Course:CONS370/Projects/A new Hawaiian Renaissance? The Mauna Kea telescope versus the Indigenous communities of Hawaii, USA
Summary
_(21186419614).jpg)
In 1968, astronomers from the University of Hawaii (UH) were granted the right to build an observatory on Mauna Kea, the tallest peak in the Hawaiian archipelago. The deal was in exchange for stewardship and protection of the mountain that is sacred to the Kānaka Maoli (the indigenous Hawaiian people) (Brown 2016: 154). In 2010, the UH applied for a permit to build a thirty-meter diameter telescope (the TMT), which would be housed in an 18 story building at the peak of Mauna Kea. This plan was met by backlash from the Kānaka Maoli, who claim this is not rightful stewardship of the land, and that there have already been too many telescopes built on Mauna Kea (Brown 2016: 155, Salazar, J.A. 2014: 279). They therefore protest and block construction efforts in defence of their sacred land. The Kānaka Maoli have received support from other Hawaiian and non-Hawaiian residents who stand in solidarity with their efforts (Brown 2016: 155).
Description
The Thirty Meter Telescope (TMT) Project initially looked at several sites before settling on the “13 North” site on Hawaii's Mauna Kea mountain (Schock et al. 2009: 384). The list once it was shortened down to five locations included: Cerros Tolar, Armazones/Tolonchar, (northern Chile), San Pedro Martir (Baja California) and Mauna Kea (Schock et al. 2009: 384).These locations were analyzed for over five years to test astronomical capacity for the observatory. It was found ultimately that all choices provided ample opportunity for astronomical progression and success when looking at characteristics such as atmospheric clarity, positions within global wind flows, etc. (Schock et al. 2009: 384-394). Ultimately however, Mauna Kea, Hawai’i was chosen with input from the Indian, Canadian, Chinese, Japanese and American astronomical communities for its unique position in the northern hemisphere, for the versatility of its location which will serve as a important “global intellectual asset” (Sanders 2013: 81).
Hawaii’s location in the archipelago Pacific has made it particularly susceptible to imperialist pursuit on behalf of Euro-Americans (Jolly 2018: 356-357). Ideals of paradise derived from Christian and capitalist values made the islands particularly vulnerable to encroachment from American development as it aspired towards what has been termed “militourism” (Jolly 2018: 367-368). Today legacies of these power struggles manifest themselves in development associated with the TMT, which has become a focal point for the Kānaka Maoli (Native Hawaiians) in asserting repossession of these ‘paradisiacal’ landscapes (Jolly 2018: 369).
Mauna Kea or Mauna a Wākea is the tallest mountain in the Hawaiian archipelago, sitting at 13,796 feet above sea level with 19,012 feet stretching down beneath the ocean’s surface to the sea floor (Jolly 2018: 358). The dormant volcano is to the Kānaka Maoli one of the most sacred landscapes within their island chain. the goddess Pele uses volcanoes to actively shape landscapes and grow the islands (Jolly 2018: 358). Described as an umbilical cord, Mauna a Wākea is described as the peak and piko (navel) of the earth, existing as a remnant of when earth and heaven were separated (Jolly 2018: 358). The ali’i, high chiefs of ancient Hawai’i, were born from the gods Papahānaumoku and Wākea, Mauna a Wākea- older siblings to Ho'ohōkū and Hāloa, ancestors to King Kamehameha III who ruled from 1825-1854 (Jolly 2018: 358). Relationships with Mauna a Wākea are described as essential to maintain pono, or balance in modernity (Jolly 2018: 358).
