Introduction

1Fishing is a subsistence activity that is closely linked to the economy and identity of maritime populations in different parts of the world and that even provides greater stability and predictability to the subsistence system. Despite this, we have observed through ethnography that these practices are little mentioned as part of the way of life of the Kawésqar1 or Alakalufes2 canoeros groups who inhabited and sailed the archipelagos of the central and western coast of the Strait of Magellan (52°40'S). This was a nomadic people of marine hunter-gatherers, moving in a territory that reached from the south of the Brecknock peninsula in the south to the Gulf of Penas in the north (Emperaire 1955; Gusinde 1991; Aguilera & Tonko 2013). Its western boundary was the Pacific Ocean and to the east it could reach the Isabel Island approximately, according to ethnographic and archaeological records (Borrero et al. 2019). However, the traditional boundaries of the territories and the interaction between different ethnic groups were constant and with a flexibility that allowed for knowledge transfer and socio-cultural exchange (Borrero & Barberena 2006; Borrero et al. 2011; Martinic 2007). Until the middle of the 20th century, the Kawésqar still maintained part of their nomadic way of life; their main subsistence activity was the collection of molluscs, especially mussels (Aulacomya atra) and crustaceans, and the hunting of pinnipeds and birds. They spent much of their time travelling around the islands in search of their food (Gusinde 1991: 293). The women harvested the molluscs and even dived to collect them, as quoted by Emperaire (1955: 198):

Mais le mode habituel de pêche pour les oursins comme pour les cholgas est la plongée. Les coquillages les plus gros et les plus savoureux sont toujours à une profondeur voisine de 7 ou 8 mètres et au-delà, et ils ne sont accessibles par aucun autre moyen […].

2Women were also responsible for maintaining and running the canoes. Initially, the boats were made of tree barks (coigüe, Nothofagus betuloides), but later, as a result of interaction with groups of navigators originating from Northern Patagonia (Chilotes), they began to build canoes made of planks sewn together with vegetable fibbers (Gusinde 1991; Medina 1984). These changes in navigation techniques and subsistence were gradual and can already be distinguished in previous centuries.

Changing lifestyles in historical times

3Since the first encounters between South American canoeros (canoe-people) and European navigators in the 16th century, gradual changes have been generated in the nomadic way of life of the Kawésqar populations. Particularly in the central zone of the Strait of Magellan, travellers and explorers wander for geopolitical reasons, and for hydrographic and scientific studies (e.g. Bougainville 2004; Duplessis 1699-1701; Fitz Roy 2009; Martinic 1999; Martinic & Moore 1982; Parker-King 1939), producing knowledge exchange and occasional coexistence with the nomadic canoeros. It is undeniable that the most radical transformations in their socio-cultural system of canoeists intensified between the 18th and 19th centuries, mainly due to contact with British, North American, and Chilote pinniped hunters who commercialized the skin of fur seal (Arctocephalus australis) and sea lion (Otaria flavescens) that led almost to the extinction of the first one (Mayorga 2010, 2016). In this context, different cultures of navigators converged in the archipelagos and on the navigation routes; at the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century, religious missions and the influence of Chilean sovereignty in the territory ended up modifying the canoeros way of life (Aguilera & Tonko 2013; Emperaire 1955; Gusinde 1991). Today there are descendants Kawésqar who live in Puerto Eden, on Wellington Island, and in other areas of the region (Aguilera & Tonko 2013; Emperaire 1955; Vega-Delgado 1995).

4Knowing the complexity of such changing processes, many of the written accounts and descriptions referring to fishing practices or techniques and consumption preferences, could be based on transformed cultural practices, especially since the end of the 18th century, or could be information specific to some groups that have already acquired foreign cultural elements (Mayorga 2020).

Archipelagic environmental context

5Currently, the marine and coastal environments of the Strait of Magellan have very varied characteristics depending on the sector of this marine passage (western, central or eastern). In the western and central sectors of the Strait, the coast and the seabed are more rugged, forming fjords, isthmus, channels, islands and inland seas, as well as having greater depth. In this context, marine productivity and thus fish communities are influenced by the Subantarctic Waters from the Pacific, especially in the western sector, in addition to the seasonal contribution of thaw in some sectors. The central basin, is filled with estuarine water that is the result of the mixture with fresh water, coming from the western basin, which move towards the east overflowing the Charles III island constriction and sinking into the central basin and filling it, because of its higher density (Rosenfeld et al. 2018). The entire central micro-basin column is composed of saline estuarine water and average salinity values of 30.8 psu and average temperature of 7 °C (Valdenegro & Silva 2003). In contrast, the eastern basin of the Strait is shallower, has a less rugged topography and is more influenced by the Atlantic Ocean, among other characteristics, which has an impact on coastal fish communities and, indeed, on the types of fisheries that may have been developed in the past and at present. In any case, it is necessary to consider, especially in this region, that coastal environments are heterogeneous and change at short distances (Benedetti-Cecchi & Cinelli 1997), which influences the distribution of resources depending on the oceanographic dynamics of each sector (e.g., salinity, sea surface temperature, bathymetry, currents, fresh water, glaciers).

