Journal of Archaeological Science (2001) 28, 253–263doi:10.1006/jasc.2000.0561, available online at http://www.idealibrary.com on

Dating and Interpreting Pine Cambium Collection Scars fromTwo Parts of the Nechako River Drainage, British Columbia

Paul Prince

Trent University, Department of Anthropology, Peterborough, Ontario K9J 7B8, Canada

(Received 21 December 1999, revised manuscript accepted 8 March 2000)

Pine cambium is a food resource that was regularly utilized by foraging populations of the interior of British Columbiafrom at least 1790 to 1950. The scars left on living pine trees (Culturally Modified Trees, or CMTs) by cambiumstripping are directly datable evidence for this subsistence activity by utilizing forestry increment borers to extract cores.Further, pine cambium is generally regarded as a marginal, or supplementary resource, with changes in the frequencyof cambium collection being related to natural cycles in the abundance of staple resources. This paper discusses thedating of these subsistence features, and in comparing two areas of the Nechako River drainage of British Columbia,suggests that pine cambium was more intensively utilized in areas lacking salmon, the staple of the greater region.

� 2001 Academic Press

Keywords: SUBSISTENCE CYCLES, HUNTER–GATHERER MOBILITY, INTERIOR PLATEAU,INCREMENT CORING, PINE CAMBIUM.

Introduction

T he cambium layer of the lodgepole pine (Pinuscontorta), lying between the inner bark (phloem)and sapwood (xylem), is an edible part tra-

ditionally consumed by aboriginal people in the in-terior of British Columbia. Trees which have survivedthe stripping of a portion of their cambium bear acharacteristic scar and are one of a number of Cultur-ally Modified Tree (CMT) types—cambium strippedpines (Mobley & Eldridge, 1992). These trees stand asa record of human resource extraction activities. Thescars, and hence the subsistence activities producingthem, are directly datable utilizing an increment borerto extract cores, and provide a wealth of informationon past economies. In this paper, I compare incrementcore dates derived from pine cambium stripping scarsin two broad parts of the Nechako River drainage, onthe Nechako Plateau of British Columbia, havingsignificantly different resource bases—one area lackingspawning grounds for salmon, the staple subsistenceresource of the greater region (Figure 1). I then makeinferences about the frequency and intensity of cam-bium collection, and its relationship to the subsistenceand mobility strategies practiced by the aboriginalinhabitants of the two areas.

Formation, Dating and Interpretation ofPine Cambium Stripped CMTsThe cambium layer of lodgepole pine trees is a sub-sistence resource that was widely exploited by the

2530305–4403/01/030253+11 $35.00/0

aboriginal populations of British Columbia, and is stilloccasionally used (Ksan, 1980: 83; Turner et al., 1990:102). Ethnographic and traditional use studies indicatethat the method of procurement was to first removeslabs of the outer bark of a young pine tree, utilizing aknife or sharp bone or antler implement (Ksan, 1980:83; Turner et al., 1990: 102; Hall, 1992). The sappycambium layer was then removed with a narrower,sharp implement in long noodle-like strips. The cam-bium noodles could be consumed fresh, immediately,or dried for later consumption (Mackenzie, 1967;Turner et al., 1990; Hall, 1992; Carlson, 1998a). Thepreferred, and presumably optimal time for cambiumcollection was late spring–early summer, when the treesap runs and has a high sugar content (Ksan, 1980: 80;Haygreen & Bowyer, 1996: 8), and the cambium iseasily separated from the inner bark (Turner et al.,1990: 102). Ethnographic and historical sources indi-cate that pine cambium was very commonly exploited(Dawson, 1878; Morice, 1893; Mackenzie, 1967), butthe contribution it made to aboriginal diet and subsist-ence is not clear. Contemporary researchers tend toregard it as a minor resource—a seasonal snack food,or else a starvation food, fallen back on in otherwiselean years (Tobey, 1981: 425; Turner et al., 1990: 102;Carlson, 1998a).

During the collection of cambium, pine trees wererarely girdled. The harvester usually made an incisionin the bark of one side of the tree at approximately eyelevel, and stripped the outer bark and cambium down-wards, towards the base (Carlson, 1998a). Often, morethan one side of the tree would be stripped in this

� 2001 Academic Press

254 P. Prince

40 km

Babine Lake

0N

Stuart Lake

Francois Lake

Cheslatta Lake

Eutsuk Lake

Ootsa L

Tahtsa L

Fraser L

Nechako River

Fraser R

Figure 1. Map showing the location of the study area in the central interior of British Columbia.

manner, but usually, enough bark was left on the treeto allow it to live. As the tree grew, the strippingsslowly healed, but a characteristic scar remained as anarea with no bark, bounded by lateral healing lobes.Such scars are visible on trees today (Figure 2), andhave been extensively classified by archaeologistsworking in the Cultural Resource Management indus-try according to morphology and tool marks left on thebark and exposed wood (Mobley & Eldridge, 1992;Carlson, 1996; Eldridge, 1997). Bark stripped trees arereferred to under the collective term Culturally Modi-fied Trees (CMT) by the forestry and CRM industries.Cambium stripped pines are only one of a number oftypes of CMT (Mobley & Eldridge, 1992; Stryd &Eldridge, 1993), but are the only type dealt with in thispaper.

