Kanehili Cultural Hui
P.O. Box 75578 Kapolei, Hi. 96707
RE:
HART Honolulu High Capacity Transit
Corridor Project Section 106 Programmatic Agreement, Honolulu Hawaii July 16
Meeting
Clarification of TCP issue the Leina a ka ‘uhane – spirit
leap and pathway as per Stipulation IX Measures to Address Reasonably
Foreseeable Direct, Indirect and Cumulative Effects Caused by the Project.
The Leina a ka ‘uhane has been determined to be National
Register eligible under Stipulation II of the National Historic Preservation
Act Section 106 Programmatic Agreement for the Project by the Federal Transit
Administration.
Dear Mr. Rogers, Mr. Matley and Mr. Grabauskas:
In the July 16, 2015 meeting the FTA-HART deflection
strategy for the Kanehili Cultural Hui (KCH) issue of the true pathway of the
Leina, which FTA and HART could not refute based upon the documentation and
evidence, was to have the SHPD representative state that the Leina TCP district
could only be recognized as National Register eligible at the point of the
leaping off place- Leiolono at Aliamanu.
It was also stated by FTA’s Ted Matley that “any recognition for the site was totally outside
of the HART Programmatic Agreement.” Yet in fact FTA did
recognize the “Leina District” in April 2012 in order to expedite
commencement of rail construction.
For those who have asked why didn’t KCH and Mike Lee,
recognized Ewa cultural practitioner and cultural descendant, raise these TCP issues
earlier we have in fact done so for years and did so officially (with receipt
documentation) to FTA, HART and SHPD in May 2013 before commencement of rail
construction, after Federal Judge Tashima’s ruling that not ALL TCP’s were
identified. ( See attached and below )
KCH would like to point out the April 20, 2012 FTA Letter
from Leslie Rogers to Dan Grabauskas, HART Re: Determination of No Historic
Properties and authorization for commencement of construction, Honouliuli
ahupuaa:
“Under Stipulation II of the National
Historic Preservation Act Section 106 Programmatic Agreement for the Project,
which was signed in January 2011 ("PA"), HART was required to conduct
a phased evaluation of potential traditional cultural properties
("TCP") prior to the commencement of construction on each area
evaluated.”
“Furthermore,
FTA recognizes that
portions of the Leina District are located within the Honouliuli
ahupua'a. However, the pathway of the Leina District does not cross the APE of
the Project within the Honouliuli ahupua' a. The Leina District does cross the APE of the
Project further along the guideway of the Project outside the Honouliuli
ahupua'a. The Leina District
will be further evaluated in subsequent geographic subdivisions where it
crosses the guideway of the Project.” Leslie
T. Rogers Regional Administrator, FTA
April 20, 2012
It should also be pointed out that in the FTA-HART
Programmatic Agreement meetings that HART will prepare National Register of Historic Places forms
for identified TCP’s.
Kanehili Cultural Hui’s TCP presentation on Thursday,
July 16, 2015 at the FTA-HART Programmatic Agreement meeting centered on the
fact that the Leina a ka
‘uhane spirit pathway was misrepresented by the HART TCP contractor SRIF
in order to provide FTA and HART the “management decision” ( stated in a previous internal HART
document, see further below ) they needed to formally declare that the Leina
was not in the APE of the project in order to immediately proceed with rail construction.
Kanehili Cultural Hui’s TCP presentation showed that the Leina pathway can be
correctly determined and identified using a program called SunCalc which
shows that the spirit pathway is not “intangible”
and can in scientific fact
be determined EXACTLY by the annual solar cycle sunset which clearly
goes over the entire West Oahu Farrington Highway (WOFH) rail segment APE of
four stations, including the East Kapolei station in January, and including the
West Loch station in Waipahu in July.
After the ruling of federal judge Wallace Tashima that
not all TCP’s along the entire rail route had been identified Mike Lee and
Kanehili Cultural Hui officially submitted an extensive package of full TCP comments,
including
the Leina, in the form of maps, surveys, reports, studies, references and
supporting Hawaiian cultural documents to FTA, HART and SHPD on May 30, 2013 as
officially recognized Section 106 Programmatic Agreement consulting parties.
