Below, readers are presented with summaries of the key recommendations of interview and consultation participants, paraphrased by the author from the original documentation. The full released transcripts and consultation records should be read to understand the significance and context of the recommendations.

· All but one interview-consultation participant stated that they would prefer no further development of observatories on Mauna Kea. A few others expressed reservations about further development, but did not rule out the possibility. High visibility of observatory features and impacts on pu‘u were raised as issues by many interviewees.

[Note: the scope of work for this study focused on current and any proposed observatory development on Mauna Kea, neither interviewees or consultant participants were asked about any other forms of development on Mauna Kea.]

· Protection of the landscape and view planes (e.g. pu‘u to pu‘u and cultural resources) needs to be addressed.

· The general consensus of all other participants-often voiced with deep emotion-was that the State of Hawai‘i - UH should be thankful for what they have been able to use, and they should use what they have wisely.

· Before trying to establish guidelines for native Hawaiian use and practices on Mauna Kea, the State-University and other facilities users of Mauna Kea must establish and adhere to their own guidelines and requirements for use of Mauna Kea.

· When addressing the varied resources in the summit of the Mauna Kea, the State-University and other agencies and users must look beyond the summit. In a traditional Hawaiian context, Mauna Kea is comprised of two major land units that extent from sea level, through the mountainous region and on to the summit of Mauna Loa. Mauna Kea is Hawai‘i-there would be no Hawai‘i had Mauna Kea not first been born. What occurs on the summit of Mauna Kea, filters down to, and has an impact on what is below.

The native system of ahupua‘a management (which may be likened to an integrated resources management planning approach) needs to be incorporated into planning for any future activities on Mauna Kea.

· Complete work and studies that were required as a part of the original master plan, and keep commitments.

Protocols for the collection of cultural data, data analysis, and any resulting recommendation should be stated, including recommendations will be implemented. Sampling of sites should be limited and plans developed in consultation with knowledgeable cultural practitioners.

· Use of existing facilities and infrastructure needs to be monitored to ensure that further damage (e.g. impacts to pu‘u, viewplains, cultural sites and practices, and geological resources) to the cultural-natural landscapes does not occur.

· A plan for access to, and use of traditional sites and resources (e.g., Keanakâko‘i) needs to be formulated in consultation with native practitioners and families who share generational ties to Mauna Kea, and who still practice their culture and religion on Mauna Kea.

· The State of Hawai‘i, University of Hawai‘i-Institute for Astronomy, and other sub-lessees and users of the Mauna Kea facilities and resources should form a sustainable partnership with community members.

Key participants in this partnership should include knowledgeable native Hawaiian families who share generational ties to Mauna Kea, and other individuals known to be knowledgeable about Mauna Kea’s various resources.

Such a partnership should have more than an "advisory role," and would focus on formulating culturally sensitive management guidelines and protocols for users of Mauna Kea. Partnership programs could also implement further literature research and oral history documentation for Mauna Kea; develop site preservation and resource monitoring plans; and design educational-interpretive programs for Mauna Kea.

· Restore documented traditional Hawaiian place names to appropriate features and use.

· Develop a plan for the restoration of the natural environment on Mauna Kea. For many interviewees, this includes maintaining hunting populations of introduced herbivores which can help keep alien plant species under check.

· Seek out and speak with members of the Hawaiian community who have generational ties to Mauna Kea, prior to undertaking any new projects. Then take their beliefs, practices, feelings, and recommendations into account in reaching management decisions.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ACHP (Advisory Council on Historic Preservation)

1985 Guidelines for Consideration of Traditional Cultural Values in Historic Preservation Review. Washington, D.C.: Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. (Draft report, August)

Beckwith, M.

1970 Hawaiian Mythology. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

Cordy, R.

1994 A Regional Synthesis of Hâmâkua District Island of Hawai‘i. Historic Preservation Division Department of Land and Natural Resources. State of Hawaii.

DLNR (Department of Land and Natural Resources)

1996 Hawaii Administrative Rules, Title 13, Department of Land and Natural Resources, Subtitle 13, State Historic Preservation Division Rules, Chapter 276:7, Consultation with individuals knowledgeable about the project area’s history; & Chapter 277, Rules Governing Minimal Requirements for Archaeological Site Preservation and Development (Draft, December 12, 1996).

Hudson, A.E.

Ms. 1932 Archaeology of East Hawaii. Ms., B.P. Bishop Museum.

Kanahele, P.K., and E. L.H. Kanahele

1997 A Hawaiian Cultural Assessment of the Proposes Saddle Road Alignments. Project A-AD-6 (1). Hilo, Hawai‘i.

Langlas, C. Ph.D., et al.

draft 1997 Draft Environmental Impact Statement - Saddle Road (State Route 200) Mamalahoa Highway (State Route 190) to Milepost 6. County of Hawaii, State of Hawaii, FHWA Project No. A-AD-6(1). Technical Appendices- Volume IV Archaeological, Historic and Traditional Cultural Assessment. Prepared for U.S. Dept. of Transportation FHWA-Central Federal Lands Highway Decision and Hawaii Dept. of Transportation. Paul H. Rosendahl, Ph.D., Inc., (Report No. 1522-022897). Hilo, Hawaii.

Malo, D.

1951 Hawaiian Antiquities. Honolulu, B.P. Bishop Museum.

Maly, K.

1998 "Mauna Kea Kuahiwi Ku Ha‘o i ka Mâlie" A Report on Archival and Historical Documentary Research; Ahupua‘a of Humu‘ula and Ka‘ohe, Districts of Hilo and Hâmâkua, Island of Hawai‘i. Prepared for Native Lands Institute. Hilo, Hawai‘i (published May 1998).

McCoy, P.

1982 Report 2. Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey. In Cultural Resources Reconnaissance of the Mauna Kea Summit Region, H. McEldowney & P. McCoy. Bishop Museum ms. 110192. (Prepared for Group 70 International)

 

McEldowney, H.

1982 Report 1. Ethnographic Background of the Mauna Kea Summit Region. In Cultural Resources Reconnaissance of the Mauna Kea Summit Region, H. McEldowney & P. McCoy. Bishop Museum ms. 110192. (Prepared for Group 70 International)

OEQC (Office of Environmental Quality Control, State of Hawai‘i)

1997 Guidelines for Assessing Cultural Impacts. Adopted by the Environmental Council; November 17, 1997.

Parker, P.L., and T.F. King

1990 Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Traditional Cultural Properties. National Register Bulletin 38. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Washington D.C.

Pukui, M.K.

1983 Olelo Noeau. B.P. Bishop Museum Special Publication 71. Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu.

Pukui, M.K., and A.L. Korn

1973 The Echo of Our Song. Chants and Poems of the Hawaiians. Honolulu: University Press of Hawaii.

Sebastian, L.

1993 Protecting Traditional Cultural Properties Through the Section 106 Process. CRM Vol. 16:22-26 (Special Issue)..