The legal battle between the Army and community activists over Makua Valley is surely not over yet, but this week, there was hope that the clock may finally be running out.
U.S. District Judge Susan Oki Mollway has for years refereed this standoff over whether the Army could resume live-fire training at Makua, though it has managed its training operations without that option for eight years.
In 2010, the judge ruled that the Army’s environmental impact statement, prepared at the insistence of plaintiffs Malama Makua, fell short of the mark. On Wednesday, she followed up by ordering quarterly reports updating the court on its progress. Spokesmen for U.S. Army Garrison Hawaii restated its position that its previous submissions were complete but added that staff would be working "diligently" to meet the court’s request.
What makes it encouraging that Mollway is holding firm is that her orderprolongs the ban on live-fire operations, meaning that more progress can be made on replacement training facilities. Lt. Gen. Francis J. Wiercinski took over the command of U.S. Army Pacific in January 2011; almost exactly a year ago, he said he was determined to keep Makua as an option for live fire in case it was needed.
But that Leeward Oahu option, he said, would be exercised only if the first choice couldn’t be met: development and improvements at Schofield Barracks in Central Oahu and Pohakuloa Training Area On Hawaii island.
"I firmly believe that if those things stay on track at Schofield and PTA, we will not have to live fire in Makua," he said then.
The judge was right to insist on the completion of the environmental study before allowing the bullets to fly again. Here are some of its shortcomings:
» The document did not include an adequate study of how the training would affect cultural sites in the valley and Makua Beach limu — seaweed consumed by families that fish in the area.
» The Army did not do any subsurface investigations for the cultural sites, such as ancient burials or other artifacts of the valley’s Native Hawaiian history.
» Seaweed from other parts of the island would need to be compared to draw any useful conclusions the arsenic contamination that was detected, and whether the Army’s activities were accountable for it.
What should be paramount is the consideration of such damage and, in particular, the disturbance and hazard to residential communities, not only from the firing of ammunition but the increased risk of brush fires. The Army still has not made a persuasive case for ignoring these impacts in favor of keeping a back-pocket alternative site for live-fire training.
It would be far better if the Army would settle with the community once and for all on this issue. Rather than spend further funds on the studies, the ideal course would be to simply refocus its attention and resources on the ongoing upgrades in the two other locations.
Clearly, having well-prepared troops is critical to national security, and Hawaii is poised to play a greater role than ever in the Asia-Pacific region. But balance with community concerns is essential, too, and in the case of Makua Valley, there is a way to achieve both.
