ML20235K395

Cultural Resource Investigation Series 1, Archaeological Evaluation of Trojan Locality 35C01

ML20235K395
Person / Time
Site:	Trojan File:Portland General Electric icon.png
Issue date:	01/31/1989
From:	Burtchard G PORTLAND STATE UNIV., PORTLAND, OR
To:
Shared Package
ML20235K094	List: 05000344/LER-1988-025, Forwards LER 88-25 Re Event Where Archaeological Significant Area Inadvertently Disturbed by Const Excavation Activities & Portland State Univ Rept, Archaeological Evaluation of Trojan Locality 35C01 ML20235K395
References
NUDOCS 8902270098
Download: ML20235K395 (84)

Text

-

Cultural Resource Investigation Series Number 1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVALUATION OF THE TROJAN LOCALITY 35C01 by Greg C. Burtchard Report Completed Under Contract to:

Portland General Electric Company,121 SW Salmon Street l Portland, Oregon 97240 1

Laboratory of Archaeology and Anthropology Department of Anthropology Portland State University Portland, Oregon 97207-0751 January 1989 8902270098 89021'7  %-

PDR ADOCK 05000344 ,

S PDC

Laboratory of l Archaeology L

j

! and .l .

[ Anthropology  !

1 7

L e

i.

t 1

[ ,

3

i 7

j j

)

i=

'I

i^ 1 4 I l  !

l'

\

d Department of Anthropology fi Portland State University

FORWARD The Trojan archaeological locality (35CO1) is located on the Oregon shore of the lower Columbia River about two miles downstream from its confluence with the Kalama River. The site now shares its general location with the Trojan Nuclear Power facility which is owned and operated by Portland General Electric Company. Site 35C01 was partially excavated in 1968,1%9 and 1970 by the Oregon Archaeological Society. Cultural materials and features observed during those years suggest that Trojan was a semi to fully sedentary residential site occupied from approximately 1250 years ago to shortly prior to historic incursions into the region. The society also encountered human remains, possibly associated with early historic canoe burials on attached Coffin Point and Coffm Rock immediately offshore.

This report and the fieldwork that preceded it is a response to accidental construction related excavation into 35CO1 during the spring of 1988. Portland General Electric contracted with the Laboratory of Archaeology and Anthropology for assistance in meeting cultural resource obligations stemming from that excavation. We followed a plan designed to maximize return from existing exposed surfaces, while minimizing additional damage to intact cultural materials. The project did not involve new data recovery excavation. Fieldwork focused largely on documentation of sediment profiles and features exposed in excavated cutbanks, and on preparation of a current site map and coordinate system. This report provides details of that effort. In addition it considers aspects of the Trojan emironment, site history, previous archaeology, impacts, and continuing research options for the Trojan site. My intent is to bring together otherwise fragmented sources of information into a single document. The report provides an introduction to what I believe to be an archaeological property of continuing high research significance; and,in the event of future research, provides material useful for designing that effort.

I wish to acknowledge the help of a number ofindividuals. Eric Gleason assisted with the fieldwork. His efforts and good humor were a constant benefit to the project. Jacqueline Cheung's graphic skill transformed our profiles and maps into a most presentable form. We also benefited from the interest and support of Portland General Electric employees. T. E. Bushnell was quite helpful in providing information and organizational support within the company. Surveyors Robert Buckley and Larry McGinnis provided readings critical to relocating previously excavated areas. Larry Rocha kindly allowed us storage space in the Trojan lower lab facility. Rick Hess and Steve Sauter were instrumental in the company's quick response to the original problem.

Steve continued to provide support with the project's public relations. Vic DeStefanis provided valuable background information on the site and on early construction at the power plant. Finally, Steven Lambert and Jeff Wheeler were most helpful with the layout and conduct of utility line testing. To these people and others who showed consistent and genuine interest in the archaeology of 35C01, I extend my thanks.

I l

l iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS FO RWARD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..................................................iii LI ST O F FI G U R ES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii LI ST O F PR O FI LES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii LI ST O F TAB LES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii I. LOCATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL

SUMMARY

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 The Site ................................................................. 4 Wetlands and Floodplains . . . ................................................. 4 Forested Uplands and Valleys .................................. .............. 5 M aj o r River s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 II. SITE HISTORY AND ETHNOHISTORY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........................... 9 History.................................................................. 9 Ethnohistory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .............................. ......... 10 III. PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGY AT 35C01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 OAS Fieldwork . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 O AS R esults . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .............. 14 O A S S u m m a ry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 IV. MODERN IMPACTS TO 35CO1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................................. 17 A r c h a e ology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Power Plant Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Power Plant Operation: 1975 to 1988 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Current Impacts to 35CO1 .................................................. 20 Impact Summary and Site Integrity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 V. FIELD PROCEDURES AND RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 M a pping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Stratigraphic Profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .................... 24 Profile 1. Sediment Descriptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ ........... 28 Profile 1. Interpretation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............ ........ 31 Profile 2. Sediment Descriptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Profile 2. Int erpretation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Profile 3. Sediment Descriptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .................... 36 Profile 3. Int erpret ation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Profile 4. Sediment Descriptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Profile 4. Interpretation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......................... 43 Profile 5. Sediment Descriptions ........... ....................... 44 Profile 5. Interpretation .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... .. 47 Profile 6. Sediment Descriptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... ......... 48 Profile 6. In t erpret ation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 Profide 7. Sediment Descriptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 Profile 7. Interpretation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............ 55 Profile Summary; Deposition, Intrusions and Features . .................. .......... 55 Deposition . . . .................................... .............. . 55 Intrusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... .. ... ........... ..... ... . 56 Features . . . . . . . . . . .. ........... ......... ... . . .... ..... 56 Utility Line Auger Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . ......... . .. . . ..... .... .. . 60 V

l i

- _ __ ____m_ _ __.______ . _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . _ _ . - - - _ _ _ _ _ ---. _ _ --

i i < -

A ,4 1

1 1

.o

' VI. =

SUMMARY

EVALUATION, RESEARCH AND MANAGEMENT SUGGESTIONS . . . . . . . . . ~ 61-- 7

- Project Summ ary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 Environmental and Historic Background . . . . . . . . .;. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' 61 .

Map and Coordinat e System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 d Cutbank Profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 l

^

S it e I nt egrity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Continuing Research at 35C01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : 63 i Existing OAS R ecords . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 ' 1 Emironmental Reconstruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 641 (

Depositional Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 -

Seasonal Occupation versus Full Sedentism ............................. .. 64 9

. Subsistence Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . 64 )

H ouse Morphology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 '

Village Component, Burial Component ................................... 65 -

Changing Site Dim ensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 j

. Early Historic Use of the Site . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 i Assemblage Comparison with Lower Columbia Sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 Long Term Site Managem ent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 l i.

B IB LI O G RAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 '

APPENDIX A: Site Report for Fill Redeposited from 35CO1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 APPENDIX B: Auger Test S umm ary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 1

l

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. General Location of 35CO1 and the Trojan Nuclear Power Plant ................. 2 Figure 2. Expanded View of 35C01 and the Trojan Nuclear Facility . . . . . . . . . . ........... 3 Figure 3. General Site Map 35C01, The Trojan Locality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Figure 4. 1970 photograph of 35C01 ................................... . ...... 13 Figure 5. 1971 photograph of the greater Trojan Nuclear facility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 L Figure 6. Map of present PGE facilities, proposed water lines and extended site boundaries . . . . 21 Figure 7. Contour map of 35C01 showing the location of profile illustrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 l

Figure 8. FCR concentration and hearth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 l Figure 9. Prehistoric pit with FCR and large mammal bone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 Figure 10. FCR on a use sur face . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 Figure 11. Composite photograph of probable plank house stratigraphy and location . . . . . . . . . . 60 LIST OF PROFILES Profile 1. 403N/474.5E to 406N/460E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Profile 2. 406N/460E to 40SN/445E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... 33 Profile 3. 408N/445E to 410N/430E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Profile 4. At 416N/424E, and 422N/418E to 432N/420E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Profile 5. Plank House Sediments near 420N/434E and 431N/436E . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ 45

Profile 6. At 433N/474E, and 430N/479E to 420N/477E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 Profile 7. 420N/477E to 403N/474.5E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 I

LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Utilized Wetland and Floodplain Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Table 2. Utilized Upland Floral and Faunal Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Table 3. Utilized Riverain Floral and Faunal Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Table 4. Artifacts and Features Reported for the 1970 Field Season . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Table 5. Key to General Sediment Horizons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 e

ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVALUATION OF THE TROJAN LOCALITY 35C01 by Greg C. Burtchard This report details procedures undertaken at archaeological site 35C01 adjacent to the Trojan Nuclear Power Plant near Rainier, Oregon. Work was done in 1988 under contract to Portland General Electric Company (PGE), owner of the Trojan facility. The project was stimulated by partial foundation excavation for an office building planned for construction within the site boundaries of 35CO1. Approximately 2,390 cubic meters of sediments were removed from the site before its archaeological value was recognized and work was halted.

Construction plans were shifted to an alternative site, avoiding further impact to cultural materials. The present project salvaged basic archaeological information pertinent to the site and specifically to sediments removed by the original preconstruction excavation.

The project pursued the following basic goals: (1) collect general background information on the local environment and historic use of the locality; (2) generate a unified surface map of the present landform of 35CO1, coordinating previous Oregon Archaeological Society (OAS) excavations and sources of site disturbance into a single coordinate system; (3) record stratigraphic profiles exposed in the 1988 preconstruction cutbank; and (4) use surface and profile data to evaluate the nature of the prehistoric cultural fill, assess site int ( grity, and suggest options for subsequent data recovery and continuing long-term management. This report presents the results in six sections. In the first, I describe the site location and its environmental setting. The second section outlines briefly the site's historic and ethnohistoric background. Third, I summarize previous OAS excavations at the Trojan site. Fourth, I note modern sources of substantial subsurface disturbance, including effects of the most recent preconstruction excavation. The fifth section outlines field procedures and results of the present project. In this section I emphasize cutbank profiles created by the partial office building excavation.

These profiles substantially enhance our ability to understand prehistoric cultural events at the locality. Finally, I use the combined information to evaluate results, and suggest long-term research and management options for 35C01.

1 L LOCATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL

SUMMARY

l Both the Trojan Nuclear Plant and archaeological site 35C01 are located on and around basaltic rock outcrops on the western side of the Columbia River floodplain. A seasonal flood channel and marshlands separate the outcrops from the main body of Coast Rang uplands flanking the river to the west. East of the Columbia the Coast range rises behind approximately 1.5 miles of joint Columbia-Kalama River floodplain. Figure 1 shows the general geographic setting. Site 35C01 is nestled in the small embayment immediately west of Coffin Rock and south of the Trojan Nuclear Plant. The expanded view provided by Figure 2 shows the site location in relation to other immediately adjacent features.

l

r i

. i, .h y., v im;. u#.. s ,

.:' l . .2 . ,

. au.i':. --1, ~n: ., . ,

.y,n! +. i.i:w r-/ .ns ns g i *

..e ........a........,,'l

- --  ; e

/~f~y y, ,,,/ _, ] s, I.l

'[, [ *' ,. / / / N'\ I. k, / /' ..h:$

g h., j g ,

f..i

.,.e  ; *

( , i g. .,

f

• 8 U  ;/ ' '+3

.N ' 8li I

""".'...d *'G. .._tvn;;,p.....,[,,

f: ..' ,C~ s, ,, j '.' ""*/ ,'* * "S*".

. p. y '* . ,

1.j

}

j es,,,* . d t. -,f

- - I

.l

,a* a

! .t . . , - ~ -

4- )

a o: .  :

s . ,

- .t

~ - ~ , ,. I . .* ,. s : (a * -

l *.; .

. ) ! .:y s, Q' 1 lj }l '{ ( * :-u s_ , . < . < - l .

• ;g ,.

~

. = .. . - . . * . . .

.,  : j i . . 114n, J . . ' . . -f .. v. '

.,, . +

. .i

-_: s. .

.__y..- .

.... .:_-______ _.._-_. . _ . _ _ _ _ . _ ..w h.. ]

s

/ _-- E

! /

s.  :

M..:fv);.j - ,

- i d e/- n t.g

-.4 y.t: g

-+- d,,ji,, :,9. /: , ,'

• p  !

t . ... ... ..... ... ,, , ..

i

.:wn: m:n a a:2w.d,n::: ,. ._... . , "

n , ; . \ '.

A.

r,. c

= -

,, l

'~ \/ l .1.r! '.,-aew

' . [.j,.j ..&. .

j 4, /

il

.g

&s' l

3.* ,,.

g _L/ . .S, l . '"":"::" ~ -

>/, /,-

z'f{s_ _ .p_. . . ,

/ ,

e. . .

/' ,/ , ,,, f

.n .

.. ._.t. .. .; ,,4

'.; . ,- gi" F:i2 - s .l sr. ,

• ,ci m

. ..  ; l

.i I

I i

i

-t"~~ ~ .

- J..

j i--

/< 1 i

I T- ...'.'

l

,, - s. _ - =

n -

>-. - . .g_. , e i .

5__*,,. ,

,,P,f a a e, ano ,

g .

/, "

i .. .e..,- @ _ _ $. .s._ _ .....

M . ,,

.e s._ _. _ _ .:,.

_ ,._ _ _ i ,,.,._. h., . ._ _ _ _ _ _ _

,e ... ,.

.l.

t....."............

. t

\ c' A, .n y u

Le'oI

,p :r 8 .a

..p.n\

,,. /y .. - g ' 4, 1

4.e-  ! y ,, e ~

g I

iag  ! ggnama...E w , i e! i - ..,...

hgil:..=**'

c N,

{ /  :.k- .{ l ,

~ '

/,','*. *I

, . , . ' ., [.- .

..,. . I .

.,,,'j ,

' l-- 3 r,j~.~'j'., : - .

g.d ., ~~~) ,, . p',' j ,( . / ,,.. 6 'l .

l 'y

..- :.. , , $.:, A .A',./

.i. j l < m ' a..?. w - -- . v 1'.f,. .., 3n at

( e......v . .. ~ ] .

s._,

. r \

'..' .)

); , /,  % . .  : " I J [ ., {...-

..  ! O 'l: (. V 'p' 2,: .n . '.,

)

ib ~q () .s_.

. . I, f. ) ,, l/ . (f L g. .' ,e-

,'l_.J_ m __.

).q

_ _J' .,. z_ _ '$ _. _ __ _ 8. . , ,~. -

. _ _~g::n_.+'(..'f~,::,,-3*z..t" _' .s 4;;'_A _4.,,r_\ [ 4.e ")

, t yj ,.,.' 4,.j,. b_ V>e' 13 (), , I.' .! y~. t e

g t c .-

~ y;,

i

., v 3

..~ r i. . / j ur

.t s x .

b, , ...t .

., v . , / . ... : ,. .l,' .

I ~.s -: .....r*

". 3 / b . )?

• t s ~- ,) .Q; . r,% l / l

% -m h ( - .

1

l. \. *,* I. L .J ..,.'.',i. * - l .. z x v .. .

x' y ,- - =

,\s7's .,  % g, *:.. s'

. , }, ' ,

l ,

( . j' '. . '. N' ,.,s,.. ' \ l w-]~

. ,. , = *,,,, g - J L .'f_

g \ . .,

. l, ,, /. . !

7 ,,,

-j l

^ ' , 's s'

-A,,  ::.;- .'.. . . . . Wl. *;\ ' 'I

,.')

y .- 'l ) . .. 4......-*......l..l\ . bl > .,

wJ.~./-- ,  :

,'-, .l,

(

i,. .. .

- t. .

5 I

,- y 3 1

(

Figure 1. General Location of 35COI and the Trojan Nuclear Power Plant

- - - - - - - - - - - - .--________m_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ , _

I s is \ \

/'l 4 l \ s\ '

>\ k i1 f

, i, j V,j '., =

Prescott -

=S: (!L 4

@7 -

3.uc6.. . ,

y  :

- j'}

IbFE \

i 2 1

/

m

• I

((f

\l ,}

i O i

TROJAN NUCLEAR PLANT

'. , l Vi1 l t

[ *.

b,}i i i

\m t

%, _s@ >

\h '3 \  % .

) k\\ *$

\ '

w.\ \ x b{ i

\, t ( %

> N

\p 3 g <g .

[

\ \%  % 8

h.*

[s v t  ?,

li S l

l$ . '[. '

(M offin 35C01 C

R k 0

ib k h!

N b h. I e-],g 'ifCEMETERY I \ <<.

.51 M ile -{-

l f 73 i ,- ,

N -

,? 1 U n .

9 )

' %' R g .l y ,s&( ( \ *dg c .

l

.y.j'9 %'n%.

_ , N -'x ( ., 1 s

\,

Figure 2. Expanded View of 35COI and the Trojan Nuclear Facility f

} 3

The Site The Trojan archaeological locality includes the basalt outcrops of Coffin Point and Coffin Rock offshore to the east, and flood sediments that have accumulated around Coffin Point and the larger outcrop upon which the Trojan plant is constructed. Figure 2 illustrates approximate site boundaries within the greater plant facility.1 The present effort is restricted to that portion of the siie contained within flood sediments that have accumulated adjacent to Coffin Point.

The site is found in what appears to be a naturallevee built from overbank deposits of the Columbia River. The modern ground surface slopes gently down toward the cast and north (toward the recreational and reflecting lakes shown in Figure 2) where dry land gives way to marshy wetlands. Within the drier levec the upper two meters of site sediments range from medium to silty sand. Fine sand dominates the profile. Rhythmic repetition of a medium sand to silty sand sequence visible in the preconstruction cutbank suggests periodic flooding i

through the channel west of the Trojan basalt outcrops.2 The flood sequence probably built the levee, ultimately providing elevated, dry ground for sustained human use of the landform. Radiocarbon dates included in Trojan L IH (Warner and Warner 1970;99), the Oregon Archaeological Society (OAS) report for 1970 excavations, .

indicate that sufficient sediments had accumulated by at least 1,250 years ago for humans to occupy the land I between the river and the marshes. Since that time approximately 1.5 meters of additional sediments have been deposited, plausibly extending the flood-free period that the site could have been occupied.

Characteristics of the environment surrounding 35C01 necessarily conditioned the nature of prehistoric human use of the locality. Humans have always been obliged to accommodate their lifestyles to patterns in the overall availability, distribution, abundance, and predictability of critical resources. Resources critical to prehistoric populations on the lower Columbia were either obtained directly from the local environment or derived through river-based trade for local products. Assuming present conditions reasonably reflect the prehistoric past, a local environmental description can not only provide general areal familiarity, but can help to build an understanding of factors influencing past human use of the landscape as well.

The idea that understanding Lower Columbia emironmental variables will assist in understanding past human use of the region is not new. Becky Saleeby takes a similar position in studying patterned prehistoric settlement on Sauvie Island upstream from Trojan. She outlined a resource catchment area in terms of seven habitat zones:

riverain, lacustrine, palustrine, riparian, oak woodlands, grasslands, and conifer forests (Saleeby 1983:173-174).

While the division clarifies differential resource availability, it seems unnecessarily fine-grained for present purposes. Here I combine floral and faunal associations common to broader emironmental units: wetlands and floodplains, forested uplands, and major rivers. These zones should have occurred in roughly the same locations in the past as in the present, and would have provided distinct resource opportunities and imposed varying -

l exploitative requirements on prehistoric populations. By describing the environment surrounding the Trojan i locality in terms of these zones I hope to draw attention to the patterned location and seasonal availability of resources that played important roles in the lives of prehistoric inhabitants of the lower Columbia.

, Wetlands and Floodplains Ponds, marshes and periodically inundated floodplains are located on islands and low elevation landforms marginal to the Columbia, Cowlitz and Kalama Rivers. The icvec location of 35C01 is itself a part of this 1

i 1

i Specifically site 35COI is located in the NE 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 1; Township 6 North, Range 2 West; Willamette Meridian. Refer to United States Geological Survey 7.5 minute quad map:

Rainier, Oreg.- Wash. Site control datum is marked on a brass cap set in concrete and situated at the northwestern base of Coffin Point. Its Lambert coordinates are N 72,469.31/ E 1,395,128.43 Lambert Grid,

! Oregon North.

2 The flood sequence can be seen in Profile 4 in this volume. It shows the western margin of the construction cutbank.

4

broader context. Marshes and ponds typically occur at elevations below 10 feet (3.05 m) above mean sea level (amsl). Standing water is fed by immediate upslope runoff and Columbia sub-surface pressure. The river exhibits substantial tidal effect at Trojan constantly pumping water into these low-lying inland depressions.

Floodplains occur above 10 feet to approximately 30 feet (9.14 m). The floodplains are free of standing water except for seasonal or exceptional flood events. The location of the lowland landforms in the near vicinity of 35CO1 can be seen on Figure 1.

Wetlands are dominated by water tolerant floral species such as cattails, sedges and marsh grasses, and a variety of herbaceous plants and brush. The nearest marshes and sloughs lie west and northwest of 35C01. This low ground is the main flood channel running between the Trojan basalt outcrops and the Oregon Coast Range.

Although the terrain has been altered recently by the addition of fill and construction of a Trojan recreation area and lake, the area still retains evidence of its previous marshland character. There is evidence suggesting that the wetlands in this area are quite old. Core logs taken from the new PGE office building site northwest of the Trojan containment building indicate up to 21 m of clayey silt to silty clay sediments overlying volcanic (probably Mazama) tephra (Cornforth Consultants 1988). The logs imply that a marsh-pond emironment has dominated channel between the basalt outcrops and the uplands for much of the last 6 to 7 thousand years. Additional wetlands occur on Cottonwood and Sandy Islands, north and south of the site respectively; and at the mouths of the Kalama River immediately opposite Trojan and the Cowlitz River a short distance downstream.

Floodplains are situated at the higher elevation margins of the wetlands. The most extensive floodplain meadows occur across the Columbia at the confluence of the Kalama and Cowlitz Rivers. Floodplain species are adapted to slightly drier conditions than those characteristic of the marshes. The typical pattern is one of grasses and forbes interspersed with trees and brush. Trees increase in density at the drier, more elevated margins, of the floodplains.

While floodplains and wetlands support distinct floral and faunal associations, both are water maintained and tend to co-occur in a mosaic of marshes, brush, trees, and seasonally dry meadows. The general emironment supports a number of species of economic importance to prehistoric human populations. Since they would have been more or less equally accessible,I have lumped them into a single emironmental/ resource categorg. Table 1 on the next page lists the zone's ethnohistorically documented resources and primary harvest seasons. Please note that the resource tables simplify reality. Nonetheless, they should serve a useful purpose in directing our attention to the array of biological resources that controlled the economic livelihood of prehistoric populations.

There is little doubt that wetland and floodplain species were economically important to lower Columbia populations. Wapato (in marshes) and camas (on floodplain meadows) prmided sources of storable carbohydrates and sugars. However, the labor investment needed to harvest, process and store these plants is relatively high. When populations were driven to use them in quantity, we could expect a substantial number of people to have been available to prmide labor during the late summer to fall seasons when producthity was i highest. Waterfowl, deer and elk were major faunal resources. They prmided concentrated protein, and by-l products such as hides, bone and feathers. As with wapato and camas, these animals should have been a focus of aethity in the lowlands during high producthity seasons.

