the Anahola community (including traditional cultural users and lineal descendents) do not know about this project. Federal funds should not be used to close off access to this important reef system. Paradise Ranch should not be allowed to rip and disk kuleana sands and back dunes (to increase water percolation!). Mr. Laymon, (known to disturb resting places of `iwi kupuna in prior CD violations) has stated that he knows where there are native Hawaiian burials. Scary.

Attached is a section excerpted from the Paradise Ranch SMA application that really deserves serious scrutiny.

Mahalo for your immediate action on this request and for requiring a cultural impact and archaeological assessment prior to any more impacting actions on these precious ancient Hawaiian homes and Conservation District Lands. Please contact me if you need any more information. Thank you for taking immediate steps to protect these resources and keep our history alive.

Hope Kallai

There were kuleana reserved in Lepeuli and resided on by Native Hawaiians until the 1930-1940’s. There are plenty of records and rememberences of these people. There are lineal descendents in the area.

One kuleana holder questioned whether he had to still pay taxes to the konohiki after Wilcox got Grant 530 Plenty of Hawaiian presence. The remains of a population of several hundred people living in Lepeuli for perhaps a thousand years are in the sands and lands of Lepeuli – not just 3 individuals. Conversion of house lots of kuleana to pasture has potential to significantly impact preservation and salvage of significant cultural resources. Closure of an ancient trail to important cultural resources is unacceptable.

The Office of Hawaiian Affairs has concerns with this project. Their comments have not been considered. There must be a culturally respectful plan for the re-burials; they must be offered protection from mechanized manipulation of the soil, herbicides and cattle manure. This is culturally and socially unconscionable. Burials in a commercial cow pasture! AUWE!

--------

We’re again forced to take a long weekend to take care of pressing matters. See ya Monday or so.

ACCESS SCHMACCESS

ACCESS SCHMACCESS: For a moment it looked like the story of the new apparently illegal fence at Lepeuli (Larsen’s) Beach had hit the big time.

After seeing the headline and subhead in this morning's Honolulu paper stating that "Development blocks traditional access; Landowners on three isles prevent people from using trails crossing their land" and seeing the story began with the name of Linda Sproat- one of those who has been most aggrieved and active in preserving the Alaloa that is now blocked by the fence- what else could it be?

But although the article is an all too familiar story of Kaua`i Planning Department bungling in preserving an access to Kauapea (Secret) Beach, nothing on the blocking of the ancient traditional access by Paradise Ranch's Bruce Laymon.

And there's nothing new on our story of Jesse Reynolds' allegation that Laymon tried to kill him last month although County Public Information Officer Mary Daubert says that "(a)ccording to KPD, the case is under investigation pending further developments, therefore, we cannot comment."

But there is news from Hope Kallai of Malama Moloa`a who has filed a complaint with the Land Use Commission asking how the heck they can ignore the fence which was apparently constructed in a conservation district (CD) without a conservation district use permit (CDUP) after Laymon withdrew his permit when the Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) decided to take a second look at it.

Kallai presents documentation noting that in 2009 the DLNR had already determined the fenced in area to be in the CD when they cited Laymon for unpermitted work and essentially asks for action.

She then presents the whole sordid history of Laymon's action in the area- a story which deserves a concise presentation.

Which is why today we present her letter in full.

-----

1 June 2011

Hope Kallai
Malama Moloa`a

Fred Talon
Land Use Commission
Department of Business, Economic Development & Tourism
State of Hawaii
P.O. Box 2359
Honolulu, Hawaii 96804-2359
(808) 587-3822 Fax: (808) 587-3827

Re: Prioritization of Conservation District Boundary Interpretation Request TMK (4) 5-1-3:003
Waioli Corporation (owner), Paradise Ranch (lessee)
Lepeuli, Kauai,

Aloha e Mr. Talon:

I would like to request prioritization of the Conservation District Boundary Interpretation on Waioli Corporation lands in Lepeuli, Kauai, that we previously spoke about on the phone (Feb., 2011 and April 2011). This request was also made by the Kauai Chapter of the Sierra Club (attached Feb. 10, 2011 letter). I understand that your office is understaffed and that your work load is heavy, but there is a need for this boundary determination interpretation to be expedited. Fencing has been recently constructed by lessee, Paradise Ranch LLC, in what appears to be this Conservation District.

May 2011 Fencing in Lepeuli

In 2009, Paradise Ranch was cited for performing work in the Conservation District. Paradise Ranch applied for a SMA Minor permit from the county of Kauai for fencing and this fencing map were submitted then.

2009 Lepeuli Map with County Engineer’s notes

An After-The-Fact CDUP was applied for work in this Lepeuli Conservation District, CDUP KA-3525, (attached), with fencing proposed at 110‘ from the shoreline. This permit was awarded, appealed by community groups, then later surrendered by the applicant, stating they had decided to move operations out of the Conservation District. After community members requested that stamped surveyors maps be presented as per the County Engineer’s original 2009 request (attached), Paradise Ranch LLC recently presented a stamped map (below) with a proposed fenceline in very close proximity to applicant’s interpretation of the CD location. This map states “minimum distance to be 110’ from shoreline” for the proposed fenceline.

2011 map with fenceline next to CD Boundary (as interpreted by Paradise Ranch)

Attached Conservation District maps and articles show the Conservation District to be 300’ from a certified shoreline in this area.

A entirely new fence was recently constructed by Paradise Ranch LLC in Lepeuli. We believe this fence is in the Conservation District and blocks the lateral coastal Alaloa. This project is federally funded through NRCS EQIP program. The pasture created by this new makai fence configuration will enable cattle to graze on a site where Hawaii State Department of Historic Preservation relocated human skeletal remains from 3 individuals. This is illegal as well as socially unconscionable.

Paradise Ranch has continued to manage the coastal vegetation in the Conservation with heavy equipment, brushhogs and chainsaws. The fenceline has been constructed in the apparent Conservation District, blocking an ancient lateral trail.

Steps need to be taken to determine the location of the boundary between the Conservation District and the Agricultural District in Lepeuli, as soon as possible. The Conservation District boundary presented on the maps by Paradise Ranch LLC is erroneous and and the fencing negatively impacts public access, human remains and archaeological sites.

This makai Conservation District is a primary monk seal pupping and rearing area. Two pups are being reared at Ka`aka`aniu reef right now. Impacts must be considered to endangered species by the restriction of public access on the ancient Alaloa trail. This forces all lateral transit on to the beach.

There are significant impacts to this fencing project. The Conservation District Boundary needs to be interpreted and determined by the state as soon as possible. What can we do to expedite this?  Mahalo for your help.

Hope Kallai

Attachments:
Sierra Club Land Use Request
SMA-Minor
CDUA 3525
2011 map
CD maps
CD Boundary article
Engineers notes

NOT DEAD YET

NOT DEAD YET: We’ve been getting a bunch of emails lately from Larsen's (Lepeuli) Beach activist Richard Spacer with his hair on fire asking us to say something again about the battle against land-owner Waioli Corporation and rancher Bruce Laymon to preserve the easier- and traditional- access to the beach which has appeared all but lost lately with the issuing of Lymon’s Conservation District Use Permit (CDUP).

We told him that what we had discovered is that there was a split among many in the environmental community- including some who may be way too close to Waioli Corp to have full objectivity on the matter- with some claiming that easy access to all areas (and specifically this one) may not be the best thing lest we “love the place to death”... which many others think is code for “keep the naked hippies out”.

So we’re glad to hear the news today that, as usual, it’s Sierra Club- along with the Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation (HLC) and the Surfrider Foundation- to the rescue and they’re ready to continue the battle and appeal the decision to grant a Conservation district Use Permit (CDUP) to Lymon to construct a fence across the traditional access and allow cattle to graze just above the beach.

But they really do need more cash to pay HLC than the SC or SF have provided thus far. As the letter we received says:

A coastal trail on Kaua`i, created hundreds of years ago by Hawaiians treading the path by foot, will be obliterated by cattle in a matter of months unless we act now.

Please read below to see how you can help preserve public access and set a precedent in protecting trails.

A traditional trail following the coastline leading to Larsen's (Lepeuli) Beach is on the verge of being turned into pasture land for a commercial cattle enterprise which will block public access to and along the trail. This ancient (alaloa) trail has been used by Hawaiians for subsistence fishing, gathering and cultural practices for many generations.

