Give Hunters Carbon Credits for Killing Axis Deer

Dear Editor,

Let’s talk global warming and Axis deer. If we all believe in global warming, then we must believe that cap and trade, a government carbon tax on fossil fuels, is the thing to do. Methane will surely be part of this tax, since it’s being promoted in Australia. Cap and trade will also allow a carbon tax credit, to offset the carbon tax you already paid.

Australia is looking at utilizing the credit to its advantage. They have over 1.2 million wild camels with each one producing 100 pounds of methane each year, which is supposedly equivalent to one ton, or 2000 lbs. of CO2 per year. Australia feels that camel hunters could eliminate the troublesome camels and each hunter will benefit from a one ton CO2 carbon tax credit for each camel eliminated, since a reduction of 100 pounds of camel methane would result. The environmentalists should be extremely happy about reducing this unscientific source of global warming.

If the Obama administration successfully implements a U.S. cap and trade, or a carbon tax on fossil fuels, paid by U.S. consumers, then Maui County might take advantage of this federal program with the 12,000 Axis deer roaming around upcountry destroying crops.

Maui County might offer Axis deer hunters a one ton CO2 carbon tax credit for each deer eliminated, thus reducing Maui’s Axis deer problem and excessive CO2 emissions by 12,000 tons. Now, how do we eliminate the 8,500 metric tons of CO2 per day emitted from Kilauea Volcano? And you were worried about power plants.

Don Gerbig

Lahaina, Maui

  *   *   *   *   *

Rail: Council, not HART, is Nexus between Contracts and Contributors

Dear Editor,

Aloha.  The new rail authority, "Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation" (HART) is a semi-autonomous City and County agency similar to the Board of Water Supply (BWS). The BWS capital projects (construction) budget is limited by the amount it can collect from water bills. HART is limited by the GET rail surcharge.

The City Council does not have to approve each construction contract that the BWS issues, but some Council members want to have approval power over the contracts issued by HART. What can be the difference?

Some say that it is because of the magnitude of the cost of the rail, but the BWS also has a huge budget. Others say that it will bring contract decisions closer to the voters. The biggest problem with getting the Council involved is that it can cause a nexus between contracts and campaign contributions. In fact, if it did cause campaign contributions to go to the Council members, it may make the cost of the rail project even greater.

We need to keep politics and campaign contributions out of contract decisions as much as possible, and the BWS model has been the most successful method so far.

Chuck Prentiss

Kailua, Oahu