Forested Uplands and Valleys in the vicinity of the Trojan site, foothills of the Pacific Coast Range boarder the Columbia River to the south and west. The hills rise immediately west of the wetlands and seasonal flood channel that separate 35C01 from the main land mass. Elevation increases abruptly to approximately 500 feet amsl and then more gradually to i

3 The resource tables draw heavily on data summarized in Saleeby (1983) and in Ray's (1938) Lower Chinook Ethnographic Notes. Supplementary resource and etaironmental data come from Hajda (1984), Netboy (1980),

ODFW & WDF (1987), Chandler er al. (1966), and Udvardy (1977).

1

l Table 1. Utilized Wetland and Floodplain Resources Common Name Taxon Resource Type Wetland Floodplain Wild Strawberry Fragaria spp. Berry Sp Osoberry Ocm/cria cerasiformis Berry Su Blackcap Rubus leucodermis Berry Su Thimbleberry Rubus panifloms Berry Su Dewberry Rubus ursinus Berry Su Elderberry Sambucus spp. Berry Su Salmonberry Rubus spectabilis Berry & Stem Su Wild Crabapple Pyrus fusca Berry-like A Elk ! Cenus elephus Large Mammal W Wood Sorrel Oxalis oregana Leaf SpSu Bracken Fern Ptcridium aquilinum 1xe' -'

White-tailed Deer ! Odoicoilcus virginianus Medium Mammal SpAW SpAW Wood Duck Air sponsa Migratory Bird Su Dabbling Duck Anas spp. Migratory Bird AW White-front Goose Anser albifrons Migratory Bird AW Canada Goose Branta canadensis Migratory Bird AW AW '

Swan Cygnus sp. Migratory Bird AW Coot Fulica amcricana Migratory Bird AW a Sandhill Crane Gms canadensis Migratory Bird spa spa Snow Goose Shen caerulescens Migratory Bird AW Cooper's Hawk Accipter cooperi Non-migratory Bird SpSuAW Red-Tailed Hawk Buteofamaicensis Non-migratory Bird SpSuAW Flicker Colaptes auratus Non-migratory Bird SpSuAW Crow Conus brachyrynchus Non-migratory Bird SpSuAW SpSuAW Hazelnut Coryfus comuta Nut A Acorn Quercus garryana Nut A Freshwater Turtle Testudinidae spp. Reptile SpSuA ,

Camas l Camasia quamash Root Su Wapato ! Sagittaria latifolia Root Au Skunk Cabbage Lysichiton camtschatcense Root & Leaf Su Cattail Typha latifolia Root & Leaf Su Horsetail Equisetum telmateria Root & Stem L,p Cow Parsnip Rcracleum lanatum Root & Stem Sp Beaver Castor canadensis Small Mammal SpSuAW Ground Squirrel Citcllus bcccheyi Small Mammal SpSuA Mink Mustela vison Small Mammal SpSuAW Muskrat Ondarra ribethicus Small Mammal SpSuAW Racoon Procyon lotor Small Mammal  ?

Brush Rabbit SyMlagus bachmani Small Mammal SpSuA .

Red Fox Vulpesfulva Small Mammal SpSuAW Wild Celery Ocnanthe sarmentosa Stem Sp over 1000 feet. East of the river the relief is more gradual. There the mountains rise behind one-half to one i mile of Kalama-Columbia floodplain. Foothills increase in elevation to the east and north eventually linking with the Green Mountain and Cascade Ranges. The Cowlitz and Kalama Rivers constitute the most significant local low-elevation breaks in the mountains. These major rivers not only provided the resources summarized in the next section, but may have provided low elevation access deep into the central Washington Cascades as well.

Forested uplands of the northwest Oregon Coast Range and western slopes of the Cascades are thoroughly described by Franklin and Dyrness (1973:52-109). The region is cloaked in classic coniferous forests dominated by Douglas fit (Pseudotsuga men:icsii), western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), red cedar (Thujaplicata). Coastal 6

s

Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis), grand fir (Abies grandes) and white pine (Pinus monticola) are common lower density constituents. A stable .long-term pattern of mild wet winters and dry summers has favored near total dominance of coniferous species. In these forests swordfern (Polystichum munitum) and sorrel (Oxalis oregana) are typical understory dominants. Deciduous species (oak -- Quercus sp.) are limited to long term stressed habitats, or to seral succession stands following wildfires (alder -- Alnus sp.).

Stable, dense coniferous forests tend to limit abundance of human utilizable food species. Recently burned areas may have been may have been more productive habitats for human exploitation. Patches dominated by early successional herbaceous and brush cover would have provided browse for herbivores and suitable habitat for edible berries (especially Rubus sp.). Consequently, prehistoric use of the uplands should have focused on the fringes of relatively open patches within the coniferous forest, and on lower elevation oak groves which occur sporadically near the forest / floodplain boundary. It is plausible that greater solar exposure of the southwest facing slopes on the Washington shore created a somewhat drier habitat than the north facing Oregon shore slopes. Assuming that the resulting habitat has included a higher fraction of relatively open parklands in the past, east bank slopes may have supported a higher ungulate population density than those of the west. With relatively easy cano access, these slopes may have been a primary focus of hunting activity despite their greater distance from site 35 COL Table 2 lists ethnographically documented plant and animal resources common to the upland zone.

Table 2. Utilized Upland Floral and Faunal Resources Common Name Taxon Resource Type Upland Serviceberry Amelanchicr alnifolia Berry A Kinnikkinnick Arctostaphylos uva-ursi Berry Su Oregon-grape Berberis spp. Ber;" Su Wild Strawberry Fragaria spp. Berry Sp Salal Gaultheria shallon Berry Su Osoberry Oemieria cerasiformis Berry Su Blackcap Rubus leucodermis Berry Su Thimbleberry Rubus parviflorus Berry Su Dewberry Rubus ursinus Berry Su Elderberry Sambucus spp. Berry Su Blue Huckleberry Vacinium ovatum Berry Su Red Huckleberry Vocinium parvifolium Berry Su Salmonberry Rubus spectabilis Berry & stem Su Elk ! Cervus c/cphus Large Mammal AW Black Bear Ursus americanus Large Mammal AW Wood Sorrel Oxalis oregana Leaf Su Bobcat Lyrtr rufus Medium Mammal  ?

Black-tailed Deer Odolcoilcus hemionus Medium Mammal SpAW Cooper's Hawk Acciptcr cooperi Non-migratory Bird SpSuAW Flicker Colaptes auratus Non-migratory Bird SpSuAW Harcinut Corylus comuta Nut A A orn Guercus garryana Nut A Lupine 1 Lupinus littoralis Root Su Mountain Beaver Aplodontia rufa Small Mammal SpSuAW Porcupine Ercthizon dorsatum Small Mammal SpSuAW Chipmunk Eutamias townsendi Small Mammal SpSuA Marten Martes americana Small Mammal SpSuAW Racoon Procyon lotor Small Mammal  ?

Red Fox Vulpes fulva Small Mammal SpSuAW

\ ,

e

I Please note that resources included in Table 2 do not exhaust the range exploitei from the uplands zone, nor  !

does it consider relative importance of these products to the aboriginal diet. Given the need for longer distance j i transport and general paucity of assimilable protein in the dense coniferous forest, the uplands may have served only as a supplemental resource area for populations centered on the Columbia.

i 4

Major Rivers The Columbia, Kalama and Cowlitz rivers are major physical features of the 35C01 emironment. River marginal floral and faunal associations are roughly similar to many of those in the wetland - floodplain zone.

A number of these species are listed in Table 3. The primtsy focus of prehistoric economic activity (at least q during the last several thousand years), however, was directed at the rivers proper. The major rivers not only >

provided an abundant and predictable source of food, but afforded long distance transportation possibilities as I well. Chinook trade and heavy reliance on fishing are well known (cf. Ray 1938). There is little reason to be:ieve that a similar pattern would not have extended several thousand years into the prehistoric past; beginning at a time when population density'occame high enough to require a h:ghly productive resource base, and to meet the relatively high labor requirements of Lower Columbia salmon fishing.

Table 3. Utilized Riverain Floral and Faunal Resources Common Name Taxon Resource Type River Season

! White Sturgem 1 Acipenser transmontanus Large Anadrs. Fish SpW l Chinook Salmon ! Oncorhynchus tschawyrscha Large Anadrs. Fish SpSuW Humpback Salmon Oncorhynchus gorbuscha Medium Anadrs. Fish SuA Chum Salmon Oncorhynchus keta Medium Anadrs. Fish A i Coho Salmon ! Oncorhynchus kisutch Medium Anadrs. Fish A l Sockeye Salmon Oncorhynchus nerka Mediu.n Anadrs. Fish Sp Steelhead Trout ! Salmo galedneri Medium Anadrs. Fish SuW White-tailed Deer ! Odolcolleus virginianus Medium Mammal SpAW Harbor Seal Phoca vitulina Medium Mammal Sp Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Migratory Bird W Kingfisher Afegaeryle alcoyon Non-Migratory Bird SpSuAW

! Flicker Colaptes auratus Non-migratory Bird SpSuAW I

Crow Corvus brachyrynchus Non migratory Bird SpSuAW Cattall Typha latifolia Root & Leaf Su Freshwater Mussel Afargaritifera & Anodonta Shellfish A Eulachon ! Thaleichythys pacificus Smal: Anadrs. Fish Sp River Otter Lutra canadensis > mall Mammal  ? 1

l. Mink Afustela rison Small Mammal SpSuAW j l! Racoon Procyon lotor Small Mammal  ?

l! The high productivity of the Lower Columbia and its tributaries is due largely to the presence of dense runs of

(

anadromous salmon (Oncorhynchus sp.), steelhead trout (Salmogairdneri), culachon (Thaleichthyspacificus), and smelt (Spirinchus thaleichthys) (cf., ODFW & WDF 1987). The continuously high productivity of anadromous i

species was due in large measure to their huge oceanic maturation habitat. The Pacific Ocean could support a dense fish population free of human predation during the growth period. Upstream spawning migrations were so large that they were difficult to over exploit prior to the development of modern fishing techniques and physical alteration of the rivers. As A result the Columbia, Kalama and Cowlitz Rivers were channels through which passed a substantial resource base that was localized in space and predictable in time.

In Chinook Ethnographic Notes, Ray (1938:107) reports exploitation of the fish listed above plus sturgeon (Acipensertransmontanus) and herring (Clupeapallasil). Given their size and abundance, salmon, steelhead and 8

perhaps sturgeon arguably were of the greatest prehistoric economic importance. Ray pays particular attention to salmon, outlining use of Chinook salmon from January through March; Chinmk and Sockey salmon from May to early July; and Coho, Chinook and Dog (Chum) salmon in overlapping runs from mid-July through December ,

(Ray 1938:107). It is not likely that all of these runs were equally productive or available to prehistoric j populations. Summer Chinook and Sockeye are upriver stock and may have been difficult to exploit on the lower I river. Chum presently are not abundant and may also have been of limited importance in the past (ODFW &

WDF 1987). Taking into account fish size and availability, spring and late autumn to winter were probably the major acquisition timu for anadromous fish. Table 3 lists economic species and harvest seasonality. An estimate of economically most important species is indicated by exclamation points (!) in the table.

In summary present environmental characteristics suggest that the Trojan locality offered an array of resources adequate to sustain a long-term, sedentary or semi-sedentary residential population in the prehistoric past.

Limited abundance of upland resources suggests that during the last several thousand years of relatively high population density, economic activities would have focused on the river, wetland and floodplain environmental zones supplemented by long distance riverain trade. Given the presence of such resources in the immediate vicinity of 35CO1 plus the existence of adequate dry land sediments for wet season occupation, there is little direct resource related reason not to expect the cultural material at the site to reflect the remains of a multi-season residential village.

II. SITE HISTORY AND ETHNOHISTORY History Summaries of early historic notes on the lower Columbia and the Trojan vicinity are avaihble in Roy Jones (1972) book, Wappato Indians. His work provides a useful introduction to original historic accounts of the region. Warner and Warner (1975) offer additional site specific information about the history of the Trojan area.

Here I touch briefly on the high points of those accounts to give the reader a general background to the site.

First known historic mention of the Trojan site was made by William Boughton in 1792. He noted a small basalt promontory with canoe burials situated in the Columbia River opposite the mouth of the Kalama River. He named the island Coffin Rock. Later Alexander Henry distinguished Coffin Point and Coffin Rock, and referred to them as burial grounds used by occupants of a village located at the mouth of the Kalama. Samuel Parker in 1835 and Charles Wilkes in 1841 also noted the location of Coffin Rock and mentioned its continuing use as a canoe burial area. Wilkes alluded to Chinook social stratification by indicating that the rock was reserved for burial of chiefs (probably really a broader range of upper class indhiduals). None of these men nor other early explorers and entrepreneurs mentioned the presence of a village adjacent to the Trojan basalt outcrops. Absence of historic mention and near proximity to an acdve burial area imply that site residence, permanent or seasonal, had terminated prior to historic intrusion into the region. Presumably all American Indian use of the locality ended in the mid 1800s due to precipitous population loss and social disintegration from apocalyptic epidemics, and relocation to reservations.

Ownership of the Trojan site and the surrounding section ofland was granted to John and Margaret Fry in 1851.

They constructed a house in the area west of the 1970 Oregon Archaeological Society (OAS) excavations shown l on Figure 3. Subsequent owners maintained the predominantly farming and ranching use of the land into the

{ carly 1900s. The completion of a regional rail line through the property in 1898 increased the general commercial activity of the area. The effective transportation that the line provided helped make the site more desirable for purchase by the Trojan Powder Company in 1918. Access was afforded by a spur to the main line, l and by road and river transport. Trojan facilities were situated directly over the portion of the site illustrated l on Figure 3. Some powder company buildings can be seen among farm buildings on Figure 4.

l The Frank Welter family farmed and managed the property during its early ownership by Trojan Powder

( Company. Subsequent generations continued to manage the property untilit was purchasea by Portland General Electric Company in 1%7. The location of the Goble basalt formation adjacent to the Columbia offered a stable 9

l

landform and access to cooling water necessary for construction of a nuclear power facility. The Trojan power .

plant was constructed in the 1970s. The containment building and cooling tower were built on the outcrops west of Coffin Point. Most ancillary facilities were constructed in the area to the immediate south (see Figures 1 and 2). Following three years of excavation by the Oregon Archaeological Society, the 35C01 locality became a concrete batch plant and docking site, then a storage area for PGE. It remained a storage area until 1988 when -

PGE began excavation for construction of a new office complex within the 35CO1 boundaries -- excavation that stimulated this report. I discuss the effects of the OAS work and PGE construction further in the third section of the report.

i Ethnohlstory

}

l Ethnographic accounts oflower Columbia were limited by the high mortality of these populations during the mid 1800s. Information on Chinook lifestyle comes from historic accounts and ethnographies drawn from memories of survivors removed from the context of original Chinook adaptation. Synopses of existing materials go beyond the intent of this report. However, interested readers should consult Yvonnne Hajda's dissertation, Regional Social Organization in the GreaterLower Columbia (Hajda 1984). Her work provides a thorough consideration of existing ethnographic and historical data relevant to the broader region. Verne Ray's classic Lower Chinook i Ethnographic Notes (Ray 1938) is a valuable general account of lower Columbia life reconstructed through historic accounts and the memory of several survivors from Willapa Bay in Washington. Finally, The Chinook Indians by Ruby and Brown (198') provides a popular and readily available account of Chinook life.

Relying on historic sources, none of the ethnohistoric accounts record a village situated precisely at the Trojan location. Given the locality's favorable position in regard to resources and riverain transportation routes, however, there is no reason to be bound by the narrow ethnographic temporal perspective. The archaeological record, when adequately investigated, can provide a more suitable long-term time depth. Existing archaeological information, discussed below, suggests that the landform was indeed the site of a residential (village) locality.

Given roughly equivalent adaptive requirements a few thousand years before the early historic period, ethnohistoric material can provide a reasonable starting point for understanding the general nature of prehistoric use of 35C01. It should be investigated in more detail if data recovery excavation takes place at the site.

III. PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGY AT 35CO1 The Trojan site was excavated during three field seasons in 1968,1%9 and 1970. Figure 3 shows the portion of the site removed during those years. All of the work was done by members of the Oregon Archaeological Society. Trojan was one of a series of sites excavated by the OAS beginning in 1952.4 Part of the society's intent was to mold the enthusiasm of local artifact collectors into paraprofessional pursuits that would retain so. me information value from sites investigated through their organization. The society was concerned about the rapid loss of archaeological resources resulting from extensive new construction along the Columbia. They hoped that their efforts would salvage a portion of the archaeological record from construction related destruction. The society made efforts to coordinate their work with professional archaeologists; and members established procedures to record basic information on feature and artifact taxonomy, count, provenience, and depth.

Unfortunately the society also recognized individual ownership of recovered materials. This created a situation in which artifact recovery could take precedence over consideration of spacial patterning, identification of features and other time consuming and less vicariously rewarding procedures. Many research procedures common to modern archaeology such as floral, faunal and sediment analyses for prehistoric dietary and environmental reconstructions were overlooked or underemphasized. Furthermore the biases inherent in searching primarily for artifacts was exacerbated by the absence of curation for later reanalysis. The advantages and liabilities of the OAS approach, then, became e Nrmauent part of the Trojan archaeological record.

4 Roy Jones (1972) outlines the history of OAS involvement in lower Columbia archaeology and provides limited treatment of results in his book Wappato Indians.

10

- = = ==ue 360/UCN 300N 4 GN

=

=

x 8

secg. Fish Pond SS 1

~

Fish Pond Se rL s

. /

\

\

\ /

\ /

• t

\

\ s 4. @D N -.,,oad R

s ~~~:

N

/s ~

/ /p **

// ! f

',',/ r-

1. Fish Pond f oupat

. .. /

-A

/

f Col l

l l

1 -

, sootysom , j sgow , , , , e goh Figure 3. General

'4 oc'o n I I I I I ,jou ,,,hsot 35 CO 1 Grid Noeth% TROJAN SITE Mao'aef'. borta Aug 1988 G C. Burtchard

,/ \\ , * &*

/

- \ u.\ere g t i. .. .. . a m ei., e . . . :

, -sect N s s

\ \

l- . . . . . . . ac. v.n

.,.n. ... . .. .......... . .

N ""' ' %N ~ -

. j 7,"

g

,. 's \

\\

',,, Aooron septicy

• 6 Tank Area 6 f- - -

[* 's s a '8

.\

Losding Psd

~,. -

N m i .. ,A o o ,.. A. . .  : ,

y**aa cAaa';g*,a  ; ,

" 'I'a h>hk ~s a El l

% .. ., s g__

u _ , . . , ,

,; OAS Escawstions i

x s A *

, g

. . o i_ i . .. ...

" ~

~

, ' ~ , . ~ ~f' c

%.. ... g' ut.., s _.

M..> ,

,v -

s S.

% ," l - s f -' "

f.m ,- '

, }, s

~ .. ,

1 N

N

\% f i.,

/

/4 SA

', s \g 8

?, ' u['g/ ,

= ,.

3..,". .'.".,:. :.. .'. s a.. n ,.., -

- 4(, p:,. '

s i(i

. s S1 _

4 APERTURE "h .--

CARD b -

A *,-:es -

5

'i Also Available On

%sg.f ' ' '- -

Aperture Card I t SP0" so o'J I t e a g g eisy soog b Map 35CO1, b Trojan Locality 890%90092-of-

I

_, . . . .._,..m.,.y,,,,,._,

r ,- a

[

3.. . ,,

A $ asze suo ,

-s.

~

,. gS

, p:

x x

- af,2 .g }^g fff:.;d' ,

.E>..

S.;;j'y:." ' '

~3 _. i *,  ;. n g -

_, , f, p ;g ,,

,m. -.

L t -.c%.., ,

, "N ' , / 'ECFf' ,

4i s

?

p&

!e 5 ..

s .

Q f

k.Ne . '., CQ " ~ ,'.

N (.h.g?e ,y -

g

,A._ ,.

't@.ap; m,

u. .

I. s tc gw 4v~, . ,r

z. ,a 'o v,9  ;

s...

j .. . (>,&. ,

~ ',

.{ , ;p

(,.

, -~

..m.~ Q

• j._

... .o f -

h '

htCtd.e52.

,, . x .

}i.

L1 .- p. .4 g

ff."i*'~

i

,e4,ghg ;L y - g

3  % ,

4.[y s g? s C 5, - *\ , v, _% *

. 3

._ .! s-

). ..p) .g e . a p,

t _ !(.,,  %

w , . f : ,' Q_

• 1 '.%'4 4 s 3.6f.y ,

.e

. .: - %  :,x, e ,

.Ni  %

y s.. , 4,s. - A g d,, y . ' -* . A ';J . '.','N[ ' .

s vs ~

'qs <- .' ;-

• '.y',

s- .

G, ,

47p :" ,

' * >\ s .\

. h' ghL . . , .

djp',I. ,

'~

.. kki

\

~

Figure 4. 1970 photograph of 35COI showing farm and Trojan Powder Company buildings, and part of the 1970 OAS excavations. CofEn Poin:is at the upper right. The larger basalt outcrop upon which the Trojan Nuclear plant is built begins at the extreme left.

Intermediate site sediments are oserbank depositr from the Columbia River.

I 13

l OAS Fieldwork During their three years of excavation at the Trojan site, members of the OAS removed approximately 1600 cubic meters of site fill. The locations of the combined excavations are shown on Figure 3. Apparently, these areas were selected to minimize interference with the farm residents and to maximize artifact return for the excavators.

Test augering and discussions with the Welter family helped make the final decisions (Jones 1972:223-224). The 1 resulting test blocks were situated directly atop the highest section of the levee adjacent to the eastern beach.

l The natural setting coupled with auger directed placement of excavation units suggests that the society removed  !

material from one of the most intensively used portions of the site. Given the size of the combined excavations, l materials removed and features intercepted should fairly reflect long term use of 35C01.  !

l i The Warners outline field procedures followed during the final year -- 1970 (Warner and Warner 1975:9-11).

Site records suggest that similar procedures were in affect during the 1968 and 1%9 seasons as well. Accordingly, the Warner's discussion of field procedure may be extended to all three field seasons. The Trojan excavations were conducted in a series of 1.5 X 1.5 meter provenience units under the general supervision of more experienced OAS members. Workers were assigned an excavation unit when they arrived each day. Site fill was removed in 30 cm arbitrary, horizontal levels and screened through 1/4 or 1/3 inch mesh hardware cloth. For each level excavators were instructed to collect formed tools, modified flakes, bone, shell and historic debris.

They completed field forms recording these items, and illustrated features and sediments visible at the bottom of each level. Diggers were directed to clean their artifacts at home and return them for measurement and illustration. Once recorded the artifacts were given to the collectors. Excavation continued in this manner through the cultural matrix into culturally sterile underlyiq sediments. A spot check of field records indicate that most units were excavated through 4 or 5 levels -- 1.2 to 1.5 meters below the modern ground surface. Upon completion of a 1.5 X 1.5 unit supervisors recorded exposed profiles, and took photographs ofinteresting artifacts and features. They then assigned the excavators new units located to enlarge the expanding excavation blocks.

The general procedure was repeated, ultimately resulting in the large blocks illustrated on Figure 3. Figure 4 shows the 1970 excavation in progress. It provides a visual notion of the substantial scale of the OAS excavation.

