ML18192A330
| ML18192A330 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 02/18/1976 |
| From: | Beckett P, Scott Bussey New Mexico State Univ, Dept of Sociology and Anthropology, Public Service Co of New Mexico |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| Download: ML18192A330 (134) | |
Text
>~~3>>>>-<<<<>>
DQEI(BI BIB AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF A PROPOSED 345 KV POWER TRANSMISSION LIIIE CORRIDOR FROM
- DEMING, NEW MEXICO TO GREENLEE COUNTY, ARIZONA Stanley D. Bussey Patri ck H. Beckett 2
Bc[7yg 7~ h'I)W>L,
.COh)h) )SS)O)j
~t>>'-W>>
0-- 'i ii-1 i 1
1CO POCKET>>>> E)
N>38Q FFBXel87g ~
U.S>> )>>UCEEAR REGU~Q)>>Q COhUh I SS )Og
~o A Report Prepared for the Public Service Company by the Cultural Resources Management Division, Department of Sociology and Anthropology, New Mexico State University June l975 1975 Cori Tg) 0
7
',g~
INTRODUCTION From Inarch l2, 1975, to March l9, l975, Patrick H. Beckett, Douglas P.
Brethauer, and Duane Hyatt of the Department of Sociology and Anthropology, New Mexico State University, conducted an archaeological survey of a p'roposed 345 KV transmission line right-of-way in Greenlee County, Arizona, for the Public Service Comoany of New Mexico.
The survey team then returned to the field from March 23, l975, to April l9, l975, to continue on from the Arizona-New Mexico border to the proposed Deming substatlon.
Duane Hyatt was replaced by Duane Burrell when the survey team returned to the field on March 23, 1975.
Beckett was field supervisor, and the principal Investigator of the project is Dr. Stanley D. Bussey, New Mexico State University.
The survey began at the Greenlee substation (SE I/4 of Sec.
29 T5S, R3IE, Greenlee County, Arizona) and ended at the proposed Deming substation
(.SW I/4 of Sec.
I6, T23S,
- R9W, Luna County, New Mexico).
The right-of-way was not staked, but it was marked by white plastic panels used as air photo spotters from the Greenlee substation to the pro-posed Hidalgo substation.
During this portion of the survey, with the use of air photos, compass bearings and horizon markers, the survey crew worked from panel to panel.
From the proposed Hidalgo substation to the proposed Deming substation the line was marked by surveyors'argets.
By the use of topographic
- maps, compass bearings and horizon markers, the survey crew IJ worked from target to. target.
The route was later checked on air photos.
While a possibility for error exists when these techniques are used, the
field supervisor feels confident that the entire right-of-way was thoroughly inspected.
Artifact analysis was performed in the field. by the field supervisor.
No collections were made except for points and sherds that were to be used for laboratory analysis.
The laboratory analysis was done by Tonl S.
Murphy, Curator, Ihew Mexico Stat University lluseum.
Copies of the survey forms will be filed with the Arizona State Museum and the Museum of New
'exico for their respective states.
In addition, a complete file will be maintained at New Mex'ico State University.
IMPACT CN CULTURAL RESOURCES In general, construction of a transmission line in the Arizona section of the proposed rioht-of-way will have little impact on cultural resources.
The New Mexico section will definitely have impact on prehisto. ic cuL.ural resources between the Hidalgo and Deming substations.
Direct Impact Two archaeological sites were found in the right-of-way in the Arizona
'project area.
Both can be bypassed if care is utilized in tower and road placement.
Site PSC-I is in the i'JN I/4 of the Nh I/4 of the Sl! I/4, Sec.,ll,
- T7S, R3IE (673I50 m.
E, 3634650 m.
N, Zone l2), Greenlee County, Arizona.
The site is a small'ithic site and is on a large flat bench which is covered by residual gravel.
Site PSC-2 is in ihe SE I/4 of the SE I/4 of the SE I/4, Sec; 17, T9S, R32E (679850 m.
E, 36I3250 m.
N, Zone l2), Greenlee County, Arizona.
It is a one-room historic site which was probably occupied around l900.
It is south of an earthen dam.
Neither of these two sites would merit nomination to the National Register.
- However, both are potential sources of information and care should bo taken to avoid them.
In various parts of the survey route occasional flakes were encountered.
As no other artifacts or sherds were noted, these areas were not designated as sites.
They were recorded in the project field notes.
Only one Alma plalnware sherd was found, and it was off the survey route on an adjacent
bench overlooking the Gi la River just north of Duncan.
The general lack of cultural remains in the survey seems to stem from the location of the proposed route.
The line transects many areas that are too rocky to farm or inhabit.
These areas are far enough away 'from the Gila River and from the mountain springs to the east that water is not g nerally available.
Ten (IO) archaeological sites were found in the right-of-way of The New Mexico project area.
These sites are in danger of being damaged or destroyed by construction if special care is not taken.
PSC-3 is in the SW I/4 of the SE I/4 of the SW I/O, Sec.
23, T2IS, R20W (699925 m.
E, 3593I55 m.
N, Zone 12), Hidalgo County, New Mexico.
The site is in a long, narrow, deflated area (25 x 200 meters),
located in an aeolian sand dune deposit.
There is a very good possib.ility that two components are present:
a Mogollon site on the south end and a pre-ceramic Cochise site on the north end or else these are two distinct use areas.
There is a slight break in the continuity 'of the site between the two areas.
PSC-4 is in the SW I/O of ihe SW I/O of the SW I/O, Sec.
22, T2IS, RI9W (707400 m.
E, 3593II5 m. N, Zone 12), Hidalgo County, New Mexico.
The site is on a broad flood, plain.
It appears to have been a Jornada h1ogollon campsite utilized only briefly.
There are no structures present.
PSC-5 is in the SW, I/4 of the SW I/4 of the SE I/4, Sec. 2I, T2IS, AI9W (708290 m.
E, 3593I35 m.
N, Zone I2), Hidalgo
- County, New Mexico.
The site is on a slight slope north of Ninemile Hill.
The area has numerous small rock clusters which are very reminiscent of hearth areas.
PSC-6 is located in the SE I/4 of the SW I/O of the NW I/O, Sec.
7,
- T23S, RI5W (741925 m.
E, 3578575 m.
N, Zone l2), Grant County, New Mexico.
Tho slto is cn a small bench southeast of a large arroyo.
No depressions
or surface structures were observed.
PSC-7 is located in the SW I/4 of the SW I/4 of the NE I/4, Sec.
I9,
- T23S, RI4W (7522IO m.
E, 3575700 m.
N, Zone 12), Grant County, New 'Mexico.
The site is on a bench on the east side of Burro Cienega.
At least six pit houses are visible, and pot sherds number in the thousands.
The site may possibly be stratified.
PSC-9 is located in the SE I/4 of the WE I/4 of the SW I/4, Sec.
30,
- T23S, RIOW (225575 m.
E, 3574385
- m. N, Zone l3),
Luna County, New Mexico.
The site is in an aeolian dune deposit east of Jones Spring Draw in a heavy growth of mesquite.
It is composed of scattered concentrations of sherds and lithic materials.
PSC-IO is located in the NE I/4 of the NW I/4 of the SE I/4, Sec.
30,
- T23S, RIOW (225900 m.
E, 3574440 m.
N, Zone 13),
Luna County, New Mexico, The site is in a large deflated area between a playa and an aeolian dune deposit.
There is a seemingly random scattering of lithics and glass arti-facts present in the site.
PSC-II is located in the NW I/4 of the NW I/4 of the SW I/4, Sec.
29,
- T23S, RIOW (226480 m.
E, 3574480
- m. N, Zone l3),
Luna County, New Mexico.
=Tho terrain in which the site is located is fairly flat, with some aeolian activity taking place.
The site is located about l50 meters east of ihe fonco line that runs between Sections 30 and 29.
PSC-IZ is located in the SW I/4 of the SE I/4 of the SW I/4, Sec.
23,
- T23S, RIOW (231655 m.
E, 35752IO m.
N, Zone l3), Luna County, New Mexico.
Tho site is on
- a. north-facing slope.
There has been a moderate amount of noollan activity in the area.
The site consists of a small scattering of chords and a mano eroding out of the surface.
PSC-l3 is located in the center of the SE I/4, Sec.
24, T23S,
- RIOW, Q33960 m.
E, 3575540 m.
N, Zone l3),
Luna County, New Mexico.
The site is south of a fence line that parallels the tlimbres River.
Ho visible evidence of subterranean or surface structures is present.
There is little pottery.
Parts of the prehistoric portion are overlain by the old Camp Cody dump.
The survey line crosses over an old tile water system running from the Mimbres River to Camp Cody.
If the power line and tower placement is tc be moved out of its existing easemeni, the new easement areas should be surveyed.
In addition, all sites that have been flagged should have their flagging removed when construction activities have ceased.
One prehistoric site was discovered outside the right-of-way.
If care is noi taken, it could be damaged by subsidiary construction.
Indirect Impact PSC-8 is located in the NE I/4 of the SW I/4 of the NW I/4, Sec.
32,
- T23S, RIIW (2I6385 m.
E, 3573445
- m. N, Zone 13),
Luna County, New Mexico.
The Public Service Company of New Mexico power lines may have an indirect impact on archaeological remains in the area in three ways:
I.
Construction of access roads for the project may lead to easier access to isolated areas and thus increase the amount of vandalism to exposed archaeological resources; 2.
Land treatment measures either in agricultural land or in range-land may destroy or lead to The destruction of archaeological resources; apd Any disturbance of the earth outside the easement area dut ing construction may lead to the destruction of cultural resources.
o~
f k
'%l RECOMi~IENDATIONS TO M IT'IGATE THE IMPACT OF CONSTRUCTION Indirect Impact The first source of possible indirect impact, possible increased accessibility, is of minor importance in this case.
Most of the project areas are moderately accessible at the present time, and most of the affected ranchers keep a close eye on their properties.
The second source of possible indirect impact, land treatment
- measures, cannot be evaluated without further information.
Any activities involving disturbance of the earth on federal and state lands should be preceded by an archaeological
- survey, as cultural resources on these lands are protected by federal and state laws.
The status of construction on private land is not clear at the present time.
The Moss-Benneit Bill (PL 93-29I) may provide funds for archaeological salvage work on private lands under certain circumstances.
The third source of possible indirect impact on archaeological resources, construction activities, can easily be controlled.
If all earthmoving, activities are limited to the areas
- surveyed, there will be no unpredicted disturbance of archaeological remains.
- However, any earthmoving activity outside the area
- surveyed, no matter how minor, should be checked for archaeological remains.
Even minor soil disturbance can lead to the destruction of significant archaeological data.
In some other construction projects in the Southwest this kind of damage has resulted from two categories of activities.
In some instances, II
Pf minor construction-related activities such as leveling ground "for equipment parks and vehicle turnarounds have destroyed archaeological sites outside I
the formal right-of-w'ay.
