The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCDP 06-25; HAGEY RESIDENCE; A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE HAGEY RESIDENCE; 2007-01-23I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE HAGEY RESIDENCE City of Carlsbad APN 155-140-37 Submitted to: City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday A venue Carlsbad, California 92008 Prepared for: HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc. 7578 El Cajon Boulevard, Suite 200 La Mesa, California 91941 Prepared by: Brian F. Smith and Associates 14010 Poway Road, Suite A Poway, California 92064 (858) 484-0915 January 23., 2007 Ht:GEIVED f/ ~l;.? Q O 2~n7 CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DEPT I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The Hagey Residence Archaeological Assessment National Archaeolo&ical Data Base Information Authors: Richard Greene and Brian F. Smith Consulting Finn: Brian F. Smith and Associates 14010 Poway Road, Suite A Poway, California 92064 -(858) 484-0915 Report Date: January 23, 2007 Report Title: Archaeological Assessment of the Hagey Residence Prepared for: HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc. 7578 EI Cajon Blvd., Suite 200 La Mesa, California 91941 Submitted to: City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, California 92008 Submitted by: Brian F. Smith and Associates 14010 Poway Road, Suite A Poway, California 92064 (858) 484-0915 USGS Quadrangle: Study Area: Key Words: San Luis Rey, California (7.5 minute) Approximately 0.45 acres Archaeological assessment of approximately 0.45 acres; APN 155-140-37; Buena Vista Lagoon; SDI-8455; USGS San Luis Rey quadrangle (7.5 minute); potential impacts; monitoring recommended. I I I I I I I I I The Hagey Residence Archaeological Assessment Table of Contents 1.0 Management Summary/Abstract ................................................................................... l 2.0 IntroductioniSetting ...................................................................................................... 2 2.1 Environmental Setting ........................................................................................... 2 2.2 Cultural Setting ..................................................................................................... 2 3.0 Methodology ................................................................................................................ 9 4.0 Report of Findings ........................................................................................................ 9 4.1 Backgraound Research .......................................................................................... 9 4.2 Field Investigation ................................................................................................. 9 5.0 Discussion/Management Considerations ..................................................................... 10 5.1 Statement of Effects ............................................................................................. 10 5.2 Recommendations ............................................................................................... 10 6.0 Personnel. ................................................................................................................... 12 7.0 Certification ............................................................................................................... 12 8.0 References Cited ........................................................................................................ 13 I Appendix I -Archaeological Record Search Results* Appendix II -NAHC Sacred Lands File Search Results* I I I I I I I I I *Confidential Appendix; bound separately List of Fi2ures Figure 2.0-1 General Location Map .......................... '. ........................................................ 3 Figure 2.0-2 USGS Project Location Map .......................................................................... 4 Figure 2.0-3 Parcel Map .................................................................................................... 5 Figure 5.1-1 Project Development Map ............................................................................ 