LOKO I‘A A Manual on Hawaiian Fishpond Restoration and Management (2007)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Contents

Hawaiian fishpond history

Permits and regulatory considerations

Hawaiian fishpond restoration

Equipment for pond operations

Net-pen production

Optimizing pond health

Troubleshooting fish culture problems

Limu production

Writing a business plan

References and further reading

Economics of revitalizing Hawaiian fishpond production

Published by the College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources (CTAHR) and issued in furtherance of Cooperative Extension work,

Acts of May 8 and June 30, 1914, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Andrew G. Hashimoto, Director/Dean, Cooperative

Extension Service/CTAHR, University of Hawai‘i at Mänoa, Honolulu, Hawai‘i 96822. An equal opportunity/affirmative action institution provid-

ing programs and services to the people of Hawai‘i without regard to race, sex, age, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, disability, marital

status, arrest and court record, sexual orientation, or status as a covered veteran. CTAHR publications can be found at www.ctahr.hawaii.edu.

Printed in Hong Kong

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Preface

his manual would not have been possible without

• Pacific American Foundation

the efforts and support of many people who deserve

• Maui Community College, Rural Development

a special mahalo and acknowledgment for their contribu-

Program

tions. Some helped by contributing to the development

• Kamehameha Schools

of certain sections of the manual; these include Keith

Yabusaki (Permits), Walter Ritte (Restoration), Jason

We are also grateful to Senator Daniel K. Inouye for

Gamiao, Traci Sylva, and Roger Babcock (Water Qual-

his support and encouragement of the project.

ity), and Malia Akutagawa, Myron Akutagawa, and

At UH Mānoa-CTAHR, Dr. Lynn LeBeck, Dr. Ken-

Collete Machado-Ke Kua Aina Hanauna Hou (Limu

neth Rohrbach, Dr. Douglas Vincent, and Lynnet Higu-

Production).

chi handled the paperwork required by USDA for the

Special thanks are due the Kia‘i Loko participants

grants that supported the project. Research upon which

who endured the cold, the wet, and the wind to experience

this publication is based was supported by the USDA

the magic of loko i‘a firsthand. The kia‘i loko (fishpond

Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension

operators) included Bill Kekahuna, Zalarina Kalipi,

Service (CSREES) under Agreements 95-34167-1610,

Micheal Weeks, Kauhane Adams, Kimo Naki, Anthony

98-34167-6887, 99-34167-8172, and 00-34167-9712.

Naki, Kaipo Seales, Kaili Seales, Kalaniua Ritte, Kamohai

Support for the publication was provided in part through

Ritte, Marlin Lavoie, Decklan Kekoa, Jonathan Kaneakua,

USDA-CSREES Agreement no. 2002-34172-12400.

Brandon Lima, Kalola Kalima, Kapanila Kapuni, and Ma-

Mahalo also to the Agricultural Development in

hinahou Ross, coordinator of the Moloka‘i Aquaculture

the American Pacific’s Donna Shaver and Kristie Tsuda

Training Program, and its trainees.

for assisting the project’s progress, and to Dale Evans,

Various agencies provided funding or other contribu-

CTAHR Office of Communication Services, for provid-

tions that made the six-year project a success:

ing this publication’s final editing and design.

• U.S. Department of Agriculture, Cooperative State

Finally, the project’s outcomes, including this pub-

Research, Education, and Extension Service

lication, primarily result from the efforts of Graydon

• U.S. Department of Labor and Industrial Relations,

“Buddy” Keala, who was employed by the project from

Office of Community Service

1996 to 2002. Buddy’s commitment and dedication to the

• University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa, College of Tropical

idea of revitalizing an ancient Hawaiian tradition were

Agriculture and Human Resources (CTAHR),

as steadfast as the walls of the loko i‘a that still stand

Cooperative Extension Service

on many of Hawai‘i’s coasts.

• Hawai‘i Department of Land and Natural Resources,

Since work on the manual and its actual publication

Aquaculture Development Program

extended several years beyond Buddy’s involvement

• Moloka‘i Aquaculture Alliance

with the project, final responsibility for the content rests

• Hui O Kuapa Association

with the co-authors and the editor.

• Billy Kalipi, ‘Ualapu‘e Fishpond Operator

• UH Mānoa Department of Engineering,

James R. Hollyer

Water Resources Research Center

Formerly with the CTAHR Agricultural Diversification Project, and

• The Oceanic Institute

Project Manager, Agricultural Development in the American Pacific

• Queen Lili‘uokalani Children’s Center

• Ke Kua ‘Äina Hanauna Hou

Luisa F. Castro

• Honouliwai Community

Assistant Water Quality Coordinator, CTAHR Department of

• Office of Hawaiian Affairs

Natural Resources and Environmental Management

• Alu Like, Inc.

• Moloka‘i Community Services Council

June 2007

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Loko i‘a

Introduction

ver a thousand years ago, utilizing an advanced

was a social structure of religion, rules, and discipline

system of celestial navigation and double-hulled

that provided cohesion for the entire system. All activity

sailing canoes, people of the South Pacific journeyed far

included ceremony and ritual, presided over by kahuna,

to the north to discover a chain of islands. Those early

or masters. Religious and spiritual convictions evolved

explorers, in many arrivals over many years, became

from a deep and profound observation and understand-

settlers and created a unique, complex society with a

ing of and respect for all things natural. In addition to

population estimated to have been from six hundred

ordinary daily life, the entire natural environment—from

thousand to almost a million people—an amazingly

the clouds in the highest atmosphere, to the currents of

large number. It is logical to ask, “How did this large

the deepest ocean—was acknowledged to be under the

population sustain itself?”

protection of the gods.

Almost every culture in the world has practiced

Such a large population required vast quantities of

aquaculture in some fashion. The ancient Egyptians

food, and the culture demanded this be accomplished in a

stocked artificial ponds with fish, the Greeks and Ro-

sustainable harmony, without waste or extensive harm to

mans raised eels, the Taiwanese walled in tidal areas,

the environment, which were believed to anger the gods.

and people in the Tuamotos, Society Islands, Australia,

The production of food included cultivating kalo, which

Cook Islands, Samoa, and New Zealand entrapped fish

could be processed into poi, and gathering seafood from

by various means. Despite such wide-ranging, ancient

the ocean and shoreline. Some type of seafood, along

aquaculture activities, as W.K. Kikuchi stated in Pre-

with poi or kalo, was part of the staple diet.

historic Hawaiian Fishponds, only a few cultures used

Production plots for kalo were extensive, as evi-

permanent ponds for raising fish.

denced by the remnants of terraced contours in many

With the early settlers of the Hawaiian archipelago

valleys, remains of sophisticated irrigation systems, and

came the tangible necessities of long-term existence—

large rock-lined enclosures at stream deltas leading into

medicinal and food plants, animals, tools—all carefully

the ocean. Consistent with the rock-enclosed, flooded

packaged on the canoes for the long voyage. Specialists,

farming of kalo was the extension of rock enclosures at

who taught and shared their knowledge through a system

the point where streams entered the sea. In this brack-

of generational apprenticeships, were among the settlers

ish-water environment, silver fish were observed to

to ensure proper use of things, although it was not uncom-

congregate, and the idea of confining them within rock

mon for one generation to develop practical improve-

walls led to systems of farming them.

ments over the methods of previous generations.

The full-scale development of loko i‘a (fishponds)

Hawai‘i is the only known place in Oceania where

from mauka (the mountains) to makai (the ocean) dates

the people practiced a “pure” form of fishpond aqua-

back over half a millennium. Cultivation and propagation

culture. In contrast to the rest of the Pacific, Hawai-

centered on many different fresh and salt-water plants

ian fishponds evolved into a unique and sophisticated

and animals, with the primary species being the prized

aquacultural practice. Nowhere else is found either the

‘ama‘ama (mullet) and ‘awa (milkfish). An inventory in

variety of fishpond types or the quantity of fishpond re-

the early 1900s found 360 loko i‘a in the islands and iden-

mains that are found in Hawai‘i. Hawaiians attempted to

tified 99 active ponds with an estimated annual production

utilize practically every body of water for either irrigated

total of about 680,000 pounds, including 486,000 pounds

agriculture, mostly for their staple kalo (taro, Colocasia

of ‘ama‘ama and 194,000 pounds of ‘awa. Loko i‘a were

esculenta), or for fishponds.

extensive operating systems that produced an average of

The transition from explorers to settlers to a per-

400-600 pounds per acre per year, a significant amount

manent population took place over many generations

considering the minimal amount of fishpond “input” and

as a unique culture developed. Inherent in the culture

maintenance effort apparent by that time.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As with the lo‘i and production of kalo, loko i‘a

train others in the art of traditional Hawaiian fishpond

production slid into decline over the past century. Factors

methods. They made productive contributions to try

contributing to the decline included changing population

to apply the lessons as practitioners. For all practical

centers, lifestyles, and economics; land development;

purposes, this document captures the cumulative ex-

elimination of productive ponds; pollution; new systems

periences of the project’s efforts. To assist the reader,

of land ownership and tenure; introduction of aggressive

the first section provides a historical perspective on the

species; and reluctance to engage in the hard physical

physical, biological, and social aspects associated with

labor of lo‘i and loko i‘a. In addition, pressure to become

fishponds of ancient times. A section on pond restoration

Westernized increased, and opportunities to learn from

is included, illustrated with examples from rebuilding

küpuna became limited.

the Honouliwai and Kahinapōhaku loko i‘a.