Due to the emphasis on record keeping the OAS procedures provided horizontal control to the nearest 1.5 m and vertical control to .3 m for the materials they recorded. Unfortunately the 1968/1 % 9 grid orientation differed from the 1970 system. The society also failed to tie either grid system to a permanent datum point, making their relocation difficult. Relocation of the OAS blocks was a goal of the present project. Thanks to assistance from PGE surveyors and presence of the 1968 block in the new cutbank profiles we relocated the blocks. We placed them into the new coordinate system and datum as shown on Figure 3.

Despite biases inherent in the collector-excavator strategy, the records of the OAS work at Trojan now represent our only archaeological record for the site. It is important that these records eventually be analyzed and incorporated into a systematic interpretation of recovered materials. Since the older coordinate system can be tied to the newer system used here, spatial control can be maintained in a fashion that should allow these records to be tied into any renewed data recovery research at the locality.

OAS Results The overall conduct of OAS excavations at Trojan was coordinated with Thomas Newman, an anthropologist at Portland State University. It was hoped that some of the recovered materials and records would be the subject of continuing analysis to be reported via one or more masters theses at the university. Unfortunately, that work was never completed and, with the exception of the final season's effort (see Table 4 and text below), the early Trojan work remains unreported. During the present project, we collected the original site records, field notebooks, maps, stratigraphic profiles, computer cards, and an assortment of photographs from the three OAS field seasons. The information contained in these records, while suffering from the biases noted above, constitutes our only remaining opportunity to salvage results from the entire previous project. The materials will remain on file at PSU's Depanment of Anthropology in perpetuity or until funding can be found to complete the work begun in 1968.

14

Table 4. Artifacts and Features Reported for the 1970 Field Season Chipped Stone Tools:

1) 4564 bifacially and unifacially worked, pointed, and bilaterally symmetrical " projectile points" and preforms

2) 5 flaked graving tools

3) 7 stone drills or awls

4) unstated number of triangular and leaf shaped knives

5) 41 unifacially worked scrappers

6) 1507 worked fragments -

7) 33 flakes stone cobbles Ground Stone Tools:

1) 421 single and double notched net weights 2); 29 complete banded and perforated net weights, plus an unstated number of fragments

3) 148 pestles and hammer stones 1

4) unstated but low frequency of mortars or hammer stone bases i

5) 4 shallow pecked " bowls"  !

6) 8 adz blades

7) 2 att ati weights ]4

8) 11 abraders and shaft smoothers l

9) 7 unidentified ground stonc artifacts Non-stone Artifacts and Ornaments: i

1) unstated number of bone awls and needles l

2) 15 antler tips and wedges

3) 2 unidentified clay objects

4) 9 pipe stem and bowl fragments

5) 23 pumice pendants

6) 1 Olivella or Oliva sp. bead Miscellaneous Prehistoric Materials:

1) 1 polished pebble

2) unstated number of yellow and red pigment pieces

3) unstated number of quartz crystals

4) unstated number of faunal fragments including deer, elk, beaver, fish, and bird

5) floral remains including hazel nut, camas llistoric Materials:

! 1) 79 beads f 2) 12 coins including 4 of recent American mint; 4 between 1850 and 1860,1 British 1842, and 3 Chinese

3) 37 clay pipe stem and bowl fragments

4) 4 Phoenix buttons .

5) unstated number of modern style buttons Features:

1 1) 27+ burials located at varying depths over the three year excavation period. Superposition of stone and wood

}- - suggests pit burial practices. Bone uniformly poorly preserved. No evidence of cranial deformation.

2) 4 caches or clustered concentrations of notched weights and/or weight stones

3) 13 hearths of ash charcoal, burned earth and/or Fire cracked rock (FCR) (some of these may be FCR caches rather than hearths proper)

4) 2 shell concentrations in association with ash and FCR  !

5) pits were not listed in the report but are numerous in site photographs and : J 6e seen in this season's y profiles of the earlier excavations l 15

At present interpretation of the results of the three years effort must rely on the clearly written account of the 1970 Trojan excavation (Warner and Warner 1975), on a short summary account by Jones (1972:222 233), and on accounts in the OAS newsletter, Screenings, on file in the PSU library. Of those sources only the Warner report includes an organized treatment of recovered materials. Site interpretations based ou excavated materials, then, presently must rely on that report. Artifacts included in the Warners' report may be grouped into chipped and ground stone tools, non-stone artifacts and ornaments, miscellaneous prehistoric materials, and historic materials. Prehistoric features include burials, caches, hearths, shell concentrations, and pits. Table 4 was a tally of reported artifacts and features from the 1970 report.6 Please be aware that due to collection techniques and rapid excavation, counts in Table 4 likely under represent actual totals removed from th ,1970 work. In addition the counts bear an unknown relationship to the full three year total. Nonetheless some of the numbers are quite large and worthy of comment. For the present I assume that more robust patterns reasonably reflect the remainder of the unclassified sample. At least three patterns are apparent: a high frequency of net weights, the wide functional range represented by the total assemblage, and the substantial number of non-cranially deformed burials. The features are also worthy of note. In my opinion the patterns are consistent with interpretation of 35C01 as a semi to fully sedentary village locality.

The large number of net weights in the Trojan sample reflects the great economic importance of anadromous fish to Lower Columbia populations. They also suggest a primary salmon fishing technique for this part of the river. The massive breadth of the Columbia at Trojan limited effective use of many alternative fishing strategies.

Weirs and dip nets are most useful in low water streams or at rapids (dip nets). Hooks or gorges and line are not efficient at catching adequate quantities of other than the very largest fish, such as sturgeon. Salmon spearing probably was practiced, but is unlikely to have provided enough fish for the total population. The dominant fishing technique here was probably seine netting. The technique involves use of woven nets top floated with wood and bottom weighted with stones. This was a most effective means of catching large quantities of anadromous fish in the large river trunk (see Ray 1938:107108). Taking advantage of the marked tidal effect at Trojan, fishermen in canoes could play out the net at high tide and drawit in as the tide ebbed. Surrounded fish could then be tossed onto shore to be clubbed and processed in quantity. The high frequency of net weights plausibly reflects this activity.

Aside from fishing, Table 4 tools functionally reflect a wide range of human activity associated with more than short term or task specific use of the locality. Reported artifacts suggest hunting activities or inter-group hostilities (projectile points); meat processing and hide working (knives and scrapers); tool manufacture and repair (uncollected but noted debitage, abraders and smoothers); wood working, including plank or canoe finishing (gravers, wedges and adzes); food processing (mortars, pestles and bowls); clothing manufacture and ornamentation (awls and the Oliva bead); and more. These are the activities associated with a mixed sex group residing on the landscape for a extended period. That period is minimally the fishing period (spring into early winter) and perhaps beyond.

Burial interpretation is ambiguous. The uniform absence of cranial deformation on the burials can only suggest burial at a time prior to the adoption of the Chinook practice, or very recent burial, or prehistoric burial of low status individuals - probably slaves. Given rapid decay of raw bone in acid soils, pre-Chinookan antiquity for the burials is unlikely. Furt) ermore, radiocarbon dates indicate that the site may be no more that 1250 years old.6 Since the property has been continuously occupied since the mid-1800s, it is also unlikely that the burials are of recent origin. For the present,I agree with the Warners (Warner and Warner 1975:98) that the human remains most likely reflect burial of low status or slave individuals; perhaps related to the early historic Kalama River village burials on Coffin Point and Coffin Rock. This interpretation, however, is far from certain. Since the 5

With the exception of the burial count, numbers in Table 4 reflect only materials excavated in 1970. This is the northernmost excavation block illustrated on Figure 3. Total excavated volume for tht block was approximately 823 cubic meters, j

6 Two radiocarbon dates are availaole from features excavated in 1%9 and 1970. The dates include a hearth 135 m below the surface at 1210 +- 95 B.P. (1-5347); and " fire area" carbon 1.51 m below the surface at 1270

(

+ 95 B.P. (1-5756) (Warner and Warner 1975:99).

16

l 1

individuals were found at varying depths within the site matrix, they could represent normal death and burial within the earlier resident population. This would be a further indicator of occupation by a complete social group. Unfortunately, burials or clearly associated materials were not dated, and intrusive pits were not noted j in the records. However, because non-human raw bone is not well preserved at the site, I feel that late j prehistoric /early historic intrusion is more likely. Final determination remains uncertain until more data are  !

available. l Feature definition arguably suffers most from a collection oriented excavation strategy. Excavators simply work too fast to give the precise, time-consuming attention needed for adequate feature exposure. The features noted in the Warner report could equally reflect short or long term use of 35C01. No mention was made of plank Louses or other structuralindicators. Nonetheless, such features were almost certainly present. Charles Hibbs (personal communication) recalls observing pit house profiles in exposed side walls. Furthermore, we have identified two possible house depressions in the present project discussed below. It is likely that excavation simply proceeded too quickly to adequately observe and record often subtle indications of prehistoric features.

Past projects' feature definitions,then, are not particularly useful for interpreting site occupation or function.

Those data, however, combined with recent site profiles are consistent with the long term residential i interpretation of 35C01.

OAS Summary The Oregon Archaeological Society work at Trojan at once constitutes a substantial intrusion into the archaeological site, and offers a potential source of information useful to understanding the prehistory of the locality and of the broader region. Records of the three years work will remain on file at Portland State University until further work is possible. For the present interpretation must rest with the work of the final season. Fortunately, the Warner publication provides en informat.ve summary of that work and of the artifacts removed. I believe that those materials most plausibly reflect long-term occupation of the Trojan levcic landform.

That use probably spanned much of an approximate 1000 year time span, beginning about 700 AD and terminating shortly prior to historic intrusion into the region. Fodowing residential abandonment of the site, existing archaeological and historic sources suggest burial use by populations residing near the mouth of the Kalama River. I feel that more sophisticated interpretation must aw tit additional work with the Trojan records in conje: ction with additional data recovery efforts at 35C01.

IV. MODERN IMPACTS TO 35COI Since the late 1960s the Trojan property has undergone a number of aethities impacting the integrity of the archaeological site. Most of the activities that took place during preceding 100 years (farm, homesite and l explosives facility) had relatively limited effect on the underlying archaeological sediments. Certainly artifact l

collection; and excavation of ditches, outhouses, septic systems took their combined toll from the archaeological record. However, subsurface disturbances were limited in size and discontinuous in space. The most extensive impacts to the site occurred since acquisition by PGE. This, of course,is a direct result of more massive cut and i fill aethities associated with construction and continuing operation of the power plant. Here I consider effects of those activities, and of the archaeological work that preceded them. I close with a brief evaluation of remaining site integrity.

1 l

Archaeology I

! The OAS excavations at Trojan have been discussed above at some length. I mention them again in this section I

not to disparage the wellintentioned work of this society, but rather to draw attention to the fact that any terrain disturbing activity irreparably damages archaeological resources. Archaeological excavation, since it is directed

) specifically toward cultural remains is particularly severe. In archaeology we hope that our understanding of the

) past and of cultural processes will be advanced sufficiently to mitigate the damage done by the excavation process itself.

l l 17

The OAS excavations were chronologically the earliest major events to impact the site. Excavators completely removed site sediments lying within the areas indicated on Figure 3. These sediments reflect a substantial, but unknown fraction of the site total. An accurate picture of site fraction awaits accurate definition of site boundaries. It is clear, however, that the information gained from the substantial physical site destruction has been low. I offer suggestions for improving the balance in the concluding section of this report.

( Power Plant Construction Full scale construction began at the Trojan nuclear facility in 1971. Work continued through 1975. Power 1 generation facilities were not located on the archaeological site per se. Nonetheless, several related activities l effected the site directly. During that period the northern end of the 35CO1 landform (the floodplain deposits between basalt outcrops) was extensively modified by construction of a docking platform. In addition, the central portion of the site was the location of a continuous pour concrete batch plant. Both facilities necessarily I

i damaged cultural materials in their respective areas. In both cases the spatial extent of the most severe subsurface disturbance can be accurately located.11gure 5 shows 35CO1 during power plant construction. The notch euvated for the docking platform can be seen immediately above the concrete plant. The concrete plant <

itself dominates the floodplain landform. Coffin Point is at the upper right.

During the construction period a meteorological monitoring tower was erected at the southern end of the site.

It can be seen at the lower left of Figure 5 and is mapped on Figure 2. Construction of the tower involved relatively little subsurface excavation. Consequently,it caused relatively little damage to subsurface archaeological I materials. The discussion below, then, concentrates on probable effects of the dock and concrete plant.

l The docking platform was constructed by blasting away bedrock from the base of the basalt outcrop immediately '

l west of Coffin Point. Contractors used fill removed from the dock to build up the landform between the two outcrops in the area adjacent to the northern beach. Some of the material also was used to reinforce the beach ,

against wake crosion. Figures 4 ans aow the docking area and northern beach before and during construction.

In the absence of clearly establishc4 35CO1 site boundaries in the area of the dock, it is not possible to determine the extent of construction related damage with certainty. Cultural materials certainly extended to the northern beach area.7 Tucked against the side of the basalt outcrop, however, the dock blasting probably did relatively little damage to the main body of the site. Damage from tbc rubble overburden should have been confined to limited mechanical recontouring of the site surface.

The effect of the concrete batch plant on archaeological materials was more severe. The massive scale of the operation is clearly visible in Figure 5. The plant was located directly over the main body of the site. This location afforded easy rail and water borne supply. The most spatially extensive effect of the plant was the continuous traffic of concrete trucks and other heavy equipment over the site surface. While traffic probably caused compaction damage, most impact from traffic would have been limited to near surface sediments. The concrete plant's water supply facility caused the most substantial subsurface damage. In order to hold mixing water a circa 20 m X 10 m X 1.25 m deep water containment pond was excavated into the site center (see Figure 5). The depth was sufficient to effectively destroy cultural materials located within its boundaries. Additional archaeological remains were lost to the holding pond's water inlet / outlet channel. It drew Columbia River water by means of a subsurface line running from the pond through the eastern beach. When the power plant was completed in 1975, excess concrete spoilage was dumped in the pond and on the eastern beach, the plant was I disassembled, and the surface was returned more or less to its preconstruction state. J The practice of dumping concrete into the water holding pond made it easy to relocate in 1988. The pond area formed the northern boundary of much of the most recent preconstruction excavation shown on Figure 3.

Clearly, the entire cultural matrix was removed from within the pond limits. Fortunately, however, much of the 7

A number of PGE workers commented on their success in finding artifacts along the remaining portion of the northern beach.

18

pond and line intersected the area previoucly excavated by the OAS. The total extent of additional damage then, was loss of approximately 12< cubic meters of site fill. The loss is substantial. but alone is not ruinous for a site the size of 35CO1.

.. NhE' '

ai t

• ~-L-s- y khIN mja

__We ux. ,.,. n h m "" . r:

m(.M.,,_e4 m; ~ 3 y-w w w;m#NN((/

Ts P-QQ,,,% 7.

ij .,

Wy' l

,L * / ., . qq <Q,/4 :.n

.., 7 ,- cw:

w , .

t L s,

, n - w.,wc s~.m.%. y ,y%

m s g e .%,

1

-,4.~ > \ t

,_%. mk)j'h3 j

sn v

f 4%A,,,,g# ,

$pn4 E

,y pM k.1~.; 4 ' wM gQ $$

&,W pr.

Nq, &g'}

= eweeteveh  % Q gly% -

gtly;,

-~+h k i Gf. .gNEMw . Ni n?,A,&v, YIhhI.. k[j /

,A

{ -

. ,o f

n at .J y + l f p.

n 1. ,c - 9 <

k ,b' A fr j

.- % _ q ' ' 4 xgy ztQ

.n

, -:erf 9 g*g p' gm.es de,jy4 a e

T, l

).$h [7< f"$j'i m ',. jk ag M Cn Y' f M_ p"  ; e y M ,

z zgljty. .Q;ggya y .

1 /

?w. HrA_gy;

• . ~

$Q j

, , e, c, a s2

(; f 2 ,Y+>,V

.h/.*f rdDb I

' -)

a. '*'PT*'

i s I

e , p, <~.~ g p, ,r .

wQmm,i gy

g y i

4 'e, . 4 G , %$ .g-

, ?y ,

y.k. s, . ' y ( %re ',

j # ti g.

jn g )

w, g  %. pp ra c x ,pe n' l

N y% j g. fm 'L ma&3&, (,. e+ j g'qkYy [e, ,~dy i,  :

r eq/ ,'

r,f'. ~

1 .'

u ,

4 - a

1. p9'%w .

t  ;

f, ) V ..- - M,

4. n - . 4pq 4 ,

r

/ . ;

g 9

w gj S ,

?g/ /

km *

\s; \ -

2 z

Il4 a ,M.

~

.m 4 \7 bQ \

/

1;\ g.

[r nc ., ,y, s c

\

x c g;x .

i# 0% I gg, Q \

}

,- A p'i .., n W +

s 4A & . a.

[; V x  ?' g% l N NL l. J y;

fp &\ , q m ,-

+

\ \ V% 46 y, % %q,

_L.~.b.lb. e n .g.nApW I L

.__Jr's 3[~ ' %

l +\'

,4 V

udfhA_: Q- g# psf.

LL '

.. __ . .._m .z_j_.

l l Figure 5. 1971 photograph of the greater Trojan Nuclear facility. The containment building and cooling tower are under construction at the upper left. The concrete batch plant and docking Facility are situated on the 35CO1 landform. 35COI forms a continuous arc l

from Coffin Point to the rneteorological tower at the lower right. Cottonwood Island and the Washington shoreline arr visible at the top of the photograph.

l 14

Power Plant Operatiom 1975 to 1988 Following completion of the main power generating facility in 1975, the central site area became largely an equipment storage yard. The most significant sources of damage to 35CO1 occurring between that date and 1988 involved construction of a Health Physics Laboratory, excavation of its utility lines, and excavation of Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) fish rearing ponds. Figure 3 shows the ponds and utility lines located during the present project. The laboratory building, commonly called the " lower lab," lies immediately southeast of the ponds. Its location is marked on Figure 6. Both fish ponds and lab were constructed on sediments now known to be a part of site 35C01. The 1971 photograph (Figure 5) shows the general area as the grassy field at the lower right.

I At the time the lower lab and fish rearing pond were built, southern site boundaries were unknown. In the early {

1970s southern site limits were set only by 1%9 excavations near the road running between the fish ponds and the OAS excavations. The actual site, however,is considerably larger. Auger tests conducted during the present project indicate that boundaries exterd through and beyond the fish ponds and lower lab. Although boundaries remain imprecisely established, the site appears to conform to the higher river marginal levec for an unknown distance to the south (see Figure 6). Unaware of those boundaries and without consideration of potential impacts to cultural resources, PGE built the lower lab shortly after construction of the power plant. It is highly probable that the construction damaged prehistoric cultural materials. Results of this season's tests, however, suggest that damage from construction of the lower lab was relatively slight. Tests in the vicinity of the lab uniformly indicate cultural materials only below .95 meter in depth (see Figure 6 and Appendix B). The lower lab was constructed on a minimally excavated concrete pad. While cultural materials certainly extend under at least a portion of the building, the building itself does not appear to intrude markedly into prehistoric cultural strata.

Water, sewer and electrical lines for the lower lab were excavated deeply enough to intercept cultural strata.

Excavation of these lines created narrow, linear intrusions at depths varying from approximately .8 m to 2.0 m through the cultural matrix. Some of these intrusions appear in the stratigraphic profiles presented in the following section of this report. Figure 3 shows the location of several of these lines. There probably are other unspecified lines through the site as well. Utility line damage to the site is genuine but spatially limited.

Providing that trenching damage does not continue to occur, further research should be able to be structured around these intrusions.

Fish rearing ponds were built by ODFW on property donated by Portland General Electric. The ponds were l excavated to approximately 4 feet (1.2 m) in the area indicated on Figure 3. Even though work was done under auspices of a state agency, excavation was not preceded by studies to determine potentialimpact to cultural resources. As with the lower lab, this season's auger tests indicate that cultural material may well have been removed by pond construction. Damage would have resulted from excavation both of the ponds themselves and from the water line connecting the ponds to the Columbia River. At present the full extant of damage is impossible to assess. Judging fror the auger results, however, most damage was done to :owermost, and l

hence earliest, occupation of the Trojan site. The ponds are located in the high ground furthew mland from the

[ river. Assuming that the most intensive prehistoric use of the landform was biased toward the river margin, the l ponds probably removed sediments containing a relatively low density of cultural debris. Those materials, however, could have been useful in reconstructing early use of the inland directed, wetlands portion of the landscape, in any case, full cultural resource damage from both the lab and fish facilities is now speculative.

To my mind it demonstrates further the need for cultural resource studies in advance of terrain disturbing activities, rather than construction with the assumption that prehistoric materials would not likely be involved.

Current Impacts to 35C01 The most recent archaeological work reported here resulted directly from partial excavation of a proposed office complex on 35CO1. Procedures completed before work was halted involved extraction of cores to determine the load capacity of subsurface sediments, drilling of sump wells around three sides of the building to control subsurface water during excavation, and partial foundation excavation for intended replacement of natural 20

4 eg p.

l- Y

k

[ {$ ,,

7 ,'.

<7.J.ii$

j/ -Dock

_ l, I  ?

' 'L.'c ; , a -w :a " '_

D i .-  :::r::

.j

• ^

Rail Line ./.  :::,:

m i .,,.?:

< : ;.;< : . . 5 7

'!  ; .: (' ,1 d'!W

.,? Fish Ponds . i  !! .i

),

q  : .:;;

[- _A /.

i:Y

. ' b:i  !!!5i5.p!O!1i!!! jjjggjlggg;;

)

! ..: )

j  !!Q L9wer,

+ ,' . . ,

' /z

'$.jij.

i .

J

,: ),; -

c.

• ...s.,:

24 ':i :!;:.: ' .gi

3. ..: ::: :i . . . :.!! '  :

!l j:!'

~ f;. $ie:

^ i:7 -

{ '

.g.:......

.[ Columbia River 2' > ' 58:!;,::::. f

"* j

^

25

,b. . ' ;  ;

11 !!!:'i.:45 ^ :NS!!!

J  !!:! :TNkiji!!!S 10  :: i: . f 9 .;[j 8 . ..:

6

'#J f ;f l

5 .'"

t . . . .a

" ]

[ k.!.  !!!

h 1 , . '

;4 l Figure 6. Map of present PGE facilities, proposed water lines and extended site boundaries.

The shaded area is the tentatively established limit of 35CO1. Proposed utility lines and auger test units are located along the dotted line. Existing buildings and utility lines are indicated by solid lines.

21

sediments by more appropriate materials (very coarse sand). The location of these features can be seen on Figure 3. In addition to the office building PGE proposes to drill two to three new water wells south of the lower lab. Water lines connecting these wells to the main plant and new office facilities will cross a portion of 35C01. Below I review the extant and anticipated impacts of the building excavation and the proposed water lines respectively.

Preconstruction excavation for the office complex clearly caused serious damage to 35CO1. While noteworthy the core and sump excavations do not constitute massive intrusions into the site. Before actual excavation was halted, however, approximately 2,390 cubic meters of site sediments were removed for the building foundation.

Average excavation depth was about 2 meters;sa depth sufficient to remove all prehistoric strata from sediments containing a high density of cultural materials. The impact is softened somewhat by the fact that the excavated area crossed blocks previously removed by the OAS in 1%9 and 1970. Nonetheless, the impact was substantial.