11 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The Hagey Residence Archaeological Assessment 1.0 MANAGEMENT SUMMARY/ABSTRACT In response to a request from Helix Environmental Planning, Inc., Brian F. Smith and Associates (BFSA) conducted a Phase I archaeological assessment of the Hagey Residence Project, located in the City of Carlsbad, in northwestern San Diego County, California. The assessment was conducted as part of the environmental clearance required for the development of approximately 0.45 acres (APN 155-140-37) for a single-family residence. The assessment program was conducted in accordance with CEQA and the City of Carlsbad guidelines to determine the presence of any archaeological or historical cultural resources that would be affected by the proposed project and whether these resources met the eligibility requirements for the California Register of Historic Places (California Register) and/or City of Carlsbad. BFSA field archaeologist Mike Tyberg conducted the survey of the project on January 10, 2007, under the direction of Brian F. Smith, Principal Investigator. No cultural resources were identified during the survey, although the property had been greatly disturbed in the past by grading and terracing. Record searches were requested from the South Coastal Information Center (SCIC) at San Diego State University (SDSU) to identify previously discovered archaeological sites adjacent to the project area, and a Sacred Lands File search was requested from the Native American Heritage Commission (NARC) to list potentially sacred or ceremonial sites or landforms on or near the project. The NARC record search was negative for the presence of cultural resources within the project boundaries, but the results of the SCIC search indicated that prehistoric site CA-SDI-8455 is located immediately west of the project boundaries. The field survey did not produce any evidence of archaeological materials within the project. However, there remains a minimal potential that the proposed project could disturb elements of SDI-8455 that may be buried beneath the sill slopes. Therefore, archaeological monitoring is recommended during all ground disturbing activities. If any artifacts, resources, or culturally modified soil is encountered during the project, then the discovery is to be evaluated by the archaeologist on site, and further mitigation measures may be required. A copy of this report will be permanently filed with the SCIC at SDSU, San Diego, California. All notes and other materials related to this project will be curated at the archaeological laboratory of BFSA in Poway, California. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The Hagey Residence Archaeological Assessment 2.0 INTRODUCTION/SETTING The project area is located on the eastern shore of the Buena Vista Lagoon, in Carlsbad, just south of Oceanside, on the west side of Interstate 5 in San Diego County (Figure 2.0-1). Specifically, the property lies in the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 36, Township 11 South, Range 5 West, of the San Bernardino Base Meridian, as shown on the USGS San Luis Rey 7.5 minute quadrangle map (Figure 2.0-2). The proposed project involves the development of the parcel for a single-family residence (Figure 2.0-3). The archaeological assessment of the .45-acre property was performed on January 10, 2007. Field archeologist Mike Tyberg conducted the survey under the direction of Brian F. Smith, Principle Investigator. 2.1 Environmental Setting The project is approximately three quarters of a mile due east of the Pacific Ocean, in northwestern San Diego County, situated on the eastern shore of the Buena Vista Lagoon in the coastal mesa region part of San Diego County. The area is characterized by a series of large bays, lagoons, and canyons, formed by large drainages and rivers originating in the Peninsular Range Mountains and foothills to the east, and mesas which terminate at the ocean in the form of bluffs (Beauchamp 1986). The property was previously graded and left a flat, level building pad in the eastern half of the parcel, and a terraced slope in the middle and western portions of the property. Near the south end of the graded pad was a large, 22 by 27 foot concrete slab. The western quarter of the property slopes down to the lagoon's edge and contains dense vegetation consisting of Coastal Sage Scrub, Chaparral, mixed native and non-native overgrown grasses, and two well-established cedar trees. The remainder of the property contains native and non- native grasses. 