HomeMy WebLinkAboutAppendix C Cultural ResourcesA PHASE I CULTURAL
RESOURCES SURVEY FOR THE
MISSION TRAIL PROJECT
LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA
APN 379-050-019, -020, and -032
Submitted to:
City of Lake Elsinore
130 South Main Street
Lake Elsinore, California 92530
Prepared for:
EPD Solutions
2355 Main Street, Suite 100
Irvine, California 92614
Prepared by:
Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc.
14010 Poway Road, Suite A
Poway, California 92064
March 29, 2022
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Archaeological Database Information
Author(s): Brian F. Smith, Elena C. Goralogia, and Jillian L.H. Conroy
Consulting Firm: Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc.
14010 Poway Road, Suite A
Poway, California 92064
(858) 679-8218
Report Date: March 29, 2022
Report Title: A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail
Project, Lake Elsinore, California
Prepared for: EPD Solutions
2355 Main Street, Suite 100
Irvine, California 92614
Submitted to: City of Lake Elsinore
130 South Main Street
Lake Elsinore, California 92530
Submitted by: Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc.
14010 Poway Road, Suite A
Poway, California 92064
Assessor’s Parcel Number(s): 379-050-019, -020, and -032
USGS Quadrangle(s): Lake Elsinore, California (7.5 minute)
Study Area: 18 acres
Key Words: USGS Lake Elsinore Quadrangle (7.5 minute); archaeological
survey; historic standpipe and concrete pipe recorded as Temp-1;
monitoring recommended.
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Table of Contents
Section Page
I. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................1
II. SETTING ....................................................................................................................1
Natural Environment .................................................................................................1
Cultural Setting – Archaeological Perspectives ........................................................5
III. SCOPE OF WORK ...................................................................................................21
IV. RESULTS OF THE STUDY ....................................................................................21
Background Research and Results of Records Searches .......................................21
Field Reconnaissance ..............................................................................................23
Significance Evaluation ...........................................................................................23
V. RECOMMENDATIONS ..........................................................................................34
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program .....................................................34
VI. CERTIFICATION ....................................................................................................36
VII. REFERENCES .........................................................................................................36
Appendices
Appendix A – Resumes of Key Personnel
Appendix B – Site Record Form*
Appendix C – Archaeological Records Search Results*
Appendix D – NAHC Sacred Lands File Search*
Appendix E – Confidential Maps*
Appendix F – Confidential Plates*
*Deleted for public review and bound separately in the Confidential Appendix
List of Figures
Figure Page
Figure 1 General Location Map .................................................................................2
Figure 2 Project Location Map (USGS) .....................................................................3
Figure 3 Site Plan .......................................................................................................4
Figure 4 1953 USGS Map* ......................................................................................24
Figure 5 Cultural Resource Location* .....................................................................32
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
List of Figures (continued)
Figure Page
Figure 6 Historic Feature Location Map* ................................................................33
*Deleted for public review and bound separately in the Confidential Appendix
List of Plates
Plate Page
Plate 1 June 2009 Aerial Photograph* ...................................................................25
Plate 2 November 2009 Aerial Photograph* .........................................................26
Plate 3 1953 Aerial Photograph* ...........................................................................27
Plate 4 1974 Aerial Photograph* ...........................................................................28
Plate 5 1980 Aerial Photograph* ...........................................................................29
Plate 6 Overview of the project, facing southwest ................................................30
Plate 7 Overview of the project, facing northeast ..................................................30
Plate 8 View of the standpipe identified on the property, facing northwest ..........31
Plate 9 Close-up view of the exposed vertical concrete pipe leading to the
standpipe ....................................................................................................31
*Deleted for public review and bound separately in the Confidential Appendix
List of Tables
Table Page
Table 1 Previously Recorded Archaeological Sites Within a One-Mile Radius
of the Project ..............................................................................................22
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
1
I. INTRODUCTION
In response to a requirement by the City of Lake Elsinore for the environmental assessment
of a proposed residential development, Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. (BFSA) conducted an
archaeological survey of the 18-acre Mission Trail Project. This project is within Assessor’s Parcel
Numbers [APNs] 379-050-019, -020, and -032 and is located southeast of the intersection of
Victorian Lane and Mission Trail in the city of Lake Elsinore, Riverside County (Figure 1). The
property is situated within Section 21, Township 6 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Base and
Meridian, as shown on the USGS Lake Elsinore, California topographic quadrangle (Figure 2).
The project consists of the construction of a residential development with a park, recreation center,
and associated parking and landscaping (Figure 3).
The archaeological survey, which was conducted on March 17, 2022, was undertaken in
order to determine if cultural resources exist within the property. The survey was positive for the
presence of a historic standpipe and concrete pipe recorded as Temp-1. As part of this study, a
copy of the report will be submitted to Eastern Information Center (EIC) at the University of
California at Riverside (UCR). All investigations conducted by BFSA related to this project
conformed to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and City of Lake Elsinore
environmental guidelines.
II. SETTING
Natural Environment
Riverside County lies in the Peninsular Ranges Geologic Province of southern California.
The range, which lies in a northwest to southeast trend through the county, extends some 1,000
miles from the Raymond-Malibu Fault Zone in western Los Angeles County to the southern tip of
Baja California. The subject property is generally flat and appears to have been entirely disked in
the past. Elevations within the property range from approximately 1,276 to 1,286 feet above mean
sea level (AMSL). The majority of the project is covered in dense native and non-native grasses
and weeds.
The project lies within the Elsinore Fault Zone, which is locally comprised of several active
fault segments (Weber 1977; Morton and Weber 2003) and forms a complex series of pull-apart
basins, the largest and most pronounced of which forms a flat-floored, closed depression called La
Laguna, which is partly filled by Lake Elsinore (Morton and Weber 2003). The majority of the
project is underlain by Holocene- and late Pleistocene-aged, young alluvial valley deposits that are
composed of unconsolidated sand, silt, and clay-bearing alluvium (Wirths 2022). The western
edge of the project is mapped as Holocene-aged, very young lacustrine deposits composed of
clayey, silty, and fine-grained sandy sediments (Wirths 2022). Soils within the project consist of
Greenfield sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes, eroded, Visalia fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes,
and Waukena loamy fine sand, saline-alkali (NRCS 2019).
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
5
During the prehistoric period, vegetation in the area of the project provided sufficient food
resources to support prehistoric human occupants. Animals that inhabited the project area during
prehistoric times included mammals such as rabbits, squirrels, gophers, mice, rats, deer, and
coyotes, in addition to a variety of reptiles and amphibians. The natural setting of the project area
during the prehistoric occupation offered a rich nutritional resource base. Fresh water was likely
obtainable on a year-round basis from the San Jacinto River, which has historically discharged
flood water into Lake Elsinore. Lake Elsinore was recorded on the 1857 Britton and Rey’s Map
as “Laguna Sal,” or “salt lake or lagoon,” making its waters poisonous. The lake currently contains
fresh water after numerous cycles of drought and flooding beginning in the early 1800s (Gunther
1984).
Cultural Setting – Archaeological Perspectives
The archaeological perspective seeks to reconstruct past cultures based upon the material
remains left behind. This is done by using a range of scientific methodologies, almost all of which
draw from evolutionary theory as the base framework. Archaeology allows one to look deeper
into history or prehistory to see where the beginnings of ideas manifest via analysis of material
culture, allowing for the understanding of outside forces that shape social change. Thus, the
archaeological perspective allows one to better understand the consequences of the history of a
given culture upon modern cultures. Archaeologists seek to understand the effects of past contexts
of a given culture upon this moment in time, not culture in context in the moment.
Despite this, a distinction exists between “emic” and “etic” ways of understanding material
culture, prehistoric lifeways, and cultural phenomena in general (Harris 1991). While “emic”
perspectives serve the subjective ways in which things are perceived and interpreted by the
participants within a culture, “etic” perspectives are those of an outsider looking in hoping to attain
a more scientific or “objective” understanding of the given phenomena. Archaeologists, by
definition, will almost always serve an etic perspective as a result of the very nature of their work.
As indicated by Laylander et al. (2014), it has sometimes been suggested that etic understanding,
and therefore an archaeological understanding, is an imperfect and potentially ethnocentric attempt
to arrive at emic understanding. In contrast to this, however, an etic understanding of material
culture, cultural phenomena, and prehistoric lifeways can address significant dimensions of culture
that lie entirely beyond the understanding or interest of those solely utilizing an emic perspective.
As Harris (1991:20) appropriately points out, “Etic studies often involve the measurement and
juxtaposition of activities and events that native informants find inappropriate or meaningless.”
This is also likely true of archaeological comparisons and juxtapositions of material culture.
However, culture as a whole does not occur in a vacuum and is the result of several millennia of
choices and consequences influencing everything from technology, to religions, to institutions.
Archaeology allows for the ability to not only see what came before, but to see how those choices,
changes, and consequences affect the present. Where possible, archaeology should seek to address
both emic and etic understandings to the extent that they may be recoverable from the
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
6
archaeological record as manifestations of patterned human behavior (Laylander et al. 2014).
To that point, the culture history offered herein is primarily based upon archaeological
(etic) and ethnographic (partially emic and partially etic) information. It is understood that the
ethnographic record and early archaeological records were incompletely and imperfectly collected.
In addition, in most cases, more than a century of intensive cultural change and cultural evolution
had elapsed since the terminus of the prehistoric period. Coupled with the centuries and millennia
of prehistoric change separating the “ethnographic present” from the prehistoric past, this has
affected the emic and etic understandings of prehistoric cultural settings. Regardless, there
remains a need to present the changing cultural setting within the region under investigation. As
a result, both archaeological and Native American perspectives are offered when possible.
Introduction
Paleo Indian, Archaic Period Milling Stone Horizon, and the Late Prehistoric Takic groups
are the three general cultural periods represented in Riverside County. The following discussion
of the cultural history of Riverside County references the San Dieguito Complex, Encinitas
Tradition, Milling Stone Horizon, La Jolla Complex, Pauma Complex, and San Luis Rey Complex,
since these culture sequences have been used to describe archaeological manifestations in the
region. The Late Prehistoric component present in the Riverside County area was primarily
represented by the Cahuilla, Gabrielino, and Luiseño Indians.
Absolute chronological information, where possible, will be incorporated into this
archaeological discussion to examine the effectiveness of continuing to interchangeably use these
terms. Reference will be made to the geological framework that divides the archaeologically-
based culture chronology of the area into four segments: the late Pleistocene (20,000 to 10,000
years before the present [YBP]), the early Holocene (10,000 to 6,650 YBP), the middle Holocene
(6,650 to 3,350 YBP), and the late Holocene (3,350 to 200 YBP).
Paleo Indian Period (Late Pleistocene: 11,500 to circa 9,000 YBP)
Archaeologically, the Paleo Indian Period is associated with the terminus of the late
Pleistocene (12,000 to 10,000 YBP). The environment during the late Pleistocene was cool and
moist, which allowed for glaciation in the mountains and the formation of deep, pluvial lakes in
the deserts and basin lands (Moratto 1984). However, by the terminus of the late Pleistocene, the
climate became warmer, which caused the glaciers to melt, sea levels to rise, greater coastal
erosion, large lakes to recede and evaporate, extinction of Pleistocene megafauna, and major
vegetation changes (Moratto 1984; Martin 1967, 1973; Fagan 1991). The coastal shoreline at
10,000 YBP, depending upon the particular area of the coast, was near the 30-meter isobath, or
two to six kilometers further west than its present location (Masters 1983).
