Journal of

Archaeological
SCIENCE
Journal of Archaeological Science 30 (2003) 1357–1371
http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jas

Modeling ancient plant use on the Northwest Coast: towards an

understanding of mobility and sedentism
Dana Lepofsky*, Natasha Lyons
Department of Archaeology, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, V5A 1S6, Canada
Received 7 July 2002; received in revised form 12 January 2003; accepted 30 January 2003

Abstract

Understanding patterns of mobility among ancient populations is inextricably linked to an understanding of fundamental aspects
of social and economic systems. On the Northwest Coast of North America, archeologists use attributes of the lithic assemblage, site
size and location, and to a lesser extent analyses of features and faunal remains to investigate patterns of mobility. Archeobotanical
data are not used in these assessments, despite the fact that explicit expectations about plant remains at different kinds of sites can
be derived from the region’s rich ethnographic record of plant use. In this paper, we present a model of ancient plant use in the Coast
Salish region of the Northwest Coast that can be used to distinguish sites which represent varying degrees of sedentism. Based on
the ethnographic and ethnobotanical literature, we characterize the expected patterning of archeobotanical remains in short-term
camps, base camps, and summer, winter, and year-round villages, according to richness, degree of specialization, density,
accessibility, and seasonality. We then apply the model to help interpret two archeological deposits from the Scowlitz site, a
multi-component site inhabited over a 3000-year span by Coast Salish peoples, and to refine the model further.
 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Northwest Coast; Complex hunter–gatherers; Paleoethnobotany; Coast Salish

1. Introduction The complexities of characterizing human mobility

Anthropologists have long recognized links between
patterns of mobility and the development of social and
economic systems [21,41,43]. Despite this, we continue
to grapple with how to define mobility so it is meaning-
ful both in terms of human behavior and can be
identified in the archeological record (e.g., [40,59]).
Recognizing the complexity of patterns of movement,
several researchers have suggested the need to decouple
definitions of mobility, and its corollary sedentism, into
how much time a group spends at a particular location
in one year and how often they return to that location
over several years (e.g., [6,13,30,34,41]). Archeologists
use various measures of the lithic, faunal, feature, and
botanical records to understand the amount of time
human populations spend in a location both within and
between years (e.g., [6,7,10,44,53,60]).
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +1-604-291-3135;
fax: +1-604-291-5666.
E-mail address: dlepofsk@sfu.ca (D. Lepofsky).
0305-4403/03/$ - see front matter  2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/S0305-4403(03)00024-4
patterns within and between yearly cycles are well
illustrated among the complex hunter–gatherers of the
Northwest Coast of North America. In the historic
period, mobility patterns of many Northwest Coast
groups involved the aggregation of families in repeatedly
occupied winter villages and the dispersal of those
families to resource collecting areas in spring through
fall. Some groups, however, made few, if any moves
away from their winter village because resources were
available nearby throughout the year [38]. In the litera-
ture, Northwest Coast groups are variously described
as sedentary or semi-sedentary, sometimes depend-
ing on the length of time spent in the winter village (e.g.,
[2, p. 25]), but often these terms are not explicitly
defined.
It is widely accepted that beginning at least 4000 years
ago, and perhaps significantly before this, groups in
many regions of the Northwest Coast became
increasingly sedentary – both within and between yearly
cycles [2,3,35]. However, within this general scenario, we
1358 D. Lepofsky, N. Lyons / Journal of Archaeological Science 30 (2003) 1357–1371
know few details about how mobility patterns differed
among groups and how these patterns shifted through
time. In the few studies where detailed analyses examine
degrees of sedentism, it is clear that there was consider-
able variability in patterns of movement across time and
space (e.g., [1,8,9,46]).
Based on models from the ethnographic record,
Northwest Coast archeologists often place archeological
sites along a continuum of increasing sedentism within
the yearly cycle. By convention, the continuum is often
divided into discrete site types: short-term camps, base
camps, summer villages, winter villages, and year-round
villages. Progressing along the continuum, sites are
generally larger, are occupied for longer periods, and are
associated with increasingly more permanent structures.
More permanent sites were occupied by larger and more
complex social groups, who conducted a broad range of
social and economic activities.
Determining where sites fall along this continuum is
key to understanding not only how each site fits into the
mosaic of regional social relations, but also for under-
standing the social dynamics within that site. On the
Northwest Coast, archeologists use attributes of the
lithic assemblage, site size and location, and to a lesser
extent analyses of features and faunal remains to assess
degree of sedentism. Typically, plant remains are not
used in these assessments, despite the fact that explicit
expectations about plant remains at different kinds of
sites can be derived from the region’s rich ethnographic
record of plant use.
In this paper, we present a model that incorporates
ethnobotanical and archeobotanical data into the in-
terpretation of sites in the Coast Salish region of the
Northwest Coast. Based on the ethnographic literature,
we characterize the expected patterning of archeo-
botanical remains in five increasingly sedentary site
types according to richness, degree of specialization,
density, accessibility, and seasonality. We then use this
model to interpret two archeological deposits at the
Scowlitz site, located in southwestern British Columbia
(Fig. 1), and to refine the model further.
2. Modeling ancient plant use among the Coast Salish
In modeling ancient plant use among the Coast
Salish, we rely heavily on the extensive ethnobotanical
record of the Coast Salish and other Northwest Coast
peoples (see references listed in Table 1). This expansive
record depicts plants as a principle ingredient in the
social, economic, and ritual relations of Coastal First
Nations during the protohistoric and historic periods
and provides details on the nature and timing of
collection, processing, and use of plant foods and
technologies. While there have undoubtedly been
changes in plant use over the past millennia (see review
in [24]), the strong connection among the Coast Salish to
many aspects of their distant past (e.g., [36,39,45]), and
the general similarities among the ethnobotanical
records of all Coastal First Nations [54,55], indicate that
the recorded knowledge of plant use has a long time
depth. This is particularly true of plants used for food
and technology, whose culturally significant properties
(e.g., how well they preserve, how they taste, how well
they burn) are unchanging.
In our model, we also rely on current vegetation
patterns in our study area to understand the distribution
of plants in the past. Recent paleoecological studies in
the Fraser Valley region reveal that there were minor
climatic fluctuations over the past three millennia that
have in turn influenced fire frequencies [16,17]. Although
these changes may have had some effect on the relative
dominance of hardwoods to coniferous trees in any
particular location within the forests, it is unlikely that
the overall species mix was affected. Further, at the level
of the landscape, these changes in fire frequency are
unlikely to have had any noticeable effect on the mosaic
of plant species available. This overall consistency in
vegetation is reflected in the pollen record for the region,
which shows no major changes in vegetation in the
past 2500 years [33]. Together, both current vegetation
patterns and the strong ethnobotanical record provide a
firm foundation for building models of past plant use in
the Coast Salish region.
3. Archeobotanical correlates of Coast Salish plant use
According to the ethnographic and archeological
records, the Coast Salish, like other Northwest Coast
peoples, were hunter–gatherers who spent their winters
in permanent villages, using stored resources collected at
other times of the year [4,35,50]. In most cases, plants
used for food, technology, medicine, and rituals were
collected during the growing season from resource har-
vesting areas located at some distance from the winter
village [4, pp. 39–40, 241; 11, pp. 25–26; 49, pp. 11, 15].
Short-term camps, base camps, and summer villages
were used as a base of operations during harvests.
Year-round occupations, though rare, are also noted in
the ethnographic literature of the Coast Salish [4, p. 31;
5]. In these cases, a village was situated close enough to
a wide range of seasonally available resources to be used
as a year-round base of operations. Diverse activities
involving the harvesting, processing, and use of plant
resources were conducted at each of these sites (Table 1).
These activities should leave distinct signatures in the
archeobotanical records of these different sites.
On the Northwest Coast, most archeobotanical
assemblages are dominated by “seeds” (including
endocarps, true seeds, achenes, and so on) and wood
charcoal. Based on the ethnobotanical record, seeds
originate from plants used for food and other purposes.
Seeds from food plants primarily originate from fruits
 D. Lepofsky, N. Lyons / Journal of Archaeological Science 30 (2003) 1357–1371 1359

