A Working Class City: the homes and meat industry of the Bay Area working class in the 1800s and early 1900s.

What made an area working class at the turn of the century? Workers have always been vital to a city’s health, so why was the working class confined to specific parts of a city? One major reason was proximity to work. Another was transportation. Lastly, the working class tended to be employed in jobs that were physically dirty, pushing their jobs and homes to the outskirts of the city. One such industry was butchering. Rail workers were also pushed to the outskirts, and their homes naturally were too. This blog will explore the early butchering industry in the Bay Area, as well as workers’ housing in both Oakland and Berkeley, in the 19^th and early 20^th centuries.

Workers’ Cottages in West Oakland

By Julie Sadlier 

Workers homes from the late 1800’s and early 1900’s can be found all over the Bay Area. Location, type of work, city planning, and diversity all played a role in what housing looked like in a specific area.

Squatters on land belonging to the Peralta family, including cattle thieves who sold their stolen goods to the San Francisco meat industry, developed the area around Oakland (Douglass). The specific squatter who started the town site of Oakland was a lawyer named Horace W. Carpentier. West Oakland was created from units of land that Vincent Peralta sold off to multiple buyers in the mid 1850s, resulting in mixed land use and plot size. The smaller lot sizes in West Oakland were perfect for narrow, almost row-style housing, and the working class families that moved into the area with the railroads, canneries, and shipyards built houses to fit their needs. Due to multiple land developers, no cohesive plan was created and homes could be placed any distance from the property line. The narrow land plots, 25 feet wide, meant small homes had to be built, less than 1000 square feet. These initial homes were usually well built, but the construction on the additions that came later were not always sound (Groth 16).

This image is from Paul Groth’s article in Urban Morphology (18). It illustrates the initial house consisting of two rooms, with many additional rooms in the back added on over time.

Workers’ cottages were mostly started before 1900. They were made of wood, and were small with only a few, interchangeable rooms. There was no interior planning or separation of spaces; any of the rooms could be a bedroom or a kitchen/work room. People added on to homes as they saw fit. As Paul Groth states in his study of worker cottages from the journal Urban Morphology, “In West Oakland, individual owners organized change at the scale of the room and plot” (15). This organizational scheme allowed for multiple families to live on one plot of land and created a high-density area.

Many people who lived in West Oakland worked for the Southern Pacific railroad, which had a terminus in Oakland. One third to one half off all jobs in the greater city of Oakland were due to the railroad, up into the 1950s (Whitman). The railroad was a major source of employment, and it employed people from many different backgrounds, creating a very diverse urban population in West Oakland. Many Pullman Car porters, who worked on the luxury Pullman train cars, were African Americans who wanted to leave the hostility of the South, and moved to West Oakland with the railroad to do so. A large portion of Oakland’s African American population originated from these workers (Whitman).

Oakland was a kind of suburb for San Francisco. With ferry service from the city, inter-urban trains and streetcars took commuters from their jobs in the city and transported them around the east bay. Over time, transportation switched from ferry and rail to bridge and car. West Oakland suffered; homes were demolished to built the Cypress Freeway and the Nimitz Freeway. Later, more houses were removed to make way for the United States Postal Service facility and the BART station and parking lot (Douglass). Transportation helped create the neighborhoods of West Oakland in the 1800s, and it also helped separate them from the rest of Oakland and destroy neighborhoods in the 1900s.

One of Jack London’s childhood homes, at 807 Pine Street in West Oakland, was right next to the Southern Pacific railroad line, and looks like a good example of a worker’s cottage. A small sized home made of wood, it is close to its neighbors in a row-house style, with only a small alley to reach the back yard. The lower floor would have been added on after the initial home was built, to allow for the boarders and rented space common with working class households of the time.

Image from Sonoma State University.

Sources:

Douglass, Robert. A Brief History of West Oakland. Sonoma State University, n.d. Web. 1 Nov. 2013. <http://www.sonoma.edu/asc/cypress/finalreport/Chapter02.pdf&gt;.

Groth, Paul. “Workers’-cottage and Minimal-bungalow Districts in Oakland and Berkeley, California, 1870-1945.” Urban Morphology 8.1 (2004): 13-25. Print.

Whitman, Frankie. “Tour of the Abandoned Southern Pacific Rail Road Station in West Oakland.” Personal interview. 8 Nov. 2013.