Paleo Indians were likely attracted to multiple habitat types, including mountains,
marshlands, estuaries, and lakeshores. These people likely subsisted using a more generalized
hunting, gathering, and collecting adaptation utilizing a variety of resources including birds,
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
7
mollusks, and both large and small mammals (Erlandson and Colten 1991; Moratto 1984; Moss
and Erlandson 1995).
Archaic Period (Early and Middle Holocene: circa 9,000 to 1,300 YBP)
Archaeological data indicates that between 9,000 and 8,000 YBP, a widespread complex
was established in the southern California region, primarily along the coast (Warren and True
1961). This complex is locally known as the La Jolla Complex (Rogers 1939; Moriarty 1966),
which is regionally associated with the Encinitas Tradition (Warren 1968) and shares cultural
components with the widespread Milling Stone Horizon (Wallace 1955). The coastal expression
of this complex appeared in southern California coastal areas and focused upon coastal resources
and the development of deeply stratified shell middens that were primarily located around bays
and lagoons. The older sites associated with this expression are located at Topanga Canyon,
Newport Bay, Agua Hedionda Lagoon, and some of the Channel Islands. Radiocarbon dates from
sites attributed to this complex span a period of over 7,000 years in this region, beginning over
9,000 YBP.
The Encinitas Tradition is best recognized for its pattern of large coastal sites characterized
by shell middens, grinding tools that are closely associated with the marine resources of the area,
cobble-based tools, and flexed human burials (Shumway et al. 1961; Smith and Moriarty 1985).
While ground stone tools and scrapers are the most recognized tool types, coastal Encinitas
Tradition sites also contain numerous utilized flakes, which may have been used to pry open
shellfish. Artifact assemblages at coastal sites indicate a subsistence pattern focused upon shellfish
collection and nearshore fishing. This suggests an incipient maritime adaptation with regional
similarities to more northern sites of the same period (Koerper et al. 1986). Other artifacts
associated with Encinitas Tradition sites include stone bowls, doughnut stones, discoidals, stone
balls, and stone, bone, and shell beads.
The coastal lagoons in southern California supported large Milling Stone Horizon
populations circa 6,000 YBP, as is shown by numerous radiocarbon dates from the many sites
adjacent to the lagoons. The ensuing millennia were not stable environmentally, and by 3,000
YBP, many of the coastal sites in central San Diego County had been abandoned (Gallegos 1987,
1992). The abandonment of the area is usually attributed to the sedimentation of coastal lagoons
and the resulting deterioration of fish and mollusk habitat. This is a well-documented situation at
Batiquitos Lagoon, where over a two-thousand-year period, dominant mollusk species occurring
in archaeological middens shift from deep-water mollusks (Argopecten sp.) to species tolerant of
tidal flat conditions (Chione sp.), indicating water depth and temperature changes (Miller 1966;
Gallegos 1987).
This situation likely occurred for other small drainages (Buena Vista, Agua Hedionda, San
Marcos, and Escondido creeks) along the central San Diego coast where low flow rates did not
produce sufficient discharge to flush the lagoons they fed (Buena Vista, Agua Hedionda,
Batiquitos, and San Elijo lagoons) (Byrd 1998). Drainages along the northern and southern San
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
8
Diego coastline were larger and flushed the coastal hydrological features they fed, keeping them
open to the ocean and allowing for continued human exploitation (Byrd 1998). Peñasquitos
Lagoon exhibits dates as late as 2,355 YBP (Smith and Moriarty 1985) and San Diego Bay showed
continuous occupation until the close of the Milling Stone Horizon (Gallegos and Kyle 1988).
Additionally, data from several drainages in Camp Pendleton indicate a continued occupation of
shell midden sites until the close of the period, indicating that coastal sites were not entirely
abandoned during this time (Byrd 1998).
By 5,000 YBP, an inland expression of the La Jolla Complex is evident in the
archaeological record, exhibiting influences from the Campbell Tradition from the north. These
inland Milling Stone Horizon sites have been termed “Pauma Complex” (True 1958; Warren et al.
1961; Meighan 1954). By definition, Pauma Complex sites share a predominance of grinding
implements (manos and metates), lack mollusk remains, have greater tool variety (including atlatl
dart points, quarry-based tools, and crescentics), and seem to express a more sedentary lifestyle
with a subsistence economy based upon the use of a broad variety of terrestrial resources.
Although originally viewed as a separate culture from the coastal La Jolla Complex (True 1980),
it appears that these inland sites may be part of a subsistence and settlement system utilized by the
coastal peoples. Evidence from the 4S Ranch Project in inland San Diego County suggests that
these inland sites may represent seasonal components within an annual subsistence round by La
Jolla Complex populations (Raven-Jennings et al. 1996). Including both coastal and inland sites
of this time period in discussions of the Encinitas Tradition, therefore, provides a more complete
appraisal of the settlement and subsistence system exhibited by this cultural complex.
More recent work by Sutton has identified a more localized complex known as the Greven
Knoll Complex. The Greven Knoll Complex is a redefined northern inland expression of the
Encinitas Tradition first put forth by Mark Sutton and Jill Gardner (2010). Sutton and Gardner
(2010:25) state that “[t]he early millingstone archaeological record in the northern portion of the
interior southern California was not formally named but was often referred to as ‘Inland
Millingstone,’ ‘Encinitas,’ or even ‘Topanga.’” Therefore, they proposed that all expressions of
the inland Milling Stone in southern California north of San Diego County be grouped together in
the Greven Knoll Complex.
The Greven Knoll Complex, as postulated by Sutton and Gardner (2010), is broken into
three phases and obtained its name from the type-site Greven Knoll located in Yucaipa, California.
Presently, the Greven Knoll Site is part of the Yukaipa’t Site (SBR-1000) and was combined with
the adjacent Simpson Site. Excavations at Greven Knoll recovered manos, metates, projectile
points, discoidal cogged stones, and a flexed inhumation with a possible cremation (Kowta
1969:39). It is believed that the Greven Knoll Site was occupied between 5,000 and 3,500 YBP.
The Simpson Site contained mortars, pestles, side-notched points, and stone and shell beads.
Based upon the data recovered at these sites, Kowta (1969:39) suggested that “coastal Milling
Stone Complexes extended to and interdigitated with the desert Pinto Basin Complex in the
vicinity of the Cajon Pass.”
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
9
Phase I of the Greven Knoll Complex is generally dominated by the presence of manos and
metates, core tools, hammerstones, large dart points, flexed inhumations, and occasional
cremations. Mortars and pestles are absent from this early phase, and the subsistence economy
emphasized hunting. Sutton and Gardner (2010:26) propose that the similarity of the material
culture of Greven Knoll Phase I and that found in the Mojave Desert at Pinto Period sites indicates
that the Greven Knoll Complex was influenced by neighbors to the north at that time. Accordingly,
Sutton and Gardner (2010) believe that Greven Knoll Phase I may have appeared as early as 9,400
YBP and lasted until about 4,000 YBP.
Greven Knoll Phase II is associated with a period between 4,000 and 3,000 YBP. Artifacts
common to Greven Knoll Phase II include manos and metates, Elko points, core tools, and
discoidals. Pestles and mortars are present; however, they are only represented in small numbers.
Finally, there is an emphasis upon hunting and gathering for subsistence (Sutton and Gardner
2010:8).
Greven Knoll Phase III includes manos, metates, Elko points, scraper planes, choppers,
hammerstones, and discoidals. Again, small numbers of mortars and pestles are present. Greven
Knoll Phase III spans from approximately 3,000 to 1,000 YBP and shows a reliance upon seeds
and yucca. Hunting is still important, but bones seem to have been processed to obtain bone grease
more often in this later phase (Sutton and Gardner 2010:8).
The shifts in food processing technologies during each of these phases indicate a change
in subsistence strategies; although people were still hunting for large game, plant-based foods
eventually became the primary dietary resource (Sutton 2011a). Sutton’s (2011b) argument posits
that the development of mortars and pestles during the middle Holocene can be attributed to the
year-round exploitation of acorns as a main dietary provision. Additionally, the warmer and drier
climate may have been responsible for groups from the east moving toward coastal populations,
which is archaeologically represented by the interchange of coastal and eastern cultural traits
(Sutton 2011a).
Late Prehistoric Period (Late Holocene: 1,300 YBP to 1790)
Many Luiseño hold the world view that as a population they were created in southern
California. Archaeological and anthropological data, however, proposes a scientific
/archaeological perspective, suggesting that at approximately 1,350 YBP, Takic-speaking groups
from the Great Basin region moved into Riverside County, marking the transition to the Late
Prehistoric Period. An analysis of the Takic expansion by Sutton (2009) indicates that inland
southern California was occupied by “proto-Yuman” populations before 1,000 YBP. The
comprehensive, multi-phase model offered by Sutton (2009) employs linguistic, ethnographic,
archaeological, and biological data to solidify a reasonable argument for population replacement
of Takic groups to the north by Penutians (Laylander 1985). As a result, it is believed that Takic
expansion occurred starting around 3,500 YBP moving toward southern California, with the
Gabrielino language diffusing south into neighboring Yuman (Hokan) groups around 1,500 to
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
10
1,000 YBP, possibly resulting in the Luiseño dialect.
Based upon Sutton’s model, the final Takic expansion would not have occurred until about
1,000 YBP, resulting in Vanyume, Serrano, Cahuilla, and Cupeño dialects. The model suggests
that the Luiseño did not simply replace Hokan speakers, but were rather a northern San Diego
County/southern Riverside County Yuman population who adopted the Takic language. This
period is characterized by higher population densities and elaborations in social, political, and
technological systems. Economic systems diversified and intensified during this period with the
continued elaboration of trade networks, the use of shell-bead currency, and the appearance of
more labor-intensive, yet effective, technological innovations. Technological developments
during this period included the introduction of the bow and arrow between A.D. 400 and 600 and
the introduction of ceramics. Atlatl darts were replaced by smaller arrow darts, including
Cottonwood series points. Other hallmarks of the Late Prehistoric Period include extensive trade
networks as far-reaching as the Colorado River Basin and cremation of the dead.
Protohistoric Period (Late Holocene: 1790 to Present)
Ethnohistoric and ethnographic evidence indicates that three Takic-speaking groups
occupied portions of Riverside County: the Cahuilla, the Gabrielino, and the Luiseño. The
geographic boundaries between these groups in pre- and proto-historic times are difficult to place,
but the project is located well within the borders of ethnographic Luiseño territory. This group
was a seasonal hunting and gathering people with cultural elements that were very distinct from
Archaic Period peoples. These distinctions include cremation of the dead, the use of the bow and
arrow, and exploitation of the acorn as a main food staple (Moratto 1984). Along the coast, the
Luiseño made use of available marine resources by fishing and collecting mollusks for food.
Seasonally available terrestrial resources, including acorns and game, were also sources of
nourishment for Luiseño groups. Elaborate kinship and clan systems between the Luiseño and
other groups facilitated a wide-reaching trade network that included trade of Obsidian Butte
obsidian and other resources from the eastern deserts, as well as steatite from the Channel Islands.
