DOCSLIB.ORG

Tataviam Geography and Ethnohistory

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Tataviam Geography and Ethnohistory Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology UC Merced Peer Reviewed Title: Tataviam Geography and Ethnohistory Journal Issue: Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology, 12(2) Author: Johnson, John R., Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, California Earle, David D., City of Lancaster City Museum/Art Gallery, California Publication Date: 1990 Publication Info: Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology Permalink: https://escholarship.org/uc/item/9b23j0pt Keywords: ethnography, ethnohistory, archaeology, native peoples, Great Basin Abstract: Basic information about Tataviam linguistics and geography obtained from Fustero and other Kitanemuk speakers has been discussed in previous publications (Kroeber 1915, 1925; Harrington 1935; Bright 1975; King and Blackburn 1978; Hudson 1982). What is not so well known is that Harrington continued his Tataviam investigations among Indians of Yokuts, Tübatulabal, and Serrano descent, who had been associated with Tataviam speakers during the nineteenth century. More information about Tataviam history, territory, and language therefore is available than has previously been summarized. This justifies a new presentation and evaluation of existing evidence. We begin with a review of Tataviam ethnogeographic data. Copyright Information: All rights reserved unless otherwise indicated. Contact the author or original publisher for any necessary permissions. eScholarship is not the copyright owner for deposited works. Learn more at http://www.escholarship.org/help_copyright.html#reuse eScholarship provides open access, scholarly publishing services to the University of California and delivers a dynamic research platform to scholars worldwide. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 191-214 (1990). Tataviam Geography and Ethnohistory JOHN R. JOHNSON, Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, 2559 Puesta del Sol Rd., Santa Barbara, CA 93105. DA'STD D. EARLE, City of Lanca.ster City Museum/Art Gallery, 44801 N. Sierra Hwy., Lancaster, CA 93535. I^EVERAL important articles have appeared words and phrases in the Tataviam language in recent years that have summarized infor­ have hitherto been pubhshed (Bright 1975). mation about the Tataviam, or Alliklik, one of Basic information about Tataviam lin­ the most enigmatic California Indian groups guistics and geography obtained from Fustero (Bright 1975; King and Blackburn^ 1978; and other Kitanemuk speakers has been dis­ Hudson 1982). So little actually is known cussed in previous pubhcations (Kroeber 1915, about these people that their very existence as 1925; Harrington 1935; Bright 1975; King and a distinct hnguistic community has remained Blackburn 1978; Hudson 1982). What is not in doubt. Indeed, some researchers have so well known is that Harrington continued suggested that aU or most of their territory his Tataviam investigations among Indians of may have belonged to the Venturefio Yokuts, Ttibatulabal, and Serrano descent, Chumash, Kitanemuk, or Serrano (Van who had been associated with Tataviam Valkenburgh 1935; Beeler and Klar 1977). speakers during the nineteenth century. More Because of the scarcity of data hitherto information about Tataviam history, territory, avaUable, there has been a need to di.scover and language therefore is available than has new approaches to the problems of who the previously been summarized. This justifies a Tataviam were, what their linguistic affiliation new presentation and evttluation of existing was, and what territory they occupied.' evidence. We begin with a review of Tatav­ 'What is known today regarding the iam ethnogeographic data. Tataviam comes primarily from the ethno­ CORROBORATION OF TATAVIAM graphic research of two anthropologists, Alfred L. Kroeber and John P. Harrington. ETHNIC IDENTITY' Kroeber's Tataviam data came from a single Recent statements on Tataviam cultural consultant, Juan Jose Fustero, whom he inter­ geography by King and Blackburn (1978) and viewed for part of a day in Los Angeles in Hud.son (1982) identify the Santa Clarita 1912 (Kroeber 1912, 1915). Harrington fh-st Basin area (the upper Santa Clara River met Fustero in 1913 at his home near Piru in drainage) as the core territory of this group. Ventura County and subsequently visited him Their analysis is based on Kroeber's and on several occasions accompanied by his Harrington's interviews with Fustero and Tejon consultants during placename trips other Kitanemuk consultants. For reference (Bright 1975; Harrington 1986:RI. 98, Fr. 536, on current maps of the area, the core territory 615, Rl. 181, Fr. 10-14; MUls and Brickfield is north of the Los Angeles metropolitan area. 1986). Harrington also coUected some It partially overlaps the western part of the Tataviam lexical items and ethnogeographic Angeles National Forest and includes the information from several of his Kitanemuk northwest portion of Los Angeles County as consultants at Tejon Ranch. Only eleven weU as part of Ventura County. 192 JOURNAL OF CALIFORNLA AND GREAT BASIN ANTHROPOLOGY The Santa Clarita Basin was first identi­ Tochonanga, documented in an 1843 land- fied as the home of a distinct linguistic and grant diseho (map), appears to have been lo­ ethnic community in an important early cated to the southeast of NewhaU (Fig. 2). Spanish account. This was the expedition We have identified other viUages and camp­ diary of the Spanish missionary explorer. sites named by Harrington's informants (see Father Francisco Garces, who passed through Fig. 1). They include the foUowmg:c2fa^re'eng, the region in early 1776. He visited the located at the original NewhaU townsite Cienaga de Santa Clara before heading spring; apatsitsing, situated on upper Castaic northeast across the Liebre-SawmUl mountain Creek near tikatsing and north of Redrock range in the northern reaches of Tataviam Mountain; and naqava'atang, farther down­ territory and into the Antelope VaUey (Coues stream and east of Townsend Peak.'^ Several 1900:268; Earle 1990:89-92). rancherias also were located on Piru Creek. In traveUing northeast from the upper The Piru viUages and several other rancherias Santa Clara region, Garces was guided by located on the northern edge of Tataviam Indians from the Antelope Valley who territory are discussed in the next section. "promised to conduct me to their land." The TERRITORIAL BOUNDARIES vUlage in the Antelope VaUey to which these Indians took him (in the Lake Hughes- A delineation of the territorial extent of Ehzabeth Lake area) was later identified by Tataviam speech mvolves the problematic him as being Beheme (the Mojave Desert issue of boundaries. Two difficulties have branch of the Serrano), and its inhabitants presented themselves in analyzingterritoriahty were clearly distinguished from the Indians of among Takic groups. First, the disruptions Santa Clara. In discussing boundaries of and population decline that occurred in indigenous hnguistic territories in Southern Mission times often made later recoUection California, Garces elsewhere stated that the difficult regarding what may have been former Beheme were bounded by the Indians of San physicaUy marked boundaries. Later consul­ Gabriel and Santa Clara (Coues 1900:444). tants were much clearer about core territories Garces thus identified an Indian territorial than about the locations of peripheral borders. and linguistic unit, "Santa Clara," which was, Second, in discussing the "real world" he indicated, distinct from that of San Gabriel significance of territoriahty, one must distin­ (Gabriehno) and that of the Beiieme (Mojave guish between the formal and substantive Desert Serrano). manifestations of territorial occupation and use. The boundaries of linguistic/ethnic units TATAVLAM SETTLEMENTS reflected the organization of society into a King and Blackburn (1978:536) have hsted series of multi-lineage territorial pohtical units several major Tataviam rancheria sites on the ("localized clans"). These clan units claimed basis of information from the Harrington certain