The Kawesas Watershed Assessment

VII: Archaeological & Ethnographic Assessment

Dana Lepofsky and Brian Pegg

Previous chapters in this report have painted a portrait of an increasingly rare landscape in British Columbia: an intact temperate rain forest watershed that retains its long-term ecological integrity. Yet the description of the Kawesas presented so far — its rocks and soils, trees and snags, salmon, midges, and bears — is incomplete. This chapter will show that First Nations people have been an integral part of the Kawesas for generations, and discuss historic human uses of the Kawesas' resources.

Increasingly EuroAmericans have begun to recognize the fundamental importance and value of First Nations ancestral activities, traditional ecological knowledge, and territorial rights. Such was the case in the 1994 decision by the province to exclude Huchsduwachsdu from logging, and enter into a co-management partnership with the Haisla First Nation. The assessment of ancestral and current First Nations activities is a key tool for determining territorial rights and for managing ecosystems on a broad cultural basis.

The overall goal of the cultural component of the KWA was to document the nature and extent of traditional use of the Kawesas Watershed by the Haisla and Henaaksiala peoples. The traditional territory of the Henaaksiala people centers on Gardner Canal and its tributaries, including the Kawesas and Kitlope watersheds. The traditional territory of the Haisla encompasses the upper reaches of Douglas Channel and its tributaries (Compton 1993; Hamori-Torok 1990). The Henaaksiala were related to the Haisla by language and trade. In 1947, the Henaaksiala and the Haisla consolidated, and it is now appropriate to refer to all as members of the Haisla Nation.

The fieldwork had two components: interviews with Haisla elders concerning traditional land use of the watershed and an archaeological reconnaissance of selected areas within the Kawesas. Fieldwork was conducted from 2–12 August. Dana Lepofsky conducted interviews during a short stay in Kitamaat Village and while in the Kawesas. Dr. Emmon Bach, a linguist with extensive knowledge of the Haisla language, assisted with interviews conducted in Kitamaat Village. Dana Lepofsky, Brian Pegg, and Ken Lertzman conducted the archaeological reconnaissance in the Kawesas.

Interviews with Haisla consultants

Sources of information

Interviews of varying lengths were conducted with four elders, all currently of Kitamaat Village. The four elders are:

• Charlie Shaw (CS) - interviewed in Kitamaat Village. Charlie is from the Kitimat area.
• Cecil Paul (CP) - interviewed in Kitamaat Village. Cecil is from the Kitlope area.
• James Robertson (JR) - interviewed in Kitamaat Village. James is from the Kitlope area.
• Ken Hall (KH) - interviewed in the Kawesas. Ken is the hereditary chief of the Kawesas. He owns the rights to the name C'ekwikas (Chaqweekash) associated with that title (see Traditional Ownership, below). Ken is extremely knowledgeable about traditional use of the Kawesas watershed, and much of the following information comes from interviews with him.

Considerably more time could be spent conducting interviews about traditional use of the Kawesas watershed and adjacent areas. Other elders with knowledge about the Kawesas were not interviewed because they were away from Kitamaat during our brief stay there. Further, time constraints limited those interviews that were conducted. As a result, the following discussion is a preliminary summary of traditional use of the Kawesas watershed.

In addition to the interviews, information on traditional use of the Kawesas comes from Brian Compton's thesis on ethnobotany of the Haisla (Compton 1993), Compton's unpublished notes, and notes from Emmon Bach. Both Compton's and Bach's information comes primarily from the late Gordon Robertson, a high ranking elder of the Kitlope/Kemano area.

Traditional ownership of the Kawesas watershed

Ken Hall is the current hereditary chief of the Kawesas and owner of the name C'ekwikas associated with that title. The title was passed to Ken from his paternal uncle John Hall, who in turn was given the title from his uncle or his grandfather. The title could be passed on to any qualified male relative and was not necessarily the prerogative of the oldest child. The owner of the name was "always watching" a potential recipient to determine if they were suitable to hold the name (KH).

