new bridging troubled waters: zooarchaeology and...
TRANSCRIPT
BRIDGING TROUBLED WATERS: ZOOARCHAEOLOGY
AND MARINE CONSERVATION ON BURRARD INLET,
SOUTHWEST BRITISH COLUMBIA
by
Nova Pierson B.A. (Hons), University of Calgary 2007
THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF ARTS
In the Department of Archaeology
© Nova Pierson 2011 SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY
Spring 2011
All rights reserved. However, in accordance with the Copyright Act of Canada, this work may be reproduced, without authorization, under the conditions for Fair Dealing.
Therefore, limited reproduction of this work for the purposes of private study, research, criticism, review and news reporting is likely to be in accordance with the law,
particularly if cited appropriately.
ii
Approval
Name: Nova Pierson
Degree: MA
Title of Thesis: Bridging Troubled Waters: Zooarchaeology and Marine Conservation on Burrard Inlet, Southwest British Columbia
Examining Committee:
Chair: Ross JamiesonAssociate Professor, Archaeology
___________________________________________
Dana LepofskySenior Supervisor Associate Professor, Archaeology
___________________________________________
Jon DriverSupervisor Professor, Archaeology
___________________________________________
Virginia Butler Examiner Professor, Anthropology, Portland State University
Date Defended/Approved: 26 April 2011
Last revision: Spring 09
Declaration of Partial Copyright Licence
The author, whose copyright is declared on the title page of this work, has granted to Simon Fraser University the right to lend this thesis, project or extended essay to users of the Simon Fraser University Library, and to make partial or single copies only for such users or in response to a request from the library of any other university, or other educational institution, on its own behalf or for one of its users.
The author has further granted permission to Simon Fraser University to keep or make a digital copy for use in its circulating collection (currently available to the public at the “Institutional Repository” link of the SFU Library website <www.lib.sfu.ca> at: <http://ir.lib.sfu.ca/handle/1892/112>) and, without changing the content, to translate the thesis/project or extended essays, if technically possible, to any medium or format for the purpose of preservation of the digital work.
The author has further agreed that permission for multiple copying of this work for scholarly purposes may be granted by either the author or the Dean of Graduate Studies.
It is understood that copying or publication of this work for financial gain shall not be allowed without the author’s written permission.
Permission for public performance, or limited permission for private scholarly use, of any multimedia materials forming part of this work, may have been granted by the author. This information may be found on the separately catalogued multimedia material and in the signed Partial Copyright Licence.
While licensing SFU to permit the above uses, the author retains copyright in the thesis, project or extended essays, including the right to change the work for subsequent purposes, including editing and publishing the work in whole or in part, and licensing other parties, as the author may desire.
The original Partial Copyright Licence attesting to these terms, and signed by this author, may be found in the original bound copy of this work, retained in the Simon Fraser University Archive.
Simon Fraser University Library Burnaby, BC, Canada
iii
Abstract
For thousands of years, the Coast Salish and their ancestors relied on the abundant
marine resources of the Strait of Georgia. In the Greater Vancouver area, First Nations
and others are working to restore and conserve taxa which are impacted by commercial
fishing, pollution, and habitat destruction. Zooarchaeological data can contribute to
modern fisheries management efforts because they reflect species presence and
abundance that pre-date modern declines.
I explore the pre-contact record of marine resource use, presence and abundance
through zooarchaeological data from Burrard Inlet and its arms. These data show
prolonged and inlet-wide use of taxa including salmon, herring, and anchovy in pre-
contact times. By harvesting locally, and focusing on multiple species, including small
and large species, pre-contact harvesting efforts may have promoted sustainability. In
contast, today’s single-species management paradigm has led to cascading declines of
preferred species, and forced commercial efforts offshore and onto once-spurned smaller
fish.
Keywords: Applied zooarchaeology; Northwest Coast; Coast Salish fisheries; fisheries management; shifting baselines; palaeodata; marine conservation.
iv
Acknowledgements
Many thanks go to the Tsleil-Waututh Nation, for allowing me to work in its
territory, but also for allowing me to contribute in my small way to its important efforts
to steward marine resources. My heartfelt thanks to my senior supervisor Dana Lepofsky,
who supplied endless encouragement, selflessly shared knowledge, and set an
inspirational example for community-focused applied archaeological research. I am
grateful for the knowledge I gleaned from discussions on zooarchaeological method and
theory with committee member Jonathan Driver. Thanks to my external examiner,
Virginia Butler – I am inspired by your work and benefited greatly from your comments.
The efforts of field and laboratory assistants Julie Ferguson, Alisha Gavreau, Julia
Jackley, Sarah Johnson, Heather Kendall, and Chris Springer were greatly appreciated.
Thanks to Andrew Barton, for sharing sediment samples from Noons Creek, as well as
his notes and files. Peter Locher and Shannon Wood at SFU archaeology labs provided
endless assistance. Susan Crockford and Becky Wigen at Pacific ID/University of
Victoria anthropology labs allowed me access to their collection, as well as their brains.
Evan Stewart at the Tsleil-Waututh Nation was an ongoing support, and Dave and
Carleen Thomas gave me an inspirational tour of Burrard Inlet. Thanks to Camilla Speller
and Dongya Yang for providing the ancient DNA analysis. For discussions on fish past
and present, thanks to Dave Bennie, Ashleen Benson, Megan Caldwell, Sean Cox, Iain
McKechnie and Jonathan Martin. I am grateful to BC Parks and the Greater Vancouver
Regional District for facilitating my work in Say Nuth Khaw Yum Provincial Park and
v
Belcarra Park. I appreciate the many others who assisted me in this work – all errors and
omissions are mine. Funding was provided by a Social Sciences and Humanities
Research Council Joseph-Armand Bombardier graduate scholarship, a SSHRC Research
Grant (awarded to D. Lepofsky), an internal SFU research grant (held by J. Driver), an
SFU Graduate Fellowship, and a BC Cross Government Research, Policy and Practice
grant.
vi
Table of Contents
Approval ............................................................................................................................. ii Abstract .............................................................................................................................. iii Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................ iv Table of Contents ............................................................................................................... vi List of Figures .................................................................................................................. viii List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... ix
Chapter 1: Applied Zooarchaeology and Coast Salish Marine Resources
on Burrard Inlet .........................................................................................1 Coast Salish Marine Resource Use in Burrard Inlet: Past and Present ................................5 The Past and the Future......................................................................................................12
Chapter 2: Methods .....................................................................................................13 Field Methods ....................................................................................................................13 Laboratory Methods ...........................................................................................................17
Fish ............................................................................................................................18 Shellfish .....................................................................................................................19 Identifications ............................................................................................................19
Quantification ............................................................................................................21 Previously Analyzed Data ..................................................................................................24
Chapter 3: The Marine Fauna of Burrard Inlet and its Arms................................25 Identified Fauna .................................................................................................................27
Tum-tumay-wheuton .................................................................................................27 Twin Islands ..............................................................................................................29 Noons Creek ..............................................................................................................30 Abundance, Change through Time, and Sampling Biases ........................................31
Exploring the Impact of the 1-mm Screen .........................................................................32 Effects of the 1-mm Screen .......................................................................................34
Diversity: Richness and Evenness .....................................................................................35
Richness: Fish ............................................................................................................35 Richness: Shellfish ....................................................................................................37
Evenness and Specialization: Fish .............................................................................38 Evenness and Specialization: Shellfish .....................................................................40 Strait of Georgia Diversity: Discussion .....................................................................41
Relative Abundance ...........................................................................................................44 Tum-tumay-whueton .................................................................................................44 Noons Creek ..............................................................................................................46
vii
Environmental Inferences ..................................................................................................47
Conclusion .........................................................................................................................51
Chapter 4: Fisheries and Fishery Impacts in Pre-contact Burrard Inlet
and its Arms and the Modern Comparison ...........................................55 Baseline Data .....................................................................................................................55 Methodological Considerations .........................................................................................61
Intra-site Sampling: Screen Size ...............................................................................61 Inter-site Sampling ....................................................................................................63
The Prey-Choice Model: A Discussion .............................................................................63 Modern and Pre-contact Management Regimes: The Case from Burrard Inlet ................64
Single-species Approach vs Ecosystem Approach ....................................................66 Local Fishing vs. Offshore Fishing ...........................................................................67
Fishing with the Food Web vs. Fishing down the Food Web ...................................68 Looking back, Moving forward: Perspectives on Fisheries Management from
Palaeodata ..................................................................................................................69
Appendices 71 Appendix 1: Abundance and Ubiquity by Column/Auger Level ......................................72 Appendix 2: CD-ROM Data Appendix .............................................................................85
Reference List ...................................................................................................................86
viii
List of Figures
Figure 1-1 Study Area ...................................................................................................................... 7
Figure 2-1 Sampling Locations at Tum-tumay-whueton, DhRr-6 (Belcarra Park) ........................ 14
Figure 2-2 Sampling Locations from Twin Islands (DiRr-16) ....................................................... 16
Figure 3-1 Relationship between Sample Weight and NISP at Tum-tumay-whueton (left) and Noons Creek (right). .............................................................................................. 32
Figure 3-2 Comparing Recovery of Most Encountered Fish with a 2-mm and a 1-mm Screen at Tum-tumay-whueton (TTW; top) and Noons Creek (NC; below) ............... 33
Figure 3-3 Relationship between NISP and NTAXA for Identified Fish Remains (left) and Total Fish Remains (right) at Tum-tumay-whueton (TTW), Noons Creek (NC), Twin Islands (TI), and Say-Umiton (SU) .......................................................... 36
Figure 3-4 Relationship between NISP and NTAXA for Invertebrates ......................................... 38
Figure 3-5 Evennes as a Percent of NISP of Five Most Abundant Fish at Tum-tumay-whueton (TTW), Noons Creek (NC), Twin Islands (TI), and Say-Umiton (SU) ........ 39
Figure 3-6 Shellfish Evenness as a Percent of NISP at Tum-tumay-whueton (TTW), Noons Creek (NC), Twin Islands (TI), Say-Umiton (SU), and Whey-Ah-Wichen (WAW) ........................................................................................................... 41
Figure 3-7 Salmon Index (top), Salmon, Herring and Anchovy Use (middle) and Shellfish Use (bottom) through Time at Tum-tumay-whueton Auger 8. .................................... 45
Figure 3-8 Salmon Index (top), Salmon, Herring, Anchovy and Eulachon Use (middle) and Shellfish Use (bottom) at Noons Creek Column 1-A. ........................................... 47
Figure 3-9 Comparison of Fish and Shellfish Recovered from Tum-tumay-whueton (TTW) and Noons Creek (NC)..................................................................................... 52
ix
List of Tables
Table 1-1 Ecological, Cultural, and Conservation Background to Five Discussed Sites in Burrard Inlet and its Arms .............................................................................................. 9
Table 3-1 NISP Vertebrate Fauna from Tum-tumay-whueton (TTW), Twin Islands (TI), and Noons Creek (NC) ................................................................................................. 26
Table 3-2 Fish Recovered from Tum-tumay-whueton (TTW), Twin Islands (TI), and Noons Creek (NC)........................................................................................................ 28
Table 3-3 Invertebrates from Tum-tumay-whueton (TTW), Twin Islands (TI), and Noons Creek (NC) ................................................................................................................... 29
Table 3-4 Ubiquity (%) of Most Common Fish Taxa in Stratified Auger and Column Samples from Tum-tumay-whueton (TTW) and Noons Creek (NC) .......................... 31
Table 3-5 Generalized Fish Requirements and Presence at Tum-tumay-whueton (TTW), Noons Creek (NC), Twin Islands (TI), Say-Umiton (SU), and Whey-Ah-Wichen (WAW) ........................................................................................................... 49
Table 3-6 Summary of Expectations and Results of Faunal Analyses ........................................... 53
Table 4-1 Comparing Modern and Pre-contact Fisheries in the Strait of Georgia and Associated Hypotheses ................................................................................................. 57
Table 4-2 Comparison of Pre-contact Fishing Practices and Consequences in Burrard Inlet and its Arms with Modern, Commercial Fishing Practices ................................. 65
1
Chapter 1:
Applied Zooarchaeology and Coast Salish Marine Resources
on Burrard Inlet
For thousands of years, the waters of the Strait of Georgia provided vast marine
resources to thriving Coast Salish cultures and economies. Today, the anthropogenic
effects of industrialization, including pollution, global warming, habitat loss, introduced
species, the spread of disease from aquaculture, and commerical fishing have led to
declines in global fisheries (e.g., Corkeron 2006; Eaton and Scheller 1996; Ehrlick and
Goulder 2007; Halpern et al. 2008; Hilborn et al. 2003; Hughes et al. 2003; Jackson et al.
2001; Kent et al. 2008; Krkosek et al. 2007; Sindermann 1979). In the “Salish Sea” these
forces have led to collapses, declines, and forced closures of important First Nations
marine resources, including salmon, herring, and eulachon (Hay and Carter 2000; Pitcher
et al. 2002; Therriault et al. 2009a), and the extirpation of shellfish species including
native oyster (NOAA, n.d.) and green sea urchin (Say Nuth Khaw Yum 2007). These
biodiversity declines threaten fundamental aspects of Indigenous culture and community
health, which are inextricably linked to the environment and the resources within it
(Indigenous Peoples Earth Charter 1992; Lepofsky 2009; Posey 1999; Secretariat of the
Convention on Biodiversity 2002; Turner and Turner 2008; United Nations 2007).
Continuing declines in biological diversity limit efforts to restore marine
ecosystems because they prohibit a full understanding of past resource diversity and
2
abundance. Those working to restore ecosystems are challenged by the “shifting baseline
syndrome,” in which the reference point they aim to recreate is at the beginning of their
own conscious interaction with that system (Pauly 1995). Because these baselines begin
after the impacts of modern industrialization, and because they change with each
generation, they result in a growing underestimation of overall biodiversity loss and
previous species abundance and distribution (Baum and Myers 2004; Carlton 1998; Pauly
2001; Salomon et al. 2007). To avoid the perils of the shifting baseline, restorationists
are increasingly seeking older baselines (e.g., O’Connell and Tunnicliffe 2001; Pitcher
2001; Willis et al. 2010). Increasingly, those working in ecological restoration recognize
there is no “pristine” condition or ecosystem untouched by humanity (e.g., Cronon 1996;
Crumley 1994; Hayashida 2005). Rather, the inextricable link between humans and their
environment is a fundamental concept in the field of Historical Ecology, which bridges
modern ecosystem management with historical datasets, including archaeological data
(Crumley 1994; Egan and Howell 2001; O’Brien 2001).
Zooarchaeology, the study of animal remains from archaeological sites, is well
placed to extend baseline data of species presence and abundance. The emergent field of
applied zooarchaeology provides a “unique perspective on the time depth of ecosystems
and biotas” to conservation biologists and resource managers working to restore
biodiversity (Lyman and Cannon 2004: xvi). Compared to just years or decades from
modern ecological studies, the dataset provided by archaeofauna can show resource
abundance over centuries or even millennia (Frazier 2007). Because pre-contact societies
did not operate at a level of consumption even approximating today’s, the relevance of
the archaeological record to address the modern fishery crisis has been questioned (Baisre
3
2010). Butler notes however (2010), that zooarchaeological data provide an “unparalleled
record” of past species abundance and distribution, and adds to our understanding of
human-environmental relationships which may have contributed to long-term species
survival or loss.
Applied zooarchaeological studies, for example, have demonstrated human-
environmental relationships which resulted in both sustainable and non-sustainable
resource use (e.g., Broughton 2004; Etnier 2007; McKechnie 2007), where an animal’s
prehistoric range differed from today’s (Peters and Pöllath 2004; Phoca-Cosmetatou
2004), the impacts of climatic and human-induced environmental change (Butler and
Delacorte 2004); and the genetic diversity once present in species now experiencing
declines (e.g., Lyman and Cannon 2004; Moss et al. 2006).
Caveats to the use of zooarchaeological data are not fatal to its employment in
modern conservation, but are important considerations. Like all historcial datasets,
archaeofauna are filtered by myriad factors. These include human prey choice (e.g.,
Dincauze 2000), butchering practices (e.g., Binford 1978), taphonomic factors which
differentially impact preservation (e.g., Lyman 1994; Reitz and Wing 2008), as well as
archaeological sampling choices (Reitz 2004). Rather than being reconstructions of a past
ecosystem, archaeological datasets are “snapshots” which when pieced together provide a
model based on available data (O’Brien 2001), providing valuable information about the
environment of the past (Dincauze 2000).
Applied zooarchaeology can benefit from the application of theoretical models
which view the archaeological record as a proxy for past species abundance and presence.
Human behavioral ecology assumes prey choice has been shaped by natural selection to
4
be beneficial to the forager, relating it to environmental abundance and availability
(Smith 1983; Winterhalder and Smith 1992, 2000). An animal’s size or trophic level
becomes a proxy for its return rates, under the assumption that the abundance of large and
typically-preferred fauna in the environment will be reflected in zooarchaeological
assemblages (Broughton 1997, 1999). The prey-choice model is the most frequently
employed foraging model used by zooarchaeologists (Lupo 2007) and the use of indices
which reflect the abundance of such fauna has proven useful in applied zooarchaeological
studies (e.g., Broughton 2004), including for icthyofauna (Bulter and Delacorte 2004;
Reitz 2004).
In this thesis, I place recent declines in marine species in eastern Burrard Inlet
(Figure 1-1) within the deep time perspective allowed by applied zooarchaeology.
Burrard Inlet is at the heart of heavily populated and industrialized Greater Vancouver
area, and its ecosystems have been greatly transformed by development of various kinds.
By sampling middens in a range of ecological settings and with a diverse range of pre-
contact functions, I construct a picture of marine resource use and abundance in this
Strait of Georgia channel extending back millennia. This research aims to provide
baseline data for current conservation efforts by the Tsleil-Waututh Nation, a Coast
Salish community whose marine stewardship program addresses culturally important
staples in these waters. More specifically, my objectives are:
1) Explore pre-contact marine resource use and abundance in eastern Burrard Inlet
and its arms using zooarchaeological data;
2) Link zooarchaeological data on past marine resource use and abundance to
modern efforts to restore these cultural staples; and
5
3) Contrast zooarchaeological evidence for past management practices in Burrard
Inlet and its arms with current resource management practices.
Coast Salish Marine Resource Use in Burrard Inlet: Past and Present
A range of water depths (Armitage, 2001: 11, 12), shoreline characteristics
(Snively, 1978: 223), and varying water temperature throughout Burrard Inlet and its
arms, provided a wealth of habitats for a diverse range of marine and foreshore fauna
(e.g., Armitage 2001; Bartroli 1997; Snively 1978). These once-abundant and varied
marine resources, including one of the largest runs of pink salmon in the Pacific
Northwest, were harvested seasonally by several Halkomelem-speaking groups, including
the Musqueam, Kwikwetlem, and Stó:lö First Nations, as well as the Squamish
(Alexander and Grier 2000; Barnett 1955; Carlson 2001; Lepofsky et al. 2007; Trost
2005). The Tsleil-Waututh Nation lived on and used the resources of Burrard Inlet year-
round, recognizing five major villages in eastern Burrard Inlet and its arms, as well as the
fishing camp at Inlailawatash, at the mouth of the Indian River (Alexander and Grier
2000; Lepofsky et al. 2007). Early European explorers found the waters of what is now
the Greater Vancouver Area to be teeming with salmon, eulachon, smelt, herring, seals
and whales, bordered by rich beds of clams and mussels, and inhabited by fishers who
had procured large quantities of fish (e.g., Bartoli 1997; Jane 1930; Kendrick 1990; Lamb
1990). Previous archaeological work in the Strait of Georgia area has demonstrated this
reliance on a wide variety of marine resources extends back thousands of years (e.g.,
Caldwell 2008; Hanson 1991; Lepofsky et al. 2007; Trost 2005).
Beyond being economic staples, such marine resources figured prominently in
Coast Salish ceremonial and social life. The relationship between human and salmon was
6
sanctified in the yearly first salmon ceremony (Amoss 1987; Gunther 1926). Social
organization, including marriage networks and kinship ties, was built upon sharing of
resources, which were distributed unevenly across time and space (e.g., Miller 2007;
Suttles 1987). Resource stewardship was integrated into the familial ownership of
important harvesting sites (e.g., Haggan et al. 2006; Jenness n.d., 1955; McHalsie 2007).
Stories behind Coast Salish place names connected the environment to people and often
served as parables promoting the responsible use of resources (Thom 2005). The very
evolution of marine species in the Pacific Northwest has been linked to human interaction
with them, through the management and in some cases transplantation of species
(Haggan et al. 2006).