According to Charles Handley (1967), the primary settlements of Late Prehistoric Luiseño
Indians in the San Jacinto Plain were represented by Ivah and Soboba near Soboba Springs, Jusipah
near the town of San Jacinto, Ararah in Webster’s Canyon en route to Idyllwild, Pahsitha near Big
Springs Ranch southeast of Hemet, and Corova in Castillo Canyon. These locations share features
such as the availability of food and water resources. Features of this land use include petroglyphs
and pictographs, as well as widespread milling, which is evident in bedrock and portable
implements. Groups in the vicinity of the project, neighboring the Luiseño, include the Cahuilla
and the Gabrielino. Ethnographic data for the three groups is presented below.
Luiseño: An Archaeological and Ethnographic Perspective
When contacted by the Spanish in the sixteenth century, the Luiseño occupied a territory
bounded on the west by the Pacific Ocean, on the east by the Peninsular Ranges mountains at San
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
11
Jacinto (including Palomar Mountain to the south and Santiago Peak to the north), on the south by
Agua Hedionda Lagoon, and on the north by Aliso Creek in present-day San Juan Capistrano. The
Luiseño were a Takic-speaking people more closely related linguistically and ethnographically to
the Cahuilla, Gabrielino, and Cupeño to the north and east rather than the Kumeyaay who occupied
territory to the south. The Luiseño differed from their neighboring Takic speakers in having an
extensive proliferation of social statuses, a system of ruling families that provided ethnic cohesion
within the territory, a distinct worldview that stemmed from the use of datura (a hallucinogen),
and an elaborate religion that included the creation of sacred sand paintings depicting the deity
Chingichngish (Bean and Shipek 1978; Kroeber 1976).
Subsistence and Settlement
The Luiseño occupied sedentary villages most often located in sheltered areas in valley
bottoms, along streams, or along coastal strands near mountain ranges. Villages were located near
water sources to facilitate acorn leaching and in areas that offered thermal and defensive
protection. Villages were comprised of areas that were publicly and privately (by family) owned.
Publicly owned areas included trails, temporary campsites, hunting areas, and quarry sites. Inland
groups had fishing and gathering sites along the coast that were intensively used from January to
March when inland food resources were scarce. During October and November, most of the
village would relocate to mountain oak groves to harvest acorns. The Luiseño remained at village
sites for the remainder of the year, where food resources were within a day’s travel (Bean and
Shipek 1978; Kroeber 1976).
The most important food source for the Luiseño was the acorn, six different species of
which were used (Quercus californica, Quercus agrifolia, Quercus chrysolepis, Quercus dumosa,
Quercus engelmannii, and Quercus wislizenii). Seeds, particularly of grasses, flowering plants,
and mints, were also heavily exploited. Seed-bearing species were encouraged through controlled
burns, which were conducted at least every third year. A variety of other stems, leaves, shoots,
bulbs, roots, and fruits were also collected. Hunting augmented this vegetal diet. Animal species
taken included deer, rabbit, hare, woodrat, ground squirrel, antelope, quail, duck, freshwater fish
from mountain streams, marine mammals, and other sea creatures such as fish, crustaceans, and
mollusks (particularly abalone, or Haliotis sp.). In addition, a variety of snakes, small birds, and
rodents were eaten (Bean and Shipek 1978; Kroeber 1976).
Social Organization
Social groups within the Luiseño nation consisted of patrilinear families or clans, which
were politically and economically autonomous. Several clans comprised a religious party, or nota,
which was headed by a chief who organized ceremonies and controlled economics and warfare.
The chief had assistants who specialized in particular aspects of ceremonial or environmental
knowledge and who, with the chief, were part of a religion-based social group with special access
to supernatural power, particularly that of Chingichngish. The positions of chief and assistants
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
12
were hereditary, and the complexity and multiplicity of these specialists’ roles likely increased in
coastal and larger inland villages (Bean and Shipek 1978; Kroeber 1976; Strong 1929).
Marriages were arranged by the parents, often made to forge alliances between lineages.
Useful alliances included those between groups of differing ecological niches and those that
resulted in territorial expansion. Residence was patrilocal (Bean and Shipek 1978; Kroeber 1976).
Women were primarily responsible for plant gathering and men principally hunted, but at times,
particularly during acorn and marine mollusk harvests, there was no division of labor. Elderly
women cared for children and elderly men participated in rituals, ceremonies, and political affairs.
They were also responsible for manufacturing hunting and ritual implements. Children were
taught subsistence skills at the earliest age possible (Bean and Shipek 1978; Kroeber 1976).
Material Culture
House structures were conical, partially subterranean, and thatched with reeds, brush, or
bark. Ramadas were rectangular, protected workplaces for domestic chores such as cooking.
Ceremonial sweathouses were important in purification rituals; these were round and partially
subterranean thatched structures covered with a layer of mud. Another ceremonial structure was
the wámkis (located in the center of the village, serving as the place of rituals), where sand
paintings and other rituals associated with the Chingichngish religious group were performed
(Bean and Shipek 1978; Kroeber 1976).
Clothing was minimal; women wore a cedar-bark and netted twine double apron, and men
wore a waist cord. In cold weather, cloaks or robes of rabbit fur, deerskin, or sea otter fur were
worn by both sexes. Footwear included deerskin moccasins and sandals fashioned from yucca
fibers. Adornments included bead necklaces and pendants made of bone, clay, stone, shell, bear
claw, mica, deer hooves, and abalone shell. Men wore ear and nose piercings made from cane or
bone, which were sometimes decorated with beads. Other adornments were commonly decorated
with semiprecious stones including quartz, topaz, garnet, opal, opalite, agate, and jasper (Bean and
Shipek 1978; Kroeber 1976).
Hunting implements included the bow and arrow. Arrows were tipped with either a carved,
fire-hardened wood tip or a lithic point, usually fashioned from locally available metavolcanic
material or quartz. Throwing sticks fashioned from wood were used in hunting small game, while
deer head decoys were used during deer hunts. Coastal groups fashioned dugout canoes for
nearshore fishing and harvested fish with seines, nets, traps, and hooks made of bone or abalone
shell (Bean and Shipek 1978; Kroeber 1976).
The Luiseño had a well-developed basket industry. Baskets were used in resource
gathering, food preparation, storage, and food serving. Ceramic containers were shaped by paddle
and anvil and fired in shallow, open pits to be used for food storage, cooking, and serving. Other
utensils included wood implements, steatite bowls, and ground stone manos, metates, mortars, and
pestles (Bean and Shipek 1978; Kroeber 1976). Additional tools such as knives, scrapers,
choppers, awls, and drills were also used. Shamanistic items include soapstone or clay smoking
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
13
pipes and crystals made of quartz or tourmaline (Bean and Shipek 1978; Kroeber 1976).
Cahuilla: An Archaeological and Ethnographic Perspective
At the time of Spanish contact in the sixteenth century, the Cahuilla occupied territory that
included the San Bernardino Mountains, Orocopia Mountain, and the Chocolate Mountains to the
west, Salton Sea and Borrego Springs to the south, Palomar Mountain and Lake Mathews to the
west, and the Santa Ana River to the north. The Cahuilla are a Takic-speaking people closely
related to their Gabrielino and Luiseño neighbors, although relations with the Gabrielino were
more intense than with the Luiseño. They differ from the Luiseño and Gabrielino in that their
religion is more similar to the Mohave tribes of the eastern deserts than the Chingichngish religious
group of the Luiseño and Gabrielino. The following is a summary of ethnographic data regarding
this group (Bean 1978; Kroeber 1976).
Subsistence and Settlement
Cahuilla villages were typically permanent and located upon low terraces within canyons
in proximity to water sources. These locations proved to be rich in food resources and also
afforded protection from prevailing winds. Villages had areas that were publicly owned and areas
that were privately owned by clans, families, or individuals. Each village was associated with a
particular lineage and series of sacred sites that included unique petroglyphs and pictographs.
Villages were occupied throughout the year; however, during a several-week period in the fall,
most of the village members relocated to mountain oak groves to take part in acorn harvesting
(Bean 1978; Kroeber 1976).
The Cahuilla’s use of plant resources is well documented. Plant foods harvested by the
Cahuilla included valley oak acorns and single-leaf pinyon pine nuts. Other important plant
species included bean and screw mesquite, agave, Mohave yucca, cacti, palm, chia, quail brush,
yellowray goldfield, goosefoot, manzanita, catsclaw, desert lily, mariposa lily, and several other
species such as grass seed. Several agricultural domesticates were acquired from the Colorado
River tribes including corn, bean, squash, and melon grown in limited amounts. Animal species
taken included deer, bighorn sheep, pronghorn antelope, rabbit, hare, rat, quail, dove, duck,
roadrunner, and a variety of rodents, reptiles, fish, and insects (Bean 1978; Kroeber 1976).
Social Organization
The Cahuilla was not a political nation, but rather a cultural nationality with a common
language. Two non-political, non-territorial patrimoieties were recognized: the Wildcats (túktem)
and the Coyotes (?ístam). Lineage and kinship were memorized at a young age among the
Cahuilla, providing a backdrop for political relationships. Clans were comprised of three to 10
lineages; each lineage owned a village site and specific resource areas. Lineages within a clan
cooperated in subsistence activities, defense, and rituals (Bean 1978; Kroeber 1976).
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
14
A system of ceremonial hierarchy operated within each lineage. The hierarchy included
the lineage leader, who was responsible for leading subsistence activities, guarding the sacred
bundle, and negotiating with other lineage leaders in matters concerning land use, boundary
disputes, marriage arrangements, trade, warfare, and ceremonies. The ceremonial assistant to the
lineage leader was responsible for organizing ceremonies. A ceremonial singer possessed and
performed songs at rituals and trained assistant singers. The shaman cured illnesses through
supernatural powers, controlled natural phenomena, and was the guardian of ceremonies, keeping
evil spirits away. The diviner was responsible for finding lost objects, telling future events, and
locating game and other food resources. Doctors were usually older women who cured various
ailments and illnesses with their knowledge of medicinal herbs. Finally, certain Cahuilla
specialized as traders, who ranged as far west as Santa Catalina and as far east as the Gila River
(Bean 1978; Kroeber 1976).
Marriages were arranged by parents from opposite moieties. When a child was born, an
alliance formed between the families, which included frequent reciprocal exchanges. The Cahuilla
kinship system extended to relatives within five generations. Important economic decisions,
primarily the distribution of goods, operated within this kinship system (Bean 1978; Kroeber
1976).
Material Culture
Cahuilla houses were dome-shaped or rectangular, thatched structures. The home of the
lineage leader was the largest, located near the ceremonial house with the best access to water.
Other structures within the village included the men’s sweathouse and granaries (Bean 1978;
Kroeber 1976).
Cahuilla clothing, like other groups in the area, was minimal. Men typically wore a
loincloth and sandals; women wore skirts made from mesquite bark, animal skin, or tules. Babies
wore mesquite bark diapers. Rabbit skin cloaks were worn in cold weather (Bean 1978; Kroeber
1976).