6From a paleoenvironmental perspective, in the western part of the Strait of Magellan a pronounced cooling of 2.5°C lasting from 5400 to 4700 years cal BP occurred (Caniupán et al. 2014). Between 600 and 250 years cal BP, a small cooling period (1-2°C) of the SST (sea surface temperature) occurred on a large scale and is recorded in all fjords and seas of the Chilean continental coast (Caniupán et al. 2014). Primary productivity from the central basin of the Strait of Magellan displayed a sharp decline between 3000 and 2200 years cal BP, with a reduction in salinity due to a period of intense freshwater supply, probably caused by higher rainfall and glacial advance. After this period, productivity recovered quickly (Aracena et al. 2015).

Fishing activity before the first encounters with European sailors: The ichthyo-archaeological evidence

7The chronocultural sequence of prehistoric canoeros occupations extends back to nearly 6,500 uncal years BP in the Strait of Magellan and Otway Sound (San Román et al. 2016). In the first four thousand years of the archaeological sequence, fishing practices change radically in relation to the last 1,500 years, initially concentrating on demersal3 species, which can currently be caught from the coast, however, they are abundant and concentrated at greater depths (Torres 2016). Subsequently, as we will describe later, the ichthyo-archaeological evidence changes, with an increase in diversity, and the exploitation of species that can be found commonly today on the coast predominates.

8In this paper we present the study of 4 representative fishing sites from the last 1,500 uncal years BP in the Strait of Magellan, located in insular and continental coastal contexts (figure 16.1).

Figure 16.1

9Excavations of these archaeological deposits are extensive, except for the Tilly East site. In all cases, all ichthyo-archaeological evidence found in situ during screening was collected.

10The Tilly-east site is located on Carlos III Island, in the central part of the Strait of Magellan, right in a sector where there is a significant change in oceanographic conditions: the influence of the Pacific Ocean is more direct, there are melting areas and the bathymetry increases in depth, among other conditions. At present it is a place of important concentration of biodiversity and high marine productivity, represented by the aggregation of fauna such as sea birds, marine mammals and, among these, humpback whales. The site has a date of 1,190±80 uncal BP (Beta 210756-carbon) and a more recent date of 410±40 uncal BP (Beta 210757-carbon) (Morello et al. 2008).

11Another island site is Offing 2-locus 2 (low terrace) on Offing Islet, opposite Dawson Island. It is dated 1,450±40 (Beta 241369-shell) at its base and 1,240±50 uncal BP at the top of the shell mound (Beta 241368-shell) (San Román et al. 20154). On the continental and central coast of the Strait of Magellan, closer to the eastern environmental conditions, is the site Punta Santa Ana 3, dated 1,305±30 (Gif-12256-shell) and 715±40 uncal BP (Gif-12224-carbon) (San Román et al. 2009, Morello et al. 2012). Finally, the Rinconada Bulnes 2 site is also located in the Brunswick peninsula, but closer to the eastern sector of the Magellan's strait, with dates of 1,600±30 (AMS, Beta-316352-carbon) and 620±30 uncal BP (AMS, Beta 316351- guanaco bone) (San Román et al. 2012).

12A total of 22,539 fish remains were analyzed. Of these, 12,876 were taxonomically identified. Other 584 are taxonomically unidentified elements and finally 9,079 are fragments5 (tables 16.1 and 16.2).

Fish exploitation in kelp forests and estuarine environments in the last 1,500 years

13Demersal fishing is almost absent in the settlements in the last 1,500 years, especially tadpole codling (Salilota australis) which dominates the fishing in earlier periods (Torres 2016). On the other hand, in these sites the most caught fish are those that inhabit coastal environments, such as kelp forests and estuarine waters (figure 16.1-16.3). Despite this trend, the diversity and importance of fish varies according to the coastal environment near each camp site, such is the case of Tilly East where the most abundant fish are small notothens (Paranotothenia magellanica and Patagonotothen sp.), which can be caught in the intertidal zone or in the rocky subtidal and the kelp forests (figure 16.2). This is repeated in Offing 2-locus 2 where the fishing is focused on notothens and channel bull blennies (Cottoperca gobio) that also live in the kelp forests. In these sites, no fishing artifact is present, at least not with a clearly established function. At present, small-scale fisheries concentrate on demersal species such as cusk-eel, hake and rockfish, which are found at greater depths and must be caught with longline or gill nets.