Today’s society better understands, tolerates, and

This manual includes a section dedicated to permit-

encourages cultural diversity. In this setting, over the

ting, which is the most frustrating, time-consuming, and

past three decades, Hawai‘i has experienced a cultural

costly aspect of fishpond restoration and revitalization

renaissance and a strong resurgence in all aspects of

projects today. Working with regulatory agencies and

native Hawaiian culture. The dramatic voyages of the

a committed permit consulting team, a quicker, user-

Hōkūle‘a raised the consciousness of all native peoples

friendly application process was drafted and used for

of the Pacific. In Hawai‘i, a deep desire to learn, share,

the application of Pānāhāhā fishpond on Moloka‘i and

and practice the traditional native culture is evidenced

Kō‘ie‘ie fishpond on Maui. This section was included in

by a language revival in special schools and classes, the

the hopes that it will help any organization cut through

continued growth and practice of hula and all its hidden

the permit application redundancy and avoid lengthy

meaning by diverse ethnic groups, and the eagerness of

delays and unnecessary expense.

the current generation to work in the mud of lo‘i and

This document includes a look at fishpond production

carry stones for loko i‘a walls. Young people throughout

and activities associated with farming fish in fishponds

Hawai‘i seek kupuna who retain customary practices

today. Use of culture pens and modern culture methods

from whom they can learn, then turn to teach the next

are shown as applied at ‘Ualapu‘e fishpond, including

generation.

data recording, daily log sheets, water monitoring, and

In 1994 the community of Moloka‘i worked dili-

pen construction.

gently and developed a strategic blueprint to address em-

The final phase of a fishpond production cycle, as it

ployment, growth, and economic issues for the island. In

pertains to this manual, concludes with the sale and mar-

evaluating the island’s assets and resources, Moloka‘i’s

keting of a viable product. A business section developed

more than 60 fishponds, encompassing over 1500 acres,

for the rural fishpond farmer looks at the economic realities

were clearly acknowledged as a huge, underutilized po-

of profit and loss, and the final section describes develop-

tential to create employment and sustainable economic

ment of an economic model for fishpond activity.

growth opportunities through practicing traditional and

The information provided is meant to be applicable

modern aqua-farming.

to almost all fishpond endeavors, but it is not meant as a

Over the past decade a small but steady effort

definitive text on how things should be done. It is hoped

spawned traditional fishpond restoration and fishpond

that the information gathered can, in its application, be

culture projects on Moloka‘i at Oneali‘i, ‘Ualapu‘e,

a resource and an avenue for further learning.

Keawanui, Kahinapōhaku, and Honouliwai fishponds.

The primary focus of this manual is on fishpond

The desire to put these historic and cultural treasures

production benefits as an economic outcome, but we also

back to productive use again, and the availability of

hope that revived interest in traditional fishponds creates

federal and state funding for agriculture and economic

opportunities for potential new science curriculums for

diversification, created a regeneration of fishpond inter-

Hawai‘i’s youth, opportunities for realizing the satisfac-

est and development on the island.

tion of rebuilding a “living treasure” for communities,

This document is a product of work done by com-

and opportunities for conducting valuable practical

mitted young men and women who put forth their time

research to better understand and manage our future.

and energy and challenged themselves to learn and

Mahalo ke akua. Mahalo kūpuna.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Loko i‘a

Hawaiian Fishpond History

oko i‘a, Hawaiian fishponds, are impressive struc-

tures. They represent one of the ancient world’s

The Moloka‘i experience

most significant and successful aquacultural achieve-

In strategic planning meetings in 1994, Moloka‘i

ments. Writing about commercial fisheries in the Hawai-

residents identified the reutilization of traditional

ian Islands in 1901, J.H. Cobb estimated that about 350

Hawaiian fishponds as a major focal point for eco-

fishponds had been in operation in ancient Hawai‘i. Today,

nomic revitalization efforts. It was assumed dur-

the remains of many of those fishponds are unrepairable,

ing the meetings that with some fishponds back in

but some could be restored to use. Newly restored loko i‘a

operation there would also be a “multiplier effect”

could be a vehicle for providing employment, economic

for the community: other areas of the economy and

opportunity, and fishstock enhancement. Fishponds can

community would benefit directly or indirectly from

also provide educational opportunities and promote the

fishpond activities. These activities would include

sharing of cultural values for the people of Hawai‘i.

contemporary aquaculture production, education,

and job training opportunities. Such spin-off efforts

Ho‘olaulima ku na kupuna,

would enhance diversified agriculture on Moloka‘i

Malama no i ka loko i‘a

and advance Hawaiian tradition and cultural knowl-

E ho‘omau i neia waiwai ho‘oilina.

edge as well as develop aquaculture science and

Let us work in the manner of our ancestors,

provide new research opportunities.

Let us preserve the fishponds

It was estimated by subsequent reconnaissance

To continue this part of our heritage.

work that 40 dormant fishponds, totalling 1500

acres, could be brought back into production on

—from Summers (1964)

Moloka‘i. If each acre produced 300 pounds of mul-

let under non-intensive production conditions (low

Hawaiian fishpond history

stocking rate and minimal inputs), the entire system

It is not known when Hawaiian fishponds began to be

could yield 450,000 pounds of mullet. At $2.50 per

constructed, but some fishpond walls have been carbon-

pound, $1,125,000 could be added annually to the

dated to the 1400s. Cobb’s estimate of 340-360 Hawai-

Moloka‘i economy from mullet production alone.

ian fishponds was for the period before the arrival of

Mission statement*

“Western influence,” marked by Captain James Cook’s

Aquaculture is an industry committed to sustaining

arrival in 1778. In 1901, Cobb identified 99 ponds in

the integrity of the rural Moloka‘i lifestyle and its

commercial production on Kaua‘i, O‘ahu, Moloka‘i,

ecosystems. Besides providing marketable prod-

and Hawai‘i. He estimated total output then at 679,692

ucts, aquaculture can reduce the human demand

pounds: 485,531 pounds of mullet and 194,161 pounds

on natural stocks.

of milkfish. The estimates of fishpond yield ranged from

300 to 500 pounds per acre. Using the low end of this

Vision statement*

range and assuming an average fishpond area of about

Our vision for Moloka‘i aquaculture is to have our

18 acres, the annual yield of Hawaiian fishponds in pre-

people prosper and enjoy an improved quality of life

Cook times could have approached 2 million pounds. In

through the development of technical and natural

contrast, the state Division of Fish and Game (now the

systems centered on the careful stewardship of our

Division of Fish and Wildlife) reported in 1975-76 a

land and water.

total fishpond production of only 20,000 pounds of fish,

* from the Moloka‘i Aquaculture Strategic Planning Session,

including only 1200 pounds of mullet.

December 1-2, 1994.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The dramatic decline in the number of ponds and the

average yield of those remaining is attributed to various

Glossary of aquatic species mentioned

factors, both social and economic, including

Traditional Hawaiian fishpond species

• money replacing barter as the standard of exchange

āholehole (Hawaiian flagtail, Kuhlia sandvicensis)

• competition from cheaper imported products

akule (big-eyed scad, Selar crumenophtalmus)

• population movement from rural to urban areas

‘ama‘ama (mullet, Mugil cephalus)

• loss of traditional fishpond management skills with

awa (milkfish, Chanos chanos)

the passing of people who had them

awa ‘aua (ladyfish, Elops machnata)

• availability of alternative sources of employment.

hīnālea (wrasses, Labridae family)

honu (turtles)

Forces of nature have also played a major role in the

kāhala (amberjack, yellowtail, Caranx mate)

destruction of Hawaiian fishponds. These forces include

kaku (barracuda, Sphryaena barracuda)

• lava flows filling in ponds

kala (unicorn fish, Naso unicornis)

• tsunami and sea storms filling in ponds or destroying

kumu (goat fish, Parupeneus porphyreus)

their walls

limu (edible seaweeds)

• land erosion filling in ponds with silt

manini (convict tang, Acanthurus triostegus)

• mangroves and other vegetation encroaching into

moano (Parupeneus pleurostigma)

production areas

moi (threadfin, Polydactylus sexfilis)

• natural processes of eutrophication, where excessive

nehu (anchovy, Anchoviella pupirea)

accumulation of nutrients in the water stimulates

ogo (a seaweed, Gracilaria bursapastoris)

excessive plant growth that causes oxygen depletion.

‘ō‘io (bonefish, Albula vulpes)

‘o‘opu (fish in families Eleotridae, Gobiidae)

Traditional production systems

‘ōpae (shrimp, in general)

Cobb reported that fishponds varied greatly in size, from

palani (surgeonfish, Acanthurus dussumieri)

less than an acre up to 600 acres. The shape of the fish-

pāpa‘i (crabs, in general)

pond, as well as its size, largely depended on the physi-

pāpio, ulua (jack, Carangidae species)

cal characteristics of the shoreline. Therefore, each was

puhi (moray eel, Muraenidae family)

unique. Other factors that influenced the fishpond shape

uhu (parrotfish, Scaridae family)

included the coastal reef structure, sand barriers, the

weke (surmullets, Mullidae family)

adjacent land mass, adjoining fishponds, depressions in

weke ula (Mulloidichthys duriflamma)

the near-shore ocean bottom, and other physical features.

