DRC-2009-003917 - 0901a06880361997

C>i^o
DENISOI^i
MINES
T^cn-'Xy^nn
Denison Mims (USA) Corp.
1050 17th Street Suite 950
Denver, CO 8026S
USA
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
www.denisonmines.com
September 3, 2007
.J^8«'°"r.^
>'
/«v
1 r
c
tT>\V' ^
90? 2009
..1 u ,
• 3':; Vt-''••>-
VIA OVERNIGHT DELIVERY
Mr. Dane L. Finerfrock
Director
Division of Radiation Control
Department of Environmental Quality
168 North 1950 West
P.O Box 144850
Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4850
Re: Cell 4B Cultural Resource Technical Proposal for Evaluative Testing
Dear Mr. Finerfrock:
Enclosed you will find one (1) CD, and two (2) hard copies, of the White Mesa Mill Cell 48 Technical Proposal
for Evaluative Testing in the proposed Cell 48 tailings area. I would appreciate you forwarding one of the
copies to the Utah State Historic Preservation Office as soon as possible. The other hard copy and the CD are
for your files. The Report was prepared for Denison Mines (USA) Corp. by Abajo Archaeology, in support of the
Cell 48 tailings license amendment request.
If you have any immediate questions please feel free to contact me at 303 389-4160.
Yours very truly,
DENISON MINES (USA) CORP.
kr^^
Harold R. Roberts
Executive Vice President, US Operations
cc: Ron F. Hochstein
Dave C. Frydenlund
Steven D. Landau
·1
I
TECHNICAL PROPOSAL FOR EVALUATIVE TESTING AT FOURTEEN
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES ON THE PROPOSED DENISON MINES (USA)
CORPORATION WHITE MESA MILL CELL 4-B,
SAN JUAN COUNTY,UTAH
Jonathan D.Till
With Contributions By:
MarkC.Bond
William E.Davis
Deborah A.Westfall
September 2009
ABAJO ARCHtEOLOGY
TECHNICAL PROPOSAL FOR EVALUATIVE TESTING AT FOURTEEN ARCHAEOLOGICAL
SITES ON THE PROPOSED DENISON MINES (USA)CORPORATION WHITE MESA MILL
CELL 4B,SAN JUAN COUNTY,UTAH
Prepared For:
Utah Public Lands Policy Coordination Office
5100 State Office Building
PO Box 141107
Salt Lake City,Utah 84114-1107
and
Utah State Historic Preservation Office
300 Rio Grande
Salt Lake City,Utah 84101-1182
Prepared Under Contract With:
Denison Mines (USA)Corporation
6425 South Highway 191
Blanding,Utah 84511
Prepared By:
Jonathan D.Till
With Contributions By:
Mark C.Bond,William E.Davis,and Deborah A.Westfall
Submitted By:
William E.Davis,Director
Abajo Archaeology
Bluff,Utah
September,2009
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1:INTRODUCTION 1
Scope of Work 1
Location and Environment 1
Archaeological Site Descriptions 5
42Sa6391 5
42Sa6392 8
42Sa6393 8
42Sa6397 11
42Sa6431 13
42Sa6757 13
42Sa8014 13
42Sa28128 17
42Sa28129 17
42Sa28130 17
42Sa28131 21
42Sa28132 21
42Sa28133 21
42Sa28134 25
CHAPTER 2:RESEARCH CONTEXT 27
Cultural-Historical Overview 27
Previous Archaeological Research in the Project Area 27
Toward a Consideration of Research Issues 31
CHAPTER 3:TESTING METHODOLOGy 36
Theoretical Orientation 36
General Testing Procedures 36
Site-specific Testing 39
42Sa6391 39
42Sa6392 43
42Sa6393 43
42Sa6397 49
42Sa6431 49
42Sa6757 53
42Sa8014 55
42Sa28128 55
42Sa28129 55
42Sa28130 55
42Sa28131 58
42Sa28132 58
42Sa28133 58
42Sa28134 63
Off-site Blading Activities 63
Artifact and Ecofact Analysis 63
Reporting and Curation 65
Proposed Schedule and Cost Estimate 65
CHAPTER 4:ORGANIZATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS 66
Key Project Personnel 66
REFERENCES 69
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1:Proj ect Location 2
Figure 2:Proj ect Area Photo 3
Figure 3:Project Area and Site Locations 4
Figure 4:Site 42Sa6391,Survey Map 7
Figure 5:Site 42Sa6392,Survey Map 9
Figure 6:Site 42Sa6393,Survey Map 10
Figure 7:Site 42Sa6397,Survey Map 12
Figure 8:Site 42Sa6431,Survey Map 14
Figure 9:Site 42Sa6757,Post-Excavation Map 15
Figure 10:Site 42Sa8014,Post-Excavation Map 16
Figure 11:Site 42Sa28128,Survey Map 18
Figure 12:Site 42Sa28129,Survey Map 19
Figure 13:Site 42Sa28130,Survey Map 20
Figure 14:Site 42Sa28131,Survey Map 22
Figure 15:Site 42Sa28132,Survey Map 23
Figure 16:Site 42Sa28133,Survey Map 24
Figure 17:Site 42Sa28134,Survey Map 26
Figure 18:Site Locations on White Mesa Mill Property 29
Figure 19:Site 42Sa6391,Antiquities Section Testing Map 41
Figure 20:Site 42Sa6391,Proposed Testing Activities Map 42
Figure 21:Site 42Sa6391,Trench A Profile 44
Figure 22:Site 42Sa6391,Trench D Profile 45
Figure 23:Site 42Sa6392,Proposed Testing Activities Map 46
Figure 24:Site 42Sa6393,Proposed Testing Activities Map 47
Figure 25:Site 42Sa6393,Trench C Profile 48
Figure 26:Site 42Sa6397,Antiquities Section Testing Map 50
Figure 27:Site 42Sa6397,Proposed Testing Activities Map 51
Figure 28:Site 42Sa6431,Antiquities Section Testing Map 52
Figure 29:Site 42Sa6431,Proposed Testing Activities Map 54
Figure 30:Site 42Sa28128,Proposed Testing Activities Map 56
Figure 31:Site 42Sa28129,Proposed Testing Activities Map 57
Figure 32:Site 42Sa28130,Proposed Testing Activities Map 59
Figure 33:Site 42Sa28131,Proposed Testing Activities Map 60
Figure 34:Site 42Sa28132,Proposed Testing Activities Map 61
Figure 35:Site 42Sa28133,Proposed Testing Activities Map 62
Figure 36:Site 42Sa28134,Proposed Testing Activities Map 64
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1:Sites by Component and Function,White Mesa Mill
Cell 4B Survey 6
Table 2:Archaeological Chronology of the Four Corners Region,
by Year and Pecos Classification Periods 28
Table 3:Excavated Site Data 30
Table 4:Site Components by Count and Percent 32
Table 5:Site Components by Possible Function 33
Table 6:Research Problems/Hypotheses Developed for Excavation
Projects Near the White Mesa Mill 34
Table 7:Proposed Testing Activities for Sites in the Cell
4B Project Area 40
Table 8:Estimated Time Requirements 65
CHAPTER 1:INTRODUCTION
This chapter serves to orient the reader to the proposed project.
Chapter 1 will:introduce Denison Mines'proposal to develop Cell 4B
and summarize the scope of work for this archaeological testing
project;describe the location and environment of the proposed project
area;and provide brief descriptions of the archaeological sites in the
proposed project area.
Scope of Work
Denison Mines (USA)Corp.proposes to construct Tailings Cell 4B
on their White Mesa Mill facility.The proposed cell has long been
planned,but not constructed.The proposed cell would be excavated,
lined,and used in the permanent storage of uranium ore tailings from
the mill facility.It is understood that these construction activities
could pose adverse effects to any historic properties in the proj ect
area.
Abajo Archaeology has conducted a cultural resource inventory
(archaeological survey)of the area proposed for the construction and
development of Cell 4B (Till 2009).A total of 14 sites were located in
the project area as a result of the archaeological survey.In order to
understand the nature and extent of the subsurface deposits at each of
these sites,Mr.Harold Roberts,Executive Vice President,and Mr.
David Turk,Radiation Safety Officer,both of Denison Mines (USA)Corp,
requested that Abajo Archaeology develop and conduct a testing program
for sites in,or immediately adj acent to,the proposed project area.
The testing program for this project is being prepared for the client,
Denison Mines (USA)Corp.,and for submittal to Mr.Dane Finerfrock,
Division of Radiation Control,Department of Environmental Quality,
State of Utah.It is also being submitted to Ms.Lori Hunsaker (Deputy
Preservation Officer,State Historic Preservation Office)and Mr.Kelly
Beck (Utah Public Lands Policy Coordination Office)for review.
Specifically,the testing program developed here proposes to:(1)
evaluate the condition and interpretability of all components,
features,and/or deposits;(2)establish the types and frequency of
cultural features;(3)determine the distribution and extent of
cultural features within each site;and (4)determine the research
significance of each site,based on the results of (1)through (3).
Location and Environment
The proposed Cell 4B project area is situated on the crest and
gently sloped flanks of two finger ridges on the north end of White
Mesa (Figures 1 and 2).The mesa's western and eastern margins drop
precipitously into Cottonwood and Recapture canyons,respectively.The
project area has an approximate rhomboid shape that covers an area of
about 55.7 acres (22.5 hectares)in Sections 32 and 33 of Township 37
South,Range 22 East (Figure 3).
2
I ."",\•Ii )i ').'.I •'.,I I I
m~sffiT/~~Y2
km ~
06/30/09
40
25
• I• I
352530
20
"i ~"".!,I I '."I ,.'i
15
20
,'.",',
10
1510
5
5
o
o
Figure 1.Project Location MaD.Denison Mines White Mesa MilL San .Tmm rmmtv TTt~h
3
Figure 2.Project Area Photo.From north edge of project looking southeast.
4
1 .5 0
fri3 FA Fa EH ea
" i
--'71":,,,. !
\......,.
I:
,~...I
[.·/~563"r
_!h1\."'"
)\
I,
Figure 3.Denison Mines White Mesa Mill Ce1l4B Project Map showing the location of
archaeological sites.
5
Archaeological Site Descriptions
Fourteen sites were found within,or immediately proximate to,
the proposed Cell 48 project area.These sites are:42Sa6391, 42Sa6392,
42Sa6393,42Sa6397,42Sa6431,42Sa6757,42Sa8014,and 42Sa28128-
42Sa28133.Thorough descriptions of the sites are found in the
project's archaeological survey report (Till 2009).Table 1 summarizes
the sites in the proj ect area by temporal component and suggested
function.The text in the rest of this chapter briefly describes the
surface manifestations of each site and the history of investigations
at each.
42Sa6391
The site occupies the crest of a low,sandy finger-ridge on the
north side of the proj ect area (Figure 3).The site was initially
identified by Thompson (1977)and subsequently tested by the
Antiquities Section (Lindsay 1978 and Nielson 1979).During these
testing activities,the adjacent 42Sa6393 was mistakenly folded into
42Sa6391.For the purposes of this investigation,we separate the
testing results for these separate areas,maintaining Thompson's
original site designations and locations.
Soon after the site's initial documentation,the Antiquities
Section excavated two backhoe trenches to test the site (Lindsay 1978
and Nielson 1979).These trenches revealed the location of two pit
structures and a cist.The results of these excavations are discussed
in greater detail in Chapter 3.
As it currently appears on the surface,42Sa6391 consists of a
scatter of lithic and pottery artifacts (Figure 4).The scatter is
contained within an area that measures about 40 m north/south by 30 m
east/west.A 3/4-in.steel pipe,representing an earlier site datum,
indicates that the site had been previously documented.The faint
traces of at least one,and perhaps two,of the previously excavated
backhoe trenches just east of the site datum are just barely
discernable.
The artifact scatter comprises pottery,lithic debitage,one
chipped stone tool (a biface),and pecked and ground stone tools.As
noted earlier,there is a scatter of sandstone rock on the site,
suggesting the presence of subsurface architecture.
The pottery assemblage suggests an association with the early to
middle Pueblo II period (Till 2009:31).Alternatively,there might be
both late Pueblo I and Pueblo II components on the site.
The diversity of artifact types suggests that a variety of
activities occurred on the site,which may indicate the site was used
as a habitation.This proposition is further corroborated by the
presence of pit structures documented in the test units by the
Antiquities Section.
Table 1.Sites by Component and Function,White Mesa Mill Cell 4B Survey
Site Number Components Suggested Function Comments
42Sa6391 Pueblo II habitation May have two pit structures.
