Fire Stick Agriculture in California
By David A. Bainbridge
©1996
Associate Professor
United States International College of Business
Alliant International University
San Diego, CA 92131
Contents
1. Introduction
The native people of what is now called Southwest North America were
intelligent, skilled and knowledgeable applied ecologists who actively
managed the land (Anderson and Nabhan 1991; Bainbridge 1996).
Although they did not have bulldozers, tractors, and transnational
seed companies they were skilled in the use of fire (a very powerful and
intensively used tool), kept animals; selected, transported and planted
seeds for annual and perennial crops, and transplanted trees and shrubs
(Blackburn and Anderson, 1993). In
most areas they relied on tree crops for much of their sustenance,
primarily the oaks, mesquites, and pines (Lanner 1981; Meyer 1984; Nabhan
1985; Bainbridge 1986, 1987; Bainbridge et al. 1990; Ortiz 1991).
A better knowledge of their management practices can explain many
"biological" mysteries and improve our use and management of the
land and protection of rare and endangered ecosystems and species.
That so little is known reflects the persistent cultural bias
against the knowledge of native people and uneducated rural people
(Chambers 1984; Kaus, 1990; Bainbridge 1994).
Although these people were not college graduates they were
intelligent and outside learning every day, building upon hundreds and
thousands of years of observation and experimentation.
We have learned the magnitude of what we have lost through studies
of the few "primitive" peoples that have survived into modern
times. These studies reveal
the richness of knowledge and the complexity of their understanding and
management. For example,
Robert Carneiro (1978) tested the knowledge of the Kuikuru people in
Central Brazil by marking trees in the rainforest and seeing which could
be identified (all 172 were easily identified).
To make the test more difficult he gathered seedlings from the
forest floor and took them back to the village (a test few if any
botanists could pass) and again all 153 specimens were readily
identified.
The enormous loss of knowledge built up over centuries of
intelligent observation, testing, and evaluation was one of the many great
tragedies of the genocide of the native people.
The fragments of the accumulated land management knowledge bank
that have survived, thanks to the tenacity and courage of the native
people and the dedicated work of anthropologists, ecologists, and
historians, show what has been lost.
Much has also been obscured by the devastation caused by severe
overgrazing by livestock in the late 1800s (Burcham, 1957).
Much greater recognition should be paid to the effects of previous
native California management practices and extensive overgrazing on
species distribution and ecosystem structure and function.
Several "biological" mysteries and anomalies can be easily
explained if past management practices are considered.
Although fully validating these hypotheses will require field work,
additional literature review, and molecular biology; enough is known to
make these the simplest explanations for many biological phenomenon.
back
to top
2. Fire
Fire management was an essential and important tool of the native
people (Lewis 1973; Biswell 1989; Anderson 1993).
Selected areas were burned regularly at different seasons and
frequencies to improve hunting, facilitate harvesting, and to produce
desired materials (i.e. numerous straight willow shoots for weaving).
Burning might be done in the Spring, Fall, Spring and Fall, or on
an annual, 5, 10, or 20 year rotation.
These "fire stick" management practices were pervasive
and lasted until long after the missions were established.
The settlers in California, who failed to understand the use of
fire, were tormented by them, and edicts from the Governor were
periodically issued to stop them -- beginning in 1793!
The elimination of periodic burning (often on a 2 to 4 year return
frequency) contributed to dramatic changes in plant communities.
In Ponderosa forests in the Southwest for example, stem counts
increased from 23 to more than 800 trees per acre in some areas (Covington
and Moore, 1992). Coastal
California was once much more grassland and oak savannas and has now been
invaded by brush.
back
to top
3. Plant distribution
The acorns come down from heaven. I plant the short acorns in the Valley.
I plant the long acorns in the Valley. Maidu
song (Bainbridge 1985b)
In addition to fire effects planting tree seeds (oak, pinyon, mesquite,
walnut, etc.), cuttings (willows, palms, etc.), and transplanting was
common but unrecognized by biologists and botanists.
These skills were well developed and common (Anderson and Nabhan
1991; Bainbridge 1985a,b,1987; Bean and Saubel 1972; Blackburn and
Anderson, 1993; Nabhan 1982, 1985; Nabhan et al. 1982; Shipek 1989). These crops provided food, medicine, building materials,
craft materials, and fertilizer (Anderson and Nabhan 1991; Ebeling 1986;
Nabhan 1985; Nabhan 1982; Felger and Moser 1974).
These resources deserve increased recognition in the border region
(Nabhan, 19 ).
Discussion with the Tohono O'odham (Papago) revealed that the knowledge of
individual trees was striking, but this is not surprising after a little
reflection. Trees near the
settlements were known by sweetness, flavor, and time of ripening.
Imagine these trees and plants as the restaurants in your
neighborhood--and how quickly a knowledge of their dishes is learned by
direct observation and by word-of-mouth and it makes sense.
