Dear Gov. Ige: ADVERTISING Dear Gov. Ige: I was very surprised and disappointed by your May 26 press conference announcing your plan for the Thirty Meter Telescope. I believe previous governors have all supported the astronomical facilities on Mauna Kea
Dear Gov. Ige:
I was very surprised and disappointed by your May 26 press conference announcing your plan for the Thirty Meter Telescope. I believe previous governors have all supported the astronomical facilities on Mauna Kea and considered the facilities an asset to the State of Hawaii.
Although you declared that the TMT project can proceed and would have the support and protection of the state government, your overall tone was negative. Your proposed plan appears to be an attempt to mollify a group of protesters — some spiritual, some separatists, and many simply misinformed — at the expense of the scientific programs.
You severely criticized the University of Hawaii and the Department of Land and Natural Resources for poor management of the science preserve on Mauna Kea. You said, “It is my own belief that the activities of Native Hawaiians, and of our scientists, to seek knowledge and to explore our relationship with our cosmos and its creation can and should co-exist on the mountain … What has instead happened is that science has received most of the attention and it has gotten way ahead of culture in our work on the mountain. The proper balance between the two has been lost.”
This statement exhibits a basic misunderstanding of the purpose of the UH lease on Mauna Kea. It was to establish “a scientific complex” at the summit with “buffer zone” to protect the complex from “activities inimical to said complex.” The DLNR and UH have met those initial objectives exceedingly well, with the establishment of the pre-eminent astronomy facility in the world. They should be complimented, not criticized.
Apparently you think that Native Hawaiian activities should have equal or balanced standing with science. You have asked the UH and DLNR to apologize for not achieving what you thought the goals should have been, not what the goals actually were. Is that fair? Can you explain what you mean by giving Native Hawaiian culture “proper balance” in the science preserve?
All of the infrastructure and telescopes now on Mauna Kea were built to support astronomy, while minimizing environmental damage. Since the first Jeep road was plowed in 1964, access has continued to be improved, so now there are tourists and recreational visitors in increasing numbers.
In 2000, a new Mauna Kea Science Master Plan was prepared which established the Office of Mauna Kea Management responsible for expanding the supervision and protection of Mauna Kea. Most people think they have done an excellent job. Apparently, you don’t agree and seem to believe that the protests could have been avoided by better management.
The protest leaders’ goals are to ban new telescopes and to eventually remove all existing telescopes. They have already rejected your plan for continuation of the TMT. So how could anyone have averted the current situation except to give in to the protesters’ demands? Is it fair to blame the Office of Mauna Kea Management for the protests?
While there has been opposition and protests for several years, they have recently increased dramatically with the proposed construction of the TMT. By using social media, and with the extensive coverage in the traditional media, the protesters have found fertile ground to spread false information and exaggeration.
They now have a substantial following, which seems to be finding a sympathetic response from your office. For two months, the protesters have maintained an illegal camp at the Mauna Kea visitor center. This selective application of the law can only proceed with the tacit approval of your office.
You have requested that the existing subleases be “re-visited” to increase rent. These facilities are all operating in accordance with existing lease agreements. You have also indicated that you think TMT should also pay more than is specified in the current agreement. You are asserting one of the protester demands to increase the rent on the observatories. Why can’t you stand behind the existing agreements made in good faith by the university and the state?
You are also requiring a reduction in the existing facilities and proposing that Native Hawaiians should have access control over Mauna Kea, restricting non-cultural activities. You seem to be supporting the protesters’ concept that Mauna Kea is “sacred” in a spiritual sense, and that the science preserve and telescopes are an infringement on Native Hawaiian sacred rights.
Do you believe that Mauna Kea belongs to all of the people of Hawaii, or just a select group?
I believe the great majority of your constituents want Mauna Kea to continue as the home of a world-class astronomical observatory, secular, and open to recreational and cultural activities which do not conflict with observatory operations. I hope, in the future, you will come to see these facilities as a major asset to the state and to science.
Gerald M. Smith
North Kohala
