DOCSLIB.ORG

Recovery Plan for the Santa Rosa Plain

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Recovery Plan for the Santa Rosa Plain U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Recovery Plan for the Santa Rosa Plain Blennosperma bakeri (Sonoma sunshine) Lasthenia burkei (Burke’s goldfields) Limnanthes vinculans (Sebastopol meadowfoam) California tiger salamander Sonoma County Distinct Population Segment (Ambystoma californiense) Lasthenia burkei Blennosperma bakeri Limnanthes vinculans Jo-Ann Ordano J. E. (Jed) and Bonnie McClellan Jo-Ann Ordano © 2004 California Academy of Sciences © 1999 California Academy of Sciences © 2005 California Academy of Sciences Sonoma County California Tiger Salamander Gerald Corsi and Buff Corsi © 1999 California Academy of Sciences Disclaimer Recovery plans delineate reasonable actions that are believed to be required to recover and/or protect listed species. We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, publish recovery plans, sometimes preparing them with the assistance of recovery teams, contractors, state agencies, Tribal agencies, and other affected and interested parties. Objectives will be attained and any necessary funds made available subject to budgetary and other constraints affecting the parties involved, as well as the need to address other priorities. Costs indicated for action implementation and time of recovery are estimates and subject to change. Recovery plans do not obligate other parties to undertake specific actions, and may not represent the views or the official positions of any individuals or agencies involved in recovery plan formulation, other than the Service. Recovery plans represent our official position only after they have been signed by the Director or Regional Director as approved. Approved recovery plans are subject to modification as dictated by new findings, changes in species status, and the completion of recovery actions. LITERATURE CITATION SHOULD READ AS FOLLOWS: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2016. Recovery Plan for the Santa Rosa Plain: Blennosperma bakeri (Sonoma sunshine); Lasthenia burkei (Burke’s goldfields); Limnanthes vinculans (Sebastopol meadowfoam); California Tiger Salamander Sonoma County Distinct Population Segment (Ambystoma californiense). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific Southwest Region, Sacramento, California. vi + 128 pp. An electronic copy of this recovery plan is available at: http://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=D01T i Acknowledgements The recovery planning process has benefitted from the advice and assistance of many individuals, agencies, and organizations. We wish to sincerely thank and gratefully acknowledge the recommendations and assistance from the following individuals: Hattie Brown, Laguna de Santa Rosa Foundation Stephanie Buss, California Department of Fish and Wildlife Dave Cook, Sonoma County Water Agency Gene Cooley, California Department of Fish and Wildlife Steven Detwiler, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Lisa Ellis, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Michael Fawcett, Fawcett Environmental Services Kandis Gilmore, M.S. Student, Sonoma State University Sarah Gordon, Gordon Ecological Cay Goude, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Colin Grant, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Vince Griego, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Michelle (Jensen) Halbur, Pepperwood Preserve Ann Howald, Garcia and Associates Josh Hull, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Rick Kuyper, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Valerie Layne, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Tracy Love, California Department of Fish and Wildlife Stacy Martinelli, California Department of Fish and Wildlife Geoff Monk, Monk Associates Ray Moranz, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Maureen Ryan, University of Washington Chris Searcy, University of California, Davis Brad Shaffer, University of California, Los Angeles Christina Sloop, San Francisco Bay Joint Venture Larry Stromberg, Wetlands Consultant Luisa Studen, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Steve Talley, Restoration Consultant Pete Trenham, Western Washington University John Vollmar, Vollmar Natural Lands Consulting Betty Warne, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Scott Wilson, California Department of Fish and Wildlife Ted Winfield, Winfield and Associates ii Executive Summary CURRENT SPECIES STATUS We listed Blennosperma bakeri (Sonoma sunshine), Lasthenia burkei (Burke’s goldfields), and Limnanthes vinculans (Sebastopol meadowfoam) as endangered in 1991 (Service 1991). Critical habitat was not designated for these plant species. The State of California also listed these species as endangered (L. burkei and L. vinculans in 1979 and B. bakeri in 1992) (CDFW 2014). We listed the Sonoma County California tiger salamander, which we identified as a distinct population segment (DPS), as endangered in 2003 (Service 2003). In 2011, we published a final rule designating critical habitat for the Sonoma County California tiger salamander (Service 2011). The State of California listed the California tiger salamander as threatened state-wide in 2009 (CDFG 2010). The Central California tiger salamander and the Santa Barbara California tiger salamander are federally listed; however, they are considered distinct entities (as DPSs), and are not addressed in this plan. HABITAT REQUIREMENTS AND LIMITING FACTORS These species occur predominantly on the Santa Rosa Plain, which is located in central Sonoma County, California, and is characterized by seasonal wetlands, predominately in the form vernal pools, and associated upland grassland