Fig. 1. Map of region, showing location of Scowlitz site.

that were eaten fresh or preserved for future consump-
tion. Seeds from non-food plants originate from plants
used for technology, medicine, and ritual, and from
weedy, invasive plants whose seeds were accidentally
introduced to the archeobotanical record. In our experi-
ence, weedy, invasive seeds dominate the non-food seed
category of the Northwest Coast, both because relatively
few seeds themselves had ethnobotanical uses, and/or
because plants were generally not bearing seeds when
harvested for other plant parts [55]. Charcoal assem-
blages are composed of wood collected and burned
primarily for fuel, and to a lesser extent of woods that
were collected for technological uses and then were later
burned.
Based on our understanding of the variation in plant
use activities between sites and our experience analyzing
the archeobotanical record of the Northwest, we devel-
oped a model of the expected archeobotanical correlates
1360 D. Lepofsky, N. Lyons / Journal of Archaeological Science 30 (2003) 1357–1371

Table 1
Activities involving plants in Coast Salish seasonal round and associated site type

Season Activities involving plant use Associated site type

Winter Production and repair of housewares and technologies; Winter village, year-round village
consumption of stored plant foods for daily meals and
occasional feasts; production of ceremonial items

Spring Consumption of fresh greens, cambium; collection of Winter village, year-round village, base camp, short-term
inner bark; consumption of first fruits; harvest, camp
processing and consumption of root foods; collection of
basketry items and other “technological” plant resources

Early summer Harvest of planks, trees and “technological” plant Year-round village, summer village, base camp,
resources; repair of nets, snares etc.; collection of short-term camp
medicines and spices; consumption of fresh foods;
harvest, processing and consumption of root foods and
berries

Late summer and Use of nets, cordage, and basketry technologies for Year-round village, summer village, base camp,
early fall fishing; exchange of plant foods, raw plant resources, short-term camp
and finished items; consumption of fresh foods;
processing and consumption of berries and roots

Late fall Re-assembly of plank houses; storage of dried foods for Winter village, year-round village
winter; marking of edible roots; cutting of nettles;
collection of fire wood; begin consumption of stored
plant foods
Sources: [4,11,12,15,19,20,22,47–52,54–58,61,62].

of seeds originating from food plants (hereafter, “food
seeds”), seeds from non-food plants (hereafter, “non-
food seeds”), and charcoal at different site types (Fig. 2).
Other plant tissues have not yet been recovered in
sufficient quantities in Northwest Coast sites to include
in the model at this point. We characterized each of
the three categories of remains by differences in rich-
ness, degree of specialization, density, accessibility, and
seasonality. In this model, patterning of food seeds
reflects food-related activities (e.g., processing, con-
sumption, rehydration), patterning of non-food seeds
largely reflects the distribution of accidentally intro-
duced weed seeds (e.g., collected incidentally with other
deliberately collected resources, introduced via seed
rain), and patterning in charcoal largely reflects fuel use.
We have not incorporated taphonomic factors in the
model which might affect the relative preservation and
therefore abundance of specific taxa. Currently, our
knowledge of the paleoethnobotanical record of the
Northwest Coast is not sufficiently detailed to make
these kinds of predictions.
3.1. Richness
In our model, richness refers to the number of
identifiable taxa per deposit. The richness of an
assemblage reflects the range of species deposited
through cultural or natural means, although a paleo-
ethnobotanist’s ability to estimate richness of the
archeobotanical assemblage is influenced by sample size
(number and/or volume of sediment examined) ([44];
also [14]). To estimate the effects of sample size on
taxonomic richness, and to determine how close the
estimated richness is to the true maximum number of
taxa in that record [23, p. 187], number of identified
specimens can be plotted against number of taxa, in a
method similar to that used in a species-area curve in
ecology. If the curve begins to level off, sample size is
sufficient to assess taxonomic richness represented in the
record [27].
Other paleoethnobotanists have used archeobotanical
richness of food plants in the context of diversity
measures (which combine richness and evenness) to
assess degree of sedentism and/or intensity of use [7,41].
Our use of richness differs from these other applications
because it examines assemblage richness on its own. We
do this both because an examination of richness alone
provides a more readily interpretable assessment of the
composition of the archeobotanical assemblage, and
because paleoethnobotanical assemblages on the North-
west Coast are generally not sufficiently large to use
established diversity measures [42].
 D. Lepofsky, N. Lyons / Journal of Archaeological Science 30 (2003) 1357–1371
In our model, richness of both food seeds and char-
coal varies with length of occupation, since a greater
variety of plants will be harvested, processed, and used
during longer occupations (Fig. 2a, c). For food plants,
we expect richness in the winter and year-round village
to be similar to the summer village, since few additional
food plants would have been harvested during the
winter. Richness may be somewhat lower in winter
villages, however, since summer plant foods eaten only
in season will not be represented in those deposits
(denoted by a break in the line). In the case of wood
charcoal, we expect length of stay to closely correspond
to richness, since the number of tasks involving wood
for fuel and technology will be greatest at longer-term
occupations.
The richness of non-food seeds (Fig. 2b) will be
influenced both by site type and context. Since the
non-food seed category is in large part composed of
weed seeds that entered deposits via natural seed rain,
outside processing and disposal areas will have more
non-food seed taxa than inside structures. Further, the
longer a site is occupied, the more such seeds it will
contain (Fig. 2b, top line). We expect the inside of
houses to contain relatively fewer non-food seed taxa
because such contexts would be protected from seed rain
(Fig. 2b, bottom line).
3.2. Specialization
We define specialization as the degree to which an
assemblage is dominated by a few, abundant species.
Specialization reflects choices made about resource
selection, and thus does not apply to the accidentally
introduced, non-food seed taxa in our samples. We
assess the degree of plant food specialization in an
assemblage by calculating the percent of the number of
identified food seeds represented by the three most
common food taxa. Similarly, specialization of fuels is
represented by the percent of number of identified
charcoal specimens represented by the three most
common charcoal taxa identified at least to genus. For
both food seeds and charcoal, a measure of 90%, for
example, would indicate a highly specialized assemblage,
whereas 40% would indicate a relatively unspecialized
assemblage.
Our use of the term specialization is closely related to
the idea of dominance-diversity relations in ecology [23].
Our method of characterizing specialization differs from
indices that assess evenness or diversity (which combines
richness and evenness) because it focuses on the species
that dominate the assemblage rather than the entire
distribution (though the number of identified taxa will
affect the percent). At this point, we have no clear
predictions about the relative evenness of all plant
remains at different site types. Our measure of specializ-
ation is more appropriate for the small sample sizes
1361
characteristic of Northwest Coast archeobotanical
assemblages than established indices (cf. [42]).
We expect the degree of specialization represented by
charcoal and food seeds to be inversely correlated with
the length of time spent at a location (Fig. 2a, c). That
is, archeobotanical assemblages at short-term camps
should contain a small number of taxa with a few
dominating, reflecting the task-specific focus of those
sites [7]. At villages, though people will use a wider range
of taxa, some taxa will always be preferred for food or
technology, and thus those assemblages should also
display some degree of specialization. The reliance on a
few species in particular, but the utilization of many,
is consistent with expectations for complex hunter–
gatherers [3, pp. 25–26].
3.3. Density
Density is the relative abundance of archeobotanical
remains in an assemblage [37] and is measured here by
the average number of seeds/liter or grams of charcoal/
liter. In general, density of plant remains will reflect
some combination of the number of people occupying a
site, how intensely the site was used, and the likelihood
that remains will be preserved [41,44]. In our model,
density of all classes of remains is most affected by
whether deposits are inside or outside contexts and by
length of stay (Fig. 2 a–c). In outside contexts, we expect
densities to be relatively higher because cleaning was
minimal and processing involving fires was probably
more common. Conversely, we expect the interiors of
structures to display lower densities of remains due to
regular cleaning of floors (cf. [18]). In both inside and
outside contexts, density should correlate with length of
stay.
3.4. Accessibility
The accessibility of plant remains refers to whether a
particular plant resource was harvested within easy
access of the site (local) or from more distant locations
(non-local). We base our assessment of accessibility on
the distribution of modern ecosystems, which as we
noted earlier, are suitable proxies for the past. We define
local plants as those that could be harvested within a
three-hour walk or canoe paddle from a site, and thus
are accessible in a day trip. Non-local plant resources
required at least an overnight trip to harvest, or were
accessed through trade. In coastal settings, an exception
to the latter would be the harvest of non-local woods
available locally as driftwood [26].
In general, we expect that local foods and fuels will
dominate the archeobotanical record. Small term camps,
base camps and summer villages should contain pri-
marily local resources because these sites are situated
near harvesting locales. Non-local resources, however,
1362 D. Lepofsky, N. Lyons / Journal of Archaeological Science 30 (2003) 1357–1371

