15x Shellfish Remains at the Fort Ross Beach and Native Alaskan Village Sites ANN M. SCHIFF T IS CHAPTER PROVIDES descriptions of the shellfish sea urchin (Strongylocentrotus sp.); and mollusk. The assemblages found at the Fort Ross Beach Site last group includes: 1) gastropods-abalone (Haliotis (FRBS) and at the Native Alaskan Village Site (NAVS). sp., probably rufescens), limpet (Fissurellidae, The review encompasses aggregate Native Alaskan Acmaeidae), homed slipper shell (Crepidula sp.), Neighborhood deposits and reports on individual dogwinlde (Thaididae), olivella (Olivella biplicata), provenience areas within each site as well. The areas of periwinkle (Littorina sp.), turban (Trochidae, FRBS include the East Profile, the Middle Profile, the Turbinidae), and other snail (Gastropoda); 2) bivalves West Profile, the FRBS Pit Feature, the Southwest Bench mussel (Mytilus sp., probably californianus), clam and the East Bench. The NAVS analysis areas are the (Veneridae, Cardiidae), and oyster (Ostrea lurida); and 3) South Cental Test Unit, the West Central Trench, the chiton (Polyplacophora). East Central Trench, the South Trench, the East Centrl Presence or absence of abalone and sea urchin is Bone Bed and the South Bone Bed. Broad classes of recorded. For all the other classes, Minimum Number of shellfLsh remains and stratigraphic context are described. Individuals (MNIs) are calculated, based on observable diagnostic elements (Waselkov 1987:154-61) as outlined CLASSWICATION SYSTEM in Volume 1. Limpets and homed slipper shell MNIs are calculated by totalling the number of caps in each As discussed in chapter 3 of Volume 1, the Sonoma assemblage-one cap per individual. Mussel, clam, and coast is typifled by rocky, wave-pounded shores fringed oyster MNIs are determined by counting the number of by precipitous cliffs and weather-beaten headlands. Fort umbos (hinges) for each class and dividing the totals by Ross coastal environs display characteristic features of two-two hinges per individual. Dogwinkle, olivella, the northem California shoreline. The rocky intertidals periwinkle, turban, and other snail MNIs are estimated by support an assortnent of shellfish and other invertebrates recording the numbers of shell apertures (openings) or that were harvested by the Native Californians, including columellae (interior central axis); each individual in the abalone, sea urchin, barnacle, chiton, limpet, olivella, and assemblage is represented by one aperture or one colu- turban (Lightfoot et al. 199 1:appendix 3). In addition to mella. Chiton MNIs are calculated by counting the total the local intertidal resources, hard shelled clam species, number of plates and dividing by eight; each chiton has highly valued for use in the production of clam shell eight plates. Bamacle MNIs are estimated by dividing beads, were gathered and/or traded from Bodega Bay, the number of pieces by 20, standardizing this analysis where they thrived in the sandy, muddy flats (Barrett with our previous analysis of survey sites (Lightfoot et al. 1952:284; Gifford; 1967:2 1; Stewart 1943:61). These 1991), and making it comparable to Swiden's work at ethnographic reports of importaiaon, however, do not CA-SON-1455 (1986:56). Detailed percentages and preclude the possibility that clams were procured locally MNI counts for the Neighborhood collection can be from various beaches in thie Ross area. found in tables 15.1 and 15.2, and figures 15.1 and 15.2. Shellfish remains are sorted into the following Appendices 15.1 and 15.2 list the counts and prove- groups: barnacle (Balanus sp., Pollicipes polyrnerus); niences for FRBS and NAVS shellfish specimens. Shellfish Remains 329 As well as a review of shellfish deposits by class, (FRBS-6/30/88-66-MO-1). this analysis will discuss interpretative source specific A review of the distribution of shellfish MNIs by and functional groupings of the Fort Ross mollusk stratigraphic levels reveals that 97% of the MNIs are assemblages: "local" vs. "imported" shells and "food" recovered from the midden level. This total rises to 99% vs. "raw material" shells. Possible imported mollusk for both the midden and the mottled brown clay levels. varieties include clams and oysters, available in abun- dance from the Bodega Bay (Port Rumiantsev) area. The SHELLFISH ASSEMBaGE - SOUtHWeStBenCH constant movement of goods between Fort Ross and Port Excavations at the Southwest Bench occurred in six Rumiantsev (Volume 1, chapter 2) may have facilitated units: 7S, 17W; 7S, 18W; 7S, 19W; 8S, 17W; 8S, 18W; this importation, but some clams may have been avail- and 8S, 