King Kamehameha III and the sovereignty of the “Sandwich Islands” (Kingdom of Hawai’i) were recognized by Daniel Webster, the United States (US) Secretary of State in 1842 when he stated in a letter that such structures should be respected and avoided in territorial conquests (Chock 1995: 463). Recognition on behalf of French and British governments followed in 1843, illustrating that this recognition was internationally acknowledged and accepted (Chock 1995: 463). The 1849 Treaty of Friendship, Commerce and Navigation with the Hawaiian Kingdom’s ratification was supposed to illustrate further proof that the US would respect Hawaiian independence (Chock 1995: 464). This respect lasted for nearly forty-five years until 1893 when American pro-annexationists formed the Committee of Safety and seized control of Iolani Palace (Chock 1995: 465). Followed by armed US Marines, the Hawaiian monarchy was abolished and a provisional government was created (Chock 1995: 465). Attempting to spare lives, Queen Lili’uokalani succumbed to these pressures (Chock 1995: 465). American opinions on annexation however were not unified; President Grover Cleveland resisted Queen Lili’uokalani’s removal from the throne, leaving official decision making power to Congress which at the time decided not to reinstate Lili’uokalani nor annex Hawai’i (Chock 1995: 465-466). Instead, the Republic of Hawai’i was created and controlled by Americans that relentlessly pursued annexation of the islands (Chock 1995: 466). They were successful in 1897 with the Treaty of 1897. Hawai’i officially became a US state in 1959 (Chock 1995: 466). Hawaii’s history of annexation into the US was contrary to international law and remains an extremely contentious part of American history.
Today Hawaii’s positionality in the USA allows it to contribute significantly to the US tourism industry (Agrusa et al. 2010: 248). Showcasing Hawaiian culture to tourists has allowed further commodification of Hawaiian lands and culture though presented in the form of ‘cultural authenticity’ (Agrusa et al. 2010: 250). In this way, presented dynamics contribute to the power struggles present with TMT construction on Mauna a Wākea and are reflective of Hawaiian ties to wider trends of settler colonialism and American imperialism. These issues reach beyond TMT’s construction though that will remain the primary focus of this wiki page.
In 1976 the Kānaka Maoli agreed to support coordinated use of Mauna a Wākea and Haleakala, the archipelago’s largest and most sacred summits, with the University of Hawai’i (UH) astronomers (Brown 2016: 150). These agreements were conditional to joint stewardship for the protection of associated habitats, native species and cultural heritage in the area and followed UH promises to facilitate Mauna a Wākea stewardship in 1968 (Brown 2016: 150). Development on the mountain led to the construction of 13 telescopes and in September 2010, a Conservation District Use Application (CDUA) was filed by UH for the TMT project (Brown 2016: 151). Within the year, Mauna Kea Hui filed for a contested case on the project (Brown 2016: 151).
Tenure arrangements
Before colonization, Hawaiian lands were traditionally held commonly between the King and chiefs and were accessible to commoners (Banner 2005: 291). In response to foreign resident complaints and under King Kamehameha III, 1850’s Kuleana Act altered these traditional methods of land allocation for the Kānaka Maoli (Banner 2005: 275). The Act allowed Hawaii's masses to acquire land titles via proof that lands had been occupied and improved, regardless of the space’s previous domain (Banner 2005: 291). Under this allotment for private ownership however, histories of commonly held land were not addressed (Banner 2005: 291). While creating a new means of land ownership, the Kuleana Act did not dissolve previously existing land sharing structures, creating an atmosphere particularly susceptible to land contestations in the context of American imperialism and consequent settler colonialism development (Lam 1989: 235-236). Following illegal annexation of Hawai’i and eventual statehood, proprietorship of land continued to grow in influence and importance (Banner 2005: 276).
