Maui Meeting Synopsis
July 24, 2001

Persons in Attendance: Mr. Barry Altland, Ms. Cute Bear, Mr. Dave Campbell, Ms. Mary Cochran, Mr. Charles Maxwell, Mr. Wayne Peterson, Mr. Rob Rathcowsiw, Mr. Walter Schmid, Mr.Mitch Skaggerberg, Mr. Thomas Tancre, Mr. Chuck Thorne

General consensus that caves are important resources in need of better protection. Caves' importance derives from the unique flora and fauna they may contain; their use as native Hawaiian burial sites; their associations with native Hawaiian spirituality; and the character of the caves themselves with lava untouched by erosion and sunlight. Unlike limestone caves, once the geological features are destroyed they are gone forever. Also, there may be bacteria in Hawaii's caves which might play a role in developing anti-cancer medication. Caves are important cultural, biological, geological, and educational resources. They need to be preserved and protected for the public's enjoyment and spiritual well being.

The timing for a cave law is right, as caving is a relatively new recreational activity in Hawaii, whose popularity is growing. Unfortunately, caves robbing has a long history dating back to the nineteenth century.

Through increased awareness and educational activities, including cave visitations the public will be better informed and more sensitive to the need to protect this fragile, unique resource. Also, by having certain caves open to the public, it might reduce people's desires to explore other, more sensitive, caves. Perhaps a responsible stewardship program could be developed to better protect caves. There is a need to have people be aware of and respectful to all aspects of cave resources in Hawaii, both scientific and spiritual.

Most cave life exists around openings, with only certain fungi living deeper in caves where there is no sunlight.

A general discussion of laws existing in other states was presented. It was suggested that in addition to the prohibitions common in most state laws the use and access of caves needed to be addressed. Also language should address such inappropriate social behaviors as partying and drinking in caves.

Consensus that most state laws seemed to have little teeth, and a hope was expressed that Hawaii would have sufficiently high penalties which could better deter cave desecration.

Perhaps the National Park Service permit system should be looked at as an approach to better manage caves.

Better a law to protect caves, than no law at all. Also, it appears current law already protects historic properties. 

Bottom Line: There is a need to balance people's desire to utilize caves for recreational and educational activities and Hawaiian spiritual concerns, especially with regards to burials. Access should be limited to non-sacred caves, and such caves need to be identified.

It was agreed to hold another public meeting in Maui after the Cave Task Force had developed an initial draft of possible legislation relating to caves. This meeting would occur sometime shortly after October 21, 2001. All people in attendance at the July 24, 2001, meeting would be notified of the next meeting. In addition, a press release would be prepared so that a wider spectrum of the public might respond.

TESTIMONY SUBMITTED VIA E-MAIL 10/24/01

Aloha,

My name is Kekula Bray-Crawford. I am currently a resident of O'ahu and a past resident of Kaeleku at Hana. I have brought testimony to the Maui Burial Council in the past regarding the Kaeleku Caves that Mr. Chuck Thorne operates his tour business out of.

The reason I testified in the past and am again presenting another testimony is that for years I have heard hushed stories of human burials and artifacts in that same cave at Kaeleku. My last testimony to the Burial Council was when Dana Hall was the chair. I had received from a local resident of Hana, pictures of human burials from that same cave that Mr. Thorne operates out of. This cave was the access to the burials and artifacts. Dana Hall informed me that I was not to keep the pictures and was to hand them over to the Burial Council. I request the Maui County Burial Council to make known the whereabouts of these pictures and the reason for their absence in this case.

I became ill and was forced to move to O'ahu for medical treatment almost two years ago. I am now recovering and find that Mr. Thorne sits on the Cave Task Force at Maui. Well and good? No, Mr. Thorne may have found cattle bones but that does not negate the fact that the cave he runs his business through was access to human burials in the past.

Kaeleku plays a primary role in Hawai'i's ancient history. People have populated Kaeleku for hundreds of years. To think that the caves and lava tubes of the area were not used for burials or the rearing of kapu practices is ridiculous. Hawaiian historian Samuel M. Kamakau (1815 - 1876) clearly establishes the fact that Kaeleku is to be considered as an historically significant area of Hawai`i. I don't believe that new usage and abuse of an area removes its' cultural significance to our people. The mana and the 'aina is still there to be activated if you will or if one wills. We still look at Waikiki and recall the lo'i (taro gardens) and loko (fish ponds) even those of us who have not seen it in this lifetime. Oral tradition is a powerful knowledge base of our people. This new legislation will hopefully protect caves and lava tubes from further commercial and other desecrations. Vandalism is something no one can have control over except by legal enforcement, however commercial usage of caves and lava tubes such as Mr. Chuck Thorne of the Cave Task Force has accomplished and continues to perpetuate, can be controlled if proper legislation is in place to allow new policy to be founded.

He seems to have developed kind language and a transparency that allows him to continue his business, so let him be used as an example of what should not be allowed to happen.

As far as the proposed draft legislation to protect caves goes, I truly hope that a main topic for debate might be ownership of CULTURAL HERITAGE. Kanaka Maoli (Native Hawaiians) have a collective right to the ownership of their heritage or what has been inherited from their ancestors, this includes mo'olelo (oral traditions). Knowledge by oral tradition is well established throughout the world where indigenous peoples are concerned. Knowledge of burials, artifacts, stories, and all forms of life as they know them must be preserved. We are too close to the extinction of too many species and in fact the Kanaka Maoli (pure blooded) race itself to allow more time to pass without enforceable limits and protections. This legislation could be viewed as a guideline for policy which would include some enforcement to be founded by each County of Hawai'i Nei. It should have mandates that would involve Counties establishing standards for their island(s) cultural heritage.

Other matters at hand would be focused on: (a) definitions of what constitutes cultural heritage; (b) administrative discretionary powers; (c) Kanaka Maoli participation in the decision-making process; (d) varied types of access to cultural areas; and, (e) guidelines for the setting up of cultural heritage agreements.

These are discussions a Cave Task Force and preservation boards, committees etc. might enter into when discussing new legislation in regards to the protection of caves and sacred sites. Make it pa'a (tight) for preserving what little we have left of our cultural heritage, for the future.