When the title to the Kawesas was passed to Ken in 1991, he gave a large feast where food and presents were distributed to the community. By doing so, he was able to demonstrate that he was strong enough to hold the title associated with the, Kawesas. By holding the title to the valley, Ken and his family have exclusive rights to use the valley and its resources. With this right comes the responsibility for "looking after" the resources within the valley. Others who want to use the valley are expected to ask permission from the chief (KH).

Traditional use of the Kawesas watershed

There is conflicting information about whether the Kawesas was ever settled on a permanent basis. KH and CS thought there were no permanent settlements in the Kawesas. According to KH, the people of Kemano village (Yamacisa) made frequent canoe trips to the Kawesas to harvest a range of seasonally available resources. According to Gordon Robertson, however, a village belonging to the Eagle Tribe was located at the northern side of the mouth of the Kawesas. This is supported by CP's statement that there were houses on a flat area on the northern side of the river. Unfortunately, we were not able to confirm the location of the village during our archaeological reconnaissance (see below).

These differing views likely result from changes in land use in the early European era. First European contact among the Haisla was in the 1790s. There are no records of the impacts of these earliest visits, but it is likely that a smallpox epidemic had reduced the Haisla/Henaaksiala population by 50% by the end of the 1840s (Boyd 1990). The Henaaksiala were particularly hard hit by the epidemics (Hamori-Torok 1990). If the permanent population of the Kawesas was small to begin with — which was likely the case, given the limited amount of flat, dry land in the valley — we can expect that the valley was depopulated early in the contact period. When the valley ceased to be settled on a permanent basis, it continued to be used on a seasonal basis from nearby settlements.

The length of seasonal trips to the Kawesas varied depending on the nature of the resource harvested. In historic times, people stayed in cabins built on flat areas away from the floodplain. These were used by individual families, who were relatives of the Halls (KH). Travel to harvesting sites was by foot and by canoe, depending on location. John Hall, KH's uncle, traveled up the valley by paddling dugout canoes which he carved as needed from cedar trees. He paddled each canoe upriver until the river became impassable. At that point he left the canoe standing upright on a tree alongside the river to be used on a subsequent trip. By placing the canoe upright, it was less likely to rot (KH, CS). KH thought that one such canoe is left standing against a tree somewhere in the middle valley.

The following is a brief description of some of the more important resources traditionally harvested by the Haisla and Hanaksiala in the Kawesas. See Table 3 for a summary of resource use throughout the seasonal round.

Plant resources

Plants were collected in the Kawesas for both food and non-food purposes. Edible plant resources which are known to have been collected include a variety of berries and fruits, roots and bulbs, and tree cambium. This summary only includes those plants that were mentioned in interviews as having been collected in the Kawesas specifically. We observed several economically important plant species in the valley that were not mentioned in interviews (e.g. bog cranberry [Vaccinium oxycoccos], Labrador Tea [Ledum groenlandicum]). Undoubtedly, many more plant and animal species than are mentioned here were traditionally harvested in the Kawesas. Berries include stink currant, blueberries, and huckleberries, all of which can be harvested in great quantity in more open forests and along stream edges. Stink currant is a favorite for making jam.

According to JR, crabapple fruits are one of the most important resources in the Kawesas. JR's father, Gordon, collected crabapples there (Compton unpub. notes).

Crabapple fruits are often picked when the fruit is just beginning to turn red, but some people pick the fruits while they are still green. The fruits are then cooked and stored in water or grease for winter use (KH).

Several plant resources growing on the Kawesas tidal flats are harvested for food. The rice-like bulbs of riceroot (giving it its local name of "Indian rice") were harvested in the spring just when it begins to flower (KH) and/or in the late summer when the plant starts to die back (JR; CP; Compton 1993). The bulbs are brought home fresh and then cooked, sometimes with crabapples or hemlock cambium preserved from the previous year (KH).

