RESOURCE INTENSIFICATION IN CENTRAL

Transcription

RESOURCE INTENSIFICATION IN CENTRAL CALIFORNIA:
EVIDENCE FROM THE LOWER SACRAMENTO RIVER VALLEY
A Thesis
Presented to the Faculty of the Department of Anthropology
California State University, Sacramento
Submitted in partial satisfaction of
the requirements for the degree of
MASTER OF ARTS
in
Anthropology
by
Emilie Malinda Zelazo
SUMMER
2013
A Thesis
by
Approved by
________________________________, Committee Chair
Mark E. Basgall, PhD.
________________________________, Second Reader
Michael G. Delacorte, PhD.
________________________________, Third Reader
Jacob L. Fisher, PhD.
__________________
Date
ii
Student: Emilie Malinda Zelazo
I certify that this student has met requirements for format contained in the University format manual, and
that this thesis is suitable for shelving in the Library and credit is to be awarded for the thesis.
__________________________________, Graduate Coordinator
Michael G. Delacorte, Ph.D.
Department of Anthropology
iii
_______________
Date
Abstract
of
by
Recent models of resource intensification in California argue for a decrease in foraging efficiency over the
late Holocene for Northern and Central California. This decrease in foraging efficiency is manifest as an
overall decrease in the abundance of large prey species relative to small prey species within archaeofaunal
assemblages. Causes of this decrease are understood to be the results of harvest pressure resulting from
rising human populations and environmental change. The purpose of this thesis is to test this model by
developing a regional synthesis of diachronic faunal exploitation within the lower Sacramento River
Valley.
Faunal assemblages from six archaeological sites were used as case examples. Three sites from the Middle
Period (2800 B.P. to 1200 B.P), SAC-67, SAC-133, and SAC-42, and three from the Late Period (1200
B.P. to 100 B.P.), Sac-329, CA-267, and SAC-29 were chosen. Catchment areas were established for each
based on paleoenvironmental recreation and used to determine site specific subsistence patterns. Richness
measures and chi-square analyses were used to determine the significance of variations in faunal abundance
over space and time.
The results demonstrated that in contrast to earlier conclusions, foraging efficiency increased during the
Late Period at the same time as diet breadth widened. Quantitative analyses demonstrated that this
contradiction was best explained by the introduction of new hunting technologies in the Late Period which
increased successful encounter rates. Results also provided evidence for the “artiodactyl spike” and the
utility of legacy collections.
___________________________________, Committee Chair
Mark E. Basgall, Ph.D.
_____________________
Date
iv
DEDICATION
This thesis is dedicated to
DR. JERALD JAY JOHNSON
and
KENNETH “RANDY” BETHARD
for their commitment to the students of CSUS anthropology, contributions to the archaeology of Northern
California, and the understanding of past human cultures
August 2013
v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This thesis would not have been completed without the unwavering support of many faculty,
friends, and family over the years. The idea was first presented to me by Dr. Jerry Johnson, who has been
an inspiration throughout this entire journey. Over his long career, Dr. Johnson’s enthusiasm, instruction,
and encyclopedic knowledge of local archaeology and beyond, imparted a great affinity for archaeology
among his students and produced many professionals working in California Archaeology today. It is hoped
the legacy he and the past students of CSUS left behind will instruct the community on Central Valley and
Northern California’s long history and provide a basis for future student and professional research. Another
source of inspiration was my Committee Chair, Dr. Mark Basgall. His support, acceptance, and
consideration, right from the start, allowed me to have the confidence I needed to complete this task.
Additional insight and instruction were provided by Dr. Michael Delacorte and Dr. Jacob Fisher. Without
their guidance, in particular the statistical assistance provided by Dr. Fisher, this thesis would not have been
a product which can hopefully serve as a contribution to the science.
Other important support was provided by Cristi Hunter, whose friendship and instruction was a
particular source of solace during this lengthy journey and by Tim Carpenter for his assistance and
instruction during the fish bone analysis. This thesis would have also not been possible without the efforts
of Bridget Wall, whose excellent graphic skills provided the majority of the graphics and whose editorial
skills saved me from certain orthographic and bibliographic doom. Her support and comradery, (especially
during seminars) as well as that of Jesse Martinez, Steve Moore, Debbie Ward, Julie Minor (Sage), Jena
Roberts, Alta Cunningham, Gary Scholze, Shannon Goshen, and Virginia Austerman provided the strength
I needed to see this task through to the end. Additional support and friendship was provided by Michelle
Noble, Bill Larson, Ryan Brady, Nikki Polson, Denise Jurich, Dave Glover, Leslie Glover, Bill Norton,
Randy Bethard, Carl Hansen, Maryann Russo, and Tina Fulton. A special mention is given to June Allison
for always being so happy and ready to ensure items were delivered and returned safely.
vi
The love, forgiveness, and patience of my family (the Correias, DiSalvos, Pinedas, and the Matts)
cannot be forgotten, particularly, Marc DiSalvo who was my friend, helper, confidant, and support for the
majority of the graduate program along with our dogs Spoonie and Lucky. The pride of my sister, and
example set for my niece and nephew alone almost make the whole experience worth it. Multiple others not
named here have helped and supported me along the way, for which I am extremely grateful.
Lastly, I wish to thank the indigenous people and their ancestors who provided the materials
examined in this thesis. I respectfully present my words to them and hope that through these words, others
may come to know the first people of the Lower Sacramento River Valley.
vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Dedication ................................................................................................................................................ v
Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................vi
List of Tables...........................................................................................................................................xi
List of Figures ..................................................................................................................................... xiii
Chapter
1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 1
Statement of Purpose ................................................................................................... 1
Statement of the Problem ............................................................................................. 1
Expansion of the Problem ............................................................................................ 2
2. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ......................................................................................................... 4
Freshwater Marsh ....................................................................................................... 5
Grassland ................................................................................................................... 10
Riparian Woodland .................................................................................................... 13
Summary .................................................................................................................... 16
3. PALEOENVIRONMENTAL, ARCHAEOLOGICAL, AND ETHNOGRAPHIC
CONTEXT ........................................................................................................................................ 18
Paleoenvironmental Context ..................................................................................... 18
Pleistocene/Holocene Transition ................................................................ 18
Early and Middle Holocene ........................................................................ 19
Late Holocene ............................................................................................. 19
Archaeological Context ............................................................................................ 22
A Brief History of Lower Sacramento Valley Archaeology ...................... 22
viii
Before the Early Period .............................................................................. 24
Early Period (4400 to 2450 B.P.) ............................................................... 24
Middle Period (2450 to 900 B.P.) ............................................................... 25
Late Period (900 to 150 B.P.) ..................................................................... 27
Ethnographic Context ............................................................................................... 29
Plains Miwok .............................................................................................. 30
Valley Nisenan ........................................................................................... 31
Ethnographic Subsistence Patterns ............................................................................ 31
Fish ............................................................................................................. 31
Birds ........................................................................................................... 33
Mammals .................................................................................................... 34
Other Fauna ................................................................................................. 36
Summary ................................................................................................................... 36
4. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND .................................................................................................. 38
Cultural and Evolutionary Ecology Theories ............................................................ 38
Contrary Evidence ..................................................................................................... 45
Summary ................................................................................................................... 46
5.RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ....................................................................................................... 48
Faunal Assemblage Selection ................................................................................... 48
Site Descriptions ........................................................................................................ 50
SAC-67 ....................................................................................................... 50
SAC-133 ..................................................................................................... 53
SAC-42 ....................................................................................................... 55
SAC-329 ..................................................................................................... 57
SAC-267 ..................................................................................................... 58
SAC-29 ....................................................................................................... 60
ix
Quantitative Analysis ................................................................................................. 62
Methodological Limitations ....................................................................................... 64
6. RESULTS .......................................................................................................................................... 66
Freshwater Marsh ...................................................................................................... 72
Grassland ................................................................................................................... 78
Riparian Woodland .................................................................................................... 82
Summary and Discussion........................................................................................... 87
7.CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................................. 92
References Cited ................................................................................................................................... 95
Appendix A.
Study Area Fauna .................................................................................................... 113
Appendix B.
Selected Faunal Assemblage Data ........................................................................... 120
Appendix C.
Subsistence Pattern Data .......................................................................................... 298
x
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Page
Table 1. Spatio-Temporal Associations and Faunal Analysts by Site .................................................... 49
Table 2. Diachronic Taxonomic Richness ............................................................................................ 66
Table 3. Mammals NISP ...................................................................................................................... 67
Table 4. Birds NISP ............................................................................................................................. 68
Table 5. Herpetofauna NISP ................................................................................................................ 68
Table 6. Fish NISP............................................................................................................................... 69
Table 7. Invertebrates .......................................................................................................................... 69
Table 8. Diachronic Taxonomic Diversity ............................................................................................ 70
Table 9. Diachronic Changes in Artiodactyl Species ............................................................................ 89
Table A-1. Study Area Mammals ....................................................................................................... 114
Table A-2. Study Area Birds .............................................................................................................. 116
Table A-3. Study Area Fish ............................................................................................................... 119
Table B-1. SAC-67 35N 2E (50-60cm) Terrestrial Taxa ................................................................... 121
Table B-2. SAC-67 35N 2E (50-60cm) Fish ..................................................................................... 142
Table B-3. SAC-67 58N 28W (40-50 cm) NW Quadrant Terrestrial Taxa ......................................... 149
Table B-4. SAC-67 58N 28W (40-50 cm) NW Quadrant Fish............................................................ 156
Table B-5. SAC-67 58N 28W (40-50 cm) SE Quadrant Terrestrial Taxa ........................................... 160
Table B-6. SAC-67 58N 28W (40-50 cm) SE Quadrant Fish ............................................................. 166
Table B-7. SAC-133 Middle Period Terrestrial Taxa ........................................................................ 172
Table B-8. SAC-133 Middle Period Fish .......................................................................................... 196
Table B-9. SAC-329 Terrestrial Taxa ................................................................................................ 226
Table C-1. Key for Subsistence Pattern Charts ................................................................................... 299
Table C-2 SAC-67 Subsistence Pattern Data ...................................................................................... 300
xi
Table C-3 SAC-133 Subsistence Pattern Data .................................................................................... 301
Table C-8 Middle Period Subsistence Pattern Data ............................................................................ 306
Table C-9 Late Period Subsistence Pattern Data................................................................................. 307
xii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
Page
Figure 1. Study Area Location .................................................................................................................... 5
Figure 2. Historic Vegetation Map .............................................................................................................. 6
Figure 3 Paleoenvironmental Chart ........................................................................................................... 20
Figure 4. Ethnographic Territories ............................................................................................................ 30
Figure 5. SAC-67 Site Overview............................................................................................................... 51
Figure 6. SAC-67 Site Map ....................................................................................................................... 52
Figure 7. SAC-133 Site Map ..................................................................................................................... 54
Figure 8. SAC-42 Site Map ....................................................................................................................... 55
Figure 10. Overview of SAC-329 Excavation, 1975 ................................................................................. 57
Figure 11. SAC-267 Site Overview........................................................................................................... 59
Figure 12. SAC-267 Site Map ................................................................................................................... 60
Figure 14. Scatter Plot of Diachronic Taxonomic Diversity (1/D) and NISP .......................................... 71
Figure 15. Freshwater Marsh Habitat Individual Site Catchments ............................................................ 73
Figure 16. Sac-67 Middle Period Freshwater Marsh Subsistence Pattern ................................................. 74
Figure 17. SAC-329 Late Period Freshwater Marsh Subsistence Pattern ................................................. 74
Figure 18. Diachronic Freshwater Marsh Terrestrial Taxa ....................................................................... 75
Figure 19. Diachronic Freshwater Marsh Fish .......................................................................................... 76
Figure 20 SAC-133 Middle Period Grassland Subsistence Pattern ........................................................... 78
Figure 21. Grassland Individual Site Catchments ..................................................................................... 79
Figure 22. SAC-267 Late Period Grassland Subsistence Pattern .............................................................. 80
Figure 23. Diachronic Grassland Terrestrial Taxa .................................................................................... 81
xiii
Figure 24. Diachronic Grassland Fish ....................................................................................................... 81
Figure 25 Riparian Woodland Individual Site Catchments ....................................................................... 83
Figure 26. SAC-42 Middle Period Riparian Woodland Subsistence Pattern ............................................ 84
Figure 27. SAC-29 Late Period Riparian Woodland Subsistence Pattern ................................................. 84
Figure 28. Diachronic Riparian Woodland Terrestrial Taxa ..................................................................... 85
Figure 29. Diachronic Riparian Woodland Fish ........................................................................................ 86
Figure 30. Study Area Middle Period Subsistence Pattern ........................................................................ 88
Figure 31. Study Area Late Period Subsistence Pattern ............................................................................ 89
xiv
1
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
Recent subsistence studies indicate a decrease in late Holocene foraging efficiency over much of
Northern and Central California (Basgall 1987; Beaton 1991; Bettinger 1991; Broughton 1994a, 1997,
2002; Broughton and Bayham 1993, 2003; Cohen 1981; Craw 2002; Fagan 2003; Hildebrandt and Jones
1992; Pierce 1988). This intensification in resource use is manifest by a relative decrease in the abundance
of large to small prey species in archaeofaunal assemblages, produced by harvest pressure resulting from
rising human populations or a decline in large mammals due to climatic change.
Statement of Purpose
This thesis tests the model of late Holocene resource intensification in an ecologically rich region
of California that supported large sedentary populations and has numerous well-preserved archaeological
collections. This is accomplished through a regional synthesis of diachronic faunal exploitation patterns
from six Middle and Late Period archaeological sites located in the lower Sacramento Valley. Results of
the quantitative analyses performed are evaluated in terms of site catchment and optimal foraging theory in
order to assess how subsistence patterns may have changed over time and space in relation to
paleoenvironmental and technological changes.
Statement of the Problem
Subsistence studies have a limited history in the study area with most archaeological work
focusing on cultural chronology. As such, discussions of subsistence patterns have remained
epistemological and heuristic, and confined primarily to the realm of balanophagy. Confounding the
problem is a lack of interest in examining legacy collections and the fact more recent floral and faunal data
are only available as gray literature. Despite these shortcomings, several regional syntheses of subsistence
strategies have been proposed for the study area (Baumhoff 1963; Pierce 1988; Ragir 1972; Schulz 1981),
along with a few detailed faunal analyses of the lower Sacramento Valley (Broughton 1994b; Craw 2002;
2
Kelley and Sparling 1976; Schulz 1979; Schulz et al. 1976; Simons 1994; Simons et al. 1978). While these
vary in scope and empirical results, their conclusions indicate that:
•
artiodactyls were economically important, but a diverse suite of medium and small mammals
were also exploited
•
a variety of birds were hunted, principally waterfowl species
•
large numbers of lentic fish were exploited while comparably fewer anadromous species were
used
When considered together, the results of prior faunal analyses indicate that the indigenous inhabitants of
the study area practiced broad-based hunting strategies for thousands of years. Underpinning this collective
view of prehistoric subsistence are the diverse and varied terrestrial, aquatic, and avian resources that were
available to and exploited by past indigenous populations. In fact, most archaeological studies contain
extensive lists of the animals exploited as compared to the deer, salmon, and acorn staples reported for
ethnographic populations of the Central Valley (Baumhoff 1963; Heizer 1949; Kroeber 1925).
Problematically though, these faunal lists are commonly presented for the site as a whole, not by
stratagraphic subdivisions. This makes it difficult to assess changes in faunal availability and exploitation
over time without additional study (Broughton 1994b:504).
Expansion of the Problem
In 1994, Jack Broughton undertook an Optimal Foraging-based assessment of faunal data from
nine archaeological sites located in the Sacramento Valley (Broughton 1994b). The purpose of this study
was to explore changes in regional subsistence. Broughton concluded that use of smaller animals generally
increase over the last 4000 years in the Sacramento Valley (Broughton 1994b:511). More specifically,
Broughton concludes there was a dramatic decline in late Holocene abundance of medium and large
mammals in relation to resident fishes over time. He also found a significant decrease in the abundance of
large anadromous to small resident fish over time (Broughton 1994a:394).
Although Broughton’s work can be faulted on various grounds, (e.g., lack of avian data and
unevenly distributed radiocarbon dates), the methods and conclusions of his study have directly influenced
3
how indigenous subsistence patterns are reconstructed in the Central Valley in general and the Sacramento
Valley in particular (see Fagan 2003; Preston 2002; Rosenthal et al. 2007). This thesis attempts to build on
Broughton’s and other’s earlier work in order to provide a more inclusive reconstruction of indigenous
subsistence patterns in the lower Sacramento Valley, one that not only uses quantitative methods but also
incorporates data Broughton’s study lacked.
4
Chapter 2
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The study area is located in the lower Sacramento Valley of central California (Figure 1), a
geographical expanse roughly coinciding with present day Sacramento County. It is bordered on the north
by the American River and on the south by the Mokelumne River. The eastern boundary is the Sierra
Nevada foothills and the western boundary is defined by the western bank of the Sacramento River. The
study area is approximately 1258.6 square kilometers (311,000 acres) in size. Geographically, the lower
Sacramento Valley can be characterized as a low-elevation “flatland” composed of alluvial plains, river
channels, sloughs, wetlands, and uplands of low relief (Moratto 1984:168). Elevations in the study area
range from sea level in the Delta to around 500 feet (152 meters) in the foothills (ARNHA 2004:1).
The lower Sacramento Valley possesses a Mediterranean climate characterized by mild winters
and warm dry summers (ARNHA 2004:11). The rainy season generally occurs from November to March
when approximately 75 percent of the annual 17.5 inches of precipitation is received (ARNHA 2004:11;
City of Sacramento 2010). Tule fog, a type of radiation fog, is also common during winter months, when
moisture condenses as warm air from the earth meets cool air draining into the valley from the foothills and
mountains. Winter lows range between -7.2 and -4.4 degrees Celsius (19 and 24 degrees Fahrenheit), but
average 3.3 degrees Celsius (38 degrees Fahrenheit) (City of Sacramento 2010). Summer temperatures can
exceed 37.8 degrees Celsius (100 degrees Fahrenheit) but are accompanied by extremely low (≤ 20 percent)
relative humidity and typically rapid evening cooling as cold marine air invades the area toward sunset.
Three vegetation communities are found within the study area: freshwater marsh, grassland, and
riparian woodland. The freshwater marsh comprises about 437.74 square kilometers (108,168 acres), the
grassland 147.62 square kilometers (36,480 acres) and the riparian woodland 645.69 square kilometers
(159,554 acres). Fauna associated with the study area are presented in Appendix A.
5
Figure 1. Study Area Location.
The geographic and climatic conditions produce several biologically rich habitats in the lower
Sacramento Valley. Historical reconstructions depict a landscape composed of large areas of open
grassland situated between riparian forests growing along natural river levees (CSUC 1999; West et. al
2007:24). A vast freshwater marsh was located where the Cosumnes and Mokelumne rivers converged and
entered the Sacramento River. Paleontological evidence indicates these habitats were present for the last
6000 years (West et al. 2007:24).
Freshwater Marsh
Historical reconstructions indicate that freshwater marshes occurred on either side of the Sacramento River
and in the southwestern portion of the study area (CSUC 1999; Küchler 1977). Early accounts
6
Figure 2. Historic Vegetation Map.
estimate that “areas of tule” occupied approximately 2175.6 square kilometers (537,600 acres) of the lower
Sacramento Valley (Thompson 1961:307). This included areas extending up the current confluence of the
Cosumnes and Mokelumne rivers near Thornton, and southwest into the Sacramento and San Joaquin Delta
(Küchler 1977). Figure 2 depicts habitat locations prior to extensive Euro-American settlement and
development circa 1900. This map indicates that freshwater marsh habitat once extended up the Cosumnes
River to its confluence with Laguna Creek. Figure 2 was created by combining data from the 1999
CVHMP Pre-1900 vegetation map (CSUC 1999) and the SEFI Delta Recreation map (SFEI 2012). Each of
these are, in turn, based on primary and proxy paleontological, geological, and hydrologic data, which
indicate that approximately a third of the study area consisted of freshwater marsh.
7
Freshwater marshes comprise some of the most extensive ecosystems in the state. Prior to
reclamation, it is estimated that almost 500,000 acres (202,343 hectares) around the confluence of the
Sacramento, San Joaquin, American, and Cosumnes rivers was freshwater marsh (Meyer and Rosenthal
2008:34 and references therein). By 1930, less than 60,000 acres (24,281 hectares) remained. Despite its
former abundance, no consistent definition of freshwater marsh habitat has been developed (Schulz
1981:16). This is reflected by the numerous terms used to describe this habitat type. Freshwater marsh was
referred to as tulares initially by the early Spanish, later tule marsh (Küchler 1977; Thompson 1961) and
more recently as fresh emergent wetland (Kramer 2003); or, less accurately, the Delta since American
settlement (ARNHA 2004; Pierce 1988). The most common term, however, is simply wetlands (CSUC
2008), although this can encompass a wide range of both permanent and seasonally flooded habitats. Thus,
to avoid confusion the term freshwater marsh will be used to describe locally permanent wetlands of
comparably consistent vegetation and other biotic composition.
Freshwater marsh soils are typically wet, ranging from very poorly to somewhat poorly drained,
with a high water table that is protected by natural river levees (USDA 1991). The anaerobic condition of
these soils leads to the development of peat and supports a variety of hydrophytic grasses such as tule
(Scirpus spp.), cattail (Typha spp.), sedge (Carex spp.) and rush (Juncus spp.) (Ingebritsen et al. 2000). The
seeds, rhizomes, and shoots of these plants are seasonally edible, with the common tule (Scirpus acutus), in
particular, contributing to the indigenous diet and providing principal raw material for the construction of
houses, boats, and mats (ARNHA 2004:83; Levy 1978:406; Schulz 1981:16, 17; Wilson and Towne
1978:392). Within the study area, freshwater marsh is sometimes bordered by flood-tolerant trees, such as
willow (Salix sp.) and Fremont’s cottonwood (Populus fremontii) that transition into riparian woodland in
better drained areas.
Freshwater marsh in the lower Sacramento Valley can be subject to significant tidal action. For
example, ocean tides in the San Francisco Bay are observed five to six hours later in the Cosumnes River
and Sacramento River flows as far north as Verona near the Feather River confluence (Gilbert 1917:15;
Ingebritsen et al. 2000; Konrad 2012; Meyer and Rosenthal 2008:22). Prior to 1921, a saltwater interface
8
extended up the Sacramento River as far as Courtland, although saltwater encroachment into the study area
was inhibited by the presence of natural levees and the western Delta islands, particularly Sherman Island
located just west of Stockton. Seasonal flooding in the winter and spring also helps to prohibit the upstream
intrusion of saltwater. Most of the primary plants and fish in the freshwater marsh habitat can tolerate
higher than average levels of salinity as well.
The most abundant faunal resource found in the freshwater marsh habitat is fish (see Table 3).
Fish inhabiting the freshwater marsh prefer slow water environments. These fish include Sacramento perch
(Archoplites interruptus); tule perch (Hysterocarpus traskii); hitch (Lavinia exilicauda); Sacramento
blackfish (Orthodon microlepidotus); and Sacramento sucker (Catostomus occidentalis). Thicktail chub
(Gila crassicauda), now extinct, were also abundant in the slow waters of the freshwater marsh. Causes for
their extinction are largely linked to the removal of the tule beds for agriculture and the introduction of
predacious bass species in the late 19th century (Moyle 2002:59, 182). Sacramento splittail (Pogonichthys
macrolepidotus) can also be found in freshwater marshes, although they are also found in the swifter and
cooler waters of the riparian woodland.
Avian species common to the freshwater marsh consist of resident and migratory species.
Residents include the great blue heron (Ardea herodias); the great egret (Egretta thula); pie-billed grebe
(Podilymbus podiceps); American bittern (Botaurus lentiginosus); common moorhen (Linula chloropus);
American coot (Fulica americana), and a limited number of waterfowl. Raptors such as the red-tailed hawk
(Buteo jamaicensis) may forage in the area, but it is not their preferred habitat. Additional common
residents include shorebirds such as the long-billed dowitcher (Limnodromus scolopaceus) and the redwing blackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus).
Migratory birds include waterfowl and a few other species. The lower Sacramento Valley is
located along the Pacific flyway. As a result, an estimated 1.5 million ducks and 750,000 geese utilize the
wetlands found in the Sacramento Valley (Bellrose 1976:21, 22; Northern California Water Association
2013). This annual visitation begins in the late fall and continues into the spring, with the greatest number
9
of migrants present between November through February. For example, the 35,000 acre Sacramento
National Wildlife Refuge estimates that over three million ducks and one million geese visit the refuge
during the winter migration (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2013). Migratory species commonly observed
in the study area include whistling or tundra swans (Cygnus columbianus), geese (e.g., Canada goose
[Branta canadensis moffitti]; greater white-fronted goose [Anser albifrons frontalis], lesser snow goose
[Chen c. caerulescens]), and dabbler ducks (e.g., mallard [Anas platyrhynchos], pintail [Anas acuta],
green-winged teal [Anas carolinensis], American widgeon [Anas americana], gadwall [Anas strepera]; and
northern shoveler [Anas clypeata]). Although migratory, populations of Canada geese and mallards and
other waterfowl are known to breed in the study area, increasing their seasonal availability. Other migratory
birds include the lesser and greater sandhill crane (Grus canadensis) who migrate into the study area in
October through mid-March (Cosumnes River Preserve 2010). The white pelican (Pelecanus
erythrorhynchos) is also a frequent late winter through spring visitor.
Unlike fish and birds, most mammals, the reptiles, and amphibians of the freshwater marsh are
found in adjacent habitats as well. The largest mammal was the tule elk (Cervus elaphus nannodes) which
also inhabited grassland and riparian woodlands. Elk are no longer found in the study area, but
approximately 500,000 are estimated to have inhabited the state in herds numbering between 6 and 40
animals in aboriginal times (Bartolome et al. 2007:370; McCullough 1969:25). Other mammals that may be
encountered in the freshwater marsh are river otter (Lontra canadensis), spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius),
and mink (Mustela vison). Reptiles and amphibians include western pond turtle (Actinemys maramorata),
western toad (Bufo boreas), Pacific chorus frog (Pseudacris egilla), and California red-legged frog (Rana
draytonii). The freshwater marsh is also home to the bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana) that was introduced in the
early 20th century from the east coast (Zeiner et al. 1990a). The freshwater mussel, Anodonta nuttaliana can
also be found on the periphery of the freshwater marsh, in low gradient, low elevation lentic habitats such
as sloughs, permanently flooded marshes, and sandbars at the mouths of tributary streams (Nedeau et al.
2005:22).
10
Grassland
The grassland habitat of the study area is characterized as a relatively flat landscape of grasses,
forbs, and isolated oaks that gently rise to meet the Sierra Nevada. The pre-1900 distribution of grasslands
(see Figure 2) comprised the largest habitat in the study area. (ca. 646 square kilometers/160,000 acres).
Although habitat boundaries may have changed little over time, more than fifty percent of grassland
habitats have been replaced by agricultural and urban development (Heady 1988:495). Two important subhabitats that occur in the grasslands, vernal pools and seasonal wetlands, are described below.
Grasslands are a diverse ecosystem that responds to variations in soil nutrients, temperature, and
moisture (Bartolome et al. 2007:383). Grasslands in the study area occur on the San Joaquin series soils
that consist of well to moderately well drained soils that formed in mixed but predominantly granitic
alluvium (Soil Survey Staff 2006; USDA 1991). They are moderate in organic matter and are underlain by
a clay hardpan cemented with iron, silica, or both. The sediments are generally loamy, but given their high
clay content and slow permeability, they are also subject to flooding (Heady 1988; USDA 1991).
Historically grassland habitats included large populations of perennial bunch grass such as purple
needlegrass (Nassella pulchra), nodding needlegrass (Nassella ceruna), and blue bunchgrass (Festuca
idahoensis), as well as many forbs, broad-leaved herbs, and bulbs (Bartolome et al. 2007:370-371; Heady
1988:495-497). These were interspersed with isolated or small stands of trees, such as buckeye (Aesculus
californica), oaks (primarily Quercus lobata), and bushes (Heady 1988:495). In spring and summer, large
areas of the grassland habitat were covered with herbaceous wildflowers, such as clover (CVHMP 2008).
Clover (Trifolium willdenovii) was an important food for local Native Americans as it was the first fresh
herb available after winter (Lightfoot and Parrish 2009:309). In fact, the timing of the Nisenan spring
flower dance depended on the emergence of clover (Bartolome et al. 2007:376; Levy 1978:403; Wilson
1972:37-38). Drought is the principal threat to perennial grasses, as it reduces their sustainability and
quantity. However annuals, which now dominate the grassland, remain dormant as seeds during the
summer and other dry times, greatly increasing their ability to survive droughts (Heady 1988:499).
11
Fauna found in the grassland habitat include a variety of mammals, birds and some reptiles. The
largest mammals were artiodactyls, i.e., tule elk, black-tailed deer (Odocoileus hemionus columbianus), and
pronghorn (Antilocapra americana). As already mentioned, tule elk were certainly abundant, but pronghorn
even more so, with some estimates placing their number in the millions prior to the 1850s with herds of
2000 to 3000 animals (Bartolome et al. 2007:370). Black-tailed deer are not as gregarious as pronghorn
forming either small groups of three to four composed of females and juveniles or solitary males. Statewide
densities of black-tailed deer average 18 to 60 individuals per square mile, but densities can range from 5 to
104 animals per square mile based on forage availability and season (Zeiner et al. 1990c:352). Black-tailed
deer also tend to prefer brush for cover so it is unlikely they would have been found grazing in the
grasslands too far from such protection. The black-tailed deer of the lower Sacramento Valley are a resident
subspecies of mule deer which do not migrate into the Sierra Nevada during the summer (ARNHA
2004:153).
Carnivorous mammals found in the grassland include coyote (Canis latrans), badger (Taxidea
taxus), striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis), and long-tailed weasel (Mustela frenata). Two lagomorphs and
several rodent species are also found here. Lagomorphs include black-tailed jackrabbits (Lepus
californicus) and desert or Audubon’s cottontails (Sylvilagus audubonii). In the past, seasonal flooding of
the grassland would have reduced suitable habitat, and likely restricted the overall population of these
animals. The same may be true for the California or Beechey ground squirrel (Spermophilus beecheyi), the
largest rodent that inhabits the grasslands. Other rodents common to grassland habitats are Heermann’s
kangaroo rat (Dipodomys heermanni), California vole (Microtus californicus), and deer or white-footed
mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus).
Numerous birds, such as raptors, vultures, and perching birds are found in the grassland. Raptors
found here include the year round resident red-tailed hawk, northern harrier (Circus cyaneus), and migrant
Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni). The turkey vulture (Cathartes aura) is also common in this habitat.
The American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), yellow-billed magpie (Pica nuttalli), and American robin
(Turdus migratorius) are common perching birds seen in the grassland, although they also frequent riparian
12
woodlands. Some waterfowl also frequent the grasslands for nesting or feeding, including Canada geese,
greater white-fronted geese, and the lesser snow geese. On the edge of the grassland bordering the foothill
woodland/chaparral, are also California quail (Callipepla californica).
Lastly, snakes of the grasslands include common kingsnake (Lampropeltis getula), gopher snake
(Pituophis catenifer), common garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis), and occasionally western rattlesnake
(Crotalus viridis). Lizards include southern alligator lizard (Elgaria multicarinata) and western fence lizard
(Sceloporus occidentalis), and amphibians include western spadefoot toad (Spea hammondii).
An important sub-habitat of the grassland is vernal pools. Vernal pools occur where impervious
layers of clay underlie the surface soil. Paleontological evidence indicates vernal pools have been a part of
the California landscape for tens of thousands of years (Holland and Jain 1988:516, 517). Vernal pools fill
with water in the winter and dry up by the end of the spring. Seeds and small aquatic life associated with
vernal pools become dormant, waiting for the next wet season. Plants and animals adapted to vernal pools
include a variety of crustaceans, such as California linderiella fairy shrimp (Linderiella occidentalis),
vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi), and tadpole shrimp (Lepidurus packardi), a variety of
beetles (Agabus sp.), true bugs (Hemiptera sp.) and solitary bees (genus Andrena), as well as spadefoot
toads, tiger salamanders (Ambystoma californiense), and waterbirds such as killdeer (Charadrius
vociferous), avocet (Recurvirostra americana), and greater yellowlegs (Tringa melanoleuca) (Keeler-Wolf
et al. 1998:9). Cinnamon teal (Anas cyanoptera) and mallard (Anas platyrhynchos) also frequently utilize
vernal pool habitats. Vernal pools in the study area are of two scales: large pools of 3500-4000 square
meters (0.86 to 0.99 acres) and clusters of small pools within a ten hectare (25 acre) area (Holland and Jain
1988:520).
The second important grassland sub-habitat is seasonal wetlands. Most grassland habitat occurs
along low lying basins between natural river levees and alluvial fan deposits from the Sierra Nevada. In the
spring, these basins would traditionally flood, inundating areas of grassland. Water would remain until it
evaporated or river levels fell below that of the flood basin (Meyer and Rosenthal 2008:30). Given these
13
conditions, extensive seasonal wetlands would have formed each year in the lower Sacramento Valley. Soil
morphology and historical data suggest that the lower 15 km (9.32 miles) of the Cosumnes River supported
a seasonal wetland prior to hydraulic mining practices upstream in the late 1800s (Florsheim and Mount
2003:313). Floodplains of this sort are critical for the growth and development of Chinook salmon
(Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) and several native cyprinids (minnows) such as Sacramento blackfish and
Sacramento splittail (Moyle 2002:256; Moyle et al. 2007; Sommer et al. 2011:81; Swenson et al. 2003).
Native amphibians also benefited from seasonal wetlands for breeding habitat (Zeiner et al. 1990a). Annual
burning of the grasslands by indigenous peoples further helped to rejuvenate floodplain soils and clear
senescent vegetation, improving the habitat for fish (Bot and Benites 2005:27; Lightfoot and Parrish
2009:98).
Along the northwestern and western edge of the study area, grassland merges with the Valley Oak
Woodland or Valley/Foothill Hardwood Forest. Grassland is dominated by valley oak (Quercus lobata) and
varies from patchy to relatively dense stands of trees depending on water availability and soil depth. The
understory is largely composed of grasses and forbs resembling grassland habitats. The Valley Oak
Woodland typically occurs at elevations averaging 150-240 meters (492-787 feet) which are largely outside
of the study area (Allan-Diaz et al. 2007:315-318). Fauna in this habitat include black-tailed deer, coyote,
dusky-footed woodrat (Neotoma fuscipes), western grey squirrel (Sciurus griseus), mourning dove
(Zenaida macroura), and California quail (Zeiner et al. 1990b:168).
Riparian Woodland
Riparian woodlands in the study area comprise both oak and river-bank forests that integrate with
valley/foothill hardwood habitats (Meyer and Rosenthal 2008:34). Historical reconstructions suggest that
approximately twelve percent of the study area was riparian woodland. Soils associated with riparian
woodlands are typically coarse textured alluvial loams with a relatively high water table (CVHMP 2008;
Thompson 1961:309). These woodlands can be up to a several miles wide on larger rivers or narrow bands
14
along banks of smaller streams and edge of freshwater marshes with tree density proportional to the size of
the waterway and natural levees (ARNHA 2004:13; Thompson 1961:294, 306, 315). Rivers bordered by
riparian woodlands include portions of the American and lower Sacramento rivers as well as the Cosumnes,
Mokelumne, and Dry and Laguna creeks (see Figure 2). Riparian woodlands were of greatest width along
the lower Sacramento River where some were four to five miles wide (Thompson 1961:307). Prior to
modern levee construction, natural river levees associated with these waterways rose 1.5 to 6 meters (5 to
20 feet) above the surrounding land (Thompson 1961:29). Riparian woodlands strengthened the levees and
acted as natural windbreaks, reducing evaporation, transpiration, and wind damage.
Dominant canopy species associated with the riparian habitat includes California sycamore
(Platanus racemosa), valley oak, Fremont’s cottonwood, white alder (Alnus rhombifolia), Oregon ash
(Fraxinus latifolia), and numerous species of willows. Prior to Euro-American settlement, some oaks and
sycamores were 75 to 100 feet tall (Thompson 1961:307) and interspersed with California black walnut
(Juglans californica) (Schulz 1981:14; Thompson 1961:307, 311). Understory vegetation in the riparian
habitat includes California box elder (Acer negunde californicum), coyotebrush (Baccharis pilularis
consanguinea), blackberries (Rubus spp.), wild rose (Rosa californica), and various annual and perennial
herbaceous species. Resident vines that inhabit the riparian woodland are California grape (Vitus
californica), poison oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum), and Dutchman’s pipe (Aristolochia californica).
Based on historical accounts, most of the riparian woodland along the Sacramento River had been
destroyed by 1868 when it was logged for fuel and cleared for agricultural fields, particularly orchards
(Thompson 1960:311-312).
A diverse and abundant fauna is found in riparian woodlands. This includes black-tailed deer and
rodents, including the American beaver (Castor canadensis), the western gray squirrel, the dusky-footed
woodrat, Botta’s pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae), and the deer or white-footed mouse. Carnivores
include mountain lion (Puma concolor), bobcat (Lynx rufus); and ringtail (Bassariscus astutus) and species
such as river otter, mink, and long-tailed weasel found in adjacent habitats. The same is true for omnivores
like coyote, gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) and striped and spotted skunks. Raccoons (Procyon
15
lotor), by contrast, may have been limited to the riparian woodlands. The now extinct California grizzly
bear (Ursus arctos californicus) and gray wolf (Canis lupus) were especially abundant in this habitat
(Jameson and Peeters 2004:79-80).
Many birds and fish but fewer reptiles and amphibians were found in riparian woodlands. Resident
birds included double-crested cormorant (Phalacrocorax auritus), red-tailed hawk; wood duck (Aix
sponsa); belted kingfisher (Ceryle alcyon); mourning dove (Zenaida macroura); and western scrub-jay
(Aphelocoma californica). Several woodpeckers and their kin are also found in riparian woodlands,
including Nuttall’s woodpecker (Picoides nutallii), downy woodpecker (Picoides pubescens), and northern
flicker (Colaptes auratus). Resident reptiles include the western pond turtle and snakes. Western pond
turtles favor marsh and river habitats with slow moving waters, submerged logs, rocks, floating vegetation,
and mud banks for basking and cover. Other reptiles and amphibians of the riparian woodland include
snakes such as the racer (Coluber constrictor) and endangered giant garter snake (Thamnophis gigas),
Pacific chorus frog, California slender salamander (Batrachoseps attenuatus), and California newt (Taricha
torosa).
Prior to the deleterious effects of hydraulic mining and agriculture, anadromous fish, such as
Chinook salmon, white and green sturgeon (Acipenser montanus and A. medirostris), and Pacific and river
lamprey (Lampetra tridentata and L. ayresii), would migrate through most of the study area rivers and
creeks. Chinook salmon had four runs on the Sacramento River but only a fall run was known on the
Cosumnes River (Moyle 2010, personal communication; Yoshiyama et al. 2001:111). Accurate salmon
counts for the Sacramento River are lacking prior to the mid 20th century, but a Wintun informant reported
that they were abundant enough to feed 200 to 300 people for two to three weeks (Yoshiyama et al.
2001:143). Fallrun spawning populations along the main stem of the Sacramento River (approximately 67
miles) averaged 217,100 annually during 1952–1959; 136,600 in the 1960s; 77,300 in the 1970s; 72,200 in
the 1980s; and 48,000 from 1990 to 1997 (Yoshiyama et al. 2001:145). Cosumnes River numbers are
smaller, but prior to 1929 they were described as “considerable” equaling those on the Mokelumne, which
produced at least 3800 pounds of salmon in 1929 (Yoshiyama et al. 2001:110). From 1953 to 1959
16
approximately 500 to 5000 Chinook salmon were estimated in the Cosumnes River although the historical
average was approximately 1000. No salmon were recorded in the Cosumnes River after 1988 until their
reintroduction in 1998 (Moyle 2010, personal communication; Yoshiyama et al. 2001:112).
Other native fish present in the faster water riparian habitats of the study area include hardhead
(Mylopharodon conocephalus), Sacramento pikeminnow (Ptychocheilus grandis), and Sacramento splittail,
with the the latter two found in slow water habitats as well.
Summary
The descriptive utility of vegetation communities, notwithstanding their boundaries and biotic
composition, can change over time, transition zones providing varied opportunities for humans and animals
alike. Soil studies indicate that the general locations have been stable for many centuries, but
paleoenvironmental data indicate that their volume and community boundaries have waxed and waned over
time in response to climatic forces (see Chapter 3). Anthropogenic factors are another source of community
change, notably aboriginal fire regimes and the devastation wrought by Euro-American occupation after the
1849 Gold Rush.
Native American fire regimes helped to rejuvenate the soil in seasonal grassland wetlands. Fire
management also helped to create and support the complex environmental mosaic and biological diversity
that characterized the study area (Lewis 1982:51-52; Parrish and Lightfoot 2009:99). Euro-American
occupation of the study area, by contrast, produced swift, deleterious, and permanent changes to the
environment. In less than 100 years, over 85 percent of the freshwater marsh, grassland, and riparian
habitats present in 1849 were destroyed (CSUC 2003:15). What early mining and agricultural practices
failed to destroy, were subsequently consumed by 20th century river channelization and urban sprawl. As a
result, less than four percent of the historic habitats of the lower Sacramento Valley remain. Most of the
native fish, large mammals, and carnivores are now extinct, extirpated, or endangered. Migratory bird and
17
fish populations have been significantly reduced, with Central Valley waterfowl decreased from an
estimated six to ten million birds in 1935 to only three to five million in 1974 and Cosumnes River salmon
extirpated sometime after 1959 (Bellrose 1976:17; Ducks Unlimited 2013; Yoshiyama et al. 2001:112).
This implies that although plant and animal resources in the study area likely shifted over time due
to anthropogenic and climatic factors, and that these changes ought to be reflected in archaeological
deposits. More than this, it suggests that the present landscape is at best an indirect and imperfect reflection
of the environment used by prehistoric people. This implies, in turn, that the study of zooarchaeological and
paleobotanical collections provide one of the only avenues available to reconstruct the prehistoric ecology
of the lower Sacramento Valley.
18
Chapter 3
PALEOENVIRONMENTAL, ARCHAEOLOGICAL, AND
ETHNOGRAPHIC CONTEXT
Paleoenvironmental Context
Previous research indicates that cultural changes may be correlated with paleoenvironmental shifts
in California (e.g., Arnold 1992; Jones et al. 1999; Kennett 2005; Moratto 1984; Moratto and Chartkoff
2007; Pierce 1988; Raab 1996; Schwitalla 2010). This concept is built upon foundations such as
Baumhoff’s (1963, 1978) examination of California where he linked cultural adaptations to vegetation
patterns. An understanding of paleoenvironmental trends may therefore help to explain the timing of and
motivation underlying cultural patterns in prehistoric California. The study area is largely composed of
aquatic environments, i.e., rivers, lakes, sloughs, marshes, comprising the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta
(the Delta). Thus, cultural adaptations would likely be related to the stability and changes in these habitats.
Paleoenvironmental data and reconstructions for the study area often rely on interpretations from
adjacent regions. This is particularly true for the Early and Middle Holocene while data for the last 900
years of Delta development and Sacramento River flows is locally available (see Figure 3).
The Pleistocene/Holocene Transition
The end of the Pleistocene and advent of Holocene conditions occurred approximately 13,500 to
11,500 years ago. Climate was generally wet and cool, and the Sacramento Valley a large river basin with
riparian forests and extensive grasslands. Freshwater marsh habitats were limited and megafauna abundant
(Meyer and Rosenthal 2008:44). Fossil remains of grazers include Columbian mammoth (Mammuthus
columbi), ancient bison (Bison antiquus), camel (Camelops hesternus), Harlan’s ground sloth
(Paramylodon harlani), western horse (Equus major), and their predators [e.g., dire wolf (Canis dirus) and
saber-toothed cat (Smilodon floridanus)] support the dominance of grassland habitats (Meyer and
Rosenthal 2008:42-43). As the Pleistocene/Holocene transition drew to a close, megafauna disappeared and
humans began to occupy the landscape (Erlandson et al. 2007:62). These changes coincided with shifts in
19
temperature and precipitation that initiated the onset of modern Mediterranean environments across
California.
Early and Middle Holocene
The Early Holocene dates from approximately 11,000 to 7000 years ago. The Middle Holocene
dates from 7000 to about 4000 years ago. During the Early Holocene, global weather patterns grew
warmer, precipitation decreased, and climate became more stable. Sea levels rose an average of 83 meters
(272 feet) every 1000 years (Meyer and Rosenthal 2008:48). Sea level rise led to the formation of the San
Francisco Bay estuary and its eastward expansion at a rate of approximately 30 meters a year (Atwater and
Hedel 1976:8; Bickel 1976:11). Sea level rise slowed after 8000 B.P. and sediment began to accumulate,
producing tidal marshes along the coast and inland Delta. By 6000 B.P., peat samples indicate vegetation
patterns similar to those of today in the study area (Shlemon and Begg 1975).
Climate during the Middle Holocene was typically warmer and drier, with a xeric peak occurring
at 6800 B.P. (Minnich 2007:59). At roughly the same time there is evidence for a high-energy water flow in
the San Francisco Bay and eastern Diablo Range that may have resulted from massive snow melt in the
Sierra Nevada and Cascade ranges (Meyer and Rosenthal 2008:57). There is no evidence of Early
Holocene human occupation in the study area and Middle Holocene sites are rare. When found, Middle
Holocene sites are typically located on aeolian dunes and return radiocarbon dates commensurate with the
latter part of the era (Meyer and Rosenthal 2008:52, 59).
Late Holocene
The Late Holocene dates between 4000 B.P. and the present. Close to 300 Late Holocene
archaeological sites are present within the study area, typically located on high ground and river levees
(Pierce 1988:16, 37). The Late Holocene marks a return to a cooler and wetter climate, with increased
precipitation and less pronounced seasonal variations in temperature (West 2000 as cited in Meyer and
Rosenthal 2008:64). This trend may have begun as early as 5000 B.P. and is associated with the increasing
presence of moist westerly winds on the Pacific Coast; lower salinity in San Francisco Bay; new glacial
formation in the Sierra Nevada; and the establishment of gray pine-blue oak woodland in the Sierra Nevada
20
foothills (Meyer and Rosenthal 2008:57; Minnich 2007:61). However, as the Late Holocene progressed,
alternating periods of wet and dry conditions occurred (Adam 1975; Byrne et al. 2001; Gorman and Wells
2000; Ingram et al. 1996; Meko et al. 2001; Meyer and Rosenthal 2008; West et al. 2007).
HOLOCENE
Figure 3. Paleoenvironmental Chart.
Figure 3 illustrates the correspondence between major climatic events, local paleoclimatic data,
and archaeological temporal periods for the study area during the Late Holocene. As seen above, two
climatic events are associated with the Late Holocene: the Medieval Climatic Anomaly (MCA) and the
Little Ice Age (LIA).
The MCA is defined as a time of increased aridity that resulted in droughts and warm temperatures
in many parts of the world, particularly in western North America (Jones et al. 1999:138). The MCA lasted
from 1150 to 600 B.P., although some researchers believe it may have began as early as 1500 B.P. (Ingram
21
1998; Kennett et al. 2007). Peat deposits from Rush Ranch in Suisun Marsh and tree ring data from the
Sacramento River watershed suggest that drought conditions manifest by low freshwater flows and high
salinity, occurred within the study area during the MCA. Data from Rush Ranch indicate reduced
freshwater by 1750 cal. B.P., almost 600 years earlier than the start of the global MCA (Byrne et al.
2001:70, 75). These conditions persisted until about 750 cal. B.P., when freshwater flows increased.
Instead, high salinity levels in peat deposits indicate that between 1750 and 750 cal. B.P. freshwater flows
into Suisun Marsh were normally 44 percent lower than the lowest modern record in A.D. 1978 (Byrne et
al. 2001:74). Similarly, tree ring data across northern California indicate low precipitation and stream flows
in the Sacramento River watershed from 1095 B.P. to 960 B.P., with extremely low stream flows around
967 B.P. (Meko et al. 2001:1035). Tree ring data signal renewed drought conditions beginning in 630 B.P.
through the beginning of the LIA at approximately 480 B.P. This suggests that during the MCA freshwater
marsh habitats were likely smaller, riparian corridors dominated by slower stream courses and fewer
sloughs, and grasslands probably more expansive and seasonally drier.
The LIA (650 to 150 B.P.) was a global climatic event marked by lowered mean temperatures,