Signed with Aloha always

Kekula

Kaua`i Meeting Synopsis
July 30, 2001

Persons in Attendance: LaFrance Kapaka Arboleda, Nancy McMahon, Cheryl Lovell-Obatake, and Nancy Naumu-Stewart

Concern was raised that underwater caves such as those used to access the Na Pali Coast should be covered.

There was a need to respect the Hawaiian culture. A cave with burials should be considered kapu.

Letter received November 23, 2001

November 19, 2001

Don Hibbard
Historic Preservation Division
DLNR
601 Kamokila
Kapolei HI 96707

Aloha Mr. Hibbard,

I am writing to express our gratitude for your interest and commitment to the protection of the caves of Hawaii. Thank you for convening informational meetings to discuss the proposed legislation to protect these sacred resources.

Our organization does not have purview over any specific caves in the Hanalei Ahupua'a, however we have longstanding concerns over the abuse and or neglect of many caves in Halele'a. Most notably, the caves in Ha'ena deserve better care and certainly protection of misuse and commercial exploitation. The sea caves along Na Pali are also of great concern to many of our members.

It seems clear that whatever the legislature does in response to the Caves Task Force will be a step in the right direction and we encourage your office to follow-through with all the recommendations made. We especially want to know how the process progresses and would appreciate being kept informed of any future opportunities to share our concerns and suggestions.

Please specifically recall our suggestion that some places be designated as "no go". Period.

Again, thank you for your efforts. Keep us informed.

Me ka pono,

Makaala Kaaumoana
Program Coordinator
(Hanalei Heritage River)

Cc Hui Ho'omalu I Ka Aina; LIMU Coalition; Hui Maka'ainana

O`ahu Meeting Synopsis
August 2, 2001

Persons in Attendance: Bertell Davis, Michael Dega, Colin Kippen, Michelle Matson, Holly McEldowney, and Bob Spear

Perhaps the federal and/or National Park Service permit system should be looked at as an approach to better manage caves. State parks, such as Illinois Rock River Park, might also be a resource.

Caves may need to be considered whenever development activities are proposed. Lava tubes have been punctured by pipelines, planting of trees, and in some instances completely bulldozed. It may be important to assess the thickness of a cave's ceiling and also its stability. Activity above a cave is a concern to consider, as seepage may result from run off from contemporary above ground use. Also the issue of vertical buffer zones with regards to burials in caves has recently come to the fore, as also a concern for whether an entire cave is a burial site if human remains are interred therein.

It was suggested existing laws and rules and regulations should be examined to see if they might be augmented to address cave issues. These might include historic preservation, conservation district zoning, natural area reserve designation. Perhaps some type of cave permit would be required, which might trigger an environmental review if the cave was to be modified in any way. Perhaps language can be articulated to regulate any economic activities that might effect a cave. The government currently regulates other commercial activities, such as boating, fishing. This could possibly lead to landowners "sterilizing" a cave prior to applying for any permits. In Thailand people who have no cultural sanction to be in a cave cannot enter caves without a government permit, as there is a concern for looting of burial and religious sites.

Any regulatory mechanism could have wide application, for example Moiliili is riddled with subterranean caverns.

Should regulation be considered, the language will also have to address any type of takings issues.

A question was raised whether there might be a way regulate cave publicity, some of which might encourage people to trespass.

Caves do have blind insect life deep inside, as long as roots penetrate to provide a suitable habitat and organic food source. Air flow is necessary, and destruction of the flow will kill cave life.

Issue of underwater caves also presented. Perhaps any proposed legislation should limit itself to caves that have some nexus with the land. Uncertain if there are any subterranean scuba tours or diving activities.

Regulation of cave use may be problematic as cannot envision "cave cops." DLNR has difficulty in meeting all their existing responsibilities, including burials. Existing programs need more resources, staffing and funding, and may have a higher priority for resources than the protection of caves.

However, if have a law, at least the public can report violations that are observed. A law would provide a vehicle for regulation, and the department would have the option to determine the level of enforcement. Because of limited enforcement capabilities, much may require self-regulation.

To be productive the task force should be clear as to what it is trying to accomplish. Perhaps it will not be able to solve every issue.

From Leeward Planning Conference

Relating to Cave Protection

Cave means any naturally occurring void, cavity, recess, or system of interconnected passages large enough for human entry occurring beneath the surface of the earth or within a cliff or ledge. The term Cave shall include, but not be limited to, any natural pit, sinkhole, underwater cave, or other feature that is an extension of the entrance. Some lava tubes are Caves. In order to be defined as a Cave, a lava tube must either: (a) have an entrance or (b) there must be evidence of prior human entry from an unknown entrance. The term Cave shall include Cave Resources.

Construction Context means all excavations necessary to construct any and all manner of improvements on the surface of the property including but not limited to foundations, basements, roads and buildings.

Exemptions

The provisions of this Cave Law shall not apply to Lava Tubes encountered within the normal course of a construction context, which the Owner does not know to be a Cave. If a lava tube is penetrated during the normal course of construction, the Owner shall be under no obligation to investigate the extent of the tube or whether or not it is a Cave as defined by this Cave Law unless there is clear evidence of archeological resources at the point of penetration. The provisions of this Cave Law shall not in any way prohibit or constrain the full and free development of the surface of the land above a cave or lava tube.

Interpretation & Conflicts:

(a) Any Archeological Resources found in a Cave shall be governed Chapter 6E, Hawaii Revised Statutes this Cave Law shall not be interpreted as expanding these Statutes and Regulations regarding archeological resources. Any Cave which is subject to a mitigation plan accepted and approved by SHPD shall be exempt from the provisions of this Cave Law. 

(b) Burials found in a Cave shall be governed Chapter 6E, Hawaii Revised Statutes this Cave Law shall not be interpreted as expanding these Statutes and Regulations regarding Burials. In particular, a burial shall be the burial and the area immediately around it and shall not make the entire interior of the cave or lava tube into a burial.