In
=- few instances construction workers have in-tentionally destroyed archaeological sites for the purposes of obtaining artifacts.
In summary, indirect impact on archaeological resources as a result of this project can easily be prevented if proper care is utilized.
Direct Impact Impact on cultural resources within ihe easement can be avoided or mitigated in several ways.
I.
S annina without road access.
If no roads are planned for the project right-of-way and precise tower placement is not a factor along the route, the sites could be spanned without damage.
If this option is selected, a field archaeologist should monitor the operation.
Site flagging should be removed after construction work is completed.
2.
S annin with road access.
If roads are planned for the project right-of-way and precise tower placement is not a factor along the route, the sites could be spanned and an access road built but a field archaeologist vl 4
lm un should monitor the operation.
s 3.
~B ass..
The sites could be bypassed by moving the line out of its oxlsting easement.
If this is done the new easement should have archaeolo-gical clearance.
4.
Excavation of the sites.
Clearance could be provided by excavation o< the affected site or sites and ihe preparation of a final report.
The nntlro process involves excavation with recording and mapping, laboratory I
on@lysis, interpretation and writing, and publishing a final report.
A Research Proposal and Estimated Budget for the Excav--icn of the Sites The information pres nted below is not organized as a project.
Instead we have presented eacn site more-o. -less independently so that the rationale for excavating each site and the approximave costs of excavating each site independently can be seen.
If i becomes necessary to excavate more than one
- site, a project budget can easily be developed from these budgets.
Rosearch Goals Site PSC-I is a very small Archaic site.
Excavation and collection would provide some basic information bearing on the utilization of the area during the Archaic Stage.
Site PSC-2 is a small historic site.
Excavation would provide historians end historic archaeologists an insight to items not always present in 'I'e historical documents.
These items include:
I) architecture,
- 2) consumer Items available, 3) time the site was occupied, and 4) how these early sottlers exploited their environment.
Site 'PSC-3 is a large ceramic site with a possible Archaic component.
Its excavation would provide'modern data on the Pinelawn Phase of the Mimbres branch of the Mogoilon.
Most of the known data is from the Reserve area to tho north so PSC-3 could provide the basis for a better understanding of the t
tpatlal distribution and regional variations and adaptations of the Pine-lawn Phase.
The excavation could provide a better insight on the shift from who Desert Archaic (Cochise) to the Formative Stage (Mogollon).
Most of our knowledge of the Pinelawn Phase is from the north (Reserve, Hew Mexico) and
Cg I'~
data from the south are badly needed.
Site PSC-4 is a small ceramic site.
Excavation and collection would provide information on special use areas.
The site was probably occupied only Briefly as a camp site.
Site PSC-5 is a 20 x 20 meter area of numerous small rock clusters.
One locality has three small clusters in a N-S axis; another locality has two small clusters in an E-W axis.
These areas could possibly be hearth areas:
they do not appear to be walls.
Excavation could provide informa-tion on this special use site (.e.g.,
is it a seasonal gathering site or a ceremonial site?)
The large number of hearths and lack of any other visible features tends to indicate a short-tern occupation (temporary camp site) or an occupation by a small group of people who used the site spora-dically over a
long period of time (gathering site).
Site PSC-6 is a ceramic site.
Excavation and collection would provide n better understanding of the transition between late Mangus and the early Mimbres Phases of the Mogollon.
There appear to be several special use areas on the site which would provide information on the subsistence economy and would tend to indicate certain roles and segregation of activities.
Excava-tion of this site could provide extremely valuable information on the kinds end rates of change occuring in the Mimbres Branch Mogollon during this time porlod.
Site PSC-7 is a playhouse vi I lage.
At least six (6) pithouses are in ovldonce and potsherds number in the thousands.
The pottery from the site Is virtually unknown in the literature.
The sherds seem to be a mixture of Coons Grandes and Mogollon influence.
Excavation and collection would pro-vldo a basic identification for these
- wares, The site itself would tend to 1
a f
II l'
reflect the cultural aff i I iations and the interaction this particular site had between the Casas Grandes and the Mogollon cultures.
Other basic cultural data could also be provided by the excavation of this site:
sub-sistence and segregation of role activities would be possible.
Site PSC-8 is a preceramic lithic site.
The site has been badly picked over by the local populace.
The site still has the potential of producing some valuable information.
Several hearths and tool use areas seem to be intact.
Essentially no preceramic sites have been excavated by professional archaeologists between the Rio Grande and the New Mexico-Arizona border.
This absence of the preceramic prehistory makes the site an important one for determining a basic sequence for the area, cultural identification and how these early inhabitants of the Southwest exploited their environment.
Site PSC-9 is a ceramic site that is located in a large aeolian dune deposit.
The site has produced an unknown brownware.
As most of this site lies under the sanddune, no activity areas were noted.
Cultural identifi-cation of the site and its place in the local sequence could be possible with the excavation of the site.
The area and location of the site tends to suggest that the site was a seasonally occupied site for the exploitation of local flora as it became available.
Site PSC-IO is a late l9th century site that contains reworked glass artifacts.
The site is probably Apache.
It is quite small and lies entirely on the surface, The site is Important as there is no known Apache site excavation in Southwestern New Mexico.
A systematic collection of the site would be made to try to identify activity areas.
Site PSC-II is a small ceramic site, All sherds are on the surface of tho ground.
A systematic collection would be made oF these sherds in hopes of determining activity areas on this site.
Site PSC-12 is a 'small site located on a slight slope.
From the pottery present the site has been assigned to the Three Circle Phase of the Mogollon.
A systematic collection would be made of I'hese sherds in hopes of determining activity areas on this si,e.
h'.
t Site PSC-13 is a g neral location where historic artifacts (Camp Cody) overlie numerous sheras assigned to the Animas Phase.
No evidence of prehistoric structures or features were evident.
An old tile water. or is necessary in order to determine ihe extent of the prehistoric remains I.
We recommend complete excavation or col lection (as appropriate) aphic sequence of cultural materials, allowing future researchers chronology for the area.
Exploitation of the environment:
The tool assemblage in each Id tend to indicate what function the site served during its sower system runs from the Mimbres River to Camp Cody.
Extensive testing
,;r I, II any are present at the site.
~ I.
g! ~,!
hosoorch Strata y
'f'I, for all sites except PSC-3 and PSC-I3.
The portion of PSC-3 which is U'lthln the right-of-way should be excavated and the rest tested.
PSC-I3 hinds extensive testing to determine its limits and to locate structures.
lW 2.
Cultural identification:
excavation and collection of these altos would provide a more complete tool inventory and one thai could be "I',~:
a (trod as a comparison for other sites in the area.
3.
Cultural sequence:
If stratified, the sites would provide a
't,i,) ogAltlgr
",~~~ ', I bosic Ol (
, <~lI,'l'! QltO liou
",,>',,CCCQpotlon and in what seasons it was occupied.
",'.;"ISI IIIIII<"5.
Population density:
Size of each site and habitation area would
give a relative demographic sample size for the site.
6.
Social structure:
Usage areas and their artifacts would tend to indicate certain roles and segregation of activities.
I h
1 I
1 1
I I
(.
j<<.
'<<(
),<<
t r"I 1
(l i \\
E (
Field tdei hods In some of tne sites most of the fili or surface soils have eroded away.
In these deflated sites the data collection phase of the projec will consist of mapping and collecting surface material.
Sites that are stratified or have been covered by soil will be photographed,
- mapped, collected and excavated.
In order to insure maximum accuracy in surface mapping an artificial grid will be established over the site.
Stakes will be placed at IO-meter Intervals along north-south and east-west lines.
The collecting units will be I-meter squares.
The normal procedure will be as follows:
The basic IO-meter square will be subdivided into I-meter squares.
Each I-meter square will be photographed.
The photograph will provide the working map of the square along with a map drawn on graph paper.
In areas where there is a heavy concentration of artifacts the square will be divided into quarter sections and the collection of artifacts will be by quarter squares.
Ordinary material from each quarter square will be bagged together.
Artifacts of special interest will be bagged and mapped separately.
After the surface material has been collected, each square will be excavated by standard techniques (by natural strata and arbitrary IO cm. levels) to sterile soil.
In this process, every attempt will be made to leave 1 he local vegetation and ground surface in its original condition.
Plants will only be moved from the squares being excavated or when it is absolutely nocossary.
i I
j
l p
- Charcoal, pollen and flotation samples will be collected where feasible.
Additional data will be collected as the need is established.
LABORATORY ANALYSIS Laboratory analysis includes the following:
I.
Mechanical treatment cleaning, numbering, etc.
2.
Typological analysis of sherds and artifacts.
3.
Functional analysis of sherds and artifacts.
4.
Technological analysis of sherds and artifacts.
5.
Preparation of punch cards for all or part of the collection.
The following subsidiary studies would be performed, where feasible:
I.
Radiocarbon dating.
2.
Obsidian hydration dating.
3.
Dendrochronology.
4.
Pollen analysis and interpretation.
5.
Bone identification and interpretation.
6.
Flotation extraction and analysis and interpretation of recovered specimens.
7.
Geological studies of lithic material.
8.
Soils interpretation.
INTERPRETATION AND WRIT ING Interpretation and writing will be done by the archaeologist who supervised the excavation and analysis and the Principal Investigator.
Archaeological interpretation will include internal and external comparisons of artifacts and spatial analysis of artifacts - the standard sorts of Interpretation and presentation of data plus whatever other procedures socm indicated by the data.
Interpretation will,be computer aided.
A published report will be submitted to the company.
If it is desired, New Mexico State University can prepare and dissemin-ate news bulletins and feature articles discussing= the work, its archaeo-.
logical importance, and The role of the company in sponsoring the project.
SUPER'4 I S ION The project will be under the overall direction of Dr. Stanley D.
Bussey, Cultural Resources Management Division, Department of Sociology and Anthropology, New Mexico State University.
Dr. Bussey wil I maintain overal I
supervision of all aspects of the project.
E 4
r y
SITE PSC-I ESTIMATED BUDGET
/
s P
a The costs detai led below are estimated maximum costs.
The actual work wi I I be done on a cost-reimbursable
- basis, i.e.,
we wi I I charge only for work actually performed up to,he limits iisted below.
Salary esti-mates will hold through June 30, 1976, but other costs may need to be readjusted after September 30, 1975.
