Ka Wai Ola - Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Volume 23, Number 4, 1 April 2006 — ls Mākua really critical to military training? [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

ls Mākua really critical to military training?

In 2001, the Army agreed that if it did not complete the required Environmental Impact Statement for Mākua by October 2004, it would suspend all live-fire training there until it complied with the law. In denying the Army's request to conduct live-fire training while its environmental study remained unfinished, the Hawai'i District Court did nothing more than hold the Army to its promise and uphold the rule of law. The court also rejected as empty rhetoric claims, like Charles Ota's, that use of Mākua is critieal. The court emphasized "the Army must do more than simply declare that training will be inadequate if it does not occur at Mākua." After

an independent review of the evidence, the court dismissed the Army's claims as "vehement pronouncements and speculation." The fact is the Army ean and does conduct elsewhere the same exercises it wanted to do at Mākua. Nearly every unit selected for deployment will train at the Nahonal Training Center in California, whieh the 25th Infantry's Brigadier General Bednarek said, under oath, "is the most realistic environment [the Army] ean put deploying formations through." Deploying units are also performing live-fire training at Pōhakuloa Training Area on Hawai'i island, and Schofield Barracks and Marine Corps Base Hawai'i on O'ahu. The facts also belie Mr. Ota's claims that theArmy has proven to be "stellar stewards of the environment at Mākua Valley." Misfired weapons have damaged irreplaceable cultural sites, and training-related fires have charred thousands of acres, killing countless endangered species. We should not sacrifice our cultural and natural heritage when alternate training sites exist. H

Donald B. Cataluna TrustEE, Kaua'i and Ni'ihau