Except for some upland freshwater ponds, almost

Other species mentioned

all Hawaiian fishponds were located next to the sea

rainbow trout (Salmo garidneri)

and were nourished with a mixture of fresh and ocean

ornamental carp (Cyprinoidei order)

water. This mixture created a brackish water environ-

tilapia (Sarotherodon mossambicus)

ment. Shallow water depth, maximum sunlight radiation,

circulation from tidal and stream flows, nutrients from

the runoff of water that had circulated in lo‘i (flooded

paddies used to grow kalo), and other organic materials

a reliable, convenient, and ever-ready supply of fresh

created highly productive, estuary-type environments.

seafood for the ruling ali‘i (chief) and the royal court.

Not only were the shoreline ponds more productive than

The first three types of coastal fishponds described

those in uplands, but some Hawaiians also believed that

below—loko wai, loko pu‘uone, and loko kuapa—be-

they produced the sweetest tasting fish.

longed to royalty. These ponds, between 10 and 100

acres in size, were considered a symbol of high social

Traditional operations and management

and economic status. A fishpond also symbolized a rich

The primary role of the ancient Hawaiian fishponds was

ahupua‘a (major land division), which reflected favor-

not to provide food for the general populace, nor was it

ably on the ali‘i as well as on the people living in the

for commerce. Rather, the ponds were used to provide

ahupua‘a.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Loko i‘a

The fishpond remained a powerful symbol even

How many ponds can be restored?

after the Great Mahele in 1848, when the concept of

In 1973, R.A. Apple and W.K. Kikuchi published a study

land and property “ownership” replaced traditional land

that began to identify those Hawaiian fishpond remnants

management structures. For example, in a study of the

worthy of historic preservation. Searching through

leeward side of the island of Hawai‘i, it was found that

historical literature, Kikuchi found, documented, and

descendants of King Kamehameha I owned seven of the

surveyed 335 ancient Hawaiian fishponds. Apple did

largest fishponds (Kikuchi 1971).

a survey by helicopter, identified the remains of 157

The smaller loko i‘a, either natural or man-made,

sites, and evaluated their condition. At that point, 101

might belong to commoners, those without titles. Fishing

of those fishponds were eliminated from consideration

rights to these fishponds or traps were bestowed to an

because they were either almost completely destroyed

‘ohana (family or extended family). These rights were

or irreparably altered.

managed, controlled, and kept within the ‘ohana to be

Only 56 of the 335 ponds evaluated had any potential

passed down from generation to generation.

use as fishponds. W.D. Madden (1997) sought out these

Because the ali‘i were occupied with religious and

last 56 ponds to find out their potential as productive

political duties, they appointed managers to oversee the

mullet and milkfish fishponds. Madden rated six ponds

daily operations of a fishpond. These individuals had

as “excellent” for fishpond aquaculture, 15 as “good,”

distinct titles and job descriptions: konohiki, the land

and the rest as “fair” or “poor” but still with possibilities

overseer of the ahupua‘a, and kia‘i loko, the resident

as productive systems.

keeper of the royal fishponds. The konohiki were like

The few fishponds still in commercial production to-

land superintendents. The kia‘i loko, on the other hand,

day are used to cultivate ogo, rainbow trout, ornamental

were responsible for the management, production,

carp, and tilapia, as well as some of the traditional native

harvesting, and protection of the fishpond within the

fishpond species including ‘ama‘ama, awa, āhole-hole,

ahupua‘a.

moi, pāpio, ‘ō‘io, awa ‘aua, and various edible seaweeds.

The amount of knowledge that these individuals had

has been likened to that of any doctoral degree in fishery

Traditional stocking methods

biology and management—and then some. The keeper’s

The primary method of getting fish into the fishpond

knowledge and position was kept within the family and

was by stocking it with young fish, called juveniles or

passed down through the generations. The keeper was

fingerlings. These were usually about 4 inches long and

very powerful in his capacity as fishpond manager, and his

less than one year old. They were caught outside the

decisions were highly respected and might even be held

fishpond, usually in the months of January to March,

above those of the ali‘i in regard to pond management.

when they were abundant. The fingerlings were put

If the work called for many people, commoners were

into a special grow-out pond using dip-nets. This initial

recruited to do maintenance upkeep of the fishponds, but

pond was smaller than the regular fishpond and free of

usually the commoners were not allowed to take fish

predator fish species. When the fingerlings had grown to

from the fishpond. The fishpond was a proud symbol of

a size at which they would not be subject to predation,

a rich ahupua‘a to which they belonged. Also, by having

they were put into the main fishpond.

a fishpond that had great quantities of fish for the ali‘i,

Other ways that fish got into the fishpond was al-

the burden of taxes was not as heavy on the commoners’

lowing them to enter through the mākāhā (sluice gate),

own food supplies. We can suppose that Hawaiian com-

but sometimes undesirable species such as jacks and

moners saw a productive fishpond as a partial release

barracuda would also get in this way. And, although

from their commitment to provide food for the chief at

there is no documented evidence of fish reproducing

the expense of depleting their personal resources. Also,

within fishponds, some kupuna believe that it occurred,

it is believed that they were sometimes rewarded for

considering the estuary-like nursery environment and

helping to maintain the fishpond when, under special

the lack of significant pollution.

conditions and during celebrations, they were allowed

Provision of nutrients for inhabitants of a fishpond

to take fish.

was through both natural means and human manage-

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ment. Nutrients carried to the ponds in drainage and

to raise ‘o‘opu, ‘ama‘ama, and āholehole.

runoff from streams and kalo plots increased productiv-

Kikuchi (1976) suggested that diversion of stream

ity at the base of the aquatic food chain, and this effect

runoff for the irrigation of kalo eventually led to fish

worked its way up to create natural food sources. Fish

aquaculture. Irrigated agriculture in lo‘i was enhanced

were also fed kalo, sweetpotato, breadfruit, mussels,

by including fish (loko i‘a kalo), and this led to pure

and seaweed. Religious beliefs did not allow the use

fishpond aquaculture—loko pu‘uone.

of any type of animal waste as a nutrient source. The

consequence of this restriction was not recognized as

Loko pu‘uone

a loss at the time, but using animal wastes would have

Loko pu‘uone (Figure 1, Type 2) contained mostly brack-

increased production of algae, a valuable food source.

ish water, with inputs from both freshwater and saltwater

The periodic removal of filamentous seaweed mats

sources. Fresh water from streams, artesian springs,

from the fishpond was usually done by women. Re-

and percolation from adjacent aquifers was mixed with

moving the seaweed mats helped maintain open water

seawater that entered through channels during incoming

surface, which enhanced fish growth and the health of

tides. This mixing produced a highly productive estuarine

the pond. It also left the nutrients that the seaweed would

environment that is known for its high biological biomass

extract from the pond available for use by microalgae and

index (Bardach et al. 1972). The most characteristic fea-

zooplankton, upon which mullet feed. This maintenance

ture of this type of fishpond was a sandbar, coastal reef

operation was directed by the kia‘i loko and called upon

structure, or two close edges of landmass that could be

all the women in the ahupua‘a to go in a line to pick out

connected to enclose a body of water. Typical of these

the limu by hand. A bamboo rake called a kope ‘ohe was

ponds were fish that were able to handle fluctuations of

also used for fishpond cleaning. This rake was dragged

salinity. These fish include ‘ama‘ama, awa, āholehole,

behind a canoe, and the outgoing currents swept the silt

pāpio or ulua, ‘ō‘io, nehu, awa ‘aua, ‘o‘opu, kaku, moi,

out the mākāhā and into the open ocean.

and weke. Various other fish may have been grown, but

When the fishpond became too full of fish or when

this depended on water quality, especially salinity level,

undesired species became too numerous, long seine

and the location of the fishpond with regard to migrating

and gill nets were used to remove large quantities of

species such as akule and nehu.

fish at a time. These nets were prized possessions of the

ali‘i or kia‘i loko. M.A. Kelley described how once it

Loko kuapä

was known where the fish congregated they would be

Loko kuapā (Figure 1, Type 1) were strictly coastal fish-

encircled again and again with nets cast from canoes.

ponds whose characteristic feature was a kuapä (seawall)

This method was used in larger fishponds where the fish

of lava or coral rubble. They were usually built over a

had a lot of “range” and could often escape harvest.

reef flat, with the wall extending out from two points on

the coast in an enclosed semicircle. These ponds usually

Types of royal and common fishponds

had one or two ‘auwai (channels) that were used mainly

Hawaiians had five basic types of fishponds, listed here

for water flushing or inflow, depending on the rising and

by location, from the uplands toward the sea.

ebbing of the tides, but were also used during harvesting

and stocking.

Loko wai

Loko kuapā, because they were enclosed reef flats,

Located inland and mostly of freshwater origin, a loko

had all the marine aquatic sea life that would be expected

wai (Figure 1, Type 3) was typically made from a natural

to be found on a reef flat including kala, palani, and

depression, lake, or pool whose water was mainly from

manini. Less common fish sometimes found in these

diverted streams, natural groundwater springs, or perco-

fishponds were the kāhala, kumu, moano, weke ula,

lation from an aquifer. Various ‘o‘opu were commonly

uhu, various species of hīnālea, surgeonfish, crevally,

found in these ponds.

goatfish, and even puhi.

