# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Location of the Solomon Islands Group and of Rennell Island within that group. ERWHS covers nearly the entire southern half of the island.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Locations of (A) Rennell Island and (B) East Rennell World Heritage Site, Lake Te-Nggano, Tingoa township, Te-Nggano Village, and Anapuli Cave.

# data[].attributes.body
Polynesians lived on the archipelago at least 4,000 years ago, and on Rennell Island between 2000 and 1600 BC when people of the Lapita Culture appeared; Bellona Island was briefly occupied by them about 1000 BC. Over a millennium, through long-range canoe voyages, their distinctive pottery was distributed throughout the Pacific from the Bismarck Archipelago in eastern Papua New Guinea to Samoa. The next settlement on the two islands was around 130 BC, with another major occupation in about 1000 AD. The present inhabitants say their ancestors landed on Bellona around 26 generations ago, about 1400 AD and came from Wallis Island (Uvea) north of Fiji (Wingham, 1997).

The Spanish navigator de Gamboa discovered the archipelago in 1568 and the English Captain Boyd in the merchant ship Bellona re-discovered the two islands in 1793. They were little developed until the 19th century when they were subjected to missionaries, blackbirding traders from the Queensland sugarcane fields, and finally to the British government as a protectorate in 1893 which ended in 1978. However, on Rennell, a lack of safe anchorage, the isolation and infertility of the island and shortage of easily obtainable fresh water prevented European settlement and the establishment of trading stations (Wingham, 1997). The name comes from James Rennell, surveyor general of Bengal from 1764 to 1777. The lake was used by both the Japanese and US forces in WW II and saw one day of the battle for Guadalcanal. Subsequently nine Catalina seaplanes were scuttled in the lake where they remain.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
New Faunal Records from a World Heritage Site in Danger: Rennell Island, Solomon Islands

# data[].attributes.body
Between 18 and 29 October 2018, surveys of the terrestrial vertebrates of East Rennell documented 56 species, including 15 squamates, 13 mammals, and 38 birds, and present four new vertebrate records for the island: Stephan's emerald dove (Chalcophaps stephani), Maluku myotis (Myotis moluccarum), littoral skink (Emoia atrocostata) and brahminy blindsnake (Indotyphlops braminus). East Rennell was designated a World Heritage site for its significant on-going ecological and biological processes, and importance for the study of island biogeography (Lavery et. al., 2021).

Locals value the biodiversity of their community, especially the use of medicinal plants. https://youtu.be/qsIPY5ay34o

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
2 September 2021 New Faunal Records from a World Heritage Site in Danger: Rennell Island, Solomon Islands¹

Tyrone H. Lavery, Lucas H. DeCicco, Jonathan Q. Richmond, Ikuo G. Tigulu, Michael J. Andersen, David Boseto, Robert G. Moyle

Remote oceanic islands have high potential to harbor unique fauna and flora, but opportunities to conduct in-depth biotic surveys are often limited. Furthermore, underrepresentation of existing biodiversity in the literature has the potential to detract from conservation planning and action. Between 18 and 29 October 2018, we surveyed the terrestrial vertebrates of East Rennell, a UNESCO World Heritage Site in Solomon Islands. We documented 56 species, including 15 squamates, 13 mammals, and 38 birds, and present four new vertebrate records for the island: Stephan's emerald dove ( Chalcophaps stephani), Maluku myotis ( Myotis moluccarum), littoral skink ( Emoia atrocostata) and brahminy blindsnake ( Indotyphlops braminus). East Rennell was designated a World Heritage site for its significant on-going ecological and biological processes, and importance for the study of island biogeography. The new records presented here provide evidence that continued field studies combined with DNA analysis will continue to uncover even greater endemic biodiversity. Rennell is currently experiencing major habitat destruction in parts of the island that are not under World Heritage protection, and we anticipate collateral damage will likely extend into protected areas. Our survey also underscores the incredible vertebrate biodiversity that stands to be lost unless conservation actions and local community needs are intertwined to promote beneficial outcomes on both fronts.

Solomon Islands represent one of the most geologically complex archipelagos on Earth, consisting of a double chain of six main islands surrounded by nearly a thousand smaller islands, all of which are purely oceanic in origin. This geologic and geographic complexity is reflected in the archipelago's biological diversity, which forms part of the East Melanesian Islands Biodiversity Hotspot ( https://www.cepf.net/our-work/biodiversity-hotspots/east-melanesian-islands). This hotspot comprises high species-level diversity for both plants and animals, many of which are found nowhere else in the world ( Mittermeier et al. 2004). The archipelago's unique geological and biological diversity have formed the foundation of numerous theoretical concepts in evolutionary biology and island biogeography (e.g., Mayr 1942, Wilson 1961, MacArthur and Wilson 1967, Mayr and Diamond 2001), many of which provide a framework for empirical hypothesis testing to this day (e.g., Manthey et al. 2020, Richmond et al. 2021).

Rennell Island is situated to the southwest of the main Solomon Islands chain, 181 km south of Guadalcanal Island and 168 km southwest of Makira Island ( Wolff 1969; Figure 1). It is the largest uplifted coral atoll in the world, estimated to have been raised at the end of the Pliocene, ca. 2.5 million years ago ( Grover 1958, Wolff 1969). Rennell harbors the 155 km ² brackish Lake Te-Nggano (also referred to in the literature as Tegano, Tungano, and Tengano), a remnant of the atoll's former lagoon that now represents the largest enclosed waterbody in the Pacific ( Wolff 1969). The island supports a high number of endemic species, including 10 plants, seven land snails, one bat, one snake, and as many as four lizards ( McCoy 2006). Among the island's avifauna, 54% of birds are endemic at the species or subspecies level (37 breeding land and freshwater bird species, six endemic species, 14 endemic subspecies) ( Filardi et al. 1999). Lake Te-Nggano has played an important evolutionary role in producing biological oddities such as an endemic sea snake ( Laticauda crockeri) and a cohort of Australasian waterbirds unique within Solomon Islands, some of which are endemic at the subspecies level (e.g., Australian White Ibis Threskiornis molucca pygmaeus and Australasian Grebe Tachybaptus novaehollandiae rennellianus).

In 1998, approximately one third of the island (encompassing Lake Te-Nggano and surrounding land, and a marine zone extending 3 km offshore) was designated as a United Nations Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) World Heritage Site. This designation was in recognition of significant on-going ecological and biological processes, and importance of the site for the study of island biogeography. It was also the first site added under customary ownership and management. Western scientific study of the island commenced in 1906, led by Charles M. Woodford. Although Woodford was an accomplished naturalist, his visit resulted in just a single bird specimen (the type specimen of Woodford's White-eye Woodfordia superciliosa), and the first mention of Threskiornis molucca (then Ibis strictipennis) ( North 1906, Woodford 1916). In 1927 Mr. G. A. V. Stanley was stationed on the island by Australia's University of Sydney and equipped with mammal collecting equipment by Ellis Le G. Troughton from the Australian Museum. Stanley subsequently forwarded a small collection that included the holotype of the endemic Rennell Flying Fox ( Pteropus rennelli) ( Troughton 1929). The Whitney South Sea Expedition made two visits in 1928 and 1930, during which the first thorough museum collections of birds-also including some mammals-were made ( Mayr 1931). Squamates were first surveyed on the America Templeton-Crocker Expedition in June 1933 (summarized by Slevin 1934), followed by Volsøe in the mid- to late 1950s ( Volsøe 1956, 1958), Wolff in the mid-1960s ( Wolff 1969), and Michael McCoy and colleagues in the late 1970s and early 1980s ( Cogger et al. 1987, McCoy 2006). The 1950s also saw major mammal collections for the Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, via the Danish Rennell Expedition led by Torben Wolff in 1951, an expedition by Mr. and Mrs. J. D. Bradley in 1953, and another led by T. Monberg in 1958 ( Hill 1962, 1968). The island was visited in 1977, 1980, and 1981 by researchers studying the systematics and venom of the endemic krait Laticauda crockeri ( Cogger et al. 1987, Heatwole et al. 2005, Heatwole et al. 2017). Filardi et al. ( 1999) published their findings from ornithological surveys in 1997 and summarized interim fieldwork by Bradley and Wolff ( 1958), Wolff ( 1973), and Diamond ( 1984). Finally, the American Museum of Natural History also holds a small collection of insectivorous bats made by M. LeCroy in 1999.

Despite this history of biological exploration, there is still much to learn about biological diversity and levels of endemism, both on Rennell and the broader Solomon Islands. Not only are comprehensive biodiversity inventories critical for advancing and testing evolutionary hypotheses, they are also imperative for understanding the effects of anthropogenic disturbance on these unique faunas, and to lay plans to conserve and manage imperiled species and habitats. Nowhere is this more pertinent than on Rennell Island. In recent years, West Rennell has faced a barrage of perturbances that include heavy commercial logging, bauxite mining, and a marine oil spill that have substantially degraded terrestrial and marine environments ( Williams 2019, Foukona 2020, Kiddle 2020). In contrast, East Rennell still hosts large tracts of intact, mature forests ( Wang et al. 2018), a result of local conservation efforts and its status as a UNESCO World Heritage Site. However, advancement of a long-term management plan for East Rennell and local incentivization for preserving the site's natural environment have not progressed beyond preliminary discussions ( Kiddle 2020). In 2013, East Rennell was placed on the List of World Heritage in Danger due to the threats posed by: logging; invasive species; over-exploitation of coconut crab and other marine resources; climate change; and inadequate legislation, management planning and administration of the property.

We aimed to develop a modern inventory of East Rennell's terrestrial vertebrate fauna to provide a thorough and recent update on the island's biological diversity, particularly those species that are endemic or in states of decline. Limited biological monitoring of the island, combined with threats posed by logging, bauxite mining, invasive species, over exploitation of marine resources, and climate change, provided justification for pursuing this most recent survey. Furthermore, the absence of genetic material for DNA studies suggested that Rennell's unique biodiversity has likely been underestimated and raised the possibility of the loss of species to habitat destruction before even being known to science. We postulated that indigenous vertebrate species remained to be scientifically documented on Rennell, and that recent extractive industries had potentially introduced non-indigenous species known to have negative impacts on other Indo-Pacific islands.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We visited Rennell Island from 18 to 29 October 2018, surveying areas in the East Rennell World Heritage Site, around Te-Nggano Village on the southwestern shore of Lake Te-Nggano ( Figure 1). Habitats surveyed included village gardens and secondary forests around Te-Nggano Village, mature forests south of Te-Nggano Village, and coastal areas to the south of Te-Nggano Village (Anapuli Cave and Tuhugaga Beach). During our 12 days of fieldwork, we made daily observations of mammals (Lavery), squamates (Tigulu and Richmond), and birds (DeCicco, Andersen, and Moyle). Vertebrate voucher specimens were collected and deposited at the University of Kansas Natural History Museum (KU), Lawrence, Kansas (mammals, squamates, birds), and the Museum of Southwestern Biology (MSB), Albuquerque, New Mexico (birds). All specimens, tissues and audio recordings (birds and bats) are publicly available for further scientific research in accordance with the Nagoya Protocol ( https://www.cbd.int/abs/about/). Data for these specimens are openly available via museum database aggregator websites such as iDigBio ( www.idigbio.org) and VertNet ( www.vertnet.org), as well as directly through the KU and MSB websites.

Figure1.

Sampling Techniques: Birds

We documented avian diversity using observational methods (visual and auditory) and mist nets (12 × 2.6 m, either 32- or 36-mm mesh size). We made daily opportunistic audio recordings, deployed 10-20 mist nets, and compiled lists of bird species detected including relative abundance. Audio recordings (aimed at documenting characteristic bird vocalizations) were made with a Sound Devices MixPre-3 recorder and Sennheiser ME67 shotgun microphone with k6 power unit (DeCicco) and a Sound Devices MixPre-6 recorder and Telinga Pro 8 mark ii stereo parabola (Andersen). All audio recordings were archived at the Macaulay Library, Cornell University, and are accessible through the associated website ( www.macaulaylibrary.org). Our observational data were archived in eBird and are freely available online ( www.ebird.org). We used mist nets as our main method of capturing and collecting bird specimens from the variety of habitat types present at the study site. We prepared specimens as dried study skins or formalin-fixed anatomical specimens. From each specimen, we collected at least two genetic samples in the form of muscle tissue preserved in 95% ethanol. We took photographs of birds in the hand and described soft part coloration (a trait that is typically lost on dried study skins) and linked these images with each specimen through respective museum databases. If ectoparasites or endoparasites were found during specimen preparation, they were preserved in 70% ethanol, and deposited either at MSB (endoparasites) or Drexel University (ectoparasites).

Sampling Techniques: Mammals

We surveyed Rennell's mammals using mist nets, active searches of caves, echolocation recordings, rodent traps, and spotlighting. Bats were captured at night using black 16 mm mesh, 12 m × 2.5 m nylon mist nets (Ecotone Series 1000, Sopot, Poland). Nets were set within primary forests, gardens and village environs suspended on ropes up to 20 m above the ground and spanning roads, or natural gaps, creeks or 'flyways' to maximize the number of species and individuals recorded. Surveys commenced before dusk and finished at dawn. Bats were also caught inside caves in mist nets or by handheld nets. Rodent traps were set in linear transects on the forest floor or opportunistically around villages and baited with peanut butter. We used an Anabat Walkabout (Titley Scientific, Brendale, QLD Australia) to record the echolocation calls of bats in free flight. Recordings were identified to species level using the guide prepared by Pennay and Lavery ( 2017). We also spotlighted for mammals when checking mist nets, and on dedicated spotlight transects. Between two and four observers scanned the forest canopy and understory on foot using LED headlamps (Led Lenser, H14R 1,000 lumens, Solingen, Germany). We preserved vouchers as wet specimens by fixing whole animals in 10% formalin and later transferring to ethanol, a tissue sample was preserved in DNA/RNA Shield (Zymo Research, Irvine, CA, USA). Ectoparasites collected from the specimens were accessioned into the collections of the Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, USA, to be curated by Dr Carl Dick at the University of Western Kentucky.

Sampling Techniques: Squamates

We used trapping transects and visual encounter surveys to document squamates. Individual adhesive traps (∼22 cm L × ∼13 cm W) are the type used to ensnare rodents and can non-lethally capture lizards as they contact the adhesive surface (e.g., Victor ® Mouse Glue Boards). We removed live specimens by applying vegetable oil to the parts of the body in contact with the board, which degrades the adhesive and does not harm the animal. Each transect consisted of 10-25 georeferenced stations spaced 50 m apart and were checked every 30-40 minutes after being deployed. Stations consisted of three traps positioned (1) on the ground, (2) on a fallen log (perch ∼1.0 m of the ground), and (3) on a tree trunk (>1.5 m above ground). This configuration ensured captures of lizard species with different behavioral ecologies, with captures recorded according to the transect number, trap station, and trap location. We surveyed three main transects (T1-T3), all generally tracking the forest trail from the village of Te-Nggano south to the coastline at Tuhugaga. T1 was closest to the village, T2 was roughly halfway between Te-Nggano and the coast, and T3 extended from the cliff face down to the beach at Tuhugaga. The three transects spanned all habitat types, from highly disturbed garden areas to primary forest.

Visual encounter surveys consisted of turning over rocks, disarticulating felled logs, peeling bark off trees, raking through leaf debris, and searching up in the trees. Visual surveys took place during the day and at night in all weather conditions, except during heavy down pours. We recorded GPS coordinates for capture points and incidental sightings.

We preserved a proportion of individuals from each survey site as voucher specimens following the general protocol of McDiarmid ( 1994). Specimens were euthanized using an intracardial injection of MS-222 (trichloro-2-methyl-2-propanol; 1 teaspoon/1 L water) following Conroy et al. ( 2009). We recorded length (snout-to-vent) and mass measurements prior to removing liver tissue for DNA, and photographed representatives of all species. We stored tissue samples in 95% ethanol and fixed all specimens in 10% buffered formalin (900 ml water, 100 ml formaldehyde, 1.5 teaspoon/L magnesium carbonate [buffer]).

Trapping transects also allowed us to survey for presence/absence of the yellow crazy ant Anoplolepis gracilipes, an invasive species known to have adverse ecological impacts on other Pacific Islands ( Holway et al. 2002, O'Dowd et al. 2003). This ant has been introduced to numerous islands in the Caribbean, Indian Ocean (Seychelles, Madagascar, Mauritius, Réunion, the Cocos Islands, and the Christmas Islands) and in the Pacific (New Caledonia, Hawai'i, French Polynesia, Okinawa, Vanuatu, Micronesia and the Galapagos Archipelago) ( McGlynn 1999, Holway et al. 2002, Wetterer 2005).

RESULTS

We recorded 56 species of vertebrates between 18 and 29 October 2018, including 15 squamates (12 terrestrial species, one sea turtle, and two sea snakes), 13 species of mammal, and 38 species of birds ( Supplementary Table S1 (08_75-3 Lavery et al_Supplementary data.pdf)). Our observations included all described endemic birds, squamates, and mammals ( Supplementary Table S1 (08_75-3 Lavery et al_Supplementary data.pdf)). Annotated notes on previously known, important species documented during the survey period are presented in the Supplemental File (08_75-3 Lavery et al_Supplementary data.pdf).

