Mahalo for supporting Honolulu Star-Advertiser. Enjoy this free story!
The University of Hawaii, long the driving entity behind management of the Maunakea Science Reserve, is poised to review and ultimately to approve a set of rules meant to keep its astronomy pursuits in balance with the environment and with cultural practitioners’ access to the summit.
It is unquestionably a necessary and long-overdue step in the right direction, recommended as part of the course correction UH has been making after state auditors and other stakeholders landed some well-deserved hits about two decades ago over its faulty oversight.
And it’s a step that comes at an exquisitely sensitive time. An enormously heated protest over the construction permit for the Thirty Meter Telescope has pushed the project to the point where its many supporters worry that developers will pull up stakes and move elsewhere.
Whether there are more rulemaking refinements to come will depend on the testimony to be delivered Wednesday before the UH Board of Regents. The meeting will begin at 9:45 a.m. at the UH-Hilo Performing Arts Center, 200 W. Kawili St. Written testimony received a day in advance will be distributed to the board and may be emailed to bor.testimony@hawaii.edu, or faxed to 956-5156.
Among the complaints from TMT protesters is that the rules are too restrictive of Native Hawaiian religious observances and other cultural practices. The rules are aimed more at protecting the construction of TMT, said one leader of the kia‘i (“protectors”), Kealoha Pisciotta.
An examination of the current proposal does not support that assertion, though. There are rules about expulsion from the UH management area, but these are for prohibited behaviors. Rules ban littering, removing natural elements from the mountain, causing noise disturbances, setting fires, using drugs or alcohol, operating drones, snow play, camping and numerous other activities.
None of those directives target a particular group; nor would they excuse similar activities by the builders of the TMT or anyone else.
They do not apply to authorized educational or research activities, but it would be impossible to have a science reserve without reasonable exclusions for legitimate educational or research work. They would bar “interference with government function.” Again, no complaints there.
Further, the rules expressly state that Native Hawaiian traditional rights, as constitutionally recognized, shall not be abridged. Access would be subject to regulation in terms of numbers and areas that could be restricted.
Broadly, the rules appear to be aimed at lessening the footprint of human activity in what has been established to be an environmentally sensitive place. The proposed rules also would ban:
>> Introducing materials from outside the management area, except by permit.
>> Conducting any activity on the pu‘u, or cinder cones, except on designated trails or roads, or by permit.
>> Unpermitted commercial activities.
It’s a lengthy document of some 77 sections. What opponents of the TMT may find objectionable is that the rules do not restrict its construction. But administrative rules such as these are not meant to override a valid permit but to expand more specifically what the public can expect of governance of the mountain summit.
Failure by UH previously to provide and enforce such guidance is what has drawn some of the fiercest criticism, and deservedly so.
Anyone with suggested improvements on that effort should propose them by or on Wednesday. Short of that, UH merits support for finally making good on pledges to be better stewards of Mauna Kea.
71