7
Figure 1-1 Study Area
(Shown are 1) Tsleil-Waututh Nation reserve; 2) Whey-Ah-Wichen; 3) Say-Umiton; 4) Twin Islands; 5) Tum-tumay-whueton; 6) Noons Creek; 7) Inlailawatash fishing camp. Figure adapted from Lepofsky et al. 2007)
Cultural continuity in the Coast Salish practice of marine resource use, however,
has been impacted by the same effects of urbanization and commercialization that are
impacting marine environments worldwide. In Burrard Inlet and its arms nearly 150
years of commercial fishing (Pitcher et al. 2002), habitat change (Haggarty 2001), and
pollution (Fisheries and Oceans Canada 2005; Stewart 2007) have reduced the
availability and health of culturally important species (e.g., Tsleil-Waututh Nation 2007).
Logging which began on the north shore in the mid-19th century resulted in landslides
and siltation, blocking salmon spawning streams (Say Nuth Khaw Yum 2010; Tsleil-
Burrard Inlet Port Moody Arm
Fraser River
• 1 • 2• 3
• 4
• 5• 6
• 7
8
Waututh Nation 2007), while log booms destroyed once-abundant eelgrass beds which
supported countless fish and invertebrates (Gerrits 2008). Urban and industrial
development has modified over half the shoreline in Burrard Inlet (Haggarty 2001),
reducing kelp beds (Brekke 2006) and in some cases destroying riparian habitat crucial to
salmon, water birds, and other species (Butler 2007; Port Moody Ecological Society
2010; Stantec 2009).
The Tsleil-Waututh Nation continues to identify strongly with the cultural staples
that have been the focus of their economic and social life for thousands of years
(Lepofsky et al. 2007). The Tsleil-Waututh people have spearheaded several initiatives to
manage the resources and lands within their territory, including the co-management of
the Say Nuth Khaw Yum Provincial Park (Say Nuth Khaw Yum 2010), sustainable
forestry initiatives (Tsleil-Waututh Nation 2007), and the safeguarding of water quality
and conservation of fish and shellfish species through the Marine Stewardship Plan
(Tsleil-Waututh Nation 2008). Along with the connection to the environment of Burrard
Inlet and its arms comes “a sacred trust, a responsibility to care for (their) traditional
territory” (Tsleil-Waututh Nation 2011).
The five sites discussed in this thesis are located within Burrard Inlet and its arms
(Figure 1-1; Table 1-1). These pre-contact midden sites are in a range of ecological
settings, and each is the result of a range of different activities at different times in the
past. Importantly, all of these sites are in areas where the Tsleil-Waututh Nation and
others are focusing marine conservation efforts.
9
Table 1-1 Ecological, Cultural, and Conservation Background to Five Discussed Sites in Burrard Inlet and its Arms
Site Methods Ecological Setting Cultural Setting Conservation Issues
Tum-tumay-
whuteon
(TTW)
Belcarra Park site
DhRr-06
Bucket-auger
sampling of
midden, 2-mm
and 1-mm
screening, faunal
analysis
Sheltered bay on east side
of Indian Arm, north of
where it meets Burrard
Inlet; silt shelf at junction of
inlet and arm slows water
flow between them
Largest of TWN’s historic villages,
midden deposits reach nearly 2 m in
depth and extend 150 m north-south
and 40 m east-west; excavated in
1971; artifacts, burials, and two
distinct components identified;
radiocarbon date of 240 A.D.
considered too young (Charlton
1972, 1980)
Abandoned in 1850s (Sparks and
Border 1989) after smallpox
decimated population (Alexander and
Grier 2000)
TWN MSP: Fish, shellfish and
water quality
DFO: Advisories against
shellfish collection due to poor
sanitary conditions; declines in
commercial species including
herring and salmon
BIEAP: Shoreline modification,
habitat loss, pollution, water
quality, invasive species,
shoreline modfication
10
Site Methods Ecological Setting Cultural Setting Conservation Issues
Noons Creek
(NC)
DhRq-1
2-mm and 1-mm
screening of
column samples
collected in 1982,
faunal analysis
Tidal flats at the eastern
end of Port Moody Arm;
adjacent to salmon
spawning stream
A discontinuous midden
approximately 150 m by 30 m
(Archaeology Branch site form), likely
contiguous with nearby Pigeon Cove
(DhRr-9; Barton 1990; McMillan
1982); previous excavators
suggested it was a seasonal
processing camp for salmon and
woodworking (Barton 1990; Charlton
1972); pre-contact burial site,
important village site (Tsleil-Waututh
Nation 2010). Largely destroyed by
development, including a municipal
recreation centre and condos.
Location of salmon hatchery
PMES: Chum and coho salmon
restoration efforts, concerns of
pollution, shoreline modification,
recreational boating discharge
DFO: Species impacted by
commercial fishing
BIEAP: Invasive species, water
quality, water temperature,
shoreline modification
Twin Islands
(TI)
DhRr-16
Bucket-auger
sampling of
midden, 2-mm
and 1-mm
screening, faunal
analysis
Two small islands in Indian
Arm connected by sand
bridge during low tide; in a
deeper section of the inlet
with suitable habitat for
bottom fish
Campsite, according to Tsleil-
Waututh Nation oral history, with
lithic remains, including flakes and a
ground slate knive observed by site
recorder on surface of 60 m by 20 m
midden. Possibility raised by
recorder that midden is associated
with early 1900s vacation cottages
(Archaeology Branch site form)
TWN MSP: Fish, shellfish, and
water quality
DFO/BC Parks: Rockfish and
lingcod conservation area,
species impacted by
commercial and recreational
fishing
BIEAP: Pollution, water quality,
invasive species
11
Site Methods Ecological Setting Cultural Setting Conservation Issues
Say-Umiton
(SU)
Deep Cove or
Strathcona site
DhRr-18
Literature review
of previously
recovered and
analyzed fauna
(Lepofsky et al.
2007; Trost 2005)
On the west side of Indian
Arm, in a sheltered cove
with calm water;
cobblestone tidal flats,
shellfish rich beaches, and
eelgrass beds; small
streams which may have
previously supported
salmon
Ancient settlement and shellfish
gathering spot; year-round
occupation inferred based on flora
and fauna from excavations
(Lepofsky et al. 2007); midden
deposits up to 1.5-m in depth and
130 m x 50 m; components likely
dating from Locarno Beach (3500-
2400 BP) to late pre-contact (1200-
250 BP)
TWN: Fish and shellfish, water
quality
DFO: Species impacted by
commercial fishing
BIEAP: Water quality, invasive
species, shoreline modification
Whey-Ah Wichen
(WAW)
Cates Park
DhRr-08
Literature review
of previously
recovered and
analyzed fauna
(Williams 1974)
On the north shore of
Burrard Inlet, near where it
meets Indian Arm; sand
and cobblestone beaches
surround a relatively flat
and deeply wooded area
Midden deposits with depths ranging
from 60-cm to 1.5 m (Alexander and
Grier 2000; Charlton 1974); early
excavators inferred seasonal use
(Charlton 1974), but faunal and
artifact assemblage considered too
rich (Alexander and Grier 2000);
possible defensive site, and place
where battles took place (Alexander
and Grier 2000); artifact styles used
to infer use up to 2500 years ago.
Though erosion and development
have disturbed midden remains, the
site is recorded to be 30 m wide and
nearly 1.5 km long (Archaeology
Branch site form)
TWN: Fish and shellfish
species, water quality
DFO: Species impacted by
commercial fishing
BIEAP: Water quality, invasive
species, shoreline modification
BIEAP: Burrard Inlet Environmental Action Program, sources Brekke 2006, Jacques Whitford AXYS 2008, Stantec 2009; DFO: Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada, sources Farwell et al. 1987, Fisheries and Oceans Canada 2005, 2007, Hancock and Marshall 1986; Hay and Carter 2000; Therriault et al. 2009a; Wallace 1999; TWN MSP: Tsleil-Waututh Nation Marine Stewardship Plan, source Tsleil-Waututh Nation 2008; PMES: Port Moody Ecological Society, sources Mattson, 2008, Port Moody Ecological Society 2011.
12
The Past and the Future
In the following chapter, I outline the methods of my field and laboratory
research, chosen because of their particular relevance to conservation within Burrard Inlet
and its arms (Chapter 2). I then describe the faunal assemblage from five sites in Burrard
Inlet and its arms, including three newly sampled sites (Chapter 3). The resulting
comparison provides a picture both of inlet-wide abundance and site-specific variation.
Finally, I contrast evidence for past fisheries management with today’s single-species
paradigm (Chapter 4). I demonstrate that applied zooarchaeology can bridge data from
the past with future marine resource management, for the Tsleil-Waututh Nation and
others working to restore important cultural and ecological resources within Burrard Inlet
and its arms.
13
Chapter 2:
Methods
Field Methods
Bucket-auger and column sampling are expedient and effective means of
exploring past resource use at Northwest Coast midden sites (e.g., Caldwell 2008;
Cannon 2000a; Casteel 1972; Moss 2007). Particularly for fish remains and other small
taxa, these sampling procedures yield zooarchaeological specimens in adequate quantity
to estimate relative abundance and richness (e.g., Cannon 2000a; Casteel 1970, 1976;
Moss 2007). While excavation units tend to yield samples biased towards large taxa,
bucket-auger and column sampling, when combined with fine-screened analysis, are
useful when small taxa, are sought (e.g., Cannon 2000a; Casteel 1976).
Following Cannon (2000a), I used a 10-cm diameter Riverside auger to extract
samples from middens at Tum-tumay-whueton (Figure 2-1) and Twin Islands (Figure
2.2). In the summer of 2008, I took two auger samples to sterile depth from the midden at
Tum-tumay-whueton. I drew each successive scoop out as a level, bagging it separately
and recording its provenience. I chose an area of the midden which had not been
previously excavated (Charlton 1980). The samples come from slightly north of the
previous excavation, and are located near the end of the landform above the beach. Both
successful samples, Auger 6 (159 cm) and Auger 8 (198 cm), extended to depths
comparable to Charlton’s (1980) excavations (~ 2 m). As a rough assessment of how well
14
the auger samples represent the spatial variability in the midden, I extracted these two
samples relatively close to each other (54cm) to see if they produced similar results. I
took a third auger sample (Auger D) in 2009 to increase my yield of fauna. This sample
(depth 91 cm) was extracted from the midden’s northwest edge, in an area removed from
the previous samples (Figure 2-1).
Figure 2-1 Sampling Locations at Tum-tumay-whueton, DhRr-6 (Belcarra Park)
Map adapted from Charlton 1980.
15
I extracted a supplemental core sample at Tum-tumay-whueton (depth =91 cm
B.S.) with a 2-cm diameter Environmentalists Subsoil Probe. While bucket-auger
samples provided ample faunal remains, I hoped to use the probe to confirm the presence
of stratigraphy and obtain radiocarbon dates (Cannon 2000b; Martindale and Letham
2008). I extracted a radiocarbon sample from the base of this core, which was taken
adjacent to the two 2008 auger samples at Tum-tumay-whueton.
16
Figure 2-2 Sampling Locations from Twin Islands (DiRr-16)
I extracted two samples from the midden at Twin Islands (Figure 2-2) where shell
was eroding on the surface, with the assumption that this was an indication of intact
deposits below. Auger scoops were bagged separately with depths recorded, as at Tum-
tumay-whueton. The deposits from Auger 9 (53 cm) and Auger 10 (23 cm) were shallow.
17
Field and laboratory observations indicated the midden at Twin Islands was disturbed and
produced few faunal remains.
I also analyzed samples from the previously excavated site of Noons Creek. These
samples were collected during salvage operations conducted by members of SFU’s
Department of Archaeology in 1982. Investigators excavated a portion of the site
threatened by the construction of residential housing units in the 300 Block of Maude
Road. Between April 13 and May 8, 1982, 17 2x2-m units were excavated to sterile
depths. As part of the salvage operation, 40x40-cm column samples were collected
(Barton 1990), but were never analyzed. Of these, I chose one column sample from the
main excavation area, where deposits were generally the deepest (117 cm). I divided this
column sample into two, treating it as two adjacent auger samples to more closely mirror
by field methods at Tum-tumay-whueton (C1-A and C1-B). Collected levels ranged from
5 cm in depth to 15 cm in depth and are recorded in Appendix 1. Like at Tum-tumay-
whueton, I chose a third sample (C-2) from another area of the Noons Creek midden
(depth = 87 cm). I used a sediment splitter to reduce the volume of these samples
similarly to those from C1-A and C1-B.
Laboratory Methods
The faunal remains from this study come from three auger samples from Tum-
tumay-whueton, two auger samples from Twin Islands, and three column samples from
Noons Creek. The three auger samples from Tum-tumay-whueton represented a total of
38 auger scoops treated as arbitrary levels; those from Twin Islands came from a total of
nine auger scoops or arbitrary levels; samples from Noons Creek represented 28
stratigraphic levels.
18
In lieu of calculating volume estimates (cf. Cannon 2000a; McKechnie 2005) of
my auger samples, I weighed each scoop, and tested whether the bulk of the sample
collected impacted the NISP recovered for selected samples for which I also explore
relative abundance (A-8 at Tum-tumay-whueton and C1-A at Noons Creek). A consistent
problem with auger sampling is that the method extracts volumes of different size and
degree of compaction. Furthermore, even if the volume and density could be controlled,
radically different amounts of time could be represented in each amount of soil. Finally,
the type of sediment, large bones, and large pieces of fire-broken rock will influence the
measurement, whether volume or weight is recorded.
Fish
While fine-screening of midden sediments is time-consuming (Ross and Duffy
2000), it has been shown to be an important methodological consideration in fish bone
analysis (e.g., Nagaoka 2005), particularly on the Northwest Coast where the recovery of
fish bones is a common goal (e.g., Hanson 1991; Partlow 2006). Using smaller meshes
(e.g., 1-mm) yields relatively higher richness values (Densmore 2009; Zohar and
Belmaker 2005) and impacts the rank order of fish taxa recovered (Gordon 1993);
I screened one auger or column sample from each of my sites using a 1-mm mesh.
The remaining one sample at Twin Islands and two each from Tum-tumay-wheuton and
Noons Creek were screened using 2-mm mesh. This allowed me to maximize recovery
from the samples put through 1-mm mesh, and to add additional column or auger samples
to my analysis, without the prohibitive time of using a 1-mm screen for all. For the
column and auger samples screened with a 1-mm mesh, I also used a nested 2-mm
screen. This allows me to compare the effects of the 1-mm versus 2-mm screen on
19
richness, rank order, and NISP. To facilitate sorting, level bags were first dry-screened
through 1-mm mesh to remove excess sediment, and then wet-screened, again through
the 1-mm mesh. Dried samples were subsequently screened through the appropriate 1-
mm or 2-mm mesh, and sorted with the aid of magnification.
Shellfish
For shellfish remains, I analyzed one auger sample from each of Tum-tumay-
wheuton and Twin Islands, and one column sample from Noons Creek. In the interest of
time, I quartered the Noons Creek sample to make it equivalent in volume to the Tum-
tumay-whueton and Twin Islands samples. Although both 6-mm and 3-mm screens are
commonly used to retrieve shellfish (Campbell 1981; Hanson 1991), I chose to sort
shellfish through a 1-mm mesh. I chose this more time-consuming method for several
reasons. First, my initial sorting through larger screens revealed blue mussels were
common at all sites, yet their hinges were rarely captured in the 6-mm and 3-mm screens.
Since I used hinges to identify invertebrate remains, I decided a smaller screen was
necessary to reflect the contribution of each species, including blue mussel. Furthermore,
I observed sea urchin spines while sorting sediment, yet these were only recovered in the
1-mm mesh. Given the importance of documenting each taxon, I decided a balance
between time and recovery was obtained by using the 1-mm mesh, but only sorting one
column or auger sample from each of the three sites.
Identifications
Following Driver (1992), whenever possible I identified fish and shellfish remains
from Tum-tumay-whueton, Twin Islands, and Noons Creek with comparative collections,
20
rather than published guides. These collections are housed at Simon Fraser University’s
Department of Archaeology and the University of Victoria’s Anthropology Department.
With the exception of ribs, rays, and spines, all identifiable fish elements were attributed
to the most specific taxonomic level. Cranial and vertebral elements were most often
recovered and identified, although rockfish spine spacers (pterygiophores), salmonid gill
rakers, and scutes from some flounders and three-spine sticklebacks were also identified.
Using Hart (1973) as a guide for species common throughout B.C. or known in
Burrard Inlet, I compared specimens against all potential candidates in the Victoria
reference collection. Generally, fish taxa are distinguishable to the family level, but
specific identifications may be less certain (see Gobalet 2001), particularly where more
distinguishable (e.g., facial) bones are absent. In the case of sculpins, for example, the
recovery of unique facial bones of buffalo (Enophrys bison) and staghorn (Leptocottus
armatus) allowed me to confidently identify these two species. Conversely, I did not
recover facial bones of blackfin (Malacocottus kincaidi) and northern (Icelinus borealis)
sculpins and red irish lord (Hemilepidotus hemilepidotus) and I made my identifications
based on comparison the vertebrae of all sculpins in the comparative collection.
However, since I am less confident of these specific identifications, I use the biological
nomenclature cf to indicate that specimens match most closely the species listed, but the
identification is not confirmed. Similarly, sand sole (Psettichthys melanostictus) and
flathead sole (Hipoglossoides elassodon) were identified based on vertebrae and thus are
distinguished with a cf. In the cases of starry flounder (Platichthys stellatus), rock sole
(Lepidopsetta bilineata), and english sole (Parophrys vetulus) more distinct bones were
present (e.g., scutes and facial bones). In the case of smelt, eulachon vertebrae are
21
distinct, but the other species identifications are more tenuous and are distinguished with
a cf. Following other Northwest Coast faunal studies, both unidentifiable and unidentified
elements – such as ribs, rays, and spines – were classified as “unidentified” (e.g., Cannon
1991; McKechnie 2005; Trost 2005).
I identified invertebrates if non-repetitive elements were present, namely the
hinges of bivalves and the apices of univalves (Mason et al. 1998). I made some
exceptions, however. Barnacles do not have these elements and were identified by their
plates. Similarly, green sea urchin was identified by spines or portions of globes, and
crabs were identified by the presence of claws. Where the hinges of clams were present
but too degraded to determine confidently which species they represented I identified
them as “clams.” Because I used the same methods to identify shellfish from these sites, I
can readily compare these results. However, intersite comparisons with Say-Umiton and
Whey-Ah-Wichen are hampered by the fact non-repetitive elements were not used to
identify shellfish at these sites (Trost 2005; Williams 1974).
Quantification
I quantified all vertebrate and invertebrate fauna using number of identified
specimens (NISP). NISP is the long-standard measure in zooarchaeological analyses
(Brewer 1992; Grayson 1984). Using NISP allows me to compare the results of my
vertebrate analysis with data from Whey-Ah-Wichen and Say-Umiton, where this
measure was also used to quantify the vertebrate fauna (Trost 2005; Williams 1974).
Because weight rather than NISP was used to quantify invertebrates at Say-Umiton (Trost
2005), my ability to compare data from my invertebrate analysis with those from Say-
Umiton is limited.
22
To understand patterns in the archaeological record, faunal analysts also use a
measure of ubiquity (Butler and Campbell 2004; Campbell and Butler 2010; McKechnie
2005). Ubiquity, the percentage of analytical units or contexts in which a given taxon is
present, can track patterns in a taxon’s presence and use across space and time. I record
ubiquity values from stratified auger samples and column samples from Tum-tumay-
whueton and Noons Creek.
I used the number of taxonomic classes (NTAXA) to compare inter- and intra-site
richness (Lyman and Ames 2004: 149; Nagaoka 2001). This measure is useful to
reconstruct both past human behavior and environmental conditions (Cruz-Uribe 1988).
It further avoids the pitfalls of derived diversity indices, which confound whether
richness or evenness are represented (Byrd 1997: 54; Lepofsky and Lertzman 2005;
Morrison and Hunt 2007; Nagaoka 2001).
To address evenness, I follow Lepofsky and Lertzman (2005) and use graphical
representations of abundance. I use evenness as a proxy for site specialization (e.g.,
Lepofsky and Lyons 2003), with the assumption that the degree of specialization of an
assemblage is inversely correlated with length of occupation. Thus, permanent villages
should be less likely to be dominated by a few abundant species than task-specific, short-
term camps. Following Lepofsky and Lyons, I consider those sites in which three taxa
make up 90% of the assemblage to be more specialized, and those with three species
making up 40% or less of NISP to be less specialized. These measures have been used in
previous zooarchaeological work in Burrard Inlet and its arms (Trost 2005).
Abundance indices are useful tools for exploring the temporal relationship
between supposedly preferred – typically larger – fauna and all other fauna (Lupo 2007).
23
These indices are also relevant where mass capture techniques allow fauna to be caught
in large numbers, such as through fishing technology on the Northwest Coast
(Winterhalder and Goland 1997). Butler and Campbell (2004) and Campbell and Butler
(2010) applied a “salmon index” on the Northwest Coast to examine first, whether
salmon intensification was linked to social complexity, and second to evaluate whether
there was depression of salmon over time. Their results (Campbell and Butler 2010)
suggest salmon was in general harvested sustainably over millennia along the coast.