Field Costs Field Archaeologist, I
day 6 $43.28 ft, Fringe benef its Q 13.855 University overhead 6
17$
Mileage:
300 miles 0 $ 20/mile
'Expendable field supp)ies Film Per diem, 3 days 0 $20/day Labaratcr Casts Lab Director, I day 8 843.28 Lab Assistant, I day 13L $30.72 Fr 1nge benef its 6
- 13. 85$
University Overhead 9 60$
Expondable supplies Total wages Total supplies Total Field Costs Wage sub-total Total Wages Total Laboratory Costs Archaeological Assistant, 2 days C $30.72 Wage sub-total
- 43. 28 61.44
$ 104.72 14.50 17.80 137.02 60.00 10.00 5.00 60.00 135.00
$ 272.02 272.02
- 43. 28
- 30. 72
- 74. 00
- 10. 25 44.40 128.65 10.00 138.65 138.65
I n
SITE PSC-I Continued Inter retation and Uiritina Costs Archaeologist, 5 days 6 $ 43.28 Typist and draf tsman, 3 days 6
$20/day Wage sub-total Fringe benef its 0 I3.85/i University overhead 6 60$
$ 2I6.40 60.00
$ 276.40 38.28 l65.84 Expendable office supplies Developing and printing film Total wages S 480.52
- 10. 00 5.00 Computer time, provided by department Total Interpretation and Writing 0.00
$ 495.52 495.52 Su ervisor and Publication Costs Principal Investigator, I day js $58.00
(.Includes supervision of planning, excavation, analysis and preparation and editing of the final report)
Fringe benefits 0 I3.855 58.00 8.03 Half of p " I i==--'-
( I I
~
II
~HZ To>el Su"ervis"ry a,".d I
Publication costs Total Pro'ect Costs s=.
3
$ I75.83 I75.83
$ I082.02 fg
)
lJ
SITE PSC-2 EST It:~TED BUDGET The costs detailed below at e estimated maximum costs.
The actual work will be done on a cost-reimbursable
- basis, i.e.,
we will charge only for work actually performed up tc the limits listed below.
Salary esti-mates will hold through June 30, l976, but other costs may need to be readjusted after September 30, l975.
Field Costs Field Archaeologist, 3 days C $43.28 Archaeo I og i ca I Ass istant I I I, 6 days 0
$30. 72 Aage sub-total Fringe benefits Q I3.85$
University overhead C l7C Total wages
- Mileage, 400 miles C $.20/mile Expendable field supplies
$ I29.84 I84.32
$ 314.I6 43.5I 53.4I
$ 4II.08 4ll.08 80.00 10.00 Film Per diem 6
$20/day/9 days Total supplies Total Field Costs 5.00 I80.00
$ 275.00 686.08 Laborator Costs Laboratory Director, I
day 6 $43.28 Laboratory Ass i stan'I, I day 9 $30. 72 Mage sub-total Fringe benef its 6 13.854 University overhead 6 60$
Total wages 43.28 30.72 74.00 I0.25 44.40
$ l28.65 Expendable supplies Total Laboratory Costs'O.OO
$ I38.65 I38.65
~
r
~
~ ~
~ r o
I
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~ ~
~
~ I
~
~
r ~
4 I
~
~
r ~
r
~
r 4 r
~
~
~ ~
I
~ I I
~ ~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~ I ~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
I ~
~
~ II
~ II
~
~
~ r r
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~ ~
0
~
~
f
~ ~ '.
~ I
~
~
~
r
~
~
I
~ I
~
~
0 r
~
~
~
~
~
~t SITE PSC-3 The cosTs detai iud below.>>'u u<:I i>>i.ilail iv.i~i>>n>>>> <<>~,t~..
Ihii,iiIucil wli> li will be done on a cost-reimbursable basis, i.e.,
we will charge only for work actually perform d up to the limits listed below.
Salary estimates wilt hold through June 30, l976, but other costs may need to be readjusted after September 30, l975.
Field Costs Field Archaeologist, 30 days 9
$43.28/day Archaeological Assistant III, l20 days 9
$30.72/day Wage sub-total Fringe benefits 6
l3.85~p University overhead 0 l7$
Total salary and wages
- Mileage, 2500 miles C $.20/mile Expendable Field Supplies Film Per'iem C $20/day, 150 days Total supplies Total Field Costs Laborator Costs Laboratory Director, IO days 6 $43.28/day Laboratory Assistant, 20 days 6$ 30.72/day Wage sub-to'I'al Fringe benefits 6 l3.85$
University overhead 6 60$
Total Salaries and Wages Expendable supplies Total Laboratory Costs
$ 1298.40 3686.40
$4984.80
$ 690.39 847.42
$6522.el 500.00 75.00 l5.00 3000.00
$3590.00
$ 432.80 614.40
$ I047.20 l45.04 628.32
$ I820.56 I5.00 IO,II2.6I I835.56
l
SITE PSC-3 Continued Inter retation and Writing Costs Archaeologist, l5 days 6
$43.28 Typist and draftsman, 5 days 9
$20.00 Wage sub-total Fringe benefits 0
l3.85~~
University overhead 6 60$
Total Wages and Salaries Expendable Office supplies Oeveloping and Printing Film Palynology, C-I4, etc.
Computer time, provided by department Total Interpretation and Writing Su ervisor and Publication Costs Principal Investigator, 5 days C $ 58.00 (includes supervision of planning, excavation,
- analysis, and preparation and editing of the final report)
Fringe benef its 6 I3.85$
University overhead 6
60~>
Total supervisory Half of Publication Cost, et. at
$300.00 Total Supervisory and Publication Total Pro'ect Costs 649.20 IOO.OO 749.20 103.76
~49.52
$ I302.48 I5.00 l5.00 400.00 0.00 1732.48
$ I732.48 290.00 40.I7 l74.00 504.I7 l50.00 654.17 654.I7
$ I4 334'.82
~
~
SITE PSC-4 ESTIMATED BUDGET The costs detailed below are estimated maximum costs.
The actual work will be done on a cost-reimbursable basis, i.e.,
we will charge only for work actually per'formed up to the limits listed below.
Salary estimates will hold through June 30,
- 1976, but other costs may need to be readjusted after September 30, l975.
Field Costs Field Archaeologist, I day 0 $43.28 Archaeolog ica I Assistant I I I, 2 days 9
$30.72 Wage sub-total Fringe benef its 6
I 3. 85~p University Overhead 6 I7$
43.28 61.44 I04.72 I4.50 l7.80 MI leage:
300 ml les 6 $.20/mi le Expendable field supplies Film Per diem:
3 days C
$20/day Total Wages I37.02 60.00 IO.OO
- 5. 00 60.00 Laborator Costs Total field costs 272.02 272.02 Laboratory Director, I day 6 $43.28 Laboratory Assistant, I day 9 $30.72 Wage sub-total Fringe benef its 8 13.85$
University overhead 6 60$
Total wages Expendable supplies Tota I Laboratory Costs 43.28 30.72 74.00 I0.25 44.40 I28.65 IO.OO l38.65 i38.65 SITE PSC-4 Continued Interpretat I on and Wr It I na Costs Archaeologist, 5 days e
$43.28 Typist and draftsman, 3 days Q $20.00 Fringe benef its C 13.855 Un Ivers ity overhead c
60~+
Total Wages and Salaries Expendable office supplies Developing and Printing Film Computer time, provided by depar'lment Total Interpretation and Writing Su ervisor and Publication Cosi s Principal Investigator, I day 0 $ 58.00 (Includes supervision of planning, excavation, analysis and preparation and editing of the final report)
Fringe benef its 9 l3.85$
University overhead 0 60$
Half of publication cost, est. at
$ I50.00 Total Supervisory and Publication Total Pro'ect Costs
$ 216.40 60.'00
$ 276. 40 38.28 I65.84
$ 480.52 IO.OO 5.00
- 0. 00
$ 495.52
$ 495.52 58.00 8.03 34.80
$ I00.83 75.00
$ I75.83
$ I75.83
$ I082.02
~
~
SITE PSC-5 ESTIMATED BUDGET The costs detailed b
low are estimated costs.
The actual work will be done on a cost-reimbursable
- basis, ie,,
we will charge only for work actually performed up the the limits listed below.
Salary estimates will hol,d through June 30, l976, but other costs may need to be readjusted after S eptember 30, I 975.
Field Costs Field Archaeologist, IO days 6 $43.28 Archaeo Iog i ca I Ass istant I I I, 20 days 0 $30. 72 Wage sub-total Fringe benefits 0
I3.85~p University Overhead C l7$
Total Salary and Wages hli leage:
950 mi les 6.20/mi le Expendable Field Supplies Film Per diem:
30 days C $20/day Total Supplies Total Field Costs Laborator Costs Laboratory Director, 5 days 9 $43.28 Laboratory Assistant, 5 days 6 $30.72 Wage sub-total Fringe benefits 6 I3.854 University Overhead C
60~>
Total Salaries and Wages Expendable Suppl ies Total Lab Costs 432.80 6I4.40
$ I047.20 I45.04 I78.02
$ I370.26 190.00 75.00 IO.OO 600.00 875.00
$ 2245.26
$2245.26 2I6.40 I53.60 370.00 51.25 222.00 643.25 IO.OO 653.25 653.25
C
~
~
SITE PSC-5 Continued interpretation and Writin Costs Archaeologist, l5 days 9
$43.28 Typist and draftsman, 4 days 0 $ 20/day Wage sub-total Fringe benefits 6 I3.85~
University overhead Q 607 Total Wages and Salaries Expendab I e Off i ce supp I i es Developing and printing f i lm Computer time, provided by department Total Interpretation and Writing 649.20 80.00 729.20 I00.99 437.52
$ l267.7I IO.OO l0.00 0.00 1287.71
$ 1287.7I Su ervisor and Publication Costs Principal Investigator, 5 days 9
$ 58/day (includes supervision of planning, excavation, analysis and preparation and editing of the final report)
Fringe benef its 6 13.85$
University overhead 9 605 Total Supervisory and Publication Half of publication cost, est.
$300.00 Total Supervisory and Publication Costs Total Pro 'ect Costs 290.00 40.
I 7 l74.00 504.I7
~$
- 50. 00 654.I7 654.I7
$ 4840.39
If II S ITE PSC-6 EST I MATED EljDGET The costs detailed below are estimated maximum costs.
The actual work will b done on a cos't-reimbursable
- basis, i.e.,
we will charge only for work act ually performed up to ihe limits listed below.
Salary estimates will.hold through June 30, l976, bui other costs may need to be readjusted after September 30, 1975.
Field Costs Field Archaeologist, 20 days 6
$43.28 Archaeo I og i ca I Ass i stant I I I, I 00 days 0
$30. 72 Wage sub-total Fringe benef its 6 l3.85$,
University Overhead C
I7~>
Total Salary and Wages Mileage:
I500 miles 0
$.20/mile Expendable Field Supplies Film Per diem:
l20 days C $20/day Total Supplies Total Field Costs Laborator Costs 865.60
$ ~072.00
$ 3937.60 545.36 669.39
$ '5I52.35 300.00 60.00 I5.00
$ 2400.00
$ 2775.00
$ 7927.35 7927.35 Laboratory Director, IO days 6
$43.28 Laboratory Ass i stant, 20 days C$ 30. 72 Wage sub-total Fringe benefits, 0 13.854 University overhead 9 60$
Total salary and wages Expendable supplies Tota'I Laboratory Costs 432. 80 6I4.40
$ l047.20 l45.04 628.32
$ I820.56 I5.00 I835.56
$ I835.56 SITE PSC-6 Continued Archaeologist, l5 days Q $43.28 Typist and draftsman, 5 days C
$20.00 Mage sub-total Fringe benefits 9
I3.85~~
'University overhead, 60~
Total Wages and Salaries Expendable Office supplies Oeveloping and printing film Computer time, provided by the depariment Palynology, C-I4, etc.