42Sa6392 Pueblo II seasonal habitation Small adobe feature may be indicated.
42Sa6393 Pueblo II habitation Based on artifact scatters,two or three households may be indicated.
42Sa6397 Basketmaker III unknown Small adobe feature may be indicated.Given the artifact scatter,it seems likely that domestic features are
possible Pueblo II unknown present.
42Sa6431 Basketmaker III unknown Known features include a burial,a hearth,and a lens ofburned adobe.
Pueblo II habitation A midden with a diverse assemblage of materials is present that suggests the presence of a habitation.
42Sa6757 Basketmaker III habitation Previously excavated by Abajo Archaeology (Davis 1985).Portions ofthe midden are still intact.Small
subsurface features may still be present.
42Sa8014 Pueblo I seasonal habitation Previously excavated by Abajo Archaeology (Davis 1985).Small subsurface features may still be present.
42Sa28128 Pueblo II and/or Pueblo III limited activity The remains of ephemeral structures orsmall subsurface features may be present.
42Sa28129 Basketmaker III and/or Pueblo I limited activity The remains ofephemeral structures or small subsurface features may be present.Pueblo II limited activity
42Sa28130 Pueblo II limited activity The remains ofephemeral structures or small subsurface features may be present.
42Sa28131 Unknown historic camp The remains of ephemeral structures or small subsurface features may be present.
42Sa28132 possible Basketmaker III limited activity ,The remains ofephemeral structures or small subsurface features may be present.
42Sa28133 Unknown Aboriginal limited activity The remains ofephemeral structures or small subsurface features may be present.
42Sa28134 Unknown AboriQinal limited activity The remains ofephemeral structures or small subsurface features may be present.
'"
7
o 10 m/~.=-.D.-=====JI
collector pile
(includes T4-T8)
/
/
/
T3
T1
---
/
(
\
)
42Sa6391
site boundary \I
~-~------~-----
KEY
.£datum
T#tool M.Bond,10/22/08
Figure 4,Site 42Sa6391,Survey Map
8
42Sa6392
Perched on a slight west-facing slope below the crest of a
finger-ridge,this scatter of cultural debris is south of its neighbor,
the previously discussed site,42Sa6391 (Figure 3).Site 42Sa6392 was
first documented by Thompson (1977)and subsequently confused with a
site located just to the south,42Sa6431,during test excavations that
were conducted by the Antiquities Section (Nielson 1979)(see Till
2009:22,31).
The site currently manifests as a scatter of lithic and pottery
artifacts and includes a small concentration of jacal (Figure 5).The
site occupies an area measuring approximately 40 m in diameter,
although the centrally located cluster of jacal materials is smaller,
covering an area that measures about 5 m in diameter.The pottery
assemblage may indicate a primary use of this location during the years
that span the early to middle Pueblo II periods.
Feature 1 consists of a concentration of jacal and sandstone
rubble.The concentration lies in the approximate center of the
artifact scatter and measures about 5 m in diameter.The variety of
artifact types on the site suggest that a diversity of activities took
place at 42Sa6392.Additionally,Feature 1 may be the remains of
surface architecture.While sediment depth is unknown,it is quite
possible that the site harbors one or more subsurface architectural
features.
42Sa6393
East of 42Sa6391,and north of 42Sa6397,this site is a scatter
of artifacts,which is located just west of the crest of a finger-ridge
on the north end of the project area (Figure 3).This site was
initially recorded by Thompson (1977),and tested by the Antiquities
Section in spring of 1978 (Lindsay 1978).However,Antiquities Section
archaeologists apparently combined it with nearby site 42Sa6391.
Further compounding the problem,the site designation "42Sa6393"was
applied to a locus of cultural materials well to the south of
Thompson's 42Sa6393.Apparently,Thompson's site 42Sa6397 was
misidentified as 42Sa6393 (Till 2009:22,34-35).
Two parallel backhoe trenches were excavated and reported by the
Antiquities Section to test this location for significant subsurface
cultural materials (Lindsay 1978;Nielson 1979).Nielson (1979)reports
the presence of a pit structure in one of the trenches,though which
trench is not known.While making a baseline map of the site for this
proposal,archaeologists observed that a third trench was excavated on
the site,but had not been reported.These observations are discussed
in greater detail in Chapter 3.
Currently,the site consists of a scatter of lithic and pottery
artifacts (Figure 6).The site measures approximately 60 m north/south
by 45 m east/west.Two concentrations of artifacts (Artifact Clusters 1
and 2)were noted on the west side of the site.In addition,the two
backhoe trenches and their associated backdirt piles are still very
evident.The pottery assemblage suggests that the site dates to the
early to middle Pueblo II period.However,it is also possible that the
9
;0
o
G)
m
-l
o
1J
o 10m
•••I
F
T1
F
~~
~site boundary
F
F
--
T2
/--.....
f y )
I Feature 1 /~--/
\Gacal concentration)
'\
~
'"FF
42Sa6392
KEY
A.datu
S sherd
F flake
T#tool
~~
~
M.Bond 10/22/08
Figure 5,Site 42Sa6392,Survey Map
10
site
boundary
M.Bond,10/22/08
o 10m....I
L
I
/
~
/
/
T1
T2
/
I
I
\
~
/'
/-,
I I
I I AC-1'
\/"-/
KEY
..t.datum
T#tool
AC-#artifact cluster
,gtlll.~'\'\berm
_backhoe trench
42Sa6393
Figure 6.42Sa6393,Survey Map
11
site has a late Pueblo I component as well as a middle Pueblo II
component.
The diversity of the site's assemblage suggests that a variety of
activities occurred on the site.Paired with the presence of a pit
structure discovered in one of the backhoe trenches,these data suggest
that the site may have functioned as a habitation for at least one of
the temporal components.
42Sa6397
Site 42Sa6397 lies on the same ridge crest as 42Sa6393 (Figure
3).The site was originally recorded by Thompson (1977),but was
erroneously tested under the site number 42Sa6393 by the Antiquities
Section in 1978 (Dykman 1978b).Confusing the issue further,Nielson
(1979:51-52)reports that he revisited 42Sa6397 and determined that
testing or further mapping of the site was not required.We can only
speculate that Nielson encountered 42Sa28132,which is indeed a sparse
scatter of artifacts.Till (2009:37-40)describes the history of site
number conflation in greater detail in the proj ect's recent
archaeological survey report.
The Antiquities Section excavated seven backhoe trenches to test
the site for significant stratigraphy or subsurface features.Two of
the trenches located subsurface cultural features,both of which were
classified as "storage pits"(Dykman 1978b).These testing activities
are discussed further in Chapter 3.
The site measures about 60 meters in diameter (Figure 7).
Cultural materials consist of a scatter of pottery,chipped stone
debitage,and a number of lithic tools.Two concentrations of cultural
materials were defined and are referred to as Artifact Clusters 1 and 2
(AC-l and AC-2).A concentration of burned jacal,Feature 1,is
contained within AC-l.Previous investigations on the site are apparent
by the presence of a steel,3/4 pipe datum.The faint remnants of the
seven backhoe trenches,which were apparently backfilled,are barely
visible.A collector pile in AC-2 includes plain gray pottery and a
neckbanded sherd.Additionally,a collector pile at the site datum
includes pottery and lithic artifacts.
The site's pottery assemblage suggests at least two components:a
substantial Basketmaker III component and a relatively minor Pueblo II
component.However,the site's occupation may be more complex.
Neckbanded pottery,and the red ware,may signal an intermediate
occupation during the Pueblo I period.
The function of the site is difficult to assess.The relatively
small number of artifacts in the surface assemblage may indicate one or
more brief occupations of the location.Earlier test excavations failed
to locate evidence of pit structures.However,such a feature may have
been missed by the test trenches.The discovery of two small pit
features by the Antiquities Section,and the presence Feature 1,
suggest the likelihood that other significant subsurface features
remain to be identified.
12
10 m
'"~2 \
\
\,
I
o
/
/
R
R
site
boundary
~~
T3
I-
C/)
l.J.J
a::
U
l.J.J
<!J
a
1'1 ,
/\concentrati,9AC-2~,/~,/-~OfjaCal /I
~I R--i /
I I
I /R --/
--R
------
x steelt-post
---
R
/-R--~---~~,
~R "R ,
/,
I collector pilei-i:'at datum II
I (__/(with T5 and IT7)
\I
AC-1 L~>~,,~---.....JT4",'/
/
/
I
42Sa6397
IIR
\
\
\
KEY
.£datum
R rubble
T#tool
AC-#artifact cluster backhoe trench M.Bond,10/24/08
Figure 7.Site 42Sa6397,Survey Map
13
42Sa6431
Site 42Sa6431 occupies the crest of a finger-ridge and the
ridge's terminal southern end,and covers an area that measures
approximately 120 m north/south by 60 m east/west (Figure 3).
Subsequent to Thompson's (1977)initial documentation of the site,
Antiquities Section archaeologists tested the site with a set of
backhoe trenches,but did so under another site number,42Sa6392
(Nielson 1979:30-46).Furthermore,it is evident that other backhoe
trenches were excavated on the site,but after the work by Nielson
(Till 2009:42-47).To date,no documentation for this second set of
test trenching has been found.Previous testing activities are
discussed further in Chapter 3.It will suffice here to note that
Nielson (1979)located three subsurface features:a hearth,a burial,
and the remains of a possible jacal structure.
The site,as Bond mapped it for the current project,consists of
a scatter of lithic and pottery artifacts as well as a midden area
(Feature 1)and a concentration of jacal (Feature 2)(Figure 8).Bond
also observed a dispersed scatter of plain gray pottery in the vicinity
of the datum,and east of it.This scatter is in the same location as
the Basketmaker materials that Nielson observed and tested in 1978.
The site's pottery assemblage suggests two components:a
Basketmaker III component and an early to middle Pueblo II component.
It is reasonable to suggest at least a seasonal habitation function for
both components.
42Sa6757
This site is located along a ridge slope near the north end of
the project boundary (Figure 3).Site 42Sa6757 has previously undergone
data recovery efforts (Davis 1985).Research shows that 42Sa6757 was a
Basketmaker III habitation with at least one pit structure that may
have been a year-round dwelling,and other smaller structures that may
have served as seasonal habitations or food processing facilities
(Figure 9).
Excavation of the site documented a total of five features,
including two pit structures,two very small habitations or field
houses,and a hearth (Davis and others 1985:128-164).The hearth is
situated on the north end of the site's midden.This cultural deposit
is partially buried under 3 to 5 cm of aeolian sediments.The midden is
fairly shallow and does not appear to be more than 15 cm thick.This
area was tested by backhoe trenches,but otherwise not systematically
sampled.
42Sa8014
Site 42Sa8014 is located near the base of the same ridge slope
that 42Sa6757 occupies (Figure 3).This site has also been subjected to
data recovery efforts (Davis 1985).Site 42Sa8014 was probably a late
Pueblo I seasonal habitation.The site consists of a small pit
structure and an associated cist (Figure 10).
428a6431
14
/
Nielson
Trenches C
and D?
--1---1_-_
-- ---1-_
KEY
-------f7-
T5'//T
I
plain gray pottery
scatter
site
boundary
o•••10mI
.+.datum
T#tool
berm
feature
Figure 8.Site 42Sa6431,Survey Map
M.Bond,10/23/08
15
42Sa6757 •••••••••
••••••••••••••••••••••••••
•••
10 m
I
••••
o
•••
•A.•
••••$I
I
I
/
//\..../......
I
(
•••••.-_¢'~"-•••••••....---..•••..+••••.#•••••••~::.r-------:C~...:---F5 ..~_::::~/;./~3.........-.~;~6~(~'~,:::::=~·.:.-//......
./...•••••••••••••••••••
-
I
I
~\\\
""---------
••
sheet
midden
A datum
KEY
F#feature
'"Abajo backhoe
••'trench
••~Antiquities Section
backhoe trench
bladed area Redrawn from
Davis and others
(1985:Figure 7-27)
Figure 9.Site 42Sa6757,Post-Excavation Map
16
42Sa8014
••••
o
•••
KEY
•
10 m
I
-...."-••••••••••••-..-
F1 ••---,it._---....••(.6'bC)
I ••)1 00'b:\......"-------."-•F2•
..:••
·.'••••••••••••
A datum
F#feature
/Abajo backhoe trench
•••••Antiquities Section backhoe trench
Redrawn from Davis and others
(1985:Figure 7-38)
Figure 10.Site 42Sa8014,Post-Excavation Map
17
Two features were located and excavated on the site.One of the
features is a pit structure while the other is a slab-lined cist.
