 I'm Marsha Joyner, and we are navigating the journey, and today what a journey it is. My goodness, we are going to take a look at Mauna Kea, the mountain in question that has been all over the world. People have all kinds of ideas and suggestions, and who knows what. So, I have asked a dear, dear friend who is a cultural icon, who I have known for, never mind, we won't go there. But every time I need something about the Hawaiian language, about the Hawaiian people, about the Hawaiian culture, this is the go-to. And this is my dear friend, Peter O'Pogue. Hi, Marsha. Cultural icon, it's like I should be stuck up on a wall or something. We're too old for that. But thank you for inviting me to come and talk to you. And, you know, if you read his resume, it's about that long we take up the whole show talking about his resume. Well, I'm not really that much of an expert, but I do know who to call. Yes. And I know we build this show about tourism, and when is tourism too much. And because you are so much a part of the tourism, and the beginning, middle, and end, and whatever, however, Mauna Kea has sucked all of the oxygen out of every other topic. So here we are. It certainly has done that, yes. So first of all, tell us, where is Mauna Kea? Well, Mauna Kea is on the island that we refer to as the Big Island, probably better not to upset people. It's Hawaii Island, which is at the southern tip of the Hawaiian Island. And it is an island still evolving. It's still got active volcanoes, et cetera. And I've always loved the Big Island. It has a primeval scent, like walk through those forests, and you expect to see a dinosaur come out from behind one of those trees, you know? And it is at South Point, the most southern point in the United States. Yes. Yes. Still evolving. Still evolving. Right. Yes. Now, so Mauna Kea is one of the many mountains on the Big Island. Is there a volcano under that one? Well, there was a volcano under that one. I'm not really sure of its status, but I'm assuming that it's normal. Well, yeah. Let's hope so. There's a whole lot of activity going on there, so I hope it's normal, or we're all in trouble. So this, why is it that that was selected for a telescope, or all of those telescopes that are up there? Well, first of all, it's at 14,000 feet. I believe if measured from the bottom of the sea, it is the tallest mountain in the world. Measured from the top of the ocean, I think it's in the second or third largest mountain. One, so the height and the degree to which it penetrates the sky is important. But also, the sky above it, apparently, is really clear. So the telescopes can penetrate the view going way back without any fuzziness. So it's an ideal spot, or a, in fact, the ideal spot in the world, or a locating up spot. But it seems to me, not being Hawaiian, but it seems to me that the Hawaiians have sailed around the world navigating with the stars. And so the telescope, to me, seems an extension of that view, an extension of what they already know. Absolutely. Yeah. The same frame, the issue, at least one of the larger perspectives on the issue. When the universe... First of all, the mountain has been held with great reverence over the years. And so the degree to which the sacredness is invoked on the mountain sometimes comes into question. Is the entire mountain sacred? Is every square foot of it sacred? What is the history of the Hawaiians' use of that mountain? What has been down through the centuries, the practices that occurred on the mountain? All of these things are now brought into question as a group of Hawaiians, a large group, is objecting to the expansion of the telescope platform. And there's, I think, 13, no, eight telescopes, I can't remember how many, but it's a large footprint. It is. This telescope, which is measured at 18 stories, has really drawn a lot of fire for many Hawaiians who are making sacred claims on the mountain as a huge cultural injury. And they're stirring up a lot of controversy throughout. And as you know, there are demonstrations going on that are preventing people who work on the other telescopes and other projects on the mountain from getting to work. So it's become a huge flashpoint in Hawaii. So let's get to the question of the cultural claims. There are a number of claims, but the one that I, first of all, I support the notion of this 30-meter telescope, the one that's in question. And I support it. The objection to the telescope is that it is a cultural injury. And the claim that, as I understand it, is that the entire mountain is sacred and that the air column above the mountain is also sacred. And any penetration into the mountain or penetration of the air column above it constitutes a cultural injury. And that's what they're saying. That's kind of a blanket. Now there are other cultural complaints regarding other activity on the mountain, but that's the base of the line. First of all, that blanket claim flies in the face of the actual history of the mountain if you look down to the record. There was a period where I actually had contracted several law scholars on these issues and came out with a white paper on it. And the claim that the entire mountain is sacred