Appreciating this active plant selection and management can explain
the distribution of palm trees, the occurrence of the Torrey pines, and
the distribution of oaks. The genic similarity of the native palms (Washingtonia
filifera) in California's desert (McClenaghan and Beauchamp 1986)
doesn't need to be explained as an unlikely recolonization process of a
relict species if the palm is recognized as a cultivated tree. It is known that palms were transported, planted and
intensively managed (Bean and Saubel 1972).
The Kumeyaay also established palms in the Jamul valley (Shipek,
1989). Finding low genic
differences in abandoned orange groves would be equally hard to explain if
they were not recognized as a cultivated crop.
Many of the biological "problems" posed by the Torrey
Pine can also be explained as the result of human intervention.
Native people traveled extensively and moved plant material over
large areas. Studies of
relatively intact cultures in the Amazon have found they were shaping the
forests to provide better living conditions and improve resource
availability (Posey, 1985; Balee, 1987).
These "primitive" forest dwellers were found to be
selecting, transporting, planting and managing plant materials from an
area as large as western Europe. It
is likely that California was no different, and that plant resources were
selected and gathered from an equally large area.
One of the closest relatives of the Torrey Pine is found in
southern Mexico (Pinus psuedostrobus) (Anon, 1993; Perry, 1991), and is easy to
imagine an early plant explorer returned with a few of these flavorful
(one of the best pine nuts) and nutritious seeds to San Diego and the
Channel Islands.
The Torrey Pines were managed by the Istaguay
(Shipek, 1989), who planted, burned ground cover, and otherwise
cared for the trees. The decline of the pines, often ascribed to drought and
secondary invasion by beetles, is more clearly a case of an abandoned
orchard failing to thrive. Removal
of competing brush and reinitiating annual burning or brush management is
likely to be essential to protect the groves.
Jedediah Smith noted that oak and pine were scattered in San Diego
(1826-7) and this suggests they were not confined to the Torrey Pines park
area but were perhaps spread throughout the area.
By the time Dana arrived in the 1840s the pines were apparently all
gone, the value of these pines for ship repairs, buildings, and fuel would
have made harvest rapid, and it is surprising that any survived.
Perhaps the Istaguay played
an important role.
...women gave sprouted acorns to the Kwaipai, or village chief, who
selected the planting area. This matches Kumeyaay ownership data that some
oak groves were family owned, some band owned, and some open to any tribal
member... Florence
Shipek, 1989
The increasing ease of identifying plant populations provides a unique
opportunity to explore plant movement and management within California.
This would be of special interest in the oaks, which were a
mainstay of life in many areas ( Bainbridge 1985a,b,1987; 1994).
Many of the problems in oak recruitment may ultimately be traced to
the removal of the native people and their management practices.
The distribution of tree species may also help unravel
anthropological questions of triblet distribution and interchange between
groups.
back
to top
4. Conclusions
It is essential to realize this country was not wilderness but home
(Gomez-Pompa and Kaus, 1991). These
lands have been managed intensively for thousands of years and eliminating
the land managers has contributed to many of the problems we now
encounter. Biologists,
botanists, and ecologists must consider the management history of the land
to evaluate vegetation change, species distribution, ecosystem dynamics,
and best management practices.
A better understanding of the use and management of the native
people of America is essential to shape management of parks and preserves
today. Non-management is not
an option, failure to manage reserves can lead to decline and
disappearance of the preferred habitat characteristics and species.
Restoration should be made a priority, with full inclusion of the native
people and recognition of their past influences and actions.
back
to top
References:
*Anderson, M.K. and G.P. Nabhan. 1991. Gardeners in Eden. Wilderness
55(194):27-30.
*Anderson, M.K. 1993. The mountains smell like fire. Fremontia
21(4):15-20.
Anon. 1993. Torrey pine. Nature notes, Torrey Pines Docent Society, Torrey
Pines State Reserve 1p.
Bainbridge, D.A. 1985a. Acorns as Food: History, Use, Recipes, and
Bibliography.
Sierra Nature Prints, Scotts Valley, CA. 28p.
Bainbridge, D.A. 1985b. The rise of agriculture: A new perspective. Ambio
14(3):148-151.
Bainbridge, D.A. 1986. Quercus: A multi-purpose tree for temperate
climates.
International Tree Crops Journal 4(3):291-289.
*Bainbridge, D.A. 1987. Acorn use in California: Past, present,
future.
pp. 453-458 in T.R. Plumb and N.H. Pillsbury,
eds. Proceedings of the
Symposium on Multiple-Use Management of
California's Hardwood Resources.
GTR PSW 100. Pacific Southwest Forest and Range
Experiment Station,
Berkeley, CA.
Bainbridge, D.A. 1996. Agroforestry in the Southwest: a rich past and
promising
future. Agroforestry and Sustainable Systems (Ft.
Collins, CO, August 7-10,
1994). Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment
Station, Ft. Collins
(In press).
Bainbridge, D.A., R.A. Virginia and W. M. Jarrell. 1990. Honey
Mesquite:
A Multipurpose Tree for Arid Lands. NFT
Highlights 90-07. Nitrogen Fixing
Tree Association, Waimanalo, HI, 2p.