The majority of the 38 species of birds detected were in gardens and secondary and primary forests around Te-Nggano Village. Two species were seen only along the airstrip in Tingoa Village (Whimbrel Numenius phaeopus and Sharp-tailed Sandpiper Calidris acuminata). We found all 20 described endemic species and extant endemic subspecies: six endemic species of forest birds, four endemic subspecies of waterbirds associated with Lake Te-Nggano, and 10 endemic subspecies of forest birds ( Supplementary Table S1 (08_75-3 Lavery et al_Supplementary data.pdf)). We found all extant endemic species and subspecies to be relatively numerous with Island Thrush ( Turdus poliocephalus), Rennell Starling ( Aplonis insularis), and Melanesian Flycatcher ( Myiagra caledonica) being the rarest, the last of which we detected only two individuals. There are four species known from Rennell Island that we did not detect (apart from seabirds, migrants, and vagrants): Pacific Black Duck ( Anas superciliosa, locally extinct), Grey Teal ( Anas gracilis, extirpated endemic subspecies), Eastern Barn Owl ( Tyto javanica, rare resident), and a nightjar ( Caprimulgus sp.) reported by Filardi et al. ( 1999). Of these, the Black Duck and Grey Teal are likely extirpated as there are no recent observations of either species. It is likely that the nightjar, first reported from Rennell Island by Filardi et al. ( 1999), was not detected by us due to our survey methods (e.g., lack of driving the road at night in search of nocturnal species) or time of year-Filardi et al. surveyed in June.

We obtained 165 audio recordings (163 of 23 bird species and two recordings of Rennell Flying Fox ( Pteropus rennelli) that are archived at Macaulay Library ( www.macaulaylibrary.org). We obtained the first archived audio recordings of the song of Rennell Starling ( Aplonis insularis) and Rennell White-eye ( Zosterops rennellianus), and just the second recordings of a number of species (e.g., Silver-capped Fruit-Dove Ptilinopus richardsii cyanopterus, Rennell Whistler Pachycephala feminina, Bare-eyed White-eye Woodfordia superciliosa, and Rennell Starling Aplonis insularis). We obtained the first recordings of the following four endemic subspecies: Pacific Kingfisher ( Todiramphus sacer amoenus), Song Parrot ( Geoffroyus heteroclitus hyacinthinus), Melanesian Flycatcher ( Myiagra caledonica occidentalis), and Island Thrush ( Turdus poliocephalus rennellianus). Finally, we provide the first recordings from Rennell Island of 12 species including a newly discovered population of Stephan's Emerald Dove ( Chalcophaps stephani).

We recorded almost all mammals previously documented on Rennell Island. However, two species went undetected. Both were echolocating bats - fawn leaf-nosed bat ( Hipposideros cervinus) and large-eared sheath-tail bat ( Emballonura dianae). These two species are widespread and relatively common in Solomon Islands, but both can be difficult to capture in mist nets. Anapuli Cave was an important site where we recorded seven of 11 bat species previously known from Rennell. Echolocation reference calls were recorded for all species trapped at this location. We also observed Diadem leaf-nosed bat ( Hipposideros diadema) foraging near our accommodation at Te-Nggano Village and recorded passive echolocation reference calls.

Of the 15 species of squamates documented, four were snakes (in three genera) and the remaining 10 were lizards (five were skinks from three genera, four were geckos from three genera, and one was a monitor). Four of the 15 species are endemic to Rennell, including two undescribed species of lizard (one skink [ Cryptoblepharus sp.] and one gecko [ Lepidodactylus sp.]), both previously documented by McCoy ( 2006).

New Faunal Records

Chalcophaps stephani (Aves: Columbidae), Stephan' s Emerald Dove - A single adult female in breeding condition (ovary 15 × 20 mm, largest ovum 8 × 8 mm and vascularized, oviduct enlarged; skull 100% ossified, no bursa) was captured in a 12 m mist net in secondary forest ca. 2 km northwest of Te-Nggano Village (S 11.702°, E 160.394°, elev. 23 m). This individual was photographed and prepared as a study skin (KU 134529) with associated genetic sample (KU 35586, duplicated at MSB:Bird:55531). We obtained audio recordings on 23, 24, 27, and 28 October of at least two additional individuals giving the typical, repeated low-frequency song (ML 134503371, ML 134503811, ML 136526651, ML 136529391, ML 141715181). All detections (single bird captured and multiple individuals heard) were in mixed secondary and mature forest to the northwest and southwest of Te-Nggano Village. We can find no mention in the literature of Chalcophaps stephani occurring on Rennell Island (see Mayr 1931, Wolff 1969, Filardi et al. 1999, Dutson 2011).

Chalcophaps stephani is distributed from Sulawesi, through New Guinea, the Bismarck Archipelago, and the Solomon Islands south to Makira Island ( Gibbs et al. 2001, Dickinson and Remsen 2013). All Solomon Island populations have been assigned to subspecies mortoni ( Dickinson and Remsen 2013) distributed from Nissan Island north of Bougainville south to Makira Island ( Gibbs et al. 2001, Dutson 2011), but explicitly not on Rennell ( Dutson 2011). There are two additional species in the genus Chalcophaps: C. longirostris occurs in Timor, Australia, parts of New Guinea, Temotu, Vanuatu, and New Caledonia ( Dickinson and Remsen 2013) and C. indica occurs in the Greater Sundas, Philippines, and southeastern Asia ( Dickinson and Remsen 2013). Molecular data (mitochondrial and nuclear; KU unpubl. data) roughly support this current parsing of the complex into three species.

The Rennell specimen matched well in plumage female specimens of C. stephani from elsewhere in Solomon Islands (e.g., KU 111368 from Kohingo Island, New Georgia group; KU 131764 from Malaita Island). The Rennell specimen differed in many aspects of plumage from female specimens of C. indica from the Philippines housed at KU and from descriptions of female C. longirostris (e.g., Dutson 2011, Pratt and Beehler 2015, del Hoyo et al. 2019). Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) sequence data (GenBank Accession: MZ508289) suggested that the Rennell specimen was closely related to populations on Makira, being identical in mtDNA sequence of subunit 2 of the NADH gene (ND2) to the specimen KU 133607 from Makira. Pairwise differences between the Rennell specimen and those of C. longirostris and C. indica were much greater. Based on morphological and molecular data, we suggest that this recently discovered Rennell population of C. stephani be recognized as the subspecies mortoni with a distribution throughout Solomon Islands, now including Rennell Island.

Myotis moluccarum (Mammalia: Vespertilionidae), Maluku myotis - We caught four Maluku myotis (two males and a female carrying young) in Anapuli Cave. The taxonomy of Southwest Pacific Myotis is in need of revision. Flannery ( 1995) identified the range east of New Guinea as including Nissan, New Britain, New Ireland, Normanby and Sudest (Papua New Guinea); Choiseul and New Georgia (Solomon Islands); and Malakula (Vanuatu) and placed them in M. adversus. Cooper et al. ( 2001) subsequently examined the molecular phylogeny of specimens from Indonesia ( n = 2 samples), Australia ( n = 21), mainland New Guinea ( n = 2), and Vanuatu ( n = 1) using the mitochondrial genes Cytochrome b and ND2. The authors concluded Australian specimens and one New Guinea specimen were monophyletic to the exclusion of Indonesian M. adversus and best regarded as M. macropus. The second New Guinea and Vanuatu specimens were each paraphyletic (ND2 data only), with the New Guinea specimen tentatively placed in M. moluccarum. The affinity of the single Vanuatu specimen was not discussed. Pending further assessment, we treat the Rennell Island specimens as M. moluccarum, alongside other range extensions from Makira and Vangunu (T. Lavery unpubl. data). External morphological measurements for adult Rennell specimens were as follows (reported in mm): head-body 44.9-50.6 (mean = 47.9); forearm 41.0-42.6 (mean = 41.8); hindfoot 9.7-10.4 (mean = 10.0); ear 12.1-13.8 (mean = 13.2); weight 8.3-9.0 g (mean = 8.7).

Emoia atrocostata (Squamata: Scincidae), Littoral Skink - Of the 10 species of lizards known from Rennell, two occurred exclusively in the eulittoral zone (intertidal or foreshore area) at Tuhugaga Beach. Both were reported previously by McCoy ( 2006), but one of the two, Emoia atrocostata, was documented in error based on a specimen at the California Academy of Sciences (CAS 72204) that was collected on Bellona, rather than Rennell (reported in Brown 1991). We recorded four incidental sightings and had five trap captures of E. atrocostata on limestone karst or directly on the sand in the eulittoral zone, with many of the trap stations becoming completely inundated at high tide (but removed prior to inundation). Emoia atrocostata was found in close association with the undescribed species of Cryptoblepharus, but the two appeared to segregate themselves among the dispersed karst outcrops along the shoreline.

Indotyphlops braminus (Squamata: Typhlopidae), Brahminy Blindsnake - The second previously undocumented reptile was the brahminy blindsnake Indotyphlops braminus, a small fossorial blindsnake that is presumed to be widely introduced to Pacific islands by humans. The three individuals captured on this survey were all collected under leaf and branch litter in an active garden within the village grounds. The species was known by some of the local children but regarded as an earth worm rather than a snake.

Invasive Species Detection

The risk of invasion by non-native species was one key justification for placing East Rennell on the list of World Heritage in Danger. Providing absence data during these surveys was thus perhaps of equal importance as presence data for certain invasive species. Numerous widespread invaders in Oceania have high potential to be introduced to Rennell, and cause damage to the indigenous terrestrial fauna. These include the Yellow Crazy Ant Anoplolepis gracilipes, Giant African Snail Achatina fulica, Cane Toad Rhinella marina, and the Brown Treesnake Boiga irregularis. We did not detect A. gracilipes on any sticky board transects (as expected if present) and did not record any of the remaining four species during visual surveys. However, we made numerous observations of the large Asian Forest Centipede Scolopendra subspinipes during night surveys, most often on tree trunks or large felled logs.

We also observed several non-native mammal species that are of concern for birds, lizards, and snakes, including the Black Rat Rattus rattus, domestic cat Felis catus, and domestic dog Canis familiaris. We detected R. rattus on all night surveys and they were common in our living quarters. At least three F. catus and several C. familiaris were observed in the immediate vicinity of the village, but they were never encountered outside of this area, presumably because of food subsidies provided by humans and the lack of fresh surface water.

DISCUSSION

The large size, geographic isolation, and limited study on the fauna of Rennell Island suggested that probability of discovering undocumented biodiversity was high for this study. Even over a short period of time in a limited part of the southeastern end of the island, we still recorded new species of birds, mammals, and squamates. This reinforces the need for continued field studies at this World Heritage site, especially given the pace and extent of habitat destruction in West Rennell, the lack of preserved tissues for DNA studies, and the probable loss of 'hidden' biodiversity that remains to be discovered through DNA analysis ( Yang and Rannala 2010, Solís-Lemus et al. 2015).

Specimens and tissue samples collected from this work are now being used to better understand the evolutionary distinctiveness and sources of the fauna on Rennell. For example, one of the scincid lizards collected during this survey ( Cryptoblepharus sp.) is the only member of the genus found in Solomon Islands and it only occurs on Rennell. This begs the question of how and why it established a population on Rennell alone, and where its ancestral source is located. At least some clue may come from the present-day human population on Rennell, which is descended from Polynesians that migrated from the Wallis and Futuna Islands where a widespread species of Cryptoblepharus is known to occur ( Gill 1995). DNA sequence data will help us better understand where in the evolutionary 'puzzle' such species fall and will likely reveal more diversity that merits species-level recognition. Such data can also be used to trace routes of dispersal to the island, which is important for mitigating the spread of invasive species.

None of the four species documented for the first time on Rennell (one lizard, one snake, one bird, and one bat) were surprising or unexpected. Emoia atrocostata is broadly distributed across western Pacific Islands and Indo-Australasia, with a unique lineage (i.e. subspecies) endemic to Solomon Islands and Vanuatu ( Brown 1991, Richmond et al. 2021). The species is widely regarded as a habitat specialist because it occurs exclusively in the littoral zone along the coastline, and prior documentation from nearby Bellona suggested that its discovery on Rennell was only a matter of time and opportunity. Similarly, the Brahminy Blindsnake I. braminus is a wide-ranging terrestrial snake species and the most frequently introduced parthenogenic reptile in the world ( Bomford et al. 2009, Wallach 2009). It is easily transported in the soil and root masses of agricultural and ornamental plants due to its small size and fossorial habits, and it is often mistaken as an earthworm when excavated.

Chalcophaps stephani occurs on nearly all islands in the Solomon archipelago, and its presence on other remote islands (including Nissan Is.) is evidence of its high dispersal ability. Prior to this survey, the species had been recorded from the adjacent islands of Guadalcanal and Makira to the north, and its congener C. longirostris occurs on islands to the southeast of Rennell. These patterns suggested that its absence from the Rennell 'stepping stone' was likely because researchers had not observed it, rather than being a true gap in the distribution of the genus. Given the high level of endemism on Rennell among other avian taxa, we found it surprising that mtDNA could not distinguish it from adjacent populations. Another possible explanation-although perhaps an unlikely one-is that this Rennell population is newly colonized. The identical ND2 sequence from populations on Makira Island are at least suggestive of this scenario, which also conveniently absolves prior surveys from having missed this species on Rennell.

Myotis moluccarum has a specialist foraging strategy that involves capturing insects and aquatic organisms from the surfaces of waterbodies by trailing its enlarged feet over the water and scooping them up ( Flannery 1995). This strategy may render the species more capable or likely to undertake migrations over oceanic barriers between islands. The species is patchily distributed in Melanesia from mainland New Guinea to Aore, off Espiritu Santo, Vanuatu ( Flannery 1995). However, it is probably far more widespread than currently realized, as recent surveys on Makira and Vangunu, Solomon Islands have detected this species for the first time in both instances.

Confirmation that the vast majority of vertebrate species previously recorded on Rennell still persist, suggests these faunas may have at least some resilience to the human-mediated disturbance on Rennell over the past ∼50 years. However, we have no robust data on individual species to indicate whether populations are stable, increasing, or in decline. Moreover, industrial scale disturbance has rapidly escalated over the past decade and there is often a delay in the severity and extent of damage on any given island biota. All bird populations appeared to be healthy in the areas of East Rennell Island surveyed, except for possibly Melanesian Flycatcher. We are unaware of comparable surveys from fragmented forests of west Rennell, but we assume that species typically limited to intact primary forests (e.g., Island Thrush) are likely rarer or absent from these disturbed areas. From our work, it appears that the conservation measures of the Te-Nggano and Hutuna communities in East Rennell have so far been successful in maintaining healthy populations of the island's bird species.

Threats Posed by Invasive Species

The UNESCO East Rennell Desired state of conservation for removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger calls for invasive species to be identified and minimized, and for biosecurity measures to be enacted to prevent new introductions. Although our surveys were not focused on invasive species detection, our lack of observations for several key species known to cause significant damage on Pacific islands (e.g., Rhinella marina, Boiga irregularis, Achatina fulica, and Anoplolepis gracilipes) ( Fritts and Rodda 1998, Lever 2001, 2003, Pikacha et al. 2015) was encouraging. Rhinella marina is toxic to most animals if ingested and consumes a variety of prey (e.g., small rodents, squamates, birds, and various invertebrates, Lever 2001). The species is well-established on Guadalcanal and is therefore a concern for Rennell, although the general absence of amphibians on Rennell suggests the limestone karsts are not conducive to amphibian reproduction. Boiga irregularis naturally occurs on other islands in the Solomon chain (including Guadalcanal), but has never been detected on Rennell. Given its well-known capacity for incidental transport via air and ship cargo ( Rodda and Savidge 2007), Rennell's indigenous birds, squamates, and mammals may be at risk of predation should the snake be introduced to the island. Similarly, A. fulica and an invasive strain of Coconut Rhinoceros beetle ( Oryctes rhinoceros) have strong potential to be introduced due to their prevalence on Guadalcanal and the frequency of potential vectors arriving to Rennell (ships or aircraft) ( Kiddle 2020).

Whilst we provided at least some evidence that invertebrate invaders common to other Pacific Islands have not become established on East Rennell, we cannot exclude the possibility that that they may be present in other more disturbed parts of the island with greater air and ship traffic, and that over time they could spread to the east. However, we did make numerous observations of the Asian Forest Centipede Scolopendra subspinipes during night walks along all squamate-trapping transects. Effects of S. subspinipes on small terrestrial fauna are unknown, but the species is a voracious predator with toxic venom and feeds mostly on vertebrates, including squamates, rats, bats, and insects ( Undheim and King 2011).

The apparent arrival of R. rattus with logging ships was first raised by the UNESCO in 2012. Since then, the species has rapidly become a major social and environmental issue and is negatively impacting subsistence agriculture. Rattus rattus was commonly seen on our spotlighting transects and damage to coconuts and food crops was readily apparent. Rattus rattus is a major threat to island endemic birds ( Harper and Bunbury 2015, Duron et al. 2017) including Rennell's five endemic species, as well as to squamates. The viability of R. rattus eradication from Rennell was considered as part of a conservation project led by the non-government organisation BirdLife International. However, it was deemed to be neither socially nor financially feasible for Rennell, in part because of the risk of continued re-introduction by commercial logging and mining activities.