Loko i‘a kalo

Loko ‘ume iki

These “kalo fishponds”

(Figure 1, Type 4) combined

Loko ‘ume iki (Figure 1, Type 5) were not actually

aquaculture with flooded agriculture. Kalo lo‘i were used

fishponds but rather fish traps. Like the loko kuapä, they

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Loko i‘a

Figure 1. Six types of ancient Hawaiian fishponds.

Source: The figure is reproduced from Hawaiian Fishpond Revitalization: A Manual, 1993, Hawaiian Fishpond Revitalization Project and Oceanic

Institute. The 1993 publication cited the following as sources for the illustration: R.A. Apple and William K. Kikuchi, 1975, Ancient Hawaiian

shorezone fishponds: An evaluation of survivors for historical preservation, U.S. National Park Service, Department of Interior, p. 157.; and B.

Costa-Pierce, 1987, Aquaculture in ancient Hawaii, BioScience 37(5).

Type 1

Type 2

Type 3

Type 4

Type 5

Type 6

were constructed on a reef flat, but loko ‘ume iki had

All materials used for the construction of the fish-

“fish lanes,” corridors used to net or trap fish going onto

pond usually came from within the same ahupua‘a. This

or off the reef. Each loko ‘ume iki had many fish lanes

pie-shaped land division had its point in the upland

with fishing rights usually assigned to a family. The traps

mountains and extended down through a valley or val-

operated without the use of gates and relied on natural

leys and out to the edge of the coastal reef. The ahupua‘a

movements of fish. The lanes were usually tapered,

provided its residents access to both mountains and ocean

with the wide end facing either inward or outward, and

and the various provisions of these resources necessary

anywhere from 10 to 40 feet long.

for sustenance.

Traditional fishpond construction

Kuapä

A traditional Hawaiian belief has it that fishponds were

Fishpond kuapä (seawalls) were constructed from many

built by Menehune, a legendary race of small people

materials including lava rock, coralline blocks, and

who worked at night. Although there has been no docu-

rubble of rocks, coral, and soil. Small rocks and coral

mentation of traditional fishpond construction methods,

fragments filled interior cracks. Coralline algae, marine

the work is clearly labor-intensive, and large ponds must

plants important in the construction of coral reefs, were

have taken a long time to construct. The only tools known

sometimes relied upon to provide “cement.” The seawall

to have been used were ropes, dragging sleds, and ‘ō‘ō

was permeable to water, allowing aeration and water

(digging sticks). It is traditionally accepted that rocks for

circulation while deflecting oncoming wave energy.

the construction were transported down from the moun-

The outer (ocean-facing) and inner seawalls differed:

tains along a human (or Menehune) chain, sometimes

the outer wall had a greater angulation to allow some

many miles long (Kikuchi 1973).

of the deflected current to “clean” or scour the outer rim

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

of the fishpond. The outer kuapä was often 5 feet wide

out with dip-nets according to desired type and size.

and 3-5 feet deep. The widest and most massive kuapä

Thus the keeper of the fishpond could be very selective

is Kaloko in Kona, Hawai‘i. This seawall is 35-40 feet

about the fish caught or released, thereby increasing the

wide at its base and over 6 feet high.

efficiency of the operation.

Mäkähä

Additional fishpond-related concepts

Sluice gates (mākāhā) were the most distinctive and

Royal fishponds were protected by a number of cultural

unique feature of Hawaiian fishponds. They were station-

and religious restrictions. For example, any form of

ary, without any moving parts. The mākāhā was made of

pollution by sewage, rubbish, and metabolites was not

wood, typically tree branches about ¹⁄2 inch in diameter

tolerated. In the latter category, women during their

lashed vertically ¹⁄2 inch apart to two or three pieces of

menstrual period were not allowed in or near a fishpond,

larger wood arranged horizontally in a grid-like manner.

to avoid “insult” to the guardian spirit of the fishpond.

The grate structure allowed water circulation and flush-

Another cultural aspect of fishponds were the

ing and the influx of fingerlings yet retained fish too large

ceremonial structures associated with them. Kū‘ula

to pass through the grid. There was no traditional location

(shrines) were built to honor the gods Kū and Hina, his

for the mākāhā, but they were positioned to maximize

wife. All fishponds had a guardian spirit called mo‘o,

the flow of current throughout the entire fishpond.

which manifested itself in either a lizard or mermaid-like

form. It was the duty of the kia‘i loko to make regular

‘Auwai

offerings to the gods at designated times of the lunar

‘Auwai (sluices) were channels of water that connected

month to ensure the well-being of the fishpond.

the fishpond with the sea. In a loko kuapä they were

The people were also very aware of the need for con-

called ‘auwai o ka mākāhā, which means “gates of the

servation. To protect the environment from overuse, they

channel,” and in a loko pu‘uone they were called ‘auwai

instituted a kapu, or restriction system. A kapu restricted

kai, or “sea gate.” Both of these ‘auwai systems served

fishing during certain months of the year to let stocks

to allow water flow, recruitment of juvenile fish from the

rebuild; this applied to designated areas offshore as well

outside, and, most importantly, harvesting.

as in the fishpond. For instance, a kapu was placed on

The innovations of the mākāhā and ‘auwai prob-

certain fish when they were spawning. A branch of the

ably allowed Hawaiians to progress from fish traps and

hau tree (hibiscus family) marked an area restricted to

enclosed ponds to artificial estuaries (fishponds), which

fishing. Migrating schooling fish like the akule could

could be better controlled and managed. A more recent

also be declared kapu. To break a kapu by poaching, as

innovation (introduced by Chinese immigrants in the

well as by polluting an irrigation system, was punishable

mid-1800s) was the incorporation of a double mākāhā,

by plucking out the offender’s eyeballs, or strangulation

two parallel grates set a few feet apart in a fishpond wall,

until death. These strict kapu ensured renewable stocks

which permitted the trapping of fish between the grates

and a stable population of fish resources, enabling effi-

and allowed for easier harvesting by small hand nets

cient fishery management from generation to generation.

(Apple 1975).

Other principal food items

Traditional harvesting

Besides fish, other animals and plants living within the

To harvest the fish, Hawaiians relied on the natural in-

traditional fishpond included the following organisms.

stincts of mature fish to congregate on the fishpond side

of the sluice gate when they sensed the incoming tide.

Crustaceans

Likewise, mature fish tend to congregate on the ocean

Many kinds of shrimp, generally called ‘ōpae, were

side of the fishpond wall during the outgoing tide. A mod-

found in all zones from the shore to upland streams.

ern fishpond operator (Wyban 1982) reported that only

There were about 14 different kinds of ‘ōpae, with

mature adult fish react to this phenomenon, and during

distinct forms, colors, sizes, and shapes. A few päpa‘i

the reproductive, spawning season, this congregation is

(crabs) were also found in fishponds.

greatly intensified.

Using this harvesting strategy, fish that were

Seaweed

“caught” inside the ‘auwai o ka mākāhā could be scooped

Over 70 distinct species of edible limu (seaweed) were

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Loko i‘a

present in Hawai‘i, found along the seashore and some-

enhanced the pond’s overall productivity through con-

times in freshwater ponds, rivers, and streams. Certain

suming seaweed and adding excrement as fertilizer.

fishponds were chosen to cultivate selected limu. The

ali‘i directed workers to segregate choice seaweeds and

Summary

transplant them into fishpond “gardens” for convenience.

Hawaiian fishponds were one of the most important

technological, social, economic, and cultural concepts

Shellfish

developed in ancient Hawai‘i. Their open channels,

The availability of various shellfish, bivalves, and

sluice gates, and unique harvesting methods were tech-

mollusks is assumed but unrecorded. Hawaiians must

nologically unsurpassed by other Pacific cultures. The

have consumed all food resources available from the

system was not developed for great amounts of yield but

fishponds, but harvest of these organisms was probably

rather for the convenience of the Hawaiian royalty. Fish-

marginal and occasional because of their slow life cycle.

ponds helped to stabilize and solidify the community’s

social structure, manage natural resources, and enrich

Turtles

the people’s relationships with the supernatural gods of

Honu (turtles) were occasionally caught and placed in

their universe. Through conservation management and a

fishponds, where they were kept healthy to be consumed

thorough understanding of their environment, Hawaiians

at a later time. Being primarily herbivores, turtles did

complemented and enhanced the natural productivity

not hinder productivity by eating fish, but rather they

that surrounded them.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Insights into Regulatory Permits Needed

to Re-Utilize Traditional Hawaiian Fishponds

efore starting any fishpond restoration work, many

Engineers (Corps). The Corps will acquaint the appli-

permits must be acquired from federal, state, and

cant with the permit process and provide a checklist of

county agencies. Jurisdiction over Hawaiian fishponds, or

agencies to contact for federal application requirements.

loko i‘a, is complex because they occur at the shoreline,

The Hawai‘i Department of Land and Natural Resources

a zone that interfaces between land and the ocean. This

(DLNR), Land Division, issues the Conservation District

zone is heavily regulated, and up to 17 permits must be

Use Application (CDUA) and is the agency for most

obtained before work on a fishpond can start. The amount

state-required permits and contacts. Some requirements

of work required in getting these permits is likened to an

may vary in their application process and cost based

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Permit process-

on whether fishpond activities are to be performed on

ing can easily cost $50,000-$80,000 and take several

private land or on public land under state lease. The fol-

years—without any guarantee of approval.

lowing pages outline some of the agencies concerned and

The permitting process starts with the federal gov-

provide worksheets for gathering information to develop

ernment, primarily the United States Army Corps of

permit applications.

