|
Comments
re SDEIS for
ATST
Project on Mount Haleakala
Submitted
to
Dr.
Craig Foltz, National Science Foundation
OEQC
Hawai’i State Dept of Health
Mr.
Mike Maberry, UH IfA
Dr.
Charlie Fein, KC Environmental, Inc.
Submitted
by
Kathleen
McDuff Individually and
for
Sierra Club Maui Group
June
14, 2009
Please
accept these comments as a supplement to the comments that were
originally submitted in writing in October 2006. The comments that
were originally submitted will not be repeated here but are equally
pertinent to this issue.
Index
Page
Introduction 3
1.
Haleakala is not the only viable site for this project but it is
the 5
only
site with cultural and historic preservation concerns
2.
The effect of this project on the ahus and on Hawai’ian
spirituality 7
would
be devastating and would irreparably interfere with
Native
Hawai’ian Practitioners’ First Amendment rights
3.
Construction activities and excavation would cause irreparable
11
harm
to Native Hawai’ian cultural beliefs and practices and
could
cause irreparable harm to endangered species, the
Maui
visitor industry and protected historical sites
4.
The operational noise and the construction noise would 12
cause
irreparable harm to Native Hawai’ian Practitioners
and
could cause irreparable harm to federally protected
endangered
species and the Maui visitor industry
5.
This project is not in compliance with state and county laws and
15
community
plans and permit applications should not be approved
6.
This is a volcano – it will erupt again in the future –
16
why
wasn’t this important fact considered in the EIS process?
7.
Long term personnel will be brought in from the mainland and 17
the
few short term jobs that might be given to locals will not
offset
the major adverse long-term and/or permanent effects to Maui
8.
The visitors survey is seriously flawed 18
9.
The view planes to and from sacred Haleakala will be irretrievably
18
damaged
for the lifetime of the telescope, which will irreparably
harm
the rights of Native Hawai’ian Practitioners as well as Maui
residents
and the visitor industry on Maui
10.
You failed to properly and effectively comply with the 106 process
20
which
is federally mandated for this project in order to protect
historical
and archeological properties
11.
The SDEIS and NSF failed to properly consider the Hawai’ian 22
ceded
land issue and Native Hawai’ian rights
Conclusion 23
On
Behalf of the Sacred Mountain Haleakala
Hawai’ian
Protocol for Sacred Places
E
Ui No Ka ‘Ae
Ask
Permission,
E
Mahalo Aku
Give
Thanks,
E
Komo Me Ka Hoano
Enter
With Reverence,
I
ka hele aku, e ho’oma’amau I ka wahi!
When
you leave, return it as you found it!
INTRODUCTION
The
summit of Haleakala is sacred, not only to the Kanaka Maoli (Native
Hawai’ians), but to the world at large. The beautiful painting
above comes from the website of Sacred
Sites, on which Haleakala
is listed as one of the most sacred sites on Mother Earth. On the
website Sacred Lands,
Haleakala is called a holy site or wahi
pana. The status of
sacred Haleakala is listed on this website as “Threatened”, due
to the proposed ATST telescope that is being planned on its summit.
It is noted on this site of sacred places around the world:
The
summit and crater area of Haleakala is a sacred site to Native
Hawai’ians, who have always been against construction of the
observatories. In the early 1960s, Hawai’ians led peaceful protests
at the state capitol in Honolulu, opposing the observatories and
insisting that the mountain belonged to everyone—not just
astronomers. Their demands went unheard.
“Their
demands went unheard.” Unfortunately, this is one of the familiar
stories of the Kanaka Maoli. Their demands have gone unheard since
their kingdom was illegally overthrown in 1893. It is time for this
to cease. The people of Hawai’i are unique. They should not be
lumped together with the Native American tribes, which are
specifically given protection in the U.S. Constitution. The
Hawai’ian people do not have a tribal council that speaks for them
and which you, by law, are required to confer with. They must be
dealt with differently and so far that has not occurred.
Hawai’ians are very spiritual
people. The sacred ‘aina (land) on which you are proposing to
build your huge structure is a living being; it is their ancestor.
The people who have been attending the 106 meetings on behalf of NSF
acknowledge that they do not understand the cultural practices and
beliefs of the Kanaka Maoli; as a result, the 106 process you have
been conducting has not worked. In order for the decision makers of
NSF to understand the significance of what the construction of this
143’+ structure will have on the Native Hawai’ians and their
cultural practices, SOMETHING ELSE needs to happen. Your
current 106 process is insufficient. The Native Hawai’ians are part of a Kingdom that was taken away
from them over one hundred years ago, with very little remorse being
shown. In the Apology Resolution that Congress enacted in 1993 to
apologize for this illegal overthrow, it was acknowledged that
…the
Native Hawai’ian people are determined to preserve, envelope and
transmit to future generations their ancestral territory, and their
cultural identity in accordance with their own spiritual and
traditional beliefs, customs, practices, language and social
institutions.