19W. The assemblage consists of 309 MNIs. able locally as well from areas like the Fort Ross Cove. Gastropods represent about 74% of the collection, the All other shellfish varieties in the classification system highest proportion at the site. Conversely, the bivalve can be obtained in abundance from the local rocky occurrence of 21.7% is the site low. Mussel MNIs intertidal. An analysis of clam and oyster in the Fort constitute 88% of the bivalve collection, with the Ross deposits may provide some insight into the trade remainder divided between clams (7.5%) and oysters activities of the Russians, Native Alaskans, and/or Native (4.4%). Chiton occurs with frequencies (4.2%) ap- Californians in the Ross community. proaching site norms. Abalone is present in 21% of the The raw material group is composed of hard shelled area specimen bags. clam, which is used -in the production of clam shell disk A stratigraphic analysis of the assemblage indicates beads. Although clam in the deposit could represent an that over 95% of the MNIs are recovered from the additional marine food resource, ethnographic sources mottled brown clay level, with an additional 3.7% report the use of hard shelled clam (Saxidomus nuttalli, evident in the highly mottled clay level. The upper Saxidomus giganteus, and Cordium corbis) in bead mixed levels contain less than 2% of the total collection. production (Barrett 1952:284-5; Gifford 1967:21; Stewart 1943:61). The analysis of clam from the Fort Ross SHELLFISH ASSEMBLAGE - EAST PROFILE deposits may indicate bead production activities and/or at Excavations on the East Profile included nine units: least the availability of raw materials used in bead P1 through P9. A total of 77 MNIs makes up the manufacture. assemblage from this area. As in the Southwest Bench, the East Profile displays a higher-than-site-average FRBS SHELLFISH ASSEMBLAGE - TOTAL SITE proportion of gastropods and a correspondingly lower The FRBS shellfish assemblage consists of a total of bivalve component 70.1% and 27.3% respectively. Over 748 MNIs. Chiton makes up the smallest proportion of 85% of the bivalve MNIs are mussels, with only two the deposit (3.3%). Bivalves constitute almost 30% of oyster MNIs and one clam MNI in the deposit. Chitons the total shellfish deposit, with mussels contributing to represent 2.6% of the assemblage. This area reveals the about 93% of the total bivalve MNIs. Clam and oyster second largest abalone presence at FRBS; abalone is are equally represented in the collection. The majority of present in 31% of the total specimen bags. the deposit MNIs is made up of gastropods (66.7%). As evidenced by a review of the stratigraphic details Abalone is present in almost 19% of the specimen bags of the collection, about 91% of the NIs occur in the collected, whereas in the aggregate, only one bamacle midden level. The clay level displays an additional 3.2% MNI is recovered from the site. of the assemblage for the East Profile. SHELLEFISHASSEMBLAGE - EAST BENCH SHELLFISH ASSEMBLAGE - MIDDLE PROFILE Excavations at ON, 12W on the eastern side of the Excavations on the Middle Profile included eight bench recovered 129 shellfish MNIs. The majority of the units (P11 through P18) and produced 215 shellfish collection is bivalve (46.5%), including almost 97% NIs. Gastropods characterize about 64% of the Middle mussel. One ground mussel umbo is found in this Profile collection, with chiton representing almost 3%. deposit (FRBS- 6/30/88-66-MO-1). This bivalve Thirty-three percent of the assemblage is bivalve, almost constituent is the highest on the site. One clam and one 93% of which is mussel. One ground mussel umbo is oyster individual are represented in the deposit. Al- found in this assemblage (FRBS-6/29/88-22-MO-1). though gastropods comprise over 51% of the East Bench Clam and oyster almost equally constitute the remaining deposit, this proportion is the lowest at FRBS. Chitons bivalves. Only 16% of the specimen bags demonstrate are present in amounts a little less (2.3%) than the site the presence of abalone, including one drilled abalone average (3.3%). Of interest, a full 50% of the area fragment (F:RBS-6/23/88/5-MO-1). specimen bags reveal thie presence of abalone, which Stratigraphic distributions in the Middle Profile represents the greatest occurrence at the Beach site. One reveal that over 86% of the shellfish M:NIs are recovered drilled abalone fragment is found in this collection from the midden levels. The bulk of the remaining 330 The Native Alaskan Neighborhood Figure 15.1 Fort Ross Beach Site Shellfish Assemblage 60 40 Tablel15.1 Fort