Content uploaded by Madonna L. Moss
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Madonna L. Moss on Mar 12, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
An Ethnozooarchaeological
Study of Land Otters and
People at Kit’n’Kaboodle
(49-DIX-46), Dall Island, Alaska
MADONNA L. MOSS
INTRODUCTION
A
member of the weasel family, the North American river
otter (Lontra canadensis) is known as “land otter” in southeast
Alaska, translated from the Tlingit language, kóoshdaa (Edwards
2009, 152). In vernacular usage and in primary ethnographic sources
(e.g., Emmons 1991; Krause 1979; de Laguna 1972; Swanton 1909), “land
otter” has unique characteristics and occurs frequently in oral literature
and stories. It is more than an “animal” in the western sense; as de
Laguna (1972, 823-26) describes, in the Tlingit moral universe all animals
had souls and were once human beings. Jonaitis (1986, 90) states that the
Tlingit view the land otter as the “single most powerful supernatural in
their universe.” One way the land otter wields its power is to transform
into a person (typically “Land Otter Man,” Kóoshdaa kaa) and back
again. Some land otters were transformed persons who had been lost
in boating accidents, drowned, and then captured and transformed
(de La g una 1972, 74 4-45). While land otters were deeply feared and
respected by laypeople, they were sought out by Tlingit shamans.
Traditionally, the land otter was the shaman’s most potent spirit helper,
or yéik. is animal has captured the imagination of many people, has
been fodder for contemporary novelists and bloggers, and one can easily
find popularized and corrupted versions of ancient Tlingit stories on the
internet and in bookstores.
is article is not primarily about Kóoshdaa kaa, however; instead,
it addresses the behaviour of Lontra canadensis, as decipherable from
remains at Kit’n’Kaboodle (49-dix-46), an archaeological site on the west
side of Dall Island in southeast Alaska. As I describe, this place was
inhabited both by people and land otters at various times in the ancient
and recent past, spanning more than fifty-five hundred years. Relying
predominantly on zooarchaeological data, I present evidence for the
21
bc studies, no. 187, Autumn 2015
bc studies
22
human occupation of the site at various times during the spring and/or
summer seasons over thousands of years. Based on field observations,
wildlife studies, and the analysis of dense lenses of tiny fish bones, the
site was occasionally occupied by land otters. Herein I describe how
faunal remains deposited by people were distinguished from those de-
posited by land otters. I propose that what is revealed at Kit’n’Kaboodle
helps explain why Tlingit have had such a special, long-term cultural
relationship with land otters.
As I show, land otters lived (and live) in some of the same places
people did. Coastal land otters forage predominantly on marine prey
from the intertidal zone and subtidal waters (Roe et al. 2010). ey are
sometimes social animals that occur in sizeable groups; at other times
a mother and her kits forage as a unit and single adult otters forage on
their own (Ben-David, Bowyer, and Faro 2005). e name “land otter”
is apt because they are well adapted to walking (and running) on land
and they sleep in dens on land. In contrast, sea otters (Enhydra lutris)
have enlarged flipper-like hind paws and are clumsy on land; they forage,
sleep, mate, and give birth in the water.
As de Laguna (1972, 74 4) writes, “everyone, myself included, has had
some personal experience of a sudden or startling encounter with a land
otter,” and this is true of myself as well. While conducting archaeological
survey, I came upon a rocky headland on which otter activity had removed
a significant amount of undergrowth from around tree roots. Sometime
later I heard human-like voices – then eight to ten upright land otter
heads emerged in the waters just offshore, initially striking me as eerily
human. Because land otters swim fast and can hold their breath for
long periods, they often seem to appear out of nowhere. en I realized
that I had scared these land otters away from one of their haunts. Many
Tlingit stories recount persons who were captured by land otters or even
married them. De Laguna’s (1972) informants stated that traditionally
these animals were not hunted nor was their flesh eaten by laypeople.
e fur trade in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries led to land
otter hunting (Emmons 1991), but this was not considered a traditional
activity. De Laguna explained that, if people had land otter fur or any
other by-product on their person, they were vulnerable to being captured
by a Land Otter. As I discuss, people and land otters shared certain
behaviours and preferences, which lends context to Tlingit ideas about
the capacity of land otters to transform into persons and vice versa.
Given that other archaeological sites located on the outer Northwest
Coast, especially caves and rockshelters, have also been used intermit-
tently by both humans and non-human animals, discrimination between
23
Dall Island Land Otters
natural and cultural vertebrate assemblages should be a priority in the
investigation of such sites. Other caves and rockshelters likely have
attracted animal activity when humans were not present. e faunal
remains accumulated in the temporary absence of people provide another
window into local ecology, and they allow us to better appreciate the
resource choices people made and to infer the technologies they used to
acquire animals used for food, skins, and other products. e differences
between the vertebrate assemblages also provide a more complete portrait
of the ecological relationships between humans and non-human animals.
THE OUTER PRINCE OF WALES ARCHIPELAGO
e cool rainforests, glacially carved ords, and convoluted archipelagoes
of the northern Northwest Coast have been home to sea-going peoples
for at least eleven thousand years. For more than twenty years, research
in southeast Alaska has documented an extensive karst limestone
landscape riddled with hundreds of caves (e.g., Baichtal and Swanston
1996; Dixon et al. 1997; Heaton 2007; Heaton and Grady 2003; Moss 2004,
2007, 2008; Moss and Erlandson 2001). ese caves, located primarily
within the Tongass National Forest and protected by federal law, are
unusual ecosystems that contain a wealth of biological, paleontological,
and archaeological resources. Since 1993, the Tongass National Forest
has sponsored interdisciplinary research to document the caves and the
fragile resources they contain. Much of this effort has taken place along
the outer coasts of the Prince of Wales Archipelago, where human use
of the exposed shorelines is limited by frequent storms and high surf.
is setting provides an opportunity to study how and when people used
such outer coast areas, how such patterns varied over time in response to
environmental and cultural changes, and how settlement and resource use
varied from that of more protected parts of the Alexander Archipelago
(Moss 2012). Because caves and rockshelters provide good conditions for
the preservation of organic remains, they sometimes contain artefacts of
wood or fibre (e.g., Moss and Erlandson 2000) and well preserved floral
and faunal remains (Lepofsky, Moss, and Lyons 2001; McMahan 1985;
Moss 2004). At Kit’n’Kaboodle (49-dix-46), investigations have focused
on understanding the chronology of site use, the physical development
of the cave and its effect on human occupation, the nature of local envi-
ronments of the middle and late Holocene, and human and non-human
activities evidenced in the site deposits (Moss and Erlandson 2010).
Kit’n’Kaboodle (49-dix-46) is located on western Dall Island in
the Prince of Wales Archipelago (Figure 1). e archaeological site is
bc studies
24
within a complex solution cave system formed in limestone bedrock,
with multiple entrances, levels, and passages. Archaeological remains
occur in various areas in the cave but also in an adjacent rockshelter
to the north (Figure 2). Test excavations and radiocarbon dating have
shown that the rockshelter was occupied between 5700 and 2400 cal BP,
that the north cave entrance has traces of use dated to 5540-5280 cal BP,
and that the main chamber of the cave was occupied between 2600 and
1500 cal BP (Moss and Erlandson 2010). at different areas of the cave
complex were occupied during different time periods is likely a conse-
quence of the geomorphological evolution of the cave itself. During the
middle Holocene, the main chamber of the cave may have been too wet
to be habitable (see below), hence people lived in the better drained rock-
shelter. During the late Holocene, people were able to live in the main
chamber of the cave, and they used shell midden debris to divert surface
water away from their primary living area. In the rockshelter, two strata
Figure 1. Location
of Kit’n’Kaboodle
Cave (49-dix-46)
at the head of Gold
Harbor, Dall Island,
southeast Alaska.
