There’s no question that the Army finds the 132,000-acre Pohakuloa Training Area (PTA) on Hawaii island valuable. Its proximity to both U.S. allies and rivals in the Indo-Pacific, its challenging, arid landscape and its expanse all add to its assets as a strategically situated training ground.

And then there’s the value inherent in the Army’s use of 23,000 acres of state land that is part of the PTA. One might even call it a “steal,” as it cost the Army just $1 in exchange for a 65-year lease with the state of Hawaii.

That 65-year lease expires in 2029. This time around, as the Army seeks to extend its access to the state’s property, far more should be expected from the military. The lease must be renegotiated, or could be brought to an end, if either the Army or state chose to end it. Many competing interests are in play.

A Hawaii Supreme Court decision in 2019 held that the state has a duty to ensure the land is protected. Native Hawaiian interests are involved, because the state property involved is former Hawaiian crown land, ceded to Hawaii from the Hawaiian royals. The state’s Constitution obligates Hawaii’s government to protect those lands for the benefit of Native Hawaiians and all residents of Hawaii.

As negotiations proceed, further arguments and declarations of responsibility can be expected to develop. At this stage, it’s already clear that the Army must, at a minimum, commit to meeting clear standards for improved environmental and cultural stewardship, if an extended lease is to be awarded.

Strong guarantees of Army clean-up and mitigation of damage, plus access by state regulators, must be required — with follow-through robustly monitored. The interests of Native Hawaiians must also be included.

There are indications that the state is prepared to insist on detailed Army commitments, and that’s appropriate.

In April, the Army issued a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), outlining impact to the land from continuing Army control. In response, the state Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) faulted the Army for failing to include details about its responsibility to maintain “ongoing monitoring, preservation and mitigation.”

DLNR’s Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands (OCCL) bluntly expressed reservations over whether any simulated warfare could be compatible with conservation land, detailing a range of damaging impacts inflicted on wildlife, Hawaiian sites and artifacts.

“Military use that involves maneuvers, ammunition, artillery and mortar systems, depleted uranium, explosives, firing points, hazardous materials and waste, live fire, unexploded ordnance, and weapons systems do not appear to be consistent with the Conservation District,” OCCL stated.

It will be up to the Army to make a case that it can operate within state guidelines.

The military devotes resources to preservation, retaining scientists who work to protect native species and archaeologists who preserve and document Hawaiian sites. Between 1998 and 2013, the Army spent $10 million on fencing to protect habitat, as well as fire prevention. Its fire department also assists the state and county in quelling wildfires outside of Pohakuloa. But in August, a massive wildfire damaged more than 26 square miles of land in the training area.

The Army has presented options, including full continued access to the state land, keeping access to 19,700 acres, or keeping 10,100 acres along with 11 miles of roads and trails. A “no action alternative” would end Army presence at Pohakuloa when the lease expires in seven years. Ultimately, the state’s decision should hinge on which alternative best protects its lands, while balancing benefits from Army presence and preparedness, which serve Hawaii and the nation.