Following these studies, I apply a salmon index (NISP salmon / [NISP salmon + all other
fish]) to a stratified auger sample from Tum-tumay-whueton and a sample from Noons
Creek to explore the relative abundance of salmon through time.
24
Previously Analyzed Data
Faunal data from two of the five sites included in this thesis are from previously
published studies. Williams (1974) details the results of faunal analysis from Whey-Ah-
Wichen. In 1974, 29 2x2m units were excavated up to 1.5 metres in depth (Charlton
1974). Despite the large volume of sediment excavated, just two species of fish – salmon
and rockfish – were identified (Williams 1974). This low richness is attributed to an
incomplete reference collection (Williams 1974), and also because small fish including
herring likely fell through the 6-mm screen. Ten species of invertebrates were identified
from this site, with Pacific littleneck, frilled dogwinkle, and butter clam the most
common.
Trost (2005) examined fauna from Say-Umiton. This site was excavated as part of
a joint Tsleil-Waututh Nation-Simon Fraser University Department of Archaeology field
school in 2000. That team excavated a 12m x 6m area, which included external and
internal house deposits (Lepofsky and Karpiak 2001). Faunal remains were recovered in
the field from 6-mm screens, and bulk sediment samples were floated to recover small
fish bones (Trost 2005). Trost identified 20 taxa, with herring, salmon, and anchovy
being the most abundant (Lepofsky et al. 2007; Trost 2005). Invertebrates were identified
by weight, with butter clam, Pacific littleneck, and Nuttall’s cockle being the most
abundant.
25
Chapter 3:
The Marine Fauna of Burrard Inlet and its Arms
I identified fish and shellfish from three sites in the Inlet Locality. These sites are
Tum-tumay whueton, a village site near the juncture of Burrard Inlet and Indian Arm
(Charlton 1980); Noons Creek, believed to be a seasonal processing settlement (Barton
1991) in the inlet’s Port Moody Arm; and Twin Islands, a small midden on a traditonal
Tsleil-Waututh Nation campsite on Indian Arm (Archaeology Branch site form). From
these sites, 15,723 bones were recovered and catalogued (Table 3-1), the majority
(n=15,445) being fish bones. For the purposes of this thesis, I focus on the identified fish
(n=4,313) from these three sites (Table 3-2), as well as the shellfish remains (n=1,656;
Table 3.3).
Below, I compare the results of my shellfish and fish analyses with previously
published studies from two other sites in the Inlet Locality: Whey-ah-Wichen, a village
site on the north shore of Burrard Inlet (Alexander and Grier 2000; Williams 1974), and
Say-Umiton, a settlement on the west side of Indian Arm (Lepofsky et al. 2007; Trost
2005).
26
Table 3-1 NISP Vertebrate Fauna from Tum-tumay-whueton (TTW), Twin Islands (TI), and
Noons Creek (NC)
TTW Fish Mammal Bird Fragments, unidentified to class
NISP Identified Taxa
2,201
4 canid 2 deer
1 coast mole 6 vole
15 rodent
3 Anas sp. -
Unidentified Taxa
6,625 131 43 22
Total 8,826 159 46 22
TI Fish Mammal Bird Fragments, unidentified to class
NISP Identified Taxa
15 - - -
NISP Unidentified Taxa
10 20 4 1
Total 25 20 4 1
NC Fish Mammal Bird Fragments, unidentified to class
NISP Identified Taxa 2,097
1 vole 1 rodent
1 bovid (sawn long bone)
- -
NISP Unidentified Taxa
4,472 30 6 12
Total 6,569 33 6 12
27
Identified Fauna
Tum-tumay-wheuton
I identified fish remains (n=2,201) from Tum-tumay-whueton from three auger
samples (A-6, A-8, and A-D) obtained in 2008 and 2009. The fragmented nature of the
remains meant just one-quarter of the bones could be identified (Table 3-1). In general,
fish taxa recovered (Table 3-2) were typical of those expected in Gulf of Georgia inlet
waters (Hart 1973), and Burrard Inlet in particular (Haggarty 2001). Salmon (n=856),
herring (n=673), and anchovy (n=378) are the most abundant species. These three species
are also ubiquitous, appearing in the majority of faunal bearing levels of the three auger
samples (Table 3.4 [salmon 94%; herring 97%; anchovy 84%]). The presence of rodent
bones and coast mole bones, and visible signs of coast mole activity on the surface of
Tum-tumay-whueton, are evidence of post-depositional disturbance. I identified 504
invertebrate remains from one auger sample (A-8) at Tum-tumay-wheuton (Table 3-3),
with blue mussel (n=180), butter clam (n=62) and Pacific littleneck (n=55) being the
most common species recovered. I obtained a basal radiocarbon date of 2940 +/- 40 BP
(Beta-259938, cal 3230-2960 BP) from charcoal obtained from a percussion core sample
taken near A-6 and A-8 at Tum-tumay-wheuton. This sample came from a greasy, black
context above sterile deposits of sand and clay. Basal levels of nearby Auger 8 and 6 also
included charcoal, bone, and burnt bone, suggesting this charcoal may also be cultural.
28
Table 3-2 Fish Recovered from Tum-tumay-whueton (TTW), Twin Islands (TI), and Noons
Creek (NC)
Taxon TTW NISP (%)
1
TI NISP (%)
1
NC NISP (%)
1
Squalus acanthias (spiny dogfish) 36 (1.6) 1 (6.7) 19 (0.9)
Raja binoculata (big skate) 4 (0.2) 3 (0.1)
Hydrolagus colliei (ratfish) 2 (0.1)
Acipenser acipenser2 (sturgeon)
Clupea harangus (pacific herring) 673 (30.6) 1 (6.7) 848 (40.4)
Engraulis mordax (northern anchovy) 378 (17.2) 261 (12.4)
Salmonidae (salmon, undifferentiated) 856 (38.9) 8 (53.3) 602 (28.7)
Osmeridae sp. (smelt, undifferentiated) 2 (0.1) 11 (0.5)
Hypomesus cf pretiosus (surf smelt) 2 (0.1) 4 (0.2)
Mallotus cf villosus (capelin) 1 (<0.1)
Spirinchus cf thaleichthys (longfin smelt) 1 (<0.1) 5 (0.2)
Thaleichthys pacificus (eulachon) 5 (0.2) 226 (10.8)
Catostomus macrocheilus2 (largescale sucker)
Mycheilus caurinus (peamouth chub) 5 (0.2)
Porichthys notatus (plainfin midshipman) 4 (0.2) 1 (6.7) 14 (0.7)
Gadidae (cods, undifferentiated) 9 (0.4) 1 (0.0)
Gasterosteus aculeatus (three-spine stickleback) 10 (0.5) 7 (0.3)
Embiotocidae (perch, undifferentiated) 57 (2.6) 2 (13.3) 18 (0.9)
Cymatogaster aggregata (shiner perch) 1 (<0.1)
Rhacochilus vacca (pile perch) 108 (4.9) 1 (6.7) 15 (0.7)
Lumpenus saggita2 (snake prickleback)
Scorpaenidae (rockfish, undifferentiated) 11 (0.5) 1 (6.7) 2 (0.1)
Hexagrammos lagocephalus (rock greenling) 1 (<0.1)
Hexagrammos stelleri (white-spotted greenling) 1 (<0.1)
Ophiodon elongatus (lingcod) 1 (<0.1) 1 (<0.1)
Cottidae (sculpin family, undifferentiated) 4 (0.2) 4 (0.2)
Blepsias cirrhosus2 (silver-spotted sculpin)
Enophrys bison (buffalo sculpin) 1 (<0.1) 1 (<0.1)
Hemilepidotus cf hemilepidotus (red irish lord) 1 (<0.1) 2 (0.1)
Icelinus cf borealis (northern sculpin) 4 (0.2)
Leptocottus armatus (pacific staghorn sculpin) 5 (0.2) 2 (0.1)
Malacocottus cf kincaidi (blackfin sculpin) 1 (<0.1)
Scorpaenichthys marmoratus2 (cabezon)
Pleuronectidae (flatfish, undifferentiated) 2 (0.1) 1 (<0.1)
Hipoglossoides cf elassodon (flathead sole) 1 (<0.1)
Lepidopsetta bilineata (rock sole) 1 (<0.1) 14 (0.7)
Parophrys vetulus (english sole) 3 (0.1) 3 (0.1)
29
Taxon TTW NISP (%)
1
TI NISP (%)
1
NC NISP (%)
1
Platichthys stellatus (starry flounder) 13 (0.6) 19 (0.9)
Starry flounder or rock sole 3 (0.1) 7 (0.3)
Psettichthys cf melanostictus (sand sole) 1 (<0.1)
NISP 2201 15 2097
NTAXA 27 6 25
1Percent NISP calculated to one decimal place. 2Expected taxa not identified at these sites, based on
previous recovery at Say-Umiton (Trost 2005). Cf. refers to identifications that are probable, but are not confirmed. Those without cf are confident identifications based on morphologically distinct elements (e.g, cranial elements, distinctive vertebrae, scutes).
Twin Islands
I identified fish bones (n=15; Table 3-1) from Twin Islands from two auger tests
(A-9 and A-10) obtained in 2008. These provided a scant record, when compared with
fauna from Tum-tumay-whueton and Noons Creek (Table 3-2), though fauna from the
small assemblage are consistent with those expected (Haggarty 2001; Hart 1973). Salmon
(n=8) made up the bulk of the small assemblage, followed by perch (n=3). Historic
disturbance was evident in the presence of non-organic remains, including a metal
fishhook and roofing shingles. The invertebrate record (n=209) was more robust than the
faunal record (Table 3-3). Blue mussel (n=40) and Pacific littleneck (n=28) were the
most abundant subsistence species.
Table 3-3 Invertebrates from Tum-tumay-whueton (TTW), Twin Islands (TI), and Noons Creek
(NC)
Taxon
TTW NISP (%)
1
TI NISP (%)
1
NC NISP (%)
1
Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis (green sea urchin) 19 (5.6) 2 (0.2)
Archaeogastropoda (limpet) 8 37
Small gastropod, misc. 8 34 91
Snail, edible, misc. 7 (2.1) 5 (5.2) 17 (2.1)
30
Taxon
TTW NISP (%)
1
TI NISP (%)
1
NC NISP (%)
1
Dentalium sp (dentalium)2
Nucella lamellosa (frilled dogwinkle) 17 (2.1)
Polinices lewisii (Lewis’s moon snail)2
Clam, misc. 9 (2.6) 14 (14.6) 14 (1.7)
Clinocardium nuttalli (Nuttall’s cockle) 5 (1.5) 2 (2.1) 75 (9.2)
Macoma nasuta (bent-nosed macoma) 15 (1.8)
Mya arenaria (softshell clam)3
Mytelis edulis (blue mussel) 180 (52.8) 40 (41.7) 374 (46.1)
Ostreola conchaphila (native oyster) 35 (4.3)
Patinopecten caurinus (weathervane scallop)3
Protothaca staminea (pacific littleneck) 55 (16.1) 28 (29.2) 70 (8.6)
Saxidomus giganteus (butter clam) 62 (18.2) 7 (7.3) 14 (1.7)
Tresus sp. (horse clam) 1 (0.3) 2 (0.2)
Tresus capax (fat gaper)2 3
Tresus nutalli (pacific gaper)2
Balanus sp. (barnacle) 155 71 187
Decopoda (crab) 3 (0.9) 4 (0.5)
NISP 504 209 954
NTAXA 10 8 14
1Percent NISP calculated to one decimal place. Percent NISP calculated without barnacles, limpets and small gastropod misc (TTW n=341; TI n=96; NC n=812).. 2Expected taxa not identified at these sites based on previous recovery at Say-Umiton. 3Expected taxa not identified at these sites based on previous recovery at Whey-Ah-Wichen (Williams 1974).
Noons Creek
I identified fish (n=2,097) from three column samples from Noons Creek (C-1A,
C-1B, C-2). Herring (n=848), salmon (n=602) and anchovy (n=261) were the most
abundant species (Table 3.2). Eulachon (n=226) were also abundant and ubiquitous
(Table 3-4). Disturbance from rodents was evident in the mammalian assemblage, which
included one unidentified rodent and a vole (Table 3-1). A sawn cow tibia (10-20 cm
below surface) in C-2 (Table 3-1) was evidence of historic disturbance. The shellfish
record was particularly robust (n=954; Table 3-3) and rich (discussed below) at Noons
Creek. Blue mussel (n=374), Nuttall’s cockle (n=75) and Pacific littleneck (n=70) were
the most common invertebrate species recovered, although an uncommon abundance of
31
native oyster (n=35) was identified at this site. A basal radiocarbon date of 1860 +/- 40
BP at Noons Creek (Beta-2599367, cal 1880-1710 BP) was obtained from charcoal
recovered from Level 10 of Column 1-A.
Table 3-4 Ubiquity (%) of Most Common Fish Taxa in Stratified Auger and Column Samples
from Tum-tumay-whueton (TTW) and Noons Creek (NC)
TTW NC
Taxon A-8 A-6 A-D All levels C-1A C-1B C-2 All levels
Salmon 93 88 100 94 100 100 100 100
Herring 100 88 100 97 100 100 100 100
Anchovy 93 75 78 84 100 100 86 96
Perch 73 63 100 78 63 63 29 52
Eulachon 6.67 25 22 16 88 50 43 61
Abundance, Change through Time, and Sampling Biases
To ensure the samples I explored for long-term temporal changes were not biased
due to inconsistent sample sizes (Tum-tumay-whueton Auger 8 and Noons Creek
Column 1-A), I plot the NISP for individual auger scoops or column levels against
sample weight (Figure 3-1) There is no clear correlation between NISP and sample
weight in samples from Noons Creek (C-1A) or Tum-tumay-whueton (A-8). The
exception to this is Level 8 at Noons Creek, which weighs considerably more (4140.9 g)
than the other samples and has a correspondingly higher NISP (345). Thus any
conclusions about the relative abundance in Level 8 must be considered in this context.
However, given the difficulties of determining any meaningful way of controlling for
time represented by any given sample, I avoid basing my interpretations on absolute
numbers. Rather, I am concerned with general trends in relative abundances through
time.
32
Figure 3-1 Relationship between Sample Weight and NISP at Tum-tumay-whueton (left) and
Noons Creek (right).
Samples weighed after fire broken rock was removed. Note outliers Level 3 at Tum-tumay-whueton and Level 8 at Noons Creek.
Exploring the Impact of the 1-mm Screen
Adding fish bones recovered from the 1-mm screen in A-8 at Tum-tumay-
whueton captured more than half as many (61%) more identifiable (n=1015) fish remains
than the 2-mm screen alone (n=630). Yet it only resulted in about one-third (36%) more
unidentifiable fish (n=2615) than the 2-mm screen (n=1927). The 1-mm screen added
three more species to the richness of this auger sample (NTAXA=20) than the 2-mm
screen (NTAXA=17). These three species are eulachon (n=1), capelin (n=1), and longfin
smelt (n=1). Eulachon were recovered in the 2-mm screen at Tum-tumay-whueton (A-6,
n=2; A-D, n=2), but these were the only examples of capelin and longfin smelt recovered.
0
50
100
150
200
250
0 1000 2000 3000
NIS
P Id
en
tifi
ed
Fis
h
Weight (g)
Level 3
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
NIS
P Id
en
tifi
ed
Fis
h
Weight (g)
Level 8
33
Figure 3-2 Comparing Recovery of Most Encountered Fish with a 2-mm and a 1-mm Screen at
Tum-tumay-whueton (TTW; top) and Noons Creek (NC; below)
The 1-mm screen had no impact on the rank order of the most common species
(Fig 3-2) at Tum-tumay-whueton, yet it dramatically increased the number of anchovy
identified. The use of the 1-mm screen added on average one-third to the NISP of first-
ranked salmon, second-ranked herring, and fourth-ranked perch (salmon 39%; herring
23%; perch 33%). Yet the additon of the 1-mm screen tripled the NISP of anchovy in this
311
212
61
15
431
260 244
20
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
Salmon Herring Anchovy Perch
TT
W N
ISP
A-8
2-mm screen 1-mm and 2-mm screen
281255
8672
23
333315
127144
24
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Herring Salmon Eulachon Anchovy Flatfish
NC
NIS
P C
-1A
2-mm screen 1-mm and 2-mm screen
34
auger sample (n=244), the third most abundant fish. When herring and anchovy are
compared using the 2-mm screen, anchovy appears dwarfed by herring. However, their
abundances are nearly equal when combined with fauna from the 1-mm.
Of the identified fish remains from C-1A at Noons Creek (n=1,008), about one-
quarter (n=216) were added by using the 1-mm screen, rather than using the 2-mm screen
alone (n=782). Of the unidentified fish (n=2,303), about one-quarter (n=480) were
captured in the 1-mm screen. Unlike at Tum-tumay-whueton, the Noons Creek sample
provided no new species by adding the 1-mm fraction to the 2-mm fraction
(NTAXA=23).
While the impact on NTAXA is negligible at Noons Creek, the use of the 1-mm
screen did change the rank order of two of the top five fish (Fig. 3-2). Using just the 2-
mm screen, eulachon is the third most abundant fish at this site, after herring and salmon.
The 1-mm screen adds between just a fraction (perch 4%) to nearly one half (eulachon
47%) to the NISP of four of the five fish taxa; however, the 1-mm screen doubles the
amount of anchovy recovered (n=144) compared to the 2-mm screen (n=72). This
effectively changes the rank order of these two fish.
Effects of the 1-mm Screen
The fish most affected by the addition of the 1-mm screen is anchovy. Given that
it has among the smallest vertebrae of fish remains in these samples – typically less 1.5-
cm in diamater, compared to 2-mm in diameter for herring – the impact of the 1-mm
screen on this fish is expected. Adding a 1-mm screen to the 2-mm screen results triples
anchovy’s raw abundance in A-8 at Tum-tumay-whueton, and doubles it in C-1A from
35
Noons Creek. While the 2-mm screen captures the presence of anchovy, these results
show it underestimates its importance in pre-contact diets. While the addition of the 1-
mm screen has negligible results on the abundance of most large fish, such as perch and
flatfish, it does have a greater impact on salmon. The unique morphology of salmon
vertebrae means even small pieces will be identifiable when smaller screens are used.
Other Northwest Coast researchers using small screens have captured vast
quantities of small fish, and shown them to be important dietary staples (e.g., Butler
1996, 2004; Hanson 1991; McKechnie 2005). Using both a 1.5-mm and a 3-mm screen to
capture fish from a sample off the west coast of Vancouver Island, McKechnie found
herring to be three times more abundant than anchovy. But in the 1.5-mm screen alone,
anchovy were more abundant (2005: 12), raising potential questions about the
effectiveness of a 3-mm screen in accurately depicting the relationship between herring
and anchovy.
Diversity: Richness and Evenness
Richness: Fish
I compare the relative richness of the three sites I analyzed – as well as two sites
addressed by previous studies – using the number of fish taxa identified. At the
settlement sites of Tum-tumay-whueton, Noons Creek, and Say-Umiton, where some fine
screening was undertaken, more than 20 fish taxa are present. Tum-tumay-whueton has
the richest assemblage (NTAXA=27), followed by Noons Creek (NTAXA=25) and Say-
Umiton (NTAXA=21; Trost 2005). This higher richness at Tum-tumay-whueton is
despite the fact less sediment was screened there than at the other two settlement sites
36
(TTW=36,000cm³ vs NC=115,200cm³ vs Say-Umiton 12x6m² and ~30cm in depth to
sterile [Lepofsky and Karpiak 2001]). Two species (salmon [n= 1,149] and rockfish
[n=31] were recovered from 29 2-m² excavation units at Whey-Ah-Wichen (Charlton
1974; Williams 1974). While the slightly larger NISP may have an impact on the higher
richness value at Tum-tumay-whueton compared to Noons Creek (Figure 3-3), analysis
by Trost (2005) at Say-Umiton resulted in higher NISP but lower NTAXA results. Thus,
site use and longevity is most likely a contributing factor behind the rich deposits at Tum-
tumay-whueton. Lower richness (NTAXA=6) at Twin Islands with its shallow deposits is
expected (5,969cm³) due to its function as a temporary camp. Low richness at Whey-Ah-
Wichen is a result of incomplete analysis of faunal remains, as well as the 0.6-cm screen
size used.
Figure 3-3 Relationship between NISP and NTAXA for Identified Fish Remains (left) and Total
Fish Remains (right) at Tum-tumay-whueton (TTW), Noons Creek (NC), Twin Islands (TI), and
Say-Umiton (SU)
This discussion of richness does not include different salmon species recovered,
as ancient DNA analysis is only available for two sites, Say-Umiton (Trost 2005) and
Noons Creek (Speller 2010). However, at least three species of salmon have been
TTWNC
SU
TI0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
NIS
P Id
en
tifi
ed
Fis
h
NTAXA
TTWNC
SU
TI0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
NIS
P T
ota
l F
ish
NTAXA
37
confirmed using ancient DNA techniques in the inlet: chum, coho and pink from Noons
Creek (Speller 2010), and chum and pink from Say-Umiton (Trost 2005: 55).
