Kanehili Cultural Hui
P.O. Box 75578 Kapolei, Hi. 96707
August 10, 2023
Pete Buttigieg, U.S. Secretary of Transportation
Federal Transit Administration
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20590
Lori M.K. Kahikina, Executive Director and CEO
HART Rail
1099 Alakea Street, 17th Floor
Honolulu, Hawaii 96813
Reid Nelson, Executive Director
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
401 F Street NW, Suite 308
Washington, DC 20001
Colin Kippen, Ka Pouhana Kūikawā
Office of Hawaiian Affairs
560 N. Nimitz Hwy #200
Honolulu, HI 96817
Elizabeth Merritt, Attorney
National Trust for Historic Preservation
1785 Massachusetts Ave NW
Washington, DC 20036
Kiersten Faulkner, Executive Director
Historic Hawai‘i Foundation
680 Iwilei Road, Suite #690,
Honolulu, HI 96817
Carlos Del Toro, Secretary of the Navy
Office of the Secretary of the Navy
1000 Navy Pentagon, Room 4D652
Washington, DC 20350
Ross Stephenson
Ewa Plain Preservation
Kanehili Cultural Hui
Representing the Ewa Honouliuli cultural interests of
Michael Kumukauoha Lee
Returned to Kahiki August 31, 2019
The US Navy tried to SMEAR and DISCREDIT the author of the Leina a ka uhane report. HART Rail absolutely LIED about the construction Area of Potential Effect (APE) to get the FTA ROD – Record of Decision –and rush construction, which led to lawsuits and a Hawaii Supreme Court Decision. Also, federal judge Tashima ruled the Section 4f TCP ID in favor of rail lawsuit plaintiffs.
ALSO SEE IMPORTANT SUPPORTING ADDENDUM DOCUMENTS – HART Rail has since destroyed all links to these public documents.
(The early HART rail meetings with consulting parties, the lies told, failure to honor the Programmatic Agreement; all they don’t want the public today to know about)
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 (to start rail construction as soon as possible.) 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, 20 (However that doesn’t mean HART won’t TRASH IT once they get the FTA ROD to start construction in the West Oahu Farrington Highway segment.)
Here are the HART Rail slides that presented the Leina a ka uhane to public meetings in 2011-12
And official letters about the Leina from DLNR-SHPD, FTA and HART Rail
FTA and HART Failed To Recognize Federal Judge Ruling On Rail Route TCP's
http://honouliuli.blogspot.com/2015/06/Judge-Tashima-HART-Rail-Lawsuit.html
FTA and HART Rail Misrepresent The True Ewa Honouliuli Native Hawaiian Spirit Pathway
http://honouliuli.blogspot.com/2015/06/fta-and-hart-rail-misrepresent-TCP.html
Honouliuli Ewa TCP's Are Important Wahi Pana (Sacred Places) On Multi-Dimensional Levels
http://honouliuli.blogspot.com/2015/06/honouliuli-ewa-tcps-are-important.html
West Oahu Leina A Ka Uhane Spirit Pathway Recognized By Federal Transit Administration
http://honouliuli.blogspot.com/2015/07/Leina-a-ka-uhane.html
The Leina nomination was never filed because Navy and big money developers opposed it – even in the very SMALL AREA that the HART Rail consultant defined! HART rail NEVER addressed it even in the later segments as they originally promised in writing. It was one lie after another.
Ewa Honouliuli Leina a ka uhane – The Spirit Leaping Place
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.”
While many generally believe that Kaena Point is Oahu’s ONLY Leina a ka uhane –spirit leaping place, the fact is that the native Hawaiian culture that came to the Ewa Plain and populated Ewa Honouliuli from Polynesia believed that Leilono (aka leiolono) atop Aliamanu was their recognized Ewa Honouliuli spirit leaping place. As well, other high places on Oahu could also be spirit leaping places, depending on the local cultural beliefs in a given ahupua’a district or moku. On other Hawaiian Islands there were also other spirit leaping places.
In Ewa the cultural spirit world was based upon the largely Tahiti- Raiatea (today French Polynesia) cultural history of souls or spirits of the deceased wanting to return to their ancient Polynesian homeland of Kahiki. The Ewa leaping spirit was not heading directly south to Raiatea, but instead into a generally westerly sunset direction which was the spirit portal to the next world, and not an actual physical place. However more recent cultural history research about Polynesian spiritual beliefs indicate that Taputapuatea on Raiatea was where Hawaiian spirits from the Ewa Plain would journey to.
Many ancient cultures including American Indians and ancient Egyptians believed that deceased spirits went to the west, towards the setting sun. Many ancient cultures also believed they could also still communicate with their ancestors for help and advice. For Ewa Plain Hawaiian’s this communication was usually achieved through a family aumakua such as a Pueo owl or Mano (shark.) The Ewa Plain Hawaiian culture was especially fond of Pueo and Mano aumakua, however it could be other types of creatures.
The plains of Ewa Honouliuli and the “kula o Kaupe‘a” (plain of Kaupe‘a), was officially identified in 2012 by a federal FTA-HART Rail Traditional Cultural Place (TCP) contract awarded to local ethnographer Kepa Maly, Kumu Pono LLC. He and his wife’s extensive research of Ewa Honouliuli’s cultural landscape history revealed that the Ewa native Hawaiians believed their Leina a ka uhane – The Spirit Leaping Place was Leilono atop Aliamanu crater. And it is important to note that when in 1825 the HMS Blonde came to Ewa Honouliuli the royal navy surveyor Charles Malden specifically indicated on his major Ewa Plains map the location of Leiolono (Leilono.)
“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 Rail TCP project researcher.
Leina a ka uhane – spirit leaping place DENIED
HCDA refuses to incorporate this major native Hawaiian National Register eligible TCP into their $500,000 Kalaeloa Master Plan because Hunt Corp of Texas plans to bulldoze ALL of the Hawaiian sites
Corrupt Navy NavFac Insiders have been working on their insider land development schemes for two decades. All based on the corrupt Ford Island land deal.
The background on the NavFac Pac real estate transaction is that they are processing excess Navy land parcels at former NAS Barbers Point and MCAS Ewa, in what is today called Kalaeloa. These lands will be transferred to Hunt Corporation using an old and out of date 2002 Ford Island agreement which did not fully identify historic Navy Kalaeloa (and other) Ewa properties. Clearly the Leina a ka uhane was never identified in 2002.
Other recently identified historic and culturally important Navy properties in the Ewa Plain area need full consideration. The Navy is violating the intent of Federal law by not doing so. Kanehili Cultural Hui is very concerned that the outdated 2002 agreement is being used to secretly omit sacred cultural sites and deliberately preclude the local community from effectively participating in the NHPA Section 106 process and commenting on preservation concerns and covenants before the lands are transferred. This is illegal under Federal laws and Orders and not acceptable to the Ewa community.
ABOVE HART MAP SHOWS LEINA PATHWAY GOES DIRECTLY OVER NAVY LANDS
The (FTA-HART Section 106) management summary considers the Leina a ka ‘uhane as a single district of several wahi pana that crosses from Moanalua and Halawa ahupua‘a to Honouliuli ahupua‘a (Figures 2 and 3). Spirits would leap from the five wahi pana in Moanalua and Halawa. If not escorted by an aumakua, spirits would land and wander Kanehili and Kaupe‘a on the ‘ewa side.
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
ABOVE HART MAP SHOWS LEINA PATHWAY GOES DIRECTLY OVER NAVY LANDS
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 (NRHP) 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 (historic) district. (The feds recognize TCP’s as historic districts.)
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.
NavFac Engineering Command Pearl Harbor, Hawai‘i March 2001
EXCERPTS:
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 plain of Kaupe‘a (which on the map would be approximately above Kualaka’i and below Puu o Kapolei) was the wandering place of those souls making an unsuccessful Leilono leap. Having no rightful other place to go; the souls wandered “in the wiliwili grove” (Sterling and Summers 1978:36).
In fact today there still are wiliwili trees within a general corridor along today’s Coral Sea Road.
According to the 19th century Hawaiian historian Samuel Kamakau (1961:47, 49), the spirits who wandered “on the plain of Kaupe‘a beside Pu’uloa...could go to catch pulelehua (moths or butterflies) and nanana (spiders)” in the hope of finding a helpful ‘aumakua (family deity) who could save them. Below the larger plain of Kaupe‘a was Kanehili, an ili (sub district) which generally comprised the identified ancient Hawaiian trail destinations of Kualaka’i and Oneula which in the western era was the former NAS Barbers Point and MCAS Ewa. It is from the chants of Hi’iaka that the area called Kanehili and the spring of Hoakalei are identified.
Hawaiian language master, Mary Pukui, also shared her personal experience with the wandering ghosts on the plain of Kaupe‘a around 1910:
A wide plain lies back of Keahi (Point) and Pu‘uloa where the homeless, friendless ghosts were said to wander about. These were the ghosts of people who were not found by their family ‘aumakua or gods and taken home with them, or had not found the leaping places where they could leap into the nether world. Here [on the plain of Ewa Honouliuli] they wandered, living on the moths and spiders they caught. They were often very hungry because it was not easy to find moths or to catch them when found.
Perhaps I would never have been told of the plain of homeless ghosts if my cousin’s dog had not fainted there one day. My cousin, my aunt and I were walking to Kalae-loa, (Barber’s Point,) from Pu‘uloa accompanied by Teto, the dog. She was a native dog, not the so-called poi dog of today, with upright ears and body and size of a fox terrier. For no accountable reason, Teto fell into a faint and lay still.
My aunt exclaimed and sent me to fetch sea water at once which she sprinkled over the dog saying, “Mai hana ino wale ‘oukou i ka holoholona a ke kaikamahine. Uoki ko ‘oukou makemake ‘ilio.” “Do not
harm the girl’s dog. Stop your desire to have it.” Then with a prayer to her ‘aumakua for help she rubbed the dog. It revived quickly and, after being carried a short way, was as frisky and lively as ever.
Then it was that my aunt told me of the homeless ghosts and declared that some of them must have wanted Teto that day because she was a real native dog, the kind that were roasted and eaten long before foreigners ever came to our shores (Pukui 1943:60-61).
The ancient Hawaiian people of Ewa Honouliuli were highly spiritual in their beliefs and everything had special meanings and purposes. This included the very ceremonial trail network connecting the Ewa shore to the Waianae volcano foothills and related important geographic places like Honouliuli.
The fact that the vertical slab flags of coral (an essential element of their spiritual world) made the trails used for Makahiki Lono procession ceremonies that much more sacred and meaningful; symbolically connecting the mountain to shoreline and into the Pacific ocean, which was their sea trail back to Taputapuatea on Raiatea. The Makahiki season starts when the star cluster Makali'i (Pleiades) rises over the horizon at sunset. This was their spiritual belief and why Leilono was also part of this connection.
MOANALUA AHUPUA‘A – Hi’iaka, Aliamanu, Leilono the Leina a ka uhane leaping place
Hi‘iaka’s pet bird became the name to Āliamanu
One of the most sacred wahi pana in Moanalua, Leilono, located along the upper rim of the
Āliamanu crater, was an entrance to Pō, or the “otherworld.” Samuel Kamakau published several
versions of this mo‘olelo. The following is a translation of Kamakua’s writings from the original
Hawaiian newspaper, Kuokoa (August 11, 1899):
It was a place said to be the opening, on the island of Oahu, for mankind to enter eternal night.
This place is on the northern side of the famous hill of Kapukaki (now Red Hill), at the boundary of Kona and Ewa, right in line with the burial hill of Aliamanu, on the upper side of the old road. It is said that this place [Leilono] is round, about two feet or more in circumference. This is the hole through which the ghosts of people slipped through to go down and this was the strata of Papa-ia-Laka. Through this opening appeared the supernatural branches of the breadfruit of Leiwalo. If a ghost who lacked an aumakua to save him climbed on a branch of the western side of the breadfruit tree, the branch withered at once and broke off, thus plunging the ghost down to the pit of darkness.
The boundaries of this place, so the ancients said, were these: Papa-kolea which was guarded by a plover; Koleana whose guard was a big caterpillar and Napeha, the western boundary which was guarded by a lizard. (Sterling and Summers 1978:9)
Hawaiians believed Āliapa‘akai was “bottomless” and connected with the ocean; Pele tried to dig a dry cave here and struck salt water (Rice 1923); Pele and Hi‘iaka dug into the ground to make a home at Āliapa‘akai (Fornander 1916-1920); a pet bird of Hi'iaka gave the name to Āliamanu.
https://www.ksbe.edu/assets/site/special_section/regions/ewa/Halau_o_Puuloa_Moanalua.pdf
The concept of Kahiki, the ancestral homeland for Kānaka Maoli (Hawaiians.) Kahiki is the symbol of ancestral connection to ancient Polynesia and the Pacific Ocean.
Ke-ala-i-kahiki, the Pathway To Kahiki... “Kahiki Homeland” is the general reference to the lands that Hawaiian ancestors migrated from and sailed back to on return visits. Hawaiʻi shares a strong cultural affinity with the Society Islands, the Tuamotu Archipelago, and the Marquesas Islands.
Raʻiātea, whose ancient name is Havaiʻi, is the location of Taputapuātea Marae, a highly sacred religious site associated with voyaging, governance, and Eastern Polynesian chiefly lineages. The heʻe/feʻe (octopus) is a metaphor for Raʻiātea as the center of a cultural alliance consisting of island groups that are under the influence of its radiating tentacles — the northernmost extremity being Hawaiʻi.
KUMULIPO
In the Kumulipo, the Hawaiian creation chant, the coral polyp or ko'a was one of the first living organisms created along with Kumulipo and Pō'ele, the first man and woman, followed by the creation of urchins, sea cucumbers, sea stars, and more ocean creatures.
KEALAIKAHIKI
The Hawaiian identity is from a Polynesian heritage shaped by the oceanic universe, Moananuiākea. Understanding Hawaiʻi’s connections to the greater Pacific world is fundamental for Hawaiians. The pathway to the motherland, place of origin, is Kahiki.
https://kaiwakiloumoku.ksbe.edu/kealaikahiki
How the Fortunate Souls of Ancient Honouliuli Ewa Hawaiians
Went West To Kahiki Heaven
Leina a ka uhane – Spirit Leaping Place Kaupe’a-Kanehili
After acknowledging its major cultural importance as a National Register TCP –Historic District, why has FTA, HART, SHPD-DLNR, HCDA, NAVY, etc, done everything possible to suppress this TCP recognition?
The very likely answer is that these government agencies want to intentionally ignore important Ewa Honouliuli traditional spiritual beliefs and deep connections to their lands so that everything can be bulldozed and made into paved highways, concrete structures that make big profits for powerful land developers. Land developers who have no ethics, souls and only worship $$$.
The fact is that federal funds were expended to pay for this TCP identification. The fact is that the HART Rail programmatic Agreement (PA) REQUIRED THIS for rail construction to begin. The fact is that the rail PA even states that even if the TCP affects “the project” or not, that there would be a nomination made as a matter of official record. The Leina a ka uhane is a prime example of how HART Rail LIES and DECEIVES the public and has never kept its promises.
The HART Rail only pays attention to downtown areas where the largest “important downtown sites are,” and not to the Ewa Honouliuli cultural lands that are NOT important to people downtown.
Few people have actually been to and seen the Ewa karst sinkholes and cave features which are amazing cultural sites, and which ARE a part of the officially recognized Honouliuli Ewa cultural landscape under the federal TCP contract produced by Kepa Maly - Kumu Pono LLC. Hawaii SHPD administrator Alan Downer stated on the record that he would support the nomination of the Leina a ka uhane to the Hawaii State and NPS National Register to recognize the beliefs of Kanehili cultural practitioner Michael Kumukauoha Lee. However, since Mike Lee’s death he has since apparently reneged under political pressure from the HCDA developers. Downer won’t return phone calls or emails about this issue.
Specifically identifying the Leina a ka uhane area was critical to getting the FTA ROD – Record of Decision to start HART Rail construction!
Native Hawaiian Traditional Cultural Place Deniers and Unindicted Co-Conspirators
The Leina a ka uhane was considered extremely important and even crucial to officially identify its APE (Area of Potential Effect) so that HART could get the FTA ROD – Record of Decision and then immediately start rail construction at the KROC center along Kualaka’i Pkwy-North South Road
This was the West Oahu Farrington Highway (WOFH) first segment of the HART project under (rushed and flawed) construction by Kiewit. And in fact the original Cayetano, Slater, etc., rail lawsuit brought before federal judge Wallace Tashima WAS UPHELD on the Section 4f count that not all Hawaiian TCP’s had been identified. And in fact, NOTHING was ever done about winning this count because nobody downtown actually gave a damn about Ewa native Hawaiian TCP’s!
It is a fact and a requirement in the HART rail Programmatic Agreement that identified TCPs would ALL have to be identified and also have written nominations to the NPS National Historic Register, EVEN IF they didn’t directly affect the Area of Potential Effect (APE) of rail construction starting at the KROC center (which HART lied about and with SRI providing their “FIX” that it wasn’t in the WOFH APE!)
The FTA TCP primary contractor from California, SRI, that subcontracted Kumu Pono LLC for their detailed ethnographic survey stated in writing to the then VERY ANXIOUS rail bureaucrats and politicians they could “fix” the APE problem by creating a Leina a ka uhane map which showed how it specifically missed the KROC rail construction segment area so that HART Rail construction could begin.
So they only showed the Leina a ka uhane in Kalaeloa – NASBP-MCAS Ewa. The TRUTH IS that the APE was actually MUCH LARGER and actually also covered the HART Rail construction segment on the Ewa Plain. Showing only how it “just missed” the KROC station Area of Potential Effect illustrates how much outright LIES and DECEPTION has gone into the HART Rail project!
Because the Ewa Plain and Kanehili lands, unlike downtown Honolulu locations that preservationists advocates, there is a relatively small, informed number of advocates for native Hawaiian cultural history like Kanehili Cultural Hui that pushback against the outright lies, deceptions and trickery of FTA, HART and SHPD-DLNR, HCDA that is controlled by big money developers. This is also why many older West Oahu residents always see the Ewa area getting the big developer LIES and SCREWED every time.
And this is WHY the HART Rail started their construction on the Ewa Plain- because it was largely empty farmland and the insider politicians KNEW there would be the LEAST AMOUNT of Community Push-Back.
And of course the millions spent on HART PROPAGANDA to SELL RAIL
“Benefits, Jobs, Low Cost Homes, etc.”
“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
Rail Derailed? Hawaii Supreme Court Rules Against Honolulu
https://www.civilbeat.org/2012/08/16937-rail-derailed-hawaii-supreme-court-rules-against-honolulu/
The Hawaii Supreme Court unanimously sided with Paulette Kaleikini, who said the city should have completed its archaeological surveys in downtown Honolulu before starting construction on the project.
https://kanehili.blogspot.com/2015/07/federal-judge-wallace-tashima-ruled.html
https://kanehili.blogspot.com/2015/07/may-2013-kanehili-hui-comments.html
http://honouliuli.blogspot.com/2014/12/the-honouliuli-ewa-battle-of-poo-hilo.html
HART Rail actually produced a TON of maps, diagrams and cultural research about the Leina a ka uhane! It was in fact their BIG Hawaiian TCP of the HART Rail project. Yet as soon as they could they TRASHED AND FORGOT ALL OF IT!
Federal Judge Wallace Tashima rules for rail plaintiffs in this Section 4f count. HART Rail was in a huge rush to get their FTA ROD – Record of Decision and start construction. Once they got that all TCP identifications and promises about the Leina a ka uhane were TRASHED. HART LIED. The Big Developers got what they wanted.
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).
After officially recognizing it to speed up HART rail construction on the Ewa Plain, HART, FTA, SHPD-DLNR, HCDA, Navy, Hawaii’s Congressional politicians, State politicians, City politicians are doing everything they can to SUPPRESS IT.
HART Consultant SRIF will make recommendations to the City regarding whether or not there are TCPs (SRI International, headquartered in Menlo Park, California, with a rich history of supporting government and industry.) Basically they told HART they will FIX the APE issue so that FTA can issue the ROD (Record of Decision) to immediately start construction.
“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 a place of stark beauty and great contrasts, captured in versions of the Pele and Hi‘iaka story” (Emerson 1915:166ff; Keonaona and Desha Sr. et al. 1927, in Maly Appendix B) and in the chant for Kûali‘I (Kapa‘ahulani, in Fornander 1916:390; 1919:458). Part of the beauty of Kaupe‘a is in the plants used to make a famous lei, as described in a song of Hi‘iaka “addressed to Lohiau and Wahine-oma‘o” (Emerson 1915:167.
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.
HART Rail also lied about Po’ohilo
Denying Native Hawaiian Cultural History and Justice: The HART Rail Po’ohilo Deceit
http://honouliuli.blogspot.com/2014/12/the-honouliuli-ewa-battle-of-poo-hilo.html
At the scene of the crime – Start rail construction ASAP, even if it requires LYING
There are several places on the ‘Ewa coastal plain associated with ao kuewa, the realm of the
homeless souls. Samuel Kamakau (1991b:47-49) explains Hawaiian beliefs in the afterlife:
There were three realms (ao) for the spirits of the dead. . . . There was, first, the realm of the homeless souls, the ao kuewa; second, the realm of the ancestral spirits, the ao ‘aumakua; and third, the realm of Milu, ke ao o Milu . . . [Kamakau 1991b:47-49] wandering souls. When a man who had no rightful place in the ‘aumakua realm (kanaka kuleana‘ole) died, his soul would wander about and stray amongst the underbrush in the wiliwili groves of Kaupe‘a and Kanehili.
If his soul came to Leilono (in Hālawa, ‘Ewa near Red Hill), there he would find the breadfruit tree of Leiwalo, ka‘ulu o Leiwalo. If it was not found by an ‘aumakua soul who knew it (i ma‘a mau iaia), or one who would help it, the soul would leap upon the decayed branch of the breadfruit tree and fall down into endless night, the pō pau ‘ole o Milu. Or, a soul that had no rightful place in the ‘aumakua realm, or who had no relative or friend (makamaka) there “who would watch out for it and welcome it, would slip over the flat lands (of the Ewa Plains) like a wind, until it came to a leaping place of souls, a leina a ka ‘uhane. . . . “ (Kamakau 1991b:47).
On the plain of Kaupe‘a beside Pu‘uloa [Pearl Harbor], wandering souls could go to catch moths (pulelehua) and spiders (nanana). However, wandering souls could not go far in the places mentioned earlier before they would be found catching spiders by ‘aumakua souls, and be helped to escape. [Kamakau 1991b:49]
The breadfruit tree Leilono was said to have been located on the ‘Ewa-Kona border, above Āliamanu
Pukui (1983:180) offers this Hawaiian saying, which places the wandering souls in a wiliwili grove at Kaupe‘a. Ka wiliwili of Kaupe‘a. The wiliwili grove of Kaupe‘a. In ‘Ewa, O‘ahu. Said to be where homeless ghosts wander among the trees. Beckwith (1940:154) has stressed that “the worst fate that could befall a soul was to be abandoned by its ‘aumakua and left to stray, a wandering spirit (kuewa) in some barren and desolate place.”
TCPs are sites associated with “cultural practices or beliefs of a living community that (a) are rooted in that community's history, and (b) are important in maintaining the continuing cultural identity of the community (Parker and King 1999:1).
The Leina a ka uhane is a Federally recognized cultural landscape historic district and Traditional Cultural Place. The Leina is identified as on the Plain of Kaupe’a and includes Kanehili. Navy BRAC studies extensively document the Plain of Kaupe’a and Kanehili as including NAS Barbers Point and MCAS Ewa. It is not a mythical or legendary place- it physically exists. The boundaries are determined by sunsets from the leaping off place at Leilono, Aliamanu Crater. Kanehili Cultural Hui has also documented its physical existence on these Navy lands.
The Leina a ka ‘uhane district was identified and formally recognized as National Register Eligible under NR categories A and B by the Federal FTA Rail project using Federal Funds contracting experts in the field of native Hawaiian TCP’s.
The Navy BRAC report IDENTIFICATION OF NATIVE HAWAIIAN TRADITIONAL CULTURAL PROPERTIES, Tuggles, Maly, etc., March 2001 (more documents further below) show the Plain of Kaupe’a as National Register Eligible under categories A, B and D. NAS Barbers Point and MCAS Ewa are Federal lands in Kaupe’a and Kanehili.
State of Hawaii Preservation Division (SHPD) approved the Leina District recognition as part of FTA, HART Section 106 project reviews of identified cultural properties in 2012.
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 as the location of the Leina District.
Kanehili Cultural Hui has been a recognized Section 106 Consulting Party in the Navy-Hunt KREP PV farm project (2012) and as a current Consulting Party in the FTA HART Rail Programmatic Agreement having attended most meetings for many years.
The City of Honolulu and HART have repeatedly stated that rail plans and stations will go through this same Kalaeloa area identified as the Leina a ka ‘uhane. The lease-purchase of NASBP MCAS Ewa under Navy NavFac by Hunt Corporation was because they have shown plans to develop three HART Rail Stations within this same Kalaeloa Leina a ka ‘uhane district.
The Kanehili Leina a ka uhane has many deep cave sites that most people have never seen
The Leina a ka uhane: A place of big caves, deep sinkholes, rare Hawaiian plants, ancient trails and lost souls. It has lots of Hawaiian cultural landscape integrity but HCDA and big developers don’t want anyone to see it or know about it.
In her chant, Hi‘iaka is walking down from the plain of Kaupe‘a, below Pu‘uokapolei, toward the Ewa shoreline and to the plain of Kānehili.
Pu‘uokapolei and the Plains of Kaupe‘a and Kānehili
Pele’s sister Hi‘iaka sang this bitter chant addressed to Lohiau and Wahine-‘ōma‘o, which uses
the association of the Plains of Kaupe‘a as a place for the wandering of lost souls:
Ku‘u aikana i ke awa lau o Pu‘uloa,
Mai ke kula o Pe‘e-kaua, ke noho oe,
E noho kaua e kui, e lei i ka pua o ke kauno‘a,
Some of the largest areas of kauno‘a grow in Kanehili off Coral Sea Rd which is the route of the ancient Hawaiian trails.
I ka pua o ke akuli-kuli, o ka wili-wili;
Some of the last natural groves Wili-wili still grow in Kanehili along the ancient trail route
O ka iho‘na o Kau-pe‘e i Kane-hili,
Ua hili au; akahi no ka hili o ka la pomaika‘i;
E Lohiau ipo, e Wahine-oma‘o,
Hoe ‘a mai ka wa‘a i a‘e aku au.
Ancient Kanehili is a beautiful and SURREAL cultural landscape that should preserved as a National Park
The Plains of Kaupe‘a, Kanehili, Pu‘uokapolei, and the Realm of Homeless Souls
Having a helpful aumakua like the Pueo owl can greatly assist making the wise choices to complete the journey to the next world – Kahiki, the Polynesian homeland. Unfortunately the Ewa Plain Pueo is greatly endangered and is rapidly losing its habitat to big land developers.
LONO AND THE GODS OF MAKAHIKI
Lono-i-ka-makahiki or Lono is the main god associated with the Makahiki. He brings prosperity to the land and is associated with fertility, agriculture, rainfall, music, and peace. Hawaiian tradition tells that Lono travels from Kahiki (ancient homeland) to the Hawaiian Islands when it first rains during the ho‘oilo (wet season) for Makahiki. On the Ewa Plain, rains in the Waianae volcano uplands would soon bring more fresh water cascading through subterranean waterways and springing forth in deep sinkholes and caves.
Why did FTA, HART and SHPD-DLNR designate the Leina a ka uhane as a National Register TCP-Historic District and is now doing everything possible to suppress this nomination?
The FTA and HART were required to identify important native Hawaiian TCP’s in Ewa West Oahu that might be affected by the HART rail route. FTA contracted with Kumu Pono LLC to identify the important native Hawaiian cultural landscapes and the the report produced was
The Oahu BWS held meetings in 2013 about Ewa Watershed Management and recognized native Hawaiian Rights and customary practices. Inside karst cave later destroyed by developer.
Most people today do not consider the significance of early Honolulu historic buildings that are all built from blocks of limestone karst (ancient reef,) that subterranean karst waterways and springs still exist and the sacred 1825 Pohukaina royal burial place was inside a karst cave located today on the grounds of royal palace.
These very significant features in Honolulu actually originated in earlier ancient native Hawaiian customs and beliefs from Ewa Honouliuli. The native Hawaiian community of Honouliuli was the original cultural and political capital of Oahu (not Honolulu)
SB1417 - Hawaiian archaeological, historic, and cultural sites shall be preserved and protected in Kalaeloa. Endangered species of flora and fauna and significant military facilities shall be preserved in Kalaeloa. (However, HCDA Kalaeloa administrator has rejected this!)
HCDA administration says this will not be in their $500,000 Kalaeloa Master Plan because of big developer objections.
Ancient Kanehili – the central area still exists with an exotic karst landscape that hasn’t been seen since ancient times. Preserved because of a land development fluke of WW-II air base construction and high security.
Kanehili is an ancient place name also closely associated with Pu'uokapolei, Kaupe'a and the Kualaka'i shore line and village. Kanehili may literally mean “Kane strikes,” however hili means to braid as a lei. “Kane''refers to a male such as a husband, brother, etc. “Kāne''also has another meaning. Kāne, in Hawaiian mythology, is one of the four major gods. Kāne is considered the highest of the three major Hawaiian deities, along with Kū and Lono, representing the god of procreation and as the ancestor of chiefs and commoners. Kāne is the creator and gives life associated with dawn, sun and sky. No human sacrifice or laborious ritual was needed in the worship of Kāne. In the Kumuhonua legend, he created Earth, bestowed upon it sea creatures, animals, plants, as well as created man and woman.
Above, 1825 Malden maps documented the cultural and historical sites of the Ewa Plain. Navy BRAC archeologists David Tuggle & Myra Tomonari-Tuggle (1997-99) were able to interpret observable archeological features and determine where the 1825 Malden trails ran through the former NAS Barbers Point and MCAS Ewa Field (today called Kalaeloa for development purposes.) The remaining Hawaiian habitation sites were near caves and sinkholes which provided a source of freshwater, agricultural plots and even for iwi burials. For early Hawaiians karst features were extremely important and they knew the differences between sinkhole and cave types (not all sinkholes and caves are the same.)
The Ewa Plain has the most unique cultural karst landscape anywhere in the Hawaiian Islands yet most people still don’t know this or how it is an entire mountain to sea ecological system which is being continuously destroyed by Ewa developers. Kanehili is the last area not yet completely destroyed.
1925 air photos show Ewa Plain Kanehili freshwater karst ponds. Close ups reveal even more.
US Fish & Wildlife Demonstrates How Ewa Plain Karst Can Be Restored
https://ewa-hawaii-karst.blogspot.com/2014/12/us-fish-wildlife-ewa-preserve.html
The rare Ewa karst cave subterranean waterways Holocaridinea rubra- Opae ula are a very endangered important native species in their original Ewa habitats. Popular worldwide as unique pets, in their original karst environment they are in real danger of being killed off by Ewa developers. A major concern is that the shrimp’s sole habitat is shrinking, with over 90% of Hawaii’s anchialine pools having disappeared due to development, and this species of shrimp is disappearing along with them.
Anchialine Pools A Window to a Hidden World HD
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IAhMOO2Ggh0
Disappearing native Hawaiian Opae Ula- Science Nation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKw8cQMQbhM
From Ewa karst caves to space travel, Opae ula can live for a decade in a totally enclosed sphere, they may provide important scientific clues for long distance space travel, alien life forms.
Halocaridina rubra, Hawaiian red shrimp
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halocaridina_rubra
https://www.shrimpscience.com/species/opae-ula-shrimp/
The bird bones were discovered while scientists were restoring tidal pools that were once part of the former Barbers Point Naval Station, now the Pearl Harbor National Wildlife Refuge-Kalaeloa Unit. Scientists have found remains of an extinct hawk—the first reported as a fossil on Oahu—a long-legged owl, Hawaiian sea eagle, petrel, two species of crow, Hawaiian finches, Hawaiian honeyeaters and the moa nalo—a flightless gooselike duck.
Karst limestone in the Ewa Plains has hundreds of springs, caves, sinkholes. Developers destroy them.
Honouliuli Ewa Limu Was the "House Of Limu" Because Of Ewa Plain Karst Spring Water
Haseko systematically wiped out native Hawaiian cultural sites linked to the Oneula trail. Now the HCDA Master Plan for Kalaeloa wants to wipe out remaining ancient Kanehili sites for condominiums.
These amazing Ewa Ancient Kanehili Opae Ula endangered native shrimp survive under extremely harsh and polluted conditions under the Ewa Plain Karst and prove that the entire subsurface which hasn't had ALL its karst waterways and caves destroyed by developers.
Mike Lee: Mountain water and rainfall streams flow directly through the Ewa Plain ancient coral reef and into the shore and reef system, affecting the health and pollution of these traditional native Hawaiian resources which are also the basis for the Ewa Kanehili marine ecosystem.
Subterranean caves and shoreline spring outlets sustain the Ewa Kanehili coastal ecosystem and fisheries which feed in the rich freshwater nutrients for limu and the entire Ewa shoreline ecosystem - This fresh spring water has been gradually choked off and is turning the reef into an underwater desert devoid of sea life.
2013 Star-Advertiser feature quotes HCDA administrator Tony Ching that there really were “underground rivers- from mountains to the sea” and functioned as a “source of water for agriculture.” For many years the Navy and Army Corps of Engineers had denied that there was such a thing as karst caves and ponds which were actually connected by tidal flows. Navy in their Hunt Corp KREP PV project Programmatic Agreements (PA) insisted this was just- “a belief by some Hawaiians” including that water feeding limu growth- “just a belief by some Hawaiians.”
Huge underwater freshwater spring off Ewa shore near Kualaka’i. Likely why there was once the popular Kualaka’i fishing village and why the 1825 Malden native Hawaiian trail went there. Fresh underwater springs are major attractants for large sea life ecosystems and help limu spawn. Oral histories tell of once bountiful quantities of easily harvested fisheries, from shellfish to pelagic.
The endangered Pueo owl aumakua is still seen throughout Kanehili by many witnesses and photos
They still survive to help wandering souls find their way to the ancient Polynesian homeland.
However developers seek every means to kill them off because they know they are an important
Hawaiian cultural legacy that they want snuffed out.
Save The Hawaiian Pueo Owl https://www.facebook.com/SavePueoOwl/
PUEO (short-eared owl) Hawaiian Aumakua
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3Eb4n-SFAM
Short-eared Owls can travel long distances and are found in many parts of the world, including North and South America, Europe, Asia, and many islands. In Hawaii it survives fairly well in less developed areas. On Oahu it is extremely endangered as a ground nester due to mass developments, wild dogs, cats. Ancient Kanehili still has relatively good areas for foraging and nesting.
Male Short-eared Owls perform eye-catching aerial displays, ascending hundreds of feet above the ground with rhythmic and exaggerated wing beats, hovering, gliding down, and rising again. This display includes “wing clapping,” when the male snaps its wings together below his body in a burst of two to six claps per second, often accompanied by yapping calls. The flight ends with the spectacular descent of the male bird, which holds his wings aloft and shimmies rapidly to the ground.
The Short-eared Owl nests on the ground, usually in the shelter of a grass mound or under a grass tuft. Breeding habitats must have sufficient ground cover to conceal nests and support this bird's small mammal prey. In ideal habitat, the Short-eared Owl may nest in loose colonies.
On Oahu 100 years ago Short-eared Owls had abundant food and nesting areas, and roosts of up to 200 birds were recorded.
Pueo have been regularly seen, but in declining numbers on the Ewa Plain. They are nearly always seen in the early morning as this is the foraging period they have adapted to. The more common gray Barn Owl (Tyto alba) which forages late in the afternoon and at night, is often mistaken for a Pueo. Early morning golfers in Ewa still report seeing them hunting along greens and fairways. They have been seen from the UHWO campus down to Ordy Pond near the Ewa shoreline. Most “bird surveys” rarely report seeing any because they are almost always looking for them at the wrong time of day.
Ewa resident Tom Berg made a major effort over several years (2014-18) to capture photos of Pueo in the area of the UHWO campus, North South (Kapolei Parkway) road down to FDR Avenue to advocate for a Pueo refuge area. Michael Kumukauoha Lee also actively supported this as the recognized native Hawaiian cultural practitioner of the Ewa Honouliuli area.
The Innergex Barbers Point solar project developer reported seeing only one Pueo in the early morning and then switched to an afternoon survey and never saw any more (not surprisingly.) This is very consistent with Pueo activity in this former MCAS Ewa, ancient Kanehili, Kaupe’a area today. More are also seen in the Waianae volcano foothills during early dawn.
ABOVE – photos taken in the UHWO, NS Road, former MCAS Ewa, ancient Kanehili- Kaupe’a area described above show that Pueo vary in appearance based upon age, health, foraging and mating season. The “horns” on Pueo show that they are alarmed or agitated.
Pueo resting in an area where they were commonly seen foraging, mating and nesting on UHWO parcels in 2016. After Tom Berg published this information online the UHWO had workers cut down all of the nesting trees and destroy the entire area, likely killing young Pueo hatchlings.
Young Pueo on a cyclone fence near the KROC center. This apparently same young Pueo was also seen on the former MCAS Ewa boundary fence and another night time cell phone photo showed possibly the same Pueo on a fence by the East Kapolei Fire Station near DHHL offices. The nighttime photo showed what looked like a very frightened and confused young Pueo who may not have survived.
Barn owls (Tyto alba) are much more common in the area as they appear in the late afternoon, early evening and can be heard screeching in the late evenings hunting for prey. The Pueo and Barn owls have apparently divided up their hunting periods to be compatible. On the Big Island of Hawaii where John Bond spent many years in 1970’s, Pueo were commonly seen all over the Waimea area during the daytime. The intense noise pollution on Oahu has driven Oahu Pueo to be primarily an early morning forager. Car lights and noises often confuse Pueo, especially under 1 year of age causing early deaths.
The DHHL Barbers Point solar project will wipe out a large area of Pueo foraging, mating and nesting areas in former MCAS Ewa – ancient Kanehili.
The Pueo is the official mascot of the UH West Oahu college yet the school developers have made every effort to destroy Pueo foraging, mating and nesting areas. All of this shows why Oahu is ultimately a cursed, doomed place run by profiteering foreign land developers and paid off Hawaiians who assist in the extermination of their cultural histories.
The Native Hawaiian Cultural Landscape of the
1825 Malden Trails
https://kanehili.blogspot.com/2023/08/ancient-kanehili-native-hawaiian.html
This ancient karst landscape was once fed by abundant springs of fresh rain water from the Waianae volcano. Ancient Hawaiians had fresh spring water down to the Ewa shoreline. Ewa Plain land developers are shutting off the once abundant underground spring rainwater streams flowing to Ewa shorelines that nourish the plants and creatures of Kanehili, including the limu which requires fresh water to survive.
The Karst Shark Caves of the Ewa Plain, Pearl Harbor
and Honolulu
https://kanehili.blogspot.com/2023/08/the-karst-shark-caves-of-ewa-plain.html
Ewa’s amazing native cultural history of water caves, suppressed by big developers. At ancient Kanehili there are still large caves, sinkholes and water connected to the Waianae volcano and the ocean. Ewa’s Opae ula karst shrimp have traveled in space with NASA. Ewa’s one of a kind bronze shark goddess statue is hidden- unless you know where to look.
FTA HART Used Fraudulent Ewa Farmland Conversion Impact Rating To Start Rail Construction
https://kanehili.blogspot.com/2015/07/FTA-HART-Farmland-Fraud.html
Hawaii SHPD administrator Alan Downer originally promised Mike Lee that he would support the nomination of the Leina a ka uhane to the State and National Register, however he has been pressured by the Navy, Hunt Corp and Hawaii’s congressional delegation to not allow this. Just as how the FTA, DLNR and HART designated the Leina a ka uhane as an historic TCP district and then completely reneged on this, this very historic and cultural area has been repeatedly screwed and cheated.
HART Rail Followed A Required Process To Identify The Traditional Cultural Places/Properties (TCP) In Ancient Honouliuli Ewa, Kanehili- and then once Rail Construction started they reneged
Below is the legal federal basis for recognizing the Leina a ka uhane
36 CFR Part 60 of the National Historic Preservation Act, and as amended (NHPA), is the regulation guide for the authorization and expansion of the National Register. CFR 60.1(b) states five ways properties can be added to the National Register. CFR 60.9 lists Nominations by Federal agencies. CFR 60.12 details Nomination appeals should a SHPO fail to act or reject a nomination.
Determination of Eligibility and Finding of Effect for Previously Unidentified Traditional Cultural Properties in Sections 1-3 Honolulu Rail Transit Project May 25, 2012:
“Two resources (wahi pana) have been identified as NRHP eligible historic properties of religious and cultural significance to Native Hawaiian organizations. These properties described meet National Register criteria and have sufficient integrity to convey the integral link between tradition and place. A finding of No Adverse Effect was made for the two properties (by having the Leina boundary conveniently start just below the APE of the East Kapolei Rail Station.) However this inconveniently then placed the Leina District in Navy lands in Kalaeloa. This has caused the Navy, FTA, HART, DLNR, HCDA, SHPD to completely reverse their previous determinations and totally ignore and lie. (Are we surprised these entities LIE whenever it suits their agendas?)
Denying Native Hawaiian Cultural History and Justice:
The HART Rail Po’ohilo Deceit
http://honouliuli.blogspot.com/2014/12/the-honouliuli-ewa-battle-of-poo-hilo.html
Contracted identification and nomination was done under the Traditional Cultural Properties (TCP) study for Sections 1–3 of the Honolulu Rail Transit Project (the Project). Prepared for: Parsons Brinkerhoff, Inc. Prepared by: The SRI Foundation Rio Rancho, New Mexico And Kumu Pono Associates LLC, Kāne‘ohe, Hawai‘I July 9, 2013 FINAL. Under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and its implementing regulations at 36 CFR §800 (60), the FTA is responsible for taking into account the effects of the Project on any historic property that is listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, The undertaking, in this case, is the expenditure of federal funds for the Project. Pursuant to 36 CFR §800.14, the FTA met its Section 106 obligations in January 2011 by entering into a Programmatic Agreement (PA) with consulting parties, including Native Hawaiian Organizations (NHOs), who have a legal interest in or a concern about the effects of the project on National Register eligible historic properties.
Sec. 2. Responsibilities of Federal agencies. Executive Order 11593
“To assure that any federally owned property that might qualify for nomination is not inadvertently transferred, sold, demolished or substantially altered. The agency head shall refer any questionable actions to the Secretary of the Interior for an opinion respecting the property's eligibility for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places. Where, after such reconsideration, the Federal agency head proposes to transfer, sell, demolish or substantially alter the property he shall not act with respect to the property until the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation shall have been provided an opportunity to comment on the proposal.
§ 63.3, § 63.4, “Such determinations may be made without a specific request from the Federal agency or, in effect, may reverse findings on eligibility made by a Federal agency and State Historic Preservation Officer. Such determinations will be made after an investigation and an onsite inspection of the property in question.” § 63.6 Review and nomination of properties determined eligible. § 63.6 (a) For a property owned by a Federal agency, or under the jurisdiction or control of the agency to the extent that the agency substantially exercises the attributes of ownership, the Keeper of the National Register will request the Federal agency to nominate the property to the National Register within six months.
Executive Order No. 11593 requires Federal agencies to administer cultural properties under their control and direct their policies, plans, and programs in such a way that federally owned sites, structures, and objects of historical, architectural, or archeological significance were preserved, restored, and maintained. Federal agencies are required to locate, inventory, and nominate to the National Register of Historic Places all properties under their jurisdiction or control that appear to qualify for listing in the National Register. The courts have held that Executive Order No. 11593 obligates agencies to conduct adequate surveys to locate "any" and "all" sites of historic value, although this requirement applies only to federally owned or federally controlled properties. Moreover, the Executive Order directed agencies to reconsider any plans to transfer, sell, demolish, or substantially alter any property determined to be eligible for the National Register and to afford the Council an opportunity to comment on any such proposal.
Executive Order No. 13007 to protect Native American religious practices. This Executive Order directs Federal land-managing agencies to accommodate Native Americans' (including native Hawaiians) use of sacred sites for religious purposes and to avoid adversely affecting the physical integrity of sacred sites. Some sacred sites may be considered traditional cultural properties and, if older than 50 years, may be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. Thus, compliance with the Executive Order may overlap with Section 106 and Section 110 of NHPA. Under the Executive Order, Federal agencies managing lands must implement procedures to carry out the directive's intent. Procedures must provide for reasonable notice where an agency's action may restrict ceremonial use of a sacred site or adversely affect its physical integrity.
IMPORTANT SUPPORTING ADDENDUM DOCUMENTS –
HART has since destroyed all links to these public documents.
They also contain important comments from Michael Kumukauoha Lee, Betsy Merritt, NTHP, Kepa Maly, KumuPono, Kiersten Faulkner, HHF, Kaleo Paik and other important parties. NOTE: Kanehili Cultural Hui has been a recognized HART Rail consulting party since 2011 and attended almost ALL of the regular meetings, annual meetings and special consultation meetings. KCH also submitted many letters and massive PDF documentation to support the cultural history of the Ewa Plain and ancient Kanehili.
HART Rail Hawaiian Trails Summary: Absolutely NO MENTION of the Ewa 1825 Malden Trails maps!
See: Kanehili Cultural Hui Written Notification Per HART PA Stipulation IX and I.H.10 (HART Rail LIES about following the FTA Programmatic Agreement. They DO NOT.
It eventually became clear that HART Rail was a totally lying, deceitful operation and lacked all concepts of ethics. The project is really just about stealing as much money as possible from Hawaii taxpayers. This is why Kanehili Cultural Hui and many other native Hawaiian groups stopped attending meetings as everyone could see it was just a BIG FRAUD and a waste of time.
Navy NavFac Attempts SMEARING and DISCREDITING Kepa Maly over Leina a ka uhane:
(As usual, they do the Hunt Corp of Texas dirty work greenlighting Hawaiian cultural sites)
Also see below: Navy NavFac tried to SMEAR and DISCREDIT Kepa Maly, Kumu Pono LLC about the Leina a ka uhane. Navy NavFac are well known liars and thugs as clearly evidenced by the Fat Leonard scandal and Red Hill Fiasco. Navy NavFac has a very long history of lying to the Hawaiian public and destroying Hawaiian cultural sites. They are the lapdog of navy land developer Hunt Corp of Texas.
See Below: Who is Kepa Maly?
Section 106 Programmatic Agreement (PA) Traditional Cultural
Properties (TCP) Study Meeting June 2011
Date and Time: June 23, 2011
Location: Ali’i Place, Honolulu, HI
Blythe Semmer
(Advisory Council on Historic Preservation ACHP) expressed frustration as the dial-in information on the agenda was not consistent with the information on the eBlast invitation.
Gilliland (CHSRA Senior Advisor - Rail Delivery Partner )
Introduced Kepā Maly and Onaona Pomeroy Maly, of Kumu Pono Associates, LLC (KPA), as the Hawaiian team conducting the TCP study. KPA has a deep understanding of Native Hawaiian culture and language, and its inclusion in the Project was in response to the consulting parties’ comments and requests. Gilliland said that the Project also will continue its relationship with SRI Foundation (SRIF), to use its expertise on TCPs and federal regulations.
Whether the subsequent research identifies TCPs as defined by federal regulations, the TCP study will add important information to the Project, which can be used in many different ways. David Cushman reviewed that SRIF was called in to assist PB and the City because of its expertise with TCPs. SRIF will assist them in following the Programmatic Agreement and implementing the TCP study as required under Section 106. KPA will gather information about places in the Project area, and submit that information to SRIF. 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. Maly began with a Hawaiian saying – not all knowledge comes from one school. He said that KPA are not experts, but they will try to do the best job they can on the project. He explained that KPA will bring historical documentary materials, including materials from Native Hawaiian language newspapers, to the Project, as well as contemporary interviews. He appealed to the consulting parties to make recommendations on the number of interviews that should be conducted, and with whom.
KPA has reviewed the Project’s cultural resources work to date, which is good work. KPA will not redo that work, but will fill in some blanks they have identified. Their goal is to add spirit and flesh that will make the piles of stones and bones come alive. KPA hopes to develop a responsible sampling of voices that have first-hand knowledge of the lives that they describe. Maly noted that the Project corridor is full of storied places. The land starts out as sacred, and even if there is no physical evidence, the stories and place names may reflect this sacredness.
Even if places do not rise to the level of ―TCP, it will be worthwhile to record information about them. Although no one can be completely successful, Maly said that KPA will do its best to
develop a spirited discussion of the area within the Project.
Pua Aiu asked if KPA would organize the TCP study by ahupua’a or some other geographic reference. The study will do both; some TCPs might cross ahupua’a boundaries, while others might be within them.
Keola Lindsey referenced a letter that the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) sent to the City in early March about the TCP study. He expressed OHA’s excitement that the City had brought in
KPA to conduct the TCP study. He reiterated that OHA was pleased with KPA’s participation and looked forward to the study.
Traditional Cultural Properties (TCP) Workshop
Date and Time: May 4, 2012, 9:00 am
Location: Ali‘i Place 1099 Alakea Street 17th Floor, Honolulu, HI 96813
Leina a ka ‘Uhane
HART has identified several locations associated with this sacred story. There are points on the Ewa side of Pu‘uloa (Pearl Harbor) and points on the Diamond Head side of Pu‘uloa (Pearl Harbor).
Kepā Maly
There are points depicted on this map, however, these are not points of land. That being said, the areas depicted for sites #1 and #3 are in the wrong locations. #1 should be Kaupe‘a (#3) and #3 should be Kānehili (#1).
The ‘ili of Pu‘uloa is a part of Kawalau o Pu‘uloa reflecting the entire Pearl Harbor. Based on well-informed, solid, culturally-based narratives, Kaupe‘a and Kānehili are zones of the kaha – of those drier, arid lands that stretch across the lower areas of Honouliuli.
The connection is that we have the leaping place. Those that have aumakua that are waiting to guide them safely to the realm of light or those who don’t have aumakua and are left to wander are going to be lost. They are still wandering the landscape.
It 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.
There is an email regarding accuracy in the specific location of Kānehili and Kaupe‘a. 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.
Pua Aiu (Hawaii SHPD Admin)
The connection between the points is not clear. If I have to look at it as an eligible property/district in order to say “effect or no effect,” I need to know why this district is there and the explanation isn’t clear.
Kepā Maly
It’s one thing to cite 600 sources but it’s another thing if they actually connect. Then there’s a question whether these are figments of imagination or rooted in fact.
Pu‘u o Kapolei is not in any native lore that I’ve seen. It was not a leina but a place that marked the solstice of the sun. There was a heiau.
Some say that “Aloha” means we are in the presence of the breath of life. That same breath that kūpuna breathed, we, our descendants and future generations will breathe. We have a responsibility to speak these names and places and pass on the history, and an opportunity to reclaim and re-speak these stories.
John Papa Ii called the very information that he had written “fragments of Hawaiian history.” Ii was born around 1802 and his role in life was as guardian of the Kamehamehas. He witnessed the Hā‘ena Heiau in the Waipi‘o ahupua‘a, the last sacrifices of humans at Papa‘ena‘ena Heiau and Leiahi. He experienced
everything – the breaking of the kapu. If it was fragmented for him at that time,how much so now? Our challenge is to treasure those fragments and pass them on.
There are a lot of things that are being made up here and if no one nips it in the bud, Hawaiian history, genealogy and moku kuauhao will be forever altered.
Mahealani Cypher
Will the TCP process result in a mitigation plan?
Pua Aiu
This is the mitigation.
Barbara Gilliland (CHSRA Senior Advisor - Rail Delivery Partner )
Right now, we are trying to satisfy the identification and effect stages of the process. HART will complete NRHP nominations in consultation with the SHPD, National Park Service and consulting parties including NHOs for properties that meet the NRHP criteria for TCPs. Wahi pana and inoa ‘āina are not more or less significant because of their NRHP eligibility.
Some general mitigation measures have been identified during the discussion. If any properties are found eligible and are affected, these measures would be applied and be open for further discussion.
Date and Time: November 1, 2012, 10:30 a.m. Location:
Ali‘i Place, 1099 Alakea Street 17th Floor, Honolulu, HI 96813
Blythe Semmer (Advisory Council on Historic Preservation [ACHP]) expressed frustration as the dial-in information on the agenda was not consistent with the information on the eBlast invitation.
Angie Westfall (State Historic Preservation Division SHPD) commented: SHPD hired two full-time Architectural Historians and two temporary Architectural Historians within the last year. The fact that HART is not getting applications is hard for us to believe. There are people on-island that meet the standards.
Ted Matley: FTA takes this process very seriously and is committed to making sure that what has been agreed upon in the PA is executed. (Matley always made these statements but never kept his word.)
PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT QUARTERLY MEETING
Date and Time: November 1, 2012, 10:30 a.m.
Location: Ali‘i Place, 1099 Alakea Street 17th Floor, Honolulu, HI 96813
New Consulting Parties
The following individuals had previously requested recognition as a consulting party. They were invited to participate in and were recognized at this November 1, 2012 meeting.
Blossom Feiteira, Rocky Naeole and Rose Puaoi were not present at the meeting.
Blossom Feiteira, Association of Hawaiian Homelands
Ha‘aheo Guanson, Pacific Justice and Reconciliation Center
Kanaloa Koko,Royal Order of the Crown; Ka Iwi ‘Ōlelo
Michael Kumukaoha Lee, Kane Hili Hui (Kanehili Cultural Hui)
Paulette Ka‘anohi Kaleikini
Rocky Naeole,Royal Order of Kamehameha-Moku ‘O Kapuāiwa (Chapter 8)
Rose Puaoi, Council for Native Hawaiian Advancement
Umi Sexton, Kingdom of Hawai‘i; Order of Kamehameha
The “Definition of a Consulting Party” handout was distributed and is attached to these minutes as Appendix C.
Hinaleimoana Wong-Kalu (O‘ahu Island Burial Council OIBC) made several comments:
What was the impetus that prompted the latest wave of consulting parties at this juncture of the discussion?
I Hope that this is not going to create the image that more people were consulted with. “We’ve had very reasonable consultation with those all along the way up until this point; I am speaking to what degree will the concerns of those who have sat at this table be honored?”
In support of the new voices and those who have yet to participate. Doesn’t appreciate that the FTA holds ultimate discretion on consulting parties as they are not in the wherewithal to determine for the Hawaiian community who is and who isn’t in a position and who has a say and who doesn’t.
The OIBC brought forth recommendations; had those been paid attention to and had OIBC been honored in their request to become a mandatory signatory of the PA, the injunction as a result of the latest Hawai‘i Supreme Court ruling could have been avoided.
(Kalekini v. Yoshioka)
https://law.justia.com/cases/hawaii/supreme-court/2012/scap-11-0000611.html
https://www.civilbeat.org/2012/08/16937-rail-derailed-hawaii-supreme-court-rules-against-honolulu/
You may want to consider how you approach working with the native community.
Ted Matley:
FTA takes this process very seriously and is committed to making sure that what has been agreed upon in the PA is executed. He also acknowledged that FTA appreciates comments received requesting more information. The Honolulu Rail Transit Project (HRTP) is a complex project and the communication process continues to be refined; we are continually working to improve communication. (Bla Bla, it’s about powerful land developers and making heavy rail fan Sen. Inouye happy.)
II. Traditional Cultural Properties (TCP)
II.A. (Studies to Determine the Presence of Previously Unidentified TCPs)
Michael Lee (Kanehili Cultural Hui) commented:
Kepā Maly was hired to do the Traditional Cultural Properties (TCP) Study and I provided oli and other information related to Chinatown and Honouliuli. The information never got to Kepā; it was never in the final report.
Mahealani Cypher commented:
Would it have been cheaper to do the full AIS before starting construction? It was acknowledged that there are costs associated with construction delays.
Michael Lee commented:
On May 11, 2012, I submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request: “What are the TMK map numbers and location of the current drilling area of HART’s contractors at Ho‘opili farm area for the rail pylons that recently hit water?” The response received from HART: “There is no responsive record but
the TMK for the area mentioned is 9-1-17:004. Please note groundwater was not encountered during drilling shafts at Pier 65 and Piers 71-76.” What of the other piers?
NOTE: When HART Rail began construction at the Kapolei KROC station the pouring of the first rail pylons was done AT NIGHT with massive floodlights, high security fencing with POLICE GUARDS, to keep people far away. There were MONTHS of concrete pouring because they encountered a HUGE KARST CAVE with water flows, etc.The coral limestone reef was just 3 feet below the alluvial soil put in by the Ewa Plantation.KCH already knew there were large karst caves in this area. Of course HART and all associated (Kiewit) DENIED THIS. The first WOFH section was riddled with concrete construction flaws and do overs. It was all done in the highest security. However, Kanehili Cultural Hui extensively documented all of this with video and photo evidence.)
Paulette Kaleikini commented:
Cultural Monitors should be state-recognized cultural and/or lineal descendants of the area; we come forward to be recognized in order to fully participate. She also noted that she had complaints from family members – who are Cultural Monitors – last night, who feel they are being controlled and manipulated. (Ultimately HART Rail gave Paulette’s entire family a big Cultural Monitor contract.)
PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT ANNUAL MEETING
Date and Time: January 25, 2013, 10:00 a.m.
Location: Ali‘i Place, 1099 Alakea Street 17th Floor, Honolulu, HI 96813
Betsy Merritt (National Trust for Historic Preservation):
Are you (FTA) going to describe the timetable and procedure for addressing the additional information the court requests on the three issues?
Will there be the opportunity for public comment on any of the items such as the TCPs and the Beretania Street Tunnel alternative?
Since all [claims] are Section 4(f) determinations, will these be sent to the Department of Interior (DOI) for review per the normal Section 4(f) process?
Betsy Merritt
It was mentioned that the BPM (Best Practices Manual) is being expedited in terms of timetable but on the expanded schedule dated a week ago, the BPM end date is December 2016, which is the latest date for any item.
(On November 1, 2012, Federal Judge Tashima granted summary judgment to the plaintiffs on three
Section 4(f) counts:
Further study on Traditional Cultural Properties;
No constructive use of Mother Waldron Park;
And, support finding that Beretania Street Tunnel alignment alternative wasn’t a feasible
and prudent alternative)
Kiersten Faulkner (Historic Hawaiʻi Foundation)
• Need to learn from experiences during initial consultation and development of the PA; part of the discussion was can we learn from that experience, document that and make sure there’s a better relationship, better communication, better outcomes as a result of that. That’s now 3-4 years ago. Memory is fading and knowledge is being lost. The Lessons Learned pieces needs to take place really quickly and include those of us who were a part of it; a lot of people came later and don’t have the same experience.
Mike Lee (Kanehili Cultural Hui)
A TCP Study is never over as far as what can be added for Historical Properties. I provided information including the chants of Hi'iaka, Pohukaina and Hawaiian maps that never got into the TCP Study for Section 1.
We’re told it’s never cut off, but we’ve never had a meeting to outline our primary source materials, thus my lawsuit [addendum to HonoluluTraffic.com et al. versus the City/FTA], which involves the Karst Cave System not being included in the FEIS. I’m pissed off being involved for three years and when it comes to Hawaiian cultural properties, we are not given an opportunity to meet. The subsurface is critical just as Roman catacombs. Not identifying our burial caves is problematic and is a part of my current federal lawsuit. How many meetings have you had for Hawaiians to identify cultural properties? You need to schedule a meeting to discuss TCP Study for Phase 1. I want a specific date. There’s been no takeaway for the Hawaiian community.
Ted (FTA) just said that it’s an ongoing process that we can add to, but I really feel that we’ve been shut out from that process. HART should hire a Cultural Interpreter; HART archaeologists are not cultural practitioners.
Haʻaheo Guanson
Concur with Mike; we’ve been asking for a meeting to provide input. Please provide a meeting date.
A lack of Native Hawaiians on this project is the overall issue. Hire more Hawaiians.
Hinaleimoana Wong Kalu (Oʻahu Island Burial Council)
Given respect to the other elements of the TCP discussion, quite a while back, the Native Hawaiian view and perception of what is a TCP was discovered. It doesn’t coincide with the Federal Guidelines; it’s two very distinct things.
Kaleo Paik
An action item for HART is to have the company [SRIF/Kumu Pono and CSH] justify why these items [Mike Lee’s information] weren’t included.
Moanalua Stream was not captured in the TCP Study for Sections 1 through 3. One of the critical components regarding TCP studies is to get input from the Native Hawaiian community.
Kiersten Faulkner (HHF)
Will the TCP scope for City Center include cultures in addition to Native Hawaiian, like Filipino (for Kalihi) and Chinese (for Chinatown)? Per the PA, “evaluate these TCPs…in accordance with guidance in the National Register Bulletin 38.” It says it’s all cultures. It’s hard for us to comment on the scope when we don’t know what the scope covers.
Mike Lee
Addressed concern with 80-foot depth of columns in conjunction with the trench depth that is being studied and how it further affects the ancient TCP like voids that carry freshwater that’s below [the surface] and that has iwi. You only went to the alluvial layer.
First Hawaiian Bank Center went through a 6-month delay during construction of their Corporate Tower because they encountered a void cave, which is a public trust resource and a Hawaiian cultural property. (Mike Lee’s father was on the FHB board of directors at that time and knew lots of inside information about the native Hawaiian history of downtown karst caves. The massive costs of the new FHB building construction Kanehili Cultural Hui has documented.)
I keep on putting it for the record in case there’s future litigation. We’re putting it on the table because if it’s not, it’s called “inadvertent” under the law. Due care with due notice in due time is part of what the law looks at; not empty yak. I’m putting it down for the record because it exists. If you fail to do it then it’s part of your to do list and if we’re not here to tell you what your to do list is then how do
you know what to do.
Your view is western-focused. That’s your definition of “culture” from a foreign entity. The catacombs in Rome are considered archaeological inventory but with us, we get negated because we’re not the Pope in Rome. Your [Joanna] view is tinted; it’s a western focus. That’s why I say cultural interpreter. You don’t bother to find out what our culture is in printed documentation where your research didn’t bother to look at because they’re experts and not cultural practitioners.
You excluded a big swath of our people and cut it off when it suits you; that’s not acceptable and we are here to say that it’s not acceptable.
Kaleo Paik
An action item for HART is to have the company [SRIF/Kumu Pono and CSH] justify why these items [Mike Lee’s information] weren’t included.
Can PB be more accountable to the staff that they pick for geotechnical-type work? When I ask the person on-site, he has no idea what a coral shelf is – that’s scary – because he’s only looking at stratigraphy. As the prime contractor, PB needs to make sure that its subcontractors are looking at things through a cultural lens, especially in these sensitive areas. It’s difficult if they come from a foreign place because they don’t understand our geography.
Mike Lee
Addressed concern with 80-foot depth of columns in conjunction with the trench depth that is being studied and how it further affects ancient TCP like voids that carry freshwater that’s below [the surface] and that has iwi. You only went to the alluvial layer.
Nothing is heard. There’s no eBlast or meeting minutes to make us feel warm and fuzzy that we’ve brought these things to the table. Nobody out there ever knows what was discussed. The priorities were never listed and blasted out to the stakeholders. We put it on the table year after year. You don’t come back with a specific date to follow-up on items we’ve requested.
FTA/KĀKO‘O MEETING AGENDA
20 January 2015
9:30 am – 12:30 noon
HART Offices
Please note that this month there will be two meetings, first a special meeting led by FTA, followed by our standard Kāko‘o meeting.
New Business
The Kane Hili Hui would like to bring up properties in the ‘Ewa region, including:
1. The underground wahi pana natural caves and tunnels within the Project. Shark God Cave, Waipouli, Pohukaina and Kupuna Cave,
2. The unidentified Traditional Cultural Properties within Honouliuli ahupua’a:
November 6, 2013, Ewa TCP detailed documents sent to Ted Matley FTA and Daniel Grabauskas, HART for Draft Supplemental EIS for Honolulu Rail Transit Project
Please see the Index of original DVD Contents containing the comments for:
Draft Supplemental EIS for Honolulu Rail Transit Project Available for Public Review. The Honolulu Rail Transit Project is a 20-mile elevated rail line that will connect West Oahu with downtown Honolulu and Ala Moana Center. The Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation and the U.S. Federal Transit Administration have prepared a Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)/Section 4(f) Evaluation for the Honolulu Rail Transit Project as required by a U.S. District Court Judgment.
Submit written comments to Mr. Ted Matley, FTA Region IX, 201 Mission Street, Suite 1650, San Francisco, CA 94105, and Mr. Daniel A. Grabauskas, Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation, City and County of Honolulu, 1099 Alakea Street, Suite 1700 Honolulu, HI 96813
November 6, 2013
Response To HART SEIS Comments on the Draft Supplemental EIS/4/(f)
TO:
Mr. Ted Matley
Federal Transit Administration, Region 9
201 Mission Street, Suite 2210
San Francisco, Ca. 94105-1831
Daniel Grabauskas
Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation
City and County of Honolulu, 1099 Alakea Street, 17th Floor
Honolulu, Hawaii, 96813
CC: HAWAII'S THOUSAND FRIENDS
25 Maluniu Avenue, Suite 102 #282
Kailua, HI 96734
Aloha,
I am responding to previous comments that I have sent in as a member of Hawaii’s Thousand Friends and in association with my membership in the Kanehili Cultural Hui.
We do not find that our well documented 3 gigabytes of photographs, reports, geo-tech, historical and archeological surveys and studies, with reference to State and federal laws and legislative laws and resolutions, have been adequately and accurately addressed in the SEIS response to our comments.
Federal Judge Tashima made clear that TCP’s – Traditional Cultural places, should all be identified. This has not been the case in our opinion in the HART response to SEIS Comments on the Draft Supplemental EIS/4/(f) document. By HART not doing so as it applies to the entire rail route is, our opinion, really an attempt to circumvent the intent of Judge Tashima’s Federal ruling.
Only a few items were cherry-picked by HART out of submitted testimony and answers were very brief and implied that these are issues that were already addressed previously in the EIS.
Clearly, HART doesn’t want to address our documented concerns, including the well documented geo-tech study done for the downtown and Kakaako areas.
