Title
Using GIS to Develop a Junior Rangers Interpretive Program at Carnegie State Vehicular Recreation Area

Author

Kelly Long
American River College, Geography 350: Data Acquisition in GIS; Fall 2009

Contact Information:
California Department of Parks and Recreation
OHMVR Division HQ
1725 23rd Street, Suite 200
Sacramento, CA 95816
(916)324-4442, klong@parks.ca.gov
Abstract

Geographic Information Systems (GIS) is a powerful analytical tool that can be used by land owners to aid in decision making. Archaeologists and State Park Interpreters used GIS to identify both the cultural resources and recreation use of Carnegie State Vehicular Recreation Area. Together they developed an interpretation trail for a Junior Rangers Program to provide a sense of stewardship for the park’s resources.
Introduction

No one can do archaeology without a map, a good map. In fact, the core of archaeological fieldwork revolves around the creation and use of two maps – a location map and a sketch map. In the not too distant past, both of these were drawn by hand; the location map plotted on a 1:24,000 U.S.G.S. topographic quadrangle, and the site map drawn in pencil, to scale, using a ruler and compass. Nowadays, with the increasing availability and affordability of Geographic Information Systems (GIS), most maps are no longer drawn by hand but on the computer or with a Global Positioning Systems (GPS) unit.
Aside from being a powerful tool, a map is the most important document an archaeologist creates because 1) it allows other archaeologists and researchers to relocate the site; 2) it is an efficient way to manage state-wide inventories of archaeological sites; and 3) beyond merely relocating and inventorying the resources an archaeologist needs to recognize spatial and temporal patterns across the landscape in order to decipher past human lifeways. Every site has spatial data that can be used to compare sites spatially and temporally and to identify trends. All of these elements help answer important research questions with regard to California history. How sites relate to each other spatially can answer questions about prehistoric land use, seasonal use of resources, and material exchange or trade patterns, just to name a few.
Additionally, it is the mission of California State Parks to protect and preserve these resources. Maintaining an up-to-date database of cultural resources helps this agency meet the goals of this mission. However, a database based solely on text and numbers alone is access poor and not enough to effectively manage and protect resources. Moreover, maps without a database are content poor. Combining a database of site attributes with maps in a GIS is a powerful tool that is just now being implemented into the cultural resource management program at California State Parks.
Inventorying, recording, and analyzing cultural resources, albeit the most time-consuming aspects of an archaeologist’s job, are not the most important goal. The fundamental goal of archaeology is to decipher past human behavior in order to educate the public so they can have a sense of place in a long and often complex human history.
Public archaeology includes “everything that relates to the wider society: cultural resources management, historic preservation, educational programs, archaeo-tourism, antiquities laws, monument restoration, avocational archaeology, popular media images of archaeology, communication with modern communities and individuals affected by archaeology, and more” (http://www.indiana.edu/~arch/saa/matrix/ia/ia03_mod_09.html). Most state archaeologists find themselves working within the realm of public archaeology and it is an important element to any cultural resource management program within California State Parks. As a state archaeologist, it is vital to educate the public about the resources they protect. Not only is the public curious about the ancient inhabitants of California but educating the public about resources instills a sense of stewardship within the public so they share a direct connection to the land and history. State archaeologists have a duty to both colleagues and the general public to explain what they are doing and why (Renfrew and Bahn 537).
The best way to spread this information is through interpretation, and the best conduit for cultural resource interpretation is to develop a Junior Ranger Program in either archaeology or California history at a State Park. This paper provides a case study where state archaeologists working together with State Park Interpreters used created a GIS in order to develop an interpretation trail for a history-based Junior Ranger interpretation program at Carnegie State Vehicular Recreation Area (SVRA).
Background

Elise McFarland, the State Park Interpreter I for Carnegie SVRA approached Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation Division’s (OHMVR) Associate State Archaeologists Kelly Long and Alicia Perez with an interest in creating an interpretation trail for visitors to learn about the variety of cultural resources within the park. Carnegie SVRA is located in the hills of Alameda and San Joaquin counties along the eastern side of the coastal Diablo Range. The city of Tracy lies 9 miles to the east and Livermore is 12 miles to the west. Access to Carnegie SVRA is gained via Tesla-Corral Hollow Road. Currently the cultural resources of Carnegie SVRA are protected with fences and resource protection signs, however there are no interpretive panels in place. The cultural resources are generally invisible to the off-highway vehicle enthusiasts who recreate at the park. The goal of this project was to shed light on the prehistoric and historic cultural resources protected within the park by using GIS to develop an interpretation trail that could be used by Junior Rangers.
Figure 1. Carnegie State Vehicular Recreation Area
Prehistoric Overview of Carnegie SVRA