Conservation Implications

Our documentation of new faunal records comes at a critical turning point in the environmental management of Rennell Island. East Rennell was designated a World Heritage Area in 1998 as the largest raised coral atoll in the world, and for its on-going ecological and biological processes. As our results attest, Rennell continues to present opportunities for biological discovery, as well as playing an important role for the science of island biogeography. It is a crucial steppingstone in the migration and evolution of western Pacific faunas (especially avifauna), and Lake Te-Nggano is a unique formation that continues to provide an environment for the evolution of endemic taxa. However, since 2006, West Rennell has been progressively exploited for timber, and more recently, minerals ( Allen and Porter 2016). Commercial logging is rapidly depleting primary forests and two mining companies (Asia Pacific Investment Development and Bintan) are actively mining Bauxite ( Wang et al. 2018). Bauxite mining involves removal of substrate for wholesale shipment and processing in China. As an uplifted atoll, Rennell consists mostly of limestone karst reliant on limited topsoils for supporting productive forests. Removal of Rennell's thin topsoil represents irreparable damage to the island's geology that will likely hinder the regeneration of forests for thousands of years. Most importantly, it significantly reduces the abilities of communities to subsist on garden-grown produce and increases reliance on store-bought foods, and a monetary income ( Kiddle 2020).

There is a strong sentiment in East Rennell that the World Heritage designation has done little to improve livelihoods, produce financial gains, or advance aspirations of local communities ( Smith 2011). Efforts to increase legal protection for East Rennell, such as declaring it a protected area under national legislation and approving the site's management plan, have not advanced beyond preliminary stages ( Kiddle 2020). Persistent threats posed by human activity and wavering community support for the World Heritage designation now place the site in jeopardy. The long-term protection of East Rennell from extractive industries is thus in a precarious state unless certain incentives and management actions can be enacted ( Allen and Porter 2016). If the scale of logging and mining occurring in West Rennell were to spread across the remainder of the island, it would surely endanger endemic species, and potentially result in the loss of species yet to be described ( Allen and Porter 2016, Kiddle 2020).

Conclusions

The unique terrestrial fauna of Rennell Island appeared to be largely intact and thriving in the East Rennell World Heritage Site. Our work took the much-needed step to build an updated and comprehensive knowledge of the island's unique biota. Rennell's cultural and natural heritage is of such exceptional importance that it transcends national boundaries and represents common importance for present and future generations: https://worldheritage.gsu.edu/outstanding-universal-value. Our discovery of four new species for the island suggests that considerably more diversity likely remains to be uncovered once DNA sequence data can be collected and analyzed. Plans to integrate the needs of local communities with preservation of the site's Outstanding Universal Value require significant, further development to mitigate current threats to the island's fauna and flora ( Kiddle 2020). Otherwise, the important results revealed as part of this, and other studies may one day be testament to nothing more than Rennell's lost contributions to ecological and biological processes, and former importance as a site for studying island biogeography.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Thank you to chiefs, landowners, and communities for allowing access to customary land for these biodiversity surveys. East Rennell World Heritage Committee chairman George Tauika assisted us with logistics and community liaison. We are indebted to numerous local community members at Te-Nggano Village who guided and assisted us during field surveys, provided invaluable local knowledge about Rennell's unique fauna, and discussed concerns about the diminishing incentives to conserve the islands' natural resources. We thank Solomon Islands Ministry of Environment, Climate Change, Disaster Management, and Meteorology for permission to conduct this work, as well as the provincial government of Rennell and Bellona. We also thank staff at Ecological Solutions Solomon Islands for their help with logistics, permitting, and fieldwork, and Robert Fisher and Mike McCoy for reviewing the manuscript and general support of the research. This work was supported by National Science Foundation grants (DEB-1557051 to MJA and DEB-1557053 to RGM). JQR acknowledges the University of Kansas for financial support for travel, allowing his participation in the study. Animal handling was approved by the University of Kansas (IACUC authorization 158-04, to Rafe M. Brown). Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.

Literature Cited

del Hoyo, J., N. Collar, G. M. Kirwan, and E. F. J. Garcia. 2019. Brown-capped Emerald Dove ( Chalcophaps longirostris). In: J. del Hoyo, A. Elliott, J. Sargatal, D. A. Christie, and E. de Juana, eds. Handbook of the Birds of the World Alive. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona (retrieved from https://www.hbw.com/node/467143 on 9 September 2019). Google Scholar

Tyrone H. Lavery , Lucas H. DeCicco , Jonathan Q. Richmond , Ikuo G. Tigulu , Michael J. Andersen , David Boseto , and Robert G. Moyle "New Faunal Records from a World Heritage Site in Danger: Rennell Island, Solomon Islands ¹," Pacific Science 75(3), 407-420, (2 September 2021). https://doi.org/10.2984/75.3.8

Accepted: 4 April 2021; Published: 2 September 2021

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
New Faunal Records from a World Heritage Site in Danger: Rennell Island, Solomon Islands1

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Remote oceanic islands have high potential to harbor unique fauna and flora, but opportunities to conduct in-depth biotic surveys are often limited. Furthermore, underrepresentation of existing biodiversity in the literature has the potential to detract from conservation planning and action.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Lake Tegano - East Rennel World Heritage Site, Solomon Islands

# data[].attributes.body
Read the story here: https://www.undp.org/pacific/news/preserving-world-heritage

# data[].attributes.body
When East Rennell in Solomon Islands was included on the World Heritage List in 1998, it became the first World Heritage Site in the independent Pacific Island states. It was also the first site inscribed upon natural criteria that was under customary ownership and management. In 2013, it was placed on the List of World Heritage in Danger. Threats to the site's Outstanding Universal Value include logging, mining, invasive species, and climate change.

Following the indictment of the site into the UNESCO List of World Heritage in Danger, researchers presented new records and evidence that continued field studies combined with DNA analysis will continue to uncover even greater endemic biodiversity. Rennell is currently experiencing major habitat destruction in parts of the island that are not under World Heritage protection. (Lavery et. al., 2021)

Check out Stephanie Clair Price's doctoral thesis (University of Western Australia School of Law), where she conducted an exploration of the World Heritage Convention regime through a Pacific lens, looking closely at the disparity between the local and global significance of the area and challenges it entails.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Research article

Open Access

Published:

Show authors

Heritage Science 9, Article number: 101 (2021) Cite this article

951 Accesses

1 Citations

Metrics

Abstract

Space technology offers effective tools to monitor the status of World Natural Heritage sites. East Rennell Island, which covers approximately 37,000 hectares (ha) and a marine area extending three nautical miles into the sea, was added to the list of endangered World Natural Heritage sites in 2013. Deforestation and natural disasters have increasingly threatened sustainable development on the island. Based on analyses of multi-source time series of remote sensing data (e.g., MODIS and Worldview), the forest cover change on Rennell Island from 2000 to 2020 and its future trends were mapped and analysed using Sen + Mann-Kendall and Hurst index models. A land cover classification system derived from high-resolution Worldview images was developed as a baseline for monitoring and analysing future forest cover changes on the island. Our results showed that (1) the areas of vegetation degradation and improvement were basically equal from 2000 to 2020. (2) The forest cover change trend had weak continuity, and significant improvements could be achieved in areas with damaged vegetation given sufficient protection measures and financial input. (3) This heritage site has a strong vegetation regeneration ability, and human activities such as mining, logging, and road construction, which could greatly disturb the unique ecosystem, should be restricted.

Introduction

The 3S space technologies are characterised by real-time and high-precision positioning, multi-temporal data acquisition with different resolutions, and intelligent and efficient data management strategies; these data have the potential for use in World Heritage Sites [ 1, 2, 3]. There is an urgent need to continuously monitor these and implement protective measures. The UNESCO World Heritage Center supervises and helps the government of the Solomon Islands improve the protection and management of the East Rennell World Heritage Site (ERWHS) by providing funding and technical coordination, including entrusting the International Centre on Space Technologies for Natural and Cultural Heritage (HIST), a Category-II centre under the auspices of UNESCO, to facilitate the monitoring of changes in the forest cover on Rennell Island. HIST is the first UNESCO centre to apply space technologies to monitor and preserve natural and cultural heritage sites. The centre is hosted by the Aerospace Information Research Institute of the Chinese Academy of Sciences. Cultural and natural heritage sites with high universal value, especially those included on the list of endangered World Heritage Sites, are threatened by natural forces and human actions [ 4]. HIST has employed space technology to monitor changes due to these factors on Rennell Island, using high-resolution data from 2015 as a benchmark for evaluating future changes on the island [ 5]. This paper presents a study on forest vegetation cover changes from 2000 to 2020 in one of the world's endangered heritage sites-East Rennell Island in the Solomon Islands-and establishes a land classification system to monitor and predict future changes. Changes in forest cover are expected to provide scientific support for the restoration and protection of the world's endangered heritage sites.

The Solomon Islands belong to Melanesia, which is located in the South Pacific Ocean, east of Papua New Guinea. It is classified as a least developed country (LDC) and a small island developing state (SIDS).

East Rennell Island makes up the southern third of Rennell Island, the southernmost island in the Solomon Island Group in the western Pacific Ocean (Fig. 1). East Rennell Island was added the World Heritage List in 1998 [ 6] and has been included on the list of endangered sites since 2013 due to logging, which adversely affects the heritage site's ecosystem. The World Heritage Committee determined that although the logging is taking place outside the core area of the heritage site, it is threatening East Rennell's outstanding universal value; therefore, the committee has asked the national authorities to provide an impact assessment of logging on the island.

East Rennell demonstrates significant ongoing ecological and biological processes and is an important site for studying island biogeography. In particular, the island is an important steppingstone in the migration of species, especially avifauna, in the western Pacific Ocean; it also provides an area for speciation processes and evolution of these species. The unmodified forest vegetation contains floral elements from the less biodiverse Pacific Islands to the east and the much richer Melanesian flora to the west. Rennell Island has a high number of endemic species, particularly among its avifauna, and harbours ten endemic plant species [ 7].

The wildlife of Rennell Island includes 11 species of bats (one endemic) and 43 species of breeding land and water birds (with four species and nine endemic subspecies, respectively). The invertebrate life on the island is also rich, with 27 species of land snails (seven endemics) and approximately 730 insect species, many of which are endemic. The flora of Lake Tengano is dominated by more than 300 species of diatoms and algae, some of which are endemic. There is also an endemic sea snake in the lake [ 8].

Data and methods

Data on the relative distributions of endemic and native species of Rennell Island are lacking or non-existing, making systematic assessments of threats and their impacts difficult. Risk monitoring and preventive diagnosis of threats to heritage sites in any given ecosystem are complex and challenging tasks [ 9]. We take advantage of long-term earth observations to monitor forest cover change and classify land cover; thus, remote sensing data provide an effective assessment tool to protect Rennell Island.

Data

Rennell Island, as a tropical island, is often obscured by dense clouds, which have a significant impact on vegetation monitoring and land cover classification from optical remote sensing data. We collected multisource remote sensing data and selected high-quality data with no or few clouds, and we obtained 432 moderate-resolution imaging spectroradiometer (MODIS) scenes with 16 day synthetic normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) data (250 m ground-resolution) MOD13Q1, 7 Landsat 7 and Landsat 8 scenes (30 m ground resolution), 20 Worldview scenes, and 7 Hansen scenes (Table 1) between 2000 and 2020. The MOD13Q1 data were used to analyse the dynamic changes in NDVI on Rennell Island, and the other data were used mostly to analyse the land cover changes on Rennell Island.

Methods

Google Earth's historical view provided images of Rennell Island from 2000 to 2020. Although the resolution of these images is relatively rough, they still helped us to quickly locate areas with obvious changes. Before data analysis, the original data were preprocessed (Fig. 2). The technical framework adopted for image interpretation and mosaicking (combining individual images to obtain a composite image for the whole island) is shown in Fig. 2.

For the high-resolution Worldview images of Rennell Island, ortho-correction was performed by PCI GXL software, then the Fmask algorithm was used to mask cloud-covered areas. The ortho images were then inlaid on the study site after cloud removal by Inpho OrthoVista software to generate cloud-free high-resolution remote sensing images covering the research area.

NDVI, which reflects the typical spectral characteristics of vegetation, is the most widely used vegetation index. There is a significant linear correlation between vegetation coverage and NDVI [ 10]. When applying a dimidiate pixel model, due to the complexity of the land surface, the selection of two extreme NDVI points at the global scale can cause great uncertainty in the estimation of vegetation coverage [ 11]. The maximum and minimum values of NDVI obtained from remote sensing images of the study area were selected as the NDVI values of pure vegetation and bare soil [ 12]:

where NDVI is the normalized vegetation index; \(DN_{nir}\) is near-infrared reflectance; \(DN_{red}\) c is red reflectance; P is vegetation coverage; \(NDVI_{max}\) is the NDVI value of pure vegetation in the study area; and \(NDVI_{min}\) is the NDVI value of bare soil in the study area.

After applying the vegetation coverage division method, the vegetation coverage in the study area was divided into five classes, as shown in Table 2. Despite concerns about work on logging and mining concessions, raw forest coverage remained high across the island area, especially on East Rennell Island, which maintained the highest forest cover.

The Theil-Sen slope analysis and Mann-Kendall test model (Sen and Mann-Kendall, respectively) have advantages over regression analysis and correlation coefficient analysis for trend analysis, namely, they do not require data that follow a normal distribution or have small variances. These methods can effectively reflect long-term dynamic vegetation characteristics [ 13], which is important when studying climate change, hydrology, and meteorology. Sequential NDVI images between 2000 and 2020 were selected for analysis.

The Sen trend analysis formula is as follows:

where x i refers to the ith NDVI data point in the time series of NDVI data on Rennell Island and x j reflects similar data. Positive and negative values of β reflect upward and downward trends, respectively, where β > 0 indicates an increasing NDVI trend, β = 0 indicates an unchanged NDVI trend, and β  < 0 indicates a decreasing NDVI trend.

The procedure for applying the Mann-Kendall test to determine the significance of the trend is described below.

For time series T, the statistic T S is calculated by formula ( 4):

where x j is the jth data point in the time series, n is the number of data samples, and sgn is a step function calculated by formula ( 5).

Z values are calculated by formula ( 6):

where VAR( T s) = ( n( n−1)(2 n+5))/18 is the variance in T S and n is the number of data points in the sequence.

At a 95% confidence level, the threshold value of Z is 1.96, and the combinations of the Z value and Sen slope are shown in Table 3.

The Hurst exponent is an index to describe the self-similarity and long-term dependence of natural phenomena. It is a mathematical tool to analyse the long-lasting nature and correlation of natural phenomena. It is widely used in hydrology, climate, and other fields [ 14, 15, 16]. Previous studies have shown that the Hurst exponent based on the rescaled range (R/S) is more stable than other methods [ 17]. Therefore, we selected the Hurst exponent to analyse the continuity in NDVI trends from 2000 to 2020.

There are NDVIi, NDVI time series, where i = 1, 2, 3, 4...N. This time series is defined for any positive integer m. The procedure for calculating the Hurst method is as follows:

There are three types of Hurst exponents with a range from 0 to 1 in Table 4. When H < 0.5, the future trend is expected to be reversed from the past trend. When 0.5 < H < 0.65, the process has a continuous characteristic, and the future trend may be consistent with the past trend. When H > 0.5, the process has a continuous characteristic, and the future trend is highly likely to be consistent with the past trend.

Results

NDVI trends on Rennell Island

The Sen + Mann-Kendall analysis method was selected to determine the distribution of the changing NDVI trends on Rennell Island from 2000 to 2020 (Fig. 3). The overall change trend of Rennell Island was not significant, and the mean Sen trend was −0.1 × 10 ⁻⁴. Increasing change trend values were observed for 50% of the study area, and areas with decreasing change trends accounted for 49.9% of the total study area. The Mann-Kendall test results indicated that there were significant changes in 5.7% of the study area, while nonsignificant changes occurred in 94.1% in the study area. Areas with slight degradation accounted for 47.1% of the total study area, and areas with slight improvements accounted for 47.0% of the study area. Slight degradation was the dominant type of change on West Rennell Island. These results combined with Google Earth images indicate that most of the areas where degradation occurred were in or near human settlements, which indicates that human activities, especially mining, deforestation, construction, and other disruptive activities on the island, likely had a significant disruptive impact on the vegetation. Overall, the change trend indicated that the vegetation on East Rennell Island was slightly improved. The areas with degraded vegetation were largely distributed near Lake Tengano; the destruction was evident and continuous in this area, mainly near facilities and constructed structures along the lake.