Total Interpretation and Nr iii ng Su ervisor and Publication Costs Principal Investiga'Ior, 5 days 6 $ 58/day (includes supervision of planning, excavation,
- analysis, and preparation and editing of the final report)
Fringe benef its C
I3.85'niversity overhead C 50$
Half of publication cost, est.
ai
$300 Total Supervisory and Publication Costs S
649. 20 S
I00.00 S
749.20 S
l03.76 S
<49,.52 S
I302 48 S
I5.00 l5.00 S
0.00 400.00 I 732. 48 I 732. 48 S
290.00 40.I7 S
I74.00 l50.00 654.17 654.I7 Total Pro'ect Costs
$ I2 l49.56 SITE PSC-7 ESTII'lATED BUDGET The costs detailed below are estimated maximum costs.
The'actual work will be done on a cost-reimbursable basis, i.e.,
we will charge only. for work actually performed up to the limits listed below.
Salary estimates will hold through June 30, l976, but other costs may need to be readjusted after September 30, I975.
Field Costs Field Archaeologist, 30 days 6
$43,28 Archaeological Assis ant III, l50 days 6
$30.72 Wage sub-total Fringe benefits 8
l3.85~~
University Overhead C
17$
Total Salary and
'Wages Mileage:
2500 miles Q
$.20/mile Expendable Field Supplies Fi Im Per Diem:
180 days C
$20/day Total Supplies Total Field Costs Laborator Costs Laboratory Direc or, l5 days 9 $43.28 Laboratory Ass i siant, 20 days C
$30. 72 Wage sub-total Fringe benefits, Q
I3.85~p University overhead 6
60~>
Total Salary and Wages Expendable supplies Total Laboratory Costs
$ Ip298.40 4 608.00
$ 5,906.40 SI8.04 I 004.09
$ 7,728.53 500.00 75.00 20.00
$ 3 600.00
$ 4,I95.00
$ II,923.53
$ II,923.53 649.20 6I4.40
$ I,263.60 175.0I 758.I6
$ 2,I96.77 20.00
$ 2,2I6.77
$ 2,2I6.77
C
~
g 1 SITE PSC-7 Continued Ij Interpretat I on and Wr It I na Costs Archaeo I og i st, 20 days C
$43. 28 Typist and draftsman, 6 days 9
$20.00 Wage sub-total Fringe benefits 6
13.854'niversiTy overhead 0 60~
Total Salaries and Wages Expendable office suoplies Developina and Printing Film Computer time, provided by the department Palynology, C-I4, etc.
Total Interpretation and Writing Su ervisor and Publication Costs 665.60 I20.00 985.60 I36.5I 59I.36
$ I,7I3.47 l5.00 20.00 $
450.00
$ 2,I98.47
$ 2,198.47 Principal Investigator, 5 days Q
$58/day (includes supervision of planning, excavation,
- analysis, and preparation and editing of the final report)
Fringe benefits 0
I3.85'niversity overhead C
60'<alf of publication cost, est.
at
$300 Total Supervisory and Publication Costs Total Pro ect Costs 290.00 40.I7 I74.00 I50.00 654.I7 654,I7
$ t6992.94
t ac' P'
SITE PSC-8 ESTIMATED BUDGET The costs detailed below are estimated maximum costs.
The actual work will be done on a cost-reimbursable basis, i.e.,
we will charge only for work actually performed up to the limits listed below.
Salary estimates will hold through June 30,
- 1976, but other costs may need to be readjusted, after September 30, 1975.
Field Costs Field Archaeologist, 15 days Q
$43.28 Archaeological Assistant III, 60 days 0
$30.72 Wage sub-total Fringe benefits 8
13.85$
University Overhead 6
17~+
Total Salary and Wages
- Mileage, 1000 miles C
$.20/mile Expendable Field Supplies Film Per Diem:
75 days Q
$20/day Total Supplies Tol'al Field Costs Laborator Costs 649.20 I 843.20
$ 2,492.40 345.20 423.71
$ 3,261.31 200.00 50.00 10.00 I 500.00
$ lp760.00
$ 5,021.31
$ 5,021.31 Laboratory Director, 10 days js
$43.28 Laboratory Assistant, 10 days 9
$30.72 Wage sub-total Fringe benefits 6
13.85~
University overhead C 604 Total Salary and Wages Expendable supplies Total Laboratory Costs 432. 80 307.20 740,00 102.49 444.00
$ 1,286.49 10.00
$ 1,296.49
$ 1,296.49
f pp
~
-3I-SITE PSC-8 Continued f
V>
"I Interpretation and
'ri ina Costs Archaeologist, l5 days 0 $43.28 Typist and Draftsman, 5 Days 0
$20 l"age sub-total Fringe benef iis G I3.85 University Overhead 8
60~>
Toi'al Salaries and Wages Expendable off i c supplies Developing and Printing Film Palynology, C-I4, etc.
Computer time, provided by the departmeni Total Interpretation and Nriting Su ervisor and Publication Costs 649.20 I00.00 749.20 I03.76 449 '2
$ I,302.48 I5.00 I5.00 400.00 $ 1,732.48
$ 1,732.48
( ((
,Il'4
>pi 4 'I(}~
}I 1 ()>I*
- (f('..I 1-Pr inc i pa I Investigator, 3 days P.
$58.00 (includes supervision of planning, excavation,
- analysis, and preparation and editing of the final repori )
Fringe benef its 0
13.
85'niversity Overhead 0
60~~
Half of publication cosi', est. at
$200 Total Supervisory and Publication Costs Total Pro ect Costs
~ 174.00 24.IO I04.40 l00.00 402.50 402.50
$ 8 452.78
1 R
L SITE PSC-9 j),
ESTIMATED aUDSET The costs detailed below are estima ed maximum costs.
The actual work wi I I be done on a cos0-reimbursable
- basis, i.e.,
we wi I I charge only for work actually performed up to the limits listed below.
Salary estimates will hold through June 30, 1976, but other costs may need to be readjusted afTer September 30, 1975.
Field Costs Field Archaeologist, IO days 0
$43.28 Archaeological Assistant III, 30 days 0 $30.72 Wage sub-total Fringe benefits C 13.85$
University Overhead 6
17~i Total Salary and'ages hiileage:
750 miles Q $.20/mile Expendable Field Supplies Film Per Diem:
40 days 0
$20/day Total Supplies Total Field Costs Laborator Costs 432.80 921.60
$ 1,354.40 187
~ 58 230 '5
$ 1,772.23 150.00 50 00 10.00 800.00
$ 1,010.00
$ 2p782.23
$ 2,782.23 Laboratory Director, 5 days 6 $43.28 Laboratory Ass istant, 5 days 6
$30. 72 Wage sub-total Fringe benefits 6 13.85$
Univers ity Overhead 6 60$
Total Salary and Wages Expendable Supp I ies Total Laboratory Costs 216.40 153.60 370.00 51.25 227.00 643.25 10.00 653.25 653.25
SITE PSC-9 Continued Interpretation and Writino Costs Archaeologist, IO days 0
$43.28 Typist and Drafts. an, 5 days C -$20 t'ge sub-iota I
Fringe benefits te I3.85~f.
University Overhead C 60~
Total Salaries and Pages Expendable office supplies Developing and Printing Film Computer Time, provided by the deoartment Palynology, C-I4, etc.
Toi a I I nterp retat i on a nd 1'Ir it i ng Su ervisor and Publication Costs Principal Investigator, 3 days e
$58.00 (includes supervision of planning, excavation,
- analysis, and preparation and editing of the final report)
Fringe benefits g I3.85~
University Overhead C 60+
Half of publication cost, est.
at
$200 Total Supervisory and Publication Costs Total Pro'ect Costs 432.80 100.00 532.80 73.79 3I9.68 926.27 IO.OO 10.00 250 QQ I 74.00 24.IO I04.40 IOO ~ 00 402.50 402.50
$ 5 034.25
$ I,I96.27
$ l,196.27
11
<<E>>
i '),
I rI I>>'
I only for work estimates wi I I hold be readjusted afTer Field Costs Field Archaeo Archaeologica Fringe benef i University Ov
>>I III Icage:
200 Expendable Fi Fi lm Per Diem:
6 days 0
(
Laborator Costs Laboratory Di Laboratory As
.'<<p,",. Fringe benef i
'<<j.i" University Ov Expendable Supplies EEE>>l; done on a cost-reimbursable basis, i.e.,
we will charge actually perfcrmed up -o ihe limi+s lisTed Delow.
Salary ihrouch June 30, 1976, but c her costs may need to September 30, 1975.
- logist, 2 days C
$43.28 I Assisian+ III, 4 days C$
$30.72
<'age sub-total t's Q
13.85~p erhead C
17~~
Total Salary and Nages miles C S.20/mile eld Supplies 86.56 122.88
. 209.44
" 29.01 35.60 274.05 40.00 10.00 5.00 120.00
$20/day Total Supplies 175.00 449.05 449 F 05 Total Field Costs
- rector, I day Q
$43.28
- sistani, 2 days Q $30.72 Mage sub-total ts 6 I3.85<<
erhead C
60~<<
Total Salary and Wages 43.28 61.44 104.72 i4.50 62.83 182.05 EO.OO E92.0$
Total Laboratory Costs 192.05 SITE PSC-10 t.'
"STIRRED BUDGET The costs detailed below are estimated maximum costs.
The actual work will be
c l
'J S ITf PSC-I 0 Cont i nued Inter retation and Writing Costs Archaeologist, 5 days C
$43.28 Typist and Draftsman, 3 days C
$20 Wage sub-total Fringe benefits 9 I3.855 University Overnead 8
60~<
Total Salaries and Wages Expendable Office Supplies Oeveloping and Printing Film Palynology, C-I4, etc.
Computer Time, provided by the department Total Interpretation and Writing Su ervisor and Publication Costs 216.40 60.00 276.40 38.28 I65.84 480.52 IO.OO 5.00 I50.00 645.52 645.52 Principal Investigator, I day Q
$58.00 (includes supervision of planning, excavation,
- analysis, and preparation and editing of the final report)
Fringe benefits 0 I3.85~
University Overhead C 60$
Half of publication cost, est.
at
$ I50 Total Supervisory and Publication Costs 58.00
- 8. 03 34.80 75.00 175.83 175.83 I 462.45
SITE PSC-II ESTIMATED BUDGET
.The costs detailed below are estimated maximum costs.