Ross Beach Site Shellfish Assemblage MNJs Total East SW East Middle West Site Bench Bench Profile Profile Profile Chiton 25 3 13 2 6 1 Mussel 207 58 59 18 66 8 Clam 9 1 5 1 2 1 Oyster 8 1 3 2 3 0 Turban 113 23 38 9 42 1 Limpet 64 10 25 6 21 2 Other Snail 321 33 165 39 75 9 Barnacle l .15 .3 0 .15 .1lI5 Abalone- 72 7 20 15 West Presence/Absence 72 7 20 15 21 9 Note: reported in whole individuals; rounding in area counts will sum greater than total. MNI = minimum number of individuals Shellfish Remains 331 individuals appear in the mixed midden/mottled brown majority of the shellfLsh deposit at FRBS is associated clay levels. with the historic occupation of Ross, reflecting food processing and possibly bead production/raw material SHELLFISH ASSEMBLAGE - WEST PROFIle acquisition activities of the Neighborhood residents. Excavations on the West Profile included 11 units: Alternatively, at most 4% of the collection is found in the P20 through P30. This collection contains only 22 lower clay levels. This minimal assemblage suggests shellfLsh individuals. The assemblage displays the most sporadic shellfish deposition associated with prehistoric, equal proportons of gastropods (54.6%) and bivalves long use-duration, special purpose sites, as discussed in (40.9%) at FRBS, representing the second lowest Volume 1. (Note: FRBS lithic analysis suggests these gastropod component and the second highest bivalve same midden/historic and clay/prehistoric correlations.) component at the site. Eight mussel MNIs and one clam With shellfish, however, the issue of preservation is NI are present in the assemblage; no oyster is found in always at hand, and pedogenic analysis of these prehis- the West Profile deposits. About 4.5% of the collection toric soils sheds additional light on the intensity of MNIs are chiton. Abalone is exhibited in 13% of the shellfsh deposition (see Price, chapter 4). specimen bags, characterizing the lowest area proportion Post-depositional issues are equally intriguing. The in evidence at FRBS. East Bench displays the highest portion of bivalves and Given the small sample size, stratigraphic analysis is the lowest component of gastropods. Conversely, the difficult. However, 21 of the 22 total MNIs recovered Southwest Bench exhibits the largest segment of gastro- came from the mottled brown clay levels. No shellfish pods and the smallest bivalve constituency. Similarly, the are evident in the lower clay and gravel levels. pit feature, unlike the parent Middle Profile area, has a higher proportion of gastropods and a lower incidence of SHELLJFISH ASSEMBLAGE - FRBS PIT FEATURE bivalves. These pit feature distributions most closely Excavations in the FRBS Pit Feature produced 78 resemble the shellfish deposits in the Southwest Bench. shellfish MINIs, 72 from the fill and 6 from the pit floor. A partial reason for this distribution could be the differ- The highest proportion of gastropods (75.7%) are in ential preservation propensities of more durable snail evidence here. Correspondingly, the pit feature reveals a columellae verses fragile mussel shells (Ford 1992: 286; low bivalve component (21.8%), the second lowest at the 314-23; Muckle 1994:129-31; Stein 1992:10; Waselkov site. Fifteen mussel MNIs, one clam, and one oyster are 1987:158-9), with destructive post-depositional processes present in the deposit. Chiton constitutes the remaining perhaps affecting the deposits in the East Bench less 2.6% of the collection. Abalone is in evidence in 11% of negatively than those in the rest of the site. Likewise, the specimen bags, representing a site-low; a drilled post-depositional activities in the feature could have abalone fragment is found in the pit feature (FRBS-6/23/ affected differential shellfish preservation, resulting in 88-5-MO-1). distributions skewed about the parent profile distribu- tions. Gastropods' hardy columellae may have a better FRBS SHELLFISH ASSEMBLAGE - SUMMARY chance of surviving post-depositional trauma than do A review of the various shellfish assemblages across delicate, thin-shelled mussels. the site reveals several issues of interestL These include Several patterns are possibly cultural in origin. In spatial and stratigraphic patteming, post-depositional the profile sections of FRBS, there is an apparent trend preservation, and cultural attributions. from east to west. Moving west, the MINI amounts of Although the complex depositional history and gastropod and the presence of abalone decrease, while geological context of FRBS make it difficult to reach the proportion of bivalves increases. The presence of frm spatial or