Minimal Bungalows in West Berkeley

By Julie Sadlier 

West Berkeley started as a community called Ocean View, and grew quickly into Berkeley. The Pioneer Starch and Grist Mill, Heywoods Lumber yard, and the Southern Pacific railroad all provided jobs to a growing working class town, and those workers needed housing. Jacobs Landing, the wharf built by James Jacobs on the waterfront in 1854, enabled the laboring class to bloom in the San Francisco suburb (Woolenberg). But unlike West Oakland, West Berkeley’s neighborhoods were planned out in advance and governed a single group of businessmen. In the late 1800s, the Berkeley Land and Town Improvement Association, created by Ocean View businessmen and Henry Durant of the University of California, organized and promoted development of West Berkeley (Woolenberg). Because of this, developers could buy and build on large blocks of land, creating a unified look to the neighborhood. The houses in any given area would be built exactly the same as their neighbors, on wider lots to allow for the new automobile technology (Groth). Garages were built into the back of properties, away from the house due to fear of fire.

This is another image from Paul Groth’s article in Urban Morphology (21). It shows the floor plan of a minimal bungalow with its built-in bathroom and kitchen areas. It also shows the garage in the back of the property.

The new style of house, called minimal bungalows, replaced workers’ cottages in West Berkeley in the early 1900s. These homes, while still small, were planed as a whole from the start, with distinct bedrooms and bathrooms. Change happened here in a larger scale. According to Paul Groth, when it came to West Berkeley, “…developers organized change at the scale of the whole house and whole block” (15). This was a much larger development scale than that seen in workers cottage districts. Things like kitchens and bathrooms were built into the homes themselves with the rising popularity of indoor plumbing. Between the wider lots and the intentional spaces inside the homes that didn’t allow for easy alterations, population density was lower in these neighborhoods.

Sources:

Groth, Paul. “Workers’-cottage and Minimal-bungalow Districts in Oakland and Berkeley, California, 1870-1945.” Urban Morphology 8.1 (2004): 13-25. Print.

Wollenberg, Charles. “Berkeley, A City in History Chapter 2.” Berkeley, A City in History Chapter 2. Berkeley Public Library, 2002. Web. 15 Nov. 2013. <http://www.berkeleypubliclibrary.org/system/Chapter2.html&gt;.

A Walking Tour of Working Class Housing in Oakland and Berkeley

By Julie Sadlier 

This walk starts in West Oakland and continues on to West Berkeley, via BART. The neighborhoods it explores are the same ones Paul Groth studied for his 2004 article in Urban Morphology on workers’ homes in West Oakland and West Berkeley. The West Oakland BART station is the perfect starting place, with very little walking required to get into the heart of a West Oakland workers’ cottages neighborhood.

From Google Maps

When you exit the BART station in West Oakland, you are in the center of a mixed-use area of residential homes and industrial businesses. Head southwest from the station to reach a five-block area of workers’ cottages. This group of streets is bordered by the 880 Nimitz Freeway to the south and east, a massive US Postal Service complex to the west, and the BART line and station to the north. All three of these facilities removed large sections of housing from this neighborhood when they were built from the 1950s to the 1980s (Douglass). This urban development, while helpful to Oakland and the greater Bay Area, was detrimental to the residents of West Oakland who lost their homes.

As you walk along the streets, pay attention to the width of the lots and the houses, as well as the front yard space. Many of these workers’ cottages show the typical small lot size, with correspondingly small homes at varying distances from the street. There is no set aesthetic for the neighborhood, because these homes were built with change and growth in mind. The rooms and the lot were the focus of builders and homeowners, rather than the entire house and city block, as we will see in West Berkeley.

Front yards paved over to create parking spaces.

Many homes have had paved over their front yards to allow for parking that was not planned into the development of the neighborhood. The homes only have narrow alleys to reach the back yard, so cars are relegated to the street or front yard parking. The homes that do have garages added them on later, raising the home to do so. Houses were also raised to add another unit to the ground floor, creating more rentable square footage and more housing.

The blue house in this photo from Chester Street is at its original height, while the houses around it have been raised.

Homes on corner lots are sometimes larger, acting as both a home and commercial building, or as completely commercial. On the south side, across from 3rd Street, is a park that was created with the building of the freeway. There are still a few properties in the middle of the park that have homes on them.

Side view of a home at Chester Street and 3rd Street.

