An Exploration of Environmental Variables Affecting the Location Of
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Nevada, Reno Environmental Variables Associated with the Location of Arborglyphs in the Eastern Sierra Nevada, Alpine County, California A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Geography By Nicholas J. Connolly Dr. Kate Berry/Thesis Advisor May, 2012 Copyright by Nicholas J. Connolly 2012 All Rights Reserved THE GRADUATE SCHOOL We recommend that the thesis prepared under our supervision by NICHOLAS J. CONNOLLY entitled Environmental Variables Associated with the Location of Arborglyphs in the Eastern Sierra Nevada, Alpine County, California be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Kate Berry, Ph. D., Advisor Scott Mensing, Ph. D., Committee Member Louis Forline, Ph. D., Graduate School Representative Marsha H. Read, Ph. D., Dean, Graduate School May, 2012 i Abstract Arborglyphs are a unique form of expression created by Basque sheepherders. The sheepherder’s arborglyphs are in part a type of history, art, and literature that is inherently linked to location. Arborglyphs disintegrate as the aspen trees they are on die so it is important to locate and document them before they are lost. This research was guided by three questions: a) which environmental variables are associated with the location of arborglyphs, b) are arborglyphs carved more frequently on the uphill side of the tree, and c) does the Taylor Grazing Act influence quantity of arborglyphs? Nine environmental variables were investigated as they related to the location of arborglyphs. The environmental features studied were: elevation, aspect, slope, distance to surface water, depth to water table, soil drainage, soil depth, precipitation, and temperature. These variables were analyzed in a geographic information system implementing a weights of evidence analysis and each of the environmental variables proved to be correlated (at the 90 percent level) to the location of the arborglyphs. Six of these variables – elevation, slope, soil depth, aspect, precipitation, and distance to surface water – are recommended to land managers as being particularly useful in locating arborglyphs. The second analysis in this study involved the placement of arborglyph on an individual tree with respect to slope and was done with arborglyphs on all slopes and then again with arborglyphs on slopes greater than ten degrees. No correlation was found. The third analysis considered whether the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934, which has been identified as contributing to the decline of Basque sheepherding ii in the American West, was associated with a decrease in arborglyphs. In examining dated arborglyphs before and after the Taylor Grazing Act, a noticeable decline was found in the quantity of arborglyphs in the post-1934 period. iii Acknowledgements This thesis would not have been possible without the help of many people. First, I would like to thank my advisor Dr. Kate Berry for her advice and help during the course of my thesis and geography education. I would also like to thank Dr. Scott Mensing and Dr. Louis Forline for their ideas and guidance throughout the thesis process. A big thanks to the Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest for their support; archaeologists, Alyce Branigan and Fred Frampton for their counsel on all things cultural; David McMorran (retired) and Cheryl Johnson for their assistance with GIS and my supervisor Kathy Lucich for allowing me the flexibility in my schedule to complete this thesis and my Master’s degree. The field work for this thesis was a wonderful time and with the effort of great volunteers we were able to at least in part preserve hundreds of previously undocumented arborglyphs. Therefore, I would like to thank my Passport in Time volunteers: Jim Blaes, Jim Goertzen, Ruby Lowery, Nancy Nagel, Sue Shuman, Lauren Smyth, Jana Williams, and Diane Wilson. Dr. Joxe Mallea-Olaetxe, thank you for your research on arborglyphs because without it this thesis would not have been possible. Also, thank you for your support of this thesis and your help with the PIT field work. I would also like to thank the Fall 2011, UNR Geography, Field Methods students: Michelle Lam, Catherine Magee, James Rosenburg, and Timothy Tabbada. Last but not least, I would like to thank my friends and family, especially Catherine Connolly, my wife for her unconditional support. iv Contents Abstract ........................................................................................................... i Acknowledgements ........................................................................................ iii 1 Introduction .......................................................................................... 1 1.1 Research Questions ............................................................................................... 2 1.2 Background and Justification of Study................................................................... 3 1.3 Definitions .............................................................................................................. 4 1.4 Overview ................................................................................................................ 5 2 Literature Review ................................................................................. 6 2.1 Populus tremuloides .............................................................................................. 6 2.1.1 Distribution and Ecological Requirements ......................................................... 8 2.1.2 The Lifespan of Aspen ...................................................................................... 12 2.1.3 Cultural Connections to Aspen ......................................................................... 17 2.2 Basque Sheepherding and Arborglyphs ............................................................... 18 2.2.1 Historical Overview .......................................................................................... 20 2.2.2 Arborglyphs ..................................................................................................... 30 3 Study Area ........................................................................................... 37 3.1.1 Topography...................................................................................................... 39 3.1.2 Climate ............................................................................................................. 44 3.1.3 Geology and Soil .............................................................................................. 46 3.1.4 Vegetation ....................................................................................................... 49 4 Methods ............................................................................................... 51 v 4.1 Data Collection ..................................................................................................... 51 4.2 Data Analysis ........................................................................................................ 53 4.2.1 Weights of Evidence ........................................................................................ 56 4.2.2 Analysis of Arborglyph Placement on Tree ...................................................... 60 4.2.3 Effect of Taylor Grazing Act on Arborglyph Quantity ...................................... 62 5 Results ................................................................................................. 63 5.1 Weights of Evidence ............................................................................................ 63 5.1.1 Elevation .......................................................................................................... 63 5.1.2 Aspect .............................................................................................................. 65 5.1.3 Slope ................................................................................................................ 66 5.1.4 Distance to Surface Water ............................................................................... 67 5.1.5 Depth to Water Table ...................................................................................... 69 5.1.6 Soil Drainage .................................................................................................... 70 5.1.7 Soil Depth ......................................................................................................... 72 5.1.8 Precipitation .................................................................................................... 74 5.1.9 Temperature .................................................................................................... 76 5.2 Weights of Evidence Sensitivity Testing .............................................................. 77 5.2.1 Recategorized Elevation .................................................................................. 78 5.2.2 Recategorized Aspect ...................................................................................... 80 5.2.3 Recategorized Slope ........................................................................................ 81 5.2.4 Recategorized Soil Drainage ............................................................................ 83 5.3 Analysis of Arborglyph Placement on Tree .......................................................... 84 5.4 Effect of Taylor Grazing Act on Arborglyph Quantity .......................................... 85 vi 6 Discussion and Conclusion................................................................