NDVI future trend forecast for Rennell Island

We used the Hurst exponent formula to obtain the distribution of persistent characteristics reflecting NDVI changes on Rennell Island from 2000 to 2020 (Fig. 4). The Hurst values ranged from 0.097 to 0.725, with a mean of 0.403. The Hurst values were classified into the following categories: anti-continuity (AC) (H < 0.5), moderate continuity (MC) (0.5 < H < 0.65) and high continuity (HC) (H > 0.65). The AC in the NDVI values on Rennell Island was strong, accounting for 86.5% of the study area. In general, the AC characteristics indicated that the vegetation in Rennell Island's ecological environments was unstable, which means that external disturbances were frequent from 2000 to 2020 and that further ecological restoration efforts are needed to ensure that the vegetation system will improve. Both the East and West Rennell Islands were dominated by areas of AC, and there was no significant feature in the continuity distribution. To further analyse the change trend and persistence of vegetation on Rennell Island, the Sen trend calculation result and Hurst index were superimposed for analysis (Fig. 5), and the data were divided into nine classes. The overlap results showed that for most areas of Rennell Island, it will be difficult to sustain previous trends in future NDVI changes (Table 5). The areas with persistent increases and decreases in the AC of NDVI accounted for 6.5% and 43.0% of the total area, respectively; these areas are located mainly in the southwestern part of the island, where the vegetation cover is likely to improve in the future. The areas with unchanged NDVI, indicating AC, account for only 0.1% of the study area; future vegetation change trends in these areas will depend on external disturbances. In the future, the vegetation cover of southwestern Rennell Island may be improved; that is, trends of continuous improvement in NDVI and AC of degradation are mainly distributed in this area. These results suggest that in the future, the vegetation along the inner side of the lake on East Rennell Island may face degradation.

Forest/vegetation cover change on Rennell Island

Due to the data acquisition period and data quality constraints, fewer images of Rennell Island were available per year between 2012 and 2018. Data from the Landsat series with a spatial resolution of 30 m were used to extract and calculate the spatial distribution of forest/vegetation cover change (Fig. 6) and change on Rennell Island from 2012 to 2018 (Fig. 7). The red, yellow, and dark green patches in Fig. 6 show the forest vegetation cover changes caused by agriculture, village and infrastructure construction, deforestation, mining activities, typhoons, and other natural disasters.

Disturbance to forest cover within the ERWHS was much less than that outside of the site; disturbances within the ERWHS at higher elevations along the periphery of the island were probably due to storms and other natural factors, while disturbances closer to Lake Tengano were most likely due to use of forests by communities to meet their essential daily needs. The Solomon Islands Government has restricted felling activities and mining concessions to residents, but the significant changes in the yellow patches (roads) suggest that road construction for timber transport is likely to be the most significant factor in forest vegetation degradation. The red patches in Fig. 6 are traces of slash-and-burn agriculture, and the locations and extents of the red areas changed annually from 2012 to 2018; the land was used for agriculture for three years after forest reclamation, after which it went into a fallow period to support land restoration. Planting cypress can lead to fast vegetation recovery, but it is necessary for areas to recover to the same forest communities that were present before disturbances, a process that can take decades.

The results of those analyses suggest that the areas with the most intense vegetation changes are in the northwestern part of the island, which is known to be the inhabited area of the island, mainly due to extensive deforestation by residents to meet their daily needs. The whole island is a natural ecosystem, and vegetation cover changes on the western part of the Rennell Islands will inevitably affect the island's environment.

Land cover classification based on Worldview images

To further analyse the land cover of Rennell Island, a detailed classification of land cover in the study area was performed using a mosaic of 20 images from 19 March 2014 to 3 October 2015 covering the entire island (Figs. 7 and 8).

Despite widespread human disturbances to forest cover on West Rennell Island, the undisturbed forest area still exceeded 90% of the study area. Undisturbed forest accounted for 52% of the area on East Rennell Island, while Lake Tengano accounted for 44.73%; in fact, undisturbed forest accounted for more than 95% of the East Rennell Island land area. Therefore, 93% of the land area on Rennell Island was undisturbed forests (see Table 6).

Our Worldview image-based land classification was used to identify similar areas in Landsat images. Comprehensive comparative analysis using high-resolution Worldview and Landsat 8 data showed that the proportions of land with the highest vegetation coverage and high vegetation coverage were significantly greater than that with low vegetation coverage (Fig. 9). The 2014 land cover data were consistent with the results of annual Landsat 8 monitoring data, which confirms that the vegetation cover on Rennell Island was restored to the maximum extent in the second year following its inclusion on the list of endangered heritage sites.

Discussion

Factors that induced vegetation changes

The following forest or vegetation cover changes are worth examining: the most intensive forest cover disturbances occurred in the northernmost parts of the island, forests were opened up by local communities for slash-and-burn agriculture and for harvesting wood to meet the needs of local residents, such as boat and housing construction, and slash-and-burn agriculture was rare within the ERWHS. Some of the larger forest clearings during specific years were attributable to temporally limited activities or events. For example, the large but dispersed patches of cleared forest in the middle of the island in 2001 were linked to port construction and associated development of settlements and villages. There was significant damage due to storms in 2003, while 2007 was a very dry year, leading to considerable burning of forests. The results of the analysis for 2000 to 2020 are as follows:

1. (1)
The area of vegetation cover on Rennell Island decreased: the areas of increasing cover were rough equal to the areas of decreasing cover, but the overall change was not significant and weak. Large areas were covered by undisturbed forest, and the ability of the forest to recover after destruction was strong. The undisturbed or unspoiled forest areas in Rennell remained large and contiguous. Within the ERWHS, forest cover accounted for over 95% of the land area. However, the vulnerability of the study area increased in response to mining and logging activities.

2. (2)
The destruction of forests on the island was mainly due to the activities of residents and natural disasters. Road construction became the primary cause of forest vegetation destruction. The government restricted mining activities in forest areas cleared for agriculture and will not develop new mining areas [ 18].

Suggestions

When planning and managing forests, consideration must be given to sustainable connectivity and forest cover contiguity in key areas. The timing of the removal of the ERWHS from the list of endangered World Heritage Sites must also be considered in the context of the state party and community interests, since improving the conservation status of the area and generating livelihood options and income are compatible with conservation. The removal of the ERWHS from the list of endangered World Heritage Sites is dependent on the removal of all threats to the site [ 19], and the time needed to achieve such complete elimination is likely to be quite long. For the state party, it would be helpful if the ERWHS were removed from the list of endangered World Heritage Sites as soon as the plan and timeframe for the mitigation of all prevailing threats to the conservation of the site have been reviewed and approved by the World Heritage Committee and regular monitoring of the implementation of the plan by UNESCO and International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) has been established.

The following suggestions were made on the basis of the results of the data analyses:

1. (1)
A land cover classification comprising 10 categories was established (see Fig. 8) for all of Rennell Island based on high-resolution Worldview images (0.5-2 m resolution) from 2014-2015. The World Heritage Centre and IUCN could use satellite remote sensing data as the baseline for future forest cover monitoring on Rennell Island.

2. (2)
Currently, there is no buffer zone demarcated for the ERWHS. The need to demarcate a buffer zone extending up to a specific distance from the current western boundary of the ERWHS into western parts of the island has been made clear; however, the establishment of this boundary will involve complex and challenging negotiations among the community owning land immediately outside the western boundary of the ERWHS, the residents of communities within the ERWHS and national and provincial government authorities. A buffer zone within which economic activities such as forestry and agriculture are prohibited will be difficult to establish via negotiations. Furthermore, for the buffer zone to be established in such a way that the connectivity of forests between the ERWHS and the western parts of the island is ensured, considerable new data on the distribution and population status of land-based avian and invertebrate endemic animals that occur within the ERWHS are needed. The allocation of other land use types must consider the entire island's connectivity and the forest cover in key areas [ 20].

3. (3)
The key factor for the protection of the natural heritage site on Rennell Island lies in its forest resources. The protection of the forest will not only promote natural restoration of the ecological environment but also protect the resources of the island through active policy programmes. At present, the main conflict lies in the interests of landowners and the forest protection requirements of natural heritage sites [ 12]. The intended nationally determined contributions (INDCs) of the Solomon Islands were discussed at the 21st session of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), and the importance of land use, land use change, and forestry sectors, particularly for climate change adaptation and minimizing greenhouse gas emissions, were mentioned. Thus, the Global Climate Fund could provide potential financing for sustainable forestry development on Rennell Island.

Conclusions

Although the vegetation on Rennell Island has a high regeneration capacity, its growth status is unstable, and human intervention is key to conservation efforts [ 21, 22].

HIST's space technology applications have achieved gratifying results at this endangered heritage site. Following HIST's recommendations, the Solomon Islands Government announced its decision to revoke and/or refuse to grant any felling licence within the ERWHS in August 2017, thus temporarily banning all logging on the site [ 23]. While this measure serves as a temporary solution, in the longer term, it will be important to introduce a legal mechanism, such as an application to be submitted by landowners, to designate property under the Protected Areas Act and adopt the management plan of this act, which would protect the property from commercial logging [ 24].

The core phrase of the world heritage designation is "outstanding universal value," and its constituent elements, verification of authenticity and integrity and effective protection and management mechanisms, indicate the standards of world heritage Sites [ 22]. Space technologies can be applied to identify the features and statuses of ground objects macroscopically, quickly and accurately. Satellite navigation and positioning technology can be applied to accurately locate sites, and geographic information technology can be applied to quickly and effectively perform spatial analyses. These cutting-edge spatial information technologies have proven advantages in the protection of archaeological and heritage sites.

Availability of data and materials

The authors confirm that data supporting the findings of this study are available. The MODIS 16-day L3 global 250 m vegetation indices were obtained from the Earth Science Data Systems (ESDS) Program of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) ( https://search.earthdata.nasa.gov/search?q=MOD13Q1). The Landsat 8 images were obtained from NASA ( https://glovis.usgs.gov/). The Worldview image data were provided by HIST.

Abbreviations

ha:

Hectare

UNESCO:

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

km:

Kilometres

NDVI:

Normalized difference vegetation index

IUCN:

International Union for the Conservation of Nature

MODIS:

Moderate-resolution imaging spectroradiometer

References

Download references

Acknowledgements

We sincerely acknowledge the constructive comments and suggestions given by Prof. Fu Bihong from HIST, which helped to greatly improve the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Netherlands Funds-in-Trust (NFiT) of the UNESCO World Heritage Center and a subproject of the Earth, Big Data, Science and Engineering pilot project by the Chinese Academy of Sciences (XDA19030501).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

1. International Centre on Space Technologies for Natural and Cultural Heritage, The Aerospace Information Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100094, China

Sijia Huo, Guolong Chen, Huiqin Shu & Ruixia Yang

2. University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100049, China

Sijia Huo, Guolong Chen, Huiqin Shu & Ruixia Yang

3. China University of Geosciences, Wuhan, 430072, China

Mengmeng Wang

Contributions

Conceptualization, SH; methodology, MW and GC; software, HS and RY; validation, GC; formal analysis, MW and GC; writing-original draft preparation, SH; writing-review and editing, SH and GC. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Guolong Chen.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Huo, S., Wang, M., Chen, G. et al. Monitoring and assessment of endangered UNESCO World Heritage Sites using space technology: a case study of East Rennell, Solomon Islands. Herit Sci 9, 101 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40494-021-00574-5
Download citation
Keywords

World Heritage

East Rennell

Solomon Island

Vegetation Change

Multi-source Remote Sensing Data

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Monitoring and assessment of endangered UNESCO World Heritage Sites using space technology: a case study of East Rennell, Solomon Islands - Heritage Science

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Space technology offers effective tools to monitor the status of World Natural Heritage sites. East Rennell Island, which covers approximately 37,000 hectares (ha) and a marine area extending three nautical miles into the sea, was added to the list of endangered World Natural Heritage sites in 2013.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Photo from Preserving the World Heritage | United Nations Development Programme

# data[].attributes.body
Lavery, T.H. et. al., 2021, New Faunal Records from a World Heritage Site in Danger: Rennell Island, Solomon Islands, Pacific Science, 75(3):407-420 (2021). https://doi.org/10.2984/75.3.8

UNDP Solomon Islands, 2021, Preserving the World Heritage, UNDP Pacific Office. https://www.undp.org/pacific/news/preserving-world-heritage

Kiddle, G.L., 2020, Achieving the desired state of conservation for East Rennel, Solomon Islands: Progress, opportunities and challenges, Wiley Online Library, https://doi.org/10.1002/app5.311

Price, S.C., 2017, Strengthening World Heritage protection in the Pacific – An exploration of Solomon Islands’ implementation of the World Heritage Convention, The University of Western Australia.

Kiddle, L., 2017, Rennell: an island of two halves, Devpolicy Blog, https://devpolicy.org/rennell-island-two-halves-20170725/#sidr-main

Price, S., 2013, The Protected Areas Project - Final report on work done towards setting up a Protected Area at the East Rennel World Heritage Site, Live and Learn Environmental Education.

Smith, A., 2011, East Rennel Worl Heritage Site: misunderstandings, inconsistencies and opportunities in the implementation of the World Heritage Convention in the Pacific Islands, International Journal of Heritage Studies, https://doi.org/10.1080/13527258.2011.618253

Wingham, E.J., 1997, Nomination of East Rennell, Solomon Islands by the Government of the Solomon Islands for Inclusion in the World Heritage List Natural Sites, New Zealand Official Development Assistance Programme, Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade – The Ministry of Culture, Tourism and Aviation.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Preserving the World Heritage | United Nations Development Programme

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
“This is the story of my life; the story of my community,” says George Taiuka when we met him near the UNESCO World Heritage Site at the Lake Tegano. East Rennell was selected for the World Heritage List in 1998 for a number of reasons. It has a remarkable ecosystem with thousands of plant species,…

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Map by Kerry Lagueux (New England Aquarium) for the Nomination for World Heritage Site document

# data[].attributes.body
Before the Phoenix Islands Protected Area became a renowned UNESCO World Heritage Site, the people and government of Kiribati, conscious and aware of the effects of climate change and the challenges they were facing, already recognized its value and enacted regulations for it's protection.

In his statement addressing the United Nations' 69th General Assembly in New York on September 26, 2014, Kiribati President Anote Tong reiterated that, "PIPA is a rich fishing ground so it's total closure on 31 December of this year would entail loss of much needed revenue for Kiribati from fishing license fees. For us, it is a major but necessary short term sacrifice for the long term health of our ocean and for sustaining fish stocks for global food security."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Background

Phoenix Islands Protected Area (PIPA) consist of 8 islands (Kanton, Endebury, Birnie, Rawaki, Mackean, Orona, Nikumaroro and Manra). Two islands of this archipelago ecosystem: Howland and Baker, lie in the adjacent territory of the United States, to the North of Kiribati.

PIPA's boundaries encompass 408,250 Sq.km, a submerged reef and at least 14 identified seamounts. It was the world's first, truly deep water, mid-ocean marine protected area.

PIPA was established under the 2008 Phoenix Islands Protected Area Regulation, promulgated pursuant to section 43(1) and 86(1) of the Environment Act (1999) as amended by the Environment (Amendment) Act 2007, and subsequently supported by the Phoenix Islands protected area Amendment Regulations 2014 and 2017. The Phoenix Islands Protected Area is the Government of Kiribati's (GOK) conservation and sustainable use strategy for the Phoenix Islands and surrounding marine environment.
Vision
To conserve the natural and cultural heritage of the Phoenix Islands protected area for the sustained benefit of the people of Kiribati and the world.
Mission
To implement effective, integrated, adaptive management that ensures the natural and cultural heritage values of PIPA are maintained and, where necessary, restored to achieve PIPA's vision.
PIPA Management Plan
The Management of the Phoenix Islands Protected Area reflects a science-and-people-based approach to conservation, focusing on preserving the health and resiliency of the area's habitats and species. The management plan emphasizes building core partnerships, infrastructure and capacity to deliver real conservation outcomes for the area. It includes implementation of zonation plan based on habitat and biological values, responsible fisheries management, and permitting requirements for tourists and researchers.

Better understanding and monitoring of PIPA's biodiversity is key. Researchers track reef health, populations of indicator species, and the impact of climate change. The very existence of PIPA is also a climate change adaptation strategy. With other stresses on its ocean ecosystems removed and managed, PIPA is better able to withstand climate changes. This unique protected area presents a rare opportunity to understand and model climate change impacts and resilience on coral reefs.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Phoenix Islands Protected Area - PIPA Conservation Trust Website

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Background Phoenix Islands Protected Area (PIPA) consist of 8 islands (Kanton, Endebury, Birnie, Rawaki, Mackean, Orona, Nikumaroro and Manra). Two islands of this archipelago ecosystem: Howland and Baker, lie in the adjacent territory of the United States, to the North of Kiribati. PIPA's boundaries encompass 408,250 Sq.km, a submerged reef and at least 14 identified seamounts.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
A chimaera, or ghost fish, was observed at around 1,850 meters depth. 

# data[].attributes.body
On 11 December 2018, Kiribati made history by being the first country in the world to have its domestic marine conservation initiative – the Phoenix Islands Protected Area (PIPA) – recognized by the United Nations General Assembly (Resolution A/Res/73/124 titled “Oceans and the Law of the Sea”) as an exemplary model of international cooperation, coordination, and collaboration in marine protection and conservation. PIPA became the largest and deepest UNESCO World Heritage Site in the world when it was inscribed in 2010. Since it's inscription the overall conservation and management outlook for PIPA has been mostly positive. Beginning in 2015, the area has banned all commercial fishing, making it one of the largest Marine Protected Areas on the planet.

