3Rd Grade Tongva Trail Study Guide
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Sec 05 11 Tribal and Cultural Resources
Tribal and Cultural Resources 5.11 TRIBAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES 5.11.1 PURPOSE This section identifies existing cultural (including historic and archeological resources), paleontological and tribal resources within the Study Area, and provides an analysis of potential impacts associated with implementation of the General Plan Update. Potential impacts are identified and mitigation measures to address potentially significant impacts are recommended, as necessary. This section is primarily based upon the Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources Technical Report for the Rancho Santa Margarita General Plan Update, Rancho Santa Margarita, Orange County, California (Cultural Study), and the Paleontological Resources Impact Assessment Report for the Rancho Santa Margarita General Plan Update, Orange County, California (Paleontological Assessment), both prepared by SWCA Environmental Consultants (SWCA) and dated April 2019; refer to Appendix F, Cultural/ Paleontological Resources Assessment. 5.11.2 EXISTING REGULATORY SETTING Numerous laws and regulations require Federal, State, and local agencies to consider the effects a project may have on cultural resources. These laws and regulations establish a process for compliance, define the responsibilities of the various agencies proposing the action, and prescribe the relationship among other involved agencies (i.e., State Historic Preservation Office and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation). The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, as amended, the California Environmental -
HOLLYWOOD CENTER PROJECT, CITY of LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA Assembly Bill 52 Consultation Summary Report
APPENDIX O Tribal Cultural Resources Report HOLLYWOOD CENTER PROJECT, CITY OF LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA Assembly Bill 52 Consultation Summary Report April 2020 HOLLYWOOD CENTER PROJECT, CITY OF LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA Assembly Bill 52 Consultation Summary Report April 2020 Prepared by: ESA 626 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 1100 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Project Director: Monica Strauss, M.A., RPA Project Location: Hollywood (CA) USGS 7.5-minute Topographic Quad Section 10, Township 1 South, Range 14 West Acreage: Approx. 4.46 acres Assessor Parcel Numbers: 5546-004-006; 5546-004-029; 5546-004-020; 5546-004-021; 5546-004-032; 5546-030-028; 5546-030-031; 5546-030-032; 5546-030-033; and 5546-030-034 626 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 1100 Los Angeles, CA 90017 213.599.4300 esassoc.com Oakland Bend Orlando Camarillo Pasadena Delray Beach Petaluma Destin Portland Irvine Sacramento Los Angeles D170105.00 OUR COMMITMENT TO SUSTAINABILITY | ESA helps a variety of public and private sector clients plan and prepare for climate change and emerging regulations that limit GHG emissions. ESA is a registered assessor with the California Climate Action Registry, a Climate Leader, and founding reporter for the Climate Registry. ESA is also a corporate member of the U.S. Green Building Council and the Business Council on Climate Change (BC3). Internally, ESA has adopted a Sustainability Vision and Policy Statement and a plan to reduce waste and energy within our operations. This document was produced using recycled paper. Table of Contents Hollywood Center Project – Assembly Bill 52 Consultation Summary Report Page Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 1 Project Description ................................................................................................................................. 2 Project Location ............................................................................................................................. -
Cultivating an Abundant San Francisco Bay
Cultivating an Abundant San Francisco Bay Watch the segment online at http://education.savingthebay.org/cultivating-an-abundant-san-francisco-bay Watch the segment on DVD: Episode 1, 17:35-22:39 Video length: 5 minutes 20 seconds SUBJECT/S VIDEO OVERVIEW Science The early human inhabitants of the San Francisco Bay Area, the Ohlone and the Coast Miwok, cultivated an abundant environment. History In this segment you’ll learn: GRADE LEVELS about shellmounds and other ways in which California Indians affected the landscape. 