PD BACKGROUND REPORT (PL-PDI-2022-000004)

Home

listed as endangered or threatened. The conservation easement for the 9,107.97-acre area also mentions that there are closed `Ohi`a lehua mesic forest, open Koa forest with Mamane, and open Koa forest. The fauna study observed several endemic bird species (short eared owls, Hawaiian hawks, common Amakihi, Apapane, I`iwi and `Elepaio) and 16 other introduced birds were also observed. Terrestrial animals included introduced species such as feral pig, cows, mongoose, cats, and dogs as well as rodents. None of the preceding species were listed as endangered. All the conservation easements discussed above include protecting ecological resources of the native forest ecosystem, open space, and water resources. 22. Archaeological Resources: An archaeological Assessment (AA) of the entire project area was conducted by Cultural Surveys Hawaii in April 1991. The AA determined that given the limited number and widely dispersed spacing of identified archaeological sites (including prehistoric and historic Hawaiian sites) over such a large project area, they would not be an impediment to the development of the project site. The AA also determined that a portion of the project area makai of the 3,000-foot elevation as part of the Kona Field System (State Site 50-10-37-6601), which could indicate a higher possibility of archaeological sites within that area. Cultural Surveys Hawaii also prepared an archaeological inventory survey (AIS) entitled, "Archaeological Inventory Survey for the Kealakekua Development Company Phase I Area (8-02-12:1) " for a portion of the project area between the 2,200- and 3,200-foot elevation in August 1991. The AIS identified 19 sites, the majority of which were believed to be associated with homestead sites or enterprises of Japanese immigrants that were utilized between 1900 and 1930 (including cookhouses, cisterns, gardens, charcoal and meat smoking kilns, furos, roads, etc.). Only one site was thought to be prehistoric (a minor agricultural terrace feature). Three sites were recommended for data recovery or retention under significance criteria C (excellent example of site type) and D (likely to yield information important in prehistory or history). Nine sites were considered significant for their information content and the final seven sites were considered to be "no longer significant" since the AIS provided adequate information about them. By letter dated February 22, 1993, the State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) accepted the AIS and agreed with the significance evaluations but required more information on the mitigation proposals for data recovery