Alameda Native History Project

Category: Featured

Articles promoted on social media. @alamedanativehistoryproject

Sogorea Te Land Trust is Not an Ohlone Organization
When you read articles like:
“Controversial Berkeley shellmound burial site to be returned to Ohlone“
“Berkeley buys Ohlone shellmound, returns it to Indigenous people“
“City aims to ‘right a historic wrong,’ to return shellmound site to Ohlone people“
Headlines around the Bay Area right now.
You are being misled.
Here’s a breakdown of how these articles are misleading, and what the truth is behind Ohlone Land Back:
1. The “West Berkeley Shellmound” is Not Being Given Back
The Parking Lot was bought for ~$27 Million Dollars.
Nothing about this is an act of charity, or legitimate “return” of native land. The fact that the property being purchased is a 2.2 acre parking lot–instead of a real shellmound–is kind of embarrassing; especially because these headlines are so wrong.
Just because the City of Berkeley City Council voted on an agenda item with the title:
Adopt first reading of an Ordinance authorizing the City to acquire the portion of the West Berkeley Shellmound located at 1900 Fourth Street and also authorizing the City to transfer that property to the Sogorea Te Land Trust, thereby returning the land to the Ohlone people.
City Council Special Meeting eAgenda March 12, 2024
Does not mean that land is actually being returned to Ohlone people.
It’s a conclusory statement based on the bandwagon fallacy: that donating money, creating cultural easements, and transferring property to the Sogorea Te Land Trust benefits Ohlone people.
And this false equivocation between a non-Ohlone organization, and “The Ohlone People” is dangerously close to the impersonation of a tribe. Especially when the transfer of money, property and benefits meant for the enjoyment of an Ohlone Tribe goes to an organization which is neither a Tribe, nor Ohlone.
2. The City of Berkeley did not Buy the West Berkeley Shellmound

The City of Berkeley only chipped in about $1.5 Million worth of City Money. That’s less than 10% of the total purchase cost of the West Berkeley Parking Lot–which is $27 Million Dollars.
For comparison, Sogorea Te Land Trust kicked in about $5M along with the $20M donation the trust recently received from the Katalay Foundation. So, the Katalay Foundation is the primary underwriter for this purchase.
I just want to note that the Valuation for the land at 1900 4th Street, which are two parcels [57-2101-1-3, and 57-2101-5], is currently $9,690,000.00 (or $9.69M).
…And also let you know that the valuation for this property jumped between 2022, and 2023; from a combined (Land + Improvements) value of $1,306,140, to its current, $9,690,000. That’s a difference of $8,383,860 in value, in just one year. I’m not sure if this has to do with $60K worth of delinquent property taxes being paid in December 2023. But there hasn’t been any obvious change on the ground which would indicate a higher valuation.
All of this is to say that a purchase cost of $27 Million Dollars is way more than what the land is worth.
So, there’s actually a really good chance the inflated cost of the property includes legal fees and losses involved in the decade long struggle of the property.
And, if that’s true, this is much more of a win for the developers than it is for anyone else. Like, $18 Million Dollars more.
3. Sogorea Te Land Trust is Not An Ohlone Tribe or Organization
Sogorea Te is not even an Ohlone word. Sogorea Te is a place name for Glen Cove, in Vallejo, which is currently Wintun and Patwin Territory.
Sogorea Te Land Trust is a non-profit Land Trust that’s supposedly gathering money to purchase [Ohlone] land to return to indigenous people; support “rematriation”; and create urban gardens, and community centers.
However….
None of the money Sogorea Te Land Trust has raised, has benefited any actual Bay Area Tribe.
Not the Yocha Dehe Wintun Tribe, Wintu Tribe of Northern California, Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco, or the Costanoan Rumsen Carmel Tribe, just to name a few.
The only group benefitting from the Sogorea Te Land Trust’s work seems to be a corporation posing as a Tribal Government, the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan Nation, INC.
But the fact that:
- Sogorea Te Land Trust is so often being confused with an Ohlone Tribe, or representing an Ohlone Tribe; and the fact that,
- Sogorea Te is now accepting land on behalf of “the Ohlone people”; and the fact that,
- Sogorea Te Land Trust is not correcting this misidentification, false equivocation, or,
  Making it clear that the Sogorea Te Land Trust is not an Ohlone tribe, and does not speak for one…
Means that the Sogorea Te Land is getting closer and closer to impersonating a tribe, or at least benefitting from the false impression that the Land Trust is an Ohlone Tribe or Ohlone Tribal Organization–which it is not.
4. The West Berkeley Shellmound is not “endangered”
It’s destroyed.…
But it’s easier for people to believe they are helping to “undo”, or “right centuries of wrong” by allowing a Land Trust to purchase an insignificant piece of what’s left of the West Berkeley Shellmound.

Wallace, W.; Lathrap, D. (1975) Contributions of the University of California Archaeological Research Facility, Vol. 29, “West Berkeley (CA-Ala-307): A Culturally Stratified Shellmound on the East Shore of San Francisco Bay” https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4616g044
The West Berkeley Shellmound has been declared “one of the most endangered historic places” in the U.S. But it’s a parking lot.
Out of the over 425 historic shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area, the Berkeley Shellmound doesn’t even make the list of “endangered places” when you compare it to the shellmounds actively being quarried in San Rafael and Richmond.
I would argue: the only reason the West Berkeley Shellmound has received so much attention is because it’s a flat, empty space which is easy to fit a hundred protestors on top of. [Other shellmounds are behind fences, and protected by Oil, Quarry and Other Industries’ Private Security Companies.]
But, as a sacred site that needs protecting, the West Berkeley Shellmound is at the bottom of the list–mostly because it’s already 👏🏽 been 👏🏽 destroyed 👏🏽; and, also, because the Spenger’s Parking Lot is not where the shellmound used to be.

Map of West Berkeley showing CA-Ala-307 (West Berkeley Shellmound)
The historic location of the West Berkeley Shellmound is on the other side of the train tracks, under what’s now mostly a Truitt & White Lumber Yard.
5. Lisjan has never been the name of any Ohlone Tribe
It’s not even an Ohlone word.