4–5 how the native people actually cultivated the land. ways in which tribal members are currently working to restore their lost culture. Native people of San Francisco Bay in a boat made of CA CONTENT tule reeds off Angel Island c. 1816. This illustration is by Louis Choris, a French artist on a Russian scientific STANDARDS expedition to San Francisco Bay. (The Bancroft Library) Grade 4 TOPIC BACKGROUND History–Social Science 4.2.1. Discuss the major Native Americans have lived in the San Francisco Bay Area for thousands of years. nations of California Indians, Shellmounds—constructed from shells, bone, soil, and artifacts—have been found in including their geographic distribution, economic numerous locations across the Bay Area. Certain shellmounds date back 2,000 years activities, legends, and and more. Many of the shellmounds were also burial sites and may have been used for religious beliefs; and describe ceremonial purposes. Due to the fact that most of the shellmounds were abandoned how they depended on, centuries before the arrival of the Spanish to California, it is unknown whether they are adapted to, and modified the physical environment by related to the California Indians who lived in the Bay Area at that time—the Ohlone and cultivation of land and use of the Coast Miwok. -
An Overview of Ohlone Culture by Robert Cartier
An Overview of Ohlone Culture By Robert Cartier In the 16th century, (prior to the arrival of the Spaniards), over 10,000 Indians lived in the central California coastal areas between Big Sur and the Golden Gate of San Francisco Bay. This group of Indians consisted of approximately forty different tribelets ranging in size from 100–250 members, and was scattered throughout the various ecological regions of the greater Bay Area (Kroeber, 1953). They did not consider themselves to be a part of a larger tribe, as did well- known Native American groups such as the Hopi, Navaho, or Cheyenne, but instead functioned independently of one another. Each group had a separate, distinctive name and its own leader, territory, and customs. Some tribelets were affiliated with neighbors, but only through common boundaries, inter-tribal marriage, trade, and general linguistic affinities. (Margolin, 1978). When the Spaniards and other explorers arrived, they were amazed at the variety and diversity of the tribes and languages that covered such a small area. In an attempt to classify these Indians into a large, encompassing group, they referred to the Bay Area Indians as "Costenos," meaning "coastal people." The name eventually changed to "Coastanoan" (Margolin, 1978). The Native American Indians of this area were referred to by this name for hundreds of years until descendants chose to call themselves Ohlones (origination uncertain). Utilizing hunting and gathering technology, the Ohlone relied on the relatively substantial supply of natural plant and animal life in the local environment. With the exception of the dog, we know of no plants or animals domesticated by the Ohlone. -
Chapter 2. Native Languages of West-Central California
Chapter 2. Native Languages of West-Central California This chapter discusses the native language spoken at Spanish contact by people who eventually moved to missions within Costanoan language family territories. No area in North America was more crowded with distinct languages and language families than central California at the time of Spanish contact. In the chapter we will examine the information that leads scholars to conclude the following key points: The local tribes of the San Francisco Peninsula spoke San Francisco Bay Costanoan, the native language of the central and southern San Francisco Bay Area and adjacent coastal and mountain areas. San Francisco Bay Costanoan is one of six languages of the Costanoan language family, along with Karkin, Awaswas, Mutsun, Rumsen, and Chalon. The Costanoan language family is itself a branch of the Utian language family, of which Miwokan is the only other branch. The Miwokan languages are Coast Miwok, Lake Miwok, Bay Miwok, Plains Miwok, Northern Sierra Miwok, Central Sierra Miwok, and Southern Sierra Miwok. Other languages spoken by native people who moved to Franciscan missions within Costanoan language family territories were Patwin (a Wintuan Family language), Delta and Northern Valley Yokuts (Yokutsan family languages), Esselen (a language isolate) and Wappo (a Yukian family language). Below, we will first present a history of the study of the native languages within our maximal study area, with emphasis on the Costanoan languages. In succeeding sections, we will talk about the degree to which Costanoan language variation is clinal or abrupt, the amount of difference among dialects necessary to call them different languages, and the relationship of the Costanoan languages to the Miwokan languages within the Utian Family. -
Edible Seeds and Grains of California Tribes
