INTERACTION BETWEEN ISLAND FOXES UROCYON-LITTORALIS AND NATIVE AMERICANS ON ISLANDS OFF THE COAST OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA II. ETHNOGRAPHIC ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL EVIDENCE

25 Pages·1991·17.2 MB·English

by  P W Collins

Ethnobiol. ll(2):205-229
/.
INTERACTION BETWEEN
ISLAND FOXES
AND
ON
NATIVE AMERICANS
ISLANDS
(Urocyon
littoralis)
OFF THE COAST OF SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA:
AND
ETHNOGRAPHIC,
ARCHAEOLOGICAL,
II.
HISTORICAL EVIDENCE
PAUL
W. COLLINS
Department Zoology
Vertebrate
of
Museum
Santa Barbara Natural History
of
2559 Puesta Del Sol
CA
93105
Santa Barbara,
ABSTRACT.—
Interactions which existed between Native Americans and island
foxes (Urocyon were examined using data gathered from archaeological,
littoralis)
how
ethnographic, and Native Americans
ethnohistoric sources to ascertain
viewed and used foxes and thus why they transported and introduced them to
islands off the coast of southern California. Island foxes were harvested for their
pelts which were used make arrow-quivers, capes, blankets, and ceremonial
to
fox dance headdresses. Although were not an important staple in the diet
foxes
of the inhabitants of the Channel Islands, they were kept as pets or semi-
domesticates and prominent and ceremonial practices.
did play a role in religious
The
Island Chumash conducted an Island Fox Dance ceremony and foxes served
Chumash Human-fox
as totems, dream-helpers, and legends. burial
characters in
and ceremonial
associations and ceremonial fox burials attest to the religious
on
significance afforded foxes by Native Americans. conclude, based this data,
I
were transported
that island foxes from the Northern Channel Islands initially
Channel
as pets and subsequently became on the Southern Islands.
feral
RESUMEN.—
Se examinaron interacciones que existian entre los indigenas y
las
de
Ios zorros empleando informarion recogida fuentes
islehos (Urocyon
littoralis),
como
percibian
arqueologicas, para averiguar y
»t6rkas
etn
utilizaban entender por que los transportaron e
los indigenas a los zorros y asi
de Los zorros islenos
introdujeron sur California.
a algunas frente a costa del
islas la
eran prendidos por que eran empleadas para elaborar aljabas, capas,
sus
pieles,
Aunque no eran
zorros
cobijas y tocados ceremoniales para danza del zorro. los
la
un de del Canal,
alimento de indigenas las Islas
importante en
dieta los
la
un
jugaban papel
eran como semidomesticados
criados mascotas o animates y
Chumash
Los indigenas
prominente en ceremoniales.
las practicas religiosas y
de zorros Servian
las ejecutaban una danza ceremonial del zorro isleno, y los
islas
Los
de de leyendas. entierros
totems, ayudantes en suenos protagonistas las
y
de asestignan
ceremonioles zorros,
asociados de humanos
y zorros, y los entierros
conferian a los zorros.
indigenos
la importancia ceremonial que los le
religiosa y
de del norte del
Concluyo, en que zorros islenos las islas
base a estos datos, los
Canal como mascotas posteriormente se
inicialmente fueron transportados y
asilvestraron en surenas del Canal.
las islas
RESUME.—
Les qui existaient
interactions
«
examine
insulaires (Urocyon ont ete
littoralis)
pour
ethnographiques ethnohistoriques
de sources archeologiques, et verifier
comment que
les indigenes percevaient et utilisaient les renards, ainsi la raison
Sud
de leur transport et de leur introduction dans les lies de la cote due de la
Californie. Les renards insulaires etaient chasses pour leurs peaux, utilisees pour
fabriquer des porte-fleches, capes et couvertures, ainsi que des coiffures rituelles
lors de la danse qui leur etait consacree. Bien que les renards ne faisaient pas
du
partie de nourriture de base des indigenes qui habitaient les lies Detroit,
la
comme
maintenus animaux domestiques ou animaux semi-domestiques,
etaient
ils
un Les
et jouaient role preeminent dans les pratiques religieuses et rituelles.
