THE DIABLO CANYON FAUNA: A COARSE-GRAINED RECORD OF...

THE DIABLO CANYON FAUNA:A COARSE-GRAINED RECORD OF TRANS-HOLOCENE FORAGING

FROM THE CENTRAL CALIFORNIA MAINLAND COAST

Terry L. Jones, Judith F. Porcasi, Jereme W. Gaeta, and Brian F. Codding

Decades ago the Diablo Canyon site (CA-SLO-2) on the central California mainland revealed one of the oldest and longestsequences (ca. 9400 radiocarbon years ago to contact) of coastal occupation on the shore of the northeastern Pacific. Theartifacts from these important deposits were reported in detail by Greenwood (1972), but only a fraction of the site’s fau-nal collections was analyzed in the original site report. Acquisition of 30 additional radiocarbon dates and analysis of thecomplete vertebrate fauna have produced a coarse-grained record of human foraging on the California mainland from 8300cal B.C. to cal A.D. 1769. The temporally controlled faunal matrix, constituting one of the largest trans-Holocene recordsfrom western North America, speaks in a meaningful way to two significant issues in hunter-gatherer prehistory: earlyHolocene foraging strategies and economic intensification/resource depression over time. The site’s earliest componentsuggests a population invested in watercraft and intensely adapted to the interface of land and sea along the northeasternPacific coastline. While boats were used to access offshore rocks, terrestrial mammals (e.g., black-tailed deer) were also ofprimary importance. Dominance of deer throughout the Diablo occupations is inconsistent with recent generalizations aboutbig-game hunting as costly signaling in western North American prehistory. Diachronic variation, correlated with super-imposed burials that show growth in human populations through the Holocene, includes: (1) modest incremental changesin most taxa, suggesting resource stability and increasing diet breadth; (2) gradual but significant variation in a few taxa,including the flightless duck which was hunted into extinction and eventually replaced by sea otters; (3) punctuated, mul-tidirectional change during the late Holocene related to historic contingencies of the Medieval Climatic Anomaly and pro-tohistoric disruptions.

Hace décadas, el sitio de Cañón de Diablo (CA-SLO-2) en el continente central de California reveló uno de las sucesionesmás viejas y más largas (ca. 9400 años del radiocarbono hace contactar) de la ocupación costera en la costa pacífica delnoreste. Los artefactos de estos depósitos importantes fueron informados con todo detalle por Greenwood (1972), pero sólouna fracción de las colecciones de faunal de sitio fue analizada en el informe original del sitio. La adquisición de 30 fechasadicionales de radiocarbono y análisis de la fauna completa del vertebrado ha producido un registro de grano gruesa delhumano que adentra en el continente de California de 8300 B.C. al 1769 A.D. La matriz temporalmente controlada de faunal,constituyendo uno de los registros más grandes de trans-Holocene de Norteamérica occidental, habla en una manera signi-ficativa a dos asuntos significativos en la prehistoria de cazador-recolector: Holocene temprano que adentra las estrategias,y la depresión económica del intensificación recurso con el tiempo. El componente más temprano del sitio sugiere a una poblacióninvertida en el watercraft e intensamente adaptado al comunica de la tierra y el mar por el litoral pacífico del noreste. Mien-tras los barcos fueron utilizados para conseguir acceso a piedras cercanas a la costa, mamíferos terrestres (por ejemplo, venadode negro-tailed) fueron también de primordial importancia. La dominación de venado a través de las ocupaciones de Diabloes contradictoria con generalizaciones recientes acerca del juego grande que caza señalar como costoso en la prehistorianorteamericana occidental. La variación diacrónica, tuvo correlación con entierros sobrepuestos que muestran el crecimientoen poblaciones humanas por el Holocene, incluyen: (1) los cambios de incremento modestos en la mayoría de las tasas, sugiriendola estabilidad del recurso y la anchura creciente de la dieta; (2) la variación gradual pero significativa en unas pocas tasa,inclusive el pato incapaz de volar que fue cazado en la extinción y finalmente reemplazado por nutrias de mar; (3) el cambiopuntuado y multi-direccional durante el tarde Holocene relacionó a contingencias históricas de las interrupciones Climáti-cas Medievales de Anomalía y protohistoric.

Terry L. Jones ■ Department of Social Sciences, California Polytechnic State University San Luis Obispo, CA 93407([email protected]) Judith F. Porcasi ■ Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095 ([email protected])Jereme W. Gaeta ■ Center for Limnology, University of Wisconsin, 680 N. Park, Madison, WI 53706 ([email protected]) Brian F. Codding ■ Department of Anthropology, Stanford University, 450 Serra Mall, Building 50, Stanford, CA 94305-2034 ([email protected])

American Antiquity 73(2), 2008, pp. 289–316Copyright ©2008 by the Society for American Archaeology

289

AQ73(2) Jones 4/9/08 9:24 PM Page 289

290 AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 73, No. 2, 2008]

Over the last 20 years the California coasthas emerged as a major testing ground forhunter-gatherer theory. Optimal foraging,

economic intensification, extensification, overex-ploitation, neo-Marxism, costly signaling, andother theories have been applied to the Californiacoast, all with varying degrees of credulity. Withnotable exceptions (e.g., Arnold’s [1992a, 1992b,2001] focus on beads and craft specialization andBasgall’s [1987] artifact-based economic intensi-fication model), most of these applications havefocused on faunal remains, particularly those fromhighly stratified deposits on the Channel Islands.In the last two decades, Channel Island archaeol-ogists have demonstrated that certain coastalresources (e.g., shellfish and fish) were exploitedmuch earlier (ca. 10,000–8000 cal B.C.) than pre-viously thought (Erlandson et al. 1996; Rick et al.2001), and that their use varied over time. Even onthe islands, however, long-term faunal sequencesthat provide critical tests for hunter-gatherer the-ory have been mostly pieced together with datafrom multiple, short-duration components, andtrans-Holocene faunal collections from single sitesare extremely rare. While sequences constructedfrom multiple sites can be quite valuable (e.g., But-ler and Campbell 2004), assemblages from singlesites avoid problems related to variability in habi-tats and methods of identification (see Gobalet2001).

In this paper we present findings from CA-SLO-2, one of six sites excavated at Diablo Canyon onthe central California mainland coast in 1968 (Fig-ure 1). While the artifact collection from this sitewas described in detail (Greenwood 1972), only aportion of the faunal remains was identified in theoriginal site report. The full collection reportedhere includes over 23,000 bird, mammal, reptile,and fish remains with over 12,000 identified to ameaningful taxonomic level (genus for mammalsand birds; family for fish). Findings from two col-umn samples are also available from the originalsite report in which an additional 12,165 fish boneswere reported (Fitch 1972).

Originally dated with three radiocarbon assays,30 additional dates now show that the faunal assem-blage from CA-SLO-2 is derived from four inter-mittent occupations between ca. 8300 cal B.C. andhistoric contact (A.D. 1769), making this one ofthe largest trans-Holocene faunal collections from

western North America. Owing to the unfortunaterealities of mainland environments (e.g., the pres-ence of ground-burrowing animals), the sequenceis more coarse-grained than those from the islandsor the stratified caves of the Great Basin. Nonethe-less, it speaks in a meaningful way to two signifi-cant issues in the hunter-gatherer prehistory: earlyHolocene adaptations, and economic intensifica-tion/resource depression over time. In contrast withthe southern California islands, the Diablo Canyonfauna show very few dramatic changes, insteadreflecting continuity of a broad-spectrum huntingstrategy that incorporated both marine and terres-trial taxa. The site’s initial Holocene component(8300–6500 cal B.C.) shows an intriguing coastaladaptation in which watercraft were used to accessoffshore rocks but terrestrial mammals were alsoof primary importance with a singular focus onblack-tailed deer (Odocoileus hemionus). Domi-nance of deer throughout the Diablo occupationsconflicts with recent generalizations about big-game hunting as costly signaling in western NorthAmerican prehistory. Reconciliation of the vari-ability in early Holocene hunting strategies repre-sented by Diablo Canyon as well as certaindiachronic patterns can only be accomplished bysupplementing notions of optimality, efficiency,and other evolved aptitudes with recognition oflocal environmental factors, historical contingen-cies (e.g., coastal colonization and the MedievalClimatic Anomaly), and by considering artifact pat-terns in tandem with the faunal data.

Early Holocene Adaptations

Perceptions of the earliest coastal prehistory of thenortheastern Pacific have advanced dramatically inthe last 20 years as finds from the northern Chan-nel Islands (Erlandson 1993, 2001, 2002; Erland-son et al. 1996, 2007; Johnson et al. 2002; Rick etal. 2001) have demonstrated that humans wereusing watercraft and exploiting fish and shellfishas early 10,000–9000 cal B.C. (Erlandson et al2007; Rick et al. 2001). Although issues remainconcerning the technological bases of these earlyisland adaptations (see Cassidy et al. 2004; DesLau-riers 2005; Erlandson, Braje, Rick, and Peterson2005; Erlandson et al. 2007; Rondeau et al. 2007),any interpretation of western North American pre-history must, based on the island findings, recog-

AQ73(2) Jones 4/9/08 9:24 PM 90

REPORTS 291

Figure 1. CA-SLO-2 and other Terminal Pleistocene/early Holocene sites on the California Coast.

AQ73(2) Jones 4/9/08 9:24 PM Page 291

nize the antiquity of nearshore and littoral adapta-tions, and the use of watercraft. Lacking terrestrialmammals after the extinction of megafauna, how-ever, the islands alone may not provide a completedefinition of the foraging strategies that accompa-nied initial human colonization of the northeasternPacific. Data from mainland coastal contexts areneeded to compliment the island findings since anypossible coastal migration route into North Amer-ica would have been marked by a much broaderarray of resources than the more limited suite foundon the southern California islands.

Much discussion of the subsistence base asso-ciated with these earliest coastal populations hasbeen framed in optimal foraging theory (e.g.,Erlandson 1991; Jones 1991; Kennett 2005:120;Raab and Yatsko 1992; Rick et al. 2005). In mostcases, researchers have sought to portray the dietof early colonists as a match for predictions ofeither a diet breadth or patch choice construct. Oflate, such interpretations have focused heavily onthe California Millingstone Culture that, as one ofthe oldest cultural complexes on the mainland, hasbeen frequently characterized as an optimal adap-tation focused heavily on gathered foods (e.g.,shellfish, seeds, and yucca) (Erlandson 1991; Jones1996; Jones et al. 2002) and small game (Hilde-brandt and McGuire 2002; McGuire and Hilde-brandt 1994). The importance of shellfish to earlyHolocene coastal populations has been repeatedlydemonstrated from the California archaeologicalrecord (Erlandson 1994; Erlandson, Vellanoweth,Rick, and Reid 2005; Fitzgerald 2000; Fitzgeraldand Jones 1999; Jones 2003; Jones et al. 2002), butthe importance of small game is more ambiguous.Relying on certain ethnographic observations (e.g.,Hawkes 1990, 1991, 1993), McGuire and Hilde-brandt (1994; Hildebrandt and McGuire 2002)argue that trapping of small and medium-sizedgame (e.g., rabbits and birds) was the optimal sub-sistence mode for early Holocene foragers, and thatthe pursuit of big game (including deer) was actu-ally a suboptimal activity that emerged only laterwhen climatic amelioration and increased humanpopulation provided a viable arena for high levelsof social competition via costly signaling. The basisof their model is the realization that while larger-bodied taxa tend to have higher average post-encounter return rates (e.g., Bayham 1979; Griffiths1975; Simms 1985; Ugan 2005), actual hunting

success had been shown to be extremely variablein some ethnographic settings due to high searchand pursuit failures (e.g., Hawkes 1990, 1991,1993, 1996; Hawkes et al. 1991, 2001), which maybe due to a prey’s relative mobility (Sih and Chris-tensen 2001). If nothing else, these challenges totypical archaeological applications of optimal for-aging theory suggest that body mass is not a viablemeasure of prey rank and that to distinguishbetween reliable and variable hunting, researchersshould pay close attention to local environmentalcircumstances (e.g., Elston and Zeanah 2002;Hockett 2005; Zeanah 2004).

CA-SLO-2 at Diablo Canyon is one of 23coastal or peri-coastal sites in California that haveproduced radiocarbon evidence for occupationbetween 11,000 and 7000 cal B.C. (Erlandson etal. 2007; Porcasi 2008) (Figure 1), although onlytwo of these (Daisy Cave and Arlington Man) haveproduced substantial evidence for pre-8000 cal B.C.habitation. The majority of the earliest coastal siteshave yielded extremely small collections of birdand mammal remains. Many of the larger assem-blages including those from CA-SON-348/H(Kennedy et al. 2005; Porcasi 2008; Schwaderer1992; Wake and Simons 2000) and CA-SCL-178(Fitzgerald and Porcasi 2003) are dominated byrabbits and conform with Hildebrandt andMcGuire’s generalizations about early Holocenefaunal exploitation. Nonetheless, the available sam-ple for the earliest Holocene is sufficiently limitedthat new findings from a substantial collection likethat of Diablo Canyon are potentially meaningfuland important, especially as they stand to shed lighton the variable expressions of past human adapta-tions in response to local environmental conditions.

Economic Intensification and ResourceDepression/Extirpation

Long-term faunal records are particularly valuablefor their potential to evaluate diachronic predictionsfrom optimal foraging and/or other behavioral eco-logical models (Bettinger 1991:100), and fauna-based regional models of hunter-gatherer resourceintensification have become increasingly commonin California (Broughton 1994a, 1994b, 1997,1999, 2002; Perry 2004) and elsewhere (e.g., But-ler and Campbell 2004; Lourandos 1983; Matson1983; Zvelebil 1989). Many of these suggest that


AQ73(2) Jones 4/9/08 9:24 PM Page 292

increasing reliance on lower-ranked taxa throughtime was the result of localized suppression or extir-pation of higher-ranked species as a result of over-exploitation (e.g., Broughton 1994a, 1994b, 1997,1999, 2002; Hildebrandt and Jones 1992; Jones etal. 2004; Kay and Simmons 2002; Lyman andWadley 2003; Salls 1992). In light of such efforts,economic intensification has become essentiallyan assumption of California prehistory despite lessthan compelling empirical support in some cases.In the absence of such evidence, recent modelshave challenged some of the prevailing assump-tions about foraging efficiency over time. Hilde-brandt and McGuire (2002) and McGuire andHildebrandt (2005) in particular have proposed alogical diachronic extension of their characteriza-tion of early Holocene optimality, suggesting thatincreased pursuit of deer in western North Amer-ica resulted from amelioration of climate and reduc-tion of demographic stress at the end of themid-Holocene climatic optimum. Increased envi-ronmental productivity ostensibly lessened pres-sures on individuals and provided male hunters theopportunity to engage in riskier hunting strategieswith more variable return rates, thereby creating anew arena for social competition in which huntingsuccess honestly signaled an individual’s underly-ing qualities and could have ultimately resulted inthe achievement of higher status (see Bliege Birdand Smith 2005; Bliege Bird et al. 2001; Grafen1990a, 1990b; Smith 2004; Zahavi 1975). Thisinterpretation was subsequently challenged onempirical grounds by Broughton and Bayham(2003) and Byers and Broughton (2004) who sug-gested that deer simply were not present in muchof western North America during the mid-Holoceneoptimum (see also Hocket 2005; Zeanah 2004).Following the standard predictions of diet breadth(or prey choice) models (see Schoener 1971;Stevens and Krebs 1986), they state that mid-Holocene increases in deer exploitation reflect thegreater availability of the species on the landscape.With an exceptionally large sample of deer remainsfrom trans-Holocene contexts, the Diablo Canyoncollection is extremely relevant to issues raised inthis debate.

