With the knowledge of how global influences jeopardize our food supply and security, energy independence and tourism-dominant economy, why would we not embrace and support the efforts of those who are diligently working to strengthen Hawaii’s resiliency?

The emerging tension of the proposed Mahaulepu dairy farm on Kauai is a perfect opportunity. The issues, however, are broader than those discussed in the article, "Diverse interests join up to oppose Kauai dairy plan" (Star-Advertiser, April 14).

The article details visitor industry concerns over possible negative visitor experiences as a result of dairy farm operations — visual blight and odor — in the Koloa area, and the possible blogging on travel media outlets, specifically TripAdvisor.

Then there’s the alliance of the visitor industry’s concerns with the possible environmental concerns of special interest groups on surface water runoff pollution. We need to go deeper.

Basing land-use decisions on speculative social media blogs and postings are questionable at best.

Negative visitor impact? Hawaii is known for its agrarian history; how are dairy operations different? Have we forgotten the stench of processing sugar cane and the billowing smoke from 40-foot stacks letting us know the prevailing wind direction? Did that harm visitor experiences? The resorts were there first?

Area agricultural activities predate area resort development. Our agricultural lands are protected by Hawaii’s "right to farm act" for the sole purpose in addressing conflicting land uses when new residential subdivisions, resort or hotel developments occur and when agricultural activities resume on agricultural lands. If there are environmental concerns, they should be validated so solutions can be sought — not left to hang as intimidation.

Being honest about the issue reveals a doublestandard. In planning theory, there is a concept termed "exporting externalities."

Externalities are the resulting impacts and outcomes (social, environmental, economic, etc.) that the community who is producing the commodity bear as part of that commodity being produced and sold to another.

So in this example, when we import our milk, we are in essence exporting (or offshoring) the impacts of dairy operations on our community and placing them on another. Well, that’s a convenient arrangement. Rather than holding ourselves accountable for the "potential environmental concerns" and searching for environmentally responsible solutions, we opt to say "not in my backyard — let another community figure it out," all the while remaining silent on the additional socioeconomic impacts of importing milk at $7-plus per gallon.

Seeking solutions to increasing our local food production ultimately brings greater affordability and food security to us all.

There is another option. If we embrace the challenge and work together to address the visitor and environmental concerns being raised, numerous possibilities arise:

» Innovation for other rural communities in Hawaii to follow.

» Diversification of our rural economies.

» Collectively strengthening our interdependence on each other and therefore resiliency.

Rather than just holding Hawaii Dairy Farms accountable, this is an opportunity to hold ourselves accountable.