Have a greener holiday party this year, and no, I’m not talking about your Christmas tree.

Sustainableparty.com has come up with a guide to direct the common person on having sustainable and environmentally friendly parties.

The guides covers issues that include: Community, Resource Conservation, Food, Transportation Materials and Waste Management. Even if you only practice one of their recommendations this year, you will feel better about this wasteful (sometimes even frivolous) season.

Please click on the following link to view these easy and practical ways to reduce your holiday impact:

Sustainable Party Best Practices

“In the absence of a contested case hearing, a circuit court is without jurisdiction even to consider the question of whether a contested case hearing was required.”

This motion is the University’s attempt to end this case before both sides have a chance to fully argue the issues for Judge Hara.  The issues raised in this case go to the foundation of our collective right to defend our public trust of natural and cultural resources from private exploitation.

The Land Board denied our request for a contested case hearing on the University’s plan to further develop the sacred summit based on the contention that we (Native Hawaiians and the public concerned about protecting the summit) do not have a “property interest” in the mountain.  By their logic, without a property interest in the mountain — like a deed — we have no right to challenge the decisions the state makes about the mountain.

We have suffered through many controversial lawsuits under the Lingle Administration.  Sadly, this case is no different.  The ceded lands case, the Superferry case, the NWHI permit case, and now this new Mauna Kea lawsuit are all examples of the Lingle Administration favoring private exploitation of Hawaii’s resources over the constitutionally protected rights of Native Hawaiians and the public to protect our land.  The Administration appears blind to the decades worth of court decisions that have solidified Hawaii’s unique public trust approach to natural and cultural resource protection; seeing only the glint of dollar signs behind every plan to exploit public resources.

This has nothing to do with Hawaii being business-friendly or not and has everything to do with Hawaii being exploited as a testing ground for those seeking to make a buck one way or another: Monsanto, Hawaii Ocean Technology, Inc., TMT Corporation, Superferry, Inc.  All of the benefits of these experiments on our land and ocean will be enjoyed by people other than us and all of the risks of these experiments — contamination, damaged land, failed projects — will be suffered by us, those connected to the Hawaiian Islands by more than just paper property interests.

For the generations of kamaaina to come, we cannot allow Hawaii’s unique and effective public trust doctrine to be diluted.  That is why we must fight the Land Board’s latest decision about the University’s plan for Mauna Kea.  And we could really use your help.  Forcing the government to follow its own laws is really expensive. Please consider giving to the Mauna Kea Legal Defense Fund by clicking here or by calling KAHEA at 877-585-2432 (toll-free).

From Marti:

Big mahalo to 350.org for organizing the global day of action on October 24, 2009 in support of bringing greenhouse gas emissions down below 350 parts per million.  Over 5,200 events were held in more than 180 countries giving rise to the “most widespread day of political action in the planet’s history.”  Wow!

We joined in on the demonstrations held in Hawaii and continue to do our part to advocate for 350 in fun and interesting ways (I carved that one myself!).  As fun as it was to carve my 350 pumpkin, the gravity of what global warming will do to the Pacific weighed heavy on my soul.

If global temperatures are allowed to rise 2 degrees — which is what world leaders discussed in Barcelona as “tenable” — then that will result in at least a 2-foot rise in sea level.  I don’t know about everybody else, but the sudden loss of our coastlines here is anything but tenable. And is nothing but immoral when you’re talking about many inhabited islands throughout the Pacific that are a mere few feet above sea level. Failing to reach the 350 goal in the immediate future means as many as 200,000 people throughout the Pacific will become “climate refugees,” losing their homes, livelihoods, and ways of life to rising sea levels, ocean acidification, and natural disasters, just to name a few of the evils triggered by global warming. Who are you, Mr. World Leader, to decide that is okay?  It’s not.

But. If the success of the 350 global day of action demonstrates anything, it is that there is the popular political will around the world necessary to achieve the 350 goal.  And, thankfully, now is the time to make this massive global push to end global warming really influence policy decisions.

On an international level, world leaders will be meeting again next month in Copenhagen, Denmark to negotiate an agreement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

At the U.S. level, the Obama Administration is expected to release a draft National Ocean Policy by December 9th to address the shocking mismanagement of oceans under U.S. control.

And here in Hawaii, hearings are being held through November by the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Taskforce on the implementing a fossil fuel fee.  Also, the Climate Change Taskforce (of which we are members) will have recommendations for the Legislature to act on when it convenes in January.

Watch for updates on how to participate in all of these decision-making opportunities.  Click here to see when and where the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Taskforce is meeting next.

Picture of the OOA experiment from HOT, Inc.

From Marti:

The Hawaii Board of Land and Natural Resources just took 250 acres of ocean along the North Kohala coast out of the public trust and gave it all to a private company for experiments in Open Ocean Aquaculture (OOA).

OOA is the practice of raising finfish under controlled conditions, in exposed, high-energy ocean environments.  It is distinct from the traditional practice of small scale aquaculture, which raises a limited number of multiple marine species in nearshore fishponds.

On October 23, 2009, the Land Board granted a Conservation District Use Permit (CDUP) to Hawaii Ocean Technology, Inc. so that it can experiment with a new OOA technology.  If it works, HOT, Inc. will make millions (maybe even billions).  If it doesn’t, HOT, Inc., will walk away and we, the public, will be left with whatever harm their botched experiment causes: impaired water quality, harm to the ocean ecosystem, fish disease, escaped fish, affects of genetically modified material in the ocean, damage from rogue cages…. the list of risks is long.

The loss of public trust ocean resources is a less obvious, but equally long-lasting harm to our oceans.

The CDUP approved last month grants HOT, Inc. an exclusive right to use 250 acres of ocean for their caged fish experiments forever.  This means that HOT, Inc. can deny people access to the area, stop them from fishing, harvesting, or boating in the area — kind of like the way “entrepreneurs” came to Hawaii, fenced up open forest land, and “experimented” with raising cows.  We all know what *that* experiment did to Hawaii.

Indeed, OOA-proponents seek to “farm the sea as we farm the land, thereby using the vast ocean resource more effectively than is the case presently,” said John Forster in Open Ocean Aquaculture–Moving Forward.  It appears he means “effectively” in the “exploit it better and faster” sense of the word.

Is the maze of fences decorated with “no trespassing” signs over every inch of land the future we want for our oceans?  That is exactly what we are going to get if this trend is allowed to continue.  As outlined in its Ocean Resources Management Plan, the state wants at least 10 OOA ventures in Hawaiian waters.  This HOT, Inc. project is the third to come online, and the existing two are already seeking similar privileges to limit public access to the ocean around their cages.

The ocean is a collective resource.  A fisherman fishes the sea, but lays no claim to the sea itself or the fish, for that matter. Erecting massive industrial commercial fish farms in the place where fish once swam wild will not save our ocean from the brink of catastrophe. It will push it closer.

We need to stop this mahele of our ocean. Instead, we need to better regulate the commercial (that is exploitive) use of our oceans.  We have to enforce the “take what you need and only what you need” mantra of traditional resource management systems that ensured that everyone was fed and the resources endured for generations to come.  At same time, we need to better support community-based loko ia, the small-scale nearshore fishponds that not only restore natural ecosystems, but help to provide fish for everyone to eat.

Help participate in Oahu community efforts to re-establish, perpetuate, and celebrate the opening of Makahiki season and the return of Lono at the following locations. Interested participants please contact event organizers by email if you have any questions concerning protocol, appropriate behavior, attire, and ho’okupu (offerings). Please be mindful and respectful of the traditions of the host community.

KO‘OLAUPOKO DISTRICT – December 4- 6th, 2009
Kualoa (Kualoa Regional Park)
Opening Saturday December 5th
6:30 AM Sunrise procession and ceremony begins
7:30 AM Registration
9:00 AM Päÿani (Makahiki Games)
6:00 PM Dinner and awards (potluck)
Contact : Umi Kai, (ulupono1@gmail.com; 840-5510)
• Families are encouraged to come and camp from Friday until Sunday
• Hawaiian Käne are encouraged to compete in the games (16 yrs and older)
• Interested Hawaiian organizations must email and RSVP in advance

WAI‘ANAE DISTRICT – November 20-21st, 2009
Mäkua (Mäkua Military Reservation)
Friday November 20th Preparation
Saturday Nov. 21st Community Access
9:00 AM Opening Procession and Ceremony
Contact William Aila (ailaw001@hawaii.rr.com; phone 330-0376)
• Mäkua Access is limited
• Interested participants must email and RSVP in advance
• Orientation session required (meetings available every Friday until Makahiki)

“The board’s decision undermines the basic right everyone in Hawaii has to stand up for their environment, their culture and their religion,” said Kealoha Pisciotta, the president of Mauna Kea Anaina Hou. “Despite extensive evidence on the record of our cultural, spiritual, environmental and recreational connections to Mauna Kea, the board is now claiming we suddenly have no right to ensure it is protected from bulldozers.”