Pottery assemblages associated with both features suggest that the two
were probably contemporaneous.One absolute date,a C-14 sample from
the floor of Feature 1,yielded a date of 1455±130 B.P.Considering the
pottery assemblages,this seems far too early to accurately represent
the feature's occupation.Bond (1985:274)recommends that the site
dates to the late Pueblo I period.Based on the pottery assemblage,it
seems likely that the site was in use sometime during the late ninth
and/or early tenth century.
42Sa28128
The site is situated on a relatively flat plain a few hundred
meters east of a low,sandy ridge crest (Figure 3).Site 42Sa28128
consists of a scatter of lithic and pottery artifacts.Located in the
southeast corner of the project area,the scatter appears to be
contained within an area that measures 30 m N/S x 20 m E/W (Figure 11).
Cultural materials on the site include a scatter of pottery
sherds,debitage,and several ground stone tools.The only temporally
diagnostic artifact recorded on the site is a corrugated jar body
sherd.This item suggests that the site dates to after about A.D.950.
The surface treatment of the white ware sherds is consistent with this
assessment.However,given that the temporal assignment is based only
on a few sherds,this assessment is tentative.Considering the site's
size,location,and focus on ground stone,the site may have been the
locus of specialized activities such as food processing.
42Sa28129
The site is situated on a very slight rise in an otherwise flat
terrain and is approximately 100 meters west of 42Sa28128 (Figure 3).
Site 42Sa28129 consists of a scatter of lithic and pottery artifacts.
The site is approximately 100 m west of Site 42Sa28128.Like that site,
42Sa28129 is small and is contained within a 30 x 30 m area (Figure
12).
Cultural materials documented on the site include pottery,lithic
debitage,and several ground stone tools.The small pottery assemblage
suggests that the site probably dates to the Pueblo II period or later;
however,one or more earlier components (dating to the Basketmaker III
and/or Pueblo I periods)may also be indicated.The small artifact
assemblage and the site's setting suggest that this location harbored a
limited activity site.
42Sa28130
The site comprises of a scatter of pottery and lithic artifacts
(Figure 3).Located on relatively flat terrain with a slight slope to
the southeast,the scatter is confined to a small area that measures
approximately 10 m north/south by 30 m east/west (Figure 13).
18
42Sa28128
o 10 m
•••I
T5
sI
(
\
'"
...
S
F T4
T2
F
----
KEY
...datum
S sherd
F flake
T#tool
site boundary
----
2-track road ----
M.Bond,10/21/08
Figure 11.Site 42Sa28128,Survey Map
19
42Sa28129
TN
o 10m
•••I
KEY
..t.datum
S sherd
F flake
T#tool
~~/
site boundary
T1 )
/
M.Bond,10/21/08
Figure 12.Site 42Sa28129,Survey Map
20
42Sa28130
o 10m....I
~
T1 \
)
/
Fs
-----
7Undary
-------/
(
\
--------------------------------------------
KEY
north edge of surface stripped-area
(this area steps down 35 to 40 cm from
the site area to the north)
A datum
S sherd
F flake
T#tool M.Bond,10/24/08
Figure 13.Site 42Sa28130,Survey Map
21
Site 42Sa28130 is the third in a cluster of four small sites in
the southeastern corner of the proj ect area.The very small pottery
assemblage at 42Sa28130 suggests that the site may date to the Pueblo
II period.The site may have been the locus of specialized activities
such as food-processing.
42Sa28131
The site's topographic location might be described as the bottom
of a small valley,or alluvial bottomland,along the north edge of the
project boundary (Figure 3).The site is an historic camp with a single
feature (Feature 1)and a few historic artifacts (Figure 14).The whole
site measures about 5 by 14 m,incorporating a fenceline to the north.
Feature 1,a campfire,is lined with small sandstone slabs and
measures 1.2 m in diameter.The artifact assemblage includes fragments
of sanitary-seal tin cans and a rifle cartridge.The rifle cartridge is
a 2 1/8-inch long,British .303 cartridge with a rebated rim.It has a
VPT 42 headstamp,dating its creation in 1942.The cartridge probably
came to the United States soon after the cessation of World War II.
The historic artifacts suggest that the site might date to A.D.
1945.The cultural affiliation of the site is difficult to assess.It
could have resulted from Anglo,Ute,or Navajo farmers,hunters,
ranchers,or passers-though.
42Sa28132
The site is situated on the slope of a finger-ridge,the crest of
which is just to the west (Figure 3).Site 42Sa28132 consists of a
small,prehistoric artifact and rock scatter (Figure 15).The artifacts
include a few items of lithic debitage and several plain gray jar body
sherds.The artifact scatter is primarily concentrated in an area that
measures approximately 15 m in diameter.The site may well be
associated with the early component (possibly Basketmaker III)on
nearby 42Sa6397,which lies just north on the crest of the finger-
ridge.
Considering the exclusion of other pottery types,this small
assemblage tentatively suggests a Basketmaker III occupation of the
site.It is possible that activities conducted in this locus were
associated with the apparent Basketmaker III component at nearby
42Sa6397.Though small,the concentration of cultural materials,which
include artifacts and rock,in this location is likely indicative of
one or more subsurface features.
42Sa28133
The site is located on a small "bench"or flat step,on the slope
of a finger-ridge,the crest of which lies east of the site (Figure 3).
This site consists of a very small scatter of lithic artifacts and
several pieces of sandstone (Figure 16).All items are confined to an
22
42Sa28131 9 2m•••I
site
boundary
/
barbed-wire fence
..-A..~"j~._.._.._
/---------....-
I \
/\
I \
\
I
/
/
-"--...
/
,/
KEY
.+.
S
F
T#
F#;;~
datum
sherd
flake
tool
feature
rock M.Bond,10/25/08
Figure 14.Site 42Sa28131,Survey Map
23
42Sa28132
F
s ..t.
\T1
KEY
..t.datum
S sherd
F flake
T#tool
R rock
Figure 15.Site 42Sa28132,Survey Map
o 10m....I
M.Bond,10/24/08
24
TN
o 2m
'...I
M.Bond,10/25/08
""\
\
)
/
~
/
!~2
(
\
\
~
datum
tool
sandstone rock
KEY
428a28133
Figure 16.Site 42Sa28133,Survey Map
25
area measuring 5 m in diameter.No diagnostic artifacts are present
that might indicate the site's age.
None of the artifacts found on the site is temporally diagnostic.
It is possible that the site represents the locus of a limited activity
site such as a food-processing facility.
42Sa28134
The site occupies the crest of a small finger-ridge that rises
just slightly above the grassy flats of White Mesa (Figure 3).This
site consists of a small scatter of lithic artifacts that measures
about 10 meters in diameter (Figure 17).The artifacts include several
pieces of lithic debitage and two ground stone tools.
Site 42Sa28134 is difficult to assess
association.However,like the other three small
of the project area,this site may represent the
activity site,such as a food-processing feature.
for its temporal
sites in this corner
remains of a limited
26
42Sa28134
TN
o 10 mI...I
KEY
&.datum
F flake
T#tool M.Bond,10/24/08
Figure 17.Site 42Sa28134,Survey Map
27
CHAPTER 2:RESEARCH CONTEXT
This chapter of the testing proposal outlines the potential
directions for research.It does so first by providing a cultural
historical overview of the area.The chapter then discusses previous
archaeological work in the immediate vicinity of the proposed Cell 4B
project area.The chapter concludes with a list of research issues that
test excavations,and later data recovery efforts,might address.
Cultural-Historical Overview
Several current,textbook syntheses of prehistory in the North
American Southwest are widely available,and serve to put the proposed
project into a temporally deep and spatially broad context (e.g.
Cordell 1997;Kantner 2004).Perhaps of more immediate interest are
several overviews that consider southeastern Utah and the encompassing
Mesa Verde region (Hurst 1992;Lipe and others 1999;Rohn 1989).All of
these documents should be consulted for information regarding the broad
patterns of cultural development in the region surrounding the project
area.Additionally,several locally oriented syntheses have been
recently written that cover the culture history of the project area,
including one composed for this project's survey (Till 2009).We
suggest that interested readers refer to these overviews for background
information regarding the culture history in the vicinity of the
project area.As a convenient reference for the general archaeological
patterns through time,we include Table 2.
Previous Archaeological Research in the Proposed Project Area
The White Mesa Mill property (Figure 18;also see Davis and
others 2003:Figure 1)has been the subj ect of varying degrees of
scrutiny by archaeologists in the recent past.Several archaeological
surveys on the property have documented scores of sites on the mill
property (e.g.Berge 1975;Casjens and Seward 1980;Fike and Lindsay
1976;Thompson 1977).Many of these sites have subsequently been tested
and excavated (Agenbroad and others 1981;Berge 1983;Casjens 1980a;
Davis 1985;Lindsay 1978;Nielson 1979;Sargent 1979;Till,in prep.).
Excavated site data on the mill property are reported here in Table 3.
The importance of these data is not to be trivialized-this data set
constitutes one of the larger bodies of excavated site data in the Four
Corners region,and has the great potential to inform archaeological
research in ways that right-of-way projects cannot.
A relatively recent Class·I inventory of this material by Davis
and others (2003)summarizes some of the gross survey data generated by
these earlier efforts.Their summary indicates that the highest
proportion of components documented on White Mesa date to the Pueblo II
period (32%),followed by Pueblo I period components (24%),Pueblo III
period components (15%),and Basketmaker III period components (14%)
(Davis and others 2003:Table 2).
While preparing the survey report for this project,we compiled a
site database that considered temporal components and functions (Till
2009:15-18).Using this database,Tables 4 and 5 illustrate the
frequencies of components and how these components cross-tabulate with
Table 2.Archaeological Chronology ofthe Four Corners Region,by Year and Pecos Classification Periods*
Dates Periods Distinctive Characteristics
AD 1300 to 1600 Pueblo IV Large plaza-oriented pueblos in Rio Grande and Western Pueblo areas;low kiva to room ratio;kachina cult widespread;corrugated
replaced by plain utility types;B/w pottery declines relative glaze ware types.
AD 1150 to 1300 Pueblo III ,Also known as the "great pueblo"period;large pueblos;high kiva to room ratios;cliff dwellings;towers;triwalls;corrugated gray and
elaborate B/w pottery,plus red ororange pottery in some areas;abandonment of the Four Corners region by 1300.
Also associated with the "Chaco phenomenon,"which refers to an apparent general settlement pattern consisting ofa community
AD 900 to 1150 Pueblo II center and dispersed households or "unit pueblos."A community center will include some configuration a great house,great kiva,
bermed middens,and roads;unit pueblos are composed ofa kiva and a surface masonry roomblock;corrugated gray ware
becomes the predominant cooking pottery.
AD 750 to 900 Pueblo I Large villages in some areas;habitations consist ofa "protokiva"(i.e.pithouse)plus surface roomblock ofjacal or simple masonry;
great kivas;cooking pottery is dominated by neckbanded gray ware;initial development and use of red ware pottery.
Habitation is formal pithouse with surface storage pits,cists,or rooms;dispersed settlement with occasional small villages;
AD 500 to 750 Basketmaker III occasional great kivas;development offirst true cooking pottery,which is "plain gray";bow and arrow generally replaces the atlatl;
beans added to cultigens.
Habitation is shallow pithouse plus storage pits or cists;dispersed settlement with small low density villages in some areas;pottery,
AD 50 to 500 Basketmaker II (late)ifpresent,is a self-tempered "mud ware";atlatl and dart;corn and squash by no beans;upland dry-farming in addition to floodplain
farming.
1500 BC to AD 50 Basketmaker II (early)Long-term seasonal use ofcaves for camping,storage,and burial;camp and limited activity sites in open;no pottery;atlatl and dart;
corn and squash;cultivation may be primarily floodplain or run-off based.
6500 BC to 1500 BC Archaic Subsistence based on wild foods;high residential mobility;low population density;shelters and open sites;altat!and dart.
pre-6500 BC Paleolndian Subsistence based on wild foods,but with a focus on large game animals,many ofwhich are now extinct;high residential mobility;
low population density;distinctive spear and/or dart points;no apparent ground stone technology.
*Adapted from Lipe (1994)
N
00
29
SCALE 1:24000
Contour Interval 40 feet
7659/16260
16259/22120
3775/8703
22116
Figure 18.White Mesa Mill Site Map showing location ofarchaeological sites (After Davis
and others 2003).
30
Table 3.Excavated Site Data,White Mesa Mill ._...---Site Number Site Name Excavation Status Component Possible Function Company Allthor (Date)1--...