25
Dall Island Land Otters
contain dense lenses of tiny fish bones and other faunal remains that I
infer were accumulated by land otters, for reasons described below. ese
deposits and the vertebrate remains are discussed here to enable other
investigators to distinguish land otter deposits from cultural deposits
(Erlandson and Moss 2001; Moss 2004). Elsewhere on the Northwest
Coast, land otters have undoubtedly created other accumulations of fish
bones and shell debris interdigitated with cultural remains.
KIT’N’KABOODLE SITE BACKGROUND
Located at the head of Gold Harbor, Kit’n’Kaboodle was discovered and
test-excavated by a US Forest Service team in 1992 (Carlson 1993). Gold
Harbor is a deeply indented bay sheltered from heavy storms and surf
that routinely batter the outer coast of Dall Island. Around Gold Harbor,
the mountainous terrain of Dall Island rises rapidly to snow-covered
peaks as much as 730 metres high. Sitka black-tailed deer, black bear,
and wolf use habitats ranging from the intertidal zone to the spruce-
hemlock rainforest to the alpine tundra at higher elevations. Along the
semi-protected rocky shoreline of Gold Harbor, intertidal shellfish beds
of mussels, barnacles, chitons, and other rocky coast species are exposed
daily. During lower tides, small pocket beaches of sand and gravel are
exposed, providing some access to burrowing clams and cockles. Gold
Harbor lacks any substantial surface streams that could have supported
salmon runs, but bay waters provided productive habitat for marine fish.
Kit’n’Kaboodle Cave is a complex solution cave formed by the dis-
solution of limestone bedrock by acidic groundwater. e cave now sits
about ten metres above the intertidal zone and has at least four entrances,
three of which contain evidence of human occupation (Figure 2; Carlson
1993). A small rockshelter located just north of the cave also contains
cultural material. A substantial resurgence, where groundwater emerges
from the depths of the earth, flows through the lower levels of the cave;
the water level and cave habitability would have been affected by relative
sea level (higher during the mid-Holocene). A source of high-quality red
ochre (hematite), commonly used for decorative and medicinal purposes,
is located in intertidal fissures below the site (Erlandson, Robertson,
and Descantes 1999), although no ochre has been found in cultural
deposits. A combination of shelter, fresh water, shellfish beds, fishing
grounds, and deer habitat repeatedly attracted people to 49-dix-46 over
a four-thousand-year period. Nonetheless, the remote location and the
difficulty of navigating the often rough and unpredictable outer coast
waters of western Dall Island seem to have limited human use of the Gold
bc studies
26
Harbor area to relatively short-term, temporary occupations, although
archaeological survey of this area has been extremely limited.
During three field trips (1994, 1996, 1998), eleven bulk samples were
collected from the site. e shellfish assemblage recovered in these
samples was distinctive: large acorn barnacles (Semibalanus cariosus) were
unusually abundant over a thirty-five-hundred-year period, but, later
in time, they were replaced by mussels (Mytilus) as the primary taxon
targeted by site residents (Moss and Erlandson 2010). Vertebrate remains
were recovered from these and other samples taken from the site.
Here I report the results of the vertebrate analysis of cultural and non-
cultural samples from Test Pit 3 in north rockshelter and from samples
from main cave entrance and north cave entrance, although these are
relatively small and problematic (as discussed below). Before proceeding
to results, I provide more information on sample context.
Figure 2. Layout of Kit’n’Kaboodle Cave and the north rockshelter,
49-dix-46, showing location of archaeological deposits.
27
Dall Island Land Otters
Main Cave Entrance
e main cave entrance was first tested by Risa Carlson in 1992. In
1996, Moss and Erlandson relocated Carlson’s Test Unit 3 in the shell
midden berm behind the cave mouth. e test unit fill was removed,
exposing undisturbed stratigraphy in the sidewalls of the upper ninety
centimetres within the midden berm (Figure 3). Faunal remains were
collected from the surface of the unit and the fill from zero to ninety
centimetres was screened over 6.35-millimetre (one-quarter-inch) mesh to
recover animal bones. en we excavated below the depth of the cultural
deposit to water-worn limestone bedrock (at 120 centimetres). ree
bulk samples were recovered from the sidewalls (at depths of 20-45 cm,
60-80 c m, and 90-105 cm). Eac h consis ted of about one gallon (~3.8 litre s)
of matrix. ese samples were not screened in the field but were returned
to the University of Oregon for processing and analysis.
North Cave Entrance
From the upper level of the main chamber in Kit’n’Kaboodle Cave, a low
and narrow solution tunnel angles to the northwest for about eighteen
metres, providing another outlet to the cave. Some mussel shells and deer
bone fragments were found on the surface of this north cave entrance.
e floor of the tunnel was strewn with cobbles, some of which may have
been piled along the base of the cave walls. Amidst the cobbles is a thin
(three- to five-centimetre thick) cave soil with charcoal and shell. A single
burned California mussel fragment from a trowel probe (twenty-five
centimetres in diameter) excavated in this shell scatter produced a date
of ca. 5540-5280 cal BP (Moss and Erlandson 2010), an age comparable
with some in north rockshelter. A small number of animal bones were
recovered from a bulk sample taken (in 1998) at a depth of zero to five
centimetres.
North Rockshelter
Inside the dripline, the floor of the rockshelter extends across an area
eighteen metres by eight metres. Much of this was covered by boulders
and talus of recent rockfall, particularly in the northwestern two-thirds
of the shelter. In the southeastern end of the shelter, the ground surface
was relatively level and shell midden was visible over a 7.5-metre-by-
4.5-metre area. is midden deposit lay beneath a crawl space where
the shelter ceiling was less than sixty centimetres high. A five- to ten-
centimetre deep bulk sample was collected in 1994, and in 1996, Probe #1
bc studies
28
was excavated in this crawl space. Probe #2 was placed at the southern
end of the shelter, where the ceiling was higher, but reached a depth of
only thirty centimetres before encountering rock that prevented further
excavation. A sample of Semibalanus cariosus from fifty centimetres deep
in Probe #1 was dated to 5230-4980 cal BP (Moss and Erlandson 2010).
e most recent date from this portion of the site is from the surface,
2690-2460 cal BP.
In 1998, Jane Smith and Erlandson excavated a 0.5-metre-by-1-metre
test pit (Unit 3) near the south end of the rockshelter between Probes #1
and #2. Excavations progressed to 110 centimetres without reaching the
base of the shell midden. Five discrete strata were identified (Figure 4).
Stratum I was a two- to six-centimetre thick layer of forest duff and light
brown cave soil that undulated across the surface of the unit. Stratum II
(to twenty centimetres) was dark grey-to-black when moist, enriched by
charcoal and other organics, with a moderate density of shell, two bone
Figure 3. Stratigraphic profile of Unit 3 inside the Main Entrance,
Kit’n’Kaboodle Cave (49-dix-46). I: loose, dark grey shell midden soil. II:
discontinuous 1-2 cm thick lens of brown cave soil, possibly an occupational
hiatus. III: dense and dark grey shell midden deposit, with variation in the
density of shell, rock, fine sediments. Feature 1: thin lens of charcoal-rich
sediment, possible hearth. IV: thin, discontinuous, sterile brown cave soil
with quantities of large angular rockfall resting atop. V: limestone bedrock.
29
Dall Island Land Otters
artefacts (a small bi-point and an awl or leister prong fragment), and quite
a bit of bone. Stratum II was not homogenous, with occasional pockets of
sandy soil that may be decomposed cobbles. Stratum II sediments were
dry-screened over 3.175-millimetre (one-eighth-inch) mesh. Excavation
was difficult due to large quantities of angular rockfall. A shell-rich
lens marked the beginning of Stratum III, thirty-three to thirty-six
centimetres below the surface. Due to the difficulty of working muddy
sediments through the screen, this and subsequent levels were water-
screened in the intertidal zone. In the southeast corner of the north half
of the unit, a portion of a hearth was found at the base of Stratum III,
rich in charcoal, burned shell, and ash.