Placing
the wants and desires of scientists (who can build their structure in
a different location where there would not be an adverse effect to
the culture and archeology of that area) over the desires of the
Native Hawai’ian people who rightly demand that their sacred
mountain not be further desecrated is clearly not following this
directive by the members of Congress who chose to honor the
Hawai’ians and their culture in an effort to reconcile the
injustice done to them 100 years prior. It is past time for the
Hawai’ian culture, the Hawai’ian people, and the Hawai’ian
‘aina to come first.
1. HALEAKALA IS
NOT THE ONLY VIABLE SITE FOR THIS PROJECT BUT IT IS THE ONLY SITE
WITH CULTURAL AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION CONCERNS
One interesting change from the draft
EIS (DEIS) and the Supplemental Draft EIS (SDEIS) is that now it is
being claimed that the Haleakala site(s) is the only site out of
over 70 other sites that satisfies the criteria for this project.
This is interesting because both in the DEIS and other documentation
from the website of NSF it has been stated that all three final sites
were excellent candidates. It was noted by the New Jersey Science
and Technology Institute in an article on their website (Press
release 973-596-3436, dated May 20, 2009 and titled World’s
Largest Telescope at NJIT’s Big Bear Captures Sun’s Magnetic
Field Better) that Big Bear
Solar Observatory (BBSO), the world’s largest telescope located at
Big Bear Lake, CA (one of the three final proposed sites for the ATST
where there are no cultural or
archaeological issues),
is
one of the premier land-based facilities supported by federal
funding. “We are already seeing images offering a
better understanding of the Sun,” said Goode. “With this
instrument we should be able to have a better understanding of
dynamic storms and space weather—which can have dramatic effects on
Earth.” The new instrument has three times
the aperture of the old telescope. It represents a significant
advance in high-resolution observations of the Sun, since it has the
largest aperture of any solar telescope in existence, said Goode.
Since it is an off-axis telescope, there is no part of the sunlight
blocked by the telescope. Other pluses include a marvelous location-- high in a Southern
California mountain lake.
Obviously, the ATST could be built at Big Bear Lake. They have just chosen not to. Serious
questions remain regarding the scoring of the three final sites. For
example, at Big Bear, CA, a site which received a “fail”
designation for “seeing” characteristics, the testing was so
flawed that less than 25% of the data sought to be evaluated was even
gathered and analyzed.
.
. . if the seeing monitor would have been operational every day from
sunrise to sunset 4,070,000 individual measurements could have been
obtained. However, the number
of
data entries for BBSO is about 1,430,000. A substantial fraction of
the missing data is related to the aforementioned observer profile.
Other contributions are from complete
system
failures (July and November 2003) and bad weather conditions.
Considering all data without a “failed ShaBaR” error flag about
910,000 data points could be used in this study. This number,
however, is further reduced by about 60,000 data
points, since some S-DIMM data were
not properly transferred to the control computer.
The
Local Seeing Environment at Big Bear Solar Observatory, Angelo
Verdoni and Carsten Denker1, New
Jersey Institute of Technology, Center for Solar-Terrestrial Research
This
clearly does not present the profile of a serious scientific study.
Likewise, the proposed La Palma site (which finished 2nd in the testing) was tested for two years and no potential cultural or
archaeological problems were found there. Interestingly, at La Palma
it was noted that the view plane of a specific peak called the
Cumbrecita, which was a popular tourist attraction because of
numerous hiking trails and scenic viewpoints – like Haleakala --
was so significant to the people of the Canary Islands that it was
determined during the testing process that this view plane must be
protected. In deference to this conclusion, the proposed site of
the telescope was relocated downhill. What a shame that you could
not understand that the view plane of Haleakala is just as important
to the Native Hawai’ians!
It was noted that the La Palma site
offers excellent high elevation “seeing” capabilities. Since La
Palma finished ahead of Big Bear Lake in the testing process, and
since Big Bear Lake can clearly be used for studying the sun flares,
storms and weather – given that it already is – the La Palma site
is a viable site. The fact that there may be a few less annual
hours of sky brightness is something that can be worked out by the
scientific community. At least one of the brilliant technological
minds from our scientific community should be able to solve this
glitch. Again, Haleakala is the preferred site, so you have chosen
to say that it is the only site that will work. This is
disingenuous – we need more honesty and more transparency. You
are asking the Hawai’ian people to “mitigate” their
spirituality even though it could destroy their practice, but you are
not willing to mitigate your preferred site with your second or third
choices. That is what could be termed as arrogance. You should
also be straightforward when discussing how important this project
might be to the scientific world, since you have apparently failed to
disclose that similar information has already been gathered and is
still being gathered elsewhere and still has not been put to use.
2. THE EFFECT OF
THIS PROJECT ON THE AHUS AND ON HAWAI’IAN SPIRITUALITY WOULD BE
DEVASTATING AND WOULD IRREPARABLY INTERFERE WITH NATIVE HAWAI’IAN
PRACTITIONERS’ FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS
There
is insufficient information provided here regarding the effect upon
the two ahus that have been set aside for Native Hawai’ian
practitioners. First, from a personal point of view as a person who
practices Native Hawai’ian spirituality up on the summit, the noise
generated by the current projects is already very, very distracting.
