Board Discussion of Mauna Kea Plan Hints at Controversies Yet to Come<\/b><\/p>\n
\u201cMauna Kea is where heaven, earth and stars find union. Not just any heaven, but Wakea, not just any earth, but Papahanaumoku, and not just any constellation of twinkling lights, but Ho`ohokukalani, whose children descend and return to the stars\u2026<\/i><\/p>\n
The development of Mauna Kea for astronomy purposes has long been a controversial issue marked by years of enforcement and contested cases and lawsuits involving the University of Hawai`i, the state Board of Land and Natural Resources, and community members concerned about impacts to the natural and cultural resources of what they consider to be one of the most sacred places in all of Hawai`i.<\/p>\n This year, with the release of its draft Comprehensive Management Plan and accompanying environmental assessment, as well as the introduction of four bills in the Legislature regarding management of the mountain, the university is trying to resolve some of the thorny jurisdictional, procedural, social, and cultural issues that have been at the center of the controversies.<\/p>\n If discussion of the CMP at the board\u2019s February 13 meeting is any indication, resolving those issues to everyone\u2019s satisfaction may be impossible.<\/p>\n About a year ago, Dawn Chang of Ku`iwalu, the company hired to prepare the plan by the University of Hawai`i, briefed the Land Board about the university\u2019s intention to develop a CMP for the summit of Mauna Kea, which it leases from the state for astronomy purposes. The university decided to develop a CMP after Third Circuit Court Judge Glenn Hara reversed a 2004 Land Board decision to grant a Conservation District Use Permit to build six telescope components, called outriggers, around the mountain\u2019s W.M. Keck Observatory. Judge Hara had determined that Department of Land and Natural Resources\u2019 rules require the board to adopt a CMP for the summit before any CDUPs are issued.<\/p>\n Although some in the Hawaiian and environmental communities have claimed that the university is only crafting the plan to clear the way for further major telescope developments, the CMP explains that Hara\u2019s decision merely highlighted the need for the university to \u201cre-evaluate its perspectives on management of Mauna Kea, as well as the circumstances and history that led them to the present state. This self-assessment revealed shortcomings in past planning and management efforts and underscored the need to address them during the CMP process.\u201d<\/p>\n On February 13, Chang (a former deputy attorney general who used to advise the Land Board) presented the board with a draft CMP, which she suggested the board adopt at its first meeting in April. Although the university had originally planned to seek board approval last December and legislation this year to establish administrative rules for the university\u2019s Office of Mauna Kea Management, it has instead decided to seek approval of the management plan and legislation for the OMKM simultaneously. In February, the university published a draft environmental assessment for the plan.<\/p>\n The plan addresses the use of three areas on the mountain: the Mauna Kea Science Reserve, facilities at Hale Pohaku, the 9,000-foot-level lodging for astronomers using the telescopes, and the summit access road \u2013 altogether about 13,000 acres. More than an inch thick, the plan discusses many things, from the community outreach that led to the plan\u2019s creation, to natural and cultural resources, to jurisdictional management issues. It includes a long section of recommendations on how the mountain should be managed and states that future development will be limited to the 525-acre Astronomy Precinct at the summit and at the 19-acre Hale Pohaku. It adds that the university\u2019s 2000 Master Plan for the mountain sets aside 10,760 acres for preservation of natural and cultural resources. It also suggests that sensitive habitats could be further protected by prohibiting development of any currently undeveloped pu`u (cinder cones) at the summit.<\/p>\n The plan states that over the next 20 years, the Institute for Astronomy (IfA) plans to construct two new antennas and two concrete pads for the Submillimeter Array, redevelop the site of the existing 2.2 meter telescope for a Pan-STARRS Observatory (which can detect killer asteroids), demolish some old facilities and conduct site restoration. Mauna Kea is also in the running as one of two potential sites for the $1 billion Thirty-Meter Telescope, which would be the largest telescope in the world. If Hawai`i is selected (the other site under consideration is in Chile), it would be located on Mauna Kea\u2019s northern plateau below the summit ridge.<\/p>\n Complaints<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n At the board\u2019s February meeting, several native Hawaiian cultural practitioners associated with a group called the Kanaka Council testified against the plan and called on the university to prepare an environmental impact statement to better address cultural issues and the psychological impact development of the summit has on native Hawaiians. While the plan addresses cultural issues in sections on cultural orientation and resources, as well as a \u201ccultural anchor,\u201d which was prepared by The Edith Kanaka`ole Foundation and provides some background on the cultural significance of Mauna Kea, Pele Defense Fund co-founder Palikapu Dedman told the board that the plan does not address any of the major issues of contention \u2013 the use of ceded land, the $1-a-year lease rent, new development, cultural impacts \u2013 and merely \u201ctells us how we should pray between garbage cans.