At the corner of Chester and 3^rd streets is an empty lot, giving us a view of the house next to it. You can see the different building stages of this home, from its initial two rooms through all of its add-ons. The starter house would have consisted of the larger section at the front. Later, the smaller back section was added, followed by the enclosed porch. If you walk around to the west side and walk up Peralta Street (named for the original owners of the land Oakland is on), you will see the huge postal service building, illustrating the continuing working class feel of the neighborhood. Many of the homes on this street are right next to the sidewalk.

Along Lewis Street, between 5th Street and Peralta, you can see an old brick factory, evidence of the area’s industrial history.

 

From Google maps.

After you’ve checked out this area, head back to BART and take it to the North Berkeley stop. In this area of West Berkeley, minimal bungalows replace workers’ cottages as the working class home. From the BART station you can walk west down Virginia Street, checking out the homes along the way. Many of these houses look very similar because they are minimal bungalows that were built at the same time by the same developer.

Similar looking homes in West Berkeley.

In about a quarter of a mile you will reach San Pablo Avenue, a busy commercial strip in the residential neighborhood. Turn right and walk up to Camelia Street. Notice all the auto body shops and other auto related business in this area.  This could be due to the importance of cars when this neighborhood was being built. If you walk around the few blocks in this area, from about Camelia Street south to Delaware Street and San Pablo Avenue out to 7^th Street, the minimal bungalow look will be apparent. These houses are still a bit smaller, nothing more than 1000 square feet, but their lots are a bit wider, allowing for a driveway and garage in the back yard.

Cars were becoming popular in the early 1900’s when these homes were built, and by 1945 many upper working class families needed cars to get to industrial centers that were being built further out (Groth 23).

A West Berkeley home set back 15 feet from from the curb.

Something else to notice is that all the homes are set back 15 feet from the front of the property, a rule implemented in Berkeley to create a more uniform look. Many of the homes in West Berkeley look the same now as they did when built 100 years ago, a result of the initial planning for the neighborhood and the type of working class family the homes were intended for.

Sources:

Douglass, Robert. A Brief History of West Oakland. Sonoma State University, n.d. Web. 1 Nov. 2013. <http://www.sonoma.edu/asc/cypress/finalreport/Chapter02.pdf&gt;.

All Photographs by Julie Sadlier, 2013

Maps from Google Maps, 30 November 2013

A Case Study of an Oakland Minimal Bungalow

By Julie Sadlier 

In another working class neighborhood, between West Oakland and West Berkeley, is the home of Dale and Dan Zola. Although this home is not in either of the areas listed in the working class homes walking tour, it has all the characteristics of a minimal bungalow. Dale and Dan Zola were kind enough to allow me to interview them about their home and neighborhood on December 8, 2013.

The Zolas home. Photo provided by Dale and Dan Zola.

Their home is on 61^st Street, a short distance from San Pablo Avenue. It is within walking distance of the rail lines through Emeryville, and was once a busy working class neighborhood with many factories and working class bars. Nearby were a Westinghouse factory, a box factory, and machine shops. The Jelly Belly factory formerly called this neighborhood home but it has since moved, leaving behind abandoned buildings. This neighborhood was, and still is, a central place for transportation. Up to the 1960s the Key System provided a streetcar down nearby Stanford Street, created by developers to offer service all over the east bay. This would have been very important for workers who did not own a car, so that they could get to and from work. Now there are buses on San Pablo, along with the Emeryville free bus service, the Emery-Go-Round. Other transportation options in the area include cars, bikes, and BART, which is a twenty-minute walk away. Transportation infrastructure continues to be important to the neighborhood.

The house itself was built in 1927, and there are other houses on the block, built at the same time, that look the same. This seems to suggest that one developer built the homes in the same manner as the homes in West Berkeley. The Zolas have lived in this home since 1981. The house itself has three main rooms to the right and two bedrooms with a bathroom between them to the left. There is a small hallway separating the bedrooms from the main rooms.  The house has gone through multiple renovations over the years, but you can still see evidence where the third room (now the kitchen) was added on to the back of the home, making it longer. It originally would have been only two rooms with two bedrooms. There is a driveway going up the right side of the property to what is now a carport, but previously it led to a garage at the back of the property.