glacial advances, expansion of polar pack-ice, and tree-line retreats (Koerper et al. 1985:99). In California,
the LIA is associated with high lake stands in the Great Basin and the Matthes Glaciation in the Sierra
Nevada (Meyer and Rosenthal 2008:65). Climate in the LIA was apparently colder, with temperatures one
to two degrees Celsius (1.8 to 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) lower than today. Precipitation was likewise greater
and, when combined with colder temperature, produced increased snow at higher elevations. At least five
extreme floods are recorded in the study area during the LIA at 650 B.P., 600 B.P., 530 B.P., 390 B.P. and
230 B.P. (Gorman and Wells 2000:216; Meko et al. 2001:1035; West et al. 2007:24). Drought conditions
are recorded in association with at least two of these flood events; at 658 to 649 B.P. and 372 to 370 B.P.
(Meko et al. 2001:1037). This suggests that increased temperatures may have contributed to increased snow
pack melt, though annual precipitation was insufficient to maintain normal stream flows. Droughts
however, of briefer duration than those in the MCA, the longest estimated at just LIA 20 years between 658
and 649 B.P. (Byrne et al. 2001:74; Meko et al. 2001:1037). These climatic perturbations vegetation
22
habitats would have led to changes in vegetation, with expansive grasslands and slow-moving rivers,
replaced by a mosaic of aquatic habitats with faster colder rivers, extensive freshwater marsh, and smaller
seasonally flooded grasslands.
Archaeological Context
Extensive evidence for human occupation of the study area does not appear until the terminal
Middle Holocene, circa 5000 to 4400 B.P.(Golla 2007:76; Meyer and Rosenthal 2008:63). Although Early
to Middle Holocene occupation has been identified in surrounding vicinity, they are lacking in the study
area (Meyer and Rosenthal 2008:60-62). This may be linked to the development of the Delta leading to
changes in vegetation, inundation, deposition, erosion, and other taphonomic processes that destroy or
cover sites. Once the Delta began to stabilize, evidence for human use of the area increases and regionally
specific cultural traditions developed.
A Brief History of Lower Sacramento Valley Archaeology
Systematic archaeological investigations of the lower Sacramento Valley began in 1933, when
J.B. Lillard and W.K. Purves of Sacramento Junior College excavated three sites near the confluence of
Deer Creek and the Cosumnes River. On the basis of artifact seriation, stratagraphic principles, burial
positions, and grave lots, Lillard and Purves developed the first archaeological chronology for the study
area and Central California. Termed the Early, Intermediate, and Recent periods, the chronology developed
by Lillard and Purves challenged Alfred Kroeber’s assertion that prehistoric California cultures had not
changed over time (Moratto 1984:179). Additional excavations in the area led to an extended report and the
formation of Delta Sequence. Temporal periods within the Delta Sequence were renamed the Early,
Transitional and Late periods (Lillard et al. 1939). The Delta Sequence was later modified and expanded by
R.K. Beardsley to include the San Francisco Bay region (Beardsley 1948, 1954a, 1954b). Renaming the
temporal sequences identified by Lillard et. al (1939) as the Early, Middle, and Late horizons, Beardsley
used this sequence as a framework for his development of the Central California Taxonomic System
(CCTS). The CCTS concept was based on the Midwestern Taxonomic System developed by W.C. McKern
for the American Midwest. In 1972, the tripartite scheme was again renamed, by S. Ragir after her
23
excavations at SJO-68. The scheme she proposed relied on the sites or regions cultural manifestations
where each culture was first identified. Thus the Early Horizon became the Windmiller Culture; the Middle
Horizon became the Cosumnes Culture; and the Late Horizon became the Hotchkiss Culture (Ragir
1972:189).
With the advent of absolute dating, J.A. Bennyhoff, D.A. Fredrickson, and R.E. Hughes spent
several decades attempting to refine the cultural chronology established by Beardsley (Bennyhoff and
Fredrickson 1994; Bennyhoff and Hughes 1987). At the same time, investigations in the San Francisco Bay
region increased and a local cultural chronology was established for the Bay Area (Moratto 1984:252).
Ultimately, Bennyhoff and Hughes (1987) offered a general chronology for California and the Western
Great Basin. By coupling Olivella shell bead types (largely from burial contexts) and radiocarbon assays,
this chronology attempted to resolve California and Great Basin sequences while preserving of regional
deviations.
More recently, a synthesis of the Central Valley archaeological record by Rosenthal et al. (2007)
has proposed a five part temporal scheme based on Fredrickson’s (1973, 1974) earlier proposed PaleoIndian, Archaic, and Emergent periods (Rosenthal et al. 2007:150). The goal of this synthesis was to
correlate foothill, valley, and Delta sequences, incorporating settlement and subsistence patterns and new
data from older sites, such as the Skyrocket and Los Vaqueros localities (Rosenthal and Meyer 2008:61
Table 6). Although the scheme works well for earlier periods, by 5000 B.P. regional variations are
apparent, complicating its utility. Refinement of the Central Valley chronology remains a central issue of
archaeological research, such that other aspects human behavior (e.g., subsistence patterns and
technological features) are generally ignored.
For the purposes of this analysis, the tripartite chronology of Early, Middle, and Late periods
proposed by Bennyhoff and Hughes (1987) will be employed. Temporal frameworks are based on
calibrated radiocarbon dates established by Groza (2002) using AMS dating of Olivella shell beads (see
Hughes and Milliken 2007:265, Figure 17.2 Scheme D). The resulting chronology is as follows: Early
Period will represent 4400 to 2450 B.P., Middle Period 2450 to 900 B.P., and Late Period 900 to 150 B.P.
24
Before the Early Period
Although no Early (11,000 to 7000 B.P.) and few Middle Holocene (7000 to 4000 B.P.) sites are
documented in the Lower Sacramento Valley, a brief discussion of these is warranted. Early Holocene sites
in the greater northern Central Valley are sometimes referred to as Paleo-Indian sites and are associated
with wide-stemmed dart points, flaked stone crescents, and a preponderance of milling equipment, such as
millingslabs, handstones, and a variety of other cobble-based pounding, chopping, and scraping tools
(Rosenthal and Meyer 2008:52). The distribution of Early Holocene sites indicates widespread use of
foothill as well as the conifer zone of the Sierra Nevada and Coast Ranges. Based on these findings,
settlement was likely semi-nomadic and subsistence focused on plant foods (including both small seeds and
nut crops) supplemented by big game.
A significant gap exists in the Middle Holocene record of northern Central Valley. Apart from a
few insecurely dated sites (e.g., LAK-509/881), Middle Holocene material is confined to the eastern slopes
of the Diablo Range and southern Sierra foothills (Rosenthal and Meyer 2008:59). This is believed to be
the result of extensive erosion and deposition during or shortly after the Middle Holocene interval
(Rosenthal et al. 2007:153). Middle Holocene or Lower Archaic sites are associated with notched and
stemmed dart points, including Lake Mohave, Silver Lake, and Pinto styles. Early Holocene milling
equipment persists (particularly in the foothills) but in marsh, riparian, and estuarine settings, mortars and
pestles appear as early as 6,000 cal. B.P., possibly signaling increased investment in a more sedentary
lifestyle (Rosenthal et al. 2007:154; Rosenthal and Meyer 2008:63).
Early Period (4400 to 2450 B.P.)
In the Late Holocene, the archaeological record increases significantly. The so called Early Period
or Windmiller Pattern is widespread throughout the Delta and northern San Joaquin Valley. Sediments
containing Early Period deposits are typically orange-brown, compacted soils lacking organic material
(Soule 1976:12). Although the origin of this pattern is unknown, the sophisticated material culture and
technologies of the Early Period suggest a fluorescence stemming from an earlier cultural pattern
(Fredrickson 1994:44).
25
The Early Period mortuary complex is characterized by ventrally extended burials with a westerly
orientation and numerous grave goods, including extensive use of red ochre. Diagnostic shell artifacts
include Haliotis ornaments corresponding to Gifford’s (1947) types K, Q, and S and the first appearance of
Olivella biplicata shell beads (Rosenthal et al. 2007:155). The latter include Bennyhoff and Hughes’ (1987)
types B and L Olivella beads. Lithic technologies include large stemmed and leaf-shaped projectile points,
polished stone atlatl spurs, ground slate pins, steatite pipes and beads, and well-made plummet style
charmstones of exotic and local material sometimes with shell bead appliqué. Quartz crystals are also
common in Early Period assemblages as are baked clay balls and ‘pecans’ with impressions indicating use
of fine twisted cordage and twined basketry (Moratto 1984:203; Rosenthal et al. 2007:155). Bone artifacts
include awls, needles, plain bird bone tubes, and fishing gear, such as bone hooks, gorges, and spear heads.
Milling equipment includes handstones and millingslabs as well as mortars and pestles.
The various aspects of the Early Period record indicate these people lived in large sedentary
groups, practicing a logistically structured Early Period subsistence pattern (sensu Binford 1979, 1980).
The presence of exotic trade goods also indicates these populations were part of a regional trade network.
Obsidian sources employed during the Early Period include eastern Sierra sources (e.g., Bodie Hills, Casa
Diablo, Coso, and Mount Hicks), North Coast Range (e.g., Napa Valley and Borax Lake), and southern
Cascades (e.g., Tuscan) (Rosenthal et al. 2007:155). As noted above, Olivella shell beads make their first
appearance in the study area during the Early Period, indicating trade with Southern California coastal
groups (Hughes and Milliken 2007:268-269).
Several Early Period sites are located in the study area. These are the Old Bridge Site (CAL-237),
the Windmiller Mound (SAC-107), the Blossom Mound (SJO-68), and the Erich Mound (SAC-168). The
Denier Mound (SAC-67) is also reported to have an Early Period burial-related component (Jerald Johnson,
personal communication 2010).
The Middle Period (2450 to 900 B.P.)
Middle Period sites are more numerous and better understood than Early Period deposits. The
Middle Period, Cosumnes Culture, or Berkeley Pattern, is a suite of diagnostic cultural traditions most
26
commonly found in the Delta, Stockton, and San Francisco Bay regions (Moratto 1984:210-211). Middle
Period deposits are typically a well-developed brown midden containing hearth features, fire-fractured
rock, storage pits, and house floors indicating Middle Period sites were intensively occupied (Bouey
1995:348-349; Rosenthal and Meyer 2008:68; Rosenthal et al. 2007:156; Soule 1976:12).
The Middle Period mortuary complex is characterized by flexed burials with variable orientations
and a paucity of grave goods. A few cremations have also been recorded. Inhumations are sometimes
accompanied by animal bones and animal burials have also been recorded. Diagnostic shell artifacts
include Haliotis type J, K, and U ornaments (Gifford 1947) and class C, D, F, and G Olivella shell beads
(Bennyhoff and Hughes 1987). Other diagnostic ornaments include bi-pointed, flat, and cylindrical slate
pendants, steatite rings, flat beads, and ear spools, and biotite, actinolite, and hematite pendants (Bennyhoff
1972 in Elsasser 1978:40; Rosenthal and Meyer 2008:69). Other diagnostic artifact types include heavy,
concave-base non-stemmed dart-sized projectile points with distinctive diagonal flaking, atlatl hooks of
bone and antler, fishtail and asymmetrical spindle-shaped charmstones, and baked clay cooking balls
(Bouey and Waechter 1992:11; Fredrickson 1994 [1973]:44-45; Moratto 1984:209-211). The Middle
Period is also marked by a growing emphasis on bone tools, whistles, tubes, spatulae, and bi-pointed
implements. Items made of mammal bone are noticeably more abundant than those made of bird bone
(Fredrickson 1994 [1973]:44; Rosenthal and Meyer 2008:73). Milling equipment includes wooden mortars
and both bi-pointed and flat-end pestles, and less frequently, handstones and millingslabs.
The beginning of the Middle Period roughly corresponds with the onset of cooler and wetter
environmental conditions (Rosenthal and Meyer 2008:64). Large sedentary communities found on levee
ridges and other elevated landforms with extensive cemeteries and smaller satellite villages characterize
this period (Rosenthal and Meyer 2008:68 and the sources therein). Economies appear to be focused on a
broad spectrum of plant and animal resources, many of which could be seasonally exploited for storage or
exchange. Specialized tools and gear are prevalent, including fishing gear, such as harpoon heads, hooks,
net weights, and mesh gauges, and fabricating implements, such as elk antler wedges, bone “shaft
wrenches,” bone awls, and stone drills.
27
Some have speculated that some attributes of the Middle Period reflect the spread of Utian
speaking groups from the Bay Area (Moratto 1984:211). Evidence of contemporaneous Windmiller
cultures is found along the western and southern edges of the Delta and along streams and axial marshes of
San Joaquin and Merced counties. These circumscribed Windmiller cultures continue until sometime
between 800 and 1000 years ago (Rosenthal et al. 2007:156). Other supporting evidence may lie in the shift
of obsidian away from eastern Sierran (e.g., Bodie Hills) sources to North Coast Range (e.g., Borax Lake
and Napa Valley) sources (Rosenthal et al. 2007:157). Similarly, shell bead and ornament trade shifts away
from southern California sources to include more Bay Area and central coast material (Heizer 1951:94-95
as cited in Ragir 1972:136; Rosenthal and Meyer 2008:69).
Study area sites with Middle Period deposits include the Johnson Mound (SAC-6), the Souza
Mound (SAC-42), the Denier Site (SAC-67), SAC-133, SAC-142, and the Stone Lake Site (SAC-145).
Faunal assemblages from three of these sites, SAC-42, SAC-67, and SAC-133, are used in this thesis.
The Late Period (900 to 150 B.P.)
The Late Period is also known as the Augustine Pattern, Hotchkiss Culture, and Emergent. Late
Period deposits are characterized by black, greasy midden (Soule 1976:12). Many Late Period sites
identified in the study area are located on high ground near watercourses. Late Period archaeological
assemblages often display regionally specific characteristics indicating a coalescence of previous Middle
Period traits with new technological developments, trade goods, and economic patterns (Fredrickson 1994
[1973]:45). The Late Period is typically divided into two phases: Phase I (700 to 400 B.P.) and Phase II
(400-150 B.P.). For the purposes of this study, the Late Period will be discussed as a single cultural period
and distinctions between the phases will only be made when significant differences exist.
Mortuary traits associated with the Late Period in the study area include tightly flexed burials, and
cremations often displaying preinternment grave pit and grave good burning . Utilitarian objects such as
hunting equipment, fishing gear, mortars and pestles (sometimes “killed”), and wealth objects such as shell
beads and ornaments are often included (Rosenthal et al. 2007:158). In Phase I, cremations appear to be
reserved for high status individuals based on the differential distribution of grave goods. In Phase II,
28
cremation is the general practice for all interments. Shell bead patterns in Phase I include incised,
trapezoidal and “big head” or “banjo” Haliotis ornaments types N, O, K, and S (Gifford 1947) and class E,
H, K, and M Olivella shell beads (Bennyhoff and Hughes 1987). Clamshell disk beads are introduced in
Phase II and quickly eclipse Olivella forms. Additional Phase II shell beads include Tivela tube and
Dentalium beads along with magnesite disk beads. In the late Phase II period, European glass trade beads
become commonplace.
Changes in lithic technologies and the baked clay industry also occur. The bow and arrow is
introduced sometime between 1100 to 700 cal. B.P. (Rosenthal and Meyer 2008:71). The earliest arrow
points were contracting stem Gunther-barbed series projectiles. These were followed by Stockton Serrated
series (Phase I) and Desert Side-notched (Phase II) points. Stockton Serrated points represent a local
invention, morphologically dissimilar to other Californian arrow point series (Rosenthal and Meyer
2008:71). Another in situ Late Period development was the incipient pottery tradition termed Cosumnes
Brownware (Johnson 1990; Kielusiak 1982). This ceramic tradition has a restricted distribution along the
Cosumnes River and appears to have been manufactured from local clay sources (Johnson 1990:156).
Examples of this pottery have been identified in assemblages from along the Cosumnes River (e.g., SAC-6,
SAC-67, SAC-107, SAC-127, SAC-265, SAC-267, and SAC-329) (Johnson 1990:146). Characteristic
examples include rolled, coiled, and pinched clay fragments as well as finished body, base, and rim sherds
(Johnson 1976:301-319, 1990:146). Animal, bird, and human effigies and hand molded bowls sometimes
displaying fingernail incising and punctate decoration are other common examples (Johnson 1990:148).
Diagnostic Late Period bone and antler artifacts include serrated fish harpoons and incised
patterned bird bone tubes and whistles. Antler or bone toggle harpoons and composite bone fish hooks are
diagnostic of Phase II. Numerous complete and fragmentary bone awls indicate the manufacture of coiled
and twined basketry, netting, and other textiles (Rosenthal et al. 2007 and the sources therein). Other
diagnostic Late Period artifacts include formed mortars and pestles, including flat-bottomed mortars,
cylindrical pestles, bi-pointed wooden mortar pestles, flanged steatite pipes, and steatite and baked clay ear
spools (Fredrickson 1973:45; Moratto 1984:212-213; Rosenthal et al. 2007:158-159).
29
There is a slight shift in exchange patterns for certain trade items during the Late Period. Raw
materials rather than finished items increase in frequency. For example, obsidian cobbles and large flake
blanks from the Napa Valley have been found in several lower Sacramento Valley sites (Fredrickson 1994
[1973]:45; Rosenthal and Meyer 2008:76; Rosenthal et al. 2007:159). Napa Valley obsidian continues to be
the major source but small amounts of Bodie Hills begin to appear again in the record (Rosenthal and
Meyer 2008:78, 79). Some deposits north of the Delta exhibit clam shell manufacturing residues, but not
those in the immediate study area. Olivella and Haliotis shell from southern California and the Central
Coast continued to be traded along with other previously unknown commodities from distant places, such
as Dentalium from Pacific Northwest and European metal items and glass beads.
Late Period sites abound in the study area. Examples include the Hollister Mound (SAC-21),
King-Brown site (SAC-29), Mosher Site (SAC-56), Booth Mound (SAC-126), Augustine Site (SAC-127),
Kadema Site (SAC-192), Whaley Site; (SAC-265), Blodgett site (SAC-267), and Georgiana Slough Site
(SAC-329). Several Late Period sites are also ethnographic known villages. These include Sama (SAC-29),
Amuchamne aka Umucha (SAC-126), and Kadema (SAC-192) (Bennyhoff 1977:58, 83, 105, 165). Faunal
assemblages from SAC-29, SAC-267, and SAC-329 are used in this study.
Ethnographic Context
Ethnographically, the study area was inhabited by the Plains Miwok and Valley Nisenan.
Information for the Plains Miwok and Valley Nisenan is limited and is derived in part from geographically
separate but linguistically related groups such as the Sierra Miwok and Hill Nisenan (e.g., Barrett and
Gifford 1933; Beals 1933; Kroeber 1925, 1929; Levy 1978; Littlejohn 1928; Ritter and Schultz 1972;
Wilson 1972; Wilson and Towne 1978). In general, inhabitants of the study area lived in permanent yearround settlements along waterways. They practiced intensive seed gathering combined with hunting and
fishing within defined territories (see Figure 3). Grassland burning was practiced by both study area
cultures and surrounding groups (Levy 1978:402; Matson 1972:43).
30
Plains Miwok
The Plains Miwok represent a linguistic amalgamation of many autonomous socio-political groups
or tribelets (Bennyhoff 1977:15; Kroeber 1962:29). They spoke one of the five Eastern Miwok languages
of the Utian language family (Levy 1978:398). Linguistic and archaeological evidence suggest that the
ancestors of the Plains Miwok have resided in the Delta region for at least 4400 years (Golla 2007:76).
Population estimates between 11.1 and 57 persons per square mile have been proposed for the Plains
Miwok, with the highest density reflecting areas along watercourses (Baumhoff 1963:219, 226; Johnson
1976:39). Cosumnes Brownware is a unique tradition attributed to Late Period Plains Miwok groups
(Johnson 1990:148). The general boundaries of Plains Miwok extended from the Deer Creek/Sloughhouse
Pacific Ocean
Figure 4. Ethnographic Territories (after Bennyhoff 1977, Map 2).
31
vicinity on the north to the lower banks of the Mokelumne River on the south, and from the edge of the
Sierra Foothills on the east to the edge of the Yolo Basin on the west.
Valley Nisenan
The Nisenan, or Southern Maidu, are the southernmost linguistic group of the Maidu Penutian
language family (Wilson and Towne 1978:387). Three Nisenan dialects are recognized Northern Hill,
Southern Hill, and Valley Nisenan. The Valley Nisenan lived on the southwestern outskirts of the larger
Nisenan territory and is the group most associated with the study area. Valley Nisenan territory extended
from the Sacramento River Pocket Area northward to the crest of the Sierras (see Figure 4). The southern
boundary is typically believed to be somewhere near SAC-29 (Johnson and Farncomb 2005:63; Matson
1972:40). Pre-contact population estimates for Nisenan range from five to seven people per square mile
(Matson 1972:44).
Ethnographic data on the Nisenan is drawn primarily from foothill groups, however, it has been
suggested that Valley Nisenan lifeways resembled those of the Plains Miwok with whom they shared
similar surroundings. The following description will account for the subsistence patterns of both groups.
Only striking differences or specific references to one group will be noted.
Ethnographic Subsistence Patterns
The Plains Miwok and the Valley Nisenan seasonally exploited various plant and game resources
within their territory (Levy 1978:402; Matson 1972:41; Wilson and Towne 1978:389). Archaeological
deposits in the study area indicate year-round occupation and use of various seeds, acorns, terrestrial game,
waterfowl, and fish (Barrett and Gifford 1933; Bouey and Waechter 1992; Craw 2002; Johnson 1976;
Milliken 1995; Schulz 1981; Soule 1976; Wilson 1972). Many of these resources provided both sustenance
and raw materials for various utilitarian, decorative, and ceremonial objects.
Fish
The diversity of fishing technologies in study area collections indicates the importance of fishing
in the diet. Important fish listed in ethnographic accounts include salmon, sturgeon, and lamprey (Barrett
32
and Gifford 1933:187-190; Wilson 1972:34-35) but archaeological evidence indicates that other species
were of even greater significance (e.g., Sacramento perch, Sacramento sucker, and thicktail chub [Lightfoot
and Parrish 2009:327-329; Rosenthal and Meyer 2008:72, 74; Stevens and Zelazo 2010]).
Ethnographic accounts indicate that fishing was both an individual and communal activity
performed from riverbanks or tule rafts. Fishing technology included clay ball and stone weighted nets, dip
nets, weirs and seines (especially in the marshes), basketry traps, toggle harpoons, bi-pointed fish hooks,
spears, and poison from buckeye (Aesculus californica) and soaproot (Chlorogalum pomeridianum)
(Barrett and Gifford 1933:187-190; Levy 1978:403; Wilson 1972:34-35; Wilson and Towne 1978:389390). Interestingly, there is no mention of fishing weirs being used along the lower reaches of the
Sacramento River although weirs were used in upper reaches of the Sacramento River. Weirs would have
been essentially useless in the lower river because it is too wide, deep, and the flow too heavy for weirs to
be effective.
Large fish (e.g., salmon and sturgeon) were usually filleted and eviscerated when caught and then
eaten fresh or dried. Salmon roe was also eaten fresh or dried while salmon vertebrae were sometimes
pounded and eaten raw (Barrett and Gifford 1933:190; Lightfoot and Parrish 2009:326). Drying was
accomplished either in the open air or by smoking (Barrett and Gifford 1933:140; Wilson 1972:35). Dried
fish were transported back to villages and stored in baskets. Dried fish was eaten in chunks, strips, or
pounded into a meal that was sometimes made into cakes. Dried fish was also mixed with acorn mush and
broiled on sticks over a fire (Barrett and Gifford 1933:139). A mixture of dried salmon roe, pine nuts and
salmon flour is recorded as being traded for salt and clam shell disk beads from the coast (Lightfoot and
Parrish 2009:326). Smaller fish were eaten when caught or dried whole. Smaller fish were also wrapped in
plant leaves and steamed in earth ovens or roasted whole in ashes (Barrett and Gifford 1933:138; Levy
1978:405; Wilson 1972:35). Fish was also used as a trade item with foothill groups (Davis 1961:35; Wilson
1972:35).
33
Birds
As with fish, various types of nets were employed to catch birds, particularly ducks. Plains Miwok
reportedly used two kinds of duck nets. The first was a weighted net that was pulled down over the ducks
as they fed in shallow water; acorns were sometimes used as bait. This net was about six feet wide and 40
feet long (Barrett and Gifford 1933:186). The second type of net was designed to catch ducks and geese as
they approached the water (Kroeber 1925:410). It was set between two notched poles and was left to lie
loose in the water. As the birds came into land, the net was pulled up by a watcher hiding on the bank,
causing the birds to become trapped as they flew into the net. There are no accounts of decoys being used
to hunt ducks in the study area groups, but they were used by other Central Valley groups (Lightfoot and
Parrish 2009:330). Nets were also used to hunt quail in the foothills and by the Nisenan to capture robins
and doves (Barrett and Gifford 1933:185; Wilson 1972:36).
Other birds were hunted using arrows, snares, traps, and nooses with acorns occasionally used as
bait (Barrett and Gifford 1933:183-187; Wilson 1972:36; Wilson and Towne 1978:390). Geese were
sometimes hunted at night, with a small fire built to attract them. Woodpeckers were also hunted at night
by capturing them in their roosting cavities (Barrett and Gifford 1933:186).
Birds were typically cooked whole in the ashes or covered in mud and baked (Barrett and Gifford
1933:138; Wilson 1972:36; Wilson and Towne 1978:389). Picking or skinning often occurred after cooking
through the removal of a baked mud covering. Bird meat was not known to be dried (Wilson 1972:36).
Other birds, such as raptors, flickers, woodpeckers, and magpies were trapped primarily for their feathers
(Lightfoot and Parrish 2009:332).
Bird bone was used for many ceremonial and decorative implements. These include whistles,
tubes, skewers, earrings, hair pins, and awls. Incised bird bone whistles and tubes are well documented
ethnographic items. Plains Miwok in the Cosumnes region employed an openwork design while that of the
Sacramento Valley Nisenan (i.e., Sutter District) used a multiline style (Bennyhoff 1994:71-73). Feathers
were employed for arrow fletching, decoration, and clothing, particularly for ceremonial items such as
dance headdresses, aprons, and belts. Duck and goose down was also used for blankets and robes
34
(Lightfoot and Parrish 2009:330). Blankets of duck feathers and feather capes have also been recorded.
Belts or ropes of woodpecker scalps sewn onto buckskin and decorated with Olivella shell beads were a
highly valuable garment and medium of exchange (Barrett and Gifford 1933:221).
Mammals
Three species of artiodactyls were used by inhabitants of the study area: tule elk, pronghorn, and
black-tailed deer. All three were hunted individually and communally, with tule elk and pronghorn being
identified as particularly important (Levy 1978:403). Hunters wore tight fitting grass caps or deer
headdresses fashioned from the skull and skin of these animals (Barrett and Gifford 1933:178-182; Wilson
1972:34). Hunting blinds were baited with mistletoe for deer hunting and disguises made of wild cucumber
for hunting pronghorn (Barrett and Gifford 1933:180). Communal deer hunts took place in the fall, when
deer congregated for the rut (Lightfoot and Parrish 2009:335). Dogs were also used to track wounded and
“very fat” deer (Barrett and Gifford 1933:180). Annual fall burns were important for not only fostering
important economic plant species, but also for creating abundant artiodactyl habitat (Levy 1978:402;
Mason 1972:43).
Artiodactyl butchering depended on the distance between the kill site and village. Ideally the
entire carcass was taken back to camp for processing, although certain entrails might be removed and
cooked at the kill site (Barrett and Gifford 1933:181; Wilson 1972:34). Brains, hides, and sinew were
typically taken back to occupation sites but entrails may be used as bait for smaller animals. Bones were
cracked and cooked for marrow or retained for tools. Artiodactyl bone and antler were widely used for
utilitarian implements. Of these, limb bones and metapodials, often referred to as “cannon bones,” were
used for awls, hair pins, “daggers,” and gaming pieces (Barrett and Gifford 1933:229; Gifford 1927:160;
Wulf 1997:173-197). The use of artiodactyl ulnae and radii for awls has also been reported (Gifford
1940:161; Wulf 1995:182, 189). Antler was used to make harpoon toggles, fishhook barbs, wedges, and
chisels among other tools (Gifford 1940:166; Wulf 1995:140). Artiodactyl hide was used for clothing,
matting, house coverings, and as trade items (Barrett and Gifford 1933:181; Wilson 1972:34).
35
Artiodactyl meat was either cooked or dried for storage, and the meat was shared among hunters,
their families and neighbors often in prescribed reciprocal relationships (Barrett and Gifford 1933:181;
Wilson 1978:389). Although hunters were appreciated, greater prestige was held for those who had
specialized knowledge (Barrett and Gifford 1933:181). This included individuals who produced hunting
equipment and utilitarian items such as pipes, baked clay objects, cordage, or luxury goods [e.g., feathered
textiles, shell bead ornamentation, ceremonial garb, and incised bird bone tubes (Bennyhoff 1977:11, 13;
Bouey 1995:25)].
Beaver were hunted at their dens, killed by being clubbed, or shot with bow and arrow (Barrett
and Gifford 1933:182). Beaver incisors are often found in archaeological deposits and were presumably
used as gouges and chisels (Gifford 1940:167, 184; Wulf 1997:136). Black-tailed jackrabbit and desert
cottontail were procured either individually by clubbing or bow and arrow, or in groups by means of a
“rabbit drive” (Barrett and Gifford 1933:182; Wilson 1972:35). Both Plains Miwok and Valley Nisenan
drove jackrabbits into nets that were stretched into a V-shape. Successful drives could procure hundreds of
jackrabbits. Lagomorphs were skinned before cooking and cooked directly on coals or encased in mud and
baked in a fire (Barrett and Gifford 1933:138; Wilson 1972:36). Rabbit skin blankets were woven from
strips of seasoned cottontail or jackrabbit fur, a single blanket requiring the skins of approximately 40
animals (Wilson 1972:35). Western gray squirrel and California ground squirrel were also eaten. They were
shot with bow and arrow or captured by dogs and cooked directly on coals (Barrett and Gifford 1933:183).
Other mammals are mentioned in study area ethnographic accounts. Rats (most likely woodrats)
and mice are likewise recorded as food. These were usually dried then pounded in to a meal (Wilson
1972:36). Gophers were roasted in hot ashes (Beals 1933:349). Wilson and Towne (1978:389) report that
“wildcats and California mountain lions were hunted for food and their skins,” by the Nisenan and Levy
(1978:403) claims that the Plains Miwok “never ate grizzly bear, black bear, fox or wildcat.” Black bears
were hunted and eaten by Nisenan people, but since the study area is outside the black bear’s natural range,
valley populations would have had little opportunity to exploit them. California grizzly bear were found in
the study area, but were greatly feared and rarely hunted (Wilson and Towne 1978:389). Dogs are
36
frequently mentioned in ethnographic accounts for hunting bear, deer, fox, lagomorphs, and squirrels, and
were also eaten at times (Barrett and Gifford 1933:270; Lightfoot and Parrish 2009:334-337).
Other Fauna
The western pond turtle was another important source of meat. Turtles were killed with a stone
and roasted in their shells (Barrett and Gifford 1933:139; Lightfoot and Parrish 2009:329). Freshwater
mussels and grasshoppers comprise two invertebrates exploited as food (Barrett and Gifford 1933:192;
Wilson and Towne 1978:389). Freshwater mussels were available in many streams and rivers and were
cooked under a layer of sand, burning grass, or brush (Barrett and Gifford 1933:139). Freshwater mussel
shells were widely employed as spoons, but only the Nisenan used them as knives (Lightfoot and Parrish
2009:323). Beads made of freshwater mussel have also been found in local archaeological collections
(Gifford 1947:30). Summer grasshopper drives were practiced by both Valley Nisenan and Plains Miwok
groups (Barrett and Gifford 1933:190; Wilson 1972:36). Pits would be dug in an open grassy field into
which grasshoppers would be driven. Once captured, grasshoppers were roasted in earth ovens or parched
in openwork baskets then dried, crushed into a meal, or stored for winter consumption (Barrett and Gifford
1933:190; Wilson and Towne 1978:390).
Summary
The study area environment has experienced many changes since the arrival of humans 11,000 to
13,500 years ago. As warmer Holocene temperatures replaced those of the Pleistocene, sea levels rose
inundating hundreds of feet of California shoreline creating the San Francisco Bay and Sacramento-San
Joaquin Delta. By approximately 6000 B.P., the Delta stabilized and was permanently settled by human
groups. Archaeological investigations reveal that by 4400 B.P., resident populations were marked by
territorial circumscription, highly developed mortuary practices, elaborate material cultures, and longdistance trade. The establishment of local culture history dominated archaeological research in the study
area until approximately thirty years ago when processual studies shifted focus onto the interplay between
landscape evolution, human behavior, and the structure of the archaeological record.
37
The paleoenvironmental record of the study area reveals that the Late Holocene was generally
cooler and wetter than the Middle Holocene, marking the onset of the modern Mediterranean climate.
When examined on a fine grained scale, however, variations in Late Holocene climate become more
apparent, with the dry MCA and the wetter LIA, distinguishing the Late Period. These events are
recognized in proxy data which indicate significant changes in rainfall and water flow out of the
Sacramento-San Joaquin drainage during the last 2,000 years. Drought conditions prevailed during the
MCA in the late Middle Period and first 300 years of the Late Period. Traditional responses to drought and
economic instability include mobility, diversification, storage and exchange (Halstead and O’Shea 1989;
Schwitalla 2010:20). Yet, archaeological evidence indicates that the MCA occurred at a time when study
area societies already possessed complex trade, socio-political, and mortuary traditions. Permanent villages,
ceremonial centers, storage facilities (granaries), and large cemeteries, indicate the presence of dense
populations. Given that much of the study area was uninhabitable wetland or treeless savannah, mobility
was limited and storage and exchange already practiced. Faced with such restrictions, changes in
technological organization and subsistence patterns may have instead offered the only solution. Instead,
technological innovations (e.g., toggle harpoons, pottery, and the bow and arrow) are an important aspect
of the Late Period. Whether there is comparable evidence for subsistence intensification from the Middle
Period to the Late Period when climatic conditions changed is less clear and explored in greater detail in
the remainder of this study.
38
Chapter 4
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
The functional relationship between human behavior and the environment is one of the foremost
areas of investigation in anthropological studies. Over the last two centuries, numerous anthropologists
have developed many theories to explain how the opportunities and constraints provided by a population’s
environment shape its demographics, behavior, and culture. My hypothesis is that changes in subsistence
patterns over time and space for the study area are the result of human foraging decisions based on need,
available resources, and technological capabilities. What follows is a brief overview of the theoretical
premises on which my hypothesis is based.
Cultural and Evolutionary Ecology Theories
One the most influential theories developed during the last century was Julian Steward’s 1955
theory of Cultural Ecology. The theory of Cultural Ecology can be defined as the study of how human
societies adapt to their environment, emphasizing how the arrangements of technology, economy, and
social organization (i.e., culture) within a society mediate the human experience of the natural world
around them. A key aspect in the formation and explanation of Cultural Ecology is the analysis of huntergatherer settlement and subsistence patterns.
The growing influence of neo-Darwinian biology and middle range (processual) theory in the
1960s and later caused many cultural ecologists to begin to incorporate testable concepts from evolutionary
ecology into their explanations. The individual, not the society, became recognized as the agent upon
whom natural selection acts (e.g., Winterhalder and Smith 1997). This assumption allows the adaptive
success of certain human behaviors to be tested in a systematic manner and is referred to as human
behavioral ecology. One of the more popular applications of behavioral ecology in anthropology has been
the examination of human foraging strategies.
In 1970, researchers C. Vita-Finzi and E.S. Higgs presented a model of hunting and gathering
economy known as site catchment analysis. Although their focus was on identifying the triggers associated
39
with the transition from hunting and gathering to agriculture in the Middle East, the conclusions they drew
are general enough to be widely applicable to a number of resource economies and remain reflective of
processual theory. Vita-Finzi and Higgs based their theory on simple cost-benefit principles, supported by a
variety of ethnographic (e.g., !Kung Bushman) and historical (e.g., Chisholm 1968) examples.
A site catchment is defined as the area from which materials preserved in an archaeological
deposit are derived (Renfrew and Bahn 2005:172). Factors that determine a site catchment are available
resources, method of economy (mobile versus sedentary), population size, and site location. The interplay
of these factors led the authors to propose a daily maximum radius of 10 kilometers (6.2 miles) for hunting
and gathering populations and 5 kilometers (3.1 miles) for the more sedentary agricultural societies
(Renfrew and Bahn 2005:172-173; Vita-Finzi and Higgs 1970:5, 7). Distances farther than these consume
more energy than the resource to be acquired will provide, and are therefore considered uneconomical. The
model Vita-Finzi and Higgs devised provides a method for creating and testing hypotheses about
prehistoric optimal forging patterns on a localized, site based level.
Optimization models can be used to examine the strategic decisions involved in the acquisition of
dietary components. Optimal foraging theory uses a set of models to predict the behavior of animals while
they are foraging (Pyke 1984:523). Foraging success is measured by the costs and benefits of search and
pursuit. Costs include factors such as pursuit time, handling time, risk, and overall energy expenditure
(Bettinger 1991:87; Craw 2002:8; Pyke 1984:530). The benefits are that individuals who are able to
maximize their net rate of energy gain (measured as caloric intake) against their net rate of energy loss
should be fit enough to reproduce successfully and therefore be favored by natural selection (Kelly
1995:53).
Optimal foraging models have been successful in evaluating the dietary preferences among human
societies in both modern and archaeological contexts. Models that have been applied to anthropological
studies include patch choice, diet breadth, group size, and time allocation. Most of these models share the
idea that within the constraints of environment and culture, the goals and choices exhibited by human
foragers will be to ensure that maximum energetic returns will be obtained per unit of foraging time spent
(Smith 1983:640). As with biological models, return rates are measured by the energetic value found in the
40
caloric content of the food items acquired. The operative assumption here is that the energetic net return of
prey item is approximately proportional to its body size or weight (Broughton 1994a:502-503; Broughton
et al. 2011:404, 423). This assumption allows resources to be ranked on a hierarchical scale according to
their post-encounter return rates. Predictive models can then be established based on the net energetic
returns provided by large and small-sized taxa.
The idea that certain resources are more highly ranked than others is a key element in the diet
breadth model. This model is also known as the prey-choice model and it provides a framework for
assessing how the relative costs and benefits of different resources (prey) are not only linked to their
energetic returns, but are also linked to their abundance in a given patch of land (Broughton 1994a:501).
For example, the higher caloric return and low handling cost of larger prey such as artiodactyls implies that
they will be a higher ranked dietary item on an encounter basis than smaller lower return prey such as
lagomorphs, waterfowl, most fish, mollusks, or acorns. This model also posits that highly ranked prey will
always be pursued when encountered, and the decision to pursue lower ranked prey is a function of the
abundance of high ranked prey (Pyke 1984:530; Smith 1983:628). Thus, lower ranked resources are only
included in the diet if the abundance of (or access to) higher ranked resources declines. When such a
dietary restriction happens to human foragers, foraging efficiency decreases and a widening of the diet
breadth typically occurs. Following this logic, the ratio of larger to smaller taxa within faunal assemblages
is typically used as a proxy measure for levels of foraging efficiency.
Resource intensification is defined as “a process by which the total productivity per areal unit of
land is increased at the expense of a decrease in foraging efficiency” (Broughton 1994a:501). Evidence of
resource intensification in past human societies is generally identified as an overall decrease in the
abundance of large prey species relative to small prey species frequencies noted within archaeofaunal
assemblages. This dietary shift is typically associated with dense populations coupled with an increased
investment in the technologies necessary to exploit the amplified amounts of old or new food items in more
cost-effective ways (Basgall 1987; Cohen 1981).
Population reconstructions of pre-contact California suggest the population living here to be
among the highest in North America (Baumhoff 1963; Cook 1955; Kroeber 1939). The ability of this
41
demographic phenomenon to exist in the absence of agriculture has been attributed to the adoption of
intensive acorn storage economies during the Late Holocene (Basgall 1987; Bean and Lawton 1977; Heizer
1958; Kroeber 1925; Meighan 1959). Baumhoff (1963) was the first to seriously consider the relationship
between carrying capacity and available food resources in California, and proposed a unique acorn-gamefish adaptation for groups that lived along the Sacramento River and its tributaries within the north-central
areas of the state.
Models of prehistoric indigenous subsistence strategies indicate that there has been a decrease in
foraging efficiency over the Late Holocene for California (Basgall 1987; Beaton 1991; Broughton 1994a,
1994b, 1997, 2002; Broughton and Bayham 1993, 2003; Cohen 1981; Craw 2002; Hildebrandt and Jones
1992; Hildebrandt and McGuire 2002; Pierce 1988; White 2003). Many reasons why diet breadth
expansion occurs in California have been suggested. The most common reasons are a decrease in the
availability of large prey due to increased exploitation by rising human populations (i.e., harvest pressure,
demographic forcing); costly signaling; decrease due to environmental change; or a combination of these
factors (Rosenthal et al. 2007:159-163). Although a limited number of resource intensification models have
been developed for northern California and the Central Valley, few have been developed for the study area.
Two resource intensification studies that specifically apply to the lower Sacramento Valley were produced
by Broughton (1994a) and Craw (2002).
In 1994, Jack Broughton conducted a coarse-grained study grounded in optimal foraging theory.
Basing his research on previously published results from legacy collections, Broughton was one of the first
researchers to attempt to systematically evaluate subsistence patterns in the Sacramento Valley. Using the
prey choice model he compared faunal data collected from nine archaeological village middens
representing Early, Middle, and Late period sites located within the Sacramento River Valley; three of
these sites, SJO-68, SAC-145, and SAC-329, are located within the study area (data from SAC-329 is also
being used in this thesis). Using a series of quantitative indices of relative abundance, Broughton measured
the diachronic changes of artiodactyls against lagomorphs; artiodactyls against anadromous fish; and
anadromous fish against freshwater fish between the sites. His conclusion was that over the past 4,000
years, a trend of increasing reliance on smaller faunal resources exploited by inhabitants of the Sacramento
42
River Valley. He explains that Late Holocene archaeological faunas from the area document dramatic
declines though time in the abundance of medium and large mammals relative to small resident fishes
despite seasonal or spatial variation (Broughton 1994a:510). However, this conclusion is not wholly
supported by his data.
Most of Broughton’s indices were consistent with a decline in optimal foraging, however, the
artiodactyl to lagomorph index failed to show a clear temporal trend (Broughton 1994a:507). If his premise
is accurate, then a statistically significant increase in lagomorphs should be seen in the archaeofaunal
record. But it is not. Complicating the issue is his exclusion of small mammal data that could have had
significance. Squirrels which compose 31 percent of the mammal assemblage and carnivores which
comprise ten percent of the total mammal assemblage (many of which were coyote remains) were not
compared to artiodactyls (Broughton 1994a:505).
Another inconsistency relates to the fact that four out the nine sites used ¼ inch screening methods
to recover archaeological data and that faunal remains from SJO-68 were recovered without a systematic
approach (Broughton 1994a:504, 506). Broughton attempts to compensate for the inconsistency in
collection methods by stating that because the relationship between time and the mammal/fish index is
“linear and negative (r= -0.85, P=0.07)…variation in recovery methods does not underlie the temporal
trend in proportional representation of mammals and freshwater fishes” (Broughton 1994a:507). This does
not appear to be the case. An examination of Tables 2 and 3 reveals that the sites having the most fish
remains are those that employed ⅛ inch screening. Further, these tables show that three out of these four
sites which used ⅛ inch screening are Late Period sites while all four of the Middle Period sites used larger
¼ inch screens. It is well known that most fish remains require fine-gauged screening methods or flotation
for recovery (Reitz and Wing 2004:120). Without such procedures, there is likely to be a significant bias in
taxonomic recovery. Thus, when the differential recovery methods are considered in conjunction with the
mean occupation date, it is no wonder that it appears that fish remains increase over time relative to the
amount of mammal remains. Further, the majority of Late Period sites are located in the lower portion of
the Sacramento Valley which is dominated by aquatic habitats while the majority of the Middle Period sites
are located in the upper Sacramento Valley which is dominated by oak woodland and grassland habitats.
43
As typical of study area sites, many of the sites Broughton sampled exhibit dates spanning several
different cultural periods. For example, deposits at GLE-101 represent over 3,000 years of occupation from
the Early Period through the Late Period while the record at SAC-145 represents almost 2,000 years of
occupation from the Middle Period through Euro-American contact at the end of the Late Period
(Broughton 1994a:506). As reviewed in the previous chapter, for at least the lower portion of the
Sacramento Valley, significant changes in climate occurred within the area over the last 4,000 years. The
Early Period was generally warm and dry while the Middle Period was generally cooler and wet. In the
Late Period, the climate fluctuated between the warm and dry MCA and the cooler and moister LIA. These
changes would have affected vegetation patterns on land and did affect water flows in the Sacramento
River. The effects of these changes would have affected floral and faunal distributions and abundance (e.g.,
primary production). By averaging the occupation spans and creating a mean date of occupation for each of
the sites, on top of collapsing the faunal remains into one assemblage for each site, Broughton essentially
removes each faunal component from its context and therefore from its temporal significance. Without
contextual reference, additional conclusions regarding “adaptively meaningful” environmental or
technological implications cannot be drawn from the data with any certainty.
Species availability across space is also not fully considered. Four different habitats are identified
for his study area, freshwater marsh, grassland, oak woodland, and riparian forest (Broughton 1994a:503).
Broughton states that no matter a site’s location “artiodactyls and freshwater fishes are available within the
Sacramento Valley floodplain year-round” (Broughton 1994a:508). Although there is truth in this
statement, as seen in Chapter Two (Table 3), freshwater fishes (i.e., minnows and cyprinids) are not found
in the same abundance in the riparian woodland (fast water) habitat as they are in the freshwater marsh
(slow water) habitat. Artiodactyl taxa also differ across habitats. Tule elk could be encountered in the
freshwater marsh, grassland, and riparian woodland, deer in the riparian woodland and grassland habitats,
while pronghorn was only found in the grasslands (see Table 2). As a result, catchment areas would have
provided unique subsistence opportunities for past inhabitants. Further, the territorial circumscription
evident in ethnographic reconstructions (see Chapter Three) would have precluded equal access to all
habitats for certain populations.
44
Despite its shortcomings, Broughton’s (1994a) study stands as one of the only studies readily
available for the Sacramento Valley that provides a coarse grained regional model useful for developing
more fine grained subsistence analyses. One such example is Craw 2002.
In 2002, California State University, Sacramento (CSUS) student Maggie Craw preformed a
quantitative analysis using the prey choice model for a single site located on the Sacramento River, SAC29. Craw’s study was an intrasite comparison temporally confined to the Late Period. Her results identified
significant diachronic changes in the abundance of artiodactyls relative to birds and fish, anadromous fish
to resident fish, and adult artiodactyls to subadult artiodactyls between Phase I and Phase II components. A
slight decrease in artiodactyl remains relative to all smaller animals was also indicated through a 10 to 20
percent decrease in artiodactyl use relative to birds (largely waterfowl) and fish (both anadromous and
resident species). Further, an increase in the amount of subadult artiodactyls over time indicated an increase
in harvest pressure for these taxa. In contrast to the above findings, the anadromous fish/resident fish index
showed an increase of approximately 11 percent over time.
An interesting result of Craw’s study was the lack of turtle remains in the components she
analyzed. Whether this was due to observer error or absence, this result is odd for a site located in a riparian
woodland habitat. Western pond turtles are small reptiles that prefer riparian woodland and freshwater
marsh habitats. Their remains are a common component in zooarchaeological assemblages associated with
these habitats over time. Ethnographic evidence also supports the exploitation of this species for
subsistence within the study area (Gifford 1933:139; Lightfoot and Parrish 2009:329). Thus if their absence
from the SAC-29 faunal assemblage is not in error, the lack of this small-bodied, easily captured resource is
in contrast with her finding of increased resource intensification during the Late Period.
In general, the shortcomings of Craw’s (2002) study relate more to the potential for further insight
rather than flaws in methodology. Craw did the lion’s share of the work by separating out units with datable
components from hundreds of samples and identifying the remains. Her statistical analyses are adequate
and the results are generally consistent with Broughton’s findings, supporting the conclusion that there is a
general decrease in foraging efficiency within the region over time. Her choice to include data relating to
age class among the artiodactyls in order to elucidate harvest pressure has interesting implications and does
45
well to support her conclusions of intensification by adding a level of analysis that is not always possible in
less robust samples. A more in- depth analysis that considered additional influences on the faunal
assemblage, such as site catchment and the effects of environmental change, could have provided further
insights into foraging efficiency at SAC-29. Such insight is something I hope to achieve in this thesis on an
intersite level by developing a subsistence pattern based on the interplay between catchment area, taxon
habitat preference, and procurement method.
Contrary Evidence
A small set of current studies have found evidence contrary to the general trend of decreased
foraging efficiency in the northern Central Valley for the Late Period. These studies (e.g., Furlong 2004;
Taite 1999; Valente 1998; White 2003) have revealed that after 1,400 B.P. there was a rise in large game
harvesting, particularly in artiodactyls (Broughton 2002:52; Rosenthal et al. 2007:162). This phenomenon
is referred to the “artiodactyl spike.” Locations where this phenomenon has been identified include
Missouri (Wolverton 2005), the Wyoming Basin (Byers et al. 2005), southern Arizona (Bayham 1982),
Nevada and northwestern Utah (Broughton and Byers 2004), Northeastern California (Broughton and
Bayham 2003; Holanda 2000), and the upper Sacramento Valley (Furlong 2004; White 2003). Reasons for
the “spike” have not yet been successfully teased out of the archaeological record and several explanations
have been put forth. The most common explanation is that harvest pressure caused distant, less depleted
deer patches, such as those located in the cultural buffer zones of the oak woodland habitat to be
increasingly targeted. However, it must be noted that the “artiodactyl spike” largely refers to an increase in
deer and not artiodactyls in general (White 2005:27-28); in fact, tule elk virtually vanish from the Late
Period faunal assemblage in Broughton’s Emeryville example (Broughton 2002:52). Additional
explanations are technological change, such as the introduction of bow and arrow technology, fire
management, the increased use of coordinated mass capture techniques, and male prestige (and therefore
increased individual fitness) through hunting prowess (Broughton 2002:52; Hildebrandt and McGuire
2002; Rosenthal et al. 2007:162; White 2005:27-29). The last explanation for the “artiodactyl spike” is
simply that deer populations rebounded due to the onset of the cool/moist climatic conditions which
46
enhanced primary productivity after 400 B.P. (e.g., Broughton and Bayham 2003; Byers and Broughton
2004; Byers et al. 2005; Holanda 2000). Documentation of the positive effects of increased precipitation
and cooler temperatures among modern artiodactyl populations has been documented for elk, pronghorn,
bison, mule deer, and bighorn sheep in a variety of environments across the west (Byers and Broughton
2004:238). Thus with an increased population, successful hunting encounters would have increased,
perhaps to an extent which allowed hunters to select prey based on size and age (e.g., antler size and tine
number) for individual prestige.
No matter the cause of the “artiodactyl spike” the tenants of optimal foraging theory dictate that an
increasing abundance of large game on the landscape should result in proportionate increases in large game
hunting (Byers and Broughton 2004:243). How this plays out for the lower Sacramento Valley will be
explored later in this thesis.
Summary
Environmental change is viewed as providing an essential baseline from which to understand
variation in the human record. The increased investment in plant resources, social complexity, new
technologies, and exchange networks reported for the Late Period suggests individuals in the study area
may have been struggling with maintaining fitness in an environment where climatic fluctuations and
economic intensification was causing foraging behavior to be less optimal than before. If intensification
models, such as those presented by Broughton (1994a) and Craw (2002), characterize subsistence change in
the Lower Sacramento Valley, then it follows that patterns of increasing diet breadth (i.e., resource
intensification) should be recognized in the differences between temporally discreet faunal assemblages.
Based on the analyses carried out by Broughton (1994a) and Craw (2002), it is likely faunal assemblages
examined in this thesis will also display statistically significant changes in diet indicative of resource
intensification over space and time. By examining the influence additional factors, such as site catchment,
animal habitat preferences, procurement technologies, and climate, may have had on resource availability,
it is hoped that some of the data gaps left by preceding investigations will be filled. To achieve this goal,
certain sets of assumptions will need to be made which future researchers may or may not find fault with.
47
These assumptions and the particular methods of how to accomplish this goal are discussed in the
proceeding chapter.
48
Chapter 5
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Temporally discrete assemblages from six archaeological collections were selected for analysis.
These included assemblages from Middle and Late Period contexts; no Early Period assemblages met the
required research criteria. This chapter presents the methods used for faunal assemblage selection, provides
site descriptions, and introduces the quantitative analyses used in this thesis. Disparities between the faunal
assemblages and an explanation of how site catchments were determined are also included. The chapter
closes with a discussion of limitations associated with zooarchaeological research methods.
Faunal Assemblage Selection
Potential collections were first identified through background research. This included a series of
interviews with archaeologists familiar with the study area and a thorough literature review. Most of the
collections identified during background research represented legacy collections stored at CSUS and other
nearby institutions. However, because recovery, cataloguing, and storage conditions varied, the following
criteria were developed for faunal assemblage selection:

The faunal assemblage was part of a catalogued collection

Provenience and descriptive information had been recorded

Faunal remains had been recovered using ⅛ inch screens

Dated components or temporally sensitive artifacts were associated with the faunal
materials

The faunal assemblage derived from a context which did not contain human burials

Published faunal data were available either as raw counts or as numbers of identified
specimens (NISP)
49
Application of this criteria resulted in the identification of faunal assemblages from six sites in the lower
Sacramento Valley: SAC-67, SAC-133, SAC-42, SAC-267, SAC-329, and SAC-29. Previously published
data were available for five of the sites.
Even though six assemblages met selection criteria, there are minor disparities in analytical
methodology between each collection. One disparity is the treatment of freshwater mussel shell. Freshwater
Table 1. Spatio-Temporal Associations and Faunal Analysts by Site.
Site
Time
Habitat
Recovery
SAC67
Middle
Period
Freshwater
Marsh
CSUS
SAC133
Middle
Period
Grasslands
FWARG
SAC42
Middle
Period
Riparian
FWARG
SAC329
Late
Period
Freshwater
Marsh
CSUS
SAC267
Late
Period
Grasslands
CSUS
Faunal
Analysts
Emilie
Zelazo,
Deborah
Ward;
Tim
Carpenter
(fish)
Dwight
Simons;
Peter Schulz
(fish)
Dwight
Simons;
Kenneth
Gobalet
(fish)
Peter Schulz
et al.
Faunal
Data
NISP
Reference
(this thesis)
NISP
Bouey and
Waechter
1992
NISP
Milliken et
al. 1995
NISP;
MNI for
fish
NISP
Soule 1976
Stanley
Johnson
Olsen;
1976
Peter Schulz
(fish)
SACLate
Riparian
CSUS
Maggie
NISP
Craw 2002
29
Period
Craw
CSUS= California State University Sacramento (formerly Sacramento State College)
FWARG= Far Western Anthropological Group, Inc.
NISP= Number of identified specimens; MNI= minimum number of inidividuals
mussel shell from SAC-267 and SAC-329 was quantified simply as “fresh water mussel,” while that from
SAC-29 and SAC 42 was separated into species (Craw 2002:78, 87; Johnson 1976:72; Jones 1995:12.2-
50
12.4; Soule 1976: 59, 86). At SAC-133, freshwater mussel shell was considered to be exclusively from
Margaritifera falcata (Bouey and Waechter 1992:156) and no freshwater shellfish data was available for
SAC-67. Specimen attributes were also not equally recorded. Data for thermal alteration, butchering marks,
root etching, and animal gnawing were not available for all specimens. As such, freshwater mussel remains
and specimen attributes are not considered in this thesis. Other discrepancies relate to analyst expertise and
sample sizes. On the other hand, preservation was assumed to be similar between the sites given the
edaphic and environmental conformity of the study area.
Even though six assemblages met selection criteria, there are minor disparities in analytical
methodology between each collection. One disparity is the treatment of freshwater mussel shell. Freshwater
mussel shell from SAC-267 and SAC-329 was quantified simply as “fresh water mussel,” while that from
SAC-29 and SAC 42 was separated into species (Craw 2002:78, 87; Johnson 1976:72; Jones 1995:12.212.4; Soule 1976: 59, 86). At SAC-133, freshwater mussel shell was considered to be exclusively from
Margaritifera falcata (Bouey and Waechter 1992:156) and no freshwater shellfish data was available for
SAC-67. Specimen attributes were also not equally recorded. Data for thermal alteration, butchering marks,
root etching, and animal gnawing were not available for all specimens. As such, freshwater mussel remains
and specimen attributes are not considered in this thesis. Other discrepancies relate to analyst expertise and
sample sizes. On the other hand, preservation was assumed to be similar between the sites given the
edaphic and environmental conformity of the study area.
Site Descriptions
SAC-67
The Denier site, SAC-67, was a large mound located on a low knoll at the confluence of Laguna
Creek, Deadman Gulch, and the Cosumnes River near Elk Grove (Figure 5). In 1949, the mound measured
2.4 meters (8 feet) high, 15.2 meters (50 feet) in diameter, and had an elevation of 3 meters (10 feet) above
sea level (UCD 1949). Based on the paleoenvironmental recreations, at the time of indigenous occupation,
51
SAC-67 was located in a freshwater marsh habitat with easy access to the grasslands and riparian woodland
(see Figure 2).
Floral and faunal remains from SAC-67 indicate year-round occupation (Jerald Johnson, personal
communication 2006), and the burial patterns indicate an age range from the Early through the Late Period
(i.e., 3,950 to 160 B.P.). Review of the artifact catalogue reveals a prevalence of Middle and Late Period
markers, including convex-base basalt and Stockton serrated projectile points, type A, C, F, G, and M
series Olivella beads, and clamshell disk forms. The site was excavated by CSUS field schools between
Laguna Creek
SAC-67
Cosumnes
River
Deadman Gulch
Figure 5. SAC-67 Site Overview. View to northeast. (Photo on file at CSUS Curation Facility Archives).
the years of 1968 and 1982. No comprehensive analysis has yet been completed for the site and much of
the collection remains uncatalogued.
Two levels from two unit blocks were selected for faunal analysis. These were 35N/2E (50 -60
cm), 58N/28W NW quadrant (40 to 50 cm), and 58N/28W SE quadrant (40 to 50 cm). All contained
Middle Period markers, including C1 (beveled); C3 (split oval), F2b (round saddle), F3a (square saddle),
52
F3b (small saddle), G2a (small saucer), G2b (large saucer), and G4 (ground saucer) Olivella beads and a
basalt concave base projectile point (Bennyhoff and Hughes 1987:118-133; Bouey and Waechter 1992:72).
Thus, the faunal material selected for analysis from SAC-67 is believed to represent a
Figure 6. SAC-67 Site Map (adapted from map in CSUS curation facility archives).
Middle Period sample from a freshwater marsh habitat.
SAC-67 was the only sample for which primary data were collected by the author (see Appendix
B). Analysis began with the separation of the remains into identifiable and indeterminate specimens. All
specimens were identified to the lowest taxonomic level possible. Element, side, and completeness were
noted and all specimens were quantified and weighed. Anatomical age characteristics, the presence of
butchering marks, modification, and degrees of thermal alteration were also documented if present.
Specimen fragments that conjoined were counted as a single specimen. Identifications were aided by the
use of the comparative faunal collection housed at the Archaeological Research Center, CSUS, and
reference texts (e.g., Cannon 1987, Gilbert 1980; Gilbert et al. 1985; Hilson 1982). Analysis of fish remains
53
was conducted by Tim Carpenter of ArchaeoMetrics using comparative collections in his laboratory.
Specimens that could not be identified to a taxonomic level lower than class were separated by size and
placed into mammal, bird, and fish categories. Indeterminate specimens were grouped by size as
vertebrates. NISP counts were recorded for each vertebrate taxon based on totals computed for each unit
level. The results presented in this thesis constitute the first published faunal data from SAC-67.
SAC-133
SAC-133, or Aufdermaur #1, has been interpreted to be a year-round occupation site located on a
long, low knoll overlooking the floodplain between the Cosumnes River and its tributary, Deer Creek, near
the community of Sloughhouse. It is the northernmost of the study sites and has an elevation of 38 meters
(125 feet) above sea level (Noble and Offermann 1990). Construction of State Route 16 bisected the site.
The site was recorded in 1937 as a 1.2 meter (4 feet) high mound measuring 68.6 meters (225 feet) N/S by
45.7 meters (150 feet) E/W (UCD 1957); however, it is likely that the top of the mound was leveled prior to
recordation for the construction of a residence.
The SAC-133 location was surveyed several times over the years, but not excavated until 1991 when test
excavations were conducted for Caltrans by Far Western Anthropological Research Group (Hartman 2007).
A site map indicating the location of the units excavated is presented in Figure 7. Based on vegetation
reconstructions, SAC-133 would have originally been situated just outside the narrow riparian woodland
within the grasslands between the Cosumnes River and Deer Creek. Stratagraphic analysis of SAC-133
cultural remains indicated that the deposit in the southern part of the site could be separated into two
temporal components, with the lower 60 centimeters generally corresponding with the terminal Middle
Period to Middle/Late Period transition (Bouey and Waechter 1992:82-83). Radiocarbon data from this
component indicates it represents a brief occupation between 1,124 to 1,060 B.P. Obsidian hydration data
(85% Napa Valley glass) measured an average ≥ 2.1 microns, also supporting a Middle Period occupation,
as does the predominance of F3b, G1, G2b, and M1a Olivella beads (Bouey and Waechter 1992:76-77, 79,
123-127). Given these results, the fauna selected from SAC-133 were restricted to specimens recovered
from contexts below 60 centimeters in the southern component. Units represented by this assemblage
54
Figure 7. SAC-133 Site Map (adapted from Bouey and Waechter 1992:Map 4).
55
include S1/S16, S41/E19, S52/E25, S52/E26, S53/E26, S74/E19, S76/E19, and S82.5/E10.5. These data are
presented in Appendix B.
SAC-42
SAC-42, or the Souza Mound, is located on a natural levee along the eastern bank of the
Sacramento River, locally referred to as ‘the Pocket’ (Figure 8). In 1934, the mound measured 82.3 meters
(270 feet) in diameter and 4.6 meters (15 feet) in height (Peak and Associates 1984:9). The site was first
excavated by amateur collector Schultz Martine in the 1930s. Roughly 50 years later, SAC-42 was subject
to salvage excavations by Peak and Associates in 1984, with additional recovery and re-burial of human
remains in 1985. Further excavation was conducted by Far Western in 1994 (Milliken 1995). Examination
of historic vegetation maps (Figure 2) places SAC-42 in riparian woodland along the Sacramento River.
Figure 8. SAC-42 Site Map (adapted from Milliken 1995:Map 5.1).
56
Analysis of recovered artifacts and burial patterns from the 1984, 1985, and 1994 excavations indicate
SAC-42 was a large residential center and cemetery during the terminal Middle Period and a camp or
satellite habitation site during the Late Period (Milliken 1995:14.7). Radiocarbon dates obtained in 1994
from features located on the southeastern edge of the site indicate an occupation range of 2370 to 1070 B.P.
(Milliken 1995:14.1). Obsidian hydration measurements taken from the same location are from Napa
Valley glass and range from 2.4 to 2.6 microns, indicating midden formation during the terminal Middle
Period (Milliken 1995:14.5). The faunal assemblage assessed in this study derives from the 1994 data
recovery of the southeastern (Milliken 1995:12.2). However, the 1/16 inch data were excluded from the
study because comparable information was not collected for any of the other sites used in this thesis.
Figure 9. SAC-329 Site Map (adapted from Soule 1976:Map III).
57
SAC -329
SAC-329 is located on the southern bank of the Sacramento River at its junction with Georgiana
Slough near Walnut Grove (Figure 9) at an elevation of less than 1.5 meters (5 feet) (Johnson and Johnson
1974). Prior to modern alterations, SAC-329 was situated next to the confluence of the Cosumnes and
Mokelumne Rivers.
Based on its location, the site was probably occupied seasonally by the ancestors of the Junizumne Plains
Miwok; the ethnographic the east bank of the Sacramento River, less than one kilometer (1/2 mile)
northeast of SAC-329 (Bennyhoff 1977:73; Soule 1976:10). The historic vegetation map (Figure 2) places
SAC-329 within a largely freshwater marsh habitat. In 1974, at least 45 meters (150 feet) of the site was
exposed along the riverbank.
Figure 10. Overview of SAC-329 Excavation, 1975. View to the west. (Photo on file at CSUS Curation
Facility Archives).
58
Excavations were conducted by CSUS from July to August of 1975 as part of the Sacramento
River bank protection project for the Sacramento District Army Corps of Engineers (Soule 1976:1).Plains
Miwok village of Junizumne was located at or near the town of Walnut Grove on Numerous artifacts
associated with Late Period occupations were recovered from the site in 1975 (Figure 10). Projectile points
were dominated by Stockton serrated types, with a few Desert Side-Notched, Gunther barbed, Cottonwood,
and Rose Spring series also recovered (Soule 1976:32-34). Shell beads analyzed by Bennyhoff consisted
mainly of thin rectangular Olivella M1a, M2a, and M2b beads with a few round thin-lipped (E1a), and tinydisk (H series), as well as clamshell disk beads (Bennyhoff and Hughes 1987:135; Soule 1976:27-29).
Steatite disk and spool beads and a magnesite disk bead were also recovered, as were two fragments of a
bilateral harpoon point. Based on the artifactual evidence, occupation is dated to the Late Period from 1,170
to 350 B.P. (Soule 1976:61).
There are two issues concerning the site’s faunal assemblage used in this thesis. First, fish data
from SAC-329 are available only as minimum number of individual (MNI) estimates. Second, unpublished
terrestrial fauna data discovered during archival research at the CSUS curation facility was used to provide
a more robust sample than the one published by Soule in 1979 (see Appendix B).
SAC-267
SAC-267, or the Blodgett Site, is a large, year-round occupation site located on a terrace above Deer Creek,
overlooking the floodplain between Deer Creek and the Cosumnes River (Ritter 1968). Elevation is 30.5
meters (100 feet) above sea level. The site was recorded in 1968 as measuring 50 meters (165 feet) in
diameter; its original diameter and height is unknown because much of the mound had been
previously removed. An aerial photo depicting the location of SAC-267 is presented in Figure 11.
SAC-267 was excavated by UC Davis in 1969 and Sacramento State College (now CSUS) from
1969 to 1973 as part of the Folsom South Canal Project. Radiocarbon dates indicate occupation of the site
between 1,450 and 110 B.P. (Johnson 1976:90). Features excavated at the site include evidence of three
59
Deer Creek
Overflow
SAC-267
Figure 11. SAC-267 Site Overview. View to northwest. (Photo on file at CSUS Curation Facility
Archives).
structures, one of which has dimensions similar to a dance house, and two large hearths. Locations
excavated by CSUS are presented in Figure 12
Artifacts recovered from the midden portion of the site support a Late Period affiliation and
include Stockton serrated, Cottonwood Triangular, and Delta Desert Side notched projectile points,
magnesite, steatite, and clamshell disk beads, and Cosumnes Brownware. The Late Period midden is
located east of the burials and cremations (see Figure 12). Only faunal data from units within the Late
Period midden (21A Feature 7, 22A, 29B, 30J, 41A, 48A, 51A, 51C, and one unit with no designation)
were used to compile the faunal assemblage. The historic vegetation map (Figure 2) places SAC-267
60
Figure 12. SAC-267 Site Map (adapted from Johnson 1976:Map 4).
compile the faunal assemblage. The historic vegetation map (Figure 2) places SAC-267 in the grassland
habitat just outside the Cosumnes River riparian woodland corridor.
SAC-29
Site SAC-29, also known as the King-Brown or Roeder site, likely represents the Valley Nisenan
village of Sama. It is located 0.4 kilometers (0.25 mile) west of the Sacramento River and 1.2 kilometers
(0.75 mile) south-southeast of former Sutterville Lake in the Pocket area of Sacramento. As of 1954, the
mound measured 125 by 69 meters (410 feet by 225 feet) in size and was at least 3 meters (10 feet) high
(Dougherty 1990:9), although Heizer (1934) recorded it as being 24 meters (80 feet) in diameter and
61
Figure 13. SAC-29 Site Map (adapted from Craw 2002:Figure 5.1).
3.05 meters (10 feet) in height. Deposits are situated on an overbank deposit of the Sacramento River that
was essentially devoid of naturally occurring stone (Dougherty1990:12). Based on the historic vegetation
map, it is likely SAC-29 was located within the Sacramento River riparian woodland during aboriginal
occupation (see Figure 2).Academic investigations of SAC-29 were conducted in 1938 through 1940 by
Sacramento Junior College and from 1954 through 1956 by CSUS (Dougherty 1990:9-10). Additional
salvage excavations were conducted by CSUS in 1957. However, the majority of the deposit was recovered
in 1967 under contract to the State Division of Beaches and Parks (now Department of Parks and
Recreation) during the construction of Interstate 5 (Figure 13). The most recent work at the site was in
1972, when Dr. Jerald Johnson monitored the site for public utility relocations (Craw 2002:33; Dougherty
1990:10).
62
The deposit at SAC-29 is one of the richest and most diverse assemblages of cultural material and
faunal remains in the lower Sacramento Valley. It dates from the Middle Period through historic times
(Dougherty 1990:94). The faunal material utilized for this thesis represents four units excavated in 1967,
S7/W0, S7/W3, N1/W13, and N2/W10. All of these units were dated to the Late Period based on obsidian
hydration (largely Napa Valley sources, average 1.74 microns) and artifactual remains (Craw 2002,
Appendix B, Table 1). Artifacts associated with these units included clamshell disk beads and H1a (ground
disk), K1 (cupped callus), and M series (thin rectangle) Olivella beads, steatite beads, and Desert Sidenotched and Stockton serrated projectile points (Craw 2002:Appendix C).
Quantitative Analysis
Identifying changes in subsistence patterns across time and space within the lower Sacramento
Valley is the goal of this investigation. In order to achieve that goal, catchment areas were created for each
site and faunal data were subjected to quantitative analyses.
Catchment area analysis was used to illuminate changes in foraging patterns over time. Catchment
areas were based on the historic vegetation map (Figure 2) presented previously which was created using
GIS data from the 2012 San Francisco Estuary Institute (SFEI) Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta of the Early
1800’s map and the 1999 California State University Chico (CSUC) Historic Vegetation Base Map (Pre1900). The vegetation habitats illustrated in the SFEI map were reconstructed from multiple sources,
including historic maps, journals, newspapers articles, photographs, and art. This information was matched
with soil, hydrologic, seasonal, and topographic information before vegetation boundaries were plotted
(Whipple et al. 2012:30). The CSUC map was largely compiled from historic map sources such as United
States Geologic Survey (USGS) quadrangles, United States Forest Service maps, and Bay Institute historic
maps (CSUC 2003:7). The information was then digitized and compared in order to “create the best
available historical vegetation information for the pre-1900 period” (CSUC 2003:6). The SFEI map
includes a total of 17 vegetation habitats while the CSUC map has eight. Not all of the habitats are found in
the study area and those that are were collapsed into three primary habitats as discussed in Chapter 2.
63
Five kilometer diameter site catchments were drawn around each of the six archaeological sites
examined in this thesis. This diameter was chosen on the basis of Vita-Finzi and Higgs’ (1970) assessment
that such a distance is representative of the area reasonably exploited on a regular basis by agricultural
societies. Although the indigenous people inhabiting the study area were hunter-gatherers, their sedentary
lifestyles and dense populations made them more akin to agricultural societies (Anderson 2005:252-253;
Lightfoot and Parrish 2009:136-137, 379 and references therein). Further, this restricted mobility pattern is
believed by many researchers to have been established in the study area by 4,000 B.P. (Rosenthal and
Meyer 2008:68; Rosenthal et al. 2007:154). Thus, the five kilometer catchment area seems appropriate for
both Middle and Late Period populations in the lower Sacramento Valley.
NISP was used because it is the preferred measure of relative taxonomic abundances within an
assemblage and the least biased quantification method for intersite comparisons (Lyman 2008:81; Peres
2010:22). Further, because it is a fundamental measurement (a simple tally) rather than a derived
measurement, the only analyst-related source of variation in NISP involves the identification skills of the
analyst (Lyman 2008:79; Peres 2010:24). Differences in the experience levels of the analysts who produced
the data used in this thesis (i.e., students vs. established scholars) are discussed above.
Two additional established biases relating to NISP are specimen interdependence, i.e., skeletal
elements from one or a few animals, and sample size. Researchers have found that specimen
interdependence is less of a problem than it seems, because of the randomness of taphonomic, depositional,
and recovery processes (Lyman 2008:37). Yet, interdependence is a source of controversy in determining
the origin of small rodents. One method used to resolve this issue is to assess skeletal completeness and
burning patterns. The simplified assumption here is that bone exhibiting patterned burning is of cultural
origin and unevenly burnt or unburned bone is of natural deposition. The recovery of relatively complete
skeletons is likewise believed to indicate a natural, “burrow” death for small rodents. Ethnographic data,
however, indicate that small rodents were a commonplace part of the indigenous diet (see Chapter 3). Mice
are reported to have been dried whole and the carcass pounded into a meal, while gophers were roasted
directly in hot ashes (Beals 1933:349). As such, it is unlikely that mice would leave any skeletal evidence
64
whereas gopher bones might be burned and skeletal completeness reasonably high. Gopher remains were
quantified in all assemblages examined for this thesis, but mice, voles, and moles were not. Evidence of
thermal alteration was not consistently recorded for all specimens. Given all of the above, the present study
assumes that gophers were culturally deposited and mice, voles, and moles were naturally deposited.
The second bias associated with faunal assemblages is related to sample size. It is inherent that the
larger the sample, the higher the NISP (e.g., Grayson 1984). To correct for differences in sample size
between assemblages, a diversity index was used to quantify the biodiversity of each sample and chi-square
with adjusted residuals were calculated for abundance ratios. Procedures for applying the statistics are
presented in Chapter 6.
Methodological Limitations
The analysis of archaeofaunal remains is fundamental to the reconstruction of past subsistence
patterns. However, like all scientific endeavors, it possesses certain limitations. Taphonomic factors always
present limitations for faunal analyses, particularly disturbance and differential preservation. Krotovina
(underground passageways created by burrowing animals that become backfilled with soil) were noted at
almost every site examined in the present study and human disturbance of the midden was a particular
problem at SAC-267 (Johnson 1976:246). Nonetheless, preservation is generally believed to be consistent
in the lower Sacramento Valley due to local edaphic conditions (Jerald Johnson, personal communication
2006; Johnson and Farncomb 2005:23, 39-40). Copious amounts of freshwater mussel shell in deposits also
aided in faunal preservation by lowering the pH value of midden soils (Peres 2010:20; Reitz and Wing
1999:117). Thus, assuming the faunal identifications presented are reasonably acceptable, data chosen for
this study are likely a close approximation of what was deposited in the past (Peres 2010:19 and references
therein).
Additional limitations relating to the identification of animal remains include curation, dating,
recovery methods, and analyst expertise. Using the criteria listed at the beginning of this chapter to select
65
samples and employing NISP quantifications helped to reduce disparities between samples, including
effects associated with sample size. The faunal samples selected for analysis range from 1,087 to 4,465
specimens. To correct for these differences, abundance ratios and statistical analyses (i.e., chi-square,
adjusted residuals, and Simpson’s Diversity Index) were used. The results of these measures and how they
relate to study area subsistence patterns are discussed in the next chapter.
66
Chapter 6
RESULTS
This chapter presents results of the quantitative analyses applied to the faunal samples selected for
study. First, the taxonomic composition of each component is presented and statistical measures used in the
subsequent analyses are explained. Second, samples are divided between habitats and analyzed in terms of
site catchment. Both general subsistence patterns and taxonomic diversity are examined as part of the site
catchment analysis. Finally, the resulting subsistence economies for each habitat are discussed in terms of
foraging efficiency tempered by paleoenvironmental and technological changes.
The total number of identified vertebrate specimens examined in this study is 15,319 (Tables 6
through 8). Freshwater mussel weights are presented in Table 9. The Middle Period assemblage is
comprised of 6,219 specimens, while the Late Period sample contains 9,100 specimens.
Table 2. Diachronic Taxonomic Richness.
Taxa
Middle Period
Late Period
Difference
Mammals
16
21
31% increase
Birds
6
8
33% increase
Fish
11
11
No Change
Herpetofauna
3
7
133% increase
Total
36
47
31% increase
Richness was calculated for each site using the lowest taxonomic level of each taxon present. For
example, if no specimens could be identified to species, such as Canis latrans, then the sum of the
specimens identified to genus level, Canis, was used; if none could be identified to the genus level, then the
sum of the specimens at the level of family, Canidae, was used, etc. As a result, 36 taxa were identified in
the Middle Period and 47 taxa were identified in the Late Period, indicating a total increase of 31 percent in
taxonomic richness over time.
Common Name
Artiodactyls
Tule Elk
Black-tailed Deer
Pronghorn Antelope
Carnivores
American Black Bear
Canids
Raccoon
River Otter
Weasels and Minks
Mink
Spotted Skunk
Striped Skunk
Lagomorphs
Black-tailed Jack Rabbit
Cottontails
Squirrels
California Ground Squirrel
Grey Squirrel
Wood Rats
Botta's Pocket Gopher
Meadow Voles
California Meadow Vole
Deer Mice
Kangaroo Rats
Heermann's Kangaroo Rat
North American Beaver
Rodents
Badger
Mammal Richness
Table 3. Mammals NISP.
Scientific Name
SAC-67 SAC-133
Artiodactyla
34
42
Cervus elaphus nannodes
1
Odocoileus hemionus columbianus
7
Antilocapra americana
3
Carnivora
7
Ursus americanus
Canis sp.
9
Procyon lotor
2
Lutra canadensis
Mustela
Mustela vison
1
Spilogale putorius
Mephitis mephitis
Lagomorpha
Lepus californicus
7
45
Sylvilagus sp.
2
25
Sciuridae
12
Spermophilus beecheyi
10
17
Sciurus griseus
2
Neotoma sp.
Thomomys bottae
14
131
Microtus sp.
Microtus californicus
4
Peromyscus sp.
Dipodomys sp.
1
Dipodomys heermanni
1
Castor canadensis
Rodentia
26
Taxidea taxus
Totals
112
291
8
10
SAC-42
167
61
26
26
32
18
10
1
2
2
1
15
14
1
3
379
SAC-329
126
106
1
3
19
149
1
3
1
4
2
10
3
3
6
574
8
85
1104
SAC-267
36
29
2
1
2
1
1
1
2
7
50
39
32
25
7
15
3
4
204
461
SAC-29
207
201
41
22
1
24
42
1
1
3
4
40
3
6
596
Total
486
389
209
54
43
1
70
203
3
3
3
2
7
2
66
93
51
31
5
32
225
13
592
23
1
4
93
230
9
2943
13
16
15
12
21
67
67
8
1
Table 4. Birds NISP.
Scientific Name
SAC-67 SAC-133
Anseriformes
2
8
Cygnus columbianus
Anserinae
4
Branta canadensis
Anatinae/Aythyinae/Dendrocygninae/
24
21
Merginae/Oxyurinae
Mallard
Anas platyrhynchos
9
Northern Pintail
Anas acuta
Gadwall
Anas strepera
Ruddy Duck
Oxyura jamaicensis
American Coot
Fulica americana
1
Pie-billed Grebe
Podilymbus podiceps
Sandhill Crane
Grus canadensis
American Crow
Crovus brachyrhynchos
1
California Quail
Callipepla californica
1
Other (doves, perching birds, hawks, grouse, shorebirds)
2
Totals
39
34
Common Name
Waterfowl
Whistling Swan
Geese
Canada Goose
Ducks
Bird Richness
2
4
SAC-42
26
101
SAC-329
17
2
16
18
SAC-267
1
1
13
38
SAC-29
94
223
Total
27
1
127
29
425
45
19
1
2
6
200
4
15
16
8
96
2
4
8
67
76
4
35
432
11
4
15
16
122
19
8
2
3
59
868
6
4
4
4
11
Table 5. Herpetofauna NISP.
Common Name
Reptiles
Western Pond Turtle
Snakes
Scientific Name
Squamata
Actinemys marmorata
Serpentes
2
48
27
4
11
-
29
-
7
-
3
20
7
-
9
115
34
Garter Snake
Thamnophis sirtalis
2
-
-
1
-
-
3
Gopher Snake
Pituophis melanoleucus
-
-
-
1
-
-
1
Pit Vipers
Crotalinae
-
-
-
-
1
-
1
Frogs
North American Bullfrog
Western Toad
Salamander
Anura
Rana catesbeiana
Bufo boreas
Caudata
1
80
15
29
1
10
1
10
42
0
1
1
1
10
176
3
1
1
4
4
0
7
Totals
Herpetofauna Richness
68
8
1
Common Name
Sturgeon
Salmon
Chinook Salmon
Minnows & Suckers
Sacramento Sucker
Minnows
Hardhead
Sacramento Blackfish
Hitch
Sacramento Pikeminnow
Sacramento Splittail
Thicktail Chub
Sacramento Perch
Tule Perch
Scientific Name
Acipenser sp.
Salmonidae
Oncorhynchus tshawytscha
Cyprinidae/Catostomidae
Catostomus occidentalis
Cyprinidae
Mylopharodon conocephalus
Orthodon microlepidotus
Lavinia exilicauda
Ptychocheilus grandis
Pogonichthys macrolepidotus
Gila crassicauda
Archoplites interruptus
Hysterocarpus trask ii
Table 6. Fish NISP.
SAC-67 SAC-133
4
2
2
8
43
349
40
216
418
66
2
16
2
13
9
22
7
1
11
299
24
8
Totals
Fish Richness
SAC-42
20
19
286
1489
3
41
40
15
10
145
1390
20
SAC-329
13
4
103
57
50
100
79
50
221
865
78
SAC-267
8
34
1513
247
130
14
40
16
8
19
81
10
SAC-29
160
427
1444
6
154
5
62
22
29
6
128
109
-
Total
207
427
67
3349
898
2257
97
195
191
162
74
524
2768
116
856
706
3478
1620
2120
2552
11,332
10
8
11
10
11
10
11
Table 7. Invertebrates (weights in grams).
Common Name
Scientific Name
Freshwater Mussel
Unionoidea
-
-
-
4723.5
1634
163
6520.5
Western Pearlshell Mussel
Margaritifera falcata
Gonidea angulata
-
132.5
-
-
-
30
162.5
-
-
151.3
-
-
320
471.3
Anodonta nuttalliana
-
-
0.1
-
-
262
262.1
-
132.5
151.4
4723.5
1634
775
7416.4
Rocky Mtn Ridged Mussel
Nuttall's Anadon
Totals
69
8
1
70
However, taxonomic richness (i.e., the number of taxa present in an assemblage) is frequently a
function of sample size (Lyman 2008:180). Sample size can also affect taxonomic evenness, or how well
identified specimens are distributed among the assemblage. Given differences in sample sizes between the
sites analyzed, the Simpson’s Diversity Index was used to assess whether sample size influenced taxonomic
diversity. Simpson’s Diversity Index evaluates both the richness and evenness of a sample. As species
richness and evenness increase, so does diversity. The formula used to calculate Simpson’s D for a finite
population is:
∑ ni (ni -1)
D=
N(N-1)
ni = the total number of specimens of a particular species (NISPi)
N = the total number of specimens of all species (NISP total)
D= Simpson’s Index of dominance
(adapted from Lyman 2008)
When the reciprocal of D (1/D) is computed, the larger the value, the more evenly specimens are
distributed. Conversely, the lower the value of 1/D, the more an assemblage is dominated by one or a few
taxa (Lyman 2008:197).
The reciprocal of Simpson’s Diversity Index was applied to each of the site samples. The results
indicate an increase in diversity in all habitats over time.
Table 8. Diachronic Taxonomic Diversity.
Habitat
Richness
NISP
Site
Time
1/D
SAC-67
Middle Period
Freshwater
Marsh
23
499
2.65
SAC-329
Late Period
Freshwater
Marsh
34
2205
5.43
SAC-133
Middle Period
Grassland
25
570
4.75
SAC-267
Late Period
Grassland
38
762
7.39
SAC-42
Middle Period
Riparian
Woodland
31
2374
2.75
SAC-29
Late Period
Riparian
Woodland
26
1739
8.62
71
When a scatter plot is created comparing diversity with NISP (Figure 14), the best fit line shows there is no
relationship between NISP and diversity, indicating that the 31 percent increase in diversity/richness seen
between Middle Period and Late Period assemblages is not being driven by sample size.
10.00
CA-SAC-29
8.62
9.00
CA-SAC-267
7.39
8.00
7.00
CA-SAC-329
5.43
6.00
1/D
R² = 0.0006
5.00
CA-SAC-133
4.75
4.00
CA-SAC-42
2.75
3.00
2.00
CA-SAC-67
2.65
1.00
0.00
20
520
1020
1520
2020
2520
NISP
Figure 14. Scatter Plot of Diachronic Taxonomic Diversity (1/D) and NISP.
One of the problems in using NISP for the analysis of prehistoric diets is that it can differentially
exaggerate taxonomic abundance. For example, NISP does not control for the interdependence of
specimens which may be from one or many individuals. In an attempt to correct for the potential
overrepresentation of certain taxa, a variation of the chi-square test of independence, Cochran’s test of
linear trend, was applied to samples. Chi-square is calculated as follows:
2
= ∑
(observed – expected)2
expected
A percentage of significance or reliability is then applied to the result based on the number of data groups
(degrees of freedom) used in the calculation.
NISP totals were entered into a chi-square calculator macro for Excel created by M. Cannon
(Cannon 2012) and adjusted residuals were rounded to the hundredth. The results of the chi-square analyses
72
were compared by habitat type, because the restricted mobility assumed for both Middle and Late Period
populations would have limited foraging to site specific catchment areas.
Freshwater Marsh
The sites representing the freshwater marsh habitat are SAC-67 (Middle Period) and SAC-329
(Late Period). First, catchments areas for each site are described. Next, subsistence patterns and chi-square
analysis are compared. Last, results are interpreted in terms of site catchments and foraging efficiency.
Site catchments were reconstructed for SAC-67 and SAC-329 based on the paleoenvironmental
data used to create Figure 2 (see Chapter 2). The site catchment of SAC-67 indicates 59 percent of the
habitat within five kilometers (three miles) is grassland, 28 percent is freshwater marsh, and 13 percent is
riparian woodland. The catchment area of SAC-329 is 86 percent freshwater marsh and 14 percent riparian
woodland habitat. No grassland habitat was located within five kilometers (three miles) of SAC-329.
The SAC-67 faunal assemblage has an NISP of 1,087. Faunal diversity (richness) includes eight
mammals, two birds, ten fish, and three herpetofauna taxa. The faunal assemblage from SAC-329 has an
NISP of 2,690 and sample diversity includes 15 mammals, four birds, 11 fish, and four herpetofauna. Over
time, diversity in the freshwater marsh habitat increased by 48 percent.
Subsistence patterns were developed for each site using an arbitrary value system to measure
taxon attributes important to prey choice, e.g., taxa weight, habitat preference, and procurement method.
For fish, weight was replaced by standard length (length x girth). Taxon selection used the same criteria as
that used to calculate richness, i.e., only specimens from the lowest level of taxonomic rank were included
for analysis. A key showing values assigned to each taxon attribute and site specific calculation charts are
presented in Appendix C.
Freshwater marsh populations appear to have relied on medium sized animals primarily procured
by mass harvesting techniques from the freshwater marsh habitat ( 2=156.38, df=28, p <0.001). Large
slow-water fish, such as Sacramento perch, accounted for over 50 percent of the taxa targeted at both sites,
suggesting such fishes remained a dietary staple for freshwater marsh populations over time. In spite of this
consistency, changes in targeted taxa are apparent. First, the number of larger taxa incorporated in the diet
73
Figure 15. Freshwater Marsh Individual Site Catchments.
74
Figure 16. SAC-67 Middle Period Freshwater Marsh Subsistence Pattern.
Figure 17. SAC-329 Late Period Freshwater Marsh Subsistence Pattern.
75
increases in the Late Period. There is also a slight increase in the number of riparian woodland taxa
included in the diet. Finally, there is an increase in the number of taxa procured by single takes. The first
and third differences will be considered in the chi-square analysis presented below. The second difference
will be discussed in terms of site catchment area at the end of the freshwater marsh analysis.
In spite of this consistency, changes in targeted taxa are apparent. First, the number of larger taxa
incorporated in the diet increases in the Late Period. There is also a slight increase in the number of riparian
woodland taxa included in the diet. Finally, there is an increase in the number of taxa procured by single
takes. The first and third differences will be considered in the chi-square analysis presented below. The
second difference will be discussed in terms of site catchment area at the end of the freshwater marsh
analysis.
Chi-square analyses of the terrestrial taxa identified in freshwater marsh assemblages indicate
there is a significant increase in the amount of artiodactyl, carnivore (e.g., canids, raccoon, river otter,
mink, and skunks), and beaver remains in the Late Period ( 2=337.40, df =6, p <0.001). Significant
decreases are seen in lagomorphs, waterfowl, medium rodents (squirrels and gophers), and turtle.
Figure 18. Diachronic Freshwater Marsh Terrestrial Taxa.
76
Thus, the chi-square results for terrestrial taxa indicate that not only were more taxa incorporated in the
Late Period diet, but that more larger bodied taxa (e.g., artiodactyls, carnivores, and beavers) were being
procured at the expense of previously exploited smaller bodied animals (e.g., waterfowl, medium rodents,
and turtle). Further, as indicated in the subsistence pattern comparison, most of the animals which increase
in frequency are best procured via single takes (see Ugan 2005:77).
Figure 20 shows that fish NISP also increases over time, but it is not equally distributed across all
taxa ( 2=106.46, df=10, p <0.001). Due to the significant increases in other species, Sacramento perch
shows a decrease in abundance over time despite a nearly 200 percent increase in NISP. Similarly,
Sacramento sucker shows a decrease in abundance, despite a 157 percent increase in NISP. All other
resident fish show statistically significant increases, with the exception of Sacramento splittail, salmon, and
sturgeon. The largest increase is in thicktail chub, which is second in magnitude
Figure 19. Diachronic Freshwater Marsh Fish.
only to the decrease in the frequency of Sacramento perch. Thus, although Sacramento perch remains an
important constituent of the diet, a wider variety of fish was utilized by freshwater marsh occupants during
the Late Period.
77
One explanation for the increased variety of Late Period fish is that the SAC-329 catchment
contains approximately three times the amount of freshwater marsh habitat as SAC-67. This increased the
habitat for slow-water, i.e., freshwater marsh, species essentially, three-fold. On the one hand, mass
harvesting techniques likely procured a greater variety of fish simply because they were present. Support
for this conclusion can be found in the limited difference of NISP (no more than 50 specimens) between the
species intensified in presence during the Late Period. Such minor differences suggest that these species
were not specifically, but generically targeted.
On the other hand, it may be that the decrease in large bodied, slow-water fish indicates that
foraging efficiency was achieved in other ways. The significant increase in larger bodied terrestrial taxa in
the Late Period supports this conclusion as does the increase in single-take procurement. Many of the larger
bodied terrestrial species added to the diet were best procured individually and found primarily in the
riparian woodlands. These include carnivores and beaver, with deficiencies in the analysis of artiodactyl
remains from SAC-67 and SAC-329 making it difficult to assess which, if any, species significantly
increased over time. Scarcely any difference (one percent) in riparian woodland exists between the
catchments of the Middle and Late Period sites, so increased use of this habitat in the Late Period supports
a shift in prey choice.
Subsistence patterns for both sites also show that the grassland habitat was largely ignored during
both the Middle and Late periods. Grassland taxa account for less than one percent of each assemblage.
This is not surprising for SAC-329, because no grassland habitat was located within five kilometers (three
miles) of the site. However, 59 percent of SAC-67 catchment was grassland. One explanation for this
incongruity relates to the seasonal characteristics of study area grasslands. During late winter/spring
flooding, grasslands adjacent to the Cosumnes River (and other streams) became seasonal wetlands, leaving
SAC-67 an island. In fact, archaeologists working at the site needed boats to reach the site during these
seasons (J. Johnson 2010, personal communication). Thus, the formerly seasonal conversion of certain
grasslands to wetland habitats would have reduced the availability of grassland resources for nearly a
quarter of the year.
78
Grassland
The two grassland habitat sites are SAC-133 (Middle Period) and SAC-267 (Late Period). Both have nearly
identical catchments with 79 to 80 percent of the foraging radius in riparian woodland, 20-21 percent in
grassland, and less than one percent freshwater marsh.
Subsistence patterns reveal that exploitation of small to medium bodied freshwater marsh &
riparian woodland animals procured by mass capture is the dominant subsistence strategy at both sites
( 2=92.34, df=29, p <0.001). This is largely reflected by the large abundance of Sacramento sucker in both
assemblages, where it appears to have been a dietary staple over time. Apart from that, little else is similar
between the two subsistence patterns.
The most significant differences between the two subsistence patterns are reflected in the decrease
of very small taxa (e.g., gopher), decrease in use of grassland & riparian woodland, and increase in the use
of freshwater marsh habitat in the Late Period. Decreases in the first two patterns are reflected by an 81
percent decrease in Late Period gopher remains, and ambiguity surrounding the squirrel remains from
Figure 20. SAC-133 Middle Period Grassland Subsistence Pattern.
79
Figure 21. Grassland Individual Site Catchments.
80
Figure 22. SAC-267 Late Period Grassland Subsistence Pattern.
SAC-267. Botta’s pocket gopher is attracted to mesic environments with a continuously growing root
system (Jameson and Peeters 2004:291). If root access is restricted due to prolonged flooding or habitat
loss, Botta’s pocket gophers will decrease in numbers. These preferences suggest pocket gophers would
have been most prevalent in riparian woodlands, but could also be found in moist areas of grassland.
Thirty-nine squirrel remains were documented in the SAC-267 assemblage, but none were
identified to species. This may be due to use of analysts from Arizona, who lacked familiarity with
California ground squirrel remains. If the squirrel remains had been assigned to species, use of either
grassland (California ground squirrel), or riparian woodland (grey squirrel), or both habitats may have
increased along with that of small animals during the Late Period. The increase in freshwater marsh taxa
relates primarily to waterfowl and slow-water fishes during the Late Period. The significance of other
changes is evident in the results of the chi-square analysis.
Chi-square analysis of terrestrial taxa ( 2=33.86, df=6, p <0.001) show significant increases in
artiodactyls, waterfowl, and beaver in grassland subsistence economies over time. Of note is the addition of
81
geese, primarily Canada goose, to Late Period diets. Geese can be found in both grassland and freshwater
marsh habitats, so travel beyond the catchment may have been unnecessary to procure geese. Significant
decreases are likewise apparent in carnivores and medium-size rodents, but the numerical decrease in
lagomorphs is not statistically significant.
Figure 23. Diachronic Grassland Terrestrial Taxa.
Figure 24. Diachronic Grassland Fish.
82
Figure 24 shows significant differences in grassland fish over time ( 2=100.62, df=10, p <0.001).
These differences included significant changes in salmon and all slow-water species. Salmon increases by
325 percent in the Late Period and slow-water fish by 638 percent. The extremely large increase in slowwater fish is amplified by the inclusion of three previously unidentified species: hitch, thicktail chub, and
tule perch.
In terms of site catchment, both the subsistence pattern and chi-square data indicate that habitats
within three kilometers (five miles) of the sites provided the bulk of faunal resources to occupants of
grassland environments over time. Although riparian woodland and grassland taxa provided the bulk of the
diet (e.g., lagomorphs, medium rodents, and Sacramento sucker), people living in grassland habitats were
exploiting habitats beyond their catchment to obtain freshwater marsh resources (e.g., waterfowl and
Sacramento perch). Intensification of this behavior during the Late Period is supported by a widening of
diet breadth to include three additional species of slow-water fish and an 83 percent increase in waterfowl
remains. At the same time, however, foraging efficiency also appears to increase, given a rise in large
bodied taxa. Most of these taxa (e.g., artiodactyls, beaver, Canada goose, and salmon) were previously
available in the site catchment, such that their increase implies improved success in encounter rates.
Riparian Woodland
The riparian woodland habitat is represented by SAC-42 and SAC-29. Both sites are located on
the east side of the Sacramento River. The SAC-42 catchment was composed of 75 percent freshwater
marsh and 25 percent riparian woodland, and the SAC-29 catchment was 75 percent freshwater marsh, 18
percent riparian woodland, and seven percent grassland (Figure 25).
The subsistence pattern derived from each of the riparian woodland faunal assemblages is
presented below. Despite similarities in catchment areas, significant differences exist between riparian
woodland subsistence patterns over time ( 2=213.41, df=26, p <0.001).
The Middle Period subsistence pattern indicates that inhabitants of SAC-42 practiced mass harvesting of
medium sized animals from freshwater marsh habitats. Most of these are Sacramento perch, a large, slowwater fish, that comprises nearly a third of the assemblage. The next most numerous taxa are Sacramento
83
Figure 25. Riparian Woodland Individual Site Catchments.
84
Figure 26. SAC-42 Middle Period Riparian Woodland Subsistence Pattern.
Figure 27. SAC-29 Late Period Riparian Woodland Subsistence Pattern.
85
sucker, artiodactyls, and waterfowl. Although no grassland habitat is present in the SAC-42 catchment,
limited numbers of grassland taxa (e.g., pronghorn, badger, and lagomorphs) were identified. These
indicate that inhabitants of SAC-42 probably ventured outside their catchment to supplement a fish based
diet, much like the people at SAC-133. Unlike the inhabitants of SAC-42, the Late Period people at SAC29 acquired a wide range of medium- and large-sized taxa from freshwater marsh and riparian woodland
habitats. These include large fish (e.g., salmon, Sacramento perch, and hardhead), large waterfowl (e.g.,
geese), and medium to large mammals (e.g., artiodactyls, canids, raccoon, badger, and beaver). Most of
these taxa were best procured by individual rather than mass capture techniques.
Both subsistence patterns include some grassland taxa (pronghorn and lagomorphs) despite the
lack of grassland habitat in the SAC-42 catchment and only seven percent in SAC-29 foraging radius. As
with the grassland habitats, inhabitants of the riparian woodland probably ventured outside their catchment
area to supplement a fish based diet. Other diachronic changes in subsistence are highlighted by the chisquare analysis. It shows that changes in the frequency of some terrestrial taxa are not significant
( 2=60.73, df =6, p <0.001). Four of the seven taxa show no statistically significant changes in relative
frequency. A significant increase is seen in waterfowl, which increase by seven percent. Conversely,
carnivores and turtles exhibit a significant decrease over the same time.
Figure 28. Diachronic Riparian Woodland Terrestrial Taxa.
86
Despite significant increases in the frequency of identified fish, fish remains actually decrease in
the Late Period assemblage overall by 25 percent. This decrease is associated with a significant decline in
Sacramento perch, coupled with a significant increase in anadromous fast-water species over time.
( 2=1732.08, df=10, p <0.001). As Figure 29 shows, Sacramento perch, staple of the Middle Period diet,
decrease by 92 percent and Sacramento sucker by 98 percent. These decreases are overshadowed, however,
by significant increases in the abundance of anadromous species (i.e., salmon and sturgeon). Salmon
increase in frequency by over 2,000 percent and sturgeon by 700 percent. Hardhead, another fast-water
species, shows a smaller yet still significant increase in frequency. The significant increase in all fast-water