Richness: Shellfish
In contrast to fish results, more shellfish taxa were recovered from Noons Creek
(NTAXA=14) than Tum-tumay-wheuton (NTAXA=10). For both these sites, these
results are lower than above-mentioned richness results for fish. Here, NISP appears to
contribute to NTAXA (Figure 3-4), but interestingly the site with the highest fish NISP
and NTAXA (Tum-tumay-whueton) is not the site with the highest shellfish NISP
(Noons Creek). As I discuss below, the differences in shellfish richness and abundance
between these two sites is likely representative of their different use histories. Despite its
paltry vertebrate record, Twin Islands was reasonably rich in shellfish (NTAXA=8).
Richness at each of these sites are comparable to results from Whey-Ah-Wichen
(NTAXA=9; Williams 1974) and Say-Umiton (NTAXA=13; Trost 2005).
38
Figure 3-4 Relationship between NISP and NTAXA for Invertebrates
Evenness and Specialization: Fish
Moderately- to highly-specialized pre-contact fisheries operated in Burrard Inlet
and its arms, using evenness as a proxy, following Lepofsky and Lyons (2003). These
fisheries focused on salmon, herring, and anchovy (Figure 3-5). At Tum-tumay-whueton,
Say-Umiton, and NC, over 80% of the assemblage is composed of these three taxa (TTW
= 87%; SU = 87%: NC =81%). At Tum-tumay-whueton and Say-Umiton these values are
high enough to be considered highly specialized; I consider Noons Creek to be moderate
to highly specialized. A small sample size makes the results at Twin Islands difficult to
interpret, though salmon (53%) and perch (20%) make up the bulk of its assemblage.
TTW
TI
NC
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
NIS
P In
ve
rte
bra
tes
NTAXA
39
Figure 3-5 Evennes as a Percent of NISP of Five Most Abundant Fish at Tum-tumay-whueton
(TTW), Noons Creek (NC), Twin Islands (TI), and Say-Umiton (SU)
Say-Umiton data from Trost (2005). Raw NISP values are presented in brackets above each bar.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
TI %
NIS
P
(8)
(1)
(3) (3)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
SU
% N
ISP
(2656)
(724)
(162)(91)
(333)
(831)
0
10
20
30
40
50
NC
% N
ISP
(602)
(848)
(261)
(33)
(226)(127)
0
10
20
30
40
50
Salmon Herring Anchovy Perch Eulachon All others
TT
W %
NIS
P
(856)
(673)
(378)
(165)(5)
(124)
40
Evenness and Specialization: Shellfish
There is a greater range between evenness – or specialization – values when
shellfish are examined using the same criteria (Lepofsky and Lyons 2003), though all are
moderately to highly specialized (Fig 3-6). Tum-tumay-whueton and Twin Islands appear
to be highly specialized towards mussels, Pacific littleneck, and clams (TTW=90%;
TI=87%). Say-Umiton meanwhile is moderately specialized (80%), with a focus on
butter clam, Pacific littleneck and Nuttall’s cockle. Noons Creek is the least specialized
assemblage (64%), with a focus on blue mussel, nuttall’s cockle and Pacific littleneck.
Whey-Ah-Wichen appears to be the most specialized assemblage (95%), focusing on
Pacific littleneck, frilled dogwinkle, and butter clam. Identification procedures at Whey-
Ah-Wichen which focused on whole or nearly-whole shell (Williams 1974) most likely
underrepresent species which preserve poorly, particularly blue mussel. It is unknown
how or whether this has affected evenness ratios, and the comparability of this dataset to
others in Burrard Inlet and its arms.
41
Figure 3-6 Shellfish Evenness as a Percent of NISP at Tum-tumay-whueton (TTW), Noons Creek
(NC), Twin Islands (TI), Say-Umiton (SU), and Whey-Ah-Wichen (WAW)
SU data from Trost (2005); WAW from Williams (1974); raw NISP values presented in brackets above each bar, except SU data in grams.
Strait of Georgia Diversity: Discussion
Richness
Richness in Burrard Inlet and its arms is considerably higher than other Strait of
Georgia zooarchaeological assemblages, though discrepancies in methods are more than
likely the cause and make conclusions about site type differences difficult to make. When
NTAXA for all five sites in Burrard Inlet and its arms are combined, 36 discrete taxa are
0204060
Mussel Butterclam Littleneck Urchin Clam misc. Nuttall's cockle
Native oyster
Frilled dogwinkle
TTW
%
0
20
40
60
NC
%
0
20
40
60
TI %
0
20
40
60
SU %
0
20
40
60
WA
W %
(12)
(411)(653)
(4) (41)
(495)
(994)(1889) (1295)
(1) (37)
(1039)(5) (34)
(40)
(7)
(28)
(14)(2)
(374)
(14)(70)
(2) (14) (75) (35) (17)
(180)(62) (55) (19) (9) (5)
42
represented. This is one-third more taxa than the site with the highest richness, Tum-
tumay-whueton (NTAXA=27). This is consistent with Ames and Lyman’s findings
(2004) that one site alone may not adequately demonstrate an ecosystem’s richness.
Where nested screens, including as small as 1-mm were used at a village site in the Strait
of Georgia, more than 20 species have been recorded (e.g., Pender Canal [DeRt-2];
NTAXA=22; Hanson 1991). Using larger (6-mm and in some cases 3-mm) screens,
investigators at Crescent Beach recovered fewer (n=16) taxa (Crockford and Wigen
2008); previous excavations at this site using screens as small as 1.5-mm captured fewer
fish taxa (n=13; Ham 1982). With the use of a 6.3-mm screen and some flotation, 14 fish
taxa were recovered from the multi-component Tsawwassen site (DgRs-2; Arcas
Consulting Archeologists 1994; Brolly et al. 1999).
When all five sites are combined, the number of shellfish taxa recovered (21) is
also richer than any one site alone. Noons Creek has the richest assemblage
(NTAXA=14). This is contrary to expectations of lower richness at a more specialized
assemblage at a seasonal procurement settlement. The Noons Creek site is less rich in
shellfish taxa than Tsawwassen however (NTAXA=20), which may also have functioned
as a seasonal procurement site (Brolly et al. 1999). Pender Canal meanwhile
(NTAXA=17; Hanson 1991) is demonstrably richer than the village site of Tum-tumay-
whueton (NTAXA=10), but more comparable to Say-Umiton (NTAXA=14). Results
from the multi-component Crescent Beach, where 10 “genera” were identified (Rankin
2010) are more intermediate. Crescent Beach was considered to be have transitioned
towards spring shellfish procurement in later layers (under the presumption these foods
would have been a welcome break from stored fish), with the exception of year-round
43
mussel procurement (Rankin 2010). Earlier excavations at this site using screens as small
as 1.5-mm recovered 13 “edible” species (Ham 1982).
Specialization
Moderate to highly specialized assemblages appear to be the rule in the Strait of
Georgia, as in Burrard Inlet and its arms. Comparisons to other sites in the Strait of
Georgia are hampered, however, by discrepancies in recovery, identification, and
reporting procedures that affect relative abundances of recovered fauna. Crescent Beach
for example, is highly specialized, with only two taxa (salmon and flatfish) making up the
majority of excavated fish (80-88%; Crockford and Wigen 2010). Earlier work at this
site resulted in a less specialized assemblage however, with three species making up just
60% of the assemblage (herring, midshipman, dogfish [Ham 1982]). At moderately-
specialized Pender Canal, three taxa (perch, herring, rockfish) comprise the majority of
the assemblage (76%; Hanson 1991). Tsawaassen can be considered the most highly
specialized assemblage, with just two species (salmon and herring) contributing 93% of
the fish taxa recovered (Brolly et al. 1999). Tsawwassen is more specialized than any
Burrard Inlet site, where three taxa make up between 81% (Noons Creek) and 87%
(Tum-tumay-whueton and Say-Umiton) of assemblages.
Shellfish identification and reporting procedures in the region are more varied
than fish, making comparisons of specialization more difficult to make. Weight, rather
than NISP, is used to quantify shellfish at Crescent Beach (Rankin 2010), at Tsawwassen
(Arcas Consulting Archeologists 1994), and at Pender Canal (DeRt-2). Further, shellfish
abundance is tabulated by excavation unit and layer at all three sites. While this allowed
the analysts to see changes in shellfish use over time and space at the site (Brolly et al.
44
1999; Hanson 1991; Rankin 2010), it makes generalizations about shellfish use on a site-
by-site basis difficult without investing time in calculations, and it is therefore not
attempted here. Ham’s work however, showed Crescent Beach to be moderately
specialized, with three species making up 70% of the shellfish assemblage by weight
(Nuttall’s cockle, horse clam and butter clam), though Nuttall’s cockle made up nearly
half this assemblage (Ham 1982).
Relative Abundance
Tum-tumay-whueton
Based on the salmon index (Butler and Campbell 2004; Campbell and Butler
2010), there is no evidence of directional change in the relative abundance of salmon
through time at Tum-tumay-whueton (Fig. 3-7). The proportion of salmon to all other
fish is consistently between 30% and 40% through all levels of A-8. Only twice in all
faunal-bearing levels in this sample does the proportion of salmon reach half. This
fluctuating consistency in the salmon index continues even as salmon’s raw NISP rises in
levels closer to the surface. Trends in salmon abundance are in contrast to those for
herring and anchovy. As the proportion of one fish drops, the others rise (Fig. 3-7), for
example, in Level 5 where salmon numbers drop and anchovy numbers rise; Level 6,
where herring drops and salmon rises; or Level 7, where salmon drops and both herring
and anchovy numbers rise. Fluctuations in the abundance of these three important taxa
may represent local harvesting decisions made in reactions to the abundance of any given
taxon; in some levels as one fishery decreases, the other two taxa fill in the shortfalls.
Such a strategy would have spread the impact of harvesting among multiple taxa, limiting
the risk of overexploitation, while still meeting yearly food needs.
45
Figure 3-7 Salmon Index (top), Salmon, Herring and Anchovy Use (middle) and Shellfish Use
(bottom) through Time at Tum-tumay-whueton Auger 8.
Depth used as a proxy for time (i.e., Level 1 surface, Level 18, basal)
The trend in shellfish harvesting at Tum-tumay-whueton appears to indicate a
drop over time, in contrast to fisheries (Fig. 3-7). The greatest abundance of shellfish
occurs in Level 7, followed by a steady decline. Increases in the abundance of the three
most common taxa (blue mussel, butter clam, Pacific littleneck) occur in Level 9 and 10.
These increases coincide with a corresponding drop in fish abundance. Several scenarios
may have contributed to this contrasted abundance. These numbers may represent
0
50
100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
NIS
P
Level
Salmon Pacific herring Northern anchovy
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Sa
lmo
n in
de
x
Level
0
20
40
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
NIS
P
Level
Blue mussel Butter clam Pacific littleneck
46
isolated basket dumps, a short-lived intensification of shellfish while fisheries faltered, or
the eventual decline in the abundance of shellfish in this area. They may also represent
human choice or agency; a choice to focus on fisheries rather than shellfish harvesting, a
change in the deposition patterns of shellfish remains, or the intentional or unintentional
crushing of shell under the village, leaving the bulk of it unidentifiable.
Noons Creek
Like at Tum-tumay-whueton, there is no directional trend in the salmon index
through the levels at Noons Creek (Fig. 3-8). Here, it fluctuates from about 20% to about
40% of the fish bone assemblage. However, rather than increasing over time as at Tum-
tumay-whueton, the NISP of fish including salmon declines closer to the surface at
Noons Creek. Peaks in salmon, herring, and anchovy appear at the same time (Level 7,
Level 3, Level 5 and 6 without anchovy). The fact these peaks are fewer and more
pronounced than those at Tum-tumay-whueton may indicate palimpsests of specialized
procurement, rather than the slow accumulation of fauna over time. Eulachon abundance
is highest at Level 7, though small numbers occur in other levels.
Shellfish abundance does not follow the same pattern as fish through the
assemblage. While small numbers of Nuttall’s cockle, Pacific littleneck, and native oyster
are present throughout, the abundance of blue mussel rises steadily until the middle of the
column, before dropping. This difference mirrors that of Tum-tumay-whueton, where
shellfish abundance drops as fish NISP rises. Taken together, these similarities may point
towards differential deposition of shellfish and fish.
47
Figure 3-8 Salmon Index (top), Salmon, Herring, Anchovy and Eulachon Use (middle) and
Shellfish Use (bottom) at Noons Creek Column 1-A.
Depth used as a proxy for time (i.e., Level 1 surface, Level 10 basal)
Environmental Inferences
An assumption of this thesis is that differences in relative abundance, richness,
and evenness of the five sites discussed are due in part to differences in local
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0 2 4 6 8 10
Sa
lmo
n in
de
x
Level
0
50
100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
NIS
P
Level
Blue mussel Pacific littleneck
Nuttall's cockle Native oyster
0
50
100
150
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
NIS
P
Level
Salmon Pacific herring Northern anchovy Eulachon
48
environments (Table 3-5). Salmon, herring, and anchovy are the most abundant taxa at
three of the settlement sites, though their rank order differs. This inlet-wide focus on
salmon, herring, and anchovy suggests pre-contact environmental abundances at least
part of the year of these migrating species. These migrations must have been consistent
enough in time and number to form the mainstay of fisheries each year, with adaptations
for fluctuations.
Fish with a range of habitat requirements are present at each of the sites for which
adequate data are available (Table 3-5). Their presence may indicate human transport, but
are more likely to reflect that a mosaic of ecosystems – encompassing sand, rocks, mud,
and eelgrass – existed throughout the inlet locality in the past. Shoreline modification has
affected much of Burrard Inlet, impacting marine species habitat and biodiversity through
homogenization (Haggarty 2001).
Within this general pattern of similarity, some differences in the relative
abundance of fauna likely reflect local ecological differences. For instance, Tum-tumay-
whueton has a relatively higher proportion of pile perch, which feed almost exclusively
on shellfish, particularly mussels (Hart 1973). Mussels are the most abundant shellfish at
Tum-tumay-whueton, suggesting the local environment supported both these species.
Freshwater peamouth chub are present in small numers at Tum-tumay-wheuton, but not
at any of the other sites. A small freshwater stream still runs south of the site, and a lake
is nearby. However, these fish do tolerate brackish water (Scott and Crossman 1973) and
could have been available where the stream meets the inlet.
Evidence for moderate specialization and the specific taxa present at Noons Creek
also reflect its particular local environment. Eulachon is the fourth most abundant fish at
49
Noons Creek, although there is no current or historically recorded eulachon spawning
stream this far east in the inlet locality. A possible explanation for its abundance here is
that eulachon were transported from more distance sources. For instance, a Squamish
informant told of a previous eulachon spawning stream farther west in Burrard Inlet
(Matthews 1955), and there is the possibility the eulachon were brought by overland trail
from Fraser River spawning grounds or by boat, as Duff (1955) describes for other
Vancouver-area groups. The fact eulachon represents more than 10% of the vertebrate
assemblage is more suggestive of a local source for this resource.
Noons Creek is also unique for its rich shellfish assemblage and the presence of
native oyster. The unique mudflats of the eastern end of Port Moody Arm may have
supported this species. Its widespread demise after the introduction of the Japanese oyster
has affected biodiversity in subtidal environments as a whole, as native oyster reefs
played a cornerstone role in ecosystem structure, including through water filtration and
contributing to the growth of eelgrass beds (NOAA n.d.).
Table 3-5 Generalized Fish Requirements and Presence at Tum-tumay-whueton (TTW), Noons
Creek (NC), Twin Islands (TI), Say-Umiton (SU), and Whey-Ah-Wichen (WAW)
Taxon Ecology*
Site
TT
O
NC
SU
¹
TI
WA
W²
Anadromous Salmon (5 species) Migrate to streams, rivers, and lakes at specific times of year to spawn; consume smaller fish, crustaceans, copepods and insects.
X X X X X
50
Taxon Ecology*
Site
TT
O
NC
SU
¹
TI
WA
W²
Smelts and smelt-like fish (herring, anchovy,eulachon,smelts)
Mainly anadromous; migrate from offshore to inshore to spawn: herring in eelgrass beds, eulachon in small streams, some smelts on beaches.
X X X X ?
Perch (pile) Resident in shallow waters, rocky shores, and old piers; mostly eat mussels, also other invertebrates and parasites off other fish.
X X X X ?
Flatfish (starry flounder,rocksole,english sole,etc.)
Resident in shallow waters typically; starry flounder in sand, mud and gravel, rock sole also in rocky bottoms. Eat invertebrates, small fishes.
X X X ?
Sculpins, greenlings, and midshipman
Resident and spawn in subtidal zone. Eat fishes and crustaceans, some eat copepods
X X X X ?
Groundfish(rockfish,lingcod) Resident at depth in subtidal zone. X X X X X
¹Trost 2005. ²Williams 1974. *SOURCES: DFO: www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca; Goodson 1988; Haggarty 2001; Hart 1973; Lichatowich 1999; Lamb and Edgell 1986
Despite the small assemblage at Twin Islands, fauna recovered here still reflect
the surrounding environment. Salmon and herring recovered at this site could have been
available as they passed through the inlet towards spawning grounds. Similarly, rockfish
and perch would have been resident in the rocky shores associated with the island.
A unique local signature at Say-Umiton is the presence of surf smelts. These fish
are generally ubiquitous in southern Strait of Georgia waters today, but may be attracted
to brackish waters (Hart 1973). Trost (2005) however argues the presence of surf smelt
indicates travel to English Bay.
51
I can make few conclusions about the environment at Whey-Ah-Wichen, due to
the vast discrepancy in field and laboratory methods employed here. Salmon were
evidently abundant, likely associated with a nearby spawning stream. The suprising array
of shellfish represented, despite the fact whole or nearly whole shell only were examined,
must reflect the abundance and richness of shellfish associated with Whey-Ah-Wichen,
prior to industrial impacts and shoreline modifications.
Conclusion
The faunal record reflects a rich and abundant record of marine resource use in
eastern Burrard Inlet and its arms. Analyses at five sites representing the inlet ecosystem
resulted in the identification of 36 fish taxa and 21 invertebrate taxa. Salmon, herring,
and anchovy are abundant throughout, and are the focus of specialized fisheries.
Proportions of salmon through time fluctuate but in a consistent range at Tum-tumay-
whueton and Noons Creek, often with opposing changes in herring and anchovy
abundance. While the particular abundance of one of these taxa may have changed year-
to-year, the reliance on three fisheries may have resulted in overall stable returns.
Abundance and richness at the village site of Tum-tumay-whueton (Table 3-6) is
as high as predicted. However, there is more evidence for specialization in fish and
shellfish procurement than anticipated from a village site (Lepofsky and Lyons 2003).
The year-round availability of mussel (Rankin 2010) may have contributed to its high
abundance here (53%; Fig. 3-6).
Contrary to expectations for a seasonal harvesting site (Table 3-6) the Noons
Creek assemblage is particularly rich. As well, both its fish and shellfish harvesting are
52
less specialized than anticipated. The Noons Creek faunal record contains relatively
abundant numbers of eulachon and native oyster, which are scant elsewhere in the inlet,
providing clues to local ecological signatures.
Figure 3-9 Comparison of Fish and Shellfish Recovered from Tum-tumay-whueton (TTW) and
Noons Creek (NC)
Differences in fauna recovered at Tum-tumay-whueton and Noons Creek reflect
environmental differences, but also site use and function. Both sites have a comparable
number of identified fish remains, yet Noons Creek has only two-thirds the unidentified
fish remains as Tum-tumay-whueton, despite the fact column samples at Noons were
twice as wide as those at Tum-tumay-whueton (Figure 3-9). Trampling from heavy and
long-term site use at the village of Tum-tumay-whueton may have contributed to more
fragmented remains. Noons Creek has nearly double the amount of shellfish recovered,
despite the fact I further subsampled for shellfish here, equalizing areal coverage. These
combined factors point towards a greater focus on shellfish at Noons Creek.
6625
2201
504
4472
2097
954
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
Unidentified Fish
Identified Fish Shellfish
NIS
P
TTW NC
53
Table 3-6 Summary of Expectations and Results of Faunal Analyses
Site Expectations Results Comments
TTW Richness (R): High Specialization (S): Moderate Abundance (A): High
R: High S: High A: High
Rich and abundant taxa; however fisheries and shellfish harvesting are more specialized than anticipated.
TI R: Low S: High A: Low
R: Low S: ?/High A: Low
As expected; fish specialization difficult to interpret due to small assemblage, but shellfish specialization high.
NC R: Moderate S: High A: Moderate
R: High S: Moderate A: Moderate
Assemblage is richer but less specialized than expected from a seasonal harvesting site.