According to the Zolas, the area may have originally been an Italian neighborhood. There is a monument nearby dedicated to the Sons of Italy who died in the First World War, built in 1921.  Over time, it became an African American neighborhood, and today it is becoming “gentrified,” with families of all ethnicities and sexualities moving in from San Francisco.  In 1981 the Zolas bought the property from the Washingtons, an African American family. Mr. Washington had worked at the De Laval factory (a dairy supply company), and his family was selling his house after his death. When the Washingtons owned it, there were rabbit hutches in the back yard, and the carport was added with them, turning the garage into storage. The Zolas themselves have done a lot of remodeling to their home. They detached and turned a third bedroom (added on by a previous owner) into a studio apartment for rent, as well as transforming the old garage into a one-bedroom rental. They updated their kitchen last year, opening it up to the rest of the home. They also rent out the second bedroom inside their home. Receiving income from renters, the Zolas are continuing the cycle of renting out part of their homes to tenants that began in the workers cottages in the late 1800s.

Railroads and Automobiles: The Spatial and Psychological Distantiation of Abattoirs

By Thomas Valdriz

One of the most important drivers of the spatial and psychological distantiation of the Bay Area’s meatpacking industry continues to be use of transportation technology. “Butchertowns” in Oakland, San Francisco, and South San Francisco maintained strong connections to both markets and hinterlands with the support of railroads networks such as the Southern Pacific, Central Pacific, Western Pacific, and Union Pacific railroads. San Francisco’s “Butchertown” established along the Southern Pacific Railroad in the late 1860’s. In the 1870’s Abattoirs in Oakland (latter part of Emeryville after the city incorporated in 1896) moved their operations northward and established a butchering reservation along the Central Pacific Railroad.[1] In 1894 South San Francisco’s Western Meat Corporation established its butchering reservation along the Southern Pacific Railroad (see Figure 1).[2] The use of extensive railroad networks enabled abattoirs spatially distance themselves from their markets, while the usage of railroads in fact compressed the time necessary to transport goods back to their consumers.  In short, railroads suited the needs of industry as well as the desires of consumers.

Figure 1: Union Pacific Railroad Network 1940
Source: Poole Bros Inc.

The next major driver in the spatial and psychological distantiation of Bay Area abattoirs came with the invention and utilization of automobiles. Beginning in the 1910’s automobiles played a vital role in delivering of goods between cities and their hinterlands.[3] In addition, automobiles played a major role in the outward spreading of cities and the creation of suburbs in 1940’s. After World War II, dependency on automobiles became a universal aspect of urban development across the Bay Area as cheap mass-produced housing developments were built within a short distance from major areas of employment.[4] Since 1940, population growth in San Francisco has grown much slower than any other Bay Area county (see Figure 2). The desires to escape crowded living conditions, crime, pollution, poor education, as well as the inability to afford living in urban areas all led to the movement into bedroom communities and suburbs during the post-war era.  Automotive-induced suburban sprawl in the post-war period of the late 1940’s not only affected the spatial arrangement of residents, but of abattoirs as well. Meatpacking in both San Francisco and South San Francisco’s began to decline in the 1940’s with the passage of stricter sanitary regulations[5] and an inability to compete with rural slaughterhouses.

Automotive-induced suburban sprawl in the post-war period of the late 1940’s not only affected the spatial arrangement of residents, but of abattoirs as well. Meatpacking in both San Francisco and South San Francisco’s began to decline in the 1940’s with the passage of stricter sanitary regulations[6] and an inability to compete with rural slaughterhouses. World War II may have increased the demand of beef for a brief amount of time; however, the Bay Area’s urban abattoirs were unable to achieve the same economies of scale that rural abattoirs gained by locating their operations in rural areas. Rural abattoirs maintained a competitive advantage over urban abattoirs because their facilities were strategically located nearby feedlots, thus reducing the weight loss that cattle experience during transportation before being slaughtered and increasing the corporation’s profit margin.[7]Once rural abattoirs were able to pull ahead from their urban counterparts, their increasing profits were then invested into the expansion of operations, leading to increased market share. With the inability to compete with rural abattoirs, urban slaughterhouses in South San Francisco, San Francisco, and Emeryville closed in 1968,[8] 1971,[9] and 1980’s[10] respectively.

Sources:

[1] Ambro, Richard. “The North End: “Butchertown”.” The Secret News. N.p., 2 Nov. 2012. Web. 1 Nov. 2013.

[2] The City of South San Francisco. South San Francisco: 100 Years of History. South San Francisco: City of South San Francisco, 2008. Print.

