Talk:Northwestern Hawaiian Islands

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Will not sink[edit]

Will not "sink beneath the waves" if they are south of the Darwin Point - Marshman 07:55, 30 May 2004 (UTC)

history?[edit]

Were these islands part of or claimed by the Kingdom of Hawaii, or were they made part of Hawaii after annexation to the US? --Jfruh 23:58, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Signed into law?[edit]

It's a bit awkward, I think, to say that the president "signed into law the creation" of the national monument. Also, it's legally misleading. Saying "signed into law" implies that he granted his approval to an act of Congress which created the monument. This is untrue. The President exercised his power under the Antiquities Act to create a National Monument. This power does not require Congressional approval, neither is it reviewable by the courts. The President created the Monument entirely by his own power, granted to him by Congress in 1906.

It would be better, I think, to say "the president issued Executive Order [number], creating the monument." That's less awkward and makes clearer the legal intricacies of the situation.

Executive Order[edit]

A quick mea culpa: the President creates a National Monument by public proclamation, not by executive order. I've changed the text. --Gradient 15:39, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Kaula?[edit]

I'm not sure that Kaula belongs in the island group. It is located to the southwest of Niihau and is part of Kauai County. It would seem to me more logical for it to belong to the Windward Islands group. Does anyone have any evidence to prove this one way or the other? Backspace 09:33, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I agree with you. I don't know why, but some sources on the web say that it is part of that group. The books that I've read about the NWHI never mention Kaula, though, so I don't think it is part. If you wan to remove it from the page, that's fine by me. SeanMD80talk | contribs 12:53, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Huh?[edit]

This statement here does not make sense:

"The islands had been protected since 1909 with a designation as an 'ecosystem reserve' by President Bill Clinton since 2000,"

Were they protected since 1909 or 2000? (Obviously Clinton didn't make any designation of the islands in 1909, not having been born yet, much less yet been president yet). I assume they had some sort of protected status from 1909 to 2000, and Clinton changed the status to give them more protection in 2000, but I on't have the necessary facts to make a clarification here. Anyone know a good way to clarify this statement so it makes sense and is accurate?

I'm trying to clarify it... if the way I did it caused the statement to be inaccurate please correct it, but I'm changing it to "The islands had been protected since 2000 with a designation as an 'ecosystem reserve' by President Bill Clinton."

In 1909 Theodore Roosevelt had declared the islands a national bird sanctuary, and that was the status of protection from 1909 to 2000. Tried to clarify that; if anyone can find a better way to make the sentence less akward but still accurate please do so. From 2000 to 2006, it was an ecosystem reserve; from 2006 to the present it is a national park. 67.190.124.18 17:03, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Monument, national monument, but good otherwise. SeanMD80talk | contribs 20:32, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Assessment comment[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Northwestern Hawaiian Islands/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Added islands section, so B-class. Not sure what should be added now.

Last edited at 20:49, 22 March 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 01:32, 30 April 2016 (UTC)