This past week the Department of Land and Natural Resources inappropriately granted Waioli Corporation’s lessee a permit for cattle fencing in 18 acres of conservation land next to the beach. They already have cattle operations in the adjacent 600 acres. This decision will have environmental impacts and threaten coastal and cultural resources.

Fortunately, Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation will appeal DLNR's decision, on behalf of a Native Hawaiian, provided they receive funding by Thursday, February 25th. The Kaua`i Group Sierra Club and Surfrider Foundation have contributed toward the appeal, but a significant amount still needs to be raised.

We're asking people who care about preserving public access on traditional trails, who can make a contribution of any amount, to please help now.

Please make your check payable to "Sierra Club". If you wish to make a sizeable donation and want it to be tax deductible, make check payable to "Sierra Club Foundation". All checks to mailed to:

Sierra Club Kaua`i Group
PO Box 3412
Lihue, HI 9676

In addition, if you want to help in other ways please email: AuntyLokeWouldGo(at)gmail.com

Mahalo!

The Kaua`i Group Sierra Club

Attached to the letter was an amazingly complete and detailed letter listing all the deficiencies in and discrepancies with Hawai`i Administrative Rules (HAR) contained in the permit which the Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) ignored in granting it.

It’s pretty long but worth the read so we’re posting the entire Jan. 8th Sierra Club letter to DLNR. It really puts together the way the sham of due process and the outright illegal nature of the granting of the permit occurred and includes all the reasons why the permit should be rescinded.

-----------

Sierra Club Kaua`i Group of the Hawai`i Chapter

January 8, 2010
Laura H. Thielen Samuel J. Lemmo, Administrator
BLNR Chairperson Office of Conservation & Coastal Lands
Department of Land & Natural Resources Department of Land & Natural Resources
P. O. Box 621 P. O. Box 621
Honolulu, HI 97809 Honolulu, HI 97809
SUBJECT: Conservation District Use Application (CDUA) KA‐3525; TMK (4) 5-1-003:003
Lepeuli, Kaua`i – Paradise Ranch, LLC
Dear Ms. Thielen and Mr. Lemmo:
The Sierra Club Kauai Group (SC) is extremely concerned that many of the requirements prescribed by HAR Chapter 13-5 are missing from the CDUA referenced above. In addition, many statements in the application do not bear up under examination of the facts. This letter provides further detail, supplemental to our October 23, 2009 letter to OCCL. The application should be denied based on reasons enumerated herein.

1. A Department Permit was not appropriate. According to HAR 13-5-40 and HAR 13-5-
33(j) a board permit with a public hearing should have been required (as requested in SC’s October 23, 2009 letter) because it involves: (1) land use for commercial purposes (ranching) and (2) that public interest warrants a hearing based on significant impacts.

2. The CDUA is not “complete” according to HAR 13-5-31(c) because many Adjacent Property Owners were not notified. Failure to notify, as required on page 14 of the Department’s CDUA Instructions, is one reason why this application incomplete.

3. Failure to comply with Required Attachments, Item 2 - Maps: Submit detailed contour maps for ocean areas and areas where slopes are 20% or more according to CDUA Instructions on page 2 and HAR 13‐5‐31(a). The CDUA survey map does not include elevation contours as required. From the plateau, a series of hills descend to the beach. The sloping terrain does not afford appropriate pasturage. Severe scarping already occurs in areas and cattle will exacerbate the erosion. Within the 20‐acre Conservation District, the degree of slope exceeds forty percent which is why it falls within the “Limited Subzone”. Any reference to slope is omitted in the application, but it is very relevant because the proposed use is a fence ‐‐ a structure which constitutes development.

4. Of the proposed fence replacement, only 1/3 is an “existing fence”. Only one-third of the proposed fencing was “existing”. Within the 20.7 acre Conservation District, which is primarily coastal scrub, only 3-acres might have been pasture. The pre-existing fence has not been in continuous use pursuant to Non‐conforming Shoreline Structures, HRS 13-222-19.

5. Failure to comply with Required Attachments, Item 2 – Maps: Provide a Certified Shoreline Map for shoreline parcels (see CDUA Instructions on page 2). The most recent certified shoreline was approved in 1978. To waive the certified shoreline requirement in lieu of the 110’ setback agreed to by the applicant is not prudent based on 30‐years of erosion (as much as .5‐ft per year in some areas). Further, evidence of the debris line indicates that the survey stakes did not correctly identify the high wash of the waves, especially at the property’s north end.

6. A Description of Coastal Hazards was Omitted in the CDUA. The applicant failed to describe the shoreline erosion that prompted subdivision of this property in Land Court Decree Application No. 1161, March 2, 2000.

7. The Unimproved Existing Road on the Beach Encroaches on State Property. The CDUA survey map indicates “existing roads”. Portions of this roadway are located on the sandy beach, within the shoreline and on state property. Requiring a certified shoreline would verify this encroachment.

8. Reference to Lepeuli Stream was omitted in the CDUA. The stream channel is a distinct topographic feature. It was not identified in the application or on the survey map. Environmental impacts of grazing in proximity to the riparian zone of Lepeuli Stream were not examined.

9. The NRCS Conservation Plan does not identify the Conservation District (Field 12) for “Prescribed Grazing” (see Enclosure A). This fact was omitted in the CDUA. According to HAR 13-5-42(19): Use of the area shall conform with the program of appropriate soil and water conservation district or plan approved by and on file with the department, where applicable. In the Plan, grazing is disallowed in the Conservation District because the land is unsuitable; it is: a) susceptible to erosion due its slope and shallow soil profiles. b) designated by FIRM Maps as zone VE -- subject to wave action, high‐velocity flow, and erosion during the 1000 year flood.

10. The CDUA did not provide written justification to deviate from the NRCS Plan according to HAR 13-5-42(c). Any deviation from the standard conditions (i.e. HAR 13- 5-42(19) -- described above -- must be supported by a satisfactory written justification stating: (1) the deviation is necessary because of the lack of practical alternatives; (2) the deviation shall not result in any substantial adverse impacts to natural resources; and (3) the deviation does not conflict with the objective of the subzone. No justification was provided. Grazing in Field 12—the 20.7 acres of the Conservation District was not permitted by the NRCS Conservation plan. The applicant has practical alternatives for pasturage within the other 600+ acres he leases. Cattle do not benefit coastal ecosystems.

11. The Brush Management Plan to enhance wildlife habitat fails to identify what species are to be “enhanced”. Brush management as a tool to “eliminate the frequency of trespass transients” that are “camping illegally” is not the purpose of an NRCS conservation plan or a CDUP – that is the jurisdiction of law enforcement.

12. Existing Fauna was not Described and the Wildlife Management Plan was omitted from the CDUA (although it was referred to several times in the application). No list of wildlife species to be benefited is provided in the CDUA. There is no evidence corroborating the applicant’s need for “brush management for wildlife purposes”.

13. Endangered and threatened species were not adequately identified in the CDUA. New evidence regarding the presence of endangered and threatened species needs to be included in this CDUA. An Hawaiian monk seal (endangered species) was born at Larsen’s Beach and 94 green sea turtles (a threatened species) hatched on the beach Fall 2009. Migratory birds of concern – the Laysan albatross – nest on the property. Impacts of fencing and cattle on these species was not addressed in the application. The NRCS Conservation Plan should be updated as well to identify these species.

14. The CDUA Failed to describe Existing Flora and provide general locations and types on a map entitled resources as required in the application. There are a number of threatened medicinal plants species, the ihi, ilima, and pohinahina. The endangered Hawaiian ground cover, ulei, and the native pohuehue are also found in this area. These species will be decimated once cattle are introduced. When pesticides or herbicides are introduced, the gathering of la`au that grow in this coastal area will have to cease because of contamination by proximity.

15. The CDUA fails to comply with HAR 13-5-22 and 23 - in the Limited Subzone, “Natural vegetative plant cover, where disturbed, shall be restored or replaced with endemic or indigenous planting.” The CDUA states that the applicant will remove trees and undergrowth to encourage reestablishment of grasses, however, no grass species have been identified for preservation or reestablishment. Only naupaka is designated for “protection” in the Conservation District but this is the same location where the applicant wants to graze cattle.