Figure 16.2

14In the sites of the Brunswick Peninsula, the change in diversity is notorious compared to the island sites, probably due to the more direct influence of environmental conditions of the continent. In these sites, fishing was concentrated on Patagonian blenny (Eleginops maclovinus) and silverside (Odontesthes sp.). In Punta Santa Ana 3 the presence of large Patagonian blennies, between 45 and 55 cm of standard length (SL) and an estimated body mass between 1.5 and 2.5 kg, stands out (Torres 2016). The capture of these large specimens must have been done through a specific fishing technique or technology (net or fishing line), however, no type of device was found to be associated with this activity, except a possible net weight (Morello et al. 2012).

15At present, these species are fished from the shore, especially Patagonian blenny, using nets in different areas of the Strait of Magellan. Light boats are also used to set the nets and drag them from the shore. The species less represented in the sites such as tadpole codling, cusk-eel and rockfish, which are predominant in the older sites, are currently caught at greater depths and mainly in the central and western basins of the Strait of Magellan.

16In general, Patagonian blenny is the most conspicuous species in the continental coastal sites of the region. For example, at Skyring (figure 16.1), there are sites with chronologies from the last 2000 years, in which only Patagonian blenny remains have been identified (Legoupil 2000). Also, at Punta Baja 1 indigenous-historic site in Otway Sound, fish remains are composed almost entirely of Patagonian blenny (Gayet 1989). There is a fishweir near this site, which suggests that it may be associated with the camp's fishing activity (Legoupil 1989).

17Very different from these contexts is the Rinconada Bulnes 2 site, where there is an absolute predominance of Patagonian grenadier, which we will discuss in later paragraphs.

Figure 16.3

18If we consider the set of vertebrate fauna, i.e. fish, birds and mammals, the density and especially the relative abundance of fish is lower than in the previous period (3,500-2,200 years uncal BP), in which sea birds, especially cormorants, and demersal fish dominated the assemblages, being marine mammals scarce, at least in the sites of the central area of the Strait of Magellan (Torres 2016). In the archaeological sites of the last thousand years, the exploitation of different taxa is more balanced, although the high density of fish remains in insular sites stands out (figure 16.4, table 16.3), which can be interpreted as a greater intensity of fishing activity in these environments. However, the most representative species (notothens) of the sites are small, which means that they are not of great nutritional value in comparison to birds and marine mammals.

Figure 16.4

Fishing or making the most of natural stranding events?

19This question arises mainly for the Rinconada Bulnes 2 site, due to the abundance of Patagonian grenadier in this site. This species is pelagic in its juvenile phase and demersal in its adult state. In summer, individuals move in large schools in search of food (small herrings), so it is common to see approaches to the coast and even strandings during the summer in certain sectors of the region. Such is the case at Punta Carrera, located only 40 meters from the Rinconada Bulnes sites, hence it is possible that indigenous groups have taken advantage of these strandings in the past. An argument to support that this is a cultural deposit and not a natural event without human intervention, is the spatial distribution of the fish remains (over 91 m²), which is centralized in the area of the shell midden, but mixed with lithic industry and mammal and bird remains (San Román et al. 2012). In the case of a natural deposit, the remains would be randomly distributed in all excavated units, even those without cultural materials. In the case of Tilly East, the site is located on a high slope and with a marked slope so it is unlikely that a stranding has reached this area. Also, in a deep level of the shell midden was found a supracleithrum6 of Patagonian grenadier with cut marks.

Fishing in historical times according to chronicles, ethnography and archaeological data

20There are very few and very succinct accounts describing the fishing activity of the Kawésqar canoeros groups, but the descriptions of the fishing gear of the Yaghan are more numerous and point out in greater detail aspects of their manufacture and their use. It should be noted that there was a constant interaction between both groups, so many of the fishing techniques could be transmitted and shared, equally with land-based hunters-gatherers from Tierra del Fuego and the continent.

21In the case of the Kawésqar society, accounts of their way of life in the early and mid 20th century point to the little importance of fishing. Emperaire (1955) indicates that fishing contributed an insignificant part of the diet, but he was referring to the community that lived in Puerto Edén (Wellington Island) that lived together with people from the Chiloé Archipelago, many of Williche origin, who arrived in this region for pinniped hunting (Aguilera & Tonko 2013). He also points out that unexpected events, such as when a shoal of herrings washes up on the beach, are taken advantage of, which in some ways supports the archaeological observations at the site of Rinconada Bulnes 2.