Fig. 2. Model of archaeobotanical remains at different site types. (a) Expectations for food seeds; (b) expectations for non-food (weed) seeds;
(c) expectations for charcoal.
 D. Lepofsky, N. Lyons / Journal of Archaeological Science 30 (2003) 1357–1371
Fig. 2. (Continued).
should be found in small quantities in winter and year-
round villages, because resources were brought to these
more permanent residences from more distant collecting
sites. In addition, the more complex social relations
associated with these sites are more likely to result in
non-local plant resources acquired through exchange
(Fig. 2a, c). All non-food seeds, as defined here, will be
local.
3.5. Seasonality
Since most Northwest Coast plants go to seed during
relatively restricted periods in the growing season,
archeobotanical seeds have the potential to be ideal
indicators of late spring through fall site use. However,
we know from the ethnobotanical record that many
plants were processed and then stored for winter use,
and thus cannot be used as reliable indicators of season
of occupation. In our model, we use only those plants
that were not stored for later use as seasonal indicators.
These include seeds from food plants which, according
to the ethnobotanical record, were never stored by
coastal First Nations because they were not suited for
preserving (e.g., watery berries such as strawberries),
and seeds from non-food plants.
1363
For short-term camps, base camps, and summer
villages, seasonal indicators represented by food and
non-food seeds should correspond directly to the
month(s) of occupation (Fig. 2a, b). A winter village
should be characterized by the absence of plant foods
that cannot be processed and the presence of plant foods
that can be preserved for storage. At winter villages, the
absence of fires during the growing season will result in
the preservation of few non-food seeds introduced via
seed rain. Year-round villages will contain food seeds
both from plants that were stored and those that were
eaten in season; in addition, outside contexts will con-
tain non-food seeds introduced via seed rain throughout
the growing season.
4. Paleoethnobotany at the Scowlitz site
The Scowlitz site, located in the upper Fraser Valley
of southwestern British Columbia, is strategically
situated at the confluence of two major rivers and within
access to a broad spectrum of ecosystems (Fig. 1).
Excavations in the main part of the site have revealed a
complicated site history that began some 3000 years ago
[28]. As is typical of riverine coastal sites with no shell to
1364 D. Lepofsky, N. Lyons / Journal of Archaeological Science 30 (2003) 1357–1371
counteract the acidic forest soils, faunal remains are
absent or poorly preserved at Scowlitz. Consequently,
the analysis of botanical remains was central to our
understanding of shifting site use. The analysis of
lithics at the Scowlitz site is ongoing; the addition of this
line of evidence will contribute significantly to our
interpretation of site use.
We focused our paleoethnobotanical analyses on
two chronologically distinct occupations. The first is a
village, composed of several large houses (c. 3000 to
1800 BP [uncalibrated]; [28,32]). Our paleoethnobotan-
ical samples from the village come from a large house
called “structure 3” (c. 2400–2200 BP). Over 100 m2 of
structure 3 has been excavated to reveal a sequence
of building episodes that produced a palimpsest of
floors, formed hearths, postholes, pits, and benches. The
repeated rebuilding of structure 3 indicates a high degree
of between year sedentism of a particular household
group, spanning several generations. The size and
permanency of post holes, hearths, and other features
suggests the house was occupied at least during the cold
and wet winter months, but could have been occupied at
other times of the year as well. We hoped that the
paleoethnobotanical analysis would augment our under-
standing of what activities were conducted in the house,
and in which seasons.
The second occupation, a more ephemeral occu-
pation called the “burned orange deposit” (BOD), is
associated with intensive food processing but no struc-
tural remains (c. 1000–800 BP). The deposit is primarily
composed of burn features that are distributed in a
haphazard fashion across a series of thin, overlapping
surfaces. No structural features were found in the
approximately 80 m2 excavated, indicating the activities
associated with this occupation took place outdoors or
within a temporary structure and thus was unlikely to
have been occupied during the winter. As with structure
3, the burned orange deposit displays a high degree of
between year sedentism, being occupied repeatedly over
at least a 200-year period. The goals of the paleoethno-
botanical analysis for this deposit were to the seasons of
occupation and the range of activities conducted.
We analyzed 28 (1 and 2 l) flotation samples from
structure 3 and the burned orange deposit. Samples were
selected from hearths, floors, and a pit from structure 3
(n=16) and burn features, surfaces, and a cooking
feature from the burned orange deposit (n=12). Sample
analysis followed standard procedures for the sorting
and identification of plant macroremains [32].
Forty-two plant taxa from 26 plant families were
identified in the paleoethnobotanical analysis. These are
represented primarily by seeds and charcoal, with
needles and non-woody tissue making up a much
smaller part of the assemblage ([32]; Table 2). Over 20
additional taxa were represented by specimens that
could not be identified [32].
5. Application of the model to the Scowlitz
archeobotanical record
At the outset of our analysis, we suggested that
structure 3 was a house that could have been occupied at
least during the winter, based on the interpretation
of structural remains and other features. The burned
orange deposit, on the other hand, appeared to be
associated with activities conducted outdoors, probably
in the non-winter months. Applying our model to the
archeobotanical record of the Scowlitz site allows use
to refine and expand our understanding of these two
deposits (Table 3).
5.1. Richness
We plotted the number of identified seed taxa
against the number of identified specimens recovered
to determine whether our sample sizes were large
enough to compare richness of food and non-food
seeds between deposits (Figs. 3 and 4). These plots
illustrate that for both structure 3 and the burned
orange deposits the number of food and non-food
seeds are approaching the true maximum number of
taxa, and are thus sufficient to compare richness. The
comparison between the two deposits reveals that both
the food seed and non-food seed assemblages from the
burned orange deposit are richer than the structure 3
assemblages (Table 3).
In contrast to seeds, charcoal richness is greater in
structure 3 than the burned orange deposit (Table 3).
This difference is especially dramatic when the number
of identified taxa is compared to the number of ident-
ified specimens in each deposit (Fig. 5). For the structure
3 assemblage, though the examination of 470 specimens
resulted in the identification of 16 taxa, the slope indi-
cates that the sample is not yet adequate to represent the
richness of species in this deposit. However, for the
burned orange deposit, a sample of 175 specimens was
sufficiently large to represent the range of charcoal taxa
present. The actual difference in richness between the
two deposits is thus even greater than the current sample
indicates.
The relatively higher richness of non-food seeds in the
burned orange deposit than structure 3 (2.3 times
higher) is consistent with our prediction that outside
contexts will contain greater amounts of weed seeds
introduced via seed rain than enclosed structures. The
difference in richness between the two deposits holds
when we include the unidentified taxa represented by
seeds in the totals (BOD, 20 unidentified+7 ident-
ified=27 taxa; Str.3, 9 unidentified+3 identified=12 taxa;
BOD:Str.3 =2.3:1). Though we cannot at this time
identify these specimens, we are confident that most, if
not all, of these seeds originate from non-edible plants.
We assert this because we have substantially greater
 D. Lepofsky, N. Lyons / Journal of Archaeological Science 30 (2003) 1357–1371 1365

