Posts: 3,202
Threads: 108
Joined: Jun 2010
12-22-2023, 07:48 PM
(This post was last modified: 12-23-2023, 03:54 PM by randomq.)
All of our ancestors believed stupid myths and committed heinous atrocities. Anyone that wants to worship the past should go get a clue.
We've got much more important matters to deal with like housing, feeding, and properly educating a state without being completely dependent on tourism, imports, and fossil fuels.
Posts: 68
Threads: 5
Joined: Jun 2020
12-22-2023, 11:42 PM
(This post was last modified: 12-22-2023, 11:43 PM by AaronS.)
This decision to designate Maunakea as a traditional historical property isn't unexpected. The Maunakea Comprehensive Management Plan stated this designation could happen. Its means a much more rigorous consultation/mitigation process with Native Hawaiians will have be conducted before any new telescopes are constructed and lease extensions are granted.
Posts: 14,111
Threads: 424
Joined: Aug 2012
a much more rigorous consultation/mitigation process
A much more "expensive" process involving off-island "consultants".
As RQ rightly points out, there are more important issues. One might even construe "the Hawaiians" as selfishly protecting their own interests above all others. Get out while you still can.
Posts: 11,018
Threads: 750
Joined: Sep 2012
as selfishly protecting their own interests above all others.
Like the interests of Hawaiians by DHHL? Which does a poor job of getting Hawaiians on their land.
Or OHA? Big budget, big trustee salaries. Does free food for a few thousand at the Mauna Kea protest help the majority of Hawaiians?
Now we have a new agency that has so far tried to write and rewrite Hawaiian history with “information that previously was refuted or not even considered in a formal setting.” And omission of major historical facts. Will it accomplish more than the momentary pride felt when your football team wins the big game?
Posts: 10,216
Threads: 344
Joined: Apr 2009
(12-22-2023, 11:42 PM)AaronS Wrote: This decision to designate Maunakea as a traditional historical property isn't unexpected. The Maunakea Comprehensive Management Plan stated this designation could happen. Its means a much more rigorous consultation/mitigation process with Native Hawaiians will have be conducted before any new telescopes are constructed and lease extensions are granted.
I think that process was going to happen anyway with the formation of the new Mauna Kea management board, so I don't see how this changes things very much.
Posts: 68
Threads: 5
Joined: Jun 2020
Tom,
I respectfully disagree. The new management structure and this designation will make it very difficult to get a lease extension and build the TMT on Maunakea.
I encourage you to look up what the Section 106 processes entail.
https://www.achp.gov/protecting-historic...ection-106
This is a brief description of the rigorous review that this designation will mandate going forward.
https://www.bigislandvideonews.com/2023/...ai%ca%bbi/
"The listing will trigger additional federal reviews for projects like the Thirty Meter Telescope. Traditional cultural properties that are listed in the National Register of Historic Places, or eligible to be listed, must undergo a National Park Service Section 106 review when there is a proposed federal undertaking. The National Science Foundation is currently considering funding the TMT observatory project. Downer said meetings are already being planned to discuss that federal review."
Posts: 10,216
Threads: 344
Joined: Apr 2009
Hi Aaron,
You make a fair point, but we're arguing about different things. The new structure will make it more difficult for the TMT to be built, but in my opinion, that's pretty much decided anyway, I don't see a way forward for the TMT on Mauna Kea even without this latest ruling. Not having the TMT is not necessarily the end of astronomy on Mauna Kea however, and as far as I understand things, this ruling only affects future development, not things that are already there. That's why I think this ruling doesn't have much impact - just simply dealing with the new MK management board and getting a new lease is hard enough already - and this ruling doesn't change things in that respect.
Posts: 14,111
Threads: 424
Joined: Aug 2012
this ruling only affects future development, not things that are already there
The protectors aren't done. Rest assured they will find a way to shut everything else down.
Posts: 68
Threads: 5
Joined: Jun 2020
12-25-2023, 01:03 AM
(This post was last modified: 12-25-2023, 01:09 AM by AaronS.)
Tom,
As far as I understand, this designation will affect both the TMT project and any new lease extensions for the existing telescopes. The master lease renewal process will likely trigger a supplemental environmental review since these facilities are located on state land. This designation will come into play during that process. The TMT will have to conduct a comprehensive Federalized Section 106 consultation/mitigation with Native Hawaiians. The latter hasn't happened with the state level based permitting that was conducted thus far. If the state level CDUP is ruled invalid because construction activity didn't start within the prescribed time frame, the TMT project will be dead for all intents and purposes. It will be too much of mountain to climb if they have to go through both the CDUP process again and do the Federalized Section 106 process.
Posts: 10,216
Threads: 344
Joined: Apr 2009
I don't disagree, Aaron, but I'm not talking about the TMT. The current observatories will have to go through a much tougher process no matter what to get the lease extended, even without this new ruling. I think it might be easier to have this discussion without involving the TMT because I see no way it will be built here so the discussion should be about the future of astronomy on Mauna Kea without the TMT.
Hope you have a wonderful Christmas!