22On the other hand, Emperaire (1955: 140) points out that on the same island there are archaeological sites with layers formed by the remains of large fish that must have corresponded to a period of time with a different climate than the present one. This was later corroborated by the study of sites from the last 1,000 years where remains of fish were found, such as the jack mackerel (Trachurus murphyi) (Curry 1999), and the snoek (Thyrsites atun) (San Román & Morello 2007), which are currently absent in these inland waters with low salinity.

23Although the low importance of fishing for subsistence is generally mentioned, it is common to find the quotation of the Patagonian blenny in the ethnographic literature. Gusinde (1991: 307) mentions:

In some places, the Kawésqar fished for big Patagonian blennies measuring between 30 and 40 cm in length, which either the man or the woman would string with the fishing spear from the canoe. Other species of small fish were not considered by our Fuegians.

24An older mention by Fitz Roy (2009: 609), contradicts this last point, although it is not clear if he is talking about Yaghan or Kawésqar:

[…] in winter they retreat to inland waters in search of seafood and the small but abundant and excellent fish they obtain from the cochayuyos […].

25Among the oldest accounts of the role of fishing are those of Antonio de Córdova in 1785-86, who points out that in Puerto Gallant, which is an important anchorage in the Strait of Magellan, the inhabitants gave greater importance to fishing than to hunting, although the form of fishing was unknown (Gusinde 1991: 51). Precisely in this sector there are at least 4 fishweirs located in different parts (Floore et al. 1999), so if A. de Córdova did not see them, it is likely that they were built later.

26Among the indigenous-historic archaeological sites, there is the Punta Baja 1 site, south of the Otway Sea (Legoupil 1989). It was an 18th century Kawésqar camp where pinniped and bird hunting was the main activity and to a lesser extent fishing (among the materials found there are also glass and metal). This was the first site where fishing activity could be archaeologically determined, particularly the capture of Patagonian blenny (Gayet 1989). A stone fishweir can be seen near the site, but it is not known if it is related to the same camp. Similarly, in other inland seas such as the Skyring sound, solely evidence of Patagonian blenny fishing has been identified at recent archaeological sites (Legoupil 2000).

27Finally, in areas more open to the influence of the Pacific Ocean and in insular environments of the Strait of Magellan, the diversity changes. There are several historical indigenous sites with the presence of fish remains, and although evidence is very scarce, intertidal species such as eelpout and channel bull blenny are represented on Santa Ines Island sites (Morello et al. 2008).

Use of mass capture techniques: Fishing nets

28There are doubts as to whether the use of nets by canoeros in the Strait of Magellan is prior or posterior to contact with Europeans or Chilotes who introduced new techniques and materials for subsistence and navigation technology.

29One of the oldest testimonies about the use of nets is that of Pedro Sarmiento de Gamboa in his trip to the Strait of Magellan in 1579-1580, he mentions that some of the crew members found baskets with fish, nets, bone points and baskets full of red soil in a small hut (Gusinde 1991: 27). Another ancient account refers to nets made of gut that were used by the natives of the western part of the Strait of Magellan for hunting birds and fishing (Duplessis 1699-1701: 153). And in the late 18th century, Byron observed two natives using a net, including the use of dogs to push fish into the net (cited in Bird 1946: 62). However, A. de Córdova, in the 18th century, mentions that although fishing was important to the Kawésqar of the western Magellan Strait, they did not use hooks or nets (Gusinde 1991: 51). Later, Bridges (1999: 155), in the late 1800s, makes a very brief reference to the use of nets by the Kawésqar, pointing out that they are similar to those used by terrestrial hunter-gatherers in Tierra del Fuego, which were made of tendons, with a uniform mesh size and knotting similar to European nets. Other authors from the mid-20th century indicate that the nets were no longer used at that time or that the existence of fishing nets among the Kawésqar is not mentioned anywhere (Bird 1946: 62; Emperaire 1955: 162).

30Nevertheless, references to the use of nets is much more recurrent for terrestrial hunters in Tierra del Fuego, both in ethnography (Gusinde 1982; Gallardo 1998) and in museum ethnographic collections (Torres 2014).

Fishing spears

31We will not detail the techno-typological and functional differences in the great variety of “bone points”, most of which were intended for hunting marine mammals, which is not the central theme of our work. We will focus on the fixed and multi-barbed points that were mainly used, according to ethno-historical sources, for fishing and also for hunting birds (table 16.4 and figure 16.5). Although these technologies are well described in ethnography, there are few specimens found in recent archaeological sites and none from our study sites.

