trampas de pesca - fish traps of Bahía Culebra, costa rica

By Anayensy Herrera Villalobos and Felipe Solís Del Vecchio

Ancestral Connections & Geographic Extent Temporal Extent Biophysical Manipulations Target Species Ceremony & Stewardship Current Status

The first inhabitants of Bahia Culebra, Costa Rica were likely speakers of the Chibchan linguistic family which was spoken in the southern part of Central America (Constenla 1991). From 800 AD on, Mesoamerican migrants, possibly speaking an Otomanguean language, may have moved into the region (Solís y Herrera 2011; Ibarra 2014). This movement coincides in part with a population increase, change in funerary customs, and the introduction of new technologies (Lange 1984). Studies of shell middens indicate that prior to 500 AD people used a greater variety and quantity of marine and coastal species (Kerbis 1980; Gutiérrez 1998). Fish traps were one of the technological innovations that may have made this increased diversity possible.

The lands around Bahía Culebra are now in a tourism concession zone overseen by the Costa Rican State. Diverse tourism projects have been developing since 1990. Archeological resources, including the fish traps of Bahía Culebra, are in the public domain, and their management is regulated through various republic or state laws. The fish traps of Bahía Culebra are no longer being used and this ancient fishing technique is completely unknown to today’s local fishermen.

The  Bahía Culebra traps are associated spatially with settlements dedicated in part to fishing and the collection of mollusks. These settlements reached their maximum circa 1000 AD.

The fish traps at Bahía Culebra may have been used initially around 900/1000 AD (Gutiérrez 1998; Vázquez et al. 2019). Constructing the fish traps must have been a slow process, in that more structures were added in the contiguous spaces available. The fish traps must have been constructed slowly over many years, given the amount of labor required for each, as more were added in the intervening spaces available. Their use must have ended in the fifteenth century, when the zone was abandoned (Solís and Herrera 2018).

Twenty-seven traps were constructed on five beaches around the bay, generally sheltered from the waves (Vázquez et al. 2019). The beaches have rocky outcrops of volcanic origin and rocks dispersed in angular and rounded blocks throughout. To construct the traps, rocks were moved short distances and placed to form walls in the shape of arcs in the high intertidal zone.

Zooarchaeological analyses of the middens indicate that most of the species in the shell-middens of nearby settlements could be fished within the bay. This includes species that frequent the open ocean  but who also entered the bay at certain times. These open ocean species may have been captured with harpoons and nets from canoes rather than with the fish trap (Gutiérrez 1998).

In combination with changing tides, the traps could have facilitated the capture of several  fish species. The most important tides occurred during the waxing and waning moons. During the high tides,  species swam closer to the beaches and the traps. The fishermen could have planned to position their canoes strategically to capture these fish when the tide receded and the fish were stranded within the traps (Herrera 2005; Herrera y Solís 2015). Some of the common species possibly captured in the traps and found in the middens are: mackerel (Caranx caballus and Caranx caninus), gafftopsail pompano (Trachinotus rhodopus); snapper (Lutjanus gutatus); grunts (Haemulon; Anisotremus); tunas (Euthynus lineatus); and maracos (Diodon holocanthus) (Gutiérrez 1998).

Currently, fishermen call the pursuit of large rather than small fish species “hunts” (cazaderas). During the “hunts,” the fishermen make the large species move close to the beaches and then use nets to capture the fish. It is possible that the presence of the stone wall traps gave the ancient fishermen an extra advantage.

Various mollusk species have habitat in the rocky and sandy zones associated with the traps. It is probable that by reducing the force of the surf, the traps converted the beaches into an ideal habitat for the development of beds of mollusks. This is the case for species such as: pearl oyster (Pinctada mazatlanica); rock oyster (Striostea prismatica; Ostrea megodon); jewel boxes (Chama echinata); limpet (Fissurella virescens); nerite snails (Neritina latissima) and chiton (Chitonidae sp.) (Solís y Herrera 2003).

There is a lack of published information on the ceremony and stewardship surrounding Trampas de Pesca.

No one is utilizing these innovations today. The abandonment of Bahía Culebra by the fifteenth century, possibly because of drought, other environmental stresses, and political events limited the continuation of this practice in subsequent generations. Furthermore, the Spanish conquest and colonization severely impacted the Indigenous populations and disconnected them from their ancestral practices. Recent populations derive from a later repopulation of the zone.

Ongoing socioeconomic development of the coastal zones for tourism purposes has affected the original landscape, although most of the prehispanic traps are still in place. They can be discerned during extraordinarily low tides; others have been covered by modern construction. The walls of the traps have been eroded naturally by waves and because some people have removed them searching for mollusks. 

More Information:

Trampas Prehispánicas de Pesca

References

Constenla, A. U. 1991. Las lenguas del área intermedia: introducción a su estudio areal. Editorial de la Universidad de Costa Rica, San Jose, Costa Rica.

Gutiérrez, M. 1998. La ictiofauna del sitio arqueológico Nacascolo, Bahía Culebra, Guanacaste. Vínculos 22:157–187.

Herrera, A. 2005. Al reencuentro de los ancestros: Mwaing Daamalut. Kokapoijmi. Editorial Universidad de Costa Rica, San José.

Herrera, A., and F. Solís. 2011. El gusto por comer moluscos: preferencias y orígenes precolombinos en la Bahía de Culebra. Vínculos 34:61–70.

Ibarra, E. 2014. Entre el dominio y la resistencia. Los pueblos indígenas del Pacífico de Nicaragua y Nicoya en el siglo XVI. Editorial Incer, San José.

Kerbis, J. C. 1980. The analysis of faunal remains from the vidor site. Vínculos 6:125–140.

Lange, F., and eds D. Stone. 1984. The Greater Nicoya archaeological aubarea. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Solís, F., and A. Herrera. 2003. Exploración de los estanques precolombinos en playa Manzanillo. Museo Nacional de Costa Rica, San José.

Solís, F., and A. Herrera. 2011. Mesoamericanos en la Bahía de Culebra, Noroeste de Costa Rica. Cuadernos de Antropología 21.

Solís, F., and A. Herrera. 2015. Herramientas y adornos de concha en el sitio Jícaro: un acercamiento a la reconstrucción de cadenas operativas, Bahía de Culebra, Noroeste de Costa Rica. Vínculos 35:67–106.

Solís, F., and A. Herrera. 2019. Habitar la Bahía Culebra: el paisaje durante el periodo Sapoá. Vínculos 35:67–106.

Vázquez, R., F. Solís, A. Herrera, and E. Hardy. 2019. Trampas prehispánicas para pesca litoral de la Bahía Culebra. Vínculos 39:1–26.