Frequently Asked Questions - extra

Some commonly heard questions about the bunkhouse with answers:

1. There is a letter in the archives saying that it is not a Chinese bunkhouse

   1. If there is, it hasn't turned up. There is a letter from Allen Shinn (see below) saying that the four buildings were not called a "China Camp" or "Chinese Camp." One of the early park map/plans had it listed as a "Chinese Camp." And that may be true that the Shinn family did not call it by such a name. However, Joshua Fong who lived nearby in the 1920s-1940s called the buildings "Chinese Camp" or "Shinn Camp" when talking about his relatives who lived here.  See Joshua Fong Memoir. See also his interview with Phil Holmes.

   2. Vice Admiral Allen Mayhew Shinn (AMS) called this remaining building the "China House." We could also call it that, but there are old kit buildings of precise proportions from China that are also called "China Houses" and many of today's restaurants are called "China House"! We decided that could be confusing.

   3. Jimmie Fong lived there until it was moved. He was sent a letter to vacate the building in 1974. Some people say that there were two Chinese men living there and that they looked in the building after they vacated.  See Jimmie Fong IMG_6515.jpg

2. The family never called it a "China Camp"

Today "China Camp" and "Chinese Camp" are words used in the literature to describe a cluster of buildings such as these where Chinese workers lived.

As much as we love and depend on the notes of Allen Shinn, he was born in 1908 and only lived his childhood on the ranch. His father, Joseph lived here from birth to death 1861-1947. Joseph knew the Chinese who worked at the ranch from the 1860s to the late 1940s.  Here is what Joseph said in some un-dated notes, probably from the 1920s or 1930s. 

"I know the Chinese thoroughly, for ever since I was a small boy when they came into my father's employ in the sixties on the ranch, which I now live on and own, there has been a camp on the place. We employed them in nursery work, budding and grafting trees, handling seeds and seedlings, and doing all of the many delicate operations called for in such a business, then later in fruit growing, and we have always found them, faithful, accurate, and careful of the interest of their employer, and ready to stay on the job by the year or as much longer as they were in the country, indeed some men worked on this place steadily, except for one or more trips to China for from 10 to 20 years. They never went on strike or left us in the lurch with our fruit getting ripe they might come to me and state that wages were higher and it would be necessary to pay so-and-so, to get men this year. I would make inquiries and always found out that conditions were as they said. I would sometimes hunt up other laborers, but was always sorry if I did. 

Yes, maybe it was not referred to as the "China Camp," but he does call it a "camp." [Shinn Joseph Views on Labor.pdf]  

In  1890, Joseph's older brother, Charles Shinn, wrote about a  fruit farm and nursery thirty miles from San Francisco [the Shinn Ranch?] "The cost of living for a Chinaman is marvelously low. But consider the manner in which they live, sleeping in bunks, 30 or 40 of which are in a room of 12 x 12, and arranged in tiers, three or 4 feet high." [the New York Times]

3. There are no square nails in it. Not an issue. Square nails were commonly used before 1900 and round nails after 1900.That means that it was built after 1900, which would make it 120 years old. Even if it was rebuilt in the 1950s, that's still 75 years old. Fifty years is considered historic.  

4. The floods of 1955 washed all of the China Camp away. The Sim Cottage and China Camp were in the same general area according to Mrs. Guzman's hand-drawn map of the Shinn Ranch. The Sim Cottage was on a rise and if you look at the 1955 flood maps, you can see that the Shinn property was not flooded in that period. It came pretty close! So it depends on how close to the creek that the China Camp was located. See floods for more information. Allen Shinn said it was moved because of the quarrying going on, not floods. Unless we find a letter or ledger saying that it was moved or lost in a flood, we may never know. Even if it was rebuilt in the 1950s, then that still makes it 75 years old. Buildings such as this must have needed to be repaired constantly. There is evidence inside of efforts to improve the comfort of this building - of paper being used to cover up cracks and there are still tin can lids hammered over knotholes.

5. Other non-Chinese people lived in the bunkhouse over time. Possibly, and where is that documentation? If they did, it could have been for many reasons, for example, the Chinese Exclusion Act and other later restrictive laws reduced the number of Chinese who could live in California or return to California. In an undated manuscript, probably 1920-1930s, Joseph Clark Shinn wrote about their difficulties getting labor over time.  It is certainly possible that another ethnic group lived in it. This just makes its story more complex, interesting, and significant. This documentation, if it exists, would be of interest.