Figure 16.5

32These points, unlike the detachable base harpoon used for catching marine mammals, are attached to the shaft and can be thrown or held steady in the hand of the fisherman or hunter. They have multiple barbs on one side or sometimes on both sides, and have a simple and elongated base. Their use is generally associated with bird hunting and, to a lesser extent, fishing, but authors emphasize one or the other activity. Emperaire (1955) reports that Kawésqar use different points for each activity: the fish point is thin and long, and has a single row of barbs. Gusinde (1991) previously noted something similar, mentioning that the long saw-like point is used for the fish. Finally, in some texts they indicate that the small points were used for otter hunting, while the larger points were for both fishing and bird hunting, and even, with bilateral barbs, for the huemul or south Andean deer (Laming-Emperaire 1972).

33Within the descriptions of the form of use of this technology, J. Byron in the 18th century points out that the Kawésqar “[...] spear fish several meters under water” (Byron 1768 cited in Emperaire 1955: 198). In the case of the Yaghan groups, some detailed accounts indicate the difficulties and technical skill required for fishing. Bridges (2000: 93) points out:

[…] one thing we could never do was to spear the fish in the water. Many times I rowed while the Yaghan, standing on the bow with his harpoon in his hand, followed the ripple produced by the fish swimming a good distance from the surface; when the spear hit the water, the refraction made me think that it inevitably failed, but the fish was there, as big as a salmon, pierced and struggling at the tip of the spear, without any luck.

34The Yaghan also use these weapons from the edge of the coast and capture the eelpouts -tukupi- that are found among the pebbles when the tide goes out. Indirectly, they are noted to be non-detachable head points, as they are compared to detachable bone points of more than forty centimetres for hunting larger prey, such as pinnipeds, porpoises or small whales (Bridges 2000).

35Some of these points were part of a composite piece, as one or more points could be adjusted to form a trident. To assemble this three-pronged spear, a small notch was made in the shaft to insert one of the tips, while another was simply set laterally and fixed with string (figure 16.5A-B) (Lothrop 1928). Gusinde (1986) also makes this distinction, considering that the fish trident is made of a lightweight shaft with one or two notches to hold as many multi-barbed points as desired. Hyades and Deniker (1981) report on the use of two barbed points attached to a shaft to catch large fish. The similarity of Gusinde (1986) and Lothrop (1928) weapon illustrations to those of Hyades and Deniker (1891) suggests that the formers were based on the latter, as they are 40 years older.

36Another important functional observation about these trident or sometimes bident spears, concerns the position of the barbs. In the ethnographic cases examined, they are outwardly oriented, while most of the spears used by fishermen from over the world are inwardly oriented (Von Brandt 1984). Similarly, the piece illustrated by Bove (2005) presents mono-barbed points attached to a pole (figure 16.5C), however one of the tips has its barb facing inwards while the other is facing outwards.

37The use of this technology by the Kawésqar seems to have been in use until recent times, particularly in Puerto Edén, where inhabitants remember using it not so long ago (Emperaire 1955).

Did the canoeros use fishing line or hook?

38Rare are the descriptions that mention the use of fishing lines by the Kawésqar. Emperaire (1955: 207) and Gusinde (1991: 306) mention it based on chronicles and ancient accounts, however, they agree that in their time this practice had been abandoned.

39Emperaire describes a distinct method, based on the accounts of the Santa María de la Cabeza expedition (Emperaire 1955: 208):

[…] when they go out in the canoe, they take some pointed sticks with which they kill them (the fish), putting at the end of the stick a “bait” that hangs from a piece of rope

40Another story by the same author, describes the use of a technique that replaces the hook (Emperaire 1955):

They attach a small limpet in its shell at the end of a line. The fish swallows the bait, and the angler then takes great care to slowly pull the fish to the surface of the water without letting it release its prey. The woman waits for the right moment, and with great dexterity, while she holds the fish at the end of the line with one hand, with the other she catches it and throws it energetically into the canoe.

41Moreover, although there are no precise data, Bird (1946: 62) observed natives with twisted tendons that could be used for fishing.

42As for the use of hooks, it seems that there was some confusion in the name of a technique that the Fuegians7 used for fishing: they only used sliding knots and bait as “hook”. For example, Gusinde (1991: 306) mentions that in some calm waters the Kawésqar fished with hooks, although later in the same paragraph he points out that “real hooks” were never seen in their waters. He may have observed the use of a fishing line with sliding knot, as he supports his comment with a reference from Bird (1946: 62), who says that by showing the natives the drawing of a hook made by Lothrop (figure 16.5I), they immediately recognized it as a fishing line, so that it would not be a hook that would catch the fish. Later on, the Kawésqar used the European hook or manufactured their own hooks with nails (Gusinde 1991: 306).

