The following is an email sent to John Keenan, volunteer at the Museum of the San Ramon Valley, in reply to his request for topics for Zoom Lectures at the museum:
Land Acknowledgement is an important step in naming and acknowledging the people who actually belong to this land. It’s a proclamation that has no legal implications, as far as I can tell. But it is the first step in naming the people whose land you are on, and acknowledging the circumstances which forced them off of it, and into obscurity. It is an attempt to undo the continuing erasure (or omission) of the history of our people, and one way to begin the process of inviting Native American people to be a part of the planning process; as well as to make space for the representation of the actual lived experiences of Native American people.
By acknowledging this land is Ohlone territory, you are honoring Ohlone people by referring to them by the name that they chose for themselves. And you are helping to correct the inaccurate representations of who has been here (“since time immemorial”–but at least for [7,000] years.)
Many times, historical societies, and museums refuse to acknowledge, or take seriously the factual (historical) background of this place. But it only takes the introduction and study of archeological, ethnographic, and direct statements by Native People, in the last 50 years for one to realize, and determine that this is indeed Ohlone Territory.
For instance, the last recorded tribal group in your area was the Verona Band of Indians, they appeared in at least two Indian Censuses, J.P. Harrington’s Research, and most recently in Randall Milliken’s detailed and thorough analysis of Mission Records. The Verona Band of Indians was recognized as a tribe by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and is known today as the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area, which claims the entire San Ramon Valley area as their homeland. Furthermore, overtures made to the existence of groups in places like “Lisjan”, are direct references to places where Ohlone people lived and worked on ranches in the post-Mission Period–as “Lisjan” is a Maidu place name for Pleasanton, California.
Inline attachment: image showing Muwekma Tribal Territory, “Some of the Direct Muwekma Ohlone Lineal Descendant Tribal Districts and Villages”
In spite of this, museums and historical societies, such as the Museum of the San Ramon Valley, continue to insist that the tribal groups of your area were Miwok; when, in fact, they were Miwok-speaking Ohlone People. And the only reason Ohlone people were misidentified was because of the blind reliance on the languages spoken by the Native People here as the sole identifying indicator of a tribe’s identity. This, of course, is a result of the fact Miwok was the primary language spoken in California Missions. (However, Jose Guzman, pictured below, spoke Chochenyo, which is an Ohlone language.)
By continuing to misidentify Ohlone people–who are alive and well today–and refusing to acknowledge their lives, and contributions to this area, is continuing to omit large portions of a rich and interesting history, some of which can only be presented by Ohlone People, themselves. This is aside from the reliance upon, and repetition of, what’s widely seen as explicitly racist, antiquated, and offensive language and references to Native American People, often still seen in museums, and historical societies, today.
[Inline attachments: 1. picture of Ohlone ancestor, Jose (“Joe”) Guzman, seated in a chair, holding a cane, on a ranch in Niles, California–unidentified woman standing behind him, perhaps one of his daughters;(2.) Jose Guzman’s son, and grand-children, also in Niles, California. Both pictures were taken in 1934.]
It is for these reasons, among many others, that Land Acknowledgement is an important facet to honoring the people of this area. But it is also a step forward in presenting accurate historical information, and respectful representation, of the people whose land you are on, and benefit from.
It is also for these reasons (among many others) I would be unable to present information about Native People in the San Ramon Valley area under the guise that they are “Miwok”. Because I know this is a false representation of the facts.
Please find the attached “Muwekma Greeting”, an official document published by the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area. It is extremely thorough and detailed; the most pertinent facts have been verified and augmented by the Bureau of Indian Affair’s own Research and Acknowledgement Division.
I hope this will help you as you consider which topics and information the Museum of the San Ramon Valley chooses to present to the public. I am copying this email to the museum’s main email address, as well.
Muwekma Ohlone Tribal Members unveiling first Trail Marker in their language, Čočeño (Chochencyo), at Coyote Hills Regional Park (aka Máyyan Šáatošikma)
On Sunday, November 27, 2022, we gathered at Máyyan Šáatošikma (aka Coyote Hills Regional Park, in Fremont) to witness the unveiling of the first of 35 trail markers, redesigned, and translated into Čočeño (Chochenyo).