SU R: High S: Moderate A: High
R: High S: High/Moderate A: High
Shellfish specialization is as expected, but fisheries are more focused than anticipated.
WAW R: High S: Moderate A: High
R: Low/High S: ?/High A: High
Relatively rich shellfish assemblage, though just two fish identified to species. Cannot interpret fish specialization with just two species identified; highly specialized shellfish harvesting most likely biased by identification procedures.
Twin Islands has a faunal record largely in keeping with expectations for a small,
temporary camp. It has a low abundance of fauna, a low record of richness, but a high
specialization for shellfish harvesting. The small numbers of vertebrate fauna recovered
here make it difficult to interpret the rate of specialization of its fisheries, however. Still,
the inclusion of this dataset does contribute to the dearth of information on smaller
settlements in the Strait of Georgia region (Hanson 1991).
Our understanding of pre-contact marine resource use in Burrard Inlet and its
arms is broadened through the addition of previously-analyzed sites of Say-Umiton and
Whey-Ah-Wichen. The village site of Say-Umiton contains a rich and abundant faunal
54
record, as anticipated. Like Tum-tumay-whueton, its fisheries are more focused than
anticipated. Unlike Tum-tumay-wheuton, however, herring rather than salmon is the
highest ranked species, and its shellfish record is quite specialized. An ethnographic
focus on shellfish harvesting, the presence of a possible pre-contact herring spawning
stream, and a less-intense occupation history than Tum-tumay-whueton (Lepofsky et al.
2007) are contributing evidence suggesting a different use history than at the larger
village of Tum-tumay-whueton.
Whey-Ah-Wichen meanwhile has a rich shellfish record, yet only two fish species
recorded. Discrepancies in methods between this analysis and those of Trost (2005) at
Say-Umiton and myself contribute to this scant record of richness. As a village site,
Whey-Ah-Wichen’s shellfish specialization is higher than anticipated, yet how
specialized its fisheries are can’t be known with the available data.
55
Chapter 4:
Fisheries and Fishery Impacts in Pre-contact Burrard Inlet
and its Arms and the Modern Comparison
Zooarchaeological data from Burrard Inlet and its arms contribute to modern
conservation efforts by opening a window on past resource abundance and use extending
as far back as 3,000 years. These data highlight long-term abundance of culturally
important species, as well as site-specific faunal signatures which provide clues about the
past environment. The methods used in this thesis were aimed specifically at making
zooarchaeological data relevant to modern conservation efforts in these waters,
particularly those of the Tsleil-Waututh Nation, who are working to restore culturally
important species. Beyond providing baseline information on species presence and
abundance, interpretations of the zooarchaeological record from Burrard Inlet and its
arms illustrate past fisheries management practices that contributed to long-term resource
sustainability.
Baseline Data
The zooarchaeological record – such as that represented in Burrard Inlet and its
arms - has potential to provide long-term fisheries data to modern resource managers.
These records are useful because they extend the biogeographic record of species
thousands of years (e.g., Pauly et al. 1998; Jackson et al. 2001; Murray 2008). In
contrast, historic fisheries data extends back little more than a century – and in some
56
cases half as long (Wallace 1998); historic sources with anectodal records of ecological
abundance date no farther back than the contact era (e.g., Chittenden in the 1880s
[Chittenden 1984]; Barrett Lennard in 1862 [Barrett-Lennard 1969]; Vancouver and
Galiano in 1792 [e.g., Lamb 1990]). Meanwhile, the zooarchaeological record of species
presence and abundance in Burrard Inlet extends as far back as 3,000 years (2940 +/- 40
BP [Beta-259938, cal 3230-2960 BP]). And because several sites in the inlet were
sampled, data are on a regional scale, providing information on species distribution
through commonalities and differences in site assemblages.
The data presented here extend our knowledge of species abundance and richness
in Burrard Inlet and its arms beyond often-truncated modern and historic baselines (e.g.,
Newsome et al. 2007; Pauly 2001). These data provide long-term and broad scale
information on species presence and abundance that are unobtainable today due to the
effects of modern and historic overfishing, pollution, and habitat destruction (e.g., Pitcher
2001). Thus, while modern fisheries data document continuing declines due to
overfishing and habitat destruction, the archaeological record illustrates continued and
widespread abundance of species such as salmon, herring and anchovy (Table 4-1). The
archaeofaunal record also documents the past distribution of species now in decline (e.g.,
salmon and herring) and those no longer present in the inlet (e.g., native oyster and sea
urchin).
57
Table 4-1 Comparing Modern and Pre-contact Fisheries in the Strait of Georgia and Associated Hypotheses
Modern Fisheries Pre-contact
Fisheries
Hypotheses Target
By 1890, the commercial fishery in the Strait of Georgia exceeded pre-contact Aboriginal fishery (Wallace 1999). In Burrard Inlet, coho and chum escapements drop drastically 1950s - 1960s and subsequently rebound. In 1980s, pink (the most abundant salmon species in Burrard Inlet) are 1/4 their 1950s numbers (25,613 v. 95,138 [Farwell et al. 1987]). Data are limited for many Burrard Inlet streams, though impassable culverts, erosion and siltation from development are cited as detrimental in some; e.g., chum in McKay Creek are decimated in the 1950s (Hancock and Marshall 1986). Noons Creek is not included in list of BC salmon spawning creeks in 1985 (Serbic et al. 1985). Coho and chum salmon enhancement program currently in operation at Noons Creek (Port Moody Ecological Society 2011).
Relative abundance of salmon shows no depression through time in stratified samples from Noons Creek or Tum-tumay-whueton; abundant, 1
st
or 2nd
ranked species at all sites.
aDNA at Noons Creek shows presence not just of chum and coho, but also pink salmon (Speller 2010).
Shared reliance on herring and anchovy may have contributed to sustained pre-contact useof salmon; management decisions may have been made in response to annual population abundance.
Noons Creek may have supported pink salmon run. S
alm
on
58
Modern Fisheries Pre-contact
Fisheries
Hypotheses Target
Fishery begins by 1877, but increases in 1906 after demand from overseas. After declines in larger, predatory fish, Strait of Georgia fisheries shift to small pelagics including herring. Peak abundance (268,000 tonnes) in herring fisheries (1963) is never repeated; fishery collapsed by 1970 (Fisheries and Oceans Canada 2009a, 2009b; Wallace 1999). Species rebounds in 2003, but subsequently declines, with spawning activity dropping in the Burrard Inlet and Howe Sound area, and a collapse of populations evident in 2005 and 2007 (Therriault et al. 2009a). Herring projections showed populations well above harvesting level for 2009, with declines in spawning in some areas not attributed to the herring roe fishery (Hay et al. 2008).
Data: Ubiquitous through time and space; abundant (1
st
ranked taxa at Noons Creek and Say-Umiton, 2
nd at Tum-
tumay-whueton) Herring continuously important and consistently used across time and space. One of three main taxa in the inlet
Focus on both predatory and prey fish may have contributed to sustained pre-contact yields.
Herrin
g
Harvested in B.C. since 1800s, anchovy and sardine landings shift in geographic abundance in multi-decadal time scales; large scale changes in oceanic temperature fluctuations are throught to be the cause (Baumgartner et al. 1992; Chavez et al. 2003; Therriault et al. 2009b). Peak anchovy abundance in B.C. in 1941; harvest in late 1990s less than 1% of that (6000 mt v 1 mt; Therriault et al. 2009b).Conservation closures of fishing in outer Burrard Inlet (Fisheries and Oceans Canada 2002). Scant information on Strait of Georgia anchovy fisheries (e.g., Fisheries and Oceans Canada 2009b; Therriault et al. 2009b)
Ubiquitous through time and space; 3
rd
ranked taxon at three inlet sites. Evidence for long-term importance of forage fish
Archaeological record suggests continued presence of anchovy through time. Are fluctuations in modern anchovy abundance anomalous? Or is more stratigraphic control needed to determine if pre-contact anchovy abundance is intermittent?
An
ch
ov
y
59
Modern Fisheries Pre-contact
Fisheries
Hypotheses Target
Commercially harvested on the Fraser River since 1870s; Fraser River eulachon fishery was B.C.’s fifth largest commercial fishery between 1903 and 1912 (Fisheries and Oceans Canada 2007b, 2008; Moody 2008). Declines in eulachon stocks in Fraser and throughout B.C. since 1994, with subsequent impacts to predators and scavenger community reliant on spawned-out carcasses (Hay 1998). Fishery closed, but eulachon caught as bycatch in offshore shrimp trawl (Fisheries and Oceans Canada 2010). Stock considered collapsed and at “precariously low level” in 2006 (Fisheries and Oceans Canada 2007b). In 1996, an estimated 1,911 tonnes of eulachon spawned in Fraser River; just 14 tonnes in 2009. Only limited “ceremonial” First Nations fishery operated in 2010; status of eulachon under consideration by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (Fisheries and Oceans Canada 2010).
Fraser River only recorded eulachon spawning river in Vancouver area by Fisheries and Oceans Canada (Hay and Carter 2000).
Eulachon ubiquitous and relatively abundant (11% NISP) at Noons Creek
Was there a pre-contact eulachon spawning stream at Noons Creek? Or does abundance reflect overland travel from Fraser River?
Eu
lac
ho
n
60
Modern Fisheries Pre-contact
Fisheries
Hypotheses Target
Fisheries for crabs in Burrard Inlet by 1880s, shrimp by 1917 Overfishing, a harsh winter, and competition from introduced species collapsed native oyster fishery in 1930s (Ketchen et al. 1983). Invertebrates were just 5% of B.C. fisheries by weight in 1970, but triple that in 1995 as declines in higher trophic level species (“fishing down the food web”) prompted fisheries to turn to shellfish and other non-migratory species (Wallace 1998). Sea urchin and native oyster extirpated in Burrard Inlet (e.g., Tsleil-Waututh Nation 2007; Fisheries and Oceans Canada 2009c). Pollution and fecal coliforms impact the edibility of existing invertebrate species (Fisheries and Oceans Canada 2005, 2007).
Evidence of extirpated and culturally important species (native oyster and urchin). Intersite differences in shellfish assemblages likely indicators of unique local environments.
Variability in abundance and presence of species at particular site suggests hetereogeneity and health of pre-contact marine environments, since impacted by shoreline homogenization and pollution.
Sh
ellfis
h
61
Methodological Considerations
The relevance of the baseline data recovered in this study is strengthened by the
particular methods used. Methods chosen for this project were aimed at increasing the
recovery of the number of species and understanding the use and abundance of marine
taxa across time and space in Burrard Inlet and its arms. The use of small screens,
sampling a number of site types in different environmental settings across the region, and
the use of ecologically-based theory which places human prey-choice within its
environmental setting, assures the applicability of the dataset.
Intra-site Sampling: Screen Size
This study, like others before it (e.g., Butler 1996; McKechnie 2005)
demonstrates the value of incorporating small (i.e. 2-mm) screens into zooarchaeological
analyses. Despite the benefits of nested screens, the time-related costs of using smaller
mesh is so prohibitive their use has often been relegated to projects where time and
budget are not limiting factors (Moss 2007). Yet as the Burrard Inlet fauna show, even
the 2-mm screen may underestimate the importance of northern anchovy in pre-contact
fisheries. As I showed in Chapter 3, the abundance of the anchovy vertebrae (typically
less than 2-mm wide) is better represented by a 1-mm screen, an even more time-
intensive commitment. For studies seeking to document presence of anchovy, a 2-mm
mesh appears to be sufficient. But where questions regarding its relative importance (e.g.,
in prey-choice models where taxon size is important) or abundance (e.g., understanding
natural and anthropogenic climate change) are addressed, a 1-mm mesh should be
employed for at least a stratified subsample of midden remains.
62
The use of smaller screens in this study and others has led to new understandings
of pre-contact Coast Salish culture and economy. In contrast to the long-held view that
the abundance and distribution of salmon was a prime-mover in the evolution of Coast
Salish cultures (e.g., Burley 1980; Carlson 2008; Matson 1983, 1992; Mitchell 1971; cf
Hanson 2008; Lepofsky et al. 2005), more recent studies using smaller screens
demonstrate that a range of fish – including smaller forage species – contributed in large
ways to the Coast Salish diet. (e.g., Caldwell 2008; Hanson 1991; Kopperl 2001;
Lepofsky et al. 2007; Trost 2005). Furthermore, the intensification of herring harvesting
through the use of traps (e.g., Caldwell 2008) and other mass capture techniques such
weirs played a key role in the developing Coast Salish diet and culture (Hanson 1991).
The use of smaller screens is not without its cautions and flaws. In my
experience, with each successively smaller screen, the time required to sort the sifted
remains more than doubles. As well, subsampling by using augers or column samples
may result in an incomplete picture of large fauna present at a site. For example, the
bones of the large sturgeon were not recovered from Tum-tumay-whueton, Noons Creek
or Twin Islands, where column and auger sampling and small screens were used. Yet this
species was recovered from excavations at Say-Umiton (Trost 2005). Whether this relates
to actual absence, or sampling bias, cannot be determined with the data present. In an
ideal situation, a combination of unit excavation with 6-mm screens and column or auger
sampling with 2-mm or smaller screens would be used. In this study, the combination of
previously collected data large-scale excavations (Trost 2005) with the fine-screened
column and auger samples provides a robust picture of past species presence in the
ecosystem as a whole.
63
Inter-site Sampling
Comparing zooarchaeological data from a large number of sites and from across a
region is considered critical to reconstruct palaeoenvironments (Driver 1993; Woollett et
al. 2000). Recovering data from an ecosystem, rather than a single archaeological site,
allows modern conservation managers better insight into the past biogeography and
distribution of taxa (Murray 2008). In this study, the combination of data from five sites
in Burrard Inlet and its arms broadens out understanding of past abundance, presence,
and distribution of taxa. It highlights both taxa which were abundant throughout the inlet
(e.g., spawning salmon, herring, and anchovy) and those whose abundance were
restricted to specific locales (e.g., sea urchin at Tum-tumay-whueton; eulachon and native
oyster at Noons Creek).
The Prey-Choice Model: A Discussion
Zooarchaeologists have used foraging theory’s prey-choice model to assess the
presence of ancient resource depression and/or intensification (e.g., Broughton 1997;
Butler and Campbell 2004; Campbell and Butler 2010). I applied this model to stratified
samples at Tum-tumay-whueton and Noons Creek. There, the salmon index indicated no
evidence for resource depression or salmon-specific intensification, despite an overall
increase in NISP in upper levels.
Such foraging models are particularly effective in applied zooarchaeology,
because they view prey choice as an adaptation to the local environment (Pianka 1974).
By placing people squarely within their environmental context, we can assume faunal
remains are residues both of human behavior and of ecosystem abundance and diversity
in the past (e.g., Winterhalder and Smith 2000). Thus – based on the lack of
64
archaeological evidence for resource depression – we can assume Burrard Inlet and its
arms supported a relatively stable abundance of salmon through time. Like Campbell and
Butler propose (2010), regular “prey switching” on seasonal, annual, or decadal levels in
response to fluctuating abundances may have promoted sustainable use of salmon over
time. Smaller, forage species are not always considered less desirable than larger species;
the use of mass capture techniques can in fact increase their ease of capture and therefore
their rank (e.g., Stiner and Munro 2002; Winterhalder and Goland 1997).
Modern and Pre-contact Management Regimes: The Case from
Burrard Inlet
The 3,000-year-old record of sustainability evident from palaeodata from Burrard
Inlet and its arms contrasts with modern commercial fisheries, which have contributed on
a global level to overextended fisheries, biodiversity loss and the collapse or
overexploitation of 70% of the world’s fish stocks (e.g., Hanna 1998; UBC Fisheries
2007). In the Pacific Northwest and Strait of Georgia, less than 200 years of commercial
fisheries operating over the capacity of the stocks have contributed to declines, risks
of extinction, and fishery collapses in important economic and cultural species like
salmon and herring (e.g., Pitcher et al. 2002; Wallace 1999; Walters 2009). Below (and in
Table 4-2), I compare three modern fisheries practices – single-species management,
offshore fishing, and fishing down the food web – with inferences about pre-contact
marine resource management based on the archaeological record in Burrard Inlet and its
arms. While I recognize each of these practices is linked, as are their consequences, I
have simplified the categorization of these effects for the sake of discussion.
65
Table 4-2 Comparison of Pre-contact Fishing Practices and Consequences in Burrard Inlet and its Arms with Modern, Commercial Fishing
Practices
Pre-Contact Fisheries Modern Fisheries
Practice Consequence Practice Consequence
Ecosytem Management
Use of a range of resident and migratory species, with a focus on 3-4 schooling species
Diverse fisheries allow sustained harvests and abundance of multiple species; fishery impacts are spread over many taxa
Single-species Management
Focus for management purposes of one particular species
Depletion of one large, preferred species after another
Technology to capture targeted fish may negatively impact others, (e.g.., as “bycatch” casualties)
Local Fishing
Harvest of spawning species (i.e., herring, salmon, anchovy) near their natal stream
Local ecological knowledge can be employed in management decisions; ability to adapt to population fluctations
Offshore Fishing
Genetically distinct populations, reliant on specific environmental conditions in natal streams are treated as one single population
Inability to react to individual population conditions
Fishing with the Food Web
Small and large fish are a consistent (and probably valued) part of the diet
Management decisions can take into account many species and facets of an ecosystem
Fishing down the Food Web
After serial depletion of large species, fisheries move to a focus on smaller, prey fish
Unsustainable numbers of small fish must be caught for fisheries to be economically viable; recovery of large fish impacted by declines in their prey as human competition for them increases
66
Single-species Approach vs Ecosystem Approach
Modern fisheries management decisions have usually been based on a “single-
species” management approach. Management decisions have focused on maximizing
catch of a single targeted species, often ignoring other ecosystem coponents and
interactions including their prey, predators, and habitat (Beddington et al. 2007; Pikitch et
al. 2004). More often than not, these fisheries efforts are aimed at one large and preferred
fish, and when this stock begins to fail, focus switches, resulting in cascading depletions
of one favoured species after another (Gianni 2004; Pauly et al. 2002; Pitcher and Pauly
1998). Devastating secondary impacts to non-targeted species occur as well. Huge
casualties are associated with bycatch (e.g., Alverson et al. 1994; Lewison et al. 2004;
Pauly et al. 2003), killing as many as 100% of non-targeted demersal species captured in
offshore fisheries (Roberts 2002). Non-targeted species are also impacted when fishing
efforts such as trawling or dredging damage their habitat, or result in crushing and
fatalities (Hourigan 2009; Thrush et al. 1998; Turner et al. 1999)
In contrast, the archaeological evidence in Burrard Inlet and its arms suggests that
multiple species were targeted by fisheries. By targeting multiple (n=36 fish; n=12
invertebrates) and both local and migratory species, the impacts on any single resident
species was reduced. Fisheries biologists support the notion that diversified food webs
allow predators to switch prey based on abundance (Pauly et al. 2002); human predators
could also make such decisions. By valuing all marine resources, pre-contact inhabitants
may have also been able to make management decisions on an ecosystemic basis
(Simberloff 1998), benefiting a range of species. By focusing on abundant and schooling
67
salmon, herring, and anchovy and supplementing their diet with smaller numbers of
resident fish, pre-contact fishers appear to have avoided the depletion of one species after
another, contributing to the sustained use of larger species like salmon, as well as the
smaller herring and anchovy.
Local Fishing vs. Offshore Fishing
As nearshore fisheries decline, modern fishing efforts have shifted offshore to the
deep sea. Technological advances and a growing market for deep-sea products (Gianni
2004) have led to a 42-metre mean plummet in global fisheries depth since the 1950s
(Morato et al. 2006). Many of the deep sea-species targeted are long-lived and late-
reproducing species, which are particularly vulnerable to fishing pressures (Morato et al.
2006; Roberts 2002). As well, migrating species that once spent a portion of their life
cycle out of the reach of human predators now have no time to rebound from harvesting
pressures (Pauly et al. 2002). Further impacting these migrating species is the fact
fisheries management decisions are based on metapopulations and do not take into
account the biology or conditions of individual populations. These species may be
heavily impacted by unaccounted for local conditions in the individual rivers and streams
in which they spawn (Kell et al. 2009; Policansky and Magnuson 1998).
In contrast, the distinct zooarchaeological signatures at each site in Burrard Inlet
and its arms are indicative of a fishery reliant on local, near-shore harvesting. By
targeting local species and those which migrated to local spawning streams and beds, pre-
contact fishers would have been able to make management decisions based on real-time
population conditions. When numbers of herring were lower than normal, for example,
fishers could have switched their focus to the next spawning taxa: anchovy and various
68
species of salmon. Such a practice would have limited impacts to the species in decline;
further spreading the impact among two further taxa would have limited the likelihood of
serial depletions. Archaeological evidence, including DNA signatures of locally-
migrating salmon species, has shown local harvesting may have resulted in millennial-old
sustainble fisheries elsewhere on the B.C. coast (Cannon et al. 2011).
