From time immemorial, our kupuna would set up traditional sea shelters near the shore during certain months of the year. Most of us did this with our parents, too. Although materials have changed, this practice has been continued through the present.
Today,
Our tarps and tents are our Sea Shelters.
Our cots and blankets are our Lauhala Mats.
Our motor vehicles are our Wa'a.
We do not know what materials our future generations will use to protect themselves and their 'ohana as they practice our culture. But we do know that if we teach them the right ways to live with the land and sea right now, they will be more likely to use those things for the benefit of the 'aina and all of the people who depend upon it for life.
Friday, September 19, 2008
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
What is PASH?
The PASH decision is what is referred to as "case law". In other words, the Hawai'i State Supreme Court ruled on laws that already existed, to clarify what those laws really mean. In this case, the court was ruling on Article 12, section 7 of the State constitution, which relates to Hawaiian rights to cultural practice, as well as HRS 1-1 and 7-1 (see links on the right).
According to a brochure from Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation,
"The decision recognized the traditional relationship Native Hawaiians have with the land and the importance of maintaining that relationship."
According to the same brochure, PASH therefore clarified the following:
• "Native Hawaiian Rights cannot be regulated out of existence by unreasonable or burdensome laws, permits or fees." In other words, the State does not have the right to make laws or departmental rules that would cause cultural practices to be extinguished if they were broadly enforced.
• "A Hawaiian tradition should be determined by balancing the reasons for continuing it and the harm it poses". In other words, traditional practices must be "reasonable" for them to be legal, and not cause harm to others. Obviously, you cannot put your neighbor's dog in the imu or exercise "gathering rights" on the lychee tree in somebody's backyard...this is common sense to most Hawaiians, and the court is relying on Hawaiians to exercise this comon sense.
However, according to this ruling you can probably legally gather salt in the places where your grandparents traditionally gathered salt, even if you must cross through undeveloped State or private lands to do so. This may not make "common sense" to some private landowners, but it is rooted in traditional land usage in Hawai'i and fully within the laws of the State of Hawai'i.
The PASH ruling also implies that the protection of Hawaiian traditional and customary rights may extend to traditional practitioners who are not of Hawaiian blood, under certain circumstances.
According to a brochure from Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation,
"The decision recognized the traditional relationship Native Hawaiians have with the land and the importance of maintaining that relationship."
According to the same brochure, PASH therefore clarified the following:
• "Native Hawaiian Rights cannot be regulated out of existence by unreasonable or burdensome laws, permits or fees." In other words, the State does not have the right to make laws or departmental rules that would cause cultural practices to be extinguished if they were broadly enforced.
• "A Hawaiian tradition should be determined by balancing the reasons for continuing it and the harm it poses". In other words, traditional practices must be "reasonable" for them to be legal, and not cause harm to others. Obviously, you cannot put your neighbor's dog in the imu or exercise "gathering rights" on the lychee tree in somebody's backyard...this is common sense to most Hawaiians, and the court is relying on Hawaiians to exercise this comon sense.
However, according to this ruling you can probably legally gather salt in the places where your grandparents traditionally gathered salt, even if you must cross through undeveloped State or private lands to do so. This may not make "common sense" to some private landowners, but it is rooted in traditional land usage in Hawai'i and fully within the laws of the State of Hawai'i.The PASH ruling also implies that the protection of Hawaiian traditional and customary rights may extend to traditional practitioners who are not of Hawaiian blood, under certain circumstances.
It should be noted that the PASH decision did not come easily. The Kohanaiki 'Ohana and many others should be credited for the many years of hard work it took to achieve this major victory in 1995.
Saturday, September 6, 2008
B.B.'s Story 9-5-8: Ka'ena & Poamoho
As we have said repeatedly in this blog, we as cultural practitioners are continuing to work toward a positive, cooperative solution with DLNR. However, stories like the following (from last night) make some people seriously wonder whether DLNR is even interested in cooperation...
Last night, on September 5, 2008, B.B. went fishing with his 'ohana and close friends at Ka'ena Point. While fishing, the family was sheltered by a tarp they had erected to protect themselves from the elements. DLNR officers came on ATV's and cited them for having the tarp up. B.B. reports that the officer who cited them, H.H., was very rude to all of them, including the children, who were very upset by the event. They were forced to take down the tarp, as the officer said that he would cite them again if they did not. There was also an implied threat of possible violence in the manner of the officer. They were all "freezing" through the night with no shelter at all, including the children.
"Camping paraphernalia?"
or
Cultural Practice Necessity?
or
Cultural Practice Necessity?
Read B.B.'s full story HERE
B.B. must go to court on October 16th at 9 a.m. for sheltering his family while fishing.
Stories like these are prompting people to ask questions such as this: "Is DOCARE a public agency of resource protection, or an independent militia?" -- Anonymous practitioner from Ka'ena
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
