Hawaii County Mayor Kimo Alameda announced Thursday that after more than two decades of advocacy, the 364-acre coastal Puna property known as Honolulu Landing had been acquired by the county for preservation.

The $3.7 million deal was made possible by the County Council’s unanimous approval of Resolution 286-25 on Sept. 17 last year. It authorized the Department of Finance to negotiate the property’s purchase using funds from the Public Access, Open Space and Natural Resources Preservation Commission, also known as PONC — a county advisory body tasked with identifying lands for purchase based on their cultural, recreational and ecological value.

Money for PONC acquisitions comes from a fund comprised of 2% of annual property tax revenue.

Honolulu Landing is situated between Nanawale Forest Reserve and Waiakahiula, comprised of 4,000 feet of rocky, undeveloped shoreline and a broad swath of deep jungle, making up a traditional Hawaiian land division known as an ahupua‘a. It is scattered with village complexes, burial sites, temples known as heiau, house platforms and traditional farming terraces — an archaeological record of Puna district’s past and the result of centuries of human habitation.

Although vacant in modern times, the property — known as a “wahi pana” or sacred place by many — is home to endangered species like the io (Hawaiian hawk), opeapea (Hawaiian hoary bat) and pueo (Hawaiian owl), as well as native trees like hau, kukui and hala.

Alameda’s announcement was celebrated by cultural practitioners, scientists and conservation groups, and especially by some lineal descendants of the area. Among this latter group was Lehua Kaulukukui, who said her great-grandmother was born on the property in 1876. The land, she said in past testimony supporting the resolution, is a part of her genealogy, reminding her that humans are “not separate from the universe.”

“We are genealogically connected to it — we all descend from that same cosmic origin,” Kaulukukui told a County Council committee last year during discussions about the purchase. “Honolulu Landing is part of that genealogy. Its walls, heiau, house sites and burials are not relics. They are living testaments to our place in the universal order. To disturb them is to break the chain between past and future, between earth and sky, between people and the cosmos.”

In a prepared statement shared with the Tribune-Herald, she thanked various county officials for their “leadership and commitment” in advancing the resolution past the finish line.

”This pivotal moment represents more than policy,” she wrote. “It is an affirmation of the enduring relationship between our people and this beloved wahi pana. Honolulu Landing holds the legacy of our Tutu, Mary Kaui Moke Kuamo‘o Keli‘ipio, and generations of ohana before her who lived in deep alignment with this aina. We recognize this action as a meaningful step toward the protection and preservation of Honolulu Landing, ensuring that its cultural, historical, and spiritual significance remains intact for future generations.”

The land got its name in the early 20th century when it served as a hub for interisland commerce. From the early 1900s up until the 1940s, cattle were driven across the lava field shoreline and made to swim out to waiting steamships, which would hoist the animals onboard before beginning their journey back to Oahu. Before that, a black sand beach resulting from the 1840 Nanawale eruption and lava flow created an ideal spot for launching canoes along an otherwise rocky, treacherous coast. Honolulu means “sheltered harbor” or “calm port” in the Hawaiian language.

Local activists also celebrated the good news, like former County Council member Eileen O’Hara, who currently serves as the executive director of Pahoa-based environmental nonprofit Malama O Puna. O’Hara lives in the Hawaiian Shores subdivision right up the coast from the now-preserved land, and has been petitioning the county for its protection since it landed on the inaugural PONC list back in 2006.

“I’m just really, really happy,” she said. “I’m happy for future generations. I feel like I can point to this and say I did something meaningful — really meaningful — for my community. To me, it’s just thrilling to succeed in this long-term endeavor.”

The property was previously slated for development by Nani Kahuka Aina LLC, which had owned it since 2006, but these plans didn’t move forward. Then it was listed for sale in the summer of 2025. This could have resulted in the property being used for the construction of a new coastal subdivision along Old Government Beach Road, posing a threat to its archaeological sites and botanical wealth.

“It’s very important — we don’t want to see more development down here,” O’Hara said. “Just imagine 200 one-acre lots being developed on that property, and the additional traffic that would cause. It would not be something that would be a benefit to anybody.”

The land’s potential for archaeological study, she said, is a critical reason why it should be left as open space.

“That is why it’s so important to preserve it, because it’s very much still an intact village up there,” she said. “I mean, it’s grown over and there’s a lot of new vegetation, but you can uncover a lot as you get further away from the road. It’s pretty exciting to think of what we might find.”

She said the lessons that the property’s “living record of the past” could teach contemporary Hawaii Island residents about self-sufficiency and “malama aina” are most important.

“This takes us back and allows us to look at how the host culture dealt with these lands,” she said. “They lived here for centuries, and they had a population that may have exceeded what we currently have on the Big Island by some estimates. And they were self-sufficient and lived off the land, and we’ve rolled backwards.”

Email Stefan Verbano at stefan.verbano@hawaiitribune-herald.com.

The May 19 primary election will have a big impact on Idaho’s Legislature, with moderate and hardline Republicans facing off across the state.

Over the past two months, Idaho EdNews profiled 14 of the most significant races for education policy. Here they are in one place.

Follow our coverage on election night, with real-time results and breaking news updates. Click here for information on how to vote and find your sample ballot.

North Idaho

• Who is running: Three-term Sen. Jim Woodward, R-Sagle, faces a fourth primary election against Scott Herndon.
• Why it matters: This matchup is one of the most expensive primaries this year. Woodward is a “middle of the road” Republican who sits on the Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee. Herndon is a more hardline Republican who wants to eliminate property taxes.

• Who is running: Two-term Rep. Elaine Price, R-Coeur d’Alene, faces Christa Hazel for District 4 House Seat B.
• Why it matters: This race is a proxy fight in the war between the hardline Kootenai County Republican Central Committee (Price) and the moderate North Idaho Republicans (Hazel).

• Who is running: Three-term Sen. Dan Foreman, R-Moscow, faces Rep. Lori McCann, a Lewiston Republican who has left her seat in the House for a Senate run.
• Why it matters: Foreman is a hardline Republican who faced criticism from the right this year for holding in committee a bill to rein in teachers’ unions. McCann said she’s challenging him over his refusal to collaborate and communicate.

West Idaho

• Who is running: Four-term legislator Sen. Christy Zito faces a three-way primary with two former legislators in the district: former House Majority Leader Megan Blanksma and five-term Rep. Terry Gestrin.
• Why it matters: Zito is a member of the hardline Gang of Eight and sits on the Senate Education committee. Republicans in the House ousted Blanksma from leadership in 2024. She says Zito isn’t representing her district. Gestrin said he wants to get back into the Statehouse to solve problems for folks in the large, rural district.

• Who is running: First-term Sen. Camille Blaylock faces a rematch with retired Marine and former legislator Chris Trakel.
• Why it matters: Blaylock sponsored a $5 million high-needs fund for special education this year. Trakel sued the Idaho Home Learning Academy in 2025, claiming the virtual school discriminated against his constitutional right to free exercise of religion. A judge dismissed the suit.

• Who is running: Two young Democrats with backgrounds in education are running for the wide-open District 16 House Seat A. Megan Woller leads the Idaho Head Start Association and Jeffrey Watkins is a West Ada public school teacher and union rep.
• Why it matters: Watkins and Woller are running to replace Rep. Soñia Galaviz, a public school teacher and House Education member, in the reliably blue district. Woller said she has the diplomacy and negotiation skills to be a legislator. Watkins said Democrats need to be “incredibly vocal” in opposition to bills that harm Idahoans.

• Who is running: First-term legislator Rep. Chris Bruce, R-Kuna, faces a rematch with Melissa Durrant for District 23 House Seat A.
• Why it matters: School choice groups like the American Federation for Children are focusing on this race, supporting Bruce and opposing Durrant. Bruce believes state funding should follow the child whether they attend public, private or home schools. Durrant opposed an early version of the Parental Choice Tax Credit because there was no priority for lower income families.

Magic Valley

• Who is running: Two-term Sen. Glenneda Zuiderveld, R-Twin Falls, faces Twin Falls County Commissioner Brent Reinke.
• Why it matters: Zuiderveld is a prominent member of the hardline Gang of Eight and routinely opposes budget enhancements, including additional funding for the College of Southern Idaho. Reinke has decades of experience as a public servant and says Zuiderveld isn’t representing the district.

• Who is running: First-term Rep. Clint Hostetler, R-Twin Falls, faces attorney Alexandra Caval for District 24 House Seat A.
• Why it matters: In his first week as a legislator, Hostetler in 2025 introduced a $250 million private school tax credit bill. Caval said she hopes the primary election will be a “course correction” for the Magic Valley after Hostetler won two years ago.

East Idaho

• Who is running: Two-term Rep. Rick Cheatum faces a three-way rematch with day trader James Lamborn and Air Force veteran Mike Saville for District 28 House Seat A.
• Why it matters: Cheatum last year voted against the $50 million Parental Choice Tax Credit. Lamborn, a strong school choice supporter, said District 28 deserves a conservative, constitutional, Christian Republican. Saville has run for office as a Democrat, an independent and a Republican. He said he supports the country first, not the party.