species supports the increased use of riparian woodlands during the Late Period, whereas fish from other
settings show no consistent pattern.
When the subsistence patterns and chi-square analysis are compared to the site catchment for each
time period, several trends are apparent. First, although freshwater marsh is equally represented in both site
catchments, the use of this habitat decreased over time with increasing use of large bodied taxa from the
Figure 29. Diachronic Riparian Woodland Fish.
87
riparian woodland (i.e., salmon and sturgeon). Increases in the NISP of other large bodied riparian
woodland taxa such as black-tailed deer, raccoon, and beaver support this Late Period trend, although the
latter increases are not statistically significant (see Figure 29).
Second, the limited grassland taxa in either assemblage reflect the likely absence/near absence of
grassland habitat in both site catchments. Nevertheless, people in both time periods either foraged beyond
their immediate catchments or traded in order to procure grassland resources. Third, in contrast to previous
habitats, there is a decrease in diet breadth (richness decreases) and an increase in foraging efficiency
(amount and kind of large bodied game) within the riparian woodland during the Late Period. This, too, is
supported by the results of the reciprocal of Simpson’s Diversity Index presented in Table 11. It indicates
that the observed decrease in taxonomic diversity is not a function of sample size because NISP varies
independently. Lastly, the significant shift in procurement methods from group to individual hunting
techniques demonstrates that Late Period changes in hunting technologies increased success in encounter
rates with larger bodied taxa and, as a result, increased foraging efficiency.
Summary and Discussion
Quantitative analysis of diachronic faunal assemblages resulted in several conclusions relating to
changes in prehistoric subsistence patterns over time and space in the study area.
1.
A broad spectrum diet with fish serving as a staple supplemented by mammals and seasonal
waterfowl characterized regional subsistence patterns
Diversity among site samples ranges from 23 to 38 taxa. This includes between eight and 11 fish taxa,
which comprise 60 to 79 percent of the assemblages. The most numerous fish in all samples were either
Sacramento perch or Sacramento sucker. Sacramento perch was the largest minnow in the study area and
its remains account for a quarter of all fish bone examined. Sacramento sucker is a medium sized fish and
its remains account for eight percent of the fish bone. A total of 21 different mammals are represented in
study area assemblages. Artiodactyls and lagomorphs are found in every sample, with the quantity of
88
medium rodents and carnivores varying. Although more than 11 bird taxa were identified, waterfowl
comprise the most numerous bird remains in every sample, with ducks accounting for 54 percent of all
identified birds.
2.
The freshwater marsh was the most targeted habitat during both the Middle and Late periods
The freshwater marsh habitat accounted for approximately 36 percent of the study area and 54 percent of
the taxa identified. Taxa which prefer a variety of habitats, including the freshwater marsh, account for an
additional 22 percent.
Figures 30 and 31 depict the subsistence patterns derived for the Middle and Late period
assemblages based on specimens from the lowest level of taxonomic rank ( 2=215.14, df=30, p <0.001).
Even when site catchments included less than one percent of this habitat (e.g., SAC-133 and SAC-267),
more than 50 percent of the taxa identified were associated with the freshwater marsh. While most taxa
procured from the freshwater marsh were fish, 29 percent represented terrestrial taxa, such as tule elk,
Figure 30. Study Area Middle Period Subsistence Pattern.
89
Figure 31. Study Area Late Period Subsistence Pattern.
raccoon, beaver, ducks, and turtle. Conversely, grassland habitats, which comprised 52 percent of the study
area, never account for more than 10 percent of the taxa exploited, even when taxa preference includes a
grassland component.
3.
Artiodactyl remains increase over time
Artiodactyls are the largest taxa found in the study area and account for 39 percent of the mammals
identified. A significant increase in artiodactyl remains is exhibited in both the freshwater marsh and
grassland habitats. An increase in artiodactyls is also seen in the riparian woodland, although it is less
significant than changes in other terrestrial fauna.
Table 9. Diachronic Change in Artiodactyl Species.
Species
NISP
Adjusted Residual
Middle
Late
Tule Elk
62
327
2.44
Black-tailed Deer
33
176
1.44
Pronghorn
29
25
-6.78
90
The limited number of pronghorn in all assemblages most likely reflects the general lack of grassland
targeting, while the significant increases in tule elk and black-tailed deer are more likely related to the next
conclusion.
4.
Changes in hunting technology increased foraging efficiency in the Late Period
Although increases in taxonomic diversity were not identified in all habitats, increases in large prey are
seen in every study area habitat over time, regardless of site catchment. These large bodied taxa prefer
multiple habitats, and some were only seasonally present. Thus, increases in these animals cannot be
attributed to changes in environment alone. The aridity and droughts experienced in the Late Period during
the MCA appear to have precluded high water flows in the Sacramento River, which may have impacted
salmon runs and reduced primary production for herbivores. Nevertheless, this is exactly the time period
when both salmon and artiodactyl remains increase in assemblages.
Increased flooding during the LIA in the latter half of the Late Period, could have also impacted
primary production and reduced habitat for certain grassland species, such as lagomorphs and pronghorn,
by increasing the size and duration of seasonal wetlands. Despite this possibility, changes in lagomorph
frequency were typically not significant and the frequency of pronghorn specimens is currently impossible
to assess with the data available. Enlarged seasonal wetlands may have provided increased forage for
juvenile fish, increasing survivorship, and/or providing hunters with easy targets. Support for such a
scenario is reflected in fish increases in Late Period freshwater marsh and grassland assemblages, but
additional study (age grading) is needed before this scenario can be considered a direct influence on local
subsistence economies.
More certain, perhaps, is that the ubiquitous increase in Late Period artiodactyls, particularly tule
elk and black-tailed deer, implies that introduction of bow and arrow technology increased hunting success.
Corresponding conclusions have been proposed for the Bay Area in order to explain similar increases in
highly ranked mammalian prey species (Wake 2012:31). Increases in individually procured medium
mammals (i.e., canids, carnivores, and beaver) and geese, support the adoption of a more efficient hunting
91
technology. Similarly, changes in fishing technology (e.g., the toggle harpoon) allowed large bodied
anadromous species to be exploited with greater success. Salmon and sturgeon were identified at all six
sites regardless of time period. It is not until when the toggle harpoon was introduced during the Late
Period that salmon and sturgeon surpass the stable dietary contribution of slow-water minnows and suckers.
92
Chapter 7
CONCLUSION
Changes related to resource intensification in the Lower Sacramento Valley are exhibited by the
faunal assemblages presented in this study. These changes are manifest as diachronic differences in
subsistence economies developed in response to divergent resource distributions and technological
efficiency.
By 4,000 years ago, sedentary populations inhabited most of the eastern Delta. Ethnographic
reconstructions (Baumhoff 1963; Johnson 1976), estimate that roughly 5,160 to 5,222 people inhabited the
nearly 1,259 square kilometer (311,000 acre) study area. Populations were concentrated on natural river
levees and areas above the floodplain (Pierce 1988:16, 37). As a result, constricted catchment areas, similar
to those of agricultural populations, were likely. The differing combinations of freshwater marsh, grassland,
and riparian woodland habitats found within each of these catchments would have provided certain
opportunities and constraints for foraging efficiency over time and space for study area populations.
Diachronic disparities exhibited between the zooarchaeological assemblages left by these
populations have led some investigators to conclude that climatic fluctuations and economic intensification
caused encounters with larger taxa, such as artiodactyls and anadromous fish, to decrease over time
throughout California. Two investigations in particular, Broughton (1994b) and Craw (2002), proposed a
decrease in foraging efficiency occurred within the study area over the last 4,000 years. Their
methodologies and results provided the foundation for this thesis.
For this study, three assemblages dating to the Middle Period (SAC-67, SAC-133, and SAC-42)
were compared to three assemblages from the Late Period (SAC-329, SAC-267, and SAC-29). Sites were
divided by habitat based on paleoenvironmental reconstructions, catchment areas were generated, and
assemblage NISPs were subjected to quantitative analyses. In general, the results found that study area
populations during both time periods practiced a subsistence pattern focused on procuring fish, such as
Sacramento perch and Sacramento sucker, and terrestrial resources, such as waterfowl, artiodactyls, and
93
fur-bearing mammals from the freshwater marsh. The results also indicated that in Late Period
assemblages, the number of taxa represented increased by 31 percent. At the same time though, numbers of
large bodied taxa, such as artiodactyls, medium mammals, geese, and anadromous fish also increased
significantly.
Several causal factors were examined in order to explain the contradiction between resource
intensification and increased foraging efficiency over time. Population increase was considered inherent
and is reflected in human osteological studies, more occupational sites, and disparate language density
(Bennyhoff 1977:Map 2; Rosenthal et al. 2007:149; Schwitalla 2010:60). Larger numbers of people would
have also restricted catchment areas and possibly led to resource depression, however, results did not
indicate resource patches underutilized before received more exploitation later. The freshwater marsh
remained the habitat most targeted during both the Middle and Late periods, while the grasslands remained
the least targeted area overall. The riparian woodland did show a 340 percent increase in use during the
Late Period, but its status as the second most utilized habitat for the study area did not change. In the end,
the most reasonable explanation for the incongruity between optimal foraging principles was the
introduction of new more efficient hunting technologies, i.e., bows and arrows, and toggle and bilateral
harpoons.
Despite such conclusions, data utilized in this thesis possessed certain limitations. Although
collection methods and general age for assemblages was held constant, inconsistencies in analyst
experience and methodologies could not be controlled. Re-analysis of all the assemblages presented here
was not possible, so certain attributes such as thermal alteration and modification patterns could not be
explored. The lack of consistency in identification to the level of species and age for some taxa, such as
salmonids, waterfowl, and artiodactyls, precluded a discussion on season of capture and harvest pressure.
Lastly, consistent data on the amount and species of freshwater mussel remains would have augmented
patch choice and catchment data.
Hopefully, future research can re-examine the data presented in this thesis in order to minimize
some of the limitations discussed above. Further, research including paleobotanical data would provide a
94
more robust picture of the subsistence systems practiced by Lower Sacramento Valley populations.
Comparisons with other indigenous patterns throughout California and beyond would also help to identify
regional trends, and the role climate, population pressure, and technology played for prehistoric subsistence
strategies. Studies relating to paleodemography, settlement patterns, and landscape use may also be able to
build on the paleoenvironmental reconstructions presented here. Above all, I hope that the data presented in
thesis demonstrates the utility of expending time and energy on the study of legacy collections. These
collections often represent the foundations behind the archaeological research and theory in practice today.
And although they can be fraught with deficiencies and challenges, these collections have considerable
potential to add to our understanding of the interplay between humans and the environment they live in.
95
References Cited
Adam, D. P.
1975
A Late Holocene Pollen Record from Pearson’s Pond, Weeks Creek Landslide, San
Francisco Peninsula, California. Journal of Research, U.S. Geological Survey 3:721-731.
Allen-Diaz, B., R. Standiford, and R. D. Jackson
2007
Oak Woodlands and Forests. In Terrestrial Vegetation of California, 3rd Edition, edited
by M. G. Barbour, T. Keeler-Wolf, and A. A. Schoenherr, pp. 313-338. University of
California Press, Berkeley.
American River Natural History Association (ARNHA)
2004
The Outdoor World of the Sacramento Region. American River Natural History
Association, Carmichael, California.
Anderson, M. K.
2005
Tending the Wild: Native American Knowledge and the Management of California's
Natural Resources. University of California Press, Berkeley.
Arnold, J. E.
1992
Complex Hunter-Gatherer-Fishers of Prehistoric California: Chiefs, Specialists, and
Maritime Adaptation of the Channel Islands. American Antiquity 57:60-84.
Atwater, B. F., and C. W. Hedel
1976
Distribution of Seed Plants With Respect to Tide Levels and Water Salinity in the Natural
Tidal Marshes of the Northern San Francisco Bay Estuary, California. USGS Open-File
Report:76-389. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia.
Barrett, S. A., and E. W. Gifford
1933
Miwok Material Culture. Bulletin of the Public Museum of the City of Milwaukee
2(4):117-376.
Bartolome, J. W., W. J. Barry, T. Griggs, and P. Hopkinson
2007
Valley Grassland. In Terrestrial Vegetation of California, 3rd Edition, edited by M. G.
Barbour, T. Keeler-Wolf, and A. A. Schoenherr, pp. 367-393. University of California
Press, Berkeley.
Basgall, M. E.
1987
Resource Intensification among Hunter-Gatherers: Acorn Economies in Prehistoric
California. Research in Economic Anthropology 9:21-52.
96
Baumhoff, M. A.
1963
Ecological Determinants of Aboriginal California Populations. University of California
Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 49(2):155-236. Berkeley.
1978
Environmental Background. In California, edited by R. F. Heizer, pp. 16-24. Handbook
of North American Indians, vol. 8, W. G. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian
Institution, Washington, D. C.
Bayham, F. E.
1982
Beals, R. L.
1933
A Diachronic Analysis of Prehistoric Animal Exploitation at Ventana Cave. Unpublished
Ph.D. dissertation, Arizona State University, Tempe.
Ethnology of the Nisenan. University of California Publications in American
Archaeology and Ethnology 31(6):335-414. Berkeley.
Bean, L. J., and H. W. Lawton
1976
Some Explanations for the Rise of Cultural Complexity in Native California with
Comments on Proto-agriculture and Agriculture. In Native Californians: A Theoretical
Retrospective, edited by L. J. Bean and T. C. Blackburn, pp. 19-48. Ballena Press, Menlo
Park.
Beardsley, R. K.
1948
Culture Sequences in Central California Archaeology. American Antiquity 14(1):1-28.
1954a Temporal and Areal Relationships in Central California Archaeology, Volume I.
University of California Archaeological Survey Reports 24:1-62.
1954b Temporal and Areal Relationships in Central California Archaeology, Volume II.
Beaton, J. M.
1991
Extensification and Intensification in Central California Prehistory. Antiquity 65:946-952.
Bellrose, F. C.
1976
Ducks, Geese, and Swans of North America. Stackpole Books, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.
97
Bennyhoff, J. A.
1972
Figures 2-6 in Development of Regional Prehistoric Cultures, by A. B. Elsasser,
published 1978. In California, edited by R. F. Heizer, pp. 37-58. Handbook of North
American Indians, Vol. 8, W. C. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution,
Washington, D.C.
1977
The Ethnogeography of the Plains Miwok. Center for Archaeological Research at Davis
Publication No. 5. University of California, Davis.
1994
Central California Augustine: Implications for Northern California Archaeology. In
Towards a New Taxonomic Framework for Central California Archaeology: Essays by
James A. Bennyhoff and David A. Fredrickson, edited by R. E. Hughes, pp. 65-74.
Contributions of the University of California Archaeological Research Facility 52.
Berkeley.
Bennyhoff, J. A., and D. A. Fredrickson
1994
A Proposed Integrative Taxonomic System for Central California Archaeology. In
Towards a New Taxonomic Framework for Central California Archaeology: Essays by
James A. Bennyhoff and David A. Fredrickson, edited by R. E. Hughes, pp. 15-24.
Contributions of the University of California Archaeological Research Facility 52.
Berkeley.
Bennyhoff, J. A., and R. E. Hughes
1987
Shell Bead and Ornament Exchange Networks between California and the Western Great
Basin. Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History 64(2):80175. New York.
Bettinger, R. L.
1991
Hunters-Gatherers: Archaeological and Evolutionary Theory. Plenum, New York.
Bickel, P.
1978
Binford, L. R.
1979
1980
Changing Sea Levels along the California Coast: Anthropological Implications. Journal
of California Anthropology 5(1):6-20.
Organization and Formation Processes: Looking at Curated Technologies. Journal of
Anthropological Research 35(3):255-273.
Willow Smoke and Dog’s Tails: Hunter-Gatherer Settlement Systems and Archaeological
Site Formation. American Antiquity 45:1-17.
Bot, A., and J. Benites
2005
The Importance of Soil Organic Matter Key to Drought Resistant Soil and Sustained
Food Production. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Bulletin 80.
Rome.
Bouey, P. D.
1995
Final Report on the Archaeological Analysis of CA-SAC-43, Cultural Resources
Mitigation for the Sacramento Urban Area Levee Reconstruction Project, Sacramento
County, California. Report on file, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Sacramento.
98
Bouey, P. D., and S. A. Waechter
1992
Final Report on Phase II Test Excavations at CA-SAC-133 Near Sloughhouse,
Sacramento County, California. Report on file, California Department of Transportation,
District 3, Marysville.
Broughton, J. M.
1994a Declines in Mammalian Foraging Efficiency during the Late Holocene, San Francisco
Bay, California. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 13(4):371-401.
1994b Late Holocene Resource Intensification in the Sacramento Valley, California: The
Vertebrate Evidence. Journal of Archaeological Science 21:501-514.
1997
Widening Diet Breadth, Declining Foraging Efficiency, and Prehistoric Harvest Pressure:
Ichthyofaunal Evidence from the Emeryville Shellmound, California. Antiquity 71:845862.
2002
Pre-Columbian Human Impact on California Vertebrates: Evidence from Old Bones and
Implications for Wilderness Policy. In Wilderness and Political Economy: Aboriginal
Influences and the Original State of Nature, edited by C. E. Kay and R. T. Simmons, pp.
44-71. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.
Broughton, J. M., and F. E. Bayham
1993
Resource Intensification in Northern California: Patterns in the Archaeological
Vertebrate Evidence. Paper presented at the 58 th Annual Meeting of the Society for
American Archaeology, St. Louis, Missouri.
2003
Showing Off, Foraging Models, and the Ascendance of Large Game Hunting in the
California Middle Archaic. American Antiquity 68(4):783-789.
Broughton, J. M., M. D. Cannon, F. E. Bayham, and D. A. Byers
2011
Prey Body Size and Ranking in Zooarchaeology: Theory, Empirical Evidence, and
Applications from the Northern Great Basin. American Antiquity 76(3):403–428.
Byers, D. A., and J. M. Broughton
2004
Holocene Environmental Change, Artiodactyl Abundances, and Human Hunting
Strategies in the Great Basin. American Antiquity 69(2):235-255.
Byers, D. A., C. Smith, and J. M. Broughton
2005
Holocene Artiodactyl Population Histories and Large Game Hunting in the Wyoming
Basin, USA. Journal of Archaeological Science 32:125-142.
Byrne, R., B. L. Ingram, S. Starratt, R. Malamud-Roam, J. N. Collins, and M. E. Conrad
2001
Carbon Isotope, Diatom, and Pollen Evidence for Late Holocene Salinity Change in a
Brackish Marsh in the San Francisco Estuary. Quaternary Research 55:66-76.
99
California State University, Chico (CSUC), Dept. of Geography and Planning
2003
Central Valley Historical Mapping Project. Electronic Resource.
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/
bay_delta/docs/cmnt081712/sldmwa/csuchicodptofgeographyandplanningcentralvalley.p
df. Accessed September 26, 2010.
Cannon, D. Y.
1987
2012
Marine Fish Osteology a Manual for Archaeologists. Simon Fraser University Library,
Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada.
Chi-Square Macro. Electronic Resource. http://home.utah.edu/~u0577421/chi-square.xls.
Accessed on July 20, 2012.
Carpenter, K. L.
2002
Reversing the Trend: Late Holocene Subsistence Change in Northeastern California. In
Boundary Lands: Archaeological Investigations Along the California-Great Basin
Interface, edited by K. R. McGuire, pp. 49-59. Nevada State Museum Anthropological
Papers 24. Carson City.
Chisholm, M.
1968
Rural Settlement and Land Use: An Essay in Location. Hutchinson University Library,
London.
City of Sacramento
2010
Sacramento Weather. Electronic Resource.
http://www.cityofsacramento.org/weather_and_population.html. Accessed October 1,
2010.
Cohen, M. N.
1981
Cook, S. F.
1955
Pacific Coast Foragers: Affluent or Overcrowded? In Affluent Foragers: Pacific Coasts
East and West, edited by S. Koyama and D. H. Thomas. Senri Ethnological Studies
9:275-295.
The Aboriginal Population of the San Joaquin Valley, California. University of
California Anthropological Record 16(2):31-80. Berkeley.
Cosumnes River Preserve
2010
Species Abundance by Month, Birds. Electronic Resource.
http://www.cosumnes.org/flora_fauna/index.html. Accessed November 28, 2010.
Craw, M. M.
2002
Resource Intensification and the King Brown Site (CA-SAC-29). Unpublished Master’s
thesis, Department of Anthropology, California State University, Sacramento.
100
Davis, J. T.
1961
Trade Routes and Economic Exchange among the Indians of California. University of
California Archaeological Survey Reports 54. Berkeley.
Dougherty, J. W.
1990
The Obsidian Projectile Points of the King-Brown Site: CA-SAC-29, Sacramento County,
California. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Department of Anthropology, California State
University, Sacramento.
Ducks Unlimited
2013
California Conservation Projects. Electronic Resource.
http://www.ducks.org/california/california-projects. Accessed March 6, 2013.
Elsasser, A. B.
1978
Development of Regional Prehistoric Cultures. In California, edited by R. F. Heizer, pp.
37-58. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8, W. C. Sturtevant, general editor.
Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
Erlandson, J. M., T. C. Rick, T. L. Jones, and J. Porcasi
2007
One if by Land, Two if by Sea: Who Were the First Californians? In California
Prehistory: Colonization, Culture, and Complexity, edited by T. L. Jones & K. Klar, pp.
53-62. Altamira Press, Plymouth, United Kingdom.
Fagan, B. M.
2003
Before California: An Archaeologist Looks at Our Earliest Inhabitants. Rowman and
Littlefield Publishers, Inc., Lanham, Maryland.
Florsheim, J. L., and J. F. Mount
2003
Changes in Lowland Floodplain Sedimentation Processes: Pre-disturbance to Postrehabilitation, Cosumnes River, CA. Geomorphology 56:305-323.
Fredrickson, D. A.
1973
Early Cultural of the North Coast Ranges, California. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation,
University of California, Davis.
1974
Cultural Diversity in Early Central California: A View from the North Coast Ranges.
Journal of California Anthropology 1(1):41-54.
1994
Spatial and Cultural Units in Central California Archaeology. In Towards a New
Taxonomic Framework for Central California Archaeology: Essays by James A.
Bennyhoff and David A. Fredrickson, edited by R. E. Hughes, pp. 25-47. Contributions of
the University of California Archaeological Research Facility 52. Berkeley.
101
Furlong, D. M.
2004
Gifford, E. W.
1927
1940
1947
Gilbert, B. M.
1980
Gilbert, K. G.
1917
Spatial and Temporal Patterns of Artiodactyl Abundances during the Holocene in North
Central California. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Department of Anthropology,
California State University, Chico.
Southern Maidu Religious Ceremonies. American Anthropologist 29(3):214-257.
California Bone Artifacts. University of California Anthropological Records 3:153-238.
Berkeley.
California Shell Artifacts. University of California Anthropological Records 9(1):1-114.
Berkeley.
Mammalian Osteology. Modern Printing Co., Laramie, Wyoming.
Hydraulic-Mining Debris in the Sierra Nevada. United States Geological Survey
Professional Paper 105. Washington, D.C.
Gilbert, B. M., L. D. Martin, and H. G. Savage
1985
Avian Osteology. Modern Printing Co., Laramie, Wyoming.
Golla, V.
2007
Linguistic Prehistory. In California Prehistory: Colonization, Culture, and Complexity,
edited by T. L. Jones and K. A. Klar, pp. 71-82. Altamira Press, Plymouth, United
Kingdom.
Gorman, M., and L. Wells
2000
Trends in River Flow Affecting the Northeastern Reach of the San Francisco Bay Estuary
over the Past 7000 Years. Quaternary Research 54:206-217.
Grayson, D. K.
1984
Groza, R. G.
2002
Quantitative Zooarchaeology. Academic Press, Orlando.
An AMS Chronology for Central California Olivella Shell Beads. Unpublished Master’s
thesis, Department of Anthropology, San Francisco State University.
Halstead, P., and J. O’Shea (editors)
1989
Bad Year Economics: Cultural Responses to Risk and Uncertainty. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge.
102
Hartman, L.
2007
Heady, H. F.
1988
Heizer, R. F.
1934
1949
1951
1958
Site Record Update for CA-SAC-133. Document on file at the North Central Information
Center, Sacramento, California.
Valley Grassland. In Terrestrial Vegetation of California: New Expanded Edition, edited
by M. G. Barbour and J. Major, pp. 491-514. California Native Plant Society, Special
Publication No. 9.
Site Record for CA-SAC-29. Document on file at the North Central Information Center,
California State University, Sacramento.
The Archaeology of Central California I: The Early Horizon. University of California
Anthropological Records 12(1):1-84. Berkeley.
Preliminary Report on Leonard Rockshelter, Pershing County, Nevada. American
Antiquity 17:89-98.
Prehistoric Central California: A Problem in Historical-Developmental Classification.
Hildebrandt, W. R., and T. L. Jones
1992
Evolution of Marine Mammal Hunting: A View from the California and Oregon Coasts.
Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 11(4):360-401.
Hildebrandt, W. R., and K. R. McGuire
2002
The Ascendance of Hunting during the California Middle Archaic: An Evolutionary
Perspective. American Antiquity 67:231-256.
Hilson, S.
1992
Mammal Bones & Teeth: An Introductory Guide to Methods of Identification. Left Coast
Press, Walnut Creek, California.
Holland, R., and S. Jain
1988
Vernal Pools. In Terrestrial Vegetation of California: New Expanded Edition, edited by
M. G. Barbour and J. Major, pp. 515-533. California Native Plant Society, Special
Publication No. 9.
Hughes, R. E. and R. T. Milliken
2007
Prehistoric Material Conveyance. In California Prehistory: Colonization, Culture, and
Complexity edited by T. L. Jones and K. A. Klar, pp. 259-272. Altamira Press, Plymouth,
United Kingdom.
103
Ingebritsen, S. E., M. E. Ikehara, D. L. Galloway, and D. R. Jones.
2000
Delta Subsidence in California: The Sinking Heart of the State. United States Department
of the Interior, United States Geological Survey. Electronic Resource.
http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2000/fs00500/. Accessed December 12, 2010.
Ingram, B. L.
1998
Differences in Radiocarbon Age Between Shell and Charcoal from a Holocene
Shellmound in Northern California. Quaternary Research 49:102-110.
Ingram, B. L., J. C. Ingle, and M. E. Conrad
1996
A 2,000-Yr Record of San Joaquin and Sacramento River Inflow to San Francisco Bay,
California. Geology 24:331-334.
Jameson, E.W. Jr., and H. J. Peeters
2004
Mammals of California. University of California Press, Berkeley.
Johnson, J. J.
1976
1990
2006
2010
Archaeological Investigations at the Blodgett Site (CA-SAC-267) Sloughhouse Locality,
California. Manuscript on file at the North Central Information Center, California State
Cosumnes Brownware: A Pottery Type Centered on the Lower Cosumnes and Adjacent
Sacramento Rivers in Central California. Nevada State Museum Anthropological Papers
23(10):146-158.
Personal Communication. California State University, Sacramento.
Personal Communication. California State University, Sacramento.
Johnson, J. J., and M. Farncomb
2005
Archaeological Field Manual, California State University, Sacramento. Institute of
Archaeology and Cultural Studies Report No. 7. Department of Anthropology, California
State University, Sacramento.
Johnson, P. J., and J. J. Johnson
1974
Jones, D.
1995
Molluscan Faunal Remains. In Report on the 1994 Archaeological Excavation on the
Skirt of the Souza Mound, Sac-42, Sacramento County, California, edited by R. T.
Milliken, pp. 12.1-12.4. Report on file at the North Central Information Center,
Jones, T. L., G. M. Brown, L. M. Raab, J. L. McVickar, W. G. Spaulding, D. J. Kennett, A. York, and P. L.
Walker
1999
Environmental Imperatives Reconsidered: Demographic Crises in Western North
America during the Medieval Climatic Anomaly. Current Anthropology 40(2):137-169.
104
Keeler-Wolf, T., D. R. Elam, K. Lewis, and S. A. Flint
1998
California Vernal Pool Assessment Preliminary Report. State of California, The
Resources Agency, Department of Fish and Game. Electronic Resource.
http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/wetlands/pdfs/VernalPoolAssessment
PreliminaryReport.pdf. Accessed November 23, 2010.
Kelley, J. E., and J. B. Sparling
1976
Faunal Analysis of 4-SAC-267 (Appendix B). Manuscript on file at the North Central
Information Center, California State University, Sacramento.
Kelly, R. L.
1995
The Foraging Spectrum: Diversity in Hunter-Gatherer Lifeways. Smithsonian Institution
Press, Washington, D.C.
Kennett, D. J.
2005
The Island Chumash: Behavioral Ecology of a Maritime Society. University of California
Press, Berkeley.
Kennett, J. P., L. Becker, and A. West
2007
Triggering the Younger Dryas Cooling by Extraterrestrial Impacts. Paper presented at the
Joint Assembly of the American Geophysical Union, Acapulco, Mexico.
Kielusiak, C. M.
1982
Variability and Distribution of Baked Clay Artifacts from the Lower SacramentoNorthern San Joaquin Valleys of California. Unpublished Master’s thesis, California
State University, Sacramento.
Koerper, H. C., J. S. Killingly, and R. E. Taylor
1985
The Little Ice Age and Coastal Southern California Human Economy. Journal of
California and Great Basin Anthropology 7(1):99-103.
Konrad, M.
2012
Kroeber, A. L.
1925
1929
1939
1962
Tides, With Particular Reference to San Francisco Bay Currents, and Rowing. Electronic
Resource. http://www.scienceisart.com/B_Tides/TidesMain.html. Accessed December
11, 2012.
Handbook of the Indians of California. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 78.
Washington, D. C.
The Valley Nisenan. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and
Ethnology 24(4):253-290.
Cultural and Natural Areas of Native North America. University of California
Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 38. Berkeley.
The Nature of Landholding Groups in Aboriginal California. University of California
Archaeological Survey Reports 56:19-58.
105
Küchler, A. W.
1977
Natural Vegetation of California. In Terrestrial Vegetation of California, edited by M. G.
Barbour and J. Major, pp. 909-938. Wiley and Sons, New York.
Levy, R.
1978
Lewis, H. T.
1982
Eastern Miwok. In California, edited by R. F. Heizer, pp. 398-413. Handbook of North
Washington, D.C.
Fire Technology and Resource Management in Aboriginal North America and Australia.
In Resource Managers: North American and Australian Hunter-Gatherers, edited by N.
M. Williams and E. S. Hunn, pp. 45-67. American Association for the Advancement of
Science, Selected Symposia Series No. 67.
Lightfoot, K. G. and O. Parrish
2009
California Indians and Their Environment: An Introduction. University of California
Press, Berkeley.
Lillard, J. B., and W. K. Purves
1936
The Archaeology of the Deer Creek-Cosumnes Area, Bulletin 1. Department of
Anthropology, Sacramento Junior College, Sacramento.
Lillard, J. B., R. F. Heizer, and F. Fenenga
1939
An Introduction to the Archaeology of Central California, Bulletin 2. Department of
Anthropology, Sacramento Junior College, Sacramento.
Littlejohn, H. W.
1928
Nisenan Geography. Manuscript on file at Bancroft Library, University of California,
Berkeley.
Lyman, R. L.
2008
Matson, R. G.
1972
Quantitative Paleozoology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Aspects of Nisenan Ecology. In Papers on Nisenan Environment and Subsistence, edited
by E. W. Ritter and P. D. Schulz, pp. 39-44. Center for Archaeological Research at Davis
Publication No. 3. University of California, Davis.
McCullough, D. R.
1969
The Tule Elk, Its History, Behavior, and Ecology. University of California Press,
Berkeley.
106
Meighan, C. W.
1959
The Little Harbor Site, Catalina Island: An Example of Ecological Interpretation in
Archaeology. American Antiquity 24:383-405.
Meko, D. M., M. D. Therrell, C. H. Baisan, and M. K. Hughes
2001
Sacramento River Flow Reconstructed To A.D. 869 From Tree Rings. Journal of the
American Water Resources Association 37(4):1029-1039.
Meyer, J., and J. S. Rosenthal
2008
A Geoarchaeological Overview and Assessment of Caltrans District 3—Cultural
Resources Inventory of Caltrans District 3 Rural Conventional Highways. Report on file,
California Department of Transportation, District 3, Marysville.
Milliken, R. T.
1995
Minnich, R. A.
2007
Moratto, M. J.
1984
Report on the 1994 Archaeological Excavation on the Skirt of the Souza Mound, Sac-42,
Sacramento County, California. Report on file at the North Central Information Center,
Climate, Paleoclimate, and Paleovegetation. In Terrestrial Vegetation of California,
edited by Michael G. Brabour, Todd Keeler-Wolf, and Allan A. Schoenherr. University
of California Press, Berkeley.
California Archaeology. Academic Press, Inc. New York. Reprint 2004 by Coyote Press,
Salinas, California.
Moratto, M. J., and J. L. Chartkoff
2007
Archaeological Progress since 1984. In California Prehistory: Colonization, Culture, and
Complexity edited by T. L. Jones and K. A. Klar, pp. 1-9. Altamira Press, Plymouth,
United Kingdom.
Moyle, P. B.
2002
2010
Inland Fishes of California. University of California Press, Berkeley.
Personal Communication. University of California, Davis.
Moyle, P. B., P. K. Crain, and K. Whitener
2007
Patterns in the Use of a Restored California Floodplain by Native and Alien Fishes. San
Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science. Volume 5, Issue 3.
Nedeau, E., A. K. Smith, and J. Stone
2005
Freshwater Mussels of the Pacific Northwest. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1-44.
107
Noble, D. and J. Offermann
1990
Updated Site Record for CA-SAC-133. Document on file at the North Central
Information Center, California State University, Sacramento.
Northern California Water Association
2013
Pacific Flyway. Electronic Resource. http://www.norcalwater.org/efficient-watermanagement/pacific-flyway/ Accessed February 4, 2013.
Peak and Associates, Inc.
1984
Report on the Salvage of CA-SAC-42, Pocket Road Area of Sacramento City,
Sacramento. Manuscript on file at the North Central Information Center, California State
Peres, T. M.
2010
Pierce, P.
1988
Preston, W. L.
2002
Pyke, G. H.
1984
Ragir, S. R.
1972
Raab, L. M.
1996
Methodological Issues in Zooarchaeology. In Integrating Zooarchaeology and
Paleoethnobotany: A Consideration of Issues, Methods, and Cases, edited by A. M.
VanDerwarker and T. M. Peres, pp. 15-36. Springer, New York.
A Geoarchaeological Analysis of the Prehistoric Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta,
California. Unpublished Master’s research paper, Department of Anthropology,
University of California, Davis.
Post-Columbian Wildlife Irruptions in California: Implications for Cultural and
Environmental Understanding. In Wilderness and Political Economy: Aboriginal
Influences and the Original State of Nature, edited by C. E. Kay and R. T. Simmons, pp.
111-140. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.
Optimal Foraging Theory: A Critical Review. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics
15:523-75.
The Early Horizon in Central California Prehistory. Contributions of the University of
California Archaeological Research Facility 15:1-158. Berkeley.
Debating Prehistory in Coastal Southern California: Resource Intensification versus
Political Economy. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 18(1):64-80.
108
Reitz, E. J., and E. S. Wing
1999
Zooarchaeology. Cambridge Manuals in Archaeology. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.
Renfrew, C., and P. Bahn, editors
2005
Archaeology: The Key Concepts. Routledge, New York.
Ritter, E. W.
1968
Ritter, E. W., and P. D. Schulz (editors)
1972
Papers on Nisenan Environment and Subsistence. Center for Archaeological Research at
Davis Publication No. 3. University of California, Davis.
Rosenthal, J. S., G. G. White, and M. Q. Sutton
2007
The Central Valley: A View from the Catbird’s Seat. In California Prehistory:
Colonization, Culture, and Complexity edited by T. L. Jones and K. A. Klar, pp. 147-164.
Altamira Press, Plymouth, United Kingdom.
San Francisco Estuary Institute
2012
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Historical Ecology Study. GIS Data. Electronic Resource.
http://www.sfei.org/DeltaHEStudy. Accessed September 26, 2010.
Schulz, P. D.
1979
1981
Fish Remains from a Historic Central California Indian Midden. California Fish and
Game 65(4):273-276.
Osteoarchaeology and Subsistence Change in Prehistoric California. Unpublished Ph.D.
dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Davis.
Schulz, P. D., H. M. Wagner, and D. P. Domning
1976
Vertebrate Fauna of Site CA-SAC-329, Sacramento County, California. In Archeological
Investigations at SAC-329 near Walnut Grove, Sacramento County, California, by W. E.
Soule, pp. 129-141. Report on file, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Sacramento.
Schwitalla, A. W.
2010
The Medieval Climatic Anomaly in Central California: Environmental Imperatives
Reconsidered from a Bioarchaeological Perspective. Unpublished Master’s thesis,
Department of Anthropology, California State University, Sacramento.
Shlemon, R. J., and E. L. Begg
1975
Late Quaternary Evolution of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, California. In
Quaternary Studies, edited by R. P. Suggate and M. M. Cresswell, pp. 259-265. The
Royal Society of New Zealand Bulletin 13. Wellington.
109
Simons, D. D.
1994
Bird and Mammal Remains. In Report of the Archaeological Analysis of CA-SAC-43,
Cultural Resources Mitigation for the Sacramento Urban Area Levee Reconstruction
Project, Sacramento County, California, edited by P. D. Bouey, pp. 247-267. Report on
file, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Sacramento.
Simons, D. D., P. D. Schulz, and H. M. Wagner
1978
Vertebrate Remains from the Stone Lake Archaeological Site. Manuscript on file,
Archaeological Research Center, California State University, Sacramento.
Smith, E. A.
1983
Anthropological Applications of Optimal Foraging Theory. Current Anthropology
24(5):625-651.
Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, USDA
2006
Official Soil Series Descriptions. Electronic Resource.
http://soils.usda.gov/technical/classification/osd/index.html. Accessed October 21, 2012.
Sommer, T., W. Harrell, M. Nobriga, and R. Kurth
2011
Floodplain as Habitat for Native Fish: Lesson's From California's Yolo Bypass.
Electronic Resource. http://baydeltaconservationplan.com/
Libraries/Dynamic_Document_Library/Floodplain_as_Habitat_for_Native_Fish__Lessons_from_Californias_Yolo_Bypass.sflb.ashx. Accessed November 25, 2012.
Soule, W. E.
1976
Archeological Investigations at SAC-329 near Walnut Grove, Sacramento County,
California. Report on file, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Sacramento.
Stevens, M. L., and E. M. Zelazo
2010
Fire, Floodplains, and Fish: the Historic Ecology of the Lower Cosumnes River
Watershed. Unpublished manuscript in the author’s possession.
Steward, J. H.
1955
Theory of Culture Change: The Methodology of Multilinear Evolution. University of
Illinois Press, Urbana.
Swenson, R. O., K. Whitener, and M. Eaton
2003
Restoring Floods on Floodplains: Riparian and Floodplain Restoration at the Cosumnes
River Preserve. In California Riparian Systems: Processes and Floodplains
Management, Ecology, and Restoration, edited by P. M. Faber, pp. 224-229. Proceedings
of the 2001 Riparian Habitat and Floodplains Conference. Sacramento, CA.
110
Taite, K.
1999
Thompson, K.
1960
1961
Ugan, A.
2005
Resource Intensification and the Los Vaqueros Archaeofauna: A Test of the Distant
Patch Hypothesis. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Department of Anthropology, California
State University, Chico.
Historic Flooding in the Sacramento Valley, California. Pacific Historical Review
29(4):349-360.
Riparian Forests of the Sacramento Valley, California. Annals of the Association of
American Geographers 51(3):294-315.
Does Size Matter? Body Size, Mass Collecting, and Their Implications for Understanding
Prehistoric Foraging Behavior. American Antiquity 70:75-90.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)
1991
General Soil Map, Sacramento County, California. United States Department of
Agriculture Soil Conservation Service. Electronic Resource.
http://soildatamart.nrcs.usda.gov/Manuscripts/CA067/0/gsm.pdf. Accessed December 14,
2010.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
2013
Sacramento National Wildlife Refuge Complex. Electronic Resource.
http://www.fws.gov/sacramentovalleyrefuges/ Accessed February 4, 2013.
University of California, Davis (UCD)
1949
1957
Valente, N. E.
1998
Resource Intensification and Foraging Efficiency at the Patrick Site (CA-BUT-1).
Unpublished Master’s thesis, Department of Anthropology, California State University,
Chico.
Vita-Finzi, C., and E. S. Higgs
1970
Prehistoric Economy in the Mount Carmel Area of Palestine: Site Catchment Analysis.
Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 36(1):1-37.
111
Wake, T. A.
2012
West, G. J.
2000
Interpreting New Samples from Famous Old Sites: Mammal Remains from the 1999
Emeryville Shellmound Excavations (CA-ALA-309 and CA-ALA-310), with Comments
on Fish and Birds. In Exploring Methods of Faunal Analysis, Insights from California
Archaeology, edited by M. A. Glassow and T. L. Joslin, pp. 4-32. Perspectives in
California Archaeology Vol. 9. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press, Los Angeles.
Pollen Analysis of Two Late Pleistocene-Holocene Cores from Clear Lake. In Final
Report of the Anderson Flat Project, Lower Lake, Lake County, California, by G. G.
White, pp. 99-112. Anthropological Studies Center, Sonoma State University, California.
West, G. J., W. Woolfenden, J. A. Wanket, and R. S. Anderson
2007
Late Pleistocene and Holocene Environments. In California Prehistory: Colonization,
Culture, and Complexity, edited by T. L. Jones and K. A. Klar, pp. 11-34. Altamira Press,
Plymouth, United Kingdom.
Whipple, A. A., R. M. Grossinger, D. Rankin, B. Stanford, R. A. Askevold
2012
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Historical Ecology Investigation: Exploring Pattern and
Process. Prepared for the California Department of Fish and Game and Ecosystem
Restoration Program. A Report of SFEI-ASC’s Historical Ecology Program, Publication
#672.
White, G. G.
2003
2005
Wilson, N. L.
1972
Population Ecology of the Colusa Reach of the Sacramento River. Unpublished Ph.D.
dissertation, University of California, Davis.
Environment or Organization? California’s Upper Archaic Artiodactyl Spike. Newsletter
of the Society for California Archaeology 39(2):26-30.
Notes on Traditional Foothill Nisenan Food Technology. In Papers on Nisenan
Environment and Subsistence, edited by E. W. Ritter and P. D. Schulz, pp. 32-39. Center
for Archaeological Research at Davis Publication No. 3. University of California, Davis.
Wilson, N. L., and A. H. Towne
1978
Nisenan. In California, edited by R. F. Heizer, pp. 387-397. Handbook of North
Washington, D.C.
Winterhalder, B., and E. A. Smith
1997
Hunter-Gatherer Foraging Strategies: Ethnographic and Archaeological Analyses.
University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Wolverton, S.
2005
The Effects of the Hypsithermal of Prehistoric Foraging in Missouri. American Antiquity
70:91-106.
112
Wulf, E. L.
1997
An Analysis of Bone and Antler Artifacts from the Augustine Site (CA-SAC-127).
Unpublished Master’s thesis, Department of Anthropology, California State University,
Sacramento.
Yoshiyama, R. M., E. R. Gerstung, F. W. Fisher, and P. B. Moyle
2001
Historical and Present Distribution of Chinook Salmon in the Central Valley Drainage of
California. In Contributions to the Biology of Central Valley Salmonids, Vol. 1, edited by
R. L. Brown, pp. 71-176. State of California Department of Fish and Game Fish Bulletin
179.
Zeiner, D. C., W. F. Laudenslayer, Jr., K. E. Mayer, and M. White (editors)
1990a California Wildlife, Volume I: Amphibians and Reptiles. California Department of Fish
and Game, Sacramento.
1990b California Wildlife, Volume II: Birds. California Department of Fish and Game,
Sacramento.
1990c California Wildlife, Volume III: Mammals. California Department of Fish and Game,
Sacramento.
113
Appendix A.
Study Area Fauna
114
Table A-1. Study Area Mammals.
Order
Artiodactyla
Lagomorpha
Rodentia
Carnivora
Common Name
Scientific Name
Habitat(s)
Average Weight
(Jameson & Peeters
2004)
Tule Elk
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Grasslands; Riparian;
Freshwater marsh
170-250kg
Black –Tail Deer
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Grasslands; Riparian
40-90kg
Pronghorn
Antelope
Antilocapra
americana
Grasslands
20-70 kg
Black-Tailed
Jackrabbit
Lepus californicus
Grasslands
1.5-3.6 kg
Desert or
Audubon’s
Cottontail
Sylvilagus
audunbonii
Grasslands
0.70-0.90 kg
North American
Beaver
Castor canadensis
Riparian
11-26 kg
California or
Beechey Ground
Squirrel
Spermophilus
beecheyi
Grasslands
0.30-0.65 kg
Western Gray
Squirrel
Sciurus griseus
Riparian
0.76 -0.90 kg
Dusky Footed
Wood Rat
Neotoma fuscipes
Riparian
0.18-0.34 kg
Heermann’s
Kangaroo Rat
Dipodomys
heermanni
Grasslands
0.06-0.07 kg
Botta’s Pocket
Gopher
Thomomys bottae
Riparian
0.10-0.21 kg
California Vole
Microtus
californicus
Grasslands
0.04-0.07 kg
Deer or WhiteFooted Mouse
Peromyscus
maniculatus
0.01-0.03 kg
Riparian
80-950kg**
Foothills and
Mountains; does not
occur naturally in
study area
190kg
Riparian
40-100 kg
California Grizzly Ursus arctos
Bear†
californicus
American Black
Bear
Ursus americanus
Mountain Lion
Puma concolor
115
Table A-1. Study Area Mammals.
Order
Common Name
Scientific Name
Habitat(s)
Average Weight
(Jameson & Peeters
2004)
Riparian
5-15 kg
8-20 kg
Bobcat
Lynx rufus
Coyote
Canis lantrans
Gray Fox
Urocyon
cinereoargenteus
Riparian
3-7kg
Racoon
Procyon lotor
Riparian
4-8kg
Badger
Taxidea taxus
Grasslands
4.5-11.4kg
River Otter
Lontra canadensis
Riparian; Freshwater
Marsh
5-10kg
Ringtail
Bassariscus astutus
Riparian
0.9-1.2kg
Striped Skunk
Mephitis mephitis
1.8-2.7kg
Spotted Skunk
Spilogale putorius
Grasslands; Riparian;
Freshwater marsh
0.2-0.8kg
Mink
Mustela vison
Riparian; Freshwater
Marsh
0.5-1.3kg
Long-Tailed
Weasel
Mustela frenata
0.2-0.4kg
Key: †= extinct, **Based on Grizzly Bear (Urus arctos) average weights Source: Reid 2006:451
116
Table A-2. Study Area Birds.
Order
Anseriformes
Common Name Scientific Name
Habitat
Seasonality
Adult Avg.
Weight
November to
February*
6,600 g
(230.4 oz)
Whistling or
Tundra Swan
Cygnus
columbianus
Freshwater
Marsh;
Grassland
Canada Goose
Branta
canadensis
moffitti
Freshwater
Marsh;
Grassland
Resident; Migrants 1,660-4,500 g
in October to
(56-156.8 oz)
April*
Greater
Anser albifrons
White –Fronted frontalis
Goose
Freshwater
Marsh;
Grassland
November to MidApril*
2,200 g
(76.8 oz)
Lesser Snow
Goose
Chen c.
caerulescens
Freshwater
Marsh;
Grassland