Kona Meeting Synopsis
August 6, 2001

Persons in Attendance: Mark Aeder, Eric Anderson, Deborah Chang, Kaliko Chun, Leimana DaMate, Ric Elhard, Brenda and Larry Ford, Keolalani Hanoa, Pele Hanoa, Roger Harris, Lunaleanawai Hauanio, Rose Herrera, Pat Hope, Jack Kelly, Brenda Luana Machado Lee, Wayne Leslie, V. Leihulu Mamac, Betty Mason, Ruby McDonald, Jim Medeiros Sr., Lolana Medeiros, Theresa K. Niahi, Robert Pacheco, Dennis Rattinger, and John Ray

The Big Island is honeycombed with lava tubes and caves.

A concern was expressed that any cave law would open caves up for use by legally permitting certain activities. Concern that rules and laws will be used against the Hawaiian people.

Burials belong to Hawaiians, and Hawaiians should have access to their family burial caves regardless if they own the land. No one should be allowed to go into caves, public or private, unless they are lineal descendants of the people interred in the cave. Caves should not be commercialized.

Hawaiian cultural rights need to be given priority over other interests.

Entire cave with burials inside is a burial site. Entire caves should be kapu if burials, petroglyphs or any archaeological resources are present.

People should not be entering into caves without first consulting with the families in the area where the caves are located. Without permission from the family anyone entering a cave is violating the cave of that family. Caves need to be protected from such violation.

Other features in caves besides burials are also important and deserve protection.

There should be no pollution of lava tubes. Nor should they be punctured to gain entry. Need to prevent cesspools from going into lava tubes. especially at Pali o Keo'a.

Even if caves have no burials, people should not enter them. Dwelling caves have spirits as well, they have a cosmological connection that shelters dreams, aspirations. Exploiting caves is always a threat and a personal affront. Have caves at Volcano National Park if want to do scientific investigations.

A question was raised whether non-Hawaiians could care for caves. While others might share the concerns of the Hawaiian community, they have no genetic connection, nor as strong a relationship to the land. People come to the Islands and they can return from whence they came. Hawaiians have nowhere else to go. This is their place. Nothing should happen in caves without reporting to the Hawaiian family or community associated with that cave.

Concern was raised that by inviting tourists to see caves their appetites would be whet to venture forth and find other caves. As one brochure noted a tourist saying, "can't wait to see more." Although tours may teach people to respect caves, the tour publicity promotes the curiosity of people and increased visitation will result. Good intentions can inadvertently cause problems which will destroy the soul of a cave. Media publicity, especially Internet, of cave tours must stop.

A letter to the editor published in the June 6, 2001 Hilo Tribune Herald was read into the record (see attached).

Similar to streams and water rights associated with those streams, caves should be treated as entities unto themselves, despite the fact that they run through many above ground parcels.

Realtors should need to disclose to any prospective buyers the presence of caves as well as other cultural concerns and rights associated with a property when they are trying to sell it.

Vandalism and looting is happening in caves.

There is a need to prohibit people from entering caves. Construction of dry stack stone barriers might provide a deterrent for people wanting to go into caves.

Have strict penalties, $250,000 fines for entering caves. Fine must be paid immediately. Make entering a cave a criminal activity.

It was recommended that the task force also look at the issue of artifacts. That all artifacts should be considered funerary objects, and the sale of artifacts should be prohibited. Registration of all artifacts as we do handguns should be considered.

Concern was expressed that any law that was passed would be unenforceable. Current laws protecting archaeology and burials presently on the books are not enforced, therefore the usefulness of more laws that would not be enforced was questioned. However, more protection for caves would be good. It would be a step forward that could offer more protection.

Recommendation was made that at a minimum one Hawaiian from the island of Hawaii sit on the task force, and it would be better if the various districts had representation as well. 

Letter received November 6, 2001

State Historic Preservation Division
601 Kamokila Blvd. Room 555
Kapolei, Hawaii 96707

October 29. 2001

Dear Sirs,

The draft language compiled by the Hawaii Caves Task Force as of October 29, 2001 is totally unacceptable. The Declaration of Intent doesn't say one word about the purpose of this law, which is to legalize and provide liability standards for permitted commercial use of caves throughout Hawaii.

Paragraph five, Permit, "Any person, natural or corporate, allowing or establishing public visitation to a cave shall obtain from the board a permit to open the cave for public visitation. The department shall charge a permitting fee and adopt rules pursuant to Chapter 91 necessary to carry out the purposes of this section." How many years will that take? This is the crux of the issue, isn't it?

It would seem to us that the State Historic Preservation Division, which has proven its inability to perform its function at the Hokulia project, and forever laments about lack of resources, would not want to take on this whole new area of responsibility. Creating laws and permitting commercial ventures without enforcement power will serve to result in depleted resources in direct violation of the state's mandate to protect vital resources.

We disagree with your stated contention that caves are owned fee simple by the property owners above them. We believe the cave systems are independent of the landmasses they pass through, much like a river that flows down the mountain. All people along the river may have water rights, but only in relation to all the other individuals along the river. The river itself is a public resource and falls under the Public Trust Doctrine.

Has the Task Force been adjusted to garner more native Hawaiian input, as requested by the South Kona-K'au community? Much of the information relayed to Mr. Don Hibbard at the first Caves Task Force meeting at Yano Hall was missing from the comments provided by Mr. Hibbard subsequent to the meeting. Having a meeting where no minutes are kept or recorded is entirely inappropriate.

In summary, we think the Caves Task Force needs to call a spade a spade and have public meetings about proposed commercial uses of caves in Hawaii.

Sincerely,

Jack Kelly
Keep Kealakekua Wild
P.O. Box 917
Captain Cook, HI 96704

Letter to the Office of the Chairperson from Brenda J. Ford

September 20, 2001

Gilbert Coloma-Agaran, Chairperson
Department of Land & Natural Resources
P.O. Box 621
Honolulu, Hawaii 96809

Re: Failure to produce accurate meeting minutes for the Public Meeting on August 6, 2001, held at Yano Hall in Captain Cook, Hawaii to discuss the protection and management of caves (lava tubes) in Hawaii.

Aloha Mr. Coloma-Agaran:

This letter is written as a sequel to my previous letter of August 7, 2001 regarding the August 6, 2001 public meeting was held at Yano Hall in Captain Cook, Hawaii to discuss the protection and management of caves (lava tubes) in Hawaii.