Complete hard copies were delivered to SHPD with
date/time stamp and additional email confirmation from SHPD. FTA and HART received
certified DVD copies as well as other parties including the NTHP and NPS.
Kanehili Cultural Hui also provides further well
referenced documentation (see below) previously submitted in May 2013, which
clearly shows Kaupe’a as the ancient name for the Ewa Plain, a direct cultural connection
with the Leina a ka ‘uhane and Kaupe’a as a well documented place of mass iwi
burials over centuries of native Hawaiian residence.
Hawaiian cultural researcher Kepā Maly says: “The Leina a ka uhane is worthy of a district
nomination because there are connections from the leaping place, He ulu o
Leiwalo, on the Moanalua side to the general region on the Honouliuli plain.
This was the leaping place – from which the ‘uhane lept and settled in the plains
of Honouliuli.”
The Department of
Hawaiian Homelands residential projects on this same Ewa Plain are named, not
by coincidence, Kaupe’a and Kanehili.
Since the federally funded FTA and HART Rail project were
the actual “trigger” to spend federal funds to extensively document the Leina TCP
district and other important storied places (wahi pana) why is it then being misrepresented for what and
where it truly is?
Kepa Maly (KPA) raised the issue of what happens to the
spirit of the dead in his interview with Kupuna Arline Eaton. He asked Ms. Eaton if she was aware of the
“…connection between Leilono at Aliamanu and Kapukaki, all the way to
Honouliuli, the leaping place of the spirits.” Ms. Eaton acknowledged the
leaping off place as a place
of spirits associated with Kaupe‘a and Kanehili (Interview
with Arline Eaton, August 23, 2011, Maly and Maly 2011 b:740).
In the determination of National Register eligibility in
the 2012 FTA, HART, SHPO letters and extensive reports they reference Kaupe’a and Kanehili,
well documented places on the Ewa Plain (Milu is a spirit purgatory.) This was
how the HART TCP consultant SRIF was able to show in the spirit pathway map
that it was outside of the HART Rail Area of Potential Effect (APE) by using a USGS
map as reference.
The HART Leina as defined in their own
map is NOT intangible but
determined by the annual solar cycle. Only a small green section was shown in
order to expedite rail construction. The red arrows show the true width of the January to July Leina
pathway.
How can
FTA and HART have it both ways? The time, money and research to discuss and thoroughly document the Leina
and then misrepresent it? Why wasn’t the true Leina pathway simply recognized?
Did FTA and HART really believe rail construction could not commence if the
true Leina a ka ‘uhane district was known? This is the most curious part of the fraudulent FTA HART “management
decision.”
Above, a straight due west leap towards
the sunset from Leiolono
crosses the rail APE
crosses the rail APE
HART stated in the July 16 TCP meeting that the spirit
pathway is “intangible” with no property references. However, Kanehili Cultural
Hui pointed out that the
pathway is determined by the sunset where native souls guided by their amakua use
it as a portal back to the Kaviki homeland and is clearly, and scientifically,
marked by the position of the Western sunset. (As shown below sunset
positions had major cultural importance.)
The
Kaupe’a, Kanehili Puuloa (Ewa Plain - Pearl Harbor) cultural relationship
The leeward (generally southwestern) side of an island is
considered the “front” for navigational purposes. The western sunset is the portal for the spirit to return
home.
And in fact, Hawaiian cultural descendant Michael Kumukauoha
Lee has pointed out that the January 8, Western sunset reference used in the Kanehili
Hui PowerPoint is where his royal relative was secretly buried, later
discovered ( head at west,
feet at east ) and then subsequently
reinterned nearby at a secret location on Ewa Hoakalei Foundation land. (Identified
as the remains of Kaomileika’ahumanu, the true birth Mother of Kauikeaouli,
Kamehameha the III.)
Michael Lee has previously stated that other well known
aliʻi have been also buried at Oneʻula, and include, but are not limited to,
Kaʻeokūlani, Kalanikūpule, Kualiʻi, Peleʻioholani, Kealiʻiahonui, and those
associated with the Oʻahu line of ruling chiefs as well as Maui and Kauaʻi.
The
importance of WEST and the solar cycle to the culture of the Ewa Plain
Michael Lee also states that the Kupuna caves of shark
goddess Ka'ahupahau in Ewa, where there is a large bronze statue in her honor
and memory, are also all
in this same exact Westerly alignment of the setting sun- which is in the Leina
spirit portal direction.