# data[].attributes.body
Innovative pilot project that highlights inequities and need for increased deep-ocean knowledge generation. The project documents efforts to build local capacity in small developing states in using comparatively low-cost technology to explore their own deep-sea backyards.

Also check out the research led by Dr. Randi Rotjan, Co-Chair of the Phoenix Islands Protected Area Scientific Advisory Committee, Chief Scientist of the Phoenix Islands Protected Area Conservation Trust, and Senior Lecturer at Boston University (BU), where she and the BU Rotjan Marine Ecology Lab teams have been leveraging PIPA as a natural laboratory to study global change in remote and wild environments, but are also studying and innovating new ways to integrate science and management. https://sites.bu.edu/rotjanlab/research/pipa/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
1. Introduction

Humankind is at a critical juncture for stewarding Earth's ocean. Negotiations are close to heralding a commitment toward protecting 30% of the ocean by 2030 at the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in 2022, and the UN Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development has just begun [ 1]. At the same time, global attention is increasingly turning to the promise of the Blue Economy, with largely unrestrained expansion of human activities and associated impacts into all areas of the ocean [ 2- 4]. This is despite the United Nations Environment Programme Finance Initiative [ 5, p. 16] defining a truly sustainable ocean economy as one that will provide 'social and economic benefits for current and future generations; restore, protect and maintain diverse, productive and resilient ecosystems; and is based on clean technologies, renewable energy and circular material flows'. It is clear that all of these needs can only be met with a sustained healthy and resilient ocean, which critically and urgently requires scientifically informed, holistic decision-making and management [ 6].

Given that the deep ocean (greater than 200 m) is the largest ecosystem on the planet, constituting 90% of all habitable space [ 7], it follows that maintaining its function is key to ensuring planetary health. The deep ocean plays a key role in providing provisioning (e.g. fisheries supporting diets and livelihoods), regulating (e.g. climate regulation via carbon sequestration and storage) and cultural services (e.g. spiritual significance) [ 8, 9]. However, with inadequate stewardship owing to deficiencies in knowledge and governance, as well as inequitable global capacity (i.e. the mix of human resource, technology, infrastructure, mechanisms, finance, access and other more nuanced types) [ 10], the fate of the deep ocean continues to remain in the hands of just a few, even though most of the world has a vested interest in deep-ocean ecosystems and issues [ 11].

The deep ocean is not just 'out there'; rather, it comprises a significant percentage of national waters and seabed. For example, about three-quarters (73%) of geographical areas globally (169 out of 231) have deep ocean within their Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) ( figure 1 and table 1). Here, we define 'geographical areas' as sovereign nations and territories that are classified by the UN M49 standard as 'developed', 'developing' or 'small island developing states (SIDS)' ( https://unstats.un.org/unsd/methodology/m49/#geo-regions). Territories that are not included in the M49 classification are included with their sovereign state. By region, the largest number of geographical areas with deep-ocean areas are in Latin America and the Caribbean (43 geographical areas), while the largest deep-ocean area within national jurisdiction is within Oceania (total 36 366 000 km ²) ( figure 1 and table 1). Of the geographical areas with deep ocean, 62% have developing economies. Furthermore, 61.9% of geographical areas globally have deep ocean occupying more than 50% of their national jurisdictions (143 out of 231), and for nearly one-third of geographical areas (32.5%) the deep ocean occupies 90% or more of their national jurisdictions (75 out of 231) ( figure 1). This includes 81.6% of all SIDS (40 out of 49) ( figure 1).

category

total deep-ocean area within national jurisdictions (km²)

% deep-ocean area of total deep ocean within national jurisdictions

total number of areas with deep ocean

% of total areas with deep ocean

For too long, deep-ocean scientific exploration and research has been the purview of a limited number of nations, entities and people. The grave mismatch between the percentage of deep-ocean area per geographical area and national access to the deep ocean for scientific study prevents most of humankind from knowing the deep ocean within their national jurisdictions or that of the global ocean commons ( figure 1 and table 1). The most recent version of the Global Ocean Science Report (GOSR) [ 11] surveyed 49 geographical areas (as defined above) with deep ocean, of which developing geographical areas were underrepresented, and showed significant disparities in national capacities to undertake open-ocean and deep-ocean research. For example, there are an average of 40 ocean science institutions per developed geographical area that took part in the survey, while non-SIDS developing geographical areas had only eight institutions per geographical area, and developing SIDS had 4.5 institutions per geographical area that participated in the survey ( figure 2). According to the GOSR, developed geographical areas, therefore, have 5-10 times more institutions in existence or actively engaged, compared with developing geographical areas. On average, developed geographical areas also operate approximately 14 global, international and/or regional class research vessels per geographical area (approx. 72% of the global fleet), while non-SIDS developing geographical areas operate approximately four vessels per geographical area, and SIDS operate zero ( figure 2) (echoed by [ 13]). Furthermore, the five geographical areas with the most research vessels (USA, Canada, Japan, Norway and Australia, respectively) account for 51% of the research vessels greater than 35 m in length reported globally. On average, approximately 2.5 times more developed geographical areas have deep submergence vehicles (submersibles, remotely operated vehicles (ROVs), and autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs)) than developing geographical areas, and SIDS operate none. It is important to note, however, that while GOSR includes the best data currently available, it still underrepresents the true disparity (e.g. France owns and operates scientific ROVs but it is not included in the GOSR data) ( figure 2). As such, the disparity of assets is skewed, as is the capacity to use these assets. The first step to mitigating these disparities is to recognize that the global community needs to go beyond the existing data in the GOSR to truly understand the capacity for deep-sea exploration and research for every country with deep ocean within their national jurisdiction. To that end, the Global Deep-Sea Capacity Assessment is currently underway as a UN Ocean Decade Activity ( https://deepseacapacity.pubpub.org/).

There are growing calls for a paradigm shift in exploration and science that includes increased access, inclusion and equity, including with regard to the deep ocean, especially given the rapidly advancing technology and imminent Blue Economy applications (e.g. [ 1, 14, 15]). However, while the goals for such paradigm shifts are laudable, programmes to address these issues are often difficult to implement, unidirectional in nature, challenging to quantify and/or can ultimately perpetuate the fundamental inequities that they are trying to address [ 10, 16, 17].

To meet the need for increased deep-sea capacity, we conducted a small pilot project, 'My Deep Sea, My Backyard' (MDSMBY). Recognizing that many deep-ocean endeavours take place in countries with deep ocean, but without deep-ocean access, MDSMBY aimed to grow deep-ocean capacity in two countries, Trinidad and Tobago, and Kiribati, to explore their deep-sea backyards using comparatively low-cost technology while building lasting in-country capacity. These pilot projects offered a glimpse into a series of issues not yet fully addressed by the ocean community. In an effort to accelerate progress in deep-ocean access, capacity and equity, here we share our experiences, including the missteps, challenges, successes and lessons learned, so that future efforts will bring us collectively closer to achieving a more equitable ocean.

2. My Deep Sea, My Backyard

MDSMBY was spawned during 'Here Be Dragons', a convening of explorers, innovators, artists, scientists and storytellers to identify the uncharted territories that still exist in ocean exploration and storytelling, and address gaps in our understanding and sharing of the ocean, hosted by K. Bell at MIT Media Lab in February 2018. From her own experience in Trinidad and Tobago, D. Amon questioned how deep-ocean exploration could be enabled in countries without the means currently. At the same time, R. Rotjan, in her role as Co-Chief Scientist of the Phoenix Islands Protected Area Conservation Trust, was facing similar challenges enabling deep-sea capacity in Kiribati. This led to a self-selected collaborative team coming together to conceptualize and propose potential solutions.

With support from The National Geographic Society ($50 000 US) and the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) ($15 000 US), a pilot study was designed to provide deep-ocean access and increased technological capacity in Kiribati and Trinidad and Tobago. These two SIDS were chosen because of pre-existing relationships between collaborators and/or a need expressed by nationals. The approach had four goals:

3. Exploring the deep ocean in Kiribati

The Republic of Kiribati is a least developed country (LDC) and SIDS, with a lower-middle-income economy by per capita Gross National Income (GNI), located in Oceania. Kiribati consists of 33 islands spanning 46° of longitude across three archipelagos stretched across all four hemispheres, in the equatorial Pacific Ocean. These archipelagos constitute the 12th largest country by ocean area but the 24th smallest country by land area. Their average elevation is only 3 m above sea level, but the maximum ocean depth is greater than 7000 m. The island of Tarawa holds most of the residential population (approx. 64 000 people of a total 117 000) and is the country's capital. Tarawa is a mid-ocean atoll that contains a large shallow lagoon and is surrounded by a fringing reef that rapidly slopes into the depths. Deep water (greater than 200 m) can be found less than 4-5 km from any point on the land and occupies 99.6% of the EEZ.

Kiribati has a long history of industrial offshore purse-seine, longline and pole-and-line tuna fishing by both foreign-flagged and locally flagged vessels. Although these activities have been concentrated in the surface layer of the ocean, many of these commercially important species and those they rely on partially dwell in the deep ocean. Additionally, Kiribati sponsors a deep-seabed mining exploration licence in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone (CCZ), granted by the International Seabed Authority (ISA), for Marawa Research and Exploration Ltd [ 18]. Kiribati is also home to the Phoenix Islands Protected Area (PIPA), the largest and deepest UNESCO World Heritage Site, which has been a focal point for deep-ocean exploration in recent years [ 19- 21]. As such, the need for increased deep-ocean literacy and capacity in Kiribati is timely and related to both industry and conservation initiatives. However, this is currently not possible as Kiribati does not have any deep-ocean scientific experts, deep-ocean scientific technology or national research vessels capable of venturing offshore to access the deep ocean.

The MDSMBY Kiribati case study was jointly undertaken by the Republic of Kiribati, Boston University, the University of Rhode Island, the PIPA Conservation Trust and the PIPA Implementation Office. However, the project was co-led by the PIPA Co-Chief Scientists, the Executive Director of the PIPA Conservation Trust and the PIPA Education and Outreach Officer in the PIPA Implementation Office. Consultations among these parties occurred prior to bringing technology to Tarawa to discuss the concept and basic logistics. Once in-country, several stakeholder meetings and training sessions were held to introduce deep-ocean ecosystems, demonstrate the technology and demonstrate analysis pathways. Decisions on where to deploy technology were made in real-time by the participants but were partly influenced by vessel availability, fuel resources, weather and participant interest in sites and locations. It became clear that, because this was the first-ever exploration of the deep ocean in the Gilbert Archipelago, the initial location was less important than the training and proof-of-concept demonstration with the technology. Transferring training and technology was the priority so that the Kiribati could then explore their waters, implementing their own study designs to meet their interests and objectives.

The MDSMBY Kiribati case study used innovative deep-ocean technology, the 'ReelCam', which was a custom-built camera system developed at the University of Rhode Island (B. Phillips) and deployed on a deep-ocean electric fishing reel [ 22] ( figure 3). It consisted of a GroupB pressure housing for a GoPro type HD camera, and an LED light (3500 lm) mounted on an aluminium frame with two commercial spherical trawl floats mounted on the top of the Euro Products frame. Approximately 10 kg of dive weights were hung approximately 1 m below the camera via a monofilament fishing line. The entire camera and weight assembly were attached to a Lindgren-Pitman electronic fishing reel loaded with a braided Tuf-Line fishing line. The camera package and weights were designed to be negatively buoyant and sink until the weights hit the seafloor. At the same time, the camera with its floats was positively buoyant and designed to hang suspended approximately a metre above the seafloor, thereby allowing a well-lit view of the benthos. Star-Oddi depth and temperature logger sensors added the potential for basic oceanographic metadata. This system provided relatively easy-to-assemble deep-submergence exploration tools, constructed from commercially available products with an entire cost approximating $10 000 US. OpenROV's Trident ROVs were also used as a shallow-water and mesophotic exploration tool, chosen for ease of use and freedom of platform (can be deployed from any platform).

The team conducted over a week of training (25 June to 2 July 2018), both in the classroom and in the field, for government fisheries officers, University of the South Pacific (USP) students, science communicators and outreach officers and multiple representatives from related government agencies (Ministry of Environment, Land and Agricultural Development (MELAD), Tourism, Fisheries). Training on use of the ocean-exploration technology was undertaken onshore and in the field ( figure 3). There was also a stakeholder consultation for individuals representing several arms of the Government of Kiribati (e.g. MELAD, Fisheries, Tourism, etc.), the police, several local villages, and USP Tarawa Campus. Stakeholder conversations were held to initiate discussions about the technology, the deep-ocean ecosystem, and how this project could help enable stakeholder goals. There was no prescribed question or hypothesis driving the consultation. Instead, open-ended stakeholder consultation facilitated two-way conversation and collaboration.

During training, the first successful deployments of the ReelCam were undertaken in true collaboration with in-country partners ( figure 3). The ReelCam successfully captured the first deep-ocean images in the Gilbert Archipelago between North and South Tarawa. These images showed benthic ctenophores at approximately 800 m depth, and were a proof of concept for the technology, platform and approach. The rationale for deployment was mainly to enable technology and training, and to demonstrate proof of concept. Once technology was transferred and training complete, stakeholders in-country could deploy the ReelCam or the Trident ROVs to achieve their own goals and interests. The Trident ROVs were used by the Ministry of Fisheries to conduct shallow coral surveys and exploration, and as a communications tool. Real-time viewing on a handheld tablet provided instant excitement and engagement, which was a powerful tool for participants. The Trident ROV's ease of use, which included deployment from many platforms such as bridges, causeways, small pangas (outboard fishing vessels) and repurposed public-sector boats such as police vessels, was a large contributor to its success. In particular, the Trident ROVs were an effective tool for helping participants to become comfortable with ROVs and higher-tech equipment and helping to visualize familiar (shallow) and novel (mesophotic) environments with the 100 m tether. To our knowledge, the mesophotic images and video captured by the Trident ROV were the first mesophotic data from the Gilbert Archipelago.

The opportunity to demonstrate and use these deep-ocean tools was key to facilitating communication about the deep ocean and the pilot study, as well as the identification of priority areas for investigation, with communities, villages, schools and the government in Kiribati. Outreach efforts included engagements with more than 2500 students from elementary through college-school level, as well as meetings with village elders, fishers and the highest levels of government ( figure 3). Additionally, this project gained coverage in multiple online blogs and articles, and a national radio interview.

There were, however, also challenges during the Kiribati case study, namely with technology. The ReelCam system lacked real-time feedback while submerged, making it difficult to determine when the system had reached the seafloor given there are strong currents around Kiribati and none of the available vessels had a sufficient depth-finder. Unfortunately, despite the clear interest in conducting this work by partners and workshop participants, the ReelCam was not used at all in the year following training, primarily because there was no funding for fuel for a vessel to go into deep water. The Trident ROV also had challenges in Kiribati, including difficulty facilitating software updates because of the limited internet. Additionally, the Trident ROV would be more successful as a science tool with additional sensors to enable measurements of depth and other oceanographic parameters such as temperature, O ₂ and salinity. Finally, the ReelCam instrumentation was lost at sea during the second training period, and COVID-19 impeded delivery of a replacement. However, interest in the technology and its use in Kiribati has been consistently communicated, which is an indication of the pilot project's success.

4. Exploring the deep ocean in Trinidad and Tobago

Trinidad and Tobago is a developing country, high-income economy by per capita GNI, and a SIDS. It is the most southerly island nation of the Caribbean archipelago and borders the South American mainland. The island of Trinidad holds most of the residential population (1.3 million people of a total 1.4 million) as well as the country's capital, Port of Spain. Trinidad and Tobago sits on an extensive continental shelf that stretches 80-100 km from Trinidad's east coast, a much greater distance than those observed within the EEZs of other Caribbean nations. Despite this, Trinidad and Tobago's deep ocean still occupies over 54 000 km ² (69.1%) of the EEZ, with depths ranging between 200 and 3500 m.

Trinidad and Tobago has large reserves of oil and natural gas, which has resulted in a prolific industry that has sustained the economy for decades and is now extending into deeper offshore areas, including those known to harbour deep-ocean methane seeps and corals within the EEZ [ 23, 24]. A small semi-industrial longline fishing fleet that targets highly migratory pelagic species operates in the deep ocean also ( http://www.fao.org/fishery/facp/TTO/en). The Government of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago has also developed a National Protected Areas Systems Plan, which includes five areas that encompass deep ocean [ 25]. As such, the need for increased deep-ocean literacy and capacity in Trinidad and Tobago is timely and related to both industry and conservation initiatives. This is currently not possible as Trinidad and Tobago does not have deep-ocean scientific technology or any national research vessels capable of venturing offshore to access the deep ocean; however there are in-country deep-ocean scientific experts.