territories as their own, but were not notes and other sources. These include the the only groups to gather resources in them major viUage of tsawayung at the site of or estabhsh temporary camps therein. The Rancho San Francisquito (NewhaU Ranch), granting of permission by one group to anoth­ near Castaic Junction, tikatsing on upper er to gather and estabhsh seasonal camps in Castaic Creek, andpi'ing, located at the inter­ its erstwhUe territory was very common. section of Castaic Creek and Elizabeth Lake Harrington's consultants at the Tejon Ranch Canyon (Fig. 1). The important rancheria of noted this phenomenon in discussing areas TATAVIAM GEOGRAPHY AND ETHNOHISTORY 193 194 JOURNAL OF CALIFORNLA AND GREAT BASIN ANTHROPOLOGY h C/l fr r ca JD > HJ v.. C <U o > Kn Oi .•n ca c ca 3 U K a Sant O fe­ a. ci) Q. 3 ^-5 O Si C o c <U o U a 4= loc ca •n a 0) > 3 c o •o r; c o ca •^ JO o 3 .3 u j; 'U •? o P cj nc ca a i< UH n fS«; Sa o x; o u ca o a; s o ) ap id s_ E 0 ir f^i ^j •o .^ C •x^ '^" n CIO -gra •a r 1^ c r^ ^ ca -s^ ro o e^ K, 0^0 o e Th (N an IJL, TATAVIAM GEOGRAPHY AND ETHNOHISTORY 195 shared between the Kitanemuk and the Kitanemuk consultants, Eugenia M6ndez, to Kawausu, and many other examples could be have spoken a dialect of Serrano/Kitanemuk^ cited (Earle 1990:94-95, 98). Thus, whUe (Harrmgton 1986: Rl. 98, Fr. 675-676; Earle formal territorial frontiers appear to have 1990:92-93). existed in at least some areas of southern Three of these four communities are Cahfornia, their expression "on the ground" mentioned in Mission-era documents (Cook is complicated by this permission-granting and 1960:256-257; Temple MS:49-53). The vUlage seasonal movement of visiting groups. in the Antelope VaUey visited by Garces and The trans-boundary occupation of camp­ identified as Beneme(Serrano/Kitanemuk) in sites, as weU as historical changes in the hnguistic affiliation was most probably location of ethnic frontiers, have made it kwarung, located near Lake Hughes. Garces difficult to use the linguistic affihations of clearly indicated that the vihage was not local placenames to reconstruct hnguistic or Tataviam.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 4.3 Cultural Resources
    4.3 CULTURAL RESOURCES INTRODUCTION W & S Consultants, (W&S) conducted an archaeological survey of the project site that included an archival record search conducted at the local California Historic Resource Information System (CHRIS) repository at the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) located on the campus of California State University, Fullerton. In July 2010, a field survey of the 1.2-mile proposed project site was conducted. The archaeological survey report can be found in Appendix 4.3. Mitigation measures are recommended which would reduce potential impacts to unknown archeological resources within the project site, potential impacts to paleontological resources, and the discovery of human remains during construction to less than significant. PROJECT BACKGROUND Ethnographic Setting Tataviam The upper Santa Clara Valley region, including the study area, was inhabited during the ethnographic past by an ethnolinguistic group known as the Tataviam.1 Their language represents a member of the Takic branch of the Uto-Aztecan linguistic family.2 In this sense, it was related to other Takic languages in the Los Angeles County region, such as Gabrielino/Fernandeño (Tongva) of the Los Angeles Basin proper, and Kitanemuk of the Antelope Valley. The Tataviam are thought to have inhabited the upper Santa Clara River drainage from about Piru eastwards to just beyond the Vasquez Rocks/Agua Dulce area; southwards as far as Newhall and the crests of the San Gabriel and Santa Susana Mountains; and northwards to include the middle reaches of Piru Creek, the Liebre Mountains, and the southwesternmost fringe of Antelope Valley.3 Their northern boundary most likely ran along the northern foothills of the Liebre Mountains (i.e., the edge of Antelope Valley), and then crossed to the southern slopes of the Sawmill Mountains and Sierra Pelona, extending 1 NEA, and King, Chester.