Čočeño is the official language of the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area, once recognized as the Verona Band of Indians, and comprised of all of the known surviving American Indian lineages aboriginal to the San Francisco Bay region who trace their ancestry through the Missions Dolores, Santa Clara, and San Jose.
It was through the work of J.P. Harrington, and Ohlone Ancestor Jose Guzman, that the Čočeño language was preserved, and survived centuries of attempted erasure.
The renaming of these 35 trail markers–which account for all of the trail markers in the Coyote Hills Regional Park–are the culmination of decades of (continuing) partnership with the East Bay Regional Park District.
The Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area is a bonafide tribe, with more than 600 enrolled members. Muwekma holds elections for their leaders, who are now Charlene Nijmeh (Chairwoman), Monica Arellano (Vice Chairwoman). Muwekma has a strong Tribal Council, made of elders and enrolled members; without whom the re-awakening of the Čočeño language, and traditions, such as almost-forgotten dances, would not be possible.
As supporters of Tribal Sovereignty, of Ohlone People’s struggle for recognition, for Land Back, and those who wish to Decolonize, and Rematriate The Land: Remember that Muwekma is a bonafide tribe–and not a corporation, like the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan “Nation”, INC.; or the Sogorea Te Land Trust.
The important distinction between these groups is that Muwekma has been here since time immemorial. That Muwekma can trace its lineage in the San Francisco Bay Area back to at least 7,000 years ago. That Muwekma accounts for hundreds of Ohlone People. That Muwekma holds regular elections, and–most importantly–Muwekma can back all their claims with extensive documentation, including pictures going back to at least the 1930’s.
Picture of Jose Guzman in Niles, California; taken 1934. Unknown Photographer.
Resources for Supporting the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area:
We sent out numerous letters to City of Oakland Officials, today. [Here’s the contact list we used.] This is what the letter said:
Alameda Native History Project 2201 Shoreline Drive #6334 Alameda, California 94501 (510) 747-8423 info@alamedanativehistoryproject.com
October 31, 2022
Oakland City Council Oakland City Hall 1 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza Oakland, CA 94612
-VIA EMAIL-
Re: Proposed Cultural Conservation Easement at Joaquin Miller Park (Agenda Item #1022-0849)
Dear City Council Members, and Staff,
I am writing to ask you to include all Ohlone people in the planning and consultation for the proposed cultural easement at Sequoia Point, in Joaquin Miller Park. Currently, there are only plans recognizing one Ohlone tribal group, the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan Nation, INC.
However, if Sequoia Point is to be treated as a Tribal Cultural Resource, then Tribal Consultation should take place with all of the Ohlone tribal groups. I know that you are familiar with Tribal Notification Requirements; so it’s especially dismaying that Tribal Consultation was not solicited from any or all of the groups in the Native American Heritage Commission’s Tribal Consultation Lists.
These groups include, but are not limited to:
Amah Mutsun Tribal Band of Mission San Juan Bautista
Confederated Villages of the Lisjan
Costanoan Rumsen Carmel Tribe
Indian Canyon Mustun Band of Costanoan
Muwekma Ohlone Indian Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area
Northern Valley Yokuts Tribe
The Ohlone Indian Tribe
Granting exclusive rights to use, and access, a Tribal Cultural Resource, as an easement in perpetuity, without consulting with other real parties in interest ( i.e., these other tribal groups) is a serious mistake that does not have to be made.
Please reach out to other affected tribes before granting exclusive rights to their land.
Sincerely,
Gabriel Duncan
Alameda Native History Project 2201 Shoreline Drive #6334 Alameda, California 94501 (510) 747-8423 info@alamedanativehistoryproject.com
Or that this is the product of Libby Schaaf’s (Mayor of Oakland) unilateral dealings with Corrina Gould (Spokesperson for Sogorea Te Land Trust, alleged Tribal Chair Person of Confederated Villages of the Lisjan Nation, INC.)