Limiting the value of diet breadth applicationsin California, however, is the fact that opportuni-ties to record ethnographic animal exploitationpractices and define resource return rates had long

passed by the time that optimal foraging theorywas developed. There are no accurate ethnograph-ically based resource return values for Native Cal-ifornia foods and their absence limits the potentialto apply optimal foraging constructs in a stricthypothetical-deductive framework. In the absenceof such values, researchers have relied on estimatesbased on historical ethnography (Simms 1985),experimentation (e.g., Jones and Richman 1995;Jones and Ferneau 2002; Raab 1992), and eth-noarchaeological observations from other parts ofthe world (e.g., Bliege Bird and Bird 1997). In ourtreatment of the Diablo fauna we refer to these esti-mates, but treat the values as guides for interpreta-tion rather than a basis for strict resource ranking.Given that the local failure rates for such taxa areunknown and that the site collection includes theremains of one extinct taxon (the flightless duck[Chendytes lawi]) and another (the sea otter [Enhy-dra lutris]) whose modern range and habitat differconsiderably from pre-contact situations, develop-ing or applying conjectural quantitative return val-ues in a rigid fashion seems unwarranted.

The Diablo Canyon Site (CA-SLO-2) and Its Fauna

CA-SLO-2 is an unusually large (ca. 400 x 320 m),deep midden, situated on a narrow coastal terraceon the north bank of Diablo Creek in San LuisObispo County, California. The site is one of nearly50 shell middens on the coastal edge of a 20-kmlong peninsula that extends 8 km into the PacificOcean between Morro and San Luis Obispo bays(Figure 1). Low coastal mountains known as theIrish Hills rise to elevations of 550 m immediatelyto the east of the coastal terrace upon which CA-SLO-2 is situated. Covering an area of ca. 150 km2,the Irish Hills consist of a series of narrow, steepridges and intervening drainages covered with adense mosaic of coastal oaks, chaparral, and occa-sional grassland. Few archaeological sites havebeen recorded in the Irish Hills, and the area todaystill has still a low number of inhabitants and servesas an informal game refuge.

Excavation Sampling Methods

Of the six sites investigated by Roberta Green-wood in 1968 in anticipation of construction ofDiablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, CA-SLO-2

REPORTS 293

AQ73(2) Jones 4/9/08 9:24 PM Page 293

was the deepest and most complex. The site wasin the direct impact area of a road that was plannedas an access to a power plant, and Greenwood’sinvestigations were undertaken to mitigate theimpacts of the road construction. She employeda mixed recovery strategy that was designed tosample artifacts, and micro- and macro-faunalremains effectively. In the area of her investiga-tions, the site extended to a depth of 3.4 m. A totalof 30 1-x-2-m units were excavated in arbitrary10-cm levels and processed with 6 mm mesh. Twocolumn samples were recovered for microanaly-sis: a .25-x-.25-m column excavated to the baseof the deposit (.8 m3) that was water-processedwith 1 mm mesh to recover fish bones, and a 1-x-1-m unit, processed with nested 6 mm and 3 mm(1⁄8 inch) mesh to recover shell remains. Green-wood (1972:5) reported a total recovery volumeof 109 m3, but data from only 98.9 m3 were avail-able for the current study due to attrition of thecollection during its 35 years in storage. Findingsfrom the fish column (Fitch 1972) and shell col-umn were reported in detail in the 1972 mono-graph, as was the site’s artifact collection(Greenwood 1972).

Stratigraphy, Cultural Chronology,and Distribution of Temporal Components

As is often the case on the California mainland,Greenwood (1972) found that the deep midden atCA-SLO-2 was relatively homogeneous with lit-tle evidence of discrete layering or physical stratig-raphy. Rather, she noted a gradual transition in soilcolor between the upper (0–150 cm; black), mid-dle (150–250 cm; very dark brown), and basal(250–340 cm; very dark yellowish brown) levels.A distinct calcium carbonate precipitate (caliche)was noted below 150 cm, which is common indeposits of early and middle Holocene in the region.In the absence of physical stratigraphy, Greenwoodrelied on three radiocarbon dates and a robustassemblage of formal artifacts to define three cul-tural components: a basal variant of the CaliforniaMillingstone Culture, dating ca. 9,400–5,000 yearsago; a Hunting Culture component in the middlelevels of the deposit, dating ca. 5,000–1,000 yearsago; and a Late Period or Canaliño component,post-dating 1,000 years ago, above 120 cm. Tworadiocarbon dates in excess of 9,000 radiocarbonyears from the base of the deposit made CA-SLO-

2, at the time of its reporting, one of the oldestcoastal sites in North America.

A total of 341 radiocarbon dates is now availablefrom CA-SLO-2 (Table 1). This enhanced chrono-metric data base generally corroborates Green-wood’s cultural-stratigraphic assessment of thesite’s occupational history, although four compo-nents can now be recognized rather than three (Table2). Radiocarbon results also indicate some vertical,intercomponent mixing due to rodent activity andthe presence of 66 human burials. The four tempo-ral components exhibit reasonable superposition(Figure 2), but bioturbation from rodent activity isan unfortunate reality on the California mainlandthat forces researchers to rely on sequences morecoarse-grained than those from the Channel Islands.Even the nearby Cross Creek Site, which is con-temporaneous with the oldest levels at DiabloCanyon and exhibited exceptional physical stratig-raphy, was also compromised by some intercom-ponent mixing (Fitzgerald 1998, 2000; Jones et al.2002). The 33 radiocarbon dates that define the Dia-blo sequence show a distinctive trend toward super-position. On the most coarse-grained level,occupation below 200 cm marks the early Holocenebetween 8300 and 3000 cal B.C., while the lateHolocene (1600 cal B.C.–contact) is representedabove 200 cm. Of 16 radiocarbon dates obtainedfrom below 200 cm, only one (1600 cal B.C.)reflects down-mixing of late Holocene materialsinto the early Holocene levels. Five early Holocenedates, however, were recovered from above 200 cmreflecting the upward movement of older materialsinto the late Holocene levels. The radiocarbonrecord further exhibits a distinctive occupationalhiatus of 1,400 years separating the early and lateHolocene occupations, but this period of abandon-ment is not distinguished by a visible soil stratum.These early and late Holocene macro-componentscan be further divided into shorter-duration culturalsubcomponents. The lowest arbitrary levels(280–340 cm; component I) mark an early Holocenevariant of the California Millingstone Culture, com-parable to that found at the Cross Creek site (CA-SLO-1797; Fitzgerald 1998, 2000; Jones et al.2002). A later, more substantive Millingstoneexpression dating 7000–3000 cal B.C occursbetween 200 and 280 cm (component II). Threehuman burials were associated with the Milling-stone levels (one Early and two Late). Site use dur-


AQ73(2) Jones 4/9/08 9:24 PM Page 294

REPORTS 295Ta

ble

1. C

alib

rate

d R

A.D

. ioc

arbo

n D

ates

fro

m C

A-S

LO

-2.

Spec

imen

C

onve

ntio

nal

Cal

ibra

ted

age

A.D

./B.C

.U

nit

No.

Lab

No.

Dep

th (

cm)

Mat

eria

lS

peci

es14

C A

ge1

sigm

a (Δ

R=

290+

35)

Ref

eren

ce

N7-

W14

Bet

a-21

6557

0-

10Sh

ell

Tegu

lasp

. 16

90+

40A

.D.

970

(101

5) 1

050

N4W

230

65A

Bet

a -1

9794

820

-30

Shel

lSa

xido

mus

nut

tall

i10

20±

40A

.D.

1510

(15

60)

1650

N4W

230

69A

Bet

a-20

6358

30-4

0Sh

ell

Myt

ilus

cal

ifor

nian

us21

70+

40A

.D.

460

(540

) 60

0N

10-W

1234

02A

Bet

a-19

2958

30-4

0Sh

ell

Myt

ilus

cal

ifor

nian

us17

40+

100

A.D

. 83

0 (9

70)

1050

N1W

129

17A

Bet

a -1

9794

640

-50

Shel

lTe

gula

sp.

940±

100

A.D

. 15

30 (

1660

) 17

20N

1 W

530

11A

Bet

a-20

4126

60-7

0Sh

ell

Myt

ilus

cal

ifor

nian

us21

30+

70A

.D.

470

(580

) 66

0N

10-W

1334

44A

Bet

a-20

6359

70-8

0Sh

ell

Myt

ilus

cal

ifor

nian

us21

40+

40A

.D.

500

(570

) 63

0N

10-W

132

98A

Bet

a-19

2956

80-9

0Sh

ell

Myt

ilus

cal

ifor

nian

us67

40+

9050

90 (

4980

) 48

50 B

.C.

S1W

1236

20A

Bet

a-20

4128

90-1

00Sh

ell

Cry

ptoc

hito

n st

elle

ri21

00+

40A

.D.

550

(610

) 66

0N

10 W

1334

53A

Bet

a-20

4129

110-

120

Shel

lM

ytil

us c

alif

orni

anus

2360

+40

A.D

. 25

0 (3

20)

390

S4W

136

70A

Bet

a -1

9795

111

0-12

0Sh

ell

Myt

ilus

cal

ifor

nian

us16

60±

90A

.D.

950

(103

0) 1

150

N4-

W5

UC

LA

-168

6B12

0B

one

1010

+85

A.D

. 15

10 (

1590

) 16

60G

reen

woo

d (1

972)

S4/W

2C

HE

NB

eta-

2063

6312

0-13

0B

one

Che

ndyt

es l

awi

7510

+40

5770

(57

20)

5680

B.C

. N

10-W

433

34A

Bet

a-19

2959

130-

140

Shel

lB

alan

ussp

.18

70+

80A

.D.

710

(800

) 91

0S1

-W1

3629

AB

eta-

2165

5914

0-15

0Sh

ell

Bal

anus

sp.

3270

+40

830

(800

) 77

0 B

.C.

S1 W

1236

31A

Bet

a-20

4130

160-

170

Shel

lC

rypt

ochi

ton

stel

leri

5130

+40

3310

(31

80)

3080

B.C

. N

1-W

530

17A

Bet

a-19

2960

170-

180

Shel

lM

ytil

us c

alif

orni

anus

2880

+90

400

(340

) 19

0 B

.C.

S1-W

1B

eta-

1701

3818

0-19

0Sh

ell

Hin

nite

ssp

.65

60+

8048

50 (

4770

) 46

80 B

.C.

Farq

huar

(20

03)

N1-

W1

Bet

a-17

0137

200-

210

Shel

lH

alio

tis

sp.

6090

+80

4340

(42

60)

4210

B.C

. Fa

rqhu

ar (

2003

)S1

-W1

3589

AB

eta-

1929

5720

0-21

0Sh

ell

Bal

anus

sp.

5220

+12

034

90 (

3330

) 31

00 B

.C.

N4-

W4

Bet

a-17

0139

220-

230

Shel

lTi

vela

stu

ltor

um56

00+

8038

00 (

3700

) 36

30 B

.C.

Farq

huar

(20

03)

S4-W

237

13A

Bet

a-20

6360

230-

240

Shel

lB

alan

ussp

. 51

50±

4033

20 (

3260

) 31

00 B

.C.

NE

1/8-

N1-

W22

3552

Bet

a-21

6558

24

0-25

0Sh

ell

Tegu

lasp

.55

50+

4037

10 (

3650

) 36

30 B

.C.

N4W

239

10A

Bet

a -1

9794

925

0-26

0Sh

ell

Myt

ilus

cal

ifor

nian

us57

00±

4039

20 (

3810

) 37

60 B

.C.

N4-

W1

Bet

a-21

6556

25

0-26

0B

one

Odo

coil

eus

hem

ionu

s32

60+

4016

00 (

1520

) 14

60 B

.C.

N1-

E4

Bet

a-21

6555

26

0-27

0B

one

Odo

coil

eus

hem

ionu

s71

10+

4060

10 (

5990

,594

0,59

30)

5920

B.C

. S1

W12

3655

AB

eta

-197

950

280-

290

shel

lM

ytil

us c

alif

orni

anus

8340

±40

6630

(65

50)

6470

B.C

. N

1/W

5G

AK

-020

4429

0Sh

ell

Hal

ioti

ssp

.97

80+

260

9180

(83

20)

7540

B.C

. G

reen

woo

d (1

972)

N1-

W4

3974

SR-6

833

290-

300

Bon

eC

hend

ytes

law

i 83

55+

2566

30 (

6570

) 64

90 B

.C.

S1 W

1236

58A

Bet

a-20

4132

290-

300

Shel

lB

alan

ussp

.51

20+

4033

00 (

3170

,315

0,31

40)

3080

B.C

. N

1W4

2999

AB

eta

-197

947

290-

300

Shel

lB

alan

ussp

.50

40±

4031

00 (

3020

) 29

30 B

.C.

NE

-S4-

W9

3557

AB

eta-

1929

6133

0-34

0Sh

ell

Col

lise

lla

sp.

8620

+50

6970

(69

20)

6850

B.C

. N

E-S

4-W

935

57B

Bet

a-19

2962

330-

340

Shel

lM

ytil

us c

alif

orni

anus

8300

+50

6590

(64

80)

6440

B.C

. S

4/W

9U

CL

A-1

686A

320-

330

Bon

eH

uman

9480

+17

5*92

40 (

8780

,877

0,87

50)

8330

B.C

. G

reen

woo

d (1

972)

All

datin

g sa

mpl

es c

ompo

sed

of s

ingl

e bo

ne o

r sh

ell f

ragm

ents

. Dat

es c

alib

rate

d w

ith th

e pr

ogra

m C

AL

IB 3

.3 (

Stui

ver

and

Rei

mer

199

3). R

ound

ed c

alen

dar

ages

incl

ude

mid

poin

t (in

pare

nthe

ses)

and

age

ran

ge a

t one

sig

ma.