The annual and well attended Oahu solstice event is held
every year at the Waikiki Aquarium on May 1 when the sun sets at an exact point at Puu-o-Kapolei, a key
Ewa Plain (Kaupe’a, Kanehili, chants of Hi’iaka, etc.) reference point. “The Hawaiian calendar is not based on dates
but celestial events. The leaving of the Ho’oilo season and the coming of the
Makali'i has been identified as our summer solstice although the date is not
consistent with our western solstice,” – Shad Kane
... The people of
O`ahu reckoned from the time when the sun set over Pu`u o Kapolei until it set
in the hollow of Mahimaomao and called this period Kau, and when it moved south
again from Pu`u o Kapolei and it grew cold and the time when young sprouts
started, the season was called from their germination (oilo) the season
Ho`oilo. There were therefore two seasons, the season of Makali`i and the
season of Ho`olio." (S.M. Kamakau, Mo`olelo Hawai`i, Vol. 1,
Chpt.2, p. 23.)
Kanehili Cultural Hui’s July 16, 2015 TCP presentation
made it clear where the true and correct Leina pathway is. Thousands of homes
have already been built on the Ewa Plain- and, spirit encounters, “hauntings”
and Night Marchers have been widely reported for many decades during the Ewa
Plantation era and in modern times in Ewa Plain schools, offices and homes. The
reason is because the Kaupe’a lands they live on are the burial sites of the
Leina a ka ‘uhane.
Kanehili
PowerPoint- view the following shared folder:
“It’s possible that every source has not been
found and identified. However, I can say the locations are accurate based on
knowledge that is far greater – from kūpuna, born and raised and buried in the
land – who described the settings of Pu‘u o Kapolei, Kaupe‘a, Kānehili and
Kualakai,” – Kepa Maly HART TCP project researcher.
In
Conclusion
There is no denying that FTA recognized the Leina a ka
‘uhane “Leina District” as a National Historic Preservation Act Traditional
Cultural Property under stipulation II of the Section 106 Programmatic
Agreement for the Project, in an April 2012 letter from FTA director Leslie
Rogers to HART executive director Dan Grabauskas.
HART Programmatic Agreement meetings showed slides
stating that if TCP’s are identified as NRHP eligible that HART will prepare NRHP nomination forms.
The Leina pathway
is a tangible boundary defined by the solar cycle and Kaupe’a and Kanehili are
tangible and well documented real places associated with the Leina
where iwi was buried and native souls resided awaiting assistance from their
amakua to complete their journey west to their homeland. Those that didn’t
remained in Kaupe’a.
National
Registering the Leina a ka ‘uhane and officially recognizing its importance as
a Traditional Cultural Property native Hawaiian religious concept should be the
HART rail educational mitigation for the residents of the Ewa Plain. Concrete
columns, cartoon coloring books, etc. are not acceptable. HART should keep a
promise for Ewa people.
Below is further well referenced documentation on the
Leina and Kaupe’a. The Navy Tuggles research showed Kaupe’a as NRHP eligible
under categories A, B and D.
This is about correcting the intentional fraudulent misrepresentation
of the Leina district in order to rush rail construction. FTA and HART should show some honesty
and justice and correct this by placing the Leina a ka uhane on the National
Register as promised.
Aloha,
John
Bond, President
Kanehili
Cultural Hui
The Leina
a ka ‘uhane and association with physical properties in West Oahu
“Maly reflected that, given the
history of the countryside, it would be more unusual not to find iwi than to
find them”. June 23, 2011,
Section 106 Programmatic Agreement (PA) Traditional Cultural Properties (TCP)
Study Meeting
— William Aila, Hui
Malama (before becoming DLNR Chair and now DHHL deputy.)
“People have estimated
that there were 800,000 to a million people living here when Westerners arrived
[in Hawaii in 1778]; some people estimate it was much higher—that’s one era,”
says William Aila, a board member of Hui Malama. “You have many generations
prior to that. A lot of people were born and died all over these Islands. They
don’t just disappear.”
