In our lead story this week, “Eco-Apartheid,” Van Jones of the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights recommends that activists take an “inclusive approach” to prevent polluters from isolating and derailing the new movement. Hawaii’s environmentalists should take his advice to heart. To a large extent, the situation here fits the model well. Native Hawaiian environmental justice groups are somewhat aligned with—but function for the most part separately from––large (and predominantly white) “mainstream” conservation groups.

Cultural tensions are partly to blame for the rift. When well-meaning white folks come to the islands to “save them” they meet a skeptical local audience. “We’re sorry about what our ancestors did, but we’re here to preserve your land” is kind of a hard sell. Even more so when you add a “By the way could you stop fishing over there? We’ve been plundering your resources for so long that they’re almost gone.”

Hawaiians say they have different goals from conservationists, who might be trying to save the whales and monk seals, but don’t have a clue about protecting the real Hawaii. Conservationists, a Molokai activist told me, are all about national parks and wildlife sanctuaries. “We don’t want national parks here,” he explained.

I was confused. The activists had spent the better part of their year on a grassroots movement to save La`au Point from irresponsible development. If they didn’t see themselves as conservationists, it seemed something was amiss. Second, I love national parks. I think they might just be the greatest thing about America. I pointed this out to the group. “Could be,” said one of the younger activists. “But this isn’t America.” Fair enough.