On August 23, 2007, the State Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the Superferry must complete an environmental review of their operations in Hawai`i. The Sierra Club and co-plaintiffs Maui Tomorrow and Kahului Harbor Coalition are asking that the Superferry stop operations until the mandatory environmental disclosure -- and appropriate protective measures -- are complete, as state law requires. While many are looking forward to the Superferry service, most appreciate the need for it to be done in a pono manner. Given Hawaii's fragile island environments and deep community values, compliance with our environmental laws is in everyone's best interest.

The Sierra Club and its allies would like to clarify any misconceptions about our lawsuit and position toward the Superferry.

Let’s set the record straight.

MYTH: The Sierra Club and co-plaintiffs intervened at the "11th hour," creating this mess.

FACT: The Sierra Club has been seeking resolution to this issue for years. It is unfortunate that Superferry and the Lingle Administration didn’t complete an environmental review of Superferry years ago as required by law. It was three years ago (2004) that the Sierra Club asked Superferry and the Lingle Administration to complete an environmental review of the Superferry. Two years ago, the Sierra Club filed suit with co-plaintiffs Maui Tomorrow and Kahului Harbor Coalition, asking that they comply with the law. Unknown environmental and public safety risks, concerned neighbor island communities, and a clear reading of the law demanded it. The review would have occurred while other planning proceeded. The Administration and Superferry corporation, however, decided to gamble and chose to skip the legal requirements of this mandatory environmental disclosure process. A unanimous Supreme Court decision – announced just hours after oral argument– called their bluff. Then, despite the decision from Hawaii’s highest court, Superferry decided to roll the dice again and start service early. Again, they lost when a judge ordered them to cease service to Maui. A responsible company doesn’t allow a problem to get to the point where they receive a restraining order.

So why did Superferry and the Administration chose to skip this process three years ago? Why did they chose not to complete an environmental review after the community groups asked, after neighbor island lawmakers asked, after the Maui, Kaua`i, and Big Island county councils asked, even after the State’s own Environmental Council ruled that it was required. Why not? Were they worried about disclosing something the public wouldn’t like to hear? Superferry began planning some 5 years ago – plenty of time to complete the entire environmental review process.

MYTH: Superferry is unfairly being singled out by plaintiffs for environmental review. Airlines, cruise ships, and interisland shipping didn't have to go through the process.

FACT: Most airlines and interisland shipping traffic were operating prior to enactment of the Hawaii Environmental Protection Act in 1974. That doesn’t mean that their impacts shouldn’t be examined on a comprehensive basis, but the current challenge is the proposed Superferry because of the public funds used to enable it to operate. Further, the Superferry is qualitatively different than existing modes of transportation. It travels at high-speed (35 knots) and carries hundreds of private vehicles and trucks daily, creating challenges beyond what is currently operating. As the Supreme Court stated in their unanimous decision, “the Superferry presents particular risks that are not borne by the existing methods of transportation...”

Regarding cruise ships, a lawsuit was brought by a Moloka`i group in 2004 to require an environmental review of their operations. That suit was never resolved before the courts, so the question of a cruise industry review is still an unresolved matter.

MYTH: Sierra Club is organizing protests and civil disobedience against the Superferry.

FACT: The Sierra Club was not involved in coordinating any of the protests against Superferry. Several Kaua`i citizen groups have stated their role in organizing the protests. The Sierra Club does not condone lawbreaking – either by the Superferry or by the protesters. The protests, however, surely reflect the deep sense of injustice many neighbor islanders feel toward the Superferry – contempt that has been irresponsibly inflamed by their proceeding in open disregard of the law.

This is why the public review process is so important in the first place: to involve the affected communities, to understand the environmental tradeoffs, to separate fact from fiction, and to protect the environment against unintended consequences.

As the “Findings and Purpose” section of the environmental review law (HRS 343-1) declares: “the process of reviewing environmental effects is desirable because environmental consciousness is enhanced, cooperation and coordination are encouraged, and public participation during the review process benefits all parties involved and society as a whole.”

MYTH: This isn't about the environment. The lawsuit is just a tactic to stop the Superferry from ever operating.

FACT: Our concern is protecting Hawaii’s unique environment. That is why we have repeatedly used the courts to ensure compliance with Hawaii’s keystone environmental review law. Many of us – in fact, many Sierra Club members – would like to see a ferry system operate inter-island. They want it to be done right, however. Complying with the Hawaii Environmental Protection Act is the first step.

The unintended consequences of not complying with our environmental review law could be great. Unintended consequences like the spread of mongoose to Kaua`i. Or the disastrous varroa bee mite to Maui. Or the invasive aquatic pest Gracilaria salicornia. Or coqui frogs everywhere. These pests can easily become stowaways underneath car or truck bodies or inside the bushels of produce being transported. With the Superferry shuttling hundreds of private vehicles, campers, and farm trucks daily, spreading these pests is all but guaranteed – unless proper protections are put in place and funded. For neighbor island farmers, the cost of new invasive species brought by the Superferry could ruin their livelihood.

Environmental reviews are used to fix problems before they occur. They don't just look at wildlife but at social consequences such as unbearable traffic, curtailment of traditional Hawaiian activities, and costly freight increases to small businesses. What are the best ways to minimize harm to Hawaii’s unique environment and communities? That’s what we’ll learn with an environmental review. Ultimately, the review process produces a better outcome for all involved, island-style.