\u201d<\/p>\n Jim Medeiros testified that unless the underlying issues are addressed, \u201cIt\u2019s gonna go on and on in circles.\u201d He added that he was afraid that the \u201cmanaged access\u201d proposed in the plan would somehow affect his cultural access to the mountain. Hawaiian artist Rocky Jensen asked the board, \u201cHow do you let us wither on the vine, morally?\u201d<\/p>\n Marti Townsend, program director for KAHEA: The Hawaiian-Environmental Alliance, also testified against the plan. \u201cWho\u2019s the university to dictate when a practitioner can come?\u201d she asked. She also asked the board to delay its decision on the plan until after the end of the legislative session, in which four bills have been introduced seeking to transfer authority over portions of Mauna Kea from the Department of Land and Natural Resources to the university.<\/p>\n Board chair Laura Thielen added that although \u201cwe need a plan to guide the mountaintop and someone who is going to take responsibility for implementation,\u201d the draft plan was unclear on who would do this. The plan does include a \u201cresponsibility matrix\u201d that lists the various entities \u2013 the university, the state burial council, the county of Hawai`i, and the DLNR \u2013 responsible for the wide range of activities on Mauna Kea. While it appeared that the OMKM would oversee day-to-day management, Thielen said she wasn\u2019t sure who would be responsible for things like decommissioning telescopes.<\/p>\n While Chang suggested that a new entity, similar to the state\u2019s Kaho`olawe Island Reserve Commission, could be created to join the various jurisdictions, she said that, ultimately, that is a policy question going beyond the scope of the plan. \u201cThat\u2019s a very complicated question for us,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n Thielen said she was still confused about who would be responsible for making many of the decisions required by the plan. \u201cI\u2019m not here today to tell you what those answers should be,\u201d she said, adding that because the state is facing several years of fiscal decline, she did not expect any new entities to be established in the near term.<\/p>\n \u201cYour point is well taken,\u201d Chang said.<\/p>\n The Land Board is expected to take up the Mauna Kea matter at its first April meeting, tentatively scheduled to be held on Hawai`i island.<\/p>\n <\/b><\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s probably good this didn\u2019t come up when the Mauna Kea people were in the room. There seems to be a pattern with the university and land use,\u201d Land Board member Tim Johns told George Atta, a Group 70 consultant representing the University of Hawai`i.<\/p>\n Nearly a decade after the Land Board found the University of Hawai`i\u2019s Institute of Marine Biology had violated its Conservation District Use Permit for Moku o Lo`e (Coconut Island) by adding a slew of new structures without permission, the university is finally getting around to obtaining an after-the-fact Conservation District Use Permit.<\/p>\n At the Land Board\u2019s February 13 meeting, the DLNR\u2019s Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands recommended approval of an after-the-fact CDUP for various unauthorized structures. Atta explained that problems obtaining Special Management Area permit approvals from the City and County of Honolulu, and shoreline certifications from the state contributed to the long delay.<\/p>\n Grant Arnold of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs testified that access issues were still \u201cquite messy,\u201d noting that while HIMB says it provides public access at the island\u2019s Maili Point, \u201cthere\u2019s a big KAPU sign \u2026 where the public is supposed to access.\u201d<\/p>\n When Johns asked OCCL\u2019s Dawn Hegger whether there were any current violations, since HIMB could not receive a permit if there were, Hegger answered, \u201cI would say in general they\u2019re in compliance with past CDUAs [Conservation District Use Applications].\u201d She added that a condition in the proposed after-the-fact CDUP requiring HIMB to provide lists of its past and planned projects will help bring the institute into compliance.<\/p>\n The board approved OCCL\u2019s recommendation with a few minor amendments.<\/p>\n <\/b><\/p>\n \u201cYou\u2019ve heard the saying, \u2018Take the money and run,\u2019\u201d Maui Land Board member Jerry Edlao told Molly Schmidt of the DLNR\u2019s Division of Forestry and Wildlife. At its February meeting, the Land Board was faced with a choice: either wait until the city\u2019s new land conservation program decides on a request by the Trust for Public Land for funds to purchase 3,582 acres at Honouliuli, or grant about $450,000 of additional state Legacy Land funds to toward the purchase now.<\/p>\n The DOFAW had initially recommended that the board wait, although Schmidt said either choice was fine with her. The TPL\u2019s Lea Hong, however, urged the board to act now since she had been very discouraged by the county process, which required two years to publish its first applications for grants.<\/p>\n \u201cI don\u2019t think you want $400,000 hanging out there. We need the money,\u201d Hong said.