16. Tree replacement should be required in the CDUA with a one-for-one replacement of trees 6-inches or more in diameter. The species and size of those trees to be removed and the species and size of the replacement trees should be identified in the CDUA. The backshore is covered with beach heliotrope, naupaka, milo, and false kamani.

17. The CDUA failed to identify the historic, archeological and cultural sites within or near the parcel. The application denied that any Hawaiian habitation occurred on the property after the 1850’s despite readily available evidence that: - There were 35 acres of lo`i kalo agriculture in Lepeuli according to Kilauea Sugar Plantation’s 1932 map. Most were located in the SMA and Conservation District along stream channels or on auwai and next to native Hawaiian habitation (kuleanas).
- The 1835 census recorded a population of 85 adults and children in Lepeuli.
- Kuleana claims for Lepeuli are found at www.ulukau.org
- Known cultural resources in the coastal zone area of the Conservation District include: streams, trails, coral reef, fishing areas, a possible fish trap, historic cultivation areas and house sites, a burial, limu gathering areas, sandy beach, turtle nesting area, native plants and possible fish sighting spots (kilo i`a).

18. The CDUA failed to describe how the proposed project would impact the historic resources and Hawaiian cultural resources, usage and rights in or near the project area. It omitted any discussion of traditional and customary Hawaiian practices for subsistence, cultural, medicinal or religious purposes that take place in or near the project area. It erroneously states that there is no record that the property was being used by native Hawaiians for their cultural beliefs, practices or resources (page 6) as it was under private ownership since the 1850’s. Evidence of kuleana lands and taro lo`i dispute that assertion.

19. Archeological Sites at Lepeuli are not acknowledged in the CDUA. Based on the quantity and significance of finds documented in the archeological inventory surveys for the adjacent coastal properties, a study should be required. A Kaua`i resident reported to SHPD on December 17, 2009 a new archeological site on the property having been exposed by erosion from recent high wave events and storm runoff. A complex of rock walls, terraces and a possible subsurface house overlooking the Lepeuli Stream channel have also been reported by residents and photo documentation is available.

20. There is no Cultural Resources Assessment in the CDUA. Practitioners of Hawaiian culture who live in, have experience with, or have knowledge about the affected district were not contacted for this application. Based on historic documentation about coastal habitation in Lepeuli and the well-known Ka`aka`aniu Reef which is a valued resource for throw-netting, spear-fishing, pole fishing, seaweed harvesting, etc., a cultural resource assessment is warranted.

21. Traditional and customary native Hawaiian rights exercised in the Conservation District will be affected or impaired by the proposed action. By law, such traditional and customary rights shall include, but not be limited to the gathering of hihiwai, opae, o`opu, limu, thatch, ti leaf, aho cord, and medicinal plants for subsistence, cultural and religious purposes.
a) The State and its agencies are obligated to protect the reasonable exercise of customarily and traditionally exercised rights of Hawaiians to the extent feasible;
b) The agencies are obligated to make an assessment of impacts upon traditional and customary practices of native Hawaiians that is independent of the applicant;
c) The independent assessment must include the following:
(1) the identity and scope of “valued cultural, historical, or natural resources” in the area, including the extent to which traditional and customary native Hawaiian rights are exercised in the affected area;
(2) the extent to which those resources – including traditional and customary native Hawaiian rights will be affected or impaired by the proposed action; and
(3) the feasible action, if any, to be taken by the agency to reasonably protect native Hawaiian rights if they are found to exist.

22. No legal basis is provided for the assertion that no prescriptive rights accrue over lands registered with the Land Court of the State of Hawaii. It is in the interest of the public, that the State provide definitive legal documentation as to whether its right to the traditional and customary trail has been relinquished.

23. Consideration of Traditional Hawaiian Values and Native Hawaiian Access was Omitted from CDUA. HRS 205A-2(b)(2)(A) establishes the objectives and policies of the coastal zone management program and provides that the objectives should, -Protect, preserve, and where desirable, restore those natural and manmade historic and prehistoric resources in the coastal zone management area that are significant in Hawaiian and American history and culture.- Evidence of settlement patterns as of 1932, demonstrate that the coastal area was inhabited by Hawaiians. And, the coastal alaloa was the means by which they would walk from lo`i to kuleanas. The applicant’s denial of any native Hawaiian cultural resources contradicts testimony of neighbors, community organizations, and cultural practitioners. Attached (Enclosure B) is the March 2, 2007 letter from Curt Cottrell, NAH Program Manager to Patricia Hanwright, the adjacent property owner in the ahupua`a of Ka`aka`aniu, stating that ”DLNR has determined that the historic trail identified on registered maps is still owned by the State pursuant to Chapter 264-1, Hawaii Revised Statutes.”

24. The CDUA failed to describe the traditional use of the “existing trail” behind the beach which is identified as “existing trail” on the CDUA survey map.
a) Hiranaka Surveyor’s analysis of Registered Map No 432 dated 1833, depicts the approximate location of Koolau Road. This is clearly not the coastal trail when compared with the government Survey Registered Map No 1395 of the Island of Kauai, dated 1878 (submitted by SC) documenting the coastal alaloa and Koolau Road. Both run parallel to the coast and Koolau Road is mauka of the coastal trail.
b) Identified as State Archeological site No. 50-30-04-1034, the alaloa is “an important access route in both traditional and historic times”.
c) The statement that the existing trail “appears to have been created” by current day beachgoers is contrary to historic evidence. This coastal right‐of‐way provided native tenants and travelers access between kuleana lands, cultivating fields and ahupua`a linking the past to present use. The coastal trail through Lepeuli, which connects the adjacent ahupua`a of Ka`aka`aniu and Waipake has been used continuously by cultural practitioners and the public.
d) Fencing will suppress, limit and restrict native Hawaiian rights to use the traditional and customary trail for access to and along the shoreline for subsistence gathering of food and plants for cultural and medicinal purposes.

25. The existing County right-of way is currently under scrutiny by county officials due to several discrepancies. An apparent boulder fall on the original trail decades ago and a boundary fence blocking access to that trail are prompting the county to conduct a survey to verify whether the existing public trail alignment corresponds to the metes and bounds in the deed for the county’s purchase from Waioli Corporation in 1979. The path currently maintained by the county is apparently sited on Waioli’s private property. Sierra Club Kaua`i Group recommends that the OCCL staff and Board members come to Kaua`i for a site visit to fully understand the threats and impacts to the resources that the Coastal Zone Management Act seeks to protect.
The applicant has not met the burden of demonstrating that the proposed land use is consistent with the criteria of HAR 13-5-30(c). Procedurally, many of the requirements prescribed by HAR Chapter 13-5 are missing from the CDUA. Furthermore, the facts would have been flushed out had a Board permit been sought instead of a Department permit which does not provide for a public hearing. As noted in SC’s October 23, 2009 letter, a hearing is warranted based on significant impacts and public interest.
Lastly, we find that the November 11, 2009 letter to SC from Ms. Nishimitsu, the applicant’s representative, is wholly unsatisfactory in addressing the concerns outlined in our letter to OCCL on October 23, 2009. Procedurally, the department should not have to rely on information that is incomplete, inaccurate or false. And, if approved, the permit may need to be modified, suspended or revoked after-the-fact in accordance with HAR 13-5-42 (11).

It is paramount to preserve the integrity and fragile nature of the Lepeuli coastal resources, species and cultural assets -- they deserve the conscientious stewardship afforded in Conservation District permit regulations, in which this application has fallen short. CDUA KA‐3525 should be denied.

Sincerely,
Judy Dalton and Rayne Regush
Sierra Club Executive Committee
Kaua`i Group, Hawai`i Chapter

cc: Ron Agor, Kaua`i Rep, BLNR
BLNR Members
Bob Schleck & Board Members, Waioli Corporation
Mayor Bernard Carvalho
Kaua`i County Council
Ian Costa, County of Kaua`i Planning Dept.
Kai Markel, OHA
Lex Riggle, NRCS
Robert Harris, Sierra Club Hawai`i Chapter

...AND THE UGLY

...AND THE UGLY: There’s good news and bad news on the Lepeuli- aka Larsen’s Beach- front.

The good news is that the appeal of the Bruce Laymon’s CDUA permit- filed by Sierra Club- along with the Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation (HLC) and the Surfrider Foundation and supported by the Office of Hawaiian Affairs has been granted.