[3] The Emeryville Historical Society. “Constructing the Crossroads: Transportation.” Emeryville. San Francisco, CA: Acadia, 2005. 34. Print.

[4] Self, Robert O. American Babylon: Race and the Struggle for Postwar Oakland. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP, 2003.25-26. Print.

[5] Dean, Ben. “Islais Landing.” Ben Dean Account Project, 2008. Web. 1 Nov. 2013.

[6] Dean, Ben. “Islais Landing.” Ben Dean Account Project, 2008. Web. 1 Nov. 2013.

[7] Pollan, Michael. “Power Steer.” New York Times 31 Mar. 2002: 8. Print.

[8] Spangler, Ray. “Scheduled to Close: Swift & Co. Was a Boon to SSF.” The Industrial City Echoes [South San Francisco] 1968: 1. Print.

[9] Fredricks, Darold. “Butcher Town (in San Francisco’s Bayview).” Butcher Town (in San Francisco’s Bayview). The Daily Journal, 10 Dec. 2010. Web. 1 Nov. 2013.

[10] Ambro, Richard. “The North End: “Butchertown”.” The Secret News. N.p., 2 Nov. 2012. Web. 1 Nov. 2013.

The Future of Bay Area Beef Abattoirs?

By Thomas Valdriz

As of 2013 the Bay Area currently only has one beef abattoir, Rancho Veal Corporation, located in Petaluma (see Figure 1 )[1]. Rancho Veal operates in a niche market, offering

Figure 1: Rancho Veal Corporation in Petaluma, California
Source: The Press Democrat

small-scale custom slaughtering services for local organic beef raised in Northern California[2]. Although the University of California has been working with livestock producers and ranchers in Marin and Sonoma counties to find viable locations to establish meat-processing facilities in the Bay Area[3], large-scale production is limited by cost-prohibitive land values and stringent zoning ordinances and state regulations,[4] both of which will hinder the potential development and expansion of meatpacking in the Bay Area.

The possibility of establishing additional or expanding the scale of slaughterhouses in the Bay Area appears to be highly unlikely without the economies of scale that larger rural abattoirs possess, and would require a complete upheaval of popular sentiments toward the nature of abattoirs and their place in society. The slow-food movement in the Bay Area and CSA (community-supported agriculture) groups are all trying to change the ways in which consumers understand where their meat comes from, however, the small scale of  home-killing (see Figure 2), industrial slaughtering in Petaluma, and mobile slaughtering (see Figure 3) operates in an extremely niche market and is cost-prohibitive for most of the population.

Figure 2: Home Killing at a Small-Scale Ranch
Source: Modern Farmer Magazine

Figure 3: Mobile Slaughtering
Source: Oakland Lockers

See For Yourself

Rancho Veal Corporation is located at 1522 Petaluma Blvd N, Petaluma, CA 94952 (see Figure 2). I do not believe that Rancho Veal offers  tours, but walking around the property enables spectators to catch a glimpse into the past, present, and future of Bay Area beef slaughtering. Traveling by taxi here is public transit available at North Petaluma Blvd and Sycamore Ln or one could drive as well.

Figure 2: Rancho Veal Corporation
Source: Google Maps

Sources:

 [1] University of California Cooperative Extension. “Niche Meat Processing Resources for the North Coast.” University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources. University of California, Web. 1 Nov. 2013.

[2] Riley, Philip. “Slaughterhouse Vital to ‘Eat Local’ Movement.” Petaluma 360. Argus-Courier, 30 May 2010. Web. 17 Nov. 2013.

[3] University of California Cooperative Extension. “Niche Meat Processing Resources for the North Coast.” University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources. University of California, Web. 1 Nov. 2013.

[4] Ferry, David. “Slaughterhouse Shortage Stunting Area’s Eat-Local Movement.” The Bay Citizen. The New York Times, 7 Apr. 2011. Web. 1 Nov. 2013.

[5] Riley, Philip. “Slaughterhouse Vital to ‘eat Local’ Movement.” PressDemocrat.com. The Press Democrat, 30 May 2011. Web. 1 Dec. 2013.

