It sounds so distant when people use the word “ancestors”. Because it’s so safe; and sterilized by a false sense of temporal distance.
Even though those shellmounds contained the Great-Great-Grandparents of Muwekma (the word for “Ohlone People“, in their language, Chochenyo) who are alive and well today.
But the bodies didn’t stay buried.
Bones from shellmounds were used to fertilize the fields, gardens, and flower beds which became iconic as soon as Mark Twain called Alameda the “Garden of California”.
The remains of hundreds of Native Americans were used to pave Bay Farm Road. Twice.
The bodies of thousands of Ohlone people were crushed, and pulverized, to make concrete for sidewalks, and foundations for houses. Their graves pushed over to fill marshland, and level out the numerous railways running through the island we now call “Alameda”.
So it’s no wonder you found someone in your backyard.
Native American Graves are being Still Being Uncovered in Alameda Today
The story goes: a contractor working on a new deck, or a foundation crew digging around the cribs will find some bones. Human bones.
You’re supposed to stop work, supposed to call the Police Department and report the discover of a burial. Because it could a crime scene. Or it could be a Native American Grave.
If the bones look old enough, some contractors will turn a blind eye, and toss them back into the ground for some other guy to dig up.
But that’s not how you should do it.
Here are the 5 Steps to Honoring Native American Graves on the Stolen Land You Now Occupy
Step 1:
Don’t call the Museum!
If you find bones in Alameda while digging, do not call the Alameda Museum.
The Alameda Museum has no one on staff, or on call, who is qualified to identify or store Native American artifacts.
Since 1948 the Alameda Museum had mis-identified Ohlone people as “Miwok”, instead of “Costanoan” which is what Ohlone people in the Bay Area were known as until about the 1970’s. This mis-identification ended abruptly when the Alameda Native History Project interceded in the miss-identification of the First Alamedans (Muwekma) and mis-attribution of their stolen property.
So don’t call them. They don’t know what they’re doing.
Step 2:
Let the ancestors rest!
Stop work.
Don’t touch a damn thing.
🤬 around and catch a curse. Or a case.
[CA HSC §7050.5(a) : Every person who knowingly mutilates or disinters, wantonly disturbs, or willfully removes any human remains in or from any location other than a dedicated cemetery without authority of law is guilty of a misdemeanor….]
I know it sucks: but pay the crew for the rest of the day and send them home.
You’re done for the day.
Step 3:
Report the discovery to the police!
Who honestly knows if this is an ancient burial? Your contractor isn’t an expert either. It doesn’t matter what they say.
Stop work and call the police immediately.
The sooner you call, the sooner this gets settled.
The Coroner is the only person who has the authority to identify whether or not the remains are Native American.
“[I]f the coroner recognizes the human remains to be those of a Native American, or has reason to believe that they are those of a Native American” he or she will contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours.
NAHC will send for a Tribal Consultant from the Tribal Groups affiliated with the area where the discovery was made, and whomever NAHC also determines is the Most Likely Descendant.
Step 5:
Step back. Tribal Consultants will handle the rest.
Consultation is private. Anyone who isn’t directly involved, won’t be.
At the end of consultation, you will generally be presented with two options:
Re-Inter (or Re-Bury) the ancestor(s) in a place on the property where they will not be disturbed again.
Tribal Consultants will remove their ancestor(s) and repatriate them at their Tribal Cemetery.
That’s it!
You just helped protect Native American Graves, and reunited someone’s ancestor with their family!
Encourage your neighbors to do the same.
Encourage the Alameda Museum to do the right thing, and give their collection of stolen artifacts back to the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area.
What did Alameda look like before the Oakland Estuary was dredged out; and Bay Farm, South Shore, and the West End were filled in?
Where was the Live Oak Forest? What kind of animals roamed what was once known as la Bolsa de Encinal?
The new Alameda Historic Ecology Web Map shows you in exquisite detail, using never-before-seen GIS data compiled and developed exclusively by the Alameda Native History Project.
You can have this map on your wall. Find out how: visit our merch page now.
Decolonizing History
The Alameda Native History Project decolonizes history by providing real and accurate information about the geography and ecology of places like Alameda, which is occupied Muwekma Ohlone territory.
Before now, only over-copied handouts, and over-generalized information has been made available by Alameda’s Historians and Schools. No concerted effort has been made to update this content since (at least) the 1970’s.