Table 2
Plants recovered from the burned orange and structure 3 deposits

Frequency by deposit (ubiquity)

a
Scientific name (common name) Burned orange Structure 3 Ethnobotanical useb Seasonal availabilityc
Food seeds
Arctostaphylos uva-ursi (kinnikinnick) 1 (8) 1 (6) F, S (U/F/W)
Cornus canadensis (bunchberry) 1 (8) – F (U)
Crataegus douglasii (black hawthorn) 6 (33) – F (U/F/W)
Fragaria sp. (strawberry) 1 (8) 10 (22) F S
Gaultheria shallon (salal) 158 (58) 55 (33) F (U/F)
Maianthemum dilatum (lily-of-the-valley) 2 (17) – F (U)
Ribes sp. (currant) 1 (8) 1 (6) F (S/U)
Rosa sp. (wild rose) 4 (25) 2 (11) F U/F/W
Rubus cf. spectabilis (salmonberry) 27 (83) 10 (22) F S
Sambucus racemosa (red elderberry) 107 (100) 35 (72) F (S/U)
Satureja cf. douglasii (yerba buena) 2 (17) 2 (11) B U

Non-food seeds
Dicentra formosa (bleeding heart) 2 (17) – W? U
Chenopodium sp. (chenopod) 34 (75) 2 (12) W U/F
Compositae (aster) 1 (8) – W? U/F
Poaceae (grass) 4 (33) 2 (11) T, W U/F
Polygonum lapithifolium (smartweed) 1 (8) – W U
cf. Portulaca – 1 W U/F
cf. Potentilla sp. (cinquefoil) 1 (8) – W U/F
Urtica dioica (stinging nettle) 1 (8) – W, T F

Charcoal
Abies sp. (true fir)d – 4 (20) I, (D)
Acer cf. macrophyllum (broad-leaved maple) 97 (75) 175 (55) P, I
Alnus cf. rubra (red alder) 24 (50) 65 (50) P, I, D
Betula cf. paperifera (paper birch) 18 (50) 24 (25) I, O
Chamaecyparis nootkatensis (yellow-cedar)d – 1 (5) I, (C)
Cornus sp. (dogwood) – 1 (5) (I, D)
cf. Lonicera (twinberry) – 3 (15) ?
Picea sp. (spruce) 5 (25) 3 (10) (O, C, I, D)
Pinus sp. (pine) – 1 (5) O, (C, I)
Pseudotsuga menziesii (Douglas-fir) 41 (67) 31 (45) P, I, (C) T
Pyrus fusca (Pacific crabapple) 1 (8) 1 (5) I
Rubus sp. (raspberry) – 4 (10) I
Salix/Populus (willow/cottonwood) 12 (17) 55 (60) P, C, I
Taxus brevifolia (western yew) 6 (17) 8 (15) I
Thuja plicata (western redcedar) 13 (50) 28 (35) P, C, I, D, R?
Tsuga sp. (hemlock) 11 (42) 4 (15) (O), I, D

Total seeds (N) 381 131

Total identified charcoal (N) 300 470
a
Only identified charcoal and seeds are presented here. See Lyons [32] for complete list of plant remains recovered.
b
Ethnobotanical uses: Food seeds: B=plant used in beverages, F=food, S=leaves smoked as tobacco; Non-food seeds: T=unspecified
technological use, W=weedy species, likely introduced incidentally; Charcoal: FC=construction, D=dyeing/tanning product, I=for making
implements, O=occasional fuel, P=preferred fuel, R=ritual use.
c
Seasonal availability: S=spring, U=summer, F=fall, W=winter (winter refers to fruits which sometimes stay on the branch throughout the
winter). Wood charcoal is available year round. Seeds from plant parts that could have been stored are indicated by a parenthesis around the season
available. These plants are not included in the determination of seasonality of the deposits.
d
Yellow-cedar and true fir are not local to the Scowlitz site; they grow at high elevations.

knowledge and a far more complete comparative collec-
tion of seeds originating from food plants than from
non-edible, weedy taxa. Thus, if these specimens
originated from food plants, we probably could have
identified them. The great majority of these unidentified
taxa were represented only by single seeds in one or
both of the deposits (two taxa are represented by
two seeds), which is also consistent with occasional,
non-deliberate introductions into the record. Taken
together, these data support our original supposition
1366 D. Lepofsky, N. Lyons / Journal of Archaeological Science 30 (2003) 1357–1371

Table 3
Summary of paleoethnobotanical results by components of the model

Burned orange Structure 3 Interpretation

Richness
Food seeds (N of taxa)
Non-food seeds (N of taxa)a
Charcoal (N of taxa)
11 7 Non-food seeds suggest burned orange deposit is outside
7 3 context, structure 3 is inside; charcoal richness indicates
10 16 structure 3 occupied longer than the burned orange deposit,
but food seeds indicate the converse. Taphonomic factors
possibly affecting seed richness.