42Sa6396 Excavated BMIII Habitation Abajo Archaeology Davis (1985)PII Habitation ..-
~403 Excavated BMIII Seasonal Habitation Abajo Archaeology Davis (1985)
42Sa6757 Excavated BMIII Habitation Abajo Archae().logy Davis (1985)
42Sa8014 Excavated PI Seasonal Habitation Abajo Archaeology.Davis (1985)--42Sa9937 Aromatic Village Excavated early PII Habitation BYUlCRMS Talbot and others (1982)
42Sa7754 Three Meter Isle Excavated early to middle PII Habitation Antiquities Section Casjens (1980)
;"".'I2Sa6385 Radon Ridge Excavated PII Habitation Antiquities Section Casjens t1980)...
42Sa6437 Proton Point Excavated Pili Habitation Antiquities Section Casjens (1980)1---
42Sa6388 Half-Life house Excavated ~PI Habitation _...-Antiquities Section Casjens (1980)PII Limited Activity
~6387 Isotope Slope Excavated PII Possible Habitation Antiquities Section Casjens (1980)
42Sa6697 Reactor Ridge Excavated early PI Habitation Antiquities Section Casjens (1980)PII Limited Activity/Burial
42Sa6386 J/Psi Point Excavated early PI Habitation Antiquities Section Casjens (1980)
42Sa6686 Plasma Point Excavated PI Habitation Antiquities Section Casjens (1980)
42Sa6436 Tailings Terrace Excavated PI Habitation Antiquities Section Casjens (1980)early PII .Limited Activity
1--4:2Sa6435 Alpha House Excavated early to middle PII Habitation Antiquities Section Casjens (1980)
42Sa6404 Barium Bottoms Excavated PI Limited Activity Antiquities Section Casjens (1980)PII Limited Activity
42Sa6383 Tested PI Unknown Antiquities Section Casjens (1980)
42Sa6685 Tested PII-PIII Limited Activity Antiquities Section Casjens (1980)--42Sa7753 Tested early PI Limited Activity Antiquities Section Casjens (1980)
42Sa7870 Tested early PI Unknown Antiquities Section Casjens (1980)
42Sa8015 Tested PII-PIII Unknown Antiquities Section Casjens (1980)
42Sa8017 Tested BMIII-PIIi Limited Activity Antiquities Section Casjens.(1980)--
42Sa6382 Tested early PI Unknown Antiquities Section Casjens (1980)PII Unknown
42Sa6381 Excavated middle Pili Seasonal Habitation Plano f\genbroad and others (1981)
42Sa6698 Excavated BMIII Habitation Plano Agenbroad and others (1981)1----PII Seasonal Habitation
42Sa6420 Tested PI Unknown Plano Agenbroad and others (1981)PII Unknown
42Sa6384 Excavated BMIII Habitation Antiquities Section Sargent (1979)
42Sa27732 Excavated late Pili Habitation Abaio Archaeology Till (in prep.)
31
function.Table 4 generally mirrors the results obtained by Davis and
others (2003),indicating that Pueblo II period sites are the most
prevalent,followed in frequency by Pueblo I,Basketmaker III,and
Pueblo III periods sites.However,it also suggests that many of these
sites were in use during important "transitional"times between the
highly generalized Pecos periods.Thus,under scrutiny,many of the
sites may derive from the late Basketmaker III/early Pueblo I and late
Pueblo I/early Pueblo II transitions.
Table 5 may indicate an important trend in settlement strategy as
it is correlated with time.Very tentatively,it appears as though
there is a 2:1 ratio of habitation sites to limited activity sites for
the Basketmaker III,Pueblo II,and Pueblo III periods.In contrast,
there is a 1:1 ratio of these site types in the Pueblo I period.
However,Table 5 shows that the sample size of pure Pueblo I period
sites is fairly small relative to the less-defined "PI to PII"range of
sites.A greater understanding of the chronology of these sites may
have significant bearing on understanding changing settlement patterns
through time.These changes may indicate significantly different
strategies for inhabiting and using the mesa's interior,which in turn,
may have significant implications for social structure and strategy as
they are correlated with larger historical trends in Puebloan history.
Toward a Consideration of Research Issues
Table 6 presents a summary of previous research designs developed
for data recovery projects on White Mesa.The research themes shown in
Table 6 suggest a set of research domains that may be appropriate for a
larger research program associated with the Cell 4B project.Such
research domains might include:environment and subsistence,
chronology,settlement,social organization,and technology.Each of
these is briefly described below.We include these only as suggestions
for future mitigation work on the property.
The domain "environment and subsistence"would recognize the
close relationship between environmental variables,such as climate and
soils,and subsistence data,which would include a variety of data
sources (e.g.archaebotanical data,food production technology and
strategies,and food residues).Historic settlement data may also be
very informative when considering such a research domain.
"Chronology"explicates the nature of the data that help
archaeologists discern the occupation and use of the White Mesa
landscape through time.Absolute dating techniques such as
dendrochronology may yield ideal and precise measures of time.However,
relative dating techniques such as pottery assemblage dating may also
provide very useful information.To this end,we suggest that some of
our concerns may be "instrumental"in nature:the improvement of our
capacity to use such relative means as pottery typologies may be one of
the goals of research associated with the project.Furthermore,in
addition to "when"a site was occupied,a question under the chronology
research domain may ask "how long"a site was occupied.
"Settlement"issues may address site-specific questions,local
site distribution problems,and region-wide issues that address large-
scale abandonment and resettlement.We suggest that all scales of such
32
Table 4.Site Components by Count and Percent,
White Mesa Mill
1---.----.--..
Period N %f----......---.~.._...-
Archaic 2 0.8-~---
Late Archaic to BMII 2 0.8..._.
BMIII 14 5.81-.
BMlII to PI 24 10.0
PI 17 7.1
f------.-._._-
PI to PII 30 12.4_.
PII 35 14.5.--
PII to PIlI 33 13.7._--
PIII 11 4.6f.....-.----
BMIII to PII 8 3.3._---
PI to PIII 8 3.3._-
BMIII to PIII 5 2.1
Pueblo,not further specified 2 0.8..-
Unknown Aboriginal 42 17.4...-
Historic,not further specified 5 2.1..-
Historic Navajo 1 0.4..-
Historic Ute 1 0.4_..-
Historic Anglo 1 0.4.-
TOTAL 241 100.0
33
Table 5.Site Components by Possible Function,White Mesa Mill--
~0
·rl
+J >,
<U +J+J ·rl-rl ?"tJ..Q ·rl Q)
<U +J ..Q TOTALPeriod~:r::0 ·rl
0 FJ;H·rl rl 0
+J <U "tJ >,~(j)
<U ~Q)H >,~Q)
+J 0 +J <U H 0 0·rl (j)0.·rl ~H ~..Q <U S S <U <U ~+J
<U Q)<U ·rl H ::l ~0:r::(/]u H (9 a p z----
N %N %N %N %N %N %N %N %N %
Archaic 2 100.0 2 100.0--
Late Archaic to BMII 2 100.0 2 100.0
BMIIl 9 64.3 1 7.1 4 28.6 14 100.0_.f--~...
BMIlI to PI 20 83.3 4 16.7 24 100.0---PI 8 47.1 1 5.9 8 47.1 17 100.0----f----PI to PII 27 90.0 1 3.3 2 6.7 30 100.0---_.._.
PII 23 65.7 1 2.9 9 25.7 1 2.9 1 2.9 35 100.0--.---PII to PIIl 28 84.8 4 12.1 1 3.0 33 100.0---f--1-----PIlI 7 63.6 4 36.4 11 100.0---BMIIl to PII 6 75.0 2 25.0 8 100.0
PI to PIIl 7 87.5 1 12.5 8 100.0--BMIII to PIII 4 80.0 1 20.0 5 100.0--
Pueblo,not further specified 2 100.0 2 100.0.-
Unknown Aboriginal 4 9.5 3 7.1 20 47.6 4 9.5 1 2.4 10 23.8 42 100.0------
Historic,not further specified 2 40.0 1 20.0 2 40.0 5 100.0--
Historic Navajo 1 100.0 1 100.0--Historic Ute 1 100.0 1 100.0---
Historic Anglo 1 100.0 1 100.0
TOTAL 143 59.3 3 1.2 9 3.7 65 27.0 6 2.5 2 0.8 11 4.6 2 0.8 241 100.0
34
_Table 6.Research Problems/HYP.2!heses Developed for Excavation Projects Near the White Mesa Mill
~.__-----.---Da'>'isi198511 ..---1 Subsistence and settlement practices vary through time on White Mesa:._____.__.._-
2 Site function differs across White Mesa.
3 'Habitation struCtures and otherfeatures have functionally distinct areas within them.-
4 The archaeological record reflects the socio-behavioral processes through which prehistoricGommunities
5 were organized.-----Evidence for trade and other relations with foreign cultural groups exists on White Mesa.---
6 Although White Mesa pottery is of the Mesa Verde ceramic tradition,most of the pottery made on White
Mesa was locally made.e-..
The quality oflithic craftsmanship is governed by the material utilized,not by the technology ofthe7__~er:.._._______
8 There were paleoenvironmental/climatic shifts during the Anasazi occupation on White Mesa..___
--._------
I----c----..._.Casiens (198.~___..
1 Natural climatic conditions changed through time.-.._.+J::lLlman habitation affected the natural environment...
Although limited,Pre-Basketmaker III occupation occurred inthe White Mesa area.
4 The relative amounts ofcultigens,weedy plants and wild foods varied through time,and correlated with
environmental change and technology.
5 The population curve variedas environment (carrying capacity)varied and as economic technology was
adapted to varying climatic conditions.
Periods of higher population density show either a diversity in site types and settlement patterns as more
6 niches were exploited,or a more specialized adaptation as greater reliance was placed on one resource.
!--=--.7 Some sites were seasonally or intermittently inhabited.--8 Sites were located near important economic resources.--r-g Sites of differenttypes were inhabited at the same time._..____
Much ofthe activity took place in "use areas"outside ofthe structures;such activities might include
10 cooking and roasting,eating,food preparation (grinding and butchering),stone tool fabrication and
sharpening,and pottery making...-
11 Dates of pottery styles and architectural styles do not agree exactly with Mesa Verde dates for these
'12~tyles..--
Changes in architecture (room types)and site layout reflect changesjn community organization.
13 Local quarries orsources supply most necessary materials for tools and pottery..-
14 While the inhabitants were largely self-sufficient,they were part of a much larger trading sphere in which
exotic materials were distributed.
15 The White Mesa inhabitants had trading and possibly other (ideological)relationships with large sites
,_cI1_earby...-
I_~Firor,Greubel,and Reed (1998)3
1 Cultural affiliation and chronology-suggests the possibility offormulating a phase-based system for
White Mesa.
2 Site structure-primarily concerned with the identification of how differentareas were used within a given
site.
3 Site function-determines the primary function ofa site,presumablya determination that could be of use
at the wider landscape level.
~.Subsistence-seemsto simply propose to examine the subsistence data gleaned from the site.
5 Settlement patterns-seems primarily concerned with issues of"mobility and scheduling,"and implicitly
tackles the issue of "site typology"(which gets backto "site function"above.
6 Social organization-appears to be mostly concerned with "residential organization"or the "composition of
groups occupying any unit ofspace"(I.e.activity area,household,community,etc.).
Technology-takes an inductive approach (i.e.generate data,then look for informative patterns);also
7 chooses to focus on lithic technology and correlate it with site type and time period.For the latter,Alpine
actually generates a few hypotheses:1)lithic artifact assemblage signatures will vary between field
houses and residences and 2)BM assemblages will differ considerably from Pueblo.
8 Extra-regional relationships-Alpine poses this basic hypothesis:evidence for long-distance trade will
tend to have been with otherAnasazi groups,not Fremont.
9 Seasonality-inductive,instrumental research (I.e.important for settlement/subsistence research
domains,so will look for data in architecture,floral,and faunal data).
1The research design in Davis (1985:29-33)presented as a "list ofresearch problems."These are reproduced
here,verbatim.These problems are essentially hypotheses,and are presented with expectations ifthey are
true...-
2Casjens (1980:44-64)produced a set of hypotheses that are repeated verbatim above.These statements are
followed by "tests"that outline how the hypotheses should be addressed.
3Firor and others (1998:14-22)list a set of"problem domains."The commentary following each heading is our
understanding ofhow the particular problem domain was to be approached by Alpine's research.For the most
part,few hypotheses were actually presented.
35
a research domain will need to be addressed by the Cell 4B proj ect,
though not for each individual site.