The meeting was chaired by Don Hibbard, Division Administrator for the State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD). The purpose of the meeting was to solicit public input from a multiple sources on a variety of issues for the task force that is empowered to develop and recommend rules for "protection" of the caves.

In regard to the items below from my previous letter, I am forced to advise you of the inadequacy of Mr. Hibbard's meeting minutes. I was most distressed to see that not only did he leave out information that we discussed but he added information that was never discussed.

Additionally, and most upsetting to me was that he did not include a single word from the community about the castigation he received for his poor performance of his duties, his lack of leadership, his lack of honesty, his staff lack of honesty (bribes), our concerns about the integrity of the Division (SHPD), and the accuracy of his note taking. The following are the comments (indented and highlighted) that he left out.

Most of the members of the Kona community had several serious issues that remain unresolved:

1. Mr. Hibbard was the only State employee at the meeting.

Not only was Mr. Hibbard the only State employee but our concern about his ability to do appropriate note taking and report facts was confirmed by the meeting minutes.

2. There was no tape recording or video recording taken of this State-facilitated meeting.

If a person wants to conceal the community's comments from one's manager, this certainly works.

3. Mr. Hibbard wrote some notes regarding comments by the public but the public repeatedly had to ask and/or tell Mr. Hibbard that we wanted a specific comment recorded for the minutes.

I specifically stated that I wanted my comment about the SHPD waiving (I used the word breached incorrectly at the meeting) its right to the attorney-client privilege when Mr. Hibbard read from the letter at the meeting. Mr. Hibbard made no reference in the meeting minutes to my request nor did he produce the letter. I had to contact the Office of Information Practices to get a partial copy of the document.

4. Mr. Hibbard stated that everyone who had signed the sign-in sheet would get a copy of the minutes. Unfortunately, the minutes Mr. Hibbard wrote cannot possibly contain all the comments.

This speaks for itself.

5. Certain staff members of Mr. Hibbard's SHPD have recently been exposed in Court for accepting financial and other gifts. Now it is months later and the people involved with the situation are still "under investigation" per Mr. Hibbard. While the individuals involved have admitted in Court under oath to accepting "gifts" from developers, they are still working with the iwi, caves, burials, other archaeological sites, and with developers on other islands and no date is in sight for resolution of their unethical acts. After an admission of wrong-doing under oath, in court, what is there to investigate? How can the community trust SHPD?

My only comment on this item is the last question, 'How can the community trust the SHPD?' Mr. Hibbard continues to shred the trust our community should have in our government with his actions. He has once again placed the SHPD in the detestable position of being caught in an apparent act of dishonesty with the meeting minutes.

6. A lack of trust in the SHPD exists with much of the Kona community. This lack of trust was further exacerbated by Mr. Hibbard's handling of the meeting, the lack of recordings, the lack of the presence of other state employees, and his lack of inclusion of Big Island Hawaiian kupuna on the task force. The selection of community representatives from the Island of Hawaii admittedly chosen by Mr. Hibbard to members of the task force is appears to be a means to a predetermined end: more tourism and less protection of the Hawaiian's religious/cultural rights. The current Island of Hawaii representatives on this task force include:

a) A developer's consultant/advocate (Leeward Planning Conference) who is also the most recent Governor-appointed non-Hawaiian member of the Hawaii Burial Council.

b) A tour owner/operator who takes people through Hawaiian caves in a "for profit" business.

Mr. Hibbard stated that he would consider adding a Hawaii County, knowledgeable person of Hawaiian ancestry but he apparently has not made a decision or will not tell us what his decision is. How long must we wait for inclusion in the process?

7. Not a single kupuna from the Island of Hawaii was included in the task force but the financial interests of the developer/tourism industry on this Island are certainly represented. The community requested even begged that at least one Hawaii Island kupuna be added only to have Mr. Hibbard state that he will consider the suggestion. A non-representative task force will only come to the previously mentioned determination. Mr. Hibbard's original task force member selections for this island were made:

a) Despite his knowledge that his employees created a disastrous legal and ethical situation on this Island,

b) Despite the fact that he knows many of the community of West Hawaii and especially many of the Hawaiians distrust him and his employees,

c) Despite the fact that multiple violations for desecration of burials are "still under investigation" months after the violations occurred, and

d) Despite the fact that no cultural expert from the Island of Hawaii is on the task force.

A good business practice to engender trust would entail making a commitment to our community (your clients) to do better, include Hawaii County kupuna in the task force, clean up all the outstanding issues, provide training on ethics for the entire SHPD, advise us of what you are doing, and document everything.

8. Promulgating new, unenforceable laws will not help to protect the lava tubes. The SHPD currently cannot and will not enforce laws already in the HRS even when notified by phone, mail, or email that violations have occurred. Mr. Hibbard maintains employees on the payroll that violate ethical and legal codes, and the SHPD has not cited and/or fined a developer for numerous violations because "the developer does not agree that a violation has occurred." (Per Dawn Chang, Attorney for the DLNR in Court in the Hokuli'a Preliminary Injunction case. She subsequently left state employment to work for the developers as a consultant.) When is it "legally" appropriate for a violator to determine that there was an actual violation? Only when the SHPD is involved.

See my comment on item number 7.

9. There needs to be a law in the HRS to prohibit puncturing lava tubes with non-discretionary fines for violations.

The prohibition of puncturing a lava tube and non-discretionary fines was left out of the minutes.

10. All the lava tubes with or without burials are sacred to the Hawaiians. Protect their cultural and religious rights. Make it illegal for anyone that is not a cultural &endash;lineal descendant to enter the lava tubes.

This was adequately addressed.

11. If each property owner owns the land to the center of the earth, then subterranean trespass should be illegal and prevented by permanently blocking all lava tube entrances. My neighborhood is currently trying to stop trespass, fruit theft, and burglary. Now we may need to worry about subterranean trespass as well from people who: a) just like to go into caves, b) cause subterranean damage that may impact our homes or businesses, or c) desecrate the lava tubes and potential burials.

This was adequately addressed.

12. If the property owner is liable for injury to trespassers, then no one should be allowed in the lava tubes except cultural-lineal descendants. Permanently block all access to lava tubes. A "No Trespass" sign never stopped anyone who wants to commit illegal acts. Make a "No Liability" law for injuries to trespassers occurring in lava tubes on private property.