It’s actually a Nisenan place name for “Pleasanton”.
Lisjan (or “lisyan”) does not appear in any historic mission records–or anywhere else–until 1921: when a Muwekma Ohlone ancestor (Jose Guzman) said “Yo soy lisjanes“, to define himself as someone from the Bernal, and Alisal Rancherias, in what’s known as Pleasanton today.
Aside from the fact that “Lisjan” appears in an interview of Muwekma ancestor Jose Guzman, which occurred about 87 years after the secularization of the Missions in California: there is nothing to prove that an Ohlone village named Lisjan ever existed. In fact, the only thing passages referring to “Lisjan” prove is that “Lisjan” is the place name for Pleasanton, California; not East Oakland–where Corrina Gould claims the “Lisjan” homeland is.
To dive in deeper to the references of “Lisjan” in the 1921 interview of Jose Guzman: Guzman was busy discussing how his family came from the North–which was Nisenan territory, where the word “Lisjan” came from–to Pleasanton. In this passage, Guzman talked about his family’s history, and of his grandfather speaking Russian.
But, let’s be clear: Lisjan is not an Ohlone word at all.
So a woman calling herself the chairperson of an Ohlone “tribe” (which is supposedly a “confederation” of Ohlone villages) named after Pleasanton, but based in East Oakland, should be considered extremely suspect. 🚩🚩🚩

re: Lisyan, “The word does not appear in any Spanish mission period records.

Levy (1978:485)

Uldall & Shipley Nisenan Texts and Dictionary
6. Confederated Villages of the Lisjan Nation, INC. is a Corporation, Not a Tribe.
Corporations Are Not Tribes.
Corporations can never be tribes.
Especially non-profit corporations.
The exercise of sovereignty is not a charitable purpose.
Real tribal governments are tax exempt because they’re actually a sovereign nation under a Constitution. A lot of Corporations claim to be Tribal Governments, but they are lying. It’s fraud, straight out.
Tribes can create corporations through State Law (State-Chartered Corporation), through Tribal Law (Tribally Chartered Corporation), or through Section 17 of the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934.
But Corporations are not Tribal Governments, because Tribal Governments are Sovereign Nations which exist outside of the normal U.S. Corporate Structure.
7. Corrina Gould isn’t a tribal chairperson.
There are a number of different reasons why Corrina Gould is not a Tribal Chairperson. The fact that the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan Nation, INC. is not a tribe is the strongest. And it’s evidenced on the faces of everyone you see in every picture of CVL’s “tribal members”.
Real Tribal Leaders are actually voted for by Tribal Members who represent all the different families which make up a Tribe.
Look at the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area:

Muwekma Ohlone Tribal Members pose for a picture in San Jose, California during a ceremony to commemorate the removal of the racist Fallon statue.
The Muwekma Ohlone Tribe was federally recognized; they have a documented 10,000 year history continuous habitation in the San Francisco Bay Area; not just Federal Documentation, but family trees, and DNA documentation directly linked to archaeological sites.
The Muwekma Ohlone Tribe is comprised of all the remaining known Indian lineages who survived the California Missions. They have over 614 enrolled tribal members.
The reason why the Muwekma Ohlone tribe seems like it’s “The San Jose Tribe”, or is only in Santa Clara is because Mission San Jose was down in Fremont. That’s where all the “Indians” got let out from when the Mission systems closed down. So that’s why the Governor issued an order re: squatters on Mission Lands; and why the present-day Muwekma population is distributed the way it is. [That is a completely different historical topic for another day.]
“But we have members all over the Bay Area,” Muwekma Chairwoman Charlene Nijmeh told me. This includes places outside of San Jose, like Castro Valley, Oakland, Berkeley, San Francisco–and even in Manteca, and Sacramento, and beyond.
But this is an argument about Traditional, Hereditary Muwekma Territory. And that territory includes Berkeley, and Oakland, and Alameda, and Albany. This whole area is Muwekma Ohlone Territory. The only reason they’re not here is because they haven’t got their land back.
When you look closer, the “tribe” Corrina Gould purports to represent is comprised only of her own immediate family members.

Official Portraits of the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan Nation, Inc. have never shown many (if any) members of the tribe Corrina Gould purports to be the Chairwoman of.
Take this into consideration when you compare the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan Nation, INC. to real tribes, like the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area–which has 600+ members from many different families, who have well-documented, hereditary links to their land and ancestors.
The pictures of the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan Nation, INC. usually have 5 or 6 actual Ohlone descendants, and the rest of the crew is comprised of Gould’s non-indigenous (“white”) supporters–who are no more Tribal Members than Ward Churchill or Elizabeth Hoover.
Corrina Gould capitalizes on the public’s confusion about who Ohlone people are and what a tribe is.
That’s why so many people mention the “Chochenyo Ohlone”, and the “Lisjan Ohlone” without ever knowing who they’re actually supporting.
If Corrina Gould were really trying to educate the public, she would have told you the truth a long time ago, and actually stepped aside to let the real tribe she came from benefit from the work she purports to do “for Ohlone people”–instead of doing it for her personal benefit, and the benefit of her immediate family members.
It’s up to you to educate yourself before you give money, land, or support to Native People.
We get it, you feel guilty about what your ancestors did Native Americans.
But your desperation to absolve yourself of your White Guilt, and the Sins of Colonization lead you into problematic “fixes”, following straw man causes which end up contributing to the erasure of the very people you’re trying to help.
Which leads me to this last point….
8. If you really want to help Ohlone People:
Stop giving money to the Sogorea Te Land Trust. It does not go to Ohlone People.
Support the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area as they fight to regain Federal Tribal Recognition on the Trail of Truth!
The Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area is the real, bona fide, tribe of this area.
March 16, 2024
Who, What, and Where is Lisjan?
“Lisjan” has been referred to as a Traditional Ohlone Village Site, in East Oakland.

Both the San Leandro Creek, and San Lorenzo Creek bear the name of “Lisjan” creek.
But “Lisjan” isn’t even an Ohlone word.
“Lisjan” is what Nisenan People call the city of Pleasanton, California.

Uldal, J. & Shipley, W. (1966) “Nisenan Texts and Dictionary”
And, just to be clear: Pleasanton wasn’t called “Pleasanton” until the 1860’s. Up to that point, it was called “Alisal”, or “Alizal”, or “El Alizal”, or “Alisal Rancheria”. And, before that, Alisal was the Bernal Rancheria.
And Nisenan People are not Maidu People. They’re totally seperate tribes.
You could say, the present day Nisenan capitol is Nevada City, California….
The “definition” of Lisjan, a Nisenan Word…
In 1929, A.L. Kroeber published “The Valley Nisenan“, which contained an expansive, and categorized Nisenan vocabulary; and a decent explanation of phonetics. However, this was only a short list, which did not contain Place Names. But, this book is an indication of the linguistic study and research going on behind the scenes, in California, in the early 20th century.
It wouldn’t be until 1966, that Hans Jørgen Uldall, would publish “Nisenan Texts and Dictionary“, with William Shipley. This volume includes some very adult stories. So, beware. But, there are Nisenan-English, and English-Nisenan dictionaries in the back.
Uldall’s dictionary contains the entry for “Lisjan”; as a Place Name for Pleasanton, California.
But, how did that name, get all the way up to Nisenan territory, 100 miles away from Pleasanton? And 45 years after Harrington’s interviews? Why is “Lisjan” being touted as a traditional Ohlone Village Site in deep East-Oakland, if “Lisjan” is another name for Pleasanton?

