Bills aimed at forcing an environmental impact statement on the Superferry service, now set for a July start, are wending their way through the Capitol. Understandably, project opponents are worried that the new enterprise represents a jarring intrusion in Neighbor Island calm, already eroded by rapid development.

But there has to be a better way to achieve a common goal than this hard-line approach, which too narrowly focuses on the Superferry as the sole agent of change in harbor operations.

The measures, SB 1276 and HB 702, would delay the start of Superferry operations until the EIS process is complete.

This seems wholly unreasonable, an end run on a long process of reviews and appeals that haven't concluded.

The project has never been required by state or federal agencies to prepare an EIS and has won court rulings upholding that original decision. But a further lawsuit was filed by Maui County and two environmental groups against the state Department of Transportation, citing the failure of the state's Kahului Harbor master plan to address the Superferry.

State Circuit Court Judge Joel August on Maui has allowed that complaint to proceed — and it should. Further study must encompass the current realities of the harbor system, including changes to longstanding operations as well as new operations.

August rightly urged the county, the environmentalists and state to negotiate rather than wait for trial.

Superferry executives say they'd cooperate in a comprehensive EIS on the entire harbor plan. Lawmakers should hold them to that pledge. It makes more sense than beating the dead horse of an environmental study that targets only one player in the critical harbor redevelopment.