It’s the fact that other local Ohlone tribal groups weren’t consulted during the process of creating the easement we see proposed today.
Also: this still isn’t LandBack. It’s just an easement.
Land is not being conveyed from the City of Oakland, to any entity, as Sogorea Te Land Trust claims. An easement just gives them the right to use Sequoia Point as they chose, within the parameters of the Memorandum of Agreement entered into by the City of Oakland and Sogorea Te Land Trust. The City of Oakland retains ownership of the 5-acre area in Joaquin Miller Park–part of Oakland’s Recreation and Parks Department.
There are some important limitations listed in the propose ordinance you can find in the City of Oakland – Calendar. This includes a clause regarding public access, as well as permit free operations within the scope of the agreement and zoning requirements.
But this is a small part of a large document, that also excludes the Sequoia Point land grant, and (possibly) any future projects at the Point, from certain CEQA, NAGPRA, and AB52 Rules, which have requirements that projects on or near Tribal Cultural Resources must follow a consultation and scoping process with representatives of all the tribal groups of the area.
Bypassing these requirements would completely preclude any other tribe’s rightful claim to be a part of, or hold a share of interest in, this easement. Other tribes would not get a say in what happens at Sequoia Point, a place which other Ohlone groups claim as a part of their tribal homeland. Where each of the Ohlone Tribal Groups should share an equal interest, and have an equal voice.
The most curious part of the Agenda Report, regarding the “Cultural Conservation Easement to Sogorea Te’ Land Trust in Joaquin Miller Park” is the section marked “Public Outreach / Interest”. This section, in its entirety, states:
City staff and the Land Trust have conducted substantial outreach. The Land Trust, both with and without City staff, met with the Friends of Joaquin Miller Park several times to receive input and feedback about the project, and the organization enthusiastically supports the project. District 4 Councilmember Sheng Thao hosted an online Town Hall about the project on September 13, 2022. More than one hundred people registered for the meeting and participants expressed strong support for the project and no opposition. The Land Trust and City staff have also presented the project multiple times to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission. The Commission recommended formal and enthusiastic approval at its meeting on September 14. Since the project was publicly announced on September 8, 2022, there has been a broad expression of support and enthusiasm from the public at large.
City of Oakland Agenda Report for Item # 10 22-0849, on for City Council Meeting Nov-1-2022
The passage above contains no mention of City Staff attempting to contact other tribal groups in the area.
Proponents of the easement appear to have had one very popular online Town Hall, and contacted the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission, and the Friends of Joaquin Miller Park, for their opinions.
But there is no mention of either City Staff, nor Sogorea Te Land Trust, reaching out to any other Ohlone Tribal Group in this area other than the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan Nation, INC.–who is conveniently fronted by the same person as the Sogorea Te Land Trust, Corrina Gould.
Most projects or proposals on this scale would require some form of Tribal Consultation, or Scoping; this proposal especially, because–for all intents and purposes–Sequoia Point is being considered, or treated, as a Tribal Cultural Resource.
When a city is creating an Environmental Impact Report or Assessment for any proposed public project (or project on public lands) they must exercise due diligence in requesting from the Native American Heritage Commission a list of tribes to consult regarding possible Tribal Cultural Resources possibly affected by the project, and develop ways to avoid or mitigate damage to those resources.
This is an example of a 2019 Tribal Consultation List for Richmond, California.
2019 Tribal Consultation List for Richmond, California – This list is public record and was included as part of an EIR filed in the City of Richmond, California.
As you can see, there is more than one Tribal Organization to consult with. There are seven organizations on this Tribal Consultation List, next to the associated tribes composing those organizations.
FYI: No, this list is not radically different in Oakland, California. I couldn’t find one quickly enough to use as an example. But please believe me, it looks the same, and still has more than one Tribal Organization. [… It’s also really difficult to track down one of these lists outside of an Environment Impact Report/Assessment.]