ΔR

fro

m I

ngra

m a

nd S

outh

on (

1996

).

*Rej

ecte

d du

e to

unr

elia

bilit

y of

col

lage

n ex

trac

tion

tech

niqu

es.

AQ73(2) Jones 4/9/08 9:24 PM Page 295

ing the late Holocene is marked primarily by a Mid-dle Period component dating 1600 cal B.C.- calA.D. 1000 (component III), with a very minor occu-pation during the Late Period between cal A.D. 1500and contact (component IV). As with many sites onthe central California mainland, CA-SLO-2 wasabandoned during most of the Medieval ClimaticAnomaly (cal A.D. 800–1350; Stine 1994), with anoccupational hiatus evident between cal A.D. 1000and 1500. A total of 63 human burials was associ-

ated with the late Holocene occupation, contribut-ing substantially to mixing of materials between theMiddle and Late Period components. However, thesuperimposed early (N = 3) and late (N = 63)Holocene burial populations provide rare empiricalsupport for population growth within the immedi-ate site vicinity over the course of the Holocene. Thisrenders CA-SLO-2 unusually important withrespect to theoretical models that incorporate pop-ulation pressure as a causal variable.


Table 2. Component Summary, CA-SLO-2.

Depth Geologic Cultural Radiocarbon Calendric Age Excavation Component (cm) Age Period Dates (N) (calibrated) volume (m3)

IV 0-70 Late Holocene Late Period 3 A.D. 1500-contact 29.0III 70-200 Late Holocene Middle Period 11 1500 B.C.- A.D. 1000 49.5

(Hunting Culture)II 200-280 Early Holocene Late Millingstone 8 5000-3000 B.C. 17.4I 280-340 Initial Holocene Early Millingstone 7 8300-6500 B.C. 3.0Total 29* 98.9

*Four non-superpositioned dates excluded.

Figure 2. Depth-distribution of radiocarbon dates from CA-SLO-2.

AQ73(2) Jones 4/9/08 9:24 PM Page 296

The coarse-grained character but overall verti-cal integrity of the occupational components rep-resented at Diablo Canyon are attested to by thedistribution of secure temporal markers (Table 3).Bones from the flightless duck (Chendytes lawi)that went extinct early in the late Holocene ca. 500cal B.C. are most abundant in the Millingstone andMiddle Period levels of the deposit. One bonerecovered from Late Period contexts, postdating thespecies’ extinction, reflects upward mixing. Thepresence of only two Cottonwood arrow points isconsistent with relatively minor use of the site dur-ing the Late Period. One of these was found in theMiddle Period excavation levels as a product ofdownward, intercomponent mixing. Certainfishing-related implements (notched and groovedstone weights, circular shell hooks) dated no ear-

lier than 1500 cal B.C. in central and southern Cal-ifornia (Jones 2003; Jones et al. 2007; King 1990;Rick et al. 2002), were almost wholly restricted tothe Middle and Late Period levels at DiabloCanyon. Only one of these late Holocene artifactswas recovered from below 200 cm.

Component Function

Interpretation of the Diablo Canyon fauna cannotbe disassociated from the site’s role in regional set-tlement systems since any change in the characterof site use could contribute substantially to varia-tion in the relative frequency of taxa (Binford 1978,1980). While some variation in flaked stone tech-nology has been noted (Farqhuar 2003), the over-all Diablo tool assemblages show consistentdiversity (Table 4) that Greenwood (1972) attrib-

REPORTS 297

Table 3. Vertical Distribution of Temporal Markers, CA-SLO-2.

Cottonwood Notched Grooved Flightless DuckArrow Stone Stone Shell (Chendytes lawi)

Component points Weights Net weights Fishhooks Bones Total

IV (Late Period) 1 18 3 18 1 41III (Middle Period) 1 5 6 22 7 41II (Late Millingstone) 0 1 0 0 50 51I (Early Millingstone) 0 0 0 0 8 8

Total 2 24 9 40 66 141

Table 4. Component Artifact Assemblages, CA-SLO-2.

IV III II I TotalArtifact N % N % N % N % N

Milling slabs 1 .08 1 .13 0 .00 0 .00 2Handstones 2 .16 1 .13 8 2.91 1 2.44 12Mortars 17 1.39 6 .78 3 1.09 0 .00 26Pestles 17 1.39 8 1.04 4 1.45 0 .00 29Pitted stones 387 31.75 188 24.51 31 11.27 7 17.07 613Projectile points 161 13.21 104 13.56 31 11.27 2 4.88 298Other bifaces 144 11.81 122 15.91 62 22.55 5 12.20 333Scrapers/Flake tools 374 3.68 250 32.59 110 4.00 17 41.46 751Choppers 19 1.56 16 2.09 9 3.27 2 4.88 46Hammerstones 33 2.71 16 2.09 10 3.64 2 4.88 61Shell fishhooks 18 1.48 22 2.87 0 .00 0 .00 40Notched stones 18 1.48 5 .65 1 .36 0 .00 24Grooved stones 3 .25 6 .78 0 .00 0 .00 9Tarring pebbles 7 .57 6 .78 1 .36 0 .00 14Bone awls 15 1.23 12 1.56 4 1.45 5 12.20 36Bipointed bone gorges 3 .25 4 .52 1 .36 0 .00 8

Subtotal 1219 10.00 767 10.00 275 10.00 41 10.00 2302Margalef Diversity Index* 2.111 - 2.258 - 2.136 - 1.885 - 1.938Shell beads 233 - 1,246 - 23 - 4 - 1506

Grand total 1,452 - 2,013 - 298 - 45 - 3808

* Index calculated for all artifacts except shell beads; formula from Magurran (1988).

AQ73(2) Jones 4/9/08 9:24 PM Page 297

uted to continuity in the basic adaptation throughtime. Artifacts associated with the site’s basal occu-pation (component I) were relatively sparse, but allof the temporal components yielded diverse arraysof ground stone (handstones, milling slabs, mor-tars, pestles, and/or pitted stones), bone awls, pro-jectile points, bifaces, scrapers, and debitage thatreflect a wide range of domestic and subsistenceactivities. CA-SLO-2 clearly functioned as a resi-dential base during all four periods of its habita-tion, an assessment further supported by theassociation of human interments with each tem-poral component. The only significant change inthe tool inventory over time was the addition of fish-ing implements (circular shell hooks, notched andgrooved stones) during the late Holocene that weinterpret as technological innovations unrelated toany change in the overall character of site use.

Analytical Methods

The faunal sample included all bird, mammal, rep-tile, and fish remains recovered from the excava-tion of 1-x-2-m units processed with 6 m mesh.Faunal identifications were made through directcomparison with museum-curated specimens. Forbirds, mammals, and reptiles, reference collectionsfrom the Los Angeles County Museum of NaturalHistory and the Zooarchaeology Laboratory at theCotsen Institute of Archaeology at University ofCalifornia, Los Angeles were used, while refer-ence materials on file at the Department of Biol-ogy, California State University, Bakersfield, wereused for fish remains. All specimens were identi-fied to the most discrete taxonomic level possiblebased on diagnostic features. In the absence of suchfeatures, unidentifiable bones were assigned toclasses (i.e., mammal, aves, etc.), and (for birds andmammals) to size categories (small, medium, orlarge). In addition, the element, part of element,side, age, number, weight, and evidence of modi-fication (i.e., burned, gnawed, cut, or worked) were,to the degree possible, recorded for each specimen.For fish remains only the element and its weightwere recorded. For deer bones, which were a majorpart of the assemblage, MNIs were calculated foreach unit level. All artiodactyl elements were alsoassigned values based on Metcalfe and Jones’s(1988; see also Binford 1978) standardized wholebone food utility index (FUI), to examine variabil-ity in element representation and butchering strate-

gies. Overall dietary trends were evaluated by cal-culating the Margalef Index to evaluate diet breadthand the Berger-Parker index (in reciprocal form) toevaluate evenness or relative specialization (Magur-ran 1988) using the combined sample of bird, mam-mal, and fish remains recovered with the samesampling technique (6 mm mesh). Fish bone datareported by Fitch (1972) based on micro-recoverytechniques (1 mm mesh) were considered in tan-dem with the findings from the larger mesh sam-pling to compensate for the fish bone that was likelymissed with the larger aperture mesh used to exca-vate units. Fitch used a microscope to sort and iden-tify fish bones, and took ca. 900 hours to completehis identifications (Fitch 1972:102). Most of themicro-elements he identified were otoliths, teeth,and vertebrae.

Bird, Mammal, and Reptile Remains

A total of 13,517 bird, mammal, and reptile remainswas identified, including specimens from of a vari-ety of small burrowing animals (e.g., the Botta’spocket gopher [Thomomys bottae], and Californiaground squirrel [Spermophilus beecheyi ]). Elimi-nating all of these possibly intrusive elements andfurther restricting analysis to specimens identifiedto the genus level or better, the sample includes2789 NISP (Table 5), representing 29 species ofbirds, 15 terrestrial mammals, 7 marine mammals,and one reptile (the western pond turtle [Clemmysmarmorata]). Overall, the collection is dominatedby the remains of black-tailed deer (NISP = 1201;43 percent), sea otters (Enhydra lutris; NISP = 431;15.5 percent), cottontail rabbits (Sylvilagus sp.;NISP = 365; 13.1 percent), and cormorants (Pha-lacrocorax sp.; NISP = 278; 9.9 percent). All ofthese species are present in the site vicinity todaywith deer and cottontails abundant in the chapar-ral, grassland, and woodlands in the Irish Hillsimmediately to the east.

The site’s basal component (NISP = 44) showeda preponderance of black-tailed deer (NISP = 18;40.1 percent), cottontail rabbit (NISP = 8; 18.2 per-cent), and the extinct flightless duck (Chendyteslawi; NISP = 8; 18.2 percent). Aquatic birds over-all, including the sooty shearwater (Puffinusgriseus) and the flightless duck account for 38.6percent of the NISP. Component II (Late Milling-stone) was dominated by black-tailed deer (NISP= 187; 44.6 percent), cottontail rabbit (NISP = 66;


AQ73(2) Jones 4/9/08 9:24 PM Page 298

REPORTS 299Ta

ble

5. B

ird,

Mam

mal

,and

Rep

tile

Rem

ains

fro

m C

A-S

LO

-2 id

entifi

ed to

the

Gen

us L

evel

or

Bet

ter.

Lat

e P

erio

dM

iddl

e P

erio

dL

ate

Mil

ling

ston

eE

arly

Mil

ling

ston

eTo

tal

Taxo

nC

omm

on N

ame

NIS

P%

NIS

P%

NIS

P%

NIS

P%

NIS

P%

Terr

estr

ial M

amm

als

Can

issp

.D

og/C

oyot

e19

2.76

774.

7010

2.39

12.

2710

73.

84L

epus

cal

ifor

nicu

s Ja

ck r

abbi

t0

.00

2.1

21

.24

0.0

03

.11

Odo

coil

eus

hem

ionu

sB

lack

-tai

led

deer

323

46.9

567

341

.09

187

44.6

318

4.91

1201

43.0

6Sy

vila

gus

sp.

Cot

tont

ail r

abbi

t70

1.17

221

13.4

966

15.7

58

18.1

836

513

.09

Oth

er T

erre

stri

al M

amm

als

(n =

11)

165.

8023

3.46

42.

580

.00

433.

86Su

btot

al42

862

.21

996

6.81

268

63.9

627

61.3

617

1961

.63

Mar

ine

Mam

mal

sE

nhyd

ra l

utri

sSe

a ot

ter

136

19.7

727

816

.97

174.

060

.00

431

15.4

5P

hoca

vit

ulin

aH

arbo

r se

al26

3.78

704.

2721

5.01

0.0

011

74.

20Z

alop

hus

cali

forn

ianu

sC

alif

orni

a se

a lio

n12

1.74

15.9

22

.48

0.0

029

1.04

Oth

er M

arin

e M

amm

als

(n =

4)

5.9

75

.39

3.7

90

.00

13.5

9Su

btot

al17

926

.26

368

22.5

543

1.34

0.0

059

021

.28

Rep

tile

Cle

mm

ys m

arm

orat

aW

este

rn p

ond

turt

le4

.58

9.5

51

.24

0.0

014

.50

Subt

otal

4.5

89

.55

1.2

40

.00

14.5

0

Non

-Mar

ine

Bir

dsN

on-M

arin

e B

irds

(n

= 5

)3

.44

11.4

90

.00

12.

2714

.43

Subt

otal

3.4

411

.67

0.0

01

2.27

15.5

4

Mar

ine

Bir

dsC

hend

ytes

law

iFl

ight

less

duc

k1

.15

7.4

350

11.9

38

18.6

066

2.38

Pele

canu

ssp

. Pe

lican

2.2

913

.80

3.7

20

.00

18.6

5P

hala

croc

orax

sp.

Cor

mor

ants

568.

1819

511

.99

266.

211

2.33

278

1.02

Uri

a aa

lge

Com

mon

mur

re4

.58

6.3

78

1.91

12.

3319

.68

Oth

er M

arin

e B

irds

(n

= 2

0)11

1.77

332.

3520

6.02

618

.18

702.

93Su

btot

al74

1.76

254

15.5

110

725

.54

1641

.44

451

16.1

7G

rand

tot

al68

810

.25

1638

10.0

941

910

.08

4410

5.07

2789

10.1

2

AQ73(2) Jones 4/9/08 9:24 PM Page 299

15.8 percent), and the flightless duck (Chendyteslawi; NISP = 50; 11.9 percent). Component III(Middle Period) also showed black-tailed deer(NISP = 673; 41.1 percent) as the dominant taxon,followed by sea otter (NISP = 278; 16.9 percent)and cottontail rabbit (NISP = 221; 13.5 percent).Component IV (Late Period) was dominated byblack-tailed deer (NISP = 323; 46.9 percent), seaotters (NISP = 136; 19.8 percent), and cottontailrabbit (NISP = 70; 10.2 percent). Clearly, deer werethe most important taxon throughout the site’s occu-pation, remaining nearly constant in relative abun-dance. Variation in other species over time was alsoapparent as sea otters increased while the flightlessduck was gradually exploited into extinction. Othermarine mammals were insignificant in the overallassemblage and showed no change. Harbor seals(Phoca vitulina), the only pinniped represented inmeaningful numbers, accounted for ca. 5 percentof NISP from the late Millingstone Period onward.Marine birds decreased incrementally through theHolocene (from 38.6 percent to 11.2 percent) as didcottontail rabbits, albeit from only 18.2 percent to10.2 percent.