    [Show full text]
  • Antelope Valley Indian Museum State Historic Park 15701 East Avenue M Lancaster, CA 93535 (661) 946-3055
    Our Mission “ Antelope Valley The mission of California State Parks is to provide for the health, inspiration and Nestled in the rocks and education of the people of California by helping buttes of the Mojave Indian Museum to preserve the state’s extraordinary biological diversity, protecting its most valued natural and Desert on Piute Butte State Historic Park cultural resources, and creating opportunities for high-quality outdoor recreation. is a precious gem that contributes immeasurably to the mosaic beauty of the desert, the Antelope California State Parks supports equal access. Valley Indian Museum.” Prior to arrival, visitors with disabilities who need assistance should contact the park at – Shirley Harriman (661) 946-3055. If you need this publication in an Antelope Valley Woman Magazine alternate format, contact [email protected]. CALIFORNIA STATE PARKS P.O. Box 942896 Sacramento, CA 94296-0001 For information call: (800) 777-0369 (916) 653-6995, outside the U.S. 711, TTY relay service www.parks.ca.gov Antelope Valley Indian Museum State Historic Park 15701 East Avenue M Lancaster, CA 93535 (661) 946-3055 www.avim.parks.ca.gov © 2005 California State Parks (Rev. 2018) Standing snugly among the Perhaps as many as 2,000 his Antelope Valley Indian Research Museum majestic granite outcroppings of years ago, speakers of the to display his large collection of prehistoric Piute Butte, the Antelope Valley Shoshonean language and ethnographic American Indian artifacts. Indian Museum incorporates group—the Kitanemuk, In 1939 Grace Wilcox Oliver, a student of the bedrock into its interior Tataviam, Kawaiisu, and anthropology, bought the Edwards home.
    [Show full text]
  • 1. Introduction
    1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Ethnographic setting The Chimariko language was spoken in the nineteenth century in a few small villages in Trinity County, in north-western California. The villages were located along a twenty-mile stretch of the Trinity River and parts of the New River and South Fork River. In 1849, the Chimariko numbered around two hundred and fifty people. They were nearly extinct in 1906, except for a ‘toothless old woman and a crazy old man’, as well as ‘a few mixed bloods’ (Kroeber 1925:109). The ‘toothless old woman’ Kroeber refers to was most likely Polly Dyer and the ‘crazy old man’ Dr. Tom, also identified by Dixon (1910:295) as a ‘half-crazy old man’. The last speaker probably died in the 1940s. First contact with European explorers occurred early in the nineteenth century, in the 1820s or 1830s, when fur trappers came to the region. However, the tribe was left largely unaffected by this encounter (Dixon 1910:297). During the Gold Rush in the 1850s the Chimariko territory was overrun by gold seekers. Continuous gold mining activities in the region threatened the salmon supply, the main food source of the tribe, and led to a bitter conflict in the 1860s (Silver 1978a:205). The fights between European miners and the tribe resulted in the near annihilation of the Chimariko in the 1860s. The few survivors took refuge with the neighboring Shasta on the upper Salmon River or in Scott Valley or with the Hupa to the northwest (Dixon 1910:297). Once the gold was gone and the miners left the region, the survivors returned to their homes after years in exile (Silver 1978a:205).
    [Show full text]
  • The Desert Serrano of the Mojave River
    The Desert Serrano of the Mojave River Mark Q. Sutton and David D. Earle Abstract century, although he noted the possible survival of The Desert Serrano of the Mojave River, little documented by “perhaps a few individuals merged among other twentieth century ethnographers, are investigated here to help un- groups” (Kroeber 1925:614). In fact, while occupation derstand their relationship with the larger and better known Moun- tain Serrano sociopolitical entity and to illuminate their unique of the Mojave River region by territorially based clan adaptation to the Mojave River and surrounding areas. In this effort communities of the Desert Serrano had ceased before new interpretations of recent and older data sets are employed. 1850, there were survivors of this group who had Kroeber proposed linguistic and cultural relationships between the been born in the desert still living at the close of the inhabitants of the Mojave River, whom he called the Vanyumé, and the Mountain Serrano living along the southern edge of the Mojave nineteenth century, as was later reported by Kroeber Desert, but the nature of those relationships was unclear. New (1959:299; also see Earle 2005:24–26). evidence on the political geography and social organization of this riverine group clarifies that they and the Mountain Serrano belonged to the same ethnic group, although the adaptation of the Desert For these reasons we attempt an “ethnography” of the Serrano was focused on riverine and desert resources. Unlike the Desert Serrano living along the Mojave River so that Mountain Serrano, the Desert Serrano participated in the exchange their place in the cultural milieu of southern Califor- system between California and the Southwest that passed through the territory of the Mojave on the Colorado River and cooperated nia can be better understood and appreciated.