Although the recognition and study of CMTs is arelatively recent occurrence (Mobley & Eldridge, 1992:93–94), and not widely known outside of the North-west Coast and Interior Plateau regions of NorthAmerica, CMTs can be regarded and treated as an-other form of archaeological feature. They are a resultof past human resource extraction and have variableattributes of form and method of production whichhave been categorized and are informative of theactivities producing them, and perhaps even of purposeor style. CMTs differ from other types of archaeologi-cal features by being, most often, a living record of

human activity. This poses conceptual challenges forarchaeologists, requiring surveying above the groundsurface, on the tree trunks, and recording sites thatoften encompass large tracts of forest covering manyhectares. In the case of pine cambium stripping scars,we are also afforded a unique opportunity—that ofobserving subsistence resource extraction features on aregional scale at the locus of activity. Further, in caseswhere the tree is still alive, the pine cambium strippingscars, and hence the resource extraction activities, aredirectly datable, employing very minimal technology—a forester’s increment borer.

Scars can also be dated by felling the tree at scarheight and removing a stem round, or ‘‘cookie’’, fromthe log, whose annual rings are then counted; or byremoving either a ‘‘partial disk’’ or a wedge from thescar face of the still-standing tree that includes anadjacent healing lobe and enough inner, pre-alterationrings to date the scar (Mobley & Eldridge, 1992:100–101). Coring with an increment borer, however, isthe most expedient, least destructive, and cheapestmethod, especially when large samples must be pro-cessed for heritage management assessments, as wasthe case in this study.

The increment borer is screwed through the tree,from the bark on one side, through the pith of the treeand exiting on the scar side. When extracted, the coreprovides a record of the annual growth of the tree. The

Dating and Interpreting Pine Cambium Collection Scars 255

Figure 2. A typical cambium stripped pine.

number of annual growth rings in a tree is greatest atthe base and decreases with height on the trunk,reflecting the growth pattern of the tree. For consist-ency, foresters and dendrochronologists take cores at astandard height (breast height) when aging a tree, sothat the results between trees are comparable and theamount of error can be calibrated. This is not as greata concern when dating CMT scars, because we are notas concerned with the inner most series of rings (whichpredate the scar) and the absolute age of the tree. Theheight at which a CMT is cored depends on the heightof the scar, and in the present study was as close aspossible to breast height in order to level any margin oferror, but averaged 100·5 cm. Growth rings in incre-ment cores can be counted under a low magnificationmicroscope, or a hand lens if broadly spaced. Sandingand occasionally wetting the core with a solution of teawere used in this study to enhance the contrast betweenrings and improve visibility. The difference between thenumber of rings from the bark to the pith and fromthe scar face to the pith provides the age of the scar.

Increment coring of cambium stripped pines is mosteffective on trees with a single scar, although in cases

where the healing lobes on the bark side are oriented ina manner permitting the insertion of the incrementborer through the pith and scars of the tree, twoseparate scars can occasionally be dated. Multiplyscarred trees have also been dated by removing acookie from the log at scar height, whose annual ringsare then counted (Carlson, 1998a). This is the mostaccurate way of dating CMTs regardless of the numberof scars. Increment coring is subject to a small degreeof imprecision. It is generally ineffective on cedar barkstrip scars due to complex ring whorls and rot (Mobley& Eldridge, 1992: 100). These problems are not asserious in lodgepole pines, although the stress of beingstripped can result in discontinuous rings and falserings. Discontinuous rings do not encompass an entirecross-section and would make a core seem younger,while false rings are two or more rings formed in asingle year, and would make a core seem older than itactually is (Haygreen & Bowyer, 1996: 28). False rings,however, are most commonly restricted to the upperregions of a tree crown, where they do not effectincrement core counts (Haygreen & Bowyer, 1996: 28).Inter-observer error and the extreme tightness of some

256 P. Prince

series of rings have also been identified as factorseffecting the precision of core counts (Carlson, 1997).To compensate for the above limitations in incrementcore dates, Carlson (1997, 1998b) estimated they wereaccurate to within �5 years each, and this convention isfollowed here. Cross-dating cores with reference to amaster chronology of entire stem rounds from a stand oftrees could help to overcome some of these problems.However, regional master chronologies were not avail-able for this study, and were not necessary given thegenerally large samples of cores derived from the clustersof CMTs, and the goals of the following analyses, whichwere to examine trends in the dispersion of scars datesfrom forests, rather than absolute ages for individualtrees and scars. The condition of the core is still anobvious factor in its accuracy. Cores which are partiallyrotten, incomplete at either the bark or scar ends, orhave missed the pith, can provide only minimum dates,and are not included in the analysis below.