Human occupation of California extends to ca. 12,000-11,000 years ago. Within the vast Central Valley of California existed a patchwork of lush environments that all centered around the meandering rivers that cross the valley. These rivers were the livelihood for prehistoric populations where the densest and oldest populations lived. The Central Valley supported a complex prehistory and acted as the crossroads for trade and culture exchange from the coastal areas out into the Great Basin. Due to the biased and sometimes violent settling of California by Euro-Americans, many areas throughout the state lack adequate ethnographic accounts for researchers to draw upon. Carnegie SVRA is an area where few ethnographic records of the late prehistoric people of the San Joaquin Valley exist. In fact it has been stated that “no large section of California is so little known ethnographically as the lower or northern San Joaquin valley.
Carnegie SVRA technically lies in the historic ethnographic boundary of the Northern Valley Yokuts, however, it is in an area where two ethnographic boundaries meet. It is within the western boundary of the Northern Valley Yokuts, but immediately adjacent to the boundaries of Costanoan/Ohlone. According to Kroeber, the boundary area west of the San Joaquin River up to the crest of the Diablo Range is vague ethnographically (Kroeber 1925:476). Kroeber states that “this territory seems to have belonged to the Yokuts; though in default of precise information it has sometimes been attributed to the Costanoan people or [even] to the Miwok. This very doubt indicates an unimportant occupation; and while the area was almost certainly visited by the Yokuts, and probably claimed by one or more of their northerly tribes, the number of residents must also have been very few” (Kroeber 1925:476).
Figure 2. Detail of Native California Indian Boundaries near Carnegie SVRA








The prehistoric sites that have been located within Carnegie SVRA suggest that the area might not have been inhabited over long periods of time, but that the area was used as a trade route by Northern Valley Yokuts traveling into Ohlone territory. Additionally, the presence of sacred sites in the area suggests that pilgrimages were made by the Native American tribes for different religious ceremonies.

Historic Overview of Carnegie SVRA

Since the area is rich in coal, sand, and clay deposits it attracted miners and businessmen alike during historic times. Edward B. (Ned) Carrell is recorded as being one of the first white settlers in the Corral Hollow around 1850. After coal was discovered in the area in 1856, Carrell began a series of mines that lasted until 1880 (Hoover et al. 1990:358). In April of 1890, John Treadwell, a San Francisco millionaire, and his brother James purchased Carrell’s land and together they founded the Tesla Coal Mine in 1896 (Mosier and Williams 2002:9). In 1895, a railroad was constructed for shipment of coal from the Tesla Coal Mine to Stockton (Mosier and Williams 2002:31). By 1900, Tesla was producing 70,500 tons of coal, and was the largest coal producer in California (Mosier and Williams 2002:31). Residential communities were established to house the company employees including Treadwell Row, Jimtown, Frytown, Harrietville, Chinatown and Darktown. (Mosier and Williams 2002). All of these cultural ruins are located within Carnegie SVRA.
The Carnegie Brick and Pottery Company Ruins, also located within Carnegie SVRA, was a large industrial area with brick kilns, drying sheds, a grinding and pugmill plant, and a building for the storage of machinery (Mosier and Williams 2002:213). The Carnegie Brick and Pottery Company had a total of 45 kilns and 13 tall smokestacks, and the clay came from the Tesla Coal Mine. The brick plants produced some of the best manufactured bricks in the state that were shipped across the county. Additionally, after the 1906 earthquake devastated San Francisco, Carnegie bricks were used to rebuild much of the fractured city. After firing about 100,000 bricks per day, the successful company suffered a series of set backs from 1909 – 1917 causing the company to fold and destroy their kilns. The Graner Hotel and two large bunkhouses that stood on site were also destroyed that same year by fire. By 1922 the Western Pacific Railroad, the last remaining feature of the Carnegie Brick and Pottery Company, was removed (Mosier and Williams 2002).
Today the Tesla mining operation is marked by mixed tailings of waste rock, clays, and sands. Faint depressions of house pits dot the neighboring hillsides that were once the booming mining towns. The cultural resources of Carnegie SVRA that have survived tell a story about the success and demise of a mining industry that fueled the economy of the state.