Permit requirements

State permits

Here are the permits required for each government en-

Department of Land and Natural Resources

tity. The actual permit process may vary depending on

the situation.

Conservation District Use Permits

Environmental Impact Statement (343 HRS)

Federal permits

or Environmental Assessment

Department of Army

Coastal Zone Management Program

Clean Water Act—404

Dept. of Health 401 WQ Certification

Historic Site Review—Sec. 106

State Historic Preservation Office

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Review)

(four conditional requirements)

National Marine Fisheries Service (R)

County permits

Coastal Zone Management (CZM)

County

Consistency Statement

Shoreline Management Area (SMA) Permit

Shoreline Setback Variance (Survey)

Grading, Grubbing, and Stockpiling Permit

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Loko i‘a

For state-owned loko i‘a, additional requirements for

state processed 29 fishponds through the CDUA process

state-leased fishponds are as follows:

and developed a Master Conservation District Use Ap-

plication (MCDUA). The MCDUA eliminates much of

DLNR-Land Management Division

the application process and provides conditions for the

State Lease mechanism

permit processing and operations. While providing some

relief, this does not eliminate the overlapping complexity

Nonprofit 501(c)1 or 501(c)3 status

of the permits.

As a result of the continuing, intimidating, and

Metes and Bounds Survey and Land Appraisal

somewhat confusing permit processes, residents of

Moloka‘i worked with permit consultants to design a

Lease Rent Negotiations

procedure that was streamlined and easier to navigate.

In addition, the permit consultants worked on making

Right-of-Entry Permit

the process timely and affordable so that ‘ohana (fam-

ily) who desire to operate a pond could apply without

Insurance Coverage

incurring a financial setback.

Several agencies agreed to exempt the following

Building Permit

from the requirements:

a. Certified Shoreline Survey

b. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Department of the

Army, Section 404 Clean Water Act Permit

Implementation of the proposed streamlined

c. Department of Health, Section 401 Water Quality

permit process

Certification

On the island of Moloka‘i there are between 60 and 80

Hawaiian fishponds. In its strategic plan, the community

Standardized forms and templates were also created that

identified these traditional systems as an avenue for edu-

made the required information easier to gather and fill

cation, culture, and economic sustainability. In 1997, the

in, two of which are reprinted here.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Management Plan

Basic information

Name _________________________________________________________ Date _______________________

Mailing address _____________________________________________________________________________

Telephone (Res.) _______________________ (Bus.) ______________________ Fax ______________________

Site, location, and ownership

Fishpond ___________________________________________________________________________________

Island _____________________________________ County _________________________________________

Ahupua‘a ___________________________________ Area of fishpond ___________________ acres

Tax map key(s) ______________________________________________________________________________

Pond ownership

_____ State

_____ Private

If state-owned, tenancy seeking

_________ Lease

_________ Revocable permit

If private, name of owner ___________________________________________________________________

Parcel description

Mark with an “X” where applicable.

1. Are you aware of the presence of any endangered native Hawaiian birds?

______ Yes

______ No

2. a) Does the fishpond or areas immediately adjacent to the fishpond contain silt?

______ Yes

______ No

If the answer is yes, please indicate areas of observed silt on your attached map labeled Exhibit I.

b) What is the depth of mud/silt at these observed locations?

_________________________________________________

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Loko i‘a

3. Do you plan to remove any silt?

_____ Yes

_____ No

If so, how?

___________________________________________________________________________________________

a) Is there mangrove infestation within the pond, on the pond walls, or around the pond?

_____ Yes

_____ No

If the answer is yes, please indicate areas of mangrove infestation on your attached map labeled Exhibit I.

Do you plan to remove any of the mangroves?

_____ Yes

_____ No

If so, how?

_____ By hand

_____ Heavy equipment

4. Make a profile of the beach lands within and adjacent to the pond walls in the space provided below. Please

refer to the instructional guide. NOTE: If beach erosion is observed, DLNR will be contacted immediately.

5. a) Are there existing recreational uses at the site?

_____ Yes

_____ No

If yes, what are these recreational uses? Locate recreational use on your attached map labeled Exhibit I.

_____ Beach

_____ Swimming

_____ Fishing

_____ Diving

_____ Boating

_____ Camping

_____ Other

____________________________________________________________

b) List alternative sites for any displaced recreational activities listed above. If possible, indicate potential

sites on a map.

___________________________________________________________________________________________

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of work and pond construction plan

6. Describe the scope of work required to repair the fishpond. See instructional guide. Use a separate piece of paper

with the following headings: Scope of work, Labor, Materials, Machinery

Attach resume(s) of key person(s) involved in the work, pond reconstruction, and pond operations.

7. Expected period of work repair.

Start date: _________________________

Completion date: __________________________

8. When will you begin to raise products in the fishpond? ______________________________

9. Please provide maps, photographs and/or drawings of the existing fishpond wall.

10. Construction plan

a) Number of persons working to repair the wall ____________

b) Proposed wall dimensions

Wall length __________ Wall height __________

Width at base _________ Width at top __________

c) Slope of inside wall in degrees

_____ 10 -20 degrees

_____ 20-30 degrees

_____ 30-40 degrees

Slope of outside wall in degrees

_____ 10 -20 degrees

_____ 20-30 degrees

_____ 30-40 degrees

d) Building materials used in fishpond repair

_____ Stone

_____ Ili‘ili

_____ Coral

Other: __________________________________________________________________

e) Are these materials found on site?

_____ Yes

_____ No

If no, which materials are from off site, where are they coming from and how much will be used?

___________________________________________________________________________________________

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Loko i‘a

Provisions 11-19: Items to adhere to

11. Precautionary measures, approved by DLNR State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD), to prevent adverse

effect to historic sites will be taken for all shore side reconstruction activities (e.g., transport of construction materi-

als).

12. All reconstruction material will come from within the existing fishpond wall and areas immediately adjacent to

the wall. Should offsite reconstruction materials be utilized, they will not be from any historic sites. Excess con-

struction materials shall not be disposed in historic sites.

13. The applicant or ‘ohana will maintain close coordination with the DLNR-SHPD before, during, and after recon-

struction.

14. The applicant or ‘ohana will comply with all applicable statutes, ordinances, rules, and regulations of the federal,

state and county governments and applicable parts of Chapter 13-5, Hawai‘i Administrative Rules.

15. The applicant, ‘ohana, its successors, and assigns shall indemnify and hold the State of Hawai‘i harmless from

and against any loss, liability, claim, or demand for property damage, personal injury, and death arising out of any

act or omission of the applicant, its successors, assigns, officers, employees, contractors, and agents under this permit

or relating to or connected with the granting of this permit.

16. Since this approval applies to conservation district use lands only, the applicant or ‘ohana is in the process of

obtaining the appropriate authorization from the DLNR-Land Division for the occupancy of state lands.

17. The applicant or ‘ohana will comply with all applicable Department of Health rules.

18. Any work or construction shall be initiated within one year of the approval and execution of the lease or revo-

cable permit, and all work and construction must be completed within a mutually agreed upon time period, and this

may be extended pending agreement by parties involved.

19. Native species commonly found along the shoreline of Hawai‘i will coexist with the fishponds.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Template 2

[This is a modified permit example of what is being required by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers]

Basic information

Name _________________________________________________________ Date ______________________

Mailing Address ____________________________________________________________________________

Telephone (Res.) ______________________ (Bus.) ______________________ Fax ______________________

Site and location

Fishpond __________________________________________________________________________________

Island ____________________________________________ County _________________________________

Ahupua‘a ____________________________________________ Area of Fishpond ___________________ acres

Tax Map Key(s) _____________________________________________________________________________

Current condition of the fishpond

Please provide maps, photographs and/or drawings of the existing fishpond walls, shoreline areas and areas where

proposed pond-related activities are to take place.

Does the fishpond or areas immediately adjacent to the fishpond contain silt?

_____ Yes

_____ No

If the answer is yes, please indicate areas of observed silt on your attached map labeled Exhibit I.

What is the depth of mud/silt at these observed locations? ____________________________________________

Is there mangrove infestation within the pond, on the pond walls or around the pond?

_____ Yes

_____ No

If the answer is yes, please indicate areas of mangrove infestation on your attached map labeled Exhibit I.

At a medium tide, what percent of the pond walls are visible and intact?

_____ %

What current activities are taking place within the fishpond?

___________________________________________________________________________________________

What current activities are taking place in the vicinity of the pond?

___________________________________________________________________________________________

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Loko i‘a

Project proposal

Describe in detail the overall project activities.

1) What you intend to do.

2) Purpose and need for the project. What is the project used for and why?

3) Please provide a map of the proposed project area indicating where work activities are to take place.

(See General Information for additional details).

If additional space is required, please attach an extra sheet of paper.

