Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Invasive Species topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances bill on invasive-species bounties as agencies warn of limits
Summary
The House Committee on Water & Land passed SP746 (SD2, HD1) relating to invasive species after testimony that the measure could help outreach but may not control coconut rhinoceros beetle populations and could divert funds from research into biological controls.
The House Committee on Water & Land advanced SP746 (SD2, HD1), a bill relating to invasive species and proposed bounties, after agencies urged caution about relying on monetary bounties as the primary tool.
Rob Hoff, representing the Department of Land and Natural Resources, said the department “supports the intent of this bill” but warned that coconut rhinoceros beetle (CRB) infestations are a growing crisis on Oahu. Hoff said CRB is “attacking coconut trees” and also threatening native loulu palms in mountain areas, noting “3 of the 4 species on Oahu are endangered and all species have been found in the wild being attacked by CRB.” He added that the department is pursuing a different approach: “we feel that [biological control research] would probably be a better option for investing.”
Jonathan hope, testifying for the Department of Agriculture, also “support[ed] the intent” but cautioned about unintended consequences of a bounty program, saying he was “concerned about some unintended consequences with using a bounty as it relates to the potential malfeasance, to to abuse, the monetary structure if it's if it's incorporated.” The Hawaii Farm Bureau filed written testimony in support.
Committee members and agency witnesses discussed differences between outreach and population control. Hoff and the Department of Agriculture both said bounty programs tend to produce public engagement but have a limited track record for actually reducing pest populations, and that diverting funds from research — including the import and permitting to study a virus-based biocontrol — could leave managers without more effective tools.
The committee voted to advance the bill with the chair’s recommended language. The committee record shows the chair’s recommendation was adopted in decision making.
The bill will move forward with committee amendments; supporters emphasized outreach and enforcement details while agency witnesses asked that funds and program design not displace ongoing biological-control research.