Fishing with the Food Web vs. Fishing down the Food Web
Modern fisheries have shifted focus from one typically large and high trophic
preferred species to the next large species as they are faced with serial depletions of these
preferred species (Gianni 2004; Pauly et al. 2002; Pitcher and Pauly 1998). This pattern
has been referred to as “fishing down the food web” (Pauly et al. 1998; Pauly et al. 2002).
Now as they turn to “previously spurned species,” fisheries must target great quantities of
smaller prey fish to be economically viable (Pauly et al. 2001; Moore 1999), at levels
which have been described as unsustainable (Jenkins et al. 2009). As well, the increased
harvest of forage fish puts human in direct competition with larger fish, birds, and
mammals which all rely heavily on these smaller species (Moore 1999).
The pre-contact faunal record in Burrard Inlet and its arms shows no evidence for
decline in large species over time, but also no particular focus on salmon alone. Forage
species like herring and anchovy were targeted in large numbers through time. This
shared focus on multiple species may have contributed to the sustainability of salmon, for
example, through time. With all aspects of the foodweb valued, management decisions
could take into account the welfare of many species.
69
Looking back, Moving forward:
Perspectives on Fisheries Management from Palaeodata
One of the key ways in which pre-contact fisheries appear to have contributed to
sustainability in the case of Burrard Inlet and its arms is by maintaining local control over
resources. In today’s commercial fisheries management regimes, such localized models
are increasingly being advocated and adopted with some real successes with tenure-based
management models and territorial use rights fisheries (TURFS; Branch et al. 2006; Cinti
et al. 2010; Grafton et al. 2006; Hilborn 2007; Hilborn et al. 2004). Like Indigenous
Northwest Coast fisheries and resource management, which employed local rights-based
accesss (e.g., Deur 2009; McHalsie 2007; Trosper 2002), tenure-based regimes provide
benefits for sustainable practices (Branch et al. 2006). In the current management
paradigm, short fishing seasons, efficient technology, and quotas lead to a “race for the
fish” (Branch et al. 2006; Hilborn et al. 2004; Hilborn 2007). Under tenure-based models,
when stocks are low, fishers have incentives to conserve, understanding they will be
rewarded in the future when stocks rebound (Eggert and Ulmestrand 2008). These
models have allowed fishers to respond weekly to fluctuating resource conditions in the
successful but short-lived Danish matje herring co-manged fishery (Raakjer and Olsen
2008); allowed New Zealand Fiordland fishers to balance commercial fishing with
ecosystem management (Grafton et al. 2006); and maintained a steady geoduck export
supply from the British Columbia Underwater Harvesters Association, even taking just
one-percent of stocks (Hand and Marcus 2004; Heizer 1999; James 2008).
In Burrard Inlet and its arms, the palaeodata suggest that local management
decisions led to sustainable fisheries practices for thousands of years. Following in the
70
footsteps of their Coast Salish ancestors, the Tsleil-Waututh Nation’s efforts to maintain
the health and productivity of its environment continue. Through the Nation’s marine
stewardship program, water and environmental quality is monitored, voluntary bans are
placed on declining fish stocks, and practices such as logging which impact fish habitat
are being monitored and regulated (Tsleil-Waututh Nation 2007; Eustace 2007). The
zooarchaeological analysis in this study is another tool in this cause and other
conservation efforts in the Greater Vancouver area. The baseline data presented are
valuable clues to past species distribution and abundance. But these data also hint at local
management practices which can assist those working today to restore these important
cultural and environmental resources.
71
Appendices
72
Appendix 1: Abundance and Ubiquity by Column/Auger Level
Abundance and Ubiquity by Level Tum-tumay-wheuton Auger 6
0-1
2 c
m
12
-19
cm
19
-32
cm
32
-41
cm
41
-56
cm
56
-68
cm
68
-80
cm
80
-100
cm
10
0-1
08
cm
10
8-1
30
cm
13
0-1
39
cm
13
9-1
59
cm
NIS
P
Ub
iqu
ity
Salmonid 27 56 43 63 40 2 2 233 87.5
Pacific herring 15 14 46 25 61 7 2 170 87.5
Northern Anchovy 9 47 20 4 9 1 90 75
Perch (pile) 1 4 9 1 1 16 62.5
Spiny dogfish 1 2 3 25
Starry flounder 6 1 7 25
Rockfish 1 1 2 25
Three-spine stickleback 2 2 12.5
Cod
Perch 6 3 1 1 11 50
Peamouth chub
Eulachon 1 1 2 25
Pacific staghorn sculpin 2 1 3 25
Plainfin midshipman
Sculpin (spp.)
Big skate 1 1 12.5
English sole 1 1 12.5
S. flounder/rock sole
Surf smelt 1 1 2 25
Flatfish (spp.) 1 1 2 25
Ratfish
Rock sole
73
Abundance and Ubiquity by Level Tum-tumay-wheuton Auger 6
0-1
2 c
m
12
-19
cm
19
-32
cm
32
-41
cm
41
-56
cm
56
-68
cm
68
-80
cm
80
-100
cm
10
0-1
08
cm
10
8-1
30
cm
13
0-1
39
cm
13
9-1
59
cm
NIS
P
Ub
iqu
ity
Sand sole 1 1 12.5
Smelt
Blackfin sculpin 1 1 12.5
Capelin
Longfin smelt
Red irish lord
Whitespotted greenling
Rock greenling
Sturgeon
Northern sculpin
Buffalo sculpin
Flathead sole
Lingcod
Shiner perch
Silverspotted sculpin
NISP 0 53 121 133 108 114 12 6 547
NTAXA 0 5 6 10 8 5 4 4
74
Abundance and Ubiquity by Level Tum-tumay-wheuton Auger 8
0-1
2 c
m
12
-35
cm
35
-50
cm
50
-62
cm
62
-71
cm
71
-77
cm
77
-90
cm
90
-100
cm
10
0-1
07
cm
10
7-1
16
cm
11
6-1
23
cm
12
3-1
34
cm
13
4-1
45
cm
14
5-1
54
cm
15
4-1
66
cm
16
6-1
77
cm
NIS
P
Ub
iqu
ity
Salmonid
6 78 91 31 49 41 47 8 21 20 10 8 14 7 431 93.33
Pacific herring
9 61 18 8 15 30 17 12 27 19 17 6 9 11 1 260 100
Northern Anchovy
50 56 35 32 22 12 3 12 2 3 4 8 3 2 244 93.33
Perch (pile)
2 2 7 5
1
1 18 40
Spiny dogfish
1
1
2 13.33
Starry flounder
1
1
1
2
5 26.67
Rockfish
1
4
5 13.33
Three-spine stickleback
2
1 3 13.33
Cod
1
1
2 13.33
Perch
4 4
4 5
1
1 1 20 46.67
Peamouth chub
1
3 1 5 20
Eulachon
1 1 6.67
75
Abundance and Ubiquity by Level Tum-tumay-wheuton Auger 8
0-1
2 c
m
12
-35
cm
35
-50
cm
50
-62
cm
62
-71
cm
71
-77
cm
77
-90
cm
90
-100
cm
10
0-1
07
cm
10
7-1
16
cm
11
6-1
23
cm
12
3-1
34
cm
13
4-1
45
cm
14
5-1
54
cm
15
4-1
66
cm
16
6-1
77
cm
NIS
P
Ub
iqu
ity
Pacific staghorn sculpin
Plainfin midshipman
2
1
3 13.33
Sculpin (spp.)
1
1 6.67
Big skate
2
2 6.67
English sole
1
1 6.67
S.flounderrocksole
1
1 1
3 20
Surf smelt
Flatfish (spp.)
Ratfish
1 1
2 13.33
Rock sole
1
1 6.67
Sand sole
Smelt
1
1 2 13.33
Blackfin sculpin
Capelin
1
1 6.67
Longfin smelt
1
1 6.67
76
Abundance and Ubiquity by Level Tum-tumay-wheuton Auger 8
0-1
2 c
m
12
-35
cm
35
-50
cm
50
-62
cm
62
-71
cm
71
-77
cm
77
-90
cm
90
-100
cm
10
0-1
07
cm
10
7-1
16
cm
11
6-1
23
cm
12
3-1
34
cm
13
4-1
45
cm
14
5-1
54
cm
15
4-1
66
cm
16
6-1
77
cm
NIS
P
Ub
iqu
ity
Red irish lord
Whitespotted greenling
Rock greenling
1
1 6.67
Sturgeon
Northern sculpin
Buffalo sculpin
1
1 6.67
Flathead sole
Lingcod
1
1 6.67
Shiner perch
Silverspotted sculpin
NISP
16 200 170 80 102 113 87 25 63 50 33 21 32 21 3 1015
NTAXA
3 9 5 7 4 9 9 5 6 8 6 6 4 3 2
77
Abundance and Ubiquity by Level Tum-tumay-whueton Auger D
0-1
5 c
m
15
-25
cm
25
-42
cm
42
-60
cm
60
-72
cm
72
-82
cm
82
-91
cm
91
-91
cm
91
-91
cm
NIS
P
Ub
iqu
ity
Salmonid 8 22 38 29 18 11 11 21 34 192 100
Pacific herring 20 36 110 19 13 9 11 12 13 243 100
Northern Anchovy
2 18
5 1 4 6 8 44 77.78
Perch (pile) 9 3 12 3 4 31 1 4 7 74 100
Spiny dogfish 1
25 3 2
31 44.44
Starry flounder
1
1 11.11
Rockfish
3
1
4 22.22
Three-spine stickleback
5
5 11.11
Cod
1 6
7 22.22
Perch 8 5 4 4 2 1 2
26 77.78
Peamouth chub
Eulachon
1
1
2 22.22
Pacific staghorn sculpin 2
2 11.11
Plainfin midshipman
1
1 11.11
Sculpin (spp.) 1
1 1
3 33.33
Big skate
1
1 11.11
English sole
1
1 11.11
S. flounder/rock sole
Surf smelt
Flatfish (spp.)
78
Abundance and Ubiquity by Level Tum-tumay-whueton Auger D
0-1
5 c
m
15
-25
cm
25
-42
cm
42
-60
cm
60
-72
cm
72
-82
cm
82
-91
cm
91
-91
cm
91
-91
cm
NIS
P
Ub
iqu
ity
Ratfish
Rock sole
Sand sole
Smelt
Blackfin sculpin
Capelin
Longfin smelt
Red irish lord
1
1 11.11
Whitespotted greenling
Rock greenling
Sturgeon
Northern sculpin
Buffalo sculpin
Flathead sole
Lingcod
Shiner perch
Silverspotted sculpin
NISP NISP 49 70 226 59 45 55 29 43 62 638
NTAXA NTAXA 5 6 13 5 6 6 4 4 4
79
Abundance and Ubiquity by Level Noons Creek Column 1-A
10
-18
cm
18
-23
cm
24
-36
cm
36
-51
cm
51
-65
cm
65
-76
cm
76
-85
cm
85
-10
6 c
m
NIS
P
Ub
iqu
ity
Salmonid 11 29 40 10 19 43 31 132 315 100
Pacific herring 13 26 26 10 62 52 35 109 333 100
Northern Anchovy 13 31 18 4 11 14 11 42 144 100
Perch (pile)
2 2
1 5 10 50
Spiny dogfish
1
6
7 25
Starry flounder
2
1
7 10 37.5
Rockfish 1
1
2 25
Three-spine stickleback 3 1
4 25
Cod
Perch
1
1 1 1 4 50
Peamouth chub
Eulachon
1 8 4 2 5 87 20 127 87.5
Pacific staghorn sculpin
1
1 12.5
Plainfin midshipman 1 1
1 1 1
5 62.5
Sculpin (spp.)
1
2 2 12.5
Big skate
1 1
2 25
English sole
1
1 12.5
S. flounder/rock sole
1
2
1 4 37.5
Surf smelt 2
2 12.5
Flatfish (spp.)
Ratfish
Rock sole
13 13 12.5
Sand sole
Smelt 2 3
3 8 37.5
80
Abundance and Ubiquity by Level Noons Creek Column 1-A
10
-18
cm
18
-23
cm
24
-36
cm
36
-51
cm
51
-65
cm
65
-76
cm
76
-85
cm
85
-10
6 c
m
NIS
P
Ub
iqu
ity
Blackfin sculpin
Capelin
Longfin smelt 1 1 1
2 5 40
Red irish lord
2 2 12.5
Whitespotted greenling
1 1 12.5
Rock greenling
Sturgeon
Northern sculpin
4 4 12.5
Buffalo sculpin
Flathead sole
Lingcod
Shiner perch
1 1 12.5
Silverspotted sculpin
NISP 47 98 100 28 95 119 176 345 1008
NTAXA 8 10 9 4 5 7 10 12
81
Abundance and Ubiquity by Level Noons Creek Column 1-B
10
-18
cm
18
-23
cm
24
-36
cm
36
-51
cm
51
-65
cm
65
-76
cm
76
-85
cm
85
-10
6 c
m
NIS
P
Ub
iqu
ity
Salmonid 8 4 31 12 13 46 23 75 212 100
Pacific herring 5 37 5 12 40 66 24 98 287 100
Northern Anchovy 1 14 8 3 1 3 7 7 44 100
Perch (pile)
2
3 5 25
Spiny dogfish
7 2 9 25
Starry flounder
1
1 1 5 8 50
Rockfish
Three-spine stickleback 1
1 12.5
Cod
1 1 12.5
Perch
1
1 1 9 12 37.5
Peamouth chub
Eulachon
3
5 40 12 60 50
Pacific staghorn sculpin
1
1 12.5
Plainfin midshipman
3
2 1 1 7 50
Sculpin (spp.)
Big skate
1
1 12.5
English sole
1 1 12.5
S. flounder/rock sole
2
1 3 25
Surf smelt
1
1
2 25
Flatfish (spp.)
Ratfish
Rock sole
1 1 12.5
Sand sole
Smelt 1 1
1 3 37.5
82
Abundance and Ubiquity by Level Noons Creek Column 1-B
10
-18
cm
18
-23
cm
24
-36
cm
36
-51
cm
51
-65
cm
65
-76
cm
76
-85
cm
85
-10
6 c
m
NIS
P
Ub
iqu
ity
Blackfin sculpin
Capelin
Longfin smelt
Red irish lord
Whitespotted greenling
Rock greenling
Sturgeon
Northern sculpin
Buffalo sculpin
Flathead sole
1
1 12.5
Lingcod
1
1 12.5
Shiner perch
Silverspotted sculpin
NISP 16 62 50 29 54 126 106 217 660
NTAXA 5 6 7 5 3 7 10 11
83
Abundance and Ubiquity Noons Creek Column 2
0-1
0 c
m
10
-21
cm
21
-23
cm
23
-35
cm
35
-51
cm
51
-63
cm
63
-76
cm
NIS
P
Ub
iqu
ity
Salmonid 3 16 3 17 12 21 3 75 100
Pacific herring 8 18 2 85 44 36 35 228 100
Northern Anchovy 3 2
34 20 8 6 73 85.71
Perch (pile)
Spiny dogfish
2
1 3 28.57
Starry flounder
1
1 14.29
Rockfish
Three-spine stickleback 2
2 14.29
Cod
Perch
1
1
2 28.57
Peamouth chub
Eulachon
2
33 4
39 42.86
Pacific staghorn sculpin
Plainfin midshipman
2
2 14.29
Sculpin (spp.)
1
1 14.29
Big skate
English sole
1
1 14.29
S. flounder/rock sole
Surf smelt
Flatfish (spp.)
1
1 14.29
Ratfish
Rock sole
Sand sole
Smelt
84
Abundance and Ubiquity Noons Creek Column 2
0-1
0 c
m
10
-21
cm
21
-23
cm
23
-35
cm
35
-51
cm
51
-63
cm
63
-76
cm
NIS
P
Ub
iqu
ity
Blackfin sculpin
Capelin
Longfin smelt
Red irish lord
Whitespotted greenling
Rock greenling
Sturgeon
Northern sculpin
Buffalo sculpin
1 1 14.29
Flathead sole
Lingcod
Shiner perch
Silverspotted sculpin
NISP 16 39 5 173 84 66 46 429
NTAXA 4 5 2 6 7 4 5
85
Appendix 2: CD-ROM Data Appendix
The CD-ROM, attached, forms a part of this work.
Data files can be opened with MSWord (Invertebrate) or MSExcel or other spreadsheet program (Vertebrate).
Data Files:
Faunal Catalogue: Vertebrate 10 KB Faunal Catalogue: Invertebrate 20 KB
86
Reference List
Alexander, Diana and Colin Grier 2000 Report on Archaeological Investigations at Cates Park, District of North
Vancouver. Unpublished Manuscript. On file with the Corporation of the District of North Vancouver, North Vancouver, B.C.
Amoss, Pamela T. 1987 The Fish God Gave Us: The First Salmon Ceremony Revived. Arctic
Anthropology 24 (1): 56-66.
Arcas Consulting Archeologists Ltd. 1994 Archaeological Investigations at Tsawwassen, B.C. Vol. II. Report on file
with the Ministry of Natural Resource Operations, Victoria, B.C.
Armitage, Doreen 2001 Burrard Inlet: A History. Harbour Publishing, Madeira Park, B.C.
Alverson, Dayton L., Mark H. Freeberg, Stevan A. Murawski, and J.G. Pope 1994 A Global Assessment of Fisheries Bycatch and Discards. FAO Fisheries
Technical Paper 339, Rome.
Baisre, Julio 2010 Setting a Baseline for Caribbean Fisheries. Journal of Island and Coastal
Archaeology 5: 120-147.
Barnett, Homer G. 1955 The Coast Salish of British Columbia. The University Press. University of
Oregon, Eugene.
Barrett-Lennard, Capt. C.E. 1969 Travels in British Columbia with the Narrative of a Yacht Voyage round
Vancouver Island. Canadiana House, Toronto.
Barton, Andrew J. 1990 Preliminary Report of the 1982 Archaeological Investigations Conducted
at the Noons Creek Site (DhR q-01), Port Moody, British Columbia. Report on File at the Department of Archaeology, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC.
Bartroli, Tomas 1997 Genesis of Vancouver City: Explorations of its Site 1791, 1792 and 1808.
Electric Print, Vancouver, BC.
87
Baum, Julia K. and Ransom A. Myers 2004 Shifting Baselines and the Decline of Pelagic Sharks in the Gulf of
Mexico. Ecology Letters 7: 135-145.
Baumgartner, T.R., A. Soutar, and V. Ferreira-Bartrina 1992 Reconstruction of the History of Pacific Sardine and Northern Anchovy
Populations over the Past Two Millennia from Sediments of the Santa Barbara Basin, California. CalCOFI Reports 33: 24-40.
Beddington, J.R., D.J. Agnew, and C.W. Clark 2007 Current Problems in the Management of Marine Fisheries. Science 316:
1713-1716.
Binford, Lewis R. 1978 Nunamiut Ethnoarchaeology. Academic Press, New York
Branch, Trevor A., Ray Hilborn, Alan C. Haynie, Gavin Fay, Lucy Flynn, Jennifer Griffiths, Kristin N. Marshall, Jeffrey K. Randall, Jennifer M. Scheuerell, Eric J. Ward, and Mark Young
2006 Fleet Dynamics and Fishermen Behavior: Lessons for Fisheries Managers. Canadian Journal of Fisheries Aquatic Sciences 63: 1647-1668.
Brekke, Heather 2006 Review of Upland Issues in Burrard Inlet: A Background Report to Assist
in Developing Indicators for Burrard Inlet. Report prepared for the Vancouver Port Authority and the BIEAP Plan Implementation Committee. Vancouver, British Columbia.
Brewer, Douglas J. 1992 Zooarchaeology: Method, Theory, and Goals. In, Archaeological Method
and Theory 4, Michael B. Schiffer editor, University of Arizona Press, Tucson. Pages 195-244.
Brolly, Richard, Brian Chisholm, Susan Crockford, Joanne Curtin, Geordie Howe, Heather Pratt, June Ryder, Arnoud Stryd, and Rebecca Wigen
1999 Archaeological Investigations at Tsawwassen, B.C., Volume IV. Arcas Consulting Archaeologists Ltd. Report on file with the Archaeology Branch, Ministry of Natural Resource Operations, Victoria, B.C.
Broughton, Jack M. 1997 Widening Diet Breadth, Declining Foraging Efficiency, and Prehistoric
Harvest Pressure: Ichthyofaunal Evidence from the Emeryville Shellmound, California. Antiquity 71: 845-862.
1999 Resource Depression and Intensification During the Late Holocene, San
Francisco Bay: Evidence from the Emeryville Shellmound Vertebrate
Fauna. University of California Press, Berkeley.
88
2004 Pristine Benchmarks and Indigenous Conservation? Implications from California Zooarchaeology. In, The Future from the Past: Archaeozoology
in Wildlife Conservation and Heritage Management. Proceedings of the
9th
ICAZ Conference, Durham 2002. Editors Roel C.G.M. Lauwrier and Ina Plug. Pages 6-18.