I was up on the summit for sunset for a group ceremony recently, and
we were unable to do our meditations as they were meant to be because
of the noise from some generator or fan at one of the buildings
currently there. The noise we heard is before you add the
operational noise from a building that will be much larger and that
requires a huge air conditioning system and large fans to help keep
it cool. Even though this was mentioned several times during the
meetings and consultations and the written comments in 2006, the
SDEIS has failed to address the impact this huge structure will have
upon the ahus themselves. How can one meditate and practice
spirituality in accordance with a tradition that integrates
vibrations, meditations, prayers, communication with nature and
spiritual energy and view planes, as well as communication with
ancestors and spiritual beings, with this monstrous, noisy structure
towering over you, as it will be at Pa’ele Ku Ai I Ka Moku. You
infer that this is minimized by the fact that there is an
unobstructed view outward from the mountain, but this shows how
little you know about Hawai’ian spirituality and is a clear example
of why the 106 process failed. This has been explained to you, but
either you do not listen or you are not able to understand. Either
way, the Hawai’ian people have not been represented as they are
required to be during this federally mandated process.
Furthermore,
as I mentioned during the 106 consultations, the energy on the top of
the mountain will be irreversibly damaged by the construction of this
structure. I presented this statement during the 106 comments, but
since it was not transcribed for the record, the person making the
decision as to whether the funding will be granted would not be able
to hear it. For that reason, I am reiterating it for the record
herein.
I
am a Native American Spiritual Practitioner and I also practice
Native Hawai’ian spirituality and have for many, many years. I am
what is known by my people as a Dream Walker. I am able to journey
back and forth between the physical and spiritual worlds. I have
been very blessed by the spirits of this beautiful ‘aina and have
been fortunate enough to have been gifted many visions from the
ancients of this land as well. One of the gifts that I have
received from these beautiful spirits was a very interesting vision.
I was transported up to the summit of Haleakala and shown by the
ancients what the kahunas felt when they were conducting their
spiritual practices up on the sacred summit. I could literally see
and feel the web that connected the different heiaus around the
islands (including all of Maui Nui and the peaks of the island of
Hawai’i) to the top of the summit. I experienced the incredible
force of the energy that this web created and it was beyond
description. My senses will never be the same. Then I was shown
what that energy felt like today, after the buildings that are on the
top of the summit have been constructed and after many of the heiaus
have been destroyed, and the energy was much different. Much less
powerful and a much different feeling. Then I was shown what the
energy would be like after further desecration to the sacred summit –
when this large 14 story telescope is constructed shadowing over the
ahus -- and I felt virtually nothing in comparison to what I
experienced before. It felt like the Mountain was withdrawing. He
was tired of fighting the negative energy on his summit and was very
disappointed. At that moment, I was brought back down to my
luncheon in Kahului, a much different person, with a lot to share
with my companions. I hope you are beginning to understand that
spirituality cannot be mitigation. You can’t put building after
building (getting larger every time) up on a sacred mountain where
spiritual practitioners go to pray and practice at a site where their
ancestors sanctified the ‘aina over hundreds of years and created
the energy for a special practice for themselves and their
descendents, and then assume that you have not desecrated this holy,
blessed site. It will never be the same. The desecration must stop
– and it must stop now while there is still hope of bringing back
that wonderful, special energy for Hawai’ian spiritual
practitioners. Allowing Hawai’ian spiritual practitioners an ahu
amidst the buildings that are violating the very spirit of the ‘aina
is not the pono way. Stopping the desecration of this living
mountain is pono. Allow the ancient energy to come back. Allow
Native Hawai’ian Practitioners to reconnect with their ‘aina and
with their ancestors in the way it was meant to be.
You
cannot build another structure upon this mountain and not interfere
irreparably with the energy of this sacred mountain that is an
integral part of Hawai’ian spirituality. I have heard from other
Hawai’ian practitioners who say that their practice will be
adversely affected to the point where they won’t even want to go up
to practice anymore. Native Hawai’ian Practitioners should never
have to go elsewhere to do their practice and they should never have
to sacrifice or limit their own spiritual practices. This is their
home. Haleakala is their ancestor. Practicing their spirituality in
the way it is meant to be practiced is their right. Directly
interfering with their First Amendment rights to practice their faith
in the way it was meant to be and has been practiced traditionally
for centuries is not only illegal – more importantly, under the
Hawai’ian culture – it is not pono.
This sacred summit has been sanctified
by Maui himself, by the goddess Pele, and by the Kahunas and the
Kupunas from ancient times through the present. It is a place where
the tones of ancient prayer are balanced within the vortex of energy
for spiritual manifestations. It should be honored by all. To
take any action other than avoidance will irreversibly interfere with
the United States and Hawai’ian Constitutionally protected
spiritual rights of the indigenous people of Hawai’i. First
Amendment religious rights are allowed to be absolute just because of
their nature.
If this project is approved and
construction is started, Kanaka Maoli Practitioners will be
prohibited from experiencing the full practice of their spirituality.