Hunting implements included the bow and arrow, throwing sticks, and clubs. Grinding
tools used in food processing included manos, metates, and wood mortars. The Cahuilla were
known to use long grinding implements made from wood to process mesquite beans; the mortar
was typically a hollowed log buried in the ground. Other tools included steatite arrow shaft
straighteners (Bean 1978; Kroeber 1976).
Baskets were made from rush, deer grass, and skunkbrush. Different species and leaves
were chosen for different colors in the basket design. Coiled-ware baskets were either flat (for
plates, trays, or winnowing), bowl-shaped (for food serving), deep, inverted, and cone-shaped (for
transporting), or rounded and flat-bottomed for storing utensils and personal items (Bean 1978;
Kroeber 1976).
Cahuilla pottery was made from a thin, red-colored ceramic ware that was often painted
and incised. Four basic vessel types are known for the Cahuilla: small-mouthed jars, cooking pots,
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
15
bowls, and dishes. Additionally, smoking pipes and flutes were fashioned from ceramic (Bean
1978; Kroeber 1976).
Gabrielino: An Archaeological and Ethnographic Perspective
The territory of the Gabrielino at the time of Spanish contact covers much of present-day
Los Angeles and Orange counties. The southern extent of this culture area is bounded by Aliso
Creek, the eastern extent is located east of present-day San Bernardino along the Santa Ana River,
the northern extent includes the San Fernando Valley, and the western extent includes portions of
the Santa Monica Mountains. The Gabrielino also occupied several Channel Islands including
Santa Barbara Island, Santa Catalina Island, San Nicholas Island, and San Clemente Island.
Because of their access to certain resources, including a steatite source from Santa Catalina Island,
this group was among the wealthiest and most populous aboriginal groups in all of southern
California. Trade of materials and resources controlled by the Gabrielino extended as far north as
the San Joaquin Valley, as far east as the Colorado River, and as far south as Baja California (Bean
and Smith 1978; Kroeber 1976).
Subsistence and Settlement
The Gabrielino lived in permanent villages and occupied smaller resource-gathering camps
at various times of the year depending upon the seasonality of the resource. Larger villages were
comprised of several families or clans, while smaller, seasonal camps typically housed smaller
family units. The coastal area between San Pedro and Topanga Canyon was the location of
primary subsistence villages, while secondary sites were located near inland sage stands, oak
groves, and pine forests. Permanent villages were located along rivers and streams and in sheltered
areas along the coast. As previously mentioned, the Channel Islands were also the locations of
relatively large settlements (Bean and Smith 1978; Kroeber 1976).
Resources procured along the coast and on the islands were primarily marine in nature and
included tuna, swordfish, ray and shark, California sea lion, Stellar sea lion, harbor seal, northern
elephant seal, sea otter, dolphin and porpoise, various waterfowl species, numerous fish species,
purple sea urchin, and mollusks, such as rock scallop, California mussel, and limpet. Inland
resources included oak acorn, pine nut, Mohave yucca, cacti, sage, grass nut, deer, rabbit, hare,
rodent, quail, duck, and a variety of reptiles such as western pond turtle and numerous snake
species (Bean and Smith 1978; Kroeber 1976).
Social Organization
Little is known about the social structure of the Gabrielino; however, there appears to have
been at least three social classes: 1) the elite, which included the rich, chiefs, and their immediate
family; 2) a middle class, which included people of relatively high economic status or long-
established lineages; and 3) a class of people that included most other individuals in the society.
Villages were politically autonomous units comprised of several lineages. During times of the
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
16
year when certain seasonal resources were available, the village would divide into lineage groups
and move out to exploit them, returning to the village between forays (Bean and Smith 1978;
Kroeber 1976).
Each lineage had its own leader, with the village chief coming from the dominant lineage.
Several villages might be allied under a paramount chief. Chiefly positions were of an ascribed
status, most often passed to the eldest son. Chiefly duties included providing village cohesion,
leading warfare and peace negotiations with other groups, collecting tribute from the village(s)
under his jurisdiction, and arbitrating disputes within the village(s). The status of the chief was
legitimized by his safekeeping of the sacred bundle, a representation of the link between the
material and spiritual realms and the embodiment of power (Bean and Smith 1978; Kroeber 1976).
Shamans were leaders in the spirit realm. The duties of the shaman included conducting
healing and curing ceremonies, guarding the sacred bundle, locating lost items, identifying and
collecting poisons for arrows, and making rain (Bean and Smith 1978; Kroeber 1976).
Marriages were made between individuals of equal social status and, in the case of
powerful lineages, marriages were arranged to establish political ties between the lineages (Bean
and Smith 1978; Kroeber 1976).
Men conducted the majority of the heavy labor, hunting, fishing, and trading with other
groups. Women’s duties included gathering and preparing plant and animal resources, and making
baskets, pots, and clothing (Bean and Smith 1978; Kroeber 1976).
Material Culture
Gabrielino houses were domed, circular structures made of thatched vegetation. Houses
varied in size and could house from one to several families. Sweathouses (semicircular, earth-
covered buildings) were public structures used in male social ceremonies. Other structures
included menstrual huts and a ceremonial structure called a yuvar, an open-air structure built near
the chief’s house (Bean and Smith 1978; Kroeber 1976).
Clothing was minimal; men and children most often went naked, while women wore
deerskin or bark aprons. In cold weather, deerskin, rabbit fur, or bird skin (with feathers intact)
cloaks were worn. Island and coastal groups used sea otter fur for cloaks. In areas of rough terrain,
yucca fiber sandals were worn. Women often used red ochre upon their faces and skin for
adornment or protection from the sun. Adornment items included feathers, fur, shells, and beads
(Bean and Smith 1978; Kroeber 1976).
Hunting implements included wood clubs, sinew-backed bows, slings, and throwing clubs.
Maritime implements included rafts, harpoons, spears, hook and line, and nets. A variety of other
tools included deer scapulae saws, bone and shell needles, bone awls, scrapers, bone or shell
flakers, wedges, stone knives and drills, metates, mullers, manos, shell spoons, bark platters, and
wood paddles and bowls. Baskets were made from rush, deer grass, and skunkbush. Baskets were
fashioned for hoppers, plates, trays, and winnowers for leaching, straining, and gathering. Baskets
were also used for storing, preparing, and serving food, and for keeping personal and ceremonial
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
17
items (Bean and Smith 1978; Kroeber 1976).
The Gabrielino had exclusive access to soapstone, or steatite, procured from Santa Catalina
Island quarries. This highly prized material was used for making pipes, animal carvings, ritual
objects, ornaments, and cooking utensils. The Gabrielino profited well from trading steatite since
it was valued so much by groups throughout southern California (Bean and Smith 1978; Kroeber
1976).
Ethnohistoric Period (1769 to Present)
Traditionally, the history of the state of California has been divided into three general
periods: the Spanish Period (1769 to 1821), the Mexican Period (1822 to 1846), and the American
Period (1848 to present) (Caughey 1970). The American Period is often further subdivided into
additional phases: the nineteenth century (1848 to 1900), the early twentieth century (1900 to
1950), and the Modern Period (1950 to present). From an archaeological standpoint, all of these
phases can be referred to together as the Ethnohistoric Period. This provides a valuable tool for
archaeologists, as ethnohistory is directly concerned with the study of indigenous or non-Western
peoples from a combined historical/anthropological viewpoint, which employs written documents,
oral narrative, material culture, and ethnographic data for analysis.
European exploration along the California coast began in 1542 with the landing of Juan
Rodriguez Cabrillo and his men at San Diego Bay. Sixty years after the Cabrillo expeditions, an
expedition under Sebastian Viscaíno made an extensive and thorough exploration of the Pacific
coast. Although the voyage did not extend beyond the northern limits of the Cabrillo track,
Viscaíno had the most lasting effect upon the nomenclature of the coast. Many of his place names
have survived, whereas practically every one of the names created by Cabrillo have faded from
use. For instance, Cabrillo named the first (now) United States port he stopped at “San Miguel”;
60 years later, Viscaíno changed it to “San Diego” (Rolle 1969). The early European voyages
observed Native Americans living in villages along the coast but did not make any substantial,
long-lasting impact. At the time of contact, the Luiseño population was estimated to have ranged
from 4,000 to as many as 10,000 individuals (Bean and Shipek 1978; Kroeber 1976).
The historic background of the project area began with the Spanish colonization of Alta
California. The first Spanish colonizing expedition reached southern California in 1769 with the
intention of converting and civilizing the indigenous populations, as well as expanding the
knowledge of and access to new resources in the region (Brigandi 1998). As a result, by the late
eighteenth century, a large portion of southern California was overseen by Mission San Luis Rey
(San Diego County), Mission San Juan Capistrano (Orange County), and Mission San Gabriel
(Los Angeles County), who began colonizing the region and surrounding areas (Chapman 1921).
Up until this time, the only known way to feasibly travel from Sonora to Alta California
was by sea. In 1774, Juan Bautista de Anza, an army captain at Tubac, requested and was given
permission by the governor of the Mexican State of Sonora to establish an overland route from
Sonora to Monterey (Chapman 1921). In doing so, Juan Bautista de Anza passed through
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
18
Riverside County and described the area in writing for the first time (Caughey 1970; Chapman
1921). In 1797, Father Presidente Lausen (of Mission San Diego de Alcalá), Father Norberto de
Santiago, and Corporal Pedro Lisalde (of Mission San Juan Capistrano) led an expedition through
southwestern Riverside County in search of a new mission site to establish a presence between
San Diego and San Juan Capistrano (Engelhardt 1921). Their efforts ultimately resulted in the
establishment of Mission San Luis Rey in Oceanside, California.
Each mission gained power through the support of a large, subjugated Native American
workforce. As the missions grew, livestock holdings increased and became increasingly
vulnerable to theft. In order to protect their interests, the southern California missions began to
expand inland to try and provide additional security (Beattie and Beattie 1939; Caughey 1970). In
order to meet their needs, the Spaniards embarked upon a formal expedition in 1806 to find
potential locations within what is now the San Bernardino Valley. As a result, by 1810, Father
Francisco Dumetz of Mission San Gabriel had succeeded in establishing a religious site, or capilla,
at a Cahuilla rancheria called Guachama (Beattie and Beattie 1939). San Bernardino Valley
received its name from this site, which was dedicated to San Bernardino de Siena by Father
Dumetz. The Guachama rancheria was located in present-day Bryn Mawr in San Bernardino
County.
These early colonization efforts were followed by the establishment of estancias at Puente
(circa 1816) and San Bernardino (circa 1819) near Guachama (Beattie and Beattie 1939). These
efforts were soon mirrored by the Spaniards from Mission San Luis Rey, who in turn established
a presence in what is now Lake Elsinore, Temecula, and Murrieta (Chapman 1921). The
indigenous groups who occupied these lands were recruited by missionaries, converted, and put to
work in the missions (Pourade 1961). Throughout this period, the Native American populations
were decimated by introduced diseases, a drastic shift in diet resulting in poor nutrition, and social
conflicts due to the introduction of an entirely new social order (Cook 1976).
Mexico achieved independence from Spain in 1822 and became a federal republic in 1824.
As a result, both Baja and Alta California became classified as territories (Rolle 1969). Shortly
thereafter, the Mexican Republic sought to grant large tracts of private land to its citizens to begin
to encourage immigration to California and to establish its presence in the region. Part of the
establishment of power and control included the desecularization of the missions circa 1832.