This map is a wake-up call for Alameda Historians….
And a challenge to the groups like the Board of the Alameda Museum, and Alameda Historical Commission, to step up their game, and, meaningfully and accurately represent and honor the contributions and lives of all Alamedans, like Quong Fat and Mabel Tatum, with permanent exhibits, public art made by someone of the heritage it represents, and historical districts commemorating more than Victorian houses.
Because, mentions only in museum newsletters, city council declarations…. Or once a year appearances at speaker panels for [AAPI/Black History, Pride, Native American, etc.] Heritage Months are not cutting it.
Featuring Alameda’s Ancient Live Oak Forest, Historic Shoreline, and Bay Area Historic Wetlands layers.
All juxtaposed against the modern day landscape to provide accurate scale and positioning.
Available in several sizes.
Preview the new Alameda Shellmound Map V.2. Available in 3 sizes. Get it now!
More Detailed Historic Geography
Because of the juxtaposition of the historic peninsula with it’s present day silhouette, it is much easier to see which parts of Alameda were physically connected and formed the peninsula more recently known as the “Encinal”.
Both Alameda and Oakland are in a region referred to as Xučyun (also known as “Huchiun”.) Xučyun is part of the ancestral homeland of the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area. Muwekma have lived in the Bay Area for over 10,000 years.
Includes All Four Alameda Shellmounds
For the first time, all four of the Alameda Shellmounds have been put onto one map. Most people only know about the shellmound on Mound Street. But there are more shellmounds, in Alameda. There were over 425 shellmounds in the Bay Area. Including Alameda’s largest shellmound, at the foot Chestnut.
Why is this important?
The existence of the three other Alameda Shellmounds was overlooked by all of Alameda’s previous historians*, including long-time (since retired) curator of the Alameda Museum: George Gunn.
From 1948, to 2020: the Alameda Museum falsely identified the First Alamedans as “a branch of Miwok”, instead of “Costanoan” or Ohlone.
The Alameda Native History Project is responsible for stepping forward and correcting the record, and educating the public about the real Alameda Native History.
This map proves that Alameda History is more than Victorian houses.
This place we call Alameda was once called “La Bolsa de Encinal”. Meaning, “the Encinal forest”. Because the peninsula was host to a verdant, “ancient”, Live Oak forest. (The forest still exists. It just looks different.)
Many of the first accounts of the historic peninsula use rather idyllic, and paradisaic language to describe the rich pre-contact ecosystem that thrived here.
Alameda was once referred to as a “Garden City”. This is the place where the Loganberry was supposedly born.
Historic Shoreline
tl;dr : Everyone wants to know where the landfill is. [There! I said it, okay?] They don’t even really care where Alameda used to be connected to Oakland. Or about the ancient whirl pool in la bahia de san leandro. But, whatever.
Look closer, and you can see the footprints of present day buildings. That’s the landfill.
For real though, I made this layer using pre-1900 shoreline vector data I compiled for the Bay Area region, and stitched together.
Bay Area Historic Wetlands layers
In Version 1, I made a kind of sloppy polygon with historical shoreline vectors, and painted it green. It was a good placeholder for the historic marshes and wetlands of the Bay Area.
Version 2 features the finely detailed historic wetlands layer created for the Bay Area Shellmounds Maps. It features very precise cut-outs for historic creeks, channels and waterways; and features full-coverage of the Bay Area region.
If you want some actual historical eco-data, check out the San Francisco Estuary Institute. They have some brilliant historical ecology GIS you would probably love, if you’ve read this far.
The Alameda Shellmound Map, Version 2, is ground-breaking in its completeness and exquisite detail.
[Footnote: Imelda Merlin mentioned numerous shellmounds in her Geology Master Thesis, but none of her assertions were backed up with any relevant citations. And geology is not archaeology, ethnology, or anthropology, the areas of study that normally concern themselves with Tribal Cultural Resources like shellmounds.
Furthermore, the famous “Imelda Merlin Shellmound Map” was actually a map of Live Oak trees present in Alameda at the time Merlin wrote her thesis (in 1977).
The “Map of Whitcher’s Survey of ‘The Encinal’ in 1853. In Alameda City Hall.”, cited on page 104 of Merlin’s thesis, has never been found by Alameda City Hall, the Alameda Free Library, or the Alameda Museum.