Black-tailed Deer. Given the evidence in otherparts of western North America for minimal use ofdeer during the early Holocene, the preponderanceof deer bone in the Diablo Canyon collections wasunexpected, although similar patterns showing thedominance of large game have been noted else-where including sites that cross the Pleistocene-Holocene boundary (Jochim 1998). In light ofongoing debate about the efficiency, variability, andsocial role of hunting large animals like deer(Broughton and Bayham 2003; Byers andBroughton 2004; Codding and Jones 2007; Hilde-brandt and McGuire 2002; McGuire and Hilde-brandt 2005; McGuire et al. 2007), and because theDiablo deer assemblage was so substantial, addi-

tional analyses were completed on these remainsrelying on Cannon’s (2003) central place foragerprey choice model.

Cannon’s (2003) model essentially relies on twovariables: (1) the relative importance of artiodactylsin the diet and (2) the representation of artiodactylskeletal elements that are used as a proxy for for-aging range and thus, relative reliability. First, anArtiodactyl Index was calculated as the ratio of allartiodactyl specimens relative to all artiodactylspecimens plus leporid specimens (e.g., Bayham1979; Broughton 1994b, 2002; Byers andBroughton 2004; Cannon 2000, 2003; Hildebrandtand McGuire 2002; McGuire and Hildebrandt2005), which shows a relative increase throughtime (Table 6). A �2 test of these values shows thatdifferences in artiodactyl relative abundancebetween components was significant (�2 = 9.38,p < .05). Further, to test whether or not thediachronic increase was significant, data were sub-jected to Cochran’s test of linear trend among pro-portions (cf. Cannon 2000, 2001, 2003), whichshowed that the temporal increase in artiodactylproportions over time was highly significant (�2

trend= 12.37, p < .001), which is consistent with pat-terns observed elsewhere in western North Amer-ica (e.g., Byers and Broughton 2004; Hildebrandtand McGuire 2002; McGuire and Hildebrandt2005). This trend is also mirrored in the weight ofdeer bone/m3 in the deposit over time (Table 7). Itshould not be overlooked, however, that this rela-tive trend differs substantially from the wholesalereplacement of rabbits by deer suggested in argu-ments made by Hildebrandt and McGuire (2002)and McGuire and Hildebrandt (2005) as deer con-stituted over 40 percent of all the non-fish verte-brate NISP throughout the entire occupation ofCA-SLO-2, including component I. The causeunderlying this pattern, however, is ultimately the


Table 6. Identified Artiodactyl and Leporid Specimens and Artiodactyl Index (AI) Values per Component, CA-SLO-2.

Artiodactyl LeporidComponent (NISP) (NISP) AI

IV (Late Period) 888 (2.96) 141 (-2.96) .863III (Middle Period) 705 (-1.81) 155 (1.81) .820II (Late Millingstone) 295 (-1.28) 67 (1.28) .815I (Early Millingstone) 27 (-1.07) 8 (1.07) .771

Parenthetical values represent the A.D. justed standardized residuals from �2 test performed on the element counts presentedin this table (�2 = 9.38, p < .05; �2 trend = 12.37, p < .001).

AQ73(2) Jones 4/9/08 9:24 PM Page 300

root of the Hildebrandt and McGuire/Broughtonand Bayham debate vis-á-vis whether late to mid-Holocene deer increases reflect efficient huntingdecisions resulting from higher prey densitiesspurred by climatic amelioration, or an increasedpropensity for males to engage in social competi-tion via costly signaling.

In an attempt to determine which explanationbest fits with the Diablo data, we relied on the sec-ond variable in Cannon’s (2003) model, whichexamines the relative abundance of deer on thelandscape through differential butchering practices.Based on the formal model developed by Metcalfeand Barlow (1992; see also Orians and Pearson1979), changes in butchering practices leading tothe deposition of artiodactyl parts with high eco-nomic value relative to low economic value wouldbe an anticipated outcome of increases in the dis-tances that hunters were traveling to pursue largegame such as deer.2 A total of 417 identifiable andnonrepetitive (per unit level) elements was eligiblefor inclusion in this analysis and was used to cal-culate mean (S)FUI values for each temporal com-ponent (Table 8). An analysis of variance of thesevalues shows no significant difference over time (F= .249, p = .861). Moreover, component values didnot vary significantly from the FUI values of a nullset of elements (i.e., from a whole artiodactyl skele-ton). This indicates that throughout the Holocene,foragers from CA-SLO-2 were consistently pro-

cessing and transporting the same sets of skeletalelements back to the residential base; further, thesesets never differed significantly from a whole artio-dactyl skeleton. This signifies that hunters werefrequently able to locate artiodactyls within a rel-atively short distance, and had no need to exten-sively process carcasses in preparation for extendedtransport. While this does suggest that huntingreturns did not decrease throughout the Holocene,it says nothing about whether or not returnsimproved. These results could be due to signifi-cantly large hunting parties, which could potentiallydivide up the load rather than differentially butcher,or to density mediated attrition (see Lyman 1984,1985, 1994). While the former variable is anunknown, the later has been shown to be insignif-icant in a number of other studies (e.g., Cannon2003; Lupo 1995), and soil acidity, which is themajor cause of deterioration of faunal remains inCalifornia, was not a problem at CA-SLO-2, whichshowed soil pH values between 7.0 and 8.4 (Green-wood 1972:49). Furthermore, an examination ofdeer age profiles also suggests that deer were rel-atively abundant throughout the Holocene, as therewas no obvious change in the deer age profile overtime (Table 9). The Diablo Canyon inhabitantsapparently exploited a consistently reliable deerpopulation in the adjacent Irish Hills throughout theHolocene, increasing their exploitation slightly dur-ing the late Holocene, but never to the degree that

REPORTS 301

Table 7. Volumetric Bone and Shell Densities per Cubic Meter and Ratios from CA-SLO-2.

Deer Fish Fish Fish Shell Shell Deer BoneBone Bone Bone Bone Weight/ Weight/ Weight/

Weight Weight NISP/m3 NISP/m3 Shell Deer Bone Fish Bone Fish BoneComponent (g)/m3 (g)/m3 (6 mm) (1 mm) (kg)/m3 Weight Weight Weight

IV 48.2 18.1 98.9 81,325 314.0 6.5 17.3 2.7III 68.2 22.3 123.9 86,621 364.7 5.3 16.3 3.1II 45.0 7.2 27.3 21,660 379.7 8.4 52.7 6.3I 2.1 5.2 23.0 13,760 26.9 13.0 5.2 3.9

Table 8. Mean Artiodactyl Body Part Utility from CA-SLO-2 by Component.

Mean Results of t-tests for differenceComponent (S)FUI NISP* SD from mean of null sample†

IV (Late Period) 36.0 99 24.3 t = -.72, p = .236III (Middle Period) 37.1 250 24.2 t = -.32, p = .374II (Late Millingstone) 35.6 64 23.4 t = -.79, p = .217I (Early Millingstone) 44.0 4 38.3 t = .54, p = .592

*Number of identified adult and sub-adult specimens to which (S)FUI values could be assigned.†Mean = 38.2, n = 118, SD = 2.3.

AQ73(2) Jones 4/9/08 9:24 PM Page 301

populations became sparse, or that deer became lessimportant than rabbits.

Fish

A total of 9,646 fish bones was identified from the6 mm sample; 6,070 to the family level or better(Table 10). Among the 30 taxonomic classes rep-resented in the identifiable sample, the remains ofrockfish (Sebastes sp.; NISP = 2,788) and cabezon(Scorpaenichthys marmoratus; NISP = 2,176) weremost abundant, both of which are common in thekelp beds and rocky areas along the Diablo coasttoday. Cabezon are relatively large fish (up to 75cm) that were probably taken with hook and line,although they might have been collected on occa-sion by hand from tidepools (Fitch 1973:106; Salls1988:558). Sixty-two species of rockfish are knownfrom the Pacific coast; most are fairly large and alsowould have been caught by line or net fishing.Together, rockfish and cabezon dominate all tem-poral components by considerable margins, repre-senting between 67 percent and 85 percent of NISP.The density of fish bone/m3 in the midden showeda gradual increase through most of the Holocene,reaching a peak value of 123.9 bones/m3 during theMiddle Period (component III) and decreasingslightly thereafter to 98.9 bones/m3 (Table 8).

Not surprisingly, the micro-samples (processedwith 1 mm mesh) reported by Fitch (1972) showgreater representation of smaller taxa and dramati-cally higher volumetric concentrations of fish bone(Table 11). He also identified a wider range of taxa(45 taxonomic classes). The majority (N = 10,834)of his sample of 12,165 elements was unidentifi-able. Among the identifiable specimens, surfperches(Embiotocidae) dominated all temporal componentsaccounting for 32.6 percent of the component I sam-ple (NISP = 43),41.7 percent of component II (NISP= 271), 34.1 percent of component III (NISP = 703),

and 33.8 percent of component IV (NISP = 314).Other important taxa were wolf-eel (Anarrhichthysocellatus; NISP = 9), that accounted for 20.9 per-cent of component IV; 16.6 percent of componentIII, but only 8.1 percent and 1.6 percent of the earlyHolocene components. In sharp contrast with the 6mm sample, the micro-sample shows an increase inexploitation of rockfish through the Holocene.Northern anchovies (Engraulis mordax) were alsoof some importance (ca. 14 percent) among the twolate Holocene components. Both surfperches andanchovies are most suited for capture by nets (Love1996; Salls 1988). Fitch (1973:108) felt that theanchovy bones in the SLO-2 midden most likelyarrived via the stomach content of larger fish andmarine mammals, and that site inhabitants did notuse nets, but he was apparently unaware that thesite’s artifact collection contains grooved stones thatare commonly interpreted as net sinkers. The con-tribution of stomach contents to the midden deposit,however, helps explain the remarkably high volu-metric concentration of fish bone reported in Fitch’sstudy. Relying on a microscope to complete iden-tifications, he documented over 13,000 fish bonesand bone fragments/m3 in the basal component ofCA-SLO-2 and an increase to a peak of over 86,000bones/m3 in the Middle Period component (Table7). This relative trend parallels the findings from thelarger mesh excavation units that also show an apexin density during the Middle Period. Fishing clearlyincreased over time at Diablo Canyon from 8300cal B.C. through cal A.D. 1000, but declined after-wards between cal A.D. 1500 and the time of con-tact.

Shellfish

Shell findings from the 1-x-1-m control columnwere reported in detail in the original site report(Greenwood 1972:49–51). As with most sites on


Table 9. Age Distribution of Black-tailed Deer (Odocoileus hemionus) from CA-SLO-2.

Late Period Middle Period Late Millingstone Early Millingstone(Component IV) (Component III) (Component II) (Component I) Total

NISP % NISP % NISP % NISP % NISP

Adult 147 85 342 82 90 80 6 86 587Juvenile 17 10 44 11 13 12 1 14 75Juvenile 0 0 6 1 2 2 0 0 8

(neonate or fetal)Sub-adult 9 5 26 6 8 7 0 0 43Total 173 100 418 100 113 100 7 100 714

AQ73(2) Jones 4/9/08 9:24 PM Page 302

REPORTS 303Ta

ble

10. F

ish

Rem

ains

fro

m C

A-S

LO

-2 (

6 m

m m

esh)

iden

tified

to th

e G

enus

Lev

el o

r B

ette

r.

IVII

III

ITo

tal

Taxo

nC

omm

on n

ame

NIS

P%

NIS

P%

NIS

P%

NIS

P%

NIS

P%

Ela

smob

ranc

hiom

orph

iSh

arks

,ska

tes,

rays

0.0

05

.13

1.2

70

.00

6.1

0C

arch

arhi

nida

eR

equi

em s

hark

s12

.66

33.8

616

4.35

12.

7862

1.02

Squa

ntin

a ca

lifo

rnic

aA

ngel

sha

rk0

.00

1.0

30

.00

0.0

01

.02

Rhi

noba

tis

prod

uctu

s Sh

ovel

nose

gui

tarfi

sh2

.11

1.0

31

.27

0.0

04

.07

Raj

ifor

mes

Skat

es2

.11

2.0

51

.27

0.0

05

.08

Myl

ioba

tis

cali

forn

ica

Bat

ray

0.0

02

.05

0.0

00

.00

2.0

3C

lupe

idae

Her

ring

s0

.00

10.2

60

.00

0.0

010

.16

Sard

inop

s sa

gax

Paci

fic s

ardi

ne0

.00

1.0

30

.00

0.0

01

.02

Mer

lucc

ius

prod

uctu

sPa

cific

hak

e7

.39

18.4

70

.00

0.0

025

.41

Pori

chth

ys s

p.Sp

eckl

efin,

or p

lain

fin m

idsh

ipm

an0

.00

13.3

43

.82

12.

7817

.28

Ath

erin

idae

Silv

ersi

des

0.0

01

.03

0.0

00

.00

1.0

2Se

bast

essp

.R

ockfi

shes

961

53.0

617

3344

.95

8823

.91

616

.67

2,78

845

.93

Hex

agra

mm

ossp

.K

elp

or r

ock

gree

nlin

g12

.66

30.7

82

.54

0.0

044

.72

Oph

iodo

n el

onga

tus

Lin

gcod

472.

6012

83.

3219

5.16

616

.67

200

3.29

Scor

paen

icht

hys

Cab

ezon

587

32.4

113

7235

.59

199

54.0

818

5.00

2,17

635

.85

mar

mor

atus

Seri

ola

lala

ndi

Yel

low

tail

1.0

60

.00

0.0

00

.00

1.0

2G

enyo

nem

us l

inea

tus

Whi

te c

roak

er0

.00

3.0

80

.00

0.0

03

.05

Em

biot

ocid

aeSu

rfpe

rche

s41

2.26

166

4.31

164.

352

5.56

225

3.71

Am

phis

tich

ussp

.B

arre

d,ca

lico,

or r

edta

il su

rfpe

rch

1.0

60

.00

0.0

00

.00

1.0

2E

mbi

otoc

a sp

.B

lack

per

ch,o

r st

ripe

d se

aper

ch0

.00

3.0

81

.27

0.0

04

.07

Rha

coch

ilus

sp.

