We are told that Hawaii is comprised of many cultures where everybody gets along. I think it would be more accurate to describe Hawaii as a place of many ethnicities where everyone is competing for a piece of a very small pie and trying hard, because of close proximity not to anger the other guy. I know that’s politically incorrect to opine and flies directly in the face of all the propaganda from the Hawaii Visitors Bureau, Hawaii Tourism Authority and virtually all the government agencies who seem to think their livelihood is dependent on that myth.
True culture develops over time and identifies with place. It would be absurd for me to assume that if I moved to Japan that my Chinese, Hawaiian and English ethnicities translate to the presence of Chinese, Hawaiian and English culture coexisting in Japan — even though I love dim sum, sing Hawaiian songs and speak English. On the contrary, I would be just another foreigner.
Seen from the native view, there can really be only one culture in Hawaii that is truly of Hawaii and that is the culture that developed over time and with a sense of place. Yes, there are many other ethnicities in Hawaii that may identify with a specific culture but those cultures do not comprise the culture of Hawaii and said truthfully they are foreign. I apologize if I offend anyone but only in Hawaii do we seem to have this phenomenon.
So what has that got to do with Mauna Kea? In my opinion, it is at heart of the conflict that has deep seeded and complex issues.
Gov. David Ige is quoted as saying “There have been many decisions made previously on Mauna Kea and about Mauna Kea and I believe those decisions have to be honored.” I admire the use of the word honored.” Ige’s ethnic/cultural background places much emphasis on honor. It’s a virtue that once corrupted can never be regained. I believe Ige to be an honorable man. However, implied in his comment is that the state and its subsidiaries — the Board of Land and Natural Resources and the University of Hawaii — have made decisions or agreements among themselves and with others that permit more telescopes to be built on Mauna Kea. What is not implied or stated is that the BLNR and UH have “dishonored” the decisions, agreements and commitments they made to the people of Hawaii and specifically to Native Hawaiians (once again).
What prompted me to write this viewpoint was that I “bumped” into two old friends who separately asked whether I had gone to Mauna Kea to protest the Thirty Meter Telescope. Why that question? Long before the TMT telescope there was the Keck telescope’s proposal to build an “array”of outrigger telescopes around the existing telescope. This would have added at least four more telescopes. The time frame was 1999. There was push back from Native Hawaiians, perhaps not on the same level that we have seen with the TMT scope.
Sen. Dan Inouye appointed a task force to help work through and mitigate the differences. Members of the task force included several from the Native Hawaiian community. They named themselves Ahahui Ku Mauna. The hui first requested full and equal standing with decision making authority. The hui next took the position that no new construction should take place on Mauna Kea until the University of Hawaii resolved the issue that while the original master plan allowed construction of 11 telescopes there were already 13 prior to Keck’s proposal for at least another four. The hui also requested that before any new construction took place that at least two telescopes, which had likely reached obsolescence at that time be torn down and removed from the summit bringing the number back to 11. And, finally, new construction could only take place on the same footprint as telescopes were removed. We believed our requests were well founded.
In 1998, state auditor Marion Higa wrote “Over 30 years have passed since construction of the first telescope on Mauna Kea. During this period, little was done to protect its natural resources. The university, as the leaseholder, should have provided sufficient protection to the natural resources and controlled public access and use. These requirements have not been adequately met. The Department of Land and Natural Resources, in its role as landlord, should have overseen the university’s activities and enforced permit conditions and regulations in protecting the state’s interests. Neither state agency has been proactive in maintaining the conservation district. The university has failed in the management of these lands.”
In countless meetings of the task force, meetings with the developer’s consultant, with the university Institute of Astronomy, Ahahui Ku Mauna never relented from its request for standing or changed its position on no new construction.
To its credit ,the University of Hawaii in its June 16, 2000, Board of Regents meeting held at the University of Hawaii at Hilo adopted a new Mauna Kea Science Reserve Master Plan, created the Mauna Kea Advisory Board and the Kahu Kupuna Council. The minutes of the meeting contain the University of Hawaii Board of Regents Resolution on the Management of the Mauna Kea Science Reserve. The second “Whereas” in the Resolution states “Mauna Kea is a precious resource to the entire State of Hawaii and regarded as a sacred place particularly by Hawaii’s native Hawaiian Community”. The third “Whereas” states “as mere stewards of Mauna Kea, the University of Hawaii has an obligation to protect this sacred place and its unique resource, discharging its managerial responsibilities with utmost sensitivity.”
Keck got what they wanted, it was preordained by the DLNR and UH. And it seems that history may repeat itself.
So, back to the first paragraph about Hawaii being a place of many cultures. Culture is forged out of sense of place. Culture has language, folklore, dances, celebrations, familial ties, religious beliefs, appearance, values and many other tangible and intangible things that are shaped by place. Mt. Fuji is sacred to the Japanese, Mt. Kenya sacred to the Kikuyu and Mt. Kilimanjaro sacred to the Masai. Unless I am connected culturally to those mauna, I would never presume to know why that is. Mauna Kea is not a precious resource to the entire state and the University of Hawaii is not the steward of Mauna Kea. We would not be protesting if that were true. Saying that just takes another slice of the pie away from Hawaiians. Non-Hawaiians value Mauna Kea for scientific purposes and as a playground, that’s their cultural perspective. Hawaiians value Mauna Kea as well, but we see no reason to have to destroy the landscape because the value is in the landscape and the landscape is the culture.
I believe Ige values honor, he is an honorable man. Unfortunately he has put in a position where there will be no honor arising from his decision.
There should be no more construction on Mauna Kea and when the leases expire, all man-made structures should be disassembled and removed and the landscape should be returned to its prior state.
Charles Young is a resident of Honaunau.
Viewpoint articles are the opinion of the writer and not necessarily the opinion of West Hawaii Today.