Certainly this means Imelda Merlin has failed to meet the burden of proof required for institutions like Alameda Museum to take reliance upon her claims re: Whitcher’s Survey, and locations of any mounds. Yet, somehow, Merlin’s geology thesis was Alameda Museum’s sole reference regarding shellmounds. (For years Imelda Merlin’s geology thesis was viewed as the authoritative source of information about Alameda shellmounds.)]
Decolonize History
One of the ways Alameda Native History Project decolonizes history is by interrogating the record. This means tracking down and reading citations. Critically evaluating reports and studies for bias. And calling out poor research, and prejudiced conclusions for what they are.
We decolonize history by updating the maps and diagrams of our past. Producing accurate, fact-based educational and reference materials to replace the biased and inaccurate educational products–which are still misinforming our schoolchildren and the greater public today.
By providing a more nuanced and comprehensive perspective; and doing away with the old, over-copied handouts from decades past: we are able to shed the misinformed, and racist, stereotypes and quackery that typify generations which brought us things like: “kill the indian, save the man”, Jim Crow, and “Separate But Equal”.
We vigorously challenge the cognitive dissonance of so many California Historians, asking “Where did all the Indians go?”, at a time when the entire United States had declared war on Native Americans. … Including the first Governor of California, who called for “war of extermination” against California Native Americans.
These ideas, stereotypes, attitudes, and beliefs have managed to propagate themselves time and time again in the textbooks and lesson plans used to “educate” countless generations of Americans.
Shellmounds are ancient structures created by thousands of years of indigenous occupation.
Shellmounds are cemeteries, or mortuary complexes. The final resting places of the first people to live in this place we call the San Francisco Bay Area.
There were once over 425 shellmounds in the San Francisco Bay Area alone. In fact, there were many more shellmounds than that.
If you look closely at the distribution of shellmounds in Marin and Sonoma Counties, and apply that density to the rest of the Bay Area, you will very easily top 600 shellmounds.
Despite the fact that shellmounds are cemeteries, hundreds were still destroyed all around the Bay Area.
And–to make matters unimaginably worse–the bodies inside were ground up, and used as overspread to level out train tracks, and build massive infrastructure (like the Angel Island Immigration complex.)
“How was this possible?” (You may ask yourself.)
Wouldn’t someone be able to tell there were bodies inside of these mounds?
Yes. People could tell there were bodies in the mounds.
Even though some news stories feature witnesses who described bones disintegrating, or “turning to dust” as soon as they were handled…. People are still finding skeletons in places like Alameda, California, whenever they dig somewhere for the first time in a hundred years–which isn’t hard to do when many houses in Alameda are 100 years old.
In spite of the desecration, and destruction visited on hundreds of shellmounds here in the San Francisco Bay Area, many still survive. And a surprising amount shellmounds survive intact.
The most well known, “intact” shellmounds in the Bay Area reside in the Coyote Hills Regional Park. They are known as the “Ryan” and “Patterson” Mounds.
They join a long list of shellmounds which have been reported upon and studied over the past 100 years or more.
This list includes (but is not limited to):
Ellis Landing (Contra Costa)
Emeryville (Alameda)
West Berkeley (Alameda)
San Bruno Mound (San Mateo)
Miller Mound (Colusa)
Alameda Shellmound (Alameda)
Ryan Mound, and Patterson Mound (Alameda)
Burton Mound (Santa Barbara)
Herzog Mound (Sacramento)
… Just to name a few.
Excerpts of Illustrations from “Shell midden” surveys in SoCal showing shellmounds in situ:
These objects and human remains were taken during a period of “salvage archaeology“. Which was a period of intense extractive and exploitive research into Native American Language, Arts, Culture and Religion under the premise that the “Aboriginal Indians of North America” would soon become “extinct”.
Obviously, much of this work was made easier by the dispossession, missionization, forced internment (on reservations), and annihilation, that Indigenous People endured since First Contact with Europeans.
Just as Indigenx, Native American, First Nation and all First People of this place survived colonization: so did their shellmounds.
It’s up to us to break the cycle of destruction. The cycle of purposely disconnecting people from the places they come from. And then destroying those places (literally) for no other reason than the speculative amount of value or resources the land is worth.
One of the ways we can put the earth back into balance is by letting those who are from this earth gain access to their ancestors; and traditional places (like hunting camps) and resources (like a river) which provide a tribal cultural benefit.