Cow parsnip and Pacific silverweed, which also grow in abundance on the tidal flats, were harvested from the Kawesas. Young cow parsnip petioles and stems, which were eaten fresh, were collected in the spring at the same time as Pacific silverweed and riceroot. Pacific silverweed roots were collected in quantity and then steamed before being eaten (KH).

Hemlock and black cottonwood cambium was also reported to have been harvested in the Kawesas. The inner bark was collected in June when the sap in the tree begins to flow. The cambium was harvested with a special knife (gec'em) which was used to scrape the cambium once the outer bark had been removed (XH). Hemlock cambium was steam-cooked and then preserved for winter use in the form of cakes (Compton 1993:183), while cottonwood cambium was consumed immediately because it quickly fermented.

We know from abundant archaeological evidence (see below) that red- and yellow-cedars were the most important non-food plants traditionally harvested in the Kawesas. Interestingly, although the Haisla consultants were quite familiar with the traditional harvest of cedar bark and wood for various purposes, memory of the use of cedars in the Kawesas specifically was limited to the carving of canoes by KH's uncle for upriver travel. This again probably reflects changes in land use in the historic period.

The inner bark of red- and yellow-cedars was harvested in early spring for a variety of purposes such as basketry, hats, clothing, partitions, and mats (Compton 1993). The inner bark of yellow-cedars was particularly valued for the production of blankets. Cedars which were stripped of their bark were carefully chosen for specific qualities. Trees with "finer" bark were preferred (KH); redcedar trees ranging from 25–40 cm in diametre were chosen for stripping (Compton 1993). The outer bark of redcedar was also harvested for less fine material, such as roofing (Compton 1993).

As elsewhere on the coast, the wood of red- and yellow-cedar served a variety of technological purposes. Primary among them was their use for construction of house posts and planks, as raw material for various implements, and for carving canoes (see Compton 1993 for details).

Fish resources

Although not as large a run as in some of the larger rivers, the oolichan harvest from the Kawesas was, and continues to be an important food source for the Haisla. The Kawesas run is unpredictable in its abundance; sometimes there is a large run in the river, and sometimes it is considerably smaller. Oolichan arrive in the Kawesas, like other rivers, sometime in March or April. Since they arrive with no prior warning, and the best oil is rendered from the fish in the first 5-6 days of the run, it is important to keep checking the rivers for signs of their first arrival (KH). The runs in the oolichan-bearing rivers are sequential, with the Kildala oolichan running one week after the Kitimat run, followed by the Kemano one week later, and then the Kawesas and Kitlope runs one or two weeks after that (KH). For this reason, it is important to consider these rivers as part of a whole system on which the Haisla depend (CP).

Oolichan is highly valued among the Haisla for the oil ("grease") which is rendered from the partly putrefied fish. Today, families harvest as many oolichans as they can over a two to three day period. It has been calculated that this amounts to as much 10 to 15 tons of raw oolichan per five families (KH). Once harvested the oolichan are placed in large bins located along side the river from which they were harvested. The fish are left to partially putrefy in these bins for five to seven days and then are cooked in large aluminum boilers. The cooked fish is left to sit for approximately 1–2 hours before the oil is skimmed off the top. (See Kuhnlein et al. (1982) for a detailed description of oolichan processing among the Nuxalk of Bella Coola, B.C.) The remaining flesh was traditionally placed in a root basket, squeezed to remove additional grease, and then placed on potato gardens for fertilizer. Potatoes thus fertilized are said to have a particularly good flavor (KH). Today, as in the past, grease is traded to Klemtu and Bella Bella, among other groups, for a variety of products, such as herring eggs and seaweed (KH; Compton 1993).

Although oolichan from the Kawesas was gathered for rendering of grease, it was particularly valued for drying. John Hall used to gather the first oolichans of the Kawesas run for making grease and then collected oolichans for drying. Others would harvest oolichan in the Kitlope for grease and then travel to the Kawesas for oolichan to be dried (KH). Temporary camps for the harvest and processing of oolichan were constructed at the mouth of the Kawesas River (CP). Such camps were probably composed of a cabin and oolichan processing bins (KH).