stratigraphic conclusions, certain findings abalone is greatest in the East Bench and the East Profile, bear discussion. Chitons (2.3% to 4.5% range) and reflecting a larger incidence of abalone processing/ barnacles (one or fewer MNI) occur with a fairly constant dumping at the east side of FRBS, perhaps associated frequency across the site areas. In all areas, gastropods with food-processing activities. (Interestingly, this occur in greater proportions than bivalves, approaching observation correlates with the greater occufrence of similar proportions only in the East Bench. While the NAVS lithic food processing artifacts in the East Bench ratio of bivalves as a whole fluctuates across the site, the and the East Profile, as discussed in chapter 9.) mix of mussel/clam/oyster remains reasonably consistent, The distributions may also provide insight into trade with the percentage of mussel to total bivalve ranging patterns and resource sharng activities of the Neighbor- from roughly 86% to 97%. hood inhabitants. About 4% clam and 4% oyster make In addition to these spatial patterns, a stratigraphic up the possibly "imported" bivalve contingent at FRBS. distinction is apparent between the upper midden and the This translates to an overall imported shellfish compo- lower clay levels. Ninety to ninety-nine percent of all nent of 2.3%. FRBS profile areas exhibit a slightly shellfish remains are recovered in the midden and higher imported segment (2.9%), but a more interesting mottled brown clay levels. This would suggest that the observation can be made in reference to thie differences in 332 The Native Alaskan Neighborhood the imported components at the two bench areas. At the proportion is the highest. Chiton constitute 7.5% of the East Bench, which exhibits the highest bivalve proportion total shellfish MNIs at the South Central Test Unit, (46.5%), the lowest imported component (1.6%) is in representing the site maximum. evidence. This reflects greater deposition at the East On the other hand, limpets (2.7%) and horned slipper Bench of refuse associated with the more locally plentiful (1%) proportions serve as site minimums. The bamacle food resource. Conversely, the Southwest Bench, which component (1.2%) approximates the site norm. Abalone displays the lowest bivalve constituent (21.7%), demon- is present in site average numbers, while sea urchin, stmes a greater, possibly imported, clam and oyster present in 3.6% of the specimen bags, reflects a site low. segment (2.6%). Although the numbers are still very A review of shellfish MNIs by stratigraphic levels small, this could suggest a larger occurrence of imported reveals that over 85% of the assemblage is found in the mollusk processing/refuse deposition at the Southwest upper topsoil and dark sandy loam levels. The topsoil Bench. level exhibits greater proportions of bivalve, chiton, and The "raw material" component at FRBS, possibly barnacle than the lower strata. No bivalves are present in indicative of clam shell bead raw material acquisition/ the clay level. production as discussed previously, averages 1.2%, with little variation across the site. An exception is the West SHELLFISH ASSEMBL4GE - WEST CENTRAL TRENCH Profile, which displays a somewhat higher raw material Excavations in the West Central Trench occurred in component (4.5%), although the small sample size limits three units: 75S, 16W; 75S, 18W; and 75S, 20W. Only any strong conclusions. Of interest, the Southwest Bench five barnacle fragments and one specimen bag with exhibits twice the East Bench raw material component. abalone present constitute the shellfish assemblage in this trench. All are found in the upper topsoil and dark sandy NAVS SHELLFISH ASSEMBLAGE - TOTAL SITE loam levels. For this analysis, the NAVS total site assemblage is defined as shellfish from the South Central Test Unit SHvELLFISH ASSEMBLAGE - EAST CENTRAL TRENCH (lIOS, 11W), the West Central Trench (75S, 16W; 75S, Excavations in the East Central Trench included five 18W; and 75S, 20W), the East Central Trench (75S, 0- units: 75S, OE; 75S, 1E; 75S, 2E; 75S, 3E; and 75S, 4E. 4E) and the South Trench (125S, 18-24W). The NAVS A total of 2,047 MNIs make up the assemblage from th is shellfish assemblage consists of a total of 5,299 MNIs. area. While the overall frequency of gastropods (84%) Barnacle comprises the smallest segment of the deposit: approaches the site norm, the East Central Trench has 1.4%; chiton represent 5.5% of the collection. Bivalves higher components of turban (13.8%) and lower constitu- constitute almost 8% of the total assemblage, with encies of other snail (59.1%). Limpet (9.5%), dogwinkle mussels contributing over 7% and clam constituting the (.9%), olivella (.1%), and periwinkle (.6%) all approxi- remaining .7%. mate overall site proportions. Chiton account for 4% of The largest proportion of the NAVS shellfish the collection, and barnacle and homed slipper each collection is gastropod (83.7%). Turban makes up almost contribute about 2% to the total. 