I challenge the statement in the SDEIS on page 4-9 that although
the project would have a major/adverse and long-term effect on
cultural resources, it would have no effect upon the survival of
Hawai’ian cultural practices and beliefs. It was further claimed
that the proposed “mitigation” would lessen the major adverse
effects on the Hawaiian culture to only “moderate.” On what
evidence do you base this conclusion? Please provide us with
documentation of the technical data you used to formulate this absurd
deduction. It appears to be mere speculation that has no basis. It
was acknowledged by the representatives at the 106 meetings that
there are no Hawai’ians who work within the NSF or even within the
Advisory Council for Historic Preservation. It was also apparent
that none of the NSF representatives present at the meetings had any
real understanding of the Hawai’ian culture or Hawai’ian
spirituality, and when they were questioned on this by a Kanaka
Maoli Kupuna, the response was that one of the objectives of the
meeting was to try to obtain some understanding of Hawai’ian
beliefs and culture. How, based upon your total lack of
understanding of the spiritual and cultural beliefs of this
indigenous culture, can you determine that your proposed “mitigation”
matters would lessen the cultural adverse effects to “moderate”,
when you have been told again and again by Kanaka Maoli that this is
not so -- you CANNOT mitigate spirituality.
Anytime you interfere with Hawai’ian
spiritual practices and prohibit the practitioners from practicing
them in any way other than the way they were meant to be practiced,
you are absolutely interfering with the survival of Hawai’ian
cultural practices and beliefs in a major adverse long term (i.e.
permanent) way. If this project is built, Native Hawai’ian
Practitioners will be adversely affected the rest of their lives –
they will not be able to practice their spirituality as it was meant
to be at this sacred place where their ancestors conducted and taught
prayers; where they connected to Wakea and Papa; and where they wove
the vortex connecting all of the heiaus of Maui and even Hawai’i to
this sacred summit where numerous Hawai’ian gods and goddesses are
said to reside.
3. CONSTRUCTION
ACTIVITIES AND EXCAVATION WOULD CAUSE IRREPARABLE HARM TO NATIVE
HAWAI’IAN CULTURAL BELIEFS AND PRACTICES AND COULD CAUSE
IRREPARABLE HARM TO ENDANGERED SPECIES, THE MAUI VISITOR INDUSTRY AND
PROTECTED HISTORICAL SITES
You
state in the SDEIS that a minimum of 250 truckloads or 125,550 cu.
feet of sacred stone and native soil will be bulldozed up and
relocated. Just digging into the lava rock, which is believed by
many Native Hawai’ians to be the bones of Pele, is an affront to
Hawai’ian spirituality. You may not move even one Pohaku
(stone) without first asking permission of the stone itself, which is
a living entity. If permission is not granted, you do not move the
stone. To bring in a bulldozer to dig up and relocate 125,550 cu.
feet from a sacred summit is an insult to the Hawai’ian culture.
Your proposed “mitigation” of limiting this outrageous act to
certain times of the day does not even begin to offset the offense.
There is no nexus between the two. Again, this clearly shows a lack
of understanding of Hawai’ian beliefs and culture. The land
clearing, the demolition, the excavation, the grading/leveling,
further digging into the ‘aina to bury electrical wires and
cables, and the subsequent relocation of the soil and Pohaku from a
sacred summit are all contrary to Hawai’ian culture and beliefs.
Placing 21 caissons into sacred ground, bringing in three to five
cranes well over 153 feet in height, and pouring cement onto and into
sacred ground -- all of this irreparably harms a living ancestor of
the Hawai’ian people. Moreover, all of this activity irreversibly
interferes with practitioners trying to meditate and practice in very
close proximity. It is irreversible because spirituality must be
practiced in the time and in the manner in which it was meant to be –
you cannot make up in 2014 what you missed in 2011, because what you
missed in 2011 may be gone forever. Hawai’ian spirituality is not
just offering prayers to a Supreme Being. It is much, much more.
In
addition to the cultural issues, which are paramount in this case, at
least 250 over-size capacity dump truck loads (it could be more),
many more regular large trucks, delivery vehicles, van shuttles and
passenger vehicles would travel the roadways leading to the
construction site during the construction phase. The Park entrance
station will have to be moved during the period to accommodate the
huge structures that would be brought in. Not only is this historic
roadway subject to potential harm during the construction period, but
the 1.7 million visitors as well as kama’aina (native born) who
travel up to Haleakala National Park and to the summit each year
will be adversely affected in a major cumulative way. Visitors
come up to the summit all day long – not just in the middle of the
night to see the sunrise. This has not been addressed
effectively`1111.
There
are endangered species that reside within Haleakala National Park.
This is where the ‘ua’u have their burrows that they return to
each year and incubate their young. There are many silversword
plants along the roadway going up to the summit and on the summit
itself. When I was there last week, I was amazed at the number that
were blooming, and I could only see the ones that were in close
proximity to the roadway – very near to the shoulder of the road
that will be required to be widened in order to bring all the
equipment up for construction. The nene are able to explore
throughout the park and these beautiful spirits are always running
across the roadway. The huge trucks and numerous vehicles coming
and going will clearly present a danger to these endangered beings –
there are only about 300 living nenes at this time – we cannot
afford to lose even one.