CMTs have been found to occur singly, or in clustersof various sizes. Clusters of CMTs which are found tobe bounded by natural features (e.g. a waterway, lakeor cliff edge), or else separated from other clusters by100 m or more, are typically treated as separate sites.Carlson (1998a, 1998c) identified two broad typesof cambium stripped pine CMT site on the NechakoPlateau. These are the Trail/Travel Type and theHarvest Area Type. In the Trail/Travel type of site,CMTs are found in linear clusters, 20 to 100 m wide,centred on a trail or natural travel route, such as a lakeor wetland margin. Carlson interpreted such sites asrepresenting limited collection of cambium for imme-diate consumption as people travelled. In the harvestarea type of site, up to thousands of CMTs can befound over a large area of dozens of hectares (Carlson,1998a). Carlson (1998a) found that these sites tend tooccur within 5–10 km of permanent or semi-permanentvillages, and/or within about 5 km of large lakes, andinterpreted them as representing regular, repeated useof areas near habitations.

Further interpretation of data collected from CMTsites is still in its infancy. The distribution of CMT sitesin British Columbia has been cited as demonstratingaboriginal use by various native bands of what areclaimed as traditional territories (Monet & Wilson,1992: 134; Stryd & Eldridge, 1993: 190). From anarchaeological perspective, CMT data have beenclaimed to be predictors of the presence of other types ofsites (Mobley & Eldridge, 1992: 105; Stryd & Eldridge,1993: 226; Carlson, 1998c: 13). Distributional data alsohave the potential to be informative about a number ofbroad issues in hunter–gatherer studies, such as groupmobility patterns, territoriality and the intensity ofresource use (Carlson, 1995, 1998a; Eldridge, 1997),although such potential has yet to be realized. With theaddition of temporal data from increment cores suchissues can be addressed on a finer scale.

The work of Carlson on the Nechako Plateau inproposed forestry cut-blocks has recorded thousands

of cambium stripped pines and collected hundreds ofincrement core dates (Carlson, 1998a). Lodgepolepines in this environment have a maximum lifespanof approximately 240 years (Carlson, 1998a). The vastmajority of increment core dates thus fall between 1790 and 1950. Preliminary analysis of these datescollectively demonstrated fluctuations in the frequencyof cambium collection, with several periods of greaterintensity of cambium exploitation (Carlson, 1998a;Smashnuk, 1999). As pine cambium is regarded as arather marginal resource, and the spring is a time ofrelative resource scarcity on the Nechako Plateau, theimplication is that the fluctuations in the frequency ofcambium collection may be related to the severityof winters and cycles in the abundance and timing ofother resources, particularly salmon (Carlson, 1998a;Smashnuk, 1999). The following sections take a closerexamination of fluctuations in pine cambium scardates from two areas of the Nechako Plateau havingsignificantly different resource bases.

The Study Area: The Nechako Plateau andthe Carrier

The Nechako Plateau is an undulating intermontanearea in the central interior of British Columbia,between the Rocky and Coast Mountain Ranges(Figure 1). The dominant feature of the region is theNechako River drainage system, which drains east-ward into the Fraser River and is fed by a series oflarge lakes, including Cheslatta Lake and the Tahtsa–Eutsuk chain at its head. Prior to the creation of theKenney Dam in 1952, the Tahtsa–Eutsuk chaindrained through Nechako Canyon on the upperNechako River. Cheslatta Lake was a separate watercourse and drained via the Cheslatta River, overthe small upper Cheslatta Falls and the large lowerCheslatta Falls, to join the upper Nechako River,below the canyon. The creation of the NechakoReservoir diverted drainage to the west coast via atunnel, connected Cheslatta Lake to the chain oflakes via a spillway, and made the Cheslatta Riverthe main source of the upper Nechako.

The most important subsistence resource in theNechako–Fraser system is two species of Pacificsalmon—sockeye and chinook. Sockeye salmon do notenter the upper Nechako, branching off downstream atStuart River and Fraser Lake during their spawningmigration. It is generally accepted that chinook salmondid not ascend beyond the confluence of the Nechakoand Cheslatta rivers, being barred by the canyon andthe falls (Borden, 1952; Alcan, 1993), although this hasbeen questioned, without support, by Carlson (1995:13). Even so, the numbers of Chinook reachingthe confluence are much smaller than the salmonruns through Fraswer Lake and the lower Nechako(Carlson, 1995: 21).

Dating and Interpreting Pine Cambium Collection Scars 257

Ethnographically, the Nechako Plateau is the terri-tory of several Carrier First Nations. The vicinity ofCheslatta Falls and the Nechako headwaters is theterritory of the Cheslatta Nation, while the territorybelow the falls to the north is that of the Stellaquo andNautli Nations, two groups who recently fissionedfrom one another and maintain separate villages onFraser Lake (Duff, 1951: 28–29). To the east is theterritory of the Saikuz Carrier (Tobey, 1981: 414;Carlson, 1995: 17, 20). The subsistence–settlementround of the 18th and 19th century Carrier was gener-ally one of aggregation and dispersal in response tolocally and seasonally available resources (Tobey,1981; Carlson, 1995: 21). Salmon was a crucial re-source. Local groups gathered in villages at salmonfishing locations in late summer and early fall, at whichtime they also gathered berries, bulbs and greens andhunted mountain goats (Tobey, 1981: 425; Carlson,1995: 21). Both salmon and berries were dried andstored, their availability fresh being very brief (Tobey,1981: 425; Carlson, 1995: 21). In late fall–early winter,individual families dispersed to hunting and trappinggrounds along lakes and smaller water courses, wherethey fished for fresh water species and hunted large andsmall game, such as deer, beaver, bear, goat, muskrat,marmot and hare (Tobey, 1981: 425; Carlson, 1995: 21,22). Large game, however, was always relativelysparse. Moose were not present before approximately 1900, and woodland caribou disappeared after 1850 (Hudson, 1983: 65; Carlson, 1995: 22). Storedsalmon and berries were the main food sources in thewinter months, and for this reason, winter habitationsites were maintained within easy reach of summervillages (Carlson, 1995: 21). Spring settlement dispersalwas broader and a wider spectrum of resources wereutilized, including migratory birds, fresh water fish(suckers and trout) caught through the ice, and cam-bium (Tobey, 1981: 425; Carlson, 1995: 21). As storesof salmon were depleted by spring, Tobey (1981: 425)characterized this season as the ‘‘lowest point on thecycle . . . many families sustained themselves on theinner bark of the hemlock [pine] until the salmonarrived’’. Shortages of stored salmon could be moresevere during low years in the ‘‘salmon cycle’’ ofproductivity (Kew, 1992), leading to greater mobility,increased trade, shifting of settlement locations,and presumably, heavier use of marginal resources(Carlson, 1995: 22, 1998a).

The above settlement–subsistence system variedsomewhat between Carrier sub-groups, dependingon the availability of salmon in their territory. TheCheslatta, who lacked direct access to salmon, buttraded for it on the coast, had a higher degree ofmobility and took in a larger territory during theirseasonal round (Duff, 1951: 29). Their particular sub-sistence round has not been detailed, but it could beexpected that they also made greater use of cambium.The following sections compare pine cambium CMTdata collected during archaeological impact assessments

from a sample of proposed logging blocks above andbelow the Cheslatta Falls, to test this proposition.

The Study SampleFor the purposes of comparison, CMT data collectedfrom the proposed logging blocks have been groupedtogether in two series. The White Eye Lake series are agroup of blocks located within 6 km of White EyeLake, a medium-sized lake encircled by the Tahtsa–Eutsuk Lake chain, approximately 55 km upstreamfrom Cheslatta Falls (Figure 3). An early 1900s habi-tation site and sizable prehistoric lithic scatter havebeen identified at White Eye Lake (French, 1999), andit is likely that the surrounding forests were utilized bypeople residing seasonally at the lake. The Nechakoseries is a group of cut-blocks in the vicinity ofChowsunket Lake, which drains into the NechakoRiver upstream from Fraser Lake, and a fourth blocka short distance (6 km) upstream from the upperCheslatta Falls (Figure 4). It is presumed that hunter–gatherers utilizing the forest resources in the Nechakoseries would have had more regular, reliable and directaccess to salmon than those using the White Eye Lakeseries.

In each of these series of proposed cut-blocks, one ormore moderate to large sized CMT site has beenrecorded (Carlson, Rankin & Prince, 1999; Prince,1999; Prince & Carlson, 1999). In each case a sample ofincrement cores was systematically collected fromacross the site, in order to assess the temporal depth ofits use. The sampling strategy ranged from collection ofone core every 100 m on transects across a very largesite in block LFD 137 (Prince, 1999), to coring of everyliving tree along a densely used trail corridor andsurrounding forest at MK-15 (Carlson, Rankin &Prince, 1999). In each case, the sample is sufficient toassess temporal and spatial variability. For much ofthe following discussion, the dates from individual siteshave been lumped together by cut-block. We canreasonably assume that each of these blocks was anindividual resource territory, as they tend to be of afairly uniform forest type and age, and are bounded bynatural features such as small lakes, creeks or wetlands.

ResultsFigures 5 and 6 show the range of increment core datescollected from each series of blocks. The absolute treering counts and the �5 year range of each date areplotted. Plotting the possible age range of cores, inmany cases, has the affect of making the dates from ablock seem less dispersed, and probably more accu-rately represents the reality of cambium collectingevents. The White Eye Lake series shows a tendencyfor dates to be distributed in one or more discrete,dense clusters per block, especially in blocks 138, 131and 139, with a scattering of individual scar dates. The

258 P. Prince

1 km

LFD 131

0N

White Eye Lake

Ootsa Lake

LFD 137

LFD 139

LFD 138

Figure 3. Location of White Eye Lake Series cut-blocks.

clusters probably reflect episodes of heavy cambiumuse within individual forest patches (sites), but ofshort-term duration. Interestingly, the clusters of scardates in individual blocks do not overlap one anotherto a significant degree, and may indicate that peopleexploited different stands of trees in different years.The seeming exception to the pattern in the White EyeLake series is block 137, where there is a heavyscattering of dates ranging from 1792–1825, and a lightscattering in later times. It is difficult to know whetherthis reflects individual events of heavy use, which havebecome blurred because of their temporal proximity,or if the forest was regularly used over approximately a30-year period. There is a weak tendency for dates tobe clustered in groups, but this is obscured by theisolated dates.