In addition to oolichan, the Kawesas is a major salmon-bearing stream. The salmonid season in the Kawesas begins with cutthroat trout which run in the early spring roughly at the same time as the oolichan run. This is followed by the spring salmon run in May, the sockeye run in June through August, and finally the coho run in October and November. Coho are the most abundant of the salmon species in the Kawesas.

Wildlife resources

A variety of animals were traditionally hunted in the Kawesas for food. The primary hunting season began in October and continued until April. Hunting ceased in the spring because it was not proper to hunt animals that may be pregnant (KH). The Kawesas was one of JR's favorite places to hunt bear, geese, and mallard. Waterfowl migrate through the Kawesas in August and September, and were hunted on the tidal flats at the mouth of the river (JR; KH). The Haisla also hunted seal in the Kawesas, which are abundant year round at the mouth of the river.

Mountain goats were hunted on the west side of Chief Mathews Bay (JR) after the first snow of the season forced the goats down to lower elevations. Goats used to be considerably more plentiful in the upper reaches of Gardner Canal than they are today. This is largely due to increased hunting pressure on the goats by the concentrated human population associated with the Kemano Project (KH). Mountain goat were traditionally hunted by setting up a camp close to where mountain goats were often found, such as under a rock overhang (KH).

In historic times, trapping expeditions for fur-bearing animals could last from two to three months (KH). Traps were set in a line about 20 m above the river. Traps were placed approximately 35–30 m apart, depending on availability of level ground; the line continued "as far back as the land will let you go" (KH). For instance, KH recalls one trip in the Kitlope when he set 18 traps in the trap line. Marten, beaver, mink, weasel, squirrel, wolverine, and occasionally deer were among the animals that were trapped in the Kawesas (KH; CS).

Beaver were sought for their meat as well as their pelts. Beaver were caught with a trap set near where the beaver left its den in search of food. The trap was buried on the shore in this location, carefully placed in relation to the length of the beaver's stride. Once the trap snapped on the beaver's paw, a large rock attached to the trap dragged the animal into water where it drowned (KH). KH notes that the beaver of the Kawesas have a distinct flavor, which he prefers to the beaver caught in the Kitimat River.

Named places in the Kawesas

Two place names have been recorded for the Kawesas (E. Bach and B. Compton pers. comm.). These are described below and their locations presented in Map 3.

• Qwisas (meaning unknown) - According to Gordon Robertson it is "an old name", whose meaning he did not know (Compton, unpub. notes). Qwisas is the place name for the village which belonged to the Eagle Tribe people, located on the north side of the river (Compton, unpub. notes). It is not known when the village name of Qwisas came to be used to refer to the valley of Kawesas as a whole (CS).
• Aulemid (toyland) - This is a place, located on the north side of the river, where water-rolled wood of distinctive shapes was gathered for use as toys (CS; Bach unpub. notes). The exact location of Aulemid is uncertain. KH thought it was located at the base of a permanent snow field on the north side of the river, but he has never visited it himself.
  

Archaeological reconnaissance

Methods

The archaeological component of the KWA focused on the lower section of the Kawesas watershed (i.e. from the mouth of the Kawesas River to where it joins with Cole Creek). Our research was limited to the valley bottom and adjacent hillsides of this portion of the valley. The archaeological reconnaissance consisted of two components: (1) a survey of subjectively selected areas within the lower Kawesas, and (2) the detailed recording of culturally modified trees (CMTs) within some of these selected areas. The investigation of CMTs was the primary focus of the archaeological research.

The survey concentrated on areas that were considered to have high archaeological site potential, such as dry, flat terrain adjacent to waterways. The confluence of streams and the areas around the tidal flat region were of particular interest. Even such high potential areas, survey was limited to areas of relatively less dense vegetation; no attempts were made to clear vegetation. Archaeological permit constraints prohibited us from excavating to find buried sites.