The bad news is that it will be heard in Honolulu on the May 13th meeting of the Board of Land and Natural Resources (BLNR).

According to Hope Kallai of Malama Moloa`a (MM) Laymon has clearcut the beach and shredded coral and apparently no agency seems to care. And there’s still no usable access while the various “stakeholder” parties wrangle over whether or not to honor the traditional Alaloa or make believe it never existed with the later seemingly being the one thing they all agree upon.

For those who are uninitiated in the debacle, follow the links above for our past posts.

Apparently the best Kaua`i people who can’t afford airfare can do is to write to various people and agencies.

Here’s a primer in preparing testimony from MM.

----

Lepeuli CDUA appeal will be discussed at the BLNR meeting May 13 in Honolulu

According to (Tiger) Kimberly K. Tiger Mills, Staff Planner for the State of Hawaii Department of Land & Natural Resources (DLNR) Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands (OCCL), the appeal of the approval of the Paradise Ranch Conservation District Use Application to convert shorefront coastal scrub into commercial cattle pasture will be considered by the Board of Land and Natural Resources (BLNR) on THURSDAY, May 13, 2010. Meetings begin at 9 am at the
Kalanimoku Building1151 Punchbowl St.Honolulu , HI 96813www.hawaii.gov/dlnr/occl
dlnr@hawaii.gov

The agenda is not available yet, but Lepeuli as an agenda item has been confirmed. Book flights now!

The BLNR meeting agenda for May 13th will appear on our website one week prior on May 6th: http://hawaii.gov/dlnr/chair/meeting

· There are many reasons for considering the appeal of this CDUA. There has been seriously inadequate community involvement. Repeated requests from the public as well as 3 requests from Senator Gary Hooser (even offering to fund the DLNR trip to Kauai for the meeting) have been refused.

-There are inadequate agency comments. Three federally listed species will potentially be negatively impacted by this project, yet there is no Habitat Conservation Plan (as required under HRS 195D-21) for these species. Federal funds are being used for pasture conversion of a native habitat with potential impacts to endangered species.

-There must be a current shoreline certification. There has not been a state survey since 1978. Project applicant states “property boundary is makai of shoreline.” He manages the coral cobble and sand with a BrushHog. This is PUBLIC LAND in the Conservation District. Applicant has removed the debris line with machinery.

-Ancient Alaloa has NEVER been closed off. It is a significant trail with important cultural and PASH access needs. It has been in continual use for many hundreds of years. All ancient roads and trails are state land. The cultural comments of segment of the Alaloa (Arch siste 1034) managed by the Na Ala Hele trail system document the importance of this trail system and the antiquity of it. The Lepeuli must be recognized as an Archaeological Site and offered state protection.

-There must be a Cultural Impact Assessment of the ahupua`a of Lepeuli before any more mechanized manipulation of cultural sites present.

DLNR never contacted any harvesters or user groups of the most important limu kohu resources in Hawaii .

-Agriculture (cattle operations) will not benefit the reef. This statement is ridiculous.

-There has never been an estimate at the usage and visitation of the Alaloa or the County Right-Of-Way. The user groups must be defined and consulted before any new trail is designed. Traditional gathers must be consulted about trail access.

-Any new trail configuration must be designed to PASH and ADA Standards. The Ancient Alaloa falls under Historic Trail standards; the County Right of Way must adhere to ADA Trail standards.

-Impact to protected species of Alaloa closure (and subsequent increase in beach travel) has not been considered.

-Native plant communities and indigenous wildlife are protected under HRS 195.

-Beach access is protected by Hawaii state laws including the right of safe transit along the shorelines. HRS 115-5 offers the public a 6’ transit corridor in areas where there are rocky shorelines or cliffs. Blocking any public access with fences or gates to the shoreline is a misdemeanor and punishable by fines.

Letters can be written to the Board of Land and Natural Resources (BLNR) at

Adaline Cummings, SecretaryBoard of Land & Natural Resources1151 Punchbowl Street, Suite 130Honolulu, Hawaii 96813Phone: 808-587-0404Fax: 808-587-0390
adaline.f.cummings@hawaii.gov

Comments should also be sent to Tiger Mills of the Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands

Kimberly K. (Tiger) Mills, Staff PlannerState of HawaiiDepartment of Land & Natural ResourcesOffice of Conservation and Coastal LandsP.O. Box 621Honolulu, Hawaii 96809
kimberly.mills@hawaii.gov

Request a current Shoreline Certification from the State Land Survey Division

Reid K. Siarot, State Land Surveyor
Department of Accounting & General Services
Land Survey Division
1151 Punchbowl St., Rm 210
Honolulu Hawaii 96813
(808) 586-0390
(808) 586-0383 fax
reid.k.siarot@hawaii.gov

and

Christopher L. Conger, Shoreline Specialist
University of Hawaii Sea Grant College Program
Department of Land and Natural Resources
1151 Punchbowl St., Rm 131
Honolulu Hawaii 96813
(808) 587-0049 work
(808) 520-4892 work cell
(808) 587-0322 fax
Chris.L.Conger@hawaii.gov

Request a Cultural Impact Assessment (CIA) and Archaeological Inventory/Assessment from

Puaalaokalani Aiu, Administrator
State Historic Preservation Division
Kakuhihewa Building,
601 Kamokila Blvd., Suite 555,
Kapolei, Hawai`i , 96707Ph: (808) 692-8015Fax: (808) 692-8020
Pua.Aiu@hawaii.gov
nancy.a.mcmahon@hawaii.gov

And

Clyde Namu`o
OHA
711 Kapi'olani Blvd., Ste. 500
Honolulu, HI 96813
Phone: (808) 594-1835
Fax: (808) 594-1865
clydenamuo@oha.org

OHA Washington, D.C., Bureau50 F St. NW, Ste. 3300Washington, D.C. 20001 Ph: (202) 454-0920 Fax: (202) 789-1758 timjohnson@ohadc.org

OHA Kaua'i & Ni'ihau2970 Kele Street, Ste. 113Lihu'e, HI 96766Phone: (808) 241-3390Fax: (808) 241-3508 kalikos@oha.org
kaim@oha.org


Comments should also be sent to the county at
mayor@kauai.gov;openspace@kauai.gov; councilmembers@kauai.gov; CouncilTestimony@kauai.gov; csimao@kauai.gov;
State emails:
dlnr@hawaii.gov; adaline.f.cummings@hawaii.gov; kimberly.mills@hawaii.gov; reid.k.siarot@hawaii.gov; Chris.L.Conger@hawaii.gov; Pua.Aiu@hawaii.gov;
nancy.a.mcmahon@hawaii.gov; clydenamuo@oha.org; timjohnson@ohadc.org; kalikos@oha.org
kaim@oha.org

PAUL HARVEY’S REVENGE

PAUL HARVEY’S REVENGE: It feels like “Let’s All Blow Smoke Up Bruce Laymon’s Ass Week” what with Laymon getting the kid-glove treatment from our friend Joan Conrow yesterday and again much more so from out no-so-much-friend Leo Azambuja in today’s local newspaper, all over Laymon’s hatemongering and intimidation campaign at Lepeuli (Larsen’s).

From multiple reports we’ve heard, the level of fear and loathing out there has increased exponentially with reports of confrontational incidents spurred by Laymon against beach goers since he withdrew his request for a state permit recently... as those who can read between the lines of Conrow’s and the paper’s reports can tell.

But one “comment” on Conrow’s post struck us as needing further exposure, that of Lepeuli activist Richard Spacer.

While many on both sides of the issue have criticized Spacer for both his tactics and his position on some of the issues- and although we don’t necessarily agree with him on all points- we thought his rebuttal needed exposure especially regarding some of the history of prescriptive rights and the case law concerning nudity. We also think his “report” regarding the FBI’s visit to Laymon investigating possible hate crimes- which we have independently confirmed- needs more exposure.

The rest, we need to point out, we can neither confirm or refute but are lending today’s column to his side of a story that was presented so one-sidedly, especially in today’s newspaper.

The third part was originally “edited” by Conrow but we requested and received that portion from Spacer today and have included it below.

Here are his comments, all “sic.”

Seems like Bruce Laymon has got to you as well, Ms. Conrow.