At thirty-eight centimetres in the northwest corner of the unit, a
concentration of fish bones and scales was found in brown sediment,
extending across the entire unit floor in a two- to three-centimetre thick
layer (Stratum IV). e top of Stratum IV in the centre of the north half
Figure 4. Stratigraphic profile of Test Pit 3 in the North Rockshelter (49-
dix-46). I: forest duff and light brown cave soil. II: dark grey-to-black
when moist, charcoal, moderate density of shell and bone. III: shell-rich
lens, a portion of a hearth (Feature 1). IV: “bone meal” concentration of fish
bones and scales, underlain by small angular cobbles. V: greasy and black
cultural matrix with shell and bone, extending beyond limits of excavation.
bc studies
30
of the unit occurred at forty-eight centimetres below the surface. Not all
of the thousands of small bones from this stratum were collected. Below
Stratum IV was a nearly continuous layer of small angular cobbles. What
appeared to be a land otter deposit (Stratum IV) atop cobbles (roof-fall)
suggested a hiatus in human occupation between Strata III and V.
Stratum V was cultural and continued to the bottom of the unit.
Similar to Stratum III, it was greasy and black, and contained deer
bone and shell. For the sixty- to eighty-centimetre level of Stratum V,
only a twenty-five-by-fifty-centimetre area in the northeast corner of
the test pit was excavated. A small obsidian microblade core fragment
(two centimetres long) was recovered in the screen. Because of large
rocks in the base of the pit, the excavated area constricted to about ten
by fifteen centimetres at a depth of one hundred centimetres. Material
from Stratum V (sixty- to eighty-centimetre and eighty- to one-hundred-
centimetre levels) was bagged as bulk samples and later processed in the
lab. A depth of 112 centimetres below the surface was reached, but the
shell midden continued below. A larger trench would have to be opened
to reach the base of the cultural deposit. From Test Pit 3, a radiocarbon
sample from the top of Stratum V (forty-six to forty-eight centimetres)
dated to 4070-3800 cal BP, and a sample from 110 centimetres dated to
5680-5490 cal BP (Moss and Erlandson 2010).
ANALYSIS OF VERTEBRATE ASSEMBLAGE: LABORATORY METHODS
e vertebrate assemblage derives from bone recovered in bulk samples
from probes and excavated units as well as from separate lots recovered
during test pit excavation. Taxonomic identifications were initially made
by me and my students through direct comparison with specimens in
the North Pacific comparative collection of reference faunal specimens
at the Department of Anthropology, University of Oregon (see http://
pages.uoregon.edu/mmoss/Zooarchaeology-at-Oregon/). Comparative
specimens on loan from Portland State University; University of Cali-
fornia, Davis; and the University of Washington were used at various
stages in the analysis. Specimens for which we did not have comparative
material were submitted to Susan Crockford, Pacific Identifications,
Inc. (using the University of Victoria’s extensive comparative skeletal
collection) at various stages in the analysis (1998, 2010, 2014). Subsequent
to each of these stages, I used Crockford’s identifications as comparators
to assist in identification of additional materials. Both Crockford and I
used a microscope to identify small fish bones. Crockford routinely as-
signed size estimates to fish bone remains, but my students and I did not.
31
Dall Island Land Otters
All specimens were identified to skeletal element and taxon to the
lowest taxonomic level within the limits of our comparative collections
and expertise. Identification protocols for assigning taxonomic categories
follow those in Moss (2004). Age, modifications, and damage were
noted. Specimens were quantified by count (nisp, number of identified
specimens) and weight (measured to 0.1 gram). All observations were
recorded on Excel spreadsheets and on tags bagged with the specimens.
e 49-dix-46 vertebrate assemblage currently resides in the Department
of Anthropology, University of Oregon (UO), but will be returned to the
Tongass National Forest for eventual curation at a federal, state, or tribal
repository. Kevin Turley (formerly a UO graduate student) conducted a
volumetric analysis of the suspected land otter deposits in 2006. ese
results are described later.
General Characteristics of the Assemblage
A total of 5,035 bone specimens, weighing 1015.6 grams, was analyzed.
Altogether seventy-one vertebrate taxa were identified: forty-four fish,
eighteen birds, and nine mammals. In addition to twenty-three fish,
twelve bird, and seven mammal species, thirteen fish, four bird, and one
mammal taxa were identified to genus, and eight fish, two bird, and one
mammal taxa were identified to family only.
e available sample types from 49-dix-46 are not ideal (Table 1).
From the main cave entrance, we screened Carlson’s fill (zero to ninety
centimetres) through 6.35-millimetre mesh to recover vertebrate remains,
and these can be compared with those recovered through the same mesh
size from the ninety- to 120-centimetre level, although the nisp from the
latter sample is small. Taken together, rockfish and Sitka black-tailed
deer were the most commonly identified taxa from these two samples,
but harbour seal, sea otter, black bear, Pacific cod, lingcod, halibut, tufted
puffin, common murre, and pelagic cormorant were also identified. From
the three bulk samples taken from this part of the site, we expected to
identify additional fish taxa, especially those with small body sizes. Like
in the one-quarter-inch samples, rockfish was the most abundant taxon.
e bulk samples did produce small fish remains, including herring,
sculpin, greenling, and prickleback. e bulk samples also yielded a few
halibut and salmon bones.
A number of probe samples were taken during the different episodes
of site testing from both the north cave entrance and north rockshelter.
Some of these were screened over 6.35-millimetre (1996) and 3.175-mil-
limetre (1998) mesh in the field, while others were bulk samples screened
bc studies
32
Table 1
Ta xo no mi c ri ch ne ss ( species , ge ne ra , a nd fa mi li es ) fr om d if fe re nt s am pl e type s f rom Ki t’n ’K ab oo dl e, 4 9 -
dix
-46
The counts were of the lowest taxonomic level possible, for example, a family level identification would only be counted if there were
no representatives of that family identified to the genus or species level for that sample.
Fish #taxa Birds
#taxa
mammals
#taxa
Tota l
n= #spe #gen
#fam
n= #spe #gen
#fam
n= #spe #gen
#fam
#taxa
Mustelid strata –
1998 Test Pit 3, I and
IV
893 19 10 534 28 5 3 2 10 15 2 1 0 3 47
Cultural strata – 1998
Te st P it 3, II, III, V
1286 6 7 6 19 35 7 1 0 8 953 6 0 1 7 34
Main Cave Test Pit 3
– bulk samples
173 4 3 1 8 1 1 0 0 1 10 1 0 0 1 10
Main Cave Test Pit 3
– 1/4” samples
162 3 1 0 4 11 3 1 0 4 65 4 0 0 4 12
Probes – bulk
samples
381 5 3 5 13 6 0 0 0 0 276 1 0 0 1 14
Probes – 1/4” samples 38 1 1 0 2 4 2 0 0 2 13 1 0 0 1 5
2933 85 1332
33
Dall Island Land Otters
over ~1.6-millimetre (one-sixteenth-inch) mesh or unscreened and
processed in the lab. Because of differences in processing and the small
sample sizes, I cannot make many controlled comparisons. From the
north cave entrance bulk sample, deer, herring, halibut, rockfish, and
Arctic shanny were identified. If the probes from north rockshelter are
taken together, the most common taxa are rockfish, prickleback, and deer.
In the one-quarter-inch samples, other taxa represented included marbled
murrelet, western grebe, and halibut. e fine-screened samples provided
a range of small fish remains: herring, sculpin, cod (gadid), greenling,
skate, gunnel (including Arctic shanny), and eelpout. ese remains may
indicate animal activity, but the results from north rockshelter Test Pit
3 analyses are more definitive.
IDEntifying Land Otter Deposits
e evidence for land otters occupying north rockshelter at Kit’n’Kaboodle
consists of the nature of faunal deposits found on the surface in Stratum I
and in Stratum IV of Test Pit 3. On the unexcavated surface, intact land
otter scat, remains from partial fish and bird carcasses, and scattered shell
(chiton, limpet, mussel, clam, and barnacle) were described by Smith
(1998), although these materials were not collected. Although some
of the shell and bone could have been transported to the site by other
scavengers, including eagles, gulls, or mink, otter scat was conspicuous,
and the steep vegetated slopes and overstory vegetation of the site vicinity
all suggest use by land otter rather than mink (following Ben-David,
Bowyer, and Faro 1996; Ben-David et al. 2005). Mink swim in saltwater
only briefly and feed on slow-moving sea urchins and crabs rather than
fish (Home 1982), and it is fish remains that dominate the land otter
strata, as is described in a later section. Having observed regurgitated
remains left by birds, studied the contents of eagle nests, and observed
both mink- and land otter-deposited materials on the surface of the
Cape Addington site as identified by wildlife biologist Douglas Larsen
(Erlandson and Moss 2001; Moss 2004), I can definitively attribute the
Kit’n’Kaboodle materials in Strata I and IV to land otter.
On the surface of Test Pit 3, areas where scat had broken down into
its bone and shell constituents were observed and sampled. Such bone
meal is the remains of otter spraint (scat whose preservation is enhanced
by land otter secretions), while scattered fish and bird bone elements of
larger size are land otter feeding detritus. In Stratum IV, a concentration
of bone meal was described as full of tiny fish bones (Smith 1998). In both
strata, fish bones were mixed with heavily fragmented mussels, and the
bc studies
34
particle size of most fragments would easily fall through 6.35-millimetre
and even 3.175-millimetre screens. Stratum IV was suspected to be a land
otter deposit in the field, but only in the laboratory did its similarity to
the Stratum I materials become evident.
For both strata, volumetric analysis helps to show that these samples
are likely the remains of otter spraint. e recent taphonomic study of
European river otter (Lutra lutra) spraints by Guillaud et al. (2015) was
extremely useful in recognizing some signatures of otter damage on
bones. e taxonomic abundances of the cultural and land otter strata
are compared to see if differences can be identified. Using behavioural
studies conducted by wildlife biologists, I argue below that, when
north rockshelter at Kit’n’Kaboodle was not occupied by people, it was
sometimes used as a feeding site described in the wildlife literature as
an “altar.” e north rockshelter is consistent with Home’s (1982, 227-28)
physical description of an altar: a feeding ledge that is elevated above
the shoreline, reached by climbing up steep slopes, and concealed by
vegetation. Land otters used this place for some time after 3800 cal
BP (Stratum IV), and the site had a similar function in the recent past
(Stratum I) that presumably continues today. First, I summarize some
crucial background on land otters in southeast Alaska.
Lontra canadensis
in Southeast Alaska
In coastal Alaska, land otters feed primarily in aquatic habitats but also
spend time on land. ey have colonized numerous islands by swimming
across as much as three kilometres of open water (Larsen 1983, 72). ey
prefer to forage along convex shorelines with steep-sloped bedrock sub-
strates (Larsen 1983, 32; Woolington 1984, 121, 125), facilitating access to
nearshore fish (e.g., rockfish, greenlings, sculpins), shellfish, crabs, and
marine birds, while minimizing exposure to predators. On land, otters
usually stay within about twenty metres of the saltwater shoreline (Larsen
1983, 1), but they sometimes take “short cuts” up to two hundred metres
into the woods to cross peninsulas (Larsen 1983, 72) and occasionally
travel several kilometres overland. ey are known to eat mink and oc-
casionally scavenge deer and sea lion carcasses (Home 1982; O’Clair and
O’Clair 1998, 417). ey come ashore to den, breed, and rest, sometimes
digging tunnels and clearing away branches and other vegetation. Kits
are born in May and usually remain at the natal den (built in a burrow
beneath rotted stump mounds) until late June or mid-July (Woolington
1984, 122-23). ese natal dens, occupied by females and their offspring,
tend to be located in secluded areas close to a steady food supply. Land
35
Dall Island Land Otters
otters require fresh water to bathe in and their trail systems often lead
from dens and resting sites to streams or ponds. Land otter spraints
contain scent gland secretions that are chemically distinct and used as
territorial markers. Much of the land otters’ terrestrial activity involves
patrolling and marking their territory and searching for “sign heaps” of
other land otters. Land otters tend to deposit spraint on conspicuous
boulders, logs, or near the confluence of streams (Chanin 1985, 98-100),
sometimes scraping together forest litter in spraint mounds up to 0.3
square metres in size (Larsen 1983, 23).
Composition of Land Otter Spraint
Land otter spraints contain indigestible food parts such as shell, bone,
and carapace fragments encased in thick mucus that protects the otters’
digestive organs from sharp edges (Home 1982, 234). Adult scats are 2.5 to
8.9 centimetres in length and 1.6 to 2.4 centimetres in thickness (Home
1982, 235). Mussels are common food, and Home (1982, 213) describes
quantities of triangular shards of mussel shell in otter scat “indicating
that otters masticate parts of the shell, and that these parts pass through
their intestines in this sharp-edged form, and in some quantity.”
Behavioural studies have established the range of taxa otters prey upon.
Home (1982, 167-68) lists forty-eight taxa from his field observations
and Larsen (1984, 1448-49) lists forty-one taxa from his analysis of
272 scats. Yet dietary analyses conducted by biologists are understandably
not focused on volumetric analyses of remains that cannot be identified
to family, genus, or species. Although biologists can recognize fresh
spraint, to my knowledge spraint buried for hundreds or thousands of
years has not been described previously.
The Density of Bones in Bone Meal
To better characterize the bone and shell meal, Turley conducted volu-
metric analyses of categories of remains using a low-power microscope,
without trying to identify specific taxa. We selected two bags of un-
screened bone meal, one from Stratum I and the other from Stratum
IV of Test Pit 3. e surface sample weighed 77.3 grams with a volume
of 127.5 m il lilit res, w hile t he Strat um IV sa mple weighe d 18.2 grams with
a volume of 42.5 millilitres (Table 2). A conspicuous difference between
the samples was that the large amount of shell in the surface sample
had already been sorted out by Moss and her students. erefore, Turley
removed shell from both samples. is resulted in a surface bone sample
bc studies
36
weighing 11.0 grams (42.5 millilitres) and the Stratum IV bone sample
weighing 10.2 grams (30.0 millilitres). From these, large fish vertebrae
(centra > 2 mm in diameter) and small fish vertebrae (centra < 2 mm
in diameter) were sorted out and counted as well as “large” fish bone
(> 2 mm). From the remaining residual (29.5 millilitres from the surface
sample and 24.75 mi ll il itr es from the Str atum I V sample), thre e 0.66-mil-
lilitre subsamples were taken to quantify smaller bone fragments and fish
scales (Table 3). Small scales were less than two millimetres in length,
whereas the larger scales were typically more than five to six millimetres
in length. Turley counted the scales and small bones using a grid and a
hand-held mechanical push counter. e results of this analysis allowed
us to estimate the total number of fish bones and scales in the bone meal
samples and to extrapolate densities of remains per unit volume (Table 4).
Taken together, the samples from Strata I and IV of Test Pit 3 yield
densities of 71 to 98 fish bones per millilitre, or 71,000 to 98,000 fish
bones per litre. e density of vertebrae smaller than 2 millimetres in
diameter ranges from 3 to 10 per millilitre, or 3,000 to 10,000 per litre.
e density of fish scales ranges from 56 to 59 per millilitre or 56,000 to
59,000 per litre. ese are higher densities than I have ever observed in
cultural deposits; hence, I suggest that densities of this magnitude can
be used as one characteristic of otter spraint deposits, whether they are
found in surface or buried contexts in either archaeological or paleon-
tological sites. Although fish scales are found regularly in fine-screened
archaeological bulk samples, they do not usually occur in this density.
In Strata I and IV, we also observed bones distorted and damaged by
the chewing action of land otters (Figure 5), much like that documented
by Guillaud et al. (2015).
Taxonomic Abundances of Land Otter Deposits
vs. Cultural Deposits
All vertebrate remains from the buried strata in the main entrance of
Kit’n’Kaboodle Cave are assumed to be of cultural origin. ese are
taken together with the cultural strata from north rockshelter Test
Pit 3: II, III, and V. Against these cultural strata, the land otter strata
(I and IV) from North Rockshelter Test Pit 3 are compared (Table 5).
In this comparison, eighteen fish taxa are found only in the land otter
strata: wolf eel, some small sculpins (padded, scalyhead, smoothhead,
prickly, and red Irish lord), walleye pollock, threespine stickleback,
northern clingfish, snailfish, some small flatfish (flathead and rock sole,
starry flounder), high cockscomb, and several pricklebacks (Lumpenus
37
Dall Island Land Otters
Table 2
Stage 1 volumetric analysis of unscreened “ bone meal” samples from surface and
Stratum IV of Test Pit 3, North Rockshelter
As described in the text, “large” vertebrae were defined as centra >2mm and “small”
vertebrae were defined as centra <2mm.
nisp Weight (g) Vol um e ( ml)
SURFACE
Shell n/a 66.30 85.00
Large vertebrae 37 1.10 4.50
Small vertebrae 93 0.50 3.25
Other fish bone 52 1.40 5.25
Residual n/a 8.00 29.50
Tot a l 77.30 127.50
STRATUM IV
Shell n/a 8.00 12.50
Large vertebrae 29 0.40 2.00
Small vertebrae 233 0.50 2.00
Other fish bone 12 0.20 1.25
Residual n/a 9.10 24.75
Tot a l 18.20 42.50
Table 3
Stage 2 volumetric analysis of unscreened “ bone meal” samples from surface and
Stratum IV of Test Pit 3, North Rockshelter; fish bone (
nisp
) quantified from sub-
samples of “residual ”
As described in the text, “large” vertebrae were defined as centra >2mm and “small”
vertebrae were defined as centra <2mm. “Large” scales were defined as >2mm in length,
and “small” scales were <2mm.
Subsample 1Subsample 2Subsample 3To ta l 2 ml
Estimated
(0.66 ml) (0.66 ml) (0.66 ml) (x 14.75)
SURFACE
Large vertebrae 0 0 0 0 0
Small vertebrae 1 1 0 2 30
Large scales 12 15 835 516
Small scales 43 27 56 126 1859
Other fishbone 11 812 31 457
STRATUM IV (x 12.375)
Large vertebrae 0 0 0 0 0
Small vertebrae 1 2 1 4 50
Large scales 5 8 9 22 272
Small scales 39 51 30 120 1485
Other fish bone 26 17 26 69 854
bc studies
38
Figure 5. Wolf eel (Anarrhichthys ocellatus) vertebrae from Stratum I of Test Pit 3, North
Rockshelter (49-dix-46) showing compression, deformation, and damage due to land otter
chewing and digestive acids.
Table 4
Volumetric analysis of “ bone meal” samples from surface and Stratum IV of
Te st P it 3 , No rth Ro ck s he lt er, b ase d o n St ag e 1 and St age 2 Analy ses
nisp (stage 1)
Estimated nisp
(stage 2)To ta l n is p nisp/ml
SURFACE (/42.5)
Large vertebrae 37 037 0.87
Small vertebrae 93 30 123 2.89
Large scales n/a 516 516 12.14
Small scales n/a 1859 1859 43.74
Other fish bone 52 457 509 11.98
Tot a l 182 2862 3044 71.62
STRATUM IV (/30.0)
Large vertebrae 29 029 0.97
Small vertebrae 233 50 283 9.43
Large scales n/a 272 272 9.07
Small scales n/a 1485 1485 49.50
Other fish bone 12 854 866 28.87
Tot a l 274 2661 2935 97.83
39
Dall Island Land Otters
Table 5
Kit’n’Kaboodle vertebrate remains (
nisp
) summary
(Families are ordered alphabetically within class.)
1998 Test Pit 3Main Cave Probes Total
TAXON COMMON NAME I & IV II, III, V bulk 1/4”bulk 1/4”
FISH
Anarchichadidae
Anarrhichthys ocellatus wolf eel 32 32
Clupeidae
Clupea pallasi Pacific herring 6 7 3 9 25
Cottidae sculpin 91 79 1 8 179
Artedius fennestralus padded sculpin 1 1
Artedius cf. harringtoni scalyhead sculpin 1 1
Artedius lateralis smoothhead sculpin 1 1
Cottus asper prickly sculpin 1 1
Enophrys sp. buffalo-type sculpin 14 14
Enophrys bison buffalo sculpin 1 3 4
Hemilepidotus sp.Irish lord 35 237
Hemilepidotus
hemilepidotus red Irish lord 2 2
Oligocottus maculatus tidepool sculpin 8 4 12
Gadidae 1 2 4 7
Gadus chalcogramma walleye pollock 10 10
Gadus macrocephalus Pacific cod 2
Gasterosteidae
Gasterosteus aculeatus
threespine
stickleback 1 1
Gobiesocidae
Gobiesox maeandricus northern clingfish 18 18
Hexagrammidae
Hexagrammos sp. greenling 56 86 1 8 151
Hexagrammos
lagocephalus rock greenling 1 3
Ophiodon elongatus lingcod 2
Liparididae 4 4
Careproctus sp. snailfish 2 2
Osmeridae
Mallotus villosus capelin 90 292
Pholidae gunnel 139 7 1 147
Pholis cf. laeta cf. crescent gunnel 1 1
bc studies
40
Pleuronectidae flatfish 10 10
Hippoglossoides
elassodon flathead sole 1 1
Hippoglossus stenolepis Pacific halibut 13 1 2 1 4 21
Lepidopsetta sp. rock sole 1 1
Platichthys stellatus starry flounder 1 1
Rajidae
Raja sp. skate 1
Salmonidae 2 2
Oncorhynchus spp. salmon 2 5 1 8
Scorpaenidae
Sebastes sp. rockfish 46 117 25 77 914 288
Sebastes cf. nebulosus cf. China rockfish 1 1
Stichaeidae 30 612 48
Anoplarchus
purpurescens high cockscomb 10 10
Lumpenus sp. prick leback 2 2
Lumpenus sagitta snake prickleback 2 2
Stichaeus punctatus Arctic shanny 22 1 2 25
Xiphister sp. prickleback 12 214
Xiphister atropurpureus black prickleback 7 7
Xiphister mucosus rock prickleback 3 1 20 24
Zoarcidae eelpouts 8
Unidentified fish 240 936 139 79 295 20 1709
BIRDS
Accipitridae
Haliaeetus leucocephalus bald eagle 1 1
Alcidae 5 5
Aethia sp. auklet 1 1
Aethia cristatella crested auklet 1 3 4
Aethia pusilla least auklet 2 2
Brachyramphus
marmoratus marbled murrelet 1
Lunda cirrhata tufted puffin 1
Ptychoramphus aleuticus Cassin’s auklet 3 3
Uria aalge common murre 3 3 1 7
Anatinae duck 2 2
1998 Test Pit 3Main Cave Probes Total
TAXON COMMON NAME I & IV II, III, V bulk 1/4”bulk 1/4”
41
Dall Island Land Otters
Corvidae
Cyanocitta stelleri Steller’s jay 1 1 2
Gavidae
Gavia sp. loon 2
Hydrobatidae
Oceanodroma furcata
fork-tailed storm-
petrel 1 1 2
Oceanodroma leucorhoa Leach’s storm-petrel 1 1
Phalacrocoracidae
Phalacrocorax sp. cormorant 5 5 10
Phalacrocorax pelagicus pelagic cormorant 1 6
Podicipedidae
Aechmophorus
occidentalis western grebe 1
Podiceps sp. grebe 1 1
Unidentified passerine 2 1 3
Unidentified bird 515 1 6 2 29
MAMMALS
Cervidae
Odocoileus h. sitkensis
Sitka black-tailed
deer 185 344 12 9154
Cricetidae
Peromyscus sp. mouse 1 1
Mustelidae 1 1
Enhydra lutris sea otter 7 1 8
Lontra canadensis land otter 2 2
Mustela vison mink 2 2
Phocidae
Phoca vitulina harbour seal 2 4 6
Soricidae
Sorex monticolus dusk y shrew 1 1 2
Ursidae
Ursus americanus black bear 1
Unidentified mammal 12 853 715 264 41155
Unidentified
mammal/bird 18 616 22 29 685
To ta l 954 2890 206 238 692 55 5035
1998 Test Pit 3Main Cave Probes Total
TAXON COMMON NAME I & IV II, III, V bulk 1/4”bulk 1/4”
bc studies
42
sp. and snake, black, and rock). In addition, the majority of certain
small fish remains occur mostly in the land otter strata; 95 percent of
the site’s Irish lord, 98 percent of capelin, 94 percent of gunnel, and 88
percent of Arctic shanny were found in Strata I and IV. e only small
fish present elsewhere but missing from the land otter strata is eelpout
(zoarcid), some of which were found in fine-screened samples from the
surface levels of probes in north rockshelter. It seems rather likely that
these can also be attributed to land otter. In Larsen’s (1984) study of 272
land otter scat samples from southeast Alaska, only two fish families
are not represented in Strata I and IV: ammodytid (sandlance) and
embiotocid (surf perch). In O’Clair and O’Clair’s (1998) overview, the
following taxa found in Strata I and IV are specifically mentioned as
known prey of land otters: buffalo sculpin, smoothhead sculpin, pholids,
and pricklebacks. Many of these taxa are denizens of the intertidal zone,
occupying tidepools or hiding under rocks that would be accessible to
land otters during different stages of the tide. Intertidal taxa include
some sculpins (padded, scalyhead, smoothhead, Irish lord), northern
clingfish, snailfish, cockscomb, pricklebacks (Arctic shanny, snake,
black, and rock), and gunnels (Love 1996; O’Clair and O’Clair 1998).