Land that the TMT would come to occupy following construction would encroach on a variety of land claims derived from differing forms of cultural legitimacy. The 65 year-long Conservation District Use Permits (CDUPs) awarded to UH from Hawaiian governments in 1968 fall under the US government’s umbrella, operating within what has been designated as “ceded” or “public lands” following Hawaii’s illegal annexation in 1898 and consequent statehood in 1959 (Salazar 2014: 1, 38-39). The federal Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) additionally holds responsibility for management of these lands on behalf of Hawaii’s State Conservation District (Salazar 2014: 38). Following initial outlines that prevented development on the scale that has occurred today, permits were granted that allowed retroactive designation of conservation lands under DLNR and consequently for Hawaii to allow telescope construction on the mountain (Salazar 2014: 39). Areas beyond these retroactive construction sites are known as part of the Mauna Kea Science Reserve (MKSR), and lands that near the bottom of Mauna Kea are designated as UH Management Areas (Salazar 2014: 39). Tension between these land designations, and the entities in control of managing and monitoring them is significant when considering histories of tenure in the area and the status of current land contestation arguments. Adding to this, is the fact that Mauna Kea is part of what was traditionally occupied by ali’i (chiefs and royal families) within the Kingdom of Hawaii’s land, which existed prior to US government interference and is referred to officially as “Crown and Government Lands” (Salazar 2014: 38). Technically because Hawaii’s annexation and statehood are internationally designated as illegal, claims to land on behalf of ali’i are just as legally legitimate as those posed by the US government and extended rights held by the UH until 2038 (Salazar 2014: 39). Choosing which land rights are ‘more legitimate’ in these contexts is incredibly challenging and presents an array of moral arguments from which different conclusions and champion land right holders can be designated. What can be stated for certain is the extent to which Hawaiian claims to sovereignty have become resurgent in response to US and International pressures trying to develop Mauna Kea for astronomical purposes jointly with organizations such as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) (Goodyear-Kaʻōpua 2014: 4). Resurgent sovereignty claims have been acknowledged to hold in many respects superior legality and morality, yet the hierarchical weight of US presence and ensuing colonialism hinder the realization of the sovereignty claims of the indigenous Hawaiian people in the context of TMT development (Salazar 2014: 279).
Administrative arrangements
The institution responsible for the building and operation of the Thirty Meter Telescope is the TMT International Observatory LLC (TIO); a non-profit organization made up of various academic, private, and governmental contributors from across the world (Thirty Meter Telescope The Process 2020: 1). The TIO is subleasing the telescope site from the University of Hawaii, Hilo - the organization that actually holds the land use lease. The administrative body that granted UH this lease and approved the TIO’s sublease is the Hawaii Board of Land and Natural Resources (BLNR). The BLNR is a seven person committee, meeting twice a month, composed of local officials appointed by the Governor and approved by the state senate (Board of Land and Natural Resources 2020: 1). The sublease between the TIO and UH was approved by the BLNR in 2014, under General Lease No. S-4191 (TMT 2020: 1).
In order to get approval for construction of the Thirty Meter Telescope, UH Hilo was required to obtain a Conservation District Use Permit. CDUPs are granted by the BLNR and involve a lengthy approval process. During this process multiple application forms are required and are reviewed by the committee, who also listen to testimony from the community before reaching a decision on whether or not to grant the permit (TMT 2020: 1). Maunakea was chosen as the preferred site for TMT in 2009 and the CDUP was not granted to UHH until 2017. This application process required UH Hilo to submit both a Conservation District Use Permit Application as well as a Final Environmental Impact Assessment.
The Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) was the first part of the application process to be completed; it was submitted in May of 2010. This statement included numerous, detailed scientific studies of the environmental influence that construction would have on the mountain’s ecosystem as well as its archaeological and cultural impacts (University of Hawaii, FEIS: 36-38).
The CDUP Application included a detailed description of the TMT’s proposed use, ecological effects, existing site information, impact on cultural issues, effect on public access and effect on the mountain’s visual aesthetic (University of Hawaii CDUP Application 2010: 3).
In September of 2017, the BLNR granted CDUP HA-3568 allowing TMT to be built. however multiple legal appeals from opponents to the Hawaii State Supreme court prevented further progress until 2019. These appeals were focused on the validity of the Consent to Sublease between the TIO and UH Hilo; ultimately none of the appeals was successful in court (TMT 2020).