See the full story here: http://www.hawaiitribune-herald.com/articles/2009/10/02/local_news/local02.txt

Tomorrow, we along with others will plead our case at the Board of Land and Natural Resource meeting for a contested case hearing on the Mauna Kea Comprehensive Management Plan.

Mauna Kea Anaina Hou, The Sierra Club-Hawaii, The Royal Order of Kamehameha I, KAHEA: The Hawaiian Environmental Alliance, Dwight J. Vincente and Clarence Kukauakahi Ching have submitted a request for a contested case hearing on the plan.

Robert Harris, executive director of the Sierra Club, said that after the plan was approved in April Mauna Kea was chosen for a $1.2 billion Thirty Meter Telescope project.

“Our position is we’re not sure you should be approving new telescopes until this comprehensive management plan is finalized,” Harris said. “If you are going to call this a comprehensive management plan, I think you’re going to have to take into account future development and this plan specifically doesn’t address any development whatsoever.”

Department of Land and Natural Resources staff are recommending against a contested case hearing, saying there are no laws or rules requiring one because of the board’s approval of the plan and that the petitioners have no property interest in the project.

“The (comprehensive management plan) does not permit or authorize any new land use of development on Mauna Kea, including telescope projects,” the recommendation said.

Marti Townsend, program director for KAHEA, said there is a public interest in the protection of public trust resources. More time is needed to develop the plan and get public input, she said.

The DLNR says the acceptance of the plan doesn’t facilitate new construction but Townsend said she thinks it does, especially in light of the recent announcement of the Thirty Meter Telescope project.

“That was our concern all along — that we’re rushing through the management plan process in order to accommodate the TMT and so it’s really a development plan,” Townsend said.

To read full article click here.

The meeting will be held tomorrow (August 28, 2009) at 9:30 in the DLNR Board Room 132 on the first floor of the Kalanimoku Building at 1151 Punchbowl St. The Board Room is located on the makai (ocean) side of the building.

The mayor stated in a letter to the committee that she does not support a ban against taro due to the issue of unenforceability because there are no “reputable scientific tests” to distinguish between natural and GM taro.

Instead, Tavares said she preferred committee members defer the bill until the council, her administration, state lawmakers and federal and state agricultural officials find a solution.

“I don’t get these lamebrained excuses about enforcement,” said longtime Native Hawaiian activist Walter Ritte of Molokai.

Medeiros’ bill would make it illegal for any person to test, raise, grow, transport or release genetically engineered taro. The penalty would be a petty misdemeanor punishable by a fine of up to $1,000 and 30 days in jail.

Lucienne de Naie of the Hawaii Sierra Club said a law in itself can be a powerful deterrent.
Dr. Lorrin Pang, the Maui District health officer, said there are plenty of people in Maui County who would volunteer to help enforce the law, including himself. Genetically modified taro can be distinguished from natural taro, he said.

To read full article click here.

Please contact Mayor Tavares and tell her what you think about GM taro enforcement! (808) 270-7855; Fax: (808) 270-7870.

The date is not yet set for the meeting to make a decision on Bill 09-100 but the council still needs to hear your support for this bill! Council members that still need  some swaying include Michael Victorino, Gladys Baisa, Joseph Pontanilla, Michael Molina and Council Chair Danny Mateo. Please take a few minutes out of your day to contact the council members and voice your support for the GMO Taro Ban bill. 