The MDSMBY Trinidad and Tobago case study was jointly undertaken by the COAST Foundation, Inter-American Development Bank (IADB), MIT Media Lab, National Geographic Society (NGS), the National Institute of Higher Education, Research, Science and Technology (NIHERST), SpeSeas and The University of the West Indies, St Augustine. Local scientist D. Amon led the Trinidad and Tobago case study. The team conducted stakeholder consultations at The University of the West Indies with over 80 individuals representing several sections of the Government of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago (e.g. Ministry of Planning and Development, Environmental Management Authority), the Coast Guard, the oil and gas industry, local environmental non-governmental organizations (NGOs), the National Institute of Higher Education Research, Science and Technology, and other academic institutions (e.g. The University of the West Indies, University of Trinidad and Tobago). This opportunity facilitated two-way conversation and collaboration about the deep-ocean ecosystem (including the scale and relevance of it in the Caribbean, as well as fundamental characteristics of the environment and biology); the pilot project including the technology, key societal drivers for exploration and how this project could help enable stakeholder goals. From this, the key question was asked 'Where in Trinidad and Tobago's deep-sea backyard is of highest priority to explore and characterize?' which led to the identification of priority reasons for and areas of investigation (on maps of the EEZ) during the stakeholder consultation. These reasons included, for instance, understanding areas before deep-ocean oil and gas exploitation, exploring interesting bathymetric features to 'see what lives there', searching for shipwrecks, and using this exploration 'to get people excited about the ocean' and 'demystify the ocean and make it more accessible in a relatively safe way'.

The MDSMBY Trinidad and Tobago case study used an innovative Deep-Sea Drop Camera developed by National Geographic's Exploration Technology Lab (ExTech) ( figure 4). This is an untethered free-falling system capable of diving to 6000 m and staying submerged for more than a day [ 26]. An OpenROV Trident ROV and a Blue Robotics BlueROV2 ROV, both rated to 100 m depth, were also used as shallow-water and mesophotic exploration tools for their ease of use and freedom of platform.

One week of training (13-17 August 2018) was conducted with two scientists, three students, a science communicator and four marine engineers from Trinidad and Tobago. Additionally, two scientists participated from The University of the West Indies Mona Campus in Jamaica and one scientist from The University of the West Indies Cave Hill Campus in Barbados. Training on use of the ocean-exploration technology was undertaken onshore and in the field ( figure 4). Unfortunately, the training was impeded by the airline temporarily losing the Deep-Sea Drop Camera, leading to its late arrival, preventing the Trinidad and Tobago team from getting enough hands-on time with the equipment to feel fully comfortable during the training workshop. To counteract the lost hands-on training time during the training week, one of the students joined project partners during another expedition in Bermuda after the initial training period.

There were many challenges during the Trinidad and Tobago case study. There were several attempts during the year following training to undertake deployments with the Deep-Sea Drop Camera. Unfortunately, recurring technical issues with the Deep-Sea Drop Camera, which could not be resolved without the in-person assistance of an ExTech engineer, led to long periods of inactive use. This was further complicated by the need to mobilize ad hoc teams quickly given the reliance on opportunistic vessels within budget range capable of transiting the long distances to Trinidad and Tobago's deep ocean, especially as the government of Trinidad and Tobago does not have such research vessels. Although suitable vessels were sourced, vessel availability usually aligned with periods when the equipment was not working or key members of the Trinidad and Tobago team were abroad, preventing research trips from moving forward. Despite the clear interest in conducting this work, there were no successful Deep-Sea Drop Camera deployments during the project.

While the training and exploration goals fell short of what was co-developed, the Trinidad and Tobago team engaged over 250 students from elementary through high-school level about the deep ocean, its inhabitants, and its exploration. The Trident ROV was not used for science but was used to assist SpeSeas as a communication tool for participants to understand the power of this type of technology and exploration for marine science and stewardship. In particular, the Trident ROV was effective for helping students and other participants to become comfortable with ROVs, higher-tech equipment, and remote ocean exploration. Real-time viewing provided instant gratification, excitement and engagement. Additionally, there was island-wide coverage on national television, radio and newspapers, as well as on multiple online blogs and articles.

5. Lessons learned

There have been many recently published insights on the steps needed to achieve genuinely inclusive and equitable ocean scientific research and conservation, including capacity-building initiatives [ 10, 14- 17, 27- 30]. In the interest of propelling the ocean-science community at large to critically assess past capacity-building projects and improve others in the present and future, we have weighed the MDSMBY pilot process and outcomes against our initial goals (reducing dependency on external expertise and promoting local research efforts in Kiribati and Trinidad and Tobago). Details on all components are articulated below and in table 2.

MDSMBY goals

Kiribati process and outcomes

Trinidad and Tobago process and outcomes

collaborate equitably while working within the cultural norms and customs of each country and according to the needs, constraints, or interests of in-country partners

challenges:

challenges:

build lasting capacity evidenced by country nationals (ideally a scientist, student and communicator) exploring the ocean and then communicating the findings

challenges:

- long-term support, financial, technical, educational, or otherwise, was not provided as this was only a pilot study

- timeline chosen was unrealistic

- metrics were not chosen to monitor and ensure effectiveness of capacity building

- not enough field training was provided

- in Trinidad, deep ocean is >100 km from the major port, requiring specific vessels that were not easily available

- no deep-ocean data were collected to enable training on species identification and data analysis, or to contextualize the implications of discoveries

enable technology transfer via access to new, innovative, (comparatively) low-cost deep-ocean technology that can be used from any platform

challenges:

- technology required repairs on several occasions, which could not be undertaken by in-country participants given complexity; this combined with other factors inhibited the successful use of the DropCam

- repairs and replacement parts could not be sourced in-country, so loss or damage necessitated long wait-times for replacement or repair

- technology was on loan; it did not remain in-country permanently, preventing use beyond the scope of the project

- locating locally-available vessels was challenging given proximity to the deep ocean

- not enough training in use of technology and working offshore was provided

- use of the technology was not built into existing infrastructure or institutions

engage a broad group of stakeholders in deep-sea exploration and science

Ultimately, this pilot study consisted of many elements that could be used in a longer-term project; however, they will require tailored and co-designed amendments to achieve the goals and meet the needs of each specific country (tables 2 and 3). Successful elements of both the Kiribati and Trinidad and Tobago case studies included partnership and collaboration between several local, regional and international organizations to co-develop outputs, and execute and co-lead the projects. Both teams inherently worked within the culture of the country and spoke to country-specific priorities. For the latter, stakeholder consultations were also undertaken to identify the needs, constraints and interests of the national community. However, for longer-term endeavours, more in-depth discussion and co-development to identify training priorities as well as the necessary support to enable these should take place between all partners. Additionally, culturally appropriate metrics (beyond the number of participants) should be chosen to monitor and ensure effectiveness of capacity building [ 10].

leadership and management

respect and recognition

technology

lasting capacity

- priorities for building lasting capacity should be co-developed with in-country partners

- in line with long-term priority outcomes, metrics should be chosen to monitor and ensure effectiveness of capacity building

- commitments should be secured for long-term, multi-year support, financial or otherwise

- realistic timelines should be chosen, recognizing that building lasting capacity requires multiple years

Both case studies conducted classroom and field training, with some of the technology continuing to be used once training was complete. However, more active operationalization was hampered by inadequate financial support (e.g. funding/compensation) for most individuals and organizations that were executing the project, both in-country and abroad. Although this was designed to be a short-term pilot study, it was ultimately unrealistic to achieve the goals within a year.

The technology was comparatively low-cost. For context, this cost is relatively inexpensive compared with the majority of deep-ocean assets, which often cost millions of dollars to build and deploy. However, we recognize that $10 000 US may still be unaffordable for many. Ample time for training should also be included. In Kiribati, there was a revolving list of personnel during training, which allowed a wider group of people to be partially trained, but also created a challenge for reinforcing knowledge. If the technology required repair or replacement, this could not be undertaken without the intervention of foreign partners owing to lack of materials and supplies on-island. Also, the lost ReelCam has still not been replaced owing to travel restrictions associated with the COVID-19 pandemic, whereas in Trinidad and Tobago, repair was not possible without National Geographic ExTech engineers, partly inhibiting its successful use. However, the ReelCam is easily repaired if spare parts are available, which is a benefit to its use. In terms of longevity and enabling future use, both the ReelCam and multiple OpenROV Tridents were permanently gifted to Kiribati, whereas the DropCam was on loan to Trinidad and Tobago for only 1 year, hindering further work. Access to vessels capable of travelling approximately 100 km was challenging in Trinidad and Tobago, especially given equipment faults, personnel travel delays and equipment return deadlines, which provided a stark difference to Kiribati, where the deep ocean was much closer but vessels with adequate batteries to power the ReelCam were less common.

The example of vessel access stresses the importance of avoiding generalizations during planning, and instead coming up with tailored and co-designed solutions. Other areas for future improvement include ensuring that the use of given or loaned technology be built into existing infrastructure, institutions and jobs, so activities are easier to undertake and do not provide an added burden above and beyond existing obligations. In addition, participants did not receive any formal certificate or degree, so the utility of the training for career advancement is limited to the knowledge gained and the participation line on their curriculum vitae (CVs).

The outreach components in both countries were the most successful given the scale and breadth of activities. Through engagement with numerous stakeholder sectors, from government officials to elementary school children, priorities for the engagement of stakeholders were co-developed with in-country partners and in line with resources available. Additionally, generating awareness and interest in deep-ocean exploration, science and stewardship was certainly accomplished. In addition, these efforts have helped to inspire further deep-ocean work led by in-country individuals. Unfortunately, because the technology saw limited use in both countries, there were insufficient data generated. As such, communication of the findings was challenging or non-existent.

6. Recommendations

With our rapidly changing climate and increasing threats to the deep ocean, we need scientifically informed decisions, which require several orders of magnitude more scientific capacity to successfully undertake exploration and research globally. Here, we build on the experiences of MDSMBY within Kiribati and Trinidad and Tobago and outline recommendations for undertaking projects aimed at growing deep-ocean capacity ( table 3). These recommendations span several categories, including leadership and management of the project, respect and recognition of cultural processes and priorities, technological challenges and advantages, training goals, outreach efforts, and specific ideas to build lasting capacity and to try to combat the disparities in deep-ocean capacities between countries and regions.

Tailored and co-designed multi-pronged approaches, rather than any single measure, are needed to successfully build lasting capacity, although these require more time, effort and funding [ 16]. Additionally, one-time activities are no substitute for long-term partnerships. Further, needs and goals must be within the remit of national priority and tied to value addition to the objectives. The timeline of most grants is incompatible with the long timescales needed to successfully build lasting capacity, necessitating sustained funding to achieve results, and thus collaboration with funding organizations is needed to reimagine the types and timescales of funding currently administered. Public funding can assist with facilitating this but will need to tailor support for each country based on the above-mentioned factors, the number of people needed to sufficiently build lasting capacity in-country, and the cost of personnel, fuel, ships, travel etc. per country.

For deep-ocean capacity-building projects to succeed, it is also clear that technology assets and training resources are necessary. However, equally necessary is the adequate provisioning of human and logistical resources. The history of volunteerism that is so common in developed-world environmental fields hampers participation of the already underrepresented. Providing reasonable salary support (in line with country norms) or embedding projects within existing workflow for full-time government employees, is necessary to catalyse and sustain local engagement. In addition, providing support for smaller resources, such as boat fuel, internet access and other incidentals, is also necessary and critical to mission success (detailed in tables 2 and 3), since in-country collaborators may not have the flexible resources needed to procure sustained logistic support.

Creating long-term project sustainability will likely be easier if the project can be embedded into an existing programme, project or entity. Tying the success of a new deep-ocean project together with the deliverables of another project helps to generate and maintain momentum, and/or create accountability over the long term. If the project falls within the bounds of a stated goal of a government (e.g. regional and national conservation and sustainable-use goals related to CBD post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework), NGO, individual or other organization or entity, that person/group becomes a natural partner invested in the project, and can help to create capacity, oversight, support-and eventually, independence-toward these types of projects, in the long term. If this cannot be achieved, then a single project should at least be well-resourced enough to stand alone and be sustained, with a clearly defined start and end date, goals, methods and deliverables determined by the in-country entity to achieve their own priorities and goals.

While the best-laid plans are always subject, and indeed likely, to change, it is nonetheless critical to plan as well in advance as possible. Both pilot studies suffered from technology and equipment timing issues, and/or from the inability to source replacement equipment or parts in-country. Given the unavoidable challenges associated with international travel (and this is especially relevant in COVID-19 times), providing ample time and backup for equipment arrival and repair (if necessary) is critical to project success. Similarly, providing ample time for training and deployment is key, as repeated deployments generate more familiarity and comfort with the technology and equipment, which will likely lead to more use of the technology post-training. More in-field contact time also increases opportunities for stochastic equipment failure and subsequent repair, providing more hands-on opportunities to troubleshoot emerging issues together, again leading to increased familiarity and comfort with the technology.

Finally, though workshops and projects can develop short-term capacity successfully, lasting capacity and independence is better achieved if grounded with experience and/or traditional education, which can also be achieved through long-term and inclusive partnerships [ 31]. This raises the need for a global push towards appropriate metrics for capacity building [ 10]. Most deep-ocean scientists have university education and training (including postgraduate), as well as postdoctoral training and in-the-field experience. This level of training and experience cannot be achieved through any workshop or short-term project. Allocating resources for scholarships and experiential long-term training opportunities, including mentorships, is critical to enable lasting capacity that can meet evolving needs and priorities for the country, and keep up with new and emerging technologies, hypotheses, ideas and data that are rapidly advancing in deep-ocean exploration and research.

Data accessibility

This article has no additional data.

Authors' contributions

D.J.A.: conceptualization, formal analysis, funding acquisition, investigation, methodology, project administration, resources, writing-original draft, writing-review and editing; R.D.R.: conceptualization, formal analysis, funding acquisition, investigation, methodology, project administration, resources, writing-original draft, writing-review and editing; B.R.C.K.: conceptualization, formal analysis, funding acquisition, investigation, methodology, project administration, resources, writing-original draft, writing-review and editing; G.A.: formal analysis, funding acquisition, investigation, methodology, writing-review and editing; R.A.: conceptualization, formal analysis, funding acquisition, investigation, methodology, writing-review and editing; E.A.: formal analysis, investigation, methodology, writing-review and editing; T.E.: formal analysis, investigation, methodology, writing-review and editing; M.C.-F.: formal analysis, investigation, methodology, writing-review and editing; K.M.G.: conceptualization, formal analysis, funding acquisition, methodology, writing-review and editing; J.G.: formal analysis, investigation, methodology, resources, writing-review and editing; L.-A.H.: formal analysis, investigation, methodology, writing-review and editing; A.H.: formal analysis, investigation, methodology, writing-review and editing; R.K.A.: formal analysis, investigation, methodology, writing-review and editing; S.L.: formal analysis, investigation, methodology, resources, writing-review and editing; K.L.: formal analysis, investigation, methodology, resources, writing-review and editing; H.L.: formal analysis, investigation, methodology, writing-review and editing; S.M.: formal analysis, investigation, methodology, resources, writing-review and editing; N.M.: formal analysis, investigation, methodology, writing-review and editing; B.P.: conceptualization, formal analysis, funding acquisition, investigation, methodology, resources, writing-review and editing; B.R.: formal analysis, investigation, methodology, writing-review and editing; S.-A.S.: formal analysis, investigation, methodology, writing-review and editing; T.T.: formal analysis, investigation, methodology, writing-review and editing; A.Te.: formal analysis, investigation, methodology, writing-review and editing; A.Tu.: conceptualization, formal analysis, funding acquisition, investigation, methodology, resources, writing-review and editing; H.V.: formal analysis, investigation, methodology, writing-review and editing; K.W.: formal analysis, investigation, methodology, writing-review and editing; K.L.C.B.: conceptualization, formal analysis, funding acquisition, investigation, methodology, project administration, resources, writing-original draft, writing-review and editing.

All authors gave final approval for publication and agreed to be held accountable for the work performed herein.

Conflict of interest declaration

We declare we have no competing interests.

Funding

This work was supported by the National Geographic Society (NGSBU-PFA-2018-03) and the Inter-American Development Bank. D.J.A. was supported by the European Union's Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Program under Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement no. 747946.

Acknowledgements

All authors would like to acknowledge the individuals who lent their time and expertise towards this process, including Keith VanGraafeiland for his assistance with figure 1.

Footnotes

One contribution of 12 to a theme issue ' Nurturing resilient marine ecosystems '.

‡ Present address: Ministry of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries, 35 Cipriani Boulevard, Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago.

5.

United Nations Environment Programme Finance Initiative. 2021 Turning the tide: how to finance a sustainable ocean recovery-a practical guide for financial institutions. Geneva, Switzerland: United Nations. Google Scholar

11.

Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission of UNESCO. 2020 Global Ocean Science Report 2020: charting capacity for ocean sustainability. Paris, France: UNESCO. Google Scholar

13.

Amon DJ, Blasiak R (eds). 2021 Transformational opportunities for mineral & genetic resources. Tetiaroa, French Polynesia: Blue Climate Initiative, Tetiaroa Society. ( doi:10.5281/zenodo.4549893) Google Scholar

16.

Harden-Davies Het al. . 2022How can a new UN ocean treaty change the course of capacity building? Aquat. Conserv. Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. ( doi:10.1002/aqc.3796)

18.

International Seabed Authority. 2021 Exploration contracts. Kingston, Jamaica: International Seabed Authority. See https://www.isa.org.jm/exploration-contracts. Google Scholar

19.