The site map (Figure 3) records the extent of the new damage and its spatial relationship to the previous archaeological excavations.

Preconstruction excavation was halted with damage limited to the area illustrated on Figure 3. Present plans call for construction of the office building northeast of the reflcction lake shown on Figure 2. In that area the natural landform is capped by approximately 4.6 m (15 feet) of basalt fill blasted from the adjacent outcrop during construction of the plant. Construction of the building in this location will not damage cultural resources.

The final source of impact considered here relates to the proposed wells and water lines south of the lower lab.

Figure 6 illustrates the location of the proposed lines. PGE engineers plan to place the lines in 3 foot (.91 m) trenches south of the lab. Theyintend to reuse existing lines re-excavated to their previous depth north and west of the lab. Cultural materials along the proposed route uniformly occur below the .95 m level (see Appendix B). Consequently, the new lines, if carefully excavated as planned, should not constitute a significant additional source of damage to 35C01.

Impact Summary and Site Integrity Since 1968, the Trojan site has suffered loss of a substantial amount of culture bearing sediments from the cumulative impact of terrain disturbing activities. The OAS excavations, concrete plant helding pond and the recent office building excavation constitute the most serious intrusions into archaeological strata. These projects removed substantial quantities of subsurface sediments from what may have been the most intensive prehistorically used portion of the landform. ODFW fish rearing ponds also removed a substantial portion of the site. Damage from the fish ponds is more difficult to assess since precise site boundaries and depths are not known in the area where the ponds were excavated. Given their location at the back of the landform, the ponds likely removed sediments containing a relatively low density of cultural debris. Construction of the docking area also resulted in unknown damage to the site. However, since the dock was built at the back of the landform immediately adjacent to an abrupt basalt outcrop, the resulting site damage was probably lower than from other comparably large construction events. Due to their shallow excavation depth, construction of the lower lab and meteorological tower probably did not entail serious damage to 35CO1. Finally, utility and sump line excavations cross the site at various points, supplying ancillary service to the greater Trojan power facility. These lines created narrow linear intrusions through pristine materials. Combined utilityline damage is genuine but limited by the lack of spatial extensiveness to the intrusions.

8 Sediments removed from this portion of 35C01 were transported to the nearby town of Goble, OR where they were used as fill to help solve a land subsidence problem. Those sediments contain cultural debris. To help l guard against future designation of those sediments as a natural prehistoric deposit, a site form has been filed with the Oregon State Office of Historic Preservation (Appendix A). The form notes the artificial context of the site materials and indicates 35C01 as the point of origin. The original excavation at 35CO1 was refilled with ]

coarse gray sand. The material assures good drainage and can easily be distinguished from natural site i sediments.

1 1

Ouestions of site integrity hinge on the remnant ability of a cultural property to lend itself productively to continuing archaeological research. Clearly, the Trojan site has been damaged substantially from the combined effect of the activities outlined above. It is equally clear that a substantial portion of the site remains intact.

While site boundaries are not established with precision, known limits extend well beyond the disturbed area.

There is no doubt that adequate site sediments exist to answer a wide range of research questions now and in  !

the future. In the final section of this report I suggest several research directions that I believe can be followed ,

productively to build upon the extant site data base. Despite the past damage I maintain that 35CO1 retains adequate physical integrity to be of significant value for research into prehinoric cultural processes on the Lower Columbia.

V. FIELD PROCEDURES AND RESULTS Field procedures for the present project had three main elements: 1) creation of a coordinate system and map recording the location of previous excavations and sources of site disturbance; 2) illustration of sediment profiles exposed in the preconstruction excavation cutbanks; and 3) auger tests of PGE's proposed new water line right of way. The work did not involve data recovery excavation. Rather, we designed our efforts for minimal additional site intrusion. While I believe the information gained will assist in interpreting Trojan's archaeological record, more refined interpretation awaits a more complete research effort.

Mapping Our first efforts were directed toward developing a coordinate system and map to accurately reflect the site's modern contours and features. Myintent was to develop a system that would not only record this season's work, but one that would facilitate relocation of past subsurface intrusions as well. The earlier OAS map, while visually informative (see Warner and Warner 1975:4) did not allow precise relocation of excavation units or blocks. OAS excavations used coordinate systems with two differing orientations, neither of which was tied to a surviving datum point. The PGE mapping system, by which recent construction was oriented, used a third non-metric orientation. Our goal was to develop a single metric system integrating the entire site with its compliment of natural and artificial features.

The new coordinate system is tied to a site control datum located at the northwest foot of Coffin Point. Datum information is recorded on a brass cap set into a buried, concrete filled, white plastic tube. It is situated precisely at N 72,46931/E 1,395,128.43 Lambert Grid, Oregon North. Oriented from control datum, the east to west base line is set at Azimuth 293 07'20" (or N 63 52'40" W). If using an optical transit and magnetic north, note that grid north is set at 315' cast of 1988 magnetic north. The east to west baseline, of course, is 90 west of that alignment.

Control datum's horizontal coordinates were set arbitrarily at 500 meters North and 500 meters East (500N/500E). The setting allows site mapping in a single NE quadrant and should accommodate eventual

, mapping of extended site boundaries. From datum we set a grid system in 20 meter units across most of the site aree. illustrated in Figure 3. Horizontallocation of mapped features are tied to this system with additional points f set as needed to insure accuracy. Most grid points were marked on wooden stakes, but we also set two aluminum capped rebar grid markers. The first was set on the baseline at 500N/450E. We placed the second point near the road at 400N/450E. The caps were tagged, painted orange and pounded flush to the ground surface. Provided they survive, datum and rebar markers should help reestablish the grid system as it appeared in 1988.

Vertical control also was keyed to site control datum. Datum is 6325 meters (20.75 feet) above mean sea level.

We recorded depth relative to datum and sea level elevation for all grid points. Contour lines on the site map indicate true sea level elevations. Stratigraphic measurements in the profile drawings presented below are recorded in depth below datum. They can be converted to sea level readings by subtracting the measurements indicated on the profile side bar from 6325. Often depth below modern cround surface is the most useful 23

figure for interpreting profiles. Depth can estimated from the profiles or obtained from originalillustrations on file at PSU.

l The final site map (Figure 3) models the ground surface as it appeared in the summer of 1988. It also includes the horizontal location of backfilled, and hence invisible, site intrusions. Figure 7 shows only the surface evident contours (the office foundation pit has since been backfilled). When we prepared the map the site boundaries l had not been extended by the auger tests discussed below. Consequently, the map illustrates only the central, l previously recognized portion of the site. Complete site mapping guided by subsurface testing should be an integral part of any continuing research at 35CO1. The present map, however accomplishes the main goal of I coordinating the various sources of major subsurface intrusion into a single coordinate system. The system is j flexible enough to allow eventual inclusion of the expanded site boundaries.

i j In 1988 we also generated a 25 cm interval contour map for a cultural feature exposed in the floor of the excavation pit. Cutbank profiles, patterned distribution of FCR and carbon stained sediments suggest a probable plank house base aligned with the 3.5 m contour on Figure 7. The house floor had been unknowingly excavated by the backhoe operator who was following a chromatic break between black and tan sediments. Fortunately the feature was not entirely removed. The map records the exposed surface and provides spatialinformation useful for later research. To help relocate the floor, we gridded it with aluminum tagged, zine coated spikes set at 2 m intervals. The feature map and the full scale site map are filed at PSU with the Trojan records.

Stratigraphic Profiles The bulk of our 1988 effort involved recording profiles exposed in the cutbanks created by the office building excavation. Excavation procedures created relatively clean vertical to diagonal faces over most the castern, southern and western sides of the pit shown on Figure 7. Most of the northern side was loose rubble, though vertical faces were created at several points. We restricted profile illustration to the more abrupt faces. The faces illustrated and the profile numbers used in this report are shown on Figure 7. They begin at the southeastern corner near the river, and progress clockwise around the pit.

In preparation for recording stratigraphy, all of the abrupt cutbanks indicated on Figure 7 were dressed with flat blade shovels and trowels. In order to avoid further damage to the site, we followed the backhoe contours rather than creating true vertical faces. The resulting exposure created an extensive view of subsurface stratigraphy cross cutting the levec from east to west, and north to south parallel to the Columbia River shore line. Our intent was to record natural, prehistoric cultural, and recently disturbed strata visible in those exposures.

In order to control for the cutbank's variable deviation from vertical, all measurements were corrected by means of a line level and t-square spanning the vertical distance from ground surface to pit floor. Measurements were related to a constant median reference line set at 1.5 m below datum (4.83 m amsl) and run around the entire pit wall. Strata were then drawn and described in 5 m long profile units. We illustrated the cutbank's actual I

deviation from vertical with cross section diagrams drawn at each 5 m interval. The strata, however, were recorded consistently as though viewed in a vertical plane. For each profile unit strata were identified, described, measured, illustrated, and photographed. Original documents are on file at PSU.

{

l u l l

'f 5 J;

' I. -

-l -1 I ,.- Ig 1- l' I l l l Grad 0 s ,

/ [. '

\

'~' "'

f ; ,

Fish Pone /~

s  ! s

~

~ , \,

3f'1986 *

' f ' ["c'."".$n" t- P2 -

\

1. a **

. ' _ P1 ,

E-Q

-::8 [4 f q

x P6

.M

~ . .

_ , n

~~  ;

- + ..

/-)/ ' ~ '

')j

~

coiumois niver -.

t

" N 'Y'"

- t 'A N

T l l

\\

.0

{ ,-

E i L ,

ss i i *Y" i i i i 'Po" .

i i Figure 7. Contour map of 35C01 showing the location of profile illustrations 25

Profiles illustrated in this volume were prepared from the original 5 meter unit illustrations. Here profile units are combined into 10 to 15 meter sections. Where possible I have joined consecutive units. Profile photographs are positioned directly below the drawings to which they pertain. Though the scale varies somewhat from the drawings the photographs provide a useful record of natural sediment appearance. I have also included cutbank cross sections. They are positioned directly above the point at which they were drawn.

Table 5 is a general key to the profiles' stratigraphic horizons. As much as possible we used shadings that mimicked the appearance of the natural strata. The illustrated horizons combine small scale inclusions. Profile specific descriptions help to discriminate variations within the generalized strata. Specific interpretive comments Follow each of the 7 profiles. Collectively, the profiles model the sediments and cultural features intercepted by the office foundation excavation. Profile specific interpretations of sediments and cultural features follow the illustrations. General interpretations for the site follow later in the report.

l u

Table 5. ~ Key to General Sediment Iforizons Profile Key

\\ Sediments not Profiled

< '.\

Disturbed Fill- Mixed Sediments and Gravel

{.j,f.f}5'f,,

o:o"

. o

• 0, Disturbed Fill - Sand Dominated I

. . Disturbed Fill - Carbon Banded Sandy Silt

/ Disturbed Fill- Archaeological Backdirt

, , . , . Silty Sand to Fine Sand Overlying Cultural Stata W.1;1!f.'F-j Ne Sand, &ing Upward ,to Sandy Silt

. Silty Sand

' \ ' Bedded he to Medium Sand Overlying Cultural Strata

/ N

\\ \\ s he Sand with Charcoal Flecks 64 o l  ::::f::L:.!!!' Cultural Fill - Dark Carbon Staining

.m :-: :<.

l M .- ??" *

Cultural Fill - Medium Carbon Staining

(

l  ?.'.

I- Cultural Fill - Light Carbon Staining he to Medium Sand Underlying Cultural Strata 27

'w  :

1 >

A Profile 1. i Gediment Descriptions. j

.z

- Stratum ' Description '!

1- Well sorted fine sand; yellowish brown,10YR5/6 (damp); moderate mottling at upper contact

'2" ' Well sorted fine sand; very dark grayish brown,10YR3/2 (damp); mottled lower boundary;

, gradual upper boundary -

'3; Well sorted fine sand; dark brown,10YA3/3 (damp); gradual boundary with strata 2 & 4, mottled boundary with stratum 1, abrupt boundary with stratum 6; moderate density burnt bone, charcoal and FCR ,

j 14 ' Well sorted fine sand; very dark grey,10YR3/1 (damp); gradual lower boundary; mottled upper boundary; moderate density burnt bone, charcoal, and FCR ,

I

'5 Compact well sorted fine' sand; dark yellowish brown,10YR/44 (Damp); mottled lower .

. boundary; abrupt upper boundary; low density charcoal and burnt bone 6'. ' Sand dominated disturbed fill; mottled very dark grey to dark yellcrovish brown,10YR3/1 to j 10YR4/4; charcoal and cement inclusions

, ~7.

Sand dominated disturbed trench fill; color as above with pockets of compact sedunents

' 8L Disturbed fill, mixed ' sediments and gravel; variable color; high cement fraction to the east '

-1 becoming gravelly to the west E9 Fine Sand; very dark grey,10YR3/1 mottled with lighter sediments; very gradual boundaries; indistinct western terminus Archaeological backdirt, fine sand dominated; very mottled very dark grayish brown 10YR4/3 I e10

. (damp) to dark brown; very abrupt boundaries

11' Disturbed fill, Carbon banded sandy silt; very dark grayish brown to brownish yellow,10YR3/2 (damp) to 10YR6/6 (damp), very abrupt boundaries.

1

- - ~ - - - - - - - - _ _ . -

'Q O

'N\

. s.

, io_ ~ s ss N sy

\

s.

\'

g,. ~ x

._'\ . sN sx 20- \

e 9,00 A- . c * . ,. r .,

~ f~  :-

,_ . , , ' s.

• 4 ,-

. F , . ,c.. . : - .*

, c + _ . , y . . . : r, ~: 1-

. -% -. e ' ;;". . 7,- .

p:.sy,,.. _

,0. 's , ;e .

s.1.:,..:,_:g, ,. .q; s wo ts. e. f, ;;: - . ~. g @tg

..s. rm., .

g/I{ij[

ga jpp-o, 1*,,

si * %; ;:,

+

.y

.;g.

"C:;ggy g;'%b pg,-gy? ' jfQ

. .n

• go : - ' ' .

WA: -3

. ~ ..~~c

^

- . ' s W N,. g.

k;., .:  !$iljg@$Y h@*^

%:ayg sumes. - . . . . . ,

- ~* wh,U%,,. gs .J A

.,6....

. i& '

N.

i d 'l'

'1 J

9 j

$1 ha.

• Nyh?

g

<s. ,

4.:

lf_' l~'

~^

a .,,.~,~;

Profile 1* 403N/474.Sg go

'w %

- _ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ - - - - - _ _ . __

N N

~ -

\

itN('N  !!

40*N ap6E 4 06 N 460%

L s,s. . . , ':1 ; ? " I ,: . i T 4ll l ? ,'.

. ; ;'.f-c v',E.?.' .ma . ','$"f .-.. -? ' W*S,.;t.-

y y . '

-->.s,- r ~ . ,

.,1

, .>~ y;g;w:;.o r:.u . 's:. .L. ^ ; y" ;_ (.yl%

. s>f. ' '; * :

\ \ .\ g. \

~

\

\

\ [\ \3 .\ \\'_\' .' \ , \'g s M4 q}, ,:*. .p.

I o v.; . ,

'] $Qs,&

w

- x7

-M~ ,

4w*'**<- -> .* %<a harCOst

%+ ' ,, FCR W,:

/

)

2;ud; '"gjug9 charcoor W .

.f South Profile t

. ., ,e .w ., . ,

--A.';. ;

.5= - -~ L ..~ r,5a ; f _ - .

• X i :7~

. , .- - s -

9 '

I

. W 6

k 4S

.?

. ,#1 ' . ,

.. .a .

..A 6 "O h W ~

f 4y '

(Qhfg zYk YE j ( - (,e ~ ~p.. . , Lt:

>* 4\

<,y$ ,'p*j .4p' t e :-

I(.y wv -

~,, -

e _.

gn.a

< n, gF , -e ss

p 7.,7 . ca.= q' g '

1. . ,,f .,; .3;,.;, ,. ,,_ .,,,, . , , . , , , ,

• + '".*~~' ~. .Q- *4 : ~ ~: ' Y :n g 7;.Le g

~r ? .%. -:R.R W?+' l =' =' 2X2arx.[-U w;.C [O %*  : =- " >*.t 'a.yw.g Q jyf,- w,y L.%k : yys%.JC'v 9 ' ' " -

-2 f zGW, sg6sy<- j w ,:,y}y sw;y;y3,,;

c L.K

,c. ., . wi. .. y jc

.;,r' f. -<f m e :4.= 3:+..

, , , ', . :y ' qy m e y: r n . "-

n-W u, T '* -

w:a x s.._

s.. s i

St APERTURE l CARD 36N/460E, Southeast Corner of the South Cutbank l

use Mailable On

.x J werture Card ,

O

Profile 1. Interpretation This first profile exhibits a combination ofintrusive and natural sediments. Disturbed strata are visible overlying the entire profile and at both left and right (east and west) margins. Concrete and gravel are clearly visible in the uppermost stratum at the extreme left. This stratum connects smoothly with concrete spoilage that caps the entire castern portion of the excavation pit visible in Profile 7. Moving to the right, the dicuibed upper stratum shows an old road bed visible in the photographs by its dense gravels. Further west grasels are less densely mixed with finer grained disturbed fill. A trench with buried electrical lines intrudes into subsurface sediments at the extreme left. At the right end of the profile are two distinct but disturbed subsurface deposits. The lower deposit (Stratum 10) is backdirt from 1%9 OAS excavations at the Trojan site (note the abrupt lower boundary of this stratum). As could be expected the backdirt contains mixed cultural debris; including such modern materials as cigarette filters, ball point pen caps, and the like. While difficult to see in the photograph,its eastern I edge clearly truncates in situ sediments. Overlying the backdirt is Stratum 11 which appears uniformly across the southern cutbank as marbled black and tan sediments. The stratum probably is a combination of OAS backdirt and imported sediments that were bulldozed over the top of the site to create a level surface for (

I operation of the concrete batch plant.

l Intact sediments can be seen between the cable trenches and OAS excavations. Prehistoric cultural fH1 appears f as gray to black sediments overlying lighter colored fine sand. The shading on the profiles mimics the natural l chromatic variation. The cultural stata contain variable densities of chipped stone, fire cracked rock (FCR), I burnt bone (primarily highly fragmented mammal bone and fish vertebrae), and charcoal. These strata also contain several cultural features. A large pit feature can be seen at the extreme left. The continuation of the pit shows on the right of Profile 7. At least two other pits show in Profile 1; one under the 404N/470E point, and a second about 2.5 m to its right. Additional pits on the extreme right are an artifact of the OAS excavation.

A hearth is clearly visible in the upper dark band (Stratum 4) near the center of the profile. This and other hearths are defined on the basis of highly oxidized sandy sediments with a high density of burned bone. FCR is scattered through the cultural strata but does not appear in feature concentrations in Profile 1.

Stratum 4 is a useful landform marker. It slopes upward to an unknown point west of 405N/465E where it is truncated by OAS excavations. In subsequent profiles the same stratum can be seen to slope gently down. The upward grading of the landform adjacent to the river suggests a river marginal levee. The landform pattern is i one of the bases for that interpretation in this report. The lowest sediment unit underlying the cultural horizons (Stratum 1) is devoid of cultural material. It is a medium to fine sand and apparently is the landform upon which the earliest site occupation took place.

i I

l l

\ u

\

l Profile 2. Sediment Descriptions Stratum Description 1 Well sorted fine sard; yellowish brown,10 YRS /6 (damp); moderate mottling at upper cantact 8 Disturbed fill, mixed sediments and gravel; variable color; high cement fraction to the cut becoming gravelly to the west 10 Archaeological bachdirt, fine sand dominated; very mottled very dark grayish brown 10'tR4/3 (damp) to dark brown; very abrupt boundaries .

11 Disturbed fill, Carbon banderl sandy silt; very dark grayish brown to brownish yellow,10YR3/2 (damp) to 10YR6/6 (damp), very abrupt boundaries 1

12 Bedded fine sand; dark grayish brown to light brownish grey,10YR4/2 (damp) to 10YR 6/2 l (damp); redeposited in excavated pit 13 Fine sand; dark brown,10YR3/3 (damp); gradual boundaries; moderate density burnt bone, 1 charcoal, and oxidized inclusions 14 Fine sand; black,10YR2/1 (damp); mottled but distinct boundary; included hearth is oxidized dark brown fine sand,10YR3/3 (damp); moderate density burnt bone, charcoal and FCR 15 Fine sand; dark grayish brown 10YR4/2 (damp); distinct boundaries ,

i 16 Fine sand; very dark grayish brown,10YR3/2 (damp); slightly mottled but distinct boundaries; i Iow density burnt bone, charcoal and FCR; tome mixing of stratum 11 17 Fine Sand; dark yellowish brown 10YR3/4 (damp); abrupt boundaries; low density burnt bone and charcoal I

i i

l

)

1 f

(

32

r w" .

i 10 N

15- x

,$S$E 4

1. (5Y

~~

S .' .:, ,.f .c.Y:

..e '.b,:c a. _-

.' -&,_2. ~ ..t .c.-k. :n .

' . *. , . . * * . s. r.c',,.6 /

4

• .<.; 2. . *g...

,. .,1 / ., ?M> . _' 6.

,lll f l/

w .

l l/ / '

l -

l/ , //

~~

[4

• y '

.. s.,.

I

i. u k .;

~$s[ ? "$- . - L" Y Y.~5R a .=, r* : ~;;wc $ Q R:?:~-l .;; [;3?:hn,*'*,;;

w.18mm Qaw  ?? % C~ ~ &.

$QL;d; . ~.i: id'G2ll72,$M$}%M1_%.o.G2n,..g

~L.,: , ._

in 'n 4

i Profile 2. 406N/460E to 4

U

')N'N N' s s.'s -

'\ N

'\ \ N dN N 'x \ Nh "F :q A.:4 ., y n . - , ,. ... _ .- .. ,_ ._

\\ -

\ '

.\ \

,/

/ / l/ l l ,! ,/ -

/ /,/

/

/

TG, 4% , T?lTM'%}7%u*pnxgag.~

q g f qw syw s e,y..M8;'.mh. , . . .--

3 ,f s~ m

,, f g # lM ~

~ mm# ." Masm^ "w#65 *

/ /- dS**% <

/'5 & /%s$ '"" ' c, j f,/&  :

South Profile W b ___ _ ;_- ~ w . a . ,

.m - +$Q . . . . . . .*f, ._,

'~

,>  ; .- 4,;

. .c.f*

g 3 . , t  ;

s.

jp- k,_.

s

.{

4 7..

f ' z.

e.

(l's

.. . r , mm L .xs ., . ,.

' ' -b'-. '

__ -iNI M. , j .,

', ' k- . _ s '.',". f ."' '" ,

_ . .; u=r . ,1

,,.,.s, -

.= ".. =" ,l-,,,

_ y. . ._.