Michael Victorino- michael.victorino@mauicounty.us Ph : (808) 270-7760
Fax: (808) 270-7639

Gladys Baisa- gladys.baisa@mauicounty.us Ph : (808) 270-7939
Fax: (808) 270-7127

Joseph Pontanilla- joseph.pontanilla@mauicounty.us Ph : (808) 270-5501
Fax: (808) 270-5502

Michael Molina- michael.molina@mauicounty.us Ph : (808) 270-5507
Fax: (808) 270-5508

Council Chair Danny Mateo- danny.mateo@mauicounty.us Ph :  (808) 270-7678
Fax: (808) 270-7717

Jo Anne Johnson-  jo_anne.johnson@mauicounty.us Ph: 270-5504

Sol Kaho’ohalahala- sol.kahoohalahala@mauicounty.us Ph: 270-7768

Bill Medeiros- bill.medeiros@mauicounty.us Ph: 270-7246

Wayne Nishiki- wayne.nishiki@mauicounty.us Ph: 270-7108

Please contact them and Ask them to support Bill 09-100 and help protect kalo from genetic modification. Your phone call or e-mail could help to extend the shield of protection for kalo to one more county.

From Alana:

Too often loko i’a are talked about as things of the past, and somewhat obsolete. They are spoken of like memorials of a time past, a time when Hawaiians could essentially farm huge amounts of fish without even needing to feed them. But those days are over, right? No, they don’t have to be. 

On Saturday at He’eia fishpond in Kaneohe, a bunch of people got together to help fish some of the predators, like baracuda, out of the fishpond. He’eia is an estimated 800 years old. It is owned by Bishop Estate, and is cared for by  Paepae o He’eia, a private non-profit organization. It has taken them years to clear destructive mangrove trees off of about half the fishpond wall, and they are still working on fixing a hole in the wall, but they still manage to produce and sell moi. He’eia produces anywhere between 300 and 700 pounds of moi each year and that number is expected to increase when the wall is fixed and the fishpond is completely restored. About 100 years ago there were many more fishponds all around the island, but most of them have either been filled in completely with mangroves, or are in ruin. 

He’eia, though, is a beautiful example of how community effort can lead to something meaningful and productive. Although many fishponds are privately owned now, they could still serve as productive entities of society. He’eia and Moli’i on O’ahu both manage to. Hawaiian fishponds utilized a system that was not found anywhere else on the planet. It was probably the most efficient and sustainable way of raising herbivore fish ever. Fishponds are not the remnants of an ancient culture. Hawaiians are still here, and Hawaii can still benefit from fishponds.

From:  Andrea

Just last month, Act 155 was passed in the Hawaii Legislature, amending Hawaii’s renewable energy law.

One of the highlights of this amendment was the strengthening of Hawaii’s Renewable Portfolio Standards (often abbreviated as RPS).  These standards are binding for electric utility companies, which must satisfy the specified percentage of their net electricity sales with electricity generated from renewable energy sources by the specified date.

Now, Hawaii’s Renewable Portfolio Standards are as follows:  10% by 2010; 15% by 2015; 25% by 2020; and 40% by 2030.  The two standards that Act 155 changed are the two later dates:  the 2020 standard was increased by 5%, and the 2030 standard was a new addition.

This strengthening of Hawaii’s Renewable Portfolio Standards was a wise move by the Hawaii Legislature.  Hawaii should be a predominant leader in the renewable energy realm, considering that it is the most oil dependent state with over 90% of its energy needs met by imported fossil fuels– a doubly detrimental impact with carbon footprints from long-distance importation and burning.  The context of climate change and sea-level rise heighten Hawaii’s energy vulnerability.

Yet, Hawaii is also ideally situated to move the ball forward with renewable energy due to the high availability of solar, wind, wave, and tidal energy.  Thus, the Legislature’s addition of the long-term standard, 40% renewable-created electricity by 2030, is in line with Hawaii’s position of great need, vulnerability, and opportunism.

However, the short-term standard could be a bit more aggressive.  Although a five-percent increase to 25% by 2020 is an improvement, a few other states have more stringent short-term standards.  For example, California is requiring 20% renewable-created electricity by 2010– double Hawaii’s 2010 standard.  And, Maine has a 2017 standard of 40%, Hawaii’s standard for 13 years later, while New York has a 2013 standard of 24%– 9% greater than Hawaii’s 2015 standard.

Regardless of the precise standards, the definition of “renewable energy” sources must be amended.  While creating more stringent standards in the short-term is ideal, amending the definition of “renewable energy” to only encompass those sources that are truly clean is a must.

As it stands now, the definition of “renewable energy” does not contain any qualifications.  For example, it includes “biofuels.”  Such an unqualified authorization allows utility companies to meet the standard with, say, palm oil, which fits the broad definition of “biofuels.”