2.2 Cultural Setting Archaeological investigations in southern California have documented a diverse and rich record of human occupation spanning the past 10,000 years. In San Diego and Riverside Counties, most researchers organize prehistory into the Paleolndian; Archaic, and Late Prehistoric Periods and history into the Mission, Rancho, and American Settlement Periods. The San Dieguito Complex, Millingstone Horizon, La Jolla Complex, Pauma Complex, and San Luis Rey Complex are archaeological manifestations that have been used to describe the Archaic and Late Prehistoric periods in the region. The Paleoindian Period is associated with the terminus of the late Pleistocene (12,500 to 9,000 YBP) and in western North America is typically associated with the Clovis Culture. The Clovis culture is distinctly recognized by large, fluted points and an emphasis on hunting large game, although other artifacts including knives, scrapers, choppers, perforators, and casual flake tools have been found in Clovis and other late Pleistocene sites (Fagan 1991; Moratto 1984). 2 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Project Pacific Ocean 0 J 6 9 12 15 Scali' in Milet, ..... I FaUbrook Pe~C,.. Del Mar La Jolla San Beraardlno County ----_J---ilversldeCounty s::rl:. SanJ•rlnto Mollllloi,u Temecula ✓- V Rherslde County ---~ --------- Palomar Mountain San Diego County hula Vista San Dlea~Y_ -_ _ ------Medco -Bal• callf ornla Figure 2.0-1 General Location Map The Hagey Residence Project 3 --- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 7 Figure 2.0-2 Project Location Map The Hagey Residence Project USGS San Luis Rey Quadrangle (7.5 minute series) 4 0 2000 Scale in Feet Scale in Meters 0 610 -- u, 0 0 - ! ~ ~ --- ' 3 .; ··• ~; .. ~ .. ~tl~ ~,;,.'i.-'-' -'i.'~,., :1-'!:," ~ / 'I-'' / ·. ,/ . "< ....... -~\ \, 4 ,£_~,,. (t..~ ~~' ,,,},~ ~"!"' .,., I "\"\ ~ ·;r '1V ~· . ..,,.. ,,-; K ,;. ~~~ 400 Scale in Feet Scale b1 Meters l l,))l\.!Of'S .. ,~ ,, i~~ ~ 120 ----------- c --,:, -- ® . €· .r.,.c.:--c . --<l"lc.,,-~•: 8:..K 48 ·@ U.r;c.4e. A(/Elt'_, ~ I ~ ....... ,l, ~ ., I .s ,~~ ,,.# :. "q_. •l Project Q !O" l:':,J't a, ~ 110r t'1r, or 0c.fA~ Q \.V Q SEC 1-T .25-RSW -P::>R l.OT I M'll'1970-CAI\.SSAO'lt:T7e9 IUP Jejq -.Ula.SBAO TCT 12•7l • '.OT I . *~~;;.~~~]ir~ MN'' n,s • u.G\JW, lo{S.4 :cTS -TCT ~ \ PIR TCl 1 -ROS 3312 KAP 622 5ru~H QCU.NS{l)E REFll{O : 190 -PM IU l!S FEB 1 s _,,, SfC 36 -T'IS-R51 ·Pa!~ 1/4 """ Figure 2.0-3 Parcel Map The Hagey Residence Project -- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The Hagey Residence Archaeological Assessment True Clovis sites have not been found in southern California; however, isolated fluted points have been found in the Cuyamaca and Tehachapi Mountains, on the coastal plain west of Santa Barbara, and in the eastern deserts. Archaeological assemblages that possibly date to the late Pleistocene have been found on the islands off the southern California coast; however, these dates are considered suspect (Erlandson 1994). The lack of sites with late Pleistocene subsurface assemblages hinders our understanding of this period of prehistory in southern California (True and Bouey 1990). The Archaic Period begins with the onset of the Holocene around 9,000 YBP. The transition from the Pleistocene to the Holocene was a period of major environmental change throughout North America (Antevs 1953; Van Devender and Spaulding 1979). In southern California, the general climate at the beginning of the early Holocene is marked by cool/moist periods and an increase in wann/dry periods and rising sea levels. The warming trend and rising sea levels generally continued until the late Holocene. Archaeological research indicates that southern California was occupied between 9,000 YBP and 1,300 YBP by population(s) that utilized a wide range of both marine and terrestrial resources. A number of different archaeological manifestations, based on geographical setting, tool kit, and/or chronology are recognized during the Archaic Period, including the San Dieguito, La Jolla, Encinitas, Millingstone, and Pauma complexes. Archaic sites generally contain milling tools, especially manos and metates, cobble and flake tools, dart projectile points and the concomitant use of the atlatl, crescents, shell, fish bone, and animal bone representing large and small game. Additionally, Archaic groups buried their dead as flex inhumations, a religious and cultural practice that is distinct from the succeeding Late Prehistoric groups. The Late Prehistoric period, sometimes referred to as San Luis Rey I and II, begins approximately 1,300 YBP. Cremation, ceramics, bow and arrow, small triangular points, the use of Obsidian Butte obsidian, and the reliance upon the acorn as a main food staple are the defining characteristics of the Late Prehistoric period (Chartkoff and Chartkoff 1984; Gallegos 2002, Moratto 1984). These characteristics are thought to represent the movement of Shoshonean and Yuman speaking groups into San Diego, Orange, Riverside, and Los Angeles Counties. Economic systems diversified and intensified during this period with the continued elaboration of trade networks, the use of shell-bead currency, and the appearance of more labor-intensive, but effective, milling technologies such as the bedrock mortar for use in acorn processing. The ethnographic period begins at approximately AD 1769 when the Mission San Luis Rey was established. Ethnographic evidence indicates that the Luisefio and Cahuilla occupied northern San Diego County. These groups were seasonal hunter-gatherers with cultural elements that were very distinct from the Archaic Period peoples, including cremation of the dead, the use of the bow and arrow, and use of the acorn as a main food staple (Moratto 1984). Along the coast, the Luisefio made use of the marine resources available by fishing and collecting mollusks for food. Seasonally available terrestrial resources, including acorns and game, were also 6 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The Hagey Residence Archaeological Assessment sources of nourishment for Luisefio and Cahuilla groups. The elaborate kinship and clan systems between the Luisefio and Cahuilla and other groups facilitated a wide-reaching trade network that included trade of Obsidian Butte obsidian and other resources from the eastern deserts and steatite from the Channel Islands. The Luisefio and Cahuilla were Takic-speaking people more closely related linguistically and ethnographically to each other and the Gabrielino and Cupefio, than to the Kumeyaay, a Yuman-speaking group who occupied territory to the south. The Luisefio occupied a territory bounded on the west by the Pacific Ocean, on the east by the Peninsular Range Mountains at San Jacinto, including Palomar Mountain to the south and Santiago Peak to the north, on the south by Agua Hedionda Lagoon, and on the north by Aliso Creek in present day San Juan Capistrano. The Luisefio differed from their southern neighbors in having an extensive proliferation of social statuses, a system of ruling families that provided ethnic cohesion within the territory, a distinct worldview that stemmed from use of the hallucinogen datura, and an elaborate religion that included ritualized sand paintings of the sacred being "Chingichngish" (Bean and Shipek 1978; Kroeber 1925). The historic period begins July 16, 1769, when the first Spanish exploring party, commanded by Gaspar de Portola (with Father Junfpero Serra in charge of religious conversion of the native populations), arrived in San Diego to secure California for the Spanish crown (Palou 1926). The natural attraction of the harbor at San Diego and the establishment of a military presence in the area solidified the importance of San Diego to the Spanish colonization of the region and the growth of the civilian population. Missions were constructed from San Diego to as far north as San Francisco. The mission locations were based on a number of important territorial, military, and religious considerations. Grants of land to persons who made an application were made, but many tracts reverted to the government for lack of use. As an extension of territorial control by the Spanish empire, each mission was placed so as to command as much territory and as large a population as possible. While primary access to California during the Spanish Period was by sea, the route of El Camino Real served as the land route for transportation, commercial, and military activities. This route was considered to be the most direct path between the missions (Rolle 1969). As increasing numbers of Spanish and Mexican people, and later Americans during the Gold Rush, settled in the area, the Native populations diminished as they were displaced or decimated by disease (Carrico and Taylor 1983). By 1821, Mexico had gained independence from Spain, and the northern territories were subject to political repercussions. By 1834, all of the mission lands had been removed from the control of the Franciscan Order, under the Acts of Secularization. Without proper maintenance, the missions quickly began to disintegrate, and after 1836 missionaries ceased to make regular visits inland to minister the needs of the native peoples (Engelhardt 1921). Large tracts of land continued to be granted to persons who applied for them or had gained favor with the Mexican government. Grants of land were also made to settle government debts. 