    [Show full text]
  • Native American Protocols, Archdiocese of Los Angeles
    NATIVE AMERICAN PROTOCOLS, ARCHDIOCESE OF LOS ANGELES INTRODUCTION The Archdiocese of Los Angeles acknowledges that the Native Americans of California are the First People of the Land and that the boundaries of the Archdiocese of Los Angeles are established on the traditional indigenous lands sacred to the people of four Native American Nations. These people were the builders of the historic missions that are today under the care of the church in the Archdiocese of Los Angeles. The Archdiocese recognizes that these tribes hold a special relationship with these missions built by their ancestors – Mission San Gabriel, Mission San Buenaventura, Mission Santa Barbara, Mission San Fernando, and Mission Santa Ines, Mission San Juan Capistrano (now under the care of the Diocese of Orange), as well as with the sub-station mission church of Our Lady Queen of the Angels, Nuestra Señora La Reina de Los Angeles (La Placita). For these reasons the Archdiocese honors a special relationship with the people of the Chumash, Tongva, Tataviam, and Acjachemen Nations. In addition, the Archdiocese recognizes that over 150,000 self-identified urban Native Americans representing over fifty American tribes live in the county of Los Angeles, the largest assemblage of urban Native Americans in the United States, and that these urban Native Americans are deserving of special recognition and pastoral concern. (The actual Native American population in the County of Los Angeles is probably between 200,000 and 250,000). The Archdiocese, in consultation with representatives of the indigenous Native American people who have a traditional presence in the Archdiocese, wishes to set forth common understandings and a participatory framework for the Church of Los Angeles, its institutions and faith communities to respect and honor within its structure, regulations, practices and liturgies the sacred traditions and practices of the Native American peoples.
    [Show full text]
  • Phase I Cultural Resources Reconnaissance Survey
    PHASE I CULTURAL RESOURCES RECONNAISSANCE SURVEY PROPOSED ALTON PARKWAY EXTENSION PROJECT, INCLUDING BAKER RANCH, LAKE FOREST, CALIFORNIA Prepared for Mr. Gene Spindler Shea Properties Vice President, Commercial Development 130 Vantis, Suite 200 Aliso Viejo, CA 92656 USGS 7.5-Minute Quadrangle: El Toro, California BonTerra Project No. Shea J003 Prepared by Patrick O. Maxon, M.A., RPA BonTerra Consulting 151 Kalmus Drive, Suite E-200 Costa Mesa, California 92626 T: (714) 444-9199 F: (714) 444-9599 August 2008 Proposed Alton Parkway Extension Project MANAGEMENT SUMMARY/ABSTRACT PURPOSE AND SCOPE BonTerra Consulting undertook this project as part of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements for the proposed Alton Parkway Extension project. The Phase I Cultural Resources Reconnaissance Report addresses the remaining approximately 380 acres of the Baker Ranch. This cultural study includes a literature review/records search, Native American scoping, and a pedestrian reconnaissance of the project area. The format of this report follows Archaeological Resource Management Reports (ARMR): Recommended Contents and Format (Office of Historic Preservation 1990). DATES OF INVESTIGATION BonTerra Consulting Archaeologist Patrick Maxon (see Appendix A: Personnel Qualifications), a Registered Professional Archaeologist (RPA), conducted the literature review at the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) at California State University, Fullerton on July 23, 2008. The cultural resources survey of the property was conducted on July 30, 2008 by Patrick Maxon and Justin Partridge of BonTerra. Mr. Maxon visited the Lake Forest Historical Society at Heritage Hill Historical Park on August 6, 2008. This report was completed in August 2008. FINDINGS OF THE INVESTIGATION In summary, four cultural resources (CA-ORA-40, CA-ORA-758, CA-ORA-1004 and CA-ORA-1150) are recorded within the Alton Parkway/Baker Ranch project area.