What’s the problem with palm oil qualifying as a renewable energy source?  This “biofuel” implicates a significant carbon footprint due to carbon-emitting land change.  After the deforestation, heavy fertilization, and peatland burning required to produce the palm oil, the production of this “biofuel” actually contributes more to global warming, opposed to ameliorating the crisis.

Renewable energy sources and, thus, renewable portfolio standards for utility companies should authorize only clean renewable sources in life-cycle terms.  Renewability should be just one requisite for clean energy sources; the holistic footprint, including emissions, land change, and other environmental impacts, also must be taken into account.

Otherwise, we may simply displace the impact to another medium.  Without amending the law to reflect this crucial qualification, the renewable portfolio standards may end up perpetuating the very problem that they are intended to improve.

Want Hawaii to lead a meaningful renewable energy transition?

Contact your representatives in the State Legislature and voice your opinion!

Here’s contact information for our House representatives:

http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/site1/house/members/members.asp

And, here’s contact information for Senate members:

http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/site1/senate/members/members.asp

From Alana:

This week Mauna Kea was chosen as the site for the Thirty Meter Telescope. It was chosen over a location in the Chilean Atacama Desert. In the weeks prior to the decision, some people thought that Mauna Kea might not be chosen because of its significantly higher cost, but was anyone actually surprised when the Mauna Kea site was chosen? It is sad to see untouched, sacred land used for a telescope that could  be obsolete in a matter of years. In these job-hungry times the state should be focusing on creating jobs that invigorate the ‘aina, rather than destroy it. The ecological and cultural price might be even more than the price of building it…

More information on the Mauna Kea site: http://www.tmt.org/news/site-selection.htm

Last Friday there was a community aquaculture meeting at the UH Law School. It was fourth of four presentations given by Christina Lizzi (Food and Water Watch, DC), Rob Parsons (Food and Water Watch Coordinator, Maui), and Kale Gumapac (Kanaka Council). The other three meetings were on the Big Island and Maui. Only about 10 people showed up to the one on O’ahu (granted, it was on short notice, and had limited publicity), but a lot of concerns were raised, and was apparent that people are not only curious about these sci-fi fish farms, but they are also concerned.  The meetings were informative about aquaculture, and the risks that come with it anywhere it the world, and also had a very cultural focus on Hawai’i.

Some of the environmental and legal issues brought up in discussion:

What state entity should preside over aquaculture?

Kona Blue has been meeting with Monsanto, the GMO company, for GMO soy in feed. 

How can wild fish in feed be reduced, while also eliminating GMO protein substitutes, like soy?

Kona Blue has plans to genetically engineer a stronger type of kahala fish. Escapes of GMO fish, or GMO fed fish could lead to terrible repercussions in the wild. 

Who holds ultimate title to leased aquaculture areas? In reality it is ceded land, and leases could be contested. 

Kona Blue is not paying fair market value on leased area (only ~$14,000 per year)

All feed is imported, and its content is not released. It could have preservatives, antibiotics, hormones, pesticides, etc. 

Virtually all of ocean farmed fish would be exported from the islands. 

Permit requirements for onshore hatcheries? The impacts of the hatcheries may be as harmful as what happens in the ocean. 

Who would enforce buffer zones around larger ventures? DOCARE? Coast Guard?

Cultural issues brought up in discussion: 

Hukilau Foods, the company running the fish farm off of Ewa beach, takes advantage of the concept of the hukilau, which historically would benefit the entire ahupua’a by providing fish to everyone who helped. Hukilau Foods, however, exports the majority of their fish to the mainland. (Asking Hukilau Foods to share their bounty on harvest days would make a big statement)

Hawai’i open ocean aquaculture operations have a tendency to equate themselves with the loko i’a (native Hawaiian fish ponds). This is similar to comparing the TMT to native Hawaiian astronomy. It is fallacious, and the two could not be more different. The ancient fishponds were set up to be self-sustaining ecosystems. They were poly-culture systems that used barracuda, sea turtles, seaweed, predatory fish, and smaller fish like a checks and balances system. It did not have to constantly be monitored for disease, and the fish did not need to be fed. The ponds were also separate from the open ocean. 