• Who is running: First-term Rep. Ben Fuhriman faces a rematch with former legislator Julianne Young for District 30 House Seat B.
• Why it matters: Fuhriman sponsored the $5 million high-needs special education fund bill this year and opposed a bill to rein in teachers’ unions. Young is a social conservative who has worked on culture war bills, such as defining genders and prohibiting public funds for gender transition procedures.

• Who is running: Four-term Rep. Rod Furniss faces former legislator Karey Hanks for District 31 House Seat B.
• Why it matters: Furniss has worked on legislation to make it easier for districts to pass bonds and find funding to build schools. Hanks, a school bus driver, wants to get back into the Statehouse to protect children from the “woke” agenda. The two share similar views on social issues and support the transgender bathroom bill.

• Who is running: Four-term Rep. Barbara Ehardt faces a challenge from firefighter Connor Cook.
• Why it matters: Ehardt is a staunch social conservative who said the transgender community started the culture war, not the Idaho Legislature. Cook, a union member, says Idaho has “gone rogue” and is using social issues as a distraction from the budget.

• Who is running: First-term Rep. Mike Veile faces former legislator Chad Christensen in District 35 House Seat A.
• Why it matters: Veile, a former Soda Springs trustee, sits on the House Education Committee. He opposes private school tax credits and said Idaho doesn’t have enough funding to support multiple education systems. Christensen supports school choice and would like to explore school district consolidation.

HELENA — A group of conservation advocacy organizations are suing the State of Montana to “cement the legality of corner crossing” in Montana.

On Thursday, Backcountry Hunters and Anglers and the Public Land and Water Access Association filed a lawsuit against Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks in Lewis and Clark County District Court.

The legal action comes one day after Lt. Gov. Kristen Juras, a Republican, addressed the Montana Environmental Quality Council about corner crossing. 

(WATCH: Lt. Gov. Juras discusses corner crossing with Montana lawmakers)

Montana elected leaders discuss “corner crossing”

Corner crossing is the act of stepping from adjoining corners of public land without stepping on the adjacent private land.

While there is no state law or case law directly addressing corner crossing in Montana, FWP, under the Gianforte administration, has stated that corner crossing remains unlawful in Montana, and people should obtain permission from the adjoining landowners before crossing corners. Wardens have been instructed to use their discretion to cite individuals for trespassing if caught corner crossing.

The new lawsuit argues that FWP policy on corner crossing is “incorrect and unlawful.”

“Though not an attack on the agency overall, as both BHA and PLWA are currently defending FWP as intervenors in separate litigation, we fundamentally disagree with the Department on this issue and believe this must now be decided before a neutral court,” said Jake Schwaller, Chair of the Montana Chapter of BHA, in a press release. “There comes a time when we simply need to stand up for our public land, and this is our time.”

The plaintiffs in the case say they had met with FWP several times about corner crossing, but believe the lawsuit is their path forward to resolving the debate.

“Montanans deserve clear, consistent guidance on how they can access their public lands,” said Alex Leone, Executive Director for PLWA, in the press release. “There is a commonsense path that respects private property while ensuring public lands aren’t effectively blocked. We’ve worked in good faith to find that solution and remain ready to do so.”

CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL COMPLAINT

According to data from onX, there are around 1.5 million acres of public lands locked behind private property in the Treasure State. About 871,000 acres of public land in Montana is “corner locked.”

Much of the recent debate on corner crossing has followed developments last year in a Wyoming corner crossing case.

(WATCH: Corner Crossing in Montana explained)

Corner crossing in Montana explained

In October, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal from the 10th District Court of Appeals on Iron Bar Holdings v. Cape. The case stems from a land access dispute in Wyoming. In 2022, the ranch, owned by pharmaceutical executive Fred Eshelman, sued a group of hunters who used a ladder to corner cross onto public land that was locked in by Eshelman’s property. The suit alleged that the hunters trespassed when they passed through the airspace over the private property.

A federal district judge agreed with the hunters, stating that nothing they did violated federal law. When the 10th District Court of Appeals took up the case, it ruled a property owner could not create an obstacle that would limit free passage over public lands.

Since the Supreme Court did not take the case up, the ruling effectively became case law. However, that ruling only impacts states in the 10th Circuit; Montana is in the 9th Circuit.

MTN has spoken with several lawyers, including a prosecutor, about the issue of corner crossing. They agreed to provide background as long as it was off-camera due to the clients they represent. The consensus from the lawyers was that most county attorneys don’t pursue corner crossing trespassing cases.

Juras also testified before the EQC that she was not aware of a true corner crossing trespass case that had gone to trial.