    [Show full text]
  • Uto-Aztecan Maize Agriculture: a Linguistic Puzzle from Southern California
    Uto-Aztecan Maize Agriculture: A Linguistic Puzzle from Southern California Jane H. Hill, William L. Merrill Anthropological Linguistics, Volume 59, Number 1, Spring 2017, pp. 1-23 (Article) Published by University of Nebraska Press DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/anl.2017.0000 For additional information about this article https://muse.jhu.edu/article/683122 Access provided by Smithsonian Institution (9 Nov 2018 13:38 GMT) Uto-Aztecan Maize Agriculture: A Linguistic Puzzle from Southern California JANE H. HILL University of Arizona WILLIAM L. MERRILL Smithsonian Institution Abstract. The hypothesis that the members of the Proto—Uto-Aztecan speech community were maize farmers is premised in part on the assumption that a Proto—Uto-Aztecan etymon for ‘maize’ can be reconstructed; this implies that cognates with maize-related meanings should be attested in languages in both the Northern and Southern branches of the language family. A Proto—Southern Uto-Aztecan etymon for ‘maize’ is reconstructible, but the only potential cog- nate for these terms documented in a Northern Uto-Aztecan language is a single Gabrielino word. However, this word cannot be identified definitively as cognate with the Southern Uto-Aztecan terms for ‘maize’; consequently, the existence of a Proto—Uto-Aztecan word for ‘maize’ cannot be postulated. 1. Introduction. Speakers of Uto-Aztecan languages lived across much of western North America at the time of their earliest encounters with Europeans or Euro-Americans. Their communities were distributed from the Columbia River drainage in the north through the Great Basin, southern California, the American Southwest, and most of Mexico, with outliers as far south as Panama (Miller 1983; Campbell 1997:133—38; Caballero 2011; Shaul 2014).
    [Show full text]
  • John P. Harrington Papers 1907-1959
    THE PAPERS OF John Peabody Harringtan IN THE Smithsonian Institution 1907-1957 VOLUME SEVEN A GUIDE TO THE FIELD NOTES: NATIVE AMERICAN HISTORY, LANGUAGE, AND CULTURE OF MEXICO/CENTRAL AMERICA/ SOUTH AMERICA I:DITRD Br Elaine L. Mills KRAUS INTER AJ 10 L Pl BLIC 110 Di ision of Kraus-Thom Jl )r 1lI1.allon LUl11tcd THE PAPERS OF John Peabody Harringtan IN THE Smithsonian Institution 1907-1957 VOLUME SEVEN A GUIDE TO THE FIELD NOTES: Native American History, Language, and Culture of Mexico/Central America/South America Prepared in the National Anthropological Archives Department ofAnthropology National Museum ofNatural History Washington, D.C. THE PAPERS OF John Peabody Harringtan IN THE Smithsonian Institution 1907-1957 VOLUME SEVEN A GUIDE TO THE FIELD NOTES: Native American History, Language, and Culture of Mexico/Central America/South America EDITED BY Elaine L. Mills KRAUS INTERNATIONAL PUBLICATIONS A Division of Kraus-Thomson Organization Limited White Plains, N.Y. © Copyright The Smithsonian Institution 1988 All rights reserved. No part ofthis work covered by the copyright hereon may be reproduced or used in any form or by any means-graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or taping, information storage and retrieval systems-without written permission ofthe publisher. First Printing Printed in the United States of America §TM The paper in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Science- Permanence of Papers for Contents Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1984. Library ofCongress Cataloging-in-Publication Data INTRODUCTION VII / V1/l Harrington, John Peabody. Scope and Content ofthis Publication VII / vu The papers ofJohn Peabody Harrington in the Smithsonian Institution, 1907 -1957.