indigenes Chumash des avaient une ceremonie appelee "la danse des renards
lies
de
insulaires," et les renards servaient de totems, de 'support-de-reves' et
personnages dans legendes des Chumash. Les associations funebres entre les
les
humains montrent
et les renards, et les funerailles rituelles des renards la significa-
aux renards par indigenes. Sur base de
tion religieuse et rituelle attribute les la
ces donnees, je conclus que les renards insulaires de lies du Detroit septentrionales
comme
ont ete transported a l'origine animaux domestiques et ensuite sont
retournes a sauvage dans Des du Detroit meridionales.
l'etat les
INTRODUCTION
have been
Skeletal remains of native animals found in archaeological sites
and examine faunal
of interest to archaeologists zoologists Archaeologists
alike.
make
remains to inferences about the dietary habits of a former occupants,
(1) site's
obtain information about American subsistence
several aspects of Native
(2)
and
such hunting and procurement,
activities as butchering techniques, areas of
examine
and and
details of storage, preservation, food preparation techniques,
(3)
adap-
settlement
patterns, activity areas, seasonal occupation of subsistence
sites,
and occupants
tations, aspects of the former
social organization of a site's
used
(Martin 1972). Faunal material recovered from can also be
archaeological sites
examine Zoologists
to questions not originally envisioned by the archaeologist.
have used taxonomy of
faunal material to the zoogeographic and
clarify history
Lyman demonstrate
particular taxa (Rea
1980; Collins 1982, 1992; 1983), to
human- and
wrought
changes
animal extirpations
in populations such as insular
Olson
introductions (Hargrave
Guthrie Walker 1991;
1970; 1980; 1980; Collins 1982,
and
Olson and to
1982; James 1982a, 1982b, 1984; Simons 1983; Rea 1986),
con-
reconstruct paleoenvironments (Grayson By combining information
1981).
and
tained in the archaeological record with data from the ethnohistoric
thorough
ethnographic more
literature should be possible develop a
to
it
how
understanding animals.
of Native Americans viewed and used particular
example
Simons's on an
(1983) article the California condor provides excellent
such
of just a study.
The separated
island fox (Urocyon found on widely
presently six
littoralis) is
variation
islands off the coast of southern Morphological
California (Hall 1981).
fox
and gray
taxonomic the
with purported mainland ancestor,
affinities
its
paper
(U. cinereoargenteus), have been assessed by Collins (1982, 1992). In a recent
foxes
examined
the role which Native Americans played establishing island
in
I
on some probable
of the islands where they presently occur and discussed
The
historical colonization sequences for each island population (Collins 1991).
JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY
morphological
variation in present-day and
archaeological samples, coupled with
an examination
of island fox remains from Channel
Island archaeological
sites,
revealed that Native Americans were
responsible for introducing island foxes from
the Northern Channel
Islands to the Southern Channel Islands
(Collins
1991).
Based on
archaeological data determined that island foxes were present on the
I
Northern Channel human
Islands prior to the arrival of populations 9000-10,000
years ago but did not appear on the Southern Channel much
Islands
until later
(about 2200 years ago on San
Nicolas Island, 3400-3800 years ago on San Clemente
and
Island, sometime between 800 and 3400 years ago on Santa Catalina
Island)
The
(Collins
1991). occurrence of island fox remains in direct association with
human
remains on Santa Rosa and Santa Cruz Islands led me to conclude that
on
foxes two
these were
islands given special mortuary treatment because they
were
assigned number
religious or ceremonial value. also found a of island fox
I
on
burials San Clemente Island which were probably associated with canid
kill-
ing mourning
or
ceremonies
(Collins
1991).
While
the morphological and
variation, evolutionary relationships, archae-
ological record of island foxes have been thoroughly examined (Collins 1982, 1991,
Why
1992), questions would Native Americans want transport and
persist. to
still
introduce
island foxes? Could the archaeological and ethnographic record shed
upon
light prehistoric interactions between humans and island foxes? Were island
foxes kept human What
as pets or utilized in subsistence activities? cultural and/or
religious
Americans
significance did Native assign island foxes?
Information and regarding
in the archaeological, ethnographic, historic records
interactions between Americans and has not been
Native island foxes fully
evaluated. document through
paper
Therefore, the primary objective of this to
is
the use humans and
of these records any between island
prehistoric interactions
foxes that might indicate why Native Americans influenced the zoogeography
of the
island
fox.
METHODS
To
Americans and
evaluate between Native island
prehistoric interactions
foxes, I have assembled data from the archaeological record and from historic
and
ethnographic manifestations of island foxes included
Archaeological
literature.
unmodified and fashioned from hides.
remains, intentional fox burials, artifacts
Faunal was examined
material from Channel for island
Island archaeological sites
and
fox bone. bone found each
recorded the type and quantity of fox at site
I
noted examined
the provenience of each occurrence (Collins 1991). In addition, I
each
bone such butchering,
modifications as
for evidence of possible cultural
whether
burning, determine
unusual manufacturing marks, to
breakage, and/or
a bone was Archaeological
processes.
derived from depositional
or natural
cultural
occurrences of unmodified remains and intentional iox burials are discussed in
an
earlier paper
(Collins 1991).
and southern
Historic and ethnographic for tribes in central Cali-
literature
fornia was indigenous cultures. In
examined determine the role of foxes in
to
used source of food
Particular being as a
looked foxes
for information relative to
I
and/or and
pets or semidomesticates, in
pelts, for manufacture of as
artifacts,
religious and/or ceremonial functions. This literature review primarily focused
on Chumash and Channel
the Gabrielino Indian that inhabited the Islands
tribes
region
(Fig.
1).
There are a number of questions which need to be discussed in considering
the role which Native Americans played in determining the present far-flung
distribution of the island fox. First, what tribes were present on the islands?
how
humans on and
Second, long have been present each of the islands therefore
were
potentially capable of influencing the distribution of island foxes? Third,
there established trade routes between the islands which could have served as
what influenced
routes for the transport of island foxes? Fourth, cultural factors
people to transport island foxes? Were they kept as pets, or as an alternative source
Were
of food or pelts? they afforded any special religious or ceremonial signifi-
and ethnographic data
In the following discussion, archaeological, historic,
used shed upon between Native Americans
are to light prehistoric interactions
and and why
island foxes to suggest Native Americans assisted in the dispersal
of island foxes.
THE PEOPLE
Based on human islands
studies of osteology, Titus argues that the
(1987)
groups
off the coast of southern California were inhabited over time by two distinct
Map
southern
FIG. 1.—
of the generalized distribution of territories in
tribal
Hudson
map
maps
California. This a composite which based on contained in
is
is
and
Blackburn and and Hale
(1985), Sails (1988), Sails (1991).
JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY
During
of people.
the Early Period (7500 to 3500 B.P.), of the islands were
all
inhabited by group
a single people from "round-headed"
of a genetic popula-
tion, possibly representing an Hokan By
earlier stock (Titus 1987). 1500 B.P., Titus
found
(1987) that this "round-headed" stock was replaced on San demente
Island
new
by
a "long-headed" assumed
genetic population represent Uto-Aztecan
to a
intrusion. Titus (1987) suggests that these "long-headed" people were probably
ancestors of the Gabrielino Indians that inhabited the Los Angeles Basin and the
Southern Channel
Islands during the last two to three millenia.
Since the Middle Period (3500 to 800 B.P.), the islands off the coast of southern
California were inhabited by belonging two language The
tribes to distinct stocks.
Northern Channel
Islands (San Miguel, Santa Rosa, and Santa Cruz) were
in
Chumash
territory (Fig. Grant 1978; Johnson 1988a) and were associated with
1;
Hokan
the
linguistic stock (Shipley The Southern Channel Islands (Santa
1978).
Barbara, San Nicolas, Santa Catalina, and San Clemente) were in Gabrielino
territory (Fig. Bean and Smith Johnson 1988b) and were associated with
1; 1978;
the Takic family of the Uto-Aztecan linguistic stock (Shipley 1978). While
it
known
is that Santa Catalina and San Clemente Islands were inhabited by
Gabrielino Indians (Kroeber 1925; Bean and Smith 1978; Johnson 1988b), the tribal
affinities of Indians on San Nicolas Island have not been firmly established as
their populations had been ethnographers could record any
depleted before
substantive The San
information and Hale inhabitants of Nicolas
(Sails 1991).
Island apparently spoke unique (Kroeber which probably was
a dialect 1907)
affiliated with the Takic family of the Uto-Aztecan linguistic stock (Shipley 1978).
Thus, was
based on San
evidence, probable that Nicolas Island
linguistic
is
it
inhabited by
people
of Gabrielino descent.
Although were during
the Northern and Southern Channel Islands inhabited
the Middle and by from language
Late Periods (800 to 120 B.P.) tribes different
who
some
stocks, their material cultures have appeared similar to archaeologists
have
"Canalino"
referred remains from both areas as (Sails 1988).
to archaeological
Trade
between two groups was frequent throughout their occupa-
these
island
tion (King remains the Eel Point
1976, The recovery of island fox skeletal at
1982).