It was not until June of 2019 that Governor David Ige issued a Notice to Proceed (NTP) to the University of Hawaii for construction of the TMT (TMT 2020). A NTP is a formal statement saying that all pre-construction conditions have been met and there are absolutely no legal impediments to beginning construction (TMT 2020).
Affected Stakeholders
The native people of Hawaii, the Kānaka Maoli, have provided significant backlash in response to the TMT construction plans. The Kānaka Maoli live according to the concept of Ho’omana Hawai’i (Brown 2016: 154). This means to cause or increase (Ho’o) the power (Mana) of something. Mana is increased by giving honor or worship (Brown 2016: 162). Ho’omana Hawai’i is therefore the act of increasing the power of the island (Brown 2016, 154). Ho'omana Hawai'i is complex in the way its numerous components are tightly intertwined. At the core of Kānaka Maoli belief is the thought that the island environment (comprising the land, sea and sky) is animate, imbued with spiritual significance and forms a web of interconnected and genealogically related elements (Brown 2016: 154). Based on knowledge passed through the generations, some of these natural formations are hailed as akua (gods or deities) (Brown 2016: 155). This is the case with Mauna Kea. in 1823, the missionary William Ellis wrote that there were 'many' accounts about Mauna Kea 'being the abode of the gods', and for this reason, 'none ever approach its summit' (Brown 2016: 160).
However, from the 1850s-1920s, there was heavy pressure to convert to Christianity, so much of the Ho’omana traditions were left behind and many gained distance from them (Brown, 2016: 161). The Kānaka Maoli faced oppression and were “told their gods were false, their rituals foolish, their dress, dances, and manners unacceptable, their skills and talents unimportant". The Hawaiians as a people knew an "identity crisis" long before the phrase was coined” (Pukui, Haertig, and Lee 1979: 85). But many Kānaka Maoli Christian converts still believed in akua, so lived according to Ho’omana Hawai’i. The traditional knowledge began to gradually regain a following, and in the 1990s, the belief system exploded into a powerful social-cultural-political renaissance-movement (Brown 2016: 163). So the tradition remained until today, never dying out and it continues to evolve, despite pressure and oppression from colonizers (Brown, 2016: 161).
Today, many more Kānaka Maoli are learning the traditional Hawaiian language (Brown 2016: 163). This allows them to read traditional documents and connect with the understandings of their ancestors. This better allows them to defend and assert their cultural rights and practices, such as Ho’omana Hawai’i (Brown 2016: 163). These documents can act as evidence, proving the traditional sacredness of Mauna Kea and reinforcing the Kānaka Maoli’s intrinsic rights to defend their land.
The Kanaka Maoli see it as their kuleana (set of rights and responsibilities) to care for and protect their ancestral land: “We believe that upholding this kuleana is crucial to our physical, spiritual, and intellectual well being. The struggle to protect Mauna a Wakea from further desecration is our kuleana” (Brown 2016: 164). The Kānaka Maoli have been acting on this kuleana since the University of Hawaii submitted a Conservation District Use Application (CDUA) for the TMT in September 2010 (Brown 2016: 151). Those against the building plan formed a group named the Mauna Kea Hui.
Timeline of activism of the Mauna Kea Hui (Brown 2016: 151):
March 2011: Mauna Kea Hui filed a petition for a contested case on the TMT-CDUA.
October 7th 2014: The group disrupted and halted the groundbreaking ceremony for the TMT.
April 2nd 2015: Hundreds of protesters held a peaceful protest, blocking the roads to prevent TMT contractors from accessing the site to prepare it. Thirty protesters were arrested.
June 24th 2015: 750 protesters turned out to block the TMT production crews from starting work. Twelve protesters were arrested.
In addition, Kānaka Maoli state that “As a part of our efforts to celebrate and protect Mauna a Wakea, we have, together with our supporters, held vigils, built ahu (shrines), conducted prayers, and performed hula and chants for the mountain” (Brown 2016: 164). The Protesters gain influence and following through social media, hoping that others will stand in solidarity with them. This was successful, as web searches for the slogan of the Mauna Kea Hui “we are mauna kea” had 1,610,000 searches in June 2015 (Brown 2016: 151).