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX G AB 52 Notification Letter and Tribal Consultation Findings
    APPENDIX G AB 52 Notification Letter and Tribal Consultation Findings DEPARTMENT OF EXECUTIVE OFFICES CITY PLANNING City of Los Angeles 200 N. SPRING STREET, ROOM 525 LOS ANGELES, CA 90012-4801 - CALIFORNIA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION VINCENT P. BERTONI, AICP SAMANTHA MILLMAN DIRECTOR PRESIDENT (213) 978-1271 VAHID KHORSAND VICE-PRESIDENT KEVIN J. KELLER, AICP EXECUTIVE OFFICER DAVID H. J. AMBROZ (213) 978-1272 CAROLINE CHOE RENEE DAKE WILSON LISA M. WEBBER, AICP KAREN MACK DEPUTY DIRECTOR MARC MITCHELL (213) 978-1274 VERONICA PADILLA-CAMPOS ERIC GARCETTI MAYOR DANA M. PERLMAN http://planning.lacity.org ROCKY WILES COMMISSION OFFICE MANAGER (213) 978-1300 January 4, 2019 Fernandeño Tataviam Band of Mission Indians Gabrielino/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Kimia Fatehi, Director, Public Relations Mission Indians 1019 2nd Street, Ste. 1 Anthony Morales, Chairperson San Fernando, CA 91340 P.O. Box 693 San Gabriel, CA 91778 Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation Gabrielino-Tongva Tribe Andrew Salas, Chairman Linda Candelaria, Co-Chairperson P.O. Box 393 1999 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 1100 Covina, CA 91723 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal San Fernando Band of Mission Indians Council John Valenzuela, Chairperson Robert F. Dorame, Tribal Chair/Cultural P.O. Box 221838 Resources Newhall, CA 91322 P.O. Box 490 Bellflower, CA 90707 Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians Joseph Ontiveros, Cultural Resource Director Gabrielino/Tongva Nation P.O. Box 487 Sam Dunlap, Cultural Resources Director San Jacinto, CA 92581 P.O. Box 86908 Los Angeles, CA 90086 Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians Michael Mirelez, Gabrielino/Tongva Nation Cultural Resources Coordinator Sandonne Goad, Chairperson PO Box 1160 106 ½ Judge John Aiso St, #231 Thermal, CA 92274 Los Angeles, CA 90012 RE: 10810 West Vanowen Street North Hollywood – Valley Village Community Plan CASE NO.: ENV-2018-6903-EAF Dear Tribal Representative: AB 52 TRIBAL CONSULTATION COMPLIANCE FORM This form, completed and signed by appropriate planning staff, must accompany the case file.