43In the case of the Yaghan, there is more detailed information about this technology; they used lines made of different materials, such as long pieces of algae (Macrocystis pyrifera). They rolled them up while they were still wet, and once they were almost dry, they used them as a line, which once immersed in water recovered its flexibility. These lines could measure several meters in length and were so strong that they were difficult to break; they could support up to 0.5 kg (Hyades & Deniker 1891: 371). Gusinde (1986: 532) also reports that this line was difficult to break, unless the fish was of medium size; and if they wanted to catch big fish, they used twisted tendon lines. Hyades and Deniker (1891: 371) mention that twisted whale tendon line was used, while seaweed lines would have been used only in emergencies. The line could have been between three and three and a half meters long (Lothrop 1928: 159). Similarly, Gusinde (1986: 529) says that there are two types of lines: one made of seaweed, about the thickness of a pencil, and another made of twisted guanaco tendons. The second was stronger than the first and could measure up to eight meters or more. A sinker was used only for the latter, the only one that could support the weight of the sinker (Gusinde 1986). Another less used material was the women's hair, which they twisted and to which they hung a small, perfectly round stone at one end, next to the bait (Bridges 2000: 94).

44The Yaghan did not use hooks either, and the mention of some authors may be due to confusion. For example, Bridges (2000: 94-95) refers to the use of the fishing rode and hook, but when describing them he only mentions the presence of bait and sinker. About these last two elements there are descriptions that indicate that at the end of the line the Yaghan used a piece of albatross, goose or wild duck feather, forming a loop, and at the sliding knot they fix the bait, which is a piece of shellfish or fish (Martial et al. 2007: 109) (figure 16.5G-H). Gusinde makes a similar observation, indicating that they fix the bait, which is a piece of shellfish or fish, in the knot (Gusinde 1986: 529):

The rope is wrapped around the stone and fixed so that its end hangs in the water, a few centimeters from the stone. At the end of the rope is a knot to which is attached the fibre of a strong rod of bird's feather about ten centimetres long and four centimetres wide. This feather is topped by a running knot containing the bait, often a piece of meat the size of a cherry.

45As for the bait, Bridges (2000: 95) also mentions the use of small fish tails.

46In general, the stories of the Kawésqar and Yaghan agree on one point: it is the women who use this fishing technique. For example, among the Kawésqar (Emperaire 1955: 208):

[…] Women are very expert in this fishing method and we had fun watching them more than once […]

47In the case of the Yaghan (Martial et al. 2007: 108):

Women are extraordinarily skilled in this type of fishing and this has often been noted in Orange Bay where they catch large quantities of beautiful fish […]

48Gusinde (1986) and Bridges (2000) also mention that this type of fishing is exclusively used by Yaghan women.

The use of stone sinkers for fishing lines

49Bridges (2000: 94-95) claims he never saw the Yaghan making fishing weights, nor even heard of them being made in his time (table 16.5). He deduces that previous generations of natives had left such large numbers of them in abandoned huts that it was not necessary to repeat the considerable amount of work involved in making these artifacts. Generally, natural round stones were chosen and the only modification made was the making of two side notches to allow for the fixing. However, Lothrop (1928) and Gusinde (1986) illustrate fishing lines with square, flat weights, sometimes with only one notch, reflecting their typological variations in both size and shape (figure 16.5 and table 16.5). Other authors point out that there is nothing special about the stone sinker (Hyades & Deniker 1891) or that any stone can be used, as long as it has a flat side, irregular edges and is at least 3 cm long (Gusinde 1986). The same author details the process of modifying the stone (Gusinde 1986: 530):

Sometimes the woman models the weight... by flattening it on one side, rounding the edges and making a small notch for the line.

50It is important to note that the line did not always have sinker; Gusinde (1986) writes that the Yaghan used weights only for lines made of tendons or when the bait was intended to be immerged deeper in the water. Consequently, in the case that sinkers have not been an unavoidable requirement, it would be difficult to determine reliably the use or disuse of the fishing lines in the prehistory of the region.

Pre-contact archaeological evidence of the use of line sinkers

51In the late archaeological sites of the last 1,500 years, the types of stone weights possibly used for fishing are scarce and variable. This contrasts with the early canoeros weights that had greater typological standardization (i.e. oval or ellipsoidal shapes with semi-grooves or notches on the longest axis of the piece and with an average weight between 200-400 g), besides being more abundant in sites with occupations dated from 6,500 years BP (Torres & Ruz 2011; Legoupil 1997; Emperaire & Laming 1961). In the late occupations the sinkers have variable dimensions (i.e. flat, ovoid or ellipsoidal shapes and with weights between 200-700 g), but on average they tend to be smaller than those used previously; in addition, the groove or notch may be on one side or at the longest end of the piece, unlike the older ones where the groove was mostly on the longest axis of the piece. On the continental coast of the Strait, the Rinconada Bulnes 2 site, the pebbles have a transversal groove and are associated with the remains of Patagonian grenadier and Patagonian blenny as we have seen in previous paragraphs. It should be noted that in general, in the late sites stone weights are scarce or have been found isolated on beaches or marine terraces.