Should we move the bunkhouse?

6. A bunkhouse would never be located so close to the Big House. The China Camp was originally built next to Alameda Creek (per Mrs. Guzmans's map) when the ranch extended on both sides of the creek. At that time, the China Camp was conveniently close to the family's original home, the Sim cottage. The Shinn family was two adults and five children living in the tiny cottage. Lucy Shinn wrote about their Chinese domestic servants in the 1870s while living in this tiny house. There would have been many jobs that we take for granted today that were laborious and needed to be done - getting firewood, carrying water, cooking over a woodstove, heating water, washing/drying clothes - that might have been done by their Chinese domestic servants. When the "Big House" was built in 1876, the Shinn family was closer to the county road. They had a windmill and a tankhouse for water.  The Chinese Camp, was a complete unit and would have still have had access to water and food from Alameda Creek. Why would they move it?
   When the creek area was quarried in the 1940s-1950s, the Sim cottage and other buildings (probably the whole China Camp according to AMS) were moved up to the farmyard. Milicent Shinn's house was moved closer to the road, a short distance East of the Big House.
   The "Chinese Camp" was tucked into the area between the Shinn barn and the packing shed. This was before there were neighborhoods surrounding the property.  After the last 4 acres became a park, there was a lot of movement in the barnyard. The Shinn barn burned down in 1977. The packing shed was moved off the Hayward fault in 2002 and that displaced the Chinese Camp. The Chinese Camp was moved to the left side of where the Shinn barn had been, after it burned in 1977. (This is about where we want to move it.) When the Santos barn was moved into its current location, it displaced the Chinese camp buildings. The last bunkhouse was moved to its current place, right on top of the Hayward fault.  (The 1990 geotechnical report located the fault zone perhaps in a different place than later studies). The smaller bunkhouse was disassembled and placed in the Santos barn, probably so the wood could be re-used. Over time the front porch has fallen, possibly due to age and truck traffic coming in the back gate.

7. MPHF's mission includes preservation of buildings across Southern Alameda County, not just tours, teas, and events.
   Generations have now tried to preserve it and its associated buildings.  The family originally moved it and has acknowledged its importance. Why would they do that, unless they wanted to preserve it? The city has moved the buildings several times and preserved the last building. Why would they spend that money if they wanted it torn down? MPHF has restored many buildings in the area. MPHF's mission: "The purpose of the Heritage Foundation shall be to coordinate the efforts of concerned individuals and organizations to preserve those historical resources which represent the heritage of Alameda County's Washington Township; and to supervise the organization of these resources to a functional use for their recognition, education, and enjoyment."
   Pretty all encompassing for all of the activities that this organization has done over time. Fits perfectly.

8. Someone would have preserved the bunkhouse already if it was important.

   1. The Shinn family thought it was important if they moved it up to the barnyard. They also thought that the trees, buildings, and the packing shed were important. In the priority of things the China Camp fell below the others. AMS worked very hard to make sure that his family's legacy was properly taken care of.

   2. Allen Shinn  (AMS) was very involved in the politics of the park for a long time. He was around when the packing shed was moved. Many letters are in the archives about his participation - dying trees, replanting the box hedge garden, ...

   3. The Shinn family donated this valuable land and property to the city. Two generations have helped out in many ways. The third generation continues to be engaged in the creation of a museum, donations of money, history, and artifacts. The family built the museum/archive room in 2002. James Shinn continued to make sure that the trees of the park were taken care of for many years. 

   4. Dr. Fisher, who founded MPHF, listed the Chinese buildings as future projects to be done when he "retired" from MPHF. See below.

   5. The Chinese Bunkhouse Preservation Project has taken on this project. We also care about it and will fundraise to preserve it as a part of the Shinn Ranch legacy.  

   6. No money will come from the hard-earned MPHF savings for the bunkhouse project. It will be funded by new grants and donations.