habitat. Vernal pools form in depressions having a shallow, impermeable soil layer that restricts the downward movement of water. The pools have an outlet barrier that further causes ponding (CH2M Hill 1995) and may be connected and fed by shallow drainage pathways called “swales.” Vernal pools generally fill during winter rains and dry in late spring or summer. “Natural” vernal pools are those that are found occurring naturally in the landscape. “Created” vernal pools are those that have been constructed in an area that was not a vernal pool in the recent past (within the last 100 to 200 years) and that is isolated from existing vernal pools (Gwin et al. 1999 and Lewis 1989)1. The listed plants grow only in seasonal wetlands. The Sonoma County California tiger salamander uses seasonal wetlands during the breeding season, and the surrounding uplands year-round. The threats to Blennosperma burkei, Lasthenia bakeri, and Limnanthes vinculans, and the Sonoma County California tiger salamander that led to their listing as endangered are many-fold. These are discussed in Section II in detail, but the primary threats are the modification and destruction of suitable habitat due to urbanization, agricultural conversion, and competition with non-native plants. In addition to habitat loss, the fragmented condition of remaining Sonoma County California tiger salamander habitat restricts migration between aquatic breeding sites and upland non-breeding habitat, along with dispersal among aquatic breeding sites (Cook et al. 2005). Since 1991, these threats have continued to such an extent that many populations of the 1 Vernal pool creation is considered an experimental science because the extent to which entire vernal pool plant and invertebrate communities can be successfully recreated is still unknown (M. Showers, CDFW, in litt, 2005). iii listed plants and salamander appear to have been extirpated or severely reduced in numbers. RECOVERY PRIORITY Recovery priority numbers for listed species addressed in this recovery plan are determined per criteria published in the Federal Register (Service 1983) and are based on degree of threat, degree of conflict with construction or other development projects or other economic activity, recovery potential, and taxonomy. The recovery priority number for Blennosperma bakeri is 5C, meaning it is a full species exposed to a high degree of threat and conflict, with a low potential for recovery. Lasthenia burkei and Limnanthes vinculans are ranked 2C, meaning they are full species, are exposed to a high degree of threat and conflict, and have a high potential for recovery. The Sonoma County California tiger salamander is ranked as a 3C, indicating that this DPS faces a high degree of threat and conflict, and has a high potential for recovery. RECOVERY STRATEGY, GOAL, OBJECTIVES, CRITERIA AND ACTIONS NEEDED The species covered by this recovery plan, Blennosperma bakeri, Lasthenia burkei, Limnanthes vinculans, and the Sonoma County California tiger salamander, have naturally limited geographic ranges, and are further constrained by inhabiting naturally rare habitat within that geographic range. Because the main cause of the decline and the main current threat to all species is the loss and degradation of habitat, our recovery strategy focuses upon this threat. We will achieve recovery of these species by preserving high-quality habitat that provides essential connectivity, reduces fragmentation, and sufficiently buffers against encroaching development. Management of these preserved areas will provide additional protection to the habitat, and address non-habitat related threats. Surveys and habitat assessments (where data are lacking) will be conducted, as will essential research that refines our knowledge on the recovery needs of the species. Additionally, habitat restoration (and potentially reintroductions) is necessary to provide additional populations to protect unique genetic diversity. ESTIMATED DATE AND COST OF RECOVERY: Date: 2065 Cost: The estimated costs for each species are: Blennosperma bakeri: $83,461,000; Lasthenia burkei: $102,630,000; Limnanthes vinculans: $99,758,000; Sonoma County California tiger salamander:
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Attachment 1: Peer City Memo
    Attachment 1:City of San Diego TPA Parking Regulations for Non-Residential Uses DRAFT: Peer City Review Memo May 2021 Prepared by: 3900 5th Avenue, Suite 310 San Diego, California 92103 Table of Contents 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 3 2 Peer City Selection ......................................................................................................................................... 4 3 Peer Cities’ Regulations and Demographics .................................................................................................. 7 SALT LAKE CITY ............................................................................................................................................... 7 SEATTLE .......................................................................................................................................................... 9 SACRAMENTO .............................................................................................................................................. 12 MINNEAPOLIS .............................................................................................................................................. 14 PORTLAND .................................................................................................................................................... 16 DENVER .......................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • "National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary."
    Intro 1996 National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands The Fish and Wildlife Service has prepared a National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary (1996 National List). The 1996 National List is a draft revision of the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1988 National Summary (Reed 1988) (1988 National List). The 1996 National List is provided to encourage additional public review and comments on the draft regional wetland indicator assignments. The 1996 National List reflects a significant amount of new information that has become available since 1988 on the wetland affinity of vascular plants. This new information has resulted from the extensive use of the 1988 National List in the field by individuals involved in wetland and other resource inventories, wetland identification and delineation, and wetland research. Interim Regional Interagency Review Panel (Regional Panel) changes in indicator status as well as additions and deletions to the 1988 National List were documented in Regional supplements. The National List was originally developed as an appendix to the Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (Cowardin et al.1979) to aid in the consistent application of this classification system for wetlands in the field.. The 1996 National List also was developed to aid in determining the presence of hydrophytic vegetation in the Clean Water Act Section 404 wetland regulatory program and in the implementation of the swampbuster provisions of the Food Security Act. While not required by law or regulation, the Fish and Wildlife Service is making the 1996 National List available for review and comment.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 81, No. 118/Monday, June 20, 2016/Notices
    39944 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Notices information collection described in Type of Request: Extension. programs and projects that increase the Section A. Form Number: N/A. supply of affordable housing units, Description of the need for the prevent and reduce homelessness, A. Overview of Information Collection information and proposed use: improve data collection and reporting, Title of Information Collection: Application information is needed to and use coordinated neighborhood and OneCPD Technical Assistance Needs determine competition winners, i.e., the community development strategies to Assessment. technical assistance providers best able revitalize and strengthen their OMB Approval Number: 2506–0198. to develop efficient and effective communities. Number of Frequency of Responses Burden hour Annual burden Hourly cost Information collection respondents response per annum per response hours per response Annual cost Application .................... 52 1 52 100 5,200 $0 $0 Work Plans ................... 23 10 230 18 4,140 40 165,600 Reports ......................... 23 4 72 6 432 40 17,280 Recordkeeping ............. 23 12 276 6 1,656 40 66,240 Total ...................... ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ 11,248 ........................ 249,120 B. Solicitation of Public Comment DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND or telephone (202) 708–2290. This is not URBAN DEVELOPMENT a toll-free number. Persons with hearing This notice is soliciting comments or speech impairments may access this [Docket No. FR–5910–N–10] from members of the public and affected number through TTY by calling the toll- parties concerning the collection of 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information free Federal Relay Service at (800) 877– information described in Section A on Collection: Veterans Home 8339.
    [Show full text]
  • The 2021 Regional Plan Fact Sheet
    Planning SAN DIEGO FORWARD: THE 2021 REGIONAL PLAN FACT SHEET Overview SANDAG is leading a broad-based with the goal to transform the way people community effort to develop San Diego and goods move throughout the region. Forward: The 2021 Regional Plan (2021 SANDAG is applying data-driven strategies, Regional Plan). This blueprint combines the innovative technologies, and stakeholder Topic areas that will be big-picture vision for how our region will input to create a future system that is faster, covered include: grow through 2050 and beyond with an fairer, and cleaner. implementation program to help make that » Air quality Part of this data-driven approach vision a reality. » Borders, including Baja includes the implementation of five key California, our tribal nations, The Regional Plan is updated every four transportation strategies referred to as and our neighboring counties years and combines three planning the 5 Big Moves. These strategies provide » Climate change mitigation documents that SANDAG must complete the framework for the Regional Plan and and adaptation per state and federal laws: The Regional consider policies and programs, changes in » Economic prosperity Transportation Plan, Sustainable land use and infrastructure, take advantage Communities Strategy, and Regional of our existing transportation highway » Emerging technologies Comprehensive Plan. The Regional and transit networks, and leverage trends » Energy and fuels Plan also supports other regional in technology to optimize use of the » Habitat preservation transportation planning and programming transportation system. Together, these » Healthy communities efforts, including overseeing which initiatives will create a fully integrated, projects are funded under the Regional world-class transportation system that » Open space and agriculture Transportation Improvement Program and offers efficient and equitable transportation » Public facilities the TransNet program.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix E Water Resources Technical Report
    Appendix E Water Resources Technical Report 1330 West Pico Blvd Project Water Resources Technical Report July 17, 2018 Prepared by: David J. Curtis, P.E., ENV SP PSOMAS 555 South Flower Street, Suite 4300 Los Angeles, California 90071 (213) 223-1400 (213) 223-1444 Fax Prepared for: Sandstone Properties 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................ 3 1.1 Project Description ........................................................................................ 3 1.2 Scope of Work ............................................................................................... 3 2.0 Surface Water Hydrology ...................................................................................... 3 2.1 General Approach ........................................................................................... 3 2.2 Data Sources .................................................................................................. 3 2.3 Existing Site Conditions .................................................................................. 4 2.4 Proposed Site Conditions ............................................................................... 4 2.5 Hydrology Results ........................................................................................... 4 3.0 Surface Water Quality ............................................................................................ 5 3.1 General Approach ........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Transboundary Issues and Solutions in the San Diego/Tijuana Border
    Blurred Borders: Transboundary Impacts and Solutions in the San Diego-Tijuana Region Table of Contents 1. Executive Summary 4 2 Why Do We Need to Re-think the Border Now? 6 3. Re-Defining the Border 7 4. Trans-Border Residents 9 5. Trans-National Residents 12 6. San Diego-Tijuana’s Comparative Advantages and Challenges 15 7. Identifying San Diego-Tijuana's Shared Regional Assets 18 8. Trans-Boundary Issues •Regional Planning 20 •Education 23 •Health 26 •Human Services 29 •Environment 32 •Arts & Culture 35 8. Building a Common Future: Promoting Binational Civic Participation & Building Social Capital in the San Diego-Tijuana Region 38 9. Taking the First Step: A Collective Binational Call for Civic Action 42 10. San Diego-Tijuana At a Glance 43 11. Definitions 44 12. San Diego-Tijuana Regional Map Inside Back Cover Copyright 2004, International Community Foundation, All rights reserved International Community Foundation 3 Executive Summary Blurred Borders: Transboundary Impacts and Solutions in the San Diego-Tijuana Region Over the years, the border has divided the people of San Diego Blurred Borders highlights the similarities, the inter-connections County and the municipality of Tijuana over a wide range of differ- and the challenges that San Diego and Tijuana share, addressing ences attributed to language, culture, national security, public the wide range of community based issues in what has become the safety and a host of other cross border issues ranging from human largest binational metropolitan area in North America. Of particu- migration to the environment. The ‘us’ versus ‘them’ mentality has lar interest is how the proximity of the border impacts the lives and become more pervasive following the tragedy of September 11, livelihoods of poor and under-served communities in both San 2001 with San Diegans focusing greater attention on terrorism and Diego County and the municipality of Tijuana as well as what can homeland security and the need to re-think immigration policy in be done to address their growing needs.
    [Show full text]
  • Butte Co. Meadowfoam
    U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the U.S. Air Force, respectively. All of the Fort Ord occurrences are on land within the Habitat Management Plan Habitat Reserve lands and will be conserved and managed in perpetuity (W. Collins in litt. 2005; U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 1997). The population at Travis Air Force Base, including over 20 acres of adjacent restored vernal pools, is protected as a special ecological preserve, with protective measures and appropriate management for the species provided in the Travis Air Force Base Land Management Plan. Seasonal managed cattle grazing has been returned to two conservation sites supporting Lasthenia conjugens: 1) the Warm Springs Seasonal Wetland Unit of the Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge in Alameda County, and 2) the State Route 4 Preserve managed by the Muir Heritage Land Trust in Contra Costa County. The L. conjugens population at the Warm Springs Unit has declined during the last 10 years due to many factors including competition by nonnative plant species. During this time period, grazing, which occurred intermittently at the Warm Springs Unit since the 1800s, has been excluded by the Refuge until a management plan could be developed. The decline in the L. conjugens population at the Warm Springs Unit cannot be attributed to a single factor, but most likely results from the complex interaction of several variables including current and historical land uses, the abiotic environment, and annual climatic variation. The increasing dominance of nonnative grasses, however, coincides with the suspension of livestock grazing, suggesting that the lack of a disturbance regime may be a primary factor in the degradation of habitat for L.
    [Show full text]
  • All Quadrants
    City of Santa Rosa Department of Planning and Economic Development Citywide Summary of Pending Development November, 2016 This report contains a list of land use permits currently in process or approved. This is not an exhaustive list of all land use entitlements, but is limited to projects that include a minimum of five new residential units or a minimum of 5,000 s.f. of new non-residential space. This report does not contain information on subsequent project permits, such as building permits that may be in process. Please contact the listed planner for more information. Status Key: Approved - Development Entitlements have been granted. Inactive - No activity in the two years since last city staff review. In Progress - Application has been submitted, under review. All Quadrants Residential (Units) Approved In Progress Inactive Multi-Family Attached 1,394 316 121 Second Unit 26 4 0 Single-Family Detached 1,472 227 94 Total 2,892 547 215 Non - Residential (Sq. Ft.) Approved In Progress Inactive Industrial 0 130,912 0 Light Industrial 0 0 0 Office 0 0 0 Public/Institutional 0 157,018 0 Retail/Services 270,585 59,357 0 Total 270,585 347,287 0 14 ± 7 20 8 12 10 19 17 5 13 3 101 16 ¤£ 4 9 15 18 6 11 PENDING DEVELOPMENTS IN NORTHEAST SANTA ROSA Data current as of December 2016 2 1 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION ABOUT EACH OF THE PROJECTS SHOWN PLEASE REFER TO THE CORRESPONDING SPREADSHEET This report is available on our website www.srcity.org/departments/communitydev/planning ÃÆ12 City of Santa Rosa December, 2016 Pending Development Report This report contains a list of land use permits currently in process or approved.