cannot be validated. There are three ways you validate a cultural claim generally. One is through archaeology. Second is through chants and oral traditions that are preserved through time. And third by scholars that do studies like that. And there is a fourth way. And that is the activity or whatever the tradition that is being claimed on the sacred place has to occur, or the activity has to occur over a period of time and in repetition. You've got to show it. It's not just something that started yesterday and all this. All right, so as you brought up earlier, the Hawaiians had a great preoccupation with the stars, but even more than that, the most sacred thing about Hawaiian culture was the search for knowledge, the search for knowledge of discovery. Hawaiians are on record and have a tremendous record down through the centuries of how well they've been able to manage natural resources. That knowledge was the basis of quality of life. And when you look at some of the things that they've done, one of them being navigation and using the stars to navigate thousands of miles of ocean without compass, without sextant, is a testimony to that kind of knowledge. Yeah, it's incredible. Things like these gigantic fishponds in managing food supply on the shoreline, where they understood the concept of photosynthesis. All of these centuries before the Europeans even got to or anybody else got to the scientific mission. So search for knowledge, trump everything. So these claims that are being made, and especially with the opportunity that the TMT, the 30-millimeter telescope, is presenting, not just to Hawaii, but it would seem to Hawaiians to become a leader in global astronomy. Seems something that is so natural to the culture and so consistent with the history of the culture and how Hawaiians have behaved in the relationship with the Earth. It seems like a no-brainer. Well, now, of course, like I said, I see it as an extension of what the knowledge they already have that just takes it to the next level. And also, since I'm a mother and a grandmother and a great-grandmother, and my sons all went to high school here, college in California, and they're still in California, you know? So I see this learning that we have, this new knowledge is a way for our students, our people to stay here, to gain all of this new horizon in things that, who knows what we're going to learn? Well, yeah, the opportunity that in the world of science, astronomy-based, presents to Hawaii in having Hawaii think its place as a global leader in this incredible growth industry. I mean, the opportunity, this is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. And so even, I think, more important is Hawaiians should be at the forefront of this search for knowledge. We should be at the forefront of wanting to locate or to create the center of gravity for global astronomy here on Island as something to be proud of. And one of the cultural consistencies that the telescope, in terms of an opportunity the telescope presents, is it was important in cultural history, in the Hawaiian culture, to search for the ancestor. That is the Hawaiian story of creation goes back to what is referred to in the chant as the night of oh, oh, darkness. They're talking about going back to the beginning of time to seek our ancestor. That is about a sacred, a cultural concept as you can get. That's what this telescope will do that will allow us to do that no other telescope so far can boast, that it will help Hawaiians actually travel through time back to the beginning or pretty close to the beginning. So with those two things as considerations, it just, it hurts me, and it puzzles me that Hawaiians would object to moving forward and taking our lead in humanity for something that is such a stellar, great, great way forward. Well, now this has been in the works for what, 10, 15 years? Yes. And all the way to the Supreme Court? Yes. And the court said it's OK to build. And now what happened that all of a sudden something else? What happened? Or do most people know that it went to the Supreme Court? I don't think, well, yeah, it was 10 years in the making and been through every kind of examination and government vetting that you could possibly go, which includes a very expensive, long, terrible years of legal battles. And they have emerged with approval to go. So that's another issue, the occupation of the mountain by the protectors. And again, I've not seen, I don't mean to insult anyone, the protectors. They have a belief system. I don't agree with the belief system. But they've pretty much brought all activity on the mountain to a stop. So this raises the issue of the rule of law, that construction on the telescope, even though it's been approved by the Supreme Court, cannot start because they won't allow the construction workers or the structure to go up. They just recently, after shutting down even the other telescopes that are already there, people from going and going to work. Now you have a question, in my opinion, of a separation of church and state. How is it that religious claims of sacredness and Trump, a person's right to access public land? And one of the things that I think is really