Excerpt from “Chochenyo Field Notes” showing the word “muwekma”.
J.P. Harrington’s “Chochenyo Field Notes” (1921)
One of the most-cited references in Ohlone History…
In 1921, J.P. Harrington performed a Language Survey of Native Americans in the East Bay. Harrington gathered numerous languages during this time, including the “Chocheño” language; which is known as the East Bay Ohlone language, today. Despite being deeply flawed, and extremely sus at times, this document continues to be a primary influence on mainstream discussions about Ohlone History in the San Francisco Bay Area.
One of Harrington’s interviewees was a man by the name of Jose Guzman. Guzman was interviewed, along with a man named “Angelo”, and a third man who is known as “informant”–presumably, Harrington’s fixer. Francisca is another interviewee who appears separately from Jose and Angelo, most times.
As a digital file this document is 2.3 gigabytes large. It has 355 pages of original scans. It is entirely hand-written in cursive. [J. Alden Mason’s “Plains Miwok, Chocehnyo Field Notes”, from 1916, actually are written in cursive.] And uses a mix of Chochenyo, Spanish, and English (in that order.)
This volume is incredibly informative. Even though, a good portion of the information provided by Jose Guzman, and Angelo become problematic in many places–when viewed in context with later anthropological work, and the lack of clear attribution to a speaker (if any) in many of the entries. This is a problem with Harrington, really.
A majority of contemporary work on East Bay Ohlone People cite J.P. Harrington’s “Chochenyo Field Notes”, from 1921.
This document is never more than one step removed from almost any article or research paper.
But who’s actually read it? As daunting as these tomes look in the beginning: I have to be honest, and tell you, it’s not as bad as it seems. 355 pages of hand-written notes goes kind of quickly if you can hang with the kind of Spanglish that’s spoken on many a rez, today.
It’s easy to get a feel for the personalities of the interviewees by how their interviews progress; and even the type of setting. Some interviews were taken at gatherings. There are write-ups of methods of fabrication for food and tools; songs; as well as old stories, passed down to Jose Guzman. Harrington’s hand-writing also changes, depending on the speed of the information he’s being given, and whether or not he’s having a good day. Sometimes, he had to switch pens, until ultimately finding a pencil.
In the beginning, Harrington focuses on the basics. Where are you from? What’s the name of your tribe? Have you heard of these people? Can you tell me the history of this place?
Harrington wouldn’t ask twice about something the same day. He would circle back to it again, on another day.
As his notes progress, the words move to phrases. The lists become Chocheño lists, with Spanish or English translation.
This is how “Lisjan” kept popping up.
Harrington’s Synthesis of Chocheño VS. The Way Chocheño Was Actually Being Spoken
Aside from where the notes explicitly said who the speaker was, or whether or not the interviewees agree, it’s difficult to tell the difference between Harrington’s own ideas and synthesis of Chocheño; and the Chocheño language as it was actually spoken.
The following entry shows how Harrington took a variation of the phrase “makin miwikma” (we are good people), and applied it to “lisjan”, to form “lisjanikma”–which, to Harrington’s understanding of Chocheño, means “lisjan people”.
makin lisjanikma, we are lisjanes. approved lisjanikma but could not get tongue around it.”
The result was a valid form of the word. But not a word which was actually in use; or even really pronounceable.
This would continue on the next page, with:
makin Jinijmin, somos muchachos, cannot say *makin jinijminka inf. tells me clearly
‘aji jinijmin mak[n]ote, puros muchachos estamos aqui”
Hand-writing is unclear for “mak[n]ote”, “mak[in]ote”, “mak[s]ote”, “mak[‘n]ote”…
This is when I started suspecting there may have been drinking involved in some of these later sessions with Jose Guzman and Angelo. (Because it looks like they’re having fun, and getting kinda goofy at times.) The informant’s answer seems to say more about the philosophy, or [machismo] culture, of the group being interviewed. I can actually see it playing out:
You can’t just say, “We’re some men.”
You have to say, “Puros muchachos estamos aqui!”
It was at this point, that I started noticing the strong Spanish-language influence in many of these examples of Chocheño given to Harrington by Chocheño speakers.
References to “Lisjan”

Page 54:
The Ind. name of the Chocheños is lisianij.
In the first few pages, we find an entry that says the “Indian Name” of the Chocheños is “Lisjan“.
This may seem like an authoritative, and all-encompassing reference. But the specifics change over time.

Page 59:
lisjanis, In. Infor. They said that S.Jose was an early mission [upside-down triangle symbol]; they called the Inds. here sometimes los viejos cristianos. Jose knows this trbu. too and uses it every day, in talking to me.
In the next entry, we find out that San Jose Mission Indians were also called “los viejos cristianos”.
We also find out that Jose Guzman references San Jose Mission Indians this way, as well. No location information is given yet. But that changes.
Soon, there are distinctions made between who is, and who isn’t Lisjan.
On page 95 of the PDF, a paragraph begins with “lisjanes were the San Jose.” It goes on to say that, neither the Doloreños, nor the Clareños, were Lisjanes.

Page 95:
lisjanes were the San Jose — the name covered up as far as S. Lorenzo Angelo thinks. 8ing. lisjan. yo soy lisjan. The Doloreños were not lisjanes, nor were the Clareños.
[Mention of Dumbarton Rail Bridge (opened 1910) at bottom of page?]
This entry includes a little more information about location. It states that the name Lisjan covered up as far as San Lorenzo. This is interesting, because the very first entry said Lisjan is the “Indian Name” of the Chocheños.
It’s also interesting, because the Chocheño-speaking Indians at San Lorenzo were called “Los Nepes”. Which means, they were considered a completely different group by Harrington’s interviewees.
Unfortunately, this entry only gives us a rough northern boundary to a possible Lisjan “territory”, certainly not enough information to pin to a certain geographic region. This also means that “Lisjan” was definitely not located in present-day Oakland, at all.