Rock sole and starry flounder can also be taken in the intertidal zone.
None of the fish taxa found in the land otter strata can be used to infer
seasonality of land otter use.
In the cultural samples, the only taxa found that were not also present
in the land otter strata include flatfish bones identified to family (pleu-
ronectid), halibut, salmonid, and China rockfish (Sebastes cf. nebulosus; a
single cleithrum identified by Crockford). Most of these are larger-bodied
fish, although fish size has not been recorded systematically. Fish taxa
that co-occur in both land otter and cultural deposits include: herring,
buffalo sculpin, tidepool sculpin, gadid (identified to family), greenling,
salmon, rockfish (identified to genus), and stichaeid (identified to family).
By way of comparison, relatively few bird and mammal taxa were
found exclusively in the land otter strata; duck, Leach’s storm-petrel,
and grebe were found on the surface, and a mouse bone (likely intrusive)
was found in Stratum IV. Cultural samples produced nine bird and
mammal taxa missing from the land otter strata: bald eagle, least auklet,
Cassin’s auklet, pelagic cormorant, sea otter, land otter, mink, harbour
seal, and black bear. Clearly, the cultural strata produced more bird and
mammal species than did the land otter strata. e cultural strata also
provided clues as to season of occupation. In Stratum III, remains of a
foetal/newborn sea otter suggest spring occupation, although sea otters
can give birth during other seasons (O’Clair and O’Clair 1998, 415). In
43
Dall Island Land Otters
Stratum V, juvenile remains of deer, land otter, sea otter, and harbour
seal were identified. In the main cave entrance, remains of a juvenile
black bear were found. Taken together this suggests that the cultural
levels were deposited during spring and summer.
To more adequately compare the fish taxa between the land otter
and cultural strata, the identifications were collapsed to the family level
(see Driver 1992). Of the 653 nisp identified to at least the family level
from the land otter strata (I, IV), 24 percent were sculpins, 21 percent
gunnels, 14 p erc ent cap elin, 14 p ercent pric kl eba cks, 9 perce nt g reen lings,
7 percent rockfishes, 5 percent wolf eel, and 3 percent northern clingfish
(Figure 6). Of the 350 nisp identified to at least the family level from
the cultural strata from the same test pit (II, III, V), 34 percent were
rockfishes, 25 percent sculpins, 25 percent g reen lings, 6 percent flatfishes,
and 3 percent pricklebacks. Although sculpins, rockfishes, and greenlings
were found in significant proportions in both samples, the body size of
the fish in the land otter samples was smaller overall, although this is a
general observation, not one backed up with measurements. Of the fish
exclusively present in the land otter strata, a number reach maximum
lengths of no more than fourteen centimetres. ese include scalyhead
and prickly sculpins, threespine stickleback, and snailfish; two other
small taxa mostly found in land otter strata are capelin and gunnel. To
consider taxonomic diversity, I calculated the reciprocal of the Simpson
Index (Krebs 1989); the land otter strata (I, IV) yielded a more diverse
assemblage (6.46) than did the cultural strata (II, III, V), the latter with
a Reciprocal Simpson Index of 4.10.
Analysis of the 49-dix-46 remains indicate that land otters preyed upon
a wider variety of fish species than did people, especially small species.
e land otter assemblage has a higher measure of diversity in that more
taxa are represented with greater evenness of abundances across taxa (even
when collapsed to family) when compared to the cultural strata. is is
not unexpected; the human residents of Kit’n’Kaboodle were obviously
more selective, choosing fewer taxa and generally larger-bodied fishes
(producing assemblages much like those reported by contributors to Moss
and Cannon [2011]). Both humans and land otters were likely taking
fish in the vicinity of Kit’n’Kaboodle; most of the land otter prey could
have derived from tidepools and intertidal rocks, while people took fish
from deeper waters, either from shore or boats. Although a single or set
of indicator species that will always signal the presence of land otters
cannot be identified, the taxonomic composition of the Strata I and IV
assemblage should be helpful in identifying land otter deposits in other
Northwest Coast sites.
bc studies
44
North Rockshelter:
Human Campsite and LAND Otter Altar
Starting in the middle Holocene (~5700 cal BP), people used north
rockshelter at Kit’n’Kaboodle as a temporary campsite over a period of
thirty-three hundred years. ey subsisted on large quantities of acorn
barnacles (Semibalanus cariosus; Moss and Erlandson 2010); hunted deer,
sea otter, and seal; and fished for rockfish, greenlings, sculpins, halibut,
and other flatfish. During times when people were not living at the site,
it could be intermittently used by land otter(s), and, sometime after 3800
cal BP, land otter usage was of significant enough duration or intensity
to leave behind an accumulation of otter spraint and feeding debris. e
analysis of vertebrate faunal remains from Test Pit 3 in north rockshelter
identifies differences between the focal activities of people versus the
behaviour of land otters.
Home (1982, 225-32) describes four types of land otter eating activity
sites in southeast Alaska: (1) incidental or random feeding sites located
below the high tide line; (2) middens comprised of piles of food remains
and scat; (3) altars, which are middens on elevated rocks, where remains
are conserved as territorial markers; and (4) expanded surface sites,
covering a zone one hundred metres or more in linear extent. Using
these definitions, north rockshelter best conforms to the altar activity
site. Strata IV and I are clearly middens located in a narrow rockshelter
Figure 6. Taxonomic abundances (%) of fish families in land otter Strata (I, IV)
and Cultural Strata. (II, III, V) in Test Pit 3, North Rockshelter (49-dix-46).