Laborsaving Techniques: The Spatial and Psychological Distantiation of Bay Area Abattoirs

By Thomas Valdriz

The utilization of technology not only brought about both the psychological and spatial distantiation between Bay Area abattoirs and their consumers, but laborsaving technology also helped to psychologically and spatially distance laborers from the products they made. Laborsaving technology has been utilized in order to increases efficiency and productivity with the end goal being to maximize profits. The sheer competitiveness of meatpacking generates the need to innovate in order to lower total costs and increase production, thereby gaining more market share and realizing more profits. In the early days of industrial meatpacking, productivity was increased as surplus value was appropriated from laborers through the division of labor. In the long run the division of labor decreases the marginal cost per unit of output.

San Francisco’s Miller and Lux,[1] South San Francisco’s Western Meatpacking Co (later called Swift & Company),[2] and Emeryville’s Golden West Meat Co[3] were all highly influential in streamlining Bay Area meatpacking and utilized laborsaving techniques and technology in order to reduce variable costs and stay competitive. By the mid 1800’s Gustavus Swift’s “disassembly line” system of industrial meat production became the standard production technique because his system enabled unskilled cheap labor to quickly assimilate into the production process by dividing the stages of slaughtering into small manageable tasks. The disassembly line of production created more unskilled jobs, leading to the breakdown of apprenticeship traditions[4] and the devolution of the intimate relationship between laborers and cattle (see Figure 3). The division of labor was exerted upon laborers and machines as well as automated devices were able to fill specific roles of production and in turn replace the jobs of the laborers who once filled unfavorable or dehumanizing duties. Although capital investment has high initial costs, over the long run innovative technology can facilitate increases in production by performing the traditionally unpleasant duties with minimal assistance from laborers, thus reducing long run variable costs and distancing laborers from detestable tasks.

The process of making slaughtering more humane was another step in spatially and psychologically dissociating laborers from their products. In the traditional disassembly line system of beef slaughtering, cattle were herded from stockyards to holding pens and positioned single file to be “stunned”. After 1958, the U.S. Congress’s Humane Slaughter Act required that cattle be rendered unconscious prior to being slaughtered.[5] Before the HSA, Bay Area abattoirs used large-caliber soft-nosed bullets or simply bludgeoned the cattle before slitting the throat. In the HSA, the US Congress outlined various methods to humanely slaughter livestock, such as the use a pneumatic captive bolt gun[6] which makes a dull and abrupt “pfft” sound and was a quicker and less psychologically stressful way for workers to perform the task of rendering a cow brain-dead before being bled by another worker. By briskly dividing the process of killing between multiple laborers, the physical act of killing became less absolute and the mental burden is minimized as laborers could isolate themselves from accountability.[7]

Contemporary abattoirs use a much more sophisticated division of labor to further increase productivity and separate laborers from dehumanizing aspects of meatpacking. Bay Area abattoirs have always had distinctive spatial zones within the structure of the slaughterhouse; however, modern-day laborers are now spatially divided into zones of production based on the life, killing, and postmortem stages of a cow’s body, all of which are visibly segregated from one another. [8] In the new spatial arrangement of the industrial slaughter, laborers are spatially and psychologically divided into separate zones and wear color-coordinated hardhats to delineate which zone their duties belong (see Figure 4).[9]

Sources:

[1] Bowcock, Robert H. Butchertown: A Collage of a San Francisco Institution during 1850-1969. San Francisco, CA: Robert H. Bowcock, 2004. 58. Print.

[2] Spangler, Ray. “Scheduled to Close: Swift & Co. Was a Boon to SSF.” The Industrial City Echoes [South San Francisco] 1968: 1. Print.

[3] The Emeryville Historical Society. “Constructing the Crossroads: Transportation.” Emeryville. San Francisco, CA: Acadia, 2005. 34-37. Print.

[4] Groth, Paul. “Working, Shopping, and Living Downtown From the 1850’s To 1900: The C.B.D., Cottage Districts, and Slums.” Lecture. American Cultural Landscapes 1600-1900. University of California, Berkeley. 1 Nov. 2013.543. Print.

[5] United States. Cong. United States Congress. Legal Information Institute. By Government Printing Office. Cong 7 USC § 1902. Cornell University, Web. 1 Nov. 2013.

[6] United States. Cong. United States Congress. Legal Information Institute. By Government Printing Office. Cong 7 USC § 1902. Cornell University, Web. 1 Nov. 2013.

[7] Pachirat, Timothy. “Kill Floor.” Every Twelve Seconds: Industrialized Slaughter and the Politics of Sight. New Haven: Yale UP, 2011.56. Print.

