Heritage Resources

Cultural Resources Specialist’s Report Whittington Forest Health Restoration Project ______________________ Hat Creek Ranger District Archaeologist February 24, 2012 Cultural Resources Affected Environment Cultural sites on the Lassen National Forest reflect human lives, spanning thousands of years before the time of local written records, history that began when fur trappers and other early travelers began creating written accounts, and traditional practices that continue today. The sites can be divided into three corresponding types: prehistoric, historic, and Traditional Cultural Properties. Prehistoric sites chronicle the activities of ancestral Native Americans, showing where they chose to live, how they made their livings, their technologies, and sometimes how they interacted. Remains range from large, complex sites with pit houses to scattered flakes of stone left by prehistoric flintknappers. Archaeological evidence from the northern portion of the Lassen National Forest suggests that humans occupied the area by 7,500 years ago, and potentially much earlier. Historic times began when Euro-Americans arrived in northeastern California early in the 19th century. Fur trappers were among the earliest arrivals. Travelers headed for the gold fields or settlement areas elsewhere passed through northeastern California, and local settlers established homesteads. Important historic economic activities included cattle and sheep ranching and lumbering. Later historic activities included construction of hydroelectric facilities, utility lines, and an increasingly complex road network. Related sites include wagon roads, building remains, and artifact scatters. Traditional Cultural Properties are important for ―association with cultural practices or beliefs of a living community that (a) are rooted in that community's history, and (b) are important in maintaining the continuing cultural identity of the community‖ (Parker and King 1998). Traditional Cultural Properties are frequently associated with Native American traditional activities. Physical remains of the activities may or may not be present. Many Native Americans maintain traditional use of national forest lands, including sacred areas, places of cultural significance, and sites where traditional gathering activities, or ceremonies, occur. The Whittington project boundary encompasses lands traditionally associated with the Pit River Tribe, falling within the territory of the Atsuge[wi] band. Traditional Cultural Properties, possibly including some with ties to the Pit River Tribe, could be present within the project area. Discussion with tribal members suggests that at least one location was formerly specifically visited by tribal elders: however, relatively recent activities have seriously altered the landscape in this location, perhaps decreasing the sense of a connection to the area. 2 Much of the project area has been previously surveyed for historic and prehistoric sites. However, a relatively recent addition to the project area—in the Twin Buttes vicinity—includes small areas that remain to be surveyed. Areas not previously surveyed to modern standards and that would be affected by the project would receive survey prior to project implementation. The previously recorded sites have been monitored. Only a few previously recorded sites are present in the project area; these include two (possibly associated) historic utility lines and a site with a variety of historic and prehistoric components. Survey completed for the current project identified a fourth site, consisting of a series of discontinuous historic stand markers. History Non-Native American peoples occupied Northeastern California later than many other portions of the state. Certain activities that played a major role in the state‘s history were important on a local scale as well, and some have clearly affected the project area. The development of tree plantations, which initially took place in the 1930s with modifications in the 1960s and later, was a major activity. Settlement and travel occurred within the project area historically. In contrast, the area is well outside current grazing allotments, and ranching use appears limited relative to many other areas on the Hat Creek District. Logging apparently took place historically on nearby lands owned by the Red River Lumber Company; use of the adjacent Forest lands for this purpose could also have occurred. Fur-bearers of various types are present within the project area, and trapping may well have occurred historically. Fur Trapping. Fur trappers were among the first Euro-Americans to venture into the general vicinity of the project area. The first written record discussing the Pit River may be that of Peter Skene Ogden, leader of a Hudson‘s Bay