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0
40.0
I, IV
II, III, V
45
Dall Island Land Otters
ten metres up a steep slope above the intertidal zone. e build-up of
debris in both strata indicates that these remains were “conserved” by
land otters in that the otters returned to the site to feed and mark their
territories with spraint. Although no clearly defined sign heaps or spraint
mounds were noted, these may have been built in the past but were not
recognized archaeologically. Land otters could occupy this site in relative
obscurity with vegetation concealing them from predators. On Dall
Island, their only predators would be black bears and wolves, although
a land otter kit might be vulnerable to an eagle (Home 1982).
Sometime after 2600 cal BP, people started to occupy the main
chamber of Kit’n’Kaboodle Cave, which they did over a one-thousand-
to thirteen-hundred-year period. e residents of the cave collected
mussels, probably from the immediate vicinity. ey fished for large
rockfish, hunted deer, and took the occasional seal, sea otter, and black
bear. Unfortunately, we lack radiocarbon dates from the uppermost
strata in both site loci, so the most recent human occupation in either
place cannot be determined. I suspect that the land otters continue to
use north rockshelter today.
CONCLUDING THOUGHTS
e west side of Dall Island is characterized by small, short, steep-sided
inlets, and the distance between inlets is large enough to challenge
canoe travellers during times of high waves. Although Kit’n’Kaboodle
is situated up inside the semi-protected inlet of Gold Harbor, the site
is fairly remote, and canoe travel must have been seasonally limited,
especially during the darker months of the year. Much of the unprotected
outer coast of the Prince of Wales Archipelago may have been used
only seasonally, like Cape Addington and the Forrester Islands (Moss
2004, 2007). ese places provided great fishing grounds and abundant
breeding seabirds and marine mammals but primarily during the spring,
summer, and perhaps into the early fall. e lack of a year-round human
settlement at Kit’n’Kaboodle, and perhaps at other caves and rockshelters
in the vicinity, provided opportunities for animals to live in places that
would otherwise host human occupation. When people were absent,
land otters and other animals may have left behind food remains mixed
in with cultural deposits.
e body of this article focuses on the distinctions between the ver-
tebrate assemblages left by people and those deposited by land otters. e
main differences include taxonomic composition, the size of prey taxa,
and the particle size and density of the remains. Yet it is the similarities
bc studies
46
between people and land otters that I believe have contributed to tra-
ditional Tlingit ideas about them. Land otters lived (and live) in some
of the same places people did. ey were skilled at catching fish, as are
the Tlingit and other Northwest Coast groups. Land otters are excellent
swimmers, while the Tlingit were expert canoeists. People and land otters
even captured some of the same fish, although the taxonomic composition
of their assemblages has been shown to differ. Land otters accumulated
shell and bone on terrestrial sites, much like the shell middens left by
people. At places like north tockshelter at Kit’n’Kaboodle, they occupied
the same place, although at different times.
At the point in the nineteenth century when Tlingit hunters and
trappers pursued land otters for their skins as part of the fur trade, the
relationship between Tlingit and land otters became one of predator to
prey. Prior to this, it is hard to characterize the ecological relationship
between Tlingit and land otters. At Kit’n’Kaboodle, only a single juvenile
tooth and a fragmentary land otter phalanx were found in Strata V and
II, respectively. As we have seen in north rockshelter, land otters and
people could occupy the same place on the landscape and fish for some
of the same types of fish, but they were not in direct competition since
they relied on different habitats; while land otters specialized in small
tidepool fish, people took larger fish somewhat further from shore. e
relationship cannot be characterized as mutualistic, in which two species
benefit from their interaction, nor was it commensal, in which one
species benefits and the other is not affected. e relationship between
most Tlingit people and land otters was one of mutual avoidance; people
feared land otters because of their supernatural power, and land otters
generally shy away from people and their settlements.
e spirit of the land otter was sought by shamans so that he (or she)
could use its intense, dangerous, supernatural power to pursue his or
her own goals ( Jonaitis 1986, 90-93). Removal of a land otter’s tongue
was dangerous and empowering to a shaman. e tongue was collected
in a bundle and conserved in a box. e shaman might also wear it on
a twisted spruce root cord as an amulet (Emmons 1991, 373). e land
otter spirit was the most powerful animal spirit a shaman could acquire.
Shamans and land otters shared a preference for rocky promontories, and
their relationship did involve direct interaction. An isolated promontory
or point was the ideal spot for a shaman’s grave and also a favourable spot
for a land otter feeding or latrine site; land-otter-people are sometimes
called “Point People” or Q!atkwedî’ (Swanton 1909, 29). A shaman might
expect to encounter a land otter at such a place.
47
Dall Island Land Otters
In his excellent study of what he calls “the Tlingit land otter complex,”
Barazzuol (1988) examines nineteen Tlingit myths in which land otters
appear. He characterizes the land otter as a “symbolic bridge,” a liminal
being uniting human and animal, adapted to both land and water, as were
the Tlingit themselves (75). e Tlingit had set protocols and many rituals
(including the memorial potlatch) to perform after the normal death of
a person, to ensure that part of his or her spirit would be reincarnated
(Kan 1989). In contrast, the fate of a person who drowned or was lost
in the woods and whose body was never recovered was very disturbing
because the spirits were left adrift and could do harm. Yet, according to
Barazzuol (1988, 99), there was a form of reincarnation that was available
to those who had drowned or been lost: they might become the spirits of
a shaman. is was the way a lost soul could be reintegrated into Tlingit
society. When someone returned (even temporarily) from the land otter
realm, s/he often helped relatives in need by providing devilfish (octopus)
as bait, catching halibut, or spearing seals (e.g., Swanton 1909, 29-33). As
Barazzuol (1988, 101) observes, when a shaman returned from the land
otter realm, s/he was able to use his/her special knowledge of healing.
Further, “the land otters mediated between life and death because it was
from them that the shaman learned to overcome death” (103).
To conclude, the remains of Kit’n’Kaboodle have directed attention to
an animal person (Hill 2013), the land otter, who played a special role in
Tlingit society. Some behaviours of the land otter, particularly fishing and
the accumulation of fish bones and shell, are similar to those of people. I
suggest that Tlingit knowledge of these behaviours and awareness of land
otter activity have contributed to Tlingit ideas about the capacity of land
otters to transform into persons and vice versa. From the framework of
relational ecology, Betts, Hardenberg, and Stirling (2015, 89) have recently
explained “how animals create human history”; certainly knowledge
of land otters is deeply integrated into Tlingit society and ideology. I
hope this article helps other Northwest Coast archaeologists in their
investigations of human-animal relationships encapsulated in sites like
Kit’n’Kaboodle.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Work at 49-dix-46 was supported by the Ketchikan Area of the Tongass
National Forest and the University of Oregon. John Autrey, Jim Baichtal,
Terry Fifield, and Jane Smith arranged logistics and assisted in the field. UO
students in my zooarchaeology course also contributed to this analysis, especially
Marissa Guenther, Felicia Madimenos, and Kevin Turley. Also at the University
of Oregon, Carley Smith worked with Rory Walsh using Gyoung-Ah Lee’s
bc studies
48
microscope to photograph small fish vertebrae to aid in the identifications. e
site map is a modification of a base map drawn by Steve Lewis of the Tongass
Cave Project. Julia Knowles of the Research Division of the Museum of
Natural and Cultural History (UO) drew the profiles. Virginia Butler, Portland
State University; Christyann Darwent, University of California, Davis; and
Katherine Pearson Maslenikov and Robert Faucett, University of Washington,
loaned comparative specimens used in this analysis. It was the work of Susan
Crockford, Pacific Identifications, Inc., that provided the essential data that
allowed identifications of tiny fish bones reported here. Susan also commented
on previous versions of this article. Rebecca Wigen also contributed to this work,
especially during my 2008 visit to the University of Victoria. I thank Philippe
Béarez and Emilie Guillaud for sharing their important research on European
river otter spraints, presented at icaz in San Rafael, Argentina. Finally, I am
grateful to the editors, Alan McMillan and Iain McKechnie, for inviting me
to participate in this special issue of BC Studies. eir constructive comments,
and reviews by two anonymous readers, have improved this article substantially.