When public taxpayer dollars are used as they are with the Superferry, the public has a right, a legal right, to ask questions – and get answers. Otherwise we might all be taken for a ride.

MYTH: The Superferry complied with all state laws and in fact went beyond what is required to protect the environment.

FACT: We wish this were true. But the State Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the State and Superferry are in violation of the Hawaii Environmental Protection Act. The court ruled that the Hawaii Department of Transportation and Superferry must complete an environmental review of their operations if they wish to operate in Hawaii’s waters.

While Superferry officials have suggested that they are taking certain precautions to protect the environment, we have no independent environmental review to even understand what environmental and community challenges exist. We also know that some of the suggested precautions fall short of what may be required. For example, while Superferry has stated that they will limit their speed to 25 knots in areas frequented by whales and other marine mammals, NOAA Fisheries suggest that 13 knots is the maximum safe speed in such areas.

MYTH: The Superferry is a more energy efficient means of travel between the islands.

FACT: Superferry may consume far more fossil fuel than interisland flights. We can't say with certainty without the benefit of a complete environmental review. Initial analyses suggest that due to the Superferry's design, propulsion choice, and high speed, the Superferry's fuel efficiency per passenger is less than a Hummer. The Superferry might consume up to six times as much fuel per passenger as a fully-loaded inter-island flight. Moving hundreds of vehicles inter-island this way is energy intensive.

Additionally, if Superferry simply augments existing modes of inter-island transit -- instead of supplanting them -- overall greenhouse gas emissions will increase.

MYTH: Interisland ferries operate all over the world so they can operate here no problem.

FACT: Maybe they can, but not without ample planning and community input. Hawai`i is like no other place on Earth, with hundreds of species found nowhere else on the planet, deep community values, and an economy based on the environment. We have to proceed with caution to protect this uniqueness.

The spread of certain invasive species – which Superferry may facilitate – may dramatically reduce the ability of some native species to survive. The recently retired Superintendent of Haleakala Nation Park, Donald Reese, wrote in a February 2005 letter: “Some current special concerns for interisland transport relevant to Haleakala National Park include little fire ant (Wasmannia auropunctata), nettle caterpillar (Darnap pallivitta), glassy-winged sharpshooter (Homolodisca coagulata), Himalayan raspberry (Rubus ellipticus), Malabar melastome (Melastoma candidum) and fountain grass (Pennisetum setaceum). These are just a few of many species already present on other islands that NPS is concerned about.”

He went on: “Because the Superferry may have serious impacts to Haleakala National Park and numerous endangered species, the National Park Service requests that an Environmental Impact Statement be prepared for this project.”

The high-speed vessel operation itself may pose a threat to the marine mammals. Traveling at 25 knots through known whale calving areas may make riders sick in more ways than one. Chris Yates, head of NOAA's Protected Resources Division in the Islands, has said that it is the high-speed collisions that appear to cause the most damage. "There are studies that show that the speed of the vessel makes a big difference in the severity of the injury," Yates said.

Hawai`i is unique. That doesn’t mean that having an interisland ferry service is impossible, it just means we need to be cautious, prepared, and adequately protected against unintended consequences.

MYTH: The environmental review process is arduous and is an impossible hurdle for a company to clear.

FACT: The environmental review process is a routine procedure. Responsible companies and State and Federal agencies complete reviews all the time. The Department of Transportation (DOT) has completed numerous such reviews in the past year. New roads, harbor improvements, airport upgrades: they all go through the process. Significantly, the DOT even required and conducted a full environmental impact statement when a ferry system just on the Island of O`ahu was proposed.

Yes, the review process can be messy because you have to deal with real science – not soundbites and promises – and real public input. Superferry would actually have to respond to questions in writing and publish the answers. Yes, it takes a few months to complete. But the resulting document provides clear answers on the adverse impacts to be expected – and how best to prepare for them.

MYTH: This whole anti-Superferry effort is being financed by the Young Brothers, Matson, the rental car companies, and the interisland airlines.

FACT: The Sierra Club is almost completely funded by individual donations. We have not received any donations from interisland airlines or shipping companies or any other businesses that may be in competition with Superferry, nor have we even discussed this issue with those businesses.

MYTH: Superferry can continue operations while the environmental review is being completed.

FACT: Three decades ago when the Hawai`i Environmental Protection Act was enacted, State elected leaders made clear that the environmental review be a “condition precedent” to implementation of a proposed action. In other words, the study must be complete before the project starts. We must look before we leap. It’s not only common sense, it’s the law.

MYTH: Superferry is a boon to business statewide.

FACT: While some businesses on O`ahu are eager for a ferry service, a number of neighbor island businesses may experience negative impacts. The environmental review process is designed to openly discuss these situations and offer mitigation.

For example, overcrowded conditions at Kahului harbor exacerbated by the Superferry mean that "less-than-container load" service at the harbor will end. Because of the change, small businesses and residents won’t be able to drive to the Maui harbor to pick up their goods, and will have to rely on the services of freight consolidators, driving up shipping costs.

The spread of invasive species such as the coqui frog could come at extreme cost for business. The Big Island real estate market has taken a hit due to the noisy racket created by high coqui infestations in certain areas. The varroa bee mite could have disasterous economic consequences for Maui and Kaua`i farmers.