Burley, David 1980 Marpole: Anthropological Reconstructions of a Prehistoric Northwest
Coast Culture Type. Department of Archaeology Publication No 8, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C.
Butler, Rob 2007 Exciting New Eelgrass Project in Burrard Inlet. T’aanuu Telegram 6
(October 2007): 5.
Butler, Virgina L. 1996 Tui Chub Taphonomy and the Importance of Marsh Resources in the
Western Great Basin of North America. American Antiquity 61 (4): 699-717.
2010 Seeking Balance in “Human Impacts” Research. Comment on Julio
Baisre’s “Setting a Baseline for Caribbean Fisheries.” Journal of Island
and Coastal Archaeology 5: 148-151.
Butler, Virgina L. and Sarah K. Campbell 2004 Resource Intensification and Resource Depression in the Pacific
Northwest of North America: A Zooarchaeological Review. Journal of
World Prehistory 18(4): 327-405.
Butler, Virginia L. and Michael G. Delacorte 2004 Doing Zooarchaeology as if it Mattered: Use of Faunal Data to Address
Current Issues in Fish Conservation Biology in Owens Valley, California. In Zooarchaeology and Conservation Biology, edited by R. Lee Lyman and Kenneth P. Cannon. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.
Byrd, John E. 1997 The Analysis of Diversity in Archeological Faunal Assemblages:
Complexity and Subsistence Strategies in the Southeast during the Middle Woodland Period. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 16: 49-72.
Caldwell, Megan 2008 A View from the Shore: Interpreting Fish Trap Use in Comox Harbour
through Zooarchaeological Analysis of Fish Remains from the Q’umu?xs
Village Site (DkSf-19), Comox Harbour, British Columbia. Unpublished Masters thesis submitted to the Department of Anthropology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba.
89
Campbell, Sarah K. 1981 The Duwamish No. 1 Site: A Lower Puget Sound Shell Midden.
University of Washington Office of Public Archaeology Research Report 1. University of Washington Institute for Environmental Studies, Seattle, Washington.
Campbell, Sarah K. and Virginia L. Butler 2010 Archaeological Evidence for the Resilience of Pacific Northwest Salmon
Populations and the Socioecological System over the last ~7,500 years. Ecology and Society 15(1): 17 (online) http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss1/art17
Cannon, Aubrey 1991 The Economic Prehistory of Namu. Archaeology Press, Simon Fraser
University, Burnaby, B.C.
2000a Assessing Variability in Northwest Coast Salmon and Herring Fisheriess: Bucket-auger Sampling of Shell Midden Sites on the Central Coast of British Columbia. Journal of Archaeological Science 27: 725-737.
2000b Settlement and Sea-levels on the Central Coast of British Columbia: Evidence from Shell Midden Cores. American Antiquity 65 (1): 67-77.
Cannon, Aubrey, Dongya Yang, and Camilla Speller 2011 Site-Specific Salmon Fisheries on the Central Coast of British Columbia.
The Archaeology of North Pacific Fisheries, editors Madonna Moss and Aubrey Cannon. University of Alaska Press. Pages 117-146 (In Press).
Carlson, Keith Thor (editor) 2001 A Stó:lö Coast Salish Historical Atlas. Douglas and McIntyre, Vancouver.
Carlson, Roy L. 2008 The Rise and Fall of Native Northwest Coast Cultures. North Pacific
Prehistory 2: 93-121.
Carlton, James T. 1998 Apostrophe to the Ocean. Conservation Biology 12 (6): 1165-1167.
Casteel, Richard W. 1970 Core and Column Sampling. American Antiquity 35 (4): 463-467.
1972 Some Biases in the Recovery of Archaeological Faunal Remains. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 38: 382-388.
1976 Comparison of Column and Whole Unit Samples for Recovering Fish Remains. World Archaeology 8 (2): 192-196.
90
Charlton, Arthur S. 1972 Noons Creek and Belcarra: A Preliminary Report on Excavations near
Port Moody. In Salvage ’71: Reports on Salvage Archaeology Undertaken
in British Columbia in 1971, edited by Roy L. Carlson. Department of Archaeology, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C. Pages 131-155.
1974 Archaeological Investigations at the Cates Park Sie (DhRr8). Submitted to the Archaeological Sites Advisory Board of B.C. Report on file with the Archaeology Branch, Ministry of Natural Resource Operations, Victoria, B.C.
1980 The Belcarra Park Site. Publication No. 9, Department of Archaeology, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C.
Chavez, Francisco P., John Ryan, Salvador E. Lluch-Cota, and Miguel Niguen 2003 From Anchovies to Sardines and Back: Multidecadal Change in the
Pacific Ocean. Science 299: 217-221.
Chittenden, Newton H. 1984 Travels in British Colmbia. Gordon Soules Book Publishers, Vancouver,
B.C. (Originally published 1882).
Cinti, A., W. Shaw, R. Cudney-Bueno, and M. Rojo 2010 The Unintended Consequences of Formal Fisheries Policies: Social
Disparities and Resource Overuse in a Major Fishing Community in the Gulf of California, Mexico. Marine Policy 34: 328-339.
Corkeron, Peter J. 2006 Opposing Views of the “Ecosystem Approach” to Fisheries Management.
Conservation Biology 20(3): 617-619.
Crockford, Susan and Rebecca Wigen 2010 Chapter VI: Faunal Remains. In, The Crescent Beach site and the Place of
the Locarno Beach Phase, editor R.G. Matson. Laboratory of Archaeology, University of British Columbia. Pages 1-21.
Cronon, William 1996 Uncommon Ground: Rethinking the Human Place in Nature. Norton
Press, New York.
Crumley, Carole L. 1994 Historical Ecology: Cultural Knowledge and Changing Landscapes.
School of American Research Press, Santa Fe, New Mexico.
Cruz-Uribe, Kathryn 1988 The Use and Meaning of Species Diversity and Richness in
Archaeological Faunas. Journal of Archaeological Science 15: 179-196.
91
Densmore, Nadia 2009 Discussion of Screen Size and Resource Depression: Using an
Examination of Faleloa, Tonga. Nexus: The Canadian Student Journal of
Anthropology 21: 41-48.
Deur, Douglas 2009 “A Caretaker Responsibility”: Revisiting Klamath and Moduc Traditions
of Plant Community Management. Journal of Ethnobiology 29 (2): 339-358.
Dincauze, Dena F. 2000 Environmental Archaeology: Principles and Practice. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge.
Driver, Jonathan C. 1992 Identification, Classification and Zooarchaeology. Circaea 9 (1) (1992 for
1991): 35-47.
1993 Zooarchaeology in British Columbia. BC Studies 99: 77-105.
Duff, Wilson 1955 The Upper Stalo Indians of the Fraser Valley, British Columbia. British
Columbia Provincial Museum Department of Education, Victoria, B.C.
Eaton, J.G. and R.M. Scheller 1996 Effects of Climate on Fish Thermal Habitat in Streams of the United
States. Limnology and Oceanography 41: 1109-1115.
Egan, Dave and Evylen A. Howell (editors) 2001 The Historical Ecology Handbook. Island Press, Washington, D.C.
Eggert, H. and M. Ulmestrand 2008 Tenure Rights and Stewardship of Marine Resources: A Co-managed
Swedesh Shrimp Fishery in a Marine Reserve. In, Case Studies in
Fisheries Self Governance, editors R. Townsend, R. Shotton, and H. Uchda. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 504,Rome. Pages 21-30.
Ehrlich, Paul R. and Lawrence H. Goulder 2007 Is Current Consumption Excessive? A General Framework and Some
Indicators for the United States. Conservation Biology 21 (5): 1145-1154.
Etnier, Michael A. 2007 Defining and Identifying Sustainable Harvest of Resources:
Archaeological Examples of Pinniped Harvests in the Eastern North Pacific. Journal for Nature Conservtion 15: 196-207.
Eustace, Chantal 2007 First Nation Won’t Fish Fraser. Vancouver Sun, August 17, 2007. Page 1.
92
Farwell, M.K., N.D. Schubert, and C.R. Harnson 1987 Salmon Escapements to Streams Entering Statistical Areas 28 and 29,
1951 to 1985. Canadian Data Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences no. 601. Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Fisheries Branch, New Westminster, B.C.
Fisheries and Oceans Canada 2002 Pacific Region Management Plan – Anchovy. Ottawa, Ontario.
2005 Annual Report to Parliament on the Administration and Enforcement of the Fish Habitat Protection and Pollution Prevention Program of the Fisheries Act. April 1, 2004-March 31, 2005. Communications Branch, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Ottawa.
2007a Annual Report to Parliament on the Administration and Enforcement of the Fish Habitat Protection and Pollution Prevention Program of the Fisheries Act. April 1 2006-March 31, 2007. Communications Branch, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Ottawa.
2007b Fraser River Eulachon (Thaleicthys pacificus): 2007 Population Assessment and Harvest Recommendations for 2008. Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat Science Advisory Report 2007/208. Ottawa, Ontario.
2008 Eualchon: Pacific Region, Fishery Overview. www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/commercial/pelagic-pelagique/eulachon-eulakane/overview-apercu-eng.htm (accessed March 9, 2011)
2009a Stock Assessment Report on Pacific Herring in British Columbia. Canadian Science Advisory Board Secretariat. Science Advisory Report 2009/066.
2009b Pacific Region Integrated Fisheries Management Plan, Food and Bait Herring, Nov. 7, 2009 to Feb. 9, 2011. Pacific Region, Vancouver, B.C.
2009c Management Plan for the Olympia Oyster (Ostrea concaphila) in Canada. Species at Risk Act Management Plan Series. Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Ottawa.
2010 Pacifc Region Integrated Fishery Management Plan – Eulachon, April 1 2010 to March 31, 2011. Ottawa, Ontario.
Frazier, J. 2007 Sustainable Use of Wildlfie: The View from Archaeozoology. Journal for
Nature Conservation 15: 163-173.
Gerrits, Lara 2007 Volunteers Plant Grass in the Inlet to Help Water Creatures. Tri-City
News, March 28, 2007.
93
Gianni, Matthew 2004 High Seas Bottom Trawl Fisheries and their Impacts on the Biodiversity of
Vulnerable Deep Sea Ecosystems: Options for International Action. International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, Gland, Switzerland.
Gobalet, Kenneth W. 2001 A Critique of Faunal Analysis: Inconsistency Among Experts in Blind
Tests. Journal of Archaeological Science 28 (4): 377-386.
Goodson, Gar 1988 Fishes of the Pacific Coast. Stanford University Press, Stanford,
California.
Gordon, Elizabeth A. 1993 Size and Differential Faunal Recovery: A Hawaiian Example. Journal of
Field Archaeology 20 (4): 453-460.
Gunther, Erna 1926 An Analysis of the First Salmon Ceremony. American Anthropologist,
New Series 28 (4): 605-617.
Grafton, R. Quentin, Ragnar Arnason, Trond Bjørndal, David Campbell, Harry F. Campbell, Colin W. Clark, Robin Connor, Diane P. Dupont, Rögnvaldur Hannesson, Ray Hilborn, James E. Kirkley, Tom Kompas, Daniel E. Lane, Gordon R. Munro, Sean Pascoe, Dale Squires, Stein Ivar Steinshamn, Bruce R. Turris, and Quinn Weninger
2006 Incentive-based Approaches to Sustainable Fisheries. Canadian Journal of
Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 63: 699-710.
Grayson, Donald K. 1984 Quantitative Zooarchaeology: Topics in the Analysis of Archaeological
Faunas. Academic Press. Orlando.
Haggan, Nigel, Nancy Turner, Jennifer Carpenter, James T. Jones, Quentin Mackie, and Charles Menzies
2006 12,000+ Years of Change: Linking Traditional and Modern Ecosystem Science in the Pacific Northwest. Fisheries Centre Working Paper Series 2006-02, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C.
Haggarty, Dana Rochelle 2001 An Evaluation of Fish Habitat in Burrard Inlet, British Columbia.
Unpublished Masters Thesis, Department of Zoology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C.
Halpern, Benjamin S., Shaun Walbridge, Kimberly A. Selkoe, Carrie V. Kappel, Fiorenza Micheli, Caterina D’Agrosa, John F. Bruno, Kenneth S. Casey, Colin Ebert,
Helen E. Fox, Rod Fujita, Dennis Heinemann, Hunter S. Lenihan, Elizabeth M.P. Madin, Matthew T. Perry, Elizaberth R. Selig, Mark Spalding, Robert Stenech, and Reg Watson
2008 A Global Map of Human Impacts on Marine Ecosystems. Science 39: 948-952.
94
Ham, Leonard Charles 1982 Seasonality, Shell Midden Layers, and Coast Salish Subsistence Activities
at the Crescent Beach Site, DgRr-1. Unpublished PhD thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C.
Hancock, M.J. and D.E. Marshall 1986 Catalogue of Salmon Streams and Spawning Escapements of the
Statistical Area 28 Howe Sound-Burrard Inlet. Canadian Data Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Science. Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Salmonid Enhancement Program, Vancouver, B.C.
Hand, C. and K. Marcus 2004 Potential Impacts of Subtidal Geoduck Aquaculture on the Conservation
of Wild Geoduck Populations and the Harvestable TAC in British Columbia. Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat Research Document 2004/131. Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Nanaimo, B.C.
Hanna, Susan S. 1998 Institutions for Marine Ecosystems: Economic Incentives and Fishery
Management. Ecological Applications 8: S170-S174.
Hanson, Diane K. 1991 Late Prehistoric Subsistence in the Strait of Georgia Region of the
Northwest Coast. Unpublished Doctoral thesis. Department of Archaeology, Simon Fraser University. Burnaby, B.C.
2008 Salmon and Models of Social Complexity on the Northwest Coast. Pacific
Prehistory 2: 123-152.
Hart, J.L. 1973 Pacific Fishes of Canada. Bulletin 180, Fisheries Research Board of
Canada. Ottawa, ON.
Hay, D.E. 1998 Historic Changes in Capelin and Eulachon Population in the Strait of
Georgia. In, Back to the Future: Reconstructing the Strait of Georgia Ecosystem, editors D. Pauly, T. Pitcher, and D. Preikshot. University of British Columbia Fisheries Centre Research Report 6 (5): 42-44.
Hay, D.E. and P.B. Carter 2000 Status of the Eulachon Thaleichthys pacificus in Canada. Canadian Stock
Assessment Secretariat Research Document 2000/145. Fisheries and Oceans Canada Science Branch, Nanaimo B.C.
Hay, D.T., P.B. Carter, and K.S. Daniel 2008 Potential Impact of British Columbia Herring roe Fishing on the Spatial
and Temporal Distribution of Herring Spawn: Examination of the Serial Depletion Hypothesis. Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat, Research Document 2007/086. Nanaimo, BC.
95
Hayashida, Francis M. 2005 Archaeology, Ecological History, and Conservation. Annual Review of
Anthropology 34: 43-65.
Heizer, S. 1999 The Commercial Geoduck (Panopea abrupta) Fishery in British Columbia,
Canada: Co-operative Perspectives of a Limited Entry Fishery with Individual Quotas. In, Use of Property Rights in Fisheries Management. FAO Technical Paper 404 (2), Rome. Pages 226-233.
Hilborn, Ray 2007 Moving to Sustainability by Learning from Successful Fisheries. Ambio 36
(4): 296-303.
Hilborn, Ray, Trevor A. Branch, Billy Ernst, Arni Magnusson, Carolina V. Minte-Vera, Mark D. Scheurell, and Juan L. Valero
2003 State of the World’s Fisheries. Annual Review of Environmental
Resources 15: 1-40.
Hilborn, Ray, André E. Punt, and José Orensanz 2004 Beyond Band-aids in Fisheries Management: Fixing World Fisheries.
Bulletin of Marine Science 74 (3): 493-507.
Hourigan, T.F. 2009 Managing Fishing Impacts on Deep-water Coral Ecosystems of the
U.S.A.: Emerging Best Practices. Marine Ecology Progress Series Vo. 397: 333-340.
Hughes, T.P., A.H. Baird, M. Card, S.R. Connolly, C. Folke, R. Grosberg, O. Hoegh-Guldberg, J.B.C. Jackson, J. Kleypas, J.M. Lough, P. Marshall, M. Nyström, S.R. Palumbi, J.M. Pandolfi, B. Rosen, and J. Roughgarden
2003 Climate Change, Human Impacts and the Resilience of Coral Reefs. Science 301: 929-933.
Indigenous Peoples Earth Charter 1992 Kari-oca Conference. May 25-3-, Kari-oca, Brazil.
Jackson, Jeremy B.C., Michael X. Kirby, Wolfgang H. Berger, Karen A. Bjorndal, Louis W. Botsford, Bruce J. Bourque, Roger H. Bradbury, Richard Cooke, Jon Erlandson, James A. Estes, Terence P. Hughes, Susan Kidwell, Carina B. Lange, Hunter S. Lenihan, John M. Pandolfi, Charles H. Peterson, Robert S. Steneck, Mia J. Tegner, and Robert R. Warner
2001 Historical Overfishing and the Recent Collapse of Coastal Ecosystems. Science 293: 629-638.
Jane, Cecil (editor) 1930 A Spanish Voyage to Vancouver and the North-West Coast of America.
The Argonaut Press, London.
96
James, Michelle 2008 Co-operative Management of the Geoduck and Horseclam Industry in
British Columbia. In, Case Studies in Fisheries Self-Governance, editors R. Townsend, R. Shotton, and H. Uchda. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 504, Rome. Pages 397-406.
Jacques Whitford AXYS 2008 Burrard Inlet Environmental Indicators Report Public Consultation
Document. Report for Burrard Inlet Environmental Action Program, Burnaby, B.C.
Jenkins, David J.A., John L. Sievenpiper, Daniel Pauly, Ussif Rashid Sumaila, Cyril W.C. Kendall, and Farley M. Mowat
2009 Are Dietary Recommendations for the Use of Fish Oils Sustainable? Canadian Medical Association Journal 180 (6): 633-637.
Jenness, Diamond n.d. The Saanich Indians of Vancouver Island. Unpublished Manuscript, on
file with the Royal B.C. Museum, Victoria, B.C.
1955 The Faith of a Coast Salish Indian. Anthropology in British Columbia Memoir 3. British Columbia Provincial Museum Department of Education, Victoria, B.C.
Kell, Laurence T., Mark Dickey-Collas, Niels T. Hintzen, Richard D.M. Nash, Graham M. Pilling, and Beatriz A. Roel
2009 Lumpers or Splitters? Evaluating Recovery and Management Plans for Metapopulations of Herring. ICES Journal of Marine Science (July 9, 2009): 1-8.
Kendrick, John (editor) 1990 The Voyage of Sutil and Mexicana 1792. The Arthur H. Clark Company,
Spokane, Washington.
Kent, M.L., G.S. Traxler, D. Kieser, J. Richard, S.C. Dawe, R.W. Shaw, G. Prosperi-Porta, J. Ketcheson, and T.P.T. Evelyn
2008 Salmonid Pathogens in Ocean-caught Fishes in British Columbia, Canada. Journal of Aquatic Animal Health 10: 211-219.
Ketchen, K.S., N. Bourne, and T.H. Butler 1983 Historic and Present State of Fisheries for Marine Fishes and Invertebrates
in the Strait of Georgia, British Columbia. Canadian Journal of Fisheries
and Aquatic Sciences 40: 1095-1119.
Kopperl, Robert E. 2001 Herring Use in Southern Puget Sound: Analysis of Fish Remains at 45-KI-
437. Northwest Anthropological Research Notes 35 (1): 1-20.
97
Krkosek, Martin, Jennifer S. Ford, Alexandra Morton, Subhash Lele, Ransom A. Myers, and Mark A. Lewis
2007 Declining Wild Salmon Populations in Relation to Parasites from Farm Salmon. Science 318 (5857): 1772-1775.
Lamb, Andy and Phil Edgell 1986 Coastal Fishes of the Pacific Northwest. Harbour Publishing, Madeira
Park, B.C.
Lamb, W.K. (editor) 1990 Vancouver Discovers Vancouver. Department of History, Simon Fraser
University, Burnaby, B.C.
Lepofsky, Dana 2009 The Past, Present, and Future of Traditional Resource and Environmental
Management. Journal of Ethnobiology 29 (2): 161-166.
Lepofsky, Dana and Monica Karpiak 2001 Report on “The Community Archaeology Project” : Excavations at the
Strathcona Park Site (DhRr-18) and Survey of the Tsleil-Waututh Nation Reserve (IR No. 3), North Vancouver, B.C. Submitted to the Tsleil-Waututh Nation. Manuscript on file with the Department of Archaeology, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C.
Lepofsky, Dana and Ken Lertzman 2005 More on Sampling for Richness and Diversity in Archaeological
Assemblages. Journal of Ethnbiology 25(2): 175-188.