October to March*
2,420 g
(84.8 oz)
Common
Merganser
Mergus
merganser
americanus
Freshwater
Marsh
October to April*
1,530 g
(54.4 oz)
Mallard
Anas
platyrhynchos
Freshwater
Marsh;
Resident; Migrants
in August to
March*
1,100 g
(38.4 oz)
Northern Pintail Anas acuta
Freshwater
Marsh
August to April*
800 g
(28.8 oz)
Canvasback
Aythya
valisineria
Freshwater
Marsh
October to March*
1,220 g
(43.2 oz)
Green-Winged
Teal
Anas
carolinensis
Freshwater
Marsh
September to
April*
350 g
(12 oz)
Cinnamon Teal Anas cyanoptera
Freshwater
Marsh
October to May*
400 g
(14.0 oz)
Northern
Shoveler
Anas clypeata
Freshwater
Marsh
October to May *
610 g
(20.8 oz)
Gadwall
Anas strepera
Freshwater
Marsh
November to
April*
910 g
(32.0 oz)
American
Wigeon
Anas americana
Freshwater
Marsh
October to April*
720 g
(25.6 oz)
Wood Duck
Aix sponsa
Riparian
Woodland
Resident
600 g
(20.8 oz)
Ruddy Duck
Oxyura
jamaicensis
Freshwater
Marsh
December to
April*
560 g
(19.2 oz)
Podicipediformes Pie-Billed Grebe Podilymbus
podiceps
Freshwater
Marsh
Resident
450 g
(16.0 oz)
117
Order
Adult Avg.
Weight
Habitat
Seasonality
Freshwater
Marsh
October to March*
4,850 g
(169.6 oz);
3,350 g
(116.8 oz)
American Coot Fulica
americana
Freshwater
Marsh
Resident; Migrants
in October to
May*
650 g
(22.4 oz)
Great Blue
Heron
Ardea herodias
Freshwater
Marsh
Resident
2,400 g
(84.8 oz)
Great Egret
Ardea alba
Freshwater
Marsh
Resident; Migrants
in April to
September
870 g
(30.4 oz)
Snowy Egret
Egretta thula
Freshwater
Marsh
Resident; Migrants
in April to May
and August to
October
360 g
(13.0 oz)
Green Heron
Butorides
virescens
Riparian
Woodland
Residents
210 g
(7.0 oz)
Black-Crowned Nycticorax
Night Heron
nycticorax
Riparian
Woodland
Resident
870 g
(30.4oz)
American
Bittern
Freshwater
Marsh
Resident;
Migrants in
October to April
700 g
(16.8 oz)
American White Pelecanus
Pelican
erythrorhynchos
Freshwater
Marsh
February to April
and September
7,500 g
(262.4 oz)
Double-Crested Phalacrocorax
Cormorant
auritus
Riparian
Woodland
Resident
1,700 g
(59.2 oz)
Freshwater
Marsh
September to May
115 g
(4.0 oz)
Accipitriformes Turkey Vulture Cathartes aura
Grassland
Resident (but
usually migrates in
winter)
1,830 g
(64.0 oz)
Falconiformes
Gruiformes
Ciconiformes
Pelicaniformes
Suliformes
Sandhill Crane
(Greater &
Lesser)
Charadriiformes Long-Billed
Dowitcher
Grus canadensis
Botaurus
lentiginosus
Limnodromus
scolopaceus
Red-Tailed
Hawk
Buteo
jamaicensis
Freshwater
Marsh;
Grassland;
Riparian
Woodland
Resident
1,080 g
(38.4 oz)
Swainson’s
Hawk
Buteo swainsoni
Grassland;
Riparian
Woodland
February to
October
855 g
(30.4 oz)
118
Order
Habitat
Seasonality
Adult Avg.
Weight
Galliformes
California Quail Callipepla
californica
Grassland
Resident
180 g
(6.0 oz)
Piciformes
Northern Flicker Colaptes auratus
Riparian
woodland
Resident
130 g
(4.6 oz)
Downy
Woodpecker
Picoides
pubescens
Riparian
Woodland
Resident
27 g
(0.95 oz)
Redwing
Blackbird
Agelaius
phoeniceus
Freshwater
Marsh
Resident
52 g
(1.8 oz)
Yellow-Billed
Magpie
Pica nuttalli
Grassland;
Riparian
Woodland
Resident
155 g
(5.0 oz)
American Crow Crovus
brachyrhynchos
Grassland;
Riparian
Woodland
Resident
450 g
(16.0 oz)
American Robin Turdus
migratorius
Grassland;
Riparian
Woodland
Resident
77 g
(2.7 oz)
Western Scrub- Aphelocoma
Jay
californica
Riparian
Woodland
Resident
85 g
(3.0 oz)
Riparian
Woodland;
Grassland
Resident
120 g
(4.2 oz)
Passeriformes
Columbiformes Mourning Dove Zenaida
macroura
Source: Sibley 2003; *=Bellrose 1976
119
Table A-3. Study Area Fish.
Scientific
Name
Common Name
Migration
Setting
Adult Standard
Length (SL)
Spawning
Season
Acipenser
transmontanus
Anadromous
Fast-water
White Sturgeon
up to 300 cm
(118 in.)
Late-winter to
Summer
Acipenser
medirostris
Anadromous
Fast-water
Green Sturgeon
up to 160 cm
(63 in.)
Spring to earlySummer
Chinook (King)
Salmon
Oncorhynchus
tshawytscha
Anadromous
Fast-water
up to 64 cm
(25 in.)
Fall-Winter
Resident
Varied
average at 30 cm
(12 in.)
Spring (use
floodplain late in
flood cycle in
May)
Sacramento
Sucker
Catostomus
occidentalis
Mylopharodon
conocephalus
Resident
Fast-water
up to 60 cm
(24 in.)
Spring
Hardhead
Sacramento
Blackfish
Orthodon
microlepidotus
Resident
Slow-water
up to 50 cm
(20 in.)
Spring to earlySummer
Lavinia
exilicauda
Resident
Hitch
Slow-water average at 15 to 20 cm Spring to early(6 to 8 in.)
Summer
Sacramento
Pikeminnow
Ptychocheilus
grandis
Resident
Varied
average at 25 cm
(10 in.)
Spring
Sacramento
Splittail
Pogonichthys
macrolepidotus
Resident
Varied
up to 45 cm
(18 in.)
Late-Winter to
early-Summer
Gila
crassicauda
Resident
Slow-water
Thicktail Chub
up to 40 cm
(16 in.)
unknown;
assumed spring
Archoplites
Sacramento Perch interruptus
Resident
Slow-water
up to 61 cm
(24 in.)
Spring to
Summer
Resident
Slow-water
up to 23.5 cm
(9 in.)
Summer
Tule Perch
Hysterocarpus
traski
Source: Moyle 2002
120
Appendix B.
Selected Faunal Assemblage Data
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
Provenience
Catalogue
#
1
small
mammal
medium
mammal
medium
mammal
medium
mammal
small to
medium
mammal
small to
medium
mammal
small to
medium
mammal
unknown
mammal
unknown
mammal
small
mammal
small
mammal
Taxa
24
8
16
54
10
1
4
5
53
84
24
Count
Part
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
Element
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Side
0.82
0.23
0.81
3.30
0.78
0.15
0.76
1.03
1.63
3.96
1.51
burnt
–
calcined
burnt
–
calcined
burnt
–
calcined
burnt
–
–
–
–
3 w/ root
etching
–
10 w/
root
etching
10 w/
root
etching
1 w/ root
etching
1 w/ root
etching
1 w/ root
etching
–
Weight
ModiBurn Type
(grams)
fication
Table B-1. SAC-67 35N 2E (50-60cm) Terrestrial Taxa.
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Common
Name
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Comments
121
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
Catalogue
#
12
74-3587
74-3587
Provenience
unknown
vertebrate
unknown
vertebrate
unknown
vertebrate
Rodentia
unknown
mammal
medium to
large
vertebrate
medium to
large
vertebrate
small to
medium
vertebrate
small to
medium
vertebrate
small to
medium
vertebrate
ungulate
Taxa
43
263
133
1
4
9
75
44
9
8
20
Count
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
–
–
–
–
–
fragment
fragment
–
–
–
distal
fragment
fragment
mandible
fragment
fragment
–
tooth
Part
Element
–
–
–
1.04
6.87
2.93
0.02
0.22
–
left
0.24
3.02
1.48
1.03
1.15
0.58
calcined
burnt
–
burnt
–
calcined
burnt
–
burnt
–
calcined
2 w/ root
etching
1 w/ root
etching
–
–
–
1 w/ root
etching
6 w/ root
etching
4 w/ root
etching
–
2 w/ root
etching
–
Weight
ModiBurn Type
(grams)
fication
–
–
–
–
–
–
Side
–
–
–
Hooved
Animal
Rodents
–
–
–
–
–
–
Common
Name
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
1 encrusted
w/ ash
–
–
–
Comments
122
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
Catalogue
#
23
74-3587
74-3587
Provenience
small
mammal
Antiolcapra
americana
small
mammal
small
mammal
large mammal
large mammal
Rodentia
Rodentia
medium to
large mammal
Artiodactyl
Squamata?
Taxa
104
310
62
1
21
8
1
2
1
1
1
Count
fragment
fragment
–
–
fragment
–
almost
complete
fragment
fragment
–
third
phalanx
–
fragment
fragment
medial
fragment
medial
fragment
fragment
Part
maxilla
mandible
third
phalanx
tooth
mandible
Element
0.03
0.08
–
–
–
4.20
14.38
3.83
–
–
2.44
29.69
left
–
10.64
0.04
–
–
0.05
–
calcined
burnt
–
–
burnt
–
–
–
burnt
–
–
0.02
–
Rodents
Rodents
Even-toed
Ungulate
–
Reptiles
Common
Name
3 w/ root
etching
11 w/
root
etching
2 w/ root
etching
–
–
–
3 w/ root
–
etching
2 w/ root
–
etching
–
Pronghorn
–
–
–
–
–
Weight
ModiBurn Type
(grams)
fication
Side
–
–
–
in 2 pieces
–
bigger than
jack rabbit
but smaller
than a
coyote=racc
oon?
–
too
fragmentary
to tell side
–
–
lizard?
Comments
123
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
Catalogue
#
34
74-3587
74-3587
Provenience
medium to
large mammal
unknown
mammal
unknown
mammal
unknown
mammal
medium to
large
vertebrate
medium to
large
vertebrate
small to
medium
mammal
small to
medium
mammal
small to
medium
mammal
medium to
large mammal
medium to
large mammal
Taxa
13
3
181
422
50
44
128
34
40
165
39
Count
Part
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
Element
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Side
2.39
0.29
9.23
24.83
2.06
12.38
29.45
6.33
1.83
7.47
2.37
burnt
–
calcined
burnt
–
calcined
burnt
–
calcined
burnt
–
–
6 w/ root
etching
4 w/ root
etching
3 w/ root
etching
–
–
8 w/ root
etching
–
–
3 w/ root
etching
–
Weight
ModiBurn Type
(grams)
fication
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Common
Name
–
–
–
–
–
one w/
possible
gnaw marks
–
–
–
–
–
Comments
124
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
Catalogue
#
45
74-3587
74-3587
Provenience
Actinemys
marmorata
medium to
large
vertebrate
small to
medium
vertebrate
small to
medium
vertebrate
small to
medium
vertebrate
unknown
vertebrate
unknown
vertebrate
unknown
vertebrate
Actinemys
marmorata
Taxa
1
1
61
220
30
64
223
40
2
Count
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
–
–
–
–
–
–
carapace
whole
whole
fragment
–
carapace
Part
Element
right
left
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Side
1.09
0.33
1.52
6.08
0.58
1.91
8.44
1.51
0.36
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
7 w/ root
etching
–
–
calcined
burnt
–
calcined
burnt
–
calcined
Weight
ModiBurn Type
(grams)
fication
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Comments
Western caudal plate
Pond Turtle (over the
tail)
Western
anterior
Pond Turtle lateral piece
above
forelimb
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Common
Name
125
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
Catalogue
#
54
74-3587
74-3587
Provenience
Actinemys
marmorata
Actinemys
marmorata
Actinemys
marmorata
Actinemys
marmorata
Actinemys
marmorata
Actinemys
marmorata
Actinemys
marmorata
Actinemys
marmorata
Taxa
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
shell
carapace
plastron
plastron
plastron
plastron
carapace
carapace
Element
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
lateral
fragment
fragment
almost
complete
Part
0.10
0.11
0.17
1.19
–
–
–
–
0.68
–
0.28
0.53
–
left
0.46
burnt
calcined
calcined
calcined
calcined
calcined
–
burnt
–
–
–
–
Western
Pond Turtle
Western
Pond Turtle
Western
Pond Turtle
Western
Pond Turtle
Western
Pond Turtle
–
–
Western
Pond Turtle
Western
Pond Turtle
Western
Pond Turtle
Common
Name
–
–
Weight
ModiBurn Type
(grams)
fication
left
Side
with rib
facet on
dorsal side;
based on
flatness and
facet size for
rib 1
from over
limbs
calcined
visible on
interior
posterior
hinge
fragment;
near top that
attaches to
carapace
edge
fragment
edge
fragment
edge
fragment
without rim
most likely
carapace
fragments
Comments
126
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
Catalogue
#
62
74-3587
74-3587
Provenience
Anas sp.
Anas
platyrhynchos
Anas
platyrhynchos
Anas
platyrhynchos
Anserinae
Anas
platyrhynchos
Anas sp.
Actinemys
marmorata
Actinemys
marmorata
Anser sp.
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
7
15
Count
coracoid
scapula
scapula
scapula
humerus
humerus
humerus
humerus
shell
shell
Element
right
right
0.33
0.42
0.39
0.48
0.29
0.58
1.70
11.09
1.00
–
left
1.49
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
calcined
burnt
Weight
ModiBurn Type
(grams)
fication
–
Side
distal
left
epicondyle
distal/
right
anterior
distal/
right
anterior
distal/
right
anterior
anterior
left
proximal
head
proximal
proximal
fragment
fragment
Part
Comments
Western
–
Pond Turtle
Western
–
Pond Turtle
Geese
bigger than
a whitefront=proba
bly Canada
Goose; too
small for
swan
Mallard
mallard
match
Ducks
same size as
65, so
probably
also mallard
Mallard
mallard
match
Mallard
mallard
match
Mallard
mallard
match
Geese
White front
match
Ducks
duck sized
& shaped;
no head
Common
Name
127
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
Catalogue
#
72
74-3587
74-3587
Provenience
Anas sp.
Anas sp.
Anas sp.
Anas sp.
Anas sp.
Anas sp.
Anas sp.
Anas sp.
Anas sp.
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
coracoid
coracoid
coracoid
coracoid
coracoid
coracoid
coracoid
coracoid
coracoid
Element
anterior
anterior
anterior
anterior
anterior
anterior
anterior
anterior
anterior
Part
right
left
right
right
right
left
right
left
left
Side
Ducks
Ducks
Ducks
Ducks
Ducks
Ducks
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
burnt
–
–
–
0.23
0.14
0.20
0.28
0.19
0.18
0.28
burnt
Ducks
Ducks
–
–
0.37
burnt
Ducks
–
–
0.29
Common
Name
Weight
ModiBurn Type
(grams)
fication
duck sized
& shaped;
no head
duck sized
& shaped;
no head
duck sized
& shaped;
no head
smaller than
mallard but
same as
pintail &
wood duck
on head; not
like
merganser
a little larger
than 2-155
mallard but
much
smaller than
goose
–
–
duck sized
& shaped
duck sized
& shaped
Comments
128
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
Catalogue
#
81
74-3587
74-3587
Provenience
Anas
platyrhynchos
Anas
platyrhynchos
Anas
platyrhynchos
Anas
platyrhynchos
medium Aves
Anas sp.
medium Aves
Anas sp.
Anas sp.
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
cuneiform
cuneiform
cuneiform
cuneiform
left
Side
whole
whole
whole
whole
right
left
left
left
left
left
anterior & right
shaft
distal/
right
anterior
anterior
Part
tarsometata
shaft
rus
carpometac proximal
arpus
scapula
coracoid
coracoid
Element
0.14
0.10
0.13
0.08
0.29
0.63
0.18
0.57
0.23
–
Mallard
Mallard
Mallard
Mallard
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
calcined
calcined
burnt
burnt
Ducks
–
–
medium
Bird
Ducks
–
–
Ducks
–
Common
Name
burnt
Weight
ModiBurn Type
(grams)
fication
only slightly
burnt; duck
sized &
shaped
duck sized
& shaped
too little to
tell, but
probably is
waterfowl
duck sized;
mallard like
duck sized
but not
enough to
say what
genus
mallard
match
mallard
match
mallard
match
mallard
match
Comments
129
91
92
93
94
95
96
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
Catalogue
#
90
74-3587
74-3587
Provenience
small to
medium Aves
small Aves
small Aves
Anser sp.
Anas sp.
medium Aves
Anas
platyrhynchos
Taxa
1
4
2
1
1
1
1
Count
lateral
fragment
fragments
–
sternum
proximal
tips
proximal
shaft
medial
lower
vertebral
column
distal &
shaft
Part
coracoid
furculum
ulna
pelvis
ulna
Element
0.36
0.05
–
0.10
0.40
0.44
–
right
right
right
0.58
–
–
–
calcined
–
burnt
–
–
–
–
root
etching
root
etching
–
–
–
–
Ducks
Ducks
–
Mallard
–
–
0.96
Common
Name
Weight
ModiBurn Type
(grams)
fication
left
Side
goose sized;
too big for
mallard;
definitely
waterfowl
shaped
bigger than
songbird;
smaller than
mallard
struts
present
bigger than
songbird;
smaller than
mallard
In 2 pieces;
bigger than
pintail & too
small for
goose
fused sacral
thoracic,
lumbar, and
sacral
vertebrae
singed
Comments
130
98
99
100
101
102
103
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
Catalogue
#
97
74-3587
74-3587
Provenience
medium Aves
medium Aves
small to
medium Aves
small to
medium Aves
medium Aves
small to
medium Aves
small to
medium Aves
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
Count
scapula
coracoid
ulna
ulna
ulna
ulna
pelvis
Element
proximal
edge
fragment
distal
anterior
lateral
shaft
fragment
lateral
shaft
fragment
lateral
shaft
fragment
lower
vertebral
column
lateral
shaft
fragment
Part
0.05
0.07
0.10
–
–
–
0.11
0.24
–
left
0.24
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
calcined
burnt
–
–
–
0.09
–
–
Weight
ModiBurn Type
(grams)
fication
Side
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Common
Name
mallard
sized
close to
mallard
sized; quill
knobs
present
mallard
sized; quill
knobs
present
close to
mallard
sized; quill
knobs
present
close to
mallard
sized; quill
knobs
present
mallard
sized
–
Comments
131
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
Catalogue
#
104
74-3587
74-3587
Provenience
Thamnophis
sirtalis
Thamnophis
sirtalis.
Serpentes
Serpentes
Lepus
californicus
Rodentia
Ungulate
Ungulate
Serpentes
Squamata
medium Aves
Taxa
8
9
1
1
2
1
1
20
1
1
1
Count
vertebra
vertebra
vertebra
vertebra
incisor
incisor
tooth
tooth
vertebra
vertebra
cuneiform
Element
fragment
whole
whole
whole
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragments
whole
whole
fragment
Part
0.02
0.01
1.16
0.06
0.02
0.02
0.04
0.13
0.26
0.20
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
burnt
–
–
calcined
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
mallard
sized but not
enough
present to be
sure
poss.
Lizardprobably not
snake
Unknown
nonvenomous
snake
partial root
Comments
Hooved
Animal
Hooved
–
Animal
Black-tailed most likely
Jackrabbit Jack Rabbit
Rodents
most likely
gopher
Garter
–
Snake
Garter
–
Snake
Snakes
–
Snakes
–
Snakes
Reptiles
–
–
–
0.08
Common
Name
Weight
ModiBurn Type
(grams)
fication
right
Side
132
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
Catalogue
#
115
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
Provenience
Sciuridae
Thomomys
bottae
small
mammal
Thomomys
bottae
Rodentia
Rodentia
Sylvilagus sp.
Lagomorpha
Serpentes
Sciuridae
Serpentes
Taxa
1
2
1
1
3
3
2
2
3
1
1
Count
mandible
mandible
lower
incisor
tooth
incisor
lower
incisor
molar
incisor
vertebra
molar
vertebra
Element
medial
fragment
medial
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
whole
Part
0.19
0.02
0.09
0.05
0.02
0.05
–
–
–
–
–
–
left
0.47
0.28
0.03
>0.01
–
–
left
0.08
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
burnt
–
–
–
–
–
–
burnt
Weight
ModiBurn Type
(grams)
fication
–
Side
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Squirrels
–
Rodents
Rodents
Rabbits &
Hares
Cottontails
Snakes
Squirrels
Snakes
Common
Name
–
–
most likely
pocket
gopher
most likely
pocket
gopher
lower
incisors
most likely
incisor
–
not gopher
snake or
rattlesnake
–
most likely
ground
squirrel
most likely
cottontail
cottontail
Comments
133
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
Catalogue
#
126
74-3587
74-3587
Provenience
Spermophilus
beecheyi
Sciuridae
Spermophilus
beecheyi
Spermophilus
beecheyi
Rodentia
Rodentia
Thomomys
bottae
Spermophilus
beecheyi
Thomomys
bottae
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
scapula
maxilla
mandible
mandible
maxilla
maxilla
mandible
mandible
mandible
Element
proximal
fragment
proximal
anterior
notch
condyle
fragment
fragment
proximal
notch
proximal
notch
proximal
condyle
Part
0.12
0.02
–
right
0.10
right
0.05
0.02
–
right
0.02
–
California
Ground
Squirrel
–
–
–
burnt
–
–
–
–
California
Ground
Squirrel
California
Ground
Squirrel
Squirrels
–
calcined
Rodents
–
–
0.05
–
–
–
0.05
burnt
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
California
Ground
Squirrel
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Rodents
–
–
0.02
Common
Name
Weight
ModiBurn Type
(grams)
fication
left
right
right
Side
most likely
ground
squirrel
–
probably
pocket
gopher
probably
pocket
gopher
–
–
–
–
Comments
134
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
Catalogue
#
135
74-3587
74-3587
Provenience
Sciuridae
small
mammal
small
mammal
Thomomys
bottae
Spermophilus
beecheyi
Thomomys
bottae
Thomomys
bottae
Sciuridae
Taxa
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
Count
mandible
maxilla
tooth row
maxilla
mandible
mandible
maxilla
maxilla
Element
medial
fragment
medial
fragment
fragment
lateral
fragment
medial
fragment
medial
fragment
medial
fragment
medial
fragment
Part
right
0.03
0.09
0.07
–
right
0.03
0.06
right
right
0.05
0.03
–
right
0.08
–
Squirrels
–
–
–
–
–
–
burnt
burnt
–
–
–
–
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
California
Ground
Squirrel
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
–
Squirrels
–
–
Common
Name
burnt
burnt
Weight
ModiBurn Type
(grams)
fication
right
Side
mandible or
maxilla;
possible
ground
squirrel
squirrel or
cottontail;
too big for
gopher; too
small for
Jack Rabbit
more likely
ground
squirrel
possible
nasal
–
teeth still
present
most likely
ground
squirrel
center
portion
Comments
135
144
145
146
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
Catalogue
#
143
74-3587
74-3587
Provenience
Sylvilagus sp.
small
mammal
small
mammal
Rodentia
Lepus
californicus
Lepus
californicus
Sylvilagus sp.
Anas sp.
Thomomys
bottae
Spermophilus
beecheyi
Thomomys
bottae
Taxa
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
Count
humerus
humerus
humerus
humerus
humerus
humerus
humerus
mandible
scapula
mandible
maxilla
Element
distal &
shaft
distal
distal &
shaft
distal
distal
proximal
ramus
distal &
shaft
distal
proximal
head
distal
fragment
medial
fragment
Part
left
left
left
right
right
right
>0.01
0.13
0.09
0.21
0.25
0.53
0.88
0.09
–
right
>0.01
–
–
–
–
–
–
calcined
–
burnt
burnt
burnt
–
Rodents
Cottontails
–
–
–
–
Black-tailed
Jackrabbit
Black-tailed
Jackrabbit
Cottontails
–
burnt
Comments
–
squirrel
sized
squirrel
sized
K-rat sized
–
–
–
Botta's
–
Pocket
Gopher
California diastama too
Ground
long for
Squirrel
gray
squirrel; too
small for
cottontail
Botta's
–
Pocket
Gopher
Ducks
–
Common
Name
–
–
–
–
0.08
right
–
–
–
–
0.04
Weight
ModiBurn Type
(grams)
fication
Side
136
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
Catalogue
#
158
74-3587
74-3587
Provenience
medium Aves
medium Aves
medium Aves
medium Aves
small
mammal
small
mammal
small
mammal
small
mammal
Sylvilagus sp.
Dipodomys
heermanni
Rodentia
small
mammal
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
proximal
fragment
distal
fragment
proximal
& shaft
proximal
fragment
distal end
proximal
& shaft
proximal
& shaft
proximal
fragment
Part
right
left
left
right
0.22
0.22
0.12
0.10
0.08
>0.01
0.07
0.28
0.05
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
calcined
–
calcined
calcined
–
calcined
burnt
burnt
–
–
–
left
0.07
–
–
–
left
>0.01
Comments
–
duck sized
duck sized
probably
squirrel
unfused
proximal
end missing;
probably
squirrel
duck sized
CA ground
squirrel size
–
CA ground
squirrel
sized
Rodents
chipmunk
sized
Heermann’s
–
Kangaroo
Rat
Cottontails
–
–
Common
Name
–
–
–
left
–
–
–
0.10
Weight
ModiBurn Type
(grams)
fication
Side
tibiotarsus distal shaft left
fragment
tibiotarsus
distal
left
tibiotarsus
distal
left
fragment
humerus
distal
right
fragment
humerus
tibia
tibia
tibia
tibia
tibia
femur
femur
Element
137
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
Catalogue
#
170
74-3587
74-3587
Provenience
medium to
large Aves
medium Aves
small Aves
medium to
large Aves
large Aves
medium to
large Aves
large Aves
medium to
large Aves
large Aves
large Aves
large Aves
medium to
large Aves
medium Aves
medium Aves
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
Count
coracoid
radius
tarsometatarsus
tibiotarsus
ulna
humerus
tibiotarsus
coracoid
coracoid
humerus
humerus
humerus
humerus
humerus
Element
anterior
fragment
proximal
fragment
proximal
fragment
distal
fragment
distal
fragment
distal
fragment
anterior
anterior
fragment
shaft
fragment
proximal
shaft
fragment
distal
fragment
shaft
fragment
proximal
proximal
& shaft
Part
right
right
left
right
right
right
left
left
–
left
left
left
left
right
Side
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
root
etching
–
–
–
–
calcined
–
–
burnt
–
–
–
–
calcined
–
–
0.03
0.05
>0.01
0.58
0.22
0.13
0.27
0.36
0.18
0.29
0.39
0.15
–
–
–
–
0.25
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
0.17
Common
Name
Weight
ModiBurn Type
(grams)
fication
mallard size
"tiny bird"
smaller than
robin
–
–
–
–
–
–
probably left
mallard
sized
cackling
goose sized
–
–
–
Comments
138
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
Catalogue
#
184
185
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
Provenience
Sciurus
griseus
Aves
small
mammal
Rodentia
Rodentia
Rodentia
Lepus
californicus
Sylvilagus sp.
Lepus
californicus
medium to
large Aves
Aves
medium
mammal
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
Part
nearly
complete
whole
whole
fragment
calcaneus
near
complete
caudal
vertebra
vertebra
fragment
innominate fragment
vertebra
vertebra
vertebra
metatarsal 3 proximal
metacarpal proximal
4
coracoid
anterior
fragment
phalanx
proximal
vertebra
fragment
Element
>0.01
>0.01
>0.01
0.02
0.30
–
–
–
–
left
0.23
0.23
–
right
>0.01
0.64
–
–
burnt
–
burnt
–
–
–
–
–
–
Western
Grey
Squirrel
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
0.21
–
–
Cotttontails
Black-tailed
Jackrabbit
–
–
–
–
–
0.09
0.08
Common
Name
Weight
ModiBurn Type
(grams)
fication
right
left
left
Side
–
acetabulum;
CA ground
squirrel size
likely
squirrel
–
–
river otter
sized; not
lagomorph
unfused
body cap;
looks fresh
unfused
body cap
unfused
body cap
–
–
–
–
Comments
139
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
Catalogue
#
196
74-3587
74-3587
Provenience
Lepus
californicus
small
mammal
Raptor
Spermophilus
beecheyi
Spermophilus
beecheyi
Spermophilus
beecheyi
Sciurus
griseus
Spermophilus
beecheyi
Spermophilus
beecheyi
Spermophilus
beecheyi
Taxa
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
tarsal
distal
phalanx
talus
talus
talus
talus
calcaneus
calcaneus
calcaneus
calcaneus
Element
near
complete
proximal
fragment
fragments
near
complete
whole
fragment
fragment
whole
whole
Part
0.21
0.12
–
left
0.07
0.08
0.06
0.07
0.14
0.07
0.13
0.12
–
–
burnt
–
burnt
–
–
–
–
–
–
calcined
–
burnt
–
–
–
calcined
–
burnt
Weight
ModiBurn Type
(grams)
fication
left
left
left
left
right
right
right
right
Side
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Comments
claw; similar
to comparative Buteo
sp.
Black-tailed
–
Jackrabbit
–
California
Ground
Squirrel
California
Ground
Squirrel
California
Ground
Squirrel
Western
Grey
Squirrel
California
Ground
Squirrel
California
Ground
Squirrel
California
Ground
Squirrel
–
Common
Name
140
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
Catalogue
#
206
74-3587
74-3587
74-3587
Provenience
Lepus
californicus
medium
mammal
Lagomorpha
small
mammal
Carnivora
small to
medium
mammal
small
mammal
Aves
Aves
Antilocapra
americana
Artiodactyl
Lepus
californicus
Aves
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
Count
ischium
cranium
femur
calcaneus
tooth root
phalanx
cranium
vertebra
coracoid
coracoid
sesamoid
patella
phalanx
Element
distal
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
posterior
fragment
whole
near
complete
posterior
fragment
anterior
fragment
fragment
whole
Part
0.10
0.13
–
–
right
–
left
0.40
0.05
0.33
0.38
0.06
–
right
0.02
–
0.05
–
0.08
1.39
0.21
–
–
right
3.58
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
calcined
burnt
burnt
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
burnt
calcined
Weight
ModiBurn Type
(grams)
fication
–
Side
–
Comments
–
–
occipital
condyle
–
medium or
large bird
–
possible
incisor
Black-tailed
–
Jackrabbit
–
jackrabbit
size
–
–
–
occipital
condyle
–
–
–
–
–
Black-tailed
–
Jackrabbit
–
looks fresh
Pronghorn
Common
Name
141
Catalogue #
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Provenien
ce
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
Archoplites
interruptus
Archoplites
interruptus
Archoplites
interruptus
Archoplites
interruptus
Archoplites
interruptus
Archoplites
interruptus
Archoplites
interruptus
Archoplites
interruptus
Archoplites
interruptus
Archoplites
interruptus
Archoplites
interruptus
Archoplites
interruptus
Archoplites
interruptus
Archoplites
interruptus
Archoplites
interruptus
Taxa
1
1
3
4
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
7
121
76
Count
dorsal fin ray
spine
dorsal fin ray
spine
dorsal fin ray
spine
premaxilla
pterygiophore
pterygiophore
1st vertebra
basioccipital
dentary
1st vertebra
2nd vertebra
1st vertebra
vertebra
vertebra
vertebra
Element
medial
distal
distal
distal
proximal
proximal
whole
proximal
fragment
whole
body
whole &
fragments
whole &
fragments
whole &
fragments
body
Part
0.02
0.14
0.12
0.03
–
–
–
–
0.02
0.02
–
left
0.13
–
>0.01
–
>0.01
0.01
–
–
0.04
–
0.02
0.16
–
left
3.17
Weight
(grams)
1.69
–
–
Side
Table B-2. SAC-67 35N 2E (50-60 cm) Fish.
Common
Comments
Name
Sacramento
–
Perch
burnt
Sacramento
–
Perch
calcined Sacramento
–
Perch
burnt
Sacramento
–
Perch
burnt
Sacramento
–
Perch
burnt
Sacramento
–
Perch
burnt
Sacramento
–
Perch
–
Sacramento
–
Perch
–
Sacramento
–
Perch
–
Sacramento
–
Perch
burnt
Sacramento
–
Perch
–
Sacramento
–
Perch
burnt
Sacramento
–
Perch
calcined Sacramento
–
Perch
burnt
Sacramento
–
Perch
Burn
Type
–
142
Catalogue #
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
Provenien
ce
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
Ptychocheilus
grandis
Cypriniformes
Cypriniformes
Oncorhynchus
tshawytscha
Ptychocheilus
grandis
Catostomus
occidentalis
Catostomus
occidentalis
Cypriniformes
Archoplites
interruptus
Archoplites
interruptus
Archoplites
interruptus
Archoplites
interruptus
Archoplites
interruptus
Archoplites
interruptus
Taxa
1
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
parasphenoid
fin ray
ultimate
sphenotic
1st vertebra
1st vertebra
vertebra
vertebra
articular
quadrate
parasphenoid
terminal
pterygiophore
hypural
ceratohyal
Element
medial
distal
proximal
near
complete
near
complete
fragment
body
fragment
distal
proximal
medial
distal
whole
dorsal
Part
0.02
–
>0.01
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.05
0.03
0.12
0.08
0.03
left
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
0.02
0.04
–
left
>0.01
Weight
(grams)
0.02
–
left
Side
Common
Comments
Name
Sacramento
–
Perch
–
Sacramento
–
Perch
–
Sacramento
big!
Perch
burnt
Sacramento
–
Perch
–
Sacramento fits with
Perch
articular
below
–
Sacramento fits with
Perch
quadrate
above
burnt
Chinook
–
Salmon
–
Sacramento
–
Pikeminnow
burnt
Sacramento
–
Sucker
calcined Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Minnows &
–
Suckers
–
Minnows &
–
Suckers
burnt Minnows &
–
Suckers
burnt
Sacramento
–
Pikeminnow
Burn
Type
–
143
Catalogue #
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
Provenien
ce
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
Lavinia exilicauda
Lavinia exilicauda
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
Lavinia exilicauda
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
Ptychocheilus
grandis
Ptychocheilus
grandis
Catostomus
occidentalis
Gila crassicauda
Mylopharodon
conocephalus
Pogonichthys
macrolepidotus
Cypriniformes
Taxa
1
1
3
2
3
6
2
1
1
2
2
1
1
5
1
1
1
1
1
Count
pharyngeal
pharyngeal
pharyngeal
pharyngeal
pharyngeal
pharyngeal
pharyngeal
pharyngeal
pharyngeal
pharyngeal
pharyngeal
pharyngeal
pharyngeal
teeth
pharyngeal
pharyngeal
pharyngeal
scapula
epihyal
Element
1 whole &
1 fragment
whole
fragment
fragments
fragments
fragments
fragments
fragments
fragment
fragment
whole
whole
fragment
whole
fragment
fragment
fragment
whole
whole
Part
0.15
0.04
0.05
–
–
left
left
–
–
left
right
–
left
right
left
right
left
right
0.02
>0.01
0.08
0.08
0.06
0.13
0.09
0.04
0.03
0.03
0.14
0.1
0.07
0.02
–
right
>0.01
Weight
(grams)
0.11
–
–
Side
Common
Name
Hardhead
–
–
–
–
–
burnt
burnt
burnt
calcined
Hitch
Hitch
Minnows
Minnows
Minnows
Minnows
Minnows
Minnows
Minnows
Sacramento
Splittail
calcined Minnows &
Suckers
–
Minnows
–
Minnows
calcined Sacramento
Pikeminnow
–
Sacramento
Pikeminnow
–
Sacramento
Sucker
–
Thicktail
Chub
–
Hitch
–
Burn
Type
–
both are
rights
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Comments
144
Catalogue #
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
Provenien
ce
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
Catostomus
occidentalis
Catostomus
occidentalis
Catostomus
occidentalis
Catostomus
occidentalis
Catostomus
occidentalis
Catostomus
occidentalis
Catostomus
occidentalis
Catostomus
occidentalis
Gila crassicauda
Gila crassicauda
Gila crassicauda
1
Archoplites
interruptus
Archoplites
interruptus
Cyprinidae
Gila crassicauda
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
Count
Taxa
ceratohyal
articular
1st vertebra
parasphenoid
parasphenoid
hyomandibular
epihyal
articular
hyomandibular
articular
basioccipital
basiopterygium
epihyal
premaxilla
dentary
Element
whole
proximal
whole
medial
medial
proximal
whole
proximal
whole
proximal
proximal
distal
whole
distal
distal
Part
0.01
0.02
–
–
left
0.03
0.07
0.15
–
right
0.16
0.03
0.03
0.05
left
right
left
left
0.02
0.15
–
left
0.02
0.14
0.04
Weight
(grams)
0.06
right
right
right
left
Side
Burn
Common
Comments
Type
Name
calcined Sacramento
–
Perch
calcined Sacramento
–
Perch
burnt
Minnows
–
–
Thicktail
–
Chub
–
Thicktail
–
Chub
–
Thicktail
–
Chub
–
Thicktail
–
Chub
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
burnt
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
burnt
Sacramento
–
Sucker
145
Catalogue #
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
Provenien
ce
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
Lavinia exilicauda
Acipenser sp.
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
Ptychocheilus
grandis
Cyprinidae
Cypriniformes
Cypriniformes
Catostomus
occidentalis
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
Cypriniformes
Taxa
7
131
1
2
6
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
Count
vertebra
vertebra
scute
1st vertebra
1st vertebra
1st vertebra
vertebra
pterygiophore
haemal spine
basiopterygium
parasphenoid
basioccipital
pectoral fin ray
ceratohyal
ceratohyal
scapula
ENP
ENP
hypohyal
ribs
ceratohyal
Element
body &
fragments
body
near
complete
fragment
body
body
body
body
distal
medial
proximal
proximal
proximal
proximal
proximal
whole
whole
whole
1 whole/2
fragments
proximal
whole
Part
0.03
0.03
0.07
0.05
0.03
0.09
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.05
0.04
0.02
0.03
0.12
0.05
0.18
>0.01
0.19
2.86
0.32
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Weight
(grams)
0.04
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
right
left
right
–
left
Side
–
Hitch
–
Burn
Common
Comments
Type
Name
calcined Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Minnows
–
–
Minnows
–
–
Minnows
–
–
Minnows
–
burnt
Minnows
anterior
–
Minnows
anterior
–
Minnows
anterior
–
Minnows
–
–
Minnows
–
–
Minnows
–
–
Minnows &
–
Suckers
burnt Minnows &
–
Suckers
–
Minnows &
–
Suckers
–
Sturgeon
–
–
Minnows
–
burnt
Minnows
–
calcined Minnows
–
–
Sacramento
–
Pikeminnow
–
Minnows
–
146
Catalogue #
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
Provenien
ce
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
74-3589
Cyprinidae
Osteichthyes
Osteichthyes
Osteichthyes
Osteichthyes
Osteichthyes
Osteichthyes
Osteichthyes
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
Archoplites
interruptus
Catostomus
occidentalis
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
Taxa
1
41
49
10
132
55
1
1
9
121
1
1
1
1
1
3
Count
ceratohyal
vertebra
vertebra
vertebra
unknown
unknown
unknown
vertebra
vertebra
vertebra
vertebra
vertebra
1st vertebra
vertebra
vertebra
vertebra
Element
medial
body &
fragments
body &
fragments
fragments
fragments
fragments
fragments
fragments
fragments
centra
body
body
whole
body
body
body
Part
0.02
0.03
0.02
2.46
0.2
0.69
0.94
0.16
3.37
1.39
0.03
0.12
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
0.05
0.02
–
right
>0.01
Weight
(grams)
0.12
–
–
Side
bony fish
bony fish
bony fish
bony fish
bony fish
bony fish
bony fish
bony fish
–
Minnows
–
burnt
calcined
–
burnt
calcined
–
calcined
ray fin fish
ray fin fish
ray fin fish
ray fin fish
ray fin fish
ray fin fish
ray fin fish
ray fin
fish;
possible
trout?
–
Common
Comments
Name
Hardhead or
–
Sacramento
Blackfish
–
Sacramento
–
Perch
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Minnows
–
burnt
Minnows
–
calcined Minnows
not perch;
particularly
calcined
burnt
Minnows
–
Burn
Type
–
147
Provenien
ce
74-3589
Catalogue #
101
Cyprinidae
Taxa
1
Count
ceratohyal
Element
medial
Part
left
Side
Weight
(grams)
0.03
Burn
Type
–
Common
Name
bony fish
ray fin fish
Comments
148
2
3
4
5
6
7
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
large Aves
medium Aves
large Aves
Anas sp.
Anas sp.
Actinemys
marmorata
CataPrologue
Taxa
venience
#
74-3603
1 Actinemys
marmorata
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
femur
keel
rib
phalanx 2
mandible
plastron
carapace
Count Element
proximal
fragment
fragment
distal
whole
medial
fragment
fragment
Part
0.14
–
0.19
0.03
0.35
–
–
0.04
left
right
0.11
0.19
–
right
Weight
(grams)
Side
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
root
etching
–
–
–
–
Comments
Western
–
Pond
Turtle
Western
–
Pond
Turtle
Ducks very like a
cinnamon teal;
smaller than a
mallard
Ducks smaller than
mallard but
bigger than
cinnamon teal
with hook on
inside
Large large bird-goose
Birds sized; bigger than
a mallard;
missing process;
upper rib
Medium bigger than
Birds flicker &
cinnamon teal;
smaller than
whitefront;
Mallard sized
Large large bird-goose
Birds sized
Modi- Common
fication Name
–
–
Burn
Type
Table B-3. SAC-67 58N 28W (40-50 cm) NW Quadrant Terrestrial Taxa.
149
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
small to
medium
vertebrate
small to
medium
vertebrate
medium Aves
Anas sp.
Anas sp.
Aves
Thomomys
bottae
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
9
74-3603
medium Aves
1
mandible
femur
coracoid
radius
radius
vertebra
humerus
radius
pollox
Count Element
CataPrologue
Taxa
venience
#
74-3603
8 Aves
proximal
fragment
distal lateral
fragment
proximal
fragment
distal
fragment
proximal
fragment
proximal
fragment
proximal
shaft
fragment
distal
centrum
proximal
fragment
Part
left
0.02
0.21
0.03
–
right
0.04
0.06
left
right
>0.01
–
0.03
–
0.02
0.11
–
right
Weight
(grams)
Side
–
burnt
Ducks
mallard sized
little bit bigger
than mallard;
small goose
sized?=large bird;
curves medially
Medium mallard sized
Birds
Botta’s
Pocket
Gopher
Birds close to mallard
sized; bigger than
cinnamon teal
Ducks mallard sized
Birds
Comments
Medium cinnamon teal
Birds sized; too big for
flicker & more
duck shaped
polished
mallard & ground
?
squirrel sized
possible.
digested
?
–
–
–
–
–
burnt
–
burnt
–
–
–
–
–
–
Modi- Common
fication Name
calcined
–
Burn
Type
150
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
large
mammal
medium to
large
mammal
large
mammal
Spermophilus
beecheyi
Antilocapra
americana
Antilocapra
americana
Ungulate
Aves
small
mammal
CataPrologue
Taxa
venience
#
74-3603
17 small
mammal
74-3603
18 small
mammal
2
1
1
1
4
1
1
1
mandible
tibia
pisiform?
carpal?
teeth
lateral
phalanx
ulna
ulna
tibia
1
1
tibia
1
Count Element
medial
fragment
medial/shaft
whole
whole
fragment
whole
distal
proximal
distal
medial/shaft
distal
Part
2.98
0.29
0.78
0.51
4.00
–
–
–
–
–
0.42
3.72
–
right
0.03
left
0.04
0.18
–
right
0.05
Weight
(grams)
left
Side
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
calcined
calcined
burnt
calcined
Burn
Type
Hooved
Animal
–
possible human?
–
–
root
possible human?
etching
–
California
–
Ground
Squirrel
–
–
–
squirrel &
cottontail like
ground squirrel
sized
Comments
stylus process;
squirrel &
cottontail like
mallard sized
olecaran process
Pronghorn
–
root
etching
–
Pronghorn
–
cut or
gnaw
marks
–
–
Modi- Common
fication Name
151
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
Actinemys
marmorata
small to
medium
mammal
medium
mammal
Rodentia/
Lagomorpha
Thomomys
bottae
medium
mammal
Thomomys
bottae
small
vertebrate
Spermophilus
beecheyi
7
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
–
radius
metapodial
nasal
humerus
maxilla
metapodial
carpal
pelvis
CataPrologue
Taxa
Count Element
venience
#
74-3603
28 Spermophilus
1
astragalus
beecheyi
shell
fragment
head/
proximal
base
whole?
distal
–
right
0.79
0.35
0.03
–
–
fragment
0.02
0.04
–
distal
–
0.08
–
0.04
0.03
–
right
0.04
left
half
whole
0.02
Side
Part
Weight
(grams)
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Comments
Botta’s
–
Pocket
Gopher
Botta’s
–
Pocket
Gopher
Rodents inside of skull
or Rabbits where 2 front
& Hares incisors rest
possible jack
rabbit but not
quite sure
fox-like & sized;
not lagomorph;
too big for
raccoon
Western
–
Pond
Turtle
possible
amphibian
California
–
Ground
Squirrel
jack rabbit sized
California
Ground
Squirrel
Modi- Common
fication Name
–
–
–
–
calcined
Burn
Type
152
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
small
mammal
small
mammal
small
vertebrate
Squamata
Rodentia
Rodentia
Rodentia
Rodentia
Rodentia
Ungulate?
Lepus
californicus
Lepus
californicus
CataPrologue
Taxa
venience
#
74-3603
38 small
vertebrate
74-3603
39 Lepus
californicus
36
1
5
3
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
fragment
fragment
fragment
–
–
fragment
–
vertebrae
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
body
fragment
whole
distal
fragment
cranial
Part
mandible
mandible
cranial
maxilla
maxilla
teeth
vertebra
tarsal?
astragalus
1
1
–
1
Count Element
–
–
2.78
0.02
0.13
–
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.06
0.02
0.09
–
–
–
–
–
–
0.07
0.08
–
–
0.06
0.15
0.08
Weight
(grams)
left
right
–
Side
burnt
–
–
Modi- Common
fication Name
rodent sized
Comments
Black–
tailed
Jackrabbit
burnt
–
Black–
tailed
Jackrabbit
–
–
Black–
tailed
Jackrabbit
burnt
–
Rodents
–
–
–
Rodents
–
–
–
Rodents
–
burnt
–
Rodents
–
–
–
Rodents
–
–
1 w/ root Hooved
–
etching? Animals
–
–
Amphibian?
possible scapula?
4 burnt
–
Lizards
–
and
Snakes
–
2 w/ root
–
etching
burnt 3 w/ root
–
etching
–
Burn
Type
153
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
proximal
fragment
fragment
–
–
–
–
cranial
mandible
–
–
17
3
55
40
1
1
10
61
62
74-3603
74-3603
83
fragment
–
16
small to
medium
vertebrate
small to
medium
vertebrate
fragment
–
2
fragment
fragment
–
Part
8
Count Element
CataPrologue
Taxa
venience
#
74-3603
52 small
mammal
74-3603
53 large
mammal
74-3603
54 large
mammal
74-3603
55 large
mammal
74-3603
56 medium to
large
mammal
74-3603
57 medium to
large
mammal
74-3603
58 medium to
large
mammal
74-3603
59 medium
mammal
74-3603
60 Rodentia
–
–
2.84
0.30
0.02
0.18
–
left
4.91
6.86
0.70
6.72
6.08
0.51
0.46
Weight
(grams)
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Side
burnt
–
–
–
calcined
burnt
–
calcined
burnt
–
calcined
Burn
Type
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Comments
5 w/ root
etching
–
bigger than a
cottontail
–
Rodents mouse or gopher
sized
3 w/ root
–
etching
–
–
4 w/ root
etching
–
–
–
–
–
Modi- Common
fication Name
154
CataPrologue
Taxa
venience
#
74-3603
63 small to
medium
vertebrate
74-3603
64 medium to
large
vertebrate
74-3603
65 unknown
mammal
74-3603
66 unknown
mammal
74-3603
67 unknown
mammal
74-3603
68 large
mammal
74-3603
69 unknown
mammal
74-3603
70 unknown
vertebrate
74-3603
71 unknown
vertebrate
74-3603
72 unknown
vertebrate
74-3603
73 Actinemys
marmorata
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
shell
3
4
43
31
15
5
35
327
83
2
fragment
fragment
–
Part
39
Count Element
2.43
0.21
–
10.05
0.67
0.65
1.31
1.68
2.58
0.18
0.38
1.12
Weight
(grams)
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Side
Modi- Common
fication Name
–
–
–
1 w/ root
etching
–
–
possible modbone
–
possible human?
–
–
–
–
–
Comments
6 w/ root
etching
burnt 5 w/ root
–
etching
calcined 1 w/ root
–
etching
calcined
–
Western shell edge
Pond
Turtle
–
4 burnt
–
calcined
burnt
–
–
calcined 6 w/ root
etching
Burn
Type
155
CataProvenience logue
Taxa
#
74-3603
1
Catostomus
occidentalis
74-3603
2
Catostomus
occidentalis
74-3603
3
Catostomus
occidentalis
74-3603
4
Catostomus
occidentalis
74-3603
5
Catostomus
occidentalis
74-3603
6
Archoplites
interruptus
74-3603
7
Archoplites
interruptus
74-3603
8
Archoplites
interruptus
74-3603
9
Archoplites
interruptus
74-3603
10 Archoplites
interruptus
74-3603
11 Archoplites
interruptus
74-3603
12 Archoplites
interruptus
74-3603
13 Archoplites
interruptus
74-3603
14 Archoplites
interruptus
Element
hypohyal
parasphenoid
ceratohyal
articular
dentary
scale
ceratohyal
spine
pterygiophore
basioccipital
vomer
fin spine
subopercle
scapula
Count
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
whole
distal
near
complete
whole
proximal
ventral
ventral
fragment
medial
whole
near
complete
distal
medial
medial
whole
Part
right
>0.01
>0.01
>0.01
–
left
>0.01
–
>0.01
–
0.01
0.07
–
left
0.01
>0.01
–
right
>0.01
0.12
left
right
0.06
>0.01
–
left
0.07
Weight
(grams)
left
Side
–
–
–
–
burnt
–
burnt
–
–
–
–
–
–
burnt
Burn
Type
Table B-4. SAC-67 58N 28W (40-50 cm) NW Quadrant Fish.
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Perch
Sacramento
Perch
Sacramento
Perch
Sacramento
Perch
Sacramento
Perch
Sacramento
Perch
Sacramento
Perch
Sacramento
Perch
Sacramento
Perch
Common
Name
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Comments
156
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
Osteichthyes
Osteichthyes
Osteichthyes
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
41
27
7
1
1
Taxa
Count
#
74-3603
15 Archoplites
1
interruptus
74-3603
16 Hysterocarpus
2
traskii
74-3603
17 Acipenser sp.
1
74-3603
18 Gila
1
crassicauda
74-3603
19 Gila
1
crassicauda
74-3603
20 Cyprinidae
1
74-3603
21 Cyprinidae
1
left
left
whole
whole
pharyngeal
arch
ceratohyal
ceratohyal
ceratohyal
hypohyal
sphenotic
plural rib
fin spine
unknown
unknown
vertebra
opercle
medial
medial
distal
proximal
whole
proximal
whole
fragments
fragments
fragments
near
complete
medial
left
pharyngeal
arch
ENP?
opercle
>0.01
0.18
0.04
0.02
>0.01
0.02
0.04
0.71
0.58
0.20
0.04
–
right
right
right
right
–
–
left
–
–
–
0.14
right
0.07
0.03
0.04
0.02
0.04
–
–
fragment
near
complete
proximal
labial scute
basioccipital
0.02
–
distal
palate
>0.01
proximal
scapula
Weight
(grams)
left
Part
Element
Side
Minnows
Minnows
Minnows
Minnows
Minnows
Minnows
Minnows
Minnows
Bony Fish
Bony Fish
Bony Fish
–
burnt
burnt
calcined
–
–
–
–
burnt
calcined
Minnows
burnt
burnt
–
–
–
–
burnt
Sturgeon
Thicktail
Chub
Thicktail
Chub
Minnows
Minnows
Sacramento
Perch
Tule Perch
–
burnt
Common
Name
Burn
Type
–
–
–
–
–
gracile fish
–
ray finned fish
ray finned fish
ray finned fish
–
different fish from
22
different fish from
21; partially burnt
–
–
–
lightly burnt
–
–
Comments
157
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
74-3603
Catostomus
occidentalis
Archoplites
interruptus
Lavinia
exilcauda
Archoplites
interruptus
Cyprinidae
Cypriniformes
Lavinia
exilcauda
Cyprinidae
Catostomus
occidentalis
Archoplites
interruptus
Cypriniformes
1
1
14
6
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Taxa
Count
#
74-3603
34 Cyprinidae
13
74-3603
35 Osteichthyes
14
74-3603
36 Archoplites
2
interruptus
74-3603
37 Cypriniformes
1
body
vertebra
1st vertebra
1st vertebra
vertebra
vertebra
vertebra
urostyle
penultimate
1st vertebra
1st vertebra
1st vertebra
body
body &
fragments
body &
fragments
whole
body
whole
proximal
whole
whole
whole
body
body
fragments
body
vertebra
vertebra
vertebra
vertebra
Part
Element
Weight
(grams)
0.29
0.31
0.05
0.01
0.03
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.14
0.02
0.14
0.28
0.01
>0.01
Side
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
burnt
burnt
burnt
burnt
burnt
burnt
burnt
burnt
burnt
Burn
Type
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Perch
Sacramento
Perch
Minnows
Minnows
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Perch
Minnows &
Suckers
Minnows &
Suckers
Hitch
Minnows
Bony Fish
Sacramento
Perch
Minnows &
Suckers
Hitch
Common
Name
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
ray finned fish
Comments
158
Taxa
#
74-3603
49 Catostomus
occidentalis
Element
vertebra
Count
6
centra
Part
Weight
(grams)
0.16
Side
–
–
Burn
Type
Sacramento
Sucker
Common
Name
–
Comments
159
5
6
7
8
9
10
74-3578
74-3578
74-3578
74-3578
74-3578
74-3578
ProCatavenience logue
#
74-3578
1
74-3578
2
74-3578
3
74-3578
4
small mammal
medium to large
mammal
small mammal
small mammal
medium
mammal
106
8
204
19
24
38
7
16
7
8
large mammal
large mammal
large mammal
medium
mammal
medium
mammal
Count
Taxa
Part
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
Element
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Side
2.93
0.98
7.93
0.90
1.59
3.53
4.63
14.15
3.50
0.64
Weight
(grams)
–
–
–
–
–
–
1 w/
root
etching
burnt
2 w/
root
etching
calcined
–
–
1 w/
root
etching
–
calcined
burnt
–
burnt
calcined
–
Burn Modifi- Common
Type cation
Name
Table B-5. SAC-67 58N 28W (40-50 cm) SE Quadrant Terrestrial Taxa.
–
–
–
–
–
–
almost all on
the smaller
end of
spectrum
almost all on
the smaller
end of
spectrum;
jack rabbit?
almost all on
the smaller
end of
spectrum;
jack rabbit?
–
Comments
160
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
74-3578
74-3578
74-3578
74-3578
74-3578
74-3578
74-3578
74-3578
74-3578
74-3578
small to
medium
vertebrate
medium to large
mammal
small to
medium
mammal
small to
medium
mammal
small to
medium
mammal
unknown
mammal
unknown
mammal
unknown
mammal
medium to large
vertebrate
medium to large
vertebrate
7
7
9
42
141
8
6
20
3
38
Taxa
Count
#
74-3578 11 medium to large 110
mammal
Part
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
Element
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Side
0.22
0.40
0.58
1.41
4.99
0.24
0.22
1.01
0.21
5.39
16.77
Weight
(grams)
–
burnt
–
calcined
burnt
–
calcined
burnt
–
1 w/
root
etching
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
4 w/
root
etching
calcined
–
burnt
Burn Modifi- Common
Type cation
Name
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Comments
161
27
28
29
74-3578
74-3578
74-3578
30
26
74-3578
74-3578
25
74-3578
medium to large
Aves
medium Aves
medium to large
Aves
Anseriformes
unknown
vertebrate
unknown
vertebrate
Taxa
#
74-3578 22 small to
medium
vertebrate
74-3578 23 small to
medium
vertebrate
74-3578 24 unknown
vertebrate
fragment
–
1
1
1
1
60
carpometacarpus
carpometacarpus
proximal
distal
fragment
fragment
–
–
fragment
–
24
medial
fragment
–
14
ulna
fragment
–
34
347
Part
Element
Count
0.08
0.07
–
left
0.24
0.31
–
–
1.36
7.57
2.10
0.56
1.10
Weight
(grams)
–
–
–
–
–
Side
burnt
calcined
–
–
–
–
–
–
1 w/
root
etching
burnt
2 w/
root
etching
calcined 1 w/
root
etching
–
2 w/
root
etching
calcined
–
burnt
–
–
–
–
Comments
1 piece
stained bluish
green=cooper
?
Waterfowl Goose sized;
too big for