These same missions were also located on some of the most fertile land in California and, as a
result, were considered highly valuable. The resulting land grants, known as “ranchos,” covered
expansive portions of California and by 1846, more than 600 land grants had been issued by the
Mexican government. Rancho Jurupa was the first rancho to be established and was issued to Juan
Bandini in 1838. Although Bandini primarily resided in San Diego, Rancho Jurupa was located
in what is now Riverside County (Pourade 1963). A review of Riverside County place names
quickly illustrates that many of the ranchos in Riverside County lent their names to present-day
locations, including Jurupa, El Rincon, La Sierra, El Sobrante de San Jacinto, La Laguna (Lake
Elsinore), Santa Rosa, Temecula, Pauba, San Jacinto Nuevo y Potrero, and San Jacinto Viejo
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
19
(Gunther 1984). As was typical of many ranchos, these were all located in the valley environments
within western Riverside County.
The treatment of Native Americans grew worse during the Rancho Period. Most of the
Native Americans were forced off of their land or put to work on the now privately-owned ranchos,
most often as slave labor. In light of the brutal ranchos, the degree to which Native Americans
had become dependent upon the mission system is evident when, in 1838, a group of Native
Americans from Mission San Luis Rey petitioned government officials in San Diego to relieve
suffering at the hands of the rancheros:
We have suffered incalculable losses, for some of which we are in part to be blamed
for because many of us have abandoned the Mission … We plead and beseech you
… to grant us a Rev. Father for this place. We have been accustomed to the Rev.
Fathers and to their manner of managing the duties. We labored under their
intelligent directions, and we were obedient to the Fathers according to the
regulations, because we considered it as good for us. (Brigandi 1998:21)
Native American culture had been disrupted to the point where they could no longer rely
upon prehistoric subsistence and social patterns. Not only does this illustrate how dependent the
Native Americans had become upon the missionaries, but it also indicates a marked contrast in the
way the Spanish treated the Native Americans compared to the Mexican and United States
ranchers. Spanish colonialism (missions) is based upon utilizing human resources while
integrating them into their society. The Mexican and American ranchers did not accept Native
Americans into their social order and used them specifically for the extraction of labor, resources,
and profit. Rather than being incorporated, they were either subjugated or exterminated (Cook
1976).
By 1846, tensions between the United States and Mexico had escalated to the point of war
(Rolle 1969). In order to reach a peaceful agreement, the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo was put
into effect in 1848, which resulted in the annexation of California to the United States. Once
California opened to the United States, waves of settlers moved in searching for gold mines,
business opportunities, political opportunities, religious freedom, and adventure (Rolle 1969;
Caughey 1970). By 1850, California had become a state and was eventually divided into 27
separate counties. While a much larger population was now settling in California, this was
primarily in the central valley, San Francisco, and the Gold Rush region of the Sierra Nevada
mountain range (Rolle 1969; Caughey 1970). During this time, southern California grew at a much
slower pace than northern California and was still dominated by the cattle industry that was
established during the earlier rancho period. However, by 1859, the first United States Post Office
in what would eventually become Riverside County was set up at John Magee’s store on the
Temecula Rancho (Gunther 1984).
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
20
During the same decade, circa 1852, the Native Americans of southern Riverside County,
including the Luiseño and the Cahuilla, thought they had signed a treaty resulting in their
ownership of all lands from Temecula to Aguanga east to the desert, including the San Jacinto
Valley and the San Gorgonio Pass. The Temecula Treaty also included food and clothing
provisions for the Native Americans. However, Congress never ratified these treaties, and the
promise of one large reservation was rescinded (Brigandi 1998).
With the completion of the Southern Pacific Railroad in 1869, southern California saw its
first major population expansion. The population boom continued circa 1874 with the completion
of connections between the Southern Pacific Railroad in Sacramento to the transcontinental
Central Pacific Railroad in Los Angeles (Rolle 1969; Caughey 1970). The population influx
brought farmers, land speculators, and prospective developers to the region. As the Jurupa area
became more and more populated, circa 1870, Judge John Wesley North and a group of associates
founded the city of Riverside on part of the former rancho.
Although the first orange trees were planted in Riverside County circa 1871, it was not
until a few years later when a small number of Brazilian navel orange trees were established that
the citrus industry truly began in the region (Patterson 1971). The Brazilian navel orange was well
suited to the climate of Riverside County and thrived with assistance from several extensive
irrigation projects. At the close of 1882, an estimated half a million citrus trees were present in
California. It is estimated that nearly half of that population was in Riverside County. Population
growth and 1880s tax revenue from the booming citrus industry prompted the official formation
of Riverside County in 1893 out of portions of what was once San Bernardino County (Patterson
1971).
Shortly thereafter, with the start of World War I, the United States began to develop a
military presence in Riverside County with the construction of March Air Reserve Base. During
World War II, Camp Haan and Camp Anza were constructed in what is now the current location
of the National Veteran’s Cemetery. In the decades that followed, populations spread throughout
the county into Lake Elsinore, Corona, Norco, Murrieta, and Wildomar. However, a significant
portion of the county remained largely agricultural well into the 1970s. Following the 1970s,
Riverside saw a period of dramatic population increase as the result of new development, more
than doubling the population of the county with a population of over 1.3 million residents
(Patterson 1971).
History of the Lake Elsinore Area
The Lake Elsinore region started to develop in 1883 with the emergence of the railroad,
which brought a steady stream of settlers, miners, and prospectors to the area, thereby creating the
community of Lake Elsinore. Lake Elsinore was called “Paiakhche by the Luiseño Indians
(Kroeber 1907:147) and Laguna Grande, meaning ‘Big Lagoon,’ by the Spaniards and Mexicans”
(Gunther 1984). When Franklin H. Heald, Donald Graham, and William Collier bought the then
12,832-acre La Laguna Rancho in 1883, it was renamed Elsinore and subdivided into lots to be
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
21
sold (Gunther 1984). That same year, Heald renamed the lake “Lake Elsinore.” Beginning in the
early 1800s, the lake began an almost constant cycle of going completely dry and then overflowing
(Gunther 1984).
By 1884, the developing town had a school and post office established, and in 1893, the
town was officially recognized as the city of Lake Elsinore. In the late nineteenth century, the
town experienced a boom due to the mining of gold between the towns of Elsinore and nearby
Perris. The most prosperous mine was Good Hope Mine, which produced over $2 million worth
of gold (Hudson 1978). In addition to the mining of gold, Lake Elsinore is also known for the
mining of tin ore, coal, clay, and asbestos. Following the mining boom, Lake Elsinore began to
bring in many tourists due to boat and auto racing and the lakefront resorts. The earliest attraction
of Lake Elsinore was the legendary Crescent Bathhouse, which was built in 1923. Historically,
the Crescent Bathhouse has attracted many Hollywood stars, such as Will Rogers. The bathhouse
was declared a National Historic Place on July 30, 1975 (Hudson 1978). In 1932, the Ortega
Highway and the airport were opened, continuing to bring people into the city. The Great
Depression limited expansion, except for the completion of a new post office in 1932 (Hudson
1978).
III. SCOPE OF WORK
In order to determine the presence of cultural resources within the proposed project, the
archaeological investigation consisted of the following tasks:
1) An archaeological records search utilizing data from the EIC at UCR was used to gather
any and all information regarding recorded cultural resources within or adjacent to the
project.
2) The initial archaeological survey of the property was accomplished by conducting a
structured intensive reconnaissance that followed 10-meter survey transects, which
covered all areas of the project. All areas of disturbed ground and any rodent burrows
were analyzed for evidence of buried archaeological deposits.
3) This archaeological technical report was prepared to present the results of the field
survey, impact analysis, and presentation of any mitigation measures required for
project approval.
IV. RESULTS OF STUDY
Background Research and Results of Record Searches
BFSA conducted a records search for the project and surrounding one-mile radius utilizing
data from the EIC at UCR (Appendix C). According to the records search, nine cultural resource
sites are located within the one-mile search radius, none of which are within the project (Table 1).
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
22
The resources include a historic residence, prehistoric and historic isolates, historic irrigation
features, Lake Elsinore, the historic Skylark airport, a historic farm complex, and a prehistoric
lithic scatter.
Table 1
Previously Recorded Archaeological Sites
Within a One-Mile Radius of the Project
Site Number Site Description
P-33-007157 Historic single-family residence
P-33-008914 Prehistoric isolate
P-33-011009 Lake Elsinore
RIV-7879 Historic Skylark Airport
P-33-014804 and P-33-019926 Historic irrigation feature(s)
P-33-014891 Historic farm complex
P-33-015945 Historic isolate
P-33-028890 Prehistoric lithic scatter
The records search results also indicate that 26 cultural resource studies (see Appendix C)
have been conducted within a one-mile radius of the project, five of which (Drover 1980; Hampson
1991; LeCount and Weber 1992; Cunningham et al. 2013; Duke et al. 2017) include the subject
property. None of these studies, which include cultural and paleontological resource assessments
and test excavations, recorded any archaeological resources within the subject property.
BFSA reviewed the following sources to help facilitate a better understanding of the
historic use of the property:
• The National Register of Historic Places index
• Built Environment Resources Directory
• Historic USGS data
• Historic aerial photographs (1938, 1953, 1962, 1967, 1974, 1978, 1980, 1982, 1985,
1994, 2002, 2005, 2009, 2010, and 2012)
Aerial photographs indicate that the property has been vacant since at least 1938 with dirt roads
and evidence of cultivation present throughout the years. From 1980 to 1994, the edge of Lake
Elsinore is immediately west of and infringing upon the subject property boundary. However, by
2002, the lake had receded, and that area was being used for the Lake Elsinore Motorsports Park.
Aerial photographs from 2009 depict a greenhouse tent in June that was gone by November of that
year (Plates 1 and 2). Further, a reservoir is shown in the southeast corner of the property on the
1953 Elsinore 7.5-minute USGS map (Figure 4) and subsequent editions of that map through 1988.
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
23
However, aerial photographs indicate that this reservoir was present from as early as 1953 through
at least 1974 (Plates 3 and 4). The reservoir is no longer visible on aerial photographs by 1980
(Plate 5).
BFSA also requested a Sacred Lands File search from the Native American Heritage
Commission on March 11, 2022. However, as of the date of this report, no response has been
received. Original correspondence is provided in Appendix D.
The records search and literature review suggest that there is a potential for primarily
historic sites to be contained within the boundaries of the property. Given the historic settlement
of the region, in addition to the frequency of historic sites and very few prehistoric sites known to
be surrounding the project, there is a potential for archaeological discoveries associated with the
historic occupation of the Lake Elsinore area.
Field Reconnaissance
Principal Investigator Brian F. Smith directed the pedestrian survey of the project on March
17, 2022 with assistance from Archaeological Field Director Clarence Hoff. Aerial photographs,
maps, and a compass permitted orientation and location of project boundaries. Where possible,
narrow transect paths were employed to ensure maximum lot coverage. All exposed ground was
inspected for cultural materials. A survey form, field notes, and photographs documented the
survey work undertaken.
