• Paying through the nose to stay rural • Concern for Koke‘e • No troops for U.S., Darfur Paying through the nose to stay rural There were two more letters vilifying big box stores in Tuesday’s paper. One of them
• Paying through the nose to stay rural
• Concern for Koke‘e
• No troops for U.S., Darfur
Paying through the nose to stay rural
There were two more letters vilifying big box stores in Tuesday’s paper. One of them equated banning big box stores with the county ordinance specifying that no building should be taller than a coconut tree. Unfortunately, we already have many buildings that exceed 25 feet — but I have never seen a high-rise big box store.
The other letter claims that big box stores would bankrupt the high school athletic programs. But, if everyone paid less for food they would have more to support the athletic programs. It is not logical to allow a few monopolists to charge high prices on the basis that they donate a small portion to local programs — sports or otherwise. Besides, I think that Wal-Mart gives donations to many local programs.
And then they bring up that old saw about saving our “rural lifestyle.” Does being rural mean you have to pay through the nose for everything you buy? We already have some big box stores and yet we still have a rural lifestyle to save. Most of Kaua‘i is indeed rural — and this is a good thing — but this description hardly fits downtown Lihu‘e and the area around the Kukui Grove Shopping Center.
Those who support the monopolists (many of them not local firms anyway) have to go to great lengths to find ways to convince us that it is our solemn duty to pay high prices in order to support those businesses that make donations to our local politicians.
Stan Godes
Hanalei
Concern for Koke‘e
Dear DLNR: I am very relieved to see that some of our local input has been heard and integrated into the plan for Koke‘e. Thank you.
I am, however, still very concerned that the plans you have for our beloved Koke‘e are still too commercialized. To put souvenir and snack stands at the lookout, in my opinion, demeans the majesty of what still remains pristine in this place of wonder. It is not very far at all for people to travel to the lodge store to get whatever they might need to eat or buy there. I guarantee you, there will be all kinds of trash left at the lookout as people discard the waste or wrappers from the food they buy. And wouldn’t it be so much better to have those needs taken care of indoors — rather than spread out in the midst of such beauty? Enlarging the parking lots and widening the roads to accommodate larger tour buses is a terrible mistake. The wider roads will change the ambience of Koke‘e dramatically. And the buses will bring too many people at once into the park. Kaua‘i is a very small, rural island. It calls for a very different vision than how our Mainland national parks are handled. Have you been to Yosemite lately? I stopped going there when I lived in California many years ago because of the density of the numbers of park visitors. It was like being in a little village. I do appreciate your willingness to suspend charging locals an entry fee — but what really is the point if it is only for a little while? But more than the cost of an entry fee, I think an entry gate will change how it feels to enter Koke‘e. Instead of climbing ever higher into the natural phenomenon of the mountains of Kaua‘i, people will feel like they are entering into a theme park that is there for their recreating. It will diminish the feeling of retreat that Koke‘e now offers. And I think it will diminish its majesty and offend the deeply spiritual energy of the place. I do understand that park maintenance requires money. But if your plans to bring in money for maintenance disrupts the integrity and spirit of the place, can’t you see that something is very, very wrong? There must be other ways we can devise to provide for park maintenance. There are two basic kinds of tourism: you can keep the integrity of the place as it is by controlling how you bring people in; or you can think about the numbers of people- represented dollars you would like to bring in and alter the place to allow for that kind of income. The latter takes the soul out of the place, homogenizes it and makes profit more important than place-integrity. Waikiki, Kanapali and Kihei, have become little Miamis because they have allowed the latter kind of tourism to change the place to accommodate the numbers. Kaua‘i is standing at the crossroads of dollar-driven development vs. sustainable place-integrity controlled development. You who are making these decisions about Koke‘e do not live on our precious island. You have not chosen a rural community lifestyle. Perhaps we cannot expect you to value what we have chosen. But I am hoping that you will somehow be granted the foresight to be able to see that our choice does have value for us. And you will dive deeper into your reconsiderations for how to malama this precious park.
Joan Levy
Kapa‘a
No troops for U.S., Darfur
In his letter of Dec. 12, “Looking for peace in all the wrong places,” Scott Robeson asks: “Why are our sons and daughters standing and dying between two groups of Iraqi citizens?” He implies that we should send our young people to a much worthier cause in Darfur. How are we to judge?
One and a half million Iraqis were killed by Saddam and a half a million Sudanese have been killed by their government’s lackeys in Darfur. Mr. Robeson seems to be suggesting that we compare attrocities and decide who is worthy of living and who is not. Would he trade all of the lives of those Iraqis whom we saw standing in voting lines with purple fingers for the lives of the citizens of Darfur? Because you know that all of the Iraqis who risked their lives to vote will be killed in greater numbers than are today, just like the millions of Vietnamese and Cambodians who were slaughtered after we abandoned them in Southeast Asia. And what about the Kurds who died such horrible deaths after being poisoned with chemical weapons by Saddam once we left after the Gulf War — shall we desert them again?
The situation in Darfur is war between the Sudanese Arab Muslim fanatics in the north and the black African Muslims in the south, in other words, the war between two groups of Sudanese citizens. Looking for peace, you say — where is there peace in Sudan to keep?
Should our Christian nation get involved in a civil war between two warring Muslim groups? No, I think not. When our troops ultimately leave Iraq a free nation, our soldiers need to come home. We spend billions of dollars every year to support and prop up the United Nations. We must continue to encourage them to step in. Perhaps Mr. Robeson should address his letter to them.
Ada Koene
Koloa