4. THE
OPERATIONAL NOISE AND THE CONSTRUCTION NOISE WOULD CAUSE IRREPARABLE
HARM TO NATIVE HAWAI’IAN PRACTITIONERS AND COULD CAUSE IRREPARABLE
HARM TO FEDERALLY PROTECTED ENDANGERED SPECIES AND THE MAUI VISITOR
INDUSTRY
A
related issue to the construction problems is the noise issue. As
noted above, the operational noise from the existing buildings
(generators, air conditioning systems and exhaust fans) as well as
traffic and other stationary sources are already causing harm to the
practice of Native Hawai’ian Practitioners. The additional
operating noise from the proposed ATST will magnify this many times
over. One possible mitigation proposed in the SDEIS was to limit
the noise to certain times of the day. Native Hawai’ian
spirituality is practiced for all of your life, all times of the day,
all days of the year. It is not limited to day more than night or
winter more than summer. It is affected, however, by where and how you practice. Practicing at
sacred sites such as Haleakala is a vital part of the rites that
practitioners perform. Quiet and solitude are also essential
components of the practice. Chants, meditations, and deep
reflections and journeys are also integral parts of the tradition,
but they cannot transpire if outside noise is interfering with your
consciousness.
During the long construction phase,
the heavy machinery, equipment and trucks, the excavation of the
sacred soil and stone, the operation of the crane, the assembling of
the structure, and the coming and going of the trucks and the
personnel and other construction noises (which will be huge) will
cumulatively result in Native Hawai’ian Practitioners being unable
to practice in a meaningful way. How can you communicate with
nature in a meditative state with a bulldozer excavating soil or
grading nearby? It is stated in the SDEIS that there are “no
noise-sensitive human receptors at HO”, so presumably, there
shouldn’t be a noise problem on the site itself. Where exactly do
you think the Hawai’ian ahus are located? Any noise other than
nature is an intrusion upon spiritual practices so Native Hawaii’ian
Practitioners are actually extra
sensitive “noise
sensitive human receptors” and should be treated accordingly.
It
is also ridiculous to state that a visitor standing at Red Hill is
not within the area that will be affected in a major adverse way by
the machinery noise of a bulldozer or other machinery, and thus
concluding that the effect to visitors to the summit would be minor
and short term. (Although in another section of the SDEIS –page
4-10 – you state that visitors standing on Red Hill, which is only
2500 feet away, would be affected in a long term way, while still
limiting it to minor.) The construction phase is not short term for
a visitor who comes to Maui for a two week vacation and has it marred
by construction noises permeating their entire (and perhaps only)
visit to the summit. What a terrible experience! Did you ask in
your “visitors survey” whether the noise from a bulldozer a few
hundred feet away would interfere with their experience at the
summit? I was up at the summit recently and I asked visitors there
at that time this question and every response I received was that it
would indeed have an adverse effect upon their experience. In fact,
one man who had come 3,000 miles with his girl friend to propose to
her on the top of the summit that day said that even someone talking
would have lessened the experience, much less if a bulldozer started
up in the middle of his proposal.
Limiting the noise-generating
activities from thirty minutes prior to sunset and thirty minutes
after sunrise will not mitigate major adverse impacts down to minor
adverse as you have inferred, since there will be people suffering
from the noises all day. Even at the critical sunrise and sunset
peak times you are considering only limiting the noises above 82 dBA
– a number that you have arbitrarily determined to be the criteria. This number seems quite high to me, and I assume to you
as well, since you also determined that noise level changes above
20dBA are “major”. Red Hill is 2,500 feet away from the
construction site – what about the Native Hawai’ian Practitioners
who will be conducting spiritual practices next to the site. If the
noise 2,500 feet away is considered to have a major effect upon the
people visiting the overlook, this same noise immediately adjacent to
where the Kanaka Maoli are trying to practice would be prohibitive.
Further, drawing a conclusion that
since that the roadways already have personnel traffic on them, then
the increased vehicle traffic will only have a negligible adverse
effect on ambient noise is not realistic. The construction trucks
alone negate this. It also appears that the effect of noise upon
the endangered species of the area is being minimized. The ‘ua’u
are in their 1,000 known burrows between February and November of
each year, not just during the April 20 to July 15 incubation period
when the “mitigation” is being considered. If they are disturbed
from their burrows prior to this time, there will be no incubation,
and there will be no future birds. Construction of this telescope
could and most probably will disturb one of the last two remaining
major nesting colonies of the Hawai’ian petrel, which is on the
brink of extinction. I repeat for emphasis because this is very
important -- the summit of Haleakala is home to one of only two
major nesting colonies of the ‘ua’u left on earth (which consists
of less than 1,000 birds). Vibrations and noise from the
construction of the ATST could cause nesting burrows to collapse.
The huge dump trucks, the cement trucks that will be going up and
down the historic roadway, and the excavation of the summit itself
during the construction phase will also have a major adverse effect
upon these birds.