The Junior Ranger Program

Very few children know what natural resources are, and fewer yet know what a cultural resource is. Additionally, there are many misconceptions about archaeology. Most commonly, dinosaurs are thought to be the archaeologist’s chief research focus. Moreover, public images of archaeology in the media conjure up images of Indiana Jones and Lara Croft, both of whom are “raiders” or pothunters. This may seem harmless in nature and even cheap publicity for archaeology as a discipline, but the reality is that these imaginary concoctions hurt the discipline. First, the public is taught that looting is acceptable. Since lands are “public,” they have a “right” to these take these resources. Lastly, popular images of archaeology have the heroes searching for mythical treasure.
The past matters, and it is important that we all have “an adequate perception of our place as human beings in the modern world. . . . It is where we have come from, and it has determined what we are. For that reason, it is necessary for us to set our faces against the lunatics and the fringe archaeologists who seek (sometimes for their own gain, but sometimes simply from a misguided inability to think straight) to confuse or corrupt our view of the past” (Renfrew and Bahn 537). Developing an interpretation program like Junior Rangers is an effective tool for dispersing this information out to the public and removing any misconceptions they may have about archaeology as a discipline.
Interpretation can be defined as “a process of simplifying complicated ideas and sharing them with a more general audience. . . . Good interpretation should establish a connection between the audience and the object of interpretation. When used effectively, interpretation can even be persuasive. It can prompt people to make changes in their thinking and behavior” (Youngentob and Hostetler 1). The main goal of interpretation is to educate the public about the world they live in, past and present, in order to form a “sustainable relationship with their environment” (Youngentob and Hostetler 1). Additionally, well-formed interpretation programs fulfills a fundamental need in our society, they get children outdoors. Thankfully, within the various SVRA parks, children are already outdoors and actively using them. There are even special tracks designed just for smaller children. So the key to providing a sense of history for young park visitors is to create a Junior Ranger Program
The Junior Ranger Program within California State Parks is the state agency’s internal interpretation program for children between the ages of 7-12 that include a wide range of topics including history, California Indians, and safety. The target audience for the program within Carnegie SVRA will be third through sixth graders, or preferably young elementary students who have California history as part of their school curriculum. Also, it is expected that the parents of the Junior Rangers would also attend the tour.
Ideally, if a child begins the Junior Ranger Program in one park, they can pick the program up in another participating park or campground. More than 70 state parks have a Junior Ranger interpretation program, however there is currently no existing program within any off-highway vehicle park. It is am effective tool for spreading the ideas of stewardship, resource protection, and safety.
The path for effective interpretation is five-fold: you must have an idea of interpretation, you must identify your goals, you must identify your target audience, you need to design your interpretation, and you need to monitor results (Youngentob and Hostetler 2). The goals or desired “take away message” for the proposed Junior Rangers program is three-fold: 1) give the OHV users/riders a sense of place in the history of Carnegie SVRA and California, 2) inspire a sense of stewardship, or pride in the resources, and 3) educate about proper riding etiquette. This interpreter is responsible for spreading the message that archaeological resources are non-renewable, meaning once they are damaged, destroyed, all information is gone forever, should be the most important moral goal for any state archaeologist or cultural resource manager. Archaeological data are irretrievable once the site has been impacted or destroyed. One of the main intrinsic values of archaeology is that it gives people in the community a sense of time and place and pride about their shared history. Hiding the resources from the public eye cannot supply information with the public.
Methods

It was apparent from the beginning that creating or designing a new trail solely for interpretation was not time or cost effective. One of the existing trail routes would be used to incorporate the new Junior Ranger interpretation program into the park. What was needed for the creation of an effective interpretation at Carnegie SVRA was three-fold: 1) Which cultural resources are near riding trails?; 2) Which of these trails are good, safe trails?; 3) Will the use of these trails impact the cultural resources?
In order to complete these tasks, first a personal geodatabase of all the cultural resources within Carnegie SVRA was developed using a geodatabase created with Microsoft Access 2003. This database had been developed by Marla Mealey, an Associate State Archaeologist from the Southern Service Center in California State Parks. Using the geodatabase to record and organize all cultural resource shapefiles has been a GIS data collection standard within the state agency for several years now.
At the beginning of the project, the cultural resource locational information was in a variety of places, random and not organized. The first step was to take this backlog of information and create a geodatabase that sorted out the duplicate, overlapping, and draft information.
Once the cultural resource geodatabase was completed for the park, a layer for the current trail system at Carnegie SVRA was pulled from OHMVR Division’s GIS files. The cultural resource geodatabase was combined with the trails layer in ArcGIS 9.3. Right away, it was easy to determine good areas for interpretation where there were cultural resources along accessible trails. One mining area had to be excluded immediately because there was no current trail system in the vicinity of it. The open riding trails were all concentrated in the eastern portion of the park unit.
Figure 3. Carnegie State Vehicular Recreation Area Trails
Figure 4. Detail of Riding Area with Corral Fire Area

A shapefile for the trail system, designated_trails, was manually filtered to show only those trails that were open to riders and in the vicinity of cultural resources. Three cultural resources where in the vicinity of these trail. Due to the confidential nature of archaeological sites, no images can be posted.
Figure 5. Current Riding Trails

