The importance and extent of aboriginal use of insect resources in California is poorly understood. Specific data on insect utilization are uncommon in the anthropological literature, although several genera have been discussed in some detail (cf. Fenenga and Fisher 1978; Swezey 1978; Fowler and Walter 1985). The purpose of this paper is to discuss one such possible insect resource, Pteronarcys californica Newport (Plecoptera: Pteronarcidae), first noted by Aldrich (1912). This species of stonefly (not a true fly) is commonly known as the California salmon fly, or the willow fly. This stonefly may have been used as food by a number of groups in northeastern California (Fig. 1), a possibility briefly discussed by Essig (1931: 33-35, Figs. 27 and 28) and more fully explored here.
Before the Wilderness: Environmental Management by Native Californians. Thomas C. Blackburn and Kat Anderson (compilers and editors). MenloPark: Ballena Press Anthropological Papers No. 40, 1993, 476 pp., 53 figs., index, $41.50, (hard cover), $31.50 (paper).
The purpose of this paper is to document population movements by Numic peoples during the ethnohistoric period. That they appear to have been expanding at the time of historic contact all along their perimeter may reflect a continuation of a general expansion through the Great Basin which may have begun in antiquity (within the last millennia [cf. Lamb 1958]). Further, it appears that Numic populations of the ethnohistoric period (at least on their perimeter) were militarily aggressive and inclined to exploit their non-Numic neighbors. The fact that the Numic groups did not generally fight among themselves but were at war with virtually all their neighbors supports this contention. This territorial expansion appears to have predated the acquisition of the horse although horses were a very important factor in some of the expansions of Numic populations, especially the Comanche.
The data from the oral tradition appear to form a plausible line of evidence that Numic populations did move north and east from the southwestern Great Basin. The extant indications of direction of movements are quite consistent with the directions postulated by Lamb. Such population movements would likely have taken place fairly late in time for these indications to still be present in the oral tradition. There are very few oral tradition data to support either of the two competing hypotheses.
Handbook of Indian Foods and Fibers of Arid America Walter Ebeling. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1986, 971 pp., 73 figures, 50 plates, 12 tables. Appendix, Glossary, Index, References, $65.00 (hardcover).
It is not my intent to rework the statistical aspects of Thomas' Reese River model with P. monophylla data since that task is well beyond the scope of this paper. However, Thomas (1973: Table 1) predicted only 91 successful pinyon harvests over a 1000-year period, a figure that would appear to be far too low for P. monophylla. Taking into account the actual productivity of P. monophylla and the Forest Service's definition of "success," it may be that Thomas' estimate of pinyon success was low by several hundred percent or more. Pinus monophylla seed crops are considerably more productive than those of P. edulis. This would indicate that the ecosystem of the western and central Great Basin was more productive during the prehistoric period than is currently recognized. The use of P. monophylla (rather than P. edulis) data in subsistence models should result in the prediction of higher population densities, more restricted settlement patterns, and a more stable social organization during the prehistoric period. This change alone could alter perception of the nature of prehistoric settlement subsistence patterns in the Great Basin from one of bare survival to one of greater stability.
Archaeology of the Three Springs Valley, California: A Study in Functional Cultural History. Brian D. Dillon and Matthew A. Boxt, eds. Los Angeles: University of California Institute of Archaeology Monograph 30, 1989, 191 pp., 58 figs., 57 tables, $17.50 (paper).
The Archeology of Mitchell Caverns. Diana G. Pinto. California Department of Parks and Recreation California Archeological Reports No. 25, 1989, 187 pp., 42 figs., 1 appendix, $5.00 (paper).