Potential restrictions to Mauna Kea access

[TomK]

Well, Ige signed off on the new restrictions today and it's 10pm. What happens now?

[Newgirl]

quote:

---

The coalition of countries and scientists investing in th TMT has the highest stake in the outcome. So by your logic, they should decide, no?

---

Actually no....they are fortunate enough to have been given the gift of setting up there, but it wasn't really theirs to start with, so they aren't really the stakeholders.

I'm actually not against the TMT, more curious as to why people sound angry over the negotiating process, wherein I hope the citizens get something in return other than "thanks for letting us use your mountain".

[TomK]

"Actually no....they are fortunate enough to have been given the gift of setting up there, but it wasn't really theirs to start with, so they aren't really the stakeholders."

Mauna Kea existed long before any human was on the island, so who, exactly, are the stakeholders?

You've already said that:

"Who's views matter the most? Anyone that has a stake in the outcome, and the priority radiates from there decreasing in importance. [...]"

Lots of people have a stake in the outcome, so their views are clearly important according to you, but they aren't stakeholders because it wasn't theirs to start with?

Really, what kind of gibberish is this?

[Newgirl]

Stake in the outcome, does not necessary a stakeholder make. Everything existed long before humans lived there, so if that's the measure you want to use, why not just open every national park or conservation areas up to everyone fair and square, not just a chosen few.

Science and organizations that sponsor it buy time on the mountain, no? I don't see them as the stakeholder, I see the as the customer, buyer, the beneficiary. Stakeholders are those who will continue to live here long after the lease expires. It's true that legally, mere citizens may not have the influence over what happens, but groups of locals protesting is surely consequential. To blow it off as if they don't have priority to claim the use of the land seems a bit arrogant to me.

[Newgirl]

BTW, are you the Tom in the Smithsonian article?

[TomK]

"Science and organizations that sponsor it buy time on the mountain, no? I don't see them as the stakeholder, I see the as the customer, buyer, the beneficiary. Stakeholders are those who will continue to live here long after the lease expires. It's true that legally, mere citizens may not have the influence over what happens, but groups of locals protesting is surely consequential. To blow it off as if they don't have priority to claim the use of the land seems a bit arrogant to me."

Huh?

[Newgirl]

These people. These are not stakeholders:

The Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation has committed US$200 million for construction. Caltech and the University of California have committed an additional US$50 million each.[42] Japan, which has its own large telescope at Mauna Kea, the 8.3-metre Subaru, is also a partner.[43]

In 2008, the National Astronomical Observatory of Japan (NAOJ) joined TMT as a Collaborating Institution.[44] The following year, the telescope cost was estimated to be $970 million[45] to $1.4 billion.[46] That same year, the National Astronomical Observatories of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (NAOC) joined TMT as an Observer.[47][48]

In 2010, a consortium of Indian Astronomy Research Institutes (IIA, IUCAA and ARIES) joined TMT project as an observer. The observer status is the first step in becoming a full partner in the construction of the TMT and participating in the engineering development and scientific use of the observatory (Subject to approval of funding from Indian Government). Two years later, India and China became partners with representatives on the TMT board. Both countries agreed to share the telescope construction costs, expected to top $1 billion.[49][50]

The continued financial commitment from the Canadian government had been in doubt due to economic pressures.[51][52] Nevertheless, on April 6, 2015, Prime Minister Stephan Harper announced that Canada would commit $243.5 million over a period of 10 years.[53] The structure will be built by Dynamic Structures Ltd. in British Columbia, and then shipped to Mauna Kea.[54]

[knieft]

Well, Newgirl, I have changed my mind as a result of your pristine arguments and logic and definitions and copying and pasting abilities.

It's not as much fun since I'm not arrogant anymore, but I am on the right side with you!

I _hate_ those cubicles, too! I'd much rather be out trolling for stuff in nature's wonderland.

Cheers,
Kirt

[kalakoa]

Well, Ige signed off on the new restrictions today and it's 10pm. What happens now?

Very stern warnings from DLNR agents who will shake their fingers "in an accusatory manner" towards the protestors, all while under the watchful eye of unbiased media coverage. Protestors will continue to argue that they are not "camping", that these are not "backpacks", and the "cookstove" does not use "propane". DLNR to write new emergency regulations.

[HereOnThePrimalEdge]

Everything existed long before humans lived there, so if that's the measure you want to use, why not just open every national park or conservation areas up to everyone fair and square, not just a chosen few.

I'm not sure if I understand your point. National parks & Mauna Kea Conservation District both have rules in place for their use. The TMT went through a 7 year permitting process, during which time everyone had an opportunity to make their concerns known. Building the TMT on Mauna Kea does not mean the area is a free for all, open to everyone, if that is what you intended to say.