Significance
The aircraft at the old Colonia airport, and for that matter the airport
and old dispersal area themselves, represent an historically important World
War II military landscape. The overall landscape appears eligible for the
U.S. National Register of Historic Places under at least two National Register
Criteria (36 CFR 60.4). Association with World War II and the strategies
of the two opposing forces makes the property eligible under Criterion
A (association with significant historic events or patterns of events).
As representative of a type of offensive airbase the landscape is probably
eligible under Criterion C (representative of a type, representative of
a distinguishable entity), as are its aircraft wrecks both individually
and as contributing elements to the landscape. To the extent that study
of the site can yield useful information about World War II and/or Japanese
military aircraft construction during World War II, the airfield area is
probably also eligible under National Register Criterion D (information
significant in the study of history or prehistory). Site #s 1 and 4 – the
“Kate” and the “Betty” – may be particularly significant both for the relative
rarity of the aircraft they represent and for the important roles both
bomber types played in World War II.
Further study of the landscape and its contributing elements – aircraft,
revetments, artillery emplacements, taxiways, and the support facilities
that must have been associated with the Japanese airfield could usefully
supplement and enrich the existing historical record of World War II in the
Pacific.
Condition
The wrecks have been torn apart to varying degrees by the original bombing
and in some cases by later earthmoving and purposeful relocation of parts.
The Betty (Site #4) retains an intact empennage but otherwise is badly fragmented.
The Kate (Site #1) and the Zeros (Site #s 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7) typically have
lost their engine areas back to the firewall, and their empennages and fuselage
portions aft of the cockpit. Most engines remain on-site, however, as do
some empennages. Some of the planes are still standing on one or both landing
gears. Where wings are elevated from the ground they are typically broken
near their midpoints, perhaps simply from corrosion, perhaps from a combination
of bomb and strafing damage, corrosion, and human action (it is easy to imagine
people standing on them and causing breakage after corrosion had weakened
them).
All the wrecks are experiencing varying levels of deterioration due to
corrosion. Deterioration is going on most rapidly where the metal of the
wrecks is in contact with the ground. Typically these areas are severely
deteriorated, while areas that remain permanently in the air are in better
condition. Most parts that might be attractive to collectors have been removed
from all the wrecks, and all are inscribed with graffiti.
We attempted to match the wrecks we examined with photographs taken of
aircraft at the Colonia airport in the 1970s and 1980s, but were unable to
make any definitive matches. Nevertheless, the differences between the aircraft
depicted twenty to thirty years ago and those we examined are striking, and
suggest that the planes are deteriorating and/or being disassembled and taken
away quickly. Aircraft depicted in 1970s/80s photos typically have complete
engines attached, complete empennages, and cockpit canopies, and are standing
on their gear. The aircraft we examined obviously display none of these characteristics.
Management Options
Management of the area, and particularly of its aircraft wrecks, presents
daunting challenges. The wrecks are obviously deteriorating, and will continue
to do so unless protective measures are taken. Taking such measures would
be expensive, however, and the payoff for taking them is uncertain. While
the wrecks undoubtedly attract a certain number of tourists, it is probably
rare for anyone to visit Yap for the sole purpose of looking at them, so
it is difficult to argue that preserving them will benefit Yap in any financial
way. They are historic relics, of course, but not every historic relic
can be preserved forever. Every government, and indeed every individual,
makes decisions every day about what to preserve and what to let go. The
government of Yap is faced with such a decision concerning the wrecks at
the old Colonia airport.
The following management options are available:
Do Nothing. If nothing is done – if the wrecks are simply left to deteriorate
– they will continue to corrode and fall apart. People will continue to take
parts away. We estimate that within twenty to thirty years, most of the wrecks
will be reduced to piles of corroded parts on the ground, and eventually
they will disappear altogether.
Preserve in Place, in Perpetuity. At the other end of the spectrum of possible
management options is that of very active intervention to preserve the wrecks
in place, in perpetuity. This would involve a complex of protective and conservation
measures, such as building roofs over the wrecks, elevating them above the
ground, treating them with protective chemicals and coatings, and policing
them to prevent further theft and vandalism.
Preserve in a Museum Context. Another preservation alternative would be
to move the wrecks, or some wrecks, to a museum or museum-like location where
they could be covered, attended to, and conserved. Combined with the application
of preservative chemicals and coatings this could extend an aircraft’s life
more or less indefinitely, but at the cost of losing connection with the
craft’s original location and the events that led to its condition. Museum
conservation would also carry a heavy price tag in both the long and short
runs.