Demopoulos AW, Auscavitch S, Sowers D, Pawlenko N, Kennedy BRC. 2018 Discovering the deep: exploring remote Pacific marine protected areas. 31, 76-77. Oceanography

23.

Trinidad and Tobago Ministry of Energy and Energy Industries. 2017 Oil and gas industry overview. Google Scholar

24.

Amon DJ, Gobin J, Van Dover CL, Levin LA, Marsh L, Raineault NA. 2017 Characterisation of methane-seep communities in a deep-sea area designated for oil and natural gas exploitation off Trinidad and Tobago. Front. Mar. Sci.

25.

Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations. 2018 National Protected Area Systems Plan for Trinidad and Tobago, pp. 1-187. Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago: Government of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago. Google Scholar

26.

Turchik AJ, Berkenpas EJ, Henning BS, Shepard CM. 2015 The Deep Ocean Dropcam: a highly deployable benthic survey tool. In New York, NY: OCEANS 2015 - MTS/IEEE, Washington, DC, 19-22 October 2015, pp. 1-8. IEEE. ( doi:10.23919/OCEANS.2015.7401978) Google Scholar

¶ Present address: Institute of Marine Affairs, Chaguaramas, Trinidad and Tobago.

References

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
My Deep Sea, My Backyard: a pilot study to build capacity for global deep-ocean exploration and research | Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Humankind is at a critical juncture for stewarding Earth's ocean. Negotiations are close to heralding a commitment toward protecting 30% of the ocean by 2030 at the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in 2022, and the UN Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development has just begun [ 1].

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Code Blue, IUCNWeb/Cat Halloway, IUCNWeb/Ameer Addulla, Joann94024, Loren Mooney, PhoenixIslands, Roderick Eime and New England Aquarium/Keith Ellenbogen

# data[].attributes.body
UNESCO’s World Heritage Marine Programme invites you join the movement to protect our ocean for future generations. The My Ocean Pledge was started by children living in UNESCO World Heritage Marine Sites who have pledged to protect these ocean treasures. Now they are calling upon the leaders of the world - and you - to protect the ocean from negative human impacts and preserve it for all of us to use and enjoy in the future.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Rosita #MyOceanPledge Phoenix Islands Protected Area World Heritage marine site

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Photo from Top10HQ - list of top 10 Largest Protected Areas accoring to the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) 

# data[].attributes.body
Amon, D.J. et. al., 2022, My Deap Sea, My Backyard: a pilot study to build capacity for global deep-ocean exploration and research, The Royal Society Publishing, https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2021.0121

IUCN Conservation Outlook Assessment, 2017, Phoenix Islands Protected Area, https://worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org/explore-sites/wdpaid/555512002

Witkin, T. et. al., 2016, Global Fishing Watch reveals a fisheries management success in the Phoenix Islands, Oceana Reports.

Tong, A., 2014, Statement by H.E. President Anote Tong, 69th UN General Assembly, New York.

Rotjan, R.D. et. al., 2014, Establishment, Management, and Maintenance of the Phoenix Islands Protected Area, Advances in Marine Biology: Large Marine Managed Areas, Elsevier, Oxford, UK.

Republic of Kiribati, 2009, Phoenix Islands Protected Area, Kiribati – Nomination for a World Heritage Site, Ministry of Environment Lands and Agricultural Development, Republic of Kiribati.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Fig. 1: Changes in land area of Hunga Tonga before and after the eruption of January 2022. | Nature

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Fig. 1: Changes in land area of Hunga Tonga before and after the eruption. | Nature

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
a–c, Satellite imagery from before the recent active phase on 6 November 2020 (a), during the active phase but before the eruption on 6 January 2022 (b) and on 17 January 2022 after the eruption (c). Shoreline boundaries are denoted by blue (a), red (b) and yellow (c) dashed lines. The location of t…

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Smithsonian Institution | Global Volcanism Program

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Global Volcanism Program | Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha’apai

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The small andesitic islands of Hunga Tonga and Hunga Ha’apai are part of the western and northern remnants of the rim (~6 km diameter) of a largely submarine caldera located about 30 km SSE of Falcon Island. The topmost sequence of welded and unwelded ignimbrite units from a caldera-forming eruption…

# data[].attributes.body
Over 80,000 people were affected by the January (2022) eruption of Hunga Tonga - Hunga Ha'apai, pulling coordinated humanitarian efforts from all over the world to assist the Tonga National Emergency Management Office (NEMO) assess damages and provide aid to the victims. Thousands of miles to the west of Tonga, Peru also felt the effects of the eruption and the subsequent tsunami when oil tanker off its coast spilled hundreds of thousands of oil, causing dire consequences to natural reserves.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In total, about 84,000 people, more than 80 per cent of the population of the South Pacific Kingdom, have been affected by the disaster.
Besides the three fatalities reported earlier in the week, no further deaths have been confirmed.
In an update released on Thursday, OCHA confirms that the whole economically vital agricultural sector, including crops, livestock and fisheries, have suffered substantially.

The agency is particularly concerned with the effect of ashfall on crops along with saltwater intrusion, and the potential of acid rain.

Around 60 to 70 per cent of livestock-rearing households have seen their animals perish, grazing land damaged, or water supplies contaminated.

Fisheries operating across the more than 170 islands that make up the archipelago, have also been significantly affected and the Government has advised against fishing amidst the ongoing contamination, or consuming fish.

Assessment

Initial Damage Assessments (IDAs) are underway on the main island, Tongatapu, as well as on islands of the Ha'apai group, by Tonga's National Emergency Management Office (NEMO) and partners.

Most parts of the country, including remote and isolated islands, have also been visited by assessment teams, said OCHA.

So far, five communities in Tongatapu have been identified as having suffered significant damage to households in coastal areas. Around 31 houses are completely damaged, 72 severely, 46 moderately, and 23 suffered minor damage.

According to OCHA, there are still serious concerns about access to safe water and the quality of groundwater.

The capital's water supply is safe to drink but most people are now relying on bottled water. Authorities have advised residents against drinking rainwater, until more information is available.

Response ongoing

Local and international partners are working hard to address these issues, shipping water, purification units and desalination equipment.

Another main issue going forward, according to OCHA, is monitoring the risk of infectious diseases.

There are also reports of a fuel shortage, but petrol supplies are coming as part of regular shipment and with some additional Australian Government support.

As regards to public health concerns, the hospital and the national pharmacy in the capital are intact and fully functioning. There are some reports, OCHA noted, of damage to some health centres in Tongatapu, 'Eua and Ha'apai.

Communications update

In terms of international connectivity, it is still limited, but the situation is gradually improving, the humanitarian coordination agency said.

Among other initiatives, a ship is on its way to fix the badly damaged underwater communication cable - the country's sole fixed link to the outside world - but that work might take several weeks to be completed. Communication with outer islands remains very limited.

Through the Emergency Telecommunications Cluster, the World Food Programme ( WFP) is helping the process of re-establishing communications, particularly telephone and internet services.

As explained to UN News, the agency is also supporting the food security and logistics clusters, working on assessing needs, priorities and other logistics aspects of the humanitarian response.

WFP has also activated its  Donate Responsibly  campaign to raise awareness on how people can donate in a responsible manner.

Airports open

After being closed for several days due to ash on the runway, the debris at Fua'amotu International Airport has reportedly been cleared thanks to the tireless efforts of Tongan authorities, and it is now operational.

Relief flights from New Zealand and Australia arrived on Thursday, and a domestic flight departed for Ha'apai, confirming that the airport there was also operational.

Oil spill in Peru

The effects of the eruption and tsunami have also been felt across the Pacific, in Peru, where the UN country team is following the impacts of a tragic oil spill that resulted from the disaster, thousands of miles to the west.

According to authorities, the spill is impacting two natural reserves in the South American country, affecting livelihoods as well as life under and above water.

The UN's Resident Coordinator, Igor Garafulic, met with authorities on Thursday morning and committed the full UN team's support to address the ecological disaster.
The volcanic eruption was the largest recorded in thirty years.
A huge, 20 km high mushroom cloud of smoke and ash was followed by a tsunami, and the eruption was heard as far away as Australia and New Zealand.

Waves as high as 1.2 metres hit the capital, Nuku'alofa, whose inhabitants fled to high ground, leaving behinds flooded houses, whilst rocks and ash rained from the sky.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
80 per cent of Tonga population impacted by eruption and tsunami

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In total, about 84,000 people, more than 80 per cent of the population of the South Pacific Kingdom, have been affected by the disaster. Besides the three fatalities reported earlier in the week, no further deaths have been confirmed.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Monitoring and Modeling the Rapid Evolution of Earth's Newest Volcanic Island: Hunga Tonga Hunga Ha'apai

# data[].attributes.body
Before the massive eruption of January, 2022, scientists were already studying Hunga Tonga Hunga Ha'apai (HTHH) since early 2015. The newly formed volcanic island was expected to erode away within months, however, observations using high-resolution satellite imaging and measuring volumetric erosion in this 36-month study estimated a lifetime of 19-42 years.

Also, check out how a team of scientists and students combined fieldwork in anthropology, oceanography, and physical volcanology to study micro- and macro-scale dynamics of this classical surtseyan eruption site in a collaborative partnership between the Kingdom of Tonga, Sea Education Association (SEA), and the United States National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to run expeditions to HTHH to calibrate satellite observations via field, ship, and drone-based measurements. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0377027320301268

# data[].attributes.body
“I felt sad that the sea overflowed. While it was happening, I was scared, and I am still sad, but it is slowly getting better.”
– Ana, 9

# data[].attributes.body
NASA Earth Observatory images by Jesse Allen, using Landsat data from the U.S. Geological Survey. Story by Ellen Gray, with Mike Carlowicz.

# data[].attributes.body
Global Volcanism Program, 2013, Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha'apai (243040) in Volcanoes of the World, v. 4.11.2 (02 Sep 2022). Venzke, E (ed.), Smithsonian Institution. Downloaded 20 Sep 2022 (https://volcano.si.edu/volcano.cfm?vn=243040). https://doi.org/10.5479/si.GVP.VOTW4-2013

Bennis, KL and Venzke, E, 2022, Report on Hunga Tonga – Hunga Ha’apai (Tonga) Global Volcanism Program, Bulletin of the Global Volcanism Network, 47:3, Smithsonian Institution.

Scarfo, M., 2022, “I cried as I was running.” Hear from children in the aftermath of the Tonga volcanic eruption. UNICEF, https://www.unicef.org/pacificislands/stories/i-cried-i-was-running

Perkins, S., 2022, The Tonga eruption may have spawned a tsunami as tall as the Statue of Liberty, ScienceNews, https://www.sciencenews.org/article/tonga-volcano-eruption-tsunami-shock-wave

Shotunde S., 2022, UN coordinator in Tonga: ‘Resources on the ground are not enough’, United Nations Humanitarian Aid, https://news.un.org/en/story/2022/01/1110162

Hite, E.B. et. al., 2020, Exploring the human-nature dynamics of Hunga Tonga Hunga Ha’apai, Earth’s newest landmass, Journal of Volcanology and Geotherman Research, ScienceDirect, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0377027320301268

Garvin, J.B. et al., 2018, Monitoring and Modeling the Rapid Evolution of Earth’s Newest Volcanic Island: Hunga Tonga Hunga Ha’apai (Tonga) Using High Spatial Resolution Satellite Observations, American Geophysical Union Publications, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL076621

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Library of Congress does not own rights to material in its collections. Therefore, it does not license or charge permission fees for use of such material and cannot grant or deny permission to publish or otherwise distribute the material.

Ultimately, it is the researcher's obligation to assess copyright or other use restrictions and obtain permission from third parties when necessary before publishing or otherwise distributing materials found in the Library's collections.

For information about reproducing, publishing, and citing material from this collection, as well as access to the original items, see: Historic American Buildings Survey/Historic American Engineering Record/Historic American Landscape Survey (HABS/HAER/HALS) Collection - Rights and Restrictions Information

No known restrictions on images made by the U.S. Government; images copied from other sources may be restricted. Rights Advisory:https://www.loc.gov/rr/print/res/114_habs.html

Obtaining Copies

If an image is displaying, you can download it yourself. (Some images display only as thumbnails outside the Library of Congress because of rights considerations, but you have access to larger size images on site.)

Alternatively, you can purchase copies of various types through Library of Congress Duplication Services.

1. If a digital image is displaying: The qualities of the digital image partially depend on whether it was made from the original or an intermediate such as a copy negative or transparency. If the Reproduction Number field above includes a reproduction number that starts with LC-DIG..., then there is a digital image that was made directly from the original and is of sufficient resolution for most publication purposes.

2. If there is information listed in the Reproduction Number field above: You can use the reproduction number to purchase a copy from Duplication Services. It will be made from the source listed in the parentheses after the number.
If only black-and-white ("b&w") sources are listed and you desire a copy showing color or tint (assuming the original has any), you can generally purchase a quality copy of the original in color by citing the Call Number listed above and including the catalog record ("About This Item") with your request.

3. If there is no information listed in the Reproduction Number field above: You can generally purchase a quality copy through Duplication Services. Cite the Call Number listed above and include the catalog record ("About This Item") with your request.

Price lists, contact information, and order forms are available on the Duplication Services Web site.

Access to Originals

Please use the following steps to determine whether you need to fill out a call slip in the Prints and Photographs Reading Room to view the original item(s). In some cases, a surrogate (substitute image) is available, often in the form of a digital image, a copy print, or microfilm.

1. Is the item digitized? (A thumbnail (small) image will be visible on the left.)

Yes, the item is digitized. Please use the digital image in preference to requesting the original. All images can be viewed at a large size when you are in any reading room at the Library of Congress. In some cases, only thumbnail (small) images are available when you are outside the Library of Congress because the item is rights restricted or has not been evaluated for rights restrictions.
As a preservation measure, we generally do not serve an original item when a digital image is available. If you have a compelling reason to see the original, consult with a reference librarian. (Sometimes, the original is simply too fragile to serve. For example, glass and film photographic negatives are particularly subject to damage. They are also easier to see online where they are presented as positive images.)

No, the item is not digitized. Please go to #2.

2. Do the Access Advisory or Call Number fields above indicate that a non-digital surrogate exists, such as microfilm or copy prints?

Yes, another surrogate exists. Reference staff can direct you to this surrogate.

No, another surrogate does not exist. Please go to #3.

3. If you do not see a thumbnail image or a reference to another surrogate, please fill out a call slip in the Prints and Photographs Reading Room. In many cases, the originals can be served in a few minutes. Other materials require appointments for later the same day or in the future. Reference staff can advise you in both how to fill out a call slip and when the item can be served.

To contact Reference staff in the Prints and Photographs Reading Room, please use our Ask A Librarian service or call the reading room between 8:30 and 5:00 at 202-707-6394, and Press 3.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Pu'ukohola Heiau National Historic Site, 623601 Kawaihae Road, Kawaihae, Hawaii County, HI

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Library of Congress does not own rights to material in its collections. Therefore, it does not license or charge permission fees for use of such material and cannot grant or deny permission to publish or otherwise distribute the material.

# data[].attributes.body
Built by the hands of King Kamehameha the Great in honor of his family war god Kūkā'ilimoku (Kū) before he united the Hawai'ian Islands under one kingdom.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Temple on the Hill of the Whale

The stone heiau at Pu'ukoholā is one of the last major sacred structures built in Hawai'i before outside influences altered traditional life permanently. Constructed in 1790-91 by Kamehameha I, this heiau, or temple, played a crucial role in the ruler's ascendancy. By 1790, Kamehameha, whom many believed destined to rule all of the Hawaiian islands, had invaded and conquered Maui, Lāna'i, and Moloka'i. Yet he was not able to lay full claim to his home island of Hawai'i because of opposition from his chief rival and cousin, Keōua Kūahu'ula. While on Moloka'i, Kamehameha learned that Keōua was invading his territory. Kamehameha sent his aunt to seek direction from the prophet Kāpoūkahi, who told her that Kamehameha would conquer all the islands if he built a large heiau dedicated to his family war god Kūkā'ilimoku (Kū) atop Pu'ukoholā—Whale Hill—at Kawaihae.

Kamehameha set to work immediately. According to the prophecy, the builders had to follow rigid guidelines in order to please Kū the war god. To ensure perfection, the prophet Kāpoūkahi served as the royal architect. Thousands of men camped out on the hills for nearly a year to work on the massive structure. Because the heiau had to be constructed of water-worn lava rocks, it is believed that rocks came from the seaside valley of Pololū. Workers formed a human chain at least 20 miles long and transported the rocks hand to hand to the top of Pu'ukoholā. Kamehameha himself labored with the others. When news of the war temple reached the rival chiefs, they decided they must attack while Kamehameha and his warriors were occupied. At the least, the rivals would interfere with the ritually specified construction process, and Kū would be displeased. At best, the invasion would eliminate Kamehameha and the threat he posed to his rivals. The chiefs of Maui, Lāna'i, and Moloka'i reconquered their islands and, joined by the chiefs of Kaua'i and O'ahu, sailed to attack Kamehameha. Kamehameha counterattacked, routed the invaders, and resumed work.