Company expedition. In 1827, the expedition entered an area wherein an unidentified river fits the description of the Pit River (Wheeler-Voegelin 1974:6- 7). Within the project area, fur-bearing animals may have included martin and fisher, bobcat and coyote. Exploration and Travel: By the mid-1840s, pioneers were crossing northeastern California to interior California, and Oregon settlement, locations. Starting in 1848 with the discovery of gold at Sutter‘s Mill, travelers through northeastern California soon included Americans, Europeans, Latin Americans, Australians, and Asians, all on their way to the gold fields. Settlers and gold seekers followed three major historic trails into and across northeastern California. These were the Applegate (the southern route of the Oregon Trail, established in 1846), the Lassen (leading south to the California gold fields, blazed in 1848), and the Nobles (blazed in 1851, and briefly 3 known as the Fort Kearney, South Pass, and Honey Lake Wagon Road, also leading to the gold fields) Trails. Topographic maps indicate that Baker‘s Toll Road (from Fall City to Millville) and a trail segment, both as shown on an 1882 map, were partly within the project area. However, survey designed specifically to identify any toll road remnants within the project area has not yet indicated any. Settlement and Development. The Bureau of Land Management‘s on-line General Land Office data indicates limited use of the project area, but does list one relevant homestead patent. It was to Amelia L. Chase/Pritten, on August 4, 1893. Other transactions include a 1902 Lands to California Patent and early (1892) cash sales to Libbie G. Cox, William A. Smith, and James W. Hall. Plantations. The Burney Spring Experimental Plantation was a reforestation experiment ―conducted in a typical northern California brushfield between August 1936 and November 1938‖ (Dunning and Kirk 1939:58). The main body of the brushfield, about 1,100 acres, was burned, with work completed on August 28, 1936 (Dunning and Kirk 1939:13). Once the area had been burned, it was stripped, an effort completed by the time winter snow fell. Tractors and trail-builders removed the brush stumps in strips about 8-10 feet wide and 10 feet apart, disturbing the ground to a depth of about six inches (Dunning and Kirk 1939:17). A small additional area was stripped without burning, using a Plumas brush stripper pulled by a tractor (Dunning and Kirk 1939:22). The strips were approximately 20 feet apart, and the soil was disturbed down to about six inches. The report also suggests that 38 acres were burned without stripping. Seedlings were planted in some areas, seeds in others. Conical rodent screens were placed over the seeds (Dunning and Kirk 1939). Poison spray was tested as a means of rabbit control. The trees initially planted were ponderosa and Jeffery pine, with sequoia added in a later replanting. A weather shelter and fencing are shown in a May 1937 photograph (Dunning and Kirk 1939:16). Remnants of these cultural features could still exist in areas that are now too overgrown for effective survey. No history of the treatment of the Cypress plantation was available at the time of writing. Activities within that plantation are anticipated to have been similar to the Burney Spring Plantation‘s. 4 Administrative Use/CCC Activities. The Burney Spring Experimental Plantation, at least, had work completed by CCC employees. A 1939 report on the plantation notes regarding the planting of seedlings that ―the planters were three technically trained foresters and four Junior Assistant Technicians, CCC‖ (Dunning and Kirk 1939:31). Seeds were planted by two technical foresters and five Junior Assistant Technicians (Dunning and Kirk 1939:32). A local informant (not named here since we have not yet requested permission to use his name) had previously noted that he worked for the CCC out of the Burney Springs CCC Camp. It appears possible that the reference was not to Burney Spring proper, but to Green Burney Camp, originally called the Burney Springs Camp but located approximately 5.5 miles to the northwest, on private land outside the project area. However, a 1941 report on the Cornaz Tract does indicate a stub camp (a temporary work camp) within the Burney Springs/Cornaz area. (Since the photo attached to the report is not dated, the actual camp use date(s) could be earlier than 1941.) The report also notes the importance of a spring, apparently Burney Spring, to fire protection, especially in light of the ―increasingly hazardous slash areas being left by nearby logging operations‖ (Hatcher 1941:4). Range use. The 1941 report also notes that grazing by sheep, on lands held by the Red River Lumber Company and government lands, occurred in the Burney Springs/Cornaz

Load more