Advertisement - Click to support our sponsors.

View Point

By Nelson Ho

Monday, March 27, 2000

Mauna Kea plan
would harm
environment

LAST month Governor Cayetano signed the environmental impact statement for a new Mauna Kea Master Plan, moving the state one step closer to approving 58 more telescopes on the mountain and the first-ever restrictions on public access to the summit.

Although the governor's letter of transmittal states that his action "does not constitute an endorsement" of the plan, his signature on the document moves the plan forward.

Unfortunately, Cayetano has failed to recognize the almost uniform public opposition to the University of Hawaii's proposed plan, and significant reservations about the proposal among some members of the UH Board of Regents.

He has also disregarded numerous substantive and technical defects in the EIS document pointed out by biologists, archeologists, cultural experts, native Hawaiians and the Sierra Club.

Cayetano's acceptance of the Master Plan EIS may also complicate ongoing meetings being held by a committee of Hawaiians, UH and observatory officials appointed last fall by Sen. Daniel Inouye to come up with workable alternatives to the proposed plan.

The UH regents have three times postponed their own approval of the plan, in part to allow that committee time to deliberate.

Some months ago, the Sierra Club submitted a detailed and highly critical analysis of the proposed environmental impact statement, which lambasted work done by Group 70 International, UH's paid consultant. Among our concerns:

The plan allows 58 more telescopes without proper environmental and cultural mitigation.
Tougher federal EIS laws must prevail in judging the proposed development because of its substantial U.S. government funding.
The plan contains virtually no funding for summit management and environmental protection, a major fault of Group 70's original 1983 plan.
The plan fails to adequately address ceded land issues and potential revenues to the Office of Hawaiian Affairs.
The plan's environmental analysis is superficial and built on inadequate studies.
It fails to acknowledge cultural and environmental constraints on the summit's "carrying capacity" for additional telescopes.
Rare plants and animals continue to be endangered by the plan's inadequate monitoring and enforcement.
The plan's restrictions on summit access are proposed without adequate justification or documentation.

For these and other reasons, the Sierra Club strongly disagrees with the governor's assertion that the EIS satisfies the requirements of Chapter 343 of Hawaii's statutes.

If Cayetano really doesn't endorse the plan, as he has said, he ought to rescind his approval of the EIS until all of its defects are dealt with, and Inouye's committee has completed its important work.

---

Nelson Ho is a Hilo resident and conservation chairman
of the Sierra Club, Hawaii Chapter.