FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
Q: What is going on with Waipi’o Valley road?
A: Mayor Mitch Roth issued an Emergency Proclamation on Feb. 25, 2022, based on safety concerns in a geotechnical report, that limited access to Waipi'o Valley. On Sept. 14, the Mayor updated his Emergency Proclamation with several amendments.
Q: Who can now legally use the road?
A: Property owners, leasees, agricultural producers, Hawaiʻi Island residents, Native Hawaiians and permitted tour vans have legal access to Waipi'o. Be aware that Protect Waipi’o Valley will likely have a presence at the top as they are sharing information with those passing their tent to access the road into Waipi’o. They will likely ask you not to enter, or to exercise a specific protocol while in Waipi’o.
Q: Is the Emergency Proclamation temporary while the County fixes the road?
A: The road can be closed under this Emergency Proclamation for up to 5 years, and can be extended if needed.
Q: Is the road unsafe in its current condition?
A: While the road can be unsafe if driven incorrectly, this closure was based primarily on rockfall hazards, not road stability. At a recent community meeting, DPW Director Steve Pause clarified that driving the road does not make it more unsafe for others.
Q: Why did MaKa join the lawsuit against Mayor Roth?
A: The original Emergency Proclamation (2/25/22) closed the Waipi‘o Valley Road to the general public, which included Hawaiian cultural practitioners, surfers, and fishermen. Mayor Roth claimed emergency powers, but no recent or imminent storm, earthquake, landslide, change in the condition of the road, or other event had created an emergency. The Mayor would not meet with with us despite repeated attempts to contact him. Because of this, MaKa joined an existing lawsuit along with 13 other individual plaintiffs in April 2022.
Q: Is Mālama i ke Kai ʻo Waipiʻo a special interest group?
A: No. We are the community made up of all ages, races and shoreline practices. We are mostly comprised of local families who have multigenerational connections to the ocean in Waipiʻo.
Q: When Waipiʻo was closed, why not just go to another beach?
A: In the last few years, the east side of Hawaiʻi Island has lost several public ocean access points to indefinite County closures and privatization, including the cherished beach parks of Kolekole and Hakalau. Each closure carries with it untold loss in the form of physical, mental, and spiritual wellbeing. In Waipiʻo’s case, these closures funneled everyone to Honoliʻi and Pololū, where they also have serious carrying capacity issues.
Q: Why did the court deny the motion by Hawaii County to dismiss the lawsuit MaKa was part of?
A: Judge Kubota; “The fact that we’re dealing with a moderate danger, and nothing in any report or any evidence of an imminent danger bothers me.”; “We have to give highest regard to the constitutional right before it will be infringed. However, in this case today … the court doesn’t have to justify constitutional issues because it’s enough to find that, with the evidence submitted before this court and whether there’s ever been a rockfall causing injury or death in the whole recorded history of Waipi‘o Valley Road, the court has to deny the motion to dismiss.”
Q: Why did MaKa request mediation with the County?
A: Based on the evidence presented, Judge Kubota had the authority to remove the entire proclamation and completely reopen Waipiʻo Valley to the hundreds of tourists that visit the Valley on a daily basis.
Q: What did MaKa achieve through the mediation agreement?
A: By requesting specific amendments to the existing Emergency Proclamation, we were able to continue restrictions on rental cars and visitor foot traffic. We reached an agreement with Mayor Roth to restore ocean access to Waipiʻo Valley for only Hawaiʻi Island residents, as well as Native Hawaiians regardless of residency. This agreement was implemented through the Amended Emergency Declaration. All other changes between the first and second Declarations was included by the Mayor without support from MaKa.
Q: Why are permitted tour vans now being allowed to return?
A: The County added licensed tour operations to the amendments.
Q: I heard you tried to ban ATVʻs, horses and riding the back of trucks?
A: No. These restrictions were in the original Emergency Proclamation made by the Mayor, based around the major danger on the road being rockfall.
Q: But don’t you think Waipi’o could use a rest?
A: Yes we agree that “rest” in terms of managed human impact is very important, especially as it pertains to tourism. However, We feel that if a rest is determined to be put into place it should be for a predetermined period of time, with a specific outcome, based on scientific facts, and include everyone, none of which are being done.
Q: Is your group against tourists in Waipi’o?
A: No, we are not against tourists in Waipiʻo, but we are also in no way advocating for them. Tourists have representation from the Hawaii Tourism Authority, which has both the responsibility and much better ability to speak on their behalf.
Q: There are different viewpoints about Waipiʻo Valley access in our community. I have seen negativity about this on on social media. Is this MaKa?
A: No. We are are not engaging in slander, racism, intimidation, bullying, or any other types of disrespectful tactics.
Q: Traditionally, who would access Waipiʻo and why?
A: “People. Many thousands of people lived in Waipiʻo of all rank, station, professions, rolls and responsibilities over hundreds and/or thousands of years. As a wahi pana, he ‘āina kuleana, he wahi punahele o nā ali‘i, it was very much visited often by guests. But as with all places across Hawaiʻi, there was protocol to be observed whenever traveling and being a guest in another ahupuaʻa, moku, ʻili, anyone elseʻs kuleana. There was the respect of the guests to the graciousness of the hosts. The expected protocol varied from place to place, people to people, generation to generation. It is obvious today that real practical practice of the 2 way respect and protocol is sorely lacking and it is our kuleana as a people to set and stand by a shared, known protocol.” Lanakila Mangauil
Q: Is it true that the fish are coming back?
A: Increasing fish abundance is an aspect of managing humans. There are specific pathways to make that happen, and they require robust fisheries data sets and community vetting. Both of which have yet to happen in Waipiʻo, and which MaKa would support.
Q: Is the road currently blocked?
A: There is currently a checkpoint at the top of the road where Hawaiʻi residency is being checked. While most are being let thru, MaKa has heard reports of some Hawaii residents being turned away illegally.
MaKa has also obtained documents showing a public easement thru the private property that leads to the beach, however county and state officials have not clarified whose responsibility this road is. We will update this page as this situation unfolds.
Q: What is MaKaʻs goal moving forward?
A: MaKa will continue to prioritize ocean access for Hawaiʻi Island residents to perpetuate traditional forms of wave riding, fishing, gathering, and other shoreline activities. We will also promote and develop coastal stewardship programs that sustain a thriving Waipiʻo Valley.
Q:What does MaKa envision for the future?
A: MaKa wants to be part of the long term solution. We believe the Amendment is a step in the right direction. Itʻs primary management function is to restrict vehicular and pedestrian tourists. This model, coupled with educational efforts on how to drive the road and a stewardship program supporting valley restoration and farming efforts, could be used for permanent management solutions.
Q: If I donate money what will it be used for?
A: Donated funds will be used for operational costs, coastal stewardship of Waipi’o and any needed litigation expenses.