Rub

berl

ip s

eape

rch,

or p

ile p

erch

0.0

02

.05

0.0

00

.00

2.0

3R

haco

chil

us t

oxot

esR

ubbe

rlip

sea

perc

h0

.00

2.0

50

.00

0.0

02

.03

Rha

coch

ilus

vac

caPi

le p

erch

6.3

36

.16

1.2

70

.00

13.2

1Sp

hyra

ena

arge

ntea

Paci

fic b

arra

cuda

0.0

01

.03

0.0

00

.00

1.0

2O

xyju

lis

cali

forn

ica

Seño

rita

0.0

00

.00

0.0

00

.00

0.0

0St

icha

eida

ePr

ickl

ebac

ks96

5.30

244

6.33

164.

351

2.78

357

5.88

Ceb

idic

hthy

s vi

olac

eus

Mon

keyf

ace

pric

kleb

ack

7.3

96

.16

0.0

00

.00

13.2

1X

iphi

ster

sp.

Roc

k or

kel

p pr

ickl

ebac

k29

1.60

711.

843

.82

12.

7810

41.

71Sc

ombr

idae

M

acke

rels

0.0

01

.03

0.0

00

.00

1.0

2M

ola

mol

aO

cean

sun

fish

0.0

00

.00

1.2

70

.00

1.0

2To

tal

1,81

110

.00

3,85

510

.00

368

10.0

036

10.0

06,

070

10.0

0

AQ73(2) Jones 4/9/08 9:24 PM Page 303

304 AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 73, No. 2, 2008]Ta

ble

11. S

umm

ary

of F

ish

Bon

e Id

entifi

catio

ns f

rom

.25

x .2

5 m

Col

umn

Sam

ple

(1 m

m m

esh)

fro

m C

A-S

LO

-2 (

from

Fitc

h 19

72).

Lat

e P

erio

dM

iddl

e P

erio

dL

ate

Mil

ling

ston

eE

arly

Mil

ling

ston

e(C

ompo

nent

IV

)(C

ompo

nent

III

)(C

ompo

nent

II)

(Com

pone

nt I

)

Taxo

nC

omm

on N

ame

NIS

P%

NIS

P%

NIS

P%

NIS

P%

Tota

l

Ana

rrhi

chth

ys o

cell

atus

Wol

f-ee

l5

1.6

578.

145

16.6

92.

911

6E

mbi

otoc

ides

Surf

perc

h10

633

.824

034

.111

341

.714

32.6

473

Eng

raul

is m

orda

xN

orth

ern

anch

ovy

4414

.010

414

.827

9.9

12.

317

6Se

bast

essp

p.R

ockfi

shes

9831

.287

12.4

248.

95

11.6

214

Oth

er61

19.4

215

3.6

6222

.914

32.6

352

Subt

otal

314

100.

070

310

0.0

271

100.

043

100.

01,

331

Uni

dent

ified

Uni

dent

ified

3,24

463

3510

8317

210

,834

Gra

nd t

otal

3,55

870

3813

5421

512

,165

Tabl

e 12

. She

ll W

eigh

ts (

3 m

m m

esh)

fro

m 1

-x-1

-m C

olum

n Sa

mpl

e,C

A-S

LO

-2 (

from

Gre

enw

ood

1972

).

Com

pone

nt I

VC

ompo

nent

III

Com

pone

nt I

IC

ompo

nent

I(0

-70

cm; .

175

m3 )

(70-

200

cm; 1

.3 m

3 )(2

00-2

80 c

m; .

8 m

3 )(2

80-3

40 c

m; .

6 m

3 )

Shel

l Sh

ell

Shel

l Sh

ell

Tota

l She

llTa

xon

Com

mon

Nam

e%

wei

ght

(kg)

%W

eigh

t (k

g)%

wei

ght

(kg)

%W

eigh

t (k

g)W

eigh

t (k

g)

Myt

ilus

cal

ifor

nian

usC

alif

orni

a se

a m

usse

l72

.715

9.8

84.3

399.

888

.126

7.6

88.3

138.

215

9.8

Hal

ioti

s ru

fesc

ens

Red

aba

lone

11.6

25.5

29.

51.

95.

8.4

.625

.5H

alio

tis

crac

hero

dii

Bla

ck a

balo

ne1.

63.

5.5

2.4

**

.1.2

3.5

Hal

ioti

ssp

.A

balo

ne.2

.4.1

.5.1

.3.1

.2.4

Tegu

lasp

p.T

urba

n sn

ails

8.2

17.9

7.6

36.0

3.8

11.5

3.8

5.9

17.9

Bal

anus

sp.

Bar

nacl

es3.

27.

02.

813

.32.

88.

52.

43.

87

Stro

ngyl

ocen

trot

us p

urpu

ratu

sPu

rple

sea

urc

hin

.1.2

.1.5

**

*.0

.2O

ther

2.4

5.5

2.6

12.2

3.3

1.7

4.9

7.6

5.5

Tota

l10

.021

9.8

100

474.

210

030

4.4

100

156.

521

9.8

*Tra

ce

AQ73(2) Jones 4/9/08 9:24 PM Page 304

the open coast of central California, the depositwas dominated by the remains of species commonto the high energy, exposed rocky habitats foundnear Diablo Canyon today: California mussels(Mytilus californianus), turban snails (Tegula spp.),abalone (Haliotis spp.), and limpets (Collisella sp.).Mussels dominate component I (88.3 percent) andall later components, decreasing slightly to 72.7percent in component IV (Table 12). Continuity ofthis basic open coast assemblage speaks to the sta-bility of Diablo Canyon intertidal environmentsthrough the Holocene. This contrasts significantlywith the estuaries and islands of the California coastthat show taxonomic variation in shellfish relatedto sediment accumulation and changes in sea sur-face temperatures (see Glassow et al. 1994; Ken-nett 2005; Kennett and Kennett 2000, amongothers). Sea surface temperatures along the Diablocoast are influenced primarily by the cold,southward-flowing California Current. The south-ern California islands, in contrast, are influencedby multiple eddying currents, including the south-ern California Countercurrent (Browne 1994).Shifts in the flow of these currents and eddies hasno doubt contributed substantially to the much her-alded variability in sea surface temperature aroundthe islands (e.g.,Arnold 1992a; Glassow et al. 1994;Kennett and Kennett 2000). The Diablo coast, incontrast, shows the influence of one cold, south-ward flowing current over time. While the Cali-fornia Current is influenced by ENSO events andthere is also some evidence for longer-term vari-ability in SST along the open coast of central Cal-ifornia (Jones and Kennett 1999), such variationwas clearly less dramatic than that around theislands. In general, the limited taxonomic variationin the Diablo shell remains suggests relative sta-bility of littoral and nearshore habitats through theHolocene.

Some change through time was noted in thedensity of shell/m,3 which showed a peak value of379.7kg/m3 during the Late Millingstone (compo-nent II), declining slightly thereafter (Table 7).More importantly, the ratio of shell:deer boneweight declined from the early to late Holocenewith a peak value in component I of 13.0 to a lowof 5.3 in component III. This suggests that shell-fish were of greater dietary importance to earlyHolocene foragers which has been demonstratedrepeatedly in California before (e.g., Erlandson

1994; Erlandson et al. 2005; Jones 1992, 2003;Porcasi 2008). A similar progression is evident inthe ratio of shell:fish bone weight, suggesting thatfish also increased in dietary importance relative toshellfish through the Holocene (Table 7). Theabsolute percentage values of shellfish versus deerand fish in the actual diet of site inhabitants is amore complicated if not irresolvable issue sincerecent studies have shown that different approachesto dietary reconstruction yield vastly differentresults (cf. Glassow 2000; Mason et al. 1998). Forour purposes, we are content to identify the rela-tive trend over time, but we also note that toolassemblages with hundreds of bifaces and projec-tile points are probably not consistent with a dietcomposed mostly of shellfish. The only otherchanges through time in the shellfish remains aremodest increases in abalone (Haliotis spp.) and tur-ban snails (Tegula spp.) (Table 12). California mus-sels that decrease during this same period generallyoccur higher in the intertidal zone than do abalone,which suggests that foragers were collecting fromprogressively deeper habitats over the course of theHolocene. This is further supported by models ofdifferential processing, which suggest that, all elsebeing equal, as travel time to a foraging patchincreases, shellfish species with lower ratios ofmeat to shell (e.g., Mytilus) should be preferentiallyprocessed in the field before those species with lowratios (e.g., Haliotis) (Bird et al. 2002). The mod-est increase in low-ranked, labor-intensive turbansnails through the Holocene is consistent withincremental labor intensification.

Summary I: Early Holocene Lifeways

The basal component at CA-SLO-2 conflicts atleast partially with recent generalizations aboutearly foraging practices in western North Amer-ica that emphasize a lack of large game (e.g.,Erlandson 1994; Hildebrandt and McGuire 2002;Jones et al. 2002; Rick et al. 2001). As with all ofthe oldest mainland coastal sites (dating between8300 and 7000 cal. B.C.) in California, CA-SLO-2 postdates megafaunal extinctions, so the absenceof those large taxa is readily understandable. Like-wise, the southern California islands, which haveyielded the oldest radiocarbon evidence for humanoccupation in the northeastern Pacific (ca. 9700 calB.C.), had no populations of large terrestrial mam-

REPORTS 305

AQ73(2) Jones 4/9/08 9:24 PM Page 305

306 AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 73, No. 2, 2008]Ta

ble

13. E

stim

ated

Ret

urn

Rat

es f

or R

esou

rces

Rep

rese

nted

at D

iabl

o C

anyo

n an

d Si

mila

r Sp

ecie

s.

Ret

urn

Rat

e (k

cal/h

r.)

Res

ourc

eTa

xon

Acq

uisi

tion

Met

hod

Low

Mea

nH

igh

Ref

eren

ce

Dee

r O

doco

ileu

s he

mio

nus

Enc

ount

er H

untin

g17

,971

24,7

1031

,450

Sim

ms

(198

7)Ja

ckra

bbit

Lep

us c

alif

orni

cus

Enc

ount

er H

untin

g13

,475

14,4

3815

,400

Sim

ms

(198

7)R

inge

d se

alP

hoca

his

pida

Enc

ount

er H

untin

g10

,550

11,7

8013

,010

Smith

(19

91)

Cot

tont

ail R

abbi

tSy

lvil

agus

sp.

Enc

ount

er H

untin

g8,

983

9392

9,80

0Si

mm

s (1

987)

Can

adia

n go

ose

Bra

nta

cana

dens

isC

anoe

-4,

930

-Sm

ith (

1991

)Sa

rdin

e,he

rrin

gs,s

choo

ling

fry

-N

ettin

g-

3806

-B

liege

Bir

d an

d B

ird

(199

7)C

anad

ian

goos

eB

rant

a ca

nade

nsis

Blin

d-

3,46

0-

Smith

(19

91)

Wat

erfo

wl

-E

ncou

nter

Hun

ting

-30

00-

Win

terh

alde

r (1

981)

Bla

ck-t

aile

d ja

ckra

bbit

Lep

us c

alif

orni

cus

Tra

ppin

g1,

495

2656

-U

gan

(200

5)Ja

ckra

bbit

Lep

us c

alif

orni

cus

Dri

ve62

824

364,

243

Sim

ms

(198

5)D

ucks

Ana

ssp

.E

ncou

nter

Hun

ting

1,97

523

422,

709

Sim

ms

(198

5)C

anad

ian

goos

eB

rant

a ca

nade

nsis

Enc

ount

er H

untin

g-

1,72

0-

Smith

(19

91)

Duc

ksA

natid

aeD

rive

dur

ing

mol

t56

193

91,

317

Sim

ms

(198

5)M

ed.-

Lar

ge b

otto

m-fi

sh,p

elag

ics

-H

andl

ine

(ree

f sl

ope)

-90

0-

Blie

ge B

ird

and

Bir

d (1

997)

Med

.-L

arge

car

nivo

rous

fish

-H

andl

ine

(bea

ch)

-90

0-

Blie

ge B

ird

and

Bir

d (1

997)

Smal

l fish

,oct

opus

,squ

id-

Spea

rfish

ing

(ree

f fla

t)-

600

-B

liege

Bir

d an

d B

ird

(199

7)C

alif

orni

a m

usse

lM

ytil

us c

alif

orni

anus

Pluc

king

543

559

574

Jone

s an

d R

ichm

an (

1995

)Sm

all c

arni

voro

us fi

sh-

Han

dlin

e (r

eef

flat)

-40

0-

Blie

ge B

ird

and

Bir

d (1

997)

Cal

ifor

nia

mus

sel

Myt

ilus

cal

ifor

nian

usSt

ripp

ing

214

330

446

Jone

s an

d R

ichm

an (

1995

)T

urba

n sn

ail

Tegu

la f

uneb

rali

sP

icki

ng73

Jone

s an

d F

erne

au (

2002

)

AQ73(2) Jones 4/9/08 9:24 PM Page 306

mals, and human subsistence there alwaysincluded major contributions from shellfish andfish. The basal component at Diablo Canyon, how-ever, shows substantial evidence for the huntingof deer even though a nearby contemporaneous site(Cross Creek) and other coastal and peri-coastaldeposits (e.g., the Duncan’s Landing Rockshelterin northern California [Wake and Simons 2000])have produced few if any remains of large animals.With substantial quantities of deer in both the basaland late Millingstone components, CA-SLO-2shows that a focus on small game was by no meansa universal in western North America during theearly Holocene. Comparison of the relative fre-quencies of taxa represented at CA-SLO-2 withresource rankings based on experimental returnrates (Table 13) suggests that the high frequencyof deer remains is consistent with the potentialcaloric value of the resource, as long as the taxaare abundant enough to mitigate potential variancecaused by high search and pursuit failures, whichseems to have been the case at CA-SLO-2. Ofcourse, the high ranking of deer is contestedbecause of high variability in hunting success(Hildebrandt and McGuire 2002; McGuire andHildebrandt 2005), and does not explain theabsence of deer bone from the nearby Cross Creekand other sites. Nonetheless, the Diablo findingsshow that hunters took deer in greater numbersthan rabbits when deer were available, suggestingthat artiodactyls were relatively abundant withinthe site vicinity. The alternative that hunters weremainly targeting rabbits but settled for deer as afallback, or for social competition, seems implau-sible. Given the proclivity for deer hunting repre-sented at Diablo Canyon, we feel that the bestexplanation for the lack of deer bones from othersites is the absence of the species from many areasduring the early-mid Holocene as suggested byBroughton and Bayham (2003) and Byers andBroughton (2004); however, the Diablo dataclearly show that the supposed dearth of deer dur-ing the early Holocene was not universal acrossall of western North America, and this variabilityprobably reflects differences in the local ecologyas others have suggested (e.g., Hockett 2005;Zeanah 2004). Early Holocene foragers in west-ern North America were apparently confrontedwith a landscape in which the distribution of deerherds was uneven, which fostered varied inter-

regional emphasis on target species. At DiabloCanyon, a reliable population of deer provided aprimary target for hunting for nearly 10,000 years.