5. THIS PROJECT
IS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH STATE AND COUNTY LAW AND COMMUNITY PLANS
AND PERMITTING SHOULD NOT BE GRANTED
Your
statement that the ATST project is consistent with the goals of
state, county and community plans is incorrect. The
Makawao-Pukalani-Kula Upcountry Community Plan states on Page 32
Paragraph 8, that no building may be built over 35' except for public
use. Paragraph 8 is not an advisory statement, but an enforceable
requirement. The Upcountry plan also states that a comprehensive
Haleakala summit master plan needs to be implemented in order to
promote orderly and sensitive development, which is compatible with
the natural and native Hawai’ian cultural environment of Haleakala
National Park.
Maui County regulations prohibit
construction of a building 14 stories high anywhere in the County.
The project is clearly not consistent with the goals of Maui County.
Additionally, after conducting numerous studies and hearing public
comments from people throughout the island over a three year period,
the General Plan Advisory Committee (a twenty-five member citizen
panel appointed by the either the Maui County Mayor or County Council
to set out recommendations for the Maui County General Plan for the
County of Maui for the next 20 years) adopted a county wide policy
plan that includes language to “immediately provide and encourage
laws to preserve and enhance the summit of Haleakala with no
new buildings.”
[emphasis added] (Policy No. 5031) Finally, there is no
comprehensive summit plan for Haleakala that protects the mountain’s natural and cultural resources,
which is required by Hawai’i state law. This telescope is not
supported by the community plan for the area; it is not supported by
the county regulations; it is not supported by Hawai’i State law;
and it is not supported by the community at large. Construction of
this project demonstrates a total lack of regard for state and county
law, ignores established planning practices, and will have a chilling
effect on the enforcement of zoning laws in the future.
6. THIS
IS A VOLCANO – IT WILL ERUPT AGAIN IN THE FUTURE – WHY WASN’T
THIS IMPORTANT FACT CONSIDERED IN THE EIS PROCESS?
Described
as “She-Who-Shapes-The-Sacred-Land” in ancient Hawai’ian
chants, Pele is the goddess of fire and volcanoes. She is
passionate, volatile and capricious. She was born of the female
spirit Haumea (Hina) and the male spirit Kane-hoa-lani, who ascended
from the supreme beings Papa and Wakea. Although she is currently
residing in the Halema’uma’u crater of Kilauea, her previous home
was here on Maui where she created sacred Haleakala. It was on
Maui that Pele’s body was torn apart and the fragments heaped up to
form the hill called Ka’iwi-o’Pele (The bones of Pele) near
Kauiki Hill on the right side of Hana Bay. She has strong ties to
Maui and most certainly to her crater Haleakala. Scientists call
this sacred volcano “dormant” because her last eruption was in
1790. The term “dormant” simply means that a volcano is not currently erupting. The term itself does not provide any predictability of future activity. But note, the Soufrière Hills volcano on the
Caribbean island of Montserrat was thought to be extinct before activity resumed in 1995. Similarly, Mount Vesuvius was
considered extinct before it destroyed Pompeii in an eruption in 79 A.D. According to
the USGS (United States Geological Survey) website, Haleakala “has
witnessed at least ten eruptions in the past 1,000 years, and
numerous eruptions have occurred there in the past 10,000 years.
Thus, Haleakala's long eruptive history and recent activity indicate
that the volcano will erupt in the future.” See http://hvo.wr.usgs.gov/volcanoes/Haleakala/ There is no mention in the SDEIS of a possible volcanic eruption as
a natural hazard, even though that must be considered before you
build on this sacred summit. There is a scientific system of
classification known as Cladistics, which has utility in hazard
assessment for sensitive facilities planned on or near known
volcanoes. The SDEIS lacks this crucial evaluation. You must not
ignore Pele, especially since you are blatantly disrespecting her and
her creation by proposing to excavate and relocate her sacred bones
on the summit during the construction phase of this telescope.
7. LONG TERM
PERSONNEL WILL BE BROUGHT IN FROM THE MAINLAND AND THE FEW SHORT TERM
JOBS THAT MIGHT BE GIVEN TO LOCALS WILL NOT OFFSET THE MAJOR ADVERSE
LONG-TERM AND/OR PERMANENT EFFECTS TO MAUI
Although
it has been a common talk story for the local proponents of the
project that this project will bring many jobs to Maui, the facts
state otherwise. Your 4.12 section acknowledges that the 25-30 key
technical personnel that will work on the project will be brought in
from the mainland, and that any local employment would be minor and
short term. I see nothing in this to benefit Maui in a way that
would offset the huge negative effects to our environment, our
culture, our ‘aina, our historical sites, or our communities.
8. THE
VISITORS SURVEY IS SERIOUSLY FLAWED
As noted in the SDEIS, Haleakala
National Park (HALE) has “indicated that [the visitors survey you
included in the SDEIS] is significantly flawed and likely biased and
there are significant technical errors in the instrument and related
reporting.” HALE further asserted that “the conclusions are
based on an insufficiently designed and administered survey.” See
3-46. I concur and maintain that this survey should not even be
considered in the Final EIS. If you do insist on including it,
however, then you must also include the potential impact of your
proposal that was part of this survey to allow those interested in
touring the ATST facility to do so, which apparently is up to 75% of
the 1.7 million visitors that come to the Park each year, as set out
in the survey. Where is the impact study on the effect these people
touring the facility will have on the noise, on the land, on the
Kanaka Maoli Practitioners trying to practice at the ahus, on the
parking lot, on the traffic, etc. You cannot make a bold statement
that most visitors would not “care” if the facility is built
based upon information gained from this flawed survey. Furthermore,
you should not be able to use such faulty reasoning as a basis to try
to offset the clear major adverse long-term effect this project will
have on the Maui visitor industry, which is already declining.