Lepofsky, Dana, Ken Lertzman, Douglas Hallett, and Rolf Mathewes 2005 Climate Change and Culture Change on the Southern Coast of British
Columbia 2400-1200 B.P.: An Hypothesis. American Antiquity 70 (2): 267-293.
Lepofsky, Dana, and Natasha Lyons 2003 Modeling Ancient Plant Use on the Northwest Coast: Towards an
Understanding of Mobility and Sedentism. Journal of Archaeological
Science 30: 1357-1371.
Lepofsky, Dana, Teresa Trost and Jesse Morin 2007 Coast Salish Interaction: A View from the Inlets. Canadian Journal of
Archaeology 31: 190-223.
Lewison, Rebecca L., Larry B. Crowder, Andrew J. Reed, and Sloan A. Freemean 2004 Understanding Impacts of Fisheries Bycatch on Marine Megafauna.
Trends in Ecoloy and Evolution 19 (11): 598-604.
Lichatowich, Jim 1999 Salmon without Rivers: A History of the Pacific Salmon Crisis. Island
Press, Washington D.C.
98
Lupo, Karen D. 2007 Evolutionary Foraging Models in Zooarchaeological Analysis: Recent
Applications and Future Challenges. Journal of Archaeological Research 15: 143-189.
Lyman, R. Lee 1994 Vertebrate Taphonomy. Cambridge University Press, New York.
Lyman, R. Lee and Kenneth M. Ames 2004 Sampling to Redundancy in Zooarchaeology: Lessons from the Portland
Basin, Northwestern Oregon and Southwestern Washington. Journal of
Ethnobiology 24(2): 329-346.
Lyman, R. Lee and Kenneth P. Cannon (editors) 2004 Zooarchaeology and Conservation Biology. The University of Utah Press,
Salt Lake City.
McHalsie, Albert (Sonny) 2007 We Have to Take Care of Everything that Belongs to Us. In, Be of Good
Mind: Essays on the Coast Salish, edited by Bruce Granville Miller. UBC Press, Vancouver, B.C. Pages 82-130.
McKechnie, Iain 2005 Column Sampling and the Archaeology of Small Fish at Ts’ishaa. In
Archaeology and Ethnography of a Nuu-chah-nulth Origin Site in Barkley
Sound, editors A.D. McMillan and D.E. St. Claire, Archaeology Press, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C.
2007 Investigating the Complexities of Sustainable Fishing at a Prehistoric Village on Western Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Canada. Journal
for Nature Conservation 15: 208-222.
McMillan, Alan D. 1982 The Original Inhabitants of the Port Moody-Coquitlam Area. Port Moody
Historical Society, Port Moody, B.C.
Martindale, Andrew and Bryn Letham 2008 Subsurface Mapping of Shell Midden Components through Percussion
Coring: Examples from the Dundas Islands. Paper presented at the 73rd Annual meeting of the Society for American Archaeology. March 26-30, Vancouver, B.C.
Mason, Roger D., Mark L. Peterson, and Joseph A. Tiffany 1998 Weighing vs. Counting: Measurement Reliability and the California
School of Midden Analysis. American Antiquity 63 (2): 303-424.
99
Matson, R.G. 1983 Intensification and the Development of Cultural Complexity: The
Northwest versus the Northeast. In, Evolution of Maritime Cultures on the
Northeast and the Northwest of North America, editor Ronald J. Nash. Department of Archaeology Publication No 11: 15-148.
1992 The Evolution of Northest Coast Subsistence. In, Long-term Subsistence
Change in Pleistocene North America, editors Dale Croes, R. Hawks, and B.L. Isaac. Research in Economic Anthropology Supplement No 6, IAI Press, Greensville, Connecticut. Pages 348-367.
Matthews, Major J.S. 1955 Conversations with Khahtsahlano 1932-1954. City Archives, Vancouver,
B.C.
Mattson, Jim 2008 Noons Creek Hatchery Lab Directors Report 2007. The Creek Crier,
Winter 2007/2008. Page 4.
Miller, Bruce Granville 2007 Introduction. In, Be of Good Mind: Essays on the Coast Salish, edited by
Bruce Granville Miller. UBC Press, Vancouver, B.C. Pages 1-29.
Mitchell, Donald H. 1971 Archaeology of the Gulf of Georgia Area: A Natural Region and its
Culture Types. Syesis 4, Supplement I, Victoria, B.C.
Moody, Megan Felicity 2008 Eulachon Past and Present. Unpublished Masters thesis, Faculty of
Graduate Studies (Resource Management and Environmental Studies), University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C.
Moore, Jon. A. 1999 Deep-Sea Finfish Fisheries: Lessons from History. Fisheries 24 (7): 16-
21.
Morato, Telmo, Reg Watson, Tony J. Pitcher, and Daniel Pauly 2006 Fishing Down the Deep. Fish and Fisheries 7: 24-34.
Morrison, Alex E. and Terry L. Hunt 2007 Human Impacts on the Nearshore Environment: An Archaeological Case
Study from Kaua’i, Hawaiian Islands. Pacific Science 61(3): 325-345.
Moss, Madonna L. 2007 The Killisnoo Picnicground Midden (49-SIT-124) Revisited: Assessing
Archaelogical Recovery of Vertebrate Faunal Remains from Northwest Coast Shell Middens. Journal of Northwest Anthropology 41(1): 1-17.
Moss, Madonna L., Dongya Y. Yang, Seth D. Newsome, Camilla F. Speller, Iain McKechnie, Alan D. MacMillan, Robert J. Losey, and Paul L. Koch
100
2006 Historical Ecology and Biogeography of North Pacific Pinnipeds: Isotopes and Ancient DNA from Three Archaeological Assemblages. The Journal
of Island and Coastal Archaeology 1 (2): 165-190.
Murray, Maribeth S. 2008 Zooarchaeology and Arctic Marine Mammal Biogeography, Conservation,
and Management. Ecological Applications 19 (2): S41-S55
Nagaoka, Lisa 2001 Using Diversity Indices to Measrue Changes in Prey Choice at the Shag
River Mouth Site, Southern New Zealand. International Journal of
Osteoarchaeology 11: 101-111.
2005 Differential Recovery of Pacific Island Fish Remains. Journal of
Archaeological Science 32: 941-955.
National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) n.d. Native Oyster Habitat Restructuring Program Briefing Document. NOAA
Fisheries Southwest Region. Accessed online March 2, 2011 http://swr.nmfs.noaa.gov/temp/tempo/NOAA_Native_Oyster_Habitat_Restoration_Program_Briefing_Document.pdf
Newsome, Seth D., Michael A. Etnier, Diane Gifford-Gonzalez, Donald L. Phillips, Marcel van Tuinen, Elizabeth A. Hadly, Daniel P. Costa, Douglas J. Kennett, Tom P. Guilderson, and Paul L. Koch
2007 The Shifting Baseline of Northern Fur Seal Ecology. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Science 104 (23): 9709-9714.
O’Brien, Michael J. 2001 Archaeology, Paleoecosystems, and Ecological Restoration. In, The
Historical Ecology Handbook, edited by Dave Egan and Evelyn A. Howell. Island Press, Washington, D.C.
O’Connell, J.M. and V. Tunnicliffe 2001 The Use of Sedimentary Fish Remains for Interpretation of Long-term
Fish Population Fluctuations. Marine Geology 174: 177-195.
Partlow, Megan A. 2006 Sampling Fish Bone: A Consideration of the Importance of Screen Size
and Disposal Context in the North Pacific. Arctic Anthropology 43(1): 67-79.
Pauly, Daniel 1995 Anecdotes and the Shifting Baseline Syndrome. Trends in Ecology and
Evolution 10: 430.
2001 Importance of the Historical Dimension in Policy and Management of Natural Resource Systems. ACP-EU Fisheries Research Report 8: 5-10.
Pauly, Daniel, Tony J. Pitcher, and David Preikshot (editors)
101
1998 Back to the Future: Reconstructing the Strait of Georgia Ecosystem. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 6 (5). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.
Pauly, Daniel, Jackie Alder, Elena Bennett, Villy Christensen, Peter Tyedmers, and Reg Watson
2003 The Future for Fisheries. Science 302: 1359-1361.
Pauly, Daniel, Villy Christensen, Sylvie Guénette, Tony J. Pitcher, U. Rashid Sumaila, Carl J. Walters, R. Watson, and Dirk Zeller
2002 Towards Sustainability in World Fisheries. Nature 418: 689-695.
Pauly, Daniel. Lourdes Palomares, Rainer Froese, Pacualita Sa-a, Michael Vakily, David Preikshot, and Scott Wallace
2001 Fishing Down Canadian Aquatic Food Webs. Canadian Journal of
Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 58 (1): 51-62.
Peters, Joris and Nadja Pöllath 2004 Holocene Faunas of the Eastern Sahara: Zoogeographical and
Palaeoecological Aspects. In, The Future from the Past: Archaeozoology
in Wildlife Conservation and Heritage Management. Proceedings of the
9th
ICAZ Conference, Durham, 2002. Editors Roel C.G.M. Lauwrier and Ina Plug. Pages 34-50.
Phoca-Cosmetatou, Nellie 2004 A Zooarchaeological Reassessment of the Habitat and Ecology of the Ibex
(Capra ibex). In, The Future from the Past: Archaeozoology in Wildlife
Conservation and Heritage Management. Proceedings of the 9th
ICAZ
Conference, Durham, 2002. Editors Roel C.G.M. Lauwrier and Ina Plug. Pages 64-78.
Pianka, Eric R.
1974 Evolutionary Ecology. Harper and Row, New York.
Pikitch, E.K., C. Santora, E.A. Babcock, A. Bakun, D.O. Conover, P. Dayton, P. Doukakis, D. Fluharty, B. Heneman, E.D. Houde, J. Link, P.A. Livingstone, M. Mangel, M.K. McAllister, J. Pope, and K.J. Sainsbury.
2004 Ecosystem-Based Fishery Management. Science 305: 346-347.
Pitcher, Tony J. 2001 Fisheries Managed to Rebuild Ecosystems? Reconstructing the Past to
Salvage the Future. Ecological Applications 11 (2): 601-617.
Pitcher, Tony and Daniel Pauly 1998 Rebuilding Ecosystems, not Sustainability, as the Proper Goal of Fishery
Management. In Reinventing Fisheries Management, editors T. Pitcher, D. Pauly, and P. Hart. Kluwer Academic Publishing, Norwell, MA. Pages 311-325.
102
Pitcher, Tony J., Eny A. Buchary, and U. Rashid Sumaila 2002 A Synopsis of Canadian Fisheries. Fisheries Centre Research Report,
University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C.
Policansky, David and John J. Magnuson 1998 Genetics, Metapopulations, and Ecosystem Management of Fisheries.
Ecological Applications 8(1): S119-S123.
Port Moody Ecological Society 2010 The Creek Crier (Summer 2010). Port Moody, B.C.
2011 www.noonscreek.org (accessed March 9, 2011)
Posey, Darrell (editor) 1999 Cultural and Spiritual Values of Biodiversity: A Complementary
Contribution to the Global Biodiversity Assessment. United Nations Environmental Programme. Nairobi, Kenya.
Raakjar, J. and C. Olsen 2008 Self Regulation of the Danish Matjes Herring Fishery from Success to
Collapse. In, Case Studies in Fisheries Self-Governance, editors R. Townsend, R. Shotton, and H. Uchda. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 504, Rome. Pages 31-40.
Rankin, Lisa 2010 Chapter VI, iii: Shellfish. In, The Crescent Beach Site and the Place of the
Locarno Beach Phase. Edited by R.G. Matson, Feb. 19, 2010. www.anth.ubc.ca/people/professors-emeritiemeritae/rg-matson/crescent-beach-book.html. Accessed March 4, 2010.
Reitz, Elizabeth J. 2004 The Use of Archaeofaunal Data in Fish Management. In, The Future from
the Past: Archaeozoology in Wildlife Conservation and Heritage
Management. Proceedings of the 9th
ICAZ Conference, Durham, 2002. Editors Roel C.G.M. Lauwrier and Ina Plug. Pages 19-33.
Reitz, Elizabeth J. and Elizabeth S. Wing 2008 Zooarchaeology, Second Edition. Cambridge University Press, New York.
Roberts, Callum M.
2002 Deep Impact: The Rising Toll of Fishing in the Deep Sea. Trends in
Ecology and Evolution 17 (5): 242-245
Ross, Anne and Ryan Duffy 2000 Fine Mesh Screening of Midden Material and the Recovery of Fish Bone:
The Development of Flotation and Deflocculation Techniques for an Efficient and Effective Procedure. Geoarchaeology 15 (1): 21-41.
Salomon, Anne K., Nick M. Tanape Sr., and Henry P. Huntington
103
2007 Serial Depletion of Marine Invertebrates Leads to the Decline of a Strongly Interacting Grazer. Ecological Applications 17 (6): 1752-1770.
Say Nuth Khaw Yum Heritage Park Indian Arm Provincial Park, Tsleil-Waututh Nation, and BC Parks
2007 Say Nuth Khaw Yum Heritage Park Indian Arm Provincial Park Draft Management Plan, Sept., 10, 2007. www.twnation.ca/treaty/PDF_Documents/SNKY_PublicDraft_Sept2007_FINAL.pdf (Accessed March 2, 2009)
Say Nuth Khaw Yum / Indian Arm Provincial Park 2010 Park Management Plan: Say Nuth Khaw Yum / Indian Arm Provincial
Park. Tsleil-Waututh Nation and B.C. Parks, North Vancouver and Victoria, B.C.
Scott, W.B. and E.J. Crossman 1973 Freshwater Fishes of Canada. Bulletin of the Fishery Research Board of
Canada 184. Ottawa, Ontario.
Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity 2002 Bonn Guidelines on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and
Equitable Sharing of the Benefits Arising out of their Utilization. Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, Montreal
Serbic, G., A. Alexander, F.Y.C. Wong, and M. Birch 1985 Index of Salmon Spawning Streams of British Columbia. Canadian Data
Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Science. Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Fisheries Research Branch, Nanaimo, B.C.
Simberloff, Daniel 1998 Flagships, Umbrellas, and Keystones: Is Single-Species Management
Passé in the Landscape Era? Biological Conservation 83 (3): 247-257.
Sindermann, C.J. 1979 Pollution-associated Diseases and Abnormalities of Fish and Shellfish: A
Review. Fisheries Bulletin 76 (4): 717-749.
Smith, Eric Alden 1983 Anthropological Implications of Optimal Foraging Theory: A Critical
Review. Current Anthropology 24(5): 625-651.
Snively, Gloria 1978 Exploring the Seashore in British Columbia, Washington and Oregon: A
Guide to Shorebirds and Intertidal Plants and Animals. Gordon Soules Book Publishers, Vancouver, BC.
Sparks, Dawn and Martha Border 1989 Echoes across the Inlet, edited by Damian Inwood. Deep Cove and Area
Heritage Association. North Vancouver, B.C.
104
Speller, Camilla 2010 Ancient DNA Analysis of Salmonid Remains from Noons Creek (DhRq-
1). Ancient DNA Lab Report 2010-2. Ancient DNA Laboratory, Department of Archaeology, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C.
Stantec 2009 Burrard Inlet Shoreline Change – Baseline Assessment. Prepared for
Burrard Inlet Environmental Action Program, Burnaby, B.C.
Stewart, Evan 2007 Archaeological Impacts of the Kinder-Morgan Oil Spill: Perspectives of
the Tsleil-Waututh Nation. Presentation delivered at B.C. Archaeology Forum, Simon Fraser University, Oct. 27, 2007.
Stiner, Mary C. and Natalie D. Munro
2002 Approaches to Prehistoric Diet Breadth, Demography, and Prey Ranking Systems in Time and Space. Journal of Archaeological Method and
Theory 9: 175-208.
Suttles, Wayne 1987 Variation in Habitat and Culture on the Northwest Coast. In Coast Salish
Essays, Talonbooks, Vancouver, B.C. Pages 26-44. Originally published 1960, Atken des 34, Internationalen Amerikanistenkongresses, Vienna.
Therriault, Thomas W., Douglas E. Hay, and Jacob F. Schweigert 2009 Biological Overview and Trends in Pelagic Forage Fish Abundance in The
Salish Sea (Strait of Georgia, British Columbia). Marine Ornithology 37: 3-8.
Therriault, Thomas W., A.N. McDiarmid, W. Wilff, and D. Hay 2009 Review of Northern Anchovy (Engraulis mordax) Biology and Fishery,
with Suggested Management Option for British Columbia. Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat, Research Document 2002/112. Nanaimo, B.C.
Tsleil-Waututh Nation 2007 Indian River Watershed Bioregional Atlas. Tsleil-Waututh Nation. North
Vancouver, BC.
2008 State of the Inlet: Marine Stewardship Program. Pamphlet, on file with the Tsleil-Waututh Nation. North Vancouver, B.C.
2010 Tsleil-Waututh Nation Bridges Noons Creek Bridge Site. News Release, Sept. 15, 2010.
2011 Stewardship. Tsleil-Waututh Nation website. www.burrardband.com/en/About%20TWN/Stewardship.aspx, accessed March 4, 2011.
105
Thom, Brian David 2005 Coast Salish Senses of Place: Dwelling, Meaning, Power, Property, and
Territory in the Coast Salish World. Unpublished PhD thesis, Department of Anthropology, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec.
Thrush, S.F., J.E. Hewitt, V.J. Cummings, P.K. Dayton, M. Cryer, S.J. Turner, G.A. Funnell, R.G. Budd, C.J. Milburn, and M.R. Wilkinson
1998 Disturbance of the Marine Benthic Habitat by Commerical Fishing: Impacts at the Scale of the Fishery. Ecological Applications 8(3): 866-879.
Trosper, Ronald L 2002 Northwest Coast Indigenous Institutions that Supported Resilience and
Sustainability. Ecological Economics 41: 329-344.
Trost, Teresa 2005 Forgotten Waters: A Zooarchaeological Analysis of the Cove Cliff Site
(DhRr18), Indian Arm, British Columbia. Unpublished Master’s thesis,
Department of Archaeology, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C.
Turner, Nancy J. and Katherine L. Turner 2008 “Where our Women Used to Get the Food”: Cumulative Effects and Use
of Ethnobotanical Knowledge and Practice, a Case Study from Coastal British Columbia. Botany 86: 103-115.
Turner, S.J., S.F. Thrush, J.E. Hewitt, V.J. Cummings, and G. Funnell 1999 Fishing Impacts and the Degradation or Loss of Habitat Structure.
Fisheries Management and Ecology 6: 401-420.
UBC Fisheries Centre 2007 2006-2007 Report. Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia,
Vancouver, B.C.
United Nations 2007 Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/en/drip.html, accessed March 5, 2011.
Wallace, S.Scott 1998 Sources of Information Used to Create Past and Present Ecosystems in the
Strait of Georgia. In, Back to the Future: Reconstructing the Strait of Georgia Ecosystem. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 6 (5): 19-20.
1999 Fisheries Impacts on Marine Ecosystems and Biological Diversity: The Role for Marine Protected Areas in British Columbia. Unpublished PhD thesis, Resource Management and Environmental Studies, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC.
106
Walters, Carl 2009 Variation in Productivity of Southern British Columbia Coho Salmon
(Oncorhynchus kisutch) Stocks and Implications for Mixed-Stock Management. Fisheries Centre Working Paper Series 2009-02. University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C.
Williams, Jean 1974 Faunal Remains from the Cates Park Site (DhRr8), North Vancouver,
British Columbia. In, Archaeological Investigations at the Cates Park Site (DhRr8) by A.S. Charlton, pages 21-52. Report on file with the Archaeology Branch, Ministry of Natural Resource Operations, Victoria, B.C.
Willis, K.J., R.M. Bailey, S.A. Bhagwat, and H.J.B. Birks 2010 Biodiversity Baselines, Thresholds, and Resilience: Testing Predictions
and Assumptions Using Palaeoecological Data. Trends in Ecology and
Evolution 25: 583-591.
Winterhalder, Bruce and Carol Goland 1997 An Evolutionary Perspective on Diet Choice, Risk, and Plant
Domestication. In People, Plants, and Landscapes: Studies in
Paleoethnobotany, editor Kristen J. Gremillion. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa. Pages 123-160.
Winterhalder, Bruce and Eric Alden Smith 1992 Evolutionary Ecology and the Social Sciences. In Evolutionary Ecology
and Human Behavior, E.A. Smith and B. Winterhalder editors. Aldine De Gruyter, New York, pages 3-23.
2000 Analyzing Adaptive Strategies: Human Behavioral Ecology at Twenty-Five. Evolutionary Anthropology 9: 51-72.
Woollett, J.M., A.S. Henshaw, and C.P. Wake 2000 Paleoecological Implications of Archaeofaunal Seal Bone Assemblages:
Case Studies from Labrador and Baffin Island. Arctic 53: 395-413.
Zohar, Irit and Miriam Belmaker 2005 Size Does Matter: Methodological Comments on Sieve Size and Species
Richness in Fish Bone Assemblages. Journal of Archaeological Science 32: 635-641.