Specialization
Food seeds (% of total food seeds) 93.9% 85.5% Burned orange deposit shorter-term camp than structure 3;
Charcoal (% of taxa identified to genus) 71.0% 67.6% supported by ubiquity measures. Plant food use appears
more specialized than fuel use. High specialization values of
seeds may in part be related to taphonomic factors.

Density
Food seeds (N/l) 20.7 6.6 Less clean-up in burned orange deposit than structure 3;
Non-food seeds (N/l) 2.9 0.3 burned orange deposit is outside context, structure 3 is
Charcoal (g/l) 6.5 29.8 inside. Ratio of charcoal in hearth:floor is more accurate
Charcoal by context (g/l): Surface 6.8 Floor 9.16 reflection of degree of clean-up.
Burns 4.9 Hearths 48.7
burn:surface 1:1.4 hearth:floor 1:0.2

Accessibility
Food seeds Local: 100% Local: 100% Structure 3 is a winter or year-round village?
Charcoal Local: 100% Local: 98.9%

Seasonality Spring through fall Spring through fall Both contexts at least three seasons; winter occupancy
cannot be determined.
a
The difference in richness of non-food seeds between the two deposits holds when unidentified seeds are included in the totals (BOD=27, Str.
3=12). While we obviously cannot definitively determine whether these seeds belong to the non-food seed category, our substantially greater
knowledge of food seed morphology suggests to us that this is the case (see text).