Interested Outside Stakeholders
New Opportunities Through Minority Initiatives in Spaces Sciences (NOMISS) was initially started as an educational outreach program that had the goal of helping ease tensions between the Kānaka Maoli and astronomers in the context of projects like Mauna Kea’s TMT. Conflict exists between astronomers that see the mountain as an amazing place for ground-based optical astronomy, while Kānaka Maoli recognize the cultural importance of the area. Unfortunately at their roots these two different views lead to completely different manners of treating and interacting with associated landscapes. In a joint effort, Native Hawaiian elders, traditionalists and environmentalists filed a contested case to block NASA’s proposal for TMT (Swanner 2013: 7). This group of individuals was Mauna Kea Hui, the group that filed for rescinding the Conservation District Use Permit (CDUP) granted to HU and its allies in the astronomy community (Brown 2016: 151).
The CDUP to summit land use for TMT was permitted to UH by the Hawai’ian Board of Land and Natural Resources and operates within the US colonialist influence over Hawai’i, making mountain management a joint responsibility between the Mauna Kea Management Board (MKMB) and HU (Miller 2016: 237). Hawaiian and HU partnerships/allies in the astronomy community include the Institute for Astronomy (IfA) which operates within the UH and runs programs jointly with NASA, the dominant and most influential space program in the world (Miller 2016: 233). The General Assembly of the International Astronomical Union additionally supports the construction of TMT, speaking for widespread support for the project from astronomy communities across the globe (Miller 2016: 235). In this way, the groups seeking to construct the TMT on Mauna Kea are very well financed and are positioned favorably in global diplomatic hierarchies to find the resources and power necessary to finish construction and the installment of the TMT. This cohort of stakeholders additionally includes very little Native Hawaiian involvement, and carries out its goals with little reference to Hawaiian culture except for when speaking of the observatory’s geographic location on Mauna Kea (Miller 2016: 234). Mauna Kea Hui, and other Native Hawaiian based coalition efforts against TMT development have a very different makeup of support networks. Established in the early 2000s, the Office of Mauna Kea Management (OMKM) in contrast holds Hawaiian ideals in tangent with development on the mountain, and is supported by groups like the Native Hawai’ian Royal Order of Kamehameha and local branches of the Sierra Club. In 2012 the groups jointly killed a NASA funded project that attempted to build two telescope dishes that were significantly smaller than current proposals under TMT development (Miller 2016: 235-236). Efforts opposing Mauna Kea development were also supported by Harry Kim, the Mayor of Hawaii County (Miller 2016: 236). In this way, efforts against TMT construction are more derived from grassroot and local interests. While powerful in resisting change, Native Hawaiian interests face significant challenges when going head to head with international pressures that have far more financial capability to legally obtain the rights to contested resources. In legal contexts financial health of pro-TMT entities are able to push harder against legitimate legal and moral claims made on behalf of Native Hawaiians (Miller 2016: 233). This source of conflict is the primary facilitator of current land contestations in the battle for/against TMT construction.
Discussion
Our primary focus with this case study has been to shed light on the conflict between the Kānaka Maoli and the settler colonial Hawaii State government. With this report, we aim to give a full, balanced view of the TMT disagreement and to provide a greater context for Native Hawaiians’ objections to its construction.
Building the TMT is not only divisive because of its physical presence on the mountain (it certainly serves to further desecrate the summit), but also because of what the development represents. This is not the first thing to be built atop Maunakea - there are numerous telescopes at the mount’s summit - however, what the TMT really represents to Native Hawaiians is the State’s complete disregard for their voices and opinions (Brown 2016: 161). This is yet another instance in Hawaii’s long history of settler colonial governments walking over the Kānaka Maoli; it encapsulates the larger issue of indigenous oppression in the islands (Brown 2016: 164).