9. Why do we need to preserve this building? A ranch was run by many people - the family, ranch managers, and Chinese worker managers. Neighbors worked here during the year - planting, pruning, harvesting. Running a ranch is a tough job and many people helped make it successful.
   The park is in the process of being written up for the National Register of Historic Places. The bunkhouse is a valuable part of the nomination because it tells a more complete story of the Shinn family - that there were other people who lived here and worked here as managers, cooks, and laborers. The bunkhouse is as important as the Big House, because it completes their story. The Shinn History is intimately connected with their Chinese workers - domestic and field. 
   wElizabeth Shinn (Solinsky) and Fong Quong Lee (long time manager) had a warm relationship that lasted after she married in 1937 and moved away. Her daughter, Elizabeth Terplan, received Christmas gifts every year from Fong Quong Lee. 

10. Why can't the designated "Shinn Park fund" pay for it? The family gave that fund to the city to use as they wish, several years ago. The city can't tell us how much is in the fund, only that about $5000 per year will be used at the park for improvements in categories that only they know about. The fund paid for many things over time - the museum, the care of the trees, and more.

11. Why not just recreate it instead of restore it? The purpose of the proposal from Page & Turnbull is to decide the right way to preserve the building. After full studies of the building we will know what path to follow - mothball, move/mothball, or full restoration. We have saved wood from an Irvington barn deconstruction and from the second Shinn bunkhouse to provide suitably old materials that would blend in with the current construction per the federal standards. Page & Turnbull know how to follow "The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties.” "Using the Standards and Guidelines for Preservation, Rehabilitation, Restoration & Reconstruction.“ 
    If a fourth option is needed, to completely reconstruct the building, that will be determined after the initial inspections.
    While we would prefer the building to be restored, a reconstructed building would still be valuable for interpreting the history of the Chinese at the Shinn Ranch. A full recreation, using the current bunkhouse as a model, would need to identified as a recreation so people know it is not original. 

12. Why not just tear it down? In the National Register of Historic Places, Asian/Pacific Islander places account for only 0.1% of properties. That's only 94 of 85,000 sites! If we preserve this building, it will help to give a voice to these forgotten people who helped build our community, our state, and our country. Preserving this building gives us a physical reminder of the people who worked along side others in the Washington Township.

13. How else is this important to the community? 

    1. The project supports the new mandate of Ethnic Studies in all California schools K-12

    2. This history is right here in our backyard. History that happened here is very relatable. A restored bunkhouse will support schools much more than just books.

    3. Future grants and cooperation with FUSD and the UCB History-Social Science Project could provide curriculum and field trips for the schools.

14. The Bunkhouse Team will highlight this last building of the China Camp on tours.
    Lately there have not been student field trips to the park. We hope to resurrect that program. 

15. What about Dr. Fisher? Why didn't he restore the building?
    Dr. Robert Fisher expected that MPHF would continue on to advocate the preservation of the remaining buildings at Shinn Park as well as other properties in the area.
    In his 1983 farewell letter to the members of MPHF, he said specifically mentioned the Chinese buildings:
    "To my successors, I wish success. It is my fondest hope that they will, with vigor and integrity, remain faithful to the concepts and goals of the Mission Peak Heritage Foundation. I remind them that the fun things, such as programs and tours, require organization and "come easy", but the nitty gritty of "dirty fingernail" restoration and the late night hours of preparation and lobbying at city hall for three cities' councils, recreation and planning commissions, as well as regional agencies, requires dedication, a tough hide, and a certain amount of masochism. To those good souls who worked with intensity, burned out, and fell by the wayside, my full appreciation and mutual understanding that there are other things in life...for I am now You! To those few faithfuls who have kept the faith and defended MPHF and given their all through the Years, my undying gratitude! Finally, I remind you that secretarys are the unsung heros that glue organizations together and make them work. A great debt is owed our first beloved Lyla Hunt. Earlene Walker has carried on that tradition and most recently, Joanne Magnuson. Her hard work, creativity and promotional skill, in spite of full time work and parenting, has made possible the success of such Foundation activities as Shinn Victorian Open House and Craft Faire and helped fulfill my dream of recreating "As You Like It" at the Ardenwood Festival.
    
    In closing take the Perogative of age in hoping that the foundation, under new leadership and a membership who will hear the pleas, for help, will ultimately complete some of the projects that time has not permitted me to see accomplished,

1. Completion of Shinn House and grounds restoration including interior, Sim Cottage, ranch shop, windmill, barn rebuilding with Tyson structure and the Chinese and packing shed buildings.".....

See 198309MissionPeakReporter.pdf for the whole letter.