Those trails were ridden by the Associate State Archaeologists and the State Park Interpreter I. Safe spots or turn outs that would allow a group of ten (10) participants were placed in a new shapefile called safe_spots. This allowed the map to be analyzed for how many trails had safe stopping points for a group to stop and observe during the tour. This is important because the State Park Interpreter I did not want the tour to obstruct other riders in the park.
Another factor that needed to be considered was time. The State Park Interpreter I only wanted a tour that lasted a maximum of 60 minutes. So the length of the trails became a part of the overall equation for exclusion. Any trail combination with a distance over 30 minutes, was once again filtered from the layer file. This would allow for an additional 30 minutes of lecture.
Results

A final trail product was produced that allowed for the group to visit three large cultural resources each representing a different aspect and theme of California’s prehistory and history. This trail begins with the group collecting out front of the Carnegie Brickworks foundations and ruins in the eastern portion of the park. Here the group can gather and have an orientation lecture. This is an ideal starting location since it is flat, open and there are ramada structures.
Next, the group will travel west to the next site, the Pottery Kiln ruins. Here the group may gather at a safe spot and then have another lecture or activity.
Finally, the group may travel up from this second location to a prehistoric site that is fenced off. It is immediately adjacent to the road, and the interpreter can go into more detail about the prehistory of the park. Activities can take place here and there is a picnic area.
Figure 6. Proposed Junior Ranger Interpretation Trail
Analysis
In order to complete the task at hand, a layer of the cultural resources within Carnegie SVRA was needed. This was probably the most time consuming aspect of this project. Several shapefiles existed within OHMVR Division’s files collected over the years by various archaeologists and volunteers. The files were not organized and there was duplicate information. A personal geodatabase created with MS Access 2003 was used to organize the cultural resource information. The benefits for using a personal geodatabase for this project were: A) Presently, there is a GIS data collecting standard for cultural resources within California State Parks to use a uniform personal geodatabase developed by Marla Mealy, Associate State Archaeologist with the Southern Service Center. By incorporating the shapefiles into the personal geodatabase, Carnegie SVRA would be current with those standards set by California State Parks; B) the personal geodatabase stores extra information about a single cultural resource than a shapefile can. For example, a single archaeological site can have information about the artifacts found there, the boundary of the site, the site’s datum (or reference point), to name a few. This can all be helpful for archaeologists or other researchers who want to compare sites in the future. C) Finally, maintaining a personal geodatabase organizes all the GIS information for the park unit into a single file instead of having thousands of shapefiles and duplicates spread across multiple computers.
In order to answer the first question, 1) Which cultural resources are near riding trails?, the sites from the various shapefiles were digitized into the geodatabase. Then, during the field visit the State Archaeologist gathered field GPS information for the sites using a Trimble GeoExplorer.
The second question, 2) Which of these trails are good, safe trails? Was addressed during the field visit as well. Trails that were too advanced for a young group of children were filtered out. Those where no safe spots occurred were also filtered out.
Finally, the last question, 3) Will the use of these trails impact the cultural resources? was addressed using data from the fieldwork. Distance from the cultural resources to the trail was noted. If cultural resources were fenced off along the road, those were given a higher level of preservation than resources that were not fenced off, or bisected by the road.
Conclusions
The project has potential for the future. Results from the junior ranger interpretation project can be monitored, geocaching opportunities can be developed along the interpretation trail, and the development of interpretation plan for the entire park unit and those areas that have yet to be opened to the public is an option as well. Essentially it is the wish of every resource specialist and interpreter to instill a sense of heightened stewardship in the current visitor base for the park unit in the hopes that it will model appropriate behavior, and empower the audience with stewardship for the park’s resources. OHV users are already empowered by the various parks available for their recreation, now they can feel the same about the wonderful resources protected at each park.
References
Cultural Heritage Tourism website (http://www.culturalheritagetourism.org/)

Hoover, Mildred Brooke, Hero Eugene Rensch, Ethel Grace Rensch, and William N. Abeloe, 1990. Historic Spots in California. Fourth edition, revised by Douglas E. Kyle. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California.

Kroeber, Alfred L., 1925. Handbook of the Indians of California. Dover Publications, Inc., New York.

M.A.T.R.I.X. Making Archaeology Teaching Relevant in the XXI Century website (http://www.indiana.edu/~arch/saa/matrix/ia/ia03_mod_09.html)

Mosier, Dan L. and Earle E. Williams, 2002. History of Tesla: A California Coal Mining Town. Mines Roads Books, Fremont, CA.

National Assembly of State Art Agencies website (http://www.nasaa-arts.org/artworks/ct_contents.shtml)

National Trust for Historic Preservation website (http://www.preservationnation.org/issues/heritage-tourism/)

Renfrew, Colin and Paul Bahn, 1996. Archaeology: Theories, Methods and Practice. Thames and Hudson, New York.

Youngentob, K.N., and M.E. Hostetler, 2003. WEC169, Environmental Interpretation: How to Communicate Persuasively. Department of Wildlife Ecology and Conservation, Florida Cooperative Extension Services, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida.