National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior National Capital Area, Region 1 Washington, DC CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY REPORT AN ETHNOGRAPHIC STUDY OF SUBSISTENCE FISHING ON THE POTOMAC AND ANACOSTIA RIVERS JANUARY 2020 Prepared by Shirley J. Fiske, PhD, University of Maryland Don Callaway, PhD, Independent Researcher Resource Stewardship and Science National Capital Area Region 1 Ethnographic Resource Study Subsistence Fishing on the Potomac and Anacostia Rivers Prepared under a cooperative agreement between the University of Maryland, Department of Anthropology, the National Park Service, National Capital Region, Cultural Anthropology Program; in conjunction with the Chesapeake Watershed Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Unit, #P11AC30805. Prepared By: Shirley J. Fiske, PhD, University of Maryland Don Callaway, PhD, Independent Researcher With assistance of: Noel Lopez, NPS Amber Cohen, University of Maryland Leslie Walker, NPS Jeremy Trombley, University of Maryland Katie Geddes, University of Maryland Davis Shoulders, American University University of Maryland College Park, Maryland January 30, 2020 Photos: Left; East Potomac Park, Hains Point. Credit: S.J. Fiske. Right; Anacostia Park. Credit: J. Trombley TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................1 2.0 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................................6 3.0 INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................9 4.0 ETHNOHISTORICAL CONTEXT OF FISHING COMMUNITIES ON THE POTOMAC AND ANACOSTIA RIVERS .......................................................................................................................... 21 4.1 Ethnohistory of African American Communities, Anacostia and Potomac Rivers ........................... 22 4.2 Piscataway Ethnohistory .................................................................................................................. 41 4.3 Latino and Hispanic Communities .................................................................................................... 63 4.4 Asian American and Pacific Islander Communities .......................................................................... 72 5.0 RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY .................................................................................... 78 5.1 Background ...................................................................................................................................... 78 5.2 Research Process and Project Team ................................................................................................ 79 6.0 FINDINGS .................................................................................................................................. 81 6.1 Findings. Demographic, Social, and Fishing Data ............................................................................. 81 6.2 Fishing Site Sampling Matrix and Field Notes ................................................................................ 139 6.3. Ethnographic Findings and Discussion .......................................................................................... 147 7.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND SUBSISTENCE FISHING ............................................................. 234 7.1 Principles of Environmental Justice ............................................................................................... 235 7.2 Food Insecurity and Subsistence Fishing ....................................................................................... 237 8.0 PARK PROFILES ......................................................................................................................... 240 8.1 Park Profiles Comparison ............................................................................................................... 240 8.2 Anacostia Park ................................................................................................................................ 264 8.3 Chesapeake & Ohio Canal National Historic Park .......................................................................... 282 8.4 George Washington Memorial Parkway ........................................................................................ 300 8.5 National Mall and Memorial Parks ................................................................................................ 320 8.6 Piscataway Park .............................................................................................................................. 339 9.0 RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................................................. 358 9.1 Park Management Recommendations .......................................................................................... 358 9.2 Research Recommendations.......................................................................................................... 365 SECTION 1: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction The National Park Service (NPS) manages the majority of the Potomac and Anacostia riverfront in metropolitan Washington, D.C. Five administrative units, National Mall & Memorial Parks (NAMA), National Capital Parks-East (NACE), George Washington Memorial Parkway (GWMP), Rock Creek Park (ROCR), and the C&O Canal (CHOH), manage some 47 miles of riverfront. This shoreline is utilized by a wide variety of anglers and recreationalists. The major intent of this research is to provide the NPS with a detailed understanding of non-recreational subsistence anglers who consume and/or share their catch from a stretch of river that reaches up the Anacostia River to the District line, and up the Potomac to Great Falls, including Rock Creek Park, and down the Potomac on the Virginia and Maryland sides to Piscataway and Mount Vernon. For the purposes of this study, subsistence fishing means fishing primarily for consuming or sharing the catch; while recreational fishing is primarily for sport or pleasure, and typically fish are caught and released (see Section 6.3.2, “Subsistence”). Research Design The research design for this project is a multi-method approach that combines primary qualitative data from transcribed oral history interviews and more formal, inductive statistical analysis using descriptive, bivariate, and multivariate techniques. In addition, a number of GIS-generated data sets are integrated into the overall analysis, providing maps but also graphic connections between spatial anchors, individuals, and social and demographic attributes. Finally, ethno-contextual histories, including consideration of the existing secondary literature, will be provided for an historical grounding that helps explain social, political, and economic aspects of current fishing and consumption behaviors. Data Collection The process began with assessments of intensity of fishing sites in the field, then the collection and transcription of oral history interviews using an open-ended protocol with fishers in the Potomac and Anacostia river areas. Participants were recruited in situ as they engaged in fishing activities throughout the Potomac/Anacostia study area. During initial contacts, we looked for anglers who appeared to be harvesting for consumption or for consumption and/or sharing. Essentially, the “filter” excludes sports anglers who practice “catch and release.” A complete description of fishing sites, including a matrix of where and when interviews were conducted, can be found in Section 6.2, “Fishing Site Sampling Matrix and Field Notes.” Sampling was purposive, not random, so generalizations are made with some caution. Focus of Study In addition to assessing the nature of peoples’ traditional and contemporary associations with park resources, this study addresses who is fishing, what fish individuals are catching and eating, how they are preparing their food, their beliefs about fish contamination or safety, which types of fish are routinely shared, and with whom they share their catch. Demographic, social, and fishing data are presented in Section 6.1, followed in Section 6.3 by detailed ethnographic observations on meaning and significance of fishing; sharing, food preparation, and safety; subsistence fishing; food insecurity; and park-associated communities. Although exploring the health effects of eating fish from the Potomac and Anacostia is not within the scope of this research, the project is, nonetheless, interested in understanding the cultural and personal underpinnings of why anglers continue to fish and consume the fish from these rivers. Two states (Maryland and Virginia) and the District of Columbia issue fish advisories on consumption of catfish, 1 SECTION 1: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY perch, and largemouth, smallmouth, and striped bass, during a month’s period of time. The waters are well-known to be polluted and contaminated; yet, anglers come to fish on the rivers, sometimes driving some distance from their homes, and consume their catch despite public health advisories on eating fish (e.g., signage posted at fishing sites) in English and Spanish, and advisories printed on the back of individual fishing licenses. In addition, a recent study, “Addressing the Risk” (OpinionWorks 2012), generated media attention and numerous newspaper articles in the D.C. metropolitan region that raised issues about the risks