The reason the public has the right to access the ala loa trail THROUGH Waioli Corporation land because under the Highways Act of 1892, passed during the reign of Queen Lililoukalani, all roads, trails, etc, at that time were guaranteed to be public forever. The trail through Lepeuli existed in 1892. There are official maps from 1878 clearly showing the trail. There is Native Hawaiian testimony. Waioli Corporation is crying foul becasue they do not like that 1892 law that Lililoukalani had the wisdom to install as she saw the changes coming, and how arrogant haole landowners would keep Hawaiians off the land. A court case on the Big Island concerning an ala loa there was resolved with maps and Native Hawaiian testimony. It is not a private property issue. That is PR spin from Waioli and Laymon becasue they do not want the public to know about the Highways Act of 1892. Google it, see for yourselves.

The same is true in next door Kaakaaniu, owned by Patricia Hanwright. DLNR's Curt Cottrell in 2007 sent her a letter essentially saying to get ready and let them in, as the state claims a coastal trail through there. Patricia Hanwright won't budge. The same stubborness as Waioli. Waioli and Patricia Hanwright are united in denying this trail exists. I have discussed this on KKCR.

The FBI investigated because the KPD has a long history of racism against Caucasians and activists feel little to no vaule will come from filing complaints against Bruce Laymon's hate speech with KPD. How coincidental was the Caucasian guys were at Laymon's home at the time of the FBI visit. Was the FBI visit scheduled in advance or did they make a surprise visit? Do you honestly think the macho he-man local boy police officer would do anything about a gay, lesbian or naturist being attacked? Whether his father is or is not Caucasian or anything else is irrelevant. Bruce Laymon's behavior stands on its own. Bruce Laymon on March 6 told Colorado beachgoer Dennis Bosio at 9:30 am that next week he was going to have 50 Hawaiians down at Larsen's and RUN the f****** haoles out. At 11:30 am the same day he told me he would have 100 Hawaiians there and said he was "taking back the beach." Whatever that is supposed to mean. Exactly HOW are the whites going to be "RUN" out of a PUBLIC beach? With guns, knives, machetes, spearguns, pit bulls?? Mr. Bosio made a notarized statement of the incident and this document is in the posession of the activists, DLNR, KPD, and attorney Colin Yost. It is publically accesible. It clearly documents Bruce Laymon's desire to drive white people out of Larsen's Beach. That means he is a bigot.

The Conservation District Use Permit (now void) granted to Bruce Laymon stated there would be no driving accross Waioli property to access the beach, unless it is NOAA or emergency vehicles. This is violated almost weekly by Filipino and Hawaiian associates of Bruce Laymon including Sherwood Iida who use Schoolhouse Road to set up camps, leave unattended fishing poles, and generally harass beachgoers. Funny how Bruce Laymon leaves that bit out.

Part 2.

The steep, un-maintained easement trail to the beach the Hawaiians mention is just that, an EASEMENT. We do not own it, Waioli does. If you read the easement document, and I assume you did because you were at county council July 7, 2010 when it was introduced, you would know Waioli reserves the right to erect walls or fencing on it. Waioli Attorney Don Wilson's theatrical on-camera denials notwithstanding, the legal document language reserves the right of Waioli to close it off.

Multiple times I have asked county spokesperson Mary Daubert to ask public works when they are going to maintain the county right-of-way trail we obtained in 1979 and the easment trail. I never get an answer as to when, and no improvement has been made to either trail in over a year. My latest request was referred to the county attorney. Why does Kauai County need to ask their lawyer before weed-whacking trails?

This "cattle ranching" project has little to do with cattle; it is all about keeping people away from Larsen's Beach that Bruce Laymon objects to. Who are those people? Bruce Laymon, Robert Schleck and Patricia Hanwright confidante and neighbor Steve Frailey have told us many times in public conversations, including October 16, 2009 at Larsen's. They use the euphemistic term "illegal behavior" to describe them. On January 19, 2011 a young lady who lives near the beach was attempting to use the gradual, lateral trail and was stopped by Bruce Laymon, busy installing 2 fence posts. She asked him who he was to stop her. He said he was the landowner. That is a fallacy. He is a lessee. She asked him WHY he was fencing. Bruce Laymon told her the fence is to keep campers, nudes, and gays from getting to the beach. In 2011 can you believe such bigoted speech is being uttered!? Campers on Waioli land is one thing. Gays and naturists on a public beach have legal protections and this hate speech against both groups is criminal and leaves Bruce Laymon and Waioli Corporation vulnerable to civil litigation. Being gay or lesbian in Hawaii is not illegal. Neither is topfree or nude sunbathing if you are not intending to affront of alarm (offend) someone on a NON-state park beach. A unanimous state supreme court ruling in 2000 settled this issue once and for all. A group called Kauai Naturists has been formed in response to recent events to document harassment of naturists, disseminate correct information, and to make certain this hate speech stops.
February 14, 2011 8:28 PM

Part 3 (note: only the final paragraph was permitted to be posted by Conrow. As noted above we received the first two paragraphs from Spacer):

Bruce Laymon is a Jehovah's Witness according to a member of that church I spoke with in Kapaa. This sect, many say cult, is well known for its intolerance of gays and lesbians. They consider it sinful and illegal. They also hate naturists. Bruce Laymon sees Larsen's as a sinful place and he is the appointed moral messenger to bring pure, "christian" values to that location, whether anyone agrees with him or not. Under Bruce Laymon's vision of Larsen's Beach, judge Sabrina Shizue McKenna, nominated by Governor Neil Abercrombie to sit on the state supreme court, would be excluded from this PUBLIC beach because she is gay. The passing of civil unions and the imminent signing into law of that legislation must be causing Bruce Laymon to lose his mind. Meanwhile, how is it that Robert Schleck, who is gay, is Bruce Laymon's boss, a man who hates gays?! What is that?

Of course, the joke is on Bruce Laymon because Waioli Corporation is using him as a pawn to "clean up" the land so it can be sold to the highest bidder for housing development. Waioli Vice President Charles Spitz told us that recently, as well as that Waioli spent over $40,000. in legal fees over this issue. So much for Waioli valuing preservation.

This issue has severely damaged Waioli's reputation. Ms. Conrow, you ask how to stop the "insanity". How to stop it is for the pro-access board members (there ARE pro-access members) to dump Robert Schleck, Bruce Laymon, and the anti-access trustees on the board NOW. Deed to the public in perpetuity and irrevocably the gradual trail from the Kaakaaniu line to the Waipake line. It is time for Waioli Corporation to say "aloha" instead of "kapu".

(PNN) N. SHORE FARM WORKER ACCUSES LAYMON OF ATTEMPTED MURDER IN LEPEULI BEATING

N. SHORE FARM WORKER ACCUSES LAYMON OF ATTEMPTED MURDER IN LEPEULI BEATING

(PNN) -- A North Shore farm workers says rancher Bruce Laymon beat and tried to kill him as he was walking down the "new" trail to Lepeuli Beach on the night of May 23.

Jesse Reynolds of Anini Beach told police on May 25 that Laymon jumped out of the bushes at about 9 p.m. and beat him on the head and lower back and then dragged him by his hair and attempted to throw him over the cliff as Reynolds was going down to the beach.

"He tried to kill me" Reynolds can be heard saying on a digital audio file obtained by PNN, which was recorded by a North Shore farmer- who asked not to be identified for fear of repercussions- as Reynolds gave his statement to the police.

The incident occurred the same day that Laymon and his workers had erected a fence blocking the traditional "Ala Loa", a gently sloping ancient trail, that was apparently constructed without a required conservation district use permit (CDUP) from the state.

"Bruce Laymon's the one who did this to me" said Reynolds apparently as he showed police marks and bruises on his back and head, saying he had still had pain in his kidneys.

According to the audio recording Reynolds can be heard telling police that "Bruce Laymon came up and started hitting me for no reason."

He continued, saying that Laymon jumped out of the bushes as Reynolds was going down to the beach, saying that Laymon was accompanied by one of his workers, known to Reynolds as "BJ," and another man whom Reynolds said he could not identify.

Reynolds says he got away and briefly hid on the beach before making his way to Kilauea where he called police from a pay phone around midnight. He says he then decided not to report the alleged beating to the police at that time for fear that they might blame him due to Laymon's position in the community. In addition he said he didn't want to have to pay for an ambulance after the dispatcher asked him if she should send one so he decided to terminate the call.