Pages 105-106:
kana lisjanka, yo soy lisjan.
makin lisjanikma, we are lisjanes. approved lisjanikma but could not get tongue around it.
The next entries that we see, are on pages 105 and 106. While the phrases “yo so lisjan”, and “we are lisjanes” are present; so is a real problem.
There is no distinction between the words and phrases that are actually used/spoken in Chocheño–and given to Harrington; and, the words and phrases J.P. Harrington created, or invented, on his own, and “pitched” to his informant, and interviewees.
Using the information found in Harrington’s notes, I prepared the following visual aids.
I wanted to find the answers to a number of questions I had:
1. Where is Lisjan? Is it in Oakland, Pleasanton, or somewhere else?
2. Who are the Lisjanes? Are they a specific group, or family?
3. Regarding what Angelo said about a Northern Boundary for Lisjan: is it possible the boundaries for Lisjan fall within the historic bounds of Mission San Jose?
Map showing Historic Place Names, Mission San Jose, and approximate North and South Mission Lands boundaries, as surveyed in 1852.
Where is Lisjan? Is it in Oakland, Pleasanton, or somewhere else?
[If this is the only document you’re going by….] And, if the Northern bounds of the name “Lisjan”, were located just before San Lorenzo, that means that:
1. Lisjan was not located in Oakland.
2. Lisjan was not bound by the historical Mission San Jose property lines.
3. Pleasanton was probably not called “Lisjan” by locals.
Who are the Lisjanes? Are they a specific group, or family?
Not much light is shed on who the Lisjanes are. While Jose Guzman probably declared himself Lisjan; it’s unclear the extent of Angelo’s affiliation to the name. At one point, one man touches his chest and tells Harrington that he is Lisjan in name, but his heart is from somewhere else.
Does this mean that Lisjan is somehow a transitory, or new affiliation based on where someone lives, now? Is this person simply saying something akin to, “I left my heart in San Francisco?” Or, “My heart yearns for home?” Or even something like, “This heart was made somewhere else; my blood pumps the blood of my ancestors, from a different place than here?”
We are told that the San Jose’s are Lisjan. The indian name for Chocheños from Mission San Jose are Lisjan. Indians from Santa Clara, and Dolores are definitely not Lisjan. Los Nepes aren’t Lisjan, either. And a tribe, from Sunol, the name of which no one could remember, was never affiliated with Lisjan.
This was one of the reasons I began to suspect that the bounds of Lisjan could be tied to the property lines of Mission San Jose.
But, alas, no matter which San Lorenzo you draw the Northern boundary of the name Lisjan upon, they always exceed the extent of mission property lines.

1921 Harrington Lisjan Map OSM View
Stay tuned.
References:
March 15, 2024
2024-2025 Cultural & Education Programming Announced!
The Alameda Native History Project is proud to announce their Cultural & Educational Program Offerings for 2024-2025.

2024 Acorn Granary Challenge
Beginning July 1, 2024; and,
Ending on July 31, 2024.
Mix modern and traditional methods of acorn granary construction to create a semi-permanent structure which will hold the acorns from our First Annual Acorn Harvest.
The challenge is creating something that will withstand the elements over winter.
We will meet as a team to construct these Acorn Granaries. Together we will learn about the different kinds of Acorn Granaries; integrated pest management uses of California Native Plants; and how indigenous technology works to keep food safe for centuries.
This is a series of free events which happens 10am-2pm Every Sunday in July.
Sign Up Happening Now

2024 Alameda “City-Wide” Acorn Harvest
September – October 2024
Take part in the First Annual Alameda Acorn Harvest.
Learn about the ancient Live Oak Forests of this place now called “Alameda”. Learn about the nutritional value and the cultural significance of acorns.
There are a number of different ways in which everyone can participate. Please check out the list of roles available on the Sign-Up Form, right after our Community Guidelines.
Snacks, Water, Coffee, and Lunch, will be provided.
Sign-Up Now

Alameda Native Food Lab: ACORNS!
Multiple Sessions Held in March 2025
Learn how to process acorns.
Sample traditional Acorn Mush.
Make different baked goods using Acorn Flour made from Alameda Oak Trees. Leave with your own Acorn Flour, and recipes to try at home!
This session is Free!
Tickets Available in September 2024
February 27, 2024
New Map: Historic Alameda Ecology

A Never-Before-Seen Map of Alameda’s Indigenous History
Can you imagine elk running down Park Street?
Cotton Tail Rabbits hopping among giant Live Oak trees on Grand?
Gathering blackberries at Chochenyo Park?
Oysters on Regent?
Making tule boats at Alameda Point?
This map combines historic elements to tell the story of Alameda before.
Developed for elementary and middle-school students to learn about local indigenous history: this map shows Alameda–before it became an island–with selected plants and animals that lived and thrived here.
These plants and animals include: Wildcats, Ducks, Blackberries, Deer, Flamingoes, and more!
This map includes the historic wetlands of the Bay Area; and the Oyster Reef zones in Alameda, two never-before-seen layers of local history (until now.)
This map is a tool that can help people imagine the ecosystems organizations like the Wild Oyster Project, and Save The Bay are working towards saving and restoring.
Imagination is one of the strongest tools in the decolonization toolbox.
One of the ways the Alameda Native History Project “Decolonizes History” is by developing, producing, and distributing accurate, relevant, and interesting educational materials for Classrooms, Community Centers, and Institutions.
The Alameda Native History Project offers updated, often novel, and never-before-seen images, maps, and infographs about the Indigenous History of this place we call the “San Francisco Bay Area”.
Our continued impact will be measured by the number of classrooms we connect with the maps and information educators want and need to fill the gaps in existing curriculum regarding local indigenous history.
This will result in students who can finally receive the answer to the basic questions about Native American History. Questions, which–until now–have simply been glossed over or ignored in mainstream, sanitized, Social Science, History, and Arts & Humanities curriculums.
The proceeds of this fundraiser will go towards putting one of these maps in every core/history class and school library in Alameda.

If you make a minimum donation of $25, and include your mailing address in the comment on this donation form (your comment is private), you will receive a Historic Alameda Ecology Map.
Donate $25
5% of the cost of printing will go back to local Alameda schools.*
You can have a direct impact on Decolonizing History, too!
By providing tangible support for our mission, you can be the reason why people know this is Ohlone Land; why that makes it our responsibility to be good stewards to the land; and how important it is for us to respect Indigenous knowledge and lived experiences, and advocate for the return of sacred places, tribal objects, and ancestral remains.
Alameda Native History Project is fiscally sponsored by The Hack Foundation (d.b.a. Hack Club), a 501(c)(3) nonprofit (EIN: 81-2908499).
*5% of total cost goes back to school via printer’s giveback program on a per transaction basis. We choose the Alameda school recipient.
January 24, 2024
ANHP Receives Grant for Bay Area Indigenous Mapping Project