Passive fishing gears: fishweirs

52They are structures formed by accumulations of rocks or pebbles from the shore itself, but in the case of sandy or muddy beaches, materials are transported from further away.

53They form dikes or small walls that allow the entry of water and fish during high tide and prevent the return of fish to the sea during low tide ebb current. Fish trapped in the fishweir can thus be caught without difficulty. According to observations on Chiloé, there are different types of fishweirs and construction techniques (Álvarez et al. 2008), and several other kind of materials can be used to complement the construction such as wooden stakes, intertwined branches or nets. The main conditions necessary for their functioning are the great amplitude of the tide, the gentle slope of the coastal edge and the fact that they are located in an area of aggregation of fish schools when the tide is high. In the Fuegian and Southern Patagonian archipelagos, these structures also depend to a great extent on the local geomorphology. For example, there are isolated corrals on open beaches, which generally have a semicircular or subquadrangular shape (figure 16.6, above); there are linear stone structures in tidal channels, in marshy areas, in small bays, in bog drains (figure 16.6, below) and at stream mouths. There are also more complex systems composed of multiple structures on open beaches, however these are more common in the northern archipelagos of Patagonia (Alvarez et al. 2008).

54The chronological and cultural affiliation of this fish catching method is problematic, since they are built in spaces of constant interaction, in this case, between indigenous canoeros, land hunters-gatherers, navigators, Chilotes, mestizos, creoles and foreigners who travel the southern seas since the sixteenth century. Emperaire (1955: 207-208) refers to the use of this technology by the Kawésqar:

[…] in the gently sloping inlets where a river flows, we find the remains of old fishweirs consisting of stone walls that completely block the entrance. This type of permanent dike is not very high, about thirty centimeters at most; it must be largely covered by the high tide so that the fish can comfortably enter the dike it forms and be retained there as it drains.

55As for the construction technique, these low walls would have been built on the shore, four meters above the low tide line and with stones available on the shore (Vega-Delgado 1995). Finally, the closure of the fishing area would have been secured with a pinniped skin stretched between two poles and forming a door, and with stones piled up at the bottom so that the fish would not escape (Vega-Delgado 1995). According to A. de Córdova, other building materials could be used (Gusinde 1991: 306-307):

[…] we only notice that at low tide they drove very sharp wooden stakes in the ground in different places along the coast, so that fish ponds were formed […].

56However, the author points out that he has never seen these structures used and does not know if people actually catch fish in this way.

Figure 16.6

57As for the intensity and productivity that the use of this technique allows, it is observed that both the Yaghan and the Kawéskar in the historical period captured a very large number of fish (Bridges 2000), between sixty and seventy prey (Vega-Delgado 1995), up to 500 Patagonian blennies (Emperaire 1955: 208). However, it seems that this was not frequent (Vega-Delgado 1995). In any case, Emperaire (1955) points out that when he observed the use of this technique, that is, in the mid-20th century, it was only practiced by the few families that still led a nomadic life. The most consumed fish were the Patagonian blennies and to a lesser extent the silversides (Emperaire 1955; Vega-Delgado 1995).

58It is interesting to note that both Bridges (2000) and Emperaire (1955), at about the same time, agreed that these were old dams, built by the predecessors of their indigenous informants. However, the present inhabitants of Porvenir, in the northwest of Tierra del Fuego, point out that these fishing corrals were built and used until the 1960s by the chilotes who arrived from the northern Patagonian archipelagos to the Fuegian archipelago for livestock, forestry and other economic activities.

59It is therefore complex to establish the origin and period of use of this fishing technique, as it is difficult to find elements of dating in these structures, in addition to the difficulties of establishing a link with archaeological occupations. Despite this, there are some indirect chronological elements that indicate that this is a rather recent technique because a large part of these structures are still in the intertidal zone, where the tidal amplitude can allow fish to be caught. If we consider the fluctuations of the sea level along the Holocene, they could not have been more than 4,000 years ago since the sea level was above the current level. Taking into account the ichthyo-archaeological evidence of the sites, only late occupations suggest that fish such as Patagonian blenny and silverside could have been caught along the coast with these structures, since fish living in rocky substrate with kelp forests are not compatible with this fishing technique. Finally, it is likely that many of these structures are of Chiloé origin; however, it cannot be excluded that indigenous Fuegian populations may have built them earlier. They could also very well have been reused and modified over time by different groups, and therefore shared among the Fuegian and Patagonian canoeros groups, Chilotes, and perhaps also by Europeans.