that structure 3, but not the burned orange deposit, was
an enclosed structure.
The conclusions we can draw from the richness of
food seeds and charcoal are more equivocal. Based on
our model, we predicted that richness of both food
seeds and charcoal would correlate with length of stay,
and thus we would expect these two classes of remains
to co-vary. However, in our analysis, food seeds are
somewhat richer in the burned orange deposit than
in structure 3 (1.6 times), while charcoal is richer in
structure 3 than in the former (more than 1.6 times
richer).
We suspect that a combination of taphonomic and
cultural factors explain the discrepancy between food
seeds and charcoal. The higher richness of food seeds,
and indeed all seeds, in the burned orange deposit could
in part be explained by the fact that seed taxa are more
likely to preserve through charring in this intensively
used deposit. However, the fact that there are 2.3 times
more non-food seeds but only 1.6 times more food seeds
in the burned orange deposit than structure 3 suggests
that differential preservation through fire alone may not
account for seed richness.
We are on firmer ground when we consider charcoal
richness. Since charcoal used as fuel presumably has an
equal chance of preserving in both deposits, charcoal
richness should more closely reflect length of occupation
as predicted by the model. These data suggest that
structure 3 was occupied for longer periods of time than
the burned orange deposit.
5.2. Specialization
Both the burned orange deposit and structure 3
assemblages are dominated by a few, abundant species,
and are thus highly specialized (Table 3). Of the food
seeds in both assemblages, salal and red elderberry
are most abundant (percent abundance of salal,
BOD=50.8%, str. 3=47.9%, and red elderberry,
BOD=34.4% and str. 3=31.6%), with Rubus (8.7%
in BOD) and/or strawberry (both 8.5% in structure 3),
being the third most abundant. Historically, both salal
and red elderberry were preferred foods among many
Coastal First Peoples, and were eaten in season and
processed for winter use (e.g., [54,61]). The high pro-
portion of these two species may in part be associated
 D. Lepofsky, N. Lyons / Journal of Archaeological Science 30 (2003) 1357–1371
Fig. 3. Number of identified food seed taxa plotted against the number
of identified specimens. (a) Burned orange deposit; (b) structure 3.
with the fact that they were processed [29]. Strawberries,
however, which were recovered in relative abundance in
both deposits, are too watery to have been processed for
winter stores. Additional plant food taxa are represented
by limited numbers in both assemblages (Table 2),
suggesting that they were eaten only incidentally in the
season of availability.
Like the seed assemblage, the distribution of char-
coal taxa in both deposits illustrates a preference
toward specific taxa (Table 3). In both deposits, there
is a strong preference for maple wood (str. 3=44.3%,
BOD=42.5%). In the burned orange deposit, the next
two taxa are Douglas-fir (18.0%) and alder (10.5%),
and in structure 3, they are willow/cottonwood (15.1%)
and alder (8.2%). Each of these taxa was highly valued
as fuel woods [55]. In both assemblages these are
followed in abundance by woods which are reported to
have been used more occasionally as fuels, as well
as woods that were used in other technologies [55]
(Table 2). The structure 3 assemblage has a greater
number of species known ethnobotanically for use in
aboriginal woodworking technologies than does the
burned orange assemblage.
Based on our model, the relatively higher specializ-
ation indices for charcoal and food seeds in the burned
orange deposit suggest that it is a shorter-term occu-
pation than structure 3. However, we note that the
differences between deposits are slight and may not be
1367
Fig. 4. Number of identified non-food seed taxa plotted against
the number of identified specimens. (a) Burned orange deposit;
(b) structure 3.
meaningful. To further explore specialization, we com-
pare ubiquity values as proposed by Bonzanni [7]. She
suggests that plant remains at shorter-term, specialized
sites will be more ubiquitous than at longer-term occu-
pations since a narrower range of activities will occur
throughout shorter-term sites. In our analysis, all com-
mon taxa, with the exception of Salix/Populus wood, are
more ubiquitous in the burned orange deposit than
structure 3 (Table 2). This lends additional support to
the interpretation that the burned orange deposit was a
relatively more specialized occupation than structure 3.
5.3. Density
The two deposits differ markedly with regards to
density of remains. For seeds, the burned orange deposit
has about three times as many food and non-food seeds
on average per liter than structure 3 (Table 3). Con-
versely, much greater densities of charcoal were recov-
ered from structure 3 than the burned orange deposits.
This patterns holds when the charcoal is examined by
context, and is particularly striking when the hearths
and burns are compared (Table 3).
The discrepancy in relative density of charcoal versus
seeds prompted us to further examine charcoal density.
When we examine charcoal densities by context within
1368 D. Lepofsky, N. Lyons / Journal of Archaeological Science 30 (2003) 1357–1371
Fig. 5. Number of identified charcoal taxa plotted against the number
of identified specimens. (a) Burned orange deposit; (b) structure 3.
the floors/surfaces we see that the hearths and burns, not
surprisingly, are driving the densities (Table 3). The
greater density of charcoal in structure 3 relates to the
nature of the hearth features, which were deep and
obviously intended to be used repeatedly. In contrast,
the burns in the burned orange deposit were shallow,
ephemeral features. These contained less charcoal due to
their low volume combined with the fact that charcoal
will more likely burn to ash in a shallower feature.
Comparing charcoal densities in burn contexts to
those in the associated floors/surfaces, we see dramati-
cally different depositional patterns in the burned orange
deposit and structure 3. In particular, a much greater
proportion of the charcoal from hearths and burns was
deposited on the surfaces of the burned orange deposit
than the structure 3 floors (charcoal g/l; BOD burns:sur-
faces: 1:1.4; str. 3 hearths:floors: 1:0.2). This difference is
likely due both to the fact that the deeper structure 3
hearths limited the spread of charcoal and because more
of the charcoal on the floor of structure 3 was swept
away than in outdoor contexts.
In our model, we suggested that the most dramatic
differences in densities should be associated with inside
versus outside contexts. Thus, the considerably lower
density of all remains in structure 3 relative to the
burned orange deposit is consistent with the likelihood
that the structure 3 deposit is derived from inside a
structure whose floor was regularly cleaned of debris.
The higher density of remains in the burned orange
deposit can be explained by the absence of cleaning and
relatively greater frequency of processing with fire which
resulted in the charring of more plant remains.
5.4. Accessibility
The majority of seed and charcoal taxa recovered in
the two assemblages could have been harvested locally,
in habitats close to the Scowlitz site (Table 3). The
exception to this is the small amounts of two non-local
wood taxa, yellow-cedar and true fir, that were recov-
ered from structure 3. Yellow-cedar could have been
harvested in the mountain ecosystems near the site, at
approximately 800 m elevation. True fir (Abies sp.)
could either be A. grandis, a low elevation species which
does not grow in the forests near the site today, or more
likely A. amabalis, a high elevation species that grows
over 500 m elevation. Both could have been collected in
a long day trip, but more comfortably on an overnight
trip. Thus, while all taxa used by the occupants of
the burned orange deposit were harvested locally, the
occupants of structure 3 occasionally traveled some
distance to bring desired woods back to the village, or
perhaps received this wood via exchange. Based on our
model, the presence of a small amount of non-local
resources in structure 3 is consistent with a winter or
year-round village.
5.5. Seasonality
Based on the seeds recovered, both structure 3 and the
burned orange deposit were inhabited for a minimum
duration of spring, summer, and fall (Tables 2 and 3). It
is not possible to distinguish whether the absence of
definitive winter indicators reflects no winter occupation
or reflects the paucity of reliable winter indicators in the
archeobotanical record of the Northwest Coast.
6. Discussion
Applying our model to the Scowlitz archeobotanical
data allows us to expand our understanding of the
deposits, which were initially based solely on structural
remains (Table 3). The archeobotanical data lends sup-
port to our initial interpretation that structure 3 was an
enclosed structure and the burned orange deposit an