7 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The Hagey Residence Archaeological Assessment Mission San Luis Rey de Franca was constructed in 1798 near present day Oceanside. Carlsbad was part of the mission's lands until the secularization of the missions. As a result of the secularization, 13,211 acres of the mission's lands were granted to Juan Maria Ramouldo Marron II in 1842, and named Rancho Agua Hedionda. The grant included present-day Carlsbad and Carlsbad Ranch. United States troops invaded California during the Mexican-American War of 1846- 1848. The acquisition of strategic Pacific ports and California land was one of the principal objectives of the war (Price 1967). At the time, the inhabitants of California were practically defenseless, and they quickly surrendered to the United States Navy in July 1847 (Bancroft 1886). The cattle ranchers of the "counties" of southern California had prospered during the cattle boom of the early 1850s. Though with the passage of the "No Fence Act," San Diego's economy changed from stock raising to farming (Rolle 1969). The Act allowed for the expansion of unfenced farms, which was crucial in an area where fencing material was practically unavailable. Five years after its passage, most of the arable lands in San Diego County had been patented as either ranchos or homesteads, and growing grain crops replaced cattle in many of the county's inland valleys (Blick 1976; Elliott 1883 [1965]). By 1870, farmers had learned to dry farm and were coping with some of the peculiarities of San Diego County's climate (San Diego Union, February 6, 1868; Van Dyke 1886). Between 1869 and 1871, the amount of cultivated acreage in the county increased from less than 5,000 acres to more than 20,000 (San Diego Union, January 2, 1872). Large-scale farming in San Diego County was limited by a lack of water and the small size of arable valleys, and the small urban population and poor roads restricted commercial crop growing. Nevertheless, cattle continued to be grazed in inland San Diego County (Gordinier 1966). During the first two decades of the twentieth century, the population of San Diego County continued to grow. The population of the inland county declined during the 1890s, but rose by nearly 70 percent between 1900 and 1910. The pioneering efforts were over and the railroads had broken the relative isolation of southern California, making life in San Diego County similar to other communities throughout the west. After World War I, the history of San Diego County was primarily determined by the growth of San Diego Bay. In inland San Diego County, agriculture became specialized, and recreational areas were established in the mountain and desert areas. During this time period, the history of inland San Diego County was subsidiary to that of the City of San Diego, which became a Navy center and industrial city (Heiges 1976). 8 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The Hagey Residence Archaeological Assessment 3.0 METHODOLOGY The methodology employed during the current investigation followed standard archaeological field procedures and accomplished the CEQA mandated assessment of the project. The archaeological study included an archaeological records search and a pedestrian field survey. The records search was requested from the SCIC at SDSU, the results of which were reviewed to determine if any known archaeological sites, historic structure locations, or other cultural resources are present in or adjacent to the current project area. The complete results of the records search are provided in Appendix I. A search of the Sacred Lands Files of the NAHC was also requested by BFSA, the results of which are provided in Appendix II. Field archaeologist Mike Tyberg conducted the archaeological survey under the direction of Brian F. Smith, Principal Investigator. The field methodology employed for the project included walking evenly spaced survey transects oriented east to west across the property. Transects varied between three and five meters apart, depending upon the slope and density of vegetation. All areas where cultural resources might be located were closely inspected. 4.0 REPORT OF FINDINGS 4.1 Background Research Archaeological records searches were requested from the SCIC and NAHC. The records search results from SCIC showed that 37 previous surveys have been conducted within one mile of the property, one of which involved the current project area. The search showed one recorded site within the property boundaries, and sixteen historic and eight prehistoric sites were reported within a one-mile radius of the parcel. Site SDI-8455 is located adjacent to the current project boundaries. The site is described as a low-density shell scatter on the lower terraces of the parcel, with one lithic production waste flake observed. The site measures approximately 45 by 25 meters (Cardenas 1981). The complete records search results from the SCIC are provided in Appendix I. The Sacred Lands File search by the NAHC was negative for the presence of sacred or ceremonial sites or landforms considered important to local tribes (Appendix II). 