    [Show full text]
  • Kizh Not Tongva, E. Gary Stickel, Ph.D (UCLA)
    WHY THE ORIGINAL INDIAN TRIBE OF THE GREATER LOS ANGELES AREA IS CALLED KIZH NOT TONGVA by E. Gary Stickel, Ph.D (UCLA) Tribal Archaeologist Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians/ Kizh Nation 2016 1 WHY THE ORIGINAL INDIAN TRIBE OF THE GREATER LOS ANGELES AREA IS CALLED KIZH NOT TONGVA by E. Gary Stickel, Ph.D (UCLA) Tribal Archaeologist Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians/ Kizh Nation The original Indian Tribe of the greater Los Angeles and Orange County areas, has been referred to variously which has lead to much confusion. This article is intended to clarify what they were called, what they want to be called today (Kizh), and what they do not want to be called (i.e. “tongva”). Prior to the invasion of foreign nations into California (the Spanish Empire and the Russian Empire) in the 1700s, California Indian Tribes did not have pan-tribal names for themselves such as Americans are used to (for example, the “Cherokee” or “Navajo” [Dine]). The local Kizh Indian People identified themselves with their associated resident village (such as Topanga, Cahuenga, Tujunga, Cucamonga, etc.). This concept can be understood if one considers ancient Greece where, before the time of Alexander the Great, the people there did not consider themselves “Greeks” but identified with their city states. So one was an Athenian from Athens or a Spartan from Sparta. Similarly the Kizh identified with their associated villages. Anthropologists, such as renowned A.L. Kroeber, a professor at the University of California at Berkeley, who wrote the first “bible” of California Indians (1925), inappropriately referred to the subject tribe as the “Gabrielinos” (Kroeber 1925).
    [Show full text]
  • Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan Proposed Land
    DRECP Proposed LUPA and Final EIS CHAPTER III.8. CULTURAL RESOURCES III.8 CULTURAL RESOURCES This chapter presents the Affected Environment for the Land Use Plan Amendment (LUPA) Decision Area and the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan (DRECP) area for cultural resources. These areas overlap, and in the following programmatic discussion are referred to broadly as the “California Desert Region.” More than 32,000 cultural resources are known in the DRECP area in every existing environmental context ⎼ from mountain crests to dry lake beds ⎼ and include both surface and subsurface deposits. Cultural resources are categorized as buildings, sites, structures, objects, and districts (including cultural landscapes and Traditional Cultural Properties) under the federal National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). Historic properties are cultural resources included in, or eligible for inclusion in, the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), maintained by the Secretary of the Interior (36 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 60.4). See Section III.8.1.1 for more information on federal regulations and historic properties. This chapter discusses three types of cultural resources classified by their origins: prehistoric, ethnographic, and historic. Prehistoric cultural resources are associated with the human occupation of California prior to prolonged European contact. These resources may include sites and deposits, structures, artifacts, rock art, trails, and other traces of Native American human behavior. In California, the prehistoric period began over 12,000 years ago and extended through the eighteenth century until 1769, when the first Europeans settled in California. Ethnographic resources represent the heritage of a particular ethnic or cultural group, such as Native Americans or African, European, Latino, or Asian immigrants.
    [Show full text]
  • Zanja Trail-7Th St. to Church St Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative
    DRAFT Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Zanja Trail and Greenway Park Project – 7th St. to Church St. October 2019 Lead Agency: City of Redlands P.O. Box 3005 Redlands, CA 92373 Prepared by: 215 N. 5TH Street Redlands, CA 92374 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Zanja Trail and Greenway Park Project – 7th St. to Church St. DRAFT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION ZANJA TRAIL AND GREENWAY PARK – 7TH ST. TO CHURCH ST. PROJECT Lead Agency: City of Redlands Project Proponent: The Redlands Conservancy Project Location: Along the Zanja alignment from 7TH St. to Church St. north of Redlands Boulevard and south of Interstate 10. Project Description: The Proposed Project would begin at 7th Street and end at Church Street. The Proposed Project includes two elements, a Zanja Trail Gateway Monument at its westernmost end at 7th Street, and a 0.4-mile trail from 7th Street to Church Street. The trail is characterized as a decomposed granite pedestrian trail with a varying width of 6 to 12 feet. Public Review Period: October 25, 2019 to November 13, 2019 Mitigation Measures Incorporated into the Project to Avoid Significant Effects: Biological Resources BIO-1: If construction activities occur within the bird breeding season (February 1 through August 31) then a pre-construction nesting survey shall be conducted no more than 30 days prior to the start of construction by a qualified biologist. The nest survey shall include the project site and areas within 500 feet of the site that could be affected by construction activities that could generate indirect effects to nesting birds, such as noise, human activity, dust, etc.
    [Show full text]