Figures from:
IDENTIFICATION OF NATIVE HAWAIIAN TRADITIONAL CULTURAL PROPERTIES, Tuggles,
Maly, etc., March 2001. (more documents further below)
IDENTIFICATION OF
NATIVE HAWAIIAN TRADITIONAL CULTURAL PROPERTIES
by H.
David Tuggle, Ph.D. M.J. Tomonari-Tuggle, M.A. with the collaboration of Maria
E. Ka‘imipono Orr, Kepâ Maly Kumu Pono Associates, and Kalani Flores Mana
‘o‘i‘o Principal Investigator: Thomas S. Dye, Ph.D.
International
Archaeological Research Institute, Inc.
Hawai‘i March 2001
EXCERPTS:
“The
main trail around O‘ahu passed through this populous area (‘I‘i 1869
[1959:96]). From the Waikîkî side, entering into ‘Ewa along the trail entailed
crossing the leaping place of souls called Leilono, which was guarded by demons
(see Kapûkakî, below). From the west, entering into ‘Ewa meant passing through the plain of
Kaupe‘a, a place of wandering souls.”
Burials from the pre-contact and post-contact eras are
known to occur over the entire ‘Ewa Plain, in sinkholes, platforms, and dune
deposits (Tuggle and Tomonari-Tuggle 1997b). There is also a 19th century reference
to chiefly burial that suggests there were places of interment for ali‘i at
Pu‘uloa (Alexander 1906:27).
“The
potential TCPs on Navy retained lands at former NAS Barbers Point include the
plain of Kaupe‘a and the locale of Kualaka‘i. These places meet general NRHP
criteria (see Section I.3.1). Connections can also be made among Kualaka‘i, the plain of Kaupe‘a, and
Pu‘uokapolei, and their association with Kahiki” (see
Johnson 1988; Tuggle and Tomonari-Tuggle 1997b:27-29).
II.2.3.1.
THE PLAIN OF KAUPE‘A
The plain of
Kaupe‘a was located on what is today called the ‘Ewa Plain. It
probably includes the housing areas and the golf course in the Navy retained
lands. Kaupe‘a (see Fig. 3 for location) has potential cultural significance
under the following NRHP criteria:
(a) it is associated with traditional events and patterns
of events, as expressed in its identification as the ao kuewa (place of
homeless souls) for the island of O‘ahu; it is also identified as a place for
the collection of plants used for a special lei.
(b) it is associated with the lives of persons
significant in the past, as found in the traditions of Hi‘iaka.
It is associated with the lives of persons significant in
the past, as found in the traditions of Hi‘iaka, has symbolic associations with
Kahiki, ancestry, and the generations of ‘Ewa.
II.2.1.1.
THE PLAIN OF KAUPE‘A AND KÂNEHILI
A
place of many pits with human bones describes most of the great expanse of the
‘Ewa Plain, where
limestone sinkholes were used for human interment over many centuries (including
the post-contact period, see below). In many cases, human remains were placed on the floors of the sinkholes (not buried) with the bones
thus visible when one looked into the pit, surely a setting to inspire
association with spirits of the dead.
Each
island had at least one place for wandering souls. For O‘ahu, this place was
the plain of Kaupe‘a. Kamakau (1870 [1964:47], italics
original) writes that Kaupe‘a was known
as: …ao kuewa, the realm of homeless souls,…also called the ao ‘auwana, the
realm of wandering souls. When a man who had no rightful place in the ‘aumakua
realm died, his soul would wander about…
(The association of Leiolono with Kaupe‘a:)
According to Kamakau
(1870 [1964:47-49]), the ao kuewa was one of the three places of the dead, the
others being the realm of the ancestral spirits (ao ‘aumakua) and the realm of
Milu, the place of endless night (pô pau ‘ole o Milu). Across the Pu‘uloa lagoon from Kaupe‘a was a place
known as Leilono, which is located on the ridge dividing ‘Ewa and Kona
districts (discussed below under Kapûkakî). It was at Leilono where the spirits
of the dead leapt from the branches of a supernatural breadfruit tree,
separating to go to one of the three realms. Those who had no help from
‘aumakua would end up friendless (po‘e ‘uhane hauka‘e), wandering the plain of Kaupe‘a catching moths and
spiders.