9. THE VIEW
PLANES TO AND FROM SACRED HALEAKALA WILL BE IRRETRIEVABLY DAMAGED FOR
THE LIFETIME OF THE TELESCOPE, WHICH WILL IRREPARABLY HARM THE RIGHTS
OF NATIVE HAWAI’IAN PRACTITIONERS AS WELL AS MAUI RESIDENTS AND THE
VISITOR INDUSTRY ON MAUI
One
million, seven hundred thousand visitors a year come to visit
Haleakala. They visit Pa Ka’oao (White Hill) and they visit Pu’u
Ula’ula (Red Hill), as well as the crater itself. The proposed
telescope would be clearly visible from the Pu’u Ula’ula Overlook
as well as most places in Haleakala National Park, including the
roadway going up to the summit, beginning at the entry station. The
three to five enormous cranes that will be used for constructing the
massive building over a four year period will be visible from the
crater itself. For Kanaka Maoli Practitioners practicing at the
ahus, this enormous towering feature will even interfere with the
view plane up to the stars at night -- how ironic since you claim
that the telescope is consistent with Hawai’ian culture and honors
Hawai’ian astronomers who navigated by the stars. Prehistoric
Polynesian navigators knew the star Arcturus as Hokule'a, the "Star
of Joy." Hokule’a is the Zenith Star of the Hawai’ian Islands today and is so important to the Native Hawai’ian culture
that the voyaging canoe that was built to reconstruct the original
Ancient Polynesians’ journey to Hawai’i is also named Hokule’a.
If this telescope is constructed, practitioners at the ahus who
look up to Hokule’a as part of their tradition will have their view
interfered with by the towering telescope.
The telescope will also obstruct the
view plane of members of the community in many other places on the
island. From Ma’alaea Harbor to the Hawai’ian Homelands to many
other populated areas of Maui, the residents of Maui who look up to
the summit of Haleakala for their sunrise and sunset prayers will
have a huge white 14 story structure stick up at the center of their
view plane. As noted in the SDEIS, based upon the overwhelming
testimony presented by the community, there is a necessity for people
to have an unimpeded view plane from mountain to ocean, particularly
in the context of ceremonial activities. This essential view plane
will be irreparably harmed if the ATST is constructed.
In these tough economic times our
visitor industry is suffering greatly, and how can we allow anything
to be built that will have a “major adverse long term effect” (in
the words of the SDEIS) on the visitors coming to our island. How
can we allow anything to interfere with the view plane of one of the
most sacred mountains on Earth? As acknowledged in the SDEIS, there
is no mitigation possible for the loss of view plane. As noted
above, the view plane for the mountain at La Palma was important
enough to preserve – why can’t the same be said of Haleakala?
It seems as though you have little or no respect for our sacred
mountain, and this is shameful! Haleakala should be treated with
the respect it so rightly deserves. Mitigation should be practiced
by the science industry by placing the project elsewhere.
10. YOU FAILED TO
PROPERLY AND EFFECTIVELY COMPLY WITH THE 106 PROCESS WHICH IS
FEDERALLY MANDATED FOR THIS PROJECT IN ORDER TO PROTECT HISTORICAL
AND ARCHEOLOGICAL PROPERTIES
The
summit of Haleakala is recognized as a very sacred place for the
Kanaka Maoli. It is thought of as the Piko (navel), the center of
Maui Nui O Kama (the greater Maui). The Hawai’ians consider the
lava, cinders, and stones to be the sacred bones of Pele.
As noted in the SDEIS, there are
several reasons why the summit of Haleakala is a cultural resource
in and of itself. It is eligible for the National Register of
Historic Places (NRHP) in several different categories. It is
eligible as a “Traditional Cultural Property” (TCP) through
consultation with State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) under
Criterion “A” for its association with the cultural landscape of
Maui as reflected in the number of known uses, oral history, mele and legends surrounding Haleakala. The attributes ascribed for
Criterion A as noted in the SDEIS include
(1) its consideration by Kanaka
Maoli and many people throughout the world as a place exhibiting
spiritual power;
(2) its significance as a
traditional cultural place because of practice – for those who live
and visit here, the summit is a place of reflection and rejuvenation;
(3) the mo’olelo and oli surrounding the summit present a cluster of stories suggesting the
significance of Haleakala as a TCP;
(4) its reputation as a place of
healing; and
(5) the remarkable “experience of
place” associated with the summit.
The summit is also eligible under
Criterion “C” because it is an example of a resource type, a
natural summit, a source for both traditional materials and sacred
uses.