National Plant Data Team August 2012 Edible Seeds and Grains of California Tribes and the Klamath Tribe of Oregon in the Phoebe Apperson Hearst Museum of Anthropology Collections, University of California, Berkeley August 2012 Cover photos: Left: Maidu woman harvesting tarweed seeds. Courtesy, The Field Museum, CSA1835 Right: Thick patch of elegant madia (Madia elegans) in a blue oak woodland in the Sierra foothills The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its pro- grams and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sex- ual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250–9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Acknowledgments This report was authored by M. Kat Anderson, ethnoecologist, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and Jim Effenberger, Don Joley, and Deborah J. Lionakis Meyer, senior seed bota- nists, California Department of Food and Agriculture Plant Pest Diagnostics Center. Special thanks to the Phoebe Apperson Hearst Museum staff, especially Joan Knudsen, Natasha Johnson, Ira Jacknis, and Thusa Chu for approving the project, helping to locate catalogue cards, and lending us seed samples from their collections. -
Ethnohistory and Ethnogeography of the Coast Miwok and Their Neighbors, 1783-1840
ETHNOHISTORY AND ETHNOGEOGRAPHY OF THE COAST MIWOK AND THEIR NEIGHBORS, 1783-1840 by Randall Milliken Technical Paper presented to: National Park Service, Golden Gate NRA Cultural Resources and Museum Management Division Building 101, Fort Mason San Francisco, California Prepared by: Archaeological/Historical Consultants 609 Aileen Street Oakland, California 94609 June 2009 MANAGEMENT SUMMARY This report documents the locations of Spanish-contact period Coast Miwok regional and local communities in lands of present Marin and Sonoma counties, California. Furthermore, it documents previously unavailable information about those Coast Miwok communities as they struggled to survive and reform themselves within the context of the Franciscan missions between 1783 and 1840. Supplementary information is provided about neighboring Southern Pomo-speaking communities to the north during the same time period. The staff of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA) commissioned this study of the early native people of the Marin Peninsula upon recommendation from the report’s author. He had found that he was amassing a large amount of new information about the early Coast Miwoks at Mission Dolores in San Francisco while he was conducting a GGNRA-funded study of the Ramaytush Ohlone-speaking peoples of the San Francisco Peninsula. The original scope of work for this study called for the analysis and synthesis of sources identifying the Coast Miwok tribal communities that inhabited GGNRA parklands in Marin County prior to Spanish colonization. In addition, it asked for the documentation of cultural ties between those earlier native people and the members of the present-day community of Coast Miwok. The geographic area studied here reaches far to the north of GGNRA lands on the Marin Peninsula to encompass all lands inhabited by Coast Miwoks, as well as lands inhabited by Pomos who intermarried with them at Mission San Rafael. -
Early Southern California History (1769-1800) by John P
Early Southern California History (1769-1800) by John P. Schmal (2019) This presentation explores the original Spanish settlement of Southern California in the late 18th Century, as well as the large number of indigenous communities that existed in the area. Of special interest will be the Expedition of 1781 from Álamos, Sonora, which led to the establishment of Los Angeles, San Buenaventura and Santa Barbara. Copyright © 2019 John P. Schmal Background Sebastián Vizcaíno (1548 – 1624) explored the California coast in 1602-1603. However, after this Spain lost interest in California and did not send any expeditions to California for over a century-and-a-half. Fearing that the Russians were moving down from Alaska to California, Spain regained interest in California and decided to establish some settlements in the area in the 1760s and beyond. José de Gálvez (1720 – 1787), Inspector General for the King of Spain was given permission by King Carlos III to explore Alta California and establish the first permanent Spanish presence there. Gálvez was supported in the planning of an expedition by Carlos Francisco de Croix (1699 – 1786), Viceroy of New Spain, and Father Junípero Serra (1713 – 1784), the head of the Franciscan mission to the Californias (Baja and Alta California). The expedition was planned in 1768. Gálvez placed Gaspar de Portolá (1723- 1786), recently appointed governor of Las Californias, in overall command of the expedition. Second in command was Captain Fernando Rivera y Moncada (1725 – 1781), commander of the Presidio at Loreto. 2 Copyright © 2019 John P. Schmal The San Diego Expeditions of 1769 Four expeditions were organized. -
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). -
Precedent Manual DRAFT 1/31/2005