Si APERTURE CARD

!3N/445E, East-Central Section of the South Cutbank Also Available On Aperture gatg 33 qo 09%. 00% -C)S t -

Profile 2. Interpretation Most of Profile 2 is taken up by disturbed sediments described for Profile 1. The OAS backdirt and basal features extend almost to the 407N/450E point. A deep pit excavated in 1968 is visible in the central photograph .

immediately above the center marker sign. Stained sediments surrounding the excavated pit are part of the I original pit overlooked in 1968. The marbled bulldozed sediments extend across the top of the entire prolide as indicated. 4 Intact prehistoric cultural deposits can be seen in the western third of the profile (the right side). As before the cultural strata (13,14,15, and 17) appear as variably carbon stained units overlying lighter colored natural sediments. The darkening, while disticct,is not so black as in Profile 1. The cultural material content, however, is similar (ie., chipped stone, bone, FCR and charcoal). Five cultural features are clearly defined. The first is an FCR concentration immediately right of the terminus of the OAS excavation. The pile of heat fractured stone is sitting directly on natural, culturally sterile sand. The small pit to its left may be the remains a cooking pit relating to the stone, but the confusion of OAS and recent preconstruction excavation makes firm interpretation difficult. A hearth is located near the center upper boundary of Stratum 14. It can be seen at the left edge of the western-most photograph. A second pit filled with large mammal (probably elk) bone is located at the western edge of the profile. It is filled with sediments from Stratum 15 and truncates underlying unit 14. The bone is unburned and in relatively good condition, suggesting that the stratum may be relatively young. Finally, a posthole dug from an even younger surface penetrates through the older horizons right of the pit (see Stratum 17).

l l

35

Profile 3. Sediment Descriptions -

Stratum Description 1 Well sorted fine sand; yellowish brown,10YR5/6 (damp); moderate mottling at upper contact 8 Disturbed fill, mixed sediments and gravel; variable color; high cement fraction to the east becoming gravelly to the west i

11 Disturbed fill, Carbon banded sandy silt; very dark grayish brown to brownish yellow,10YR3/2 (damp) to 10YR6/6 (damp), very abrupt boundaries 14 Fine sand; very dark brown 10YR2/2 (damp) fading to the west; gradual lower boundary; mottled but distinct upper boundary v>ith patches of naturally oxidized fine sand; moderate density burnt bone, charcoal and FCR 15 Fine sand; dark grayish brown 10YR4/2 (damp); distinct boundaries 16 Fine sand; very dark grayish brown,10YR3/2 (damp); slightly mottled but distinct boundaries; low density burnt bone, charcoal and FCP; some mixing of stratum 11 17 Fine Sand; dark yellowish brown 10YR3/4 (damp); abrupt boundaries; low density burnt bone and charcoal 18 ' Poorly sorted fine to medium sand; very dark brown (east) to dark brown (west),10YR2/2 (damp) to 10YR3/3 (damp); gradual boundaries with charcoal concentrations at lower boundary; moderate to high density burnt bone and charcoal 19 Fine sand; yellowish brown 10YR5/4 (damp); gradual boundaries; distinct bedding to the west 1.0 Disturbed fill, mottled mixed sediments; dark yellowish brown to black,10YR4/4 (damp) ta 10YR2/1 (damp); gradual lower boundary; abrupt upper boundary; low density charcoal and burnt bone 21 Fine sand fining upward to sandy silt; dark yellowish brown (east) to yellowish brown (west);

10YR3/6 to 10YR5/6; gradual boundaries; moderate iror, mottling 36

'N io- s \\

x\s s'

' .,N\

'x\ \'\

s

'( s'y N;

' \x;'QjfN\

gu s xx x Sh s , x$\' Ys

. h- 138E

\ \

s s

\ \ \ \

g\\

n...,.c

,,.;,:,9. 3. 3 anss au s\.. <

.' s\,1s' ,

. ,o

.g s \ u\ n-

.- ~ n _

, g ,,,,

,s-mqqq w ~R* , ~~'"""~"'w:w r myn.mmp y m y. .9. 7. ;.  :

~~

..1

1. c. ,,,,...,,,m...........

2c-f,E ~

7'"_u ..m. .

! l ..-

?

b

, Wl . , G'y' f ~. 4 ,

M j.[ -/ < 1 m, ,

~

,. 5 >

~

. , 7'"l~ % ;-"l[- . ...~-

a : f,,&sj[A?SOf;&}

a ... , -

';. , .* -l, J @ 3..c:p.g,?t*..;5. .Uq .v,  :;.

,f ..n 09 :: , .

!5

...;;-Q ' ;;

R:l,.1 > <. -ll-lT:_ , i ?.a OL,, ~. m '- .

s ?. . x;wiMwxcuhm;.y ' ;,-: h?

-a.tcarm'.asn%en

\f am

)

Profile 3. 40SN/445E to

- ~ %,

'N s

'N

\\ x

~

'N '

kN 'N 409N 43,$ E g4 g Q g l N q o' *.]*o,; . ',,,,a.* : :.. ; y . . . . ':::

.. .: .; ..::-. ... . . ". ,sn;. . . .w M '.ym . .s f. :: . : . V.;.i .;.' *.'.:.**al;,

QpVp$% (a M '::...:';6.....w

f. .: .. ,.....' .:. ._

, .;.. *. .*. ;..l *..: :.;

m

r . . ..c. . .

. , . . . .

.....n.....;,.,.... . . . .. ...

5 1 South Profde

, .w. s. c.w.

c, y,; :;,n.-

m v..&.. m  : < . , . . . -

-q -

,4

.p. y ,. ---

g fg',;,~$jy:%..,,.,,.$

g w  ;;, r

+.

d, ; . ,.;

h:n.x:; u. s 4- n.

y,

-d

' A':;r  %

. . . , , W e. j

.A , .,: p i.qrucs g:p\.L.., -

c 5 -

~,3; .;g .a.,. .. t, , ,.;.y-s,..

_n .

.. 3

.x, ,* p:.;~::~,.t y * - .,, , ~ . ' .. ...

v-r ,. =. -. r y., r.

,,es .-

• aa w. ..

w., - < -~... . , .+.,1

,yx. ..4A.4r,,

1135 A M'el .. >>; M'M $

S1 APERTURE CARD 10N/430E, West-Central Section of the South Cutbank g.gule On Aperture Card 37 goaqq 0092-o -

Prome 3. Interpretation Profile 3 continues the southern cutbank exposure to the west. Through Profile 3 all profiles have been continuous. As with the preceding profiles the uppermost horizons are composed of modern disturbed =

sediments. Stratigraphic units 8,11,20, and the unnumbered trench fidl to the west were all recently deposited.

The open trench near 409N/435E holds a water line currently serving the lower lab. Trench fill to the right of this is associated with a sewer line to the same building.

Intact sediments lie below the disturbed horizons. The unmodified lardform is nearly level, though it slopes slightly down to the west. The apparently sharp down slope in carbon stained stratum 18 is an artifact of' m filling of a probable prehistoric structure. The horizontal surface is typical of the landward side of a natural river levee and is consistent with that interpretation of landform creation.

Cultural horizons 14 and 15 are continuations of the same units shown in Profile 2. A third, darkly carbon stained, cultural horizon (Stratum 18) truncates these strata, sloping down gradually then abruptly to the west.

It dives under the construction excavation floor at about 2.2 m below datum. Dense charcoal concentrations occur at various points along its lower boundary. Important to its interpretation is the fact that the horizon appears in other profile units. Most informative is its presence in the center of the excavation in west facing Profile 5. There the lower boundary of the unit is deeper than 3 m below datum. Fire cracked rock increases in density near the base of the horizon. The stratum appears to be the profile of a prehistoric use surface.

Given its overall size, excavation, and patterned association with FCR, I suggest that the feature represents the remains of a plank house. The distinct, clearly bounded stratum suggests, further, that it may have been a single use feature free of the archaeological complications of multiple building episodes. I discuss the feature further in the section following the profiles.

. Culturally sterile sediments underlie the cultural horizons. The natural deposits filling the possible plank house do not indicate prehistoric cultural presence with certainty. Clearly, use of this part of the landform decreased following abandonment of the structure. More restricted occupation may have continued elsewhere. Indeed, data recovery excavation eventually may extract materials from these sediments (we did no screening while preparing the profiles). For the present, however, it appears that the housepit represents one of the last prehistoric residential occupations at the Trojan site.

39

i

N ,

l Pronle 4.~ Sediment Descriptions LStratum ,

, Description Disturbrd fill, Carbon banded sandy silt; very dark grayish brown to brownish 'ycilow,10YR3/2 (damp) to 10YR6/6 (damp), very abrupt boundaries

' 19 -' Fine sand; y' cllowish brown 10 YRS /4 (damp); abrupt boundaries; distinct sediment bedding -

20 Disturbed fill, mottled mixed sediments; dark yellowish brown to black,'10YR4/4 (damp) to 10YR2/1 (damp); abrupt lower boundary; very abrupt upper boundary; low density charcoal

and burnt bone 21.' Medium fine sand fining upward to sandy silt; yellowish brown (south) to dark yellowish brown L (north),10YR5/6 (damp) to 10YR 3/4 (damp); moderately abrupt boundaries; moderate iron g mottling; very low density charcoal .

' ~ 22 ~ Bedded medium sand; light gray,10YR7/2 (dry); moderately abrupt lower boundary; abrupt "3

. upper boundary 23 Fine sand fining upward to sandy silt; dark grayish brown,10YR4/2 (damp); moderately abrupt boundaries '

24 Fine sand fining upward to sandy silt; dark yellowish brown at base 10YR4/4 (damp); dark

- grayish brown,10YR4/2 at silt top; graduallower boundary; moderately abrupt upper boundary 5 -25

' Silty sand; dark grayish brown,10YR4/2 (damp); gradual boundary; iron mottled; very low  ;

density charcoal i

)l l

.]

1

(

40

l l

i

\

io- 's\ \ -

x \N s x N 's N>

is- - s '\

s \ \\ '

N so w'm\h'm ';4 '

i ME i

' N- 'N N is_

bb$khk

/ / / /_.

b\" hh5k 2 '"sk - k' 4

\ 3E

, q' ' \

\,.(

y ,m-  % '

' - s si sy

-- , i A. .;, '

20 2.L~ ri.

Southwest Profile

^< Q O f' y rL' .: /~^

(( fWt.S

.g. . . ;.. s, .. ; y .x y ,: p :, w : , ? R' x.:,Dw r},$ $ .

4*

'2

-y SE(

- ' ~ T n .rd ;w 5,-

,g Y~..r,,O.q fa,'. +.j

.y > _W'e .

,. Q ,. f r & .,r.' .i:.- . -

r$ -

..g f

.. y ',.  % }gt;,f{,,:k,.

s?. . e 4 '"

^

~ e

, , ' +. .s

. . L

.<3_

, h. , < .r_ . _ - .,

w %. pJ,

~ ,a ,f. ..

y f.'f . 3 P ,,(. j.k$ .,, j " ,

pg ,

i 1 f .; '-

t I . f.'

b. . . , ,

u,. ,

~

w. gn

.> i .s . _

. ;v . . ~s, o_  ;

f , *' q i y f

- 4,j

~

. ... r: .,.:.

g.

['T_-h WT}$pIk~{;l;h**~ hjj'}.1>f),{ k '

~.3* k **""uk-~ l** f$t's f...

c 1 4 < :'d t? t i W .,*.: -

Profile 4. At 416N/424E,S West Cuthank

.i - i . . . _ . . . . _ . . _ . . . . _ . . . _ _ _ _ . . . . - . . _ _ . . . _ . . . . . . . . .

s _

.\

d y, ,,

N'e'NN" N

. N'.

3. . . . .N

\gh\g\g\ N g

x s [' '\\s sN x

'y s" h..x, .,...=z.

x'N'x N'NN N >

r [ Y" ' ' ' '

~

D'' '

\ \. N \g 1 '.", ,,,...S,, iv M ..

\

j g ,\ g s vj yr gM g[ llIllillll BWMiillllllillWITI'llhEN" l -

C

% ist Profiles

..w.

.x. ,

p.g g

,.. . , A%

w :.- ,. j3 x.w

").-( .' G*%:

~

~

~~_'--tFg12M,_.nhl%,g

, ht l tyP2<

w. .. i . :n % 2 c c M & a:w i ~ .

I 61 APERTURE l CARD suthwest Corner of the South Cutbank; and 422N/418E to 432N/420E, -

Also Available On Aperture Card 41

$90 %70099-05 -I

Profile 4. Interpretation These profiles are not continuous with the preceding three. They resume to the west and north of fill disturbed by excavation of the lower lab sewer line (refer to Figure 7 for orientation). The southwest facing profile (left) is the westernmost unit on the southern cutbank. The adjacent two profiles are from the western cutbank and are at approximate right angles to the first. None of the profiles provide clear evidence of cultural strata at the depths exposed. The absence of cultural stata in these units suggests that this portion of the landform lies west of the main body of the archaeologicallocality. However, since the site has not been systematically tested, I have included the area within the present boundaries for 35COI.

The strata exposed in Profile 4 are particularly useful for extending the interpretation of natural process of landform creation. Specifically, the horizons exhibit rhythmic repetition of a fine sand to sandy silt structure.

The pattern is typical of an intermittent, long-interval flood sequence. In this interpretation sand is deposited during periods of particularly massive overbank flooding. Presumably, these are the times at which Columbia River flood waters flowed between the Trojan basalt outcrops and the Oregon-side Coast Ran foothills. After the floods receded vegetation regenerated on the newly deposited dry land. Given adequat '.ime, the darker color and finer soil particles associated with an A-horizon begin to form at the top of the new deposit. The rhythmic pattern in the west profiles is consistent with formation of such incipient palcosols and subsequent burial by infrequent, bi.t repeated, massive flood events.

Stratum 21 most clearly shows the color shift associated with a flooding / soil forming process. It shows clearly along the upper central portion of the West Profiles. I tentatively identify the dark band at the top of that stratum as a paleosol based on its chromatic and particle size chareteristics. Careful examination of the northernmost photograph (at the right) shows the less distinct, but repetitive pattern in Strata 23,24 and possibly

25. Future sediment tests, conducted by a professional sedimentary geologist, should be able to establish clearly the flood (or alternative) depositional processes that have built the Trojan landform. Such studies may also be usefulin building a better understanding of the Lower Columbia depositional sequence.

I 1

43

l

? L:

T Profile 5. Sediment Descriptions P

' Stratum Description 1' Well sorted fine sand; dark yellowish brown,10YR4/4 (damp); moderate iron mottling 8 Disturbed fill, mixed sediments, cement and gravel; abrupt boundaries 18 Fine sand; very dark gray,10YR3/1 (damp); gradual boundary; moderate density burnt bone, charcoal and FCR 19 Compact fine sand; brown 10YR4/3 (damp); abrupt boundaries; distinct bedding -

21 . Fine sand fining upward to sandy silt; brown at base to dark grayish brown at silt top,10YR4/3.

to 10YR3/3; gradual lower boundary; abrupt upper boundary 23 Medium fine sand fining upward to sandy silt; dark yellowish brown at base to dark grayish brown at silt top,10YR4/4 (damp) to 10YR4/2 (damp); gradual boundaries

' 24 , Fine sand fining upward to sandy silt; dark yellowish brown at base 10YR4/4 (damp); dark grayish brown,10YR4/2 at silt top; gradual boundaries ~

i

.(-

44

y. . _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . ___

i I

q "'""***"7.

i

. J to-l) l1 25-g

(

I

}

20-A$kE I ]

3 Southwest Profile v rr r:1~..

',3 .'n" ..t '? .4 ' 3 p. c

.. ~ * ,

c ,.

e m .. , -

8m, ~ ~ . . , . .. . .

. : - ?.- . . m., , y

,,, ,,Mw[

[. g, e, c; . , , _ . -

.>.g.w,

.u

~ - - ~ . .e-

.7

, cr' , .w. .: .. .,

d

,,,,s .,

W, J ,

4@e&i;I~f.

-.-c y8 '

...*""-s , *

..,,F '

y .#

, yy : - . _ , _- ..

,= -s

• gwy f ,-

'f + . . -

t- ,

4,

%g.,

ur

2. . s 2. , s , l .- k u p. Ws

'. . ,, g,

'  : ~ h . ' ' Y& ,~ '

~,

rf'isb;. .',

.1~ -

Profile 5, plankIlouse Sedime Ph, West Facing Cut t

,, m

^! (,

l

'N \'

'o-M

\b \ \

g . q s

'N 20.

\ \s\

bx 4 1N 4 6E

's

\ \ s\

\s\\\ '\

\ \\ \s -10

," N

\k\ 4-..

s

.m

. er 21 - .

_t 5 23 . , , [. ,,g . 9,n , ,[""""kh .. 3 7 ., ,, , ,"' "~:'

.m <, q.z..y.gr i3 q.va.oppy ,"""5'er.4n eve g.,f. n.cri ii.,,;.,,,.,, ,, ;,,,y n.,,.i.e,.....cre

. . , *yPygy&MS$7?ief;-@ err n grp e gypy,

$C411:Ai;dASJalMdh45flisdM2$ngej

• B+ 1 7

'j ? . . .

West Profile y ~-~1 Cs-  ; .

.~.

j l

n j -- - f . g} ,. ,

. .+ >

~

. . . - ~

q[ *4 , s .

, g 't .

~ ,

a e,.c. ,,; o, s.

.m v, .

. s. %3 - ,. .

, _j. }

,.f;$$;f*[ . , i-AW . e.

89, . . ..

p.:.6 y.r

o u . _ . . ,p. .

1

.. .; .,....- .n.ct, lN2"&$5 N '

h*$

~o~ : - ~$- - 1 . .'. ; w.a

. 1,:g, . g,.p .,u _,.

S1 APERTURE CARD

?s tiear 420N/434E and 431N/436E, Central Omce Construction pks dabic On Also Ava.

Aperture Card 45 gqogst 6809-06

Profile 5. Interpretation Profile 5 records sections cut out of the center of the excavated pit (see the location map, Figure 7). Despite limited exposure they provide useful natural and cultural stratigraphic data. Non-cultural strata are consistent with patterns described for preceding Profile 4. The cultural stratum is contiguous with the tentatively identified plank house stratum introduced in Profide 3.

Since it was at the edge, rather than in the middle, of the excavation pit the righthand profile shows most of the natural stratigraphy. In that profile the upper horizons (under the disturbed cap) show the same rhythmic sequence that was visible in Profile 4. Strata 21,23 and 24 are the same fine sand fining upward to sandy silt horizons visible further west. There presence here suggests that the phenomenon was general over the landform as would be expected in massive flood events.

The cultural horizon (Statum 18) shows distinctly in the shallow profile from the center of the excavation pit.

It is present, but less distinct, in the northern profile. Stratum 18 in these profiles is the same stratigraphic unit shown on Profile 3. The lower deeply stained arc is part of a larger rectangular / oval sediment horizon. This horizon was partially excavated by the backhoe operator. Its base can be seen in the left hand photograph accompanying Profile 5. It is the surface upon which the identification sign sets. The horizon continues into the intact profile at an oblique angle to the south where eventually linking with the sloping, carbon stained horizon in Profile 3. Coincident with the darkest stained portion of the stratum is a relatively high density concentration of burnt bone, FCR and charcoal. The less darkly stained, higher stratum to the right has a markedly lower frequency of these materials. At present,I feel that the variation in color intensity most plausibly reflects interior versus exterior contemporaneous use surfaces. If so the more intense carbon staining, and higher frequency of cultural debris is a byproduct of spatially constrained activities and regular fire building associated with bounded interior space. Alternatively, the lighter, uppermost Stratum 18 may actually be an older cultural horizon truncated by the house pit much like Stratwn 14 was cut in Figure 8. Firm determination must await excavation of the structure. Stratum 18, however, remains one of the most fascinating features illustrated by the cutbank profiles.

1 1

1 47

Profile 6. Sediment Descriptions Stratum - = Description 1 ' Well sorted fine sand;' dark yellowish brown,10YR4/4 (damp); gradual boundary; mottling limited to upper contact with stratum 27

~

8 . Dis't urbed fill, mixed sediments, cement and gravel; very abrupt boundary I'

,27 Fine sand; dark brown to very dark brown,10YR3/3 to 10YR2/2; gradual lower boundary; abrupt upper boundary; moderate density burnt bone, charcoal and FCR  ;

I 28L- Be'dded fine sand; yellowish brown,10YW (damp); abrupt boundaries; may be in disturbed '

context -

t Medium to fine sand; brown,10YR4/3 (damp); no iron mottling; abrupt boundary 30 ' . &c sand striped bed strata; striping caused by alternating carbon stained and clean shore line

~

sand; moderately abrupt boundaries; cultural material limited to stained strata; moderate  !

densities of burnt bone, charcoal and FCR, highest density in basal carbon stained stratum

Sample stata exposed in profile window:'

.l 1

a Deeply stained fine sand; black,10YR3/1 (damp) b: Fine silty sand; dark grayish brown,10YR4/2 (damp) c ' Mottled fine sand; vary dark grayish brown,10YR3/2 (damp) d Internally bedded fine sand; grayish brown to very dark gray,10 YRS /2 (damp) to 10YR3/1

~

(damp) - ~

i

.i 1 31 Bedded fine sand; dark grayish brown,10YR4/2 (damp); massive unit; moderately abrupt lower l F ' boundary; very abrupt upper boundary l

[ ,

y ,

4 4 i

l ia-l:

v

maa =ne.

N

\

l to_

s

\

\ \s 15 . -

\ Culvert

~

N 20- .

p NN N

\

q N

_ 9 g hr.

g, .g .6. g *,_ u c. g-g;i).*[f i '4,::'},; . :,.9'.:;.;

, .,...h , .. . , .y , ,, y . - ,, . f c p.,, , ** '-

.;:V y - [l:

kihY:y hifN-l Ql*,'.,i L .'

' l. C. *;.

.f p: V,*

• j:,?.- % - [. * . 'N 'W ' 4 * .%.

..<,g' L 'k ',. V.* v 4.1 y' ':, 3. . ... , . . . .

2:r ' #-g .~. y, . 1, p '. . p

, , . p \ , . '. ! D ,Q . : .4 - '. .....

k

~

t, 'Qi({NY:

ggeh' ew NJ- , -

q w. +0 o ^^3 4;:~ <' S .pt k,7 w .... ' YWj [$h l68 ; ,1 3 Tys)- z{- %. .t.-@ : -i : L ;. .

25'- '^

.hkh.kbNI ' Mik:lkQ[b;- ..Q[@ 2%S .jikik Y .h(([k[.EN:. . . , .

. jij$8 p,'l , ,, yl . ';r h'7 w- .

2A .'* , Qi . ' 5. -: .4r. O Culver t

/;_:' ,,o omse'_:A-

" g 1 '" .,

-^-

North Profile QQ p]

- 4 l

.,-" ' F i- - I - p.A

,  :.  % . 2 .,1

/

~**~ % 9 '~. ' a ;;;;,.y 1 ,

p . ,- ,

,--c m jg

_ ... r' rys -.

w w. ,n 4

v _.t- J A t.

1 gg '

8

.,e .

l -

m- ) , .

? * .. *%e; "y. J s;

, . .f i

r: n ;??N. - '

_ ,, R w.

as;y uy-};;;v %p%w;;w, q,3 ,pg.s v3

,y;;%gfh , ' %,

kw-.m s.

g

,p. .,'s. k.

s*ws nn

= , < , . .z.

Dia *-ti. : .: An6W.g d. ,

1r

, g "etsh.4

. .m 9~ .,h w y

)

i Profile 6. At 433N/474E, Northeast Ci Northeast Corner of the Et t

es ==

N _

\

N s N N N

\

d25N 478E N 47g

, g 477E,

~. ~ .x Q1 y. . ..g .-( ; .+ b+',

4. ' 7 - ,g- *' ,t f 6 , e, ,

t.