Two days later, at the urging of many- including the farmer who made the audio recording- Reynolds finally did file a complaint with police, accompanied by the farmer who verified to PNN that the audio file was indeed recorded by him and that the persons on the recording were he, Reynolds and the two policemen who took the complaint.

According to the farmer, Reynolds is trying to obtain the police report and find out what the status of the case is and whether Laymon has been questions and/or arrested.

(PNN) OHA JOINS FRAY IN QUESTIONING LEPEULI (LARSEN'S) PERMIT

OHA JOINS FRAY IN QUESTIONING LEPEULI (LARSEN'S) PERMIT

(PNN) -- The movement to reverse a Conservation District Use Permit (CDUP) issued by the Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) to Waioli Corporation lessee Bruce Laymon- one which would cut off traditional access to Lepeuli (Larsen's) Beach and potentially pollute the reef by allowing cow grazing just above the beach- has another ally.

The Office of Hawaiian Affairs’ (OHA) Clyde Namu‘o has joined the Sierra Club in questioning the permit and, in a letter to Tiger Mills of the state Office of Conservation and Coastal Land, points out the shoddy nature of the application and process in granting the permit, asking pointed questions as to what much of the permit was based on.

While the Sierra Club letter- which we posted in full a week ago Monday- detailed the specific discrepancies and deficiencies Namu’o simply puts the onus on Laymon and the DLNR to fully explain themselves focusing on the cultural, access and gathering rights issues involved.

“We have concerns that the project will impact constitutionally-protected traditional and customary Native Hawaiian rights. We note that the project site is located near the shoreline where Native Hawaiians engage in a number of traditional and customary practices, such as fishing and gathering” the letter states.

He asks how, as the permits states, the ranching operation will get rid of “nude sunbathers” but not “Native Hawaiians exercising their traditional and customary rights along the shoreline (who) will be impacted by this project in the same way nude sunbathers will be affected.”

He also questions the contention in the application that that "there is no record of native Hawaiian usage" of the area which, he says, is contrary to the statements of people in the area and he puts the onus on Laymon to substantiate his statements.

In his application and testimony before the Board of Land and Natural Resources (BLNR) Laymon and his attorney Lorna Nishimitsu tried to create confusion over where the traditional “alaloa” in the area actually runs saying opponents should prove that it runs across the fenceline that would cut off the trail that’s been used for as long as people in the area can remember.

But Namu’o says “It is our understanding that traditional use of this trail has never ceased. We fear that the proposed fence will disrupt our beneficiaries' use of the trail and impact the trail itself. Moreover, there seems to be disagreement between the applicant and the community regarding the exact location of the alaloa and the Ko`olau Road. We request that state officials and the applicant consult with the community and OHA to discuss appropriate measures to mitigate the impacts this project will have on cultural sites and traditional and customary Native Hawaiian practices.”

Laymon’s has a history of environmental degradation and Waioli has seemingly turned a blind eye to what he’s doing on their land as we detailed last October. But despite promises from Kaua`i BLNR representative Ron Agor to recognize the issues and try to block the permit, his support for Laymon was in fact the deciding factor according to minutes of the BLNR meeting at which the pertinent was granted.

The following is the text of OHA’s letter in full

-----

February 9, 2010

Tiger Mills
Office of Conservation and Coastal Land
Department of Land and Natural Resources
P.O. Box 621
Honolulu, HI 96809

RE: Paradise Ranch LLC, Hanalei, Kam TMK: (4) 5-1-003: 003.

Aloha e Tiger Mills,

The Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) received your letter requesting comments on the above-mentioned project. Paradise Ranch LLC proposes to construct a fence for pasture purposes that will run parallel to the sea, 100 feet from the shoreline. OHA has reviewed the project and offers the following comments.

We have concerns that the project will impact constitutionally-protected traditional and customary Native Hawaiian rights. We note that the project site is located near the shoreline where Native Hawaiians engage in a number of traditional and customary practices, such as fishing and gathering. The applicant states on page 5 of the CDIJA that the fence project will bring its ranching operation close enough to the beach to impact "nude sunbathers." However, the applicant states that its operations will not impact fishers or other beachgoers. The applicant must explain why its ranching operation will impact nude sunbathers but not other users. We suspect that if the ranching operation affects one user, it will likely affect all users in the same way. We assume then that Native Hawaiians exercising their traditional and customary rights along the shoreline will be impacted by this project in the same way nude sunbathers will be affected. The applicant must fully explain these impacts and offer mitigation measures.

Page 6 of the application states that "there is no record of native Hawaiian usage" on the property since the 1850s. We ask to review the records the applicant used to arrive at this conclusion. Further, OHA is troubled by the applicant's suggestion on page 6 that the state "should not take any action to establish any protection" of traditional and customary Native Hawaiian rights. The Hawai`i Constitution specifically asserts that the state must protect Native Hawaiian rights. In addition, the Hawai`i Supreme Court ruled that the state must assess the impacts its actions will have on Native Hawaiian resources and rights (See the three-part test the court established in Peakai O Ka `Aina v. Land Use Comm'n, 94 Haw. 31, 47 (2000))

OHA has specific concerns regarding the project's impact on area trails, particularly the alaloa, which is designated as State of Hawai`i Historic Site No. 50-30-04-1033. It is our understanding that traditional use of this trail has never ceased. We fear that the proposed fence will disrupt our beneficiaries' use of the trail and impact the trail itself. Moreover, there seems to be disagreement between the applicant and the community regarding the exact location of the alaloa and the Ko`olau Road. We request that state officials and the applicant consult with the community and OHA to discuss appropriate measures to mitigate the impacts this project will have on cultural sites and traditional and customary Native Hawaiian practices.

In addition, the historic, archaeological and cultural sites section of this CDUA is incomplete as no sites are listed, not even the alaloa, which as mentioned earlier is a state historic site. Please note that the applicant must identify and submit management plans for historic, archaeological and cultural sites located not only within the subject parcel but also near it.

We request the applicant's assurances that should iwi kapuna or Native Hawaiian cultural or traditional deposits be found during the construction of the project, work will cease, and the appropriate agencies will be contacted pursuant to applicable law.

The applicant states on page 5 that the proposed fence will bring the applicant's ranching operations closer to the beach. The applicant must explain the impact this will have on the marine resources of the area. Many of our beneficiaries' traditional practices rely on these marine resources. The applicant also must explain how the expansion of its ranching operation will affect endangered and threatened species such as monk seals and green sea turtles. These animals may be impacted in the same way as the nude sunbathers.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment. If you have further questions, please contact Sterling Wong by phone at (808) 594-0248 or e-mail him at sterlingw@oha.org .

'O wau iho no me ka `oia’i’o,

Clyde . W. Namu‘o
Chief Executive Officer
C: OHA Kaua`i CRC Office

GIMME LAND LOTSA LAND

GIMME LAND LOTSA LAND: As we age time compresses so although it was nearly a decade ago- 2002 to be exact- it seems like only a few years since the biggest issue in the election that year was the disappearing access to mauka and makai.

It was finally dawning on local people that we have gone to one too many places only to find one too many "no trespassing" signs and worse, fences where once we roamed.

And another thing that happens as we age- those accesses that are left seem to get steeper and more dangerous every time we go. Photographer and teacher David Boynton found that out only too late when he slipped and fell to his death on a trail he had hiked for decades.

That's why it so distressing to read our friend Joan Conrow not just excusing but actually celebrating the news she reported Sunday that hate-monger Bruce Laymon has finally erected his fence at Lepeuli (Larsen's) Beach closing off the prescriptive rights to that section the Ala Loa- an ancient trail that leads gently down to the beach- in favor of a steep, rocky trail that has been designated by the county as the "new" access.

Although she says "I don’t like fences, especially near the beach" she goes on to say:

Still, I totally understand why he did it. Keeping cattle in is only part of it. Quite frankly, it’s the only thing that would keep me, and everyone else who has ever used that path, out.

Besides, let’s not forget that there is, after all, another perfectly good access right there, and it had been freshly weed-whacked to make its presence quite clear.


Then bafflingly she includes a picture that shows a zig-zagging, steep, rocky, narrow trail- one that looks more like it was sprayed with roundup than cut- that disappears into the woods.