This was adequately addressed.

13. If the State can claim "public trust" and "own" mineral rights and water rights, then lava tubes are part of the public trust and must be protected as well for the public and the Hawaiians.

The subject of public trust was not mentioned in the meeting minutes.

14. Violations to and desecration of lava tubes and their artifacts and iwi should be a criminal violation and very large non-discretionary fines should be assessed.

Non-discretionary fines was left out of the minutes.

Per Mr. Hibbard, "Registration of all artifacts as we do handguns should be considered." At no time was this subject addressed. Why would Mr. Hibbard make up something to put in the minutes when he left out so much?

Mr. Coloma-Agaran, I truly do not like to write letters like this but certainly Mr. Hibbard has failed and continues to fail our community. His behavior reflects poorly on the SHPD and on you as his manager. I hope that you can rectify situation quickly.

Brenda Ford

Hilo Meeting Synopsis
August 7, 2001

Persons in Attendance: Alice Aumua, Jack Russell Brauher, Bobby Camera, Mara Durst, Ric Elhard, Ole Fulks, Rose Herrera, Keikialoha Kakipi, Billie Keawekau, E. Rose

Manina Kuamoo, Kuulei Maunupau, Manu Aluli Meyer, Jade Moniz Nakamura, Paul Rosendahl, Laura Schuster, Ululani Sherlock, and Fred Stone

Caves have been continually used by the host culture. The desecration of caves with burials within them is blasphemous. Remains were placed in a manner so as not to be disturbed. Burial caves should not be disturbed. However, it is recognized that many caves and burials are vulnerable to disturbance. All appeared to agree that caves with burials should be kapu and needed to be protected. However, there appeared to be less clarity on the boundaries of burial areas.

Members of the Hawaiian community felt an entire cave if it contained burials, whether it be 200 feet or twenty two miles long, should be considered a burial cave and not be disturbed. The areas below the ground were meant for the dead.

Members of the Hawaiian community were uncomfortable with any language which would permit access to caves, even those without bones. They fear if entry is allowed in caves without bones, soon all caves will be without bones. It is better to just say no, so that people can better understand the large concern Hawaiians have for the protection of burial caves.

Others wondered if access to non-burial caves with good geology, good biology and/or good archaeology might be feasible if the access was controlled and the resources protected. People are invited to visit Honaunau and Lapakahi to learn more about the history and culture of the Hawaiian people.

Some urged finding a balance where people might be able to go in some caves, but not others.

Some people may have reason to go in caves, but others should not go.

Concern was raised that punching holes in caves to gain access had to be controlled.

Concern was raised as how to protect the ohia forests over caves, as the destruction of the trees will make a desert of a thriving cave environment nestled in the ohia roots. It may be difficult to prohibit the clearing of people's lands.

At the present time only two cave animals are listed on the endangered list. Both of these are on Kauai. However, many of Hawaii's blind cave creatures have yet to even be scientifically described. A species must be described before it can be considered endangered. Critical habitat has become a big issue and will need to be examined with regards to caves.

County grubbing permits lack teeth. It might be useful to require that a property owner post a grubbing permit, like a building permit, when they undertake such activity, then at least people will know the activity is authorized.

At the present governmental permitting agencies do not have cave location information. The Hawaii Volcano Observatory holds this material. There is a concern that such information in a government repository would be become public information leading to further desecration of the resource.

Sometimes the presence of a cave on a property is unknown until a bulldozer hits it. Indeed, unknown lava tubes do present a danger to bulldozer operators, as they can fall through.

Concern was raised how to deal with cesspools. Hitting a lava tube is currently a property owner's dream.

Because of the length of some caves, especially on the island of Hawaii, and the unavailability of location information on many, many known and unknown caves, the issues of trespass and owner liability may need to be examined. Many people may not even be aware caves are under their property.

Concern was raised about Hawaii's caves being publicized on the Internet, encouraging increased curiosity. There is a need to stop bringing people in and treating caves as a commodity. Exploitation of caves a problem.

Concern was raised that it is difficult to control entry to a lengthy cave with multiple entries, and how can people be effectively kept out. Some sort of management plan needs to be developed. It may be possible to gate or close off entries to caves. However, it will be impossible to gate every cave, and people will still break through any barriers. Absolute protection is impossible.

There is a need to regulate the mahaoi, with clear laws to stop the entrance into burial caves. The kupuna iwi need to be protected. Even well intentioned people do not necessarily understand there are protocols which accompany dealing with human skeletal remains and burial objects. There is a need to contact families and community people who are knowledgeable about these matters; seek permission prior to entering their caves. Disturbing burials and bringing the existence of such places to the knowledge of a Hawaiian places a heavy cultural responsibility upon that person. It is best to not disturb at all.

Question raised whether some sort of cooperative effort could be developed which would involve non-Hawaiians as well as Hawaiians in stewardship programs for caves.

Because of genealogical ties to caves not everyone should be involved in their care. Also, although some intentions may be good, some distrust the ultimate motivations, such as commercial.

Caves have suffered a lot of abuse. People not constrained by cultural beliefs have had a lot of freedom. While such freedom may be viewed as nice, it has resulted in problems. Cave desecration, looting and vandalism have been happening for a long time. Only now the government appears to be interested in this issue. Better late than never.

The idea of a cave law is good, but it will need enforcement. Problems will not be remedied without enforcement. Where will the money come from to protect caves? There was a concern that the State does not have sufficient moneys now to cover its responsibilities. However, people are causing damage and conducting tours, some in an irresponsible manner, thus we need a law to better control these people. Better a law with no enforcement than no law at all, at least society would have a tooth to chew with.

Any state law that is considered should address all caves, not just caves on state lands.

Should a law be passed it would be good to have a cave hotline. One place to call should someone observe inappropriate behavior with regards to a cave. Also the police departments should be educated on all aspects of any law that is passed.

Should look at existing federal, state and county laws to see how much protection they afford caves and their resources. Should obtain NPS permit information. Also good resource people would include Jon Giffin and Jim Martin for cave management, and Don Swanson and Ken Hahn for cave geology.