,+ g ,.,..* V: * ,-

t, ei *, * ,,;* -- -

cv g. . . . . r . g . . . . , q. .. . . . ., . . . .

, g ,. , 8t .- i ,# ,

• P ^.: b j ' E . ,. - .f g -

.L- ,-

• e . .., y'c, ,

, o: .. , e, y.,..

..g.. )...,

q 2,S ..w :3 .;. . :;g,gr  %.

.t

. , e . i. ; , . . g , , 4 ', ' . ,

t ;*. 4 ya a ,. p- s.  :

-...,,g,,.

• . ,;:.,A,..,a p.p..,f.g.(

s j g.4,j jd

e. l e .s

s y .--o. .[ o-.j'.4.,. .;:V ., _ n' e- itf-f , .  ; f'].:.j . , ':.

,. .g , .

. c-~".t*

.a

. ~* , ,L_ . R

. , , , *. p .4t.1::r .  ; [ .j(/,g..g q..4q,m

-q 4 .,._ . 9 ' a. -

og : c. .pyp !.] : %., -:. ..d ... . ~

a -

v ..

~ ., . +4 c .j W e,.,P y -

.'y..

A ,. .J.,,.p.,f . p ,

a. .

..... * . , . r. -

• ,. .I

y a',

.,I, .- -

,7 ,

rr ,% .A , f g . . I, p e g * .'. I

• l^h- M,7.D.fa[... ,hh . 4,;I

V.[ .,1 L * '

d J,,, i ,. i i < /

• s s , , ,

f,. , , a .y,, , ,, y g sr. .

< < . <, i ,i, , , , , s', i, < < ~ < , ~ i i , i ii, , , i, w '

t '57-

.lg

} ' ~~'

t g , ). ,'.,., ' . ' , ' ' ,ve~

. , ' _ ' . ' Z. ' ,

'. w- . -

3

>o a 7~- y",

7- ..

,-[M g g g{-

[ --

~

-L- _

?

, .ey! w

~

. > < J;7 &{

7 ,, ,,i~

East Profile Yr

,, i,( W '

'~. *$ l t y , Agggh"N.L y gn .

M:iW

.- . . .~ .~.. - . . . .

pk[ b 4,9 $3 ~ p. 47-

' & lA i 'M Mks. h .O.,:'; t ~, .$j,Mg'j,g,%

4 ;- #  ?(

r "t ,

4

) 4bk,3

_ xW [,M, _

, Y .i.n  :-

s s

, 7 n

,,q2', \Y .*

g ;;a ,. . . - wf e*:.Teg, g&."*

i>%3 > +.

.:^ Q-vg% p,, w

[n.) 4 A

& ' 4.gf . . . w.,,.%hk h h  :  :

vef,

%me, n_,IM;;&

% t m .2:~%y'Z I?t. .m  ;

~~'T= ,M W . " * . E 4% .. --

SI rner of the North Cutbank; and 430N/479E to 420N/477E, APERTURE

cuth"ak CARD Also Available On 49 Aperture Card

$ 9 0'c1 ~7 D O C & 0 -

l Profile 6. Interpretation Profile 6 actually contains two distinct units. The first profile is a north facing profile from the northeastern corner of the excavation pit. The second is a 10 m long east facing profile beginning at the same corner. The two profiles are at approximate right angles to one another. Both are capped by cement, sand and gravel spoilage (Stratum 8) from the 1970s concrete batch plant. That disturbed horizon shows most clearlyin the East Profile. The culvert at the extreme left (north end) of the East Profile is the remains of the water line for the concrete plant's water supply pond. Both profiles have intact cultural strata under the disturbed cap. The nature of the stratigraphy, however, is somewhat different in each.

The cultural stratum in the North Profile (Stratum 27 is a mottled, but single massive carbon stained unit. It is not unlike cultural horizons illustrated on the south cutface (Profiles 1 and 2). Like those strata, it contains

{

a relatively evenly dispersed moderate density of burnt bone, chipped stone, FCR, and charcoal. Several cultural features are also evident in the profile. A large pit is clearly visible to the immediate right of the 433N/474E marking tape. It emanates from within the cultural horizon and is excavated into the underlying culturally sterile horizon (Stratum 1). Most of a second large pit was removed by the preconstruction excavation. Its shadow is still visible at the lower left center of the photograph above the marking sign. The profile also intercepted several possible post hole remnants. Several vertical linear features can be seen in the profile. Some of these may be rodent runs, but the relatively true vertical alignments suggest human origin.

1 In the east profile, cultural strata occur in distinctive striped beds. The stripes are alternating horizontally bedded units of clean and carbon stained sand. The striping is most likely a byproduct of the shoreline location. The gray / black units reflect periods ofintense human use of the landscape. The cleaner sands were deposited during seasonal high water stands, or by aeolian processes during low water periods. At present I feel that seasonal fluvial processes are most probable. Abrupt boundaries between the stripes suggest relatively rapid deposition / erosion cycles. Vegetation did not become well enough established to diffuse stratigraphic boundaries before the next event deposited or removed sediments.

Prehistoric cultural materials clearly are limited to the darker units. Materials include the same array described for previous cultural strata. Artifact density, especially FCR, is particularly high in the lowermost cultural stratum. There we encountered at least one FCR feature located at the extreme right of the east profile.

Presently, I identify the dark stripes simply as cultural use surfaces. We did not observe phenomena such as pithouse excavation or piled earth berms often associated with bounded interior space. The possibility exists, however, that the carbon stained horizons may represent house floor features.

l l

l 51

h .-

~

Profile 7. Sediment Descriptions Stratum - Description

- Well sorted fine sand; very dark grayish brown,10YR3/2 (damp); mottled lower boundary; 2 '

gradual upper boundary 6 Sand dominated disturbed fill; mottled very dark grey to dark yellowish brown,10YR3/1 to-10YR4/4; charcoal and cement inclusions 8 . Disturbed fil( mixed sediments with cement and gravel; variable very light gray color L 29 . Medium to fine sand; brown,10YR4/3 (damp); no iron mottling; abrupt boundary 1

30 Fine sand; striped bed effect variably visible; stripes blend to a consistent black,10YR2/1  ;

(damp), circa profile center; striped beds reappear immediately south of 410N/476E, and are .i obscured again at the extreme south; moderately abrupt boundaries; cultural materiallimited to stained strata; moderate dentities of burnt bone, charcoal and FCR, highest density in basal carbon stained stratum; j 31 Bedded fine sand; dark grayish brown,10YR4/2 (damp); massive unit; moderately abrupt lower boundary; very abrupt upper boundary i 1

)

l d

'l I

i 5

4 l

52 {

• 10 _

15-20- \ x NN

%\ x 420 N 41sN 477E 4765E l I

g. .. - . , . . T

.4 F.- . *..* . i . ~- . e ..

-.:,.. . , . . . . - . a . i . . .e , - s w L ' ;. y

. ?L.ey' T: %q.  :;;.,. t.;.v4.

7 . : .: 6'* ,, :ce .y ',,[* , eg .

. Q.: h. . . ,.: v.':. ' . < ;w]

r .3[. % e s; q,,,4. ;.~ j;.:. ,::;.:..

- ,,9..,<,c w:n ?;?,. ^: ,

, 4 . 4 ' ,. ;e ,

(v.'j: +;Q:'4.T4.q:i({;;.%,' < t j ; '.' y _;',: lg ' 9 ', f t -46"At i'-- *Fi  ;'.c

- ,_.&.{ ' u' ,*2, , 2 :<>.

15- .We% i

, ;irre.

i .

s -s9. L J ., .') . ' ;. ,, ., a ' *- >

. ;' ., p; ,, .s.

, i s io

< i .

I I 4

4,,, ,f i .

. , ,iis , i ,

/% / s //,e

(

) l < , ;q r f ,

e

' 31 / 'e / / /, s /- s - ).

20- '/ /s e e s <

' .

4 ,, ,*f,F,. m ,w

.,w.. , y. y*.. gs i ~

- - ,, .r 3

.W-g.A .e g. ;n.4. Asg.t y.gs uc++ - z <; , .

.-- ,.+ w

.-~

.. y, .e . . -. .,

--.%.5 - *x,;q :re ,

.p'4

.6 p -M.. T

.~' u *-J ,3 .

q Q Q g),j. s.{~'.y.g . f _ r '[3 , . g.,

f u. .r

.y y '+,:_ ?.w ;:Q,. f%m,fQV,Q:

4

y. . y .. -

._.e. ,,,

- .y ..

. , . ., wy -

,; 4. ,% .. -

• 3 r, ...;

~ .

l i

'1 B .,r .

I 1

ac,, , W * -. -.

. . q. q. .,,.r ., n. ., , -

. ,,4,,

.f --

3.; .- w ,n . -

4 1

QMhh4 ,

. w) j,,h,.. j [. ( h' 6 4$v...;kfg( h .

b Di_dk b I h heh5I; h N h rN i

ed Profile 7. 420N/477E to 403N/474<

a

-i ih*='.a %.i ,

- - - _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ l

Ns N

N' x sN N x

v s Ns

'sq N

N 410N 476E ,

, .(*.

(. '

6,[:, , f = . , ) ?Ia $ A ,.' . g.';.3 ty. :,'4;.. .', -:.p.x;p

._-% . 7 . p. ,.

- .tr .

g .

• • • • g,gh

.<: :- . ..s'*  ;-4. . *..+. . .em. .*c.  ;' .- . c.

e ~

t. g -

w.n

.; .; p . 1. y ; q : i .,4 y .4,. - ; . 4:

,o lp;: i .'- -

!, ';e .;, n ;.s; ;-s 3;" ., . g' i,q.:

s.

. .y y. :.n.e. [Q..jj %. . . g . (s".a

?#.,;A~}'j

,

..j ,,: ;-t:. ,; i , " ~ , .: , , , ,l ,; : > }::

W'

.: .s s .,-u ., a

~

o a u

"n e,.o.s m .w r x.

g

.v....... < : ( .

<,.; w : o:,.. p . w~, e a:a. w ". e. me ...

- _e, a

e - t . . ,,,, ql . -.

15

=W^

Lwa , y.os.a.

f kp .:.~1.>.

, %%3 ?'

< *  %?

.e ss. :uny#,.j,..- mAj www

, r. ,~ %.s n..;: ae . Qy m an;sa anu,W&V% sa -

l

-to i o > ,

t

{g - - . -

s g,, . a>.

u

-~>c c g.,

z.y g;3~e,.,

g ja y .; * , _ .1;e .j/1 ~; w +<@ 14 9 ;g;g '.j q,;.  ; ;p'

%gg- ag;:-

w ==~ mm -+ ir

g .

m , ,, - w -

,,, c

, y .,

=.r g. w 4tn ,

, z..

5'-

4- 7u mg; ,,7 u. , ,

.s . s<.,

. .w..

g  ;, .

y g . ~.,, x g p,. p

,p. & .

. .,n n .

. . '.x ;,. am. ,.,

m-y9 k. Yg W wn e,i . , y ' ,As' _.

&_ g , ,

w .r? .

w

~ q

w--

wm 7 '

3

• gy -

._ , . u

.L  ; &- ,, s . .: ,.

-- ?_

3 gg . . , - L- * . .a .=.-s,.

nmn n a ,..s. - % x. /. , . . .

-.~ .. : q . m. ..

. ...;;~,. .

Y-w.

SI APERTURE CARD -

,E, Southeast Corner of the East Cutbank Also Available On Aperture Card 53

$DQR 0099-Of -

Profile 7. Interpretation Profile 7 is an extension of the previous shoreline edge eastern cutbank profile. It completes the circuit around the office building excavation pit. The right (southern) end of Profile 7 connects at right angles to the left-hand (eastern) end of Profile 1. The drawing and photographs clearly show concrete plant spoilage over the top of the entire shoreline area. Underlying that cap is a massive, culturally sterile, sand unit of uncertain origin (Stratum 31). The prehistoric cultural stratum lies between that upper sand unit and the equally sterile underlying horizon.

Unlike preceding profile striping is limited to the northern end (the left) where it continues the Profile 6 pattern; and to a possible pit house situated to the right of the 410N/476E mark. The intermediate area was penetrated

} by a number of tree roots. It is possible that in this area the stripes were obliterated by that vegetraive activity.

I Note, however, that the cultural profile is generally more restricted in that area. It is possible : hat the striped ,

areas are zones of more intense cultural use. If so the striped beds at the right of this profile and throughout l the East Profile of Profile 6 represent one area of repeated human use or habitation. The beds to the left of i 410N/476E represent a second use/ habitation area.

The second set of striped beds, at the right side of the profile, exhibit several features characteristic of excavated house floors.8 The strata are horizontal, associated with multiple pit features and spatially bounded by excavation into culturally sterile sediments. In my opinion, the co-occurrence of these features is sufficient to tentatively identify the feature as a second house structure. The multiple horizontal strata most plausibly represent reuse of the same building location following periodic fluvial or aeolian infilling. Bear in mind that the "use surfaces

• identified for Profile 6 may also represent habitations. Collectively, these features and the probable plank house identified earlier provide support for identification of 35CO1 as a moderate to long term residential locality.

At least 6 pits show in the profile. The darkly stained pit at the righthand edge (obscured by shadow) is a continuation of the pit previouslyidentified in Profile 1. At least three additional pits penetrate the house floors to its left. Continuing left it is difficult to discriminate between prehistoric pits and tree root sediment mixing.

Further left, between 415N/476.5E and the tree are two additional pits that appear to be of cultural origin. Final determination of the validity of these features and of the house floor designations must await more thorough data recovery research.

Profile Suntmary; Deposition, Intrusions and Features Despite extensive damage to 35C01 excavation for the Trojan office complex created an extensive profile view of the site. The cutbanks exposed a range of natural and features useful in reconstructing site and landform formation processes. Here I summarize some of the more salient observations from the profiles.

Deposition f

Sediments throughout the site are sand dominated. Over much of the central, east to west, expanse of the

) excavation the sand unit is massive. Much of the internal stratigraphy shown on the profiles (eg., Profiles 1 and i

2) reflects color variation from differential cultural use rather than obvious textural differences. Sediments at shoreline and inland edges of the levee (visible in Profiles 6 and 7 near the shoreline; and Profiles 3 and 4 inland), however, break into distinct depositional units. These strata suggest that the landform was built by redundant depositional processes. Most likely the bulk of the landform was built by massive (rather than seasonal) flood events washing through the inland channel behind the Trojan basalt outcrops. If so the floods occurred with enough velocity to deposit medium to fine sands, building a natural levee adjacent to the river.

The existence of the site itself was probably dependent on the levee building process. I suggest that the site only could become winter habitable when sediments reached the elevation at which cultural deposits begin 8

The pithouse nature of these strata was first observed by Kenneth Ames on a visit to the project site.

55

(approximately 2.75 m amsl). At some point below this the sediments would simply have been too wet for other than late summer, dry season use.

Sediments near the site's eastern shoreline with the Columbia probably were deposited by shorter term high .

water events. Abrupt boundaries in the Profile 6 striped beds suggests shorter periodicity in sediment  ;

deposition / erosion cycles. These sediments were probably laid down by less massive seasonal flooding. Surface vegetation did not become well enough established to diffuse the stratigraphic boundaries before new sediments were deposited or old ones removed. The effect apparently moderated only a short distance inland where the l sediments exhibit more long term stability. /

Please note that these depositional assessments are preliminary in natme. They represent my best effort to interpret the landform's creation processes from visual observation of cutbank sediments. Alternative, particularly aeolian, possibilities cannot be eliminated completely. The site clearly offers an opportunity for more sophisticated sediment studies. That work should be done by a specialist with procedures adequate to distinguish between alternative depositional mechanisms.

Intrusions Aside from the preconstruction excavation itself, visible sources of modern site intrusion include relatively shallow power and water line trenches, deeper sewer trenches, the concreu plant's water pond and intake line, and the OAS excavations. The impact of the intrusions is variable. Utility lines seldom exceeded 1 m in depth.

Consequently, their damage to the site is relatively low. The sew r lines are dug more than 2 m below the modern ground surface. These lines are deep enough to completely displace archaeological sediments in their path. The only redeeming factor of such lines is that they are narrow and linear. Site damage could reasonably be compensated by data recovery excavation from adjacent sediments.

The recent office excavation, the concrete pond and the OAS excavations clearly constitute the major intrusive impacts to the Trojan site. The loss of archaeological materials is substantial and irrevocable. Maps and profiles included in this report, fix the locations and extent of these intrusions with reasonable accuracy. The photograph of the concrete batch plant in operation (Figure .') illustrves the massive nature of the impact. Despite these impacts, it is important to recognize that a substantial fraction of the site still aists intact. The central portion of the site emphasized in this report has been subjected to the most intensive impacts of the entire site locality.

Yet even here an impressive amount of prehistoric sediments and cultural features remain. Intact sediments are nestled in and among the various excavation pits and trenches. Those sediments are easily seen in the profiles. The reader should not leave with the impression that the Trojan site has little residual value. Known site limits and extant profiles indicate that sufficient cultural resources remain to be of utility for a variety of archaeological research topics.

Featums Features bisected by the cutbanks extend the range reported for the 1970 OAS excavation (Warner and Warner 1975). That report noted burials, hearths, caches and shell concentrations (see Table 4). There is little doubt that actual total was considerably higher than observed. Features visible in the present profiles include charcoal concentrations, hearths, pits, post hole molds, FCR concentrations (caches), and probable house floors and/or use surfaces. Note that these are only the features fortunate enough to have been exposed in the cutbank. They also under represent the total population occurring within the full excavated area. Nonetheless, combined features provide a notion of the range used by the locality's prehistoric inhabitants.

Charcoal concentrations were found at severallocations within the cultural matrix. The greatest density was at the margins of the possible Plank house discussed below. Increased frequency in the house sediments may reflect household heating / cooking activity (or a structural fire). Charcoal concentrations such as these, lacking immediate association of other culturalitems, are seldom recorded as distinct cultural features. I mention them here to draw attention to the fact that fire building was more frequent than suggested by the hearths visible in the profiles. Indeed repeated fire burning throughout the site's occupation period caused the grayish black staining characteristic of the cultural horizons. The fact that the stained sediments are so widely dispersed 56

throughout the site is consistent with an inference of cold season occupation, and/or use by a substantial population. ,

I Hearths appear as orange, heat oxidized sediments within the general site matrix. They are associated with a relatively high frequency of burned and highly fragmented bone. Neither of the two hearths illustrated on the profiles were bounded by stone, nor was there clear evidence of excavation. The exposed portion of the hearths were measured 70 cm and 48 cm respectively. Since we did not excavate actual dimensions are unknown. Figure 8 shows the hearth illustrated in Profile 2. It appears as a white basin shaped inclusion at the base of the charcoal stained stratum in the upper right hand corner of the photograph. This is the smaller of the two hearths clearly defm' ed in the cutbank profiles. The fire cracked rock concentration at the lower left of the photograph is typical of such features at the site.

. .v r y y ~33 w g gygjig 7 - T D f,

$i5, v 7-

{ w.

9 ,

,j.

j j

,,h ffp #

• ye> \ y l h%

• l [ J;?g &*  ;

. . , o s,

,o ,+,

d'

• f' .Jip? '&

%gqof {l Rc*k g _  ;

r

+ ;, -

.w '

. ).%y %g n,2 j' .

' s s ,7 . . pyy h;' /' ~).,q -'y't ';5.;y[I I) 3Q f e M_[f;, pf *9.'

D,' Nr 1 g .s A

. , , }. ' .N. . . h,$

ya . .

L

+

g/' W o ,a# w . > > Q , ' l O.f' A $ f. oyf ,

_ ;; o , n

,o f. y y } ) y ,

\

M?

$f .,

, 5 pq ~4. +

LA x J9 g%3, / ;p [ p X J5: } 3_ ~

ldbg7 s

,.7L

• C ,

m' DON $, " Y h. $ a F M ' w& W )-$ '

yQ.. ' ;g .n . ,;. m (', - t .- ~ [ ,$ ' %  ::

Figure 8. FCR concentration and hearth exposed in the south cutbank profile, At least 13 pit features are visible in the office cutbanks. Size variation reflects corresponding functional variation. Pits were put to a wide range of uses such as food and equipment storage, burial, roasting, and stone boiling. Once abandoned and filled they can difficult to find. At Trojan most observed pits appear as carbon stained intrusions into otherwise culturally sterile, lighter colored sediments. The most visible pits, then, tend l to be those dug during early occupation when clean sand was the available building surface. Later occupants I

were obliged to conduct their activities on previously used, often carbon stained, sediments. Their pits were dug into already darkened sand. Accordingly, profiles from later pit features now are more difficult to detect. One visible later prehistoric pit was located hear 408N/445E in Profile 2. Carefulinspection of Figure 9 shows the subtle color change that bounds the pit. The interior is filled with lighter colored sediments characteristic of the younger stratum from which the pit was dug. The feature measures 80 cm at its widest point. Visible in the center are bone fragments of and unburned large mammal (probably clk).

57

N ' k -

[ .

l'

~

y$ -

p ,

4 g[

.I

.b -

[.f' .

l-, ,

l' /9 1."

4 ts

' h }l.

t.

"r

~

!  ?

y y l

2 C4,g 4/4 ' l .{ . ,; Oc; 1,[84 '

(9 %y

,7 .q fr fFGk j ,. ) i s . ,..

/ ..

Y .1A,  %

~ * ~ .G'

' '. ' ./ . M g, .

n.

(g y pQ <

4, ,.y

!; bgg -

y, x if, I. *

A idhe y 'y ,

L j dj @e n 9 M.

y$

w a --

in; ' t( . %p N") % rVf y%

                                           > 9 e. 4,,,4_.,                                                                                 s.                                                   >}w >. .
                                                                                                                                                                                                       ; 5
                                                                                                                                                                                                             ~

s. . . , __

                                                                                                                                                                                                                      ,  ".e f fTD % h '                                                                                                                                      , khpf , ' L& D.s
                                                                                                                   , j i                                                     3,                                                                          !t 7
                                         .%p mf )q                y y.'                                                                                 c' ;m,.yy; %l%                                                        f: !.
                                         &Mhh                                                                 ., :

l$@ M l4:ssg ANhdh .wa hu5 .%

• i Figure 9. Prehistoric pit with FCR and large mammal bone. Vertical post mold visible at the l extreme right.

One of the post molds is barely visible to the right of the pit in Figure 9. It was excavated from a higher surface j than the pit and has since filled with stratigraphically younger sediments than the pit. This post may be of

           . historic origin. However, at least two prehistoric post molds show in the North Profile of Profile 6. Functionally, poles and posts can serve a wide variety of purposes from large scale housing construction to use with smaller scale items such as racks and platforms. Isolated from a fuller archaeological context post molds have little interpretive value. For the present, suffice it to say that they broaden the feature list in a manner that is consistent with the residentialinterpretation of 35CO1, 1

Fire cracked rock (FCR) is a common constituent of archaeological localities throughout the Northwest and I beyond. In many parts of the prehistoric world, stone was a critical element of the cooking process. Large quantities of stones were used to retain heat within ovens used to process vegetal products such as camas. It was also used to boil foods in tightly woven baskets or in lined pits. In the boiling process stones were heated and

           . inserted into the container, eliminating the need to apply heat to its exterior. Both the boiling and roasting processes exposed stone to intense thermal stress, causing repeated breaking of the heating stones. Since rocks i-are normally abundant, less desirable fractured pieces were discarded readily. It is hardly surprising, then, to find FCR as a common culturalitem in prehistoric localities across the region. As cooking material stone was l

a valuable but expendable item. It generally accumulated rapidlyin trash middens. As expected FCR is a common constituent of the cultural matrix at Trojan. In the exposed cutbanks rock is typically well dispersed throughout the cultural matrix. None of the profiles exhibited a dense mixed concentration of FCR, bone, shell, charcoal or other materials characteristic of a concentrated garbage midden. There were, however, at least two smaller concentrations of FCR. These appeared to be free of other midden debris, but were in close association with other cultural features. The first concentration is in or near a pit.