___________________________________________________________________________________________

Pond reconstruction activities

Expected period of work repair: Start date: _________________ Completion date: ________________________

Do you plan to remove any silt?

_____ Yes

_____ No If so, how?

___________________________________________________________________________________________

1) Identify type(s) of material dredged (discharged) and amount(s) of each material in cubic yards (e.g., rock, sand,

clay, concrete, etc.).

2) Where will dredged material be deposited?

3) If dredged material deposited upland of project site, identify deposit site and remedial steps if necessary to pre-

vent runoff back into the water cycle and pond.

4) Please describe the benefits of the project (e.g., reconstruction and reuse of historic cultural property, job creation,

fish production, community and self empowerment)

If additional space is required, please attach an extra sheet of paper.

___________________________________________________________________________________________

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mangroves

Do you plan to remove any of the mangroves?

_____ Yes

_____ No If so, how?

_____ By hand (including chainsaw)

_____ With heavy equipment

Walls

Please provide maps, photographs, and/or drawings of the existing fishpond wall.

Number of persons working to repair the wall ____________

Proposed wall dimensions

Wall length __________

Wall height __________

Width at base _________

Width at top __________

Slope of inside wall in degrees:

_____ 0-10 degrees

_____ 10-20 degrees

_____ 20-30 degrees

Slope of outside wall in degrees

_____ 0-10 degrees

_____ 10-20 degrees

_____ 20-30 degrees

Building materials used in fishpond repair

_____ Stone

_____ ‘Ili‘ili

_____ Coral

Other: ______________________________________________________________________________________

Are these materials found onsite?

_____ Yes

_____ No

If no, which materials are from offsite, where are they coming from, and how much will be used?

___________________________________________________________________________________________

Pond operations

When will you begin to raise products in the fishpond? ______________________________

What type of products are being raised and by what methods?

_________________________________________________________________________________________

What periodic maintenance activities will be needed to maintain the fishpond?

_________________________________________________________________________________________

The proposed project will comply with all state, federal, and county regulations and ordinances. No adverse impacts

are foreseen with this project.

Applicant’s Signature ________________________________________________ Date ___________________

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Major control powers over aquaculture uses of lands and waters.

Activities involving public lands and waters and having significant environmental effects

EIS procedures, Chap. 343, HRS; P.L. 91-190.

Management of public lands and water

EIS procedures, Chap. 343, HRS; P.L. 91-190

Approving agencies/state/federal

resources. BLNR, Chap. 171 HRS

Approving agencies/county/state/federal

State Land Use Commission and counties establish

Shoreline area

limits, Chap. 205, Sec. 34 HRS. Counties regulate

Prohibitions on commercial removal of beach

20’-40’

and enforce; variance procedure

materials 1000’ from shoreline or from waters

less than 30’ deep, Chap. 205 Sec. 34, HRS

Shoreline area

300’

20’-40’

EIS procedures; Chap. 343 HRS. approving agencies/county/state/federal

Activities affecting historic sites

Fishponds

Project review, department of land and natural resources (DLNR); Chap. 6,

HRS, EIS procedures; Chap. 343, HRS; approving agency/DLNR

Conservation

Agriculture-rural

Urban

District boundaries

No specific limits

established by

State submerged lands and waters, Chap.

Conservation district

Joint county/SLUC

County jurisdiction

State Land Use

171 HRS, conservation dist. use application,

use application, BLNR.

jurisdiction special

Chap. 205, 46

Commission

BLNR EIS applicability, Chap. 343 HRS

Chaps. 183, 205 HRS,

permit for “unusual

HRS, various

(SLUC); Chap.

DLNR Reg. no. 4. EIS

and reasonable

permits

205 HRS

applicability, Chap. 343

uses,” Chap. 205,

HRS

Sec. 6, HRS, SLUC regs.

Special management area (SMA)

Varying distances but not less than 100 yds from shoreline and including inland

waters subject to tidal and salinity influences. Chap. 205a, HRS, county SMA

permit; shoreline protection rules and regs. planning commissions (Hawaii, Maui,

Kauai counties), city council (Oahu)

Activities affecting navigable waters, state shorewaters and shores, streams, and other surface waters and wetlands influenced by tides

Varying distances

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers jurisdiction over

Department of Health

Department of Transportation,

U.S. Army Corps of

Department of Health control

navigable waters, permits for construction,

regulates water pollution.

Harbors Division, permit for

Engineers, P.L. 92-

of water pollution from “point”

structures, and disposal of materials. Rivers

P.L. 92-500, Chap. 342

work, Chap. 266, HRS joint

500 Sec. 404 Corps’

sources—NPDES permit P.L.

and Harbors Act of 1899, Sec. 10, Federal

HRS, state public health

jurisdiction with Corps

regulations, dredge and

92-500, Chap. 342, HRS state

Water Pollution Control Act amendments of

regulations

fill permits

public health regs

1972, P.L. 92-500

Tsunami, flood, and soil erosion hazard areas (development constraint districts)

historic and open space districts, special planning and zoning districts, etc.

Varying distances

Survey to establish shoreline, Chap. 205, Sec. 31 HRS certification of chairman,

County planning departments and commissions, various zoning and use permits

Board of Land and Natural Resources (BLNR) shoreline setback rules and regs,

public works and building departments grading and building permits

county planning commissions (Hawaii, Maui, Kauai), city council (Oahu)

“Shoreline” defined as the upper reaches of the wash of waves of

vegetation line, Chap. 205, Sec. 31(2) HRS. “Shore waters” defined as all

ocean waters below mean high water mark, Chap. 266, Sec. 3(C) HRS

Ocean

Land

Diagram adapted from Aquaculture Development for Hawaii—Assessments and Recommendations, Hawaii Department of Planning and Economic Development, Aquaculture Planning Program, 1978, which had

adapted it from Existing Control Powers Within the Coastal Zone, Planning Department, County of Hawaii, Sept. 1976.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hawaiian Fishpond Restoration

awaiian legends often credit the Menehune as the

contractors for fishponds, which were said to have

been completed overnight. More likely, building a fish-

pond in ancient Hawai‘i required multitudes of people

from the apuhua‘a to labor extensively at the task of

gathering rocks and constructing the pond’s walls. Today,

recent projects to restore fishponds provide insight into

the effort required to construct these aquaculture systems

centuries ago. The following chapter gives details on the

methods adopted in rebuilding fishponds on Moloka‘i,

as well as some guidence about obtaining the necessary

permits to undertake a fishpond reconstruction.

Before any physical labor starts . . .

Restoring a fishpond can be very rewarding work, but it

can also be very hazardous if you are not physically pre-

pared and careful. Lifting rocks can be highly injurious

to the back, hands, legs, and feet—anyone undertaking to

assist with this work should understand that. The safety

tips on the next page provide advice on how to reduce

the chances of injury.

Pre-restoration reconnaissance

An essential first step, well before the restoration

work begins, is to make an assessment of the existing

A contemporary rock wall restoration on Molokai‘i.

features and characteristics of the fishpond. This is not

necessarily “permit-mandatory,” but it is the founda-

tion for the process of acquiring a permit. Having the

basic information we suggest will assist in beginning

• Measure the water depth at high and low tides.

the planning and implementation of a safe and effective

• Note whether the water is clear or murky, and when.

restoration effort.

• Note whether there is a sand, coral, or mud bottom.

Over a period of several days, or longer, closely

• Identify and count, if possible, any limu and fish

examine the fishpond to be restored and the surrounding

around the remaining wall areas.

area. Observe and take notes on the differences during

• Note the condition of the shoreline (e.g., mud or sand)

changing tides, winds, and weather conditions. Take de-

• Note the plant and animal life on the shore.

tailed measurements and record your observations on the

• Note the activities around the pond (houses, roads,

pages of a water-resistant notebook. Take photographs,

boating, etc.)

and make sketches.

Once the restoration work has started:

Get a good start on the planning process

• Keep a daily record of observations about the pond

• Measure the width of the original footprint of the wall.

and its biology.

• Count how many mākāhā were in the wall.

• Take detailed pictures frequently to document the

• Note the size, location, and number of displaced rocks.

restoration process.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Loko i‘a

Safety tips

Safety tip—protecting hands and feet

According to the National Safety Council’s accident

A good pair of gloves is a must. Cloth and leather

facts, back injuries are the most common type of work

gloves do not last more than two to three days.

injury. Bending over to pick up and place stones can

Synthetic gloves work best, but they need to be rinsed

put a great strain on your back. To help avoid back

out and dried daily to keep them from getting smelly

problems, follow this advice:

from fungus growing in them. Do not allow anyone to

• Make sure your footing is solid—this is especially

work without closed shoes and gloves—the ocean is

important in wet areas.

full of hidden creatures and unsafe surfaces that can

result in serious injury.

• Keep your back as vertical as possible by centering

your body over your feet.

Personnel

• Size up the load you are about to move. Pick up one

side, and see if you can handle it comfortably. Get

8 strong and healthy individuals (at minimum)

help if the object is too bulky or heavy. Use a hand

Supplies

truck, dolly, or floating device, as appropriate.

First-aid kit

• Get a good grip and keep the load close to you.

Cellular telephone

• With your stomach firm, lift the object using your leg

Drinking water

muscles, not your back muscles.