Visibility during the survey was approximately 50 percent due to dense native and non-
native grasses and weeds. The entire property appears to have been previous disked and graded
and dirt roads are present along the northern and western property boundaries (Plates 6 and 7).
During the survey, BFSA staff carefully inspected all exposed ground surfaces, including rodent
burrows and disturbed areas. Three cut-off wood power poles are located on the western half of
the property and a concrete standpipe was identified in the southeastern portion of the property,
with a partially buried, vertical concrete pipe leading to the standpipe (Plates 8 and 9).
The standpipe and vertical concrete pipe were likely fed by the reservoir present from the
early 1950s to the mid-1970s, as indicated by aerial photographs and USGS maps. As a result of
the field survey, the standpipe and concrete pipe have been recorded as Temp-1 (Figures 5 and 6;
see Appendix B).
Significance Evaluation
For a resource to be eligible for inclusion on the California Register of Historical Resources
(CRHR), one or more of the following criteria must be met:
1) Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns
of local or regional history or the cultural heritage of California or the United States.
2) Associated with the lives of persons important to local, California or national history.
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
24
Figure 4
1953 USGS Map
(Deleted for Public Review; Bound Separately)
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
25
Plate 1
June 2009 Aerial Photograph
(Deleted for Public Review; Bound Separately)
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
26
Plate 2
November 2009 Aerial Photograph
(Deleted for Public Review; Bound Separately)
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
27
Plate 3
1953 Aerial Photograph
(Deleted for Public Review; Bound Separately)
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
28
Plate 4
1974 Aerial Photograph
(Deleted for Public Review; Bound Separately)
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
29
Plate 5
1980 Aerial Photograph
(Deleted for Public Review; Bound Separately)
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
30
Plate 6: Overview of the project, facing southwest.
Plate 7: Overview of the project, facing northeast.
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
31
Plate 8: View of the standpipe identified on the property, facing northwest.
Plate 9: Close-up view of the exposed vertical concrete pipe leading to the standpipe.
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
32
Figure 5
Cultural Resource Location Map
(Deleted for Public Review; Bound Separately)
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
33
Figure 6
Historic Feature Location Map
(Deleted for Public Review; Bound Separately)
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
34
3) Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region or method of
construction or represents the work of a master or possesses high artistic values.
4) Has yielded, or has the potential to yield, information important to the prehistory
or history of the local area, California or the nation.
Archival research indicates that the standpipe and vertical concrete pipe are not associated
with any significant events or people in California or national history, they do not embody
distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, do not represent the
work of a master, do not possess high artistic values, and have not yielded/do not have the potential
to yield information important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California, or the
nation. As such, Temp-1 is not eligible for the CRHR and the historic features are not considered
Historical Resources under CEQA criteria (Section 15064.5).
V. RECOMMENDATIONS
In accordance with CEQA and City of Lake Elsinore environmental guidelines, the
potential impacts associated with the proposed development of the project were evaluated. No
prehistoric resources were identified during the survey. However, the cultural resources study for
the project was positive for the presence of a historic standpipe and concrete pipe recorded as
Temp-1. Site Temp-1 is likely associated with the 1950s to 1970s reservoir that was located in the
southeast corner of the property. As stated in Section IV, Temp-1 does not meet the minimum
criteria for inclusion in the CRHR and the historic features are not considered Historical Resources
under CEQA criteria (Section 15064.5).
Although Temp-1 is not eligible for the CRHR, it is recommended that the project be
conditioned with archaeological and Native American monitoring of all ground-disturbing
activities due to the potential to encounter buried historic features or archaeological deposits.
Given the close proximity of the project to previously recorded Native American resources, Native
American monitoring will be necessary. A cultural resources Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program (MMRP) will be recommended as a condition of approval for this property.
The scope of the MMRP is presented below.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
A MMRP to mitigate potential impacts to undiscovered, buried cultural resources within
the project shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the lead agency. This program shall include,
but not be limited to, the following actions:
1) Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide written verification
that a certified archaeologist has been retained to implement the monitoring program.
This verification shall be presented in a letter from the project archaeologist to the lead
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
35
agency.
2) The certified archaeologist shall attend the pre-grading meeting with the contractors to
explain and coordinate the requirements of the monitoring program.
3) During the original cutting of previously undisturbed deposits, the archaeological shall
be on-site, as determined by the consulting archaeologist, to perform periodic
inspections of the excavations. The frequency of inspections will depend upon the rate
of excavation, the materials excavated, and the presence and abundance of artifacts and
features. The consulting archaeologist shall have the authority to modify the
monitoring program if the potential for cultural resources appears to be less than
anticipated.
4) Isolates and clearly non-significant deposits will be minimally documented in the field
so the monitored grading can proceed.
6) In the event that previously unidentified cultural resources are discovered, the
archaeologist shall have the authority to divert or temporarily halt ground disturbance
operation in the area of discovery to allow for the evaluation of potentially significant
cultural resources. The archaeologist shall contact the lead agency at the time of
discovery. The archaeologist, in consultation with the lead agency, shall determine the
significance of the discovered resources. The lead agency must concur with the
evaluation before construction activities will be allowed to resume in the affected area.
For significant cultural resources, a Research Design and Data Recovery Program to
mitigate impacts shall be prepared by the consulting archaeologist and approved by the
lead agency before being carried out using professional archaeological methods.
7) Before construction activities are allowed to resume in the affected area, the artifacts
shall be recovered and features recorded using professional archaeological methods.
The project archaeologist shall determine the amount of material to be recovered for an
adequate artifact sample for analysis.
8) All cultural material collected during the grading monitoring program shall be
processed and curated according to the current professional repository standards. The
collections and associated records shall be transferred, including title, to an appropriate
curation facility, to be accompanied by payment of the fees necessary for permanent
curation.
9) A report documenting the field and analysis results and interpreting the artifact and
research data within the research context shall be completed and submitted to the
satisfaction of the lead agency prior to the issuance of any building permits. The report
will include Department of Parks and Recreation Primary and Archaeological Site
Forms.
10) If any human remains are discovered, the county coroner and lead agency shall be
contacted. In the event that the remains are determined to be of Native American
origin, the Most Likely Descendant, as identified by the NAHC, shall be contacted in
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
36
order to determine proper treatment and disposition of the remains.
VI. CERTIFICATION
I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the
data and information required for this archaeological report, and that the facts, statements, and
information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, and have been
compiled in accordance with CEQA criteria as defined in Section 15064.5.
March 29, 2022
Brian F. Smith Date
Principal Investigator
VII. REFERENCES
Bean, Lowell John
1978 Cahuilla. In Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8. California, edited by Robert
F. Heizer. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
Bean, Lowell John and Florence C. Shipek
1978 Luiseño. In Handbook of North American Indians (Vol. 8), California, edited by R.F.
Heizer. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
Bean, Lowell John and Charles R. Smith
1978 Gabrielino. In Handbook of North American Indians, Vol 8. California, edited by
Robert F. Heizer. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
Beattie, George W. and Helen P. Beattie
1939 Heritage of the Valley: San Bernardino’s First Century. Biobooks, Oakland,
California.
Brigandi, Phil
1998 Temecula: At the Crossroads of History. Heritage Media Corporation, Encinitas,
California.
Byrd, Brian F.
1998 Harvesting the Littoral Landscape During the Late Holocene: New Perspectives from
Northern San Diego County. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology
20(2):195–218.
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
37
Caughey, John W.
1970 California, A Remarkable State’s Life History. Prentice-Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs,
New Jersey.
Chapman, Charles E.
1921 A History of California: The Spanish Period. The Macmillan Company, New York.
Cook, Sherburne F.
1976 The Conflict Between the California Indian and White Civilization. University of
California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles, California.
Cunningham, Robert, Wendy Jones, Evelyn N. Chandler, and Roger Mason
2013 Cultural Resources Investigation Results of the Marshalling Yard Survey, Access
Road Survey, and Supplemental 115kV Transmission Line Survey in Support of the
Alberhill Substation, Riverside County, California. ECORP Consulting, Inc.
Unpublished report on file at the Eastern Information Center at the University of
California at Riverside, Riverside, California.
Drover, Christopher E.
1980 An Archaeological Assessment of Proposed Wastewater Treatment Facilities at the
Southeast End of Lake Elsinore and Railroad Canyon, Riverside County, California.
Albert A. Webb Associates. Unpublished report on file at the Eastern Information
Center at the University of California at Riverside, Riverside, California.
Duke, Curt, Matthew Stever, and Benjamin Scherzer
2017 Cultural and Paleontological Resources Assessment, East Lake Specific Plan
Amendment No. 11, Lake Elsinore, Riverside County, California. Duke CRM.
Unpublished report on file at the Eastern Information Center at the University of
California at Riverside, Riverside, California.
Engelhardt, Zephyrin
1921 San Luis Rey Mission, The King of the Missions. James M. Barry Company, San
Francisco, California.
Erlandson, Jon M. and Roger H. Colten (editors)
1991 An Archaeological Context for Early Holocene Sites on the California Coast. In
Hunter-Gatherers of Early Holocene Coastal California, edited by Jon M. Erlandson
and Roger H. Colten, pp. 101–111. Perspectives in California Archaeology 1. Institute
of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles.
Fagan, B.
1991 Ancient North America: The Archaeology of a Continent. Thames and Hudson.
London.
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
38
Gallegos, Dennis
1987 A Review and Synthesis of Environmental and Cultural Material for the Batiquitos
Lagoon Region. In San Dieguito-La Jolla: Chronology and Controversy. Editor. San
Diego County Archaeological Society Research Paper 1.
1992 Patterns and Implications of Coastal Settlement in San Diego County: 9000 to 1300
Years Ago. In Essays on the Prehistory of Maritime California, edited by Terry Jones.
Center for Archaeological Research, Davis, California.
Gallegos, Dennis R. and Carolyn E. Kyle
1988 Five Thousand Years of Maritime Subsistence at Ballast Point Prehistoric Site SDI-48
(W-164) San Diego, California. Unpublished report on file at the South Coastal
Information Center at San Diego State University, San Diego, California.
Gunther, Jane Davies
1984 Riverside County, California, Place Names: Their Origins and Their Stories.
Rubidoux Printing, Riverside, California.
Hampson, R. Paul
1991 Cultural Resources Survey and Test Excavation, Lake Elsinore, California.
Greenwood and Associates and Infotech Research, Inc. Unpublished report on file at
the Eastern Information Center at the University of California at Riverside, Riverside,
California.
Handley, Charles
1967 The Sun City Story. Sun City News 2 February:6, 15-19. Sun City, California.
Harris, Marvin
1991 Cultural Anthropology. HarperCollins Publishers Inc., New York, New York.
Hudson, Tom
1978 Lake Elsinore’s Valley, Its Story, 1776-1977. Lake Elsinore Bicentennial Commission,
1978.
Koerper, Henry, C., Jonathan E. Ericson, Christopher E. Drover, and Paul E. Langenwalter, II
1986 Obsidian Exchange in Prehistoric Orange County. Pacific Coast Archaeological
Society Quarterly 22(1):33–69.
Kowta, M.
1969 The Sayles Complex: A Late Milling Stone Assemblage from Cajon Pass and the
Ecological Implications of Scraper Planes. University of California Publications in
Anthropology 6.
Kroeber, A.L.
