The Hawaii Supreme Court denied a petition filed by the State of Hawaii, Board of Land and Natural Resources, and Alexander and Baldwin, which claimed there was not enough permitted water to fight the wildfires in Upcountry Maui. 

What You Need To Know

  • The Hawaii Supreme Court denied a petition filed by the State of Hawaii, Board of Land and Natural Resources, and Alexander and Baldwin, which claimed there was not enough permitted water to fight the wildfires in Upcountry Maui

  • The petition was filed the day after the wildfires started on Maui 

  • On Wednesday, the Hawaii Supreme Court heard arguments on the petition. The attorney for Maui County said there was sufficient water for fighting the fires

  • Battles over water on Maui have been ongoing for over a century, and this is just the latest iteration in the debate

Multiple battles over water on Maui have ignited following the wildfires. These fights are just the latest iteration in debates over stream flows that date back to the late 1800s when water was diverted for sugar plantations. 

The day after the wildfires started on Maui, the State of Hawaii, Board of Land and Natural Resources, and Alexander and Baldwin filed a petition in the Hawaii Supreme Court, saying there was “not enough permitted water to battle the wildfires” in Upcountry Maui. The petition asked to overturn a June court decision that limited Alexander and Baldwin’s stream diversion in East Maui from 40 million gallons to 31.5 million gallons.

Over the last two decades, Hawaiian and environmental groups have fought to restore the water in East Maui’s streams. The Sierra Club has argued that permits granted by the Board of Land and Natural Resources to East Maui Irrigation and Alexander and Baldwin daily fail to protect the water for customary Hawaiian practices and ecological balance. In 2018, the Commission of Water Resource Management granted the restoration of water to some streams in the area.

On Wednesday, the Hawaii Supreme Court heard arguments on the Board of Land and Natural Resources and Alexander and Baldwin’s request. The attorney for Maui County, Mariana Lowy-Gerstmar, said there was sufficient water for fighting the fires. She said the county used 37,000 gallons of reservoir water over the course of five days to fight the fires. The county is allocated 7.5 million gallons per day. 

During the proceedings, Justice Todd Eddins and Sabrina McKenna both grilled Board of Land and Natural Resources attorney Miranda Steed on the declaration that there was not enough water to fight the fires. She replied that Maui County was not the only agency fighting the fire, noting the state Division of Forestry and Wildlife was also involved. In response, Eddins continued to ask for “factual support” that more water was needed.

The following day, the high court denied the petition, stating the petitioner had failed to establish a “clear and indisputable right to the relief requested.”

Sierra Club Director Wayne Tanaka praised the Hawaii Supreme Court's decision, but said it did not right "the blatant, unfounded misrepresentations" that were put forward. 

"Lying to our supreme court, lying to the people of Hawaii, and exploiting the unimaginable pain and suffering of the people of Maui just to help a real estate investment corporation continue to hoard and waste water is simply inexcusable," said Tanaka.

The fires in Upcountry Maui, which started on Aug. 8, are ongoing. So far, they have destroyed 19 homes. More than a thousand acres have burned in Kula and Olinda.  

Michelle Broder Van Dyke covers the Hawaiian Islands for Spectrum News Hawaii. Email her at michelle.brodervandyke@charter.com.

Editor's note: This post has been updated to include comment from Sierra Club Director Wayne Tanaka. (Aug. 24, 2023)

Related Stories