Table 1 presents a statistical summary of scar datesfrom each site within the series of blocks, with theexception of sites with fewer than four dates. Thestandard deviation of sites around the mean age ofeach site was calculated to provide an indication ofthe degree of dispersion within each site. Standarddeviation, however, is not resistant to the effect ofoutliers, the isolated dates visible graphically in Figure5, which obscure clustering. In order to reduce theeffect of outliers, the midspread (interquartile range)—the range of dates in the middle half of a batch(Drennan, 1996: 28)—and trimmed standard deviation

(right-most column, Table 1) were calculated for datesfrom each site. Outliers were defined as dates falling 1·5or more midspreads from either the upper or lowerquartile, following Drennan (1996: 41–42). These dateswere trimmed from each site (as indicated on Figure 5),and the mean and standard deviation recalculated. Inseveral cases, calculating outliers did not result in anydates being trimmed from a site: that is, the batch ofdates contained no significant outliers. In several othercases, the elimination of outliers greatly reduced thedispersion of dates. This is particularly so in the case ofsites from block LFD 137, which fall into three tight,but overlapping clusters. The mean of midspreads andtrimmed standard deviations from all sites in the WhiteEye Lake series accentuates and confirms the patternof tight clustering visible graphically.

The Nechako series of increment cores shows amarkedly different distribution. Whether taken as ab-solute dates or ranges, the increment core ages aremore dispersed. Statistically, the mean of trimmedstandard deviations in the Nechako series site datesis more than twice that of White Eye Lake seriessites (10·24 years, as opposed to 4·99 years), as isthe midspread (15·67 years and 7·27 years, respect-ively; Table 1). These differences between theWhite Eye Lake and Nechako series sites have highstatistical significance (t=2·67, P=0·0147 and t=2·51,P=0·024).

Dating and Interpreting Pine Cambium Collection Scars 259

5 km

106-137

0N

Chowsunket LakeFrancois Lake

Cheslatta Lake

MK-15

Falls

Fraser Lake

Upper Nechako River

Nechako Canyon

Knewstubb Lake

104-1

115-2

Figure 4. Location of Nechako Series cut-blocks.

1780120

1960

CMT No.

LFD 137

Dat

e A

D

0

1800

1820

1840

1860

1880

1900

1920

1940

White Eye Lake Series Dates

= outlying dates and small samplesn = 103; nT = 93

10080604020

LFD 138 LFD 131 LFD 139

Figure 5. Plot of range of dates of White Eye Lake Series cambium strippings.

The distribution of dates in blocks MK-15, 106-137and 104-1, appear especially broad and sparselyscattered. Even in block MK-15, where the largest

sample of cores was collected, individual dates are notas heavily represented as in the White Eye Lake series.It appears as though cambium was regularly, but less

260 P. Prince

intensively collected in the Nechako series. Dates fromblock 115-2 are more clustered, particularly in the early1880s and around 1890, representing use of differentsites within the block. But given the possible 10 yearrange of each individual date, there could instead havebeen light, near continuous use of the forest over a40–50 year period. This possibility is more consistentwith the rest of the Nechako series data, which suggests

near continuous use of cambium resources in theseforests over broad periods of time.

1840120

1940

CMT No.

106-137

Dat

e A

D

0

1850

1860

1870

1880

1890

1900

1910

1920

Nechako Series Dates

= outlying dates and small samplesn = 105; nT = 81

10080604020

104-1 115-2 MK-151930

Figure 6. Plot of range of dates of Nechako Series cambium strippings.

Table 1. Summary of CMT age range data by site

X(years ) s

Mid-spread

XT

(years ) sT

White Eye Lake Series SitesLFD 137:1 1809·25 5·909 3 1807·5 3·317LFD 137:2 1817·65 22·441 14 1810·05 8·172LFD 137:3 1826·6 40·519 4 1812·4 2·191LFD 138:1 1913·57 11·043 4 1911·07 2·018LFD 138:2 1909 8·124 2 1910·67 0·516LFD 138:3 1910·71 1·113 2 1910·43 0·534LFD 138:4 1908·75 13·5 15 1908·75 13·5LFD 131:1 1928·33 1·23 1 1928·58 0·668LFD 131:4 1904·28 12·513 16 1904·28 12·513LFD 139:1 1889·23 9·001 15 1889·23 9·001LFD 139:3 1875·8 8·044 4 1878·8 2·49Mean (X) 12·131 7·27 4·99Nechako Series Sites106-137 1888·93 18·191 10 1889·53 11·173104-1 1870·78 9·311 19 1870·78 9·311115-2:1 1886·6 9·289 16 1886·6 9·289115-2:2 1883·28 4·548 3 1883·21 2·833115-2:3 1890·33 14·832 22 1890·33 14·832mk-15 1878·18 16·437 24 1877·23 14·018Mean (X) 12·101 15·67 10·243t-Test comparisons of series t=0·695 t=2·509 t=2·757