11% of the aggregate assemblage, and 9.6% of the Eight percent of the shellfish MNIs are mussel and shellfish remains are in the limpet category. Homed .5% are clam, resulting in an overall bivalve segment slipper represents 1.8%, while dogwinkle, olivella, and somewhat higher than the NAVS average. The extent of periwinkle each contribute less than 1% to the total. The the presence of both abalone and sea urchin in the East other snail segment (62.2%) contains the remaining Central Trench typifies overall site occurrences. gastropods, resulting in the largest single component at Stratigraphic analysis displays variations in shellfish NAVS. Abalone is present in 13.5% of the collected distributions across soil levels. Almost 90% of the specimen bags, while over 5% of the specimen bags collection is located in the upper levels, about 11% in the contain evidence of sea urchin. In addition, ten worm lower sandy loam, and only .3% in the clay level. All pit/ casts, one abalone button (NAVS 8/6/91-35-0-1), and mottled fill levels approximate trench shellfish class one ground mussel umbo (NAVS 8/12/91-89-0-1) are proportions, whereas the topsoil horizon contains greater found in the deposit segments of other snail and fewer bivalves and limpets. No bivalves or barnacles are present in the clay levels. SHELLFISH ASSEMBLAGE - SOUETH CENTRAL TEST UNIT Excavations at llOS, 11W produced 295 shellfish SHsELLFISH ASSEMBLAGE - EAST CENTRAL BONE BED MNIs. The majority of the collection is other snail Excavations in the East Central Bone Bed occurred (65.6%), withi an additional 14.7% turban in the assem- in three units at the western end of the East Central blage. These segment proportions are the largest at Trench (755, QE; 75S, 1E; and 75S, 2E) and extended NAyS. Bivalves comprise over 7% of the deposit, across two 10 cm levels (20-30 cm and 30-40 cm). The including 5.3% mussel and almost 2% clam. The mussel assemblage consists of 411 shellfish MIIs. As in the percentage is the lowest at NAyS, while the clam parent trench, the East Central Bone Bed exhibits a low Shellfish Remains 333 Figure 15.2 Native Alaskan Village Site Shellfish Assemblage 100- so~~~~~~~~~~_s 40 [Jill Barnacle MNI % Chto MN _ o I Ii_ Total Site SC Test Unit South Trench South Bone Bed EC Trench EC Bone Bed Table 15.2 Native Alaskan Village Site Shellfish MNIs Total South Central West East Central South East Central South Bone Site Test Unit Central Trench Trench Bone Bed Bed Trench Chiton 289 23 0 83 185 14 28 Mussel 375 16 0 164 196 60 43 Clam 35 6 0 1 1 19 3 3 Limpet 509 8 0 194 307 5 1 86 Horn Slipper 94 3 0 40 51 13 9 Dogwinkle 35 0 0 18 17 2 1 Olivel!a 10 0 0 3 7 3 0 Periwinkle 16 0 0 13 3 1 1 Turban 569 43 0 282 244 53 41 Other Snail 3,294 192 0 1,208 1,894 202 291 Barnacle 73 4 .25 3 1 39 9 7 Abalone- Presence/Absence 272 11 1 115 145 34 25 Sea Urcin PrseceAbece 10 305848361 MM=mniu ube fidiiul 334 The Native Alaskan Neighborhood proportion of other snail (49.4%, a site low). However, cm levels (20-30 cm and 30-40 cm). The assemblage greater than average proportions of turban (13%), honed consists of 510 shellfish MNIs. The South Bone Bed slipper (3.2%, a site high), and limpet (12.5%) are in exhibits several deviations from the parent South Trench evidence. Dogwinkle, olivella, and periwinkle each distributions, an observation also made for the East constitute less than 1% of the shellfLsh MNI total, as in Cental Trench as discussed earlier. Other snail repre- overall NAVS and parent trench distributions, but with a sents about 57% of the shellfish MNIs, less than in either slightly greater olivella segment. Nevertheless, this bone the parent trench or the overall site distributions. bed contains the smallest overall gastropod component Dogwinkle and periwinkle each account for less than .2% (76.3%) at NAVS. of the collection, and there is no evidence of olivella in Conversely, almost twice the site proportion of the South Bone Bed. As in the parent South Trench bivalves is in evidence in the East Central Bone Bed deposit, turban represents about 8% of the shellfish (15.2%), with increased mussel occurrence accounting MNIs, the lowest proporton at NAVS. for the