<\/p>\n The TPL is assisting the state in purchasing the Honouliuli Preserve, formerly managed by The Nature Conservancy of Hawai`i, from the James Campbell Company. On February 13, DOFAW recommended that the Land Board approve eight Legacy Land acquisitions totaling $4.7 million. In order of priority, they include the following:<\/p>\n \u2022\t$537,500 for the Honouliuli preserve, which will be cooperatively managed by the DLNR and the U.S. Army;<\/p>\n \u2022\t$450,000 for the state\u2019s acquisition of 65.56 acres adjacent to the Hamakua Marsh in Kailua, O`ahu, from Kane`ohe Ranch;<\/p>\n \u2022\t$7,000 for the state\u2019s acquisition of seven acres in North Kohala from Chalon International of Hawai`i, Inc., to protect scenic, cultural and historic values;<\/p>\n \u2022\t$750,000 to the Kaua`i Public Land Trust to buy three-quarters of an acre near Black Pot beach park in Hanalei to protect recreational and open space;<\/p>\n \u2022\t$201,787 to the Center for Non-Violent Education and Action (Malu `Aina) for 11.14 acres in Puna, Hawai`i;<\/p>\n \u2022\t$1,250,000 for the state\u2019s acquisition of 17.05 acres in Lapakahi, Hawai`i,<\/p>\n \u2022\t$448,831 for the Kona Historical Society\u2019s purchase of 2.11 acres in Kona Mauka; and<\/p>\n \u2022\t$609,425 for the Maui Coastal Land Trust\u2019s acquisition of an agricultural conservation easement over 27.44 acres in Pupukea, O`ahu, to be held by the North Shore Community Land Trust.<\/p>\n The DOFAW report notes that the Legacy Land Conservation Commission, which provides recommendations to the Land Board, had recommended that any additional funds under $470,000 be provided to the applicants in order ranked, which would result in an increase in the award for the Honouliuli project from $537,500 to $982,956.<\/p>\n Given the state\u2019s current financial situation and the likelihood that Legacy Land funds could be raided this legislative session, the board unanimously voted to approve all of the projects, including the additional $450,000 for the Honouliuli Preserve.<\/p>\n <\/b><\/p>\n There was a method to Mike Lee\u2019s madness \u2013 but it may have backfired. On February 13, Lee told the Land Board that his December 2008 request for a contested case hearing regarding Haseko Inc.\u2019s proposal to reduce the size of its planned `Ewa Marina was driven less by his worries over creating anoxic conditions in the marine environment, and more by his wish to have his \u201cday in court,\u201d where he hoped to resolve what he sees as serious mismanagement of important archaeological resources, including the unearthed bones of an ali`i.<\/p>\n At the board\u2019s meeting, the DLNR\u2019s Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands recommended, at Haseko\u2019s request, rescinding an amendment to Haseko\u2019s Conservation District Use Permit regarding the size of the marina.<\/p>\n \u201cAs Mr. Lee\u2019s petition appears to contest the amendment regarding the reduction of the size of the marina, if the Board rescinds the granted amendment\u2026the issues raised in Mr. Lee\u2019s petition would be moot,\u201d OCCL\u2019s report to the Land Board states. The report adds that mitigation for archaeological, cultural, and historical features was addressed in the CDUP.<\/p>\n Lee admitted that by rescinding its request to shrink the marina, \u201cThey [Haseko] took the air out of my balloon.\u201d Still, he said that his concerns about cultural resources remained because while the DLNR had concluded in 1993 that there were no significant burials in the area, \u201can ali`i was dug up (in 2001) and there has been no effort to reconcile this.\u201d Lee said that he wanted the ali`i to be buried with its accoutrements somewhere nearby under concrete with a plaque.<\/p>\n In the end, the board unanimously approved the OCCL\u2019s recommendation.<\/p>\n — Teresa Dawson<\/p>\n Volume 19, Number 9 March 2009<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Board Discussion of Mauna Kea Plan Hints at Controversies Yet to Come “Mauna Kea is where heaven, earth and stars find union. Not just any heaven, but Wakea, not just any earth, but Papahanaumoku, and not just any constellation of … Continued<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[13,170],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1193","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-board-talk","category-march-2009"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1193","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1193"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1193\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1193"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1193"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1193"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\n<\/i>\t\u201cFor some Hawaiians, Mauna Kea is so revered that there is no desire to ascend it, no desire to trespass on what is considered sacred space. Simply viewing the tower, the mountain, from afar, both affirms its presence, and reaffirms the sense of connection with both place and personage. For this reason, many Hawaiians feel that activities on Mauna Kea that lead to visible alterations of the landscape not only have a significant effect on the mountain itself, but also have a damaging effect on everything and everyone that is physically, genealogically, spiritually, and culturally tied to Mauna Kea.\u201d<\/i><\/p>\n
\nUH Gets CDUP
\nA Decade Late<\/b><\/div>\n
\n<\/b><\/b><\/p>\n
\nHonouliuli Preserve Wins
\nExtra Legacy Land Funds<\/b><\/div>\n
\n<\/b><\/b><\/p>\n
\nHaseko Rescinds Plan
\nTo Shrink Marina<\/b><\/div>\n
\n<\/b><\/b><\/p>\n