When looking at the laws of other states the task force must realize that in Hawaii the cultural connection to caves is much greater than anywhere else in the nation.

Suggestions were made to expand the Caves Task Force to include native Hawaiians from the island of Hawaii, also a representative from Hui Malama i Na Kupuna o Hawaii Nei, an archaeologist, and geologist. County Planning Departments should also be kept in the loop with regards to the activities of the task force.

Scientific Abstract submitted by Francis G. Howarth

EX: Proc. First Intern. Cave Management Symp. Murray KY, July 15-18 1981. J. E. Mylroie, ed. 171 pp.

ABSTRACT

The sometimes a bizarre adaptation that restrict obligate cave animals to life in caves, coupled with their island-like habitat, have reinforced the assumption that cave animals are somehow fragile and therefore lead an endangered existence. Although many cave animals undoubtedly are endangered, the development of management recommendations for their conservation is hampered by the lack of good ecological data concerning the requirements of the species, For example, what factors limit cave animal distribution; what are the significant perturbations; and how do these cause rarity and endangerment? Experimental ecological studies in caves are difficult since in few other habitats is man so clearly an intruder than in the subterranean world. Caves are a fragile window through which man can visit and study the fauna that lives in the unique environment within cavernous rock. Many caves threatened by land use changes have never been surveyed, and their biological resources remain unknown. Indeed, it has only been within the last decade that biologists have realized that highly specialized cave invertebrates live in lava tubes and in tropical caves. The following are some of the major threats to the cave ecosystem: 1) mining activities, 2) land use changes such as deforestation and urbanization, 3) alteration of ground water flow patterns, 4) waste disposal and pollution, 5) local extirpation of trogloxenes (a food source), 6) the introduction of non-native species, and 7) direct human disturbance from visitation.

While it is probably not necessary to convince cavers and speleologists of the value of conserving cave invertebrates, it is useful to reiterate some of the important justifications (see also Orsak, 1981; Pyle, et al, 1981; and Iliffe, 1979).

First, because they are there. There is a strong moral and ethical standard that all species sharing our planet have a right to exist.

Second, aesthetics: There is something about blind, pale cave creatures that piques the curiosity of both laymen and biologists. That such animals exist at all seems incredible. Such interest certainly may be used to generate a desire to conserve species.

Third: Cave ecosystems provide a unique habitat for evolutionary and ecological research. The study of the adaptations of cave species to their environment has great potential for providing insights into general evolutionary processes.

Fourth: As environmental indicators. A large proportion of the U.S. and the world's population relies on subterranean aquifers for its domestic water. Native aquatic animals provide ready made indicators of water quality. Loss of a species through pollution would indicate a serious degradation of the water supply.

Fifth: Caves have many other intrinsic and extrinsic values, of course, and to protect a cave for its geological, archeological, educational, recreational or other values should provide some protection for its fauna (Schmidt, 1965).

Although additional pragmatic values could be cited, we may have more success in the public sphere if we rely more on the moral and aesthetic values.

In 1977 I proposed that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service place the no-eyed big-eyed hunting spider (Adelocosa anops Gertsch, Lycosidae) and its major prey species, the blind - terrestrial amphipod (Spelaeorchestia koloana Bousfield and Howarth, Talitridae) on the federal endangered and threatened species lists respectively. During the review process the bureaucrats in Washington held a special workshop to determine a quota on how many amphipods the spider would be allowed to eat! This led to the political cartoon (Figure 1) which appeared in the MIAMI HERALD, in Florida. Clearly these two animals have been living together for millennia, and the fact that one of them eats the other is not the perturbation causing rarity. In fact, from an ecological perspective the question which should have been asked to ensure the survival of both species is: "How can we maintain the population of the amphipod so that it can feed the spider?"

Figure 1. The proposal that the two cave animals from Kauai be protected under the U.S. Endanqered Species Act attracted some attention since one species, the amphipod, is the major prey of the otherspecies, the spider. This cartoon, which was created by Mr. Bill Kitchen, appeared on the front pane of the MlAMI HERALD, Florida on 7 December, 1977

The cartoon illustrates bureaucratic and popular ignorance of basic cave biology. The real solution for the conservation of rare invertebrates lies in an ecosystem or habitat approach. If the habitat of a species is protected that species can usually take care of itself. However, if its habitat is altered so that it no longer supports that species through its life cycle, the species is doomed to disappear no matter what steps are taken otherwise.

Why are cave invertebrates rare and endangered? In spite of the widespread assumption that cave animals are fragile, I believe that no species of plant or animal is inherently "fragile". Evolutionary theory predicts that species are admirably adapted to their natural environment. Extinctions are caused by novel perturbations. The response of a given species to a new perturbation is correlated with the type, timing, and severity of the perturbation; however, most importantly, the perturbation must be defined as the organism perceives it. For example a severe flood in a cave during the normal flood season may not be as detrimental to a cave community as a relatively minor flood occurring at an unusual time, or even as an absence of a flood during the normal period.

Certainly the extinction of species is a natural phenomenon.

However, the quickening pace of man-induced extinctions should have everyone concerned.

The following are the major threats to the cave ecosystem.

1) Mining limestone and basalt for cement, cinder, building stone, and other products, such as at Batu Caves, Malaysia, as well as from the disturbance caused by the mining of materials found in caves, e.g. guano.

2) Land use changes in the vicinity of -caves, for example, urbanization, deforestation, road construction, water impoundments, and other construction activities.

3) Alteration of ground water flow: for example, impoundments that flood caves, removal of ground water for urban and agricultural use, or channelization of surface water.

4) Pollution from waste water and sewage disposal as wel1 as the use of cave entrances as garbage and offal dumps; the "out of sight, out of mind philosophy"; including oil spills, oil well leaks and road runoff.

5) Introduction of exotic plants and animals. Numerous facultative cave animals have been spread by man. These non-native species, both obligate and facultative, may pervade and often disrupt the ecosystem in unpredictable ways.

6) The local extirpation or extinction of food source animals and plants such as cave roosting bats, cave crickets, and, at least in Hawaii, certain trees. This threat clearly relates to land use changes in the vicinity of caves already mentioned, as well as to the next one, number 7.