The actual work will be done on a cost-reimbursable basis, i.e.,
we will charge only for work actually performed up to the limits listed below.
Salary estimates will hold through June 30,
- 1976, bui other costs may need to be readjusted after September 30, 1975.
Field Costs Field Archaeologist, 2 days 0
$43.28 Archaeological Assistant III, 4 days 9
$30.72 Wage sub-total Fringe benefits C 13.85$
University Overhead C>
17~<
Tol al Salary and Wages
- Mileage, 200 miles Q $,20/mile Expendable Field Supplies F I lm Per Diem:
6 days C $20/day Total Supplies Total Field Costs Laborator Costs Laboratory Director, I
day C
$43.28 Laboratory Assistant, 2 days C $30.72 Wage sub-total Fringe benefits Q
13.85~p University Overhead 9 60$
Total Salary and Wages Expendable Supplies Total Laboratory Costs 86.56 122.88 209.44 29.01 35.60 274.05 40,00 10.00 5.00 120,00 175.00 449.05 449.05 43.28 61.44 104.72 i4.50 62.83 102, 05 10.00 192.05 192,05 SITE PSC-I I Continued Interpretation and Writing Costs Archaeologist.
Typist and Dra Fringe benefit University Ove Expendable Off Developing and Palynology, C-Computer time, 5 days C
$43. 28
- ftsman, 3 days 6
$20 Wage sub-total s
Q I3.85~~
rhead 6 60$
Total Salaries and Wages ice Supplies Printing Film 14, etc.
provided by ihe department Total Interpretation and Writing 216.40 60.00 276.40 38.28 165.84 480.52 IO.OO 5.00 I50.00 645.52 645.52 Su ervisor and Publication Costs Principal Investigator, I day 9
$58.00 (Includes supervision of planning, excavation,
- analysis, and preparation and editing of the final report)
Fringe Benefits Q I3.85$
University Overhead C 60$
Half of Publication Cost, esi. at
$ I50 Total Supervisory and Publication Costs 58.00 8.03 34.80 75.00 I75 83 I75 83 1 462.45
S ITE PSC-12 ESTIMATED BUDGET The costs detailed below are estimated maximum costs.
The actual work will be done on a cost-reimbursable basis, i.e.,
we will charge only for work actually performed up to the limits listed below.
Salary estimates wi II hold through June 30, 1976, but other costs may need to be readjusted af'I'er September 30,
- 1975, Field Costs Field Archaeologist, 2 days C
$43,28 Archaeological Assistant III, 4 days 0
$30.72 Wage sub-total Fringe benefits 6 13.85$
University*Overhead 6
17$
Total Salaries and Wages Ilileage:
200 miles 0
$.20/mile Expendable Field Supplies F I lm Per Diem:
6 days 6 $20/day Total Supplies Total Field Costs 86.56 122,88 209,44 29.01 35.60 274.05 40.00 10.00 5.00 120.00 175.00 449.05 449.05 Laborator Costs Laboratory Director, I day 6 $43.28 Laboratory Assi s I'ant, 2 days 6 $30.72 Wage sub-total Fringe benefits C
13.85'niversity Overhead 6 60$
Total Salary and Wages Expendable supplies Tota I Laboratory Costs
- 43. 28 61.44 104.72 14.50 62.83 182.05 10.00 192.05 192.05
~)
~p
SITE PSC-l2 Continued I ntero retat i on and
'Wr it i na Costs Archaeo I og i st, 5 days e
$43. 28 Typist and Draftsman, 3 days C $20
'lage sub-toia I
Fringe benefits C
l3.85~p University Overhead
(-". 60~p Total Salaries and Wages Expendable Office Supplies Developing and Printing Film Palynology, C-I4, eic.
Computer time, provided by the department Total Interpretation and Nriiing Su ervisor and Publication Costs Principal Investigator, I day 6
$58.00 (includes supervision of planning, excavation,
- analysis, and preparation and editing of the final report)
Fringe benefits 6 13.85$
University Overhead 6 60<
Half of Publication Cost, est. at
$ I50 Total Supervisory and Publication Costs Total Pro ect Costs 2I6.40 60.00 276.40 38.28 l65.84 480.52 I0.00 5.00 I50.00 645.52 645.52 58.00 8.03 34.80 75.00 175.83 175.83
$ I 462.45
~I
, ~
F 1
SITE PSC-13 EST I ~'ATED BUDGET k
r,
'k The costs de7ai leo below are es-;imaied maxi~urn costs.
The actual work will be done on a
ost-rei;.ours ble basis, i.e.,
we will charge only for work ac.ually oer orred up to the limits listed below.
Salary estimates wili hold,hrough Jure 3C,
- 1976, but other costs may need to be readjusted afte.
September 3",
1975.
Field Costs k
,k k k
kJ) 1 I'kk kk
,',3
~, $
k f
k'kk k
k, i Ik',,(
'k'J', l~>l IO days Q
$20/day Total Supplies Total Field Costs Laborator Costs Laboratory Director, I
day 9
$43.28 Laboratory Assistant, I day Ia 30.72 3tage sub-total Fringe Bene f iis e
- 13. 85~p University Overhead C
60~p Total Salary and Nages Expendable Supplies Total Laboratory Costs Field Archaeologist, 5
d vs e
$43.28 Archaeological Assis7an
- III, days C $30.72
'i'a e sub-total Fringe Benefits C
13.85,~
University Overhead 0
>7r Total Salary and
'4'ages hlileage:
250 miles e S.20/mile Expendable Field Suoplies Fi lm Per Diem:
216.40 153.60 370. 00 51 '5 62.90 484.15 50.00 10.00 5.00 200.00 265.00 749.15 749.15 43.28 30.72 74.00 10.25 44.40 128.65 10.00 138.65 138.65
't p V
-4I-Interpretation and Nri ina Costs Archaeologist, 5 days P.
$43.28 Typist and Draftsman, 3 days 0 $20.00 Nage sub-total Fringe Benefits 6
13.85~
University Overhead C
60~<
Total Saiary and Nages Expendable Offic Supplies Developing and Printing Film Computer time, provided by the depar.ment
=
Total Interpretation and Nriting I Investigator, I day Q
$58.00 des supervision of planning, excavation,
- sis, and preparation and editing of the report) enefits C I3.85~
ty Overhead Q
60~<
Publication Cost, est.
at
$ I50 Total Supervision and Publication 5I SITE PSC-l3 Continued A
'i vv)$
v IV 4(
i i'VV 5
'l~ iV
,l Ii Su ervisor and Publication Costs Principa
'P",,f'I>,
( inc I u Half of Total Pro'ect Costs tp, jl'I'
,,5,'g I,4 N~w$,
'I6.40 60.00 276.40 38.28 I65.84 480.52 IO.OO 5.00 495.52 495.52 58 F 00 8.03
- 34. 80 75.00 175.83 l75.83
$ I 559. I5
It APPENDIX I
The Sites Site PSC-I Location:
NN -'f the IIU/
of the SW
,', Sec.
I I, T7N, R 3IE, Greenlee County, Arizona (673150 I1.E.,
3634650 M.N., Zone l2).
Cultural Aff i I i ation:
Cochi se
(? )
Stage:
Unknown Size:
5 x 5 meters
==
Description:==
The site consists of a small scattering of stone tools and flakes.
The lithic assemblage lies directly on top of a residual surface and is all surface material, with no stratigraphy.
Ceramic Evidence:
No sherds Lithic Evidence:
Diagnostic tool types include:
Two (2) fine-grained quartzite scrapers; one (I) chert hammerstone; four (4) retouched flakes and approximately ten (IO) waste flakes, mostly fine-grained quartzite and chalcedony.
Artifact Disposition:
AII material left at site undisturbed.
Recommendations:
Not recommended for National Register.
Recommend by-passing site it at all possible.
If the site cannot be avoided, and collection is necessitated, three (3) man-days are
- needed, with travel time included.
Comments:
Site was flagged by red flagging on creosote bush.
Owner:
U.S.
Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management.
I r
PSC-1 T 7S,R 3'lE
~~ ~~lTTFR c~kcg goA
~ ~
~ ~ ~
~
~ ~
~
Xl(y lg
~t
/p ggfE
~
girr-'~
~
~
~..
3 P5C-1 10 KEY:
-- acr oyo sur vey line
=== I"OBCI 4 site
)
f/j IJ.
f//
~~ h4 J/
)(l...
>; =.i
>i)i i<8 =.=-=-
~
'l1 scale:
'1m'.
I y( I' f
I
Site PSC-2 Location:
SE -'f the SE -'f the SE -', Sec.
17, T9S, R32E, Greenlee County, Arizona (679850 M.E., 3613250 M.N., Zone 12).
Cultural Affiliation: Historic Age:
Circa A.D.
1900 Size:
10 x 10 meters
==
Description:==
A one-room dwelling which measures 3.5 x 4.0 meters.
A doorway is located on the east wall.
The structure has a basalt cobblestone foundation and had been a wooden structure with glass windows and a tin roof.
A few very small wood fragments are left, and only the foundation and a few pieces of galvanized tin are left.
No outhouse loca'I'ion could be determined.
Approximately 10 cm. of fill in structure.
Artifacts:
None were removed from the site, except for a NRA.38-55 car-tridge which was brought back for identification.
Window glass, china (without trademark),
galvanized tin and wood fragments were present.
Recommendations:
Not recommended for inclusion in the National Register.
If the site cannot be avoided, and if an excavation is necessitated, nine (9) man-days are
- needed, with travel time included.
Otherwise, it is recommended that the site be bypassed if at all possible.
l4ner:
U.S.
Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management.
'C 4
1
~ clGtTl
=== I-OaC}
-- ar royo C Qnt,OLI 1" One r oom histor ic site SOu.th
&a(( ha S a.
rn~gncric.
0 baa.ring of 79>
ha.sT Wa.l(,
ha.O
- a. ma.inc.V ic bea.ring of 3'P1. Rpyyoy(ma.tc(.p' 0 c el.
of g. ( a re zna. in f iN Ch c.
room. 7'ha Struc.turc ha.g
- a. b~ SA(f cobb(c Stone.
loup)cia.g gaii.
1 mBt.GI"
I 1
t
. Site PSC-3 Location:
S'4' of The SE k of the SN -', Sec.
23, T2IS, R 20",I, Hidalgo
- County, New mexico (699925 M.E., 3593I55 M.N., Zone 12).
Cultural Affiliation: Mogollon Stage:
Pinelawn Size:
25 x 2OO meters
==
Description:==
The site consis s of a large number of potsherds and worked stone eroding out of large dune buildup area.
No structures were noted in the area.
There are areas, however, that were possible living floors.
The pottery clusters in the southern half of the
- site, while the northern half has numerous manos and metates scattered about; There is a good possibility thai The site is more than 25 meters wide as there is, a heavy aeolian buildup over the entire area.