egregious is that the state has put itself in a position where it actually seems to think it has to ask permission from the protectors. I mean, that's what the optic is. It is, it is. Ask permission to access state lands, that's something weird about that. It is, yes. Listen, we need to take a break. And when we come back, let's keep going. Let's see where this takes us. All right. OK, we'll be back in 60 seconds. Aloha. I'm Keisha King, host of At the Crossroads, where we have conversations that are real and relevant. We have spoken with community leaders from right here, locally in Hawaii, and all around the world. Won't you join us on thinktechhawaii.com or on YouTube on the Think Tech Hawaii channel. Our conversations are real, relevant, and lots of fun. I'll see you at the Crossroads. Aloha. Aloha. I'm Winston Welch, host of Out and About. It's a show that we have every other Monday on Think Tech Live here. We explore a variety of topics that are really interesting. We have organizations, events, and the people who fuel them in our city, state, country, and world. We've got some amazing guests on here, like all the shows at Think Tech. So if you want to catch up on stuff, tune into my show every other Monday and other shows here on Think Tech Live. It's a great place to learn about stuff, to be informed. And if you have some ideas, come on my show. Let's talk about it. See you later. And Aloha. Aloha. I'm Marcia Joyner, and we are back. We are navigating a journey that takes us all the way back to the beginning of time. The Night of Poe. The Night of Poe. I like that. I like that. My guest is Peter Poe, a cultural icon. And I went to work at the original satellite city hall. And Peter Poe's mother, Margaret, was there. She was the icon. She was the icon. I'm the son of the icon. OK. Now, so tell us. Yeah, so there are two sides to every story. So we've talked about the search for knowledge, how Hawaiians ought to be supporting the philosophical and et cetera. Now, while I don't agree with the methods that are being used in terms of how the issue is being fought, I will say this about some of the claims that we've taken. I believe the state and the University of Hawaii could have done a much, much better job over the 10 years that this has been an issue. For instance, we know that the footprint of the telescopes that are there has been growing and growing. And so this is not new news that it was growing to a point where they were going to get some protest. Two of the telescopes, as I understand it, are now obsolete. You would think that they would have to stave off some of the complaints that they've been hearing over the years. But they would have come forward. If there is a plan, I don't know, a decommissioned plan. What is the plan to decommission? Because telescopes go obsolete as the technology increases. If one has been offered, I'm not aware of it. I don't know that I haven't heard anybody really talk about it other than there was some expression of intent from the university who has the lease on that part that they were concerned about it. But I think it would be a great start if a decommissioning plan of existing telescopes, as they go out, were to happen, won. And then secondly, there are other activities on the mountain because the claims to sacredness, while they're centered on the TMT, it also includes other kinds of activity, tourist activity that goes on on the mountain, other uses. And so the overall management of the mountain, I think, has come under question as to whether, in the name of one, the Hawaiians being able to access certain areas of the mountain to practice their cultural and religious practices. And how the mountain is used for other purposes, I think sort of begs to be better managed. So that's an issue that is part of the overall dialogue. So it's kind of looking at- Is that being, is that, because we don't hear that. Are they, are someone, Ohaha, anybody looking at management? Well, it's a problem because there's no communication. There's no public communication coming from those who manage the mountain on these issues. So it's not that I don't, no one calls a press conference, generally you'll have a, I think the university has a spokesman that they use who once in a while will come out. But there's been, as far as I'm concerned, no real attempt to regularly communicate with the public on what the status of mountain is, other than reading the newspaper, watching television and seeing what reporters have to say about the latest confrontation. And most reporters have no sense of history. They're all young, they don't know. They don't know. And it is really sad for me that we don't know more that our media doesn't tell us the history and or if there is, I guess the university, because they have classes geared to the telescope, why they're not out front and telling us the whole, just like you told us the story. Where are they? Yeah. Whereas Ohau, aren't they part of managing the land? Yeah, well, as I understand it, I was with Ohau for eight years and I've been gone, I didn't run again last session, but as I understand it, Ohau's position is really directed more towards the total management of the