mallard
Medium to has struts
Large
Birds
Medium
wood duck
Birds
and crow
sized
Medium to mallard &
Large hawk & goose
Birds
sized; singed
on end
Burn Modifi- Common
Type cation
Name
162
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
74-3578
74-3578
74-3578
74-3578
74-3578
74-3578
74-3578
74-3578
Aves
Rana sp.
Actinemys
marmorata
Actinemys
marmorata
Actinemys
marmorata
Actinemys
marmorata
Lepus
californicus
Lepus
californicus
3
1
1
4
4
1
1
1
1
32
74-3578
whole
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
distal
distal
distal
distal
Part
esophageal rings fragments
maxilla
shell
shell
shell
plastron
metapodial
metapodial
metapodial
coracoid
1
Lepus
californicus
Element
Count
Taxa
#
74-3578 31
Anas sp.
0.40
0.52
0.52
0.08
–
–
–
–
>0.01
0.02
–
–
0.08
–
0.01
0.03
–
right
0.16
Weight
(grams)
left
Side
–
–
–
–
Ducks
Birds
Blacktailed
Jackrabbit
burnt
–
Blacktailed
Jackrabbit
–
–
Blacktailed
Jackrabbit
–
–
Western
Pond
Turtle
–
1 w/
Western
root
Pond
etching
Turtle
burnt
1 w/
Western
root
Pond
etching
Turtle
calcined
–
Western
Pond
Turtle
–
–
Frogs
calcined
burnt
Burn Modifi- Common
Type cation
Name
tip broke in
storage
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
pintail &
gadwall sized;
could be a
small mallard,
such as a hen?
–
Comments
163
47
74-3578
45
74-3578
46
44
74-3578
74-3578
43
74-3578
unknown
vertebrate
Anas sp.
medium Aves
medium to large
Aves
medium Aves
1
1
1
1
1
1
42
74-3578
rib or bird scapula
cuneiform
radius
carpometacarpus
sternum
sternum
humerus
1
Anseriformes
Element
Count
Taxa
#
74-3578 41
Anseriformes
distal
whole
shaft
distal
lateral
superior
lateral
proximal
Part
0.11
0.47
–
0.30
left
left
0.74
0.04
–
left
0.24
4.19
Weight
(grams)
left
right
Side
root Waterfowl
etching
–
Waterfowl
goose sized
Comments
little bit
smaller than a
mallard; too
big for a coot;
form is
indicative of
waterfowl
calcined
–
Medium bigger than a
Birds
crow-duck
sized
–
–
Medium to too big for
Large
mallard; too
Birds
small for
swan; goose
sized
–
gnaw
Medium mallard like
marks
Birds
–
–
Ducks
mallard sized
& like;
definitely
waterfowl
like
–
–
poss. mod
bone?;
juvenile deer
sized or really
big bird
–
–
Burn Modifi- Common
Type cation
Name
164
50
51
52
74-3578
74-3578
74-3578
small Aves
Anas sp.
Anas sp.
1
1
1
1
49
74-3578
mandible
radius
radius
sternum
carpometacarpus
1
medium to large
Aves
Element
Count
Taxa
#
74-3578 48 large Aves
medial
fragment
proximal
proximal
inferior
lateral
lateral
Part
left
right
>0.01
0.07
0.09
0.05
–
left
0.15
Weight
(grams)
left
Side
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Comments
metacarpal
III; medial
fragment;
goose sized
Medium to lateral caudal
Large
process
Birds
Ducks
waterfowl
shaped but
mallard sized
Ducks
waterfowl
shaped but
mallard sized
Small
–
Birds
Large
Birds
Burn Modifi- Common
Type cation
Name
165
13
14
15
74-3579
74-3579
74-3579
Cypriniformes
Cypriniformes
Cyprinidae
Provenience CataTaxa
logue
#
74-3579
1 Archoplites
interruptus
74-3579
2 Hysterocarpus
traskii
74-3579
3 Archoplites
interruptus
74-3579
4 Archoplites
interruptus
74-3579
5 Archoplites
interruptus
74-3579
6 Archoplites
interruptus
74-3579
7 Ptychocheilus
grandis
74-3579
8 Ptychocheilus
grandis
74-3579
9 Cyprinidae
74-3579
10 Cyprinidae
74-3579
11 Cyprinidae
74-3579
12 Cyprinidae
1st vertebra
basioccipital
abdominal
vertebra
abdominal
vertebra
vertebra
1st vertebra
1st vertebra
2nd cervical
vertebra
2nd cervical
vertebra
vertebra
1
1
2
13
10
1
1
1
1
2
vertebra
1st vertebra
1
1
whole
whole
fragments
fragments
body
body
body
body
body
body
body
distal
whole
whole
caudal vertebra near complete
vertebra
3
1
pterygiophore
1
0.03
0.03
0.10
0.02
>0.01
0.03
0.10
>0.01
0.06
0.04
>0.01
0.04
>0.01
0.17
0.24
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
burnt
–
burnt
–
burnt
calcined
–
burnt
–
burnt
calcined
burnt
–
–
–
Table B-6. SAC-67 58N 28W (40-50 cm) SE Quadrant Fish.
Count
Element
Part
Side Weight Burn
(grams) Type
Minnows &
Suckers
Minnows &
Suckers
Minnows
Sacramento
Perch
Sacramento
Perch
Sacramento
Perch
Sacramento
Perch
Sacramento
Pikeminnow
Sacramento
Pikeminnow
Minnows
Minnows
Minnows
Minnows
Sacramento
Perch
Tule Perch
Common
Name
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
1 caudal, 2
abdominal
–
–
Comments
166
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
74-3579
74-3579
74-3579
74-3579
74-3579
74-3579
74-3579
74-3579
74-3579
74-3579
74-3579
74-3579
74-3579
74-3579
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
Archoplites
interruptus
Catostomus
occidentalis
Catostomus
occidentalis
Archoplites
interruptus
Archoplites
interruptus
Catostomus
occidentalis
Archoplites
interruptus
Archoplites
interruptus
Cyprinidae
logue
#
74-3579
16 Cypriniformes
15
3
4
7
1
7
11
10
3
1
1
1
2
1
3
whole
body
body
body
body
body
fragments
abdominal
whole & body
vertebra
abdominal
body
vertebra
abdominal
body
vertebra
abdominal
body
vertebra
abdominal
body
vertebra
caudal vertebra
body
caudal vertebra
body
abdominal
body
vertebra
caudal vertebra
cervical vertebra
cervical vertebra
abdominal
vertebra
abdominal
vertebra
caudal vertebra
vertebra
0.05
>0.01
0.04
0.08
0.03
0.05
0.05
0.25
0.26
0.15
0.03
0.20
0.22
0.03
0.19
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
burnt
burnt
–
burnt
–
burnt
–
–
calcined
–
–
–
calcined
calcined
Count
Element
Part
Side Weight Burn
(grams) Type
Minnows
Minnows
Minnows
Minnows
Minnows
Minnows &
Suckers
Sacramento
Perch
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Perch
Sacramento
Perch
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Perch
Sacramento
Perch
Minnows
Common
Name
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
precaudals
–
–
–
–
–
–
Comments
167
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
74-3579
74-3579
74-3579
74-3579
74-3579
74-3579
74-3579
74-3579
74-3579
Catostomus
occidentalis
Ptychocheilus
macrolepidotus
Salmonidae
Ptychocheilus
macrolepidotus
Ptychocheilus
macrolepidotus
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
Cypriniformes
Cypriniformes
logue
#
74-3579
31 Archoplites
interruptus
74-3579
32 Archoplites
interruptus
74-3579
33 Archoplites
interruptus
74-3579
34 Gila crassicauda
74-3579
35 Archoplites
interruptus
74-3579
36 Cyprinidae
vertebra
pharyngeal arch
ceratohyal
pharyngeal arch
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
ceratohyal
epihyal
vertebra
scapular
scapular
rib
scapular
pharyngeal arch
pharyngeal arch
vertebra
2
1
vertebra
1
whole
whole
fragment
fragment
whole &
fragments
fragment
whole
medial
medial
medial
distal
fragments
fragment
fragments
fragment
0.02
–
right
>0.01
>0.01
0.01
–
right
0.08
>0.01
0.05
>0.01
0.03
0.04
0.02
right
left
–
right
right
left
left
0.06
>0.01
0.05
–
right
–
>0.01
–
Common
Name
Comments
Sacramento
–
Perch
burnt
Sacramento
–
Perch
calcined Sacramento
–
Perch
–
Thicktail Chub
–
–
Sacramento
–
Perch
burnt
Minnows
Splittail or
Thicktail
Chub
–
Minnows &
–
Suckers
burnt
Sacramento
–
Splittail
–
Sacramento
–
Splittail
–
Minnows
–
–
Minnows
–
–
Minnows &
–
Suckers
–
Salmon
most likely
Chinook
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Splittail
–
Count
Element
Part
Side Weight Burn
(grams) Type
168
56
57
58
59
60
74-3579
74-3579
74-3579
74-3579
74-3579
Archoplites
interruptus
Catostomus
occidentalis
Archoplites
interruptus
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
logue
#
74-3579
46 Cyprinidae
74-3579
47 Ptychocheilus
macrolepidotus
74-3579
48 Catostomus
occidentalis
74-3579
49 Archoplites
interruptus
74-3579
50 Catostomus
occidentalis
74-3579
51 Catostomus
occidentalis
74-3579
52 Archoplites
interruptus
74-3579
53 Cyprinidae
74-3579
54 Cyprinidae
74-3579
55 Cyprinidae
quadrate
ceratohyal
cleithrum
articular
cleithrum
cleithrum
opercle
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
1
1
1
cranial
dorsal fin ray
spine
pterygiophore
cleithrum
cleithrum
opercle
1
1
epihyal
epihyal
1
2
0.08
–
fragments
distal
dorsal
dorsal
proximal
fragments
dorsal
fragments
ventral
fragments
proximal
0.13
>0.01
>0.01
0.03
0.03
0.03
>0.01
0.09
right
left
right
–
–
–
–
–
0.10
0.02
>0.01
0.08
0.04
0.03
left
left
–
near complete right
medial
proximal
whole
proximal
near complete left
whole
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Count
Element
Part
Side Weight Burn
(grams) Type
Sacramento
Perch
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Perch
Minnows
Minnows
Minnows
Sacramento
Splittail
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Perch
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Perch
Minnows
Minnows
Minnows
Common
Name
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Comments
169
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
74-3579
74-3579
74-3579
74-3579
74-3579
74-3579
74-3579
74-3579
74-3579
74-3579
74-3579
74-3579
Archoplites
interruptus
Ptychocheilus
macrolepidotus
Archoplites
interruptus
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
Osteichthyes
Osteichthyes
Osteichthyes
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
Cyprinidae
Acipenser sp.
logue
#
74-3579
61 Catostomus
occidentalis
74-3579
62 Cyprinidae
74-3579
63 Archoplites
interruptus
74-3579
64 Cyprinidae
74-3579
65 Archoplites
interruptus
74-3579
66 Cypriniformes
parasphenoid
basioccipital
basioccipital
1
1
1
1
2
91
12
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
frontal
opecular
unknown
unknown
unknown
preopercle
coracoid
hyomandibular
scute
lachrymal
abdominal
vertebra
sphenotic
coracoid
?
1
1
1
parasphenoid
1
fragment
proximal
fragments
fragments
fragment
medial
dorsal
distal
whole
proximal
whole
fragment
distal
medial
distal
fragments
near complete
medial
0.08
>0.01
>0.01
0.02
–
–
–
–
right
right
–
–
–
right
left
left
–
left
>0.01
0.05
1.65
0.31
>0.01
0.04
>0.01
0.02
0.04
>0.01
>0.01
>0.01
0.02
–
–
right
0.01
–
–
–
–
burnt
calcined
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Count
Element
Part
Side Weight Burn
(grams) Type
Sacramento
Sucker
Minnows
Sacramento
Perch
Minnows
Sacramento
Perch
Minnows &
Suckers
Sacramento
Perch
Sacramento
Splittail
Sacramento
Perch
Minnows
Minnows
Fish
Fish
Fish
Minnows
Minnows
Minnows
Sturgeon
Common
Name
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
most likely
labial scutes
–
–
–
–
–
unnamed
bone
–
–
–
Comments
170
logue
#
74-3579
79 Archoplites
interruptus
74-3579
80 Cyprinidae
74-3579
81 Ptychocheilus
grandis
74-3579
82 Hysterocarpus
traskii
74-3579
83 Hysterocarpus
traskii
74-3579
84 Archoplites
interruptus
74-3579
85 Hysterocarpus
traskii
74-3579
86 Catostomus
occidentalis
74-3579
87 Cyprinidae
74-3579
88 Cyprinidae
74-3579
89 Cyprinidae
74-3579
90 Cyprinidae
74-3579
91 Osteichthyes
74-3579
92 Mylopharodon
concephalus
otolith
otolith
articular
hyomandibular
vomer
cleithrum
hyomandibular
unknown
pharyngeal arch
epihyal
ceratohyal
hyomandibular
unknown
quadrate
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
medial
fragments
proximal
fragments
fragment
whole
fragment
proximal
dorsal
distal
>0.01
>0.01
0.02
>0.01
>0.01
0.02
0.02
>0.01
left
–
–
–
–
–
–
right
0.03
0.02
–
left
>0.01
–
0.02
0.05
near complete
–
proximal
right
fragment
0.05
right
fragment
burnt
–
–
–
–
–
–
Sacramento
Sucker
Minnows
Minnows
Minnows
Minnows
Fish
Hardhead
Sacramento
Perch
Tule Perch
–
–
Tule Perch
Sacramento
Perch
Minnows
Sacramento
Pikeminnow
Tule Perch
Common
Name
burnt
–
–
–
–
Count
Element
Part
Side Weight Burn
(grams) Type
articular
fragment
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
palate
–
–
–
rodistrum
Comments
171
carapace
carapace
carapace
vertebra
vertebra
vertebra
vertebra
coracoid
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
S74/E19
S74/E19 130-140 Anseriformes
870A
947A
947A
957A
1
1
1
carapace
1
furculum
carpometacarpus
humerus
carpometacarpus
carapace
2
Anseriformes
longbone
1
80-90
humerus
1
CataLevel
Unit
Taxa
logue #
(cm)
509A S52/E26 100-110 Actinemys
marmorata
marmorata
marmorata
marmorata
marmorata
marmorata
marmorata
marmorata
656A S53/E26 60-70 Reptilia
847A S74/E19 70-80 Reptilia
902A S74/E19 100-110 Reptilia
1164A S74/E19 90-100 Reptilia
476A S52/E26 70-80 Anseriformes
–
–
–
–
–
–
fragment
whole
distal end
–
–
–
–
–
–
left
left
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
whole
–
whole
–
whole
–
whole
–
proximal right
end
distal end left
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
whole
whole
Table B-7. SAC-133 Middle Period Terrestrial Taxa.
Burn
Count
Element
Part
Side
Type
1
carapace
fragment
–
–
Common
Name
Western
Pond Turtle
–
Western
Pond Turtle
–
Western
Pond Turtle
–
Western
Pond Turtle
–
Western
Pond Turtle
–
Western
Pond Turtle
–
Western
Pond Turtle
–
Western
Pond Turtle
–
Reptiles
–
Reptiles
–
Reptiles
–
Reptiles
chopped Waterfowl
off
chopped Waterfowl
off
–
Waterfowl
–
Waterfowl
chopped Waterfowl
off
Modification
–
–
–
–
–
axial
axial
axial
axial
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Comments
172
S76/E19
S76/E19
S41/E19
1087A
1115A
338A
669A
509A
489A
363A
363A
355A
S53/E26
679A
60-70
70-80
60-70
80-90
70-80
Callipepla
californica
Fulica
americana
Crovus
brachyrhynchos
Passeriformes
Lepus
californicus
S52/E25 80-90 Lepus
californicus
S52/E25 90-110 Lepus
californicus
S52/E25 90-110 Lepus
californicus
S52/E26 80-90 Lepus
californicus
S52/E26 100-110 Lepus
californicus
S53/E26 70-80 Lepus
californicus
S76/E19
1104A
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
metapodial
ulna
radius
premolar or molar
incisor
ulna
femur
tarsometatarsus
carpometacarpus
tarsometatarsus
tibiotarsus
ModiCommon
fication
Name
–
Waterfowl
chopped
Ducks
off
chopped
Ducks
off
chopped
Diurnal
off
Birds of Prey
distal end left burned chopped California
off
Quail
distal end right
–
chopped American
off
Coot
distal end right
–
chopped American
off
Crow
distal end left
–
–
Perching
Birds
proximal right
–
chopped Black-tailed
end
off
Jackrabbit
proximal right
–
end
off
Jackrabbit
whole
–
–
–
Black-tailed
Jackrabbit
whole
–
burned
–
Black-tailed
Jackrabbit
whole
right
–
–
Black-tailed
Jackrabbit
whole
left
–
–
Black-tailed
Jackrabbit
distal
–
–
–
Black-tailed
epiphysis
Jackrabbit
CataLevel
Burn
Unit
Taxa
Count
Element
Part
Side
logue #
(cm)
Type
1132A S76/E19 80-90 Anseriformes
1
mandible
fragment right
–
882A S74/E19 90-100 Anas sp.
1
tibiotarsus
distal end right calcine
d
1132A S76/E19 80-90 Anas sp.
1
coracoid
proximal left
–
end
363A S52/E25 90-100 Falconiformes
1
carpometacarpus
distal end left
–
unfused
–
–
singed
–
–
–
–
–
–
singed
–
possibly Teal
–
possibly Teal
Comments
173
S74/E19
S74/E19 90-100
S74/E19 90-100
S74/E19 100-110
S74/E19 110-120
S74/E19 120-130
S74/E19 120-130
S74/E19 120-130
S74/E19 120-130
S74/E19 130-140
870A
882A
882A
902A
919A
933A
933A
933A
933A
947A
80-90
80-90
S74/E19
870A
70-80
S74/E19
847A
Lepus
californicus
Lepus
californicus
Lepus
californicus
Lepus
californicus
Lepus
californicus
Lepus
californicus
Lepus
californicus
Lepus
californicus
Lepus
californicus
Lepus
californicus
Lepus
californicus
Lepus
californicus
CataLevel
Unit
Taxa
logue #
(cm)
698A S53/E26 100-124 Lepus
californicus
847A S74/E19 70-80 Lepus
californicus
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
premolar or molar
metapodial
astragalus
femur
premolar or molar
humerus
metapodial
metapodial
premolar or molar
metapodial
humerus
premolar or molar
ModiCommon
Comments
fication
Name
off
Jackrabbit
–
–
Black-tailed with incisor and
Jackrabbit
3 premolar/
molar
whole
–
–
–
Black-tailed
Jackrabbit
–
distal end left
–
off
Jackrabbit
–
proximal
–
–
end
off
Jackrabbit
–
whole
–
–
–
Black-tailed
Jackrabbit
–
distal end
–
–
off
Jackrabbit
–
whole
–
–
–
Black-tailed
Jackrabbit
–
distal end right burned chopped Black-tailed
off
Jackrabbit
–
whole
–
–
–
Black-tailed
Jackrabbit
–
distal end left burned chopped Black-tailed
off
Jackrabbit
–
whole
right
–
–
Black-tailed
Jackrabbit
–
distal end right burned
cut
Black-tailed
Jackrabbit
–
whole
–
–
–
Black-tailed
Jackrabbit
–
Burn
Count
Element
Part
Side
Type
1
radius
proximal right
–
end
1
mandible
whole
right
–
174
CataLevel
Unit
Taxa
logue #
(cm)
957A S74/E19 140-150 Lepus
californicus
957A S74/E19 140-150 Lepus
californicus
957A S74/E19 140-150 Lepus
californicus
1087A S76/E19 60-70 Lepus
californicus
1104A S76/E19 70-80 Lepus
californicus
1104A S76/E19 70-80 Lepus
californicus
1115A S76/E19 70-80 Lepus
californicus
1132A S76/E19 80-90 Lepus
californicus
1132A S76/E19 80-90 Lepus
californicus
1132A S76/E19 80-90 Lepus
californicus
1132A S76/E19 80-90 Lepus
californicus
1139A S76/E19 80-90 Lepus
californicus
1148A S76/E19 80-90 Lepus
californicus
1183A S76/E19 100-110 Lepus
californicus
Burn ModiCommon
Count
Element
Part
Side
Type fication
Name
1
premolar or molar fragment
–
burned
–
Black-tailed
Jackrabbit
1
metapodial
whole
–
–
–
Black-tailed
Jackrabbit
1
metapodial
distal end
–
–
cut
Black-tailed
Jackrabbit
1
metapodial
proximal
–
–
portion
off
Jackrabbit
1
premolar or molar
whole
–
–
–
Black-tailed
Jackrabbit
1
pelvis
fragment right
–
off
Jackrabbit
1
calcaneus
proximal
–
–
end
off
Jackrabbit
1
humerus
distal end left
–
off
Jackrabbit
1
femur
proximal left
–
cut
Black-tailed
end
Jackrabbit
1
femur
proximal right
–
end
off
Jackrabbit
1
metapodial
whole
–
–
–
Black-tailed
Jackrabbit
1
metapodial
proximal
–
–
cut
Black-tailed
end
Jackrabbit
1
tibia
proximal left
–
portion
off
Jackrabbit
1
radius
proximal right
–
end
off
Jackrabbit
–
–
–
–
head present
–
–
acetabulum
present
–
–
–
–
–
singed
Comments
175
S52/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
476A
669A
669A
679A
679A
698A
80-90
80-90
70-80
70-80
80-90
70-80
Sylvilagus sp.
Sylvilagus sp
Sylvilagus sp.
Sylvilagus sp.
Sylvilagus sp.
Sylvilagus sp.
CataLevel
Unit
Taxa
logue #
(cm)
1198A S76/E19 110-120 Lepus
californicus
1198A S76/E19 110-120 Lepus
californicus
1198A S76/E19 110-120 Lepus
californicus
1198A S76/E19 110-120 Lepus
californicus
1198A S76/E19 110-120 Lepus
californicus
1198A S76/E19 110-120 Lepus
californicus
1198A S76/E19 110-120 Lepus
californicus
1208A S76/E19 120-130 Lepus
californicus
363A S52/E25 90-110 Sylvilagus sp.
476A S52/E26 70-80 Sylvilagus sp.
astragalus
metapodial
humerus
metapodial
tibia
1
1
1
1
1
mandible
metapodial
metapodial
calcaneus
1
1
1
1
scapula
1
mandible
premolar or molar
scapula
premolar or molar
1
1
1
1
incisor
1
ModiCommon
Comments
fication
Name
–
Black-tailed
–
Jackrabbit
whole
–
–
–
Black-tailed
–
Jackrabbit
whole
–
–
–
Black-tailed
–
Jackrabbit
proximal left
–
chopped Black-tailed glenoid fossa
end
off
Jackrabbit and neck present
whole
right
–
–
Black-tailed
–
Jackrabbit
Black-tailed
whole
right burned
–
Jackrabbit
singed
Black-tailed
whole
–
–
–
Jackrabbit
–
distal end right
–
off
Jackrabbit
–
distal end
–
–
–
Cottontails
–
chopped
distal end left
–
off
Cottontails
–
chopped
whole
left
–
off
Cottontails
without teeth
whole
–
–
–
Cottontails
–
fragment right burned
–
Cottontails
singed
chopped
fragment left
–
off
Cottontails
–
whole
–
–
–
Cottontails
–
whole
–
–
–
Cottontails
–
Burn
Count
Element
Part
Side
Type
1
maxilla
fragment
–
–
176
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19 70-80 Sylvilagus sp
S52/E26
1087A
1115A
1164A
1164A
1183A
1198A
1233A
489A
80-90
60-70
60-70
Spermophilus
beecheyi
Sylvilagus sp
Sylvilagus sp
Sylvilagus sp
Sylvilagus sp
Sylvilagus sp
Sylvilagus sp
1087A
100-110
100-110
120-130
120-130
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
902A
902A
933A
933A
Sylvilagus sp
Taxa
Level
(cm)
60-70
847A
870A
882A
882A
CataUnit
logue #
831A S74/E19
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
mandible
calcaneus
metapodial
phalanx
premolar or molar
radius
ilium
innominate
scapula
metapodial
calcaneus
metapodial
innominate
metapodial
1
1
1
1
1
1
humerus
astragalus
astragalus
metapodial
1
1
1
1
–
–
–
–
–
distal end
–
whole
right
whole
–
fragment left
proximal
–
portion
fragment left
Modification
chopped
off
–
–
–
chopped
off
–
–
–
cut
chopped
off
fragment left
–
chopped
off
whole
–
–
–
whole
–
–
–
distal end left burned
cut
fragment left
–
chopped
off
whole
left
–
–
distal end
–
–
chopped
off
fragment right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
distal end right
whole
left
whole
right
whole
–
Burn
Count
Element
Part
Side
Type
–
–
–
–
singed
–
–
blade only
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Comments
California with incisor and 4
Ground
premolar/ molars
Squirrel
Cottontails
Cottontails
Cottontails
Cottontails
Cottontails
Cottontails
Cottontails
Cottontails
Cottontails
Cottontails
Cottontails
Cottontails
Cottontails
Cottontails
Cottontails
Cottontails
Cottontails
Common
Name
177
70-80
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
1087A
1087A
1115A
1139A
80-90
70-80
60-70
Spermophilus
beecheyi
Spermophilus
beecheyi
Spermophilus
beecheyi
Spermophilus
beecheyi
S74/E19 140-150 Spermophilus
beecheyi
957A
60-70
beecheyi
Spermophilus
beecheyi
933A
70-80
S74/E19
Spermophilus
beecheyi
beecheyi
S53/E26
Spermophilus
beecheyi
Taxa
847A
685A
669A
CataLevel
Unit
logue #
(cm)
518A S52/E26 110-120
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
ulna
vertebra
femur
mandible
humerus
femur
femur
mandible
ulna
left
left
–
–
proximal
end
whole
left
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
burned
–
–
left
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Modification
–
right
right
distal end right burned
fragment
proximal
end
proximal
end
proximal
end
fragment
proximal
end
Burn
Count
Element
Part
Side
Type
1
pelvis
fragment left
–
Common
Name
California
Ground
Squirrel
California
Ground
Squirrel
California
Ground
Squirrel
California
Ground
Squirrel
California
Ground
Squirrel
California
Ground
Squirrel
California
Ground
Squirrel
California
Ground
Squirrel
California
Ground
Squirrel
California
Ground
Squirrel
–
–
singed; unfused
with 3 premolar/
molars
–
–
head present
–
–
–
Comments
178
beecheyi
beecheyi
beecheyi
beecheyi
S52/E25
S52/E25
S52/E25
1198A
1198A
1198A
1233A
349A
349A
355A
80-90
70-80
Thomomys bottae
Thomomys bottae
Thomomys bottae
beecheyi
1164A
70-80
beecheyi
1164A
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
incisor
molar
mandible
femur
humerus
scapula
auditory bulla
femur
mandible
whole
whole
fragment
proximal
end
shaft
fragment
whole
shaft
fragment
burned
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
left
–
–
–
–
–
–
left
right
–
–
–
–
–
Modification
–
–
right burned
–
left
CataLevel
Burn
Unit
Taxa
Count
Element
Part
Side
logue #
(cm)
Type
1164A S76/E19 90-100 Spermophilus
1
incisor
whole
–
–
beecheyi
Common
Name
California
Ground
Squirrel
California
Ground
Squirrel
California
Ground
Squirrel
California
Ground
Squirrel
California
Ground
Squirrel
California
Ground
Squirrel
California
Ground
Squirrel
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
–
–
with incisor
–
–
glenoid fossa
present
–
–
with premolar
lower
Comments
179
S52/E25 90-110 Thomomys bottae
S52/E26
S52/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
363A
496A
518A
656A
656A
669A
669A
669A
70-80
70-80
70-80
60-70
60-70
80-90
S52/E25
355A
Thomomys bottae
Thomomys bottae
Thomomys bottae
Thomomys bottae
Thomomys bottae
Thomomys bottae
Level
(cm)
80-90
CataUnit
logue #
355A S52/E25
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
premolar
incisor
mandible
femur
humerus
incisor
mandible
radius
mandible
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
left
–
–
–
–
right
fragment
proximal
end
–
–
–
–
–
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
Modification
–
left
distal end right
whole
fragment
whole
fragment
Burn
Taxa
Count
Element
Part
Side
Type
Thomomys bottae
1
mandible
fragment left
–
Common
Name
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
–
lower
without teeth
–
–
lower
with incisor
–
with incisor and
premolar
without teeth
Comments
180
S53/E26
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
679A
691A
698A
831A
847A
847A
870A
870A
80-90
80-90
70-80
70-80
60-70
80-90
80-90
S53/E26
679A
Thomomys bottae
Thomomys bottae
Thomomys bottae
Thomomys bottae
Thomomys bottae
Thomomys bottae
Thomomys bottae
Level
(cm)
80-90
CataUnit
logue #
679A S53/E26
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
incisor
incisor
humerus
humerus
mandible
incisor
femur
femur
incisor
right
–
–
–
–
distal end right
proximal
end
right
–
–
fragment
right
right
–
proximal
end
proximal
end
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Modification
–
–
Burn
Taxa
Count
Element
Part
Side
Type
Thomomys bottae
1
incisor
–
–
–
Common
Name
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
lower
upper
–
–
without teeth
–
–
–
lower
upper
Comments
181
S74/E19 90-100 Thomomys bottae 1
882A
882A
882A
902A
902A
902A
902A
902A
902A
1
humerus
mandible
incisor
incisor
mandible
mandible
incisor
incisor
mandible
–
–
–
–
right
–
–
–
distal end right
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
left
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Modification
–
left
fragment
fragment
whole
whole
fragment
CataLevel
Burn
Unit
Taxa
Count
Element
Part
Side
logue #
(cm)
Type
882A S74/E19 90-100 Thomomys bottae
1
mandible
fragment left
–
Common
Name
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
–
without teeth
upper
lower
with incisor
with incisor
lower
upper
without teeth
with incisor
Comments
182
919A
919A
933A
919A
933A
919A
919A
933A
919A
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
mandible
mandible
premaxilla
humerus
mandible
mandible
mandible
mandible
mandible
left
–
left
left
–
–
–
left
left
right
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Modification
–
–
right burned
distal end
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
CataLevel
Burn
Unit
Taxa
Count
Element
Part
Side
logue #
(cm)
Type
919A
2
incisor
–
–
–
Common
Name
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
without teeth
with incisor
with incisor
–
without teeth
with incisor,
premolar, and 2
molars
with incisor
with incisor
singed; without
teeth
lower
Comments
183
933A
947A
947A
947A
947A
947A
947A
947A
947A
2
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
2
humerus
humerus
incisor
mandible
mandible
mandible
mandible
maxilla
incisor
left
left
right
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
distal end
left
right
–
–
whole
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Modification
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
CataLevel
Burn
Unit
Taxa
Count
Element
Part
Side
logue #
(cm)
Type
1
incisor
–
–
–
Common
Name
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
–
–
lower
without teeth
without teeth
without teeth
with premolar
and 2 molars
without teeth
lower
upper
Comments
184
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
957A
957A
1087A
1087A
1087A
1104A
1104A
70-80
70-80
60-70
60-70
Thomomys bottae
Thomomys bottae
Thomomys bottae
Thomomys bottae
Thomomys bottae
957A
60-70
957A
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
mandible
mandible
incisor
mandible
mandible
femur
humerus
incisor
incisor
–
–
–
–
–
right
–
left
left
fragment
–
–
fragment
fragment
right
–
–
–
–
proximal
end
left
–
–
–
proximal
end
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Modification
–
–
CataLevel
Burn
Unit
Taxa
Count
Element
Part
Side
logue #
(cm)
Type
1
femur
proximal right
–
end
Common
Name
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
without teeth
with incisor
lower
without teeth
with incisor and
premolar
–
epiphysis
present
lower
upper
–
Comments
185
70-80
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
1104A
1104A
1104A
1115A
1132A
1132A
1139A
1139A
1139A
80-90
80-90
80-90
80-90
80-90
70-80
70-80
70-80
Level
(cm)
70-80
CataUnit
logue #
1104A S76/E19
Thomomys bottae
Thomomys bottae
Thomomys bottae
Thomomys bottae
Thomomys bottae
Thomomys bottae
Thomomys bottae
Thomomys bottae
Thomomys bottae
3
1
1
2
2
1
2
1
1
incisor
mandible
mandible
incisor
mandible
mandible
molar
premolar
incisor
–
–
–
right
right
–
left
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Burn
Taxa
Count
Element
Part
Side
Type
Thomomys bottae
3
incisor
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Modification
–
Common
Name
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
upper
without teeth
with incisor and
2 premolars
lower
without teeth
without teeth
–
–
lower
upper
Comments
186
S76/E19
1148A
1164A
1164A
1164A
1164A
1164A
1164A
1183A
80-90
80-90
S76/E19
1139A
Thomomys bottae
Thomomys bottae
Level
(cm)
80-90
CataUnit
logue #
1139A S76/E19
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
mandible
femur
premolar
incisor
mandible
mandible
mandible
mandible
tibia
–
–
fragment
right
–
–
–
–
–
distal end
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
right
right
left
left
–
Modification
–
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
distal end
Burn
Taxa
Count
Element
Part
Side
Type
Thomomys bottae
2
premolar
–
–
–
Common
Name
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
with incisor
–
–
upper
with premolar
and 3 molars
with incisor
with incisor
with incisor
–
–
Comments
187
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
1183A
1198A
1198A
1198A
1222A
1222A
1222A
1101120
1101120
Thomomys bottae
Thomomys bottae
Thomomys bottae
1183A
1101120
1183A
1
3
2
1
1
2
1
1
4
mandible
mandible
cranial
femur
incisor
mandible
humerus
scapula
incisor
–
left
right
–
–
–
right
–
right
right
–
whole
left
left
–
distal end
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Modification
–
–
–
CataLevel
Burn
Unit
Taxa
Count
Element
Part
Side
logue #
(cm)
Type
1
premaxilla
–
–
–
Common
Name
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
with incisor
with incisor
without teeth
epiphysis
unfused
lower
without teeth
–
–
upper
without teeth
Comments
188
S74/E19
S53/E26
S74/E19 130-140 Microtus
californicus
S76/E19
1222A
1222A
1223A
870A
669A
947A
1132A
80-90
70-80
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Dipodomys sp.
1222A
80-90
1222A
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
incisor
premolar/molar
femur
femur
tibia
femur
humerus
premaxilla
incisor
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
right
–
–
whole
–
proximal
end
whole
distal end
right
–
–
–
left
proximal
end
–
–
–
distal end right
–
–
–
–
–
–
Modification
–
–
–
–
CataLevel
Burn
Unit
Taxa
Count
Element
Part
Side
logue #
(cm)
Type
1
mandible
–
right
–
Common
Name
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Botta's
Pocket
Gopher
Kangaroo
Rat
California
Meadow
Vole
California
Meadow
Vole
California
Meadow
Vole
lower
–
epiphysis
unfused
–
–
–
–
without teeth
upper
without teeth
Comments
189
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19 100-110 Canis sp.
S76/E19 100-110 Canis sp.
S76/E19 130-140 Canis sp.
S41/E19 60-70 Procyon lotor
S76/E19 110-120 Procyon lotor
S74/E19 90-100 Carnivora
1115A
1183A
1183A
1222A
221a
1198A
882A
1115A
1164A
870A
355a
698A
947A
70-80
60-70
70-80
Canis sp.
Canis sp.
Canis sp.
Canis sp.
1087A
1115A
80-90
S74/E19
870A
Microtus
californicus
Taxa
S52/E26 90-100 Canis sp.
S53/E26 60-70 Canis sp.
Level
(cm)
80-90
496A
656A
CataUnit
logue #
1132A S76/E19
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
phalanx
phalanx
phalanx
premolar
incisor
premolar or molar
metapodial
astragalus
mandible
ulna
metapodial
metapodial
cranial
humerus
mandible
femur
tibia
metapodial
Modification
–
whole
whole
whole
distal end
distal end
–
–
–
left
–
burned
burned
–
–
–
–
burned
–
–
chopped
off
distal end right
–
chopped
off
whole
right
–
–
fragment left burned chopped
off
fragment
–
–
chopped
off
whole
–
–
–
proximal
–
–
chopped
end
off
whole
–
–
–
fragment
–
–
–
proximal left
–
chopped
end
off
fragment
–
–
–
fragment
–
–
–
fragment
–
–
–
distal end
–
–
–
Burn
Count
Element
Part
Side
Type
1
mandible
–
right
–
Carnivores
Carnivores
Carnivores
Carnivores
Carnivores
Carnivores
Carnivores
Canids
Raccoon
Raccoon
Canids
Canids
Canids
Canids
Canids
Canids
Common
Name
California
Meadow
Vole
Canids
Canids
–
–
–
epiphysis;
unfused
–
singed
–
–
–
–
rear of sagital
crest present
–
–
–
–
–
unfused
–
without teeth
Comments
190
CataLevel
Burn
Unit
Taxa
Count
Element
Part
Side
logue #
(cm)
Type
1087A S76/E19 60-70 Carnivora
1
phalanx
whole
–
–
1115A S76/E19 70-80 Carnivora
1
phalanx
distal
–
–
portion
509A S52/E26 100-110 Cervus elaphus
1
3rd phalanx
whole
–
–
nannodes
221A S41/E19 60-70 Odocoileus
1
mandible
–
left
–
hemionus
columbianus
1
maxilla
fragment right
–
hemionus
columbianus
1
premolar
whole
right
–
hemionus
columbianus
1
pelvis
fragment right
–
hemionus
columbianus
1
3rd phalanx
whole
–
–
hemionus
columbianus
1
3rd phalanx
whole
–
–
hemionus
columbianus
1
3rd phalanx
whole
–
–
hemionus
columbianus
656A S53/E26 60-70 Artiodactyla
1
cranial
fragment
–
–
Black-tailed
Deer
Black-tailed
Deer
Black-tailed
Deer
–
–
–
–
–
acetabulum
present
upper
chopped Artiodactyls large artiodactyl
off
Black-tailed
Deer
–
off
Deer
–
chopped Black-tailed with molar 1 and
off
Deer
molar 2
rear ch(?)
Common
Comments
Name
Carnivores
–
Carnivores proximal end cut
off
Tule Elk
–
off
Deer
–
Modification
–
–
191
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19 110-120 Artiodactyla
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
831A
847A
847A
847A
870A
919A
1087A
1087A
1087A
1115A
1183A
60-70
60-70
60-70
60-70
60-70
80-90
70-80
70-80
70-80
60-70
60-70
S76/E19
1087A
Artiodactyla
Artiodactyla
Artiodactyla
Artiodactyla
Artiodactyla
Artiodactyla
Artiodactyla
Artiodactyla
Artiodactyla
Artiodactyla
Artiodactyla
Artiodactyla
Taxa
Level
(cm)
60-70
CataUnit
logue #
656A S53/E26
1
1
3
3
3
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
premolar or molar
sesamoid
metacarpal
mandible
premolar or molar
sesamoid
premolar or molar
metapodial
metapodial
tibia
premolar or molar
rib
fragment
–
–
–
–
–
proximal
end
fragment
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
fragment
fragment
fragment
distal
portion
distal end
distal end
fragment
fragment
ModiCommon
Comments
fication
Name
chopped Artiodactyls large artiodactyl;
off
axial
–
chopped Artiodactyls large artiodactyl;
off
axial
–
–
Artiodactyls
medium
artiodactyl
–
chopped Artiodactyls
medium
off
artiodactyl
–
medium
off
artiodactyl
–
–
Artiodactyls
medium
artiodactyl;
unfused
–
–
Artiodactyls
medium
artiodactyl
–
–
Artiodactyls
medium
artiodactyl
–
–
Artiodactyls
medium
artiodactyl
–
medium
off
artiodactyl
–
medium
off
artiodactyl
burned
–
Artiodactyls
medium
artiodactyl;
singed
–
–
Artiodactyls
medium
artiodactyl
Burn
Count
Element
Part
Side
Type
1
vertebra
fragment
–
–
192
S52/E25
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
1208A
1208A
1208A
1208A
349A
509A
656A
656A
679A
80-90
60-70
60-70
Artiodactyla
Artiodactyla
Artiodactyla
Artiodactyla
1198A
70-80
1198A
Artiodactyla
Taxa
Level
(cm)
60-70
1198A
CataUnit
logue #
1183A S76/E19
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
metapodial
phalanx
cranial
maxilla
phalanx
phalanx
rib
vertebra
premolar or molar
phalanx
rib
distal
portion
distal end
fragment
distal
portion
fragment
distal end
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
fragment
–
–
Artiodactyls
off
–
Artiodactyls
–
ModiCommon
fication
Name
off
–
Artiodactyls
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
chopped
off
chopped
off
chopped
off
chopped
off
chopped
off
chopped
off
chopped
off
Artiodactyls
Artiodactyls
Artiodactyls
Artiodactyls
Artiodactyls
Artiodactyls
Artiodactyls
burned chopped Artiodactyls
off
–
–
–
–
–
Burn
Count
Element
Part
Side
Type
1
tibia
proximal
–
–
end
1
cranial
fragment
–
–
medium
artiodactyl
medium
artiodactyl;
auditory region
medium
artiodactyl; axial
medium
artiodactyl
medium
artiodactyl
medium
artiodactyl; one
side burnt
medium
artiodactyl
medium
artiodactyl
medium
artiodactyl
medium
artiodactyl
medium
artiodactyl
medium
artiodactyl
medium
artiodactyl
Comments
193
S52/E25
S52/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
1222A
349A
489A
518A
679A
679A
831A
847A
847A
870A
1087A
1087A
1104A
70-80
60-70
60-70
80-90
70-80
70-80
60-70
80-90
80-90
80-90
70-80
80-90
S53/E26
679A
Anseriformes
Anseriformes
Anseriformes
Anseriformes
Anseriformes
Anseriformes
Anseriformes
Anseriformes
Anseriformes
Anseriformes
Anseriformes
Artiodactyla
Artiodactyla
Taxa
Level
(cm)
80-90
CataUnit
logue #
679A S53/E26
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
cranial
carpometacarpus
tibiotarsus
carpometacarpus
tarsometatarsus
tibiotarsus
humerus
tarsometatarsus
sternum
bill tip
mandible
coracoid
phalanx
–
–
–
fragment
–
proximal right
end
proximal right
end
whole
left
distal end left
distal end right
proximal right
end
distal end right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
fragment
fragment
–
–
–
left
distal end right
distal end
off
chopped
Ducks
off
chopped
Ducks
off
chopped
Ducks
off
chopped
Ducks
off
chopped
Ducks
off
chopped
Ducks
off
chopped
Ducks
off
chopped
Ducks
off
chopped
Ducks
off
–
Ducks
chopped
Ducks
off
–
Ducks
Burn ModiCommon
Count
Element
Part
Side
Type fication
Name
1
metatarsal
shaft
–
burned chopped Artiodactyls
off
2
carpal or tarsal
whole
–
–
–
Artiodactyls
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
medium
artiodactyl
medium
artiodactyl
medium
artiodactyl
–
Comments
194
80-90
S76/E19
1139A
1222a
1
humerus
Source: Bouey and Waechter 1994; Note: no weights were presented
Level
(cm)
70-80
CataUnit
logue #
1115A S76/E19
distal end right
–
Burn
Taxa
Count
Element
Part
Side
Type
Anseriformes
1
humerus
proximal right
–
end
Anseriformes
1
tibiotarsus
distal end right
–
Modification
chopped
off
chopped
off
chopped
off
Ducks
Ducks
Common
Name
Ducks
–
–
–
Comments
195
Unit
S41/E19
S41/E19
S41/E19
S41/E19
S41/E19
S41/E19
S41/E19
S41/E19
S41/E19
S41/E19
S41/E19
S41/E19
S41/E19
S41/E19
S41/E19
Catalogue #
221B
221B
221B
221B
221B
221B
221B
221B
221B
221B
221B
221B
221B
221B
221B
Taxa
60-70 Catostomus occidentalis
60-70 Cyprinidae
60-70 Cyprinidae/Catostomidae
Level
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
7
3
Count
metapterygoid
postcleithrum
scapular
hyomandibular
sphenotic
1st vertebra
epibranchial
pharyngeal arch
dentary
cleithrum
pleural rib 4
ceratohyal
autosphenotic
abdominal
vertebra
caudal vertebra
Element
Table B-8. SAC-133 Middle Period Fish.
left
left
right
left
right
–
left
right
left
left
right
left
left
–
–
Side
Burn
Common
Comments
Type
Name
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Minnows
–
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
196
Unit
S41/E19
S52/E25
S52/E25
S52/E25
S52/E25
S52/E25
S52/E25
S52/E25
S52/E25
S52/E25
S52/E25
S52/E25
S52/E25
S52/E25
S52/E25
Catalogue #
221B
338B
338B
338B
349B
349B
349B
349B
355B
355B
355B
355B
355B
363B
363B
Taxa
90-110 Cyprinidae
90-110 Cyprinidae
80-90 Orthodon microlepidotus
Level
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
tooth
articular
caudal vertebra
ceratohyal
quadrate
2nd vertebra
basioccipital
abdominal
vertebra
metapterygoid
cleithrum
cleithrum
caudal vertebra
supraoccipital
basioccipital
opercle
Element
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
left
–
–
right
–
–
–
right
–
–
–
right
–
left
–
–
right
right
Burn
Type
–
Side
Common
Comments
Name
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Minnows and
–
Suckers
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Minnows and
–
Suckers
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Sacramento
–
Blackfish
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Minnows and
–
Suckers
Minnows
–
Minnows
–
197
Unit
S52/E25
S52/E25
S52/E25
S52/E25
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
Catalogue #
363B
363B
363B
363B
363B
459B
459B
459B
459B
459B
459B
459B
459B
459B
459B
Taxa
60-70 Cyprinidae
60-70 Cyprinidae
60-70 Cyprinidae
60-70 Mylopharodon
conocephalus
60-70 Mylopharodon
conocephalus
60-70 Ptychocheilus grandis
Level
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
6
1
Count
cleithrum
epiotic
frontal
palatine
cleithrum
urohyal
abdominal
vertebra
basipterygium
pharyngeal arch
pharyngeal arch
maxillary
abdominal
vertebra
ceratohyal
caudal vertebra
1st vertebra
Element
right
left
right
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
right
–
–
–
left
–
–
–
right
right
right
–
–
–
right
–
Burn
Type
–
–
–
Side
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
Minnows
Minnows
Minnows
Sacramento
Pikeminnow
Minnows and
Suckers
Hardhead
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Common
Comments
Name
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Minnows and
–
Suckers
Minnows and
–
Suckers
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Hardhead
–
198
Unit
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
Catalogue #
459B
459B
476B
476B
476B
476B
476B
489B
489B
489B
489B
489B
489B
496B
496B
Taxa
80-90 Pogonichthys
macrolepidotus
70-80 Cyprinidae
70-80 Mylopharodon
conocephalus
60-70 Mylopharodon
conocephalus
Level
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
2
3
1
1
1
1
1
Count
abdominal
vertebra
cleithrum
quadrate
metapterygoid
pharyngeal arch
pharyngeal arch
abdominal
vertebra
caudal vertebra
interopercle
subopercle
metapterygoid
quadrate
basipterygium
pterygiophore
pharyngeal arch
Element
Sacramento
Sucker
Minnows and
Suckers
Sacramento
Sucker
Minnows and
Suckers
Minnows and
Suckers
Sacramento
Pikeminnow
Sacramento
Splittail
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
Minnows and
Suckers
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
left
left
left
right
–
–
–
left
–
–
left
right
right
–
–
–
left
left
Minnows and
Suckers
Minnows
Hardhead
–
right
Common
Name
Hardhead
Burn
Type
–
Side
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Comments
199
Unit
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
Catalogue #
496B
496B
496B
496B
496B
496B
496B
496B
503B
503B
503B
503B
509B
509B
509B
Taxa
90-100 Cyprinidae
90-100 Archoplites interruptus
90-100 Mylopharodon
conocephalus
90-100 Cyprinidae
90-100 Oncorhynchus tshawytscha
Level
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
supraethmoid
abdominal
vertebra
caudal vertebra
coracoid
tripus
maxillary
1st vertebra
hyomandibular
opercle
prevomer
pharyngeal arch
2nd vertebra
preopercle
vertebra
caudal vertebra
Element
–
–
–
–
–
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
right
–
–
–
Sacramento
Sucker
Minnows
Sacramento
Perch
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
Minnows and
Suckers
Minnows and
Suckers
Minnows and
Suckers
Minnows and
Suckers
Sacramento
Sucker
Feature 2
Feature 2
Feature 2
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Burn
Common
Comments
Type
Name
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Chinook
–
Salmon
–
Minnows
–
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Hardhead
–
right
right
–
right
–
left
–
–
Side
200
Unit
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S52/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
Catalogue #
509B
509B
509B
509B
518B
518B
518B
518B
518B
521B
521B
521B
656B
656B
656B
656B
Taxa
120-126 Cyprinidae
120-126 Cyprinidae
100-110 Cyprinidae
100-110 Cyprinidae
Level
3
7
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
Count
vertebra
abdominal
vertebra
caudal vertebra
subopercle
1st vertebra
hypural
vertebra
caudal vertebra
neural complex
interopercle
hypural
abdominal
vertebra
supracleithrum
hyomandibular
basipterygium
pleural rib 4
Element
–
–
–
left
–
–
–
–
–
right
left
–
–
left
right
left
Side
Common
Comments
Name
Sacramento
Feature 2
Sucker
–
Minnows
Feature 2
–
Sacramento
Feature 2
Sucker
–
Minnows
Feature 2
–
Minnows and Feature 2
Suckers
–
Sacramento
Feature 2
Sucker
–
Sacramento
Feature 2
Sucker
–
Sacramento
Feature 2
Sucker
–
Suckers
–
Minnows
Feature 2
–
Suckers
–
Minnow
Feature 2
–
Sacramento
–
Perch
burnt Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
Burn
Type
–
201
Unit
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
Catalogue #
656B
656B
656B
656B
656B
656B
656B
656B
656B
656B
656B
656B
656B
656B
656B
Taxa
60-70 Cyprinidae
Level
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
6
Count
pharyngeal arch
quadrate
opercle
dentary
palatine
dentary
scapular
hypural
basipterygium
preopercle
opercle
palatine
ceratohyal
abdominal
vertebra
ceratohyal
Element
right
right
right
left
left
right
left
–
right
right
right
right
left
right
–
Side
Burn
Common
Comments
Type
Name
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Perch
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Minnows
–
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
202
Unit
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
Catalogue #
669B
669B
669B
669B
669B
669B
669B
669B
669B
669B
669B
669B
669B
669B
669B
Taxa
70-80 Orthodon microlepidotus
70-80 Cyprinidae
70-80 Mylopharodon
conocephalus
Level
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
8
1
8
1
Count
vertebra
ceratohyal
pharyngeal arch
neural complex
opercle
opercle
maxillary
abdominal
vertebra
basioccipital
1st vertebra
caudal vertebra
caudal vertebra
abdominal
vertebra
pharyngeal arch
1st vertebra
Element
–
left
left
–
left
right
left
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Common
Comments
Name
Sacramento
–
Perch
Minnows and
–
Suckers
Hardhead
–
Minnows and
Suckers
burnt Minnows and
Suckers
–
Sacramento
Sucker
burnt Minnows and
Suckers
–
Sacramento
Sucker
–
Minnows
–
Sacramento
Sucker
burnt Sacramento
Sucker
–
Sacramento
Sucker
–
Sacramento
Blackfish
–
Sacramento
Sucker
–
Minnows and
Suckers
–
–
Burn
Type
burnt
right
–
–
Side
203
Unit
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
Catalogue #
669B
669B
669B
669B
669B
679B
679B
679B
679B
679B
679B
691B
691B
691B
691B
Taxa
90-100 Cyprinidae
70-80 Cyprinidae
70-80 Cyprinidae
Level
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
6
1
1
4
1
1
1
Count
scapular
abdominal
vertebra
caudal vertebra
opercle
scapular
pharyngeal arch
pharyngeal arch
CTX?
ceratohyal
abdominal
vertebra
abdominal
vertebra
caudal vertebra
tripus
opercle
epihyal
Element
right
–
–
right
right
right
left
–
–
–
right
–
left
left
left
Side
Common
Comments
Name
Minnows
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Minnows
–
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
burnt Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Minnows and unknown
Suckers
bone
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Perch
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Minnows
–
Burn
Type
–
–
204
Unit
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S53/E26
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
Catalogue #
698B
698B
698B
698B
698B
831B
831B
831B
831B
831B
831B
831B
831B
831B
831B
Taxa
60-70 Cyprinidae
60-70 Mylopharodon
conocephalus
60-70 Mylopharodon
conocephalus
60-70 Mylopharodon
conocephalus
Level
1
1
1
1
1
1
9
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
4
Count
epihyal
basioccipital
frontal
tripus
caudal vertebra
abdominal
vertebra
pterygiophore
ceratohyal
pharyngeal arch
ceratohyal
abdominal
vertebra
tripus
abdominal
vertebra
vertebra
caudal vertebra
Element
left
–
left
–
–
–
–
left
left
left
–
–
–
–
Side
–
Hardhead
Minnows and
Suckers
–
Minnows and
Suckers
burnt Minnows and
Suckers
–
Sacramento
Sucker
–
Minnows
–
Hardhead
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Burn
Common
Comments
Type
Name
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Sacramento
–
Perch
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Pikeminnow
–
Hardhead
–
205
Unit
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
Catalogue #
831B
831B
831B
831B
831B
831B
847B
847B
847B
847B
847B
847B
847B
847B
847B
Taxa
70-80 Cyprinidae
60-70 Mylopharodon
conocephalus
Level
1
1
1
1
1
3
7
1
7
10
1
1
1
2
1
Count
pharyngeal arch
caudal vertebra
1st vertebra
branchiostegal
parasphenoid
caudal vertebra
caudal vertebra
abdominal
vertebra
vertebra
caudal vertebra
caudal vertebra
ceratohyal
pharyngeal arch
vertebra
articular
Element
left
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
right
left
–
left
Side
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Common
Comments
Name
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Minnows and
–
Suckers
Hardhead
–
Sacramento
Sucker
–
Sacramento
Perch
–
Minnows and
Suckers
–
Minnows and
Suckers
–
Minnows and
Suckers
–
Minnows and
Suckers
burnt Minnows and
Suckers
–
Sacramento
Sucker
–
Minnows
–
Minnows and
Suckers
burnt Sacramento
Perch
–
Sacramento
Pikeminnow
–
–
–
Burn
Type
–
206
Unit
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
Catalogue #
847B
847B
847B
847B
847B
847B
847B
847B
852B
852B
870B
870B
870B
870B
870B
Taxa
70-80 Acipenser sp.
70-80 Mylopharodon
conocephalus
Level
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
Count
pharyngeal arch
caudal vertebra
abdominal
vertebra
autosphenotic
caudal vertebra
caudal vertebra
vertebra
quadrate
maxillary
abdominal
vertebra
ceratohyal
scute
quadrate
pterygiophore
pharyngeal arch
Element
–
left
–
right
–
–
–
–
right
right
left
–
–
left
–
right
Common
Name
Hardhead
Minnows and
Suckers
–
Sturgeon
–
Sacramento
Sucker
–
Sacramento
Perch
–
Sacramento
Pikeminnow
–
Sacramento
Sucker
–
Sacramento
Sucker
–
Minnows and
Suckers
–
Minnows and
Suckers
burnt Minnows and
Suckers
burnt Sacramento
Perch
–
Sacramento
Sucker
–
Minnows and
Suckers
–
Sacramento
Sucker
Burn
Type
–
Side
–
–
–
–
Feature
B5a/b
Feature
B5a/b
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Comments
207
Unit
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
Catalogue #
870B
870B
870B
870B
870B
870B
870B
870B
870B
870B
870B
870B
870B
870B
870B
Taxa
80-90 Cyprinidae
80-90 Cyprinidae
Level
1
1
1
8
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
4
Count
dentary
metapterygoid
abdominal
vertebra
neural complex
ceratohyal
branchiostegal
hyomandibular
basioccipital
pharyngeal arch
quadrate
1st vertebra
articular
2nd vertebra
enterotic
vertebra
Element
right
left
–
–
left
–
left
–
left
left
–
left
–
left
–
Side
Burn
Common
Comments
Type
Name