           . This FCR cluster can be seen at the lower left of Figure 8. The second concentration is on one of the possible use surfaces shown on Profile 6. Figure 10 is a close up of that FCR feature. The photograph also shows the L            striped bed effect of alternating clean shoreline sand and carbon stained sand associated with the inhabited i.

58 l i

      'i..

J surface. Both FCR clusters probably represent caches of heating stones intended for use within their larger situational context. 1- g u_.m y:.c yy. y*,ypm;w? s y w ye.,

                                                                                 ,s +'       . >                  ;, ,,,_,                  y,
                                                      - .~ .         4 3.,,I ,.#

9* \,, w%*4

                                     - t % &p,   ,,

A 1- ) - 5', ' , g' L

                                            *"      \          ' *    .

- 3

                               . e jQ""'

wm n u

                                                                                                   '"Q          . .

q, a 4 p' u , . ,

                                                                                  '              -              ^

pi - j

m Q $qip w n ya d::% ~g-

                                                                                                                       % yyj       % e)

Q

                                                                                                            ~
                                                                                                     , z.~;a , ; .l.~-h C Wm:;,

N , { -~4s, N i jj

                                                                               ~

g qy$ gdfff

                                                                                    %g             ncf%y yLyd : a - Le*7 -d
                             .k                                                       is      N'M
                                                                                                              ~%

Q MGM"O ~~O ,." Figure 10. FCR on a use surface exposed by the east cuthank. Sediments are Columbia River shoreline deposits. Black banded stata are carbon stained cultural deposits. I have emphasized the possibility of house floors or non-structural use surfaces at three locations in the profiles. The coincidence of FCR and other cultural material with horizontally banded sediments in Figure 10 and Profile 6 suggests intense use of that area. I did not identify it as a structural surface because I could see no evidence of structural boundaries in the profile. The evidence, however, is limited and by no means precludes the possibility. On the other hand, surfaces exposed at the left of Profile 7 were associated steep sidewalls excavated into parent sediments. The surfaces contained a number ofinternal pit features. The coincidence of floors, pits l and excavated sidewalls enhances the probability that Profile 7 shows the remains of an excavated house. A probable third structure is located in the west central portion of the preconstruction excavation. Its profile is visible in Profiles 3 and 5, and in the composite photograph on the following page (Figure 11). Since it was situated roughly in the center of the foundation excavation, the third structure was more completely exposed than the previous two. Recall that the backhoe operator, in following a black to tan sediment color transition, inadvertently excavated much of the house floor. In addition to creating the two profiles, that excavation allowed us to estimate the size and orientation of the structure. The profiles suggest a gradual, slope sided excavation into parent sediments. The slope was gradual enough that, at the outer margins, it was difficult to distinguish from a naturally sloping landform. Careful inspection of the feature, however, indicates that it was excavated through underlying sediments (see Profile 3 and Figure 11). Perhaps the nearest analog to a similar profile which also was identified as an excavated structure is in a report on house pit excavations at site 45SA11 near Bonneville Dam (Minor, Toepel and Beckham 1986:185). The profile shape and coincidence of deeply carbon stained sediments with charcoal concentrations and higher density FCR combine to tentatively identify the house pit / plank house. 59

l l l l P~M'"%LMminGMMMTfRWGW07Q p '

                                                                                                                         '(    ,

[ h-Mgf $ $lI F ',~' ^ #"..*M : D h 5 p.' 8.h p.'h $ h ,, y 0 Y,. Yf$[*ykI.7 "- .syA fhhk .1 % p uG. y h N E N[ d y y y. i D gsJr Th gg Db g 9@*-j "5$N$$M NM p 8$iMIdWh$g$6Nrhfhh6! %m a 3 (. g y..M

                                                                              #                                                                a                     m      ,;pg N.h-thM. k .                                                                                                                             !

Figure 11. Composite photograph of probable plank house stratigraphy and location within the construction excavation. 1 The size and shape of the plank house also are consistent with ethnohistorically observed plank houses. Ray (1938:124) notes a size range from 14 X 20 feet to 40 X 100 feet. We estimated the width of the Trojan house at 9 m (29.5 feet) by reference to abrupt changes in color intensity in the central horizontal exposure. The full l length is not exposed, but it measured approximately 21 m (68.9 feet) before entering the southern profile. The long axis of the house appears to be oriented from grid northwest to southeast; roughly parallel to the river. The Figure 11 composite photo was taken from the northern edge of the structure. It crosses the house at an oblique j angle to the southwest showing sediments and bac,khoe excavation. Despite minor distortion the photo clearly  !

 !                                    shows the overall profile shape. Eric Gleason in the background provides a notion of scale. A gridded contour map of the feature is on file with site records at the PSU Department of Anthropology.

l l' In sum the profiles have been most useful in providing information pertinent to understanding landform depositional processes, the nature of prehistoric occupation on that landform, and the character of the most intrusive of the historie uses of the landform. I have given profiles extensive treatment here because they constitute the single greatest data base available from the most recent office building intrusion. I hope that the lj profiles, through their interpretation of sediments an cultural features, can provide a useful starting point for future data recovery efforts at 35CO1. Utility Line Auger Testing l The final work conducted this season involved auger probing within a proposed right of way for a new PGE water and electrical line. If completed the utility lines will be located as shown on Figure 6 of this report. The area lies southeast of the previously established site boundaries in the vicinity of the meteorological tower and the l lower lab. The lines be will placed in a backhoe trench not to exceed .95 m in depth. Where the lines approach the previously known site boundaries, PGE will reopen existing lines, such as the water line visible in profile Figure 8. Our test objective was to establish the presence or absence of cultural materials within the direct impact depth of the proposed right of way. The probe tests offered our first opportunity to extend the southeastern site boundaries of 35CO1. Testing was done with hand held twist auger and clam shell style post hole digger. We dug tests units at 10 and 20 meter intervals as indicated on Figure 6. Except where I was unable to penetrate disturbed surface gravels, 60 l

auger depths ranged from 1 m to 1.4 m below modern ground surface. Tests deviating from the illustrated right of way are abandoned alternative routes. All fill removed by the auger was screened through 1/4 inch mesh and returned to the auger units. The results of the tests are included as Appendix B of this report. I The tests indicated the presence of cultural material (fire cracked rock, chipped stone and charcoal) at depths below .95 m widely distributed in the area indicated on the Figure 6. In most units material density was low and sediments exhibited minimal carbon staining. Tests in the vicinity of the lower lab, however, produced a higher i frequency of material in more deeply stained sediments. Test unit 14 produced a particularly high material l density in association with deeply carbon stained sediments. Materials in this unit suggest intense, perhaps household, use of that area. Full spatial extent of that use area, however, is not known. The relative great depth of the cultural materials in all test units suggests a relationship to early use of 35C01. Minimally, results indicate that during early occupation the site was larger than previously recognized. They suggest further that the site may have become somewhat more spatially restricted through time. I remind the reader, however, that precise site boundaries and temporal changes have yet to be determined for the Trojan site. The presently known extended boundaries are indicated on Figures 2 and 6. Please note the limitations of the auger tests. They were intended only to established site presence / absence within the direct impact area. They provide data only on the upper depth of site fill, not the full profile. Furthermore, since they were limited to the proposed right of way they do not systematically establish site boundaries. Their usefulness largely lies in extending the known site limits in a manner allowing more accurate, though still approximate estimates of site boundaries. Those boundaries, site depth and material analyses are subject to refinement at a later date. VI.

SUMMARY

EVALUATION, RESEARCH AND MANAGEMENT SUGGESTIONS To this point the report has lealt with three of the four goals listed at the outset. Those goals include 1) collection of general emironmental and historic background information relevant to the site; 2) generation of a site map and coordinate system to accurately record site features and previous site impacts; and 3) documentation of prehistoric stratigraphic profiles in recently exposed excavation cutbanks to record the nature of the prehistoric stratigraphy. This final section offers a brief summary of the preceding material and draws on the combined data to evaluate the site's continuing research integrity and to suggest longer term research and management options. Project Summary Emironmental and Historic Background The environmental data were divided into three basic resource zones surrounding the Trojan locality: wetlands and floodplains; forested uplands and valleys; and major rivers. Within those zones I listed ethnohistorically i reported floral and faunal species used by the Native American population. My intent was not only to prmide I a descriptive image of the Trojan emironment, but to partition the area in a manner related to its prehistoric use. Comparison of seasonal and locational availability of more critical, higher return resources from those lists suggests that human populations could plausibly have sustained a permanent occupation of the Trojan site. Critical supplies could have been obtain via task specific trading activities, and through hunting and gathering groups operating logistically from a Trojan home base. The extent to which plausibility of semi to full sedentism can genuinely be applied to Trojan awaits more sophisticated analysis of the site's archaeological record. The site's historic background was reviewed in order to prmide a basic notion of the events affecting the landform since Euroamerican incursion into the region. The coverage of early historic and ethnohistoric events was brief. Readers with a specialinterested in those fields may wish to consult some of the suggested references. 61

l Since my emphasis has been prehistoric,1 focused on events that would have had the greatest impact on i prehistoric integrity of the site. In that regard the Oregon Archaeological Society excavations, the Trojtn 1 concrete batch plant, and recent preconstruction excavation for the office building were given special attention. The OAS combined excavations constituted the single greatest intrusion into prehistoric cultural sediments. Unfortunately, collections from the excavations are dispersed among the excavators, and records from the first two seasons have yet to be organized into a report. The report of the third season has provided artifact I summaries and other information useful in tentatively establishing site function. I argued that the range of reported materials and features were consistent with long-term sedentary occupation of the landform as suggested l by the area's emironmental structure. While, the recent construction related intrusions returned no I archaeological information per se, this project has attempted to salvage some of the information value of the remnant excavation profiles. 4 Map and Coordinate System The second goal was to generate a new map and coordinate control system for 35CO1. Versions of the base map l appear as Figures 3 and 7 in the report. The map shows the central portion of the site as known at the start of the season. Its coordinate system and permanent control datum are intended not only to illustrate site features, but to provide spatial control necessary to relate future archaeological research to earlier excavations and to j major sources of site intrusions, j Utility line auger testing took place after the base map was prepared. Those tests resulted in extension of the site boundaries beyond those illustrated on the map. The coordinate system, however, can be expanded to accommodate full site boundaries if and when they are better known. For the present the map should be regarded as a surface illustration of the most intensively used portion of the landscape (both historically and prehistorically). Its expansion and refinement should occur as an integral part of continued archaeological work l at the site. ' Cutbank Pro!11es l Much of the report has focused on illustration and evaluation of recently exposed profiles. This reflects the relatively high value of the visible sediments. Profile information was particularly useful for interpreting sediment depositional processes, for clarifying the nature of prehistoric fill and features, and for assisting in more precisely locating historic intrusions into prehistoric deposits. Since the preceding section interpreted and summarized profile data, I will restrict comments here to a summary evaluation of their cultural implications. j Except at the shoreline and inland margins of the site, cultural sediments tend to appear as a single massive unit.

 ! This suggests that during its 1000 years of use, the site experienced no extended periods of cultural hiatus. The i

site appears to have been either continuously used or repeatedly occupied on a regular basis from about 1250 years ago to its abandonment prior to Euroamerican settlement in the region. Profile data generated during the

 , present project, especially identification of excavated structures, are consistent with interpretations suggesting long term residential occupation of 35C01.

I have hesitated to make a firm statement about settlement seasonality because the extant resource data are not J l: available to demonstrate stored, or winter available goods. Nonetheless,I believe that the preponderance of the , ll available data suggest permanent residential occupation of the Trojan site. The presence of a year-round '1 resource base, the existence of adequate well drained sediments for winter occupation, site location sheltered from upriver wind, broad functional range in recorded artifact assemblage, deeply charred sediments reflecting repeated fire use, abundant pit and hearth features, and stratigraphy suggestive of plank houses ali indicate ll substantial residential investment in place. I suggest that 35COI tentatively be considered a fu1> season residential site with logistic mobility by task specific sub-groups to exploit specific resources or to engage in trade. Future research should investigate the problem of seasonal versus sedentary occupation further. The most immediate need is for macrobotanical and faunal remains that would assist with not only seasonality, but l emironmental and dietary issues as well. In the longer term the site should be tied into a broader framework j l l 62 {

i investigating the manner in which Trojan functions within a pattern of prehistoric exploitation of the greater  ! lower Columbia region. I Site Integrity I have addressed the issue of site integrity at several points in the report, but a few summary remarks are in order here. Given the extensive nature of previous disturbance to the Trojan site it may seem reasonable to question its remnant cultural resource value. Ultimately, the significance of any archaeological picperty lies in its ability to provide information that advances our understanding of cultural processes in general and in the region in which it is located. There should be no doubt that 35C01 contains adequate intact cultural materials of significant value to continuing research in regional prehistory. Previous disturbances, while severe, did not remove the bulk of sediments from what is now known to be a much larger site. This season's profiles indicate that even in areas of most extreme damage, substantial fractions ofin situ cultural sediments remain. With the exception of the fish pond area other sources of site damage are generally narrow and linear (utility and sewer lines), or relatively shallow (the lower lab and meteorological tower). These sources of damage should have left subsurface sediments substantially intact around and below the intrusions. Even iflimited to the recently exposed and highly disturbed area, moderate data recovery excavations could obtain valuable new information on site function, resource utilization, seasonality, house structure, and more. Excavations in other parts of the site could extend the data base even further. The Trojan site, then, continues to be an important cultural resource property. In the next sections I introduce several research topics that can be productively pursued at Trojan. The report closes with management suggestions to help preserve the site until further research is practical. Continuing Research at 35C01 The Trojan site should be preserved until such time that controlled archaeological research is possible. My intent throughout the report has been to stimulate interest in the range of research issues that can be pursued productively at 35C01, and to provide basic data needed to organize eventual continuation of archaeological work at the site. BelowI list several research directions that should be considered in future archaeological work. The list is not exhaustive, but rather emphasizes my personal environmental interests and stresses data gaps that became apparent while conducting the present study. Subsequent workers will undoubtedly refine and expand the list as they develop their own research programs. Existing OAS Records The Oregon Archaeological Society maintained field notebooks, forms and data cards on materials recovered in 1968,1%9, and 1970. With the help of several OAS members we have collected those records plus a variety of field maps, photographs, computer cards, unit profiles, and some material remains. These items are maintained the PSU Department of Anthropology. Clearly, any continuing work related to 35CO1 should make l use of information idready compiled for the site. Despite recovery biases OAS records would be most usefulin structuring a continuing data recovery plan. For example, analyses of the range and frequency of artifact types will assist with general functional inferences for

the site as whole. Furthermore, the records retain horizontal and vertical provenience control for the artifacts and features described. OAS provenience units and materials, when tied to the new coordinate system, can be approximately relocated in space. Spatial distribution and relative density of materials could then be restructured.

Such information would help isolate high intensity use areas and may suggest intrasite functional variation. Minimally, the records contain data on site depth, sediment type and color, feature location (often illustrated), general observations, and profile descriptions. Those data can be used to generate expectations that can be taken to archaeological record in renewed data recovery efforts. 63

i.?vironmental Reconstruction My interpre stion of cultural materials has assumed the existence of a dynamic causal relationship between the basic structo e of human cultural systems and the character of the larger ecosystems of which they are a part. Ifcult: al syi :ms are indeed adaptive mechanisms that assist human popt.'ations to cope with their surroundings, then an drstanding of cultural systems can be assisted by refining our knowledge of past environmental conditions. At present our understanding of past environmental circumstances along the Lower ColumMa is l limited largely to analogies with present or recently past conditions. In this report,I have assumed that present ! and ethnohistorically observed floral and faunal patterns surrounding the Trojan site extended for a indefinite period into the prehistoric past. The assumption is not unreasonable, but speculative in the absence of further data. A larger body of empirical environmental data would allow us to reduce the uncertainty. l There are at least three potential sources of past environmentalinformation in the vicinity of the Trojan site: l utilized food remains, sediment deposition information, and pollen profiles from nearby wetlands. With proper l temporal control these data could be combined to build an environmental model spanning the last several thousand years. That information can then provide a firmer basis for modeling the manner in which prehistoric populations adapted to Lower Columbia environments through time. 1 I Depositional Processes Study of depositional process at Trojan and elsewhere in the Lower Columbia can help reconstruct the river's flood history. That information has applications to landform building and human occupation, to environmental reconstruction, and to investigation of dramatic depositional /crosional events. Present information suggests that the Trojan lowland landform is a levee built by massive but infrequent floods. A thorough investigation of site

   ' sediments will help identify the regularity of floods and other depositional events. That information would be a useful addition to predicting the probability for flood season occupation of the site. Depositional informadon may also help identify longer term climatic wet-dry cycles important to environmental reconstruction mentioned above. Dramatic events include earthquakes and particularly large scale floods such as possible effects of a Bonneville landslide flood circa 800 years ago. If sediments from that event can be recognized it would help chart the dcwnstream effects of the flood, if any; and would provide a useful temporal marker within the stratigraphic sequence.

Seasonal Occupation versur Full Sedentism Renewed work e MCO1 should address the problem of seasonal versus full sedentism discussed above. The extent to which p. . Mc Lower Columbia populations sustained a fully sedentary residential pattern is not well understood. Saleeby and Pettigrew (1983) suggest that in the Portland Basin, resource abundance and multi-seasonal availability facilitated a sedentary residence pattern for that zone. They contrast the pattern with a proposed bi-seasonal residential system for the Columbia Gorge and near coastal Columbia River.'O Extant data from 35CO1, a &n stream fringe Portland Basin site, tend to support the fully sedentary pattern. Those l data, however, are inr.or,clusive without further information from the site itself. Faunal and macrobotanical I studies of resources consumed at the site should be analyzed to check for presence of species spanning the full 1 seasonal range versus a pattern dominated by a more limited range. That data, should be of great value in fixing j the site's dominant residential pattern. Trojan can then be placed in its larger regional context to evaluate 4 broader implications for residential mobility. Subsistence Practices Closely related to the issue of seasonality and environmental reconstruction is the need to dev: lop a firm , knowledge of the subset of the full resource range actually exploited at Trojan. Reconstruction of resource f' distribution patterns and abundance should allow us to develop models to mimic past human land use practices. l 1

          %finor (1983a and 1983b) uses finer scale emironmental variability to argue for sub-regional variation in an essentin11y bi-seasonal residential pattern for coastal and estuarine populations.

It is important that future work take pains to identify utilized resources from the archaeological record. The study should be structured to maximize the probability of detecting temporal changes in utilization patterns. If

       ' temporally sensitive data can be obtained our assumptions about long term resource stability can be challenged or strengthened. These data represent our best opportunity to not only reconstruct past emironmental conditions, but to fit effectively the Trojan inhabitants into that broader system and to see how the relationship changes through time.

House Morphology Chinookan plank houses are described by Swan (1857) and Ray (1938:124-126) among others, but remain  ; relatively little known archaeologically along the Lower Columbia. Tb OAS exposed a probable plank house i at 45CL11, the Herzog site, near Lake Vancouver (Forman 1977). Others have been tentatively identified and partially excavated or sampled. The number, however, remains small. The morphological range and temporal depth of enclosed structures is not yet well known from the archaeological record. Perhaps the most thorough archaeological account of Chinookan plank houses comes from further upstream at 45SA11 near Bonneville dam (Minor,Toepel and Beckham 1986). Reporting on earlier excavations they describe ' a series of rectangular plank houses overlying stratigraphically distinct excavated oval structures identified as the remains of mat lodges. They use that stratigraphic distinction to suggest a late prehistoric replacement of an inland affiliated culture group (oval house builders) by Lower Columbia affiliated groups (rectangular plank house builders). That position assumes, among other things, that the ethnohistorically observed pattern for the Lower Columbia is ubiquitous, and reflects cultural or stylistic rather than functional distinctions in structural  ! forms. Plank house morphology reported for 45SA11 could be compared with those at Trojan to check the extent to which the rectangular pattern is replicated at the Lower Columbia. Since Trojan has multiple structures and reasonable temporal depth, block exposure of structures should help refine our knowledge of the morphological and temporal range of structures within a single Lower Columbia locality. Such studies at Trojan, in conjunction with work elsewhere, could address the issue of whether rectangular plank houses are a Chinookan cultural phenomenon or part of a wider range of structures with broader functional considerations. I should note too, that Trojan's tentatively identified plank house, partially exposed by the office building excavation pit, may offer an unusual opportunity to investigate the nature of prehistoric house remains. Since it appears to be an isolated house free of multiple reuse events,it could provide an unusually clear siew of the position of prehistoric features free of the complication of repeated rebuilding. The northern boundary appeared oval from surface inspection. Its profile, however, is strikingly similar to Feature 535 identified as a rectangular house at 45SA11 (cf. Minor, Toepel and Beckham 1986:185). Complete exposure and comparison with other structures will allow firmer determination of their configuration. Village Component, Hurial Component l The Trojan burials pose a problem. Burial grounds have become a sensitive issue with modern American Indian l groups who often are reluctant to have excavators digging in them. At present it is not clear whether the burials unearthed at 35COI (other than on Coffin Point or Coffin Rock) represent a specific burial area per se or were [ an incidental part of ongoing village life and death. It is possible that the burials were part of the Coffin Point-l Coffin Rock burial area relegated for low status indhiduals. Slave status is implied by the general absence of cranial flattening common to early historic higher status Chinook speakers. If low lying 35C01 was used exclusively as a late prehistoric to early historic slave burial area, then there should be certain archaeological indicators. The burials should all be relatively recent, they should be in pits intrusive into the older sillage sediments, and they should be virtually devoid of grave goods. If established, these data collectively would strongly imply rigid status differentiation and socially related spatial partitioning of a late 35COI burial ground. The burials, however, may not be related to burials at Coffin Point at all. If the individuals were buried during general occupation of the village, then the burial practice more likely represents a social cross-section of the population. In a village context it is unlikely that the entire skeletal sample would be a slave population. If this can be demonstrated, then the time depth of the Chinookan head flattening practice may be relatively shallow. 65

