04-19-2015, 06:32 PM
Daring to stray on topic, and following up on the ceded land and stewardship issue, many have voiced concerns with the management of Mauna Kea's resources by UH and DNLR over the last 40+ years as found repeatedly by the state auditor. (ran across this on a comment thread - it's fascinating what you can learn from listening)
http://files.hawaii.gov/auditor/Reports/2014/14-07.pdf
"...
Our 1998 Audit of the Management of Mauna Kea and the Mauna Kea Science Reserve (Report No. 98-6) found that UH’s management of the science reserve was inadequate to ensure the protection of Mauna Kea’s natural resources. The university had focused primarily on the development of Mauna Kea and tied the benefits gained to its research program.
...
We also found that DLNR needed to improve its protection of Mauna Kea’s natural resources, particularly the conservation district permitting process and enforcement. The department’s administrative requirements were frequently overlooked or not completed in a timely manner.
In our 2005 Follow-up Audit of the Management of Mauna Kea and
the Mauna Kea Science Reserve (Report No. 05-13), we found that while UH and DLNR had made improvements in managing Mauna Kea and the science reserve, more needed to be done. The university still lacked administrative rule-making authority, exercised weak permit monitoring, and management plans for the science reserve needed to be updated to reflect current use and management and to provide increased transparency and accountability of the university.
We also found that the leases, subleases, and permits were dated and that DLNR, as landowner, did not provide a mechanism to ensure compliance with lease and permit requirements. The department’s divisions did not coordinate their efforts in protecting natural resources, and a management plan for the Mauna Kea Ice Age Natural Area Reserve was needed.
...
Our current audit [2014] found that UH and DLNR have made progress on implementing many of our major recommendations from 2005, thus demonstrating their commitment to protecting Mauna Kea and its summit area. However, UH has yet to adopt administrative rules implementing its management responsibilities. We found UH issued unauthorized permits to regulate and assess fees for commercial tour activities, putting Mauna Kea’s resources and UH’s Mauna Kea revenues at risk. Without administrative rules, UH still lacks enforcement authority to effectively protect the mountain from public activities and ensure public health and safety within the summit area.
..."
http://files.hawaii.gov/auditor/Reports/2014/14-07.pdf
"...
Our 1998 Audit of the Management of Mauna Kea and the Mauna Kea Science Reserve (Report No. 98-6) found that UH’s management of the science reserve was inadequate to ensure the protection of Mauna Kea’s natural resources. The university had focused primarily on the development of Mauna Kea and tied the benefits gained to its research program.
...
We also found that DLNR needed to improve its protection of Mauna Kea’s natural resources, particularly the conservation district permitting process and enforcement. The department’s administrative requirements were frequently overlooked or not completed in a timely manner.
In our 2005 Follow-up Audit of the Management of Mauna Kea and
the Mauna Kea Science Reserve (Report No. 05-13), we found that while UH and DLNR had made improvements in managing Mauna Kea and the science reserve, more needed to be done. The university still lacked administrative rule-making authority, exercised weak permit monitoring, and management plans for the science reserve needed to be updated to reflect current use and management and to provide increased transparency and accountability of the university.
We also found that the leases, subleases, and permits were dated and that DLNR, as landowner, did not provide a mechanism to ensure compliance with lease and permit requirements. The department’s divisions did not coordinate their efforts in protecting natural resources, and a management plan for the Mauna Kea Ice Age Natural Area Reserve was needed.
...
Our current audit [2014] found that UH and DLNR have made progress on implementing many of our major recommendations from 2005, thus demonstrating their commitment to protecting Mauna Kea and its summit area. However, UH has yet to adopt administrative rules implementing its management responsibilities. We found UH issued unauthorized permits to regulate and assess fees for commercial tour activities, putting Mauna Kea’s resources and UH’s Mauna Kea revenues at risk. Without administrative rules, UH still lacks enforcement authority to effectively protect the mountain from public activities and ensure public health and safety within the summit area.
..."