The Alameda Native History Project is the proud recipient of a Native Solidary Project grant for our work mapping the Indigenous Bay.
Our mapping project seeks to reverse the erasure, and inaccuracies promulgated by biased archeologists and flawed anthropological analysis.
We do this by centering the indigenous knowledge and lived experiences in historical narratives about indigenous people by presenting those narratives from Indigenous People themselves.
This grant will go towards printing educational materials, and putting them in classrooms, institutions, and community centers Alameda, and the Greater Bay Area.
You can have a meaningful and direct impact in decolonizing history by supporting the printing and distribution of accurate, interesting, and educational Indigenous History materials to schools and other institutions in Alameda and the Greater Bay Area.
Provide tangible support to our mission, to Decolonize History, by donating to the Alameda Native History Project.
DONATE
All of your donations are tax deductible.
This project practices financial transparency.
Alameda Native History Project is fiscally sponsored by The Hack Foundation (d.b.a. Hack Club), a 501(c)(3) nonprofit (EIN: 81-2908499).
January 18, 2024
Alternatives to Shuumi (2023)
Wondering which Native American organizations you should give to on Giving Tuesday?
Hopefully, when you read this, you already know that Shuumi Land Tax doesn’t really go to all Ohlone people. (But we don’t want to discourage your well-meaning intent and your need to help Indigenous people in anyway you can.)
If you really want to help the Native American People in the San Francisco Bay Area, I’ve compiled a list of organizations where your generous donation and goodwill have a measurable impact.

The Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area

This is the real Ohlone tribe you probably thought you were donating money to when you considered paying Shuumi “Land Tax”.

With over 10,000 years of continuous habitation of this place now known as the San Francisco Bay Area, your donation directly to this tribe of over 600 enrolled members will be felt immediately; and put to use as Muwekma reawaken their Chochenyo language, remember dances, and revitalize their culture.

The Muwekma Ohlone Tribe is a bonafide native American Tribe, which has been recognized over and over again by The Courts, but still struggles for recognition with the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Muwekma is set to begin their Trail of Truth in their epic battle for justice; in the form of a Tribal Homeland, Education, Housing, Medical Services, and–last but not least: Sovereignty.

If you want to help Ohlone people in the San Francisco Bay Area (and beyond):

Go to Muwekma.org to educate yourself and your friends about the Indigenous People of the San Francisco Bay Area.

[See also: “Who/What/Where is Lisjan?“, “Who are the Lisjan Ohlone? What does Chochenyo mean?”, “Corrina Gould Convicted of Fraud“]

Intertribal Friendship House Oakland

Established in 1955 as one of the first urban American Indian community centers in the nation.

It was founded by the American Friends Service Committee to serve the needs of American Indian people relocated from reservations to the San Francisco Bay Area.

“The Bay Area American Indian community is multi-tribal, made of Native people and their descendants—those who originate here and those who have come to the Bay region from all over the United States and from other parts of this hemisphere.“

IFH Oakland’s local programming is important and impactful.

Friendship House SF

Friendship House SF provides a girth of wellness services for Native American People in the SF urban rez.

One of the most important services the Friendship House SF provides is treatment and recovery services for Native Americans. Lots of tribes will send their members to the Friendship House SF for their treatment and recovery services.

The Friendship House SF also provides meeting space for other organizations to hold their events and retreats. Very thankful to the Friendship House SF for giving me and organizations I’ve been a part space for so many years.

Native American Health Center

Provides primary care, mental health, and dental services primarily. Also organizes and hold the Indigenous Red Market, contributes to Powwows, and other Native American Events and Programs throughout the San Francisco Bay Area.

Contributing to this organization will also support a wider range of programs and services in the Bay Area.

NAHC is a pretty solid choice, all around.

American Indian Cultural Center

A member of Intersection for the Arts.

Since 1968, the purpose of the American Indian Center has been to create a community space based on Native American values, culture, programming, traditional foods, and community support.

Contributing to this organization will help sustain AICC’s mission to improve and promote the well-being of the American Indian community and to increase the visibility of American Indian cultures in an urban setting in order to cultivate awareness, understanding and respect.

American Indian Child Resource Center

The American Indian Child Resource Center is a non-profit social services and educational community-based organization serving American Indian community members from across the greater Oakland/San Francisco Bay Area and surrounding counties.

The American Indian Child Resource Center is a COA Accredited Organization.

First Nations Development Institute

Economic Development Corporation which invests in and creates innovative institutions and models that strengthen asset control (land stewardship is one example) and support economic development (through grants and programs) for American Indian people and their communities.

First Nations Development Institute is another solid choice because you know your money will be well invested, and you can read the reports on how it was used.
Which Native American Organizations Should You Donate To?

Hopefully, this helps you decide where to invest for Giving Tuesday in the year 2023!
P.S.
You can always donate to the Alameda Native History Project, or any of these other organizations, any time of the year! Don’t wait until Thanksgiving.
November 17, 2023
Scarcity Mindset As A Hurdle to Museum Accountability
By now there should be no doubt that most museums, which display or hold Native American artifacts, directly benefit from grave robbing, or the often racist, prejudiced language and ignorant beliefs regarding Native Americans first uttered by now dead anthropologists [like Alfred Kroeber], and perpetuated by the ailing volunteers and aging septuagenarians responsible for interpreting and curating these artifacts today.
Many of these museums do no care to get the information or facts straight, and continue to present California Native Americans as “extinct”, “disappeared”, and brush off or dismiss any mention of actual living Native people as someone trying to raise trouble.
Advocates for the truthful portrayal, accurate naming, and return of tribal objects and remains are often called “hostile”, dismissed as rabble rousers, and subjected to projection by the very people who should have read White Fragility.
Even more infuriating is the belief consulting with any Native American individual on any subject–whether or not it’s related to the stolen Tribal Grave Goods or Ceremonial Objects in these Museum’s possession–is used as cover for the Museum to continue to disregard the wishes of the very real, and still living Native American people who have a lawful claim, and a legal right to demand the return and repatriation of these Native American Tribal Resources and Cultural Objects.
In fact, many of the people museums choose to consult with regarding Native American artifacts are not Native Americans at all.

Truthfully, Native American people are consistently shut out of events, exhibitions and lectures about their own culture and identity.
A lot of apologists will say “it’s not like this anymore”; or dismiss the Standard Operating Procedures museums as a thing of the past…. But these conditions till persist.
Native American People continue to be discounted, ignored; and their history, culture and contributions continue to be minimized and ignored.
But the truth remains: The artifacts and objects on display in most museums have been stolen from Native American People, their graves, and do not belong to the museums who refuse to return them.

There are three main reasons why Museums refuse to return Tribal Cultural Objects.
The first is that there is no Federally Recognized Tribe which claims these objects to return them to. This is especially true for the Repatriation of Native American Remains.
It’s a shame that these institutions are unwilling to do the research and work necessary to properly identify Tribal Cultural Objects and Native American Remains to repatriate the same way they did the research to identify and prepare the same goods and burials for exhibition.
It’s despicable the way Museums claim such helplessness and ignorance when it comes time to give stolen objects back, even though the exact same objects are the she subjects of fundraising events and lectures proudly given by white anthropologists, and non-native experts, even today.
Charlene Nijmeh, the Chairwoman of the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area, talks about how the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe was removed from the rolls of Native American Tribes simply for the purpose of denying Ohlone people in the San Francisco Bay Area their right to a tribal land base; because land in the Bay Area is so valuable.
In this same way, institutions like the University of California Berkeley (which holds the remains of thousands of Native Americans) are incentivized to claim an inability to identify which tribes the bodies in their crypt belong to.
So, too, are Museums incentivized to weaponize their incompetence in order to keep their pilfered goods.

The second reason is the fallacy that Native American Remains are “more valuable” as research or display objects.
This is a completely reprehensible argument that bears no merit, as far as I’m concerned. Simply because these same people would not agree that their family members are more valuable being dug up, defiled in the name of science, and put on display without so much of a whisper of their name or life’s story.
It’s worth saying, “If you’re not okay with your grandma being dug up and put on display, why are you doing it to mine?”
The blatant disrespect of Native American Graves as things which can be dug up, broken, moved to a landfill, reburied, and used as overspread is something which has been enabled by the statements of people like Alfred Kroeber, who explicitly declared entire tribes of Native Americans (like Ohlone people) “extinct”.
It s because these remains are considered “ancient”, or attributed to a time before our modern history where no living descendants exist–“pre-historic” for all intents and purposes–that oil companies, city, state and federal governments have dug up the bodies of our ancestors with impunity. And why money is still being given to universities to study our ancestors’ remains, even today.
But this is a fallacy, because Native American people are not extinct; they have not disappeared. We are still here, today. And we do not want anyone digging up our relatives to build pipelines, parking lots… or “for science”. Period!
(How come laws against the abuse of a corpse apply to every body except for Native American bodies?)
The third, and final, reason why institutions refuse to even consider returning stolen Native American artifacts to tribes is an extension of the preceding “more valuable for science” reasoning.
However, the very basis of some museums’ refusal to return tribal objects is clearly rooted in the scarcity mindset.

Museum Fallacy #3:
“If we give away all of our artifacts, we won’t have any left!”
“If we give away all of our artifacts, we won’t have any left!” This was actually said to me by a volunteer at the Alameda Museum.
This is dissonant because many museum’s holdings are made of stolen property. Repatriation is the only correct course of action; anything less is a travesty.
This standing also presumes the only thing of value the museum has to offer is the exhibition of original artifacts, no matter how broken or uninteresting those artifacts are; and, in spite of the fact that curators and museum staff and volunteers have no […] clue how those objects are used, where they actually came, or what the history of their use and development is.
In all of this, there is not even a hint of concern about whether or not the museum has a duty to investigate/research, find, and try to contact the tribe associated with the Native American objects and artifacts in their possession.
Consideration of actual Native American People is so far removed from the discussion, it’s a little ridiculous.

Representation of average museum volunteer docents. (AI-generated.)
Especially given the fact that these Museum are inviting Native American people to give lectures during Native American Heritage Month. (But consider the audience….)
The idea that there aren’t enough artifacts is a fallacy based upon a false sense of ownership and authority magically imbued by the mere possession of these stolen grave goods.
The implied scarcity mindsight that the only thing which gives museums like the Alameda Museum any value is a handful of broken pieces of bones and tools–which no one knows the use for (or even the names of)–is laughable in its appeal to ignorance.
The fact that Alameda Museum is not, and has never been, the place to see Native American artifacts belies this mindset as a straw man argument for the lack of interest or determination of the museum to change or do any better. But, in the end, it’s the museum which must do the work.
So let’s get down to brass tax here:
1. Museums need to get real about the fact that no one cares whether or not they exhibit real artifacts if their exhibits are trash and don’t actually provide any education value; especially if Museum Staff & Volunteers don’t know anything about them. [There’s no value here.]
2. Returning Native American Grave Goods is the right thing to do. (It’s probably illegal for museums to possess them.) And Museums owe money, and other restitution, to Tribes for their illegal conversion of Tribal Property.
3. Contacting Tribes to begin the repatriation process is necessary.
4. Museums need to seriously consider purchasing replicas made by Native American artisans in exchanging for the return of Grave Good and Ceremonial Objects.
5. Museums are required to pay Indigenous People for their time and consultation at a rate commensurate with like professionals in the same or similar industries–regardless of whether or not those Indigenous Consultants have any academic credentials.
Indigenous Peoples’ lived experiences and actual subject matter expertise are more valuable than any degree.
Indigenous science is valid.
Indigenous science is a distinct, time-tested, and methodological knowledge system that can enhance and complement western science. Indigenous science is about the knowledge of the environment and knowledge of the ecosystem that Indigenous Peoples have. It is the knowledge of survival since time immemorial and includes multiple systems of knowledge(s) such as the knowledge of plants, the weather, animal behavior and patterns, birds, and water among others.
Indigenous people are experts.
Museums will do well to remember these facts when treating Indigenous People with the reverence and respect they deserve.
November 16, 2023
99% of Alameda Museum’s Ohlone Artifacts Were Stolen from Native American Graves
We’ve found a pattern of reckless and careless treatment of 100% of those stolen artifacts.
The Alameda Museum has roughly 186 Native American Artifacts. All of those artifacts were found in connection with Native American Graves, except for 2.
So, we can’t say ALL of the artifacts are grave goods. But we can say:
99.93% of Alameda Museum’s Indigenous Artifacts are Stolen Burial Goods from Native American Graves all over the place we now call “Alameda.”
Shellmounds are cemeteries, ancient structures, sacred sites, historical resources, and ancient structures built by the first inhabitants of this area, Ohlone people.
Shellmounds are made rows of burials stacked vertically and alternately; covered with the shell-laden soil found along the San Francisco Bay Region’s shorelines.
There were several excavations of the shellmounds of Alameda.
Artifacts saved from excavations attended by professional and amateur anthropologists/archeologists were donated to both the Alameda Library, and the U.C. Berkeley Museum. [Some artifacts were notably kept by a City Engineer by the name of I.N. Chapman.]
Alameda Free Library existed long before the historical Alameda Historical Society, or the Alameda Museum were ever founded.
The Two Alameda Historical Societies
To be clear about the two Alameda Historical Societies: one of these societies existed in the early 1900’s, and is mentioned in newspaper articles, as being interested in the early Alameda Free Library’s “Museum” in the Carnegie Library.
The second iteration of the Alameda Historical Society started in the 1940’s, and was instrumental in moving the Museum from the basement of the Alameda Free Library, into the old Alameda High School Auto Shop in the 1980’s. And then, into the storefront of the Masonic Building, on Alameda Avenue–where it remains [“lies in state”?] today.
Transfer of Artifacts & Records from Alameda Free Library to Alameda Museum
All of these artifacts taken from the mounds were transferred from the Alameda Library to the Alameda Museum when the Museum moved into the old Alameda High School Auto Shop.
Those artifacts weren’t the only things transferred to the Alameda Museum.
At it’s inception, the Alameda Museum was designated as the Official City Repository for City Records, and the Records of the City of Alameda’s Departments, including (but not limited to,) Alameda’s Fire and Police Departments.
I know this isn’t incredibly relevant, but it’s important to know this background information, especially when the Alameda Museum claims they don’t have stolen artifacts, or that the artifacts the museum displays aren’t Native American Grave Goods. You’ll know that 99.93% of artifacts in the Alameda Museum’s possession are Grave Goods because they were taken from the Alameda “mounds”, which are Native American Graves.
Out of the approximately 186 Ohlone Artifacts in the possession of Alameda Museum, only two of them are unrelated to Native American Graves.
The other 184 artifacts are directly attributed to the shellmounds of Alameda.
What’s more: the Alameda Museum’s pattern of wanton “inattention”, and reckless disregard for these burial goods are clearly stated in the museum’s own records:

History:
Stone mortar and pestle found in one of Alameda’s mounds. The information on the pestle can be connected to a donation documented in the museum records: Subject: One Indian Mortar and Pestle. Date received: April 1954. Unfortunately, as a result of earlier inattention there is no further description, and as a result of later inattention during moves and minor catastrophes, it is not certain the mortar and pestles are together anymore, and the connection has been lost. Part of a collection of objects found in the largest Shellmound, also known as Sather’s Mound in Alameda, or smaller mounds. The excavations at Sather’s Mound were carried out in 1908 by Captain Clark, an amateur anthropologist. The items were donated to the Alameda Free Library, and passed on to the museum when the museum moved to a separate location. Date: April 1954 Mortar Acquired from: unknown Date: before 1991
Condition:
Notes: 6/30/2020 MvL: The label has suffered water damage when a pipe in the museum burst. Any accession numbering of the mortars and pestles was lost and has been redone.
The above excerpt of an artifact’s description establishes the Alameda Museum’s pattern of careless disregard, and reckless neglect of Native American artifacts.
Grave goods belong in graves; not museums.

Mismanagement of Ohlone Artifacts by Alameda Museum:
- Misidentified the tribe associated with these stolen Ohlone artifacts;
- Mixed up mortars and pestles, (among other things) so they no longer match;
- Lost records and identifying information about the stolen burial goods;
- Carelessly and recklessly stored, handled, and moved Ohlone grave goods.
This mismanagement, and noncompliance with their Service Provider Agreement with the City of Alameda; with the standards and practice of commensurate professionals and institutions engaged in the conservation and preservation of historical records and artifacts; and the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA); has resulted in damage to these priceless, irreplacable artifacts, which the Alameda Museum possesses without permission, or right of ownership.
This evidence of unreported and unclaimed, loss/damage to Ohlone grave goods; and the established pattern of careless and reckless neglect of Ohlone artifacts…
Should be reason enough for the Alameda Museum to concede it cannot adequately care for any of the 186 Ohlone artifacts it possesses; and return them to the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area in the most expeditious way possible.
September 22, 2023
Elizabeth Hoover Should Resign
May 1, 2023, Elizabeth Hoover issues a statement admitting that she used her non-existent Mohawk and Mi’kmaq ancestry to get to where she is today… But it was her “experience and expertise” which helped her become a professor–not the fact that she gained said experience an expertise from impersonating an indigenous person.
This isn’t the first time we’ve heard about Elizabeth Hoover; but this is next chapter in the saga. The last time we we heard about Elizabeth Hoover was in October, 2022. Pretendian Country Today ran an article about a statement Hoover published on her personal site.

The statement wasn’t an apology. It was an announcement. Hoover ended it with: “I will accept with humility and understanding the decisions of people who do not think I belong in certain spaces.”
But she never actually stepped down, or stopped selling her books.
Around May 1, 2023, Elizabeth Hoover published an addendum to her statement. In this addendum, Elizabeth Hoover admitted to being a “white person” who “identified” as Mohawk, and Mi’kmaq.
Hoover stood by her initial claims she was misled by a blind belief in family lore. She admitted to changing the subject, or accusing her interrogators of being envious, jealous, or interfering with her assumed identity as a Mohawk and Mi’kmaq woman, whenever anyone tried to ask her the hard questions about her family history, tribal enrollment status, or her ancestry.
In spite of all this: Elizabeth Hoover is currently a professor at U.C. Berkeley; a position she admitted using fraud to attain:
Identifying as a Native person gave me access to spaces and resources that I would not have otherwise, resources that were intended for students of color. Before taking part in programs or funding opportunities that were identity-related or geared towards under-represented people I should have ensured that I was claimed in return by the communities I was claiming. By avoiding this inquiry, I have received academic fellowships, opportunities, and material benefits that I may not have received had I not been perceived as a Native scholar.
Elizabeth Hoover Admission of Fraud, May 1, 2023
Elizabeth Hoover denies that her untrue statements and absolute impersonation of an indigenous person did not help her attain her current position. But she doesn’t seem to understand that she totally admitted to benefitting from her own fraud. And she continues to benefit from the apathy of U.C. Berkeley.
Her flimsy reasoning is that she wasn’t hired during U.C. Berkeley’s First Peoples hiring blitz…. So, her employment must be because of all of the experience and expertise she gained… while impersonating an indigenous person.
This is all despite the fact Hoover outlined how she benefitted from identifying as a person with Mohawk and Mi’kmaq ancestry:
- Access to spaces and resources
- Participating in Programs
- Funding
- Academic fellowships
- Material benefits
Elizabeth Hoover admitted to abusing identity-based resources intended for people of color, and under-represented people–and, securing those resources with a false identity.
Elizabeth Hoover knew how claiming Indigenous ancestry worked. She’s worked with many tribes before. She had that special access as an indigenous person.
What’s really surprising was her access to the benefits and resources which usually require more specific information–like an enrollment number–which Elizabeth Hoover did not actually have.
Elizabeth Hoover actively evaded these question, and, managed to escape uncomfortable conversations at all costs.
This episode totally exposes the flaws in academia, and in the movement; and shows you yet another example of a non-indigenous person gaming the system. These deficiencies are commonly overlooked because “not every tribe is federally recognized”, and unrecognized tribes exist. [They actually do, like Kutzadika’a.]
Members of legitimate unrecognized tribes can still establish their Indian Ancestry.
These things: the opportunities, monetary rewards and other material benefits. Are the product of a long series of fraudulent transactions; which lead to the accrual of the Experience and Expertise Elizabeth Hoover attributes to her hiring as a professor.
It’s amazing how much cognitive dissonance Elizabeth Hoover has regarding the fact that she used a false identity to get to where she is.
Elizabeth Hoover can admit to doing all these things. But she somehow does not make the connection between (a) the fact that she should not be in the position she is today, and (b) the fact she’s in a place she doesn’t belong.
That’s why she needs to resign: because she’s not supposed to be there.