discrepancy. Clams make up less than 1% of the On the other hand, the South Bone Bed contains a assemblage, as is the case for the entire site. Chiton greater proportion of bivalves (9%) than in either the constitute a little over 3% of the collection, a site low. parent South Trench or the total collection. As in the East Bamacles (2%) occur with somewhat greater frequency Central Bone Bed, this discrepancy is explained wholly than in NAVS as a whole. Of interest, the East Cental by a larger proporton of mussel (8.4%), while the clam Bone Bed evidences the largest percentage (13.6%) of segment (.6%) approaches site norms. Barnacle, homed sea urchin presence at NAVS, over twice the site occur- slipper, and chiton components almost exactly resemble rence. Abalone is present in 12.8% of the specimen bags. NAVS totals. The largest proportion of limpets (16.9%), however, is found in this bone bed, which is significantly SHEUFISH ASSEMBLAGE - SOUTEH TRENCH greater than the 9.6% total site component. Of particular Excavations in the South Trench included seven interest, abalone is present in a larger percentage of units: 125S, 24W; 125S, 23W; 125S, 22W; 125S, 21W; specimen bags that anywhere else at NAVS: 14.7%. Sea 125S, 20W; 125S, 19W; and 125S, 18W. A total of 2,962 urchin also turns up in 8.2% of the specimen bags, almost shellfish MNIs constitutes the assemblage from this area. twice as often as in the parent South Trench. Both the abalone button and the ground mussel umbo are found in this deposit. As is the case with the East Central NAVS SHELFISH ASSEMBLAGE - SUMMARY Trench, the South Trench closely parallels the distribu- A review of the assemblages from various areas tions found in the total site. Gastropods (83.5%) com- across NAVS provides several observations. As with the prise the majority of the collection, allocated among FRBS deposits, spatial and stratigraphic patterning, post- other snail (64%), turban (8.2%), horned slipper (1.7%), depositional preservation, and cultural attributions will be dogwinkle (.6%), olivella (.2%), and periwinkle (.1%). discussed. Limpets represent 10.4% of the shellfish deposit, a Spatial patterns are in evidence for several shellfish slightly greater segment than is found in the assemblage groups. Barnacles occur in all areas and with a fairly as a whole. constant frequency (1.2% to 2% range). Abalone Bivalves (7.2%) occur with somewhat less frequency presence is also consistent in all locations across the site, than in NAVS as a whole, and consist of 6.6% mussel and with presence percentages ranging from 12.8% to 14.7%. .6% clam. Corresponding to the site proportions, In all cases, the proportion of gastropods is far larger than banacle accounts for less than 2% of the collection, the bivalve segment, although gastropod percentages while chiton proportions are somewhat greater at 6.2%. range from a high of almost 84% to a low of about 76%. Indications of both abalone (14%) and sea urchin (4.6%) With the exception of the East Central Bone Bed, all deviate somewhat from the proportions in the overall areas evidence between a 7% and 9% bivalve segment. accumulation: abalone is higher and sea urchin is lower. The two bone bed bearing trenches (South and East A stratigraphic review of this area suggests that over Central) evidence similarities in the distributions of 85% of the shellfish MNIs are found in the upper topsoil shellfish remains: each contains like proportions of clam and dark sandy loam levels, with the remaining 15% and the same overall gastropod segments. The two bone occurring in the lower pit fill strata. Topsoils demon- beds (South and East Central) contained within the strate higher proportions of other snail, compared with trenches are more like each other than either is like its greater segments of limpet and bivalve in the loam and own parent trench deposit: high levels of sea urchin and fill levels. Chiton and barnacle are constant throughout. limpet, low levels of other snail. Nonetheless, each bone bed displays several distributional peculiarities. The East SHELUFISH ASSEMBLAGE - SOUTH BONE BED) Central Bone Bed exhibits the highest percentage of sea Excavations in thie South Bone Bed occurred in three urchin presence, the largest bivalve segment, and the units near the west end of the Southi Trench (125S, 23W; greatest mussel constiuent. In the Southi Bone Bed, thie 125S, 22W, and 125S, 21W) and extended across two 10- greatest segment of limpets is manifest, as well as the Shellfish Remains 335 highest percentage of abalone presence. locations and/or culinary preferences of different NAVS