Honu'apo Park Resource Management Plan

Ka‘alāiki literally translates as “small lava rock” (Pukui et al. 1974:60). It is well known for its springs and
pond along the coast. The coastal area of Ka‘alāiki, including a portion of the southern part of Hīlea Nui is
generally referred to as Kāwā. Kāwā was and still is known for its surf break (I‘i 1963:134). Little has been
written in legendary or historical literature about Ka‘alāiki. Marion Kelly makes mention of a large red
stone in the middle of the pond that is the kū ula, or fish god (Kelly 1980:26). Population reports for 1835
combine Ka‘alāiki and Hīlea Nui together, reporting 238 people, including 67 children (Schmitt 1973:30).
During the Māhele, Ka‘alāiki was retained as Government land. There was one kuleana awarded makai of
Highway 11 (LCAw. 7091). LCAw. 7091 was awarded to Kaluahine. Two land grants (por. 993, and por.
2370) purchased within Ka‘alāiki are partially located makai of Highway 11. Grant number 993 was
purchased by Kimokeo Keawe in 1852 and consisted of 119.50 acres. Grant number 2370 was purchased
by Noa Malailua in 1857 and consisted of 350.0 acres. A third land grant (1530) was purchased by
Kimokeo Keawe in 1855 and consisted of 15.70 acres surrounding the pond at Ka‘alāiki. While the land
grant encompassed the pond, the land commission specifically reserved the fishpond as belonging to the
government (Kelly 1980:30).
Early archaeology in Ka‘alāiki began with John Stokes. Stokes recorded one heiau in Ka‘alāiki (Stokes
and Dye 1991:126,127). The heiau was called ‘Imakakaloa Heiau or ‘Imakakoloa Heiau, and was located
approximately one mile inland from the ocean, mauka of Highway 11, and out of the current study area. It
is unclear whether this heiau still exists.
In 1967 Francis Ching investigated selected areas on Hawai‘i Island to determine where National
Historic Landmark plaques would be placed (Ching 1967). Three of the areas he investigated are relevant
to the current study; Ka‘alāiki, Hīlea Nui, and Nīnole. Around Kāwā Bay, in Ka‘alāiki, Ching reiterated
what was written in a 1967 Lloyd Soehren letter; that from the southern side of Kāwā Bay to the next lava
flow there were “…a considerable number of house sites, grave sites, camp sites, and other architectural
features pertaining to the aboriginal and early post-European Hawaiian culture” (Ching 1967:10).
In 1970, the Bishop Museum Department of Anthropology conducted an inventory of archaeological
and historical sites in the districts of Kona, and Ka‘ū and in Anaehoomalu, South Kohala, Island of Hawai‘i
(Emory 1970). The work for this study was largely based on Violet Hansen’s island wide survey and the
Bishop Museum’s register. All of the sites and features were already listed in the Bishop Museum register,
and this report was only a visit to the sites to observe their present condition. In Ka‘alāiki, Kāwā, there
were 97 sites recorded. In the immediate vicinity of the Kāwā Spring there were six sites, two wells, and
one enclosure. To the south of the spring there were ten house sites, two platforms, twenty-two burials, ten
enclosures, and one shelter. On the coast at Kailiiki, within Ka‘alāiki were two house complexes, a shelter
cave, a platform, a burial platform, and a house site. On the coast at Wailea, within Ka‘alāiki there were
five house sites, two agricultural features, two burial platforms, and a walled pond. From Wailea to
Hawaloa, in the extreme southern part of the ahupua‘a there were eight house sites, five platforms, three
agricultural features, and thirty or more burials, mostly the platform type. A petroglyph consisting of a
large circle, with small circles on the interior was located at the boundary between Ka‘alāiki and
Hōkūkano.
In 1978, the Archaeological Research Center Hawaii, Inc. (ARCH) conducted an archaeological
reconnaissance of TMK: 3-9-5-16:32 por. in Ka‘alāiki Ahupua‘a (Ewart 1978). The area investigated was a
portion of Parcel 36, on the mauka side of the government road. The property owner, Arthur Ulrich, had
done an initial investigation of his property. After having located numerous archaeological features he
contacted ARCH and requested a professional evaluation of those resources. An ARCH archaeologist spent
one day in the field reviewing the sites and features recorded by Mr. Ulrich. Archaeological features
included platforms, walls, enclosures, and modified sinks, lava blisters, and caves. Ewart suggests that the
features post date 1868 and are those of habitation areas (platforms), with nearby agricultural use areas
(modified sinks, lava blisters, and caves), and animal pens (enclosures). Evidence such as ash and faunal
remains suggested possible shelter use within some of the sinks, caves, and blisters. Cultural deposits
encountered were disturbed and with the exception of three platforms, the archaeological features were
evaluated as being in poor condition.
11