1976 Handbook of the Indians of California. Reprinted. Dover Editions, Dover
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
39
Publications, Inc., New York. Originally published 1925, Bulletin No. 78, U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
Laylander, Don (editor)
1985 Some Linguistic Approaches to Southern California’s Prehistory. In San Diego State
University Cultural Resource Management Casual Papers 2(1):14–58.
Laylander, Don, Jerry Schaefer, Nick Doose, Jessica Hennessey, and Ian Scharlotta
2014 A Regional Synthesis of Prehistoric Archaeological Landscapes in the
Jacumba/McCain Valley Region, San Diego and Imperial Counties, California.
Prepared for the Bureau of Land Management and San Diego Gas & Electric by ASM
Affiliates, Carlsbad, California.
LeCount, Lisa and Carmen A. Weber
1992 Cultural Resources Survey for the East Lake Specific Plan. Chambers Group, Inc.
Unpublished report on file at the Eastern Information Center at the University of
California at Riverside, Riverside, California.
Martin, P.S.
1967 Prehistoric Overkill. In Pleistocene Extinctions: The Search for a Cause, edited by P.
Martin and H.E. Wright. Yale University Press: New Haven.
1973 The Discovery of America. Science 179(4077): 969-974.
Masters, Patricia M.
1983 Detection and Assessment of Prehistoric Artifact Sites off the Coast of Southern
California. In Quaternary Coastlines and Marine Archaeology: Towards the
Prehistory of Land Bridges and Continental Shelves, edited by P.M. Masters and N.C.
Flemming, pp. 189-213. Academic Press, London.
Meighan, Clement W.
1954 A Late Complex in Southern California Prehistory. Southwestern Journal of
Anthropology 10(2).
Miller, J.
1966 The Present and Past Molluscan Faunas and Environments of Four Southern
California Coastal Lagoons. Master’s thesis. University of California, San Diego.
Moratto, Michael J.
1984 California Archaeology. Academic Press, New York.
Moriarty, James R., III
1966 Culture Phase Divisions Suggested by Topological Change Coordinated with
Stratigraphically Controlled Radiocarbon Dating in San Diego. Anthropological
Journal of Canada 4(4):20–30.
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
40
Morton, D.M. and F.H. Weber
2003 Preliminary geologic map of the Elsinore 7.5' quadrangle, Riverside County,
California: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 03-281, version 1.0, scale
1:24,000.
Moss, M.L. and J. Erlandson
1995 Reflections on North American Coast Prehistory. Journal of World Prehistory 9(1):1–
46.
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)
2019 Web Soil Survey. Electronic document, https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/
App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx, accessed March 24, 2022.
Patterson, Tom
1971 A Colony for California: Riverside’s First Hundred Years. Press-Enterprise, Riverside,
California.
Pourade, Richard F.
1961 Time of the Bells. The History of San Diego Volume 2. Union-Tribune Publishing
Company, San Diego, California.
1963 The Silver Dons. The History of San Diego Volume 3. Union-Tribune Publishing
Company, San Diego, California.
Raven-Jennings, Shelly, Brian F. Smith and Johnna L. Buysse
1996 The Results of a Cultural Resource Study at the 4S Ranch, Rancho Bernardo, County
of San Diego. Unpublished report on file at the South Coastal Information Center at
San Diego State University, San Diego, California.
Rogers, Malcolm J.
1939 Early Lithic Industries of the Lower Basin of the Colorado River and Adjacent Desert
Areas. In San Diego Museum Papers (No. 3 – 1989 printing). San Diego Museum of
Man, San Diego, California.
Rolle, Andrew F.
1969 California: A History (Second Edition). Thomas Y. Crowell Company, New York.
Shumway, George, Carl L. Hubbs, and James R. Moriarty, III
1961 Scripps Estate Site, San Diego, California: A La Jollan Site Dated 5,460-7,370 Years
Before the Present. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 93(3).
Smith, Brian F. and James R. Moriarty, III
1985 An Archaeological Reconnaissance of San Diego Motor Racing Park, Otay Mesa, San
Diego. Unpublished report on file at the City of San Diego, Environmental Analysis
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
41
Division, San Diego, California.
Strong, William Duncan
1929 Aboriginal Society in Southern California. University of California Publications in
American Archaeology and Ethnology 26(1).
Sutton, Mark Q.
2009 People and Language: Defining the Takic Expansion into Southern California. Pacific
Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 41(2&3):33–93.
2011a The Palomar Tradition and Its Place in the Prehistory of Southern California. Pacific
Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 44(4):1–74.
2011b A Prehistory of North America. Routledge, New York.
Sutton, Mark Q. and Jill K. Gardner
2010 Reconceptualizing the Encinitas Tradition of Southern California. Pacific Coast
Archaeological Society Quarterly 42(4):1–64.
True, Delbert L.
1958 An Early Complex in San Diego County, California. American Antiquity 23(3).
1980 The Pauma Complex in Northern San Diego County. The Journal of New World
Archaeology 3(4):1–39
Wallace, William J.
1955 A Suggested Chronology for Southern California Coastal Archaeology. Southwestern
Journal of Anthropology 11:214–230.
Warren, Claude N. (editor)
1968 Cultural Tradition and Ecological Adaptation on the Southern Coast. In Archaic
Prehistory in the Western United States, C.I. Williams, editor. Eastern New Mexico
University Contributions in Anthropology 1(3):1–14.
Warren, Claude N. and D.L. True
1961 The San Dieguito Complex and its Place in California Prehistory, In Archaeological
Survey Annual Report 1960-1961. University of California Press, Los Angeles,
California.
Warren, Claude N., D.L. True, and Ardith A. Eudey
1961 Early Gathering Complexes of Western San Diego County: Results and Interpretations
of an Archaeological Survey. Archaeological Survey Annual Report 1960-1961.
University of California, Los Angeles.
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
42
Weber, F.H., Jr.
1977 Seismic hazards related to geologic factors, Elsinore and Chico fault zones,
northwestern Riverside County, California: California Div. of Mines and Geology
Open-File Report 77-4 LA.
Wirths, Todd A.
2022 Paleontological Assessment for the Mission Trail Project, Lake Elsinore, Riverside
County, California. Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. Unpublished report on file at
Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc., Poway, California.
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
APPENDIX A
Resumes of Key Personnel
Brian F. Smith, MA
Owner, Principal Investigator
Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc.
14010 Poway Road Suite A
Phone: (858) 679-8218 Fax: (858) 679-9896 E-Mail: bsmith@bfsa-ca.com
Education
Master of Arts, History, University of San Diego, California 1982
Bachelor of Arts, History, and Anthropology, University of San Diego, California 1975
Professional Memberships
Society for California Archaeology
Experience
Principal Investigator 1977–Present
Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. Poway, California
Brian F. Smith is the owner and principal historical and archaeological consultant for Brian F. Smith and
Associates. Over the past 32 years, he has conducted over 2,500 cultural resource studies in California,
Arizona, Nevada, Montana, and Texas. These studies include every possible aspect of archaeology
from literature searches and large-scale surveys to intensive data recovery excavations. Reports
prepared by Mr. Smith have been submitted to all facets of local, state, and federal review agencies,
including the US Army Corps of Engineers, the Bureau of Land Management, the Bureau of
Reclamation, the Department of Defense, and the Department of Homeland Security. In addition, Mr.
Smith has conducted studies for utility companies (Sempra Energy) and state highway departments
(CalTrans).
Professional Accomplishments
These selected major professional accomplishments represent research efforts that have added
significantly to the body of knowledge concerning the prehistoric life ways of cultures once present in
the Southern California area and historic settlement since the late 18th century. Mr. Smith has been
principal investigator on the following select projects, except where noted.
Downtown San Diego Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Programs: Large numbers of downtown San
Diego mitigation and monitoring projects, some of which included Broadway Block (2019), 915 Grape
Street (2019), 1919 Pacific Highway (2018), Moxy Hotel (2018), Makers Quarter Block D (2017), Ballpark
Village (2017), 460 16th Street (2017), Kettner and Ash (2017), Bayside Fire Station (2017), Pinnacle on the
Park (2017), IDEA1 (2016), Blue Sky San Diego (2016), Pacific Gate (2016), Pendry Hotel (2015), Cisterra
Sempra Office Tower (2014), 15th and Island (2014), Park and G (2014), Comm 22 (2014), 7th and F Street
Parking (2013), Ariel Suites (2013), 13th and Marker (2012), Strata (2008), Hotel Indigo (2008), Lofts at 707
10th Avenue Project (2007), Breeza (2007), Bayside at the Embarcadero (2007), Aria (2007), Icon (2007),
Vantage Pointe (2007), Aperture (2007), Sapphire Tower (2007), Lofts at 655 Sixth Avenue (2007),
Metrowork (2007), The Legend (2006), The Mark (2006), Smart Corner (2006), Lofts at 677 7th Avenue
(2005), Aloft on Cortez Hill (2005), Front and Beech Apartments (2003), Bella Via Condominiums (2003),
Acqua Vista Residential Tower (2003), Northblock Lofts (2003), Westin Park Place Hotel (2001), Parkloft
Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. 2
Apartment Complex (2001), Renaissance Park (2001), and Laurel Bay Apartments (2001).
1900 and 1912 Spindrift Drive: An extensive data recovery and mitigation monitoring program at the
Spindrift Site, an important prehistoric archaeological habitation site stretching across the La Jolla
area. The project resulted in the discovery of over 20,000 artifacts and nearly 100,000 grams of bulk
faunal remains and marine shell, indicating a substantial occupation area (2013-2014).
San Diego Airport Development Project: An extensive historic assessment of multiple buildings at the
San Diego International Airport and included the preparation of Historic American Buildings Survey
documentation to preserve significant elements of the airport prior to demolition (2017-2018).
Citracado Parkway Extension: A still-ongoing project in the city of Escondido to mitigate impacts to an
important archaeological occupation site. Various archaeological studies have been conducted by
BFSA resulting in the identification of a significant cultural deposit within the project area.
Westin Hotel and Timeshare (Grand Pacific Resorts): Data recovery and mitigation monitoring program
in the city of Carlsbad consisted of the excavation of 176 one-square-meter archaeological data
recovery units which produced thousands of prehistoric artifacts and ecofacts, and resulted in the
preservation of a significant prehistoric habitation site. The artifacts recovered from the site presented
important new data about the prehistory of the region and Native American occupation in the area
(2017).
The Everly Subdivision Project: Data recovery and mitigation monitoring program in the city of El Cajon
resulted in the identification of a significant prehistoric occupation site from both the Late Prehistoric
and Archaic Periods, as well as producing historic artifacts that correspond to the use of the property
since 1886. The project produced an unprecedented quantity of artifacts in comparison to the area
encompassed by the site, but lacked characteristics that typically reflect intense occupation, indicating
that the site was used intensively for food processing (2014-2015).
Ballpark Village: A mitigation and monitoring program within three city blocks in the East Village area of
San Diego resulting in the discovery of a significant historic deposit. Nearly 5,000 historic artifacts and
over 500,000 grams of bulk historic building fragments, food waste, and other materials representing an
occupation period between 1880 and 1917 were recovered (2015-2017).