Although the boundaries of the plain of Kaupe‘a are not
clearly defined, it certainly occupied a substantial portion of the ‘Ewa Plain,
including the area next to Pearl Harbor lagoon and the area of former NAS
Barbers Point. Kamakau (1870 [1964:47-49]) describes the plain as “beside
Pu‘uloa,” and as a place of wiliwili trees, which is a common tree on the
dryland limestone of ‘Ewa. In the tradition of Pele and Hi‘iaka (Emerson
1915:167; Keonaona and S.L. Desha Sr. et al. 1927, in Maly Appendix B), the
plain is described as extending from “the wiliwili trees…to Kanehili” (Ke Au
Hou 1911, in Sterling and Summers 1978:44), and as back of Keahi and Pu‘uloa
(Pukui 1943:59).
“At
the same time, it is clear from Manu’s description quoted above, as well as
many other references, that the plain of Kaupe‘a (and associated places of the
‘Ewa Plain) was much more than just a place of ghosts.”
It is possible
that Kaupe‘a refers to the ‘Ewa Plain as a whole. This is suggested in
a comparison of the repetition of place names and related features (primarily
vegetation and springs) in the Pele and Hi‘iaka traditions, as well as in the
chant for Kûali‘i (Kapa‘ahulani, in Fornander 1916:390; 1919:458). The
following section from the tradition of Makanikeoe (Manu 1895, May 10, in Maly
Appendix B) provides a substantial associative context for Kaupe‘a and the ‘Ewa
Plain being synonymous:
Makanikeoe then
departed from this place, turning to the plain of Puuloa. He passed many pits
in this place where the bones of men have been left. He
then followed the trail to the breadfruit tree, Leiwalu, at Honouliuli. This is
the breadfruit tree of the expert sailor, Kahai, so told in his story:
There
are also many pits in which were planted sugarcane and bananas, and planting
mounds. He also saw manu oo (honey creepers) sipping the nectar of noni
blossoms. There were also two ducks that had gone into a pit, and with a great
strength, they were trying to push a stone over, to hide the pit. This
Makanikeoe knew what the ducks were trying to do. They wanted to hide a spring
of water which flowed underground there. It is this spring which in calm times
could be heard, but not found by the people who passed through this area.
Parker and King (1990:9; emphasis added) elaborate on this by noting: Thus a property may be defined as a ‘site’ as long as it was the location of a significant event or activity, regardless of whether the event or activity left any evidence of its occurrence. A culturally significant natural landscape may be classified as a site, as may the specific location where significant traditional events, activities, or cultural observances have taken place…A concentration, linkage, or continuity of such sites or objects, or of structures comprising a culturally significant entity, may be classified as a district.
I.3.4.2.1. Place as
Tangible Property
To qualify for the NRHP, a property
must be a “tangible property—that is, a district, site, building, structure, or
object” (Parker and King 1990:9). However, a tangible property does not have to
be a constructed one, under the NR definition of “site” (from NR Bulletin 16,
quoted in Parker and King 1990:9): …the location of a significant event, a prehistoric or historic
occupation or activity, or a building or structure, whether standing, ruined,
or vanished, where the location itself possesses historic, cultural, or
archaeological value regardless of the value of any existing structure.
Parker
and King (1990:9; emphasis added) elaborate on this by noting: Thus a property
may be defined as a ‘site’ as long as it was the location of a significant
event or activity,
regardless
of whether the event or activity left any evidence of its occurrence. A
culturally significant natural landscape may be classified as a site, as may
the specific location where significant traditional events, activities, or
cultural observances have taken place…A concentration, linkage, or continuity of such sites or
objects, or of structures comprising a culturally significant entity, may be
classified as a district.
Rail Lawsuit Requires
Identification Of All Traditional Cultural Properties
HART Consultant SRIF will make recommendations to the City
regarding whether or not there are TCPs
Page iv DOEFOE for
Previously Unidentified Traditional Cultural Properties-Sec 1-3
“SRIF
will make recommendations to the City regarding whether or not there are TCPs
in or near the APE that are National Register-eligible that may be affected by
the Project. SRIF’s role is to see the right people are
consulted, and the regulations followed so that the City, and the Federal
Transit Administration can make management decisions. He noted that
since he and Martha Graham of SRIF are not Hawaiians, KPA will do the actual
TCP research for the Project.” May 25,
2012