Of course, this does not mean that the earliestforagers at Diablo Canyon focused exclusively onthe terrestrial environment. The inhabitants of Dia-blo Canyon 9,000–10,000 years ago exploitedmarine birds (flightless and otherwise) as 37 per-cent of their large vertebrates and also pursuedsuch low-return activities as line fishing and shell-fish collection. Shellfish, of course, are a gatheredresource that might best be weighed against othergathered foods, most of which were floral not fau-nal. While ethnographic and experimentallyderived return rates for waterfowl are potentiallylow, data from Smith (1991; see Table 13) indicatethat return rates are considerably higher when thebirds are hunted from boats. Moreover, flightlessducks that were probably adapted to predator-freeislands and offshore rocks would certainly haveconstituted an attractive prey item. It is possiblethat this resource was so attractive that it encour-aged terrestrially based mainland foragers todevelop watercraft, but the pursuit of other marinebirds, line-fishing, and shellfish collection repre-sented in the basal component at Diablo Canyonseem more consistent with populations alreadyintensely adapted to the linear interface betweensea and land represented by the coastline of thenortheastern Pacific (e.g., people with boats).Erlandson et al. (2007) have emphasized theimportance of kelp forests along this interface, butthe Diablo finds suggest that these people were alsointerested in terrestrial game in land habitats adja-cent to the sea. This is probably due to the highdensity of deer in the site vicinity (e.g., in the adja-cent Irish Hills). As their exploitative activitiesbrought them further inland, these early popula-tions encountered areas lacking deer and appar-ently shifted their attention to more plentifulsmaller animals. In this instance, optimal foragingtheory exposes behavior that can only be under-stood by recognizing historical contingenciesrelated to coastal colonization (e.g., boating tech-nology) and particulars of the local environment(e.g., deer abundance). While archaeological appli-cations of behavioral ecological models oftenignore these local variables (despite their explicitimportance in most models), the Diablo case sug-gests that this approach is untenable.

REPORTS 307

AQ73(2) Jones 4/9/08 9:24 PM Page 307

Summary II: EconomicIntensification/Resource Suppression

Evidence for change through time at DiabloCanyon is generally of a more muted character thanthe dramatic variation often reported from the Cal-ifornia Islands. This modest variability is partiallya product of the coarse-grained or blurred charac-ter of the mainland record caused by bioturbation;however, the site’s shellfish and fish assemblagesalso indicate that nearshore environments were rel-atively stable through the Holocene and that envi-ronmental inducements to cultural change werelimited. Still, three types of diachronic variation areapparent: (1) modest incremental changes in vol-umetric densities, ratios, and percentages; (2) grad-ual but qualitatively and quantitatively significantchanges in certain taxa, including one (the flight-less duck) that was hunted into extinction; and (3)punctuated, multidirectional change during the lateHolocene.

Nearly all of the gradual but modest changes thatoccurred between ca. 8300 cal B.C. and cal A.D.1000 (components I through III) can be correlatedwith population growth reflected in the Diablo bur-ial record. Small, incremental increases in volu-metric density of fish bone correlate well with anoverall increase in diet breadth reflected by Mar-galef Index values (Figure 3). Through the courseof the Holocene, the Diablo foragers progressivelybroadened their diets at the same time they har-vested increasing quantities of fish. As Arnold etal. (2004:15) note, such small incremental changesdo not match the formal predictions of economicintensification (sensu Boserup 1965) in that theyimply no major reorganization of human labor, nordo they in themselves indicate resource suppres-sion. Indeed, they suggest a reliable resource basethat accommodated increasing harvesting pressureover most of the Holocene. Still, these changes arenot wholly insignificant either. Bone weight-basedratios show that shellfish became less important rel-ative to both deer and fish over time, highlightinga fundamental difference in shellfish vs. fish inpotential to contribute to economies affected bypopulation growth; while shellfish became rela-tively less important in the overall diet, fishincreased in both absolute and relative importance.The overall decrease in dietary evenness throughthe Holocene (Figure 3) seems to reflect the emer-

gence of a modest specialization in fishing in thelate Holocene albeit one dramatically less intensivethan those of the Santa Barbara Channel Islands.This specialization is also apparent in the lateHolocene artifact assemblage (Table 4). We sug-gest that the qualitative increase in fishing throughthe Holocene represents a legitimate case of inten-sification, albeit a modest and gradual one.

Certain resources at Diablo Canyon exhibitmore significant diachronic variation, particularlythe flightless duck, sea otters, and abalone. Changesin the relative importance of these resources areecologically interrelated since the three specieswere all residents of littoral/nearshore marine habi-tats. The case of the flightless duck is particularlyimportant as it constitutes the only unequivocalcase in precontact North America of resource over-exploitation so extreme that it led to extinction.This highly vulnerable species that accounted for18.2 percent of the large vertebrate remains in com-ponent I decreased through the Holocene and is themain cause underlying an overall decrease inexploitation of marine birds. Radiocarbon datesfrom other sites indicate that the flightless duck wasextinct by ca. 500 cal B.C. (Morejohn 1976), whichcorrelates well with the patterning at DiabloCanyon. At the same time this taxon declined andexploitation of all marine birds decreased, sea ottersincreased in relative importance. Elsewhere, theinitial exploitation of otters as a presumably low-ranked resource (exploitable only with boats) hasbeen attributed to suppression of larger, more highlyranked pinnipeds (Hildebrandt and Jones 1992;Jones and Hildebrandt 1995). No such pattern isevident at Diablo Canyon where sea otters were theonly marine mammal exploited in significant num-bers. Rather, the more substantive decline of theflightless duck preceded the initial exploitation ofotters. This seems to reflect the replacement of oneprey item exploited by watercraft with another. Theincreased exploitation of abalone that parallels theincrease in otter bones through the Holocene mustbe partially a reflection of the reduction in otter pop-ulations (a major predator on abalone) as a resultof increased human predation. Although manyother factors (e.g., sea temperature variation, dis-eases) influence abalone populations, the likelyimpact of increased human predation on otters can-not be overlooked. Erlandson, Rick, Estes, Graham,Braje, and Vellanoweth (2005) and Braje et al.


AQ73(2) Jones 4/9/08 9:24 PM Page 308

REPORTS 309

Figure 3. Diversity Indices from combined Bird, Mammal, and Fish (6 mm) remains from CA-SLO-2 compared withburial populations, shell:deer bone weight, and fish bone weight over time.

AQ73(2) Jones 4/9/08 9:24 PM Page 309

(2007) have made similar observations on theChannel Islands. At Diablo Canyon, an apparentcoharvesting strategy ultimately yielded certainfood benefits for human populations. Over thecourse of the Holocene, foragers at Diablo Canyonsimultaneously helped wipe out one species whilethey reduced the population of a key nearshorepredator with whom they were in competition. Thenet result was greater absolute productivity—albeitin the form of more lower-ranked resources.3

The Diablo data also highlight the relativeimportance of large terrestrial mammals through-out the Holocene. Despite the predictions of some(e.g., Hildebrandt and McGuire 2002) and findingsfrom other sites on the California coastal margin(e.g., Cross Creek), the Diablo collection reflectsa local deer population abundant enough to sup-port sustained levels of exploitation and provide areliable and efficient resource for over 10,000 years.The Diablo case supports other recent studies (e.g.,Elston and Zeanah 2002; Hockett 2005; Zeanah2004) that highlight the importance of under-standing how local environmental factors directlyaffect the distribution of local fauna. The local

abundance of deer at Diablo Canyon, and theirinferred reliability suggest that artiodactyls wouldnot be the best target prey for males wishing to dis-tinguish themselves from others via costly signal-ing, as even lower-quality (or less-skilled) hunterswould be capable of obtaining deer in this situa-tion due to their ready availability—although itremains possible that individual hunters wereattempting to signal their ability to provision, whichis a possible signaling strategy (see Gintis et al.2001; Smith and Bliege Bird 2005). This form ofsignaling seems a greater match to the record at Dia-blo Canyon, suggesting that male hunters procuredlarge game with enough consistency that it waspart of a provisioning strategy in which foragersacquired these large terrestrial mammals efficientlythroughout the Holocene without measurablydepressing their populations.

The late Holocene provides the only substan-tive suggestion of environmentally induced cul-tural change in the Diablo record. Like many sitesin the region, CA-SLO-2 was abandoned duringmost of the Medieval Climatic Anomaly when thereis evidence for widespread droughts throughout


Figure 4. Relative frequency of flightless duck (Chendytes lawi), sea otter (Enhydra lutris), and abalone (Haliotis spp.)remains from CA-SLO-2.

AQ73(2) Jones 4/9/08 9:24 PM Page 310

much of western North America (Stine 1994); afterca. A.D. 1000, the site was occupied only from ca.cal A.D. 1500–1770. This relatively minor, post-drought occupation is reflected by reduced num-bers of artifacts and burials, and coincident declinesin shell and fish bone volumetric density. However,unlike most of the developments during the first9,000 years of the site’s occupation, there is lessoverall consistency in the directionality of faunalchange. Diet breadth and evenness, for example,converge for the first time (Figure 3). The most par-simonious explanations for the varied character ofthese late cultural changes are historical contin-gencies related to the Medieval droughts (Jones etal. 1999) and Protohistoric diseases (Erlandson andBartoy 1995; Preston 1996). In her original analy-sis of CA-SLO-2, Greenwood (1972) recognizedthat the most recent occupation was less intensivethan earlier ones and suggested that early historicdisruptions were the cause. Our analysis of thesite’s fauna leads to the same conclusion althoughwe envision Medieval drought as an additional dis-ruptive variable.

Discussion

CA-SLO-2 has produced one of the largest trans-Holocene faunal assemblages from the west coastof North America. The site’s basal component illu-minates an initial Holocene coastal adaptation inwhich foragers exploited a wide range of terrestrialand marine foods including deer, marine birds(especially the extinct flightless duck), rabbits,open-coast shellfish, and fish. While this subsis-tence mode is partially consistent with life “on thekelp highway” suggested by Erlandson et al. (2007)in that it almost certainly involved the use of water-craft, it also included heavy exploitation of terres-trial foods from land habitats adjacent tp the sea.The suite of resources exploited by Diablo’s earli-est residents can be seen as optimal only for a pop-ulation already invested in development ofwatercraft and who were intensely adapted to theinterface of land and sea along the coastline of thenortheastern Pacific. The heavy representation ofdeer in basal and later components at DiabloCanyon suggests that recent generalizations aboutan emphasis on small game by early Holocene for-agers (e.g., Hildebrandt and McGuire 2002) arepremature and that early colonists exploited larger

game when it was available. Uneven distributionof deer herds in western North America during theearly-middle Holocene probably explains therecovery of deer bones from some areas and notothers (Byers and Broughton 2004; Hockett 2005;Zenah 2004). The historical contingencies ofcoastal colonization and gradual, uneven post-Pleistocene expansion of deer populations follow-ing terminal Pleistocene megafauna extinctionsmay explain the dietary choices available to andmade by the earliest coastal inhabitants.

The Diablo record further includes unequivocalevidence of population growth in the site area inthe form of superimposed burial populations. Cor-related changes in faunal consumption patternsimply the influence of incremental populationgrowth although a basic, broad-spectrum mixedeconomy persisted throughout the Holocene. Witha stable marine environment influenced by onecold, southward-flowing current (the CaliforniaCurrent), Diablo Canyon shows relatively mutedvariation consistent with gradual diet broadening,and emergence of a very modest specialization innearshore fishing. There is no evidence for over-exploitation of pinnipeds or fish, and the impor-tance of the latter as the key resource thataccommodated population growth is clearlydemonstrated, raising questions about argumentsadvanced elsewhere (e.g., Broughton 1994a, 1999;Salls 1992) for prehistoric fish overexploitation.The site does show the only unequivocal case ofgradual overpredation leading to extinction inNorth America, although the flightless duck wasrendered extinct through the combined efforts offoraging groups all along the California and Ore-gon coasts not by the Diablo Canyon hunters alone.Disappearance of the species was followed by sig-nificant changes related to exploitation of a less vul-nerable, more elusive (and presumablylower-ranked) taxon, the sea otter. At the time ofhistoric contact when the final use of CA-SLO-2ended, the prevailing adaptation was slightly moreintensive than that of the early Holocene and therewas one less Native species present in the region.However, an overall broad-spectrum foraging strat-egy was still present.

Diachronic changes at Diablo Canyon are muchless dramatic than those on the southern Califor-nia Islands, partially due to more extreme vari-ability in marine environments off the islands as

REPORTS 311

AQ73(2) Jones 4/9/08 9:24 PM Page 311

well as the exaggerated selective pressures thatoperate on human and animal populations in insu-lar situations. While the islands provide dramaticevidence for the same principles of foraging effi-ciency discussed here, the uniqueness of island cul-tural trajectories is also illuminated by comparisonwith the mainland. The effects of several of thesame historical contingencies are apparent in bothareas (e.g., coastal colonization, the Medieval Cli-matic Anomaly, protohistoric diseases), the main-land record illuminates foraging decisions made bygradually growing human population on a less cir-cumscribed, continental land mass.

Acknowledgments. We are deeply indebted to RobertaGreenwood for completing such a thorough investigation ofCA-SLO-2 in 1968. Her research at the site is still one of themost important studies in western North American archaeol-ogy. We would like to express our most sincere thanks toMike Cannon for his assistance in applying his model, and toDoug and Rebecca Bird for numerous informative discus-sions. We also thank Luther Bertrando and the San LuisObispo County Archaeological Society for allowing us towork with the Diablo faunal collection, Terry Joslin andValerie Levulett for discovering a last cache of lost bones,Jennifer Farquhar for sharing her radiocarbon findings withus, and Ken Gobalet for his assistance with the fish boneidentifications. Helpful comments on earlier drafts of themanuscript were provided by Roberta Greenwood and JonErlandson; we are indebted to both of them as well as to twoanonymous reviewers. Angela Barrios and Sarah Mellingerwere most helpful in compiling the Diablo data base.Funding for dating and analysis of faunal remains fromDiablo Canyon was provided by California Sea GrantR/CZ–187. Any mistakes in fact or judgment are strictly theresponsibility of the authors.