4.2 Field Investigation The archaeological field survey of the project took place on January 10, 2007. The property consists of approximately 0.45 acres, two-thirds of which is impacted by grading and terracing. As a result, ground visibility was good to fair in the exposed portions of the project, particularly in the graded areas, while visibility was reduced to very poor in the western quarter of the parcel next to the lagoon, where native vegetation was still present. A concrete pad measuring 22 feet by 27 feet was noted near the south end of the graded area. No evidence of 9 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The Hagey Residence Archaeological Assessment prehistoric or historic cultural resources was observed within the project. Because the property has been previously graded, particularly the eastern two-thirds of the parcel, access to the original ground surface and/or native soils was compromised. However, it did not appear that soil was imported to create a level building pad, rather, it appeared that the leveling of the building pad pushed soil westward to enlarge the flat building area, and created terraces that stepped down to the lagoon. Therefore, there is little chance that a cultural deposit or resource was obscured by the creation of the building pad, for grading throughout the parcel would have exposed at least a portion of the cultural deposit as evidence of the deposit would be apparent in the disturbed soil. Additionally, measures were employed to compensate for the poor visibility which included the occasional scraping of the ground surfaces with shovels to expose dirt and the close inspection of rodent burrows to search for artifacts. 5.0 DISCUSSION/MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS 5.1 Statement of Effects The proposed project involves the use of approximately .45 acres for development of a single-family residence. According to the development plan, (Figure 5.1-1) it appears that the entire property will be impacted as a result of the proposed project ( except for a 100 foot setback from the lagoon, which is deeded open space). Although no cultural resources were located during the current survey of the project area, one previously recorded prehistoric resource, SDI- 8455, was identified just west of the property along the lagoon shore. Therefore, there is a small potential that portions of SDI-8455 may be exposed by grading or other foundation work to the proposed project. 5.2 Recommendations Due to the presence of a recorded cultural resource adjacent to the project, archaeological monitoring is recommended for all ground disturbing activities. In the event that any cultural resources, concentration of artifacts, or culturally modified soil deposits are discovered within the project at any time during construction, all work should be halted near the discovery and a qualified archaeologist shall record and evaluate the discovery under CEQA and the City of Carlsbad criteria. The discovery of any resources shall be reported to the lead agency prior to any evaluation testing. If the deposit is evaluated as significant, mitigation measures may be required. 10 - >-' >-' --- 0 40 0 Scale in Feet Scale m Meters 12 ------------- ·, I L --· -·- --t,'S°,::\~~M·--•-'olC- ~~:""-~:':.""..:=-~-~~ ::..=----.. -----"" ___ .. _ ~~~:- :~w ,4.'}"" •;~c,•,1 , .. :-_.. .... ~"~· ... 71' .,__,_,__..,i: .• ,.<.?-j_ . -. . -' _ ... f"J•,.,,. " ._,,,/,,,,. • ~ r , !I _,,,/ •., .,,., \ \' --: ~ I ' .... ; .. l• ... I ,... •' ,.,:_;.,.)-~ ,.,..._._!UJ,,..JI,'---= .:\ :,7 __ . -:....-;:,.-:t</t 1t ~ ~--~--""·--'-; :-::, ~-CL . '" :f l·;;, )· 'i:l ,v ,~ 1i1 ~ ! ..1 • • I -, ~JOt~OH ...... ..,__ ~!';fl~l"I 1~z=1 ~----.;,< ..:__ -"'..;.. I I ✓\ t I:: I -~ __ ...,.,,,. ___ ..;......,.. __ _: ~I ;'1 •/' / . .,._,._, ,, ' -i •✓-· ✓ L _ -·7'•:::::: --...,._ ' ' --..I ,:o~a~e ',!Cl,.~ , , ' . . ' ,.f..-,~ .,.., ;..,; -~ -, , . , --~-~~"'""!. t , a • , ~ =r,:;-'" --'" ...... - - I I / ' . ~..:.-..;--;:;.. -9"'-~..._~ i !' ii !I ~ I_,__·,.;.;,,..;.~·•·-.. - 1 ~-::,,...=.-:.-::..~-=--= t t,,__ __ .. __ _ ~ ~ ••', t ♦1 •• . t• I ~ t;: ~ _ _t.:t: . ~,- •r--4 ... .... w-.:i-~=·c ""_ l§'.-=s...