Assessment
From the point of view of the Kānaka Maoli, “we have been disparaged and even ridiculed for our beliefs, and the powerful backers of the TMT are doing everything they can to proceed with its construction” (Brown 2016: 164). However, the followers of Christianity or any other world religion are not pressed to justify their beliefs or authenticate their traditions. They are accepted as sacred beliefs and are granted adequate respect. Westerners are not pushed to justify the sacredness of Ground Zero or war memorials (Brown 2016: 163), so it is not fair that the Kānaka Maoli are pushed to validate Ho’omana Hawai’i and their wishes to protect the sanctity of Mauna Kea. This can be seen as a reiteration of colonization - the westerners pushing their agenda onto the ancestral land of other peoples and declaring it as law.
While the State government has primarily used its superior political power to force the project through, they have also tried to use their influence to ensure TMT benefits local residents. The State government and the TIO have developed several incentives tied to the TMT’s construction in order to sway protesters’ perceptions and to make the project more appealing to locals (Thirty Meter Telescope TMT Supporting Education: 1). These include the multiple education grants and internships provided by the TMT International Observatory LLC. to student citizens of Hawaii, contingent on the successful completion of the telescope’s construction (Thirty Meter Telescope TMT Supporting Education: 1).
Recommendations
This case study illustrates the extent to which power struggles have been perpetuated through decades of American imperialism and manifested themselves in the TMT’s construction and land contestations for Mauna Kea.
While claims of TMT legitimacy are valid from modern and Western perspectives, these perspectives do not fully capture the nature of Mauna Kea and the observatory’s construction. This stems from the fact that the Kānaka Maoli exist within the US due to illegal actions carried out on behalf of American government entities in the late 19th century (Chock 1995: 466). Under subsequent evaluations of legal legitimacy, despite international powers disproportionately favoring TMT construction, ultimate rights extending beyond current CUDPs belong to Hawaii’s ali’i (Salazar 2014: 1, 38-39). When evaluating how TMT construction will likely progress in the coming years, from this standpoint alone, it appears that Hawaii’s native elite will have the ultimate say in determining Mauna Kea’s use and potential TMT construction. If this is the case, prioritizing Kānaka Maoli collective wants and desires will be absolutely necessary when developing policy and local plans for development of the mountain. These processes and plans should integrate needs resting beyond the elite, and include the everyday Hawaiian so as to protect collective cultural heritage associated with Mauna Kea’s landscapes.
Of course, renewal of UH’s CUDP for Mauna Kea’s summit lands brings scenarios capable of protecting Hawaiian cultural heritage associated with Mauna Kea into question. American government interests are tied to entities that from a diplomatic standpoint, orient the administration to be more inclined towards TMT construction and thus long term renewals of CUDPs. While the US certainly has vested interest in seeing the preeminent telescope built on its own territory, initial research conducted by groups funding TMT construction illustrate how Mauna Kea is not the sole location that could lead the project to success. The locations chosen in the final five in addition to Mauna Kea: Cerros Tolar, Armazones/Tolonchar, (northern Chile), and San Pedro Martir (Baja California), can be reanalyzed including the associated social license of their peoples to ensure that just as Kānaka Maoli interests are being respected, individuals in these locations are having theirs looked after as well (Schock et al. 2009: 384). These areas should obviously also meet some of the scientific requirements for the TMT’s construction including location at sites where: coastal mountain ranges are present near cold oceans that have stable subtropical conditions, or isolated high mountains are present on islands situated in temperate ocean environments that have low inversion layers, or are sites that have low katabatic wind and jet stream associated turbulence (these features keep thermal backgrounds and water vapor levels low in favor of higher image quality) (Schock et al. 2009: 385).
Collaboration with ultimate TMT location areas’ elite/non-elite natives should be included in future planning stages/TMT efforts. This should additionally be the case if TMT construction is continually pursued in Hawaii: interests held by the astronomy community and the Kānaka Maoli should both be given careful consideration when planning the initiation of the TMT, especially when considering impacts that will follow TMT installment regarding topics like employment, biodiversity of the area, cultural heritage and employment.