References Cited

Arnold, Jeanne E.1992a Complex Hunter-Gatherer-Fishers of Prehistoric Cal-

ifornia: Chiefs, Specialists, and Maritime Adaptations ofthe Channel Islands. American Antiquity 57:60–84.

1992b Cultural Disruption and the Political Economy inChannel Islands Prehistory. In Essays on the Prehistory ofMaritime California, edited by Terry L. Jones, pp.129–146. Publication 10. Center for ArchaeologicalResearch at Davis, Davis, California.

Arnold, Jeanne E. (editor) 2001 The Origins of a Pacific Coast Chiefdom: The Chu-

mash of the Channel Islands. University of Utah Press, SaltLake City.

2004 Foundations of Chumash Complexity. Cotsen Insti-tute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Ange-les.

Arnold, Jeanne E., Michael R. Walsh, and Sandra E. Hollimon2004 The Archaeology of California. Journal of Archaeo-

logical Research 12:1–73.Basgall, Mark E.

1987 Resource Intensification Among Hunter-Gatherers:Acorn Economies in Prehistoric California. Research inEconomic Anthropology 9:21–52.

Bayham, Frank E. 1979 Factors influencing the Archaic Pattern of Animal Uti-

lization. Kiva 44:219–235. Bettinger, Robert L.

1991 Hunter-Gatherers: Archaeological and EvolutionaryTheory. Plenum Press, New York.

Binford, Lewis R.1978 Nunamuit Ethnoarchaeology. Academic Press, New

York.1980 Willow Smoke and Dogs’Tails: Hunter-Gatherer Set-

tlement Systems and Archaeological Site Formation.American Antiquity 45:4–20.

Bird, Douglas W., Jennifer L. Richerson, Peter M. Veth, andAnthony J. Barham

2002 Explaining Shellfish Variability in Middens on theMeriam Islands,Torres Strait,Australia. Journal of Archae-ological Science 29:457–469.

Bliege Bird, Rebecca, and Douglas W. Bird1997 Delayed Reciprocity and Tolerated Theft:The Behav-

ioral Ecology of Food-Sharing Strategies. Current Anthro-pology 38:49–78.

Bliege Bird, Rebecca, and Eric Alden Smith2005 Signaling Theory, Strategic Interaction, and Symbolic

Capital. Current Anthropology 46:221–248.Bliege Bird, Rebecca, Eric Alden Smith, and Douglas W. Bird

2001 The Hunting Handicap: Costly Signaling in HumanForaging Strategies. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiol-ogy 50:9–19.

Boserup, Esther1965 The Conditions of Agricultural Growth. Aldine,

Chicago. Braje,Todd J., Douglas J. Kennett, Jon M. Erlandson, and Bren-

dan J. Culleton2007 Human Impact on Nearshore Shellfish Taxa: A 7000

Year Record from Santa Rosa Island, California. Ameri-can Antiquity 72:735–756.

Broughton, Jack M.1994a Late Holocene Resource Intensification in the Sacra-

mento River Valley, California: The Vertebrate Evidence.Journal of Archaeological Science 21:501–514.

1994b Declines in Mammalian Foraging Efficiency duringthe Late Holocene, San Francisco Bay. Journal of Anthro-pological Archaeology 13:371–401.

1997 Widening Diet Breadth, Declining Foraging Effi-ciency, and Prehistoric Harvest Pressure: IchthyofaunalEvidence from the Emeryville Shellmound, California.Antiquity 71:845–862.

1999 Resource Depression and Intensification during theLate Holocene, San Francisco Bay: Evidence from theEmeryville Shellmound Vertebrate Fauna. University ofCalifornia Publications in Anthropological Records, No.32. University of California, Berkeley.

2002 Prey Spatial Structure and Behavior Affect Archaeo-logical Tests of Optimal Foraging Models: Examples fromthe Emeryville Shellmound Vertebrate Fauna. WorldArchaeology 34:60–83.

Broughton, Jack M., and Frank E. Bayham2003 Showing Off, Foraging Models, and the Ascendance

of Large-Game Hunting in the California Middle Archaic.American Antiquity 68:783–789.

Browne, D. R.1994 Understanding the Oceanic Circulation in and Around

the Santa Barbara Channel. In The Fourth CaliforniaIslands Symposium: Update on the Status of Resources,


AQ73(2) Jones 4/9/08 9:24 PM Page 312

edited by William L. Halvorson, and Gloria J. Maender,pp. 27–34. Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History,Santa Barbara.

Butler, Virginia L., and Sarah K. Campbell2004 Resource Intensification and Resource Depression in

the Pacific Northwest of North America: A Zooarchaeo-logical Review. Journal of World Prehistory 18:327–405.

Byers, David A., and Jack M. Broughton2004 Holocene Environmental Change, Artiodactyl Abun-

dances, and Human Hunting Strategies in the Great Basin.American Antiquity 69:235–255.

Cannon, Michael D. 2000 Large Mammal Relative Abundance in Pithouse and

Pueblo Period Archaeofaunas from Southwestern NewMexico: Resource Depression among the Mimbres-Mogollon? Journal of Anthropological Archaeology19:317–347.

2001 Archaeofaunal Relative Abundance, Sample Size, andStatistical Methods. Journal of Archaeological Science28:185–195.

2003 A Model of Central Place Forager Prey Choice andan Application to Faunal Remains from the Mimbres Val-ley, New Mexico. Journal of Anthropological Archaeol-ogy 22:1–25.

Cassidy, Jim, L. Mark Raab, and Nina A. Kononenko2004 Boats, Bones, and Biface Bias: The Early Holocene

Mariners of Eel Point, San Clemente Island, California.American Antiquity 69:109–130.

Codding, Brian F., and Terry L. Jones2007 Man the Showoff? Or the Ascendance of a Just-So

Story: A Comment on Recent Applications of Costly Sig-naling in American Archaeology. American Antiquity72:349–357.

Des Lauriers, Matthew2005 The Watercraft of Isla Cedros, Baja, California: Vari-

ability and Capabilities of Indigenous Seafaring Technol-ogy along the Pacific Coast of North America. AmericanAntiquity 70:342–360.

Elston, Robert G., and David W. Zeanah2002 Thinking Outside the Box: A New Perspective on

Diet Breadth and Sexual Division of Labor in thePrearchaic Great Basin. World Archaeology 34:103–130.

Erlandson, Jon M.1991 Shellfish and Seeds as Optimal Resources: Early

Holocene Subsistence on the Santa Barbara Coast. InHunter-Gatherers of Early Holocene Coastal California,edited by Jon M. Erlandson and Roger H. Colten, pp.89–100. Institute of Archaeology, University of Califor-nia, Los Angeles.

1993 Evidence for a Terminal Pleistocene Human Occu-pation of Daisy Cave, San Miguel Island, California. Cur-rent Research in the Pleistocene 10:17–21.

1994 Early Hunter-Gatherers of the California Coast.Plenum Press, New York.

2001 The Archaeology of Aquatic Adaptations: Paradigmsfor a New Millennium. Journal of Archaeological Research9:287–350.

2002 Anatomically Modern Humans, Maritime Voyaging,and the Pleistocene Colonization of the Americas. In TheFirst Americans: The Pleistocene Colonization of the NewWorld, edited by Nina G. Jablonski, pp. 59–92. Memoirsof the California Academy of Sciences No. 27, San Fran-cisco.

Erlandson, Jon M., and Kevin Bartoy1995 Cabrillo, the Chumash, and Old World Diseases. Jour-

nal of California and Great Basin Anthropology17:153–173.

Erlandson, Jon M., Douglas. J. Kennett, B. Lynn Ingram, DanA. Guthrie, Don. P. Morris, M. A. Tveskov, G. James West,and Phillip. L. Walker

1996 An Archaeological and Paleontological Chronologyfor Daisy Cave (CA-SMI–261), San Miguel Island, Cali-fornia. Radiocarbon 38:355–373.

Erlandson, Jon M., René L. Vellanoweth, Torben C. Rick, andMelissa R. Reid

2005 Coastal Foraging at Otter Cove: A 6,600-Year-OldShell Midden on San Miguel Island, California. Journalof California and Great Basin Anthropology 25:69–86.

Erlandson, Jon M., Todd J. Braje, Torben C. Rick, and JennaPeterson

2005 Beads, Bifaces, and Boats: An Early Maritime Adap-tation on the South Coast of San Miguel Island, Califor-nia. American Anthropologist 107:677–683.

Erlandson, Jon M., Torben C. Rick, James A. Estes, Michael H.Graham, Todd J., Braje, and Rene L. Vellanoweth

2005 Sea Otters, Shellfish, and Humans: A 10,000 yearRecord from San Miguel Island, California. In Pro-ceedings of the Sixth California Islands Symposium,edited by Dave Garcelon, and Catherin Schwemm, pp.9–21. National Park Service Technical PublicationCHIS-05-01, Institute for Wildlife Studies, Arcata, Cal-ifornia.

Erlandson, Jon M., Michael H. Graham, Bruce J. Borque, DebraCorbett, James A. Estes, and Robert S. Steneck

2007 The Kelp Highway Hypothesis: Marine Ecology, theCoastal Migration Theory, and the Peopling of Americas.Journal of Island and Coastal Archaeology 2, in press.

Farquhar, Jennifer M.2003 Organization of Flaked Stone Technology and Set-

tlement Mobility on the South Central Coast of Califor-nia: A Perspective from Diablo Canyon and Point Sal,Unpublished Master’s thesis, Department of Anthropol-ogy, California State University, Sacramento.

Fitch, John1972 Fish Remains, Primarily Otoliths from CA-SLO-2,

Diablo Canyon. In 9000 Years of Prehistory at DiabloCanyon, San Luis Obispo County, California, edited byRoberta Greenwood, pp. 101–120. Occasional Paper No.7, San Luis Obispo County Archaeological Society, SanLuis Obispo, California.

Fitzgerald, Richard T. 1998 Archaeological Data Recovery at CA-SLO-1797, the

Cross Creek Site, San Luis Obispo County, California,Coastal Branch Phase II Project. Garcia and Associates,San Anselmo, California. Submitted to California Depart-ment of Water Resources, Sacramento. Report on file atthe Central Coast Information Center of the HistoricalResources Information System, Department of Anthro-pology, University of California Santa Barbara.

2000 Cross Creek: An Early Holocene Millingstone Site.The California State Water Project, Coastal Branch SeriesPaper No. 12. San Luis Obispo County ArchaeologicalSociety, San Luis Obispo, California.

Fitzgerald, Richard T., and Terry L. Jones1999 The Milling Stone Horizon Revisited: New Perspec-

tives from Northern and Central California. Journal ofCalifornia and Great Basin Anthropology 21:65–93.

Fitzgerald, Richard T., and Judith F. Porcasi2003 The Metcalf Site (CA-SCL-178) and its Place in Early

Holocene California Prehistory. Society for CaliforniaArchaeology Newsletter 37(4):27–31.

Gintis, Herbert, Eric Alden Smith, and Samuel Bowls2001 Costly Signaling and Cooperation. Journal of Theo-

retical Biology 213:103–119.

REPORTS 313

AQ73(2) Jones 4/9/08 9:24 PM Page 313

Glassow, Michael A.2000 Weighing vs. Counting Shellfish Remains: A Com-

ment on Mason, Peterson, and Tiffany. American Antiq-uity 65:407–414.

Glassow, Michael A., Douglas J. Kennett, James P. Kennett, andLarry R. Wilcoxon

1994 Confirmation of Middle Holocene Ocean CoolingInferred from Stable Isotopic Analysis of Prehistoric Shellsfrom Santa Cruz Island, California. In The Fourth Cali-fornia Islands Symposium: Update on the Status ofResources, edited by William L. Halvorson and Gloria J.Maender, pp. 223–232. Santa Barbara Museum of NaturalHistory, Santa Barbara.

Gobalet, Kenneth W. 2001 A Critique of Faunal Analysis; Inconsistency among

Experts in Blind Tests. Journal of Archaeological Science28:377–386

Grafen, A.1990a Sexual Selection Unhandicapped by the Fisher

Process. Journal of Theoretical Biology 144:473–516.1990b Biological Signals as Handicaps. Journal of Theo-

retical Biology 144:517–546.Greenwood, Roberta S.

1972 9000 Years of Prehistory at Diablo Canyon, San LuisObispo County, California. San Luis Obispo CountyArchaeological Society Occasional Papers no. 7.

Griffiths, David1975 Prey Availability and the Food of Predators. Ecology

56:1209–1214.Hawkes, Kristen

1990 Why Men Hunt? Benefits for Risky Choice. In Riskand Uncertainty in Tribal and Peasant Economies, editedby Elizabeth Cashdan, pp 145–166. Westview Press, Boul-der, Colorado.

1990 Showing Off: Tests of an Hypothesis about Men’sForaging Goals. Ethology and Sociobiology 12:29–54.

1993 Why Hunter-Gatherers Work: An Ancient Version ofthe Problem of Public Goods. Current Anthropology34:341–361.

1996 Foraging Differences between Men and Women:Behavioral Ecology of the Sexual Division of Labor. InPower, Sex and Tradition: The Archaeology of HumanAncestry, edited by Stephen Shennan, and James Steele,pp. 283–305. Routeledge, London.

Hawkes, Kristen, James. F. O’Connell, and Nicholas G. Blur-ton Jones

1991 Hunting Income Patterns among the Hadza: BigGame, Common Goods, Foraging Goals and the Evolu-tion of the Human Diet. Philosophical Transactions of theRoyal Society, London, series B, 334:243–251.

2001 Hunting and Nuclear Families: Some Lessons fromthe Hadza about Men’s Work. Current Anthropology42:681–709.

Hildebrandt, William R., and Terry L. Jones1992 Evolution of Marine Mammal Hunting:A View from

the California and Oregon Coasts. Journal of Anthropo-logical Archaeology 11:360–401.

Hildebrandt, William R., and Kelly R. McGuire2002 The Ascendance of Hunting during the California

Middle Archaic: An Evolutionary Perspective. AmericanAntiquity 67:231–256.

Hockett, Bryan2004 Middle and Late Holocene Hunting in the Great Basin:

A Critical Review of the Debate and Future Prospects.American Antiquity 70:713–731.

Ingram, B. L., and J. R. Southon1996 Reservoir Ages in Pacific Coast Estuarine Waters.

Radiocarbon 38:573–582.Jochim, Michael A.

1998 A Hunter-Gatherer Landscape. Plenum Press, NewYork.

Johnson, John R.,Thomas Stafford, Jr., H. Ajie, and Don P. Mor-ris

2002 Arlington Springs Revisited. Proceedings of the 5th

California Islands Symposium, edited by David R. Browne,Kathryn L. Mitchell, and Henry W. Chaney, pp. 541–545.Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, Santa Barbara,California.

