Ka Wai Ola - Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Volume 30, Number 9, 1 September 2013 — Baybayan's truth not the whole story [ARTICLE]

Baybayan's truth not the whole story

By Kealoha Pisciotta

Aloha. As a Native Hawaiian cultural practitioner, I wish to respond to Mr. Chad Kālepa Baybayan's opinion pieee about Mauna Kea ( West Hawai 'i Today, April 19; a eondensed version of whieh ran in KWO' s July issue). First, Kālepa, mahalo for speaking your truth, as I believe that is one of the greatest forms of respect one may offer another. While I respect your truth, other important truths about Mauna Kea were omitted fromyour commentary, thus altering readers' perspectives on the issue of Mauna Kea development. I wish to point out some omissions you may have forgotten to share. It is my hope that by doing so, a more complete story of Mauna Kea - and the impact of its astronomy development - will appear. The four most glaring omissions are as follows: 1. You did not inform the readers that you work for the 'Imiloa Astronomy Center that has received funding from Gordon Moore, one of the Thirty Meter Telescope funders. 2. That while testifying at the contested case hearing, the university did not offer you as an expert witness nor were you qualified as an expert of the cultural practice relating to Mauna Kea - as were members of the Mauna Kea Hui, including Kumu Hula Paul Neves, Kumu Hula Pua Case and Mr. Kalani Flores of the Flores-Case 'Ohana, Mr. Clarence Kauakahi Ching and I. 3. When questioned about your Native Hawaiian practices relating to Mauna Kea, you answered that you understood Mauna Kea from the perspective of the sea. So you did not menhon that construction of the TMT atop Mauna Kea wouldNOT directly impact yourparticular cultural or religious practice, as it would other Native Hawaiian practitioners - including members of the Mauna Kea Hui and me. 4. Lastly, you mentioned that you are only one of four individuals that Papa Mau Piailug graduated into the rank of master navigator and while that must have been a tremendous honor for you, you failed to menhon that others of that rank, including Nainoa Thompson, have spoken out in support of protecting Mauna Kea. While serving as a university regent, Thompson said of further development on Mauna Kea, "This is really about the native people being subject to racism and disrespect" (quoted in the Honoluhi Star-Bulletin, June21, 1999). In the end, the core issue is about the many Hawaiians whose practices will be negatively impacted. It's about the 'āina that will be negatively impacted. Even the university's environmental impact statements (EIS) admit this fact: "From a cumulative perspective, the impact of past and present actions on cultural, archaeological, and historic resources is substantial, significant, and adverse: these impacts would continue to be substantial, significant, and adverse with the consideration of the [TMT] Project and other reasonably foreseeable future actions." This means development is not good for either Mauna Kea or the people of Hawai'i. Aloha and mahalo for listening to my truth too. ■ Keaīoha Pisciotta is a Native Hawaiian practitioner and one ofthe six petitioners in the Board ofLand and Natural Resources contested case to protect Mauna Keafromfurther industrialization and desecration. She lives in 'ŌIa'a, Hilo, Hawai'i Island.