My point is: cities are required to send letters to every single one of these organizations requesting consultation. Those letters, and replies by tribal representatives, must be filed in the Environmental Impact Report/Assessment; along with a report regarding the request for consultation and any subsequent consultation and scoping activities.
The law requiring requests for consultations, and the consultation lists, were created and required in order to ensure that Native American land rights are respected; Native American Graves, and Cultural Resources are preserved, and protected from desecration.
This is done by codifying the Tribal Consultation process in the California Environmental Quality Act; thereby ensuring that Native American Tribes have a voice, and a say, in what happens on their traditional homelands, to their sacred places, and tribal resources.
The preamble of AB52, and the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, both specifically state this is the legislative intent of these laws.
The well-defined and accepted procedure of the Tribal Consultation Process was not followed to create the proposed Sequoya Point Cultural Easement.
To grant this land to one Ohlone group, without even talking to the others, is wrong; and in opposition to the Equity of all Ohlone People of the San Francisco Bay Area.
Choosing to award one single tribal group with land grants, while simultaneously excluding all others, sows division among indigenous people. And it interferes with tribal sovereignty in a way that disenfranchises thousands of indigenous people from having ownership of a place and project that is supposed to be for them.
The City of Oakland is meddling in tribal politics in the same way the US does in the Middle East. Or Haiti. Or any other place where people have turned around and said, “maybe that wasn’t such a good idea.” Where the actual people living in those countries have done things like burn flags, and tell us to get out. [Judgments reserved.]
The same way that some tribes were denied recognition by the US Government for petty, arbitrary reasons from the start–just as other Tribes were arbitrarily, and capriciously unrecognized [“removed from the Tribal Rolls”] during the Termination Era for the same.
This meddling is unwelcome, and sets a dangerous precedent across the rest of the San Francisco Bay Area, as well as California. The precedent that Tribal Consultation doesn’t matter.
Tribal Consultation matters.
All Ohlone Tribal Groups should be consulted, and have an equal share–and an equal voice–in the Ohlone Cultural Easement at Sequoia Point.
Excluding the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area, as well as other tribal groups, from what’s happening at Sequoia Point, is not equitable. And the easement should not go forward without proper consultation with all affected tribes of the this area. Especially since this is a land grant made in perpetuity,
This might seem like a repeat of the circumstances which led to the hostile take-over of the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC.: A well-known non-profit organization with dubious claims of tribal sovereignty, and a lack of transparency which was suspended as a corporation by the California Franchise Tax Board for failure to pay taxes and/or file required financial documents.
The fact that Sogorea Te Land Trust is subject to a California Franchise Tax Board Tax Lien was discovered by a Lien Notice filed in Alameda County, on 8/23/2022, as Instrument #2022146941.
It’s unclear if Sogorea Te Land Trust’s Tax Exempt Status will be Revoked, or if the corporation itself will be Suspended by the California Secretary of State (like the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC. was;) but we will continue to provide you with updates as this situation evolves.
In the meantime–if you actually care about whether or not the Land Trust you support (like Sogorea Te Land Trust) adhere to ethical standards, and sound fiduciary conduct, we recommend checking the Land Trust Accreditation Commission’s Website, and searching for the land trust you support.
[Spoiler alert: Sogorea Te Land Trust is not an accredited land trust.]
On Monday, Amy Wooldridge (Director of Alameda Parks & Recreation Department) replied to our open letter concerning the possibility of Sogorea Te Land Trust being given a portion of Linear Park, in Alameda–at the corner of Main Street and Singleton Avenue.
In our preliminary email, asking whether or not this was true, Wooldridge told us: “The Recreation and Parks Department is working with the Sogorea Té Land Trust and Confederated Villages of Lisjan to develop an agreement regarding a section of tule plants in the Main Street Linear Park between Singleton and Stargell streets…. Sogorea Té Land Trust will take responsibility for maintenance of this area which includes removing weeds and invasive plants…. They will also then have the opportunity to cultivate the tule plants that they use for ceremonial dress, boats, roofing, and baskets.”