[8] Pachirat, Timothy. “Kill Floor.” Every Twelve Seconds: Industrialized Slaughter and the Politics of Sight. New Haven: Yale UP, 2011.61. Print.

[9] Pachirat, Timothy. “Kill Floor.” Every Twelve Seconds: Industrialized Slaughter and the Politics of Sight. New Haven: Yale UP, 2011.82. Print.

Bay Area Abattoirs 1860-1900

By Thomas Valdriz

The slaughtering of animals is a topic that most rational human beings tend to avoid. The majority of the public would rather not know the stages of the production that a given cut of beef went through to get from the farm to the fork. The desire to physically and mentally distance oneself from the production of meat is a characteristic that most Americans feel, and has been a pervasive sentiment throughout the history of the San Francisco Bay Area. Since in the late 1860’s, popular support to keep abattoirs away from heavily populated locations has pushed Bay Area municipalities to pass ordinances requiring abattoirs to relocate outside of residential and downtown commercial districts. The relocation and subsequent reorganization of abattoirs created spatial and psychological distantiations that enabled consumers and laborers to dissociate themselves from the products and negative externalities of meatpacking. The urban to rural transformation as well as the spatial reorganization of Bay Area beef abattoirs has been made possible through the utilization of improved transportation technologies and production techniques; both of which have enabled consumer and wage laborer alike to distance themselves from the perceived horrors of industrialized beef production.

The San Francisco Bay Area experienced unprecedented growth in the 19th century due in part to the discovery of gold and the American belief of Manifest Destiny. The growing population of San Francisco, which tripled between 1860-1870, and doubled between 1870 and 1890[1] brought about new market opportunities for entrepreneurs daring enough to move their operations westward. Many enterprising butchers, cattlemen, and laborers established themselves in the San Francisco Bay Area with the hopes of filling the needs of consumers and to earn a living. Although abattoirs were able to meet ever-increasing consumer demands, the immense scale of industrial beef production and production’s inherent negative externalities soon became too much for the populace to handle. What was once a public nuisance became a topic of real concern, especially for public health advocates who feared increased pollution and lack of sanitation would lead to the future spread of diseases[2].

In the early years of San Francisco Bay Area history slaughtering was typically performed in areas neighboring the downtown market district in order to sell fresh meat and animal byproducts directly to consumers.[3] Abattoirs sold a variety of commodities ranging from meat (fresh, salted, and smoked), hides, tallow, and bones, however, the inefficiencies of early meat processing created many waste products and the inherent nature of the industry brought a notoriously foul odor to nearby neighborhoods.[4] Slaughterhouses plagued both laborers and local residents alike; the noxious smells of meat production could be detected from miles away, leading many Bay Area residents to voice their concerns in both local and state government.

Specialized slaughterhouse reservations became an increasingly common landscape feature of many Bay Area cities beginning in the mid to late 1800’s. In 1866 the California Supreme Court passed legislature requiring San Franciscan abattoirs to vacate the central business district.[5] Although municipalities were not legally allowed to divide or assign land into areas subject to particular planning restrictions until the 1920’s, large-scale abattoirs looked for large plots of land in the fringes of large cities in order to have room to expand operations and to distance their facilities from residential areas.[6][7]

Given the constraints established by the municipalities and California state law, private corporations were given the freedom to build as they pleased, locating their facilities nearby running water (to dump garbage) and along railroad lines. [8] As unpleasant as slaughterhouse districts in the mid to late 19th century may have been, both policymakers and residents alike understood the crucial products and services that abattoirs provided. Distancing the public from negative externalities like pollution, disease, and vermin while also accommodating the needs of industrial meat processing was made possible through the use of new innovations in transportation.

Sources:

[1] US Census Bureau. Historical Census Populations of Counties and Incorporated Cities in California, 1850–2010. Mar. 2013. Raw data. Washington D.C.

[2] “Butchertown of Oakland Filthy.” The San Francisco Call 7 Mar. 1908, 103rd ed., sec. 98: 10. Print.

[3] O’Brien, Tricia. “Butchertown.” San Francisco’s Bayview Hunters Point. Charleston, SC: Arcadia Pub. 2005. 27-33. Print.

[4] Bowcock, Robert H. Butchertown: A Collage of a San Francisco Institution during 1850-1969. San Francisco, CA: Robert H. Bowcock, 2004. 59. Print.