Discussion and conclusion

60The extensive strip of archipelagos that borders western Patagonia constitutes a continuous territory where different marine nomadic groups have been circulating since prehistoric times, exchanging knowledge about the sea and its resources. This became more complex with the arrival of other foreign cultural agents, but having a maritime identity must have helped the reciprocal transfer of knowledge. In this context it is expected that in societies with strong roots in the sea, fishing played a predominant role in their economy and culture. However, the ethno-historical sources that describe the Kawésqar show that this activity had little importance at least in historical period, this contrasts with the information about the Yaghan canoeros groups that lived south of the Strait of Magellan.

61Even so, and in a general way, the diversity of fishing practices used by the Patagonian and Fuegian canoeros groups can be appreciated and it is likely that many of these practices have been abandoned at the time of contact, among other changes in the way of life. On the other hand, there are also fishing techniques that could have been incorporated in historical times as a result of this interaction with foreign groups, for example the circulation of European sailing expeditions and especially foreign and Chilote pinniped hunters since the eighteenth century and later Chiloé population for livestock and forestry. This is the case of the fishweirs that are characteristic of the northern archipelagos of Patagonia. Although it is probable that this was also a technique used by the Fuegian and Southern Patagonian canoeros, it could have been expanded during the aforementioned migrations.

62Considering this point, we can interpret the ethnographic information about fishing in the 19th and 20th centuries as a reflection of the irreversible transformation of the original cultures of this region, but much of this information comes from groups with the greatest Western contact (e.g. Puerto Eden, Beagle Channel, and Strait of Magellan). This is why archaeological information on fishing in pre-contact sites differs from ethno-historical sources and also from evidence of fishing from indigenous-historical sites. In this way, the scarce importance given to fishing and the low diversity of species mentioned in the historical sources, is consistent with the scarcity of ichthyo-archaeological vestiges in the archaeological contact sites, so that their scarcity is not necessarily attributable to their low preservation, but rather to their low consumption.

63On the other hand, the results of the historical pre-contact sites, although there are not many sites, and that for the moment it is not something that can be generalized, still give a different picture of the contact period. In these previous occupations, fishing was an important and diversified activity, although always centered on fish from nearshore environments, kelp forests or river mouths. In addition, there are differences in the diversity of fish caught, depending on whether it is an island context or the continental coast. In the case of island settlements, fishing is focused on rocky environments and kelp forests; compared to the abundance of marine mammals and birds, fish played a significant role, considering the density of remains found in excavations. However, the fish caught are mainly small notothens with low biomass contribution, so it is not comparable to the contribution of consumed sea birds and less to that of mammals. On the other hand, in the sites of the continental coast the fishing presented greater contribution in biomass, since the Patagonian blenny and the Patagonian grenadier are species of greater size, besides having a similar representativeness to the birds and greater to the rest of mammals.

64With respect to fishing technology, in the Strait of Magellan, this evidence is scarce in the archaeological sites studied pre-contact (from the last thousand years), with ichthyo-archaeological remains. However, according to the reviews about the Kawésqar and especially the Yaghan groups, it is possible that many of these evidences have not left an archaeological record, for example, the use of fishing lines, which did not even require weights or in the case of requiring them, they did not need further training. In addition, it is possible that the multi-barboured tips have been preserved and transported because of their greater investment of energy in manufacture.

65Finally, it is necessary to consider the marine palaeoecological dynamics during the late Holocene. During the last 2000 years, there are significant environmental fluctuations in this archipelagic region (Bertrand et al. 2017; Aracena et al. 2015; Caniupán et al. 2014), which could undoubtedly impact the subsistence, mobility and settlement system. Regarding the fishing, it is necessary to consider these factors since the fjords and inland seas inhabited by canoeists were permanently influenced by changes in oceanographic conditions. This is evident for the last 1000 years, if we consider for example the palaeoecological and archaeological studies in the Seno Skyring (Kilian et al. 2007; Legoupil 2000) and the ichthyo-archaeological evidence found in the Puerto Eden area (San Román & Morello 2007; Curry 1999).

Funding

66This work was carried out with­in the framework of the Program of de National Research and Development Agency of the Chilean state (PAI-ANID 77170027)  “Historical trajectories of the last 2000 years in insular Magallanes: An integrated approach from archaeology, coastal paleoecology and intertidal cultural heritage” and the research project FONDECYT 1085329 (Chile).

Acknowledgements

67We are grateful for the collaboration of the Instituto de la Patagonia, Universidad de Magallanes, the laboratory Ethnologie préhistorique UMR 7041, especially to Dominique Legoupil and Marianne Christensen, and the UMR AASPE, MNHN, Paris.