Our primary objections were two-fold:
The Confederated Villages of the Lisjan Nation, Inc. is not a tribal government; the City of Alameda is Muwekma Ohlone Territory.
Confederated Villages of the Lisjan Nation, INC.
Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area
Less than 5 years old.
Documented existence before 1890. (aka “Time Immemorial”)
Represents 1 family.
Thousands of enrolled tribal members.
Corporation
Federally Recognized as a Tribal Nation*
*The Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area is currently fighting to restore their Federal Recognition as a Tribe. Find out how you can help.
The site proposed for management by Sogorea Te Land Trust has been subject to soil and groundwater pollution which was never properly cleaned.
2 x 6,000 gallon gasoline tanks removed in
1 x 550 waste oil tank.
These tanks were leaking gasoline and waste oil into the soil at Main Street, and Singleton Avenue, specifically.
Contaminated soil around tanks were used to back-fill holes made from tank removal.
Contaminated groundwater sprayed on contaminated soil for dust suppression during the entire project.
Existence of Toxic Marsh Crust 4-18 below ground surface.
Water table at 3 feet BGS, drainage ditch at least 4 feet deep.
2021 Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment report finds Benzene, Naphthalene, and other contaminants in ground water at one of the 26 underground storage tanks within 1,000 feet of proposed land management area.
Specific guidance from Alameda County Healthcare Services requiring review of sufficiency of corrective actions before Land Use may be changed.
It was our impression that the City of Alameda had reached out to Sogorea Te Land Trust in another performative display of “restorative justice” to give indigenous people [toxic] land back.
We found out that this was not the case. Sogorea Te Land Trust was not being given land by the City of Alameda.
“This was simply intended as a short, one-year maintenance agreement that also included and allowed for the Sogorea Te Land Trust to cultivate the plants for non-edible purposes.” Amy Wooldridge told us; adding, “They had reached out to me directly with this interest and since this park is in need of more maintenance, it seemed like a good fit.”
However, after being told about the dubious nature of Sogorea Te Land Trust’s intentions to convey trust land to the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area, and being given credible information regarding the suspected contamination of Linear Park, Amy Wooldridge has told us she intends to “pause” plans for collaboration with Sogorea Te Land Trust, “and will keep the Muwekma [Ohlone] Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area apprised of anything connected with Indigenous People that I’m involved with here in Alameda.”
This news is a victory for the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area, because the City of Alameda falls within traditional Muwekma Ohlone territory.
The City of Alameda, Alameda Museum, and City of Albany all need to know that hyping Corrina Gould so much is really detrimental to the struggles of the actual Ohlone tribe of this area.
As much as you hate to hear me continue to say this, I’m going to be even more clear: The Confederated Villages of the Lisjan “NATION”, INC. is not a tribal government.
CVL is not a confederated group of tribes because there is no other tribal government to confederate with that isn’t already fully incorporated into the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco…
CVL was originally created as a mutual benefit corporation to benefit only one family, those related to Corrina Gould by birth or by marriage.
And, CVL was only created to bolster the illusion that Corrina Gould was a real tribal chairperson; even though her organization held no votes, and isn’t diverse enough to represent Ohlone people as a political group beyond Gould’s immediate family.
As much as you don’t want to listen; don’t want to look; it is necessary to break the black out on this subject.
Because your willful ignorance is what’s actually causing damage. Not my insistence on reiterating the facts of the matter.
I’m not a misogynist like Gould would have you believe. When I say #rematriatetheland, this is what I mean: honor the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area by recognizing their Sovereignty as a Tribal Nation of thousands…
By recognizing the OG Ohlone. The original, indigenous, woman-led resistance.
By not recognizing people like Charlene Nijmeh, Monica Arellano, and Dolores Marine Galvan, you’re only contributing to the indigenous erasure. And disrespecting tf out of the people you should be taking pains to build relationships with.
The Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area doesn’t need your #shuumi. They need their Federal Recognition Restored.
That’s how Ohlone People get their land banks, land base, and land back.
Nothing short of Federal Recognition will do this.