mountain, although in terms of any official vote that they've taken, I believe that the majority of trustees probably do support the protectors with respect specifically to MP, but that has not been a decision that was made by a formal vote of the trustees. Well, I mean, that's fine to support the protectors. Yeah, that's not an issue. My issue is where are they to tell the story, though the rest of us know the story just like you did, to say, well, who is the manager of the land? Is there a manager of the land? So that you say, this is where their practice is? And like you're saying, now we are at a Yes, there is. Church and state here. We have an issue here. There's a formal state entity that is responsible for the land. It's called the Office of Monarchy Management. Well, where are they? The state operated and it's a group, it's a relatively inclusive group of people. I don't know whether, I don't know what kind of authority they have to speak on behalf of the state on an issue like this, whether they have to take direction. But they haven't said a word. We didn't know that they existed. Yeah, so that's part of my complaint and I'm not faulting them directly but the buck stops with the governor's office basically. Oh my. There needs to be a lot more information coming out of that. So yeah, so the overall management of the mountain under this Office of Monarchy Management, we just need to hear. They've dropped the ball. One thing that, again, probably my biggest concern moving forward on not just on monarchy but any cultural claim that will affect public policy or has the potential for stirring up some controversy is that when in ancient times, when you had cultural practices, they were governed by the priesthood. It was a priesthood that was able to rule on things. And then if claims were being made, it was a way to adjudicate it, vet and to establish whether a claim was legitimate and could be proven by the three methods that I mentioned earlier, anthropology, et cetera. Well, there is no center of gravity on that now. For all the scholars that we have around, there's no real formal body that is either assigned a responsibility either by the state or perhaps the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. I tried to get OHA to actually establish a process, a procedure by which, whenever there was a controversy like this, that we would have some kind of an organization or a group of people that would weigh in through research and through checking out history and to tell us whether a cultural claim is legitimate or not. That is absent here, almost totally absent. It is. I mean, at least I haven't seen it. I haven't heard, I didn't read it in the paper or anything. Yes. So, you know, like I've evidence, I've noticed that the protectors on a couple of occasions, if the news reports, I got that right, have created new, what we call an ahu, it's basically a small stone- Right. A concrete platform. And then declared the area sacred. So, something that wasn't there yesterday, all of a sudden appears today and becomes sacred. So, you know, how does that, is that, is that a practice that we need to honor? I doubt it, but, you know, again, in the absence of the priesthood or any governmental body that is able to weigh in, I think it's critical moving forward because Mauna Kea is only one as we move forward. I think one cultural issue that is, you know, it's a warning signal that moving forward, we need to be prepared to deal with other cultural issues that I'm sure is gonna arise as the, especially the younger people, are getting very, very strident about culture. And in my opinion, a little bit of lack on doing the homework and really understanding the whole. Look, it seems to me as big as Mauna Kea is, that there's room for both. There is totally room for sharing. The mountain does need to be shared. I think it has to be carefully shared, but certainly it has a lot of ways to bless us all, you know, in terms of its position. Now, there's one, before we go, there's one thing that I did hear just yesterday, and that is a tour company had to lay off people because they cannot take people up to the mountain. What about tourism in the mountain? Gotta be careful. I think if tourism is carefully monitored, I don't see any reason why we should not, you know, share the mountain. So, I know there might be some objection to it, but tourism in general, which I hope we'll have a chance to. You gotta come back, we'll talk about that, yes. We'll talk about tourism, but it's a good question about leading tourist access, you know, something that other people consider sacred. I personally think it's fine, but there's more stuff going on with tourism. I mean, basically we pretty much reach capacity and it's gonna get worse before it gets to that point. Well, we need to, gosh, I hate to let you go. So, what we'll do is part two. Okay. So, when we can talk about tourism, because it's, especially when you look at poor Lanakai and it's just overrun, just overrun. But Peter, thank you so much. It's always a pleasure to spend time with you. And we will come back and we will do part two. Is tourism too much? Thank you, Martha. Thank you so much. Aloha.