Three mixed redcedar and yellow-cedar stands, identified from forest cover maps, were surveyed for CMTs. After an initial reconnaissance of the stands, we quantified areas within the stands to get an estimate of the density and age of CMTs. A combination of transects and quadrats were used. Transects (CMT I and VIII) were linear surveys of known distance, in which we recorded the number of CMTs relative to unstripped cedars larger than 30 cm diametre. Quadrats (CMT II, III, IV and VI) were 30 x 40 m plots in which we recorded the number of CMTs relative to unstripped cedars, as well as detailed attributes of each CMT We also informally surveyed the cedar stand at the mouth of Cole Creek (Map 1.1); two CMTs were subjectively selected for coring from this area (CMT VII, UTM 560064). The location of the cedar stands, and the transects and quadrats within, are plotted on Map 3.

An increment borer was used to date CMTs in the transects and quadrats. This was accomplished in two ways. The first method was used on trees whose diametre was larger than the length of our increment borer; this method closely follows the "scar-boring method" described by Barrett and Amo (1988:4–6). In this method several cores were extracted from the healing lobe associated with the stripping event. The initial core was extracted from just inside the healing lobe with the purpose of intersecting the scar surface. Successive borings were for the purpose of either intersecting the scar tip (which most accurately dates the stripping event) or to narrowly bracket the location of the scar tip. Based on ring thickness, we estimate that in most of our cores we were able to bracket the "true" age within 30 years. In those cases where our core actually hit the scar tip, the "true" age is likely within five years of our estimate. Accuracy beyond five years is unlikely, due to the possibility of missing annual rings. Contrary to Mobley and Eldridge (1992:99–100), we found this relatively non-destructive method to be adequate for dating the culturally modified trees.

A second method, called "face-boring" (Barrett and Arno 1998), was used to date CMTs in CMT VIII which were less than 50 cm in diametre. Face-boring involved extracting two cores, one through the scar surface into the heartwood and a second through unscarred bark into the heartwood. The first core provides an estimate of the age of the tree when it was modified, while the second core provides an absolute age for the tree itself. By subtracting the age of the first core from the second core, we estimated when the modification of the tree occurred. As in those instances when we hit the scar tip, estimated age based on this method is likely within five years of the true age.

We attempted to date all CMTs in the quadrats, but some were extensively rotted or had a scar lobe too thick to be cored. Within the transects, we cored only those trees which displayed little or no rot and had a moderate to small lobe. The cores were processed and dated in the Department of Archaeology, Simon Fraser University. Cores were first mounted on cardboard and sanded to produce a flat surface on which the annual rings were clearly visible. The rings between the scar surface and the outer cambium were then counted on a dissecting microscope. For western redcedar cores, these rings were readily visible at low magnification (6.4x). Magnification up to 40x was used for Alaskan yellow-cedar cores as the annual rings are much closer together, and the difference between early and late wood less distinct. In problematic yellow-cedar cores, moistening the sanded surface helped to clarify the rings. A pin was used to mark the core with one small hole at 10 year intervals, two holes at 50 year intervals, and three holes at 100 year intervals.

Results

Survey of select areas

Given the dense undergrowth and extensive tree roots, archaeological sites are not visible on the forest floor. Since our archaeological permit did not allow subsurface testing, it was impossible to locate sites, even in areas which had high archaeological potential. The only non-CMT site that was identified is on the flat bank where the current base camp cabin is located (Map 3). Prior to our arrival, excavations associated with the cabin turned up a bone, some planks, and a purple medicine bottle. Work on the cabin while we were in the Kawesas produced charcoal and ash near the same spot. Although we did not see the medicine bottle, from its description we can surmise that the site has an early historic occupation component. Given the limited number of dry, relatively flat areas in the Kawesas, and the proximity of this location to the river's mouth, we expect that the site would have a prehistoric component as well. Based on the information gathered regarding traditional use of the Kawesas valley, other prehistoric sites are expected to be present in the river valley. These may include oolichan processing sites, trapping camps, hunting camps, and more permanent habitation sites.