~1-_, .:. Figure 5.1-1 Project Development Map The Hagey Residence Project -- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The Hagey Residence Archaeological Assessment 6.0 PERSONNEL Field archaeologist Mike Tyberg, conducted the archaeological survey under the direction of Brian F. Smith, Principal Investigator. Richard Greene conducted the records search review and drafting of this report under the direction of Brian F. Smith. Danielle Kaheaku conducted the technical editing. Erica Manabat produced the report, and Clint Callahan produced the graphics. 7.0 CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this archaeological report, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, and have been compiled in accordance with CEQA and the City of Carlsbad guidelines. Brian F. Smith Principal Investigator 12 January 23, 2007 Date I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The Hagey Residence Archaeological Assessment 8.0 REFERENCES CITED Antevs, Ernst 1953 The Postpluvial or the Neothermal. Berkeley: University of California Archaeological Survey Reports 22:9-23. Bancroft, Hubert Howe 1886 History of California (Vol. II). The History Company, San Francisco. Bean, Lowell John and Florence C. Shipek 1978 Luisefio. In Handbook of North American Indians Vol. 8: California. Edited by R. F. Heizer. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. Blick, J. D. 1976 Agriculture in San Diego County. In San Diego-An Introduction to the Area. Edited by Philip Pryde. Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company, Dubuque, Iowa. Beauchamp, R. Mitchel 1986 A Flora of San Diego County, California. Sweetwater lliver Press, National City, California. Cardenas, S. 1981 Site record for SDI-8455. On file at the SCIC, SDSU. Carrico, Richard L. and Clifford V. F. Taylor 1983 Excavation of a Portion of Ystagua: A Coastal Valley lpai Settlement. Environmental Impact Report on file at the City of San Diego, Environmental Quality Division. Chartkoff, Joseph L. and Kerry Kona Chartkoff 1984 The Archaeology of California. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California. Elliott, Wallace W. 1883 History of San Bernardino and San Diego Counties (1965 Edition). lliverside Museum Press, Riverside. Engelhardt, Zephryn 1921 San Diego Mission. James M. Barry Company, San Francisco. Erlandson, J. 1994 Early Hunter-Gatherers of the California Coast. Plenum Press. New York. 13 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The Hagey Residence Archaeological Assessment Fagan, Brian 1991 Ancient North America: The Archaeology of a Continent. Thames and Hudson. London. Gallegos, Dennis 2002 Southern California in Transition: Late Holocene Occupation of Southern San Diego County. In Catalysts to Complexity: Late Holocene Societies of the California Coast, edited by J. Erlandson and T. Jones. Gordinier, Jerry G. 1966 Problems of Settlement in the San Diego Foothills. Unpublished Master's thesis, San Diego State College, San Diego. Heiges, Harvey 1976 The Economic Base of San Diego County. In San Diego -An Introduction to the Region. Edited by Philip Pryde. Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company, Dubuque, Iowa. Kroeber, A. L. 1925 Handbook of the Indians of California. Dover Editions, Dover Publications, Inc., New York. Moratto, Michael J. 1984 California Archaeology. Academic Press, New York. Palou, Fray Francisco 1926 Historical Memoirs of New California. Edited by Herbert Eugene Bolton (4 Volumes). University of California Press, Berkeley. Price, Glenn W. 1967 Origins of the War with Mexico. University of Texas Press, Austin. Rolle, Andrew F. 1969 California: A History (Second Edition). Thomas Y. Crowell Company, New York. True, D. L., and Paul D. Bouey 1990 Gladishill: A Probable San Dieguito Camp near Valley Center, California. Journal of New World Archaeology 7(4):1-28. Van Devender, T.R. and W.G. Spaulding 1979 Development of Vegetation and Climate in the Southwestern United States. Science 204:701-710. Van Dyke, Theodore 1886 Southern California. Fords, Howard and Hulbert. 14 I The Hagey Residence Archaeological Assessment I I Newspapers/ Publications I San Diego Union 1868 February 6: 2 (col. 1). 1872 January 2 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 15 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The Hagey Residence Archaeological Assessment APPENDIX I Archaeological Records Search Results (Deleted/or public review; bound separately) I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The Hagey Residence Archaeological Assessment APPENDIX II NAHC Sacred Lands File Search Results (Deleted for publlc review; bound separately)