Alameda Native History Project releases a new Alameda Shellmound Map Model to show the capability of Augmented Reality, when it comes to virtual classrooms, and independent & remote learning. And to showcase the direction of education, and uses for technology, as we progress further into the 21st Century.
This map is appropriate for use in a K-12 setting; and represents the Alameda Shellmounds, as seen by N.C. Nelson. [“Shellmounds of the San Francisco Bay Region”, Nelson, 1909] This map model was created by Gabriel Duncan, and it was stylized using Adobe Aero.
Alameda Native History Project is not sponsored by, or receiving money from Adobe. This is not a paid product placement. This is an example of how to use the tools already available to you, for free, to make really cool stuff for your class or presentations.
For more information about this model, or how to get a copy, email the Alameda Native History Project.
The Alameda Native History Project project presents a map of the three Alameda Shellmounds, as seen by N.C. Nelson in 1907, restored and presented in the present-day landscape.
For the first time ever, the Shellmounds of Alameda are being visualized, and presented as a physical, tangible land feature.
The purpose of this map is to:
Acknowledge that Alameda was a place were local Ohlone communities came to bury their loved ones;
Illustrate the large size and scale of shellmounds, in general;
Visualize a theoretical landscape where the Alameda Shellmounds were preserved;
Fill the gaps made by Alameda Museum’s lack of accurate or meaningful information about the First Alamedans: Ohlone People.
Created using derivatives of open-source data, including (but not limited to) USGS, NOAA, USCG, NASA, Google Earth. Analyzed, processed, and produced by the Alameda Native History Project, using open-source software available to anyone with a smart phone, and the most basic computer.
Why did the Alameda Native History Project create these maps?
Necessity
The first map created by the Alameda Native History Project was the geographicaly-conformed (or “geo-conformed”) version of N.C. Nelson’s historic 1909 Map of the San Francisco Bay Region Showing Distribution of Shell Heaps. This 20th Century version of Nelson’s map was painstakingly converted, and conformed, to 21st century Geographic Coordinate Systems.
Geo-conforming Nelson’s map made it possible to accurately plot the coordinates marked on Nelson’s map; and perform Present Day Observations of the Bay Area Shellmounds.
The San Francisco Bay Area Shellmound Map now has over 300 confirmed locations. The accuracy of this map has improved considerably over time; and the research version is now accurate to within 100 feet.
This was because maps like those featured by the Stanford University’s Spatial History Lab were little more than photocopies of the original coastal surveys, with graphic overlays.
While this might be impressive to some, the lack of any real functionality or new information derived from this kind of exercise was underscored when I tried to find/use this information in the context of the Shellmounds of Alameda.
Stanford University, Spatial History Project1909 N.C. Nelson Map of the San Francisco Bay Region Showing Distribution of Shellheaps
This made it necessary to recreate a map of the historic shoreline of the San Francisco Bay Region, and hand-plot more than 300 shellmounds, just so I could view these maps and take screenshots of them to share with you. All in an effort to show you where the Shellmounds of Alameda are.
Clarity
Reproduction of Whitcher’s Survey.
The same geo-conformance process was applied to an historic map of Alameda, which has become the Alameda Museum’s sole reference concerning the shellmounds of Alameda: Imelda Merlin’s “Alameda: A Geographical History”. This book is a Geology Master’s Thesis, by Imelda Merlin, who lived and died in Alameda, California.
The fact that Merlin was an Alameda resident; and that Alameda Museum owns the copyright to the book should be immaterial to the generally dubious nature of a photo-copied map, with hand-drawn notations.
In spite of the fact that Imelda Merlin was a student at the University of California, Berkeley, it appears that the most relevant information created by N.C. Nelson–for the archaeology department of the same university–was avoided altogether by Imelda Merlin in her work.
For the aforementioned reasons, it was determined that Imelda Merlin’s work merited careful scrutiny and interrogation.