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Minnows
–
–
Minnows
–
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
burnt Sacramento
–
Pikeminnow
–
Sacramento
–
Pikeminnow
–
Sacramento
–
Pikeminnow
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
208
Unit
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
Catalogue #
870B
870B
870B
870B
870B
870B
870B
870B
882B
882B
882B
882B
882B
882B
882B
882B
Taxa
90-100 Cyprinidae
90-100 Cyprinidae
80-90 Mylopharodon
conocephalus
80-90 Cyprinidae
80-90 Acipenser sp.
Level
13
2
4
3
1
3
3
2
9
1
1
2
1
1
8
1
Count
caudal vertebra
1st vertebra
vertebra
caudal vertebra
basioccipital
vertebra
abdominal
vertebra
2nd vertebra
1st vertebra
parasphenoid
pharyngeal arch
1st vertebra
pharyngeal arch
scute
caudal vertebra
quadrate
Element
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Common
Comments
Name
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Sturgeon
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
Minnow
–
Sacramento
–
Pikeminnow
Hardhead
–
Sacramento
Sucker
–
Minnows and
Suckers
–
Minnows
–
Sacramento
Sucker
burnt Minnows and
Suckers
–
Sacramento
Sucker
burnt Minnows and
Suckers
–
Minnows
–
Minnows and
Suckers
–
Minnows and
Suckers
–
–
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
right
right
Burn
Type
–
Side
209
Unit
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
Catalogue #
882B
882B
882B
882B
882B
882B
882B
882B
882B
882B
882B
882B
882B
882B
882B
Taxa
90-100 Cyprinidae
90-100 Cyprinidae
90-100 Mylopharodon
conocephalus
Level
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
Count
preopercle
basipterygium
pleural rib 4
quadrate
articular
neural spine
maxillary
pleural rib 4
hyomandibular
dentary
pharyngeal arch
pharyngeal arch
pharyngeal arch
abdominal
vertebra
ceratohyal
Element
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Pikeminnow
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
Minnows
Minnows
Sacramento
Sucker
–
–
–
–
–
left
–
left
right
–
–
–
left
–
–
–
right
–
–
–
–
–
Common
Name
Sacramento
Pikeminnow
Sacramento
Sucker
Hardhead
Burn
Type
–
right
left
left
right
right
left
–
Side
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Comments
210
Unit
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
Catalogue #
882B
882B
882B
882B
882B
882B
882B
902B
902B
902B
902B
902B
902B
902B
902B
Taxa
100-110 Cyprinidae
90-100 Cyprinidae
90-100 Mylopharodon
conocephalus
Level
1
9
1
1
3
1
1
6
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
Count
neural complex
caudal vertebra
pleural rib 4
palatine
abdominal
vertebra
abdominal
vertebra
abdominal
vertebra
vertebra
pectoral spine
basipterygium
pharyngeal arch
articular
pterygiophore
metapterygoid
frontal
Element
–
–
left
left
–
–
–
–
–
right
left
right
–
right
left
Side
Common
Name
Hardhead
Sacramento
Sucker
–
Minnows
–
Minnows and
Suckers
–
Sacramento
Sucker
–
Sacramento
Sucker
–
Sacramento
Perch
–
Minnows and
Suckers
burnt Minnows and
Suckers
–
Sacramento
Perch
–
Minnows and
Suckers
–
Minnow
–
Sacramento
Sucker
–
Minnows and
Suckers
–
Sacramento
Sucker
–
Burn
Type
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Comments
211
Unit
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
Catalogue #
902B
902B
902B
902B
902B
902B
902B
902B
902B
919B
919B
919B
919B
919B
919B
Taxa
100-110 Cyprinidae
Level
3
1
1
1
2
3
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
Count
ceratohyal
quadrate
preopercle
preopercle
abdominal
vertebra
vertebra
cleithrum
1st vertebra
vertebra
caudal vertebra
vertebra
pleural rib 4
basioccipital
palatine
terminal vertebra
Element
right
left
left
left
–
–
left
–
–
–
–
right
–
right
–
Side
Burn
Common
Comments
Type
Name
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Pikeminnow
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
burnt Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Minnows
–
–
Chinook
–
Salmon
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
212
Unit
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
Catalogue #
919B
919B
919B
919B
919B
919B
919B
919B
919B
919B
919B
919B
919B
919B
933B
933B
Taxa
110-120 Cyprinidae
110-120 Cyprinidae
110-120 Cyprinidae
110-120 Cyprinidae
Level
6
1
4
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
7
1
1
1
1
Count
caudal vertebra
pharyngeal arch
vertebra
pleural rib 4
basipterygium
articular
ceratohyal
caudal vertebra
1st vertebra
dentary
articular
caudal vertebra
epihyal
basioccipital
basipterygium
2nd vertebra
Element
–
right
–
left
left
right
left
–
–
left
left
–
right
–
–
–
Side
Common
Comments
Name
Minnows
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Minnows
–
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Minnows
–
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
burnt Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Minnows
–
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
burnt Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Sacramento
–
Pikeminnow
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
Burn
Type
–
–
213
Unit
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
Catalogue #
933B
933B
933B
933B
933B
933B
933B
933B
933B
933B
933B
947B
947B
947B
947B
Taxa
Level
6
9
1
7
1
1
1
1
1
5
2
1
1
1
1
Count
vertebra
vertebra
abdominal
vertebra
caudal vertebra
enterotic
pleural rib 4
prevomer
abdominal
vertebra
abdominal
vertebra
neural complex
caudal vertebra
vertebra
tripus
metapterygoid
tripus
Element
–
–
–
–
right
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
right
left
left
Side
Common
Comments
Name
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
burnt Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
burnt Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Salmon
–
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
Burn
Type
–
214
Unit
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
S74/E19
Catalogue #
947B
947B
947B
947B
947B
947B
947B
947B
947B
957B
957B
957B
957B
957B
957B
Taxa
140-150 Cyprinidae
140-150 Cyprinidae
Level
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
tooth
abdominal
vertebra
cleithrum
2nd vertebra
abdominal
vertebra
caudal vertebra
dentary
ceratohyal
hyomandibular
hyomandibular
urohyal
ceratohyal
interopercle
abdominal
vertebra
enterotic
Element
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
left
–
–
–
–
right
left
right
–
–
–
left
–
–
–
Burn
Type
–
right
left
left
–
Side
Common
Comments
Name
Sacramento
–
Perch
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Sacramento
–
Pikeminnow
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Sacramento
–
Perch
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Minnows and
–
Suckers
Minnows and
–
Suckers
Sacramento
–
Perch
Minnows
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Minnows
–
215
Unit
S74/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
Catalogue #
957B
1087B
1087B
1087B
1087B
1087B
1087B
1087B
1087B
1087B
1087B
1087B
1087B
1087B
Taxa
Level
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
5
6
1
Count
metapterygoid
quadrate
vertebra
pleural rib 4
parasphenoid
pleural rib 4
maxillary
metapterygoid
caudal vertebra
1st vertebra
hyomandibular
abdominal
vertebra
caudal vertebra
pharyngeal arch
Element
–
–
right
–
–
–
–
right
–
–
–
left
–
–
right
left
–
–
–
left
–
–
–
right
–
Burn
Type
–
–
left
Side
Common
Comments
Name
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Minnows and
–
Suckers
Minnows and
–
Suckers
Sacramento
–
Pikeminnow
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Chinook
–
Salmon
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Minnows and
–
Suckers
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Sacramento
–
Sucker
216
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
1087B
1087B
1087B
1087B
1087B
1087B
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
1104B
1104B
1104B
1087B
1104B
1087B
1087B
1087B
S76/E19
1087B
Taxa
Level
70-80 Cyprinidae
60-70 Mylopharodon
conocephalus
S76/E19
60-70 Cyprinidae
Ptychocheilus grandis
S76/E19
60-70
Catostomus occidentalis
S76/E19
60-70
Archoplites interruptus
S76/E19
60-70
S76/E19
Unit
Catalogue #
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
articular
2nd vertebra
abdominal
vertebra
abdominal
vertebra
hyomandibular
caudal vertebra
dentary
opercle
pharyngeal arch
dentary
basioccipital
prevomer
interopercle
basipterygium
vertebra
Element
–
–
right
right
–
–
–
–
left
right
left
Common
Name
Chinook
Salmon
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
Hardhead
Minnows
Sacramento
–
Pikeminnow
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Sacramento
–
Perch
burnt Sacramento
Perch
–
Minnows
–
Sacramento
Perch
–
Sacramento
Sucker
–
–
–
–
–
left
–
–
Burn
Type
–
right
right
–
Side
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Comments
217
Unit
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
Catalogue #
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
Taxa
70-80 Cyprinidae
70-80 Cyprinidae
70-80 Cyprinidae
70-80 Cyprinidae
70-80 Cyprinidae
Level
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
1
1
6
1
1
1
1
1
8
Count
3rd neural
process
hyomandibular
enterotic
abdominal
vertebra
2nd vertebra
ceratohyal
dentary
vertebra
basioccipital
caudal vertebra
scapular
dentary
1st vertebra
maxillary
hyomandibular
vertebra
Element
left
left
–
–
right
–
right
–
–
–
left
left
–
right
left
–
Side
Burn
Common
Comments
Type
Name
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Minnows
–
burnt Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Minnows
–
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Chinook
–
Salmon
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Minnows
–
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Minnow
–
–
Minnow
–
218
Unit
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
Catalogue #
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
Taxa
Level
1
1
1
1
5
1
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
pharyngeal arch
enterotic
caudal vertebra
abdominal
vertebra
parasphenoid
frontal
caudal vertebra
vertebra
hypural
interopercle
quadrate
maxillary
quadrate
tripus
Element
right
left
–
–
–
right
–
–
–
right
left
left
right
left
Side
Common
Comments
Name
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
burnt Sacramento
–
Perch
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Burn
Type
–
219
Unit
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
Catalogue #
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
1104B
Taxa
70-80 Mylopharodon
conocephalus
70-80 Cyprinidae
70-80 Cyprinidae
70-80 Cyprinidae
70-80 Cyprinidae
Level
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
sphenotic
hyomandibular
urohyal
2nd vertebra
maxillary
pharyngeal arch
supracleithrum
neural complex
supracleithrum
basipterygium
abdominal
vertebra
parasphenoid
hyomandibular
prootic
pharyngeal arch
quadrate
Element
Minnows
Minnows
Minnows
Sacramento
Pikeminnow
Sacramento
Sucker
–
–
–
–
–
–
left
left
–
–
left
left
–
–
–
–
–
left
–
right
–
–
–
right
–
–
–
Common
Name
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
Minnows
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Perch
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
Hardhead
Burn
Type
–
right
right
left
left
Side
Feature B3
–
–
Feature B3
Feature B3
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Comments
220
Unit
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
Catalogue #
1104B
1104B
1120B
1120B
1120B
1120B
1120B
1120B
1120B
1120B
1120B
1120B
1120B
1120B
1120B
Taxa
80-90 Cyprinidae
80-90 Cyprinidae
Level
1
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
2nd vertebra
basioccipital
dentary
opercle
ceratohyal
hyomandibular
articular
pharyngeal arch
postcleithrum
palatine
cleithrum
hyomandibular
quadrate
prevomer
postcleithrum
Element
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Burn
Type
–
left
right
right
right
right
left
left
left
right
left
left
–
right
Side
Common
Name
Sacramento
Sucker
Minnows
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Pikeminnow
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
Minnows
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Feature B3
–
Feature B3
Comments
221
Unit
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
Catalogue #
1120B
1120B
1120B
1120B
1120B
1120B
1120B
1120B
1120B
1120B
1120B
1120B
1120B
1120B
1120B
1120B
Taxa
80-90 Cyprinidae
80-90 Cyprinidae
80-90 Mylopharodon
conocephalus
80-90 Cyprinidae
80-90 Cyprinidae
80-90 Cyprinidae
Level
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
Count
2nd vertebra
frontal
basipterygium
pharyngeal arch
interopercle
coracoid
neural spine
cleithrum
urohyal
parasphenoid
cleithrum
enterotic
epibranchial
caudal vertebra
vertebra
1st vertebra
Element
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
right
right
left
right
–
–
–
right
–
–
–
left
–
–
–
–
–
–
right
left
–
Burn
Type
–
–
–
Side
Sacramento
Sucker
–
Common
Comments
Name
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Minnows and
–
Suckers
Minnows and
–
Suckers
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Minnows
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Minnows
–
Minnows
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Sacramento
–
Sucker
Minnows
–
Minnows
–
Hardhead
–
222
Unit
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
Catalogue #
1120B
1120B
1120B
1120B
1120B
1120B
1120B
1120B
1120B
1120B
1120B
1120B
1120B
1120B
1120B
Taxa
80-90 Mylopharodon
conocephalus
80-90 Cyprinidae
Level
1
1
3
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
4
4
1
Count
postcleithrum
supracleithrum
caudal vertebra
neural spine
metapterygoid
ceratohyal
dentary
pharyngeal arch
abdominal
vertebra
cleithrum
abdominal
vertebra
1st vertebra
basipterygium
caudal vertebra
terminal vertebra
Element
–
–
right
–
–
–
–
right
–
–
–
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
Minnows and
Suckers
Minnows and
Suckers
Sacramento
Sucker
Sacramento
Sucker
Burn
Common
Type
Name
–
Minnows and
Suckers
–
Minnows and
Suckers
–
Minnows and
Suckers
–
Minnows
–
Sacramento
Sucker
–
Minnows and
Suckers
–
Sacramento
Sucker
–
Hardhead
left
left
right
right
right
–
–
left
–
–
–
Side
Feature B3
Feature B3
Feature B3
Feature B3
Feature B3
Feature B3
Feature B3
Feature B3
Feature B3
Feature B3
–
Feature B3
–
–
–
Comments
223
Unit
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
S76/E19
Catalogue #
1120B
1164B
1164B
1164B
1164B
1164B
1164B
1164B
1164B
1164B
1164B
1164B
1164B
1164B
Taxa
Level
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
11
2
3
1
1
Count
parietal
parasphenoid
urohyal
tripus
cleithrum
quadrate
branchiostegal
2nd vertebra
caudal vertebra
caudal vertebra
abdominal
vertebra
vertebra
caudal vertebra
parasphenoid
Element
right
–
–
right
right
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Side
Burn
Common
Comments
Type
Name
–
Minnows and Feature B3
Suckers
–
Sacramento
–
Perch
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
burnt Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Perch
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
–
Minnows and
–
Suckers
–
Sacramento
–
Sucker
224
Unit
S76/E19
Catalogue #
1164B
Taxa
Level
1
Count
basipterygium
Element
right
Side
Burn
Type
–
Common
Name
Sacramento
Sucker
–
Comments
225
Level
040-50
040-50
040-50
040-50
040-50
040-50
050-60
050-60
050-60
050-60
050-60
050-60
050-60
050-60
060-70
Unit
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Castor canadensis
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Actinemys
marmorata
Cervus elaphus
nannodes elaphus
Actinemys
marmorata
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Taxa
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
maxilla
humerus
molar
incisor
mandible
marginal
distal phalanx
marginal
molar
distal phalanx
tibia
femur
femur
molar
mandible
Element
Side
left
–
left
right
left
–
–
–
–
–
left
left
–
right
–
Part
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Table B-9. SAC-329 Terrestrial Taxa.
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Western Pond
Turtle
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Western Pond
Turtle
Tule Elk
paired
–
in mandible
listed above
–
–
–
–
–
Burn
Common Name Comments
Type*
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
Beaver
–
–
Tule Elk
–
226
Level
060-70
060-70
060-70
060-70
060-70
060-70
060-70
060-70
060-70
080-90
070-80
070-80
090-100
090-100
090-100
090-100
Unit
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Bufo boreas
Thamnophis sp.
Peromyscus sp.
Actinemys
marmorata
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Castor canadensis
Taxa
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
Count
right
left
–
left
left
right
left
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
metacarpal
femur
femur
mandible
incisor 1
right
–
–
left
lower
left
left
proximal end
molars
present
–
–
–
–
left
–
Side
Part
humerus
proximal end
vertebra
–
mandible
teeth present
costal vertebra
–
humerus
femur
tibia
innominate
molar
mandible
mandible
Element
–
–
–
–
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Beaver
–
–
–
–
Burn
Type*
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
Western Toad
–
–
Garter Snakes
–
–
Deer Mice
–
–
Western Pond
–
Turtle
–
Tule Elk
–
227
Level
090-100
100-110
100-110
100-110
110-120
110-120
230-240
230-240
230-240
230-240
230-240
230-240
230-240
230-240
230-240
Unit
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Microtus
californicus
Carnivora
Procyon lotor
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Taxa
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
4
1
1
1
1
1
Count
vertebra
sacrum
tibia
humerus
humerus
molar
maxilla
–
left
right
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
fragment
–
–
–
–
right
–
left
California
–
Meadow Vole
Carnivores
–
Raccoon
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
California
–
Meadow Vole
California
–
Meadow Vole
California
–
Meadow Vole
California
–
Meadow Vole
California
–
Meadow Vole
California
–
Meadow Vole
California
said more
Meadow Vole than 1 but no
Burn
Type*
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
Black-tailed
–
Deer
–
left
left
upper
proximal end
teeth present
left
right
–
teeth present
Side
Part
upper premolar
–
astragalus
–
mandibles
teeth present
incisor
calcaneum
mandible
mandible
femur
Element
228
Level
230-240
230-240
230-240
240-250
240-250
240-250
240-250
240-250
240-250
240-250
240-250
240-250
240-250
240-250
240-250
240-250
250-260
Unit
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Thamnophis sp.
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Castor canadensis
Castor canadensis
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Peromyscus sp.
Carnivora
Thamnophis sp.
Microtus
californicus
Taxa
1
1
5
6
1
1
1
1
2
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
mandible
canine
vertebra
maxilla
ischium
tibia
femur
incisor
mandible
vertebra
lower molar 1
astragalus
molar
squamosal
maxilla
cervical
vertebra
scaphoid
Element
–
right
left
–
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
left
right
–
left
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
left
–
–
teeth present
Side
Part
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Garter Snakes
–
Raccoon
layer 3
Raccoon
layer 3
Beaver
layer 3
Beaver
layer 3
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
Deer Mice
layer 3
Carnivores
layer 3
Garter Snakes
layer 3
California
layer 3; 3
Meadow Vole pairs maxilla
Black-tailed
Deer
Burn
Type*
amt given
–
Tule Elk
–
229
Level
250-260
250-260
250-260
250-260
250-260
250-260
250-260
250-260
250-260
250-260
260-270
260-270
260-270
260-270
260-270
Unit
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Actinemys
Taxa
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
3
1
1
Count
shell
femur
femur
molar
mandible
femur
incisor
tibia
femur
humerus
humerus
frontal
molar
mandible
mandible
Element
fragment
–
right
–
–
–
left
–
left
left
–
–
right
–
–
left
–
–
–
–
right
–
–
–
right
–
left
left
–
proximal end
Side
Part
Burn
Type*
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
California
layer 3; 1
Meadow Vole
pair
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
Western Pond
layer 3
230
Level
260-270
260-270
260-270
270-280
270-280
270-280
160-170
170-180
170-180
180-190
180-190
180-190
180-190
180-190
190-200
190-200
190-200
Unit
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
9W
9W
9W
9W
9W
9W
9W
9W
9W
9W
9W
cf .Anas
Castor canadensis
cf. Microtus
cf. Mustela
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
cf. Microtus
cf.
Peromyscus
Procyon lotor
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
marmorata
Castor canadensis
Castor canadensis
Mephitis mephitis
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Castor canadensis
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
5
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
right
–
right
–
right
left
left
left
–
–
incisor
present
proximal end
proximal end
right
left
–
anterior ends
–
left
–
terminal
right
right
–
left
Side
–
–
–
teeth present
Part
lower premolar
–
4
tibiotarsus
distal end
scaphoid
–
femur
proximal end
canine
–
femur
femur
mandible
cheek teeth
mandible
astragalus
phalanx
humerus
ilium
ischium
cuboid
mandible
Element
Raccoon
Ducks
Beaver
Voles
Weasels &
–
–
–
–
–
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
Burn
Type*
Turtle
–
Beaver
layer 3
–
Beaver
layer 3
–
Striped Skunk
layer 3
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
California
East Layer 3
Meadow Vole
Posthole
–
Beaver
East Layer 3
Posthole
–
Tule Elk
layer 2 & 3;
1 incisor
present
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
Voles
layer 3
–
Deer Mice
layer 3
231
Level
190-200
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
210-220
210-220
210-220
210-220
220-230
010-020
010-020
020-030
030-040
030-040
Unit
9W
9W
9W
9W
9W
9W
9W
9W
9W
9W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Castor canadensis
Castor canadensis
Microtus
californicus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
cf. Oxyura
cf. Anas
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
burnt
–
–
–
–
–
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
incisor
humerus
supraoccipital
mandible
molar
right
–
left
left
distal end
–
–
–
–
carpometacarpu proximal end
s
molar
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Raccoon
Raccoon
California
Meadow Vole
California
Ruddy Duck
Beaver
Beaver
California
Meadow Vole
Black-tailed
Deer
Tule Elk
Black-tailed
Deer
in mandible
–
–
layer 1
–
layer 3
layer 3
burnt; layer
3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
Burn
Type*
Minks
–
Ducks
small; layer
3
burnt
Tule Elk
layer 3
–
Side
distal end
Part
distal phalanx proximal end
incisor
metacarpal
femur
sacrum
fibula
sesamoid
humerus
Element
232
Level
030-040
030-040
030-040
030-040
030-040
040-050
050-060
050-060
050-060
050-060
050-060
060-070
060-070
060-070
060-070
Unit
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Equs caballus
Equs caballus
Microtus
californicus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Castor canadensis
Passeriformes
cf. Pituophis
Pituophis
melanoleucus
Microtus
californicus
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Castor canadensis
californicus
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
10
16
1
6
2
Count
patella
navicular
phalanx
sesamoid
femur
phalanx
sesamoid
mandible
cheek tooth
humerus
vertebra
vertebra
sesamoid
lower cheek
teeth
molar
Element
Tule Elk
Beaver
–
–
–
–
–
left
–
–
left
–
–
–
–
–
poximal end
–
–
distal
epiphysis
–
distal end
–
–
–
–
–
–
distal end
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Domestic Horse
Domestic Horse
Tule Elk
Tule Elk
California
Meadow Vole
Tule Elk
Beaver
Perching Birds
Gopher Snakes
Gopher Snake
Tule Elk
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
layer 1
layer 1
–
–
layer 1
Burn
Type*
Meadow Vole listed above;
layer 1
–
California
layer 1
Meadow Vole
–
Black-tailed poss. assoc.;
Deer
layer 1
–
Side
–
Part
233
Level
060-070
070-080
080-090
080-090
080-090
080-090
090-100
090-100
150-160
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
170-180
170-180
Unit
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Branta canadensis
Castor canadensis
Microtus
californicus
Anseriformes
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
cf. Thamnophis
Taxa
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
coracoid
distal phalanx
maxilla
sesamoid
vertebra
femur
mandible
molar
tibia
calcaneum
sesamoid
metapodial
humerus
lower molar 1
tibia
upper molar 2
metapodial
Element
right
left
–
–
–
–
–
–
right
–
–
–
–
distal end
–
–
left
left
–
–
–
left
left
right
–
Side
proximal end
–
–
distal end
–
distal end
–
distal
condyle
distal
condyle
Part
Black-tailed
Deer
Canada Goose
Beaver
California
Meadow Vole
–
–
–
–
burnt
–
–
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Garter Snakes
Raccoon
Raccoon
Tule Elk
–
–
–
–
Black-tailed
Deer
–
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
burnt; layer
3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
–
–
–
–
Burn
Type*
–
Waterfowl
–
–
Raccoon
–
–
Raccoon
–
–
Raccoon
–
–
Tule Elk
–
234
Level
170-180
170-180
170-180
180-190
180-190
180-190
180-190
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
200-210
200-210
Unit
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Odocoileus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Anseriformes
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
cf. Thamnophis
Microtus
californicus
Castor canadensis
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
cf. Thamnophis
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Castor canadensis
Castor canadensis
Procyon lotor
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
26
3
1
2
Count
Black-tailed
Deer
–
–
–
–
–
left
–
–
–
–
–
–
mandible
–
left
left
Waterfowl
–
–
right
–
–
fragment
–
–
–
left
–
–
–
–
–
Black-tailed
Black-tailed
Deer
Garter Snakes
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Beaver
Beaver
Raccoon
–
–
–
–
–
–
left
–
–
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
Burn
Type*
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
Garter Snakes
layer 3
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
Beaver
layer 3
–
Tule Elk
layer 3
proximal end
Side
Part
s
astragalus
–
molar
distal phalanx
upper premolar
4
molar
tooth
calcaneum
7th cervical
vertebra
vertebra
mandible
vertebra
molar
femur
molar
Element
235
Level
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
210-220
210-220
210-220
210-220
220-230
Unit
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Odocoileus
Castor canadensis
Microtus
californicus
cf. Procyon
cf. Oxyura
Microtus
californicus
cf. Thamnophis
Actinemys
marmorata
Anseriformes
Castor canadensis
hemionus
columbianus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Castor canadensis
Taxa
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
3
3
Count
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
fragment
proximal
upper premolar
2
trapezoid
–
–
proximal end
–
–
–
–
left
–
–
–
–
–
left
–
–
Black-tailed
Tule Elk
Beaver
California
Meadow Vole
Raccoon
Ruddy Duck
California
Meadow Vole
Garter Snakes
Western Pond
Turtle
Waterfowl
Beaver
Beaver
Black-tailed
Deer
Black-tailed
Deer
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
large bird;
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
in manible
listed above;
layer 3
in manible
listed above;
layer 3
fragment;
layer 3
fragment;
layer 3
layer 3
Burn
Type*
Deer
left
Side
–
Part
s
carpometacarpu carpometaca
s
rpus
molar
–
molar
–
vertebra
marginal
humerus
molar
incisor
lower molar 1-3
lower premolar
1-3
Element
236
Level
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
230-240
240-250
240-250
000-010
000-010
000-010
000-010
000-010
010-020
010-020
Unit
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
6W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
Castor canadensis
Microtus
californicus
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Procyon lotor
hemionus
columbianus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Castor canadensis
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
–
–
–
–
right
innominate
upper premolar
3
maxilla
femur
ischium
ilium
periotic
molar
proximal
phalanx
mandible
–
left
–
right
left
left
left
right
left
left
proximal end
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
California
Meadow Vole
California
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Raccoon
Beaver
California
Meadow Vole
Tule Elk
Beaver
Black-tailed
Deer
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 4
layer 4
–
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
Burn
Type*
Deer
–
Side
–
distal end
Part
proximal
proximal end
phalanx
mandible
anterior end
proximal
phalanx
phalanx
Element
237
Level
010-020
020-030
020-030
020-030
030-040
030-040
030-040
030-040
030-040
030-040
030-040
Unit
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
californicus
Branta canadensis
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Anseriformes
Aves
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Taxa
1
1
3
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
Count
olecranon
molar
lower molar 1-3
lower premolar
2-4
lower canine
humerus
quadrate
mandible
lower incisor 23
coracoid
phalanx
Element
–
right
left
left
left
left
left
–
right
–
–
–
–
–
left
–
Side
distal end
–
–
–
anterior end
distal end
Part
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Black-tailed
Deer
Black-tailed
Deer
Raccoon
Raccoon
Raccoon
Waterfowl
Bird
Raccoon
Raccoon
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
in mandible
listed
above;layer
1
in mandible
listed
above;layer
1
in mandible
listed
above;layer
1
in mandible
listed
above;layer
1
layer 1
Burn
Type*
Meadow Vole
–
Canada Goose
layer 1
–
Tule Elk
layer 1
238
Level
030-040
030-040
040-050
040-050
040-050
050-060
050-060
050-060
050-060
060-070
060-070
150-160
150-160
150-160
150-160
Unit
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Anseriformes
Microtus
californicus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Peromyscus sp.
Anseriformes
Peromyscus sp.
Peromyscus sp.
Anseriformes
Aves
Anseriformes
Anseriformes
Taxa
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
tarsal
ulna
radius
humerus
femur
antler base
pubis
lower molar 2-3
tibiotarsus
tip of beak
coracoid
carpometacarpu
s
tarsometatarsus
mandible
incisor
Element
Black-tailed
Deer
–
–
–
left
–
left
–
proximal end
–
proximal end
left
Waterfowl
California
Meadow Vole
Black-tailed
Deer
–
–
left
–
distal end
proximal end
–
right
–
–
–
–
Black-tailed
Deer
Tule Elk
Tule Elk
Deer Mice
Waterfowl
Deer Mice
Deer Mice
–
–
–
–
right
right
right
–
–
–
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 1
layer 3
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
in mandible
listed above;
layer 1
in mandible
listed above;
layer 1
layer 1
Burn
Type*
–
Waterfowl
layer 1
–
Bird
layer 1
–
Waterfowl
layer 1
–
Waterfowl
layer 1
–
–
right
right
Side
distal end
–
–
–
Part
239
Level
150-160
150-160
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
170-180
170-180
170-180
Unit
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Peromyscus sp.
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Microtus
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
Count
thoracic
vertebra
mandible
femur
humerus
pubis
femur
molar
mandible
mandible
maxilla
astragalus
calcaneum
phalanx
proximal
phalanx
Element
left
–
–
–
right
–
–
teeth present
right
distal end
distal end
–
Tule Elk
–
–
–
–
Tule Elk
California
–
–
–
–
right
–
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Deer Mice
Black-tailed
Deer
Tule Elk
Tule Elk
Black-tailed
Deer
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
left
–
–
–
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
Burn
Type*
–
Black-tailed
layer 3
Deer
left
left
–
proximal end
–
–
–
distal end
Side
Part
240
Level
170-180
180-190
180-190
180-190
180-190
180-190
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
Unit
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
californicus
Castor canadensis
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Canis sp.
Aves
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Taxa
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
2
1
Count
humerus
femur
femur
molar
incisor
mandible
mandible
maxilla
astragalus
humerus
maxilla
femur
molar
molar
maxilla
Element
right
left
–
–
right
right
left
–
–
right
left
left
–
proximal end
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
proximal end
–
left
Side
fragment
–
Part
Burn
Type*
Meadow Vole
–
Beaver
layer 3
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
Canids
layer 3
–
–
layer 3
–
California
paired; layer
Meadow Vole
3
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
241
Level
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
Unit
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Canis sp.
Canis sp.
Anseriformes
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Canis sp.
Canis sp.
Canis sp.
Canis sp.
Canis sp.
Canis sp.
Canis sp.
Taxa
3
1
1
1
4
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
vertebra
tibia
femur
humerus
incisor
mandible
vertebra
unknown
tibiotarsus
mandible
humerus
femur
femur
ischium
astragalus
tibia
ulna
innominate
Element
left
–
right
right
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
right
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
in mandibles
listed above;
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
–
left
right
right
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
epiphysis
distal
epiphysis
–
fragment
distal end
–
Canids
Canids
Waterfowl
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
–
–
burnt
–
–
–
Side
Part
Burn
Type*
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
Canids
layer 3
–
Canids
layer 3
–
Canids
layer 3
–
Canids
layer 3
–
Canids
layer 3
–
Canids
layer 3
–
Canids
layer 3
242
Level
200-210
210-220
210-220
210-220
210-220
210-220
210-220
210-220
210-220
210-220
210-220
210-220
220-230
220-230
000-010
Unit
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
4W
3W
Procyon lotor
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
cf. Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Procyon lotor
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Taxa
1
1
1
3
1
2
1
1
2
3
1
1
4
1
2
Count
premolar
incisor
molar
vertebra
ulna
tibia
femur
femur
innominate
molar
mandible
mandible
incisor
calcaneum
frontal
Element
–
right
left
–
left
left
right
left
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
right
–
–
–
fragment
–
Side
Part
Burn
Type*
–
Raccoon
layer 3
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
California
in frontals
Meadow Vole listed above
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
–
Raccoon
layer 3
–
Black-tailed
layer 1
Deer
243
Level
010-020
010-020
010-020
020-030
020-030
030-040
030-040
030-040
030-040
040-050
040-050
040-050
040-050
050-060
050-060
Unit
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Equs caballus
Equs caballus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Equs caballus
Procyon lotor
Equs caballus
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
mandible
mandible
premolar
humerus
sesamoid
lunar
phalanx
sesamoid
femur
proximal
phalanx
2nd phalanx
tibia
magnum
proximal
phalanx
lunar
Element
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
right
–
–
–
–
–
left
–
–
proximal
epiphysis
distal end
–
–
teeth present
fragment
–
–
–
–
–
right
–
–
proximal end
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Raccoon
Raccoon
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Tule Elk
Black-tailed
Deer
Black-tailed
Deer
Domestic Horse
Domestic Horse
Domestic Horse
Raccoon
Domestic Horse
Tule Elk
Black-tailed
Deer
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
Burn
Type*
–
Black-tailed
layer 1
Deer
proximal end
Side
Part
244
Level
050-060
050-060
050-060
060-070
070-080
070-080
070-080
070-080
070-080
080-090
080-090
090-100
090-100
090-100
090-100
090-100
090-100
090-100
100-110
Unit
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
Bufo boreas
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Microtus
californicus
Thamnophis sp.
Bufo boreas
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Anseriformes
Aves
Spilogale putorius
Peromyscus sp.
Bufo boreas
Passeriformes
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Procyon lotor
Castor canadensis
Passeriformes
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
right
right
Waterfowl
Bird
Striped Skunk
Deer Mice
California
Meadow Vole
Garter Snakes
Western Toad
Black-tailed
Deer
–
–
–
fragment
Western Toad
Tule Elk
Western Toad
Perching Birds
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Raccoon
Beaver
Perching Birds
Raccoon
–
–
right
–
left
–
–
–
–
–
–
teeth present
right
right
–
left
–
–
–
–
–
right
trochlea
–
–
proximal end
–
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
Burn
Type*
–
Raccoon
layer 1
–
left
–
distal
epiphysis
–
–
–
Side
Part
tarsometatarsus distal end
tarsometatarsus proximal end
calcaneum
–
mandible
–
vertebra
vertebra
molar
mandible
humerus
metatarsal
carpometacarpu
s
vertebra
innominate
femur
tibia
humerus
mandible
lower premolar
3
ulna
Element
245
Level
100-110
100-110
110-120
110-120
110-120
110-120
110-120
110-120
120-130
120-130
170-180
170-180
170-180
170-180
180-190
180-190
Unit
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
Procyon lotor
Bufo boreas
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Thamnophis sp.
Branta canadensis
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Microtus
californicus
Thamnophis sp.
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Peromyscus sp.
Taxa
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
molar
sesamoid
upper premolar
4
incisor
molar
vertebra
mandible
vertebra
coracoid
tibia
ulna
mandible
humerus
cervical
vertebra
tooth
incisor
Element
burnt
–
–
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
fragment
fragment
–
–
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
right
left
–
right
–
–
–
distal end
proximal end
–
–
–
–
–
–
right
–
layer 1
Tule Elk
Tule Elk
Black-tailed
Deer
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
Garter Snakes
layer 1
Canada Goose
layer 1
Raccoon
layer 1
Raccoon
layer 1
California
layer 1
Meadow Vole
Garter Snakes
layer 1
California
layer 3
Meadow Vole
California
in mandible
Meadow Vole listed above;
layer 3
Raccoon
layer 3
Tule Elk
Burn
Type*
–
Deer Mice
in mandible
listed above;
layer 1
–
Western Toad
layer 1
–
Tule Elk
layer 1
fragment
Side
Part
246
Level
180-190
180-190
180-190
180-190
180-190
180-190
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
200-210
Unit
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Procyon lotor
Microtus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Aves
Aves
Thamnophis sp.
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Castor canadensis
Taxa
0
1
1
1
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
Count
lower molar 1
molar
innominate
femur
molar
mandible
metapodial
metapodial
humerus
humerus
vertebra
metapodial
molar
skull
tibia
fibula
Element
–
–
–
–
–
right
left
left
–
proximal end
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Raccoon
California
–
–
–
Beaver
–
–
left
Tule Elk
–
left
Tule Elk
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Bird
Bird
Garter Snake
Tule Elk
Tule Elk
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
Burn
Type*
–
right
Side
distal
epiphysis
teeth present
condyle
proximal end
distal end
–
distal end
facial
portion
–
proximal end
–
Part
247
Level
200-210
210-220
210-220
220-230
230-240
230-240
230-240
040-050
040-050
040-050
240-250
120-130
120-130
230-240
030-040
Unit
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
3W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Branta canadensis
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Castor canadensis
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Microtus
californicus
Passeriformes
Odocoileus
hemionus
californicus
Anseriformes
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Microtus
californicus
Anseriformes
Anseriformes
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
–
–
scapula
astragalus
femur
proximal
portion
–
–
fragment
fragment
–
–
incisor
cheek tooth
scapula
tibia
burnt
–
–
left
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
left
–
–
–
–
–
–
distal portion
California
Meadow Vole
Waterfowl
Waterfowl
–
right
California
Meadow Vole
Perching birds
Black-tailed
Deer
Beaver
Tule Elk
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Canada Goose
Tule Elk
Black-tailed
Deer
layer 3
layer 1
burnt
layer 3 & 4
–
layer1
layer1
layer1
layer 4
layer 4
layer 4
layer 3 & 4
layer 3
Burn
Type*
Meadow Vole
–
Waterfowl
layer 3
–
Black-tailed
layer 3
Deer
–
–
–
–
Side
right
teeth present
proximal
epiphysis
–
–
Part
coracoid
anterior end
carpometacarpu
–
s
femur
distal
epiphysis
lower molar 1
–
mandible
tibia
humerus
molar
Element
248
Level
030-040
030-040
030-040
030-040
060-070
060-070
060-070
060-070
060-070
060-070
010-020
010-020
010-020
Unit
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
Microtus
californicus
Odocoileus
hemionus
Bufo boreas
Bufo boreas
Microtus
Reithrodontomys
megalotis
Reithrodontomys
megalotis
Reithrodontomys
megalotis
Reithrodontomys
megalotis
columbianus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Passeriformes
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
0
1
1
1
Count
vertebra
urostyle
humerus
tibia
femur
scapula
femur
lower molar 1-2
lower molar 1-2
humerus
phalanx
sesamoid
lower premolar
2
Element
burnt
–
left
right
left
right
left
distal end
–
–
–
–
–
distal
epiphysis
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
right
–
–
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
fragment
–
–
–
–
California
Meadow Vole
Black-tailed
Deer
Western Toad
Western Toad
California
Harvest Mouse
Harvest Mouse
Harvest Mouse
Harvest Mouse
Perching birds
Tule Elk
Tule Elk
Black-tailed
Deer
–
–
–
layer 1
burnt; layer
1
layer 1;
appears
recent
layer 1;
appears
recent
layer 1;
appears
recent
layer 1;
appears
recent
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
Burn
Type*
left
Side
–
Part
249
Level
070-080
070-080
070-080
080-090
080-090
080-090
080-090
000-010
020-030
020-030
110-120
110-120
110-120
110-120
Unit
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
californicus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Procyon lotor
Microtus
californicus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
cf. Sylvilagus
cf. Spermophilus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Bufo boreas
Procyon lotor
Taxa
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
Count
lower molar 2
femur
tibia
tibia
lower premolar
4
cheek tooth
phalanx
phalanx
penultimate
phalanx
lower molar 1
lower premolar
2-4
metatarsal
femur
tooth
Element
–
–
right
–
–
–
–
left
–
–
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
fragment
–
–
fragment
–
–
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
right
–
–
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Tule Elk
Tule Elk
Western Toad
Raccoon
Cottontails
Ground Squirrel
Black-tailed
Deer
Black-tailed
Deer
Raccoon
California
Meadow Vole
Black-tailed
Deer
layer 1 & 2
layer 1 & 2
layer 1 & 2
layer 1 & 2
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
–
–
Burn
Type*
Meadow Vole
–
Black-tailed
layer 1
Deer
–
Side
fragment
Part
250
Level
050-060
050-060
050-060
100-110
100-110
100-110
100-110
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
Unit
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
Bufo boreas
Bufo boreas
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Thamnophis sp.
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Microtus
californicus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Bufo boreas
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
astragalus
maxilla
upper premolar
ungual phalanx
vertebra
calcaneum
metapodial
tibia
radius
ulna
penultimate
phalanx
humerus
sesamoid
frontal w/ antler
base
femur
Element
Tule Elk
–
–
right
–
–
left
–
right
left
left
epiphysis
–
fragment
–
–
–
–
distal end
–
–
–
–
burnt
–
Western Toad
Western Toad
Black-tailed
Deer
–
–
–
–
–
–
Raccoon
Raccoon
Raccoon
Black-tailed
Deer
Garter Snakes
Black-tailed
Deer
Tule Elk
Western Toad
proximal
portion
–
–
–
–
–
–
right
right
–
Black-tailed
Deer
left
–
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
–
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
Burn
Type*
–
California
layer 1
Meadow Vole
–
Black-tailed
layer 1
Deer
–
Side
Part
251
Level
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
Unit
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
Procyon lotor
Anas strepera
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
upper premolar
4
tooth
naviculocuboid
metapodial
vertebra
thoracic
vertebra
rib
4
upper molar 1
upper molar 2
upper molar 2
upper molar 1
unerrupted
lower molar 1
upper molar 1
lower premolar
4
petrosal
coracoid
metacarpal
Element
–
–
–
–
burnt
–
–
–
–
–
right
–
right
–
centrum
–
fragment
–
fragment
head
neural spine
burnt
–
–
–
right
–
–
–
distal end
burnt
burnt
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
burnt
Tule Elk
Tule Elk
Tule Elk
Tule Elk
Tule Elk
Tule Elk
Tule Elk
Raccoon
Gadwall
Tule Elk
Raccoon
Raccoon
Raccoon
Raccoon
Raccoon
Raccoon
Raccoon
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
Burn
Type*
left
left
right
right
right
Side
–
–
–
–
–
Part
252
Level
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
050-060
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
100-110
100-110
100-110
150-160
150-160
Unit
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
Castor canadensis
Microtus
californicus
Castor canadensis
Castor canadensis
Castor canadensis
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Microtus
californicus
cf. Spermophilus
Mustela sp.
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Castor canadensis
Castor canadensis
Castor canadensis
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
astragalus
femur
humerus
tooth
magnum
femur
phalanx
lower incisor 1
phalanx
cheek tooth
lower molar 2
lower canine 1
cheek tooth
ungual phalanx
phalanx
distal
metapodial
cuboid
cheek tooth
metapodial
Element
–
–
–
–
–
left
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
left
right
right
distal portion
–
–
fragment
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
burnt
burnt
–
–
burnt
–
burnt
–
–
–
–
burnt
burnt
burnt
left
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
fragment
–
–
–
California
Meadow Vole
Ground Squirrel
Weasels &
Tule Elk
Beaver
California
Meadow Vole
Beaver
Beaver
Beaver
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Tule Elk
Raccoon
Raccoon
Raccoon
Beaver
Beaver
Beaver
–
–
–
–
–
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
Burn
Type*
–
Black-tailed
layer 3
Deer
–
Side
distal
epiphysis
Part
253
Level
110-120
110-120
110-120
060-070
060-070
060-070
030-040
030-040
030-040
030-040
140-150
140-150
Unit
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Castor canadensis
Castor canadensis
Microtus
californicus
Anas cf. acuta
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Branta canadensis
Branta canadensis
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
dentary
dentary
cheek tooth
lower premolar
4
cheek tooth
–
–
–
left
–
left
right
fragment
fragment
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
burnt
–
left
–
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Beaver
Beaver
Tule Elk
Canada Goose
Canada Goose
Tule Elk
layer 3;
looks fresh;
most likely
same
individual
layer 3;
looks fresh;
most likely
same
individual
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Burn
Type*
Minks
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
Northern Pintail
–
–
Black-tailed
–
Deer
right
–
left
–
left
–
fragment
fragment
Side
Part
humerus
distal portion
carpometacarpu
–
s
phalanx
–
pisiform
coracoid
tooth
humerus
Element
254
Level
140-150
140-150
140-150
140-150
140-150
140-150
140-150
140-150
140-150
Unit
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Procyon lotor
Oxyura
jamaicensis
Passeriformes
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
Count
lower incisor 1
carpometacarpu
s
carpometacarpu
s
humerus
phalanx
tooth
maxillary
femur
femur
Element
left
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
left
–
distal portion
–
–
–
–
right
–
fragment
Side
Part
–
–
–
burnt
Perching Birds
Raccoon
Ruddy Duck
Tule Elk
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
Burn
Type*
–
California
layer 3;
Meadow Vole looks fresh;
most likely
same
individual
–
California
layer 3;
most likely
same
individual
–
California
fagment;
Meadow Vole
layer 3;
looks fresh;
most likely
same
individual
–
California
layer 3;
most liely
same
individual
–
Tule Elk
layer 3
255
Level
040-050
040-050
040-050
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
090-100
090-100
090-100
090-100
090-100
190-200
190-200
190-200
Unit
11E
11E
11E
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Branta canadensis
Anas sp.
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Procyon lotor
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Castor canadensis
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
carpal
astragalus
lower molar 1
lower dentary
molar 1-2
canine
lower incisor 2
femur
femur
coracoid
cheek tooth
tibia
femur
metatarsal
caudal vertebra
femur
astragalus
Element
–
burnt
–
left
–
right
right
left
–
fragment
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
right
left
–
–
–
left
–
burnt
–
–
left
–
–
–
–
right
–
–
–
Beaver
Tule Elk
Black-tailed
Deer