Posted on Instagram:
It’s bad enough @UC Berkeley won’t give back the stolen ancestors, or the huge swath of stolen land they received through land grants. But letting a professor continue to teach after she’s been wearing brown face for her entire life is also not cool.
A lot of people are going to say it’s not her fault that she believed her family rumors/fantasies of Mohawk and Mi’kmaq ancestry. But it is.
If you claim Indigenous/First Nations/Native American/American Indian ancestry, you should be able to prove it by knowing who your nearest full-blooded relative is.
If your family lore is true, this should be relatively easy to do. This is what the “Indian Rolls” are for, the Indian Censuses, and other documentation the Federal Government maintains to track our downfall. [Good luck with that, Uncle Sam.]
Claiming indigenous ancestry when you have none is akin to stolen valor. Our ancestors literally fought and died so we could be here. We are the survivors of countless atrocities, attempted genocide, family massacres, sterilization campaigns, boarding schools, and more.
Claiming indigenous ancestry when you have none is not only offending, but it’s illegal when you sell books, give speeches, interviews, paid appearances, and gain other benefits by claiming a heritage that you have no right to.
Where’s the line?
UC Berkeley needs to show some integrity.
You can tell them, too. Here’s a list of people you can contact:
ESPM Dept. Chair Michael Mascarenhas: (510) 643-3788
Chancellor Carol Christ: (510) 642-7464
Exec. Vice Chancellor Ben Hermalin: (510) 642-1961
Equity & Inclusion Dania Matos: (510) 642-7294
Office of the Chancellor Khira Griscavage: (510) 643-8880
September 1, 2023
Landback Wildflower Mix
What’s Inside Planting Instructions How To Get the Landback Wildflower Mix
A mix of hand-collected Native California Plants chosen for the semi-arid climate of Alameda, and places like it, below 1,000 feet.
All of them are full sun; except for the Tomcat Clover, which is happiest with a little soil moisture.

Tomcat Clover
Trifolium willdenovii
Credit: Jennifer McNew, BLM
Most of the plants in the Landback Wildflower Seed mix were selected because they are easy to grow, and help to provide food and pollen for a variety of life-forms, the most popular of which would be butterflies, and native honey bee and bumble bees. But these plants also sustain Birds, and Moths.
Gilia Capitata is beautiful, blue, self-sewing and easy to grow. Blooms throughout spring, well into summer.

Blue Thimble Flower
(aka “Globe Gilia”)
Gilia capitata
Credit: Amada44
Many of these plants should look familiar, if you’ve ever been hiking around the East Bay. We live in a place where there are many places where you can observe wildflowers as they exist in nature.
Goldfields are numerous, and can be found all over the shoreline of the Bay Area, for instance: on Doolittle Drive, along the Martin Luther King Jr. Regional Shoreline.

Goldfields
Lasthenia glabrata
Credit: Cliff Hutson
The California Coastal Poppy is a native cultivar developed for its drought tolerance, deer resistance, and self-sowing attributes. The orange dot in the center make the perfect landing pad for all kinds of pollinators.

Coastal Poppy
Eschscholzia californica var. maritima
Credit: Paul Hermans
Each seed pack has a unique ratio of seeds.
Chinese Houses set themselves apart with their long stalks, which reach up to 2 feet high, and their distinctive purple petals. These wildflowers are especially attractive to pollinators, including the Variable Checkerspot, Edith’s Checkspot Butterflies; and the Bilobed Looper Moth (among others.)

Chinese Houses
(aka “Innocence”)
Collinsia heterophylla
Credit: Stickpen
Some packets have a small amount of these beautiful and super drought tolerant California native plants:

Elegant Tarweed
Madia elegans
Credit: Calibas
Smells like pineapple. Drought & Deer tolerant. Reliably self-sows. Late-season bloom from Mid-Summer to Fall.

Serpentine Sunflower
Helianthus bolanderi
Credit: Richard Spellenberg
Grows up to 5′ tall. Doesn’t care what soil you plant it in. Goes crazy in compost-enhanced soil. Great cut flower. Self-Sows.
About the Seed Packets
The Landback Wildflower Mix has been specifically chosen to be easy to grow and drought-tolerant; requiring only a couple of waterings a month once they are established.
These seeds require no pretreatment and can be sown directly into the ground where they will be grown. Coastal Poppy roots are fragile, and should not be transplanted or moved from their original plot, once established.
Planting Instructions:
Prepare seedbed by removing existing weeds. Mix seeds with compost, broadcast where it is to grow, rake in lightly, and tamp. If fall rains don’t begin, irrigate 1-2 times weekly until seedling have made good growth.
Watering:
Water 1-2 times weekly until the plants are established. Once these plants are established, they can be water 1-2 a month. [With the exception of the Tomcat Clover, which enjoys a little moisture in its soil.]
Planting Time:
Fall and winter are optimal for annual flowers. The sweet spot is mid-fall.
Sowing Rate:
The Landback Wildflower Mix seed packet can seed approximately 5 square feet.
Source of the Seeds in the Landback Wildflower Mix:
These seeds were purchased, mixed, and repackaged by Alameda Native History Project from Larner Seeds, and Klamath-Siskiyou Native Seeds, for give-away purposes only.
Neither Larner Seeds, nor Siskiyou Native Seeds are affiliated with the Alameda Native History Project.
A Note On Larner Seeds:
Larner Seeds was founded by Judith Larner Lowry. She is an expert on local native plants, seed gathering, and propagation, and has written a number of books on this subject.
Larner Seeds is based in Bolinas, California, and is definitely worth the visit, if you can make it over to their Seed Shop & Demonstration Garden.
How To Get the Landback Wildflower Mix
You can pick up a Landback Wildflower Mix seed packet from our booth at the:
Blues, Brews & BBQ Festival
September 17, 2023
Noon to 6pm
Call or Email Us ahead of time to reserve your packet!
August 28, 2023