Site (SC1I-43C) below was radiocarbon dated at 3400 B.P. (Collins
a level that
pre-Hokan
1991), coupled with "round-headed" people stock)
the that (i.e.,
fact
were
suggests
present on San Clemente around 3000 B.P. (Titus 1987),
Island
that foxes were San Clemente Island by peoples
probably transported to
first
on
belonging were present the
to an Hokan Thus, island foxes
earlier stock.
Southern Uto-Aztecan
Channel populations of stock.
Islands prior to the arrival of
-There
History
of Native American Occupation the Southern California Islands. is
of
and
thus
still controversy about when humans arrived in coastal California
first
when
Some and
authors (Berger
each of the Channel were inhabited.
Islands
first
Orr have suggested
Davis
Orr and Bryan 1978)
1966; Orr 1978;
Berger 1966; 1968;
that humans may have reached the New World as early as 30,000 to 40,000 B.P.
However, colonization
Pleistocene
most used support a late
of the evidence to
New
of the or circumstantial
World unsubstantiated cultural origin, is
either of
is
end
or unclear human presence prior to the of the
(Glassow Although
1980).
Pleistocene continues to be debated, today the majority of archaeologists agree
that widespread occupation of North America did not occur until about 11,500
assumed humans came
years ago (Haynes can be that to California
1976).
It
North America.
shortly after their arrival in
initial
human
radiocarbon dates associated with occupation suggest a
Reliable
terminal Pleistocene occupation of the Channel Islands at about 9000 to 10,000
human
on
The
B.P. earliest currently accepted date obtained so far for activity
the Northern Channel Islands an uncorrected radiocarbon date of 10,260
is
± 90 years obtained from the Daisy Cave (SMI-261) on San Miguel Island
B.P. site
(Snethkamp on Rosa have been
Early radiocarbon dates Santa Island
1986).
B.P.-and Lobo
obtained Arlington Springs (SRI-173)-10,080 ± 810 years at
at
A
human
Canyon and
(SRI-116)-7650 ± 580 years B.P.-(Berger Protsch
1989).
Lobo Canyon was more (Morris
burial (SRI-116) dated than 8700 years B.P.
at at
The accepted dated occurrence humans on Santa Cruz Island
1987). earliest for
Punta
comes from a corrected radiocarbon date of 7500 years B.P. obtained at the
were
Arena (SCrI-109; Erlandson Thus, the Northern Channel Islands
site 1988).
by Americans by
inhabited Native 9000 to 10,000 years ago.
human
During the last decade several radiocarbon dates have established
occupation of the Southern Channel Islands by about 9700 years ago (Sails 1988).
On
San ranged
Clemente
Island the charcoal-based radiocarbon dates
earliest
The
from
9775 ± 165 to 9870 ± 770 years B.P. for SC1I-43B (Erlandson 1988).
human
obtained
earliest radiocarbon date for occupation on San Nicolas Island,
from midden be 8000
a at SNI-339, 8215 ± 85 years B.P. (reservoir-adjusted to
is
years B.P.) (Sails 1988). Further archaeological research on Santa Catalina Island
needed determine whether was the other
is to this island inhabited as early as
Southern Channel
Islands.
been
Thus, humans have
there reasonably
is accurate evidence to suggest that
on 8000
present
islands off the coast of southern California for at least the last
have
and
to 9000 years possibly as long they could
as 10,000 years. Therefore,
been the
influencing the distribution of island foxes in this region at least since
end
of the
Pleistocene.
Native American trade routes. —There abundant evidence establishing the existence
is
and
of trade in resources and manufactured between islands
goods, both
mainland, and among the islands (King Hudson Tartaglia 1976;
1976; 1976;
Hudson
Chumash canoe trips
et al. 1978). Ethnohistoric accounts describe
between
between the Northern Channel and mainland and
Islands the adjacent
(Hudson acorns,
islands The mainland Chumash seeds,
et al. 1978). traded roots,
milkweed and arrows
shawls bows,
fiber, furs, skins, of fox blankets, deer,
skin,
bone beads,
to their island counterparts and
in return for shell, "coral," fish
(King
mammal
abalone marine and other items
shell, fish, meat, sea
otter pelts,
Hudson
Hudson
1976; 1976; Tartaglia
1976;
et 1978).
al.
found
Other can be
evidence of mainland-to-island and trade
island-to-island
made
in the distribution of goods manufactured on the such as objects
islands,
Many and comals
of and
steatite (soapstone), bowls,
shell. of the steatite ollas,
found Gabrielino
throughout from
southern California appear to have originated
JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY
on
quarries Santa Catalina Island (Heizer and Treganza Meighan and
1944;
Johnson Meighan
1957; Wlodarski
1959; have been
1979). Steatite artifacts also
reported from most Channel
of the Islands including San Clemente (McKusick
and Warren
San
1959), Nicolas (Bowers 1890; Bryan 1930, 1970), Santa Cruz
(Rogers and Santa Rosa Mainland
1929), Islands (Orr 1968). sites situated along
the coastal zone throughout southern have produced many
California also
examples
of steatite artifacts (Meighan and Rootenberg 1957; Finnerty et 1970).
al.
money
Shell bead was Chumash
also a significant item of trade (King Island
1991).
money
specialized in the manufacture bead and ornaments
of shell shell (King
1976, 1982). These objects were widely distributed throughout southern
Califor-
reaching
nia, as Arizona (Glassow
far east as sites in 1980).
The when
exact dates intensive trade of manufactured goods for natural
resources began
have not yet been firmly established. Several authors have sug-
gested that manufacturing was engaged by A.D.
frequently in islanders after 1000
(Meighan and
Rootenberg Meighan Wlodarski Glassow
1957; 1959; 1979; 1980;
King
1991), but trade of manufactured goods and natural resources did occur
earlier with less intensity (King Although quarrying, manufacturing, and
1982).
exchange
of soapstone objects from Santa Catalina Island began more than 4000
years
ago, large-scale production and exchange of this island-manufactured
resource was
restricted to the last 500 to 700 years (Wlodarski 1979). Since island
fox bone on San Clemente around
first appears in the archaeological record Island
3400 B.P., and on San Nicolas Island around 2200 B.P. (Collins 1991), island foxes
were
probably transported the Southern Channel Islands prior to the period
to
of
intensive
manufactured goods.
inter-island trade of
money
summary, and
In bead quar-
the presence of island-manufactured shell
ried bead
steatite in mainland and island mainland quarried serpentine
sites,
blanks on
in early Santa Cruz Island obsidian in early contexts all the islands,
sites,
and
mammal
non-native bone mule deer and domestic dog) in island
(i.e.,
among
archaeological trade both the
contexts, firmly establishes the existence of
islands and between the islands and the mainland (King 1982). Santa Cruz,
Santa
Catalina, and San Clemente each had established trade routes with
Islands
the between Santa Cruz
adjacent mainland Trade routes also existed
(Davis
1961).
and
groups
Santa Catalina and between islands within each of the island
Islands,
some
(Davis
1961). Thus, possible that people could have transported foxes to
is
it
of the between the Northern
offshore occurred
islands. Moreover, since trade
and may
have
Southern Channel route of introduction well
Islands, a possible
followed San Clemente Island
Cruz Santa Catalina or
this direction Santa to
(i.e.,
and
then
San
to Nicolas
Island).
ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECORDS OF ISLAND FOXES
ON CHANNEL ISLANDS
THE
IN PREHISTORIC
SITES
In the archaeological occur-
a previous record of
paper, provide a detailed
I
rence A summary warranted
of island of these results is
foxes (Collins 1991). brief
here.
unmodified remains
included
Archaeological foxes
manifestations of island
and and
intentional were found in 27 archaeological sites
burials. Island foxes
one fossil locality on the six largest islands off the coast of southern California.
Unmodified fox remains were present in sites which ranged in age from 7500 B.P.
On
(Santa Cruz and Santa Rosa Islands) to historic times (all six islands). the
Southern Channel Islands, foxes appear in the archaeological record about
first
3400 3800 on San Clemente 800 3400 B.P. on Santa Catalina
to B.P. Island, to
and on San bone has
Island 2200 B.P. Nicolas Island (Collins 1991). Island fox
be recorded from any Early Period on the Southern Channel Islands.
yet to sites
human
Foxes were found throughout occupation on Santa Cruz and Santa Rosa
on San
islands and were present beginning in Middle through Late Period sites
A
on
Miguel Island. island fox skull recovered from a geological formation
fossil
Santa Rosa Island dating between 10,400 and 16,000 years suggests that foxes
were present on that island prior to the arrival of Native Americans 9000 to 10,000
years ago.