REFERENCES
Baichtal, J.F., and D.N. Swanston. 1996. Karst Landscapes and Associated Resources:
A Resource Assessment. Portland, OR, US Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station.
Barazzuol, R. 1988. “The Tlingit Land Otter Complex: Coherence in the Social
and Shamanic Order.” MA thesis, University of British Columbia.
Ben-David, M., G.M. Blundell, J.W. Kern, J.A.K. Maier, E.D. Brown, and S.C.
Jewett. 2005. “Communication in River Otters: Creation of Variable Resource
Sheds for Terrestrial Communities.” Ecology 86 (5): 1331-45.
Ben-David, M., R.T. Bowyer, and J.B. Faro. 1996. “Niche Separation by Mink and
River Otters: Coexistence in a Marine Environment.” Oikos 75: 41-48.
Betts, M.W., M. Hardenberg, and I. Stirling. 2015. “How Animals Create Human
History: Relational Ecology and the Dorset-Polar Bear Connection.” American
Antiquity 80 (1): 89-112.
Carlson, R. 1993. “Over view of Archaeological Resources Associated with Caves
and Rockshelters in Southern Southeastern Alaska.” Paper presented at the
Alaska Anthropological Association Annual Meeting, Anchorage.
Chanin, P. 1985. The Natural History of Otters. London: Croom Helm.
de Laguna, F. 1972. Under Mount Saint Elias: The History and Culture of the Yakutat
Tlingit. Smithsonian Contributions to Anthropology, vol. 7. Washington:
Smithsonian Institution.
Dixon, E.J., T.H. Heaton, T.E. Fifield, T.D. Hamilton, D.E. Putnam, and F.
Grady. 1997. “Late Quaternary Regional Geoarchaeology of Southeast Alaska
Karst: A Progress Report.” Geoarchaeology 12 (6): 689-712.
Driver, J.C. 1992 . “Identification, Classification, and Zooarchaeology.” Circaea
9 (1): 35-47.
Edwards, K. 2009. Dictionary of Tlingit. Juneau, AK: Sealaska Heritage Institute.
49
Dall Island Land Otters
Emmons, G.T. 1991. The Tlingit Indians, edited with additions by Frederica de
Laguna. Seattle/New York: University of Washington Press/American Museum
of Natural History.
Erlandson, J.M., and M.L. Moss. 2001. “Shellfish Feeders, Carrion Eaters, and
the Archaeology of Aquatic Adaptations.” American Antiquity 66 (3): 413-32.
Erlandson, J.M., J.D. Robertson, and C. Descantes. 1999. “Geochemical Analysis
of Eight Red Ochres from Western North America.” American Antiquity 64 :
517-26.
Guillaud, E., P. Béarez, C. Denys, and S. Raimond. 2015. “Taphonomy of a Fish
Accumulation by the European Otter (Lutra lutra) in Central France.” Journal
of Taphonomy (in press).
Heaton, T.H. 2007. “Diverse Avifaunas from Coastal Caves in Southeast Alaska.”
Current Research in the Pleistocene 24: 12-13.
Heaton, T.H., and F. Grady. 2003. “The Late Wisconsin Vertebrate History of
Prince of Wales Island, Southeast Alaska.” In Ice Age Cave Faunas of North
America, ed. B.W. Schubert, J.I. Mead, and R.W. Graham, 17-53. Bloomington:
Indiana University Press.
Hill, E. 2013. “Archaeology and Animal Persons: Toward a Prehistory of Human-
Animal Relations.” Environment and Society: Advances in Research 4: 117-36.
Home, W.S. 1982. “Ecology of River Otters (Lutra canadensis) in Marine Coastal
Environments.” MS thesis, University of Alaska.
Jonaitis, A. 1986. Art of the Northern Tlingit. Seattle: University of Washington Press.
Kan, S. 1989. Symbolic Immortality: The Tlingit Potlatch of the Nineteenth Century.
Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press.
Krause, Aure.l 1979 [1956]. The Tlingit Indians: Results of a Trip to the Northwest
Coast of America and the Bering Straits. University of Washington Press, Seattle.
Krebs, C.J. 1989. Ecological Methodology. New York: Harper and Row.
Larsen, D.N. 1983. “Habitats, Movements, and Foods of River Otters in Coastal
Southeast Alaska.” MS thesis, University of Alaska.
—. 1984. “Feeding Habits of River Otters in Coastal Southeastern Alaska.” Journal
of Wildlife Management 48 (4): 1446-52.
Lepofsky, D., M.L. Moss, and N. Lyons. 2001. “The Unrealized Potential of
Paleoethnobotany in the Archaeology of Northwestern North A merica:
Perspectives from Cape Addington, Alaska.” Arctic Anthropology 38 (1): 48-59.
Love, M. 1996. Probably More Than You Want to Know about the Fishes of the Pacific
Coast. 2nd ed. Santa Barbara, CA: Really Big Press.
McMahan, D. 1985. “Dall Island Project, Paleoethnobotany: Preliminary Results
of Analysis.” Report prepared for D. Reger, Office of History and Archaeology,
Alaska Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation, and C.R. Campbell, usda
Forest Service, Ketchikan. Ms. on file, Office of History and Archaeology,
Anchorage.
Moss, M.L. 2004. Archaeological Investigation of Cape Addington Rockshelter: Human
Occupation of the Rugged Seacoast on the Outer Prince of Wales Archipelago, Alaska.
Eugene: University of Oregon Anthropological Papers 63.
—. 2007. “Haida and Tlingit Use of Seabirds from the Forrester Islands, Southeast
Alaska.” Journal of Ethnobiology 27 (1): 28-45.
bc studies
50
—. 2008. “Outer Coast Maritime Adaptations in Southern Southeast Alaska:
Tlingit or Haida?” Arctic Anthropology 45 (1):41-60.
—. 2012. “Understanding Variability in Northwest Coast Faunal Assemblages:
Beyond Economic Intensification and Cultural Complexity.” Journal of Island
and Coastal Archaeology 7 (1): 1-22.
Moss, M.L., and A. Cannon, eds. 2011. The Archaeology of North Pacific Fisheries.
Fairban ks: Un iversity of A laska Press.
Moss, M.L., and J.M. Erlandson. 2000. “Wolf’s Lair: Middle and Late Holocene
Wooden A rtifac ts from a Sea Ca ve on Ba ker Island , Alaska.” Canadian Journal
of Archaeology 24: 107-28.
—. 2001. “The Archaeology of Obsidian Cove, Suemez Island, Southeast Alaska.”
Arctic Anthropology 38 (1): 27-47.
—. 2010. “Diversity in North Pacific Shellfish Assemblages: The Barnacles of
Kit’n’Kaboodle Cave, Alaska.” Journal of Archaeological Science 37: 3359 -69.
O’Clair, R.M., and C.E. O’Clair. 1998. Southeast Alaska’s Rocky Shores: Animals.
Auke Bay, AK: Plant Press.
Roe, A.M., C.B. Meyer, N.P. Nibbelink, and M. Ben-David. 2010. “Differential
Tree and Shrub Production in Response to Fertilization and Disturbance by
Coastal River Otters in Alaska.” Ecology 91 (11): 3177-88.
Smith, J. 1998. Dall Island Fieldnotes. Manuscript in possession of M.L. Moss,
Department of Anthropology, University of Oregon, Eugene.
Swanton, John R. 1909. Tlingit Myths and Texts. Washington, DC: gpo.
Woolington , J.D. 1984. “Habitat Use and Movements of River Otters at Kelp Bay,
Baranof Island, Alaska.” MS thesis, University of Alaska.