There are too many archeological sites
and resources to list here (doesn’t that tell you a story in and of
itself), but please note that the burial sites, petroglyphs,
platforms, trail segments, temporary shelters, cairns, and other
features also qualify the summit for importance under Criterions “A”,
“D”, and “E”. How can you even consider desecrating such
an historically sensitive property?
Due to the VAST historic nature of the
summit of Haleakala, section 106 requirements for protecting
historic properties apply. These
requirements have not been met on this project.
The NSF is required to evaluate the property for significance,
access whether the project will have adverse effects on this historic
property and determine whether the adverse effects can be addressed
through avoidance, minimization and/or mitigation. As the personnel
present at the meetings were repeatedly told during the 106 process,
you can not mitigate the spirituality of the Kanaka Maoli.
Avoidance is the only answer for this project. The summit of
Halekala is sacred to the people of Hawai’i for many, many reasons
that are interrelated to their Constitutionally protected spiritual
and cultural practice, and this very important fact has been
repeatedly ignored by the NSF. This premise is clear because
repeatedly during the 106 process, after heartrending comments were
offered in an attempt to help those present understand why any action
on this land other than avoidance was contrary to Hawai’ian
cultural beliefs, the response continually was “what can you
propose that would mitigate that concern?” The Native Hawai’ian
community clearly stated (again and again) that there is nothing that
can mitigate the construction of this project on the sacred summit of
Halekala.
See, also reasons set out more fully in the Introduction and in Section 2
herein, as to why the 106 process as implemented thus far is not in
compliance with federally required procedures that must be followed
in order to protect historic properties.
11. THE SDEIS AND
NSF FAILED TO PROPERLY CONSIDER THE HAWAI’IAN CEDED LAND ISSUE AND
NATIVE HAWAI’IAN RIGHTS
There is no clear title to the lands
on which this project is proposed, because these lands originally
belonged to the Hawai’ian Kingdom until they were illegally turned
over to the United States during the 1898 annexation. The nearly 1.8
million acres of land that were originally turned over were then
passed into state possession when Hawai’i officially became a U.S.
state in 1959; however, proper ownership of this land has still never
been fully addressed. As noted in the Congressional Apology
Resolution of 1993, neither the Native Hawai’ian people of Hawai’i
nor their sovereign government ever consented to or received
compensation for the illegal appropriation of the lands that belonged
to the Kingdom of Hawai’i. This resolution further acknowledges
that the indigenous Hawai’ian people never directly relinquished
their claims to their inherent sovereignty as a people or over their
national land to the United States, either through their monarchy or
through a plebiscite or referendum. The referendum recognizes
categorically that the health and well-being of the Native Hawai’ian
people is intrinsically tied to their deep feelings and attachment to
the land and recognizes that “the Native Hawai’ian people are
determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations
their ancestral territory, and their cultural identity in accordance
with their own spiritual and traditional beliefs, customs, practices,
language and social instructions.”
There is no such acknowledgment in
your SDEIS, because you do not understand or appreciate all that is
integrated into Native Hawai’ian culture and beliefs. There is no
provision or discussion in the SDEIS of the potential impact of being
evicted from the site after the ceded land issue is finally decided
in the courts. This is a clear error and omission that could have a
huge bearing on the project itself and is absolutely something that
must be considered by the NSF before a decision is made regarding
whether to fund this project or not.
CONCLUSION
For
numerous reasons, many of which have been noted herein and in my
written comments to the DEIS in 2006, the only viable option for this
project is to build it elsewhere. If you try to construct it on the
sacred summit of Haleakala, such action
? would illegally prohibit the
exercise of Native Hawai’ian First Amendment rights
? would cause irreparable harm to
a federally recognized and world-renown historic site
? would irreparably harm the
Native Hawai’ian people of Hawai’i
? would permanently interfere with
the survival of Hawai’ian cultural practices and beliefs
? could cause irreparable harm to
federally protectived endangered species
? could cause the visitor industry
(an integral part of the Maui economy) to decline irreparably
? could irreparably harm an
historic roadway
? could cause irreparable harm to
archeological features intertwined with Hawai’ian culture
and beliefs
? could end up covered by lava
when the volcano next erupts
? could, after spending over
$160,000,000, be evicted from the site after the ceded lands
issue is decided by the courts (which
it will be).
The
righteous (pono) way to handle this dilemma is to build the project
at one of the other sites or in space, where it should have been
built to begin with. Too much thought was given during this process
to satisfying the needs of the scientists requesting the funding and
too little thought was given to the needs, beliefs and way of life of
the Hawai’ian people. It is clear that no one from the NSF, the
UH IfA, or the people preparing the DEIS gave serious consideration
to the spiritual and cultural beliefs and needs of the Hawai’ian
people. If they had, they would have realized the totally
devastating effect such a project would have on the Kanaka Maoli
and, more importantly, on their living ancestor, the sacred mountain
Haleakala, on whose behalf I humbly submit these comments. Now
that you are aware of the irreparable damage it will cause, please do
the right thing.
Submitted
with the sincere hope that this message will reach your heart as well
as your mind.
Kathleen
McDuff
|