Similarly,"social organizationU will operate to cover issues
that are site-specific as well as trends that are regional.Such a
domain might encompass questions that grapple with demographics,but
may also address the esoteric concerns of problems that delve into
ideology.
"TechnologicalU concerns will address detailed examinations and
analyses of features and artifacts that heretofore have been
understudied or perhaps not studied at all.These problems will not be
addressed simply for the sake that they are there;rather,such studies
will only be proposed if they are pertinent to addressing other domains
in the proposed research design.
Finally,in anticipation of the data recovery proj ect on the
White Mesa Mill property,we want to underscore our belief that a good
mitigation program will include a strong educational component.To that
end,and to the extent that we can,Abajo Archaeology will propose a
public component that may include such efforts as a project web site or
blog,a museum exhibit at Blanding's Edge of the Cedars Museum,a
series of public presentations,and perhaps some activities with local
avocational groups that involve artifact processing and/or analysis.
36
CHAPTER 3:TESTING METHODOLOGY
This chapter serves to cover a wide range of subjects,all of
which are pertinent to the subject of how Abajo Archaeology will
conduct archaeological testing on sites found within the proposed Cell
4B proj ect area.Chapter 3 first describes the theoretical framework
under which Abaj 0 Archaeology will approach this testing program.The
chapter then describes the general procedures that will be used to
investigate the sites,as well as Abajo's response to human burials.
Site-specific testing procedures,described by individual site,are
then proposed.Following this discussion,we propose methods for off-
site blading.The chapter then turns to the analysis of artifacts (e.g.
pottery and lithic materials)and ecofacts (e.g.animal bone and pollen
and macrobotanical samples),and the methods and techniques used to
catalog and analyze these items.A brief section of the curatorial
techniques and arrangements precedes the final section,which outlines
a time-table for Abajo Archaeology's proposed testing program.
Theoretical Orientation
The basic theoretical orientation that underlies the
archaeological testing efforts for this proj ect can be described as
scientific.We affiliate our efforts with the over-arching field of
North American anthropology,and follow a processual archaeology
approach to our field work,laboratory research,and reporting (sensu
Binford 1962;Cordell 1994).Attributes of this approach include an
expectation of explanation for observed patterns in the archaeological
record,an assumption that archaeological materials represent elements
of the prehistoric society that created these materials,and that these
social elements are interrelated and compose the social whole.
Considering the whole as a system,a change in one or more elements
results in the patterned and predictable change in other elements.
Having said this,we recognize that most of the results of our
test excavations will be of limited scientific value,at least in terms
of explanation.Rather,these same results will be used to create,at a
later date,a research design for future data recovery (i.e.
excavation)efforts at these sites.
General Testing Procedures
To the end of preparing this proposal,Abajo Archaeology first
generated base-line maps for each site.After obtaining permission from
the landowner,fieldwork to create these maps was done from July 27
through August 12,2009.The work was done under the supervision of
archaeologists Jonathan Till and Mark Bond;Till and Bond were assisted
by Vaughn Hadenfeldt and Lois Young.As each base-line map was created,
the field crew established a 4-meter metric grid on each site.Wooden
grid stakes were placed along one or more cardinal axes within the
site.Each base-line map will be used to guide,control,and report
test excavations on the site being investigated.Further,these grids
will be useful in later data recovery efforts.
The 4-meter grid on each site will also assist archaeologists in
their efforts to provenience artifacts and ecofacts from the site in
37
question.Abajo Archaeology will use a provenience system derived from
the Dolores Archaeological Project (Wilshusen and others 2000)and Crow
Canyon Archaeological Center (2001).This system is widely used in the
Mesa Verde region;the use of the provenience system in this context
will help make this body of data comparable with a much larger data set
within the area.The system basically assigns a unique number,a
"provenience designation"or "PO,"to a specific horizontal and
vertical context on a site.Artifacts and features that are found in
that context are documented in association with that particular number.
Artifact processing and cataloging procedures are discussed further in
another section of this chapter.
Several techniques,varying in intensity and destructiveness,
will be used to conduct subsurface test investigations.The techniques
may include auger probes,shovel probes,small test trenches that
measure no more than 1 square meter in area,backhoe trenches,and even
road maintainer scrapes.With a few exceptions,the general order of
testing activities on each site will be:1)auger/shovel probes;2)
test unit and,when called for,backhoe excavation;3)road maintainer
scrapes.These activities are described below.
Most sites will be tested with auger probes.This excavation
technique will use an auger bit measuring 8 inches in diameter.The
augers themselves may be hand-tools or power-tools (i.e.gas-powered
augers)Auger probes will be excavated at two-meter intervals.We
suggest that field archaeologists may occasionally decide to excavate
shovel probes,in lieu of the more narrow-diameter auger probes,to
better identify the presence or absence of cultural deposits.Data that
will be recorded for each auger and/or shovel probe include
observations of sediment texture,color,the presence and/or absence of
cultural materials,and the nature of other inclusions in the sediment.
When possible,archaeologists will note the depths at which soil
changes occur.Fill from auger and shovel probe excavations will be
screened through ~-inch mesh.All artifacts retrieved from auger and
shovel probes will be provenienced according to their individual auger
or shovel probe,but no vertical subdivision will be made in this
provenience (provenience methodology is described at the end of this
section).These artifacts will be collected for cataloging and,at
later dates,analysis and curation.The frequencies of artifacts
retrieved from these probes and other test excavations will help
archaeologists generate estimates for the anticipated amounts of
artifacts from these sites.This knowledge will in turn be used to
determine how much time will be needed for particular analysis tasks,
and what down-the-line curation needs may be anticipated.Upon their
completion,auger and shovel probes will be backfilled for reasons of
safety.
Several sites have middens and/or artifact concentrations that
may represent formal trash deposits.In a few instances,architecture
is indicated by the presence of jacal fragments on the surface.In the
cases where formal trash deposits or architectural remnants are
indicated,we propose the emplacement of hand-excavated test units.
Data from these units will help archaeologists understand the nature
and extent of these deposits.
meter
Hand-excavated test units will measure no more than
in area.Such excavations will be conducted full-cut,
1 square
i.e.,with
38
no vertical subdivision.The fill from the test units will be screened
through ~-inch mesh.Like auger and shovel probes,cultural materials
will be collected and provenienced with their associated test units.
Again,data pertinent to the stratigraphy observed in each test unit
will be recorded.In those instances where cultural stratigraphy is
noted,one or more profiles will be drawn and photographed.
We also recommend that during testing archaeologists have the
discretion to hand-excavate occasional test units to better identify
cultural features or stratigraphy discovered in auger probes.Test
units are not specified for 42Sa28128,42Sa28129,42Sa28130,42Sa28132,
and 42Sa28134;we suggest that one test unit be allowed to investigate
and characterize the sediments at each of these sites.
The general locations of subsurface features discovered by hand-
or auger-excavated means will be delineated with pin flags.We propose
that flagging be done particularly on those sites slated for scraping
with a road maintainer.
When used,the road maintainer will systematically scrape
sediments from the surfaces of sites,or in areas immediately
surrounding sites,to remove plow zone sediments that can obscure
subsurface feature outlines.The depths for road maintainer scrapes can
be finely adjusted to suit the context.We recommend that in any given
pass of a road maintainer over an area,that the amount of fill removed
will not exceed 10 cm.Indeed,in many situations,a scraping "pass"
will probably not exceed 5 cm.At all times,an archaeologist will
monitor the road maintainer's activities.Artifacts observed in scraped
fill or back-dirt,and not in the context of an archaeological feature,
will be retrieved and provenienced with a general,sub-surface PD
(provenience designation)number established for that particular site.
When subsurface features are located,scraping will cease in that
location.Artifacts retrieved in association with the feature will be
assigned a general PO for that particular feature.Relatively small
features,such as hearths,will be tested for depth with a soil
probe/auger (which will not exceed 1 in.in diameter).Other features
may be subject to the use of a judgmental,hand-excavated unit to test
for integrity and extent.Sites to be scraped with a road maintainer
are explicitly noted in Table 6 and in the section on Site-specific
Testing below.
Abaj 0 Archaeology proposes the initial use of a road maintainer
at the two previously investigated sites,42Sa6757 and 42Sa8014.With
the exception of 42Sa6757 and 42Sa8014,road maintainers will only be
used after a site has been investigated with all other testing
techniques outlined above.With the exception of 42Sa6757 and 42Sa8014,
a surface collection of all artifacts in those gridded portions of the
site to be scraped will be made;these artifacts will be provenienced
according to their location within the 4-m grid established on the
sites.Again,a monitoring archaeologist will be present whenever a
road maintainer is used.
We also propose the use of a backhoe at several sites to re-open
backhoe trenches that had been previously excavated by the Antiquities
Section to test the sites.An archaeologist will be present to monitor
all backhoe excavations.The details of these activities are discussed
39
below in the Site-specific Testing section.We do note that any
artifacts observed in the course of these particular excavations will
be collected,but assigned only a general provenience.For backhoe
work,this provenience will be according to the particular trench;for
road maintainer work,only a "general site"provenience will be
assigned unless the artifact(s)is associated with a specific feature.
Before concluding this section,we should discuss our approach to
human remains.Previous research at prehistoric sites on White Mesa
have documented a moderate number of human burials (e.g.Casjens 1980;
Davis 1985;Firor and others 1998).In the event that human remains are
encountered,excavators will treat the remains with sensitivity and
respect in the spirit of the Native American Graves Protection and
Repatriation Act (NAGPRA).If human burials are encountered,Abajo
archaeologists will cease excavation in the vicinity of the remains and
contact the San Juan County Sheriff and Medical Examiner,as well as
the Division of State History.
Site-specific Testing
This section details the testing procedures that we propose for
the sites in the Cell 4B project area.Six of the 14 sites were
previously recorded,tested,and were determined to contain significant
deposits.Two of these sites,42Sa6757 and 42Sa8014,were subjected to
data recovery efforts (Davis 1985).We will recommend that the surfaces
of these two sites be bladed to determine the presence and/or extent of
subsurface architectural elements that may have been missed by previous
excavation work.The four other sites,42Sa6391,42Sa6393, 42Sa6397,
and 42Sa6431 were tested and determined to contain significant
deposits;however,the data gathered from these sites are insufficient
to determine the number of subsurface features,the depth of midden
deposits,and the frequencies of artifacts within particular
assemblages.We believe that the immediate on-site activities that we
propose for these four sites are relatively low-impacting,but will
provide us with the information we need to produce a research design
for data recovery.
The remaining sites in the project area,including 42Sa6392 and
42Sa28128 through 42Sa28134,have not been tested for significance or
extent.Given the depth of sediments and previous excavations on the
larger White Mesa Mill property (e.g.Casjens 1980;Davis 1985),it
seems likely that all of these sites will harbor significant deposits
even if at relatively minimal levels.For this reason,the testing
program that we propose for these sites will simultaneously consider
significance and extent,and will require a degree of reflexivity to
respond to the presence of subsurface features if such are discovered.
Table 7 summarizes the testing activities proposed on all 14
sites within the Cell 4B project area.
42Sa6391
and Nielson (1979)conducted test excavations
and 20 illustrate the locations of their
Trenches A and D.Both trenches documented
Both Dykman (1978)
at 42Sa6391.Figures 19
backhoe trench excavations,
Table 7.Proposed testing activities for sites in the Cell 48 project area
Site Previously tested?Number of Number of Number of backhoe trenches
auger probes test units to be re-excavated Surface-scraping on site?
42Sa6391 yes 114 1 Scraping may occur outside auger-probe
area.
42Sa63921 no 34 2 Scraping may occur outside auger-probe
area.
42Sa6393 yes 135 3 3 Scraping may occur outside auger-probe
area.Midden areas will be avoided.
42Sa6397 yes 105 2 ,Scraping may occur outside auger-probe
area.
42Sa6431 yes 204 3 4 Scraping may occur outside auger-probe
area.Midden area(s)will be avoided.
42Sa6757 yes That portion of the site that is north of the
midden area should be scraped.
42Sa8014 yes The entire surface ofthe site should be
42Sa28128
scraped.
no 95 Probable.
42Sa28129 no 84 Probable.
42Sa28130 no 89 Probable.
42Sa28131 no 38 1 Probable.
42Sa28132 no 57 Probable.
Probable.
42Sa28133 no 42 2
42Sa28134 no 73 Probable.
