Thirty or so years from now, when the next Ira Rohter or someone of his ilk writes a history of Hawai'i, the events and battles unfolding today at places like Bachman Hall, Uncle Walter Ritte's house, the corner of Dillingham and Vineyard, and the Hawai'i Legislature concerning taro, its progeny and the intellectual property rights of Native Hawaiians, will probably be referred to as the third Great Mahele.

The first two maheles were fought over Hawaiian land and water rights. The coming mahele will be fought over Hawaiian intellectual property rights.

Indeed, there is currently a heated intellectual property rights battle between a former UH professor — who successfully patented the DNA for a new hybrid Hawaiian taro he created from the DNA of a long-existing, uniquely Hawaiian taro strain — and respected Hawaiian activist Walter Ritte and his allies. It would be a mistake, however, to think that this battle is just between the professor and Ritte. It is a preview of things to come.

All battles begin with border skirmishes of sorts. The one between the professor and Ritte is really just the first skirmish between the two sides; more fighting inevitably will follow. The difference is that this time, more Hawaiians are paying attention. Trespassers are being called trespassers.

On one side of the battle are Hawaiians. On the other side of the battle are those seeking to take from Hawaiians property Hawaiians view as belonging to them. Here, the property at issue is intellectual property — specifically, the patent for Hawaiian taro currently owned by a former UH scientist.

Hawaiians such as Ritte argue that no one should own the DNA to Hawaiian taro to the detriment, real or imagined, of others. The other side argues if they are not allowed to patent what they "create," there will be no incentive for them to create new, disease-resistant strains of taro or other fruits and vegetables.

This battle has spilled into the halls and conference rooms of the Legislature. Opponents have moved for a moratorium on patents by the state for taro and similar plants until a compromise is reached between the two sides over how to resolve this issue. As of this writing, there are three bills on this issue going through the Legislature.

The taro patent, like all patents, may or may not have commercial value. If it does, the patent holder — in this case, the professor — could make a lot of money. In registering the patent, the professor asserted a claim of ownership over property. What the professor did is akin to claiming "unclaimed" land or property. In doing so, he threw down the proverbial gauntlet. Fortunately for Hawaiians, this time around, Ritte was paying attention and recognized the challenge issued for what it was: a first move by a non-Hawaiian to claim for himself property Hawaiians view as belonging communally to all.

A brief review of Hawai'i's history reveals that the event referred to by historians as the first Great Mahele allowed recent immigrants to these Islands — who imposed upon the native people a land-tenure system whose concepts and rules were alien to Hawaiians — to dispossess Hawaiians of their lands.

Under this system, only Hawaiians who registered their land grants received land. Simple. Straightforward. It worked, if the goal was to dispossess Hawaiians of their land. The majority of Hawaiians didn't register their lands, and therefore lost them; recent immigrants claimed these lands.

The second Great Mahele involved essentially the same players, with the recent immigrants once again employing the same strategy used in the first mahele. This time, the battle was not about land but water.

Both events, history shows us, dispossessed Hawaiians of the two most essential things all native people and their cultures need to survive: land and water.

From studying these events — regardless of which side you take — we all learn, essentially, the same lesson: If you take away a people's land and water, you will successfully take away from that community its language, customs and culture.

Fortunately for Hawaiians and the people of Hawai'i, much progress toward healing is being made by people like Micah Kane, director of the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands. Under Kane, the DHHL is aggressively moving to return more Hawaiians back to the land. If Kane is able to deliver even half of what he set out to deliver, he will likely put more Hawaiians back onto their lands than any of his predecessors. This is an excellent first step toward nursing the Hawaiian people back to health.

A movement also is under way to right the wrongs of the second mahele, and these efforts are led by people like Kapua Sproat. These are excellent second steps toward righting these wrongs and toward healing the Hawaiian people.

The lessons learned from the first two maheles were these: