T. S. Dye & Colleagues, Archaeologists, Inc.735 Bishop St., Suite 315, Honolulu, Hawai‘i 96813

Archaeological Inventory Survey for a RoadRealignment in Kohala

Thomas S. Dye, Ph.D.

January 28, 2003

Contents1 Introduction 2

1.1 The Survey Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21.2 Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21.3 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

1.3.1 Previous Archaeology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51.3.2 History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

1.4 Settlement Pattern Predictions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

2 Methods 9

3 Field Survey Results and Conclusions 9

Glossary 11

Bibliography 12

Illustrations1 Project area location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Current condition of the road realignment corridor . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Current condition of north detour road alignment . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Eroded face . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Tables1 Land Commission awards in Kawaihae 1st ahupua‘a . . . . . . . . . 8

1

2 1 INTRODUCTION

1 Introduction

At the request of Earth Tech, Inc. T. S. Dye & Colleagues, Archaeologists, Inc. hascompleted an archaeological inventory survey of approximately 4.5 acres in South Ko-hala. The inventory survey was carried out in advance of a realignment project for asmall stretch of the Kohala Mountain road located at the boundary of North and SouthKohala districts, primarily within the ahupua‘a of Kawaihae 1st in South Kohala, but

ahupua‘aextending a short distance into the ahupua‘a of Waika in North Kohala (fig. 1). In ad-dition to the new road section, two temporary detour roads are proposed, one at eachend of the new road section. At the time of the archaeological survey, detour locationshad not been finalized. Preferred locations are mauka of the current road. The survey

maukaarea took in all of the land potentially usable for detour roads.

1.1 The Survey Area

The 1.8 ha survey area is located at a sharply curving portion of the Kohala Mountainroad just south of the boundary between North and South Kohala (fig. 1), at elevationsof 3,200–3,400 ft. above sea level. The southern end, along a straight section of the roadtakes in possible detour road corridors on both sides of the road. The middle portion isbounded by the current road on the mauka side and by the construction corridor for theproposed new road section on the makai side. The narrow north portion is bounded by

makaithe current road on the makai side and by the proposed location of a detour road on themauka side.

The survey area emcompasses portions of several tax map parcels. The north endon the mauka side of the road, a preferred location for one of the detours, is tax mapparcel 5–9–2:1, owned by Kahua Ranch. On the makai side of the road at the northare various smaller parcels in tax map plat 5–9–9; these parcels constitute a recentsubdivision and the proposed realignment project will not extend into these parcels.According to the tax map, many are held by Kohala Joint Ventures and several are usedtoday for residences. The bulk of the project area is located in tax map parcels 6–1–1:2and 3, both of which are Hawaiian Home Lands leased to Kahua Ranch. The proposednew section of road and one possible detour road location run through tax map parcel6–1–1:3, makai of the current road. A possible detour road location mauka of the roadis in tax map parcel 6–1–1:2.

1.2 Environment

The project area is located on the leeward flank of the Kohala Volcano on lavas thatwere erupted during the Pleistocene epoch, approximately 120,000–230,000 years ago(Wolfe and Morris 1996). The land slopes down to the west and has moderate localrelief (fig. 2). Immediately mauka of the project area is the scoria cone, Pu‘u Honu,which stands about 200 m above the surrounding terrain. Keanahalululu Gulch cutsthrough the northern end of the project area; it marks the boundary between North andSouth Kohala districts. This gulch is relatively shallow through the project area withgently sloping sides and a boulder-filled bed (fig. 3).

1.2 Environment 3

��

�

���

� �

���

�

��

��� ��� � � �� � �

��� ����� ��� � �

� ����� �

� �������

� �������� ����� �

����� � ����� ��������� �"!#�%$ &

')( *�+ ,.- /"0�*�1�2 3546( 7')( *�8 *:9,�3;( ,.4=< > ?�2�@A,.2 /

� ')( *�0:4�0�< ,B9C> / ,D > / ,

E

FG H I J K�L H K M N M

FO H P J K�L H K M N MF Q R S T U V W X R U X

Y)Z.[�Z\^]`_badcfe)g g _�hji"k)_#l�mn^ojpq)h)_�e)g ejisr l�t l�mu�v)pjZw`h)v�k)h)o ]yx)z�z){

Figure 1. Project area location on a portion of the U.S.G.S. Kawaihae quad map,showing the location of known and probable historic sites in the vicinity.Inset: Project location on Hawai‘i Island.

The project area gets about 30 in. of rain annually (Giambelluca and Schroeder1998:57). Soils developed on ash from Pu‘u Honu along the mauka edge of the sur-vey area are classified as Palapalai silt loam (Sato et al. 1973). These are deep soils,extending to depths of 60 in. or more. Elsewhere in the project area are Waimea veryfine sandy loams. These soils, also formed in volcanic ash, have depths up to 42 in.over hard basalt bedrock. Both soils are typically used for pasture, as they are todayin the project area. Waimea very fine sandy loams are used for irrigated agriculture insome parts of Hawai‘i Island. The lands of the project area are classified as Zone C2 byRipperton and Hosaka (1942). This is the most desirable zone for non-irrigated agri-culture, and is ideal land for pastures of many types (Ripperton and Hosaka 1942:37).Vegetation is typical of an active pasture. The project area falls on the boundary of twopasture vegetation types. Kikuyu-rattail grassland is found makai of the road; mixed,

4 1 INTRODUCTION

Figure 2. Current condition of the road realignment corridor through pasture lands,looking north. The approximate route of the road is indicated by the grayline.

Figure 3. Current condition of north detour road alignment, looking southeast.Keanahalululu gulch is in the foreground and Pu‘u Honu is in the back-ground at the left.

1.3 Background 5

wet grasses and herbs are found mauka of the road (McEldowney 1983).

1.3 BackgroundThe goals of this section are to predict the kinds and distributions of historic propertiesthat might still be present in the project area and to provide a context for understandingand evaluating the significance of any historic properties that are found.

1.3.1 Previous Archaeology

The traditional Hawaiian settlement pattern of leeward Kohala was one of the firstin Hawai‘i to be studied archaeologically, beginning with the University of Hawai‘ifield school at Lapakahi in 1968 (Pearson 1968; Newman 1970). Subsequent workat Lapakahi (Tuggle and Griffin 1973; Rosendahl 1972, 1994), in the Mahukona areanorth of Lapakahi (Burgett and Rosendahl 1993; Wulzen and Goodfellow 1995), alongthe leeward coast from ‘Upolu Point south to Lapakahi (Tomonari-Tuggle 1988), atLamaloloa, Kaipuhaa, and Koaeae immediately south of Lapakahi (Barrera 1995), atPao‘o (Hammatt and Folk 1980), near the southern boundary of North Kohala districtat Waika and Kahua (Graves and Franklin 1998), and in Kawaihae (Clark and Kirch1983; Barrera and Kelly 1974) has confirmed a traditional settlement pattern dividedinto three zones (Kirch 1985; Rosendahl 1994:282-283). A narrow band of habitationsites along the coast is separated from a broad inland zone of agricultural features andhabitation sites by a barren zone with few archaeological sites other than the trails thattraverse it, connecting sites along the coast with their agricultural lands. The locationand width of the barren zone varies with climate and other factors (Smith and Schilt1973; Ladefoged et al. 1998). In the relatively wet north, near ‘Upolu Point, it is lessthan 1 km wide but it widens as it moves into the dry southern lands. Above the settledlands was forest, through which trails were established and resources were exploited.

On the basis of a detailed survey and excavations, Rosendahl (1994) identifiedseven functional site types in the inland agricultural region of Lapakahi and describedtheir distribution over the landscape. Residential features were most commonly C-shaped structures, but included platforms, rectangular enclosures, and complexes offeatures. The C-shaped structures were distributed in clusters of two to five featuresthroughout an extensive system of rectangular agricultural fields, defined by piled stoneand earthen embankment borders and by a series of trails running up and down theslope. Tentative burial features, including mounds and small platforms, were usuallyfound in groups associated with a cluster of C-shaped structures. Water catchment fea-tures fashioned “atop elevated, dome-like bedrock outcroppings of collapsed naturallava flow blisters or bubbles” (Rosendahl 1994:39), were found mostly at higher eleva-tions with greater rainfall. Three religious features, all stone platforms were found atlocations with commanding views of the area below. Other features that did not fit intoone of the other six functional site types included isolated walls, stone alignments andfirepits, cairns, a small cave, rock shelters, and petroglyphs.

Within the ahupua‘a of Kawaihae, most archaeological work has been carried outat the coast. Major projects at the coast include inventory survey and data recoveryalong the route of the Waimea–Kawaihae highway (Clark and Kirch 1983; Barrera and

6 1 INTRODUCTION

Kelly 1974), and an inventory survey of lands in Kawaihae 1st from the coast to anelevation of approximately 600 ft. above sea level (Allen 1987), followed by anotherto 1,000 ft. above sea level (Hammatt et al. 1991). These surveys found sites clusteredclose to the coast, with a decline in density inland and north of Kawaihae Bay.

The project area and the lands around it were the subject of a reconnaissance surveyby helicopter and foot of Hawaiian Home Lands (Hammatt and Shideler 1991). Thissurvey yielded both traditional Hawaiian sites and historic-era sites related to cattleranching, along with many probable sites that were noted but not investigated duringthe reconnaissance. The general pattern of settlement revealed by the reconnaissanceindicates that traditional Hawaiian sites are located at somewhat lower elevations thanhistoric-era sites, but with what appears to be substantial overlap. Traditional Hawaiiansites are generally located along Keanahalululu and Waipahoehoe Gulches and Keawe-wai Stream. They include heiau, house sites, and irrigated agricultural fields, “unusual

heiauin their integrity and degree of preservation” (Hammatt and Shideler 1991:4). No dry-land fields, similar to those of North Kohala, were found. Instead, agriculture appearsto rely on irrigation water drawn from the gulches, which are here more developedthan they are in North Kohala. The historic-era sites include enclosed house sites andenclosures interpreted as corrals.

Four recorded sites are located within 1 km of the project area (see fig. 1 onpage 3). Site 50–10–05–149131 is the former site of the Kawaihae Uka Church atHo‘epa and the Akahi homestead (Hammatt and Shideler 1991:35). Site 50–10–05–14914 is the former site of the Awaa, Iokepa, and Ikaika homesteads (Hammatt andShideler 1991:35). Site 50–10–05–14915 is a terraced house site with associated en-closures, one of which is interpreted as an agricultural field, and an ‘auwai. This site

‘auwaiis believed to date to the prehistoric period. Site 50–10–05–14916 is an historic-erahouse site and corral (Hammatt and Shideler 1991:42).

The nearest probable site noted by the reconnaissance survey is located on a rockyridge about 150 m makai of the project area.

Two inventory surveys mauka of Kohala Mountain Road, south of the project area,have been carried out (Walker and Rosendahl 1994, 1995). These surveys recordedhistoric-era sites associated with cattle ranching.

1.3.2 History

The project area falls within the traditional district of Kohala; the modern districts ofNorth Kohala and South Kohala were created by an act of legislature in 1859 (King1935:216).

Few legends specifically mention the project area, which is located in in an areatraditionally known as na pu‘u ‘aina ko (Walker and Rosendahl 1994:12). Maly hastranslated a legend published in 1917 in the Hawaiian language newspaper Ka Hokuo Hawai‘i in Hilo (Walker and Rosendahl 1994:11–12) that involves an encounterbetween the legend’s protagonists and a master fighter named Keanahalululu in the

1The site numbers used here were assigned by SHPD. They differ systematically from the numbers usedby Hammatt and Shideler (1991), which consist of a three digit site number and a two digit prefix. TheSHPD assigned five digit site numbers, derived by merging the original site number and prefix, to which wasadded the prefix 50–10–05, e.g. 14–913 becomes 50–10–05–1493.

1.3 Background 7

chiefess Keawewai’s sugarcane fields. Keanahalululu is the name of the gulch that tra-verses the project area; it can be translated as “the cave of roaring; as wind travellingthrough a cave” (Walker and Rosendahl 1994:11). Keawewai is the name of a gulch inKahua ahupua‘a north of the project area and of a stream south of the project area inKawaihae ahupua‘a.

Both of the ahupua‘a names concern water. Waika is translated as “cleared water”,and Kawaihae, “the water [of] wrath” because people are said to have fought over freshwater from a pool here (Pukui et al. 1974).

Clark (1983) provides an overview of the history of Kawaihae, information fromwhich is summarized below.

Maps from the early nineteenth century show about 100 houses around KawaihaeBay, stretching from Keawehala Point in Kawaihae 2nd ahupua‘a to just north of thelighthouse in Kawaihae 1st. There were two fishponds at Kawaihae: Makeahua pond, aloko wai near the homestead of John Young, and another fishpond of unrecorded type. loko wai

Salt works at Kauhuhu provided a product for trade with foreign vessels that called atKawaihae Bay, one of the best natural harbors on the island, and later for use in thecattle industry.

The pili grass lands extended about 6 km back from the coast in the early historic pili

period, A.D. 1792–1850 (McEldowney 1983:442). Above these for another 3 km werekula lands, whose use for agriculture is described as patchy (McEldowney 1983:420). kula

The project area falls within the upper kula zone mapped by (McEldowney 1983).Above the kula was ‘ohi‘a rainforest, which extended to the tops of the mountains. ‘ohi‘a

Historically, the boundary between kula and rainforest has moved mauka, primarilyas an indirect result of economic opportunities brought about by contact with the worldoutside Polynesia. The first of these had a direct effect on the forest through removalof sandalwood trees. The sandalwood trade was in full swing by 1823, when ReverendEllis saw two to three thousand men carrying sandalwood to Kawaihae, and was doneby the early 1840s when the forests had been stripped of the tree. It was followed bytrade in provisions for whalers, including agricultural products such as Irish and sweetpotatoes, taro, and coconuts, along with pigs, fish, and salt. This trade declined in the1850s, as the whaling industry collapsed due to technological advances leading to theeconomical distaillation of kerosene from crude oil. More stable than these ventureswas one that occupies the project area today—cattle ranching. Cattle were introducedto the island by Vancouver in 1793 and they multiplied under a kapu against their cap- kapu

ture for ten years. By the early 1800s, feral herds were being culled by bullock hunting.An industry based on meat, hides, and tallow had been established by the governmentand chiefs by 1830 and grew rapidly in the 1840s. The modern ranches that operate inthis region were established in the early twentieth century; Kahua Ranch, which ownsor leases lands of the project area, was formed in 1928 by Atherton Richards and RonVon Holt (Walker and Rosendahl 1994:14).

The Land Commission awarded ten small parcels within the ahupua‘a of Kawaihae1st (table 1), none of which are near the project area. Nine of the awards are for landsat the shore; this area has now been extensively modified with modern developmentof the deep draft harbor (Cordy 2000:348). The largest parcel, 5.2 acres, is located inthe uplands at the place identified on the U.S.G.S Kawaihae quadrangle as KawaihaeUka, south of the project area near the boundary of Kawaihae 1st and 2nd ahupua‘a. It

8 1 INTRODUCTION

includes lands given to Lorenzo Lincoln for his “long services for Kuakini in tanningleather” (Land Board 1851a:Vol. 3, 203), and lands that came to him through his wife’sfamily. It had three houses within an enclosure and two corrals (Land Board 1851b:Vol.4, 144–145).

Table 1. Land Commission awards in Kawaihae 1st ahupua‘a

Award Awardee Acres4884 Wm. French 1.344101 Kahanaui 0.194091 Kaue 1.544106 Kaui 0.094094 Kepaimaka 1.18513 Lorenzo Lincoln 5.23669 Makahi 0.2533668 Manuia 3.283826 Punihaniha 0.589971 W. P. Leleiohoku 0.06

No kuleana awards were recorded for Waika ahupua‘a.kuleana

The paucity of land claims in upland Kawaihae doesn’t mean that these landsweren’t used, or that people didn’t live here. The village of Ho‘epa, located about 500m south of the project area at the edge of Waipahoehoe Gulch, had at least 217 adults in1857 and was occupied until the 1950s (Walker and Rosendahl 1995:7–8). The villageincluded a church, called variously Ho‘epa Church, Kawaihae Uka Church, and pos-sibly Sacred Heart of Jesus Roman Catholic Church (Hammatt and Shideler 1991:11),along with several homesteads whose owners are known (see pg. 6).

1.4 Settlement Pattern PredictionsIn traditional Hawaiian times, the project area appears to have been located at the up-land edge of the cultivated zone. Based on the archaeological remains recorded duringa reconnaissance survey, cultivation here appears to have been irrigated with waterfrom the now-dry gulches. The dryland field systems of North Kohala, characterizedby rock and earthen embankments up to 1 m high and 2 m wide, extend as far south asKahua ahupua‘a, about 1.3 km north of the project area (Ladefoged et al. 1998; Lade-foged and Graves 2000). Use of the project area at this time might have been limitedto periodic exploitation for feathers and other forest products, assuming that the foresthad not been cleared to this elevation until the historic-era.

During the historic era, use of the project area for cattle ranching is well docu-mented, although when this began is not known. Use of the area by the 1850s whenHo‘epa Village was established seems relatively certain, however.

Traditional Hawaiian and historic-era site types recorded in the vicinity includeenclosures, platforms, and ‘auwai. Many of these are relatively substantial structuresand most are in excellent condition. They are easily identified; the architectural featuresstand above the low pasture grass that surrounds them and the ‘auwai show clearly asdepressions in the generally flat pastures.

9

2 Methods

The project area was surveyed over a period of three hours on December 20, 2002 bythe author, with the assistance of Karl Bromwell, Earth Tech, Inc., who pointed outthe survey area boundaries and provided combinations to the locks on pasture gates.The entire survey area is in low pasture grass and visibility was excellent (see fig. 2 onpage 4). Pedestrian survey covered the proposed road corridor and the potential detourlocations at the north and south ends with sufficient intensity to find all potentiallysignificant surface architectural features. In addition, exposures of soil and sedimentwere identified and carefully searched for evidence of buried historic sites. Digitalphotographs were taken to document the current condition of the project area.

3 Field Survey Results and Conclusions

Pedestrian survey of the project area indicates that traditional Hawaiian and historic-era stone structures are not present. Other than ranch roads and fences there are noman-made structures in the project area.

Sediment exposures throughout the project area were examined for evidence ofpast human activity. An expanse of sediment along the ranch fence bordering the road,visible along the right hand side of figure 2 on page 4 yielded no evidence of a burieddeposit. In addition, an eroded face mauka of the Kohala Mountain Road contained noevidence of a burn layer or other human activity (fig. 4).

Figure 4. Eroded face, looking west. Note the lack of a burn layer exposed in theface. See figure 1 on page 3 for the location of the eroded face. The scaleis marked in 10 cm increments.

10 3 FIELD SURVEY RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, the proposed construction of a road through the project area willhave “no effect” on historic sites because no historic sites are present.

GLOSSARY 11

GlossaryEntries for Hawaiian words are excerpted or paraphrased, where possible, from theHawaiian Dictionary (Pukui and Elbert 1971), or from Lucas (1995). Geological andgeographical terms are from American Geological Institute (1976) and Clark (1998).Archaeological terms are from Bray and Trump (1982) and Mignon (1993).

‘auwai Ditch.

‘ohi‘a Two kinds of forest trees. See also ‘ohi‘a ‘ai and ‘ohi‘a lehua.

‘ohi‘a ‘ai The mountain apple tree, Eugenia malaccensis, a forest tree to 50 ft. high.

‘ohi‘a lehua An endemic species, Metrosideros polymorpha, that ranges in habit fromprostrate shrubs to tall trees and is distributed from sea level to 2,200 m elevationon all the main Hawaiian Islands.

ahupua‘a Traditional Hawaiian land division usually extending from the uplands tothe sea.

heiau Traditional Hawaiian place of worship.

kapu Taboo, prohibition; special privilege or exemption from ordinary taboo; sacred-ness; prohibited, forbidden; sacred, holy, consecrated; no trespassing, keep out.

kula Plain, field, open country, pasture. Land with no water rights.

kuleana Right, title, property, portion, responsibility, jurisdiction, authority, interest,claim, ownership.

loko wai Freshwater pond or lake.

makai Seaward.

mauka Inland, upland, toward the mountain.

pili A native grass, Heteropogon contortus.

12 BIBLIOGRAPHY

BibliographyAllen, M. S. (1987). Archaeological Inventory Survey of DHHL Lands, Kawaihae,

South Kohala, Hawaii. Prepared for Department of Hawaiian Home Lands. Hon-olulu: Department of Anthropology, B. P. Bishop Museum.

American Geological Institute (1976). Dictionary of Geological Terms (Revised ed.).Garden City, N.Y.: Anchor Press.

Barrera, Jr., W. (1995, January). Lamaloloa, Kaipuhaa and Koaeae, North Kohala,Hawaii Island: Archaeological Inventory Survey of TMK:5–7–01:11. Prepared forMr. Dennis Gordy. Comstock Cultural Resource Management Inc.

Barrera, Jr., W. and M. Kelly (1974). Archaeological and Historical Surveys of theWaimea to Kawaihae Road Corridor. Island of Hawaii. Number 74–1 in Departmen-tal Report Series. Honolulu: Department of Anthropology, B. P. Bishop Museum.

Bray, W. and D. Trump (1982). The Penguin Dictionary of Archaeology (Second ed.).New York: Penguin Books.

Burgett, B. D. and P. H. Rosendahl (1993). Summary of Archaeological InventorySurveys, Kapaanui Agricultural Subdivision and Mahukona Property, Lands of Ka-paanui, Kou, Kamano, Mahukona 1st and 2nd, Hihiu, and Kaoma, North KohalaDistrict, Island of Hawaii (TMK: 3–5-7–02:11 and TMK: 3–5-7–03:1–3, 10–14,16–18. Prepared for Chalon International of Hawaii, Inc. Hilo, Hawaii: Paul H.Rosendahl, Ph.D., Inc.

Clark, A. N. (1998). The Penguin Dictionary of Geography (Second ed.). London:Penguin Books.

Clark, J. T. (1983, February). The Waimea-Kawaihae region: Historical background.See Clark and Kirch (1983), Report 3, pp. 39–57.

Clark, J. T. and P. V. Kirch (Eds.) (1983, February). Archaeological Investigations ofthe Mudlane-Waimea-Kawaihae Road Corridor, Island of Hawai‘i: An Interdisci-plinary Study of an Environmental Transect. Number 83–1 in Departmental ReportSeries. Honolulu: Department of Anthropology, B. P. Bishop Museum.

Cordy, R. (2000). Exalted Sits the Chief: The Ancient History of Hawai‘i Island.Honolulu: Mutual Publishing.

Giambelluca, T. W. and T. A. Schroeder (1998). Climate. In S. P. Juvik and J. O. Juvik(Eds.), Atlas of Hawai‘i (Third ed.)., pp. 49–59. Honolulu: University of HawaiiPress.

Graves, D. K. and L. J. Franklin (1998, March). Archaeological Inventory Survey,Kahua Makai/Kahua Shores Coastal Parcels: Lands of Kahua 1 and 2 and Waika,North Kohala District, Island of Hawai’i (TMK:3–5-9–01:7,8). Prepared for GentryHawaii, Ltd. Hilo, Hawaii: Paul H. Rosendahl, Ph.D., Inc.

BIBLIOGRAPHY 13

Hammatt, H. H. and W. H. Folk (1980). Archaeological Surface Survey and SubsurfaceTesting of Coastal Lands in Pao‘o, Kohala, Hawai‘i Island. Prepared for SignalProperties. Lawa‘i, Hawaii: Archaeological Research Center Hawaii, Inc.

Hammatt, H. H. and D. W. Shideler (1991, February). A Reconnaissance and Archaeo-logical Assessment for the Kawaihae Master Plan. Prepared for R. M. Towill Corp.Kailua, Hawaii: Cultural Surveys Hawaii. Draft report.

Hammatt, H. H., D. W. Shideler, D. K. Borthwick, M. Stride, M. McDermott, andK. Nakamura (1991). Archaeological Survey and Testing, Kawaihae 1 (Komohana),South Kohala, Hawaii. Prepared for Department of Hawaiian Home Lands. Kailua,Hawaii: Cultural Surveys Hawaii.

King, R. D. (1935). Districts in the Hawaiian Islands. In J. W. Coulter (Ed.), AGazetteer of the Territory of Hawaii, Number 11 in University of Hawaii ResearchPublications, pp. 214–230. Honolulu: University of Hawaii.

Kirch, P. V. (1985). Feathered Gods and Fishhooks: An Introduction to HawaiianArcaheology and Prehistory. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

Ladefoged, T. N. and M. W. Graves (2000). Evolutionary theory and the historicaldevelopment of dry-land agriculture in North Kohala, Hawai‘i. American Antiq-uity 65(3), 423–448.

Ladefoged, T. N., M. W. Graves, and R. Jennings (1998). Dryland agricultural expan-sion and intensification in Kohala, Hawai‘i Island. Antiquity 70, 861–880.

Land Board (1846–1851a). Foreign testimony. Archives of Hawaii.

Land Board (1846–1851b). Native testimony. Archives of Hawaii.