TOTALS 1070 14 7
+:-o
.j>
f-'
--------"
\~--~~
~
~
~~~------~
~
cist
pit structU~\",1 /\;
Trench A ;:;"__/\~~
.t./~J --artifact trati~
\concenTrEmc~D pit structure""
42Sa6391
T}
"I \I I cultural feature
\ I
,/
KEY
.t.pipe datum
o 10mIe..I
Redrawn from Nielson (1979:Figure 7)
Figure 19.Site 42Sa6391,Antiquities Section Testing Map
42
428a6391
•128N
124E
o rT
5m
".,....~
Contour interval is 25 cm
a
•128N
100E
-25
-50
-75-100
---...---~'\/
\
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-125 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ·
0 0 0 0 0 j
0 0 0 0 0 I·
11 p;;;nr",,,,"(t,,",,9,,",'1 0 0 0 0 0 0
100N@ 0 0 @ 0 @ 0 @ 0 ~~@ 100N.OOE·32E
\-collector
0 0 0 0 0 pile
@ 0 0 0 0 /a
0 0 0 0
\@ 0 0 0 0 /
0 0 0 0 0 /~-25
~/
~.---KEY -5011sitedatum
grid stake
76N .76N ·D 100E 124E -75
proposed test unit
0 proposed auger probe
@ stake and auger probe -100
M"""""""""",,previous test trench
-125 Till,Bond,and Young
8/3/09
Figure 20.Site 42Sa6391,Proposed Testing Activities Map
43
evidence of pit structures,which are illustrated in Figures 21 and 22.
Both backhoe trenches were evidently backfilled.
Testing activities proposed for 42Sa6391 will primarily consist
of the excavation of auger probes.Figure 20 shows the proposed
placement of auger probes on the site.We also recommend the excavation
of a single 1-by I-m test unit in the location of the highest artifact
density on the site,which is just south of the pit structures exposed
in the test trenches (Figure 20).While the surface signature of these
materials do not necessarily indicate that a midden is present in this
location,it is quite possible that the site's surface has been
collected-a nearby collectors'pile demonstrates that such activities
may have occurred on the site.
After the excavation of the shovel probes and test unit,we
recommend the use of a road maintainer to strip the surface sediments
in the area immediately outside that portion of the site that had been
augered,and perhaps including the two north-most rows of auger probes.
42Sa6392
As noted earlier,test excavations have previously occurred under
this number;however,the site number was misapplied,and instead used
in association with the location that is actually 42Sa6431.The salient
point here is that 42Sa6392 was never actually tested.
We propose that testing activities include the excavation of both
auger probes and two small test units.We suggest the excavation of a
0.5-by 2.0-m test unit in the location of Feature 1 to better describe
its nature and extent as a cultural feature.We also recommend
excavation of a 1-by I-m test unit in a small area of relatively high
artifact density.The proposed locations of these test excavations are
presented in Figure 23.
Upon the conclusion of these excavations we recommend the use of
a road maintainer to strip the surface sediments in the area
immediately outside that portion of the site that had been augered.
42Sa6393
The Antiquities Section conducted excavations at this site in
1978 (Dykman 1978b;Nielson 1979).The reports from these excavations
indicate that two backhoe trenches were excavated on the site.When the
site was documented for this project's survey report,two trenches were
apparent.However,archaeologists preparing the site's base-line map
for this proposal observed the faint remains of what appears to be a
third,backfilled trench.Figures 6 and 24 illustrate the location of
these trenches.Nielson states that one pit structure was located in
Trench C (Figure 25);however,it is not apparent which of the three
trenches is Trench C.Neither trench appears to have been backfilled,
and both appear to have since filled with slumped sediments.
We
sediments
recommend that a
to determine the
backhoe be used
exact location
to remove
of the pit
these slumped
structure.An
42Sa6391
Trench A Profile
South Wall
o
lid
storage cist
Mancos
Corrugated jar
~/
base of trench
1m
ash/ens
eb pit structure ~
----------/
base of trench
Redrawn from Lindsay (1978:Figure 21)
-P--P-
Figure 21.Site 42Sa6391,Trench A Profile
42Sa6391
Trench 0,South Wall Profile
1
~pit structure outline ---------
.p-
V1
possible
bench top
2
possible
bench top
4
3
KEY
1 Plow zone
2 Fill
3 Mixed sand and caliche
4 Caliche
a
r
1 m
Redrawn from Nielson (1979:Figure 10)
Figure 22.Site 42Sa6391,Trench D Profile
46
42Sa6392
fT
Contour interval is 25 m
•140N
100E
\
/"""\)0 0 0 0 0 0
Feat re 1
I 120N @ @ /~~/@ I •120N.84E I \124E
I A I
\\I
"-/I0000000
\-
\
/\
0 0 0 0 {\0
\I
-125 \/"-.-/""0 0 0 0-100
-75
KEY
A datum -2 /---"'"artifact concentration 100N ----,100E •
grid stake
0 proposed auger probe
+50
@ stake and auger probe 0 +25 +75
+100 +125 +150
0 proposed test unit Till,Bond,Hadenfeldt,and Young
8/4/09
Figure 23.Site 42Sa6392,Proposed Testing Activities Map
47
.100N
168E
artifact
scatter
boundary
/
/~84N •144E ___-
\
\
\
I
I
J
I
'/...
----
sheet midden
oooooooo@
0000000000
o 0 0 0 0 0 0 @ 0
o
\100N
100E
I
\
\
\
\,·,"
\
\
\
I
• 0 0 0 0 I~~~~~~~~~~~~~o 0 0 0 Ie
•000 0
o 0 0 0
•0 ,0..-0-~O
......0 0 0 0 0...
/e 0 0 0 0 0
/ 0 0 0 0 0
I •0 0 a lEEl~~~~B&l]
• 0 0 0 0
o
I
428a6393
fT
KEY
i1
o
100N.
80E
o proposed te unit
k<"';!D!,'!!previous test tre h
~trench fill berm
Till,Young,Hadenfeldt,and Bond
7/31/09
Figure 24.Site 42Sa6393,Proposed Testing Activities Map
428a6393
Trench C Profile
North Wall
3
KEY
1 Plow zone sediments
2 Structure fill
3 Sterile sediments
4 Rodent burrow sediments
1
2
3
a
[
4 3
2m
.p-
ee
Redrawn from Nielson (1979:Figure 8)
Note:Recorded by Nielson as 42Sa6391
Figure 25.Site 42Sa6393,Trench C Profile
49
archaeologist will monitor the removal of the old trench fill.Figure
25 shows the locations of the proposed auger probes.
We recommend the use of a road maintainer to surface-scrape the
areas outside the gridded portion of the site,but only after other
testing activities have already occurred.
42Sa6397
As noted earlier,this site was misidentified as 42Sa6393,and
was tested with that number (Dykman 1978b).The Antiquities Section
excavated seven backhoe trenches on the site (Figures 7 and 26).Two of
the trenches documented two possible storage features.All of these
trenches have been backfilled.
We recommend the excavation of auger probes and a small test unit
on the site.The test unit,measuring a.5-by 2.a-m,will be placed
over Feature 1,a concentration of jacal.We also recommend that
intensive,1-by 1-m grids of auger probes be placed over AC-l and AC-
2,both of which are artifact concentrations.Figure 27 illustrates the
proposed testing strategy for 42Sa6397.
If no features are located through the above measures,we
recommend the use of a road maintainer to scrape the surface of the
site,except in those locations where the possible storage features had
been found.However,prior to surface-scraping,surface artifacts will
be collected according to their 4-by 4-m grid locations.
42Sa6431
As noted earlier,this site was tested by the Antiquities Section
under the mistaken designation of 42Sa6392.At least two sessions of
testing are apparent for the site,though at the time of this writing
only one document recording testing activities has been found (Nielson
1979).The first set of archaeological testing activities involved the
placement of nine test trenches (Figure 28).These trenches were
excavated by hand,backhoe,or some combination thereof.These
excavations located three features:a hearth,a burial,and a lens of
charcoal and daub.Cultural materials collected include 39 Chapin Gray
and Plain Gray pottery sherds,an assemblage that is indicative of the
Basketmaker III period.
The trenches and/or units that Nielson excavated in July of 1978
are now practically impossible to discern.These excavations were
apparently backfilled-a few alignments were barely detectable by the
differential desiccation of cheatgrass.Relocation of the trenches was
made even more difficult by the fact that at least one other set of
backhoe trenches were excavated on the site,evidently after Nielson's
initial testing efforts.
This second testing event,which apparently involved the
excavation of seven backhoe trenches,is readily apparent on the site.
As is the case with 42Sa6393,these trenches were not backfilled and
are accompanied by parallel berms of backdirt (Figures 8 and 29).These
features are still readily apparent on the site's surface,but have
50
428a6397
(Recorded as 428a6393 by Dykman (1978)
Trench F
Trench E /
Trench G
o T}10m
••=--r=-._====:jl
"-......_--.....
Pit 2
A datum
""/
/
/
/
artifact c ncentration
Pit 1
Trench
Trench A
Redrawn from Dykman (1978:Figure 24)
Figure 26.Site 428a6397,Antiquities Section Testing Map
51
artifact
scatter
boundary
o rT
5m
~-.....,
Contour interval is 25 em
/
\
/
0
KEY
b.datum
gridstake
\0 proposed augerprobe
@ stake and augerprobe
\=proposedtest unit
previous backhoe trench
\
\
\
\
•100N
140E
2._0 .....0 0
/",
0/0 0 0 \0
I =~jaCalf00 I 0 .I concentration
~0 0 10,,,/
_.9_-0 0 0
•180N
124E
/
/
/
+50
+50
428a6397
/.0 0 0 0 0 0 @
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 @
0 0 0 0 0 0
/b.
@ 0 @ 0 @
0 0 0 0 0-25
I 0 0 0 0
I %
"1 0 0 0 0 0 0 @
:%
\
\
"
"""-...
.............---
100N .100E
Till,Hadenfeldt,and Young
7/30109
Figure 27.Site 42Sa6397,Proposed Testing Activities Map
52
42Sa6431
(Recorded as 42Sa6392 by Nielson (1979))/
o 10 m
.MM I
Tench G
Trench
Trench A
,"~zct concentration
>nchD
Trench H
Redrawn from Nielson (1979:Figure 13)
Figure 28.Site 42Sa6431,Antiquities Section Testing Map
53
filled in considerably to the point where the stratigraphic profiles
are no longer discernable.
Due to the lack of reported information on this second set of
trenches,we propose that a backhoe be used to remove the fill of these
trenches so that the profiles might be examined again (those trenches
illustrated in Figure 29).We recommend that an archaeologist be
present while the trenches are re-excavated.After the trenches have
been opened,the profiles of each will be examined.If significant
cultural deposits are observed,at least one profile of the trench will
be drawn.No screening of the fill will occur;however,any artifacts
observed will be collected and documented in association with the
particular trench of origin.
We also recommend the excavation of auger probes and four test
units on the site (Figure 29).Working in conjunction with auger
probes,the two 1-by I-m units in Feature 1,an apparent formal
midden,will assist archaeologists in describing the nature of the
cuItural fill and in determining its extent.A hand-excavated trench,
measuring 0.5-by 2.O-m,placed over Feature 2 will help verify and
describe this concentration of jacal as a cultural feature.Finally,a
single 1-by 1-m unit in the Basketmaker III artifact concentration
will help describe the nature of these deposits and their extent.The
reader will note a gap in the auger probes in this portion of the site.
This gap reflects the approximate location of previous testing
activities (Figure 28).Figure 29 illustrates the proposed testing
strategy for 42Sa6431.
We recommend the use of a road maintainer to surface-scrape the
areas outside the gridded portion of the site,but only after other
testing activities have already occurred.No surface-scraping will
occur in the vicinities of the possible check dams (see Figure 29).
42Sa6757
This site has already undergone data recovery (Davis 1985).As
noted in Till (2009:69)the potential exists for the site to harbor
other,smaller features previously undiscovered by backhoe-excavated
test trenches.We recommend that the northern portion of the site,
which harbored all of the site's structural features,be systematically
surface-stripped with a road maintainer (Figure 9).This activity would
be closely monitored by an archaeologist.Upon the discovery of new
features,surface stripping in the immediate vicinity of the feature
will cease.Newly discovered features may be tested using methods
outlined in this proposal.Small features,such as hearths or cists,
may be tested for depth with a soil sampler or probe that measures no
more than 1 inch in diameter.
The midden area in the
systematically characterized.
stratigraphy is known (see
warranted.
southern portion of the site has not been
As the depth and extent of this cultural
Davis 1985:164),further testing is not
54
-200
-150
•132N
184E
-250
o
f
/
•100N
156E
...-/
•192N
156E
/
o
Feature 2
Gac ncentrati~n)
artifact
scatter
boundary
~.--::-,
\
I
I
,.,.\
0'0 •
o 0
o
---. .
-
oo~
----100N.
100E
I
\
\,,",.
gridstake
stakeand auger
trench berm
proposed auger
proposed test unit
previous testtrench
\
~,__')midden/concentration
o
~
<S2SO>
@
=0
42Sa6431
o tT
10 m
I \
Contour interval is 50 em
KEY
i:J..
Till,Bond,Hadenfeldt,and Young
8/5/09
Figure 29.Site 42Sa6431,Proposed Testing Activities Map
55
42Sa8014
As with the preceding site,42Sa8014 has already been subjected
to intensive excavation (Davis 1985;also see Figure 10).We suggest
that the surface sediments of the entire site be stripped
systematically with a road maintainer.This activity will be closely
monitored by an archaeologist.Upon the discovery of a new feature,
surface stripping in the immediate vicinity of the feature will cease.
Newly discovered features may be tested using methods outlined in this
proposal.Small features,such as hearths or cists,may be tested for
depth with a soil sampler or probe that measures no more than 1 in.in
diameter.
We suggest the establishment of an off-site datum prior to
surface-stripping activities.It is likely that the site's datum will
be destroyed by a road maintainer.Therefore,a new off-site datum
would facilitate the documentation of new features,if any,relative to
the site's old datum.
42Sa28128
This site consists of a small scatter of pottery and lithic
artifacts.We propose that a grid of auger probes be established on the
site.We also recommend that a single,0.5-by 1.O-m test unit be
excavated on the site to better characterize and examine the site's
stratigraphy.Figure 30 illustrates the proposed testing strategy for
42Sa28128.
If no features are located through the above measures,we
recommend the use of a road maintainer to remove the site's surface
sediments.However,surface artifacts will first be collected according
to their 4-by 4-m grid location.
42Sa28129
This site consists of a small scatter of pottery and lithic
artifacts.We propose that a grid of auger probes be established on the
site.We also recommend that two,0.5-by 1.0-m test units be excavated
on the site to better characterize and examine the site's stratigraphy.
One unit would be placed in the west portion of the site,while the
second unit would examine the stratigraphy in the area closer to the
site's datum.Figure 31 illustrates the proposed testing strategy for
42Sa28129.
If no features are located through the above measures,we
recommend the use of a road maintainer to remove the site's surface
sediments.However,surface artifacts will first be collected according
to their 4-by 4-m grid location.
42Sa28130
This site consists of a small scatter of pottery and lithic
artifacts.We propose that a grid of auger probes be established on the
site.We also recommend that two,0.5-by 1.G-m test units be excavated
428a28128 \BLAOIE DID I STJRB E 0 rT
AREA
----'--~\\~
--<--128N 4m0132EiiiIIiiiI
0 0 0 '\0 -~-----Contour interval is 25 em
/
0/0 0 \'")-.L..-
""'\-L..
;I 0 0 o /
0 0 0 oj 0 0
\/0 ·0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
~/0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
\artifact 0 0 • 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 (/I U1
scatter 0'
boundary (0 0 !:Ao 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 I
I .0 0 ·0 0 .0 0 .0 0 .0
/
\0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
/
0 • 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
\//'KEY
0 0 0 0 /!:A datum
\0 //.grid stake·0 0 .
/proposed auger probe0
"--...~
-25 /-50 --h5 1-100
100N.-
100E
Till,Bond,and Hadenfeldt
7/27/09
Figure 30.Site 42Sa28128,Proposed Testing Activities Map
fT
o 5m
~.--=
Contour interval is 25 em
Figure 31.Site 42Sa28129,Proposed Testing Activities Map
58
on the site to better characterize and examine the site's stratigraphy.
One unit would be placed in the west portion of the site,while the
second unit would be placed in the eastern portion of the site.Figure
32 illustrates the proposed testing strategy for 42Sa28130.
If no features are located through the above measures,we
recommend the use of a road maintainer to remove the site's surface
sediments.However,surface artifacts will first be collected according
to their 4-by 4-m grid location.
42Sa28131
This is the only historic site in the proj ect area.We suggest
the excavation of a grid of auger probes.We also recommend the
placement of a 0.5-by 2.0-m test unit be placed over one-half of the
hearth feature to better describe and ascertain the nature of its
associated stratigraphy and structure.Figure 33 illustrates the
proposed testing strategy for 42Sa28131.
42Sa28132
This site consists of a small scatter of pottery and lithic
artifacts,as well as a scatter of rock.We propose that a grid of
auger probes be established on the site.We also recommend that a
single,0.5-by 1.0-m test unit be excavated on the site to better
characterize and examine the site's stratigraphy.We suggest that this
unit be established in the northern portion of the site in the vicinity
of the several rocks on the site's surface.Figure 34 illustrates the
proposed testing strategy for 42Sa28132.
If no features are located through the above measures,we
recommend the use of a road maintainer to remove the site's surface
sediments.However,surface artifacts will first be collected according
to their 4-by 4-m grid location.
42Sa28133
The site consists of a small scatter of lithic tools and several
pieces of sandstone.As Till (2009:61)suggests,this location may
represent the remains of a food-processing facility,such as a mealing
room or bin.Considering the small size of the site,we recommend the
excavation of a grid of auger probes placed at one-meter intervals
within the site boundary,and a larger grid of auger probes placed at
two-meter intervals around the site's perimeter.We also suggest the
excavation of a test trench,measuring 0.5-by 2.0-m,through the
approximate center of the rock scatter.Figure 35 illustrates the
proposed testing strategy for 42Sa28133.
If no features are located through the above measures,we
recommend the use of a road maintainer to remove the site's surface
sediments.However,surface artifacts will first be collected according
to their 4-by 4-m grid location.
128N ./I I I
•128N
42Sa28130 100E I 128E
rT
(0 +60 I +40 I +20 I 0 I -20
-----'\artifact scatter
/boundary(\Contour interval is 20 cm I
/
0 0 0 0 o '----
/I -----
0 0 0 0 0 ---I I ""0 0 0 0 0 .0 0 0
KEY I \1
Li.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Li.datum I !! I
\.J1
\0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
grid stake I 0 0 0 0 0 I 6 0 0 0
0 proposed auger probe
\/
0 0 0 0 0 I o ,0 0 0
0 /0 0
-----.100N ./................---I .I • 0 o (.0 o •//'100N.
100E 136E
..............I~oor ooo /
---/
+80 /+60 1+40 -------1-20I+20 In
)
I -=;---
NORTHE D..Q F ()t:~,_.~__.---~=:J-Till,Bond,jladenfeldt,and Young-r--8/4/09=.-
Figure 32.Site 42Sa28130,Proposed Testing Activities Map
o
60
428a28131
o juniper tree truck
2m~~i
116N
100E
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
can
0 0 0 I r-~")(I 0 0 0i\
\I
biface Feature 1/"--/X canfragment(hearth)
-------x112N •0 0 0 0 0 0 0
96E
!b00 0 0 0 0
\
"\
\0 0 0 0 0 0
\
"\
0 \ 0 0 0 0 0 0"\
\
\(l)
\<>?
\(l)
""'?(l)"."~
KEY
\",-
\0-".
•100N ~/.;!b datum "100E "~
\19
grid stake (l)
0 proposed auger probe \
"
c=J proposed test unit """"...
Till and Bond
8/11/09
Figure 33.Site 42Sa28131,Proposed Testing Activities Map
61
136N
100E
428a28132
o rr 5m
l!'5iiil""tIIlIII"""'l
Contour inteNal is 25 cm
0 0 o ---0.-0
+50 0 /0
0 0 0 0 o artifact scatter
0 0 0 0 ""boundary
;0 0 0 0
!:J,I+25 0 0 0 0
/@ 0 @ 0 @ /•120N
128E
0
I ~\0 0 0 0-25 !-----0 0---0 I---:sa-
\ 0
0 0 0 I ------,----------.0 0 0
-75 /~0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
-----
KEY
-100 !:J,datum
grid stake
proposed auger probe
@ stake and auger probe
-125
Till,Bond,Young,and Hadenfeldt
7/29/30
Figure 34.Site 42Sa28132,Proposed Testing Activities Map
428a28133
o tT
2m
!i
Contour interval is 25 cm
o o
62
.116N
100E
o o o o
0 0 0 0 0 0
--------
/""0 0 0 0 0 0
/<il Tool 1 \
/~\
0 0 0 !:b.0 0 0
{<:lTool2 \
jacal \\scatter
0 0 0 0 0 0
'"/
~I
/'---0 0 ---0 0 0
o
KEY
!:b.datum
grid stake
o .100N 0
100E o o o
o proposed auger probe
proposed test unit
rock
Till,Bond,and Hadenfeldt
7/28/09
Figure 35.Site 42Sa28133,Proposed Testing Activities Map
63
42Sa28134
This site consists of a small scatter of lithic artifacts.
Considering the small size of the site,we recommend the excavation of
a grid of auger probes placed at one-meter intervals within the site
boundary,and a larger grid of auger probes placed at two-meter
intervals around the site's perimeter.We also suggest the excavation
of a test trench,measuring 0.5-by 1.0-m,to characterize the nature
and depth of cultural stratigraphy on the site.Figure 36 illustrates
the proposed testing strategy for 42Sa28134.
If no features are located through the above measures,we
recommend the use of a road maintainer to remove the site's surface
sediments.However,surface artifacts will first be collected according
to their 4-by 4-m grid location.
Off-site Blading Activities
Immediately following the formal testing fieldwork outlined
above,those sites that are significant will be delineated either with
flagged lathe or plastic barrier fence.A road maintainer will then be
used to systematically strip the sediments from the off-site acreage in
the Cell 4B proj ect area.An archaeologist will be present to walk
behind the road maintainer.Whenever prehistoric or historic materials
are observed,scraping activities will cease while the archaeologist
makes a determination as to the nature of the materials.If features or
significant cultural deposits or features are observed,all blading
will cease in the vicinity of that cultural occurrence.
Should the cultural materials be proximate to the bounds of a
nearby site,then the newly discovered items will be documented with
that site.However,it is quite possible that significant subsurface
features may be present without having a surface signature (e.g.
hearths or burials).If Abajo personnel determine the material to be an
archaeological site,blading in that location will cease and the site
will be protected with lathe and/or barrier fence.The site will be
recorded and an IMACS form for the site will submitted to the State.
The site will be considered further in the project's upcoming research
design.
Artifact and Ecofact Analysis
All artifacts and other specimens recovered from the sites will
be brought to the Abajo Archaeology office in Bluff,Utah,at the end
of each working day.Artifacts will be cleaned,cataloged,and
analyzed.Cataloging methods and techniques will generally follow those
described in Crow Canyon Archaeological Center's on-line laboratory
manual (Ortman and others 2005)."Field specimen"numbers (FS)will be
assigned to artifacts on the basis of their association with particular
contexts (described by PO numbers).Catalog data will be entered into a
relational database.All artifact databases will share as key fields
the site number,the PO number,and the FS number.
Detailed artifact analyses will
project.Rather,only quantitative data
not be
(such as
performed for this
counts and weights),
64
42Sa28134 tT
0 4m
i
Contour interval is 25 em
-25 0
128N..128N
100E 124E
----~
/\/
o /@ 0 0 0 0
\
0/0 0 0 0
+IIt:J,.
0 @ 0 0 0 0
if 0 0 0 I0000
o I 0 0 @ 0 0 0 0 /
0 I 0
0 0 0 0 0 /
0\
0 0 @ 0 0 I
0 0 0 0 0 0 0/\
0 0 @ 0 0 0/
\/0 0 0 0
0 @ 0 /0
~.,/
100N..100N
100E 124E
KEY
0
t:J,.datum
-25
grid stake
0 proposed auger probe
@ stake and auger probe
Till,Bond,and Hadenfeldt
7/28/09
Figure 36.8ite 428a28134,Proposed Testing Activities Map
65
generated during cataloging activities,will be
Again,these data will be produced according
(2005).These data will be used to estimate
further detailed analyses and for curation.
Reporting and Curation
gathered and reported.
to Ortman and others
the requirements for
Upon completion of the field work and analysis,Abajo Archaeology
will produce a monograph that reports the testing results and pairs
those data with a research design.The research design will use the
testing results to outline a data recovery plan for the sites in the
proposed Cell 4B project area.Abajo Archaeology will submit this
monograph to the Utah Department of Environmental Quality,Division of
Radiation Control,the compliance agency responsible for issuing and
administering the operation license of the Denison Mines White Mesa
Mill.This agency would,in turn,submit the report to the Utah State
Historic Preservation Office (SHPO).Abajo will also tender a copy for
review to the Utah Public Lands Policy Coordination Office.