Precedent Manual DRAFT 1/31/2005 NOTE: This precedent manual was last updated in 2005. Please query the Federal acknowledgment decision documents on the Indian Affairs website for more recent material. These documents are text-searchable; therefore, updating this manual is no longer necessary. ACKNOWLEDGMENT PRECEDENT MANUAL compiled by Office of Federal Acknowledgment U.S. Department of the Interior NOTE: This document is a working draft. As a work in progress, it will continually change. DRAFT 1 / 31 / 2005 Precedent Manual DRAFT 1/31/2005 Precedent Manual DRAFT 1/31/2005 Acknowledgment Precedent Manual TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ......................................................................................................................... i Table of Acknowledgment Petitions ...................................................................... iii Table of Acknowledgment Findings ........................................................................v Contents by Criterion and Section ........................................................................ vii Criterion 83.7(a)...................................................................................................................1 Criterion 83.7(b) ................................................................................................................59 Criterion 83.7(c)...............................................................................................................133 Criterion 83.7(d) ..............................................................................................................205 -
May 29, 2020 Assemblymember Lorena Gonzalez Chair, Assembly
May 29, 2020 Assemblymember Lorena Gonzalez Chair, Assembly Appropriations State Capitol, Room 2114 Sacramento, California 95814 RE: AB 1968 (Ramos) The Land Acknowledgement Act of 2021 – SUPPORT Dear Chair Gonzalez: The Surfrider Foundation strongly supports AB 1968, the Tribal Land Acknowledgement Act of 2020, which recognizes the land as an expression of gratitude and appreciation to those whose homelands we reside on, and is a recognition of the original people and nations who have been living on and stewarding the land since time immemorial. AB 1968 provides a learning opportunity for individuals who may have never heard the names of the tribes that continue to live on, learn from and care for the land. The Surfrider Foundation is a non-profit grassroots organization dedicated to the protection and enjoyment of our world’s oceans, waves and beaches through a powerful network. Founded in 1984, the Surfrider Foundation now maintains over one million supporters, activists and members, with more than 170 volunteer-led chapters and student clubs in the U.S., and more than 500 victories protecting our coasts. We have more than 20 chapters in along California’s coast, in areas including the ancestral homelands of indigenous peoples including the Chumash in Malibu, known as “Humaliwu” in the Chumash language, and Rincon, the Acjachemen in Trestles, known as “Panhe” in the Acjachemen language, the Amah Mutsun in Steamer Lane, the Ohlone in Mavericks, and the Acjachemen and Tongva shared territory in Huntington Beach, known as “Lukupangma” in the Tongva and Acjachemen language. These indigenous people continue to live in these ancestral homelands today and have embraced the sport of surfing in these areas, although the clichéd imagery of surf culture fails to reflect these facts. -
APPENDIX B Cultural Resources Assessment
APPENDIX B Cultural Resources Assessment 3700 Riverside Drive Mixed-Use Project Cultural Resources Assessment prepared for City of Burbank 150 North Third Street Burbank, California 91502 Contact: Daniel Villa, Senior Planner prepared by Rincon Consultants, Inc. 250 East 1st Street, Suite 301 Los Angeles, California 90012 August 2020 Please cite this report as follows: Madsen, A., M. Strother, B. Campbell-King, S. Treffers, and S. Carmack 2020 Cultural Resources Assessment for the 3700 Riverside Drive Mixed Use Project, City of Burbank, Los Angeles County, California. Rincon Consultants Project No. 19-08998. Report on file at the South Central Coastal Information Center, California State University, Fullerton. Table of Contents Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................ 1 Unanticipated Discovery of Cultural Resources ............................................................................. 1 Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains ................................................................................ 2 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 3 Project Location and Description ........................................................................................ 3 Personnel ...........................................................................................................................