Dear Mr. Cysewski;

Thank you for your recent letter regarding the EnviroWatch web page. We appreciate your response and would like to comment further on the purpose of our investigation and the response we have received.

First, our original letter to Mr. Mike Wilson, DLNR, questioned a possible conflict of interest that may have occurred when NELHA, acting under DLNR Conservation District Use Permit HA 1862, assumed responsibility for monitoring their’s and their tenant’s impact on the environment through the Cooperative Environmental Monitoring Program and by other means. This conflict of interest was brought up because DLNR has a direct interest in the success of NELHA under their Aquaculture Development Program and, therefore, cannot monitor the results without the possibility or perception of prejudice.

Because Cyanotech is currently expanding their operations, our questions are a direct result of that activity. However, our questions are being directed to DLNR because Ho’ona and Keahole Point are on State Conservation land, and are posed indirectly to NELHA because they are responsible for the land under their agreement with DLNR.

Our questions were prompted by our concern that any permits issued by DLNR and other agencies, in the name of the public, may be abused without proper, independent monitoring of activities at the site. Since Cyanotech's expansion has a direct impact on both the environment and the historical aspects of the site, we are questioning whether the "perceived" absence of environmental and historical damage can be proven or shown not to have existed in the past. We are also requesting guarantees that such damage will not occur in the future.

NELHA and Cyanotech may be working with and following all procedures set forth by DLNR and the State Historical Preservation Division, but, are those procedures correct? Has every attempt been made to follow the procedures with due diligence? Are qualified people conducting the studies and is every effort being made to collect relevant data at the right time? Are the permits and procedures truly effective in safeguarding our environment, or do they need to be changed internally, or by the Legislature, in order to avoid conflicts of interest and remedy loop holes.

You may note from our web site that, after speaking with Mr. Apo in the Governor’s office, we proposed that a committee or task force be formed to look into the issues. Our letter addressing this possibility was completely ignored by the Governor and Mr. Wilson. Instead, we received a letter requesting that, since the matter is under litigation, all further inquiries be directed to the Attorney General’s office.

It is responsible behavior for environmental advocates to be interested in effects to the environment. DLNR cannot permit a company to proceed with questionable use of State Conservation Land until the absence of environmental damage has been proven to the satisfaction of the public. Cyanotech's expansion may affect historic sites, wetlands, anchialine ponds, and the fragile dry land environments of Kona, either directly or indirectly, through it's impact on ground water conditions. If NELHA and the DLNR have specific information indicating there are no effects they should share it with the public.

We do note that your letter indicates a ruling on the curator issue was rendered by Judge Ibarra. Was Mr. Wilson using that litigation as an excuse to avoid answering our questions about the environment or is there other litigation pending? If so, can you tell us about it?

Regarding the issue of the curator, Mr. Kaiokekoa; we are concerned that there may be more to this than meets the eye and that it may directly relate to other things going on at the site. We have reviewed some of the public documents involving the case and understand your concerns. Although a ruling was made against Mr. Kaiokekoa, we are still researching and questioning the full story. We don't think that the case of the curator should be entirely closed at this time and, although his story is only a small part of the total picture, we felt that he too should be heard.

We understand your concern regarding the EnviroWatch report. If you have anything that you would like us to add to the web site, or to the story in general, please feel free to send us your thoughts and documents. We look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

Carroll E. Cox