Nutritious food

Sunscreen, hat, sunglasses

• Move your whole body as you go. If you need to turn

Long-sleeved T-shirt

while holding the object, don’t twist. Turn by moving

Shoes or boots with sturdy bottoms

your feet in the direction you want to go.

Heavy-duty rubber (synthetic) gloves

• Avoid overreaching for objects at or above shoulder

Back brace

height.

• Stretch and warm up your muscles before you start

Equipment

any bending, pulling, or lifting work.

Flat raft or barge

‘Ö‘ö (prying bars)

Plastic baskets (heavy-duty)

Pickaxes

Hard tine iron rakes

Cargo netting

Dragging sled

Canopy or tarp for shade

Chairs to sit and rest

Restoration

Restoring a fishpond can be a long process from a paper-

work standpoint as well as from a physical perspective.

It can easily take well over a year to acquire all the per-

mits that are needed before the first rock can be moved.

permits. The information gathered in the pre-restoration

It can also cost $10,000 (or likely more) in legal costs

reconnaissance will be necessary in filling out the permit

and fees to process all the necessary documents. This

applications.

waiting time can be trying financially and emotionally, so

patience is a must. Patience and perseverance, however,

A restoration mind-set based on Hawaiian

can be rewarded!

traditions

This section starts with some advice on permits

The patience and perseverance that is required to begin,

and traditions, then covers the basics of reconstructing

sustain, and complete a fishpond restoration is embodied

a fishpond, and then the basics are generally applied in

in two Hawaiian philosophies: Ho‘omanawanui, “take

examples of two types of fishpond.

your time and do not rush,” and kūlia i ka nu‘u, “strive

for the highest, and do your very best.” It goes without

Permits

saying that hard work from beginning to end is the cor-

The first step in restoring a fishpond is to have ALL of the

nerstone of fishpond restoration. However, the proper

required permits before any reconstruction work is done.

respect for these historic cultural treasures signifies an

Missing just one permit is enough to halt a restoration

appreciation of the genius, intellect, and hard work of the

project and could result in legal action being brought

Hawaiians who built them in the first place. Respectful

against the restorers. Do not proceed without the proper

actions suggested while working on the fishpond include

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A small-scale model (about 5 feet across) was constructed to learn the process of restoring a fishpond.

• listening to your leaders and advisors

• staying focused on what you are there to do

• avoiding horse-play or showing off when lifting and

moving rocks.

Other considerations to keep in mind:

• Planning, leadership, and discipline are essential to

keep the effort going.

• Talk about and reherse the process of lifting, carrying,

and placing rocks; talk also about what to do in an

emergency.

• Morale needs to be kept high thoughout the project, so

make the effort to praise the work that is being done

and to celebrate small accomplishments.

A crew practices fishpond wall construction on land,

• Once the reconstruction process is under way, rotate

where it is easier and safer to learn the process.

workers through different jobs as their strength, de-

sires, and abilities dictate; work rotations combined

with rest periods help break up the day and make for

a safer environment, because boredom and fatigue

reconstruct a fishpond. Each situation will be different,

can create harzardous conditions when working with

but thoughtful planning will help reduce uncertainty if an

heavy rocks.

unexpected situation arises. It is almost certain that the

rebuilding process will take longer than expected. Take

Reconstructing a Hawaiian fishpond—

time at the end of each work day to make sure there are

An overview

physical supports on partially finished sections of the

Being organized and methodical when restoring a fish-

wall. If this is not done, the ocean might wash out sec-

pond can increase the safety and efficiency of the project.

tions of the wall before work picks up again. Following

The following steps provide general guidance on how to

are some basic procedures.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Loko i‘a

Preparing the pond wall foundation, with the pond layout staked in the background.

Assemble all the necessary tools and equipment as

Next, dig out any stones within the working area,

noted in the list given previously. A well stocked

stacking them by general size and shape near the

first-aid kit is a must. At least eight healthy, strong indi-

work site. This step can reduce the time it takes to locate

viduals will be required to perform the heavy lifting, so

an appropriate stone. Think carefully about how these

pre-planning and recruitment are necessary. Make sure

piles are located so the stones do not need to be moved

there is adequate water and healthy food at all times to

more than once.

keep up fluid and energy levels, and be mindful of the

impact of the sun on exposed skin. Have shaded rest

When placing one rock on top of another, place

areas if possible, and take regular and frequent breaks.

it 1-2 inches inside of the front edge of the lower

rock. Each rock should slant or lean toward the center of

The first reconstruction task is to find the niho stones:

the wall. This way, gravity pulls them inward toward the

the old footprint of the wall. This should already

middle of the wall rather than outward or to the side, in

be known from the reconnissance work done for the

which case they might fall off the end of the unfinished

permits. If the footprint can be found at the shoreline, it

wall section.

is where rebuilding should start. If this point cannot be

As the outside and inside walls begin to rise above

located, start where the original footprint is closest to

the pond floor, the middle of the wall is filled with

the shore. Use the largest stones for the bottom, ocean-

smaller rocks, which do not have to be placed in any

facing side of the wall. Begin to reestablish the inside

particular way. As the ocean-facing side of the wall is

and outside walls by following the original footprint as

built up, be sure to support the first layer of rocks with

closely as possible.

at least 2 feet of supporting rocks inside the wall so that

waves do not topple it.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rock wall construction work includes face-setting, filling, and feeding the setters and fillers with rock materials.

As the wall is built up from the bottom layer of rocks,

the “seams” between adjacent rocks should be staggered.

In other words, the next rock should be placed over the

seam between the two lower rocks. Try to face a flat side

of the rock outward, because that side will be exposed to

wave impact and needs to deflect the energy of the waves.

Long, narrow rocks should be placed pointing toward the

Low tide reveals piles

A wall interior, filled

center of the wall. This will add strength to the wall.

of rocks ready for wall

with small-rock rubble.

To determine the final height of the fishpond wall,

construction.

consult a tide chart to identify the highest annual tide for

the locality. The wall should be as tall as the highest pos-

sible tide, plus 1 foot. The highest possible tide usually

ranges from 4-5 feet above the average high tide water

mark, depending on the time of month and year. Consult

a tide calendar for this information. A review of histori-

cal data on major tides of the past 20-50 years in the

area of the fishpond restoration is important. The water

A team approach to

Honouliwai fishpond

should never go over the wall during the highest tide if it

moving large rocks with an

restoration, early stage.

is planned and built correctly, so build for a 20-50-year

‘ö‘ö is aided by the rocks’

bouyancy in water.

high tide or for waves brought on by abnormal weather.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Loko i‘a

Using an ‘ö‘ö to move rocks too heavy to carry.

A monthly tide calendar.

A team of at least eight people is needed to keep the

with a team each using an ‘ō‘ō (a thick rod made of steel

job running smoothly, safely, and efficiently. This

or strong wood). The tip of the ‘ō‘ō is placed under the

allows two teams of four, each with two “feeders” and

rock, with a smaller rock used under the ‘ō‘ō to increase

two “setters.” If there are extra people, they can help

leverage. The large rock is rolled inches at a time and

to “feed” (transfer) and stack rocks near the wall, or to

used as the base of the wall.

carry small rocks in plastic baskets to fill the wall, or to

set up another team of four. Additional people can also

Putting basic reconstruction skills

help support the workers by bringing out water, food, and

to practice: Two examples

supplies to them.

The overview presented above provides some general guid-

To begin rebuilding large sections of the wall, there

ance on how to reconstruct a fishpond wall. The dimensions

should be two people setting rocks on the outside wall and

and strength of a fishpond wall are determined to a large

two people setting the inside wall. Two people feed rocks

extent by the length of the wall and the bottom contour

to the outside team, and two more feed the inside team.

of the reef fronting the fishpond wall. A fringing reef acts

The most experienced rock setters should be the ones

as a wave energy buffer and can reduce the strength of a

setting the rocks that create the base or footprint, with

wave by over half. If there is a shallow reef or sandbar

the secondmost able setters building the wall up to the

close to the wall, the wall may need to be significantly

required height. As the outside and inside walls go up,

higher and wider than if this were not the case, because

the middle needs to be filled with large and small rocks

the wall needs to be able to withstand most of the force of

so that the wall can withstand wave and tide action.

the waves. Following are two examples of fishponds that

Without this internal support, the wall will collapse on

illustrate this distinction. Honouliwai fishpond has a reef

itself when hit by a large wave.

abutting it, so the rocks needed to be very large, whereas

Before a rock is hoisted onto a wall, a close examina-

the Kahinapōhaku pond has a large fringing reef in front

tion of the wall is needed to determine where the rock

of it, allowing the pond wall rocks to be smaller.

should land and finally come to rest. Similarly, the rock’s

surfaces need to be examined to choose the best surface

Honouliwai fishpond

to fit on the rocks already in the wall. The “face” is the

Honouliwai fishpond has a narrow reef to protect it, so

side that will face the outside of the wall, while the “sit”

the fishpond wall’s rocks are wide and long so it can

is the side of the rock that will sit on the lower two rocks

withstand the almost unrestricted force of waves and

on the wall. It is important to plan where the rocks are

tides. Both the width and height of the wall average

going to fall, because it is inefficient and inconvenient

5¹⁄2-6 feet. Because the wave force is large, the rocks

to move the larger rocks more than once.

that were originally used to build it were large as well.