In the summer of 1791 the heiau was finished. Kamehameha invited his cousin Keōua Kūahu'ula to the dedication ceremonies. Perhaps awed by the power of the heiau and its god, perhaps resigned to the ascendancy of his cousin, Keōua Kūahu'ula came willingly to what would be his doom. When he arrived there was a scuffle and, whether Kamehameha intended it or not, Keōua and almost all of his companions were slain. The body of Keōua was carried to the heiau and offered as the principal sacrifice to Kū.

The death of Keōua Kūahu'ula ended all opposition on the island of Hawai'i, and the prophecy began to come true. By 1810, through conquest and treaties, Kamehameha the Great, builder of Pu'ukoholā Heiau, was the revered king of all the Hawaiian Islands.

Pu'ukoholā Heiau measures 224 by 100 feet with 16-to 20-foot-high walls on the landward side and on the ends. Three long, narrow terraced steps cross the side that faces the sea, opening the interior to view from canoes floating offshore and, presumably, intimidating any attackers. At the time the temple was in use, there were thatched houses and an altar for the ruling chief and his priests. Wooden images of Hawaiian gods stood on the platform and terraces. After Kamehameha I died in 1819, his son abolished the religious traditions of the past. Most temples, including Pu'ukoholā Heiau, were abandoned. Only heiau that served as mausoleums were maintained.

The Island Kingdom of Kamehameha

From childhood, Kamehameha seemed destined for greatness. With the appearance of a bright, white-tailed star (possibly Halley's Comet) in 1758 Hawaiian seers predicted the emergence of a great leader. Kamehameha, "The Lonely One," was born around that time in the Kohala district on the northwestern tip of the island of Hawai'i.

Son of a high chief and a princess, Kamehameha began training as a child to join the ranks of nā ali'i koa, the chiefly warriors. By young adulthood he was tall and muscular—every bit the powerful warrior his family had expected. In 1782 at the death of his uncle, Kalani'opu'u, who ruled the island of Hawai'i, Kamehameha inherited land on the northern part of the island and was given custody of his family's war god, Kūkā'ilimoku. As he gained power, he intended to one day rule all of the Hawaiian Islands.

Unification, in his view, would bring peace to the continually warring chiefdoms throughout the islands. His rival for control of his home island was his cousin Keōua Kūahu'ula, with whom he battled indecisively in the 1780s. In 1790 Kamehameha successfully invaded Maui, Lāna'i, and Moloka'i with the aid of John Young and Isaac Davis, stranded British sailors who became his close advisors. The next year he returned to Hawai'i and defended his lands against the chiefs of O'ahu and Kaua'i in a naval battle off the coast near the Waipi'o Valley. The island of Hawai'i finally came under his full control when his cousin Keōua was slain on the beach below Pu'ukoholā Heiau.

In 1794 Kamehameha reconquered Maui, Lāna'i, and Moloka'i. Victory in a bloody battle on O'ahu ended opposition there in 1795. Fifteen years later, peaceful negotiations finally brought him Ceremony at Pu'ukoholā Heiau Kaua'i. By 1810 Kamehameha had established his island kingdom.

Kamehameha appointed governors to administer each island. He ruled according to Hawaiian tradition but outlawed some of the more severe practices such as human sacrifices. With John Young as his trading agent, he parlayed the sandalwood trade into great wealth for himself and his people. Kamehameha remained king of the islands until his death in 1819. The Hawaiian monarchy he founded lasted until 1893.

The Chiefly Warriors of Hawaii

Hawaiian chiefs attained ruling status by heredity but were often required to defend their territory by force. During his rise to power, Kamehameha I had four main battle chiefs from his home island in addition to his foreign advisors John Young and Isaac Davis. These chiefs led armies composed of nā ali'i koa and nā koa.

Nā ali'i koa were a highly trained, organized, and disciplined force with centuries of tradition behind them. These elite warriors were sons of varying degrees of ali'i (chiefs) and were trained by personal tutors to increase their battle skills and proficiency. Kamehameha himself was trained from age seven or eight, not surprising for a child of such promise—and whose family deity was the war god Kūkā'ilimoku.

Because of their high status, nā ali'i koa did not train with the maka'āinana (commoners), who were taken away from the land and their tasks only in time of war to serve in the ranks of nā koa. Organized military training was a luxury afforded to a select few, and for most young men, duty meant tending to farming, fishing, and other daily needs. At the call of the kālaimoku (a rank equivalent to prime minister), nā koa rose from all classes and from all regions of the islands except from the kauwā, society's outcast class. Kauwā could not mingle even with commoners; they were sacrificed in the heiau when no lawbreakers or war prisoners were available.

The war god Kū depicted in the form of a feathered deity with dogs' teeth and mother-of-pearl eyes. A double-hulled canoe, with an English swivel gun mounted at the bow, was a formidable war vessel. These crafts were based on traditional Polynesian designs dating back several centuries. The boat's two hulls were individually constructed of wood, then connected with crossbeams. The heaviest and strongest crossbeam supported the full weight of the mast and sail. Sails were made of woven pandanus leaves. This vessel could carry up to 35 warriors.

Weapons of war: Pāhoa (dagger) made from hardwood, nearly 17 inches long; ma'a (sling) made from braided fiber with a spindle-shaped stone; wooden pāhoa with sharks' teeth bound to its edges; niho 'oki (curved wooden knife) with single shark's-tooth blade. Warriors would wield a wooden ku'ia (fighting quarter staff), about six feet long with points on either end. A warrior's club, or newa, has a carved stone head lashed to its wooden base with fiber cord.

Like high chiefs, warriors usually had body tattoos. Patterns signified the wearer's family ties, loyalty to a particular chief, and 'aumakua (family guardian spirit). Warriors usually wore headgear indicating military rank and social status, along with providing protection.

As part of their training, to maintain constant readiness for attack or defense, nā ali'i koa routinely fought mock engagements called kaua kio. An impressive showing in one of these fights would bring a youth to the attention of his superiors and even to the chiefs. In 1793 Kamehameha himself put on a demonstration where he dodged six spears hurled toward him. Though blunted spears were usually used in these mock encounters, even the most accomplished warriors were sometimes killed.

Exploring Pu'ukoholā Heiau
General Information

(click for larger map)

Getting to the Park The park is on the island of Hawaii, one mile south of Kawaihae off HI 270. The island is served by Kona and Hilo international airports. Waimea-Kohala Airport, 12 miles east of the park, has commuter flights.

For a Safe Visit Federal laws protect all natural and cultural features in the park. The temples are fragile and are sacred to native Hawaiians. They are closed to the public; you can view them from below. * Stay on designated trails. Carry ample drinking water; wear proper clothing, footwear, hat, and sunscreen; do not attempt hikes if you are not in good physical condition. * This region is prone to grass fires; smoking is prohibited. * Camping, picnicking, and swimming are not allowed within the park. They are permitted at nearby Samuel M. Spencer Park. * Use caution entering and exiting the park road and visiting the John Young's Homestead site. * For a full list of regulations, including firearms information, go to the park website.

Accessibility We strive to make our facilities, services, and programs accessible to all. For information, ask at the visitor center or visit our website.
A Walking Tour of the Park
The visitor center and the park road gate are open daily. Note: These hours change—check with the park. A self-guiding walking tour (allow about one hour) begins at the visitor center.

Pu'ukoholā Heiau Built by Kamehameha I in 1790-91. Today it is the setting for cultural events.

Mailekini Heiau On the hillside between Pu'ukoholā Heiau and the sea are the ruins of Mailekini Heiau, possibly a war or agricultural temple used by the ancestors of Kamehameha. This older temple was nearly as big as Pu'ukoholā Heiau but not so finely crafted. During the rule of Kamehameha I, John Young helped the king convert this temple into a fort.

Hale o Kapuni Heiau Dedicated to the shark gods, this heiau lies submerged just offshore. The temple was last seen in the 1950s, when the rock platform was visible during low tides. The Stone Leaning Post overlooks the site of the shark temple.

Pelekane On the coast below Pu'ukoholā and Mailekini is the site of the royal courtyard at Kawaihae. After his father died, Kamehameha II returned here to prepare for his role as king.

Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail This trail was established in 2000 for the preservation, protection, and interpretation of traditional native Hawaiian culture and natural resources. A small section of this 175-mile trail corridor runs through the park.

Site of John Young's Homestead John Young was a British sailor stranded on Hawaii in 1790. He became a trusted military adviser to Kamehameha I. Young served as governor of Hawaii Island after Kamehameha designated him an ali'i nui (high chief), giving him the name 'Olohana. Young married Ka'oana'eha, the niece of Kamehameha. His granddaughter was Queen Emma, wife of Kamehameha IV. Today Young's homestead site has the remains of the oldest known European-style house in Hawaii.

Source: NPS Brochure (2014)

Establishment

For More Information
Please Visit The

OFFICIAL NPS
WEBSITE

Brochures ◆ Site Bulletins ◆ Trading Cards

Documents
A Cooperative Archaeological Excavation Project at the John Young Homestead, Pu'ukohola Heiau National Historic Site, Kawaihae 2, South Kohala, Island of Hawaii Publications in Anthropology 1, Pacific Island Cluster (Mara Durst w/Jake Barrow and Kecia Fong, September 2001)

A Cultural History of Three Traditional Hawaiian Sites on the West Coast of Hawai'i Island ( HTML edition) (Linda Wedel Greene, September 1993)

Benthic marine algae of the coastal waters of Puukohola Heiau National Historic Site (Puukohola Heiau National Historic Site marine flora) Pacific Islands Cooperative National Park Resources Studies Unit Technical Report No. 16 (F. W. Ball, February 1977)

Biological inventory of anchialine pool invertebrates at Pu'uhonua o Hōnaunau National Historical Park and Pu'ukoholā Heiau National Historic Site, Hawai'i Island Pacific Islands Cooperative National Park Resources Studies Unit Technical Report No. 181 (L.K. Tangio, D. Foote, K.N. Magnacca, S.J. Foltz, K. Cutler, 2012)

Bird inventory of Pu'ukohola Heiau National Historic site, Hawaii Island Pacific Islands Cooperative National Park Resources Studies Unit Technical Report No. 102 (M. P. Morin, May 1996)

Coastal Hazard Analysis Report: Pu'ukoholā Heiau National Historic Site and Kaloko-Honokōhau Historical Park, Big Island of Hawai'i NPS Natural Resource Technical Report NPS/NRPC/GRD/NRTR-2010/387 (S. Vitousek, M.M. Barbee, C.H. Fletcher, B.M. Richmond and A.S. Genz, October 2010)

Excavations at John Young's Homestead, Kawaihae, Hawaii: Archeology at Pu'ukohola Heiau National Historic Site Western Archeological and Conservation Center Publications in Anthropology No. 47 (Paul H. Rosendahl and Laura A. Carter, 1988)

Foundation Document, Pu'ukohola Heiau National Historic Site, Hawaii (Draft, August 2014)

Foundation Document, Pu'ukohola Heiau National Historic Site, Hawaii (March 2015)

Foundation Document Overview, Pu'ukohola Heiau National Historic Site, Hawaii (January 2015)

Geologic Resources Inventory Report, Pu'ukoholā Heiau National Historic Site NPS Natural Resource Report NPS/NRPC/GRD/NRR-2011/386 (T.L. Thornberry-Ehrlich, April 2011)

Hawai'i Island National Parks Junior Ranger Adventure Book (c2016)

Herpetological inventory in West Hawai'i national parks: Pu'uhonua o Hōnaunau National Historical Park, Kaloko-Honokōhau National Historical Park, Pu'ukoholā Heiau National Historic Site Pacific Islands Cooperative National Park Resources Studies Unit Technical Report No. 141 (J. Bazzano, April 2007)

Historic Structure Report: Pahukanilua: Homestead of John Young, Historical Data Section of the Historic Structure Report (Russell A. Apple September 1978)

Inventory of marine vertebrate species and fish-habitat utilization patterns in coastal waters off four national parks in Hawai'i Pacific Islands Cooperative National Park Resources Studies Unit Technical Report No. 168 (Jim Beets, Eric Brown and Alan Friedlander, February 2010)

Junior Ranger Adventure Book, Hawai'i Island National Parks (Date Unknown)

Junior Ranger Program, Pu'ukoholā Heiau National Historic Site (Date Unknown)

National Register of Historic Places Nomination Form

Puukhohola Heiau (Heiau of Pu'u Kohola) (John A. Hussey, May 25, 1962)

Natural and Cultural Resources Management Plan and Environmental Assessment - Puukohola Heiau National Historic Site, Hawaii (December 1982)

Predicting Impacts of Sea Level Rise for Cultural and Natural Resources in Five National Park Units on the Island of Hawai'i Pacific Islands Cooperative National Park Resources Studies Unit Technical Report No. 188 (Lisa Marrack and Patrick O'Grady, June 2014)

Puukohola Heiau National Historic Site plant survey Pacific Islands Cooperative National Park Resources Studies Unit Technical Report No. 15 (J. D. MacNeil and D. E. Hemmes, February 1977)

Reestablishment of the Historic Scene at Pu'ukohola Heiau National Historic Site, Hawai'i County, Hawai'i Environmental Assessment/Assessment of Effect (April 2004)

The physiography and marine fauna of inshore and intertidal areas in the Puukohola Heiau National Historic Site Pacific Islands Cooperative National Park Resources Studies Unit Technical Report No. 13 (D. Cheney, D. E. Hemmes and R. Nolan, January 1977)

Vascular plants of Pu'ukohola Heiau National Historic site, Hawaii Island Pacific Islands Cooperative National Park Resources Studies Unit Technical Report No. 101 (L. W. Pratt and L. L. Abbott, May 1996)

Vegetation Inventory Project: Pu'ukoholā Heiau National Historic Site NPS Natural Resource Report NPS/PUHE/NRR-2011/459 (Dan Cogan, Keith Schulz, David Benitez, Greg Kudray and Alison Ainsworth, September 2011)

Vegetation management strategies for three national historical parks on Hawai'i Island Pacific Islands Cooperative National Park Resources Studies Unit Technical Report No. 121 (Linda W. Pratt, September 1998)

Water Quality in the Brackish Waterbody at Pu'ukoholā Heiau National Historic Site: Summary Report 2007-2011 NPS Natural Resource Data Series NPS/PACN/NRDS-2013/508 (David F. Raikow and Anne Farahi, July 2013)

Handbooks ◆ Books

Videos Puukohola Heiau National Historic Site

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Park Archives: Puukohola Heiau National Historic Site

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Temple on the Hill of the Whale The stone heiau at Pu'ukoholā is one of the last major sacred structures built in Hawai'i before outside influences altered traditional life permanently. Constructed in 1790-91 by Kamehameha I, this heiau, or temple, played a crucial role in the ruler's ascendancy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Natural and Cultural resources Management Plan and Environmental Assessment - Puukohola Heiau National Historic Site, Hawaii : National Park Service : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Due to a planned power outage on Friday, 1/14, between 8am-1pm PST, some services may be impacted.

# data[].attributes.body
Published by UH Manoa's Department of Botany, native and alien (invasive) plants were catalogued, studied and recommendations stated for future care of the site plants.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Vascular plants of Pu'ukohola Heiau National Historic Site, Hawai'i Island

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
One hundred four vascular plant species were found within Pu'ukohola Heiau National Historic Site in 1992-94. Seventy of these plants (67% of the total) were alien species (introduced since 1778). Fourteen plant species in the Park (13%) were originally Polynesian introductions, 13 (13%) were indigenous, and 7 (7%) were endemic.

# data[].attributes.body
Pu'ukohola Heiau NHS is open all year round and shares the history of the beginning stages of the Hawaiian Kingdom.

# data[].attributes.body
As significant now as it ever was

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Photo by Pierre Lessage of Kite Aerial Photographers

# data[].attributes.body
National Park Service, 1982, Natural and Cultural resources Management Plan and Environmental Assessment – Puukohola Heiau National Historic Site, Hawaii, Clemson University Libraries, https://archive.org/details/naturalculturalr00puuk/page/n1/mode/2up

Richmond et. al., 2008, Geologic Resource Evaluation of Kaloko-Honokohau National Historical Park, Hawai’i: Geology and Coastal Landforms, USGS, https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2008/1191/

Historic American Landscapes Survey et. al., 2009, Pu’kuohala Heiau National Historic Site, 62-3601 Kawaihae Road, Kawaihae, Hawaii County, HI Drawings from Survey HALS HI-4, Library of Congress, https://www.loc.gov/resource/hhh.hi0943.sheet?st=gallery

The National Park Service, 2004, Environmental Assessment – Assessment of Effect, Reestablishment of the Historic Scene at Pu’ukohola Heiau National Historic Site, Hawai’I County, Hawai’i, Tetra Tech, Inc.

Calvin & Rosanna Hamilton, 2005-2008, Pu’ukohola Heiau National Historic Site The Temple on the Hill of the Whale, ScienceViews.com, https://scienceviews.com/islands/puukoholaheiau.html

Pratt LW and Abbott LL, 1996, Vascular plants of Pu’ukohola Heiau National Historic Site, Hawai’i Island, Cooperative National park Resources Studies Unit, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Department of Botany, PCSU, http://hdl.handle.net/10125/7324