Because, at this point, I already had two other sources of location information compiled for the Alameda Native History Project:
1. Public Records Aggregate
Any mention of Alameda Shellmounds in the following archives/libraries/collections:
All references to the Alameda Shellmounds at the Alameda Free Library:
this includes references in the Historic Alameda Newspaper Archives, and the “Alameda Historic Reels”;
as well as Clipping Files, Alameda Historical Society Card Catalog [Defunct];
Library Catalog, and Special Collections.
Online Newspaper Archives, Indexes
Online Finding Aids
Genealogy Websites, National Archive, and More.
References were logged, and copies of the documents were saved. Then the documents were analyzed, information was extracted, and processed to produce an aggregated list of locations of the Alameda Shellmounds–according to explicit references in these sources.
Then the locations were geocoded, and plotted to create a map that … I don’t even know what to call. “Shellmounds Mentioned in the News”?“Historic Shellmounds”?
“Public Records” is not a very attractive label; but it might be the best label for that layer on the Alameda Shellmounds Map. [So, in case you ask “What is the Public Records Layer on the Alameda Shellmounds Map”, now you know.]
2. Nelson’s Map of the SF Bay Region Shellmounds
Like I said, this was the first map I painstakingly recreated. So, therefore, I had the locations Nelson marked within Alameda.
When I analyzed the base map printed in Imelda Merlin’s book, I was able to use these sources to help conform Merlin’s base map with current Geographical Coordinate Systems, so I could plot the positions marked in the Imelda Merlin layer in the Alameda Shellmounds Map.
I used innumerable copies of maps, surveys, photographs, and other visual representations of Alameda, from 1880 to 1910 to help conform the “Whitcher Survey” referenced in Merlin’s Map. I was never able to find a true copy of the “Whitcher Survey”. The survey is not at City Hall–as Merlin’s book states–or in the Alameda Free Library. The Museum did not have it, at last check.
I also looked to see if any map copy provided by the official website of a University, or Government Institution, or the publisher itself, or a credible archive, actually included similar shellmound positions during the time Merlin’s map was created.
TL;DR: they do not. Not even the Land Grant Case Maps, or the legit Combined, Drafted, or Official Coastal Surveys of that time, have even a hint of a shellmound anywhere. (I even tried to find a copy of the coastal survey used in a well-known documentary about the Shellmounds of West Berkeley, but was unable to track down the file before publication.)
However, even though Merlin’s map diverges from the Official Historical Record, she did capture something in her hand-drawn sketch: all of the dots on her map correspond to places where Ohlone graves have been found.
In spite of the fact Merlin calls the First Alamedans “Miwok”–instead of Ohlone. In spite of the fact that Merlin doesn’t even mention the map in the actual narrative (or “text”) of her book. In spite of the fact that the map was published in her thesis (which was then published a few years later, in a book) without any references, or citations–aside from the coast survey base map.
Somehow, she manages to highlight the same places I have located using mentions of Ohlone graves and Native American remains found in historic Alameda newspapers. Many of these discoveries happened decades after the publication of Merlin’s work. …Which could indicate that these discoveries are coincidences, rather than correlations.
It makes sense that the discovery of human remains would be carefully guarded; only mentioned in whispers between Alameda insiders, and related professionals. Certainly, the newspaper would be encourage to leave anything like that out. … At least until the houses were sold.
It’s not hard to have editorial control when real estate companies were the primary revenue sources for local Alameda newspapers. Furthermore, the Redline wars in Alameda were brewing long before residents voted to approve Measure A, in 1973.
In a “closed”, racist, housing economy, where BIPOC are excluded, and declining property values could be caused by even a whisper of non-white interest in a neighborhood: the prevalence of bones underfoot could undermine the appeal of an entire city.
Historic Redline Map showing Oakland, Berkeley, and Alameda
Alameda was probably a place where the surrounding Indigenous communities would come to bury their dead.
When you take into account historic newspaper articles like the one below (from 1893;) and the preponderance of subsequent articles concerning Native American Graves and Remains found, and then plot those locations into their own map, you get a layer of “Remains & Relics Found”.
While it is the Euro-Centric imperative to determine a single point; and explicit boundaries: the size and nature of the shellmounds was as much a mystery to these colonizers as it is to us today. For different reasons though.