P=0·497 P=0·024 P=0·0147

DiscussionContrary to my expectation that in areas with rela-tively easy access to salmon, pine cambium would beless frequently and more irregularly used, the CMT

Dating and Interpreting Pine Cambium Collection Scars 261

dates from the Nechako series seem to show theopposite. The broad scattering of dates would seem toreflect regular, nearly annual collection of cambiumfrom forest patches, although perhaps not of a highintensity. When the possible 10 year range in individualdates is considered, Carlson’s hypothesis that fluctu-ations in cambium collection would correspond tonatural cycles in salmon abundance is not borne outeither. Instead, the pattern is one of near regularcambium exploitation. Dates from the 1870s and 1880sare well represented, as demonstrated in other areas ofthe Nechako Plateau by Carlson (1998a), and inter-preted by Smashnuk (1999) to be a result of lowsalmon abundance, or some factor of social or demo-graphic stress among the Carrier. However, the 1860s,1890s and early 1900s are also fairly frequently andregularly represented in the Nechako series.

The White Eye Lake series shows a marked tendencyfor dates to occur in tight, dense clusters, reflectingheavy exploitation of cambium for short periods. Thisis contrary to my expectation that in the absence ofdirect access to salmon, cambium would be moreregularly utilized. However, for the periods that arerepresented, it appears that cambium was more heavilyutilized in the White Eye Lake series. This may meanthat some other resource shortage occurred duringthese periods, perhaps in the availability of salmonthrough trade, which was overcome by a heavy relianceon marginal resources, like cambium. It is perhapsmore likely that cambium was regularly exploited on aheavy basis, but that the Cheslatta Carrier, beinghighly mobile, collected it from different stands offorest each year. This would account for the lack inoverlap between dates for the blocks in the WhiteEye Lake sample: the forests utilized in the periodsbetween clusters may simply not have been sampled byarchaeologists.

The differences in CMT dates from the two seriesmay, in fact, be largely reflections of differences in themobility strategies practiced well above CheslattaFalls, and at or below the falls on the Nechakodrainage, which is in part a function of access tosalmon. That is, foragers utilizing the forests in theNechako series of blocks may have been less mobile,and present in these forests on a more regular basis,thus collecting small amounts of cambium thereregularly, as desired.

The differences between the series are also consistentwith differences that Carlson (1998) identified betweenCMT site types. He noted that CMTs on well estab-lished trails have a wide range of scar dates, whilesecondary trails have clusters of dates reflecting singlestripping events, and Harvest Area sites often havea scatter of dates spanning approximately 30 years(Carlson, 1998). The Nechako series sites in blocks106-137, 104-1 and MK-15 are on, or near to a majortrail, and roughly fit the characteristics of ‘‘well estab-lished’’ trails, or a combination of Trail and HarvestArea type sites (Prince & Carlson, 1999; Carlson,

Rankin & Prince, 1999), while most of the White EyeLake series sites are more consistent with secondarytrails (Prince, 1999). However, the heavy, short-termuse of cambium along secondary trails in the WhiteEye Lake area, as opposed to the regular, less intensivecollection of cambium along major trails, or harvestareas in the Nechako series, is consistent with theargument that there were differences in mobility strat-egies. Given the intensity of cambium stripping alongthese trails, it is possible that one of their purposeswas to facilitate access to this resource. Further, sitesin block LFD 137 in the White Eye Lake area areconsistent in confuguration and density with theHarvest Area, or major trail type (Prince, 1999), yet theincrement core dates show a tendency to cluster (Table1), and support the argument for greater intensity ofcambium use in the absence of salmon.

A possible complicating factor in the above interpre-tations is the influence of involvement in the 19thcentury fur trade, and other forms of interaction withEuro-Canadians upon the mobility and subsistencestrategies of the Carrier. The trapping of fur bearinganimals was primarily a winter activity (Tobey, 1981:417), with trade presumably occurring in the spring.Trade of furs at European posts on the interior lakes(i.e. Stuart Lake, Babine Lake) in spring could haveameliorated food shortages during this season, andreduced the need for cambium. However, there areindications that direct access to the trading posts wastightly controlled by the nearest bands (Brown, 1823:96–97; Harmon, 1957: 149; Vanstone, 1974), suchthat the Cheslatta, who were some distance frominterior posts, probably would not benefit from such asupplement. The Carrier also traded salmon to theEuropeans, who relied heavily upon it for survivalduring the winter (Brown, 1823; Tobey, 1981: 417).For the Carrier with direct access to spawninggrounds, this may have meant an intensification of thefishery, but the Cheslatta, again, were probably notgreatly affected. Throughout the fur trade the bulk ofthe Cheslatta’s trade probably continued to be with thecoast, at Kimsquit and Kitlope (Compton, 1869: 11;Smith, 1877). These locations, however, are some dis-tance from trading posts themselves (Prince, 1992),so that exchange was probably mainly furs for salmon.Given the generally accepted high rate of inter-culturalborrowing by the Carrier during the fur trade, thispattern of exchange was probably intensified in theearly to mid-19th century (Goldman, 1940; Wolf,1982). This is still consistent with the argument forwide ranging mobility above Cheslatta Falls during theperiod covered by the increment cores. Further, theCheslatta would have been vulnerable to shortagesin fur bearing animal stocks for meeting their sub-sistence needs (salmon) as well, perhaps increasingthe importance of cambium periodically. A secondpossible influence of European contact upon thetraditional economy on the Nechako Plateau was theestablishment of reserves in the 1890s, which was

262 P. Prince

intended to attenuate the seasonal round and encour-age wage labour. However, Euro–Canadian industrieswere not well established in the area at that time andCarrier peoples continued to subsist by hunting–fishing–gathering, including gathering cambium,within their traditional territories (Tobey, 1981: 417,425).