Ceramic Evidence:
Alma Plain sherds in abundance in the hundreds.
Lithic Evidence:
Basalt and sandstone metates; sandstone manos;
- blades, side scrapers, plane scrapers, concave and convex scrapers and a
hammerstone.
Artifact Disposition:
Six sherds brought back to the NMSU Museum for analysis.
All other sherds and artifacts were left undisturbed on the site.
Recommendations:
Recommend by-passing site if at all possible.
If ihe site cannot be avoidod, and excavation and collection are necessary, l50 man-days are needed.
Comments:
Site was flagged by red flagging on mesquite bushes.
Owner:
Bureau of Land Management (BLM Status map SI'l-2I, II/74).
PSC 3 T21S,R2OW
~I gl I/'
I/
tt I
V I/
ffI I(
I r
I
~l KEY:
water (t emp.)
cont.our I OQCI depression Slt.8 sc8,IB: 1tTII.
- l
~
y t
II,
Site PSC-4 Location:
SI'( z of the SN
~ of the Si'/ z, Sec.
22, T2IS, RI9N, Hidalgo Coun y, New Mexico (707400 Il.E., 3593115 I1.N., Zone IZ).
Cultural Affiliation: Iiogollon (Jornada)
Stage:
Unknown Size:
5 x 5 meters
==
Description:==
Site rests on a broad flood plain.
No structures were present.
Site appears to have been a
camp site utilized only brief ly.
Ceramic Evidence:
Eleven Jornada Brown sherds were in evidence.
Two sherds were collected for further lab analysIs.
Lithic Evidence:
Two stone artifacts were observed on the site, a
projectile point and a spokeshave-graver made out of rhyolite.
Artifact Disposition; Two potsherds and the projectile point were collected and brought back for lab analysis.
All other sherds and the spokeshave-graver were left on the site undisturbed.
Recommendations:
Not recommended for the National Register.
Recommend by-passing sile if at all possible.
If the site cannot be avoi'ded and collection is necessary, three man-days are needed, with travel time included.
Comments:
Site was flagged by red flagging and is located IS meters north of USGS marker S2I ~S22 S27l S28 Owner:
State of New l1exico (BLM Status I1ap SM-2l, I I/74).
l 1
I
PSC-4P 5 T21S, R19W
)
22 03oo 27
~0 (g~
0 KEY:
-- arroyo contour US70
=== roach
" borrow p)t A site scale: 1mi.
4
)
Site PSC-5 Location:
.'f the SN -'f the SE Sec,.
22, T2IS, RI9'el, Hidalgo
- County, New Mexico (708290 M.E., 3593I35 M.N., Zone I2).
Cultural Affiliation: I'~ogollon Stage:
Unknown Size:
20 meters N-S axis; 25 meters E->I axis.
==
Description:==
The area has numerous areas of small rock clusters.
One 1
locality has three smal I areas of rocks in a N-S axis; another locality ha" two smal I areas of rocks in an E-8 axis.
These areas could possibly be hearth areas; they do not appear to be walls.
Ceramic Evidence:
Three Alma Plain sherds Lithic Evidence:
Two retouched flakes Other Evidence:
One live Gmm round Artifact Disposition:
All material left at site undisturbed.
Recommendations:
Not recommended for National Register.
Recommend by-passing site if at all possible.
If the site cannot be
- avoided, and excavation and collection are necessary, 30 man-days are needed, with travel time included.
Comments:
Site is on a slight slope.
Location is approximately one-half mile north of Ninemi le Hill.
Ownership:
State of New Mexico (BLM Status Map SUI-2l, Il/74).
P Site PSC-6 Location:
SE g of the SN -'f the NN,', Sec.',
- T23S, RI5W, Grant
- County, New Mexico (74I925 M.E., 3578575 M.N., Zone I2).
Cultural Affiliation: Mogollon Stage:
Late Mangus - Ear I y Mimbres Size:
25 meters N-S axis; 30 meters E-N axis
==
Description:==
The site is situated on a small bench SE of a large arroyo.
No depressions or surface structures in evidence.
Abundant potsherds and worked stone are scattered in a 25 x 30 meter area.
Ceramic Evidence:
Mimbres Classic Black-on-White, Mangus Black-on-
- White, Alma Plain, Three Circle Neck-Banded Lithic Evidence:
Polishing stone, spokeshaves,
- blades, side scrapers, utilized and reiouched flakes.
Artifact Disposition:
Eleven (II) sherds and the polishing stone were collected for further analysis at the New Mexico State University Museum.
All other potsherds and stone were left undisturbed at the site.
Recommendations:
Possible that ihe.site is of National Register sig-nificance.
Recommend by-passing site if at all possible.
If the site cannot be avoided, and excavation and collection are necessary, I20 man-days are needed, with travel time included.
Comments:
The site has not been disturbed or pothunted.
Location is approximately l200 ft. northeast of the El Paso Natural Gas line.
Ownership:
State of New Mexico (BLM Status Map SN-27, 6/74).
~ ~
~ ~
PRE -6 T2~S,R~~~
l~
'I1 I'))
I
'I(
g W~>/
V9 Vo J
'4 s~~o 0
c l
o O
I
~D
~
Q PSG.
I QIgo KEY-'-
arroyo c ontoUr
=== rotc!
A site scaIe:
1 mi.
h[fl S i te PSC-7 Location:
SN of.the SNh of the NE
.', Sec, l9, T23S, RI4>l, Grant
- County, New Mexico (7522IO t4.E.,
3575700 M.N., Zone lg).
Cultural Affiliation: Mogollon Stage:
Unknown Size:
80 meters N-S axis; 75 meters E-lr'xis
==
Description:==
The site is situated on a bench on the east side of Burro Cienega Creek.
At lea t six piihouses are in evidence, and ceramics number in the thousands.
Burro Cienega Creek provides arable land.
The site is possibly stratified.
Ceramic Evidence:
Alma Plain, Iiimbres Red l'lash (?),
Casas Grandes Red Nares
(?),
and some unidentified sherds.
Lithic Evidence:
Obsidian point, sidescrapers, spokeshaves, utilized and retouched flakes.
Artifact Disposition:
Twelve (l2) sherds and the obsidian point were collected for further analysis at the New Mexico State University Museum.
All other material left on ihe site undisturbed.
Recommendations.
The site is an important one, and is of possible National Register significance.
Recommend by-passing site if at all possible.
If the site cannot be avoided, and excavation and collection are necessary, l80 man-days are needed, with travel time included.
Comments:
The site has not been disturbed or pothunted.
Ownership:
Kipp Ranch, patented land (BLM Status Map SN-27, 6/74).
tl lk
1
'I
~
~
~ I ~
~
~
I l
l
~ $
>I II'
)p
~ t Site PSC-8 Location:
NE z of the Sl'I -'f the NM z, Sec.
32, T23S, RIIH, luna
- County, New Mexico.(ZI6385 M.E., 3573445 fl.N., Zone I3).
Cultural Affiliation: Cochise Stage:
Unknown Size:
40 x 40 meters
==
Description:==
The siie is eroding oui of a shallow overburden, and several hearths are in evidence.
The site is known to some of the local population.
It is located just west of the dirt road running north from the Deming pumping station (El Paso Natural Gas Co.),
.one-half mile north from the road junc ion.
Ceramic Evidence:
None Lithic Evidence:
Scraper
- planes, side scrapers, spokeshaves, utilized and retouched flakes.
Artifact Disposition:
All ma'lerial left at the site undisturbed.
Recommendations:
There will be no direct impact on the.site as it lies to the north of the survey line.
Indirect impact will be minimal as there is already easy access to the site.
Comments:
There are a large number of 22 caliber shelIs and broken glass in the area.
The site also looks as if it had been surface collected.
Several use areas are still visible along with several hearths.
Ownership:
State of Now Mexico (BLM Status Map SW-27, 6/74).
. ~ )
I g
T23 S,R11W
/
II Il A
\\
lJ> pic-S llllll J
u lli/70 II o
1 P.S IIHAruAAIr, PASO II+AS Ii>1
,gO fg os oll PQPSIAP II 0
'1-o s.(l 5fA1ioRQ KEY:
-- arroyo pipeline
=== roacl contour a tank s)te
4 H
%l 14 fl 4
I I
q '1
~,I IIf Hl I
e't Site PSC-9 Location".
SE -'f the NE
.'f the SW -', Sec.
30 T23S RIOW Luna J
- County, New Mexico (225575 M.E., 3574385 II.N., Zone I3).
Cultural Affiliatior: Unknown Stage:
Unknown Size:
70 meters N-S axis; 50 meters E-W axis
==
Description:==
Located in an aeolian dune deposit, east of Jones Sprin Draw in a heavy growth of mesquite.
The site is composed oi scattered concentrations of potsherds and worked stone.
Ceramic Evidence:
Unknown brownware Lithic Evidence:
One broken vesicular basalt
- mano, side scraper, utilized and retouched flakes.
Artifact Disposition:
Ten unidentified potsherds were collected for lab analysis at the New Mexico State University Museum.
All other artifacts were left on the site undisturbed.
Recommendations:
lt is possible that the site is of National Register s>gnificance.
It is recommended that the site be by-passed if at all possible.
If the site cannot be avoided, and collection is necessary, 40 man-days are needed, witli travel time included.
'., (
Comments:
Site was flagged by red flagging on mesquite bushes.
Ownership:
- Private, patented land (BLM Status Map SW-27, 6/74).
AJ lg t
I 4
I
PS C 9;i08.11 T23S, R'IOW 0
30 Q Psc-p 0
I
,)4 50 I
PSc-10:t.
I I
l 5PSC-rl KEY:
-- arroyo, ditch corrtoul-
=== I"OQCI A site
t 0,$
t 1'
l II I
III I
II I
r I
I I
)
t I
I Site PSC-IO Location:
NE 4 of the NW -'f the SE ~, Sec.
30, T23S,
- RIOW, Luna
- County, New tlexico (225900 II.E., 3574440 M.N., Zone 13).
Cultural Affiliation:
Apache
(?)
Age:
I9th Century Size:
20 x 20 meters
==
Description:==
The site is in a large deflated area.
It is situated between a playa and an aeolian dune deposit.
There is a random scattering of worked stone and glass artitacts present on the site".
The number of artifacts is quite smal I (approximately 20-30).
Ceramic Evidence:
Ono sherd of Jornada Brown (probably intrusive)
Lithic Evidence:
Several broken manos and retouched flakes were present.
Other Evidence:
Several other artifacts were encountered that were made (rom brown bottle glass.
They include a very fine scraper and a graver.
Artifact Disposition:
The scraper,
- graver, and a portion of a bottle bottom were collected'or further analysis at the New Mexico State University Museum.
AII other artifacts were left on the site undisturbed.
Recommendations:
Not recommended for the National Register.
Recommend by-passing site i( at all possible.
If the site cannot be avoided, and excavation and collection are necessary, six (6) man-days are
- needed, with travel time included.