CMT survey

A total of 46 CMTs were recorded in the quadrats and transects. Forty-five of this total are bark-stripped yellow- and redcedar trees (Photo); one western redcedar tree with a test hole was also recorded (Photo). Thirty-one of the CMTs were cored to date the modification event. Our informal survey of the cedar stands indicates that CMTs in the form of bark-stripped trees are widespread wherever there are red- or yellow-cedars. In some areas stripping was observed to at least 450 m elevation.

Dates from the cores ranged from 395 to 98 years age (Figure 3). There is a peak in the distribution at approximately 150 to 200 years ago. The decline in CMTs after 150 years ago may be associated with an outbreak of smallpox among the Haisla and Henaaksiala in the late 1830s or early 1840s (Boyd 1990). The decline in CMTs older than 200 years is probably due to the survivability of the archaeological resource itself. Many old modification scars will be grown over completely by the healing lobes, while others develop extensive rot.

Based on the transects and quadrats, the average density of CMT's in the Kawesas cedar stands is 60/ha; 54.7 percent of the cedars larger than 30 cm diametre in our transect and quadrats were modified in some manner. Many trees had more than one scar, and one large dominant had as many as seven scars. In CMT VII, a more remote cedar stand, we observed few modified redcedars, but as many as 50% of the yellow-cedars had been stripped. This likely reflects the fact that there are fewer yellow-cedars than redcedars in the watershed, and an adequate supply of redcedar bark could be obtained from other, easier to access areas.

In addition to bark stripping scars, one large redcedar was found to have a 'test hole' (c.f. Stryd and Eldridge 1993; Photo) — possibly for the purpose of testing heartwood soundness prior to felling of the tree for planks (KH). Coring of the scar lobe on this tree produced a prehistoric date of 254 years BP. Metal axe marks in the test hole, however, indicate the test hole is historic in age, and is therefore independent of the stripping event which originally produced the scar lobes on the CMT.

Discussion

Whether or not the Kawesas Watershed was ever settled on a permanent basis, it was used extensively and intensively by the Haisla people. Plant, mammal, and fish resources were collected throughout the year from a variety of ecosystems, from the alpine tundra to the river mouth. Most of the resources were only seasonally available, and thus the harvesting trips required careful timing. Some of the food resources, such as oolichan and crabapple, were sought from the Kawesas, in particular, because of their abundance or particular flavor.

The results of the CMT study clearly demonstrate the extensive and intensive use of the valley in prehistoric and early historic times. A large number of the relatively more accessible cedars were stripped for their cambium, but even some of the "more accessible" cedars required arduous climbs to access the harvesting location. Considerably more effort was expended to harvest some yellow-cedars growing in more remote locations. Several of the cedars had been stripped more than once, reflecting a long term, managed use of the cedar resource.

Although the cultural component of the KWA did result in information about the nature and extent of traditional use of the Kawesas, there is considerably more to be learned about the role of the valley in Haisla culture. More extensive interviewing with knowledgeable elders will reveal additional information about the history of the valley and its people. Further, a more extensive archaeological program, involving systematic surveying and below-ground testing for sites, as well as a more extensive coring program of CMTs, will result in information about the prehistoric use of the valley which complements the knowledge of the elders.

Although traditional use of the Kawesas watershed declined in the early part of this century, it continues to be an important part of traditional Haisla life. People continue to harvest resources in the Kawesas, particularly oolichan, crabapples, and various mammals. With the current resurgence of "traditional ways", the Kawesas has both economic and symbolic value for the Haisla people.

About Get Data Links

 

Find your watershed

You are here:
Inforain.org » Research » The Kawesas Watershed Assessment » Chap VII: Archaeological & Ethnographic Assessment