Lucas, P. F. N. (1995). A Dictionary of Hawaiian Legal Land-Terms. Honolulu: NativeHawaiian Legal Corporation and University of Hawai‘i Committeee for the Preser-vation and Study of Hawaiian Language, Art and Culture.

McEldowney, H. (1983, February). A description of major vegetation patterns in theWaimea-Kawaihae region during the early historic period. See Clark and Kirch(1983), Report 16, pp. 407–448.

Mignon, M. R. (1993). Dictionary of Concepts in Archaeology. Number 13 in Refer-ence Sources for the Social Sciences and Humanities. Westport, Conn.: GreenwoodPress.

Newman, S. T. (1970). Hawaiian Fishing and Farming on the Island of Hawaii inA.D. 1778. Honolulu: Department of Land and Natural Resources.

Pearson, R. J. (Ed.) (1968, December). Excavations at Lapakahi, N. Kohala, HawaiiIsland—1968. Number 69–2 in State Archaeological Journal. Honolulu: Departmentof Land and Natural Resources, Division of State Parks.

14 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Pukui, M. K. and S. H. Elbert (1971). Hawaiian Dictionary (Third ed.). Honolulu:University of Hawaii Press.

Pukui, M. K., S. H. Elbert, and E. T. Mookini (1974). Place Names of Hawaii. Hon-olulu: University of Hawaii Press.

Ripperton, J. C. and E. Y. Hosaka (1942). Vegetation Zones of Hawaii. Number 89 inHawaii Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin. Honolulu: University of Hawaii.

Rosendahl, P. H. (1972). Aboriginal Agriculture and Residence Patterns in UplandLapakahi, Island of Hawaii. Ph. D. thesis, University of Hawaii, Honolulu.

Rosendahl, P. H. (1994). Aboriginal Hawaiian structural remains and settlement pat-terns in the upland agricultural zone at Lapakahi, island of Hawai‘i. Hawaiian Ar-chaeology 3, 14–70.

Sato, H. H., W. Ikeda, R. Paeth, R. Smythe, and M. Takehiro, Jr. (1973). Soil Surveyof the Island of Hawaii, State of Hawaii. Washington, D. C.: United States Depart-ment of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service in cooperation with the Universityof Hawaii Agricultural Experiment Station.

Smith, K. and A. Schilt (1973). North Kohala: Agricultural field systems and geo-graphic variables. In H. D. Tuggle and P. B. Griffin (Eds.), Lapakahi, Hawaii: Ar-chaeological Studies, Number 5 in Asian and Pacific Archaeology Series, pp. 309–320. Honolulu: Social Science Research Institute, University of Hawaii.

Tomonari-Tuggle, M. (1988). North Kohala: Perception of a Changing Community.Honolulu: Division of State Parks, Outdoor Recreation and Historic Sites, Depart-ment of Land and Natural Resources, State of Hawaii.

Tuggle, D. H. and B. Griffin (1973). Lapakahi, Hawaii: Archaeological Studies. Num-ber 5 in Asian and Pacific Archaeology Series. Honolulu: Social Science ResearchInstitute, University of Hawai‘i.

Walker, A. T. and P. H. Rosendahl (1994, April). Archaeological Inventory Survey,Proposed NEXRAD and ATCBI Sites and Related Access Road Corridor, Land ofKawaihae 1st, South Kohala District, Island of Hawai‘i. Prepared for SRI Interna-tional. Hilo: Paul H. Rosendahl, Ph.D., Inc.

Walker, A. T. and P. H. Rosendahl (1995, January). Archaeological Inventory Sur-vey, Proposed Substation Site and Utility Corridor for NEXRAD. Prepared for SRIInternational. Hilo, Hawaii: Paul H. Rosendahl, Ph.D., Inc.

Wolfe, E. W. and J. Morris (1996). Geologic Map of the Island of Hawaii. NumberI-2524 in Miscellaneous Investigations Series. Denver: U.S. Geological Service.

Wulzen, W. and S. T. Goodfellow (1995). Final Report, Phased Archaeological Inven-tory Survey, Phase II—Data Collection, Chalon International, Mahukona MaukaParcel, Lands of Kamano, Mahukona 1st and 2nd, Hihiu, and Ka‘oma, North Ko-hala District, Island of Hawai‘i (TMK: 3–5–7–02: por. 27 and 36). Prepared forChalon International of Hawaii, Inc. Hilo, Hawai‘i: Paul H. Rosendahl, Ph.D., Inc.