Stratigraphic analysis of NAVS deposits reveals that residents. the majority of the shellfish remains are found on the Imported and/or bead-raw-material clam proportions upper horizons: 85% to 90%. Among the few shellfish of .5% to .7% consistently appear in all locations, remains found in the lowest clay levels, no bivalves are exclusive of the South Central Test Unit (1.9%). This evident. - suggests that deposition of the possible imported food or Shellfish NI densities reveal various rates of shell disk bead raw material is fairly evenly distributed across deposition across the NAVS landscape. The southern the site, but two to four times greater in the South Central area has higher densities than the central area, and both Test Unit. Additionally, the highest presence of abalone bone beds have higher densities than the surrounding at NAVS and the abalone button found in the South parent trenches. In the East Central Trench, shellfish Trench may reflect abalone working in the south. MNIs occur at the rate of 585 per cubic meter. By contrast, the density rate for the South Trench is 898 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS - FRBS AND NAVS MNIs per cubic meter. This central/south density pattem also holds true within the bone beds: 822 MNIs per A comparison of the shellfish remains from the two cubic meter in the East Central Bone Bed and 1020 MNIs Native Alaskan Neighborhood sites reveals several per cubic meter in the South Bone Bed. Interestingly, a similarities as well as some differences. FRBS exhibits similar cental/south density pattern is also observed for smaller gastropod percentages and larger bivalve con- NAVS lithic artifacts (chapter 9). stituencies than NAVS. It is possible that human impact Post-depositional factors may account for the at NAVS, such as trampling, may have differentially distributional differences seen in the South Central Test destroyed more bivalves than gastropods, while dumping Unit. The South Central Test Unit displays the largest episodes at FRBS tended to preserve both equally. It is segment of clam, chiton, and other snails, but the smallest also possible, however, that the mix of shellfish is an portion of mussels and sea urchin presence. It is possible accurate reflection of the numbers of bivalves and that post-depositional activities in the South Central Test gastropods deposited around the Neighborhood. The Unit area adversely affected the preservation of mussels latter explanation would suggest a cultural origin for the and sea urchin, both fragile species, as compared to hard distributional differences. shelled clam, chiton plates, and snail columella. Diag- Both NAVS and FRBS display greater total propor- nostically representative limpet and homed slipper are tions of gastropods than bivalves across all site areas. present in site low proportions; identifiable dogwinkle, These similarities could be purely a function of post- periwinkle, and olivella are not in evidence at all in the depositional deterioration forces; snail may preserve test uniL While this may simply be a function of the better than mussel. Or, as mentioned above, cultural smaller sample size, differential preservation can not be factors may be at play. ruled ouL Differential post-depositional preservation NAVS and FRBS display similar percentages of factors may also be at work with opposite effects in the limpet, while NAVS evidences somewhat greater East Central Bone Bed. The bone bed proportions of sea numbers of chiton. In both areas, barnacle remains are urchin, mussel, and identifiable horned slipper are the few: one MNI at FRBS and 73 MNIs at NAVS. FRBS highest at NAVS, and are suggestive of protective post- evidences greater presence of abalone than NAVS. Since depositional factors (rapid burying?) possibly occurring it is unlikely that preservation factors would explain this in this area. difference, it is possible that dumping episodes by the Culturl factors may be reflected in the shellfish residents of NAVS are responsible for the larger occur- distributional differences seen at NAVS; the deposits may rence of abalone at FRBS. be the results of specific processing and cooking activi- The NAVS East Central Bone Bed and the FRBS ties associated with the bone bed deposits. The general East Bench both display the highest mussel proportions density patterns in and of themselves may suggest more in their respective sites. This may reflect spatially related intense activities occurring in the bone beds and in the areas where mussels were processed, cooked, and southern areas of NAYS. Also, the absence of shellfish