were
Remains of 51 island foxes that appear to have been intentionally buried
found at 12 sites on four of the Channel Islands (Table Foxes were found in
1).
human
direct association with remains on Santa Cruz and possibly in direct
Island,
human
association with remains in cemeteries on Santa Rosa Island (Table 1;
human were found
Collins 1991). Burials of foxes not in association with remains
on Santa Cruz, San Nicolas, and San Clemente Of 10 fox burials found
Islands.
on San Clemente seven were pups and were with grave
Island, three associated
head
Nine
goods. of the 10 fox burials contained foxes that were folded
solitary
and
to tail each stuffed vertically, dorsal surface down, into individual grave pits
and
(Fig. 2; Sails Hale 1991). There appear to be differences in fox burial patterns
between
the Northern and Southern Channel reasons for
the possible
Islands,
which
are discussed
later in this paper.
The human One patterns
use
of foxes in subsistence activities.— of the interaction
human
between and sub-
island foxes Native Americans was the use of foxes in
kept as
sistence activities. Foxes could have been harvested for food or pelts, or
pets or semidomesticates.
The
use of foxes as a source of food. Nine and northern Califor-
tribes in central
known
were
nia gray southern Califor-
to eat foxes (Driver Voegelin In
1937; 1942).
and
mainland and
nia, the island Gabrielino and Chumash, Kitanemuk, Serrano,
Yumans
Colorado River Landberg 1965;
occasionally ate foxes (Harrington 1942;
Martin Rea California
1972; 1981). Six tribes in northern California, one in central
gray
(Tubatulabal), and one southern from eating
in California (Luiseno) refrained
that
fox (Drucker 1937; Voegelin 1938, Thus, ethnographic sources indicate
1942).
were
foxes not an important food source most California peoples.
for
The
virtual absence of fox bones from archaeological throughout Califor-
sites
Indian
nia also suggests that foxes were not a staple in the diet of any California
and
Gray Gabrielino
tribe (Collins 1982). fox remains are scarce in mainland
Chumash
Ora-193
Gabrielino which have recorded gray fox include
sites. sites
(Langenwalter Big Tujunga LAn-167 (Martin Langenwalter 1978),
1981), 1972;
An north
and unnamed
Mulholland LAn-246
(Galdikas-Brindamour site
1970).
have
of Agoura (Ven-39) the only mainland Chumash which gray fox
in
is site
JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY
filial!
If
i
Llil§lil§!l
lllllllllHI
Iff
JllJl
& llgl 1
lj
J JEbJ
I § 1 1 1 1 1 1
SI!
<<<<<<•
££
:££
f
i
I
^
^
|
o o
f
-JJ
I £
•si-Si
"
*l
M
^l|
III a
I
-2-2
-3
-a
Hi
**-*
ii-s
1?S
III
SS si
SvoS •
so
Sil
DO
HI
|
II
ill
ill
Is*
III
ill
m l
.
JJ.
«
ill
hi
11
*s«
? i
111
Bdv
§1
ill
i!i
fill
B}il
Jill
u u u u Z 5 ssl sss ss
i
FIG. 2.—Typical example of the folded head to orientations observed in ritual
tail
Island
Lemon Clemente
from Tank on San
island fox burials recovered the
Site
(SC1I-1542) (From and Hale by
Sails 1991, permission).
(one
been recorded (Martin 1972). Unmodified fox remains were rare at these sites
mainland
to three specimens at each). The scant archaeological evidence of foxes in
In
was regularly.
sites suggests that there a cultural preference not to eat fox
indicates
Chumash
remains from and Gabrielino sites
general, analysis of faunal
such
animals
and marine
that of the coastal island peoples tended to utilize
all
were of
mammals animals
and marine while land
as
fish, shellfish, extensively,
importance (Landberg Glassow
lesser 1965; 1980).
archaeologica
mainland
Island foxes have not yet been recovered from any
abundant in
more
Remains
sites in southern California. of island foxes are far
(Collii
Channel mair sites
Island archaeological than gray foxes are in
sites 1
Island
A
situation.
1991). combination of factors probably responsible for this
is
popula-
mainland gray fox
than
fox populations exhibit higher population densities
general
show
and a
more
tions (Laughrin are diurnally active (Fausett 1982),
1980),
of
result
the
humans These probably
(Laughrin
lack of fear of 1977). factors,