[5] Sacramento Daily Union. “The Slaughter-House Case.” Sacramento Daily Union 22 Sept. 1884, 52nd ed., sec. 24: 4. Print.

[6] Groth, Paul. “Working, Shopping, and Living Downtown From the 1850’s To 1900: The C.B.D., Cottage Districts, and Slums.” Lecture. American Cultural Landscapes 1600-1900. University of California, Berkeley. 1 Nov. 2013.543. Print.

[7] Robichaud, Andrew, and Erik Steiner. “Trail of Blood: The Movement of San Francisco’s Butchertown and the Spatial Transformation of Meat Production, 1849-1901.” Spatial History Project. Stanford University, 1 Apr. 2010. Web. 1 Dec. 2013.

[8] Walker, Richard. “Industry Builds Out the City: The Suburbanization of Manufacturing In the San Francisco Bay Area 1850-1940.” Manufacturing Suburbs: Building Work and Home on the Metropolitan Fringe. By Robert D. Lewis. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University, 2004. 99. Print.

Historic Bay Area Butchertown Districts: Suggested Walking Routes

By Thomas Valdriz

San Francisco

Figure 1: Location of Wholesale Butchers in San Francisco Circa 1886
Source: Robichaud and Steiner

Figure 2: San Francisco’s Butchertown 1870’s Source: Robichaud and Steiner

Figure 3: San Francisco’s Butchertown Walk
Source: Google Maps

Traveling to San Francisco’s Butchertown District is easily done through the use of public transit or by driving. Take BART to Civic Center station, then connect to the 19 SF Muni and stop at the intersection of 3rd and Evans streets.

South San Francisco

Figure 4: East Grand Ave Circa 1900
Source: South San Francisco Public Library

Figure 5: Western Meat Co at 200 E Grand Ave 1923
Source: South San Francisco Public Library

Figure 6: South San Francisco Tour
Source: Google Maps

South San Francisco’s Butchertown district is easily accessed by the SSF Caltrain, San Mateo Transit, or by automobile. By taking San Mateo Transit, tourists will be dropped off in the northwest corner of the district and can make their way southeast down E Grand Ave, the heart of SSF’s meatpacking district.

Oakland (Emeryville)

Figure 7: Emeryville’s  Butchertown 1903
Source: Richard Ambro

Figure 8: Emeryville Butchertown District Walk 
Source: Google Maps

Figure 9: Emeryville Stockyards 1914
Source: Richard Ambro

To get to Emeryville’s Butchertown District, Amtrak, AC Transit, or a automobile will suffice.  My suggested tour assumes you take Amtrak to Emeryville Station, dropping tourists at the southwest corner of the district.

Photo Sources:

[1] Robichaud, Andrew, and Erik Steiner. “Trail of Blood: The Movement of San Francisco’s Butchertown and the Spatial Transformation of Meat Production, 1849-1901.” Spatial History Project. Stanford University, 1 Apr. 2010. Web. 1 Dec. 2013.

[2] Robichaud, Andrew, and Erik Steiner. “Trail of Blood: The Movement of San Francisco’s Butchertown and the Spatial Transformation of Meat Production, 1849-1901.” Spatial History Project. Stanford University, 1 Apr. 2010. Web. 1 Dec. 2013.

[3] South San Francisco Public Library. “Street: Grand Avenue at Linden, Early 1900’s.”Flickr. Yahoo!, 21 May 2013. Web. 1 Dec. 2013.

[4] South San Francisco Public Library. “Industry: Western Meat Company, Aerial View of Plant, 1923.” Flickr. Yahoo!, 21 May 2013. Web. 1 Dec. 2013.

[5] South San Francisco Public Library. “Industry: Western Meat Company, early 1900’s, steam-engine next to building.” Flickr. Yahoo!, 21 May 2013. Web. 1 Dec. 2013.

[6] Google Corporation. “Google Maps.” Google Maps. N.p., 1 Dec. 2013. Web. 1 Dec. 2013.

[7] Ambro, Richard. “The North End: “Butchertown”.” The Secret News. N.p., 2 Nov. 2012. Web. 1 Nov. 2013.

[8] Google Corporation. “Google Maps.” Google Maps. N.p., 1 Dec. 2013. Web. 1 Dec. 2013.

[9] Ambro, Richard. “The North End: “Butchertown”.” The Secret News. N.p., 2 Nov. 2012. Web. 1 Nov. 2013.