The SHPD-Kaleikini Supreme Court case shows the far-reaching impacts of the Hawaii Supreme Court decision in August for the Honolulu rail project. That ruling concluded the State Historic Preservation Division failed to follow its own rules in allowing an archaeological inventory survey to be completed in four phases — construction was allowed to begin on each rail segment following survey work.
Reading the letters exchanged between various City, State and Federal agencies (FTA, HART, etc.) show how rushed and sloppy the Archeological Inventory Survey (AIS) work was and how it was being tailored to fit expedited rail contracts and rail construction.
It is clear that being very familiar with the culture and history of Honouliuli-Ewa that the HART AIS was a shallow exercise in identification of cultural and historic resources and doesn’t truly meet professional standards for an EIS.
How can the entire HART EIS be based upon such poor and inaccurate work?
Honouliuli (being renamed with a fake “Ho’opili” name for development purposes) was the site of a very important ancient Hawaiian community with vast kalo ponds feeding many thousands of people.
In fact the LARGEST pre-contact Hawaiian community on the island of Oahu existed here! Nearby was the original historic capital of the Hawaiian Kingdom- Waipio, and the entire area was known as the breadbasket of Oahu for its rich agriculture and aquaculture resources.
Ewa Plantation (which is also being given the fake name of “East Kapolei”) saw several Ewa Plains plantation villages, including Pipeline Village (in 1906 for Portuguese and Japanese workers) located out where the HART rail line was constructed.
Waimanalo Camp, another Ewa Plantation village is another Ewa Plantation village that has not been adequately documented. The Ewa Plantation shows numerous roads and camps that the HART rail line will be impacting. There is more out there that needs an accurate cultural landscape survey done before major rail Transit Oriented Development takes place.
Ewa and Honouliuli was also linked by major important ancient Hawaiian trails where HART rail and Transit Oriented Development will develop, yet this has NOT been included as rail route impacts on these important Hawaiian trails. These trails were also of major importance during the annual Makahiki Ceremonies with Lono processions traveling throughout the ahupua’a of Honouliuli.
In addition, these same trails are still used, it is said, by the Night Marchers of Honouliuli, meaning that future rail stations, offices and homes will be directly on top of these important ancient spirit pathways.
Ewa and Honouliuli needs to be a recognized historic landscape and Traditional Cultural Properties area and part of the Ewa Plains Cultural Historic Corridor District.
There will be another rail station at the DeBartolo DHHL “shopping center” site next to Ewa Village and the historic Hawaiian Railway – O.R.& L, yet there is absolutely no mention of the environmental impacts this will cause.
Attempts are already being made to force the historic railway to move its historic rail yard. Land next to historic Verona Village has already been taken away and traded to DHHL as part of a HART Rail development deal. Where is the EIS impact and mitigation for this?
The State of Hawaii is mandated under law to protect cultural resources- caves, karst, underground streams and rivers under Statute 6D 1-10, Article 11, Section 7 State Constitution: Do NOT destroy these aquifers and native Hawaiian cultural practice.
The underground water that is known by hydrological documents and traditional Hawaiian cultural observation flows below ground in a myriad of karst channels and networks, which rail pylons and other site construction may very likely impact, especially in the Kalo’i gulch area on the Ewa Plain.
Of special concern is that Parsons Brinckerhoff wrote in the 2003 Final Honolulu BRT EIS:
"...extreme disruption of existing underground utilities and constant dewatering made necessary by a high-water table and poor soils would drive construction costs to unacceptable levels." -2003 FEIS
How has this finding of FACT changed?
Won’t construction costs be driven to unacceptable levels due to extreme disruption of existing underground utilities and constant dewatering? We provided a great deal of documentation to substantiate this but it was largely ignored or “already addressed.” We don’t see it being addressed.
HART has chosen to pick just a few items in the submitted testimony to address and left out many of the important and very valid documented concerns.
Some of the concerns still not adequately addressed or glossed over:
Identification of Ewa Plain – Ewa- Honouliuli TCP’s,
Protection of the Ewa Plains 1825 Malden Trails (ancient Hawaiian trails),
The Kanehili-Kaupe’a Leina a ka Uhane, a very sacred spiritual leaping place,
The major Kalo’i waterway not adequately surveyed for archeological sites,
The Ewa Plantation TCP - The most successful Sugar Plantation on Oahu,
The Ewa Plains extension of the King Kalakaua charted O.R.&L. in 1890,
The Kanehili-Kaupe’a below ground Karst water transport system
Evidence shows that important TCP context information was omitted to arrive at a HART desired “no effect” on Ewa TCP conclusion.
HART-SHPD documents indicate an extremely RUSHED process to expedite FTA approval and rail pylon construction.
HART-SHPD-FTA DECISION WAS FLAWED- A KANEHILI CULTURAL HUI REPORT
Leina a ka Uhane – Spirit Leap, 1825 Malden Trails put into cultural context…The Kanehili Traditional Cultural Place & Historic and Cultural Landscape
SEE ATTACHED SHPD-HART-FTA DOCUMENTS
https://www.academia.edu/39153962/Leina_a_ka_Uhane_Spirit_Leap
The HART TCP Decision: Leina a ka Uhane
“To identify possible TCPs, a wide variety of sources were consulted including existing literature, archival documents, historic maps, and oral tradition. The results of this effort are documented in a technical report (Kumo Pono 2012) and a management summary (SRI Foundation and Kumu Pono 2012).”
This overall SRI report and the Kumu Pono technical report are really excellent new additions to understanding the major importance of Ewa Plains wahi pana(s) such as the Leina a ka Uhane.
HART Rail NEVER Addressed AT ALL the historic 1825 Malden Trails in their APE!
At NO POINT did the HRTP studies address the actual historic and cultural CONTEXT of the 1825 Royal Navy identified Malden Trails which were the MAJOR HAWAIIAN TRAILS that tied together and linked the entire TCP-wahi pana areas from Honouliuli to Kualaka’i and One ula!
The HRTP study actually ERASES the 1825 trails because they don’t want anyone to KNOW that the rail line and rail stations cross DIRECTLY OVER this major Hawaiian Trail Network used for Makahiki processions, native commodity trade, ahupua'a communication, ahupu’a defense, etc.
Further, the HRTP TCP decision doesn’t include the importance of Pu’u o Kapolei as it is linked by the ancient Hawaiian trails to Kualaka’i and Onelua through Kaupea and Kanehili. There are Hi’iaka chants and other significant stories that identify these areas and their major LINKED importance to the overall TCP area. Pu’u o Kapolei was a heiau, home for Tahitian royalty and an important major landmark on Oahu marked the seasonal solstice of the sun.
The HRTP TCP decision clearly does NOT want to put this major Ewa Plains TCP into any type of CONTEXT because it doesn’t fit their rail route and TOD agenda! So is this just REALLY SLOPPY WORK- or a deliberate misrepresentation of what this area is really all about?
SHPD appears in the documents to go along with “whatever” HART wants and FTA needs to “see” so that rail pylon construction can begin ASAP. Keep in mind, this is the same SHPD that approved construction in phases that was eventually struck down by the Hawaii Supreme Court in the Kaleikini Decision. Hawaii SHPD has always been the lapdog of HART Rail, Navy land developers.
DLNR - SHPD (Aila) seems “confused” by why HART/FTA conclude that the Poohilo appears to have “integrity of location” eligible for the National Historic Register, but then says it is outside of the rail Area of Potential Effect (APE). Is this just to throw out some “see we actually care about historic site identification” in order to IGNORE the MAJOR Ewa Plains TCP that actually ARE in their APE?
These types of DEVELOPER LED AGENDA reports always like to throw in a lot of cultural and archeological FLUFF that are designed to say LOOK OVER HERE but NOT OVER THERE! They make it APPEAR they have done due diligence when in FACT they are HIDING what they DON’T WANT PEOPLE TO SEE. They are doing this with iwi and Karst water resources as well by hiding the survey and geotechnical reports.
Kepā Maly says:
Leina a ka Uhane
The ‘ili of Pu‘uloa is a part of Kawalau o Pu‘uloa reflecting the entire Pearl Harbor. Based on well-informed, solid, culturally-based narratives, Kaupe‘a and Kānehili are zones of the kaha – of those drier, arid lands that stretch across the lower areas of Honouliuli.
The connection is that we have the leaping place. Those that have aumakua that are waiting to guide them safely to the realm of light or those who don’t have aumakua and are left to wander are going to be lost. They are still wandering the landscape.
It 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.
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.
January 8, 2014 Kanehili Cultural Hui Written Notification Per HART Rail Stipulation IX and I.H.10
Kanehili Cultural Hui
P.O. Box 75578 Kapolei, Hi. 96707
January 8, 2014
Mr. Ted Matley
Federal Transit Administration, Region 9
201 Mission Street, Suite 2210
San Francisco, Ca. 94105-1831
Michael Formby
Department of Transportation Services
City & County of Honolulu
650 South King Street, Third Floor
Honolulu, Hawaii
Paul Cleghorn, Kako’o
Pacific Legacy, Inc30 Aulike Street, Suite 301
Kailua, Hi. 96743
CC: Jon Y. Nouchi
Deputy Director, Planning and Environmental
Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation (HART)
Honolulu, Hawaii
CC: Elizabeth Merritt, Attorney
National Trust for Historic Preservation
1785 Massachusetts Ave NW
Washington, DC 20036
CC: Kiersten Faulkner, Executive Director
Historic Hawai‘i Foundation
680 Iwilei Road, Suite #690,
Honolulu, HI 96817
CC: Michael Kumukauoha Lee
Native Hawaiian Cultural Descendant
Kanehili Cultural Hui
RE: Honolulu High Capacity Transit Corridor Project Programmatic
Agreement, Honolulu Hawaii
Stipulation IX Measures to Address Reasonably Foreseeable Indirect and Cumulative Effects Caused by the Project
Dear Mr. Matley, Mr. Formby and Mr. Cleghorn:
Kanehili Cultural Hui (KCH) is a consulting party to the HART Programmatic Agreement (PA) for the Honolulu High Capacity Transit Corridor Project (Project), and has identified significant direct, indirect and cumulative effects on resources determined eligible for the National Register of Historic Places that was not evaluated in the PA.
Written Notification Per Stipulation IX and I.H.10
Pursuant to PA Stipulations IX and I.H.10, Kanehili Cultural Hui is providing this letter as notice to the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and the PA Program Manager (Kako’o) of the significant adverse effects and requesting that FTA call a meeting of the consulting parties as soon as possible to discuss what next steps would be appropriate under the new circumstances to correct and mitigate the
effects on the historic and cultural resources (IX.D).
Identification of Historic and Cultural Properties
The subject properties:
1. The underground wahi pana natural caves and tunnels within the Project.
2. The unidentified Traditional Cultural Properties within Honouliuli ahupua’a.
3. The correct location of the Leina a ka ‘uhane within Honouliuli ahupua’a.
4. The 1825 Malden Map which identified important ancient Hawaiian trails within Honouliuli ahupua’a that are also identified in numerous further map editions up to 1878 and which are publically available at the Hawaii State Bureau of Conveyance.
Relevance to the Honolulu High-Capacity Corridor Project
The Project is directly threatening, impinging upon and very likely damaging these known important and documented historic traditional cultural properties and native Hawaiian cultural properties.
Stipulation to Address Reasonably Foreseeable Indirect and Cumulative Effects Caused by the Project
The 11th Whereas clause of the PA notes that “adverse effects may include reasonably foreseeable effects caused by the Project that may occur later in time, be farther removed in distance, or be cumulative;” and the 17th, 18th, 19th and 20th
Whereas clauses reference transit oriented development as a specific issue relevant to the PA.
The Project in the Ahupua’a of Honouliuli, Moku of Ewa directly affects above ground and below ground traditional native Hawaiian cultural resources and further the Project directly encourages and sponsors massive primary and secondary impacts through three Transit Oriented Development (TOD). None of the three TOD’s would be located where they are on 1000-year-old traditional native Hawaiian agricultural properties which supported the largest Oahu population prior to Western contact without the Project placing these three rail stations along the route.
The Project does not go to the communities of Ewa or Kapolei where the populations are but instead creates, encourages and sponsors an entirely new major population center to be called “East Kapolei” that speculates that vast numbers of new residents will live there. The Project never assessed the massive primary and secondary impacts of a major new population center being created on these Honouliuli traditional cultural properties and the below surface cultural resources.
Stipulation IX.D states that “if consulting parties identify during the duration of the PA that a significant indirect or direct adverse effect on resources determined eligible for the National Register as part of the Section 106 process for this project that was not evaluated in this PA, the consulting party shall follow procedures identified in Stipulation I.H.10. Upon such notification, FTA will call a meeting of the consulting parties to discuss what next steps would be appropriate under the circumstances to mitigate the effects on such resources.”
Conclusions
Throughout the Section 106 consultation process that led to the development of the Programmatic Agreement, consulting parties have raised the issue and concern that the urban development enabled by the project would lead to adverse effects and irreparable harm to historic and cultural resources. FTA and the City addressed the issue by including stipulations that provided a “wait and see” approach, with the hope and expectation that existing planning, permitting and development agencies would follow through on their preservation responsibilities.
Unfortunately, we have seen that approach has failed to protect important Honouliuli traditional cultural ahupua’a properties and cultural resources. In the absence of meaningful measures from the State agencies to protect these important historic and cultural properties and resources under the Hawaii State Constitution, it is necessary to revisit the Programmatic Agreement for measures to avoid, minimize and mitigate cumulative direct and indirect effects that are being caused by the Project, and especially the Transit Oriented Developments (TOD.)
We look forward to your timely response and prompt attention to this matter.
Aloha,
John Bond, President
Kanehili Cultural Hui
P.O. Box 75578
Kapolei, Hi. 96707
Honouliuli, Moku of Ewa
Copies via email:
FTA: Leslie Rogers, Ted Matley
HART: Dan Grabauskas, Brennon Morioka, John Nouchi, Kawika Farm
ACHP: Reid Nelson, Charlene Vaughn, Blythe Semmer
SHPD: Alan Downer, Jessica Puff, Susan Lebo
NAVY: John Lohr, Jeff Dodge, Charlene Oka-Wong
NTHP: Betsy Merritt, Brian Turner
NPS: Elaine Jackson-Retondo, Paul DePrey, Melia Lane-Kamahele
OIBC: Hinaleimoana Wong-Kalu
AHCC: Mahealani Cypher
OHA: Jerry Norris, Kai Markel
HE MO‘OLELO ‘ĀINA– TRADITIONS AND STORIED PLACES IN THE DISTRICT OF ‘EWA AND
MOANALUA (IN THE DISTRICT OF KONA), ISLAND OF O‘AHU
A TRADITIONAL CULTURAL PROPERTIES STUDY – TECHNICAL REPORT
PREPARED BY Kepā Maly • Cultural Historian/Resource Specialist & Onaona Maly • Researcher/Project Administrator
PREPARED FOR
SRI Foundation, 333 Rio Rancho Drive, Suite 103, Rio Rancho, New Mexico 87124
APRIL 21, 2012
© 2012 Kumu Pono Associates LLC
Determination of Eligibility and Finding of Effect for Previously Unidentified Traditional Cultural Properties in Sections 1-3 Honolulu Rail Transit Project
May 25, 2012, Determination of Eligibility
The study documented 49 sites, including ahupua’a. Of these 49, 26 are wahi pana, or sacred and storied places. This includes the Leina a ka ‘uhane as a single property, rather than its multiple constituent parts (see below), but excludes Po‘ohilo as it was addressed in correspondence dating to April 20, 2012 (Attachment A). Another ten sites are inoa ‘Ɨina, or named places. Inoa ‘Ɨina are distinct from wahi pana in that they lack any story. Thirteen are ahupua’a, or traditional land divisions.
Guidance for TCPs is provided in a few sources, including National Register Bulletin 38 (Parker and King 1998). It provides a number of nuances associated with TCPs. TCPs are sites associated with “cultural practices or beliefs of a living community that (a) are rooted in that community's history, and (b) are important in maintaining the continuing cultural identity of the community (Parker and King 1999:1). As described in the cited reports, the identified wahi pana (sacred and storied places) generally meet this definition and warrant consideration as potentially NRHP eligible TCPs.
Another issue with the term TCP is that Bulletin 38 has sometimes been interpreted as requiring a Native Hawaiian organization to demonstrate continual use of a site in order for it to be considered a TCP in accordance with Bulletin 38. It is important to note that under the NHPA and the Section 106 regulations, the determination of a historic property’s religious and cultural significance to a Native Hawaiian organization is not tied to continual or physical use of the property. Also, continual use is not a requirement for National Register eligibility (ACHP 2011:14)
DRAFT REPORT STUDY TO IDENTIFY THE PRESENCE OF PREVIOUSLY UNIDENTIFIED TRADITIONAL CULTURAL PROPERTIES IN SECTIONS 1 – 3 FOR THE HONOLULU RAIL TRANSIT PROJECT
HART TCP Management Summary:
Hawaiian Trails
Absolutely NO MENTION of the historic 1825 Malden Trails in the HART Rail APE! A KEY EWA PLAIN CULTURAL MAP!
Honolulu Rail Transit Meeting Notes—2 June 23, 2011 May4_Leina_tcp_workshop4
Meeting Summary
Section 106 Programmatic Agreement (PA) Traditional Cultural
Properties (TCP) Study Meeting
Date and Time: June 23, 2011
Location: Ali’i Place, Honolulu, HI
Purpose
The purpose of the meeting was to provide an overview of the approach for conducting additional TCP research related to previously unidentified TCPs as identified in the programmatic agreement. The meeting provided an opportunity for the consulting parties to meet with the SRI Foundation and Kumu Pono Associates to ask questions and provide feedback to the research team on possible interviews and additional research.
Maly reflected that, given the history of the countryside, it would be more unusual not to find iwi (native burials) than to find them.
Gilliland introduced Kepā Maly and Onaona Pomeroy Maly, of Kumu Pono Associates, LLC (KPA), as the Hawaiian team conducting the TCP study. KPA has a deep understanding of Native Hawaiian culture and language, and its inclusion in the Project was in response to the consulting parties’ comments and requests. Gilliland said that the Project also will continue its relationship with SRI Foundation (SRIF), to use its expertise on TCPs and federal regulations. Whether the subsequent research identifies TCPs as defined by federal regulations, the TCP study will add important information to the Project, which can be used in many different ways.
David Cushman reviewed that SRIF was called in to assist PB and the City because of its expertise with TCPs. SRIF will assist them in following the Programmatic Agreement and implementing the TCP study as required under Section 106.
KPA will gather information about places in the Project area and submit that information to SRIF. 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 made sure that the Leina a ka uhane WOULD NOT be shown in the HART Rail APE.)
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 (and start rail construction ASAP.) He noted that since he and Martha Graham of SRIF are not Hawaiians, KPA will do the actual TCP research for the Project. (However, SRIF ``fixed” the Leina pathway so that it would NOT be close to the initial HART rail construction site- and which also expedited the FTA ROD – Record of Decision to start immediate construction. And a VERY BIG influence from Sen, Inouye and mayor Mufi.)
Keola Lindsey referenced a letter that the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) sent to the City in early March about the TCP study. He expressed OHA’s excitement that the City had brought in KPA to conduct the TCP study. He reiterated that OHA was pleased with KPA’s participation and looked forward to the study.
February 11, 2016, Arrogant and usual thug-like Navy Hawaii tries to smear (as they do to Kanehili Cultural Hui, and others, etc.) Hawaiian ethnographer Kepa Maly, Kumu Pono, LLC
We just learned this afternoon some important news about the Kanehili Cultural Hui effort to have the Leina a ka uhane placed on the National Register, as was determined and supported by the FTA, DLNR and SHPD in 2012.
The National Trust for Historic Preservation attorney in Washington DC working with us and who is party to high level negotiations on the Kalaeloa Barbers Point land transfer by the Navy- told us that the Navy has been blocking consultations by Kanehili Hui and Oahu Hawaiian cultural practitioners on the Leina a ka uhane issue.
Most disturbing of all are the outright lies being told by the Navy to the Federal level consultants and National Trust attorney that the Leina only applies to a relatively small rectangular area on one specific parcel! This is of course incredibly ignorant but they have been hoping that mainland consultants will not understand what the Leina is and its cultural importance. (Hunt Corp of Texas ALSO states that the December 7, 1941 Ewa Battlefield is only a small piece of concrete. Their lawyers tried to block the NPS National Register nomination and also endlessly sue the Navy over this to try to weasel more money. Meantime Navy NavFac is Hunt Corp of Texas lapdog and partner in their illegal destructions of historic and cultural sites in HCDA Kalaeloa. They also pay off Hawaii’s congressional members who have close business ties with Hunt Corp.)
And the Navy has retained a local native Hawaiian consultant (who always parrots whatever their Navy NavFac master wants) who has said in writing that everything researched and stated by Kepa Maly, Kumu Pono Associates about the Leina nomination was just "made up" and "just stories by others."
This is an incredible insult to Hawaii's highly regarded Hawaiian cultural ethnographer and his wife, whose work as Kumu Pono Associates is of the highest quality in the State of Hawaii.
Far worse is that the Navy has been telling the Federal level consultants and National Trust attorney that Kepa Maly had subsequently "withdrawn" his research supporting the Leina National Register nomination!
I called Kepa Maly at his home on Lana'i and he stated that he has never done any such thing, and no one has ever told him about this. He stated that he would write a letter to the National Trust attorney stating his position.
The attorney will call him Thursday to also talk with him directly- which I greatly encouraged her to do as soon as possible. This news that outright lies are being used by the Navy to block recognition of the Leina is something the Kanehili Cultural Hui takes very seriously and in fact should require a Federal investigation by the Navy Inspector General and other Federal agencies. This is an outright violation and the people responsible should be fired if not prosecuted.
We hope the Aha Moku Oahu takes a firm position on this outright violation of State and Federal laws preventing consultation and additionally making outright lies to other federal parties.
John Bond, President
kanehili Cultural Hui
Who is Kepa Maly?
Long Story Short with Leslie Wilcox - Kepa Maly - Lāna'i and the Spirit of Place - Part 2 - YouTube
https://www.kumupono.com/about/
Response To HART SEIS Comments on the Draft Supplemental EIS/4/(f) November 6, 2013
TO:
Mr. Ted Matley
Federal Transit Administration, Region 9
201 Mission Street, Suite 2210
San Francisco, Ca. 94105-1831
Daniel Grabauskas
Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation
City and County of Honolulu, 1099 Alakea Street, 17th Floor
Honolulu, Hawaii, 96813
CC: HAWAII'S THOUSAND FRIENDS
25 Maluniu Avenue, Suite 102 #282
Kailua, HI 96734
Aloha,
I am responding to previous comments that I have sent in as a member of Hawaii’s Thousand Friends and in association with my membership in the Kanehili Cultural Hui.
We do not find that our well documented 3 gigabytes of photographs, reports, geo-tech, historical and archeological surveys and studies, with reference to State and federal laws and legislative laws and resolutions, have been adequately and accurately addressed in the SEIS response to our comments.
Federal Judge Tashima made clear that TCP’s – Traditional Cultural places, should all be identified. This has not been the case in our opinion in the HART response to SEIS Comments on the Draft Supplemental EIS/4/(f) document. By HART not doing so as it applies to the entire rail route is, in our opinion, really an attempt to circumvent the intent of Judge Tashima’s Federal ruling.
Only a few items were cherry-picked by HART out of submitted testimony and answers were very brief and implied that these are issues that were already addressed previously in the EIS. Clearly, HART doesn’t want to address our documented concerns, including the well documented geo-tech study done for the downtown and Kakaako areas.
The SHPD-Kaleikini Supreme Court case shows the far-reaching impacts of the Hawaii Supreme Court decision in August for the Honolulu rail project. That ruling concluded the State Historic Preservation Division failed to follow its own rules in allowing an archaeological inventory survey to be completed in four phases — construction was allowed to begin on each rail segment following survey work.
Reading the letters exchanged between various City, State and Federal agencies (FTA, HART, etc.) show how rushed and sloppy the Archeological Inventory Survey (AIS) work was and how it was being tailored to fit expedited rail contracts and rail construction.
It is clear that being very familiar with the culture and history of Honouliuli-Ewa that the HART AIS was a shallow exercise in identification of cultural and historic resources and doesn’t truly meet professional standards for an EIS.
How can the entire HART EIS be based upon such poor and inaccurate work?
Honouliuli (being renamed with a fake “Ho’opili” name for development purposes) was the site of a very important ancient Hawaiian community with vast kalo ponds feeding many thousands of people. In fact the LARGEST pre-contact Hawaiian community on the island of Oahu existed here! Nearby was the original historic capital of the Hawaiian Kingdom- Waipio, and the entire area was known as the breadbasket of Oahu for its rich agriculture and aquaculture resources.
Ewa Plantation (which is also being given the fake name of “East Kapolei”) saw several Ewa Plains plantation villages, including Pipeline Village (in 1906 for Portuguese and Japanese workers) located out where the HART rail line will be constructed.
Waimanalo Camp, another Ewa Plantation village is another Ewa Plantation village that has not been adequately documented. The Ewa Plantation shows numerous roads and camps that the HART rail line will be impacting. There is more out there that needs an accurate cultural landscape survey done before major rail Transit Oriented Development takes place.
Ewa and Honouliuli were also linked by major important ancient Hawaiian trails where HART rail and Transit Oriented Development will develop, yet this has NOT been included as rail route impacts on these important Hawaiian trails. These trails were also of major importance during the annual Makahiki Ceremonies with Lono processions traveling throughout the ahupua’a of Honouliuli. In addition, these same trails are still used, it is said, by the Night Marchers of Honouliuli, meaning that future rail stations, offices and homes will be directly on top of these important ancient spirit pathways.
Ewa and Honouliuli needs to be a recognized historic landscape and Traditional Cultural Properties area and part of the Ewa Plains Cultural Historic Corridor District.
There will be another rail station at the DeBartolo DHHL “shopping center” site next to Ewa Village and the historic Hawaiian Railway – O.R.& L, yet there is absolutely no mention of the environmental impacts this will cause. Attempts are already being made to force the historic railway to move its historic rail yard. Land next to historic Verona Village has already been taken away and traded to DHHL as part of a HART Rail development deal. Where is the EIS impact and mitigation for this?
The State of Hawaii is mandated under law to protect cultural resources- caves, karst, underground streams and rivers under Statute 6D 1-10, Article 11, Section 7 State Constitution: Do NOT destroy these aquifers and native Hawaiian cultural practice.
The underground water that is known by hydrological documents and traditional Hawaiian cultural observation flows below ground in a myriad of karst channels and networks, which rail pylons and other site construction may very likely impact, especially in the Kalo’i gulch area on the Ewa Plain.
Of special concern is that Parsons Brinckerhoff wrote in the 2003 Final Honolulu BRT EIS:
"...extreme disruption of existing underground utilities and constant dewatering made necessary by a high-water table and poor soils would drive construction costs to unacceptable levels." -2003 FEIS
How has this finding of FACT changed? Won’t construction costs be driven to unacceptable levels due to extreme disruption of existing underground utilities and constant dewatering? We provided a great deal of documentation to substantiate this but it was largely ignored or “already addressed.” We don’t see it being addressed.
HART has chosen to pick just a few items in the submitted testimony to address and left out many of the important and very valid documented concerns.
Some of the concerns still not adequately addressed or glossed over:
Identification of Ewa Plain – Ewa- Honouliuli TCP’s,
Protection of the Ewa Plains 1825 Malden Trails (ancient Hawaiian trails),
The Kanehili-Kaupe’a Leina a ka Uhane, a very sacred spiritual leaping place,
The major Kalo’i Waterway not adequately surveyed for archeological sites,
The Ewa Plantation TCP - The most successful Sugar Plantation on Oahu,
The Ewa Plains extension of the King Kalakaua charted O.R.&L. in 1890,
The Kanehili-Kaupe’a below ground Karst water transport system,
The Ewa Battlefield of the December 7, 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor,
The 1825 Malden surveyed trails were major conduits for communication, defense, trade and very important religious and cultural ceremonies. And the Leina a ka Uhane in Kanehili and Kaupe’a of the Ewa Plains was a sacred burial area for iwi kupuna in the tens of thousands.
Burials in the Kanehili and Kaupe’a areas were conducted using the native Hawaiian Trails documented by Malden in 1825. The trails followed water streams and below surface Karst water sinkholes and which HART Rail guideway and stations go directly over.
There are many stories of construction or personal vehicles falling into underground caves and sinkholes over a period of many decades, including up until very recently.
HART AIS accepted documents state that “voids’ will be filled with liquid concrete. This is completely unacceptable!
John Bond
Kanehili Cultural Hui
P.O. Box 75578
Kapolei, HI. 96707
Please see the Index of original DVD Contents containing the comments for:
Draft Supplemental EIS for Honolulu Rail Transit Project Available for Public Review
The Honolulu Rail Transit Project is a 20-mile elevated rail line that will connect West Oahu with downtown Honolulu and Ala Moana Center. The Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation and the U.S. Federal Transit Administration have prepared a Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)/Section 4(f) Evaluation for the Honolulu Rail Transit Project as required by a U.S. District Court Judgment.
Submit written comments to Mr. Ted Matley, FTA Region IX, 201 Mission Street, Suite 1650, San Francisco, CA 94105, and Mr. Daniel A. Grabauskas, Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation, City and County of Honolulu, 1099 Alakea Street, Suite 1700 Honolulu, HI 96813
HB324 HD2 SD2 (Bill introduced by Ewa Senator Espero but not passed.) Pearl Harbor-Honouliuli Historical District
I PART . HISTORICAL DISTRICTS
§6E-F, Historical district designation. (a) The legislature may designate a contiguous geographical area in the State as a historical district. The designation shall be for honorary purposes to recognize the historical and cultural significance of that area to Hawaii.
(b) The department of land and natural resources may collaborate with interested parties to preserve historic property and other historically significant sites within a historical district and promote the historical district for educational, tourism, and economic purposes.
References
‘Aha Kiole Advisory Committee, State of Hawai‘i
2010 Best Practices and Structure for the Management of Natural and Cultural Resources in
Hawai‘i, Final Report. Report to the Twenty-Seventh Legislature, 2011 Regular Session.
http://ahamoku.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/2011-Aha-Kiole-Legislative-ReportFinal.pdf,
accessed October 23, 2011.
Alexander, W D.
1903 Hawaiian Geographic Names. U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey, Treasury Department
Appendix No. 7—Report for 1902. Washington: Government Printing Office.
Beckwith, Martha W.
1940 Hawaiian Mythology. Yale University Press.
Coulter, J. W.
1935 A Gazetteer of the Territory of Hawaii. University of Hawaii Research Publications 11.
Honolulu: University of Hawaii.
CSH [Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i , Inc.]
2008 Archaeological Resources Technical Report: Honolulu High-Capacity Transit Corridor
Project. Prepared by Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i. Prepared for the City and County of
Honolulu. August 15, 2008. Available at http://www.honolulutransit.org/
Dudley, Michael Kioni
1990 A Hawaiian Nation I: Man, Gods, and Nature. NƗ KƗne O Ka Malo Press: Honolulu.
Elbert, Samuel H.
1957 “The Chief in Hawaiian Mythology.” The Journal of American Folklore 70, no. 278:306-322.
Fornander, Abraham (compiler)
1916 He Kaao no Pikoiakaalala. Collection of Hawaiian Antiquities and Folk-lore. Bernice P.
Bishop Museum Memoirs, Vol. IV.
1918 He Kaao no Namakaokapaoo. Collection of Hawaiian Antiquities and Folk-lore. Bernice
P. Bishop Museum Memoirs, Vol. V.
Gowans, Alan
1993 Fruitful Fields. American Missionary Churches in Hawai‘i. Department of Land and
Natural Resources, State Historic Preservation Division, Honolulu.
Hammatt, Hallett H.
2010 Final Archaeological Inventory Survey Plan for Construction Phase II of the Honolulu
High-Capacity Transit Corridor Project, Waiawa, MƗnana, Waimano, Waiau, Waimalu, Kalauao, ‘Aiea, and HƗlawa Ahupua‘a, ‘Ewa District, Island of O‘ahu, TMK: [1] 9-7, 9-63 8, and 9-9 (Various Plats and Parcels). Prepared for Parsons Brinkerhoff, Inc. and the City & County of Honolulu. Prepared by Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc. Hammatt, Hallett H., and David W. Shideler
2009 Archaeological Inventory Survey Plan for Construction Phase I of the Honolulu HighCapacity Transit Corridor Project, Station 392+00 (near East Kapolei Station) to Station 776+00 (near Waimano Home Road), Honouliuli, Hǀ‘ae‘ae, Waikele, Waipi‘o, and Waiawa Ahupua‘a, ‘Ewa District, O‘ahu TMK: [1] 9-1, 9-4, 9-5, 9-6, 9-7 (Various Plats and Parcels). Prepared for Parsons Brinkerhoff, Inc. and the City & County of Honolulu. Prepared by Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc. Handy, E.S. Craighill
1940 The Hawaiian Planter: His Plants, Methods and Areas of Cultivation. B.P. Bishop
Museum Bulletin 161. Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu.
Handy, E.S. Craighill and Elizabeth Green Handy, with Mary Kawena Pukui 1972 Native Planters in Old Hawaii: Their Life, Lore, and Environment. Honolulu: Bishop Museum.
Hawaiian Encyclopedia.com
2011 http://www.hawaiianencyclopedia.com/hula-and-mele.asp,
accessed August 26, 2011 Herman, RDK
1999 The Aloha State: Place Names and the Anti-Conquest of Hawai'i. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, Vol. 89, No. 1 (March 1999), pp.76-102.Ii, John Papa (M.K. Pukui, translator)
1959 Fragments of Hawaiian History. Honolulu: Bishop Museum Press. James, Van
2010 Ancient Sites of O‘ahu: A Guide to Hawaiian Archaeological Places of Interest, revised
edition. Honolulu: Bishop Museum Press.Kahiolo, G.W.
1861 “He Moolelo no Kamapuaa” (A Tradition of Kamapuaa). Ka Hae Hawaii, July 10, 1861– Aukake 28, 1861.
Ka Loea Kalaiaina
1899-1900 “Na Wahi Pana o Ewa” (Storied Places of Ewa). Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum.
M.K. Pukui, translator
Kamakau, S.M., 1870 Nupepa Ke Au Okoa, Okatopa 6, 1870.
1961 Ruling Chiefs of Hawai‘i. Trans. By M. K. Pukui et al. Honolulu: Kamehameha Schools.
64 Kameeleihiwa, Lilikala
1992 Native land and foreign desires: how shall we live in harmony? Honolulu: Bishop
Museum Press.
1996 A Legendary Tradition of Kamapua‘a, the Hawaiian Pig-God. Honolulu: Bishop
Museum Press. Kanahele, Edward L.H.
2010 Forward. In James, V., Ancient Sites of O‘ahu: A Guide to Hawaiian Archaeological
Places of Interest, revised edition. Honolulu: Bishop Museum Press. Pp. ix-x. Kawaharada, Dennis, ed.
2001 Ancient O‘ahu: Stories from Fornander & Thrum. Kalamaknj Press: Honolulu. Kihe, J.W.H.I.
1924 “Na Hoomanao o ka Manawa.” Ka Hoku o Hawaii June 5 and 12, 1924. (K. Maly, translator.)
Kimura, Larry L. 1983 The Hawaiian Language. In Report on the Culture, Needs, and Concerns of Native
Hawaiians, pp. 173-203. Washington: Native Hawaiian Study Commission. King, Thomas F.
2003 Places That Count: Traditional Cultural Properties in Cultural Resource Management. Walnut Creek: Alta Mira Press. Kirch, Patrick Vinton
1985 Feathered Gods and Fishhooks: An Introduction to Hawaiian Archaeology and Prehistory. Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press.
2000 On the Road of the Winds: An Archaeological History of the Pacific Islands before European Contact. University of California Press: Berkeley. Luomala, Katharine
1983 Phantom Night Marchers in the Hawaiian Islands. Pacific Studies Vol. VII, No. 1, pp. 1-32. Malo, David
1951 Hawaiian Antiquities. Honolulu: B.P. Bishop Museum. (First published in 1903.) Maly, KepƗ
2001 MƗlama Pono i ka ‘Ɩina: An Overview of the Hawaiian Cultural Landscape. Maly, KepƗ and Onaona Maly 65
2011a “Hanohano LƗna‘i” – “LƗna‘i is Distinguished:” An Ethnography of Ka‘Ɨ Ahupua‘a and the Island of LƗna‘i. Kumu Pono Associates LLC. http://www.lanaichc.org/Kaa%20Study/Kaa_Ahupuaa_Ethnography_Lanai_May_21_20
11e_reduction.pdf, accessed October 20, 2011.
2011b He Mo‘olelo ‘Ɩina–Traditions and Storied Places in the District of ‘Ewa and Moanalua (in the District of Kona), Island of O‘ahu: A Traditional Cultural Properties Study –Technical Report. Technical Report for the Honolulu High Capacity Transit Corridor Project Traditional Cultural Property Study.
Marshall, Wende Elizabeth
2011 Potent Mana: Lessons of Healing and Power. SUNY Press. McAllister, J.G.
1933 Archaeology of Oahu. B.P. Bishop Museum Bulletin 104. Honolulu: Bishop Museum Press (Reprinted l971). New York: Kraus Reprint Co.
McGregor, Davianna Pomaikai, Paula T. Morelli, Jon K. Matsuoka, Rona Rodenhurst, Noella Kong, and Michael S. Spencer
2003 An Ecological Model of Native Hawaiian Well-Being. Pacific Health Dialog Vol. 10, No. 2:106-128.
Mokumaia, J. Kulia
1922 Moanalua i Kela Au i Hala aku a o Moanalua i Keia Au e Nee Nei — Moanalua in Times Past, and Moanalua in this Time Which Moves Forward. Kuokoa Nupepa, February 17 – June 29, 1022
Monahan, Christopher M.
2008 NƖ Wahi Pana O Waimea (O’ahu), a Traditional Cultural Property Study of Waimea. Prepared for the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Honolulu. 1Ɨone, C. Kanoelani
2008 The Pilina of Kanaka and ‘Aina: Place, Language and Community as Sites of Reclamation for Indigenous Education: The Hawaiian Case. Dissertation, Political Science, University of Hawai‘i. (see also ‘O ka ‘Ɩina, ka ‘ƿlelo, a me ke KaiƗulu.+njlili: Multidisciplinary Research on Hawaiian Well-Being Vol.5 (2008):315-339. Kamehameha Schools.)
National Register of Historic Places 1999 How to Complete the National Register Multiple Property Documentation Form. National Register Bulletin. Washington, D.C.: National Park Service.
National Register of Historic Places 1991 How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. National Register Bulletin 15. Washington, D.C.: National Park Service. 66
Oliver, Douglas L. 1989 [1961] The Pacific Islands. Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press. Paman, Joylynn
2010 Our Ahupua‘a – Sustainable Living in Traditional Hawaiian Culture. Poster for the Conservation Council for Hawai‘i. http://www.conservehi.org/documents/CCH_PosterGuide10.pdf, accessed October 22, 2011. Parker, Patricia L., and Thomas F. King, 1990 Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Traditional Cultural Properties. National Register Bulletin 38. Washington, D.C.: National Park Service.
Pukui, Mary Kawena 1983 µƿlelo No‘eau: Hawaiian Proverbs and Poetical Sayings. Honolulu: Bishop Museum Press. Pukui, Mary Kawena, and Samuel H. Elbert
1966 Place Names of Hawaii. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Pukui, Mary Kawena, Elbert, Samuel H., and Mookini, Esther T.
1974 Place Names of Hawaii, 2nd edition. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Silva, Noenoe K.
2008 NƗQƗ I Ke Kumu: Look to the Source. Te Kaharoa, vol. 2:64-76.
Thrum, Thomas G. 1907 Hawaiian Folktales. Chicago: A.C. McClurg and Co. Westervelt, W. D.
1916 Hawaiian Legends of Ghosts and Ghost-Gods, Collected and Translated from the Hawaiian. Ellis Press, Boston