Traditional tribal hunting grounds provide a tribal cultural benefit as source of traditional sustenance…. A river (or certain parts of it) where fish are caught, or plants or other things are gathered, is a natural resource which provides a tribal cultural benefit.
There is an air gap between the idea of land stewardship as a Native American landscaping service; and land stewardship through traditional cultural practices which have shaped much of the natural ecosystems of the Bay Area for over 10,000 years.
Render of a shellmound on the shore of the Carquinez Strait.
The mounds which still exist are not flat; have not been dug out; and are certainly not parking lots, transit stations, or shopping malls.
Parking lots are not “undeveloped” space.
Parking lots are not “open space”.
Parking lots have been levelled, packed, and paved.
…Just because parking lots are flat does not mean the land “isn’t developed”.
You need to know this:
When we talk about saving sacred sites. We’re talking about real sacred sites. Places which have been spared from development, either by ignorance, or by luck.
Render of a shellmound across the bay from San Francisco. Possibly in Albany, or El Cerrito.
Shellmounds are a part of the natural environment.
Shellmounds support the ecosystems they reside in.
Shellmounds are not parking lots!
Aside from the spiritual impact of shellmounds to their surrounding areas: shellmounds today provide habitat for plants and wildlife where that habitat is endangered–and, under constant threat of development.
You can help protect sacred land by protecting the environment around it.
You can help protect sacred land by advocating for its conservation, and return to the San Francisco Bay Area Ohlone Tribe: the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe.
While support for land trusts, and ideas like “rematriation” are wonderful….
Fundraising campaigns like “Shuumi Land Tax” take away from the real causes of Ohlone Tribal Recognition, Ohlone Tribal Sovereignty, and Ohlone Ancestral Land Back.
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.
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.
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.
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
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
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. 🚩🚩🚩
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:
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.
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.
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.
On Monday, September 4, 2023, the City of Alameda’s five-year agreement with the Alameda Museum to provide archival storage expired.
According to the agreement, the Alameda Museum, as an Independent Contractor, would provide the following:
Be open to the public for free at least 15 hours a week.
Be open for free group tours, especially for education based groups.
Store historical records of the city and provide archival preservation.
Dedicate 25% of warehouse to archival storage.
Dedicate an additional 25% of warehouse to the City’s historical exhibits, including documents and photo archives from the Library, City records, Police and Fire Departments, Alameda Recreation and Park Department, and other City records.
Assist with providing archive digital photos and text for City historical interpretive signage as requested.
The agreement made it clear the Alameda Museum is a Service Provider; and not a Civil Servant.
The agreement also provided a standard of care:
Provider agrees to perform all services hereunder in a manner commensurate with the prevailing standards of like professionals or service providers… all services shall be performed by qualified and experienced personnel[.]
Service Provider Agreement Between the City of Alameda and the Alameda Museum executed 09/05/2018
In the Recitals, the Agreement states that the Alameda Museum “possesses the skill, experience, ability, background, volunteer and staff time, and knowledge to provide the services described in this agreement on the terms and conditions described herein.”
But, even when this was signed, in 2018, the Alameda Museum didn’t possess any of the skill, experience, ability or background to perform these services.
George Gunn wasn’t qualified to preserve historical documents; and he didn’t.
George Gunn was an architect; not a serious records preservationist, or an archivist. Sure, he was able to inventory houses outside of the museum. But he never inventoried or organized the inside of museum in any useful or practical way–and this is a truth uncovered by what was supposed to be a routine records request that started almost four years ago.
Before 2019, the Alameda Museum had never bothered to organize the catalogue by Keyword, or Date.
Museum staff had simply redirected visitors to the Alameda Free Library, hoping the Library would do the Museum’s heavy lifting for them; instead of providing access to the relevant materials the Library actually transferred to the Museum.
This is why it always feels like a run-around.
Because the Alameda Museum always tries to redirect you to Alameda Free Library, even if the Library referred you to the Museum.
But this story lead straight to the Alameda Museum from the beginning; and I was not going to be redirected. I had the receipts.
I was following up on a number of items referenced in historical newspapers as donated to the Alameda Library; so I knew those items were in the possession of the Alameda Museum because of the transfer.
Of course the Museum didn’t know what I was talking about at first, and forced me to show them my sources to validate my inquiry.
Despite inheriting such a well organized, and cross-referenced volume of data and objects from the library, the Alameda Museum still managed to index it in a way that made it impossible to search the historical City Records, and City Exhibits. This was the second major hurdle.