outside context. This is supported, in particular, by the
richness of non-food seeds which suggests that the
burned orange deposit, but not structure 3, was
regularly exposed to seed rain. The density of all classes
of remains further indicate that the regular clean-
ing of surfaces—which we associated with inside
houses—played a greater role in the formation of the
deposits in structure 3 than the burned orange deposit.
Other lines of evidence further suggest that structure
3 was a year-round village, while the burned orange
 D. Lepofsky, N. Lyons / Journal of Archaeological Science 30 (2003) 1357–1371
deposit was a three-season base camp from which a
variety of activities were conducted. Based on the
seasonality of the archeobotanical remains themselves,
both deposits were occupied a minimum of spring
through fall. The archeobotanical record does not allow
us to evaluate whether the deposits were also occupied in
the winter, however, the fact that the burned orange
deposit was not enclosed argues against its use during
the cold and rainy winters typical of this region. While it
is possible that structure 3 was used for three seasons,
and then abandoned during the winter, we can think of
no reason why people would have left such a structure
for one season, only to return in the following spring.
The fact that the structure 3 assemblage is less special-
ized than that of the burned orange deposit and contains
a small amount of non-local resources, is also consistent
with structure 3 being a year-round village. Charcoal
richness, which is higher in structure 3 than the burned
orange deposit, supports the interpretation that struc-
ture 3 was a year-round occupation.
Taken together, these results indicate that structure 3
and the burned orange deposit display varying degrees
of sedentism. While both deposits were occupied repeat-
edly over a 200-year period, only the occupants of
structure 3 lived in permanent structures and were
sedentary for much or all of the year. Some 1200 years
later, occupants of the burned orange deposit lived in
temporary structures for some portion of three seasons.
They apparently moved elsewhere during the winter
months, but returned to the Scowlitz site repeatedly
throughout two centuries. Our on-going archeo-
botanical research at other sites in the region will
help us determine how these shifting settlement patterns
at Scowlitz fit into other changes in the regional
socio-economy.
While our model has helped us to expand our in-
terpretation of the deposits at the Scowlitz site, some
aspects of the model require modification. In particular,
we were surprised by the high degree of specialization in
food plants observed in the burned orange deposit
(93.9%), as this is more consistent with our expectations
for a short-term camp than a site that was occupied for
as long as three seasons. Undoubtedly, taphonomic
factors, in particular the mass processing of fruits for
storage, inflated the abundance of species such as salal
and elderberry. Thus, though the comparison of our
specialization indices for food seeds against ubiquity
values suggests that our measure of specialization does
reflect real differences in behaviour, the numbers them-
selves may be meaningful only for general comparisons.
Our assessment of specialization of charcoal should not
be subject to the same biases, and thus should more
closely mirror choices that were made about the use of
fuel.
Another area of revision to the model is in density
measures, which we used to assess degree of clean up.
1369
We found that the degree to which a surface was
regularly cleaned is best assessed by examining the ratio
of charcoal in hearths to floors rather than just deter-
mining overall density of remains. We have observed at
other sites in the Northwest that house floors tend to be
relatively devoid of plant remains, that hearths contain
relatively more remains, and outside contexts have the
highest density [25,27].
A final refinement of the model would be to make
predictions about how individual plant taxa enter the
archeological record. Ideally, this would require year-
round sampling of soils in different ecosystems to deter-
mine the extent of seed rain. Further, we would benefit
from observing how different traditional processing
techniques affect the likelihood that different taxa will
preserve in the record. Ultimately, these details would
add considerably to our ability to decipher the small
sample sizes characteristic of paleoethnobotanical
assemblages on the Northwest Coast.
Despite these limitations, the model, combined with
our extensive knowledge of the features, resulted in a
broader understanding of shifting patterns of mobility
at the Scowlitz site. In many projects, however, the
archeologists do not have the opportunity to conduct
large, areal excavations, and interpretations must
instead be based on limited samples collected from a
series of test units. The analysis of paleoethnobotanical
remains in the context of this model would signifi-
cantly advance the understanding of site use, in ad-
dition to complementing others kinds of more standard
analyses (e.g. faunal analyses). At sites where faunal
remains are poorly preserved, such as the non-shell
bearing sites on the Northwest Coast, archeobotanical
remains may be one of the few lines of data that
can be used in conjunction with lithic analyses to
determine patterns of mobility.
The development and use of models such as this
should not, however, replace careful and extensive
sampling of the archeological record, nor should it
encourage us to standardize discussions about ancient
plant use. Lyman [31] has discussed the problems of
limited sampling and misinterpretation of sites on the
Northwest Coast at length, and our analysis demon-
strates that if archeologists wish to retrieve the range of
variation in plant assemblages, then floors, hearths, and
outside contexts should be sampled. Yet, if a range of
deposits can be sampled, even from test pits, the appli-
cation of this model should provide an avenue by which
to explore mobility patterns that would otherwise not be
available in limited scale projects.
Acknowledgements
This research was supported in part by a SSHRC
Research Grant (#410-96-1575), an SSHRC small grant
1370 D. Lepofsky, N. Lyons / Journal of Archaeological Science 30 (2003) 1357–1371
(#31-631359), a Simon Fraser University President
Research Grant (13-871307), the British Columbia
Heritage Trust (#93-052), the Department of Anthro-
pology and Sociology at the University of British
Columbia, the Department of Archeology at Simon
Fraser University, and the University of British
Columbia Office of the Dean of Arts. We thank the
many field school students and Scowlitz community
members who helped us collect and process the
paleoethnobotanical samples. We appreciate Ken
Lertzman for countless discussions about sampling and
Cathy D’Andrea for always being willing to take a look
at yet another badly eroded specimen.
References
[1] S.R. Acheson, In the wake of the iron people: a case for changing
settlement strategies among the Kunghit Haida, The Journal of
the Royal Anthropological Institute 1 (1995) 273–299.
[2] K.M. Ames, The Northwest Coast: complex hunter-gatherers,
ecology, and social evolution, Annual Review of Anthropology
23 (1994) 209–229.
[3] K.M. Ames, H.D.G. Maschner, Peoples of the Northwest Coast.
Their Archaeology and Prehistory, Thames and Hudson,
London, 1999.
[4] H.G. Barnett, The Coast Salish of British Columbia, University
of Oregon, Eugene, 1955.
[5] W.R. Belcher, The ethnohistory and archaeology of shellfish
utilization in Puget Sound, Northwest Anthropological Research
Notes 32 (1998) 133–161.
[6] K.A. Bergsvik, Sedentary and mobile hunter-fishers in Stone Age
Western Norway, Arctic Anthropology 38 (2001) 2–26.
[7] R.M. Bonzanni, Plant diversity in the archaeological record:
a means towards defining hunter-gatherer mobility strategies,
Journal of Archaeological Science 24 (1997) 1129–1139.
[8] S.G. Calvert, A Cultural Analysis of Faunal Remains from
Three Archaeological Sites in Hesquiat Harbour, B.C, Ph.D.
Dissertation, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, 1970.
[9] A. Cannon, The Economic Prehistory of Namu, Archaeology
Press, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C, 1991.
[10] J.C. Chatters, Hunter-gatherer adaptations and assemblage
structure, Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 6 (1987)
336–375.
[11] W. Duff, The Upper Stalo Indians of the Fraser River of British
Columbia, Anthropology in British Columbia, Memoir no. 1,
British Columbia Provincial Museum, Victoria, 1952.
[12] B. Galloway, The Coqualeetza Elders, Upper Sto:lo
Ethnobotany, Coqualeetza Education Training Center, Sardis,
British Columbia, 1982.
[13] M.D. Gallivan, Measuring sedentariness and settlement popu-
lation: accumulations research in the Middle Atlantic Region,
American Antiquity 67 (2002) 535–557.
[14] D.K. Grayson, Quantitative Zooarchaeology, Academic Press,
Orlando, 1984.