She goes on to recount the reaction from a "friend" whose age and agility isn't noted.

“That’s it?” said my friend. “From what I’d heard, I thought you had to scale rocks, risk life and limb. It doesn’t look bad at all.”

“It's not,” I replied. “That’s been totally overblown. Most anyone could go down it.”


Most anyone? One other thing about aging is that the ground seems to get farther and farther away each year and ankles seem to twist a lot more when navigating rocky, steep, uneven accesses.

We can't imagine that what came next wasn't a joke but she wrote that when she got home she received an email from Lepeuli activists describing how a woman whose husband had drowned at the beach was now unable to go there due to a subsequent brain injury.

I wonder, did those who heard her story suggest she call Bruce? Because I’m pretty sure he would have been happy to drive her. And did her husband drown because the lateral trail made it oh so very easy to access the dangerous waters of that beautiful beach?

Is that what we need to do to get access these days? Call a total turd like Laymon to arrange a ride around his fence- which may or may not have been legally constructed after he withdrew his request for a state permit to construct the fence after it became apparent it was about to be pulled.

And, knowing Laymon's predilections I'm sure if it was a group of naked, gay "hippies" he would have dropped everything to welcome them to "his" beach.

Aside from the fact that Laymon has a history of racist, homophobic rants and threats against beach users that would make anyone think a lot more than twice about calling him- assuming they had his number- what kind of precedent does that set when an access that has been used for centuries is suddenly cut off and you have to call the owner and ask for ask to go there as a "favor?"

At the risk of over-simplifying someone else's mana`o, Joan is among those who think that it's okay to restrict access- or make places harder to get to- to preserve "special" places. And there is something to be said about that.

But this is not one of those cases.

When she says that she's "very interested in the question of whether the trail it blocks is a traditional ala loa — an issue that will be decided by the courts, and not Bruce Laymon’s fence," she points to the problem here and in other places because what tends to happen is that it becomes the community's responsibility to hire an attorney at great expense to fight a rich landowner in a state where land equals power and money speaks in the courts.

In this case, even though the state is currently essentially on "our" side it appears that they are way too cash strapped to initiate any legal action against Laymon after he withdrew his permit so as to take an immediate and potentially binding decision out of their hands and make it harder still to enforce conservation district laws and regulations.

And as for the county, despite pleas from the public to withhold action the council recently pushed through a "deal" with property owner Waioli Corporation right before Laymon pulled his fast one by abandoning any claim to the Ala Loa, in favor of the the "new" access. That further complicated the state's case because they had a stipulation in place that required that the county "work out" access issues with Waioli giving them leverage on the Ala Loa.

One thing is clear. Anything that some court might do, some day, would be at the end of years and years of litigation during which time the public- or at least na kupuna- is shut out from the access they've enjoyed since time immemorial. And if that goes on long enough- like say 20 years as it has in other instances- any prescriptive rights go out the window too.

It's hard enough to deal with our disappearing recreational opportunities with greedy landowners scooping up accesses and closing them off. But when those that enjoy them the most start sleeping with the enemy it only make it that much harder to protect them.

That's getting old too.

POISON `IWI

POISON `IWI: We're still cussin' like a sailor every time we try to use the county's newfangled webcast site but since Ho`ike is, as usual, woefully inept at getting the meetings on the "air"- much less the schedule of council meetings posted on-line- we tuned to the MP3 audio today to get an aural gander at the section on Nancy McMahon's application to serve on the county's Kauai Historic Preservation Review Commission.

And never- we repeat never- in over 35 years, have we seen a steadier stream of people come to the hot seat to talk stink about a nominee.

McMahon, as Joan Conrow wrote last month,

was the former Kauai district archaeologist and SHPD deputy director who approved the burial treatment plan that allowed Joe Brescia to build on top of iwi kupuna. Pua Aiu signed off on the plan after it was rejected by the Kauai Niihau Island Burial Council, thus setting the precedent that capping iwi in concrete and building over them is compatible with a determination to “preserve in place.”

As a matter of fact it was McMahon's actions that were singled out for the wrath of Judge Kathleen Watenabe in the matter as Conrow reported earlier saying

But that irritation was tempered by the good news that Nancy McMahon, the state archaeologist whose misdeeds created the Bresica boondoggle – to quote Judge Watanabe: “The heart of this case is the failure of the state to follow procedures put in place to protect cultural practitioners, the general public and the rights of landowners.” — has been placed on indefinite administrative leave without pay. Her suspension followed a National Park Services inquiry into and state legislative hearings on the screwed up mess that is the State Historic Preservation Division.

It seems like every time there was some kind of pilikila regarding burials McMahon was in the forefront.

Our headline and lede last May said it all:

THREE BURIALS UNEARTHED BY COWS AT LEPEULI UNCEREMONIOUSLY REBURIED BY SHPD’S MCMAHON WITHOUT BURIAL COUNCIL NOTIFICATION.

PNN) -- Three burials that were disinterred by Bruce Laymon's cattle operation on Waioli Corporation property at Lepeuli (Larsen’s Beach) and were unceremoniously moved and reinterred by State Historical Preservation Division (SHPD) Archeologist Nancy McMahon, according to a letter from McMahon to Hope Kallai of Malama Moloa`a.

McMahon's nomination despite the outrageous conflict of interest in serving on a commission that essentially would review her work, was one of those "council only" appointments where the mayor picks three, the council picks three and the body picks the last one. But the problem has been getting people to serve so the commission hasn't met in ages because they don't have a quorum.

So when McMahon put her name forward she was somewhat of an automatic nominee, according to councilmembers.

The only question really for council members was whether to reject McMahon outright yesterday as the oodles of outraged onlookers had demanded or take 60 days, as Chair Jay Furfaro requested, to "investigate" some of the charges.

After much wrangling, somewhat surprisingly since it had appeared there were only going to be three votes to kill the resolution during discussion, the council voted to kill it right then and there.

As a side note, the main thing the council apparently wanted to look into was one charges that many made, as we heard in an email earlier this week.

Apparently McMahon's educational background had been thrown into question because when her opponents checked with University of Hawai`i-Manoa they discovered her degree was "in anthropology, not archeology."

Seemingly they weren't the only ones who didn't know that archeology is more properly called "physical anthropology," as opposed to cultural anthropology. No one gets an undergraduate degree in "archeology" but rather studies both branches of anthropology and is awarded the appropriate degree.

We don't know what's wrong with this woman- she's apparently a glutton for rejection. First she ran and finished last in the 2008 election for council. Then a steady stream of charges- including one by a Kaua`i massage therapist that she was "filthy dirty" (ouch) - were telecast with such vile tossed in her direction that would bring a normal person to tears.

It's hard to say anyone deserves that but in McMahon’s case she's practically begged for it.

And, with twisted aloha, the community has once again granted her request.

DON’T FENCE ME IN

DON’T FENCE ME IN: Things are heating up at Lepeuli (Larsen’s) Beach with a showdown apparently scheduled for Saturday when board members of the Waioli Corporation are planning a site visit coinciding with a Sierra Club “beach cleanup”.

Also, lessee Bruce Laymon has apparently gone off the deep end this week and is engaging in terroristic threatening with hate crime overtones according to a letter from activist Richard Spacer addressed to Senator Gary Hooser and Councilperson Lani Kawahara which we’ve obtained.

Though we haven’t confirmed the truth of matter one way or the other Spacer’s letter includes another letter from someone identified as “Dennis” detailing Laymon’s actions last Saturday.

Spacer writes:

Dear Lani and Senator Hooser:

And this came in to me today too.

This visitor to our island was at Larsen's about 2 hours earlier than me, today, Saturday March 6.

I have concealed his last name and email for privacy, but I encouraged him to go public and to contact you and other organizations and officials about this incident. This is unacceptable and charges need to be filed. Many jurisdictions would consider this a hate crime and terroristic threatening. Bruce Laymon is out of control. How long is this clearing by machine going to be allowed by DLNR? Today is the 4th day that I know about. Accusing a 50 year old visitor of breaking farm/landscaping equipment deep inside a property the guy is unfamiliar with except for the beach and lateral trail?! Writing letters that are lies? How can Laymon accuse him of writing letters if he does not even know the guys name??!! This is sooooo stupid.

Dennis writes:

This morning about 9:30 am and was on the lateral trail where the trail becomes a road.

