Posted on: Wednesday, July 30, 2003

Makua: Actions speak louder than words

The Army is saddled with a credibility problem in Makua Valley. In its battle to win support for its use of culturally important and environmentally sensitive lands for training, the Army has two strikes against it:

• Having widely trumpeted impressive precautions against damage from fires caused by live-fire training, it is now faced with the aftermath of a "controlled burn" that quickly overwhelmed those measures.

• At the same time, there is an effort under way in Congress to relieve the Army of current levels of responsibility for environmental stewardship of training areas like Makua. That's a "gift" we suspect many within our local military leadership are reluctant to receive.

It's been our impression that in Hawai'i, there's great sincerity concerning the effort at Makua. Serious money has been invested in environmental and safety protection.

The proposal to lift certain environmental obligations now in place was introduced by the Pentagon. But it's not clear where the the pressure is coming from. Is it a response to pleas from field commanders who regard environmental obligations as annoying and expensive obstacles to their training mission? Or is it a top-down push from an administration routinely critical of tough environmental laws?

The controlled burn was intended to clear heavy brush to allow specialists to go in and identify ancient Hawaiian cultural sites. Good intentions in this case were frustrated by a misjudgment of weather and drought conditions.

But at the same time, the effort proceeds in Congress to have the military relieved of any need for those good intentions. A letter in this newspaper from Naomi Arcand of the Sierra Club's O'ahu group called this effort "an all-out war on endangered species."

Asserting in his responding letter that Arcand was flatly wrong, Col. David Anderson, commander of Army Garrison Hawai'i, listed the protective measures in place at Makua, and added:

"We take our responsibilities as stewards of the land as seriously as we take our responsibilities to provide our nation's soldiers tough, realistic training opportunities they require and deserve. Clearly, the Army in Hawai'i is committed to the protection of our most precious resource of all — the 'aina."

We applaud that commitment. How does it square with the open and concerted effort in Congress to win relief from it?