Glossary of Hawaiian Terms
Ahu: Shrines (Brown 2016: 164).
Akua: akua has many meanings: a master who reigns supreme over all things; a spirit/soul; mana; strength; knowledge; a thing that does not die, without a source; a ruling ali'i (a high-ranking person); a corpse; a ghost; a kaua (a member of the 'despised' class); and a devil (Kepelino 2007:10-11). In this paper we are referring to akua as a god/deity. Mauna Kea is seen as an akua.
Ali’i: Chiefs/royal families and leaders of ancient Hawaii.
Hāloa: man ancestor to King Kamehameha III (Jolly 2018: 358).
Ho’o: causation or bringing something into being (Brown 2016, 154).
Ho'ohōkū: woman ancestor to King Kamehameha III (Jolly 2018: 358).
Ho’omana: To cause, give or increase mana (Brown 2016, 154).
Kānaka Maoli: The Native people of Hawai’i (Jolly 2018: 357).
Kuleana: a set of rights and responsibilities. (Brown 2016, 164).
Mana: Broadly referred to as power, but more specifically, mana is “simultaneously an entity in its own right, an essence, an energy, an ability, a capacity, a potential to effect positive or negative change; it can be spiritual, intellectual, or physical; it powers and empowers; it is intangible but its manifestations are tangible; it can be embedded in or transferred to something else; it is intrinsic but it can be increased or diminished; and it grants authority and defines status” (Pukui and Elbert 1986: s.v. 'mana').
Mauna a Wākea: synonym for Mauna Kea, the tallest mountain in the Hawaiian archipelago (Jolly 2018: 358).
Papahānaumoku: god that joined with Wākea, Mauna a Wākea to create Mauna Kea (Jolly 2018: 358).
Pele: Hawaiian goddess that shapes the archipelago through her manipulation of volcanoes (Jolly 2018: 358).
Piko: navel of the earth (Jolly 2018: 358).
Pono: balance (Jolly 2018: 358).
Wākea, Mauna a Wākea: god that joined with Papahānaumoku to create Mauna Kea (Jolly 2018: 358).
References
Agrusa, W., Lema, J., Tanner, J., Host, T., Agrusa, J. 2010. Integrating Sustainability and Hawaiian Culture into the Tourism Experience of the Hawaiian Islands. PASOS 8(2): 247-264. doi.org/10.25145/j.pasos.2010.08.018.
Banner, S. (2005). Preparing to Be Colonized: Land Tenure and Legal Strategy in Nineteenth-Century Hawaii. Law & Society Review 39(2): 273-314. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3557617.
Board of Land and Natural Resources. (2020). Retrieved April 12, 2020, from https://dlnr.hawaii.gov/boards-commissions/blnr-board/
Brown, M.A. (2016). Mauna Kea: Ho‘omana Hawai‘i and Protecting the Sacred. Journal for the Study of Religion, Nature and Culture 10(2), 150-169 doi.org/10.1558/jsrnc.v10i2.27795.
Chock, J.M.L. (1995). One Hundred Years of Illegitimacy: International Legal Analysis of the Illegal Overthrow of the Hawaiian Monarchy, Hawai’i’s Annexation, and Possible Reparations. University of Hawai’i Law Review 17(2): 463-512. https://heinonline-org.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/HOL/P?h=hein.journals/uhawlr17&i=469.
Goodyear-Kaʻōpua, N., Hussey, I., Wright, E. K., & e-Duke Books Scholarly Collection 2014. (2014). A nation rising: Hawaiian movements for life, land, and sovereignty. Durham: Duke University Press. https://doi-org.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/10.1215/9780822376552.