In past generations the ocean was revered for its healing properties. Even when I was growing up I was taught to go in the ocean if I had a wound, but these days you are more likely to get staff infection than be healed. The ocean is changing, and not for the better. Adding an unknown amount of fish excrement to our waters could lead to a rise in “slime” which can lead to several health problems in humans. 

EIS’ fail to address most cultural concerns. How will sharks that are attracted to the cages be address? In 2005 Kona Blue killed a resident 16-foot tiger shark that many people felt was an ‘aumakua.

Obviously there are a lot of conflicting interests here regarding land and ocean use. We came to the conclusion that the best way to benefit our island community would be to use all the money that would have be given to aquaculture ventures, to instead  restore the loko i’a. If that happened, entire communities would reap the benefits, and not just a CEO and 20 employees of a company. Open ocean aquaculture has already proven itself to be a generally unprofitable business in Hawai’i– Kona Blue says it needs to expand or it will go out of business. Why not produce something locally, in a truly sustainable way, that would be for local people? The infrastructure for fishponds is already there, they just need a little makeover.

Maui taro farmers need your help. Our beloved Haloa is once again under the threat of being generically modified, this time on Maui. The Maui County Council needs to hear from the public on this issue. Please voice your opinion (in Haloa’s favor of course) and let it be known to the council that you care about the purity of the kalo within the islands. Take a minute out of your day to contact the council and show your opposition to GM taro. Monsanto, Dow Chemical, and Syngenta have been making their rounds, so pick up your phone and show them that Hawaii doesn’t back down on this issue.

Ask them to support Bill 09-100 and help protect taro from genetic modification.

Council members to contact:

Mike Molina (Haiku, Paia, Makawao)  270-5507
Gladys Baisa (Kula, Pukalani, Ulupalakua)  270-7939
Joe Pontanilla (Kahului) 270-5501
Jo Anne Johnson (West Maui) 270-5504
Danny Mateo (Molokai) 270-7678
Sol Kaho’ohalahala (Lanai) 270-7768
Bill Medeiros (East Maui) 270-7246
Wayne Nishiki (South Maui) 270-7108
Michael Victorino (Wailuku, Waihee, Waikapu) 270-7760

Councilmembers are expected to make a key decision in this process by July 16th, so please, please, please call them today.  Your phone call could help to extend the shield of protection for taro to one more county.

From:  Andrea

Sparked by curiosity about the legal procedure for chemical spills and releases, I have been researching the Hawaii Emergency Planning and Community-Right-to-Know Act.  After days picking apart the details of this Act and  related regulations, I am left to wonder where I may find the “Community-Right-to-Know” aspect.

It seems like it should be called Department of Health-Right-to-Know.  Nowhere in this Act is there a mandate for notifying the public when there is a chemical release or spill.  Facilities that store hazardous and extremely hazardous substances over a threshold amount are bound to report their chemical inventory and releases or spills to the Department.   But, what about notifying the public of this danger?

As discovered by a call to the Hawaii Office of Hazard Evaluation and Emergency Response, the Department of Health is not bound to notify the public.  The Department decides, within its discretion, whether to notify the public through a general statement about a chemical release in the community.

When I started researching this law, I expected to find public notification requirements about what hazardous substances are present in the community and when they are accidentally released.  The only public right-to-know is the ability to request records on particular facilities from the Department of Health.  But, this policy does not truly inform the community because members of the public must know exactly what they are looking for in order to request that information.

If the apparent goal of the Act is the community’s right-to-know about the presence and release of hazardous substances within the community, there should be a provision binding the Department of Health to notify the public.  In other words, the Department should make records on these hazardous substances more accessible to the public, actually informing the community in a meaningful way.

As it stands now, the Hawaii Emergency Planning and Community-Right-to-Know Act requires notifying the Department, but there is an essential step missing in the process:  notifying the public, rather than requiring the public to specifically request information that is not generally public knowledge.  The onus should be on the Department, the information-bearing party, not the public.

These guys on Maui are dedicated to helping ensure the future health of our islands. From a bamboo construction company to a new recycling center, living in an environmentally-friendly fashion day-to-day has become more accessible to the average person on Maui than ever before.

Yellow Seed Bamboo Nursery

Check out the following article and support the companies who make it their mission to support our ʻāina!
Maui organizations promote environment throughout the year