Posted on: Thursday, October 17, 2002

ELECTION
Stop the turf wars over Mauna Kea

In 1997, University of Hawai'i President Kenneth Mortimer declared his intent to protect the fragile environment and cultural sites atop Mauna Kea, even if it meant barring recreational users.

The move came in response to criticism by Hawaiians and environmentalists that the university had neglected natural resources and cultural sites in its zeal to control the globe's premier stargazing location.

The Hawai'i chapter of the Sierra Club shot back that sightseers and others who visit Mauna Kea for recreational purposes have been made scapegoats to problems caused by the astronomy industry, and that public access should not be restricted.

Well, the debate is happening again.

UH's Office of Mauna Kea Management, which oversees activities at the summit, recently mailed out a questionnaire to gauge opinion on limiting public access to the mountain summit.

One compromise posed in the questionnaire is a "reasonably priced" shuttle from the halfway point to the observatory-lined summit.

And once again, the Sierra Club objects, complaining that UH refuses to acknowledge the club's contention that the main causes of environmental and cultural damage at Mauna Kea's 13,769-foot crown are industrialization and commercialization, not visitors making a day trip.

The matter is up for public comment, and a final decision on restricting access will be made by the university's Board of Regents.

We'd hate to see the regents jump at restricting public access before determining who, if anyone, is harming the mountain, and in what way.

It's increasingly apparent that some won't be happy until astronomy is driven off the mountain. But that's not going to happen anytime soon, nor should it.

Sure, snowboarders and skiers flock to the mountain during blizzards, and under those conditions, their access should involve restrictions for safety reasons. And sightseers aren't always as prudent as they should be.

But overall, visitors are not mobbing the mountain and destroying natural and cultural resources. Besides, hasn't the issue of shared access already been addressed in the Mauna Kea master plan? That plan seeks to restrict development of telescopes to a 600-acre area and designates about 10,000 surrounding acres as a cultural and wildlife sanctuary.

The master plan was designed to balance the needs of various interest groups, and shared access should continue to be the goal.