Conclusions

Increment core dates from pine cambium CMTs col-lected from series of proposed logging blocks locatedwell above Cheslatta Falls, on the Nechako Riverdrainage, and at or below the falls, show markeddifferences in their distribution. I have argued thatthese differences reflect inconsistencies in the resourcebase of the two areas, and the mobility strategiesand degree of cambium exploitation of local hunting–gathering populations. The territory above the fallslacks salmon spawning grounds, and historically,hunter–gatherers occupying this area were highlymobile, subsisting off wide ranging secondary re-sources and trading for salmon. Increment core datesfrom this area form tight, discrete clusters and seemto reflect short-term intensive collection of cambiumfrom discrete patches of forest. The intensity ofcambium collection probably reflects the importanceof this resource in the subsistence and seasonal roundof people who lacked direct access to salmon, andhad difficulty in putting up adequate winter stores.Gaps in the clusters of dates may mean that otherpatches of forest were utilized, further reflecting ahigh degree of group mobility. It is suspected thatfurther data collection will indicate intensive use ofother stands of trees during these interveningperiods.

By contrast, increment core dates collected fromareas traditionally used by people with more readyaccess to salmon are far more scattered and seem toindicate less intensive, but more regular collection ofcambium. Hunter–gatherers utilizing these forests mayhave had a greater degree of economic security, lessneed for mobility, and collected cambium routinely,but casually as a supplement, from regularly usedstands of forest.

At present, interpretations of CMT data are in theirpreliminary stages. The data, and interpretations pre-sented in the present study demonstrate the potentialof CMT data on pine cambium collection, and per-haps of information on other marginal food sources,to explain hunter–gatherer mobility patterns andsettlement–subsistence strategies. At the very least, itmay stimulate research on what hunter–gatherers doaway from aggregated settlements and the pursuit ofstaple resources, as in many cases the majority of theyear is spent in such ‘‘lesser’’, but perhaps no lesscrucial pursuits.

AcknowledgementsThe data reported here were collected by TracesArchaeological Research and Consulting. My analysisand interpretation of the data have been stimulated bythe pioneering research of Traces’ principal archaeol-ogists, the late Arne Carlson and Leslie MitchellCarlson. I hope that this research lives up to theirstandards. My continued access to the data was gener-ously facilitated by Roy L. Carlson of Simon FraserUniversity. The present version of this paper hasbenefited from the comments and suggestions of twoanonymous reviewers and the editor, and my formercolleagues from Traces, Amanda Smashnuk, NadineGray and Rick James. Many thanks to AubreyCannon of McMaster University for suggestions andguidance on presenting the data and demonstrating thetrends I observed.

ReferencesAlcan (1993). Kemano Completion Project Outline. Unpublished

Report on File, British Columbia Utilities Commission, Smithers.Borden, C. (1952). Results of archaeological investigations in central

British Columbia. Anthropology in British Columbia 3, 1–43.Brown, W. (1823). Babine Report on District 1822–23. Manuscript

B11/a/1, Reel no. IM15, HBC Archives in the Public Archives ofCanada, Ottawa.

Carlson, A. (1995). Archaeological Sites of the Nechako Canyon,Cheslatta Fall and vicinity, Central Interior British Columbia:Permit Report 1994–97. Unpublished Report on File, Archae-ology Branch, Government of British Columbia, Victoria.

Carlson, A. (1996). An Archaeological Potential Model for theVanderhoof Forest District. Unpublished Report on File,Ministry of Forests, British Columbia, Vanderhoof.

Carlson, A. (1997). Interim Report on Archaeological ImpactAssessments in CPs 104-1, 106-136, 110-2 and 115-2. UnpublishedReport on File, Archaeology Branch, Government of BritishColumbia, Victoria.

Carlson, A. (1998a). Nechako Plateau Culturally Modified Trees.Paper Presented at the 31st Annual Canadian ArchaeologicalAssociation Conference, Victoria.

Carlson, A. (1998b). Site Inventory Form for FjSg-12. UnpublishedReport on File, Archaeology Branch, Government of BritishColumbia, Victoria.

Carlson, A. (1998c). 1997 Archaeological Inventory and ImpactAssessments of Plateau Forest Products Operations in theVanderhoof Forest District: Permit Report 1997-235. Unpub-lished Report on File, Archaeology Branch, Government ofBritish Columbia, Victoria.