Rocks that cannot easily be carried can be moved

Large rocks require special tools and handling to place

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Honouliwai fishpond completed.

An experienced setter is stacking the shore face and the

interior cross-section of the wall.

them on a wall, and workers need to be extremely careful

proper lift height and to land the rock safely on the wall.

when handling very heavy rocks.

A normal hoist would include four workers holding

the cargo net at the bottom of the wall and two workers

Moving rocks

on top of the wall holding onto an edge or corner of

With the rocks used to build a pond like Honouliwai, it

the net. All would pull together, with the bottom four

sometimes took four to eight strong people to handle a

responsible for getting the momentum of the lift going

single rock. To help with that effort, a large cargo net was

and the top two responsible for the follow-through after

used. The rock was rolled onto the center of the net, and

the rock leaves the water and lands on the wall. The two

the workers would surround it. Once their footing was firm,

workers on the wall would service several cargo net teams

they grabbed the edges of the net and lifted the rock off

and be responsible for preparing the wall to receive the

the ocean floor. They then walked the rock to the location

next rock. For rocks that were too big to be moved with

near the wall where it was to be placed. The rock remained

a net, an ‘ō‘ō was used, as previously described.

underwater during transport so that the bouyancy of the

The more planning done before the final placement

saltwater would make it somewhat lighter. Because these

of rocks onto the wall, the easier and faster it was to build

rocks were so large, all eight workers were often needed

the wall. It took a lot of time and effort to move each rock

to transport and hoist them into place.

into its final position once it was on the wall. The trick

It was easier to move rocks from the shoreline to

to minimizing the number of adjustments needed was to

the wall during low tide, but it was easier to hoist the

hoist the rock and have it land as close as possible to the

rocks onto the wall during high tide, as the rocks were

final position and be in the proper orientation.

in the water for more of their trip from the pond floor to

Concentration, teamwork, and a resolute “can-do”

the wall. The workers lifted on the chant of “one-two-

attitude were essential in keeping accidents from happen-

three—up!” Good momentum starts while the rock is

ing. Care was taken never to allow the team to become

in the water; once the rock leaves the water, the team’s

tired or bored. For the first few months, the work only

follow-through and coordination is important to get the

took place for half a day, as muscle fatigue made things

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Loko i‘a

dangerous. It took time for the workers to condition their

bodies for this kind of hard work.

Environmental impacts

Turbidity and siltation was minimal during this restora-

tion. When a rock was lifted up with a pickaxe end or

an ‘ō‘ō, coral or mud silt came up with it. The silt would

drift with the current for 2-6 yards and then dissipate

or settle back to the bottom of the pond. Moving rocks

to the wall by hand or cargo net produced negligible

amounts of turbidity. Water quality was not a problem,

as the pond bottom had very little silt.

Kahinapöhaku fishpond

The Kahinapōhaku fishpond had a large fringing reef

fronting it, which provided a good deal of protection.

The base of the wall, according to the original footprint,

was approximately 15 feet wide, but it was only 10 feet

wide near the shoreline, being out of the direct wave

impact area.

The Kahinapōhaku fishpond kuapä was damaged

by a major storm surge that caused it to collapse. The

wall collapsed outward, toward the ocean, which may

seem odd because the waves came from that direction.

Actually, the waves washed over the seawall and the

back-surges against the inner wall pushed it outward

as the waves retreated. Repair to this breach took about

two days. If fish are being cultured in the fishpond, im-

mediate repair is critical or losses will result. Damage

can also allow undesirable fish species to enter.

Moving rocks

Due to the reef fronting this fishpond, the rocks used in

this pond were smaller, “one-man” size, which a strong

Passing large stones down a line.

person could generally carry alone. This made for less

dangerous working conditions. Rocks could be moved

and placed on the wall with less pre-planning, because

once placed on the wall they could be easily moved

went up faster. The setters, however, had to move slower

around to find a perfect fit. Two four-person teams, one

and more deliberately to follow the original footprint

on the inside wall and the other on the outside wall,

and place the rocks properly. While being careful, those

worked well at this fishpond.

doing the fill could work as fast as they wanted by just

In many places, the original footprint could not

throwing smaller size rocks into the middle of the wall.

be found. As a result, the setter had to slow down and

More hours per day could be put in because the rocks

align the wall using as many reference points as could

were smaller and the physical toll on the workers’ bodies

be found. Sometimes rocks had to be removed to realign

was not as high as with the Honouliwai fishpond. The

the wall.

Kahinapōhaku pond’s rocks represent the typical size of

Workers at this fishpond had more independence and

rocks found in most fishponds on Moloka‘i. Thus it will

needed less teamwork than those at the Honouliwai pond

be easier to rebuild and to maintain this fishpond after

because the rocks were smaller and as a result the wall

storms and high surf.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Aerial view of Kahinapöhaku fishpond with half of the

wall completed.

Collapsed pond wall at Kahinapöhaku.

Kahinapöhaku’s unrestored wall with original rocks.

Kahinapöhaku fishpond wall completed.

Environmental impacts

to build upon with smaller fill stones. Angular rocks

There was very little turbidity at this site, so the impact

are easier to set than round ones, and the wall will have

of the restoration project was negligible.

better structural integrity.

Note the progression of the next base rocks. In stack-

Rock wall construction

ing the rocks along the sides, offset the next stone about

The photo above shows a short inside wall; some fish-

2-3 inches toward the middle to get the angled slope

ponds are totally rock-lined, inside and out. This cross-

front and back. The edging rock surfaces are also angled

section depicts the angled, trapezoid-shape stacking. Two

inward, adding to the integrity of the wall as waves and

large niho (base) rocks are on the bottom corners. The

tides batter it. Smaller, less angular stones and also ili‘ili

main rock-setters created the “footprint,” using the niho

(pebbles) can be used as fill.

to provide the foundation of the wall for other stackers

In the other photo, the wall is complete. Note the

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Loko i‘a

A cross-section of a wall’s “footprint.”

A completed, filled-in wall section.

line-up of rocks on the right side going backwards. This

those involved experienced a rejuventation of Hawaiian

is how it should look. Initially it may look like the stones

culture and applying its practices to bringing a fishpond

are not lining up, but after 30-50 feet it should start to

back to life by restoring its walls. It was not simply a

look more and more like a fishpond wall. It is a good

physical effort, but a mental and spiritual effort as well.

idea to have a practice session to build a small wall, then

Those reconstructing a Hawaiian fishpond gain immense

get up on it. If you can walk along the top edges without

pride of accomplishment and respect for the knowledge

the wall collapsing, you have built a sturdy wall.

and skills the ancient Hawaiians possessed but which

are not always adequately appreciated in today’s world.

In the end . . .

Pride and knowing the cultural importance of the resto-

ration effort played a significant role in restoring both

the Honouliwai and Kahinapōhaku fishponds. This

aspect of these projects cannot be overemphasized—

appreciating the history, culture, and community in-

volved brought everyone closer as a team. Above all,

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Equipment for Pond Operations

Land tools

“Land tools” are used to develop and maintain the

Land tools

facilities on land that are necessary in the operation of

a fishpond. From left to right: plastic basket, pick-axe,

shovels, ‘ō‘ō (digging tool), rakes (hard tine and flex-

ible), boots, back brace, gloves, flagging tape, and 300-ft

tape measure; missing from picture: post pounder.

Water tools

“Water tools” (below, right) are necessary for fish pro-

duction efforts in the water. They are used for sampling,

harvesting, stocking, and transferring animals from one

system to another. Clockwise from left: large fish net,

plastic basket, cooler, reusable ice packs, bamboo dip-

net, seine, gloves, and scoop nets.

Fingerling collection supplies

Fingerling collection supplies (below) are used to capture

fingerlings for transport, sampling, or health assess-

ment. A fish tranquilizer, MS-222, provides sedation for

reducing stress during transport. Collection equipment

shown includes a 5-gallon bucket with a battery-operated

aerator and a bamboo dip-net; not shown are a small

mesh seine net, scoop nets, and an 8-ft, ³⁄8-inch mesh

casting net.

Water tools

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Loko i‘a

Sampling equipment

Sampling equipment is used frequently to measure the

animals cultured. The data collected allow feed calcu-

lations based on fish growth and the total biomass of

the production system sampled. From left to right: a

homemade fish measure for small fish; paper napkins;

a portable, battery-operated, 0-200 gram balance; and

a waterproof data tablet.

First-aid kit

The first-aid kit is mandatory equipment that should be

well stocked at all times. Special items useful for fish-

pond first aid include duct tape, vinegar, meat tenderizer,

and an eye wash bottle. Vinegar or meat tenderizer is

used to relieve pain from jellyfish stings. (Meat tender-

izer contains an enzyme that breaks down the proteins

in the jellyfish venom, which irritate the skin and cause

pain.)

Recordkeeping

Logbooks and data sheets are used for recordkeeping (see

the chapter on Optimizing Pond Health for examples of

records to keep). A data sheet can be created and printed

with a computer program. Water quality, fish production,

and sampling data are entered on the paper spreadsheet

and later typed back into the computer spreadsheet for

analysis and transformation to produce additional data

useful for production management. Special waterproof

paper can be purchased for field recording.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LOKO I‘A A Manual on Hawaiian Fishpond Restoration and Management (2007) - page 1