Archaeology at the Padres Ballpark: Involved the analysis of historic resources within a seven-block area
of the “East Village” area of San Diego, where occupation spanned a period from the 1870s to the
1940s. Over a period of two years, BFSA recovered over 200,000 artifacts and hundreds of pounds of
metal, construction debris, unidentified broken glass, and wood. Collectively, the Ballpark Project and
the other downtown mitigation and monitoring projects represent the largest historical archaeological
program anywhere in the country in the past decade (2000-2007).
4S Ranch Archaeological and Historical Cultural Resources Study: Data recovery program consisted of
the excavation of over 2,000 square meters of archaeological deposits that produced over one million
artifacts, containing primarily prehistoric materials. The archaeological program at 4S Ranch is the
largest archaeological study ever undertaken in the San Diego County area and has produced data
that has exceeded expectations regarding the resolution of long-standing research questions and
regional prehistoric settlement patterns.
Charles H. Brown Site: Attracted international attention to the discovery of evidence of the antiquity of
man in North America. Site located in Mission Valley, in the city of San Diego.
Del Mar Man Site: Study of the now famous Early Man Site in Del Mar, California, for the San Diego
Science Foundation and the San Diego Museum of Man, under the direction of Dr. Spencer Rogers and
Dr. James R. Moriarty.
Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. 3
Old Town State Park Projects: Consulting Historical Archaeologist. Projects completed in the Old Town
State Park involved development of individual lots for commercial enterprises. The projects completed
in Old Town include Archaeological and Historical Site Assessment for the Great Wall Cafe (1992),
Archaeological Study for the Old Town Commercial Project (1991), and Cultural Resources Site Survey at
the Old San Diego Inn (1988).
Site W-20, Del Mar, California: A two-year-long investigation of a major prehistoric site in the Del Mar
area of the city of San Diego. This research effort documented the earliest practice of
religious/ceremonial activities in San Diego County (circa 6,000 years ago), facilitated the projection of
major non-material aspects of the La Jolla Complex, and revealed the pattern of civilization at this site
over a continuous period of 5,000 years. The report for the investigation included over 600 pages, with
nearly 500,000 words of text, illustrations, maps, and photographs documenting this major study.
City of San Diego Reclaimed Water Distribution System: A cultural resource study of nearly 400 miles of
pipeline in the city and county of San Diego.
Master Environmental Assessment Project, City of Poway: Conducted for the City of Poway to produce
a complete inventory of all recorded historic and prehistoric properties within the city. The information
was used in conjunction with the City’s General Plan Update to produce a map matrix of the city
showing areas of high, moderate, and low potential for the presence of cultural resources. The effort
also included the development of the City’s Cultural Resource Guidelines, which were adopted as City
policy.
Draft of the City of Carlsbad Historical and Archaeological Guidelines: Contracted by the City of
Carlsbad to produce the draft of the City’s historical and archaeological guidelines for use by the
Planning Department of the City.
The Mid-Bayfront Project for the City of Chula Vista: Involved a large expanse of undeveloped
agricultural land situated between the railroad and San Diego Bay in the northwestern portion of the
city. The study included the analysis of some potentially historic features and numerous prehistoric
Cultural Resources Survey and Test of Sites Within the Proposed Development of the Audie Murphy
Ranch, Riverside County, California: Project manager/director of the investigation of 1,113.4 acres
and 43 sites, both prehistoric and historic—included project coordination; direction of field crews;
evaluation of sites for significance based on County of Riverside and CEQA guidelines; assessment of
cupule, pictograph, and rock shelter sites, co-authoring of cultural resources project report.
February- September 2002.
Cultural Resources Evaluation of Sites Within the Proposed Development of the Otay Ranch Village 13
Project, San Diego County, California: Project manager/director of the investigation of 1,947 acres
and 76 sites, both prehistoric and historic—included project coordination and budgeting; direction of
field crews; assessment of sites for significance based on County of San Diego and CEQA guidelines; co-
authoring of cultural resources project report. May-November 2002.
Cultural Resources Survey for the Remote Video Surveillance Project, El Centro Sector, Imperial County:
Project manager/director for a survey of 29 individual sites near the U.S./Mexico Border for proposed
video surveillance camera locations associated with the San Diego Border barrier Project—project
coordination and budgeting; direction of field crews; site identification and recordation; assessment of
potential impacts to cultural resources; meeting and coordinating with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
U.S. Border Patrol, and other government agencies involved; co-authoring of cultural resources project
report. January, February, and July 2002.
Cultural Resources Survey and Test of Sites Within the Proposed Development of the Menifee West GPA,
Riverside County, California: Project manager/director of the investigation of nine sites, both prehistoric
and historic—included project coordination and budgeting; direction of field crews; assessment of sites
Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. 4
for significance based on County of Riverside and CEQA guidelines; historic research; co-authoring of
cultural resources project report. January-March 2002.
Cultural Resources Survey and Test of Sites Within the Proposed French Valley Specific Plan/EIR, Riverside
County, California: Project manager/director of the investigation of two prehistoric and three historic
sites—included project coordination and budgeting; survey of project area; Native American
consultation; direction of field crews; assessment of sites for significance based on CEQA guidelines;
cultural resources project report in prep. July-August 2000.
Cultural Resources Survey and Test of Sites Within the Proposed Development of the Menifee Ranch,
Riverside County, California: Project manager/director of the investigation of one prehistoric and five
historic sites—included project coordination and budgeting; direction of field crews; feature
recordation; historic structure assessments; assessment of sites for significance based on CEQA
guidelines; historic research; co-authoring of cultural resources project report. February-June 2000.
Salvage Mitigation of a Portion of the San Diego Presidio Identified During Water Pipe Construction for
the City of San Diego, California: Project archaeologist/director—included direction of field crews;
development and completion of data recovery program; management of artifact collections
cataloging and curation; data synthesis and authoring of cultural resources project report in prep. April
2000.
Enhanced Cultural Resource Survey and Evaluation for the Tyrian 3 Project, La Jolla, California: Project
manager/director of the investigation of a single-dwelling parcel—included project coordination;
assessment of parcel for potentially buried cultural deposits; authoring of cultural resources project
report. April 2000.
Enhanced Cultural Resource Survey and Evaluation for the Lamont 5 Project, Pacific Beach, California:
Project manager/director of the investigation of a single-dwelling parcel—included project
coordination; assessment of parcel for potentially buried cultural deposits; authoring of cultural
resources project report. April 2000.
Enhanced Cultural Resource Survey and Evaluation for the Reiss Residence Project, La Jolla, California:
Project manager/director of the investigation of a single-dwelling parcel—included project
coordination; assessment of parcel for potentially buried cultural deposits; authoring of cultural
resources project report. March-April 2000.
Salvage Mitigation of a Portion of Site SDM-W-95 (CA-SDI-211) for the Poinsettia Shores Santalina
Development Project and Caltrans, Carlsbad, California: Project archaeologist/ director—included
direction of field crews; development and completion of data recovery program; management of
artifact collections cataloging and curation; data synthesis and authoring of cultural resources project
report in prep. December 1999-January 2000.
Survey and Testing of Two Prehistoric Cultural Resources for the Airway Truck Parking Project, Otay Mesa,
California: Project archaeologist/director—included direction of field crews; development and
completion of testing recovery program; assessment of site for significance based on CEQA guidelines;
authoring of cultural resources project report, in prep. December 1999-January 2000.
Cultural Resources Phase I and II Investigations for the Tin Can Hill Segment of the Immigration and
Naturalization Services Triple Fence Project Along the International Border, San Diego County, California:
Project manager/director for a survey and testing of a prehistoric quarry site along the border—NRHP
eligibility assessment; project coordination and budgeting; direction of field crews; feature recordation;
meeting and coordinating with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; co-authoring of cultural resources project
report. December 1999-January 2000.
Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. 5
Mitigation of a Prehistoric Cultural Resource for the Westview High School Project for the City of San
Diego, California: Project archaeologist/ director—included direction of field crews; development and
completion of data recovery program including collection of material for specialized faunal and
botanical analyses; assessment of sites for significance based on CEQA guidelines; management of
artifact collections cataloging and curation; data synthesis; co-authoring of cultural resources project
report, in prep. October 1999-January 2000.
Mitigation of a Prehistoric Cultural Resource for the Otay Ranch SPA-One West Project for the City of
Chula Vista, California: Project archaeologist/director—included direction of field crews; development
of data recovery program; management of artifact collections cataloging and curation; assessment of
site for significance based on CEQA guidelines; data synthesis; authoring of cultural resources project
report, in prep. September 1999-January 2000.
Monitoring of Grading for the Herschel Place Project, La Jolla, California: Project archaeologist/ monitor—
included monitoring of grading activities associated with the development of a single- dwelling parcel.
September 1999.
Survey and Testing of a Historic Resource for the Osterkamp Development Project, Valley Center,
California: Project archaeologist/ director—included direction of field crews; development and
completion of data recovery program; budget development; assessment of site for significance based
on CEQA guidelines; management of artifact collections cataloging and curation; data synthesis;
authoring of cultural resources project report. July-August 1999.
Survey and Testing of a Prehistoric Cultural Resource for the Proposed College Boulevard Alignment
Project, Carlsbad, California: Project manager/director —included direction of field crews;
development and completion of testing recovery program; assessment of site for significance based on
CEQA guidelines; management of artifact collections cataloging and curation; data synthesis;
authoring of cultural resources project report, in prep. July-August 1999.
Survey and Evaluation of Cultural Resources for the Palomar Christian Conference Center Project,
Palomar Mountain, California: Project archaeologist—included direction of field crews; assessment of
sites for significance based on CEQA guidelines; management of artifact collections cataloging and
curation; data synthesis; authoring of cultural resources project report. July-August 1999.
Survey and Evaluation of Cultural Resources at the Village 2 High School Site, Otay Ranch, City of Chula
Vista, California: Project manager/director —management of artifact collections cataloging and
curation; assessment of site for significance based on CEQA guidelines; data synthesis; authoring of
cultural resources project report. July 1999.
Cultural Resources Phase I, II, and III Investigations for the Immigration and Naturalization Services Triple
Fence Project Along the International Border, San Diego County, California: Project
manager/director for the survey, testing, and mitigation of sites along border—supervision of multiple
field crews, NRHP eligibility assessments, Native American consultation, contribution to Environmental
Assessment document, lithic and marine shell analysis, authoring of cultural resources project report.
August 1997- January 2000.
Phase I, II, and II Investigations for the Scripps Poway Parkway East Project, Poway California: Project
archaeologist/project director—included recordation and assessment of multicomponent prehistoric
and historic sites; direction of Phase II and III investigations; direction of laboratory analyses including
prehistoric and historic collections; curation of collections; data synthesis; coauthorship of final cultural
resources report. February 1994; March-September 1994; September-December 1995.
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
APPENDIX B
Site Record Form
(Deleted for Public Review; Bound Separately)
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
APPENDIX C
Archaeological Records Search Results
(Deleted for Public Review; Bound Separately)
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
APPENDIX D
NAHC Sacred Lands File Search
(Deleted for Public Review; Bound Separately)
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
APPENDIX E
Confidential Maps
(Deleted for Public Review; Bound Separately)
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Mission Trail Project
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
APPENDIX F
Confidential Plates
(Deleted for Public Review; Bound Separately)