Carlson, A., Rankin, L. & Prince, P. (1999). An ArchaeologicalInventory and Impact Assessment of Block MK-15 andMitigation/Management Study of CMTs at Site FjSg-12. Unpub-lished Report on File, Archaeology Branch, Government ofBritish Columbia, Victoria.

Compton, P. N. (1869). An Account of an Early Trip to FortVictoria and of Life in the Colony. Manuscript in BritishColumbia Archives, Victoria.

Dawson, G. (1878). Report of explorations in British Columbia,chiefly in the basins of the Blackwater, Salmon and NechakoRivers, and on Francois Lake. Geological Survey of Canada,Report of Progress for 1876–77, Montreal.

Drennan, R. (1996). Statistics for Archaeologists: A Common SenseApproach. New York: Plenum Press.

Duff, W. (1951). Notes on Carrier social organization. Anthropologyin British Columbia 2, 28–34.

Dating and Interpreting Pine Cambium Collection Scars 263

Eldridge, M. (1997). The Significance and Management of CulturallyModified Trees. Unpublished Report on File, Ministry of Forests,British Columbia, Nanaimo.

French, D. (1999). Archaeological Investigations in the TraditionalTerritory of the Cheslatta Nation. Paper Presented at the32nd Annual Canadian Archaeological Association Conference,Whitehorse.

Goldman, I. (1940). The Alkatcho Carrier of British Columbia. In(R. Linton, Ed.) Acculturation in Seven American Indian Tribes.New York: D. Appleton–Century, pp. 48–100.

Hall, L. (1992). The Carrier: My People. Cloverdale: FriesenPrinters.

Harmon, D. (1957). In (W. Lambe, Ed.) Sixteen years in IndianCountry: The Journal of Daniel Williams Harmon. Toronto:MacMillan and Co.

Haygreen, J. & Bowyer, J. (1996). Forest Products and Wood Science:An Introduction. Ames: Iowa State University Press.

Hudson, D. (1983). Traplines and Timber: Social and EconomicChange Among the Carrier Indians of Northern British Columbia.Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Anthropology,University of Alberta, Edmonton.

Ksan, People of (1980). Gathering What the Great Nature Provided:Food Traditions of the Gitksan. Vancouver: Douglas & McIntyre.

Kew, M. (1992). Salmon availability, technology and cultural adap-tation in the Fraser River watershed. In (B. Hayden, Ed.) AComplex Culture of the British Columbia Plateau. Vancouver:University of British Columbia Press, pp. 177–221.

Mackenzie, A. (1967). Alexander Mackenzie’s Voyage to the PacificOcean in 1793. New York: Citadel Press.

Mobley, C. & Eldridge, M. (1992). Culturally modified trees in thePacific Northwest. Arctic Anthropology 29, 91–110.

Monet, D. & Wilson, A. (1992). Colonialism on Trial: IndigenousLand Rights and the Gitksan and Wet’suweten Sovereignty Case.Philadelphia: New Society Publishers.

Morice, A. G. (1893). Notes archaeological, industrial and sociologi-cal on the Western Denes with an ethnographical sketch of thesame. Transactions of the Canadian Institute 4, 1–222.

Prince, P. (1992). A People With History: Acculturation andResistance in Kimsquit. Unpublished MA Thesis, Simon FraserUniversity, Department of Archaeology, Burnaby.

Prince, P. (1999). 1998 Archaeological Inventory and Impact Assess-ments of Proposed Fraser Lake Sawmills Operations in the LakesForest District: Permit 1998–261. Unpublished Report on File,Archaeology Branch, Victoria.

Prince, P. & Carlson, A. (1999). Archaeological Inventory andImpact Assessments of Proposed Fraser Lake Sawmills Oper-ations in the Lakes and Vanderhoof Forest Districts: Permit1997-198. Unpublished Report on File, Archaeology Branch,Government of British Columbia, Victoria.

Smashnuk, A. (1999). CMT Dates From the Nechako Plateau andSubsistence Practices of the Carrier During the Historic Period.Paper Presented at the 32nd Annual Canadian ArchaeologicalAssociation Conference, Whitehorse.

Smith, M. (1877). Appendix I, report on surveys in British Columbiaduring the year 1875. In (S. Fleming, Ed.) Report on Surveysand Preliminary Operations on the Canadian Pacific Railway upto January 1877. Ottawa: Maclean, Roger and Co., pp. 162–176.

Stryd, A. & Eldridge, M. (1993). CMT archaeology in BritishColumbia. BC Studies 99, 184–234.

Tobey, M. (1981). Carrier. In (J. Helm, Ed.) Handbook of NorthAmerican Indians, Volume 6: Subarctic. Washington: SmithsonianInstitution, pp. 413–432.

Turner, N., Thompson, L., Thompson, M. & York, A. (1990).Thompson Ethnobotany: Knowledge and Usage of Plants by theThompson Indians. Victoria: RBC Museum, Memoir 3.

Vanstone, J. (1974). Athapaskan Adaptations: Hunters and Fishermenof the Subarctic Forests. Chicago: Aldine Publishing.

Wolf, E. (1982). Europe and the People Without History. Berkeley:University of California Press.