ARTESA: An Example of How Vineyards Threaten Redwood Forests and Native American History

By Peter R. Schmidt

Peter Schmidt is a graduate of Santa Rosa High School. In 1960, he assisted Essie Parrish, the then leader and famous healer of the Pomo to repair the Round House at Kashia Rancheria East of Stewarts Point. He is Professor of Anthropology and Archaeology at the University of Florida as well as a property owner in NW Sonoma County.

As an early morning mist filters through the redwoods in the village of Annapolis in NW Sonoma County, a Pomo elder of the Kashia band walks through the forest toward an ancient settlement site. The elder’s presence at this place is linked to a deep concern over the spirituality of sacred places being endangered by development of this land into vineyard.

While redwood forest conversion to vineyards is not new to Sonoma County, this particular development entails the conversion of 130 acres of redwood and mixed timberland into vineyard. Forest conversion not only contradicts the Sonoma County General Plan but it also threatens key heritage sites that are critical to the cultural well-being of Native peoples.

The zone in which the forest conversion is proposed by Artesa Winery (owned by Spanish winery Codorniu, one of the largest corporate wineries in the world) was once populated and used by Pomo ancestors. We know this from anthropological studies done in the early Twentieth Century by Alfred Kroeber and Samuel Barrett, both famous anthropologists at UC Berkeley who studied the Pomo and other northern California Native Americans.

The area around Annapolis was an ideal location for settlements between the rich marine resources of the Pacific Ocean and communities located in the interior. The more inland, higher location where Annapolis sits today meant more sun and less fog during much of the year, avoiding the cold and wet along the coastal terrace yet close enough to the ocean to conveniently harvest marine resources. Located just a short distance away from the Gualala River, once a seasonal source of salmon, Annapolis once hosted a wide array of Native American activities in prehistoric and historic settlements, along with other areas where stone tools were manufactured, where shell fish were processed, and where ritual life was conducted.

The first Artesa application to Cal Fire for forest conversion on the Annapolis property in 2000 elicited a warning from the Northwest Information Center at Sonoma State that the area around Annapolis is historically sensitive and has a high probability for Native American cultural resources. Curiously, this early warning has been overlooked in the subsequent 10 years of controversy surrounding the development.

Archaeological survey in 2001 located sites and locales of interest, severalof which were later reassessed, demarcated, and required to be protected—to become fenced off islands in the midst of vineyard. Later professional objections about inadequate archaeological survey methods however led Cal Fire to require another survey in 2009.

The results from this later survey significantly increased the number of known sites, a clear recognition that earlier studies of the property had been insufficient. This recent survey is also far from adequate, suggesting that a more scientific assessment would yield even more site locations. My additional investigations show more locales within and immediately bordering the project area. Only the most rigorous survey possible of this property—located in the midst of a highly sensitive historical area—is an acceptable solution for protection of indigenous history. Anything less creates serious questions about how we treat the histories of Native peoples.

Cal Fire has responded by suggesting additional mitigations that require bulldozers and graders be followed by an archaeologist and Native American monitors (often youth not trained in archaeology) to document sites disturbed during grading and ripping. The notion that it is possible to mitigate harm to heritage sites after they have been destroyed unmasks procedures that are contrary to preservation and contrary to respect for Native American sensibilities and history. Creating work for Native youth under these circumstances makes them pawns in the desecration of their own history.

The 1989 Sonoma County General Plan (Goal OS-9) requires review of such projects to “Preserve significant archaeological and historical sites, which represent the ethnic, cultural, and economic groups that have lived and worked in Sonoma County.” Sonoma County planners have commented on the Draft EIR issued by Cal Fire in 2009, noting that it is not compatible with many of the 1989 County General Plan goals. In a letter to Cal Fire in 2009, Sonoma County Director of Permit and Resource Management Pete Parkinson states that “agricultural activities on forest resource lands is [sic] not compatible with the County General Plan,” repeating a position taken to the 2001 EIR.

Missing from these assessments is any mention of how historical and archaeological sites will be adequately identified and preserved. The next Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for this property will soon be published, at which time Sonoma County authorities must step up and declare their determination to protect this sensitive historical and archaeological zone.

As an area where development has been limited and population is sparse, Annapolis provides an unusual opportunity to understand and preserve an important part of Pomo and other Native American history in Sonoma County. Pomo history has been mostly erased in the interior of the county, along streams and rivers such as Santa Rosa Creek and the Russian River. Most of the recent destruction of these Native American settlements and other sites has occurred as a consequence of vineyard development that necessitates the ripping of soils with bulldozers equipped with vertical forks that penetrate deeply to destroy ancient sites, permanently removing any knowledge of the past.

Once known as the Gateway to the Redwood Empire, Sonoma County appears to be on the verge of forsaking its natural heritage and its cultural heritage simultaneously. All of those who are concerned about the future of Sonoma County need to ask why we are allowing the destruction of redwood forests and Native American heritage to emerge as ‘business as usual’.
As the Pomo ask that their sacred places not be desecrated, why we are not stopping this desecration while we have the chance?

Hopefully the image of the Pomo elder will remain a promising reminder of a history preserved rather than an image that comes to haunt us.