7) Disturbance from human visitation. This last perturbation needs elaboration, for its effects are probably least understood, and yet disturbance seriously affects a greater number of caves. Actual collecting of specimens is probably a minor factor except for some conspicuous species. The cave environment shares with other discrete habitats, such as montane bogs and sand dunes, a vulnerability to trampling and physical disturbance. However, the surface biologist often needs only to go 100-200 m away from a well worn trail in order to lay out his study plots in a relatively undisturbed site. On the other hand, since the cave is a discrete void in rock, the cave biologist is restricted to the same passages as every other visitor. Unless he can exercise unusual control over access, he can count on his study areas being crawled through, trampled, or even vandalized. Furthermore, tobacco smoke contains a powerful insecticide which, in the relatively enclosed cave atmosphere, challenges, if not kills, many cave invertebrates. In addition the smoke from torches and cigarettes lowers the relative humidity, further jeopardizing the terrestrial species. Hazardous refuse such as carbide and batteries left in caves by visitors adds another threat to cave life. Fortunately, with few exceptions, the disturbance from human visitation is reversible, that is the cave fauna often recovers in time after human disturbance ceases. In spite of these difficulties in finding potentially good caves and field assistants, I was fortunate to have begun my survey in Hawaii before organized sport caving developed there. My field data on cave animal distribution show that, other factors being equal, species diversity and population levels of invertebrates in caves is inversely proportional to the level of visitation and human disturbance. For example, immatures of both the cixiid planthopper and the Schrankia moth feed solely on roots which penetrate the cave roof and are particularly sensitive to disturbance. If the roots are bumped or damaged, many nymphs fall to the floor. In passages where roots do not reach the floor, the nymphs may not find suitable roots, and they starve. Stepping on roots that do reach the floor may kill their distal portions thereby starving the nymphs already feeding on them. As a result the populations of these two species and their predators often reflect the level of human disturbance.

SOLUTIONS:

The top priority for the conservation of cave invertebrates is to conduct thorough biological inventories and ecological studies in threatened caves. In many instances the rarity of cave species is correlated more with the rarity of cave biologists than with the actual animal populations. There is an urgent need for biological surveys as new cave areas and new species are being discovered regularly. The inventory must be linked to an information retrieval system in order to analyze and utilize the data.

Cave biology is now in an expansive phase. Only a decade ago specialized cave animals, particularly terrestrial species, were thought to exist almost exclusively in temperate limestone caves. Recent discoveries in both lava tubes and caves in the tropics have shattered that assumption (Howarth, 1980). Diverse faunas are now known from the Galapagos, Hawaii, New Guinea, Thailand, Sarawak, Central America, the Greater Antilles, and tropical South America. Thus the scope and horizons of biospeleology have more than doubled in the past ten years.

Biospeleology may be 300 years behind some other biological sciences. For example, primate specialists are currently formulating conservation strategies for South American monkeys. Cave biologists, on the other hand, will first need an expedition to South America to find the cave animals, then describe them and work out their ecological needs before conservation strategies can be intelligently proposed. However, we may not have even 20 years to catch up with other conservation groups, if we accept the projections of continuing environmental degradation (National Research Council, 1980).

Many threatened caves and cave areas have never even been inventoried, and their biological resources remain unknown.

There is also an urgent need for ecological studies, especially experimental ecological projects that are designed to determine (1) what specific factors limit cave animal distribution; (2) what the critical perturbations are; (3) how these cause rarity and endangerment; and (4) what mitigative measures will be effective.

Obviously we need to know the ecological requirements of the species concerned. Without this information the establishment of a reserve or management recommendations for a species may not benefit that species. For example, Harrison (1964), established the world's first earwig reserve in Niah Great Cave, Sarawak, in order to preserve a population of the bizarre, rare earwig, Arixenia esau Jordan, a representative of a small, poorly known but extremely interesting suborder of earwigs. Visitation to this room was restricted, and the collecting of earwigs from the floor was prohibited. Although the intent was highly admirable, subsequent research on the biology of this species has shown that it is obligately associated with the naked bat, Cheiromeles torquatus Horsfield, and that earwigs found on the floor in the ''earwig sanctuary'' had become separated from their hosts and therefore were doomed.

This first "earwig sanctuary'' no matter how well maintained and policed could not have had any potential whatsoever for the survival of the species for which it was created. Maintenance of adequate populations of the host bat is the most logical management strategy (Marshall, 1977).

A similar example concerns the Texas blind salamander, Typhlomolge rathburni in Ezell's Cave, San Marcos, Texas (Davis, 1972; Byers, 1977). The major population of the salamander lives in the Edwards Aquifer (Longley, 1978) and the major threats are pollution and drawdown of the water supply. The populations in Ezell's Cave makes little, if any, contribution to the survival of the species, but this small, protected population could be used as a research and education facility to enhance survival and public awareness of both the main population und its numerous associated cave invertebrates.

As I emphasized- earlier, the major long-term strategy in the conservation of cave invertebrates is the protection of suitable habitats. No other strategy will work, although immediate threats sometimes require short term solutions. Protection of the habitat may include the establishment of formal reserves as well as agreements with landowners and managers for the resources under their care. Cave reserves must be of sufficient size to support the ecosystem. In addition, they should include associated surface and underground environments that are vital to the cave species. Examples include overlying forests that provide food either directly into the cave or for foraging trogloxenes, major bat foraging habitats, and water sheds that supply water in sufficient quantity and quality.

Many researchers (myself 1ncluded) feel that the major populations of most cave species live in the voids within the rock and enter human-size cave passages only where food and environmental conditions allow. Others feel that the major populations occur in caves but that the animals can use the smaller voids to migrate between caves. A few animals are thought to live only in caves and not to be able to exploit the smaller voids.