In either case modern osteological techniques could help determine nutritional status, bone trauma and the general physical condition of the indhiduals in life. Continued excavation, then, could potentially provide information on temporally distinct use of the site, status differentiation among late Lower Columbia populations, temporal range of the cranial deformation practice, and physical condition of the population. The issues, however, must take into account sensithities of modern American Indian groups. Care must be taken to coordinate any archaeological activities invohing burials with tribal authorities. I hope that they would consider such studies a reasonable and useful way to increase their own understanding of the Native American past. Changing Site Dimensions In the body of the report I noted that auger data suggest that the site may have been more spatially expansive during early occupation and decreased in size through time. Present data do no more than hint at that possibility. Future work should make an effort to precisely locate site boundaries and trace changes through time. I presently have no theoretical grounds to expect such a shift; indeed, I generally would anticipate the reverse. I merely note the possibility in the hope that it will be pursued further in the future. Early illstoric Use of the Site Several classes of early historic artifacts were listed in the 1970 excavation report (Warner and Warner 1975:100-113). These include trade beads, Chinese coins, Phoenix buttons, ceramic pipe bowls and stems, and nineteenth century United States coins. The origin of these materials remains unresolved. They may be associated with burial use of the site, or perhaps with an unreported habitation on the site. Future research should be sensitive to the possibility of a limited scale early historic residential component at Trojan. It should be structured to identify the locus of that occupation (if it exists) and attempt to relate or distinguish it from burials at the site. Assemblage Comparison with Lower Columbia Sites Cultural materials previously excavated from 35C01 are not fully comparable with the slowly growing body of collections from the Lower Columbia. Since Trojan samples were not stored, they cannot be reevaluated. Cultural materials removed from new excavations should compare functional and stylistic attributes with other regional collections. Such samples are an essential foundation for establishing site function and possible changes through time. Intersite similarities or variation in frequencies of classes of materials can be used to assess the role played by Trojan occupants in larger riverain and inland land use systems. Furthermore, the sample will help evaluate the utility of schemes that attempt to relate relative frequencies of items, principally projectile points, to temporal / cultural periods along the Lower Columbia (cf. Pettigrew 1981). Long Term Site Management Archaeological research is unique among the sciences in its focus on human events as they unfold over long periods of time. It is this long temporal focus that holds the key to understanding patterns in the critical relationship between human cultural systems and the broader ecological context within which humans struggle to maintain a secure existence. To my mind the primary value of archaeology lies in its potential to explain broad patterns in changing human use of the earth rather than simply in the fascinating objects that archaeologists and others occasionally unearth. Our ability to cope with such long term processes is possible only because cultural and emironmentally relevant materials are deposited in stratigraphic sequence in the ground. Those materials are sparse and fragile. Their value diminishes substantially when their stratigraphic context is disturbed. To the extent that we value or ability to understand long term hu: nan events, we are obliged to maintain stewardship over diminishing cultural resources that contribute to such knowledge. Despite past damage the Trojan site remains a valuable cultural property. It offers substantial potential to contribute information spanning approximately 1,250 years of adaptation to the Lower Columbia. Maintenance of its value hinges on continuing preservation of the site, OAS excavation records and any samples that remain 66 i

l from those excavations. OAS records are on file at PSU's Department of Anthropology. I suggest that the University maintain curation of these records until and if funds are made available for further work on 35C01. The small samples at the Trojan Visitor Center and at PSU should also be retained. In the event that further work is possible at the site, I suggest that the research include an effort to obtain as much of the previously excavated material as oossible. That material should be incorporated into the research as possible, then curated at an approved facility. Most important is continuing maintenance of site's physicalintegrity. In this regard 35CO1 can benefit from stewardship by Portland General Electric Conipany. The fact that the site falls within the bounds of the Trojan power facility offers security from vandalism and crosional site deterioration not common to sites along the Columbia. To protect the site PGE officials need only guarantee that subsurface sediments remain intact in perpetuity. The river front should be guarded against erosion; and the site protected from bulldozing, vandalism, trenching, or other sources of physical modification that would penetrate below the modern ground surface. If construction is unavoidable that work should be preceded by an archaeological effort guided be a research design that would realize some of the information potential of the site. Any further archaeological work, even if independent of construction, should be carefully planned to minimize additionalloss of site sediments while pursuing its research goals. l l 67

BIBLIOGRAPHY l Chandler, S. Robbins, Bertel Bruun, and Herbert S. Zim i 1966 Birds ofNorth America. Golden Press. New York. Cornforth Consu'tants 1988 New Site Summary Boring Logs for the Trojan Engineering Office Building. Records on file at Portland General Electric Co., Portland; or Cornforth Consultants, Inc. Tigard, Oregon. Forman, Cam and Dave 1977 Hereg, 45-CL-11. Report No. 3. Published by the Oregon Archaeological Society. Portland. Franklin, Jerry F. and C.T. Dyrness 1973 Natural Vegetation of Oregon and Washington. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report PNW-8. Portland. Hajda, Yvonne P. 1984 Regional Social Organization in the Greater Lower Columbia,1792-1830. Ph.D. Dissertation in Anthropology. University of Washington. Jones, Roy F. ' 1972 WappatoIndians of the Lower Columbia River Valley. Anthony Netboy (ed.). Privately Printed. Minor, Rick 1983a AboriginalSettlement and Subsistence at the Mouth of the Columbia River. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Oregon. Eugene. 1983b Settlement and Subsistence at the Mouth of the Columbia River. In Robert E. Greengo (ed.) Prehistoric Places on the Southem Northwest Coast, pp. 195-210. Thomas Burke Memorial Washington State Museum. University of Washington. Seattle. Minor, Rick, Kathryn A. Toepel and Stephen D. Beckham 1986 An Overview ofInvestigations at 4SSA11; Archaeology in the Columbia River Gorge. Report to the Portland District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Portland, Oregon. Netboy, Anthony 1980 The Columbia RiverSalmon and Steelhead Trout. University of Washington Pscss. Seattle. ( ODFW & WDF > 1987 Status Report; Columbia RiverFish Runs andFisheries 1960-86. 3ointly published by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Washington Department of Fisheries. Pettigrew, Richard M. 1981 A Prehistoric Culture Sequence in the Portland Basin of the Lower Columbia Valley. University of Oregon Anthropological Papers, No. 22. Eugene. Ray, Verne 1938 Lower Chinook Ethnographic Notes. University of Washington Publications in Anthropology. 7(2):29-165. University of Washington Press. Seattle. Ruby, Robert H. and John A. Brown 1976 The Chinook Indians; Traders of the Lower Columbia River. 1988 edition, the University of Oklahoma Press. Norman. 69

Saleeby, Becky M. , 1983 Prehistoric Settlement Pattems in the Portland Basin of the Lower Columbia River: Ethnohistoric, .\ Archaeological, andBlogeographicPerspectives. Ph.D. Dissertation in Anthropology. University of Oregon. 1 l Saleeby, Becky and Richard M. Pettigrew 1983 Seasonality of Occupation of Ethnohistorically Documented Villages of the Lower Columbia , River. In Robert E. Greengo (ed.) Prehistoric Places on the Southern Northwest Coast, pp.169 ) 194. Thomas Burke Memorial Washington State Museum. University of Washington. Seattle. i Uvardy, Miklos D. F. 1977 The Audubon Society Field Guide to Nonh American Birds. Alfred A Knopf. New York Warner, Irene and George Warner 1973 Trojan III- 35C01; Archaeological Report Covering the Third and Final Season of Salvage Excavation of the Trojan Site. Oregon Archaeological Society Report No. 7. Portland. 1 I , 1 i i l J i I 70 l t

APPENDIX A l i Oregon ArchaeologicalInventory Modified Site Form Redeposited Fill from 35COI 1 l Site fill removed from the 1988 preconstruction excavation for an office building at 35CO1 was deposited behind . the Goble Tavern immediately south of U.S. Highway 30 in Goble, Oregon. This site form documents the present location of that fill material. It is on file at the Oregon State Historic Preservation Office as a permanent record of the genuine association of any cultural materials with 35CO1 rather than with the Goble Tavern locality. SITE NO.: 35CO1x (Fill Removed from site Context)

      'A. Identification County: Columbia USGS Quad: Rainier, Oreg.- Wash. and Kalama, Wash.- Oreg.

Site Name: Not Applicable B. IAcation - Goble Tavern fill locality (35CO1x) Township: 6 North Range: 2 West Section: 12 1/4 Section: NW 1/4, SW 1/4, SE 1/4 UTM Zone: 10 Easting: 509700 Northing: 5095405 35C01 (Trojan Site) Actual Location Township: 6 North Range: 2 West Section: 1 1/4 Section: NE 1/4, SW 1/4, NW 1/4 UTM Zone: 10 - Easting: 509160 Northing: 5097745 I C. Ownership The property has been privately owned since 1980 by Will Hicks,70522 Columbia River Highway, Goble, OR,

   , 97048. The property is a business and parking lot operating under the title of The Goble Tavern." Evelyn Beasly was the owner from 1973 to 19540. Doris Dalton was owner from about the 1950s to 1973.

The locality is located approximately 5 miles south of Rainier, OR on U.S. Highway 30 running between Portland and Astoria. The tavern is immediately south of the highway in Goble. 35C01 site fill was deposited behind the tavern as indicated on the attached sketch map. 71

1 D. Temporal AITiliation Fill materialis associated with 35CO1. Native American cultural materials range from approximately 1250 B.P. to early historic times. The fill may contain both residential and burial material. Historic debris may be associated both with American Indian and subsequent Euroamerican use of the originallandform. Note that the Goble tavern context is not genuine. The fill presently has little or no stratigraphic integrity. No cultural materials have been collected from the Tavern locality. For information pertinent to components, features and i materials from the actual 35C01 locality see the following reports on file at the Oregon State Historic l I Preservation Office, at Portland General Electric Company and at Portland State University. Burtchard, Greg C. j 1989 Archaeological Evaluation of the Trojan Locality; 35CO1. Laboratory of Archaeology and } Anthropology, Cultural Resource Investigation Series No.1. Portland State University. Portland. Warner, Irene and George Warner 1973 Trojan III- 35C01; Archaeological Report Covering the Third and Final Season of Salvage Ercavation of the Trojan Site. Oregon Archaeological Society Report No. 7. Portland. E. Physical Description Dimension: circa 80 meters X 10 meters in an arc 2 Area: approximately 800 m Elevation: 20 feet amst Downslope Direction: SW at approx 45 Drainage Basin: No.19, Columbia Immediate Drainage: Columbia River Setting: open Prehistoric Site Type: out of context, see records for 35CO1 Site Integrity: 0% l Primary Landform: valley l Primary Location: Top, bottom and slope l Secondary Landform: (Goble Tavern) Creek & Swamp Secondary Imcation: floor The materials were dumped as illustrated on the attached site map to attempt to solve a land subsidence problem behind the tavern. The tavern appears to be built in a highly erosive context and both it and the fill may eventually be lost to continued landform subsidence and stream erosion. l i Reported: Greg C. Burtchard September 28,1988 l Attached: USGS location Map, Rainier and Kalama Quads l Sketch Map of the Redeposited Locality 1

                                                                                                                  )

l 72

i f. ( i 36 ,/ l' '

                                                                                                                                                                                                                              -! . . I',                        ,I                                  
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    '*Pi'-

C'. ~ j! 2 ' T. Sub

                                                                                          . .s
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      ' f , h{'

m ,. bi '

                                                                                                                                                                                            /                 n o rays '.                      ,',/, Well i

f Q s U% Ns ' l/l MouSd'.i p' - l

                                \x
                                                                                     ^                                      yl                   ,

l ,' l n ,, , E' L - O l ' hQt ,

y hle m., n  % .

                                                                                                                                                               '--               d                      -. e - -- --
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                . 2 -Q                                                     ,

N' ' y ,,, ,I, Cabie

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 ..            k,.h i '*gN\';i y, x J g..
                ,                                                                        ',%                                          i              ,, , , -              [(                                                                                                      -       I
                )', !', 'J i ,,. .- ;dI'
                                                                                                , \'[

t

                                                                                                                                           ,       ;    ji,             . \, N,                        ;               _
                                                                                                                                                                                                                             's,                                                                             ,)((

k .' N s  :. A g  :;, ,, 1 N /b , i roja hk, 3 01 \,' h ,* " o

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              ,.             k'                          ,3 BM                               Mile 73 r                                                                                                       l'
      +  "
                                                ^
                                                    .,; /

7. -19/ ::. t

                                                                                                                                                                 \ x\ .\                                                                       i,          k-                                              s             k g,2(w;                    (%o g.\ ,
                                                                                                         ~

3 3 { 'l

                                                             .        s                              no    .-o               ;                                      \ '\ * ,s N. -

N - 'i

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                ','lf'D
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  ,          l
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             -2                                             <

O," " h w ' E'a k, . \ \ N N \ \ \, ~ (, , G. .

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           \
                                                                                             --          's,                                                 \             \                        il
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         , ,' g     ,
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               'N \ , \ ; h
                                                                                                                  *                                                           \                                                                                                                       
                   '(                                          )

• y, g

                                                                                                                                                                     \h,Mr        [N s,
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      ,     (
                     *'                                                                                                                        '\ \

\ ) m ({ , -,' - Th N - N -r N 4 'o. ,-

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       .. . \
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        - ' ' , ,h(,%                s,-

s,

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             ,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~

g

                                 'I                                                                                                                                                                                                 - [ ~ NN ,
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     ~

o \?. ,,. \h\s 'l Y,~~I -

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             's.

e x \\ Cf ,. g s p 9-y pw?ps.y5p&t .

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           '      :.        'y;;

o% a s-'h's :'::. t ' \ :, .' '

                                                                                                                            'C 56                                                                                                                                   .

1

e. s'4' N l ,' '

/ 'gj - 0 J h .,\ i p q 'N'g Mile .g . 's , i,', js'fdWNZ o - kf be hF . . h h[EhkND'Q). Goble Sch'TO C% Q / __ d / R*:AW'O '

                                                                                                                                                                                    /

A A D'F g \ g'\j ['. pQ 3"

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       ',' , - .\
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          ' . \ j' lh
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           \

Q location of fill removed from 35COI and redeposited immediately east of the Goble Tavern in Goble OR. The map is an enlar;:ement from USGS Rainier and Kalama Quads. 73

1

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      ,{

l

                                                                  e**'*ty.9.,
                                                                                            'G g ['

A f.

                                                                                             . .E{ETy.7n, i,)                                            <

84 9 -ayJ o

                                                                                             - 4.ik Vthgy:, '                                                                                               }
                                                                                                                                            ';"'                   S:d. Par w g f

Jn g o v.-a n. o e a \ t S:8W':.h.  :.! . 4 pas. J, :. Ble6.,s j I /:!.. llik

                                                                          !.!!.1...

]A lii:1 n.,..

s.

                                                                                   '::s                                                     %                          rx.. #

;,, P6 4. 3

                                              ':: ?                                    !!!!\

l::'  ::!.y

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                ,d'iE
                                                                                                                                                                                                                       ../....+.

iiiN ..di 5

                                                       '                                                       ' ' :...                                                                                    d$
                                                                                                                           !b.                              At pvavm ke Aru.                             d~

l' of JSYo2. 5:1e

                                                                                                                                            '::s                                                    Wif y,j!4 .-                         -
                                                                                                                                                ' li:.7.,3' ' '             E II            . M :i

w.. .: W::j 'd',:

                                                              ' !:i,;.l .
                                                                     .... . .g,          ..       .
                                                                      \:lii.._       .          ... .
                                                                                                                                            .,               i:$.W .                                        .;;;f'
                                                                                                                                                           .:c.' . z...:.:e...

k::::. ......... .,i:!F

                                                                                                                                                                                 .::: [ ' ,..

s . N. . n. . * . . . . . ...:.U:

                                                                                                 . !::          .....,'.....,.                                  w .. '.q.:. .s. . . . . .. ;
                                                                                                                                                        *f

• Dep h ei h l m f p,qul cim. sm .t. 5,.6 vm asp.

avsk v in .. Chamal i l t Sketch map of landfill near the Goble Tavern in Goble, OR. Backdirt was removed from 35C01 during the summer of 1981. Illustrated area is used for parking beside and behind the tavern. Map prepared 9/28/88. 74

APPENDIX B Auger Test Summary Proposed Utility Line Right of Way Southeast Portion of 35CO1 The following is a summary of results for a series of auger tests for cultural materials in a proposed utility line right of way. Test unit numbers refer to locations indicated on Figure 6 in the body of the text. Test procedures are discussed in Section V., Field Procedures and Results; Part (3), Utility Line Auger Testing. l i l Unit No. Location Ma x Cult. Description Depth Matr. ? 1 1 m NNW of Well #1 30 cm N/A Shallow excavation in road; unable to penetrate fdl; refer to Unit 3 ' 2 11 m NNW of Well #1 20 cm N/A Same as above 3 Intermediate to &2m 1.0 m No 0-15 cm coarte sand fill; 15-80 cm fine sand NNW of Units 1 & 2 with pea sized gravel; 80-100 cm silty sand to sandy silt 4 31 m NNW of Well #1 1.0 m No . 0-20 cm fine sand; 20-40 cm sandy silt; 40-100 cm fine sand 5' 41 m NNW of Well #1 1.0 m No 0-55 cm disturbed fdl, brick, angular basalt, plastic, etc.; 55-100 cm brown fine sand 6 51 m NNW of Well #1 1.0 m No 0-15 disturbed fill; 15-100 cm fine sand with profuse iron concretions 7 61 m NNW of Well #1 1.0 m No Disturbed fill with fractured basalt and bottle glass throughout prorde, low frequency suggests rodent mixing 8 At Well #2 turn point,66 .95 m No Fine sand to silty sand entire depth, moderate m NNW of Well #1 iron concretions 9 20 m NW of Well #2 1.2 m No 0-30 cm silty sand with abrupt lower boundary; 30-120 cm medium sand 1 10 40 m NW of Well #2 1.4 m No 0-85 compact very silty sand top to silty sand lower; 85110 cm very silty sand; 110-130 fme sand; 130-140 very silty sand 11 60 m 'lbW of Well #2, .95 m No 0-80 cm very silty sand to sandy silt; 80-95 cm 2.25 m SE of Well #3 fine sand to slightly silty sand turn point 75

rs ?, (' Unit No. Location . M. a x CuIt. Description

                     >                                                                                            Depth      . Matr. ? -

12 20 m NNW of Well #3,- 1.0 m No 0-20 cm silty sand; 20-80 cm compact sandy. near SW' corner of Met silt; 80-100 cm very sandy silt - Tower fence 13 ! 40 m NNW of Well #3 in 35 m ' .N/A Unable to penetrate basalt- gravel parking Parking Lot . surface

                                                                          ~

14 62 m NNW of Well #3, 1.4 m - ' Yes 0-95 cm , brown / tan slightly. silty sand,.

+           '

at Fence Line occasional charcoal & 1 FCR frag; 95-140 cm carbon black line sand, charcoal, FCR,2 chert Y. flakes; lower boundary not reached

              '15 .-     80 m NNW of Well #3,2                                                                     13 m        Yes       0-85 cm basalt rubble fill; 85-100 cm sandy silt; -

m E of SE corner of; 100-130 cm silty sand, low density FCR below Lower Lab 120 cm ,

                                                                                                                                                                                              ^

16 84 m NNW of Well #3, .15 m N/A Unable to penetrate basalt rubble near Sidewalk entrance to

                        . Iower Lab '

17 Not tested : 18 S of road,1 m E of line '13 m Yes - 0-40 cm sandy silt & crushed rock fill; 40-80 '! cm sandy silt; 80-100 cm very sandy silt, poss. FCR; 100-120 cm fine sand, pos. FCR 19 20 m - . SSE of #18, 1.1 m No 0-40 cm disturbed fill; 40-80 cm compact, iron - .! between road and fish mottled, sandy silt to silty sand; 80-110 cm fine ponds,1 m E of line brown sand  ; i 20 44. m SSE of #18, 135 m - Yes 0-75 cm backhoe removed fill; 75-120 cm fine

"'l.                                                                                                                                     sand & moderate charcoal flecks; 1220-135 cm between road and pond slightly carbon stained fine sand, low density        !

J- FCR ( 21 65 m SSE of #18, in 1.25 m Yes 0-85 cm backhoe removed fdl; 85-100 cm triangle made by pond brown sandy silt; 100-120 low density FCR in road & Lab parking lot brown sandy silt 22 On fence line,10 m NE 1.2 m Yes em slightly silty sand; 60-70 cm same,1 of #14, alternate line petrified wood flake; 70-80 cm silty sand, q minor charcoal; 80-90 cm, FCR, red chert core, bone; 90-120 cm slightly carbon stained

   ^L silty sand, chert flakes, FCR, Charcoal 23         On fence line,8.5 m SW                                                                     13 m      Yes       0-110 cm fine to slightly silty sand; 110-130 cm of #14, alternate line                                                                                         same sed., low density FCR & chert flakes            I
                                                                                                                                                                                              \

76 L

Unit No. Location Max Cult. Description Depth Matr. ? 24 On fence line 26 m SW of 13 m Yes 0-90 cm fine sand; 90-110 cm slightly silty sand,

                                  #14, alternate line                     110-130 cm same sed., low density FCR, calcined bone 25                             Alternate line, 14.5 m    1.4 m Yes     0-70 cm backhoc excavated sandy silt; 70-110 NNW of Well #3 turn                     cm sandy silt; 110-140 cm sandy silt, low point                                   density FCR, charcoal 26                             Alternate line, 31.5 m    13 m  Yes     0-85 cm backhoe excavated sandy silt with iron NNW of Well #3 turn                     mottling; 85-120 cm same sed., 120-130 cm point                                   same sed., low density FCR 27                             Alternate line in Parking 13 m  Yes     0-60 cm backhoe excavated basalt rubble fill; lot 47 m NNW of Well                    80-110 cm sandy silt; 110-120 cm same sed.,
                                  #3 tura point                           charcoal flecks,1 FCR fragment; 120-130 cm brown silty sand, low density FCR, charcoal f

j f i l

7, s Ror.tland State University

                                                 ' l'ortland Oregnn 97207-4751 t.

Laboratory cf Archaeology and' Anthropology February 1,~1989-1Leland Gilson State Archaeologists Department of. Transportation Parks ~and Recreation Division

       '525 Trade Street SE

Salem OR~97310

Dear Mr. Gilson:

                                 ~

EnclosedLis a copy of ArchaeolooicaJ-___ Evaluation of the s. i Tr o.1an Local:A tu : 31CQ1 2 This is the final report of the_ project

        -carried out by the Latoratory.cf. Archaeology and Anthropology
       .under. contract to Portland General Electric Company (PGE) at their. Trojan' nuclear power facility.                            As you recall,~the work was stimulated..by partials excavation for an office building within 35CD1 site boundaries. After' construction was halted the office complex was moved to an alternative location, avoiding further                                        -v
        ~ damage toLeultura11 materials.                         The present project was designed; primarily to evaluate adverse effects of-the partial excavation, to record culturally relevant information from exposed cutbanks and, sits surfaces, to document the location of sediments removed from.35C01,_and;to suggest continuing research and management-
       . options for'the' Trojan Site.                          Additional effort has been made in the body of the report to_ develop information relevant to a t       . broader general understanding of the prehistoric and-historic events-effecting.the locality.

h Based,on.my discussions with you, I believe that this report completes PGE's cultural resource obligations related directly to the partial construction excavation at 35C01. Thank you for your

       . assistance and advice _during the effort.                             I welcome your comments and suggestions. ' Feel free to write or call me at Portland State University or contact me at my home office (472-52B1).

Sincerely,

f. / l Greg C. Burtchard Senior Archaeologist f

I

                                                                                                                  )

cc. T.E. Bushnell, Portland General Electric Company, Portland OR / (:..tlece hf 1.ilieral \rts ar d Sdences Department of \nthn.p<% W'220 dol 8

                                                                                                               / i}}