Jones, Terry L.1991 Marine-Resource Value and the Priority of Coastal

Settlement: A California Perspective. American Antiquity56:419–443.

1992 Settlement Trends Along the California Coast. InEssays on the Prehistory of Maritime California, editedby T. L. Jones, pp. 1–37. Center for ArchaeologicalResearch at Davis no. 10. University of California, Davis.

1996 Mortars, Pestles, and Division of Labor in PrehistoricCalifornia: A View from Big Sur. American Antiquity61:243–264.

2003 Prehistoric Human Ecology of the Big Sur Coast, Cal-ifornia. Contributions of the University of CaliforniaArchaeological Research Facility. No. 61. University ofCalifornia Arcaheological Research Facility, Berkeley.

Jones, Terry L., and Jennifer A. Ferneau2002 Prehistory at San Simeon Reef: Archaeological Data

Recovery at CA-SLO-179 and -267, San Luis ObispoCounty, California. San Luis Obispo County Archaeo-logical Society Occasional Papers No. 16. Cotsen Insti-tute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles.

Jones, Terry L., and William R. Hildebrandt. 1995 Reasserting a Prehistoric Tragedy of the Commons:

Reply to Lyman. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology14:78–98.

Jones, Terry L., and Douglas J. Kennett1999 Late Holocene Climate Change and Cultural Ecology

of the Central California Coast. Quaternary Research51:74–82.

Jones, Terry L., Richard T. Fitzgerald, Douglas J. Kennett,Charles H. Miksicek, John L. Fagan, John Sharp, and JonM. Erlandson

2002 The Cross Creek Site (CA-SLO-1797) and its Impli-cations for New World Colonization. American Antiquity67:213–230.

Jones, Terry L., Gary M. Brown, L. Mark Raab, Janet L.McVickar, W. Geoffrey Spaulding, Douglas J. Kennett,Andrew York, and Phillip L. Walker

1999 Environmental Imperatives Reconsidered: Demo-graphic Crises in Western North America During theMedieval Climatic Anomaly. Current Anthropology40:137–170.

Jones, Terry L., Nathan E. Stevens, Deborah A. Jones, RichardT. Fitzgerald, Mark G. Hylkema

2007 The Central Coast: A Mid-latitude Milieu. In Cali-fornia Prehistory: Colonization, Culture, and Complexity,edited by Terry L. Jones and Kathryn A. Klar, pp. 125–146.Altamira Press, Walnut Creek, California.

Jones, Terry L., William R. Hildebrandt, Douglas J. Kennett,and Judith F. Porcasi

2004 Prehistoric Marine Mammal Overkill in the North-eastern Pacific: A Review of New Evidence. Journal ofCalifornia and Great Basin Anthropology 24:69–80.


AQ73(2) Jones 4/9/08 9:24 PM Page 314

Jones, Terry L., and Jennifer R. Richman1995 On Mussels: Mytilus californianus as a Prehistoric

Resource. North American Archaeologist 16:33–58.Kay Charles E., and Randy T. Simmons

2002 Wilderness and Political Ecology: Aboriginal Influ-ences and the Original State of Nature. University of UtahPress, Salt Lake City.

Kennedy, M. A., A. D. Russell, and T. Guilderson2005 A Radiocarbon Chronology of Hunter-Gatherer Occu-

pation from Bodega Bay, California, U.S.A. Radiocarbon47:1–29.

Kennett, Douglas J.2005 The Island Chumash; Behavioral Ecology of a Mar-

itime Society. University of California Press, Berkeley.Kennett, Douglas J., and J. P. Kennett

2000 Competitive and Cooperative Responses to ClimateInstability in Coastal Southern California. American Antiq-uity 65:379–395.

King, Chester D.1990 Evolution of Chumash Society: A Comparative Study

of Artifacts Used for Social System Maintenance in theSanta Barbara Channel Region Before A.D. 1804. Gar-land Publishing, New York.

Lourandos, H.1983 Intensification:A Late Pleistocene-Holocene Archae-

ological Sequence from Southwestern Victoria. Archae-ology in Oceania 18:81–94.

Love, M.1996 Probably More than You Want to Know about the

Fishes of the Pacific Coast. Really Big Press, Santa Bar-bara.

Lyman, R. Lee1984 Bone Density and Differential Survivorship of Fossil

Classes. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology3:259–299.

1985 Bone Frequencies: Differential Transport, In SituDestruction, and the MGUI. Journal of ArchaeologicalScience 12:221–236.

1994 Vertebrate Taphonomy. Cambridge University Press,Cambridge.

Lupo, Karen D. 1995 Hadza Bone Assemblages and Hyena Attrition: An

Ethnographic Example of the Influence of Cooking andMode of Discard on the Intensity of Scavenger Ravaging.Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 14:288–314.

Lyman, R. Lee., and Reed Wadley2003 Sustainable Yields and Conservation Goals. Science

301:309. Magurran, A. E.

1988 Ecological Diversity and its Measurement. PrincetonUniversity Press, Princeton, New Jersey.

Mason, Roger D., Mark L. Peterson, and Joseph A. Tiffany1998 Weighing vs. Counting: Measurement Reliability and

the California School of Midden Analysis. American Antiq-uity 63:303–324.

Matson, R. G.1983 Intensification and the Development of Cultural Com-

plexity: The Northwest versus Northeast Coast. In TheEvolution of Maritime Cultures on the Northeast andNorthwest Coasts of America, edited by R. J. Nash, pp.125–148. Department of Archaeology, Publication 11.Simon Frazier University.

McGuire, Kelly R., and William R. Hildebrandt1994 The Possibilities of Women and Men: Gender and the

California Millingstone Horizon. Journal of Californiaand Great Basin Anthropology 16:41–59.

2005 Re-Thinking Great Basin Foragers: Prestige Huntingand Costly Signaling during the Middle Archaic Period.American Antiquity 70:695–712.

McGuire, Kelly R., William R. Hildebrandt, and Kimberly L.Carpenter

2007 Costly Signaling and the Ascendance of No-Can-DoArchaeology: A Reply to Codding and Jones. AmericanAntiquity 27:349–358.

Metcalfe, Duncan, and K. Renee Barlow1992 A Model for Exploring the Optimal Trade-off between

Field Processing and Transport. American Anthropologist94:340–356

Metcalfe, Duncan, and Kevin T. Jones1988 A Reconsideration of Animal Body-Part Utility

Indices. American Antiquity 53:486–504.Morejohn, G. Victor

1976 Evidence of the Survival to Recent Times of theExtinct Flightless Duck Chendytes lawi. In CollectedPapers in Avian Paleontology Honoring the 90th Birthdayof Alexander Wetmore, edited by Alexander Wetmore andStorrs L. Olson, pp. 207–211. U.S. Government PrintingOffice, Washington, D.C.

Monahan, Christopher M.1998 The Hadza Carcass Transport Debate Revisited and

its Archaeological Implications Journal of Archaeologi-cal Science 25:405–424.

Orians, Gordon H., and Nolan E. Pearson 1979 On the Theory of Central Place Foraging. In Analy-

sis of Ecological Systems, edited by David J. Horn, Gor-don R. Stairs and Rodger D. Mitchell, pp. 155–177. OhioState University Press, Columbus.

Perry, Jennifer E.2004 Resource Intensification and Environmental Vari-

ability: Subsistence Patterns in Middle and Late PeriodDeposits at CA-SBA-225, Vandenberg Air Force Base,California. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthro-pology 24:81–102.

Porcasi, Judith F.2008 Subsistence Patterns of Prehistoric Coastal Califor-

nia: Investigating Variations of Early Maritime Adaptation.Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, School of Archaeologyand Ancient History, Leicester University, Leicester.

Preston, William1996 Serpent in Eden: Dispersal of Foreign Diseases into

Pre-Mission California. Journal of California and GreatBasin Anthropology 18:3–37.

Raab, L. Mark1992 An Optimal Foraging Analysis of Prehistoric Shell-

fish Collecting on San Clemente Island, California. Jour-nal of Ethnobiology 12:63–80.

Raab, L. Mark, and Andrew Yatsko1992 Ancient Maritime Adaptations of the California

Bight:A Perspective from San Clemente Island. In Essayson the Maritime Prehistory of California, edited by TerryL. Jones, pp. 173–194. University of California, Davis,Publication 10. Center for Archaeological Research,Davis.

Rick, Torben C., Jon M. Erlandson, and Rene L. Vellanoweth2001 Paleocoastal Fishing along the Pacific Coast of the

Americas: Evidence from Daisy Cave, San Miguel Island,California. American Antiquity 66:595–614.

Rick, Torben C., Jon M. Erlandson, René L. Vellanoweth, andTodd J. Braje

2005 From Pleistocene Mariners to Complex Hunter-Gatherers: The Archaeology of the California ChannelIslands. Journal of World Prehistory 19:169–228.

REPORTS 315

AQ73(2) Jones 4/9/08 9:24 PM Page 315

Rick, Torben C., Rene L. Vellanoweth, Jon M. Erlandson, andDouglas J. Kennett

2002 On the Antiquity of the Single-Piece Shell Fishhook:AMS Radiocarbon Evidence from the southern Califor-nia Coast. Journal of Archaeological Science 29:933–942.

Rondeau, Michael, Jim Cassidy, and Terry L. Jones2007 Colonization Technologies: Fluted Projectile Points

and the San Clemente Island Woodworking/MicrobladeComplex. In California Prehistory: Colonization, Culture,and Complexity, edited by Terry L. Jones and Kathryn A.Klar, pp. 63–70. Altamira Press, Walnut Creek, Califor-nia.

Salls, Roy A.1988 Prehistoric Fisheries of the California Bight. Unpub-

lished Ph.D. dissertation, Archaeology Program, Univer-sity of California, Los Angeles.

1992 Prehistoric Subsistence Change on California’s Chan-nel Islands: Environmental or Cultural. In Essays on thePrehistory of Maritime California, edited by Terry L.Jones, pp. 157–172. Center for Archaeological Researchat Davis No. 10. University of California, Davis.

Schoener, T. W. 1971 Theory of Feeding Strategies. Annual Review of Ecol-

ogy and Systematics 2:369–404.Schwaderer, Rae

1992 Archaeological Test Excavation at the Duncans PointCave, CA-SON-348/H. In Essays on the Prehistory ofMaritime California, edited by Terry L. Jones, pp. 55–71.Center for Archaeological Research at Davis No. 10. Uni-versity of California, Davis.

Sih, Andrew, and Bent Christensen2001 Optimal Diet Theory: When Does it Work and When

Does it Fail? Animal Behavior 61:379–390.Simms, Steven R.

1985 Acquisition Costs and Nutritional Data on Great BasinResources. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthro-pology 7:117–125.

1987 Behavioral Ecology and Hunter-Gatherer Foraging:An example from the Great Basin. BAR InternationalSeries 381. British Archaeological Reports, Oxford.

Smith, Eric A. 1991 Inujjuamiut Foraging Strategies. Aldine de Gruyter,

Hawthorne, New York. 2004 Why do Good Hunters Have Higher Reproductive

Success? Human Nature 15:343–364.Smith, Eric Alden, and Rebecca Bliege Bird

2005 Costly Signaling and Cooperative Behavior. In MoralSentiments and Material Interests: The Foundations ofCooperation in Economic Life, edited by Herbert Gintis,Samuel Bowls, Robert T. Boyd and Ernst Fehr, pp.115–148. MIT Press, Cambridge.

Stevens, David W., and John R. Krebs1986 Foraging Theory. Princeton University Press.

Stine, Scott1994 Extreme and Persistent Drought in California and

Patagonia during Mediaeval Time. Nature 369:546–549.Stuiver, M., and P. J. Reimer

1993 Extended 14C Data Base and Revised CALIB 3.014C Age Calibration Program. Radiocarbon 35:215–230.

Ugan, Andrew2005 Does Size Matter? Body Size, Mass Collecting, and

Their Implications for Understanding Prehistoric Forag-ing Behavior. American Antiquity 70:75–89.

Wake, Thomas A., and Dwight D. Simons2000 Trans-Holocene Subsistence Strategies and Topo-

graphic Change on the Northern California Coast: TheFauna from Duncans Point Cave. Journal of California andGreat Basin Archaeology 22:295–320.

Winterhalder, Bruce1981 Optimal Foraging Strategies and Hunter-Gatherer

Research in Anthropology. In Hunter-Gatherer ForagingStrategies: Ethnographic and Archaeological Analyses,edited by Bruce Winterhalder and E. A. Smith, pp. 13–35.University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Zahavi, A. 1975 Mate Selection: Selection for a Handicap. Journal of

Theoretical Biology 53: 205–214.Zeanah, David W.

2004 Sexual Division of Labor and Central Place Forag-ing: A Model for the Carson Desert of Western Nevada.Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 23:1–32.

Zvelebil, M.1989 Economic Intensification and Post-Glacial Hunter-

Gatherers in North Temperate Europe. In MesolithicEurope, edited by Marek Zvelebil, pp. 80–88. John Don-ald Publishers, Edinburgh.

Notes

1. One date, obtained by Greenwood (1972:4) from asample of human bone, yielded a calibrated age of 8770 calB.C., which is anomalously older than all other dates from thesite. Given the uncertainties about collagen extraction tech-niques used in 1972, it seems best to reject this date.

2. While researchers have argued over the specifics ofsuch utility indices in ethnographic situations (see reviews inMonahan 1998), treating these measures as qualitative mea-sures comparable between time periods has been shown toclarify archaeological situations of resource depression(Cannon 2003). This paper treats utility indices as relative,qualitative measures that are useful for comparison betweendifferent temporal components within a single site. Utilizedin this way, an increase in the proportion of high utilityremains deposited at the site indicates a decrease in the abun-dance of artiodactyls on the landscape. This is so because asthe relative abundance of artiodactyls decreases, foragers willhave to spend a greater amount of time in search and pursuit.As a consequence, they are more likely to be further awayfrom the central place, which would increase the payoff ofprocessing and culling artiodactyl parts that have low eco-nomic utility. A decrease in the proportion of high utilityremains indicates the opposite.

3. The ranking of sea otters is also complicated by thevalue of their pelts which were important trade items inNative California.

Submitted March 26, 2007; Accepted August 31, 2007.


AQ73(2) Jones 4/9/08 9:24 PM Page 316

THE DIABLO CANYON FAUNA: A COARSE-GRAINED RECORD OF...

Documents

Transcript of THE DIABLO CANYON FAUNA: A COARSE-GRAINED RECORD OF...