Koholalele Hamakua EA PBR Final TMK No. 4-2-005:001

Home

HAMAKUA LAND SALE: KOHOLALELE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT time, growing, harvesting and processing of sugar was rudimentary, relying on Hawaiian labor and the power of water, oxen, mule and horse. The industry grew through the 1800's as a result of increased demand from the U.S., a reduction in import duties, introduction of new cane varieties and importation of labor. The Hamakua Mill Company, which eventually evolves to be the Hamakua Sugar Company was founded in 1877 by Theo Davies and Charles Notley, Sr. Notley, a British businessman originally acquired a lease for the ahupua`a in 1872 from P. Nahaolelua, heir of Ka`ilakanoa (See Peralto, Exhibit E). Following the death of P. Nahaolelua, the land was foreclosed upon as Nahaolelua's heir was not able to maintain the mortgage. The land was transferred to a German sugar planter, Hermann A. Widemann in 1878. Throughout, Notley maintained a lease for the land and in 1882 purchased it from Widemann (Peralto, Exhibit E). In addition to Notley's intest in sugar, he also formed Kuka`iau Ranch with John M. Horner in the mauka lands of the Kuka `iau and Koholalele (Peralto, Exhibit E). The Kuka `iau Ranch lands did not include the project area lands. By 1910, the Hamakua Mill Company had 4,800 acres planted in sugarcane; employed more than 600 people; and, had a warehouse and landing below the cliff at Koholalele. Five individuals who either worked for the Hamakua Sugar Company or live in the area and have knowledge of the site were contacted for interviews. None of the cultural informants had knowledge of past or ongoing cultural practices on the project site. Additionally, letters of inquiry were sent to organizations whose expertise would include the project area. Apart from a letter acknowledging receipt of the letter of inquiry, no organizations responded with information concerning the potential for cultural resources to occur in the project area or suggestions for further contacts. Public notices were also published in Ka Wai Ola, The Honolulu Advertiser and the Hawaii Tribune Herald. The CIA concludes, "Based on organizational response as well as archival research, it is reasonable to conclude that, pursuant to Act 50, the exercise of native Hawaiian rights, or any ethnic group, related to gathering, access or other customary activities will not be affected by development activities on this parcel. Because there were no cultural activities identified within the project area, there are no adverse effects." Potential Impacts and Mitigation Measures Based on the conclusion of the CIA, no impacts to cultural resources are expected if the land is sold. Similarly, if the land is subdivided into agricultural lots and developed for agricultural uses, no impacts to cultural resources are expected. No mitigation measures are proposed. 4 -5