[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 14]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 19371]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




    INTRODUCTION OF THE SOUTH MAUI COASTAL PRESERVATION ACT OF 2005

                                 ______
                                 

                              HON. ED CASE

                               of hawaii

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, July 28, 2005

  Mr. CASE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce a bill directing the 
Secretary of the Interior to undertake a study to determine the 
suitability and feasibility of designating and acquiring lands located 
along the southern coast of the island of Maui as a National Seashore, 
National Recreation Area, National Monument, National Preserve, or 
other unit of the National Park Service.
  The study area covered by the proposed South Maui Coastal 
Preservation Act of 2005 includes lands from and including the 'Ahihi-
Kinau Natural Area Reserve to Kanaloa Point, a distance of 
approximately six miles.
  The area is rich in archaeological, cultural, historical, and natural 
resources. Important sites in the proposed park area contain remnants 
of dwellings, heiau (places of worship), fishing shrines, platforms, 
enclosures, shelters, walls, graves, and canoe hale (houses) that date 
back as early as 1100 A.D. This portion of the southern coast is also 
the home of unique native plants and animals, some of which are 
endangered.
  The County of Maui passed Resolution 00-136 on October 6, 2000, 
expressing its support for having this area designated as a National 
Park. The Hawaii State House and Senate also passed bills in support of 
having the area managed by the National Park Service.
  Both these resolutions were in support of my predecessor, 
Congresswoman Patsy T. Mink's bill, H.R. 591, introduced in the 107th 
Congress, to study the feasibility of designating the more limited area 
from Keone`o `io to Kanaloa Point as a National Park.
  An initial reconnaissance survey by the NPS indicated that the 
resources deserved protection but stated that the more limited area was 
not appropriate for a National Park because most of the land was owned 
by the state. However, I believe the expressions of support for NPS 
control of the area by the County and State offer a firm basis for 
moving forward. Therefore, I have included a provision in my bill to 
ensure that the proposed study includes consultation with the State of 
Hawaii to assess the feasibility of transferring some or all of the 
State lands in the study area to the federal government.
  The State of Hawaii has been unable to effectively manage and protect 
these important resources due to lack of funds. Further, this pristine 
coastline lies directly in the path of development and, absent action, 
too soon will be lost forever.
  This is a site of national significance, which deserves the level of 
protection only the National Park Service can provide. I urge my 
colleagues to support this bill.

                          ____________________