Iokepa Casumbal-Salazar. (2017). A Fictive Kinship: Making “Modernity,” “Ancient Hawaiians,” and the Telescopes on Mauna Kea. Native American and Indigenous Studies, 4(2), 1-30. doi:10.5749/natiindistudj.4.2.0001.
Jolly, M. (2018). Contested Paradise: Dispossession and Repossession in Hawai’i. The Contemporary Pacific 30(2): 355-377. doi.org/10.1353/cp.2018.0031.
Kepelino, Beckwith, M. W., & Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum. (2007). Kepelino's traditions of hawaii (Rev. ed.). Honolulu: Bishop Museum Press. http://resolve.library.ubc.ca/cgi-bin/catsearch?bid=3831784.
Lam, M. (1989). The Kuleana Act Revisited: The Survival of Traditional Hawaiian Commoner Rights in Land. Washington Law Review 64(2): 233-288. https://heinonline-org.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/HOL/Page?lname=&handle=hein.journals/washlr64&collection=&page=233&collection=journals#.
Miller, S. (2016). Mauna Kea: Two Cultures and the ‘Imiloa Astronomy Center. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews 41(2-3): 222-245.https://doi-org.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/10.1080/03080188.2016.1223589.
Pukui, Mary Kawena, and Samuel H. Elbert. 1986. Hawaiian Dictionary: HawaiianEnglish, English-Hawaiian (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, rev. edn).
Pukui, Mary Kawena, E.W. Haertig, and Catherine A. Lee. 1979. Nana IKe Kumu: Look to the Source, 2 Vols. (Honolulu: Hui Hanai).
Salazar, J.A. (2014). Multicultural Settler Colonialism and Indigenous Struggle in Hawai’i: The Politics of Astronomy on Mauna a Wākea (Order No. 3691724). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global; Worldwide Political Science Abstracts. (1672938590). Retrieved from http://ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/docview/1672938590?accountid=14656.
Sanders, G.H. (2013). The Thirty Meter Telescope (TMT): An International Observatory. Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy 34(2): 81-86. doi.org/10.1007/s12036-013-9169-5.
Schock, M., Els, S. Riddle, R., Skidmore, W., Travoullon, T., blum, R., Bustos, E., Chanan, G., Djorgovski, S.G., Gillett, P., Gregory, B., Nelson, J., Otarola, A., Segeul, J., Vasquez, J., Walker, A., Walker, D., and Wang, L. (2009). Thirty Meter Telescope Site Testing I: Overview. Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific 121(878): 384-395. doi.org/10.1086/599287.
Swanner, L. A. (2013). Mountains of controversy: Narrative and the making of contested landscapes in postwar american astronomy (Order No. 3567084). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (1417075941). Retrieved from http://ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/docview/1417075941?accountid=14656.
Thirty Meter Telescope. (2020). The Process. Retrieved from http://www.maunakeaandtmt.org/tmt-process/#legal-process
Thirty Meter Telescope. (2020). TMT Supporting Education. Retrieved from http://www.maunakeaandtmt.org/get-the-facts/tmt-supporting-education/
University of Hawai’i at Hilo. (2010). Final Environmental Impact Statement Volume 1 Retrieved from https://dlnr.hawaii.gov/occl/files/2013/08/2010-05-08-HA-FEIS-Thirty-Meter-Telescope-Vol1.pdf
University of Hawai’i at Hilo. (2010). Conservation District Use Permit Application: Thirty Meter Telescope Project, Island of Hawai’i. Retrieved from http://www.malamamaunakea.org/uploads/management/plans/TMT_CDUA_HA3568_2010-09-02.pdf.
Created by:
August Schwanauer
Amrit Krishna
Katie Little
_9months-fromtop.jpg){kind=small} |
This conservation resource was created by Course:CONS370. It has been viewed over {{#googleanalyticsmetrics: metric=pageviews|page=Course:CONS370/Projects/A new Hawaiian Renaissance? The Mauna Kea telescope versus the Indigenous communities of Hawaii, USA|startDate=2006-01-01|endDate=2020-08-21}} times. |