in deposited. Additionally, both areas may have been the West Central Trench suggests that the remains of subject to minimal post-depositional destructive factors. processing and/or cooking shellflsh were not deposited in FRBS exhibits larger proportions of possibly thiis area, as the West Central Trench is spatially separate imported shellfish and clam shell raw materials. Both of from the units excavated in both of the bone beds and in these segments are a function of shellfish remains the southern, cliff-edge midden locations. Additionally, associated with Native Californian activities: pre- site-high proportions of limpets in the South Bone Bed historic/historic trade with and procurement from Bodega compared with site-high proportions of mussels in the Bay, and the use of hard shelled clam in the production of East Central Bone Bed may indicate food-processing clam shell disk beads. Of interest, this aspect of the 336 The Native Alaskan Neighborhood FRBS deposit may reflect earlier (pre-NAVS) Native Gifford1 E. W. Califorian activities on the beach, unrelated to trade or 1967 Enth ographic Notes on the Southwestey Pomo. raw material procuremenL Alternatively, FRBS may Anthropological Records, Vol. 25. University of Califor.ia have been the locus of Native Californian activities that ss, Breey. were coincident with the occupation of NAVS. Also, the Ken, A. M., and Coan, E. constant flow of goods from Bodega Bay to Fort Ross 1963 Marine Molluscan Genera of Western North during Russian times, discussed earlier in this chapter, America: An Illustrated Key. Stanford University Press. must be considered as a possible source of importation of shellfish as food and/or raw material for any or all of the Lightfoot, K., Wake, T., and Schiff, A. Neighborhood inhabitants. 1991 The Archaeology and Ethnohistory of Fort Ross, Both NAVS and FRBS disclose a dearth of shellfish California, Volume 1, Introduction. Contnbutions of the remains in the lower clay levels. The relative infre- University of California Archaeological Research Facility quency of shell characterizes the prehistoric non-site No. 49. Berkeley. manifestations often found on the coastal terrace. Morris, P. A. Sporadic, temporary visits, not associated with shellfsh 1966 A Field Guide to Pacific Coast Shells, 2nd ed. gathering and processing, would result in minimal Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston. deposition of shellfish remains. Muckle, R. J. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 1994 Differential Recovery of Mollusk Shell from Archaeologocal Sites. Journal of Field Archaeology, 21 I thank Kent Lightfoot and Antoinette Martinez for (1): 129-31. their insightful remarks on earlier drafts of this chapter. In addition, I thank Hannah Ballard and Thomas Wake Smith, R. I., and Carlton, J. T. for their practical advice on shellfish classification 1975 Light's Manual: Intertidal Invertebrates of the systems. I thank the many people who have supported or Central California Coast. University of California Press, participated in the Fort Ross Archaeology Project since Berkeley. its inception in 1988, including UCB field school Stein, J. K. participants, laboratory analysts, and Archaeological 1992 Analysis of Shell Middens. Deciphering a Shell Research Facility personnel. I am especially indebted to Midden, edited by J. Stein, pp.1-24. Academic Press, the many people at the Fort Ross State Historic Park and New York. the California Department of Parks. I am most grateful for the sage counsel and constant advocacy of Kent Stewart, 0. C. Lightfoot. Finally, I thank Robert Schiff for his under- 1943 Notes on Pomo Etinography. University of Califor- stated guidance and immutable good humor. nia Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology, Vol. 40, No. 2, pp. 29-62. University of California Press, Berkeley. Swiden, C. 1986 Analysis of Shellfish Remains from SON-1455. REFERENCES Appendix A in Cultural Resource Survey at the Fort Ross Campground, Sonoma County, California by Glenn Farris, Barrett, S. A. pp. 55-64. On file, Archaeology Laboratory, California 1952 Matrial Aspects of Pomo Culture. Bulletin of the Parks Department, Sacramento. Public Museum of the City of Milwaukee, Vol. 20, Part 2. Waselkov, G. A. Ford, P. J. 1987 Shellfish Gathering and Shell Midden Archaeology. 1992 Interpreting the Grain Size Distributions of Archaeo- Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, Vol. 10, logical Shell. Deciphering a Shell Midden, edited by J. edited by M. Schiffer, pp. 93-209. Academic Press, New Stein, pp. 283-325. Academic Press, New York. York.