[15] E. Gunther, Ethnobotany of Western Washington: The
Knowledge and Use of Indegenous Plants by Native Americans,
University of Washington Press, Seattle, 1945.
[16] D.J. Hallett, Holocene fire history and climate change in
southern British Columbia, based on high-resolution analyses of
sedimentary charcoal, Ph.D. Simon Fraser University, Burnaby,
2001.
[17] D. J. Hallett, D.S. Lepofsky, R.W. Mathewes, K.P. Lertzman,
11,000 years of fire history and climate in the mountain hemlock
rainforests of southwestern British Columbia based on sedimen-
tary charcoal, Canadian Journal of Forest Research 33 (2003)
292–312.
[18] B. Hayden, A. Cannon, Where the garbage goes: refuse disposal
in the Maya Highlands, Journal of Anthropological Archaeology
2 (1983) 117–163.
[19] D. Jenness, The Saanich Indians of Vancouver Island, unpub-
lished manuscript, on file Royal British Columbia Museum,
Victoria, n.d.
[20] D. Jenness, The Faith of a Coast Salish Indian, Anthropology in
British Columbia Memoir, no. 3, British Columbia Provincial
Museum, Victoria, 1955.
[21] R.L. Kelly, Mobility/sedentism: concepts, archaeological
measures, and effects, Annual Review of Anthropology 21 (1992)
43–66.
[22] H. Kuhnlein, N.J. Turner, Traditional plant foods of Canadian
indigenous people. Nutrition, botany, and use, in: S. Katz (Ed.),
Food and Nutrition in History and Anthropology 8, Gordon and
Breach Publisher, Philadelphia, 1991.
[23] C. Krebs, Ecological Methodology, Harper and Row Publishers,
New York, 1989.
[24] D. Lepofsky, The Northwest, in: P. Minnis (Ed.), People and
Plants in Ancient North America, Smithsonian Institution Press,
Washington, in press.
[25] D. Lepofsky, Formation processes: paleoethnobotanical
evidence, in: B. Hayden (Ed.), Formation Process at the Keatley
Creek Site, Lillooet, B.C., Archaeology Press, Simon Fraser
University, Burnaby, 2000, pp. 105–134.
[26] D. Lepofsky, N. Lyons, M. Moss, The use of driftwood on the
North Pacific Coast: An example from Southeast Alaska, Journal
of Ethnobiology (in press) 26 ms pages.
[27] D. Lepofsky, K.D. Kusmer, B. Hayden, K.P. Lertzman, Recon-
structing prehistoric socioeconomies from paleoethnobotanical
and zooarchaeological data: An example from the British
Columbia Plateau, Journal of Ethnobiology 16 (1996) 31–62.
[28] D. Lepofsky, M. Blake, D. Brown, S. Morrison, N. Oakes, N.
Lyons, The archaeology of the Scowlitz site, Southwestern British
Columbia, Journal of Field Archaeology 27 (4) (2000) 391–416
[released 2002].
[29] D. Lepofsky, M. Moss, N. Lyons, The unrealized potential of
paleoethnobotany in the archaeology of Northwestern North
America: Perspectives from Cape Addington, Alaska, Arctic
Anthropology 38 (2001) 48–59.
[30] K.G. Lightfoot, The occupation duration of Duncan, in: K.G.
Lightfoot (Ed.), The Duncan Site: A Study of the Occupation
Duration and Settlement Patterns of an Early Mogollon Pithouse
Village, Arizona State University, Phoenix, 1984, pp. 47–82.
[31] L. Lyman, Prehistory of the Oregon Coast, Academic Press, San
Diego, 1991.
[32] N. Lyons, Investigating Ancient Socioeconomy in Sto:lo
Territory: A Paleoethnobotanical Analysis of the Scowlitz
Site, Southwestern, B.C., unpublished MA Thesis, Simon Fraser
University, Burnaby, BC, 2001.
[33] R. Mathewes, A palynological study of postglacial vegetation
changes in the University Research Forest, southwestern British
Columbia, Canadian Journal of Botany 51 (1973) 2085–2103.
[34] R.G. Matson, The relationship between sedentism and status
inequalities among hunter and gatherers, in: M. Thompson, M.T.
Garcia, R.J. Kense (Eds.), Status, Structure, and Stratifica-
tion: Current Archaeological Reconstructions, Archaeological
Association of the University of Calgary, Calgary, 1985,
pp. 245–252.
[35] R.G. Matson, G. Coupland, The Prehistory of the Northwest
Coast, Academic Press, San Diego, 1995.
[36] A. McHalsie, D.M. Schaepe, K.T. Carlson, Making the
world right through transformation, in: K.T. Carlson (Ed.), A
Stó:lō-Coast Salish Historical Atlas, Douglas and McIntyre,
 D. Lepofsky, N. Lyons / Journal of Archaeological Science 30 (2003) 1357–1371
University of Washington Press, Stó:lō Heritage Trust,
Vancouver, 2001, pp. 6–7.
[37] N.F. Miller, Ratios in paleoethnobotanical analysis, in: C.A.
Hastorf, V.S. Popper (Eds.), Current Paleoethnobotany,
University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1988, pp. 72–85.
[38] D. Mitchell, House and household mobility on the Northwest
Coast of North America, Paper presented at International
Symposium of Complex Hunter-Gatherers of the World,
University of California at Los Angeles, 1994.
[39] G. Mohs, Spiritual sites, ethnic significance and native
spirituality: the heritage and heritage sites of the Sto:lo Indians of
British Columbia, unpublished M.A. Thesis, Simon Fraser
University, Burnaby, B.C., 1985.
[40] M.C. Nelson, M. Hegmon, Abandonment is not as it seems: an
approach to the relationship between site and regional
abandonment, American Antiquity 66 (2001) 213–235.
[41] J.E. Rafferty, The archaeological record of sedentariness: recog-
nition, development, and implications, in: M.E. Schiffer (Ed.),
Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, Vol. 8,
Academic Press, New York, 1985 New York,, pp. 113–155.
[42] V.S. Popper, Selecting quantitative measurements in
paleoethnobotany, in: C.A. Hastorf, V.S. Popper (Eds.), Current
Paleoethnobotany, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1988,
pp. 53–71.
[43] M.A.P. Renouf, Sedentary hunter-gatherers: a case for northern
coasts, in S.A. Gregg (Ed.), In Between Bands and States, Center
for Archaeological Investigations, Occasional Papers no. 9,
Southern Illinois University, pp. 89–107.
[44] T.R. Rocek, Sedentarization and agricultural dependence: per-
spectives from the pithouse-to-pueblo transition in the American
Southwest, American Antiquity 60 (1995) 218–239.
[45] D. Schaepe, Origins: the first peopling of S’ólh Téméxw, in: K.T.
Carlson (Ed.), A Stó:lō-Coast Salish Historical Atlas, Douglas
and McIntyre, University of Washington Press, Stó:lō Heritage
Trust, Vancouver, 2001, pp. 20.
[46] F.L Stewart, K.M. Stewart, The Boardwalk and Grassy Bay
Sites: patterns of seasonality and subsistence on the Northern
Northwest Coast, B.C, Canadian Journal of Archaeology 20
(1996) 39–60.
[47] W. Suttles, The Economic Life of the Coast Salish of Haro and
Rosario Straits, PhD. Dissertation, University of Washington,
Seattle, republished 1974, by Garland Publishing Inc., New York,
1951a.
[48] W. Suttles, The diffusion of the potato among the Coast Salish,
Southwest Journal of Anthropology 7, 1951b, reprinted in Coast
Salish Essays, 1987, Talon Books.
1371
[49] W. Suttles, Katzie Ethnographic Notes. Anthropology in British
Columbia Memoir, no. 2. British Columbia Provincial Museum,
Victoria, 1955.
[50] W. Suttles, Central Coast Salish, in: W. Suttles (Ed.), The
Handbook of North American Indians, vol. 7, Northwest
Coast, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C, 1990a,
pp. 453–475.
[51] W. Suttles, Environment, in: W. Suttles (Ed.), The Handbook of
North American Indians, vol. 7, Northwest Coast, Smithsonian
Institution, Washington, D.C, 1990b, pp. 16–29.
[52] W. Suttles, The shed-roof house, in: R. Wright (Ed.), A Time of
Gathering: Native Heritage in Washington State, University of
Washington Press, Seattle, 1991, pp. 212–222.
[53] P.T. Thacker, Hunter-gatherer lithic economy and settlement
systems, in: G.T. Odell (Ed.), Stone Tools: Theoretical Insights
into Human Prehistory, Plenum Press, New York, 1996,
pp. 101–124.
[54] N.J. Turner, Food Plants of Coast FirstPeoples, University of
British Columbia Press, Vancouver, 1995, (in collaboration with
the Royal British Columbia Museum).
[55] N.J. Turner, Plant Technology of FirstPeoples of British
Columbia, University of British Columbia Press, Vancouver,
1998, (in collaboration with the Royal British Columbia
Museum).
[56] N.J. Turner, M. Bell, The ethnobotany of the Coast Salish
Indians of Vancouver Island, Economic Botany 25 (1971) 63–104.
[57] N.J. Turner, R. Bouchard, Ethnobotany of the Squamish
Indian People of British Columbia, unpublished manuscript in
possession of the authors, n.d.
[58] N.J. Turner, H. Kuhnlein, Two important “root” foods of the
Northwest Coast Indians: springbank clover (Trifolium wormsk-
joldii) and pacific silverweed (Potentilla anserine ssp. pacifica),
Economic Botany 36 (1982) 411–432.
[59] M.D. Varien, Sedentism and Mobility in a Social Landscape, The
University of Arizona Press, Tucson, 1999.
[60] G.A. Warrick, Estimating Ontario Iroquoian duration, Man in
the Northeast 36 (1988) 21–61.
[61] K. Washbrook, An Introduction to the Ethnobotany of the Sto:lo
People in the Area Between New Westminster and Chilliwack on
the Fraser River, Parks Canada and Sto:lo Nation, Chilliwack,
British Columbia, 1995.
[62] W. Woodcock, Katzie Natural Resources Past and Present: A
Report on the History of the Natural Resources within the
Traditional Territories of the Katzie People, Katzie Band Office,
Pitt Meadows, British Columbia, 1996.