When George Gunn finally left, the shadow of his leadership still remained.
The Museum Warehouse was not indexed. And, despite the efforts of the Museum’s volunteers, many of Alameda Museum’s holdings that were indexed, were indexed incorrectly.
This isn’t just proof Alameda Museum wasn’t in compliance with their contract; these circumstances underscore the need for the Archives to be maintained and preserved by a qualified Archival Preservation specialist.
Identification, dating, authentication and assignment of keywords of Alameda Museum’s artifacts needs to be performed by qualified persons. Data Entry and Cross-Referencing of existing card catalogs needs to be performed accurately, and with care.
And this is not to mention the financial and existential challenges George Gunn left Alameda Museum Board Members to deal with in his wake.
None of this is an excuse for the fact the Board Members didn’t do anything to encourage Gunn to provide the services or fire him. Point of fact: Gunn was constantly co-signed; his seat was never contested.
George Gunn, for his part, was belligerent in his noncompliance and perceived omnipotence [read: hubris].
George Gunn thought he would always be able to “survive” his critics… But he resigned in 2021, two years before the Museum’s contract expired.
While people like Dennis Evanosky [sorry, Dennis] and Woody Minor lauded Gunn’s “accomplishments”: Gunn’s only listed accomplishments reflected his own personal interests–outside of the museum–and unintentionally highlighted that Gunn’s notable achievements did not confer a public benefit.
Coincidentally, Dennis Evanosky was a signator to the Agreement with the City of Alameda, as the President of the Alameda Museum Board of Directors.
Museum Lacks Skilled Staff or Volunteers to Provide Preservation Services
Even if the Alameda Museum has been able to stay open for the 15 hours required of it for some of 5 years of this agreement, the Museum certainly does not have the volunteer or staff time to provide the archival services necessary to manage and preserve Alameda City Records.
This is because the Alameda Museum lacks any staff or volunteer hours to do the work that piled up during George Gunn’s tenor.
The Alameda Museum openly admits this:
They lack trained staff, they’re volunteer run.
They don’t have enough staff or volunteer hours to provide access to the Archives.
Board members are largely only scheduled for 2 hours a week.
The Alameda City Records are invaluable, priceless materials the City pays to be conserved in a warehouse suited for archival preservation.
Charging for Admission & Tours At Meyer House could Violate Agreement
Meyers House required $5 cash only admission fee.
The Service Provider Agreement specifically states the Museum must be open to the public (for no admission fee) for at least 15 hours per week.
Is the Meyer House exempt from the Agreement for some reason?
If so, the Meyer House and Garden hours of operations should not count towards to the total amount of time the Alameda Museum is open to the public.
Which would bring the Alameda Museum’s total time “Open To The Public” to only 7.5 hours–exactly half of the 15 hours the museum is required to be open for.
Museum Does Not Have Important Documents Regarding Transfer of Artifacts From Alameda Library
To be honest, my research request has less to do with the Alameda Museum, than with the Official City Repository they are paid to manage.
For context, my research request with the Alameda Museum started on November 24, 2019. And I was looking for archival materials like Newspapers of Records, Archival Photographs and Documents from the Library, City Records from the Council and other Departments and City Offices, as well as objects, artifacts, and other things donated to the Alameda Free Library’s Museum — all materials that were transferred to the Alameda Museum for safe keep, per the Service Provider Agreement between the Alameda Museum and the City of Alameda.
The first hurdle was the Museum’s lack of useful, practical, or accessible index/catalog.
Today, Valerie Turpen claims the Museum’s holdings have been catalogued and can now be searched by keyword — which was impossible before. But this doesn’t mean that my records request has been satisfied, or that I am any closer to reviewing the historical documents I request nearly four years ago.
Part of the reason is because some records are missing.
For instance, it appears that all records of the donation of Ohlone Artifacts to the Alameda Library are missing. There is no record of when the artifacts were donated, or by who. Every artifact in the “Native American Collection” seems to bear the same boiler-plate language:
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.
Alameda Museum, “Native American Artifacts” as of May 31, 2022
The images above are a small selection of the Ohlone Artifacts stolen from the Alameda Shellmound and put on display as “Miwok” artifacts until I called the Museum out for their inaccuracies in 2019.
As you can tell from the object description quoted above: the exact provenance is impossible to tell because of Alameda Museum’s failure to accurately identify these stolen burial goods, and preserve integral paperwork related to their “donation”.
The plain and obvious disregard for indigenous objects and history stands in sharp contrast to the careful cataloguing and indexing of the white, Victorian-era artifacts proudly displayed and advertised by the Alameda Museum.
And it begs the question: How can the Museum have spent so much time cataloguing all of the objects owned by white Alamedans, from artwork to silverware to shoes, to the smallest, most inconsequential objects… but completely neglect the provenance, identification, and indexing of the most historically important objects in the entire Alameda Museum: proof of what life was like for the First Alamedans.
These artifacts were celebrated and popular during the early 1900’s. Several lectures were given on the Alameda Shellmounds, which featured artifacts now in the possession of the Alameda Museum.
Is this indicative of how other collections in the Alameda Museum are being mismanaged, improperly attributed, and haphazardly stored?
What other “city exhibits” are being neglected and what other records have been lost by the Alameda Museum?
When’s the last time the Museum even took inventory of their holdings? Seems like the answer is never, if their holdings weren’t even catalogued in 2019.
How could the Alameda Museum have let these conditions persist for so many decades?
Has the City ever inspected it’s own Archives for Compliance with the Service Provider Agreement?
All signs point to, “No”.
Maybe it’s time for the City of Alameda to take a better look at how the Alameda Museum has mismanaged the City Archives;
And either take serious steps to provide required access to those Archives at the Alameda Museum;
Or put out a Request for Proposals from qualified records storage and preservation companies.
In the Indigenous Bay Area, water and life have always gone hand-in-hand. It was impossible to tell where the sea truly ended on this coast. Even inland, the San Francisco Regions’s natural aquatic resources are used with reverence, and traded throughout the region (and beyond.) Salmon connect the sea to the rivers, streams, and lakes of California, and they are a living link shared by many Indigenous People in California.
Did the First People of the Bay Area Benefit from the Waterbodies and Waterways through Sustenance Fishing?
It is without any doubt that the First People of the place we now call the San Francisco Bay Area have used, worn, consumed, or cultivated almost all of the things in the pre-contact environment. This includes the natural aquatic resources of the San Francisco Bay Region.
You already know about salmon; edible plants, like kelp, eelgrass; but, think even smaller, like byssal thread–the stuff that holds mussels together in their beds–which was mainly used as an adhesive. These are the Traditional & Cultural Tribal Beneficial uses.
It’s established that Indigenous people engaged in Sustenance Fishing, individually.
As a group, Tribes engaged in Tribal Sustenance Fishing by working together to catch or gather larger numbers of natural aquatic resources like fish, shellfish, and vegetation, to be able to feed their group (or Tribe).
The shellmounds’ very existence is proof that this is true because of the sustained consumption, gathering, and use of shellfish it would take to gather the amount of shells used for the burials, and cemermonies, that shellmounds physically represent, and immortalize [as tangible evidence of this use.]
Consider also, the sheer amount of tools, currency, jewelry, and clothing, which is made from shells proves a continuous Tribal Cultural Beneficial Use for the last 10,000 years.
Surely, the shellmounds are the emodiment of the Traditional, Cultural, and Sustenance, Tribal Beneficial Uses for the WaterBodies of the San Francisco Bay Region?
Yes, Indigenous People have engaged in Sustenance Fishing, and Tribal Sustenance Fishing in all of the waterbodies in the San Francisco Bay Region for at least 10,000 years. And, that Sustenance-based use directly influences the innumerable Traditional, Cultural, [and Ceremonial] uses in First People’s societies.
Natural Aquatic Resources and Indigenous Ceremony
The less opaque “Tribal Beneficial Use” of the waterways and waterbodies of the San Francisco Bay Region (or “Basin”) are their ceremonial uses and connections.
This is because ceremonies for things like funerals, and ancestor worship has not been performed at shellmounds regularly in the region since approximately the 1770’s [which is when the Bay Area began to be invaded, and occupied, by Spain, Mexico, and the United States (in that order.)
But not all was lost. The First People of the San Francisco Bay Area are alive and well.]
Shellmounds, today, exist on private property, and are inaccessible to the Indigenous people whose blood relations are buried there. While it is difficult to compel land owners to grant Easements For Tribal Beneficial Uses… Government Agencies and Departments should create policies granting such Cultural Easements For Tribal Beneficial Uses upon request.