Even if the animals live mostly in the numerous smaller voids within cavernous rock, the only windows open for man to enter and study such fauna are caves, and rarely mines. If the caves are destroyed or so altered that their fauna is destroyed but the animals survive within unenterable voids out of reach of both the biologist and the lay public, then the animals, in a very special and narrow sense could be considered extinct. For even if the population lives on, the fact might remain - forever secret. We might consider such cave faunas then as "biological phenomena", like the monarch butterfly roosts, buffalo herds, and bat flights, where the species itself is not endangered but a phenomenon associated with the species is highly endangered and is spectacular enough to warrant protection. Protection is now being sought for monarch roosts, but it is too late for the phenomenal buffalo herds. Under this philosophy cave reserves specifically for populations of spectacular cave animals are a worthwhile and logical goal for conservationists. In order to manage such reserves we still need detailed ecological data on the animal's requirements. Education is another long-term strategy which can aid in finding solutions to conservation problems.

Unfortunately, education can have capricious results, for one hard-core vandal, armed with the additional knowledge from an educational program, can irreversibly negate the beneficial activities of 100 good people. The two-edged sword created by education is a real dilemma for which we~ must find a solution (Wilmut, 1972; Day, 1980).

In cases where there is a strong negative correlation between the level of human visitation and the number of species present, recreational caving should be discouraged until adequate protection of representative caves is assured. Unlike other conservation groups which often publicize their cute, fuzzy critters in order to generate public support, we must be much more restrained in popularizing the cave fauna: because the increase in public curiosity leads to an increase in cave visitation. This is a paradox, for if the existence of these animals is not made public, then their habitats may be destroyed through ignorance during changes in land use. We must solve this paradox.

How does one sensitize cavers to respect the resources within caves? My experience has been that it is fairly easy to instill a conservation ethic within the sphere of interest of an individual but much more difficult to instill such a feeling across many disciplines in any one individual. I have introduced many Hawaiian biologists to the wonders of Hawaiian caves, and all have been quick to agree with my own conservation feelings on the biological resources, but some have been slow, even recalcitrant, to understand that there might be other resources in the caves and blithely trample through archeological, geological, or other wonders. Conversely, geologists and archeologists have quickly grasped the significance of cave resources in their own field only to trample unknowingly through biological resources. Such sensitivity seems to accrue only after long experience in caves, that is only after the explorer has seen the degradation of cave resources for himself does he realize he is part of the problem.

Unfortunately, there are not enough caves for every beginning explorer to learn this lesson on his own.

On a recent field trip with a biologist who quickly became impressed with the cave fauna and who carefully avoided breaking tree roots or disturbing the animals, I pointed out some rather nice sand castles built in the volcanic ash by dripping water. His reaction to this relatively rare phenomenon in 5 Hawaiian caves was to suddenly stomp and kick his way through the whole display saying: "Sand castles! They look like just piles of sand to me!" I protested his actions rather vehemently, but I am afraid that I did not convince him that sand castles in caves have any use or aesthetic value.

In another instance I was in a newly discovered pristine cave with one of the most effective conservationists in Hawaii who is also an astute field biologist. He had gotten ahead of me, and imagine my shock when I rounded a corner in the cave passage and came upon the word SHIT written in 10-cm high black letters in a small patch of white cave slime. I caught up with him and gave him my lecture again on how graffiti beget graffiti in caves, but he was quite unconvinced - because he felt that it was not a graffito since he was marking the location of a small pile of rat droppings which had some interesting insects on them and furthermore this was a pristine cave without graffiti and it was unlikely that graffiti artists or vandals would find it. Both of his arguments were patently false of course, and after some consideration I erased the word even though it virtually destroyed the remains of a rather nice patch of slime and its inhabitants.

Even though I remain somewhat skeptical of many education programs, show caves might provide a logical forum for public education displays. I propose that cave biologists encourage and assist private and public show cave managers in creating educational displays on cave life. These displays could include cave animals in natural surroundings in their native caves, either in terraria or peepholes within the cave. I believe that there would be economic gains for private show cave operators. With well executed displays much beneficial publicity could accrue, besides the major spinoff of having the managers learn to better understand and appreciate the rich resources under their care. Unfortunately, we would be in much worse trouble if show cave managers started exchanging fauna. In fact that prospect must be guarded against. Since Mammoth Cave is virtually the type locality of cave biology in North America, and the richness of its fauna is known world wide among biologists, the Nationa1 Park Service could set an example in educating visitors to the wonders of cave animals.

LITERATURE CITED

Byers, Anne M. 1977. Let Them Live, A sampling of the endangered species the Conservancy has saved from extinction. The Nature Conservancy News 27(4):8-18.

Davis, William K. 1971. Ezell's Cave: 1870-1970. In: (E.L.

Lundelius and B.H. Slaughter, editors) Natural History of Texas Caves. pp. 94-99.

Day, Kenrick, L. 1980. Cave Conservation: Why have we failed? Guest Editorial. National Speleological Society News 38(8):176-178.

Harrisson, Tom. 1964. Borneo caves with special reference to Niah Great Cave. Studies in Speleol. 1(1):26-32.

Howarth, F.G. 1980. The zoogeography of specialized cave animals: a bioclimatic model. Evolution 34(2):394-406.

Ililffe, Thomas M. 1979. Bermuda's caves: a non-renewable resource. Environmental Conservation 6(3):181-186.

Longley, Glenn. 1979. Subterranean aquatic fauna of the Edwards aquifer in Texas, as indicated by samples from wells and springs. Abstract of paper given at 1978 NSS Convention, New Braunfels,

Texas. NSS Bulletin 41:111.

Marshall, Adrian G. 1977. The earwigs (Insecta: Dermaptera) of Niah Caves, Sarawak. The Sarawak Museum J. XXV(46 ns):205-209.

National Research Council, Committee on Research Priorities in Tropical Biology. 1980. Research Priorities in Tropical Biology.

National Academy of Sciences, Washington. 116 p.

Orsak, Larry J. 1981. Introduction to the Proceedings and an Update on Terrestrial Arthropod Conservation. Atala 6(1-2):1-18.

Pyle, R., M. Bentzien, and P. Opler. 1981. Insect conservation. Ann. Review Entom. 26:233-258.

Schmidt, Victor A. 1965. Problems of Cave Conservation in the V.S.A. Studies in Speleology. 1:82-88.

Wilmut, J. 1972. Cave conservation---a lost cause? Cave Science: J. British Speleol. ABBOC. 6(49):17-24.

Return to SHPD Legislative Report Page

Return to SHPD Homepage