Comments:
SIte was flagged by red flagging, Ownership
- Private, patented land.
~ J ll W
f II'
Site PSC-II Location:
NN
~ of the NN 4 of the SN q, Sec.
29, T23S, RIOI'I, Luna
- County, New Mexico (226480 M.E., 3574480 M.H., Zone l3)
Cultural Affiliation: Jornada Mogollon Stage:
Unknown Size:
20 x 20 meters
==
Description:==
The site is comprised of a scattered small number of Jornada Brown sherds (IO sherds noted).
The terrain is fairly flat, with some aeolian activity taking place.
The site is located about 150 meters east of the fence line that runs between sections 30 and 29.
Ceramic Evidence:
Jornada Brown Lithic Evidence:
No,worked stone noted Artifact Disposition:
Two sherds were collected for further analysis at the New Mexico State University Museum.
All,other sherds were left at the site undisturbed.
Recommendations:
Not recommended for the National Register.
Recommend by-passing site if at all possible.
If the site cannoi be avoided,
'I and collection is necessary, six (6) man-days are needed, with travel time included.
Comments:
Site was flagged by red flagging.
Ownership:
State of New Mexico
t tl 1t I
t 1
t tt tt 4
I I
t I'
t I
I Site PSC-l2 Location:
,'f The SWk, Sec.
23,
- T23S, RIOW, Luna
- County, New Mexico (231655 II.E., 3575210 M.N., Zone I3).
Cultural Affiliation: Mogollon Stage:
Three Circle Phase Size:
IO x iO meters Descrip rion:
The sile consists of a smail scattering of potsherds and a
lone mano.
The site is situated on a slope thai faces north.
There has been a moderate amount of aeolian activity in the area.
Ceramic Evidence:
Mangus Black-on-White, Alma Plain Lithic Evidence:
One large unifacial basalt mano Artifact Disposition:
Nine (9) sherds and the mano were collected for further analysis at the New Mexico State University Museum.
All other sherds left on the site undisturbed.
Recommendations:
Not recommended for the National Register.
Recommend'y-passing site if at all possible.
If the site cannot be avoided, and excavation and collection are necessary, six (6) man-days are
- needed, with travel time included.
Comments:
Site was not flagged.
Ownership:
State of New Mexico (BLM Status Map SW-28, II/74).
4g r
'l I
P SC-'l2 813 T23S,R'IOW
,x4
.v'~
~~y4 pic-0 P
ii
, l I
I h
'\\
ggg r gy SI:Ja i'I
<f h
n' If II N
4 h
II y
I if ~)l I
cf n
hIl to~ItI tf <<v t
KEY:
rivBr,clltch contour I
=== roaa borrow pit a tQnk A Sit8 Sf alla 1 IIIi.
ta I
I li '
Site PSC-l3 Location:
The center of the SE -', Sec.
24, T23S,
- RION, Luna County, New Mexico (233960 M.E., 3575540 M.N., Zone l3)
Cultural Affiliation: Casas Grandes; Historic Stage:
Animas Phase; Camp Cody Nrlll Size:
IOO meters N-5 axis; 250 meters E-Irl axis I escription:
The site lies south of a fence line thai parallels the Mimbres River.
No surface evidence of subsurface or surface structures is present.
The ceramic evidence is very meager due to parts of the site being overlain by the old Camp Cody dump.
The survey line crosses over an old tile water system running from the Mimbr es River to Camp Cody.
Ceramic Evidence:
Jornada Brown, Playas Red Plain, Playas Red Punctate, Playas Red Incised, Casas Grandes Brownware Plain, and one sherd of Reserve Smudged.
Lithic Evidence:
One side scraper, and utilized and retouched flakes.
Other Evidence:
World War I
and Post Norld Mar II era household arti-facts abound in ihe dump area.
Artifact Disposition:
Twenty-nine sherds were collected for further analysis at the New Mexico State University Museum.
All other arti-facts were left at the site undisturbed.
Recommendations:
Possibility that the site should be nominated to the National Register.
Extensive testing would have to be carried out to determine the limits and significance of the ite.
Recommend by-passing the site if at all possible.
A professional archaeologist should be present if by-passing the site is acceptable.
If the
!e k ~
Si e PSC-l3 (contirued) s Ite cannoi be avo I "ed 2nd excavat i on and cc I I ec, i on are necessary, ten (IO) ran-davs c-,'n-ensive testlna woul" be needed to determine the exten of the s i -e and i
s components.
"xcavat I G I cost 5 cou I d then be esvimajed.
Corm its:
Site was no- -la aec as it would draw attention to local collec-.ors who were observing our movements.
The site steps aboui 50 meters west of -ne route chan e
in Section 24.
Ownership:
S ate o-Hew llexico (BLll Status liap SN-28, I I/74).
I I
1 t
~l APPiNDI X I I A I3rief Overview of the Prehistory oi Southwestern New Mexico Archaoological!y see king, southerr.,",ew Mexico has been one of the least understood oarts of ihe state, oossiblv because there are few spectacular ruins or mc-.umerts.
llore work has been done in the western pari or -.he state -"an
- .n tne eastern, but archaeologists still have more ques7!ons than answers about he area.
I',ost o', the archaeo-logical work in this par c-the state has been done so long ago that the information has only Ii...iied value for modern archaeologists.
The archaeolo"ical summary below is organized on the basis of the stage system which is generally accepted by American Archaeologists (see Willey and Phillips 1958).
) j<<
J E
Lithic Stage The Lithic Stage dates from late glacial and early post-glacial times.
The available evidence, which is relatively sparse, indicates that cultures at this stage placed heavy emphasis on hunting.
Ilany of the animals associated with this stage are now extinct.
The earliest humans in southwestern New Mexico seem to have been the hunters of the Llano Complex, which includes, among others, the Clovis and Folsom traditions.
We have little integrated information on the Llano occupation of this area.
For the most part, ou-knowledge comes from scattered finds of Clovis, Folsom, Plainview and Scottsbluff points.
In the absence of any information, we can only suppose that I
<<(f
y I
(I
the general sequence in this area follows that of the rest of the state (see Normington l957; Judge l973).
At the start of the Altithermal, a period of general drying which began about 7000 B.C., the hunters of the Llano complex seem to have moved out into the Great Plains, probably following the herd animals (e.g.,
bison) which were th ir accustomed prey.
Archaic Stage The Archaic Stage is a phenomenon of the post glacial period.
Archaic peoples are generally characterized by the hunting of modern species of animals and by a heavy reliance on wild plant foods.
Grinding stones and a number of stone tools which seem to have been used for processing vegetable foods became common.
The Archaic tradition found in southwestern New Mexico is called the Cochise.
The Cochise tradition has been divided into three (or possibly four) sequential stages.
Most of the Cochise sites which have been excavated and interpreted lie around the margins of southwestern New Mexico.
In this area we need the full range of archaeological work, beginning with the very basic task of testing and validating the chronological sequence and then proceeding to more sophisticated studies.
The three stages of the Cochise Culture are termed Sulphur Springs, Chiricahua, and San Pedro.
There has been some attempt, as we shall see later, to establish another
- phase, the Cazador, placed between that of the Sulphur Springs and Chiricahua phases.
The Sulphur Springs stage of Sayles and Antcvs (194I:8-9) is the least understood and oldest of the trio.
There are only a handful of
iti
~
II Il A
known sites that can be def initely atrributed o the Surphur Springs stage.
If geological dating by Antevs is correct, then the Surphur Springs type site places the earliest Cochise Culture beside the Llano hunting cultures toward the end of the last glacial epoch.
This placement is supported by the fauna that Sayles stated were found in direct association stratigraphically with the Sulphur Springs artifacts:
- horse, bison, pronghorn antelope, dire wolf, coyote, mammoth (Sayles 194I:l2).
To this list of fauna, Nhalen (l97I:94) adds:
snow goose, mallard duck, teal-duck,
- raven, mussel,
- clams, and jackrabbit.
There has, in the past, been recognized a temporal hiatus between the Sulphur Springs stage and he Chiricahua stage mostly due to ihe relatively few radiocarbon dated sites of the two stages.
This temporal gap has sometimes been referred to as the Cazador stage (Antevs l962:l92-I95; Sayles l964:476).
A recent study of he San Pedro Valley (Whalen l97I:69-70) reviews an unpublished manuscript of Sayles (dated l958) on ihe tool assemblago of the Cazador type site:
Ai the Double Adobe type site, Sayles included in the Caza-dor tool complex biface blades, leaf-shaped flakes, heavily barbed corner notched projectile points, and leaf-shaped projectile points, bone implements, and some milling stones.
With reference to Cazador tools, he remarked:
"Other types of chipped stone tools are present in the Cazador stage and are comparable to those identified with the Sulphur Springs Stage."
(Whalen l97I:69).
Cazador type sites have been questioned as to their separate stage status as the known sites all lie within a short distance from known Sulphur Springs type sites.
These Cazador sites have been lumped together with the Sulphur Springs sites and assigned to the Sulphur
gj l,
N I
Springs stage by Nhalen for briefly the fol lowing reasons:
... (I) the iwo radio-carbon dates avai lable for this
- stage, col lected from a ool len prof i le by llartin (l965:
58,
- 57) at the Cazador type sites at Double Adobe regis-ter 6, 280 B.C. (charcoal>
anc 5, 070 B.C.
(leached carbonaceous alluvium).
'o."i dates fall within the time range pr scribed for the Sulonur SDrings;
<2) the presence of scraping and cutting,ools a-Sulphur Springs siTes com-bined with ihe presence or bu"nec and cracked animal
- bones, suggest participation in hun-.inc...(5)...the four Cazador sites found in ihe l950's were all along Nhitewater Draw at locations formerlv classi-led Sulpnur Springs sites.
No Cazador site has been ound adiacent to a Chiricahua site
('Ãhalen 1971:69-70).
The spatial and temporal relationship and close proximity of the Cazador sites to ihe Sulphur Springs stage sites would tend to discredit the validity of maintaining two distinct stages for what are probably two distinct usage areas for one nuclear group of hunters and gatherers.
Irwin-Nilliams also questions he age of the Cazador materials and states tha4 "...the detailed similarity of Cazador arti-facts to those of the late Chi ricahua Phase makes this LCazador StageJ at the moment unacceptable."
(Irwin-'Ailliams l968:5I).
For the moment the question of the Cazador Stage is still open.
The Chiricahua stage, as identified by Sayles (l94I:l5) is found under iwo conditions:
I.
In association with middens and hearths along the foothills of the eastern slope of the Chiricahua Vnuntains; 2.
In erosion channels later than the deposits containing arti-facts identified with ihe Sulphur Springs stage.
i~>
The Chirjcahua stage has been identified and tied to a large spatial area in eastern
- Arizona, hew Mexico, and northern Mexico (Irwin-Niliiams l967:447).