    [Show full text]
  • Tidal Marsh Recovery Plan Habitat Creation Or Enhancement Project Within 5 Miles of OAK
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Recovery Plan for Tidal Marsh Ecosystems of Northern and Central California California clapper rail Suaeda californica Cirsium hydrophilum Chloropyron molle Salt marsh harvest mouse (Rallus longirostris (California sea-blite) var. hydrophilum ssp. molle (Reithrodontomys obsoletus) (Suisun thistle) (soft bird’s-beak) raviventris) Volume II Appendices Tidal marsh at China Camp State Park. VII. APPENDICES Appendix A Species referred to in this recovery plan……………....…………………….3 Appendix B Recovery Priority Ranking System for Endangered and Threatened Species..........................................................................................................11 Appendix C Species of Concern or Regional Conservation Significance in Tidal Marsh Ecosystems of Northern and Central California….......................................13 Appendix D Agencies, organizations, and websites involved with tidal marsh Recovery.................................................................................................... 189 Appendix E Environmental contaminants in San Francisco Bay...................................193 Appendix F Population Persistence Modeling for Recovery Plan for Tidal Marsh Ecosystems of Northern and Central California with Intial Application to California clapper rail …............................................................................209 Appendix G Glossary……………......................................................................………229 Appendix H Summary of Major Public Comments and Service
    [Show full text]
  • Loch Lomond Button-Celery)
    Natural Diversity Data Base 2003). The Sacramento National Wildlife Refuge populations have been monitored annually since 1992 (J. Silveira in litt. 2000). One additional occurrence of C. hooveri in Merced County is on private land (the Bert Crane Ranch) that is protected from development by a conservation easement (J. Silveira in litt. 2000). We funded a status survey for Chamaesyce hooveri and other vernal pool plants in 1986 and 1987 (Stone et al. 1988), resulting in 10 new occurrences. We and the California Department of Fish and Game jointly funded an ecological study of the Vina Plains Preserve pools, which was conducted by faculty from California State University, Chico (Alexander and Schlising 1997). Independent surveys conducted by Joseph Silveira led to discovery of the Merced and Glenn county occurrences (J. Silveira in litt. 2000). Private landowners also have contributed to conservation of this species. One pool in Tehama County was fenced by the property owner in the late 1980s, to exclude livestock (Stone et al. 1988). 3. ERYNGIUM CONSTANCEI (LOCH LOMOND BUTTON-CELERY) a. Description and Taxonomy Taxonomy.—Loch Lomond button-celery, specifically known as Eryngium constancei (Sheikh 1983), is a member of the carrot family (Apiaceae). This species was only recently described and therefore has no history of name changes. The common name was derived from the type locality, Loch Lomond, which is in Lake County (Sheikh 1983). Other common names for this species are Loch Lomond coyote-thistle (Skinner and Pavlik 1994) and Constance’s coyote-thistle (Smith et al. 1980). Description and Identification.—Certain features are common to species of the genus Eryngium.
    [Show full text]
  • An Investigation of the Reproductive Ecology and Seed Bank
    California Department of Fish & Game U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: Endangered Species Act (Section-6) Grant-in-Aid Program FINAL PROJECT REPORT E-2-P-35 An Investigation of the Reproductive Ecology and Seed Bank Dynamics of Burke’s Goldfields (Lasthenia burkei), Sonoma Sunshine (Blennosperma bakeri), and Sebastopol Meadowfoam (Limnanthes vinculans) in Natural and Constructed Vernal Pools Christina M. Sloop1, 2, Kandis Gilmore1, Hattie Brown3, Nathan E. Rank1 1Department of Biology, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, CA 2San Francisco Bay Joint Venture, Fairfax, CA 3Laguna de Santa Rosa Foundation, Santa Rosa, CA Prepared for Cherilyn Burton ([email protected]) California Department of Fish and Game, Habitat Conservation Division 1416 Ninth Street, Room 1280, Sacramento, CA 95814 March 1, 2012 1 1. Location of work: Santa Rosa Plain, Sonoma County, California 2. Background: Burke’s goldfield (Lasthenia burkei), a small, slender annual herb in the sunflower family (Asteraceae), is known only from southern portions of Lake and Mendocino counties and from northeastern Sonoma County. Historically, 39 populations were known from the Santa Rosa Plain, two sites in Lake County, and one site in Mendocino County. The occurrence in Mendocino County is most likely extirpated. From north to south on the Santa Rosa Plain, the species ranges from north of the community of Windsor to east of the city of Sebastopol. The long-term viability of many populations of Burke’s goldfields is particularly problematic due to population decline. There are currently 20 known extant populations, a subset of which were inoculated into pools at constructed sites to mitigate the loss of natural populations in the context of development.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]