It should be assumed that water, and the proximity to it, played a large role in the selection of the location shellmounds, because shellmounds are found almost exclusively near the shores and riverbanks of the San Francisco Bay Area.
We should also assume that funerary practices included natural aquatic resources (like shellfish, fish, vegetation) which were gathered and used as ceremonial objects, to make special clothing, for the ceremony, or things given to the decedent for use in the afterlife; or, to protect their body on earth; or, for other myriad reasons, including: it was their favorite [object here.]
It’s not surprising then, that the amount of direct influence shellmounds and the waterways and waterbodies of the San Francisco Bay Region have on each other leave almost no corner of the Bay Area untouched.
Composite map of San Francisco Bay Basin Plan Waterbodies shown in lines and polygons.
There are three sets of data here. Just like there are three colors.
The green features show the San Francisco Bay Basin Waterbodies.
Yellow features are part of the wider network of waterbodies to which shellmounds are connected.
Red features show where shellmounds and basin waterbodies are intrinsically linked.
Fix geometries. (It helps to make a spatial index.)
Reproject to NAD83 California State Plane Zone 3
Find features for layers which matched the location of shellmounds within my margin of error, and with consideration to the average size of shellmounds recorded.
You know, then do the cosmetic stuff, as you can see in the picture above.
Consider the Confidentiality of Tribal Cultural Resources
Is this a bad time to point out that N.C. Nelson’s Shellmound Map was hand-plotted, using a completely different geographic coordinate reference system? I think that matters….
Use This Information As Another Reason to Listen to Indigenous Voices
It is an ethical obligation for Indigenous People to be included, respected, and listened to in the planning process. Not just to check the boxes on the Environmental Impact Assessment, or after a burial has already been disturbed.
Tribal Cultural Resources, and Tribal Beneficial Uses must also be taken into account when facilities Water Treatment Plants, Oil Refineries, and Quarries, seek to renew their license to operate.
Especially when those facilities generate large quantities of hazardous waste, endanger nearby communities, and deprive indigenous people of their beneficial use of natural aquatic resources and Tribal Cultural Resources through:
The illegal occupation of unceded land. (No, for real, the treaties were never ratified. Indigenous people in the Bay Area never gave away anything, and never will.)
Destruction of Tribal Cultural Resources to create infrastructure, like levees, landfills, and larger things like water treatment plants, and municipal dumps (many are on the shores of the San Francisco Bay Basin).
Forced Extinction and Endangerment of Native Plants and Animals, especially whales, fish, shellfish and aquatic vegetation.
The spoiling of natural resources through pollution, dumping, and paving.
… Among other things.
The Shellmounds of the San Francisco Bay Basin are not only Tribal Cultural Resources, they are intrinsically connected with the Tribal Beneficial Uses of this region’s natural aquatic resources.
Extracted Basin Plan Lines and PolygonsExtracted Basin Plan Lines and Polygons (Dissolved by Waterbody Name)
I vaguely remembered having to do a lot of work in the beginning to make that shoreline map because I was just learning how to use GIS software. But I didn’t remember the specifics. And, I couldn’t find an original file for the project that wasn’t already incorporated into a larger project.
So, I did what I probably should have done in the first place, and took a look at the data table, to find some identifier that Google would help me resolve. That identifier came as a “Project ID” number: “CA37B01”.
Even better: the website took me to another place where I could search for and download the files I wanted, The National Geodetic Survey – NOAA Shoreline Data Explorer… Which is better than the regular National Shoreline Data Explorer, because it loads faster, and is easier to filter. Also, the difference between vector and raster files is very clearly delineated.
Once I got everything mended together, I had a redux of the “Pre-1900 Historic Shoreline of the San Francisco Bay Region”.
As awesome and fun as this is, the map is still missing Goat Island–known as Yerba Buena Island Today–which Treasure Island was built (or filled) next to, and the San Francisco Bay Bridge was built (tunneled) through. Mapping of Goat Island does not appear to have occurred until after the year 1900. I could not find any T-Sheets or National Shoreline Datum in either vector or raster form showing Goat Island.
It’s a little disappointing. But it does not invalidate or really detract from the overall purpose of this project; which was to show the Pre-1900 Shoreline of the San Francisco Bay Area.
To request a copy of this GIS Dataset, send an email with the subject “Pre-1900 Bay Area Shoreline”.