These sites contain identifiable point types.
Dick (l965:30-33) gives these as the leaf-shaped Pelona; the concave
- base, side-notched Chiricahua; the contracting stem, Augustin; along with the possible earlier Bat Cave form which
...is a leaf-shaped point with s!ighi lateral Indentations below the base.
The point has been named Bat Cave Poin+,
to facilitate future reference.
This point is concentra-ted in the buff sand horizon and the above two levels in the midden.
Ii correlates stratigraphically with the hugustin Point. (Dick l965:32).
The majority of flaked lithic tools, excluding projectile points, tend io be core tools, Choppers and plane scrapers are percussion flaked; hammerstones are often unmodified cobbles whose sides show signs of battering.
Pressure flaked tools are present in 'I'he form of side scrapers and cutting edges.
These are largely made from percussion flakes.
Manos and metates appear i.n large numbers in both space and time throughout the Cochise development.
The mano tends to be the one-handed asymmetrical mano, generally from locally indigenous stone.
Metates generally are slab metates or a shallow basin type.
These are principally used for the processing of wild foodstuffs.
Fauna include:
coyote, bison, turtle, pronghorn antelope, mule deer, jackrabbit, cottontail, Sonora deer, woodrat,"'orcupine,
- wolf, rock squirrel, wildcat, kit'ox, prairie dog, badger, bighorn sheep, gray fox (Ylhalen 1971:94-95).
Corn and squash appear for the first
0 1
IV time in the archaeological record at Bat Cave, the corn being related to Cilapalote, a type of popcorn.
- Later, in San Pedro times, there is evidence of introgression of teosinte which allows for a larger possible ear and better adaptation
.to lower altitude and drought.
Other flora include:
amaranth
- seeds, blue ramma seeds, juniper berries, sunflower C
- seeds, wainuts, and yucca pods (Mhalen 1971:99-100).
The type site for the succeeding San Pedro stage assigned by Sayles and Antevs (1941:21) is in an exposure of an arroyo wal I of the San Pedro drainage.
The deposition of the site was later in time than that of the Chiricahua stage soi ls.
Grinding tools continue in wide usage in this stage, along with the addition of the mortar and pestle.
The manos are general ly larger than the types from the earlier stages and the metates usual ly have a
deeper basin (Say les and Antevs 1941:24).
A wider use of flora appears to take place, suggesting the reasons for adding the mortar and pestle to the artifact inventory.
Beans were added (Dick 1965:106) to complete the Southwest domesticated trio of corn, beans, and squash.
Other economical plants include:
- acorns, agave, amaranth
- seeds, blue grama seeds, bluegrass
- seeds, bulrush "rhyzomes, cattai I seeds, goosefoot
- seeds, festuca
- seeds, juniper berries, pine nuts, prickly pear buds, primrose seeds, red berry, sagebrush
- seeds, saltbush
- seeds, sunflower seeds, trisetum seeds, walnuts and yucca pods
('I'lhalen 1971:99-100).
This is almost a 300 percent increase from 8 plants, utilized to 23 in the recorded archaeological records from Chiricahua to San Pedro times.
!y V
0 (1
Il The point typology of the San Pedro becomes more complex as regional differences begin to appear.
Generally,
- however, the points belong to variations of shallow corner-notched and shallow side-notched types'lore use of nressure flaking is evident in the San Pedro pro-jectile points than in previous stages.
The local fauna continue to be exploited i'n San Pedro times with the exception oi f'he turtle.
The list includes all of those utilized by the Chi ri cahua and expands to include gopher, rinctai I cat, e I k,
- duck, hawk, muskrat, and turkey (9/halen l97I:94-95).
Sometime near the beginning of the Christian era (the date is not firmly established),
the Cochise gatherers gradually shifted to a horticultural economy and entered the Formative Stage.
Formative Stage The Formative Stage is characterized by a heavy dependence on domesticated plants (and sometimes animals),
Ihe presence of perma-nen'I villages and the manufacture of pottery.
In southwestern thew Mexico, the Formative population, the Mogollon, seem to have developed directly out of the Cochi se.
This shift to a Formative economy did not happen at the same time in all parts of southwestern New Mexico.
Along the Rio Grande, an archaic way of life may have continued until as late as A.D. 900.
C The earliest t~agol lon artifact assemblage seems to be a
San Pedro Cochise assemblage with the addition of pol tery and pi I houses (houses with the floors dug below the surface of the ground, with the wal ls of the pit serving as part of the house wal ls).
The techniques for
r i.
making pottery probably spread into the Southwest from I!exico.
The pit house may have developed local ly.
Joe Ben Wheat (1955) has divided the Wogol lon into six geographical branches.
Al I are general ly simi lar; but each has certain specialized features and each has a slightly different cultural sequence.
Tne Mogol lon of the Mimbres Branch (basical ly the Gi la and Mimbres drainagns) began with the
',ol lowing basic characteristics,:.
pit houses with sloping entrance passages; red-slipped pottery; plain brown pottery and a general absence of obvious luxury goods.
For about the firs'housand years of their occupation of the area, the basic inventory changed very little, though styles di d change.
After about A.D. 850, the Wimbres Branch inventory began to change with the addition of many features imported from outside the area.
It has been assumed that most of the new features came from the north, but it !s now suspected that some, at least, were a result of influence from civi lized Vexico.
Most of the good evidence from early Mogol ion sites comes from the Reserve area.
In the absence of evidence to the contrary, archaeologists have assumed that the early development of the Mogol lon was the same throughout the Mimbres Branch, but this may not be true.
About A.D.
1000 (Reserve Phase),
the Mogol ion in the northern part of the area shi fted from a Mogol lon pattern with some northern (Anasazi) influence to an Anasazi pattern with some Mogol lon characteristics.
They adopted surface'houses of stone
- masonry, ceremonial structures of an Anasazi pattern and black-on-white pottery made with Anasazi techniques.
Further south',
the same changes occurred during the Mangus and Mimbres Phases,-
t
)f l
l
but more s!owly and with a less complete rejection of flogol ion traditions.
South Phases of the 'limbres -Branch I<orth Pinelawn Georgetown San Lorenzo (?)
"San Francisco Three Circle Hangus I'limbres Pinelawn Georgetown San Lorenzo (?)
San Francisco Three Ci rc le Reserve Tularosa About A.D.
I250 or I300, the Ilogollon abandoned southwestern New I'mexico.
At least some of them seem to have moved north.
After the ~llmbres Branch Mogollon left, they were replaced by one or more groups which are collectively called the "Animas Phase".
The Animas Phase is poorly understood.
Pottery and houses typical of Casas Grandes (Chihuahua),
Sa!ado (eastern Arizona) and Jornada Mogollon (Rio Grande Valley) appear.
No site with an Animas Phase occupati on has been excavated by a modern professional archaeologist.
Along the Gila River, adobe pueblos of the Salado tradition were built.
The relationship between the Salado peoples and the "Animas Phase" is unknown.
Finally, at about the beginning of the historic period, the Athabaskan-speaking Apache moved into the area.
While it ls possible to produce a reasonably coherent summary of what is known of the prehistory of southwestern New IQxico, actually we know only a fraction of what we need to know before we can under-stand the prehistory of the area.
S~
APPENDIX III A Brief Historic Overview of Camp Cody Camp Cody was a training center for the United States Army's 34th Division.
It was built and established in 19i7 ai a cost of
$2,025,000 (NMHPS 1942:14)
The first military contingent to arrive at Camp Cody was the E
Minnesota National Guard, organized as the 135th Infantry Regiment.
Additional National Guard troops wore brought from North Dakota, South
These National Guard Units became the 34th Infantry Division in October 1917 (James 1971:58).
Troops of the 34th Division who trained here nicknamed themselves the "Sandstorm Division" (James 1971:18).
At the termination of World War I, the facilities were used as a tuberculosis sanitarium for ex-soldiers, by the United States Public Health Service.
In 1922, the Camp Cody facilities were transferred to the Deming Chamber of Commerce (NMHI<S 1942:14).
From 1923 until it closed its doors in 1938, the sanitarium was operated by the Sisters of Holy Cross of Notre Dame.
Six sisters acted as caretakers of the property until March 12,
- 1939, when a
careless smoker and a cigarette butt started a grass fire that quickly razed the sanitarium and could be seen 55 miles away in Silver City (El Paso Times 3/13/39:I).
1 V) f't
~ll
'I' BI BLIOGRAPHY General References Wheat, J.B.
1955
!Ioaol lon Culture
. "ior to R.D.
I000, Society for American Archaeology Ilemoi rs, No.
IO.
Willey, G.P..
and... hillips l958.
Ilethod and Theory in American Archaeoioa
, The University of Chicaao Press.
Wormington, H.tl.
1957 Ancient !:an in North A,erica, Denver Museum of Natural History, Popular Series No.
4.
Reference ited Anonymous l939 Flames Paze Sanatorium Near Darning, The El Paso Times, March I3, l939, p.
I.
- Antevs, E.
1962 "Late Quaternary Climates in Arizona", American Anti uit,
Vol. 28, No. 2, pp.
I93-I98.
Dick, H.W.
l965 Bat Cave, School of American Research, Monograph No. 27.
Irwin-Williams, C.
l967 "Picosa:
The elementary Southwestern culture", American
~Anti nit, Voi. 32, No.
4, pp. 44i-457.
James p
H. L.
l97 I Sceni c Tri s to the Geo lo i c Past No.
IO Southwestern New Mexico, pp. 56-58.
- Judge, W.J.
l973 Paleoindian Occu ation of the Central Rio Grande Val le in New IIexico, University of New Mexico Press.
Martin, P.S.
l963 "Early Man in Arizona:
the pollen evidence",
American Anticnitv, Voi. 29, No. i, pp. 67-73.
Quoted in Ni<<alen i97i.
New Mexico Historical Records Survoy (NMIIRS) l942 Inventory of the County Archives of New IIexico No.
I5, Luna County (Deming), p.
I4.
Prepared by the New Mexico Ilistorical Records Survey Service Division, War Services Section Work Projects Administration.
Sponsored by the University of New Mexico.
C 0'g 4
I 1
1<
,'1 j
Say les, E.B.
l964 "The late Ouaternary climate record" American Anti uit Vol, 30, No.
4, pp.
476-480.
- Sayles, E.B.
and E. Antevs l94I The Cocnise Culture, medallion Papers, No. 24.
~
- Whalen, N.M.
197I Cochise Culture sites in the central San Pedro drainage, Arizona.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Arizona.
Wheat, J.B.
1955 Vooollon Culture Prior to A.D. I000, Society for Arrerican Archaeology IIemoirs, No.
IO.
Willey, G.R.
and P. Phillips l958 I!ethod and Theory in American Archa pip~a, University of Chicago Press, Wormington, H.fl.
l957 Arcient Van in North America, L'enver t1useum of Natural History, Popular Series, No.
4.
0 It "l~