Balee, W. 1987. Cultural forests of the Amazon. Garden Nov/Dec pp
12-14,32.
*Bean, L.J. and K.S. Saubel. 1972. Temalpahk: Cahuilla Indian knowledge
and
usage of plants. Malki Museum Press, Banning, CA
*Biswell, H.H. 1989. Prescribed Burning in California Wildlands Vegetation
Management. University of California Press,
Berkeley, CA 255p.
*Blackburn, T.C. and M.K. Anderson. 1993. Before the Wilderness. Ballena
Press,
Menlo Park, CA 476p.
Blurton Jones, N. and M.J. Konnor. 1976. !kung knowledge of animal
behavior.
pp 325-348. In Lee, R.B. and I. De Vore eds.
Kalahari Hunter Gatherers.
Harvard University Press. Cambridge, Mass.
*Burcham, L.T. 1957. California Range Land: An Historico-Ecological Study
of the
Range Resource of California. Division of
Forestry, Dept. of Natural
Resources, Sacramento, CA 261p.
Carneiro, R.L. 1978. The knowledge and use of rain forest trees by the
Kuikuru
Indians of Central Brazil. pp. 201-216 in R.I.
Ford, ed. The Nature and Status
of Ethnobotany, No. 67. Museum of Anthropology,
University of Michigan,
Ann Arbor, MI.
Chambers, R. 1983. Rural Development: Putting the Last First. Longman
Scientific, Essex, England 246 p.
Covington, W.W. and M.M. Moore. 1992. Post settlement changes in natural
fire
regimes: Implications for restoration of old
growth ponderosa forests.
pp. 81-99 in M.R. Kaufmann, W.H. Moir, and R.L.
Bassett. Old-Growth Forests
in the Southwest and Rocky Mountain Regions. USDA
Forest Service
GTR RM 213. US Dept. of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Rocky Mountain Forest
and Range Experiment Station, Ft. Collins, CO.
Ebeling, W. 1986. Handbook of Indian Foods and Fibers of Arid America.
University of California Press, Berkeley, CA
971p.
Englehardt, Fr. Z. 1920. The missions and missionaries of California, new
series:
local history: San Diego Mission. James H. Berry,
San Francisco. (cited in
Shipek, 1989).
Felger, R.S. and M.B. Moser. 1974. Seri Indian pharmocopia. Economic
Botany
28(4):414-436.
Gomez-Pompa, A. and A. Kaus. 1992. Taming the wilderness myth. Bioscience
42(4):271-279.
Kaus, A. 1990. The conservation of conservation. Presentation American
Anthropological Association, New Orleans (reprint
UC Mexus newsletter)
Lanner, R.M. 1981. The Pinon Pine: A Natural and
Cultural History. University
of Nevada Press, Reno, NV 208p.
*Lewis, H.T. 1973. Patterns of Indian Burning in California. Ballena
Press, Ramona
101p.
McClenaghan, L.R. and A.C. Beauchamp. 1986. Low genic differentiation
among
isolated populations of the California Fan Palm (Washingtonia
filifera).
Evolution 40(2):315-322.
Meyer, D. 1984. Processing, Utilization, and Economics of Mesquite Pods.
Swiss
Federal Institute of Technology, Zurich,
Switzerland 159p.
*Nabhan, G.P. 1982. The Desert Smells Like Rain. North Point Press, San
Francisco, CA 148p.
*Nabhan, G.P. 1985. Gathering the Desert. University of Arizona Press,
Tucson,
AZ 209p.
*Nabhan, G.P. 199 . Genetic resources of the U.S.-Mexican Borderlands:
Wild
relatives of crops, their uses and conservation.
pp. 345-360. In P. Ganster
and H. Walter. Environmental Hazards and
Bioresource Management in the
U.S.-Mexico Borderlands. UCLA Latin America
Center Publications LA
*Nabhan, G.P., A.M. Rea, K.L. Reichardt, E. Melink, and C.F. Hutchinson.
1982.
Papago influence on habitat and biotic diversity:
Quitovac oasis
ethnoecology. Journal of Ethnoecology 2:124-143.
Ortiz, B. 1991. It Will Live Forever: Traditional Yosemite Indian Acorn
Preparation. Heyday Books, Berkeley, CA 148p.
Perry, J.P. 1991. The Pines of Mexico and Central America. Timber Press,
Portland Oregon pp. 146-153.
Posey, D. 1985. Indigenous management of tropical forest ecosystems: The
case
of the Kayapo Indians of the Brazilian Amazon.
Agroforestry Systems
3(2):139-158.
*Shipek, F. 1989. An example of intensive plant husbandry: the Kumeyaay of
southern California. pp. 159-170. In D.R. Harris
and G.C. Hillman editors.
Foraging and Farming, Unwin Hyman, London.
Wilken, G. C. 1987. Good Farmers: Traditional Agricultural Resource
Management
in Mexico and Central America. UC Press, Berkeley
pp. 129-146.
* are especially important, readable, useful
|