Slow the Process of Decay. A number of relatively simple measures could
be undertaken to slow the deterioration of the wrecks, though these measures
would by no means halt decay altogether. Simply lifting the wreckage off
the ground and placing it on piers or pilings while removing soil from it
would reduce the rate of corrosion in the areas most subject to it. Building
simple shelters over the planes, perhaps with post and thatch construction,
would be a low-cost way to protect a plane from the elements. Such measures
would detract somewhat from the sense of discovery that visitors can experience
when visiting a wreck “in the wild,” and they would involve both initial
and long-term commitment of funds, albeit fairly limited funds.
Give or Sell to Others. In the past some wrecks have been given or sold
to parties in other countries (notably Japan) who sought them for purposes
of conservation and exhibition or as sources of parts to use in historic
aircraft reconstructions. This practice probably continues informally on
a small scale today, and could be adopted as a formal preservation practice.
Doing so would almost certainly require resolving questions of ownership.
Arguments could be made for ownership of the wrecks by the Japanese, U.S.,
F.S.M., Yap State and Rull Municipality governments, as well as by the landowners
on whose property they lie. Assuming ownership could be resolved, a sale
and gift policy would also have to be harmonized with FSM and Yap State law
pertaining to the removal of historic artifacts – a perhaps daunting but not insurmountable
obstacle. Of course, the longer the wrecks are left to deteriorate, the less
amenable they become to use as sale and gift items.
Document. Documentation is not a means of physically preserving historic
sites, but it does preserve a record of them that can be used in interpretation
and scholarly research, perhaps long after the sites themselves have disappeared.
In the case of complex metal artifacts like aircraft, it is often the only
feasible option for achieving any kind of preservation at all. Documentation
might include more detailed maps than provided in this report, both of individual
sites and of the airport and dispersal area in general, together with detailed
photographic coverage and the results of historical and oral historical research.
Recommendations
We recommend a mixed strategy that applies different management standards
to different wrecks, as follows:
- Documentation: A more detailed study should be completed of the airport
area than we were able to provide in this year’s work. The entire
area should be inspected in detail and all wreckage, structures, and bomb
pits should be recorded and mapped. Background historical and oral historical
research should be completed. The results should be published both in a
technical report and in a popularly-oriented book or booklet.5
- Preserve in a Museum Context: If funds are available, the wrecks at
Site #s 1, 5 and/or 7 might be appropriate for conservation in a museum
context. Further documentation is likely to result in the identification
of other aircraft that could be similarly preserved. The relatively intact
cockpit area and empennage of the “Betty” at Site #4 might
also be suitable for museum interpretation, provided their removal was
balanced with appropriate documentation of their original context.
- Slow the Process of Decay: Of the sites surveyed in this assessment,
Site #s 1, 5 and 7, if not moved to a museum location, may be the most
amenable to preservation in the short term by raising the aircraft somewhat
off the ground and constructing informal shelters over them – assuming
that preservation in a museum context is not feasible, or as an interim
measure until such an action can be taken. It is very likely that a detailed
documentation program will reveal other aircraft equally or more appropriate
for this kind of treatment. In each case, small-scale, inexpensive measures
could be implemented to facilitate visitor access and public interpretation
– with the understanding that facilitated access may speed deterioration
by making it easier for people to remove or vandalize parts of the aircraft.
Reasonable measures might include clearing and planting walkways as has
been done at Site 4, and placement of simple interpretive signs, or perhaps
creating self-guiding brochures in various languages.
- Do Nothing: No specific preservation actions are recommended for Site
#s 2, 3, and 4, besides documentation as part of an overall study and,
as noted above, possible removal of parts of Site #4 for museum interpretation.
All three, however, are good places to allow visitors to experience the “discovery”
of untreated, slowly decaying aircraft remains. There are probably many
other such sites remaining to be discovered. With this option too, small-scale,
inexpensive public interpretation development could be undertaken; self-guiding
brochures might be particularly appropriate.
- Give or Sell to Others: Although we do not recommend that any of the
wrecks recorded in this report be given or sold to other parties, we do
believe that this option is one that the governments of Yap and the FSM
need to consider, whose legal dimensions should be explored, and on which
a concrete, balanced policy should be developed. Given the number of wrecks
in the area, their condition, the near impossibility of preserving many
or perhaps any of them over the long run, and the continuing interest in
acquiring World War II artifacts by individuals and institutions on other
countries, we think it would be inadvisable not to entertain the sale and
gift option. One possibility to consider is that of bartering with a third
party to take several aircraft and return one suitable for museum display.
Although not as desirable as retaining and interpreting the aircraft in
place, such an arrangement may in the long run become the only economically
feasible means of making an aspect of Yap’s World War II history
available for public appreciation.
- Preserve in Place in Perpetuity: We recommend none of the wrecks documented
in this report for preservation in place in perpetuity. The potential costs
of such preservation are simply too high, the outcome too uncertain, and
the aircraft too deteriorated, to make such preservation a prudent use
of scarce funds.
|