A man who identified himself as Bruce Laymon got out of a dump truck and confronted me.

He said " you are on private property and you know it, I am going to take your picture and the next time we see you on our property we will have you arrested". He was agitated, threatening and confrontational. He did not take my picture at this time but did yell at some workers to remember me if I came back on their property.

He accused me of being part of the group vandalizing his equipment and taking pictures and stirring up trouble. I had no idea about the damage to the equipment until the afternoon when I got the newspaper and saw todays story.

I did not respond aggresively but did ask him several times if he really was B.L. I had no idea who he was other than his word.

I then got off the lateral trail and went down on the beach and walked to the picnic table on the north end.

A little while later I walked back down south on the beach a hundred yards or so and was talking to 2 guys I see there alot.
We were on the sand not too far from the grass line. The guy who said he was Bruce Laymon came down on to the sand and starting yelling at me again. He took my picture with a disposable camera and asked me for my name. When I smiled for the picture he said, "you better watch out, you think this is funny." He was yelling about how he was going to have 50 hawaiians down here next week and they were going to take the beach back. "You watch and see, we will run you haoli's out of here. That's all you fucking haoli's do is come down here, get naked, and leave all kinds of shit back here in woods." He also yelled about how his entire crew was family and that's why they were doing this work, to reclaim the beach for their family and the hawaiians.

I tried to calm him down and talk to him but he was having none of that. He kept accusing me of stirring up trouble. He also said that I was spreading lies through the newspaper.

Nice aloha spirit,
dennis (all sic)

We’ve are also in possession of a letter from Waioli Corporation’s attorney Don Wilson who is apprehensive about the coinciding Sierra Club activity and the board members’ visit, and implies that no matter what anyone does these days they are trespassing if they try to go to the beach at Lepeuli.

We haven’t confirmed the letter is from Wilson but we have no reason not to trust our source.

Wilson writes, in part:

(T)he Sierra Club has apparently scheduled a beach walk and trash clean-up at Larsen's Beach for this Saturday. I just found out about it this afternoon. As I mentioned in my last letter we have a Waioli Board of Trustees tour also scheduled for Saturday and I don't want there to be any conflict or problem with both events happening simultaneously. I'm told that the Sierra Club hasn't yet set a specific time for its event so I don't know for certain that there will be a scheduling conflict but I want to be cautious and to not inadvertently have an uncomfortable situation set up for anyone. Also, I don't know precisely where the Sierra Club is planning on conducting its beach walk. If they intend on using the lateral trail that is on Waioli's property instead of either the County-owned trail (doubtful) or the other existing trial that is not affected by the proposed fencing project and that is on Waioli property then we would have a concern about that. Given recent events and just as a general rule I don't want this to escalate into something that can be avoided and I certainly welcome the Club's beach walk and trash clean-up if it is limited to public property and is not being used as a way to exercise any control over the private property, is being conducted on the basis of a claimed legal right that is disputed by my client, or simply to prove a point. I don't assume that such is the intent but I just don't know exactly what they are planning.

If it's okay with you and if I find out anything further that indicates there may be an issue with simultaneous events or with what we consider to be trespassing (with the acknowledgment that you may not agree with that conclusion), and based on your comments below, I'll contact Sierra Club directly. I will be polite and respectful in any communication I have, and as I mentioned above I think it is a very good thing that they are doing if it is limited to the publicly-owned beach. I don't plan on any phone or other verbal communications about this and the last thing I want is for a controversy to erupt.

Although it sounds like things have already “erupted”, what with Laymon going on his “naked hippie patrols” after the alleged “vandalism” of his tractor- which some believe was self-inflicted to create sympathy although there is no evidence either way- Saturday’s showdown at the Waioli/Laymon Corral promises to be anything but a walk on the beach.

---------

We’ll be taking a long weekend- see ya Monday.

A GORY BUSINESS

A GORY BUSINESS: While some might say it's practically oxymoronic we've been been on a quest lately with a holy grail of being nicer and kinder to others.

But yesterday's letter to the editor from that slime ball masquerading as a human being, Ron Agor, was so insulting that all bets are off today.

Agor's defense of apparently-fired Kauai District Archaeologist and SHPD Deputy Director Nancy McMahon on the heels of an onslaught of Kanaka Maoli activists who successfully testified against her appointment to the county's Historic Preservation Commission, was to call the Native Hawaiians "savages" in practically every other paragraph.

Real sensitive to the host culture, Ron- especially from a member of the state Board of Land and Natural Resources. What, heathen and pagan weren't strong enough?

But his screed defending McMahon seems kind of appropriate for these two-peas-in-a-pod, since for the past few years every time some kind of outrageous treatment of`iwi kupuna (bones) burials occurred, the names Agor and McMahon seemed to come up every time.

Agor's rant begins by praising McMahon for her actions as state archeologist in trying to:

compromise with private property owners where the burials are respected and the private property owners have reasonable use of their properties.

Nancy McMahon during her tenure as the qualified state’s archaeologist always did her job in making sure the above mentioned compromise came to fruition on every project subjected to this process.

And compromise the `iwi she did.

In actuality McMahon's cavalier attitude has led to blatant abuse of her position to favor developers, ignoring the wishes of the Kaua`i Burial Council to the point where, during the court battle over the Brescia property cemetery debacle, she was singled out for blame in the fiasco by 5th Circuit Court judge Kathleen Watenabe for, among other things, ordering the `iwi be permanently encased in concrete.

That's what made this statement from Agor all the more removed from reality

It is interesting to know that recently the courts have recognized the practices and procedures of DLNR as reasonable and have often rendered decisions in favor of private property owners when they followed their permit conditions imposed by the State.

Here's what a letter from a group called Kānaka Maoli Scholars Against Desecration- signed by a list of notable scholars as long as your arm- said about McMahon's actions in the Brescia case

The SHPD’s own rules empower the island Burial Council to determine the disposition of previously known burials. The island Burial Council’s decision on this issue is supposed to be binding. Yet, SHPD deputy administrator Nancy McMahon sanctioned the use of vertical buffers and concrete caps on the burials to make way for installing the footings of Brescia’s house. Her authorization for such an intrusive "preservation" measure is a fundamental repudiation of the power allocated to all of the island Burial Councils.

By ignoring the decision of the island Burial Council, her actions undermine both the very concept of historic preservation and the reason for the founding of the island Burial Councils. Tragically, before a court could intervene, and based on McMahon’s unauthorized agreements, Brescia’s team managed to install massive house foundations on a portion of the cemetery.

In another incident almost exactly a year ago on May 12, 2010 the headline of a PNN news story pretty much summed up what happened in saying:

Three Burials Unearthed By Cows At Lepeuli Unceremoniously Reburied By SHPD's McMahon Without Burial Council Notification.

You might want to read the article and followups- it's actually even worse than that with McMahon attempting to cover up the discovery of a Hawaiian house site by another local archeologist.

So how did McMahon get away with this stuff for so long- stuff including many unproven accusations from burial protectors of taking home `iwi and even stealing artifacts from sites and offering them for sale?

Well. many times it was Agor's position on the all powerful BLNR that made it possible.

Agor has been a Republican Party mainstay for many years and so when Republican Governor Linda Lingle took over she appointed him as the lone Kaua`i representative.

Now you'd think that with all the other BLNR members one single rep wouldn't be able to insure things go the way he wants. But the "tradition" on the board is to defer to the single neighbor island reps on matters on their island.

For instance when Lepeuli rancher Bruce Lymon tried to lie his way into a conservation district use permit (CDUP) it was Agor who convinced the board to grant it without examining the facts- a decision that was reversed later after the Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation, OHA and others set the record straight and the permit was rescinded.

As for Agor his tenure has been marked by deceit and misrepresentation to members of the community, often telling people he would assure the BLNR would vote a certain way only to do exactly the opposite according to the minutes of the meeting, as he did with the Koke`e leaseholders and other cases during his tenure.

One thing became clear to us today in reviewing our coverage of the Agor and McMahon- they deserve each other. Their actions go way beyond the usual racism and promotion of monied American interests to, not just being active participants in the continuing genocide of na kanaka, but being leaders in the theft of the land and culture.

And there's nothing nice or kind about that.

We now return you to the "trying very hard not to be mean anymore" Parx.