Early anthropologists, archaeologists, and ethnologists lacked the imagination necessary to make the logical leaps necessary to recognize the purposefully obscure nature of our infrastructure, or decode the metaphors we left in notes and drawings for our friends.
Because of this, and because white people destroyed as much of our stuff that they possibly could (on purpose [I don’t know why]), we are now–in many cases–left with the remnants of remnants.
Because the records concerning these events, and the mere existence of the massive burial grounds under the City of Alameda, and the cities of the rest of the San Francisco Bay Region have been actively concealed, and suppressed, this story has remained untold.
“Alameda’s Indian Mounds“, published in The San Francisco Examiner, on Sunday, March 26, 1893:
“When the progressive Alamedan decides to build a home of his own on a section of the encinal that have been allotted to him by his favorite real estate dealer…
“He does not order work suspended when the excavators, who have undertaken the task of building his prospective basement, run across a well preserved skeleton or turn up a hideous looking skull.
“He has become used to such things and he knows…
“in all Alameda there is scarcely a square yard of ground that does not harbor the crumbling remains…”
The pieces of the puzzle can still be found.
And so, Nelson’s Map, Merlin’s Map, and the Public Records map were offered as three separate layers of the Alameda Shellmounds Map; so that you may also discover and analyze the similarities and differences between the locations, yourself.
The other layers mentioned, such as “Remains & Relics Found”, and more are also available to view using the layers panel of the Alameda Shellmounds Map.
As our records continue to grow, and new information found, the map and this site continue to grow as well.
Aesthetic & Availability
Let’s face it: no one wants to look at nth generation copies of copies.
I don’t know about you, but I’m tired of trying to squint, and adjust brightness, contrast, and gamma until I can barely almost read the most important part of this chapter….
I want to look at a webmap of the San Francisco Bay Area Shellmounds. I need my experiences to be more interactive, and offer more than an empty citation to a book I can’t even find anymore. I want to see a scan of the book. And read the citation myself.
But even that’s not enough. I find myself getting triggered by the language of these old, dead, white men that I just want to fight.
Most of these narratives are written from an all-white perspective, often using racial slurs, and offensive descriptions. For the past 74 years, the Alameda Museum has furthered the “gentle savage” myth that permeated Victorian Era culture in America. And continues to push the idea that Ohlone people just disappeared from Alameda, and the Bay Area, entirely.
It’s been the same narrative since “time immemorial”. (Even that phrase is from a white-washed narrative meant to pander to a White Gaze that isn’t even a majority anymore.)
California History, when it comes to Indigenous People, is broad, at best. Very little space or effort is given to properly naming, or describing Native Americans, how they looked, where they lived, what they ate….
Most textbooks will even allude to American Indian relationships with White People as something symbiotic; and leave this chapter of history conveniently blank, to make room for the concept of Manifest Destiny.
The history that we are being taught has specifically avoided the policy of indigenous extermination enacted by a California Governor in the late 1800’s; California’s military support of Indian Wars in Oregon in the early 1900’s; or, how Los Angeles stole water rights from Tribal Nations in the Central Valley and has helped to destabilize the California ecosystem, with devastating effects.
We are not taught about this.
We have instead been dazzled by trains, bridges, and pretty houses with gardens, like babies with a ring of keys.
California is the most diverse state in terms of Tribal Nations, with over 300 Indigenous Languages Spoken in California, alone. We are astronomers, conservationists, artists, engineers, doctors, and so much more. Our stories and contributions matter.
Ohlone people still live in the San Francisco Bay Area. The Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area could use your help in fighting for federal recognition.
The Native American, Indigenous People that you speak of like they went extinct in the 1800’s; those people are my great-grandparents.
The first step in justice for Indigenous Californians is recognizing us.
This is why it’s important to update the aesthetic of Historical Curation, and Exhibition Design, to utilize the tools we have in the 21st Century to reach learners everywhere, using the interactive multimedia methods they use and engage everyday.