Additionally,copies of the monograph will be submitted to the Edge of
the Cedars Museum,Blanding,Utah and do Abajo's client,Denison Mines
(USA)Corp.
In addition to this monograph,all artifacts and other materials
associated with the testing project will be curated at the Edge of the
Cedars Museum in Blanding,Utah.To that end,artifacts will be
packaged in appropriate archival housing at the time of cataloging.The
actual curation of materials collected during the testing phase will
occur at a later date,when all proj ect materials from data recovery
efforts will be tendered to a federally approved curatorial facility.
Proposed Schedule and Cost Estimate
Table 8 outlines the schedule of work for the proposed project.
The fieldwork will take place between September 16,2009 and October
23,2009.A total of 30 working days is anticipated to complete the
fieldwork.The field crew will consist of the proj ect director,field
director and five field archaeologists.After completion of the
fieldwork,the artifact rough sort analysis and data entry will take
one week to complete.We calculate that the overall cost for this
phase of the project will be around $65,000.
Table 8.Estimated Time Requirements
Fieldwork Person days/hrs
Principal Investigator 10 Days/80 Hrs
Project Director 30 Days/240 Hrs
Field Director 30 Days/240 Hrs
5 Field Archaeologists 150 Days/1200 Hrs
Artifact Rough Sort Analysis
Project Director 3 Days/24 Hrs
Lab Assistant 5 Days/40 Hrs
66
CHAPTER 4:ORGANIZATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS
Past Performance
Abaj 0 Archaeology is a cuItural resource management and
consulting company organized in 1981 to meet the growing need for
cultural resource management services in Utah,Arizona,Colorado,New
Mexico and surrounding areas.The company is a general partnership
owned and operated by William E.Davis and Deborah A.Westfall in
Bluff,San Juan County,Utah.
Abaj 0 Archaeology has been recognized by both state and federal
land management agencies for its commitment to high standards of
performance.Abaj0's key archaeologists all hold Master's degrees in
Anthropology and have a combined record that exceeds 80 years of
professional expertise.The archaeologists all retain qualifications
that meet or exceed the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and
Guidelines.Through a network of professionals in other disciplines,
Abajo Archaeology incorporates studies from botany,geology,
geomorphology,hydrology,paleontology,zoology,and physical and
cultural anthropology to produce well-rounded,in-depth reports and
articles that contribute to current issues of anthropological method
and theory.
Abajo Archaeology has demonstrated its professional competence to
federal and state agencies and to private industries.These include the
U.S.D.I.Bureau of Land Management,National Park Service,and Bureau
of Indian Affairs;the U.S.D.A.Forest Service;the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission;the Navaj 0 Nation;the Utah Department of Transportation,
the Utah Federal Highway Administration;and the respective state land
management offices of Utah,Arizona,Colorado and New Mexico.Our
combined expertise and capabilities have pleased project sponsors with
efficient,cost-effective,and timely completion of documentary
research,field investigations,and report preparation pursuant to
meeting requirements for legal compliance in accord with project
scheduling.
Key Project Personnel
Abajo Archaeology acts as a central clearinghouse for a group of
committed,independent Consulting Archaeologists who have a combined
professional experience exceeding 80 years in prehistoric and historic
cultural resource management and research.Each Consulting
Archaeologist holds a Master's Degree in Anthropology and has
experience that exceeds the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and
Guidelines (48 Federal Register,Part IV).
Principal Investigator:William E.Davis
William E.Davis received his M.A.in Anthropology from Northern
Arizona University in 1982.Mr.Davis'professional career spans 35
years for archaeological research and cultural resource management
consulting services in Utah,Arizona,New Mexico,Colorado,and
Wyoming.He has authored over 100 technical reports and has published
numerous research reports on High Plains and Southwest archaeology.As
67
Principal Investigator he is responsible for organizing,implementing,
and overseeing all projects.Specific duties include project
administration,proposal and research design preparation,fieldwork
(survey and excavation),analysis and report preparation,and
monitoring of compliance procedures.
Mr.Davis will serve as Principal Investigator for the White Mesa
Mill Cell 4B Evaluative Testing Project.He will be responsible for
organization,management,and internal control.His duties will include
coordination with the Denison Mines personnel and overall logistics and
problem control.He will also be available in the field on an as-needed
basis.During the research design preparation phase,Mr.Davis will
provide input towards the development of research issues/domains,will
develop the time/cost schedule and will review and edit the report.
Project Director:Jonathan Till
Jonathan D.Till has engaged in archaeological work and research
in the northern Southwest for over 20 years,and in the Mesa Verde
region for more than 15 years.Past employers include the Coconino and
Kaibab National Forests,the State of Arizona,the Navajo Nation
Archaeological Department,and Abajo Archaeology.In addition to
archaeological survey and excavation,Till is well-experienced in the
material culture of prehistoric Puebloan societies.For the past six
years he has worked at Crow Canyon Archaeological Center's research
lab,managing the analyses of artifacts from numerous sites,teaching
analytical techniques to hundreds of children and adults,and reporting
on the results of these analyses.Till holds a B.A.in Anthropology
from Grinnell College (1989),and an M.A.in Anthropology and a
Certificate in Museum Studies from the University of Colorado (2001).
He has authored numerous technical reports,has co-authored several
book chapters,and has delivered many professional presentations.His
research interests include the so-called "Chaco phenomenon"of the Four
Corners region.
Field Director:Mark Bond
Mark C.Bond has engaged in archaeological fieldwork in the Four-
Corners Southwestern region for over 30 years.He has participated in
southeastern and northeastern Utah archaeological projects for 20 years
of that time primarily as a Field Project Supervisor.During the 1981
archaeological excavations at the White Mesa Mill he participated as a
crew leader and subsequently directed the analysis of all ceramic
artifacts recovered by the project.His report on this analysis
represents the ceramic chapter in the final project report.More
recently,Bond directed the field crews during the Colorado University
(Boulder)Summer Archaeological Field School sessions (1996-2004)at
the Bluff Great House Site (42Sa22674)in Bluff,Utah.He has
consulted on numerous archaeological field projects and authored
numerous technical reports.Bond holds a B.A.in Anthropology from New
Mexico State University (1974)and an M.A.in Anthropology from
Northern Arizona University (1981).
68
Archaeologists
Five field archaeologists will be responsible for completing the
day-to-day tasks involved in the test excavations at the White Mesa
Mill Cell 4B proj ect.They will be directly accountable to the field
director.Persons retained for this position will be required to have a
B.A.in Anthropology,in addition to extensive archaeological field
experience.
Resources
Abajo Archaeology's office facility is situated in Bluff,San
Juan County,Utah.The office,with 1000 square feet of floor space and
storage area,is geared mainly toward the administration of the
company,secretarial and bookkeeping functions,and report and proposal
preparation.The office also contains a library of anthropological and
archaeological journals,books,papers and cultural resource management
academic reports by various colleagues and institutions,as well as an
extensive map library.The office is equipped with standard laboratory
equipment for performing initial artifact analyses,including cleaning,
stabilizing,cataloging,recording of attribute data,microscopic
examination and photography.Final bagging and ordering of artifacts
for museum curation is done in the office,using specialized supplies
and equipment.Lastly,the office is equipped with multiple computers
to facilitate rapid production of reports,cultural resource inventory
forms,and general mathematical functions.
69
REFERENCES
Agenbroad,Larry D.,William E.Davis,and E.Steve Cassells
1981 1980 Excavations on White Mesa,San Juan County,Utah.Abajo
Archaeology,Bluff,Utah.
Binford,Lewis
1962 Archaeology as Anthropology.American Antiquity 28:217-225.
Berge,Dale L.
1975 Archaeological Survey of the Pinto-Abajo Transmission Line,
Southeastern Utah.Brigham Young University,Provo.
Casjens,Laurel A.(Editor)
1980 Archaeological Excavations on White Mesa,San Juan County,Utah,
1979.Division of State History,Antiquities Section,Salt Lake
City,Utah.
Casjens,Laurel A.and Gregory L.Seward
1980 White Mesa Archaeological Survey,Preliminary Report.Unpublished
Report.Unpublished report prepared by the Antiquities Section,
Division of State History,State of Utah.
Cordell,Linda
1997 Archaeology of the Southwest,Second Edition.Academic Press,San
Diego,California.
Davis,William E.
1985 Anasazi Subsistence and Settlement on White Mesa,San Juan
County,Utah.Abajo Archaeology,Bluff,Utah.
Davis,William E.,Winston B.Hurst,and Deborah A.Westfall
2003 Class I Cui tural Resource Inventory of the Proposed Whi te Mesa
Mill Site,White Mesa Mill Materials Borrow Area and Two
Associated Corridor Routes,Grand and San Juan Counties,Utah.
Abajo Archaeology,Bluff,Utah.
Dykman,James L.
1978a
1978b
Fike,
1976
Site 42Sa6391 in Archeological Test Excavations on White Mesa,
San Juan County,Southeastern Utah,edited by La Mar W.Lindsay,
pp.69-77.Unpublished report prepared by Antiquities Section,
Division of State History,State of Utah.
Site 42Sa6393 in Archeological Test Excavations on White Mesa,
San Juan County,Southeastern Utah,edited by La Mar W.Lindsay,
pp.78-84.Unpublished report prepared by Antiquities Section,
Division of State History,State of Utah.
Richard E.and LaMar W.Lindsay
Archaeological Survey of the Bluff Bench,San Juan River and
White Mesa Areas,San Juan County,Utah,1973-1974.Antiquities
Section Selected Papers,No.9.
Firor,James,Rand A.Greubel,and Alan D.Reed
1998 Archaeological Data Recovery at Four Anasazi Sites on White Mesa
Along US Highway 191,San Juan County,Utah.Ms.on file,Utah
Department of Transportation,Salt Lake City,Utah.
70
Hurst,Winston B.
1992 Chapter III:Previous Archaeological Research and Regional
Prehistory,pp 11 74.In Cultural Resource Inventory and
Evaluative Testing along SR-262,Utah -Colorado State Line to
Montezuma Creek ,Navajo Nation Lands,San Juan County,Utah by
Mark C.Bond,William E.Davis,Winston B.Hurst,Deborah A.
Westfall.Abajo Archaeology,Bluff,Utah.
Kantner,John
2004 Ancient Puebloan
Cambridge.
Southwest.Cambridge University Press,
Lindsay,LaMar W.(Editor)
1978 Archeological Test Excavations on White Mesa,San
Southeastern Utah.Unpublished report prepared by
Section,Division of State History,State of Utah.
Juan County,
Antiquities
Lipe,
1994
William D.
Native American Archaeological Chronology,
Area.In Blue Moun tain Shadows 13:inside
Historical Commission.
Greater Four Corners
front cover.San Juan
Lipe,
1999
William D.,Mark D.Varien,and Richard H.Wilshusen (Editors)
Colorado Prehistory:A Context for the Southern Colorado River
Basin.Colorado Council of Professional Archaeologists,Denver,
Colorado.
Nielson,Asa S.
1979 Additional Archaeological Test Excavations and Inventory on
Mesa,San Juan County,Southeastern Utah.Division of
History,Antiquities Section,Salt Lake City,Utah.
White
State
Rohn,
1989
Arthur H.
Northern San Juan Prehistory.In Dynamics
Prehistory,edited by Linda Cordell and George
Smithsonian Institution Press.Washington D.C.
of
J.
Southwest
Gumerman.
Sargent,Kay
1979 Excavations
Division of
Utah.
at 42Sa6384,
State History,
White Mesa,
Antiquities
San Juan County,Utah.
Section,Salt Lake City,
Thompson,Richard A.
1977 An Intensive Cultural Resource Inventory Conducted on White Mesa,
San Juan County,Utah.International Learning and Research,Inc.,
Cedar City,Utah.
Till,
2009
Jonathan D.
CuItural Resource Inventory of the Proposed Denison Mines (USA)
Corporation White Mesa Mill Cell 4B,San Juan County,Utah.Abajo
Archaeology,Bluff,Utah.
In prep.Excavations at Site 42Sa27732,A Pueblo
Habitation.Abajo Archaeology,Bluff,Utah.
III Period
71
Wilshusen,Richard H.(compiler)
1999 The Dolores Legacy:A User's Guide to the Dolores Archaeological
Program Data.Anasazi Heritage Center,Dolores,Colorado.
J
I
I
I
-I
I
!
I