Raccoon
Raccoon
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Canada Goose
Ducks
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Raccoon
Black-tailed
Deer
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 3
layer 3
layer 1
layer 3
layer 3
–
–
layer 3
Burn
Type*
–
Tule Elk
–
distal end
fragment
–
left
Side
fragment
Part
256
Level
210-220
210-220
210-220
210-220
210-220
210-220
210-220
210-220
210-220
210-220
210-220
210-220
205-220
205-220
205-220
Unit
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
Anas strepera
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Microtus
californicus
Sylvilagus sp.
Procyon lotor
cf. Anas
Anas strepera
Taxa
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
Gadwall
Tule Elk
–
–
burnt
burnt
–
–
–
–
–
–
left
–
left
–
–
lower premolar
3
phalanx
–
–
–
–
right
left
California
Meadow Vole
Cottontails
Raccoon
Ducks
Gadwall
–
–
fragment
–
–
–
Tule Elk
–
right
fragment
Tule Elk
Tule Elk
Black-tailed
Deer
Black-tailed
Deer
Tule Elk
–
–
fragment
fragment
Tule Elk
layer 3
Bone
Feature
Bone
Feature
Bone
Feature
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
Burn
Type*
–
Tule Elk
layer 3
–
–
Side
–
fragment
Part
fragment
distal portion
–
proximal
portion
humerus
distal portion
lower molar 3-2
–
phalanx
humerus
carpal
coracoid
cheek tooth
sesamoid
cheek tooth
scaphoid
patella
distal
metapodial
carpal
Element
257
Level
205-220
205-220
205-220
205-220
205-220
205-220
205-220
205-220
205-220
205-220
010-020
010-020
010-020
010-020
010-020
Unit
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
2W
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
Branta canadensis
Microtus
californicus
Castor canadensis
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Procyon lotor
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
left
left
left
left
right
–
–
–
–
–
lower canine
–
lower incisor 1 fragment
radius
distal portion
–
–
left
right
right
left
left
left
left
–
–
symphysis
Side
Part
lower dentary
–
premolar 3-4
lower dentary
–
molar 1
lower dentary
–
canine
humerus
distal portion
dentary
–
dentary
lower dentary
premolar 2
lower dentary
molar 1
lower dentary
molar 2
lower dentary
premolar 2
scapula
rib
Element
–
Raccoon
–
Burn
Type*
–
Tule Elk
Bone
Feature
–
Tule Elk
Bone
Feature
–
Tule Elk
Bone
Feature
–
Tule Elk
Bone
Feature
–
Tule Elk
Bone
Feature
–
Tule Elk
Bone
Feature
–
Tule Elk
Bone
Feature
–
Raccoon
Bone
Feature
–
Raccoon
Bone
Feature
–
Raccoon
Bone
Feature
–
Canada Goose
–
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
Beaver
–
burnt
Black-tailed
–
Deer
258
Level
080-090
060-070
070-080
070-080
070-080
070-080
050-060
050-060
050-060
050-060
090-100
090-100
090-100
Unit
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Procyon lotor
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Castor canadensis
Castor canadensis
Microtus
californicus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Anas sp.
Castor canadensis
Taxa
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
lower dentary
premolar 4
lower dentary
premolar 3
lower dentary
canine
lower dentary
molar 1-2
innominate
coracoid
humerus
lower incisor 1
upper incisor 1
upper incisor 1
sesamoid
lower cheek
tooth
naviculocuboid
Element
Ducks
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Raccoon
–
left
right
left
left
left
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
right
proximal
portion
–
distal portion
right
Beaver
Beaver
California
Meadow Vole
Black-tailed
Deer
–
–
–
–
–
–
fragment
fragment
–
Raccoon
Raccoon
Tule Elk
–
–
Black-tailed
Deer
–
–
left
–
–
very worn,
old
individual
very worn,
old
individual
very worn,
old
individual
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Burn
Type*
–
Beaver
–
fragment
Side
Part
259
Level
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
020-030
020-030
020-030
020-030
230-240
230-240
230-240
230-240
030-040
030-040
030-040
Unit
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
Microtus
californicus
Anseriformes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Bufo boreas
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Microtus
californicus
Thamnophis sp.
cf. Pituophis
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Procyon lotor
Taxa
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
–
–
–
–
–
–
vertebra
lower molar 1
dentary
lower molar 1
lower dentary
molar
upper molar 1
scapula
sesamoid
–
–
right
–
–
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
right
–
left
–
–
distal portion
Side
Part
lower incisor 1
–
or 2
humerus
distal portion
vertebra
vertebra
penultimate
phalanx
humerus
ungual phalanx
Element
–
–
–
–
–
–
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Western Toad
California
Meadow Vole
Waterfowl
Tule Elk
–
burnt
–
Raccoon
California
Meadow Vole
Garter Snakes
Gopher Snakes
Black-tailed
Deer
–
–
–
burnt
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Burn
Type*
burnt
Black-tailed
–
Deer
260
Level
030-040
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
040-050
040-050
040-050
040-050
040-050
210-220
210-220
210-220
Unit
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
Procyon lotor
Anas acuta
Branta canadensis
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Oxyura
jamaicensis
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Aves
Taxa
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
1
Count
proximal
portion
fragment
–
fragment
maxilla
upper molar 1
scapula
cheek tooth
fragment
–
fragment
–
left
right
right
–
right
right
left
–
–
right
right
right
left
–
right
–
–
–
right
–
–
distal portion
Side
Part
dentary
lower premolar
3
ulna
–
tibiotarsus distal portion
humerus
fragment
metatarsal
–
phalanx
–
femur
–
femur
maxilla
dentary
humerus
cheek tooth
tarsometatarsus
Element
Raccoon
Raccoon
–
–
–
–
Raccoon
Northern Pintail
Canada Goose
Raccoon
Raccoon
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Ruddy Duck
burnt
burnt
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Burn
Type*
–
Birds
possible
raptor
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
burnt
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
Raccoon
–
–
Raccoon
–
261
Level
210-220
210-220
210-220
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
070-080
070-080
070-080
090-100
180-190
170-180
170-180
Unit
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
1W
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Carnivora
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Procyon lotor
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Castor canadensis
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
Count
dentary
metatarsal
dentary
lower canine
cheek tooth
cheek tooth
occiput
metapodial
cheek tooth
phalanx
upper premolar
3
upper molar 1
lower molar
femur
dentary
Element
–
–
burnt
–
–
–
left
–
right
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
right
left
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
fragment
–
fragment
fragment
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
right
–
Beaver
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Raccoon
Tule Elk
Carnivores
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Tule Elk
Black-tailed
Deer
Tule Elk
layer 3 & 4
–
layer 3 & 4
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Burn
Type*
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
burnt
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
Tule Elk
–
Side
Part
262
Level
170-180
170-180
170-180
170-180
170-180
170-180
170-180
170-180
170-180
170-180
130-140
130-140
130-140
130-140
130-140
130-140
130-140
Unit
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Procyon lotor
Castor canadensis
Castor canadensis
cf Anas
Peromyscus sp.
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
Taxa
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
5
1
Count
humerus
humerus
femur
femur
cheek tooth
metatarsal
caudal vertebra
tooth
tarsometatarsus
dentary
dentary
femur
tibia
humerus
humerus
tooth
maxillary
Element
–
–
right
left
left
left
–
–
–
–
left
right
–
left
right
right
left
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
fragment
fragment
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Side
fragment
Part
Burn
Common Name
Type*
–
California
Meadow Vole
–
California
Meadow Vole
–
California
Meadow Vole
–
California
Meadow Vole
–
California
Meadow Vole
–
California
Meadow Vole
burnt
Raccoon
–
Beaver
–
Beaver
–
Ducks
–
Deer Mice
–
California
Meadow Vole
–
California
Meadow Vole
–
California
Meadow Vole
–
California
Meadow Vole
–
California
Meadow Vole
–
California
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3 & 4
layer 3 & 4
layer 3 & 4
layer 3 & 4
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3 & 4
layer 3 & 4
layer 3 & 4
layer 3 & 4
layer 3 & 4
layer 3 & 4
Comments
263
Level
130-140
130-140
130-140
130-140
130-140
130-140
130-140
130-140
130-140
130-140
130-140
130-140
040-050
180-190
030-040
050-060
Unit
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
7E
7E
7E
7E
californicus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Sylvilagus
audubonii
Castor canadensis
Castor canadensis
Castor canadensis
Castor canadensis
Oxyura
jamaicensis
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Microtus
californicus
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Castor canadensis
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
Count
cheek tooth
vertebra
upper incisor 1
sesamoid
upper incisor 1
phalanx
astragalus
carpal
coracoid
metatarsal
phalanx
phalanx
metatarsal
metapodial
radius
cheek tooth
Element
–
–
–
–
–
burnt
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
right
–
left
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
proximal
portion
–
–
fragment
fragment
burnt
burnt
–
burnt
–
–
fragment
distal portion
Beaver
California
Meadow Vole
Tule Elk
Tule Elk
Beaver
Beaver
Beaver
Beaver
Ruddy Duck
Raccoon
Raccoon
Raccoon
Desert Cottontail
Black-tailed
Deer
Black-tailed
Deer
–
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
Burn
Type*
Meadow Vole
–
Black-tailed
layer 3
Deer
–
–
Side
right
–
Part
264
Level
050-060
180-190
180-190
180-190
010-020
120-130
120-130
120-130
050-060
050-060
100-110
100-110
100-110
080-090
070-080
150-160
Unit
7E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
11E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
Anas sp.
Sylvilagus
audubonii
cf. Odocoileus
Castor canadensis
Microtus
californicus
Procyon lotor
Anas acuta
Microtus
californicus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Procyon lotor
Castor canadensis
Castor canadensis
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
cf. Mustela
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
metapodial
phalanx
carpometacarpu
s
scapula
3rd metatarsal
phalanx
innominate
lower dentary
premolar 4
lower molar 1-3
humerus
lower incisor 2
dentary
metapodial
lower molar 1
upper molar 1
phalanx
Element
–
burnt
–
–
burnt
left
left
–
right
left
right
–
–
–
fragment
–
–
–
distal portion
lacking
–
–
–
–
left
–
–
–
–
–
fragment
–
–
–
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
left
–
–
Black-tailed
Deer
Ducks
Desert Cottontail
Beaver
California
Meadow Vole
Raccoon
Northern Pintail
Raccoon
Beaver
Beaver
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Weasels &
Minks
California
Meadow Vole
Black-tailed
Deer
layer 3
–
layer 2
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
burnt
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
–
–
–
–
Burn
Type*
–
Tule Elk
–
fragment
–
Side
fragment
Part
265
Level
150-160
150-160
150-160
150-160
140-150
140-150
140-150
140-150
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
Unit
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Microtus
californicus
Oxyura
jamaicensis
Microtus
californicus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Castor canadensis
Anas strepera
Microtus
californicus
Odocoileus
Castor canadensis
Castor canadensis
Procyon lotor
Anas sp.
Castor canadensis
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
naviculo-
proximal
phalanx
carpal
unknown
femur
ectocuneform
naviculocuboid
femur
scapula
cheek tooth
cheek tooth
phalanx
phalanx
ulna
scapula
tarsal
Element
right
–
–
–
right
–
–
–
–
proximal
portion
–
right
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
California
Meadow Vole
Black-tailed
Deer
–
proximal
portion
–
right
–
–
fragment
California
Meadow Vole
Ruddy Duck
–
–
–
Beaver
Gadwall
California
Meadow Vole
Black-tailed
Tule Elk
Black-tailed
Deer
Tule Elk
–
–
Beaver
Beaver
Raccoon
Ducks
Beaver
burnt
–
burnt
–
–
layer 3
–
–
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
–
–
–
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
–
Burn
Type*
–
–
right
–
–
Side
epiphysis
–
–
fragment
fragment
proximal
portion
fragment
Part
266
Level
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
170-180
170-180
170-180
170-180
130-140
130-140
130-140
130-140
130-140
130-140
130-140
130-140
110-120
110-120
Unit
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
hemionus
columbianus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Castor canadensis
Anas strepera
Castor canadensis
Microtus
californicus
Lutra canadensis
Oxyura
jamaicensis
Procyon lotor
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Castor canadensis
Castor canadensis
Branta canadensis
Anas acuta
Peromyscus sp.
Peromyscus sp.
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
right
–
–
–
–
–
left
–
right
–
Raccoon
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Beaver
Beaver
Canada Goose
Northern Pintail
Deer Mice
Deer Mice
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
left
right
–
proximal
portion
fragment
–
Beaver
Gadwall
Beaver
California
Meadow Vole
River Otter
Ruddy Duck
–
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
Tule Elk
–
–
–
–
–
–
fragment
Black-tailed
Deer
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
layer 4
layer 4
layer 3
layer 3
layer 4
layer 4
layer 3
layer 3
Burn
Type*
Deer
–
Side
right
–
Part
lower incisor 1
–
upper incisor 1
–
humerus
distal portion
tibia
distal portion
dentary
–
lower molar 2
–
femur
humerus
upper molar 2
lower molar 1
dentary
ulna
proximal
phalanx
carpal
coracoid
lower incisor 1
lower incisor 1
ectocuneform
cuboid
Element
267
Level
110-120
110-120
110-120
110-120
110-120
110-120
110-120
110-120
110-120
120-130
120-130
120-130
120-130
120-130
120-130
120-130
120-130
Unit
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Canis sp.
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Castor canadensis
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
2
1
3
1
1
2
1
Count
proximal
phalanx
femur
proximal
phalanx
premaxilla
premaxilla
upper canine
upper canine
upper incisor 12
upper molar 3
upper premolar
4
humerus
dentary
lower molar 1
femur
humerus
lower molar 1-2
dentary
Element
left
right
right
left
–
left
left
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
right
–
–
–
right
–
fragment
–
–
right
–
–
–
–
right
left
–
fragment
Side
Part
–
–
–
–
burnt
burnt
–
–
–
Raccoon
Raccoon
Raccoon
Raccoon
Raccoon
Raccoon
Raccoon
Canids
Tule Elk
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Burn
Type*
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
burnt
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
burnt
California
–
Meadow Vole
burnt
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
Beaver
–
268
Level
120-130
120-130
120-130
120-130
120-130
120-130
120-130
120-130
040-050
040-050
060-070
060-070
060-070
090-100
090-100
090-100
Unit
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
7E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
Procyon lotor
Anas strepera
cf. Branta
cf. Branta
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Branta canadensis
Anas sp.
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
Count
Gadwall
Raccoon
–
–
–
–
–
–
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
dentary
maxillary
dentary
humerus
humerus
humerus
left
left
right
–
left
proximal
portion
distal portion
–
–
–
–
left
Canada Goose
Canada Goose
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Canada Goose
Ducks
Raccoon
Raccoon
–
–
–
right
–
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
layer 1
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Burn
Type*
–
Raccoon
–
Side
Part
tibia
distal portion
carpometacarpu fragment
s
sternum
fragment
carpal
–
lower molar 3
lower molar 1
upper premolar
4
upper premolar
1-2
upper premolar
3
femur
Element
269
Level
090-100
230-240
230-240
230-240
230-240
230-240
130-140
130-140
130-140
080-090
080-090
210-220
210-220
210-220
Unit
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
Microtus
californicus
Castor canadensis
Procyon lotor
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Sciurus griseus
Procyon lotor
californicus
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
Count
ungual phalanx
tibia
scapula
proximal
phalanx
metatarsal
lower molar 1-3
dentary
lower incisor 2
cheek teeth
lower molar 1
lower molar 1
dentary
dentary
ulna
Element
left
left
right
left
right
–
left
left
left
–
–
–
left
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Side
fragment
Part
burnt
burnt
burnt
burnt
–
–
–
–
burnt
–
–
–
–
burnt
California
Meadow Vole
Beaver
Western Grey
Squirrel
Raccoon
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Tule Elk
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Tule Elk
Raccoon
layer 3 & 4
layer 3 & 4
layer 3 & 4
layer 1
layer 1
layer 2 & 3
layer 2 & 3
layer 2 & 3
layer 4
layer 4
layer 4
layer 4
layer 4
layer 1
Burn
Type*
Meadow Vole
270
Level
070-080
070-080
070-080
180-190
180-190
180-190
180-190
180-190
050-060
050-060
140-150
140-150
140-150
140-150
140-150
140-150
Unit
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
Microtus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Thamnophis sp.
Oxyura
jamaicensis
Microtus
californicus
Castor canadensis
Anas strepera
Microtus
californicus
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Castor canadensis
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Taxa
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
2
1
Count
lower molar 1
lower molar 1
dentary
dentary
lower incisor 3
vertebra
phalanx
lower molar 1
tarsometatarsus
coracoid
phalanx
sesamoid
metapodial
femur
metatarsal
femur
Element
–
–
–
–
left
right
–
–
–
left
left
right
left
right
distal portion
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
burnt
–
–
–
burnt
–
–
left
–
burnt
California
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Tule Elk
Garter Snakes
California
Meadow Vole
Beaver
Ruddy Duck
Gadwall
Beaver
Tule Elk
California
Meadow Vole
Tule Elk
Raccoon
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 1
layer 1
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 1
layer 1
Burn
Type*
burnt
Raccoon
layer 1
–
–
Side
fragment
epiphysis
Part
271
Level
140-150
140-150
140-150
140-150
140-150
140-150
140-150
140-150
140-150
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
Unit
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Sylvilagus sp.
californicus
Taxa
1
2
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
1
1
Count
maxilla
lower molar 1-2
dentary
dentary
dentary
phalanx
lower molar 1
dentary
humerus
maxillary
cheek tooth
lower molar 3
lower molar 2
lower molar 2
Element
left
right
right
–
–
right
left
left
–
right
left
left
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Side
–
Part
–
–
–
burnt
–
burnt
–
–
–
burnt
–
–
–
–
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Cottontails
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
Burn
Type*
Meadow Vole
272
Level
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
150-160
150-160
150-160
150-160
Unit
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Sciurus griseus
Sciurus griseus
Anas strepera
Anas strepera
Castor canadensis
Sylvilagus sp.
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Sylvilagus sp.
californicus
Taxa
1
2
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
Count
humerus
dentary
upper incisor 1
premaxilla
humerus
coracoid
carpal
metapodial
navicular
tibia
femur
innominate
innominate
cheek tooth
Element
left
–
–
left
–
–
–
–
–
right
–
–
fragment
–
Western Grey
Squirrel
Western Grey
Squirrel
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
burnt
left
–
right
Ruddy Duck
–
right
–
proximal
portion
–
–
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Ruddy Duck
Beaver
Cottontails
–
right
–
–
left
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Cottontails
–
–
–
–
–
–
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
layer 3
Burn
Type*
Meadow Vole
–
Side
–
Part
273
Level
150-160
150-160
150-160
150-160
150-160
150-160
150-160
150-160
170-180
170-180
170-180
170-180
170-180
190-200
190-200
Unit
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
Castor canadensis
Castor canadensis
Anas strepera
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Canis sp.
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Mephitis mephitis
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
8
3
1
1
2
Count
phalanx
upper incisor 1
coracoid
vertebra
lower molar 1
proximal
phalanx
tibia
phalanx
tibia
lower molar 1
vertebra
humerus
femur
femur
femur
Element
Side
right
right
left
right
–
–
left
–
–
left
–
–
left
–
–
Part
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
burnt
–
burnt
–
–
burnt
burnt
Beaver
Beaver
Ruddy Duck
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Canids
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Burn
Type*
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
burnt
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
burnt
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
Striped Skunk
–
274
Level
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
090-100
090-100
Unit
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
3E
3E
Castor canadensis
Oxyura
jamaicensis
Oxyura
jamaicensis
Castor canadensis
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Anas strepera
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Castor canadensis
Castor canadensis
Castor canadensis
Castor canadensis
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
6
1
2
1
1
1
1
Count
upper premolar
carpometacarpu
s
carpometacarpu
s
maxillary
humerus
dentary
humerus
maxillary
vertebra
cheek teeth
dentary
maxillary
innominate
claw
calcaneum
phalanx
Element
left
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
right
–
–
–
left
–
right
–
–
–
right
–
left
–
–
–
–
–
left
–
–
distal portion
Side
Part
–
–
–
burnt
burnt
–
–
burnt
–
–
–
burnt
–
burnt
burnt
Beaver
Beaver
Ruddy Duck
Ruddy Duck
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Gadwall
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Beaver
Beaver
Beaver
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Burn
Type*
–
Beaver
–
275
Level
230-240
230-240
230-240
230-240
230-240
230-240
230-240
230-240
070-080
070-080
210-220
140-150
140-150
Unit
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
Pituophis
melanoleucus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
cf. Peromyscus
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
12
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
thoracic
dentary
cheek tooth
lower incisor 3
lower incisor 1
vertebra
innominate
innominate
femur
femur
cheek tooth
lower molar 1
dentary
4
Element
left
–
left
right
–
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
left
left
–
–
left
–
–
proximal
portion
proximal
portion
–
right
Side
–
Part
–
–
–
–
–
burnt
–
burnt
–
burnt
burnt
–
–
California
Meadow Vole
California
Tule Elk
Black-tailed
Deer
Black-tailed
Deer
Gopher Snake
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Deer Mice
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Burn
Type*
276
Level
140-150
140-150
170-180
170-180
170-180
170-180
170-180
170-180
170-180
170-180
170-180
170-180
170-180
170-180
Unit
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Mephitis mephitis
Actinemys
marmorata
Thamnophis sp.
californicus
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
lower incisor 1
lower premolar
3
lower canine
upper premolar
4
dentary
maxillary
femur
lower molar 1-2
dentary
cheek tooth
tibia
maxillary
vertebra
carapace
vertebra
Element
–
burnt
–
left
–
left
–
–
right
–
left
right
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
distal portion
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Black-tailed
Deer
Raccoon
Raccoon
Raccoon
Raccoon
Raccoon
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Striped Skunk
Western Pond
Turtle
Garter Snakes
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Burn
Type*
Meadow Vole
–
Side
marginal
Part
277
Level
170-180
150-160
150-160
150-160
150-160
150-160
150-160
030-040
020-030
020-030
020-030
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
Unit
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Oxyura
jamaicensis
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
Procyon lotor
Anas sp.
Procyon lotor
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Thamnophis sp.
Thamnophis sp.
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
Count
humerus
dentary
tooth
humerus
radius
ulna
humerus
astragalus
vertebra
sacrum
scapula
femur
cheek tooth
maxillary
vertebra
Element
right
–
left
left
–
–
–
–
–
–
burnt
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Ruddy Duck
Black-tailed
Deer
–
distal portion
proximal
portion
distal portion
left
–
right
–
–
Raccoon
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
left
left
–
burnt
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Garter Snakes
Ducks
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
distal portion
–
–
Raccoon
–
–
–
–
–
–
cut
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Burn
Type*
–
Garter Snakes
–
–
Side
Part
278
Level
200-210
200-210
040-050
040-050
040-050
010-020
010-020
010-020
010-020
010-020
010-020
010-020
Unit
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
californicus
Taxa
1
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
frontal
humerus
innominate
femur
femur
dentary
dentary
phalanx
upper molar 1
upper premolar
4
ulna
cheek tooth
Element
–
left
right
right
–
left
right
left
right
right
left
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Side
–
Part
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Tule Elk
Black-tailed
Deer
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Black-tailed
Deer
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Burn
Type*
Meadow Vole
279
Level
010-020
010-020
010-020
010-020
010-020
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
Unit
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
Actinemys
marmorata
Thamnophis sp.
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Anseriformes
Taxa
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
2
6
1
1
2
1
1
1
Count
innominate
femur
maxillary
femur
upper molar 1-2
maxillary
lower molar 1-2
dentary
vertebra
carapace
furculum
cheek tooth
tibia
axis
atlas
Element
left
–
–
–
left
–
right
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
marginal
Side
Part
–
–
burnt
burnt
–
–
–
–
–
–
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Western Pond
Turtle
Garter Snakes
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Burn
Type*
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
burnt
Waterfowl
–
280
Level
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
160-170
050-060
050-060
Unit
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Castor canadensis
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
cf. Spermophilus
Peromyscus sp.
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Peromyscus sp.
californicus
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
scaphoid
dentary
petrosal
radius
lower premolar
upper molar 2
lower molar 2
lower canine
dentary
humerus
distal tibia
lower molar 1
dentary
lower molar 1
upper molar 1
Element
left
left
–
–
left
–
left
–
left
left
–
–
left
–
right
left
–
left
left
–
proximal
portion
–
left
distal portion
right
–
–
distal portion
–
Side
–
Part
Black-tailed
Deer
–
burnt
Black-tailed
Deer
Beaver
Raccoon
–
–
Raccoon
Raccoon
Raccoon
Raccoon
Raccoon
Ground
Squirrels
Raccoon
Deer Mice
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Deer Mice
–
–
–
–
–
–
burnt
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Burn
Type*
Meadow Vole
281
Level
050-060
050-060
050-060
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
Unit
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Procyon lotor
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Procyon lotor
Taxa
2
1
1
2
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
Count
phalanges
mesocuneform
caudal vertebra
caudal vertebra
metatarsals
astragalus
navicular
calcaneum
astragalus
tibia
femur
lower premolar
3-4
lower molar 1-2
dentary
metacarpal
lower incisor 3
dentary
Element
Side
–
left
–
left
left
left
right
right
left
left
left
right
left
–
–
left
–
Part
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
burnt
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Raccoon
Raccoon
Raccoon
Raccoon
Raccoon
Raccoon
Raccoon
Raccoon
Raccoon
Raccoon
Raccoon
Raccoon
Raccoon
Raccoon
Raccoon
Black-tailed
Deer
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Burn
Type*
burnt
Black-tailed
–
Deer
282
Level
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
190-200
010-20
020-30
030-40
030-40
Unit
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
1E
1E
1E
1E
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Pituophis
melanoleucus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Procyon lotor
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
Count
second phalanx
metapodial
lower incisor
thoracic
vertebra
upper premolar
3
vertebra
humerus
humerus
femur
femur
dentary
dentary
phalanges
Element
left
–
Mule deer
–
distal
condyle
–
Tule Elk
Tule Elk
Mule deer
Black-tailed
Deer
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Gopher Snake
–
burnt
–
–
–
burnt
–
right
–
burnt
–
left
–
burnt
–
left
–
–
–
left
–
–
left
right
–
–
–
left
–
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Burn
Type*
burnt
Raccoon
–
nueral arch
Side
Part
283
Level
030-40
030-40
030-40
030-40
030-40
030-40
030-40
030-40
030-40
030-40
040-50
Unit
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Peromyscus sp.
Peromyscus sp.
Procyon lotor
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
1
1
Count
metapodial
incisor
mandible
upper incisor 3
femur
innominate
femur
molar
incisor
mandible
mandible
Element
–
right
–
left
left
right
left
left
left
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
distal end
–
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Black-tailed
Deer
Deer Mice
Deer Mice
California
California
Meadow Vole
California
California
Meadow Vole
California
California
Meadow Vole
California
California
Meadow Vole
Raccoon
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Burn
Type*
–
California
–
California
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
California
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
California
Meadow Vole
Side
Part
284
Level
040-50
040-50
120-130
200-210
200-210
210-220
210-220
210-220
210-220
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
Unit
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Thamnophis sp.
Thamnophis sp.
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
cf. Microtus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Thamnophis sp.
Taxa
1
1
1
1
14
3
2
2
1
1
52
1
3
1
Count
molar
mandible
molar
maxilla
vertebra
vertebra
molar
mandible
calcaneum
femur
vertebra
molar
mandible
trapezoid
Element
Tule Elk
–
left
right
–
–
–
–
–
left
–
distal end
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Garter Snakes
Garter Snakes
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Voles
–
–
distal
epiphysis
–
–
–
–
–
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Garter Snakes
–
–
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Burn
Type*
–
Black-tailed
–
Deer
teeth present
Side
Part
285
Level
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
Unit
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
1E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
lower molar 1
femur
humerus
lower molar 1
dentary
petrosal
petrosal
radius
molar
metapodial
calcaneum
innominate
humerus
Element
left
ight
left
left
left
–
–
–
–
–
proximal
portion
–
–
–
proximal end
burnt
–
left
–
burnt
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
left
–
–
left
–
–
left
–
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Black-tailed
Deer
Black-tailed
Deer
Black-tailed
Deer
Tule Elk
Tule Elk
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Burn
Type*
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
Tule Elk
–
distal end
Side
Part
286
Level
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
190-200
180-190
180-190
180-190
180-190
180-190
180-190
180-190
180-190
180-190
Unit
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Castor canadensis
Microtus
californicus
Branta canadensis
Branta canadensis
Branta canadensis
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Castor canadensis
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
metapodial
metacarpal
astragalus
astragalus
carpal phalanx
femur
innominate
femur
dentary
tarsometatarsus
ulna
humerus
phalanx
femur
upper molar 1
Element
left
–
distal
epiphysis
–
Black-tailed
Deer
Tule Elk
–
left
–
–
–
–
–
–
Tule Elk
right
–
–
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Beaver
California
Meadow Vole
–
right
–
–
–
Canada Goose
left
left
–
proximal end
left
–
burnt
Canada Goose
Canada Goose
Tule Elk
–
–
burnt
burnt
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Burn
Type*
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
burnt
Beaver
–
burnt
–
–
–
–
left
–
right
–
–
distal portion
Side
Part
287
Level
180-190
180-190
180-190
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
210-220
200-210
200-210
Unit
3E
3E
3E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
5E
2E
2E
2E
2E
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
Oxyura
jamaicensis
Oxyura
jamaicensis
Columbidae
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
cf. Lunda
Castor canadensis
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Columbidae
Branta canadensis
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Sylvilagus sp.
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
Count
–
–
left
left
left
–
–
–
–
left
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
humerus
maxillary
vertebra
–
–
right
–
–
–
right
left
Side
Part
carpometacarpu
–
s
tibiotarsus distal portion
coracoid
proximal
phalanx
phalanx
vertebra
cheek tooth
tibia
femur
humerus
tarsal phalanx
sesamoid
Element
burnt
–
burnt
burnt
burnt
burnt
burnt
burnt
–
–
burnt
burnt
–
–
Doves &
Pigeons
California
Meadow Vole
California
Ruddy Duck
Ruddy Duck
Tufted Puffin
Black-tailed
Deer
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Doves &
Pigeons
Beaver
Canada Goose
Cottontails
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Burn
Type*
–
Tule Elk
–
288
Level
200-210
200-210
200-210
220-230
220-230
220-230
260-270
260-270
260-270
260-270
230-240
260-270
260-270
030-040
190-200
Unit
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
cf. Anas
Castor canadensis
Castor canadensis
Castor canadensis
cf. Microtus
cf. Microtus
cf. Microtus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Thamnophis
californicus
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
9
1
1
Count
metapodial
humerus
femur
femur
dentary
femur
ungual phalanx
phalanx
4th metatarsal
vertebra
dentary
innominate
vertebra
upper molar 2
femur
Element
–
–
–
–
–
right
–
–
left
–
–
right
left
left
right
–
–
–
coronoid
process
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
proximal
portion
epiphysis
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
burnt
–
–
–
–
–
–
Tule Elk
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Ducks
Beaver
Beaver
Beaver
Voles
Voles
Voles
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Garter Snakes
–
–
–
–
–
Feature 1
Feature 2
Feature 2
Feature 2
–
–
–
–
–
–
Burn
Type*
Meadow Vole
–
Side
epiphysis
Part
289
Level
190-200
190-200
110-120
110-120
100-110
250-260
250-260
250-260
220-230
220-230
040-050
040-050
040-050
040-050
240-250
Unit
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Odocoileus
Microtus
californicus
Anas sp.
Oxyura
jamaicensis
Microtus
californicus
cf. Canis
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Anas strepera
Taxa
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
Count
upper premolar
2
astragalus
innominate
lower molar 1-3
dentary
lower molar 1
humerus
coracoid
vertebra
caudal vertebra
innominate
humerus
humerus
lower molar 1
dentary
Element
left
right
–
–
left
right
–
left
left
left
left
left
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
left
left
–
proximal
portion
distal portion
Side
Part
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
burnt
–
–
–
–
Black-tailed
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Tule Elk
California
Meadow Vole
Ducks
California
Meadow Vole
Canids
Ruddy Duck
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Burn
Type*
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
burnt
Gadwall
–
290
Level
240-250
240-250
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
200-210
060-070
060-070
060-070
Unit
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
Microtus
californicus
Odocoileus
hemionus
Procyon lotor
Thamnophis sp.
Anas sp.
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Sylvilagus sp.
hemionus
columbianus
Microtus
californicus
Anas sp.
Taxa
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
Count
phalanx
maxillary
upper molar 1
vertebra
radius
metapodial
upper incisor 1
premaxilla
humerus
lower molar 1-2
dentary
tooth
phalanx
dentary
Element
burnt
–
–
–
left
left
–
proximal
portion
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
left
–
–
–
–
right
–
–
–
left
–
–
left
–
–
–
California
Meadow Vole
Black-tailed
Deer
Raccoon
Garter Snakes
Ducks
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Cottontails
Tule Elk
California
Meadow Vole
Ducks
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Burn
Type*
Deer
proximal
portion
–
left
Side
–
Part
291
Level
050-060
050-060
050-060
070-080
080-090
080-090
080-090
090-100
090-100
090-100
230-240
230-240
230-240
230-240
Unit
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
cf. Canis
Microtus
californicus
Anas sp.
Procyon lotor
Oxyura
jamaicensis
Procyon lotor
Anas sp.
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Procyon lotor
columbianus
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
lower molar 1
femur
femur
carpal
femur
humerus
humerus
upper incisor 1
tibia
carpometacarpu
s
ulna
coracoid
radius
lower incisor 2
Element
right
–
left
left
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
burnt
burnt
–
–
–
distal portion
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Black-tailed
Deer
California
Meadow Vole
Canids
Ducks
distal portion
–
Raccoon
–
left
Raccoon
–
Raccoon
–
–
Ruddy Duck
–
Ducks
Raccoon
–
–
Tule Elk
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Burn
Type*
–
left
left
–
left
–
–
proximal
portion
–
right
–
Side
distal portion
–
Part
292
Level
230-240
230-240
230-240
210-220
210-220
210-220
210-220
210-220
210-220
210-220
210-220
210-220
210-220
210-220
210-220
Unit
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
Antilocapra
americana
Anas sp.
cf. Lepus
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
cf. Canis
Branta canadensis
cf. Canis
cf. Canis
Taxa
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
Count
humerus
carpal
navicular
caudal vertebra
humerus
lower incisor 1
lower molar 1-2
dentary
ectocuneform
tooth
astragalus
carpometacarpu
s
femur
canine
humerus
Element
–
right
left
–
left
left
left
left
left
–
left
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
left
–
–
distal portion
left
Side
distal portion
Part
Pronghorn
Ducks
–
Hares
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Canids
Tule Elk
Tule Elk
Tule Elk
Tule Elk
Canada Goose
Canids
burnt
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
burnt
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Burn
Type*
burnt
Canids
–
293
Level
210-220
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
Unit
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Oxyura
jamaicensis
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Odocoileus
hemionus
columbianus
Taxa
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
Count
dentary
upper molar 2
upper molar 1-2
maxillary
magnum
lower premolar
lateral phalanx
ungual phalanx
thoracic
vertebra
carpometacarpu
s
ulna
Element
–
–
–
–
right
left
left
right
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
left
–
Side
–
proximal
portion
proximal
portion
Part
–
–
–
–
burnt
–
–
–
–
–
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
California
Meadow Vole
Black-tailed
Deer
Black-tailed
Deer
Black-tailed
Deer
Black-tailed
Deer
Black-tailed
Deer
Black-tailed
Deer
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Burn
Type*
burnt
Ruddy Duck
–
294
Level
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
Unit
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Microtus
californicus
Taxa
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
1
2
Count
ilium
humerus
humerus
humerus
humerus
femur
femur
femur
tibia
lower molar1
upper molar 1
cheek tooth
dentary
lower molar 1-2
Element
–
left
left
right
–
–
–
–
left
right
–
right
distal portion
distal portion
right
–
–
–
–
–
left
left
–
right
right
–
proximal
portion
–
Side
Part
Burn
Type*
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
burnt
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
–
California
–
Meadow Vole
burnt
California
–
Meadow Vole
295
Level
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
220-230
210-220
210-220
210-220
210-220
210-220
210-220
210-220
220-230
220-230
Unit
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
2E
6W
1E
Procyon lotor
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Cervus elaphus
nannodes
Castor canadensis
Branta canadensis
Anas strepera
Anas strepera
Anas sp.
Lepus californicus
Castor canadensis
Procyon lotor
Taxa
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Count
–
left
left
right
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
upper premolar
–
–
–
left
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Raccoon
Beaver
Tule Elk
Tule Elk
Tule Elk
Tule Elk
Tule Elk
Tule Elk
Tule Elk
Canada Goose
–
–
Gadwall
Gadwall
Black-tailed
Jackrabbit
Ducks
Beaver
–
left
right
–
–
–
burnt
burnt
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Burn
Type*
–
Raccoon
–
proximal end
right
left
–
–
–
–
right
–
–
distal portion
Side
Part
rib
antler
scapula
upper premolar
2
scapula
upper molar 1-3
cranium
scapula
coracoid
tibiotarsus
humerus
upper cheek
tooth
2nd metatarsal
lower canine
Element
296
230-240
1E
Procyon lotor
Taxa
1
Count
calcaneum
4
Element
–
Part
left
Side
–
Raccoon
–
Burn
Type*
Source: Unpublished document on file at CSUS Anthropology Lab; Note: All data presented here is copied from source. No weights were
recorded in original source; *= Burn types were not distinguished in source
Level
Unit
297
298
Appendix C.
Subsistence Pattern Data
299
Weight
Size
Very Small
Small
Table C-1. Key for Subsistence Pattern Charts.
Mammals
Birds & Kilograms Fish
Turtles
Very small
0-0.5
Mammal
Small Mammal
Ducks, 0.5 to 1
Small fish
Coots,
Grebes
Medium
Turtle
Small to Medium Geese
Mammal
Medium Mammal
Large
Large Mammal
Small-Medium
Habitat
Terrestrial
Species
Freshwater
Marsh
Grasslands
Riparian
Freshwater
Marsh and
Grasslands
Freshwater
Marsh and
Riparian
Grasslands and
Riparian
All 3 Habitats
Procurement Hunting
Method†
Single Takes
(dart; bow and
arrow; harpoon)
Standard
Length*
Value
1
Up to 20cm
2
1 to 5
Medium fish
20 to 40 cm
3
5 to 20
Large fish
40 cm to
100 cm
100+ cm
4
20 to 100+ Extra large
fish
5
Fish
Slow waters
1
Fast waters
2
3
4
Varied
5
Group (net;
drives)
Both single and
group
Key: *= fish only, †= Ugan 2005
6
7
1
2
3
Taxa
Weight
Pronghorn Antelope
5
Mink
2
3
Cottontails
2
2
Grey Squirrel
2
1
Geese
3
Ducks, Coots, Grebes
2
Turtle
2
Sturgeon
5
Chinook Salmon
4
Sacramento Sucker
3
Hardhead
4
Hitch
2
3
3
Thicktail Chub
3
Sacramento Perch
4
Tule Perch
2
Grand Total
Habitat Procurement Number
2
3
3
5
1
1
2
2
7
2
2
2
2
1
10
3
1
2
3
1
14
4
3
4
1
3
33
5
1
48
3
1
4
3
1
2
5
3
40
3
2
2
1
2
13
5
2
9
5
2
7
1
2
11
1
2
299
1
2
8
519
Category Totals
Weight
Habitat
1
14
1
2
117
2
3
78
3
4
303
4
5
7
5
6
0
6
7
Table C-2. SAC-67 Subsistence Pattern Data.
364
22
24
4
105
0
0
Procurement
1
81
2
358
3
80
300
Taxa
Weight
Artiodactyls
Tule Elk
5
Black-tailed Deer
5
Canids
4
Racoon
4
3
Cottontails
2
2
1
2
Turtle
2
Sturgeon
5
Chinook Salmon
4
Sacramento Sucker
3
Hardhead
4
3
3
3
Sacramento Perch
4
Grand Total
Category Totals
Weight
Habitat
7
1
1
1
131
1
6
3
7
2
75
2
6
1
9
3
286
3
3
1
2
4
59
4
2
2
45
5
10
5
2
2
25
6
2
1
17
7
6
1
131
1
3
22
5
1
11
3
1
2
3
1
8
5
3
216
3
2
16
1
2
2
5
2
22
5
2
1
1
2
24
561
48
87
28
0
250
147
1
Procurement
1
188
2
135
3
238
301
Taxa
Weight
Tule Elk
5
Black-tailed Deer
5
Pronghorn Antelope
5
Canids
4
Racoon
4
Striped Skunk
3
3
Cottontails
2
2
1
4
Badger
4
Geese
3
2
Turtle
2
Sturgeon
5
Chinook Salmon
4
Sacramento Sucker
3
Hardhead
4
3
Hitch
2
3
3
Thicktail Chub
3
Sacramento Perch
4
Tule Perch
2
Grand Total
7
1
61
6
3
26
2
3
26
6
1
18
3
1
10
6
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
6
1
15
3
1
1
2
1
3
4
3
26
1
3
165
5
1
29
3
1
20
3
1
19
5
3
286
3
2
3
1
2
41
1
2
40
5
2
15
5
2
10
1
2
145
1
2
1390
1
2
20
2375
Category Totals
Weight
Habitat
1
15
1
2
257
2
3
526
3
4
1444
4
5
133
5
6
7
1801
34
68
11
340
60
61
Procurement
1
178
2
1668
3
529
302
Taxa
Weight Habitat Procurement
Number
Tule Elk
5
7
1
126
Black-tailed Deer
5
6
3
106
Pronghorn Antelope
5
2
3
1
Canids
4
6
1
19
Racoon
4
3
1
149
River Otter
4
5
1
1
Spotted Skunk
2
7
1
1
Striped Skunk
3
6
1
4
3
2
2
2
Cottontails
2
2
2
10
2
2
1
3
Grey Squirrel
2
3
1
3
4
3
1
85
Geese
3
4
3
18
2
1
3
53
Sturgeon
5
3
1
13
Chinook Salmon
4
3
1
4
Sacramento Sucker
3
5
3
103
Hardhead
4
3
2
57
3
1
2
50
Hitch
2
1
2
100
3
5
2
79
3
5
2
50
Thicktail Chub
3
1
2
221
Sacramento Perch
4
1
2
865
Tule Perch
2
1
2
78
Grand Total
2201
Category Totals
Weight
Habitat
1
0
1
2
248
2
3
527
3
4
1180
4
5
246
5
6
2201
7
1367
16
311
18
233
129
127
2201
Procurement
1
514
2
1512
3
175
2201
303
Taxa
Weight Habitat Procurement
Number
Black-tailed Deer
5
6
3
29
Pronghorn Antelope
5
2
3
2
American Black Bear
5
8
1
1
River Otter
4
5
1
2
Mink
2
5
1
1
Spotted Skunk
2
7
1
1
Striped Skunk
3
6
1
1
3
2
2
7
Cottontails
2
2
2
50
Wood Rats
2
3
1
32
1
6
1
25
4
3
1
4
Geese
3
4
3
14
2
1
3
40
Turtle
2
5
1
20
Sturgeon
5
3
1
8
Chinook Salmon
4
3
1
34
Sacramento Sucker
3
5
3
247
Hardhead
4
3
2
14
3
1
2
40
Hitch
2
1
2
16
3
5
2
8
Thicktail Chub
3
1
2
19
Sacramento Perch
4
1
2
81
Tule Perch
2
1
2
10
Grand Total
706
Category Totals
Weight
Habitat
1
25
1
2
170
2
3
336
3
4
135
4
5
40
5
6
7
8
206
59
92
14
278
55
1
1
Procurement
1
129
2
245
3
332
304
Taxa
Weight
Tule Elk
5
Black-tailed Deer
5
Pronghorn Antelope
5
Canids
4
Racoon
4
Mink
2
Striped Skunk
3
3
Cottontails
2
1
4
Badger
4
Geese
3
2
Sturgeon
5
Salmon sp.
4
Sacramento Sucker
3
Hardhead
4
3
Hitch
2
3
3
Thicktail Chub
3
Sacramento Perch
4
Grand Total
Habitat Procurement
Number
7
1
201
6
3
41
2
3
22
6
1
24
3
1
42
5
1
1
6
1
1
2
2
3
2
2
4
6
1
40
3
1
3
2
1
6
4
3
94
1
3
299
3
1
160
3
1
427
5
3
6
3
2
5
1
2
62
1
2
22
5
2
29
5
3
6
1
2
128
1
2
109
1735
Category Totals
Weight
Habitat
1
40
1
2
326
2
3
329
3
4
616
4
5
424
5
6
7
620
35
637
94
42
106
201
Procurement
1
946
2
362
3
427
305
Taxa
Weight
Tule Elk
6
Black-tailed Deer
5
Pronghorn Antelope
5
Canids
4
Racoon
4
Mink
2
Striped Skunk
3
3
Cottontails
2
2
Grey Squirrel
2
1
4
Badger
4
Geese
3
2
Turtle
2
Sturgeon
5
Chinook Salmon
4
Sacramento Sucker
3
Hardhead
4
3
Hitch
2
3
3
Thicktail Chub
3
Sacramento Perch
4
Tule Perch
2
Grand Total
Habitat ProcurementNumber
7
1
62
6
3
33
2
3
29
6
1
27
3
1
12
5
1
1
5
1
1
2
2
54
2
2
29
2
1
28
3
1
2
3
1
160
3
1
1
2
1
3
4
3
30
1
3
220
5
1
88
3
1
26
3
1
29
5
3
542
3
2
21
1
2
43
1
2
53
5
2
46
5
2
18
1
2
156
1
2
1713
1
2
28
3455
Category Totals
Weight
1
2
3
4
5
6
160
449
890
1806
88
62
Table C-8. Middle Period Subsistence Pattern Data.
Habitat
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
2213
143
251
30
696
60
62
Procurement
1
473
2
2161
3
821
306
Spotted Skunk
Striped Skunk
Cottontails
Grey Squirrel
Wood Rats
Badger
Geese
Turtle
Sturgeon
Salmon sp.
Sacramento Sucker
Hardhead
Hitch
Thicktail Chub
Sacramento Perch
Tule Perch
Grand Total
Taxa
Tule Elk
Black-tailed Deer
Pronghorn Antelope
Canids
Racoon
River Otter
Mink
2
3
3
2
2
2
2
1
4
4
3
2
2
5
4
3
4
3
2
3
3
3
4
2
Weight
6
5
5
4
4
4
2
7
6
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
2
4
1
5
3
3
5
3
1
1
5
5
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
1
1
1
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
6
12
64
3
3
32
65
92
6
126
392
27
181
465
356
76
152
138
116
56
368
1055
88
4648
Habitat ProcurementNumber
7
1
327
6
3
176
2
3
25
6
1
43
3
1
191
5
1
3
5
1
2
Category Totals
Weight
1
2
3
4
5
6
Table C-9. Late Period Subsistence Pattern Data.
65
751
1192
1931
382
327
Habitat
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
2193
110
1105
126
560
225
329
Procurement
1
1624
2
2125
3
899
307

RESOURCE INTENSIFICATION IN CENTRAL

Transcription

Similar documents

2015 SPRING WACAC COLLEGE FAIR

WHEN? WHAT? WHERE?

RETAIL / OFFICE / RESTAURANT

PDF

March 2014

The Diamond - Celebrate Me Week

1308 28TH STREET SACRAMENTO, CA 95816

Youth Services Unit Making an Impact

judicial

2012-Sponsorship Proposal